[ { "path": ".github/workflows/runtests.yml", "content": "# GitHub actions workflow for testing tmtoolkit\n# Runs tests on Ubuntu, MacOS and Windows with Python versions 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10 each, which means 9 jobs are spawned.\n# Tests are run using tox (https://tox.wiki/).\n#\n# author: Markus Konrad \n\nname: run tests\n\non:\n push:\n branches:\n - master\n - develop\n - 'release*'\n\njobs:\n build:\n runs-on: ${{ matrix.os }}\n strategy:\n matrix:\n os: [ubuntu-latest, macos-latest, windows-latest]\n python-version: [\"3.8\", \"3.9\", \"3.10\"]\n testsuite: [\"minimal\", \"full\"]\n steps:\n - uses: actions/checkout@v2\n - name: set up python ${{ matrix.python-version }}\n uses: actions/setup-python@v2\n with:\n python-version: ${{ matrix.python-version }}\n cache: 'pip'\n - name: install system dependencies (linux)\n if: runner.os == 'Linux'\n # only managed to install system dependencies on Linux runners\n run: |\n sudo apt update\n sudo apt install libgmp-dev libmpfr-dev libmpc-dev\n - name: install python dependencies\n run: |\n python -m pip install --upgrade pip\n pip install tox\n - name: run tox (linux)\n # since system dependencies could only be installed on Linux runners, we run the \"full\" suite only on Linux ...\n if: runner.os == 'Linux'\n run: tox -e py-${{ matrix.testsuite }} -- --hypothesis-profile=ci\n - name: run tox (macos or windows - minimal)\n if: runner.os != 'Linux' && matrix.testsuite == 'minimal'\n run: tox -e py-minimal -- --hypothesis-profile=ci\n - name: run tox (macos or windows - recommendedextra)\n # ... on all other OS we run the \"recommendedextra\" suite instead of the \"full\" suite\n if: runner.os != 'Linux' && matrix.testsuite == 'full'\n run: tox -e py-recommendedextra -- --hypothesis-profile=ci\n" }, { "path": ".github/workflows/stale.yml", "content": "name: Close inactive issues\non:\n schedule:\n - cron: \"23 3 * * *\"\n\njobs:\n close-issues:\n runs-on: ubuntu-latest\n permissions:\n issues: write\n pull-requests: write\n steps:\n - uses: actions/stale@v3\n with:\n days-before-issue-stale: 30\n days-before-issue-close: 14\n stale-issue-label: \"stale\"\n stale-issue-message: \"This issue is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity.\"\n close-issue-message: \"This issue was closed because it has been inactive for 14 days since being marked as stale.\"\n days-before-pr-stale: -1\n days-before-pr-close: -1\n repo-token: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}\n\n" }, { "path": ".gitignore", "content": ".cache/\n.idea/\n**/__pycache__\n*.pyc\n.hypothesis\nbuild/\ndist/\n*.egg-info/\n.~lock.*\nexamples/data/*.pickle\n!examples/data/ap.pickle\n!examples/data/nips.pickle\n!examples/data/bt18_sample_1000.pickle\n**/.ipynb_checkpoints/\n.pytest_cache/\n.covreport/\n.tox/\n.Rhistory\ndoc/source/data/corpus_norm.pickle\n.coverage\n" }, { "path": ".readthedocs.yaml", "content": "# .readthedocs.yml\n# Read the Docs configuration file\n# See https://docs.readthedocs.io/en/stable/config-file/v2.html for details\n\n# Required\nversion: 2\n\n# Build documentation in the doc/ directory with Sphinx\nsphinx:\n configuration: doc/source/conf.py\n\n# Set the version of Python and other tools you might need\nbuild:\n os: ubuntu-20.04\n tools:\n python: \"3.9\"\n\n# Optionally set the version of Python and requirements required to build your docs\npython:\n install:\n - requirements: requirements_doc.txt\n" }, { "path": "AUTHORS.md", "content": "# Authors\n\n## Maintainer / main developer\n\n[Markus Konrad](https://github.com/internaut) @ [WZB](https://github.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/)\n\n## Contributors\n\nSorted by date of first contribution:\n\n* [Matt Cooper](https://github.com/mcooper)\n* [Dominik Domhoff](https://github.com/ddomhoff)\n* [Christof Kälin](https://github.com/christofkaelin)\n" }, { "path": "LICENSE", "content": " Apache License\n Version 2.0, January 2004\n http://www.apache.org/licenses/\n\n TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION\n\n 1. Definitions.\n\n \"License\" shall mean the terms and conditions for use, reproduction,\n and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this document.\n\n \"Licensor\" shall mean the copyright owner or entity authorized by\n the copyright owner that is granting the License.\n\n \"Legal Entity\" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all\n other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under common\n control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition,\n \"control\" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the\n direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or\n otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the\n outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity.\n\n \"You\" (or \"Your\") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity\n exercising permissions granted by this License.\n\n \"Source\" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications,\n including but not limited to software source code, documentation\n source, and configuration files.\n\n \"Object\" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical\n transformation or translation of a Source form, including but\n not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation,\n and conversions to other media types.\n\n \"Work\" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or\n Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a\n copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work\n (an example is provided in the Appendix below).\n\n \"Derivative Works\" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object\n form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the\n editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications\n represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes\n of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain\n separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of,\n the Work and Derivative Works thereof.\n\n \"Contribution\" shall mean any work of authorship, including\n the original version of the Work and any modifications or additions\n to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally\n submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright owner\n or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of\n the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition, \"submitted\"\n means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent\n to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited to\n communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems,\n and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the\n Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but\n excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise\n designated in writing by the copyright owner as \"Not a Contribution.\"\n\n \"Contributor\" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal Entity\n on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and\n subsequently incorporated within the Work.\n\n 2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of\n this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,\n worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable\n copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of,\n publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the\n Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form.\n\n 3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of\n this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,\n worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable\n (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made,\n use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work,\n where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable\n by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their\n Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s)\n with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You\n institute patent litigation against any entity (including a\n cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work\n or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct\n or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses\n granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate\n as of the date such litigation is filed.\n\n 4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the\n Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without\n modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You\n meet the following conditions:\n\n (a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or\n Derivative Works a copy of this License; and\n\n (b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices\n stating that You changed the files; and\n\n (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works\n that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and\n attribution notices from the Source form of the Work,\n excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of\n the Derivative Works; and\n\n (d) If the Work includes a \"NOTICE\" text file as part of its\n distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must\n include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained\n within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not\n pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one\n of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed\n as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or\n documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or,\n within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and\n wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents\n of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and\n do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution\n notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside\n or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided\n that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed\n as modifying the License.\n\n You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and\n may provide additional or different license terms and conditions\n for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or\n for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use,\n reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with\n the conditions stated in this License.\n\n 5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise,\n any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work\n by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of\n this License, without any additional terms or conditions.\n Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify\n the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed\n with Licensor regarding such Contributions.\n\n 6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade\n names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor,\n except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the\n origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.\n\n 7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or\n agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each\n Contributor provides its Contributions) on an \"AS IS\" BASIS,\n WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or\n implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions\n of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A\n PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the\n appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any\n risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License.\n\n 8. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory,\n whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise,\n unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly\n negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be\n liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect, special,\n incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a\n result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the\n Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill,\n work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all\n other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor\n has been advised of the possibility of such damages.\n\n 9. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing\n the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer,\n and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity,\n or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this\n License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only\n on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf\n of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify,\n defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability\n incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by reason\n of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability.\n\n END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS\n" }, { "path": "MANIFEST.in", "content": "include AUTHORS.md\ninclude conftest.py\ninclude LICENSE\ninclude README.rst\ninclude requirements.txt\ninclude requirements_doc.txt\ngraft doc/source\nprune doc/source/.ipynb_*\ngraft tmtoolkit/data\n" }, { "path": "Makefile", "content": "run_tests:\n\tPYTHONPATH=. pytest -l tests/\n\ncov_tests:\n\tPYTHONPATH=. pytest --cov-report html:.covreport --cov=tmtoolkit tests/\n\tcoverage-badge -f -o coverage.svg\n\t#rm .coverage*\n\nsdist:\n\tpython setup.py sdist\n\nwheel:\n\tpython setup.py bdist_wheel\n\nreadme:\n\tcat doc/source/intro.rst > README.rst\n\techo >> README.rst\n\techo >> README.rst\n\tdoc/source/install.rst >> README.rst\n\techo >> README.rst\n\techo >> README.rst\n\tcat doc/source/license_note.rst >> README.rst\n\n" }, { "path": "README.rst", "content": "**This repository is archived. Further development of tmtoolkit has moved to https://github.com/internaut/tmtoolkit.**\n\n------------\n\n\ntmtoolkit: Text mining and topic modeling toolkit\n=================================================\n\n*tmtoolkit* is a set of tools for text mining and topic modeling with Python developed especially for the use in the\nsocial sciences, in journalism or related disciplines. It aims for easy installation, extensive documentation\nand a clear programming interface while offering good performance on large datasets by the means of vectorized\noperations (via NumPy) and parallel computation (using Python's *multiprocessing* module and the\n`loky `_ package). The basis of tmtoolkit's text mining capabilities are built around\n`SpaCy `_, which offers a `many language models `_.\n\nThe documentation for tmtoolkit is available on `tmtoolkit.readthedocs.org `_ and\nthe GitHub code repository is on\n`github.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/tmtoolkit `_.\n\n**Upgrade note:**\n\nSince Feb 8 2022, the newest version 0.11.0 of tmtoolkit is available on PyPI. This version features a new API\nfor text processing and mining which is incompatible with prior versions. It's advisable to first read the\nfirst three chapters of the `tutorial `_\nto get used to the new API. You should also re-install tmtoolkit in a new virtual environment or completely\nremove the old version prior to upgrading. See the\n`installation instructions `_.\n\nRequirements and installation\n-----------------------------\n\n**tmtoolkit works with Python 3.8 or newer (tested up to Python 3.10).**\n\nThe tmtoolkit package is highly modular and tries to install as few dependencies as possible. For requirements and\ninstallation procedures, please have a look at the\n`installation section in the documentation `_. For short,\nthe recommended way of installing tmtoolkit is to create and activate a\n`Python Virtual Environment (\"venv\") `_ and then install tmtoolkit with\na recommended set of dependencies and a list of language models via the following:\n\n.. code-block:: text\n\n pip install -U \"tmtoolkit[recommended]\"\n # add or remove language codes in the list for installing the models that you need;\n # don't use spaces in the list of languages\n python -m tmtoolkit setup en,de\n\nAgain, you should have a look at the detailed\n`installation instructions `_ in order to install additional\npackages that enable more features such as topic modeling.\n\nFeatures\n--------\n\nText preprocessing\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\nThe tmtoolkit package offers several text preprocessing and text mining methods, including:\n\n- `tokenization, sentence segmentation, part-of-speech (POS) tagging, named-entity recognition (NER) `_ (via SpaCy)\n- `lemmatization and token normalization `_\n- extensive `pattern matching capabilities `_\n (exact matching, regular expressions or \"glob\" patterns) to be used in many\n methods of the package, e.g. for filtering on token or document level, or for\n `keywords-in-context (KWIC) `_\n- adding and managing\n `custom document and token attributes `_\n- accessing text corpora along with their\n `document and token attributes as dataframes `_\n- calculating and `visualizing corpus summary statistics `_\n- finding out and joining `collocations `_\n- `splitting and sampling corpora `_\n- generating `n-grams `_\n- generating `sparse document-term matrices `_\n\nWherever possible and useful, these methods can operate in parallel to speed up computations with large datasets.\n\nTopic modeling\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n* `model computation in parallel `_ for different copora\n and/or parameter sets\n* support for `lda `_,\n `scikit-learn `_\n and `gensim `_ topic modeling backends\n* `evaluation of topic models `_ (e.g. in order to an optimal number\n of topics for a given dataset) using several implemented metrics:\n\n * model coherence (`Mimno et al. 2011 `_) or with\n `metrics implemented in Gensim `_)\n * KL divergence method (`Arun et al. 2010 `_)\n * probability of held-out documents (`Wallach et al. 2009 `_)\n * pair-wise cosine distance method (`Cao Juan et al. 2009 `_)\n * harmonic mean method (`Griffiths, Steyvers 2004 `_)\n * the loglikelihood or perplexity methods natively implemented in lda, sklearn or gensim\n\n* `plotting of evaluation results `_\n* `common statistics for topic models `_ such as\n word saliency and distinctiveness (`Chuang et al. 2012 `_), topic-word\n relevance (`Sievert and Shirley 2014 `_)\n* `finding / filtering topics with pattern matching `_\n* `export estimated document-topic and topic-word distributions to Excel\n `_\n* `visualize topic-word distributions and document-topic distributions `_\n as word clouds or heatmaps\n* model coherence (`Mimno et al. 2011 `_) for individual topics\n* integrate `PyLDAVis `_ to visualize results\n\nOther features\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n- loading and cleaning of raw text from\n `text files, tabular files (CSV or Excel), ZIP files or folders `_\n- `splitting and joining documents `_\n- `common statistics and transformations for document-term matrices `_ like word cooccurrence and *tf-idf*\n\nLimits\n------\n\n* all languages are supported, for which `SpaCy language models `_ are available\n* all data must reside in memory, i.e. no streaming of large data from the hard disk (which for example\n `Gensim `_ supports)\n\n\nContribute\n----------\n\nIf you'd like to contribute, please read the `developer documentation `_ first.\n\n\nLicense\n-------\n\nCode licensed under `Apache License 2.0 `_.\nSee `LICENSE `_ file.\n\n.. |pypi| image:: https://badge.fury.io/py/tmtoolkit.svg\n :target: https://badge.fury.io/py/tmtoolkit\n :alt: PyPI Version\n\n.. |pypi_downloads| image:: https://img.shields.io/pypi/dm/tmtoolkit\n :target: https://pypi.org/project/tmtoolkit/\n :alt: Downloads from PyPI\n\n.. |runtests| image:: https://github.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/tmtoolkit/actions/workflows/runtests.yml/badge.svg\n :target: https://github.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/tmtoolkit/actions/workflows/runtests.yml\n :alt: GitHub Actions CI Build Status\n\n.. |coverage| image:: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/tmtoolkit/master/coverage.svg?sanitize=true\n :target: https://github.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/tmtoolkit/tree/master/tests\n :alt: Coverage status\n\n.. |rtd| image:: https://readthedocs.org/projects/tmtoolkit/badge/?version=latest\n :target: https://tmtoolkit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/?badge=latest\n :alt: Documentation Status\n\n.. |zenodo| image:: https://zenodo.org/badge/109812180.svg\n :target: https://zenodo.org/badge/latestdoi/109812180\n :alt: Citable Zenodo DOI\n" }, { "path": "conftest.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nConfiguration for tests with pytest\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nfrom hypothesis import settings, HealthCheck\n\n\n# set default timeout deadline\nsettings.register_profile('default', deadline=5000)\n\n# profile for CI runs on GitHub machines, which may be slow from time to time so we disable the \"too slow\" HealthCheck\n# and set the timeout deadline very high (60 sec.)\nsettings.register_profile('ci', suppress_health_check=(HealthCheck.too_slow, ), deadline=60000)\n\n# load default settings profile\nsettings.load_profile('default')\n" }, { "path": "doc/Makefile", "content": "# Minimal makefile for Sphinx documentation\n#\n\n# You can set these variables from the command line, and also\n# from the environment for the first two.\nSPHINXOPTS ?=\nSPHINXBUILD ?= sphinx-build\nSOURCEDIR = source\nBUILDDIR = build\n\n# Put it first so that \"make\" without argument is like \"make help\".\nhelp:\n\t@$(SPHINXBUILD) -M help \"$(SOURCEDIR)\" \"$(BUILDDIR)\" $(SPHINXOPTS) $(O)\n\nnotebooks:\n\tjupyter nbconvert --to notebook --execute --inplace --ExecutePreprocessor.timeout=600 --PlainTextFormatter.max_seq_length=20 source/*.ipynb\n\n.PHONY: help Makefile\n\n# Catch-all target: route all unknown targets to Sphinx using the new\n# \"make mode\" option. $(O) is meant as a shortcut for $(SPHINXOPTS).\n%: Makefile\n\t@$(SPHINXBUILD) -M $@ \"$(SOURCEDIR)\" \"$(BUILDDIR)\" $(SPHINXOPTS) $(O)\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/api.rst", "content": ".. _api:\n\nAPI\n===\n\ntmtoolkit.bow\n-------------\n\ntmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats\n :members:\n\ntmtoolkit.bow.dtm\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.bow.dtm\n :members:\n\n\ntmtoolkit.corpus\n----------------\n\nCorpus class and corpus functions\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.corpus\n :members:\n :imported-members:\n :exclude-members: find_spec, strip_tags, numbertoken_to_magnitude, simplify_unicode_chars, visualize\n\nFunctions to visualize corpus summary statistics\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.corpus.visualize\n :members:\n\n\ntmtoolkit.tokenseq\n------------------\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.tokenseq\n :members:\n\n\ntmtoolkit.topicmod\n------------------\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.topicmod\n :members:\n\nEvaluation metrics for Topic Modeling\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate\n :members:\n\n\nPrinting, importing and exporting topic model results\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io\n :members:\n\n\nStatistics for topic models and BoW matrices\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats\n :members:\n\n\nParallel model fitting and evaluation with lda\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda\n :members: AVAILABLE_METRICS, DEFAULT_METRICS, compute_models_parallel, evaluate_topic_models\n\n\nParallel model fitting and evaluation with scikit-learn\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_sklearn\n :members: AVAILABLE_METRICS, DEFAULT_METRICS, compute_models_parallel, evaluate_topic_models\n\n\nParallel model fitting and evaluation with Gensim\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_gensim\n :members: AVAILABLE_METRICS, DEFAULT_METRICS, compute_models_parallel, evaluate_topic_models\n\n\nVisualize topic models and topic model evaluation results\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\nWordclouds from topic models\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\n\n.. autodata:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.DEFAULT_WORDCLOUD_KWARGS\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.generate_wordclouds_for_topic_words\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.generate_wordclouds_for_document_topics\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.generate_wordcloud_from_probabilities_and_words\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.generate_wordcloud_from_weights\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.write_wordclouds_to_folder\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.generate_wordclouds_from_distribution\n\nPlot heatmaps for topic models\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\n\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_doc_topic_heatmap\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_topic_word_heatmap\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_heatmap\n\nPlot probability distribution rankings for topic models\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\n\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_topic_word_ranked_prob\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_doc_topic_ranked_prob\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_prob_distrib_ranked_prob\n\nPlot topic model evaluation results\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\n\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_eval_results\n\nOther functions\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\n\n.. autofunction:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.parameters_for_ldavis\n\n\nBase classes for parallel model fitting and evaluation\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.topicmod.parallel\n :members:\n\n\ntmtoolkit.utils\n---------------\n\n.. automodule:: tmtoolkit.utils\n :members:\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/bow.ipynb", "content": "{\n \"cells\": [\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"# Working with the Bag-of-Words representation\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The [bow module](api.rst#tmtoolkit-bow) in tmtoolkit contains several functions for working with Bag-of-Words (BoW) representations of documents. It's divided into two sub-modules: [bow.bow_stats](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats) and [bow.dtm](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.bow.dtm). The former implements several statistics and transformations for BoW representations, the latter contains functions to create and convert sparse or dense document-term matrices (DTMs).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Most of the functions in both sub-modules accept and/or return sparse DTMs. The [previous chapter](preprocessing.ipynb) contained a section about what sparse DTMs are and [how they can be generated with tmtoolkit](preprocessing.ipynb#Generating-a-sparse-document-term-matrix-(DTM)).\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## An example document-term matrix\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Before we start with the [bow.dtm](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.bow.dtm) module, we will generate a sparse DTM from a small example corpus.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 1,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:01.648092Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:01.647002Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.794595Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.795222Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 5 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-3665 (1158 tokens): Presidential elections in France have never been a...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2058 (1174 tokens): Merkel : ' Only if Europe is doing well , will Ger...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-3016 (621 tokens): Farron likens PM 's politics to Trump 's and Putin...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1206 (135 tokens): Man critical after four - car collision in Dublin ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-119 (110 tokens): Is a ' seven - day NHS ' feasible ? The \\\" seven...\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 3198 / vocabulary size: 1170\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"import random\\n\",\n \"random.seed(20191113) # to make the sampling reproducible\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"import numpy as np\\n\",\n \"np.set_printoptions(precision=5)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import Corpus, print_summary\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus = Corpus.from_builtin_corpus('en-NewsArticles', sample=5)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We employ a preprocessing pipeline that removes a lot of information from our original data in order to obtain a very condensed DTM.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 2,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.813273Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.808624Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.900780Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.901468Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenis_punctis_stoplemmalike_numpostag
0NewsArticles-1190dayFalseFalsedayFalseNOUNNN
1NewsArticles-1191nhsFalseFalseNHSFalsePROPNNNP
2NewsArticles-1192dayFalseFalsedayFalseNOUNNN
3NewsArticles-1193nhsFalseFalseNHSFalsePROPNNNP
4NewsArticles-1194pledgeFalseFalsepledgeFalseNOUNNN
..............................
914NewsArticles-3665349articleFalseFalsearticleFalseNOUNNN
915NewsArticles-3665350authorFalseFalseauthorFalseNOUNNN
916NewsArticles-3665351alFalseFalseAlFalsePROPNNNP
917NewsArticles-3665352jazeeraFalseFalseJazeeraFalsePROPNNNP
918NewsArticles-3665353policyFalseFalsepolicy.-FalseNOUNNN
\\n\",\n \"

919 rows × 9 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token is_punct is_stop lemma \\\\\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-119 0 day False False day \\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-119 1 nhs False False NHS \\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-119 2 day False False day \\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-119 3 nhs False False NHS \\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-119 4 pledge False False pledge \\n\",\n \".. ... ... ... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"914 NewsArticles-3665 349 article False False article \\n\",\n \"915 NewsArticles-3665 350 author False False author \\n\",\n \"916 NewsArticles-3665 351 al False False Al \\n\",\n \"917 NewsArticles-3665 352 jazeera False False Jazeera \\n\",\n \"918 NewsArticles-3665 353 policy False False policy.- \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" like_num pos tag \\n\",\n \"0 False NOUN NN \\n\",\n \"1 False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"2 False NOUN NN \\n\",\n \"3 False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"4 False NOUN NN \\n\",\n \".. ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"914 False NOUN NN \\n\",\n \"915 False NOUN NN \\n\",\n \"916 False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"917 False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"918 False NOUN NN \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[919 rows x 9 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 2,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import (lemmatize, filter_for_pos, to_lowercase,\\n\",\n \" remove_punctuation, filter_clean_tokens, remove_common_tokens,\\n\",\n \" tokens_table)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_norm = lemmatize(corpus, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"filter_for_pos(corpus_norm, 'N')\\n\",\n \"to_lowercase(corpus_norm)\\n\",\n \"remove_punctuation(corpus_norm)\\n\",\n \"filter_clean_tokens(corpus_norm, remove_shorter_than=2)\\n\",\n \"# remove tokens that occur in all documents\\n\",\n \"remove_common_tokens(corpus_norm, df_threshold=5, proportions=0)\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"tokens_table(corpus_norm)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We retained all documents, but removed more than half of the token types:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 3,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.907873Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.907071Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.910623Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.909986Z\"\n },\n \"scrolled\": true\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"(5, 516)\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 3,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import vocabulary_size\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"len(corpus_norm), vocabulary_size(corpus_norm)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We fetch the document labels and vocabulary and convert them to NumPy arrays, because such arrays allow advanced indexing methods such as boolean indexing.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 4,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.917028Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.916249Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.919215Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.919844Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"array(['NewsArticles-119', 'NewsArticles-1206', 'NewsArticles-2058',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3016', 'NewsArticles-3665'], dtype=''\\n\",\n \"\\twith 576 stored elements in Compressed Sparse Row format>\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 6,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import dtm\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"mat = dtm(corpus_norm)\\n\",\n \"mat\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We now have a sparse DTM `mat`, an array of document labels `labels` that represent the rows of the DTM and an array of vocabulary tokens `vocab` that represent the columns of the DTM. We will use this data for the remainder of the chapter.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## The `bow.dtm` module\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"This module is quite small. Most importantly, there's a function to convert a DTM to a pandas DataFrame, [dtm_to_dataframe](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.dtm.dtm_to_dataframe). Note that the generated dataframe is *dense*, i.e. it uses up (much) more memory than the input DTM.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's generate a dataframe from our DTM, the document labels and the vocabulary:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 7,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.987276Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.986335Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.989631Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.990036Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
110pm70abuseaccessaccessionaccusationactadditionaddressadministration...wingwinstonworkworkersworldwoundyearyorkyucel�
NewsArticles-1190001000000...0000000000
NewsArticles-12061100000000...0000000002
NewsArticles-20580000110000...1021002020
NewsArticles-30160010000000...0100310100
NewsArticles-36650001001111...1000001000
\\n\",\n \"

5 rows × 516 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" 110pm 70 abuse access accession accusation act \\\\\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-119 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1206 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-2058 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3016 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3665 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" addition address administration ... wing winston \\\\\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-119 0 0 0 ... 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1206 0 0 0 ... 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-2058 0 0 0 ... 1 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3016 0 0 0 ... 0 1 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3665 1 1 1 ... 1 0 \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" work workers world wound year york yucel � \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-119 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1206 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-2058 2 1 0 0 2 0 2 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3016 0 0 3 1 0 1 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3665 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[5 rows x 516 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 7,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.bow.dtm import dtm_to_dataframe\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"dtm_to_dataframe(mat, labels, vocab)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can see that an index with the document labels was created and that the vocabulary tokens become the column names.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"You can combine tmtoolkit with [Gensim](https://radimrehurek.com/gensim/). The `bow.dtm` module provides several functions to convert data between both packages:\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"- [dtm_and_vocab_to_gensim_corpus_and_dict](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.dtm.dtm_and_vocab_to_gensim_corpus_and_dict): converts a (sparse) DTM and a vocabulary list to a *Gensim Corpus* and *Gensim Dictionary*\\n\",\n \"- [dtm_to_gensim_corpus](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.dtm.dtm_to_gensim_corpus): convert a (sparse) DTM only to a *Gensim Corpus*\\n\",\n \"- [gensim_corpus_to_dtm](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.dtm.gensim_corpus_to_dtm): converts a *Gensim Corpus* object to a sparse DTM in COO format\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## The `bow.bow_stats` module\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"This module provides several statistics and transformations for sparse or dense DTMs.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"### Document lengths, document and term frequencies, token co-occurrences\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's start with the [doc_lengths](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_lengths) function, which simply gives the number of tokens per document (i.e. the row-wise sum of the DTM):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 8,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.996085Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.995474Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.998779Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:07.999384Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"array([ 38, 40, 330, 157, 354])\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 8,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats import doc_lengths\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"doc_lengths(mat)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The returned array is aligned to the document labels `labels` so we can see that the last document, \\\"NewsArticles-3665\\\", is the one with the most tokens. Or to do it computationally:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 9,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.007554Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.006769Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.009630Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.010059Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"'NewsArticles-3665'\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 9,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"labels[doc_lengths(mat).argmax()]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"While `doc_lengths` gives the row-wise sum across the DTM, [term_frequencies](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.term_frequencies) gives the column-wise sum. This means it returns an array of the length of the vocabulary's size where each entry in that array reflects the number of occurrences of the respective vocabulary token (aka term).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's calculate that measure, get its maximum and the token type(s) for that maximum value:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 10,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.016206Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.015466Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.020657Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.021102Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"(23, array(['medium'], dtype='= 0.01]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The function [doc_frequencies](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_frequencies) returns how often each token in the vocabulary occurs at least *n* times per document. You can control *n* per parameter `min_val` which is set to `1` by default. The returned array is aligned with the vocabulary. Here, we calculate the document frequency with the default value `min_val=1`, extract the maximum document frequency and see which of the tokens in the `vocab` array reach the maximum document frequency:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 12,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.036728Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.035151Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.040272Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.039582Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"(4, array(['minister'], dtype=' 0]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can also calculate the *co-document frequency* or *token co-occurrence* matrix via [codoc_frequencies](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.codoc_frequencies). This measures how often each pair of vocabulary tokens occurs at least *n* times together in the same document. Again, you can control *n* per parameter `min_val` which is set to `1` by default. The result is a sparse matrix of shape *vocabulary size* by *vocabulary size*. The columns and rows give the pairs of tokens from the vocabulary.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's generate a co-document frequency matrix and convert it to a dense representation, because our further operations don't support sparse matrices.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"A co-document frequency matrix is symmetric along the diagonal, because co-occurrence between a pair `(token1, token2)` is always the same as between `(token2, token1)`. We want to filter out the duplicate pairs and for that use [np.triu](https://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/reference/generated/numpy.triu.html) to take only the upper triangle of the matrix, i.e. set all values in the lower triangle including the matrix diagonal to zero (`k=1` does this):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 14,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.056891Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.055943Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.067091Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.067515Z\"\n },\n \"scrolled\": true\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"array([[0, 1, 0, ..., 0, 0, 1],\\n\",\n \" [0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 0, 1],\\n\",\n \" [0, 0, 0, ..., 1, 0, 0],\\n\",\n \" ...,\\n\",\n \" [0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 0, 0],\\n\",\n \" [0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 0, 0],\\n\",\n \" [0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 0, 0]])\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 14,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats import codoc_frequencies\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"codoc_mat = codoc_frequencies(mat).todense()\\n\",\n \"codoc_upper = np.triu(codoc_mat, k=1)\\n\",\n \"codoc_upper\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Now we create a list that contains the pairs of tokens that occur together in at least two documents (`codoc_upper > 1`) together with their co-document frequency:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 15,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.079757Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.073605Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.083176Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.084275Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[('government', 'minister', 3),\\n\",\n \" ('minister', 'time', 3),\\n\",\n \" ('access', 'channel', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('access', 'day', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('access', 'minister', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('access', 'news', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'author', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'co', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'critic', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'distribution', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'heart', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'law', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'minister', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'policy', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'question', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'right', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'state', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'support', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'system', 2),\\n\",\n \" ('april', 'time', 2),\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 15,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"interesting_pairs = [(vocab[t1], vocab[t2], codoc_upper[t1, t2])\\n\",\n \" for t1, t2 in zip(*np.where(codoc_upper > 1))]\\n\",\n \"# sort by codoc freq. in desc. order\\n\",\n \"sorted(interesting_pairs, key=lambda x: x[2], reverse=True)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Generate sorted lists and datatables according to term frequency\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"When working with DTMs, it's often helpful to rank terms per document according to their frequency. This is what [sorted_terms](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.sorted_terms) does for you. It further allows to specify the sorting order (the default is descending order via `ascending=False`) and several limits:\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"- `lo_thresh` for the minimum term frequency\\n\",\n \"- `hi_thresh` for the maximum term frequency\\n\",\n \"- `top_n` for the maximum number of terms per document\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's display the top three tokens per document by frequency:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 16,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.093879Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.092838Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.100957Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.100129Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[[('day', 3), ('nhs', 2), ('bbc', 2)],\\n\",\n \" [('car', 4), ('garda', 4), ('collision', 3)],\\n\",\n \" [('merkel', 14), ('refugee', 13), ('eu', 13)],\\n\",\n \" [('politic', 7), ('party', 6), ('farron', 5)],\\n\",\n \" [('medium', 23), ('candidate', 19), ('macron', 15)]]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 16,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats import sorted_terms\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"sorted_terms(mat, vocab, top_n=3)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The output is a list for each document (this means the output is aligned with the document labels `doc_labels`), with three pairs of `(token, frequency)` each. It's also possible to get this data as dataframe via [sorted_terms_table](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.sorted_terms_table), which gives a better overview and also includes labels for the documents. It accepts the same parameters for sorting and limitting the results:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 17,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.116818Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.111903Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.145474Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.144250Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
tokenvalue
docrank
NewsArticles-1191day3
2nhs2
3bbc2
NewsArticles-12061car4
2garda4
3collision3
NewsArticles-20581merkel14
2refugee13
3eu13
NewsArticles-30161politic7
2party6
3farron5
NewsArticles-36651medium23
2candidate19
3macron15
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" token value\\n\",\n \"doc rank \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-119 1 day 3\\n\",\n \" 2 nhs 2\\n\",\n \" 3 bbc 2\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1206 1 car 4\\n\",\n \" 2 garda 4\\n\",\n \" 3 collision 3\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-2058 1 merkel 14\\n\",\n \" 2 refugee 13\\n\",\n \" 3 eu 13\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3016 1 politic 7\\n\",\n \" 2 party 6\\n\",\n \" 3 farron 5\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3665 1 medium 23\\n\",\n \" 2 candidate 19\\n\",\n \" 3 macron 15\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 17,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats import sorted_terms_table\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"sorted_terms_table(mat, vocab, labels, top_n=3)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 18,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.157108Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.154438Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.174738Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.175466Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
tokenvalue
docrank
NewsArticles-20581merkel14
2refugee13
3eu13
4germany8
5country8
6turkey6
7europe6
NewsArticles-30161politic7
2party6
NewsArticles-36651medium23
2candidate19
3macron15
4france9
5election9
6le7
7coverage6
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" token value\\n\",\n \"doc rank \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-2058 1 merkel 14\\n\",\n \" 2 refugee 13\\n\",\n \" 3 eu 13\\n\",\n \" 4 germany 8\\n\",\n \" 5 country 8\\n\",\n \" 6 turkey 6\\n\",\n \" 7 europe 6\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3016 1 politic 7\\n\",\n \" 2 party 6\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3665 1 medium 23\\n\",\n \" 2 candidate 19\\n\",\n \" 3 macron 15\\n\",\n \" 4 france 9\\n\",\n \" 5 election 9\\n\",\n \" 6 le 7\\n\",\n \" 7 coverage 6\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 18,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"sorted_terms_table(mat, vocab, labels, lo_thresh=5)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Term frequency–inverse document frequency transformation (tf-idf)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[Term frequency–inverse document frequency transformation (tf-idf)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tf%E2%80%93idf) is a matrix transformation that is often applied to DTMs in order to reflect the importance of a token to a document. The `bow_stats` module provides the function [tfidf](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.tfidf) for this. When the input is a sparse matrix, and the calculation supports operating on sparce matrices, the output will also be a sparse matrix, which means that the tf-idf transformation is implemented in a very memory-efficient way.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's apply tf-idf to our DTM using the default way:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 19,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.184711Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.181775Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.187019Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.186549Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"<5x516 sparse matrix of type ''\\n\",\n \"\\twith 576 stored elements in COOrdinate format>\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 19,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats import tfidf\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"tfidf_mat = tfidf(mat)\\n\",\n \"tfidf_mat\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can see that the output is a sparse matrix. Let's have a look at its values:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 20,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.194266Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.193729Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.197257Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.197861Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"matrix([[0. , 0. , 0. , ..., 0. , 0. , 0. ],\\n\",\n \" [0.03132, 0.03132, 0. , ..., 0. , 0. , 0.06264],\\n\",\n \" [0. , 0. , 0. , ..., 0. , 0.00759, 0. ],\\n\",\n \" [0. , 0. , 0.00798, ..., 0.00798, 0. , 0. ],\\n\",\n \" [0. , 0. , 0. , ..., 0. , 0. , 0. ]])\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 20,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tfidf_mat.todense()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Of course we can also pass this matrix to `sorted_terms_table` and observe that some rankings have changed in comparison to the untransformed DTM:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 21,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.203557Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.202459Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.221501Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.221917Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
tokenvalue
docrank
NewsArticles-1191day0.077434
2bbc0.065935
3victoria0.065935
NewsArticles-12061car0.125276
2garda0.125276
3collision0.093957
NewsArticles-20581merkel0.053148
2refugee0.049351
3eu0.038639
NewsArticles-30161politic0.055856
2farron0.039897
3party0.037484
NewsArticles-36651medium0.081394
2candidate0.067239
3macron0.053083
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" token value\\n\",\n \"doc rank \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-119 1 day 0.077434\\n\",\n \" 2 bbc 0.065935\\n\",\n \" 3 victoria 0.065935\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1206 1 car 0.125276\\n\",\n \" 2 garda 0.125276\\n\",\n \" 3 collision 0.093957\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-2058 1 merkel 0.053148\\n\",\n \" 2 refugee 0.049351\\n\",\n \" 3 eu 0.038639\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3016 1 politic 0.055856\\n\",\n \" 2 farron 0.039897\\n\",\n \" 3 party 0.037484\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3665 1 medium 0.081394\\n\",\n \" 2 candidate 0.067239\\n\",\n \" 3 macron 0.053083\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 21,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"sorted_terms_table(tfidf_mat, vocab, labels, top_n=3)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The tf-idf matrix is calculated from a DTM $D$ as $\\\\textit{tf}(D) \\\\cdot \\\\textit{idf}(D)$.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"There are different variants for how to calculate the term frequency $\\\\textit{tf}(D)$ and the inverse document frequency $\\\\textit{idf(D)}$. The package tmtoolkit contains several functions that implement some of these variants. For $\\\\text{tf()}$ these are:\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"- [tf_binary](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.tf_binary): binary term frequency matrix (matrix contains 1 whenever a term occurred in a document, else 0)\\n\",\n \"- [tf_proportions](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.tf_proportions): proportional term frequency matrix (term counts are normalized by document length)\\n\",\n \"- [tf_log](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.tf_log): log-normalized term frequency matrix (by default $\\\\log(1 + D)$)\\n\",\n \"- [tf_double_norm](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.tf_double_norm): double-normalized term frequency matrix\\n\",\n \" $K + (1-K) \\\\cdot \\\\frac{D}{\\\\textit{rowmax}(D)}$, where $\\\\textit{rowmax}(D)$ is a vector containing the maximum term count per document\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"As you can see, all the term frequency functions are prefixed with a `tf_`. There are also two variants for $\\\\textit{idf()}$:\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"- [idf](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.idf): calculates $\\\\log(\\\\frac{a + N}{b + \\\\textit{df}(D)})$ where $a$ and $b$ are smoothing constants, $N$ is the number of documents and $\\\\textit{df}(D)$ calculates the [document frequency](#Document-lengths,-document-and-term-frequencies,-token-co-occurrences)\\n\",\n \"- [idf_probabilistic](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.idf_probabilistic): calculates $\\\\log(a + \\\\frac{N - \\\\textit{df}(D)}{\\\\textit{df}(D)})$\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The term frequency functions always return a sparse matrix if possible and if the input is sparse. Let's try out two term frequency functions:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 22,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.228886Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.228077Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.231334Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.232035Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"matrix([[0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 0, 0],\\n\",\n \" [1, 1, 0, ..., 0, 0, 1],\\n\",\n \" [0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 1, 0],\\n\",\n \" [0, 0, 1, ..., 1, 0, 0],\\n\",\n \" [0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 0, 0]])\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 22,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats import tf_binary, tf_proportions\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"tf_binary(mat).todense()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 23,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.240833Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.239939Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.244072Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.243310Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"matrix([[0. , 0. , 0. , ..., 0. , 0. , 0. ],\\n\",\n \" [0.025 , 0.025 , 0. , ..., 0. , 0. , 0.05 ],\\n\",\n \" [0. , 0. , 0. , ..., 0. , 0.00606, 0. ],\\n\",\n \" [0. , 0. , 0.00637, ..., 0.00637, 0. , 0. ],\\n\",\n \" [0. , 0. , 0. , ..., 0. , 0. , 0. ]])\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 23,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tf_proportions(mat).todense()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Just like the [document frequency](#Document-lengths,-document-and-term-frequencies,-token-co-occurrences) function `doc_frequencies`, the inverse document frequency functions also return a vector with the same length as the vocabulary. Let's use these functions and have a look at the inverse document frequency of certain tokens:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 24,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.254232Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.253371Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.257431Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.256687Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[('110pm', 1.252762968495368),\\n\",\n \" ('70', 1.252762968495368),\\n\",\n \" ('abuse', 1.252762968495368),\\n\",\n \" ('access', 0.9808292530117262),\\n\",\n \" ('accession', 1.252762968495368),\\n\",\n \" ('accusation', 1.252762968495368),\\n\",\n \" ('act', 1.252762968495368),\\n\",\n \" ('addition', 1.252762968495368),\\n\",\n \" ('address', 1.252762968495368),\\n\",\n \" ('administration', 1.252762968495368)]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 24,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats import idf, idf_probabilistic\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"idf_vec = idf(mat)\\n\",\n \"list(zip(vocab, idf_vec))[:10]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 25,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.262323Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.261799Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.268979Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.268178Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[('110pm', 1.6094379124341003),\\n\",\n \" ('70', 1.6094379124341003),\\n\",\n \" ('abuse', 1.6094379124341003),\\n\",\n \" ('access', 0.916290731874155),\\n\",\n \" ('accession', 1.6094379124341003),\\n\",\n \" ('accusation', 1.6094379124341003),\\n\",\n \" ('act', 1.6094379124341003),\\n\",\n \" ('addition', 1.6094379124341003),\\n\",\n \" ('address', 1.6094379124341003),\\n\",\n \" ('administration', 1.6094379124341003)]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 25,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"probidf_vec = idf_probabilistic(mat)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"list(zip(vocab, probidf_vec))[:10]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Note that due to our very small sample, there's not much variation in the inverse document frequency values.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"By default, [tfidf](api.rst#tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.tfidf) uses `tf_proportions` and `idf` to calculate the tf-idf matrix. You can plug in other functions to get other variants of tf-idf:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 26,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.276735Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.275969Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.278738Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.279357Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"array([[0.40236, 0.40236, 0.40236, ..., 0.40236, 0.40236, 0.40236],\\n\",\n \" [0.70413, 0.70413, 0.40236, ..., 0.40236, 0.40236, 1.0059 ],\\n\",\n \" [0.40236, 0.40236, 0.40236, ..., 0.40236, 0.5748 , 0.40236],\\n\",\n \" [0.40236, 0.40236, 0.5748 , ..., 0.5748 , 0.40236, 0.40236],\\n\",\n \" [0.40236, 0.40236, 0.40236, ..., 0.40236, 0.40236, 0.40236]])\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 26,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats import tf_double_norm\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# we also set a \\\"K\\\" parameter for \\\"tf_double_norm\\\"\\n\",\n \"tfidf_mat2 = tfidf(mat, tf_func=tf_double_norm,\\n\",\n \" idf_func=idf_probabilistic, K=0.25)\\n\",\n \"tfidf_mat2\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 27,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.289639Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.284300Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.307249Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:08.308053Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
tokenvalue
docrank
NewsArticles-1191bbc1.207078
2nhs1.207078
3victoria1.207078
NewsArticles-12061car1.609438
2garda1.609438
3collision1.307668
NewsArticles-20581merkel1.609438
2refugee1.523218
3germany1.092119
NewsArticles-30161politic1.609438
2farron1.264558
3putin1.092119
NewsArticles-36651medium1.609438
2candidate1.399511
3macron1.189585
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" token value\\n\",\n \"doc rank \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-119 1 bbc 1.207078\\n\",\n \" 2 nhs 1.207078\\n\",\n \" 3 victoria 1.207078\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1206 1 car 1.609438\\n\",\n \" 2 garda 1.609438\\n\",\n \" 3 collision 1.307668\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-2058 1 merkel 1.609438\\n\",\n \" 2 refugee 1.523218\\n\",\n \" 3 germany 1.092119\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3016 1 politic 1.609438\\n\",\n \" 2 farron 1.264558\\n\",\n \" 3 putin 1.092119\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-3665 1 medium 1.609438\\n\",\n \" 2 candidate 1.399511\\n\",\n \" 3 macron 1.189585\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 27,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"sorted_terms_table(tfidf_mat2, vocab, labels, top_n=3)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"---\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Once we have generated a DTM, we can use it for topic modeling. The [next chapter](topic_modeling.ipynb) will show how tmtoolkit can be used to evaluate the quality of your model, export essential information from it and visualize the results.\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"metadata\": {\n \"kernelspec\": {\n \"display_name\": \"Python 3 (ipykernel)\",\n \"language\": \"python\",\n \"name\": \"python3\"\n },\n \"language_info\": {\n \"codemirror_mode\": {\n \"name\": \"ipython\",\n \"version\": 3\n },\n \"file_extension\": \".py\",\n \"mimetype\": \"text/x-python\",\n \"name\": \"python\",\n \"nbconvert_exporter\": \"python\",\n \"pygments_lexer\": \"ipython3\",\n \"version\": \"3.8.10\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"stem_cell\": {\n \"cell_type\": \"raw\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"collapsed\": false\n },\n \"source\": []\n }\n }\n },\n \"nbformat\": 4,\n \"nbformat_minor\": 2\n}\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/conf.py", "content": "# Configuration file for the Sphinx documentation builder.\n#\n# This file only contains a selection of the most common options. For a full\n# list see the documentation:\n# https://www.sphinx-doc.org/en/master/usage/configuration.html\n\n# -- Path setup --------------------------------------------------------------\n\n# If extensions (or modules to document with autodoc) are in another directory,\n# add these directories to sys.path here. If the directory is relative to the\n# documentation root, use os.path.abspath to make it absolute, like shown here.\n#\n\nimport os\nimport sys\nfrom datetime import date\n\nimport sphinx_rtd_theme\n\nsys.path.insert(0, os.path.abspath('../..'))\n\n\n# -- Project information -----------------------------------------------------\n\nproject = 'tmtoolkit'\ncopyright = f'{date.today().year}, Markus Konrad'\nauthor = 'Markus Konrad'\n\n\n# -- General configuration ---------------------------------------------------\n\n# Add any Sphinx extension module names here, as strings. They can be\n# extensions coming with Sphinx (named 'sphinx.ext.*') or your custom\n# ones.\nextensions = [\n 'nbsphinx',\n 'sphinx.ext.autodoc',\n 'sphinx_rtd_theme'\n]\n\n# Add any paths that contain templates here, relative to this directory.\ntemplates_path = ['_templates']\n\n# List of patterns, relative to source directory, that match files and\n# directories to ignore when looking for source files.\n# This pattern also affects html_static_path and html_extra_path.\n\nexclude_patterns = ['**.ipynb_checkpoints']\n\n\n# If true, '()' will be appended to :func: etc. cross-reference text.\nadd_function_parentheses = False\n\n# If true, the current module name will be prepended to all description\n# unit titles (such as .. function::).\nadd_module_names = True\n\n# type hints\nautodoc_typehints = 'description'\nautodoc_typehints_format = 'short'\n\n# The name of the Pygments (syntax highlighting) style to use.\npygments_style = 'sphinx'\n\n# -- Options for HTML output -------------------------------------------------\n\n# The theme to use for HTML and HTML Help pages. See the documentation for\n# a list of builtin themes.\n#\n\nhtml_theme_path = [sphinx_rtd_theme.get_html_theme_path()]\nhtml_theme = \"sphinx_rtd_theme\"\n# html_static_path = ['static']\n\n# Output file base name for HTML help builder.\nhtmlhelp_basename = '%sdoc' % project\n\n# Never skip __init__\n\ndef skip(app, what, name, obj, would_skip, options):\n if name == \"__init__\":\n return False\n return would_skip\n\ndef setup(app):\n app.connect(\"autodoc-skip-member\", skip)\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/data/corpus_example/sample1.txt", "content": "This is the first example file. ☺ We showcase NER by just randomly listing famous people like Missy Elliott or George Harrison.\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/data/corpus_example/sample2.txt", "content": "Here comes the second example (with HTML tags & entities).\n\nThis one contains three lines of plain text which means two paragraphs." }, { "path": "doc/source/data/corpus_example/sample3.txt", "content": "And here we go with the third and final example file.\nAnother line of text.\n\n§2.\nThis is the second paragraph.\n\nThe third and final paragraph." }, { "path": "doc/source/data/tm_wordclouds/.gitignore", "content": "# Ignore everything in this directory\n*\n# Except this file\n!.gitignore\n\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/development.rst", "content": ".. _development:\n\nDevelopment\n===========\n\nThis part of the documentation serves as developer documentation, i.e. a help for those who want to contribute to the development of the package.\n\n\nProject overview\n----------------\n\nThis project aims to provide a Python package that allows text processing, text mining and topic modeling with\n\n- easy installation,\n- extensive documentation,\n- clear functional programming interface,\n- good performance on large datasets.\n\nAll computations need to be performed in memory. Streaming data from disk is not supported so far.\n\nThe package is written in Python and uses other packages for key tasks:\n\n- `SpaCy `_ is used for the text processing and text mining tasks\n- `lda `_, `gensim `_ or `scikit-learn `_ are used for computing topic models\n\nThe project's packages are published to the `Python Package Index PyPI `_.\n\nThe package's dependencies are only installed on demand. There's a setup routine that provides an interface for easy installation of SpaCy's language models.\n\nText processing and normalization is often used to construct a Bag-of-Words (BoW) model which in turn is the input for topic models.\n\n\nContributing to tmtoolkit\n-------------------------\n\nIf you want to contribute to tmtoolkit, you can create code or documentation patches (updates) and submit them as `pull requests `_ on GitHub. The first thing to do for this is to fork the `GitHub repository `_ and to clone it on your local machine. It's best to create a separate branch for your updates next. You should then set up your local machine for development as follows:\n\n- create a `Python virtual environment `_ – make sure that the Python version you're using for this is supported by tmtoolkit\n- update pip via ``pip install -U pip``\n- if you're planning to contribute to the code or to the tutorials in the documentation:\n\n - install *all* dependencies via ``pip install -r requirements.txt``\n - run the tmtoolkit setup routine via ``python -m tmtoolkit setup all`` to install the required language models\n - check that everything works by running all tests via ``pytest tests/``\n\n- if you're *only* planning to contribute to the documentation (without the tutorials which are Jupyter Notebooks):\n\n - install dependencies for documentation via ``pip install -r requirements_doc.txt``\n\nYou can then start working on the code or documentation. Make sure to run the tests and/or create new tests when you provide code updates in your pull request. You should also read this developer documentation completely before diving into the code.\n\n\nFolder structure\n----------------\n\nThe project's root folder contains files for documentation generation (``.readthedocs.yaml``), testing (``conftest.py``, ``coverage.svg``, ``tox.ini``) as well as project management and package building (``Makefile``, ``MANIFEST.in``, ``setup.py``). The subfolders include:\n\n- ``.github/worflows``: provides Continuous Integration (CI) configuration for *GitHub Actions*,\n- ``doc``: documentation source and built documentation files,\n- ``examples``: example scripts and data to show some of the features (most features are better explained in the tutorial which is part of the documentation),\n- ``scripts``: scripts used for preparing datasets that come along with the package,\n- ``tests``: test suite,\n- ``tmtoolkit``: package source code.\n\n\nPackaging and dependency management\n-----------------------------------\n\nThis package uses `setuptools `_ for packaging. All package metadata and dependencies are defined in ``setup.py``. Since tmtoolkit allows installing dependencies on demand, there are several installation options defined in ``setup.py``. For development, the most important are:\n\n- ``[dev]``: installs packages for development and packaging\n- ``[test]``: installs packages for testing tmtoolkit\n- ``[doc]``: installs packages for generating the documentation\n- ``[all]``: installs all required and optional packages – recommended for development\n\nThe ``requirements.txt`` and ``requirements_doc.txt`` files simply point to the ``[all]`` and ``[doc]`` installation options.\n\nThe ``Makefile`` in the root folder contains targets for generating a Python *Wheel* package (``make wheel``) and a Python source distribution package (``make sdist``).\n\n\nBuilt-in datasets\n-----------------\n\nAll built-in datasets reside in ``tmtoolkit/data/``, where ``LANGUAGE_CODE`` is an ISO language code. For the `ParlSpeech V2 `_ datasets, the samples are generated via the R script ``scripts/prepare_corpora.R``. The `News Articles `_ dataset is used without further processing.\n\n\nAutomated testing\n-----------------\n\nThe tmtoolkit package relies on the following packages for testing:\n\n- `pytest `_ as testing framework,\n- `hypothesis `_ for property-based testing,\n- `coverage `_ for measuring test coverage of the code,\n- `tox `_ for checking packaging and running tests in different virtual environments.\n\nAll tests are implemented in the ``tests`` directory and prefixed by ``test_``. The ``conftest.py`` file contains project-wide test configuration. The ``tox.ini`` file contains configuration for setting up the virtual environments for tox. For each release, tmtoolkit aims to support the last three major Python release versions, e.g. 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10, and all of these are tested with tox along with different dependency configurations from *minimal* to *full*. To use different versions of Python on the same system, it's recommended to use the `deadsnakes repository `_ on Ubuntu or Debian Linux.\n\nThe ``Makefile`` in the root folder contains a target for generating coverage reports and the coverage badge (``make cov_tests``).\n\n\nDocumentation\n-------------\n\nThe `Sphinx `_ package is used for documentation. All objects exposed by the API are documented in the Sphinx format. All other parts of the documentation reside in ``doc/source``. The configuration for Sphinx lies in ``doc/source/conf.py``. The `nbsphinx `_ package is used for generating the tutorial from Jupyter Notebooks which are also located in ``doc/source``.\n\nThe ``Makefile`` in the ``doc`` folder has several targets for generating the documentation. These are:\n\n- ``make notebooks`` – run all notebooks to generate their outputs; these are stored in-place\n- ``make clean`` – remove everything under ``doc/build``\n- ``make html`` – generate the HTML documentation from the documentation source\n\nThe generated documentation then resides under ``doc/build``.\n\nThe documentation is published at `tmtoolkit.readthedocs.io `_. For this, new commits to the master branch of the GitHub project or new tags are automatically built by `readthedocs.org `_. The ``.readthedocs.yaml`` file in the root folder sets up the build process for readthedocs.org.\n\n\nContinuous integration\n----------------------\n\nContinuous integration routines are defined via `GitHub Actions (GA) `_. For tmtoolkit, this so far only means automatic testing for new commits and releases on different machine configurations.\n\nThe GA set up for the tests is done in ``.github/worflows/runtests.yml``. There are \"minimal\" and \"full\" test suites for Ubuntu, MacOS and Windows with Python versions 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10 each, which means 18 jobs are spawned. Again, tox is used for running the tests on the machines.\n\n\nRelease management\n------------------\n\nPublishing a new release for tmtoolkit involves several steps, listed below. You may consider creating a `pre-release `_ for PyPI first before publishing a final release.\n\n1. Preparation:\n\n- create a new branch for the release version X.Y.Z as ``releaseX.Y.Z``\n- check if there are new minimum version requirements for dependencies or generally new dependencies to be added in ``setup.py``\n- check if the compatible Python versions should be updated in ``setup.py``\n- set the new version in ``setup.py`` and ``tmtoolkit/__init__.py``\n\n2. Documentation updates:\n\n- check and possibly update the tutorials – do all code examples still work and are all important features covered?\n- update documentation\n- update README\n- update changelog (``doc/source/version_history.rst``)\n\n3. Testing:\n\n- run examples and check if they work\n- run tests locally via tox\n- push to GitHub repository ``develop`` or ``release*`` branch to run tests via GitHub Actions\n\n4. Publish package to PyPI:\n\n- build source distribution via ``make sdist``\n- build wheel via ``make wheel``\n- check both via ``twine check dist/...``\n- if checks passed, upload both to PyPI via ``twine upload dist/...``\n\n5. Finalization\n\n- make a new tag for the new version via ``git tag -a vX.Y.Z -m \"version X.Y.Z\"``\n- push the new tag to the GitHub repository\n- create a new release from the tag in the GitHub repository\n- merge the development or release branch with the master branch and push the master branch to the GitHub repository\n- log in to `readthedocs.org `_, go to the project page, activate the current version, let it build the documentation\n- verify documentation on `tmtoolkit.readthedocs.io `_\n\nIf you notice a (major) mistake in a release *after* publication, you have several options like yanking the release on PyPI, publishing a post-release or updating the build number of the wheel. See `this blog post `_ for more information about these options.\n\n\nAPI style\n---------\n\nThe tmtoolkit package provides a *functional API*. This is quite different from object-oriented APIs that are found in many other Python packages, where a programmer mainly uses classes and their methods that are exposed by an API. The tmtoolkit API on the other hand mainly exposes data structures and functions that operate on these data structures. In tmtoolkit, Python classes are usually used to implement more complex data structures such as documents or document corpora, but these classes don't provide (public) methods. Rather, they are used as function arguments, for example as in the large set of *corpus functions* that operate on text corpora as explained below.\n\n\nImplementation details\n----------------------\n\nTop-level module and setup routine\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\nThe ``__main__.py`` file provides a command-line interface for the package. It's only purpose is to allow easy installation of SpaCy language models via the :ref:`setup routine `. The ``tokenseq`` module provides functions that operate on single (string) tokens or sequences of tokens. These functions are used mainly internally in the ``corpus`` module, but are also exposed by the API to be used from a package user. The ``utils.py`` module provides helper functions used internally throughout the package, but also to be possibly used from a package user.\n\n``bow`` module\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\nThis module provides functions for generating document-term-matrices (DTMs), which are central to the BoW concept, and some common statistics used for these matrices.\n\n``corpus`` module\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\nThis is the central module for text processing and text mining.\n\nAt the core of this module, there is the :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus` class implemented in ``corpus/_corpus.py``. It takes documents with raw text as input (i.e. a dict mapping *document labels* to text strings) and applies a SpaCy NLP pipeline to it. After that, the corpus consists of :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` (implemented in ``corpus/_document.py``) objects which contain the textual data in tokenized form, i.e. as a sequence of *tokens* (roughly translated as \"words\" but other text contents such as numbers and punctuation also form separate tokens). Each token comes along with several *token attributes* which were estimated using the NLP pipeline. Examples for token attributes include the Part-of-Speech tag or the lemma.\n\nThe :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` class stores the tokens and their \"standard\" attributes in a *token matrix*. This matrix is of shape *(N, M)* for *N* tokens and with *M* attributes. There are at least 2 or 3 attributes: ``whitespace`` (boolean – is there a whitespace after the token?), ``token`` (the actual token, i.e. \"word\" type) and optionally ``sent_start`` (only given when sentence information is parsed in the NLP pipeline).\n\nThe token matrix is a *uint64* matrix as it stores all information as *64 bit hash values*. Compared to sequences of strings, this reduces memory usage and allows faster computations and data modifications. E.g., when you transform a token (lets say \"Hello\" to \"hello\"), you only do one transformation, calculate one new hash value and replace each occurrence of the old hash with the new hash. The hashes are calculated with SpaCy's `hash_string `_ function. For fast conversion between token/attribute hashes and strings, the mappings are stored in a *bidirectional dictionary* using the `bidict `_ package. Each column, i.e. each attribute, in the token matrix has a separate bidict in the ``bimaps`` dictionary that is shared between a corpus and each Document object. Using bidict proved to be *much* faster than using SpaCy's built in `Vocab / StringStore `_.\n\nBesides \"standard\" token attributes that come from the SpaCy NLP pipeline, a user may also add custom token attributes. These are stored in each document's :attr:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document.custom_token_attrs` dictionary that map a attribute name to a NumPy array. These arrays are of arbitrary type and don't use the hashing approach. Besides token attributes, there are also *document attributes*. These are attributes attached to each document, for example the *document label* (unique document identifier). Custom document attributes can be added, e.g. to record the publication year of a document. Document attributes can also be of any type and are not hashed.\n\nThe :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus` class implements a data structure for text corpora with named documents. All these documents are stored in the corpus as :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` objects. *Corpus functions* allow to operate on Corpus objects. They are implemented in ``corpus/_corpusfuncs.py``. All corpus functions that transform/modify a corpus, have an ``inplace`` argument, by default set to ``True``. If ``inplace`` is set to ``True``, the corpus will be directly modified in-place, i.e. modifying the input corpus. If ``inplace`` is set to ``False``, a copy of the input corpus is created and all modifications are applied to this copy. The original input corpus is not altered in that case. The ``corpus_func_inplace_opt`` decorator is used to mark corpus functions with the in-place option.\n\nThe :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus` class provides parallel processing capabilities for processing large data amounts. This can be controlled with the ``max_workers`` argument. Parallel processing is then enabled at two stages: First, it is simply enabled for the SpaCy NLP pipeline by setting up the pipeline accordingly. Second, a *reusable process pool executor* is created by the means of `loky `_. This process pool is then used in corpus functions whenever parallel execution is beneficial over serial execution. The ``parallelexec`` decorator is used to mark (inner) functions for parallel execution.\n\n\n``topicmod`` module\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\nThis is the central module for computing, evaluating and analyzing topic models.\n\nIn ``topicmod/evaluate.py`` there are mainly several evaluation metrics for topic models implemented. Topic models can be computed and evaluated in parallel, the base code for that is in ``topicmod/parallel.py``. Three modules use the base classes from ``topicmod/parallel.py`` to implement interfaces to popular topic modeling packages:\n\n- ``topicmod/tm_gensim.py`` for `gensim `_\n- ``topicmod/tm_lda.py`` for `lda `_\n- ``topicmod/tm_sklearn.py`` for `scikit-learn `_\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/getting_started.ipynb", "content": "{\n \"cells\": [\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"# Getting started\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"This is only quick overview for getting started. Corpus loading, text preprocessing, etc. are explained in depth in the respective chapters.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"## Loading a built-in text corpus\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Once you have installed tmtoolkit, you can start by loading a built-in dataset. Note that you must have installed tmtoolkit with the ``[recommended]`` or ``[textproc]`` option for this to work. See the [installation instructions](install.rst) for details.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's import the [builtin_corpora_info](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.builtin_corpora_info) function first and have a look which datasets are available:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 1,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:11.428539Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:11.427097Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:13.868641Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:13.868205Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['de-parlspeech-v2-sample-bundestag',\\n\",\n \" 'en-News100',\\n\",\n \" 'en-NewsArticles',\\n\",\n \" 'en-parlspeech-v2-sample-houseofcommons',\\n\",\n \" 'es-parlspeech-v2-sample-congreso',\\n\",\n \" 'nl-parlspeech-v2-sample-tweedekamer']\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 1,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import builtin_corpora_info\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"builtin_corpora_info()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Let's load one of these corpora, a sample of 100 articles from the [News Articles dataset from Harvard Dataverse](https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/GMFCTR). For this, we import the [Corpus](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus) class and use [Corpus.from_builtin_corpus](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus.from_builtin_corpus). The raw text data will then be processed by an [NLP pipeline](https://spacy.io/usage/spacy-101#pipelines) with [SpaCy](https://spacy.io). That is, it will be tokenized and analyzed for the grammatical structure of each sentence and the linguistic attributes of each token, among other things. Since this step is computationally intense, it takes quite some time for large text corpora (it can be sped up by enabling parallel processing as explained later).\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 2,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:13.873602Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:13.873034Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.438738Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.438313Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n },\n \"scrolled\": true\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 2,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import Corpus\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corp = Corpus.from_builtin_corpus('en-News100')\\n\",\n \"corp\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can have a look which documents were loaded (showing only the first ten document labels):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 3,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.444345Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.443859Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.447634Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.448004Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['News100-2338',\\n\",\n \" 'News100-3228',\\n\",\n \" 'News100-1253',\\n\",\n \" 'News100-1615',\\n\",\n \" 'News100-3334',\\n\",\n \" 'News100-92',\\n\",\n \" 'News100-869',\\n\",\n \" 'News100-3092',\\n\",\n \" 'News100-3088',\\n\",\n \" 'News100-1173']\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 3,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp.doc_labels[:10]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## Accessing documents and document tokens\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We can now access each document in this corpus via its document label:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 4,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.454699Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.453877Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.456920Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.457598Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"Document \\\"News100-2338\\\" (680 tokens, 9 token attributes, 2 document attributes)\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 4,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp['News100-2338']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"By accessing the corpus in this way, we get a [Document](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.Document) object. We can query a document for its contents again using the square brackets syntax. Here, we access its tokens and show only the first ten:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 5,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.464307Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.463502Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.466655Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.467342Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[\\\"'\\\",\\n\",\n \" 'This',\\n\",\n \" 'Is',\\n\",\n \" 'Us',\\n\",\n \" \\\"'\\\",\\n\",\n \" 'Makes',\\n\",\n \" 'Surprising',\\n\",\n \" 'Reveal',\\n\",\n \" 'About',\\n\",\n \" 'Jack']\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 5,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp['News100-2338']['token'][:10]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Most of the time, you won't need to access the `Document` objects of a corpus directly. You can rather use functions that provide a convenient interface to a corpus' contents, e.g. the [doc_tokens](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.doc_tokens) function which allows to retrieve all documents' tokens along with additional token attributes like Part-of-Speech (POS) tags, token lemma, etc.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's first import `doc_tokens` and then list the first ten tokens of the documents \\\"News100-2338\\\" and \\\"News100-3228\\\":\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 6,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.514038Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.490838Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.516094Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.516757Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import doc_tokens\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"tokens = doc_tokens(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 7,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.522649Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.521855Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.524583Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.524981Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[\\\"'\\\",\\n\",\n \" 'This',\\n\",\n \" 'Is',\\n\",\n \" 'Us',\\n\",\n \" \\\"'\\\",\\n\",\n \" 'Makes',\\n\",\n \" 'Surprising',\\n\",\n \" 'Reveal',\\n\",\n \" 'About',\\n\",\n \" 'Jack']\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 7,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tokens['News100-2338'][:10]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 8,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.530930Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.530117Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.533513Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.534198Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['Neil',\\n\",\n \" 'Gorsuch',\\n\",\n \" 'facing',\\n\",\n \" \\\"'\\\",\\n\",\n \" 'rigorous',\\n\",\n \" \\\"'\\\",\\n\",\n \" 'confirmation',\\n\",\n \" 'hearing',\\n\",\n \" 'this',\\n\",\n \" 'week']\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 8,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tokens['News100-3228'][:10]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can retrieve more information than just the tokens. Let's also get the POS tags via `with_attr='pos'` and enable structuring the results according to the sentences in the document via `sentences=True`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 9,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.557612Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.547961Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.646644Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.647236Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"tokens = doc_tokens(corp, sentences=True, with_attr='pos')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"For each document, we now have a dictionary with two entries, \\\"token\\\" and \\\"pos\\\":\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 10,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.653137Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.652327Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.655359Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.656021Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"dict_keys(['token', 'pos'])\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 10,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tokens['News100-2338'].keys()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Within these dictionary entries, the tokens and the POS tags are contained inside a list of sentences. So for example to get the POS tags for each token in the fourth sentence (i.e. index 3), we can write:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 11,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.660989Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.660349Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.664014Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.663575Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['DET',\\n\",\n \" 'NOUN',\\n\",\n \" 'VERB',\\n\",\n \" 'ADP',\\n\",\n \" 'ADP',\\n\",\n \" 'DET',\\n\",\n \" 'ADJ',\\n\",\n \" 'PROPN',\\n\",\n \" 'VERB',\\n\",\n \" 'ADP',\\n\",\n \" 'PROPN',\\n\",\n \" 'PART',\\n\",\n \" 'PUNCT',\\n\",\n \" 'PROPN',\\n\",\n \" 'PROPN',\\n\",\n \" 'PUNCT',\\n\",\n \" 'VERB',\\n\",\n \" 'ADP',\\n\",\n \" 'VERB',\\n\",\n \" 'ADP',\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 11,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# index 3 is the fourth sentence, since indices start with 0\\n\",\n \"tokens['News100-2338']['pos'][3]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We could for example combine the tokens and their POS tags by using `zip`. Here we do that for the first five tokens in the fourth sentence:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 12,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.670332Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.669849Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.675261Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.675913Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[('The', 'DET'),\\n\",\n \" ('episode', 'NOUN'),\\n\",\n \" ('started', 'VERB'),\\n\",\n \" ('off', 'ADP'),\\n\",\n \" ('with', 'ADP')]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 12,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"list(zip(tokens['News100-2338']['token'][3][:5],\\n\",\n \" tokens['News100-2338']['pos'][3][:5]))\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"To get an overview about the contents of a corpus, it's often more useful to get it in a tabular format. The tmtoolkit package provides a function to generate a [pandas DataFrame](https://pandas.pydata.org/) from a corpus, [tokens_table](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.tokens_table).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We'll use that now and instruct it to also return the sentence index of each token via `sentences=True`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 13,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.702561Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:27.698198Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:28.165449Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:28.164889Z\"\n },\n \"scrolled\": true\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docsentpositiontokenis_punctis_stoplemmalike_numpostag
0News100-102600KremlinFalseFalseKremlinFalsePROPNNNP
1News100-102601givesFalseFalsegiveFalseVERBVBZ
2News100-102602noFalseTruenoFalseDETDT
3News100-102603commentFalseFalsecommentFalseNOUNNN
4News100-102604onFalseTrueonFalseADPIN
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc sent position token is_punct is_stop lemma \\\\\\n\",\n \"0 News100-1026 0 0 Kremlin False False Kremlin \\n\",\n \"1 News100-1026 0 1 gives False False give \\n\",\n \"2 News100-1026 0 2 no False True no \\n\",\n \"3 News100-1026 0 3 comment False False comment \\n\",\n \"4 News100-1026 0 4 on False True on \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" like_num pos tag \\n\",\n \"0 False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"1 False VERB VBZ \\n\",\n \"2 False DET DT \\n\",\n \"3 False NOUN NN \\n\",\n \"4 False ADP IN \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 13,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import tokens_table\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"toktbl = tokens_table(corp, sentences=True)\\n\",\n \"toktbl.head()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Using subsetting, we can for example select the fourth sentence in the \\\"News100-2338\\\" document:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 14,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:28.180703Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:28.180121Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:28.195724Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:28.196322Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docsentpositiontokenis_punctis_stoplemmalike_numpostag
28191News100-23383101TheFalseTruetheFalseDETDT
28192News100-23383102episodeFalseFalseepisodeFalseNOUNNN
28193News100-23383103startedFalseFalsestartFalseVERBVBD
28194News100-23383104offFalseTrueoffFalseADPRP
28195News100-23383105withFalseTruewithFalseADPIN
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc sent position token is_punct is_stop lemma \\\\\\n\",\n \"28191 News100-2338 3 101 The False True the \\n\",\n \"28192 News100-2338 3 102 episode False False episode \\n\",\n \"28193 News100-2338 3 103 started False False start \\n\",\n \"28194 News100-2338 3 104 off False True off \\n\",\n \"28195 News100-2338 3 105 with False True with \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" like_num pos tag \\n\",\n \"28191 False DET DT \\n\",\n \"28192 False NOUN NN \\n\",\n \"28193 False VERB VBD \\n\",\n \"28194 False ADP RP \\n\",\n \"28195 False ADP IN \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 14,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"toktbl[(toktbl.doc == 'News100-2338') & (toktbl.sent == 3)].head()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"---\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We can do much more with text corpora in terms of accessing and transforming their contents. This is shown in great detail in the [chapter on text preprocessing](preprocessing.ipynb).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Next, we proceed with [working with text corpora](text_corpora.ipynb).\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"metadata\": {\n \"kernelspec\": {\n \"display_name\": \"Python 3 (ipykernel)\",\n \"language\": \"python\",\n \"name\": \"python3\"\n },\n \"language_info\": {\n \"codemirror_mode\": {\n \"name\": \"ipython\",\n \"version\": 3\n },\n \"file_extension\": \".py\",\n \"mimetype\": \"text/x-python\",\n \"name\": \"python\",\n \"nbconvert_exporter\": \"python\",\n \"pygments_lexer\": \"ipython3\",\n \"version\": \"3.8.10\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"stem_cell\": {\n \"cell_type\": \"raw\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"collapsed\": false\n },\n \"source\": []\n }\n }\n },\n \"nbformat\": 4,\n \"nbformat_minor\": 2\n}\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/index.rst", "content": ".. tmtoolkit documentation master file, created by\n sphinx-quickstart on Tue Aug 27 11:30:06 2019.\n You can adapt this file completely to your liking, but it should at least\n contain the root `toctree` directive.\n\n.. include:: intro.rst\n\n.. include:: license_note.rst\n\n.. toctree::\n :maxdepth: 4\n :caption: Contents:\n\n install\n getting_started\n text_corpora\n preprocessing\n bow\n topic_modeling\n api\n development\n version_history\n\nIndices and tables\n==================\n\n* :ref:`genindex`\n* :ref:`modindex`\n* :ref:`search`\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/install.rst", "content": ".. _install:\n\nInstallation\n============\n\nRequirements\n------------\n\n**tmtoolkit works with Python 3.8 or newer (tested up to Python 3.10).**\n\nRequirements are automatically installed via *pip* as described below. Additional packages can also be installed\nvia *pip* for certain use cases (see :ref:`optional_packages`).\n\n\nInstallation instructions\n-------------------------\n\nThe package *tmtoolkit* is available on `PyPI `_ and can be installed via\nPython package manager *pip*. It is highly recommended to install tmtoolkit and its dependencies in a separate\n`Python Virtual Environment (\"venv\") `_ and upgrade to the latest\n*pip* version (you may also choose to install\n`virtualenvwrapper `_, which makes managing venvs a lot\neasier).\n\nCreating and activating a venv *without* virtualenvwrapper:\n\n.. code-block:: text\n\n python3 -m venv myenv\n\n # activating the environment (on Windows type \"myenv\\Scripts\\activate.bat\")\n source myenv/bin/activate\n\nAlternatively, creating and activating a venv *with* virtualenvwrapper:\n\n.. code-block:: text\n\n mkvirtualenv myenv\n\n # activating the environment\n workon myenv\n\nUpgrading pip (*only* do this when you've activated your venv):\n\n.. code-block:: text\n\n pip install -U pip\n\nThe tmtoolkit package is highly modular and tries to install as few software dependencies as possible. So in order to\ninstall tmtoolkit, you can first choose if you want a minimal installation or install a recommended set of\npackages that enable most features. For the recommended installation, you can type **one of the following**, depending\non the preferred package for topic modeling:\n\n.. code-block:: text\n\n # recommended installation without topic modeling\n pip install -U \"tmtoolkit[recommended]\"\n\n # recommended installation with \"lda\" for topic modeling\n pip install -U \"tmtoolkit[recommended,lda]\"\n\n # recommended installation with \"scikit-learn\" for topic modeling\n pip install -U \"tmtoolkit[recommended,sklearn]\"\n\n # recommended installation with \"gensim\" for topic modeling\n pip install -U \"tmtoolkit[recommended,gensim]\"\n\n # you may also select several topic modeling packages\n pip install -U \"tmtoolkit[recommended,lda,sklearn,gensim]\"\n\nThe **minimal** installation will only install a base set of dependencies and will only enable the modules for BoW\nstatistics, token sequence operations, topic modeling and utility functions. You can install it as follows:\n\n.. code-block:: text\n\n # alternative installation if you only want to install a minimum set of dependencies\n pip install -U tmtoolkit\n\n.. note:: The tmtoolkit package is about 7MB big, because it contains some example corpora.\n\n.. _setup:\n\n**After that, you should initially run tmtoolkit's setup routine.** This makes sure that all required data files are\npresent and downloads them if necessary. You should specify a list of languages for which language models should be\ndownloaded and installed. The list of available language models corresponds with the models provided by\n`SpaCy `_ (except for \"multi-language\"). You need to specify the two-letter ISO\nlanguage code for the language models that you want to install. **Don't use spaces in the list of languages.**\nE.g. in order to install models for English and German:\n\n.. code-block:: text\n\n python -m tmtoolkit setup en,de\n\nTo install *all* available language models, you can run:\n\n.. code-block:: text\n\n python -m tmtoolkit setup all\n\n.. _optional_packages:\n\nOptional packages\n-----------------\n\nFor additional features, you can install further packages using the following installation options:\n\n- ``pip install -U tmtoolkit[textproc_extra]`` for Unicode normalization and simplification and for stemming with *nltk*\n- ``pip install -U tmtoolkit[wordclouds]`` for generating word clouds\n- ``pip install -U tmtoolkit[lda]`` for topic modeling with LDA\n- ``pip install -U tmtoolkit[sklearn]`` for topic modeling with scikit-learn\n- ``pip install -U tmtoolkit[gensim]`` for topic modeling and additional evaluation metrics with Gensim\n- ``pip install -U tmtoolkit[topic_modeling_eval_extra]`` for topic modeling evaluation metrics ``griffiths_2004`` and\n ``held_out_documents_wallach09`` (see further information below)\n\nFor LDA evaluation metrics ``griffiths_2004`` and ``held_out_documents_wallach09`` it is necessary to install\n`gmpy2 `_ for multiple-precision arithmetic. This in turn requires installing some C\nheader libraries for GMP, MPFR and MPC. On Debian/Ubuntu systems this is done with:\n\n.. code-block:: text\n\n sudo apt install libgmp-dev libmpfr-dev libmpc-dev\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/intro.rst", "content": "tmtoolkit: Text mining and topic modeling toolkit\n=================================================\n\n|pypi| |pypi_downloads| |rtd| |runtests| |coverage| |zenodo|\n\n*tmtoolkit* is a set of tools for text mining and topic modeling with Python developed especially for the use in the\nsocial sciences, in journalism or related disciplines. It aims for easy installation, extensive documentation\nand a clear programming interface while offering good performance on large datasets by the means of vectorized\noperations (via NumPy) and parallel computation (using Python's *multiprocessing* module and the\n`loky `_ package). The basis of tmtoolkit's text mining capabilities are built around\n`SpaCy `_, which offers a `many language models `_. Currently,\nthe following languages are supported for text mining:\n\n- Catalan\n- Chinese\n- Danish\n- Dutch\n- English\n- French\n- German\n- Greek\n- Italian\n- Japanese\n- Lithuanian\n- Macedonian\n- Norwegian Bokmål\n- Polish\n- Portuguese\n- Romanian\n- Russian\n- Spanish\n\nThe documentation for tmtoolkit is available on `tmtoolkit.readthedocs.org `_ and\nthe GitHub code repository is on\n`github.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/tmtoolkit `_.\n\nFeatures\n--------\n\nText preprocessing and text mining\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\nThe tmtoolkit package offers several text preprocessing and text mining methods, including:\n\n- `tokenization, sentence segmentation, part-of-speech (POS) tagging, named-entity recognition (NER) `_ (via SpaCy)\n- `lemmatization and token normalization `_\n- extensive `pattern matching capabilities `_\n (exact matching, regular expressions or \"glob\" patterns) to be used in many\n methods of the package, e.g. for filtering on token or document level, or for\n `keywords-in-context (KWIC) `_\n- adding and managing\n `custom document and token attributes `_\n- accessing text corpora along with their\n `document and token attributes as dataframes `_\n- calculating and `visualizing corpus summary statistics `_\n- finding out and joining `collocations `_\n- `splitting and sampling corpora `_\n- generating `n-grams `_\n- generating `sparse document-term matrices `_\n\nWherever possible and useful, these methods can operate in parallel to speed up computations with large datasets.\n\nTopic modeling\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n- `model computation in parallel `_ for different copora\n and/or parameter sets\n- support for `lda `_,\n `scikit-learn `_\n and `gensim `_ topic modeling backends\n- `evaluation of topic models `_ (e.g. in order to an optimal number\n of topics for a given dataset) using several implemented metrics:\n\n - model coherence (`Mimno et al. 2011 `_) or with\n `metrics implemented in Gensim `_)\n - KL divergence method (`Arun et al. 2010 `_)\n - probability of held-out documents (`Wallach et al. 2009 `_)\n - pair-wise cosine distance method (`Cao Juan et al. 2009 `_)\n - harmonic mean method (`Griffiths, Steyvers 2004 `_)\n - the loglikelihood or perplexity methods natively implemented in lda, sklearn or gensim\n\n- `plotting of evaluation results `_\n- `common statistics for topic models `_ such as\n word saliency and distinctiveness (`Chuang et al. 2012 `_), topic-word\n relevance (`Sievert and Shirley 2014 `_)\n- `finding / filtering topics with pattern matching `_\n- `export estimated document-topic and topic-word distributions to Excel\n `_\n- `visualize topic-word distributions and document-topic distributions `_\n as word clouds or heatmaps\n- model coherence (`Mimno et al. 2011 `_) for individual topics\n- integrate `PyLDAVis `_ to visualize results\n\n\nOther features\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n\n- loading and cleaning of raw text from\n `text files, tabular files (CSV or Excel), ZIP files or folders `_\n- `splitting and joining documents `_\n- `common statistics and transformations for document-term matrices `_ like word cooccurrence and *tf-idf*\n\n\nLimits\n------\n\n- only languages are supported, for which `SpaCy language models `_ are available\n- all data must reside in memory, i.e. no streaming of large data from the hard disk (which for example\n `Gensim `_ supports)\n\n\nBuilt-in datasets\n-----------------\n\nCurrently tmtoolkit comes with the following built-in datasets which can be loaded via\n:meth:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus.from_builtin_corpus`:\n\n- *\"en-NewsArticles\"*: `News Articles `_\n *(Dai, Tianru, 2017, \"News Articles\", https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/GMFCTR, Harvard Dataverse, V1)*\n- random samples from `ParlSpeech V2 `_\n *(Rauh, Christian; Schwalbach, Jan, 2020, \"The ParlSpeech V2 data set: Full-text corpora of 6.3 million parliamentary speeches in the key legislative chambers of nine representative democracies\", https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/L4OAKN, Harvard Dataverse)* for different languages:\n\n - *\"de-parlspeech-v2-sample-bundestag\"*\n - *\"en-parlspeech-v2-sample-houseofcommons\"*\n - *\"es-parlspeech-v2-sample-congreso\"*\n - *\"nl-parlspeech-v2-sample-tweedekamer\"*\n\n\nAbout this documentation\n------------------------\n\nThis documentation guides you in several chapters from installing tmtoolkit to its specific use cases and shows some\nexamples with built-in corpora and other datasets. All \"hands on\" chapters from\n`Getting started `_ to `Topic modeling `_ are generated from\n`Jupyter Notebooks `_. If you want to follow along using these notebooks, you can download them\nfrom the `GitHub repository `_.\n\nThere are also a few other examples as plain Python scripts available in the\n`examples folder `_ of the GitHub repository.\n\n\n.. |pypi| image:: https://badge.fury.io/py/tmtoolkit.svg\n :target: https://badge.fury.io/py/tmtoolkit\n :alt: PyPI Version\n\n.. |pypi_downloads| image:: https://img.shields.io/pypi/dm/tmtoolkit\n :target: https://pypi.org/project/tmtoolkit/\n :alt: Downloads from PyPI\n\n.. |runtests| image:: https://github.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/tmtoolkit/actions/workflows/runtests.yml/badge.svg\n :target: https://github.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/tmtoolkit/actions/workflows/runtests.yml\n :alt: GitHub Actions CI Build Status\n\n.. |coverage| image:: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/tmtoolkit/master/coverage.svg?sanitize=true\n :target: https://github.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/tmtoolkit/tree/master/tests\n :alt: Coverage status\n\n.. |rtd| image:: https://readthedocs.org/projects/tmtoolkit/badge/?version=latest\n :target: https://tmtoolkit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/?badge=latest\n :alt: Documentation Status\n\n.. |zenodo| image:: https://zenodo.org/badge/109812180.svg\n :target: https://zenodo.org/badge/latestdoi/109812180\n :alt: Citable Zenodo DOI\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/license_note.rst", "content": "License\n=======\n\nCode licensed under `Apache License 2.0 `_.\nSee `LICENSE `_ file.\n\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/preprocessing.ipynb", "content": "{\n \"cells\": [\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"# Text preprocessing and basic text mining\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"During text preprocessing, a corpus of documents is tokenized (i.e. the document strings are split into individual words, punctuation, numbers, etc.) and then these tokens can be transformed, filtered or annotated. The goal is to prepare the raw document texts in a way that makes it easier to perform eventual text mining and analysis methods in a later stage, e.g. by reducing noise in the dataset. The package tmtoolkit provides a rich set of tools for this purpose implemented as *corpus functions* in the [tmtoolkit.corpus](api.rst#tmtoolkit-corpus) module.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"**Reminder: Corpus functions**\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"All *corpus functions* accept a [Corpus](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus) object as first argument and operate on it. A corpus function may retrieve information from a corpus and/or modify the corpus object.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\\n\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## Optional: enabling logging output\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"By default, tmtoolkit does not expose any internal logging messages. Sometimes, for example for diagnostic output during debugging or in order to see progress for long running operations, it's helpful to enable logging output display. For that, you can use the [enable_logging](api.rst#tmtoolkit.utils.enable_logging) function. By default, it enables logging to console for the `INFO` level.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 1,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:30.666116Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:30.665273Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:33.130734Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:33.130266Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.utils import enable_logging\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"enable_logging()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## Loading example data\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's load a sample of ten documents from the built-in *NewsArticles* dataset. We'll use only a small number of documents here to have a better overview at the beginning. We can later use a larger sample. To apply sampling right at the beginning when loading the data, we pass the `sample=100` parameter to the [from_builtin_corpus](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus.from_builtin_corpus) class method. We also use [print_summary](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.print_summary) like shown in the previous chapter.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 2,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:33.136940Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:33.136002Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.590577Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.591189Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stderr\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"2022-03-11 09:31:33,939:INFO:tmtoolkit:creating Corpus instance with no documents\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 09:31:33,940:INFO:tmtoolkit:using serial processing\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 09:31:34,666:INFO:tmtoolkit:sampling 100 documents(s) out of 3824\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 09:31:34,668:INFO:tmtoolkit:adding text from 100 documents(s)\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 09:31:34,669:INFO:tmtoolkit:running NLP pipeline on 100 documents\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 09:31:44,583:INFO:tmtoolkit:generating document texts\\n\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (1271 tokens): For more than a week,-France - has been rocked by ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (224 tokens): President Trump says he has asked the Justice Depa...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (426 tokens): Trump suggests Obama was ' behind ' town hall prot...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (30 tokens): Islamic State battle : Fierce gunfight outside Mos...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (298 tokens): Royal Bank of Scotland sees losses widening Bai...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (202 tokens): Minister reiterates Govt support for Finucane inqu...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (774 tokens): Turkey - backed rebels in ' near full control ' of...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (410 tokens): Russian doctors use mobile field hospital to provi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (513 tokens): Protests after Anaheim policeman drags teen , fire...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (975 tokens): An amazing moment in history : Donald Trump 's pre...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 59598 / vocabulary size: 9223\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"import random\\n\",\n \"random.seed(20220119) # to make the sampling reproducible\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import Corpus, print_summary\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_small = Corpus.from_builtin_corpus('en-NewsArticles', sample=100)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_small)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The logging information was printed on red, the information below on white came from `print_summary`. We will disable logging again using [disable_logging](api.rst#tmtoolkit.utils.disable_logging):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 3,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.595588Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.594957Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.597243Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.597658Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.utils import disable_logging\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"disable_logging()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"These are the names of the documents that were loaded:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 4,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.606796Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.605979Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.609384Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.610049Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['NewsArticles-1100',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1119',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1185',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1263',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1353',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1377',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1387',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1407',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1472',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1515',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1519',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1546',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1561',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1587',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1589',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1610',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-162',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-169',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1777',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1787',\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 4,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import doc_labels\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"doc_labels(corpus_small)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## Accessing tokens and token attributes\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We start with accessing the documents' tokens and their *token attributes* using [doc_tokens](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.doc_tokens) and [tokens_table](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.tokens_table). Token attributes are meta information attached to each token. These can be linguistic features, such as the Part of Speech (POS) tag, indicators for stopwords or punctuation, etc. The default attributes are a subset of [SpaCy's token attributes](https://spacy.io/api/token#attributes). You can configure which of these attributes are stored using the `spacy_token_attrs` parameter of the `Corpus` constructor. You can also add your own token attributes. This will be shown later on.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"At first we load the tokens along with their attributes via `doc_tokens`, which gives us a dictionary mapping document labels to document data. Each document data is another dictionary that contains the tokens and their attributes. We start by checking which token attributes are loaded by default in any document (here, we use \\\"NewsArticles-2433\\\"):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 5,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.636673Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.614540Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.758067Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.757172Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"dict_keys(['token', 'is_punct', 'is_stop', 'like_num', 'tag', 'pos', 'lemma'])\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 5,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import doc_tokens, tokens_table\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# with_attr=True adds default set of token attributes\\n\",\n \"tok = doc_tokens(corpus_small, with_attr=True)\\n\",\n \"tok['NewsArticles-2433'].keys()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"So each document's data can be accessed like in the example above and it will contain the seven data entries listed above. The `'token'` entry gives the actual tokens of the document. Let's show the first five tokens for a document:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 6,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.768251Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.766129Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.773772Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.773042Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['DOJ', ':', '2', 'Russian', 'spies']\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 6,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tok['NewsArticles-2433']['token'][:5]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The other entries are the attributes corresponding to each token. Here, we display the first five lemmata for the same document and the first five punctuation indicator values. The colon is correctly identified as punctuation character.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 7,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.780683Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.779864Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.783580Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.784216Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['doj', ':', '2', 'russian', 'spy']\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 7,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tok['NewsArticles-2433']['lemma'][:5]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 8,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.792224Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.791187Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.794865Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.795563Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[False, True, False, False, False]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 8,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tok['NewsArticles-2433']['is_punct'][:5]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"If your NLP pipeline performs sentence recognition, you can pass the parameter `sentences=True` which will add another level to the output representing sentences. This means that for each item like `'token'`, `'lemma'`, etc. we will get a list of sentences. For example, the following will print the tokens of the 8th sentence (index 7):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 9,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.806125Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.805251Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.988802Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:44.989413Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['A',\\n\",\n \" 'Justice',\\n\",\n \" 'Department',\\n\",\n \" 'official',\\n\",\n \" 'said',\\n\",\n \" 'the',\\n\",\n \" 'agency',\\n\",\n \" 'has',\\n\",\n \" 'not',\\n\",\n \" 'confirmed',\\n\",\n \" 'it',\\n\",\n \" 'is',\\n\",\n \" 'the',\\n\",\n \" 'same',\\n\",\n \" 'person',\\n\",\n \" 'and',\\n\",\n \" 'declined',\\n\",\n \" 'further',\\n\",\n \" 'comment',\\n\",\n \" 'to',\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 9,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tok_sents = doc_tokens(corpus_small, sentences=True, with_attr=True)\\n\",\n \"tok_sents['NewsArticles-2433']['token'][7] # index 7 means 8th sentence\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"For a more compact overview, it's better to use the [tokens_table](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.tokens_table) function. This will generate a [pandas DataFrame](https://pandas.pydata.org/) from the documents in the corpus and it will by default include all token attributes, along with a column for the document label (`doc`) and the token position inside the document (`position`).\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 10,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.005773Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.001847Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.324859Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.325499Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenis_punctis_stoplemmalike_numpostag
0NewsArticles-11000PresidentFalseFalsePresidentFalsePROPNNNP
1NewsArticles-11001TrumpFalseFalseTrumpFalsePROPNNNP
2NewsArticles-11002saysFalseFalsesayFalseVERBVBZ
3NewsArticles-11003heFalseTrueheFalsePRONPRP
4NewsArticles-11004hasFalseTruehaveFalseAUXVBZ
..............................
59593NewsArticles-960282prioritiesFalseFalsepriorityFalseNOUNNNS
59594NewsArticles-960283forFalseTrueforFalseADPIN
59595NewsArticles-960284theFalseTruetheFalseDETDT
59596NewsArticles-960285nationFalseFalsenationFalseNOUNNN
59597NewsArticles-960286.TrueFalse.FalsePUNCT.
\\n\",\n \"

59598 rows × 9 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token is_punct is_stop lemma \\\\\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1100 0 President False False President \\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1100 1 Trump False False Trump \\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1100 2 says False False say \\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-1100 3 he False True he \\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-1100 4 has False True have \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"59593 NewsArticles-960 282 priorities False False priority \\n\",\n \"59594 NewsArticles-960 283 for False True for \\n\",\n \"59595 NewsArticles-960 284 the False True the \\n\",\n \"59596 NewsArticles-960 285 nation False False nation \\n\",\n \"59597 NewsArticles-960 286 . True False . \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" like_num pos tag \\n\",\n \"0 False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"1 False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"2 False VERB VBZ \\n\",\n \"3 False PRON PRP \\n\",\n \"4 False AUX VBZ \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"59593 False NOUN NNS \\n\",\n \"59594 False ADP IN \\n\",\n \"59595 False DET DT \\n\",\n \"59596 False NOUN NN \\n\",\n \"59597 False PUNCT . \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[59598 rows x 9 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 10,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tbl = tokens_table(corpus_small)\\n\",\n \"tbl\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"You can use all sorts of filtering operations on this dataframe. See the [pandas documentation](https://pandas.pydata.org/docs/user_guide/indexing.html) for details. Here, we select all tokens that were identified as \\\"number-like\\\":\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 11,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.330709Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.330112Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.350282Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.350715Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenis_punctis_stoplemmalike_numpostag
288NewsArticles-111964fifteenFalseTruefifteenTrueNUMCD
320NewsArticles-111996oneFalseTrueoneTrueNUMCD
328NewsArticles-1119104fourFalseTruefourTrueNUMCD
759NewsArticles-1119535100FalseFalse100TrueNUMCD
787NewsArticles-1119563fourFalseTruefourTrueNUMCD
..............................
59253NewsArticles-90185685FalseFalse85TrueNUMCD
59256NewsArticles-9018599FalseFalse9TrueNUMCD
59374NewsArticles-960632021FalseFalse2021TrueNUMCD
59400NewsArticles-960892010FalseFalse2010TrueNUMCD
59413NewsArticles-9601021,550FalseFalse1,550TrueNUMCD
\\n\",\n \"

1139 rows × 9 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token is_punct is_stop lemma \\\\\\n\",\n \"288 NewsArticles-1119 64 fifteen False True fifteen \\n\",\n \"320 NewsArticles-1119 96 one False True one \\n\",\n \"328 NewsArticles-1119 104 four False True four \\n\",\n \"759 NewsArticles-1119 535 100 False False 100 \\n\",\n \"787 NewsArticles-1119 563 four False True four \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"59253 NewsArticles-901 856 85 False False 85 \\n\",\n \"59256 NewsArticles-901 859 9 False False 9 \\n\",\n \"59374 NewsArticles-960 63 2021 False False 2021 \\n\",\n \"59400 NewsArticles-960 89 2010 False False 2010 \\n\",\n \"59413 NewsArticles-960 102 1,550 False False 1,550 \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" like_num pos tag \\n\",\n \"288 True NUM CD \\n\",\n \"320 True NUM CD \\n\",\n \"328 True NUM CD \\n\",\n \"759 True NUM CD \\n\",\n \"787 True NUM CD \\n\",\n \"... ... ... .. \\n\",\n \"59253 True NUM CD \\n\",\n \"59256 True NUM CD \\n\",\n \"59374 True NUM CD \\n\",\n \"59400 True NUM CD \\n\",\n \"59413 True NUM CD \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[1139 rows x 9 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 11,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tbl[tbl.like_num]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"This however only filters the table *output*. We will later see how to filter corpus documents and tokens.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"If you want to generate the table only for a subset of documents, you can use the `select` parameter and provide one or more document labels. Similar to that, you can use the `with_attr` parameter to list only a subset of the token attributes.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 12,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.355739Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.355195Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.368407Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.369059Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docsentpositiontokenpos
0NewsArticles-243300DOJNOUN
1NewsArticles-243301:PUNCT
2NewsArticles-2433022NUM
3NewsArticles-243303RussianADJ
4NewsArticles-243304spiesNOUN
..................
837NewsArticles-243327837toPART
838NewsArticles-243327838reflectVERB
839NewsArticles-243327839newADJ
840NewsArticles-243327840developmentsNOUN
841NewsArticles-243327841.PUNCT
\\n\",\n \"

842 rows × 5 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc sent position token pos\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-2433 0 0 DOJ NOUN\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-2433 0 1 : PUNCT\\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-2433 0 2 2 NUM\\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-2433 0 3 Russian ADJ\\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-2433 0 4 spies NOUN\\n\",\n \".. ... ... ... ... ...\\n\",\n \"837 NewsArticles-2433 27 837 to PART\\n\",\n \"838 NewsArticles-2433 27 838 reflect VERB\\n\",\n \"839 NewsArticles-2433 27 839 new ADJ\\n\",\n \"840 NewsArticles-2433 27 840 developments NOUN\\n\",\n \"841 NewsArticles-2433 27 841 . PUNCT\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[842 rows x 5 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 12,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# select a single document and only show the \\\"pos\\\" attribute (coarse POS tag)\\n\",\n \"tokens_table(corpus_small, select='NewsArticles-2433', sentences=True, with_attr='pos')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 13,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.379087Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.378266Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.397700Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.397266Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenpostag
0NewsArticles-24330DOJNOUNNN
1NewsArticles-24331:PUNCT:
2NewsArticles-243322NUMCD
3NewsArticles-24333RussianADJJJ
4NewsArticles-24334spiesNOUNNNS
..................
1949NewsArticles-491107fightVERBVB
1950NewsArticles-491108toPARTTO
1951NewsArticles-491109defendVERBVB
1952NewsArticles-491110itPRONPRP
1953NewsArticles-491111.PUNCT.
\\n\",\n \"

1954 rows × 5 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token pos tag\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-2433 0 DOJ NOUN NN\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-2433 1 : PUNCT :\\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-2433 2 2 NUM CD\\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-2433 3 Russian ADJ JJ\\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-2433 4 spies NOUN NNS\\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... ...\\n\",\n \"1949 NewsArticles-49 1107 fight VERB VB\\n\",\n \"1950 NewsArticles-49 1108 to PART TO\\n\",\n \"1951 NewsArticles-49 1109 defend VERB VB\\n\",\n \"1952 NewsArticles-49 1110 it PRON PRP\\n\",\n \"1953 NewsArticles-49 1111 . PUNCT .\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[1954 rows x 5 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 13,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# select two documents and only show the \\\"pos\\\" and \\\"tag\\\" attributes\\n\",\n \"# (coarse and detailed POS tags)\\n\",\n \"tokens_table(corpus_small, select=['NewsArticles-2433', 'NewsArticles-49'],\\n\",\n \" with_attr=['pos', 'tag'])\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"**Side note: Common corpus function parameters**\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"Many corpus functions share the same parameter names and when they do, they implicate the same behavior. As already explained, all corpus functions accept a `Corpus` object as first parameter. But next to that, many corpus functions also accept a `select` parameter, which can always be used to specify a subset of the documents to which the respective function is applied. We also already got to know the `sentences` parameter that some corpus functions accept in order to also represent the sentence structure of a document in their output.\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"To know which functions accept which parameter, check their documentation.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## Corpus vocabulary\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The corpus *vocabulary* is the set of unique tokens (usually refered to as *token types*) in a corpus. We can get that set via [vocabulary](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.vocabulary). By default, the set is converted to a sorted list:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 14,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.408252Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.407453Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.410597Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.410983Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['\\\\n\\\\n',\\n\",\n \" '\\\\n\\\\n ',\\n\",\n \" ' ',\\n\",\n \" ' ',\\n\",\n \" ' ',\\n\",\n \" ' ',\\n\",\n \" '!',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"-',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"?\\\"But',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"?\\\"I',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"?\\\"hiba',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"?\\\"the',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"?Although',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"?And',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"?Depending',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"?During',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"?For',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"?House',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"?Indo',\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 14,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import vocabulary\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"vocabulary(corpus_small)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The parameter setting `sort=False` results in emitting a Python set:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 15,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.416654Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.416020Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.419117Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.419741Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"{'1,550',\\n\",\n \" 'over',\\n\",\n \" 'plantation',\\n\",\n \" 'lobbyists',\\n\",\n \" 'tone',\\n\",\n \" 'holding',\\n\",\n \" 'Midlands',\\n\",\n \" 'Laboratory',\\n\",\n \" 'investigators',\\n\",\n \" 'homemade',\\n\",\n \" 'country.-\\\"But',\\n\",\n \" 'noted',\\n\",\n \" 'band',\\n\",\n \" 'deported',\\n\",\n \" 'awarded',\\n\",\n \" 'backdrop',\\n\",\n \" 'Hannah',\\n\",\n \" 'centuries',\\n\",\n \" 'no',\\n\",\n \" 'flights',\\n\",\n \" ...}\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 15,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"vocabulary(corpus_small, sort=False)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"This corpus function also accepts a `select` parameter. To get the sorted vocabulary for document \\\"NewsArticles-2433\\\", we can write:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 16,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.424941Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.424376Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.427216Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.427660Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['\\\\n\\\\n',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"',\\n\",\n \" \\\"'s\\\",\\n\",\n \" '(',\\n\",\n \" ')',\\n\",\n \" ',',\\n\",\n \" '-',\\n\",\n \" '--',\\n\",\n \" '.',\\n\",\n \" '2',\\n\",\n \" '2014',\\n\",\n \" '22',\\n\",\n \" '29',\\n\",\n \" '33',\\n\",\n \" '43',\\n\",\n \" '500',\\n\",\n \" ':',\\n\",\n \" 'A',\\n\",\n \" 'Akehmet',\\n\",\n \" 'Aleksandrovich',\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 16,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"vocabulary(corpus_small, select='NewsArticles-2433')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"To get the number of unique tokens in the corpus, i.e. the vocabulary size, we can use [vocabulary_size](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.vocabulary_size), which is basically a shortcut for `len(vocabulary())`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 17,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.434321Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.433792Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.436828Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.437475Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"9223\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 17,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import vocabulary_size\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"vocabulary_size(corpus_small)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The corpus function [vocabulary_counts](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.vocabulary_size) is useful to find out how often each token in the vocabulary occurs in the corpus:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 18,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.449380Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.448667Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.464792Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.465227Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"{'ID': 1,\\n\",\n \" 'agent': 6,\\n\",\n \" 'cop': 1,\\n\",\n \" 'mark': 1,\\n\",\n \" 'number': 18,\\n\",\n \" 'passion': 1,\\n\",\n \" 'unable': 1,\\n\",\n \" 'Where': 2,\\n\",\n \" 'types.-': 1,\\n\",\n \" 'Closer': 1,\\n\",\n \" 'Reflection': 1,\\n\",\n \" 'approach': 8,\\n\",\n \" 'users': 10,\\n\",\n \" 'average': 11,\\n\",\n \" 'designed': 2,\\n\",\n \" 'geared': 1,\\n\",\n \" 'stream': 3,\\n\",\n \" 'sites': 2,\\n\",\n \" 'deportation': 4,\\n\",\n \" 'discourse': 1,\\n\",\n \" ...}\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 18,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import vocabulary_counts\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"vocabulary_counts(corpus_small)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"If you don't want to obtain absolute counts, you can use the `proportions` parameter. Setting it to `1` gives you ordinary proportions (i.e. $\\\\frac{x_i}{\\\\sum_j x_j}$) and `2` gives you these proportions on a log10 scale.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 19,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.478550Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.477854Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.496383Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.495951Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"{'ID': 1.6779086546528407e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'agent': 0.00010067451927917044,\\n\",\n \" 'cop': 1.6779086546528407e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'mark': 1.6779086546528407e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'number': 0.0003020235578375113,\\n\",\n \" 'passion': 1.6779086546528407e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'unable': 1.6779086546528407e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'Where': 3.3558173093056814e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'types.-': 1.6779086546528407e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'Closer': 1.6779086546528407e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'Reflection': 1.6779086546528407e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'approach': 0.00013423269237222726,\\n\",\n \" 'users': 0.00016779086546528407,\\n\",\n \" 'average': 0.00018456995201181247,\\n\",\n \" 'designed': 3.3558173093056814e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'geared': 1.6779086546528407e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'stream': 5.033725963958522e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'sites': 3.3558173093056814e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'deportation': 6.711634618611363e-05,\\n\",\n \" 'discourse': 1.6779086546528407e-05,\\n\",\n \" ...}\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 19,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"vocab_proportions = vocabulary_counts(corpus_small, proportions=1)\\n\",\n \"vocab_proportions # will reuse that later\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Tabular output is often more convenient for displaying results. You can set the `as_table` parameter to `True` to get a dataframe of tokens and their frequency. You can also specify to sort the dataframe by specifying the column to sort by in the `as_table` parameter. By default, this will sort in ascending order, but if you prefix the column name by \\\"-\\\", you obtain a descending sort order. Here, we will get a table of tokens with their frequencies in descending order:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 20,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.510079Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.509389Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.537036Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.536609Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
tokenfreq
3742the2670
1339,2426
6325.2175
7933\\\"1417
457of1387
.........
4062colours1
4059foolish1
4056591
4053shift1
9222ageing1
\\n\",\n \"

9223 rows × 2 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" token freq\\n\",\n \"3742 the 2670\\n\",\n \"1339 , 2426\\n\",\n \"6325 . 2175\\n\",\n \"7933 \\\" 1417\\n\",\n \"457 of 1387\\n\",\n \"... ... ...\\n\",\n \"4062 colours 1\\n\",\n \"4059 foolish 1\\n\",\n \"4056 59 1\\n\",\n \"4053 shift 1\\n\",\n \"9222 ageing 1\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[9223 rows x 2 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 20,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"vocabulary_counts(corpus_small, as_table='-freq')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"**Common parameter `as_table`**\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"Just like `select` or `sentences`, the `as_table` parameter is also a common parameter available for many corpus functions, e.g. [doc_lengths](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.doc_lengths), [doc_num_sents](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.doc_num_sents) or [doc_texts](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.doc_texts).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We can see that \\\"the\\\" and \\\"to\\\" are top-ranking tokens, along with some punctuation characters. We can check the share of tokens for \\\"the\\\":\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 21,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.543364Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.542561Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.545612Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.546377Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"0.04480016107923085\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 21,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"vocab_proportions['the']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"So the token \\\"the\\\" occurs more the 4% of the time in the whole corpus.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## Visualizing corpus summary statistics\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"There are several functions for visualizing summary statistics of corpora which are implemented in the [corpus.visualize](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.corpus.visualize) module. These are especially useful to see how certain processing steps influence summary statistics like token distributions and document length in a corpus. We will start with a few visualizations for the current corpus and can later compare these with plots generated after text processing.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Let's import the plotting functions that we'll use. We also need to import `matplotlib.pyplot` in order to generate a Figure and an Axes object on which the actual plot is drawn. Most plotting functions in tmtoolkit work this way that you need to pass these two objects. This allows for full flexibility since you can adjust the plot before and after applying the plotting function.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 22,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.551897Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.551150Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.553422Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.552984Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"import matplotlib.pyplot as plt\\n\",\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus.visualize import (plot_doc_lengths_hist,\\n\",\n \" plot_doc_frequencies_hist, plot_ranked_vocab_counts)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"**Side Note: So much `from tmtoolkit.corpus import ...`**\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"You'll see a lot of import statements from the `tmtoolkit.corpus` module in this chapter, because all corpus functions are defined in this module. In this manual, I like to explicitly point out from where to import an object (like a function) and only import those objects that I actually need. However, it's completely fine to make a wildcard import `from tmtoolkit.corpus import *` at the beginning of your own code so that all objects in that module are directly available. An alternative approach is to import the corpus module with a short alias name, e.g. `import tmtoolkit.corpus as crp`. Then, you can access all objects in that module via `crp.<...>`.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Next, we'll use [plot_doc_lengths_hist](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.visualize.plot_doc_lengths_hist) to show the distribution of document lengths (i.e. number of tokens in each document) in our corpus. By default, the y-axis uses a log10 scale which is useful for medium and large scaled corpora, but since our corpus is so small we'll use a linear scale instead:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 23,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.569108Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.568126Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.741630Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.742312Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"image/png\": \"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\\n\",\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n \"metadata\": {\n \"needs_background\": \"light\"\n },\n \"output_type\": \"display_data\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"fig, ax = plt.subplots()\\n\",\n \"plot_doc_lengths_hist(fig, ax, corpus_small, y_log=False) # use linear scale\\n\",\n \"plt.show();\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can improve this plot, e.g. to better see the distribution of small documents:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 24,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.751101Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.750386Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.991380Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:45.990657Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"image/png\": \"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\\n\",\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n \"metadata\": {\n \"needs_background\": \"light\"\n },\n \"output_type\": \"display_data\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(10, 6)) # make the plot larger\\n\",\n \"plot_doc_lengths_hist(fig, ax, corpus_small, y_log=False, bins=20) # use 20 bins\\n\",\n \"ax.set_xticks(range(0, 2201, 200)) # set x axis ticks and range\\n\",\n \"plt.show();\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"As expected, this is a right skewed distribution with a few quite large documents with more than 1500 tokens, but also several documents that are very small (less than 100 tokens). The above example shows nicely how you can adjust the plot before and after applying tmtoolkit's plotting function.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The function [plot_doc_frequencies_hist](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.visualize.plot_doc_frequencies_hist) lets us plot the distribution of document frequencies of each token type. This time, we stick with the log10 scale on the y-axis, because otherwise the token types with high document frequency would be hardly visible in the plot, since there are so few of them.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 25,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:46.014158Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:46.009585Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:46.870002Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:46.869212Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"image/png\": \"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\\n\",\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n \"metadata\": {\n \"needs_background\": \"light\"\n },\n \"output_type\": \"display_data\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"fig, ax = plt.subplots()\\n\",\n \"plot_doc_frequencies_hist(fig, ax, corpus_small)\\n\",\n \"plt.show();\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"This shows us that the large majority of token types has a low document frequency, i.e. they occur only in a few documents. There are only very few token types that occur in almost every document. Words like \\\"the\\\" or \\\"a\\\" are usually among these.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Another common type of plot is a *rank-frequency distribution* plot for token frequencies. This means the tokens are ordered in descending order from the most frequent token to the least frequent token. This forms the x-axis. On the y-axis the frequency of the respective tokens is plotted. Rank and frequency of tokens in text corpora usually have an inverse relationship, i.e. the second most frequent token occurs only half as often as the most frequent token, the token on rank 100 only has 1/100 of the frequency of the most frequent token, etc. This is a power law distribution which appears as nearly straight line when plotted on a log-log scale (i.e. a log scale on both axes).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We can also observe that in our small corpus using the [plot_ranked_vocab_counts](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.visualize.plot_ranked_vocab_counts) function, which by default uses a log-log scale:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 26,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:46.907484Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:46.906460Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.145256Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.144336Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"image/png\": \"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\\n\",\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n \"metadata\": {\n \"needs_background\": \"light\"\n },\n \"output_type\": \"display_data\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"fig, ax = plt.subplots()\\n\",\n \"plot_ranked_vocab_counts(fig, ax, corpus_small, zipf=True)\\n\",\n \"plt.show();\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"I additionally passed the argument `zipf=True` which compares the corpus' distribution to the distribution predicted by [Zipf's law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipf%27s_law).\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## Text processing: transforming documents and tokens\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"So far we haven't modified anything in our corpus, we only investigated its contents. This will change now as we will apply several text processing methods to the contents of our corpus. But before we do that, I want you pay attention to an important detail about how a `Corpus` object behaves when it is modified.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Aside: A `Corpus` object as \\\"state machine\\\"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"A `Corpus` object is implemented as a \\\"state machine\\\", i.e. its contents (the documents) and behavior can change when you apply a function to it. For instance, let's suppose we want to turn all tokens in a corpus to lowercase tokens. We do that by applying [to_lowercase](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.to_lowercase):\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"```python\\n\",\n \"corp = Corpus({\\n\",\n \" \\\"doc1\\\": \\\"Hello world!\\\",\\n\",\n \" \\\"doc2\\\": \\\"Another example\\\"\\n\",\n \"}, language='en')\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"doc_tokens(corp)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# Out:\\n\",\n \"# {\\n\",\n \"# 'doc1': ['Hello', 'world', '!'],\\n\",\n \"# 'doc2': ['Another', 'example']\\n\",\n \"# }\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"to_lowercase(corp)\\n\",\n \"doc_tokens(corp)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# Out:\\n\",\n \"# {\\n\",\n \"# 'doc1': ['hello', 'world', '!'],\\n\",\n \"# 'doc2': ['another', 'example']\\n\",\n \"# }\\n\",\n \"```\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"As you can see, the tokens \\\"inside\\\" `corp` are changed *in place*. It's important to see that after applying the function `to_lowercase`, the tokens in `corp` were transformed and **the original tokens from before calling this method are not available anymore.** In Python, assigning a *mutable* object to a variable binds the same object only to a different name, it doesn't copy it. Since a `Corpus` object is a mutable object (you can change its contents), when we simply assign such an object to a different variable (say `corp_original`) we essentially only have two names for the same object and by applying a function to one of these variable names, the values will be changed for *both* names.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"#### Copying `Corpus` objects\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"What can we do about that? There are two ways: The first is to *copy* the object which can be done with the Python [copy](https://docs.python.org/3/library/copy.html#copy.copy) function. By this, we create another variable `corpus_orig` that points to a separate `Corpus` object. The second way is to apply the corpus transformation function, e.g. `to_lowercase`, but set the parameter `inplace=False`. This will then return a *modified copy* and retain the original input corpus. The `inplace` parameter is a common corpus function parameter that is available for all functions that modify a `Corpus` object in some way. By default, it is set to `True`.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We start with the first way, copying a `Corpus` object:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 27,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.169396Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.164216Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.331764Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.332352Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (1271 tokens): For more than a week,-France - has been rocked by ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (224 tokens): President Trump says he has asked the Justice Depa...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (426 tokens): Trump suggests Obama was ' behind ' town hall prot...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (30 tokens): Islamic State battle : Fierce gunfight outside Mos...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (298 tokens): Royal Bank of Scotland sees losses widening Bai...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (202 tokens): Minister reiterates Govt support for Finucane inqu...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (774 tokens): Turkey - backed rebels in ' near full control ' of...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (410 tokens): Russian doctors use mobile field hospital to provi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (513 tokens): Protests after Anaheim policeman drags teen , fire...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (975 tokens): An amazing moment in history : Donald Trump 's pre...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 59598 / vocabulary size: 9223\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from copy import copy\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_orig = copy(corpus_small)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_orig) # same content\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 28,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.338252Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.337516Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.341348Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.340743Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"(140496641496592, 140495515676976)\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 28,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# but the different IDs confirm that we have two different objects\\n\",\n \"id(corpus_small), id(corpus_orig)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We now apply `to_lowercase` to `corpus_small`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 29,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.410528Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.369959Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.443425Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.443832Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (1271 tokens): for more than a week,-france - has been rocked by ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (224 tokens): president trump says he has asked the justice depa...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (426 tokens): trump suggests obama was ' behind ' town hall prot...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (30 tokens): islamic state battle : fierce gunfight outside mos...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (298 tokens): royal bank of scotland sees losses widening bai...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (202 tokens): minister reiterates govt support for finucane inqu...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (774 tokens): turkey - backed rebels in ' near full control ' of...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (410 tokens): russian doctors use mobile field hospital to provi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (513 tokens): protests after anaheim policeman drags teen , fire...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (975 tokens): an amazing moment in history : donald trump 's pre...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 59598 / vocabulary size: 8369\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import to_lowercase\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"to_lowercase(corpus_small)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_small) # all tokens are lowercase\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The tokens of the copied original corpus remain unchanged:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 30,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.450550Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.449823Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.453773Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.453146Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (1271 tokens): For more than a week,-France - has been rocked by ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (224 tokens): President Trump says he has asked the Justice Depa...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (426 tokens): Trump suggests Obama was ' behind ' town hall prot...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (30 tokens): Islamic State battle : Fierce gunfight outside Mos...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (298 tokens): Royal Bank of Scotland sees losses widening Bai...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (202 tokens): Minister reiterates Govt support for Finucane inqu...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (774 tokens): Turkey - backed rebels in ' near full control ' of...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (410 tokens): Russian doctors use mobile field hospital to provi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (513 tokens): Protests after Anaheim policeman drags teen , fire...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (975 tokens): An amazing moment in history : Donald Trump 's pre...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 59598 / vocabulary size: 9223\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"print_summary(corpus_orig)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Note that this also uses up almost twice as much computer memory now. So you shouldn't create copies that often and also release unused memory by using `del`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 31,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.460122Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.459409Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.462860Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.462016Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"# removing the object again\\n\",\n \"del corpus_small\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Now to the second approach. We pass the `inplace=False` parameter and get back a transformed copy of `corpus_orig` as return value:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 32,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.518550Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.491967Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.732181Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.731553Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (1271 tokens): for more than a week,-france - has been rocked by ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (224 tokens): president trump says he has asked the justice depa...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (426 tokens): trump suggests obama was ' behind ' town hall prot...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (30 tokens): islamic state battle : fierce gunfight outside mos...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (298 tokens): royal bank of scotland sees losses widening bai...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (202 tokens): minister reiterates govt support for finucane inqu...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (774 tokens): turkey - backed rebels in ' near full control ' of...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (410 tokens): russian doctors use mobile field hospital to provi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (513 tokens): protests after anaheim policeman drags teen , fire...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (975 tokens): an amazing moment in history : donald trump 's pre...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 59598 / vocabulary size: 8369\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corpus_lowercase = to_lowercase(corpus_orig, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_lowercase)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Again, the original corpus stays unchanged:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 33,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.739086Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.738519Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.742197Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.741517Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (1271 tokens): For more than a week,-France - has been rocked by ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (224 tokens): President Trump says he has asked the Justice Depa...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (426 tokens): Trump suggests Obama was ' behind ' town hall prot...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (30 tokens): Islamic State battle : Fierce gunfight outside Mos...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (298 tokens): Royal Bank of Scotland sees losses widening Bai...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (202 tokens): Minister reiterates Govt support for Finucane inqu...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (774 tokens): Turkey - backed rebels in ' near full control ' of...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (410 tokens): Russian doctors use mobile field hospital to provi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (513 tokens): Protests after Anaheim policeman drags teen , fire...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (975 tokens): An amazing moment in history : Donald Trump 's pre...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 59598 / vocabulary size: 9223\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"print_summary(corpus_orig)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 34,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.748814Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.747931Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.750225Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.750688Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"del corpus_lowercase\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We're now ready to apply some common text processing steps to our corpus.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Lemmatization and token normalization\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Lemmatization brings a token, if it is a word, to its base form. The lemma is already found out during the tokenization process and is available in the `lemma` token attribute. However, when you want to further process the tokens on the base of the lemmata, you should use the [lemmatize](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.lemmatize) corpus function. This function sets the lemmata as tokens and all further processing will happen using these lemmatized tokens:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 35,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.825809Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:47.789835Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.285379Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.285775Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenis_punctis_stoplemmalike_numpostag
0NewsArticles-11000PresidentFalseFalsePresidentFalsePROPNNNP
1NewsArticles-11001TrumpFalseFalseTrumpFalsePROPNNNP
2NewsArticles-11002sayFalseFalsesayFalseVERBVBZ
3NewsArticles-11003heFalseTrueheFalsePRONPRP
4NewsArticles-11004haveFalseTruehaveFalseAUXVBZ
..............................
59593NewsArticles-960282priorityFalseFalsepriorityFalseNOUNNNS
59594NewsArticles-960283forFalseTrueforFalseADPIN
59595NewsArticles-960284theFalseTruetheFalseDETDT
59596NewsArticles-960285nationFalseFalsenationFalseNOUNNN
59597NewsArticles-960286.TrueFalse.FalsePUNCT.
\\n\",\n \"

59598 rows × 9 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token is_punct is_stop lemma \\\\\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1100 0 President False False President \\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1100 1 Trump False False Trump \\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1100 2 say False False say \\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-1100 3 he False True he \\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-1100 4 have False True have \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"59593 NewsArticles-960 282 priority False False priority \\n\",\n \"59594 NewsArticles-960 283 for False True for \\n\",\n \"59595 NewsArticles-960 284 the False True the \\n\",\n \"59596 NewsArticles-960 285 nation False False nation \\n\",\n \"59597 NewsArticles-960 286 . True False . \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" like_num pos tag \\n\",\n \"0 False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"1 False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"2 False VERB VBZ \\n\",\n \"3 False PRON PRP \\n\",\n \"4 False AUX VBZ \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"59593 False NOUN NNS \\n\",\n \"59594 False ADP IN \\n\",\n \"59595 False DET DT \\n\",\n \"59596 False NOUN NN \\n\",\n \"59597 False PUNCT . \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[59598 rows x 9 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 35,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import lemmatize\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# we use `inplace=False` to generate a lemmatized copy `corpus_norm`\\n\",\n \"# of the original data; all further steps will be applied to `corpus_norm`\\n\",\n \"corpus_norm = lemmatize(corpus_orig, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"tokens_table(corpus_norm)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"As we can see, the `lemma` column was copied over to the `token` column.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"**Stemming**\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"tmtoolkit doesn't support stemming directly, since lemmatization is generally accepted as a better approach to bring different word forms of one word to a common base form. However, you may install [NLTK](https://www.nltk.org/) and apply stemming by using the [stem](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.stem) function.\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Depending on how you further want to analyze the data, it may be necessary to \\\"clean\\\" or \\\"normalize\\\" your tokens in different ways in order to remove noise from the corpus, such as punctuation tokens or numbers, upper/lowercase forms of the same word, etc. Note that this is usually not necessary when you work with some approaches such as word embeddings (word vectors). \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"If you want to remove certain characters in *all* tokens in your documents, you can use [remove_chars](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.remove_chars) and pass it a sequence of characters to remove. There is also a shortcut [remove_punctuation](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.remove_punctuation) which will remove all punctuation characters (all characters in [string.punction](https://docs.python.org/3/library/string.html#string.punctuation) by default) *in* tokens. This means, a token like \\\"vs.\\\" will be transformed to \\\"vs\\\" and a token \\\",\\\" will be transformed to an empty token \\\"\\\". It's useful to also remove empty tokens and we will do that in a later step.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 36,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.333798Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.329528Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.351719Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.352134Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (1271 tokens): for more than a week,-france - have be rock by - t...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (224 tokens): President Trump say he have ask the Justice Depart...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (426 tokens): Trump suggest Obama be ' behind ' town hall protes...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (30 tokens): islamic State battle : fierce gunfight outside Mos...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (298 tokens): Royal Bank of Scotland see loss widen bail - ou...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (202 tokens): Minister reiterate Govt support for Finucane inqui...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (774 tokens): Turkey - back rebel in ' near full control ' of Al...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (410 tokens): russian doctor use mobile field hospital to provid...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (513 tokens): protest after Anaheim policeman drag teen , fire g...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (975 tokens): an amazing moment in history : Donald Trump 's pre...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 59598 / vocabulary size: 7287\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import remove_chars\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# remove only full stops \\\".\\\"\\n\",\n \"remove_chars(corpus_norm, ['.'])\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_norm)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 37,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.423091Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.395867Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.433507Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.434158Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (1271 tokens): for more than a weekfrance have be rock by tensi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (224 tokens): President Trump say he have ask the Justice Depart...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (426 tokens): Trump suggest Obama be behind town hall protest ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (30 tokens): islamic State battle fierce gunfight outside Mosu...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (298 tokens): Royal Bank of Scotland see loss widen bail out R...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (202 tokens): Minister reiterate Govt support for Finucane inqui...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (774 tokens): Turkey back rebel in near full control of Al Ba...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (410 tokens): russian doctor use mobile field hospital to provid...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (513 tokens): protest after Anaheim policeman drag teen fire gu...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (975 tokens): an amazing moment in history Donald Trump s press...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 59598 / vocabulary size: 7203\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import remove_punctuation\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# remove all punctuation\\n\",\n \"remove_punctuation(corpus_norm)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_norm)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Notice how the vocabulary size (the number of unique token types in a corpus) was also reduced with each step. We can also confirm that our functions worked by comparing the set of characters used in the original corpus to the set of characters used at the current normalization step via [corpus_unique_chars](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_unique_chars). We can see that there are no more punctuation characters in the latter set:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 38,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.451809Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.451018Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.454392Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.454999Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['\\\\n',\\n\",\n \" ' ',\\n\",\n \" '!',\\n\",\n \" '\\\"',\\n\",\n \" '#',\\n\",\n \" '$',\\n\",\n \" '%',\\n\",\n \" '&',\\n\",\n \" \\\"'\\\",\\n\",\n \" '(',\\n\",\n \" ')',\\n\",\n \" '*',\\n\",\n \" '+',\\n\",\n \" ',',\\n\",\n \" '-',\\n\",\n \" '.',\\n\",\n \" '/',\\n\",\n \" '0',\\n\",\n \" '1',\\n\",\n \" '2',\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 38,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import corpus_unique_chars\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# original corpus\\n\",\n \"sorted(corpus_unique_chars(corpus_orig))\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 39,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.466449Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.465646Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.469187Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.469897Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['0',\\n\",\n \" '1',\\n\",\n \" '2',\\n\",\n \" '3',\\n\",\n \" '4',\\n\",\n \" '5',\\n\",\n \" '6',\\n\",\n \" '7',\\n\",\n \" '8',\\n\",\n \" '9',\\n\",\n \" 'A',\\n\",\n \" 'B',\\n\",\n \" 'C',\\n\",\n \" 'D',\\n\",\n \" 'E',\\n\",\n \" 'F',\\n\",\n \" 'G',\\n\",\n \" 'H',\\n\",\n \" 'I',\\n\",\n \" 'J',\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 39,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# transformed corpus\\n\",\n \"sorted(corpus_unique_chars(corpus_norm))\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"A common (but harsh) practice is to transform all tokens to lowercase forms, which can be done with [to_lowercase](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.to_lowercase), as already shown before:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 40,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.518917Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.493552Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.542849Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.542164Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (1271 tokens): for more than a weekfrance have be rock by tensi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (224 tokens): president trump say he have ask the justice depart...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (426 tokens): trump suggest obama be behind town hall protest ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (30 tokens): islamic state battle fierce gunfight outside mosu...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (298 tokens): royal bank of scotland see loss widen bail out r...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (202 tokens): minister reiterate govt support for finucane inqui...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (774 tokens): turkey back rebel in near full control of al ba...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (410 tokens): russian doctor use mobile field hospital to provid...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (513 tokens): protest after anaheim policeman drag teen fire gu...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (975 tokens): an amazing moment in history donald trump s press...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 59598 / vocabulary size: 6692\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"to_lowercase(corpus_norm)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_norm)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"There are several ways on how to treat numbers in text. You may choose to leave them untreated, remove them completely or transform them to placeholders that only encode their magnitude. Number removal can be applied via [filter_clean_tokens](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.filter_clean_tokens) which I will present later. Number transformation to magnitudes can be done via [numbers_to_magnitudes](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.numbers_to_magnitudes) which I will show now. But first, let's get an overview about the numbers used in the corpus:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 41,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.568110Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.548974Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.717722Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.718366Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenlike_num
288NewsArticles-111964fifteenTrue
320NewsArticles-111996oneTrue
328NewsArticles-1119104fourTrue
759NewsArticles-1119535100True
787NewsArticles-1119563fourTrue
...............
59253NewsArticles-90185685True
59256NewsArticles-9018599True
59374NewsArticles-960632021True
59400NewsArticles-960892010True
59413NewsArticles-9601021550True
\\n\",\n \"

1139 rows × 4 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token like_num\\n\",\n \"288 NewsArticles-1119 64 fifteen True\\n\",\n \"320 NewsArticles-1119 96 one True\\n\",\n \"328 NewsArticles-1119 104 four True\\n\",\n \"759 NewsArticles-1119 535 100 True\\n\",\n \"787 NewsArticles-1119 563 four True\\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ...\\n\",\n \"59253 NewsArticles-901 856 85 True\\n\",\n \"59256 NewsArticles-901 859 9 True\\n\",\n \"59374 NewsArticles-960 63 2021 True\\n\",\n \"59400 NewsArticles-960 89 2010 True\\n\",\n \"59413 NewsArticles-960 102 1550 True\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[1139 rows x 4 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 41,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"table_norm_num = tokens_table(corpus_norm, with_attr='like_num')\\n\",\n \"table_norm_num[table_norm_num.like_num]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"You can see all tokens that were detected as \\\"number-like\\\" by SpaCy. Those that consist of digits can be converted to their respective magnitudes using the mentioned `numbers_to_magnitudes` function. This function has many options for customization, but by default a two digits number will be converted to \\\"10\\\", a three digits number to \\\"100\\\", a ten digits number to \\\"1,000,000,000\\\", etc. You may customize this output, e.g. so that all numbers are converted to the form \\\"NNN...\\\". You can further drop or keep signs, use thousands separators, etc. Depending on your research context, it may or may not make sense to reduce numbers in such a way.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 42,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.723784Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.722820Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.915579Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.914807Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenlike_num
288NewsArticles-111964fifteenTrue
320NewsArticles-111996oneTrue
328NewsArticles-1119104fourTrue
759NewsArticles-1119535100True
787NewsArticles-1119563fourTrue
...............
59253NewsArticles-90185610True
59256NewsArticles-9018591True
59374NewsArticles-960631000True
59400NewsArticles-960891000True
59413NewsArticles-9601021000True
\\n\",\n \"

1139 rows × 4 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token like_num\\n\",\n \"288 NewsArticles-1119 64 fifteen True\\n\",\n \"320 NewsArticles-1119 96 one True\\n\",\n \"328 NewsArticles-1119 104 four True\\n\",\n \"759 NewsArticles-1119 535 100 True\\n\",\n \"787 NewsArticles-1119 563 four True\\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ...\\n\",\n \"59253 NewsArticles-901 856 10 True\\n\",\n \"59256 NewsArticles-901 859 1 True\\n\",\n \"59374 NewsArticles-960 63 1000 True\\n\",\n \"59400 NewsArticles-960 89 1000 True\\n\",\n \"59413 NewsArticles-960 102 1000 True\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[1139 rows x 4 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 42,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import numbers_to_magnitudes\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"numbers_to_magnitudes(corpus_norm)\\n\",\n \"table_norm_num = tokens_table(corpus_norm, with_attr='like_num')\\n\",\n \"table_norm_num[table_norm_num.like_num]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"As we can see, all numbers with digits were converted to their respective magnitudes.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The function [filter_clean_tokens](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.filter_clean_tokens) finally applies several steps that remove tokens that meet certain criteria. This includes removing:\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"- punctuation tokens (i.e. all tokens with attribute `is_punct` set to `True`)\\n\",\n \"- stopwords (very common words for the given language, i.e. all tokens with attribute `is_stop` set to `True`)\\n\",\n \"- empty tokens (i.e. `''`)\\n\",\n \"- tokens that are longer or shorter than a certain number of characters\\n\",\n \"- \\\"number-like\\\" tokens\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"This method has many parameters to tweak, so it's recommended to check out the documentation.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 43,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.991152Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:48.955415Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.122903Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.123755Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (578 tokens): weekfrance rock tension flare police officer alleg...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (96 tokens): president trump say ask justice department investi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (182 tokens): trump suggest obama town hall protest president do...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (21 tokens): islamic state battle fierce gunfight outside mosul...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (163 tokens): royal bank scotland see loss widen bail royal bank...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (105 tokens): minister reiterate govt support finucane inquiry m...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (398 tokens): turkey back rebel near control al bab turkey defen...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (202 tokens): russian doctor use mobile field hospital provide m...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (253 tokens): protest anaheim policeman drag teen fire gun lapd ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (404 tokens): amazing moment history donald trump press conferen...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 28042 / vocabulary size: 6268\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import filter_clean_tokens\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# remove punct., stopwords, empty tokens (this is the default)\\n\",\n \"# plus tokens shorter than 2 characters\\n\",\n \"filter_clean_tokens(corpus_norm, remove_shorter_than=2)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_norm)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Due to the removal of several tokens in the previous steps, the overall number of tokens was almost halved as compared to the original corpus:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 44,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.131021Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.130132Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.134652Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.133794Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"(59598, 28042)\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 44,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import corpus_num_tokens\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_num_tokens(corpus_orig), corpus_num_tokens(corpus_norm)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can also observe that the vocabulary got smaller after the processing steps, which, for large corpora, is also important in terms of computation time and memory consumption for later analyses:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 45,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.144567Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.143651Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.147188Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.147896Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"(9223, 6268)\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 45,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"vocabulary_size(corpus_orig), vocabulary_size(corpus_norm)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"name\": \"#%% md\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"source\": [\n \"You can also apply custom token transform functions by using [transform_tokens](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.transform_tokens) and passing it a function that should be applied to each token in each document (hence it must accept one string argument).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"First let's define such a function. Here we create a simple function that should return a token's \\\"shape\\\" in terms of the case of its characters:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 46,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.155397Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.154497Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.159217Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.158503Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"('XX', 'XxxxxXxxx', 'xxxxx')\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 46,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"def token_shape(t):\\n\",\n \" return ''.join(['X' if str.isupper(c) else 'x' for c in t])\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"token_shape('EU'), token_shape('CamelCase'), token_shape('lower')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can now apply this function to our documents (we will use the original documents here, because they were not transformed to lower case):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 47,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.229511Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.198933Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.483314Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.482830Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (1271 tokens): Xxx xxxx xxxx x xxxxxxXxxxxx x xxx xxxx xxxxxx xx ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (224 tokens): Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx xxxx xx xxx xxxxx xxx Xxxxxxx Xxxx...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (426 tokens): Xxxxx xxxxxxxx Xxxxx xxx x xxxxxx x xxxx xxxx xxxx...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (30 tokens): Xxxxxxx Xxxxx xxxxxx x Xxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx Xxx...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (298 tokens): Xxxxx Xxxx xx Xxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxx xx Xxx...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (202 tokens): Xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx Xxxx xxxxxxx xxx Xxxxxxxx xxxx...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (774 tokens): Xxxxxx x xxxxxx xxxxxx xx x xxxx xxxx xxxxxxx x xx...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (410 tokens): Xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxx xx xxxxx...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (513 tokens): Xxxxxxxx xxxxx Xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxx x xxxx...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (975 tokens): Xx xxxxxxx xxxxxx xx xxxxxxx x Xxxxxx Xxxxx xx xxx...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 59598 / vocabulary size: 176\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import transform_tokens\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_shapes = transform_tokens(corpus_orig, func=token_shape, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_shapes)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 48,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.489111Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.488382Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.491352Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.490909Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"del corpus_shapes\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"There are several more token transforming functions available in tmtoolkit. These are listed in the [corpus module API](api.rst#tmtoolkit-corpus). There are for example functions to simplify or normalize unicode characters in tokens.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"**Retokenization**\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"One important point to note is that although you may change a token's text via a transformation, its token attributes such as POS tag, lemma, etc. stay the same. This is because the SpaCy NLP pipeline is only run initially and in most of the cases this is fine. However, if you want to re-run the NLP pipeline after you've applied some transformations in order to re-tokenize and re-analyze the text so that token attributes are also updated, you should run the [corpus_retokenize](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_retokenize) function.\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Identifying and joining token collocations\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"*Collocations* are tokens that occur together in a series frequently (i.e. more than would be expected by chance). Examples could be the collocations \\\"United\\\", \\\"States\\\" or \\\"Bank\\\", \\\"of\\\", \\\"America\\\". The tmtoolkit package provides functions for identifying and joining such series of tokens.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"For identifying collocations, you can use [corpus_collocations](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_collocations). By default, it will produce a dataframe ranked by a collocation statistic.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 49,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.499143Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.498611Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.997475Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:49.998268Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
collocationstatistic
0capsule falcon1.0
1manchester victoria1.0
2consulate deluge1.0
3dominique ingres18141.0
4carl jr1.0
5petroleum fundwill1.0
6russians consume1.0
7v8 fords1.0
8cristie clare1.0
9solder alloy1.0
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" collocation statistic\\n\",\n \"0 capsule falcon 1.0\\n\",\n \"1 manchester victoria 1.0\\n\",\n \"2 consulate deluge 1.0\\n\",\n \"3 dominique ingres1814 1.0\\n\",\n \"4 carl jr 1.0\\n\",\n \"5 petroleum fundwill 1.0\\n\",\n \"6 russians consume 1.0\\n\",\n \"7 v8 fords 1.0\\n\",\n \"8 cristie clare 1.0\\n\",\n \"9 solder alloy 1.0\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 49,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import corpus_collocations\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_collocations(corpus_norm).head(10)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The default statistic is the normalized variant of the *pointwise mutual information (NPMI)* measure implemented in the [pmi](api.rst#tmtoolkit.tokenseq.pmi) function. You can use a different statistic via the `statistic` argument. Here, we use the PMI³ statistic from the [tokenseq](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.tokenseq) module:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 50,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:50.005286Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:50.003221Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:50.665154Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:50.666405Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
collocationstatistic
0le pen-7.143448
1white house-8.012485
2real estate-8.032940
3kuala lumpur-8.162017
4donald trump-8.184953
5united states-8.216084
6reddit newsvine-8.295549
7digg reddit-8.295549
8newsvine permalink-8.295549
9tumblr linkedin-8.295549
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" collocation statistic\\n\",\n \"0 le pen -7.143448\\n\",\n \"1 white house -8.012485\\n\",\n \"2 real estate -8.032940\\n\",\n \"3 kuala lumpur -8.162017\\n\",\n \"4 donald trump -8.184953\\n\",\n \"5 united states -8.216084\\n\",\n \"6 reddit newsvine -8.295549\\n\",\n \"7 digg reddit -8.295549\\n\",\n \"8 newsvine permalink -8.295549\\n\",\n \"9 tumblr linkedin -8.295549\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 50,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.tokenseq import pmi3\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_collocations(corpus_norm, statistic=pmi3).head(10)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"There are a few more parameters to `corpus_collocations`. For instance, you can specify a threshold value via `threshold` and produce a list output instead of a dataframe via `as_table=False`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 51,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:50.672754Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:50.670907Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:51.489965Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:51.488925Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[('le pen', -7.143447542606667),\\n\",\n \" ('white house', -8.012485389630276),\\n\",\n \" ('real estate', -8.0329400813261),\\n\",\n \" ('kuala lumpur', -8.162017123601242),\\n\",\n \" ('donald trump', -8.184952560000124),\\n\",\n \" ('united states', -8.216084344871515)]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 51,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corpus_collocations(corpus_norm, statistic=pmi3, threshold=-8.25, as_table=False)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"After identifying and investigating collocations, you may also choose to join some of them so that they form a single token. This can be done via [join_collocations_by_statistic](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.join_collocations_by_statistic). Here, we specify the collocation statistic to use, we set a minimum threshold and also enable returning a set of actually joint tokens:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 52,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:51.498316Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:51.497267Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.167339Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.168393Z\"\n },\n \"scrolled\": true\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"{'donald_trump',\\n\",\n \" 'kuala_lumpur',\\n\",\n \" 'le_pen',\\n\",\n \" 'real_estate',\\n\",\n \" 'united_states',\\n\",\n \" 'white_house'}\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 52,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import join_collocations_by_statistic\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"join_collocations_by_statistic(corpus_norm, statistic=pmi3, threshold=-8.25, return_joint_tokens=True)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Six collocations were joint to form single tokens. We can check one of them to see in which documents this joint token appears by using the [find_documents](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.find_documents) function. This function searches the documents for matches to one or more keywords or patterns. By default, it returns all documents with at least one match as dictionary that maps document labels to number of matches. Here, we use the common parameter `as_table` again to provide a tabular output:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 53,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.179769Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.178600Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.244824Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.248125Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docn_matches
0NewsArticles-495
1NewsArticles-33532
3NewsArticles-722
2NewsArticles-22401
4NewsArticles-26411
5NewsArticles-18601
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc n_matches\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-49 5\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-3353 2\\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-72 2\\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-2240 1\\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-2641 1\\n\",\n \"5 NewsArticles-1860 1\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 53,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import find_documents\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"find_documents(corpus_norm, 'united_states', as_table='-n_matches')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Another option for joining collocations is using the [join_collocations_by_patterns](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.join_collocations_by_patterns) function, which allows you to define a pattern of subsequent tokens that should be joint. Here, we want to join all subsequent tokens where the first token is \\\"north\\\" and the second is anything that starts with \\\"korea*\\\", i.e. matching for example \\\"north\\\", \\\"korea\\\" or \\\"north\\\", \\\"korean\\\". The pattern \\\"korea*\\\" is a *glob pattern* – details on pattern matching will be given in the next section.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 54,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.281228Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.269752Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.400887Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.401504Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"{'north_korea', 'north_korean', 'north_koreans'}\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 54,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import join_collocations_by_patterns\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"join_collocations_by_patterns(corpus_norm, ['north', 'korea*'], match_type='glob', return_joint_tokens=True)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can see, that three collocation patterns were joint. Again, we can find the documents that contain these patterns using a glob pattern:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 55,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.461493Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.440526Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.494612Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.493924Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docn_matches
0NewsArticles-158718
1NewsArticles-186011
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc n_matches\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1587 18\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1860 11\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 55,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"find_documents(corpus_norm, 'north_korea*', match_type='glob' , as_table='-n_matches')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Visualizing corpus statistics of the transformed corpus\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"In order to see the effect of the corpus transformations on the distribution of tokens, we can again plot these transformations.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Plotting the distribution of document lengths on the same scale as for the original corpus reveals that the documents are now much shorter and that the distribution is much less dispersed:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 56,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.521477Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.520670Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.749507Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.750000Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"image/png\": \"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\\n\",\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n \"metadata\": {\n \"needs_background\": \"light\"\n },\n \"output_type\": \"display_data\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(10, 6)) # make the plot larger\\n\",\n \"plot_doc_lengths_hist(fig, ax, corpus_norm, y_log=False, bins=20) # use 20 bins\\n\",\n \"ax.set_xticks(range(0, 2201, 200)) # set x axis ticks and range\\n\",\n \"plt.show();\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can also observe that there's now a much stronger deviation from the distribution predicted by Zipf's law. This is also expected, since we removed many high frequent token types (stopwords).\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 57,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.772383Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:52.771675Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:53.012352Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:53.012764Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"image/png\": \"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\\n\",\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n \"metadata\": {\n \"needs_background\": \"light\"\n },\n \"output_type\": \"display_data\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"fig, ax = plt.subplots()\\n\",\n \"plot_ranked_vocab_counts(fig, ax, corpus_norm, zipf=True)\\n\",\n \"plt.show();\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Accessing the corpus documents as SpaCy documents\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Sometimes it may be necessary to convert the documents of a corpus to SpaCy documents, i.e. [SpaCy Doc objects](https://spacy.io/api/doc). This may be the case when you need to use further functionality that SpaCy provides or if you interface with other code that requires SpaCy documents as input. For this purpose, you can use the [spacydocs](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.spacydocs) function. The result will be a dictionary that maps document labels to SpaCy `Doc` objects.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 58,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:53.068706Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:53.053306Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:57.747292Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:57.745924Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"spacy.tokens.doc.Doc\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 58,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import spacydocs\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"spacy_norm = spacydocs(corpus_norm, collapse=' ')\\n\",\n \"# check the type of a sample document\\n\",\n \"type(spacy_norm['NewsArticles-2433'])\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 59,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:57.754005Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:57.753256Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:57.759766Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:57.758848Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"doj 1 russian spy indict yahoo hack washington cnnthe department\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 59,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# show the first 10 tokens of a sample document\\n\",\n \"spacy_norm['NewsArticles-2433'][:10]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Note that the `spacydocs` functions will first generate the document texts from the current tokens via [doc_texts](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.doc_texts). In case of `corpus_norm`, these are transformed (lower case) and filtered tokens. Because of that, we set `collapse=' '` for forcing a space between each token when recombining the document texts. Otherwise filtered tokens may be joint because of missing whitespace between them. After the document texts were generated, the corpus' NLP pipeline is applied to generate the SpaCy documents.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Keywords-in-context (KWIC) and general filtering methods\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"*Keywords-in-context (KWIC)* allow you to quickly investigate certain keywords and their neighborhood of tokens, i.e. the tokens that appear right before and after this keyword.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"There are three corpus functions for this purpose:\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"- [kwic](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.kwic) is the base function accepting a search pattern and several options that control how the search pattern is matched (more on that below); use this function when you want to further process the output of a KWIC search;\\n\",\n \"- [kwic_table](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.kwic_table) is the more \\\"user friendly\\\" version of the above function; it produces a dataframe with the highlighted keyword by default;\\n\",\n \"- [filter_tokens_with_kwic](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.filter_tokens_with_kwic) works similar to the above functions but applies the result by filtering the documents; it is explained in the [section on filtering](#Filtering-tokens-and-documents);\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's see the KWIC functions in action. We will start with `kwic` and use the original, unprocessed data:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 60,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:57.773045Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:57.763213Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:57.899371Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:57.899914Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"{'NewsArticles-2433': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2225': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2487': [['Dutch', 'lower', 'house', 'of', 'parliament']],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-49': [['by', 'White', 'House', 'bullying', '.']],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-469': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2766': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2712': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2301': [['on', 'the', 'House', 'of', 'Representatives'],\\n\",\n \" ['to', 'the', 'House', 'Intelligence', 'Committee'],\\n\",\n \" ['The', 'White', 'House', 'on', 'Monday']],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1377': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3428': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3208': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2156': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2143': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2730': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3159': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3201': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3353': [['purchased', 'a', 'house', 'outside', 'Mexico']],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-355': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-422': [],\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2867': [['along', 'White', 'House', 'fence', '\\\\n\\\\n'],\\n\",\n \" ['the', 'White', 'House', ',', 'sources'],\\n\",\n \" ['the', 'White', 'House', 'fence', ','],\\n\",\n \" [' ', 'White', 'House', 'press', 'secretary'],\\n\",\n \" ['the', 'White', 'House', 'fence', '.'],\\n\",\n \" ['a', 'White', 'House', 'fence', 'last']],\\n\",\n \" ...}\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 60,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import kwic\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"kwic(corpus_orig, 'house', ignore_case=True)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The function returns a dictionary that maps document labels to the KWIC results. Each document contains a list of \\\"contexts\\\", i.e. a list of tokens that surround a keyword, here `\\\"house\\\"`. This keyword stands in the middle and is surrounded by its \\\"context tokens\\\", which by default means two tokens to the left and two tokens to the right (which may be less when the keyword is near the start or the end of a document). \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We can see that \\\"NewsArticles-2487\\\" and \\\"NewsArticles-49\\\" contain one context, \\\"NewsArticles-2301\\\" contains three contexts, etc., but most documents don't contain the search pattern and hence provide an empty list as result.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"With `kwic_table`, we get back a dataframe which provides a better formatting for quick investigation. See how the matched tokens are highlighted as `*house*` and empty results are removed:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 61,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:57.934517Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:57.908348Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.060590Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.061256Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
doccontexttoken
0NewsArticles-11190new White *House* is being
1NewsArticles-11191his White *House* was in
2NewsArticles-11192his White *House* and a
0NewsArticles-12630near our *house* . I
0NewsArticles-15460of White *House* counselor -
0NewsArticles-16100. White *House* spokesman Sean
0NewsArticles-21320the White *House* . \\\"
1NewsArticles-21321a White *House* gathering of
0NewsArticles-23010on the *House* of Representatives
1NewsArticles-23011to the *House* Intelligence Committee
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc context token\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1119 0 new White *House* is being\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1119 1 his White *House* was in\\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1119 2 his White *House* and a\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1263 0 near our *house* . I\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1546 0 of White *House* counselor -\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1610 0 . White *House* spokesman Sean\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-2132 0 the White *House* . \\\"\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-2132 1 a White *House* gathering of\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-2301 0 on the *House* of Representatives\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-2301 1 to the *House* Intelligence Committee\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 61,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import kwic_table\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# showing only the first 10 results\\n\",\n \"kwic_table(corpus_orig, 'house', ignore_case=True).head(10)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"An important parameter is `context_size`. It determines the number of tokens to display left and right to the found keyword. You can either pass a single integer for a symmetric context or a tuple with integers `(, )`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 62,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.070735Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.064684Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.229913Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.228623Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
doccontexttoken
0NewsArticles-11190way his new White *House* is being portrayed and
1NewsArticles-11191reports that his White *House* was in chaos ,
2NewsArticles-11192coverage of his White *House* and a desire to
0NewsArticles-12630militants exploded near our *house* . I was fr...
0NewsArticles-15460bizarre image of White *House* counselor - Kel...
0NewsArticles-16100he said . White *House* spokesman Sean Spicer ...
0NewsArticles-21320Cabinet at the White *House* . \\\" Hopefully we
1NewsArticles-21321He told a White *House* gathering of Americans...
0NewsArticles-23010from lawmakers on the *House* of Representativ...
1NewsArticles-23011by Monday to the *House* Intelligence Committe...
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc context \\\\\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1119 0 \\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1119 1 \\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1119 2 \\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1263 0 \\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1546 0 \\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1610 0 \\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-2132 0 \\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-2132 1 \\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-2301 0 \\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-2301 1 \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" token \\n\",\n \"0 way his new White *House* is being portrayed and \\n\",\n \"1 reports that his White *House* was in chaos , \\n\",\n \"2 coverage of his White *House* and a desire to \\n\",\n \"0 militants exploded near our *house* . I was fr... \\n\",\n \"0 bizarre image of White *House* counselor - Kel... \\n\",\n \"0 he said . White *House* spokesman Sean Spicer ... \\n\",\n \"0 Cabinet at the White *House* . \\\" Hopefully we \\n\",\n \"1 He told a White *House* gathering of Americans... \\n\",\n \"0 from lawmakers on the *House* of Representativ... \\n\",\n \"1 by Monday to the *House* Intelligence Committe... \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 62,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# 4 tokens to each side of the keyword (only display first 10 rows)\\n\",\n \"kwic_table(corpus_orig, 'house', ignore_case=True, context_size=4).head(10)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 63,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.271216Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.233119Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.385484Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.385919Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
doccontexttoken
0NewsArticles-11190White *House* is being portrayed and
1NewsArticles-11191White *House* was in chaos ,
2NewsArticles-11192White *House* and a desire to
0NewsArticles-12630our *house* . I was frightened
0NewsArticles-15460White *House* counselor - Kellyanne Conway
0NewsArticles-16100White *House* spokesman Sean Spicer said
0NewsArticles-21320White *House* . \\\" Hopefully we
1NewsArticles-21321White *House* gathering of Americans who
0NewsArticles-23010the *House* of Representatives Intelligence Co...
1NewsArticles-23011the *House* Intelligence Committee , which
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc context \\\\\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1119 0 \\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1119 1 \\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1119 2 \\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1263 0 \\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1546 0 \\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1610 0 \\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-2132 0 \\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-2132 1 \\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-2301 0 \\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-2301 1 \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" token \\n\",\n \"0 White *House* is being portrayed and \\n\",\n \"1 White *House* was in chaos , \\n\",\n \"2 White *House* and a desire to \\n\",\n \"0 our *house* . I was frightened \\n\",\n \"0 White *House* counselor - Kellyanne Conway \\n\",\n \"0 White *House* spokesman Sean Spicer said \\n\",\n \"0 White *House* . \\\" Hopefully we \\n\",\n \"1 White *House* gathering of Americans who \\n\",\n \"0 the *House* of Representatives Intelligence Co... \\n\",\n \"1 the *House* Intelligence Committee , which \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 63,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# 1 token to the left, 4 tokens to the right of the keyword (only display first 10 rows)\\n\",\n \"kwic_table(corpus_orig, 'house', ignore_case=True, context_size=(1, 4)).head(10)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The KWIC functions become really powerful when using the pattern matching options. So far, we were looking for *exact* (but case insensitive) matches between the corpus tokens and our keyword `\\\"house\\\"`. However, it is also possible to match patterns like `\\\"new*\\\"` (matches any token starting with \\\"new\\\") or `\\\"agenc(y|ies)\\\"` (a regular expression matching \\\"agency\\\" and \\\"agencies\\\"). The next section gives an introduction on the different options for pattern matching.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"#### Common parameters for pattern matching functions\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Several functions and methods in tmtoolkit support pattern matching, including the already mentioned function `find_documents` and the KWIC functions, but also functions for filtering tokens or documents as you will see later. They all share similar function signatures, i.e. similar parameters:\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"- `search_token` or `search_tokens`: allows to specify one or more patterns as strings\\n\",\n \"- `match_type`: sets the matching type and can be one of the following options:\\n\",\n \" - `'exact'` (default): exact string matching (optionally ignoring character case), i.e. no pattern matching\\n\",\n \" - `'regex'` uses [regular expression](https://docs.python.org/3/library/re.html) matching\\n\",\n \" - `'glob'` uses \\\"glob patterns\\\" like `\\\"politic*\\\"` which matches for example \\\"politic\\\", \\\"politics\\\" or \\\"politician\\\" (see [globre package](https://pypi.org/project/globre/))\\n\",\n \"- `ignore_case`: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\\n\",\n \"- `glob_method`: if `match_type` is 'glob', use this glob method. Must be `'match'` or `'search'` (similar behavior as Python's [re.match](https://docs.python.org/3/library/re.html#re.match) or [re.search](https://docs.python.org/3/library/re.html#re.search))\\n\",\n \"- `inverse`: inverse the match results, i.e. if matching for \\\"hello\\\", return all results that do *not* match \\\"hello\\\"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's try out some of these options with `kwic_table`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 64,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.405207Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.404465Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.553830Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.554455Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
doccontexttoken
0NewsArticles-11000in various *agencies* who had
0NewsArticles-13770Anadolu news *agency* . Earlier
1NewsArticles-13771and news *agencies*
0NewsArticles-15610National Crime *Agency* every month
1NewsArticles-15611National Crime *Agency* for specialist
0NewsArticles-16100. Source:-News *agencies*
0NewsArticles-18600state news *agency* . The
0NewsArticles-21560ministries and *agencies* in all
0NewsArticles-23010. Source:-News *agencies*
0NewsArticles-24330said the *agency* has not
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc context token\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1100 0 in various *agencies* who had\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1377 0 Anadolu news *agency* . Earlier\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1377 1 and news *agencies*\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1561 0 National Crime *Agency* every month\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1561 1 National Crime *Agency* for specialist\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1610 0 . Source:-News *agencies*\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1860 0 state news *agency* . The\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-2156 0 ministries and *agencies* in all\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-2301 0 . Source:-News *agencies*\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-2433 0 said the *agency* has not\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 64,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# using a regular expression, ignoring case (only display first 10 rows)\\n\",\n \"kwic_table(corpus_orig, r'agenc(y|ies)', match_type='regex', ignore_case=True).head(10)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 65,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.568899Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.567768Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.751966Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.752613Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
doccontexttoken
0NewsArticles-11190modern American *political* history .
1NewsArticles-11191than the *political* media ,
2NewsArticles-11192his own *poll* numbers ,
3NewsArticles-11193Washington 's *political* establishment and
4NewsArticles-11194Trump among *political* elites in
0NewsArticles-11850over a *police* - officer
1NewsArticles-11851the latest *police* violation to
2NewsArticles-11852- against *police* brutality.-
3NewsArticles-11853when the *police* stopped him
4NewsArticles-11854by the *police* circulated on
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc context token\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1119 0 modern American *political* history .\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1119 1 than the *political* media ,\\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1119 2 his own *poll* numbers ,\\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-1119 3 Washington 's *political* establishment and\\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-1119 4 Trump among *political* elites in\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1185 0 over a *police* - officer\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1185 1 the latest *police* violation to\\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1185 2 - against *police* brutality.- \\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-1185 3 when the *police* stopped him\\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-1185 4 by the *police* circulated on\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 65,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# using a glob, ignoring case (only display first 10 rows)\\n\",\n \"kwic_table(corpus_orig, 'pol*', match_type='glob', ignore_case=True).head(10)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 66,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.802449Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.775533Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.927505Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.928467Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
doccontexttoken
0NewsArticles-11190leaks are *absolutely* real .
0NewsArticles-11850the biggest *unresolved* problem is
0NewsArticles-14070of Belfast *solicitor* - Pat
0NewsArticles-15870North 's *isolationist* regime ,
1NewsArticles-15871in the *isolated* country ,
0NewsArticles-17870roundabout legal *solution* for an
0NewsArticles-18600embraced the *isolated* state ,
1NewsArticles-18601have been *sold* to North
0NewsArticles-21520\\\" rock *solid* \\\" support
1NewsArticles-21521a negotiated *solution* and deny
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc context token\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1119 0 leaks are *absolutely* real .\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1185 0 the biggest *unresolved* problem is\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1407 0 of Belfast *solicitor* - Pat\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1587 0 North 's *isolationist* regime ,\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1587 1 in the *isolated* country ,\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1787 0 roundabout legal *solution* for an\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1860 0 embraced the *isolated* state ,\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1860 1 have been *sold* to North\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-2152 0 \\\" rock *solid* \\\" support\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-2152 1 a negotiated *solution* and deny\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 66,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# using a glob, ignoring case (only display first 10 rows)\\n\",\n \"kwic_table(corpus_orig, '*sol*', match_type='glob', ignore_case=True).head(10)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 67,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.947267Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:58.946465Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:59.450959Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:59.451379Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
doccontexttoken
0NewsArticles-11000investigate leaks *\\\\n\\\\n* President Trump
1NewsArticles-11001his administration *.* The news
2NewsArticles-11002leaks are *\\\"* very serious
3NewsArticles-11003very serious *.* \\\" \\\"
4NewsArticles-11004serious . *\\\"* \\\" I
5NewsArticles-11005. \\\" *\\\"* I 've
6NewsArticles-11006the leaks *.* Those are
7NewsArticles-11007criminal leaks *,* \\\" Trump
8NewsArticles-11008leaks , *\\\"* Trump said
9NewsArticles-11009this afternoon *.* \\\" We
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc context token\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1100 0 investigate leaks *\\\\n\\\\n* President Trump\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1100 1 his administration *.* The news\\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1100 2 leaks are *\\\"* very serious\\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-1100 3 very serious *.* \\\" \\\"\\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-1100 4 serious . *\\\"* \\\" I\\n\",\n \"5 NewsArticles-1100 5 . \\\" *\\\"* I 've\\n\",\n \"6 NewsArticles-1100 6 the leaks *.* Those are\\n\",\n \"7 NewsArticles-1100 7 criminal leaks *,* \\\" Trump\\n\",\n \"8 NewsArticles-1100 8 leaks , *\\\"* Trump said\\n\",\n \"9 NewsArticles-1100 9 this afternoon *.* \\\" We\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 67,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# using a regex that matches all tokens with at least one vowel and\\n\",\n \"# inverting these matches, i.e. all tokens *without* any vowels\\n\",\n \"# (only display first 10 rows)\\n\",\n \"kwic_table(corpus_orig, r'[AEIOUaeiou]', match_type='regex', inverse=True).head(10)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"#### Filtering tokens and documents\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We can use the pattern matching parameters in numerous filtering methods. The heart of many of these methods is [token_match](api.rst#tmtoolkit.tokenseq.token_match). Given a search pattern, a list of tokens and optionally some pattern matching parameters, it returns a boolean NumPy array of the same length as the input tokens. Each occurrence of `True` in this boolean array signals a match.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 68,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:59.458230Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:59.457492Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:59.461263Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:59.461813Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[('President', False),\\n\",\n \" ('Trump', False),\\n\",\n \" ('says', False),\\n\",\n \" ('he', False),\\n\",\n \" ('has', False),\\n\",\n \" ('asked', False),\\n\",\n \" ('the', False),\\n\",\n \" ('Justice', False),\\n\",\n \" ('Department', False),\\n\",\n \" ('to', True),\\n\",\n \" ('investigate', False),\\n\",\n \" ('leaks', False),\\n\",\n \" ('\\\\n\\\\n', False),\\n\",\n \" ('President', False),\\n\",\n \" ('Trump', False),\\n\",\n \" ('said', False),\\n\",\n \" ('today', True),\\n\",\n \" ('he', False),\\n\",\n \" ('has', False),\\n\",\n \" ('directed', False)]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 68,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.tokenseq import token_match\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# first 20 tokens of document \\\"NewsArticles-1100\\\"\\n\",\n \"doc_snippet = corpus_orig['NewsArticles-1100']['token'][:20]\\n\",\n \"# get all tokens that match \\\"to*\\\"\\n\",\n \"matches = token_match('to*', doc_snippet, match_type='glob')\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# show pair-wise results\\n\",\n \"list(zip(doc_snippet, matches))\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The `token_match` function is a rather low-level function that you may use for pattern matching against any list/array of strings, e.g. a list of tokens, file names, etc.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The following functions cover common use-cases for filtering during text preprocessing. Many of these functions start either with `filter_...()` or `remove_...()` and these pairs of filter and remove functions are complements. A *filter function* will always *retain* the matched elements whereas a *remove function* will always *drop* the matched elements. Note that a remove function is actually a shortcut for a filter function with the parameter `inverse=True`.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We can observe that behavior with the first pair of functions, [filter_tokens](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.filter_tokens) and [remove_tokens](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.remove_tokens). Since these functions *modify* a corpus, you can again choose to make these modifications to the existing corpus object (\\\"in-place\\\") or return a modified corpus using the `inplace` parameter.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 69,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:59.508022Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:59.470366Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:59.778018Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:59.778425Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (1 tokens): house\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (3 tokens): House House House\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 53 / vocabulary size: 8\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import filter_tokens\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# retain only the tokens that match the pattern in each document\\n\",\n \"corpus_filtered = filter_tokens(corpus_orig, '*house*', match_type='glob',\\n\",\n \" ignore_case=True, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_filtered)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 70,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:59.808787Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:31:59.788348Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:00.214269Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:00.213859Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (1271 tokens): For more than a week,-France - has been rocked by ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (224 tokens): President Trump says he has asked the Justice Depa...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (426 tokens): Trump suggests Obama was ' behind ' town hall prot...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (30 tokens): Islamic State battle : Fierce gunfight outside Mos...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (298 tokens): Royal Bank of Scotland sees losses widening Bai...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (202 tokens): Minister reiterates Govt support for Finucane inqu...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (774 tokens): Turkey - backed rebels in ' near full control ' of...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (409 tokens): Russian doctors use mobile field hospital to provi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (513 tokens): Protests after Anaheim policeman drags teen , fire...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (972 tokens): An amazing moment in history : Donald Trump 's pre...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 59545 / vocabulary size: 9215\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import remove_tokens\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# remove the tokens that match the pattern in each document\\n\",\n \"corpus_filtered = remove_tokens(corpus_orig, '*house*', match_type='glob',\\n\",\n \" ignore_case=True, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_filtered)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The pair [filter_documents](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.filter_documents) and [remove_documents](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.remove_documents) works similarily, but filters or drops whole documents regarding the supplied match criteria. Both accept the standard pattern matching parameters, but also a parameter `matches_threshold` with default value `1`. When this number of matching tokens is hit, the document will be part of the result set (`filter_documents`) or removed from the result set (`remove_documents`). By this, we can for example retain only those documents that contain certain token patterns.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's try out these functions in practice:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 71,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:00.262998Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:00.224777Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:00.555716Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:00.556530Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 21 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2641 (1225 tokens): Muslim Artist 's Dreamy Nude Self - Portraits Show...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2867 (170 tokens): Person detained after hopping bike - rack barrier ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1610 (380 tokens): Jewish community centres hit by wave of bomb threa...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1546 (277 tokens): Kellyanne Conway 's Ultra - Casual Oval Office Pho...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2132 (490 tokens): Trump on health care : ' It 's a big , fat , beaut...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2431 (1678 tokens): Will Europe ride the populist wave ? A visual guid...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (410 tokens): Russian doctors use mobile field hospital to provi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2487 (1015 tokens): Dutch election : High turnout in key national vote...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (975 tokens): An amazing moment in history : Donald Trump 's pre...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2301 (464 tokens): DOJ seeks more time on Trump wiretapping inquiry ...\\n\",\n \"(and 11 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 16655 / vocabulary size: 3813\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import filter_documents\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_filtered = filter_documents(corpus_orig, '*house*', match_type='glob',\\n\",\n \" ignore_case=True, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_filtered)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can see that 21 out of 100 documents contained the pattern `'*house*'` and hence were retained.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We can also adjust `matches_threshold` to set the minimum number of token matches for filtering:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 72,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:00.610833Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:00.595205Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:00.913551Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:00.914194Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 5 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2867 (170 tokens): Person detained after hopping bike - rack barrier ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-3094 (694 tokens): House Intel Chair : Trump Administration Documents...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-3156 (554 tokens): Republicans working on changes to healthcare overh...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-3739 (491 tokens): Trump ally : Ivanka Trump 's new gig is n't nepoti...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-72 (1054 tokens): Speaker John Bercow defends his comments on Donald...\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 2963 / vocabulary size: 936\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import filter_documents\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_filtered = filter_documents(corpus_orig, '*house*', match_type='glob',\\n\",\n \" matches_threshold=4,\\n\",\n \" ignore_case=True, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_filtered)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Five out of 100 documents contained the pattern `'*house*'` at least four times and hence were retained.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 73,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:00.955432Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:00.944151Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:01.417771Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:01.418152Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 79 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (1271 tokens): For more than a week,-France - has been rocked by ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (224 tokens): President Trump says he has asked the Justice Depa...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (426 tokens): Trump suggests Obama was ' behind ' town hall prot...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1561 (539 tokens): Do not jail all paedophiles , says police chief ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1519 (246 tokens): SpaceX announces planned private trip around moon ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (30 tokens): Islamic State battle : Fierce gunfight outside Mos...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (298 tokens): Royal Bank of Scotland sees losses widening Bai...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (202 tokens): Minister reiterates Govt support for Finucane inqu...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (774 tokens): Turkey - backed rebels in ' near full control ' of...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (513 tokens): Protests after Anaheim policeman drags teen , fire...\\n\",\n \"(and 69 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 42943 / vocabulary size: 7573\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import remove_documents\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_filtered = remove_documents(corpus_orig, '*house*', match_type='glob',\\n\",\n \" ignore_case=True, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_filtered)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"When we use `remove_documents` we get only the documents that did *not* contain the specified pattern. Since we had 21 documents that contained the \\\"house\\\" pattern, we now have the complement set with the 79 documents that don't contain this pattern.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Another useful pair of functions is [filter_documents_by_label](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.filter_documents_by_label) and [remove_documents_by_label](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.remove_documents_by_label). Both functions again accept the same pattern matching parameters but they only apply them to the document names:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 74,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:01.474804Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:01.441843Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:01.688927Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:01.688235Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 73 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (1271 tokens): For more than a week,-France - has been rocked by ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (224 tokens): President Trump says he has asked the Justice Depa...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (426 tokens): Trump suggests Obama was ' behind ' town hall prot...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (30 tokens): Islamic State battle : Fierce gunfight outside Mos...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (298 tokens): Royal Bank of Scotland sees losses widening Bai...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (202 tokens): Minister reiterates Govt support for Finucane inqu...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (774 tokens): Turkey - backed rebels in ' near full control ' of...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (410 tokens): Russian doctors use mobile field hospital to provi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (513 tokens): Protests after Anaheim policeman drags teen , fire...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (975 tokens): An amazing moment in history : Donald Trump 's pre...\\n\",\n \"(and 63 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 43114 / vocabulary size: 7598\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import filter_documents_by_label\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_filtered = filter_documents_by_label(corpus_orig, r'-\\\\d{4}$',\\n\",\n \" match_type='regex', inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_filtered)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"In the above example we wanted to retain only the documents whose document labels ended with exactly 4 digits, like \\\"...-1234\\\". Hence, we only get \\\"NewsArticles-1880\\\" and \\\"NewsArticles-3350\\\" but not \\\"NewsArticles-99\\\". Again, `remove_documents_by_label` will do the exact opposite.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"You may also use [Keywords-in-context (KWIC)](#Keywords-in-context-(KWIC)-and-general-filtering-methods) to filter your tokens in the neighborhood around certain keyword pattern(s). The method for that is called [filter_tokens_with_kwic](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.filter_tokens_with_kwic) and works very similar to [kwic](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.kwic), but filters the documents in the `Corpus` instance with which you can continue working as usual. Here, we filter the tokens in each document to get the tokens directly in front and after the glob pattern `'*house*'` (`context_size=1`):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 75,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:01.746925Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:01.728082Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.010815Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.011421Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (3 tokens): our house .\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (0 tokens): \\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (9 tokens): White House is White House was White House and\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 158 / vocabulary size: 50\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import filter_tokens_with_kwic\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_filtered = filter_tokens_with_kwic(corpus_orig, '*house*',\\n\",\n \" context_size=1, match_type='glob',\\n\",\n \" ignore_case=True, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_filtered)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"When your NLP pipeline annotated your documents' tokens with Part-of-Speech (POS) tags, you can also filter them using [filter_for_pos](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.filter_for_pos):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 76,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.051432Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.050666Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.429472Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.430081Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenis_punctis_stoplemmalike_numpostag
0NewsArticles-11000PresidentFalseFalsePresidentFalsePROPNNNP
1NewsArticles-11001TrumpFalseFalseTrumpFalsePROPNNNP
2NewsArticles-11002JusticeFalseFalseJusticeFalsePROPNNNP
3NewsArticles-11003DepartmentFalseFalseDepartmentFalsePROPNNNP
4NewsArticles-11004leaksFalseFalseleakFalseNOUNNNS
..............................
17594NewsArticles-96090PutinFalseFalsePutinFalsePROPNNNP
17595NewsArticles-96091RussiaFalseFalseRussiaFalsePROPNNNP
17596NewsArticles-96092capabilitiesFalseFalsecapabilityFalseNOUNNNS
17597NewsArticles-96093prioritiesFalseFalsepriorityFalseNOUNNNS
17598NewsArticles-96094nationFalseFalsenationFalseNOUNNN
\\n\",\n \"

17599 rows × 9 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token is_punct is_stop \\\\\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1100 0 President False False \\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1100 1 Trump False False \\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1100 2 Justice False False \\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-1100 3 Department False False \\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-1100 4 leaks False False \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"17594 NewsArticles-960 90 Putin False False \\n\",\n \"17595 NewsArticles-960 91 Russia False False \\n\",\n \"17596 NewsArticles-960 92 capabilities False False \\n\",\n \"17597 NewsArticles-960 93 priorities False False \\n\",\n \"17598 NewsArticles-960 94 nation False False \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" lemma like_num pos tag \\n\",\n \"0 President False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"1 Trump False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"2 Justice False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"3 Department False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"4 leak False NOUN NNS \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"17594 Putin False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"17595 Russia False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"17596 capability False NOUN NNS \\n\",\n \"17597 priority False NOUN NNS \\n\",\n \"17598 nation False NOUN NN \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[17599 rows x 9 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 76,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import filter_for_pos\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# \\\"N\\\" means filter for nouns\\n\",\n \"corpus_filtered = filter_for_pos(corpus_orig, 'N', inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"tokens_table(corpus_filtered)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"In this example we filtered for tokens that were identified as nouns by passing the *simplified POS tag* `'N'` (for more on simplified tags, see the function documentation). We can also filter for more than one tag, e.g. nouns or verbs by passing a list of required POS tags.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The `filter_for_pos` function has no `remove_...` counterpart, but you can set the `inverse` parameter to `True` to achieve the same effect.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Finally there are functions for removing tokens based on their document frequency: [filter_tokens_by_doc_frequency](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.filter_tokens_by_doc_frequency) along with the shortcut functions [remove_common_tokens](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.remove_common_tokens) and [remove_uncommon_tokens](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.remove_uncommon_tokens). The former removes all tokens that have a document frequency greater or equal a certain threshold defined by parameter `df_threshold`. The latter does the same for all tokens that have a document frequency lower or equal `df_threshold`. This parameter accepts a frequency proportion (default) or absolute count (via parameter `proportions`).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Before applying the function, let's have a look at the total number of tokens again, to later see how many we removed. We will also store the vocabulary in `orig_vocab` for later comparison:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 77,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.437345Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.436538Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.439871Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.440494Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"59598\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 77,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import doc_lengths\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"orig_vocab = vocabulary(corpus_orig, sort=False)\\n\",\n \"corpus_num_tokens(corpus_orig)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 78,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.485701Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.480158Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.886851Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.887520Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"44102\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 78,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import remove_common_tokens\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_filtered = remove_common_tokens(corpus_orig, df_threshold=0.9, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"corpus_num_tokens(corpus_filtered)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"By removing all tokens with a document frequency threshold of 0.9, we removed quite a number of tokens in each document. Let's investigate the vocabulary in order to see which tokens were removed:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 79,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.895549Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.894721Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.897754Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.898415Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"{'\\\\n\\\\n',\\n\",\n \" \\\"'s\\\",\\n\",\n \" ',',\\n\",\n \" '.',\\n\",\n \" 'a',\\n\",\n \" 'and',\\n\",\n \" 'in',\\n\",\n \" 'is',\\n\",\n \" 'of',\\n\",\n \" 'on',\\n\",\n \" 'that',\\n\",\n \" 'the',\\n\",\n \" 'to'}\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 79,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# set difference gives removed vocabulary tokens\\n\",\n \"orig_vocab - vocabulary(corpus_filtered, sort=False)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can see that this – as expected – removed very common token types.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The `remove_uncommon_tokens` function works similarily. This time, let's use an absolute number as threshold:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 80,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.952298Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:02.932451Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.444139Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.444635Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"{'1,550',\\n\",\n \" 'plantation',\\n\",\n \" 'lobbyists',\\n\",\n \" 'tone',\\n\",\n \" 'Midlands',\\n\",\n \" 'Laboratory',\\n\",\n \" 'investigators',\\n\",\n \" 'homemade',\\n\",\n \" 'country.-\\\"But',\\n\",\n \" 'deported',\\n\",\n \" 'backdrop',\\n\",\n \" 'Hannah',\\n\",\n \" 'centuries',\\n\",\n \" 'permitted',\\n\",\n \" 'Reflection',\\n\",\n \" 'blow',\\n\",\n \" 'unrest',\\n\",\n \" 'restructure',\\n\",\n \" 'Kingsbury',\\n\",\n \" 'diligence',\\n\",\n \" ...}\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 80,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import remove_uncommon_tokens\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_filtered = remove_uncommon_tokens(corpus_orig, df_threshold=1,\\n\",\n \" proportions=0, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# set difference gives removed vocabulary tokens\\n\",\n \"orig_vocab - vocabulary(corpus_filtered, sort=False)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The above means that we removed all tokens that appear only in exactly one document. As expected, these are rather uncommon token types.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"There are more filtering functions available. See the [corpus functions API](api.rst#tmtoolkit-corpus) and search for `filter_` functions.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Working with document and token attributes\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Each document and each token in a corpus can have an arbitrary number of *attributes* attached to it. Think of these attributes as meta information or \\\"annotations\\\" at document or token level. An example for a document attribute is the document label, i.e. its name. An example for a token attribute is the POS tag.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"While the mentioned examples are attributes that tmtoolkit creates itself, you can also create your own attributes. For example, you may add a publication year as document attribute or a token attribute that indicates whether a token is in all caps. You can then use these attributes for example for filtering or in further analyses.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"#### Document attributes\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"There are two functions for adding or updating document or token attributes, respectively: [set_document_attr](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.set_document_attr) and [set_token_attr](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.set_token_attr). We'll start with adding a new document attribute, `year`. At first we need to provide the attribute data as dict that maps document labels to document attribute values. For the purpose of this tutorial, we'll simply make up some data by drawing a random year for each document.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 81,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.452945Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.452388Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.458024Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.457384Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"{'NewsArticles-2433': 2020,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2225': 2020,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2487': 2016,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-49': 2017,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-469': 2016,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2766': 2017,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2712': 2019,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2301': 2019,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1377': 2020,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3428': 2016,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3208': 2015,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2156': 2018,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2143': 2019,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2730': 2019,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3159': 2015,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3201': 2018,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3353': 2016,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-355': 2019,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-422': 2019,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2867': 2019,\\n\",\n \" ...}\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 81,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"doc_years = {lbl: random.randint(2015, 2020) for lbl in corpus_orig}\\n\",\n \"doc_years\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can now use `set_document_attr` to create the new document attribute and pass the data:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 82,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.517810Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.497222Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.633372Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.632639Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"('label', 'has_sents', 'year')\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 82,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import set_document_attr\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_new = set_document_attr(corpus_orig, 'year', data=doc_years, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"# using the `doc_attrs` property to check that the new attribute is recorded:\\n\",\n \"corpus_new.doc_attrs\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"When we investigate the token table, we can see a new column `year` which is constant for each document:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 83,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.645779Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.643522Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.981915Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:03.982317Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenis_punctis_stoplemmalike_numpostagyear
0NewsArticles-11000PresidentFalseFalsePresidentFalsePROPNNNP2018
1NewsArticles-11001TrumpFalseFalseTrumpFalsePROPNNNP2018
2NewsArticles-11002saysFalseFalsesayFalseVERBVBZ2018
3NewsArticles-11003heFalseTrueheFalsePRONPRP2018
4NewsArticles-11004hasFalseTruehaveFalseAUXVBZ2018
.................................
59593NewsArticles-960282prioritiesFalseFalsepriorityFalseNOUNNNS2016
59594NewsArticles-960283forFalseTrueforFalseADPIN2016
59595NewsArticles-960284theFalseTruetheFalseDETDT2016
59596NewsArticles-960285nationFalseFalsenationFalseNOUNNN2016
59597NewsArticles-960286.TrueFalse.FalsePUNCT.2016
\\n\",\n \"

59598 rows × 10 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token is_punct is_stop lemma \\\\\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1100 0 President False False President \\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1100 1 Trump False False Trump \\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1100 2 says False False say \\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-1100 3 he False True he \\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-1100 4 has False True have \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"59593 NewsArticles-960 282 priorities False False priority \\n\",\n \"59594 NewsArticles-960 283 for False True for \\n\",\n \"59595 NewsArticles-960 284 the False True the \\n\",\n \"59596 NewsArticles-960 285 nation False False nation \\n\",\n \"59597 NewsArticles-960 286 . True False . \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" like_num pos tag year \\n\",\n \"0 False PROPN NNP 2018 \\n\",\n \"1 False PROPN NNP 2018 \\n\",\n \"2 False VERB VBZ 2018 \\n\",\n \"3 False PRON PRP 2018 \\n\",\n \"4 False AUX VBZ 2018 \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"59593 False NOUN NNS 2016 \\n\",\n \"59594 False ADP IN 2016 \\n\",\n \"59595 False DET DT 2016 \\n\",\n \"59596 False NOUN NN 2016 \\n\",\n \"59597 False PUNCT . 2016 \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[59598 rows x 10 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 83,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tokens_table(corpus_new)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"In the above example, we set a document attribute value for each document in the corpus. However, you can also just set values for a subset of the documents. All other documents will then also contain that document attribute, but with a default value which is determined with the `default` parameter. Let's find out all documents that contain the token \\\"president\\\" (ignoring case). This is only a subset of all documents. We create an attribute dictionary that assigns `True` to all these documents:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 84,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.008220Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.007506Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.099993Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.099155Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"{'NewsArticles-2433': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2225': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2487': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-49': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2766': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2301': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1377': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3208': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2143': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3201': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3353': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2502': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2431': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-3309': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1185': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-21': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-2132': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1119': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-549': True,\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-760': True,\\n\",\n \" ...}\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 84,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"president_docs = find_documents(corpus_new, 'president', ignore_case=True)\\n\",\n \"president_attrs = {lbl: True for lbl in president_docs}\\n\",\n \"president_attrs\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We now use this dictionary to create a new document attribute `president`. All documents not contained in `president_attrs` will get the default attribute value `False`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 85,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.120741Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.120001Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.258788Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.257866Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docyearpresident
0NewsArticles-11002018True
224NewsArticles-11192017True
1199NewsArticles-11852017True
2470NewsArticles-12632016False
2880NewsArticles-13532020False
............
57599NewsArticles-7702017False
57987NewsArticles-7802016False
58110NewsArticles-8362015False
58397NewsArticles-9012015False
59311NewsArticles-9602016True
\\n\",\n \"

100 rows × 3 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc year president\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1100 2018 True\\n\",\n \"224 NewsArticles-1119 2017 True\\n\",\n \"1199 NewsArticles-1185 2017 True\\n\",\n \"2470 NewsArticles-1263 2016 False\\n\",\n \"2880 NewsArticles-1353 2020 False\\n\",\n \"... ... ... ...\\n\",\n \"57599 NewsArticles-770 2017 False\\n\",\n \"57987 NewsArticles-780 2016 False\\n\",\n \"58110 NewsArticles-836 2015 False\\n\",\n \"58397 NewsArticles-901 2015 False\\n\",\n \"59311 NewsArticles-960 2016 True\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[100 rows x 3 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 85,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"set_document_attr(corpus_new, 'president', data=president_attrs, default=False)\\n\",\n \"toktbl = tokens_table(corpus_new, with_attr=['year', 'president'])\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# only show rows with document name, year and president indicator\\n\",\n \"toktbl[['doc', 'year', 'president']].drop_duplicates()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"#### Token attributes\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Similar to document attributes, we can use `set_token_attr` for creating or updating token attributes. However, this function has two modes of assigning attribute values to tokens. The default mode assigns each token occurrence, i.e. each token type, a certain attribute value. We will start with this mode.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We set a new token attribute `obama` and simply assign a boolean value to each token which is `True` when the token is \\\"Obama\\\", else `False`.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 86,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.289349Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.288681Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.293743Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.294542Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"('is_punct', 'is_stop', 'like_num', 'tag', 'pos', 'lemma', 'obama')\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 86,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import set_token_attr\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"set_token_attr(corpus_new, 'obama', data={'Obama': True}, default=False)\\n\",\n \"# check the token attributes property\\n\",\n \"corpus_new.token_attrs\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can see that it worked, but it isn't really useful:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 87,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.307136Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.300110Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.635094Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.634668Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenis_punctis_stoplemmalike_numobamapospresidenttagyear
137NewsArticles-1100137ObamaFalseFalseObamaFalseTruePROPNTrueNNP2018
1072NewsArticles-1119848ObamaFalseFalseObamaFalseTruePROPNTrueNNP2017
4699NewsArticles-15152ObamaFalseFalseObamaFalseTruePROPNTrueNNP2016
4715NewsArticles-151518ObamaFalseFalseObamaFalseTruePROPNTrueNNP2016
4769NewsArticles-151572ObamaFalseFalseObamaFalseTruePROPNTrueNNP2016
4815NewsArticles-1515118ObamaFalseFalseObamaFalseTruePROPNTrueNNP2016
4927NewsArticles-1515230ObamaFalseFalseObamaFalseTruePROPNTrueNNP2016
4950NewsArticles-1515253ObamaFalseFalseObamaFalseTruePROPNTrueNNP2016
4992NewsArticles-1515295ObamaFalseFalseObamaFalseTruePROPNTrueNNP2016
5087NewsArticles-1515390ObamaFalseFalseObamaFalseTruePROPNTrueNNP2016
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token is_punct is_stop lemma like_num \\\\\\n\",\n \"137 NewsArticles-1100 137 Obama False False Obama False \\n\",\n \"1072 NewsArticles-1119 848 Obama False False Obama False \\n\",\n \"4699 NewsArticles-1515 2 Obama False False Obama False \\n\",\n \"4715 NewsArticles-1515 18 Obama False False Obama False \\n\",\n \"4769 NewsArticles-1515 72 Obama False False Obama False \\n\",\n \"4815 NewsArticles-1515 118 Obama False False Obama False \\n\",\n \"4927 NewsArticles-1515 230 Obama False False Obama False \\n\",\n \"4950 NewsArticles-1515 253 Obama False False Obama False \\n\",\n \"4992 NewsArticles-1515 295 Obama False False Obama False \\n\",\n \"5087 NewsArticles-1515 390 Obama False False Obama False \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" obama pos president tag year \\n\",\n \"137 True PROPN True NNP 2018 \\n\",\n \"1072 True PROPN True NNP 2017 \\n\",\n \"4699 True PROPN True NNP 2016 \\n\",\n \"4715 True PROPN True NNP 2016 \\n\",\n \"4769 True PROPN True NNP 2016 \\n\",\n \"4815 True PROPN True NNP 2016 \\n\",\n \"4927 True PROPN True NNP 2016 \\n\",\n \"4950 True PROPN True NNP 2016 \\n\",\n \"4992 True PROPN True NNP 2016 \\n\",\n \"5087 True PROPN True NNP 2016 \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 87,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"toktbl = tokens_table(corpus_new)\\n\",\n \"toktbl[toktbl.obama].head(10)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The second mode to assign token attribute values is much more useful. In this mode, you provide a dictionary that maps a document label to a list or array of token attribute values. The list's/array's size must match the number of tokens in the respective document. With this, you can assign an attribute value to each token in each document. We will use this to add a token attribute that records the number of characters in each token. At first, we generate that data:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 88,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.675712Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.674067Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.679156Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.679842Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[9, 5, 4, 2, 3, 5, 3, 7, 10, 2, 11, 5, 2, 9, 5, 4, 5, 2, 3, 8, ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 88,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"doc_toks = doc_tokens(corpus_new)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"tok_lengths = {lbl: list(map(len, tok)) for lbl, tok in doc_toks.items()}\\n\",\n \"# show the number of characters for each token in a sample document\\n\",\n \"tok_lengths['NewsArticles-1100']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Now we pass this data but set `per_token_occurrence=False` to indicate that the data contains attribute values per token in each document.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 89,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.692741Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.692030Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.804033Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.804928Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokennchar
0NewsArticles-11000President9
1NewsArticles-11001Trump5
2NewsArticles-11002says4
3NewsArticles-11003he2
4NewsArticles-11004has3
...............
59593NewsArticles-960282priorities10
59594NewsArticles-960283for3
59595NewsArticles-960284the3
59596NewsArticles-960285nation6
59597NewsArticles-960286.1
\\n\",\n \"

59598 rows × 4 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token nchar\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1100 0 President 9\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1100 1 Trump 5\\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1100 2 says 4\\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-1100 3 he 2\\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-1100 4 has 3\\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ...\\n\",\n \"59593 NewsArticles-960 282 priorities 10\\n\",\n \"59594 NewsArticles-960 283 for 3\\n\",\n \"59595 NewsArticles-960 284 the 3\\n\",\n \"59596 NewsArticles-960 285 nation 6\\n\",\n \"59597 NewsArticles-960 286 . 1\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[59598 rows x 4 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 89,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"set_token_attr(corpus_new, 'nchar', data=tok_lengths, per_token_occurrence=False)\\n\",\n \"tokens_table(corpus_new, with_attr='nchar')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"#### Removing attributes\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Document and token attributes can be removed with [remove_document_attr](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.remove_document_attr) and [remove_token_attr](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.remove_token_attr) respectively.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 90,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.810686Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.810063Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.812874Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.813313Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"('label', 'has_sents', 'president')\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 90,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import remove_document_attr\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"remove_document_attr(corpus_new, 'year')\\n\",\n \"corpus_new.doc_attrs\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 91,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.820603Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.819841Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.822593Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.823213Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"('is_punct', 'is_stop', 'like_num', 'tag', 'pos', 'lemma', 'nchar')\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 91,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import remove_token_attr\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"remove_token_attr(corpus_new, 'obama')\\n\",\n \"corpus_new.token_attrs\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can tell [filter_tokens](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.filter_tokens) and similar functions to use document or token attributes instead of the tokens for matching. The common parameter name for this option is `by_attr`. For example, we can use the `nchar` attribute, which we created before, to filter for tokens of a certain length:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 92,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.836674Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:04.830235Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.111373Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.110498Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokennchar
0NewsArticles-11000has3
1NewsArticles-11001the3
2NewsArticles-11002has3
3NewsArticles-11003the3
4NewsArticles-11004the3
...............
9277NewsArticles-96039its3
9278NewsArticles-96040has3
9279NewsArticles-96041the3
9280NewsArticles-96042for3
9281NewsArticles-96043the3
\\n\",\n \"

9282 rows × 4 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token nchar\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1100 0 has 3\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1100 1 the 3\\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1100 2 has 3\\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-1100 3 the 3\\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-1100 4 the 3\\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ...\\n\",\n \"9277 NewsArticles-960 39 its 3\\n\",\n \"9278 NewsArticles-960 40 has 3\\n\",\n \"9279 NewsArticles-960 41 the 3\\n\",\n \"9280 NewsArticles-960 42 for 3\\n\",\n \"9281 NewsArticles-960 43 the 3\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[9282 rows x 4 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 92,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corpus_3chars = filter_tokens(corpus_new, 3, by_attr='nchar', inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"tokens_table(corpus_3chars, with_attr='nchar')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 93,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.115982Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.115232Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.117287Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.117864Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"del corpus_3chars\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Note that all matching options then apply to the token attribute column, in this case to the `nchar` column which contains integers. Since `filter_tokens` by default employs exact matching, we get all tokens where `nchar` equals the first argument, `3`. If we used regular expression or glob matching instead, this method would fail because you can only use that for string data.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"If you want to use more complex filter queries, you should create a \\\"filter mask\\\" and pass it to [filter_tokens_by_mask](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.filter_tokens_by_mask). A filter mask is a dictionary that maps a document label to a sequence of boolean values. For all occurrences of `True`, the respective token in the document will be retained, all others will be removed.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Let's try that out with a small example: We now generate the filter mask, which means for each document we create a boolean list or array that for each token in that document indicates whether that token should be kept or removed.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We will iterate through the document tokens with attributes supplied from `doc_tokens`. We set `as_arrays=True` to obtain the `nchar` and `pos` token attributes for each document as NumPy array.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 94,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.191681Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.146366Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.232438Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.231804Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"(array([3, 1, 1, 7, 5, 8, 2, 5, 4, 2]),\\n\",\n \" array(['NOUN', 'PUNCT', 'NUM', 'ADJ', 'NOUN', 'VERB', 'ADP', 'PROPN',\\n\",\n \" 'NOUN', 'SPACE'], dtype='\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenncharpossmall_nouns
0NewsArticles-11000President9PROPNFalse
1NewsArticles-11001Trump5PROPNTrue
2NewsArticles-11002says4VERBFalse
3NewsArticles-11003he2PRONFalse
4NewsArticles-11004has3AUXFalse
.....................
59593NewsArticles-960282priorities10NOUNFalse
59594NewsArticles-960283for3ADPFalse
59595NewsArticles-960284the3DETFalse
59596NewsArticles-960285nation6NOUNFalse
59597NewsArticles-960286.1PUNCTFalse
\\n\",\n \"

59598 rows × 6 columns

\\n\",\n \"\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token nchar pos small_nouns\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1100 0 President 9 PROPN False\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1100 1 Trump 5 PROPN True\\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1100 2 says 4 VERB False\\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-1100 3 he 2 PRON False\\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-1100 4 has 3 AUX False\\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... ... ...\\n\",\n \"59593 NewsArticles-960 282 priorities 10 NOUN False\\n\",\n \"59594 NewsArticles-960 283 for 3 ADP False\\n\",\n \"59595 NewsArticles-960 284 the 3 DET False\\n\",\n \"59596 NewsArticles-960 285 nation 6 NOUN False\\n\",\n \"59597 NewsArticles-960 286 . 1 PUNCT False\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[59598 rows x 6 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 95,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"import numpy as np\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"filter_mask = {}\\n\",\n \"for doc_label, doc_data in doc_tokattrs.items():\\n\",\n \" tok_lengths = doc_data['nchar']\\n\",\n \" tok_pos = doc_data['pos']\\n\",\n \" # create a boolean array for nouns with token length less or equal 5\\n\",\n \" filter_mask[doc_label] = (tok_lengths <= 5) & np.isin(tok_pos, ['NOUN', 'PROPN'])\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# it's not necessary to add the filter mask as token attribute\\n\",\n \"# but it's a good way to check the mask\\n\",\n \"set_token_attr(corpus_new, 'small_nouns', data=filter_mask, per_token_occurrence=False)\\n\",\n \"tokens_table(corpus_new, with_attr=['nchar', 'pos', 'small_nouns'])\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Finally, we can pass the mask dict to `filter_tokens_by_mask`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 96,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.453530Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.452688Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.521545Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.522176Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenncharpossmall_nouns
0NewsArticles-11000Trump5PROPNTrue
1NewsArticles-11001leaks5NOUNTrue
2NewsArticles-11002Trump5PROPNTrue
3NewsArticles-11003today5NOUNTrue
4NewsArticles-11004leaks5NOUNTrue
.....................
6913NewsArticles-96029Trump5PROPNTrue
6914NewsArticles-96030U.S.4PROPNTrue
6915NewsArticles-96031rest4NOUNTrue
6916NewsArticles-96032world5NOUNTrue
6917NewsArticles-96033Putin5PROPNTrue
\\n\",\n \"

6918 rows × 6 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token nchar pos small_nouns\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1100 0 Trump 5 PROPN True\\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1100 1 leaks 5 NOUN True\\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1100 2 Trump 5 PROPN True\\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-1100 3 today 5 NOUN True\\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-1100 4 leaks 5 NOUN True\\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... ... ...\\n\",\n \"6913 NewsArticles-960 29 Trump 5 PROPN True\\n\",\n \"6914 NewsArticles-960 30 U.S. 4 PROPN True\\n\",\n \"6915 NewsArticles-960 31 rest 4 NOUN True\\n\",\n \"6916 NewsArticles-960 32 world 5 NOUN True\\n\",\n \"6917 NewsArticles-960 33 Putin 5 PROPN True\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[6918 rows x 6 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 96,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import filter_tokens_by_mask\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"filter_tokens_by_mask(corpus_new, mask=filter_mask)\\n\",\n \"tokens_table(corpus_new, with_attr=['nchar', 'pos', 'small_nouns'])\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Generating n-grams\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"So far, we worked with *unigrams*, i.e. each document consisted of a sequence of discrete tokens. We can also generate *n-grams* from our corpus where each document consists of a sequence of *n* subsequent tokens. An example would be:\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Document: \\\"This is a simple example.\\\"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"**n=1 (unigrams):**\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" ['This', 'is', 'a', 'simple', 'example', '.']\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"**n=2 (bigrams):**\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" ['This is', 'is a', 'a simple', 'simple example', 'example .']\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"**n=3 (trigrams):**\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" ['This is a', 'is a simple', 'a simple example', 'simple example .']\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The function [ngrams](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.ngrams) allows to generate n-grams. Here, we create bigrams and display a sample document, \\\"NewsArticles-2433\\\":\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 97,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.581486Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.540362Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.653236Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.653610Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['DOJ :',\\n\",\n \" ': 2',\\n\",\n \" '2 Russian',\\n\",\n \" 'Russian spies',\\n\",\n \" 'spies indicted',\\n\",\n \" 'indicted in',\\n\",\n \" 'in Yahoo',\\n\",\n \" 'Yahoo hack',\\n\",\n \" 'hack \\\\n\\\\n',\\n\",\n \" '\\\\n\\\\n Washington',\\n\",\n \" 'Washington (',\\n\",\n \" '( CNN)The',\\n\",\n \" 'CNN)The Department',\\n\",\n \" 'Department of',\\n\",\n \" 'of Justice',\\n\",\n \" 'Justice announced',\\n\",\n \" 'announced Wednesday',\\n\",\n \" 'Wednesday that',\\n\",\n \" 'that four',\\n\",\n \" 'four people',\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 97,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import ngrams\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"ngrams(corpus_orig, n=2)['NewsArticles-2433']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"By default, the ngrams are joined with a space (can be adjusted via `join_str`), but you can disable that using `join=False` so that each n-gram is a list of size *n*:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 98,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.822080Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.694093Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.878997Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.878584Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[['DOJ', ':', '2'],\\n\",\n \" [':', '2', 'Russian'],\\n\",\n \" ['2', 'Russian', 'spies'],\\n\",\n \" ['Russian', 'spies', 'indicted'],\\n\",\n \" ['spies', 'indicted', 'in'],\\n\",\n \" ['indicted', 'in', 'Yahoo'],\\n\",\n \" ['in', 'Yahoo', 'hack'],\\n\",\n \" ['Yahoo', 'hack', '\\\\n\\\\n'],\\n\",\n \" ['hack', '\\\\n\\\\n', 'Washington'],\\n\",\n \" ['\\\\n\\\\n', 'Washington', '('],\\n\",\n \" ['Washington', '(', 'CNN)The'],\\n\",\n \" ['(', 'CNN)The', 'Department'],\\n\",\n \" ['CNN)The', 'Department', 'of'],\\n\",\n \" ['Department', 'of', 'Justice'],\\n\",\n \" ['of', 'Justice', 'announced'],\\n\",\n \" ['Justice', 'announced', 'Wednesday'],\\n\",\n \" ['announced', 'Wednesday', 'that'],\\n\",\n \" ['Wednesday', 'that', 'four'],\\n\",\n \" ['that', 'four', 'people'],\\n\",\n \" ['four', 'people', '--'],\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 98,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"ngrams(corpus_orig, n=3, join=False)['NewsArticles-2433']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Note that the `ngrams` functions just retrieves the tokens as n-grams, but doesn't alter the corpus contents in any way. In contrast to that, when you use the [corpus_ngramify](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_ngramify) function the corpus object internally stores that you want to operate on n-grams in all further operations.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"In the following example, we set the corpus to handle its tokens as bigrams. Note how `doc_tokens` then returns bigrams:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 99,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.963862Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:05.927636Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:06.174935Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:06.174470Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['DOJ :',\\n\",\n \" ': 2',\\n\",\n \" '2 Russian',\\n\",\n \" 'Russian spies',\\n\",\n \" 'spies indicted',\\n\",\n \" 'indicted in',\\n\",\n \" 'in Yahoo',\\n\",\n \" 'Yahoo hack',\\n\",\n \" 'hack \\\\n\\\\n',\\n\",\n \" '\\\\n\\\\n Washington',\\n\",\n \" 'Washington (',\\n\",\n \" '( CNN)The',\\n\",\n \" 'CNN)The Department',\\n\",\n \" 'Department of',\\n\",\n \" 'of Justice',\\n\",\n \" 'Justice announced',\\n\",\n \" 'announced Wednesday',\\n\",\n \" 'Wednesday that',\\n\",\n \" 'that four',\\n\",\n \" 'four people',\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 99,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import corpus_ngramify\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_bigrams = corpus_ngramify(corpus_orig, n=2, inplace=False)\\n\",\n \"doc_tokens(corpus_bigrams)['NewsArticles-2433']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The same goes for `tokens_table`, too. Notice how each token attribute becomes a bigram, too:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 100,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:06.198111Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:06.182048Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:07.370939Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:07.369651Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenis_punctis_stoplemmalike_numpostag
0NewsArticles-11000President TrumpFalse FalseFalse FalsePresident TrumpFalse FalsePROPN PROPNNNP NNP
1NewsArticles-11001Trump saysFalse FalseFalse FalseTrump sayFalse FalsePROPN VERBNNP VBZ
2NewsArticles-11002says heFalse FalseFalse Truesay heFalse FalseVERB PRONVBZ PRP
3NewsArticles-11003he hasFalse FalseTrue Truehe haveFalse FalsePRON AUXPRP VBZ
4NewsArticles-11004has askedFalse FalseTrue Falsehave askFalse FalseAUX VERBVBZ VBN
..............................
59493NewsArticles-960281the prioritiesFalse FalseTrue Falsethe priorityFalse FalseDET NOUNDT NNS
59494NewsArticles-960282priorities forFalse FalseFalse Truepriority forFalse FalseNOUN ADPNNS IN
59495NewsArticles-960283for theFalse FalseTrue Truefor theFalse FalseADP DETIN DT
59496NewsArticles-960284the nationFalse FalseTrue Falsethe nationFalse FalseDET NOUNDT NN
59497NewsArticles-960285nation .False TrueFalse Falsenation .False FalseNOUN PUNCTNN .
\\n\",\n \"

59498 rows × 9 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token is_punct is_stop \\\\\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1100 0 President Trump False False False False \\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1100 1 Trump says False False False False \\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-1100 2 says he False False False True \\n\",\n \"3 NewsArticles-1100 3 he has False False True True \\n\",\n \"4 NewsArticles-1100 4 has asked False False True False \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"59493 NewsArticles-960 281 the priorities False False True False \\n\",\n \"59494 NewsArticles-960 282 priorities for False False False True \\n\",\n \"59495 NewsArticles-960 283 for the False False True True \\n\",\n \"59496 NewsArticles-960 284 the nation False False True False \\n\",\n \"59497 NewsArticles-960 285 nation . False True False False \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" lemma like_num pos tag \\n\",\n \"0 President Trump False False PROPN PROPN NNP NNP \\n\",\n \"1 Trump say False False PROPN VERB NNP VBZ \\n\",\n \"2 say he False False VERB PRON VBZ PRP \\n\",\n \"3 he have False False PRON AUX PRP VBZ \\n\",\n \"4 have ask False False AUX VERB VBZ VBN \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"59493 the priority False False DET NOUN DT NNS \\n\",\n \"59494 priority for False False NOUN ADP NNS IN \\n\",\n \"59495 for the False False ADP DET IN DT \\n\",\n \"59496 the nation False False DET NOUN DT NN \\n\",\n \"59497 nation . False False NOUN PUNCT NN . \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[59498 rows x 9 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 100,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tokens_table(corpus_bigrams)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 101,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:07.379793Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:07.378734Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:07.382272Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:07.383051Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"del corpus_bigrams\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Generating a sparse document-term matrix (DTM)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"If you're working with a bag-of-words representation of your data, you usually convert the preprocessed documents to a document-term matrix (DTM), which represents of the number of occurrences of each term (i.e. vocabulary token) in each document. This is a *N* rows by *M* columns matrix, where *N* is the number of documents and *M* is the vocabulary size (i.e. the number of unique tokens in the corpus).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Not all tokens from the vocabulary occur in all documents. In fact, many tokens will occur only in a small subset of the documents if you're dealing with a \\\"real world\\\" dataset. This means that most entries in such a DTM will be zero. Almost all functions in tmtoolkit therefore generate and work with *sparse matrices*, where only non-zero values are stored in computer memory.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"For this example, we'll generate a DTM from the `corpus_norm` instance. First, let's check the number of documents and the vocabulary size:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 102,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:07.403110Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:07.391216Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:07.428653Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:07.433806Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"(100, 6271)\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 102,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"len(corpus_norm), vocabulary_size(corpus_norm)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can use the [dtm](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.dtm) function to generate a sparse DTM from the current instance:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 103,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:07.453390Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:07.449669Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.084841Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.087353Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"<100x6271 sparse matrix of type ''\\n\",\n \"\\twith 17204 stored elements in Compressed Sparse Row format>\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 103,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import dtm\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"dtm_norm = dtm(corpus_norm)\\n\",\n \"dtm_norm\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can see that a sparse matrix with 100 rows (which corresponds with the number of documents) and 6271 columns was generated (which corresponds to the vocabulary size). 17204 elements in this matrix are non-zero.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We can convert this matrix to a non-sparse, i.e. *dense*, representation and see parts of its elements:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 104,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.099418Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.098468Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.114105Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.115631Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"matrix([[0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 0, 0],\\n\",\n \" [0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 0, 0],\\n\",\n \" [0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 0, 0],\\n\",\n \" ...,\\n\",\n \" [0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 0, 0],\\n\",\n \" [0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 0, 0],\\n\",\n \" [0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 0, 0]], dtype=int32)\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 104,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"dtm_norm.todense()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"However, note that you should only convert a sparse matrix to a dense representation when you're either dealing with a small amount of data (which is what we're doing in this example), or use only a part of the full matrix. Converting a sparse matrix to a dense representation can otherwise easily exceed the available computer memory.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"There exist different \\\"formats\\\" for sparse matrices, which have different advantages and disadvantages (see for example the [SciPy \\\"sparse\\\" module documentation](https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/sparse.html#usage-information)). **Not all formats support all operations that you can usually apply to an ordinary, dense matrix.** By default, the generated DTM is in *Compressed Sparse Row (CSR)* format. This format allows indexing and is especially optimized for fast row access. You may convert it to any other sparse matrix format; see the mentioned SciPy documentation for this.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The rows of the DTM are aligned to the *sorted* list of document labels and its columns are aligned to the *sorted* vocabulary. For example, let's find the frequency of the term \\\"white_house\\\" in the document \\\"NewsArticles-2867\\\" (remember that we transformed all tokens to lower case and joint the collocation \\\"white house\\\" in the normalized corpus `corpus_norm`). To do this, we find out the indices into the matrix. By default, the corpus functions `doc_labels` and `vocabulary` return sorted lists, so these will be aligned with our matrix rows and columns.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 105,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.126887Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.125779Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.131153Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.131899Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"49\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 105,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"doc_labels(corpus_norm).index('NewsArticles-2867')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 106,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.148782Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.147787Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.152324Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.151550Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"6139\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 106,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"vocab_norm = vocabulary(corpus_norm) # will later reuse that\\n\",\n \"vocab_norm.index('white_house')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"This means the frequency of the term \\\"white_house\\\" in the document \\\"NewsArticles-2867\\\" is located in row 49 and column 6139 of the DTM:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 107,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.159608Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.158729Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.162501Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.163418Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"6\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 107,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"dtm_norm[49, 6139]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can check that by using the `count` method on the tokens of this document:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 108,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.174038Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.172923Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.178787Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.179863Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"6\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 108,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corpus_norm['NewsArticles-2867']['token'].count('white_house')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"See also the following example of finding out the index for \\\"administration\\\" and then getting an array that represents the number of occurrences of this token type across all 100 documents:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 109,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.187703Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.186888Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.191904Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.190929Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"matrix([[2, 6, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,\\n\",\n \" 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0,\\n\",\n \" 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,\\n\",\n \" 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0,\\n\",\n \" 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1]], dtype=int32)\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 109,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"vocab_admin_ix = vocab_norm.index('administration')\\n\",\n \"dtm_norm[:, vocab_admin_ix].todense().flatten()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The `dtm` function also allows to directly return the document labels and vocabulary that are aligned to the matrix, which is quicker and less error-prone. This can be achieved with the `return_doc_labels` and `return_vocab` parameters, respectively.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Another interesting option is the `as_table` parameter, which returns the result as dataframe. Note that you should only use this option for small datasets, as it returns a dense dataframe that consumes a lot of memory:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 110,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.207829Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.206962Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.698684Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.697201Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
010620170113201701202017012720170830110100100010000...zangzapadzelenyzepingzhangzionistzonezorzuma�
NewsArticles-11000000000000...0000000000
NewsArticles-11190000000100...0000000000
NewsArticles-11850000004140...0000001000
NewsArticles-12630000001200...0000000000
NewsArticles-13530000000000...0000000000
..................................................................
NewsArticles-7700000021010...0000002000
NewsArticles-7800000010000...0000000000
NewsArticles-8360000020020...0000000000
NewsArticles-9010000024071...0000000000
NewsArticles-9600000000030...0000000000
\\n\",\n \"

100 rows × 6271 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" 01062017 01132017 01202017 01272017 0830 1 10 100 \\\\\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1119 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1185 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1263 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1353 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... ... .. .. ... \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-770 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-780 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-836 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-901 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-960 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" 1000 10000 ... zang zapad zeleny zeping zhang \\\\\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1100 0 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1119 0 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1185 4 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1263 0 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1353 0 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-770 1 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-780 0 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-836 2 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-901 7 1 ... 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-960 3 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" zionist zone zor zuma � \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1100 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1119 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1185 0 1 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1263 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1353 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"... ... ... ... ... .. \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-770 0 2 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-780 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-836 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-901 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-960 0 0 0 0 0 \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[100 rows x 6271 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 110,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"dtm(corpus_norm, as_table=True)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Serialization: Saving and loading `Corpus` objects\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The current state of a `Corpus` object can also be stored to a file on disk so that you (or someone else who has tmtoolkit installed) can later restore it using that file. The functions for that are [save_corpus_to_picklefile](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.save_corpus_to_picklefile) and [load_corpus_from_picklefile](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.load_corpus_from_picklefile).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's store the current state of the `corpus_norm` instance:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 111,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.712200Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.711332Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.755782Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.756560Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (575 tokens): weekfrance rock tension flare police officer alleg...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (96 tokens): president trump say ask justice department investi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (181 tokens): trump suggest obama town hall protest president do...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (21 tokens): islamic state battle fierce gunfight outside mosul...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (163 tokens): royal bank scotland see loss widen bail royal bank...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (105 tokens): minister reiterate govt support finucane inquiry m...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (398 tokens): turkey back rebel near control al bab turkey defen...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (202 tokens): russian doctor use mobile field hospital provide m...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (253 tokens): protest anaheim policeman drag teen fire gun lapd ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (398 tokens): amazing moment history donald_trump press conferen...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 27888 / vocabulary size: 6271\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import save_corpus_to_picklefile\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_norm)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"save_corpus_to_picklefile(corpus_norm, 'data/corpus_norm.pickle')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Let's change the object by retaining only documents that contain the token \\\"house\\\" (see the reduced number of documents):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 112,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.791972Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.780585Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.887493Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.888378Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 21 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2641 (578 tokens): muslim artist dreamy nude self portrait power self...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2867 (85 tokens): person detain hop bike rack barrier white_house fe...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1610 (193 tokens): jewish community centre hit wave bomb threat anti ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1546 (118 tokens): kellyanne conway ultra casual oval office photo we...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2132 (201 tokens): trump health care big fat beautiful negotiation wa...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2431 (786 tokens): europe ride populist wave visual guide cnneurope p...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (202 tokens): russian doctor use mobile field hospital provide m...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2487 (469 tokens): dutch election high turnout key national vote cruc...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (398 tokens): amazing moment history donald_trump press conferen...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-2301 (214 tokens): doj seek time trump wiretappe inquiry justice depa...\\n\",\n \"(and 11 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 7595 / vocabulary size: 2673\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"filter_documents(corpus_norm, '*house*', match_type='glob')\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_norm)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can restore the saved data using `load_corpus_from_picklefile`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 113,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.901590Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:08.900811Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:09.662939Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:09.663355Z\"\n },\n \"scrolled\": true\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1185 (575 tokens): weekfrance rock tension flare police officer alleg...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1100 (96 tokens): president trump say ask justice department investi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1515 (181 tokens): trump suggest obama town hall protest president do...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1353 (21 tokens): islamic state battle fierce gunfight outside mosul...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1472 (163 tokens): royal bank scotland see loss widen bail royal bank...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1407 (105 tokens): minister reiterate govt support finucane inquiry m...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1377 (398 tokens): turkey back rebel near control al bab turkey defen...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1263 (202 tokens): russian doctor use mobile field hospital provide m...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1387 (253 tokens): protest anaheim policeman drag teen fire gun lapd ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1119 (398 tokens): amazing moment history donald_trump press conferen...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 27888 / vocabulary size: 6271\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import load_corpus_from_picklefile\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_norm = load_corpus_from_picklefile('data/corpus_norm.pickle')\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corpus_norm)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"You can see that the full dataset with 100 documents was restored.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"This is very useful especially when you have a large amount of data and time intensive operations, e.g. token transformations or filtering. When you're finished running these operations, you can easily store the current state to disk and later retrieve it without the need to re-run these operations.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"---\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The final result after applying preprocessing steps and hence transforming the text data is often a document-term matrix (DTM). The [bow module](api.rst#tmtoolkit-bow) contains several functions to work with DTMs, e.g. apply transformations such as *tf-idf* or compute some important summary statistics. The [next chapter](bow.ipynb) will introduce some of these functions.\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"metadata\": {\n \"kernelspec\": {\n \"display_name\": \"Python 3 (ipykernel)\",\n \"language\": \"python\",\n \"name\": \"python3\"\n },\n \"language_info\": {\n \"codemirror_mode\": {\n \"name\": \"ipython\",\n \"version\": 3\n },\n \"file_extension\": \".py\",\n \"mimetype\": \"text/x-python\",\n \"name\": \"python\",\n \"nbconvert_exporter\": \"python\",\n \"pygments_lexer\": \"ipython3\",\n \"version\": \"3.8.10\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"stem_cell\": {\n \"cell_type\": \"raw\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"collapsed\": false\n },\n \"source\": []\n }\n }\n },\n \"nbformat\": 4,\n \"nbformat_minor\": 2\n}\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/text_corpora.ipynb", "content": "{\n \"cells\": [\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"# Working with text corpora\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Your text data usually comes in the form of (long) plain text strings that are stored in one or several files on disk. We can load and transform this data into a [Corpus](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus) object so that we can perform all kinds of operations that are implemented as *corpus functions* in tmtoolkit. The `Corpus` class itself resembles a [Python dictionary](https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/datastructures.html#dictionaries) with some additional functionality.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's import the `Corpus` class first:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 1,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:12.786647Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:12.785708Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.035583Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.036204Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import Corpus\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"name\": \"#%% md\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"source\": [\n \"## Loading text data\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Several methods are implemented to load text data from different sources:\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"- load built-in datasets\\n\",\n \"- load plain text files (\\\".txt files\\\")\\n\",\n \"- load folder(s) with plain text files\\n\",\n \"- load a tabular (i.e. CSV or Excel) file containing document IDs and texts\\n\",\n \"- load a ZIP file containing plain text or tabular files\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We can create a `Corpus` object directly by immediately loading a dataset using one of the `Corpus.from_...` methods. This is what we've done when we used `corp = Corpus.from_builtin_corpus('en-News100')` in the [previous chapter](getting_started.ipynb).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's load a folder with example documents. Make sure that the path is relative to the current working directory. The data for these examples can be downloaded from [GitHub](https://github.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/tmtoolkit/tree/master/doc/source/data). \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"**Note: Rich text documents**\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"If you want to work with \\\"rich text documents\\\", i.e. formatted, non-plain text sources such as PDFs, Word documents, HTML files, etc. you must convert them to one of the supported formats first. For example you can use the [pdftotext](https://www.mankier.com/1/pdftotext) command from the Linux package `poppler-utils` to convert from PDF to plain text files or [pandoc](https://pandoc.org/) to convert from Word or HTML to plain text.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 2,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.041158Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.040432Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.711062Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.711676Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 2,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp = Corpus.from_folder('data/corpus_example', language='en')\\n\",\n \"corp\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"name\": \"#%% md\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"source\": [\n \"Again, we can have a look which document labels were created and print one sample document:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 3,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.717473Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.716823Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.720156Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.720771Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['sample1', 'sample2', 'sample3']\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 3,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp.doc_labels\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 4,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.726471Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.723606Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.730205Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.729417Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['And',\\n\",\n \" 'here',\\n\",\n \" 'we',\\n\",\n \" 'go',\\n\",\n \" 'with',\\n\",\n \" 'the',\\n\",\n \" 'third',\\n\",\n \" 'and',\\n\",\n \" 'final',\\n\",\n \" 'example',\\n\",\n \" 'file',\\n\",\n \" '.',\\n\",\n \" '\\\\n',\\n\",\n \" 'Another',\\n\",\n \" 'line',\\n\",\n \" 'of',\\n\",\n \" 'text',\\n\",\n \" '.',\\n\",\n \" '\\\\n\\\\n',\\n\",\n \" '§',\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 4,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp['sample3']['token']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The [corpus_summary](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_summary) and [print_summary](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.print_summary) functions are very helpful to get a first overview of a loaded corpus:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 5,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.735046Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.734250Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.737431Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.738181Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 3 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> sample2 (33 tokens): Here comes the second example ( with HTML < i > ta...\\n\",\n \"> sample3 (36 tokens): And here we go with the third and final example fi...\\n\",\n \"> sample1 (25 tokens): This is the first example file . ☺ We showcase NER...\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 94 / vocabulary size: 64\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import print_summary\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"**Side note: Corpus functions**\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The `corpus_summary` and `print_summary` functions are examples of *corpus functions*. All corpus functions accept a `Corpus` object as first argument and operate on it. A corpus function may retrieve information from a corpus and/or modify it. Most functions in the `tmtoolkit.corpus` module are corpus functions.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Another option is to create a `Corpus` object and adding further documents using the `corpus_add_...` functions. Here we create an empty `Corpus` and then add documents via [corpus_add_files](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_add_files) which is another example of a corpus function (one that modifies a `Corpus` object). It takes a `Corpus` object and one or more paths to raw text files.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 6,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.743598Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:15.742635Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.507966Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.508466Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 0 document in English\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 0 / vocabulary size: 0\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp = Corpus(language='en')\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 7,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.514643Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.512301Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.526578Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.527194Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 1 document in English\\n\",\n \"> data_corpus_example-sample1 (25 tokens): This is the first example file . ☺ We showcase NER...\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 25 / vocabulary size: 24\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import corpus_add_files\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_add_files(corp, 'data/corpus_example/sample1.txt')\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"name\": \"#%% md\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"source\": [\n \"Note that this time the document label is different. Its prefixed by a normalized version of the path to the document. We can alter the `doc_label_fmt` argument of `corpus_add_files` in order to control how document labels are generated. But at first, let's remove the previously loaded document from the corpus. Since a `Corpus` instance behaves like a Python `dict`, we can use `del`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 8,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.532459Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.531866Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.534209Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.534642Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 0 document in English\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 0 / vocabulary size: 0\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"del corp['data_corpus_example-sample1']\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"name\": \"#%% md\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"source\": [\n \"Now we use a modified `doc_label_fmt` paramater value to generate document labels only from the file name and not from the full path to the document. We also load three files now:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 9,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.539347Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.538813Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.574751Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.575371Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 3 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> sample2 (33 tokens): Here comes the second example ( with HTML < i > ta...\\n\",\n \"> sample3 (36 tokens): And here we go with the third and final example fi...\\n\",\n \"> sample1 (25 tokens): This is the first example file . ☺ We showcase NER...\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 94 / vocabulary size: 64\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corpus_add_files(corp, ['data/corpus_example/sample1.txt',\\n\",\n \" 'data/corpus_example/sample2.txt',\\n\",\n \" 'data/corpus_example/sample3.txt'],\\n\",\n \" doc_label_fmt='{basename}')\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corp)\\n\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"name\": \"#%% md\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"source\": [\n \"As noted in the beginning, there are more `corpus_add_...` and `Corpus.from_...` functions/methods to load text data from different sources. See the [corpus module API](api.rst#tmtoolkit-corpus) for details.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"**Note**\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Please be aware of the difference of the `corpus_add_...` and `Corpus.from_...` functions/methods: The former *modifies* a given `Corpus` object, whereas the latter *creates* a new `Corpus` object.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## Configuring the NLP pipeline, parallel processing and more via Corpus parameters\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"When initializing a `Corpus`, you can pass several arguments. You *must* at least provide either the `language`, `language_model` or `spacy_instance` argument. The simplest is to just pass the `language` as two-letter ISO 639-1 language code (\\\"en\\\", \\\"de\\\", \\\"es\\\", etc.). A respective SpaCy language model will then be automatically selected depending on that language code and the NLP pipeline features that you require. Alternatively, you set the SpaCy language model to be loaded via `language_model`. Finally, if you already loaded a [SpaCy pipeline instance](https://spacy.io/api/language) yourself, you can also pass it via the `spacy_instance` parameter.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"You can specify the features, i.e. the components, of the NLP pipeline using the `load_features` parameter. This only applies if you don't provide your own pipeline instance via `spacy_instance`. It determines the pipeline's capabilities, i.e. if POS-tags, named entities, sentences, etc. are recognized. By default, tmtoolkit will load and enable all components except for the named-entity recognition (NER) component. The more components are enabled, the slower the text processing works and the more memory it uses. So it makes sense to only enable pipelines that you actually use. See the [SpaCy documentation](https://spacy.io/models#design) for which pipelines are implemented (note that this also depends on the language and language model).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's create a corpus with only a minimal pipeline. If we set `load_features` to an empty sequence, only a basic tokenizing pipeline is run.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 10,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.580889Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:16.580174Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.188920Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.188286Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp_minimal = Corpus.from_folder('data/corpus_example', language='en', load_features=[])\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can compare the token table output of the minimal pipeline with the default pipeline used in the previously loaded `corp` object:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 11,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.202944Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.197083Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.216926Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.217392Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenis_punctis_stoplike_num
0sample10ThisFalseTrueFalse
1sample11isFalseTrueFalse
2sample12theFalseTrueFalse
3sample13firstFalseTrueTrue
4sample14exampleFalseFalseFalse
.....................
89sample331thirdFalseTrueTrue
90sample332andFalseTrueFalse
91sample333finalFalseFalseFalse
92sample334paragraphFalseFalseFalse
93sample335.TrueFalseFalse
\\n\",\n \"

94 rows × 6 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token is_punct is_stop like_num\\n\",\n \"0 sample1 0 This False True False\\n\",\n \"1 sample1 1 is False True False\\n\",\n \"2 sample1 2 the False True False\\n\",\n \"3 sample1 3 first False True True\\n\",\n \"4 sample1 4 example False False False\\n\",\n \".. ... ... ... ... ... ...\\n\",\n \"89 sample3 31 third False True True\\n\",\n \"90 sample3 32 and False True False\\n\",\n \"91 sample3 33 final False False False\\n\",\n \"92 sample3 34 paragraph False False False\\n\",\n \"93 sample3 35 . True False False\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[94 rows x 6 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 11,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import tokens_table\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"tokens_table(corp_minimal)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 12,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.223426Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.221100Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.237640Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.238479Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenis_punctis_stoplemmalike_numpostag
0sample10ThisFalseTruethisFalsePRONDT
1sample11isFalseTruebeFalseAUXVBZ
2sample12theFalseTruetheFalseDETDT
3sample13firstFalseTruefirstTrueADJJJ
4sample14exampleFalseFalseexampleFalseNOUNNN
..............................
89sample331thirdFalseTruethirdTrueADJJJ
90sample332andFalseTrueandFalseCCONJCC
91sample333finalFalseFalsefinalFalseADJJJ
92sample334paragraphFalseFalseparagraphFalseNOUNNN
93sample335.TrueFalse.FalsePUNCT.
\\n\",\n \"

94 rows × 9 columns

\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token is_punct is_stop lemma like_num \\\\\\n\",\n \"0 sample1 0 This False True this False \\n\",\n \"1 sample1 1 is False True be False \\n\",\n \"2 sample1 2 the False True the False \\n\",\n \"3 sample1 3 first False True first True \\n\",\n \"4 sample1 4 example False False example False \\n\",\n \".. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... \\n\",\n \"89 sample3 31 third False True third True \\n\",\n \"90 sample3 32 and False True and False \\n\",\n \"91 sample3 33 final False False final False \\n\",\n \"92 sample3 34 paragraph False False paragraph False \\n\",\n \"93 sample3 35 . True False . False \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" pos tag \\n\",\n \"0 PRON DT \\n\",\n \"1 AUX VBZ \\n\",\n \"2 DET DT \\n\",\n \"3 ADJ JJ \\n\",\n \"4 NOUN NN \\n\",\n \".. ... ... \\n\",\n \"89 ADJ JJ \\n\",\n \"90 CCONJ CC \\n\",\n \"91 ADJ JJ \\n\",\n \"92 NOUN NN \\n\",\n \"93 PUNCT . \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"[94 rows x 9 columns]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 12,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tokens_table(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"As we can see, the minimal pipeline produces less information: The lemmata and POS tags are missing from the table for the corpus using the minimal pipeline. Also, if we'd wanted sentences, we'd get an error since sentences recognition is not enabled in the minimal pipeline:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"```python\\n\",\n \"tokens_table(corp_minimal, sentences=True)\\n\",\n \"# results in ValueError: sentence numbers requested, but sentence borders not set; Corpus documents probably not parsed with sentence recognition\\n\",\n \"```\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"You can also use the default pipeline as basis and add new components via the `add_features` parameter. Here, we add the NER component for finding out named entities like persons. The table then shows a new column `ent_type` with `\\\"PERSON\\\"` entries next to names:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 13,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.243886Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.243013Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.913764Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.914320Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
docpositiontokenent_typeis_punctis_stoplemmalike_numpostag
15sample115famousFalseFalsefamousFalseADJJJ
16sample116peopleFalseFalsepeopleFalseNOUNNNS
17sample117likeFalseFalselikeFalseADPIN
18sample118MissyPERSONFalseFalseMissyFalsePROPNNNP
19sample119ElliottPERSONFalseFalseElliottFalsePROPNNNP
20sample120orFalseTrueorFalseCCONJCC
21sample121GeorgePERSONFalseFalseGeorgeFalsePROPNNNP
22sample122HarrisonPERSONFalseFalseHarrisonFalsePROPNNNP
23sample123.TrueFalse.FalsePUNCT.
24sample124\\\\nFalseFalse\\\\nFalseSPACE_SP
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" doc position token ent_type is_punct is_stop lemma \\\\\\n\",\n \"15 sample1 15 famous False False famous \\n\",\n \"16 sample1 16 people False False people \\n\",\n \"17 sample1 17 like False False like \\n\",\n \"18 sample1 18 Missy PERSON False False Missy \\n\",\n \"19 sample1 19 Elliott PERSON False False Elliott \\n\",\n \"20 sample1 20 or False True or \\n\",\n \"21 sample1 21 George PERSON False False George \\n\",\n \"22 sample1 22 Harrison PERSON False False Harrison \\n\",\n \"23 sample1 23 . True False . \\n\",\n \"24 sample1 24 \\\\n False False \\\\n \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" like_num pos tag \\n\",\n \"15 False ADJ JJ \\n\",\n \"16 False NOUN NNS \\n\",\n \"17 False ADP IN \\n\",\n \"18 False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"19 False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"20 False CCONJ CC \\n\",\n \"21 False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"22 False PROPN NNP \\n\",\n \"23 False PUNCT . \\n\",\n \"24 False SPACE _SP \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 13,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp_ner = Corpus.from_folder('data/corpus_example', language='en', add_features=['ner'])\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"tokens_table(corp_ner, select='sample1').tail(10)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Parallel processing\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"A final important parameter is the `max_workers` setting. With it, you can enable parallel processing and specify the number of worker processes that can run in parallel. You should never set this value higher than the number of CPU cores in your machine (it will still work, but it will actually slow down the processing). Parallel processing makes most sense for large corpora with thousands of documents. With the small toy examples in this tutorial, you won't see performance gains (you will actually see performance loss due to increased overhead for setting up the parallel processing).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"You can provide an integer value to `max_workers`, which sets the number of worker processes. 0 or 1 disable parallel processing (the default behavior).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Here, we use two workers, i.e. two CPU cores of our machine:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 14,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.919628Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:17.918915Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:18.659804Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:18.660429Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 14,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp_2w = Corpus.from_folder('data/corpus_example', language='en', max_workers=2)\\n\",\n \"corp_2w\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"If you use a negative number `x`, this means \\\"use all available CPU cores, but leave `x` spare cores. For example, when your machine has four CPU cores, three of them will be used by tmtoolkit when setting `max_workers=-1`.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 15,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:18.665079Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:18.664019Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:19.513984Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:19.514681Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 15,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp_allbutone = Corpus.from_folder('data/corpus_example', language='en', max_workers=-1)\\n\",\n \"corp_allbutone\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Finally, you can pass a float value to the `max_workers` parameter which specifies the fraction of available CPU cores to use (rounded). Here, we use 50% of the available CPU cores:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 16,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:19.520031Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:19.519332Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:20.228284Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:20.227131Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 16,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp_halfcpus = Corpus.from_folder('data/corpus_example', language='en', max_workers=0.5)\\n\",\n \"corp_halfcpus\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 17,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:20.239328Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:20.234315Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:20.253509Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:20.255153Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"del corp_2w, corp_allbutone, corp_halfcpus\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Text preprocessing *before* tokenization\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Finally, there's the option to provide a text preprocessing pipeline that is applied on the raw text documents *before* the text is tokenized. This is helpful in cases where the tokenizer might be confused by some elements in the text. An example might be HTML tags like in `italic text`. If your text contains these, you should remove them, since the tokenizer can't handle them as seen for example in document \\\"sample2\\\":\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 18,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:20.266956Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:20.265882Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:20.283383Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:20.284316Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['Here',\\n\",\n \" 'comes',\\n\",\n \" 'the',\\n\",\n \" 'second',\\n\",\n \" 'example',\\n\",\n \" '(',\\n\",\n \" 'with',\\n\",\n \" 'HTML',\\n\",\n \" '<',\\n\",\n \" 'i',\\n\",\n \" '>',\\n\",\n \" 'tags',\\n\",\n \" '&',\\n\",\n \" 'amp',\\n\",\n \" ';',\\n\",\n \" 'entities',\\n\",\n \" ')',\\n\",\n \" '.',\\n\",\n \" '\\\\n\\\\n',\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 18,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp['sample2']['token']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"There are two options for how to handle this: One option is to write your own code for loading the text and cleansing it and then pass the preprocessed text as dictionary to the `Corpus` constructor. The other option is to use the `raw_preproc` parameter for the `Corpus` class. This parameter allows you to pass one or more functions that will be applied one after another to the raw input text. The only requirement for these functions is that they accept a string and return a processed string.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"There's already a function for stripping HTML tags in tmtoolkit, [strip_tags](api.rst#tmtoolkit.tokenseq.strip_tags), and we can set it as sole input preprocessing function. We can see in the tokens of \\\"sample2\\\", that there are no more HTML tags and the HTML entity `&` was converted to `&`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 19,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:20.300673Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:20.299400Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:21.444635Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:21.445456Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['Here',\\n\",\n \" 'comes',\\n\",\n \" 'the',\\n\",\n \" 'second',\\n\",\n \" 'example',\\n\",\n \" '(',\\n\",\n \" 'with',\\n\",\n \" 'HTML',\\n\",\n \" 'tags',\\n\",\n \" '&',\\n\",\n \" 'entities',\\n\",\n \" ')',\\n\",\n \" '.',\\n\",\n \" '\\\\n\\\\n',\\n\",\n \" 'This',\\n\",\n \" 'one',\\n\",\n \" 'contains',\\n\",\n \" 'three',\\n\",\n \" 'lines',\\n\",\n \" 'of',\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 19,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import strip_tags\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corp = Corpus.from_folder('data/corpus_example', language='en', raw_preproc=strip_tags)\\n\",\n \"corp['sample2']['token']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"You may specify your own preprocessing function and pass all functions that will be applied one after another as a list:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 20,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:21.456750Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:21.454065Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.433000Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.433645Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['Here',\\n\",\n \" 'comes',\\n\",\n \" 'the',\\n\",\n \" 'second',\\n\",\n \" 'example',\\n\",\n \" '(',\\n\",\n \" 'with',\\n\",\n \" 'HTML',\\n\",\n \" 'tags',\\n\",\n \" '&',\\n\",\n \" 'entities',\\n\",\n \" ')',\\n\",\n \" '.',\\n\",\n \" ' ',\\n\",\n \" 'This',\\n\",\n \" 'one',\\n\",\n \" 'contains',\\n\",\n \" 'three',\\n\",\n \" 'lines',\\n\",\n \" 'of',\\n\",\n \" ...]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 20,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"def remove_line_breaks(txt):\\n\",\n \" return txt.replace('\\\\n', ' ')\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corp_no_lb = Corpus.from_folder('data/corpus_example', language='en',\\n\",\n \" raw_preproc=[strip_tags, remove_line_breaks])\\n\",\n \"corp_no_lb['sample2']['token']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"**Text (pre-)processing**\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The tmtoolkit package contains a lot of text processing and text \\\"normalization\\\" functions, but they can all be applied *after* tokenization, i.e. after creating the `Corpus` object. The [next chapter](preprocessing.ipynb) will present many of these functions. You should **only use the raw_preproc parameter in cases where downstream tasks like tokenization fail due to malformed input (e.g. text with HTML tags).** In all other cases use the functions explained in the next chapter.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## Corpus properties, iteration and corpus functions for document management\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"A `Corpus` object provides several helpful properties that summarize the text data and the `tmtoolkit.corpus` module features several corpus functions to manage the documents.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"### Properties\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's start with the number of documents in the corpus. There are two ways to obtain this value: \"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 21,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.440018Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.439323Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.450449Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.450877Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"3\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 21,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"len(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 22,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.459061Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.458405Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.462596Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.461952Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"3\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 22,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp.n_docs\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Other important properties are the language of the documents in the corpus and the SpaCy language model used in the NLP pipeline (note that so far tmtoolkit requires that all documents within one corpus use the same language):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 23,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.474732Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.473744Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.477191Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.475430Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"'en'\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 23,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp.language\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 24,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.483695Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.482900Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.486447Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.485828Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"'en_core_web_sm'\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 24,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp.language_model\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The corpus' SpaCy NLP pipeline is given with the `nlp` property:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 25,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.493430Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.492538Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.495478Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.496054Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 25,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp.nlp\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"As you can configure the NLP pipeline (as shown in the previous section), sentence recognition is optional. You can check if sentences were recognized using the following property:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 26,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.505576Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.504740Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.508252Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.507610Z\"\n },\n \"scrolled\": true\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"True\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 26,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp.has_sents\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The `max_workers` property shows how many worker processes are used during computations.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 27,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.513929Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.513161Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.523680Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.522905Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"1\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 27,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp.max_workers\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"You can set new values for this property in order to temporarily enable parallel processing:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 28,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.529752Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.528951Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.532321Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.532957Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 28,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp.max_workers = 2\\n\",\n \"corp\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 29,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.538614Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.537789Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.540359Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.539736Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp.max_workers = 1 # reset\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%% md\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"source\": [\n \"Another important property is the list of document labels:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 30,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.547189Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.546373Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.549090Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.549668Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['sample1', 'sample2', 'sample3']\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 30,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp.doc_labels\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Working with a `Corpus` object like with a dictionary\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"A `Corpus` object resembles a dictionary, i.e. it provides the same methods. The keys of this corpus-dictionary are the unique document labels and the values or elements are the respective [Document](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.Document) objects.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"You can access a `Corpus` object's elements via square brackets (`corp[]`) or `corp.get()`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 31,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.555691Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.554994Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.561909Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.561206Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"Document \\\"sample1\\\" (25 tokens, 9 token attributes, 2 document attributes)\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 31,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp['sample1']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 32,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.567029Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.566289Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.582685Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.582123Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"Document \\\"sample2\\\" (27 tokens, 9 token attributes, 2 document attributes)\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 32,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp.get('sample2')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The square brackets also accept an integer *i*, which will give you the document with the *i*th document label (corresponding to the order in `corp.doc_labels`):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 33,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.589505Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.588601Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.591777Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.592318Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"Document \\\"sample3\\\" (36 tokens, 9 token attributes, 2 document attributes)\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 33,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp[2]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Slicing is also supported and returns a list of `Document` objects:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 34,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.598301Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.597423Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.600829Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.601542Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[Document \\\"sample1\\\" (25 tokens, 9 token attributes, 2 document attributes),\\n\",\n \" Document \\\"sample2\\\" (27 tokens, 9 token attributes, 2 document attributes)]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 34,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp[0:2]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"You can also update existing documents or add new documents using the bracket syntax. For this, you can either pass a string, a `Document` object or a [SpaCy Doc](https://spacy.io/api/doc) object.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 35,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.610480Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.609562Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.613884Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.613148Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 3 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> sample2 (27 tokens): Here comes the second example ( with HTML tags & e...\\n\",\n \"> sample3 (36 tokens): And here we go with the third and final example fi...\\n\",\n \"> sample1 (25 tokens): This is the first example file . ☺ We showcase NER...\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 88 / vocabulary size: 59\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"print_summary(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 36,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.619897Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.618940Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.644062Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.643227Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 4 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> sample2 (10 tokens): This is the updated version of the second example ...\\n\",\n \"> sample3 (36 tokens): And here we go with the third and final example fi...\\n\",\n \"> sample1 (25 tokens): This is the first example file . ☺ We showcase NER...\\n\",\n \"> sample4 (8 tokens): This document was added as fourth example .\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 79 / vocabulary size: 66\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"corp['sample2'] = 'This is the updated version of the second example.'\\n\",\n \"corp['sample4'] = 'This document was added as fourth example.'\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \" The dictionary-interface of the `Corpus` class also allows to iterate through its contents via `corp.items()`, `corp.keys()` or `corp.values()`.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 37,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.652160Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.651371Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.665728Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.665183Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Document length for sample1: 25\\n\",\n \"Document length for sample2: 10\\n\",\n \"Document length for sample3: 36\\n\",\n \"Document length for sample4: 8\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# iterate through pairs of document labels `lbl` and\\n\",\n \"# document objects `d` and report each document's length\\n\",\n \"for lbl, d in corp.items():\\n\",\n \" print(f'Document length for {lbl}: {len(d)}')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 38,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.674059Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.673230Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.676713Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.676090Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[{'label': 'sample1', 'has_sents': True},\\n\",\n \" {'label': 'sample2', 'has_sents': True},\\n\",\n \" {'label': 'sample3', 'has_sents': True},\\n\",\n \" {'label': 'sample4', 'has_sents': True}]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 38,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# make a list of each document's document attributes\\n\",\n \"# (more on document attributes in the next chapter)\\n\",\n \"[d.doc_attrs for d in corp.values()]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%% md\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"source\": [\n \"### Corpus functions for document management\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"#### Splitting documents\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Sometimes you may want to split larger documents. In our example corpus, document \\\"sample3\\\" consists of three paragraphs:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 39,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.690305Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.688894Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.692095Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.689535Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"And here we go with the third and final example file.\\n\",\n \"Another line of text.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"§2.\\n\",\n \"This is the second paragraph.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The third and final paragraph.\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import doc_texts\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"print(doc_texts(corp)['sample3'])\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can use the [corpus_split_by_paragraph](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_split_by_paragraph) function for splitting documents by paragraphs. There's also [corpus_split_by_token](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_split_by_token) for splitting by an arbitrary token.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 40,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.701054Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.700263Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.705907Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.705286Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 6 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> sample3-3 (6 tokens): The third and final paragraph .\\n\",\n \"> sample2 (10 tokens): This is the updated version of the second example ...\\n\",\n \"> sample1 (25 tokens): This is the first example file . ☺ We showcase NER...\\n\",\n \"> sample4 (8 tokens): This document was added as fourth example .\\n\",\n \"> sample3-1 (19 tokens): And here we go with the third and final example fi...\\n\",\n \"> sample3-2 (11 tokens): § 2 . This is the second paragraph . \\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 79 / vocabulary size: 49\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import corpus_split_by_paragraph\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corpus_split_by_paragraph(corp)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"As we can see above, the \\\"sample3\\\" document was split into three individual documents, one per paragraph. You can further customize the splitting process by tweaking the parameters, e.g. the minimum number of line breaks used to detect paragraphs (default is two line breaks).\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"#### Joining documents\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"There's of course also a function for doing the inverse operation, i.e. joining several documents. This function is called [corpus_join_documents](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_join_documents) and it accepts a dictionary that maps a name for the newly joint document to a string pattern or a list of string patterns of documents to be joint. This function is especially helpful when you want to bundle lots of smaller documents (e.g. tweets) into a bigger document (e.g. all tweets of one account).\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 41,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.722372Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.721524Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.724848Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.724240Z\"\n },\n \"scrolled\": true\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 4 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> sample2 (10 tokens): This is the updated version of the second example ...\\n\",\n \"> sample3-rejoined (36 tokens): And here we go with the third and final example fi...\\n\",\n \"> sample1 (25 tokens): This is the first example file . ☺ We showcase NER...\\n\",\n \"> sample4 (8 tokens): This document was added as fourth example .\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 79 / vocabulary size: 49\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import corpus_join_documents\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# alternative: no matching, specify each document name in a list\\n\",\n \"# corpus_join_documents(corp, {'sample3-rejoined': ['sample3-1', 'sample3-2', 'sample3-3']})\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# join all documents matching \\\"sample3*\\\" to form a new document \\\"sample3-rejoined\\\"\\n\",\n \"# \\\"sample3*\\\" is a glob pattern, so we set this as `match_type` (more on that in the next chapter)\\n\",\n \"# we also set glue to an empty string, because we don't need to have additional line breaks\\n\",\n \"# between the documents\\n\",\n \"corpus_join_documents(corp, {'sample3-rejoined': 'sample3*'}, glue='', match_type='glob')\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 42,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.737557Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.736771Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.743185Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.742311Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"And here we go with the third and final example file.\\n\",\n \"Another line of text.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"§2.\\n\",\n \"This is the second paragraph.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The third and final paragraph.\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"print(doc_texts(corp)['sample3-rejoined'])\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%% md\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"source\": [\n \"#### Sampling a corpus \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Finally you can sample the documents in a corpus using [corpus_sample](api.rst#tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_sample). To get a random sample of two documents from our corpus:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 43,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.750052Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.749210Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.751723Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T08:32:22.752388Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 2 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> sample3-rejoined (36 tokens): And here we go with the third and final example fi...\\n\",\n \"> sample4 (8 tokens): This document was added as fourth example .\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 44 / vocabulary size: 30\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import corpus_sample\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# sample two out of four documents in the corpus\\n\",\n \"corpus_sample(corp, 2)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"---\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"There are more corpus functions for document management, namely the functions for filtering documents. These will be explained in the [next chapter](preprocessing.ipynb), which will also show how to apply several text processing and mining methods to a corpus.\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"metadata\": {\n \"kernelspec\": {\n \"display_name\": \"Python 3 (ipykernel)\",\n \"language\": \"python\",\n \"name\": \"python3\"\n },\n \"language_info\": {\n \"codemirror_mode\": {\n \"name\": \"ipython\",\n \"version\": 3\n },\n \"file_extension\": \".py\",\n \"mimetype\": \"text/x-python\",\n \"name\": \"python\",\n \"nbconvert_exporter\": \"python\",\n \"pygments_lexer\": \"ipython3\",\n \"version\": \"3.8.10\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"stem_cell\": {\n \"cell_type\": \"raw\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"collapsed\": false\n },\n \"source\": []\n }\n }\n },\n \"nbformat\": 4,\n \"nbformat_minor\": 2\n}\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/topic_modeling.ipynb", "content": "{\n \"cells\": [\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"# Topic modeling\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The [topicmod module](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.topicmod) offers a wide range of tools to facilitate [topic modeling](https://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2012/4/147361-probabilistic-topic-models/fulltext) with Python. This chapter will introduce the following techniques: \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"- [parallel topic model computation for different copora and/or parameter sets](#Computing-topic-models-in-parallel)\\n\",\n \"- [evaluation of topic models (including finding a good set of hyperparameters for the given dataset)](#Evaluation-of-topic-models)\\n\",\n \"- [common statistics and tools for topic models](#Common-statistics-and-tools-for-topic-models)\\n\",\n \"- [export of topic models and summaries to different file formats](#Displaying-and-exporting-topic-modeling-results)\\n\",\n \"- [visualization of topic models](#Visualizing-topic-models)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"A quick note on terminology: So far, we spoke about *tokens* or sometimes *terms* when we meant the individual elements that our documents consist of after we applied text preprocessing such as *tokenization* to the raw input text strings. These tokens can be lexicographically correct words, but they don't have to, e.g. when you applied stemming you might have tokens like \\\"argu\\\" in your vocabulary. There may also be numbers or punctuation symbols in your vocabulary. For those topic modeling techniques that tmtoolkit supports, the results are always two probability distributions: a *document-topic distribution* and a *topic-word distribution*. Since the latter is called topic-*word* and not topic-*token* or *-term* distribution, we will also use the term *word* when we mean any token from the corpus' vocabulary.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"## An example document-term matrix\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"tmtoolkit supports topic models that are computed from document-term matrices (DTMs). Just as in the previous chapter, we will at first generate a DTM. However, this time the sample will be bigger:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 1,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:24.987868Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:24.986877Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.809000Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.808555Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stderr\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:27,476:INFO:tmtoolkit:creating Corpus instance with no documents\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:27,476:INFO:tmtoolkit:using serial processing\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:28,133:INFO:tmtoolkit:sampling 100 documents(s) out of 3824\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:28,135:INFO:tmtoolkit:adding text from 100 documents(s)\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:28,136:INFO:tmtoolkit:running NLP pipeline on 100 documents\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:34,803:INFO:tmtoolkit:generating document texts\\n\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1036 (835 tokens): Amnesty accuses Tunisian authorities of torture ah...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1126 (163 tokens): This Makeup Palette Has A Game - Changing Little S...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1141 (914 tokens): Aslef members reject Southern rail deal Aslef m...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-104 (31 tokens): Your pictures : Broken resolutions Each week , ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1090 (1291 tokens): Martin challenges Fitzgerald over Tusla informatio...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1043 (270 tokens): Burhan Ozbilici wins 2017 World Press Photo compet...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-113 (1071 tokens): Use talk not tech to tame your children 's online ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1048 (476 tokens): Espirito Santo police return to work after murder ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1032 (653 tokens): Germany 's right - wing AfD seeks to expel state l...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1137 (226 tokens): These Cool New ' Vertical Forest ' Skyscrapers Are...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 66637 / vocabulary size: 9469\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"import random\\n\",\n \"random.seed(20191120) # to make the sampling reproducible\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"import numpy as np\\n\",\n \"np.set_printoptions(precision=5)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"from tmtoolkit.utils import enable_logging\\n\",\n \"enable_logging()\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import Corpus, print_summary\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corp = Corpus.from_builtin_corpus('en-NewsArticles', sample=100)\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We will also now generate two DTMs, because we later want to show how you can compute topic models for two different DTMs in parallel. At first, we to some general preprocessing.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 2,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.813794Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.812832Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.898361Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.897887Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stderr\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:34,844:INFO:tmtoolkit:replacing 2186 token hashes\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:34,879:INFO:tmtoolkit:replacing 502 token hashes\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:34,893:INFO:tmtoolkit:generating document texts\\n\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1036 (835 tokens): amnesty accuse tunisian authority of torture ahead...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1126 (163 tokens): this makeup palette have a game change little sec...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1141 (914 tokens): aslef member reject southern rail deal aslef memb...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-104 (31 tokens): your picture break resolution each week we publ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1090 (1291 tokens): martin challenge fitzgerald over tusla information...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1043 (270 tokens): burhan ozbilici win 2017 world press photo competi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-113 (1071 tokens): use talk not tech to tame your child s online habi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1048 (476 tokens): espirito santo police return to work after murder ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1032 (653 tokens): germany s right wing afd seek to expel state lead...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1137 (226 tokens): these cool new vertical forest skyscraper be des...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 66637 / vocabulary size: 6758\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import lemmatize, to_lowercase, remove_punctuation\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"lemmatize(corp)\\n\",\n \"to_lowercase(corp)\\n\",\n \"remove_punctuation(corp)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corp)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Check if there are a few odd, unprintable characters in any tokens:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 3,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.908993Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.908500Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.911082Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.911461Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"{('\\\\xa0', b'\\\\xc2\\\\xa0'),\\n\",\n \" ('à', b'\\\\xc3\\\\xa0'),\\n\",\n \" ('ó', b'\\\\xc3\\\\xb3'),\\n\",\n \" ('™', b'\\\\xe2\\\\x84\\\\xa2'),\\n\",\n \" ('�', b'\\\\xef\\\\xbf\\\\xbd')}\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 3,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"import string\\n\",\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import corpus_unique_chars\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"{(c, c.encode('utf-8')) for c in corpus_unique_chars(corp) if c not in string.printable}\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Remove all of them but \\\"à\\\" and \\\"ó\\\"\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 4,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.933636Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.929103Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.954574Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.954115Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stderr\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:34,932:INFO:tmtoolkit:replacing 3 token hashes\\n\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"{('à', b'\\\\xc3\\\\xa0'), ('ó', b'\\\\xc3\\\\xb3')}\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 4,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import remove_chars\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"unprintable_bytes = {b'\\\\xc2\\\\xa0', b'\\\\xe2\\\\x84\\\\xa2', b'\\\\xef\\\\xbf\\\\xbd'}\\n\",\n \"unprintable_chars = set(map(lambda b: b.decode('utf-8'), unprintable_bytes))\\n\",\n \"remove_chars(corp, unprintable_chars)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# check again\\n\",\n \"{(c, c.encode('utf-8')) for c in corpus_unique_chars(corp) if c not in string.printable}\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Now we at first apply more \\\"relaxed\\\" cleaning:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 5,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.990562Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:34.987355Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:35.285318Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:35.284898Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stderr\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:34,991:INFO:tmtoolkit:creating Corpus instance with no documents\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:34,991:INFO:tmtoolkit:using serial processing\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:35,098:INFO:tmtoolkit:filtered tokens by mask: num. tokens was 66637 and is now 30407\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:35,177:INFO:tmtoolkit:filtered tokens by mask: num. tokens was 30407 and is now 30407\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:35,253:INFO:tmtoolkit:filtered tokens by mask: num. tokens was 30407 and is now 16443\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:35,280:INFO:tmtoolkit:generating document texts\\n\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1036 (241 tokens): accuse authority ahead key talk germany right grou...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1126 (19 tokens): game change little product reveal feature game new...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1141 (248 tokens): member reject southern deal member reject deal sou...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-104 (7 tokens): break week publish set theme week break\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1090 (266 tokens): challenge information leader claim minister justic...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1043 (64 tokens): win 2017 world press win 2017 world press image ru...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-113 (256 tokens): use talk child online like parent house like happy...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1048 (141 tokens): police return work murder officer return work stat...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1032 (158 tokens): germany right seek state leader leader germany ask...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1137 (43 tokens): new design help fight world need dont china kind d...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 16443 / vocabulary size: 791\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from copy import copy\\n\",\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import filter_clean_tokens, remove_common_tokens, remove_uncommon_tokens\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"corp_bigger = copy(corp)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"filter_clean_tokens(corp_bigger, remove_shorter_than=2)\\n\",\n \"remove_common_tokens(corp_bigger, df_threshold=0.85)\\n\",\n \"remove_uncommon_tokens(corp_bigger, df_threshold=0.05)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corp_bigger)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Another copy of `corp` will apply more aggressive cleaning and hence will result in a smaller vocabulary size:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 6,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:35.327990Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:35.308160Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:35.618305Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:35.617836Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stderr\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:35,328:INFO:tmtoolkit:creating Corpus instance with no documents\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:35,328:INFO:tmtoolkit:using serial processing\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:35,437:INFO:tmtoolkit:filtered tokens by mask: num. tokens was 66637 and is now 19002\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:35,489:INFO:tmtoolkit:filtered tokens by mask: num. tokens was 19002 and is now 18551\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:35,544:INFO:tmtoolkit:filtered tokens by mask: num. tokens was 18551 and is now 18551\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:35,599:INFO:tmtoolkit:filtered tokens by mask: num. tokens was 18551 and is now 5065\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:35,613:INFO:tmtoolkit:generating document texts\\n\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"Corpus with 100 documents in English\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1036 (91 tokens): authority germany right group security official mi...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1126 (3 tokens): product way twitter\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1141 (52 tokens): member member member member secretary decision mem...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-104 (2 tokens): week week\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1090 (103 tokens): information leader minister child prime time week ...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1043 (18 tokens): world press world press world press russia year ne...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-113 (69 tokens): child house service house service month time child...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1048 (59 tokens): police work officer work state people day police o...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1032 (58 tokens): germany state leader leader germany state party le...\\n\",\n \"> NewsArticles-1137 (12 tokens): new world china press day area china house office ...\\n\",\n \"(and 90 more documents)\\n\",\n \"total number of tokens: 5065 / vocabulary size: 141\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import filter_for_pos\\n\",\n \"corp_smaller = copy(corp)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"filter_for_pos(corp_smaller, 'N')\\n\",\n \"filter_clean_tokens(corp_smaller, remove_shorter_than=2)\\n\",\n \"remove_common_tokens(corp_smaller, df_threshold=0.8)\\n\",\n \"remove_uncommon_tokens(corp_smaller, df_threshold=0.1)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"del corp # remove original corpus\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"print_summary(corp_smaller)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We will create the document labels, vocabulary arrays and DTMs for both versions now:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 7,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:35.630807Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:35.630264Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:35.688386Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:35.688769Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stderr\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:35,628:INFO:tmtoolkit:generating sparse DTM with 100 documents and vocab size 791\\n\",\n \"2022-03-11 10:04:35,671:INFO:tmtoolkit:generating sparse DTM with 100 documents and vocab size 141\\n\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"(<100x791 sparse matrix of type ''\\n\",\n \" \\twith 9247 stored elements in Compressed Sparse Row format>,\\n\",\n \" <100x141 sparse matrix of type ''\\n\",\n \" \\twith 2378 stored elements in Compressed Sparse Row format>)\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 7,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.corpus import dtm\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"dtm_bg, doc_labels_bg, vocab_bg = dtm(corp_bigger, return_doc_labels=True, return_vocab=True)\\n\",\n \"dtm_sm, doc_labels_sm, vocab_sm = dtm(corp_smaller, return_doc_labels=True, return_vocab=True)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"del corp_bigger, corp_smaller # don't need these any more\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"dtm_bg, dtm_sm\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We now have two sparse DTMs `dtm_bg` (from the bigger preprocessed data) and `dtm_sm` (from the smaller preprocessed data), a list of document labels `doc_labels` that represent the rows of both DTMs and vocabulary arrays `vocab_bg` and `vocab_sm` that represent the columns of the respective DTMs. We will use this data for the remainder of the chapter.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## Computing topic models in parallel\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"tmtoolkit allows to compute topic models in parallel, making use of all processor cores in your machine. Parallelization can be done per input DTM, per hyperparameter set and as combination of both. Hyperparameters control the number of topics and their \\\"granularity\\\". We will later have a look at the role of hyperparameters and how to find an optimal combination for a given dataset with the means of topic model evaluation.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"For now, we will concentrate on computing the topic models for both of our two DTMs in parallel. tmtoolkit supports three very popular packages for topic modeling, which provide the work of actually computing the model from the input matrix. They can all be accessed in separate sub-modules of the [topicmod module](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.topicmod):\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"- [topicmod.tm_lda](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda) provides an interface for the [lda](https://lda.readthedocs.io/en/latest/) package\\n\",\n \"- [topicmod.tm_sklearn](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_sklearn) provides an interface for the [scikit-learn](http://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/generated/sklearn.decomposition.LatentDirichletAllocation.html) package\\n\",\n \"- [topicmod.tm_gensim](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_gensim) provides an interface for the [Gensim](https://radimrehurek.com/gensim/) package\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Each of these sub-modules offer at least two functions that work with the respective package: `compute_models_parallel` for general parallel model computation and `evaluate_topic_models` for parallel model computation and evaluation (discussed later). For now, we want to compute two models in parallel with the [lda](https://lda.readthedocs.io/en/latest/) package and hence use [compute_models_parallel](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda.compute_models_parallel) from [topicmod.tm_lda](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We need to provide two things for this function: First, the input matrices as a dict that maps labels to the respective DTMs. Second, hyperparameters to use for the model computations. Note that each topic modeling package has different hyperparameters and you should refer to their documentation in order to find out which hyperparameters you need to provide. For lda, we set the number of topics `n_topics` to 10 and the number of iterations for the Gibbs sampling process `n_iter` to 1000. We always want to use the same hyperparameters, so we pass these as `constant_parameters`. If we wanted to create models for a whole range of parameters, e.g. for different numbers of topics, we could provide `varying_parameters`. We will check this out later when we evaluate topic models.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"**Note**\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"For proper topic modeling, we shouldn't just set the number of topics, but try to find it out via evaluation methods. We should also check if the algorithm converged using the provided likelihood estimations. We will do both later on, but now focus on `compute_models_parallel`.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 8,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:35.694772Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:35.694011Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.611168Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.610684Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"defaultdict(list,\\n\",\n \" {'smaller': [({'n_topics': 10,\\n\",\n \" 'n_iter': 1000,\\n\",\n \" 'random_state': 20191122},\\n\",\n \" )],\\n\",\n \" 'bigger': [({'n_topics': 10,\\n\",\n \" 'n_iter': 1000,\\n\",\n \" 'random_state': 20191122},\\n\",\n \" )]})\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 8,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"import logging\\n\",\n \"import warnings\\n\",\n \"from tmtoolkit.utils import disable_logging\\n\",\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda import compute_models_parallel\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# disable tmtoolkit logging for now (too much output)\\n\",\n \"disable_logging()\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# suppress the \\\"INFO\\\" messages and warnings from lda\\n\",\n \"logger = logging.getLogger('lda')\\n\",\n \"logger.addHandler(logging.NullHandler())\\n\",\n \"logger.propagate = False\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"warnings.filterwarnings('ignore')\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# set data to use\\n\",\n \"dtms = {\\n\",\n \" 'bigger': dtm_bg,\\n\",\n \" 'smaller': dtm_sm\\n\",\n \"}\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# and fixed hyperparameters\\n\",\n \"lda_params = {\\n\",\n \" 'n_topics': 10,\\n\",\n \" 'n_iter': 1000,\\n\",\n \" 'random_state': 20191122 # to make results reproducible\\n\",\n \"}\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"models = compute_models_parallel(dtms, constant_parameters=lda_params)\\n\",\n \"models\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"As expected, two models were created. These can be accessed via the labels that we used in the `dtms` dict:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 9,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.616058Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.615463Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.618074Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.617684Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[({'n_topics': 10, 'n_iter': 1000, 'random_state': 20191122},\\n\",\n \" )]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 9,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"models['smaller']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can see that for each input DTM, we get a list of 2-tuples. The first element in each tuple is a dict that represents the hyperparameters that were used to compute the model, the second element is the actual topic model (the `` object). This structure looks a bit complex, but this is because it also supports varying parameters. Since we only have one fixed set of hyperparameters per DTM, we only have a list of length 1 for each DTM.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We will now access the models and print the top words per topic by using [print_ldamodel_topic_words](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.print_ldamodel_topic_words):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 10,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.623112Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.622647Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.636043Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.636429Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"topic_1\\n\",\n \"> #1. mr (0.159627)\\n\",\n \"> #2. germany (0.134861)\\n\",\n \"> #3. member (0.096337)\\n\",\n \"topic_2\\n\",\n \"> #1. police (0.229620)\\n\",\n \"> #2. man (0.185890)\\n\",\n \"> #3. officer (0.145804)\\n\",\n \"topic_3\\n\",\n \"> #1. party (0.132964)\\n\",\n \"> #2. election (0.132964)\\n\",\n \"> #3. leader (0.072724)\\n\",\n \"topic_4\\n\",\n \"> #1. people (0.149059)\\n\",\n \"> #2. country (0.117747)\\n\",\n \"> #3. attack (0.056375)\\n\",\n \"topic_5\\n\",\n \"> #1. al (0.118424)\\n\",\n \"> #2. syria (0.109317)\\n\",\n \"> #3. force (0.097174)\\n\",\n \"topic_6\\n\",\n \"> #1. company (0.173780)\\n\",\n \"> #2. percent (0.086901)\\n\",\n \"> #3. business (0.069525)\\n\",\n \"topic_7\\n\",\n \"> #1. trump (0.196396)\\n\",\n \"> #2. house (0.109759)\\n\",\n \"> #3. president (0.088581)\\n\",\n \"topic_8\\n\",\n \"> #1. year (0.217796)\\n\",\n \"> #2. time (0.102423)\\n\",\n \"> #3. day (0.073904)\\n\",\n \"topic_9\\n\",\n \"> #1. china (0.299307)\\n\",\n \"> #2. development (0.074851)\\n\",\n \"> #3. european (0.071598)\\n\",\n \"topic_10\\n\",\n \"> #1. report (0.087935)\\n\",\n \"> #2. official (0.058197)\\n\",\n \"> #3. president (0.058197)\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io import print_ldamodel_topic_words\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"model_sm = models['smaller'][0][1]\\n\",\n \"print_ldamodel_topic_words(model_sm.topic_word_, vocab_sm, top_n=3)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 11,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.641900Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.640652Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.650874Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.651294Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"topic_1\\n\",\n \"> #1. american (0.041231)\\n\",\n \"> #2. new (0.036285)\\n\",\n \"> #3. america (0.029689)\\n\",\n \"topic_2\\n\",\n \"> #1. year (0.032174)\\n\",\n \"> #2. day (0.026613)\\n\",\n \"> #3. work (0.025025)\\n\",\n \"topic_3\\n\",\n \"> #1. party (0.051625)\\n\",\n \"> #2. election (0.051625)\\n\",\n \"> #3. vote (0.040334)\\n\",\n \"topic_4\\n\",\n \"> #1. people (0.090103)\\n\",\n \"> #2. country (0.067925)\\n\",\n \"> #3. million (0.032580)\\n\",\n \"topic_5\\n\",\n \"> #1. say (0.109116)\\n\",\n \"> #2. report (0.040041)\\n\",\n \"> #3. mr (0.025522)\\n\",\n \"topic_6\\n\",\n \"> #1. trump (0.085939)\\n\",\n \"> #2. president (0.063024)\\n\",\n \"> #3. russian (0.045838)\\n\",\n \"topic_7\\n\",\n \"> #1. police (0.048848)\\n\",\n \"> #2. man (0.039545)\\n\",\n \"> #3. officer (0.034119)\\n\",\n \"topic_8\\n\",\n \"> #1. china (0.066056)\\n\",\n \"> #2. company (0.057441)\\n\",\n \"> #3. market (0.030878)\\n\",\n \"topic_9\\n\",\n \"> #1. help (0.029090)\\n\",\n \"> #2. child (0.028429)\\n\",\n \"> #3. good (0.024463)\\n\",\n \"topic_10\\n\",\n \"> #1. say (0.091405)\\n\",\n \"> #2. year (0.040949)\\n\",\n \"> #3. come (0.021510)\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"model_bg = models['bigger'][0][1]\\n\",\n \"print_ldamodel_topic_words(model_bg.topic_word_, vocab_bg, top_n=3)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We could also generate models from different parameters in parallel, either for a single DTM or several. In the following example we generate models for a series of four different values for the `alpha` parameter. The parameters `n_iter` and `n_topics` are held constant across all models.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 12,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.658083Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:39.657444Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.965758Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.966138Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[({'alpha': 0.01, 'n_iter': 500, 'n_topics': 10, 'random_state': 20191122},\\n\",\n \" ),\\n\",\n \" ({'alpha': 0.001, 'n_iter': 500, 'n_topics': 10, 'random_state': 20191122},\\n\",\n \" ),\\n\",\n \" ({'alpha': 0.0001, 'n_iter': 500, 'n_topics': 10, 'random_state': 20191122},\\n\",\n \" ),\\n\",\n \" ({'alpha': 0.1, 'n_iter': 500, 'n_topics': 10, 'random_state': 20191122},\\n\",\n \" )]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 12,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"var_params = [{'alpha': 1/(10**x)} for x in range(1, 5)]\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"const_params = {\\n\",\n \" 'n_iter': 500,\\n\",\n \" 'n_topics': 10,\\n\",\n \" 'random_state': 20191122 # to make results reproducible\\n\",\n \"}\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"models = compute_models_parallel(dtm_sm, # smaller DTM\\n\",\n \" varying_parameters=var_params,\\n\",\n \" constant_parameters=const_params)\\n\",\n \"models\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We could compare these models now, e.g. by investigating their topics.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"A more systematic approach on comparing and evaluating topic models, also in order to find a good set of hyperparameters for a given dataset, will be presented in the next section.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"## Evaluation of topic models\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The package tmtoolkit provides several metrics for comparing and evaluating topic models. This can be used for finding a good hyperparameter set for a given dataset, e.g. a good combination of the number of topics and concentration paramaters (often called alpha and beta in literature). For some background on hyperparameters in topic modeling, see [this blog post](https://datascience.blog.wzb.eu/2017/11/09/topic-modeling-evaluation-in-python-with-tmtoolkit/).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"For each candidate hyperparameter set, a model can be generated and evaluated in parallel. We will do this now for the \\\"big\\\" DTM `dtm_bg`. Our candidate values for the number of topics `k` range between 20 and 120, with steps of 10. We make the concentration parameter for a prior over the document-specific topic distributions, alpha, depending on `k` as `1/k`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 13,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.971393Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.970832Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.973638Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.973230Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[{'n_topics': 20, 'alpha': 0.05},\\n\",\n \" {'n_topics': 30, 'alpha': 0.03333333333333333},\\n\",\n \" {'n_topics': 40, 'alpha': 0.025},\\n\",\n \" {'n_topics': 50, 'alpha': 0.02},\\n\",\n \" {'n_topics': 60, 'alpha': 0.016666666666666666},\\n\",\n \" {'n_topics': 70, 'alpha': 0.014285714285714285},\\n\",\n \" {'n_topics': 80, 'alpha': 0.0125},\\n\",\n \" {'n_topics': 90, 'alpha': 0.011111111111111112},\\n\",\n \" {'n_topics': 100, 'alpha': 0.01},\\n\",\n \" {'n_topics': 110, 'alpha': 0.00909090909090909},\\n\",\n \" {'n_topics': 120, 'alpha': 0.008333333333333333}]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 13,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"var_params = [{'n_topics': k, 'alpha': 1/k}\\n\",\n \" for k in range(20, 121, 10)]\\n\",\n \"var_params\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The heart of the model evaluation process is the function [evaluate_topic_models](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda.evaluate_topic_models), which is available for all three topic modeling packages. We stick with lda and import that function from [topicmod.tm_lda](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda). It is similar to [compute_models_parallel](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda.compute_models_parallel) as it accepts varying and constant hyperparameters. However, it doesn't only compute the models in parallel, but also applies several metrics to these models in order to evaluate them. This can be controlled with the `metric` parameter that accepts a string or a list of strings that specify the used metric(s). These metrics refer to functions that are implemented in [topicmod.evaluate](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Each topic modeling sub-module defines two important sequences: `AVAILABLE_METRICS` and `DEFAULT_METRICS`. The former lists all available metrics for that sub-module, the latter lists the default metrics that are used when you don't specify anything with the `metric` parameter. Let's have a look at both sequences in [topicmod.tm_lda](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 14,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.977871Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.977246Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.979602Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.979980Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"('loglikelihood',\\n\",\n \" 'cao_juan_2009',\\n\",\n \" 'arun_2010',\\n\",\n \" 'coherence_mimno_2011',\\n\",\n \" 'griffiths_2004',\\n\",\n \" 'held_out_documents_wallach09',\\n\",\n \" 'coherence_gensim_u_mass',\\n\",\n \" 'coherence_gensim_c_v',\\n\",\n \" 'coherence_gensim_c_uci',\\n\",\n \" 'coherence_gensim_c_npmi')\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 14,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod import tm_lda\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"tm_lda.AVAILABLE_METRICS\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 15,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.983851Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.983237Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.985976Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.985544Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"('cao_juan_2009', 'coherence_mimno_2011')\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 15,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"tm_lda.DEFAULT_METRICS\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"For details about the metrics and the academic references, see the respective implementations in the [topicmod.evaluate](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate) module.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We will now run the model evaluations with [evaluate_topic_models](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda.evaluate_topic_models) using our previously generated list of varying hyperparameters `var_params`, some constant hyperparameters and the default set of metrics. We also set `return_models=True` which means to retain the generated models in the evaluation results. We can see, that we can also pass parameters to the model evaluation functions. Here, we set the `top_n` and `include_prob` parameters for the [metric_coherence_mimno_2011](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate.metric_coherence_mimno_2011) evaluation function.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 16,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.997990Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:04:41.997488Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.712144Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.711668Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[({'n_topics': 20,\\n\",\n \" 'alpha': 0.05,\\n\",\n \" 'n_iter': 1000,\\n\",\n \" 'random_state': 20191122,\\n\",\n \" 'eta': 0.1},\\n\",\n \" {'model': ,\\n\",\n \" 'cao_juan_2009': 0.1583051825037188,\\n\",\n \" 'coherence_mimno_2011': -382.93408472911716}),\\n\",\n \" ({'n_topics': 30,\\n\",\n \" 'alpha': 0.03333333333333333,\\n\",\n \" 'n_iter': 1000,\\n\",\n \" 'random_state': 20191122,\\n\",\n \" 'eta': 0.1},\\n\",\n \" {'model': ,\\n\",\n \" 'cao_juan_2009': 0.11654514557276367,\\n\",\n \" 'coherence_mimno_2011': -376.1229148097469}),\\n\",\n \" ({'n_topics': 40,\\n\",\n \" 'alpha': 0.025,\\n\",\n \" 'n_iter': 1000,\\n\",\n \" 'random_state': 20191122,\\n\",\n \" 'eta': 0.1},\\n\",\n \" {'model': ,\\n\",\n \" 'cao_juan_2009': 0.11915454452526894,\\n\",\n \" 'coherence_mimno_2011': -377.6888458635427})]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 16,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda import evaluate_topic_models\\n\",\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate import results_by_parameter\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"const_params = {\\n\",\n \" 'n_iter': 1000,\\n\",\n \" 'random_state': 20191122, # to make results reproducible\\n\",\n \" 'eta': 0.1, # sometimes also called \\\"beta\\\"\\n\",\n \"}\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"eval_results = evaluate_topic_models(dtm_bg,\\n\",\n \" varying_parameters=var_params,\\n\",\n \" constant_parameters=const_params,\\n\",\n \" coherence_mimno_2011_top_n=10,\\n\",\n \" coherence_mimno_2011_include_prob=True,\\n\",\n \" return_models=True)\\n\",\n \"eval_results[:3] # only show first three models\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The evaluation results are a list with pairs of hyperparameters and their evaluation results for each metric. Additionally, there is the generated model for each hyperparameter set.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We now use [results_by_parameter](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate.results_by_parameter), which takes the \\\"raw\\\" evaluation results and sorts them by a specific hyperparameter, in this case `n_topics`. This is important because this is the way that the function for visualizing evaluation results, [plot_eval_results](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_eval_results), expects the input.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 17,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.716973Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.716406Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.719199Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.718799Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"[(20,\\n\",\n \" {'model': ,\\n\",\n \" 'cao_juan_2009': 0.1583051825037188,\\n\",\n \" 'coherence_mimno_2011': -382.93408472911716}),\\n\",\n \" (30,\\n\",\n \" {'model': ,\\n\",\n \" 'cao_juan_2009': 0.11654514557276367,\\n\",\n \" 'coherence_mimno_2011': -376.1229148097469}),\\n\",\n \" (40,\\n\",\n \" {'model': ,\\n\",\n \" 'cao_juan_2009': 0.11915454452526894,\\n\",\n \" 'coherence_mimno_2011': -377.6888458635427})]\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 17,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"eval_results_by_topics = results_by_parameter(eval_results, 'n_topics')\\n\",\n \"eval_results_by_topics[:3] # again only the first three models\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can now see the results for each metric across the specified range of number of topics using [plot_eval_results](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_eval_results):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 18,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.730630Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.730160Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.967661Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.967273Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"image/png\": \"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\\n\",\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n \"metadata\": {\n \"needs_background\": \"light\"\n },\n \"output_type\": \"display_data\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize import plot_eval_results\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"plot_eval_results(eval_results_by_topics);\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The evaluation metrics seem to agree and show best fits for models with 30 to 70 topics. We would normally investigate a set of models in this range, but for simplicity, lets continue with a model with `n_topics=50` and `alpha=0.02`. We don't have to generate a model with these hyperparameters again, because it's already in the evaluation results (thanks to `return_models=True`). We extract the model from there in order to use it in the rest of the chapter.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 19,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.972073Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.971586Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.973938Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.974319Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"(50, 0.02, 0.1)\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 19,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"best_tm = [m for k, m in eval_results_by_topics if k == 50][0]['model']\\n\",\n \"best_tm.n_topics, best_tm.alpha, best_tm.eta # just to make sure\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## Common statistics and tools for topic models\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The [topicmod.model_stats](api.rst#module-tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats) module mostly contains functions that compute statistics from the document-topic and topic-word distribution of a topic model and also some helper functions for working with such distributions. We'll start with an important helper function, [generate_topic_labels_from_top_words](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.generate_topic_labels_from_top_words).\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Generating labels for topics\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"In topic modeling, topics are numbered because they're *abstract* – they're simply a probability distribution across all words in the vocabulary. Still, it's useful to give them labels for better identification. The function [generate_topic_labels_from_top_words](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.generate_topic_labels_from_top_words) is very useful for that, as it finds labels according to the most \\\"relevant\\\" words in each topic. We'll later see how we can identify the most relevant words per topic using a special [relevance statistic](#Topic-word-relevance). Note that you can adjust the weight of the relevance measure for the ranking by using the parameter `lambda_` which is in range $[0, 1]$.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The function requires at least the topic-word and document-topic distributions from the model, the document lengths and the vocabulary. It then finds the minimum number of relevant words that uniquely label each topic. You can also use a fixed number for that minimum number with the parameter `n_words`.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 20,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.979348Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.978850Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:28.999981Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.000369Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"array(['1_error_case', '2_germany_german', '3_trump_president',\\n\",\n \" '4_circumstance_describe', '5_flight_air', '6_report_agency',\\n\",\n \" '7_company_reform', '8_intelligence_russia', '9_party_vote',\\n\",\n \" '10_al_syria'], dtype='\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
rank_1rank_2rank_3rank_4rank_5rank_6rank_7rank_8rank_9rank_10
topic
9_party_voteparty (0.09073)vote (0.04245)leader (0.02635)right (0.02434)minister (0.02233)percent (0.02233)voter (0.02032)political (0.01629)call (0.01629)come (0.01629)
\\n\",\n \"\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" rank_1 rank_2 rank_3 \\\\\\n\",\n \"topic \\n\",\n \"9_party_vote party (0.09073) vote (0.04245) leader (0.02635) \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" rank_4 rank_5 rank_6 \\\\\\n\",\n \"topic \\n\",\n \"9_party_vote right (0.02434) minister (0.02233) percent (0.02233) \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" rank_7 rank_8 rank_9 \\\\\\n\",\n \"topic \\n\",\n \"9_party_vote voter (0.02032) political (0.01629) call (0.01629) \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" rank_10 \\n\",\n \"topic \\n\",\n \"9_party_vote come (0.01629) \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 21,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io import ldamodel_top_topic_words\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"top_topic_word = ldamodel_top_topic_words(best_tm.topic_word_,\\n\",\n \" vocab_bg,\\n\",\n \" row_labels=topic_labels)\\n\",\n \"top_topic_word[top_topic_word.index == '9_party_vote']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Marginal topic and word distributions\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"We'll now focus on the marginal topic and word distributions. Let's get the marginal topic distribution first by using [marginal_topic_distrib](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.marginal_topic_distrib):\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 22,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.538324Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.537778Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.540120Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.540500Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"array([0.01576, 0.01888, 0.01706, 0.00615, 0.00833, 0.03309, 0.03259,\\n\",\n \" 0.01403, 0.02541, 0.03231, 0.02303, 0.01714, 0.02143, 0.03394,\\n\",\n \" 0.01467, 0.01534, 0.0367 , 0.02148, 0.01134, 0.01369, 0.02523,\\n\",\n \" 0.01143, 0.0359 , 0.01353, 0.01892, 0.01301, 0.01765, 0.02398,\\n\",\n \" 0.01649, 0.02521, 0.02488, 0.01322, 0.00826, 0.03753, 0.00964,\\n\",\n \" 0.08694, 0.01579, 0.0151 , 0.01658, 0.02005, 0.01848, 0.00534,\\n\",\n \" 0.01172, 0.00715, 0.01603, 0.02789, 0.01261, 0.00995, 0.01288,\\n\",\n \" 0.01625])\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 22,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats import marginal_topic_distrib\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"marg_topic = marginal_topic_distrib(best_tm.doc_topic_, doc_lengths_bg)\\n\",\n \"marg_topic\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The marginal topic distribution can be interpreted as the \\\"importance\\\" of each topic for the whole corpus. Let's get the sorted indices into `topic_labels` with `np.argsort` and get the top five topics:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 23,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.544702Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.544028Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.546629Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.546986Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"array(['36_say_year', '34_america_nation', '17_white_trump',\\n\",\n \" '23_country_love', '14_say_committee'], dtype='\"\n ]\n },\n \"metadata\": {\n \"needs_background\": \"light\"\n },\n \"output_type\": \"display_data\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"import matplotlib.pyplot as plt\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"plt.hist(coh, bins=20)\\n\",\n \"plt.xlabel('coherence')\\n\",\n \"plt.ylabel('n')\\n\",\n \"plt.show();\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"And print the best and worst topics according to this metric:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 40,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.858896Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.858312Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.861395Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.860929Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"array(['30_china_chinese', '10_al_syria', '2_germany_german',\\n\",\n \" '18_minister_election', '6_report_agency', '36_say_year',\\n\",\n \" '8_intelligence_russia', '3_trump_president', '9_party_vote',\\n\",\n \" '7_company_reform'], dtype='\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
rank_1rank_2rank_3rank_4rank_5rank_6rank_7rank_8rank_9rank_10
topic
6_report_agencyreport (0.1104)say (0.07203)official (0.0353)agency (0.0321)people (0.03051)news (0.02571)early (0.02092)member (0.01773)law (0.01773)number (0.01773)
\\n\",\n \"\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" rank_1 rank_2 rank_3 \\\\\\n\",\n \"topic \\n\",\n \"6_report_agency report (0.1104) say (0.07203) official (0.0353) \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" rank_4 rank_5 rank_6 \\\\\\n\",\n \"topic \\n\",\n \"6_report_agency agency (0.0321) people (0.03051) news (0.02571) \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" rank_7 rank_8 rank_9 \\\\\\n\",\n \"topic \\n\",\n \"6_report_agency early (0.02092) member (0.01773) law (0.01773) \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" rank_10 \\n\",\n \"topic \\n\",\n \"6_report_agency number (0.01773) \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 42,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"top_topic_word[top_topic_word.index == '6_report_agency']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"More coherence metrics can be used with the function [metric_coherence_gensim](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate.metric_coherence_gensim). This requires that [gensim](https://radimrehurek.com/gensim/) is installed. Furthemore, most metrics require that a parameter `texts` is passed which is the tokenized text that was used to create the document-term matrix.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Filtering topics\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"With the function [filter_topics](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.filter_topics), you can filter the topics according to their topic-word distribution and the following search criteria:\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"- `search_pattern`: one or more search patterns according to the [common parameters for pattern matching](preprocessing.ipynb#Common-parameters-for-pattern-matching-functions)\\n\",\n \"- `top_n`: pattern match(es) must occur in the first `top_n` most probable words in the topic\\n\",\n \"- `thresh`: matched words' probability must be above this threshold\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"You must specify at least one of `top_n` and `thresh`, but you can also specify both. The function returns an array of topic indices (which start with zero!).\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's find all topics that have the glob pattern (`match_type='glob'`) \\\"russ*\\\" (to match both \\\"russia\\\" and \\\"russian\\\") in the top 5 most probable words:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 43,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.883563Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.883082Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.891564Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.891952Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"array([ 7, 24, 38, 41])\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 43,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats import filter_topics\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"found_topics = filter_topics('russ*', vocab_bg,\\n\",\n \" best_tm.topic_word_, match_type='glob',\\n\",\n \" top_n=5)\\n\",\n \"found_topics\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can use these indices with our `topic_labels`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 44,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.895956Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.895452Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.898186Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:29.897779Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"array(['8_intelligence_russia', '25_sanction_visit',\\n\",\n \" '39_russian_diplomat', '42_win_anti'], dtype='\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
rank_1rank_2rank_3rank_4rank_5
topic
topic_1error (-0.8448)case (-0.8618)stage (-0.897)statement (-0.9278)detail (-0.9412)
topic_2germany (-0.1098)german (-0.9475)linkedin (-1.021)tumblr (-1.021)stumble (-1.021)
topic_3trump (0.02926)president (-0.4054)course (-0.9024)play (-1.059)fact (-1.187)
\\n\",\n \"\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" rank_1 rank_2 rank_3 \\\\\\n\",\n \"topic \\n\",\n \"topic_1 error (-0.8448) case (-0.8618) stage (-0.897) \\n\",\n \"topic_2 germany (-0.1098) german (-0.9475) linkedin (-1.021) \\n\",\n \"topic_3 trump (0.02926) president (-0.4054) course (-0.9024) \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" rank_4 rank_5 \\n\",\n \"topic \\n\",\n \"topic_1 statement (-0.9278) detail (-0.9412) \\n\",\n \"topic_2 tumblr (-1.021) stumble (-1.021) \\n\",\n \"topic_3 play (-1.059) fact (-1.187) \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 51,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"# using relevance matrix here and showing only the first 3 topics\\n\",\n \"ldamodel_top_topic_words(topic_word_rel, vocab_bg, top_n=5)[:3]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"If you're interested in the top *topics for each word/token*, you can use [ldamodel_top_word_topics](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_word_topics). Here, we generate the top five topics for each token in the vocabulary, but only display the output for four specific words. Instead of the generic `\\\"topic_...\\\"` topic names, we additionally pass our previously generated topic labels `topic_labels`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 52,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:30.397130Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:30.396627Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:36.504804Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:36.504345Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
rank_1rank_2rank_3rank_4rank_5
token
china30_china_chinese (0.4125)37_north_discuss (-2.959)34_america_nation (-4.323)42_win_anti (-5.29)4_circumstance_describe (-5.365)
chinese30_china_chinese (-0.3812)22_space_european (-1.433)42_win_anti (-4.893)4_circumstance_describe (-4.969)44_note_7 (-5.059)
russia8_intelligence_russia (-0.539)25_sanction_visit (-0.907)39_russian_diplomat (-0.9549)42_win_anti (-1.286)31_company_investment (-3.681)
russian39_russian_diplomat (-0.1902)8_intelligence_russia (-1.083)25_sanction_visit (-1.224)42_win_anti (-2.033)24_industry_service (-2.628)
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" rank_1 rank_2 \\\\\\n\",\n \"token \\n\",\n \"china 30_china_chinese (0.4125) 37_north_discuss (-2.959) \\n\",\n \"chinese 30_china_chinese (-0.3812) 22_space_european (-1.433) \\n\",\n \"russia 8_intelligence_russia (-0.539) 25_sanction_visit (-0.907) \\n\",\n \"russian 39_russian_diplomat (-0.1902) 8_intelligence_russia (-1.083) \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" rank_3 rank_4 \\\\\\n\",\n \"token \\n\",\n \"china 34_america_nation (-4.323) 42_win_anti (-5.29) \\n\",\n \"chinese 42_win_anti (-4.893) 4_circumstance_describe (-4.969) \\n\",\n \"russia 39_russian_diplomat (-0.9549) 42_win_anti (-1.286) \\n\",\n \"russian 25_sanction_visit (-1.224) 42_win_anti (-2.033) \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" rank_5 \\n\",\n \"token \\n\",\n \"china 4_circumstance_describe (-5.365) \\n\",\n \"chinese 44_note_7 (-5.059) \\n\",\n \"russia 31_company_investment (-3.681) \\n\",\n \"russian 24_industry_service (-2.628) \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 52,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io import ldamodel_top_word_topics\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"top_word_topics = ldamodel_top_word_topics(topic_word_rel, vocab_bg,\\n\",\n \" top_n=5, topic_labels=topic_labels)\\n\",\n \"top_word_topics[top_word_topics.index.isin(['china', 'chinese', 'russia', 'russian'])]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Note that the values in parantheses are the corresponding values from the matrix for that word in that topic. They're negative because of the log transformation that is applied in the topic-word relevance measure.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Similar functions can be used for the document-topic distribution: [ldamodel_top_doc_topics](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_doc_topics) gives the top topics per document and [ldamodel_top_topic_docs](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_topic_docs) gives the top documents per topic. Here, `top_n` controls the number of top-ranked topics or documents to return, respectively. This time, we use the filtered document-topic distribution `new_doc_topics`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 53,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:36.510806Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:36.508017Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.262297Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.261745Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
rank_1rank_2rank_3
document
NewsArticles-10329_party_vote (0.6419)2_germany_german (0.1385)18_minister_election (0.1008)
NewsArticles-103621_attack_group (0.3321)6_report_agency (0.2325)2_germany_german (0.1495)
NewsArticles-10438_southern_deal (0.6322)32_britain_democratic (0.2544)24_industry_service (0.002519)
NewsArticles-104342_win_anti (0.6779)10_al_syria (0.1851)6_report_agency (0.0619)
NewsArticles-104850_officer_police (0.5356)45_day_morning (0.2608)6_report_agency (0.1974)
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" rank_1 rank_2 \\\\\\n\",\n \"document \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1032 9_party_vote (0.6419) 2_germany_german (0.1385) \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1036 21_attack_group (0.3321) 6_report_agency (0.2325) \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-104 38_southern_deal (0.6322) 32_britain_democratic (0.2544) \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1043 42_win_anti (0.6779) 10_al_syria (0.1851) \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1048 50_officer_police (0.5356) 45_day_morning (0.2608) \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" rank_3 \\n\",\n \"document \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1032 18_minister_election (0.1008) \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1036 2_germany_german (0.1495) \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-104 24_industry_service (0.002519) \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1043 6_report_agency (0.0619) \\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1048 6_report_agency (0.1974) \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 53,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io import ldamodel_top_doc_topics\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"ldamodel_top_doc_topics(new_doc_topic, doc_labels_bg, top_n=3,\\n\",\n \" topic_labels=new_topic_labels)[:5]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"And now for the top documents per topic:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 54,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.267396Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.266663Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.629449Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.629837Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
rank_1rank_2rank_3
topic
2_germany_germanNewsArticles-293 (0.8348)NewsArticles-879 (0.4695)NewsArticles-3119 (0.2692)
3_trump_presidentNewsArticles-3140 (0.8479)NewsArticles-19 (0.2168)NewsArticles-3730 (0.172)
5_flight_airNewsArticles-1539 (0.6423)NewsArticles-1982 (0.6268)NewsArticles-526 (0.4505)
6_report_agencyNewsArticles-1545 (0.8991)NewsArticles-3125 (0.6466)NewsArticles-2269 (0.4598)
7_company_reformNewsArticles-2799 (0.8006)NewsArticles-461 (0.5785)NewsArticles-2613 (0.4432)
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" rank_1 rank_2 \\\\\\n\",\n \"topic \\n\",\n \"2_germany_german NewsArticles-293 (0.8348) NewsArticles-879 (0.4695) \\n\",\n \"3_trump_president NewsArticles-3140 (0.8479) NewsArticles-19 (0.2168) \\n\",\n \"5_flight_air NewsArticles-1539 (0.6423) NewsArticles-1982 (0.6268) \\n\",\n \"6_report_agency NewsArticles-1545 (0.8991) NewsArticles-3125 (0.6466) \\n\",\n \"7_company_reform NewsArticles-2799 (0.8006) NewsArticles-461 (0.5785) \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" rank_3 \\n\",\n \"topic \\n\",\n \"2_germany_german NewsArticles-3119 (0.2692) \\n\",\n \"3_trump_president NewsArticles-3730 (0.172) \\n\",\n \"5_flight_air NewsArticles-526 (0.4505) \\n\",\n \"6_report_agency NewsArticles-2269 (0.4598) \\n\",\n \"7_company_reform NewsArticles-2613 (0.4432) \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 54,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io import ldamodel_top_topic_docs\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"ldamodel_top_topic_docs(new_doc_topic, doc_labels_bg, top_n=3,\\n\",\n \" topic_labels=new_topic_labels)[:5]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"There are also two functions that generate datatables for the full topic-word and document-topic distributions: [ldamodel_full_topic_words](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_full_topic_words) and [ldamodel_full_doc_topics](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_full_doc_topics). The output of both functions is naturally quite big, as long as you're not working with a \\\"toy dataset\\\".\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 55,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.643794Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.643231Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.645825Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.646181Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
carecarrycasecausecentercentralcentrecenturycertainchairman
00.0002560.0002560.0028200.0053830.0002560.0002560.0002560.0002560.0002560.000256
10.0002780.0002780.0002780.0002780.0002780.0002780.0002780.0002780.0002780.003063
20.0004650.0004650.0004650.0004650.0004650.0004650.0004650.0004650.0004650.000465
30.0001600.0001600.0001600.0001600.0001600.0001600.0001600.0001600.0001600.000160
40.0001620.0001620.0034090.0001620.0001620.0001620.0001620.0017850.0001620.001785
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" care carry case cause center central centre \\\\\\n\",\n \"0 0.000256 0.000256 0.002820 0.005383 0.000256 0.000256 0.000256 \\n\",\n \"1 0.000278 0.000278 0.000278 0.000278 0.000278 0.000278 0.000278 \\n\",\n \"2 0.000465 0.000465 0.000465 0.000465 0.000465 0.000465 0.000465 \\n\",\n \"3 0.000160 0.000160 0.000160 0.000160 0.000160 0.000160 0.000160 \\n\",\n \"4 0.000162 0.000162 0.003409 0.000162 0.000162 0.000162 0.000162 \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" century certain chairman \\n\",\n \"0 0.000256 0.000256 0.000256 \\n\",\n \"1 0.000278 0.000278 0.003063 \\n\",\n \"2 0.000465 0.000465 0.000465 \\n\",\n \"3 0.000160 0.000160 0.000160 \\n\",\n \"4 0.001785 0.000162 0.001785 \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 55,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io import ldamodel_full_topic_words\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"df_topic_word = ldamodel_full_topic_words(new_topic_word,\\n\",\n \" vocab_bg,\\n\",\n \" row_labels=new_topic_labels)\\n\",\n \"# displaying only the first 5 topics with 10 tokens\\n\",\n \"# from sorted vocabulary list (tokens 120 to 129)\\n\",\n \"df_topic_word.iloc[:5, 120:130]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 56,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.655641Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.655141Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.657754Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.658139Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/html\": [\n \"
\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \" \\n\",\n \"
_doc2_germany_german3_trump_president5_flight_air6_report_agency
0NewsArticles-10320.1385430.0001260.0001260.000126
1NewsArticles-10360.1494980.0000830.0000830.232506
2NewsArticles-1040.0025190.0025190.0025190.002519
\\n\",\n \"
\"\n ],\n \"text/plain\": [\n \" _doc 2_germany_german 3_trump_president 5_flight_air \\\\\\n\",\n \"0 NewsArticles-1032 0.138543 0.000126 0.000126 \\n\",\n \"1 NewsArticles-1036 0.149498 0.000083 0.000083 \\n\",\n \"2 NewsArticles-104 0.002519 0.002519 0.002519 \\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" 6_report_agency \\n\",\n \"0 0.000126 \\n\",\n \"1 0.232506 \\n\",\n \"2 0.002519 \"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 56,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io import ldamodel_full_doc_topics\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"df_doc_topic = ldamodel_full_doc_topics(new_doc_topic,\\n\",\n \" doc_labels_bg,\\n\",\n \" topic_labels=new_topic_labels)\\n\",\n \"# displaying only the first 3 documents with the first\\n\",\n \"# 5 topics\\n\",\n \"df_doc_topic.iloc[:3, :5]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"For quick inspection of topics there's also a pair of print functions. We already used [print_ldamodel_topic_words](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.print_ldamodel_topic_words), but we haven't tried [print_ldamodel_doc_topics](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.print_ldamodel_doc_topics) yet. This prints the `top_n` most probable topics for each document:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 57,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.665705Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.662375Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.669186Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.669572Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"name\": \"stdout\",\n \"output_type\": \"stream\",\n \"text\": [\n \"NewsArticles-1032\\n\",\n \"> #1. 9_party_vote (0.641877)\\n\",\n \"> #2. 2_germany_german (0.138543)\\n\",\n \"> #3. 18_minister_election (0.100793)\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1036\\n\",\n \"> #1. 21_attack_group (0.332116)\\n\",\n \"> #2. 6_report_agency (0.232506)\\n\",\n \"> #3. 2_germany_german (0.149498)\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-104\\n\",\n \"> #1. 38_southern_deal (0.632242)\\n\",\n \"> #2. 32_britain_democratic (0.254408)\\n\",\n \"> #3. 24_industry_service (0.002519)\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1043\\n\",\n \"> #1. 42_win_anti (0.677856)\\n\",\n \"> #2. 10_al_syria (0.185094)\\n\",\n \"> #3. 6_report_agency (0.061903)\\n\",\n \"NewsArticles-1048\\n\",\n \"> #1. 50_officer_police (0.535578)\\n\",\n \"> #2. 45_day_morning (0.260814)\\n\",\n \"> #3. 6_report_agency (0.197407)\\n\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io import print_ldamodel_doc_topics\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# subsetting new_doc_topic and doc_labels to get only the first\\n\",\n \"# five documents\\n\",\n \"print_ldamodel_doc_topics(new_doc_topic[:5, :], doc_labels_bg[:5],\\n\",\n \" val_labels=new_topic_labels)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"You can also export the results of a topic model to an Excel file using [save_ldamodel_summary_to_excel](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.save_ldamodel_summary_to_excel). The resulting Excel file will contain the following sheets:\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"- `top_doc_topics_vals`: document-topic distribution with probabilities of top topics per document\\n\",\n \"- `top_doc_topics_labels`: document-topic distribution with labels of top topics per document\\n\",\n \"- `top_doc_topics_labelled_vals`: document-topic distribution combining probabilities and labels of top topics per\\n\",\n \" document (e.g. `\\\"topic_12 (0.21)\\\"`)\\n\",\n \"- `top_topic_word_vals`: topic-word distribution with probabilities of top words per topic\\n\",\n \"- `top_topic_word_labels`: topic-word distribution with top words per (e.g. `\\\"politics\\\"`) topic\\n\",\n \"- `top_topic_words_labelled_vals`: topic-word distribution combining probabilities and top words per topic\\n\",\n \" (e.g. `\\\"politics (0.08)\\\"`)\\n\",\n \"- optional if `dtm` is given – `marginal_topic_distrib`: marginal topic distribution\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Additionally to saving the output to the specified Excel file, the function will also return a dict with the sheets and their data.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 58,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.696148Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:37.695625Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:39.313008Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:39.312614Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io import save_ldamodel_summary_to_excel\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"sheets = save_ldamodel_summary_to_excel('data/news_articles_100.xlsx',\\n\",\n \" new_topic_word, new_doc_topic,\\n\",\n \" doc_labels_bg, vocab_bg,\\n\",\n \" dtm = dtm_bg,\\n\",\n \" topic_labels = new_topic_labels)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"To quickly store a topic model to disk for sharing or loading again at a later point in time, there are [save_ldamodel_to_pickle](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.save_ldamodel_to_pickle) and [load_ldamodel_from_pickle](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.load_ldamodel_from_pickle). The function for saving takes a path to a pickle file to create (or update), a topic model object (such as an LDA instance as `best_tm`, but you could also pass a tuple like `(new_doc_topic, new_topic_word)`), the corresponding vocabulary and document labels, and optionally the DTM that was used to create the topic model. The function for loading the data will return the saved data as a dict. We will only show the dict's keys here, as the data itself is too large to be printed: \"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 59,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:39.317459Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:39.316679Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:39.323335Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:39.322921Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"dict_keys(['model', 'vocab', 'doc_labels', 'dtm'])\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 59,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io import save_ldamodel_to_pickle, \\\\\\n\",\n \" load_ldamodel_from_pickle\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"save_ldamodel_to_pickle('data/news_articles_100.pickle',\\n\",\n \" best_tm, vocab_bg, doc_labels_bg,\\n\",\n \" dtm = dtm_bg)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"loaded = load_ldamodel_from_pickle('data/news_articles_100.pickle')\\n\",\n \"loaded.keys()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"## Visualizing topic models\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The [topicmod.visualize](api.rst#visualize-topic-models-and-topic-model-evaluation-results) module contains several functions to visualize topic models and evaluation results. We've already used [plot_eval_results](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_eval_results) during [topic model evaluation](#Evaluation-of-topic-models) so we'll now focus on visualizing topic models.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"### Heatmaps\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Let's start with heatmap visualizations of document-topic or topic-word distributions from our topic model. This can be done with [plot_doc_topic_heatmap](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_doc_topic_heatmap) and [plot_topic_word_heatmap](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_topic_word_heatmap) respectively. Both functions draw on a [matplotlib](https://matplotlib.org/) figure and *Axes* object, which you must create before using these functions.\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Heatmap visualizations essentially shade cells in a 2D matrix (like the document-topic or topic-word distributions) according to their value, i.e. the respective probability for a topic in a given document or a word in a given topic. Since these matrices are usually quite large, i.e. with hundreds of rows and/or columns, it doesn't make sense to plot a heatmap of the whole matrix, but rather a certain subset of interest. When we want to visualize a document-topic distribution, we can optionally select a subset of the documents with the `which_documents` parameter and a subset of the topics with the `which_topics` parameter. Let's draw a heatmap of a subset of documents across all topics at first:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 60,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:39.338353Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:39.337655Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:40.482262Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:40.482619Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"image/png\": \"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\\n\",\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n \"metadata\": {\n \"needs_background\": \"light\"\n },\n \"output_type\": \"display_data\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"import matplotlib.pyplot as plt\\n\",\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize import plot_doc_topic_heatmap\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# create a figure of certain size and\\n\",\n \"# Axes object to draw on\\n\",\n \"fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(32, 8))\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# randomly selecting a subset of documents\\n\",\n \"which_docs = random.sample(doc_labels_bg, 5)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"plot_doc_topic_heatmap(fig, ax, new_doc_topic, doc_labels_bg,\\n\",\n \" topic_labels=new_topic_labels,\\n\",\n \" which_documents=which_docs);\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 61,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:40.536656Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:40.534311Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:40.796328Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:40.796665Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"image/png\": \"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\\n\",\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n \"metadata\": {\n \"needs_background\": \"light\"\n },\n \"output_type\": \"display_data\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(6, 8))\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# randomly selecting a subset of topics\\n\",\n \"which_topics = random.sample(list(new_topic_labels), 10)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"plot_doc_topic_heatmap(fig, ax, new_doc_topic, doc_labels_bg,\\n\",\n \" topic_labels=new_topic_labels,\\n\",\n \" which_documents=which_docs,\\n\",\n \" which_topics=which_topics);\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"is_executing\": false,\n \"name\": \"#%% md\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"source\": [\n \"Similarily, we can work with [plot_topic_word_heatmap](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_topic_word_heatmap) to visualize a topic-word distribution. We can also select a subset of topics and words from the vocabulary:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 62,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:40.803401Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:40.802719Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:41.109411Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:41.109753Z\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"name\": \"#%%\\n\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"image/png\": \"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\\n\",\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"
\"\n ]\n },\n \"metadata\": {\n \"needs_background\": \"light\"\n },\n \"output_type\": \"display_data\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize import plot_topic_word_heatmap\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(12, 8))\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"which_words = ['may', 'european', 'referendum', 'brexit',\\n\",\n \" 'eu', 'uk', 'britain', 'company', 'trade', 'growth']\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"plot_topic_word_heatmap(fig, ax, new_topic_word, vocab_bg,\\n\",\n \" topic_labels=new_topic_labels,\\n\",\n \" which_topics=which_topics,\\n\",\n \" which_words=which_words);\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Note that there's also a generic heatmap plotting function [plot_heatmap](api.rst#plot-heatmaps-for-topic-models) for any kind of 2D matrices. \"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Word clouds\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"Thanks to the [wordlcloud package](https://pypi.org/project/wordcloud/), topic-word and document-topic distributions can also be visualized as \\\"word clouds\\\" with tmtoolkit. The function [generate_wordclouds_for_topic_words](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.generate_wordclouds_for_topic_words) generates a word cloud for each topic by scaling a topic's word by its probability (weight). You can choose to display only the top `top_n` words per topic. The result of this function will be a dictionary mapping topic labels to the respective word cloud image.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 63,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:41.114494Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:41.113821Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:46.542261Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:46.541868Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"dict_keys(['2_germany_german', '3_trump_president', '5_flight_air', '6_report_agency', '7_company_reform', '8_intelligence_russia', '9_party_vote', '10_al_syria', '11_play_game', '12_parent_child', '13_economic_meeting', '14_say_committee', '15_northern_election', '16_mr_damage', '17_white_trump', '18_minister_election', '19_police_shoot', '20_percent_limit', '21_attack_group', '22_space_european', '23_country_love', '24_industry_service', '25_sanction_visit', '26_judge_victim', '27_man_new', '28_feel_mp', '29_club_sell', '30_china_chinese', '31_company_investment', '32_britain_democratic', '33_general_authority', '34_america_nation', '35_force_group', '37_north_discuss', '38_southern_deal', '39_russian_diplomat', '40_turkish_country', '41_bill_house', '42_win_anti', '43_bank_investor', '44_note_7', '45_day_morning', '46_support_provide', '47_family_refugee', '48_body_north', '49_fire_death', '50_officer_police'])\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 63,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize import generate_wordclouds_for_topic_words\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# some options for wordcloud output\\n\",\n \"img_w = 400 # image width\\n\",\n \"img_h = 300 # image height\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"topic_clouds = generate_wordclouds_for_topic_words(\\n\",\n \" new_topic_word, vocab_bg,\\n\",\n \" top_n=20, topic_labels=new_topic_labels,\\n\",\n \" width=img_w, height=img_h\\n\",\n \")\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# show all generated word clouds\\n\",\n \"topic_clouds.keys()\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"Let's select specific topics and display their word cloud:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 64,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:46.545614Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:46.545175Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:46.558972Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:46.559311Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"image/png\": \"iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAZAAAAEsCAYAAADtt+XCAABpDklEQVR4nO2dd7gdVfW/33uTkE4ChBogF0KvoUV6FUFEivQugigqIIIoNkBQUIp8FaX3KkWqSO+d0GuoISS0ENJJz/398Zn5nTlzpuypp+33eeY5987Zs8uZmb32XnvttcBisVgsFovFYrFYyqKj3hVoA/oBmwLfAFYHVgSWBBYDegMLAXOAmcAM4DNgPPAx8DrwmnNMK7viCWiHNlosFkspdADfBW4DZgPdGY95wHPAmahDbgRasY09geOBl5Cg+xoJtt8DfepUp3bjDPQ8rGaY/iyqn6NrCqqXxVIKmwOvkL1DDTo+KLEdUbRiGzuQMAyr18NAjzrVrZ1IKkCWADYG9sYKEEuT8wdgAcV0rN3AP8trSiit2sbdDer2/TrVrZ1IKkBcBmMFSOl01rsCLcSZwCkUu670vwLzNqGV27hHTmksFoslEftT3IjcPWahxep60eptfMGgfu/WqW7thDsDWTnhdYOxM5DSsTOQ7CwC/CPD9TNQx9kdk+5RtKhbD9qhjf0N0gwovBYWl4HAFcBE9Ew8hiz9svJd4Ca01jYb+Aq4H9jCk2Yl9KxugAw7pgEnI8vCJ4EpwAUE959HAC8ii8PJwN3AyBzq3ZD0rHcFWoBfAIsapn0UuAV4HhgNTAXme75fGFgaWAaZw64ObAisT33VV+3QxukGaSYXXQnL/+c64CPgr8gc/AjgQWAz1EGn5ThgcWQwMRZYDjgcuAtYC5mWu1yNhM0s4CRge6fsj4AfAXcC//WkPw/4qZPX9UgIHgI87lz7WIZ6W1qQnsAXxKs+3kedZFp6Uz/VTju0EeAq4tt4fd1q1z64KqyrfOc3cs7fFXLdYMxUWEGzyH2daw9z/ndnIOc5/6/t/O8OcAY6/5/kyWNz59xZvryXQIOol2Lq1ZRYFVY2volGM1GMRxvsRmUoZzb1U+20QxsBbjZIc3nhtbC4XOf7/3k0+t+WbJqToJnm887nMN/5N53PMc6nO/OZ5uQzyJN2X+fzQl8eXwDPACOIf4+aDitAsvEtgzRHAV8WXZECaYc2AtwB/Cfi+3OA+0qqiwXGBZz7EOgLDMmQ78rA39DaxidIEIx2vvP3h65nhLnO5xTPd/N96VdxPt+hdua6vfNdywkQuwaSjbhFvXHA7WVUpEDaoY0u+wDHAAcCqzrnXgL+D7ixXpVqU4JMxd0OO84YI4yN0TrKJGQU8ipaRF8CDSD8+MtZEJG3W7ejkFeFID41rmmTYAVIejqANWPS/Ifoh67RaYc2epkHnO0clvoyDLmR8bICsm5KO9s9lorftlc857dKmZ+Xd4HtkMeCN3LIrymwKqz0LEG8WWezL5y1QxstjckhVM9CRqJ1hIeotupLQi/n068eOzRlfl6udT5/R/DsqSVNwO0MJD1LGaRp9pFIO7TR0ngsQK5MHkTrTosgM95ZyJWOS1+0pjEImYWDzHJ3QOsVX6E1CZe7kcuaG5GV1wBgV2RVlVYouTyBPDX8EhjulDUVGIpmOC8BP8xYhqWF2Ip4s8/hdatdPrRDGy2NxRlIvTQEWb19hdRWQRsJtyb62fwsIP9fAu8hq7/xwN+RAHkZOM1J45rxHuj838f5/3hPPpOBcwPy3wOpsaYggfch8G+qNypaLOxAfOe6ZN1qlw/t0EaLxZISuwaSHhP13+zCa1Es7dBGi8WSEitA0tMO0RzboY0WiyUlVoBYLBaLJRVWgFgsFoslFUWa8a6ELA82cv5eAZnj9Uf22DOQq4CxaBPOy8AjyAKjkTemDUQmg3Eb7JqZdmhjO9KBdthvCKyH3snl0L3uh8xieyKfZDOcYzLyBfWhc7yN3ICYeC8ug07k7HBL1KbhQBd6ht29F952vI/q/yStZYK+HvJbtxZ6b5ek8hvMQvfrK+TG/j3Uzz5Bxhg3eeu4u9CmnP1IHhDG5VPkSO1S4K18qmVET7TvYahzLBPy98AS6wSKh5DF94+Xdmijy2nAb3POcz000GkmOpE/s+8BOyNX+lmZD7wOPI1iadxD+Y4w10R9zf6kb9N7yMT2fGTSWzZjqHXgCPotTeLTLAocjUItB+VjwhfIJf0twAPUyShmOHAlcjoWZ/ZpeswHbqDik6go/oOE1vwc657nkYeTwnZoo5/TCqjniALqWRT9UOyL9yn+/s1Az5jrNLBI1kKd3YIc6z8buBh5XiiTMRF1ioq/0wMNjqZFXJ/mODHHthnRC/gN2uhT1MM5G/g9FTcEefN2gXXP48ijc22HNvppZwFyCHLXUfZ9dONpFEFv4E/kO0j1H5OAHxTYBj9jIuqybsg1XWjmV0T7w8oshCXR7tCyHs4nKWbTWjt0ru3QRj/tKECWQOqIetzDaRTn72koijVTVlsuRwKraMZE1OE7AenXRi7oi2izNxKjMWmtsFZFN7TM7fmbosAvq5dYpsXSLKyHFkZ3qlP511PMwvo6qK/ZoIC8w/g+CldbzwiZy/n+Xx8N2PNYwwriv/FJakkjQFZBvl6WTVMgsgiYgaReUpZD3jhXS1m2pX14CcUpeRIFDJpIY1v3ZWEbFIvexPllUVxSQJ6ro4XdtO2aSXonidujuOn1cji7nO/vu1DY3qIICxUcSdIfZ1EUF9hUCn6MgtI/gkzmxlIJttKBLH9WRfGEd8dMRbAUsvzYiGBnaUm5knSqsRWAXWLSXEB2q4Y8RnXt0EY/tziHl05kSj7EcyzmfK5CsTr8ohiBBGVSy7l56J18AalSxqGB3WykihqEIuitDqyB3tOFQvJ6DZnG5skSyBOvSRS/BaiPcY8PkVp0FupnFnHy+QYKibuTYb7bI2eLP0lS8ZxwB+j90Owgqs+dgwZML6C2f4qEp9v2Iegero2MEPz9/iw0MC+UTtRxm+jTRgN7knyGsxF6aEzKeJLwB7oMdg6pl/cYXK/K5UQ7tNFlLZpvDWQpkuvEHwIOIPl964P2GZyBOipvnkdla0YNPZGWI64t84CrSa6R6Af8Cs1KTX6zPTK1JpwxEWW6Hfr5EWmeQPdy4QRlDgb2Qus8U5x8UqmvknI0Zj/2v9DDloXDkVSMK+u0sAxKoB0613Zoo0szCpC7MBccj5PvOsJwFDxpFBrl5smviW/PRCTQsrA82s8SV9YXRJvVpmVMRJnvEv7+jUZ7e7LSDziIEtbNlsXM5vgPYRmkYFvizYPnUr+Xuh0613Zoo0uzCZBDMBMc81CH3CyOMVdAG+mi2jQOWDGn8gYh9U/c73hmTuV5GRNR3gKkTvSfvw6zTYYNxcXE/8CXFlDu3gblFq67C6EdOtd2aKNLMwmQPmh9Ma6+c5G6opm4nug2zQY2zrnMNYnXeMwk/20EY2LK9B8X0DwDgf9PF1qkiWrYBxQnFa+MKbsbzVbKpp6dax/gZLS/I+jeeCOn9XXSjkYv3xcofrNJJEErQBpTgPwcsw7niDrVLy2rEu8t4ZcFlf2HmHK70abpPBljUKZ73IN2oDcdZxDfuCJHOUtSMfuN+nHLpp6d62VIGJyIhOeJSJC8gSwt+jrpelHZ7HkzevnORvrjr5BlRhRWgDSeAOlA+vG4ul5Xrwpm4AKi2/Qp2ddXw1iCYJWR9/gg5zLHxJTnHl9RXxPt1PQg3srjTYqfVp0TU4f5pHcmlpZ6da6LOHlf7Dt/OdKbev35uIYPfh83XUjP/GRMWVaANJ4A2Zb4ek6h+UIN90GuRKLadVzBdbghpvxuNEDLizEG5ZXR7tTEmdluRfyej0tQI4vkwpjvO4GDC65Do7CS8+l3Rf0GEuTeDZ57o5nJub60Y9D+nE2RMLE0D/sYpPkX8HnRFcmZnYkejHQD1xRch/sM0pS9038Sup8NSZwA2dEgj5vzqEgMo4FXY9IE+Y5pRSY4n/4ZV5fzOcZzbjiyWJkZkM9o53OVvCpmKYVvx3y/APhHGRXJmbiOeRTFC8VRBmnyXsCP4zqC39+GIG4nepx7Znd3eRncjfzihLER2lU8sZzq1I0xyBvAD6nsJN4AxUa4GulLvYSpF93zRc8eLfmxOrU+kvw8jNTOzUbcvob/lVCHN5A1VtQ6S5k+uUBeBhqWqBlIb6QXjuKpHOsSR1xZncDIMirSAOyPFvTOR66dT0CL4z/ypRuNVFpBTuHcmcd7BdXRkj8bGqQpZVdxziyPPO5GEaeByIP5VGb4YSxLOZ56QXt4Hi+prFRECZAgnyl+XsixLnGYTC/XL7wWjcFeSD21NhotrYLMEP1T3WuRJdaxvvNdTh7PId85luZgPYM0jxRdiQJY1yBNptCrCZgS871/nbFI3kIzooYlSkCYuE1/J6+KGPApcroXFXMgTwuJRmY7pKqbFpPuMuSk8jTU+TyDrHMORYvrzbZPoN2JM7uei1xzNBsm721ZM+U4AQJ6h94vuiKU27+mImoGYiJlyx69jon5Pk4/3CpciKzjvFHnJqPR56aedPOBXVH4y7WBP6NYBw8gdd8rJdXXkg9xz/d7SIg0GyYm+HF7wfI6NjOoS1lxQhp+LStqBhKnk4R4fWHexJXXDgLk22ix/CbgWbT5qRMZEByCjA2GUzEmmIsEx59Lr6klb+LeyVRR5RoAk76mkegbnyQXJpdUTmqiBEic98nZaFRQJnGhTxcrpRb15VJkULB/wHfvoM1QI4AHS6yTpXh6Isd/UeQRH6ceNNumx7JcijT0+gdEq7DiXAbUo3Fx9tBljQzqRU/k0iBs7cNVX5U9M7QUj8mzHbcm1qjUM3RsI9PwETSjZiBxpmpz8qyIIXGR7zpQvbNGyGtU5gF3APshg4KnnXNLAjugfTu3Uo7Jo6VcTARIw49YQyjKv5WlYKIESNwGs3q4FTaJcNjqG+MOAH6B3JTsi0Zvk5D1zZEUE5vaUn9M1CYNP2INoVe9K2BJR5QAiVMX1SOcbNysaAH1mRmVyQzgVOewtA8ms+qyNrjlTdzMaT6acTcKzWjpVghZBEg91hviymxYnzEWS0ZMnu1mXUuIa9urtM8m4aYiSiUUtxDbi3irkLwZEvN9nJWWxdKszCJ+5Nts1kwucZv3BpZSC0tiogTIOIPrl4hPkitx5Y0vpRYWS/l0I28MUSxTRkUKIK6vKbufsRgSJUA+Mrg+r8D2JnQAK8SkMRF6FkuzEjdAWpUmjJlN/AbIhSlf22ExIEqAvGZwfZmxJJYn3tyvGf0AWSymxPmDGkBzBgh7yyBNnB8wSx2IEiDvA1NjrjdxL50XJn74rW8nSyvzkkGaLQuvRf6YePUuOw6HxYAoAdKNNqpFYeJ4LC82jU/Cc4XXwmKpHy8apNmh8Frkz5vEm+luV0ZFLMmI25gXFwVsOLByTnWJIy7k5as0ry8gi8WEZ4GvY9LsQvOZ884H7o9J802ar10tT5wAMYlutk8eFYlhLeLjk5QR8tJiqSezUMjaKPoDB5dQl7y5M+b7AcCeZVTEYk6cAHmP+FCyh1G8d0p/qNYgriu4DhZLI3CLQZoTaL5d6bcSP7s6gea0MmtZTHxLXRzzfRdwUPaqhLI0cHhMmlFYB4KW9uBG4o1bVgB+VUJd8mQy8YPANdGA1dJE9AbGEh3FazwwuKDyr40puxs5GCybnQ3qNbgO9cqTdmijy1rEt3VEvSrn4x/E13UusEW9KpiSNdF6SFS7JlPu/rMiGUN0W39dt5rlzI+If2BvJP/p5X4G5b6F2Uwqb9qhc22HNro0kwAZitQ9cfX9Eli3TnVMy+XEt+tNYPF6VTBHxtAmAqQnskGPu7Fn5ljmtsjJWlyZu+RYZhLaoXNthza6NJMAATid+Pp2A18Rb8GYB3mtuQxFswyTgWMZFqCD0AD60ALyHkObCBCA9dC0OO7GXoUsJrJwGLI4iSvr3xnLyUI7dK7t0EaXZhMgfYG3MRMiC9BaZt4+pQah9c870DpkXhyIWbumAceQfzyRvsC30ZqMO4g9K+cyoM0ECMDxmN3YD9C6RFLrrPWBewzLGEt9p7Ht0Lm2Qxtdmk2AAGyE2UDLPb5GgmQr0llODgS+hWLRPIJilLh55+1G6HLM2zUGGQ10pSxrINoU/TtkJh30m1oBEkBUPJAgzkIvUdyi9QrANUildRO6Ka+hTt/rknop5ABuc2A3zF2jzAJ2x8b+tpjRk4pDvrDDZGH258i0fQqyhPJ+ev8uK6Ty80i1ci1m6499kUXj4UhN5FovjgW+oBKXYyDSIiwMDEOqopWB5ShvvfEIYFm0gTCOYcAZzvEOatdo5Fx1Kgoy15dKuwYiz8WrOkezejFuShZCm35MRwdBo6BpxFtbhB2zge8U3sp42mF03mxtvAq4F3gG6cg/QREc0z6raY/ZqEN+F/l5egi4DdikoHYfjdRUZbfTexThyHQg+u3q2S73sDOQHFkI+A/l38QZNIbwgObrXNPQbG2cTv07mqhj3+KazoFopF2vthXlCbs3svCs972zAiSAtNPROcAewJ9yrEscY5Ce0sS9isXSblyDVMHv17siOTMb2BstlpelGrQYkkWf2Y0Wnb6FOvei6AYuRQvsLxdYjsXS7DyHrCXPQYO8VuLvyKX7g3UoeyJmrvQtKekP/AHZnOc5bXyAcl3GJ6HZ1DtpaLY2trMKy8+KwEUUvwY0D7gLPStlsTPwWM7t8B/zgfuQs9ii/IqNialDw6uw8mYQcBSygkh74yYA/6TcYFVpaLbONQ3N1kYrQGpZBPgJ6gy9ZrdZjonA7UittFR5TalhPbQ28QH5tOtj4Aq0nlRGu8bE1KfhBUiRni2XA7YBNkahb1dED3N/p9wZyBrrI6S3fRl4HE0V5xdYL4ulXRmABmYbon0vy6P3dBFk5toHmdl/7Tk+Bz5EnbT7nr6OOrhGYiXU12yI4hQNQxsn+6O2zUMDjGnO55fISm60c7yJ2thKdCPvzdYNvsVisVgS0Q3cXGQB9XBC2KysgKbtXyBVwAdoo5Ofo9CIrU95VbNYLJbySboTvZ25DO1aPQ4ZCyyLdrr66UCS3/62FovFYqEH0g3/sd4VsdRwCeGLkGPqVy2Lpe5YFVaDsDiaUXxV74pYLJaGZSLag+PyHdSJ3+M5t4JzzruwfQTwIvJFNhm4GxgZUU7S9F5WQZqT9526WArkH8BnBPsZ8kv2B3zfh/EyMs9bH9myf40evNMD0g4FrkYWI7OQ87xvp2pJ69IHWROtjza1ej1Gj6lftSxtyL1Ub3Q8HZiEOnnX4nV39GwOc/4/z/n/TuCXSMvxEVpn3TKgjCTp/f3UGsCnyIrOOpAsgRWQ9+Gt0c040/l/BLWuo/sgk8gLiRcg96FYDj9HAuEoavcILIo6wHeRx9VdgRuQifOOSRvSRnjdso+pb1UsbcZpaLDn8jjwN/QsruWcOwUZ4oBcz3RT62drCeRF+CXf+aTpu6nEmV/HKfc5YDGj1lhyYwi6GT83SHsa8QJkDrCaQT5zkU27Swdyi/+8QT3aFStALPViV/TcDUUOZ2cC2wHjgR86ae6g4s/PnU0ERVa8z/nOG/Moafpu4AIU1ngiCqsxMGGbIrFrIPXhNTQDieJbKFaD1zleN/AE8glkzYQtlsbCHditi4J99UZrFc8BmzrfjfCkW8X5fIdaFfn2zndegZA0PWi2cQ/SaJyANlLmhjU1rQ+fGqRZHKnJwmYzg9C6iMViaQw+Qe/2Gui9fRutgTyN1NCLIDX3c056dwB/FNopH4S3r0iaHrRYfz0SMDejxfbP45tihhUgjctXznFcyPeTSqxLu7ERipC5CbA6Gr0tQIuhbyFVwGVINeGnE+mj+yPrmKD4NScCf3b+noI6Fv9AYSsUNhbgEBQsy9L4PI9mCv2QtgAkQM6gMgtx48e/i1RcDwNvGOSdND1o8/P+yCntg0iFtjWV6JOWEsh7DeQug3z+jASIXfBKRpY1kA2Q2tDE8d40wn0MPeWkGRvy/e2+vILWw47yfL9WwPeWxuR3SPC/ARzsnOuL1j0vo/qZdBfFryfYL+EA3/9J0/utsPZFA6EbQ65PjJ2ByPxzGWQb/XLKPDqpxNZ2dZCroRHrFNJJ+7NQIJ1Hgf9DndEQNAWdBJycsq6WcD6meoFyNBotjkcv4xrIAq4XelmvRTMS/2jwRTR7WQ7FFZ/q+/4bvv9HUrsmto7zOdMpw9IcPA/8At13dwYyE/Utu6DZg8sTyLLzl8hY5m70rAxFM9CXqCy+p0nv5wbnutPQbOa3qVpoqeIt1DlcE5EmbgZyIOEj1S99aV/GbAbilvtP1LHNRbrL+4AdDK9vR7JaYf0ROAl5jw5idaTrdsu4JCDNDzzfb+r7bkXn/Gzgfufv8wLyeNb57ulk1bfUmcXQffOrN//POX9CwDV7IMEyBa1rfgj8G9gipAzT9GE70S9zvjskuimWOIZSedGjBIileSjDjHc/TxlBLsBHeL4/wvfd/s75F4FTnb+f86XppBLb5J95VdpiyZt2V2FtH5/EYqnhLtS5dxDskfkNNMPoDazt+24T5/MVJERAZp8LUQlDOxwtwuNJ0woMR+q/8eRsTloHWqktqWn3fSBWgFjSMI3KukYvakOezkXuIqB2AXxj5/Nl4AXn74XQrMVlHc/fL9AaDETrPG8RbJnWTLRSWzLRzgKkA5nEWSxp8NrhB1m0uDMHrwDpg2YbIAEylsoamdcZnitAZmNurtnobEPraDxaqS2ZaOcf4RvAkvWuhKUhWQh1ElshAbAMWhztj4RAX+LfHVeADEHP2eco3Gov5/wrnnTfIliAvI5mM63AN+tdgRxppbYUxp5UFgI/C/h+NeCvyGxtEhUroVeQudihwNIJy+xAaqW/I5O0T5FeeAJy/3E+sBPJbZjXRIuXfwH+R7UVTdLDb2vt5VxfWr+DxDgme6413WVe9H0615P/Tb7vVkXO4Z5BlmKznTaMRkYJ+6BYKmWSdRH9SPQ7JnkmgtzKjPR87850XU/B73jSufuGvGa87znnLkxR/0bFtXZM8140Gq3UlsLwdkzzqYy4eiGf9/OJf7HOT1DeZsgaxeSFHUVlMTKOnoZ5toIAKeI+netJ5+r1F0JCySTvd6jW7xdNFgHyL6rr/hpyyb0/2r27LrASmpFM96QLEiB9kLDuBn7mnLvB+d+7q3wX59wCtHegH5XwAT9KWP9GxWvt2Oydbiu1JTOmKqxO5DJ4AnAbmgWY8N/4JAAchkZbpqPVDdBuz++jXZkWUfR9WhkJpptQx2d6zZNo8fg1w2vqwXZo9gHqGA4DLo9IHzcLnoVmFWuhvSNQWf94xpPuWU9+I5BgcvNuBQusDuQWphVopbbkQpI1kGXQ7me3U5qNOobn0UJgJwqSMhLt7p4DPGSQ7/ep3Yz1FuqkXkXWLoOR/nh/KmaTCyE1yWdU7+70M49aD5UA26LNNy43U+lAophukKaeFHWfQL/59VSEx2zgVuRj5xP0gq2EZkWbe67rh+ISrIM650Zkf8/f1xItPHqjNsXxIhIgq6F1E3eXu1eAfI4W092gWK6ju7no+S+S9dGmtG8gdeRgp55fo9nw++hdfBTdY/+mWD+d6D1d13Osg2ZWXq4nfuB3NlL5mbImsDPyY7Y2eucHol3gU9HO65eAW9D7EEc92wLSdHwPvccj0MCwP7oHY1GfdxO1MUAaBq9qpBu9VO7fFwFLRVy7NGp8HCtTrQqYh9wAhFmH9aGyi9I9PqH2ppqwoy+fPDYSnku26e1kz7VpVFhF3Kdzffm7x4tUxyrx89OAa0xnRFlIq8LyRpT8cUzabahuV5hr/WOc7z9EHVs36pz9A7ebnO8uB/7g/P1ygronZUXk4juJ6nYucsQXJTiHBFyX9vAHTQpiIPIZ5l2TMDmeRAIzirLb4uUIzNfhbqVBowv6Oyb3CPMOmwa/U7lfGVzTiSJ9ea8Lcg8QR6sKkLzv07kBeX+EPNTG4er83SPJmlha0goQd3NgN+rEw+ik4oIkToBsQaXz/ZHz9+MB6X7pfPcscIXz92UJ6p6ENdEoNk1H+GxAfl7K7nTd9aM0x2dExwSvhwDpiQYRSfMfD6xnWEZpBHVMd+SY/0pUL8K+h/kayPa+eoV5PY2ilQVInvfp3ID89zG8dmvfdWVsiksrQE7xXPc+wbPa/sCV1P4eYQJkAJUFcXewdGZAui2d76YCjzl//zRB3ZPwEtV1fw0NwHZAKq31kHr3x2hd8n1P2kNTlvlrX5l5LTx3UD37+AhF4PshmiWuh4xtDqZ2sNqN1gmTUlRboFa7Mh3dg73RGuL6KAT2adRako6nwbYlBHVMIyOvSIY7VXePJJ4hvb6C3GOlhOW3sgDJ8z6d68t7IpW9DHH08107Lsd6gbwfD0O66S2QDvwET3kT0Mu3I3JquCbykBtkSbc80pd7X8jTUUd6NFIHTnS+ewqtCcQJEJBJczdaL+pGaw5++iP1rTedqZVhEjak+n7citmgbS3UafVNWW6Rne4BwMVIRRjHXtRaDg5NWF5RbdnXl+9zBLvJcRlA9ay5G63vNAz+jskkil4S3Bi+7pH0hfGb/B6Y8PpWFSB536dzffkHefeMYobn2rwNEMZQXTfT456Q/PagWogEHfcjweXtSKIEyPW+68M6LG8cknmYLdInxe81uow1KShWgCTFP4PcPzp5DUW0pSfVz/JnSIUWxwA0KHOvW0C1G5zCSeLKJG/1g3+UPDrh9V/5/m+o6VsdKVpN9Hp8kiq8O6kb3fPBLcji5QJktTMLCZSPkbpjX6Q+nUK1JVUUXlPccQRHMYTq9YXRaLE9b7p9/0eNcFuV23z/L1ePSvj4HppJu/yVeIs30IDsYs//HWjGXRpJXugJOZbbG43ivEzMmKeN3CfyvE9BBO12rxddBeQ5GjNz7kcw84hwJsHrHn5+SHQwoDwY5fv/j2hN5PmCy20kPvb9b2IMUjS7+f6/McG1fqOMbbNVJRlJZiAzciy3iJu2UAF5NiN53qcg2tZ1dQswGrjX8/+SaCZ1E1rIbwfm+f4v29VOEN49UxNJtlb4ie//KMuy3KmXSqHRVRn1ohEe5jjm17sClkwchgwA3H0QnWgdbU+ktrvGOYICZTU6ayGXSGujjnQxYBG0ntSXiiPMRmIg1Wo0N6JhWkzWTnKjXh25f/1iFjJPy4J/atpsdFAJImSxFMV4tPP8VKSq8/YBKyNz5pORiu584D809qBhIWQp9zOq49k3C3mr3ns6h3+mVQj1EiAz0OKkOxrog6bSppZHrcgiJPcybLGkYQoyTT4bbTg9hOp9Lx1oH8U2aB/Ir2gwE1GHFZEp6+oh309wjq9Qn/M1GqR9q5TameFfC24q6qlKeoFq3d9a1C7yNRv+kVqS3zfsJbBYiuIjJEh+jfZIHIrWQrwDmeHIdPs64Adon0ojsAjy0eW1JPsa7eS+DfUlkwOu25zGEiD+Ncs3Md+oG0Ypsw+orwB5mGoBsiPlCpAFvv/zGP1P8f0f5MQxjE1zKN9iScPXaH/Elciy7Qjn8KpX9kdmo43iYv4UqoXHaNSHjIm5rtFm+X5z3f4kN5WvG/UMaetusHL5KeWuAfitiRbJIU+/iavJ7ljQQ31ADuVbLFkZA/wGCRK/D6cfEu+EsAw6qd0A+H3MXNfk8Z7nyWSqhchyNJFaq54C5C20QOeyFPIFk8YSKc2owr+hayTan5KF53z/74rZBsdDqcSKsFgagenIyeP/ec51oFF+vVmC6tnRJ5hv7Fwj/+pk5mHP3500UcjcegoQkN+iSZ7/90YuTtY0uHZ5NJ1+inSbZ8ZSbbm1GHBSiny8vIr0yi79UMyRKHfzh1COl1qLJQ3+TW1LpMhjZg55eBno+99k17ZLkC+yJOTdFqh1fnpMDnmWQr33Y3yA3EP811OXbZEOcBTwNPLt5FpPLIpM9dZCFhguafWalyKTRZcTkcO5G6h4+B2AbKuXQtPfKDfpC9C0/x+ec1uhsK6XoR2/01DgnjWB3anMPD5AVmiNOEIqg3kUsw9mexTrw5QOstnhl0EftPi9N1IpLUQlsNpf0Ow+L/y+u9J4OvjC939Wf01+rxXLocGwf13Tz8Ho/c5C3m0B9TenUOnTtkD9zNk55F03/E76ziuwrG3Qg5nGMV436ad8A4E3EpRjMtLpBO5OWP+pSKCc7zmX1pli3vfpXF/+RTmInEey3yzps7E0ink+IqT8tVEHPNOp80VI0DcafdDAKqy9M1AHFMQ/kVrKNADRUGqDNaWJOzHcl8ds9Htn4V1fnt+PSb8fev78v1fSYE9FtAU0mPTX7UzMguUNR6bWF+RQj9woU4CARhGXIud7pp3DXGSyt3yGcodSG6AqiwABraVcRCUWRNTxApVZx9Ge81aA5CtAjnH+H0/tjHVFXz3d4wnqr+b18xvi2zya4Fm5N+riK2h943A0698AzYa3AA5CYaan+fK9P0O9n/LlNR1tZvyOU+4G6F4dgFTbm8Xk91tffrOd/FZD718fZAiwv6/dLyCNRloBUkRbXP5E7b2cjGYoxyMheTDwE6e8m6j24vtIirYURtkCxGV5FKbyNqT6+Qp1LtORj5hH0Uh9X/Lbtt+BXFtfiUZcU5wyJ6NwpE+g0dvBCfNdHXnWfBrFup7t5PkWsqvflWo1ojdQlhUg+QqQO5z//xVQ9s3Od1+juBfnUYkb0WjWca9j1u4NAq59wPDaMKGUNHaGl28QPAMIO34Wk19/ql3gmxyvIdP6xzzn0giQvNvi0oEEoz9mienxSIq2WErkKCRQouI/mPIy1aOMdqdoAfKB8/8uvnK9kTH385w/2zmXZ3THrHRi3rkcEnD9acAcw+vdYz7SDOThAHVHzFXVJp3u0mhAaZLfzVRUkn/xnE8jQIpoi5etUNz2JPdpHOqfLA3M0agjCopol5R+aLZ1HVaAQPECxA1stZav3D8759+iWu2zsXO+kXysDcC83WEhcZdEwuViNBL/CM245yCV8CQ02/gP8AuyqYeDGITUiXejTm8mmpl/AbyNQs+egvl+kw7gu2hf2QfoPs9CqspRSAPwDd81u5FdgED+bfGzCVJVufdpOtX36A5kBLQ5dXLE2mi7MtuR81CkuMF1rke9GYjUC0MMj0Uxe2lcK6y5SF24JBVLmg70Yi6HrF7O8Vy3LBIes8lnxpkHHagdJu0+AA1OLBZLC3MedgaShg5qFzOjZiBfOv+v4snjW865udRu+Fzc+a40v0KGvILZDGSVsAwslrxoNAuTslgBWUgFTfO3plZX7l98DGNd5B10ClqQfRTpM7MwFLgadYCz0F4Sv+v7m5ETuV3RwuIsZJ1xOrWBtjqRrvQlp44z0HT7+BTl1pNu4u3+vbzpfHoDJ7ltvgMZOXhxDTSKDtCVFJNZxcPIAMVisRTEgwSH8rwcbcryWkf1QWqOCwkXIGsjHeXTSH2wB9IjzyXa/UPUDGRRJAjeRe5OdkUmffN9ed6MOsBP0TrNd6hYT/3al+eVqOO9FG1E2xWZD3qtq0zLrTdPYD4DOc75fyLaC3GdJ80mAXnvRWVtpJHoTXS736U9Y51bLKVyAHrhvG5T+iHb97+GXHMa4QLkdtSJ+yOePUH0aDBKgJyGBNBwz7kOZI7oFX6uGep2vuufd8p3GemkOzWiPknKrTdJBMgAKpZY3uPakLwvcL6/oaC6Z6E3EoKj0KBlNhJ0f8Rs45nFYslIH2TNcKbn3EGo01gt5JooATIduCLg/LHONSsGfAfRAuQ5tPHJz/loFuEu7t6MdrP7uZbq0KTu5qthIeUlLbfeJBEgINXlf5FaahxwBsEhTnuhhfZuZOBgsVgCqLcvrHoyC5n+HYjUPPOReeNTaE0gCb3RxqYgP0Guxc/iJI8zvTjaTRsmtAZR2ZzndyWPc513ncvV6/s9EWcpt5n4EKn34uhJZQ3sxeKqY7E0N+0sQEAODo9E1jivIp9cR6TIZzZSfQV55nSte9I4ofvKOcIcOE7y/G2yoOymXwqNwPMotxWZibl7cIulbWl3ATIKCY79kdnjTOR+PQ33Iiulfsi6yWUPNPNIOvtw8/wxWnvweyBNw8NoY9P3kTqurHIbgUfR+s0o5/P9+lbHYml+2l2AgKyufo923N6E1jK8dCKVzSAqIWpXQ+sWU6jEB/gd8CzwEHLnPhMt1G9MbQyCHp48F3XKWNWTp6seOgtZSj2KHN+NRWqokWgWcHLCtj4O3IqEyDLIPHkecubYA1ljFVFuI7Al1Sa8k5AwcQXKKBpr17nFYmkChiAVVDfBbrAPJHyB1u+ddw20p2AqmoU8gdRjfn4eked7AfX7J+rc5iJLr/uAHTxpbiZ43eYaasN89kSun19Hgmo6mmn8IEW59SbJIvrhyGDhCXR/gtJ+hvbxnITWSvIIFmSxtD19yB7u1WLJm6RWWC4dyIninkiVdycSlEHXjw243mKxJKCbWtVOFNs56S8vpjoWC5BegIQxEDmmOwPN6Nw8LBZLAEWtgXyGzFpHFpS/xZIHnWgj6cboWd3I+d/7XsypQ70slqagKAHylfOZJQCNxZI3Q5Cw2Bi5L9kIzTq8jEPuaJ5xPu0+EIslhKIEiDvtzyNuhsWSB++idQ8vM5Bl2nNUBEbcJkuLxeJQlABZz/kMcq9RFsujfRkboNCyw5CfoAFUNv59hvxUvYacKz5H47nvjqIDBUjaHBiB3KWsgMyD+yNPvF+j9ajPkIXX26jTfJLq/Sqtjis83kfx6u9GHnqTePS11IflgA2B9dEzvhxyGDkA7bvqi1SNMzzHl8jzgHuMRh6oZ5dcd1N6oHd4S/ROD6fSZ/V3vnff5fGoTW9QmS1PK73GEQzwHe4iuv+8/1gMBfB5z7nmwYTlbkj0gmiYPymX3sgc9cWYfMKOiSioUKPHUtgMxfZ2/TWlOeYg66O9qHX53iwkWUSf7Ts/jkpEt29Tn4Be55H+/kUdjegAMgmd6L79HXWUef0us1GHew6KStivpPZEsRVwCdqXlKVdd6EtBw3xLud1w/ZKWG6cANk94tq9kWTOo97z0Ch1qYT1L5pd0Swp7w7nY+AnNMjDl4AkAqQPmqn9CgmOL33pFqC9MRchn2grl1B/K0CqWQQ4gXyFRtQxA7gFbfjtX0L7XDqQAHsphzb4j/HIBVFd3+XT0c7c+aRrxFzS7VaOEyBBeQ5CHUIRD9iXVAeWqherIDckRb9QowneTNmoZDXjXQ3NWC9FLm3m+q79ArnpLworQMRCKP76VxT/jAcd8yjP4Gcl4JGC2+O+y/7wDqWzGJW4GbNRBLeo41gnfdqbESdA/uNLvyLV9vpFHSelbE8e/AjtGC/rZVqAXNybxN2uN3nvA+kNfAPFS3nLk0dRWAGi9VLvb12P487CWykOR+sYZbVrPnqW6/4ujyXZRsK0xAkQrwO8ZZGbjrJuxt+KaHAEPZE6pV4v1b3UZ10gCVkESCea2e2FAjHdgjqyOQF5FEW7C5CjqV2bqsdRtJahB/IpV6/23UqdPYncQWMIkAXIbn8g9Rm1nFBc06vogbwC1/vFGkVjC5EkAmRLFAv+YrSONCMk/QTgf2jktityOlkU7SpAOoCzqf/z3Q18QrFOZTuBqxqgnfdRwLqI6Q/3CrBt3oWnoAPFHv8p4VEDXaaiqHofoFjhrtfcQUj15ZoEJuEMZDr334TXJeVKZBSQhAXoPr1NZcY4Dy0OLoF0rxuSLOTpBsD9KE5KGQOIInk04NxkZLHneuMdRa3zySI5Fvgz2uDoPRYLOOcejWA5lJULSBd3x89M5L36aypesxcmmcrmcoo13b8ARTpNwtfIs/fHaF1oImrTYs6xClL9JWnn9mitL2ldcqEv5XgmjZuBdBM985iBPMhugoRNHKsi1+XTDcp1j0/RTSyKExPUpRt1jAeilyeOHui3+RfJ2nwrZr9n2SSZgUwDHkMmnPshK6tGbFMce9DcM5DfkW4EPRW4EfgZ8iQwxJ+xQwewNLrvRyMBMTYkzwUkH0Qm4eiQcoOOaejZ3ASFVI5jYWBn4J4EZXQTHiSuJTARIFEvzZK1WRqxLFJbmJZ1Vcpy4tgGc8u3d8hmZbEksj83bfPvMpRVFEkESGdQBk3IbjSvAPkOyd/r51HAt6zql1WQqfpDVN6xBzLmGcUmBK+n+Y/5aBa6SIayRmK+920W2qjYkqQRIAuQKiArnSgQlGmZI3Io00tfKhsw445byM9u/XuYWYbMAdbNqcy8yNsKqxnYjeYUIIui9QbT9/ozJDiKYGkUk2f7gvJfCHk5iGvjhBzr0B9ZqZr8tk/mVGbDkUaA/DbnOlxjWO5dOZf7Z8NyryP/0fRWmJkKv0ADmAR6SCNAeiA98N2oQ5uFdOCDPGn6oFHamgXWPS270ZwC5DLM3+nHabxNvEkwUdNNJn4dNykdaLHc5DfeLeeyI1kf6R2LVgMkFSCPkr8euz9SD8WVvYD8disvQbhVkPd4luLM8aIiL3qPuizChZBUgCwJPBWSbrAnXW8qm9o2K7IBKdiN5hMgayAhbfJ83Ytm483KooRHvHSP+cBOBZW/NJrZxP3OowoqPxDXpLRo66OkAmS94Gwys5Nh+X/LqbwzDcqahZxCFslNBvV4j2LNHpOQRID0Qvp09/wXaCofJEAAribfe5wXu9F8AsTkuepG3gDKdClSBKcS387zCq7DkQZ16EabZkvhQ6fAolfwkwiQ/xVcl2cM6jCe7DOgPpg5UiujI1ses41dSU2MiyKJAPmR8/9s4FAqs+kwAeKmf7aw2qdjN5pLgCyD2exjJo3vxDQO78w1qp1LF1yPAci8Oe43Pz9rQaYqKVcf+XLWAnPk0oLzP9cgzTLI2iILuxO/WW8O2oNSNGMxC0P8w6IrUgD7OZ9/QW2Mc+P+jvPpjyFiScZhmK2bnUHlN29WdiXemuoitBWgSKajtdw4vpu1IFMBMsP5nJS1wJyYjRZBi+R2zDbPZdVlHmBYl88zlmPKBQZptkOzlWZibefzDsP07rM+qIC6tBMmllST0B6IZudggzTXF14L8bBBmqHAOlkKMRUgbzmfy2UpLEeeoPhgSDORRUMcm2coozfa+xHHtRnKSMrLyAQxig5k099MuKFrTSMOuvsOZkamskTRhZml0YU0WECkFPQhfl/WF8iNThmYljMySyGmAuQy53O3LIXlyDMllfOQQZqRmO0cDWJz4l1TzCF5YK6smBhLfLvwWuTLl85nl2F6t+P7OP+qtA2mz8jVhdaiHLZEQiSKeygvAuZYZI0Vx4ZZCjEVIFcAtyETzqLMz5LwUknlmEjxvqQ35zUxER1F+X6oHjFIsxXN5QrEHXTsaZj+B85nkA8tixmbGqR5i/gZbzOwtUGaV4uuhI8vDNJk2opgKkBcy5sLkQ75QjRd60IL7FFHEZS12PYastmOY9WU+Y8wSPN8yryzYCI4F0Zxm5sF1zjgKLTnJYyeSB+/FXruTdaELMGMMEhjoqtvBky2FJRtJDDZIE2mtUxTe/7bkMXRMsii4gjMvWkWMUr9sIA8g5iFVBhdMenSChCTBaw3UuadhS/Ron2cb7H10L6QZuBO5BRyd6QyOQ45V3T5CXq+d6Gy1vd35OHYkpzemK1/tIpbjXUN0jSiACllx7/p3oygIwkm+0Dqoc6Jq9M/UuTbSW0I1aDDZJG9CEz2WPymTnVzSboTvS/mm9ouoXE2THrZjebYB7IyZr+zScfb6CxMtj6ynoeJhiUU0xekkez+TRaG8uQTgzRpXN0vgdnvX69F3LHEr9EsW0ZFcmQmikC4M5pxbEn1zudZaFbyN7TgaUmP6bMxutBalENZ8dSLoBPNFmenudhUgFySJvOCKNvcb5JBmjQCxDTS3ZfxSQphokGaZhMgLnc5R0+0K3hhNLP9FFm9WbJj0qlOQkK72WlmAQKyIi1UgDQSRe//8DPFIE0a/z2DDNJ0G5ZfBF8ZpDFpQyMzD2umWxQm8S3K2hxbNGHBrVqeZgyyU2T4ySBMRqRpPOTG2Yy7ZSddR8oLk5FhM3tNtRSLyfPd7GGSXdr2PWhGAVI2RQkQk2vqqU4xmdK27YtjicXk2UilNmlATIRlS5JWhdWJeYjJvHWcZQs9k/LSzBJMrqnnRr2i2l1vFkNO79ZAax8m7Ty80Bq1JiYOFMvalV00zbgUkAtJGj4EOAnZyS+LeUeedyeY1m1IWkwEZZqRlImPpaxxoLNgMkNqNj9Rh6JYDHHuY/xYAZIck3eins93npi0dQpwWtEVSUnqmaCpAOmPwkwmDcH4UcL0JpT90Jl0pGlugMnMrBcS1PUYqZlMy5tJgGyGrAndgc8CFHd7bt1q1NqYPButogI1aes84KyiK1I2pgLkSCrC4wXkbO9T4F/IjvtCJGRGIhv7icAWFGPjvXABeUZhYk2SxrTYxEy2A4XIrIcp72IGaSYXXYkcORYJj2nIncn1WJPdIpkRn4TFC69FOZgYAwyMT9J8mAqQXZzPu9BOWHf34jnIFO9cT9otUbTAK5EQyXuEZ9Kh58miBmlMnJb5MXUrPoTGFSCmbWgE3MBfv0fPpqVYPjNIswT1m2Hniclm44VQX2JiHt80mK5juLG4z6R66/tMavXJjwF/RPF2f5apdsEsTDqrp7SYbJZLI0AmYzZyGZYi7zwwKbeZBIg72jWJ8WLJjsmz0YP6Pd95MtYwXaPEU8oNUwHibhjzO86bQfAI3Q2AtE+aSsXQQbk3wsRbZdrNaCbO1erl8dak3GZxpAiVDZmT61mJNsK0U12z0FqUw2eYrWmuHp+kuTAVIK4ayq/ymog6c7/J3jjnmrReauNYoaB8/QxGri7iSLvW85JBmkwhJ1OyNGa7a18uuB558przuUZda9E+TMBsp3mmiHgNQjdmXptHFFyP0jEVIOOcT79AeA/p9vxRrfoiC6IB6asWydrxSXLBtPN+O2X+Lxqk2Shl3lkwKXMGzTUDcf25/ZLmCoTVzJgMkLYuuhIlMcogzZaF16JkTAWIG9Roe9/5Z53PE3znd3U+i1r8NQnekgcmEdWmAh+kzN8kZO66mC3k54mJC/knaa7Fz+tQZM0dgFtormBYzYpJMLRNaA1fUiZxTUYirUbLYCpA7nA+9/ZdczOyb/4eiiz2a7RR63Ln+0eyVzGQrQrK149JR/o06TvSt4ExMWl6oE6vTL5jkObewmuRL99EI+IJKKjUe2gN6n/oOY46LOkwMVjoSTFrpWVzD/F++nqgPrTt6I1euLOptbo6h+BAJbNIrmoyCSjlHkk3NSZlMNogGFeP32Us5/8MyvhvxjKSsJFBfcr4/U1IElAqS9CdRmI34uvbCAGlQB3mV8TX921awy/fQ8S31SRcdNNgug9kNrAKwSPtE9CGrJ9SWfN4BW3Wei0gfV7sA5xSYP57Ybbr/a6M5VwOHB2TZgcUVndMxrJM+JFBmudJv+5TL2xo2vKZj8JhHxqTblX0Pl9fdIUK5iritRYboaWA+4uvTnPRG1lHZdFnJpmBfESxTsxeNahD2rUPP6MMyro4p7KiGEbFhXzU8eMS6mJC0pC2rcBuNM8MBLTGYfI+j6d8LxN50wet+8a19TXK9+nXFiQRIN3ADwqqx96G5eflHM2kvHnABjmVF8YtBvX4kuKs65JiBUjjCxDQ2pPJ+3RLvSqYI6di1tY/16uCrUxSAfIFZi43kjAIzW5MOvS8NjR2IBVLXJmvU1znfbBB+d3ArwoqPw1WgDSHANkV83f6zDrVMS8WRv2SSVsPrFMdW5akAqQbeID8VFkdyOrGpNx/51Smy7cMy72T/D0Sb4mMHuLK/ph04XuLwgqQ5hAgAE9h/k6fT3O7ej8Ss3bOo/xQAf3RYLFU5459KMf/VBoB0o3MjLO6hu6BvAqblFfULvsrDcu/l/zsyXdFceZNyv1uTmXmhRUgzSNA1sHMqtE9nqPY/V49gG2RsPpeznl3oIGtaVsvo1gnsR1okHgZ8kbdDSxVYHk1dJMsfvF2TvrLE5aTVoB0A29S8bialGVRp2xa1r9SlhPHosjSyqQOY6l4SU7DEOACw7K6gaszlFUUVoA0jwABOJFk7/R85FcvL28MQ4F9kUGKV81UxCxgKGYL6u7xJfAb8lPJLwccgizDxgeU19ACZE3nmjcSlpNFgLjH3WhEYTIjGQ78FbXNNP8xFGstMgK5CTGtz3PAYZg9eB1oIf5ctIPetIyXSR7Fr2g6MVOL7FivChbEnsS3+SYa011LJ2aGGkHHu2jP2V7AykSruAagGc+eSGhdjSwmw/IuSo20KfJYnqSds9Hm1mPQgDhqZtILDQRHAgcho56b0G8VV04uAsT0IetGnZrpAu7SyEf+FJKpWjYk3v3BAeiHinOoOAf5mnoH+fKagfaxDARWBNZHe1uSMB+NaB9JeF1SdgduJNnaTjdaZH8TGQFMQ79BP+TKfCUkPJKOcD5B0fzGJLwujkFoxjUo5Fg45vxAzJ/fOUhgTkn5+SXJBlBh9EIxMEzaF/ad6drAAvQMZGm3iTPEpPQFHiS9tsClGzlznYHub1/UPw0g+ZroD6n4SsubNO+yn+nIi/QsJ5+BzpFlnWhpzGK25EI3yV6gpZxr4rb2+zGZgXwHjS6SzBryOn6SsD1Z2Bv9fmW30Xt8QnIha0oSHXG9jytyavOODdCWJEdR+6wWxmzXdllH0QvZO5FMq1DGkcsMpCj3Ae7i19QC8l4SbfLbFS3+lsWpFLf2EcSNSN+dJlxuHryNFt5MYpZYLEmYCnybStygVudutGCfNm5QwxImQAb4jrDz/mMxtE3/H076l/KvMks4nw8iyV50iMhu4HjgDwWXE8RdwMYUE1s+ittQRMlmctduaS5mo30Qh5KPerDReRatb95W32qUQ17TpL0Slmuiwjrbd80wdHOKmOZ9Sq0L+3rQBziD4lVanwP7l9Qmq8Jq/KNIV0FehiIT9gUltCnoKHsvxi6YLXQXcXwCnE7B2zJOR/6Z5qes5Fzg5BTlmgiQKwOu64GcOSYxm4ur/3nkv8s9K6uhuBZp70vY8SXweyqhi8vACpDGP8oSIC7roL0KSS2X0hzzkGppb8rZ4+ZnIeSKycTnXtZjDpr5fJfa6LGZiLNiWQw99Nc4lfhtTPr5yL76EWR7nBQTK6w7Cd//sDCyfT6SdPGHJ6DO4gLyc5RYBMNROw8kfXjfeWgh81pkWjkjn6oZ8wDaL9QMXAl8P4d8dkQmms1CL5IbwuTBosAeaJ1zOzQDz4PxwOPAo8DtSMPQCGyGTI6/ByyfQ37dyGHjA0jV/ygFvd+mZpBj0U0t2omeiQB5BLNATysj9yAbopH78sj0rR8ShtPRAzQa+aF60Cl7fop615NVUFjQDVCbV0AziQHo/s5wjk+A91F7n0R7KNpB92xpbnqjqJwbAWuh93h5ZJre1zk6kUGNe0xHz/sHzvEhWo9t5EGhy4po/XED5+9hyGKqP+q73Hd6GmrnNCQYR3uOt4BJZVc8ijsop7MxUWE9XkI9LBaLxRKDqRlvIwXjacQdtq3O5mhkMw2ZF2fZwPQ7qgcEO2euXWtzLJXfKom7810818UFdhuCdmw/gTaXzXE+H3bKT+pAcyPgT0hF+imyuJrp/P0QWm8bapjXJagNXhPYDmTififa4DoLGYCMAs5CaylJedsp55oU11pi6EvFfLZITGYgT5RQD0s1z1N9D7JYalkBkoxFqXhKnoP5e3gDld/4+Ih0ByF1R9Q7Nx7p6ePYAPNF4WlI7x+HK0DmIMExEMVaj8r7AIN8/VgBkgJTK4uZzmFpT/wL9V31qESb8hWaeeyPFrUPotaU3c9AKoYm8wnvFH+KrA1d3kALrpORq4sdnc9l0ILsN9H6WRgfo3U4l9FoVuA681vDybMXWqO7FunrTXzm9UJrAdeiNVB3ZvUBsizqouKDr5kMFSw50iozkOFo4b5Un/sF8hzV92D3DHnZGUhytqTye71pkN4bHOyukDTrUwlfPAsJJj99gIs8eX1EvDrrj8BJaAE4iNXRArebZ5wPqks8aW+l0qbhAWmXIr1rdjsDaQFaQYAMRPtIupHr6FbAXQOZCvyTbOtQVoCk4y0qv1mcI0JvaIIwNZHXF9UxEXn1QN6Y3bRHGdc4nP08+cVZRnkFSDfwH4pxwWQFSAOQdYG7FQSId/GyVQRInlgBko5fYDZqX5KKx4KJBBs8rObJ64uQNF5+4kn/TKJaBzOQyq7zOTFpvQJkFmpfEVgBkgJTSb40ciQ4IuT7tZHFxtdIf3oR+UXMazZaLYCRpTG4ElkzAexD+J6sfajsNr6e4A7a657n3pA0XrxCYwOyb+xz3cyD1jZMd4LfT3oX80PQ2tE7SBB9idZKvu18PzvkOpfDkYC5zfm/A/nxetzJaybab/JvpB4Mojfa+X4NmtG7rugnAI8hYwevirCTSgTBLX159aES4fHdiPo+GtOuUjiGijWGf5axIhIaQTOFpFPNVpiBeFUNdgZSi52BpOdaKr/bD0LSeP3ChUXyu8qT5kSDcodSfc+6jGscjtftUJRA8s5ATk5Z1prILDmsTzkNDYCjZiBuh/wcEnq3Ep7fxgHXdyLnpHH921tI2Lk8RrDqcHPfdUN835/nnD8rpD25YNrBuy4nbkeV8vJXtPN5JrL9/ieanm6GdJ3txFCkHrBYiuAiz99BDgBXQtHpQIvtYV4dvGqgPxPfqY3zXR8Xv3shYAcn7zuQJdaHSF02Fa0RpvEzNzHFNb1RZ78kGrGfiH6npZAHh/8iF02mYXOXQRE9v4vcHu2GZmXfRDOIu5GQ8bMA9Z8fAWciLxnDUJ+xFRVjh9WQEYLLKOfTv7fFNat+3/n0C60RvuvrihsO0u+DaiUqjv28wuJs59wdCctp5hlIBzKL9NbVzkBqsTOQbHhnuH5/byd5vvtlRB5PE/+eRR0bRuR9JNGj/aDDdAby44h0YfzYc/2hAd93IlWWmyZuBtKN1ph2SlGXfoQP2nugzr4bCRkX1+DAL5TucM6fQGUW5dJBJWR1kLVabpjuA3FHLH6LiR+gH+RttHHJ5Sa06LcejcH6yDnbN4BV0fpMXyprNu+jF/NR5BPry5j8OtFLtK7nWIfaWOnXO0cUZxO90cvleDRyAY1kdvPVZ1cksDZEa1YdSF/8CRK696Lp8NyIMkyd/a2HLHPKZF/0crv6/blob8TNhtcPQCaeO6HR2RJI3/wl8vX2MHpuX8qtxsVwMZV9IIdR/ey4Gzyj9n5AtWO9W9HmvyR8EnL+X0iAuLyORtavOddMcsr+Gq1FJN3hngZ3EDeWYK/KC5D38R0T5HkpmmkkJSoA3nw0G9oAWBa90wuozCDW9JwDxVsf79TjL1Rb5g1HhgqTqMxQ6oprlurdBduBbko3EhZelnXOz0pYTt4zkBWBewzy9B5zkXTvF5HvkIR5Rh2mOsrjPdd4VRMrU7tTPOiYT62e1I+pu/ERhnUOIs0MZH+qY6HMRKGNTTkC81HxrUhN0agsRmVn+udUBoHed+e/MXlc70mbh1kuSM3t5rmA4NG+F2+I16JmIB1UFqGviEjneh02nYEU5UXaO1tyf5MOKp4C3PDSrhXdHUioTEczDnd2s6fz/X0F1fP/Y7oGMsX5HOw5tz2wHPrh/aEpXYuGsuMJeFkTTft2SHhdTzTjKjNcblLcDm4t5FU3SqXg8gzxM6uPkLXPf9Fi7PtUDCTqxQFo0dedecxAQieukwTdy8uBCzE3/9wNCeRGmT37mUjFJ9YSVKyIvOrSK2Ly8OrF182nWlXuba5Fv3sYvYkeoOXFYCrWah9GpJuLBhimZBnVd6HBoDvbHYvu6dcEh8zuBl50/nbv1abO54tIWL+IZhxrOudHOJ+Fr3+YdvBvAltQHSPbnTrfQa1pnTvSLTvGhJdrqF6oex24GjmGnIBuzCJIqq+HFsHc3bMXxOT9JcF7Xn6NpsMu+1Gt2suLJVHncTeV3/pNZOb4LhL4g9BIZRv0YIXtSPbyFsFxL64hnX+hrByEOkN3oDMVqaCi3Gl4uYjq9sxAnduD6MWdg37LzZA6dmkn3TLo91qf9GajRXIRlQ57X+RU0N2BPYn4tUfvyHQXNNpNqi3wM8zzd9z92TTm+7zwqsjiXDEl6avS/FY9kcHRUVT63TnI/ctnSIAsSbARzvMopvraSPC4C+jPOp/Pof55Y6QuXNdzXUNwHOpwJ6LFueuoTLWCdsXu5Xz3VsJy8lJh+fO5FbNIXGuhxai+Cevt8mtfuXkuontVWN1oRuGqMb4bc+3qZFPLXOMre0SGvExVWIdQHXlxItIPm7Kvr5znkGo1jAFIaHivSeL9tmzcjW9TUIfh1jloFBuENyLkX3Ooj/e3+0NEuk400PH+zkWpsBbxXHtSTNoPMVdhLZWwHqCQ1N7n6hvU9kk/J/g32ZPq5/FVNPMY7Pv+Yuf/j53/l0tRz0IYQMUSy3v4VVcuFzjfJx195yVADvRdk8ZiIg1lCpBuZBY5LOqinChSgASpGL9PtfD4DI2+TOmJ3Hx7r49b/wE95+M81y0gnWvwMvDuTL/S8/fIqIs8rItGve51FxCu5uuPVGVXoEFWEKd48nqfWoMSNx9vXYsWIJ1U1lqiVGredEUIkN5U1mIejkj3W4J/ky4qA/LeSOX2uud7d5/Oy0iV5T7zhWO6BjIdLRzdjR668WjlP8gWvReV6bSJ2qQIun3/R408m5mfUm3y14xM8/3/A2Tl4j6b45CdfFxMCy/fo1qw/pX49R/Qc36x5/8OtHO4EfHuTHcHKm8RvAchiFfQQrdrlfcj9Fs/j0a6/0YWeW+jdbC70awwrLO/lIpqZ0WnLqejTv9opHYbixw9Po18cRXNAuAF5++tCXe1tC7FrsksQ2Ut5t6IdGHCfwx6foejwVtPtPbpMh7duzWpqK8aYv9HGvoiXdzGJA88lNcMZFXfNZ9hvlEoC2XOQD6kGKdyQRQ5A1nT893hVHwkdaNZb5qY714VazfJBhDb+q59Kjp5XfG384QUeWyJ2Q7pbiQg/HtPvOyB1hqi8rgfrc9535Ui94F4/XgdHJLG+3wXMQPxWm2eF5JmS6pn3f7fxN2rcqrzeYjv+xud866q7KSEdWwJ8jTj9ZvvzkcLUH6fMnlSpgC5ODp5rhQpQFw97UFUC4+3MY9a58c1L+/GbObhxetosBtF0WtUtqJSz3lUjACS0hMtyl+P1E/T0MxkEpqpXI1mK3E70EGDt/ORsc1MpLEYi9Yh9/Gk29pT9yIFSF/Upm6nPr9GI/nF0SD3GvTcTaI4AQIVj8YzUb/grrMuC/wKqdC+IPw3cQWHu5F0Zd/3rkrTXRtLYubeMuQpQIZS+TH9xztooS8sZkFayhQgx+aYdxxFCpBByCR8jufca6SPgOnqgPM6ojZe1htvnBAbRCmctanunP3Hr6gIqqIEyBZU9u+4h/eZf4ZqzYlfgOzq+e6LgPw38eVdRgTZ0lQg9WA8snT4BxqdeVkZLfq9h3Sxe2FmpdVITK53BXKgG40Gb0FrZy69qb1npqTxsRRFT+q7nykK7xrkFfWqRBPwGlr8PxfNRmYjq77/ocHLXzCLipiFx5Ea/QakUp+HZh3PotnDFshDb9iaptck9+mA71+k4lX5Y4KFTMtTlC+sYcDfkcljWL7vIR1uFsqcgRyYY95xFDUDmUd1dDrv8RDVQsWUdUPyy3I0ogBZjIoV1QTMXaJbLLnRaC/GKLIHpQriI2QJ8ms02zgUTf+9ZQ1HfpWuQ5ZAcfEBLNnpQUVv/yhaD3HVitsgz85HJMzTvyHsTap172lIOxsqkhOp6NEvxD6vFkupdCF30964BO5xYco87QwkHv8ayFdIFdOBLHwm+75PutYz2Hf9mAx1bVT2pOK76SvMFrctFksBDEBebr2dzgK0oJUUK0Di8QuQ3Xzfb0/FeWc3sp5LalHiuqpxrx+Uvrp1ZzO0x+IM4P+QLr1ez4HFUkUrL6KbMh25Z/k/z7kOkrl3tqTHrx66H/iZ5/9OZF4atgM6iId9138zXdUaguWQSvVXSA27uee7U7AxvC11xAqQCjf6/k9jBud32FaKKV0LciHwN8//A5FXA9Pf0+9M8Jg8KlUnPkdm5zPQbGoCcp64PelDvFosuWAFSAX/prUJKfLwm841qh+lZuB4ql3hDEOb0UysjW6gOvjZFsghaDPyMFKnDkBGL0sgD7oP1LNSFgu0rgD5J1JLmXqgHQr80Xfu0RTl+v0QHUQyJ4CWCguQO/xXPOc2RRu+4phHbZTHs9BaV5CTPz/Dkcoozq2/xdLWNJoZb16sinzg/BW5Pn4EbSb6AO0FmYc6ki7kDmIfKs7OQKO7l1KU+z7a5OO6uF/I+f9vaKfpOPSbL4I8nw5FsRNM41u0G9ORq/pnqZj7Hog8DPwp5tpbkZXdbzznjgd+iNzcjEIWeAvQvV8auTHZiIojxjSDCIvF0uR4Yx0kPUaT3gcTaPe732VB1PGz4GxqKNoK6zS0WH03Emivox2tU6n2UdWNrKS+RALzJSSg70A+k+L2XKQJabsh1a7HF2C26bMDucj2OqlLcjxiUEZWdg4pu6uEstud06j93Utxg25pbE6j2s+MyTEfmUsumkP5O1JtStoMAsTUI2vcEeZt1CWNAAEJDK8gm4F5gKmtkFBM0o5x5BcvPAorQOqHFSAZaVUV1u+QD6wdkdnjqkgtMRjt3u1A6pEvkA+cJ9Au9LE5lX8PsBIKjLQDWkxfDK05TUGbv0YjD53351Rmq3MLUke5IYP7oVnPSOT3LIpH0X6KTVBwsa3Q87AYWpR3n4XRyKfQA0j1OD/XFlgsFovFkiN2BlI/7AwkI61qhWWxWCyWgrECxGKxWCypsALEYrFYLKmwAsRisVgsqbACxGKxWCypsALEYrFYLKmwAsRiaUy6610BiyUOK0AslsbEbmK0NDyNLkD6Io+2FyPnd5+gXcNzqOwcfgJ53z0EWLk+1Wwp9gfeRa5CniZb9MEg1iKZS5GTcy6/WZjj+7838jN2BfJQPAn5JJsBfIhc3x9LxelkkfRCUSL/hiIkjke+yuYhTwtvIs8OR5HNr5wpmyJvy0+hfmEOis0zHngIPUNrBlxnhXSL0gH8HL0kSTqbG+pQ11ZieWp9iL2ecxlWgFQTthN9oPN9J3Ak6hhNfq85yA39YgXUdQByTmlal24kVG4G1iigPpugEAqmdfkf8rjsclxAmrid6AeF5L1FHg3ycHdAGZ8CPXIupyW5kmSdjHscXI/KthB7EPy7DsqxDCtAqgkTID1QyIGgjsTk+Bh5Mc6LrYExKeviCrbfk5/W4zek87L8NZV+4pCA7+MESB/ky85/3RW5tEosjmaX/jL+mmMZLcuPiH4AZiBX4rN95xdgQ8hmJUyADIi6KCG9kQPEndCLfBxykHgxcp9uBYg6ub5IPZS2w+5G6qSROdTxcII7tDTHrZhFlYziLznU40jkbDWpAAE4N+C6GZgFKzPhpyF1LmIW11L0BD6i9od7BdiL2ml5f2B1pLf/RXnVbFmWo1YwP1Vi+ZtTe+9PLrH8ehAkQL5EAtV/fiZwn/Pd6Wjt7y6qY6X4j0+BpTLU7xBq48F4j7HAjcDfnTpdjgYCUQLnLtJ7Aj80It9utH53LRIy56IYNx8EpJvn1DeNAFkjpOwfpWyTn6cC8n42p7xbmu2o/eHeQq67LeWwH3oJpwP3AiuUWLYVIMHHRNQ5hb0HA1EIXr/wd4+rUtZtNcKF06PAxmi9MohFUQyb6SHXn5OiPkMIXxd9E9gy4tr1MAs0Z+qNN2h2+Hyi1gSzYki9fpxD3i3P76n94Q6pa40sZWIFSPCI2nQG8Q2kSvHnsQDFQ0lCT9QhBtXpd4QLDj/DUBuC8tkuYZ2CZmXdSDCYDjL/GJJHUgEStpi+juH1YfgDrnWjmefgjPm2BddS++MtV9caWcrECpDqYzowPGF++4TklTRw2c9C8vlbwnxAsU0+C8jrbcytioYRvGg+luQWZ1cF5JNUgPRBM0P/9X9PWBc/bwXkeX3GPNsGv8XJfMxHOpbmxwqQ6uNPKfMMUq/MB5YxvL4D7bHy5zGG9AvgYWsXBxhef2LI9T9IUZchBM/UkggQCF5Mn0j632j9kDrtkDK/tuMxakdglvbBCpDqoytlnt8Jye94w+t3CLn++ynrAzLffTMgz6cNr3894NpxaFNjGsLUYUkEyOoheeyXsk5nB+T1MQ284bvRKtZo9bFY6sUbaMSfhvvRCNvPTobXB80KZqENgWlZAFwXcH5jtHAcRRfBO8nvQtZeabg15XVe3kKeMPwcliKvTmDfgPNXod+uIWmkDnsxpFesR7kHoOnoI+ilnUzFLcPHaLfrJcgSZkjO5R+C3LTMAqYi65agBwk0Qr/Lqd/XwDtI57p8znWy1B/TkXkQc5ALDz8jDK/fNODc/WTXCNwScn7HmOvWCzl/T4a6PIFG+Fm5MODctiS3XtyGYBXjFUkr1MrshfZrnI3cjjyObLRnET6NNz2S2JX3Rh33w0hQJClnDnA12i1qyhWe6x/znL8kopxLfHkcTfjO2ykkc6UQZloZdNyVIN+sFKHCujkgz6yWMhDsBuPoFPmEqbCOyVi/U0PyjRtsLB5y3e8y1sdlakDe18Rcc3JInbIOnIL2hyRRYUH4YvqpCfO5LCCPoNlNW5OHoMgqQLYAPs+hvAnAuoZlXuG5bjqyPDnSoIzDneu/TfRmLrc+gw3r004C5JsBef4jY54AL/nynE06/1NhAmS3jPULMzONU2OFrZ98L2N9XJ4NyPvVmGtuCbhmFtk1KA8G5JtUgIAs0/z5jMPcwqwP0iqEvf8NSyOpsMrideJtxuchfzezItIMQVZjSVVa/ZG9vtfCZgp6YPyc7KQ/n4o12gI0iguqz08S1qUdeBDtQ/ByIHIVkpY1qVUH3Y5Gonnxecbrx4Scj3tew/ac+H/DtLwTcK4r5pqg2f4Ysq8NfJLxepeLAs4Nxdx6amdq/c19jXb4NzRp3Qmk5W5goYjvNwUW8fw/H3M9p+nDNAm4lIqKYAFa47jT+XwZuZJwWQrYHlmw+FUfywAnOEcSrkLtvMHJdzx64K4FtvKkG4rUZcOQ6uwXTt1nIU+kt1P9cu0J/Nmg/M2AJVFn4j/2StiWRqcb6anP8pwbjNqZdof2QQHnLk2ZVxhTMl4ftl4R569pkZDzWevjEjT4GYj8rSWpcx71mZxDHqDF9MepVSMfjvq8OIKMFm4h+LeyROAubHnVPUWwPBpR/Rbz+Am9kK7WP82cQvxU9YqA656ido/LkoSrl4IsOw73pZlP9h2rrabCArnVmOnLN61+uRNtXvPmNZb0s/kwFVbSDYR+VgnJ9zcx150Wcl1e7uHPCMl/yYhrgtYqHs6hLn8NyDeNCgs0q/XnNYd4B6+DCVbtb5uyHqXSjios0Au/MlIjfWp4zVzUib/vO78wsEGKOrgeRb18jmYVfsagRTY///H934kNqhXEV8BNvnObkc676dbUeke4kvxNLbMGO5odcj5OfTsw5PzMDHUxySdKMxFU5zzq4w/alYWb0XPmpRfxrpj2pHbj4UfkIyALp10FSFpmA/8KOD8iYT5RI6jHA87dRvAayVfU6nG7EtalXbgg4NwPU+RzoO//buSBNm+yqpfD1niC9od4CdtXkZdD07B8wgQeBAuLKIFTD2YRrBKN2xMSpL66guD3veGwAiQ5jwWcSzq9H0e4fvODgHOjIvLyz6DCdNjtzlPUWvscTDK3E31QzBQvjxB8z7KSZZEfZHwRRJxefVrI+bxiwoTlEyXYguoU1r4k5JGHl6DF9FWRajaIZan1INyNZrRNgRUgyRkXcG5wwjzGRnw3IeDcexHp/etEWTueVsY/C1mUWoEQxa7ULugGqRbzYHDG68MWy+MESJhKd3D6qlThtzYCCYgoARK28J6VwTnk4cVdTPcTNgvZj9o++FEU474psAIkOUEL+0njFAcJCZcg0+GodRr/1L8eu/mbhWuovX9J1Fh+66sphO+uzoqp48MwwtyDRD17EN55rZKhLl5WDTj3Ucw1XwacG5ZDXQbnkIefoFnIXgTPvPYPOHdFrrUpGCtA6kPUKDBI9xllsuhPb70XhzMNmUp72RqzznFxau36byC/xWU/WQN5hRlTxG3aeyXkfB7hVDtQkCo/r8Vc93rAuQGYW1CGUYTBSdBien+0WO5lNWrXTqeTzd9Y6VgBInqgPR4HA2eikeo9KKDOm2hU9jnq+CflUF7UBsUgohYYLck4P+CcyY7ffald2M5774eXrO5W1g84N4H4zXNfEKwy3ThjfQDWIngkHheuNUyorZuhLr3Ib1blJWwx3W+NFeSx90bijRwainYXIJugTWafoYf0SrSx7wA02twQuWzuQvbcA8ln8+W8gtNbwnkFeMZ37vvEW/X41Vevk08I0zCS+Dbz0zfk+pcNr/9fwLltya7yCXOHcl/MdS+FnP92hrpsQHpX8HEEOVjcimq1pH9GAk2mvoL2FSDDkDvnp4AjyN/DbhxNYaLXwvgX0xdHC+RhrAJs5DtX1OK5y7JoAJOGnQheCzPdFOpX84E6231S1gc0yw8adb+KFp+jeI9gVyq7knz90SUv315BvE3tYnoHFYONVahVCb4XcE3D044CZH00Zd4t5PtJ6EZejNyCHItUHPsB3yXbS2RpDP5NrZ46ajHdP/uYS7wH2Tz4WcrrglzrzEdrNiY8C7wQcP4PpN8PcijBC+hBi85BBAm1YYSHPoiiH+aRENMSNAvZ3fn8bsB3TWO628gU7cpkCNLx+t0GzAbOQ04O4xahlw24/qzIK2pdmZwXkXa1gPyj1Gb3+NL+OqYucbSiK5MgzvGVs4Bgy6UOal1p5LnQGRWRcD7hewjCCPPCa+KTyaReQWtIcaxAsAfsTzC3GlwppD4fkHzv08kheWVxZeKnN7Vu3mch9eL91N5nv3eDpqDdZiBnUevZcywKWPMzKq6mLa3PBVTf6w6C7fU3o9Yiqmj1lUsncm2ztmH6jQke+XYDJyUs+y7kYNTPj5ELINO+Yxha4wjyCXU85gYl7xE8C1kBzShN9z/tB/zeMG0WZlM7q+iNNg76BwUPosB1lowUOQMZiFwke/OfR3I/VkEzBDsDyYeyY6L740F8Qq1O/QJfmvEBabIQNQNxj5kooNOiIXkMAH6JOq2g6/3ByUxZErU3KM+n0f0Km7EvgrxHTwu5Po2r8mUi8nuT2l3dXoYhwR8XVyevGQgEv8vXBZwL2g/SFJTtzr2ebE3tKOUBgnW9UZS94G4pjguo9nq6NLK+c9U9vah1b38l2R0dxvEIMhnfxfm/D4pwdxIy/HgPqWIHIM/S2xHulmM86QcVn6OF6gep3dm+MVor/AR4EnW805HQWQEJlzArp1HAD1LU5xPUlqAB2OpoF/f7yMruEzRLWhxpGPyzuK/RbCqtS38T3kauj7yCzW9IMIV84rNbKHYG8hNqJf9vU+RzTEA+dgaSD2XPQHqhXf5hI+Og2UHem8+CyjgCCYeg6H1JjkkE7wdJyiZoN3iWurjHU4TPpEw5L2Md5iIjmp7UaiXynIGAFuuj6hLk5LNpaKc1kMEB59JEkIsLCWppHuZSuxlwZyqjeb+frMfILzJfFP9Fg6ftSb747fIRsA3wYg71eRoY6XymxR04bUOtBVxSfkYlbklSpiIT3tuQCjtsk2Je3Ex0P3NFweUXSjsJkMkB5wYnzGM94FuZa2JpJC6iOpZHXxQXvJNac8syFs9fQmonUGe3M5qRJIlb80/kJuPlHOv1AZohHkYyZ3/daGPixsBR5OdV4fdIGL2UoB63od/FaxxQ5GZQUHvD1GRvU7up1ZKBIlVYO1E7fUyinhmAfPYETUOtCisfylZhudzpK/MypLbxnptKfjEx0tALzYguQ6PmKWgEPRMFHLsL+DnRkf3yogOtHZ2F1kE+RdZU85x6vYlG3seQj9PDOLYE/oY64y+REJ2N1kEeQmtHQXtQyiLone4GflXHOuVCOy2iP44ecG+bv41GRnGjgGXQC7FWMVWz1JkL0EjfZWtqY3zcgPTl9WIu8vxblPffJHSjjvmhelfE4TGC4/SEMQ9Z0t1O+IbiPAlStc0Hri6h7EJpJwEyDQkB787VTqRvPgZ1EH6fU13IT9LRVDYrTUWjvjJGenmzHgp+Ncg5Fvb87R5+NkS/zRTU9qDPz4E3YspeCJlMB5Xp1iXIA+2+aOE6qvwxxLsEj+J/Th5dzv9d1HYsZe39sLQePwo4dy/xji0tCSl6J/oqTp5B08mpyELkHmSWODYgzSw0dffvYm4WFdZnAXnncbwcUaZL2E7iPI60+xy8/CYi/zdzyN/SOMyjsiZSNL0JtmDzm4c3Je20iA7wDjKrC4r7PBDpvXcANqXWtcAUtI7yEMHeSi3NzaWExwO3sw9LWvakNuT1ROCOOtQld9pNgID0nlsiYWLKvUj94+p8H6O++nBL/nxO8IauebSArtpSN34acO4SbIyfpqcTece8DKkovqJi1fIx2g18OvlsxGokHiHYpNmixXO/qiFIqFiam7JUWNtT+zzNoxzLNIulEB7BCpAwtqH2hQ9yvW1pbuZSvADpjQam/ufpigLLtBiyAlJFfYGmgh8gN+tp07UTj2AFSBg3Uv2yf0o+lopdnjxdX2pLAH9Ee4umICvB0cDlxM96l0C+sV5A7kpmA+OA/yDrsbiQBF5WQ0Ygz6H3ZA5a9H0LdbA/Jf6d2QBtyByNjFSmo01y52EWNraLfH+ffZDL9C+R4cv7Tl2Wd753HTLeZlC3NHSieDF+4TGbiqWfxYBeKJBM3jyMTOAOQruGg8zkkqRrJx7BCpAglkKdp/eF/0tOeXd58lwXdYDjqO1g3OObEXl9D1kMRlml3UO8l4WF0I71OO+03ejdCaIHcG5MHnOJ3zDXRT6/T09qBwHeYwqyovyQ4gTISsj9TFD5pxZQXkuzBbKvz5Me6KH8Y07p2o2HsQIkiN9T/bLPJzjAVBq6PPkehgY1c4Dr0Qh/f+A4FNfiU8Ljs3/HqVc3cndyIppxfBO5O3naU86DhLud70Azc+/I+N9ov9N+Tp3ORnHfP47Ix+vq/k3kqmRbpz7HIq/B7vdRjku7yOf3OcuTz0dOfbZGG4ZPQ8/9VLTemVaA9EBGNFeh3e9/co4LkVuUMGH6akS9LSGcRv4CZCl0Q36eU7q86Yc6ozfQVNl17XAe1aoA1xlc0O72J9D028tpwAS06e58tKdjBpri/5hatcXCaIT5GTIMeBa5/b6bYAHyXeAmpOabjV6y+9EgwGWwU2aYe5PdnTYdE/J9ozKQWlv9PM0suzz5zkJ7jNYMSRvWWQ9A978bdVRhblWu8JTlD8XrciTVHf/wiLoPDDn/LU8e9yKdv59+yMW6K5DDYu90kf33GU5lcfxDgsMurE717O22kLyi6EmwgIg6JhD9G7cV66DRy+dUbvYNVI/WLiY8EM1pnnQD0ChqFOpoZyI/P0EP/j9QZxgk4W9Oka4obkIznwtRR/p7p9wvqA69mUaAuJ3HK8hH1G+QrrqbalVhJ5UX91YU+e2f6OX5gGAB8ggSeucgoXs2uidTqN4TcxHqDLoC8rgdjRybLWbK36l9VjbNMf8uX95Jw9SCRtNeNU8YS3jSBbka6UCDOnfmsVKKuoCiDHaj+z00It1wKrOmsPevi+y/zx891x8cke7PnnS3pSgnqQD5FHlzsFDZVfkAGm3uhDqbe6h2g7Ea8np5B5qOjvAcS3nS9UId3alIt7sHmobPR/suvKzgXL81ujFnevLsSpGuKCYh9yh+/Htu0gqQ56ge7S2OZgWPe87t6qT1b4BzzQonB5Q5IODcvlTUCi5rO+dO96VdAgnO/wTk08gcTu1Lf3vOZXR58n4pZR5uh23ildeNcTIj4Lu1PHX5d8q69KOyXnSfQfrHnbTTCQ4y1UX23+dhKjMdf/ArL14nmbelKMdUgCxw8l8mRRkty4roxznEMP0VJFdhLe+UcWzI90MwU02Zpsube9DM7FiCfUu5pBUgQbOzF6i4AAf4l5N2ZEDa8ZivgQx38vGvIz2KZlRene5xTtpdaCwGUxvAaCE0wwiylJlG/gONLk/+F6XMYyJmHZf/8Ku6DvZ895OUddnQk4eJocE/POnXCfi+i+y/j+umZ0xMukU9Zd2WopxOpI6+H83mJyJh+jVaL3oUvS+mceybmqQmih+iH+h81DldQf7+9MciVZZ/+3+zcCj6fc5Bi2t3IHXWwznlHxTQaCbVsxLXXPHDgLQfAWsEnF8ZdSibobWahVEoVaidPZ2HrF32Aq51zn0fCZW0AZCKYl90P2ZTGZEPIlyX/jPyX7fzMjnFNT2oVn8mYSGqvSZ41Ytpnfl5303/QCeICSHlBzE5cW3EYOczLkjclJT5uyxAz4iF5AKkG6lBDkcLcT9B1gUnkq7j6ECxkfdBaq9FUUfYzF6CP0WWMashYXIQat+tqMM1iacdFksazBxMugvqCyJTVdgYWe1MQqPFV9Ei+hIELybfiswsj0QCZEM0kzqHWo/GjUJvghd6vZyCYp4Xiek98dJB5Z6+SLB7jDCm+f73Dga6U9TFj8mekyRlpvl9TOsBev8W0J5unHInTUc9F43ozkdWFacgq5wtkBfbJPwFqXpOQ0LoEzRKnJSiXo3G28j+/XfAGcAvkDmi61fJ9YXTp/bSzCqUsc7nCtSOyJanlmORqmNTqkN8bhWS/zw0qzoVWcu4arUrUtS1EZiMDB7CIsfVGzdQ0yAUMTFLFDtvONm0IQm8M4rFDdJ7Zx0mM5Y0THHqEjdTG4AVHrmR9Yd8AS18dyPVh58ZVOJLB/FdpO8/xcnrU6RKadYb3JNagTAXqXug2lrFVS9tUZ2cXdHIPwvuwuaPfee3Idhixp3xjPOdj9oEehESggcgj6MvIJPiRuMNNMB5Bw1M5lLxd3YXlah5jSo8XNzF5VXJpt591fN30DtrwuvoN4RaY5cg3J3jM9HAqghGO5/DiO5zVi6o/LYk6QxkR7Rh6V6kS++NOo9uZAbq52mk5jrLuaY/6jjdUe6rTp77IL3zWuiFbtYZyFLIrPZu53MissI4EL08Xgulu9CawelopjAGjeb3dK7NIkRuR4L5MDT6exytaxyE7P79QuRuZFV3I+pIByBBNpBwldsXyGT5B2gk67fKahQep9pCrVm5E1kWdiLV4WmRqcN5CZngL4lUqr+lduAQxxxkLLI7mqUuhwRyECshFSlo4TnMZX5WHkfmv53IkOP6kHQ7FFS+xYBVkSCYgKbVE9Gi+k4h6TvQg/4xeug+o9qKaGnUqU5CC32PI7XYzYS/II1shdUPjczfQQJjDhK01xJsfbI26rwnoPY/gV6CvxBuhWVqtTUIqRnd/TrPoA7oFIIXKn+Jdg7PRpZaf0cC5GXC78VIKvsJ/JZOlgpdVCx/zkiZxwB0L93fO87abX3C78mvPPV5gWhT0/4EbyYcSWV/xwOEbyR8jIpZa9iMp4vsv89qVPZ+vUdw24dS+Q3TWmFZLJacWB29iDfVuyINThfZO0iQCtLrr+t+tLa2HxqYHYcCY71P+GADpHl4xJPPDOSk8MfIau0naNBwHxp8hPmeOsmTx9vIFcq2zuF3ZXJmRLu6yOf3+acnnw+RscFWyPDnt2gAO4HKjv7bMpRlsVgycjJ6EcNmoBbRRT4dJCgYWpiXB/+xWkQ+A5CaxySfKOeOv6HiHj3omI/Um1FWUl3k8/v0ptrHl//4ChmK/BcrQCyWurIwMnp4k2Tuw9uRLvITICBDjR+jjnA8Umm5Lt0fQO5zooSHl5Fo4+lrSLU5F6l5Xkeq130J97vlsrqTxztIFTsdLWqfj9mGui7y+306kGHHg0jF7rpz/zuVtT/X6eJtGcuyWCwJ6Iv8ah2H9iMsQE71LBaLxWKJZDCadcxEI9Y96lobi8VisVgsFovFYrFYLBaLxWKxWCwWi8VisVgsFoulEfh/ufIpUELZoPUAAAAASUVORK5CYII=\\n\",\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 64,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"topic_clouds['50_officer_police']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"The same can be done for the document-topic distribution using [generate_wordclouds_for_document_topics](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.generate_wordclouds_for_document_topics). Here, a word cloud for each document will be generated that contains the `top_n` most probable topics for this document:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 65,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:46.573561Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:46.573082Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:55.532297Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:55.531909Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"['NewsArticles-1032',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1036',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-104',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1043',\\n\",\n \" 'NewsArticles-1048']\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 65,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize import generate_wordclouds_for_document_topics\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"doc_clouds = generate_wordclouds_for_document_topics(\\n\",\n \" new_doc_topic, doc_labels_bg, topic_labels=new_topic_labels,\\n\",\n \" top_n=5, width=img_w, height=img_h)\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"# show only the first 5 documents for\\n\",\n \"# which word clouds were generated\\n\",\n \"list(doc_clouds.keys())[:5]\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"To display a specific document's topic word cloud:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 66,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:55.535671Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:55.535240Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:55.544809Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:55.545198Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [\n {\n \"data\": {\n \"image/png\": \"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\\n\",\n \"text/plain\": [\n \"\"\n ]\n },\n \"execution_count\": 66,\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"output_type\": \"execute_result\"\n }\n ],\n \"source\": [\n \"doc_clouds['NewsArticles-1032']\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"We can write the generated images as PNG files to a folder on disk. Here, we store all word clouds in `topic_clouds` to `'data/tm_wordclouds/'`:\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 67,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:55.548565Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:55.548095Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:56.045729Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:56.045303Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize import write_wordclouds_to_folder\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"write_wordclouds_to_folder(topic_clouds, 'data/tm_wordclouds/')\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"### Interactive visualization with pyLDAVis\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"The [pyLDAVis package](https://pyldavis.readthedocs.io/) offers a great interactive tool to explore a topic model. The tmtoolkit function [parameters_for_ldavis](api.rst#tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.generate_wordclouds_for_document_topics) allows to prepare your topic model data for this package so that you can easily pass it on to pyLDAVis.\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"code\",\n \"execution_count\": 68,\n \"metadata\": {\n \"execution\": {\n \"iopub.execute_input\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:56.049783Z\",\n \"iopub.status.busy\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:56.049329Z\",\n \"iopub.status.idle\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:56.051951Z\",\n \"shell.execute_reply\": \"2022-03-11T09:05:56.051513Z\"\n }\n },\n \"outputs\": [],\n \"source\": [\n \"from tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize import parameters_for_ldavis\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \"ldavis_params = parameters_for_ldavis(new_topic_word,\\n\",\n \" new_doc_topic,\\n\",\n \" dtm_bg,\\n\",\n \" vocab_bg)\"\n ]\n },\n {\n \"cell_type\": \"markdown\",\n \"metadata\": {},\n \"source\": [\n \"If you have installed the package, you can now start the LDAVis explorer with the following lines of code in a Jupyter notebook:\\n\",\n \"\\n\",\n \" import pyLDAvis\\n\",\n \" pyLDAVis.prepare(**ldavis_params)\"\n ]\n }\n ],\n \"metadata\": {\n \"kernelspec\": {\n \"display_name\": \"Python 3 (ipykernel)\",\n \"language\": \"python\",\n \"name\": \"python3\"\n },\n \"language_info\": {\n \"codemirror_mode\": {\n \"name\": \"ipython\",\n \"version\": 3\n },\n \"file_extension\": \".py\",\n \"mimetype\": \"text/x-python\",\n \"name\": \"python\",\n \"nbconvert_exporter\": \"python\",\n \"pygments_lexer\": \"ipython3\",\n \"version\": \"3.8.10\"\n },\n \"pycharm\": {\n \"stem_cell\": {\n \"cell_type\": \"raw\",\n \"metadata\": {\n \"collapsed\": false\n },\n \"source\": []\n }\n }\n },\n \"nbformat\": 4,\n \"nbformat_minor\": 2\n}\n" }, { "path": "doc/source/version_history.rst", "content": ".. _changes:\n\nVersion history\n===============\n\n0.11.2 - 2022-03-11\n-------------------\n\n- updated `Arun et al. 2010 `_ topic model evaluation metric to better follow the paper's instructions instead of the implementation adapted from the *ldatuning* package (see `this discussion `_ – many thanks to `@hkimber `_)\n- updated `Mimno et al. 2011 `_ topic model evaluation metric's default argument values to be the same as used in the original paper; added an optional argument to include word probabilities into the calculations\n- added an example with topic model evaluation for the `AP and NIPS datasets `_\n- added a `developer documentation `_\n\n0.11.1 - 2022-02-10\n-------------------\n\n- show better error messages when dependencies for optional module ``corpus`` are not met\n- fix a SciPy deprecation warning\n\n0.11.0 - 2022-02-08\n-------------------\n\nThis release brings several major API changes to the text loading, text preprocessing and text mining parts of\ntmtoolkit. All these features are now in a single sub-module, ``corpus``. This module contains a ``Corpus`` class which\nholds ``Document`` objects. All text processing and text mining operations can be performed on ``Corpus`` objects. These\noperations are implemented as a functional API in the ``corpus`` sub-module.\n\nIt is advisable to re-install tmtoolkit in a new virtual environment following the\n:ref:`installation instructions `. Make sure to run ``python -m tmtoolkit setup ``, where\n```` is a list of language codes like ``en,fr``.\n\nFurther changes include:\n\n- added new functions for identifying and joining token collocations\n- added new functions for visualizing corpus summary statistics\n- added new function ``find_documents``\n- added new text normalization functions ``normalize_unicode``, ``simplify_unicode``, ``numbers_to_magnitudes``\n- added support for sentences\n- added support for using all SpaCy token attributes\n- added common ``select`` argument for many text processing/mining functions to operate only on a subset of documents\n- added common ``as_table`` argument for many text processing/mining functions to operate to convert the result to a\n (sorted) dataframe\n- added common ``proportions`` argument for many text processing/mining functions to convert resulting frequencies to\n proportions or log proportions\n- added common ``inplace`` argument for many text processing/mining functions to either transform a corpus in-place or\n return a transformed copy\n- added 6 new languages now supported by SpaCy (Catalan, Danish, Macedonian, Polish, Romanian, Russian)\n- added new function ``corpus_join_documents`` for joining documents\n- added option for calculating log probabilities or proportions\n- fixed log probability calculations for higher precision in BoW statistics and topic model evaluation functions\n- dependencies for text processing and text mining are now optional\n- added function for easier logging: ``enable_logging``\n- moved all functions that operate on string or numeric sequences to ``tokenseq`` sub-module\n- all glob patterns now use ``EXACT`` flag\n- added type annotations for ``corpus``, ``tokenseq`` and ``utils`` sub-modules\n- updated dependencies (only SpaCy 3.2 or higher is now supported)\n- updated minimum Python requirements (Python 3.8 or higher)\n- removed datatable support\n\n\n0.10.0 - 2020-08-03\n-------------------\n\nThis release marks a switch from NLTK to `SpaCy `_ for text preprocessing tasks. With this change,\nmuch more languages are supported (see `this list `_). It is advisable to re-install tmtoolkit\nin a new virtual environment following the :ref:`installation instructions `. Make sure to run\n``python -m tmtoolkit setup ``, where ```` is a list of language codes like ``en,fr``.\n\nFurther changes:\n\n* added support for word and document vectors via SpaCy\n* added built-in datasets available via ``Corpus`` class\n* added ``ldamodel_top_word_topics`` and ``ldamodel_top_topic_docs`` functions\n* added new filter functions and options for ``TMPreproc``\n* made stemming function optional (only available when NLTK is installed)\n* run DTM generation in parallel\n* updated dependencies\n* restructured tests\n\n\n0.9.0 - 2019-12-20\n------------------\n\n* added usage and API documentation\n* added support for Arun 2010 metric in `tm_gensim` (thx to @mcooper)\n* added support for `datatable package `_\n* added functional API for text preprocessing\n* added KWIC in text preprocessing\n* added post-installation setup routine to download necessary data files\n* added built-in corpora\n* added `sorted_terms` and `sorted_terms_data_table` to `bow_stats`\n* added `glue_tokens` function\n* retain sparse matrices in several `bow_stats` functions such as tfidf\n* corpus module: loading of CSV and ZIP files, added several other new methods\n* faster `get_dtm` (now works in parallel)\n* `filter_tokens` / `filter_documents` accept multiple patterns at once\n* lots of (partly **breaking**) changes and speed improvements in `TMPreproc`\n* fixed error with `ignore_case` being ignored in `token_match` for regex and glob\n* integrate tox\n* use Numpy extras for hypothesis tests\n* compatibility with Python 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8\n\n\n0.8.0 - 2019-02-05\n------------------\n\n* faster package and sub-module import\n* remove support for Python 2.7 (now only Python 3.5 and higher is supported)\n* use `germalemma package `_\n* use importlib instead of deprecated imp\n* fix problem with not installing all required packages\n\n\n0.7.3 - 2018-09-17 (last release to support Python 2.7)\n-------------------------------------------------------\n\n* new options in `corpus` module for converting Windows linebreaks to Unix linebreaks\n\n0.7.2 - 2018-07-23\n------------------\n\n* new option for `exclude_topics`: `return_new_topic_mapping`\n* fixed `issue #7 `_ (results entry about model gets overwritten)\n\n0.7.1 - 2018-06-18\n------------------\n\n* fix stupid missing import\n\n0.7.0 - 2018-06-18\n------------------\n\n* added sub-package `bow` with functions for DTM creation and statistics\n* fixed problems with evaluation and parallel calculation of gensim models (#5)\n* added Gensim evaluation example\n\n0.6.3 - 2018-06-01\n------------------\n\n* made `get_vocab_and_terms` more memory-efficient\n* updated requirements (fixes #6)\n\n0.6.2 - 2018-04-27\n------------------\n\n* added new function `exclude_topics` to `model_stats`\n\n0.6.1 - 2018-04-27\n------------------\n\n* better figure title placement, grouped subplots and other improvements in `plot_eval_results`\n* bugfix in `model_stats` due to missing unicode literals\n\n0.6.0 - 2018-04-25\n------------------\n\n* **API restructured: (uninstall package first when upgrading!)**\n * sub-package `lda_utils` is now called `topicmod`\n * no more `common` module in `topicmod` -> divided into `evaluate` (including evaluation metrics from former `eval_metrics`), `model_io`, `model_stats`, and `parallel`\n* added coherence metrics `PR #2 `_\n * implemented modified coherence metric according to Mimno et al. 2011 as `metric_coherence_mimno_2011`\n * added wrapper function for coherence model provided by Gensim as `metric_coherence_gensim`\n* added evaluation metric with probability of held-out documents in cross-validation (see `metric_held_out_documents_wallach09`)\n* added new example for topic model coherence\n* updated examples\n\n0.5.0 - 2018-02-13\n------------------\n\n* add `doc_paths` field to `Corpus`\n* change `plot_eval_results` to show individual metrics' results as subplots – **function signature changed!**\n\n0.4.2 - 2018-02-06\n------------------\n\n* made greedy partitioning much more efficient (i.e. faster work distribution)\n* added package information variables\n* added this CHANGES document :)\n\n0.4.1 - 2018-01-24\n------------------\n\n* fixed bug in `lda_utils.common.ldamodel_full_doc_topics`\n* added `topic_labels` for doc-topic heatmap\n* minor documentation fixes\n\n0.4.0 - 2018-01-18\n------------------\n\n* improved parameter checks for `TMPreproc.filter_for_pos`\n* improved tests for `TMPreproc.filter_for_pos`\n* fixed broken test in Python 2.x\n* added `generate_topic_labels_from_top_words`\n* speed up in `top_n_from_distribution`\n* added relevance score calculation (Sievert et al 2014)\n* added functions to get most/least distinctive words\n* added saliency calculation\n* allow to define axis labels and plot title in `plot_eval_results`\n\n" }, { "path": "examples/README.md", "content": "# Examples\n\nThis folder contains very few examples for *tmtoolkit*. The majority of examples is available as Jupyter Notebooks as \npart of the [documentation](https://tmtoolkit.readthedocs.io/). You may download these notebooks from\nthe [documentation source](https://github.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/tmtoolkit/tree/master/doc/source) and run them\non your computer.\n" }, { "path": "examples/__init__.py", "content": "\"\"\"\ntmtoolkit – examples\n\nMarkus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n" }, { "path": "examples/_benchmarktools.py", "content": "from datetime import datetime\n\n\ntimings = []\ntiming_labels = []\n\n\ndef add_timing(label):\n timings.append(datetime.today())\n timing_labels.append(label)\n\n\ndef print_timings():\n print('timings:')\n t_sum = 0\n prev_t = None\n for i, (t, label) in enumerate(zip(timings, timing_labels)):\n if i > 0:\n t_delta = (t - prev_t).total_seconds()\n print('%s: %.2f sec' % (label, t_delta))\n t_sum += t_delta\n\n prev_t = t\n\n print('total: %.2f sec' % t_sum)\n" }, { "path": "examples/benchmark_en_newsarticles.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nBenchmarking script that loads and processes English language test corpus with Corpus in parallel.\n\nThis examples requires that you have installed tmtoolkit with the recommended set of packages and have installed an\nEnglish language model for spaCy:\n\n pip install -U \"tmtoolkit[recommended]\"\n python -m tmtoolkit setup en\n\nFor more information, see the installation instructions: https://tmtoolkit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/install.html\n\nTo benchmark whole script with `time` from command line run:\n\n PYTHONPATH=.. /usr/bin/time -v python benchmark_en_newsarticles.py [NUMBER OF WORKERS]\n\"\"\"\n\nimport sys\nimport logging\n\nfrom tmtoolkit.corpus import Corpus, doc_tokens, vocabulary, dtm, lemmatize, to_lowercase, filter_clean_tokens\n\nfrom examples._benchmarktools import add_timing, print_timings\n\nlogging.basicConfig(level=logging.INFO)\ntmtoolkit_log = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\ntmtoolkit_log.setLevel(logging.INFO)\ntmtoolkit_log.propagate = True\n\nif len(sys.argv) > 1:\n max_workers = int(sys.argv[1])\nelse:\n max_workers = 1\n\nprint(f'max workers: {max_workers}')\n\n#%%\n\nadd_timing('start')\n\ndocs = Corpus.from_builtin_corpus('en-NewsArticles', language='en', max_workers=max_workers)\nprint(str(docs))\n\n#%%\n\nadd_timing('load and tokenize')\n\ntoks = doc_tokens(docs)\nadd_timing('doc_tokens')\n\ntoks_w_attrs = doc_tokens(docs, with_attr=True)\nadd_timing('doc_tokens with attributes')\n\nvocab = vocabulary(docs)\nadd_timing('vocabulary')\n\nlemmatize(docs)\nadd_timing('lemmatize')\n\nto_lowercase(docs)\nadd_timing('to_lowercase')\n\nfilter_clean_tokens(docs)\nadd_timing('filter_clean_tokens')\n\ndtm_ = dtm(docs)\nadd_timing('sparse_dtm')\n\nprint_timings()\n" }, { "path": "examples/bundestag18_tfidf.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nExample script that loads and processes the proceedings of the 18th German Bundestag and generates a tf-idf matrix.\nThe data is quite large, consisting of 15,733 documents with 14,355,341 tokens in total. This script shows how to\nhandle large data efficiently by using the parallel processing power of tmtoolkit and sparse matrix calculations\nthat use few memory.\n\nNote that it is highly advisable to run this script section by section (denoted with \"#%%\" or even line by line in an\ninteractive Python interpreter in order to see the effects of each code block.\n\nThe data for the debates comes from offenesparlament.de, see https://github.com/Datenschule/offenesparlament-data.\n\nThis examples requires that you have installed tmtoolkit with the recommended set of packages and have installed a\nGerman language model for spaCy:\n\n pip install -U \"tmtoolkit[recommended]\"\n python -m tmtoolkit setup de\n\nFor more information, see the installation instructions: https://tmtoolkit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/install.html\n\nMarkus Konrad \nJune 2019 / Feb. 2022\n\"\"\"\n\nimport re\nimport pickle\nimport string\nimport random\nfrom pprint import pprint\nfrom zipfile import ZipFile\n\nfrom tmtoolkit import corpus as c\nfrom tmtoolkit.corpus import visualize as cvis\nfrom tmtoolkit.tokenseq import unique_chars\nfrom tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats import tfidf, sorted_terms_table\nfrom tmtoolkit.utils import enable_logging, pickle_data, unpickle_file\nimport matplotlib.pyplot as plt\nimport numpy as np\nimport pandas as pd\n\npd.set_option('display.width', 140)\npd.set_option('display.max_columns', 100)\n\n#%% Optional: set up output log for tmtoolkit\n\nenable_logging()\n\n#%% Load the data inside the zip file\n\nprint('loading data from zip file')\n\nwith ZipFile('data/bt18_full.zip') as bt18zip:\n # there is a pickled pandas data frame inside the zipfile\n # extract it and load it\n bt18pickle = bt18zip.read('bt18_speeches_merged.pickle')\n bt18_data = pickle.loads(bt18pickle)\n\n# we don't need this anymore, remove it to free memory\ndel bt18pickle, bt18zip\n\n#%% Generate document labels\n\n# format of the document labels: _\nbt18_data['doc_label'] = ['%s_%s' % (str(sitzung).zfill(3), str(seq).zfill(5))\n for sitzung, seq in zip(bt18_data.sitzung, bt18_data.sequence)]\n\nprint('loaded data frame with %d rows:' % bt18_data.shape[0])\nprint(bt18_data.head())\n\nbt18_texts = dict(zip(bt18_data.doc_label, bt18_data.text))\ndel bt18_data\n\n\n#%% Prepare raw text data preprocessing\n\n# remove some special characters\n\ncorpus_chars = unique_chars(bt18_texts.values())\nprint('special characters in text data:')\npprint(sorted(corpus_chars - set(string.printable)))\n\nkeepchars = set('óéıàŁŽńôíśžê̆耺ćÖÇ₂ãüÀijܚ슟ēûçÉöáåúèäßëğîǧҫČœřïñ§°')\ndelchars = corpus_chars - set(string.printable) - keepchars\nprint(f'will remove characters: {delchars}')\n\ndelchars_table = str.maketrans('', '', ''.join(delchars))\n\n# we will pass this function as \"raw_preproc\" function\ndef del_special_chars(t):\n return t.translate(delchars_table)\n\n# some contractions have a stray space in between, like \"EU -Hilfen\" where it should be \"EU-Hilfen\"\n# correct this by applying a custom function with a regular expression (RE) to each document in the corpus\npttrn_contraction_ws = re.compile(r'(\\w+)(\\s+)(-\\w+)')\n\n# in each document text `t`, remove the RE group 2 (the stray white space \"(\\s+)\") for each match `m`\n# we will pass this function as \"raw_preproc\" function\ndef correct_contractions(t):\n return pttrn_contraction_ws.sub(lambda m: m.group(1) + m.group(3), t)\n\n\n# correct hyphenation issues in the documents like \"groß-zügig\"\n# we will pass this function as \"raw_preproc\" function\npttrn_hyphenation = re.compile(r'([a-zäöüß])-([a-zäöüß])')\ndef correct_hyphenation(t):\n return pttrn_hyphenation.sub(lambda m: m.group(1) + m.group(2), t)\n\n\n#%% Generate a Corpus object\n\n\n# we use the column \"doc_label\" as document labels and \"text\" as raw text\nprint('creating corpus object')\ncorpus = c.Corpus(bt18_texts, language='de', max_workers=1.0,\n raw_preproc=[del_special_chars, correct_contractions, correct_hyphenation])\n\n# we don't need this anymore, remove it to free memory\ndel bt18_texts\n\nc.print_summary(corpus)\n\n#%% storing a Corpus object\n\n# at any time, we may store a Corpus object to disk via `save_corpus_to_picklefile` and later load it\n# via `load_corpus_from_picklefile`; this helps you to prevent long running computations again\n\n# c.save_corpus_to_picklefile(corpus, 'data/bt18_corpus.pickle')\n# corpus = load_corpus_from_picklefile('data/bt18_corpus.pickle')\n\n#%% Have a look at the vocabulary of the whole corpus\nprint('vocabulary:')\npprint(c.vocabulary(corpus))\n\nprint(f'\\nvocabulary contains {c.vocabulary_size(corpus)} tokens')\n\n#%% Display a keywords-in-context (KWIC) table\n\nprint('keywords-in-context (KWIC) table for keyword \"Merkel\":')\nprint(c.kwic_table(corpus, 'Merkel'))\n\n#%% Text normalization\n\n# lemmatization\nc.lemmatize(corpus)\n\n# convert all tokens to lowercase and apply several \"cleaning\" methods\nprint('applying further token normalization')\nc.to_lowercase(corpus)\nc.filter_clean_tokens(corpus)\nc.remove_tokens(corpus, r'^-.+', match_type='regex')\n\nprint('vocabulary:')\npprint(c.vocabulary(corpus))\n\nprint(f'\\nvocabulary contains {c.vocabulary_size(corpus)} tokens')\n\n# there are still some stray tokens which should be removed:\nc.remove_tokens(corpus, ['+40', '+', '.plädieren'])\n\n#%% Let's have a look at the most frequent tokens\n\nprint('retrieving document frequencies for all tokens in the vocabulary')\nc.vocabulary_counts(corpus, proportions=1, as_table='-freq').head(50)\n\n# the rank - count plot shows quite a deviation from Zipf's law, because we already applied some token normalization\nfig, ax = plt.subplots()\ncvis.plot_ranked_vocab_counts(fig, ax, corpus, zipf=True)\nplt.show()\n\n#%% Further token cleanup\n\n# we can remove tokens above a certain threshold of (relative or absolute) document frequency\nc.remove_common_tokens(corpus, df_threshold=0.8)\n\n# since we'll later use tf-idf, removing very common or very uncommon tokens may not even be necessary; however\n# it reduces the computation time and memory consumption of all downstream tasks\n\n#%% Document lengths (number of tokens per document)\n\nfig, ax = plt.subplots()\ncvis.plot_doc_lengths_hist(fig, ax, corpus)\nplt.show()\n\n\n#%% Let's have a look at very short documents\n\ndocsizes = c.doc_lengths(corpus, as_table='length')\n\n# document labels of documents with lesser or equal 30 tokens\ndoc_labels_short = docsizes.doc[docsizes.length <= 30]\ndoc_labels_short_texts = c.doc_texts(corpus, select=doc_labels_short, collapse=' ')\n\nprint(f'{len(doc_labels_short)} documents with lesser or equal 30 tokens:')\nfor lbl, txt in doc_labels_short_texts.items():\n print(lbl)\n pprint(txt)\n print('---')\n\n\n#%% Remove very short documents\n\nprint('removing documents with lesser or equal 30 tokens')\nc.remove_documents_by_label(corpus, doc_labels_short.to_list())\n\n\n#%% Another keywords-in-context (KWIC) table\n\nprint('keywords-in-context (KWIC) table for keyword \"merkel\" with normalized tokens:')\nprint(c.kwic_table(corpus, 'merkel'))\n\n#%% Create a document-term-matrix (DTM)\n\n# this creates a sparse DTM where the matrix rows correspond to the current document labels and the\n# matrix columns correspond to the current vocabulary\n# the calculations take several minutes, even when they're performed in parallel\n\nprint('creating document-term-matrix (DTM)')\ndtm = c.dtm(corpus)\n\nprint('matrix created:')\nprint(repr(dtm))\n\ndoc_labels = np.array(c.doc_labels(corpus))\nvocab = np.array(c.vocabulary(corpus))\n\n\n#%% Saving / loading a DTM\n\n# again, you may store the DTM along with the document labels and vocabulary to disk to later load it again:\n\n# pickle_data((dtm, doc_labels, vocab), 'data/bt18_dtm.pickle')\n# dtm, doc_labels, vocab = unpickle_file('data/bt18_dtm.pickle')\n\n\n#%% Computing a tf-idf matrix\n\n# we can apply tf-idf to the DTM\n# the result will remain a sparse matrix, hence it doesn't allocate much memory\n\nprint('computing a tf-idf matrix from the DTM')\ntfidf_mat = tfidf(dtm)\nprint('matrix created:')\nprint(repr(tfidf_mat))\n\n#%% Investigating the top tokens of the tf-idf transformed matrix\n\n# this will create a data frame of the 20 most \"informative\" (tf-idf-wise) tokens per document\ntop_tokens = sorted_terms_table(tfidf_mat, vocab, doc_labels, top_n=20)\n\nrandom_doc = random.choice(doc_labels)\nprint(f'20 most \"informative\" (tf-idf high ranked) tokens in randomly chosen document \"{random_doc}\":')\n\nprint(top_tokens[top_tokens.index.get_level_values(0) == random_doc])\n" }, { "path": "examples/gensim_evaluation.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nAn example for topic modeling evaluation with gensim.\n\nPlease note that this is just an example for showing how to perform topic model evaluation with Gensim. The\npreprocessing of the data is just done quickly and probably not the best way for the given data.\n\nThis examples requires that you have installed tmtoolkit with the recommended set of packages plus Gensim and have\ninstalled a German language model for spaCy:\n\n pip install -U \"tmtoolkit[recommended,gensim]\"\n python -m tmtoolkit setup de\n\nFor more information, see the installation instructions: https://tmtoolkit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/install.html\n\n\"\"\"\n\n\nimport matplotlib.pyplot as plt\nimport gensim\nimport pandas as pd\n\nfrom tmtoolkit import corpus as c\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod import tm_gensim\nfrom tmtoolkit.utils import pickle_data, enable_logging\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate import results_by_parameter\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize import plot_eval_results\n\n#%%\n\nenable_logging()\n\n#%% loading data\n\nprint('loading data...')\nbt18 = pd.read_pickle('data/bt18_sample_1000.pickle')\nprint('loaded %d documents' % len(bt18))\ndoc_labels = ['%s_%s' % info for info in zip(bt18.sitzung, bt18.sequence)]\n\n#%%\n\nprint('loading and tokenizing documents')\n# minimal pipeline\nbt18corp = c.Corpus(dict(zip(doc_labels, bt18.text)), language='de', load_features=[], max_workers=1.0)\ndel bt18\nc.print_summary(bt18corp)\n\nprint('preprocessing data...')\n\nc.stem(bt18corp)\nc.filter_clean_tokens(bt18corp)\n\nc.print_summary(bt18corp)\n\n#%%\n\nprint('creating gensim corpus...')\n\ntexts = list(c.doc_tokens(bt18corp).values())\ngnsm_dict = gensim.corpora.Dictionary.from_documents(texts)\ngnsm_corpus = [gnsm_dict.doc2bow(text) for text in texts]\n\ndel bt18corp\n\n#%%\n\n# evaluate topic models with different parameters\nconst_params = dict(update_every=0, passes=10)\nks = list(range(10, 140, 10)) + list(range(140, 200, 20))\nvarying_params = [dict(num_topics=k, alpha=1.0 / k) for k in ks]\n\nprint(f'evaluating {len(varying_params)} topic models')\neval_results = tm_gensim.evaluate_topic_models((gnsm_dict, gnsm_corpus), varying_params, const_params,\n coherence_gensim_texts=texts) # necessary for coherence C_V metric\n\n# save the results as pickle\nprint('saving results')\npickle_data(eval_results, 'data/gensim_evaluation_results.pickle')\n\n# plot the results\nprint('plotting evaluation results')\nplt.style.use('ggplot')\nresults_by_n_topics = results_by_parameter(eval_results, 'num_topics')\nplot_eval_results(results_by_n_topics, xaxislabel='num. topics k',\n title='Evaluation results', figsize=(8, 6))\nplt.savefig('data/gensim_evaluation_plot.png')\nplt.show()\n" }, { "path": "examples/minimal_tfidf.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nA minimal example to showcase a few features of tmtoolkit.\n\nMarkus Konrad \nFeb. 2022\n\"\"\"\n\nfrom tmtoolkit.corpus import Corpus, tokens_table, lemmatize, to_lowercase, dtm\nfrom tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats import tfidf, sorted_terms_table\n\n\n# load built-in sample dataset and use 4 worker processes\ncorp = Corpus.from_builtin_corpus('en-News100', max_workers=4)\n\n# investigate corpus as dataframe\ntoktbl = tokens_table(corp)\nprint(toktbl)\n\n# apply some text normalization\nlemmatize(corp)\nto_lowercase(corp)\n\n# build sparse document-token matrix (DTM)\n# document labels identify rows, vocabulary tokens identify columns\nmat, doc_labels, vocab = dtm(corp, return_doc_labels=True, return_vocab=True)\n\n# apply tf-idf transformation to DTM\n# operation is applied on sparse matrix and uses few memory\ntfidf_mat = tfidf(mat)\n\n# show top 5 tokens per document ranked by tf-idf\ntop_tokens = sorted_terms_table(tfidf_mat, vocab, doc_labels, top_n=5)\nprint(top_tokens)\n" }, { "path": "examples/topicmod_ap_nips_eval.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nTopic model evaluation for AP and NIPS datasets (http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Bag+of+Words).\n\nThis examples requires that you have installed tmtoolkit with the \"lda\" package.\n\n pip install -U \"tmtoolkit[lda]\"\n\nFor more information, see the installation instructions: https://tmtoolkit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/install.html\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nimport os\nimport sys\n\nimport numpy as np\nimport matplotlib.pyplot as plt\n\nfrom tmtoolkit.utils import unpickle_file, enable_logging\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda import evaluate_topic_models, AVAILABLE_METRICS\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate import results_by_parameter\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize import plot_eval_results\n\n\n#%%\n\nif len(sys.argv) != 5:\n print('req. args: dataset, number of workers, eta, alpha numerator')\n exit(1)\n\ndataset = sys.argv[1]\nn_workers = int(sys.argv[2])\neta = float(sys.argv[3])\nalpha_numerator = float(sys.argv[4])\n\nprint(f'dataset: {dataset}, workers: {n_workers}, beta: {eta}, alpha numerator: {alpha_numerator}')\n\ndataset_short = os.path.basename(dataset)[:-7]\n\n#%%\n\nenable_logging()\n\n#%%\n\nprint('loading data...')\n\ndoc_labels, vocab, dtm = unpickle_file(dataset)\ndoc_labels = np.asarray(doc_labels)\nvocab = np.asarray(vocab)\n\n#%%\n\nprint('running evaluations...')\n\nconst_params = {\n 'n_iter': 1500,\n 'eta': eta,\n 'random_state': 20220105 # to make results reproducible\n}\n\nvar_params = [{'n_topics': k, 'alpha': alpha_numerator/k}\n for k in list(range(20, 201, 2))]\n\nmetrics = ['arun_2010', 'cao_juan_2009', 'coherence_mimno_2011']\n\nif 'griffiths_2004' in AVAILABLE_METRICS:\n metrics.append('griffiths_2004')\n\neval_results = evaluate_topic_models(dtm,\n varying_parameters=var_params,\n constant_parameters=const_params,\n return_models=False,\n metric=metrics,\n n_max_processes=n_workers)\n\n#%%\n\nprint('plotting evaluations...')\n\neval_by_topics = results_by_parameter(eval_results, 'n_topics')\nplot_eval_results(eval_by_topics,\n title=f'Evaluation results for {dataset_short}\\nalpha={alpha_numerator}/K, beta={eta:.4}')\n\n#plt.show()\nplt.savefig(f'data/topicmod_evaluate_{dataset_short}_{eta:.4}.png')\n\nprint('done.')\n" }, { "path": "examples/topicmod_lda.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nAn example for topic modeling with LDA with focus on the new plotting functions in `tmtoolkit.corpus.visualize` and\nin `tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize`.\n\nThis examples requires that you have installed tmtoolkit with the recommended set of packages plus \"lda\" and have\ninstalled an English language model for spaCy:\n\n pip install -U \"tmtoolkit[recommended,lda]\"\n python -m tmtoolkit setup en\n\nFor more information, see the installation instructions: https://tmtoolkit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/install.html\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nimport os.path\n\nimport matplotlib.pyplot as plt\n\nfrom tmtoolkit.utils import enable_logging, pickle_data, unpickle_file\nfrom tmtoolkit.corpus import Corpus, lemmatize, to_lowercase, remove_punctuation, remove_common_tokens, \\\n remove_uncommon_tokens, filter_clean_tokens, print_summary, remove_documents_by_length, dtm, \\\n corpus_retokenize, save_corpus_to_picklefile, load_corpus_from_picklefile\nfrom tmtoolkit.corpus.visualize import plot_doc_lengths_hist, plot_doc_frequencies_hist, plot_vocab_counts_hist, \\\n plot_ranked_vocab_counts, plot_num_sents_hist, plot_sent_lengths_hist, plot_num_sents_vs_sent_length, \\\n plot_token_lengths_hist\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda import evaluate_topic_models # we're using lda for topic modeling\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate import results_by_parameter\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io import print_ldamodel_topic_words\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize import plot_eval_results, plot_topic_word_ranked_prob, plot_doc_topic_ranked_prob\n\n#%%\n\nenable_logging()\n\n#%% loading the sample corpus (English news articles)\n\ncorp_picklefile = 'data/topicmod_lda_corpus.pickle'\n\nif os.path.exists(corp_picklefile):\n docs = load_corpus_from_picklefile(corp_picklefile)\nelse:\n docs = Corpus.from_builtin_corpus('en-NewsArticles', max_workers=1.0)\n save_corpus_to_picklefile(docs, corp_picklefile)\n\nprint_summary(docs)\n\n\n#%% plot some corpus summary statistics\n\n# you can copy those and also do the plotting also after corpus transformations in the next cell\n# this shows you nicely how the transformations change the distribution of words in the corpus\n\nfig, ax = plt.subplots()\nplot_doc_lengths_hist(fig, ax, docs)\nplt.show()\n\nfig, ax = plt.subplots()\nplot_vocab_counts_hist(fig, ax, docs)\nplt.show()\n\nfig, ax = plt.subplots()\nplot_ranked_vocab_counts(fig, ax, docs, zipf=True)\nplt.show()\n\nfig, ax = plt.subplots()\nplot_doc_frequencies_hist(fig, ax, docs)\nplt.show()\n\nfig, ax = plt.subplots()\nplot_num_sents_hist(fig, ax, docs)\nplt.show()\n\nfig, ax = plt.subplots()\nplot_sent_lengths_hist(fig, ax, docs)\nplt.show()\n\nfig, ax = plt.subplots()\nplot_num_sents_vs_sent_length(fig, ax, docs)\nplt.show()\n\nfig, ax = plt.subplots()\nplot_token_lengths_hist(fig, ax, docs)\nplt.show()\n\n#%% apply preprocessing pipeline\n\ncorp_preproc_picklefile = 'data/topicmod_lda_corpus_preprocessed.pickle'\n\nif os.path.exists(corp_preproc_picklefile):\n docs = load_corpus_from_picklefile(corp_preproc_picklefile)\nelse:\n remove_punctuation(docs)\n corpus_retokenize(docs)\n lemmatize(docs)\n to_lowercase(docs)\n filter_clean_tokens(docs, remove_numbers=True)\n remove_common_tokens(docs, df_threshold=0.90)\n remove_uncommon_tokens(docs, df_threshold=0.05)\n remove_documents_by_length(docs, '<', 30)\n\n save_corpus_to_picklefile(docs, corp_preproc_picklefile)\n\nprint_summary(docs)\n\n#%% generating the document-term matrix\n\ndtm_picklefile = 'data/topicmod_lda_dtm.pickle'\n\nif os.path.exists(dtm_picklefile):\n bow_mat, doc_labels, vocab = unpickle_file(dtm_picklefile)\nelse:\n bow_mat, doc_labels, vocab = dtm(docs, return_doc_labels=True, return_vocab=True)\n pickle_data((bow_mat, doc_labels, vocab), dtm_picklefile)\n\n\n\n#%% running the evaluation\n\neval_res_picklefile = 'data/topicmod_lda_eval_res.pickle'\n\nif os.path.exists(dtm_picklefile):\n eval_results = unpickle_file(eval_res_picklefile)\nelse:\n const_params = {\n 'n_iter': 1500,\n 'eta': 0.3,\n 'random_state': 20220105 # to make results reproducible\n }\n\n var_params = [{'n_topics': k, 'alpha': 10.0/k}\n for k in list(range(20, 101, 20)) + [125, 150, 175, 200, 250, 300]]\n\n metrics = ['cao_juan_2009', 'arun_2010', 'coherence_mimno_2011', 'griffiths_2004']\n\n eval_results = evaluate_topic_models(bow_mat,\n varying_parameters=var_params,\n constant_parameters=const_params,\n return_models=True,\n metric=metrics)\n\n pickle_data(eval_results, eval_res_picklefile)\n\n#%% plotting evaluation results\n\neval_by_topics = results_by_parameter(eval_results, 'n_topics')\nplot_eval_results(eval_by_topics)\n\nplt.show()\n\n#%% selecting the model and printing the topics' most likely words\n\nselected_model = dict(eval_by_topics)[200]['model']\n\nprint_ldamodel_topic_words(selected_model.topic_word_, vocab=vocab)\n\n#%% investigating, how many \"top words\" sufficiently describe a topic\n\nfig, ax = plt.subplots()\nplot_topic_word_ranked_prob(fig, ax, selected_model.topic_word_, n=40, log_scale=False,\n highlight=[4, 12, 32], alpha=0.025)\n\nplt.show()\n\n# -> about 5 to 10 words aggregate most of the probability per topic\n\n#%% investigating, how many \"top topics\" sufficiently describe a document\n\nfig, ax = plt.subplots()\nplot_doc_topic_ranked_prob(fig, ax, selected_model.doc_topic_, n=40, log_scale=False, highlight=list(range(4)),\n alpha=0.003)\n\nplt.show()\n\n# -> about 10 to 15 topics aggregate most of the probability per document\n" }, { "path": "requirements.txt", "content": "# requirements.txt\n#\n# installs dependencies from ./setup.py, and the package itself,\n# in editable mode for development\n\n-e .[all]\n\n# don't forget to install the language models too via:\n# python -m tmtoolkit setup all\n" }, { "path": "requirements_doc.txt", "content": "# requirements_doc.txt\n#\n# installs doc dependencies from ./setup.py, and the package itself,\n# in editable mode for development\n\n-e .[doc]\n" }, { "path": "scripts/fulldata/.gitignore", "content": "# Ignore everything in this directory\n*\n# Except these files\n!.gitignore\n!README.md\n\n" }, { "path": "scripts/fulldata/README.md", "content": "This folder stores the full datasets from which the sample datasets for the built-in corpora in tmtoolkit are generated:\n\n```\nCorp_Bundestag_V2.rds\nCorp_Congreso_V2.rds\nCorp_HouseOfCommons_V2.rds\nCorp_TweedeKamer_V2.rds\n```\n\nDue to their size, they are not part of the repository. You can download the respective datasets from https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/L4OAKN.\n\nFurthermore, this folder contains the NIPS dataset (`vocab.nips.txt` and `docword.nips.txt`) which can be obtained from http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Bag+of+Words.\n" }, { "path": "scripts/nips_data.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nConvert NIPS data from http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Bag+of+Words to sparse DTM format stored as pickle file.\n\nMarkus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nimport numpy as np\nfrom scipy.sparse import coo_matrix\nfrom tmtoolkit.utils import pickle_data\n\n\n#%%\n\nwith open('fulldata/vocab.nips.txt') as f:\n vocab = np.array([l.strip() for l in f.readlines() if l.strip()])\n\n#%%\n\nn_docs = None\nn_vocab = None\nn_nonzero = None\nentries = []\nrow_ind = []\ncol_ind = []\n\nwith open('fulldata/docword.nips.txt') as f:\n for i, l in enumerate(f):\n l = l.strip()\n\n if i < 3:\n n = int(l)\n if i == 0:\n n_docs = n\n elif i == 1:\n n_vocab = n\n elif i == 2:\n n_nonzero = n\n else:\n j, k, n = list(map(int, l.split()))\n entries.append(n)\n row_ind.append(j-1) # convert to zero-based index\n col_ind.append(k-1) # convert to zero-based index\n\n\nassert len(vocab) == n_vocab\nassert len(entries) == len(row_ind) == len(col_ind) == n_nonzero\n\ndtm = coo_matrix((entries, (row_ind, col_ind)), shape=(n_docs, n_vocab), dtype='int64')\n\ndoc_labels = np.fromiter((f'doc{str(i+1).zfill(4)}' for i in range(n_docs)), dtype='\n\"\"\"\n\nimport os\nfrom codecs import open\n\nfrom setuptools import setup, find_packages\n\n__title__ = 'tmtoolkit'\n__version__ = '0.11.2'\n__author__ = 'Markus Konrad'\n__license__ = 'Apache License 2.0'\n\n\nGITHUB_URL = 'https://github.com/WZBSocialScienceCenter/tmtoolkit'\n\nDEPS_BASE = ['numpy>=1.22.0', 'scipy>=1.7.0', 'globre>=0.1.5',\n 'pandas>=1.4.0', 'xlrd>=2.0.0', 'openpyxl>=3.0.0',\n 'matplotlib>=3.5.0']\n\nDEPS_EXTRA = {\n 'textproc': ['spacy>=3.2.0', 'bidict>=0.21.0', 'loky>=3.0.0'],\n 'textproc_extra': ['PyICU>=2.8', 'nltk>=3.6.0'],\n 'wordclouds': ['wordcloud>=1.8.0,<1.9', 'Pillow>=9.0.0'],\n 'lda': ['lda>=2.0'],\n 'sklearn': ['scikit-learn>=1.0.0'],\n 'gensim': ['gensim>=4.1.0'],\n 'topic_modeling_eval_extra': ['gmpy2>=2.1.0'],\n 'test': ['pytest>=7.0.0', 'hypothesis>=6.36.0'],\n 'doc': ['Sphinx>=4.4.0', 'sphinx-rtd-theme>=1.0.0', 'nbsphinx>=0.8.0'],\n 'dev': ['coverage>=6.3', 'coverage-badge>=1.1.0', 'pytest-cov>=3.0.0', 'twine>=3.8.0',\n 'ipython>=8.0.0', 'jupyter>=1.0.0', 'notebook>=6.4.0', 'tox>=3.24.0', 'setuptools>=60.7.0'],\n}\n\n# DEPS_EXTRA['minimal'] = DEPS_BASE # doesn't work with extras_require and pip currently\n# see https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/issues/1139\n\nDEPS_EXTRA['recommended'] = DEPS_EXTRA['textproc'] + DEPS_EXTRA['wordclouds']\nDEPS_EXTRA['all'] = []\nfor k, deps in DEPS_EXTRA.items():\n if k not in {'recommended', 'all'}:\n DEPS_EXTRA['all'].extend(deps)\n\nhere = os.path.abspath(os.path.dirname(__file__))\n\n# Get the long description from the README file\nwith open(os.path.join(here, 'README.rst'), encoding='utf-8') as f:\n long_description = f.read()\n\nsetup(\n name=__title__,\n version=__version__,\n description='Text Mining and Topic Modeling Toolkit',\n long_description=long_description,\n long_description_content_type='text/x-rst',\n url=GITHUB_URL,\n project_urls={\n 'Bug Reports': GITHUB_URL + '/issues',\n 'Source': GITHUB_URL,\n },\n\n author=__author__,\n author_email='markus.konrad@wzb.eu',\n\n license=__license__,\n\n classifiers=[\n 'Development Status :: 4 - Beta',\n 'Intended Audience :: Science/Research',\n 'Intended Audience :: Developers',\n 'License :: OSI Approved :: Apache Software License',\n\n 'Operating System :: OS Independent',\n 'Programming Language :: Python',\n 'Programming Language :: Python :: 3',\n 'Programming Language :: Python :: 3.8',\n 'Programming Language :: Python :: 3.9',\n 'Programming Language :: Python :: 3.10',\n\n 'Topic :: Scientific/Engineering :: Information Analysis',\n 'Topic :: Software Development :: Libraries :: Python Modules',\n 'Topic :: Utilities',\n ],\n\n keywords='textmining textanalysis text mining analysis preprocessing topicmodeling topic modeling evaluation',\n\n packages=find_packages(exclude=['tests', 'examples']),\n include_package_data=True,\n python_requires='>=3.8',\n install_requires=DEPS_BASE,\n extras_require=DEPS_EXTRA\n)\n" }, { "path": "tests/__init__.py", "content": "\"\"\"\ntmtoolkit – automated tests\n\nMarkus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n" }, { "path": "tests/_testtextdata.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nTest corpora for different languages.\n\"\"\"\n\nimport random\n\nrandom.seed(20200203)\n\ntextdata_sm = {\n 'en': {\n 'empty': '',\n 'small1': 'the',\n 'small2': 'This is a small example document.',\n 'unicode1': 'Two unicode characters that look similar but are encoded differently: \\u00C7 and \\u0043\\u0327',\n 'unicode2': 'Try to simplify these unicode characters: \\u00C7 \\u0043\\u0327 é ῷ \\u0043\\u0332',\n # shortened samples from builtin NewsArticles corpus:\n 'NewsArticles-1': 'Disney Parks Just Got More Expensive As Ticket Prices Rise Again\\n\\nA single day in a Disney park can cost as much as $124.\\n\\nA Disney vacation just got a little more expensive.- The company announced over the weekend that prices at its theme parks in Florida and Anaheim will increase, along with the costs of some annual passes. Under the company\\'s tiered admission system introduced last year, prices vary based on the day.- At the Magic Kingdom-in Walt Disney World, a single-day ticket will cost-$107 for adults or $101 for children on the cheapest \"value\" days, an increase of $2, according to Fox 5 in Orlando.- A \"regular\" ticket will jump $5, to $115 for adults and $109 for children.- \"Peak\" days will remain unchanged at $124 for adults and $118 for kids.- The other three theme parks in Florida have slightly lower prices at $99/$107/$119 for adults and $93/$101/$113 for kids, increases of between $2 and $5. In Anaheim, prices for a single day at Disneyland-or its sister park, Disney California Adventure,-will cost $97/$110/$124 for adults and $91/$104/$118 for children, increases of between $2 and $5. MousePlanet has a breakdown on many of the Disneyland ticket options and how much they\\'re increased. The Orange County Register also lists all-price increases since 2000, when a Disneyland ticket cost just $41, or $57.14 in 2016 dollars according to the CPI inflation calculator. Discounts are available for multiple-day admissions, but the company will now offer a $20 discount on such tickets purchased online or by phone in advance, the Orlando Sentinel said.-- The prices of some annual passes at both resorts will also increase along with most parking fees.- Disney\\'s earnings report last week showed lower net income and revenues, falling short of analysts\" expectations, Deadline reported. Year-over-year attendance in theme parks for the last quarter fell by 5 percent, the Orlando Sentinel said, in part because Hurricane Matthew closed the Florida parks for a day and a half in October. However, despite the lower attendance, revenue and income in the theme parks division-increased, according to Forbes.- Motley Fool analyst Rick Munarriz noted in his column that price increases in the parks may have helped to lower guest counts at the company\\'s famously crowded parks, with lower attendance in three of the past four quarters, while increasing revenue and profit.- \"Disney will come out of this just fine,\" he predicted. \"Disney is making more with less, and as long as revenue and operating income keep inching higher, don\"t expect the media giant to ease back on the annual increases.\" The jump in prices comes just days after the company announced that \"Pandora: The World Of Avatar,\" the land at Disney\\'s Animal Kingdom in Florida,-will open on May 27. Lands themed to \"Star Wars\" will open at Disneyland in Anaheim and Disney\\'s Hollywood Studios in Florida in 2019, the company said.-',\n 'NewsArticles-2': 'Sikh Temples Open Their Doors To Oroville Dam Evacuees\\n\\n\"We\\'r well prepared.\"\\n\\nMore than 180,000 people in Northern California were ordered to evacuate-late on Sunday due to erosion of the emergency spillway in the nation\\'s tallest dam. Several Sikh temples in the area opened their doors to people in need of places to spend the night. Earlier in the evening, California\\'s Department of Water Resources said the Oroville Dam\\'s emergency spillway, which prevents water from rushing over the top of the dam when levels are high, was in danger of failing and sending an \"uncontrolled release of flood waters from Lake Oroville.\" .@CA_DWR update on #OrovilleSpillway pic.twitter.com/xzGp6xxyR6 Thousands of residents from counties including Yuba, Butte and Sutter were told to leave their homes immediately. Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg tweeted that individuals evacuating the Yuba county area could seek shelter in at least seven local Sikh houses of worship in the area. Sacramento is about an hour and a half south of Oroville Dam. Sikh Temples in Sacramento region are open for people evacuated around #OrovilleDam. Am told they have food ready & all in need are welcome. pic.twitter.com/Vz2jYEte2w \"We\\'r well prepared,\" Dr. Gurtej S. Cheema of Sacramento\\'s Capital Sikh Center told the Huffington Post. The gurudwara is one of the closest for residents leaving Yuba City. \"We have meals, shelter. We can accommodate at least 50 people here.\" Cheema said that after evacuation orders were announced, members of the gurudwara delivered enough bedding for 50 people to spend the night at the temple. They also prepared hot tea and meals for evacuees to eat once they arrive. \"We have three families over here right now, and we\\'r expecting at least 10 more [to spend the night],\" Cheema added. Overall, he said the temple had received 30 calls from individuals saying they were on their way, fighting gridlocked traffic in the area.-- \"We\\'r glad we can help and are available,\" he added. Yuba City\\'s first Sikh temple was built in 1969, though the community\\'s roots in the area date back decades before.-In November, Yuba City was home to the biggest Sikh event outside India, the Sacramento Bee reported.-Tens of thousands of individuals gathered at the 37th annual Sikh Parade Festival to honor the teachings of Sikhism\\'s founder and celebrate the Sikh pioneers who came to Yuba City 110 years ago from Punjab.',\n 'NewsArticles-3': 'BRICS wants to set up an alternative rating agency. Why it may not work\\n\\nMisheck Mutize, University of Cape Town and Sean Gossel, University of Cape Town The idea of establishing an alternative credit rating agency led by the BRICS bloc of countries is gaining momentum. But there are questions as to whether it will prosper given the major challenges it\\'s bound to face. Leaders from the bloc made of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa are championing the idea. The idea formerly emerged during the 2015 BRICS summit in Ufa and was affirmed by the Goa Declaration at the 8th BRICS Summit. Most recently South Africa\\'s President Jacob Zuma said BRICS countries had taken the decision that they could rate themselves, and perhaps others too. The aim would be to ensure a more \"balanced view\" when ratings are made. Both Brazil and Russia have recently been downgraded by Moody\\'s. And for over a year South Africa has lived with a possible downgrade by the \"big three\" Western credit rating agencies, Standard & Poor\\'s, Moody\\'s and Fitch. The big three have faced increasing criticism. Critics claim that the frequent downgrades of developing countries are unjust and serve Western political interests. BRICS has started engaging financial experts on a business model for the new rating agency as well as what methodology it would adopt. This isn\\'t the first time there\\'s been an attempt to challenge the big three. China, Russia, India and Brazil have all established their own credit rating agencies. But none has ever come close to establishing itself as an alternative. Will the BRICS initiative be the exception? Critics of the big three were emboldened after the 2008 financial crisis. The rating agencies were forced to pay over $2.2 billion in fines relating to their complicity in the credit crisis. This further damaged their credibility and heightened accusations, particularly in emerging countries. Critics have also attacked the rating agencies\\' issuer pay model. Under this system credit rating agencies are paid by the institutions being rated (debt issuers) and not by the investors who use the information, creating a conflict of interest. Critics also argue that this entrenches geopolitical biases. The hope is that a new agency would compensate for the perceived bias in the global financial architecture. It would also create competition and offer investors, issuers and other stakeholders a wider choice and a more diverse view on creditworthiness. Given that BRICS is home to half the world\\'s population, accounts for more than a quarter of the world\\'s economic output and has recently set up a nascent New Development Bank, the countries under its banner have, between them, the capacity to establish an influential credit rating institution. But questions have been raised about whether the new rating agency satisfies a financial need or is politically motivated. And if it will be competent to provide an independent, objective and credible credit rating service based on sound methodology. China has already expressed concerns about the credibility of a new agency. Analysts have also strongly criticised the probable adoption of the existing \"issuer-pay\" model. This would mean that the current model is simply replicated. Considering that the three major rating agencies control more than 90% of the world\\'s ratings business, establishing a new one wouldn\\'t be easy. It could take years, or even decades, to gel. There have been previous attempts to launch new ratings agencies. All failed to take off. Examples include the Lisbon headquartered ARC Ratings which was launched in November 2013 as a consortium of five national ratings agencies from South Africa, Malaysia, India, Brazil and Portugal. It is yet to release its first sovereign rating. The CARE Rating agency of India, started in April 1993, is still rating small to medium enterprises. The Global Credit Ratings (GCR) was established in South Africa in 1995. It is only planning to start offering sovereign credit ratings from 2017. Others that have been launched include: MARC of Malaysia which has been operational since 1996, but still only covers corporate ratings; The Hong Kong based Universal Credit Rating Group which was launched in 2014l Russia\\'s Analytical Credit Rating Agency (ACRA) which was established in 2015; the Beijing based China Chengxin Credit Rating Group, established in 1992; and Dagong Global Credit Rating established in 1994. None has established itself as an alternative credit rating agency of choice for emerging countries. The biggest task for a new BRICS credit rating agency will be to convince investors, particularly those from the US and Europe, that the ratings assigned are politically impartial. One way of doing this would be to adopt the \"investor-pays\" model where investors subscribe to ratings released by the agencies, and the subscription revenues become its source of income. This would ensure transparency and credibility while avoiding conflicts of interests. But adopting a new model might not fly given that main users of the credit rating information are global pension and mutual funds which currently use at least one of the \"big three\" rating agencies. They are therefore unlikely to trust any ratings from the new BRICS rating agency with a yet to be tested rating model. Adopting a new model would also be tricky as the BRICS rating agency would need to wield enough influence to be able to attract sufficient subscriptions from international funds. Finally, investors will be sceptical about the new BRICS rating agency\\'s ability to compensate for losses in the event that it issues false ratings as the \"big three\" did in the US. The BRICS agency is likely to be another failed rating agency project unless it can overcome these three hurdles. Misheck Mutize, Lecturer of Finance and Doctor of Philosophy Candidate, specializing in Finance, University of Cape Town and Sean Gossel, Senior Lecturer, UCT Graduate School of Business, University of Cape Town This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.',\n 'NewsArticles-4': 'Education Department Drops Web Site On Disabilities Act That Riled DeVos\\n\\nNew Education chief couldn\\'t get behind federal civil rights law at confirmation hearings.\\n\\nA Department of Education web site explaining the rights of students under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act has vanished. That\\'s the same law that confounded new Education Secretary Betsy De Vos during her confirmation hearings. DeVos dodged questioning about the law last month, insisting it was up to individual states on whether to grant disabled students their educational rights, even though it\\'s a federal law that applies across the nation. New U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has also blasted the Disabilities Act for its \"special treatment of certain children,\" blaming it for the-\"Acceleration in the decline of civility and discipline in classrooms across America.\" A link to the the web site ceased working shortly before DeVos took office, the Seattle Post Intelligencer reported.- The Department of Education site now attributes the broken link-to \"gechnical difficulties\" and sends-people instead to the 159-page text of the very technical, complicated statute. The department site also lists available special education programs. The Disabilities Act information site that has now vanished was established under George W. Bush\\'s administration as an aide for parents, students, teachers and school administrations to help them understand the rights of disabled students to an appropriate free public education under the law. The site was updated as modifications were passed and courts continued to interpret the law. Washington Democratic Senators Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray, who both voted against DeVos\" confirmation, issued a statement Friday demanding to know why the information had been scrubbed. \"the Department\\'s failure to keep this critical resource operational makes it harder for parents, educators, and administrators to find the resources they need to implement this federal law and protect the rights of children with disabilities,\"hey said. The Washington senators demanded -a \"detailed timeline\" of when the information was taken down, and when it will be restored. They also criticized Donald Trump for not being an \"Advocate for disability rights [who]-famously mocked the physical disability of a New York Times reporter who asked him a question at a news conference\" during his presidential campaign. During her confirmation hearings last month Sen. Tim Kaine (D.-Va.) quizzed DeVos on the law. DeVos responded that it was a \"matter best left to the states.\" Kaine then asked: \" some states might be good to kids with disabilities and other states might not be so good and, what then, people can just move around the country if they don\"t like how kids are being treated?\" DeVos again repeated that it\\'s an issue \"best left to the states,\" apparently unaware of how federal law works. Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), who has a son with special needs,-clarified that the act is a federal civil rights law, adding: \" do you stand by your statement a few minutes ago that it should be up to the state whether to follow it?\" DeVos responded: \"I may have confused it.\"Jeff Sessions spoke out against the law in 2000 from the Senate floor when he was representing Alabama. \"We have created a complex system of federal regulations and laws that have created lawsuit after lawsuit, special treatment for certain children, and that are a big factor in accelerating the decline in civility and discipline in classrooms all over America. I say that very sincerely,\" Sessions said. Multi-billionaire Republican mega-donor DeVos was confirmed last Tuesday by a vote of 51-50. Her highly controversial confirmation required Vice President Mike Pence to vote to break a tie in the divided Senate. She has no experience in education and supports school vouchers and charter schools. She was blocked by protesters last week during her first visit to public school in Washington D.C. There has been no response to the web site changes from DeVos.'\n },\n 'de': {\n # shortened samples from builtin NewsArticles corpus:\n 'sample-9611': 'Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte '\n 'Kommissionsmitglieder! Liebe Gäste! Herr Dr. Neu, es ist einfach, sich vehement gegen das '\n 'Parlamentsbeteiligungsgesetz zu stellen, wenn man jeden Auslandseinsatz der Bundeswehr '\n 'grundsätzlich ablehnt. Ich finde allerdings, dass das Wahrnehmen internationaler Verantwortung '\n 'anders aussieht.\\n\\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Bundeswehr ist eine Parlamentsarmee. Das '\n 'heißt, der Deutsche Bundestag stimmt darüber ab - und das soll auch so bleiben -, wenn unsere '\n 'Bundeswehr, unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten, in einen Einsatz bewaffneter Streitkräfte gehen '\n 'soll. Wir, der Deutsche Bundestag, übernehmen mit diesen Entscheidungen die Verantwortung '\n 'für den Einsatz unserer Soldatinnen und Soldaten.\\n\\nWir alle wissen, dass es aktuell mehr '\n 'Konflikte und Kriege auf der Welt gibt als jemals zuvor. Die Welt ist viel unfriedlicher '\n 'geworden, und mehr denn je gilt es, gemeinsam Verantwortung zu übernehmen. Nationale '\n 'Alleingänge sind der Anfang vom Ende für Europa.\\n\\nWenn Europa seine Interessen wahren '\n 'und seiner zunehmenden Verantwortung in einer globalisierten Welt nachkommen will, dann wird '\n 'es seinen wirksamen außenpolitischen und sicherheitspolitischen Beitrag dazu leisten müssen.',\n 'sample-7949': 'Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Ich finde, es ist vielsagend, '\n 'wenn nur halbherzig über die Fluchtursachen gesprochen wird. Das eine Mal hört man, das '\n '„Schleusertum“ sei eine Fluchtursache. Das andere Mal hört man, die unzureichende Finanzierung '\n 'der Flüchtlingslager sei ein Grund. Zu der Vielzahl der Gründe, die genannt werden, gehört '\n 'auch die fragile Staatlichkeit. Aber die Gründe für die Fragilität der Staatlichkeit einiger '\n 'Staaten werden nicht genannt. Es ist kein Zufall, dass die meisten Flüchtlinge, die derzeit '\n 'nach Europa kommen, aus Syrien, Libyen, Afghanistan, dem Kosovo oder dem Irak kommen. '\n 'Das hat etwas mit der westlichen Kriegsführung in diesen Ländern zu tun, die dazu dient, '\n 'die eigenen Interessen durchzusetzen. Das schafft Fragilität.\\n\\nWir hören auch von '\n 'sogenannten Wirtschaftsflüchtlingen. Ich würde eher sagen: Es sind Armutsflüchtlinge. '\n 'Die Ursache für deren Flucht liegt darin begründet, dass es Handelsabkommen gibt, die '\n 'Handelsliberalisierungen vorsehen, die die Wirtschaft in deren Heimat - sei es die '\n 'Landwirtschaft, sei es die Industrie - vollends kaputtmachen. Jüngst wurden EPA '\n 'verabschiedet, sogenannte neue Handelsabkommen mit Afrika, die erneut einen Armutsschub '\n 'auf dem afrikanischen Kontinent hervorrufen werden und weitere Flüchtlinge produzieren werden.',\n 'sample-9': 'Herr Präsident, Sie haben wie meistens recht. Ich nehme die Wahl an und bedanke mich für das '\n 'große Vertrauen. Danke schön!',\n 'sample-991': 'Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Werte Gäste! Letzteres ganz '\n 'besonders; denn das sind wir als Touristiker den Gästen schuldig.\\n\\nIch habe die Zeit im '\n 'Herbst und im Winter des vergangenen Jahres, als wir noch nicht in den Ausschüssen tagten, '\n 'genutzt, um mich eingehend mit diesem Bericht vertraut zu machen. Ich habe darin viel '\n 'Wissenswertes und Interessantes gelesen, aber ich habe auch einige Stellen vermisst, '\n 'wo ich gerne weitere Impulse gesetzt hätte.'\n },\n 'fr': { # wikipedia article of the day 2020-02-05\n 'sample-1': \"L'histoire de La Flèche recouvre l'ensemble des évènements, anciens ou plus récents, liés à cette ville et particulièrement nombreux à l'époque moderne. Si l'occupation de son territoire remonte à la Préhistoire, La Flèche naît peu après l'an mille par la construction d'une forteresse sur les rives du Loir. Lieu stratégique par sa position sur un cours d'eau navigable et au croisement de routes reliant les grandes provinces de l'ouest de la France, elle est un temps la propriété des Plantagenêt, comtes d'Anjou et rois d'Angleterre. La Flèche est pourtant délaissée par ses différents seigneurs à la fin du Moyen Âge jusqu'à ce que Françoise d'Alençon s'y retire à la fin de sa vie, en 1537.\",\n 'sample-2': \"Le tournant du xviie siècle marque un nouvel essor pour la ville qui devient une cité rayonnante grâce aux faveurs et à la bienveillance d'Henri IV, roi de France, et de Guillaume Fouquet de La Varenne. Sous l'impulsion de ce dernier, gouverneur de la ville, La Flèche se modernise et devient un important centre administratif et judiciaire, mais c'est avant tout l'installation du collège des Jésuites en 1603 qui marque un certain âge d'or. L'un de ses anciens élèves, Jérôme Le Royer de La Dauversière œuvre au renouveau spirituel de La Flèche tout en étant l'un des fondateurs de la ville de Montréal au Canada. En 1641 puis en 1653, des centaines de Fléchois s'engagent pour y fonder une colonie.\",\n 'sample-3': \"Marquée par le passage des Vendéens à deux reprises lors de la Virée de Galerne en 1793, La Flèche connaît un nouvel essor quand Napoléon Ier y établit le Prytanée national militaire en 1808, dans les locaux de l'ancien collège. Occupée par les Prussiens en 1815 puis en 1871, la ville paie un lourd tribut dans les combats de la Première Guerre mondiale avec le décès de 339 de ses habitants.\",\n 'sample-4': \"Après 1945, La Flèche s'agrandit par l'annexion de deux autres communes, tout en poursuivant son développement économique. La fin du xxe siècle est marquée par de grands travaux d'urbanisme dont l'extension de l'hôtel de ville, la construction d'une gare routière ou la rénovation du centre-ville, des travaux qui se poursuivent au xxie siècle avec notamment l'aménagement d'une base de loisirs, la construction d'un grand complexe sportif et d'un nouveau cinéma, ou encore la rénovation des façades de l'église Saint-Thomas.\",\n },\n 'es': { # wikipedia article of the day 2020-02-05\n 'sample-1': \"El AH-64 Apache es un helicóptero de ataque de origen estadounidense. Se trata de un aparato bimotor con rotores principal y de cola de cuatro palas que cuenta con una cabina biplaza en tándem para dos tripulantes. Puede realizar misiones de ataque contra carro, asalto, escolta y caza-helicóptero, con capacidad operativa todo tiempo y día-noche. Para ello dispone de un equipo de sensores en el morro para adquisición y designación de objetivos y visión nocturna.\",\n 'sample-2': \"Su armamento básico es un cañón automático M230 de calibre 30 mm situado debajo del fuselaje entre las ruedas delanteras. Además es equipado con una combinación de misiles antitanque AGM-114 Hellfire y cohetes Hydra 70 en los cuatro soportes de sus dos estructuras alares; no obstante, puede portar misiles antiaéreos AIM-92 Stinger o AIM-9 Sidewinder en los extremos de las alas.\",\n 'sample-3': \"Fue diseñado por Hughes Helicopters como Modelo 77 en respuesta al programa «Helicóptero de Ataque Avanzado» (en inglés: Advanced Attack Helicopter o AAH) del Ejército de los Estados Unidos para reemplazar al AH-1 Cobra, logrando su primer vuelo el 30 de septiembre de 1975. El Ejército eligió el AH-64, denominado YAH-64 en su fase de prototipo, sobre el Bell YAH-63 en 1976; y en 1982 aprobó su producción en serie. El AH-64 es el principal helicóptero de ataque del Ejército estadounidense, y también el de otras naciones a las que fue exportado, entre las que se incluyen Reino Unido, Israel, Japón, Grecia y los Países Bajos entre otros.\",\n 'sample-4': \"Con Estados Unidos ha entrado en acción en la invasión estadounidense de Panamá de 1989, y sirvió en la guerra del Golfo, en la guerra de Kosovo, en la guerra de Afganistán de 2001 y en la guerra de Irak. Israel utilizó el Apache en sus conflictos en Líbano y en la Franja de Gaza.\",\n },\n 'pt': { # wikipedia article of the day 2020-02-05\n 'sample-1': \"O rio Piracicaba é um curso de água do estado de Minas Gerais, Região Sudeste do Brasil, pertencente à bacia do rio Doce. Nasce a 1 680 metros de altitude, em uma das vértices da serra do Caraça, no distrito ouro-pretano de São Bartolomeu, percorrendo 241 km até a foz no rio Doce, entre os municípios de Ipatinga e Timóteo.\",\n 'sample-2': \"Tem como principais afluentes os rios da Prata, de Peixe, Maquiné e Santa Bárbara e o ribeirão do Turvo. Sua bacia hidrográfica abrange 5 465,38 km² de área de drenagem e um total de 21 municípios.\",\n 'sample-3': \"O povoamento em suas margens foi iniciado no final do século XVII, sob o contexto da exploração do ouro em Minas Gerais, que levou à fundação de arraiais em Ouro Preto e Mariana. Embora a mineração tenha sido desenvolvida no Quadrilátero Ferrífero nos séculos seguintes, a urbanização na área da bacia se consolidou somente no século XX, após a locação da EFVM.\",\n 'sample-4': \"A via férrea, próxima ao rio, fez surgir núcleos urbanos. Ao mesmo tempo, a disponibilidade de matas para extração de madeira e a presença do rio para captação de água incentivaram a instalação de empresas siderúrgicas em João Monlevade e no atual Vale do Aço, impulsionando o crescimento demográfico e econômico.\",\n },\n 'it': { # wikipedia article of the day 2020-02-05\n 'sample-1': \"Bruce Springsteen (pronuncia americana: [bɹuːs ˈspɹɪŋstiːn]; Long Branch, 23 settembre 1949) è un cantautore e chitarrista statunitense.\",\n 'sample-2': \"«The Boss», come è sempre stato soprannominato, è uno degli artisti più conosciuti e rappresentativi nell'ambito della musica rock. Accompagnato per gran parte della sua carriera dalla E Street Band, è divenuto famoso soprattutto per le sue coinvolgenti e lunghissime esibizioni dal vivo, raggiungendo il culmine della popolarità fra la seconda metà degli anni settanta e il decennio successivo.\",\n 'sample-3': \"Fra i suoi album di maggior successo si annoverano Born to Run, Darkness on the Edge of Town, The River e Born in the U.S.A., lavori emblematici della sua poetica volta a raccontare – con l'immediatezza della musica rock – la quotidianità degli \\\"ultimi\\\" d'America, nel solco della tradizione dei cosiddetti «storyteller», offrendo uno spaccato della grandezza e delle contraddizioni della società statunitense; con il disco The Rising è intervenuto anche sulla tragedia degli attentati dell'11 settembre 2001. Springsteen è noto inoltre per il suo sostegno a numerose iniziative di carattere sociale e per il suo impegno a favore dello sviluppo del suo Stato d'origine, il New Jersey. Negli anni duemila ha partecipato attivamente al dibattito politico negli Stati Uniti, appoggiando le campagne presidenziali di John Kerry e di Barack Obama.\",\n 'sample-4': \"In più di quarant'anni di carriera ha venduto 65 milioni di dischi nel suo paese e, secondo alcune stime, circa 120 milioni nel mondo. Il suo lavoro gli ha fruttato parecchi riconoscimenti, tra cui venti Grammy, un Oscar, un Tony Award e il Kennedy Center Honor, che gli è stato attribuito per il suo contributo alla diffusione della cultura degli Stati Uniti nel mondo; è stato inoltre insignito della medaglia presidenziale della libertà, massima onorificenza civile statunitense.\",\n },\n 'nl': { # wikipedia article of the day 2020-02-05\n 'sample-1': \"Cristiano Ronaldo dos Santos Aveiro (Funchal, 5 februari 1985) is een Portugees profvoetballer die bij voorkeur als linksbuiten speelt. Hij verruilde in 2018 Real Madrid voor Juventus. Voorafgaand speelde hij voor Sporting Lissabon en Manchester United. Tot 2013 was hij de duurste voetballer aller tijden. In 2015 werd hij de all-time topscorer van de UEFA Champions League/Europacup I alsmede de meest scorende Real Madrid-speler ooit. Hij schaarde zich in 2018 tot het tiental spelers dat de Champions League vijfmaal won. Op zijn palmares als clubspeler prijken verder zes landstitels, vijf nationale bekers, zes nationale supercups, drie Europese supercups en vier wereldkampioenschappen voor clubs.\",\n 'sample-2': \"Ronaldo debuteerde in 2003 in het Portugees voetbalelftal, waarvan hij in 2008 aanvoerder en 2014 topscorer aller tijden werd. Op het door Portugal gewonnen Euro 2016 werd hij recordinternational. Ronaldo werd in 2008, 2013, 2014, 2016 en 2017 uitgeroepen tot beste voetballer ter wereld. Hij is na Ali Daei de speler met de meeste interlanddoelpunten.\",\n 'sample-3': \"Ronaldo is de zoon van Dinis Aveiro, een tuinman, en zijn vrouw Dolores dos Santos Aveiro, een kok. Ronaldo was een ongewenst kind en zijn moeder overwoog abortus. In plaats daarvan dronk zij op advies donker bier om vervolgens te rennen totdat ze bijna flauwviel, maar een miskraam bleef uit. Zijn vader was een alcoholist en verkocht, met zijn andere zoon Hugo, \\\"Manchester United\\\"-shirts van Ronaldo om alcohol te kunnen blijven kopen. Hij dronk zich dood toen Ronaldo negentien jaar oud was.\",\n 'sample-4': \"Ronaldo is afkomstig van het Portugese eiland Madeira. Als kind begon hij aldaar met voetballen bij de amateurclub CF Andorinha. Hierna speelde hij bij CD Nacional en maakte hij op twaalfjarige leeftijd de overstap naar het vasteland van Portugal om te worden opgenomen in de jeugdopleiding van Sporting Lissabon. Vijf jaar later, in oktober 2002, maakte de vleugelaanvaller zijn officiële debuut voor het eerste elftal van de club; in een competitiewedstrijd thuis tegen Moreirense (3-0) scoorde hij twee doelpunten. Ronaldo speelde vervolgens nog dertig officiële wedstrijden in zijn eerste jaar als prof en voegde daarin drie goals toe aan zijn seizoenstotaal van vijf.\",\n },\n 'el': { # wikipedia article of the day 2020-02-05\n 'sample-1': \"Ο Ιάννης Ξενάκης (29 Μαΐου 1922 – 4 Φεβρουαρίου 2001) ήταν ένας από τους σημαντικότερους Έλληνες συνθέτες και αρχιτέκτονες του 20ού αιώνα, διεθνώς γνωστός ως “Iannis Xenakis”. Οι πρωτοποριακές συνθετικές μέθοδοι που ανέπτυξε συσχέτιζαν τη μουσική και την αρχιτεκτονική με τα μαθηματικά και τη φυσική, μέσω της χρήσης μοντέλων από τη θεωρία των συνόλων, τη θεωρία των πιθανοτήτων, τη θερμοδυναμική, τη Χρυσή Τομή, την ακολουθία Φιμπονάτσι κ.ά. Παράλληλα, οι φιλοσοφικές του ιδέες για τη μουσική έθεσαν καίρια το αίτημα για ενότητα φιλοσοφίας, επιστήμης και τέχνης, συμβάλλοντας στο γενικότερο προβληματισμό για την κρίση της σύγχρονης ευρωπαϊκής μουσικής των δεκαετιών του 1950 και 1960.\",\n 'sample-2': \"Γεννήθηκε στη Βραΐλα της Ρουμανίας. Ήταν ο πρωτότοκος γιος του Κλεάρχου Ξενάκη, εμπόρου με καταγωγή από την Εύβοια, και της Φωτεινής Παύλου, η οποία καταγόταν από τη Λήμνο.\",\n 'sample-3': \"Η μητέρα του πέθανε από ιλαρά όταν ο Ξενάκης ήταν πέντε ετών, αλλά πρόλαβε να του εμφυσήσει την αγάπη της για τη μουσική (η ίδια έπαιζε ερασιτεχνικά πιάνο).\",\n 'sample-4': \"Πέντε χρόνια αργότερα (1932) ο πατέρας του τον έστειλε μαζί με τα αδέλφια του Ιάσονα (φιλόσοφο και καθηγητή στο Πανεπιστήμιο της Λουιζιάνας, ΗΠΑ) και Κοσμά (ζωγράφο) στην Αναργύρειο και Κοργιαλένειο Σχολή Σπετσών. Εκεί πήρε και τα πρώτα του μαθήματα μουσικής (Αρμονίας και πιάνου).\",\n },\n 'nb': { # wikipedia article of the day 2020-02-05\n 'sample-1': \"Frøyningsfjelltromma (Freavnantjahke gievrie) er ei sjamantromme, også kalt runebomme, fra det sørsamiske området i Norge. Gjennom den siste kjente eieren er den knyttet til Frøyningsfjellet i Namdalen.\",\n 'sample-2': \"Den er en av de best dokumenterte samiske trommene i Norge: eierne Bendix Andersen Frennings Fjeld og Jon Torchelsen Fipling-Skov møtte Thomas von Westen i 1723 og gav ham en forklaring på trommas symboler og deres betydning. Tromma ble «beslaglagt» det samme året, og har siden 1837 vært i Meininger Museum i Tyskland.\",\n 'sample-3': \"Tromma skal ifølge Bendix og Jon være «arved i 4de Led». Den er ei rammetromme utført ved sveiping av et tynt trestykke av furu til en jevn, symmetrisk oval med største mål 48 x 30 cm. Tromma er bevart med 50 lærreimer fest til undersiden.\",\n 'sample-4': \"134 små metallbiter er festet til reimene. På ramma er det festet 11 små stifter av tinn i korsform; Bendix og Jon forklarte at dette «viiser hvor mange Biørne efter denne Runne-Bommes prophetie ere fældede.»\",\n },\n 'lt': { # wikipedia article of the day 2020-02-05\n 'sample-1': \"Klondaiko aukso karštine (angl. Klondike Gold Rush) vadinamas apie 100 tūkstančių aukso ieškotojų antplūdis į Jukono regione esantį Klondaiko baseiną, Šiaurės vakarų Kanadoje 1896-1899 metais po to, kai vietiniai kalnakasiai šiame regione surado aukso.\",\n 'sample-2': \"1896 m. rugpjūčio mėn. trys žmonės, vadovaujami Džimo Skukumo, indėno iš Tagišų genties, išvyko iš Karkroso gyvenvietės į šiaurę, žemyn pagal Jukono upę ieškoti Skukumo sesers Keitės (Shaaw Tláa)ir jos vyro Džordžo Karmako. Be Skukumo grupelėje buvo jo pusbrolis Čarlis Dousonas, taip pat jo gentainis Petsis Chendersonas. Suradę žvejojusius lašišas Keitę ir Karmaką būrelis žmonių patraukė pas Robertą Chendersoną, atvykėlį iš Škotijos, kuris ieškojo aukso Indėnų upėje, į šiaurę nuo Klondaiko. Chendersonas papasakojo Karmakui apie savo paieškų vietą.\",\n 'sample-3': \"Tuomet Džordžas Karmakas, jo indėnų – tagišų kilmės žmona Keitė Karmak, jos brolis Skukumas Džimas ir pusbrolis Dousonas Čarlis, remdamiesi Roberto Hendersono pasakojimu, pradėjo aukso paieškas Bonanza upėje, kuri buvo vienas iš Klondaiko intakų.\",\n 'sample-4': \"1896 m. rugpjūčio 16 d. ieškotojai surado turtingus aukso išteklius. Neaišku, kas aptiko auksą: Džordžas Karmakas ar Skukumas Džimas, tačiau oficialiai aukso atradėju buvo pripažintas Džordžas Karmakas, nes paraiška buvo užregistruota būtent jo vardu. Ieškotojai baiminosi, kad valdžia gali nepripažinti vietos indėno aukso atradėju.\",\n },\n 'ja': {\n 'sample-1': \"アップルがイギリスの新興企業を１０億ドルで購入を検討\",\n 'sample-2': \"自動運転車の損害賠償責任、自動車メーカーに一定の負担を求める\",\n 'sample-3': \"歩道を走る自動配達ロボ、サンフランシスコ市が走行禁止を検討\",\n 'sample-4': \"ロンドンはイギリスの大都市です。\",\n },\n 'zh': {\n 'sample-1': \"作为语言而言，为世界使用人数最多的语言，目前世界有五分之一人口做为母语。\",\n 'sample-2': \"汉语有多种分支，当中官话最为流行，为中华人民共和国的国家通用语言（又称为普通话）、以及中华民国的国语。\",\n 'sample-3': \"此外，中文还是联合国正式语文，并被上海合作组织等国际组织采用为官方语言。\",\n 'sample-4': \"在中国大陆，汉语通称为“汉语”。\",\n },\n 'ca': { # wikipedia article of the day on 2022-01-11: Hidrogen (Hydrogen)\n 'sample-1': \"L'hidrogen és l'element químic de símbol H i nombre atòmic 1. La seva massa atòmica mitjana d'1,00784 uma en fa l'element més lleuger. Es tracta de la substància química més abundant de l'Univers i en constitueix un 75% de la massa bariònica. Les estrelles no romanents es componen principalment d'hidrogen en estat de plasma.\",\n 'sample-2': \"En condicions estàndard de temperatura i pressió, l'hidrogen és incolor, inodor, insípid, no tòxic, no metàl·lic, i altament combustible; pren la forma d'un gas diatòmic de fórmula molecular H2. L'hidrogen atòmic d'ocurrència natural és molt rar a la Terra, ja que forma fàcilment compostos covalents amb la majoria d'elements i es troba present a la molècula d'aigua i en la majoria de compostos orgànics. L'hidrogen té un paper molt important en la química d'àcid-base: en moltes reaccions s'intercanvien protons entre molècules solubles.\",\n 'sample-3': \"En compostos iònics, l'hidrogen pot prendre una càrrega negativa (en forma d'un anió conegut com a hidrur que s'escriu H−), o bé una càrrega positiva (catió H+). Aquest darrer s'escriu com si fos un simple protó però, en realitat, els cations d'hidrogen en compostos iònics ocorren en espècies més complexes. D'altra banda, l'isòtop més comú de l'hidrogen és el proti (símbol 1H), que té un sol protó i cap neutró. Com que es tracta de l'àtom conegut més simple, l'àtom d'hidrogen ha estat molt utilitzat per resoldre problemes teòrics: per exemple, com que és l'únic àtom neutre que té una solució analítica de l'equació de Schrödinger, l'estudi de l'energètica i dels enllaços de l'àtom d'hidrogen tingué un paper clau en el desenvolupament de la mecànica quàntica.\",\n 'sample-4': \"L'hidrogen gas fou produït artificialment per primer cop als inicis del segle xvi mitjançant la barreja de metalls i àcids forts. En els anys 1766–81, Henry Cavendish fou el primer a reconèixer que l'hidrogen era una substància distinta i que produeix aigua quan es crema, propietat que més tard li donà a l'element el seu nom actual: el nom «hidrogen» és una derivació del grec que significa 'formador d'aigua'.\",\n },\n 'da': { # wikipedia article of the week on 2022-01-11: Margrethe 2.\n 'sample-1': \"Hendes Majestæt Dronning Margrethe II (Margrethe Alexandrine Þórhildur Ingrid, Danmarks dronning) (født 16. april 1940 på Amalienborg Slot) er siden 14. januar 1972 Danmarks regent. Hun er datter af kong Frederik 9. og Dronning Ingrid. Margrethe II var gift med prins Henrik (prinsgemalen) med hvem hun har sønnerne kronprins Frederik og prins Joachim.\",\n 'sample-2': \"Margrethe efterfulgte sin far ved dennes død den 14. januar 1972. Efter hendes tiltrædelse blev hun den første kvindelige monark i Danmark siden Margrethe 1. Som monark har hun den næstlængste regeringstid af alle danske monarker kun overgået af Christian 4.\",\n 'sample-3': \"Kanonsalut fra Flagbastionen på Kronborg Slot i anledning af Dronningens 69 års fødselsdag. Margrethe II er Danmarks dronning i medfør af Tronfølgeloven af 1953, og tilhører den glücksburgske slægt. Dronningen tituleres Hendes Majestæt Dronning Margrethe II, i tiltale Deres Majestæt. Idet Margrethe II er barnebarn af Margareta af Connaught er hun nr. 220 i den britiske tronfølge.\",\n 'sample-4': \"Prinsesse Margrethe blev født den 16. april 1940 i Frederik VIII's Palæ på Amalienborg Slot i København i sin farfar Kong Christian 10.'s regeringstid. Hun var datter af kronprins Frederik og kronprinsesse Ingrid af Danmark. Hun er opkaldt efter sin mormor Margareta og har også arvet Margaretas kælenavn Daisy.\",\n },\n 'mk': { # wikipedia article of the week on 2022-01-11: Брзина на светлината (Speed of light)\n 'sample-1': \"Брзина на светлината, обично се бележи со латинично c (лат. celeritas — брзина) — физичка константа важна во голем број области од физиката. Нејзината вредност (во вакуум) изнесува точно 299.792.458 м/сек. (≈3,00⋅108 м/с), односно 1.079.252.848,8 км/ч. Според Специјалната теорија на релативноста тоа е максималната брзина со која сета енергијата, материјата и сите информации можат да патуваат во универзумот, а која може да се постигне единствено во вакуум . Затоа често се обележува и со c0. Во други средини (течности, гасови...) брзината на светлината е различна и секогаш помала отколку во вакуум. Со брзината на светлината во вакуум се движат честичките кои немаат маса и електромагнетното зрачење (светлината и гравитационите бранови и се одвиваат промените во полињата. Тие ја задржуваат c без разлика на движењето на нивниот извор или на инерцијалниот појдовен систем на набљудувачот. Во Теоријата на релативноста c ги соединува просторот и времето и се појавува во познатата Ајнштајнова равенка за еднаквост на масата и енергијата E = mc2.\",\n 'sample-2': \"Брзината со која светлината се пренесува низ проѕирни материјали (стакло, воздух...), а радиобрановите низ кабли, е помала од c. Односот меѓу c и v, брзината со која светлината патува низ одреден материјал, го дава показателот на прекршување n на материјалот (n = c / v). За видливата светлина показателот на прекршување на стаклото изнесува околу 1,5, што значи дека низ стаклото светлината патува со брзина од c / 1.5 ≈ 200.000 км/с. Показателот на прекршување на воздухот изнесува приближно 1.0003 за видливата светлина, што значи дека таа низ воздух се движи со брзина од 299.700 км/с (90 км/с побавно отколку со c).\",\n 'sample-3': \"Кога електромагнетните бранови треба да поминат големо растојание или при правење прецизни мерења, нивната конечна брзина значајно отстапува од c. За пристигање на пораки испратени од Земјата до далечни вселенски сонди, а и обратно, потребни се од неколку минути до неколку часа. Онаа светлина која ја емитуваат ѕвездите нив ги напуштила пред мноштво години, што значи дека ние ја гледаме и проучуваме историјата на вселената и вселенските објекти. Ограничената брзина на светлината ја ограничува и онаа која е теоретски максимум на сметачите, поради преносот на информациите од чип на чип. Затоа, пак, брзината на светлината овозможува мерење огромни растојанија со голема прецизност.\",\n 'sample-4': \"Првиот научник кој покажал дека светлината патува со определена, конечна брзина е Оле Ремер. Тоа го објавил во 1676 година по набљудувањето на движењето на Ија (една од месечините на Јупитер). Во 1865 година Џејмс Кларк Максвел претпоставил дека светлината е електромагнетен бран и затоа патува со брзината c спомената во неговата теорија на електромагнетизмот. Во 1905 година Алберт Ајнштајн претпоставил дека брзината на светлината не зависи од движењето на светлинскиот извор во ниеден инерцијален појдовен систем, а последиците од ваквата поставка ги истражил изведувајќи ја Специјалната теорија на релативноста и покажувајќи дека параметарот c не е важен само за светлината и електромагнетизмот.\",\n },\n 'pl': { # wikipedia article of the week on 2022-01-11: Medaliści igrzysk olimpijskich w skeletonie (List of Olympic medalists in skeleton)\n 'sample-1': \"Medaliści igrzysk olimpijskich w skeletonie – zestawienie zawodników i zawodniczek, którzy przynajmniej raz stanęli na podium zawodów olimpijskich w skeletonie.\",\n 'sample-2': \"Skeleton jest jedną z trzech dyscyplin zaliczanych do sportów saneczkowych, które znajdują się w programie zimowych igrzysk olimpijskich. Zawody skeletonowe zadebiutowały na Zimowych Igrzyskach Olimpijskich 1928 w szwajcarskim Sankt Moritz, gdzie w 1884 roku rozegrano pierwsze w historii zawody w tej dyscyplinie sportu. W jedynej skeletonowej konkurencji, jedynkach mężczyzn, zawodnicy mieli rywalizować w czterech przejazdach, a końcowa klasyfikacja miała zostać wyłoniona na podstawie sumy wszystkich czasów. Ostatecznie rozegrano jednak tylko trzy przejazdy. Po raz drugi w historii zawody skeletonowe na zimowych igrzyskach olimpijskich rozegrano w 1948 roku, ponownie na torze w Sankt Moritz. Podobnie jak 20 lat wcześniej jedyną konkurencją były jedynki mężczyzn. Tym razem zawodnicy rywalizowali w sześciu ślizgach, a o końcowej klasyfikacji decydował łączny czas wszystkich przejazdów. W latach 80. XX wieku zaczęto organizować zawody Pucharu Świata w skeletonie, a od 1996 roku w zawodach zaczęły startować także kobiety. Dzięki temu podczas Zimowych Igrzyskach Olimpijskich 2002 w Salt Lake City, po 54-letniej przerwie skeleton powrócił do programu zimowych igrzysk olimpijskich. Wówczas to, oprócz konkurencji męskich jedynek, po raz pierwszy w historii, rozegrano również zawody jedynek kobiet.\",\n 'sample-3': \"W 1928 roku pierwsze w historii zimowych igrzysk olimpijskich zawody skeletonowe wygrał reprezentant Stanów Zjednoczonych, Jennison Heaton, który na tych samych igrzyskach zdobył także srebrny medal w konkurencji bobslejowych piątek. Drugie miejsce zajął jego młodszy brat, Jack Heaton, który łącznie stracił sekundę do zwycięzcy. Najniższe miejsce na podium zajął Brytyjczyk David Carnegie.\",\n 'sample-4': \"Jack Heaton powtórzył swoje osiągnięcie 20 lat później, przegrywając jedynie z reprezentującym Włochy Nino Bibbią. Tytuł mistrza olimpijskiego zdobyty przez Włocha był pierwszym w historii startów jego kraju na zimowych igrzyskach olimpijskich. Podobnie jak 20 lat wcześniej, brązowym medalistą został reprezentant Wielkiej Brytanii, tym razem był to John Crammond.\",\n },\n 'ro': { # wikipedia article of the week on 2022-01-11: Jigoku Shoujo\n 'sample-1': \"Jigoku Shoujo (地獄少女 Jigoku Shōjo?), cunoscut în engleză de asemenea și ca Jigoku Shōjo: Girl from Hell, Hell Girl (în română: Fata Iadului) este un serial anime produs de Aniplex și Studio Deen. Regizorul serialului este Takahiro Ōmori, iar scenaristul este Hiroshi Watanabe și este distribuit în Statele Unite ale Americii și Canada de către Funimation și Sentai Filmworks.\",\n 'sample-2': \"Acțiunea anime-ului este bazată pe existența unui sistem supranatural care le permite oamenilor să se răzbune prin trimiterea altor oameni în Iad, datorită serviciilor unui personaj misterios și al asistenților acestuia. Ajutoarele lui Ai încearcă să îi determine pe răufăcători să își dea seama de culpabilitatea lor și să-și recunoască greșelile, însă rezultatul este același: trimiterea lor în Iad. Răzbunarea, ura, nedreptatea și alte emoții de natură umană sunt teme comune care sunt prezente pe parcursul seriilor anime.\",\n 'sample-3': \"Acest anime a fost difuzat pe teritoriul Japoniei prin numeroase posturi de televiziune, precum Animax, Tokyo MX, MBS și altele, în perioada 4 octombrie 2005 și 4 aprilie 2006. Urmând succesul primei serii, o serie secundă, Jigoku Shōjo Futakomori (地獄少女 二籠?), a fost programată pe 7 octombrie 2006 pe Animax. Postul Nippon Television a realizat o serie televizată live-action, difuzată din data de 4 noiembrie 2006.\",\n 'sample-4': \"Al treilea sezon al anime-ului a fost anunțat pe versiunea mobilă a site-ului oficial Jigoku Tsūshin. Titlul oficial al acestuia a fost prezentat ca fiind Jigoku Shōjo Mitsuganae (地獄少女 三鼎?). și a fost emis pe posturile de televiziune nipone la data de 4 octombrie 2008\",\n },\n 'ru': { # wikipedia article of the week on 2022-01-11: Сате (Saté)\n 'sample-1': \"Сате́, реже сатэ́ (индон. и яв. sate), также сатэ́й (малайск. и англ. satay), местный вариант сатти́ (сулу satti) — блюдо индонезийской, малайзийской[en] и ряда других кухонь стран Юго-Восточной Азии. Представляет собой миниатюрный вариант шашлыка, который может готовиться практически из любых видов мяса, птицы, субпродуктов, даров моря и многих других продуктов, в том числе растительного происхождения — например, тофу, темпе, различных овощей и даже фруктов.\",\n 'sample-2': \"Шампуры для сате обычно изготовляются из бамбука, реже — из высушенных жилок пальмовых листьев. Кроме того, существуют отдельные виды сате, которые нанизываются на стебли определённых растений или металлические шпажки. Абсолютное большинство видов этого кушанья готовится в мангале на углях, однако в некоторых районах Малайзии нанизанные на шампур продукты варят в кипятке или разогретом соусе.\",\n 'sample-3': \"Блюдо возникло под влиянием кулинарных традиций народов Южной Азии и Ближнего Востока и фактически представляет собой местную адаптацию кебаба. Родоначальницей сате считается яванская кухня[en], в которой и сейчас это кушанье играет исключительно важную роль. В настоящее время оно пользуется большой популярностью в Индонезии и Малайзии, где является одним из наиболее распространённых блюд ресторанной и уличной кухни, имеющим множество вариаций в плане используемых продуктов, нюансов приготовления и подачи. Достаточно широко сате известно в Сингапуре, Брунее, Таиланде, на Филиппинах и, в меньшей степени, за пределами Юго-Восточной Азии, в частности, в Нидерландах — бывшей метрополии Индонезии.\",\n 'sample-4': \"Сате не принадлежит к числу исконных, самобытных блюд народов Малайского архипелага и Малайского полуострова. Общепризнано, что изготовление этого кушанья было освоено под влиянием индийских и арабских кулинарных традиций, которое было здесь весьма ощутимым на протяжении многих столетий, а непосредственным его прототипом стал кебаб. Первыми в этом регионе технологию жарки мяса и других продуктов на шампуре ввели в обиход яванцы, заимствовавшие её в ходе культурных обменов с народами Ближнего Востока и южной части Индостана. Основным фактором, обусловившим миниатюаризацию шашлыков по сравнению с их изначальным прототипом, считается относительный дефицит мяса, характерный для Явы во все исторические времена, который, в свою очередь, предопределён недостатком пастбищных земель и климатическими условиями, не слишком благоприятствующими скотоводству.\",\n },\n}\n" }, { "path": "tests/_testtools.py", "content": "import string\n\nfrom hypothesis import strategies as st\nfrom hypothesis.extra.numpy import arrays, array_shapes\n\n\ndef strategy_2d_array(dtype, minval=0, maxval=None, **kwargs):\n if 'min_side' in kwargs:\n min_side = kwargs.pop('min_side')\n else:\n min_side = 1\n\n if 'max_side' in kwargs:\n max_side = kwargs.pop('max_side')\n else:\n max_side = None\n\n if dtype is int:\n elems = st.integers(minval, maxval, **kwargs)\n elif dtype is float:\n elems = st.floats(minval, maxval, **kwargs)\n elif dtype is str:\n elems = st.text(min_size=minval, max_size=maxval, **kwargs)\n else:\n raise ValueError('no elements strategy for dtype', dtype)\n\n return arrays(dtype, array_shapes(min_dims=2, max_dims=2, min_side=min_side, max_side=max_side), elements=elems)\n\n\ndef strategy_dtm():\n return strategy_2d_array(int, 0, 10000)\n\n\ndef strategy_dtm_small():\n return strategy_2d_array(int, 0, 10, min_side=2, max_side=6)\n\n\ndef strategy_2d_prob_distribution():\n return strategy_2d_array(float, 0, 1, allow_nan=False, allow_infinity=False)\n\n\ndef strategy_tokens(*args, **kwargs):\n return st.lists(st.text(*args, **kwargs))\n\n\ndef strategy_lists_of_tokens(*args, **kwargs):\n return st.lists(st.lists(st.text(*args, **kwargs)))\n\n\ndef strategy_texts(*args, **kwargs):\n return st.lists(st.text(*args, **kwargs))\n\n\ndef strategy_texts_printable():\n return strategy_texts(string.printable)\n\n\ndef strategy_str_str_dict(keys_args, keys_kwargs, values_args, values_kwargs):\n return st.dictionaries(st.text(*keys_args, **keys_kwargs), st.text(*values_args, **values_kwargs))\n\n\ndef strategy_str_str_dict_printable():\n return st.dictionaries(st.text(string.printable), st.text(string.printable))\n" }, { "path": "tests/data/.gitignore", "content": "test_pickle_unpickle*\n" }, { "path": "tests/data/100NewsArticles.csv", "content": "article_id,publish_date,article_source_link,title,subtitle,text,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n1,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pence-break-tie-betsy-devos-confirmation-vote-today/story?id=45310061,\"Betsy DeVos Confirmed as Education Secretary, With Pence Casting Historic Tie-Breaking Vote\",,\"Michigan billionaire education activist Betsy DeVos was confirmed today to serve as the secretary of education in President Trump's administration, after Vice President Mike Pence cast a tie-breaking vote in the Senate. The Senate voted on DeVos\"\"?highly contentious nomination this afternoon, and the tally was split evenly, requiring Pence to use his authority as president of the upper chamber of Congress to break the impasse. This was the first time that a vice president has broken a tie to confirm a Cabinet nominee. Pence read the vote count 50-50 and then voted himself, rendering the tally 51-50. The day before the vote, Democrats staged a 24-hour marathon of speeches, with more than 30 lawmakers taking to the floor to urge at least one additional Republican to vote against DeVos and block her confirmation. \"\"It is hard to imagine a worse choice,\"\"?Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said before she read letters from constituents urging her to vote no. DeVos stirred up vehement opposition from teachers\"\"?unions and all 48 Senate Democrats. Many cited concerns about her support of school vouchers, which critics believe will weaken public schools, and her lack of experience, since she never attended or worked in the public education system. Others cited her lack of familiarity with a landmark law protecting the education needs of disabled children. She was panned for a gaffe during her confirmation hearing, when she hedged on an answer about guns in schools by saying they might be needed in states like Wyoming to defend against \"\"potential grizzlies.\"\"?DeVos' nomination drew above-average negative reactions from the public, with voters flooding Senate phone lines and email accounts in recent weeks. Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said his office received 14,000 calls about DeVos. In addition to the entire Democratic caucus, two moderate Republicans, Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska announced they would not support DeVos. During a speech announcing her opposition, Collins said DeVos\"\"?focus on charters and vouchers \"\"raises the question of whether or not she fully appreciates that the secretary of education's primary focus must be on helping states and communities, parents, teachers, school board members and administrators strengthen our public schools.\"\"?Before the confirmation vote, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee voted along party lines, 12-11, to refer DeVos\"\"?nomination to the full Senate. ABC News\"\"?Morgan Winsor contributed to this report.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n2,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/melania-trump-white-house-millions-brand-45327337,Melania Trump Says White House Could Mean Millions for Brand,,\"First lady Melania Trump has said little about what she intends to do with her prominent position. But in new court documents, her lawyers say that the \"\"multi-year term\"\" during which she \"\"is one of the most photographed women in the world\"\" could mean millions of dollars for her personal brand. While the new documents don't specifically mention her term as first lady, the unusual statement about her expected profits drew swift condemnation from ethics watchdogs as inappropriate profiteering from her high-profile position, which is typically centered on public service. The statement came Monday in a libel lawsuit the first lady re-filed in a state trial court in Manhattan. Trump has been suing the corporation that publishes the Daily Mail's website over a now-retracted report that claimed she once worked as an escort. In the filing Monday, Trump's lawyers argued that the report was not only false and libelous, but also damaged her ability to profit off her high profile and affected her business opportunities. Trump \"\"had the unique, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, as an extremely famous and well-known person, as well as a former professional model, brand spokesperson and successful businesswoman, to launch a broad-based commercial brand in multiple product categories, each of which could have garnered multi-million dollar business relationships for a multi-year term during which plaintiff is one of the most photographed women in the world,\"\" the lawsuit said. The products could have included apparel, accessories, jewelry, cosmetics, hair care and fragrance, among others, the suit says. The first lady is seeking compensatory and punitive damages of at least $150 million. Richard Painter, who advised former President George W. Bush on ethics, said the language in the lawsuit shows Melania Trump is engaging \"\"in an unprecedented, clear breach of rules about using her government position for private gain. This is a very serious situation where she says she intends to make a lot of money. That ought to be repudiated by the White House or investigated by Congress.\"\" Painter is part of a group of attorneys suing the president for an alleged violation of a constitutional clause that prohibits presidents from receiving foreign gifts or payments. In response to questions from The Associated Press, Charles Harder, Melania Trump's attorney, said \"\"the first lady has no intention of using her position for profit and will not do so. It is not a possibility. Any statements to the contrary are being misinterpreted.\"\" Harder did not respond to a follow-up question about what the lawsuit means by \"\"once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.\"\" To Painter and others, there is no ambiguity. \"\"She's not talking about the future,\"\" Painter said. \"\"She's talking about earning money now.\"\" Scott Amey, general counsel of the Washington watchdog Project on Government Oversight, said it is \"\"another example of the first family blurring the line between public service and private business interests.\"\" Trump previously filed the lawsuit against Mail Media Inc. in Maryland, but a judge earlier this month ruled the case was filed in the wrong court. The lawsuit is now filed in New York, where the corporation has offices. Trump also had sued blogger Webster Tarpley for reporting the unsubstantiated rumors. Trump filed the lawsuit in Maryland after both Tarpley and the Daily Mail issued retractions. On Tuesday, Melania Trump's attorneys said they'd settled the Maryland case against Tarpley. \"\"Mr. Tarpley has issued the attached retraction and apology to Mrs. Trump and her family, and agreed to pay her a substantial sum as a settlement,\"\" Harder's office said in a statement. Melania Trump's previous work in marketing has drawn scrutiny before. On Inauguration Day, the official White House biography for Melania Trump originally included an explicit reference to her jewelry collection, which it noted was sold on the home-shopping channel QVC. By the next day, that bio had been edited and simplified to say that she had \"\"launched her own jewelry collection.\"\" A spokeswoman for the first lady said the website was updated out of \"\"an abundance of caution\"\" and that the jewelry line is no longer available in any case. President Donald Trump continues to financially benefit from his global business empire, breaking from past practice. Previous presidents and their families have divested from business interests and placed their holdings in a blind trust, although there is no legal requirement to do so. Trump handed daily management of the real estate, property management and licensing to his adult sons and a longtime Trump Organization employee.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n3,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/trump-fears-fraud-gop-eliminates-election-commission-45328264,\"As Trump Fears Fraud, GOP Eliminates Election Commission\",,\"A House committee voted on Tuesday to eliminate an independent election commission charged with helping states improve their voting systems as President Donald Trump erroneously claims widespread voter fraud cost him the popular vote. The party-line vote came less than two days after Trump vowed to set up a White House commission helmed by Vice President Mike Pence to pursue his accusations of election fraud. \"\"We're going to look at it very, very carefully,\"\" Trump said of voter fraud in an interview with Fox News that aired Sunday. \"\"It has to do with the registration, and when you look at the registration and you see dead people that have voted.\"\" Reports that Trump told congressional leaders in a meeting last month that 3 to 5 million ballots were cast illegally during the 2016 race were met with discomfort on Capitol Hill. While top Republicans have refused to disavow his charges of election fraud, they haven't pushed for action on the issue, which remains a low priority for congressional leadership. The vote in the House Administration Committee underscored, once again, the political differences between the Republican president and the party's rank-and-file. The GOP majority on the committee eliminated the Election Assistance Commission, which was created by Congress after the 2000 Florida recount to upgrade voting technology and provide election-related information to federal entities, state officials and election administrators. Republicans say the commission is a prime example of government waste. They've been introducing legislation to end the commission for years with little success. \"\"If we're looking at reducing the size of government this is a perfect example of something that can be eliminated,\"\" said Rep. Gregg Harper, the committee chairman. \"\"We don't need fluff.\"\" Harper said he hadn't spoken to Trump about the legislation. \"\"He's certainly welcome to call me at any time,\"\" he said. The bill was opposed by committee Democrats and voting rights groups, who argued that the federal agency plays a vital role in protecting elections from hacking and other types of interference. \"\"At a time when the vast majority of the country's voting machines are outdated and in need of replacement, and after an election in which foreign criminals already tried to hack state voter registration systems, eliminating the EAC poses a risky and irresponsible threat to our election infrastructure,\"\" said Wendy Weiser, the democracy program director at the Brennan Center for Justice. The committee also voted to terminate the public financing system, which provides major party presidential nominees a lump sum grant of roughly $94.14 million in the general election. But by accepting the grant, a candidate may not raise any additional funds and is severely limited in how much of his own money he can give or lend to his campaign. President Barack Obama effectively ended the practice of candidates taking general election public financing in 2008, when he chose not to accept it. His Republican rival John McCain took the grant that year and was swamped by the Obama campaign's spending. Neither Hillary Clinton nor Trump accepted public financing this year. Money for the public financing of campaigns is collected through voluntary $3 checkoffs on taxpayers' returns. The checkoffs do not affect how much money a taxpayer owes. The legislation would devote $63 million of the available funds to pediatric cancer research. The remainder would be returned to the Treasury for deficit reduction. It is not clear if the full House will vote on the measures.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n4,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/appeals-court-decide-challenge-trumps-immigration-executive-order/story?id=45325524,Appeals Court to Decide on Challenge to Trump's Immigration Executive Order,,\"This afternoon, three federal judges from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments in the emergency legal challenge to President Trump's executive order that temporarily bars immigration and travel to the U.S. for people from seven Muslim-majority countries and for refugees. The hearing, which will be conducted over the phone at 3 p.m. Pacific time, will allow each side to give 30-minute arguments. The plaintiffs in this appeal, Washington and Minnesota, will state their case, as will the Department of Justice. The public can listen to the hearings live on the 9th Circuit website. The judges are expected to rule on the future of the executive order after hearing oral arguments. While their decision won't determine the constitutionality of Trump's immigration ban, it will determine whether the suspension of the executive order, ruled by U.S. District Court Judge James Robart, will remain. The two states have argued that Trump's order was likely to cause \"\"irreparable harm\"\" to businesses, schools, family relations and state residents' freedom to travel and is unconstitutional because it discriminates on the basis of religion. The Justice Department said the travel restrictions are a matter of national security and the administration was excluding people from countries with ties to terrorism, not people of a certain religion. Today, Trump suggested that the legal battle between the two states and the Justice Department could make it all the way to the Supreme Court. \"\"We're going to take it through the system,\"\" said Trump. \"\"It's very important for the country, regardless of me or whoever succeeds at a later date.\"\" On Capitol Hill today, Secretary of >Homeland Security John Kelly defended the immigration executive order, calling it \"\"lawful and constitutional.\"\" Only a week old, the order has sparked protests and outcry across the country. The legal community has been grappling with the order, some travelers have been delayed, and others are wondering if they will be allowed previously approved entry into the United States. The order, called Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States, bars all people with immigrant and nonimmigrant visas from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from coming to the U.S. for 90 days. It also prevents the entry of refugees from anywhere in the world for 120 days, with an indefinite ban on refugees from the war-torn country of Syria. The Monday after Trump signed his order, Washington state filed a legal challenge that was joined by Minnesota. Robart, an appointee of President George W. Bush, on Friday issued a temporary restraining order, which covers the entire U.S., blocking the travel ban. Trump immediately took issue with the move, tweeting on Saturday, \"\"The opinion of this so-called judge ... is ridiculous and will be overturned!\"\" On Saturday the Department of Justice, challenging Robart's ruling, turned to the powerful 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco to try to immediately lift the restraining order while the appeal was being considered. The appeals court denied the request. The outcome of today's hearing with the 9th Circuit could determine \"\"?at least temporarily \"\"?the fate of thousands of refugees, immigrants and travelers in the United States and abroad hoping to enter the U.S.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n5,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/US/23-states-winter-weather-alerts-us-braces-severe/story?id=45319196,At Least 4 Tornadoes Reported in Southeast Louisiana,,\"At least four tornadoes touched down in Louisiana today, causing damage and injuring locals. Tornadoes were reported in New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Donaldsonville, Ponchatoula and Killian, according to ABC News meteorologist Melissa Griffin. Tornado watches were in effect for parts of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and the Florida panhandle. The tornado watch in Louisiana and Mississippi expired after 2 p.m., when the storms moved east, Griffin said. The tornado watch in Alabama and Florida is set to expire at 6 p.m. Severe storms are expected in cities such as Gulfport, Biloxi, Mobile and Pensacola. There could still be isolated and severe storms in North and South Carolina. As of Tuesday morning, at least 23 U.S. states were under winter weather alerts, and a tornado watch has been issued for parts of the Southeast as most of the country braces for severe weather this week. \"\"We are in a very active weather pattern all across the country, from California to New York,\"\"?ABC News senior meteorologist Max Golembo said. An atmospheric river, which draws massive amounts of water vapor from the Pacific Ocean, has taken aim at California, where the National Weather Service has issued flash flood and flood watches through Friday. Copious rainfall is in the forecast for the West Coast until the end of the week, potentially bringing floods, mudslides and debris flows. ABC News\"\"?weather team predicts more than a half a foot of rain in Central to Northern California over the next several days. Additional rain is expected for Portland, Oregon, and Seattle. \"\"California will see waves of moisture on and off through Friday,\"\"?Golembo said. Meanwhile, thunderstorms and damaging winds are expected to rattle Southern states, from the Gulf Coast to the Ohio Valley. The National Weather System has issued a tornado watch for portions of southern Louisiana, southern Mississippi and other parts of the region's coast until 2 p.m. local time. \"\"severe storms are firing up already in Louisiana and Mississippi,\"\"?Golembo said. \"\"damaging winds are the biggest threat this morning.\"\"? Northeastern states can expect to see rain, snow and ice this week, according to ABC News meteorologists. The first of two storms arrives today, bringing rain and ice for much of the region, with potential snowfall in Boston and other parts of New England. The icy weather moved through the Hudson Valley into southern New England this morning. By this afternoon, the snow and ice in Boston will transition to heavy rain, with some snow and ice lingering in New England and the upper Hudson Valley near Albany, New York. ABC News meteorologists said a second storm will move into the Northeast on Thursday morning, bringing mostly snow to New York City and Boston. Heavy snowfall is in the forecast until Thursday afternoon. Some weather models are showing snow farther south in Philadelphia and Washington, D.C. \"\"This could be a plowed event for major Northeast cities,\"\"?Golembo said. \"\"stay tuned. This is a changing forecast.\"\"? \",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n6,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/mother-backpacker-slain-australia-criticizes-trump-45322081,Mother of Backpacker Slain in Australia Criticizes Trump,,\"The mother of a backpacker slain in an Australian hostel wrote an open letter to U.S. President Donald Trump, rejecting the decision to label her daughter's death as a \"\"terror attack.\"\" The August slayings of Mia Ayliffe-Chung, 20, and fellow Briton Tom Jackson, 30, were on a list of 78 attacks the White House says were \"\"executed or inspired by\"\" the Islamic State terror group \"\"?and under-reported by the media. Rosie Ayliffe says the possibility of terrorism was discounted early in the investigation. \"\"My daughter's death will not be used to further this insane persecution of innocent people,\"\" she wrote. Police in Australia allege that suspect Smail Ayad shouted \"\"Allahu akbar\"\" \"\"?an Arabic phrase meaning \"\"God is great\"\" \"\"?during the attack, but said there was no indication the assault was motivated by extremism. They have said they are investigating whether Ayad, who is French and was 29 years old at the time of killing, had a romantic obsession with Ayliffe-Chung. The attack took place in front of dozens of backpackers at a hostel in northern Queensland. Ayliffe-Chung was found dead at the scene. Jackson tried to stop the attack and was fatally wounded. \"\"This vilification of whole nation states and their people based on religion is a terrifying reminder of the horror that can ensue when we allow ourselves to be led by ignorant people into darkness and hatred,\"\" Ayliffe wrote.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n7,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trumps-labor-secretary-pick-andrew-puzder-admits-employing/story?id=45314474,Trump's Labor Secretary Pick Andrew Puzder Admits to Employing Undocumented Worker,,\"Donald Trump's pick for labor secretary, Andrew Puzder, admitted Monday night that he and his wife employed an undocumented worker for years, according to a statement. \"\"My wife and I employed a housekeeper for a few years, during which I was unaware that she was not legally permitted to work in the U.S.,\"\" Puzder, a fast food executive, said in the statement. \"\"When I learned of her status, we immediately ended her employment and offered her assistance in getting legal status. We have fully paid back taxes to the IRS and the state of California and submitted all required paperwork regarding her employment.\"\" His hearing has been stalled, but he still plans to pursue confirmation for the position. Puzder is the CEO of CKE Restaurants Inc., the parent company of Hardee's and Carl's Jr. \",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n8,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/iran-president-nuclear-deal-blueprint-disputes-45316889,Iran's Top Leader Mocks 'Newcomer' Trump,,\"Iran's supreme leader said Tuesday that \"\"newcomer\"\" President Donald Trump had shown the \"\"real face\"\" of the United States, after the American leader accused Iran of being ungrateful for sanctions relief approved by the Obama administration and vowed a tougher stance. Last week, after Iran tested a ballistic missile, Trump tweeted that the country was \"\"playing with fire,\"\" saying they \"\"don't appreciate how 'kind' President (Barack) Obama was to them. Not me!\"\" Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who makes the final decisions on all major policies in Iran, appeared to respond to the tweet in a remarks carried by State TV. \"\"Why should we be thankful to the previous U.S. administration?\"\" he said. \"\"Because it imposed anti-Iranian sanctions? Because of the extremist Islamic State group? Setting the region on fire in Iraq and Syria?\"\" He went on to mock Trump, saying: \"\"We are thankful to Mr. Newcomer, of course, since he has shown the real face of the U.S. and proved what Iran has said for 38 years about the political, economic, social and moral corruption of the U.S. government.\"\" He added that the Iranian people \"\"are not afraid of any threat.\"\" Trump has repeatedly criticized the 2015 nuclear agreement between Iran, the U.S. and five other world powers, in which Tehran agreed to curb its uranium enrichment in exchange for the lifting of international sanctions, but he has not said what he plans to do about it. His administration said Iran was \"\"on notice\"\" over the missile test, and imposed new sanctions on more than two dozen Iranian companies and individuals. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, a moderate who has worked to improve relations with the West, said earlier Tuesday that the nuclear agreement could serve as a blueprint for resolving other Middle East disputes. As an example, he pointed to Russian-led negotiations in Kazakhstan aimed at firming up a shaky Syrian cease-fire and paving the way for the revival of peace talks to end that country's nearly six-year civil war. Iran and Russia are close allies of Syrian President Bashar Assad, while the U.S. and other Western countries support the rebels fighting to topple him.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n9,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/eu-britain-pay-ordered-leaving-45319307,EU to Britain: Pay Up for What You Ordered Before Leaving,,\"The European Union is warning Britain that any financial commitment it has taken on as a member \"\"should be honored in full,\"\" even well after it leaves as a result of the Brexit negotiations. Estimates have been made that the bill at the exit door could go as high as 60 billion euros ($64 billion). \"\"This will be an essential element of the negotiations on the orderly separation,\"\" EU Commission spokesman Margaritis Schinas said Tuesday. Otherwise, he said, it would be like going to a pub with 27 friends, ordering a round and leaving while the party continues. \"\"You still need to pay for the round you ordered,\"\" Schinas said.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n10,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/US/multi-state-manhunt-southeast-intensifies-alleged-murderer-accomplice/story?id=45320369,Multi-State Manhunt in Southeast Intensifies for Alleged Murderer and Accomplice,,\"A manhunt is intensifying in the Southeast for alleged killer William \"\"Billy\"\" Boyette and his alleged accomplice Mary Rice, who are on the run and considered armed and dangerous after the deaths of three women in the Florida panhandle area. In Escambia County, Florida -- where uniformed and plain clothed officers are increasing patrols -- the sheriff's office on Monday called Boyette, 44, and Rice, 37, moving targets, saying they are believed to be moving through wooded areas and may be along the Florida and Alabama border. U.S. Marshals from across the country, along with bloodhounds and helicopters, are taking part in the search, officials said this morning. \"\"We have a killer in our midst,\"\" said Escambia County Sheriff David Morgan. The first reported crime was on Jan. 31, in Santa Rosa County, Florida, when Alicia Greer, 30, and Jacqueline Moore, 39, were found shot to death at an inn, Morgan said. Boyette and Rice are both suspects, The Associated Press reported. Greer, a mother of three, was allegedly in an abusive relationship with Boyette, the victim's father told ABC affiliate WEAR in Pensacola. Authorities say the other victims didn\"\"t appear to have any connection to Boyette. On Feb. 3, in nearby Baldwin County, Alabama, 52-year-old Peggy Broz was discovered shot to death in her driveway, Morgan said. Officials said today that both Boyette and Rice were involved in the fatal shooting. According to AP, investigators said the duo then stole Broz' car. On Feb. 6, in Escambia County, Florida, 28-year-old Kayla Crocker was shot and injured during a home invasion, they added. Crocker's white Chevrolet Cobalt was stolen, and Morgan said that video surveillance showed the duo took the car. We just received these recent pictures of Boyette and Rice. Now believed to be traveling in a white 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt Fl Tag #9613BJ. pic.twitter.com/mDQhvp48aG Santa Rosa County, Florida, Sheriff Bob Johnson this morning said there is no doubt Rice is a \"\"willing participant\"\" in the crime-spree. Regarding Boyette, Johnson said, \"\"it's just a matter of time\"\" before he's caught. The pair were last seen in west Escambia County, Alabama, he said. \"\"Sooner or later he's going to make a mistake and when he does were gonna pounce on him,\"\" Johnson said. \"\"Hopefully we can get to him before he does anything stupid again.\"\" The Associated Press contributed to this report.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n11,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/Health/flu-takes-toll-nyc-children-reported-dead-seasonal/story?id=45320883,Flu Takes a Toll in NYC With 4 Children Reported Dead in Seasonal Outbreak,,\"The flu season has been particularly rough in New York City this year with four pediatric deaths from the virus reported in the city, all in January, according to New York State Health Department. The flu has been spreading across the country, with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention seeing epidemic levels of flu activity late last month. There have been 15 flu-related pediatric deaths in the nation during this current flu season, the CDC reported last week. New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania all reported high levels of flu-like activity, according to a CDC flu report last week. Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, said while the deaths are tragic, the New York cases are not unusual for the flu season. The New York State Department of Health did not disclose the ages of the children or whether they had been vaccinated or had an underlying condition that would have put them at additional risk for complications. \"\"Every year in our pediatric emergency room come children who are otherwise clearly healthy and they are seriously ill with the flu,\"\" Schaffner said of Vanderbilt. \"\"The lesson is that flu can strike even healthy children.\"\" During the previous flu season, a total of 89 pediatric deaths related to the flu virus were reported in the U.S., according to the CDC. Public health experts have been concerned about vaccination rates since pediatricians may have had difficulty getting some children to get vaccinated against the flu if they have an aversion to needles, Schaffner noted. While in the past doctors could vaccinate needle-averse children with a flu mist vaccine, they were advised not to use the flu nasal spray this year, since it was found less effective than a vaccine injection. \"\"It's clear that the substantial majority of children who die from influenza every year have not been vaccinated,\"\" Schaffner said, clarifying that he was speaking generally and not about the recent deaths in New York. Flu can cause symptoms of headache, fever, joint pain and cough. The seasonal flu generally spreads across the U.S. from November till March, with the peak number of cases often occurring in February. The number of people affected every year can vary widely, but generally, the CDC reports that \"\"millions of people are sickened, hundreds of thousands are hospitalized and thousands or tens of thousands of people die from flu every year.\"\" Children under the age of 1 are at increased likelihood of developing complications if they contract the flu.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n12,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/romania-president-crisis-45317513,Romania Protests Endure as President Says Country in Crisis,,\"Romania's president told lawmakers Tuesday that the country is in a \"\"fully-fledged\"\" political crisis, after hundreds of thousands demonstrated against a government measure that would weaken the country's anti-corruption drive. In an address to Parliament, President Klaus Iohannis, a critic of the two-month-old government, said the majority of Romanians now believed the country was going in the wrong direction. \"\"Romania needs a government that is transparent, which governs predictably by the light of day, not sneakily at night,\"\" the president said, referring to the late hour the government passed an emergency ordinance last week aimed at decriminalizing some forms of official corruption. The move \"\"?which bypassed Parliament and was not signed off by Iohannis, who has limited powers \"\"?ignited the biggest protests seen since communism ended in the country in 1989. As a result, the government will now seek to introduce the plan in Parliament. Thousands gathered for the eighth consecutive evening in Victory Square outside the government offices, shouting \"\"Social Democratic Party, the red plague!\"\" and \"\"Resign!\"\" In smaller numbers, about 2,000 protesters gathered outside the presidential palace yelling \"\"Get out, you traitor!\"\" Iohannis, who was elected in 2014 by direct vote, was chairman of the opposition Liberal Party. He quit the party that year to stand as president. He has been critical of the government headed by Prime Minister Sorin Grindeanu, which came into being after the December parliamentary elections. The government \"\"has been saying publicly I can't stomach the result of the vote ... that I'd overturn a legitimate government,\"\" Iohannis said. \"\"That's false. You won, now govern and legislate, but not at any price.\"\" Some lawmakers booed and shouted \"\"shame on you!\"\" at Iohannis and walked out. Other lawmakers cheered. Despite the crisis, Iohannis said Romania didn't need early elections, a view the government shares. Liviu Dragnea, chairman of the governing Social Democratic Party, and Senate speaker Calin Popescu Tariceanu refused to greet the president when he arrived at Parliament. In his speech, Iohannis pressed ahead with an earlier initiative to hold a referendum on another government initiative to pardon prisoners. Critics say the proposal will help government allies convicted of corruption. Dragnea, the main power broker behind the government, expressed disappointment Iohannis did not deliver a \"\"speech of unity,\"\" and said \"\"he should leave the government alone, to govern.\"\"\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n13,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/hillary-clinton-releases-video-statement-future-female-45318123,Hillary Clinton Releases Video Statement: 'Future Is Female',,\"Hillary Clinton says \"\"the future is female\"\" in a new video statement. The former Democratic presidential nominee cites as an example the millions of demonstrators who took part in last month's Women's March. The video was made for the MAKERS Conference, a California gathering focused on women's leadership. She says the world needs \"\"strong women to step up and speak out.\"\" She asks conference attendees to set an example for women and girls who are \"\"worried about what the future holds\"\" and whether women's \"\"rights, opportunities and values will endure.\"\" The three-day MAKERS Conference began Monday and includes other high-profile speakers from politics, Hollywood and business.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n14,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/homeland-security-secretary-john-kelly-defends-travel-ban/story?id=45322742,Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly Defends Travel Ban but Regrets Quick Rollout,,\"In his first appearance before Congress as secretary of Homeland Security, John Kelly called President Trump's executive order on immigration \"\"lawful and constitutional\"\" but said he should have delayed the order's rollout \"\"just a bit\"\" so that members of Congress could be prepared. \"\"The thinking was to get it out quick so that potentially people that might be coming here to harm us would not take advantage of some period of time that they could jump on an airplane and get here,\"\" Kelly said. He argued that the order, which blocks travelers from seven Muslim-majority nations from entering the country, \"\"will prevail [in court] and be able to take the steps necessary to protect our nation.\"\" Kelly repeatedly disputed that the executive order is a Muslim ban, insisting it's just a \"\"pause\"\" based on security concerns. He said five of the seven countries named in the order are \"\"nearly failed states\"\" and four of them don't have U.S. embassies. \"\"So I'm at a total loss to understand how we can vet people from various countries when in at least four of those countries we don't even have an embassies,\"\" he said. Earlier in the hearing, Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., asked Kelly to provide information on any \"\"bad people\"\" who have been let into the U.S. since a court halted the executive order. \"\"Let's just say, for instance, a person who is trying to get to the United States to do some harm, some terrorist attack, is coming in during this period that the courts put a stay on our enforcement. We won't know that until an individual who's a bad person, until they do something bad,\"\" Kelly said. \"\"But it's entirely possible that someone that's coming in, whether it's during this stay court action or previous to this, they intend to do us harm.\"\" \"\"But you don't have any proof at this point?\"\" Thompson followed up. \"\"Not until the boom,\"\" Kelly said. When asked to clarify, Kelly responded, \"\"Not until they act to blow something up or go into a mall and kill people.\"\" He continued, \"\"The vetting on the other end, in those seven countries, are suspect. And Mr. Trump, and certainly in my view, we have to do a pause, which he ordered. Now is under court action, so that we can take a look at what we're doing on the other end. I believe the vetting on the other end right now is not adequate to protect the nation.\"\" ABC News' Morgan Korn contributed to this report.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n15,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/times-kellyanne-conway-referenced-bowling-green-massacre-attack/story?id=45311574,2 Other Times Kellyanne Conway Referred to Bowling Green 'Massacre' or 'Attack',,\"Last week senior Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway came under fire for referring to a Bowling Green \"\"massacre\"\"?or \"\"attack\"\" \"\"?an incident that never happened \"\"?to defend his controversial executive order temporarily halting immigration and refugees from seven Muslim-majority nations. Although she later said she misspoke, the Feb. 2 interview wasn\"\"t the first time Conway made the reference. Cosmopolitan.com is reporting that she also made inaccurate comments about attacks in Bowling Green as early as Sunday, Jan. 29, when she said President Barack Obama implemented a similar action in 2011. \"\"He did. It's a fact,\"\"?Conway said in remarks not initially published by Cosmopolitan.com. \"\"Why did he do that? He did that for exactly the same reasons. He did that because two Iraqi nationals came to this country, joined ISIS, traveled back to the Middle East to get trained and refine their terrorism skills and come back here and were the masterminds behind the Bowling Green massacre of taking innocent soldiers\"\"?lives away.\"\"?And in a Jan. 29 interview with TMZ, Conway said two Iraqi men were the \"\"masterminds\"\"?behind a \"\"Bowling Green attack\"\"?on American troops. \"\"President Obama suspended the Iraq refugee program for six months in 2011, and no one certainly covered \"\"?I think nobody noticed,\"\"?she told TMZ. \"\"He did that because, I assume, there were two Iraqis who came here, got radicalized, joined ISIS and then were the masterminds behind the Bowling Green attack on our brave soldiers.\"\"?In response to criticism of her citing a nonexistent Bowling Green attack or massacre, Conway released a statement, explaining that she misspoke. \"\"I meant to say masterminds or terrorists and not massacre,\"\"?Conway said in the statement. \"\"It does not detract from the evil they perpetrated and the evil that others may wish to perpetrate if they lie about why they are here.\"\"?Her comments about Bowling Green began garnering attention shortly after her interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews aired Thursday night. \"\"I bet it's brand-new information to people that President Obama had a six-month ban on the Iraqi refugee program after two Iraqis came here to this country, were radicalized, and they were the masterminds behind the Bowling Green massacre,\"\"?Conway told Matthews. \"\"Tost people don\"\"t know that because it didn\"\"t get covered.\"\"? She later said she was referring to the \"\"Bowling Green terrorists\"\"?ABC News first reported on in 2013. On @hardball @NBCNews @MSNBC I meant to say \"\"Bowling Green terrorists\"\" as reported here: https://t.co/nB5SwIEoYI The story was about two Iraqi refugees who plotted to attack Americans and who later admitted in court to attacking U.S. troops in Iraq. The two refugees lived in Bowling Green, Kentucky, but they never committed a massacre or any attacks in Bowling Green, as Conway said.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n16,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-dishonest-press-report-terror/story?id=45306486,Trump Says 'Very Dishonest Press Does Not Want to Report' on Terror,,\"President Trump on Monday lambasted the \"\"dishonest press\"\" for what he says is an unwillingness to report on terrorist attacks. \"\"We have seen what happened in Paris, Nice, all over Europe,\"\" Trump said while speaking at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida in his address to U.S. service members. \"\"It has gotten to a point where it is not even being reported. And in many cases, the very, very dishonest press does not want to report it.\"\" Trump did not specify any particular incidents that had been omitted from coverage. \"\"They [the press] have their reasons, and you understand that,\"\" he said. During a subsequent press gaggle aboard Air Force One, White House press secretary Sean Spicer appeared to double down on the president's claim, saying there were several instances of the media under-reporting terrorist attacks. \"\"There's a lot of instances that have occurred where I don't think they've gotten the coverage it's deserved and I think that's what the president was clearly referring to there,\"\" Spicer said. Spicer did not offer any specific examples at the time, but said he believed that while some attacks or foiled attacks \"\"barely [get] coverage,\"\" extensive reporting has been done on some protests against the Trump administration. Included in a list of attacks that the White House provided Monday evening were the Paris attacks in November 2015, San Bernardino, in December 2015, Brussels in March 2016 and Nice, France in July 2016. Those incidents, each with multiple casualties, were among dozens of attacks the White House listed between September 2014 and December 2016. \"\"The point here is that these terrorist attacks are so pervasive at this point that they do not spark the wall-to-wall coverage they once did,\"\" a White House spokesperson said. During his brief remarks at the headquarters of the U.S. Central Command, the president seemed to make reference to his executive order banning immigration and visas from seven Muslim-majority nations that is currently the subject of a number of legal challenges. \"\"We need strong programs,\"\" he said, adding that \"\"people that want to destroy us and want to destroy our country\"\" must be kept out. Trump went on to defend NATO while simultaneously saying members of the alliance were not making \"\"full and proper contributions.\"\" Echoing President Ronald Reagan, Trump said the U.S. military should be guided by the mantra \"\"Peace Through Strength,\"\" before repeating his campaign refrain \"\"America First.\"\" \",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n17,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/tom-brady-wife-gisele-bundchen-retire/story?id=45326185,Tom Brady Says Wife Gisele Bundchen Wants Him to Retire,,\"At 39 years old, quarterback Tom Brady is still at the top of his game: On Sunday, he led the New England Patriots to victory over the Atlanta Falcons in Super Bowl LI, earning the game's MVP title. But his wife, Gisele Bundchen, wants the father of her children to hang it all up. While speaking to Jim Miller on his SiriusXM NFL Radio show Monday, Brady said, \"\"If it was up to my wife, she would have me retire today. She told me that last night three times.\"\" But Brady isn't ready to leave football behind just yet. \"\"I said, \"\"Too bad, babe, I'm having too much fun right now.\"\"?You know, I feel like I can still do it and if you love what you do and you'r capable of doing it then --\"\" he added, cutting himself off. \"\"I'd be so bored if I wasn\"\"t going out there, knowing that I could still do it. So, I'm going to work hard to be ready to go and I still plan on playing for a long time.\"\" Tom Brady talks #SB51 win, \"\"magical year,\"\" and his response to Gisele telling him to retire https://t.co/HYlPhQcdc0 (AP Photo) #SuperBowl pic.twitter.com/4MI8vhNZiv Brady spoke to ABC News last year about the lengths he goes to to stay in top shape at his age. \"\"there's no other 39-year-olds playing now at quarterback,\"\" he said. \"\"I don\"\"t go to bed at 1 a.m. and wake up at 5 a.m. and say, \"\"Let's see if I can get this done today.\"\"?Instead, he said he's usually in bed by 8:30 p.m. \"\"Because my career is so important, I think I make a lot of, I wouldn\"\"t call them sacrifices, but just concessions for my job,\"\" he continued. \"\"Sometimes, it's hard to cut things out, for me where I cut is, like, my friends, they probably don\"\"t get as much time as they used to.\"\" Brady and Bundchen are also famous for their healthy lifestyle. \"\"I try to not eat as much sugar, but it's so hard in our American diet to do that. ... It's hard to completely avoid. I don\"\"t drink much alcohol,\"\" Brady said last year. Despite the retirement talk, Bundchen was in Houston for Sunday's big game and joined her husband on the field with their three children after the win. She later posted, \"\"Wonderful things come to those who work hard with focus, tireless dedication and who never stop believing. Forever grateful for this moment. Congratulations my love!!\"\" Wonderful things come to those who work hard with focus, tireless dedication and who never stop believing. Forever grateful for this moment. Congratulations my love!!#neverstopbeliving #lovemovesmountains #dedication #family #thankyouGod ????Coisas maravilhosas acontecem para aqueles que trabalham duro, com foco, dedicação incans��vel, e que nunca deixam de acreditar. Para sempre grata por este momento. Parab��ns meu amor!! #nuncaparedeacreditar #oamormovemontanhas #dedicação #fam��lia #obrigadaDeus A photo posted by Gisele Bundchen (@gisele) on Feb 6, 2017 at 7:58am PST \",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n18,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/tom-brady-missing-super-bowl-jersey-shows-ebay/story?id=45299006,\"Texas Rangers to Help Search for Tom Brady's Stolen Super Bowl Jersey, Lt. Gov. Says\",,\"The Texas Rangers are joining the search for the jersey worn by New England Patriots star quarterback Tom Brady in last night's historic Super Bowl game. Brady's jersey was allegedly stolen from the Patriots locker room after the Super Bowl in Houston, according to a statement from Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who said he asked the Texas Rangers to help the Houston Police look for it. \"\"Tom Brady's jersey has great historical value and is already being called 'the most valuable NFL collectible ever,\"\" Patrick said in a statement. \"\"It will likely go into the Hall of Fame one day. It is important that history does not record that it was stolen in Texas. I\"\"ve called Colonel Steve McCraw to ask that the Texas Rangers work with the Houston Police Department on this case.\"\" \"\"I'm a Texans and Cowboys fan first,\"\" Patrick said, \"\"but the unquestionable success of the Super Bowl in Houston last night was a big win for our entire state and I don\"\"t want anything to mar that victory. Whoever took this jersey should turn it in. The Texas Rangers are on the trail.\"\" The intrigue surrounding Brady's missing jersey began last night after the Patriots' historic win, when Brady was seen on video telling Patriots owner Robert Kraft that his game jersey was stolen. The Patriots said Brady's jersey and pads were taken off the field before the trophy ceremony Sunday night, Boston station FOX25 reported Monday morning; it appears the jersey disappeared at some point after that. This clarified an earlier Fox25 report that a team equipment manager had locked the jersey up. This morning, Brady told reporters he is still missing the jersey, saying he put it in his bag Sunday night and later it was gone. \"\"If it shows up on eBay somewhere, someone let me know,\"\" Brady said this morning. \"\"It's unfortunate, because that's a nice piece of memorabilia,\"\" Brady said. \"\"Those are pretty special ones to keep ... What can you do? I'll take the ring and that's good enough for me.\"\" Brady, who was named Most Valuable Player of the Super Bowl for the fourth time, accepted the MVP trophy from NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell with smiles at the press conference this morning. Goodell had suspended Brady for the first four games of the 2016 season for his alleged involvement in the deflation of footballs during the 2015 AFC championship game. Last night marked the biggest comeback in Super Bowl history as the Patriots erased a 25-point deficit, beating the Atlanta Falcons 34-28 in overtime. It was also a record fifth Super Bowl win for Brady. Brady said at a press conference this morning of the Falcons, \"\"I give them a lot of credit. They're a great football team.\"\" \"\"It took a lot of great plays for us to overcome the deficit and the hole that we dug. But we were able to do it,\"\" Brady said. Brady said the Patriots \"\"faced a lot of adversities\"\" this year and he called their stunning victory a \"\"great way to really culminate the season.\"\" \"\"It took a kind of miraculous effort to do it,\"\" he said, adding that he's \"\"happy that we were able to get it accomplished.\"\" Brady said \"\"it was great\"\" to celebrate at the Super Bowl with his mother, who has been ill and missed all of this season's games. \"\"She's been through a lot. Way harder than what I went through last night ... and my dad's been there every step of the way. They set such a great example for me,\"\" Brady said. Now that the big game is over, Brady said he's looking to spending time with his children, who he said will be happy to see the trophy. \",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n19,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/International/putin-friend-poisoned-russian-activists-wife-tells-trump/story?id=45310449,\"Putin Not a Friend, Poisoned Russian Activist's Wife Tells Trump\",,\"The wife of a poisoned Russian opposition activist says President Donald Trump must not consider Vladimir Putin a friend. In an exclusive interview with ABC News after visiting her comatose husband in a Moscow hospital, Evgenia Kara-Murza said, \"\"�[Trump] must know that such people as Vladimir Putin are not friends. And they cannot be dealt with on friendly terms.\"\"?Her husband, 35-year-old Vladimir Kara-Murza, an outspoken critic of Putin, remains in critical condition, fighting for his life, she said. His doctors say he was poisoned by an unknown substance, she added. The activist was hospitalized on Thursday shortly after feeling ill; within hours, most of his major organs were failing. It is the second time in two years that he was poisoned; the first time, in 2015, left the father of three with nerve damage that left him walking with cane. Evgenia Kara-Murza said that she does not know who is behind the poisoning but that she believes it can only be related to his work. A veteran opposition campaigner, he has appeared repeatedly before the U.S. Congress, pressing for it to impose sanctions on Russian officials involved in human rights abuse. On Sunday, Fox News Host Bill O��Reilly asked Trump if he respects his Russian counterpart, to which the U.S. president said he did but \"\"ghat doesn\"\"t mean I'm going to get along with him.\"\"?When the host interjected that \"\"Putin's a killer,\"\"?Trump said, \"\"Lot of killers. We're got a lot of killers. What, you think our country's so innocent? You think our country's so innocent?\"\"?Wiping away tears during an interview from Moscow, Evgenia Kara-Murza told ABC News\"\"?Brian Ross that neither her husband nor other Putin opponents will be stopped by the ugly tactics. \"\"people like my husband will never stop, no matter what. They will fight, with all of their might.\"\"?Vladimir Kara-Murza is hardly the first Putin critic to have come to serious harm in mysterious circumstances. \"\"there is a pattern of Putin's critics being poisoned or dying of mysterious, unexplained medical problems,\"\"?said former White House national security official Richard Clarke, now an ABC News consultant. \"\"This is straight out of the old KBG playbook, and it's death by poison.\"\"?Two years ago this month, Boris Nemtsov, a prominent opposition leader in Russia and longtime critic of Putin, was shot to death on a Moscow bridge. Vladimir Kara-Murza worked closely with Nemtsov, who was the godfather of one of Kara-Murza's daughters. In 2006 a former Russian spy, Alexander Litvinenko, died after being poisoned by a rare radioactive material in London \"\"?a murder blamed on Putin by a British government-ordered inquiry. Trump's defense of Putin has drawn the ire not just of foreigners living in fear of the Russian president. On Monday night, leaders from both U.S. political parties were at a loss to explain why the U.S. president continued to defend one of the United States\"\"?starkest adversaries. In an interview with ABC News from Capitol Hill today, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., was critical of the president's comments, saying \"\"the United States of America has made serious mistakes \"\"?we all know that \"\"?but not, nowhere near anything like the intentional murders committed by Vladimir Putin.\"\"?Meanwhile, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said that she wanted \"\"go know what the Russians have on Donald Trump.\"\"?\"\"I think we have to have an investigation by the FBI into his financial, personal and political connections to Russia,\"\"?she said. ABC News\"\"?Cho Park, Alex Hosenball and Paul Blake contributed to this report.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n20,2017/2/7,http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dept-justice-calls-ruling-immigration-order-case-vastly/story?id=45310450,Dept. of Justice Cites 'National Security' in Calling for Trump Immigration Order Reinstatement,,\"The Department of Justice blasted a court ruling that imposed a nationwide restraining order on President Donald Trump's immigration executive action, citing \"\"national security\"\" as a reason for it to be reinstated. \"\"The State argues...that the injunction does not impose any irreparable harm. But the injunction reinstates procedures that the President determined should be temporarily suspended in the interest of national security,\"\" the reply brief to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, filed Monday evening, says. \"\"The potential national-security risks and harms resulting from the compelled application of procedures that the President has determined must be reexamined, for the purpose of ensuring an adequate measure of protection for the Nation, cannot be undone. Nor can the effect on our constitutional separation of powers.\"\" The DOJ also called Washington state Federal Judge James Robart's action \"\"lastly overbroad, extending far beyond the State's legal claims to encompass numerous applications of the Order that the State does not even attempt to argue are unlawful.\"\"?Today, the appeals court scheduled oral arguments in the case for 3 p.m. PT on Feb. 7. On Friday, Robart agreed with the states of Washington and Minnesota that Trump's executive order -- which curtailed immigration and refugees from seven predominantly Muslim countries -- was likely to \"\"go cause irreparable harm\"\"?to businesses, schools, family relations, and state residents\"\"?freedom to travel and issued a nationwide temporary restraining order blocking most parts of the executive order. The Trump administration appealed to the 9th Circuit late Saturday night arguing that the president is acting within his authority and that the ruling by Robart \"\"second-guesses the President's national security judgment.\"\"?Early Sunday morning, the 9th Circuit rejected the DOJ's request for an emergency stay on the restraining order. Washington state's lawsuit received support from major technology companies including Apple, Google, and Facebook, as well as former secretaries of state and national security officials. Former Secretaries of State Madeleine Albright and John Kerry joined former national security and foreign affairs officials including Leon Panetta, Janet Napolitano, Lisa Monaco, and Michael Hayden and wrote a declaration to the appeals court that \"\"where is no national security purpose for a total bar on entry for aliens from the seven named countries,\"\"?adding that as a national security issue, the executive order was \"\"ill-conceived, poorly implemented, ill-explained.\"\"?\"\"the opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!\"\"?Trump tweeted on Saturday. Trump has also tweeted that if something happens while his executive order is blocked, to blame the judge in the case. ABC News' James Hill, Arlette Saenz, Kate Shaw, and Jack Date contributed to this report.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n21,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/politics/betsy-devos-senate-vote/index.html,Betsy DeVos confirmed as education secretary, vice president casts historic tie-breaking vote,Washington (CNN)Vice President Mike Pence cast a historic tie-breaking vote Tuesday to confirm Betsy DeVos as the next education secretary after the Senate was evenly divided over the controversial pick.,\"The 51-50 vote ends Trump's toughest confirmation battle yet. Senate Democrats debated through the night and into Tuesday morning in a last-ditch attempt to derail DeVos, buoyed by support from Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine. Throughout the fight, Democrats argued they needed \"\"Just one more!\"\" to lure away another Republican vote. But Senate Republican leaders succeeded in delivering a victory to Trump in a confirmation fight that very few expected to become as tough as it did. DeVos' poor performance in her confirmation hearing -- punctuated by her suggestion that a school in Wyoming might want to have guns on premises to protect against grizzly bears -- contributed to roaring anger among public school supporters and teachers unions. Even before her hearing, critics pointed to DeVos's lack of experience with public schools and her bankrolling of efforts like school vouchers that could take money from public institutions. Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer voiced his displeasure with the vote moments after she was confirmed, tweeting, \"\"Today @VP Mike Pence did something no one else has ever done: cast the tie breaking vote on his own cabinet nominee.\"\" Devos tweeted after the vote, \"\"I appreciate the Senate's diligence & am honored to serve as @usedgov Secretary. Let's improve options & outcomes for all US students.\"\" Sen. Chris Murphy told CNN earlier Tuesday that DeVos seemed to have no knowledge of the federal law that protects students with disabilities. \"\"You put those two things together, lack of compassion for what's happened to places like Sandy Hook and an inability to just understand the basic law around vulnerable students and it was clear at the end of that hearing that this was someone who shouldn't be the secretary of education,\"\" the Connecticut Democrat said. DeVos' Senate vote comes after a dramatic 24 hours of protest from Democrats inside and outside the Capitol that lasted through the night, into Tuesday morning, with Democratic senators taking shifts in the Senate arguing against DeVos. The delay tactics have succeeded in stalling many of Trump's most important Cabinet picks -- but Senate Republican leaders promised Monday to get votes for four nominees this week: DeVos, Health and Human Services nominee Tom Price, Treasury pick Steven Mnuchin and attorney general nominee, Sen. Jeff Sessions. Meanwhile, with each passing day, more questions have been raised about Trump's Cabinet picks. Labor Department nominee Andrew Puzder admitted Monday to hiring an undocumented immigrant as a housekeeper. But Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn promised to overcome Democratic tactics with long hours at the Capitol -- including the possibility of working through Saturday. \"\"We'll be burning the midnight oil,\"\" Cornyn said Monday.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n22,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/politics/trump-watch-live-coverage-week-3/index.html,Trump watch: Live coverage,\"From travel ban to high-stakes confirmation hearings, we are tracking President Trump's third week in office.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n23,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/05/opinions/devos-racism-public-school-opinion-wong/index.html,A vote for DeVos is a vote for resegregation,\"Felicia Wong is President and CEO of the Roosevelt Institute, an economic and social policy think tank working to re-imagine the rules so they work for all Americans, and co-author of the forthcoming book \"\"Rewrite the Racial Rules: Building an Inclusive American Economy.\"\" Randi Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers, is on Roosevelt's board. The views expressed in this commentary are her own.\",\"The limited scope of DeVos' education policy experience has raised questions for many about whether she is suited to run the federal agency charged with making American public education first-rate for all children. But there is another subterranean element to this debate, which now should be surfaced, especially given our racially charged environment and the role that segregated schools have long played in our politics. Racial animus was a primary catalyst of the move toward private and religious K-12 education almost 50 years ago, and racial segregation remains a dominant factor in all schooling, public and private, today. DeVos' track record suggests that as secretary, she will do little to combat these trends. In the wake of the 1954 Brown v. Board Supreme Court decision, which famously declared that separate schools for black and white children were not equal, the federal government began -- albeit slowly -- to desegregate. This applied to schools in the South that were previously forbidden by law from educating children of different races together and to schools in the North plagued by de facto segregation. The backlash, now infamous but perhaps too familiar even today, was fierce. From Alabama Governor George Wallace's stance in the schoolhouse door and his proclamations of \"\"segregation now, segregation forever\"\" to Louise Day Hicks leading the Boston antibusing movement, the reaction to desegregation roiled American politics. But the Brown ruling did not apply to private schools. Thus, an estimated half-million white students left public schools between 1964 and 1975 to enroll in schools that were known as \"\"segregation academies.\"\" This move to private schools was part of a larger \"\"white flight\"\" movement. White flight was one of the greatest demographic shifts in American history. Millions of whites nationwide moved out of cities and into racially isolated suburbs. Scholar Kevin Kruse has called white flight \"\"the most successful segregationist response to the moral demands of the civil rights movement and the legal authority of the courts.\"\" The character and quality of most American schools today, like the neighborhoods in which they are found and which they shape, have a racial past. Now, American public schools are falling back into a kind of racial segregation that is reminiscent of our country before Brown. In the last 25 years, the number of severely racially isolated schools, defined as those with 0-10% white students, has tripled. In 2010 in New York City, 92% of black students and 88% of Latino students attended schools that were majority-minority, some of which see such severely racialized and concentrated poverty that they are dubbed \"\"apartheid schools.\"\" In DeVos's own state of Michigan, which has seen two decades of charter school growth, enrollment and funding for public schools has waned while schools have become increasingly segregated. Nor does public funding for private schools, which DeVos advocates, seem to achieve much good for students of color. Voucher and other public funding programs are marketed as appealing because tax dollars \"\"follow the child.\"\" But research over the past fifteen years shows that private schools are even more racially segregated than public schools. This has negative consequences for both white students and students of color. Research shows that both black children who attend desegregated schools end up with more income, higher wages and better long-term health, with no negative effects on white students. Further, a range of studies strongly suggest that desegregated schools educate all children such that they can better contribute to American society and to a healthier American economy. It is therefore both a moral outrage and an economic mistake that so much of the current movement in favor of school choice and religious education carries the stain of racial animosity, even in dog-whistle form. Of course, many private and religious schools are excellent and inclusive places of learning. But let's not be fooled. School choice is not really about freedom. Freedom, of course, is a bedrock American value. But the kind of \"\"freedom\"\" associated with the flight away from integration and toward racial isolation will never lead to a more truly free United States. So as senators consider DeVos' nomination to oversee public education for every American child, they would do well to remember the deepest values of public schooling, as well as the deeper meaning of appointing a Secretary of Education associated with a more exclusive and racially exclusionary vision.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n24,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/politics/iran-khamenei-trump-comments/index.html,\"Trump 'shows true face of US,' says Iran's Supreme Leader\",\"(CNN)Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Tuesday that he's grateful to President Donald Trump for showing \"\"the true face of the US.\"\"\",\"Khamenei told a gathering of Iran's air force commanders in Tehran that the new US administration has shown the world \"\"the depth of corruption in US government,\"\" according to quotes published by Iran's semi-official MEHR news agency. Khamenei reportedly told the commanders: \"\"We however thank this new guy in the White House, since he largely did the job we had been trying to do in the past decades: to divulge the true face of the US. We had been working to show the world the depth of corruption in US government and ranks and files of the ruling elite; Trump did it in few days after coming to the White House.\"\" He added: \"\"Their claims to human rights are no longer tenable.\"\" Khamenei also made an apparent reference to the five-year-old son of an Iranian mother who was detained at a US airport following Trump's ban on visas for seven Muslim-majority countries, including Iran. According to Iran's official news agency, IRNA, the Ayatollah said: \"\"Presently, too, by embarking on such actions, like putting handcuffs on a five-year-old kid, he [Trump] is demonstrating the reality behind the American human rights.\"\" Khamenei's comments come amid escalating tensions between Iran and the US since Trump became president. The travel ban and sanctions enacted by the Trump administration, coupled with missile testing by Iran, have contributed to the deteriorating relationship. Concerns have been raised over the future of a deal, brokered by the Obama administration, that requires Iran to heavily restrict its nuclear program. On Saturday, a day after the Trump administration imposed fresh sanctions over an Iranian ballistic missile test, US Defense Secretary James Mattis called Iran \"\"the single biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world.\"\" Two days earlier, Trump had tweeted that \"\"Iran has been formally PUT ON NOTICE\"\" and should have been \"\"thankful\"\" for the \"\"terrible deal\"\" brokered by the Obama administration. He declined to rule out military action against Iran. But a senior Iranian adviser to the Ayatollah, Ali Akbar Velayati, dismissed Trump's remarks as \"\"baseless ranting.\"\" And this is not the first time that the Ayatollah has spoken in such terms about the US President. In November, during the election race, Khamenei lambasted both Trump and Hillary Clinton for revealing what he called the moral shortcomings of the US.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n25,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/politics/yemen-raid-al-qaeda/index.html,Al Qaeda leader mocks Trump after Yemen raid,\"(CNN)Days after a raid on an al Qaeda compound in Yemen led to the first US military combat death under Donald Trump, the leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula released an audio message taunting the new American President.\",\"In an 11-minute recording, AQAP leader Qassim al-Rimi condemned the January 29 raid, saying, \"\"The new fool of the White House received a painful slap across his face.\"\" The message was released online Saturday and translated by the SITE Intelligence Group. In the recording, Rimi also claimed \"\"dozens of Americans were killed and wounded,\"\" a number starkly at odds with the US account, which reported the death of one Navy SEAL, Chief Petty Officer William \"\"Ryan\"\" Owens. Three additional SEALs also were wounded. Rimi acknowledged the deaths of 14 men and 11 women and children in the raid, a joint counterterrorism effort between the United States and United Arab Emirates. A senior US military official told CNN on Monday that Rimi was a target of the operation. The recording was released after last week's raid. Trump is using Obama as a security blanket Civilian deaths Reportedly among the dead was the 8-year-old the daughter of Anwar al-Awlaki, the late US-born cleric who directed attacks against the United States. Awlaki was killed in 2011. Reprieve, a London-based nongovernmental organization, and a Sanaa-based human rights worker told CNN that at least 23 civilians were killed in the attack. \"\"When the Americans escaped, they dragged their killed and wounded, and they found no other alternative but to destroy their own planes so that it would not be proof of their scandal,\"\" Rimi said. The senior US military official told CNN on Monday that intelligence collection wasn't the only objective of the Yemen raid but that it had also targeted Rimi. In the event Rimi wasn't there, the US military believed it would find intelligence that would help lead to him, the official said. Green-lighting the mission was not dependent on al-Rimi being there, however, a senior US military official emphasized. But US Central Command, which oversees forces in the region, had strongly disputed that Rimi was the objective of the raid more than a week ago. \"\"It wasn't a high-value target mission,\"\" Col. John Thomas told CNN, referring to operations aimed at killing or capturing terrorist leaders. Thomas added no hard intelligence indicated a \"\"high possibility\"\" Rimi was at the compound on the night of the raid, saying that Navy SEALs would have captured any leaders of the al Qaeda affiliate, including Rimi, as part of an intelligence-gathering operation. \"\"Anyone found on site would have been taken,\"\" Thomas said. NBC first reported that Rimi was a target of the raid. The chance to take out such a pivotal member of al Qaeda may explain the large allocation of resources used in the mission. Military botches release of video seized in Yemen raid Raid missteps Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula fighters detected the SEAL team before it reached its objective, leading to an intense firefight. Following news of the raid, the military had said the goal of the mission was to gather intelligence on the al Qaeda affiliate in Yemen. On Friday, the Pentagon released clips from an al Qaeda training video seized during the raid but later pulled them because the video was nearly a decade old. Government officials previously told CNN plans for the raid had been in the works for months and that Trump green-lighted the mission shortly after his inauguration. How Donald Trump's first military action went from the Obama White House to deadly raid The Pentagon said the battle resulted in the deaths of 14 al Qaeda fighters, including two AQAP leaders. Many observers have considered al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula among the most dangerous, if not the most dangerous, branch of al Qaeda since its formation in 2009. Rimi reportedly became its leader following a 2015 drone strike that killed Nasir al-Wuhayshi.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n26,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/politics/trump-japan-shinzo-abe-mar-a-lago/index.html,Trump teeing up a softer diplomatic approach with Japan,\"Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump is turning on the charm. Or at least, he's turning on his golf cart.\",\"After a combative round of telephone diplomacy with even the staunchest US allies, the commander in chief is planning a more genial approach this week when he decamps with Japan's Prime Minister to his winter getaway in Florida for a round of golf. He's not likely to instruct Shinzo Abe how to dance the Cotton-Eyed Joe, the way George W. Bush did when Vladimir Putin visited his Crawford, Texas, ranch. Nor is he hoping to replicate the courtside bro-out Barack Obama enjoyed with David Cameron at a March Madness game in Ohio. But in bringing Abe to his ornate southern retreat Mar-a-Lago, Trump is nonetheless continuing a long tradition of presidents melding recreation and negotiation in their encounters with foreign leaders. Trump, who is still seeking his diplomatic footing three weeks into his term, finds himself more relaxed at his oceanfront oasis than in the White House, where he's lived for less than a month. He hopes the gesture will also put the buttoned-up Abe at ease. \"\"That's the one thing about golf -- you get to know somebody better on a golf course than you will over lunch,\"\" Trump told a radio interviewer over the weekend. The President has told aides he hopes to use golf and visits to Mar-a-Lago as a way to develop warmer ties with his foreign counterparts, many of whom are approaching his presidency with uncertainty. Trump, who prefers to sleep in his own bed, has expressed little interest so far in traveling abroad, though he's committed to attending a European NATO summit in May and accepted an invitation from Britain's Queen Elizabeth II for a state visit this summer. RELATED: Theresa May in trouble over Trump's UK state visit invite At Mar-a-Lago, Trump is happy to play host. Overlooking the Atlantic on Florida's Gold Coast, the club is firmly Trump's turf. On his first trip there as president last weekend, he mingled in the club's living room with paying members even as a Washington state judge halted his controversial immigration order. Friends say Trump is most relaxed in the confines of his estate -- or playing golf on the courses he owns nearby. \"\"He's able to relax on the golf course with people he knows and trusts and likes,\"\" said Robin Bernstein, one of Mar-a-Lago's original members, who speaks with Trump frequently when he's staying in Florida. \"\"I think that he finds golf kind of his outlet to relax. He loves it, he enjoys it, he's a fabulous athlete, and that's what he loves. Some people go fishing -- Donald loves golf.\"\" In Abe, Trump finds a leader eager to foster a closer bond with the US, particularly given Trump's tough criticism of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, which Japan was a partner in, and the costs of US security support provided to the East Asian nation. \"\"This is a testament to the importance the United States places on the bilateral relationship and the strength of our alliance and the deep economic ties between the United States and Japan,\"\" White House press secretary Sean Spicer said on Tuesday after detailing the weekend trip. Abe enjoyed a congenial working relationship with Obama, but the two men never developed warm personal ties. When Abe tried bringing Obama to Tokyo's best sushi restaurant in 2014, the US president grew restless as the dinner stretched for hours. Abe is hoping to start fresh with Trump, already meeting once with the real estate mogul in November. The pair discussed bilateral ties in Trump's Louis XIV-style livingroom at Trump Tower in Manhattan. Abe brought along a gold-colored golf driver as a gift. \"\"I know he loves the game, and we're going to have a lot of fun,\"\" Trump said in the radio interview this week. \"\"I'll just make sure he's my partner.\"\" Trump's invitation for a weekend at his private club continues a well-established practice of vacation diplomacy for US presidents. His predecessors have acted both as hosts for their foreign counterparts and as guests at vacation spots and golf courses the world over. But no recent president has owned as lavish a getaway home as Trump, or been so eager to show it off. Obama, who maintained a residence in Chicago but rarely visited there himself, employed public properties instead to host foreign leaders away from the White House. Obama invited the new Chinese President Xi Jinping to the Sunnylands estate in Southern California for their first meeting, including a long ramble in scalding desert heat around the grounds. He used Camp David, the presidential retreat in Maryland's Catoctin Mountains, to reassure Arab Gulf leaders of his Iran nuclear deal in 2015. Accustomed to more lavish environs, leaders like Saudi King Salman sent top advisers instead. More relaxing were his encounters with Cameron. After Obama flew him to Dayton for the NCAA tournament in 2012, Cameron reciprocated with a round of golf at the Grove Club in Hertfordshire. He was one of the few foreign leaders who joined Obama for golf -- others included the Prime Ministers of New Zealand and Malaysia. Bush, who swore off golf shortly after the start of the Iraq War, hosted more than a dozen leaders among the scrub brush at his Crawford ranch. His three-day summit there with Putin in 2001 featured line dancing and a barbecue, but little agreement on missile defense. A session with the Saudi King resulted in some awkward photos of the President holding the Gulf monarch's hand. Bill Clinton used Camp David to try securing an agreement between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat at the end of his term. He wasn't successful; the wooded retreat proved less inspiring than it had 20 years earlier, when Jimmy Carter brokered a successful peace accord there between Israel and Egypt. Like Trump, Clinton identified golf as an entry point into personal relationships with counterparts. A round in 2000 with Singapore's Prime Minister in Brunei started late and stretched well past midnight. American leaders aren't alone in using quieter retreats as a setting for talks. When Obama visited Saudi Arabia in 2014, then-King Abdullah received him at his desert getaway oasis, Rawdat Khurayim, 35 miles outside Riyadh. Trump, too, could soon find himself at another leader's vacation home when he travels to Britain -- though not necessarily to make him more comfortable. Alex Salmond, the former Scottish first minister, suggested this week that Trump's visit to the United Kingdom may take place at Balmoral, the Queen's Scotland estate, to evade the expected masses of protesters in London. The palace later tamped down that speculation, noting the Aberdeenshire castle was privately owned by the royal family, and thus unsuitable for a state visit. But of the Queen's other official residences, two -- Windsor Castle, outside London, and Holyroodhouse, in Edinburgh -- would at least move Trump away from the capital.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n27,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/politics/white-house-terror-attack-list-trump/index.html,Journalists call out White House claims on terror reporting,(CNN)Journalists are calling out a White House claim that news outlets are failing to adequately report terror attacks.,\"On Monday, the White House issued a list of 78 terror attacks to underscore President Donald Trump's assertion that the media is failing to adequately report them. Trump told enlisted service-members at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida that attacks were happening \"\"all over Europe\"\" and that \"\"it's gotten to a point where it's not even being reported.\"\" \"\"And in many cases, the very, very dishonest press doesn't want to report it. They have their reasons, and you understand that,\"\" Trump added. Later, the White House distributed a list of the attacks Trump was citing, saying \"\"most did not receive adequate attention.\"\" \"\"Below is a list of 78 major terrorist attacks targeting the West that were executed or inspired by ISIS since September 2014, soon after the terror group declared its caliphate. Most of these attacks did not receive adequate attention from Western media sources,\"\" a White House official said on background, when distributing the list. But reporters in print, on air and on social media have robustly covered many of those attacks and terror in general. \"\"As a journalist I'm really troubled by that,\"\" Washington Post columnist David Ignatius said on CNN's \"\"The Lead\"\" on Monday, responding to Trump's initial statement. \"\"We have brave colleagues who everyday are taking big risks to cover these stories. Look at The New York Times, which the President demonizes often. The New York Times this weekend had an outstanding piece of reporting about how ISIS has been reaching out, is more involved in some attacks in Europe and abroad,\"\" he said. Ignatius said he has about 100 examples of strong reporting he'd like to show the President. CNN's Anderson Cooper also highlighted his coverage of many of the events listed. \"\"Not only did we cover many of the attacks on that list the White House has released, we covered them heavily. I know because I was there on the ground reporting a number of them,\"\" he said Monday night, before showing footage of himself reporting from Ottawa, Canada, in 2014; Paris in November 2015; San Bernardino, California, in 2015; in Orlando, Florida, in June 2016. He added: \"\"To be sure, we as a program did not cover each and every incident on the list, however other programs, as well as CNN International covered most if not all of them, many of them exhaustively.\"\" The attacks listed span from September 2014 to December 2016, and include the Paris attacks, the Orlando nightclub shooting, the truck attacks in Nice and Berlin, the Brussels airport attack, the Istanbul airport and Sultanahmet attacks, and the Sydney siege. But the White House only mentions attacks that appear to have been carried out with Islamist motives and omits other terror operations. It does not mention the recent attack on a mosque in Quebec City, or the racially motivated attack by Dylann Roof on a church in South Carolina, in which nine black worshipers were shot dead. White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters after Trump's statement that the President \"\"felt as though members of the media don't always cover some of those events to the extent that other events might get covered; that a protest will get blown out of the water, and yet an attack or a foiled attack doesn't necessarily get the same coverage.\"\" Trump has used terror attacks to justify his controversial temporary ban on citizens from seven Muslim-majority nations from entering the US. He has also repeatedly referred to media organizations critical of him as \"\"fake news.\"\"\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n28,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/politics/trump-travel-ban-oral-arguments-what-you-need-to-know/index.html,Trump travel ban oral arguments: what you need to know,(CNN)Three federal judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals are set to hear oral arguments at 6 p.m. ET Tuesday in the challenge to President Donald Trump's travel ban.,\"The lawsuit, brought by attorneys general of Washington and Minnesota, has captivated the nation since last Friday when a federal district court judge put a stop to Trump's executive order restricting travel for foreign nationals, and as a result, temporarily opened US borders to immigrants once again. The hearing will be by telephone and livestreamed; here's what to listen for: What's the hearing about? US District Court Judge James Robart upended Trump's executive order nationwide Friday by temporarily halting the key provisions restricting travel for foreign nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries (Syria, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia and Yemen) and refugee admissions. The central question for the appellate court is whether Robart abused his discretion by putting a temporary hold on the travel ban. No court has addressed the constitutionality of the executive order thus far. The players The attorney general of Washington state, Bob Ferguson, filed the case and was later joined by the attorney general of Minnesota, Lori Swanson. The suit is being defended by lawyers at the Civil Division of the Department of Justice in Washington, DC. The randomly assigned three-judge panel includes Judge William C. Canby Jr, an appointee of President Jimmy Carter; Judge Michelle T. Friedland; who was appointed by President Barack Obama; and Judge Richard R. Clifton, an appointee of President George W. Bush. When is this hearing? The appellate court has set an hour-long telephonic oral argument in the case for Tuesday at 6 p.m. ET. It will be available for live streaming through the court's website. Each side will get 30 minutes to make their case. What are the states saying? On Monday attorneys for the states that filed the lawsuit submitted their brief urging the appellate court to keep the travel ban suspension in place. The states say that the temporary restraining order should remain in place because the President had \"\"unleashed chaos\"\" by signing the order. They also argue that the government's claim -- that it would be \"\"irreparably harmed\"\" by keeping Robart's temporary suspension order in place while the case proceeds to the merits -- doesn't make any sense. To accept DOJ's position, they argue, \"\"would mean that until the (Executive) Order was issued, Defendants were suffering some, unspecified, ongoing irreparable harm. That makes no sense. ...Preserving the status quo against sudden disruption is often in the interest of all parties.\"\" What is the Trump administration's argument? The government submitted its own brief in response Monday evening. DOJ continues to emphasize that the states do not have the ability to sue in this case and a district court judge does not have the right to second-guess the President's national security judgment in the immigration context. But the government also raised a fallback argument in its latest court filing -- suggesting if the appellate court is inclined to uphold the Seattle district court's decision, then it must at least limit it to the class of people who have been previously admitted to the US -- like someone traveling on a student visa. In the government's view, aliens outside of the US who have never stepped foot on US soil have no constitutional right to enter the US. What happens next? The judges have a number of different options at their disposal to resolve this case, but it is unlikely that they would rule on whether the ban is constitutional (since that is not the question before them) -- the central issue is whether the executive order should remain suspended for now. For example, the judges could dismiss DOJ's request for a stay of Robart's decision because, as the government acknowledges, temporary restraining orders are generally not appealable, or they could uphold his ruling -- but under either scenario the suspension of the ban would remain in place while the case moves forward with further scheduled hearings. Alternatively, the appellate court could find Robart abused his discretion and overreached to include classes of people not protected under the Constitution (e.g., aliens living abroad) -- in which case the travel ban would go back into effect. After the three-judge panel publishes its decision, the losing party has 14 days to file a petition for rehearing the case by the full appellate court (but is not required to do so in order to get the case in front of the Supreme Court). Given the high stakes involved in this lawsuit, it is expected that whoever ultimately loses before the Ninth Circuit will most likely appeal to the Supreme Court. At the moment, there are only eight justices on the court, meaning if there is a 4-4 split then the Ninth Circuit's ruling will be the law of the land.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n29,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/europe/romanian-president-on-corruption/index.html,\"People appalled by corruption bill, Romanian President says\",\"(CNN)The President of Romania has attacked the country's government in a speech in Parliament, saying \"\"Romanians are appalled\"\" over the corruption bill scandal that has rocked the country in recent days.\",\"President Klaus Iohannis said it is time for Romania to decide whether it wants to be a \"\"strong prosperous\"\" nation or a \"\"weak despised one\"\" -- and he called for a referendum so the people can have their say. Half a million citizens took to the streets on Sunday in the largest of a series of demonstrations over a bill that would have protected many politicians from being prosecuted for corruption. The Social Democrat-led government announced that day in a statement that it was repealing the decree, which had been approved last week without input from Parliament. However, Prime Minister Sorin Grindeanu indicated that he still planned to push through the amendments to the criminal codes via legislation that would be put to Parliament for approval. Protests continued over the issue Monday night -- albeit on a smaller scale -- with calls for the government to be removed. 'Transparent government' In his speech on Tuesday, Iohannis, a former National Liberal Party politician, said withdrawing the decree is too little. Although he stopped short of calling for a fresh election, he told members of the center-left government, which has been in power since December, \"\"Your first worry was to take care of the files of the convicted (politicians). Romanians are appalled. \"\"The withdrawal of Ordnance 13 is too little. Early elections, at this point, is too much. Who needs to come up with a solution? The Social Democrats, as they created the problem.\"\" At this point, members of the governing coalition -- made up of the Social Democrats and a smaller party, the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats, walked out of the room. \"\"Are you already tired?\"\" asked the President. \"\"Too bad. Romania needs a strong government, a transparent one, whose governing is predictable, done in broad daylight, not stealthily at night.\"\" He went on to ask, \"\"What kind of nation do we want to be? Do we want to be a strong, prosperous one, which builds a rule of law and respects it, where justice is strong and independent? Or do we want to be a weak nation, despised, which risks everything to save a few from difficult times?\"\" This, he said, would be the \"\"question and the purpose\"\" of a referendum, which would \"\"really find out the will of the Romanian people.\"\" Demonstrations continue Around 25,000 demonstrators gathered in Victory Square, Bucharest, on Monday evening and around 20,000 elsewhere in the country, according to estimates by the Romanian media. Although they turned out in far smaller numbers than Sunday, they continued to call for the government to resign. A counter-demonstration with about 3,000 people gathered outside the presidential palace in support of the government, calling for Iohannis to resign. Speaking to CNN on Tuesday, Vlad Mixich, a Romanian journalist and political commentator, said of the President's address to Parliament, \"\"He talked mainly to the people who protested in the last week in the streets. I think it was important for him to do that. \"\"This was one of the biggest protests in Romania since (the fall of communism in) 1989. So he had to speak directly to those people who were in the streets to protest even if the protesters don't perceive the President as their leader\"\".\"\" Mixich said the referendum suggested by the President \"\"would be a symbolic gesture. One of the type that politicians love so much -- it will keep this topic on the table.\"\" A brighter future \"\"The protests won't stop until some of the ministers will quit their jobs. We've had enough of them,\"\" said Bianca Dumitru, 25, a sports journalist who joined protests in her home town of Brasov, central Romania. \"\"The last week was incredible for the whole country. We got so united and motivated that we have to thank the government for this. But I think it's time for them to let us enjoy the victory and live in a prosperous environment, with a bright future ahead.\"\" Parliament is due on Wednesday to debate a censure motion submitted by the opposition in a bid to remove the government from office. This is not expected to succeed, as the coalition holds a majority in the legislative body.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n30,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/politics/barack-obama-kitesurfing-richard-branson/index.html,Barack Obama's kitesurfing adventure with Richard Branson,Washington (CNN)#IslandLife was good to Barack Obama.,\"Before returning to Washington, the former president dove into an aquatic and athletic challenge with his friend, Virgin Group founder and billionaire Richard Branson, while vacationing on the British Virgin Islands with former first lady Michelle Obama. Now that Obama is free from many Secret Service-imposed restrictions that did not allow him to partake in activities like surfing, Branson offered Obama the chance to learn how to kitesurf. But to make things more interesting, Branson took on a challenge of his own. \"\"We decided to set up a friendly challenge: Could Barack learn to kitesurf before I learned to foilboard? We agreed to have a final day battle to see who could stay up the longest,\"\" Branson wrote in a post on Virgin.com. Kitesurfing is riding on a surfboard while holding onto a kite and foilboarding is riding a surfboard with a hydrofoil that goes into the water lifts the board above the surface. Following a few days of training, the challenge was on and Obama kitesurfed his way to victory. \"\"We were neck and neck until the last run on the last day, when I got up on the foilboard and screamed along for over 50 metres, three feet above the water,\"\" Branson wrote. \"\"I was feeling very pleased with myself, only to look over and see Barack go 100 metres on his kiteboard! I had to doff my cap to him and celebrate his victory.\"\"\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n31,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/health/male-birth-control-vasalgel-contraceptive-monkey-trial-trnd/index.html,\"Male contraceptive gel effective in monkeys, but will it work in humans?\",\"(CNN)When it comes to contraception, there are no long-lasting, easily reversible options for men. The only choices are condoms or a vasectomy.\",\"And it's been this way for more than a century. But a new injectable gel that blocks sperm inside the body, preventing them from leaving while allowing seminal fluid to pass through, has proved effective in trials using monkeys. The researchers behind the product, known as Vasalgel, hope it could get trials in humans within a few years. \"\"What was important here was that this worked and was safe in animals similar to humans,\"\" said Elaine Lissner, executive director of the Parsemus Foundation, the medical research organization behind Vasalgel that is also leading the trials. A new study, published Tuesday, involved 16 male monkeys receiving injections of Vasalgel who were released into social outdoor housing with females. Any adverse effects, as well as their ability to impregnate females, was compared with a historical sample of monkeys that had received vasectomies. \"\"It was a simple efficacy study,\"\" Lissner said, meaning the researchers merely set out to see whether the gel was safe and worked to prevent pregnancy. The social groups were monitored for at least one breeding season, and the team reported in its paper that none of the females in the group conceived during that time. One monkey had the gel inserted incorrectly, and another developed a sperm granuloma, or lump of sperm, but the majority tolerated the gel and saw little inflammation, Lissner said, adding that rates of granuloma and inflammation are usually higher after a vasectomy. Lissner's team is hoping to conduct clinical trials in humans next year and plans to stage further animal trials this year in preparation. But although the gel worked well in monkeys, it won't necessarily translate perfectly to humans. \"\"This is a bigger, longer task than we first anticipated,\"\" Lissner said. Stopping sperm in their tracks Administering Vasalgel inside a man, or a monkey, involves a polymer injected into the sperm-carrying tubes between the testicles and penis, known as the vas deferens, to block sperm as they are released. The injection is given under anesthetic and mimics the effect of a vasectomy, but without the snip. \"\"It's a sticky gel that goes into (the tubes) and basically filters out sperm,\"\" Lissner said. A similar polymer called RISUG is being trialled in India and has proved effective in men. The new gel is injected in a location similar to that cut during a vasectomy and allows fluids through while blocking sperm. The backed-up sperm are then reabsorbed by the body. A further benefit is that -- unlike with a vasectomy -- the gel is meant to disintegrate when a second solution is injected to break down the barrier and flush it out. This would make the process reversible. Reversibility was shown in trials on rabbits, but it was not tested in the new trial on monkeys. Recent trials on baboons also failed to reverse the effect. \"\"Successful reversibility will be the key to make this world-changing,\"\" Lissner said. Invasive procedure A further factor likely to impact numbers using this method is that Vasalgel still involves minor surgery to pull out the sperm tubes and inject the gel. What's more, when sperm are reabsorbed into the body, there is a risk of an immune reaction, potentially leaving men less fertile after reversal -- similar to vasectomy, though risks with the gel are lower, according to Lissner. \"\"Fifty percent of men after a vasectomy reversal remain infertile,\"\" said Dr. Ilpo Huhtaniemi, emeritus professor of reproductive endocrinology at Imperial College London, who was not involved in the new study. However, he points out that this doesn't prevent men from having children, as sperm can still be collected and used for in-vitro fertilization. The latest evidence on monkeys has many hoping a new form of contraceptive may be on the horizon, but experts believe more evidence is first needed on its reversibility. \"\"In order for it to have a chance of replacing the traditional surgical method of vasectomy, the authors need to show that the procedure is reversible, and it's reassuring that apparently such studies are ongoing,\"\" said Allan Pacey, professor of andrology at the University of Sheffield who was also not involved in the new research. \"\"The idea of trying to replace the traditional method of vasectomy by inserting a gel into the tube which carries sperm from the testicles to the penis at ejaculation is not a new one. However, we haven't seen much progress in developing the idea in recent years, so this study is a useful step in the right direction.\"\" A male hormonal birth control injection was shown to prevent pregnancy in a 2016 study but was ended early due to side effects. Other approaches have involved strategies to control the production of sperm by targeting the hormone testosterone, but this had side effects of depression and weight gain. In 2015, Japanese scientists discovered a protein, calcineurin, found to be crucial in helping sperm swim and break through the membrane of a female egg in order to fertilize it. When the genes behind this protein were blocked during studies in mice, they became infertile. But Vasalgel is further along than the Japanese research and has not shown severe side effects in animals. Lissner is confident that her team's gel will overcome the challenges. She sees value in providing birth control that does not interfere with hormones. \"\"Why manipulate the whole body when there's a small tube that all the sperm swim through?\"\" she asked. Huhtaniemi agrees that Vasalgel could be valuable in certain populations but feels that in terms of birth control for the masses, a less-invasive option is needed. \"\"We need a pill. That's the easiest to administer,\"\" he said. \"\"It is feasible. We just need to find the right target.\"\"\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n32,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/sport/new-zealand-hotel-room-bugged-australia/index.html,Man arrested over Australia vs. New Zealand 'bug gate' case,(CNN)A man has been charged over the discovery of a listening device in New Zealand's team room ahead of last year's Rugby Championship match against Australia.,\"New Zealand Rugby had reported that a room had been bugged in Sydney's Double Bay Intercontinental Hotel, where the All Blacks held meetings before August's Bledisloe Cup clash with the Wallabies. New South Wales police said Tuesday that a 51-year-old man, who was employed as a security consultant at the time of the alleged offense, had been charged with public mischief. He will appear in court on March 21. READ: 'Invictus' legend dies aged 45 All Blacks head coach Steve Hansen described the charge as \"\"bizarre\"\" and \"\"unbelievable.\"\" \"\"The charged man has worked for the All Blacks, and many other organizations, for a long time and is someone who is well respected by us,\"\" the 57-year-old said in a statement released by New Zealand Rugby. \"\"However, as with all cases before the courts, there has to be a due process that takes place and it is not right or proper for us to make any further comment as this could jeopardize the outcome of the case.\"\" READ: The double life of 'Super Maro' READ: Record-breaking All Blacks sidestep 'clown affair' READ: NZ star apologizes after airport toilet incident 'Still leaves a bitter taste' Bill Pulver, chief executive of Australia Rugby Union (ARU), praised the police. \"\"The aspect that still leaves a bitter taste out of this whole affair is that the discovery of the device was reported publicly on game day, when it is understood that the alleged discovery of the device occurred much earlier in the week leading up to the Test match,\"\" he said in a statement. \"\"Clearly the media attention which resulted from it was a distraction that neither team needed on the morning of a very important Test match. \"\"The ARU and the Wallabies were never accused of any wrongdoing, however it was still important that this matter reached a conclusion to provide complete reassurance to all fans that the organization and the team had no part in any of this. \"\"There may be some questions that remain but certainly today's news is welcome news that an individual has been called to account over this incident.\"\" READ: NZ legend McCaw ends career Visit cnn.com/rugby for more news and videos The All Blacks, ranked the world's best rugby union team, went on to beat Australia 42-8 in the match to record their biggest win over the Wallabies on Australian soil in 113 years. Hansen's team set a new world record with its 18th consecutive victory in the third and final Bledisloe Cup series fixture in Auckland in October, but lost to Ireland in Chicago in its next game.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n33,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/europe/vladimir-kara-murza-suffers-organ-failure/index.html,Putin critic in 'grave' condition after suffering full organ failure,\"Moscow (CNN)A vocal critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who said he was poisoned in 2015, has suffered \"\"full organ failure\"\" and is still in \"\"grave\"\" condition after being hospitalized in Moscow last week, his wife says.\",\"Doctors in the hospital where Vladimir Kara-Murza, 35, is being treated say they still \"\"have no real idea\"\" what caused his illness, but agree a \"\"toxic substance\"\" is to blame, his lawyer Vadim Prokhorov told CNN. Kara-Murza's wife, Yevgenia, told CNN that doctors have tried to bring her husband out of a medically-induced coma but that when they did so, he \"\"had almost no reaction at all, except to his name being called.\"\" He is currently on dialysis and artificial ventilation. She said doctors have diagnosed him with \"\"acute intoxication by an unidentified substance\"\" and that there is \"\"no prognosis,\"\" adding that the risks are now more serious due to his previous illness. Prokhorov told CNN that an investigator from the Khamovniki district of Moscow contacted him last Friday to inquire about the circumstances which led to Kara-Murza's hospitalization, but has not received any further updates about the ongoing investigation. \"\"The problem is that they are not paying any real attention to this,\"\" Prokhorov said. \"\"The investigative committee is only interested in this situation because of the media coverage.\"\" He said he has no direct proof his client was poisoned. The Kremlin has denied any involvement in Kara-Murza's 2015 illness. Moscow denies involvement in 2015 health scare CNN spoke to Kara-Murza in 2015, months after a mysterious illness nearly killed him. \"\"I fell into a coma, all of my major organs began failing, one after another. It was the kidneys first, then the lungs, the heart, the liver,\"\" he said at the time. He said he believed his 2015 suspected poisoning was a politically motivated attack. \"\"Frankly there is no other possible reason,\"\" he said. \"\"I don't have any money dealings. I don't have any personal enemies. I didn't steal anybody's wife.\"\" The case had parallels with the killing of former Russian agent Alexander Litvinenko in London. A British public inquiry into that 2006 poisoning found two former Russian agents responsible for carrying out the poisoning with the radioactive isotope Polonium-210. Its final report concluded that Putin was \"\"probably\"\" aware of the operation. The Russian Foreign Ministry dismissed the UK inquiry as politically motivated and the Kremlin said Russia wasn't involved. In February 2015, a leading Russian opposition figure and friend of Kara-Murza, Boris Nemtsov, was shot to death on a bridge near the Kremlin as he walked home from a restaurant. Kara-Murza became ill four months later. US lawmakers urge investigation Kara-Murza's hospitalization has triggered an outcry from US lawmakers, who have called on the Trump administration to speak out on his behalf. US Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Florida, said Putin should be held accountable if there is evidence the government poisoned Kara-Murza. \"\"Vladimir Putin does not deserve any benefit of the doubt here, given how commonplace political assassinations and poisonings have become under his regime,\"\" said Rubio, a frequent Putin critic. \"\"I am praying that Kara-Murza's condition improves.\"\" He urged the White House and the State Department to question Russian authorities about the case. Kara-Murza, who splits his time between Russia and his family home in Virginia, is a dual Russian-British citizen. He is part of the Open Russia foundation, an organization of anti-Putin activists who call for open elections, a free press and civil rights reforms. When he fell ill last week, Kara-Murza was touring Russia for screenings of a documentary about Nemtsov.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n34,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/health/arkansas-rape-law-trnd/index.html,New law lets husbands sue wives to stop abortion - even in rape cases,(CNN)A new Arkansas law will let a husband sue a doctor to stop his wife from getting an abortion. And it makes no exception for cases of spousal rape.,\"The law, called the Arkansas Unborn Child Protection From Dismemberment Abortion Act, was passed and signed by Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, and goes into effect later this year. It prohibits dismemberment abortion, the most common procedure used in second-trimester abortions. A clause in the law states that the husband of a woman getting the abortion can sue the doctor to stop his wife's abortion. The husband has to be the father of the child. And because there's no exemption in the law for rape or incest, a woman's rapist could theoretically file suit to stop the abortion. The ACLU of Arkansas claims the law is unconstitutional and plans to challenge it in court before it goes into effect. One Arkansas lawmaker said there wasn't much debate about those parts of the law. \"\"It was not something that was talked about on the Senate floor,\"\" Arkansas state Sen. Joyce Elliott told CNN affiliate KARK. \"\"If we cannot make headway on something like an exception for rape and incest, I think it just felt kind of fruitless to make some sense out of the rest of what was in the bill.\"\" Elliott added, \"\"They don't see the outrage in constantly putting the thumb on women to dictate what they can do and not do.\"\" But another lawmaker believes husbands should have a voice in these decisions. \"\"I think a woman does have control over her own body, but when you have created a life, you created a life with someone else,\"\" said state Sen. Missy Irvin. Kansas and Oklahoma passed similar abortion laws which are tied up in the courts, according to CNN affiliate KFSM. A few states, with conservative lawmakers emboldened by Donald Trump's election, have passed strict new abortion laws, including Ohio, which passed a measure banning abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n35,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/motorsport/f1-drivers-zoom-charity-photo-auction-hamilton-button-verstappen/index.html,Formula One stars auction photos for children's charity,(CNN)Ever wanted to get to know your favorite Formula One star a little better?,\"The annual Zoom charity event auctions signed photographs taken by the biggest names in motor racing to raise funds for the Starlight Children's Foundation. Giving fans a glimpse behind the scenes, the project has raised more than $100,000 for charity since it was launched in 2012. \"\"Zoom is a super project,\"\" said former F1 chief executive Bernie Ecclestone. \"\"We are proud to be supporting it again, helping to raise money for charity while showing what the stars of F1 get up to away from the TV cameras.\"\" READ: Five ways F1 will change after Liberty Media takeover\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n36,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/06/asia/china-japan-disputed-islands-intrusion/index.html,Chinese ships sail near disputed Japanese islands,\"(CNN)Three Chinese Coast Guard ships entered waters near a chain of islands claimed by both China and Japan in the East China Sea on Monday, according to authorities from both sides.\",\"Japan controls the chain and calls them the Senkaku Islands, while China calls them the Diaoyu Islands. The sailing comes just days after US Defense Secretary James Mattis reaffirmed America's commitment to defending Japan and its disputed islands. According to Japanese broadcaster NHK, protests were lodged with the Chinese Embassy in Tokyo and in Beijing through the Japanese Embassy. Tensions have flashed numerous times in recent years over the disputed islands,-including face-offs between Japanese and Chinese air and naval forces-that have been termed dangerous by both sides. EXPLAINER: How an uninhabited island chain split Japan and China China's State Oceanic Administration, which oversees the country's Coast Guard, put out a statement late Monday saying the three ships \"\"cruised within China's Diaoyu Islands territorial sea.\"\" China's Defense Ministry, which is separate from the Oceanic Administration, posted a statement on its website confirming the Coast Guard ship movement. Japan's Coast Guard said the Chinese vessels spent two hours in Japanese territorial waters. It was the fourth time Chinese ships have entered Japan's waters this year, the Japanese Coast Guard said. There were 36 such incidents in 2016, it said. Despite the frequency of the Chinese sailings, experts said having one so soon after Mattis' visit to Japan sent a subtle message to both Tokyo and Washington. \"\"It is both a signal that China won't be intimidated from defending its interests/claims and a test to see how the new (Trump) administration responds,\"\" said Carl Schuster, a professor at Hawaii Pacific University and former director of operations at the US Pacific Command's Joint Intelligence Center. Denny Roy, an Asian security expert at the East-West Center in Honolulu, said ship movements in disputed waters could result in a shooting incident. \"\"The danger is especially high considering military personnel on both sides are often eager to demonstrate their determination to defend what they consider national territory,\"\" Roy said. And a China-Japan military confrontation could bring US forces into play. During a press conference Saturday in Tokyo, Mattis said the US would defend the islands with Japan. \"\"I made clear that our long-standing policy on the Senkaku Islands stands -- the US will continue to recognize Japanese administration of the islands and as such Article 5 of the US-Japan Security Treaty applies,\"\" Mattis said in an appearance with Japanese Defense Minister Tomomi Inada. The US position was reinforced Tuesday in a phone call between Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida and the new US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, according to a statement from Japan's Foreign Ministry. \"\"The United States will be against any unilateral action made to damage the Japanese administration of the Senkaku Islands,\"\" Tillerson stated during the call, according to the Japanese statement. China responded quickly on Saturday to the US stance on the islands, saying it brings instability to the region. \"\"Diaoyu and its affiliated islands have been Chinese territory since ancient times. These are historical facts that cannot be changed. The so-called US-Japan security treaty was a product of the Cold War, and it should not harm China's territorial sovereignty and legitimate rights,\"\" Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said in a statement. \"\"We urge the US side to adopt a responsible attitude and stop making wrong remarks on the issue of the sovereignty of Diaoyu Islands,\"\" Lu said. The US commitment to the Senkakus is not new. In 2014, the Obama administration also said the remote chain fell under the treaty. In late 2013, China-declared an air defense identification zone (ADIZ) over much of the East China Sea, including the Senkakus, despite objections from Tokyo and Washington. Japan also has an ADIZ over the islands. Although the Senkakus are uninhabited, their ownership would allow for exclusive oil, mineral and fishing rights in the surrounding waters. While the Senkakus remain a source of friction in the US-China relationship, Mattis' visit seemed to have soothed relations a bit in another area, the South China Sea. Although the US defense chief said \"\"China has shredded the trust of nations in the region\"\" by fortifying disputed South China Sea islands, Mattis also said no increased US military maneuvers there were needed. Lu, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, on Monday welcomed that stance. \"\"As for Mattis' comment that there is no need for large-scale military operations in the area and the issue should be resolved through diplomacy, these remarks deserve our affirmation,\"\" Lu said.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n37,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/world/afghanistan-explosion/index.html,20 dead in suicide blast outside Afghan Supreme Court in Kabul,\"Kabul, Afghanistan (CNN)At least 20 people are dead after a suicide blast Tuesday outside Afghanistan's Supreme Court in Kabul, police and other officials told CNN.\",\"A suicide bomber detonated his explosives in a parking near the court in the Afghan capital, according to Basir Mojahid, spokesman for Kabul's chief of police. The attack at around 3:45 p.m. local time targeted Supreme Court employees as they were leaving for the day, Mojahid said. At least 35 people were wounded in the blast, according to Saleem Rasooli, head of Kabul hospitals. There have been no initial claims of responsibility. An eyewitness told CNN that he felt the explosion shake the ground as he was leaving his office, opposite the Supreme Court. Nimatullah Mati said the area is home to several residential apartments and was crowded Tuesday afternoon with people who were heading home from work. Ambulances and firetrucks arrived on the scene within five minutes, Mati said. Afghanistan's chief executive, Abdullah Abdullah, expressed his condolences on Twitter. \"\"The blood of our people isn't cheap & won't be wasted,\"\" he said. NATO also condemned the attack. \"\"Anyone who seeks to destabilize the pillars of a functioning government are enemies of Afghanistan,\"\" Italian army Lt. Gen. Rosario Castellano, deputy commander of the NATO mission in Afghanistan, said in a statement. The blast comes a month after at least 36 people were killed and dozens wounded in two suicide bombings near the Afghan Parliament in Kabul. The Taliban claimed responsibility for those January 10 attacks. Tuesday's blast underscores the growing concern about the security situation in Afghanistan, where the country's security forces and its international allies have been fighting Taliban militants and other radical groups for years. A new report Monday from the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan said more than 11,000 people were killed or injured in 2016. That's the highest number of civilian casualties in a single year since the United Nations began systemically documenting those in 2009. The report also shows a record spike in the number of children killed in the long-running Afghanistan War. Of the 3,498 killed last year, 923 were children, the report said. Anti-government forces, mainly the Taliban, were behind almost two-thirds of the casualties, according to the report. ISIS militants have established a presence in the country, and their attacks particularly target Shia Muslims, the report said.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n38,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/middleeast/syria-executions-amnesty-international-report/index.html,\"13,000 people hanged in secret at Syrian prison, Amnesty says\",\"(CNN)Thousands of people have been hanged at a Syrian prison in a secret crackdown on dissent by the regime of Bashar al-Assad, a report by Amnesty International alleges.\",\"The human rights group says as many as 13,000 people have been executed at Saydnaya prison, north of the capital Damascus in a \"\"hidden\"\" campaign authorized by senior regime figures. Amnesty's report, Human slaughterhouse, says prisoners are moved in the middle of the night from their cells under the pretext of being transferred. They are taken to the grounds of the prison, where they are hanged, likely unaware of their fate until they feel the noose around their neck, Amnesty alleges. The report is the culmination of a year-long investigation, including interviews with 84 witnesses including security guards, detainees, judges and lawyers, Amnesty says. Most of those hanged were civilians \"\"believed to be opposed to the government,\"\" the report finds. \"\"The horrors depicted in this report reveal a hidden, monstrous campaign, authorized at the highest levels of the Syrian government, aimed at crushing any form of dissent within the Syrian population,\"\" Lynn Maalouf, the deputy director for research at Amnesty's Beirut office, said in a statement announcing the report. Amnesty International says there are two detention centers at Saydnaya prison. In the \"\"red building,\"\" the majority of detainees are civilians who have been arrested since the beginning of the conflict in 2011, according to the organization. In the \"\"white building,\"\" the detainees are mainly military officers and soldiers. CNN has asked the Syrian government for comment. The report contends that the executed detainees were given a sham trial by \"\"a so-called Military Field Court.\"\" \"\"The judge will ask the name of the detainee and whether he committed the crime. Whether the answer is yes or no, he will be convicted ... This court has no relation with the rule of law. This is not a court,\"\" a former judge said, according to Amnesty. Nicolette Waldman, an Amnesty International researcher, elaborated on the horrific conditions prisoners allegedly face. \"\"They have been actually dying in massive numbers as a result of repeated torture in combination with the systematic deprivation of food, water, medicine and medical care,\"\" she told CNN. \"\"(The report) has gotten the attention it deserved,\"\" Waldman said. \"\"It's a big story. But for people who work on Syria, it was almost a test case for 'Does the world still care, not just about death but the fact that it was organized, systematic?'\"\" In light of its findings, she said Amnesty is calling for investigation without delay and for the UN to act immediately. \"\"I want to be very clear that these practices are unacceptable, and they have to stop. They have to be brought to an end. Mass killings of civilians and extermination so that people are dying of starvation, of illness, of treatable diseases must stop, and Russia has a very special responsibility to uphold peace and security in the world,\"\" Waldman said. \"\"We are calling on them to use their influence with the Syrian authorities to push for access to independent monitors to all of the prisons in Syria run by the government where these atrocities are taking place so the perpetrators can be held to account.\"\" Speaking at the UN, UK Ambassador and Deputy Permanent Representative Peter Wilson responded to the report's allegations. \"\"We have seen the report of Amnesty International on atrocities in Syria,\"\" he said. \"\"Our foreign secretary has said he is sickened by that report. We strongly condemn these atrocities, and we continue to effort to shine a light on what's happening in Syria and to hold people accountable for these actions.\"\" 'Just a headline' President Assad's regime has previously been accused of extrajudicial killings and war crimes during the country's civil war, which broke out in 2011. In 2014, CNN was given a copy of a report that found \"\"direct evidence\"\" of \"\"systematic torture and killing\"\" by the Syrian government, based on photographs leaked by a Syrian defector. One of the report's authors called it a \"\"smoking gun\"\" proving the use of torture. But Assad has steadfastly maintained that many of the accusations leveled against him are politically motivated. \"\"I'm just a headline -- the bad president, the bad guy, who is killing the good guys,\"\" Assad told a group of western visitors, including The New York Times, in November. \"\"You know this narrative. The real reason is toppling the government. This government doesn't fit the criteria of the United States.\"\" The UN estimates that about 400,000 people have been killed since the start of the war and another 4.8 million have fled the country.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n39,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/arts/martin-schoeller-celebrity-photos/index.html,From bodybuilders to Obama: How Martin Schoeller takes an 'honest' photograph,This video is a segment from the CNN Style show.,\"But what truly distinguishes the German-born New Yorker's practice is his his consistent style. \"\"It's been 20 years that I've been taking these close-up portraits and everybody (has) the same lighting, the same setting, the same angle, the same camera. Nobody is retouched -- what you see is what you get,\"\" Schoeller explained to CNN Style show presenter Derek Blasberg. By treating each portrait in the same way, regardless of the subject, Schoeller attempts to find some truth in what he feels can be a very dishonest medium. \"\"I do think all photographs lie. I don't think there is one picture that is really honest. You can't describe a person in a split second, but maybe in the grand scheme of photography, I think there are some pictures that are more honest than others, you know? So I'm trying to steer to the little bit more honest side of the spectrum,\"\" he said. Out of the thousands of people he has photographed, who does Schoeller find the most challenging to photograph? \"\"Actors in general are difficult to shoot because they are always acting. You feel like 'Oh, this was an honest, great portrait' while you're photographing them... and then (I'm) looking at the contact sheets and I feel like, 'Oh my god, they were playing the whole time and I didn't even notice it.'\"\" Watch the video above to find out more about Martin Schoeller's photography.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n40,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/entertainment/christie-brinkley-sports-illustrated-swimsuit/index.html,\"Christie Brinkley, 63, back in SI Swimsuit issue\",(CNN)Christie Brinkley has made a splash return in the latest Sports Illustrated Swimsuit issue.,\"Thirty-eight years after she first appeared on the cover of the coveted magazine, Brinkley is back in the pages -- this time with daughters Alexa Ray Joel, 31 and Sailor Brinkley Cook, 18. The trio were photographed posing on the beach in Turks & Caicos. Brinkley also gets a solo pic sporting a red bikini and called it a \"\"full circle moment.\"\" Brinkley made history when she appeared on the cover three consecutive years in a row, 1979, 1980 and 1981. The 63-year-old posted the magazine photo with her daughters on Instagram Monday and wrote \"\"thank you Sports Illustrated for sending the powerful message that good things come in packages of every size and we do not come with an expiration date!\"\" Joel is Brinkley's daughter with Billy Joel, and like her father, is a singer. She shared a her bikini shot with a caption about body acceptance. \"\"I don't have a completely flat tummy, or cellulite-free thighs... nor am I a model's height or shape,\"\" Joel wrote. \"\"Neither are hundreds of millions of other beautiful women out there. SO WHAT.\"\" Brinkley told People she had decided at age 30 to stop posing in bathing suits. The opportunity to pose with her daughters made her change her mind, she said. \"\"I thought, 'Those days are over,'\"\" she said. \"\"But to get to do it with my girls, I thought, 'One last go!'\"\"\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n41,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/sport/ski-world-championships-st-moritz-lindsey-vonn/index.html,\"St .Moritz 2017: Lindsey Vonn, Mikaela Shiffrin seek world titles\",(CNN)Free-falling out of the start gate and accelerating to 90 miles per hour in just six seconds.,\"It's a chilling prospect and it's just the beginning of the men's downhill course in St. Moritz. The start hut is cut into a rock face and the slick slope is so steep -- 100% or 45 degrees -- TV cameramen must abseil into positions wearing crampons. But the one skier able to conquer their fear and harness this breakneck speed will be crowned world downhill champion for the next two years. The race is the highlight of the 2017 World Championships, which start this week in the chic Swiss town. St. Moritz, the jewel of the Engadin valley, has been a longtime destination for the jetset and draws a well-heeled international clientele to its fine-dining restaurants and five-star hotels. Often dubbed the \"\"home of winter sports,\"\" St. Moritz has hosted two Winter Olympics and four previous World Championships. A total of 600 athletes from more than 70 countries will compete across six alpine skiing disciplines -- slalom, giant slalom, super-G, downhill, super combined (downhill and slalom) and the team event. Outside of the Olympics, it's the biggest event in the sport and carries more cachet than the World Cup circuit. \"\"It's winning, basically, the Olympics minus all the other sports -- that's what the World Championships is for us. It's big,\"\" Mikaela Shiffrin, who leads the World Cup overall and slalom standings, told CNN's Alpine Edge. The 21-year-old American is going for a third straight slalom world title after winning gold in Schladming in 2013 and Beaver Creek two years ago. She also won the Olympic slalom gold in 2014, and is aware she has set herself a very high benchmark. \"\"Not winning stinks -- it makes me feel like I've done something wrong,\"\" Shiffrin adds. But the headline attraction will be her compatriot Lindsey Vonn, the second most successful ski racer of all time -- male or female -- with 77 World Cup wins, behind only Sweden's Ingemar Stenmark (86). Speed queen Vonn, the 2010 Olympic downhill champion, won her only world title in 2009 and is back on the circuit following a broken arm and severe nerve damage to her right hand sustained in a crash shortly after returning from knee surgery. Vonn won in only her second race since returning to the circuit in Garmisch-Partenkirchen in Germany in January, but crashed in a downhill at Cortina d'Ampezzo in Italy this month. In St. Moritz Tuesday, she skied out during the opening run of the World Championships' first race -- the women's super-G -- after trying to regain grip on her pole. \"\"I just kind of lost my concentration there for a minute,\"\" Vonn, the 2015 bronze medalist, told reporters. \"\"I stayed on my feet, so that was the important thing.\"\" Austria's Nicole Schmidhofer won the gold medal from Tina Weirather of Liechtenstein and home favorite Lara Gut in perfect conditions, after two days of heavy snow had canceled the men's and women's downhill training sessions. Defending champion and Olympic gold medalist Anna Veith didn't make the second run after missing a gate. The women's downhill start is lower than the men's but still a considerable test of skill and stamina. Vonn's main rivals on Sunday will be World Cup overall champion Gut and Slovenia's Ilka Stuhec, this season's World Cup downhill leader. Another Slovenian Tina Maze, who has since retired, won the world title in 2015. The men's downhill takes place Saturday on the legendary \"\"Free Fall\"\" course, which was dreamed up by Bernhard Russi, the Swiss two-time downhill world champion and 1972 Olympic gold medalist. READ: Vonn crashes in Cortina READ: Vonn wins first race since comeback READ: Lindsey Vonn -- 'Hardest recovery of my career' Racers access the start hut via a steel staircase before plunging from 9,317 feet to 6,692 feet down to the Salastrains plateau above St. Moritz. Switzerland's Patrick Kung is the defending champion, but Italy's Peter Fill won the 2015-16 World Cup title and leads the standings this season. Norway's Kjetil Jansrud and Italian Dominik Paris, the winner in Kitzbuhel, are second and third in the World Cup standings. Former wold junior champion Beat Feuz triumphed at St. Moritz last year and the 29-year-old Swiss skier could improve on his World Championship bronze from Beaver Creek in 2015. The men's slalom on February 19 is likely to be a shootout between Austria's Marcel Hirscher and Sweden's Henrik Kristofferson. Hirscher, 27, has won four World Championship golds and a record five overall World Cup titles, while 22-year-old Kristofferson is last year's World Cup slalom champion. It is worth keeping an eye on Briton Dave Ryding, who has been making waves after scoring his country's joint best result in a World Cup race with a second place in the slalom in Kitzbuhel last month. He equaled the achievement of Konrad Bartelski in a downhill in Val Gardena, Italy in 1981. Ryding followed it up with 10th in the Schladming night slalom and sits fifth in the World Cup slalom standings. Visit cnn.com/skiing for more news and video Britain has won 11 medals at the World Championships but none since 1936.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n42,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/06/arts/bio-art-microbes-and-machines/index.html,Of microbes and machines: How art and science fuse in bio-art,\"Sean Redmond is one of the curators of the Morbis Artis: Diseases of the Arts exhibition. Darrin Sean Verhagen works for RMIT University. He has previously received funding from the Australia Council, Arts Victoria and City of Melbourne.\",\"There is art in science -- the artistic precision of the scalpel, the cool aesthetics of the laboratory, and the intimate observations undertaken by scientists to discover new materials and microbes living unseen in the world. Bio-art, an artistic genre that took hold in the 1980s, solidifies, extends and enriches this organic relationship. According to the artist and writer Frances Stracey, it represents: \"\"a crossover of art and the biological sciences, with living matter, such as genes, cells or animals, as its new media.\"\" Bio-artists might use and incorporate imaging technologies within the artistic space; bringing living and dead matter into the gallery. They draw upon biology metaphors to imbue artwork with healing and wounding propensities. In BioCouture, for example, fashion, art, and biology are weaved together, blossoming new materials into existence. As author Suzanne Anker has noted, \"\"Donna Franklin and Gary Cass have invented dresses made from cellulose generated by bacteria from red wine. Suzanne Lee composes 'growing' textiles produced by sugar, tea and bacteria to fashion jackets and kimonos.\"\" Lee makes jackets out of cellulose produced by bacteria in baths of green tea and sugar. Bio-art includes the skins and cells of celluloid and digital video, the membranes of sound, and the liquids and fluids of body parts and eyeballs. To take another example, in Christian B?k's The Xenotext, a \"\"chemical alphabet\"\" is used to translate poetry into sequences of DNA for subsequent implantation into the genome of a bacterium. When translated into a gene and then integrated into the cell, the poetry constitutes a set of instructions, all of which cause the organism to manufacture a viable, benign protein in response. Writes B?k: \"\"I am, in effect, engineering a life-form so that it becomes not only a durable archive for storing a poem, but also an operant machine for writing a poem \"\"-one that can persist on the planet until the sun itself explodes...\"\" Scientists and artists work together in what become teeming new spaces of co-creation. Together, they often set Bio-art within current debates and concerns about what constitutes life, what counts as a sentient being, and who gets to determine what lives are saved, exploited or destroyed. Bio-art draws together the hopes and concerns of scientists and artists as we hurtle into an age where human life and everyday living seems to be undergoing radical and sometimes dangerous transformations. As author Sheel Patel suggests in relation to Bok's work: \"\"If a living cell can be cultured to spit out and produce novel poetry, could we eventually live in a society where humans are no longer needed to produce new thoughts, and works of literature?\"\" Arts and disease In the interactive art-science exhibition Morbis Artis: Diseases of the Arts, actual and metaphoric communicative diseases are employed to explore the often toxic relationship between human and non-human life. The exhibition explores the thin doorway that exists between life and death in a vexing age of species and habitat destruction, and the increasingly permeable tissues of contemporary bodies. The discourses of science in particular train us to see and to look for disease in every location. Science's microscopic and bio-technological powers allow it to reach into every atom. Of course, dominant discourse also communes that some spaces, things, and objects are more diseased than others. We are taught to see disease in the homes of outsiders and the nests of insects, in the fabric of pariah nation states and the tissues of certain religions and philosophies. At the same time, new materialism and animal philosophy question the very parameters of what life is, where it can be found, and they turn the question of disease onto humankind, whose activities are seen to infect all that it touches and taints. There is a frightening collision, then, between the possibilities and limitations of human and non-human life: caught as it were between nightmare and dream. Morbis Artis: Diseases of the Arts is composed of 11 artistic works, with each piece using a different media or art form to explore the chaos of the world it draws upon. Each artist imagines disease differently, and yet within the terror of their imaginings there is great beauty, and much hope. In Drew Berry's video projection, infectious cells are \"\"set free\"\" so that the very connective tissue of the exhibition room teems with the droplets of life and death. Herpes, influenza, HIV, polio and smallpox bacteria are projected onto the gallery wall as if they have taken flight. Magnified and chaotic, those entering the space are hit by their scale and size. Lienors Torre's multimedia and glass work on degenerative vision explores how our view of the world is metered and tainted by digital technologies. We see two large glass eyeballs, a liquid animation, and a glass cabinet full of jars filled with water in varying degrees of opacity, with engraved eye images on them. Eyes quickly become raindrops as the liquidity of vision is brought to watery life. There are tears and scars that reflect across the eyes of this exquisite art-piece. In Alison Bennett's touch-based screen work, the viewer is presented with a high-resolution scan of bruised skin. Viewers can use the touch-screen to manipulate the soft and damaged tissue before them, and their eyes become organs of touch. What does it feel like to touch a bruise and be bruised? The gallery is thus, both laboratory and studio. In all its variant forms, and with a scalpel and a paintbrush to hand, Bio-art fashions the world anew. Morbis Artis: Diseases of the Arts is currently exhibited at the RMIT Gallery until February 18, 2017.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n43,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/sport/joost-van-der-westhuizen-south-africa-rugby-alistair-hargreaves-cobus-visagie/index.html,Joost van der Westhuizen: Fearless rugby legend 'broke the mold',\"(CNN)Joost van der Westhuizen finally lost his brave battle with a body-wasting disease, but his powerful legacy lives on in modern rugby.\",\"Wheelchair-bound and barely able to talk in his later years, the South Africa legend passed away Monday aged 45. Motor neurone disease had left him a shadow of the gladiator who helped the Springboks win the World Cup in 1995, but his contribution to the game will never be forgotten, says former teammate Cobus Visagie. \"\"Joost basically created the new requirements for a modern No. 9,\"\" the former South Africa front-row prop told CNN's World Sport show Tuesday. Van der Westhuizen was 6 foot 2 inches tall, but played at scrumhalf -- a position traditionally occupied by the game's smallest players, providing the link between teams' backs and forwards. \"\"Some days I looked down when we were standing in a circle and saw a man with boots three sizes bigger than myself -- a scrumhalf!\"\" added Visagie, who played alongside van der Westhuizen at the 1999 World Cup and won 29 caps for his country. \"\"He had incredible speed, he had incredible bravery -- he's very well known for the tackles he made in the crucial 1995 World Cup, but also in all other games.\"\" In the 1995 World Cup final against New Zealand, van der Westhuizen stopped a rampaging Jonah Lomu when the giant winger had broken through the South African defense. The Springboks went on to win 15-12 in extra time, in the first major sporting event to be staged in South Africa after the end of Apartheid rule. The '95 side has achieved iconic status, notably through the Hollywood film \"\"Invictus.\"\" \"\"Who could forget that '95 World Cup tackle?\"\" former Springboks forward Alistair Hargreaves told CNN. \"\"He was fearless, and for a scrumhalf he certainly broke the mold. As a young boy, he epitomized what South African rugby was all about. We idolized him.\"\" READ: Blitzboks star leaves sevens on a high READ: Scotland stuns Ireland in Six Nations opener READ: Van der Westhuizen vows to fight motor neurone disease Courage on the field -- and off it Van der Westhuizen was diagnosed with motor neurone disease in 2011, having retired from international rugby in 2003 with what was then a record 89 caps for the Springboks. Also known as ALS or Lou Gehrig's disease, the condition causes muscles to weaken and waste away over time. In 2014 the \"\"Ice Bucket Challenge\"\" became a worldwide phenomenon, with millions of people helping to raise awareness and funds to research the disease. Although he never played alongside van der Westhuizen, Hargreaves -- who left South Africa in 2012 to play domestic rugby in England -- was fortunate enough to met his childhood hero later in life. \"\"I met him after his career and I probably met him at a time that his illness really kicked in,\"\" Hargreaves said. \"\"If he was resilient on the field, he certainly proved to be resilient and even more courageous when he found out about the terrible circumstances he found himself in. \"\"What a brilliant battle he fought. You can only respect the man for what he did.\"\" After his diagnosis, van der Westhuizen set up the J9 Foundation, a charity dedicated to helping sufferers of motor neurone disease. \"\"It is incredibly sad, but Joost fought a long battle,\"\" Hargreaves added. \"\"He was aware of the struggle he faced and I presume there is a certain amount of relief at the end of it. \"\"The guy has achieved so much, he's done so much for rugby, I'm sure they're going to hold him up as a real legend of the game.\"\" Visit cnn.com/rugby for more news and videos A public memorial service will be held on Friday at Loftus Versveld Stadium in Pretoria, South Africa, the home ground of van der Westhuizen's provincial side the Blue Bulls.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n44,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/us/harambe-cheeto-trnd/index.html,\"Cheeto that looks like Harambe worth $100,000? Nothing is okay anymore\",\"(CNN)In the 26th century BC, the Egyptians constructed the Great Pyramid of Giza, an architectural marvel that would remain the tallest structure in the world for millennia, and still stands to this day.\",\"In 1499 AD, Michelangelo completed the Pieta, a transcendent marriage of classical ideals and divine imagination long considered one of the finest works ever freed from stone. In 2017, a Flamin' Hot Cheeto that looks like a dead gorilla was put up for sale on the internet. Well, we had a good run. We're going to choose NOT to believe the Cheeto -- which \"\"looks like Harambe the Gorilla\"\" in the way any given Cheeto looks like anything -- sold for almost $100,000 after a 132-episode bidding war. That's what the eBay page says, but if you believe that, then you are admitting the flame of human innovation dies here, snuffed out under an amorphous log of cornmeal and monosodium glutamate. The seller of this foul totem does, however, appear to be legit. The account has been active since 2008 and has enough buyer and seller feedback for there to be a dim possibility that someone doled out a luxury cars' worth of cash on a Cheeto. CNN has reached out for comment. Really, we did. To salt the wound, there are now dozens of Harambe Cheeto-related items polluting the eBay listings, a cruel burlesque at the nadir of consumerism and irony and possibly humanity itself. If you want one, you can buy one with your hard-earned money. Or, you could open up any bag of Cheetos and squint. It doesn't matter. Nothing matters anymore.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n45,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/africa/maasai-tanzania-wildlife-warriors/index.html,Lion-killer Maasai turn wildlife warriors to save old enemy,\"(CNN)The Maasai have roamed Tanzania since time immemorial. Cattle in tow, the East African pastoralists have circled the land looking for fresh grass, co-existing with nature for as long as anyone can remember.\",\"But nature is not always kind. Fifty percent of the world's lion population lives in East Africa -- and lions like to eat livestock. Historically the Maasai would use deadly force to protect their herds, often heading out in revenge parties to hunt and kill lions. There were ritual killings also, known as \"\"Ala-mayo.\"\" Killing a lion, a symbol of strength and power, was a rite of passage for Maasai initiates into \"\"Morani,\"\" the warrior class. Armed with a spear, these youths became men in the process, returning to the tribe to be treated with new-found respect. The Tanzanian government banned ritual killing in the 1970s, but certain pockets of activity were silently condoned. In Ngorongoro Crater, north west of Tarangire National Park and a conservation area since 1959, the practice was judged sustainable due to the high lion concentration and low human presence. In the 1960s the tribe claimed no more than 10 animals per year, but as with so much of the world in the 20th century, the Maasai's population grew in Ngorongoro. Forty lions, if not more, are now under threat annually in the conservation area, and all over Tanzania lion numbers are declining. Conservationists know the problem needs to be addressed, and in a remarkable turnaround they've enlisted the very best gamekeepers to patrol the Maasai Steppe: the Maasai themselves. At around 5am the Maasai \"\"Wildlife Warriors\"\" rise to birdsong, nature's alarm clock. A bowl of porridge and cup of chai to start the day. Slipping on a pair of sandals, their soles recycled from old car tires, the Warriors head out of their \"\"kraal,\"\" a small sheltered community, to begin tracking. These Maasai have traded in their hunting ways for a life of conservation. Part of an initiative run by the Tanzania People and Wildlife Fund, an organization specializing in human-animal conflict, the Warriors are spread across communities in Tarangire and the surrounding rangeland, using their skills, their lifeblood, to protect what was once their adversary. Beyond the \"\"boma,\"\" a low wall surrounding the \"\"kraal,\"\" tracks line the dirt. They betray the lions, hyenas and wild dogs who visit in the night, drawn to livestock and, in the dry season, the community's water supply. On an uneventful day, Warriors might take a car owned by the Fund and conduct an animal headcount, circling the Steppe in the early morning. But sometimes tracks start inside the \"\"boma,\"\" suggesting a big cat. When big cat footprints are involved, they usually lead to a kill. The next step is crucial. \"\"People are becoming more and more angry towards wildlife,\"\" says Wildlife Warrior Lucas Lengoje. In the past a carcass resulted in retribution. The head of cattle per person has decreased among the Maasai in recent years, meaning the pain of every loss is felt all the more. \"\"The community finds it very difficult to comprehend the importance of the wildlife,\"\" Lengoje adds. \"\"It takes time to calm them down and for them to believe you, as they care more about their livestock than wildlife.\"\" Some of the reprisals have become extreme. Aside from spearings, Maasai have begun poisoning carcasses between a lion's initial gorge and second feed. This not only kills the lion, but anything that feeds on the lion's subsequent carcass. Wildlife Warriors intercede, dissipate the situation, and ultimately provide solutions for their communities and those around them. One of their primary concerns is to document the attack and location, using GPS to map the incident on the Fund's database. They'll also warn neighboring herders of the dangers nearby, and sometimes provide contact details so Maasai can claim compensation from the government. Then begins the long-term approach to preventing cattle loss. \"\"Living Walls\"\" (African myrrh trees joined by chain link fences) are being used by the Fund and built in collaboration with the Maasai, and have been rolled out across communities. \"\"The difference between the 'boma' and the Living Wall is that the living wall uses chain link,\"\" explains Elvis Kisimir, from the Fund. 'Bomas' contain dried twigs from the thorny acacia bush, but chain link is infinitely more effective, especially when fortified with living, fast-growing thorny trees, which only become more impassable with age. In the wet season these walls reach over 12 feet high. \"\"We currently have more than 700 'bomas,' and the Living Wall is a program that has safeguarded 99% of our livestock at night,\"\" says Kisimir. This immediate success is being supplemented with education programs fronted by Maasai Wildlife Warriors, aimed at neutralizing any antagonism between man and his fellow predators. \"\"If we decided to do this on our own, we wouldn't achieve much,\"\" admits Kisimir. \"\"Community is everything.\"\" Laly Lichtenfeld, executive director of the Fund, describes this as \"\"the next step,\"\" and a way to help create a self-regulating environment in which both Maasai and lions can prosper. \"\"The Maasai people are absolutely critically integral to the conservation process in northern Tanzania,\"\" she adds. \"\"This is their land, and their livelihoods are so dependent on wise environmental stewardship. \"\"Healthy grasslands mean healthy livestock. And the livestock, the cattle, are core of their being -- who they are. It's their pride, it's their identity; it's their economic wellbeing. And so if they can manage to really keep these ecosystems intact and healthy, then everything in the system benefits.\"\"\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n46,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/health/dalai-lama-humor-how-you-can-have-it-too/index.html,\"Playful humor: The Dalai Lama's secret weapon (and how it can be yours, too)\",\"(CNN)When you are the spiritual leader of an entire people, you've lived your entire adult life in exile, your movements are restricted by ever-watchful bodyguards and you must watch every word for fear of setting off an international incident, you would think your face would reflect the weight of the world.\",\"But when you are the Dalai Lama, the deepest lines on your 81-year-old skin are laugh lines. His Holiness knows how to find joy in nearly everything and everyone, largely because of his sense of humor. It is something he uses regularly to quickly win over crowds and something he thinks everyone should embrace in order to have a better life. When he presided over the Emory-Tibet Symposium in December at an imposing temple owned by the Tibetan community in exile in Mundgod, India, he showed his teasing nature right away. Gathered were thousands of saffron-robed nuns and monks, world-renowned scientists, Tibetans and many interested followers, eager learn how to \"\"bridge science and Buddhism for mutual enrichment.\"\" The crowd looked as serious as the topic. As they waited in the temple, they murmured quietly and shifted in their seats. Finally, the low moan of a guttural chant began, and everyone quieted and sat up a little straighter. When His Holiness finally emerged from a side door, the sound of scraping plastic chairs echoed throughout the hall as the crowd stood and applauded. Some prostrated themselves on the ground. His Holiness walked in slowly, surrounded by monks in traditional robes and bodyguards in Western dress. Two monks gently guided him down a small set of steps. At the bottom, the Dalai Lama smiled with great joy, laughing and waving at the friends gathered in his honor. \"\"When you smile, I notice everyone around you smiles. I notice it is very contagious as well,\"\" said Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN's Chief Medical correspondent, in an interview with His Holiness after the event. \"\"Basically, we are social animal,\"\" the Dalai Lama replied. \"\"We need friend. In order to develop genuine friendship, trust is very important. For trust, if you show them genuine sort of respect, genuine love, then trust come, so here I think the expression of genuine warm feeling smile I think part of that, that's genuine smile.\"\" But it is clear that joking around is also key to winning over a crowd. At the event, the Dalai Lama finally sat in his floral chair, against what looked like a pillow one of the monks must have grabbed from his bed, hoping to make him more comfortable. The crowd quieted, leaning forward to hear what His Holiness had to say. But instead of a prayer or a gentle word of wisdom, he decided it was the perfect time to wipe his brow. He took his time and then, rather than putting the white washcloth on the table next to him, he immediately put it on his head, where it rested like an absurd floppy hat. Giggling, he wore it through first part of the meeting, for about an hour. Then, he reached with some ceremony for a glass jar of candy on the low table in front of him. \"\"This is not decoration,\"\" he joked, holding it up. He pointed to himself -- \"\"eat\"\" -- and promptly unwrapped the gold foil to pop a hard candy into his mouth. His impish behavior, laughing and joking did the trick. The solemn and respectful crowd began laughing with him, warming up immediately. Everyone seemed ready to listen to a discussion of heavy topics such as \"\"What are the fundamental constituents of the universe, and how did it originate?\"\" and \"\"How is knowledge established and what constitutes valid reasoning?\"\" When Gupta later asked His Holiness about why he decided to wear the washcloth so comically, the Dalai Lama admitted it was, in part, because he is practical and gets hot. But he also hinted that there was something deeper: It's important for leaders, particularly spiritual leaders, to \"\"act like a human being\"\" and to be playful. Often, \"\"everyone too much formal,\"\" he said, \"\"That is self-torture.\"\" And though he knows he must respect those leaders, despite \"\"no word, no movement\"\" from them, he has sometimes developed \"\"a strange thinking\"\" and often hopes something unexpected will happen to make that leader act more \"\"like a human being.\"\" \"\"I had this experience (in) 1954 when I was in Peking,\"\" His Holiness said. \"\"Some Indian ambassador, he call on me, come to my room, then as usual, some Chinese foreign ministries officials come. \"\"Everyone too much formal like that,\"\" he said then mimed being stiff. \"\"Then somehow they brought some fruit, somehow dumped over, and then everyone acted like a human being,\"\" he said, laughing and miming people scrambling around, as he saw them do around on the floor. His Holiness suggests everyone let themselves be playful and find the funny in life. In his book \"\"My Spiritual Journey,\"\" he calls himself a \"\"professional laugher\"\" and writes that he comes from a cheerful family that is always \"\"amusing ourselves, teasing each other, joking. It's our habit.\"\" A quick laugh and an ability to see humor in daily situations and to be playful have been shown to help adults lower stress levels, both for themselves and for those around them, studies show. By being playful and using humor, people also become more observant and more empathetic. They are often bored less, they learn more, they have more friends, and studies show that people who are willing to let out their playful side tend to have a better sense of all-around well-being. His Holiness believes that no matter how difficult your life may be, this approach will bring you something much deeper. \"\"Thinking only of the negative aspect doesn't help to find solutions and it destroys peace of mind,\"\" he writes. \"\"I love smiles, and my wish is to see more smiles, real smiles. ... If we want those smiles, we must create the reasons that make them appear.\"\"\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n47,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/travel/taschen-rooftop-photos-book/index.html,13 incredible rooftops around the world,\"(CNN)As cities become more crowded and congested at the street level, refuge can often be found many stories above.\",\"More than 50 rooftops designed by some of the world's most renowned and up-and-coming architects and landscape designers is featured in \"\"Rooftops: Islands in the Sky,\"\" Taschen's photography book releasing February 15 in the United States. The book features forests reaching for the skies, blooming gardens, pools flowing to a building's edge, art installations and outdoor spaces that switch easily from serving lunch to pouring drinks as nighttime hot spots. \"\"There may be as many ways to design and convert rooftops as there are buildings in modern cities,\"\" writes the book's editor Philip Jodidio. \"\"The attraction of the roof, the high place, is ancient, surely going further back in the human psyche than even the Old and New Testaments or the Qur'an,\"\" he goes on. \"\"Simply put, the roof offers a view, a place to contemplate the city, or to escape from its bustle and noise, at least for a time.\"\" Click through the gallery to see the work of Norman Foster,-Shigeru Ban,-Toyo Ito, Frank Gehry, Ken Smith-and-more.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n48,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/opinions/trump-claim-on-under-covering-terrorism-is-baloney-bergen/index.html,Trump's terrorism claim is baloney,\"Peter Bergen is CNN's national security analyst, a vice president at New America and a professor of practice at Arizona State University. He is the author of \"\"United States of Jihad: Investigating America's Homegrown Terrorists.\"\"\",\"Now comes President Donald Trump's claim Monday at the key US military base overseeing the war on ISIS -- US Central Command in Tampa, Florida -- that the media aren't reporting terrorism for \"\"reasons\"\" the President didn't elaborate upon. Trump told the CENTCOM audience, \"\"You've seen what happened in Paris and Nice. All over Europe, it's happening. It's gotten to a point where it's not even being reported. And in many cases, the very, very dishonest press doesn't want to report it. They have their reasons, and you understand that.\"\" To \"\"prove\"\" that the media aren't covering terrorism adequately the Trump White House, which is fighting in court to reinstate a refugee ban citing the terrorist threat, on Monday night released a list of 78 \"\"major\"\" terrorist attacks since September 2014, claiming, \"\"Most have not received the media attention they deserved.\"\" This is one of the biggest baloney sandwiches this White House has foisted on the public since ... well ... the \"\"Bowling Green massacre,\"\" but it's a much bigger and harder-to swallow helping of baloney because it is the President who is forcing it down our throats rather than one of his aides. Taking the White House timeline of terrorist attacks, I ran it through the Nexis database, which is an authoritative resource for tracking media hits of all types, including in newspapers, magazines, wire service reports, TV news shows and the like. The results show that terrorist attacks over the past couple of years are, in fact, some of the most well-reported stories of our times. The total number of media hits for the 78 terrorist attacks that the White House released Monday is 80,878, or about an average of slightly more than 1,000 mentions per incident. And those numbers clearly understate how much coverage the media have given these incidents because a Nexis search only will display a maximum of 3,000 mentions for any given search. There are 16 terrorist attacks on the White House list of purportedly under-covered attacks that each elicited more than 3,000 media mentions. The following are a representative sample: \"\"?In Ottawa in October 2014 Michael Zehaf-Bibeau killed a Canadian soldier. \"\"?Two months later in Sydney, Man Haron Monis killed two Australians. \"\"?In March 2015, 21 tourists were killed at the Bardo Museum in Tunis, Tunisia. \"\"?Two months later in Garland, Texas, two ISIS-inspired militants attacked a Prophet Mohammed cartoon contest. Luckily no one was killed except the terrorists. \"\"?In Tunisia, also in 2015, 38 were killed at a beach popular with Westerners. \"\"?In October 2015, 224 were killed in Sinai, Egypt, when ISIS brought down a Russian passenger jet with a bomb. The terror attacks in Paris and Nice, France, that Trump cited in his CENTCOM speech also received more than 3,000 media mentions. The terrorist attacks that didn't get as much coverage were -- surprise --- the ones where there were no deaths or that took place in countries such as Saudi Arabia or Bangladesh where there is little independent media reporting. In three cases, there were no articles listed in the publications included in the Nexis database, and in each of those cases there were no casualties. The media, including CNN, have exhaustively covered terrorism around the globe since the 9/11 attacks made the issue a central national security concern. Indeed, the wall-to-wall media coverage of the ISIS attacks in Paris in November 2015 in which 129 were killed and the ISIS-inspired attack in San Bernardino, California, a month later in which 14 were killed was instrumental in boosting Trump in the polls, according to the polling analysis site FiveThirtyEight Many Americans felt threatened by the ISIS-directed and ISIS-inspired attacks. As the presidential campaign was in full swing at the beginning of 2016, just over half of Americans said they were very or somewhat worried that they, or a member of their family, would be victims of a terrorist attack. This was the largest number to feel that way since just after the 9/11 attacks. And how did so many Americans learn about the terrorist attacks they were so scared of? Here's a clue: It wasn't through telepathy. Below is the official White House timeline of terrorist attacks since September 2014 with my annotations in bold about the media coverage they each received. (There are a number of incorrectly spelled words I have left as they were in the original.) TIMELINE: September, 2014 - December, 2016 NUMBER OF ATTACKS: 78 MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA September, 2014 TARGET: Two police officers wounded in knife attack ATTACKER: Abdul Numan Haider 406 stories TIZI OUZOU, ALGERIA September, 2014 TARGET: One French citizen beheaded ATTACKER: Jund al-Khilafah in Algeria 140 stories QUEBEC, CANADA October, 2014 TARGET: One soldier killed and one wounded in vehicle attack ATTACKER: Martin Couture-Rouleau 1,509 stories OTTAWA, CANADA October, 2014 TARGET: One soldier killed at war memorial; two wounded in shootings at Parliament building ATTACKER: Michael Zehaf-Bibeau More than 3,000 stories NEW YORK CITY, NY, USA October, 2014 TARGET: Two police officers wounded in knife attack ATTACKER: US person 477 stories RIYADH, SAUDI ARABIA November, 2014 TARGET: One Danish citizen wounded in shooting ATTACKERS: Three Saudi Arabia-based ISIL members 10 stories ABU DHABI, UAE DATE: December 2014 TARGET: One American killed in knife attack ATTACKER: Dalal al-Hashimi 24 stories SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA December, 2014 TARGET: Two Australians killed in hostage taking and shooting ATTACKER: Man Haron Monis More than 3,000 stories TOURS, FRANCE December, 2014 TARGET: Three police officers wounded in knife attack ATTACKER: Bertrand Nzohabonayo 91 stories PARIS, FRANCE January, 2015 TARGET: One police officer and four hostages killed in shooting at a kosher supermarket ATTACKER: Amedy Coulibaly More than 3,000 stories TRIPOLI, LIBYA January, 2015 TARGET: Ten killed, including one US citizen, and five wounded in bombing and shooting at a hotel frequented by westerners ATTACKERS: As many as five ISIL-Libya members 837 stories RIYADH, SAUDI ARABIA January, 2015 TARGET: Two US citizens wounded in shooting ATTACKER: Saudi Arabia-based ISIL supporter 5 stories NICE, FRANCE February, 2015 TARGET: Two French soldiers wounded in knife attack outside a Jewish community center ATTACKER: Moussa Coulibaly 268 stories COPENHAGEN, DENMARK February, 2015 TARGET: One civilian killed in shooting at a free-speech rally and one security guard killed outside the city's main synagogue ATTACKER: Omar Abdel Hamid el-Hussein 535 stories TUNIS, TUNISIA March, 2015 TARGET: 21 tourists killed, including 16 westerners, and 55 wounded in shooting at the Bardo Museum ATTACKERS: Two ISIL-aligned extremists More than 3,000 stories KARACHI, PAKISTAN April, 2015 TARGET: One US citizen wounded in knife attack ATTACKERS: Pakistan-based ISIL supporters 375 stories PARIS, FRANCE April, 2015 TARGET: Catholic churches targeted; one civilian killed in shooting, possibly during an attempted carjacking ATTACKER: Sid Ahmed Ghlam 612 stories ZVORNIK, BOSNIA April, 2015 TARGET: One police officer killed and two wounded in shooting ATTACKER: Nerdin Ibric 61 stories GARLAND, TX, USA May, 2015 TARGET: One security guard wounded in shooting at the Prophet Muhammad cartoon event ATTACKERS: Two US persons More than 3,000 stories BOSTON, MA, USA June, 2015 TARGET: No casualties; one police officer attacked with knife ATTACKER: US person 627 stories EL GORA (AL JURAH), EGYPT June, 2015 TARGET: No casualties; camp used by Multinational Force and Observers (MFO) troops attacked in shooting and bombing attack ATTACKERS: Unknown number of ISIL-Sinai members 0 stories LUXOR, EGYPT June, 2015 TARGET: One police officer killed by suicide bomb near the Temple of Karnak ATTACKER: Unidentified 101 Stories SOUSSE, TUNISIA June, 2015 TARGET: 38 killed and 39 wounded in shooting at a beach frequented by westerners ATTACKERS: Seifeddine Rezgui and another unidentified attacker More than 3,000 stories LYON, FRANCE June, 2015 TARGET: One civilian killed in beheading and explosion at a chemical plant ATTACKER: Yasin Salhi 188 stories CAIRO, EGYPT July, 2015 TARGET: One killed and nine wounded in VBIED attack at Italian Consulate ATTACKER: Unidentified ISIL operatives 1,085 stories CAIRO, EGYPT July, 2015 TARGET: One Croatian national kidnapped; beheaded on August 12 at an unknown location ATTACKER: Unidentified ISIL-Sinai operative 466 stories PARIS, FRANCE August, 2015 TARGET: Two civilians and one US soldier wounded with firearms and knife on a passenger train ATTACKER: Ayoub el-Khazzani 2,484 stories EL GORA, EGYPT September, 2015 TARGET: Four US and two MFO troops wounded in IED attack ATTACKER: Unidentified 5 stories DHAKA, BANGLADESH September, 2015 TARGET: One Italian civilian killed in shooting ATTACKER: Unidentified 788 stories COPENHAGEN, DENMARK September, 2015 TARGET: One police officer wounded in knife attack ATTAKER: Palestinian national 130 stories EL GORA, EGYPT October, 2015 TARGET: No casualties; airfield used by MFO attacked with rockets ATTAKER: Unidentified ISIL-Sinai operatives 0 stories PARRAMATTA, AUSTRALIA October, 2015 TARGET: One police officer killed in shooting ATTAKER: Farhad Jabar 1,826 stories RANGPUR, BANGLADESH October, 2015 TARGET: One Japanese civilian killed in shooting ATTAKER: Unidentified 471 stories HASANAH, EGYPT October, 2015 TARGET: 224 killed in downing of a Russian airliner ATTAKER: Unidentified ISIL-Sinai operatives More than 3,000 stories MERCED, CA, US November, 2015 TARGET: Four wounded in knife attack on a college campus ATTAKER: US person 163 stories PARIS, FRANCE November, 2015 TARGET: At least 129 killed and approximately 400 wounded in series of shootings and IED attacks ATTAKERS: Brahim Abdelslam, Saleh Abdeslam, Ismail Mostefai, Bilal Hadfi, Samy Amimour, Chakib Ahrouh, Foued Mohamed Aggad, and Abdelhamid Abaaoud More than 3.000 stories DINAJPUR, BANGLADESH November, 2015 TARGET: One Italian citizen wounded in shooting ATTAKER: Unidentified 203 stories RAJLOVAC, BOSNIA December, 2015 TARGET: Two Bosnian soldiers killed in shooting ATTAKER: Enes Omeragic 42 stories SAN BERNADINO, CA December, 2015 TARGET: 14 killed and 21 wounded in coordinated firearms attack ATTAKERS: Two US persons More than 3,000 stories LONDON, ENGLAND, UK December, 2015 TARGET: Three wounded in knife attack at an underground rail station ATTAKER: Muhyadin Mire 44 stories DERBENT, RUSSIA December, 2015 TARGET: One killed and 11 wounded in shooting at UN World Heritage site ATTAKER: Unidentified ISIL-Caucasus operative 286 stories CAIRO, EGYPT January, 2016 TARGET: Two wounded in drive-by shooting outside a hotel frequented by tourists ATTAKERS: Unidentified ISIL operatives 5 stories PARIS, FRANCE January, 2016 TARGET: No casualties; attacker killed after attempted knife attack on Paris police station ATTAKER: Tarek Belgacem 97 stories PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA January, 2016 TARGET: One police officer wounded in shooting ATTAKER: US person 321 stories HURGHADA, EGYPT January, 2016 TARGET: One German and one Danish national wounded in knife attack at a tourist resort ATTAKER: Unidentified 5 stories MARSEILLES, FRANCE January, 2016 TARGET: One Jewish teacher wounded in machete attack ATTAKER: 15 year-old Ethnic Kurd from Turkey 184 stories ISTANBUL, TURKEY January, 2016 TARGET: 12 German tourists killed and 15 wounded in suicide bombing ATTAKER: Nabil Fadli More than 3,000 stories JAKARTA, INDONESIA January, 2016 TARGET: Four civilians killed and more than 20 wounded in coordinated bombing and firearms attacks near a police station and a Starbucks ATTAKERS: Dian Joni Kurnaiadi, Muhammad Ali, Arif Sunakim, and Ahmad Muhazan bin Saron 2,530 stories COLUMBUS, OH, US February, 2016 TARGET: Four civilians wounded in machete attack at a restaurant ATTAKER: US person 108 stories HANOVER, GERMANY February, 2016 TARGET: One police officer wounded in knife attack ATTAKER: Safia Schmitter 60 stories ISTANBUL, TURKEY March, 2016 TARGET: Four killed and 36 wounded in suicide bombing in the tourist district ATTAKER: Mehmet Ozturk 306 stories BRUSSELS, BELGIUM March, 2016 TARGET: At least 31 killed and 270 wounded in coordinated bombings at Zaventem Airport and on a subway train ATTAKERS: Khalid el-Bakraoui, Ibrahim el-Bakraoui, Najim Laachraoui, Mohammed Abrini, and Osama Krayem More than 3,000 stories ESSEN, GERMANY April, 2016 TARGET: Three wounded in bombing at Sikh temple ATTAKERS: Three identified minors 197 stories ORLANDO, FL, US June, 2016 TARGET: 49 killed and 53 wounded in shooting at a nightclub ATTAKER: US person More than 3,000 stories MAGNANVILLE, FRANCE June, 2016 TARGET: One police officer and one civilian killed in knife attack ATTAKER: Larossi Abballa 1,124 stories KABUL, AFGHANISTAN June, 2016 TARGET: 14 killed in suicide attack on a bus carrying Canadian Embassy guards ATTAKER: ISIL-Khorasan operative 1,404 stories ISTANBUL, TURKEY June, 2016 TARGET: 45 killed and approximately 240 wounded at Ataturk International Airport ATTACKERS: Rakhim Bulgarov, Vadim Osmanov, and an unidentified ISIL operative More than 3,000 stories DHAKA, BANGLADESH July, 2016 TARGET: 22 killed, including one American and 50 wounded after hours-long siege using machetes and firearms at holy Artisan Bakery ATTACKERS: Nibras Islam, Rohan Imtiaz, Meer Saameh Mubasheer, Khairul Islam Paye, and Shafiqul Islam Uzzal More than 3,000 stories NICE, FRANCE July, 2016 TARGET: 84 civilians killed and 308 wounded by an individual who drove a truck into a crowd ATTACKER: Mohamed Bouhlel More than 3,000 stories WURZBURG, GERMANY July, 2016 TARGET: Four civilians wounded in axe attack on a train ATTACKER: Riaz Khan Ahmadzai 283 stories ANSBACH, GERMANY July, 2016 TARGET: At least 15 wounded in suicide bombing at a music festival ATTACKER: Mohammad Daleel 300 stories NORMANDY, FRANCE July, 2016 TARGET: One priest killed in knife attack ATTACKERS: Adel Kermiche and Abdel Malik Nabil Petitjean 1,637 stories CHALEROI, BELGIUM August, 2016 TARGET: Two police officers wounded in machete attack ATTACKER: Khaled Babouri 10 stories QUEENSLAND, AUSTRALIA August, 2016 TARGET: Two killed and one wounded in knife attack at a hostel frequented by Westerners ATTACKER: Smail Ayad 852 stories COPENHAGEN, DENMAKR September, 2016 TARGET: Two police officers and a civilian wounded in shooting ATTACKER: Mesa Hodzic 43 stories PARIS, FRANCE September, 2016 TARGET: One police officer wounded in raid after VBIED failed to detonate at Notre Dame Cathedral ATTACKERS: Sarah Hervouet, Ines Madani, and Amel Sakaou 21 stories SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA September, 2016 TARGET: One civilian wounded in knife attack ATTACKER: Ihsas Khan 269 stories ST. CLOUD, MN, US September, 2016 TARGET: 10 wounded in knife attack in a mall ATTACKER: Dahir Ahmed Adan 241 stories NEW YORK, NY; SEASIDE PARK AND ELIZABETH, NJ, US September, 2016 TARGET: 31 wounded in bombing in New York City; several explosive devices found in New York and New Jersey; one exploded without casualty at race in New Jersey; one police officer wounded in shootout ATTACKER: Ahmad Khan Rahami More than 3,000 stories BRUSSELS, BELGIUM October, 2016 TARGET: Two police officers wounded in stabbing ATTACKER: Belgian national 31 stories KUWAIT CITY, KUWAIT TARGET: No casualties; vehicle carrying three US soldiers hit by a truck ATTACKER: Ibrahim Sulayman 0 stories MALMO, SWEDEN October, 2016 TARGET: No casualties; mosque and community center attacked with Molotov cocktail ATTACKER: Syrian national 26 stories HAMBURG, GERMANY October, 2016 TARGET: One killed in knife attack ATTACKER: Unknown 516 stories MANILA, PHILIPPINES November, 2016 TARGET: No casualties; failed IED attempt near US Embassy ATTACKERS: Philippine nationals aligned with the Maute group 1 story COLUMBUS, OH, US November, 2016 TARGET: 14 wounded by individuals who drove a vehicle into a group of pedestrians and attacked them with a knife ATTACKER: US person More than 3,000 stories N'DJAMENA, CHAD November, 2016 TARGET: No casualties; attacker arrested after opening fire at entrance of US Embassy ATTACKER: Chadian national 11 stories KARAK, JORDAN December, 2016 TARGET: 10 killed and 28 wounded in shooting at a tourist site ATTACKERS: Several gunmen 2,037 stories BERLIN, GERMANY December, 2016 TARGET: 12 killed and 48 wounded by individual who drove truck into a crowded market ATTACKER: Anis Amri More than 3,000 stories\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n49,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/opinions/fight-for-democracy-opinion-ghitis/index.html,Trump vs. America: The fight for democracy,\"Frida Ghitis is a world affairs columnist for The Miami Herald and World Politics Review, and a former CNN producer and correspondent. The views expressed in this commentary are her own.\",\"Trump was defending the Russian President after Fox's Bill O'Reilly called Putin a \"\"killer.\"\" His response, \"\"You think our country is so innocent,\"\" reveals Trump's dismissive attitude toward the most fundamental democratic norms that America has aspired to embody. Clearly, the United States has made many grave mistakes throughout history, but the country's guiding principles have remained unchanged: the fierce defense of individual liberties and an unshakeable commitment to democratic ideals. In Russia, by contrast, Putin has decimated the opposition, imprisoned critics and taken control of all branches of government. The free press is a faint shadow of its former self, and Putin's critics, including journalists, continue to turn up dead under suspicious circumstances. One of Putin's most vocal critics, Vladimir Kara-Murza, remains in a Moscow hospital in \"\"grave condition\"\" after suffering a \"\"full organ failure\"\" that, as his lawyer told CNN, doctors agree is the result of a \"\"toxic substance.\"\" Despite Trump's comments and recent executive actions, Trump should expect push-back from a country committed to liberal democratic principles. This division between the President and the American people makes the United States the latest battleground in a worldwide clash of ideologies. When the wave of populist authoritarianism started, few would have expected the United States, the principal beacon of modern democracy for over 200 years, to fall under the spell of nativist politics. But fall it did. The many Americans who remain skeptical of Trump and now find themselves protesting on a weekly basis can take comfort in knowing they are not alone. On Sunday, while the American public was rapt in the Super Bowl, an astonishing sight came into focus in Romania. Hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets to protest a government push to decriminalize corruption. The remarkable part was that protesters had already won. Demonstrations had begun six days earlier, after the government tried to quietly pass a decree that would have cleared the records and freed from prison people convicted of corruption for amounts less than $47,000. The government agreed to rescind the order. But the demonstrations only grew, with protesters saying they came out to protect their democracy. Romanians knew they had to fight for democracy because of their recent communist past and the onslaught in neighboring countries against liberal democracy, which requires separation of powers, a free judiciary, free and fair elections and, yes, freedom to protest. Sadly, now, in the aftermath of the global financial crisis and the surge of refugee arrivals, demagogic politicians have leveraged popular discontent, lashing out against foreigners, vowing to put their country's \"\"true\"\" residents first, and gradually dismantling the foundations of liberal democracy. Romanians seem to have won round one. But the forces defending democracy elsewhere, including in neighboring Hungary, have been losing. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban openly declared he's building an \"\"illiberal state,\"\" and is making strides in his quest to imitate regimes run by the likes of Putin. Democratic freedoms have suffered sharp reverses in recent years. Turkey is slipping into dictatorship, Venezuela remains mired in autocracy, as do countries in every continent. But what's ahead for the United States? Some veterans of the battle are pessimistic. When millions of mostly women took to the streets the day after Trump's inauguration, Julia Ioffe, whose family fled Russia, threw cold water on their jubilant movement, tweeting, \"\"The happy, feisty crowds, the clever signs - it all feels like the protests in Moscow in 2011. That went nowhere.\"\" It's true that protests have not achieved much against other authoritarian regimes. In Venezuela, the Chavista regime came to power in 1999, and despite every effort from a determined opposition, it remains in power. In Turkey, mass demonstrations, and even what seemed like electoral victories, have failed to stop Recep Tayyip Erdogan's march to de facto dictator. In Russia, Putin is all but unchallenged, with a quiescent legislature and near-complete control of the news Russians consume. But the story is likely to have a different outcome in the United States. Yascha Mounk, a Harvard expert in right-wing populism, observed that Trump is turning out to be \"\"more authoritarian than I feared,\"\" though the opposition is also proving \"\"more courageous than I expected.\"\" America has deeper democratic roots than any of the countries whose liberal democracies has been toppled. The national religion is freedom from tyranny. The day after Trump took office, Americans put on what may have been the largest national demonstration in the country's history. A week later, when Trump issued his travel ban for seven Muslim-majority countries, spontaneous demonstrations materialized at major airports across the country. Lawyers filed legal briefs on the spot. While the Republican-controlled Congress has proven mostly silent in countering Trump's attacks on the independent media and the judiciary, the press appears determined to do its job and judges seem unintimidated by White House bullying. Even members of the executive branch are speaking out. Many Americans support Trump, but there are signs that his sharp break with democratic traditions, his attacks on judges, his fulminations against the media and against critics of all stripes -- from comedians to restaurant reviewers -- are producing a backlash. History is being written by two opposing forces -- those fighting for and those fighting against liberal democracy. President Trump's likening of America to Putin's Russia puts him on the illiberal side. But the American people have spent hundreds of years building a strong democratic system, and they are prepared to fight to defend it.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n50,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/opinions/trumps-moral-relativism-lucas-opinion/index.html,Trump has become Putin's ally in Russia's war on the West,\"Edward Lucas is a senior editor at The Economist, where he was the Moscow bureau chief from 1998 to 2002. He is also senior vice president at the Center for European Policy Analysis, a Washington, DC, think tank. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own.\",\"\"\"Whataboutism\"\" was a favorite Kremlin propaganda technique during the Cold War. It aimed to portray the West as so morally flawed that its criticism of the Soviet empire was hypocritical. Any criticism of the Soviet Union (the war in Afghanistan, martial law in Poland, persecution of dissidents) was met with a list of Western abuses (supporting fascist dictatorships, trampling trade unions, racial oppression). It was well encapsulated in a joke about the fictional Radio Yerevan (a staple of Soviet-era humor) in which a caller asks what is the average wage of an American manual worker. The real answer would undermine Soviet claims to economic superiority, so after a pause, the pundit replies: \"\"Over there they lynch Negroes.\"\" By the time the system collapsed, that phrase had become a derisive synecdoche for Soviet propaganda as a whole. \"\"Whataboutism\"\" seemed to have died in the 1990s when Russia's official aim was to become like the West. But it made a comeback under President Vladimir Putin, whose propaganda machine specializes in spreading FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) in the West. If Americans, Britons, Germans and others can be made to believe that their rulers are crooks and idiots, and that legality and liberty are a sham, then they will be much less likely to take risks and make sacrifices in defending their own countries. To some extent, \"\"whataboutism\"\" is a sensible tactic in argument. Criticism delivered from a purported moral high ground deserves special scrutiny. We shouldn't take lessons from Russia about minority rights, say, given the way that the Kremlin mistreats its own indigenous populations -- Maris, Buryats, Komis and the like. But unlike Putin's Russia, the West is genuinely well placed to make such criticisms. We are not perfect. But we are self-critical and self-correcting. The cornerstone of our system is contestability. Of course, our elected representatives and government officials make mistakes -- but they are constrained and challenged for them. They risk civil and criminal legal actions, impeachment, media scrutiny, public protest and being tossed out of office into a lifetime of disgrace. These checks and balances are imperfect too, but they do work. President François Hollande has misruled France only mildly by Russian standards. But whereas he won't get a second term, President Putin can stay in office as long as he wants. President Trump has made an outrageous mistake in his visa ban and has immediately run into legal obstacles. When was the last time a Russian court told Putin that his actions were illegal? All this is lost on Trump. He appears to wish that America were more like Russia. He finds legal constraints on executive power outrageous. That view is not just mistaken: it is dangerous. All over the world, people look to America as a beacon of freedom and justice. It sets a standard (albeit sometimes a theoretical one) by which other political systems are judged. That represents a huge store of political capital. Trump is squandering it with every word he utters. Moral relativism corrodes sentiment in the frontline states of the new cold war. In places like Bulgaria, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, pro-Western figures are feeling that their struggle is doomed. Why bother fighting for freedom when the leader of the free world has given up? Worse than this, the thinking will spread that maybe Putin is right: the world is all about power and money, and the political currency that really works is coined from lies and fear. If those are the real rules of the game, then better to play them. It seems to have worked for Trump, after all. Edward Lucas is a senior editor at The Economist, where he was the Moscow bureau chief from 1998 to 2002. He is also senior vice president at the Center for European Policy Analysis, a Washington, D.C., think tank. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n51,2017/2/7,http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/06/opinions/sean-spicer-cupp/index.html,Sean Spicer has a problem: Melissa McCarthy,\"S.E. Cupp is the author of \"\"Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media's Attack on Christianity,\"\" co-author of \"\"Why You're Wrong About the Right\"\" and a columnist at the New York Daily News. The opinions expressed in this commentary are her own.\",\"Let's hope these came in handy when he watched Melissa McCarthy parody the White House spokesman on \"\"Saturday Night Live\"\" over the weekend. We all know his thin-skinned, humorless boss, President Donald Trump, has not taken kindly to SNL's countless spoofs, complaining on Twitter that SNL is \"\"unwatchable,\"\" \"\"totally biased\"\" and \"\"not funny.\"\" He's also said that Alec Baldwin's impersonation \"\"just can't get any worse.\"\" I happen to largely agree with that assessment. \"\"SNL\"\" has taken to merely mimicking Trump and his antics through Baldwin, rather than cleverly satirizing him. Despite plenty of material to work with, thus far, the Trump-SNL era has been, well, boring and predictable. Until this weekend, that is. The difference between the usual Trump spoofs and McCarthy's take on Spicer is that hers was actually hilarious. A podium-wielding McCarthy plays on Spicer's rocky start at the White House -- his oratorical stumbles, his new, Trump-like scorn for critical press, his equally Trumpian fact-manipulation -- with a well-studied ear for his tics and tone. Exaggerating a White House spokesman might sound like inside-the-beltway kind of humor that average viewers won't appreciate or find funny. But in the theatrical, reality-television era of Trump, everyone around him is a character, too. And in this case, \"\"SNL\"\" writers didn't just mimic Spicer, they encapsulated a far bigger story: this is what it looks like when a normal, professional political operative becomes Trumpified. And if you didn't laugh out loud, you may have Trump's thin-skin disorder. But will Spicer follow his boss's lead, tweeting out how unfunny \"\"SNL\"\" is, or telling reporters that the show is biased and unwatchable? Not if he's smart, he won't. If an \"\"SNL\"\" spoof is funny, there's only one way for the spoofee to handle it -- embrace it. At his next press briefing (Monday's was called off), where he will undoubtedly be asked about it, he should laugh it off, say he was flattered, and then make a joke at his own expense. He already took a crack at this approach in an interview with Extra on Sunday, telling AJ Calloway that McCarthy \"\"could dial back\"\" a bit, but also managing to call the show \"\"funny.\"\" If he can keep this up, he'd be following a long tradition of politicos taking parody in stride. In 1995, House Republicans invited Chris Farley, who'd been impersonating Speaker Newt Gingrich on \"\"SNL,\"\" to impersonate him to his face at the conference meeting while Gingrich laughed along. After spoofing George H.W. Bush for four years, Dana Carvey was invited to the White House to meet him. After Bush lost to Bill Clinton, he had Carvey come cheer up his staff. In October of 2008, after Tina Fey spent weeks perfectly portraying then Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, Palin appeared on \"\"SNL\"\" alongside Fey and Alec Baldwin, who \"\"mistakes\"\" her for Fey -- his former 30 Rock co-star -- and asks how she could appear on the show with the real Palin, \"\"that horrible woman.\"\" But that was all BT -- Before Trump. I know dozens of people in his new administration and many have become more like him, at least outwardly. They've become defensive, self-serious and aggressive, and they've adopted Trump's rhetorical penchant for hyperbole, bombast and fact-blurring. They say things publicly that I know they never would have said before. It seems like they're playing a part in a new Trump reality show. I wouldn't be surprised if Spicer reverts to Trump's lack of humor toward unflattering satire, just to stick to script. But that would make it infinitely worse. It's already problematic that the credibility of the White House and its staff is being lampooned only two weeks into the job. With the elevation of Trump political adviser Steve Bannon, some are wondering who are the cooler heads and saner voices surrounding the president. If the White House wants to allay these fears -- and perhaps they do not -- Spicer should be his cooler, saner, pre-Trump self, and play along with McCarthy's performance. Otherwise, the notion that Trump's White House can't take a joke gets a lot more serious.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n52,2017/2/2,http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/30/world/myfreedomday-students-stand-up-to-slavery/index.html,#MyFreedomDay: Students stand up to slavery on March 14,\"(CNN)Right now, between 21 and 45 million people are trapped in slavery. At least 5.5 million of those are children.\",\"Although slavery is outlawed in every country, criminals earn more than $150 Billion every year from enslaving people. But you can do something about it. On MARCH 14, 2017, we want YOU and your school to join us for #MyFreedomDay. We're asking students to organize events at their school on the day to highlight modern slavery and celebrate freedom. The schools that show the most spirit in fighting slavery will be featured on CNN TV, CNN.com and CNN Facebook. A few schools will even receive a visit from a CNN correspondent, who will report live from the school on the day. So how do you take part? We're encouraging students and teachers to come up with their own ideas, but here are some suggestions for the kind of thing you could do. Film Screening - Look for movies or documentaries that deal with human trafficking. If you want to use a CNN documentary, we'll let you show it for free. You can watch the videos at cnn.com/myfreedom. Art Show -- Create art work, in any media, and show it off at the school then post it to Twitter or Instagram using #MyFreedomDay. The theme can be anti-slavery and should include peaceful, hopeful messages; art work about survivors and traffickers, and any form of expression that highlights human trafficking in a way that will raise awareness to your community. Stand for Freedom -- Students can stand for 45 mins (or 45 hours, if you're really dedicated!) to represent the 45 million victims of slavery in the world today. Holi Day - The Indian Festival in March celebrates love and color to raise awareness and money. Festivities involve washable pigmented powders that can be thrown at each other. Add music and a booth for human trafficking information and you have a full day of fun for the community. Panel Discussion -- Invite local lawmakers and anti-trafficking organizations to discuss the issue and what it looks like not just abroad, but in your hometown. Day of Service -- Support a half-day of service where students volunteer at rehabilitation centers, visit their local lawmakers for a call to action, or collect items needed for survivors in conjunction with local organizations. It doesn't matter what you do, as long as you do something. Let us know your plans by telling us on Twitter or Instagram, using #MyFreedomDay. (You must be aged 13 or older to post on social media). Find out more at cnn.com/myfreedom. And you can use the same hashtag to tell us what freedom means to you. - It could be the freedom to see your friends or family - Freedom to be yourself - Freedom to do the job you choose - Freedom to travel - Freedom to express yourself the way you choose Whatever freedom means in your life -- the important thing is the message, and encouraging people to think about the freedom they may take for granted.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n53,2016/12/21,http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/19/americas/costa-rica-migration/index.html,The other migrant crisis: Thousands risk journey through Latin America,\"Paso Canoas, Costa Rica (CNN)Yolanda ticks off the countries she and her husband have passed through in the last three months: Brazil, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, Panama and now Costa Rica. But she is no tourist.\",\"\"\"A lot of roads, lots of bus rides, and a lot of walking too,\"\" she tells CNN, agreeing to be interviewed but asking that we only use her first name and not show her face. \"\"For a 7-month pregnant woman, that is a long, long time.\"\" Yolanda says she is originally from Congo. She and her husband are among tens of thousands of migrants -- many from Africa and Haiti -- criss-crossing South and Central America trying to reach the United States. Now they're stuck in the border town of Paso Canoas, Costa Rica, waiting for the travel documents that will let them enter the country and continue their journey northward. \"\"I hope to leave soon, for my turn to come fast so I can see a doctor,\"\" she says. \"\"I don't want my baby to be born on the road.\"\" Read: Deadly crossing into Europe Long an obligatory stop on an important trade and tourist route, Paso Canoas has seen an unprecedented influx of migrants trekking north in recent months. The huge surge in undocumented arrivals is a logistical and humanitarian nightmare for the government of Costa Rica. \"\"At this moment Costa Rica is absolutely overwhelmed with our immigration situation and we're doing our best to protect the human rights of the people who are coming,\"\" said Mauricio Herrera Ulloa, the Costa Rican Communications Minister and point person for the migration crisis. \"\"No one was prepared or was thinking about the possibility that we would receive 10,000 people from Haiti or Africa.\"\" Perilous journeys Since April, when Costa Rica first started issuing transit visas for undocumented migrants, more than 18,000 people have crossed the border into the country. There are no comparative figures because the demand simply wasn't there in previous years so the visas didn't exist, officials say. It is a situation that is being replicated in border towns throughout the Americas. Experts say migrants are risking their lives in perilous journeys that expose them to crime and hunger and leave them vulnerable to human trafficking. \"\"They offer (migrants) something that they really need and in the case of these people, what they really need is to get one more border north,\"\" says Cy Winter, director of border management for the International Organization for Migration (IOM). More on human trafficking That means they often pay so-called coyotes for illegal border crossings -- breaking their ties to the state and public administration system. They often fall prey to false job offers \"\"just over the border.\"\" \"\"But then, on the other side, what's arranged there is completely different,\"\" says Winter. \"\"So they end up in a place where they have to work and they've got no way to get away from it.\"\" 'Congo isn't a country, it's a password' The IOM and other experts believe the majority of migrants are Haitians, many of them pretending to be Congolese in order to avoid deportation since it would be too costly for most Latin American countries to fly them to Africa. And in both Haiti and Congo, French is spoken. \"\"The people I've spoken to claiming to be from Congo, barely know the capital and don't know the dialects that are spoken in the Congo and don't know the football jersey,\"\" said Winter. According to the US Secretary of Homeland Security, some 40,000 Haitian migrants are working their way north, already overwhelming many border crossings into the United States. Many of them entered Brazil as legal refugees after the 2010 earthquake. But the economic crisis in Brazil has made it increasingly difficult for migrants to get jobs, sparking an exodus. \"\"We've seen accumulations of up to 5,000 people on the border in various countries in South America so it is a concerning uptick in arrivals,\"\" said Winter. One migrant I met on the Panamanian-Costa Rican border told me that every single one of the dozens of \"\"Congolese\"\" migrants milling about the migration office was actually from Haiti. \"\"Here, Congo isn't a country, it's a password,\"\" he said, explaining that he and others destroy their passports so that they can re-invent themselves. The bottlenecks at borders have raised serious concerns. The IOM has begun offering workshops at schools like Colegio Progreso -- in Panama, just across the border from Paso Canoas -- teaching students about the connection between migration and human trafficking. In the past, the school was used as a shelter for hundreds of Cubans trying to make their way to the United States. The regional school director says she heard stories of women turning to prostitution in desperation. \"\"In relation to the people being trafficked, we've heard horror stories,\"\" said Flor Bonilla. In San Jose, the capital of Costa Rica, Marilia Morales is just as worried. She founded the non-profit Rahab Foundation 20 years ago to rescue, rehabilitate and support survivors of sexual exploitation. Now she's launching a project on Costa Rica's northern border with Nicaragua. \"\"We have an avalanche of people coming, we have Africans, Haitians, we have people coming from a lot of places,\"\" Morales told CNN. \"\"We are in the process of training our personnel and we are going to be working with this community directly because they have to be aware that they could be victims of human trafficking, either for slave labor, sexual slavery and other ends,\"\" she said. Nicaragua has closed its borders to undocumented migrants forcing thousands on the border into deplorable makeshift shelters and tent villages. On Costa Rica's southern border, officials are trying to process migrants as quickly as possible. They're admitting 100-200 a day, but there is a long waiting list. In Yolanda's case, her hopes for a quick trip through Costa Rica were quickly dashed. Upon arrival, she was told she would have to wait six weeks just for an appointment with immigration officials. Without the laissez-passer, she and her husband can't access the shelters set up by authorities in conjunction with the Red Cross -- warehouses and schools where migrants get free meals and a mattress to sleep on. For the time being, they are sleeping in a makeshift hostel just a short walk from the border. They pay $5 a day and squeeze in with some 50 other people. Yolanda says she left Congo for Brazil, where she worked in a restaurant for a year. She says both she and her husband lost their jobs in the recession -- just as they discovered she was pregnant. Now, their dream is for their daughter to be born in the United States. But the odds are not in their favor. The money they borrowed from family back home is running out and she says they can't ask for more. While Yolanda says she is from Congo, when I first met her, she couldn't at first remember or pronounce what she said was her hometown: Brazzaville, the capital of Congo. When the time came to say goodbye to Yolanda and her husband, I couldn't help but wonder where they came from, and where this journey will ultimately take them. Unfortunately for Haitians trying to make their way into the United States, officials recently eliminated the generous benefits and easy entry that were established after the 2010 earthquake. Which means that even if they make it to the US border after months of travel and hardship, neither Haitian nor Congolese migrants are likely to get in. \",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n54,2016/8/23,http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/23/world/canada-indigenous-sex-trafficking/index.html,Canada's stolen daughters: Sex traffickers target indigenous Canadians,\"Winnipeg, Canada (CNN)As Lauren Chopek painfully details her story, she does so with the reticence of a survivor, as if somehow remaining silent would have been better.\",\"\"\"I used to blame myself for everything. But, like I, I would say I let them do that to me. I am dirty. It's my fault,\"\" says Chopek through tears. But Chopek is finally speaking out, determined to shake the guilt and shame that she knows should stalk her perpetrators instead of her. \"\"Now I see that I was just a child,\"\" says Chopek, now sitting serenely in a safe house, a healing lodge in rural Manitoba that cradled her in the love and protection she so needed when she escaped her life on the streets. Now 19, Lauren was just 14 when she was sexually exploited and trafficked for sex in her hometown of Winnipeg. But as an indigenous girl in Canada, her story is hardly rare. More from the CNN Freedom Project Canada's indigenous population is very small -- just 4% of the population -- yet more than 50% of all sex trafficking victims in Canada are indigenous. The reasons are complicated and varied but are ultimately rooted in a legacy of poverty, racism and abuse. \"\"I was actually making these bad choices for a reason,\"\" explains Chopek. \"\"You know when you experience sexual abuse it's really confusing. You never know if it's your fault or is it theirs.\"\" 'Targets of violence and abuse' Diane Redsky runs Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata Centre, which advocates for indigenous women and children, specifically sex trafficking victims. Her organization runs the rural healing lodge where Chopek stayed, as well as safe houses, rehabilitation and prevention programs throughout Manitoba. Read: Trafficked women tattooed by their pimps Redsky says the history of racism against indigenous Canadians feeds into the cycle of violence and exploitation against them. \"\"It's really difficult to be able to fight those stereotypes as indigenous women when a whole society is targeting indigenous women and girls, particularly for violence and abuse -- and that spills over into sex trafficking,\"\" says Redsky. Tanay Little's story shows how insidious the abuse can be. Little was just 11 when she was sexually exploited on the streets surrounding her family's home in Winnipeg. An older girl, someone who pretended to be her friend she says, was actually preying on Little, first luring her with drugs and then trafficking her for sex. \"\"I remember one time that she put me in a room and then two guys, one, not together, but one would come in and then I would have sex with him and then the other the other guy would come in. And then I'd get high after that,\"\" says Little. She is blunt about what would happen if she refused to have sex with anybody. \"\"If you're not beat up, then you would get raped by a few of them at once,\"\" explains Little. \"\"There is a debt bondage that's between $1,000 and $2,000 a day that these girls must bring, must hand in to their trafficker or else,\"\" says Redsky. These startling anecdotes have been heard in family homes, police stations and safe houses for years in Manitoba. The province is now taking the lead on an innovative approach to prevention and rehabilitation. Focus on the victims Redsky and others in Manitoba are now leading transformative programs to help identify the threats and risks so prevalent in indigenous communities. It is a new approach to help fight sex trafficking, one that focuses on the needs of the victims. Jennifer Richardson runs Tracia's Trust, Manitoba's strategy to combat sexual exploitation and sex trafficking of children. Crucially, Manitoba's government has committed more than $10 million Canadian a year to fund it, a huge sum for a population of only about a million people. \"\"Within a 10-year span Manitoba has really grown this massive strategy that is just recognized throughout Canada as being kind of the frontier leaders in this area,\"\" says Richardson. Read: 'I was raped 43,200 times' The program is different and revolutionary for Manitoba because it uses not only targeted funds, but also words, deeds, and training to fight human trafficking in a whole new way. Outreach on neighborhood streets is one strategy that is executed with the help of law enforcement officers. Almost daily, Winnipeg Police dispatch an elite unit on the streets to try and counter sexual exploitation and human trafficking. The approach is a departure for Winnipeg Police, who now say their efforts are firmly focused on helping victims. Outreach is conducted in a way to help victims and then bring their perpetrators to justice. Law enforcement officials acknowledge a history of bias and racism that in the past prevented police from truly understanding how and why indigenous girls are vulnerable and at risk. \"\"There is bias in the police service. We recognize it, that there's implicit bias. We certainly have taken steps to try to address that in a myriad of ways,\"\" says Danny Smyth, Winnipeg's deputy police chief. \"\"We have a team that's dedicated just to outreach. Just to being out there and trying to get to know who's out on the street, and trying to establish a relationship with them,\"\" adds Smyth. The legacy of years of abuse and racism though are making it difficult for Canada's indigenous community to heal and move on. Canada will soon launch an inquiry that will focus on why hundreds of indigenous women and girls have gone missing or been murdered over the years. Canadian and independent studies have revealed that indigenous women and girls are five times more likely to die in violent circumstances than non-indigenous women and girls. \"\"We're still in a society that targets indigenous women and girls. In fact the national task force concluded that there's a market for indigenous girls,\"\" says Redsky, adding, \"\"what that leads to is a society who views indigenous women as less than, and in fact of no human value.\"\"\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n55,2016/4/22,http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/21/us/project-vic-child-abuse/index.html,How child predator was caught by tiny clue in photo he posted online,\"(CNN)In a bathroom, the predator has placed a child on the counter to photograph his evil acts.\",\"In the background of the photo, which was posted online, are products including prescription medication. But zooming in on that pill bottle makes the details unreadable. In a small, dark lab Jim Cole, special agent and supervisor of Victim Identification at the Homeland Security Investigations Cyber Crimes Center gets to work using the latest technology available. Using technology to identify abusers \"\"Utilizing some technology that hadn't even been released to the public yet we were able to take a look at the bottle and reverse out some of the motion blur,\"\" Cole said. They can now see the offender's first name \"\"Stephen,\"\" the first two letters of the last name and the first three digits on the prescription order. With that he applies to the pharmacy for the customer details of every person who fits that criteria. It narrows the list down to a man named \"\"Stephen Keating.\"\" But that's not all. The offender's fingers are also in the picture and incredibly this crack team manages to pull the fingerprints from the image. \"\"That was the first time we were able to do that,\"\" Cole said. The evidence was strong enough to put Stephen Keating behind bars for 110 years. Investigators rescued his 14 victims. No victim left behind Cole co-founded Project VIC: their aim is that no victim is be left behind. \"\"We strive to find these children as quick as possible,\"\" Cole said. \"\"The longer it takes us the longer that child is in harm's way.\"\" Read: Raid reunites trafficked sisters It's not an easy task when Cole says they are seeing 500,000 images a week: that's over 25 million a year. The Keating case ran for about three weeks and in the past it could have taken months -- or worse, the image may never have been uncovered at all. Using technology known as \"\"Photo DNA\"\" their computers can wade through the hundreds of thousands of photos fast, categorizing the ones they've already seen to allow his team to focus on the new victims. \"\"What used to take us nine months now takes us a month,\"\" said Cole. \"\"It helps us review video on a scale of about 100 times faster than previously,\"\" he added. \"\"It's been a complete game-changer for law enforcement and we get that feedback from the field all the time.\"\" Easing psychological burden The efficiency not only saves time, it helps ease the psychological burden on investigators. \"\"We definitely see a mental health benefit because the nature of our offenders is they are trading material we've seen hundreds of thousands of times in addition to the new material,\"\" Cole said. Read: Vietnamese girls smuggled in to China, sold as brides The technology helped investigators find a seemingly harmless photo of a known offender with her victim on vacation. The image showed the pair holding fish at a campsite. The fish were isolated from the image and sent to Cornell University, which provided investigators with a geographical area where those fish can be caught. The campsite image, with the child and perpetrator removed, was sent to every single campsite advertiser in that location. Upon tracking down the actual campsite they found the same photo posted in the reception room. \"\"Within four hours we had her identified,\"\" Cole said. The child was rescued and the woman is now serving a 25-year sentence. On another image of an offender with a young girl, the Project VIC team noticed a company logo on the man's sweatshirt but they couldn't decipher what was written. Some cutting edge technology helped make the logo almost completely readable. An online search for names that might match the letters led investigators to a plumbing business. The offender, a former employee, was tracked down and four victims were rescued. Global problem The number of images like these being shared online is on the rise. Last year the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) received 4.4 million reports to its CyberTipline. That's a nearly 800% increase in reporting since 2013. Tip-offs come from the public, and also companies like Facebook, Google and Twitter, who are mandated by U.S. regulations to report any such images. According to Lindsay Olson, director of the Exploited Child Division at NCMEC, 94% of the cases last year were outside the United States. \"\"The CyberTipline receives reports of child porn, online enticement of children for sexual acts, online sex trafficking, child molestation; any type of child exploitation can be reported to the cyber tip line,\"\" said Olson. \"\"We make reports available to law enforcement in about 100 countries and we also work with Europol and Interpol.\"\" Swedish based company Griffeye was one of the founding partners of Project VIC. Director Johann Hofmann says it donates its software to be used in child exploitation cases. \"\"As more and more crime is becoming more and more digital as data is being distributed online,\"\" he said. \"\"You see a new type of police officer that is behind a computer screen and with the right tools they can crack these cases.\"\" The Internet has no borders so law enforcement agencies need to overcome traditional geographic boundaries to work together. Project VIC is now being used by Interpol, Europol and agencies in 35 countries including the United Kingdom and Canada, and it's about to be rolled out in Australia. In the United States the results speak for themselves. \"\"We've been absolutely floored by the success we've seen with Project VIC,\"\" said Cole. \"\"Going back a few years we were seeing victims in the low hundreds and in this past year we've rescued over 1,000 victims just in HSI (Homeland Security Investigations -- a division of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)). alone and we've seen similar results in other agencies as well.\"\"\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n56,2016/4/19,http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/17/asia/vietnamese-girls-child-brides-china/index.html,Vietnamese girls smuggled into China and sold as child brides,The names of the trafficked girls in this story have been changed to protect their identities.,\"Lan remembers the night that changed her whole life. While preparing for university along the border in northern Vietnam, a friend she met online asked her to a group dinner. When she was tired and wanted to go home, the people asked her to stay and talk and have a drink. Next thing she knew, she had been smuggled across the border to China. \"\"At that time, I wanted to leave,\"\" says Lan. \"\"There were other girls there in the car but there was people to guard us.\"\" The villages along the Vietnamese-Chinese border are a hunting ground for human traffickers. Girls as young as 13 say they are tricked or drugged, then spirited across the porous border by boat, motorbike or car. Young Vietnamese women are valuable commodities in China, where the one-child policy and long-standing preference for sons has heavily skewed the gender ratio. To put it simply, Chinese men are hungry for brides. \"\"It costs a very huge amount of money for normal Chinese man to get married to a Chinese woman,\"\" explained Ha Thi Van Khanh, national project coordinator for the U.N.'s anti-trafficking organization in Vietnam. Traditionally, Chinese men wishing to marry local women are expected to pay for an elaborate banquet and to have purchased a new home to live in after the wedding. \"\"This is why they try to import women from neighboring countries, including Vietnam.\"\" Diep Vuong started the Pacific Links Foundation to combat trafficking in Vietnam. She says that Vietnamese brides can sell for upwards of $3,000 to the end buyer and that they are often considered desirable because of cultural similarities to the Chinese. Nguyen was just 16 when a friend's boyfriend drugged her and smuggled her into China. She tried to resist a forced marriage. For three months, she refused, even though her traffickers beat her, withheld food and threatened to kill her, she says. Finally, she relented. She says her husband was kind to her, but she never stopped missing her family in Vietnam. \"\"My desire to go home was indescribable,\"\" Nguyen said. \"\"I agreed to marry the man but I could not stay with a stranger without any feelings for him.\"\" When her mother-in-law realized Lan was never going to warm to the marriage, the family returned her to the traffickers. They got their money back, Nguyen says, after which she was forced into a second marriage. A refuge for escaped women The Pacific Links Foundation runs a shelter for trafficking victims in the city of Lao Cai, northern Vietnam. The young women stay for an average of two to three years. They go to school or get vocational training. They do art therapy. They learn to cook and sew and keep a big garden. Surrounded by other woman with similar experiences, the shelter helps them get back on their feet and then to find jobs to support themselves. \"\"Once that whole investment process can happen with these young women then it is much easier for them to have their own lives,\"\" says Diep. Her organization also does community outreach to try and stop more girls from falling into the hands of traffickers. About once a month, a group of trafficking victims visits the market at Bac Ha, a regional hub for buying food, fabric and livestock. On this day, on a stage overlooking hundreds of shoppers, they talk about their experiences, take questions and play games with the crowd. When they ask people to share personal experiences concerning trafficking, more than 20 people come forward. \"\"I think awareness is the only tool,\"\" Diep says. Ha from the U.N. agrees that the top priority is to spread awareness, especially in the poor, rural regions along the border. She also believes reducing poverty will help stop women going to China seeking work, another common way traffickers lure victims. Saved at the border During CNN's trip to the border, the government called and told us the police had just rescued five girls as they were about to cross the border with a trafficker. We met the girls, who are just 14 years old. They said they were promised $600 to go to work in China by a neighbor from the same village. They didn't tell their parents they were going. The neighbor is now under arrest. The Vietnamese police are sometimes able to rescue women even after they have crossed into China, by enlisting the help of Chinese authorities. Nguyen Tuong Long, the head of the government's social vice prevention department in Lao Cai, says last year they rescued and returned 109 Vietnamese trafficking victims. \"\"Because of cooperation between the Vietnamese and the Chinese police, we have found and caught trafficking rings,\"\" Nguyen says. \"\"We've found women far inside China, at brothels where they're forced to become sex workers.\"\" Trafficked women who aren't rescued in raids have to find ways to get out on their own. Some of them say they were able to contact their families from China, but they couldn't get help from police because they didn't know exactly where they were. Lan and Nguyen ended up in the same town in China. After two years, together they managed to slip out of their homes and take a taxi to a local police station. The whole time they were afraid their husbands' families would find them. The Chinese police investigated and eventually returned them to Vietnam. The women were free of their forced marriages, but they paid a high price. Both left their babies in China. Lan says if she saw her daughter again, she would apologize for leaving her behind. \"\"I hope she'll have a better life there,\"\" she says. Both Lan and Nguyen say in school their teachers had talked to them about trafficking. At the time, neither believed it could happen to them.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n57,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/02/07/donald-trump-vaccines_n_14636042.html,Hundreds Of Health Groups Plead With Trump To Look At Scientific Evidence On Vaccines,The president has falsely said the shots cause autism.,\"WASHINGTON \"\"?Hundreds of state and national medical groups on Tuesday sent President Donald Trump-scientific evidence debunking the theory that childhood vaccines cause autism.- \"\"Claims that vaccines are unsafe when administered according to expert recommendations have been disproven by a robust body of medical literature, including a thorough review by the National Academy of Medicine,\"\"?reads the-letter, which was signed by groups including the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American Academy of Pediatrics.- The medical groups attached summaries of more than three dozen studies that found no link between vaccines and neurological problems, and noted that immunization has eradicated several diseases in the U.S. Trump has repeatedly espoused the discredited theory that children can get autism from vaccines. He hosted Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a proponent of the autism theory, in January at Trump Tower in New York City. Kennedy said afterward that Trump had asked him to head a commission investigating vaccine safety.- A Trump spokeswoman previously said no decision had been made about whether to create a commission. The White House press office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.-- Public health groups have been wary of wading into the political fray on vaccines, reluctant to give the impression that there's any legitimate debate among scientists over whether people should have their children immunized. The letter had been in the works since Trump's vaccine doubts resurfaced last month, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics. Several government bodies already vouch for the safety of vaccines, and nongovernment researchers have repeatedly probed the link between vaccines and autism since a 1998 paper first caused alarm. That paper has since been retracted.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n58,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/02/07/jake-gyllenhaal-broadway-musical-debut_n_14636028.html,Here Is Jake Gyllenhaal Singing His Heart Out Ahead Of His Broadway Musical Debut,\"Yes, yes, yes, yes and yas.\",\"Attention, world: Jake Gyllenhaal is making his Broadway musical debut this month. How do we know? Well, We're known. But also, Gyllenhaal just posted a video teasing his singing chops on Facebook, and damn. The kid's got talent. \"\"This is what happens when Riva Marker (the badass president of NineStories) and I invite #CaryJojiFukunaga to rehearsals for our new Broadway musical,\"\"?he wrote in a status accompanying the video. Cary Joji Fukunaga, of \"\"true Detective\"\"?fame, did indeed shoot the single-shot video, Variety reports. And you can tell. In the nearly four-minute video above, Gyllenhaal sings a song \"\"?\"\"�Finishing the Hat,\"\"?to be exact \"\"?from an upcoming revival of Stephen Sondheim's musical, \"\"sunday in the Park With George.\"\"?The actor, best known for his role in \"\"donny Darko\"\"?(it's true!), will begin preview performances of the show at New York City's Hudson Theatre this Saturday, Feb. 11.-The musical's official opening night is set for Thursday, Feb. 23.- Until then, you're got this:\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n59,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/02/07/new-study-finds-e-cigarettes-are-much-safer-and-less-toxic-than-tobacco_n_14636026.html,New Study Finds E-Cigarettes Are Much Safer And Less Toxic Than Tobacco,\"\"\"There is a very low risk associated with their long-term use.\"\"\",\"Consuming e-cigarettes is far safer and less toxic than smoking conventional tobacco cigarettes, according to the findings of a study analyzing levels of dangerous and cancer-causing substances in the body. Researchers found that people who switched from smoking regular cigarettes to e-cigarettes or nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) such as gum or patches for at least six months had much lower levels of toxins in their saliva and urine than those who continued to smoke. \"\"ourstudy adds to existing evidence showing that e-cigarettes and NRT are far safer than smoking, and suggests that there is a very low risk associated with their long-term use,\"\"?said Lion Shahab, a specialist in epidemiology and public health at University College London who led the work. E-cigarettes, which heat nicotine-laced liquid into vapor, have grown into an $8 billion-a-year market, according to Euromonitor International - more than three times that of NRT products. They are, however, still dwarfed by a tobacco market estimated by Euromonitor to be worth around $700 billion. Many health experts think e-cigarettes, or vapes, which do not contain tobacco, are a lower-risk alternative to smoking and potentially a major public health tool. But some question their long-term safety and worry that they may act as a \"\"gateway\"\"?to taking up conventional cigarettes. The U.S. surgeon general in December urged lawmakers to impose price and tax policies that would discourage their use. Monday's study, published in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine, analyzed saliva and urine samples from long-term e-cigarette and NRT users as well as smokers, and compared levels of key chemicals found in their bodies. It found that smokers who switched completely to e-cigarettes or NRT had significantly lower levels of toxic chemicals and carcinogens compared to people who continued to smoke tobacco cigarettes. Those who used e-cigarettes or NRT but did not completely quit smoking did not show the same drop in toxin levels. This underlined that a complete switch was needed to get the long-term health benefits of quitting tobacco, the researchers said. The World Health Organization says tobacco is the world's biggest preventable killer, with a predicted cumulative death toll of a billion by the end of this century if current trends continue. Tobacco smoking currently kills around 6 million people a year. Kevin Fenton, national director of health and wellbeing at the government authority Public Health England, said the findings held a clear message for tobacco smokers. \"\"Switching to e-cigarettes can significantly reduce harm to smokers, with greatly reduced exposure to carcinogens and toxins,\"\"?he said in a statement. \"\"the findings also make clear that the benefit is only realized if people stop smoking completely and make a total switch. \"\"the best thing a smoker can do, for themselves and those around them, is to quit now, completely and forever.\"\"?(Reporting by Kate Kelland; Editing by Kevin Liffey)\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n60,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-conversation-us/should-scientists-engage_b_14636016.html,Should scientists engage in activism?,,\"By Ivan Oransky, New York University and Adam Marcus, Johns Hopkins University Have you heard that scientists are planning a march on Washington? The move is not being billed as a protest, but rather as a \"\"celebration of our passion for science and a call to support and safeguard the scientific community,\"\" although it comes as a direct response to recent policy changes and statements by the Trump administration. Not everyone thinks the nonprotest protest is a good thing. It's \"\"a terrible idea,\"\" wrote Robert Young, a geologist at Western Carolina University, in The New York Times. The march, Young said, will just reinforce a belief among some conservatives that \"\"scientists are an interest group,\"\" and polarize the issue, making researchers' jobs more difficult. Others find that argument less than convincing, pointing out that science and politics have always been intertwined. As the founders of the blog Retraction Watch and the Center for Scientific Integrity, we often see researchers reluctant to push for or embrace change - whether it's to the conventional way of dealing with misconduct in journals (which for years was basically to not do so) or addressing problems of reproducibility of their experiments. To the timorous, airing dirty laundry, and letting the public in on the reality of science, could endanger public trust - and funding. So this isn't the first time scientists and engineers have voiced similar concerns. Take the example of Marc Edwards and his colleagues at Virginia Tech: To many people watching the Flint water crisis, they were heroes. After being asked to visit by concerned residents, they found, and announced, that people in the beleaguered city were being exposed to excessive amounts of lead through their tap water. They also launched a crowdfunding campaign to raise money for water filters for city residents and created a website to push their findings about the hazards of the city's water supply and shame governments at all levels to act. If not for their tireless efforts, thousands of children may have been exposed to dangerous amounts of lead for far longer than they already were. Even the Environmental Protection Agency has acknowledged that it waited too long to sound the alarm. But that's not exactly how the editor of a leading engineering journal sees things. In October, a remarkable editorial appeared in the journal Environmental Science & Technology. The essay, by University of California, Berkeley engineering professor and Water Center Director David Sedlak, ES&T's editor-in-chief, expressed concern that some of his colleagues in the field had crossed the \"\"imaginary line\"\" between scientist and advocate. \"\"Speaking out against a corrupt or incompetent system may be the product of a culture where idealism, personal responsibility, and Hollywood's dramatic sensibilities conspire to create a narrative about the noble individual fighting injustice,\"\" Sedlak wrote. By becoming \"\"allies of a particular cause, no matter how just, we jeopardize the social contract that underpins the tradition of financial support for basic research.\"\" In other words, don't cross Congress - which many scientists already view as hostile to their profession - and risk retaliation in the form of budget cuts. That's no small pie, either. Through its oversight of the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Department of Energy and other agencies and programs, Congress holds the strings to a research purse worth nearly US$70 billion a year. Let's take a moment to absorb all that. Some (unnamed but easily identified) scientists, lulled by the media, have cast themselves as superheroes in a struggle against villains born of their own conceit. Their arrogance and vanity threaten to awaken the master, who will punish us all for the sins of a few. We rarely get the opportunity to watch a chilling effect in action, but you can almost see the breath of researchers caught up in a debate over the proper role of scientists in the crisis. It's not just engineers who fear speaking out. \"\"We have too often been reluctant to voice our protest, for fear of incurring the [National Institute of Mental Health's] displeasure (and losing whatever opportunities we still have for funding),\"\" wrote neuroscientist John Markowitz in The New York Times last fall. In a refreshing piece, Markowitz was arguing that \"\"there's such a thing as too much neuroscience.\"\" As cofounders of Retraction Watch, a blog that focuses on some of science's nasty episodes, we are occasionally admonished that pointing out cases of fraud - even when we also praise good behavior - will give anti-science forces ammunition. In some ways, we should be glad scientists are acknowledging these concerns, instead of pretending they're never swayed by the almighty dollar. But anyone who clings to the notion that science exists in a pure vacuum, untainted by politics, economics or social justice needs also to understand that science is a human endeavor and scientists have the same eyes and ears for injustice and outrage as the rest of us. Although the conduct of science demands honesty and rigor, nowhere is it written that researchers must remain silent when governments or other powerful players either misuse science or suppress findings in the service of harmful policies. And before Edwards and his efforts on behalf of the Flint community, some scientists have spoken out. Claire Patterson, a physical chemist, put himself on a decades-long collision course with industry when he took on lead poisoning. John Snow earned the ire of Londoners when he removed the pump handle on a cholera-infested well, and wasn't vindicated until after his death. It took Peter Buxtun several years to stop the infamous Tuskegee syphilis experiment; he eventually had to leak documents to reporter Jean Heller in 1972. Edwards and his colleagues, we would argue, are part of a long tradition of bridging the worlds of science and policy. They have been instrumental in bringing not only attention but change to the beleaguered city of Flint. And money: Thanks in part to their pressure, the Senate in September voted overwhelmingly to approve $100 million in aid for Flint, and hundreds of millions more in loans from the Environmental Protection Agency for upgrading municipal water infrastructures and studying exposure to lead. In a stinging rebuke to Sedlak, Edwards and three coauthors - Amy Pruden, Siddhartha Roy and William Rhoads - blasted the critical editorial as a \"\"devastating, self-indictment of cowardice and perverse incentives in modern academia.\"\" Indeed, scientists who accept funding with the tacit agreement that they keep their mouths shut about the government are far more threatening to an independent academy than those who speak their minds. Since Nov. 8, it has been painfully clear that science will be playing defense for a while. The United States has never seen a regime so hostile to science and the value of the scientific method. President Donald Trump has declared climate change a \"\"hoax\"\" cooked up by the Chinese. He has flirted seriously with debunked anti-vaccination views and declared that polls (read, data) that are negative about his ambitions are \"\"fake news.\"\" Science and politics are not always compatible. And science need not always triumph over policy: After all, research shows that steroids improve athletic performance, but we have a compelling political interest to ban them. The same can be said of eugenics. Research must always be ethical, and ethics is a conversation that includes scientists and policymakers. Still, while the two domains are separate, the divide is, and should be, bridgeable. As Edwards and his colleagues write, \"\"The personal and professional peril is great, the critics are numerous and vocal, but staying silent is to be complicit in perpetrating injustice. And no matter what may come of the rest of our lives or careers, we are certain of one thing: Flint was a community worth going out on a limb for, and by upholding a just cause, we enhanced the social contract between academics and the public.\"\" That could easily be said of the March for Science. Except now it's not just a limb but the entire tree that's in peril. Ivan Oransky, Distinguished Writer In Residence, Arthur Carter Journalism Institute, New York University and Adam Marcus, Adjunct Faculty for Advanced Academic Programs, Johns Hopkins University This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n61,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/02/07/princesses-wear-pants-by-savannah-guthrie_n_14636008.html,Savannah Guthrie's New Kids' Book Shows That Princesses Can Be Strong Women,\"The book is a celebration of \"\"girl power.\"\"\",\"On Monday, TODAY co-anchor Savannah Guthrie announced that she's written a children's book \"\"?and revealed the title.- The book, which she co-wrote with parent educator Allison Oppenheim, is called \"\"Princesses Wear Pants,\"\"?and it's about Princess Penelope Pineapple, who \"\"celebrates girl power by showing young girls that its not how they look, but what they do that matters most.\"\"Guthrie and Oppenheim both said it was their princess-obsessed daughters who inspired them to create the book.- \"\"I realized pretty quickly Vale was going to love princesses. I think it's in her genetic code,\"\"?Guthrie told TODAY of her daughter. \"\"We wanted our daughters to be okay with their love of princesses but also realize that princesses are strong women with real things to do.\"\"?Both women noted that they are not \"\"Anti-princess.\"\"Oppenheim told TODAY, \"\"We don\"\"t want to send our little girls the message that what they love is problematic or silly. But we do want them to know that women are substantive and do important things no matter how they look. I see the princess phase as a major opportunity for learning, if we navigate it thoughtfully.\"\"?The book's website also hints at empowering content, revealing that Princess Penelope flies in the Pineapple Air Command, hosts a science fair and works in her vegetable garden.- The book will be available in September and can be pre-ordered here.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n62,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/madelaine-dangelo/how-to-minimize-risks-and_b_14635990.html,How to Minimize Risks and Maximize Returns in Art Investments,,\"Many investors interested in alternative assets often shy away from art due to the overwhelming amount of risks and responsibilities that come with acquiring investment grade art. In this article, we identify these risks, and tell you how investing in art through Arthena will make you want to start today. Comparables, Experience and Costs: Needless to say, investment grade art is not the stock market or the real estate market where you can compare prices of one asset to another. With art assets, the ability to determine the legitimacy and the price, comes with expertise - this barrier makes it difficult for the traditional investor to confidently invest. When evaluating a work of art, art appraisers look for: Authenticity, condition, rarity, provenance, and value. Art appraisers' expertise can charge anywhere between $50 dollars to several hundreds of dollars an hour, and not all have equivalent experiences. Additional time is needed to ween out truly experienced art appraisers from those who are not. How can Arthena help? By investing through Arthena, we take away all the troubles of doing your own research, determining which work to purchase, placing the right bid, and hiring the right appraiser. At Arthena, we use our very own regression analysis to determine works of art to purchase for investment purposes. We organize artworks with similar core characteristics into logical groups according to their specific criteria, in accordance with USPAP (Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice) guidelines, which is also known as a IRS appraisal. The characteristics include artist, genre, date range, content, materials, size, coloration, and style, among others. Then, Arthena targets works by artists that have shown appreciation over the past 5 years and are projected to grow by 20% +/- YoY over the next five, or the lifetime of the fund. From storage to insurance, Arthena takes all these burdens away from the traditional art investor. By investing a minimum of $10k into our funds, we handle every troublesome task when it comes to acquiring a work of art. Just sit back, and watch your investment grow. Illiquidity: Generally, the art market is relatively illiquid in comparison to traditional assets such as equities and stocks. Therefore, art assets are ideal for long-term investments. That being said, there is varying liquidity within the art market itself. Determined by the difference between the ask and bid price, the lower the bid price from the ask price, the more illiquid the asset is. The greater the bid is from the ask price, the more liquid it is. Let Arthena identify the art market's most liquid assets: Arthena acquires works in the emerging, PWC, and Modern market sectors, which in total account for over 70% of the US market, and have shown the highest rate of growth over the past 10 years. Art market analysts have identified the most liquid sector of the art market are works of art under $250,000. Arthena confirms that the artist and art work fit our growth metrics, rate at 1 or above for Sharpe Ratio, to confirm that it is a high growth investment with low volatility, and determine its maximum acquisition price Lack of Data: Many reports have noted upon the lack of transparency in the art market. As a result, companies have created indices such as Mei Moses and Artnet index to amend this \"\"problem\"\". Nonetheless, these indices bring in a new set of issues. Such indices as the two mentioned do not encompass the entire art market. For example, Mei Moses's data lies primarily on numbers from Sotheby's and Christie's, negating their online sales as well as other auction houses and private sales. Another problem is that some indexes rely heavily on repeat sales, but does not include bought in lots, which variates some data. How Arthena operates through transparency: As such, Arthena acquires works at auction for increased price transparency to the benefit of our investors and our methodology. When works from Arthena's index of artists appear at auction, Arthena uses regression modeling to determine maximum acquisition price. Once acquired, investors can view their art collection through Arthena's online dashboard, allowing our clients to have full access into their investments. Stock market vs. art market performance: Multiple art market analysts have determined that the art market has a low correlation to the stock market, while other analysts have deemed that there is still a certain level of correlation between the two because of the notion that investors would only spend disposable income on collectibles and luxury assets when the market is bullish rather than vice versa. Regardless, the art market has proven itself to be a great store of wealth especially during times of economic uncertainty. Notably, it only took the art market 16 months to return to pre-recession levels in 2008, while the stock market took six years. As such, according to Deloitte: \"\"Increasing awareness of art as an asset class: 53% of wealth managers had a high level of awareness of developments linked to art as an asset class, up from 43% in 2012 and 33% in 2011; this signals that increasing attention is being paid by the wealth management community to the art and collectibles market.\"\" - Deloitte and ArtTactic Art & Finance Report 2014 Arthena takes a new approach to investing in art. Like a hedge fund, Arthena identifies specific market segments and artists that have shown impressive historical performance and creates buy orders to acquire said works. Don't wait any longer, invest today through Arthena. Click here to start investing in our funds.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n63,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/02/07/paid-family-leave-ivanka-trump_n_14635968.html,Progressives Hang Onto Hopes For Ivanka Trump,Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) hopes President Donald Trump would be receptive to a paid family leave plan because his daughter has spoken about the issue.,\"WASHINGTON \"\"?Progressives wondering whether President Donald Trump will give any notice to their concerns hold out hope that his daughter Ivanka will intervene. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), a longtime champion of paid family leave, on Tuesday reintroduced her Family Act, which would guarantee 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave for all workers. The legislation, which proposes a universal paid leave program funded by a small payroll tax, failed to advance in the previous session of the Republican-led Congress, and likely faces the same fate under Trump. But Gillibrand and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), sponsor of a companion bill in the House, on Tuesday expressed optimism that the president would be receptive, in part because Ivanka Trump has spoken about the issue. \"\"I am hopeful that the administration will reach out to me and work with me on a national paid leave plan,\"\"?Gillibrand said on a call with reporters. Gillibrand referenced Ivanka Trump's speech at last summer's Republican National Convention, in which she presented her father, who has a record of demeaning women, as a champion for women's rights and a supporter of equal pay for women. It led many progressives to hope that her influence would encourage-\"\"?or at least make it possible \"\"?that the president pivot from his campaign promises. Ivanka Trump also tried during the campaign to deflect attention away from her father's history of misogyny and climate change denial. Last week, Ivanka Trump and husband Jared Kushner, a senior White House adviser, reportedly convinced the president not to roll back LGBTQ protections, a important achievement of former President Barack Obama. Trump's proposed paid leave plan, like most of his policy proposals, contains little substance and is limited in scope. It allows for six weeks of paid leave, and only applies to mothers. Ivanka Trump said in an interview when her father's leave plan was announced in September that it is intended to \"\"help mothers in recovery in the immediate aftermath of childbirth.\"\"?She would not elaborate on whether it would apply to LGBTQ, adoptive or foster parents, or people caring for aging parents. \"\"we'll wait to see what the dimensions of it, what the details are,\"\"?DeLauro said of Trump's proposal.- \"\"I don\"\"t know when they will move forward with making a substantive proposal,\"\"?she added. \"\"We'r waiting for them to join the debate. We'r on the field. The U.S. remains the only industrialized country without mandated paid family leave. Sunday was the 24th anniversary of the Family Medical Leave Act, which provides 12 weeks of unpaid leave for people who work at companies with more than 50 employees. The push for universal paid leave is growing, with state legislatures and businesses enacting more expansive plans. Gillibrand said she hopes to gain bipartisan support because the issue affects everyone. \"\"Despite the fact that we don\"\"t have a Republican yet, I am optimistic that people will be demanding action on this issue, that people will rise up and say we need a national paid leave plan, and really call on their elected leaders to listen to the challenges that they'r facing,\"\"?Gillibrand said. \"\"I am hopeful that the new administration will focus on it because they did run on it, they did talk about it, and it should be nonpartisan.\"\"?,-1\"\"\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n64,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/02/07/my-first-time-masturbating_n_14635960.html,My First Time Masturbating,True story: The best sex I've ever had is with myself.,\"You don\"\"t need a partner to have amazing, fireworks-on-the-Fourth-of-July level orgasms. The animated-Glamour video above is a great reminder of that. In it, a 27-year-old woman named Mariel talks about how reading harlequin novels and erotica as a teen quickly led her down the pathway to self-pleasure. \"\"I saw stars,\"\"?she says of her first time masturbating. \"\"I must have come in less than 30 seconds. Needless to say, I fell right to sleep.\"\"Now as an adult, she still considers sex with herself the best sex she's ever had.- \"\"Every time I touch myself or learn a different way to make myself feel good, I feel more confident to bring that into my sexual experiences with other people,\"\"?she says. Watch the video to hear her full story.--\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n65,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/02/07/sean-duffy-terrorism_n_14635946.html,GOP Congressman Insists White Terrorist Attacks Are Totally Different,\"Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.) also pointed to \"\"the good things\"\" that came from the shooting of black churchgoers in Charleston, South Carolina.\",\"Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.) vehemently defended President Donald Trump's ban on refugees and travelers Tuesday, arguing that terrorists who come from the Middle East are an existential threat to the United States and totally different from white domestic terrorists,-who just commit \"\"Ane-off\"\"?incidents that the government can\"\"t do anything about.- Duffy said Trump was justified in stopping Syrian refugees from entering the United States \"\"until in Syria they figure out this conflict in the civil war and this hotbed for terrorism.\"\"?Presumably, however, once the conflict is over, women and children, for example, won\"\"t feel it is as necessary to escape their country to find a safe haven.- Host Alisyn Camerota pressed Duffy on Trump claiming that the media were intentionally covering up terrorist attacks and either not reporting or underreporting them. The White House later Monday released a list of 78 attacks it said backed up Trump's claim. The list notably did not include a recent attack on Muslims inside a Quebec City mosque that killed six people. Trump, who frequently tweets about terrorist attacks, also has not mentioned this one.- Duffy argued in his CNN interview that attacks by white people \"\"?such as the one in Quebec City \"\"?aren\"\"t as big of a problem.- \"\"You don\"\"t have a group like ISIS or al Qaeda that is inspiring people around the world to take up arms and kill innocents. That was a one-off. That was a one-off, Alisyn,\"\"?Duffy said. Camerota then pointed to the massacre of black churchgoers in Charleston, South Carolina, in 2015 and the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, as acts carried out by white terrorists. Duffy tried to make lemonade out of the Charleston attack, in which a white supremacist killed nine people:- CAMEROTA: How about Charleston, congressman? He was an extremist. He was a white extremist?- DUFFY: Yes, he was. OK? CAMEROTA: How about that? That doesn\"\"t matter?- DUFFY: No, it does matter. It does matter. Look at the good things that came from it. [Then-South Carolina Gov.] Nikki Haley took down the Confederate flag, that was great.- But you want to say I can give you a couple of examples. There's no constant threat that goes through these attacks. And you have radical Islamic terrorists and ISIS that are driving the attacks, and if you want to compare those two, maybe you can throw another one \"\"��?CAMEROTA: You can.- Duffy claimed that people on the left were manufacturing outrage, saying there was plenty of blame to go around.- \"\"Look at Gabby Giffords. The Marxist, who took her life, a leftist guy, and now you see violence and terror in the streets all across America, burning and beating people with Donald Trump hats. The violence you have to look in, you'r trying to use examples on the right,\"\"?he said. Former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.) is not dead. As a congresswoman in 2011, she survived an assassination attempt, and she remains an outspoken proponent of gun safety reform. Duffy said he be happy to help do something about white supremacy but he just didn\"\"t know what to do: \"\"Can we vet that? How should we vet that to keep ourselves safe? I will join you in that effort, what do you do?\"\"?- Watch Duffy's full interview below:- Camerota: Why isn't the president talking about white terrorism? Duffy: There's a difference. https://t.co/YEgSitUsdS The Southern Poverty Law Center has tracked radical-right terrorist plots that have occurred since the Oklahoma City bombing and has a list here.- There have been zero fatal terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since 1975 by immigrants from the seven countries listed in Trump's executive order. The order restricts travelers from those countries from coming to the U.S. for 90 days, prevents refugees from all countries from entering the U.S. for 120 days and bars Syrian refugees indefinitely. Want more updates from Amanda Terkel? Sign up for her newsletter, Piping Hot Truth, here.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n66,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/02/07/6-things-i-learned-from-being-ghosted_n_14635944.html,I Was Ghosted 3 Times In The Last Year. Here Are 6 Things I Learned.,Hello? Helllllllllllllo?,\"Ah, dating in the 21st century. If disappointing websites, drug-resistant STIs and troublingly short attention spans weren\"\"t enough to make us lose our minds (and possibly our libidos), we'r also now stuck grappling with another modern phenomenon: ghosting. The New York Times defines ghosting as \"\"ending a romantic relationship by cutting off all contact and ignoring the former partner's attempts to reach out.\"\"?This has happened to me three times in the past year. Granted, I don\"\"t believe it necessarily needs to be a \"\"relationship\"\"?in the traditional sense in order for one party to be ghosted. It could (or should) also include entanglements that involved meeting up or hanging out or hooking up with someone two or more times before the other person vanished without a trace. I haven\"\"t been in a formal relationship in almost four years, but I frequently meet guys that I find worthy of getting to know better (both with and without my clothes on) and the exchanges that result from those interactions are meaningful to me in one way or another \"\"?at least meaningful enough to want some closure if or when they end. After investing some time and energy and possibly saliva or other body fluids in another person, it's disconcerting when they suddenly disappear. Of course, if you're only been on one or two \"\"dates\"\"?(however you want to define that term) with someone and at the end of your time together neither of you reaches out to the other, that's not ghosting. That's just life.-And I understand that dating is hard and that finding someone who ticks \"\"?or if we'r really lucky, tickles \"\"?all of our boxes is virtually impossible but I still (perhaps naively) cling to the (perhaps now radical and totally outdated) idea that it's a mature move to give someone a heads up if you'r going to stop talking or seeing or fucking them. So, in light of my experiences over the past year, here are a few humble and totally unscientific thoughts on ghosting: 1. Just don\"\"t do it. Be an adult and send a text that reads something like: \"\"Hey. Glad we hung out but I'm just not feeling a connection. Stay awesome\"\"?or whatever other generic and possibly hurtful or patronizing or maybe just uncomfortable (but at least emotionally clear) and instructive language you want to use. I'll respect you for it even if it bums me out and that way neither of us has to dread randomly running into the other at Whole Foods or at that bar with all those vintage pinball machines that I stupidly and regretfully introduced you to because I thought you were cool (or at least we won\"\"t experience more than the usual basic human level of dread that accompanies those kinds of surprise social interactions). 2. If you do it, do not \"\"?as two of the three guys who originally ghosted me have done \"\"?start texting me again three to four weeks later and pretend like nothing happened as if you unexpectedly slipped into a coma and then suddenly woke up again or went on a hot air balloon trip around the world and didn\"\"t have access to your phone and just forgot to tell me. The only thing worse than ghosting is re-materializing a month later \"\"?and I mean worse for both of us because at that point, I\"\"ve had all that time to think about how bad your taste in music actually is or question a million other questionable things you told me in our short time together and now that I\"\"ve thought about it, I don\"\"t want to see you again. 3. Being ghosted made me realize I\"\"ve probably ghosted guys in the past-(and now that I'm publishing this piece, I'm guessing one or two or 74 of you will come forward and say as much). If I ghosted you, I'm sorry. I was an asshole. I was immature. And I was probably scared of hurting your feelings or just didn\"\"t know how to verbalize why I didn\"\"t want to see you again. Chances are it was something innocuous and had nothing to do with your character. And I'm sure if you asked any of the guys who ghosted me, they say exactly the same things. But that doesn\"\"t excuse it and going forward I'm vowing taking my own advice, no matter how awkward it might feel. 4. Human beings are finicky creatures and, what's more, as our cultural ideas about and understanding of what dating and relationships and couples and families look like continues to shift and destabilize,-linking up and breaking apart is probably only going to get trickier. These days many of us aren\"\"t looking to get married or have kids (or at least aren\"\"t looking to get married and have kids the way our parents or our grandparents-did) and so, the way we think about how we enter and exit relationships is mutating and not always in ideal ways, which means we have to be even more mindful of our (in)actions. 5. Communicating is hard \"\"?and getting harder.-As much as I think the guys who ghosted me suck, I get it. And in many ways, aside from reminding me to treat others the way I'd like to be treated, being ghosted also has made me rethink who and what I'm looking for in a partner or a fuck buddy \"\"?or just someone I want to go and have a donut with. What's more, it's made me rethink how I communicate with other human beings in general and reevaluate what the best way is to express myself and my needs and my desires to friends and family and colleagues, too. Email and texts make it easy to send a message but we have to stop to think about the quality of those messages. And are those forms of communication appropriate for what we need to say?-What is the value of face to face contact and experiencing the world offline? What are the best ways to grow a relationship and how often do I rely on technology as a crutch to deal with \"\"?or get out of \"\"?something? These are all questions that have been pacing the hallways in my head lately and it feels good (or at least productive) to think about them. 6. Ghosting aside, there's something kind of nice about dating as a 38-year-old because I know what I want better than I did when I was 25 or even 32 and I put up with less shit. And if, in the end, someone doesn\"\"t text me back, the truth is I'm totally happy to spend Friday night watching \"\"the Great British Bakeoff\"\"?all by myself (maybe, if I'm being totally honest, even happier).\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n67,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/02/06/orthodox-women-clergy_n_14635938.html,\"Despite Ban, These Orthodox Jewish Clergywomen Are Determined To Serve\",Not even a ban from the religious establishment will stop these women from fulfilling their calling.,\"The Orthodox Union, one of the largest-networks of Orthodox Jewish synagogues in America, recently adopted a policy that bans women from serving as clergy.- Opinions about whether women should be allowed to serve as clergy have caused some division within America's Modern Orthodox Jewish community. The religious establishment, including the OU's counterpart, the Rabbinical Council of America,-is strongly opposed to women's ordination.-On the other hand, some OU synagogues have embraced the idea of women clergy. The new policy attempts to clear up the confusion. But despite the enforcement of this glass ceiling, Orthodox women who have felt the pull to serve as spiritual leaders aren\"\"t backing away from their calling.- Rabba Sara Hurwitz is the co-founder and Dean of Yeshivat Maharat, an-Orthodox Jewish seminary that ordains women as clergy. The school has graduated 14 female clergy and 28 others are currently students. Hurwitz told The Huffington Post that nine of the their graduates are currently employed in synagogues. She said students remain committed to \"\"learning, teaching, being a pastoral presence for people in their time joy and vulnerability, and being a role model for others.\"\"?\"\"their reaction [to the policy] is to keep marching forwards, fulfilling their passion to become clergy,\"\"?she wrote in an email. The OU's decision comes down to a difference in opinion about God's will for men and women. According to a statement, OU leaders said that they had been approached by Orthodox rabbis and lay leadership for definitive guidance about women's ordination. The OU placed the question in front of a group of seven modern Orthodox rabbis. After months of reviews and forums with community members, the panel concluded that more should be done to encourage women towards leadership positions. However, their interpretation of Jewish law found that men and women have-different gender roles and obligations when it comes to serving in a synagogue. OU leaders argued that the idea of gender equality in religious practice \"\"inexorably clashes\"\"?with the Orthodox interpretation of Jewish scripture. In their worldview, individual autonomy must always submit to the will of God, as interpreted by rabbinic leaders. The rabbis agreed that women can serve as administrators, educators, and counselors. They can even advise other women about Jewish law as it relates to marriage, sexuality and women's health.- But on the matter of ordination, the rabbis concluded that women weren\"\"t allowed. As a result, the OU adopted a policy on February 1 that discourages-member synagogues from employing-women clergy, or allowing women to perform tasks typically associated with clergy \"\"� such as officiating at significant life-cycle events, delivering sermons from the pulpit, and serving as a synagogue's primary religious teacher. Instead of focusing on what women are prohibited from doing, the leaders asked the community to focus on what women are allowed to do.- \"\"Women must be encouraged to share their Torah knowledge, and their enthusiasm and wisdom, with the broader community,\"\"?the leaders said in a statement. \"\"Let us focus our energy and communal creativity on increasing and enhancing the contributions that women make to our shuls and communities, rather than being consumed with limitations.\"\"?But some female Orthodox clergy are determined not to let these restrictions stop them from acting as spiritual leaders. Maharat Ruth Balinsky Friedman, an ordained spiritual leader at Washington D.C.'s Ohev Sholom - The National Synagogue, told The Huffington Post that she's determined to keep doing her job. \"\"I am grateful to have an extremely supportive community, and so this decision does not affect me personally. However, some of my colleagues are personally affected, and this decision caused them a lot of upset and worry,\"\"?she told The Huffington Post in an email. \"\"therefore, my top reaction is one of anger.-That these rabbis made this decision without considering the effects it would have on the women who are currently serving as clergy, or who are training to serve, is disgraceful.\"\"?The OU's statement does not explicitly state whether the rabbinic panel listened to ordained women's voices and opinions during the review process. The Huffington Post's requests for comment were not returned. The Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance, a group that advocates for expanded roles for women within the community, was \"\"dismayed\"\"?by the OU's decision.- \"\"there are various ways of practicing Judaism, halachic Orthodox Judaism,\"\"?Sharon Weiss-Greenberg, the group's executive director, told the Forward. \"\"We are disappointed, however, that the OU is attempting to squash that healthy debate and impose their [religious ruling] on hundreds of synagogues, thus centralizing power\"\"?and not giving autonomy to communities\"\"?lay and professional leaders.\"\"?Bracha Jaffe, a member of Yeshivat Maharat's Class of 2017, is still hoping to take the title of \"\"rabba\"\"?after her ordination this year. She told The Huffington Post that she feels the forum doesn\"\"t reflect the diversity within the Orthodox community. She said the OU's decision has encouraged her and her colleagues to \"\"do our work in a more public fashion\"\"?to raise their visibility.- \"\"�Visible female clergy presence in Orthodox synagogues lends validity to women's participation, gives voice to the women's side and creates a welcoming space and role models for women of all ages in our synagogues,\"\"?Jaffe told The Huffington Post. \"\"Let us not deprive the Orthodox world of what these talented and dedicated women have to offer!\"\"?,-1\"\"\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n68,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/quora/what-effect-does-suger-ha_b_14635936.html,What Effect Does Suger Have on Our Brains?,,\"What does sugar do to our brains? originally appeared on Quora - the knowledge sharing network where compelling questions are answered by people with unique insights. Answer by Keck Medicine of USC, 500+ internationally renowned doctors at a leading academic medical center, on Quora: This question originally appeared on Quora - the knowledge sharing network where compelling questions are answered by people with unique insights. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n69,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/02/03/arab-erotic-poetry-women-art_n_14635932.html,\"Inspired By Erotic Arabic Poetry, Women Artists Depict Radical Love\",\"\"\"Radial Love: Female Lust\"\" features 48 women artists from around the world interpreting ancient poetry.\",\"Wallada bint al-Mustakfi was an Andalusian poet who lived and wrote in 11th-century Spain,-sometimes sewing her verses onto the trim of her transparent tunics and wearing them around town. The daughter of a caliph, Wallada eventually inherited her father's palace and transformed it into a literary hall where she'dmentor young women of all backgrounds in poetry and the arts. Her poems mixed themes of spiritual worship and erotic yearning \"\"?sometimes exalting her beloved, other times scolding the lovers who had done her wrong. She wrote: \"\"I am made for higher goals and by Allah I am going my way with pride. I allow my lover to touch my cheek And bestow my kiss to him who craves it.\"\"When Irish born, London-based actress R��is��n O'Loughlin unexpectedly encountered Wallada's poems last year, she was struck by how contemporary they felt. \"\"they read like the best pop lyrics,\"\"?O'Loughlin said in a statement. \"\"Short and sweet in their intense defiance, desire, lovesick longing, pride and fun.\"\"?In an email to The Huffington Post,-O'Loughlin said they reminded her of the songs of contemporary songstress FKA Twigs, who infuses her erotic lyrics with hints of spiritual reverence.- Astounded by her discovery, O'Loughlin began to research other women poets from the ancient Arab world. She landed upon the collection of Abdullah al-Udhari, comprised of verses written by women between the 7th and 12th centuries. Like Wallada, the other ancient poets spun verses that praised pleasures both carnal and divine with the same fearless breath.-One piece by 11th-century poet Itimad al-Rumaykiyya reads: \"\"I urge you to come faster than the wind to mount my breast and firmly dig and plough my body, and don\"\"t let go until you're flushed me thrice.\"\"?Lyrics like these \"\"?lavish and unapologetic \"\"?contradict the persistent, patriarchal myths that cast women, and especially women of Muslim faith, as submissive or silent. These ancient Arabic poets revealed that for millennia, women of various backgrounds, classes and faiths have expressed their feelings and beliefs in no uncertain terms, through passages that vibrate with conviction and lust, sometimes directed toward another person, and alternately, toward life itself.- \"\"I was really attracted to the poems, in part, because they didn\"\"t have any agenda,\"\"?O'Loughlin told HuffPost. \"\"Today the idea of empowerment is sold to us. It's become an advertising tool used to sell dresses or soap. These artists, their way of speaking, just felt really free. They felt like celebrations of life.\"\"?Inspired by these visionary poets whose words still resonate centuries later,-O'Loughlin brainstormed how to usher this little-known pocket of ancient, erotic feminist literature into contemporary discussions, in a time so many of the stereotypes regarding femininity, Islam and the Arab World still persist. She decided to match present-day artists with their poetic predecessors, inviting women of today to create visual testimonies to accompany the written works that came before them.- O'Loughlin collected 24 total poems from Arabic women poets \"\"?most are Muslim, though one is Jewish and one predates Islam. She recruited two female contemporary artists from different cultural and artistic traditions to craft an artistic responses to each poem. The resulting exhibition, called \"\"radical Love: Female Lust,\"\"?features 48 artworks made by women around the world, approximately half of whom are of Arab descent. Hailing from countries including Syria, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Lebanon, Egypt, Russia, America, Pakistan and Ghana, the featured artists use ancient Arabic poetry as a point of departure, visualizing desire and worship in a dizzying array of manifestations.- The show will take place at the Crypt Gallery in London, a former burial ground located beneath a church. According to O'Loughlin, \"\"Here the words of these poets who have been silenced are given voice again, and in doing so the desire for life that is present in the female rises in the work of the modern artist.\"\"?The curator funded the entire exhibition herself, and is currently crowdfunding on Generosity to help with the cost. She hopes to earn enough to divide all proceeds from the show between the participating artists and the Global Fund for Women,-helping Syrian refugees who have relocated to Lebanon.- The image above, a print by by Saudi artist Hend al-Mansour, was inspired by the poet Juml, a young Bedouin woman who, in 9th-century Iraq, served as a concubine to poet Idris Ibn Abi Hafsah. Al-Mansour riffed off the style of the Arabic storybook Maqamat Badi\"\"?al-Zaman al-Hamadhani,-adding splashes of neon pink and her heroine's salty expression.- Another work, by Dublin-based photographer Deborah Sheedy titled \"\"I Keep my Passion to Myself,\"\"?was inspired by a poem by Zahra. Her airy, black-and-white photo depicts a woman spinning in a white dress, appearing like something between an embodied human and imagined chimera. The photo-\"\"?blurred and bubbling from the edges \"\"?transforms what photographers often construe as mistakes into opportunities for additional experimentation and play.- The motley assemblage of artists have a few things in common:-urgency, a desire to express core emotions like strength, vulnerability and love. \"\"they are a deliberate and timeless resistance to the silencing and patronizing of females,\"\"?O'Loughlin added. \"\"Whatever external restraints were placed on these women, they retained a vitality and independence of spirit, a powerful tonic to these troubling times.\"\"O'Loughlin originally began researching ancient Arabic poetry in 2015 -Before Brexit, before Trump's election, and before the president's-executive order barring immigrants from seven Muslim-majority nations. Islamophobia and the xenophobic myths that such thinking engenders were palpable then. \"\"I was shocked by Brexit and I was shocked by Donald Trump being elected,\"\"?she said. \"\"But I was aware that people were being reduced to their ethnicity or their faith.\"\"?Through her exhibition, O'Loughlin hoped to reveal the futility of defining human beings through such sweeping labels,-demonstrating the depth and difference that exist within every cultural category.- \"\"It's crazy that the word \"\"Muslim\"\"?is being described to define millions of people who are from different places and cultures,\"\"?O'Loughlin continued. \"\"people from Pakistan or Palestine or Algeria come from such distinct cultures. And every single woman has a different relationship to God.\"\"?Subsequently, the featured artists in her exhibition do not disclose their faiths alongside their work. That, O'Loughlin expressed, is an aspect of themselves they are not compelled to explain to anyone. \"\"they are women and artists, that's all they have to be.\"\"?Radical Love: Female Lust-is on view Crypt Gallery, St Pancras, London from Feb. 14 through March 5. The show will raise money for The Global Fund for Women helping Syrian refugees.-\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n70,2017/2/7,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/renee-fisher/a-valentine-for-potus_b_14631164.html,A Valentine For POTUS,,\"Dear POTUS, This year, I'm sending you a Valentine, not because I love you or respect you, but because I love my country. And you are the duly-elected symbol of that country. You may not know that I love my country, since I'm not in the pro-life movement, I don't attend church, fear immigrants, or verbally wave the flag every chance I get. I'm not even Christian, which I suspect is becoming ground zero for patriotism. In fact, I pretty much don't fit any of the recent descriptions used for those who love our country. My love of country stems, instead, from deep, unwavering gratitude. Gratitude that my parents were allowed to emigrate here, and that this country made room for them. Gratitude that I was given a childhood that was dramatically different than theirs. Gratitude that my life choices were those of people who have enough food to eat, a home to live in, and a government that protects them and not hunts them down. I had only to decide which clothes to wear for school that day, which homework assignment should be done first, and which children's shows I would look forward to seeing on TV over the weekend. These were decisions my parents never got to consider when they were growing up. I also love my country because my experience growing up was that people of different religions living together was entirely normal. My friends were Jewish, Protestant, Catholic. We attended the same school, borrowed books from the same library, watched movies on Saturday morning at the same theater. My parents did not experience this. Because of their religion, they lived only where the government allowed them to live. Their lives were so insular that they never learned the languages of the countries in which they lived. This is what I'd like you to understand, that, because of who I am and because of the circumstances of my family history, I love my country. You and I speak the same language, and we may use the same terms, but I may mean something a bit different than you when I do so. For example: pro-life: My belief is that life is sacred, and that being pro-life means that we have an obligation to those, like my parents, who seek asylum within our borders. And we have an obligation to those who live here now, to be inclusive. Pro-life means not shutting them out, either economically, socially, or educationally. I do not believe that they are here to suck us dry or kill us. I believe they are, like my parents, here to have a chance at a better life. \"\"radical Islamic terrorism\"\": a favorite term of yours. You'll be happy to know that I believe radical Islamic terrorism exists and that it is a threat to us and to the world. I also believe radical non-Islamic terrorism exists. It has resulted in Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombing, Dylann Roof and the Charleston Church shooting, Adam Lanza and the Newtown School shooting, Charles Roberts and the Amish school shooting, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold and the Columbine High School massacre. The list goes on and on. Terrorism, no matter its motivation, is unacceptable. \"\"government-run education monopoly\"\" Democracies depend on the educational system they provide their citizens. Corporations that are monopolies have consumers at their mercy, and may set prices to increase profit. They don't have to consider the welfare of the people who use their products or services. Education, as a monopoly, ensures that common standards are upheld. They are beholden to the people who use their services. There is a big difference between a business and an educational system. People of means will always have the option of sending their children to private school, just as people of faith will always have the option of sending their children to faith-based school. And people will (and should) have the option of home-schooling or sending their children to charter schools. But none of these alternatives should impact in any way whatsoever on the public school system that the vast majority of Americans attend. Alternatives mean choice, not the standard. \"\"fake news\"\": I agree wholeheartedly that fake news exists. But, in this era of unlimited avenues in which people can gather information, it's irresponsible to accept any news (no matter where it comes from) without checking sources. If you limit yourself solely to one source or one way of thinking, you become vulnerable to manipulation. And that is a very dangerous place to be. A free society is based on a free press. It is not up to any leader of this country to decide what people should read and/or listen to. It is up to us, the people,to do due diligence to weed through news sources, in order to make ourselves better-informed citizens. I also have definitions that differ from yours, regarding what it would take to \"\"make America great again\"\" and \"\"make the inner cities safe\"\" and \"\"keep our borders safe.\"\" I will happily share them with you, if you'd like. So, here's your Valentine, POTUS, from a grateful-to-be-here patriot of this amazing country. I suspect that no matter what path you choose to lead this country down for the foreseeable future, I will make my opinion known. I will continue to exercise the right that was not given to my parents. And I will continue to love this country as much as anyone possibly can and to get chills whenever I say the Pledge of Allegiance or sing the national anthem.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n71,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38895007,Brexit rebellion avoided after 'meaningful vote' offer,The government has seen off an attempt to add conditions to its Brexit bill as a Conservative rebellion was avoided.,\"The government has seen off an attempt to add conditions to its Brexit bill as a Conservative rebellion was avoided. MPs rejected a bid by Labour's Chris Leslie to force the government to consult Parliament on the deal struck with the EU before it is finalised. It came after ministers pledged that a \"\"meaningful\"\" vote would be offered. Labour and some Tories had pushed for MPs to have a decisive say on the final terms, but the 326 to 293 vote means the bill remains unchanged. MPs are still debating other elements of the draft legislation, which will authorise the prime minister to formally begin Brexit negotiations under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. Theresa May has already promised Parliament will get a say on the final deal, but critics, including some Conservatives, said they wanted more than the \"\"take it or leave it\"\" vote being offered. Any possibility of a Conservative rebellion appeared to be halted by comments from Brexit Minister David Jones. Mr Jones said MPs would get a say on the final draft Brexit agreement before it was voted upon by the European Parliament. \"\"This will be a meaningful vote,\"\" he told MPs. \"\"It will be the choice of leaving the EU with a negotiated deal or not.\"\" However, some MPs questioned whether any concessions had in fact been offered. Asked what would happen if Parliament rejected the Brexit deal or if there was no agreement with the EU to vote upon, Mr Jones said that in each scenario the UK would still leave the EU but \"\"fall back on other arrangements\"\". This would effectively see the UK default to World Trade Organization trade rules, involving potential tariffs on exports and imports. Opponents of Brexit have said this would cause real damage to British business, but supporters say the UK can live with the consequences if necessary as the UK would then be free to negotiate its own trade arrangements. Mr Jones said the government wanted to avoid a situation in which ministers were sent back to the negotiating table to hammer out a better deal. This, he said, would be hard given the two-year limit for talks and would also be \"\"the surest way of undermining our negotiating position and delivering a worse deal\"\". Former chancellor Ken Clarke - the only Tory to vote against kickstarting the Brexit process last week - said Parliament should have the opportunity to shape the final deal, while former SNP leader Alex Salmond said MPs should have a genuine choice without the \"\"Sword of Damocles\"\" hanging over them. Labour's Chuka Umunna said the choice facing MPs was \"\"unacceptable\"\", Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg described it as a \"\"symbolic handout\"\" while Green Party leader Caroline Lucas said MPs were being \"\"duped\"\". But Labour's font bench claimed the move as a \"\"significant victory\"\" in response to its repeated demands for a \"\"meaningful\"\" vote at the end of the two-year negotiation process. The party withdrew its proposed amendment before Mr Leslie's was defeated. MPs, who overwhelmingly backed the European Union Bill last Wednesday, are currently in the middle of three further days of more detailed debate, with the Commons looking at amendments proposed by MPs. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who backed the Remain side in last year's EU referendum, has ordered his MPs to support the government's bill, whether his party's amendments are accepted or not. If passed by Parliament - with the House of Lords due to scrutinise it after the Commons - the bill would allow Prime Minister Theresa May to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, getting divorce talks with the EU under way. Mr Corbyn argues that it would be undemocratic to ignore the will of the people, as expressed in last June's EU referendum. Shadow business secretary Clive Lewis has vowed to oppose the bill unless Labour amendments are passed in the Commons. Frontbench members of parties are generally expected to resign from their post if they ignore a three-line whip.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n72,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38889941,Speaker John Bercow defends his comments on Donald Trump,Commons Speaker John Bercow has defended voicing his opposition to Donald Trump addressing Parliament.,\"Commons Speaker John Bercow has defended voicing his opposition to Donald Trump addressing Parliament. His comments, including accusing the US president of \"\"racism and sexism\"\", had been made \"\"honestly and honourably\"\" and were within his remit, he told MPs. Several Conservatives have criticised the Speaker, one saying his career could be in \"\"jeopardy\"\" and another that he had damaged the national interest. Downing Street called his comments \"\"a matter for Parliament\"\". The US president has accepted an invitation from the Queen for a state visit to the UK, which can include an address to both Houses of Parliament, later this year. However, responding to a point of order in the Commons on Monday, Mr Bercow said he was opposed to Mr Trump speaking to MPs and peers - as some other international leaders have done. He said it was \"\"not an automatic right\"\", but an \"\"earned honour\"\", to applause from Labour and SNP MPs. Questioned in the Commons on Tuesday about his remarks, he replied: \"\"The House has always understood that the chair has a role in these matters.\"\" He added: \"\"I was honestly and honourably seeking to discharge my responsibilities to the House.\"\" Mr Bercow said it was time \"\"to move on to other matters\"\". Conservative MP Sir Gerald Howarth said there had been a \"\"rather subdued aspect\"\" among his party's MPs when Mr Bercow had spoken. He added: \"\"I do hope that you will help us to ensure that we can have full confidence in your impartiality, because that's the way for the House to proceed.\"\" The \"\"relationship between the United Kingdom and United States is an extremely important one\"\", Sir Gerald also said. However, Labour MP Paul Flynn said the Commons owed Mr Bercow \"\"a debt of gratitude for deciding that in this case such an invitation should not be supported by this House.\"\" And SNP MP Alex Salmond, who had several run-ins with Mr Trump when he was Scottish First Minister, told Mr Bercow: \"\"If ever a statement deserved clapping, then yours did yesterday.\"\" Mr Bercow is one of three \"\"key holders\"\" to Westminster Hall - where Mr Trump's predecessor Barack Obama spoke in 2011 - along with the Speaker of the House of Lords, Lord Fowler, and the Lord Great Chamberlain, a hereditary peer in charge of certain parts of the Palace of Westminster. All three must agree in order for an address to take place there. Lord Fowler addressed peers on Tuesday, saying Mr Bercow had not informed him ahead of voicing his opinion on Mr Trump, adding that Mr Bercow had told him he was \"\"genuinely sorry\"\" for this. He added: \"\"I don't intend to argue the case for or against Mr Trump's visit. That's not my role as Speaker. \"\"But let me say I have spent the last 30 years campaigning against discrimination, particularly against LGBT people and people with HIV/Aids.\"\" As speaker, Mr Bercow is the highest authority of the House of Commons and must remain politically impartial. Several senior Conservatives have been highly critical of his comments. One unnamed Tory MP and former cabinet member told the BBC he \"\"must be close to standing down\"\" as Speaker, while another said his remarks had gone \"\"way beyond what is acceptable\"\". Conservative MP Nadine Dorries said: \"\"When he loses support for what was a very partisan moment I think his position will become more and more in jeopardy.\"\" Crispin Blunt, the Conservative MP who chairs the Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee, said Mr Bercow was going to have to deal with \"\"the consequences\"\" of his comments. He added that the Speaker, \"\"who's meant to referee all of this, should keep himself above that\"\". What is a state visit? Former Culture Secretary John Whittingdale told Sky News: \"\"It was a performance, it was John Bercow playing to the gallery and I think it was damaging to the national interest. I think it is regrettable that he did it.\"\" Fellow Conservative Nadhim Zahawi, who has been critical of Mr Trump's travel ban on nationals from seven mainly Muslim countries, said the Speaker prided himself on his neutrality and to become the story was \"\"a bad place to be\"\". He said Mr Bercow had opened himself up to accusations of hypocrisy after allowing other controversial leaders, like the Chinese president, to speak, and urged him to explain his thinking to MPs. Meanwhile, Joe Wilson, a Congressman for Mr Trump's republican Party, told the BBC's Newsnight programme Mr Bercow's interjection had been \"\"very disappointing\"\". \"\"If ever in recent years there's been a more pro-British president of the United States, it's Donald Trump,\"\" he said. Former UKIP leader Nigel Farage said Mr Bercow had \"\"abused his position\"\" and that to have expressed his opinions in the way he did \"\"devalues this great office\"\". But Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who has called for the state visit to be postponed, welcomed the intervention, while Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron said Mr Trump was \"\"not welcome\"\". A petition to withdraw the invitation to the US president - and another one backing the visit - will be debated by MPs later this month. No date for Mr Trump's visit has been announced.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n73,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38899472,RAF Typhoon jets escort Pakistan plane to Stansted,RAF fighter jets have been scrambled to divert a Pakistan International Airlines plane to Stansted Airport.,\"RAF fighter jets have been scrambled to divert a Pakistan International Airlines plane to Stansted Airport. Stansted said the flight from Lahore to Heathrow had landed in Essex at 14:50 GMT after being escorted by Typhoons. Essex Police said the diversion had been due to reports of a disruptive passenger and was \"\"not believed to be a hijack situation or terror matter\"\". In an unrelated matter, a passenger due to be arrested by police on arrival at Heathrow was held at Stansted instead. The Met said the 52-year-old had been arrested on suspicion of committing fraud offences in the UK and was being transferred to a London police station. The Airbus A330 was held away from the airport after its diversion and Pakistan International Airlines said passengers were provided with \"\"surface transport\"\" to London. Stansted remained open as usual throughout the incident. An Essex police spokesman said: \"\"An aircraft was diverted to Stansted Airport at around 3pm this afternoon while over UK airspace en route to Heathrow Airport due to reports of a disruptive passenger on board. \"\"The plane is currently at the airport and officers are making enquiries. There is no disruption to the ongoing operation of Stansted Airport.\"\" However, Pakistan International Airlines said in a statement that UK authorities had received \"\"some vague security threat through an anonymous phone call\"\" regarding the flight. Pakistan's Civil Aviation Authority tweeted: \"\"#PIA flight bound for Heathrow from Lahore has been diverted to #Stansted due to reasons aboard the aircraft.\"\" The RAF confirmed that Quick Reaction Alert Typhoon aircraft had been scrambled from RAF Coningsby, in Lincolnshire. Stansted is a designated airport for dealing with hijacks and major security alerts. Such incidents are dealt with in a remote part of the airfield to the north-west of the terminal building. Are you on board the flight? Get in touch by emailing haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk. Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also contact us in the following ways:\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n74,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-38893753,Accused Ian Stewart says 'never stopped loving' author Helen Bailey,\"The man accused of murdering children's author Helen Bailey has told a court he \"\"never stopped loving\"\" her.\",\"The man accused of murdering children's author Helen Bailey has told a court he \"\"never stopped loving\"\" her. Ian Stewart, 56, denies murdering his fiancee and dumping her body in order to inherit her money. Mr Stewart broke down in tears as he told jurors there was \"\"no way\"\" he was responsible for killing the Electra Brown writer. St Albans Crown Court heard he sent her texts while she was missing, begging her to return. Mr Stewart is accused of drugging and probably suffocating his bride-to-be as part of a plot to acquire her riches. He was repeatedly overcome by emotion as he recalled the early days of their relationship, saying: \"\"We totally clicked and worked together as a couple.\"\" The 51-year-old writer was last seen on 11 April and reported missing by Mr Stewart on 15 April. She was found beneath the garage, together with that of her dachshund Boris, on 15 July. Mr Stewart denied knowing she had died until her body was found in a cesspit, Simon Russell Flint, defending, asked him: \"\"Did you have any knowledge of her death until you heard her body had been found?\"\" \"\"No,\"\" he replied. When it was suggested he had killed his fiancee, he responded: \"\"No way\"\". The former software engineer said he first met Ms Bailey on a Facebook group for widowers and widows following the death of his wife in 2010. The pair started out comforting each other over their losses - Ms Bailey's first husband drowned in 2011 - but eventually began a relationship. \"\"We totally clicked and worked together as a couple,\"\" he told the court. \"\"I had fallen in love with her quite quickly but she warned me once to never say the L word. But then I went to hug her and I said it and she replied instantly, 'I love you too'. \"\"I never stopped loving her.\"\" The prosecution alleges Mr Stewart murdered Northumberland-born Ms Bailey for her money. She was worth more than ?3.3m at the time of her death, the court heard. They also allege he disposed of her phone. Mr Stewart, of Baldock Road, Royston, also denies preventing a lawful burial, fraud and three counts of perverting the course of justice. The trial continues.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n75,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38897507,Education nominee Betsy DeVos wins Senate confirmation vote,\"The US Senate has confirmed President Donald Trump's controversial nominee for education secretary, Betsy DeVos, by the slenderest possible margin.\",\"The US Senate has confirmed President Donald Trump's controversial nominee for education secretary, Betsy DeVos, by the slenderest possible margin. US Vice-President Mike Pence cast the tie-breaking vote to secure her cabinet role, splitting the chamber 50-50. It was the first time ever that a vice-president has interceded in such a way for a cabinet secretary. Mrs DeVos, a billionaire who has no experience with public schools, faced a rocky confirmation hearing last month. Moments after voting ended, she tweeted: \"\"I appreciate the Senate's diligence & am honored to serve as @usedgov Secretary. \"\"Let's improve options & outcomes for all US students.\"\" Senate Democrats staged a 24-hour debate into Tuesday to hold up her confirmation. They hoped their all-night speaking marathon would pressure more Republican senators to oppose the nomination, but their efforts were in vain. Mr Pence was also the first vice-president to cast a deciding vote in the Senate since 2008, when Dick Cheney voted on a tax adjustment plan. No Democrats voted in favour of Mrs DeVos. Two Republican senators stood by their plan to oppose her confirmation, leaving the Senate in a deadlock. In the end Donald Trump is going to get the team he wants. Betsy DeVos's education secretary nomination looked a bit shaky for a while, but no Republican senator was willing to be the third \"\"no\"\" vote that would have sunk her. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson's ties to Russia made some conservatives uneasy, and prompted sharp questioning from Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, but the former oil magnate's party closed ranks behind him. The only real question mark left is labour secretary nominee Andrew Puzdner, whose confirmation hearings have been postponed four times amid reports that he has not fully disentangled himself from his sprawling fast-food business empire. If he withdraws, however, it will be quietly, before a confrontation with Democrats heats up. Democrats always faced an uphill battle in bringing down any of Mr Trump's cabinet nominees, given the mathematical reality of being in the Senate minority. Republicans were loath to deal an early, embarrassing setback to the new president, possibly earning his long-term enmity. The fight over Mrs DeVos and other nominees has engaged the Democratic base, however. Now the question is whether they will stay engaged in the months and years ahead - or if this initial surge of activism will recede over time. Critics say Mrs DeVos, who advocates for charter schools, is not qualified to run the Department of Education. She faced intense scrutiny before a Senate committee in January, when she made headlines for noting that a Wyoming school might need a gun to defend against grizzly bears. Labour unions, rights groups and teaching organisations have also spoken out against her nomination. Groups including the American Federation of Teachers and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights held protests against Mrs DeVos outside of Congress on Monday evening. The 59-year-old is a wealthy Republican Party donor and a former Michigan Republican Party chairwoman who has long campaigned for education reform in the state. Her husband Dick DeVos was a chief executive of the beauty and nutrition giant Amway and her brother is Erik Prince, the founder of the controversial private security company Blackwater. She is among several of Mr Trump's cabinet picks whom Democrats have been trying to block from being approved. Democrats said in January they would target eight of Mr Trump's nominees based on their lack of qualifications and policy positions. Before Mrs DeVos' approval, just six of Mr Trump's cabinet picks had been confirmed, compared with former President Barack Obama's 12 cabinet secretaries at this point in 2009 and 16 of George W Bush's in 2001, according to the Washington Post. The slowed process is also partly due to the fact that some of Mr Trump's picks have not completed a lengthy vetting process typically required of Cabinet candidates, which helps identify potential conflicts of interest. Hundreds of staff positions also remain vacant as the fate of 15 of Trump administration's nominees hangs in the balance.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n76,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38899343,Barack Obama goes kitesurfing with Richard Branson,,Former US President Barack Obama has enjoyed a spot of kitesurfing with Richard Branson.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n77,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38884601,More affordable housing promised in White Paper,\"The government has vowed to build more affordable houses and help people buy and rent, after admitting the current market is \"\"broken\"\".\",\"The government has vowed to build more affordable houses and help people buy and rent, after admitting the current market is \"\"broken\"\". The new housing strategy for England includes giving councils powers to pressurise developers to start building on land they own. Ministers also pledged to make renting more \"\"family-friendly\"\" with longer tenancies offered. Labour called the measures announced \"\"feeble beyond belief\"\". The government says at least 250,000 new homes are needed each year to keep pace with demand and councils and developers need to \"\"get real\"\" to the scale of the challenge. Mr Javid set out the details of the housing White Paper in a statement to MPs, with measures including: So-called starter homes, championed by former Prime Minister David Cameron, will be aimed at \"\"households that need them most\"\", those with combined incomes of less than ?80,000, or ?90,000 in London. Starter homes are new homes built for first-time buyers between 23 and 40 years old and sold at least 20% below market value. The maximum price after the discount has been applied is ?250,000 outside London and ?450,000 in the capital. Under the new proposals, starter home buyers will need a mortgage, \"\"to stop cash buyers\"\", and some or all of the discount will have to be repaid if the property is resold within 15 years, \"\"to reduce the risk of speculation\"\". A proposal that 20% of all larger developments had to be starter homes is to be dropped and replaced with a \"\"clear expectation\"\" that at least 10% of developments will be \"\"affordable home ownership units\"\". The 22-year-olds who bought their own home (without mum and dad's help) Ruby Willard, a recruitment consultant, and engineer Sam Bardell bought a ?182,200 two-bedroom terraced house in Havant, Hampshire, last year. They took advantage of the government's Help to Buy Isa, but to save for the ?18,000 deposit, it was a case of being \"\"quite tight\"\", she says. \"\"When we decided we were going to buy, I thought I'm not going to spend money elsewhere when I don't need to... \"\"I get commission and Sam gets overtime so we probably earn ?55,000 overall, which meant we were in a position we could borrow maybe more than people on minimum wage.\"\" Read how other 20-somethings managed to do it Mr Javid said: \"\"Walk down your local high street today and there's one sight you're almost certain to see: young people, faces pressed against the estate agent's window, trying and failing to find a home they can afford. \"\"With prices continuing to skyrocket, if we don't act now, a whole generation could be left behind. We need to do better, and that means tackling the failures at every point in the system. \"\"The housing market in this country is broken and the solution means building many more houses in the places that people want to live.\"\" Mr Javid admitted there was \"\"no one single magic bullet\"\" and there had to be a \"\"proper conversation about housing need\"\". Ministers have admitted the government is behind schedule in its efforts to build one million new homes in England by 2020. For Labour, shadow housing minister John Healey said: \"\"We hoped for better and we needed better. His disappointment will desperately disappoint millions of people struggling to cope with a housing crisis. It was feeble beyond belief.\"\" He added: \"\"We were promised a White Paper; we are presented with a white flag.\"\" The Lib Dems criticised the \"\"utterly vacuous\"\" proposals for not mentioning the government's stated aim of a million new homes by 2020, a target ministers have insisted they are still aiming for. BBC home editor Mark Easton This government seems to speak with two voices on housing: the communities department wants to shift the balance of power firmly towards new development in places people want to live, but Number 10 and some influential Tory backbenchers are sympathetic to the passionate concerns of those who wish to protect the countryside and particularly the green belt. The real question that lies behind all the rhetoric and policy bullet-points is whether the balance of power between development and local opposition has fundamentally changed. Ministers now accept England needs 250,000 new homes every year, they have described the housing market as \"\"broken\"\" and they agree that radical change is the only way to mend it. But many have yet to be convinced that this White Paper amounts to a \"\"realistic plan\"\" to achieve that. Read more from Mark Former Conservative housing minister Grant Shapps told the BBC's Daily Politics the problem would not be solved simply \"\"by slotting in a few more homes in converted former industrial sites\"\". He added: \"\"Housing ministers over the years have come out with documents or bills, and the truth is none of them are going to make much difference - and I don't suppose this will make that much difference either. \"\"The reason is this - unless you build literally two, three, million more homes then you're not going to solve the problem.\"\" The Local Government Association said the White Paper contained \"\"some encouraging signs\"\" on increasing housing supply and affordability. It welcomed the new \"\"flexibility\"\" around starter homes and called for new power and funding to allow councils to build affordable homes directly. The Campaign to Protect Rural England welcomed what it said was a focus on addressing current failings rather than \"\"meddling\"\" with the planning system. \"\"We are pleased that ministers have recognised that weakening the Green Belt is unnecessary,\"\" said chief executive Shaun Spiers. \"\"But with 360,000 houses already proposed for Green Belt land the government needs to do much more to uphold national policy and stop councils releasing it for development.\"\" Daniel Bentley, editorial director at the think tank Civitas, said: \"\"The problem is not sites with planning permission standing idle, except in limited circumstances. \"\"It is with sites that are being developed, but too slowly to get ahead of demand and make any difference to the affordability of housing.\"\" Graeme Brown, interim chief executive of the homelessness charity Shelter, said: \"\"The White Paper poses the right questions. What we need now is quick and bold action that helps people in need of a decent home tomorrow, not in 10 years.\"\" Where can I afford to live? Do you feel the need to get on the housing ladder or are you happy to rent? Or are you looking to downsize after living in your family home for several years? Tell us your experiences by emailing haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk You can also contact us in the following ways:\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n78,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-38893253,Mia Ayliffe-Chung: Backpacker's mum slams Trump 'terror' claim,\"The mother of a backpacker who was stabbed to death in Australia has criticised the White House for labelling her death a \"\"terror attack\"\".\",\"The mother of a backpacker who was stabbed to death in Australia has criticised the White House for labelling her death a \"\"terror attack\"\". Mia Ayliffe-Chung, 20, who was killed at a hostel in Queensland in August, did not die as a result of terrorism, police have said. Despite this, her death was included on a list of 78 alleged \"\"terror\"\" attacks released by the Trump administration. Rosie Ayliffe said Mia's death must not be used to persecute innocent people. How the BBC covered Trump's list of 'under-reported' terror attacks The White House released the list of attacks to back up Mr Trump's claim the media was \"\"under-reporting\"\" attacks committed or inspired by the Islamic State group. The list included the Bataclan theatre attack in Paris, the shootings in Sousse, Tunisia, which killed 30 British tourists, and Ms Ayliffe-Chung's murder. The 20 year old, from Wirksworth, died from multiple stab wounds, during the attack at Home Hill, near Townsville. Australian police have ruled out the possibility her death - which was widely reported by media in the UK and abroad - was the result of a terror attack. Mr Trump's comments come amid a legal bid by his administration to restore a travel ban on visitors and refugees from seven predominantly Muslim countries. In an open letter to the president, Mrs Ayliffe said: \"\"Treating immigrants as disposable commodities and disregarding their safety causes deaths throughout our so-called civilised world.\"\" French national Smail Ayad, 29, has been charged with the murder of Ms Ayliffe-Chung and that of Thomas Jackson, 30, from Cheshire, who was also stabbed and later died in hospital. Mrs Ayliffe added: \"\"The possibility of Mia and Tom's deaths being consequent to an Islamic terror attack was discounted in the early stages of the police investigation. \"\"This vilification of whole nation states and their people based on religion is a terrifying reminder of the horror that can ensue when we allow ourselves to be led by ignorant people into darkness and hatred.\"\" Mr Trump has insisted \"\"the threat from radical Islamic terrorism is very real\"\" and has vowed to have the travel ban reinstated.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n79,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-38891663,Surrey couple's divorce payments raised after 15 years,\"The ex-husband of a woman who was awarded ?230,000 on her divorce has been told by the Court of Appeal he must support her for life.\",\"The ex-husband of a woman who was awarded ?230,000 on her divorce has been told by the Court of Appeal he must support her for life. Maria Mills, 51, was originally awarded ?1,100 a month from 50-year-old Graham Mills after 13 years of marriage. Appeal Court judges also ruled he should pay her ?1,441 per month as she is \"\"unable to meet her basic needs\"\". Mr Mills had argued he should not have to \"\"pick up the tab\"\" 15 years after the couple split. Lord Justice Longmore and Sir Ernest Ryder heard the couple married in 1988, had a now-grown-up son, separated in 2001 and divorced in 2002. Mr Mills, a surveyor, had agreed to give Mrs Mills, a former Notting Hill estate agent, almost all their \"\"liquid capital\"\" when they divorced, while he kept his business. His barrister, Philip Cayford, told the court Mr Mills, who now lives in Guildford, had since remarried and wanted to \"\"move on\"\" with his life. The court heard Mrs Mills had made some \"\"unwise\"\" property investments, moving from a house in Weybridge to a flat in Wimbledon, and then to an apartment in a luxury Victorian mansion block in Battersea. After selling the Battersea flat she was left \"\"without any of the capital\"\", the court was told, and was now living in a rented home in Weybridge. Mrs Mills works for two days per week as a beauty therapist, the court was told. Frank Feehan, representing Mrs Mills, said she had been left with the responsibility for the couple's young child and without enough money to buy a house that she considered \"\"good enough\"\". He said his client was \"\"unable to meet her basic needs\"\". In the ruling, Sir Ernest said Mr Mills had the ability to make the increased maintenance \"\"until a further order of the court\"\".\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n80,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38894023,\"Tax burden to be highest in 30 years, says think tank\",\"Tax is set to rise as a share of the UK's income to its highest level since 1986, according to a think tank.\",\"Tax is set to rise as a share of the UK's income to its highest level since 1986, according to a think tank. Higher income from taxes and relatively low growth will combine to create this effect, according to the the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Austerity will continue into the 2020s, after Chancellor Philip Hammond's decision to scrap a target of balancing the nation's books, it said. The Treasury said it was committed to repairing Britain's finances. Forecasts by Oxford Economics, which contributed to the report, estimate the UK economy will grow by 1.6% in 2017. In 2018, growth in gross domestic product will slow to 1.3%, Oxford Economics said. Growth is expected to be dulled as a result of inflation prompted by the decline of the value of the pound after the EU referendum. While a weaker pound is likely to improve the performance of manufacturers and exporters, higher costs for consumers will more than erase this gain, said the report. Ahmed: Public finances and the shadow of Osborne \"\"Though the UK economy has continued to achieve solid growth, it has been almost entirely reliant on the consumer,\"\" said Andrew Goodwin, lead UK Economist at Oxford Economics and co-author of part of the report. \"\"With spending power set to come under significant pressure from higher inflation and the welfare squeeze, the consumer will not be able to keep contributing more than its fair share. Exports should be a bright spot, but overall a slowdown in GDP growth appears likely.\"\" The UK's economy could be 3% smaller by 2030 than if Britain had voted Remain, according to forecasts in the IFS's annual Green Budget. This annual analysis, ahead of next month's Budget, says spending on health, social care and benefits for sick or disabled people represents a particular risk to the public finances because it accounts for almost one third of government expenditure. The report confirms that the period between 2009 and 2014 saw the slowest rate of growth in health spending in England since the mid-1950s. And it argues that health budgets by the end of this decade will be over a billion pounds less than what is needed to cope with England's growing and ageing population, regardless of what are likely to be significant rises in demand for NHS care. In a statement, the Treasury said: \"\"The government is committed to repairing the public finances and living within our means so that we can build an economy that works for all. \"\"That has required some difficult decisions on spending, but we are determined to deliver efficient public services which provide maximum value for every pound of taxpayers' money.\"\" Spending on public services dropped by 10% since 2010, the report said, after adjusting the figures for inflation. To meet his target of eliminating the deficit during the next parliament, which is from 2020 to 2025, Mr Hammond will probably have to find a further ?34bn in tax rises and spending cuts, extending austerity. The report said ?17bn of tax rises could be needed to contribute to closing the gap for government between outgoings and income.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n81,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-38892464,Manchester tram racist abuse man jailed,A man who admitted racially abusing a US army veteran on a Manchester tram with two other males has been jailed.,\"A man who admitted racially abusing a US army veteran on a Manchester tram with two other males has been jailed. Juan Jasso was verbally attacked and had beer thrown at him for tackling the trio for using foul language on the Metrolink tram on 28 June. Jobless Robert Molloy, 20, of no fixed address, was jailed for six months for abusing Mr Jasso and two other men. Sentencing of Aaron Cauchi, 19, was adjourned over illness while a boy, 16, was given a six-month referral order. The court heard the trio had been drinking all night when they went on a \"\"rampage\"\" and abused Mr Jasso and two other people in separate incidents. Their abuse of Mr Jasso was filmed by a passenger and widely viewed. Trouble began at 07:45 BST when a passenger heard \"\"disgusting, vile abuse\"\" on the tram packed with mothers with babies, schoolchildren and commuters, the court heard. Joseph O'Connor, prosecuting, told the court the trio then got off the tram and surrounded another man, \"\"with their chests stuck out and shoulders back, striking him with a cigarette lighter to intimidate him\"\". Shortly afterwards another man was cycling to work when he passed the trio and one or more spat at him, the court heard. Molloy pleaded guilty to racially aggravated assault, common assault and using threatening words or behaviour. Jailing Molloy, chair of the bench Michael Evans told him: \"\"Hopefully on your release from prison a lesson will be learned and you will be able to make a positive contribution and treat people with respect.\"\" Molloy was also banned from using Greater Manchester trams for two years. Cauchi, of Spa Crescent, Little Hulton, Salford, who admitted to using threatening words or behaviour to Mr Jasso and another man and an assault on a third man, was taken from the court in an ambulance to hospital after complaining of stomach pains. It is not known when he will be sentenced. The youth, who cannot be named for legal reasons, received a six-month referral on Monday. He was charged with using threatening words or behaviour and common assault.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n82,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-38891475,Strippers who blackmailed Danny Cipriani sentenced,\"Two strippers who admitted blackmailing rugby player Danny Cipriani, after one of them aborted his child, have received suspended sentences.\",\"Two strippers who admitted blackmailing rugby player Danny Cipriani, after one of them aborted his child, have received suspended sentences. Lisa Murphy, 39, had a termination in the summer of 2015 after a relationship with Cipriani, 29, the court heard. But when she was forced to miss work, due to complications, she asked him for money, which he did not pay. Murphy enlisted her colleague, Violet Smith, 29, for help and they threatened to go to the papers with the story. Murphy from Wootton, Northampton, and Smith of Slough, Berkshire, were handed a 22-month sentence suspended for two years at Kingston Crown Court. The Wasps fly-half - who was playing for Sale Sharks at the time - had offered to pay for the abortion but Murphy refused, insisting she could have the procedure for free on the NHS, the court heard previously. But when she experienced a health scare following the procedure and was unable to work, she became \"\"increasingly frustrated, increasingly upset, and increasingly desperate\"\", her lawyer, Hannah Duncan, said. Judge Peter Lodder noted while Cipriani had \"\"repeatedly\"\" offered to help, he \"\"did not act according to his earlier promises\"\". He said: \"\"Certainly he does not appear to have fully appreciated the extent of your difficulties\"\". Judge Lodder said Murphy was \"\"feeling increasingly desperate and was continuing to suffer from the emotional consequences of her condition\"\". Nigel Mitchell, representing Smith, said the pair had been offered ?18,000 for their story by The Sun but intended to resolve the situation with the former England player and continued to message him between September and October 2015. He said: \"\"Ms Smith's intention was to try and resolve matters. Like her co-defendant, not for a second did she consider her action and behaviour was amounting to a criminal offence.\"\" Judge Lodder added that Smith was \"\"motivated by concern\"\" for her friend. \"\"It is against that background that the threat to go to the newspapers was made,\"\" he told the court. Describing how both defendants had since lost their jobs, he commented: \"\"It is an understatement to say that nobody has come out of this episode well.\"\" \",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n83,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-38894409,Kyra Poh: The 14-year-old who is the 'world's fastest flyer',,\"Fourteen-year-old indoor skydiver Kyra Poh was crowned the \"\"world's fastest flyer\"\" in one of the sport's biggest competitions, the Wind Games. Riding winds as fast as 230km/h (143mph), Kyra flips and whirls around the arena, a small blur of white spandex in a giant vertical wind tunnel.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n84,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38900223,Want to buy a house? Under 25? Watch this,,\"Owning a home by the age of 25 has become an unobtainable dream for many over the last two decades. Soaring property prices mean just one in five 25-year-olds own a property, compared to nearly half two decades ago, according to one recent study.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n85,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38899342,Sean Spicer: 'I don't think the President owns a bathrobe',,\"The New York Times has referred to President Trump wearing a bathrobe and his press secretary Sean Spicer has come out to refute that, calling it 'fake news'. Social media, meanwhile, has been flooded with photos of a younger Mr Trump clad in a robe.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n86,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-38892452,Comedian says Simon Cowell 'furious' about BGT prank,,\"The comedian who pretended to be a \"\"rapping rabbi\"\" on Britain's Got Talent has told 5 live he thought Simon Cowell would be amused by his stunt. Simon Brodkin told 5 live's Afternoon Edition: \"\"I thought Simon Cowell would have a sense of humour about it and would find the whole thing funny\"\", but he has been told he is \"\"pretty furious\"\" about the prank. Brodkin, known for his comedy character Lee Nelson, has carried out similar stunts on President Trump, Sir Phillip Green and Sepp Blatter. Brodkin reveals how he does his stunts in a Channel 4 documentary called Britain's Greatest Hoaxer.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n87,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-38881351,The European village where Muslims and gays are unwelcome,,\"Muslim dress and \"\"Homosexual propaganda\"\"?have been banned in a remote village in southern Hungary. Its mayor, Laszlo Toroczkai, says that while he would welcome people from Western Europe to live in the area, \"\"we wouldn't like to attract Muslims to the village\"\". Lesley Ashmall reports for the Victoria Derbyshire programme. The Victoria Derbyshire programme is broadcast on weekdays between 09:00 and 11:00 on BBC Two and the BBC News channel.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n88,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38890907,'Don't let parents have social media',,\"Research commissioned by Newsround has found that 10-12 year-olds feel worried and pressured about looking good in the photos they share on social media. The majority take at least four selfies before choosing one to share, and three quarters say they edit photos before posting them. But what's shaping their attitudes?\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n89,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38898641,How do you reintroduce a herd of bison into the wild?,,\"A herd of plains bison have been successfully reintroduced to Canada's oldest national park, more than 100 years after they were nearly hunted out of existence.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n90,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38896276,A look inside Number 10 at Theresa May's top team,,\"Since Theresa May's team moved into Downing Street last July, pretty much all of her predecessor's advisers were given their marching orders. So who is in her new team? As part of the Daily Politics series Westminster Village, reporter Mark Lobel takes a look inside that famous door. For rights reasons, this film is not available outside the UK. More: Follow @daily_politics on Twitter and like us on Facebook and watch a recent clip and watch full programmes on iPlayer\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n91,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38890905,Will robots replace workers by 2030?,,\"According to some predictions, robots will go on to replace people in a third of UK jobs by 2030. So should we be worried by the rise of the machines? BBC Breakfast's Tim Muffet reports.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n92,2017/2/6,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/38877149,Southern rail: Could drivers reject deal?,\"\"\"It's two weeks of my life I'll never get back. But we finally got there.\"\"\",\"\"\"It's two weeks of my life I'll never get back. But we finally got there.\"\" Bizarrely, the bosses of both sides said exactly the same thing to me when I interviewed them last week, moments after they'd announced a deal to resolve the worst of the Southern rail strikes. Mick Whelan from Aslef and Nick Brown from GTR (Southern's parent company) looked shattered but pleased with their agreement. But was everyone cracking the champagne corks too soon? Aslef's 1,000 or so drivers still need to vote on the deal and there are possible signs that they might just kick it out. I spoke to a couple of Southern's train drivers over the weekend and they were not happy. One wrote this to me: \"\"GTR, 'We will agree to carry on doing exactly what we want.' Aslef, 'OK, we'll agree to that then.'\"\" He went on: \"\"I'm very much of the opinion it will be a resounding 'no' vote (when members vote). The feeling is the union has sold us out.\"\" Another driver also said that everyone he'd spoken to will vote no to the deal, again saying that they felt let down and that the company had got away with it. He even suggested that some of his colleagues might leave Aslef and join the RMT union instead. The RMT is still in dispute with Southern over the same issue and was vitriolic about the deal over the weekend. True, this is just the opinion of two drivers who've been chatting to their colleagues. But it suggests some anger at what they are being asked to sign up to. I understand that there is going to be a meeting in Brighton on Tuesday, where Aslef reps will try to sell the deal to members. It's bound to be frosty. All of this doesn't necessarily mean that Aslef's drivers will vote against the agreement. When I interviewed Mick Whelan last week he told me: \"\"I'm not in the habit of making deals that my members don't like.\"\" Then there are the London members who already use driver-only-operated trains and may not feel as strongly over this crunch issue. Plus, Aslef doesn't pay members during industrial action, and the double whammy of losing strike-day pay plus overtime may be enough to cut their appetite for a fight. If the drivers do vote against the deal though, it's hard to see where the next breakthrough in this dispute might come. If two weeks of \"\"incredibly intense\"\" negotiation at the TUC can't solve it, what can? Presumably, Aslef would be forced to call more crippling strikes, which would also turn up the heat on the government to take over either part or all of this troublesome, complex behemoth of a franchise. I can tell you, ministers are not keen to seize control. Meanwhile, the RMT union, which represents the guards/conductors, has vowed to keep fighting. Their strikes don't have the same impact as Aslef's, with the last one only knocking out around 30% of services. But even that might change if their angry Aslef colleagues decide not to cross picket lines. Anyway, we should know all on 16 February when the ballot result comes back. The worst may not be over for beleaguered Southern passengers.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n93,2017/2/6,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38650976,Why the falling cost of light matters,\"Back in the mid-1990s, an economist called William Nordhaus conducted a series of simple experiments with light.\",\"Back in the mid-1990s, an economist called William Nordhaus conducted a series of simple experiments with light. First, he used a prehistoric technology: he lit a wood fire. But Prof Nordhaus also had a piece of hi-tech equipment with him - a Minolta light meter. He burned 20lb (9kg) of wood, kept track of how long it burned for and carefully recorded the dim, flickering firelight with his meter. Next, he bought a Roman oil lamp, fitted it with a wick, and filled it with cold-pressed sesame oil. He lit the lamp and watched the oil burn down, again using the light meter to measure its soft, even glow. Bill Nordhaus's open wood fire had burned for just three hours on 9kg of wood. But a mere eggcup of oil burned all day, and more brightly and controllably. Why did he do this? He wanted to understand the economic significance of the light bulb. But Prof Nordhaus also wanted to illuminate a difficult issue for economists: how to keep track of inflation, the changing cost of goods and services. 50 Things That Made the Modern Economy highlights the inventions, ideas and innovations that helped create the economic world. It is broadcast on the BBC World Service. You can find more information about the programme's sources and listen online or subscribe to the programme podcast. To see why this is difficult, consider the price of travelling from - say - Lisbon in Portugal to Luanda in Angola. When that journey was first made, by Portuguese explorers, it would have been an epic expedition, possibly taking months. Later, by steam ship, it would have taken a few days; then, by plane, a few hours. An economic historian could start by tracking the price of passage on the ship, but once an air route has opened up, which price do you look at? Maybe you simply switch to the airline ticket price once more people start flying than sailing. But flying is a different service - faster, more convenient. If more travellers are willing to pay twice as much to fly, it hardly makes sense for inflation statistics to record that the cost of the journey has suddenly doubled. It was to raise this question over the way we measure inflation that Bill Nordhaus started fooling around with wood fires, oil lamps and light meters. He wanted to unbundle the cost of a single quality that humans have cared deeply about since time immemorial, using the state-of-the-art technology of different ages: illumination. Light is measured in lumens, or lumen-hours. A candle gives off 13 lumens while it burns. A typical modern light bulb is almost 100 times brighter than that. Imagine gathering and chopping wood 10 hours a day for six days. Those 60 hours of work would produce 1,000 lumen hours of light. That is the equivalent of one modern light bulb shining for just 54 minutes, although what you would actually get is many more hours of dim, flickering light instead. Of course, light is not the only reason to burn fires: they also help keep you warm, cook your food and scare off wild animals. If you just needed light and a wood fire was your only option, you might decide to wait until the Sun comes up. Thousands of years ago, better options came along - candles from Egypt and Crete, and oil lamps from Babylon. Their light was steadier and more controllable, but still prohibitively expensive. In a diary entry of May 1743, the president of Harvard University, the Reverend Edward Holyoake, noted that his household had spent two days making 78lb (35kg) of tallow candles. Six months later, he noted: \"\"Candles all gone.\"\" And those were the summer months. The iPhone at 10: How the smartphone became so smart The steel box that changed global trade The hidden strengths of unloved concrete How the barcode changed retailing Nor were these the clean-burning paraffin wax candles we use today. The wealthiest could afford beeswax, but most people - even the Harvard president - used tallow candles, stinking, smoking sticks of animal fat. Making them involved heating up animal fat and dipping and re-dipping wicks into the molten lard. It was pungent and time-consuming work. According to Prof Nordhaus's research, if you set aside one whole week a year to spend 60 hours devoted exclusively to making candles - or earning the money to buy them - that would enable you to burn a single candle for just two hours and 20 minutes every evening. Things improved a little as the 18th and 19th Centuries unfolded. Candles were made of spermaceti - the milk-hued oily gloop harvested from dead sperm whales. American founding father Ben Franklin loved the strong, white light they gave off, and the way they \"\"may be held in the hand, even in hot weather, without softening\"\", and noted that they \"\"last much longer\"\". While the new candles were pleasing, they were also pricey. George Washington calculated that burning a single spermaceti candle for five hours a night all year would cost him ?8, or well over $1,000 (?820) in today's money. A few decades later, gas lamps and kerosene lamps helped to lower costs. They also saved the sperm whale from extinction. But they, too, were basically an expensive hassle. They dripped, smelt and set fire to things. Then something changed. That something was the light bulb. By 1900, one of Thomas Edison's carbon filament bulbs would provide you with 10 days of bright, continuous illumination, 100 times as bright as a candle, for the money you could earn with our 60-hour week of hard labour. By 1920, that same week of labour would pay for more than five months' continuous light from tungsten filament bulbs. By 1990, it was 10 years. A couple of years after that, thanks to compact fluorescent bulbs, it was more than five times longer. The labour that had once produced the equivalent of 54 minutes of quality light now produced 52 years. And modern LED lights continue to get cheaper and cheaper. Switch off a light bulb for an hour and you are saving illumination that would have cost our ancestors all week to create. It would have taken Benjamin Franklin's contemporaries all afternoon. But someone in a rich industrial economy today could earn the money to buy that illumination in a fraction of a second. And of course our light bulbs are clean, safe and controllable - no flicker, pig fat stink or risk of fire. The light bulb has become an icon of innovation. It has transformed our society into one where we can work, read, sew or play whenever we want to, regardless of how dark the night has become. But the price of light alone tells a fascinating story: it has fallen by a factor of 500,000, far faster than official inflation statistics suggest. A thing that was once too precious to use is now too cheap to notice. Tim Harford writes the Financial Times's Undercover Economist column. 50 Things That Made the Modern Economy is broadcast on the BBC World Service. You can find more information about the programme's sources and listen online or subscribe to the programme podcast.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n94,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38899301,Reality Check: Will it be easier to build on green belt?,\"The government has described the housing market as broken, promised more affordable homes and said it would help people to buy and rent.\",\"The claim: The green belt is safe from an increase in development. Reality Check verdict: The rules for developing green belt previously said that it was allowed only in exceptional circumstances. The government has now specified what would count as exceptional circumstances. It is not clear whether the new rules will be more or less strict than just letting councils decide what counted as exceptional circumstances. The government has described the housing market as broken, promised more affordable homes and said it would help people to buy and rent. A big question in discussions of increasing the supply of homes is whether planning regulations will be changed to make it easier to build on green belt land. Green belts were introduced after World War Two to stop cities from sprawling and countryside being spoilt. About 13% of England is now covered. This covers scenic sites open to the public, such as the Chiltern Hills and North Downs, but it also covers a lot of land that has limited public access and may not be particularly beautiful. In the House of Commons, Communities Secretary Sajid Javid said: \"\"In 2015, we promised the British people that the green belt was safe in our hands and that is still the case.\"\" So what has changed? There has been little variation in the amount of green belt land since 1997, although data is not available for every year. The Housing White Paper says the current planning regulations allow building on the green belt only \"\"in exceptional circumstances\"\" but that there is no detail given of what would amount to exceptional circumstances. The government has now specified that before allowing development on green belt land, councils would need to rule out options including: The White Paper also says that councils allowing the boundaries of green belt land to be changed would have to make up for it by improving other bits of green belt. It also asks for suggestions of other things councils should take into account before doing so. Read more from Reality Check\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n95,2017/2/7,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-38877658,The Kylie Minogue vs Kylie Jenner trademark battle,A trademark battle between Kylie Minogue and Kylie Jenner appears to have come to an end.,\"A trademark battle between Kylie Minogue and Kylie Jenner appears to have come to an end. Jenner, who first shot to fame in the US reality TV show Keeping Up With the Kardashians, has been trying to trademark the name Kylie in the US. But she has been blocked by the veteran Australian pop star Minogue, best known for hits such as I Should Be So Lucky and Can't Get You Out Of My Head. After a long and heated battle, the Kylies may have reached a settlement. According to papers filed with the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), in April 2015 Jenner attempted to register the mark \"\"KYLIE\"\" in the US for \"\"advertising services\"\" and \"\"endorsement services\"\". In response, Minogue's team filed their opposition in February 2016, citing possible confusion and \"\"damage\"\" to Minogue's branding. They noted Minogue was an \"\"internationally renowned performing artist, humanitarian and breast cancer activist\"\" who already owns Kylie-related trademarks in the US in several industries, as well as the website www.kylie.com. Jenner, on the other hand, was dismissed as a \"\"secondary reality television personality\"\" who had drawn criticism for her \"\"photographic exhibitionism and controversial posts\"\" on social media. The case was suspended at least twice in 2016 for settlement negotiations. On 19 January Minogue's team withdrew its opposition, which means Jenner's application could proceed. This raises the possibility that they agreed to a settlement. The BBC approached both sides, but Jenner's lawyers declined comment, and Minogue's team did not respond. The USPTO does not comment on individual cases. But meanwhile Jenner appears to have conclusively lost another battle - to trademark her full name. In November 2015, Jenner's lawyers separately tried to trademark the name \"\"KYLIE JENNER\"\" for a long list of clothing and accessories. But this was rejected in July last year. On 23 January, Jenner's team appealed against this decision. Flight attendant shares story of saving trafficking victim Why do Germans hate this football club? How to own a home in the UK by the age of 25 Last year, Jenner launched a line of cosmetics called KYLIE. According to her latest appeal, she wants to eventually have \"\"KYLIE JENNER\"\" branded clothing as well as loungewear, swimwear, and underwear. Meanwhile, Minogue owns \"\"KYLIE\"\" and other similar trademarks in perfumes and toiletries, music and sound recordings, live entertainment, jewellery, dolls and toys, and printed matter such as magazines and books. So far, Minogue has released fragrances, furniture and clothes with her trademarks on them. She also had previously said in interviews she intends to one day produce a musical featuring her greatest hits, and owns the US trademark for \"\"Lucky: The Kylie Minogue Musical\"\". But it's more than that. Since the 1980s, Kylie Minogue has never had to go by any other name but Kylie, and her team has argued it's a fundamental part of the pop diva's identity. Even with a possible settlement, what the battle shows is that at the very least brand KYLIE is not won without a fight. Reporting by the BBC's Tessa Wong, Kevin Ponniah and Jay Savage.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n96,2017/2/6,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38877091,Do 'longest flight' records matter?,\"Qatar Airways has launched what it says is the longest current non-stop commercial route, after completing a journey from Doha to Auckland.\",\"Qatar Airways has launched what it says is the longest current non-stop commercial route, after completing a journey from Doha to Auckland. Flight QR920 landed on Monday after 16 hours and 23 minutes, slightly quicker than expected. The Boeing 777-200LR jet was showered with water cannons on arrival - a tradition for airlines on new routes. Carriers like to talk up these records, but how are they measured and do they really matter? Longest (time) or furthest (distance) are the two key distinctions to make, but it's not as simple as it might sound. The distance between two cities doesn't vary for airlines of course, but they might choose to take alternative routes. For example, a carrier might choose to avoid flying over certain countries which can alter how far a plane flies from point A to point B. And airlines have been known to take unconventional routes. In October last year, Air India flew Delhi to San Francisco by crossing the Pacific rather than the Atlantic - a direction switch which added an extra 1,400km to the journey, making the 15,127km trip the longest ever non-stop flight by distance. By comparison, Qatar's new route is 14,535km. But regardless of the route, flight time is dependent on headwinds or tailwinds. For example, Qatar's return leg from Auckland to Doha is expected to take about 18 hours because of headwinds. And though Air India went the \"\"long way round\"\", favourable tailwinds meant the journey took about two-and-a-half hours less than its conventional route. \"\"The longest flying time doesn't always correspond with the longest distance,\"\" says Ellis Taylor of Flightglobal. \"\"Of course, from a passenger perspective, the flying time is probably the best measurement.\"\" Record-breaking flights may make headlines. But new long-haul flights mean nothing if they're treated as a standalone route, says Mr Taylor. Rather, it's what a new route brings to the airline's existing network. \"\"On its own, it wouldn't be viable to fly between Auckland and Doha, but Qatar is focusing on the passengers from Auckland going on to Europe, Africa, the US or elsewhere,\"\" says Mr Taylor. \"\"In that light, even though it may take some time for the route to stack up from a profit perspective, it may help the economics of its wider network.\"\" Historically, most of the major long-haul routes have been serviced by legacy airlines like Singapore Airlines and Australia's Qantas. But adding new routes have allowed newer airlines like Qatar, and perhaps most notably Emirates, to expand their business very rapidly. \"\"It's also about reach for Middle East airlines striving to outdo each other,\"\" says Geoffrey Thomas of Airlineratings.com. Longest flight records will continue to change hands as airlines launch new routes, and the range capability of aircraft improves. Last year, for example, Qantas revealed it would fly direct between Perth and London from March 2018, a flight that will take 17 hours. The price of fuel and the types of planes which airlines buy will be the determining factors in opening new routes \"\"With the arrival of the 777-8X in 2022, new records such as flights from Sydney to New York and Sydney to London will be set,\"\" says Mr Thomas. \"\"The 777-8X will be the ultimate long haul airliner.\"\" But remember, for routes to be viable, they also require people to buy tickets. That depends on passengers being willing to sit in their seats for 16, 17 or maybe 18 hours at a time. How long that desire will last (especially for travellers cramped up in economy) is something airlines will monitor carefully.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n97,2017/2/6,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38881119,Taking on Trump: Is the US facing a constitutional crisis?,\"Donald Trump says he is defending the United States from terrorism - but a \"\"so-called judge\"\" is \"\"making the job very difficult\"\".\",\"Donald Trump says he is defending the United States from terrorism - but a \"\"so-called judge\"\" is \"\"making the job very difficult\"\". But the judge - in halting the president's controversial executive order on immigration - said he was making sure President Trump's actions follow the law. That sets two theoretically equal branches of the government against one another - and could bring about a crisis. The separation of powers is crucial to understanding how the US is governed. The country's constitution established its treasured system of checks and balances - where the different branches of government hold equal authority and offset one another. The federal government's power is split into three distinct parts - the executive branch, which includes the president and his cabinet; the legislative branch, Congress, which makes the laws; and the judiciary. This works well most of the time, with each branch co-operating with the next. But with the president in open conflict with another branch, there are fears that an impasse could be reached. That could lead to a constitutional crisis - a scenario in which the situation cannot be resolved - particularly after Mr Trump seemed to openly question the judge's authority. \"\"The President's hostility toward the rule of law is not just embarrassing, it is dangerous,\"\" Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy, from the Senate judiciary committee, said. \"\"He seems intent on precipitating a constitutional crisis.\"\" There are about 700 federal district judges in the US - the type facing down the president's order. Unlike state court judges, these men and women are part of the federal court system - along with the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals. Day to day, it's the 94 District Courts which deal with interpretation of US laws, treaties, and public officials - powers devolved to them from the Supreme Court. The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made... But the courts do not offer opinions on government policy unless they are asked - they only interpret law when a case is brought before them. The other two branches of government make and enforce the laws, and the judicial branch interprets the laws when there is a dispute. That is the issue here - a presidential executive order has all the force of law, and is subject to the same checks. Those judicial powers have been used many times before. Barack Obama faced stumbling blocks in 2015 when he attempted to use an executive order to grant a reprieve to undocumented immigrants, and George W Bush faced similar battles over detainees in Guantanamo Bay. It is true that district judges are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Judge James Robart, for example - the \"\"so-called judge\"\" of Mr Trump's Twitter criticism - was appointed by President George W Bush and confirmed in 2004. But Mr Trump can't fire judges. That's because the founding fathers of the United States created a system to protect the judiciary from interference. Only Congress can remove a federal judge from office through impeachment, which involves both the House and Senate. It is the same system used to remove a president. This \"\"article three\"\" protection is, in practical terms, very rigid. Only eight judges have been convicted in an impeachment trial in the entire history of the United States. The end result is that federal judges usually serve until they choose to retire - or until death. In effect, two of the country's three branches of government are in conflict - and neither can remove the other. Inside the mind of Donald Trump Which executive actions will have the most impact? Tech world caught between Trump and a liberal place The Supreme Court, as the name implies, has ultimate power in the judiciary - the other courts are inferior to it. In this case, the government could have taken its appeal against the district rulings straight to the Supreme Court - and may still do so. Nine seats make up the court Four were appointed by Democrats: two by President Clinton, and two by President Obama Four were appointed by Republican Presidents: George W Bush, George Bush Snr, and Ronald Reagan One seat is vacant following the death of Antonin Scalia. Just as with the other federal courts, though, the Supreme Court is protected from interference. But there are currently only eight judges on the Supreme Court. Four were appointed by a Democrat, and four by a Republican - with one vacant seat waiting to be filled by Mr Trump's nominee, which could swing the balance of power. Congress could break any deadlock that crops up between the president and the judiciary by creating a law that overturns his decision - or even impeaching a president or judge. Since Mr Trump's Republican party holds a majority there, action against the president seems unlikely. And the independence of the courts is so essential to the US way of governing, that moving to attack judges on behalf of the president would be a drastic step. Nonetheless, with two of the three powers in conflict, the decision may fall to Congress eventually - unless Mr Trump modifies his order. That may be the most prudent move, in keeping with his predecessors who have often backed off in the face of judicial opposition. For now, though, Mr Trump \"\"just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril\"\" - and shows no signs of changing his mind.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n98,2017/2/3,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38830514,Trump presidency week two: Foot still on accelerator,\"President Trump's first week in office was widely regarded as a whirlwind. His second week has been no less hectic. Despite the mass protests of week one and falling approval ratings, the administration appears to be doubling down on its pledge to shake up the Washington playbook.\",\"President Trump's first week in office was widely regarded as a whirlwind. His second week has been no less hectic. Despite the mass protests of week one and falling approval ratings, the administration appears to be doubling down on its pledge to shake up the Washington playbook. In a divided America, many people are repelled by the agenda and tone of this administration, while many others are pleased that their president is taking a bold stand and getting things done. Here are five key things from week two in Trumpland. On Friday, a week after his inauguration, President Trump issued an executive order suspending all refugee admissions for 120 days, banning Syrian refugees indefinitely and suspending arrivals from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days. The immediacy of the announcement, which Mr Trump said was necessary to not allow any lag time for \"\"bad dudes\"\" to sneak in, caused widespread confusion at airports around the world. Families were separated, and even Green Card holders from the affected countries were initially included in the ban. An Iraqi who put his life at risk as an interpreter for the US army was among hundreds of people detained at airports. Around the world, travellers were prevented from boarding planes, and in some cases, were pulled off flights. Vetted refugees waiting to travel to the US despaired. An Iran-born BBC reporter with British citizenship was among those temporarily detained. Demonstrators flocked to airports in protest, with many lawyers offering their services for free and filing emergency motions to have people released. Mr Trump said the restrictions were required so new security measures could be put in place to protect America from possible terrorist attacks. Things were working out \"\"very nicely\"\", he said. Steve Gruber, a popular talk-show host in Michigan, summed up the mood among many Trump voters. Listeners, he said, \"\"are encouraged that a politician, albeit a new one, is actually doing the things he said he would do\"\". Several courts moved to block parts of the order being implemented, but reports said that border officers in some places were not complying with the rulings. As condemnation grew, including from a few top Republicans, many foreign governments and major US companies, the White House insisted it was not a Muslim ban, pointing to the many Muslim-majority countries not involved. Thousands join protests across UK But former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani undermined that claim, admitting to Fox News that Mr Trump had previously asked him how to legally implement a ban on Muslims. He said, however, that the ban implemented was based on \"\"danger\"\", not religion. Sean Spicer, the White House's combative press secretary, blasted journalists for reporting it as a travel \"\"ban\"\", even though his boss used that very wording on Twitter. Meanwhile, the world tried to figure out the unique language on display at protests in Scotland. The immigration order's fallout dominated headlines for most of this week. \"\"This has proven to be an embarrassing episode in what looks like a not-ready-for-primetime White House,\"\" our correspondent Anthony Zurcher wrote. Amateur hour at the White House? But President Trump's supporters think he's doing a great job. The former reality TV star now in the White House was this week finally given a chance to fire someone. In the middle of the furore over the immigration ban, acting attorney general Sally Yates ordered justice department lawyers not to enforce President Trump's executive order. Within hours, she was dismissed and accused by President Trump of \"\"betraying\"\" her department and being \"\"weak on borders\"\". Some observers and journalists asked whether the dismissal would have a chilling effect across government. But the White House said justice department lawyers had deemed the order legal and thus Ms Yates was not fulfilling her duty. The move came on the heels of other comments from the administration suggesting that dissent from officials would not be tolerated. As news spread on Monday that hundreds of US diplomats around the world were planning to use a \"\"dissent channel\"\" to argue that the immigration restrictions would not make the US safer, Sean Spicer said \"\"they should either get with the programme or they can go\"\". That seemed like a pretty direct message to US government employees with independent views. On Tuesday evening at a White House ceremony, Donald Trump unveiled his pick to fill the vacant seat on the Supreme Court - Judge Neil Gorsuch, of Colorado. The Democrats, whom the administration has chastised for seeking to stymie them at every opportunity, have hinted they will use all means at their disposal to block his confirmation in the Senate. The Supreme Court has the final say on such divisive issues such as abortion, gun control and gay rights. Since Judge Antonin Scalia died a year ago, the court has been split equally between liberal and conservative justices, at four each. Whoever holds the ninth seat is thus pretty significant, though justices don't always split on clear ideological lines. Barack Obama tried to replace Mr Scalia with a nominee of his choice, but the Republicans didn't allow it given an election was forthcoming. Like the late Mr Scalia, the Ivy-League educated Mr Gorsuch is known to support textualism, or the interpretation of law according to its plain text. He also maintains a strict interpretation of the US Constitution, or how it was originally understood by the Founding Fathers. Who is Neil Gorsuch? Why is the US Supreme Court so important? House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi called the nominee \"\"a very hostile appointment\"\" and \"\"a very bad decision, well outside the mainstream of American legal thought\"\". And of course, there were more protests. Stephen Bannon, Donald Trump's chief strategist, is a man who many people believe is behind much of what has come out of the White House in the past two weeks. The former executive chairman of populist, conservative news website Breitbart has been described as a \"\"rumpled right-wing agitator\"\" by the New York Times. On Saturday night, he was given a seat on the National Security Council's inner circle, or principals' committee. Under the restructuring, the Joint Chiefs and director of national intelligence have been told only to attend when discussions pertain to their areas. The move shocked many Washington veterans. \"\"It's completely unprecedented to have a political adviser as a member of that group,\"\" Eliot Cohen, director of the Strategic Studies Program at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, told the BBC. Mr Bannon has a \"\"destructive\"\" world view and has accumulated an \"\"unhealthy\"\" level of power, he said, describing it as an \"\"ominous\"\" move. What exactly is his destructive world view? Well, according to the Daily Beast, in 2013 Bannon said he wanted \"\"to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today's establishment\"\". The White House tried to brush the changes off, pointing to the fact that Obama adviser David Axelrod had been included in some council meetings. Mr Bannon jokingly referred to himself as \"\"Darth Vader\"\" in a recent interview where he described US media as \"\"the opposition party\"\". Steve Bannon will now sit at a table where issues pertaining to US national security, and thus global stability, are discussed at a very, very senior level. Refugees are very much on President Trump's radar at the moment and it is well known that he likes to talk about deals. But a phone call on the subject on Saturday between the US president and the Australian PM, which was scheduled to last for an hour, was cut short from the White House after just 25 minutes. President Trump said the conversation with Malcolm Turnbull, in which they discussed a refugee resettlement deal between the two nations, was not a favourite among calls he had taken with world leaders. In fact, the Washington Post reported that Mr Trump described the conversation as \"\"the worst by far\"\". He appeared to be somewhat irritated by the subject matter - a deal struck with the Obama administration which would see up to 1,250 asylum seekers to Australia resettled in the US. What next? President Trump was so worked up after discussing \"\"the worst deal ever\"\" that he decided to issue a statement in his preferred manner - via Twitter. Mr Trump tweeted that he would \"\"study this dumb deal\"\". Later, Mr Spicer gave an official version of his boss's 25-minute call with Mr Turnbull. He said that both leaders had \"\"emphasised the enduring strength and closeness of the US-Australia relationship\"\". Mr Turnbull later thanked President Trump for agreeing to uphold the deal. Trump's first week: Well, that was intense\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n99,2017/2/3,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38856081,Should you have two bins in your bathroom?,\"Our bathrooms are filled with shampoo bottles, toilet rolls and cleaning products which could easily be put into our recycling bins when finished with.\",\"Our bathrooms are filled with shampoo bottles, toilet rolls and cleaning products which could easily be put into our recycling bins when finished with. Yet research shows our green intentions are washed away as soon as we step near a toilet. Now a business group has come up with an idea for how to combat this problem - two bathroom bins. The Circular Economy Taskforce, who were brought together by Prince Charles's Business in the Community environment charity, says it could boost recycling. So should two bins really sit alongside your stack of loo roll in the bathroom? Why should people have two bins in their bathrooms? \"\"It's trying to address the problem that people are less likely to recycle packaging for things we use in our bathrooms than for things we use in other rooms of the house,\"\" says Jonny Hazell, senior policy adviser for environmental think tank Green Alliance. The Recycle Now campaign points to its statistics, which show that while 90% of packaging is recycled in our kitchens, only 50% is being recycled in the bathroom. \"\"Often homes have one central recycling bin located in the kitchen, so when in the shower or washing your face it can be tricky to remember to transfer it to that bin,\"\" it says. \"\"This is why having a recycling bin or bag in the bathroom might be useful, if there is space.\"\" Business in the Community says two bins could make it easier to separate out the plastics that can be recycled. \"\"But it doesn't have to be a bin, it could be as simple as a bag on the door handle that you bring down to the kitchen every week,\"\" it added. Where has this idea come from? While recycling has grown from 12% to 45% in the UK over the last decade, campaigners say the bathroom is an area that needs more focus. The Circular Economy Taskforce came up with the idea as part of its work looking at practical collaborative ways to boost recycling and re-use rates. \"\"The bathroom is one of the areas that has come up time and time again in the group as somewhere where both business and consumers can make a difference to help us all reduce our impact on the environment,\"\" says Business in the Community. \"\"Thinking about how different types of bins could boost recycling in the bathroom is just one example of a potential simple solution that could have a big impact.\"\" Why are people failing to recycle their bathroom products? Campaigners believes it comes down not just to where a recycling bin is located but also to confusion over what can be recycled. Recycle Now says: \"\"There can also be confusion about what can or can't be recycled with bathroom products. \"\"For example many people don't realise that bleach bottles can be easily recycled - simply make sure it's empty and put the lid back on. \"\"Recycling just one bleach bottle saves enough energy to power a street light for 6.5 hours, so the value quickly adds up.\"\" Research from the University of Exeter also found that people who threw away waste in the bathroom saw it as being \"\"dirty\"\" and were less likely to recycle it. Going through your bathroom bin to separate out what can and can't be recycled can seem off-putting,\"\" says Business in the Community. It added: \"\"There is also a lot of confusion around what can be recycled in the bathroom, for example many consumers are confused by aerosols.\"\" How much recyclable waste comes from a bathroom? A surprising amount. Typical products include: Plastic shampoo, conditioner and shower gel bottles, plastic moisturiser bottles (such as for hand cream and body lotion), glass face cream pots (plus the cardboard packaging they come in), perfume and aftershave bottles, aerosols for deodorant, air freshener and shaving foam, bleach and bathroom cleaner bottles, toothpaste boxes and toilet roll tubes. Is a lack of recycling in bathrooms a real problem? Every little helps, is the message from environmental and recycling groups. \"\"In general, the less we recycle, the more water and energy we need to use to produce the materials we use in our daily lives,\"\" said Mr Hazell. Recycle Now says recycling reduces the amount we are sending to landfill and makes use of resources already available rather than making them from scratch. \"\"Ultimately this means reduced levels of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere which contribute to climate change,\"\" it added. \"\"For instance it takes 75% less energy to make a plastic shampoo bottle from recycled plastic compared with using virgin materials.\"\" Can two bins have a meaningful impact on recycling overall? \"\"Ensuring you recycle in the bathroom can make a big difference,\"\" says Recycle Now. \"\"It would save ?135,000 in landfill costs if every UK household threw their next empty shampoo bottles into the recycling bin. \"\"On top of this, if everyone recycled one more toilet roll tube it would save enough cardboard inner tubes from landfill to go round the M25 38 times.\"\" But what if you don't have the space for two bins? There are other options. Hang a reusable bag on the bathroom door so you can transfer your recyclable items straight into the recycling bin. Or opt for a bin with split compartments which can be used to separate recyclable and non-recyclable items.\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n100,2017/2/3,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38852000,Vegetable shortage: How to cope as supermarkets ration lettuces,\"Some supermarkets are rationing iceberg lettuces, with experts warning it could be the, er, tip of the iceberg.\",\"Some supermarkets are rationing iceberg lettuces, with experts warning it could be the, er, tip of the iceberg. Bad weather in Europe has already caused a #courgette crisis, alongside a shortage of broccoli, tomatoes, salad peppers and aubergines. With vegetable shortages expected to continue until April, what alternatives are there for shoppers? During the UK's winter months of December, January and February, UK farmers produce beetroot, Brussel sprouts, cabbage, cauliflower, celeriac, chicory, fennel, Jerusalem artichokes, kale, leeks, parsnips, potatoes, red cabbage, swede and turnips. We've become a \"\"slightly strange group\"\", expecting all-year-round produce, according to Lord Haskins, the former chairman of Northern Foods, which supplies Tesco. \"\"Thirty years ago you'd never have worried about buying lettuce in the middle of the winter - lettuces were things that grew in the summer and you ate them in the summer - you ate cauliflowers and Brussels sprouts in the winter,\"\" he says. As for courgettes, they are actually \"\"very, very out of season\"\", says organic vegetable retailer Riverford. We have just got used to supermarkets supplying them all year round. Eating British produce that's in season is often cheaper, as it is produced locally - and it can be healthier too. According to food industry campaign group Love British Food, fruit and vegetables that are in season contain the nutrients, minerals and trace elements that our bodies need at particular times of year. Apples, for example, are packed with vitamin C to boost our resistance to winter colds. The group's Alexia Robinson recommends beetroot, kale, cabbages, broccoli and traditional root vegetables for their health-giving properties. Riverford says a slaw made with cabbage, beetroot or swede will offer \"\"10 times more nutrients\"\" than an iceberg lettuce - which it says aren't known for their nutritional value. If you are really keen on iceberg lettuces, you can probably pay a bit more for one from Peru or South Africa, says Lord Haskins. But imported vegetables can clock up a lot of air miles before they land on your plate - making them worse for the environment. Hatty Richards, from the Community Farm in Chew Magna, Somerset, says buying local is better. \"\"We have such a range on our doorsteps already, it's fresher, it's really good for the environment - it reduces air miles - and it supports local business which is crucial.\"\" Lord Haskins agrees, and suggests your tastebuds may also be grateful: \"\"We all buy stuff from far parts. They don't taste nearly as good: strawberries at this time of year from Egypt don't taste anything like as good as a British strawberry in May, June, July.\"\" A leafy salad is nice - but there are plenty of alternative dishes to try. Riverford's Guy Watson thinks the UK's more bitter winter salad leaves and root vegetables can provide \"\"a far superior substitute\"\" which will easily make up for a lack of lettuce. Vibrant winter coleslaws and cauliflower salads \"\"bring British veg to life\"\", he says, adding that one of the Riverford Field Kitchen's most popular winter dishes is a kale caesar salad. Kale, which was originally used to feed cows, is a robust, hardy winder leaf that can withstand frosty weather. It can also be used in soups, stews, stir fries, gratins or just wilted with butter. For Ms Robinson suggests embracing winter comfort food with a \"\"good old fashioned winter stew with plenty of root vegetables with tender meat\"\". If you're still not convinced you can do without leafy salads, try growing your own. Those who do want to eat lettuce need not despair. According to the campaign group Eat Seasonably, lettuce, rocket and other crunchy salad leaves are some of the easiest things to grow at home, all year around - on a seed tray indoors, on your window sill or in the garden. Ms Robinson says: \"\"As well as the cress there are many great veg that can be easily grown in window boxes such as leaf lettuce, radishes, spinach, green onions and of course a good selection of herbs.\"\" Another easy win is beetroot, Eat Seasonably says, which can be grown in a big pot. Though beetroot is harvested in October, Riverford says it can last up to four months if it's kept in a cold storage. \"\"Carrots are not too hard to grow either,\"\" Riverford's Emily Muddeman said, \"\"Leeks, kale - you could plant just four or five stalks of kale and it will go on sprouting.\"\" Any budding gardeners could start with planting onions later this month - Eat Seasonably says they are \"\"not even slightly difficult to grow\"\".\",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\n" }, { "path": "tests/data/bt18_speeches_sample.csv", "content": ",speaker_fp,text\n10942,christian-flisek,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Nach dem ehemaligen Vorsitzenden der SPD-Bundestagsfraktion ist ein Gesetz benannt, nach dem kein Gesetz den Bundestag so verlässt, wie es von der Regierung eingebracht wurde. Für dieses sogenannte Struck’sche Gesetz ist die heute debattierte Änderung des Telemediengesetzes geradezu ein Musterbeispiel. Der Gesetzentwurf hat uns parlamentarisch sehr intensiv und lange beschäftigt. Aber im Ergebnis beschließen wir heute ein Gesetz, das an ganz erheblichen Stellen vom Regierungsentwurf abweicht. Herr Kollege von Notz, deswegen sollten Sie sich in zweiter und dritter Lesung nicht am Regierungsentwurf abarbeiten. Vielmehr sollten Sie sich mit der heutigen Beschlussvorlage befassen.\n\nWir schaffen Rechtssicherheit in Deutschland für öffentliche WLANs; darauf wurde schon hingewiesen. Wir leisten damit einen ganz erheblichen Beitrag dazu, dass Deutschland aus der WLAN-Wüste geführt wird. Das ist allerhöchste Zeit. Die bisher geltende Störerhaftung bei der Bereitstellung von öffentlichen WLAN-Netzen traf allzu oft die falschen Personen: den Familienvater, der oft erst mit der Abmahnung erfahren hat, was alles über seinen Anschluss möglich ist, oder die Kaffeehausbetreiberin, die die Handlungen ihrer Gäste nicht kontrollieren konnte und die Gäste auch nicht persönlich kannte. Eine ganze Abmahnindustrie konzentrierte sich auf diese Menschen, um Profite zu machen, ohne irgendeinen volkswirtschaftlichen Nutzen dabei zu erzielen. Die Bereitsteller von WLAN-Netzen wie etwa der Familienvater oder die Gastronomin waren und sind aus zwei Gründen die falschen Adressaten einer Haftung. Erstens. Sie wollten sich in den allermeisten Fällen immer rechtstreu verhalten. Zweitens fehlten ihnen schlicht die Mittel, um die Nutzer ihrer W-LAN-Netze zu kontrollieren.\n\nDie bisherige Störerhaftung war aus Sicht der Rechteinhaber ein effektives und vielleicht auch ein lukratives Instrument, aber es war in höchstem Maße unfair. Dieser Situation schieben wir heute gemeinsam einen Riegel vor. Deshalb ist es auch richtig, sie abzuschaffen. Um jede rechtliche Unsicherheit zu beseitigen, haben wir - darauf hat der Kollege Klingbeil ausdrücklich hingewiesen - auch klargestellt, dass die Haftungsprivilegierung jede Art der Haftung umfasst.\n\nLassen Sie mich aber auch klarstellen, dass die Rechteinhaber nach wie vor nicht schutzlos zu stellen sind. Das Gegenteil ist der Fall. Wir müssen die Inhaber von immateriellen Schutzgütern auch im digitalen Zeitalter schützen; sie brauchen genauso viel Rechte, wie es im analogen Zeitalter notwendig war und ist. Deswegen ist es auch ganz wichtig - der Kollege Durz hat darauf völlig zu Recht hingewiesen -, dass wir nicht so tun, als ob wir in einer globalen digitalen Welt mit nationalem Recht und nationalen Gesetzen alles lösen könnten.\n\nDie Plattformen, die es im Wesentlichen auf Urheberrechtsverletzungen abgesehen haben und darauf abzielen, die Profite einzufahren, sitzen eben nicht in Deutschland. Sie sitzen nicht in Tuttlingen, sondern sie sitzen in Timbuktu. Deswegen ist der Ansatz, den wir mit unserem Entschließungsantrag gehen, nämlich dass wir den Geldströmen folgen wollen oder, besser formuliert, dass wir solchen illegalen Plattformen nachhaltig den Geldhahn zudrehen wollen, der richtige Ansatz. Mit dem Entschließungsantrag haben wir genau das in das Hausaufgabenheft unserer Bundesregierung hineingeschrieben.\n\nIch glaube, wir können heute gemeinsam diesen Gesetzentwurf guten Gewissens beschließen. Ich würde mich wirklich darüber freuen; ich sage das ausdrücklich zu den Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Opposition. Ich weiß, in der Stellenbeschreibung des Oppositionspolitikers steht Lob für die Regierung nicht drin, das ist nicht ausdrücklich erwähnt.\n\nAber vielleicht können auch Sie irgendwann einmal über Ihren Schatten springen. Heute wäre dazu die Gelegenheit.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n12540,gunther-krichbaum,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Eines ist doch klar: Wenn Präsident Erdogan so weitermacht, dann können wir auch nicht so weitermachen wie bisher. Gestern hat die Europäische Kommission ihren Fortschrittsbericht zur Türkei vorgelegt. Ein Fortschrittsbericht über ein Kandidatenland könnte nicht desaströser sein.\n\nDie Türkei bewegt sich mehr auf die Ausgangstür der Verhandlungen zum Beitritt zur Europäischen Union hin als zur Eingangstür der EU. Das muss uns besorgt machen; denn die Leidtragenden sind am Ende die Menschen: die Bürger und die Zivilgesellschaft; Frau Roth hat es gerade beschrieben.\n\nDoch bevor wir Schlüsse ziehen, müssen wir uns fragen, wo wir stehen. Fakt ist, dass wir uns in der Europapolitik und in der Außenpolitik alle gegenseitig brauchen. Das wird in der Tat bei dem Flüchtlingsabkommen deutlich. Man kann viel darüber klagen und schimpfen; Fakt ist aber auch, dass dieses Flüchtlingsabkommen wirkt und die Flüchtlingszahlen massiv gesunken sind.\n\nDie Schlepper- und Schleuserkriminalität wurde wirksam bekämpft. Genau das war das Ziel dieses Abkommens. Wir wollten nicht, dass sich diese Organisationen eine goldene Nase an dem Leid der Menschen verdienen.\n\nWir stehen - das wurde bislang noch nicht erwähnt - aber auch in Verhandlungen über Zypern. Wir stehen vor einer ganz entscheidenden Phase, die es immerhin erlaubt, zu sagen, dass wir der Wiedervereinigung Zyperns so nahe gekommen sind wie seit Jahren nicht mehr. Auch dafür brauchen wir die Türkei. Wir brauchen die Türkei auch in der NATO, wie schon angeklungen ist.\n\nDas alles ist richtig. Aber wir können natürlich nicht die Augen davor verschließen, was tatsächlich passiert. Das Verhalten gegenüber oppositionellen Kräften, der Zivilgesellschaft, Kurden, Minderheiten, Journalisten, Parlamentariern und damit Kollegen kann so nicht stehen bleiben. Es ist inakzeptabel. Wenn Parlamentarier verhaftet und ihrer Stimme beraubt werden, dann ist es unsere Aufgabe, ihnen eine Stimme zu geben.\n\nDenn erst stirbt die Pressefreiheit, dann die Meinungsfreiheit und somit am Ende die Demokratie. Die Demokratie, verbunden mit Frieden, Freiheit und Rechtsstaatlichkeit, gehört aber zu den Kernwerten der Europäischen Union.\n\nDeswegen müssen wir schon allein im Interesse anderer Kandidatenländer hier Reaktionen zeigen. Was sollen denn Länder wie Montenegro, Serbien und alle, mit denen wir in Verhandlungen stehen, denken, wenn wir auf diese Vorkommnisse in der Türkei nicht oder nur schleppend reagieren, aber all den anderen Ländern, mit denen wir verhandeln, härteste Bedingungen stellen, was auch richtig ist?\n\nDeswegen kann ich eins zu eins unterschreiben, Herr Außenminister, was Sie gerade an Maßnahmen beschrieben haben, die wir umsetzen sollten. Für diese Signale sind wir Ihnen als Parlamentarier dankbar.\n\nIch hätte mir in dem Fortschrittsbericht der Europäischen Kommission, der gestern publiziert wurde, aber noch etwas mehr gewünscht. Wir gewähren den Kandidaten Vorbeitrittshilfen. Diese dienen dazu, dass diese Länder sich Schritt für Schritt an die Standards der Europäischen Union annähern können. Das ist in der Förderperiode, wie man das etwas technisch nennt, 2014 bis 2020 für die Türkei immerhin ein stolzer Betrag von 4,4 Milliarden Euro. Ich wäre nicht dafür, diese 4,4 Milliarden Euro, zumal sie auch zum Teil schon geflossen sind, in toto einzufrieren. Aber ein Drittel davon ist für die Förderung der Justiz und Rechtsstaatlichkeit reserviert. Mit diesem Geld werden junge Richter und Staatsanwälte ausgebildet. Das sind genau jene, die Herr Erdogan im Rahmen seiner Säuberungsaktion aus dem Amt gehoben hat. Das ist schon eine politische Veruntreuung von EU-Geldern. Deswegen muss man an dieser Stelle reagieren und wenigstens diesen Teil der Mittel einfrieren.\n\nSolche Signale brauchen wir.\n\nWir brauchen natürlich auch Signale an die Zivilgesellschaft. Hier können wir als Parlamentarier viel tun. Wir sollten mehr denn je in die Türkei reisen, auch wenn der Reiseetat des Deutschen Bundestages zurzeit etwas unter Druck steht. Aber diese Reisen machen Sinn. Mehr denn je sollten wir solche unternehmen.\n\nLassen Sie mich abschließend Folgendes sagen - das klang schon mehrfach an -: Wenn die Türkei und vor allem Herr Erdogan jetzt noch weitergehen - wir müssen zwischen dem Land bzw. den Menschen in der Türkei und Herrn Erdogan differenzieren - und die Todesstrafe im Rahmen einer Verfassungsreform einführen sollten, dann macht es in der Tat keinen Sinn mehr - das sind wir letztlich uns gegenüber schuldig, auch unseren Werten, die wir zu verteidigen haben -:\n\nEin Land, das die Todesstrafe einführt und sich damit offensichtlich von den Werten der Europäischen Union abwenden möchte, hat in der Tat keinen Platz mehr in Europa.\n\nDas sind wir uns, aber auch den anderen Ländern, die Mitglied der Europäischen Union werden möchten, schuldig.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n415,jens-koeppen,\"Vielen Dank. - Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Herr Krischer, Sie haben am Anfang und auch zum Schluss Ihrer Rede den Konsens beschworen. Das fand ich sehr gut. In der Tat, wir haben einen breiten Konsens in diesem Haus, nämlich dass wir die Umstellung der Energieversorgung in Deutschland vorantreiben wollen. Dazu brauchen wir - auch das haben Sie gesagt - die Akzeptanz der Menschen. Wir dürfen aber mit dem Umbau der Energieversorgung in Deutschland - auch das haben Sie gesagt - den Wirtschaftsstandort Deutschland nicht gefährden.\n\nWir sind ebenfalls einer Meinung, dass Strom kein Luxusgut werden darf, weder für die Familien noch für die Rentnerinnen und Rentner noch für die Studenten, aber schon gar nicht für die Unternehmen. Der Anteil der Industrie an der Wertschöpfung in Deutschland beträgt nun einmal 23 Prozent. Das ist immerhin doppelt so viel wie zum Beispiel in Frankreich, in Großbritannien oder den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika.\n\nIch finde es gut, dass Sie in Ihrem Antrag eindeutig geschrieben haben, dass Sie die besonderen Ausgleichsregelungen im Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetz nicht angreifen wollen. Sie wollen es auch dabei belassen. Sie haben sogar geschrieben - ich zitiere -, dass es eine „sinnvolle ordnungspolitische Maßnahme“ ist. Das begrüßen wir außerordentlich. Das sind ja auch Maßnahmen, die Sie auf den Weg gebracht haben.\n\n- Das haben Sie in Ihrem Antrag geschrieben. - Dennoch häufen sich, Frau Lemke, wie schon in der 17. Wahlperiode die Widersprüche in Ihren Anträgen. Der Antrag ist ja auch bloß ein bisschen „refreshed“; sie haben ihn schon mehrmals vorgelegt. Wir haben bereits mehrmals darüber gesprochen. Sie haben den Antrag jetzt ein bisschen aufpoliert. Das ist völlig in Ordnung.\n\nSie schreiben, dass die hohen Kosten für die EEG-Umlage und der fortlaufende Anstieg der Kosten den besonderen Ausgleichsregelungen für energieintensive Unternehmen angelastet werden muss. Das ist eine Behauptung. Sie behaupten auch - das können wir so nicht stehen lassen -: Mit der EEG-Novelle 2012 wurde die Regelung massiv ausgeweitet.\n\nMachen wir doch einmal einen Faktencheck. Sie beschreiben es als überbordend und ausufernd; das haben Sie auch in Ihrer Rede so zitiert. Die Kriterien, Herr Krischer, sind genau die gleichen geblieben wie bei Ihnen:\n\ndie Strommenge - dazu komme ich gleich noch genauer -; es muss produzierendes Gewerbe sein, und es muss ein Unternehmen sein, das im internationalen Wettbewerb steht. Wir haben in der Novelle 2012 lediglich eine Mittelstandskomponente hinzugefügt. Wir haben gesagt: Die Strommenge sinkt von 10 Gigawattstunden auf 1 Gigawattstunde.\n\n- Ich komme dazu. - In der Tat sind es mehr Unternehmen geworden. Das ist doch Sinn und Zweck der Übung gewesen. Aber, wie Herr Kollege Bareiß schon gesagt hat, die Strommenge ist in vier Jahren, vom Jahre 2010 bis zum Jahre 2013, um 10 Prozent gestiegen: von genau 86,6 Gigawattstunden auf 95,3 Gigawattstunden. Das heißt, die Novelle 2012 hatte eine Erhöhung der EEG-Umlage von 0,2 Cent zur Folge. Das sind für einen Durchschnittshaushalt im Monat 60 Cent. Dafür bekommen wir aber einen international wettbewerbsfähigen Mittelstand und sichern die Arbeitsplätze in Familienunternehmen. Das sollte es uns wert sein.\n\nJetzt kommen wir zu Ihrer zweiten Behauptung. Sie sagen, die Novelle von 2012 hätte völlig neue Branchen, insbesondere die böse Braunkohleindustrie, in diese Liste gespült.\n\n- Das haben Sie so geschrieben; ich kann das zitieren. - Machen wir einmal den Faktencheck: Vor 2012, vor der Novelle, standen sechs Unternehmen der Braunkohleindustrie auf dieser Liste. Jetzt dürfen Sie raten, wie viele es heute sind! Sechs. Sie beklagen, dass diverse Unternehmen der Fleischindustrie plötzlich dort auftauchen. Vor 2012 waren genau die gleichen Unternehmen auch drin.\n\nSie beklagen außerdem, dass vor 2012 49 Schienenbahnen dort auftauchten. Heute sind es 53; das sind 4 mehr.\n\nWieso können Sie sagen, dass neue und überbordend viele Unternehmen in diese Liste gespült worden sind? Das ist nicht der Fall.\n\nKommen wir zu Ihrer dritten Behauptung; wir sind bereits darauf eingegangen. Sie sagen: Alle Betriebe zahlen lediglich 0,05 Cent pro Kilowattstunde, und die besonderen Ausgleichsregelungen sind schuld an der Höhe der Umlage von 6,24 Cent.\n\nMachen wir auch hier den Faktencheck: Es gibt eine eindeutige Staffelung. Bis zu 1 Gigawattstunde wird von allen Betrieben die volle Höhe bezahlt. Bis 10 Gigawattstunden sind es 10 Prozent, und bis 100 1 Prozent. Erst ab 100 Gigawattstunden kommen die 0,05 Cent zum Tragen. Das heißt: Die Summe der besonderen Ausgleichsregelungen macht zurzeit 1,35 Cent aus. Das sind 4 Euro pro Monat pro Durchschnittshaushalt.\n\nHerr Krischer, lassen Sie uns das einmal durchrechnen. Sie sagen, das ist eine Milchmädchenrechnung, aber die Zahlen sagen etwas anderes. Würden wir die Rücknahme dieser besonderen Ausgleichsregelungen veranlassen und somit eine Deindustrialisierung in Deutschland riskieren, würden wir - Stand heute - auf eine EEG-Umlage von 5 Cent kommen, und die Haushalte würden 4 Euro einsparen. Wollen wir das riskieren? Ich denke, nein.\n\nHerr Krischer, ich habe noch eine Empfehlung an Sie. Machen wir einmal Folgendes - dann kommen wir nämlich vom Theoretischen ins Praktische -: Wir setzen uns hin, nehmen die Liste und gucken uns alle Betriebe in allen Bundesländern an, die beim Bundesamt für Wirtschaft und Ausfuhrkontrolle verzeichnet sind. Das machen wir mit den Unternehmen in Ihrem Wahlkreis, in meinem Wahlkreis, in allen Wahlkreisen - ohne Ausnahme. Wir gucken uns alle an.\n\nDann sagen wir, welches Unternehmen die drei Kriterien, die Sie und wir eingeführt haben, nicht erfüllt. Dann machen wir den Faktencheck und sagen: Diese Unternehmen sollen nicht mehr von der Ausgleichsregelung profitieren.\n\nIn meinem Wahlkreis gibt es zwei Papierfabriken, sie stehen nebeneinander. Die eine hätte von einem Jahr aufs andere 15 Millionen Euro zusätzliche Kosten;\n\ndas betrifft übrigens ungefähr 1 000 bis 1 200 Arbeitsplätze. Das heißt: Wenn diese Firmen die EEG-Umlage - so ist ja Ihr Wunsch - jetzt komplett bezahlen sollen, dann würde das eine hundertfache Erhöhung bedeuten. Denn alle mittelständischen Papierfabriken zahlen zurzeit 125 000 Euro EEG-Umlage. Wenn diese Regelung wegfallen würde, dann wären das mit einem Schlag 12,5 Millionen Euro. Wissen Sie, was die Vertreter von UPM-Kymmene aus Finnland dann zu mir sagen? Sie sagen schlicht und ergreifend: Das kann niemand wollen. - Die schließen dann ab und schmeißen den Schlüssel weg, ohne sich umzudrehen. Das wird nämlich passieren, und das werden wir nicht riskieren.\n\nSelbstverständlich.\n\nHerr Krischer, Sie wissen doch ganz genau, dass das Problem mit dem Differenzstrom und der Merit-Order-Effekt die Urkrankheiten des EEG sind. Genau deswegen müssen wir es doch anfassen!\n\nHerr Krischer, wenn Sie den Börsenstrompreis als den Industriepreis für Deutschland nehmen und sagen: „Deutschland geht es am besten“ und dabei die übrigen Faktoren, die auch mit in den Strompreis eingehen, ignorieren, dann sind Sie auf dem Holzweg. Es ist eben nicht nur der Börsenstrompreis, der bezahlt werden muss. Es ist in Deutschland eben auch die EEG-Umlage, die bezahlt werden muss. Der Grund, aus dem wir die Unternehmen davon befreien wollen, ist nicht, dass wir wollen, dass die Haushalte 4 Euro mehr bezahlen, um die „fette Industrie“ zu unterstützen, sondern, dass wir die Arbeitsplätze im Land halten wollen. Denn die Unternehmen würden sonst nichts anderes tun, als abzuschließen und aus dem Land zu gehen. Sie würden sich nicht einmal umdrehen, um zu gucken, wo der Schlüssel ist, sondern sie würden einfach gehen. Dazu gibt es eindeutige Aussagen. Wir dürfen es nicht dazu kommen lassen - auch wenn Sie alle jetzt so entrüstet den Kopf schütteln: Sie müssen sich wirklich einmal mit den Industriebetrieben und mit den mittelständischen Betrieben unterhalten -;\n\ndeswegen haben wir die Mittelstandskomponente eingeführt.\n\nIch will abschließend sagen, Herr Krischer: Wenn Sie in Ihrem Antrag schreiben, Sie wollen das EEG verstetigen, Sie wollen das EEG konservieren und Sie wollen es auch zementieren - es soll also nicht angefasst werden -: Das führt in die Sackgasse.\n\n- Sie haben geschrieben, dass das letztendlich so verstetigt werden soll.\n\nWir brauchen - darauf haben wir uns in der Koalition verständigt - eine grundlegende - ich lege Wert darauf: eine grundlegende - Reform des EEG. In diese Reform muss Eingang finden, dass wir die technologischen Innovationen nach vorne bringen. Wir müssen die Energieeffizienzmaßnahmen weiterhin im Blick haben.\n\nWir müssen hin zur Vergütung der Energieversorgung und weg von der Vergütung der reinen Installation und Erzeugung. Wir müssen endlich wieder nutzbare Energie fördern. Der Ausbau muss bedarfsgerecht mit der vorhandenen, aber vielleicht auch mit der neuen Netzinfrastruktur synchronisiert werden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ein Ausbau auf der grünen Wiese ohne Abnehmer muss der Vergangenheit angehören. Wir brauchen die Akzeptanz der Menschen. Wir brauchen innovative Ideen statt Besitzstandswahrung. Wenn Sie den Konsens, den Sie vorhin beschworen haben, wollen, dann sind Sie herzlich eingeladen, mitzumachen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n152,johann-wadephul,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! In der Tat steht zur sachgrundlosen Befristung nichts im Koalitionsvertrag, und das hat seinen Grund, nämlich den, dass wir an den Regelungen nichts ändern werden. Ich will Ihnen das kurz begründen.\n\nDie sachgrundlose Befristung von Arbeitsverhältnissen gibt es seit Mitte der 80er-Jahre. Eingeführt wurde sie von Arbeitsminister Norbert Blüm. Nachdem sie Erfolge zeitigte und dafür gesorgt hat, dass es mehr Beschäftigung gegeben hat, war es Rot-Grün, Frau Kollegin Müller-Gemmeke, die diese in das Teilzeit- und Befristungsgesetz überführt hat.\n\nEs war die Abgeordnete Dr. Thea Dückert, die am 26. Oktober 2000, damals der Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen angehörend, zur Einführung dieses Gesetzes sagte:\n\nIm Ganzen wird die Befristung ohne sachlichen Grund weiterhin ermöglicht; das ist uns wichtig.\n\nIch muss sagen: Die Kollegin Dückert hatte recht.\n\nDie Arbeitsmarktlage gibt ihr recht. Bleiben Sie doch bitte bei dem, was Sie selber erkannt haben. Das hat für mehr Beschäftigung in Deutschland gesorgt.\n\nVerabschieden Sie sich doch nicht von allen Reformen, die Sie durchgeführt haben! Es ist doch eine etwas schizophrene Situation: Wir werden europaweit dafür bewundert, uns wird dafür auf die Schultern geklopft. Da kommt man sich als Unionsmensch eigenartig vor: Wir werden dafür gelobt, was Rot-Grün für sinnvolle Reformen durchgeführt hat. Die mussten wir an manchen Stellen - bei Hartz IV haben Sie die Kinder vergessen usw. - nachbessern. Das haben wir gemacht. Sie haben dem auch zugestimmt. Sie haben notwendige Arbeitsmarktreformen durchgeführt. Jetzt haben diese Erfolg. Aber das Schizophrene ist, dass Sie diese wieder zurückdrehen wollen. Das ist völlig irrsinnig, und das werden wir nicht machen.\n\nDiese Reformen waren richtig und notwendig. Sie sorgen für Arbeitsplätze, und deswegen bleibt es dabei.\n\nDas ist keine Märchenstunde. Schauen Sie sich doch schlicht und ergreifend die Arbeitsmarktzahlen in Deutschland an.\n\nWir haben noch nie so viele sozialversicherungspflichtig Beschäftigte gehabt wie heute.\n\nWir haben eine exzellente Situation in allen Kassen.\n\n- Liebe Kollegen der Linksfraktion, Sie merken - diesen Verhandlungserfolg kann die SPD in der Tat für sich verbuchen -, dass Ihnen sozialpolitisch sämtliche Felle wegschwimmen.\n\nDeswegen fangen Sie in einer parlamentarischen Ungeduld an, diese Themen noch einmal hochzukochen. Es ist schlicht und ergreifend in dem Bereich nicht mehr zu erreichen. Wir müssen bei dem bleiben, was sinnvollerweise vereinbart worden ist.\n\nIch möchte in dieser Debatte zumindest einmal - das hat der Kollege Linnemann vorhin auch schon gemacht - auf die Arbeitgeberseite zu sprechen kommen. Auch die gibt es. Nicht jeder Arbeitgeber, insbesondere der im betroffenen Mittelstand, ist ein schlimmer Ausbeuter, der jungen Menschen, von denen Sie hier die ganze Zeit reden, die Zukunft verbauen will. Wir reden doch praktisch über den Mittelstand. Befristete Arbeitsverhältnisse haben faktisch im Bereich der Kleinstbetriebe, das heißt in Betrieben mit bis zu zehn Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern, gar keine Bedeutung, weil diese Betriebe ohnehin jederzeit kündigen können. Da gilt das Kündigungsschutzgesetz überhaupt nicht.\n\nDie Regelungen haben ebenso wenig Bedeutung bei größeren, tarifgebundenen Unternehmen, wo es entweder Haustarifverträge oder die von dem Kollegen Dr. Linnemann schon erwähnten Tarifverträge gibt - Stichwort IG BCE -, die eine zum Teil noch viel längere sachgrundlose Befristung zulassen. Betroffen sind die Betriebe, die sich in der schwierigen Sandwichposition, also dazwischen, befinden, das heißt mehr als zehn Arbeitnehmerinnen oder Arbeitnehmer haben, aber noch kein Großbetrieb sind, der ohnehin mitbestimmt ist, wo es einen Betriebsrat gibt, wo es eine Gewerkschaft gibt, wo auf solche Sachen ohnehin mit Einstellungskriterien und mit einem Haustarifvertrag reagiert wird. Diese Betriebe schaffen Arbeitsplätze in Deutschland. Sie brauchen in diesem Haus einen Anwalt, und das werden die Unionsfraktion und Personen wie Herr Dr. Linnemann als Vorsitzender unserer Mittelstands- und Wirtschaftsvereinigung sein. Menschen wie er sorgen dafür, dass diese Betriebe weiterhin einen Anwalt im Bundestag haben. Sie brauchen die Möglichkeit der sachgrundlosen Befristung, um atmen zu können.\n\nTäuschen Sie sich nicht: Vermeintliche Sachgründe wie „Wir haben jetzt einen Auftrag, und zur Abwicklung dieses Auftrages stellen wir befristet mehr Menschen ein“ sind vor Arbeitsgerichten in Deutschland unsicher. Ich bin in diesem Bereich seit einigen Jahren beratend tätig. Als verantwortlicher Jurist wird man keinem Betriebsinhaber sagen können: Mit dieser Begründung kannst du dich, wenn die Auftragslage schlechter wird oder wenn dieser Auftrag abgewickelt ist, ohne Weiteres und ohne Abfindung wieder von den Arbeitnehmern trennen. - Diese Trennung wollen die Arbeitgeber ja nicht, um den Arbeitnehmern irgendetwas Schlechtes zu tun, sondern weil sie schlicht und ergreifend nicht mehr bezahlbar sind. Bevor Betriebe in die Gefahr kommen, notleidend zu werden oder sogar in die Insolvenz zu gehen, zumindest in eine ganz schwere Schieflage zu kommen, müssen wir dem Mittelstand die Luft zum Atmen geben. Insofern ist es richtig, dass dieses Instrumentarium erhalten bleibt.\n\nWenn man sich den Koalitionsvertrag insgesamt anschaut - das ist in dieser Debatte etwas zu kurz gekommen -, dann muss man sagen: Er ist nicht zu mittelstandslastig, sondern er ist gerade im sozialpolitischen Bereich erheblicher Kritik aus dem Arbeitgeberlager ausgesetzt. Deswegen geht Ihre Kritik, dass wir die Interessen der Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer nicht hinreichend gewürdigt hätten, vollkommen fehl. Das ist ein ausgewogener Koalitionsvertrag. Auch in diesem Bereich werden wir ihn umsetzen und dafür sorgen, dass es noch mehr Beschäftigung in Deutschland gibt.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4350,paul-lehrieder,\"Frau Kollegin, Sie haben gerade ausgeführt, dass Bayern 125 Prozent der Kinder fördert. Das würden wir gerne tun; aber das ist in Bayern gar nicht nötig. Stimmen Sie mir zu, dass nach diesem Rechenmodell, wenn 50 Prozent der Kinder eine Kita besuchen und für 70 Prozent der verbleibenden 50 Prozent Betreuungsgeld gezahlt wird, insgesamt etwa 70 bis 80 Prozent eine Förderung erhalten? Die 70 Prozent beziehen sich nämlich auf die verbleibenden 50 Prozent, nur um die mathematischen Grundrechenarten für Sie etwas aufzufrischen, Frau Kollegin. Stimmen Sie mir zu, dass das einen Prozentsatz ergibt, der unter 100 Prozent liegen dürfte?\"\n11445,thorsten-frei,\"Liebe Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Natürlich ist jeder Tote im Mittelmeer ein Toter zu viel.\n\n- Jetzt hören Sie doch bitte erst einmal zu.\n\n- Das werde ich Ihnen sofort erklären, liebe Frau Hänsel. - Natürlich bedrückt uns die Tatsache, dass seit Beginn des Jahres 2014 10 000 Menschen im Mittelmeer gestorben sind. Deswegen haben wir die Anträge von Grünen und Linken sehr aufmerksam gelesen.\n\nAber ich muss Ihnen sagen, dass Sie sowohl in der Analyse als auch in den Schlussfolgerungen, die Sie daraus ziehen, danebenliegen.\n\nEinige Punkte sind in dieser Debatte bereits genannt worden. Erstens. Natürlich kann es nie gelingen, ein Netz zu spannen, das alle, die im Mittelmeer in Lebensgefahr sind, schützt. Zweitens. Damit setzt man natürlich auch Fluchtanreize und unterstützt vor allen Dingen das dreckige Geschäft von Schleppern insoweit, als man Gefahr läuft, das letzte Stück der schmutzigen Arbeit der Schleuser, die Menschen auf ihren Kähnen auf hohe See bringen und dort ihrem Schicksal überlassen, mitzuerledigen. Deswegen glaube ich: Das, was wir tun, ist erstens gut und zweitens richtig.\n\nIch bitte Folgendes zu bedenken: Die Frontex-Operationen Triton und Poseidon haben inzwischen qualitativ und quantitativ das Ausmaß von Mare Nostrum angenommen. Darüber hinaus gibt es EUNAVFOR MED und die NATO-Operation in der Ägäis. Fakt ist, dass Europa noch nie so viel Personal, noch nie so viel Kapazitäten und noch nie so viel Geld in die Waagschale geworfen hat, damit wir am Ende erfolgreich sein können. Die Zahlen bestätigen das: In den vergangenen zwölf Monaten wurden 60 000 Menschen von Frontex gerettet, 15 000 bis 16 000 Menschen sind alleine durch deutsche Marinesoldaten im Rahmen von EUNAVFOR MED gerettet worden, und in der Ägäis ist überhaupt niemand mehr gestorben, weil die Westbalkanroute zu ist und es die Vereinbarung zwischen der Europäischen Union und der Türkei gibt.\n\nBitte schön.\n\nNein, Frau Kollegin Dağdelen, das ist aus unserer Sicht keine Möglichkeit. Ich werde gleich noch etwas zum Thema „legale Migration“ sagen. Wenn Sie glauben, dass man 1,8 Millionen illegale Grenzübertritte nach Deutschland im vergangenen Jahr zu legalen Grenzübertritten machen sollte, sage ich dazu klipp und klar Nein. Es gibt andere Dinge, mit denen wir versuchen, dieses Problem nachhaltig zu lösen.\n\nEs ist falsch, wenn Sie sagen, dass EUNAVFOR MED vor der Küste Libyens die Seenotrettung sozusagen nur nebenbei erledigen würde.\n\nNein, es ist geradezu nachhaltig, wenn man darüber hinaus auch gegen Schlepper und Schmuggler vorgeht, auch gegen Waffenschmuggler, und man einen Beitrag dazu leistet, auf mittlere Sicht letztlich auch Marine und Küstenschutz zu ertüchtigen, ihre Aufgaben zu erledigen.\n\nEs geht doch darum, das Problem nachhaltig zu lösen, und nicht darum, Strohfeuer zu löschen. Es ist richtig, dass es eine humanitäre Pflicht zur Seenotrettung gibt. Wer den Einsatz aber auf die Seenotrettung begrenzt - das tun Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen auch -,\n\nwer sagt, dass das Mandat, über das wir nachher sprechen werden, kontraproduktiv und hochriskant ist, und alles andere außer Acht lässt, der ist letztlich naiv. Das wollen wir nicht. Deshalb ist das, was wir machen, richtig.\n\nSie haben einen richtigen Satz gesagt. Natürlich muss es das Ziel sein, dass die Menschen gar nicht erst die schwierige Fahrt über das Mittelmeer machen. Deswegen muss man an dieser Stelle auch sagen, dass man etwas tun muss, um Fluchtursachen zu bekämpfen.\n\nIn Ihrem Antrag werfen Sie uns aber vor, diesbezüglich bliebe alles vage. Das ist doch überhaupt nicht so. Erst in dieser Woche hat die Bundeskanzlerin in mehreren Reden darauf hingewiesen,\n\ndass die Bekämpfung von Fluchtursachen und Migration wahrscheinlich die größte Herausforderung in der ersten Hälfte dieses Jahrhunderts sein wird.\n\nSchauen Sie sich die Maßnahmen der Europäischen Union an, beispielsweise die Tatsache, dass die Europäische Union im Rahmen eines Migrationspaktes 8 Milliarden Euro bis zum Jahr 2020 zur Verfügung stellen möchte; gehebelt durch private Folgeinvestitionen soll diese Summe auf 64 Milliarden Euro anwachsen. Denken Sie daran, dass die Europäische Investitionsbank in den nächsten fünf Jahren ihre Projektmittel verdoppeln möchte und 6 Milliarden Euro zur Verfügung stellt - gehebelt durch private Mittel wächst dies letztlich auf 15 Milliarden Euro an -, um insbesondere Länder wie Jordanien, den Libanon und die Türkei, aber auch afrikanische Länder zu unterstützen, um dort letztlich Perspektiven zum Bleiben zu stärken. Ich glaube, dass das der richtige Ansatz ist und dass er im Übrigen auch lohnend ist. Wir wissen, dass wir in Deutschland in diesem und im nächsten Jahr insgesamt 50 Milliarden Euro aufzuwenden haben, um die Unterbringung und Integration von Flüchtlingen zu gewährleisten. Ich glaube, dass dieses Geld in den Herkunftsländern sehr viel besser angelegt ist.\n\nIch will zuletzt sagen: Ja, es ist falsch, wenn Sie behaupten, dass wir nichts tun, um legale Migration zu ermöglichen. Natürlich hat die Kommission einen Vorschlag vorgelegt, durch den die Bluecard reformiert werden soll. Aber wir verstehen vielleicht etwas anderes darunter. Wir können über ein Einwanderungsgesetz reden, aber Einwanderung heißt, dass wir die zu uns holen, die unsere Gesellschaft tatsächlich weiterbringen. Wir können im Rahmen der legalen Migration auch über Resettlement-Programme sprechen.\n\nAber wir können illegale Migration nicht wie in der Vergangenheit eins zu eins zu legaler Migration machen.\n\nDeswegen muss man darüber sprechen, ob man die Seenotrettung nicht anders vornehmen sollte. Man muss auch überlegen, ob es nicht besser ist, Möglichkeiten zu finden, Flüchtlinge erst gar nicht auf das europäische Festland zu bringen. Diese Abschreckungseffekte sollen sich nicht gegen Flüchtlinge, sondern letztlich gegen Schlepper richten. Darüber müssen wir uns Gedanken machen. Wir dürfen uns durchaus anschauen, wie das in anderen Ländern geschieht, die damit erfolgreich sind und letztlich verhindern, dass es Tote auf See gibt.\n\nÜber all diese Themen sollten wir uns Gedanken machen. Dann wird eine nachhaltige Lösung daraus und kein ideologisches Strohfeuer, wie wir es hier in Ihren Reden erlebt haben.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n5527,marcus-held,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Das Thema, mit dem wir uns heute zu befassen haben, ist ein gesamtgesellschaftliches Thema; denn die Situation und Ausgangslage bei der Überwachung von Gebäuden, von Straßen, von Plätzen, von Veranstaltungen haben sich in den zurückliegenden Jahren stark gewandelt. Das hat Auswirkungen auf das tägliche Leben unserer Mitbürgerinnen und Mitbürger, auf ihr -Sicherheitsempfinden und damit auf die Lebensqualität.\n\nEs geht ganz zentral um das Gewaltmonopol des Staates, um die Frage, ob unsere heutigen Regularien hierfür überhaupt noch anwendbar sind. War es bis vor einigen Jahren völlig klar, dass vom Gewaltmonopol des Staates auszugehen ist und im Bereich der Bewachung und der Sicherheit und Ordnung keine Privatisierung -erfolgt, so leisten heute in ganz Deutschland über 185 000 Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter privater Sicherheitsdienste einen großen Beitrag zur Gefahrenabwehr und sind damit innerhalb unserer Sicherheitsarchitektur nicht wegzudenken. Ob wir als Gesetzgeber die rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen diesen Veränderungen bereits angepasst haben, das ist leider mehr als fraglich.\n\nWir müssen sehen, dass sich hier zwei Interessen gegenüberstehen. Zum einen ist da die althergebrachte und in unserer Rechtsordnung tief verwurzelte Auffassung, dass das Gewaltmonopol grundsätzlich beim Staat liegt. Nach dieser Auffassung bestehen Eingriffsrechte nur durch Organe des Staates: durch die Polizei, ihre Hilfsbehörden sowie kommunale Ordnungsämter in abgestufter Weise. Dieser seit Jahrzehnten in unserer Rechts-ordnung verbriefte Grundsatz ist nicht zuletzt vor dem Hintergrund unserer Geschichte durchaus nachvollziehbar und begründet. Auf der anderen Seite müssen wir, wenn 185 000 Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter in privaten Sicherheitsdiensten heute vergleichbare Aufgaben in unserer Gesellschaft verrichten, prüfen, welche Rechte diesen Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern zukommen sollen und ob diese Rechte dann nicht mehr bei der Polizei und damit bei dem Gewaltmonopol des Staates liegen müssen.\n\nVoraussetzung für eine solche Übertragung und Veränderung des Rechtssystems ist allerdings, dass private Sicherheitsfirmen in der öffentlichen Wahrnehmung unumstritten sind, breites Ansehen und Anerkennung genießen, wie dies beispielsweise bei der Polizei der Fall ist.\n\nDiese Anerkennung kann nur erreicht werden, wenn die Qualität der privaten Sicherheitsdienste stimmt und wenn vor allem die qualitative Auswahl des Personals sichergestellt ist. Deshalb haben wir im Koalitionsvertrag festgeschrieben, dass wir verbindliche Anforderungen an Seriosität und Zuverlässigkeit privater Dienstleister und ihrer Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter stellen wollen.\n\nEine Arbeitsgruppe zur Überprüfung und Überarbeitung des Bewachungsrechts ist unter dem Vorsitz des BMWi eingerichtet worden. Sie soll noch in diesem Jahr entsprechende Lösungsvorschläge erarbeiten und vorlegen. Wir wollen die Ergebnisse der Kommission abwarten und dann gemeinsam Verbesserungen umsetzen.\n\nDerzeit ist das Bewachungsgewerbe in § 34 a der Gewerbeordnung und in der Bewachungsverordnung geregelt. Die Erteilungsvoraussetzungen sind sehr niederschwellig. Das Gleiche gilt leider auch für Personen, die in Bewachungsunternehmen beschäftigt sind. Was kann und soll sich ändern?\n\nWir haben uns heute mit dem Antrag der Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Grünen zu befassen und sind im Gegensatz zu dem, was Sie in Ihrem Antrag schreiben, nicht der Auffassung, dass wir § 31 der Gewerbeordnung ausdehnen sollten; denn § 31 der Gewerbeordnung beschäftigt sich mit Bewachungsunternehmen, die auf Seeschiffen tätig sind und zur Bekämpfung von Piratenangriffen eingesetzt werden. Diese Aufgabe ist mit einem durchschnittlichen Bewachungsgewerbe nicht vergleichbar. Das Zulassungsverfahren wäre zu aufwendig und kostenintensiv. Außerdem würde es die Gefahr mit sich bringen, dass kleine Bewachungsunternehmen vom Markt verdrängt würden. In der Praxis liegen die Probleme zudem nicht bei den Unternehmen, sondern beim eingesetzten Bewachungspersonal. Hier müssen wir ansetzen. Eine gute Ausbildung, ein gutes Auftreten und vor allem Fingerspitzengefühl in brenzligen Situation sind beim Bewachungspersonal wichtig.\n\nGenau in diese Richtung ist die Arbeitsgruppe in ihrer ersten Sitzung im Januar gegangen. Es werden die Erhöhung der Sachkundeanforderungen für die Bewacherinnen und Bewacher, die Einführung regelmäßiger Zuverlässigkeitsüberprüfungen und anderes vorgeschlagen. Weitere Ansätze für Qualitätsverbesserungen können sich durch die Weiterentwicklung der Norm DIN 77200 ergeben, die sich mit genau diesen Anforderungen befasst. Wir haben uns in diesem Jahr aber auch noch mit dem Vergaberecht zu beschäftigen. Gerade durch Verbesserungen im Vergaberecht können wir für das Bewachungsgewerbe einiges auf den Weg bringen; denn wenn es um Menschen geht, kann nicht immer nur der Preis entscheiden. Hier muss vor allem die Qualität stimmen. Deshalb ist als wichtiges Auswahlkriterium der Nachweis qualitätssichernder Standards einzuführen.\n\nQualität hat ihren Preis, und das ist auch gut so für die Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter in diesem privaten Sektor.\n\nWir wollen keine Regelung auf EU-Ebene - auch das sage ich deutlich -, da dies nur zu EU-Minimalstandards und damit zu einer Absenkung des Niveaus in Deutschland führen würde.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich zusammenfassen: Wir wollen die Anforderungen an Seriosität und Zuverlässigkeit privater Sicherheitsfirmen erhöhen, indem wir Änderungen im Gewerberecht vornehmen. Qualifizierte private Sicherheitsdienste können zur wirksamen Entlastung der Polizei in unserem Land beitragen und die Sicherheit der Bürgerinnen und Bürger in Deutschland verbessern. Dazu muss aber sichergestellt werden, dass solche Privaten zum Zuge kommen, die genau die Qualifikationen, die ich genannt habe, nachweisen.\n\nWir müssen in dieser Debatte aber auch die grundsätzliche Frage beantworten, ob wir bereit sind, gesetzlich verankerte Befugnisse des staatlichen Gewaltmonopols Polizei auf private Sicherheitsdienstleister zu übertragen, wie zum Beispiel die Überprüfung von Personalien oder die Aussprache von Platzverweisen. Viele Tausend Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter privater Sicherheitsfirmen unterstützen schon heute die Ordnungsämter unserer Städte bei der täglichen Arbeit. Auch hier werden wir zu entscheiden haben, wie wir dazu stehen. Am Ende bleibt die Kernfrage: Rütteln wir am staatlichen Gewaltmonopol aus Artikel 33 des Grundgesetzes oder nicht? Die heutige Diskussion über das Bewachungsrecht ist nur ein Einstieg.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n276,beate-walter-rosenheimer,\"Ja.\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Staatssekretärin. - Ich habe eine Zusatzfrage. Sie haben schon erwähnt, dass die Anzahl der Jugendlichen und jungen Menschen, die das Förderprogramm in Anspruch nimmt, steigt. Haben Sie dazu Zahlen? Wie viele sind das? Wie läuft das? Wie haben Sie geplant, dieses Programm weiterzuführen?\n\nVielen Dank. - Ich würde mich freuen, wenn Sie mir die Zahlen zukommen ließen.\n\nHaben Sie irgendwelche Pläne? Wird darüber diskutiert, die Willkommensstruktur zu verändern oder vielleicht auch etwas zu tun, um den Eindruck, der in Europa entstanden ist, zu verändern?\"\n11946,valerie-wilms,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Kollege. - Sie haben ja gerade eben so schön getönt, dass alles, was im Bundesverkehrswegeplan drinsteht, finanzierbar und realistisch ist und auch tatsächlich kommen soll. Im Zusammenhang mit dem Bundesverkehrswegeplan wird immer von einer sogenannten Schleppe ab 2031 geredet. Der Bundesverkehrswegeplan geht aber nur bis 2030. Bis 2030 wollen Sie 38,5 Milliarden Euro investieren und danach noch einmal 42,8 Milliarden Euro. Sie haben damit eigentlich schon den Bundesverkehrswegeplan 2045 vorgelegt. Aber in dem Gesetzentwurf, der uns vorliegt, verschweigen Sie ja, welche Projekte dieser übernächste Bundesverkehrswegeplan beinhaltet. Können Sie uns einmal sagen, welche das sein werden? Darauf bin ich gespannt.\n\nHerr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Dobrindt, -\n\n- es ist ja ganz interessant, wie Sie hier immer auf den Grünen herumdreschen. Wenn ich mich richtig entsinne - ich bin ja schon ein paar Jährchen älter -, dann hat es im Bund noch keinen einzigen grünen Verkehrsminister gegeben.\n\nEs wird höchste Zeit, dass endlich einmal Realität und Vernunft in diese Hütte an der Invalidenstraße einziehen.\n\nIch hoffe, dass das nächstes Jahr gelingen wird.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Selbstbeweihräucherung, die wir hier eben erlebt haben, lässt sich mit einem altbekannten Sprichwort zusammenfassen: Eigenlob stinkt, und zwar stinkt es gewaltig zum Himmel - auch in Bayern. Es stinkt nicht nur, sondern das, was Sie hier machen, hat auch gar nichts mehr mit der Realität zu tun.\n\nDeswegen wird es Zeit, den Leuten reinen Wein einzuschenken.\n\nWir müssen es so sagen, wie es ist. Im Wort „Bundesverkehrswegeplan“ ist der Begriff „Plan“ enthalten. Daher müssten Sie eigentlich auch einen Plan haben. Sie haben aber keinen. Es gibt keinen. Der Bundesverkehrswegeplan ist im besten Fall so etwas wie eine grobe Empfehlung, was man vielleicht einmal machen könnte.\n\nDemnächst werden sich wieder viele Wahlkreisabgeordnete für ein Projekt feiern, das im Plan steht. Ich gucke einmal zu meinem lieben Kollegen aus Schleswig-Holstein, aus der beschaulichen Stadt Lauenburg an der Elbe und am Elbe-Lübeck-Kanal.\n\nIn den Bundesverkehrswegeplan, sogar in den Vordringlichen Bedarf zur Engpassbeseitigung, ist auf einmal ein Projekt namens Elbe-Lübeck-Kanal gekommen. Es handelt sich um eine beschauliche Wasserstraße für den touristischen Verkehr.\n\nJetzt wird irgendwo behauptet und davon geträumt, man könne dort wieder Güterverkehr stattfinden lassen. Dafür verplanen Sie 838 Millionen Euro. Das sind mehr als 10 Prozent dessen, was insgesamt für die Wasserstraße vorgesehen ist. Dieses Geld würde ich lieber in die Sanierung maroder Schleusen stecken als in so ein System, eine Wette auf die Zukunft.\n\nDaran zeigt sich deutlich, was das Ganze ist: nichts weiter als Wahlkreisbeglückung.\n\nDenn solch ein Eintrag in die Listen bedeutet erst einmal gar nichts. Die meisten Kolleginnen und Kollegen wissen es entweder nicht so genau oder wollen es nicht wissen. Wir müssen es deswegen einmal erklären: Herr Dobrindt spricht gerne vom großartigen Investitionsprogramm. Er behauptet, alles sei durchfinanziert. Wie er darauf kommt, ist und bleibt schleierhaft. So unterschlägt er den sogenannten Weiteren Bedarf. Dieser umfasst Projekte für über 40 Milliarden Euro. Bei der Finanzplanung fehlen sie aber.\n\nHierfür wird nie Geld da sein. Der Weitere Bedarf - Herr Herzog, Sie können nachher noch erzählen - steht nur aus einem einzigen Grund im Plan: aus purer Feigheit. Sie trauen sich nicht, den Menschen draußen zu sagen, dass das, was dort steht, sowieso nicht zu erreichen ist.\n\nAber auch im Vordringlichen Bedarf wird es nicht besser. Weil Sie viel zu viel versprechen, haben Sie die sogenannte Schleppe erfunden; das ist eigentlich eine infektiöse Kinderkrankheit.\n\nDie „Schleppe“ ist nichts weiter als ein plumper Taschenspielertrick.\n\nSie versprechen einen Gewinn, sagen aber nicht, dass er erst in der übernächsten Runde ausgezahlt wird.\n\nNeben diesen Taschenspielertricks, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, gibt es eine weitere riesige Lücke zwischen Plan und Realität. Zunächst einmal wird die Mehrheit in diesem Haus einen völlig illusorischen Plan durchdrücken. Spannend wird aber erst, was davon tatsächlich im Haushalt landet. Denn der Plan hat noch gar keine Auswirkungen. Finanziert wird das nachher erst über den Haushalt, und der von uns beschlossene Haushalt ist in der Realität leider nur eine grobe Empfehlung. In den vergangenen Jahren wurden die Mittel für die umweltfreundlichen Verkehrsmittel regelmäßig nicht so ausgegeben, wie wir als Haushaltsgesetzgeber es beschlossen haben.\n\nWo ist das Geld gelandet? - Damit komme ich zum Schluss, Herr Präsident.\n\nWo ist das Geld gelandet? Das haben wir auch gestern wieder gesehen. Zum größten Teil ist das Geld irgendwo in Bayern, in irgendwelchen bayerischen Umgehungsstraßen versackt.\n\nIch fordere Sie deswegen zu einer ehrlichen Prüfung der Gesetzentwürfe auf. Haben Sie endlich Mut! Streichen Sie das, was nicht bezahlt werden kann! Machen Sie Schluss mit diesem unglaubwürdigen Verhalten!\n\nDanke.\n\nHerr Kollege Herzog, Sie haben eben wirklich super dargestellt, worauf es Ihnen ankam, nämlich darauf, dass Sie sich dafür abfeiern lassen konnten,\n\ndass ein Projekt in Ihrem Wahlkreis in diesem Plan steht.\n\nIch rate Ihnen dringend, einmal einen Blick in Artikel 38 des von uns so geliebten Grundgesetzes zu werfen.\n\nDarin steht - ich zitiere -: „Sie sind Vertreter des ganzen Volkes ...“. - Sie sind also nicht nur Vertreter Ihres Wahlkreises,\n\nund es wäre deshalb sehr hilfreich, wenn Sie Ihre Äußerungen und Ihr ganzes Handeln auf eine Gesamtstruktur, die wir für den Verkehr brauchen, ausrichten würden.\n\nSie haben ja super zitiert, wie wir das haben wollen. Wir wollen nämlich einen Netzplan und nicht ein Sammelsurium an einzelnen Wünschen haben, die von den Wahlkreisabgeordneten, von den Ministerpräsidenten oder von Sonstigen geäußert werden.\n\nWie wollen Sie das in diesen Plan eigentlich noch hineinbringen? Wie haben Sie das vor? Oder wollen Sie sich schlicht und ergreifend einfach nicht ans Grundgesetz halten?\"\n6065,albert-stegemann,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! In den vergangenen Wochen erschienen immer wieder Beiträge in den Medien, ob nun bei Stern TV oder in den Zeitungen, die von aktuellen Stellenverlagerungen bei der Post berichteten. Die Nachricht von der Schaffung der Servicegesellschaft, der DHL Delivery GmbH, löste bei so manchem Zeitgenossen reflexartige Reaktionen wie „Mehr Arbeit für weniger Geld“ aus. Passende persönliche Schicksale waren ebenfalls schnell gefunden und rundeten dieses Bild ab.\n\nIn den Augen der Kritiker ist dies ein weiteres Beispiel für mangelndes Verantwortungsbewusstsein von Unternehmen in unserem Land. In diesem Zusammenhang reichen die Vorwürfe von einer Auslagerung in prekäre Beschäftigungsverhältnisse über die Schaffung einer Zweiklassenbeschäftigung bis zur Aushöhlung der Tarifverträge. Wir haben das alles schon gehört. Kurz gesagt: Bei der Post würden die gleichen Zustände wie damals bei Schlecker, der Fleischindustrie oder den Gebäudereinigern herrschen.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund möchte ich den Kollegen von der Linken danken, dass sie dieses Thema in einer Aktuellen Stunde aufgegriffen haben.\n\nDoch während bei Ihnen die Alarmglocken schellen und Sie alle rhetorischen Register ziehen, muss ich Ihnen sagen: Fehlalarm. Denn ich bin der Überzeugung, dass in dem hier herangezogenen Fall die Schlagzeilen zu kurz greifen und teilweise politisch motiviert sind. Deshalb freue ich mich außerordentlich, hier jetzt einen Beitrag zur Versachlichung leisten zu dürfen.\n\nDie Logistikbranche in der Bundesrepublik ist ein Bereich, der wie kaum ein anderer von hoher Dynamik gekennzeichnet ist.\n\nWir sehen hier einen enormen Wachstumsmarkt. Zugleich stehen die Dienstleister wie DHL, Hermes, DPD und UPS, um nur einige Beispiele zu nennen, in starker Konkurrenz zueinander. Dieser Wettbewerb wird ganz maßgeblich über den Preis ausgetragen. Das kommt nicht zuletzt auch den Kunden zugute.\n\nDie Post bzw. deren Logistikdienstleister DHL hat das Wachstumspotenzial des Marktes erkannt. Der Konzern hat nun Schritte eingeleitet, um langfristig und erfolgreich auf dem Markt bestehen zu können. Damit nimmt der Konzern die Verantwortung für seine Mitarbeiter wahr, da eine wettbewerbsfähige Unternehmensstruktur letztlich auch immer im Interesse der Mitarbeiter ist.\n\nDen Vorwurf, das alles sei eine Art des plumpen Lohndumpings, lasse ich an dieser Stelle nicht gelten.\n\nSo fand diese Umstrukturierung doch im Korsett von Rechtsstaat und Tarifautonomie statt und nicht in einer Wildwestmanier, wie wir sie in der Vergangenheit teilweise haben erleben müssen.\n\nWir sehen an dieser Stelle also kein Outsourcing oder gar Tarifflucht. Was aktuell passiert, ist lediglich der Wechsel eines kleinen Teils der Belegschaft in einen anderen Tarifvertrag. An dieser Stelle sei angemerkt, dass wir in den Regionalgesellschaften von einem Durchschnittslohn von 12,79 Euro pro Stunde sprechen.\n\nIm Übrigen werden bei den 49 Gesellschaften in den kommenden Jahren etwa 20 000 Stellen geschaffen. Noch einmal: Die hier geltenden Verträge sind nicht irgendwelche Schmuddelverträge. Nein, diese sind ordentlich tarifiert und auch unbefristet.\n\nDie Entscheidung, tarifliche Gestaltungsspielräume zu nutzen, fußt in diesem Fall also nicht etwa auf dem Wunsch, jenseits der bestehenden Regelungen die schnelle Mark zu machen. Nein, ein gutes Unternehmertum muss sich auch immer wieder auf aktuelle Entwicklungen einstellen und darauf reagieren. Die Vergangenheit hat gezeigt, dass die Sozialpartner solche Herausforderungen gemeinsam und erfolgreich bewältigen können. Ich für meinen Teil kann nicht erkennen, dass sich die Deutsche Post nun von diesem Grundsatz verabschiedet hat. Eine funktionierende Sozialpartnerschaft bedeutet aber nicht, dass der Wunsch nach einer guten Tariflandschaft immer auch mit dem Wunsch nach dem höchsten Tarifabschluss einhergehen muss. Dieser letzte Satz ist kein Ausdruck falsch verstandener Unternehmerfreundlichkeit, sondern ein Ausdruck des Respekts vor der Unabhängigkeit der Tarifpartner.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n2922,volker-kauder,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Ich bin wieder einmal - es wird nicht überraschen - ganz anderer Auffassung als Gregor Gysi.\n\nGerade an diesem Tag! Wir haben uns diesen Tag für eine Debatte zunächst nicht ausgesucht, uns dann aber bewusst entschieden, diese Debatte am 1. September zu führen. Denn dies ist auch eine Botschaft. Sie lautet - im Gegensatz zu dem, was Gregor Gysi sagt -: Wir alle wollen heute miteinander - die Linke einmal ausgeschlossen; ich beziehe die Grünen ein - einen Beitrag dazu leisten - über das, was konkret gemacht werden soll, reden wir noch -, dass Frieden entsteht und Krieg gerade nicht.\n\nDas ist die Botschaft des heutigen Tages.\n\nJa, Herr Hofreiter, während wir hier diskutieren, leiden Menschen in Syrien, im Irak und auch anderswo. Aber sie haben auch auf die Entscheidung gewartet, die gestern die zuständigen Ministerien getroffen haben, und sie warten darauf, was wir heute im Deutschen Bundestag sagen. Deswegen bin ich froh, dass von allen Gruppen, die in Syrien und im Irak betroffen sind, heute Vertreter auf unserer Ehrentribüne anwesend sind; wir haben sie zu dieser Debatte am heutigen Tag eingeladen.\n\nJesiden, Assyrer, chaldäische Katholiken, Aleviten und auch Vertreter unserer Kirchen sind hier heute anwesend. Dies zeigt, dass dieses Thema doch sehr bewegt.\n\nDie Frage, was wir jetzt tun können, um im Irak oder auch in Syrien zu helfen, ist nicht ganz einfach zu beantworten. Deswegen ist es gut, wenn wir uns intensiver damit befassen.\n\nHerr Gysi, man kann zu unterschiedlichen Einschätzungen hinsichtlich der Ereignisse im Jahr 2003 im Irak kommen; das will ich gar nicht bestreiten. Aber der ISIS - damals hat er noch so geheißen - ist nicht im Irak entstanden, sondern in Syrien. Die ganze Welt hat zugeschaut, wie er dort immer stärker geworden ist.\n\nIch habe schon damals gesagt, Amerika müsse sich der Sache annehmen, doch alle haben geschrien: Keine Einmischung! - Der ISIS ist dann zum „Islamischen Staat“ geworden, als er, ermutigt durch die Erfolge in Syrien, in den Irak eingefallen ist. Das ist die Verbindung. Die These, weil die Amerikaner den Irak angegriffen haben, sei der ISIS entstanden, ist grottenfalsch. Der ISIS ist in Syrien entstanden.\n\nJetzt geht es darum, zu helfen. Vollkommen unabhängig davon, wie die Situation entstanden ist, muss den Menschen, die in konkreter Not sind, geholfen werden. Eine Diskussion, bei der es um das Wann, Hätte und Wäre geht, hilft nicht weiter. Hunderttausende Flüchtlinge leben in dramatischen Verhältnissen. Wir, die wir in Arbil waren und uns dort umgesehen haben - das waren die Kollegen Schockenhoff, Mißfelder und ich -, haben das gesehen. Dort wurde uns gesagt, wir müssten helfen, damit sich die ohnehin schon bestehende menschliche Katastrophe nicht noch weiter verschärfe. Der kurdische Präsident Barsani hat zu mir gesagt, sie seien 5 Millionen Menschen, jetzt erwarteten sie, dass bis zu 1,4 Millionen Flüchtlinge bei ihnen leben würden. Das ist in etwa so, als wenn 20 bis 30 Millionen Flüchtlinge in die Bundesrepublik Deutschland kämen. Er sagte, das könnten wir ihnen nicht alleine überlassen. Deswegen bittet er mit Recht darum, dass wir humanitäre Hilfe leisten.\n\nDas hat die Bundesrepublik Deutschland getan; das muss ich an dieser Stelle einmal sagen. Nicht irgendjemand ist dort hingeflogen, es war nicht ein Transporter von irgendjemandem, sondern es waren Ursula von der Leyen und ihr Kollege Steinmeier aus dem Auswärtigen Amt, die den Transport der Güter dorthin begleitet haben. Herzlichen Dank dafür, dass Sie dies geleistet haben.\n\nFrau Roth, es ist richtig, dass die Hilfe nicht ausreicht und dass noch mehr getan werden muss. Aber es wäre völlig falsch, nun zu fordern, Deutschland solle an dieser Ecke noch etwas mehr machen, Frankreich an jener usw. Wir brauchen eine in Europa koordinierte Hilfe. Mir haben die Vertreterin von UNICEF, der Oberbürgermeister von Arbil, ein Deutschkurde, und andere gesagt, dass sie erwarten, dass Europa seine Hilfe koordiniert; denn sie brauchen keine vielen kleineren Hilfspakete, deren Verteilung sie vor Ort dann wieder organisieren müssen.\n\nWorauf kommt es jetzt an? Natürlich geht es zum einen um Lebensmittelpakete. Aber vor allen Dingen müssen jetzt die Voraussetzungen dafür geschaffen werden, dass die Menschen durch den Winter kommen.\n\nIn Dohuk leben Zehntausende Menschen auf dem blanken Boden, der, wenn es regnet, zu Schlamm wird. Sie haben nur ein Zeltdach über sich, sonst nichts. In Arbil leben die Menschen in nicht fertiggestellten Parkhäusern, in nicht fertiggestellten Hochhäusern. Es gibt Tausende von Kindern, die auf dem nackten Betonboden liegen müssen, die dort leben müssen und in vielen Fällen nicht einmal das Nötigste zum Überleben haben. Sie brauchen jetzt Hilfe. Diese Hilfe kann vor Ort geleistet werden. Man hat mir gesagt, man bräuchte für den Winter Container, damit wenigstens die vielen Familien untergebracht werden könnten. Wenn man bedenkt, was ein solcher Container kostet, dann kommt man auf Gesamtkosten bei diesem Projekt von insgesamt 200 bis 300 Millionen Euro. Da kann ich nur sagen: Wenn dies die europäische Gemeinschaft nicht hat, dann muss man wirklich verzweifeln, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen. Dann müsste man verzweifeln.\n\nDeshalb bin ich der Bundeskanzlerin und dem Außenminister auch dankbar, dass sie mithelfen, diese Mittel auf europäischer Ebene zu mobilisieren. Sie sind ja da, und die Container können vor Ort fertiggestellt werden. Es bleiben dann acht Wochen.\n\nWarum ist dies so wichtig? Wenn man eineinhalb oder zwei Tage lang in einer solchen Region ist, kann man, auch wenn man mit noch so vielen Menschen gesprochen hat, nicht sagen: Ich habe mit den Menschen gesprochen, und die Menschen haben mir dieses und jenes gesagt. - Wir haben schon mit vielen Menschen gesprochen, und die Botschaft war: „Wir würden gerne wieder in unsere Heimat zurück“; denn viele haben dort etwas verloren. Sie hatten einen kleinen Handwerksbetrieb, sie hatten ein kleines Geschäft oder waren als Lehrer tätig, und sie sagen: Wir hatten ein kleines Häuschen oder eine Wohnung, wir hatten also etwas. Dorthin wollen wir wieder zurück, aber natürlich nur, wenn ihr uns beschützen könnt. - Im Augenblick ist es wohl kaum zuzusagen, dass die Menschen in ihre Heimat zurück und dort auch beschützt werden können.\n\nÜbrigens - das macht das ganze menschliche Drama deutlich -: Das bezieht sich teilweise auch auf das Verhältnis zu den Nachbarn. Es wurde erzählt, dass man, auch wenn man seit Jahrzehnten mit den Nachbarn zusammengelebt hat, eines Morgens nach dem Aufwachen feststellen musste, dass ein „N“ an der Türe stand. Die Nachbarn haben sie überfallen und hinausgeworfen und ihnen alles weggenommen.\n\nDeswegen haben die Menschen Sorge davor, zurückzugehen, und deshalb sagen sie: Wir brauchen eine Stabilisierung vor Ort. - Andere haben mir berichtet, sie glaubten nicht mehr an eine Perspektive, und deshalb wollen sie das Land verlassen. Beides gibt es. Deswegen ist es richtig, mehr Flüchtlinge aufzunehmen.\n\nEs ist aber ein glatter Irrtum, zu glauben, nur damit, Flüchtlinge aufzunehmen, sei das Problem gelöst. Wir müssen vor Ort helfen, um den Menschen dort eine Perspektive zu geben.\n\nEs hat mich sehr angerührt - Sie wissen, dass ich bei solchen Fragen nicht so leicht sensibel reagiere -, dass der Präsident zu mir gesagt hat: Herr Kauder, ich habe mit allen gesprochen und sie gebeten, nicht zu gehen, sondern zu bleiben. Wir kämpfen miteinander, wir gewinnen miteinander, oder wir sterben miteinander. Aber wenn ihr jetzt geht, dann ist es, als ob man einem Körper Arme und Beine abschneidet. - Er hat gesagt: Wenn alle gehen würden, die jetzt betroffen sind, dann hätte der „Islamische Staat“ sein Ziel erreicht. Deswegen sagte er: Helft uns, damit die Menschen eine Perspektive in dieser Region über den Winter hinaus haben. - Deshalb sage ich Ja zur Aufnahme von Flüchtlingen, aber wir müssen auch alles dafür tun, dass diese Region nicht jesidenfrei und christenfrei wird. Das sind die angestammten Gebiete dieser Menschen.\n\nDiese Menschen haben dort, wie es formuliert worden ist, ein Geburtsrecht.\n\nNatürlich muss diese Region gesichert werden. Deswegen sind die Kurden, die das tun müssen, auch darauf angewiesen, dass sie sich des „Islamischen Staates“ mit seiner modernen Bewaffnung erwehren können. Selbstverständlich ist es wahr, dass die eingekesselten Jesiden durch die amerikanische Luftwaffe und die Armee der PKK einen Korridor zur Flucht bekommen haben. Aber die Kurden haben mir erzählt, dass sie in den Zeitungen gelesen haben, sie seien abgehauen und hätten alle im Stich gelassen, als die IS-Miliz gekommen sei. Die militärische Führung hat mir dazu gesagt: Das war ganz -dramatisch. Wir haben mit unseren Waffen auf die gepanzerten Fahrzeuge des IS geschossen, und nichts ist passiert. Wir haben weitergemacht. - Als die Soldaten gemerkt haben, dass sie keine entsprechende Ausrüstung hatten, um sich zu wehren, sind sie geflohen. Auch sie wären lieber dort geblieben. Sie sagen: Jetzt helft uns bitte, damit wir uns in Zukunft wehren können.\n\nPräsident Barsani hat zu mir gesagt: Ich will nicht und ich erwarte nicht, dass Ihre Söhne und Töchter bei uns im Irak für uns und für unsere Glaubensbrüder kämpfen. Aber ich erwarte schon, dass Sie mich in die Lage versetzen, mich zu wehren, wenn die IS-Truppen weiter auf dem Vormarsch sind. - Deshalb sind Waffenlieferungen notwendig.\n\nNatürlich kann man sagen, Herr Hofreiter: Wir wollen ein UNO-Mandat haben und dieses und jenes. - Nur: Während wir hier diskutieren und einige ein UNO-Mandat verlangen, finden vor Ort Kämpfe statt. Für diese Kämpfe brauchen die Menschen das notwendige Material, und zwar jetzt und sofort.\n\nDeshalb ist die Entscheidung der zuständigen Ministerien völlig richtig. Damit nehmen wir unsere Verantwortung wahr. Ja, es ist auch richtig, den Blick darauf zu richten, was in Zukunft geschehen soll: Die Kurden sind durchaus pessimistisch, ob es gelingt, die sunnitischen Stämme dazu zu bringen, den Weg der Gewalt wieder zu verlassen; denn dass der IS im Irak so erfolgreich ist, ist nur möglich, weil er die Unterstützung einer breiten Bevölkerung findet.\n\nEs war doch so: Als die IS-Truppen in die Stadt -Mosul - das ist eine große Stadt - eingefallen sind, hat sich ein großer Teil der Bevölkerung versammelt, hat ihnen geholfen und sie freudig als Befreier von der schiitisch gefärbten Regierung begrüßt, die für sie nichts gemacht hat. Diese Menschen sagen: Bisher ist kein Vertreter unserer eigenen Regierung aus Bagdad zu uns in die Region gekommen und hat mit uns gesprochen oder sich um uns gekümmert. - Übrigens ist bis zum heutigen Tage der deutsche Außenminister der einzige Minister, den die Menschen in Kurdistan gesehen haben.\n\nBei diesen Punkten muss man natürlich sagen: Da muss sich in Zukunft etwas ändern. Aber zu glauben, dass dies alles in kurzer Zeit geschehen kann, ist ein Irrtum. Solange sich der „Islamische Staat“ - jetzt kommt ein Punkt, von dem ich weiß, dass er nicht einfach ist - nach Syrien zurückziehen kann, wenn wir die Bedingungen für ihn im Irak verschlechtern, so lange wird das Problem nicht zu lösen sein.\n\nBei allem, was wir für den Irak tun - das haben wir doch erlebt -, dürfen wir nicht vergessen: Kaum hatten die Amerikaner und die Peschmerga-Armee den Druck erhöht, sind die IS-Truppen nach Syrien ausgewichen und haben an einem einzigen Tag 700 Männer abgeschlachtet - an einem einzigen Tag. Solange diese Truppen die 1 000 Kilometer lange Grenze, die gar keine Grenze mehr ist, nach Belieben überqueren können, so lange wird das Problem nicht gelöst werden. Eine solche Grenze - über dieses Thema muss man sich einmal ernsthaft unterhalten - kann nur durch Drohnen kontrolliert werden und durch sonst nichts.\n\n- Ja, ja. - Wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass diese Terrorgruppe nicht weiter wächst. Sie ist nicht nur eine Gefährdung der Region dort, sondern - das hat die Bundeskanzlerin vorhin gesagt, und das haben auch schon viele andere angesprochen - auch für unsere Region.\n\nEs ist doch kaum zu fassen, dass Hunderte oder gar Tausende von jungen Leuten aus ganz Europa sich dieser Truppe anschließen und morden, schlachten, vergewaltigen und rauben. Das muss auch uns herausfordern, alles zu tun, dass so etwas in unserem Land nicht geschieht. Es kann auch nicht so weitergehen, dass radikale Salafisten in unserem Land für den Heiligen Krieg in Syrien und im Irak werben. Das darf nicht passieren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nIch bin außerordentlich dankbar - es hat zwar lange gedauert, aber das ist jetzt egal -, dass der Vorsitzende des Zentralrats der Muslime in Deutschland in diesen Tagen klare Worte gefunden hat, indem er gesagt hat: Die islamistische Terrorgruppe ISIS hat mit uns nichts zu tun, und Unterstützung durch uns findet auch nicht statt. - Für dieses klare Wort bin ich dankbar.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, im Plenum des Deutschen Bundestages zeichnet sich ab, dass man grundsätzlich der Meinung ist, es muss geholfen werden. Draußen im Land findet noch die eine oder andere Diskussion statt, ob man dies darf oder nicht. Mich hat ein Satz von Rupert Neudeck besonders beeindruckt. Er hat gesagt: „Ich möchte nicht, dass Menschen sterben für die Reinheit meines Pazifismus.“\n\nEs gibt tatsächlich Phasen und Zeiten, in denen man sich auf den Weg machen muss, um sich anderen in den Weg zu stellen. Der „Islamische Staat“ darf in unserer Welt keinen Erfolg haben, weil er nämlich etwas zerstören will, was, gerade von diesem Tag, dem 1. September, ausgehend, für uns sehr wichtig ist: eine Welt der Freiheit bzw. der Religions- und Glaubensfreiheit, eine Welt, in der die Menschen selbst entscheiden können, wie sie leben wollen, unbedrängt von Terroristen. Deswegen ist es richtig, dass die Bundesregierung sich so klar positioniert hat und dass wir dieses Anliegen in unserem Antrag entsprechend unterstützen und an ISIS oder den „Islamischen Staat“ die klare Botschaft senden: Wir lassen euch nicht gewähren!\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n8838,herbert-behrens,\"Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Das, was eben vom Verkehrsminister dargestellt worden ist, ist genau das, was Kollege Claus vorhin benannt hatte: Die Produktion von Sprechblasen, Ankündigungen und anderen Dingen ersetzt das, was wir eigentlich in der Verkehrspolitik erwarten müssen, nämlich konkrete Antworten auf konkrete Herausforderungen.\n\nDa bleiben Sie weit hinter dem zurück, was erforderlich ist, auch hinter Ihren eigenen Ankündigungen. Ich finde, Ihre Politik ist gescheitert.\n\nEin Synonym oder ein Sinnbild für dieses Scheitern wurde schon genannt: Die Pkw-Maut, die zum 1. Januar 2016, also quasi in vier Wochen, eingeführt werden sollte, ist gescheitert, weil in Europa kein Platz für eine Ausländermaut ist. Auch sind Sie mit dem Ansatz gescheitert, wirklich zu einer Umverteilung des Verkehrs zu kommen - weg von der Straße, hin zu den umweltfreundlicheren Verkehrswegen, zu Schiene und Wasserstraße.\n\nWahrscheinlich haben wir den Augenblick verpasst, in dem die Chance bestanden hatte, zu einer Veränderung in der Verkehrspolitik zu kommen, nämlich zu dem Zeitpunkt, als CSU-Chef Seehofer dann doch sein Versprechen nicht wahrgemacht hat, seine drei Minister aus dem Kabinett herauszuziehen. Das war die letzte Chance, zu einer Umkehr in der Verkehrspolitik zu kommen. Das ist leider nicht passiert.\n\nWir werden uns also weiterhin mit Ihnen als Ankündigungsminister auseinandersetzen müssen, und das ist bitter - bitter auch deshalb, weil bei den Koalitionspartnern von der CDU und der SPD leider nur ein Zugucken festzustellen ist. Man lässt den Verkehrsminister gewähren, man fällt ihm nicht in den Arm. Aber Sie müssen das doch endlich stoppen, damit es nicht so weitergeht.\n\nDringend nötige verkehrspolitische Entscheidungen wie beispielsweise die Neubewertung der vielen, vielen Projekte, die im neuen Bundesverkehrswegeplan stehen, den wir nicht kennen, bleiben aus. Hier werden Entscheidungen getroffen, die möglicherweise nach Vorlage des Bundesverkehrswegeplans anders zu bewerten wären. Wie gehen Sie denn mit den Plänen um, ein wirklich zukunftsweisendes Verkehrsnetz aufzubauen, wenn Sie gar nicht wissen, auf welcher Grundlage wir uns bewegen? Das gilt ebenso für den Infrastrukturbericht. Es wäre doch sinnvoll, zu wissen: Wie sieht es denn eigentlich bei uns in der Republik aus? Was muss an welchen Stellen gemacht werden? Auch da gibt es nur Ankündigungen, ansonsten: Fehlanzeige. Das ist nicht hinnehmbar, das ist verantwortungslos, das ist keine Verkehrspolitik.\n\nEs wäre eine kleine Chance, sich den Änderungs- und Entschließungsanträgen zuzuwenden. Damit besteht zumindest die Möglichkeit, zu sagen: Wir steuern um. - Sie können beispielsweise unserem Antrag und auch dem der Grünen folgen, und die 11,2 Millionen Euro, die immer noch in eine wahrscheinlich nicht kommende Pkw-Maut investiert werden - in Personal, in Gutachten -, einfach streichen.\n\nDas Geld könnte man sicherlich besser nutzen, um Leute zu unterstützen, die sich intensiv ehrenamtlich in der Flüchtlingshilfe engagieren.\n\nDiese Politik des Bundesverkehrsministers darf nicht fortgesetzt werden. Wir brauchen ein handlungsfähiges Verkehrsministerium, zum Beispiel, um den großangelegten Betrug bei den Abgaswerten aufzuarbeiten. Eine Untersuchungskommission wurde eingerichtet. Ergebnisse der Untersuchungskommission: Fehlanzeige.\n\nAll das, was hier auf den Tisch gebracht worden ist - dass nicht nur die USA betroffen sind, sondern auch der europäische Markt betroffen ist, dass nicht nur bei Stickoxiden manipuliert worden ist, sondern auch bei Abgaswerten, beim CO2-Ausstoß getäuscht worden ist, dass der VW-Konzern nicht isoliert so vorgegangen ist, sondern auch andere Automobilfirmen dabei waren -, wurde nicht von der Untersuchungskommission herausgefunden, sondern beruhte auf Geständnissen in der Öffentlichkeit oder wurde durch Untersuchungen von Initiativen zutage gebracht. Bei Ihnen ist da absolute Fehlanzeige. Sie sind Ihren Aufgaben nicht gerecht geworden. Auch da sind Sie massiv gescheitert. Diese Bilanz ist ein extremer Gegensatz zu dem, was wir eben gehört haben.\n\nInvestitionshochlauf - diesen Begriff mag niemand mehr hören,\n\nweil er ein Euphemismus ist. Dasselbe gilt für „Investitionsoffensive“ oder die These, dass wir uns mit Mehrausgaben eine vernünftige Verkehrsinfrastruktur gönnen wollen. All das findet nicht statt, es sind lediglich Ankündigungen.\n\nSchauen wir uns die Ausgaben an, stellen wir Folgendes fest: 5,7 Milliarden Euro sind für Investitionen vorgesehen, 2,9 Milliarden Euro davon für den Erhalt. Wo bleibt denn die auch von Ihnen geforderte Priorisierung, mehr in den Erhalt als in den Neubau zu stecken? Das sind nicht einmal die 65 Prozent, die Sie in Ihrem Entschließungsantrag gefordert haben. Auch da bleiben Sie weit hinter dem zurück, was Sie angekündigt hatten.\n\nAber selbst diese 50 Prozent sind nicht sicher. Da ist ein Blick in den Verkehrshaushalt 2014 ganz hilfreich, anhand dessen wir festgestellt haben, dass beim Haushaltsvollzug massiv Fehler gemacht worden sind. Sie haben Ihr Ministerium da nicht im Griff. Sie haben, weil die Gelder gegenseitig deckungsfähig sind - vom Neubau darf in den Erhalt umgeschichtet werden und umgekehrt -, genau diesen Weg genommen: Sie haben noch einmal 400 Millionen Euro - Mittel, über deren Verwendung nicht vom Bundestag beschlossen worden ist -, die für den Erhalt vorgesehen waren, en passant in den Neubau rübergeschoben. Das ist eine falsche Politik, die wir nicht akzeptieren, und darum sprechen wir ganz deutlich vom Scheitern Ihrer Verkehrspolitik.\n\nMeine Redezeit reicht leider nicht aus, um die Liste der Versäumnisse und Fehler komplett abzuarbeiten:\n\nIch kann leider nichts dazu ausführen, dass Sie auch in der Infrastrukturpolitik, was den Breitbandausbau anbetrifft, massiv versagen, indem Sie die Technologie von morgen mit einer Technologie aus dem letzten Jahrhundert realisieren wollen. Das passt wohl nicht zusammen.\n\nIch kann nichts dazu sagen, wie Sie mit diesem merkwürdigen, undurchschaubaren Toll-Collect-Deal bei der Ausweitung der Lkw-Maut auf alle Bundesstraßen agiert haben.\n\nIch kann nichts Weitergehendes dazu ausführen, was die ÖPP-Projekte für die Zukunft bedeuten. Die jungen Leute, die hier auf der Tribüne sitzen, können heute schon aus den hier beschlossenen ÖPP-Projekten ablesen, dass sie für Fehlentscheidungen, die heute hier getroffen werden, werden zahlen müssen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dieser Verkehrsminister ist nach der halben Wahlperiode am Ende. Mehrausgaben im Verkehrshaushalt können das nicht überdecken. Wir brauchen einen Neuanfang mit neuem Personal.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n2294,kerstin-griese,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Gestern haben wir im Ausschuss für Arbeit und Soziales der Änderung des Ghettorentengesetzes einstimmig zugestimmt. Alle Fraktionen sind sich einig, dass die Änderungen, die wir heute in zweiter und dritter Lesung beschließen, für die Betroffenen endlich etwas mehr Gerechtigkeit bedeuten. Ich bedanke mich schon zu Beginn meiner Rede ganz herzlich für diese Einmütigkeit im Deutschen Bundestag.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es geht - das wurde schon gesagt - um Menschen, die in der NS-Zeit unter schlimmsten Bedingungen und zu Hungerlöhnen in von den Nazis errichteten Ghettos gearbeitet haben. Ihre Arbeitskraft wurde ausgenutzt, ihr Leben sollte keine Zukunft haben. Dennoch wurden für sie Rentenbeiträge abgeführt. Die Betroffenen selbst haben jahrzehntelang gefordert, dass sie für diese Zeit eine Rente und nicht etwa eine Entschädigung bekommen, weil sie das, was sie dort unter Zwangsbedingungen, eingesperrt im Ghetto, erlitten haben, dennoch als Arbeit empfunden haben.\n\nBis Ende 2013 sind insgesamt rund 57 000 Ghettorenten bewilligt worden. 21 500 dieser Renten wurden wegen der Anwendung der Regelung, nur vier Jahre rückwirkend zu zahlen, und knapp 17 000 von ihnen wegen versäumter Antragsfrist erst später ausgezahlt. Etwa zwei Drittel aller Renten werden jetzt durch dieses Gesetz rückwirkend ab 1997 ausgezahlt. Etwa zwei Drittel der Antragsteller werden jetzt eine entsprechende Unterstützung bekommen.\n\nAls der Bundestag das Ghettorentengesetz 2002 beschlossen hat, war für uns nicht abzusehen, dass es dazu führen wird, dass in den ersten Jahren etwa 90 Prozent der Anträge, also der allergrößte Teil, abgelehnt werden. Erst durch eine Entscheidung des Bundessozialgerichts 2009 hat sich das verändert. Etwa die Hälfte aller bislang abgelehnten Anträge wurde dann rückwirkend bewilligt. Aber das Problem war, dass sie nur vier Jahre rückwirkend bewilligt wurden; das liegt an unserem Sozialrecht. Dies wurde von den Betroffenen als Unrecht empfunden, weil andere diese Rente ja ab 1997 bekamen. Es ging um Ansprüche, die die Menschen verdient haben. Auch durch die Möglichkeit, stattdessen Zuschläge zu bekommen, wurde man dem Gerechtigkeitsbedürfnis der Opfer nicht gerecht. Sie wollten ihr gutes Recht. Sie wollten die Ghettorenten ab 1997, wie sie ihnen auch laut Gesetz zustehen.\n\nEs ging und geht den Opfern um die Anerkennung ihrer geleisteten Arbeit. Mit den drei Änderungen, um die es heute geht, erzielen wir tatsächlich Fortschritte: Wir geben erstens die zurückwirkende Vierjahresfrist auf. Wir schaffen zweitens die Optionsmöglichkeit einer rückwirkenden Zahlung ab 1997 oder einer Zahlung mit Zuschlägen ab 2005. Drittens - auch das ist interessant - streichen wir die Antragsfrist, die bisher im Jahre 2003 endete. Noch heute stellen Menschen Anträge. Noch heute erfahren Menschen, dass sie aufgrund ihrer Arbeit in Ghettos in der damaligen Zeit eine Rente bekommen können. Deshalb ist es gut, dass wir die Antragsfrist streichen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, in den Beratungen, die wir sehr intensiv geführt haben, sind von den Grünen und den Linken zwei Anliegen vorgetragen worden; sie sind auch hier gerade vorgestellt worden. Ich will dazu gerne etwas sagen.\n\nDie Fraktion Die Linke hat die Überlebenden, die heute in Polen leben, ins Gespräch gebracht. Viele Menschen waren ja aufgrund der deutschen Besatzung -Polens im Zweiten Weltkrieg dort in Ghettos. Für diese Personengruppe gilt das Ghettorentengesetz nicht, weil es ein Sozialabkommen zwischen Deutschland und -Polen aus dem Jahr 1975 gibt, in dem vereinbart ist, dass alle Menschen, die in Polen leben, vom dortigen Sozialversicherungsträger auch für in Deutschland geleistete Arbeit - das Gleiche gilt auch umgekehrt - eine Rente bekommen. Deshalb kann dieses Abkommen nicht einseitig von uns verändert oder aufgekündigt werden. Ich bin sehr froh, dass die Bundesregierung bereits Gespräche führt - diese Gespräche wird sie auch weiterhin führen -, um dieses Problem im Sinne der polnischen Ghetto-beschäftigten einvernehmlich so zu lösen, dass sie den anderen Personen gleichgestellt werden.\n\nMit dem Entschließungsantrag der Fraktion Die Linke, der uns gerade eben erst vorgelegt wurde, wird also eigentlich das gefordert, was wir schon tun, nämlich Gespräche in diese Richtung zu führen. Wir unterstützen die Bundesregierung bei ihren Gesprächen und wünschen ihr viel Erfolg im Sinne der Betroffenen. Wir machen das aber auf dem diplomatischen Weg und nicht über diesen Antrag.\n\nDie Fraktion der Grünen hatte vorgeschlagen, dass es den Hinterbliebenen - dem Witwer bzw. der Witwe - von Ghettorentenberechtigten möglich sein soll, auch nach dem Tod der bzw. des Berechtigten einen Antrag auf Ghettorente zu stellen. Diese Forderung habe ich aus den Reihen der Betroffenen zwar noch nicht gehört; aber selbst wenn jemand sagt, dass die betroffene Person zeitlebens keinen Antrag auf Ghettorente gestellt hat, weil die Sorge vor einer Ablehnung so groß war oder weil man keine schlimmen Erinnerungen wecken wollte, kann man, da die Rente durch eine individuelle Willenserklärung beantragt werden muss, nach deren Tod keine Rente für diese Person beantragen. Man kann aber sehr wohl eine Hinterbliebenenrente beantragen. Auch das passiert heute noch, und es ist wichtig, dass das weitergeht. Wir haben die Forderung allerdings sehr ernsthaft geprüft und sind zu dem heute vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf gekommen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, der Präsident des Zentralrates der deutschen Juden, Dieter Graumann, hat vor ein paar Wochen in der Jüdischen Allgemeinen geschrieben - ich zitiere -:\n\nDas Leid, das diese mittlerweile hochbetagten Menschen erfahren haben, lässt sich mit nachträglich gezahlter Rente gewiss nicht wiedergutmachen.\n\nEr betonte, dass die früheren Ghettoarbeiter bisher mit bürokratischen Vorschriften abgekanzelt worden seien. Jetzt würden sie aber endlich ernst genommen und würdig behandelt. Herr Graumann bezeichnet diese Rentenregelung als eine „Geste der Menschlichkeit“.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es ist beschämend, dass wir diesen Beschluss erst so spät, 69 Jahre nach Ende des Zweiten Weltkrieges, 69 Jahre nach Ende der nationalsozialistischen Gewaltherrschaft, fassen, aber es ist gut, dass wir es heute tun, und es ist vielleicht ein besonderes Zeichen, dass wir diese überfällige „Geste der Menschlichkeit“ einstimmig zeigen werden. Herzlichen Dank dafür an die Bundesregierung und an alle Fraktionen im Deutschen Bundestag.\"\n4533,eva-bulling-schroter,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn wir über Effizienz sprechen, müssen wir auch über Gebäudesanierung reden. Der Ruf der Gebäudesanierung ist zurzeit total mies. „Die Volksverdämmung“ titelt Der Spiegel diese Woche ziemlich böse. Es heißt, die Wärmedämmung führe nicht zu niedrigeren Heizkosten, man hantiere mit giftigen Materialien, und all das nutze nur geldgierigen Investoren, die Mieter vertreiben. Ja, die Dämmung sei sogar brandgefährlich, so war diese Woche zu lesen.\n\nDiesen schlechten Ruf hat die Wärmedämmung zum Teil zu Recht. Es ist einem schweren Fehler der Politik geschuldet, dass es zum Beispiel Vermietern ermöglicht wird, große Teile von Sowiesokosten für Modernisierung unter dem Deckmantel der Ökologie binnen kurzer Frist auf die Miete umzulegen. Vermieter können die Wärmedämmung zum lukrativen Geschäftsmodell machen und bei den Mietern absahnen. Das lehnen wir ab.\n\nDas ist leider tatsächlich möglich, und damit muss endlich Schluss sein. Die Modernisierungsumlage muss dringend überarbeitet und unbedingt kurzfristig auf 5 Prozent gesenkt werden, sonst wird es keine Akzeptanz von dringend notwendigen Sanierungsmaßnahmen geben. Der schlechte Ruf der Gebäudesanierung ist für mich größtenteils lobbygesteuert; denn in unzähligen Fällen ist die Sanierung erfolgreich und nützt den Menschen und der Umwelt; das wissen wir doch alle.\n\nSie von den Grünen verzeihen mir bitte, dass ich heute weniger über Ihren Antrag rede, sondern mehr über den Nationalen Aktionsplan Energieeffizienz. Dieser setzt auf besonders rentable Geschäftsmodelle; eine Vokabel, die viele Leute eher fürchten als befürworten, weil sie die Auswirkungen dieser sogenannte Geschäftsmodelle durch Mieterhöhungen schmerzhaft zu spüren bekommen haben.\n\nIch begrüße ausdrücklich, dass laut Nationalem Aktionsplan Energieeffizienz Maßnahmen zur Gebäude-sanierung und andere Effizienzmaßnahmen endlich von der Steuer abschreibbar sind.\n\nDies halte ich für einen guten Schritt.\n\nDieser Effizienzplan ist aber kein Ersatz für ein Gesamtkonzept, das unbedingt langfristig angelegt werden muss. Angesichts des bisher Versäumten wirkt er eher wie eine Art Notfallplan.\n\nAber der Kern meiner Kritik ist ein anderer: Der Nationale Aktionsplan Energieeffizienz setzt allein auf Freiwilligkeit und Förderung. Ich habe meine Zweifel. Ich frage mich, ob er damit den gewünschten Erfolg haben wird, oder ob sich am Ende herausstellt, dass das alles Luftschlösser waren. Zu viele Beispiele freiwilliger Selbstverpflichtung sind bereits gescheitert. Wir haben in unserer Zeit als Parlamentarier bereits entsprechende Erfahrungen gemacht.\n\nAngesichts der Dringlichkeit, die eine drohende Klimaschutzlücke mit sich bringt, ist in der gegenwärtigen Situation das vollständige Setzen auf freiwillige Maßnahmen der falsche Weg.\n\nSie wollen Energieeffizienz zu einem Lifestyle-Produkt machen wie das schnittige Auto, das neueste Smartphone oder die italienische Kaffeemaschine. Wie soll man sich das vorstellen? Dämmung als der letzte Schrei für modebewusste Yuppies? Ich sehe schon Agenturen daran arbeiten, die Energieeffizienz sexy zu machen,\n\nnach dem Motto „Schau mir auf die Holzhackschnitzelheizung, Kleines“. Das ist doch ein Witz.\n\nZum Glück gibt es Beispiele wie Dänemark. Dänemark ist Deutschland ein paar Schritte voraus. Und wie haben die Dänen das geschafft? Richtig: mit Ordnungsrecht. Im Neubau ist in Dänemark der Einbau von Öl- und Gasheizungen seit 2013 verboten. Ab 2016 müssen auch Altbauten auf Gas und Öl verzichten, sofern sie an ein Fernwärmenetz angeschlossen werden können. Dänemark setzt seit vielen Jahren konsequent auf erneuerbare Wärme, Fernwärme und Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung. 70 Prozent der Fernwärme stammen aus erneuerbaren Energien oder der Müllverbrennung.\n\nDer Schlüssel zum Erfolg ist ein ambitioniertes Ordnungsrecht, also klare Vorgaben aus der Politik, die selbstverständlich sozial flankiert werden müssen. Anders werden wir es nicht schaffen. Es bleibt nicht mehr viel Zeit, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\"\n7948,gabi-weber,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Das Mittelmeer ist ein Grab geworden. Das Bild des ertrunkenen Flüchtlingsjungen Aylan hat viele Menschen aufgerüttelt. Aber warum erst jetzt? Lampedusa ist doch schon längst eine bittere Mahnung. Die UNO verzeichnete für 2014 rund 3 500 im Mittelmeer ertrunkene Menschen; dieses Jahr sollen es bereits 2 000 sein. Die Menschen begeben sich in die Hände von kriminellen Schleppern, die sie auf seeuntüchtigen Booten auf den Weg nach Europa schicken.\n\nEs sind die Schrecken des syrischen Bürgerkrieges, der Terror des selbsternannten IS-Kalifats, zerfallende Staaten und wirtschaftliche Perspektivlosigkeit, die sie verzweifeln lassen und zum Aufbruch bewegen. Die Not der Menschen ist so groß, dass sie die lebensgefährliche Überfahrt über das Mittelmeer antreten.\n\nWenn wir heute dem Bundeswehreinsatz im Rahmen der Operation EUNAVFOR MED zustimmen, dann genehmigen wir eine Operation, die das Geschäft der Schleuser massiv behindern soll, diese in Italien vor Gericht stellen lässt und aufgefundene Flüchtlinge sicher nach Italien geleitet. Ja, diese Operation setzt bei den Symptomen an, aber auch das ist neben der Ursachenbekämpfung notwendig.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich möchte an dieser Stelle - und hier spreche ich sicher für alle in diesem Hause - den beteiligten Soldatinnen und Soldaten Dank und Anerkennung aussprechen. Sie leisten einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Rettung von Menschenleben.\n\nFür die Rettung Schiffbrüchiger oder in Seenot geratener Flüchtlinge gab es die effektive italienische Operation Mare Nostrum. Solch eine Mission muss durch die EU neu aufgelegt werden; der kleinere Einsatz Triton reicht nicht.\n\nGegen die Schleuser selbst vorzugehen, war bisher allerdings zu wenig im Fokus. Das ändern wir mit dem jetzt vorgesehenen Mandat.\n\nFlankierend müssen wir aber auch gegenüber Italien europäische Solidarität leisten. Dieses Land schultert einen Großteil der Flüchtlingswelle über das Mittelmeer. Unsere Partner Italien und Griechenland können das nicht alleine leisten. Es braucht mehr Union an dieser Stelle, und zwar Europäische Union.\n\nIn diesen Tagen wird von der Entwicklungspolitik verlangt, sie möge schnelle Lösungen der Flüchtlingsfrage präsentieren. Ich sage es ganz deutlich: Diese Erwartung kann sie nicht erfüllen. Fluchtursachen lassen sich nicht von heute auf morgen bekämpfen. Dazu braucht es einen langen Atem und einen großen Werkzeugkasten. Zu diesem Werkzeugkasten gehört zweifelsohne ein umfassendes Zuwanderungsgesetz, das Flüchtlingen legale Möglichkeiten für einen Neustart in Deutschland bietet. Liebe Kollegen von der Union, reichen Sie uns dazu die Hand.\n\nWir beschließen heute einen weiteren Einsatz im Mittelmeer und leisten bereits humanitäre Hilfe. Aber was ist weiter zu tun? Erstens muss eine langfristige Entwicklungspolitik betrieben werden. Soeben wurden von der UNO in New York 17 Entwicklungsziele verabschiedet, die alle Staaten binden, auch uns. Sie verpflichten uns, unsere Wirtschafts-, Handels- und Klimapolitik so zu ändern, dass sie Menschen in anderen Ländern nicht die Lebensgrundlage rauben.\n\nDie EU-Wirtschaftsabkommen müssen wir daraufhin kritisch überprüfen. Unsere Entwicklungspolitik muss so ausgerichtet sein, dass sie Armut wirklich und nachweisbar bekämpft, Einkommen und Arbeit für die lokale Bevölkerung schafft und insgesamt die lokale Teilhabe aller ermöglicht.\n\nWir brauchen zweitens die Schaffung von Sicherheit in fragilen oder zerfallenden Staaten. Vor diesem Hintergrund müssen wir internationale Polizeimissionen viel stärker in den Blick nehmen. Diese haben die richtigen Werkzeuge, um organisierter Kriminalität oder Korruption etwas entgegenzusetzen. Dann ist es nicht hilfreich, dass im Haushalt genau dieser Mittelansatz gekürzt wird.\n\nWir brauchen drittens Steuergerechtigkeit. Entwicklungsländer haben oft eine erschreckend niedrige Steuerquote. Korruption, gesetzliche Lücken und Steueroasen erlauben es den dortigen Eliten, sich ihrer Mitverantwortung für ein gesundes Staatswesen zu entziehen, übrigens genauso wie bei uns an der einen oder anderen Stelle. Entwicklungspolitik muss hier einen Schwerpunkt setzen. Staaten, die über stabile Einnahmequellen verfügen, besitzen mehr Möglichkeiten, ihrer Bevölkerung eine Zukunft im eigenen Land zu bieten.\n\nWer denkt, ich würde mit dieser Auflistung von Themen abweichen, irrt. Wer glaubt, mit einfachen Lösungen dieser Krise Herr werden zu können, befindet sich auf dem Holzweg. Man muss das eine tun - Bekämpfung der Schleuser, humanitäre Soforthilfe und legale Einwanderungswege - und darf das andere - Staatsaufbau, Schaffung von Lebensperspektiven vor Ort und Gewährleistung individueller Sicherheit - nicht lassen. Lassen Sie uns für beides arbeiten.\n\nAber die Durchsetzung dieses Anforderungskatalogs wird Geld kosten. Im Übrigen bin ich der Meinung, dass die deutsche ODA-Quote zügig und in klar messbaren Zwischenschritten in Richtung 0,7 Prozent des Bruttosozialprodukts steigen muss. Ich möchte gerade jetzt an Bundesfinanzminister Schäuble appellieren, nicht vom Ziel einer zeitnahen Einführung der Finanztransaktionsteuer Abstand zu nehmen.\n\nDavon, dass die Einführung verschoben werden sollte, war zu meiner Verwunderung unlängst zu lesen. Aber schließlich war diese Steuer die Gegenleistung für die Zustimmung meiner Fraktion zum Fiskalpakt. Wir brauchen die Finanztransaktionsteuer zügig, nicht irgendwann.\n\nIch schließe damit und bitte Sie um Zustimmung zu dem vorliegenden Mandat.\n\nDanke.\"\n10046,dietmar-bartsch,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Frau Bundeskanzlerin, Sie haben mehrfach in Ihrer Rede davon gesprochen, dass die aktuelle Flüchtlingskrise nur gelöst werden kann, wenn die Fluchtursachen beseitigt werden. Ja, das ist richtig, aber das darf nicht zu einer Phrase werden, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nIch will es noch einmal klar und deutlich sagen: Die Flüchtlinge sind die Botschafter der Kriege und des Elends dieser Welt. Deutschland und Europa müssen an die Ursachen, an den Kern des Problems gehen, und der liegt nun mal im Krieg und in der Zerstörung in Syrien, im Irak und in der ganzen Region. Das bedeutet aber auch: Schluss mit Waffenlieferungen in Krisenregionen, Schluss mit militärischer Logik in Krisenregionen\n\nund Nachdenken über eine andere Weltwirtschaftsordnung. Ich könnte jetzt noch einmal die Situation in Afghanistan seit 2002 schildern. Da sehen wir die Ergebnisse der Politik. Das kann so nicht weitergehen.\n\nSie haben zu Beginn Ihrer Rede auf die Situation in Griechenland Bezug genommen. Ich habe gestern ein Video gesehen, das Norbert Blüm in Idomeni zeigt. In diesem Video sagt er: Was ist das für ein Europa? Hier, wenn ich die Bahngleise sehe, wenn es um Geschäft und Waren geht: freie Bahn; wenn es um die Menschen geht: dann nicht. Geldgeschäfte: global und grenzenlos. Wenn es um die Menschen geht: eingesperrt. Was ist das für eine Welt? Ist das Globalisierung? - Norbert Blüm hat mit den Fragen und der Analyse völlig recht.\n\nEs ist leider so: An vielen innereuropäischen Grenzen und auch an seinen Außengrenzen hat Europa seine Humanität, seine Menschlichkeit verloren. Der Tod - Sie haben die Zahlen genannt - ist zu einer alltäglichen Nachricht geworden, und es sind keine Lösungen in Sicht. Das große Projekt Europa, das ein Projekt des Friedens, der Kultur und der Solidarität ist, steht vor dem Scheitern. Es geht Europa nicht gut, Frau Bundeskanzlerin. Um diese Dimension geht es, um nicht mehr und auch nicht weniger.\n\nNun sind in diesen Gipfel auch mit Blick auf die Landtagswahlen, die stattgefunden haben, viele Erwartungen gesetzt worden. Natürlich ist unbestritten: Die Türkei ist ein Schlüsselland in dieser Krise. Sie meinen, Lösungen gefunden zu haben, indem Sie mit dem Despoten Erdogan einen Schulterschluss suchen. Erdogan diktiert Europa Bedingungen.\n\nFrau Merkel, Sie haben eben von Angemessenheit gesprochen. Sie hofieren einen Mann, der Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler entlässt, weil sie von ihrem Recht der freien Meinungsäußerung Gebrauch machen und sich für den Frieden in der Türkei einsetzen. Sie hofieren einen Mann, der die Türkei zu einer Kriegspartei in Syrien gemacht hat, der die Türkei über Jahre zu einem Transitland des Terrorismus gemacht hat. Sie hofieren einen Mann, der Journalisten verhaften lässt, der die Pressefreiheit abschafft und kritische Zeitungen staatlich besetzen lässt. Sie hofieren einen Mann, der Krieg gegen die eigene Bevölkerung, gegen die Kurden führt mit Hunderten Toten, der sogar im Irak, also in einem anderen Land, bombardieren lässt. Sie hofieren einen Mann, der Frauen niederknüppeln lässt und der kurz vor dem Internationalen Frauentag mit Gummigeschossen gewaltsam gegen eine friedliche Demonstration von Frauen vorgegangen ist. 103 ermordete Frauen im Jahr 2015! Mit so einem Partner kann es keine Lösung für Europa geben. Menschenrechte dürfen nirgendwo und niemals auf dem Verhandlungstisch liegen.\n\n- Auch nicht in Russland, Herr Kauder. Da haben Sie völlig recht. Ich habe „nirgendwo“ gesagt.\n\nIhre Vorvereinbarung auf dem letzten EU-Gipfel besagt, dass Sie Flüchtlinge vor allen Dingen aus Griechenland wieder in die Türkei abschieben wollen. Sie haben das eben noch einmal dargelegt. Für jeden abgeschobenen Flüchtling sollen andere aus Syrien in die EU einreisen dürfen. Darunter sind im Übrigen unter Umständen auch Kurdinnen und Kurden. Stellen Sie sich vor, dass von Griechenland Kurdinnen und Kurden in die Türkei abgeschoben werden. Was ist denn das für eine Herangehensweise? Das kann doch nicht wahr sein.\n\nDas alles ist ein scheinheiliger Deal. Sie schaffen damit das fundamentale Recht in der Europäischen Union auf ein individuelles Asylverfahren ab. Dieses Recht ist aber nun einmal ein Grundrecht.\n\nWährend in Idomeni im Dreck und in Fäkalien Kinder geboren werden und leben müssen, machen Sie uns vor, dass es eine europäische Lösung geben kann. Sie haben völlig recht - auch Herr Blüm hat das gesagt -: 500 Millionen Europäer müssten in der Lage sein, dieses Problem zu lösen. Ja, es muss eine europäische Lösung unter Einbeziehung der Menschen geben. Doch das Problem ist: Europa folgt Ihnen nicht mehr. Sie haben eben de facto kein Wort zu den problematischen europäischen Partnern gesagt, weder zu Ungarn noch zu Polen oder zu Frankreich. Beim Verteilungsschlüssel wollen die EU-Staaten nicht mitmachen. Das ist doch die reale Lage. Der UN-Hochkommissar für Flüchtlinge, al-Hussein, bezeichnet die kollektive und willkürliche Ausweisung von Flüchtlingen sogar als illegal. Das Europäische Parlament ist gegen Ihren Vorschlag. Die Mehrzahl der EU-Staaten will nicht mitmachen.\n\nEs gibt dafür einen Grund: Frau Bundeskanzlerin, Sie haben einen Beitrag dazu geleistet, dass Europa so entzweit ist. Das hat auch mit Alleingängen und Drohungen Richtung Athen vor anderthalb Jahren zu tun. Das ist doch die Realität. Ist Ihnen aufgefallen, dass Nicht-EU-Staaten die Grenzen zu uns dichtmachen? Mazedonien baut Grenzanlagen gegen die EU. Früher wollten diese Länder die Schlagbäume Richtung EU einreißen. Das alles ist auch das Ergebnis von zehn Jahren Ihrer Politik, Frau Merkel. Das ist ein Ergebnis Ihrer Politik.\n\nSie sind mitverantwortlich für die politische, humanitäre und soziale Krise in Europa. Sie waren es doch, die sich mit ihrem Finanzminister geweigert hat, die Verantwortlichen für die Wirtschafts- und Finanzkrise wirklich zur Verantwortung zu ziehen.\n\nDas, was Krise in Griechenland, Spanien und anderen Ländern ist, ist im Übrigen auch Krise in unserem Land. Auch da sage ich ganz klar: Was waren denn die Rezepte? Weiterhin die schwarze Null. Ein Ergebnis ist, dass es in unserem Land auf der einen Seite immer mehr Kinder und immer mehr Rentnerinnen und Rentner in Armut gibt und dass auf der anderen Seite wenige Menschen extrem viel Geld besitzen, und zwar obszön viel Geld, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nWarum wird die ungerechte Verteilung von Einkommen und Vermögen in Deutschland und Europa angesichts dieser Krise nicht einmal thematisiert?\n\nKurz vor den Landtagswahlen kam der Vizekanzler mit der Forderung, in Deutschland müsse mehr in Sachen „sozial“ getan werden. Das, lieber Herr Gabriel, kam zwar spät und direkt vor den Wahlen - na ja -, aber es ist völlig richtig. Auch wir sind dieser Auffassung. Allerdings sind wir der Auffassung, dass es für alle in diesem Land ein Solidaritätspaket geben sollte. Ja, das sollten wir machen.\n\nDeswegen gibt es unseren Entschließungsantrag. Wir fordern mehr Investitionen unter anderem in den sozialen Wohnungsbau, ins Gesundheitswesen, in Schulen und in Bildung. „5 x 5“ haben wir vorgeschlagen, also fünfmal 5 Milliarden Euro für ein soziales Land, solide finanziert. Das muss doch wirklich möglich sein.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, es wurde in diesem Land bereits viel Vertrauen in die Politik zerstört. Was das bedeutet, haben wir alle am letzten Sonntag sehen können. Die Braunen im nationalkonservativen blauen Gewand sind in drei Landtage zweistellig eingezogen, und sie fischen ganz bewusst am ganz rechten Rand.\n\nDie AfD ist aber nicht nur rechtspopulistisch und rassistisch. Nein, sie würde das Land sogar noch unsozialer machen. Die AfD spaltet die Gesellschaft. Sie will Hartz IV absenken, den Mindestlohn abschaffen, die Frauen zurück an den Herd schicken und fürs Vaterland gebären lassen. Deshalb, meine Damen und Herren: Das übliche Parteiengeplänkel ist keine Antwort auf die Fragen der Zeit. Alle in diesem Haus haben am 13. März verloren. Das muss man erst einmal anerkennen und entsprechend handeln.\n\nWir als demokratische Sozialistinnen und Sozialisten haben einen Vorteil. Wir sagen: Wir können niemals glücklich sein, wenn andere unglücklich sind.\n\n- Sie auch? Sehr schön. Nur mittun! Sie haben nachher die Möglichkeit; denn dann findet eine wunderbare Abstimmung statt.\n\nDie alten Recken der Union haben das im Übrigen begriffen. Sie haben begriffen: Die Menschen in diesem Land wollen wieder ernst genommen und gehört werden, und sie wollen mehr soziale Gerechtigkeit. Wir haben das verstanden. Ich hoffe, Sie auch. Kommen Sie mit den entsprechenden Ergebnissen vom Gipfel zurück!\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n3134,arnold-vaatz,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Frau, Hagedorn, da ich Ihre Kritik nicht ganz nachvollziehen konnte, habe ich mich eben noch schnell schlaugemacht und bin zu dem Ergebnis gekommen, dass das Recht der Bundesregierung, den Straßenbauplan von 2014 unterjährig fortzuschreiben, auf einer klaren Rechtsgrundlage beruht, die im Übrigen bereits seit dem Jahr 1960 existiert.\n\nDiese korrespondiert mit einem Haushaltsvermerk, nämlich dem Vermerk Nummer 5 aus dem Kapitel 1209, den Sie mit beschlossen haben. Das wollte ich zur Ergänzung Ihrer Ausführungen, liebe Frau Hagedorn, kurz mitteilen.\n\nWir reden in diesem Haushalt grundsätzlich über die Position der Bundesregierung zu einem elementaren Funktionsprinzip der Gesellschaft, nämlich zu dem Prinzip Mobilität. Wir wissen, dass die Mobilität eine der absolut grundlegenden Voraussetzungen für Wachstum, Wohlstand und eine gute Zukunft ist. Deshalb ist dieser Haushalt auch ein zentraler Teil unserer Arbeit. „Mobilität“ haben wir im Ministerium nun zum ersten Mal nicht nur als Mobilität für Personen und für Güter, sondern auch als Mobilität für Informationen verstanden. Diese Zusammenfassung halte ich für sehr sinnvoll.\n\nWie ist diese Mobilität zu gestalten? Wir müssen sie bezahlbar, sicher und umweltverträglich gestalten. Sie muss eine hohe Qualität haben. Das heißt, sie muss nachhaltig gestaltet werden, sodass auch morgen und übermorgen noch Mobilität möglich ist. Dazu brauchen wir eine Menge Investitionen.\n\nWir alle in diesem Hause stellen übereinstimmend fest: Bei der Finanzierung unserer Mobilitätsinfrastruktur liegt manches im Argen. Wir sind etwas unterfinanziert.\n\nDeshalb zählt es zu unseren zentralen Aufgaben, dass wir uns im Hinblick auf unsere Finanzierungsprinzipien umsehen, welche Möglichkeit wir haben, um erstens mit Geld rationeller umzugehen und zweitens unsere Aufgaben so präzise zu formulieren, dass ein sehr guter Preis-Leistungs-Effekt herauskommt. Ich glaube, an der Stelle sind wir tatsächlich weitergekommen.\n\nZum Ersten. Wir werden selbstverständlich weiter unsere konventionellen Mittel, unsere Budgetmittel, die öffentlichen Mittel, für den Ausbau der Verkehrsinfrastruktur nutzen müssen, und zwar effizient. Der Kollege Eckhardt Rehberg wird in seinem abschließenden Beitrag darauf hinweisen, wie wir mit den Mitteln, die wir hatten, teilweise wirklich umgegangen sind. Dann überlasse ich es Ihnen, festzustellen, ob man das nicht auch etwas günstiger hätte gestalten können.\n\nZum Zweiten. Neben den Haushaltsmitteln müssen wir uns auch noch nach anderen Finanzierungsquellen umsehen, und deshalb rückt das Thema Nutzerfinanzierung natürlich immer stärker in den Fokus.\n\nWir haben hier in den letzten Jahren einiges getan, aber ich glaube, dass wir hier noch stärker voranschreiten müssen. Die Nutzerfinanzierung ist kein sensationeller, einmaliger Vorgang, sondern sie hat eine lange Tradition in Europa. Der größte Teil unserer Nachbarstaaten geht diesen Weg seit langem. Wir grenzen an Polen, an Tschechien, an Österreich, an die Schweiz und an Frankreich. All diese Länder praktizieren die Nutzerfinanzierung, zu der wir mit Fahrzeugen, die in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland zugelassen sind, übrigens schon seit langem beitragen.\n\nDeshalb kann es kein derart kritikwürdiges Beginnen sein, wenn wir uns darum bemühen, zu erreichen, dass auch Fahrzeuge, die aus diesen Ländern kommen und für die in diesen Ländern Steuern gezahlt werden, bei uns zur Nutzerfinanzierung beitragen, und zwar nach Möglichkeit im selben Maße, wie wir das dort tun. Ausländerfeindliches Reden oder eine Stimmungsmache gegen unsere Nachbarn kann ich darin nicht erkennen. Ich glaube, das ist ein weit überzogener Vorwurf.\n\nDas ist eine grundsätzliche Frage der Gerechtigkeit, und man muss die Möglichkeit haben, das zu diskutieren, ohne ständig in die Ecke gestellt zu werden, was dazu dienen soll, die Empörungsindustrie in diesem Land anzukurbeln.\n\nDie nächste Frage, die sich uns stellt, lautet: Werden wir auch privates Kapital akquirieren können, um unsere Infrastrukturfinanzierung voranzubringen? Zu dem Thema ÖPP wird der Kollege Sendker gleich unsere Vorstellungen für die nächste Zeit vortragen. Ich denke, auch das sind ganz wichtige Möglichkeiten zur Ergänzung unseres gesamten Finanzierungskomplexes.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, zum ersten Mal wird in Deutschland jetzt ein wichtiges Verkehrsinfrastrukturprojekt mit Projektanleihen finanziert, die durch die Projektgesellschaft ausgegeben werden. Neu daran ist, dass erstmals nicht eine reine Kreditfinanzierung stattfindet, sondern dass sich institutionelle Anleger - Versicherungen, Förderbanken usw. - an einem langfristigen Engagement in Deutschland interessiert zeigen, sich auch tatsächlich engagieren und an unserer Infrastrukturfinanzierung beteiligen.\n\nAuch die Europäische Investitionsbank hat ein Instrument zur Verbesserung der Kreditwürdigkeit bereitgestellt, nämlich die EU-Projektanleiheninitiative. Sie wird erstmals in Deutschland eingesetzt. Seitens der Europäischen Investitionsbank wurde hier eine Garantie gegeben, wodurch die Finanzierungsmargen für den Bund deutlich gesenkt werden konnten.\n\nDas alles sind kleine, aber wichtige Schritte zur Verbesserung unserer Infrastrukturfinanzierung.\n\nDie Verkehrsinfrastruktur - daran darf kein Zweifel aufkommen - wird in der öffentlichen Hand bleiben. Niemand denkt daran, sie zu privatisieren.\n\nHerr Gysi hat sich ja mit dem Gedanken getragen, zur Verewigung seines Namens eine Straße zu kaufen. Das wird nicht funktionieren.\n\n- Ich kann mir allerdings vorstellen, dass sich in Deutschland irgendwann eine Sackgasse oder vielleicht ein Kreisverkehr finden wird, die bzw. den man nach Gysi benennen könnte. Das ist kein Problem; das sind Sachen, die wir ohne Weiteres ertragen können.\n\nDie öffentliche Infrastruktur bleibt aber in öffentlicher Hand. Herr Gysi braucht sich da also überhaupt nicht zu bewerben.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ein Punkt ist mir noch ganz besonders wichtig: Nicht nur der Bund hat Infrastrukturaufgaben, sondern auch die Länder haben Infrastrukturaufgaben. Wir haben im Augenblick noch keine Entscheidung darüber getroffen, wie es hier weitergeht. Es gibt drei zentrale Finanzierungsinstrumente, nämlich erstens die GVFG-Mittel, zweitens die Entflechtungsmittel und drittens die Regionalisierungsmittel.\n\nÜber die Zukunft dieser Zuwendungen müssen wir in dieser Legislaturperiode eine Entscheidung fällen.\n\nDiese Entscheidung sollten wir in großer Eintracht und mit großer Verantwortung fällen; denn an dieser Stelle entscheidet sich die Zukunft in unseren Kommunen. Es geht auch um die Frage, wie bezahlbar die Mobilität für die Bürger in Zukunft sein wird. Das halte ich für eine ganz wichtige Sache.\n\nEs ist eine Aufgabe und ein klarer Vorsatz der Regierung und unserer Fraktion, die Fortschreibung dieser Mittel in angemessenem Maße zu garantieren. Das bedeutet natürlich auch, dass dann die entsprechende Infrastrukturfinanzierung in den Kommunen erforderlich sein wird, was wir unterstützen wollen. Das bedeutet, dass die Länder, die im Augenblick die Anwendung der GVFG-Mittel noch nicht gesetzlich fixiert haben, diese Fixierung nach Möglichkeit so schnell wie möglich vornehmen sollen.\n\nBei der digitalen Netzinfrastruktur - dazu eine letzte Bemerkung - ist es besonders unbefriedigend, dass es in der Breitbandversorgung ein spürbares Ost-West-Gefälle gibt. Da muss Abhilfe geschaffen werden. Die Internet-erreichbarkeit ist existenziell für die Zukunft der Räume, besonders der ländlichen Räume. Sie wird Arbeitsplätze schaffen, auch dezentral.\n\nVielen Dank für den Hinweis; ich höre gleich auf. - Das sind wir den Menschen schuldig. Ich glaube, wir haben auch in dieser Hinsicht einen guten Haushalt vorgelegt und damit noch bessere strategische Voraussetzungen für morgen geschaffen.\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin.\"\n7361,tino-sorge,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Maler Vincent van Gogh, der ehemalige Fußballnationaltorwart Robert Enke, der Gentleman-Playboy und spätere Kunstsammler Gunter Sachs, der Schauspieler Robin Williams, der Sänger der Band Nirwana, Kurt Cobain - diese Menschen hatten vermutlich nicht viele Gemeinsamkeiten; aber eines verbindet sie, nämlich dass sie ihrem Leben selbst ein Ende gesetzt haben. In ihrer Verzweiflung war der Tod offenbar der einzige Ausweg, die einzige Erlösung, um ihrem Leid zu entgehen.\n\nGenauso vielfältig wie die persönlichen Gründe, warum sich Menschen das Leben nehmen, ist die Art und Weise, wie dieser Entschluss letztendlich umgesetzt wird. Deshalb, Frau Klein-Schmeink, finde ich es ein bisschen enttäuschend, dass Sie in Ihrem Antrag den Eindruck erwecken, als gäbe es punktuelle Maßnahmen, um Suizide generell zu vermeiden.\n\n- Ich habe ihn sehr genau gelesen. Sie haben im Grunde gemacht, was Sie häufig in Ihren Anträgen machen: Es gibt ein buntes Potpourri von Forderungen aus allen möglichen Bereichen. Das reicht von Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund über Mitarbeiter im Strafvollzug bis hin zu bauordnungsrechtlichen Vorgaben; es ist alles drin. Immer soll es mehr geben; aber es werden keine konkreten Lösungsvorschläge genannt.\n\nWir sind uns alle einig, dass wir Menschen in Krisen, die suizidale Gedanken haben und sich umbringen möchten, weil sie - aus welchen Gründen auch immer - ihr Leben nicht mehr lebenswert finden, helfen und ihnen Angebote machen müssen, um zu verhindern, dass es dazu kommt. Dazu gehört auch, dass wir die Thematik in der Öffentlichkeit konkret behandeln und das Thema enttabuisieren - denn leider ist es ein Tabuthema -, indem wir darüber sprechen. Insofern ist es gut, dass wir heute eine Debatte zu diesem Thema führen. Aber ich finde es schade, dass Sie suggerieren, die Bundesregierung und wir als Politiker würden überhaupt nichts machen.\n\nEs ist die Aufgabe der Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung, Gesundheitsförderung und Prävention auf Bundesebene zusammen mit allen Trägern, den Ländern, den Kommunen, den Sozialversicherungsträgern und den freien Trägern, zu organisieren. Das gibt es bereits. Ich gebe Ihnen völlig recht, Frau Wöllert, dass Prävention und Gesundheitsförderung viel stärker ins gesellschaftliche Bewusstsein rücken müssen. Darin sind wir uns alle einig. Hier gehen wir in dieselbe Richtung. Ich hatte selbst vor einiger Zeit in meinem Wahlkreis die Möglichkeit, einen Einblick in die gute Arbeit der Bundeszentrale zu bekommen. Ich habe damals mit Marlene Mortler die Jugendfilmtage eröffnet. In diesem Rahmen ging es um Drogen-, Alkohol- und Nikotinmissbrauch. Das zeigt, dass wir in der Politik auf einem guten Weg sind.\n\nDas Nationale Suizidpräventionsprogramm, mit dem die Suizidprävention unterstützt wird, ist bereits angesprochen worden. Das Bundesgesundheitsministerium ist, wie Sie wissen, seit der Einführung 2002 fachlich und finanziell eng damit vernetzt.\n\nDie Wichtigkeit des Themas zeigt sich auch an den vielen Projekten, die in diesem Bereich durchgeführt werden und die - das muss auch einmal gesagt werden - zu einer deutlichen Reduzierung der Suizidzahlen geführt haben. Aber das alles verschweigen Sie in Ihrem Antrag. Darin findet sich kein einziges Wort dazu.\n\nKonkret an die Fraktion der Grünen gerichtet möchte ich noch eines sagen: Ich finde es ein bisschen zynisch, wenn Sie in Ihrem Antrag alle möglichen Punkte aufführen, aber kein einziges Wort darüber verlieren, dass Sie tagtäglich der Legalisierung von Drogen, nämlich von Cannabis, das Wort reden.\n\nDazu habe ich in Ihrem Antrag nichts gefunden. Aber bevor Sie jetzt wieder sagen, dass es keinen Zusammenhang, keine Korrelation mit unserem Thema gibt, sollten Sie sich mit den wissenschaftlichen Studien befassen. Es gibt eine tolle Studie - „toll“ in Anführungszeichen -, die ESPAD-Studie. Für das European School Survey Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs wurden 45 000 Jugendliche befragt. Die Studie hat gezeigt, dass es durch den Konsum von Cannabis eine signifikante Erhöhung des Suizidrisikos gegeben hat.\n\nWeil Sie jetzt vielleicht sagen, dass das nichts miteinander zu tun hat, habe ich noch eine Studie herausgesucht. Ein neuseeländisches und australisches Forschungsteam hat über 30 Jahre 1 265 Menschen, die im neuseeländischen Christchurch geboren wurden, wiederholt untersucht und mit ihnen geredet. Dabei ging es ausschließlich um den Konsum von Cannabis. Ich will nicht weiter darauf eingehen; aber als Fazit ist festgestellt worden, dass häufiger Cannabiskonsum die Wahrscheinlichkeit von Suizidgedanken und auch das Suizidrisiko erhöht. Auch das sollten Sie in Ihre Anträge mit aufnehmen.\n\nJa, natürlich. Sehr gerne.\n\nLiebe Frau Kollegen Scharfenberg, wenn Sie mir genau zugehört hätten, hätten Sie gemerkt, dass ich das gar nicht in Abrede gestellt habe. Ich habe vielmehr gesagt, dass die Zahlen stimmen. Darüber sind wir nicht uneins; da gibt es gar keinen Dissens. Ich habe lediglich gesagt, dass Sie in Ihren Anträgen die Thematik gegebenenfalls ein bisschen ganzheitlicher betrachten sollten.\n\nIch kann Ihnen konkrete Beispiele nennen. Beispielsweise fordern Sie in Ihrem Antrag die Bundesregierung auf, einen Gesetzentwurf vorzulegen, der den Schwerpunkt auf eine Gesundheitsförderung in den Alltagswelten legt. Wir haben doch über das Präventionsgesetz diskutiert. Im Grunde haben wir genau das gemacht, was Sie fordern. Das Präventionsgesetz unterstützt Präven-tionsarbeit in den Lebenswelten. Sie haben konstruktiv mitdiskutiert. Nun stellen Sie sich aber hierhin und tun so, als wäre in diesem Bereich nichts passiert. Wie Sie wissen, geben wir in diesem Bereich 500 Millionen Euro mehr aus. 500 Millionen Euro! Das ist kein Pappenstiel.\n\nDa Sie sagen, Eigenlob stinkt, habe ich ein Zitat der Vorsitzenden der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Suizidprävention, Frau Professor Barbara Schneider, herausgesucht. Sie hat in einem Schreiben an Bundesminister Gröhe das Präventionsgesetz ausdrücklich gelobt. Ich zitiere:\n\nDas Präventionsgesetz für Deutschland stimmt ganz besonders mit seinem fundamentalen Anspruch, die Prävention in der Breite der Gesellschaft zu etablieren, mit dem Anliegen und den jahrzehntelangen Bestrebungen der Suizidprävention durch die Deutsche Gesellschaft für Suizidprävention überein.\n\nSelbstverständlich.\n\nIch stimme mit Ihnen darin überein, dass es schon ein Erfolg ist, dass wir das Präventionsgesetz verabschiedet haben. Ich finde es aber schade, dass Sie damals die Chance nicht genutzt haben, dem Gesetz, das wir erst vor kurzem beschlossen haben, zuzustimmen. Gerade bei Ihrem Ansatz hätte ich mir gewünscht, dass Sie gesagt hätten: Es ist super, dass wir ein Präventionsgesetz machen; das unterstützen wir als Grüne. - Aber Sie sagen einfach: Nein, das gefällt uns nicht. Der eine Punkt ist nicht richtig. An anderer Stelle könnte mehr getan werden. Also stimmen wir gar nicht zu. - Das finde ich nicht gut. Wenn selbst Experten wie Frau Schneider, die ich eben zitiert habe, sagen, dass in diesem Bereich viel passiert ist, dann können Sie doch nicht so tun, als wäre überhaupt nichts geschehen. Es gehört zur Fairness dazu, dass Sie zugeben, dass wir durchaus etwas getan haben.\n\nIch fahre mit meinen Ausführungen zu Ihrem Antrag fort. Ich habe ihn mir genau durchgelesen. Es ist interessant, zu sehen, wie Sie bestimmte Sachverhalte auf sehr unterschiedliche Weise begründen. So sagen Sie zum Beispiel, im Bereich der Heil- und Gesundheitsberufe müsse mehr getan werden, wohl wissend, dass wir uns mitten in der Diskussion darüber befinden und eine Reform des Medizinstudiums vornehmen wollen. Die Bund-Länder-Verhandlungen laufen.\n\n- Ja, genau das ist der Punkt. Aber es ist schade, dass Sie laufende Verhandlungen ignorieren und parlamentarische Verfahren offensichtlich nicht zur Kenntnis nehmen.\n\nSie haben die Palliativversorgung angesprochen. Das ständige Wiederholen der Aussage, dass bereits laufende Maßnahmen umgesetzt werden müssten, bringt uns nicht weiter, sondern hält uns nur auf.\n\nGanz besonders interessant finde ich Ihre Forderung nach Änderung der baurechtlichen Vorgaben. Sie fordern die Bundesregierung auf, darauf hinzuwirken, dass die Bundesländer ihre baurechtlichen Vorgaben dahin gehend überprüfen, inwieweit baurechtliche Regelungen zur Suizidprävention berücksichtigt werden können. Als Jurist finde ich das sehr interessant. Da das Baurecht in die Kompetenz der Länder fällt, habe ich mir das Bauordnungsrecht der jeweiligen Bundesländer angeschaut, insbesondere der Bundesländer, in denen Sie als Grüne mitregieren, zum Beispiel das Baurecht von Baden-Württemberg, wo Sie als Grüne den Ministerpräsidenten stellen. Trotz intensiver Suche habe ich keine entsprechende Regelung gefunden. Das gilt auch für NRW, Niedersachsen, Rheinland-Pfalz und Bremen. Ich habe nichts gefunden. Wenn Sie so etwas wollen, dann können Sie das in den Bundesländern, in denen Sie regieren, schnell umsetzen. Aber dort machen Sie nichts. Stattdessen stellen Sie sich hier hin und werfen uns vor, nichts zu machen, und fordern uns auf, entsprechende Maßnahmen umzusetzen.\n\nLassen Sie uns konstruktiv darüber sprechen. Wir haben Ihren Antrag zur Kenntnis genommen. Wir werden darüber diskutieren. Aber seien Sie auch konstruktiv, und loben Sie uns einmal, wenn wir etwas umsetzen. Das tut nicht weh.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n8169,matthias-birkwald,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! An Silvester 2014 waren 1 Million Menschen in Deutschland auf Grundsicherung im Alter und bei Erwerbsminderung, sprich: auf Sozialhilfe, angewiesen. Sie mussten aufs Sozialamt, weil ihre Erwerbsminderungsrente durchschnittlich weniger als 735 Euro betrug oder ihr Alterseinkommen im Schnitt unter 782 Euro lag oder weil sie sich ihre Miete nicht leisten konnten oder weil sie sich ihre Medikamente nicht leisten konnten. Was sie vom Sozialamt dann erhalten, liegt weit unter den gängigen Armutsrisikogrenzen. Die offizielle Armutsgrenze der Europäischen Union liegt für alleinlebende Menschen in Deutschland bei 979 Euro im Monat. Das ist der eigentliche Skandal. Und daran ändert Ihr 54 Seiten langer Gesetzentwurf gar nichts.\n\nIhr Gesetzentwurf ändert auch Nullkommanichts daran, dass die Zahl derjenigen Älteren, die aufs Sozialamt müssen, in den vergangenen zehn Jahren um 76 Prozent gestiegen ist, und sich bei den Erwerbsgeminderten die Zahl sogar verdoppelt hat. Jahr für Jahr kommen 30 000 bis 40 000 Betroffene neu dazu. Akzeptieren Sie endlich, dass viele Altersrenten und noch mehr Erwerbsminderungsrenten nicht vor Armut schützen! Darum sage ich Ihnen: Schaffen Sie die ungerechten Abschläge für Erwerbsminderungsrentner und \u001erentnerinnen ab!\n\nUnd: Schaffen Sie die Kürzungsfaktoren in der Rentenanpassungsformel ab! Das wäre bitter notwendig.\n\n(Beifall der Abg. Kathrin Vogler\n\n[DIE LINKE])\n\nAber davon findet sich selbstverständlich nichts in Ihrem Gesetzentwurf.\n\nWorum geht es Ihnen? Seit dem 1. Januar 2014 ist die Grundsicherung im Alter komplett auf den Bund übergegangen. Daraus ergeben sich Auslegungsfragen, Verfahrensänderungen usw.; das machen Sie alles mehr oder weniger bürokratisch korrekt. Aber dann liest man auf einmal auf Seite 40 des Gesetzentwurfes, dass sich der Bundesrat in seiner Stellungnahme einem echten Problem zuwendet, Herr Kollege Weiß, den ich an dieser Stelle gerne ansprechen möchte, einem Problem, wegen dessen sich immer wieder Betroffene an uns wenden: Die Grundsicherung, die die Rente ja oft nur aufstockt - sagen wir zum Beispiel: um 200 Euro -, wird am Beginn eines Monats ausgezahlt. Die Rente - sagen wir zum Beispiel: in Höhe von 600 Euro - wird aber erst am Ende des Monats ausgezahlt. Folge: Die Rentnerin muss einen Monat lang von 200 Euro leben. Wie soll denn das gehen?\n\nWir hatten der Bundesregierung im November 2014 zu dieser Lücke zwischen Grundsicherung und Rentenauszahlung eine Frage gestellt. Sie wollten prüfen, was Sie tun können. Der Bundesrat hat zur Lösung des Problems drei leider hochkomplizierte Verfahrensvarianten vorgelegt. Das ist schon befremdlich; aber dass die Bundesregierung auf Seite 51 des Gesetzentwurfs ebenfalls das Problem anerkennt, die vom Bundesrat vorgeschlagene Regelung in epischer Breite auf ihre Schwächen hin abklopft, um dann am Ende nichts vorzulegen, das ist wirklich unverschämt.\n\nZitat:\n\nDie Bundesregierung lehnt es bereits im Grundsatz ab, das im SGB XII geltende Zuflussprinzip ... zu durchbrechen ...\n\nWelcher Grundsatz denn? Ignoranz? Bürokratische Weltfremdheit? Nein, das ist wirklich ein Schlag ins Gesicht von älteren Menschen, die einen Monat lang von 200 Euro leben sollen.\n\nDer Deutsche Verein für öffentliche und private Fürsorge, wahrlich keine kommunistische Vorfeldorganisation, hatte ganz einfach und elegant gefordert, die Rente im ersten Monat nicht zu berücksichtigen - ganz einfach. Man bekäme also im ersten Monat einmalig zum Beispiel 800 Euro Grundsicherung und erst ab dem nächsten Monat dann immer nur 200 Euro Grundsicherung am Anfang des Monats und 600 Euro Rente am Ende des Monats. Das ist doch ein guter Vorschlag. Setzen Sie ihn um. Die Betroffenen werden es Ihnen danken.\n\nJetzt nach all der Kritik noch ein bisschen Lob\n\nund ein bisschen Eigenlob.\n\nBisher wurde die Verletztenrente bei früheren Wehrdienstleistenden der Nationalen Volksarmee auf die Grundsicherung angerechnet und die der Wehrdienstleistenden der Bundeswehr nicht. Das war ungerecht, und das ist ungerecht. Die Linke kritisiert das schon seit der 16. Legislaturperiode.\n\nJetzt wollen Sie endlich einen Freibetrag von durchschnittlich 238 Euro im Jahr einführen. Damit würden Sie immerhin eine der einigungsbedingten Ungerechtigkeiten beseitigen. Das ist gut. Machen Sie weiter so.\n\nNoch ein Wort zur Hofabgabeklausel bei Bauern.\n\nDie Linke bleibt dabei: Die Hofabgabeklausel ist anachronistisch. Sie muss gestrichen werden. Sie wirkt häufig wie eine Zwangsenteignung: Gibt der Landwirt den Hof ab, bekommt er eine Minirente, kann aber nichts dazuverdienen; gibt er ihn nicht ab, hat er komplett umsonst eingezahlt. Dass wenigstens die jüngeren Ehepartnerinnen einen eigenen Rentenanspruch behalten, wenn ihr Gatte den Hof nicht abgibt, wäre ein kleiner Fortschritt. Das ändert an dem Grundproblem aber nur wenig. Darüber werden wir in der Anhörung noch reden.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n12922,volker-beck,\"Der Anstieg, den Sie aber vermelden können, deckt sich mit Beobachtungen der Polizei in Berlin, die von einem noch dramatischeren Anstieg in diesem Jahr ausgeht. Danach sind im ersten Dreivierteljahr so viele homo- und transphobe Straftaten begangen worden wie im ganzen letzten Jahr. Das wäre ein Anstieg um über 30 Prozent. Ich wollte Sie fragen, wie die Bundesregierung auf diese dramatische Erhöhung der Zahl der Straftaten in diesem Bereich reagiert und wie sie sich diese Erhöhung erklärt.\n\nSie haben ja aufgeführt, dass laut Statistik 99 Tatverdächtige ermittelt wurden. Mich interessiert auch, inwiefern man diese Täter - ich glaube, das hatte ich in der Ausgangsfrage eigentlich auch gefragt - den verschiedenen Kategorien der politisch motivierten Kriminalität - „links“, „rechts“, „Ausländerkriminalität“ und „sonstige“ - zuordnen kann.\n\nDas heißt, Ihnen liegen keine Erkenntnisse vor über das Ausmaß von islamfeindlichen Straftaten sowohl gegen Personen als auch gegen Einrichtungen. Denn der Eindruck, der uns insbesondere von den islamischen Verbänden vermittelt wird, ist, dass in letzter Zeit zumindest die Zahl der Anschläge auf Moscheen und Einrichtungen - Schmierereien, Hassparolen und dergleichen - zugenommen hat. Man hätte natürlich gerne ein valides Gesamtbild.\n\nDie Tendenz bei beiden Fragen - vorhin Homo- und Transphobie und jetzt Islamfeindlichkeit - scheint darauf hinzudeuten, dass Straftaten, die durch gruppenbezogene Menschenfeindlichkeit motiviert sind, zunehmen. Das entspricht auch den Ergebnissen der Untersuchungen der Universität Leipzig bezüglich autoritärer und rechtsextremer Einstellungen in Deutschland - Stichwort „Mitte“-Studie - und dergleichen mehr. Welche Konsequenzen will die Bundesregierung ziehen, um dieser Entwicklung sowohl hinsichtlich der Einstellungen als auch hinsichtlich der Taten, die aus den Einstellungen folgen, präventiv entgegenzusteuern?\n\nIch wollte die Bundesregierung fragen, ab welchem Zeitraum sie garantieren kann, dass diese Praxis, die vom Kollegen Ströbele abgefragt wurde, definitiv nicht mehr stattgefunden hat oder nicht stattgefunden hat.\"\n15449,daniela-de-ridder,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Gäste auf den Rängen! Liebe Kolleginnen der Opposition, ich wünschte mir so manches Mal mehr Frauensolidarität. Hätten wir die auch in diesem Parlament, dann müssten Sie doch anerkennen, dass wir in dieser Legislaturperiode so viel Frauenpolitik durchgesetzt haben und so viel Gewinnbringendes für Frauen erreicht haben wie selten zuvor,\n\nbeispielsweise die Frauenquote und das Entgelttransparenzgesetz. Das mag zwar alles nicht reichen, aber man muss es doch würdigen, anerkennen und unterstützen. Ich fahre fort mit dem Elterngeld Plus, der Familienpflegezeit und dem Kitaausbau.\n\nAll dies sollte man anerkennen und würdigen.\n\nSie haben ja recht: Wenn es darum geht, der AfD und ihren Kampfparolen gegen Gender-Mainstreaming und Genderforschung entgegenzutreten, dann müssen wir uns verbünden und dem gemeinsam solidarisch entgegentreten.\n\nIm Übrigen steht mit meiner Person gerade das Beispiel eines Hassobjekts am Rednerpult, liebe Frau Gohlke, nämlich mit Blick auf das, was die AfD verkündet. Ich war lange Genderforscherin, und ich war lange Gleichstellungsbeauftragte und damit für Gender-Mainstreaming zuständig. Ja, es ist eine Schande, dass Populisten Gleichstellung infrage stellen. Aber dabei soll es nicht bleiben.\n\nGerade im Wissenschaftsbereich haben wir eine ganze Menge durchgesetzt. Lassen Sie mich daran erinnern, dass wir einen Pakt für den wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchs geschlossen haben, der gerade auch die Karrierewege junger Nachwuchswissenschaftlerinnen in den Blick nimmt. Aber auch da gilt, dass wir die Frauen nicht isoliert betrachten dürfen, sondern dass wir auch junge Väter in den Blick nehmen müssen. Wenn Männer ein Teil des Problems sind, dann müssen sie doch auch ein Teil der Lösung sein. Das ist unerlässlich, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nDa darf auch gerne geklatscht werden.\n\nZweitens will ich noch einmal deutlich machen, dass der Arbeitsmarkt segregiert ist und dass Frauen - das hat Frau Kollegin Zollner schon angesprochen - auch dann entsprechender Würdigung und Anerkennung bedürfen, wenn sie sich für frauenspezifische Bereiche wie die Pflegewissenschaften entscheiden.\n\nDrittens haben wir Programme wie „Frauen an die Spitze“, mit denen wir deutlich machen: Ja, Frauen können denken. Frauen können forschen. Frauen können lehren. Darin müssen sie auch unterstützt werden.\n\nAber nicht genug: Nein, wir sind nicht nur zufrieden. Das will ich keineswegs in Abrede stellen. Ja, es hätte mich gefreut, liebe Unionskolleginnen, wäre es uns gelungen, jetzt schon eine ganz klare Aussage dahin gehend zu machen, wie es mit dem Professorinnenprogramm weitergeht. Schade, dass der Antrag, den wir entwickelt haben, am Widerstand der Union gescheitert ist. Eine Schwalbe reicht eben nicht, um einen Sommer zu machen. Eine Kanzlerin reicht nicht, um gute Gleichstellungspolitik zu machen.\n\nDas ist ärgerlich, und das wird in der nächsten Legislaturperiode noch einmal deutlich akzentuiert werden müssen.\n\nJa, liebe Claudia Lücking-Michel, auch ich bin ein Fan der Quote, wenn Sie mit dem Kaskadenmodell daherkommen. Aber warum ist es uns nicht gelungen, dies stärker zu transportieren? Das wird beantwortet werden müssen.\n\nIch war ganz erschrocken: Exzellenzstrategie, sagte der Kollege Kaufmann neulich in einer Diskussion, an der Kai Gehring und ich teilgenommen haben, habe nichts mit Gender-Mainstreaming oder Gender und Diversity zu tun. Das finde ich fahrlässig. Ich denke allein an das Medizinstudium und daran, dass es eigentlich gesichertes Wissen darüber gibt, dass die Symptome etwa bei Herzinfarkt bei Frauen anders aussehen als bei Männern. Wenn wir dringend auf Genderforschung angewiesen sind, dann können wir nicht ignorieren, dass Exzellenz in der Wissenschaft und Gender zusammengehören und beobachtet werden müssen.\n\nJa, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir haben hier noch vieles zu tun, und wir müssen uns dem auch widmen. Wir von der SPD schlagen deshalb vor, sofort noch einmal darüber nachzudenken - und wir haben ja noch ein bisschen Zeit -, wie es weitergehen soll mit der Genderforschung, wie es auch mit der Unterstützung der jungen Nachwuchswissenschaftlerinnen weitergehen muss. Wir schlagen vor, liebe Claudia Lücking-Michel, dass es noch einmal einen Vorstoß in dem Programm „Frauen an die Spitze“ und vor allem im Professorinnenprogramm gibt. Was wir dazu tun müssen - und das ist unser Vorschlag, den Martin Schulz dann hoffentlich wird durchsetzen können -, ist sicher, einen Gleichstellungsrat einzusetzen, in dem wir all diese Expertise, die Frauen und Männer mitbringen, bündeln und zur Unterstützung von Frauen und Männern in der Wissenschaft einbringen. Wir wollen da überhaupt nicht ausschließend wirken.\n\nLiebe Frauen, die Sie die Chance haben, zu wählen: Wählen Sie nicht nur so, dass Sie denken, Sie müssten die althergebrachten Rezepte von gestern unterstützen. Wählen Sie bitte auch in Ihrem eigenen Interesse diejenigen, die Gleichstellung unterstützen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n224,katja-keul,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Kollege Weiß, dass Sie die Zwischenfrage zulassen. - Sie haben gerade gesagt, Sie verhindern durch das, was Sie jetzt tun, zukünftige Beitragssteigerungen. Das verstehe ich nicht ganz; denn es ist doch, glaube ich, nicht so, dass diese zusätzlichen Beitragseinnahmen, die Sie erhalten, weil Sie den Beitragssatz jetzt nicht senken, nachhaltig für die zukünftigen Generationen vorgehalten werden, sondern Sie haben vor, dieses Geld im nächsten Jahr unmittelbar wieder auszuzahlen, um Ihre Wahlgeschenke zu bezahlen. Das Geld ist doch weg und kommt den zukünftigen Generationen nicht in Form von weiteren Anwartschaften zugute.\"\n10203,kerstin-andreae,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich war am Mittwoch beim parlamentarischen Abend des VCI. Es ist nicht unbedingt ein Heimspiel für die Grünen, bei den Vertretern der chemischen Industrie zu sein. Das ändert sich jetzt ein bisschen. Wir haben dort die steuerliche Forschungsförderung vorgestellt und natürlich breite Unterstützung bekommen. Logisch.\n\n- Logisch, ja. Aber ich komme nachher noch einmal zum VCI.\n\nVolker Kauder war auch da, und er hat uns erklärt, warum das alles nicht geht: wegen Mitnahmeeffekten; man könne alle Ausgaben absetzen. Das sind berechtigte Sorgen,\n\nund natürlich nehmen wir sie ernst. Es geht um das Geld der Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler. Deswegen legen wir einen Gesetzentwurf vor, der genau eine solche Abgrenzung vornimmt, damit es eben nicht zu Mitnahmeeffekten kommt. Ich empfehle Volker Kauder, sich diesen Gesetzentwurf einmal gut anzuschauen. Er ist modern, er ist innovativ - das ist Mittelstandspolitik.\n\nWissen Sie, die Innovationszyklen werden immer kürzer. Das heute verfügbare Wissen verdoppelt sich alle sieben Jahre. Im Jahr 2030 wird dies alle 72 Tage der Fall sein. Das heißt, wir brauchen eine Förderung, die den Herausforderungen - dieser Schnelligkeit, dieser Dynamik - und der Digitalisierung gerecht wird, eine Förderung, die zu dieser neuen Innovationswelt passt.\n\nWas sind jetzt die Vorteile unseres Ansatzes? Wir legen nicht fest, welches konkrete Forschungsvorhaben gefördert wird, weil wir nicht wissen, welche Vorhaben letztendlich entscheidende Durchbrüche bringen können. Wir fördern Ausgaben, nicht Gewinne - wie Sie mit den Patentboxen. Wer Gewinne macht, der hat es schon geschafft.\n\nWir wollen nicht die Projektförderung einschränken, sondern parallel zur Projektförderung einen steuerlichen Bonus von 15 Prozent für Forschungs- und Entwicklungsausgaben einführen. Als Nachweis dafür, dass es tatsächlich Forschungs- und Entwicklungsausgaben sind, gibt es ein Zertifikat. Das muss auch nicht die Steuerbehörde prüfen; vielmehr gibt es - wie heute schon beim ZIM oder bei Forschungsprojekten - Forschungszentren, zum Beispiel Jülich, die diese Zertifikate ausstellen. Damit hat man die Abgrenzungsprobleme, die scheinbar Volker Kauders Sorge sind, gelöst. Schauen Sie sich das an! Hier liegt der richtige Vorschlag.\n\nJetzt kommt die schlechte Nachricht an den VCI: Wir fokussieren auf den Mittelstand. Das hat gute Gründe: Über 60 Prozent der kontinuierlich forschenden KMUs werden nicht von der öffentlichen Forschungs- und Innovationsförderung erreicht. Die öffentliche Projektförderung geht an mehr als der Hälfte der forschenden Unternehmen vorbei, unter anderem, weil die Bürokratie für die kleinen Unternehmen zu groß ist. Unterhalten Sie sich mal mit den Unternehmen!\n\nSie sind nicht in der Lage, die Projektförderung zu nutzen, weil ihnen die Manpower fehlt. Ein großes Unternehmen hat entsprechende Abteilungen. Ein kleines Unternehmen hat vielleicht kreative Ideen, schlaue Ideen, hat Potenzial, das wir heben wollen, aber eben nicht die Möglichkeit, die Projektförderung zu nutzen. Deswegen fokussieren wir auf die KMU.\n\nUnsere bisherige Forschungsförderung ist konzernlastig, und das können wir uns nicht dauerhaft leisten.\n\nJetzt schauen wir einmal über den nationalen Tellerrand hinaus. In 27 der 34 OECD-Länder gibt es eine steuerliche Förderung von FuE. In allen EU-Ländern außer Estland und Deutschland gibt es eine steuerliche Forschungsförderung.\n\nWas ist jetzt mit Ihnen? Alle drei Parteien sind mit der Forderung nach einer steuerlichen Forschungsförderung in den Wahlkampf gegangen. Die SPD hatte ihren „Modernisierungspakt für Deutschland 2025“. Und was steht da drin? Die Forderung nach einer steuerlichen Forschungsförderung.\n\n- Der Beifall gilt Ihnen von der SPD. Der Beifall gilt auch der CDU. Denn was forderten Sie auf Ihrem Parteitag im Dezember 2014? Eine steuerliche Forschungsförderung. Ja, es ist doch einfach mal an der Zeit.\n\nWenn Deutschland in der Spitzengruppe der führenden Industrie- und Innovationsnationen bleiben möchte - angesichts der Herausforderungen, die vor uns stehen, wäre das klug, auch im Hinblick auf Arbeitsplätze -, dann muss die Politik mehr tun, um Forschung und Entwicklung in den Unternehmen zu fördern.\n\nIch bin jetzt gespannt auf die Debatte. Jetzt haben Sie den Gesetzentwurf, und dann werden Sie sagen: Das klappt nicht, das klappt auch nicht, an der Stelle funktioniert es nicht usw. - Wunderbar! Es ist die erste Lesung. Dann fangen Sie an, bringen Sie Änderungsanträge ein! Wir sind bereit, das alles zu verbessern, damit wir als Deutscher Bundestag in unserem gemeinsamen Interesse, die Kreativität kleiner und mittelständischer Unternehmen zu fördern und ihr Potenzial zu heben, eine steuerliche Forschungsförderung zusammen auf den Weg bringen können. Ich verspreche Ihnen: Wir werden dann nicht das Copyright auf diesen Gesetzentwurf beanspruchen. Aber fangen Sie jetzt nicht an, in der Debatte kleinteilig an irgendwelchen Punkten herumzumäkeln, sondern sagen Sie uns klipp und klar, ob Sie bereit sind, der steuerlichen Forschungsförderung den Weg zu bereiten. Lassen Sie uns das gemeinsam machen - für den Innovationsstandort Deutschland! Es wäre wunderbar, wenn wir das hinkriegen.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nWissen Sie, Herr Lengsfeld, Sie haben ja recht, dass die steuerliche Forschungsförderung für alle Unternehmen deutlich teurer werden würde, nämlich um ungefähr 4 Milliarden Euro. Wenn wir beobachten, dass unsere Forschungsförderung konzernlastig ist und dass bei der Projektförderung - das finden Sie in sämtlichen Studien; sogar beim DIW - vor allem die großen Unternehmen zum Zuge kommen, dann stelle ich mir als Wirtschaftspolitikerin die Frage, ob es nicht sinnvoll wäre, ein Instrument zu konzipieren, das den kleinen und den mittleren Unternehmen zur Verfügung steht. Ich gehe nämlich sorgsam mit Steuergeldern um. Ich möchte nicht, dass wir 4 Milliarden Euro für eine steuerliche Forschungsförderung in die Hand nehmen und sie allen zugutekommen lassen. Ich möchte, dass wir uns auf die Unternehmen konzentrieren, bei denen wirklich Bedarf ist, bei denen die Mittel wirklich effizient eingesetzt werden. Das sind die KMUs.\n\nErzählen Sie mir nicht, dass wir jetzt zwischen einem guten und einem schlechten Arbeitsplatz unterscheiden. Das ist ziemlicher Kokolores. Gehen Sie stattdessen einmal auf die Frage ein, warum Sie nicht in der Lage sind, zu sehen, dass wir eine konzernlastige Forschungsförderung haben und dass wir im Mittelstand viel Potenzial haben, das wir heben könnten, und dass wir den Gesetzentwurf deswegen so konzipiert haben.\"\n1694,ekin-deligoz,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Das, was die Vertreterin der Koalitionsfraktionen hier gesagt hat, und das, was Sie, Frau Ministerin, gesagt haben, hört sich alles sehr gut an.\n\nDas ist alles sehr wohlklingend. Auch Ihr Koalitionsvertrag liest sich zunächst ganz gut.\n\nWenn man sich dann den Haushaltsentwurf, den Sie uns vorgelegt haben, ansieht, ist man enttäuscht, weil sich nichts von dem, was Sie hier versprechen, in Ihrer Vorlage abbildet.\n\nIhr Anspruch und die Realität klaffen extrem auseinander.\n\nJa, Ihr Einzelplan wächst, aber doch nur wegen steigender Inanspruchnahme von Elterngeld und Betreuungsgeld. Sie reden hier großartig von Ausbau und Qualität der Kindertagesbetreuung. Wo spiegelt sich das denn wider? Diese Aufgabe ist dringend. Wir unterstützen Sie. Wir stehen dabei an Ihrer Seite und kämpfen dafür. Aber statt sich dafür einzusetzen, machen Sie daraus erst einen Ressortstreit. Dann sagen sie hier: Ein richtiger Ressortstreit ist das nicht; die Länder sind auch noch mit dabei. Und dann befürworten Sie so eine Art Pauschalüberweisung ohne Bindung an einen Auftrag. Sie kämpfen ja noch nicht einmal dafür, Frau Ministerin. Wir hätten von Ihnen wenigstens erwartet,\n\ndass Sie sich dafür einsetzen, dafür einstehen und kämpfen, dass Sie sagen: „Ja, ich will mich für die Qualität einsetzen“, statt hier weichzuspülen und sich herauszureden.\n\nSie könnten zum Beispiel Qualität verbindlich machen, indem Sie Standards setzen. Sie könnten das Kinder- und Jugendhilfegesetz ändern und sagen: „Das ist verbindlich“, und nur dann das Geld überweisen. Aber das machen Sie nicht. Das steht noch nicht einmal in Ihrem Koalitionsvertrag. Dieses Thema nehmen Sie noch nicht einmal mehr in den Mund. Im Wahlkampf sah das anders aus.\n\nSelbst von den in Aussicht stehenden 1,5 Milliarden Euro findet sich nichts in Ihrem Haushalt. Wenn Sie das sozusagen trotzdem anpreisen, haben Sie den Kampf schon verloren, und mit Ihnen haben auch die Kinder und die Eltern diesen Kampf verloren. Das ist der Auftrag an Sie. Leider reichen warme Worte da nicht aus. Sie müssen jetzt dazu stehen.\n\nDas, was beim Elterngeld passiert, ist gut und erwünscht. Wir wollen, dass es von mehr Vätern in Anspruch genommen wird. Aber von einem Erfolgsmodell können wir beim Betreuungsgeld schon nicht mehr sprechen. Es bindet eine halbe Milliarde Euro - das wird jetzt immer mehr; die SPD klang da schon einmal ganz anders -, und Sie alle wissen doch, dass wir das Geld brauchen. Die gleichzeitige Teilerwerbstätigkeit von Elternpaaren hätten wir längst haben können. Es ging aber nicht, weil das Geld fehlte. Über die Partnermonate im Elterngeld reden wir gar nicht mehr. Beim Kindergeld streiten Sie, Frau Schön. Ja, in der letzten Wahlperiode haben Sie etwas geändert.\n\nIn dieser Wahlperiode werden Sie die Freibeträge für die Besserverdienenden anpassen. Für die Kindergeldempfänger wird womöglich gar nichts herausspringen.\n\nUnd die Kinder von Eltern im ALG-II-Bezug schauen aus der Ferne zu. Das ist Ihre Art von Gerechtigkeit in diesem Land: Wer nichts hat, der geht leer aus. Damit rühmen Sie sich hier auch noch.\n\nÜberhaupt: Zum Thema Kinderarmut habe ich bisher kein einziges Wort gehört. Weder in Ihrem Koalitionsvertrag noch in den Reden findet Kinderarmut überhaupt noch Platz. Das verwundert mich auch nicht. Eine Reform des Kinderzuschlags wird in den kommenden vier Jahren ausbleiben. Ein angemessener Regelsatz wird, wenn überhaupt, in die weite Ferne verschoben werden. Der Unterhaltsvorschuss wird definitiv unangetastet bleiben. Alleinerziehende Mütter, die vorwiegend von Armut betroffen sind, bekommen zwar einen Freibetrag - den Sie vielleicht anheben wollen -, aber nur die, die auch ein entsprechendes Gehalt haben, profitieren davon. Alle anderen werden leer ausgehen.\n\nIch wünschte mir von Ihnen wirklich mehr Einsatz, Frau Ministerin; denn eigentlich wissen Sie es besser. Sie waren einmal eine Ministerin, die genau diese Themen in die Hand genommen hat. Umso enttäuschender ist, dass Sie jetzt eine solche Vogel-Strauß-Politik machen und das alles gar nicht mehr wahrnehmen wollen.\n\nFrau Ministerin, Sie haben womöglich auch keine andere Chance. Sie wollen verwalten statt gestalten.\n\nDas liegt auch daran, dass der Wille zur Gestaltung Mut zur Prioritätensetzung und Mut zur politischen Entscheidungsfindung voraussetzt. Diesen Mut haben Sie nicht. Sie haben mit dem Koalitionsvertrag nämlich ein Stillhalteabkommen abgeschlossen.\n\nSie akzeptieren das Betreuungsgeld, sie akzeptieren das, was Ihre Kollegen wollen, und damit haben Sie sich darauf eingelassen, auf die Gestaltung all der Punkte zu verzichten, bei denen wir in diesem Land eigentlich Bewegung brauchen - zum Beispiel die Reform der Fami-lienförderung oder eine gezielte Armutsförderung. Wir brauchen auch in Ihrem Haus Macherinnen.\n\nFrau Schön, Sie sprechen hier über die Evaluation der Familienleistungen. Das ist nun die dritte Wahlperiode, seitdem das angestoßen wurde. Wir wissen alles.\n\nWir haben Papiere und Studienergebnisse ohne Ende. Wir kennen die Evaluationen. Sie liegen uns allen vor, bleiben aber ohne Konsequenzen. Sie sagen: Von 180 Milliarden Euro, die dort investiert werden, fließen zwei Drittel des Geldes in Steuern und Transfers und ein Drittel in die Infrastruktur. Die anderen Länder haben uns voraus, dass sie in die Infrastruktur investieren, in die Qualität, in die Strukturen. Das alles wissen wir. Aber Sie setzen mit dem Betreuungsgeld eher noch eins drauf, statt sich um das zu kümmern, was fehlt.\n\nSie sprachen auch von Generationengerechtigkeit. Ja, auch wir wollen diese, aber wir sagen: Wenn schon Solidarität, dann nicht nur Solidarität der Beitragszahler, sondern Solidarität der gesamten Gesellschaft, sei es mit den Rentnern, sei es mit unseren Kindern. Das ist echte Solidarität.\n\nSie aber verschieben die Belastungen aus allen Richtungen auf die Kinder.\n\nEines kommt bei Ihnen überhaupt nicht vor. Wenn wir schon über Seniorenpolitik reden, frage ich: Wer setzt sich denn für die Frau ein, die im Alter von Grundsicherung leben wird? Wo bleibt Ihr Engagement gegen Altersarmut? Diese wird in Zukunft weiblich sein. Aber das findet bei Ihnen gar nicht statt. Zwei Wochen Pflegezeit werden da nichts nutzen. Das wird ein Tropfen auf den heißen Stein sein, auch wenn Sie sich damit rühmen. Nötig ist vielmehr, dass wir uns für die Rechte dieser Frauen einsetzen.\n\nAll dies aufzuzählen, ist frustrierend. Daher will ich auch etwas Positives sagen.\n\nIch begrüße wirklich ausdrücklich - ich heiße dies aus Überzeugung gut -, dass das Ministerium den Beauftragten für Fragen des sexuellen Kindesmissbrauchs finanziell abgesichert hat.\n\nAn diesem Punkt kann man wirklich sehen, wie sehr es notwendig ist, dass die Politik über Parteigrenzen hinweg zusammenhält, wenn es um Kinderschutz und die Rechte der Kinder geht.\n\nIch wünschte mir, ehrlich gesagt, noch etwas mehr als die finanzielle Absicherung der Beauftragtenstelle und theoretische Kinderschutzdebatten, ich wünschte mir, dass wir tatsächlich den Mut haben, Kinderrechte auch ins Grundgesetz zu schreiben; denn das wäre wirklich ein Meilenstein.\n\nWir hätten vielleicht eine Mehrheit dafür. Aber daran, dass Sie den Mut und den Gestaltungswillen dazu haben, zweifle ich inzwischen.\"\n4954,kathrin-vogler,\"Vielen Dank. - Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! 1 213 960 000 Euro - so viel hat die elektronische Gesundheitskarte die Versicherten der gesetzlichen Krankenkassen bis gerade eben gekostet, über 1,2 Milliarden Euro für eine Karte, die bisher nicht mehr kann als die alte Krankenversicherungskarte. Das soll wohl noch länger so bleiben, zumindest schreibt dies das Bundesministerium für Gesundheit in seiner Antwort auf eine Kleine Anfrage meiner Fraktion vom November des letzten Jahres. Nun steht im SGB V: Leistungen der gesetzlichen Krankenversicherungen sollen ausreichend, zweckmäßig und wirtschaftlich sein. - Die Linke sagt: Die E-Card, diese elektronische Gesundheitskarte, ist weder zweckmäßig noch wirtschaftlich. Auch deshalb lehnen wir sie ab.\n\nWir teilen auch die Sorge vieler Versicherter, Ärztinnen und Ärzte, Datenschützerinnen und Datenschützer, dass eine zentrale Struktur den Schutz der sensiblen Sozialdaten im Gesundheitswesen vor Missbrauch auf Dauer nicht gewährleisten kann. Deshalb fordern wir mit unserem Antrag, der Ihnen heute vorliegt: Stoppen Sie die E-Card jetzt, bevor weitere Milliarden an Krankenkassenbeiträgen in diesem schwarzen Loch der Gesundheitspolitik versickern!\n\nWir fordern Sie auch auf, endlich ernst zu machen und ernsthaft über moderne IT-Lösungen für das Gesundheitswesen nachzudenken. Wir müssen jetzt Alternativen zur E-Card prüfen. Es ist doch so, dass schon die einfachsten Anwendungen die Gematik, also die Betreibergesellschaft, vor schier unüberwindliche Schwierigkeiten zu stellen scheinen. Bis heute gibt es keine -Konzepte und keinen verbindlichen Zeitplan für patientenrelevante Anwendungen. Das kann man zum Beispiel daran erkennen - der vdek, der Verband der Ersatzkassen, weist in einer Pressemitteilung darauf hin -, dass die derzeitige Karte nicht einmal über genügend Speicherplatz verfügt, um einen Medikationsplan darauf zu speichern. Ein Medikationsplan ist keine große Datei, sondern maximal ein DIN-A4-Blatt mit ein bisschen Text, vielleicht 1 Kilobyte. Zu einem Zeitpunkt also, an dem Millionen Menschen über Smartphones mit etlichen Gigabyte Speicherplatz verfügen und USB-Sticks oder Speicherkarten nicht mehr die Welt kosten, ist das ein echter Anachronismus.\n\nWir brauchen für das Gesundheitswesen IT-Lösungen, die sowohl in Sachen Datenschutz als auch in Sachen Funktionalität zweckmäßig und ausreichend, aber eben auch datensparsam und zukunftssicher sind.\n\nDas Bundesgesundheitsministerium allerdings möchte bei der E-Card weiter aufs Gaspedal treten. Aus dem Ministerium verlautbart jetzt, die E-Card sei ein Sportwagen, der leider nur in der Garage stehe. Jetzt aber solle eine sechsspurige Autobahn gebaut werden, auf der der Flitzer dann mit Tempo 250 losrasen könnte. Das Bild finde ich ein bisschen schräg. Es zeigt auch, dass Sie umwelt- und verkehrspolitisch vielleicht nicht ganz auf dem neuesten Stand sind. Ich muss Ihnen vorwerfen - ich bleibe dabei im Bild -, dass Sie offensichtlich einen Sportwagen gebaut haben, der nicht einmal genug Platz im Kofferraum hat, um eine kleine Kiste Bier oder -Mineralwasser darin zu transportieren. Wenn Sie jetzt nicht auf die Bremse treten, Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Regierungsfraktionen, dann droht die E-Card zum BER der Gesundheitspolitik zu werden,\n\nder immer mehr Geld verschlingt, ohne dass wir jemals erfahren, wann er denn endlich funktionieren wird.\n\nWir fordern: Stoppen Sie die E-Card jetzt! Gehen wir zurück auf Los! Entwickeln wir neue Alternativen, patientenfreundlich und datensparsam! Beenden Sie den Druck auf die Skeptikerinnen und Skeptiker unter den Versicherten! Die alten Krankenkassenkarten können gültig bleiben. Für diejenigen, die sich keine E-Card -zulegen wollen, muss das Ersatzverfahren auf Papier weiter möglich sein. Ich freue mich auf jeden Fall auf die weiteren Beratungen, auch zum E-Health-Gesetz.\"\n5621,britta-haßelmann,\"Vielen Dank. - Herr Staatssekretär, für mich erschließt sich nicht, warum Sie die Frage meiner Kollegin nicht beantworten. Frau Keul hat eine ganz konkrete Frage gestellt, und zwar nach der Auffassung des Bundesjustizministeriums und nicht nach irgendwelchen Spekulationen. Sie hat ganz klar nach einem Sachverhalt und der Bewertung des Justizministeriums gefragt. Ich möchte Sie bitten, jetzt dazu etwas zu sagen.\"\n1247,katja-kipping,\"Frau Präsidentin! Ich möchte eine persönliche Erklärung abgeben, warum ich gegen die hier vorliegenden Beschlussvorlagen stimmen werde; das ist für mich eine sehr persönliche Angelegenheit.\n\nSie von der Union, den Grünen und der SPD haben im Ausschuss der Aufhebung der Immunität von Caren Lay und Michael Leutert zugestimmt. Sie behandeln das als eine rein formale Angelegenheit; vielleicht haben Sie damit, rein formalistisch gesehen, auch recht. Aber hier handelt es sich eben nicht um eine formale Angelegenheit. Das, was wir in Dresden jahrelang am 13. Februar erleben mussten, war alles andere als eine Formalie.\n\nJahrelang habe ich mich als Dresdnerin geschämt, weil meine Heimatstadt am 13. Februar zum Gebiet für den europaweit größten Naziaufmarsch wurde. Jahrelang mussten wir erleben, wie die Nazis das stille Gedenken der Dresdner für ihre Form von braunem Geschichtsrevisionismus missbraucht haben.\n\nWie Sie wissen, haben wir immer Gegenaktionen durchgeführt, Kundgebungen mit Kerzen. Sie waren natürlich symbolisch wichtig. Aber sie wirkten angesichts der Fackelzüge der braunen Brut, die ungehindert durch die Dresdner Innenstadt gezogen ist, verdammt hilflos. Vor diesem Hintergrund war ich froh, als sich endlich ein breites Bündnis gefunden hat, das gesagt hat: Das müssen wir ändern! - Tausende, ja Zehntausende haben sich entschieden: Wir stellen uns den Nazis friedlich, aber entschieden in den Weg.\n\nDarunter waren auch Caren, Micha, ich und viele weitere Abgeordnete aus unterschiedlichen Fraktionen.\n\n- Ja, auch aus anderen Parteien.\n\nWenn man wusste, wie sich die braune Gewalt in Sachsen ausgeweitet hat, und wenn man, wie ich, erlebt hat, wie diese braune Brut ungehindert durch die Dresdner Innenstadt zog, dann konnte man sich an diesem Tag nicht hinter Formalien verstecken. Da gab es einfach etwas, das größer war. In mir hat alles gerufen: Hier musst du deinem Gewissen folgen! Hier musst du Gesicht zeigen! Hier kannst du nicht fragen, ob wirklich jede Sitzblockade genehmigt ist! - Ich bin froh, dass viele so gedacht haben.\n\nDie vielen haben dabei viel auf sich genommen. Es war an diesem Tag verdammt kalt. An vielen Kreuzungen gab es keine Toilette. Eine drückende Blase, kalte Füße - das war das Mindeste, was man in Kauf genommen hat.\n\nHeute geht es um die Aufhebung der Immunität von Caren Lay und Michael Leutert. Da ich mit beiden auf derselben Kreuzung war, weiß ich, dass auch andere Abgeordnete, auch Abgeordnete anderer Fraktionen, dort waren. Natürlich steht die Frage im Raum: Warum geht es heute nur um die Aufhebung der Immunität dieser beiden? Die Antwort ist ganz einfach: Es war ein NPD-Anwalt, der sich im Nachhinein Zeitungsfotos angeschaut hat, um willkürlich Strafanzeige gegen bekannte Gesichter zu erheben. Es war also ein Anwalt jener Nazipartei, deren Vertreter im Sächsischen Landtag vom „Bomben-Holocaust“ gesprochen und damit eines der schlimmsten Menschheitsverbrechen der Geschichte verharmlost haben.\n\nKönnen Sie sich vorstellen, wie das in den Ohren der Jüdischen Gemeinde klingt? Wir hatten in Dresden einst eine sehr reiche jüdische Gemeinde mit 5 000 Mitgliedern. Nur 41 davon haben den Holocaust in Dresden überlebt. Sie müssen sich heute Hohn und Spott von den Nazis gefallen lassen, und deren Anwalt erstattet jetzt eine Strafanzeige. Ich finde, mit solchen Nazianwälten darf man sich nicht gemein machen!\n\n- Ja, Sie schütteln den Kopf, weil Sie das offensichtlich immer noch als eine Formalie behandeln.\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Teile der sächsischen Justiz und der sächsischen Polizei sehen das offensichtlich anders als ich. Sie sind verdammt eifrig, wenn es darum geht, die antifaschistische Zivilcourage zu kriminalisieren. Reden wir über den Fall von Pfarrer König: Das Verfahren musste inzwischen eingestellt werden, weil man festgestellt hat, dass die Polizei entlastende Beweise einfach unterschlagen hat, und weil man festgestellt hat, dass einseitig ermittelt worden ist. Einem jungen Familienvater drohen jahrelange Haftstrafen. Flächendeckend wurden die Telefone Zehntausender Leute einfach überwacht. Gleichzeitig versagt ebenjener sächsische Sicherheitsapparat, wenn es darum geht, Opfer von brauner Gewalt zu schützen.\n\nSie alle haben sicherlich von dem jungen Paar in Hoyerswerda gehört. Die beiden sind bekennende Antifaschisten. Nazis sind in ihre Wohnung eingebrochen und haben der Frau sogar eine Vergewaltigung angedroht. Die sächsischen Sicherheitsbehörden wussten nichts zu deren Schutz zu tun. Sie mussten umziehen, mussten die Stadt verlassen.\n\nWenn ich den Eifer bei der Verfolgung und Kriminalisierung von antifaschistischer Zivilcourage und das jämmerliche Versagen, wenn es um den Schutz der Opfer brauner Gewalt geht, gegenüberstelle, muss ich sagen:\n\nDafür fehlen mir jegliche zivilisierten Worte. Das finde ich beschämend und peinlich.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. Die heutige Immunitätsaufhebung ist nur ein Mosaikstein in diesem größeren Gebilde. Deswegen stimme ich dagegen. Als Dresdnerin und Demokratin sage ich: Danke schön! Ein Danke an all jene, die trotz Schikane und klirrender Kälte mit dazu beigetragen haben, dass der europaweit größte Naziaufmarsch in Dresden Geschichte wird. Auch in Zukunft muss gelten: Kein Fußbreit den Nazis!\n\nDanke schön.\"\n14839,andre-hahn,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Durch die von mir betreuten Landkreise Sächsische Schweiz-Osterzgebirge und Meißen zieht sich ein blaues Band: die Oberelbe - wie ich finde, eine der schönsten Regionen in Deutschland. Allerdings sind Hochwasser in diesem Bereich der Elbe keine Seltenheit. Besonders verheerend waren das Winterhochwasser von 1845 und die sogenannte Jahrhundertflut im August 2002. Damals, 2002, verloren zigtausend Menschen ihren Besitz. Viele von ihnen hatten nicht einmal eine Versicherung gegen die Schäden. Das ist im Übrigen bis heute ein Problem.\n\n2006, 2010 und 2013 gab es erneut starke Hochwasser an der Elbe. Die Abstände werden hier und in anderen Regionen, wie in Bayern und am Rhein, immer kürzer.\n\nDie zunehmend extremen Wetterlagen haben unbestreitbar etwas mit dem Klimawandel zu tun. Das ist aber nur eine von mehreren Ursachen für die Entstehung von Hochwasser. Hinzu kommen eine starke landwirtschaftliche Nutzung und eine zunehmende Flächenversiegelung in den Städten und Gemeinden an den Nebenflüssen. Dadurch wird weniger Wasser vom Boden aufgenommen. Außerdem wurden viele Deiche sehr nah am Fluss errichtet. Ein Abfließen des Wassers in ursprüngliche Gewässerauen ist dadurch häufig nicht mehr möglich.\n\nInnerhalb Deutschlands müssen sich zehn Bundesländer auf gemeinsame Maßnahmen einigen. Am 10. November 2006 unterschrieben diese zusammen mit dem Bund Maßnahmen gegen Hochwasser. Sie planten unter anderem, weitere Retentionsräume einzurichten, aber auch Bebauungsverbote und Überschwemmungsgebiete festzusetzen.\n\nDieses Ziel unterstützen wir, sofern es sich auf das gesamte Einzugsgebiet der Elbe bezieht. Warum mache ich diese Anmerkung? Anfang Juni 2014 teilte der sächsische Staatssekretär Jaeckel auf einer öffentlichen Veranstaltung zum Hochwasserschutz in Bad Schandau mit, dass das angestrebte Schutzziel bei Hochwasser im Oberen Elbtal nicht erreichbar sei und jeder Bürger in Flussnähe Eigenvorsorge zu treffen habe. Das ist für mich nicht akzeptabel. Auch das Obere Elbtal braucht einen wirksamen Hochwasserschutz. Der internationale Hochwasserrisikomanagementplan für die Elbe muss ab Schmilka, ab der Grenze, und nicht erst ab kurz vor Dresden gelten.\n\nHeute stimmen wir über einen Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung ab, zu dessen Zielen es gehört, für den Bau von Hochwasserschutzanlagen die Möglichkeiten für beschleunigte Planungs- und Genehmigungsverfahren auszuschöpfen. Daneben soll es für diese Gebiete Neuregelungen für ein hochwasserangepasstes Bauen und ein Verbot neuer Heizölverbrauchsanlagen geben. Mit dem Gesetz soll das Nationale Hochwasserschutzprogramm in Höhe von circa 5,5 Milliarden Euro flankiert werden.\n\nDie Umsetzung ist aus unserer Sicht jedoch unzureichend. Wir meinen, die Flüsse brauchen mehr Raum. Durch die Bodennutzung muss die Wasseraufnahme des Bodens so weit wie möglich gewährleistet werden. Für die Linke heißt das Zauberwort deshalb „Hochwasservorsorge“. Der Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung verfehlt dieses Ziel leider.\n\nFür mich sind die zu erwartenden Auswirkungen auf den Städtebau sehr problematisch. In der Anhörung im Umweltausschuss wurde darauf hingewiesen, dass Risikogebiete nicht hinreichend abgegrenzt seien, was hinsichtlich der Restriktionen für Bauleitplanung und Bauweise zu großen Schwierigkeiten führen kann. Auch müssen die Lasten gerecht verteilt werden. Laut Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung kommen auf die Bürgerinnen und Bürger über 1 Milliarde Euro zu, auf die Wirtschaft knapp 22 Millionen Euro, auf die Verwaltungen in den Ländern nicht einmal 3 Millionen Euro, und für den Bund entsteht gar kein Erfüllungsaufwand.\n\nBei dem Gesetzentwurf, der auf der Zielgeraden noch nachgebessert wurde, und beim Entschließungsantrag der Koalition wird sich die Linke der Stimme enthalten.\n\nNeben dem Gesetzentwurf liegt heute - auch die Ministerin hat darauf hingewiesen - auch das Bundesprogramm „Blaues Band Deutschland“ zur Abstimmung vor. Mit diesem Programm soll verstärkt in die Renaturierung von Bundeswasserstraßen investiert werden. Daneben sollen neue Akzente in Richtung Natur- und Gewässerschutz, Hochwasservorsorge sowie Wassertourismus, Freizeitsport und Erholung gesetzt werden. Dieses Bundesprogramm wird auch seitens der Linken positiv bewertet.\n\nDem Entschließungsantrag der Koalition können wir dennoch nicht zustimmen. Wir haben im Ausschuss sechs konkrete Kritikpunkte benannt. Aufgrund der geringen Redezeit kann ich hier heute nur einen herausgreifen.\n\nEs ist essenziell für die Wirkung des Programms, dass andere Vorhaben der Bundesregierung dem damit verbundenen Ziel nicht entgegenwirken. Wir sagen hier: Die geplante Weser- und Elbvertiefung ist definitiv kontraproduktiv und daher abzulehnen.\n\nEs gilt jetzt also, die Ziele aus diesem Programm gemeinsam mit den Ländern und Kommunen, den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern sowie der Wirtschaft durch konkrete Maßnahmen umzusetzen. Dies wird - so ist zumindest meine Hoffnung - auch dem Nationalpark Sächsische Schweiz, den Bewohnern der Region und ihren Gästen zugutekommen - und dies nicht nur heute, sondern hoffentlich auch in der nahen und fernen Zukunft.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n9733,martina-stamm-fibich,\"Verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Jeder zehnte Deutsche leidet unter Harn- und/oder Stuhlinkontinenz. Experten sprechen sogar von einer Volkskrankheit. Dennoch wagen viele Erkrankte nicht einmal einen Arztbesuch, weil die Krankheit ein solches Tabuthema ist. Sie werden durch ihre Scham vom gesellschaftlichen Leben abgehalten. Ein Facharzt sagte zu mir sehr treffend: An Inkontinenz stirbt man nicht, aber sie kann einem das Leben nehmen. - Dabei kann man qualitativ gute Inkontinenzprodukte bekommen, die viele Symptome lindern können.\n\nIn den letzten Jahren hat sich die Qualität der Versorgung mit Inkontinenzhilfsmitteln jedoch massiv verschlechtert. So liegt die Monatspauschale der gesetzlichen Krankenkassen für Inkontinenzhilfsmittel aktuell zum Teil unter 12,50 Euro, aber für eine qualitativ hochwertige, angemessene Versorgung müssten es mindestens 20 Euro sein. Die Konsequenz daraus sind Aufzahlungen, die derzeit zwischen 50 und 100 Euro pro Monat betragen, und die Betroffenen zahlen auf, weil die Produkte, die sie bekommen, in Anzahl oder Qualität einfach nicht ausreichen.\n\nMenschen, die viel unterwegs sind, brauchen andere Hilfsmittel als Menschen, die bettlägerig sind. Bei der Versorgung mit Inkontinenzhilfsmitteln darf Wirtschaftlichkeit nicht der einzige Maßstab sein.\n\nKrankenkassen müssen sicherlich nicht die individuelle Farbauswahl der Hilfsmittel bezahlen, aber sie müssen eine Versorgung sicherstellen, die die individuelle Lebensrealität der Betroffenen berücksichtigt. Vor zwei Jahren ist deshalb eine Petition beim Deutschen Bundestag eingegangen, in der die Abschaffung der Pauschale für Inkontinenzhilfsmittel gefordert wird. Stattdessen sollen die Krankenkassen einfach alle Kosten übernehmen, die anfallen. Die Abschaffung dieser Pauschale unterstützt der Petitionsausschuss nicht, aber wir haben das Problem erkannt und werden die Petition zur Erwägung an das Bundesministerium für Gesundheit überweisen. Ziel ist es, die Qualität der Versorgung zu verbessern. Individuelle Bedürfnisse müssen durch die Krankenkassen berücksichtigt werden, und Aufzahlungen für die Patientinnen und Patienten dürfen nur dann vorkommen, wenn der Bedarf über eine angemessene und qualitativ gute Versorgung hinausgeht.\n\nMit dem Votum zu dieser Petition unterstreichen wir bewusst einen Prozess, den wir bereits in Gang gesetzt haben. In den mittlerweile zwei Jahren, in denen mich die Petition begleitet, habe ich das Problem an vielen Stellen deponiert, und die ersten Erfolge sind bereits zu verbuchen.\n\nSo hat die Barmer GEK im Dezember 2015 ihre Ausschreibungen über aufsaugende Inkontinenzmittel gestoppt. Die Krankenkasse setzt nun wieder auf klassische Hilfsmittelverträge. Fast zeitgleich hat der GKV-Spitzenverband angekündigt, dass das Haus die sogenannte Produktgruppe 15 „Inkontinenzhilfsmittel“ im Hilfsmittelverzeichnis überarbeiten wird. Hauptkriterium dieser Überarbeitung wird die Qualität der Produkte sein.\n\nVerehrte Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Wir haben den Stein ins Rollen gebracht, aber wir sind noch nicht am Ziel. Auf der politischen Ebene haben wir viele Gespräche geführt. Das Bewusstsein für das Problem rund um die Ausschreibungen ist gewachsen. Derzeit überarbeitet das BMG die Regelungen der Hilfsmittelversorgung. An den Ausschreibungen soll festgehalten werden, aber neben dem Preis soll auch die Qualität entscheiden. Das ist der entscheidende Schritt hin zu einer guten Versorgung der Betroffenen. Ich freue mich, dass der Petitionsausschuss hier zu einem einstimmigen hohen Votum gekommen ist.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n11004,matthias-heider,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Was haben eigentlich die Unternehmen Daimler-Benz, Eon und Edeka gemeinsam? Sie alle sind schon einmal in den Genuss einer Ministererlaubnis gekommen. Daimler-Benz durfte sich im Jahr 1989 mit MBB, einem Luft- und Raumfahrtunternehmen, zusammenschließen. Das Unternehmen Eon konnte im Jahr 2002 mit der Ruhrgas fusionieren. Schließlich hat der Wirtschaftsminister in diesem Jahr entschieden, dass der Handelskonzern Edeka das Unternehmen Kaiser’s Tengelmann übernehmen darf. Über dieses aktuelle Fusionsverfahren haben wir im Wirtschaftsausschuss und in mittlerweile einigen Sitzungen hier in diesem Haus gesprochen. Ich habe wiederholt in der Diskussion auf die Risiken hingewiesen, die mit dieser Entscheidung einhergehen. Aus meiner Sicht sind noch nicht alle Fragen gelöst. Einige sind gerade angesprochen worden: Reicht das Arbeitsplatzargument als alleinige Begründung aus, um erhebliche Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen aufzuwiegen? Ist es sinnvoll, eine solche Erlaubnis vom Wohlwollen Dritter, von den Gewerkschaften, abhängig zu machen? Werden durch die Bedingungen wirklich alle Arbeitsplätze bei Kaiser’s Tengelmann gesichert, oder wird Edeka eigene Arbeitnehmer bei sich entlassen, um die Übernahme möglichst effizient zu gestalten? Diese Fragen müssen noch beantwortet werden. Da warten wir noch auf die Entwicklung, die sich in diesen Wochen erst ganz langsam zeigt.\n\nGenerell nehme ich jedenfalls aus diesen Verfahren erst einmal mit: Das Instrument der Ministererlaubnis scheint reformbedürftig zu sein. Deshalb, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, ist die Aufmerksamkeit, die Sie dieser Regelung zuteilwerden lassen, verdient, auch wenn ich Ihren Lösungsvorschlag nicht teile.\n\nDas Ministererlaubnisverfahren ist seit seiner Einführung im Jahr 1973 umstritten. Die Ministererlaubnis ist im deutschen Kartellrecht ein Ausnahmeinstrument. Es gibt sie beispielsweise im europäischen Kartellrecht nicht. Der Bundeswirtschaftsminister kann sich durch seine Ministererlaubnis über eine ablehnende Entscheidung des Bundeskartellamtes hinwegsetzen und eine Fusion zweier Unternehmen aufgrund von Vorteilen für das Allgemeinwohl erlauben.\n\nDoch was sind diese Gründe für das Allgemeinwohl? In den 22 Ministererlaubnisverfahren, die seit Einführung des Instruments durchgeführt worden sind, haben sich verschiedene Fallgruppen herausgebildet. So hat der Bundeswirtschaftsminister im Fall von Daimler/MBB eine Ministererlaubnis zur Verbesserung der Privatisierungsmöglichkeiten und aus Gründen des Subventionsabbaus erteilt. Außerdem spielte in dem Verfahren die Sicherung der internationalen Wettbewerbsfähigkeit eine Rolle. Auch das hat im Verfahren Eon und Ruhrgas eine Rolle gespielt. Schließlich war im Verfahren Edeka/Kaiser’s Tengelmann der ausschlaggebende Grund die Arbeitsplatzsicherung. Neu daran war und ist, dass das Argument der Arbeitsplatzsicherung bisher nicht bei einer Entscheidung als einziger Ausnahmegrund angesehen worden ist.\n\nDas Risiko liegt darin, dass dies eine politische Entscheidung ist.\n\nDas soll heißen: Die Frage, was als Allgemeinwohl angesehen wird, haben verschiedene Wirtschaftsminister in den letzten Jahren natürlich völlig verschieden beantwortet. Das ist das Problem daran. Die Entscheidung des Wirtschaftsministers hat einen zu großen Abstand zu den wettbewerbsrechtlichen Verbotsmerkmalen im Laufe der Jahre bekommen.\n\nSie, liebe Grüne, schlagen jetzt in Ihrem Antrag zur Begrenzung dieser Unabhängigkeit ein aufschiebendes Veto des Deutschen Bundestages vor. Wenn der Bundeswirtschaftsminister von einem solchen Veto abweichen will, dann soll dies nur mit Zustimmung der Bundesregierung möglich sein. Ich halte den Vorschlag nicht für zielführend; denn die Entscheidung über eine Ministererlaubnis bedarf umfangreicher wettbewerbsrechtlicher Ermittlungen, ausführlicher Informationen, die eingeholt werden müssen, und einer zeitaufwendigen Analyse dieses Sachverhalts.\n\nEine solche Möglichkeit der Ermittlungs- und Analysetätigkeit hat unser Parlament nicht. Bei Ihrer Argumentation, dass das Parlament die Allgemeinwohlgründe am besten bestimmen könne, verkennen Sie, dass es eigentlich wirtschaftspolitische Gründe sind. Maßgeblich für die Entscheidung über eine Ministererlaubnis ist nicht nur die Beurteilung der Gemeinwohlargumente, sondern vielmehr die Abwägung mit den Wettbewerbswirkungen des Zusammenschlusses.\n\nDabei sind entsprechende Merkmale der Marktmacht zu untersuchen; sie sind festzustellen, und sie sind hinterher wieder zu überprüfen. Daher glaube ich nicht, dass ein Veto in einem solchen Verfahren die Entscheidung zu einer besseren machen würde, auch nicht dadurch, dass der Rest der Bundesregierung darin einbezogen wird. Entscheidungsfindungen in dieser Form halte ich nicht für sinnvoll.\n\nSie würden im Zweifel nur die Entscheidung auf eine andere Ebene heben.\n\nWir wollen nicht, dass das Parlament exekutives Handeln vornimmt. Das ist Aufgabe der Regierung, die hier zu meiner rechten Seite sitzt, und unsere Verfassung sagt, dass wir das gar nicht dürfen. Aufgabe der Monopolkommission in einem Ministererlaubnisverfahren ist es, ein Gutachten zu erstellen. Das Gutachten enthält neben der Würdigung der vom Bundeskartellamt festgestellten Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen und der Gemeinwohlgründe eine Empfehlung, die an den Minister ausgesprochen wird.\n\nBisher haben die Gutachten der Monopolkommission keine Bindungswirkung. Das verkennt jedoch den Wert der Arbeit, den diese Kommission leistet. Es sind hochkarätige Mitglieder, die volkswirtschaftliche, betriebswirtschaftliche, sozialpolitische, technologische und wirtschaftsrechtliche Kenntnisse und Erfahrungen mitbringen. Sie sind prädestiniert dafür, den Minister zu beraten, und ihrer Arbeit sollte ein höherer Stellenwert zukommen.\n\nIch halte es für sinnvoll, die Arbeit der Kommission weiter zu stärken, indem der Bundeswirtschaftsminister seine Ministererlaubnis nur im Einvernehmen mit der Monopolkommission treffen sollte. So würde sichergestellt, dass die Expertise der Mitglieder dieses Gremiums auch Gewicht hat. Zudem ersparen wir dem Minister, dass er im Kreuzfeuer der Kritik steht, wenn die Entscheidung nicht so ausgeht, wie sich viele das vielleicht vorgestellt haben.\n\nDer Rücktritt des ehemaligen Vorsitzenden der Monopolkommission Professor Zimmer spricht Bände. Das zeigt auch, dass in dem Gremium der Monopolkommission nicht nur Unmut, sondern auch Unverständnis über diese Entscheidung herrscht. Das ist nachvollziehbar, zumal es nicht das erste Mal gewesen ist, dass ein Bundeswirtschaftsminister so entschieden hat. In den neuen Verfahren, in denen der jeweilige Wirtschaftsminister eine Ministererlaubnis erteilt hat, ist er nur in drei Fällen den Empfehlungen der Monopolkommission gefolgt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich glaube, wir können heute eines feststellen: Die Reform der Ministererlaubnis steht nach vielen Jahrzehnten an. Lassen Sie uns die Diskussion darüber in den Beratungen über die anstehende neunte Novelle des Gesetzes gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen führen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n7150,ulle-schauws,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Gäste! Zuallererst möchte ich das Anliegen der UNESCO, das Natur- und Kulturerbe der Welt zu bewahren und damit auch dem Frieden zu dienen, ausdrücklich würdigen. Dieses Anliegen ist gerade in Zeiten, in denen in Krisengebieten wie im Irak oder in Syrien durch den sogenannten IS und den Bürgerkrieg Weltkulturerbestätten zerstört werden, wichtiger denn je. Erst in den letzten Tagen haben wir miterleben müssen, wie das Weltkulturerbe der historischen Altstadt von Sanaa im Jemen bei einem Luftangriff der arabischen Koalition teilweise zerstört wurde. Die UNESCO-Generaldirektorin Irina Bokowa hat den Luftangriff auf eines der ältesten Juwele der islamischen Kultur zu Recht scharf kritisiert.\n\nDiese schockierenden Beispiele zeigen uns eindrücklich, dass die Zerstörung von Kulturerbe oft mit Gewalt gegen Menschenleben einhergeht. In erster Linie steht für uns natürlich der Schutz von Menschenleben im Vordergrund. Trotzdem ist auch der Schutz der Weltkulturstätten eine enorme Herausforderung; denn die Zerstörungen treffen die jeweiligen Identitäten und Gedächtnisse für nachkommende Generationen, die es weltweit zu schützen gilt.\n\nHier, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Großen Koalition, reichen die Forderungen Ihres Antrags nicht aus. Sie bedauern zwar die weltweite gezielte und irreversible Zerstörung unschätzbarer Kulturgüter, verharren aber im reinen Aufzählen von aktuellen Regierungsmaßnahmen. Sie vermeiden es, der Bundesregierung ein deutliches Bekenntnis zu einem stärkeren Engagement in Krisengebieten wie zum Beispiel im Jemen abzuverlangen. Ich sage ganz ehrlich: Ich hätte mir hier wirklich einen engagierteren Ansatz von Ihnen gewünscht.\n\nWährend bedeutende Weltkulturerbestätten auf der ganzen Welt zerstört werden, hat sich Deutschland in den letzten Jahren zu einem Umschlagplatz für geraubte Kulturgüter und Antiquitäten entwickelt. Hier will Staatsministerin Grütters mit ihrer angekündigten Novellierung des Kulturgüterschutzgesetzes nun endlich nachjustieren. Ich sage: Das ist gut so. Welche katastrophalen Konsequenzen der Einfluss von Händlern und Sammlern auf den Kulturgutschutz haben kann, hat uns das unzureichende Gesetz von 2007 eindrücklich gezeigt. Da sollten auch Sie sich als Koalitionsfraktionen mehr engagieren und sich entschieden gegen reine Lobbyinteressen stellen.\n\nGanz und gar unverständlich ist, dass Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Union, noch 2011 gemeinsam mit der FDP in dem Antrag „UNESCO-Welterbestätten in Deutschland stärken“ ausdrücklich das breite bürgerschaftliche Engagement von NGOs für die UNESCO-Welterbestätten begrüßt haben. Das kommt in Ihrem Antrag jetzt leider nicht mehr vor. Das ist umso bedauerlicher, weil genau diese Aktivitäten der NGOs zum Beispiel bei der Tagung des UNESCO-Welterbekomitees Ende Juni in Bonn von der Bundesregierung nicht unterstützt werden. Staatsministerin Böhmer hat eine finanzielle Unterstützung, zum Beispiel von Side Events, abgelehnt. Hierzu vermisse ich in Ihrem Antrag ganz konkrete Forderungen. Sie verharren da scheinbar lieber in Allgemeinplätzen, und das ist leider zu wenig.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, was den Erhalt und die Entwicklung der deutschen Weltkulturerbestätten betrifft, sieht es auch nicht besser aus. Das aktuelle Programm „Nationale Projekte des Städtebaus“ wird mit einem Volumen von 50 Millionen Euro der hohen Nachfrage bei weitem nicht gerecht. Allein 2014 wurden hier Projektanträge mit einem Fördervolumen von 900 Millionen Euro eingereicht, darunter auch viele UNESCO-Welterbestätten. Wir brauchen deshalb dringend die Wiederauflage eines Investitionsprogramms für UNESCO-Welterbestätten, das ausreichend ausgestattet ist. Auch hierzu finde ich nichts Konkretes in Ihrem Antrag.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir werden uns deswegen bei der Abstimmung über Ihren Antrag enthalten. Aber ich kann sagen: Ich kann dem Eigenlob Ihres Antrags heute nicht zustimmen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4982,matthias-heider,\"Herr Kollege Ernst, vielen Dank, dass Sie die Frage zulassen. - Sie haben gerade die deutsche Richterschaft zitiert. Ist Ihnen eigentlich bekannt, dass in der deutschen Zivilprozessordnung seit 1897 Verfahren über die Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, über die vorläufige Vollstreckbarkeit von Schiedsgerichtssprüchen enthalten sind und dass noch nie ein Richter daran Zweifel gehabt hat, dass es seine Berechtigung hat?\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Kollegin, dass Sie die Zwischenfrage zulassen. - Sie sind bemüht, einmal den Hintergrund von Schiedsverfahren aufzuklären. Ich darf darlegen, dass das nicht etwa eine Paralleljustiz ist, wie Sie das darstellen, sondern dass das ein seit über 100 Jahren gepflegtes Verfahren in Deutschland ist, womit sich Parteien gegenseitig Recht erweisen.\n\nIst es richtig, dass die Grünen eine Schiedsordnung haben und in einem Schiedsverfahren innerhalb Ihrer Partei geurteilt wird, wenn es Streitigkeiten gibt? Würden Sie mir zustimmen, dass das ein ordentliches Verfahren ist, um Streitigkeiten beizulegen?\"\n11049,katja-kipping,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Wir schreiben das Jahr 26 nach der Wende, und leider sind wir noch weit entfernt von einer wirklichen Rentengerechtigkeit zwischen Ost und West. Noch immer ist der Rentenwert Ost niedriger als der Rentenwert West, noch immer gibt es vielfältige Benachteiligungen bestimmter Gruppen infolge der Rentenüberleitung. Mit all den vielfältigen Benachteiligungen von ostdeutschen Biografien in der Rente werden wir als Linke uns niemals zufriedengeben. Hier lassen wir nicht locker.\n\nAuch die Mütterrente ist so geregelt, dass Menschen im Osten weniger davon profitieren. Der Begriff „Mütterrente“ hat sich umgangssprachlich eingebürgert, insofern werde auch ich ihn verwenden, auch wenn wir wissen, dass sehr wohl auch Väter besondere Rentenpunkte für Kindererziehung bekommen können. Da der Rentenwert Ost niedriger ist als der Rentenwert West, gibt es für die Erziehung eines im Osten geborenen Kindes niedrigere Rentenansprüche, und zwar 1,79 Euro weniger je Rentenpunkt. Kindererziehungszeiten im Osten werden also in der Rente geringer entlohnt als Kindererziehungszeiten im Westen. Die Teilung zwischen Ost und West lebt damit in der Rente fort; wirkliche Einheit sieht anders aus.\n\nGemeinsam mit einem breiten Bündnis für eine gerechte Mütterrente, also mit Verdi, der Volkssolidarität, dem Sozialverband und dem Frauenrat fordern wir: Machen Sie Schluss mit dieser Ungleichbehandlung der Erziehungszeiten in Ost und West. Jedes Kind sollte uns gleich viel wert sein.\n\nNeben dem niedrigeren Rentenwert Ost gibt es eine weitere Benachteiligung: Frauen, deren Rente einen Übergangszuschlag beinhaltet, bekommen den zusätzlichen Mütterrentenpunkt darauf angerechnet. Diese Regelung kann dazu führen, dass ostdeutsche Mütter bei der Verbesserung der Mütterrente leer ausgehen, so beispielsweise geschehen bei einer fast 80\u001ejährigen Frau, die sechs Kinder geboren hat und 1996 in Rente gegangen ist. Eigentlich hätte ihr bei sechs Kindern eine Erhöhung um 158 Euro zugestanden, doch ihre bisherige Rente beinhaltet eben jenen Übergangszuschlag, und damit sieht sie von den Verbesserungen in der Mütterrente 0 Euro.\n\nInsgesamt sind 6 500 hochbetagte Frauen davon betroffen, 6 500 hochbetagte Frauen von Dresden bis Schwerin, die wegen Gesetzesformulierungen aus dem Jahre 1993 in ihrem Portemonnaie wirklich nichts davon sehen, was wir bei der Mütterrente verbessert haben. Ich finde, es ist beschämend, dass Sie von der CDU und von der SPD nicht in der Lage sind, für diese 6 500 Frauen schnell eine Lösung zu finden.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich frage mich wirklich, warum Sie so verbissen auf die Benachteiligung von ostdeutschen Frauen in der Mütterrente bestehen. Sind Sie so verbohrt, dass Sie denen rentenpolitisch unbedingt noch eins mitgeben wollen, nur weil sie in der DDR gelebt haben, oder liegt es daran, dass diejenigen, die die Probleme des Ostens kennen, bei SPD und CDU nichts zu sagen haben? Ja, ganz offensichtlich hat der Osten bei Ihnen nichts zu melden.\n\nDie Linke legt heute auch noch zwei Anträge vor, die besondere Rentenungerechtigkeiten für Bergleute in der Braunkohleveredelung und Benachteiligungen der Ostkrankenschwestern, also den Beschäftigten im Gesundheits- und Sozialwesen der DDR, ansprechen. Beide Berufsgruppen waren besonderen Härten ausgesetzt. Deswegen gab es für sie im Rentensystem der DDR besondere Regelungen. Die in der Braunkohleveredelung Beschäftigten waren den Bergleuten unter Tage gleichgestellt. Als Ausgleich für ihre gesundheitsgefährdende Arbeit konnten sie früher in Rente gehen. Die Beschäftigten im Gesundheits- und Sozialwesen der DDR erhielten als Würdigung für ihre besonders anspruchsvolle Arbeit einen entsprechenden Steigerungsbetrag bei der Rente.\n\nBeide Regelungen sind bei der Rentenüberleitung nicht berücksichtigt worden bzw. nach einer Übergangszeit weggefallen. Deshalb müssen heute viele der Ostkrankenschwestern mit einer Rente nur knapp über dem Hartz-IV-Niveau auskommen, und das nach einem wirklich aufopferungsvollen Arbeitsleben. Da muss doch etwas drin sein.\n\nZu den in der Braunkohleveredelung Beschäftigten. Viele Kumpel, die dort gearbeitet haben, mussten infolge von gesundheitlichen Schäden eher in Rente gehen. Dafür müssen sie nun nach dem jetzigen Rentenrecht lebenslang Abschläge in der Rente in Kauf nehmen. Hier muss doch etwas geschehen, und zwar schnell.\n\nDenn den Betroffenen läuft die Zeit, ja die Lebenszeit davon. Um das einmal zu verdeutlichen: Im Jahr 1996 hat im Raum Borna/Espenhain eine Gruppe die Kämpfe für die ihnen zustehenden Rentenansprüche aufgenommen. Damals waren sie über 1 000. Heute sind es nur noch rund 350. Die Fehlenden haben nicht einfach aufgegeben, nein, sie sind schlichtweg weggestorben. Hier auf Zeit zu spielen, ist einfach nur zynisch.\n\nWir haben Ihnen im Oktober letzten Jahres einen umfassenden Antrag vorgelegt, in dem wir alle Berufsgruppen aufgeführt haben, die infolge der Rentenüberleitung benachteiligt werden. In der Debatte damals haben die jeweiligen Redner aus beiden Koalitionsfraktionen gesagt, dass sie es gerade bei den in der Braunkohleveredelung Beschäftigten wie bei den Ostkrankenschwestern wirklich sehr bedauern, dass man da nichts machen kann. Mit unseren Anträgen erinnern wir Sie an Ihr Bedauern von damals. Nehmen Sie sich wenigstens dieser zwei Beschäftigtengruppen an. Gesetzliche Regelungen sind doch kein Naturgesetz. Sie lassen sich ändern, wenn man den politischen Willen hat. Also bringen Sie endlich den politischen Willen auf, und helfen Sie wenigstens diesen beiden Beschäftigtengruppen.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Herr Weiß hat den Eindruck erweckt, wir würden nur Vorschläge für Rentnerinnen und Rentner im Osten unterbreiten. Deswegen möchte ich das richtigstellen. Von unserem rentenpolitischen Vorschlag, dass das gesetzliche Rentenniveau wieder erhöht wird, profitieren Menschen in Ost wie West gleichermaßen.\n\nAuch von unserem Vorschlag, eine solidarische Mindestrente von mindestens 1 050 Euro einzuführen, profitieren Männer wie Frauen in Ost und West gleichermaßen.\"\n15703,jurgen-hardt,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und liebe Kollegen! Ein nachhaltiger Friedensansatz muss selbstverständlich ganz stark auf die zivilen Elemente setzen. Der frühere Verteidigungsminister Franz Josef Jung hat in seiner Amtszeit genau diesen vernetzten Ansatz, diesen Comprehensive Approach, vorangetrieben. Ich finde, da er jetzt seine letzten Tage im Deutschen Bundestag verbringt,\n\ngilt es, ihm dafür Danke schön zu sagen.\n\nDer vernetzte Ansatz, der Comprehensive Approach, ist so etwas wie das Markenzeichen der Europäischen Union in Fragen von Sicherheit und dauerhaftem Frieden geworden. Wir reden in diesen Tagen viel darüber, wie wir die Europäische Union in der Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik stärken können. Auf dem EU-Gipfel in der vergangenen Woche wurde mit der Vereinbarung zur Ständigen Strukturierten Zusammenarbeit, PESCO, eine erste Weichenstellung vorgenommen. In den nächsten drei Monaten werden wir konkrete Schritte unternehmen. All dem liegt die Idee zugrunde, dass ohne militärische Mittel zivile Anstrengungen häufig fruchtlos sind, dass mit militärischen Mittel allein man aber niemals in der Lage ist, eine nachhaltige Friedenssituation herzustellen, also den Frieden nachhaltig zu bewahren. Das sollte ein Markenzeichen der Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik der Europäischen Union sein. Damit gewinnen unsere internationalen, auch unsere transatlantischen Bemühungen um dauerhaften Frieden nicht nur in quantitativer Hinsicht, sondern auch in qualitativer Hinsicht an Bedeutung.\n\nIch glaube, dass wir gut daran tun, an dem Konzept der wertebasierten Außenpolitik auch in der Sicherheitspolitik festzuhalten. Wir formulieren in diesem Papier der Bundesregierung ein ganz klares Bekenntnis zu den Menschenrechten, zu den internationalen Institutionen und zur Achtung von internationalen Verträgen. Das unterstützen wir voll und ganz.\n\nUmso verwunderter war ich allerdings, als ich am vergangenen Sonntag die Rede des SPD-Parteivorsitzenden auf dem Parteitag gehört habe. Er hat 80 Minuten gesprochen. In diesen 80 Minuten hat er an mehreren Stellen Amerika - mal sanft, mal scharf - kritisiert; aber er hat nicht ein einziges Mal die russische Aggression auf der Krim und in der Ukraine kritisiert. Mit Blick auf die Frage, wie die wertebasierte Außenpolitik der Zukunft aussehen sollte, sollte der SPD-Kanzlerkandidat dieses Papier dringend lesen und sich dringend zu eigen machen. Sonst wird es ihm im Wahlkampf nicht erspart bleiben, dass wir ihn damit konfrontieren.\n\nWenn ich noch einen kleinen Schwenk machen darf: Sie haben eben von der Bedrohung des INF-Vertrags gesprochen. Sie haben das frei formuliert, nicht aus dem Manuskript. Sie haben gesagt, der INF-Vertrag, der Mittelstreckenwaffenabrüstungsvertrag, sei bedroht durch die Bemühungen Russlands - in Kaliningrad ist das wohl -, die Raketen zu modernisieren.\n\nAber Sie haben auch gesagt, in gleicher Weise sei das, was die amerikanische Seite plane, eine Bedrohung. Ich sage Ihnen: Wir müssen Aktion und Reaktion schon sauber auseinanderhalten. Wir können uns gerne darüber unterhalten, wie man auf diese Provokation Russlands, auf diese mögliche Verletzung des INF-Vertrags seitens Russlands reagiert. Aber diejenigen, die sich darüber Gedanken machen, wie man darauf reagieren kann, mit denjenigen auf eine Stufe zu stellen, die diesen, wie wir finden, massiven Rückschritt in der Abrüstungspolitik zu verantworten haben, nämlich den Russen, das finde ich nicht in Ordnung. Wenn, dann sollten wir bitte schön alle Sachverhalte vor dem Hintergrund einer wertebasierten Außenpolitik betrachten.\n\nIch möchte eingehen auf das Verhältnis zwischen zivilen und militärischen Mitteln im Bereich unser Haushaltsaufwendungen. In diesem Jahr haben wir zum ersten Mal das 0,7\u001eProzent-Ziel im Bereich wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung erreicht, natürlich auch, weil wir gegenwärtig viel im Rahmen der humanitären Hilfe tun. Ich glaube, es ist völlig klar - das ist in diesem Hause vermutlich auch unstrittig -, dass wir uns das Ziel setzen, diese Quote mindestens zu halten und niemals mehr unter diese 0,7 Prozent Entwicklungshilfeausgaben, unter diese sogenannte ODA-Quote, zu fallen.\n\nAber wir haben eben auch vor drei Jahren - lange bevor Donald Trump am Horizont als Präsident von Amerika zu erkennen war - auf dem Gipfel in Wales verabredet, dass wir uns dem 2\u001eProzent-Ziel der NATO annähern wollen. Dieser Beschluss von Wales der 28 NATO-Mitglieder von vor drei Jahren trägt eben auch die Unterschrift des SPD-Außenministers Frank-Walter Steinmeier. Deswegen waren wir schon über die eine oder andere Äußerung in der Vergangenheit etwas verwundert,\n\nbei der wir das Gefühl hatten, dass sich die SPD bei der Frage des 2\u001eProzent-Ziels in unserem Commitment ein Stück weit vom Acker macht.\n\nWenn wir mangelnde Verlässlichkeit bei anderen Regierungen beklagen - zum Beispiel den amerikanischen Präsidenten dafür kritisieren, dass er vielleicht etwas zu zögerlich ein klares Bekenntnis zu Artikel 5 des NATO-Vertrages abgegeben hat -, dann sollten wir als Deutsche keinen Zweifel daran lassen, dass wir uns wirklich buchstabengetreu an die NATO-Vereinbarung von Cardiff von vor drei Jahren halten.\n\nIch glaube, wir sollten uns zum Ziel setzen, dass wir zum einen, was die Verteidigungsausgaben angeht, unser Cardiff-Versprechen einhalten und zum anderen auch die zivilen Komponenten zum Zweck der Friedenssicherung und für die Entwicklung der Länder ausbauen. Ich finde die Idee ganz spannend, zu sagen: Es muss 1 Euro zusätzlich für Verteidigung ausgegeben werden, aber eben auch 1 Euro zusätzlich für zivile Maßnahmen.\n\nIch glaube, das wird die Politik der Union für die Jahre 2017 bis 2021 sein. Auf der Basis werden wir sicherlich auch Unterstützung bekommen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n10495,barbara-lanzinger,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Kürzlich sagte ein Augsburger IG-Metall-Bevollmächtigter bei einer Demonstration für die Stahlindustrie: Stahl ist nicht alles, aber der Anfang von vielem. - Dem stimmen wir, denke ich, insgesamt zu.\n\nDie Stahlindustrie hat als Basisindustrie eine zentrale Bedeutung für die industrielle Wertschöpfungskette - das haben wir heute schon vielfach gehört -; denn ohne Stahl keine Autos, keine Maschinen, keine Schiffe, keine Flugzeuge, keine Messer, keine Töpfe und auch keines der vielfältigen Präzisionswerkzeuge.\n\nInsbesondere die deutsche und die europäische Stahlindustrie ist mit ihren hochwertigen Stahlen die Grundlage für unzählige Innovationen und Hochtechnologien. Dazu zählen Windräder genauso wie effiziente Turbinen. In der Stahlindustrie und den stahlintensiven Branchen - auch das wurde schon mehrfach erwähnt - sind Hunderttausende Menschen in Deutschland und Europa beschäftigt, davon viele im Mittelstand. Kurzum: Wir brauchen hochwertigen Stahl, und wir brauchen deswegen eine deutsche und europäische Stahlindustrie. Damit diese eine Chance hat, müssen wir uns mit Nachdruck für sie einsetzen. Deshalb ist der heutige Antrag enorm wichtig, um uns dem zu stellen und darüber heute im Plenum zu diskutieren.\n\nLassen Sie mich die Bedeutung der Stahlindustrie auch anhand einiger Beispiele und Zahlen verdeutlichen. Die deutsche Stahlindustrie beschäftigt etwa 90 000 Menschen. Daneben sind vor allem die nachgelagerten stahlintensiven Branchen von großer Bedeutung. Allein auf den Automobilsektor und auf die Bauindustrie entfallen über 50 Prozent des deutschlandweiten Stahlbedarfs. Das heißt: keine Energiewende ohne Stahl, keine Elektromobilität ohne Stahl und kein Wohnungsbau ohne Stahl.\n\nBayern ist auch dafür bekannt, Stahlindustrieland zu sein. Zumindest war Bayern bis vor einigen Jahren ein hochinnovatives Stahlindustrieland. Wir haben allein in der Oberpfalz sehr viele Arbeitsplätze verloren. Wir haben es geschafft - vorhin wurde der Strukturwandel angesprochen -, in der Oberpfalz diesen Strukturwandel mit sehr viel Engagement zu meistern. Dabei mussten wir auch Verluste hinnehmen. Aber heute floriert das Ganze. Auch das muss man einmal sagen.\n\nBayern ist auch dafür bekannt, ein Innovationsstandort zu sein: mit Hochtechnologien und beispielsweise mit einer mittelständisch geprägten Maschinenbaubranche. In der stahlintensiven Baubranche in Bayern sind rund 140 000 Menschen beschäftigt. Im Automobilbereich sind es 184 000 und in der Maschinenbaubranche 218 000 Menschen. Dies entspricht etwa einem Drittel des produzierenden Gewerbes in Bayern.\n\nDie Arbeitsplätze sind - obwohl die Arbeit sicherlich manchmal beschwerlich ist - hochgradig attraktiv. Sie bieten Arbeit für hochqualifizierte Fachkräfte. Auch das muss man festhalten. Gerade in dieser Branche gibt es sehr gute Arbeitsbedingungen. So haben allein in meiner Heimat Oberpfalz im Jahr 2014 rund 90 000 Menschen eine Anstellung in der Metall- und Elektroindustrie gefunden. Dabei liegt der Anteil der Betriebe mit weniger als 250 Beschäftigten bei 85 Prozent. Die kleinen und mittelständischen Betriebe haben hier eine ganz starke regionale Verwurzelung.\n\nIch möchte auch die Ausbildungsplätze erwähnen. In diesen mittelständischen Unternehmen gibt es ebenso attraktive und vielfältige Ausbildungsplätze - auch bei den kleinen Mittelständlern und nicht nur bei den großen Unternehmen. Es heißt nicht, dass diese Arbeits- und Ausbildungsplätze automatisch verloren gehen, wenn es in Deutschland und in Europa keine Stahlindustrie mehr gibt. Aber die Unternehmen, die auf hochqualitativen Stahl und innovative Stahlprodukte angewiesen sind, bekämen massive Probleme, wenn sie einseitig von außereuropäischem Stahl abhängig wären.\n\nNoch einmal ein konkretes Beispiel: In der Maxhütte in der Oberpfalz werden Stahlrohre sowohl für die Automobil- als auch für die Energiebranche produziert. Ich höre, dass das Unternehmen auf hochwertigen Stahl angewiesen ist, der beispielsweise aus den Lech-Stahlwerken nahe Augsburg stammt. Die gesamte Stahlindustrie hat eine besondere Bedeutung für Bayern, Deutschland und für Europa.\n\nNoch einmal zu China und den Wettbewerbsverzerrungen. Ich möchte es wiederholen: Es ist nicht hinnehmbar, dass vor allem die chinesischen Unternehmen den europäischen und den deutschen Markt mit Stahl fluten. Allein von 2012 bis 2015 haben sich die Stahlexporte aus der Volksrepublik China mehr als verdoppelt: von etwa 55 Millionen auf 112 Millionen Tonnen Stahl. Ein fairer Wettbewerb kann dabei nicht aufkommen, wenn chinesische Unternehmen den Stahl zu Niedrigstpreisen anbieten. Ich möchte betonen: Das Problem ist nicht, dass China eine florierende Stahlindustrie hat, die sich im Rahmen eines fairen Wettbewerbs durchsetzt. Das Problem ist vielmehr, dass der chinesische Stahl durch staatliche Maßnahmen teilweise unterhalb der Herstellungskosten verkauft wird.\n\nEinige Gedanken zur Energiewende und zu den Strompreisen: Auf nationaler Ebene müssen die richtigen Weichen für eine wettbewerbsfähige Stahlindustrie gestellt werden - so auch im Rahmen der Energiewende.\n\nEine besondere Bedeutung für die Stahlindustrie - darauf möchte ich auch noch einmal kurz eingehen - hat die Eigenstromerzeugung auf Basis von Kuppelgasen, anderen Restenergien und auch durch die Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung. Mithilfe dieser Verfahrenstechniken kann die Stahlindustrie einen Großteil ihres Stroms selbst erzeugen. Diese Verfahren sind nicht nur energiepolitisch, sondern auch ökologisch betrachtet sinnvoll.\n\nDie Stahlindustrie ist eine der energieintensivsten Branchen; wir haben es gehört. Aus diesem Grund ist sie besonders von den hohen Stromkosten betroffen, auch durch das Fehlen von Stromleitungen. Auch deshalb müssen wir dafür sorgen, dass der Leitungsausbau in den nächsten Jahren zügig vorankommt; denn unsere energieintensiven Unternehmen brauchen Versorgungssicherheit. Transport und Verbrauch gehen leider nicht immer zusammen. Im Ergebnis mussten deshalb oftmals Kraftwerke hoch- oder runtergeregelt werden.\n\nEine weitere Möglichkeit, steigenden Strompreisen entgegenzuwirken, ist das Thema Speicher. Zu den Energiespeichern zählen nicht nur Batteriespeicher und Pumpspeicherkraftwerke, sondern zum Beispiel auch die Umwandlung von elektrischer Energie in brennbare Gase oder Wärme. Speicher sind vielseitig und dezentral einsetzbar, eben dort, wo sie gebraucht werden. Aktuell können sie durch den Letztverbraucherstatus nicht wirtschaftlich betrieben werden. Es geht auch nicht darum, den Speichern einen Vorteil zu verschaffen, sondern darum, diskriminierende Rahmenbedingungen auch hier zu beseitigen. Nur so können sie wirtschaftlich betrieben werden, und nur so wird Deutschland Spitzenreiter - wir sprechen über die Innovationskraft der Stahlindustrie und der gesamten Wirtschaft - im Bereich der Speichertechnologie bleiben.\n\nHohen Strompreisen entgegenzuwirken, das dient auch der Stahlindustrie in Deutschland.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Schluss kommen. Die Stahlindustrie in Deutschland und Europa ist kein notwendiges Übel, wie es früher oftmals formuliert wurde, sondern die Grundlage für Wirtschaftskraft und Innovation, insbesondere auch in Bayern. Sie hat Strahlkraft auch in andere europäische Länder. Lassen Sie uns für die richtigen Rahmenbedingungen kämpfen. Ich denke, mit dem vorliegenden Antrag zur Stärkung der Stahlindustrie in Deutschland und Europa machen wir einen richtigen Schritt. Deshalb bitte ich Sie darum, unserem Antrag zuzustimmen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n140,manfred-zollmer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist schon erstaunlich, zu erfahren, was der Chef der Deutschen Bank auf der Euro Finance Week von sich gegeben hat. Er hat natürlich Regulierung kritisiert - das gehört immer dazu -, und dann hat er gesagt, das Konzept von „too big to fail“ sei Unsinn, damit müsse nun Schluss sein. Lieber Herr Fitschen, „too big to fail“ ist kein Unsinn, „too big to fail“ ist das Problem.\n\nEs ist wirklich schon dreist, so unverfroren wieder die alte Melodie zu singen, dass Gewinne privatisiert und Verluste sozialisiert werden. Denn das ist die Konsequenz.\n\nWir müssen feststellen, dass die wesentliche Ursache der Euro-Krise die Finanzmarktkrise war. Sie hat die Staaten in die Überschuldung getrieben - die Ausnahme war Griechenland -, weil Banken, die überschuldet waren, nicht den normalen marktwirtschaftlichen Gang in die Insolvenz antreten konnten. Hier könnte man Herrn Fitschen einmal über den Ordnungsrahmen einer Marktwirtschaft aufklären. Aber lassen wir das. Wenden wir uns jetzt Europa zu.\n\nOberstes politisches Ziel der Sozialdemokratie ist es, zu verhindern, dass der Steuerzahler erneut bluten muss, und deswegen unterstützten wir von Anfang an die Bankenunion in Europa. Sie ist eine der zentralen Maßnahmen, um eine Wiederholung der Krise zu verhindern. Der geplante Stresstest der EZB soll sicherstellen, dass die Altlasten im Bankensystem vor Eintritt in die Bankenunion bereinigt werden. Wir wissen nicht, wie groß diese Altlasten sind; aber wir haben Befürchtungen, dass sie einfach da sind. Sanierung und Rekapitalisierung von Banken im europäischen Raum sind deshalb eine vordringliche Aufgabe.\n\nWir haben über die Bankenaufsicht gesprochen. Ich will wegen meiner begrenzten Redezeit da nicht in die Details gehen. Lieber Kollege Troost, darüber sollten wir noch einmal separat diskutieren. Es muss jetzt darum gehen, eine entsprechende Regelung für die Abwicklung und Restrukturierung von Banken zu treffen: Wer macht es? Wer entscheidet? Wer finanziert?\n\nEin Abwicklungsverfahren für marode Banken in Europa muss praktikabel sein - Herr Schick, ich stimme Ihnen zu, es muss über das Wochenende entschieden werden können; das ist völlig klar -; aber es muss auch rechtssicher sein. Warum rechtssicher? Weil in diesem Bereich jede Entscheidung mit Sicherheit beklagt wird. Wenn man das Ganze auf einer unsicheren Rechtsgrundlage durchführt, dann richtet man großes Chaos an.\n\nNun gibt es unterschiedliche Rechtsauffassungen. Das muss man einfach konzedieren; das ist so. Ich bin kein Jurist - zum Glück.\n\nAber wir müssen das zur Kenntnis nehmen. Und wir müssen zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass der Bundesfinanzminister eine ganz klare Rechtsauffassung hat, die er von Anfang an geäußert hat. Er hat gesagt: Art. 114 AEUV ist nicht ausreichend. - Es geht um die Frage: Ist es noch Harmonisierung, oder ist es schon Zentralisierung? Darüber streiten sich die Juristen. Wir können diesen Streit nicht entscheiden; aber wir müssen politisch fordern, dass wir eine wasserdichte Lösung finden, die Rechtssicherheit gewährt, die also vor Gericht Bestand hat. Das ist unsere politische Forderung.\n\nDarüber hinaus brauchen wir eine Abwicklungsbehörde für die systemrelevanten grenzüberschreitenden Banken. Darüber, wie man das organisiert, gibt es verschiedene Vorschläge. Nun muss es darum gehen, in den Verhandlungen in Brüssel einen rechtssicheren Kompromiss zu finden. Wenn das auf der Basis der bestehenden Verträge nicht möglich ist, dann muss es als Zwischenlösung ein intergouvernementales Netzwerk mit nationalen Bankenabgaben geben,\n\nbis die rechtlichen Voraussetzungen für eine gemeinschaftliche Institution geschaffen sind. Bis dahin bleiben die Mitgliedstaaten in der Tat in der Verantwortung.\n\nAber Ziel bleibt, eine gemeinsame europäische Bankenabgabe einzuführen. Das ist für uns Sozialdemokraten wichtig.\n\nDenn das oberste Ziel ist es: Steuerzahler dürfen nicht noch einmal herangezogen werden. Deshalb soll die Haftungskaskade kommen; dazu ist schon einiges gesagt worden.\n\nNun haben wir aber das Problem, dass die Frage, wann die Neuregelung eigentlich in Kraft tritt, noch unbeantwortet ist. Das ist ein entscheidender Punkt. Die aktuellen Haftungsregeln gelten bisher bis 2018. Die Neuregelung muss aber vor Ablauf der aktuellen Haftungsregeln in Kraft treten. Das ist unsere politische Auffassung. Das ist ein ganz wichtiges Ziel, das der Minister erreichen muss, damit wir hier vernünftige Strukturen haben.\n\nLieber Herr Schick, in Ihrem Antrag taucht so etwas nicht auf.\n\nWir sind bei Ihren Anträgen von der Qualität her eigentlich mehr gewohnt. Was Sie uns mit diesen Anträgen präsentieren, ist ein bisschen dünn.\n\n- Gern,\n\naber dann ein bisschen substanzieller und auf den Sachverhalt bezogen!\n\nZur Rekapitalisierung der Banken und zum ESM hat der Kollege Poß Entsprechendes gesagt. Da hat es die Zusage der Bundeskanzlerin im Juli gegeben, unter Schwarz-Gelb noch. Das können wir jetzt nicht vom Tisch wischen. Was wir können, ist, dem Finanzminister eine glückliche Hand bei den schwierigen Verhandlungen in Brüssel zu wünschen;\n\ndenn wir wissen: Wir müssen jetzt Nägel mit Köpfen machen - ich komme zum Schluss -, durch die Europawahl verlieren wir sonst viel zu viel Zeit.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n2710,stephan-harbarth,\"Herr Präsident! Sehr verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Wir befassen uns heute mit der Einsetzung des zweiten Untersuchungsausschusses der laufenden Legislaturperiode. Das ist gewissermaßen der erste richtige Anwendungsfall der neu in die Geschäftsordnung aufgenommenen Bestimmung.\n\nDie formalen Voraussetzungen für die Einrichtung dieses Untersuchungsausschusses liegen nach unserer Überzeugung vor. Die erforderliche Zahl von Abgeordneten - erforderlich sind 120 Abgeordnete - hat das entsprechende Petitum unterzeichnet. Wir haben im Geschäftsordnungsausschuss über den Text des Untersuchungsgegenstandes intensiv beraten.\n\nDer zunächst vorliegende Entwurf war nach unserer Überzeugung aus einer Vielzahl von Gesichtspunkten heraus problematisch. Das galt etwa für die Frage, ob der Untersuchungsgegenstand eigentlich hinreichend bestimmt ist. Das galt für die Frage, ob die Grundrechte der Betroffenen gewahrt sind. Das galt aber auch für die Frage, ob die Zahl der Mitglieder dieses Untersuchungsausschusses die Mehrheitsverhältnisse dieses Parlamentes widerspiegelt.\n\nWir haben uns über all diese Fragen in den vergangenen Tagen und Wochen ausgetauscht. Wir haben aus meiner Sicht einen Untersuchungsgegenstand definiert, der den Vorgaben der Verfassung Rechnung trägt. Das ändert nichts daran, dass wir als CDU/CSU-Fraktion im Augenblick nicht erkennen können, warum es dieses Untersuchungsausschusses wirklich bedarf. Wir sind da aber sehr offen. Wir werden deshalb heute nicht dagegen stimmen, sondern wir werden uns enthalten.\n\nWir müssen aber schon zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass im Innenausschuss die in Rede stehenden Vorgänge intensiv debattiert wurden, eine Vielzahl von Fragen gestellt wurde und der BKA-Präsident immer wieder befragt wurde. Deshalb ist aus unserer Sicht im Augenblick nicht erkennbar, was der Untersuchungsausschuss an neuen Erkenntnissen tatsächlich zutage fördern kann. Das ändert aber nichts daran, dass er nun seiner Aufgabe nachgehen kann.\n\nNachdem sich dieses Thema einige Monate hingezogen hat, ist es wichtig, dafür zu sorgen, dass es nicht zu einer Klamaukveranstaltung wird, sondern dass es zu einer sachlichen Aufklärung kommt. Das wünsche ich allen Beteiligten. Ich glaube, unter dem Vorsitz der Kollegin Dr. Högl ist der Untersuchungsausschuss in besten Händen.\n\nWir sehen für diesen Untersuchungsausschuss immerhin die Perspektive und die Chance, dass er die öffentliche Aufmerksamkeit auf das Thema richten möge, das eigentlich dahintersteht. Wir haben im Zusammenhang mit der Edathy-Affäre erlebt, was es in diesem Land an Missständen im Bereich der Kinderpornografie gibt. Das ist intensiv diskutiert worden. Wir sind allerdings in der Politik in den letzten Jahren bei diesem Thema nicht wirklich weitergekommen.\n\nIch glaube, wir sollten uns bei aller Notwendigkeit zu Aufklärung und Diskussionen in dem Untersuchungsausschuss immer wieder das unermessliche Leid der betroffenen Kinder vergegenwärtigen, um das es in den Fällen der Kinderpornografie geht. Es geht nicht darum, dass man etwas konsumiert, sich etwas anhört oder anschaut wie eine Videokassette oder eine CD. Es geht vielmehr darum, dass von Teilen der Gesellschaft etwas konsumiert wird, was davor unter schwersten Verbrechen und Menschenrechtsverletzungen an unschuldigen Kindern produziert wurde.\n\nEs ist kein Ruhmesblatt für die Politik in Deutschland, dass wir in diesem Bereich in den letzten Jahren nicht vorangekommen sind. Für uns als CDU/CSU-Fraktion ist es wichtig, dass wir vor allen Dingen in zwei Feldern Fortschritte machen. Zum einen müssen wir die entsprechenden strafrechtlichen Vorgaben novellieren, damit Verhalten, das in schwerster Form in die Rechte der verletzten Kinder eingreift, auch bestraft werden kann.\n\nZum Zweiten muss die Polizei mit den Instrumenten ausgestattet werden, die sie benötigt, um diese Verbrechen aufzuklären. Leider ist die Polizei derzeit in vielen Fällen nicht in der Lage, weil sie keine entsprechende Handhabe hat, gerade diese schlimmen Straftaten, die im Internet begangen werden, aufzuklären. Lassen Sie uns das nicht vergessen. Das ist nach meiner festen Überzeugung im Interesse der betroffenen Kinder noch hundertmal wichtiger als dieser Untersuchungsausschuss.\n\nIch danke noch einmal allen, die konstruktiv an der Vorbereitung mitgewirkt haben. Das gilt auch für die Fraktionsmitarbeiterinnen und \u001emitarbeiter, die sehr engagiert zu Werke gegangen sind.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9788,alexander-neu,\"Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Somalia - so wird es gesagt - ist ein fragiler Staat. „Die Stabilisierung des Landes ist eine Generationenaufgabe“, so steht es im Antrag der Bundesregierung. Ziel sei es, den Aufbau tragfähiger staatlicher Strukturen in Kooperation mit anderen internationalen Organisationen herbeizuführen. Die Methode wird als umfassend bezeichnet: außenpolitische Instrumente, sicherheitspolitische Instrumente, entwicklungspolitische Instrumente. EUTM Somalia, seit Februar 2010 in Kraft, soll ein sicherheitspolitisches Instrument sein. Die Bundeswehr beteiligt sich mit bis zu 20 Soldatinnen und Soldaten im Rahmen der Sicherheitssektorenreform.\n\nWas hier so honorig als Staatsaufbau dargestellt wird, ist nicht nur honorig, sondern natürlich auch machtpolitisch eigennützig, aber dabei wenig effektiv. In Mogadischu herrscht ein Regime, das man durchaus als autoritär-islamistisch bezeichnen kann. Die Scharia, die vor einigen Jahren eingeführt wurde, steht über der Verfassung. Faktisch konkurrieren in Somalia zwei islamistische Gruppierungen, wobei die eine davon, die als moderater betrachtet wird - ob sie es ist oder nicht, sei dahingestellt -, von der Europäischen Union unterstützt wird. Ich räume ein: Man kann sich die Partner im internationalen Umfeld nicht immer aussuchen. Man muss sie aber als das benennen, was sie sind. Diese Partner sind Islamisten.\n\nDer Fortschritt, der im Antrag der Bundesregierung dargestellt wird, ist mehr als widersprüchlich. Die Bundesregierung sagt auf der einen Seite, es sei eine positive Entwicklungsperspektive erkennbar. Als Beispiel wird die Einführung der vorläufigen Verfassung 2012 genannt. Demgegenüber heißt es aber auch: Eine weitverbreitete Korruption, organisierte Kriminalität, Terrorismus, unsichere Lebensverhältnisse sowie eine fehlgeleitete wirtschaftliche Entwicklung seien maßgeblich verantwortlich und ursächlich für die prekäre Sicherheitslage. Das ist eine gute Analyse; denn Armut als Ursache für Terror wird hier analysiert. Eine außerordentlich ehrliche Analyse vonseiten der Bundesregierung, die wir so gar nicht gewohnt sind.\n\n- Nein, leider nicht. Wir würden es gut finden. Jetzt hat sie es einmal geschafft, und das lobe ich auch.\n\nAber was unternimmt die Bundesregierung dagegen? Der sozioökonomische Aufbau Somalias ist immer noch völlig unterentwickelt. Der Aufbau repressiver Instrumente, das heißt militärischer Fähigkeiten, dominiert. Aber auch das läuft irgendwie nicht so richtig rund. Der Aufbau militärischer Fähigkeiten geht auch deshalb fehl, weil dem wirtschaftlichen Aufbau keine Priorität zukommt. Symptomatisch hierfür ist: Im letzten Jahr, am 9. Juni, haben somalische Soldaten eine Straßensperre errichtet, nahe des Trainingscamps Dschasira. Die Soldaten haben das deshalb gemacht, weil sie unzufrieden über den ausbleibenden Sold waren. Das ist ein Zeichen für die nach wie vor unterentwickelte sozioökonomische Sphäre. Nichts wird dagegen gemacht. Man lässt Somalia im Bereich der sozialen Entwicklung weiter am Boden liegen.\n\nMir fehlt immer noch eine Bilanzierung, wie viele der ausgebildeten Soldaten - die Zahl 5 000 ist vorhin genannt worden - noch im Dienst der somalischen Streitkräfte sind. Wie viele von denen sind übergelaufen? Nichts davon steht in dem Antrag. Das fehlt. Eine ehrliche Bilanzierung der Effektivität dieser Trainingsmaßnahme verweigern Sie, weil Sie genau wissen, dass die Bilanz desaströs sein würde.\n\nAber es gibt weitere Gründe, warum Somalia nicht auf die Beine kommt. Einer davon ist der US-Drohnenterror, der das alltägliche Leben überschattet. Die Normalisierung ist einfach gar nicht möglich. Warum hierzu keine kritischen Worte seitens der Bundesregierung? Nichts dazu.\n\nDas westliche Verständnis von Staatsaufbau macht das Projekt, euphemistisch formuliert, zu einer Generationenaufgabe, wie es die Bundesregierung in weiser Voraussicht konstatiert hat. Realistisch ausgedrückt, wird der westliche Staatsaufbau zum Scheitern verurteilt sein. Sie ahnen es, und wir wissen es.\n\nDie Linke lehnt einen militärisch gestützten Staatsaufbau ab und somit auch die Mission EUTM Somalia.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n8401,petra-sitte,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! In der Antike geboren, entwickelte sich über Jahrhunderte die Idee, dass der Mensch über sich selbst, über seinen eigenen Körper und Geist souverän ist.\n\nEr besitzt in seiner Natur begründete angeborene Rechte. Im 19. Jahrhundert fand diese Idee Eingang in die deutsche Rechts- und Verfassungsgeschichte. Danach kann der Rechtsstaat diese Rechte nicht etwa verleihen; nein, meine Damen und Herren, er hat sie zu garantieren.\n\nInsbesondere auch die Väter und Mütter des Grundgesetzes, obwohl sie alle anderen Gründe gehabt hätten, haben großen Wert auf die Souveränität des Individuums gelegt.\n\nIch frage mich nun also: Was ist in den letzten Jahren in diesem Land passiert, dass ein Teil des Parlaments meint, jetzt so massiv in diese Souveränität eingreifen zu müssen?\n\nGibt es irgendeinen wissenschaftlich untersuchten Beweis für die Notwendigkeit? Nein. Es ist vorhin schon gesagt worden: Es gibt keinen. - Das wissen Sie so gut wie ich. Nicht zuletzt wegen dieses Umstands hat die letzte Bundesregierung ihren damaligen Gesetzentwurf zurückgezogen.\n\nAls Hauptgründe für eine Strafrechtsverschärfung hört man nun:\n\nErstens heißt es, die Rechtslage der Ärzte sei unklar. Je nach Landesärztekammer - das stimmt - ist sie im Standesrecht verschieden geregelt: Das geht von „keine Regelung“ bis zum Verbot. Dabei könnte das Urteil des Berliner Verwaltungsgerichts von 2012 für Klarheit sorgen. Es heißt dort - ich zitiere -:\n\nDer ärztlichen Ethik lässt sich kein klares und eindeutiges Verbot der ärztlichen Beihilfe zu Suizid in Ausnahmefällen entnehmen.\n\nDamit ist alles gesagt.\n\nZweitens stehen Sterbehilfevereine in der Kritik. Roger Kusch mit Sterbehilfe Deutschland gilt als das schwarze Schaf. Nur, mit ihm beschäftigen sich regelmäßig Ermittlungsbehörden und Gerichte. Also: Unser Rechtsstaat funktioniert doch hier augenscheinlich ziemlich gut, auch ohne strengere Gesetze.\n\nDie Vereine Dignitas oder Exit bieten Suizidassistenz an, aber nach Schweizer Recht, nicht nach deutschem Recht. Da haben wir gar nicht einzugreifen. Sie sind also schon jetzt streng reguliert. Andere Sterbehilfevereine, meine Damen und Herren, gibt es in Deutschland gar nicht.\n\nWas es aber schon gibt, ist die Sorge, dass sich Vereine neu bilden könnten. Die Gesetzentwürfe der Gruppen um Herrn Hintze bzw. um Frau Künast nehmen diese beiden Punkte ernst. Wir stellen aber nicht die Selbstbestimmung der Menschen infrage. Wir wollen wegen diffuser Besorgnisse nicht in Grundrechte eingreifen. Ursprünglich wollten wir eigentlich an der Rechtslage auch gar nichts ändern. Aber unsere Entwürfe sind jetzt vor dem Hintergrund einer Verbotsdebatte auch in dem Geist entstanden: besser den bewährten Rechtszustand schützen, als der Bevölkerung, auch der konfessionell gebundenen Bevölkerung, gegen ihren mehrheitlichen Willen das Strafrecht aufzuzwingen.\n\nRechtfertigen nun die gefühlten oder geglaubten Gründe für ein Verbot oder für eine massive Einschränkung der Sterbehilfe wirklich eine solch historische Mission, dass der 18. Deutsche Bundestag der Meinung ist, Normen und Werte einer Jahrhunderte andauernden liberalen Tradition durch eine Strafrechtsverschärfung über Bord werfen zu dürfen? Das entspräche vielleicht den theologischen Vorstellungen der großen Religionsgemeinschaften. Aber wir, meine Damen und Herren, sind das Parlament eines säkularen Staates.\n\nMenschen in diesem Land wollen ihre Sinnwelten und ihre Selbstbestimmung leben. Der Bundestag würde mit einem Verbot oder mit einer Strafrechtsverschärfung essenziell Selbstbestimmungsrechte aus Artikel 1 des Grundgesetzes einschränken, und zur Würde des Menschen gehört eben nicht nur sein Leben und dessen selbstbestimmte Gestaltung, sondern es gehören auch Sterben und Tod dazu. Wieso soll es in diesen Phasen anders sein?\n\nWieso, so frage ich Sie, meine Damen und Herren, die Sie für eine Strafrechtsverschärfung sind, haben Sie bei solchen Entscheidungen ein solch tiefes Misstrauen gegenüber den Menschen in diesem Land? Wieso sollen diese nicht sehr bedacht genau darüber viele Jahre nachgedacht haben, aus ihrer konkreten Situation heraus mit Angehörigen geredet haben usw.?\n\nUnd schließlich: Wieso glauben Sie, meine Damen und Herren, dass nachfolgende Generationen nicht genauso mit den Freiheiten umgehen können, die uns die gültige Rechtslage seit über 140 Jahren bietet? Wenn sich bis heute keine gravierenden Fehlentwicklungen eingestellt haben, warum bitte sollen nachfolgende Generationen verantwortungsloser als wir entscheiden?\n\nAuch deshalb sei gesagt: Eines Verbots- oder Verschärfungsgesetzes bedarf es nicht. Deshalb werbe ich dafür: Begegnen Sie dem Verbotsentwurf der Gruppe um Herrn Sensburg und der unverhältnismäßigen Strafrechtsverschärfung der Gruppe um Herrn Brand und Frau Griese mit einem Nein!\n\nDanke für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n5341,manfred-zollmer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In der Tat hat das Thema Staatsverschuldung nichts von seiner Bedeutung verloren.\n\n- Ganz ruhig bleiben. Auf Ihre Argumente gehe ich gleich noch ein. - In der Tat ist es wichtig, darüber zu diskutieren, wie wir in Zukunft mit Staatsverschuldung und übermäßiger Staatsverschuldung umgehen wollen. Das haben wir im Deutschen Bundestag in der letzten Legislaturperiode getan - da ging es im Wesentlichen um die Situation in Europa -, und wir werden jetzt über die aktuelle Situation diskutieren.\n\nWir haben gehört: Anlass für diese Debatte war eine Vollversammlung der Vereinten Nationen. Sie hat sich mit großer Mehrheit einer Resolution der G 77 und Argentiniens angeschlossen. Deutschland und eine Reihe weiterer Staaten haben diese Resolution abgelehnt.\n\nDie Frage ist, warum. Ich werde diese Frage beantworten. Die vorliegende Resolution bezieht sich auf die Entwicklung in Argentinien im letzten Jahr. Argentinien war sozusagen der Zündmechanismus. Argentinien hatte ein Problem. Es war von einem amerikanischen Gericht zur Zahlung von 1,3 Milliarden Dollar an einen Hedgefonds verurteilt worden. Dieser Hedgefonds hatte argentinische Staatsanleihen auf dem Sekundärmarkt zu günstigen Konditionen aufgekauft\n\nund vor einem amerikanischen Gericht dann erstritten, zum vollen Wert entschädigt zu werden. Nur - das muss man fairerweise sagen -: Argentinien hat diese Bonds zu amerikanischem Recht ausgegeben.\n\nNun wollte Argentinien, lanciert über den G-77-Vorsitz, mithilfe einer Resolution der Generalversammlung der VN die Erarbeitung einer Konvention zur Staateninsolvenz erzwingen. Das heißt, es ging um ein spezifisches argentinisches Problem.\n\nJetzt muss man eines ganz klar wissen, Herr Kekeritz: Bereits im Vorfeld der Diskussion bei den Vereinten -Nationen hat es massive inhaltliche und prozedurale Bedenken gegeben. Man muss einfach einmal zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass zwischen markigen verbalen Sprüchen, die wir hier heute zur Genüge gehört haben,\n\nund der Realität häufig Welten liegen. Das sehen Sie am Beispiel der griechischen Regierung. Man muss sich ja nur einmal ansehen, was da in wenigen Tagen an Unsinn verbreitet worden und an Positionswechseln erfolgt ist.\n\n- Ausatmen, dann machen wir weiter.\n\nIch will auf die Probleme hinweisen. Es gibt ja die bestehenden Verhandlungsstränge zum IWF und zum Pariser Club und deren Arbeit bezogen auf die Entschuldung von Staaten. Es gibt massive rechtliche Probleme. Zum Beispiel stellt sich die Frage: Wie gehen wir mit parlamentarischen Budgetrechten um? Deutschland hat sich sehr intensiv für eine sinnvolle Regelung zur Staatsinsolvenz eingesetzt, aber Argentinien war nicht bereit, einen ergebnisoffenen Prozess mitzutragen. Argentinien war nicht bereit, den üblichen konsensorientierten Weg zu gehen. Ausgehandelte Kompromisspapiere zur Festlegung der Verhandlungsmodalitäten wurden von Argentinien zurückgezogen,\n\nund der ursprüngliche Entwurf wurde dann wieder zur Abstimmung gestellt.\n\nLieber Herr Kekeritz, das, was Deutschland dann gemacht hat, ist nicht erbärmlich. Vielmehr haben wir uns gegen dieses Verfahren gewehrt, und zwar völlig zu Recht.\n\nIm Ergebnis gab es eine gemeinsame europäische Haltung gegenüber der mangelnden Kompromissbereitschaft von Argentinien.\n\nIch beschäftige mich im Deutschen Bundestag seit langer Zeit sehr intensiv mit Lateinamerika und weiß, dass argentinische Politik für einen europäischen Politiker nicht immer nachvollziehbar ist.\n\nAktuelle Ereignisse in Argentinien zeigen das sehr deutlich. Wir haben das sehr bedauert, weil es um ein wichtiges Thema geht. Das Verhalten von Argentinien hat -leider nicht dazu beigetragen, dieses Thema zu versachlichen und einer Lösung näherzubringen.\n\nDeutschland konnte der Resolution aus inhaltlichen und prozeduralen Bedenken nicht zustimmen. Das, was in dieser Resolution steht, ist in dieser Form rechtlich, politisch und praktisch nicht realisierbar. Wir halten es für nicht akzeptabel, dass die vorhandenen Gremien, die sich mit diesen Themen beschäftigen - das sind der Pariser Club und der IWF -,\n\nnun aus diesem Verfahren ausgegrenzt werden sollen.\n\nDer Pariser Club trat erstmals 1956 zusammen, als es um die Bewältigung der Auslandsverschuldung von - Sie erraten es - Argentinien ging. Der Pariser Club vermittelt zwischen Geberländern und Schuldnerländern. Dieses Vorgehen war in vielen Ländern sehr erfolgreich, zum Beispiel bei der Umsetzung der Kölner Schuldeninitiative - im Übrigen damals von Rot-Grün initiiert - zugunsten der sogenannten Heavily Indebted Poor Countries, also der hochverschuldeten armen Länder. Insgesamt wurden dort Schulden in Höhe von 43 Milliarden Dollar erlassen. Es ist natürlich das Geld des Steuerzahlers gewesen, das hier eingesetzt wurde, Geld des Steuerzahlers, mit dem wir in der Tat sehr sorgfältig umgehen müssen.\n\nJa, kein Problem.\n\nJa, jetzt machen wir ein Quiz. - Der Pariser Club ist ein informelles Gremium; das wissen Sie.\n\nAber ich frage Sie: Wenn man informell sehr erfolgreich arbeitet, wo, bitte schön, ist denn das Problem?\n\nMan hat dort sehr erfolgreich gearbeitet; darauf möchte ich hinweisen.\n\nWir befinden uns ja in einem Dialogprozess. Das sollten wir also machen.\n\nWissen Sie: Ich kann etwas nur dann boykottieren, wenn es an einem bestimmten Ort stattfindet,\n\nvon einem Prozedere begleitet wird, das ergebnisorientiert ist,\n\nund in einem Konsensprinzip alle Seiten und all diejenigen, die damit zu tun haben, berücksichtigt. Das ist hier nicht der Fall. Ich habe Ihnen eben gesagt, wie agiert worden ist.\n\n- Jetzt sind Sie nicht dran.\n\n- Ja, es ist nicht nur Deutschland. Herr Kekeritz, Sie haben mich gefragt, und ich versuche, Ihnen zu antworten; Entschuldigung.\n\nStellen Sie sich einmal die Frage, warum nicht nur Deutschland nicht an den Verhandlungen, die jetzt stattfinden, teilnimmt, sondern warum es auch die gesamte EU nicht tut.\n\nWeil alle Länder gesagt haben: Wir lassen uns nicht am Nasenring durch die Manege ziehen; es ist nicht möglich, dieses komplexe Problem in wenigen Verhandlungsrunden zu lösen. - Da ich sehr viel mit Finanzmarktregulierung zu tun habe, kann ich Ihnen bestätigen: Dieser Prozess funktioniert in dieser Form nicht. Er muss über die Institutionen, die sich bisher mit diesen Problemen beschäftigt haben, geführt werden; das ist unsere Linie.\n\n- Weil sie die Ahnung und die Kompetenz haben.\n\n- Ja, so ist es; in der Tat.\n\nEine Laienspieltruppe, die sich zufällig zusammensetzt, kann da keine vernünftigen Ergebnisse hinbekommen.\n\nIch will darauf hinweisen: Auch der IWF hat sich intensiv mit diesem Problem beschäftigt, und er hat Vorschläge gemacht, wie man mit diesem Thema umgehen sollte. Er hat gesagt: Wir wollen in Anleihen sogenannte Collective Action Clauses festschreiben, die im Falle -einer drohenden Zahlungsunfähigkeit eine Schulden-restrukturierung erlauben würden. - Es geht dabei um einen geregelten Prozess der Schuldenrestrukturierung, bei dem es klare Anleihebedingungen gibt, die im Krisenfall von den Gläubigern akzeptiert werden müssen. Das ist ein Verfahren, das wir auch in Europa anwenden;\n\nwir haben da also auch eigene Vorstellungen.\n\nDieses Verfahren müsste auch von Hedgefonds akzeptiert werden. Das heißt, es gibt Institutionen, die sich mit diesem Thema beschäftigen und konkrete Vorschläge gemacht haben. Diese Vorschläge müssen weiterentwickelt werden. Das ist die deutsche Position. In dieser Richtung sollten wir weiterdiskutieren.\n\nDie grundsätzliche Frage bleibt, wie das Verhältnis von Gläubigern und Schuldnern im Falle von Zahlungsschwierigkeiten ausgestaltet werden soll. Unserer Meinung nach brauchen wir einen fairen und transparenten Prozess, der auch die Gläubiger mit einbezieht. Daran müssen wir weiterarbeiten, und daran wollen wir weiterarbeiten. Im Rahmen der Vereinten Nationen ist genau dieser Weg nicht beschritten worden. Deshalb haben wir das damals abgelehnt.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n2684,christian-lange,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Ich beantworte die Frage gerne wie folgt: Die Verhandlungen haben erst begonnen. Die Auswirkungen des sogenannten TiSA-Abkommens werden nach dem vorläufigen Stand der Verhandlungen im Bereich des Bundesministeriums der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz voraussichtlich nicht über die bestehenden Verpflichtungen aus dem General Agreement on Trade in Services, GATS, hinausgehen.\n\nZunächst einmal kann ich nicht bestätigen, dass nichts herauskommt. Ich kann hier aber nur Ausführungen zu dem machen, was unser Haus betrifft, und ich sagte Ihnen bereits, dass unser Haus nach dem derzeitigen Stand davon nicht betroffen ist.\n\nZu den Zielen gehört in der Tat auch, mehr Dienstleistungsfreiheit für professionelle Beratungsdienstleistungen, zum Beispiel für Anwälte, herzustellen. Für Deutschland hat aber schon das GATS - ich nannte es bereits: das Allgemeine Übereinkommen über den Handel mit Dienstleistungen - im Verhältnis zu den Partnerstaaten zu Freiheit im grenzüberschreitenden Dienstleistungsverkehr - etwa die Beratung auf dem Gebiet des jeweiligen nationalen Rechts - im Rahmen der bestehenden Zulassungsprüfungen geführt. TiSA wird nach heutigem Stand nicht darüber hinausgehen.\n\nWir beteiligen uns in der Tat aktiv. Zunächst will ich dazu aber sagen, dass sowohl der öffentliche Dienst als auch die Justiz selbst nicht betroffen sind.\n\nSpezielle Vorschriften des Datenschutzes und des Verbraucherschutzes - Letzteres hatten Sie ja angesprochen - sind nicht im TiSA-Verhandlungspaket enthalten. Die Bundesregierung wird sich aber trotzdem gegen jegliche negativen Auswirkungen auf die Schutzbereiche der Bürgerinnen und Bürger aussprechen, und sie tut das bereits.\n\nFrau Kollegin, haben Sie bitte Verständnis dafür, dass ich hier nur über die Dinge Auskunft geben kann, die in den Ressortbereich des Bundesministeriums der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz fallen. Die Antwort auf diese Frage obliegt nicht unserem Hause, und ich bitte Sie deshalb, sie an das zuständige Haus zu richten.\"\n14953,fritz-felgentreu,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! „Nad Bab’im Jarom pamjatnikow net“, „über Babi Jar, da steht keinerlei Denkmal“ - dieser berühmte Stoßseufzer am Anfang von Jewgenij Jewtuschenkos monolithischem Gedicht über das Massaker an den Kiewer Juden im Herbst 1941 wirkt auf mich ein bisschen wie eine abschließende Verdichtung vieler Beweggründe für Ihren Antrag, liebe Frau Beck. Im übertragenen Sinne kann dieser Ort, der als denkmalsloser in die Weltliteratur eingegangen ist, für das Verhältnis immer noch zu vieler Deutscher zur Ukraine stehen. Der Ukraine scheint gleichsam die Landmarke, das Erkennungsmerkmal, zu fehlen. Es fällt zu vielen von uns immer noch schwer, neben dem gewaltigen Russland, das so großen Raum im kollektiven Bewusstsein in Anspruch nimmt, die Ukraine überhaupt als europäisches Land mit eigener Identität und eigener Geschichte angemessen wahrzunehmen.\n\nDarauf hat sie aber einen Anspruch, sowohl aus eigenem Recht als auch aus einer historischen Verantwortung Deutschlands heraus. Es ist ein Verdienst des Antrags der Grünen, diesen Anspruch zu begründen.\n\nDie junge Generation, die bereits in einer unabhängigen Ukraine aufgewachsen ist, sieht sich mit unzähligen Herausforderungen und Problemen konfrontiert. Es handelt sich dabei nicht nur, aber auch um Spätfolgen historischer Katastrophen, für die Deutschland einen großen Teil der Verantwortung trägt. Zweimal hat Deutschland auf ukrainischem Boden zerstörerisch Krieg geführt, ein weiteres Mal brachte der Vormarsch der sowjetischen Armeen große Verwüstungen mit sich.\n\nDass der Vernichtungskrieg gegen die Sowjetunion auf dem Boden der Ukraine ausgekämpft wurde, ist eine Tatsache, die wir uns manchmal nicht genügend bewusst machen.\n\nDie Erschütterungen und inneren Konflikte, die diese Kriege ausgelöst, und die Opfer, die sie gekostet haben, zeichnet der vorliegende Antrag nach. Sie haben der Ukraine ihren Stempel aufgedrückt. Ihre Nachwirkungen sind bis heute spürbar.\n\nDas Anliegen des Antrags und die einzige Forderung, die er erhebt, erscheinen mir daher durchaus sinnvoll und berechtigt. Die SPD-Fraktion wird aber den Antrag dennoch so, wie wir ihn heute lesen, nicht beschließen können. Gestatten Sie mir, drei Gründe dafür auszuführen.\n\nErstens bedarf eine Positionsbestimmung des Deutschen Bundestages in einer so wichtigen Frage einer gemeinsamen Anstrengung aller Fraktionen, die dazu bereit sind.\n\nDer Antrag einer einzigen Fraktion ist dafür doch eine zu schmale Grundlage. Bisher haben Grüne, SPD und Union nicht zu einer gemeinsamen Haltung gefunden,\n\nund mit der Fraktion der Linken dürfte sie gar nicht erreichbar sein.\n\nOb die Ausschussberatungen noch Fortschritte bringen werden, müssen wir ausloten.\n\nJa bitte, gern.\n\nDas ist vielleicht ein ganz gutes Stichwort. Ich bin ja kein Mitglied des Auswärtigen Ausschusses, wie Sie wissen, und ich bin deswegen nur aus zweiter Hand über die Abstimmungsprozesse informiert, die im Hintergrund im Laufe der letzten zwölf Monate stattgefunden haben.\n\nIch meine mich aber zu erinnern, dass ursprünglich ein Problem im Umgang mit dem Vorschlag der Grünen darin lag, dass er eigentlich auf eine Stellungnahme zum Jahrestag des Massakers von Babi Jar im vergangenen Jahr ausgerichtet und dass der Beratungszeitraum relativ kurz war.\n\nAndererseits gab es zumindest bisher von grüner Seite keine große Bereitschaft, den historischen Blickwinkel, den sie einnehmen, um eine Perspektive auf die Gegenwart zu ergänzen.\n\nEs ist schwierig gewesen, eine Abstimmung vorzunehmen; so habe ich es zumindest verstanden.\n\nEr möchte dazu wohl eine Stellungnahme abgeben. Bitte schön.\n\nEben.\n\nVielen Dank, lieber Kollege Annen. - Frau Beck, ich bitte um Verständnis: Ich glaube, wir sollten hier jetzt nicht die Ausschussdebatte vorwegnehmen. Für eine solche Debatte ist ja der Ausschuss da. So wie es der Kollege Annen hier eben dargestellt hat, so ist die Kommunikationssituation zumindest auch bei mir angekommen. Das habe ich auch zur Grundlage meiner Ausführungen hier gemacht, die noch ein bisschen weitergehen sollen. Auf genau diese Punkte werde ich noch eingehen.\n\nWie ich eben gesagt habe: Neben einer Positionsbestimmung, die sich der historischen Verantwortung stellt - davon bin ich fest überzeugt -, brauchen wir auch den Blick auf die Gegenwart. Ohne ihn kommen wir nicht aus. Ich finde, das, was Ute Finckh-Krämer gesagt hat, zeigt deutlich, warum das so ist und dass das unbedingt in eine solche Positionsbestimmung des Deutschen Bundestages hineingehört. Anteilig wird dieser Blick jetzt in einem umfassenden Antrag zur Weiterentwicklung der Östlichen Partnerschaft von den Koalitionsfraktionen vorbereitet. Ich würde mich freuen, wenn es gelänge, beide Perspektiven, die historische und die aktuelle, zusammenzuführen.\n\nWir brauchen tatsächlich ein noch genaueres Nachdenken darüber, wodurch sich die deutsche Haltung gegenüber der Ukraine in Abgrenzung von ihren Nachbarstaaten eigentlich auszeichnet. Entweder tun wir das, oder wir müssen mindestens Weißrussland, wahrscheinlich aber auch die Moldau und einige andere Staaten in eine breiter angelegte Positionsbestimmung einbeziehen; denn fast alles, was wir zur deutschen Verantwortung gegenüber der Ukraine formulieren, wäre ähnlich oder gleich auch über Weißrussland zu sagen. Damit wird die Aufgabe, eine Haltung und Richtung festzulegen, noch komplexer, als sie sowieso schon ist; denn bei aller Ähnlichkeit der historischen Erfahrungen sehen wir in der Gegenwart beider Länder doch sehr große Unterschiede.\n\nDie SPD-Fraktion wird deshalb, wie eben deutlich geworden ist, die Initiative der Grünen bei der Beratung im Ausschuss konstruktiv würdigen. Ich traue diesem Parlament zu, etwas Gutes daraus erwachsen zu lassen. Aber es könnte sich am Ende in einer ganz anderen Gestalt präsentieren, als wir heute absehen können.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13722,wolfgang-schauble,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Mit den beiden Gesetzentwürfen sollen die Finanzbeziehungen zwischen Bund und Ländern neu geregelt werden. Die Gesetzentwürfe setzen das nach langen intensiven Verhandlungen erzielte Einvernehmen zwischen den Regierungschefs von Bund und Ländern um.\n\nDie Länder sollen zur Unterstützung bei der Erfüllung ihrer Aufgaben ab dem Jahre 2020 um insgesamt etwas über 9,7 Milliarden Euro jährlich finanziell entlastet werden, wobei die Summe im Laufe der Jahre ansteigen wird. Diese 9,7 Milliarden Euro sind die für den Bund im Jahre 2020 entstehenden Kosten. Die Berechnung basiert auf der aktuellen Steuerschätzung vom November 2016; sie wird sich also noch ein wenig verändern. Die Kosten werden, wie erwähnt, in den Folgejahren in Abhängigkeit von der Steuerentwicklung und der Finanzkraftentwicklung der Länder anwachsen. Den Kosten des Bundes stehen Entlastungen der Länder in gleicher Höhe gegenüber.\n\nEin Großteil der Länderentlastung ab 2020 erfolgt über den bundesstaatlichen Finanzausgleich. Bekanntlich laufen die geltenden Regeln des Finanzausgleichs nach aktueller Rechtslage Ende 2019 aus. Der Entlastungsbetrag enthält die Fortsetzung von bereits heute geltenden bzw. ähnlich geltenden Regelungen wie den Entflechtungsmitteln - auch die Entflechtungsmittel waren ursprünglich einmal bis Ende 2019 befristet; wir haben uns darauf verständigt, dass sie länger gewährt werden sollen; sie sollen künftig als Umsatzsteuerfestbetrag in gleicher Höhe fortgesetzt werden -, der Gemeindeverkehrsfinanzierung, der Finanzhilfen für Seehäfen und der Sanierungshilfen für das Saarland und die Freie Hansestadt Bremen anstelle der heutigen Konsolidierungshilfen sowie der besonderen Hilfen für die ostdeutschen Länder, die an die Stelle des Ende 2019 wegfallenden Solidarpakts II treten sollen.\n\nDer Länderfinanzausgleich im engeren Sinne wird in seiner jetzigen Form mit diesen Gesetzentwürfen abgeschafft - ebenso wie der Umsatzsteuervorabausgleich.\n\nDie Verteilung des Länderanteils an der Umsatzsteuer wird grundsätzlich nach der Einwohnerzahl der Länder erfolgen, aber modifiziert durch Zu- und Abschläge zum angemessenen Ausgleich der Unterschiede in der Finanzkraft. Die nähere Ausgestaltung dieses Ausgleichs erfolgt in enger Anlehnung an den bisherigen Finanzausgleich unter den Ländern.\n\nWie erwähnt kann der Bund zur besonderen Entlastung des Saarlands und der Freien Hansestadt Bremen künftig Sanierungshilfen gewähren. Die Länder ergreifen dafür gleichzeitig Maßnahmen zum Abbau ihrer übermäßigen Verschuldung sowie zur Stärkung der Wirtschafts- und Finanzkraft.\n\nDaneben werden die Voraussetzungen für die Weitergewährung der Finanzhilfen des Bundes in den Bereichen Seehäfen und Gemeindeverkehrsfinanzierung geschaffen. Die Änderungen des Grundgesetzes sehen vor, dass der Bund den Ländern hierfür ab 2020 Finanzhilfen in Höhe von rund 330 Millionen Euro gewährt.\n\nFür eine zielgerichtete und effiziente Förderung von Investitionen in gesamtstaatlich bedeutsamen Bereichen soll der Bund mehr Einwirkungsrechte bei Finanzhilfen erhalten. Künftig werden die Arten der zu fördernden Investitionen und die Grundzüge der Ausgestaltung der Länderprogramme zur Verwendung der Finanzhilfen durch eine bundesrechtliche Regelung mit Zustimmung des Bundesrats oder durch Verwaltungsvereinbarungen geregelt.\n\nWir haben im Übrigen 2015 den Kommunalinvestitionsförderungsfonds aufgelegt, um finanzschwachen Kommunen zusätzliche Investitionen zu ermöglichen. Dabei muss erwähnt werden, dass die Hilfen des Bundes immer nur eine ergänzende Funktion haben können. Denn in allererster Linie - dabei muss es auch bleiben - haben die Länder für eine ausgewogene Finanzierung ihrer Kommunen zu sorgen.\n\nDas ist die Ordnung des Grundgesetzes und die Aufgabe der Länder.\n\nDas klappt auch in vielen Ländern ganz gut, leider nicht in allen.\n\nDeswegen ist eine zeitlich, inhaltlich und finanziell klar begrenzte Bundeshilfe für finanzschwache Kommunen sinnvoll.\n\nDamit wir den Kommunen effektiver helfen können, erweitern wir durch eine Grundgesetzänderung für diesen Zweck die Möglichkeiten von Bundeshilfen an finanzschwache Kommunen, insbesondere im Bereich der kommunalen Bildungsinfrastruktur, vor allem für die Sanierung von Schulbauten. Wir stocken dafür den Fonds um weitere 3,5 Milliarden Euro auf.\n\nWir schaffen bei Mischfinanzierungen neue Kontrollrechte des Bundesrechnungshofs in den Ländern und Kommunen. Auch das war ein lange diskutierter Punkt.\n\nWir stärken den Stabilitätsrat, der künftig neben der Einhaltung der Schuldenbremse im Bund auch die Einhaltung der Schuldenbremse in den einzelnen Ländern überwachen soll und überwachen kann.\n\nWir haben uns mit den Ländern darauf verständigt, dem Bund zusätzliche Kompetenzen in der Steuerverwaltung zu übertragen, insbesondere im Bereich der Informationstechnik. Das wird künftig hoffentlich die Einigung in Steuerfragen zwischen Bund und Ländern vereinfachen und beschleunigen.\n\n- Ja, hoffentlich. Alle, die damit zu tun haben, wissen, dass das „hoffentlich“ aus vollem Herzen ausgesprochen ist.\n\nMit der verabredeten Verkehrsgesellschaft des Bundes schaffen wir die Bundesauftragsverwaltung bei den Bundesautobahnen ab. Der Bund wird die alleinige Verantwortung für Planung, Bau, Betrieb, Erhaltung und Finanzierung von Bundesautobahnen übernehmen. Er kann sich dann künftig zur Erledigung dieser Aufgabe einer Gesellschaft privaten Rechts bedienen. Die Autobahnen und Fernstraßen und die Gesellschaft selbst bleiben im unveräußerlichen Eigentum des Bundes. Eine Beteiligung privater Investoren an der Gesellschaft ist nicht vorgesehen. Aber die Gesellschaft wird offen sein für Finanzierungen durch öffentlich-private Partnerschaften, wie wir sie bereits jetzt haben. Ich will bei der Gelegenheit hinzufügen, dass ich nicht sehe, dass die Gesellschaft eine Ermächtigung zur Aufnahme von Krediten erhalten wird.\n\nMit der Einrichtung eines verbindlichen bundesweiten Verwaltungsportalverbundes machen wir einen großen Schritt in der Modernisierung der öffentlichen Verwaltung. Alle Nutzer, Bürgerinnen und Bürger sowie Unternehmen, werden künftig Verwaltungsleistungen von Bund, Ländern und Kommunen online in Anspruch nehmen können. Wir sehen dafür eine Übergangsfrist von fünf Jahren vor; denn es ist ein ungeheuer ambitioniertes Projekt. Dabei wird sich für die Verwaltungen dann auch der administrative Vollzugsaufwand verringern. Wir werden stärker wegkommen von einfachen Routinearbeiten, was angesichts der knappen Personaldecke in vielen Verwaltungsbereichen zu einer Entlastung führen kann.\n\nEntsprechendes haben wir mit dem Gesetz zur Modernisierung des Besteuerungsverfahrens für die Steuerverwaltung bereits auf den Weg gebracht. Auch hier werden die Beschäftigten künftig mehr Zeit für zielgerichtete Prüfungen haben, um Verstöße noch besser aufdecken zu können.\n\nIn dem Gesetzespaket ist auch ein Entwurf zur Neuregelung zum Unterhaltsvorschuss enthalten. Für alle Kinder bis zur Vollendung des 12. Lebensjahres sind bei Ausfall der Unterhaltsleistungen des anderen Elternteils Leistungen nach dem Unterhaltsvorschussgesetz ausnahmslos und ohne Höchstbezugsdauer zu gewähren. Das wird so vorgeschlagen.\n\nFür Kinder von der Vollendung des 12. Lebensjahres bis zur Vollendung des 18. Lebensjahres sollen die Leistungen nach dem Unterhaltsvorschussgesetz nur dann zustehen, wenn das Kind nicht auf SGB\u001eII-Leistungen angewiesen ist oder wenn der alleinerziehende Elternteil im SGB\u001eII-Bezug ein eigenes Einkommen von mindestens 600 Euro brutto erzielt. Durch diese Regelung soll ein langfristig paralleler Bezug von SGB\u001eII-Leistungen und Unterhaltsvorschuss vermieden werden. Kindeseinkommen wird entsprechend dem Unterhaltsrecht zur Hälfte angerechnet, wenn das Kind einen Schulabschluss hat. Regelungen zum Rückgriff auf den barunterhaltspflichtigen Elternteil werden verbessert und vereinfacht.\n\nDiese Reform soll am 1. Juli 2017 in Kraft treten, damit die Kommunen genügend Zeit haben, sich auf die neue Rechtslage einzustellen. Der Bund trägt statt, wie bisher, einem Drittel künftig 40 Prozent der Kosten; die Länder tragen 60 Prozent der Kosten für den Unterhaltsvorschuss. Die Mehrausgaben für den Bund unter Einrechnung der im SGB\u001eII-Bereich entstehenden Entlastungen betragen insgesamt 38 Millionen Euro pro Jahr.\n\nVerehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dieses umfangreiche Gesetzespaket spiegelt einen nach schwierigen Verhandlungen erzielten Kompromiss zwischen den Ländern und dem Bund wider. Die Ausgestaltungen des Finanzausgleichs im Einzelnen sind im Wesentlichen zwischen den 16 Ländern so vereinbart worden, und der Bund hat dann seinen Teil in den Verhandlungen mit den Ländern beigetragen. Weil es ein nach schwierigen, langen Verhandlungen erzielter Kompromiss ist, hat die Bundesregierung in der Gegenäußerung zu den Stellungnahmen des Bundesrates im ersten Durchgang dafür geworben, dass man bei dem vereinbarten Kompromiss bleibt und dass auch der Bundesrat und die Bundesländer nicht versuchen sollten, das mühsam erzielte Kompromisspaket jetzt wieder aufzuschnüren. Ich werbe im Interesse des Gesamtpaketes ausdrücklich dafür.\n\nIch will im Übrigen hinzufügen: Natürlich ist die sich ab dem Jahre 2020 ergebende Mehrbelastung für den Bund in Höhe von 9,7 Milliarden Euro aufsteigend eine Berechnung gegenüber der heutigen Rechtslage. Wenn man die Sachlage, die bis 2019 besteht, zum Maßstab nimmt, beträgt die Mehrbelastung für den Bund 4,3 Milliarden Euro aufsteigend. Aber auch das ist ein erheblicher Beitrag. Ich will das in diesem Zusammenhang erwähnt haben.\n\nWas uns in diesen Verhandlungen nicht gelungen ist, ist, eine Vereinbarung zu erzielen, die das Gesamtsystem, das komplizierte System des Ausgleichs zwischen Bund, Ländern und Kommunen, ein Stück weit transparenter, ein Stück weit systemischer und berechenbarer macht und vor allen Dingen Anreize in dem System verbessert. Das war am Anfang das ehrgeizige Vorhaben der Bundesregierung. Wir sind damit jedenfalls nicht zu einem durchschlagenden Erfolg gekommen, um es zurückhaltend zu sagen.\n\nDeswegen werbe ich erstens dafür, dass wir den Kompromiss, so wie wir ihn vereinbart haben, jetzt gesetzgeberisch umsetzen, und ich werbe zweitens dafür, dass man sich in künftigen Legislaturperioden damit beschäftigt, wie wir das Verhältnis unserer föderalen Ordnung, das Verhältnis zwischen Bund, Ländern und Kommunen, so weiterentwickeln können, dass wir in Anbetracht des schnelleren Wandels aufgrund der Veränderung der Bedingungen im wirtschaftlichen Wettbewerb, der Globalisierung und vieler anderer Fragen in der Lage sind, angemessen schnell zu reagieren. Dafür sind wir im Bund-Länder-Verhältnis in einer grundsätzlich richtigen Ordnung nicht optimal aufgestellt.\n\nDie Verwaltungsverfahren müssen schneller werden, und wir müssen Anreize schaffen, dass diejenigen, die Entscheidungen treffen, stärker die finanziellen Konsequenzen aus ihren Entscheidungen tragen. Das ist ein altes ordnungspolitisches Prinzip. Wir haben einen wichtigen Schritt gemacht. Aber wir sind mit den Arbeiten, unseren Föderalismus zukunftstauglich zu halten, nur für diese Legislaturperiode, aber nicht für die Zukunft am Ende.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n927,carsten-trager,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Als mittlerweile fünfter Redner stehe ich hier, und ich kann nicht anders: Auch ich werde das Hohelied der Nachhaltigkeit singen. Wie die vier Kolleginnen und Kollegen vor mir bin natürlich auch ich von dem Konzept überzeugt. Wie die vier Kolleginnen und Kollegen halte auch ich Nachhaltigkeit für unerlässlich, ja, für das entscheidende Kriterium für gute Politik.\n\nIch sehe es aber ein bisschen so wie Frau Dr. Wilms: In dem allumfassenden Konsens liegt auch eine gewisse Gefahr. Wir führen den Begriff Nachhaltigkeit mittlerweile so häufig, bei so vielen Gelegenheiten, und das oft so unreflektiert, dass sich der geneigte Zuschauer unter Umständen manchmal gelangweilt abwendet. Es gibt inzwischen einen geradezu inflationären Gebrauch des Begriffs Nachhaltigkeit. Das Wort schmückt Hochglanzbroschüren von Konzernen. Keine politische Grundsatzrede kommt ohne einen Absatz zur Nachhaltigkeit aus. Auch was wir konsumieren, ist mittlerweile nachhaltig; Mode, Autos, sogar Urlaubsreisen sind nachhaltig. Der Begriff läuft Gefahr, fast alles zu meinen und damit dann auch wieder nichts.\n\nHubert Weiger, der Vorsitzende des BUND, der übrigens auch aus meiner schönen Heimatstadt Fürth stammt, spricht sogar von einem Missbrauch des Begriffs. Ich zitiere:\n\nEin bisschen weniger Straßenbau wird als nachhaltiger Straßenbau bezeichnet, ein bisschen weniger Schulden werden als nachhaltiges Haushalten charakterisiert.\n\nIch schlage vor, dass wir hier verbal ein bisschen abrüsten und dem Begriff wieder Trennschärfe geben.\n\nIch möchte jetzt nicht alles wiederholen, was meine Vorredner schon gesagt haben. Stattdessen möchte ich Ihnen kurz sagen, warum ich Nachhaltigkeit für wichtig halte. Worauf sollte sich ein enger gefasster Begriff von Nachhaltigkeit konzentrieren? Wo setzen wir die Schwerpunkte?\n\nWir alle, die wir hier sitzen, kennen natürlich den Ursprung des Begriffs: Fälle niemals mehr Holz, als angepflanzt wird. - Das ist ein schönes, griffiges Bild, das zum Ausdruck bringt: Wirtschaftliches Handeln ist erlaubt, aber bitte nur mit Blick auf die Zukunftsfähigkeit und auf das Gemeinwohl. Übertragen auf heute heißt das - das wurde schon gesagt -: Wir müssen unseren Kindern und Enkelkindern ein intaktes ökologisches, ökonomisches und, ich betone, soziales Gefüge hinterlassen. In der öffentlichen Wahrnehmung steht im Zusammenhang mit dem Begriff Nachhaltigkeit meist die Versöhnung von Ökonomie und Ökologie im Vordergrund.\n\nIch schlage vor, dass wir den Fokus ein kleines bisschen hin zum sozialen Aspekt verschieben. Ich bin fest davon überzeugt, dass die Bereiche Ökologie und Soziales eng miteinander verknüpft sind. Nachhaltigkeit kann es nur geben, wenn die Bereiche Soziales, Umwelt sowie wirtschaftliche Interessen gleichermaßen berücksichtigt werden.\n\nUnsere Aufgabe ist es, dafür zu sorgen, dass wir keine abgehobene Diskussion über das Thema Nachhaltigkeit führen. Sie sollte nicht bloß auf Gutverdiener abzielen, die im Biomarkt einkaufen können oder Hybridautos fahren. Im Gegenteil: Ich möchte, dass wir unseren Blick ein bisschen drehen und uns fragen: Wer sind die Leidtragenden von nicht nachhaltiger Politik? Das sind die Menschen, die an einer stark befahrenen Straße wohnen, weil die Mieten dort billiger sind, die aber unter Abgasbelastung und Lärm leiden müssen.\n\nDas sind jene Menschen, die keine Bioprodukte kaufen, und zwar nicht, weil sie es nicht wollen; vielmehr können sie es nicht, weil die Produkte ein bisschen teurer sind.\n\nNach meiner Vorstellung bedeutet mehr Nachhaltigkeit mehr soziale Gerechtigkeit, und mehr soziale Gerechtigkeit bedeutet mehr Nachhaltigkeit. So gesehen ist nachhaltige Politik nicht nur gute Politik, sondern auch sozialdemokratische Politik und christliche Politik, sie ist auch sozialistische Politik und grüne Politik. Hier schließt sich der Kreis. Denn wir alle beanspruchen für unsere Politik den Ansatz einer zukunftsfähigen Verbindung von Ökologie, Ökonomie und Sozialem. Wir sind uns nicht nur heute, sondern generell einig, dass Nachhaltigkeit sehr wichtig für uns ist.\n\nIch freue mich auf die Diskussion im Parlamentarischen Beirat für nachhaltige Entwicklung. Wir sollten daran arbeiten, den Fokus zunächst ein bisschen und dann ein Stück weiter zu verschieben. In diesem Sinne übergebe ich jetzt an den sechsten Redner dieser Debatte.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n958,petra-sitte,\"Guten Morgen, meine Damen und Herren! Dass wir den Gesetzentwurf zur Änderung des Abgeordnetengesetzes bereits eine Woche nach der Einbringung beschließen, hat nicht wirklich etwas mit politischer Effizienz zu tun.\n\nGenau genommen wollen Sie den Gegenstand „Abgeordnetenentschädigung“ quasi wie eine heiße Kartoffel ganz schnell loswerden.\n\nIch will noch einmal daran erinnern - mein Kollege hat es schon angesprochen -: Es hat eine Expertenkommission fast eineinhalb Jahre an Empfehlungen zur Reform des Systems „Abgeordnetenrecht“ gearbeitet. Sie hat 17 Sitzungen abgehalten.\n\nAm Ende ist ein umfangreicher Bericht vorgestellt worden. Über diesen Bericht haben wir hier und in den Ausschüssen nie im Einzelnen geredet. Er hat bei der Anhörung eine Rolle gespielt - das ist wohl wahr -; das reicht aber nicht; das ist unangemessen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Große Koalition hat außer einem mittelschweren politischen Erdbeben noch nichts ausgelöst, auch keines ihrer Großvorhaben. Aber die Änderung des Abgeordnetengesetzes rauscht jetzt innerhalb einer Woche ganz schnell durch den Bundestag, quasi wie durch ein Wurmloch, während andere Gesetzesvorhaben monatelang quasi scheintot in den Ausschüssen schmoren. Mit diesem Verfahren nehmen Sie auch der Öffentlichkeit die Chance, sich kritisch dazu zu verhalten oder eben auch sich einzumischen. Dabei bedarf aus unserer Sicht gerade ein so hochsensibles Thema einer öffentlichen Mitsprache und einer öffentlichen, transparenten Darstellung.\n\nAuch davon leitet sich Akzeptanz ab.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, das Grundgesetz spricht von angemessener, die Unabhängigkeit sichernder Entschädigung.\n\nWas angemessen ist, wird natürlich je nach konkreter persönlicher sozialer Situation unterschiedlich bewertet; darüber sind wir uns hier klar, und das sollten wir vor allem auch nicht ausblenden. Selbst wenn das Richtergehalt hier mehrheitlich als Richtgröße hingenommen wird, so muss man sich doch die Frage stellen, ob das Angleichungstempo angemessen ist.\n\nWir meinen, eine Erhöhung um 830 Euro, also um 10 Prozent, innerhalb von konkret sieben Monaten, das ist schon ziemlich drastisch. Ich glaube, man findet keine Berufsgruppe, die eine solche Steigerung verbuchen kann.\n\nDieser Prozentsatz, finden wir, passt einfach nicht in eine Gesellschaft, in der für die Masse der Beschäftigten die Reallöhne seit 2000 stagnieren, während unsere Bezüge seit 2000 eine Steigerung um 25 Prozent erfahren haben. Meine Damen und Herren, es ist kein Opfer, im Bundestag zu sitzen.\n\nSo forsch Sie nun die Diätenerhöhung angehen, so schaumgebremst sind Sie bei Veränderungen der Altersversorgung. Es gab nicht wirklich ein Signal an irgendeiner Stelle, dass Sie bereit sind, das bestehende System infrage zu stellen. Sie balsamieren mit dieser Gesetzesänderung das bestehende beamtenrechtsähnliche Modell. Die Änderungen sind, wenn man es genau nimmt, eigentlich eher kosmetischer Natur. Da besteht der Leistungsanspruch etwas später, da liegt das Leistungsniveau etwas niedriger, während man durch die Diätenerhöhung schon einen spürbaren Verlustausgleich feststellen kann. Auch ein Rentenanspruch in Höhe von 65 Prozent, bezogen auf unsere Diät, steht, selbst wenn dieser erst nach 26 Jahren bestehen soll, immer noch in einem krassen Widerspruch zum Rentenanspruch der Masse der Bevölkerung, der ja bis 2030 nach Ihren Beschlüssen auf 43 Prozent reduziert werden soll.\n\nDas Wort „Armutsrente“ gehört mittlerweise zu unserem alltäglichen Wortschatz. Wir haben immer die Position vertreten, dass Abgeordnete und alle anderen Menschen mit Erwerbseinkommen in die gesetzliche Rentenkasse einzahlen sollten. Damit ist dann eben nicht nur den öffentlichen Systemen geholfen, sondern dann würden vielmehr eben auch - Sie haben ja von der Vergleichbarkeit der Abgeordneten mit allen anderen im Land gesprochen - Maßstäbe wieder geradegerückt.\n\nFazit: Eine echte Reform des Abgeordnetenrechts wäre dringend notwendig gewesen. Die Große Koalition hat aber nun mit ihrem Turboverfahren diese Chance auf Jahre vertan; denn es ist klar, dass dieses Gesetz über Jahre Bestand haben wird. Ich und meine Fraktion, vielleicht auch die Öffentlichkeit, haben gelernt: Große Koalition bedeutet nicht automatisch großer Entwurf.\"\n9490,annette-widmann-mauz,\"Herr Präsident! Herr Abgeordneter, die Aufklärung der Ursachen von statistisch auffällig hohen Zahlen von Krebserkrankungen in bestimmten Regionen liegt in der Zuständigkeit der jeweiligen Landesbehörden. Die Ursachenerforschung wegen erhöhter Krebserkrankungszahlen im Landkreis Rotenburg (Wümme) erfolgt derzeit durch den zuständigen Landkreis, unterstützt von verschiedenen Behörden des Landes Niedersachsen, unter anderem des Landesgesundheitsamtes sowie des Epidemiologischen Krebsregisters Niedersachsen. Zurzeit läuft dort die Auswertung einer Befragung sämtlicher Bewohner der Samtgemeinde Bothel. Circa 7 000 Fragebögen wurden verschickt, circa 5 000 sind zurückgekommen und werden derzeit geprüft und ausgewertet.\n\nAuf der Grundlage der Informationen aus der Befragung wird versucht werden, die Ursache für die vermehrten Krebserkrankungen zu identifizieren. Zusätzlich hat das Niedersächsische Ministerium für Soziales, Gesundheit und Gleichstellung eine Literaturstudie zu den Risikofaktoren des in diesem Zusammenhang gehäuft auftretenden multiplen Myeloms in Auftrag gegeben. Deren Ergebnisse werden in der zweiten Jahreshälfte erwartet. Sie sollen mit den Ergebnissen aus der Befragung abgeglichen werden, um daraus gegebenenfalls auf Landes- oder kommunaler Ebene weitere Schritte abzuleiten.\n\nSehr geehrter Herr Abgeordneter, ich glaube, zunächst einmal ist es wichtig, die Ergebnisse der Umfrage und die Literaturstudie abzuwarten; denn nur so kann man die Ursächlichkeit klären, nur so kann man klären, ob ein Zusammenhang zwischen der Erdgasförderung in der Region und den Erkrankungen besteht. Wenn diese Ergebnisse vorliegen, dann wird zu entscheiden sein, ob und welche weiter gehenden Untersuchungen durchzuführen sind. Wir warten sehr gespannt auf die Ergebnisse der Befragung und die Studie.\n\nZunächst einmal: Das Bundesgesundheitsministerium ist an den gesundheitlichen Auswirkungen interessiert, die sich gegebenenfalls aus verschiedenen Förderungen ergeben können. Dafür haben wir bisher keine belastbaren Daten. Diese werden derzeit ermittelt. Wenn es darüber hinausgehende Thesen gibt, die in andere Ressorts der Bundesregierung fallen, wird sich die Bundesregierung auch damit auseinandersetzen. Aber ich bitte um Nachsicht, dass das Bundesgesundheitsministerium zunächst natürlich die gesundheitlichen Auswirkungen besonders im Blick hat. Dazu brauchen wir valide Kenntnisse. Diese sind erst Mitte des Jahres nach der Auswertung zu erwarten.\"\n2985,gregor-gysi,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Sie haben sich zu einem Haushalt entschlossen, mit dem Sie alles, was wichtig ist, verschieben oder ausfallen lassen. Die Kindergelderhöhung wird verschoben, die Abschaffung der kalten Progression wird verschoben - es wird also weiterhin so sein, dass zum Beispiel Leute, die 3 Prozent brutto mehr erhalten, netto nur 0,5 Prozent mehr verdienen -, die Investitionen in Bildung, in digitale Netze, in Wasserwege, in Brücken und in Straßen fallen aus.\n\nUnd warum? Nur, um zum ersten Mal einen ausgeglichenen Haushalt vorzulegen! Für ein sehr zweifelhaftes Denkmal verzichten Sie auf alles, was Zukunft ausmacht. Das kann nicht in Ordnung sein; das wissen Sie selbst.\n\nLassen Sie mich zunächst etwas zur Außenpolitik sagen. Außenminister Kerry hat nun voll Stolz erklärt, dass es eine Koalition der Willigen gegen ISIS unter Einschluss der Türkei und Deutschlands gibt.\n\nMich interessiert die Türkei. Bisher war es so, dass die Türkei potenzielle Kämpfer der terroristischen Söldner-armee ISIS in Richtung Syrien und in Richtung Irak unbehelligt durchgelassen hat. Transporte mit Hilfsgütern wurden gestoppt. Interessanterweise hat die Türkei einen Tag nach unserer Debatte vom 1. September dieses Jahres die Transporte mit Hilfsgütern durchgelassen. Sind Sie sich wirklich sicher, dass die Türkei ihre Haltung zu ISIS grundsätzlich geändert hat? Ich mache da erst einmal ein Fragezeichen.\n\nDann ist die Frage: Wie will sich nun eigentlich die Bundesregierung beteiligen? Sie haben schon Waffen an Peschmerga geliefert. Das war falsch, das bleibt falsch. Dem Irak fehlt vieles, aber keine Waffen. Es gibt viele Möglichkeiten: Man kann die humanitären Hilfen für Kurdinnen und Kurden, für Jesiden, für Christinnen und Christen und viele andere ausbauen. Man kann eine irakische Einheitsregierung unterstützen, damit es keine Ausgrenzungen mehr gibt: weder von Sunniten noch von Schiiten noch von Christinnen und Christen, Jesiden oder anderen. Man kann Gespräche anbahnen. Man kann so vieles tun. Das Einzige, worauf die Regierung kommt, sind Waffenlieferungen. Das ist wirklich absurd; das muss ich ganz klar sagen.\n\nIch habe noch weitere Fragen: Was ist überhaupt die Koalition der Willigen? Wann kehren wir zum Völkerrecht zurück?\n\nZuständig ist der Sicherheitsrat der Vereinten Nationen, der auf der Grundlage der Charta der Vereinten Nationen zu entscheiden hat, nicht irgendwelche Koalitionen der Willigen.\n\nWarum leiten Sie diesbezüglich nichts ein? Ich glaube, Sie leiten deshalb nichts ein, weil das Verhältnis der USA zu Russland besonders schlecht ist. Aber wir wissen doch: Das Ganze geht nur mit, nicht ohne und schon gar nicht gegen Russland. Die internationalen Probleme sind nur mit Russland zu lösen, egal ob ich an ISIS denke, ob ich an die Probleme im Iran denke, ob ich an Syrien denke. Wir sind doch auf Russland angewiesen.\n\nSie, Herr Kauder, haben hier am 1. September gesagt, dass ISIS mit dem falschen Krieg der USA und anderer Staaten gegen den Irak, der 2003 begonnen hat, nichts zu tun hat, weil ISIS in Syrien entstanden ist. Das stimmt, da haben Sie recht. Aber ohne den Bürgerkrieg in Syrien wäre ISIS nie entstanden. Ohne den Krieg gegen den Irak wäre ISIS niemals über die Grenze von Syrien in den Irak gekommen. Dort gibt es gar keinen Staat mehr. Es gibt auch keine Kontrolle mehr. Daran ist der Krieg von 2003 schuld. Deshalb gibt es sehr wohl einen Zusammenhang.\n\nIch sage Ihnen noch etwas. Die PKK und die PYD in Syrien - das hat hier auch der außenpolitische Sprecher der Unionsfraktion eingestanden - schützen inzwischen die Jesiden, die Christinnen und Christen. Wir müssen unsere Politik ändern. Prüfen Sie das PKK-Verbot und heben Sie es auf! Haben Sie endlich die Kraft, ISIS zu verbieten! Es wird höchste Zeit, dass das geschieht.\n\nIn der Sendung Panorama wurde Folgendes gezeigt: Bei einer Demonstration waren auf der einen Seite Demonstranten mit PKK-Fahnen zu sehen, und die Polizei griff sofort ein. Auf der anderen Seite waren Demonstranten mit ISIS-Fahnen zu sehen, und es passierte nichts. - Da muss sich in unserem Land etwas gründlich ändern.\n\nIch freue mich sehr, dass alle Dachverbände der Muslime in Deutschland ISIS scharf verurteilt haben und für den 19. September dieses Jahres zu einer Großkundgebung aufrufen.\n\nWir alle beurteilen Assad überwiegend negativ. Viele haben gegen Assad gekämpft, aber wir haben immer gesagt: Wir brauchen diesen Kontakt. Wir brauchen die Möglichkeiten zu Gesprächen. - Jetzt wird es ganz deutlich: Wir brauchen Assad auch im Kampf gegen ISIS. Es ist also nie klug, übertrieben zu reagieren.\n\nWissen Sie: Ihre ganze Außenpolitik wirkt hilflos, wirr und durcheinander. Das ist viel zu wenig. Dafür ist die Verantwortung Deutschlands zu groß. Ich sage Ihnen noch etwas: Im Kalten Krieg hat der Westen gesiegt. Aber er konnte nicht aufhören, zu siegen. Die alte Ordnung wurde zerstört, und keine neue friedenschaffende Ordnung hergestellt.\n\nEs gibt eine besondere Verantwortung der USA, Russlands und Chinas, dann erst kommt die EU mit Großbritannien, Frankreich und Deutschland. Dieser Verantwortung werden Sie alle nicht gerecht. Das verunsichert die Menschen sehr. Das macht sie so unzufrieden. Sie wissen gar nicht, wohin das Ganze läuft.\n\nIch komme zur Ukraine. Endlich gibt es eine Vereinbarung über eine Feuerpause, einen Waffenstillstand. Das ist für mich schon ein Durchbruch. Der Donbass bleibt selbstverständlich Bestandteil der Ukraine. Es geht dann um weitgehende Autonomierechte. Was wir jetzt brauchen - das sage ich Ihnen schon jetzt -, ist ein Marshallplan für die Ostukraine. Wir brauchen regionale Wahlen.\n\nEs gibt Extremisten auf beiden Seiten. Es gibt die sogenannten Freiwilligenverbände der ukrainischen Armee, die faschistisch strukturiert sind. Aber es gibt auch bei den Separatisten extremistische Kräfte, die den Anschluss des Donbass an Russland fordern und von einem großrussischen Reich träumen.\n\nAlle Fragen müssen am Verhandlungstisch geklärt werden.\n\nWie Finnland sollte die Ukraine nicht zur NATO gehören. Und ich sage Ihnen: Die NATO-Gipfel-Beschlüsse sind absolut kontraproduktiv - schnelle Eingreiftruppe, Aufrüstung im Baltikum und in Polen. Der Vertrag zwischen der NATO und Russland sieht aber vor, dass eine dauerhafte Stationierung von NATO-Streitkräften in Osteuropa verboten ist. Wollen Sie diesen Vertrag verletzen? Was sollen die geplanten Änderungen? Russland wird darauf wiederum mit einer Änderung seiner Militärdoktrin reagieren. Es besteht die Gefahr einer neuen Runde des Rüstungswettlaufs. Das Minsker Abkommen über die Feuerpause - und zwar unbefristet - muss doch ein Anlass zur Deeskalation auch durch NATO und EU sein. Deshalb sind auch die neuen Sanktionsbeschlüsse falsch; denn sie führen zu einer Eskalation, obwohl das Gegenteil notwendig ist.\n\nIch sage Ihnen noch etwas: Die Sanktionen und ihre Antworten schaden - völlig unnötig - der Wirtschaft und der Bevölkerung in Deutschland - übrigens insbesondere in den neuen Bundesländern. Denn 80 Prozent der Exporte von Deutschland nach Russland kommen aus den neuen Bundesländern. Da wird das gravierende Folgen haben.\n\nIch sagen Ihnen: Eine vernünftige Politik wäre, die Sanktionen unverzüglich aufzuheben.\n\nUnd was macht die NATO? Sie führt acht Manöver in der Ukraine durch - aktuell ein Manöver im Schwarzen Meer, zusammen mit den USA, der Türkei, Spanien und der Ukraine. Dann gibt es Northern Coast, ein Manöver in der Ostsee, an dem auch die Bundeswehr mit 1 000 Soldaten teilnimmt. Was soll diese Provokation Russlands?\n\nDie NATO und vor allem die USA fordern, 2 Prozent der Wirtschaftsleistung in den Verteidigungsetat zu stellen - 2 Prozent. Deutschland ist gegenwärtig bei 1,3 Prozent. Wenn wir diesen Wunsch erfüllten, müssten wir rund 24 Milliarden Euro mehr für Rüstung ausgeben.\n\nFrau von der Leyen, Sie - das habe ich doch richtig verstanden? - wollen nicht so viel ausgeben, aber schon mehr. Und die Kanzlerin habe ich so verstanden, dass sie eigentlich nicht mehr ausgeben will. Ich hoffe, Sie verständigen sich darauf, weniger auszugeben - auf gar keinen Fall mehr! Das will ich auch deutlich sagen.\n\nIch will Ihnen ein Beispiel nennen: Nur mit den Atomwaffen der acht Atommächte kann die Menschheit 1 000-mal ausgelöscht werden. Reicht das nicht? Was soll zusätzliche Aufrüstung? Müssen wir die Menschheit 1 500-mal auslöschen können? Wo soll das hinführen?\n\nIch sage Ihnen ganz klar: Die USA, die NATO und auch Deutschland sind hoch gerüstet. Wir brauchen keine Aufrüstung mehr.\n\nMit Aufrüstung erreicht man auch nicht mehr Frieden - im Gegenteil. Und ich sage jetzt auch deutlich: Mit Aufrüstungsreden und Aufrüstungsentscheidungen erreichen wir nichts. Was wir brauchen, sind Abrüstungsreden und Abrüstungsentscheidungen.\n\nDie Bundesregierung - und damit auch EU und NATO - werden immer abhängiger von der US-Regierung. Warum können Sie diesbezüglich eigentlich nicht souveräner, nicht eigenständiger auftreten? Das geht mir so auf die Nerven; das muss ich Ihnen ehrlich sagen. Die NSA hört unsere gesamte Bevölkerung ab, betreibt Wirtschaftsspionage, aber Sie haben Angst, irgendetwas Wirksames dagegen zu unternehmen.\n\nIch nenne Ihnen nur ein Beispiel: In Wiesbaden wird gerade ein hohes Gebäude für die NSA gebaut. Warum haben Sie denn nicht den Mumm, der US-Regierung zu sagen: Unter diesen Bedingungen, ohne No-Spy-Abkommen, ohne ein Abkommen, das gegenseitige Spionage ausschließt, kann die NSA niemals in dieses Gebäude einziehen. Die Volkssolidarität, Attac oder andere Leute, die etwas Vernünftiges machen, können da gerne einziehen, aber nicht die NSA.\n\nZeigen Sie mal etwas Mumm!\n\nIch sage Ihnen auch: Dieses Duckmäusertum, das Sie an den Tag legen, führt nicht zu Freundschaft, sondern zu Verachtung. Wenn man Freundschaft will, muss man sich als Erstes Respekt erarbeiten. Und mit solchen Entscheidungen erarbeitet man sich Respekt, den wir dringend benötigen.\n\nNun höre ich aber auch, dass der BND die Türkei abhört. Aber ich habe das doch richtig verstanden: Die USA, Deutschland und die Türkei - wenn auch gegen unseren Willen - führten zusammen Krieg in Jugoslawien, dann in Afghanistan, und gleichzeitig behandeln sie sich wie Kriegsgegner. Das ist ja ein dolles Bündnis, kann ich nur sagen. Riesenfragezeichen!\n\nEin weiterer Punkt sind die Abkommen. Eines liegt schon vor - das CETA-Abkommen mit Kanada -; das andere, das TTIP-Abkommen, ist geplant. Ich habe dazu schon einiges gesagt. Was uns am meisten stört und befremdet, ist die Investitionsschutzklausel. Ich komme noch darauf zurück.\n\nDie Bundesregierung sagt, sie sei auch gegen die Investitionsschutzklausel. Sie ist aber in dem Abkommen vorgesehen. Ich bin sehr gespannt, was Sie diesbezüglich vorhaben. Zu hören ist schon, dass die Vorteile so groß sind, dass man vielleicht doch damit leben kann, was eine Katastrophe wäre, sowohl im Verhältnis zu Kanada als auch zu den USA.\n\nWas bedeutet denn eine Investitionsschutzklausel? Wenn wir in Berlin einmal eine vernünftigere Regierung bekämen - das ist schließlich möglich, zum Beispiel mit Linken -\n\n- es freut mich, dass Sie sich jetzt schon darauf freuen -,\n\nund die beschlösse plötzlich, dass es mehr Mitbestimmung gibt oder dass Konzerne etwas mehr Steuern zahlen müssen, dann könnten die kanadischen und amerikanischen Unternehmen sagen: „Das geht nicht; es verstößt gegen das Verbot von Investitionshemmnissen;\n\ndenn wir haben unseren Sitz hier unter anderen Voraussetzungen gegründet“, und Schadenersatz fordern.\n\nDas ist eine Katastrophe, weil Sie jede vernünftigere Politik ausschließen. Deshalb darf das niemals in Kraft treten.\n\nEs gibt einen Zeugen. Dieser Zeuge ist kein Linker, sondern der Ministerpräsident Australiens. Er hat gesagt, er würde das Abkommen nie wieder unterschreiben, und zwar aus folgendem Grund: In Australien wurde, nachdem das Abkommen unterschrieben wurde, angeordnet, dass auf Zigarettenschachteln der Hinweis erfolgen muss, dass Zigaretten ungesund sind. Es war ein bisschen spät, aber irgendwann hat auch Australien das angeordnet. Der Punkt ist, dass das Unternehmen Philip Morris, das dort schon seinen Sitz hatte, sagte: „Das geht nicht; das verstößt gegen die Investitionsschutzklausel“, und Schadenersatz in Milliardenhöhe forderte.\n\nWollen Sie Politik wirklich unmöglich machen? Das geht nicht. Stoppen Sie das Ganze so schnell wie möglich!\n\nAußerdem erleben wir eine Entstaatlichung, und zwar in dreifacher Hinsicht: erstens durch CETA und TTIP. Denn es sollen keine ordentlichen Gerichte zuständig sein. Es gibt dann nur ein Schiedsgericht, bestehend aus drei Advokaten, die über Milliardenbeträge entscheiden sollen. Der ordentliche Gerichtsweg ist ausgeschlossen. Das ist eine Entstaatlichung. Es verstößt auch gegen die Rechtsstaatlichkeit. Das ist nicht hinnehmbar.\n\nDie zweite Entstaatlichung, die noch viel schlimmer ist, erleben wir in Somalia, Irak, Libyen und Afghanistan. Nirgendwo funktioniert der Staat noch. In Ägypten, Syrien und in der Ukraine besteht die Gefahr der Zerstörung des Staates.\n\nDas Dritte ist eine Entstaatlichung in unserer Gesellschaft. Darauf möchte ich Sie gerne hinweisen, weil ich finde, dass wir sehr viel genauer darauf achten müssen. Es gibt ein oberstes Zehntel in unserer Gesellschaft, das sich nicht mehr für den Staat interessiert. Diese Menschen gehen zwar formal wählen, aber mehr interessiert sie nicht, weil sie alles, ob Firmensitz oder Wohnsitz, danach begründen, wie die Rechtsvorschriften in welchem Teil der Welt aussehen, wo welche Steuerregeln und Arbeitsschutzregeln herrschen und welche Löhne kassiert werden etc. Sie haben sich vom Staat innerlich völlig verabschiedet.\n\nZu meinem großen Bedauern ist es so, dass wir zwar Teile des unteren Viertels erreichen - andere auch -, aber bestimmte Teile des unteren Viertels erreichen wir gar nicht mehr. Diese Menschen haben sich völlig vom Staat verabschiedet und gehen auch nicht mehr wählen. Was glauben Sie, wie oft ich versuche, mit ihnen zu reden. Ich stelle eine Entwicklung fest, die mir große Sorgen macht, weil sie für die Demokratie ungeheuer schädlich ist.\n\nWir müssen erreichen, dass die gesamte Gesellschaft wieder am gesellschaftlichen Leben teilnimmt. Davon sind wir weit entfernt.\n\nJetzt werde ich auch etwas zu den Ursachen sagen, zum Beispiel unsere Vermögensentwicklung. Es gibt Zahlen, die einen umhauen. Die EU-Millionäre, von denen es eine reichliche Anzahl gibt, haben ein Geldvermögen - es geht nur um das Geld, ohne Grundstücke und Unternehmen - von 17 Billionen Euro. Die gesamten Staatsschulden der EU belaufen sich auf 11 Billionen Euro. Stellen Sie sich vor, sie würden uns das ganze Geld überweisen. Dann könnten wir alle Schulden bezahlen und ihnen sogar noch 6 Billionen zurücküberweisen. Dann wären sie immer noch nicht arm. Aber so weit geht noch nicht einmal die Linke.\n\nWir sagen aber: Wir brauchen endlich eine Millionärsteuer in der Europäischen Union.\n\nAber Sie weigern sich, ein Stück mehr Gerechtigkeit herzustellen.\n\nGehen wir einmal zu Deutschland über. In Deutschland haben wir ein Geldvermögen - passen Sie jetzt auf, Herr Kauder! Sie müssen sich die Zahlen merken - von 10 Billionen Euro. Jetzt gibt es eine neue Studie der -Europäischen Zentralbank, die besagt: 1 Prozent unserer Bevölkerung - 1 Prozent, ich bitte Sie! - besitzt 32 Prozent davon. Das sind weit über 3,5 Billionen Euro. 50 Prozent - die in finanzieller Hinsicht unteren 50 Prozent - unserer Haushalte und damit die Hälfte unserer Bevölkerung besitzt 1 Prozent davon. Nun sage ich, was für mich am erschreckendsten ist. Diese Hälfte besaß 1998 4 Prozent. Meine Damen und Herren von Union und Sozialdemokratie, aus 4 Prozent werden bei uns nicht Schritt für Schritt 5 und dann 6 Prozent, sondern aus 4 Prozent wird 1 Prozent. Werden es in fünf Jahren 0,5 Prozent sein? Die Schere geht immer weiter aus-einander. Das ist unerträglich.\n\nDie schlimmste Umverteilung von unten nach oben hatten wir durch die Agenda 2010 in Verantwortung von SPD und Grünen. Seit 2000 haben wir - das ist dieselbe Entwicklung - einen Anstieg der Unternehmens- und Vermögenseinkommen, Herr Kauder, um 60 Prozent zu verzeichnen. In derselben Zeit sind die Reallöhne um 3,7 Prozent gesunken. Erklären Sie das den Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern, die das ganze Vermögen geschaffen haben! Ich jedenfalls finde diese Entwicklung unerträglich. Wir müssen die Umverteilung von unten nach oben stoppen und eine von oben nach unten einleiten, um ein Stück Gerechtigkeit in unserer Gesellschaft zu erreichen.\n\nDie Bundeskanzlerin und ihr Vizekanzler beklagen den Investitionsstau seit zehn Jahren. Einen solchen Stau gibt es tatsächlich; das stimmt. Allerdings, Frau Bundeskanzlerin, wer regiert denn seit zehn Jahren? Ich frage Sie das so ganz nebenbei. Ich habe vorhin gesagt, dass es sich um einen Verzicht auf Zukunft handelt, wenn die notwendigen Investitionen ausbleiben. Aber schauen wir uns das einmal genauer an: 1991 investierten die Unternehmen noch 40 Prozent ihrer Gewinne, 2013 nur noch 9 Prozent. Warum? Wir brauchen sehr dringend Investitionen. Das wichtigste Gebiet ist die Bildung. Gestern wurde ein neuer OECD-Bericht veröffentlicht. Er besagt, dass in keinem anderen Industrieland der Bildungserfolg von Kindern so abhängig von der sozialen Herkunft ist wie in Deutschland. Auch das ist ein Skandal. Ich möchte Chancengleichheit für alle Kinder. Deshalb sage ich Ihnen: Wir brauchen endlich Kindertagesstätten für Kinder vom nullten bis zum sechsten Lebensjahr in ganz Deutschland, die ganztägig geöffnet sind, und zwar in ausreichender Anzahl, mit kleinen Kindergruppen, mit gut ausgebildeten Erzieherinnen und Erziehern, die endlich anständig verdienen müssen, und das alles selbstverständlich gebührenfrei einschließlich eines vollwertigen, gesunden Mittagessens. Das müssen wir in Deutschland erreichen.\n\nIch sage Ihnen zu den Schulen Folgendes: Ich bin ein Anhänger der Gemeinschaftsschule. Dazu werde ich jetzt nicht viel sagen, nur so viel: Sie sollten sich einmal die Studie zum Vergleich zwischen Gemeinschaftsschulen und getrennten Schulen anschauen. Wissen Sie, was dabei herausgekommen ist?\n\n- Ich werde Ihnen sagen, was auch in Bayern dabei herausgekommen ist. - In den Gemeinschaftsschulen sind nicht nur die schlechteren Schülerinnen und Schüler besser als die in getrennten Schulen, sondern auch die besten und besseren Schülerinnen und Schüler sind besser. Sie haben es nicht begriffen. Nur in Gemeinschaftsschulen lernen sie sozial. Wenn Sie die Schülerinnen und Schüler isolieren, dann bringen Sie ihnen nichts bei.\n\nAbgesehen davon möchte ich, dass alle Schülerinnen und Schüler ein vollwertiges, gesundes Mittagessen gebührenfrei bekommen. Ich möchte Schülerinnen und Schüler nicht in der Suppenküche sehen.\n\nKommen Sie mir nicht mit dem Argument, dass das zu viel Geld kostet. Für jede Bank haben Sie Milliarden parat. Investieren Sie das Geld endlich in die Bildung! Das wäre wirklich wichtig.\n\nDes Weiteren haben wir ein Problem bei der Nachfrage. Es tut mir leid, aber das kann ich Ihnen nicht ersparen. Die Reallöhne sind gesunken. Das Rentenniveau ist gesunken. Die prekäre Beschäftigung hat enorm zugenommen. Deutschland hat in Europa den größten Niedriglohnsektor. Er ist größer als der in Griechenland. Denken Sie einmal darüber nach, um welche Zahlen es sich dabei handelt! Nun beschwert sich die belgische Regierung bei der Europäischen Union über Deutschland wegen Lohndumping, weil zum Beispiel die Arbeit auf Schlachthöfen in Deutschland so schlecht bezahlt wird, dass die belgischen Unternehmen niederkonkurriert werden. Ich finde, dass wir auch darüber nachdenken müssen.\n\nHerr Gabriel, es tut mir leid, aber Sie haben gesagt, dass kein Geld für Investitionen da ist - ich habe Ihnen vorhin gesagt, dass Sie damit auf Zukunft verzichten -, darauf kann ich nur erwidern: Die Schuldenbremse war eben Unsinn. Die erste war okay. Aber die neue Schuldenbremse, die Sie erfunden und im Grundgesetz verankert haben, geht völlig daneben und ist völlig überflüssig.\n\nIch sage Ihnen aber auch ganz klar: Wer Investitionen und soziale Gerechtigkeit will, muss Steuergerechtigkeit herstellen. Wer behauptet, dass er in der Lage sei, soziale Gerechtigkeit herzustellen und Investitionen zu ermöglichen, ohne Steuergerechtigkeit herzustellen, der sagt nicht die Wahrheit; das wissen Sie ganz genau. Das geht nicht. Aber hier haben Sie null Mut.\n\nWas passiert, wenn wir wirklich den von Ihnen, Herr Gabriel, vorgeschlagenen Weg gehen und die Investitionen privatisieren, wenn also die Unternehmen das Ganze übernehmen? Wollen Sie wirklich die öffentliche Daseinsvorsorge noch stärker privatisieren? Die Politik verliert dann die Zuständigkeit für Energie- und Wasserpreise. Wir haben dann auch nichts mehr mit den Preisen für Mobilität zu tun. Wir sind dann nicht mehr für Wohnungen, Krankenhäuser und Bildung zuständig. Wollen Sie das alles ernsthaft privatisieren? Das kann doch nicht Ihr Ernst sein, wirklich nicht.\n\nAußerdem: Wenn öffentliche Investitionen privat -finanziert werden, wollen die Privaten auch eine Rendite haben. Die wollen etwas daran verdienen. Die Gebühren müssen dann alle Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler, alle Bürgerinnen und Bürger bezahlen. Auch das ist unerträglich.\n\nDann sage ich Ihnen noch etwas. Ich muss Sie fragen, Herr Schäuble: Stimmt es, dass Sie ernsthaft darüber nachdenken, die Bundesstraßen zu verkaufen? Also wirklich, lassen Sie den ganzen Quatsch mit der Maut. Das bringt nichts, liebe CSU. Packen Sie die einfach weg. Das bringt gar nichts.\n\nAber einmal abgesehen davon: Wenn Sie wirklich die Bundesstraßen verkaufen, dann sage ich Ihnen, was passieren wird. Dann werden die Länder anfangen, die Länderstraßen zu verkaufen, dann werden die Kommunen anfangen, die Kommunalstraßen zu verkaufen. Ich weiß gar nicht, wie viele Arten von Maut wir dann überall bezahlen müssen. Das lasse ich alles weg. Aber eines sage ich Ihnen, Herr Schäuble: Wenn das je passieren sollte, dann muss ich Ihnen ein bisschen drohen. Dann werde ich mit allen Mitteln versuchen, die Straße zu kaufen, in der Sie wohnen.\n\nDann wird es für Sie sehr teuer, wenn Sie nach Hause wollen. Außerdem benenne ich dann die Straße um. Es wird Ihnen am peinlichsten sein, immer schreiben zu müssen, dass Sie Zum Gysi Nummer 1 wohnen. Aber das mache ich dann. Das ist garantiert.\n\nIm Übrigen hat der Internationale Währungsfonds - wie Sie wissen, ist das keine linke Organisation - festgestellt, dass wir mit etwas mehr Steuergerechtigkeit 80 Milliarden Euro pro Jahr mehr einnehmen könnten. Dann hätten wir das Geld für Bildung und Investitionen, das wir dringend benötigen.\n\nDie Europäische Zentralbank hat nun den Leitzins auf den niedrigsten Stand in der Geschichte gesetzt: auf 0,05 Prozent. Ich will Ihnen sagen, was das bedeutet. Die Sparerinnen und Sparer in Deutschland, auch die kleinen und mittleren, bekommen so gut wie gar keine Zinsen. Da wir eine Inflationsrate haben, das heißt alle Dienstleistungen und Waren teurer werden, man aber keine Zinsen bekommt, verlieren die Sparguthaben Jahr für Jahr an Wert. Das heißt, die Sparerinnen und Sparer bezahlen die ganze Krise. Das kommt dabei heraus. Dasselbe passiert mit den Lebensversicherungen, weil auch die an Wert verlieren. Bei den Lebensversicherungen nehme ich Ihnen eine Sache schon übel, nämlich dass Sie die Leistungen aus Lebensversicherungen hier im Bundestag gekürzt haben,\n\nund das am Tag des Viertelfinalspiels Deutschland gegen Frankreich bei der Fußballweltmeisterschaft, und zwar in der Hoffnung, dass es keiner mitbekommt. Ich finde das ziemlich übel; das muss ich Ihnen sagen.\n\nAußerdem habe ich noch eine Frage: Wenn wir auf Sparguthaben so niedrige Zinsen bekommen, warum gibt es dann eigentlich noch so hohe Zinsen bei Dispokrediten und anderen Krediten? Wenn schon niedrige Zinsen, dann müssten die Banken und Sparkassen auch diesbezüglich ihre Politik ändern.\n\nAber ich sage Ihnen auch: Sie werden mit privaten Investitionen in die Wirtschaft nicht wirklich weiterkommen. Nehmen wir den Süden Europas: 25 Prozent Arbeitslosigkeit, 50 Prozent Jugendarbeitslosigkeit, zum Beispiel in Griechenland und in Spanien. Wer will da investieren? Wer soll denn bei sinkenden Löhnen, Renten und Sozialleistungen noch einkaufen können? Daran, dass selbst die Deutsche Bundesbank für Deutschland höhere Löhne fordert, weil sie sieht, dass die Nachfrage permanent zurückgeht, sehen Sie, welchen Stand wir diesbezüglich erreicht haben.\n\nWas mich auch stört, ist, dass die EZB wieder die Schrottpapiere von den Banken aufkaufen will. Das ist doch der Gipfel der Frechheit. Die Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler haften wie immer für alle Banken. Ich möchte, dass endlich Banken für Banken haften.\n\nKein Industrieunternehmen, kein Bäckermeister hat die Chance, dass Sie die Schulden übernehmen, aber bei jeder Bank übernehmen wir die Schulden. Das geht nicht mehr, das muss endlich beendet werden.\n\nDie ganze falsche Bankenrettung in der Euro-Krise war ein Aufbauprogramm für die AfD. Wenn wir das beenden wollen, müssen Sie auch diesbezüglich die Politik ändern.\n\nLiebe Frau Bundeskanzlerin, wir hatten einen kleinen Disput hier beim letzten Haushalt, und zwar über die Mütterrente. Das Problem muss ich auflösen. Sie haben gesagt, dass wir schon jetzt einen hohen staatlichen Zuschuss an die gesetzliche Rentenversicherung zahlen und der 2018 sogar erhöht werden soll. Das mag sein, aber das ändert an folgendem Umstand nichts: Jetzt gibt es eine Erhöhung der Mütterrente. Diese Erhöhung kostet Geld, und jetzt erhöhen wir nicht den staatlichen Zuschuss. Also muss diese Erhöhung, weil wir den staatlichen Zuschuss nicht erhöhen, allein von den Beitragszahlerinnen und Beitragszahlern bezahlt werden.\n\nDas heißt, die Lidl-Kassiererin und jedes Unternehmen bezahlen das,\n\naber Frau Merkel, Herr Gabriel, Herr Kauder und Herr Gysi nicht. Das ist und bleibt grob ungerecht.\n\nSie hätten ja einen anderen Weg gehen können. Sie hätten ja sagen können: Die Erhöhung der Mütterrente kostet soundso viel Geld, und in diesem Umfang erhöhen wir den Zuschuss. - Dann hätten wir es aus Steuermitteln finanziert. Da Frau Merkel, Herr Gabriel, Herr Kauder und Herr Gysi mehr Steuern als die Lidl-Kassiererin zahlen, wäre das gerecht gewesen. So bezahlt sie es allein. Ich kann es ihr nicht erklären, und Sie können es ihr auch nicht erklären. Das ist die Wahrheit.\n\nJetzt sage ich Ihnen auch etwas zur deutschen Einheit. Ganz aktuell ist in der Pflege ein Mindestlohn vereinbart worden: Ost 8,65 Euro, West 9,40 Euro - und das 24 Jahre nach der deutschen Einheit. Ich bitte Sie! Wer die deutsche Einheit will, muss endlich für gleiche Löhne bei gleicher Arbeitszeit in Ost und West und für eine gleiche Rente bei gleicher Lebensleistung und für eine gleiche Mütterrente in Ost und West streiten.\n\nWer das nicht macht, der ist eben nicht für die deutsche Einheit.\n\nIch sage Ihnen, Herr Kauder, auch wenn es Sie ärgert: Inzwischen ist die Linke die Partei der deutschen Einheit. Sie verfolgen diese Ziele nicht.\n\n- Ich wusste, dass ich Ihre Zustimmung bekomme.\n\nNun muss ich noch ein Thema anschneiden: das Thema „Überwachung der Linken“. Unser Spitzenkandidat in Thüringen, Bodo Ramelow, hat ja einen großen Erfolg vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht erreicht; schon deshalb hat er sich vieles verdient. Aber einmal abgesehen davon: Bundesinnenminister de Maizière hat daraufhin entschieden, dass die Beobachtung aller Mitglieder unserer Fraktion durch das Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz eingestellt wird.\n\nDas begrüße ich. Die Gerichte haben entschieden, dass alle Unterlagen über uns zu vernichten sind. Auch das begrüße ich. Erst die überflüssige Arbeit, das alles herzustellen, und nun haben sie die Arbeit, das alles zu vernichten. Aber das sei ihnen auch gegönnt. Wir haben -damit der Bundesrepublik Deutschland zu mehr Rechtsstaatlichkeit und Demokratie verholfen.\n\nNun habe ich 16 Bundesländer angeschrieben - meine Herren und Damen von der CSU, hören Sie gut zu - und gefragt, ob sie weiterhin die Bundestagsabgeordneten der Linken beobachten. 15 Bundesländer haben „Wir haben das noch nie gemacht“ oder „Wir haben das schon längst oder jetzt eingestellt“ geantwortet. Nur ein Land, Bayern, hat geantwortet, dass es bei der Beobachtung bleiben soll. Also, wir sehen uns vor Gericht wieder. Wir werden auch Bayern zu Rechtsstaatlichkeit und Demokratie verhelfen.\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Man kann ja in Bayern als Linker nicht im öffentlichen Dienst arbeiten. Wir wollen auch die Interessen des öffentlichen Dienstes vertreten. Wie sollen wir das eigentlich machen, abgesehen davon, dass uns dadurch natürlich auch Gelder verloren gehen? Jetzt habe ich mir dazu im Internet Informationen beschafft. Also, hören Sie einmal zu: Da wird gefragt, wenn man sich beim öffentlichen Dienst in Bayern bewirbt, ob man Mitglied des Verbandes der Kleingärtner, Siedler und Kleintierzüchter der DDR - so einer linksextremistischen Massenorganisation - war.\n\nWer in der DDR Äpfel geerntet oder Kaninchen gezüchtet hat, soll also keine Chance im öffentlichen Dienst in Bayern haben können. Auch Schwachsinn muss Grenzen kennen.\n\nLassen Sie mich noch etwas sagen, was mir wichtig ist: Sie alle behaupten doch, Parteien der Mitte zu sein. Aber dass die mittleren Einkommen in unserer Gesellschaft aufgrund des Steuerbauchs alles bezahlen, das nehmen Sie nicht zur Kenntnis. Es gibt nur eine Partei, die Linke, die will, dass der Steuerbauch beseitigt wird. Wir vertreten hier die Mitte, nicht Sie.\n\nDas ist die Wahrheit. Wir vertreten die unteren Einkommen, aber auch die mittleren.\n\nZum Schluss sage ich Ihnen eins: Ich will nicht rechthaberisch sein.\n\n- Gut, dann sage ich: Ich will nicht mehr rechthaberisch sein. Das können Sie akzeptieren. Passen Sie auf! Ich habe mich in meinem Leben auch geirrt; das bestreite ich gar nicht.\n\nWer hatte bei Afghanistan recht? Wir oder die anderen Fraktionen? Inzwischen wissen Sie alle, dass wir recht hatten. Dieser Krieg war falsch. Wer hatte bei der Praxisgebühr recht? Sie, die das für eine geniale Erfindung hielten, oder wir? Inzwischen ist sie ja abgeschafft.\n\nWer hatte bei der Beobachtung durch das Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz recht? Sie oder wir? Wir hatten recht, wie das Bundesverfassungsgericht festgestellt hat. Und wer hatte beim Mindestlohn recht? Sie haben mich alle beschimpft. Inzwischen haben Sie ihn eingeführt.\n\n- Na, aber sicher, in den 1990er-Jahren. Das kann ich Ihnen nachweisen.\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Sie werden noch einsehen, dass auch die Rente ab 67 ein Grundfehler ist.\n\nDeshalb merken Sie sich doch bitte, liebe Union, liebe SPD, liebe Grüne, dass Sie sich viel häufiger und schneller, auch in Ihrem Interesse, nach den Linken richten sollten.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n3758,dennis-rohde,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Uns liegt heute ein Antrag der Linken zur Situation auf dem Wohnungsmarkt speziell in Hochschulstädten vor. Ich gebe ihnen in dem einen Punkt recht: Hochschulstädte haben oftmals ein Wohnraumproblem, und sie haben somit auch ein Problem mit steigenden Mietpreisen. Wir wissen aber auch, dass wir nicht nur über eine isolierte Lösung für Studierende nachdenken sollten;\n\ndenn natürlich sind auch in Hochschulstädten andere gesellschaftliche Gruppen ebenfalls betroffen. Wir müssen auch über Lösungen für Menschen mit niedrigem Einkommen, für Sozialleistungsempfänger, für ältere Mitbürgerinnen und Mitbürger mit kleinen Renten und - das ist leider oftmals auch nötig - für Alleinerziehende nachdenken. All das müssen wir mitbedenken. Wir brauchen Lösungen, die allen gerecht werden und die insbesondere nicht die eine Gruppe gegen die andere ausspielen.\n\nWir werden dieses Problem in der Großen Koalition entschlossen angehen, und zwar im Rahmen des Verfassungsrechts; das ist etwas, was Sie in Ihrem Antrag insbesondere im Hinblick auf die Mietpreisbremse nicht beachten; ich komme gleich kritisch darauf zu sprechen. Wir werden das Problem angehen, indem wir insbesondere die Städtebauförderung aufstocken und das Bestellerprinzip bei den Immobilienmaklern einführen, also dafür Sorge tragen, dass Menschen nicht mehr dadurch vom Abschluss eines Mietvertrages abgehalten werden, dass sie sich die hohe Einmalzahlung nicht leisten können. Und ja, wir werden eine Mietpreisbremse einführen, die wirkt.\n\nWenn man sich anschaut, welche Forderungen sich da innerhalb der Koalition gegenüberstanden - wir haben sie leider nicht nur immer intern diskutiert, sondern sie wurden manchmal auch öffentlich kommuniziert -, dann muss man sagen: Es wird eine Mietpreisbremse mit klarer sozialdemokratischer Handschrift. Wir haben uns nicht vom Weg abbringen lassen. Wir haben uns durchgesetzt, und darauf sind wir auch stolz.\n\nJetzt zur Mietpreisbremse der Linken. Ich finde Ihre Forderung einfach nicht seriös, und ich glaube, ein Gesetz auf Basis Ihrer Vorschläge würde im Endeffekt keiner Mieterin und keinem Mieter helfen. Ich bin der festen Überzeugung, dass ein solches Gesetz bei der erstbesten Möglichkeit vom Bundesverfassungsgericht wieder kassiert werden würde. Denn das, was Sie vorschlagen, ist ja keine Mietpreisbremse; das ist eine Wohnungsmarktvollbremsung im dichten Stadtverkehr. Da ist der Auffahrunfall leider vorprogrammiert.\n\nDenn was fordern Sie? Sie fordern erstens, eine „Miet-erhöhung allein wegen der Wiedervermietung“ auszuschließen. Zu Deutsch: Sie fordern die Abschaffung des marktwirtschaftlichen Prinzips von Angebot und Nachfrage. Sie wollen nicht einmal einen Rahmen für Mietabschlüsse bieten. Sie wollen Mietabschlüsse diktieren. Das ist eine Reduktion der Vertragsfreiheit fast auf null. Das ist weder richtig noch verfassungskonform. Solche Sachen wird es mit uns Sozialdemokraten nicht geben.\n\nSie fordern zweitens, dafür zu sorgen, dass Mieterhöhungen im Bestand nur noch zum Ausgleich der Inflation zulässig sind. Ich bitte Sie alle, sich einmal vorzustellen, was los wäre, wenn wir morgen eine solche Regelung einführen würden. Damit würden wir nämlich genau diejenigen bestrafen, die in den letzten Jahren, im letzten Jahrzehnt auf Mieterhöhungen verzichtet haben. Es gibt ja nicht nur den bösen Vermieter und den guten Mieter. Ich kenne auch viele Vermieter, die sagen: Mein Mieter hat ein kleines Einkommen; ich habe deswegen seit Jahren auf Mieterhöhungen verzichtet, damit die Person in meiner Wohnung bleiben kann. - Wenn wir diesen Vermietern jetzt sagen: „Wenn der Mieter einmal ausgezogen ist, dann darfst du die Miete nicht bzw. nur in Höhe der Inflationsrate erhöhen“, dann wird nur eine Miete erzielt werden können, die dauerhaft unter der ortsüblichen Vergleichsmiete bleibt, und der eigentlich Soziale ist am Ende der Bestrafte. Das kann nicht richtig sein.\n\nDann wird immer wieder gefordert, dass die Mietpreisbremse auch für Neubauten gelten solle. Für die SPD sage ich: Neubauten ähnlich wie jetzt schon von einer solchen Regelung auszunehmen, ist richtig; denn eine Mietpreisbremse schafft keinen zusätzlichen Wohnraum; sie lindert das Symptom. Aber wir müssen die Ursache bekämpfen, und die Ursache bekämpfen wir nur, indem wir Angebot und Nachfrage wieder ins richtige Verhältnis setzen, indem wir Anreize für Neubau setzen und ihn nicht noch zusätzlich blockieren.\n\nIch sage Ihnen auch: Eine Gefährdung der Mietpreisbremse besteht nicht. Es gibt 42 Millionen Bestandswohnungen, und jedes Jahr kommen circa 250 000 Neubauwohnungen - das sind rund 0,6 Prozent - dazu. Wer da von einer Gefährdung der Mietpreisbremse spricht, der macht sich selbst etwas vor.\n\nWir tun für den Mietmarkt, was wir tun können. Wir versprechen nicht das Blaue vom Himmel, eben weil wir wissen, dass es keine kurzfristigen Lösungen gibt. Für Entspannung auf dem Mietmarkt zu sorgen, ist ein langfristiger Prozess. Die Botschaft der Großen Koalition des heutigen Tages ist aber auch: Wir sind bereit, diesen Prozess anzugehen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8146,josef-goppel,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! An einem Tag, an dem wir die neuen Gesetze für Asylbewerber verabschiedet haben, darf man schon sagen: Hier geht es um Beseitigung und Eindämmung von Fluchtursachen, und zwar weit in die Zukunft hinein.\n\nDas ist das Erfreuliche und Hoffnungsvolle an der Umsetzung des Nagoya-Protokolls.\n\nIch sehe es noch vor mir, wie vor ziemlich genau fünf Jahren, im Oktober 2010, die Delegierten geradezu erleichtert aufgeatmet und stürmisch Beifall gespendet haben, weil es endlich gelungen war, zu einem Übereinkommen zu finden, damals, ein Jahr nach dem Desaster in Kopenhagen in Bezug auf den Klimaschutz.\n\nDieses Nagoya-Protokoll kommt etwas spröde daher; das wurde von den Rednerinnen und Rednern vor mir ganz gut beleuchtet. Ich sehe auch Anlass, drei Punkte zu markieren, an denen nachgearbeitet werden muss:\n\nErstens. In der Anhörung hat sogar der Vertreter der chemischen Industrie gesagt: Wir wissen nicht, wann die Nutzung beginnt und wann sie endet. Man befürchte eine Flut von Rechtsstreitigkeiten zulasten der Betriebe, die umsetzen wollen. In der europäischen Verordnung fehlt der Bereich der Vermarktung. Im spanischen Umsetzungsgesetz sind Verwendung und Vermarktung enthalten. Auch im französischen Umsetzungsgesetz ist von Utilisation commerciale die Rede, also der nutzbringenden Verwendung. Deswegen denke ich, das muss in den weiteren Beratungen darüber, wie man das Ganze handhabbar macht, noch einmal aufgegriffen werden.\n\nZweiter Punkt. Es geht um gewaltige kulturelle Unterschiede für indigene Völker. Übrigens, heute Abend sind welche vom Amazonas hier in Berlin; auch dort geht es um diese Fragen. Für diese Menschen kann etwas, was der Mutter Erde entnommen wird, niemals Privatbesitz sein. Deswegen haben sie keinerlei Verhältnis zu dem, was wir „Patente“ nennen. Es geht also darum, in einem offenen und durchsichtigen Prozess in den jeweiligen Ländern ausgiebig und einfühlsam mit den bisherigen Hütern dieser Schätze zu reden. Sie sehen oftmals ihre nationale Regierung als Handlanger der Industrie.\n\nDamit bin ich beim dritten Punkt. Der Vorteilsausgleich, um den es geht - das hat ja mein Kollege Schulze sehr klar dargestellt -, geht fast immer an die nationale Regierung, aber noch lange nicht an die lokalen Gruppen, die in den jeweiligen Gebieten wohnen und in einer Art Allmendewirtschaft, in einer allgemeinen Wirtschaftsweise, über Jahrhunderte mit diesen Stoffen umgegangen sind und sie auch zum Wohl ihrer Gemeinschaften verwendet haben.\n\nDeswegen ist auch an diesem Punkt noch einmal nachzuarbeiten.\n\nTrotzdem: Wenn ich ein Resümee ziehe, kann ich sagen, dass wir heute an einem wichtigen Punkt sind, auch wenn die Anzahl der Abgeordneten, die an diesem Beschluss teilnimmt, überschaubar ist. Dennoch ist es ein Beschluss, der die Welt gerechter macht, der weit in die Zukunft reicht und der uns auch hilft, in einer positiven Art und Weise auf die Gemeinschaften und Völker, die diese Schätze besitzen, zuzugehen - so wie das Bild Deutschlands seit kurzem ja auch durch sein Verhalten gegenüber Flüchtlingen geprägt wird.\n\nIch sage nochmals - ich kehre zum Anfang zurück -: Hier geht es darum, durch einen gerechten Vorteilsausgleich für Lebens- und Entwicklungschancen in diesen Ländern zu sorgen, damit dort die eigene, gewachsene Kultur auch im 21. Jahrhundert eine Zukunft hat.\"\n5344,kathrin-vogler,\"Liebe Frau Präsidentin! Kolleginnen und Kolle-gen! Meine Damen und Herren! Vor 35 Jahren ha-be ich als Jugendliche die Grundsatzerklärung der Deutschen Friedensgesellschaft unterschrieben. Da heißt es:\n\nDer Krieg ist ein Verbrechen an der Mensch-heit. Ich bin daher entschlossen, keine Art von Krieg zu unterstützen und an der Beseiti-gung aller Kriegsursachen mitzuarbeiten.\n\nDeswegen bin ich ausgesprochen stolz und froh, einer Fraktion in diesem Haus angehören zu dür-fen, die keinem Militäreinsatz im Ausland zu-stimmt.\n\nUns ist es wichtig, Gewalt, Krieg und Bürgerkrieg durch eine aktive Friedenspolitik im Vorfeld zu verhindern. Menschen, die von Krieg und Gewalt betroffen sind, wollen wir ohne Waffen wirksam helfen. Dafür setzen wir voll auf die zivile Konflikt-bearbeitung.\n\nHerr Steinmeier, es ist gut, dass Sie sich heute selbst an dieser Debatte beteiligen. Es ist auch gut, dass der Bundespräsident in der nächsten Woche aktive und -engagierte Menschen aus der zivilen Konfliktbearbeitung in das Schloss Belle-vue zu sich einlädt. Das sind wichtige Symbole. Aber wir wollen, dass die zivile Krisenprävention und Konfliktbearbeitung endlich über Symbolpolitik hinauskommen.\n\nWorüber reden wir hier? Zivile Konfliktbearbei-tung bedeutet, mit zivilen, das heißt mit nicht mili-tärischen Mitteln Gewalt zu verhindern oder zu beenden. Das findet etwa statt, wenn Friedens-verhandlungen vereinbart oder überwacht werden, wenn Kindersoldaten durch Verhandlungen befreit und zu ihren Familien zurückgebracht werden oder wenn Journalisten lernen, wie man der Verbrei-tung von Hass und Angst durch eine ausgewoge-ne Berichterstattung entgegentreten kann. Das findet statt, wenn Kriegsverbrecher in rechtsstaat-lichen Verfahren verurteilt werden und ihre Opfer Gerechtigkeit erfahren.\n\nIch freue mich, dass wir heute auf der Besu-chertribüne Menschen begrüßen können, die sich dieser großen Aufgabe leidenschaftlich widmen. Stellvertretend begrüßen möchte ich Ramy Lakkis und Assem Shraif aus dem Libanon.\n\nSie bauen dort mit Unterstützung des Zivilen Frie-densdienstes aus Deutschland Friedensnetzwerke auf und arbeiten so gegen die wachsenden Span-nungen zwischen den Religionsgruppen, aber auch - Herr Steinmeier, Sie haben das angespro-chen - zwischen syrischen Flüchtlingen und Ein-heimischen an. Diese Arbeit ist schwierig, aber notwendig. Diese müssen wir noch mehr unter-stützen.\n\nDas Grundgesetz verlangt in seiner Präambel von uns allen, dem Frieden in der Welt zu dienen. Das bedeutet doch, dass Frieden die Leitschnur unseres Handelns in allen politischen Bereichen sein muss. Genau dafür gibt es seit 2004 den Ak-tionsplan „Zivile Krisenprävention, Konfliktlösung und Friedenskonsolidierung“. Wenn Sie einmal draußen auf der Straße fragen, ob die deutsche Politik in den letzten zehn Jahren nach Einschät-zung der Menschen friedlicher geworden sei: Was meinen Sie, was Sie dann zu hören bekommen? Das ist beileibe nicht nur ein Vermittlungsproblem; denn die Menschen erleben das Tag für Tag. Sie müssen nur die Nachrichten verfolgen.\n\nObwohl wir in einer Zeit leben, in der Krisen und Konflikte immer häufiger in Gewalt münden, bleibt doch der Beitrag Deutschlands und dieser Bun-desregierung zur zivilen Krisenprävention und Konfliktbearbeitung auch nach zehn Jahren Akti-onsplan beschämend gering. Das beginnt schon bei den Begrifflichkeiten. Bei Ihnen findet sich un-ter der Überschrift „Zivile Krisenprävention, Kon-fliktlösung und Friedenskonsolidierung“ ein buntes Sammelsurium an Maßnahmen, auch Polizeiein-sätze, die Aufrüstung und Ausbildung von Armeen und sogar Militäreinsätze mit Kampfauftrag. Das hat doch mit ziviler Krisenprävention nichts, aber auch gar nichts zu tun.\n\nEin Beispiel: Sie wollen die Kapazitäten der ei-genverantwortlichen zivilen Krisenprävention in Afrika stärken. Gut, aber welche Maßnahmen füh-ren Sie dafür an? Die Ausbildung von Soldaten in Mali. Was, bitte, hat das mit ziviler Krisenpräven-tion zu tun? Nichts, aber auch gar nichts.\n\nMan kann unterschiedlicher Meinung sein, wel-che Rolle Militär und Polizei in der Konfliktvorbeu-gung oder -beilegung haben können, aber wir soll-ten doch bitte zivile, polizeiliche und militärische Maßnahmen ordentlich trennen, genau wie wir das aus gutem Grund auch im Inland tun.\n\nJa, wir haben auch Fortschritte zu verzeichnen. Der Zivile Friedensdienst ist mit 230 Fachkräften in 36 Konfliktregionen im Einsatz und unterstützt dort Friedensprozesse. Er hat sich ganz hervorra-gend entwickelt. Aber es gibt viel mehr Bedarf, gerade dort, wo die Konflikte zwar auf der Straße liegen, aber noch nicht offen ausgebrochen sind, wie zum Beispiel in den Flüchtlingslagern des Li-banon. Im Libanon kommt mittlerweile auf jeden Einwohner ein syrischer Flüchtling. Deswegen will die Linke den Zivilen Friedensdienst auch deutlich besser ausstatten.\n\nAuch die Ausbildung ziviler Fachkräfte kommt in kleinen Schritten voran. Das Förderprogramm ifa zivik des Auswärtigen Amtes war wichtig. Auch da könnte man noch mehr tun.\n\nAber was den Kern des Aktionsplans eigentlich betrifft, da hat sich meiner Ansicht nach zu wenig bewegt; denn eigentlich sollten doch alle Ministe-rien hinterfragen, was sie vielleicht unbeabsichtigt zu den Konflikten in der Welt beitragen. Es ist doch der Kern des Aktionsplans, dass sich zum Beispiel das Wirtschaftsministerium vor dem Ab-schluss des nächsten Freihandelsabkommens einmal Gedanken darüber macht, ob das Abkom-men vielleicht zur Verschärfung von Konflikten in dem entsprechenden Partnerland beitragen könn-te, oder dass es dann, wenn es um Erdölimport aus Nigeria geht, die Auswirkungen auf die Kon-fliktlage in den Fördergebieten im Nigerdelta be-rücksichtigt. Ich würde mir wünschen, Herr Steinmeier, dass die Bundesregierung diese Per-spektive wieder aufgreift.\n\nDas Bild von der Bundesrepublik als Vorreiter der zivilen Krisenprävention, das die Bundesregie-rung so gerne zeichnet, ist schon deshalb schief, weil Deutschland selbst inzwischen Partei in allzu vielen Kriegen und Konflikten ist. Das kommt da-her, dass Sie vor allem auf die Karte des militäri-schen Eingreifens setzen. Deswegen wird unser Land mehr und mehr unfähig, die zivilen Möglich-keiten, die es gibt, auch wirklich zu nutzen.\n\nWenn Sie, Herr Steinmeier, oder der Bundes-präsident von Deutschlands Verantwortung in der Welt reden, dann ist es vor diesem Hintergrund doch kein Wunder, dass viele Menschen das als Ankündigung von noch mehr Militäreinsätzen wahrnehmen. Diese Regierung benutzt die zivile Krisenprävention als Feigenblatt für eine militärin-terventionistische Politik, und das zeigt sich doch schon an den finanziellen Mitteln.\n\nMeine Fraktion hat die Bundesregierung ge-fragt, was sie denn für die Umsetzung des Akti-onsplans in den einzelnen Ressorts ausgibt. Das Wirtschafts- und das Umweltministerium haben dafür nach eigenen Angaben in den letzten zehn Jahren keinen einzigen Cent ausgegeben. In vie-len Ministerien ist noch nicht einmal klar, was die-ses Zivile eigentlich ist, das gefördert werden soll. Die jährlich etwa 1,2 Milliarden Euro, die für die zivile Krisenprävention nach Ihren eigenen Anga-ben ausgegeben werden - die Angabe ist über-höht -, sind einfach lächerlich gering, wenn man überlegt, dass allein die Bundeswehr 32 Milliarden Euro im Jahr verschlingt.\n\nDann haben wir konkret nachgefragt, welche Rüstungsexporte diese Bundesregierung in Län-der genehmigt hat, für die sie gleichzeitig Maß-nahmen der Krisenprävention bewilligt hat. Die Antwort darauf haben Sie uns verweigert. Das war selbst Ihnen wohl doch zu peinlich. Also haben wir das selber zusammengestellt, und der Befund ist erschreckend. Herr Steinmeier - Sie haben über Kolumbien gesprochen -, im Jahr 2013 hat die Bundesregierung Rüstungsexporte nach Kolumbi-en im Wert von über 50 Millionen Euro bewilligt. Gleichzeitig hat das Auswärtige Amt Projekte zur Konfliktbewältigung im Wert von 1,5 Millionen Eu-ro gefördert, unter anderem Projekte für den Kampf gegen Korruption. Sie liefern also Waffen an eine korrupte Regierung. Ist das „vorsorgende Außenpolitik“?\n\nIndien und Pakistan: Beide Länder haben Maß-nahmen der Krisenprävention ergriffen. Gleichzei-tig haben Sie nach Indien 2013 Waffenexporte im Wert von 107 Millionen Euro, nach Pakistan Waf-fenexporte im Wert von 47 Millionen Euro bewil-ligt. Beide Länder sind seit langen Jahren im Streit um Kaschmir. In beiden Ländern gibt es bewaffne-te Auseinandersetzungen. Jetzt erklären Sie mir doch einmal, was das für eine Krisenprävention ist, die Sie da betrieben haben, und wie man zwei Länder aufrüsten kann, die sich miteinander im Dauerkonflikt befinden?\n\nDas können Sie nicht erklären. Entschuldigen Sie, das ist doch reiner Etikettenschwindel.\n\nMilitäreinsätze und Waffenlieferungen sind nämlich nicht Teil der Lösung; sie sind Teil des Problems.\n\nWir müssen feststellen: Bei nahezu jedem größe-ren bewaffneten Konflikt, der heute über unsere Fernsehbildschirme flimmert, gab es in der Ver-gangenheit Waffenlieferungen, missglückte Inter-ventionen. Außerdem gibt es eine Politik der Spal-tung auf diesem Planeten, die immer mehr Men-schen arm und sehr wenige Menschen dafür sehr reich macht. Wenn etwa im Südsudan die Vieh-züchter und die Ackerbauern wie Kain und Abel um die letzten Wasserressourcen kämpfen, dann nützt ihnen auch keine noch so große Militärprä-senz. Diese Konflikte können sie nur beilegen, wenn es einerseits genug Wasser gibt und ande-rerseits Streitbeilegungsmechanismen, die von al-len Seiten akzeptiert sind.\n\nWenn alle Ministerien überprüfen müssten, was sie zur Eskalation von Konflikten beitragen, dann gilt das natürlich auch für das Verteidigungsminis-terium. Ich bin der festen Überzeugung, dass dann kein einziger der derzeitigen Bundesweh-reinsätze mehr Bestand hätte.\n\nAber leider ist der Irrglaube an den Nutzen mili-tärischer Interventionen nicht nur in der Bundes-regierung verbreitet; in Ihrem Entschließungsan-trag zur heutigen Debatte fordern Sie, liebe Kolle-ginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, Deutsch-lands Fähigkeiten im militärischen Bereich nach dem „do no harm“-Ansatz zu überprüfen, also da-hin gehend, wie sie sich auf gewaltsam ausgetra-gene Konflikte auswirken. Das klingt so ähnlich wie etwas, was auch wir fordern. Es klingt also erst einmal nicht schlecht; aber es wirft doch die Frage nach den Konsequenzen auf. Welcher der von den Grünen in den letzten Jahren unterstützte Militäreinsatz hätte denn Ihrer Meinung nach die-sen Anspruch erfüllt? Der KosovoKrieg? Der Af-ghanistan-Krieg? Die westliche Intervention in Li-byen, für die auch in Ihrer Fraktion geworben wur-de?\n\nNein, ich sage Ihnen eines: Sie müssen diese militärische Logik überwinden.\n\nDeutschland braucht ein Gesamtkonzept für eine zivile Außenpolitik, die sich von den Regeln des Völkerrechts, dem Prinzip des Gewaltverzichts und vom Gedanken des frühzeitigen, vorbeugen-den Handels leiten lässt. Dafür brauchen wir auch eine Umverteilung im Bundeshaushalt. Denn, mei-ne Damen und Herren, würden Sie einen einzigen Eurofighter weniger kaufen, könnten Sie mit dem eingesparten Geld die Mittel für den Zivilen Frie-densdienst für fünf Jahre mehr als verdoppeln. Das wäre mehr als ein Symbol, und damit könnte Deutschland wirklich dem Frieden in der Welt die-nen.\"\n197,harald-terpe,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Auch von meiner Seite herzlichen Glückwunsch, Herr Minister Gröhe. So neu und überraschend die Materie für Sie vielleicht sein mag, so überraschend ist es natürlich auch, dass das erste Fachgesetz in dieser Legislaturperiode ein Gesundheitsgesetz ist. Aber wie es immer so ist: Ins Wasser geworfen zu werden, ist die beste Methode, um schwimmen zu lernen. Auf gute Zusammenarbeit!\n\nDurch informelle Gespräche ist es gelungen, für ein erstes eilbedürftiges Gesetz ein Verfahren zu wählen, das, was die Fachlichkeit betrifft, einen regulären Prozess mit Anhörung sowie zweiter und dritter Lesung ermöglicht. Damit haben wir als Parlamentarier eine erste Bewährungsprobe gut bestanden. Vielleicht ist das auch ein hoffnungsvoller Anfang im Umgang mit der Opposition. Vielen Dank dafür.\n\nDie Arzneimittelpolitik der Vorgängerregierung bestand aus dem Dreiklang Preismoratorium, Rabatt und Nutzenbewertung von Arzneimitteln.\n\nJetzt sollen diese Regulierungselemente teilweise revidiert bzw. nicht fortgeführt werden. Dazu liegen zwei Gesetzentwürfe vor. Der zweite und umfangreichere Gesetzentwurf befasst sich zum einen mit der Fortsetzung des Preismoratoriums bis Ende 2017. Ich freue mich schon auf die Beratungen im Fachausschuss, weil wir uns natürlich über die Frage unterhalten müssen, ob der Zeitpunkt richtig gewählt ist. Dazu ist schon gesagt worden, dass er auch vorverlegt werden kann. Aus der Erfahrung des Übergangs in die neue Legislaturperiode kann man sich auch fragen, ob man ihn nicht drei Monate nach hinten verlegen muss, damit wir nachher nicht wieder in die Situation geraten, die wir in diesem Jahr haben,\n\nnämlich in einem verkürzten Verfahren arbeiten zu müssen.\n\nEs kann aber auch sein, dass wir uns darüber unterhalten müssen, ob dieses Preismoratorium zielgenau ist.\n\nDas Zweite ist die Festsetzung des Herstellerrabatts auf 7 Prozent. Dazu muss man klar sagen: Das bedeutet zunächst eine Kostensteigerung auf dem Arzneimittelmarkt, weil wir von 16 auf 7 Prozent zurückgehen. Zunächst haben wir also mit einer Kostenerhöhung zu rechnen, die natürlich die gesetzlich Versicherten tragen müssen. Auch das wird eine spannende Diskussion, denke ich.\n\nDas Dritte, für uns sehr Wesentliche, ist die Festlegung zur Fortführung der Nutzenbewertung. Da sage ich ganz klar: Wir als Bündnisgrüne haben uns sehr viele Jahre für die Nutzenbewertung der Arzneimittel eingesetzt und waren damals auch sehr zufrieden, dass das in der schwarz-gelben Koalition begonnen wurde. Nun ist aber die Frage, wie wir zukünftig mit dem Bestandsmarkt umgehen. Es wird das Argument gebracht, das sei aufwendig und der Einspareffekt sei fraglich. Das mag sein, aber wir haben nicht nur aus Einspargründen die Bewertung des Bestandsmarkts begrüßt, sondern aus einem ganz anderen Grund: Es sind nämlich die Nutzeneffekte auch aus Patientenperspektive interessant. Schließlich ist die Frage interessant, ob die Medikamente, die man nutzenbewertet oder nicht, Standardvergleichstherapien für neu zu bewertende Arzneimittel sein können. In diesem Zusammenhang ist aus fachlichen Gründen natürlich die Diskussion interessant, ob das, was Sie vorhaben, die richtige Entscheidung ist oder ob man vielleicht noch zielgenauer vorgehen muss.\n\nUm diese Frage ausführlich auch im Ausschuss erörtern zu können, werden wir natürlich dem ersten, kürzeren Gesetzentwurf im verkürzten Verfahren zustimmen. Die Idee, die wir hatten, war, das Preismoratorium erst einmal für drei Monate zu verlängern, um dann eine ordentliche Anhörung durchführen zu können. Also, wir werden dem zustimmen. Ich freue mich auf die Diskussion im Fachausschuss, die wir bis Ende März führen müssen.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n554,clemens-binninger,\"Herr Präsident! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich habe auch den Beiträgen der Oppositionsredner, nicht nur meiner eigenen Kollegen, aufmerksam zugehört. Herr Kollege Korte, ich würde mich gern mit Ihren Vorschlägen auseinandersetzen, nur: Es gab keine.\n\nAcht Minuten ohne eigene konkrete Vorschläge.\n\nImmer nur Kritik am Minister, was er angeblich vergessen hat und was zu kurz kommt. Aber eine eigene Agenda: Fehlanzeige.\n\nWenn Sie wollen, dass wir in den politischen Streit um den besten Weg kommen - den ich auch mit Ihnen führen würde -, müssen Sie sagen, was Sie wollen, und dürfen nicht nur lamentieren, was angeblich alles fehlt. Vielmehr müssen Sie Ihr eigenes Programm vorstellen. Das haben Sie nicht getan.\n\nFrau Kollegin Mihalic, Glückwunsch auch von mir zur ersten Rede. Sie haben sinngemäß gesagt: Es ist nicht Hauptaufgabe der Opposition, dafür zu sorgen, dass wir bei den Sicherheitsgesetzen die Verfassung einhalten.\n\n- „Mit Karlsruhe zusammen.“ - Ganz bescheiden! Eigentlich machen die es alleine, aber so sei es.\n\nIch will nur daran erinnern: Eine der größten Schlappen dieses Parlaments bzw. einer Regierung war das rot-grüne Luftsicherheitsgesetz, mit dem Sie grandios gescheitert sind.\n\nInsofern sollte man immer daran denken, dass man auch selber im Glashaus sitzt, bevor man meint, hier eine Rolle einzunehmen, die nicht zu uns passt.\n\nHerr Kollege von Notz, die Vorratsdatenspeicherung durfte nicht fehlen.\n\n- Bei uns fehlt sie auch nicht. Wir werden sie auch umsetzen. Ich hätte nur die Bitte:\n\nWenn wir diesen politischen Streit führen, dann müssen wir der Bevölkerung und allen, die vielleicht anderer Meinung sind als wir, deutlich machen, dass unser Verfassungsgericht - ich bin mir sehr sicher, dass der Europäische Gerichtshof nicht anders entscheiden wird - sagt: Die Vorratsdatenspeicherung ist grundsätzlich mit unserem Grundgesetz vereinbar.\n\nKönnen wir diesen Satz einmal an den Beginn der Debatte stellen?\n\nEs kommt darauf an, wie wir sie regeln. Das ist der entscheidende Punkt.\n\nSie tun immer so, als ob es per se verfassungswidrig wäre. Das ist nicht der Fall. Es kommt darauf an, wie wir es regeln. Wir haben uns vorgenommen, dass wir der Datensicherheit, den Speicherfristen und all diesen Dingen einen hohen Stellenwert einräumen.\n\nDann ist es nicht verfassungswidrig.\n\nInsofern sollten wir da zu einer seriösen Debatte kommen.\n\nWir brauchen diese Daten für unsere Behörden, wenn auch nicht - Kollege Hartmann, da haben Sie recht - als Allheilmittel. Aber es ist doch kaum zu ertragen, dass die Strafverfolger, wenn ein Straftäter kinderpornografische Inhalte ins Internet stellt - mit den wirklich schlimmsten Bildern, die man sich vorstellen kann -, sagen müssen: Wir haben zwar die IP-Adresse des Verbrechers, der dieses Video ins Netz gestellt hat, erfahren von den Providern aber nicht, wem diese IP-Adresse gehört, weil sie sie nicht speichern müssen, weil sie mit Verweis auf eine fehlende Regelung zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung sagen, dass sie es nicht speichern. - Dann hört die Strafverfolgung schon auf, bevor sie überhaupt begonnen hat. Bei solch schweren Verbrechen ist das nicht hinnehmbar - auf keinen Fall!\n\n- Doch, das ist auch Vorratsdatenspeicherung.\n\nJetzt will ich kurz drei der Punkte herausgreifen, die der Minister angesprochen hat. Ich bin sehr dankbar, dass wir uns in der Koalition darauf verständigt haben, die Empfehlungen des NSU-Untersuchungsausschusses umzusetzen. Es sind 47 gemeinsame Empfehlungen. Da brauchen wir übrigens nicht auf Sondervoten irgendeiner Fraktion abzuheben; es sind 47 Empfehlungen, die alle Fraktionen mitgetragen haben. Wenn wir dafür sorgen, dass sie umgesetzt werden, haben wir der Sache am meisten gedient.\n\nIch will deutlich machen, wer davon betroffen ist, erst recht, weil auch der Justizminister hier ist: Es sind nicht nur hinsichtlich Polizei und Verfassungsschutz Reformüberlegungen notwendig; auch Staatsanwaltschaften bis hin zum Generalbundesanwalt haben sich in der NSU-Sache nicht mit Ruhm bekleckert. Auch da muss es Veränderungen geben.\n\nDas ganze tragische Scheitern im Zusammenhang mit den schrecklichen Morden des NSU hat aber auch gezeigt, dass die Sicherheitsarchitektur des Föderalismus sehr schnell an ihre Grenzen kommt. Deshalb sind nicht nur wir und die Bundesregierung in der Pflicht. Wir richten natürlich auch einen Appell an die Länder, die Reformen, die wir empfohlen haben, auch in den Ländern umzusetzen. Wenn wir alle zusammen handeln, dann wird sich hier in der Sache etwas bewegen.\n\nDer zweite Punkt. Eine der großen Schwächen war, dass sich Polizei und Verfassungsschutz nicht austauschen konnten; es gab keine gemeinsame Datei. Wir hatten eine gemeinsame Datei für den Bereich des Islamismus, aber nicht für den Bereich des Rechtsextremismus. Jetzt haben wir für beide Bereiche eine Datei: die Rechtsextremismusdatei und die Antiterrordatei. Karlsruhe hat über die Antiterrordatei geurteilt und sie für grundsätzlich verfassungskonform erklärt, aber unter dem Vorbehalt notwendiger Veränderungen.\n\nDiese werden wir vornehmen. Dann haben die Sicherheitsbehörden in unserem Land das Instrument, das sie brauchen, um unter Beachtung des Trennungsgebotes die Informationen auszutauschen, die ausgetauscht werden müssen, damit wir in unserem Land Islamismus und gewaltbereiten Rechtsextremismus bekämpfen können. Insofern ist es ein wichtiger Schritt, wenn wir hier vo-rangehen.\n\nEin dritter Punkt. In einem aktuellen Fall hat das BSI nach Weihnachten gewarnt, dass Nutzerdaten und Kennwörter zu 16 Millionen E-Mail-Adressen gestohlen worden sind. Ich muss sagen: Ich habe großen Respekt davor, was das BSI hier in der kurzen Zeit gestemmt hat, wie es die Bevölkerung gewarnt und eine eigene Homepage aufgebaut hat, auf der man überprüfen konnte, ob die eigene E-Mail-Adresse betroffen ist. Ich habe es selber gemacht. Das hat innerhalb weniger Minuten tadellos geklappt. Ich war Gott sei Dank nicht betroffen. - Ich hoffe, dass ich nicht betroffen war, aber ich bin mir ziemlich sicher.\n\nDer Fall zeigt doch auch: All die Warnungen zur Sicherheit im Netz - zu Botnetzen, Serverattacken und -infizierten Homepages -, die wir seit Jahren äußern, werden von den Menschen offenkundig noch nicht so sensibel aufgenommen, weil man immer denkt: Das ist weit weg, das betrifft mich nicht. - Die Schaffung von Sicherheit im Netz wird eine der wichtigsten Aufgaben sein, vor denen wir in den nächsten Jahren stehen - damit die Akzeptanz für alle Möglichkeiten, die das Netz den Bürgern, den Behörden und der Wirtschaft bietet, erhalten bleibt und das Netz nicht zu einem Ort der Unsicherheit wird, sondern ein Ort der Sicherheit bleibt.\n\nHerr Minister, ganz zum Schluss sage ich Ihnen: Die Fraktionen, die Regierungsfraktionen allemal, vielleicht die anderen auch, werden Sie gerne auf Ihrem Weg begleiten, die Agenda, die Sie uns skizziert haben, umzusetzen.\n\nEs gehört zum Selbstbewusstsein von Parlamentariern, dass wir manchmal vielleicht etwas aufs Tempo drücken, manchmal vielleicht etwas auf der Bremse stehen oder auf eine Abzweigung oder eine Sehenswürdigkeit am Rande des Weges hinweisen.\n\nAber wir sind an Ihrer Seite.\n\nEines verpflichtet uns alle: Wenn es uns gelingt, sei es im politischen Streit oder durch gemeinsame Gesetzgebung, ein Stück dazu beigetragen zu haben, dass die Menschen in unserem Land in Freiheit und Sicherheit leben können, dann haben wir unsere Aufgabe erfüllt.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n12377,heike-baehrens,\"Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn wir zwölf Monate zurückblicken und die damalige Situation mit heute vergleichen,\n\ndann dürfen wir mit Fug und Recht behaupten: Wir haben bei der Aufnahme und Versorgung von Flüchtlingen bereits viel erreicht. Die Bearbeitung der Anträge wurde beschleunigt, Psychotherapeuten ohne Kassenzulassung dürfen jetzt traumatisierte Asylbewerber behandeln, und es wurden die gesetzlichen Voraussetzungen geschaffen, um die Gesundheitskarte in den Ländern einführen zu können.\n\nAber klar ist auch - da stimmen wir mit der Intention des grünen Antrags überein -: Die psychosoziale und psychotherapeutische Versorgung von Flüchtlingen muss weiter verbessert werden.\n\nDie Behandlung von traumatisierten Geflüchteten ist noch unzureichend. Vorhandene Dienste und Angebote sind überlaufen. Es gibt zu wenige Dolmetscher. Auch die Frage der Finanzierung dieser Leistungen ist nicht ausreichend geklärt.\n\nPsychosoziale Zentren und Traumazentren, die sich dieser Aufgabe fachlich qualifiziert, gut vernetzt und oft mit Unterstützung von Ehrenamtlichen widmen, müssen Jahr für Jahr um ihre Finanzierung bangen.\n\nDas ist absolut unbefriedigend.\n\nIch habe in dem Jahresbericht von Refugio Stuttgart, den ich gerade erst erhalten habe, gelesen: Dieser gemeinnützige Verein hat einen Pool aus Dolmetschern für 17 Sprachen aufgebaut und sie für den Einsatz in der Psychotherapie geschult. Solche vorhandenen Strukturen und Kompetenzen müssen politisch und finanziell gefördert werden; denn sie sind das Fundament, auf dem die psychotherapeutische und psychosoziale Versorgung von Flüchtlingen weiter verbessert werden kann.\n\nUnsere Familienministerin Manuela Schwesig hat deswegen dieses Jahr psychosoziale Zentren mit rund 3 Millionen Euro gefördert. Darum ist es umso unverständlicher, dass der Finanzminister trotz sprudelnder Steuereinnahmen diese Förderungen jetzt wieder kürzen will. Wir als SPD werden bei den abschließenden Haushaltsverhandlungen dafür kämpfen, dass die wichtige Arbeit dieser Zentren fortgeführt werden kann.\n\nDarüber hinaus diskutieren wir auch die Möglichkeit, für diese Aufgabe zusätzliche Projektmittel im Haushalt des Gesundheitsministeriums bereitzustellen. Heute Morgen hat Herr Finanzminister Schäuble genau an dieser Stelle gleich zu Anfang seiner Rede gesagt: „Am Geld wird die Integration nicht scheitern.“\n\nDa nehmen wir ihn beim Wort.\n\nWir wollen eine bessere psychotherapeutische und psychosoziale Versorgung von Flüchtlingen. Aber ganz so einfach wie Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, es in Ihrem Antrag formuliert haben, ist es dann doch nicht. Sie wollen die Dolmetscherleistungen von den Krankenkassen zahlen lassen.\n\nDas sehen wir kritisch; denn die Bereitstellung von Dolmetschern ist nicht per se eine Gesundheitsleistung. Sie ist eine gesamtgesellschaftliche Aufgabe, ja, eine Integrationsleistung, die von der öffentlichen Hand und damit aus Steuermitteln geleistet werden muss.\n\nEs wäre nicht richtig, dies allein den Beitragszahlern der gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung aufzuladen. Mit Steuermitteln können wir nicht nur Dolmetscher finanzieren, sondern auch bereits bestehende psychosoziale Netzwerke wie Refugio zielgenau stärken, fördern und auch ausbauen.\n\nDass es in Koalitionen, Frau Klein-Schmeink, nicht immer leicht ist, solche Ziele ganz schnell zu erreichen, das erfahren Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Grünen, gerade selbst ganz unmittelbar in Baden-Württemberg, wo Sie mit Ihrem Koalitionspartner um die Einführung der Gesundheitskarte für Flüchtlinge ringen müssen, die Sie hier in Ihrem Antrag fordern.\n\nAuf jeden Fall werden wir uns bei den laufenden Haushaltsverhandlungen für weitere Verbesserungen bei der psychotherapeutischen und psychosozialen Versorgung von Flüchtlingen einsetzen.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n11979,waltraud-wolff,\"Frau Kollegin Rüffer, herzlichen Dank. - Sind Sie bereit, zur Kenntnis zu nehmen, dass der Bund die Kommunen um 5 Milliarden Euro entlastet - Punkt eins - und wir 700 Millionen Euro in die Hand nehmen, um das Bundesteilhabegesetz in Gang zu setzen, dass es also kein Spargesetz ist? Sind Sie auch bereit, anzuerkennen, dass wir beim Leistungszugang - bei dem Thema wollte ich mich vorhin schon melden - erstens Bestandsschutz haben, zweitens Unterstützungsbedarf in fünf aus neun Lebensbereichen als Voraussetzung haben, drittens Unterstützungsbedarf in drei aus neun Lebensbereichen als Voraussetzung haben, wenn jemand auf Assistenz angewiesen ist, viertens es einen Ermessensspielraum gibt, dass wir also vier Möglichkeiten haben, dass wir Geld in die Hand nehmen und keine Einsparungen vornehmen? Bitte erklären Sie mir, was Sie hier erzählen!\"\n4288,rainer-arnold,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Nur ein Satz an die Linke, damit jeder sieht, welcher Unfug dort geredet wird: Bei dieser Regierung stehen alle Zeichen auf Militär.\n\nFrau Kollegin, es sind 3 300 Soldaten in internationalen Friedensmissionen,\n\nmeist im Auftrag der Vereinten Nationen. In der Spitze waren es knapp 11 000. Es sind also deutlich weniger geworden - und nicht mehr, so wie Sie tun.\n\nRichtlinie und Richtschnur für das Handeln dieser Regierung ist auch im Verteidigungsbereich der Koalitionsvertrag. Herr Kollege Lindner, Sie mögen ja kritisieren, dass die Regierung und die Ministerin das Falsche tun; das ist Ihre Aufgabe. Aber so zu tun, als ob nichts getan werde, das geht wirklich an der Sache vorbei. Schauen Sie in den Koalitionsvertrag, und Sie werden feststellen: Alles, und zwar wirklich alles, was wir damals aufgeschrieben haben, ist entweder abgearbeitet oder bereits aufs Gleis gesetzt. Das gilt für die Evaluierung, die wir in den nächsten Wochen diskutieren werden und bei der wir feststellen werden, dass sich die Welt verändert hat und man heute andere Antworten geben muss.\n\nDas gilt natürlich auch für die Attraktivität des Soldatenberufes. Alle konkreten Forderungen, die wir aufgeschrieben haben, hat die Ministerin in einem sehr großen Paket aufs Gleis gesetzt. Dabei ist uns ein Punkt besonders wichtig: Wir wollen, dass die Zeitsoldaten bei ihrer sozialen Altersabsicherung den Angestellten im öffentlichen Bereich gleichgestellt werden. Ich denke, darüber werden wir in den nächsten Wochen noch ein wenig diskutieren und noch einiges verbessern können.\n\nDies gilt auch für die Neustrukturierung der Beschaffungsprozesse. Natürlich war die Kumulierung der Probleme in den letzten Wochen ein Weckruf. Die einzelnen Fakten sind uns nicht wirklich neu, aber ihre Kumulierung hat zu Recht eine hohe Aufmerksamkeit geweckt. Dabei zeigt sich natürlich schon - Sie sprachen das Thema Boxer an -, dass alte Anordnungen, wie zum Beispiel die Befüllung eines Gerätes statt zu 100 Prozent nur zu 70 Prozent, letztlich ein Irrweg sind. Dort haben Betriebswirte und Sparkommissare formuliert und nicht Sicherheitspolitiker. Wir Sicherheitspolitiker wissen, dass die Geräte und die personelle Vorhaltung bei Streitkräften eben nicht betriebswirtschaftlich, sondern Vorsorge sind. Das heißt, Redundanzen und Reserven sind in diesem System immer erforderlich, und wir werden in dieser Koalition versuchen, in den nächsten Jahren auch dort Veränderungen herbeizuführen.\n\nDazu gehört auch der Auftrag im Koalitionsvertrag, Verantwortung für die Rüstungswirtschaft zu übernehmen. Auch dies werden wir tun. Die Ministerin hat diesen schwierigen Prozess der Neu- und besseren Strukturierung der Beschaffungsprozesse benannt. Ich nenne ein weiteres Thema: Wir wollen auch die Debatte über Kernfähigkeiten zügig abschließen. In den verteidigungspolitischen Richtlinien für das Jahr 2011 - diese haben wir nicht verfasst, trotzdem steht dort an einer Stelle etwas wirklich Richtiges drin - heißt es: Kernfähigkeiten sind auch dort, wo die Bundeswehr signifikante und international anerkannte Fähigkeiten einbringt.\n\nDamit ist klar: Die Verteidigungsministerin muss an dieser Stelle sagen, wo wir diese anerkannten Fähigkeiten haben. Die anderen Ressorts müssen ihren sicherheitspolitischen Beitrag leisten, und das Wirtschaftsressort muss die Frage klären: Wie hilft man den Unternehmen bei den schwierigen Anpassungsprozessen in den nächsten Jahren? Deshalb begrüßen wir es, dass es eine Staatssekretärsrunde gibt, die diese Themen zukünftig kooperativ bearbeiten will. Die Kernfähigkeiten sind kein Pingpongspiel, das zwischen den Ressorts hin- und hergeht. Es ist eine gemeinsame Verantwortung dieser Koalition.\n\nNach dieser Anforderung aus den alten Verteidigungspolitischen Richtlinien ist natürlich auch klar, dass Gefechtsfahrzeuge, Raketenabwehr und U-Boote in Deutschland eine besondere Ausprägung haben und deshalb auch zu diesen Schlüsselfähigkeiten gehören müssen. Wenn wir dies ernst nehmen, werden wir in den nächsten Jahren auch über Forschung sprechen müssen. Ich bin nicht der Auffassung - wir diskutieren das als Parlamentarier schon lange -, dass die etwa 300 Millionen Euro tatsächlich dem Technologieland Deutschland entsprechend dem Haushalt zur Verfügung stehen. Wir werden die Forschungsmittel genau dort, wo wir Kernfähigkeiten definiert haben, in den nächsten Jahren verstärken müssen, damit wir auch im Jahr 2030 moderne Streitkräfte haben.\n\nWenn der Koalitionsvertrag abgearbeitet wird, ist trotzdem nicht alles gut; das wissen wir, denn die Welt hat sich verändert.\n\nNiemand hätte sich vorgestellt, dass in Europa mit Waffengewalt Grenzen verändert werden. Das hat Auswirkungen auf die Debatten in der NATO. Die NATO muss sich deshalb mit Sicherheit nicht neu erfinden. Aber die Reaktionsfähigkeiten und die -geschwindigkeiten in der NATO werden sich verändern, und das wird auch Auswirkungen auf die Organisation der Bundeswehr haben. Entscheidend bleibt aber: Es darf nicht der geringste Zweifel entstehen, dass Artikel 5 für alle gilt. Die NATO ist politisch entschlossen, das durchzusetzen und damit zu zeigen: Wir sind verlässlich.\n\nEntscheidend ist und bleibt auch in Zukunft, dass die NATO ihre Fähigkeiten so sichtbar zur Schau stellt, dass jeder weiß, er hat dagegen keine Chance, dass jeder weiß, die NATO ist ein überlegenes Bündnis. Das wollen wir deshalb, weil wir wissen, dass dann, wenn unsere Fähigkeiten sichtbar sind, wir sie aller Wahrscheinlichkeit nach nicht brauchen werden. Das ist das eigentliche Ziel.\n\nDie zweite Veränderung in der Welt - darüber wurde schon viel gesprochen - ist das Auftreten der brutalen Terroristen des sogenannten IS. Es handelt sich nicht mehr - das ist schon neu - um diese alte asymmetrische Bedrohung, über die wir jahrelang gesprochen haben. Das ist jetzt nicht mehr asymmetrisch. Es haben sich möglicherweise sogar die Vorzeichen bei der Symmetrie verschoben. Es wird nämlich Staatlichkeit durch Terroristen organisiert. Ich fand es schon beeindruckend, was die Königin Rania von Jordanien zu diesem Thema gesagt hat. Sie vertrat zum einen deutlich ihre Meinung, auch gegenüber der arabischen Welt, dass jeder Verantwortung trägt und dass hinter den Angriffen dieser Ideologen eine übelste Ideologie und ein globaler Machtanspruch steckt. Zugleich sagte sie: Ideologien sind nicht mit Kugeln zu beseitigen.\n\nDas Thema wird uns also noch lange beschäftigen, und auch die Menschen in Deutschland - wir sehen das derzeit bei vielen Diskussionen - merken, wie ernsthaft das ist. Sie verstehen auch, dass in bestimmten Situationen Diplomatie aktiv bleiben muss - die Bundesregierung leistet hier Vorbildliches; das wurde schon häufig gesagt -, man sich gleichzeitig aber solch brutalem fundamentalen Terrorismus notfalls auch mit Waffengewalt entgegenstellen muss. Wenn man das nicht selber kann, wenn man das nicht selber will, weil das vielleicht auch nicht besonders effektiv ist - das hat man im Irak bei den Amerikanern gesehen -, bleibt eben nur der Weg, denjenigen zu helfen, die das auch in unserem Interesse tun.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund ist es richtig, dass ein neues Weißbuch aufgelegt wird. Im Ergebnis wird darin die Veränderung in dieser Welt sichtbar, und am Ende werden wir aus meiner Sicht eine neue Debatte bekommen, und zwar nicht über eine neue Bundeswehr oder eine ganz neue Reform, sondern darüber, was die Streitkräfte in Zukunft können müssen. Dies darf in Zukunft nicht, wie in der Vergangenheit allzu häufig geschehen, vom Diktat der leeren Kassen abgeleitet werden,\n\nsondern es muss davon abgeleitet werden, was wir als Deutsche in die internationale Politik einbringen können und einbringen wollen.\n\nManche Soldaten haben in den letzten Jahren ja immer wieder gesagt: Was wollt ihr mit eurer Debatte erreichen? Wir bieten euch doch ein möglichst breites Spektrum an Fähigkeiten an, damit ihr Politikerinnen und Politiker auswählen könnt. - Das ist der falsche Ansatz, um es ganz klar zu sagen. Wir Politiker definieren, welche Fähigkeiten unsere Streitkräfte brauchen. Die Soldaten setzen das dann operativ um. Das ist die richtige Reihenfolge. Damit kommt allerdings auch Verantwortung auf uns zu: Wenn wir diese Aufgaben definiert haben, müssen wir schon dafür sorgen, dass die Streitkräfte die dafür notwendigen Mittel bekommen.\n\nDeshalb bin ich dankbar, dass unsere Haushälterin - ihr möchte ich an dieser Stelle wirklich danken - nicht nur die schwarze Null im Auge hatte, sondern immer auch im Blick hatte, dass es bei der Bundeswehr nicht nur um Waffen geht, sondern in erster Linie auch um Menschen. Sie hat vor diesem Hintergrund wichtige Beiträge geleistet, dass der Haushalt im nächsten Jahr auskömmlich ist. Herzlichen Dank! In Zukunft werden wir Debatten führen, bei denen das ebenfalls sichtbar wird. So wird das Attraktivitätsprogramm seriös und nachhaltig in zukünftigen Haushalten abgebildet werden. Das ist ganz wichtig für die Glaubwürdigkeit.\n\nIn diesem Sinne: Recht herzlichen Dank. Ich denke, wir sind auf einem guten Weg. In drei Jahren wird man sagen können: Diese Große Koalition hat die Herausforderung angenommen, die Chancen, die sich für die Bundeswehr boten, ergriffen und ihre Aufgaben erledigt.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n4436,anette-kramme,\"Herzlichen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Herr Kurth, ich gehe nicht davon aus, dass Sie tatsächlich die Frage beantwortet haben wollen, welche rechtli-chen Hemmnisse eine Beschäftigung im Renten-alter erleichtern. Solche wären mir nämlich nicht bekannt. Sofern Ihre Frage so gemeint sein sollte, ob es rechtliche Hemmnisse gibt, die die Beschäf-tigung im Rentenalter erschweren, kann ich Ihnen Folgendes sagen:\n\nDerzeit beschäftigt sich eine Arbeitsgruppe der Koalitionsfraktionen mit der Frage flexibler Über-gänge in das Rentenalter. Insoweit wird auch über Hemmnisse diskutiert, die die Beschäftigung im Rentenalter erschweren. Wir werden die Ergeb-nisse dieser Arbeitsgruppe abwarten und uns dann in einem gesonderten Prozess mit dieser Thematik näher beschäftigen.\n\nIch hoffe, Sie haben Verständnis dafür, dass ich jetzt nicht 15 Themen der Reihe nach herunterde-klinieren kann.\n\nIch kann aber sehr wohl einige dieser Fragestel-lungen wiedergeben. Es geht beispielsweise um die Frage der Rentenbeiträge von Älteren. Es geht beispielsweise um die Frage von befristeten Ar-beitsverhältnissen bei Älteren. Es geht beispiels-weise um Hinzuverdienstmöglichkeiten von Älte-ren, die sich auch im vorgezogenen -Rentenbezug befinden. Es geht um Fragen der Gesundheitspoli-tik. Es geht um die Frage, wie man die Gesund-heit älterer Menschen besser schützen kann, so-dass diese länger am Erwerbsprozess teilnehmen können. Es geht um Vorschläge zu einem soge-nannten Alterssicherungsgeld. - Das sind die Dinge, die mir aus dem Stegreif dazu einfallen.\n\nHierzu gibt es keine Meinungsbildung innerhalb der Bundesregierung. Wie gesagt, wir werden uns mit der Thematik beschäftigen, wenn der Prozess in der Koali-tionsarbeitsgruppe abgeschlossen ist.\"\n10114,erwin-ruddel,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Gerade in dieser Legislaturperiode haben wir die Qualitätsstandards in der Versorgung besonders in den Mittelpunkt gestellt und haben hier große Fortschritte erreicht. Eine gute Versorgung ist ohne eine gute Pflege nicht möglich. Ich denke, dadurch werden auch die Bedeutung und die Wertigkeit der Pflege besonders in den Mittelpunkt gerückt. Wir haben in Deutschland eine gute Pflege. Ich danke allen Pflegekräften für ihre motivierte und kompetente Arbeit. Ich denke, viele Länder können sich ein Beispiel an der Pflege, die wir in Deutschland anbieten, nehmen.\n\nBis 2030 wird die Zahl der Pflegebedürftigen um die Hälfte auf etwa 3,5 Millionen Menschen steigen. 2050 sind bereits 4,5 Millionen Pflegebedürftige prognostiziert. Gerade die Altenpflege ist sehr personalintensiv. Durch den demografischen Wandel und die gestiegenen Leistungsangebote werden wir in Zukunft deutlich mehr Pflegekräfte benötigen. Bis hierhin gehe ich mit dem Antrag der Linken einig, aber dann hört die Übereinstimmung auch auf.\n\nDie Frage ist doch: Was müssen wir konkret tun, um Abhilfe zu schaffen? Mit einem Wünsch-dir-was-Katalog kommen wir da nicht weiter. Stattdessen müssen wir uns die Mühe machen, an den verschiedensten Stellschrauben konkret anzusetzen und durch geeignete Maßnahmen dafür zu sorgen, dass sich künftig deutlich mehr Menschen als bisher für die Pflege entscheiden. Das heißt: Wir müssen Anreize schaffen, um die Motivation für den Pflegeberuf zu stärken, um die Ausbildung zu verbessern und um die Arbeitsbedingungen attraktiver zu gestalten. Und genau das tun wir.\n\nWir senken den Schlüssel für die Betreuungskräfte in der Altenpflege. Wir reduzieren überflüssige Bürokratie und überbordende Dokumentationspflichten.\n\nWir reformieren grundlegend den Pflege-TÜV, und wir werden ein neues Pflegeberufegesetz verabschieden. Morgen werden wir bereits die Gelegenheit haben, hier in diesem Haus darüber zu debattieren.\n\nBereits im letzten Jahr hat die Altenpflege in Deutschland so viele Ausbildungsplätze angeboten wie nie zuvor. Insgesamt standen knapp 29 000 Plätze zur Verfügung. Das ist ein schöner Erfolg für die Ausbildungs- und Qualitätsoffensive in der Altenpflege,\n\ndie gemeinsam von der Bundesregierung, den Arbeitgebern und den Gewerkschaften ins Leben gerufen wurde.\n\nIch kann mir auch sehr gut vorstellen, dass wir bald vermehrt junge Flüchtlinge ausbilden können, zumal gerade die Altenpflege in den letzten Jahren positive Erfahrungen mit der Ausbildung von Menschen aus Drittstaaten gemacht hat. Dabei steht selbstverständlich fest, dass die Beherrschung der deutschen Sprache gerade für den Umgang mit alten und pflegebedürftigen Menschen eine Grundvoraussetzung ist.\n\nUm möglichst viele junge Leute für den ebenso anspruchsvollen wie zukunftssicheren Pflegeberuf zu gewinnen, werden wir das Schulgeld in der Ausbildung abschaffen. Unabhängig davon müssen sich aber auch die Arbeitsbedingungen in der Pflege weiter verbessern. Denn leider gilt nach wie vor, dass gerade viele jüngere Menschen nicht dauerhaft im Pflegeberuf bleiben.\n\nHier sind zuvörderst die Arbeitgeber in der Pflicht, anständige Tariflöhne zu zahlen, um den Pflegeberuf attraktiver zu machen. Deshalb gilt den Sozialleistungsträgern der Appell, ordentliche Pflegesätze zu vereinbaren, damit die Pflegeeinrichtungen ihre Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter auch angemessen bezahlen können.\n\nBei den kommunalen Spitzenverbänden gab es bekanntlich gewisse Begehrlichkeiten mit Blick auf den von uns vorangetriebenen Bürokratieabbau. Die Dividende aus dem Bürokratieabbau steht aber den Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern in der Pflege zu und kommt auf diese Weise dort an, wo sie hingehört, nämlich bei den pflegebedürftigen Menschen.\n\nMit Blick auf Länder und Kommunen füge ich hinzu: Es geht grundsätzlich nicht an, dass die Pflegeversicherung für etwas bezahlt, was bisher von anderen finanziert wurde. Das heißt: Jeder zusätzliche Euro muss am Bett ankommen. Das gilt im Übrigen genauso für die Krankenhäuser. Die in die Fallpauschalen eingestellten Anteile für die Pflege müssen auch genau dort ankommen.\n\nEs muss Schluss sein mit der Praxis von Krankenhausverwaltungen, Mittel aus den Pflegetöpfen in Richtung Investitionen umzuleiten, weil sie von Länderseite chronisch unterfinanziert sind.\n\nIch erinnere in diesem Zusammenhang daran, dass wir im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart haben, die Krankenhäuser zu verpflichten, die Mittel für das Pflegepersonal nicht für andere Zwecke zu entfremden. In diesem Sinne braucht die Pflege insgesamt von uns allen einen Schutzschirm. Das bedeutet selbstverständlich auch, dass Mittel zur Erhöhung der Tariflöhne in der Pflege eins zu eins den Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern zugutekommen müssen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, mit Blick auf die anstehende Reform der Pflegeberufe werden wir dafür sorgen, dass keiner der drei Pflegebereiche Schaden nimmt, indem wir sicherstellen, dass keine wichtigen Ausbildungsinhalte verloren gehen.\n\nAngesichts der demografischen Entwicklung und der von uns deutlich ausgeweiteten Leistungen in der Pflege können wir es uns umso weniger leisten, potenzielle Kräfte gerade in der Altenpflege zu verlieren. Deshalb wird auch gewährleistet bleiben, dass für Hauptschulabsolventen in Verbindung mit einer abgeschlossenen Ausbildung - beispielsweise einer einjährigen Pflegehelferausbildung - der Zugang zur Ausbildung bestehen bleibt und diese auch erfolgreich nach insgesamt drei Jahren absolviert werden kann.\n\nDa die Pflegeversicherung jährlich bis zu 300 Millionen Euro für die generalistische Ausbildung zusätzlich zur Verfügung stellen soll, werden die Interessen der Altenpflege keinesfalls zu kurz kommen. Denn unsere Aufgabe besteht darin, Versorgungsprobleme zu lösen.\n\nGestatten Sie mir abschließend noch den Hinweis auf einige wichtige flankierende Maßnahmen, die wir auch mit dem Ziel einer Stärkung der Pflege beschlossen haben:\n\nKünftig haben Senioren und pflegebedürftige Menschen einen verbrieften Anspruch auf einen einheitlichen Medikationsplan und Zugang zu einer spürbar besseren Hospizarbeit und einer flächendeckenden Palliativversorgung.\n\nMit dem Gesetz zur Verbesserung der Palliativ- und Hospizversorgung haben wir außerdem die Voraussetzungen für Verträge zwischen Heimträgern und Ärzten geschaffen. Bislang waren Heimbewohner gerade von fachärztlicher Versorgung häufig abgehängt oder wurden viel zu oft und völlig unnötig in Kliniken eingewiesen, vor allem nachts und an Wochenenden. Zudem werden Zahnärzte künftig häufiger zu Vorsorgeuntersuchungen in Pflegeheime kommen. Wir unterstützen auch den Ausbau der Ärztenetze und machen die Förderung von Praxisnetzen mit den anderen an der Versorgung beteiligten Berufsgruppen und Versorgungseinrichtungen verbindlich.\n\nDas alles verbessert nachhaltig die Versorgung pflegebedürftiger Menschen, entlastet die Pflegekräfte und schafft mehr Zeit für pflegerische Betreuung und menschliche Zuwendung. Darauf kommt es uns besonders an.\"\n12731,christian-hirte,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Vor zwei Wochen hat der MDR bei den Kollegen des Haushaltsausschusses eine Umfrage gemacht, welches die Lieblingszahl im Haushalt des nächsten Jahres sei. Es wird Sie nicht überraschen, dass ich einer derjenigen bin, denen die Null besonders gut gefällt.\n\nMan kann gar nicht oft genug betonen, welch große historische Leistung es ist, dass wir nicht nur im nächsten Jahr wieder ohne Nettoneuverschuldung auskommen, sondern es auch die gesamte bisherige Legislaturperiode geschafft haben, und das, obwohl wir erheblich mehr Geld in die Hand genommen haben für Zukunftsinvestitionen, für Infrastruktur, für Familien, für Bildung und Forschung, für Sicherheit - sowohl innen als auch außen - oder auch für Kultur.\n\nIch glaube, das ist ein Grund, auch mal froh sein zu können. Das sage ich insbesondere mit Blick auf die Opposition, verbunden mit der Frage, ob es nicht manchmal auch eine Nummer kleiner ginge, was die Vorwürfe anbelangt, die Sie gegenüber uns von der Koalition gerade mit Blick auf den diesjährigen Haushaltsplan erheben. Ein Wort der Anerkennung für den grundsätzlich erfolgreichen Weg, den wir gemeinsam beschreiten, und ein Wort des Respektes dafür, dass unser Land in einer Lage ist wie kein anderes in Europa, wären zumindest angemessen.\n\nIch denke - das will ich gleich vorab sagen -, dass wir einen hervorragenden Haushalt für das nächste Jahr, 2017, vorlegen und ein bisschen stolz auf die Arbeit sein können, die wir gemeinsam geleistet haben, auch mit Blick auf die Fortschritte, die nach der Einbringung in den Haushaltsberatungen erzielt werden konnten.\n\nWeil uns das Thema Umweltschutz wichtig ist, gibt es auch im Etat für Bau und Umwelt erhebliche Aufwüchse - die Ministerin hat darauf hingewiesen -: über 1 Milliarde Euro mehr im Umwelt- und Bauetat, nicht nur für Maßnahmen im Inland, etwa im Bereich des Wohnungsbaus, sondern auch für Aufgaben im Rahmen unserer Verantwortung für die globalen Aufgaben im Bereich der Umwelt- und Klimaschutzpolitik. Wir stellen für die Internationale Klimaschutzinitiative deutlich mehr Mittel zur Verfügung, und ab 2018 werden wir diese jährlich um 75 Millionen Euro aufstocken.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, insbesondere von den Grünen, natürlich ist es so, dass Deutschland weltweit immer noch für seine Vorreiterrolle beim Klimaschutz geschätzt wird.\n\nJetzt mögen Sie hingehen und behaupten, dass wir unsere Aufgaben nicht gut wahrnehmen, aber die weltweite Wahrnehmung ist eine andere. Knapp 50 Länder haben in der letzten Woche beim Gipfel in Marrakesch angekündigt, ihren Energiebedarf möglichst bald zu 100 Prozent aus erneuerbaren Energien zu decken.\n\nDie Staaten des Climate Vulnerable Forum sind nicht weit von dem entfernt, was wir in Deutschland mit dem Klimaschutzplan auf den Weg gebracht haben.\n\nEs ist so, dass viele dieser Länder gar nicht darüber diskutieren können, wie man aus der Kohle aussteigt, weil sie schlicht keine haben.\n\nNatürlich ist es gut und richtig, dass sie gar nicht erst in eine solche Technologie einsteigen; aber wir haben sie, und wir müssen auch dafür Sorge tragen, dass bei uns,\n\nin einem industrialisierten Land, Strom dauerhaft sicher verfügbar und auch bezahlbar bleibt.\n\nIch glaube, da haben wir Gutes auf den Weg gebracht.\n\nDas gilt im Übrigen auch für den Klimaschutzplan, der von der Bundesregierung vorgelegt wurde. Ich denke, wenn man ihn genau lesen würde - das rege ich an -, würde man feststellen, dass es dem Plan angesichts der ihm innewohnenden Konsequenz auch bei den Sektorzielen, die die Ministerin angesprochen hat, immanent ist, dass natürlich auch wir in Deutschland aus der Kohleverstromung aussteigen werden.\n\nWir wollen anderen Ländern, insbesondere den armen, Hilfestellung bei der Umstellung auf emissionsfreie Stromerzeugungstechnologien und bei vielen anderen Umwelttechnologien geben. Insofern ist es gut, dass wir in Deutschland insoweit einen Beitrag leisten, als wir erneut eine Exportinitiative für Umwelttechnologien auflegen. Ich bin den Kollegen Berichterstattern ausdrücklich dankbar, dass wir das gemeinsam gemacht haben. Ich glaube, wenigstens das könnten Sie von den Grünen doch ausnahmsweise einmal wertschätzen; denn ich glaube, diese Initiative ist gut, um die Situation in Deutschland im Hinblick auf Arbeitsplätze, für den Bereich Forschung und Entwicklung, zu verbessern und gleichzeitig dort zu helfen, wo Bedarf besteht, um so auf internationaler, globaler Ebene etwas für den Klimaschutz zu tun.\n\nVorhin gab es ganz kurz schon eine Diskussion zum Thema Solarenergie. Da könnte man sagen, das war quasi ein großangelegtes, aber leider extrem teures Projekt zum Export von Umwelttechnologien. Die Solarindustrie in Deutschland ist deswegen kaputtgegangen, weil wir sie schlicht überfordert haben.\n\nDie deutschen Produzenten waren angesichts der hohen Fördersätze nicht in der Lage, mit der Produktion hinterherzukommen. Das hat dazu geführt, dass wir andernorts, insbesondere in Südostasien, die Produzenten erst groß gemacht haben.\n\nAndere Themen wurden schon angesprochen; ich muss es nicht wiederholen. Die Mittel für die internationale Zusammenarbeit, etwa für die europäische Klimaschutzinitiative, haben wir mehr als verdoppelt, auf 17 Millionen Euro. Auch da zeigt sich, dass sich Deutschland nicht nur auf nationaler, sondern auch auf europäischer und internationaler Ebene engagiert.\n\nDie Biodiversität ist angesprochen worden. Auf nationaler Ebene ist insbesondere die Nationale Strategie zur biologischen Vielfalt von Bedeutung. Mit einem Mittelaufwuchs um 5 Millionen Euro auf 20 Millionen Euro für 2017 leisten wir, denke ich, einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Stärkung der Biodiversität.\n\nBesonders freue ich mich über den neuen Werra-Ulster-Weser-Fonds, mit dem dafür Sorge getragen werden soll, dass die von der Kaliproduktion betroffenen Anrainer beim Umgang mit den negativen Folgen unterstützt werden.\n\nZur Wahrheit gehört, dass wir Kaliproduktion benötigen, und ich hoffe, dass wir uns einig sind, dass die weltweite Ernährungssituation nur mit Kalidünger bewältigt werden kann. Wir wollen und müssen auch in Deutschland unseren Beitrag dazu leisten. Dazu ist es erforderlich, dass wir die Produktion beibehalten, aber eben auch denjenigen helfen, die durch die Folgen der über 100 Jahre währenden Produktion und der jahrzehntelangen Verpressung, zum Beispiel in der Region Gerstungen, belastet sind. Das wollen wir mit Nachteilsausgleichen in den Bereichen Wohnen, Infrastruktur, Siedlungsentwicklung, Arbeit und Wirtschaft, Bildung, Kinder- und Jugendarbeit, Soziales und Gesundheit, Mobilität, Freizeit und Tourismus, Kultur, Sport und Engagementförderung sowie Wissenschaft und Forschung tun.\n\nAls Thüringer erlauben Sie mir zuletzt noch eine Anmerkung zu einem Thema, das 2019 auch in meinem Heimatland eine besondere Rolle spielen wird: 100 Jahre Bauhaus.\n\nWir stellen im Etat des BMUB 500 000 Euro zur Verfügung, um die Arbeit der gemeinsamen Geschäftsstelle in Weimar zu unterstützen. Das ist richtig und angebracht, weil das Bauhaus die Welt im besten Wortsinn verändert hat. Das kann man städtebaulich an sehr vielen Orten, nicht nur in Deutschland, sondern weltweit, nachvollziehen. Aber das Thema Bauhaus entfaltet auch im Bereich von Kunst und Kultur bis heute seine Wirkungen. Deswegen haben wir nicht nur im Einzelplan 16, sondern - das sage ich schon einmal in Vorausschau auf die morgen zu debattierenden Etats - auch im Bereich der Kulturstaatsministerin weitere 3 Millionen Euro und im Bereich des Auswärtigen Amtes weitere 2 Millionen Euro auf den Weg gebracht, um dafür Sorge zu tragen, dass wir dieses Jubiläum im Jahr 2019 angemessen begehen können.\n\nWir haben - auch da bin ich froh, dass wir im Kulturbereich so viel auf den Weg bringen konnten - zum Beispiel für das Reformationsjubiläum erneut Mittel in die Hand genommen. Das betrifft nicht nur den Bereich des Baus, wo wir zum Beispiel wieder Möglichkeiten haben, in Sakralbauten zu investieren, sondern auch die Tatsache, dass wir, nachdem wir im Jahr 2011 mit 5 Millionen Euro begonnen haben, im nächsten Jahr bei 11,65 Millionen Euro landen, die wir in den Haushalt einstellen, um das Reformationsjubiläum angemessen begehen zu können. 280 Projekte konnten bislang gefördert werden. Das ist eine hervorragende Maßnahme, die wir jetzt - im kleinen Maßstab - auch beim Bauhaus fortsetzen werden.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, ich denke, haushalterisch hat es selten - ich würde sogar sagen: nie - bessere Zeiten für unser Land gegeben. Wir haben keinerlei Anlass, uns von Sorgen und Missmut umtreiben zu lassen. Im Gegenteil: Wir sollten deutlich machen, wie gut es unserem Land geht. Kein anderes Land - so eine Studie aus Großbritannien - bietet so hervorragende Chancen und Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten für junge Menschen. Wenn das nicht das Beste ist, was Politik in einem Land für die Zukunft leisten kann, weiß ich es auch nicht. Dazu haben wir, auch wir Haushälter, unseren Beitrag geleistet. Vielen Dank allen, die sich da mit eingebracht haben.\n\nVielen Dank auch für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n9617,wolfgang-gehrcke,\"Herzlichen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Ich möchte zu einer Sache eine Klarstellung machen, weil sie immer wieder, wie ich finde, in einer falschen Art und Weise wiederholt wird - auch von Niels Annen gerade. Die Absicht ist erkennbar.\n\nWir haben bei der Einsetzung der Kommission - das können Sie im Protokoll nachlesen; ich bedauere sehr, dass wir nicht einmal den Präsidenten haben überzeugen können - davon gesprochen, dass wir in den Auftrag der Kommission auch die Frage nach der Stärkung und dem Ausbau der Parlamentsrechte aufnehmen wollen.\n\nDas wollten wir ausdrücklich in dem Auftrag der Kommission haben - was Sie gemacht haben, ist eine andere Sache -, das ist abgelehnt worden.\n\nMan wollte nicht den Auftrag erteilen, dass die Parlamentsrechte auch gestärkt und ausgebaut werden. Das war der Kern der Meinungsverschiedenheiten. Wir wollten nicht das Feigenblatt in einer Kommission, die sich dieser Aufgabenstellung verweigert, für Sie spielen. Das hätten Sie gerne gehabt und hätten hinterher sagen können: Die waren auch dabei und durften ihre Meinung äußern. - Entscheiden konnten wir ja sowieso nichts. Deswegen bleibt meine Fragestellung, ob dieses Parlament bereit ist, seine eigenen Rechte auszubauen und damit die Rechte der Regierung zu schmälern. Das ist der Kern der Differenz. Dazu müssen Sie sich bekennen, und dazu brauchen Sie nicht einen solchen Unsinn zu erzählen, dass wir uns verweigert haben, dass wir nicht wollten und, und, und.\n\nIch weiß, dass Sie sich Mühe gegeben haben. Herr Rühe und Herr Kolbow waren bei uns in der Fraktion. Das war eine ganz muntere Debatte. Die SPD hat uns immer zum Kaffeetrinken eingeladen, um mit uns zu reden. Darum geht es nicht. Es geht darum, ob diese Kommission den Auftrag vom Parlament zur Stärkung und zum Ausbau der Parlamentsrechte bekommen hätte oder nicht. Das haben Sie nicht geleistet, und das wollten Sie nicht. Das Ergebnis spricht dafür, dass es nicht erfüllt worden ist. Das wollte ich hier noch einmal klarstellen.\"\n13131,franziska-brantner,\"Sehr geehrte Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Bürgerinnen und Bürger! Am vergangenen Wochenende haben Dutzende Unschuldige ihr Leben verloren: in der Sankt-Peter-und-Paul-Kirche in Kairo überwiegend Frauen, die beteten, in Istanbul vor allem Polizisten, die ein Fußballspiel schützen wollten. Diese Attentate sind furchtbar, verurteilenswert, durch nichts zu rechtfertigen - genauso wie all jene, die vorher in Paris, Brüssel, Nizza passierten, oder all jene weltweit, von denen wir hier kaum etwas mitbekommen.\n\nIch möchte heute hier vor allen Dingen über Ägypten sprechen. Präsident el\u001eSisi hat von einem abscheulichen Terrorakt gesprochen und Staatstrauer angeordnet, und er hat von einem Angriff gesprochen, dessen Ziel es sei, Christen und Muslime zu spalten, der aber die Einheit Ägyptens weiter stärken solle. Das ist richtig; denn wir dürfen die Religionen nicht gegeneinander ausspielen. Das darf nicht passieren - egal wo Attentate verübt werden.\n\nDas Attentat von Kairo war feige und widerwärtig. Die Täter müssen unnachgiebig verfolgt werden und vor Gericht gebracht werden. Aber leider bestehen in Ägypten Zweifel daran, dass dies geschieht. Human Rights Watch hat nach dem jüngsten Attentat wieder daran erinnert, dass Polizisten und sogenannte Sicherheitsorgane seit Jahren immer wieder tatenlos zuschauen, wenn Kopten Opfer von Übergriffen werden, und dass viele Fälle bis heute nicht aufgeklärt sind und keine Verantwortlichen zur Rechenschaft gezogen werden. Diese Kritik und diese Appelle darf el\u001eSisi nicht vom Tisch wischen, wenn ihm die Minderheitenrechte der Kopten wirklich wichtig sind.\n\nHeute hier muss man auch sagen, dass für el\u001eSisi und seine Regierung in den letzten Jahren jeder, der nicht ganz ins Konzept passt, sofort ein Terrorist geworden ist. Viele von denen, die friedlich ihre Meinung sagen, friedlich demonstrieren, kritische Zeitungsartikel schreiben, versuchen, ins Ausland zu reisen, um darüber zu berichten, wurden einfach mit dem Stempel „Terrorist“ verurteilt. Aber alle zu Terroristen zu erklären, ist keine effektive Terrorismusbekämpfung;\n\ndas ist einfach Unterdrückung und keine Terrorismusbekämpfung.\n\nDabei ist klar: Minderheitenrechte müssen gelten - für Kopten in Ägypten, Muslime im Süden Nigerias oder Christen im Norden Nigerias, für Hindus in Pakistan, für Christen und Moslems in Myanmar und - eine andere Minderheit, aber bei uns relevant - für Roma in vielen Staaten Europas. Nur wenn wir uns für alle gleich einsetzen und alle gleich schützen wollen, sind wir glaubwürdig, wenn wir uns dann für eine Gruppe einsetzen. Ansonsten kommt es wie eine Umarmung für eine Gruppe rüber. Dann sind wir nicht glaubwürdig. Minderheitenrechte gelten für alle, egal woher sie kommen, egal welcher Religion sie angehören.\n\nDenn was sie verbindet - und das ist für mich ein zentraler Punkt -, ist, dass Minderheitenrechte Menschenrechte sind. Die Durchsetzung von Minderheitenrechten ist immer nur so stark wie die Durchsetzung von Menschenrechten generell. Ein Mensch ist ein Mensch, und wenn Menschenrechte nicht garantiert sind, sind auch Minderheitenrechte nicht garantiert.\n\nMomentan steht es in Ägypten leider schlecht um die Situation der Menschenrechte an sich. Sie haben es mitbekommen: Das Gesetz zu den NGOs, den Nichtregierungsorganisationen, ist eines, das deren Leben, Arbeiten und Wirken erheblich erschweren wird.\n\nGerade gab es auch gute News, zumindest News mit Licht und Schatten, und zwar vom Supreme Court. Das haben Sie vielleicht mitbekommen, aber manchmal geht es ja auch unter. Es geht um die Frage, wie in Ägypten mit Demonstrationen umgegangen werden darf. Der Oberste Gerichtshof hat geurteilt, dass das Innenministerium nicht mehr willkürlich Demonstrationen verbieten darf. Das sind gute News. Wir hoffen, dass el\u001eSisi dies anerkennt und nicht dagegen vorgeht, dass er akzeptiert, dass das Innenministerium nicht mehr die Macht hat, Demonstrationen willkürlich zu verbieten. Das wäre ein Fortschritt, auch wenn es schade ist, dass die Klausel, dass man mindestens zwei Jahre ins Gefängnis kommt, wenn man an einer nichtgenehmigten Demo teilnimmt, nicht gekippt wurde. Aber immerhin, die komplette Willkür hat das Verfassungsgericht ausgehebelt. Vielleicht ist das ein Appell, auch hier zu sagen: Die Menschenrechte haben möglicherweise eine Chance in diesem Land - und damit auch die Minderheitenrechte.\n\nAber auch der Westen ist ja nicht ohne Schuld. Westliche Regierungen lassen Minderheiten- und Menschenrechte immer wieder hängen, wenn es geopolitisch opportun erscheint. Das sieht man aktuell am Fall Aleppo. Dass die syrische Regierungsseite wieder schießt, dass wir keinerlei Möglichkeiten haben, Zivilisten endlich aus dieser Hölle herauszubekommen, das sind Völkerrechtsbrüche; wir haben die Verbrechen benannt. Herr Bartsch, dass das keine Konsequenzen hat und zum Beispiel nicht weitere Sanktionen nach sich zieht, ist ein Signal, das unserer Meinung nach das Völkerrecht schwächt.\n\nDass Menschen das Vertrauen in den Westen verlieren, das Vertrauen in die Werte, dass sie den Glauben an die internationalen und universellen Menschenrechte verlieren - wundern wir uns darüber? Und wenn sie vielleicht sogar zu Feinden werden, müssen wir uns dann nicht auch Fragen stellen? Ich glaube, wir kommen ohne diese Fragen nicht weiter.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n4138,philipp-mißfelder,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Frau Vogler, ich habe, ehrlich gesagt, auch schon bei der Diskussion im Ausschuss nicht verstanden - ich glaube, es war der Kollege Schmidt, der diese Frage kürzlich auch Herrn van Aken gestellt hat -, was eigentlich Ihre Alternative zu dem Vorgehen bei UNMISS ist. Man kann sicherlich auch kritische Punkte ansprechen - das tun wir ja auch -, aber das, was Sie vorgeschlagen haben, war definitiv gar keine Alternative dazu. Die Entscheidung, sich bei UNMISS zurückzuziehen, würde in der Konsequenz dazu führen, dass die Situation im Land unübersichtlicher werden und die Gefährdung der Zivilbevölkerung zunehmen würde. Das werden wir nicht zulassen. Wir wollen einen, wenn auch begrenzten, aber substanziellen Beitrag dazu leisten, dass sich im Südsudan Staatlichkeit entwickeln kann.\n\nDazu trägt UNMISS aus unserer Sicht bei.\n\nDeshalb gilt mein Dank zunächst einmal den 16 deutschen Soldatinnen und Soldaten, die sich im Einsatz befinden und die unter der Flagge der UNO dort tätig sind. Angesichts der schwierigen Bedingungen im Südsudan gehört es gerade am heutigen Abend dazu, neben dem Dank auch zu sagen: Wir finden es richtig, dass die Bundeswehr sich an diesem UNO-Mandat beteiligt.\n\nDer Kampf des Südens um seine Unabhängigkeit ist ja nun wirklich nicht neu. Seit 1947 hat sich dieses Land darum bemüht, unabhängig zu werden. 99 Prozent der Südsudanesen haben für die Unabhängigkeit ihres Landes gestimmt. Vor diesem Hintergrund ist es keine Überraschung, dass wir nun seit Jahren über dieses Thema reden. Seit 2005 beschäftigen wir uns mit dem Thema „bewaffnete Streitkräfte im Sudan“. Später ging es dann um den Südsudan, als dieser seine Eigenstaatlichkeit erreicht hatte. Wir glauben, dass dieser Beitrag nach wie vor sinnvoll ist.\n\nIch glaube, dass man eines schon kritisch diskutieren muss - das haben Sie und andere Vorredner ja auch angesprochen -, nämlich die Frage: Reicht das, was wir tun, aus, oder muss das nicht stärker eingebettet werden in das, was wir bei der NATO dank Franz Josef Jung, der den Comprehensive Approach dort eingeführt hat, unter dem Stichwort „vernetzte Sicherheit“ deutlicher betonen? Da sage ich ganz ehrlich: Das ist etwas, was wir uns vielleicht im Rahmen dieser Mandatsverlängerung noch einmal genauer anschauen müssen. Trotzdem glaube ich, dass die heutige Mandatsverlängerung aus vier wichtigen Gründen sinnvoll ist.\n\nErstens. Sie trägt maßgeblich dazu bei, den Zugang der südsudanesischen Zivilbevölkerung zur Hilfe überhaupt sicherzustellen; denn ohne militärisches Eingreifen wäre zivile Hilfe gar nicht möglich. Auch das gehört zu diesem Mandat.\n\nZweitens. Es ist wichtig, dass das Waffenstillstandsabkommen, das nach wie vor sehr fragil ist und durch das die verfeindeten Parteien weiter in einen politischen Prozess hineingebracht werden müssen, durch militärische Maßnahmen unterstützt wird.\n\nDrittens. Ein weiterer Punkt ist die Entstehung von öffentlicher Sicherheit und der Schutz der Flüchtlingslager. Gemäß Kapitel VII der Charta der Vereinten Nationen - auch das ist vorhin angesprochen worden - ist es aus unserer Sicht sehr wohl richtig, hier einen flankierenden Militäreinsatz zu fordern und diesen auch fortzusetzen. Insofern passt dieses UNO-Mandat sehr gut in die Aufgabenstellung hinein, weil gerade der Schutz von Flüchtlingslagern zum Kernbereich dieses Mandats gehört.\n\nViertens. Ein letzter Grund, warum das Mandat sinnvoll und richtig ist, ist die Untersuchung der Verletzung von Menschenrechten sowie die Überwachung des humanitären Völkerrechts.\n\nDamit bin ich nun bei einem Punkt, bei dem ich natürlich sage: Das wird nie allein durch militärische Maßnahmen gewährleistet werden können. Vielmehr stellt sich die Frage: Hat der Südsudan die Chance, dass eine Staatlichkeit entsteht und dass dadurch im Bereich der Konfliktprävention zukünftig mehr getan werden kann? Weiterhin stellt sich die Frage, was wir, auch finanziell, über das bisherige Maß hinaus tun können. Ich habe es ja gerade schon gesagt: Wir glauben, dass die vernetzte Sicherheit, das Zusammenwirken von Entwicklungshilfe, Bundeswehrmaßnahmen und diplomatischen Initiativen, dazu führen kann, dass es eine Friedenskonsolidierung gibt, aber auch dazu, dass eine dauerhafte Beilegung des Konflikts überhaupt in greifbare Nähe rückt; denn davon sind wir noch weit entfernt. Ich glaube, dass der Konflikt nach wie vor zeigt, dass wir immer noch vor einer Herausforderung stehen, bei der man natürlich nicht gerne militärische Maßnahmen einsetzt, bei der es aber nach wie vor sinnvoll ist, diese militärische Komponente einzubringen, um damit den politischen Prozess tatsächlich weiter anstoßen zu können.\n\nIch plädiere dafür - wir haben es in unserer Fraktionssitzung, aber auch in anderen Gremien in dieser Woche besprochen -, dass wir uns über dieses Mandat hinaus, und nicht erst wieder in zwölf Monaten, mit der Frage der Zukunft des Südsudan beschäftigen und überlegen: Was können wir unter dem Stichwort „vernetzte Sicherheit“ zusätzlich leisten, um neben den militärischen Aufgaben einen politisch stabilisierenden Beitrag zu leisten? Ob nun die Afrika-Leitlinien der Bundesregierung, die herausgebracht worden sind, dazu ausreichen, lasse ich einmal dahingestellt sein. Vielleicht können wir darauf aufbauend aber noch einen weiteren Beitrag leisten.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n10971,barbara-woltmann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren!\n\nWir werden nicht durch die Erinnerung an unsere Vergangenheit weise, sondern durch die Verantwortung für unsere Zukunft.\n\nDas stellte schon der irische Schriftsteller, Politiker und Pazifist George Bernard Shaw fest.\n\nDie unfassbaren Verbrechen Hitlers haben sich unlöschbar in die deutsche Geschichte eingebrannt. Es ist und muss uns Erinnerung und Mahnung für die Zukunft sein. Viele Menschen leiden noch immer unter den schrecklichen Ereignissen des Zweiten Weltkrieges. Dieser Krieg hat Elend und Verderben über Millionen von Menschen in Europa und darüber hinaus gebracht.\n\nDas Gedenken an Verdun, an den Ersten Weltkrieg 100 Jahre zurück, oder auch an den Völkermord an den Armeniern - heute Morgen hier in diesem Hause beraten - erinnert uns daran, mahnend wachsam zu sein gegen jeden Aggressor gegen die Menschlichkeit. Die sowjetischen Truppen und die anderen Siegermächte waren es, die ein Deutschland befreiten, in dem Menschen planmäßig und in nie dagewesenem Umfang vernichtet und Andersdenkende gnadenlos verfolgt wurden. Der Zweite Weltkrieg hat Europa weitgehend verwüstet.\n\nAuch das Schicksal der sowjetischen Kriegsgefangenen in der NS\u001eZeit war ein menschenverachtendes Kapitel der Naziherrschaft. Das wissen wir alle und bestreitet niemand. Sämtliche Regierungen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland haben der moralischen und finanziellen Wiedergutmachung des vom NS-Regime verübten Unrechts stets eine besondere Priorität eingeräumt. Dieser Aufgabe stellt sie sich, wie wir sehen, noch heute.\n\nIhre Forderung, liebe Kollegen und Kolleginnen von den Linken, der Deutsche Bundestag solle die Überlebenden um Verzeihung bitten und ihren Angehörigen Achtung und Mitgefühl bezeugen, finde ich allerdings - wie schon teilweise meine Vorredner - sehr missverständlich. Das klingt nämlich so, als wenn Sie der deutschen Bevölkerung damit jedwedes Mitgefühl absprechen - in der Vergangenheit und in der Gegenwart. Das können Sie nicht wirklich ernsthaft meinen.\n\nWas hat Sie im Grunde dazu bewogen, nach der Diskussion um die Anerkennungsleistung an ehemalige sowjetische Kriegsgefangene im Jahre 2015 - meine Vorredner haben schon darauf hingewiesen - und den daraus erfolgten Regelungen jetzt wieder diese Diskussion auf die Tagesordnung zu heben und Ihren Antrag vorzulegen?\n\nMir erschließt sich das nicht wirklich.\n\nLetztes Jahr ist auf Antrag der Grünen sowie der Linken über eine finanzielle Anerkennung von NS-Unrecht für sowjetische Kriegsgefangene im Plenum eingehend diskutiert und eine entsprechende Vorlage an den Haushaltsausschuss überwiesen worden. Nach einer Sachverständigenanhörung hat der Haushaltsausschuss im Mai 2015 einen Beschluss zum Nachtragshaushalt gefasst und einen symbolischen finanziellen Anerkennungsbetrag von 10 Millionen Euro bereitgestellt; denn das Bundesentschädigungsgesetz greift für Kriegsgefangene nicht.\n\nDer Bundestag hat den Nachtragshaushalt dann auch beschlossen. Das heißt, das Leid dieser Menschen ist - auch darüber ist hier damals diskutiert worden - durch diesen Betrag zumindest symbolisch anerkannt worden.\n\nEhemalige sowjetische Kriegsgefangene erhalten demnach eine Einmalzahlung in Höhe von 2 500 Euro. Wir gehen von bis zu 4 000 noch lebenden Berechtigten aus. Bisher sind 1 233 Anträge eingegangen. In 391 Fällen wurden Leistungen ausgezahlt, etwas mehr sind erledigt, und nicht alle konnten anerkannt werden. Diese Regelung halte ich ausdrücklich für richtig; denn eine Entschädigung von Kriegsgefangenen durch die Stiftung „Erinnerung, Verantwortung und Zukunft“ ist auch ausgeschlossen. Bei den internationalen Verhandlungen, die der Errichtung dieser Stiftung vorausgegangen sind, wurde dies einvernehmlich so geregelt. Die Begründung war damals, man wolle keine neuen Reparationszahlungen zum Ausgleich von Kriegsschäden ehemaliger Kriegsgefangener justiziabel machen. Die Stiftung wurde bereits 2000 gegründet, um vor allen Dingen Zahlungen an ehemalige Zwangsarbeiter zu leisten.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Bundesrepublik Deutschland hat auf dem Gebiet der Entschädigung für NS\u001eUnrecht bis heute rund 70 Milliarden Euro erbracht. Deutschland war dabei immer darauf bedacht, dass die Entschädigungsleistungen nicht einseitig - das heißt nur für eine Gruppierung - gewährt werden, sondern dass alle Betroffenen und alle Verfolgten zumindest eine späte Wiedergutmachung bekommen. Allerdings muss auch ich sagen: Mit Geld allein kann man das, was dort passiert ist, nie wiedergutmachen.\n\nDa stehen wir zu unserer historischen Verantwortung.\n\nFestzuhalten bleibt: Krieg ist immer eine furchtbare Geißel für alle davon Betroffenen, insbesondere dann, wenn man es mit solch menschenverachtenden Regimen wie dem Naziregime zu tun hat. Wir sollten und müssen uns daher - auch im Interesse unserer Kinder und der nachfolgenden Generationen - immer unserer Geschichte bewusst sein, damit ein solches Verbrechen niemals wieder geschieht. Aber man sollte niemandem, der den Krieg nicht erlebt hat, Schuldgefühle einreden. Die meisten von uns sind nach Kriegsende geboren.\n\nIch möchte ganz ausdrücklich betonen: Wir haben die Schuld unserer Vorfahren von Beginn an auf unsere Schultern genommen und die Verantwortung übernommen. Wenn wir es aber nach über 70 Jahren nicht langsam schaffen, uns von dem Gedanken zu emanzipieren, dass das alles immer noch nicht reicht und wir nicht genug tun, habe ich die Sorge, dass sich dieses Pflichtgefühl irgendwann ins Gegenteil verkehren wird.\n\nWir sehen uns heute von kriegerischen Auseinandersetzungen umgeben, die entsetzliche Gräueltaten, die wir in unserem friedlich vereinten Europa seit über 70 Jahren durch unsere gemeinsame Politik erfolgreich abgewendet haben, zutage bringen.\n\nDiesmal nicht, nein. - Ich trete dafür ein, dass wir unseren Blick auf die Gegenwart und die Zukunft richten, ohne die Vergangenheit zu vergessen. Wir sollten dafür Sorge tragen, dass unser Friedensmodell für andere Regionen in der Welt beispielhaft sein kann. Wir sollten daher voller Zuversicht in die Zukunft schauen. Es sind 70 Jahre Frieden, die uns das europäische Haus beschert hat. Das müssen wir heute mehr denn je vermitteln. Da halte ich Ihren Antrag für nicht zielführend.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nKollege Beck, ich glaube, Sie wollen mich missverstehen; denn ich weiß nicht, warum auch immer Sie diesen Beitrag jetzt gemacht haben.\n\nIch habe in keiner Weise gesagt, dass die Vergangenheit und die Erinnerung an die Vergangenheit nicht wichtig sind. Ganz im Gegenteil: Die Erinnerung an die Vergangenheit - ich habe das in meiner Rede mehrfach gesagt - ist zwingend notwendig; denn sonst kann ein Volk keine Zukunft haben. Das steht für mich überhaupt nicht zur Disposition. Ich muss die Vergangenheit kennen, um dann auch in die Zukunft schauen zu können. Beides gehört zusammen.\n\nIch habe an George Bernard Shaw erinnert, der gesagt hat, dass wir uns auch der Verantwortung für unsere Zukunft stellen müssen. Das heißt, beides gehört zusammen.\n\nIn keiner Weise habe ich an irgendeiner Stelle das Unrecht, das den russischen Soldaten damals widerfahren ist, kleinreden wollen. Ganz im Gegenteil: Es gab ein großes Unrecht gegenüber dieser Gruppe. Insofern verstehe ich Ihre jetzigen Bemerkungen nicht. Ich glaube, dass ich in meiner Rede ausdrücklich angesprochen habe, dass es ein furchtbares, schreckliches, menschenverachtendes Regime war - nicht nur russischen Soldaten, sondern auch vielen anderen Gruppen gegenüber, wie zum Beispiel den Juden.\n\nIch habe mir heute Morgen auch noch einmal ganz ausführlich die Ausstellung im Paul-Löbe-Haus zum Dialog zwischen Deutschland und Polen angeschaut. Auch in Polen sind sehr viele Menschen durch das Unrechtsregime umgekommen.\n\nInsofern sage ich: Die Vergangenheit gehört dazu, aber auch die Zukunft, und ich glaube, das ist in meiner Rede mehr als deutlich geworden.\"\n7885,oliver-krischer,\"Herr Staatssekretär, ich kann, ehrlich gesagt, Ihre Nichtantwort an dieser Stelle nicht verstehen; denn im Raume steht die Manipulation einer Software, um bestimmte Abgaswerte unter Prüfbedingungen zu erreichen. Ich möchte an dieser Stelle die Frage des Kollegen Kühn präzisieren: Können Sie uns den Rechtsrahmen, also die Paragrafen, in denen die Straf- und Sanktionsbewehrung für so etwas geregelt ist, nennen, sowohl für die juristische Person, also für das handelnde bzw. nicht handelnde Unternehmen, als auch in zweiter Linie für die Personen, die entsprechende Manipulationen durchgeführt haben? Welche Rechtsgrundlage ist hier also einschlägig? Dass Sie nicht sagen können, wie das im Detail aussieht, ist mir völlig klar. Aber Sie müssen doch hier eine einschlägige Rechtsgrundlage nennen können.\n\nHerr Staatssekretär, ich kann Ihre Antwort jetzt nur so verstehen, dass Sie uns hier nicht sagen können, in welcher Form die entsprechende EU-Richtlinie in deutsches Recht umgesetzt worden ist. Anders ist Ihre Antwort nicht zu interpretieren. Es geht nicht um einen konkreten Fall. Wir fragen jetzt ganz allgemein. Das war die Frage des Kollegen Kühn; der Kollege Wunderlich hat das noch einmal genau so gefragt. Sie können also die Antwort darauf, wo Sanktionsmöglichkeiten in Deutschland existieren, nicht liefern.\n\nDeshalb meine konkrete Nachfrage: In den USA führt das, was wir an Softwaremanipulationen zur Veränderung von Abgaswerten zur Kenntnis bekommen haben, zu strafrechtlichen Ermittlungen. Da scheint das sogar ein Straftatbestand zu sein, wenn ich das richtig interpretiere. Kann es sein, dass die gleiche Handlung am gleichen Motor - da werden ja ähnliche Motoren verwendet - in Deutschland überhaupt keine Ordnungswidrigkeit, Straftat oder irgendein Verstoß gegen Recht ist?\n\nHerr Staatssekretär, Sie haben gerade geantwortet, dass Sie von einer Rückrufaktion des VW-Konzerns in der Größenordnung von einer halben Million Fahrzeugen nichts mitbekommen haben. Okay, das muss ich zur Kenntnis nehmen. Da kann sich dann jeder ein Bild über Ihre Arbeit machen.\n\nDie ICCT-Studie hat Ihnen vorgelegen bzw. liegt Ihnen vor. Mich würde, da diese Studie sehr deutlich nachweist, dass es erhebliche Überschreitungen bei Stickoxidemissionen nicht nur bei VW, sondern bei vielen Fahrzeugherstellern gibt, einfach konkret interessieren: Welche konkrete Konsequenz hat diese Studie in Ihrem Haus gehabt? Zu welcher politischen Aktivität hat das geführt?\n\nIhre Antworten hier machen mich fast sprachlos.\n\nEs ist unglaublich, dass der größte deutsche und europäische Automobilkonzern in Schwierigkeiten kommt, die Schwierigkeiten selber zu verantworten hat und die Bundesregierung hier in einer derart lapidaren Art und Weise damit umgeht.\n\nIch erwarte von einer Bundesregierung, dass sie jetzt ihren Teil dazu leistet und zum Beispiel die Ergebnisse von Messungen, die durchgeführt wurden, öffentlich macht.\n\nAn der Stelle möchte ich ganz konkret bei Ihnen nachfragen: Wie oft hat das Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt in der Vergangenheit bei einer Typzulassung eigentlich konkret nachgemessen? Wie oft ist in der Vergangenheit bei Typzulassungen nachgemessen worden?\n\nHerr Staatssekretär, meine Frage war, wie oft es zu Nachmessungen durch das Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt bei Typzulassungen gekommen ist. Ihre Nichtantwort interpretiere ich so, dass die Antwort in Zahlen null ist, dass eine Kontrolle nicht stattgefunden hat und dass die Bundesregierung durch ihr Nichthandeln an der Stelle insofern zumindest die Mitverantwortung trägt, da sie nicht überprüft hat. Das möchte ich hier einfach feststellen. Diese Wertung möchte ich hier machen.\n\nMich würde konkret interessieren, welche Institutionen Sie jetzt mit der Nachprüfung der vorhandenen auf der Straße fahrenden Dieselfahrzeuge, die die Grenzwerte nach bisherigen Messungen nicht einhalten, beauftragen. Welche Institutionen werden damit beauftragt? Wie soll das Ganze organisiert werden?\n\nHerr Kollege Barthle, da würde mich interessieren: Auf welcher Rechtsgrundlage werden dann die weiteren Messungen bei den betroffenen Fahrzeugen durchgeführt? Sie haben eben gesagt, dass Messungen erfolgen sollen. Welche Rechtsgrundlage gibt es da? Vor allen Dingen: Wer finanziert diese Messungen? Mich interessiert auch Folgendes: Auf welcher Rechtsgrundlage wird die Kommission bei VW tätig? Wie findet das Ganze statt? Öffnet VW freiwillig alle Türen, alle Bücher und den Zugang zu allen Rechnern, oder wie läuft das Ganze dort ab? Das würde mich interessieren. Ich bitte Sie, das hier einmal darzustellen.\n\nMeine weitere Frage ist: Wenn es bei den vorhandenen Fahrzeugen zu Nachrüstungen kommen müsste, würde die Bundesregierung dann dafür sorgen, dass der VW-Konzern und möglicherweise auch weitere Automobilunternehmen die vollen Kosten dafür übernehmen?\n\nHerr Staatssekretär, Herr Minister Dobrindt hat an dieser Stelle in der vergangenen Woche auf die Frage, ob Kontakte in die USA aufgenommen worden seien, geantwortet, dass die Kommission, die er jetzt eingesetzt hat - die derzeit in Wolfsburg tätig ist -, Kontakt mit den USA aufnehmen wird. Das heißt, das muss jetzt innerhalb der letzten sieben Tage passiert sein. Vorher scheint es - jedenfalls war die Antwort des Ministers nicht anders zu verstehen - keinerlei Kontakt in Richtung USA gegeben zu haben. Mich interessiert natürlich: Welche Erkenntnisse hat dieser Kontakt gebracht - das ist ja eine entscheidende Frage, wenn man im VW-Konzern unterwegs ist und versucht, Fragen zu klären -, und was heißt das für europäische Autofahrerinnen und Autofahrer?\n\nHerr Staatssekretär, mir ist jetzt, ehrlich gesagt, gar nicht mehr klar - auch nicht nach der Frage der Kollegin Haßelmann und Ihrer Antwort darauf -, was Sie genau machen: Prüfen Sie nur die Abschalteinrichtung? Schauen Sie sich die Technik nur dahin gehend an, was die Abschaltvorrichtung und die dahinterstehende Software ist, oder schauen Sie sich auch die gesamten Abgaswerte des Fahrzeugs an? Gesetzt den Fall, Sie finden ein Fahrzeug, das eine immense Überschreitung der zulässigen Abgaswerte aufweist, obwohl die Abschaltvorrichtung im konkreten Fall völlig korrekt und nicht beanstandenswert ist, machen Sie nichts; so habe ich Sie jetzt verstanden. Ist das so?\n\nIch spreche von den Dingen, von denen Sie gerade sprechen.\n\nHerr Staatssekretär, ich habe Sie jetzt so verstanden: Sie haben das Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt beauftragt, nur zu überprüfen, ob die Fahrzeuge eine solche nicht zulässige Abschaltvorrichtung besitzen. Sie haben uns eben erklärt, dass man nicht in die Software schaut. Daher würde mich natürlich interessieren - diese Abschaltvorrichtung ist eine Software -, wie man das herausfinden will, ohne in die Software zu schauen. Das ist mir ein Rätsel. Aber Sie werden das sicherlich verstanden haben.\n\nIch darf also feststellen, dass Sie das eigentliche Problem, nämlich die Überschreitungen der Stickoxidgrenzwerte - das ist ja auch das Problem in den USA -, hier überhaupt nicht untersuchen, dass Sie keine Nachprüfungen unternehmen und dass Sie hier keine Messungen vornehmen. Deshalb würde ich Sie bitten - Sie haben jetzt mehrfach vom Auftrag an das Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt gesprochen; offenbar liegt er Ihnen vor -, uns diesen Auftrag hier für das Protokoll wörtlich vorzulesen.\n\nHerr Staatssekretär, ganz einfache Frage: Prüfen Sie - Sie haben eben auch mehrfach gesagt, die Kommission prüft; ich habe gar nicht genau verstanden, wer prüft, aber ich sage jetzt einfach einmal „Sie“ - oder prüft das Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt jetzt fabrikneue Fahrzeuge, die vom Hersteller zur Verfügung gestellt werden, oder werden Fahrzeuge überprüft, die schon auf der Straße fahren, die also schon im Betrieb befindlich sind?\n\nHerr Staatssekretär, herzlichen Dank für Ihre Ausführungen. - Sie widersprechen etwas den Ausführungen Ihrer Kollegin Zypries in der Fragestunde der letzten Woche. Da hat sie uns nämlich zu meiner Verwunderung und auch zur Verwunderung von Kollegen erläutert, dass das Konzernhaftungsgesetz und die Stresstests in einem inhaltlichen Zusammenhang stehen, und das mit als Begründung angeführt, warum das Konzernhaftungsgesetz, das eigentlich schon in der letzten Sitzungswoche im Kabinett verabschiedet werden sollte - so war jedenfalls die öffentliche Ankündigung -, sich weiter verzögern würde: weil die Ergebnisse der Stresstests nicht vorliegen.\n\nIch habe Sie so verstanden, dass das in keinem unmittelbaren Zusammenhang steht und dass die Verlängerung der Konzernhaftung unabhängig vom Ergebnis der Stresstests erfolgt, weil sie sowieso vorgenommen werden muss. Dazu bitte ich Sie um Klarstellung und um einen Hinweis - da das Konzernhaftungsgesetz öffentlich angekündigt war -, wann die Kabinettsbefassung geplant ist und wann wir mit der Vorlage des Gesetzentwurfs rechnen können.\"\n9235,markus-kurth,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! 500 Milliarden Euro, das sind 100-mal die Kosten des unvollendeten Flughafens BER. 500 Milliarden Euro, das sind 23 Monatsausgaben der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung. 500 Milliarden Euro würde es kosten, wenn man die Vorschläge der Linken zur Anhebung des Rentenniveaus auf 53 Prozent umsetzen würde.\n\nUm dies zu finanzieren, müsste man, auch nach den eigenen Berechnungen von Matthias Birkwald, den Beitragssatz in der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung auf 28 Prozent anheben.\n\nIch frage Sie wirklich: Was denken Sie sich politisch? Wo leben Sie denn?\n\nIch sage nicht, dass Sie falsch gerechnet haben; Sie haben es ja vorgerechnet.\n\n- Sie wollen mir das jetzt wahrscheinlich alles noch einmal darlegen, was die 28 Prozent betrifft. Wir haben hier ja schon mehrfach gehört, dass Sie die Riester-Beiträge sozusagen umrechnen.\n\n- Ja, die klassische Mathematik. - Darum möchte ich eine Zwischenfrage an dieser Stelle nicht zulassen. Das, was Herr Birkwald jetzt vorrechnen würde, kenne ich nämlich schon.\n\nAber Politik ist nicht die Fortsetzung der Mathematik mit anderen Mitteln. Politik ist der Kampf um gesellschaftliche Mehrheiten.\n\nEigentlich ist das, was Sie hier vorlegen, im Vergleich zu dem, was Klaus Ernst in einem, wie ich finde, bemerkenswerten Artikel in der Frankfurter Rundschau jüngst geschrieben hat, ein Rückschritt. Herr Ernst hat nämlich geschrieben - das war das erste Mal, dass man das als klare Analyse so lesen konnte -, die Linke müsse „runter von der Zuschauertribüne“. Er schrieb auch, man müsse sich die Frage stellen, ob es sich die Linke in ihrer Biedermeierwelt noch lange so kuschelig machen kann.\n\nIch habe das als erste vernünftige strategische Überlegung bewertet, wie man in diesem Parlament vielleicht auch andere Mehrheiten herstellen kann.\n\nIch habe das als Bereitschaft verstanden, endlich Verantwortung zu übernehmen - etwas, was Sie in den ganzen letzten Jahren, gerade in der Sozialpolitik, sehr oft nicht getan haben.\n\nIhr Antrag macht genau das, was Herr Ernst in seinem Artikel auch gefordert hat, nicht. Er eröffnet nämlich keine strategische Perspektive. Das ist schade. Sie schaden mit diesem Antrag nicht nur sich selbst - das könnte mir ja völlig egal sein -, sondern Sie schaden auch einer vernünftigen Debatte darüber, wie man das Rentensystem weiterentwickeln kann, und Sie machen es den Regierungsfraktionen wahnsinnig leicht. Deshalb ist es ganz einfach, Ihren Antrag abzulehnen.\n\nJa, das kann er gerne machen. Ich freue mich darauf.\n\nHerr Ernst, ich muss meine eben gemachten, ermunternd gedachten Bemerkungen zur strategischen Überlebensfähigkeit wieder ein bisschen relativieren. Politik ist keine voluntaristische Veranstaltung.\n\nWenn Sie sagen, dass wir keine Abstriche machen müssen, dann müssen Sie sich, selbst wenn Sie eine absolute Mehrheit hätten, fragen, ob denn das, was Herr Birkwald hier vorgeschlagen hat, auch nur ansatzweise mit den Gewerkschaften machbar sein würde. Das würde es nämlich nicht. Ich bin sicherlich niemand, der die Lohnnebenkosten als Superargument ganz oben an die erste Stelle stellt, aber einen Beitragssatzanstieg um 10 Prozentpunkte kann man nicht ignorieren. Das wird natürlich Folgen für die Ökonomie haben.\n\nWir können auch die gesetzliche Rentenversicherung nicht allein betrachten; denn auch die gesetzliche Krankenversicherung steht angesichts des demografischen Wandels vor Kostensteigerungen.\n\nWenn man sich überlegen will, wie man Politik macht, muss man gerade bei einer langfristig angelegten Sozialversicherung sehen, dass das Ganze pfadabhängig ist. Die jetzige Situation mit dem Drei-Säulen-Modell ist nicht vom Himmel gefallen, sondern ein längerer Entwicklungsprozess. Genauso wird man in einem längeren Entwicklungsprozess Defizite dieser drei Säulen analysieren und schauen müssen, wie man jeweils innerhalb der drei Säulen damit klarkommt; das führe ich gleich noch aus.\n\nSicherlich wird man sagen, dass die gesetzliche Rente sozusagen als Basis und Voraussetzung für die private Vorsorge gestärkt werden muss. Ich erwarte aber ein planvolles Vorgehen\n\nund nicht einfach das Aufstellen eines Wunschkatalogs und die Aussage: So muss das aber sein. - Das ist genau die kuschelige Oppositionswelt, aus der Sie sich doch angeblich verabschieden wollten.\n\nIch finde, man kann es den Regierungsfraktionen angesichts dessen, was im Feststellungsteil analysiert wird, nicht leicht machen; denn das absinkende Rentenniveau wird aktuell leider nicht durch die Riester-Rente kompensiert. Wie eine meiner Kleinen Anfragen an das Finanzministerium ergeben hat, sind es nur 6,4 Millionen von 35 Millionen Versicherungsberechtigten, die den Riester-Vertrag wirklich voll besparen. Das heißt also: Der ganze Niveauausgleich findet so gar nicht statt.\n\nWir haben gleichzeitig eine hohe Selektivität bei Riester; denn die Geringverdiener schließen das eben nicht ab.\n\nDiese hohe Selektivität bzw. diese Unwucht haben wir gleichzeitig bei der zweiten Säule, der Betriebsrente. Auch da sehen wir: Der Verbreitungsgrad ist noch zu gering. Er konzentriert sich auf die Großunternehmen und auf eher besserverdienende Personen. Hier ist eben für einen großen Teil der Bevölkerung die zweite Säule auch nicht tragfähig. Das bedeutet, dass wir bei jeder Säule schauen müssen, wie wir an der Stelle weiter vorankommen.\n\nDa sehe ich bei der Großen Koalition aber großes Schweigen im Walde. Sie haben verschiedene, im Diffusen bleibende Vorschläge; manche Sachen liegen in den Schubladen des Bundesministeriums. Im Grunde genommen befinden Sie sich aber in einer Blockadesituation, und zwar wegen des Rentenpakets, das Sie gleich, nachdem Sie die Regierung übernommen haben, verabschiedet haben. Seitdem trauen Sie sich doch gegenseitig nicht mehr über den Weg, blockieren sich und schieben notwendige Entwicklungen auf.\n\nSie kommen auch in anderen Bereichen nicht voran. Selbst bei an sich eigentlich harmlosen Geschichten wie der Arbeitsstättenverordnung wird alles gleich aufgeblasen, Unternehmerlager und Wirtschaftsflügel der CDU regen sich auf, und deswegen unterbleiben notwendige Weiterentwicklungen oder fallen, wie bei Ihren Vorschlägen zur Flexirente, minimal aus. Ob da ein Gesetz kommt - wir warten ohnehin schon lange darauf.\n\nDas Glück, das Sie haben, ist, dass die wirtschaftliche Lage günstig ist. Der Problemdruck wird aber nicht geringer. Es steht zu befürchten, dass wir spätestens ab Mitte der 2020er-Jahre sowohl von der Beitragsseite als auch von der Seite der Altersarmut unter Druck geraten, wenn wir an dieser Stelle nichts machen.\n\nWarum stellen Sie sich zum Beispiel in Bezug auf die Betriebsrente nicht die Frage, ob Sie es machen sollten wie in Großbritannien? Dort gibt es ein Opt-out-Modell. Arbeitgeber müssen eine Betriebsrente anbieten, und die Beschäftigten können dann sagen, ob sie sie wollen oder nicht. In Großbritannien ist die Verbreitung der Betriebsrente dadurch gestiegen, und sie befindet sich auf dem Vormarsch. Warum kann man sich das nicht einmal überlegen? Warum reagieren Sie nicht auf diese Mängel, die ich gerade in Bezug auf die Riester-Rente genannt habe?\n\nWir diskutieren im Moment in der Fraktion darüber - ich hoffe, dass wir bald zum Abschluss kommen -, dass man die Förderung bei Riester umstellen kann, und zwar weiter in Richtung der Geringverdienenden, damit dort die Verbreitung steigt. Wir brauchen gleichzeitig mehr Transparenz bei den Produkten. Diese ist unbefriedigend.\n\nAll die Reparaturen bei der zweiten und dritten Säule werden trotzdem nicht dazu führen, dass alles ausgeglichen wird, was mit dem gesetzlichen Rentenniveau zusammenhängt.\n\nDarum gebe ich zu: Wir müssen das Niveau der gesetzlichen Rente nach oben hin stabilisieren. Das muss tatsächlich so sein; denn die Voraussetzungen für die kapitalgedeckte Absicherung - auch die Betriebsrente ist überwiegend kapitalgedeckt - werden in Zukunft nicht besser. Wir haben, weil wir eine sehr reife Volkswirtschaft sind, ein tendenziell sinkendes Zinsniveau. Wir werden nicht auf 4 Prozent Kapitalmarktzinsen bei entsprechend risikoarmen Anlagen kommen. Darauf muss man reagieren.\n\nIm Unterschied zu 2000, der Jahrtausendwende, ist es so, dass wir seitdem eine Finanzmarkt- und Euro-Krise hatten und die gesetzliche Rente die Überlegenheit des Umlagesystems unter Beweis gestellt hat. Nicht einmal die Versicherungswirtschaft stellt in Abrede, dass die umlagefinanzierte gesetzliche Rente Voraussetzung für private Vorsorge ist. Nur wenn wir eine armutsfeste und stabile gesetzliche Rente haben, haben Leute auch Anreize, privat vorzusorgen oder Betriebsrenten in Anspruch zu nehmen.\n\nDas heißt, wir sind in dieser Hinsicht ein Stück weiter als vor 15 Jahren, auch gesellschaftlich. Selbst Herr Schiewerling hat gewisse Nachdenklichkeit signalisiert. So sollte man dann das Ruder langsam umsteuern und sich in eine andere Richtung bewegen. Das macht die Regierung im Moment leider nicht. Aber nur voluntaristische Das-will-ich-so-Sprüche und eine Mindestrente von 1 050 Euro zu fordern, sind keine realistische und keine strategische Perspektive.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6681,jens-zimmermann,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Lieber Herr Hahn, Sie haben eben meinen Parteivorsitzenden angesprochen. Dazu will ich eines klarstellen: Als Parteivorsitzender der SPD braucht man -permanent so ein Rückgrat, und das hat unser Parteivorsitzender auch.\n\nEs gibt doch ein Problem in dieser ganzen Debatte. Es wird ein Bohei gemacht, und es wird die Behauptung in den Raum gestellt, es wäre irgendetwas passiert. Es ist aber überhaupt nichts passiert.\n\nSie haben es so dargestellt, als würden wir die Listen und die Inhalte nicht zur Kenntnis bekommen. Eines ist doch klar: Auch wir, die SPD - das hat mein Kollege Christian Flisek doch eben auch klargemacht -, wollen wissen, was darin steht. Sie sitzen doch auch im Untersuchungsausschuss. Wir sitzen da doch nicht 15 Stunden nur so zum Spaß herum. Dass überhaupt die Existenz dieser Selektorenlisten dem Parlament zur Kenntnis gekommen ist, liegt doch an unserer gemeinsamen Arbeit in diesem Ausschuss. Deswegen haben wir ein Interesse daran, zu wissen, was in diesen Listen steht.\n\nAber wir machen uns jetzt - das ist doch der Punkt - Gedanken über ein geeignetes Verfahren, wie wir einerseits die Inhalte erfahren können, um damit arbeiten zu können, andererseits aber nicht irgendwelche Informationen nach außen tragen, die vielleicht auch unsere Interessen in Deutschland schädigen könnten. Wir sind mitten in diesem Prozess. Deshalb sage ich: Es ist überhaupt noch nichts passiert.\n\nWenn es dazu kommen sollte, dass die Amerikaner komplett Nein sagen, dann müssen wir weiter diskutieren. Wir haben heute im Ausschuss gesagt: Wir geben dem Kanzleramt die zwei Wochen über Pfingsten Zeit, und dann werden wir sehen, wie es weitergeht. Mir ist aber ein Punkt ganz wichtig: In der Öffentlichkeit wird doch nur der Streit wahrgenommen. Eine Fraktion versucht, schriller als die andere aufzutreten. Aber um was es eigentlich geht, weiß so gut wie keiner.\n\nDie Menschen draußen müssen doch denken, dass es diese Selektorenliste gibt und jegliche Kommunikation in Deutschland davon betroffen ist. Dass wir über Bad Aibling reden, dass wir über Satellitenkommunikation aus Krisenregionen reden, wird doch in der Diskussion völlig unter den Tisch gekehrt.\n\nDenn das würde nicht zur Skandalisierung passen.\n\nDas ist doch die Problematik, die wir haben.\n\nSchauen wir uns doch einmal an, wie erfolgreiche Untersuchungsausschüsse in der Vergangenheit gearbeitet haben. Das erinnert mich sehr an die Arbeit, wie sie in unserem Ausschuss erfolgt. Sie ist nämlich meistens sehr kollegial und von dem Interesse geleitet, am Ende wirklich herauszubekommen, was hier eigentlich schiefläuft. Wir müssen versuchen, daran zu arbeiten, und sollten schauen, dass wir uns nicht von diesen Aktuellen Stunden aus dem Konzept bringen lassen, in denen viele Leute reden, die allenfalls sporadisch in diesem Ausschuss sind, die aber hier große Worte machen.\n\nWir müssen schauen, dass unsere Arbeit peu à peu weitergeht; denn dieser Ausschuss ist bisher unglaublich erfolgreich. Wir haben sehr viel aufgedeckt; wir wissen, in welche Richtung es bei unseren eigenen Diensten geht; wir wissen, dass wir Verbesserungen und Veränderungen bei den rechtlichen Grundlagen brauchen. Das alles sind Erkenntnisse, die bei der Arbeit unseres Ausschusses herausgekommen sind.\n\nIch kann verstehen, dass die Opposition auf der einen Seite versucht, die Regierung und die sie unterstützenden Fraktionen zu piksen, wo es nur geht. Das ist ihr Recht, das ist ihre Aufgabe. Es ist auf der anderen Seite aber auch klar, dass die Große Koalition und die Regierung, die von ihr unterstützt wird, versuchen, nach Möglichkeit in dieser Situation keine Fehler zu machen.\n\nIch finde, beide Ansinnen sind vollkommen nachvollziehbar. Nur, wir müssen schauen, dass wir unsere gute Sacharbeit im Ausschuss nicht dieser öffentlichen Auseinandersetzung opfern. Das wäre der Sache vollkommen unangemessen.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Abschluss noch eine Sache sagen, weil sie uns alle betrifft. Wir leben nicht in einem luftleeren Raum, wo die Diskussion, die wir gerade führen, eine rein akademische Diskussion wäre. Wir erleben es doch gerade selbst als Deutscher Bundestag. Wir wurden einem massiven Cyberangriff ausgesetzt. Das zeigt eindeutig, dass wir uns mit der Sicherheit und vor allem mit der Sicherheit im Internet auseinandersetzen müssen.\n\nDa gibt es keine einfachen Lösungen. Es wird häufig so dargestellt, als wären Geheimdienste per se erst mal schlecht oder als würden sie nicht im Interesse unseres Landes arbeiten.\n\nMan muss doch einmal klarstellen, dass wir an dieser Stelle auch ein Interesse haben. Ich sage nicht, dass diese Abwägung einfach ist.\n\nAber es ist falsch, so zu tun, als könnte man einfach alle Geheimdienste abschaffen, und alles wäre gut.\n\nIn diesem Sinne kann ich für meine Fraktion nur das Angebot zu einer weiteren ordentlichen Arbeit in unserem Ausschuss aufrechterhalten. Ich glaube, eine solche Arbeit leisten wir auch die meiste Zeit. In einer Viertelstunde geht es, glaube ich, weiter.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12176,kai-gehring,\"Da Herr Lengsfeld leider keine Frage zugelassen hat\n\nund Ihre Redezeit so kurz ist, möchte ich Sie jetzt unheimlich gerne fragen, wie Sie als SPD-Bundestagsabgeordneter zum Vorschlag von Hubertus Heil stehen, der gestern im Handelsblatt erklärt hat, dass er einen Forschungsbonus für KMU will. Vieles, was er dort äußert, kommt mir sehr bekannt vor und ist mit unserem grünen Gesetzentwurf, der heute zur Diskussion steht, in Einklang zu bringen.\n\nWenn ich mir die Wahlprogramme von CDU/CSU und SPD angucke, dann wird klar: Sie hätten sich schnell zusammentun und einen kleinen Änderungsantrag zu unserem Gesetzentwurf stellen können. Dann gäbe es ab jetzt eine steuerliche Forschungsförderung für KMU in der Republik.\n\nWenn man aber Sie und Herrn Lengsfeld reden hört, hat man den Eindruck, Sie sind dagegen.\n\nSie kündigen ein Jahr vor der Bundestagswahl etwas an, was vielleicht am Sankt-Nimmerleins-Tag kommt. Deshalb frage ich Sie: Stehen Sie hinter den Vorschlägen von Hubertus Heil zur steuerlichen Forschungsförderung? Wie ist das: Bekommen Sie gemeinsam mit dem Koalitionspartner noch in diesem Jahr einen Gesetzentwurf hin?\"\n6101,thomas-jarzombek,\"Vielen Dank. - Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Die Tageszeitung Die Welt hat vor wenigen Tagen eine Theorie aufgestellt, nämlich dass Google ohne „Jugend forscht“ nicht erfunden worden wäre. Man hat als Beleg für diese These angeführt, dass der junge Andreas von Bechtolsheim mit 18 Jahren den Bundeswettbewerb „Jugend forscht“ gewonnen hat und, wie der eine oder andere weiß, später einer der ersten Investoren bei Google gewesen ist, eine Firma gegründet hat, Sun Microsystems, die unter anderem die Programmiersprache Java entwickelt hat und, glaube ich, ein schweres Fundament des Internets ist.\n\nDer junge Andreas von Bechtolsheim aus Bayern, Deutschland, der mit 18 Jahren bei „Jugend forscht“ gewonnen hat, beginnt danach an der TU München zu studieren. Man kann es an verschiedenen Stellen nachlesen: Er war frustriert, weil es dort keine Computer für den jungen, computerbegeisterten Andreas von Bechtolsheim -gegeben hat. Schon kurze Zeit später ging er nach -Pittsburgh, dann nach Stanford. Er ist nie wieder nach Deutschland zurückgekehrt.\n\nIch hatte vor zwei Jahren die Gelegenheit, ihn persönlich zu treffen. Ich habe ihn gefragt, was wir als Deutsche eigentlich tun können, damit Deutschland wieder zum Gründerstandort wird und beim Internet aufholt. Seine Antwort war sehr resignativ. Ich freue mich, dass heute schon so oft von der Enquete-Kommission „Internet und digitale Gesellschaft“ und von der Projektgruppe Medienkompetenz gesprochen wurde, die ich damals vor fünf Jahren geleitet habe. Dort haben Kollegin Rößner und auch einige andere aus diesem Saal mitgearbeitet. Man muss sich hier die Frage stellen: Was ist aus all diesen guten Dingen, die wir hier vor fünf Jahren gemeinsam auf die Schiene gebracht haben, eigentlich geworden?\n\n- Freut euch mal nicht zu früh, Herr Mutlu.\n\nDie Studie ICILS kommt zu dem Ergebnis, dass in Deutschland - das ist ein bitteres Ergebnis - elf Schüler auf einen Computer kommen, dass Chile und Thailand hier vor uns liegen, dass die Lehrerausbildung im Bereich IT Zufall ist und dass es auf diesem Gebiet seit 2006 eigentlich kaum noch eine Entwicklung gibt. Jetzt muss man sich die Frage stellen, was in den Ländern eigentlich passiert ist.\n\nLieber Herr Mutlu, ihr Grünen seid Schnacker, wenn ich das mal so sagen darf.\n\nHier werden schlaue Reden gehalten. Frau Rößner, Sie kommen aus Rheinland-Pfalz und müssten doch einmal zu Ihrer Ministerpräsidentin gehen und sagen: Mach doch mal etwas! - Hannelore Kraft hat in Nordrhein-Westfalen von Megahertz, Megabits und Mega-Irgendwas gesprochen.\n\nIch habe keinen einzigen Beitrag in NRW gesehen, wie man an dieses Thema herangehen will.\n\nWir haben hier doch gemeinsam gesagt: Wir wollen ein Tablet oder ein Laptop für jeden Schüler. - Wo ist die entsprechende Initiative in den Ländern? Man kann sagen: Bring your own device! Die Geräte, die die Schüler schon besitzen, sollen also mitgebracht werden, und daneben sorgen wir für einen Ausgleichsmechanismus für diejenigen, die sich ein solches Gerät nicht leisten können. Ich sehe in diesen Ländern keine entsprechende Initiative.\n\nIn unserem Antrag wird richtigerweise auch auf das Programmieren eingegangen. Das Programmieren nach der Grundschule ist eine sehr wichtige Kompetenz. Diese könnte man doch einmal zum Schwerpunkt machen.\n\nZum Thema Lehrerausbildung. Ich finde es einen Skandal, dass in der heutigen Lehrerausbildung immer noch nicht gelernt wird, wie man mit der IT umgeht.\n\nAuch die neuen digitalen Medien - das hat die Kollegin Esken sehr richtig gesagt -, die Open Educational Resources und das digitale Lernen sind ganz wichtig. In Deutschland hat man immer den Eindruck, dass das Lernen trocken sein und Schmerzen bereiten muss.\n\nDas darf auf keinen Fall Spaß machen, sonst ist das Spielerei. Schauen Sie sich einmal an, wie viele Kinder vor einigen Jahren bei „Dr. Kawashimas Gehirn-Jogging“ mit totaler Begeisterung Rechenaufgaben gelöst haben. Man kann offenbar auf spielerische Weise auch diejenigen erreichen, deren Eltern sie nicht zum Bildungserfolg antreiben.\n\nWir haben gestern Abend mit unserer Arbeitsgruppe ein spannendes Start-up-Unternehmen getroffen, nämlich sofatutor. Es wurde hier in Berlin gegründet und hat mittlerweile über 200 Mitarbeiter. Sie machen Lern-videos für Schüler und veröffentlichen sie im Internet. Das ist wirklich eine tolle Sache. 90 000 Schüler haben dies abonniert. Momentan brauchen sie Wachstumskapital, aber sie finden hier niemanden, der sie finanziert. Jetzt haben sie Angebote aus den USA. Mit diesen Angeboten ist aber verbunden, dass sie dann auch in die USA gehen müssen. Hier sind also wichtige Weichenstellungen nötig, um ein Unternehmen wie sofatutor in Deutschland, in Berlin, zu halten und die entsprechenden Projekte mit unseren Lernplänen zu verbinden.\n\nDamit komme ich zu meinem letzten Punkt, nämlich der Lust zum Gründen. Auch das ist ein extrem wichtiges Thema. Ich bin stolz und froh, dass in Deutschland so viele junge Menschen davon träumen, eine Karriere im öffentlichen Dienst zu machen.\n\nDas ist wahrscheinlich auch der Grund dafür, dass unsere öffentliche Verwaltung so viel leistungsfähiger ist als in manch anderen Ländern. Ich will hier Griechenland gar nicht exemplarisch benennen. Ich würde es mir aber schon wünschen, dass sich der eine oder andere auch dafür entscheidet, zu gründen.\n\nEs gibt eine junge Dame, Martina Neef, die hier ganz tolle Projekte mit Schülern durchführt. In den Projektwochen wird gezeigt, wie man ein Unternehmen gründet, um Lust auf Unternehmensgründungen zu machen. Das geht nur mit Gründern zusammen. Ich glaube, hier müssen wir noch mehr machen.\n\nVieles aus diesem Antrag führt genau dorthin. Deshalb bin ich Sven Volmering sehr dankbar, dass er diesen Antrag in den letzten Monaten mit so viel Energie nach vorne getrieben hat\n\nund sich nicht dadurch frustrieren lässt, dass wir hier viele gute Projekte und viele gute Fördermittel auf den Weg bringen, während in den Ländern - zumindest in einigen - am Ende nur sehr wenig passiert. Dort muss mehr stattfinden.\n\nDie Länder bilden jetzt allen Ernstes einen Bund-Länder-Arbeitskreis zu der Frage, ob die Landesmedien-anstalten bei Google hineinregulieren können, wenn es um die Ergebnisreihenfolge bei manchen Themen geht. Ich glaube, wenn das die zentrale Problemstellung der Länder ist, dann haben sie noch nicht begriffen, was die Herausforderung des digitalen Wandels ist.\n\nIch freue mich über unsere Initiative.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n14621,franziska-brantner,\"Das können Sie doch erst nach der Rede sagen. Das können Sie nicht vor der Rede sagen!\n\n- Oh.\n\nSehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Wir diskutieren heute über Kindertageseinrichtungen, Kindertagespflege und über die Gelder vom Bund dafür. Herr Weinberg, Sie haben gerade gesagt: Das war bis jetzt eine Erfolgsgeschichte. Wir stimmen aber heute nicht über die Vergangenheit ab, sondern darüber, was in der Zukunft kommt. Hier ist das Problem, dass es in Deutschland für die Kitas einen Qualitätsaufbruch bräuchte. Diesen Aufbruch haben wir heute leider nicht vorliegen. Bei uns im Ländle würde man sagen: nicht einmal ein Aufbrüchle. Das ist gar nichts. Das ist nicht einmal das Minimum. Es ist extrem schade, dass wir diesen Aufbruch nicht weitermachen, dass wir diese Erfolgsgeschichte nicht fortführen können.\n\nEs hätte zu dem Aufbruch kommen können, ist es aber nicht. Es ist natürlich immer noch besser, 100 000 Plätze zusätzlich zu bekommen als keine. Es ist auch besser, dass über Dreijährige mit gefördert werden können. Auch eine Raumgestaltung ist positiv.\n\nAber jetzt schauen wir uns doch einmal an, worum es eigentlich momentan geht. Sie sagen: Wir haben in den nächsten vier Jahren Geld für 100 000 zusätzliche Plätze. - In der gemeinsamen Anhörung haben alle Experten gesagt - es gab nicht einen, der etwas Gegenteiliges gesagt hat -: Das reicht hinten und vorne nicht. - Wir haben die Zahl schon gehört: 350 000 zusätzliche Plätze werden eigentlich gebraucht. - Für 100 000 Plätze wollen Sie Geld bereitstellen. Das heißt, wir haben da schon eine Lücke von 250 000 Plätzen, und da ist noch nicht einmal eingerechnet, dass alle Flüchtlingskinder in die Kitas kommen und hoffentlich mehr Kinder geboren werden. Das heißt, wir haben eine Lücke beim Ausbau.\n\nDann haben wir noch nicht über die Steigerung der Qualität gesprochen, dann wird noch kein Cent für mehr Erzieherinnen, geschweige denn für eine bessere Bezahlung von Erzieherinnen zur Verfügung gestellt.\n\nFrau Schwesig, wenn Sie mir sagen, dass es Länder gibt, die da skeptisch sind, dann kann ich nur sagen: Ja, natürlich! Wenn die Länder wissen, dass das Geld für die nächsten vier Jahre nicht einmal für den Ausbau, geschweige denn für die Steigerung der Qualität reicht, dann ist ihre Bereitschaft nicht so hoch, gemeinsam Gesetze zur Qualität zu machen.\n\nEs ist klar, dass der Bund da mit in die Verantwortung muss. Diese Verantwortung übernehmen Sie nicht, und dann beschweren Sie sich und schieben es auf die Länder. So geht das nicht. Sie sind hier an der Regierung, Sie müssen ein Zeichen setzen.\n\nDas ist Ihre Verantwortung. Das ist kein Angebot.\n\nWas wir hinsichtlich der Qualität brauchen, ist klar - es liegt auf dem Tisch -: Es geht darum, dass Erzieherinnen und Erzieher mehr Zeit für die Kinder haben. Man kann eine Geschichte nicht schneller vorlesen, man braucht dazu Zeit, und davon hängt so viel ab. Die Erzieherinnen und Erzieher sind Vorbilder, Mentorinnen, Spielkameraden - sie sind so viel für unsere Kinder. Und wir wissen: Diese Zeit ist für die Kinder das Wichtigste. Wenn sich keine persönlichen Beziehungen entwickeln, dann leidet darunter die Qualität. Deswegen wollen wir endlich regeln, dass sich in der Betreuung der unter Dreijährigen eine Erzieherin oder ein Erzieher um drei Kinder kümmert - wenn sie älter sind, können es ein paar mehr Kinder sein. Das ist das, was wir gesetzlich regeln wollen. Natürlich kostet das Geld, und da muss sich auch der Bund in die Pflicht nehmen lassen.\n\nZu Ihrem Antrag. Wir hören in der Öffentlichkeit - von Frau Schwesig, von der SPD - immer wieder etwas zur Beitragsfreiheit. Natürlich ist sie langfristig unser aller Ziel. Wir haben bei den Kitas aber eine Lücke von 250 000 Plätzen, wir haben also nicht einmal ausreichend Plätze, noch nicht genügend Qualität. Ich sage Ihnen jetzt ganz offen: Bevor es dazu kommt, dass ich als Abgeordnete keinen Beitrag mehr leisten muss, möchte ich, dass erst einmal das Gehalt der Erzieherinnen steigt.\n\nDas ist meine ganz klare Priorität. Ich möchte erst einmal, dass es gute Betreuungsplätze gibt und dass die Erzieherinnen besser bezahlt werden. Wenn ich am Ende keinen Beitrag mehr zahlen muss - von mir aus! Aber das ist nicht erste grüne Priorität.\n\nUnd wenn Sie, Frau Schwesig, obwohl Sie in der Regierung sitzen, es nicht einmal schaffen, den Ausbau voranzubringen, und dann draußen die Beitragsfreiheit versprechen, dann finde ich das echt ziemlich frech.\"\n13820,michael-roth,\"Guten Abend, Frau Präsidentin! Wir hatten ja eben eine engagierte Debatte, und ich darf jetzt Sie alle einladen, sich einem Gesetzentwurf zu widmen, der mir ganz besonders am Herzen liegt. Wenn es nach mir ginge, Frau Präsidentin - aber ich bin ja nur Diener des Parlaments -, würde ich sehr lange und intensiv mit Ihnen über dieses Thema sprechen wollen. Denn in diesen Zeiten der Krisen und Konflikte ist unser Land außen- und sicherheitspolitisch so sehr gefordert wie nie zuvor. Das betrifft eben nicht nur Parlamentarierinnen und Parlamentarier, nicht nur Soldatinnen und Soldaten, sondern vor allem auch viele zivile Expertinnen und Experten. Sie helfen Tag für Tag dabei, neue Konflikte zu verhindern, Krisen zu entschärfen und die Folgen von Krieg und Hass zu lindern.\n\nUm genau diese Menschen geht es in der heutigen Debatte. Mit dem sogenannten Sekundierungsgesetz - ich gebe zu: ein ziemlich technisch klingender Name - schaffen wir die gesetzliche Grundlage dafür, dass unsere zivilen Expertinnen und Experten ihre Aufgaben künftig noch besser erfüllen können.\n\nDer vorliegende Gesetzesentwurf mag komplex sein und recht nüchtern daherkommen. Wir wollen mit ihm jedoch Menschen ganz konkret ihren Arbeitsalltag erleichtern. Genau darum geht es.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die globalen Bedingungen für unser Handeln haben es in sich: Die Welt wird instabiler. Die internationale Ordnung ist im Umbruch. Darauf müssen wir reagieren und international mehr Verantwortung übernehmen. Wie gut, dass sich in den vergangenen Jahren in weiten Teilen von Politik und Gesellschaft ein breiter Konsens entwickelt hat, diese neue Rolle entschlossen anzunehmen. Der Wille ist da, jetzt braucht es aber auch Gestaltungskraft. Dazu müssen wir aus unseren Erfahrungen lernen und noch besser werden.\n\nAktuell werden unter Federführung meines Hauses die neuen Leitlinien der Bundesregierung für Krisenprävention, Konfliktbewältigung und Friedensförderung erarbeitet. Diese Leitlinien wollen wir im Frühjahr im Kabinett verabschieden. Sie haben das Ziel, das Krisenengagement in einer gemeinsamen Strategie zusammenzuführen; denn Krisen und Konflikte überwindet man nicht im Alleingang. Unser Krisenengagement muss immer Teil einer Politik sein, die in multilaterale Bemühungen um Frieden und Sicherheit eingebettet ist.\n\nUnser Zentrum für Internationale Friedenseinsätze spielt dabei eine zentrale Rolle. Ich weiß nicht, ob sich jemand von Ihnen daran erinnert: Als Ende der 1990er-Jahre hochqualifiziertes Zivilpersonal für eine Friedensmission der OSZE im Kosovo gesucht wurde, musste das Auswärtige Amt quasi aus dem Nichts geeignete Expertinnen und Experten rekrutieren. Zu dieser Zeit gab es schlicht keine zentrale Anlaufstelle, wie wir sie heute mit dem ZIF hier in Berlin haben. Die Gründung des ZIF im Jahr 2002 unter der rot-grünen Bundesregierung war der Startschuss für die Professionalisierung der deutschen Personalpolitik für internationale Friedenseinsätze. Mit seinem integrierten Ansatz der Rekrutierung, Ausbildung und Betreuung von Zivilpersonal unter einem Dach dient das ZIF inzwischen weltweit als Vorbild.\n\nJedes Jahr rekrutiert das ZIF mehr als 160 Expertinnen und Experten für internationale Friedensmissionen und mehr als 300 Wahlbeobachter. Ihre Arbeit, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ist ein Schatz. Sie helfen dabei, Krisen zu entschärfen oder, noch besser, Konflikte gar nicht erst entstehen zu lassen. Sie überwachen Waffenstillstände und Wahlen. Sie schaffen tragfähige Strukturen bei Justiz und Sicherheit. Um es ganz konkret zu machen: Unsere zivilen Expertinnen und Experten helfen beim Aufbau von Rechtsstaatlichkeit im Kosovo, bei der Demobilisierung der FARC-Guerilla in Kolumbien, und sie stärken die Sicherheitskräfte in Mali, die gegen Terrorismus und organisierte Kriminalität kämpfen. Ohne sie wäre es nicht möglich, ausgehandelte Friedensabkommen umzusetzen, wie beispielsweise im Kongo oder der Ukraine.\n\nSie unterstützen aber auch die Verwaltung der Missionen oder arbeiten im Sekretariat der OSZE in Wien oder bei der EU in Brüssel.\n\nGerade in Krisengebieten wie in der Ostukraine oder in Afghanistan arbeiten unsere Kolleginnen und Kollegen unter schwierigsten Bedingungen. Oft können sie sich wegen der angespannten Sicherheitslage nicht frei bewegen, oder sie wohnen in geschützten Gemeinschaftsunterkünften oder gar Militärstützpunkten, und sie sind häufig für lange Zeit von ihren Familien und Freunden getrennt. Auch deshalb wissen wir, was wir an den vielen Expertinnen und Experten haben, die für uns und mit uns weltweit im Einsatz sind. Ihre herausragende Arbeit ist zu einem Markenzeichen deutscher Außenpolitik geworden - und darauf bin ich auch ein bisschen stolz, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nWir wollen unsere Anerkennung aber nicht nur mit freundlichen Worten ausdrücken. Wir wollen unsere zivilen Expertinnen und Experten auch in der Praxis noch besser unterstützen und schützen. Wir wollen sie für ihre Arbeit angemessen bezahlen und sicherstellen, dass sie rechtlich und sozial ordentlich abgesichert sind. Dafür soll die Neufassung des Sekundierungsgesetzes sorgen. Es ist ein Meilenstein in der rechtlichen und sozialen Absicherung des Zivilpersonals. Es wird uns erlauben, den Expertinnen und Experten für ihre wichtige Tätigkeit erstmals nicht nur Aufwandsentschädigungen, sondern wirkliche Gehälter auf der Grundlage von regulären Arbeitsverträgen zu zahlen. Sie werden auch belastbare Kranken- und Sozialversicherungen haben. Wir sorgen auch dafür, dass unsere Sekundierten in ihren schwierigen und oftmals sehr gefährlichen Missionen bestmöglich abgesichert sind.\n\nIn Zukunft soll das ZIF mit seiner hervorragenden Expertise Arbeitgeber und zentraler Ansprechpartner für Sekundierungen sein. So stellen wir eine bestmögliche Vorbereitung und Betreuung unseres Zivilpersonals in allen Phasen der Entsendung sicher. Mit der Erfahrung des ZIF in der internationalen Personalpolitik stellen wir auch sicher, dass wir zielgenau die Personen ansprechen können, die am besten für jede einzelne Aufgabe geeignet sind. Denn wir brauchen die besten Frauen und Männer. Gerade weil wir die internationale Ordnung mitgestalten wollen, brauchen wir Menschen, die Expertinnen und Experten auf ihrem Gebiet sind, die jeweilige Region kennen und bereit sind, auch Führungspositionen in den Missionen zu übernehmen. Dafür bietet das neue Sekundierungsgesetz eine ganz hervorragende Grundlage.\n\nErfahrene Kolleginnen und Kollegen von Ihnen wissen: Das Auswärtige Amt bringt selten Gesetze auf den Weg. Dieses ist ein besonders wichtiges und liegt mir als Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender des Zentrums für Internationale Friedenseinsätze ganz besonders am Herzen. Ich bitte Sie um gute Beratungen und um Ihre Unterstützung.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13851,volker-ullrich,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Exorbitante Millionengehälter und Abfindungen, die in keinem Verhältnis zum durchschnittlichen Verdienst eines Arbeitnehmers stehen oder zum Ertrag eines Unternehmens, haben mit sozialer Marktwirtschaft wenig zu tun. Es sind absurde Exzesse, wenn manche Vorstände in einem Jahr Arbeit das Doppelte oder Dreifache von dem verdienen, was eine Krankenschwester oder ein Polizist in ihrem Arbeitsleben nach Hause bringen.\n\nDie Entwicklung der Managementvergütung hat sich über den Lauf der Jahre sehr erstaunlich entwickelt. In den 80er-Jahren betrug sie etwa das 15- bis 16-Fache, Mitte der 90er-Jahre das 19-Fache und heute das über 50-Fache des Verdienstes eines durchschnittlichen Arbeitnehmers. Was bemerkenswert ist und was hier nicht verschwiegen werden darf, ist der Umstand, dass es innerhalb von sieben Jahren zu einem exorbitanten Anstieg kam, nämlich vom 20-Fachen auf das 40-Fache. Diese exorbitante Steigerung vom 20-Fachen auf das 40-Fache fand in den Jahren 1998 bis 2005 statt. Das waren bekanntlich die rot-grünen Jahre in Deutschland.\n\nDarauf, meine Damen und Herren, hat der Gesetzgeber reagiert. Darauf hat die Union reagiert, indem im Jahr 2009 die Frage der Vorstandsvergütung neu geregelt wurde. Wir haben gesagt: Die Vorstandsvergütung muss zukünftig angemessen sein, und sie muss an nachhaltigen Zielen ausgerichtet werden. Verantwortlich dafür ist der Aufsichtsrat. Ja, jetzt muss man zu Recht fragen, ob dieses Gesetz in der Praxis funktioniert oder nicht.\n\nSchauen wir doch auf den Aufsichtsrat, in dem Vertreter von SPD und Gewerkschaften die absolute Mehrheit haben, womit sie die Vergütungspolitik eigenverantwortlich bestimmen können. Ein solcher Aufsichtsrat mit der absoluten Mehrheit von SPD-Vertretern und Gewerkschaftern ist die Volkswagen AG. Ausgerechnet in diesem Aufsichtsrat sind die absurdesten und unerträglichsten Vergütungen zu verzeichnen: ein Herr Winterkorn, der 16 Millionen Euro verdient hat und jetzt eine Betriebsrente in Höhe von 3 100 Euro hat - täglich -, eine Frau Hohmann-Dennhardt, die nach 12 Monaten Arbeit mit einer Abfindung in Höhe von 13 Millionen Euro nach Hause geht. Ich sage Ihnen ehrlich: Wer hohe Managementvergütungen zu Recht anprangert, der muss beginnen, vor der eigenen Tür zu kehren.\n\nWelche Möglichkeiten hat der Gesetzgeber, auf diese Verhältnisse zu reagieren? Ich meine, ein wesentlicher Punkt ist die Kontrolle durch Transparenz. Wenn nämlich Vergütungsstrukturen und Entscheidungsprozesse nicht mehr allein im Hinterzimmer entschieden werden, sondern auf der Hauptversammlung diskutiert werden, wenn also Transparenz und Offenheit herrschen, dann wird allein durch den öffentlichen Druck eine Entwicklung in Gang gesetzt werden, die zu einer Begrenzung führt.\n\nEin solches Gesetz, meine Damen und Herren, hat die letzte Koalition aus CDU/CSU und FDP im 17. Deutschen Bundestag beschlossen -\n\ngegen die Stimmen der SPD, der Linken und der Grünen.\n\nWas ist passiert? Im Bundesrat hat die SPD dieses Gesetz am 20. September 2013 gestoppt. Wir hätten seit vier Jahren eine Hauptversammlungskompetenz haben können. Sie haben das verhindert. Also machen Sie jetzt hier bitte keinen Aufstand.\n\nWir werden einen neuen Anlauf unternehmen, dass die Hauptversammlung eine zusätzliche Kompetenz bekommt - nicht alleine, sondern gemeinsam mit der Verantwortung im Aufsichtsrat. Wir werden auch die Arbeitnehmervertreter, die in großen Unternehmen eine wichtige Rolle spielen, nicht aus der Verantwortung entlassen. Wir werden aber auch die Verantwortung der Arbeitnehmervertreter in den Aufsichtsräten ergänzen durch die Verantwortung der Eigentümer, also der Aktionäre und der Kleinaktionäre.\n\nIm Rahmen einer solchen Hauptversammlungspflicht und -kompetenz kann geregelt werden, dass beispielsweise auch über die Managementvergütungen der zweiten und dritten Ebene, also die der Bereichsvorstände, berichtet werden muss, damit der Kleinaktionär einen vollkommenen Blick darauf hat, wie die Entgeltstrukturen im Unternehmen aussehen. Das ist effektive Kontrolle durch Transparenz. Ich lade Sie ein, da bei uns mitzumachen.\n\nBeim Thema Steuerrecht bitte ich darum, dass wir klug agieren. Das Steuerrecht ist komplex und für viele zu kompliziert, auch für diejenigen, die sich damit oftmals beruflich beschäftigen; das ist gar keine Frage. Aber wir dürfen keine Situation bekommen, bei der am Ende des Tages der Kleinaktionär durch einen verminderten Gewinn auf Ebene des Unternehmens stärker leidet als das Unternehmen.\n\nBei einem Unternehmen mit einem Umsatz von 60 bis 70 Milliarden Euro fällt eine Managementvergütung von 2 oder 3 Millionen Euro bei der steuerlichen Abzugsfähigkeit nämlich nicht ins Gewicht.\n\nAndererseits ist das Argument, dass eine Gemeinschaft hohe Vergütungen nicht auch noch durch steuerliche Subventionen fördern muss, ein tragfähiges Argument.\n\nDeswegen sage ich: Lassen Sie uns darüber klug und besonnen reden\n\nund nicht irgendwelche Schnellschüsse machen. Wir stehen bereit.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n1631,thomas-dorflinger,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich gehörte von Beginn dieser Debatte an, als der Bundesaußenminister vortrug, zu den Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die hoffnungsvoll waren und erwartet haben, dass die Debatte über den Einzelplan des Auswärtigen Amtes der aktuell durchaus ernsten Situation in Europa gerecht werden würde. Ich habe mit Freude vernommen, dass Frithjof Schmidt den Bundesaußenminister sogar gelobt hat und der Kollege Liebich einen für seine Verhältnisse moderaten Beitrag in dieser Debatte geleistet hat. Diese Hoffnung bestand bis eben, bis Alexander Ulrich gesprochen hat. Jetzt sind wir, was die Tonlage unserer Debatte angeht, wieder dort, wo wir auch sonst immer waren. Ich halte das nicht für angemessen.\n\n- Das ist nicht überraschend, Herr Kollege Wellmann; das ist richtig. Trotzdem ist es etwas betrüblich, weil die gegenwärtige Situation in Europa den Ernst dieser Debatte erfordert. Der Bundesaußenminister hat in seinem Beitrag die richtige Tonlage vorgegeben.\n\nWenn man von einer steigenden Verantwortung der deutschen Außenpolitik redet, ist es, glaube ich, viel zu kurz gesprungen, wenn man darunter anschließend nur die quasi weltweit zu erwartende Omnipräsenz der Bundeswehr versteht. Das haben auch bei der Sicherheitskonferenz in München weder der Bundesaußenminister noch der Bundespräsident noch andere Redner, die dort vorgetragen haben, so gemeint oder gesagt.\n\nEs ist richtig - auch wenn wir den Einzelplan des Bundesministeriums für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung erst zu einem späteren Zeitpunkt beraten -, in diesem Kontext auch auf die Vorschläge von Gerd Müller einzugehen. Sie stehen in einem guten Verhältnis, in einer guten Korrespondenz zu dem, was der Bundesaußenminister mit Blick auf die Außenpolitik der Bundesregierung vorgetragen hat: dass Außenpolitik nicht in erster Linie eine militärische Dimension hat, sondern erstens eine politische und zweitens selbstverständlich auch eine soziale. In diese Richtung gehen auch die Vorschläge, die aus dem Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung gekommen sind. Dafür bin ich seitens der CDU/CSU-Fraktion ausgesprochen dankbar.\n\nAußenpolitik hat etwas mit Verantwortung, aber selbstverständlich auch etwas mit Verlässlichkeit zu tun. Verlässlichkeit erwarten nicht nur diejenigen, die bereits Opfer einer Intervention aus der Nachbarschaft geworden sind, beispielsweise die Kolleginnen und Kollegen in der Ukraine, sondern Verlässlichkeit erwarten zu Recht auch diejenigen, die sich gegenwärtig mit der Frage befassen müssen - und das durchaus ernsthaft und berechtigt -, ob sie in naher Zukunft möglicherweise selbst Opfer einer solchen Intervention werden. Die Mitglieder des Europaausschusses des Deutschen Bundestages haben am heutigen Nachmittag noch Gelegenheit, mit dem Ministerpräsidenten der Republik Moldau darüber zu diskutieren. Ich bin gespannt auf dieses Gespräch.\n\nWer beispielsweise in das hineinhört, was eine Praktikantin in meinem Büro, die aus Georgien stammt, zu diesem Thema sagt, wer Wortmeldungen etwa aus den baltischen Staaten, aber auch aus Polen hört - der Bundesaußenminister hat darauf hingewiesen -, der spürt, dass die Befürchtungen dort zu Recht bestehen, dass sich damit auch gewisse Erwartungen an die Rolle der Bundesrepublik Deutschland verbinden. Da darf man sich nicht auf eine Nabelschau konzentrieren.\n\nIch bin sehr dafür, dass wir in der Konzeption unserer zukünftigen Überlegungen auch darauf abstellen - Andreas Schockenhoff hat darauf hingewiesen -, das eigene Tun aus der Vergangenheit einer kritischen Reflexion zu unterziehen, ob das die Rolle der Bundesrepublik, der Europäischen Union oder der NATO angeht - Fakt ist: es ist richtig, wir haben in der Vergangenheit nicht alles richtig gemacht -, aber wenn wir daraus sozusagen einen permanenten Prozess der außenpolitischen Gewissenserforschung machen würden, dann legten wir die Außenpolitik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und damit letztlich auch der Europäischen Union ein ganzes Stück weit lahm. Das kann weder in unserem Interesse sein noch im Interesse derer, die auf unsere Verlässlichkeit und auf unsere Verantwortung zählen, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren.\n\nJetzt stehen wir wenige Wochen vor einer Entscheidung. Am 25. Mai findet die Wahl zum Europäischen Parlament statt. Da ist es natürlich wohlfeil, auf die eine oder andere Fehlentwicklung in Europa hinzuweisen und möglicherweise mit einem groben Keil auf einen groben Klotz zu hauen. Das ist in dieser Debatte Gott sei Dank nicht passiert. Es ist aber zu vermuten, dass das im Wahlkampf wieder so sein wird. Ich rate uns dazu, in den Wochen bis zum 25. Mai einen Blick auf das zu werfen, was in der Vergangenheit falsch gelaufen ist; die Europäische Union hat in ihrer Selbstorganisation nicht alles richtig gemacht. Ich glaube, dass es aber auch nottut, an der einen oder anderen Stelle den Blick auf das zu richten, was wir als Europapolitiker an Verbesserungsvorschlägen in die Debatte einbringen können.\n\nIch nenne exemplarisch eine Diskussion im dänischen Parlament, die im Januar dieses Jahres zu einer Reihe von Vorschlägen - 23 an der Zahl - geführt hat, wie man die Rolle der nationalen Parlamente bei der Entscheidungsfindung auf der europäischen Ebene verbessern, intensivieren könnte - zusammen mit den Entscheidungsträgern auf der europäischen Ebene, namentlich der Kommission, dem Rat, aber auch dem Parlament.\n\nWenn man die 23 Vorschläge durchsieht, meine Damen und Herren, dann stellt man fest: Es sind ein paar Vorschläge dabei, die im Grunde genommen das Mitwirkungsrecht des Deutschen Bundestages, also die deutsche Rechtslage, abbilden. Aber zur Wahrheit gehört natürlich auch, dass die Mitwirkungsrechte nationaler Parlamente in anderen Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Union keineswegs so ausgeprägt und ausgestaltet sind wie in Deutschland. Deswegen, glaube ich, gehen die Vorschläge, die aus Dänemark kommen, auch wenn sie an der einen oder anderen Stelle nur die geltende Rechtslage in Deutschland abbilden, bezogen auf die Kolleginnen und Kollegen in den anderen nationalen Parlamenten durchaus in die richtige Richtung. Ich freue mich darauf, wenn wir im Europaausschuss des Deutschen Bundestages in den nächsten Wochen diese Vorschläge einer genaueren Beratung unterziehen und in Kontakt mit den Kolleginnen und Kollegen anderer Parlamente darüber nachdenken, ob wir den einen oder anderen Vorschlag aus Dänemark weiterentwickeln und möglicherweise in die Tat umsetzen können, um Entscheidungsprozesse nicht nur auf der europäischen Ebene, sondern auch auf der nationalen Ebene transparenter zu machen. Das ist einer von den konkreten Vorschlägen, die mit Blick auf den 25. Mai Sinn machen.\n\nIch will mit einem Dankeschön und einem Lob schließen, einem Dankeschön und einem Lob deshalb, weil ein nicht unmaßgebliches Mitglied dieses Hauses ein Ceterum-censeo aufgegriffen hat, das uns fraktionsübergreifend eint. Das betrifft ein Thema, an dem wir bereits in der 17. Legislaturperiode gearbeitet haben und an dem die etwas Älteren auch schon in der 16. Wahlperiode und davor gearbeitet haben. Es geht um das Sprachregime und das Übersetzungsregime der Europäischen Union. Im Europaausschuss ist das, wie gesagt, so etwas wie das Ceterum-censeo aller Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nIch will mich beim Vizepräsidenten des Deutschen Bundestages, bei Johannes Singhammer, bedanken, dass er bei seinem jüngsten Aufenthalt in Brüssel das Thema wieder auf die Agenda gesetzt hat - darin einer Tradition folgend, die der Präsident des Deutschen Bundestages bei seinen Unterredungen auf der europäischen Ebene bereits seit vielen Jahren vertreten hat.\n\nDass das ein Thema ist, liegt nicht daran, dass wir keine Fremdsprachen könnten. Jeder von uns ist aufgrund dessen, was er in der Schule oder Universität gelernt hat, der einen oder anderen Fremdsprache mächtig. Aber wenn wir über komplizierte Sachverhalte beraten - Herr Staatssekretär Kampeter beispielsweise, wenn es um die finanziellen Herausforderungen in der Europäischen Union geht -, dann ist es gut, dass wir dies in unserer Muttersprache tun können und nicht auf Übersetzungen angewiesen sind.\n\nDeswegen freue ich mich, wenn wir in der Zukunft auf der Grundlage dessen, was Johannes Singhammer an Beitrag geleistet hat, arbeiten können.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n7497,ulle-schauws,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Gäste! Kulturpolitisch war in letzter Zeit viel von großen Plänen und Namen zu hören, leider weniger von handwerklich guten Konzepten oder nachhaltigen Strukturlösungen. Aber es kann und darf bei dem Auftrag, den die Bundeskulturpolitik hat, nicht nur um schnelle Erfolge und leere Ankündigungen gehen.\n\nEin erstes Paradebeispiel ist die ausstehende Novellierung des Kulturgutschutzgesetzes. Hier war im Sommer die Aufregung groß. Die Feuilletons waren voll davon. Da stellt man sich die Frage: Warum war das so? Weil unsinnige Neuregelungen bei Künstlern und Sammlern Panikreaktionen ausgelöst haben. Es ging um private Leihgaben in öffentlichen Museen, es ging um die Rechte auf Zutritt zu privaten Sammlungen. Diese Regelungen, Frau Staatsministerin, befanden sich in einem Referentenentwurf Ihres Hauses. Jetzt müssen Sie unter Hochdruck nachbessern. Da sage ich Ihnen: Das war nicht nur handwerklich ganz schlecht, sondern das hätte Ihnen so auch nicht passieren dürfen.\n\nEinmal ganz abgesehen von Ihrer miserablen Kommunikation. Es bei einem so hart umkämpften Gesetz zu versäumen, das Warum und das Wie von Regelungen verständlich zu erklären, war ein eklatanter Fehler. Sie haben unnötig Öl ins Feuer der Händlerlobby gegossen. Hier hätte ich mir von einer Staatsministerin - das muss ich ganz ehrlich sagen - mehr Weitblick und einen professionelleren Umgang erwartet.\n\nMit massivem Widerstand durch die Händlerlobby war zu rechnen; das haben Sie gewusst. Das hat bereits die Umsetzung des Kulturgüterrückgabegesetzes 2007 gezeigt. Die wichtigen Fragen, zum Beispiel unter welchen Voraussetzungen Kulturgut zukünftig als national wertvoll eingetragen wird, lassen Sie weiter offen. Hier bestätigt sich Ihre Vorgehensweise: Großes ankündigen, nicht entsprechend inhaltlich nachliefern.\n\nNoch ein Thema der Kategorie „Schöner Plan - fehlendes Konzept“ steht auf der kulturpolitischen Agenda: das Humboldtforum; Sie haben es eben wieder erwähnt. Auch hier hören wir von der Bundesregierung vor allem euphorisierte Superlative. Mit dem Gründungsintendanten Neil MacGregor steht uns herausragende Kompetenz zur Verfügung; ganz ohne Frage. Das ist gut, aber das reicht ja nicht aus.\n\nBis heute haben Sie konzeptionell immer noch nichts Substanzielles geliefert. Offen bleibt neben dem Inhalt außerdem die zukünftige Finanzierung.\n\nAuch bei TTIP sind wir Zeuginnen und Zeugen einer Kulturpolitik, die Großes verkündet und erst dann schaut, wohin die Reise geht. Sie behaupteten, Frau Staatsministerin, die Kultur könne von den Verhandlungen durch eine Generalklausel ausgenommen werden. Haben Sie konkret etwas dazu gemacht? Wir haben seitdem nichts mehr von Ihnen dazu gehört.\n\nDas Gutachten unserer Fraktion zu den möglichen Auswirkungen von TTIP auf den Kulturbereich hat gezeigt: Die Verhandlungsstrategie der USA lässt eine solche Ausnahme überhaupt nicht zu. Ich sage Ihnen: So bedeutende Verhandlungen können Sie nicht laufen lassen nach dem Motto „Wird schon gut gehen“. Das reicht uns, das reicht auch den Kulturleuten nicht aus.\n\nWas wir von einer Kulturstaatsministerin erwarten - und zu Recht erwarten können -, sind eine nachhaltige Kulturpolitik und eine Vision für morgen. Meine Damen und Herren von der Bundesregierung, ich frage Sie: Wo finden wir die im Koalitionsvertrag angekündigte konzeptorientierte Kulturförderung, wo die Analysen und Statistiken einer verstärkten Kulturpolitikforschung und die angekündigten Maßnahmen zu Inklusion, Geschlechtergerechtigkeit und interkultureller Öffnung von Kulturbetrieben? Gerade jetzt, da uns alle das Thema „Flucht vieler Menschen“ beschäftigt, da es uns alle angeht - viele von Ihnen haben es heute erwähnt -, ist auch die Kulturpolitik der Regierung gefordert, ihren Beitrag zu leisten. Ich hoffe, dass wir Ihre Konzepte dazu bald bekommen werden. Ich sage noch einmal: Große Pläne brauchen gute und nachhaltige Konzepte. Das ist im BKM eine große Leerstelle. Darum, Frau Grütters: Machen Sie Ihre Hausaufgaben! Sie haben nur noch zwei Jahre Zeit.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n1338,ursula-schulte,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sie alle kennen sicher das Buch „Die unendliche Geschichte“ von Michael Ende. Manchmal denke ich, dass die Beschäftigung mit der rechtlichen Gleichstellung von Frauen und Männern genau in diese Kategorie passt.\n\nDenn das Thema steht schon sehr, sehr lange auf der politischen Agenda.\n\nSicherlich, wir haben schon viel erreicht. Aber als ich vor genau 30 Jahren mit meiner kommunalpolitischen Arbeit anfing, habe ich nicht im Traum daran gedacht, dass wir im Jahr 2014 von einer wirklichen Gleichstellung von Männern und Frauen noch so weit entfernt sein würden.\n\nEin wichtiges Thema für meine Fraktion und mich sind vor allem die erheblichen Lohnunterschiede zwischen Männern und Frauen. Auch im 21. Jahrhundert gibt es da bei uns in Deutschland nach wie vor ein deutliches Gefälle. Von einer Entgeltgleichheit kann nicht die Rede sein. Die Gründe sind sicher vielschichtig. Aber Frauen verdienen immer noch bis zu 22 Prozent weniger, einfach deshalb, weil sie Frauen sind. Das ist beschämend, nicht akzeptabel und muss geändert werden.\n\nAber es kommt noch schlimmer. Im Laufe ihrer Erwerbsbiografie und vor allem mit steigendem Alter verändert sich dieser Einkommensunterschied weiter zulasten der Frauen. Für diese Gerechtigkeitslücke gibt es verschiedene Ursachen. Der Erste Gleichstellungsbericht nennt insbesondere die familienbedingte Erwerbsunterbrechung und vor allem die geringen Verdienstmöglichkeiten in frauentypischen Berufen sowie das Fehlen von Frauen in bestimmten Berufen und auf höheren Führungsebenen. Deshalb kann ich Ihnen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, nur beipflichten, wenn Sie in Ihrem Antrag fordern - ich zitiere -:\n\nDer Grundsatz „Gleicher Lohn für gleiche und gleichwertige Arbeit“ muss endlich durchgesetzt werden, damit Frauen gerecht entlohnt werden.\n\nEs geht also darum, typische Frauenberufe aufzuwerten, die Teilzeitfalle zu durchbrechen, die prekären Beschäftigungsverhältnisse abzuschaffen sowie ein Verfahren in Gang zu setzen, das Transparenz über die Entgeltstrukturen in Betrieben und bei den Tarifvertragsparteien sicherstellt. Genau das sieht der Koalitionsvertrag vor.\n\nDie Regierungskoalition hat sich unter anderem darauf verständigt, die direkte Lohndiskriminierung zwischen Männern und Frauen zu beseitigen, indem Unternehmen gesetzlich verpflichtet werden, einen Bericht zur Entgeltgleichheit vorzulegen, ein individuelles Auskunftsrecht einzuführen und sich verbindlichen Prüfverfahren zu unterziehen. Unsere zuständige Ministerin ist - da bin ich vollkommen sicher - ein Garant dafür, dass dies auch umgesetzt wird.\n\nWas wir in der Tat benötigen - darauf möchte ich ganz besonders hinweisen -, ist ein aussagekräftiges Prüf- und Bewertungsverfahren zur Messung von Lohnungleichheit. Wir brauchen effektive Prüfsteine, die möglichst viele Diskriminierungstatbestände erfassen. Es soll aber nicht nur bei Transparenz und Prüfung bleiben. Wenn es tatsächlich einen Hinweis auf Entgeltdiskriminierung gibt, benötigen wir auch Mittel und Wege, damit Betriebe und Tarifvertragsparteien aktiv werden müssen. Und wir benötigen Maßnahmen zur Durchsetzung sowie entsprechende Sanktionsmöglichkeiten, um diese Diskriminierung abzubauen. Wir brauchen also klare gesetzliche Regelungen.\n\nWenn wir Entgeltdiskriminierung aufdecken und angehen wollen, müssen wir alle handelnden Akteure ins Boot holen. Es geht nicht gegeneinander, sondern nur miteinander. Wenn wir hier und heute klare Signale an die Unternehmen senden, müssen wir ebenso dafür sorgen, dass das Prinzip der Entgeltgleichheit auch in andere Politikbereiche einbezogen wird. Dazu zähle ich die Reform der Minijobs, die Einführung des flächendeckenden Mindestlohns, die Diskussion über das Betreuungsgeld und insbesondere ein geschlechtergerechtes Steuersystem, Stichwort Ehegattensplitting.\n\nIn all diesen Bereichen besteht weiterhin sehr großer Handlungsbedarf, wenn wir die Entgeltgleichheit und die Gleichstellung von Männern und Frauen wirklich realisieren wollen.\n\nLassen Sie mich hier und heute das Thema Entgeltgleichheit noch aus einer ganz anderen Perspektive beleuchten, die mir persönlich sehr am Herzen liegt. Als Abgeordnete für den Kreis Borken vertrete ich - wie es so schön heißt - den ländlichen Raum. Hier stellen sich manchmal Probleme bzw. Fragen doch ein wenig anders dar. Ein Kernthema im ländlichen Raum, mit dem ich als langjährige Kommunalpolitikerin häufig zu tun hatte, sind die Leistungen pflegender Angehöriger. Wenn ich von pflegenden Familienangehörigen spreche, meine ich in erster Linie Frauen. Ich nenne sie inzwischen die vergessenen Frauen. Sie pflegen nach der Kindererziehung in der Mehrheit oft die eigenen Eltern oder Schwiegereltern, gar nicht so selten beide Elternpaare, ohne dass diese Leistung gesellschaftlich anerkannt wird. Diese Frauen und auch die wenigen pflegenden Männer sind für unsere Gesellschaft eine wesentliche Stütze.\n\nOhne sie würde das System der Pflege zusammenbrechen, allein weil uns die finanziellen und personellen Ressourcen fehlen.\n\nFakt ist, dass mir die Entscheidung, ob ich als pflegender Angehöriger noch berufstätig sein kann oder nicht, vielfach durch den Grad der Pflegebedürftigkeit abgenommen wird. Bei schwer demenzerkrankten Menschen mit Weglauftendenz oder bei Menschen mit schweren körperlichen oder geistigen Behinderungen ist eine Berufstätigkeit für die Pflegenden kaum denkbar. Deshalb benötigen wir neben einer neuen Wertschätzungskultur - diese bitte nicht nur in Sonntagsreden - eine stärkere Berücksichtigung dieser Leistung bei den Rentenansprüchen.\n\nEs kann nicht sein, dass wir diese Frauen am Ende in die Grundsicherung schicken. Hier tragen wir alle unmittelbar Verantwortung. Auch das gehört für mich zu einer gerechten Entlohnung von Frauen.\n\nIch könnte noch viele andere Themen ansprechen. Aber ich habe meine Redezeit schon überzogen, wie ich gerade sehe.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich doch noch einen Wunsch äußern. Ich wünsche mir, dass spätestens die Generation meiner Enkelin Charlotte, die jetzt neun Jahre alt ist, nach Leistung und Qualifikation bezahlt wird. Sie soll sich keine Gedanken mehr darüber machen müssen, wie sie Familie und Beruf miteinander vereinbaren kann. Kurz: Sie soll ein gleichberechtigtes, vielfältiges Frauenleben führen. Dafür lohnt es sich doch zu kämpfen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank, dass Sie mir zugehört haben.\"\n10325,thomas-de-maiziere,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Ich bringe heute für die Bundesregierung den Gesetzentwurf ein, der die Staaten Tunesien, Marokko und Algerien als sichere Herkunftsstaaten bestimmen soll. Dieser Gesetzentwurf orientiert sich an drei Grundsätzen:\n\nErstens. Jeder Mann und jede Frau bekommen in Deutschland ein faires Asylverfahren. „Faires Asylverfahren“ heißt, dass jeder Antragsteller seine Situation in einer persönlichen Anhörung vortragen kann, und das heißt, dass diese Angaben sorgfältig geprüft werden. Auch Antragsteller aus sicheren Herkunftsstaaten erhalten, wie alle anderen, ein Asylrecht, wenn sie einen Asylgrund geltend machen können. Daran soll und wird auch der vorliegende Gesetzentwurf nichts ändern. Dennoch: Die Einstufung als sicheres Herkunftsland wird Veränderungen für Antragsteller aus diesen Ländern bringen. Wir führen eine gesetzliche Vermutung ein, dass Asylanträge aus diesen Ländern unbegründet sind. Der Asylantrag wird abgelehnt, wenn der Antragsteller nicht nachweisen kann, dass er über einen Asylgrund verfügt.\n\nIm letzten Jahr wurden etwa 26 000 Asylbewerber aus den drei Staaten in Deutschland registriert. Die Anerkennungsquote für Tunesien lag bei 0,0 Prozent, für Algerien lag sie bei unter 1 Prozent, für Marokko bei etwa 2,3 Prozent; im ersten Quartal 2016 lag die Quote sogar nur bei 1,2 Prozent. Wir zeichnen also per Gesetz eine Entwicklung nach, die längst Alltag ist. Asylanträge aus Tunesien, Marokko und Algerien haben in der Regel keine Aussicht auf Erfolg. Menschen aus diesen Ländern kommen ja auch überwiegend aus asylfremden Gründen nach Deutschland: Sie wollen Arbeit, und sie wollen ein besseres Leben. Leider kommen manche aus diesen Staaten nach Deutschland, um hier Straftaten zu begehen. Das Asylrecht ist aber nicht das richtige Instrument, um die vielen wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Probleme in den Herkunftsländern aufzufangen. Asylrecht ist kein Einwanderungsrecht.\n\nDer zweite Grundsatz. Jeder hat ein Interesse an einem schnellen Asylverfahren, zumindest sollte jeder Interesse an einem schnellen Asylverfahren haben. Was meine ich damit? Wir wollen nicht, dass bereits die Dauer des Asylverfahrens einen Anreiz darstellt, hier einen aussichtslosen Asylantrag zu stellen, weil man in dieser Zeit untergebracht und versorgt wird, vielleicht besser als im Herkunftsland. Das geht zulasten der Kommunen, das geht zulasten der öffentlichen Haushalte, und das geht letztlich auch zulasten der schutzbedürftigen Asylantragsteller, weil für sie weniger Kapazitäten zur Verfügung stehen.\n\nDie Einstufung der Maghreb-Staaten als sichere Herkunftsstaaten erlaubt es den Behörden und Gerichten, schneller über Anträge aus diesen Ländern zu entscheiden.\n\nDie Anträge können in den besonderen Aufnahmeeinrichtungen zügig zum Abschluss gebracht werden. Die dem Ausländer zu setzende Ausreisefrist verkürzt sich auf eine Woche; das könnten Sie sonst nicht machen, Frau Kollegin Amtsberg. Auch eine Klage ist innerhalb einer Woche zu erheben und hat keine aufschiebende Wirkung; das ist in den anderen Fällen anders. Das zuständige Verwaltungsgericht soll grundsätzlich innerhalb einer Woche über den Antrag auf einstweiligen Rechtsschutz entscheiden, auch das ist in anderen Fällen anders. All das senkt den Anreiz, hier einen chancenlosen Asylantrag zu stellen. Und das ist auch Absicht des Gesetzes.\n\nDer dritte Grundsatz. Schnellere Asylverfahren sind wichtig, aber genauso wichtig ist, dass abgelehnte Asylbewerber, wenn kein sonstiger Duldungsgrund vorliegt, Deutschland schnell wieder verlassen und in ihre Länder zurückkehren, freiwillig oder durch Abschiebung. Bislang verzögerten sich Abschiebungen nach Tunesien, Marokko oder Algerien auch, weil die Zusammenarbeit mit diesen Ländern bei der Identifizierung ihrer Staatsbürger und bei der Ausstellung von Reisedokumenten schwerfällig war.\n\nIch bin vor einigen Wochen in Tunesien, Marokko und Algerien gewesen und habe dort Vereinbarungen treffen können, die die Rückführung aus Deutschland in diese Länder erleichtern. Warum haben diese Länder das gemacht? Diese Länder und diese Regierungen wollen nicht, dass ihr guter Ruf und der gute Name derjenigen Bürgerinnen und Bürger, die zu Zehntausenden in Deutschland rechtstreu, als Steuerzahler, als Beitragszahler, als gute Nachbarn, leben, in Mitleidenschaft gezogen werden durch eine kleine Zahl von Straftätern, die den Namen dieser Länder beschmutzen. Das wollen diese Länder nicht. Deswegen sagen sie - gerne, ungerne -: Wir nehmen die Menschen zurück, wenn ihr Asylantrag abgelehnt wird. - Und das ist richtig so.\n\nDie Bundesregierung hat sich die Einstufung von Algerien, Marokko und Tunesien als sichere Herkunftsstaaten dennoch nicht leichtgemacht. Wir haben uns anhand der Rechtslage, der Rechtsanwendungen und der allgemeinen politischen Verhältnisse ein Gesamturteil über die Verhältnisse in den jeweiligen Staaten gebildet. In der Begründung dieses Gesetzentwurfs werden die Erwägungen für jedes der drei Länder ausführlich dargelegt. Ich weiß natürlich aus den Besprechungen mit den Ministerpräsidenten der Länder, dass diese - und insbesondere einer - sehr viel Wert darauf legen, dass ihnen in der Begründung überzeugend dargelegt wird, wie die gesamtpolitische Einschätzung dieser Länder ist.\n\nAuch wenn Algerien, Marokko und Tunesien als sichere Herkunftsstaaten eingestuft werden, so verschließen wir dennoch nicht die Augen vor bestehenden Defiziten, die es auch in diesen Staaten im Hinblick auf die Menschenrechte gibt. Aber alles in allem kann man mit guten Gründen sagen, dass diese drei Staaten - wie viele andere in der Welt auch - sichere Herkunftsstaaten sind. Sie selbst wollen es auch: Sie wollen als sichere Herkunftsstaaten bestimmt werden.\n\nAus all diesen Gründen bringe ich diesen Gesetzentwurf ein und bitte um zügige Beratung und später dann auch um Zustimmung im Bundesrat.\n\nAuf eine konstruktive Beratung in diesem Haus!\"\n4236,thomas-de-maiziere,\"Frau Präsidentin, wie soll ich denn das verstehen?\n\nFrau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sie sehen einen fröhlichen und dankbaren Innenminister vor sich.\n\n- Ja, das ist so.\n\nDie Regierung hatte im Regierungsentwurf schon etliche Verbesserungen vorgenommen. Der Haushaltsausschuss hat nun in engem Kontakt mit dem Finanzministerium und mit uns und mit Unterstützung der Hauptberichterstatter, aber auch vieler anderer, an den richtigen Stellen noch viel draufgepackt. Das ist wirklich gut.\n\nIch möchte das vor allen Dingen betonen, weil ich hier, gerade im Bereich der Sicherheit, der sonst zu den umstrittensten gehört, etwas Seltenes erlebt habe. Viele der Vorhaben und Projekte haben, auch in den Einzelabstimmungen, die ausdrückliche Zustimmung aller Fraktionen gefunden. Unverständlicherweise hat die Opposition den Haushalt insgesamt dennoch abgelehnt.\n\nIch verstehe das als große Unterstützung für mein Haus, aber vor allem für die Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter, für die Polizisten, für die Mitarbeiter des BAMF und der Sicherheitsbehörden. Sie gewährleisten Freiheit und Sicherheit in unserem Land, und dafür ein herzliches Dankeschön.\n\nZukunftsweisend ist auch der Beschluss der Finanzierung der „Netze des Bundes“. Hier geht es um ziemlich viel Geld: 450 Millionen Euro in drei Jahren. Das ist ein ehrgeiziges Projekt. Einige haben dazu gesprochen. Es muss stärker koordiniert werden, Herr Bartsch, das stimmt. Das ist nicht alleine, aber auch eine Antwort auf das Thema NSA. Wir werden die Realisierung der Empfehlungen des Ausschusses zügig in Angriff nehmen.\n\nDas führt mich zu einer grundsätzlichen Bemerkung, die ich gerne machen möchte, weil sehr viel von Investitionen die Rede ist. Uns fällt ziemlich viel ein, wie wir den Ländern im Bereich Bildung, Autobahnen, vor allem im Bereich Energieeffizienz durch Investitionen helfen können. Das ist alles gut und schön. Aber wir können auch mal an uns denken. Wir haben das bei den Konjunkturprogrammen gemacht. Wir haben für Investitionen in Bundesliegenschaften eine Vorabquote eingeführt. Wir haben es bei der Flut gemacht. Wir haben gesagt: Von den 8 Milliarden Euro geht ein gewisser Anteil in die eigene Infrastruktur des Bundes, Schleusen usw.\n\nWenn es jetzt um die Verteilung der Investitionen geht, dann fallen mir und uns allen ganz viele Bereiche ein, in die wir - ich sage das als Minister für innere Angelegenheiten - investieren können, zum Beispiel in die Erneuerung unserer IT-Strukturen oder in die Liegenschaften des Bundes. Wir können viel gutes Geld für die eigenen Belange des Bundes in die Hand nehmen und nicht nur für noch so berechtigte Belange Dritter. Das wollte ich gerne an dieser Stelle einmal sagen.\n\nDie Sicherheit und der Schutz der Freiheit haben eine herausragende Bedeutung für unser Land. Es gibt einen großen gesellschaftlichen und politischen Konsens, das zu erkennen, zu erhalten und die dafür notwendigen Schritte zu tun. Auch dafür, dass das deutlich geworden ist, möchte ich mich beim Haushaltsausschuss ausdrücklich bedanken.\n\nMein wichtigstes Anliegen als Bundesminister des Innern ist, dass die Bürgerinnen und Bürger in Deutschland sicher leben können. Einen wesentlichen Anteil daran haben nicht nur Gesetze und die internationale Zusammenarbeit und vieles andere mehr, sondern unsere Polizistinnen und Polizisten und die Mitarbeiter in den Sicherheitsbehörden. Sie üben Tag und Nacht gewissenhaft und gerne ihren Beruf aus. Sie genießen in der Bevölkerung ein hohes Ansehen. Die Polizei liegt bei über 80 Prozent, die Bundeskanzlerin bei 65 Prozent und der Papst bei 55 Prozent, die Parteien liegen ziemlich weit hinten.\n\nWir müssen dafür sorgen, dass der Polizeiberuf attraktiv bleibt. Auch dafür leisten wir mit dem Haushalt 2015 einen Beitrag. Die Zahlen wurden genannt: 406 neue Stellen für die Bundespolizei, Schutzausrüstung, Kfz, Hebungen gerade im unteren und mittleren Bereich.\n\nUnsere Polizistinnen und Polizisten müssen auf der Straße immer wieder buchstäblich den Kopf hinhalten, auch und gerade, wenn es brenzlig wird. Leider verliert eine Reihe von Bürgern immer mehr den Respekt vor staatlichen Funktionsträgern insgesamt. Verbale und körperliche Angriffe nehmen zu. In Bremen wird jetzt gerade eine Spuckhaube eingeführt, die diejenigen über den Kopf bekommen, die regelmäßig Polizisten im Kfz usw. anspucken. Auch dagegen, dass es diese Spuckhauben gibt, gibt es jetzt Protest. Ich finde es gut bzw. nur recht und billig, dass man dafür sorgt, dass Polizisten nicht angespuckt werden.\n\nBei links- und rechtsextremistischen Gruppen ebenso wie bei alkoholisierten Fußballanhängern bis hin zu einzelnen Gruppen scheinen die gewalttätigen Auseinandersetzungen mit der Polizei eine Art Eventcharakter zu haben. Wir haben insgesamt einen Rückgang der Gewaltkriminalität, auch der Jugendgewaltkriminalität - das ist gut -, verzeichnen aber einen Anstieg der Intensität von Gewaltausübung, und zwar nicht nur gegenüber Polizisten, sondern auch gegenüber Rettungskräften und Repräsentanten des Staates. Die Polizistinnen und Polizisten im Bund und in den Ländern tragen Verantwortung für unsere Sicherheit. Also tragen wir Verantwortung dafür, dass sie bei ihrer Arbeit sicher sind. Der Haushalt leistet auch einen Beitrag hierfür.\n\nZum Katastrophenschutz ist hier viel gesagt worden. Ich unterstütze das natürlich ausdrücklich, insbesondere was zur liegenschaftlichen Situation gesagt worden ist. Das hilft auch den Helfern vor Ort.\n\nIch will nur einmal auf Folgendes hinweisen - Herr Brandl hat das auch gemacht -: Während wir hier debattieren, sind THW-Helfer in Afrika und kämpfen gegen die Ausbreitung von Ebola, sind THW-Helfer in Jordanien und im Nordirak und helfen dort in den Flüchtlingslagern. Wir denken gern an unsere Ortsverbände, aber ich finde, eine solche Debatte bietet auch Anlass, diesen Menschen im Ausland und ihren Angehörigen sowie den Arbeitgebern, die sie freistellen, einmal ein herzliches lautes Dankeschön zu sagen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, es ist heute nicht die Zeit, umfassend über die Sicherheitslage zu sprechen. Aber Sie wissen, die Sicherheitslage ist ernst. Die Terrororganisation, die sich selbst „Islamischer Staat“ nennt - und die wir nicht „Islamischer Staat“ nennen sollten -, zeigt eine archaische Brutalität. Menschen werden enthauptet, Frauen vergewaltigt, versklavt, Grenzen, die seit über 100 Jahren bestehen, ignoriert - und mit all dem brüstet sich die IS öffentlich.\n\nMänner und einige Frauen bringen aus Deutschland, bringen aus Europa den Krieg in diese Gegend; sie exportieren Gewalt und Terror. Mitte September habe ich ein Betätigungsverbot gegen die Organisation IS ausgesprochen. Wir sehen hier Erfolge; es gibt viele Festnahmen und Ermittlungen. Diensteanbieter in den sozialen Medien nehmen zunehmend Profile vom Netz. Alles, was sich dort an Sympathiewerbung für die IS findet, Herr Abgeordneter Beck, ist durch dieses Betätigungsverbot strafbar geworden. Das ist gut so. Das Betätigungsverbot fügt sich in eine Reihe von anderen Maßnahmen ein, sowohl von mir, die wir demnächst diskutieren, Stichwort „Personalausweis“, als auch vom Justizminister, Stichwort „Reisen“ und anderes; es ist heute nicht die Zeit, im Einzelnen darauf einzugehen. Wir wollen verhindern, dass der Terrorismus von Deutschland aus exportiert wird. Wir wollen erst recht verhindern, dass geschulte Terroristen - zumal wenn sie aus Deutschland gekommen sind - nach Deutschland zurückkehren und hier Anschläge verüben. Dazu brauchen unsere Sicherheitsbehörden Unterstützung. Dafür brauchen wir internationale Zusammenarbeit. Dazu brauchen wir auch eine Stärkung des Bundesamts für Verfassungsschutz; davon ist gesprochen worden.\n\nWir können damit keine vollständige Sicherheit herstellen. Niemand kann eine Garantie dafür geben, dass es in Deutschland nicht zu einem Anschlag kommt. Aber wir sind entschlossen, das uns Mögliche zu tun, damit es nicht passiert.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ein Wort zum Thema Flüchtlinge. Frau Hajduk, Sie haben darüber gesprochen, und es ist über die zusätzlichen Stellen gesprochen worden; das ist alles richtig. In der Tat: Ich halte es für falsch, der Bevölkerung zu sagen: Das ist jetzt mal ein Jahr, nächstes Jahr wird alles wieder gut. - Das wird wohl nicht der Fall sein. Trotzdem verlangt dies angesichts der Flüchtlingsströme, angesichts der Bürgerkriege in Syrien und im Irak und all dessen, was dort passiert ist, natürlich eine Strategie, die darüber hinausgeht, einfach alle aufzunehmen. Auch darüber zu sprechen, ist heute nicht die Zeit.\n\nDas hat etwas mit der Arbeit vor Ort zu tun, das hat etwas mit der Arbeit in den Transitländern zu tun, das hat mit dem Dubliner Übereinkommen zu tun - alle Staaten müssen ihre Verpflichtungen aus diesem Übereinkommen erfüllen -, das hat etwas mit europäischer Solidarität und mit vielem anderen mehr zu tun. Darüber sind wir uns möglicherweise einig. In einem Punkt sind wir uns vielleicht nicht einig - ich will nicht, dass hier zu viel Harmonie verbreitet wird -:\n\nJa, wir sind dafür, dass im BAMF schnell entschieden wird - auch mithilfe zusätzlicher Stellen -, wer politisch verfolgt wird, wer Asyl verdient. Diese Personen müssen integriert werden, und zwar so schnell wie irgend möglich.\n\n- Oder als Flüchtling anerkannt wird, Herr Beck. Das ist jetzt gar nicht mein Punkt.\n\nIch möchte auf etwas anderes hinaus: Wir wollen auch, dass die Anträge derjenigen, die aus sicheren Herkunftsländern kommen, genauso schnell geprüft werden,\n\ndamit sie nicht integriert werden und unser Land schnell wieder verlassen, damit die Aufnahmebereitschaft der Bevölkerung erhalten bleibt.\n\nNun ein Wort zu Herrn Gabriel. Wir sind in Gesprächen mit den Ländern über die Frage, ob, in welcher Weise und in welchem Umfang wir den Ländern und, ehrlich gesagt, vor allem den Kommunen in allen anstehenden Punkten, von der Unterbringung bis zum Thema Gesundheit, helfen können und müssen. Das ist schwierig. Die Länder verhalten sich gegenüber den Kommunen sehr unterschiedlich. Das Spektrum der Kostenerstattung durch die Länder reicht von 20, 30 Prozent der Kosten der Kommunen bis zu 90, 100 Prozent. Ich möchte alle, die hier große Töne spucken, man sollte den Kommunen helfen, bitten, erst einmal in den jeweiligen Ländern dafür zu sorgen, dass diese den Kommunen helfen. Das wäre auch einmal etwas.\n\nAber wir überlegen uns etwas. Das läuft auf ein Gespräch der Bundeskanzlerin mit den Ministerpräsidenten der Länder hinaus. Es könnte ja sein, Frau Hajduk, dass Herr Gabriel das, was er gesagt hat, gar nicht erfunden hat. Es könnte ja sein, dass er es nur als Erster öffentlich gemacht hat und es die Gespräche schon seit längerem gibt. Wir sind der Meinung, dass wir erst am Ende der Debatte etwas verkünden sollten und nicht am Anfang der Debatte. Also seien Sie nicht so stolz auf Ihren diesbezüglichen Antrag auf dem Parteitag der Grünen.\n\n- Das verstehe ich; aber vertrauen Sie doch einmal ein bisschen darauf, dass es auch andere Möglichkeiten gibt, den Kommunen und den Ländern zu helfen, ohne den Haushalt noch einmal anfassen zu müssen. Norbert Barthle, ich glaube, auch das ist ein wichtiger Punkt.\n\nIch will nur sagen: Wir haben das im Blick. Wir machen das verantwortungsvoll, und das ist richtig so.\n\nEine letzte Bemerkung zum Sport - Herr Barthle hat heute Morgen einiges dazu gesagt -: Wir hatten gegenüber der ursprünglichen Veranschlagung schon 8 Mil-lionen Euro draufgelegt. Jetzt kommen noch einmal 15 Millionen Euro hinzu. Auch die NADA-Finanzierung ist gesichert. Ich füge hinzu - das hat Norbert Barthle heute Morgen gesagt, sicher auch im Namen von Herrn Gerster -: Dieses Geld kommt nicht einfach obendrauf und wird nicht nach dem Gießkannenprinzip verteilt, sondern wir verbinden damit die Erwartung, dass damit der Einstieg in eine Strukturveränderung, in eine Effektivierung der Spitzensportförderung verbunden ist - hoffentlich auf dem Weg zu Olympischen Spielen in Deutschland.\n\nDaran werden wir erinnern, und ich hoffe, dass wir das gemeinsam tun werden.\n\nIch habe meine Rede begonnen mit dem Satz: Sie sehen einen fröhlichen, zufriedenen und dankbaren Innenminister. - Das ist so. Noch mehr würde ich mich freuen, wenn nicht nur die Koalition, sondern nach all den schönen Reden auch die Opposition sagen würde: Verdammt noch mal, das war eine gute Sache. Dieses Mal stimmen wir zu.\"\n4392,martin-burkert,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Mit diesen Haushaltsberatungen - das ist schon angesprochen worden - wird auch die Leistungs- und Finanzierungsvereinbarung auf den Weg gebracht. Mit der LuFV II sorgen wir für mehr Qualität in unserem Schienennetz. Wir haben endlich mehr Geld für die Schiene; auch das wurde erwähnt. Das ist sehr wichtig. Wir werden ab dem 1. Januar 2015 noch genauer auf die Verwendung dieser Mittel schauen.\n\nIch bin in diesem Zusammenhang sehr dankbar, dass wir gemeinsam mit dem Bundesrechnungshof eine gute und vernünftige Lösung gefunden haben. Zu den aus meiner Sicht erfolgreich abgeschlossenen Verhandlungen zwischen dem Verkehrsministerium und der DB AG darf ich Ihnen, Herr Minister Dobrindt, aber auch Herrn Kefer von der Deutschen Bahn AG herzlichen Glückwunsch sagen. Es waren harte Verhandlungen. Frau Bär, vielleicht können Sie Herrn Jacobs im Ministerium, der die Verhandlungen begleitet hat, meinen herzlichen Dank ausrichten.\n\nDas ist ein Werk, das wir damals auf den Weg gebracht haben, das jetzt fortgeschrieben wurde und das es verdient, erwähnt zu werden.\n\nWir haben im Rahmen der LuFV I in den letzten Jahren festgestellt, dass es Verbesserungsbedarf gibt. Neben der besseren finanziellen Ausstattung haben wir Dinge gemacht, die dringend notwendig waren; das kann sicherlich auch die Opposition nicht leugnen. Mit dem Fünfjahresplan über Instandhaltung und Reparatur des Schienennetzes können wir den Sanierungsstau bei Bahnhöfen, Brücken, Tunneln, Schienen, Weichen sowie Elektro- und Datenleitungen auflösen. Das wird angegangen und abgearbeitet.\n\nWir haben die nächsten Jahre jährlich 4 Milliarden Euro zur Verfügung. Das sind 1,3 Milliarden Euro mehr pro Jahr als bisher. Vielen Dank an die Haushälter. Ich glaube, hier ist es gelungen, etwas für die Schiene zu tun. Auch das muss man an diesem Tag einmal sagen.\n\nIch will noch weitere positive Punkte nennen.\n\nMit härteren Anforderungen und stärkeren Kontrollen stellen wir die Weichen für eine höhere Qualität des Eisenbahnbetriebs. So verpflichtet sich die Bahn ab 1. Januar 2015 mit dieser LuFV II, 875 Brücken teilweise oder komplett zu sanieren. Andernfalls drohen Strafzahlungen; auch das haben wir deutlich gemacht.\n\nIch begrüße ausdrücklich, dass die Notrufsäulen, die mit Blick auf einen sicheren Betrieb auch einen infrastrukturellen Bezug haben, aus dem Bereich „Station und Service“ ausgenommen werden.\n\nAuch die Verbesserung der Qualitätskennziffer Bahnsteighöhe, Herr Behrens und Herr Minister, ist in der Tat ein weiterer historischer Schritt am heutigen Tag, weil wir eine einheitliche Bahnsteighöhe von 76 Zentimetern festschreiben. Diese Norm wird wahrscheinlich erst in hundert Jahren am letzten Bahnhof erfüllt sein,\n\naber die Fahrzeugindustrie begrüßt das sehr, weil das für ihre Planung wichtig ist.\n\nEin ebenso wichtiger und guter Schritt ist - auch das will ich sagen; meine Kollegin Bettina Hagedorn hat es schon erwähnt -, dass die Netzerlöse über die Bahndividende wieder in vollem Umfang der Schiene zugutekommen.\n\nAber ich will hier auch sagen, dass trotzdem noch einige Fragen offenbleiben. Zunächst muss man feststellen, dass am Ende dieses Jahres, also noch im Dezember, der Aufsichtsrat der Deutschen Bahn AG dem Bahnvorstand die Unterschriftsgewährung ermöglichen muss. Hier ist die Frage: Was geschieht eigentlich, wenn die Dividende nicht in der vorgesehenen Höhe gezahlt werden kann? Herr Kampeter, ich will hier ein deutliches Wort an das Finanzministerium richten. Wenn das der Fall sein sollte, dann bitte ich schon, den Koalitionsvertrag zugrunde zu legen, weil wir dort vereinbart haben, dass erst die Instandhaltung, sprich: die LuFV, kommt und dann Aus- und Neubau. Ich glaube, das sollten wir hier noch einmal deutlich erwähnen; denn so sicher erscheint mir diese Dividende noch nicht.\n\nIch will mich bei den Haushältern ausdrücklich dafür bedanken, dass es am 3. Dezember dieses Jahres noch einmal eine Anhörung gibt. Ich halte es für sehr wichtig, Herr Rehberg und Frau Hagedorn, dass diese noch stattfindet, bevor die Beschlussfassung erfolgt. Herr Rehberg, ich habe genau zugehört, was Sie in diesem Zusammenhang zum Thema Schiffe gesagt haben. Ich bin da bei Ihnen. Personalkosten sind ein Problem. Darüber werden wir uns sicher unterhalten müssen. Aber ich sage in Richtung des Ministers: Herr Minister, vielleicht sollten wir einmal überlegen, ob wir Züge ausflaggen. Da könnten wir in Bezug auf die Personalkosten etwas tun. Auch die Bahn braucht jeden Euro; das nur am Rande.\n\nZurück zur Leistungs- und Finanzierungsvereinbarung. Auf keinen Fall darf geschehen, dass wir, was die Dividende angeht, Druck aufbauen, der dann am Schluss auf das Personal abgewälzt wird. Ich glaube, auch darauf müssen wir schauen. Und wir müssen Obacht geben, dass keine Deckelung der Trassenpreise erfolgt, wie das im letzten Entwurf zum Eisenbahnregulierungsgesetz vorgesehen war - das steht ja auch noch an -, weil dann die DB Netz AG ihre Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten verliert und die Berechnungen zur LuFV gefährdet sind. Auch dazu an dieser Stelle einen Fingerzeig.\n\nZudem muss die Personalplanung angepasst werden. 1,3 Milliarden Euro mehr bedeuten mehr Personal bei der DB Netz AG, aber auch beim Eisenbahn-Bundesamt. Da sind wir in der Verpflichtung, weil diese Behörde dem Ministerium untersteht. Es wäre falsch, wenn die so wichtigen LuFV-Mittel nicht verbaut werden könnten, weil beim EBA die Kapazitäten fehlen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, es gibt also noch Luft nach oben. Bitte verstehen Sie mich hier nicht falsch. Mögliche Unsicherheiten aufzuzeigen, heißt nicht, den LuFV-Entwurf generell infrage zu stellen. Wir müssen nur Obacht geben.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich noch zwei Punkte nennen.\n\nDie Erstellung einer Kapazitätskennziffer und eines Parameters, der über die Oberflächenbeschaffenheit der Gleise Auskunft gibt, ist eine große Herausforderung, aber auch wünschenswert. Diese sollen Auskunft geben, wie wir die LuFV weiterentwickeln. Auch in puncto Schienenlärm ist das ein ganz wichtiger Punkt. Und wir brauchen weitere Anstrengungen im Bereich Barrierefreiheit, Herr Minister. Wir müssen es ernst damit meinen, dass die Bahnhöfe in unserem Land barrierefrei werden.\n\nWir bekommen Geld, und wir sollten dieses nutzen. Insofern freue ich mich, wenn die LuFV am 1. Januar 2015 hoffentlich in Kraft tritt. Sie bleibt ein wichtiges Instrument. Die Große Koalition hat sie weiterentwickelt. Ich hoffe, dass die Opposition der LuFV am Ende zustimmt.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nFrau Kollegin Leidig, nachdem Sie erst die LuFV dafür gelobt haben, dass uns 28 Milliarden Euro mehr zur Verfügung stehen, und dann aufgeführt haben, was damit alles gemacht werden muss - in einigen Punkten zu Recht; wobei man anführen muss, dass die Zahl der Verspätungsminuten im Schienenpersonennahverkehr gesunken ist; das gehört zur Ehrlichkeit dazu -, frage ich Sie an dieser Stelle, ob die Fraktion Die Linke in der Sitzung des Ausschusses für Verkehr und digitale Infrastruktur am nächsten Mittwoch der Beschlussfassung über die Leistungs- und Finanzierungsvereinbarung zustimmen wird oder nicht.\"\n4423,eva-bulling-schroter,\"Danke schön, Herr Minister, für den Bericht. - Auch ich möchte zum Nationalen Aktionsplan Energieeffizienz fragen. Wir alle wissen, dass die Energiewirtschaft eine wichtige Rolle im Bereich Energieeffizienz spielen muss. In dem Entwurf des Nationalen Aktionsplans Energieeffizienz des Umweltministeriums war von einem Beitrag der Energiewirtschaft in Höhe von 40 bis 65 Millionen Tonnen CO2 zu lesen. In einer Tabelle im Entwurf des Klimaaktionsplans waren auch diese Zahlen zu finden. Im jetzt vorgelegten Nationalen Akti-onsplan Energieeffizienz findet sich diese Tabelle nicht mehr. Sie als Wirtschaftsminister hätten dort zumindest eine Reduzierung um 22 Millionen Ton-nen CO2, über die jetzt immer gesprochen wird, festhalten können. Meine Frage ist: Welchen Bei-trag der Energiewirtschaft zur CO2-Reduktion stel-len Sie sich jetzt vor?\n\nDanke schön. - Noch einmal zum Nationalen Aktionsplan Energieeffizienz. Es geht jetzt um die Finanzierung, Herr Minister. Da lese ich, dass sich diese Maßnahmen, soweit sie zu einnahme- und ausgabenseitigen Belastungen im Bundes-haushalt führen, in die haushaltspolitische Ge-samtstrategie des Bundes einfügen müssen. Das bedeutet, dass entsprechende Maßnahmen grundsätzlich im eigenen Politikbereich gegenzu-finanzieren sind.\n\nIch würde gerne erklärt bekommen, was unter Gegenfinanzierung zu verstehen ist. Bezieht man sich da auf die schwarze Null? Gibt es da einen Vorbehalt? - Man braucht ja Geld für diese gan-zen Maßnahmen; umsonst wird es nicht gehen.\"\n10362,bernd-fabritius,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Mit dem Antrag, den wir heute debattieren, greifen die Grünen ein nicht ganz neues Thema auf. Die Beschränkung der Zivilgesellschaft in immer mehr Staaten fordert von der Weltgemeinschaft, von Europa und von Deutschland engagierte Maßnahmen, um diesem bedauerlichen Trend entgegenzuwirken, wo immer es geht.\n\nDie Bundesregierung berücksichtigt dies in ihrer täglichen Arbeit. Ich bin Ihnen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, dennoch dankbar für die Einbringung des Antrags; denn es lohnt sich vielleicht, in diesem Hohen Haus erneut über solche Entwicklungen zu sprechen. Es lohnt sich ebenso, über Grenzen des eigenen Handlungsspielraums nachzudenken, denen man bei diesem Thema bedauerlicherweise begegnet.\n\nDer Politikwissenschaftler Francis Fukuyama rief 1992 nach dem Zusammenbruch der Sowjetunion und des Kommunismus sein berühmt gewordenes „Ende der Geschichte“ aus, womit er die Hoffnung auf den weltweiten Siegeszug der Demokratie weiter nährte. Nur 24 Jahre danach müssen wir jedoch feststellen, dass eine „decade of decline“ hinter uns liegt, wie der jüngste Bericht von Freedom House die zurückliegenden Jahre treffend bezeichnet. Einfach ausgedrückt sind damit sowohl der teilweise Rückzug der Demokratie als auch ihre abnehmende Qualität gemeint, die in einer ganzen Reihe von Ländern zu beobachten sind und die uns in den internationalen Fachgremien tagaus, tagein beschäftigen. Wir alle kennen die prominenten Beispiele: Es sind die üblichen Verdächtigen. Der Antrag listet einige von ihnen auf. Sie, Frau Kollegin Schulz-Asche, haben zu Recht weitere genannt.\n\nDie „decade of decline“ bzw. der „shrinking space“ für zivilgesellschaftliches Handeln, um den Begriff des UN-Sonderberichterstatters Maina Kiai zu verwenden, hat vor vielen weiteren Ländern - unter ihnen durchaus auch Demokratien - nicht Halt gemacht. Da wurden Wahlen manipuliert, Wähler eingeschüchtert, Medien drangsaliert, die staatliche Propaganda ausgeweitet, Bürgerrechte missachtet sowie NGOs stigmatisiert und mit speziellen, darauf zugeschnittenen Gesetzen gebrandmarkt. Machthaber versuchen, ihre Amtszeit auf teils fragwürdige, teils eindeutig illegale Weise bis in die Ewigkeit zu verlängern. Menschenrechtsverteidiger werden inhaftiert oder verschwinden einfach spurlos.\n\nSolche Repressionen und Vorgehensweisen gab es leider schon immer. Was uns besonders besorgt, ist die Tatsache, dass sie nach einer Phase der relativen Demokratieausbreitung in den 90er-Jahren seit einiger Zeit wieder spürbar zunehmen. Sicher ist es kein Zufall, dass dieser Anstieg genau in dem Jahrzehnt stattfand, in dem das Internet der breiten Masse der Menschheit zugänglich wurde. Das Internet bot dieser eine ganz neue Form der Kommunikation und der Beteiligung sowie der Information. Die Menschen konnten plötzlich direkt und unmittelbar feststellen, welche Möglichkeiten es in anderen Ländern gibt: Man kann seine Regierung friedlich abwählen, frei seine Meinung sagen, seine Religion ausüben, man hat individuelle Rechte, auch gegenüber dem eigenen Staat, und kann diese einklagen und vieles mehr.\n\nDies führt zu einem neuen Selbstbewusstsein der Menschen. Sie fordern ihre Rechte ein und damit ihre alten Eliten heraus. Sie gehen auf die Straße und wollen gehört werden. Bei den Machthabern führt dies zu den bereits genannten Gegenreaktionen. Rund um den Globus sehen viele von ihnen ihre Macht und damit sich selbst in Gefahr. Sie können mit der informationellen Freiheit, die so viele aus ihrer Sicht unerwünschte Gedanken und Ideen ins Land spülen, nicht umgehen. Sie reagieren deshalb über, manchmal im Affekt, oft wohlüberlegt. Es geht ihnen schlicht und ergreifend um sich selbst, um eigene Interessen. Im Extremfall führt dies zu schweren Konflikten oder Kriegen mit vielen Toten, wie in der Ukraine oder beim sogenannten Arabischen Frühling, übrigens auch in Syrien. Auch wenn diese Fälle selbstverständlich unterschiedlich gelagert sind: Alle drei begannen mit dem friedlichen Aufbegehren der Bürger für mehr Demokratie und Freiheit.\n\nWas aber bedeutet das für uns? Auch wenn wir zu Recht stolz darauf sein können, dass Deutschland im Freedom-House-Index einen der vordersten Plätze belegt, kann und darf uns der Raumverlust für die Zivilgesellschaft in vielen Teilen der restlichen Welt gewiss nicht gleichgültig sein. Das gilt zuerst aus rein menschlichen, humanitären Gründen, aber auch aus ganz praktischen Erwägungen, wie wir angesichts der weltweiten Flüchtlingsströme erleben müssen: Neben Kriegen und Armut sind gerade staatliche Repressionen eine gewichtige Fluchtursache.\n\nWas sollen und können wir also tun? Die Bundesregierung setzt sich in allen Foren und Gremien, deren Mitglied sie ist, für Menschenrechte und deren Verteidiger ein. Sie thematisiert die Einschränkung des zivilgesellschaftlichen Raumes, wo immer es nötig ist. Selbstverständlich tritt die Bundesregierung nachdrücklich für die Umsetzung der EU-Leitlinien für Menschenrechtsverteidiger ein, wie auch für die entsprechenden Leitlinien der OSZE. Darüber hinaus unterstützt sie die Arbeit des UN-Sonderberichterstatters für Menschenrechtsverteidiger. Der Schutz und die Unterstützung von Menschenrechtsverteidigern sind ein Schwerpunkt der Projektförderung von Auswärtigem Amt und BMZ. Mit regelmäßig veranstalteten Regionalkonferenzen für Menschenrechtsverteidiger fördern die deutschen Auslandsvertretungen gezielt die internationale Vernetzung der Zivilgesellschaft und den intergesellschaftlichen Dialog. Die Möglichkeiten zum Schutz von Menschenrechtsverteidigern sind also vielfältig. Die Bundesregierung nutzt diese alle sehr engagiert und nachhaltig. Das heißt natürlich nicht, dass alles in bester Ordnung ist und wir uns gemütlich zurücklehnen können. Machthaber lassen sich immer neue Repressalien einfallen, mit denen unliebsame Akteure in ihrer Zivilgesellschaft drangsaliert werden. Dem gilt es entgegenzuwirken.\n\nEines ist Ihnen sicher aufgefallen: Alle Maßnahmen, die die Bundesregierung bereits ergreift und die ich in Erinnerung gerufen habe, stehen so oder so ähnlich erneut im heute vorliegenden Antrag der Grünen. Auch stand vieles von dem, was die Grünen heute fordern, bereits in einem Antrag, den der Bundestag mit Zustimmung der Koalitionsfraktionen im vergangenen Dezember verabschiedet hat. Dem haben damals sogar die Grünen zugestimmt; bis heute haben sie dies vermutlich vergessen.\n\nLassen Sie mich einen weiteren Punkt ansprechen, der die Grenzen eines solchen Antrages aufzeigt. Wenn es um antidemokratische Tendenzen und die Einschränkung des zivilgesellschaftlichen Raums in anderen Ländern geht, müssen wir realistischerweise einsehen, dass unser Einfluss an Grenzen stößt. Es handelt sich bei den betroffenen Ländern immer noch um unabhängige souveräne Staaten. Ich habe in dieser Debatte bisweilen das Gefühl, dass der eine oder andere das im Eifer des Gefechts ein bisschen übersieht. Bereits der Titel des Antrages „Anti-NGO-Gesetze stoppen“ suggeriert nämlich, die Bundesregierung oder der Bundestag könne einfach so daherkommen und in die Gesetzgebung anderer Länder eingreifen, diese steuern oder gar stoppen. Deshalb kann dieser Antrag maximal dafür herhalten, das Thema nochmals als Debatte in den Bundestag einzubringen - das hat er erfüllt -, für viel mehr aber nicht.\n\nDer weltweite Einsatz sowohl der Bundesregierung als auch der anderen einschlägigen Gremien zeigt Erfolge. Lassen Sie mich daher zum Abschluss den Blick auf positive Beispiele der letzten Zeit richten. In Myanmar, das jahrzehntelang zu den repressivsten Ländern überhaupt gehörte, konnte die oppositionelle NLD um Aung San Suu Kyi einen beeindruckenden Wahlsieg erreichen. Auch wenn aus menschenrechtlicher Sicht längst nicht alle Probleme gelöst sind - ich denke dabei vor allem an die Minderheitenpolitik -, ist ein friedlicher Wandel, der Mut macht, dort in vollem Gange. Die Bürger des von Repressionen und Misswirtschaft heimgesuchten Venezuela stimmten trotz Drohungen und Einschüchterungen für die Opposition und verhalfen dieser zu einer Zweidrittelmehrheit im Parlament, mit der sich Präsident Maduro nun auseinandersetzen muss. In Nigeria ist es das erste Mal überhaupt gelungen, durch Wahlen einen friedlichen Regierungswechsel herbeizuführen. - Vielleicht können wir aus diesen Beispielen etwas lernen. Ich wünsche mir, dass es diesen und anderen Ländern gelingt, den positiven Trend zu verstetigen. Dabei sollten wir Hilfe leisten, soweit es in unserer Macht steht.\n\nDanke.\"\n15560,ute-finckh-kramer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer oben auf den Tribünen! Wir reden heute nicht nur über die fünf Anträge der Oppositionsfraktionen, sondern wir reden auch - und das freut mich sehr - über die drei Jahresabrüstungsberichte 2014, 2015 und 2016, die wir bisher nur im Unterausschuss „Abrüstung“ diskutiert hatten. In diesen drei Jahresabrüstungsberichten steht durchaus, was alles in den letzten drei Jahren für Abrüstung und Rüstungskontrolle getan wurde.\n\nDa die Kollegen aus dem Verteidigungsausschuss zum Teil hier sind, möchte ich darauf hinweisen, dass wir in Deutschland eine ganz spezielle Einrichtung haben, nämlich das Zentrum für Verifikationsaufgaben der Bundeswehr. Es stellt trotz international wachsender Spannungen unbeirrt und fachlich hochkompetent die Umsetzung der vertrauensbildenden Maßnahmen und der Verträge wie des Vertrags über den Offenen Himmel oder des Wiener Dokuments sicher. Wir können froh und dankbar sein, dass wir ein solches Zentrum haben. Ich weiß nicht, wie lange wir es schon haben; ich glaube, seit ungefähr 25 Jahren. Das ist eines der Themen, die weiterhin gut abgedeckt sind.\n\nWir haben in diesen knapp vier Jahren auch einen Vertrag, der heute noch nicht diskutiert wurde, in Kraft setzen können, nämlich den Arms Trade Treaty, also den Vertrag über die Kontrolle von Importen und Exporten konventioneller Waffensysteme. Auch er sorgt für Transparenz, und man erhält Kontrollmöglichkeiten, die man bisher nicht hatte. Die Bundesregierung hat diesen Vertrag sehr unterstützt. Auch darüber können und sollten wir uns am Ende dieser Legislaturperiode freuen.\n\nEs gibt altgediente Abrüstungsverträge, auf die wir nicht verzichten können und wollen. Ich möchte in diesem Zusammenhang den INF ansprechen, den Vertrag über die Vernichtung landgestützter Mittelstreckenraketen in Europa, für den etliche von uns, die wir hier sitzen, demonstriert haben. Er wurde 1987 nach der Installation der Pershing II und der Cruise Missiles geschlossen, was 1990 dazu geführt hatte, dass die Waffensysteme, durch die sich das Risiko eines versehentlich begonnenen Atomkriegs drastisch erhöht hatte, wieder aus Deutschland abgezogen werden konnten. Dieser Vertrag ist derzeit in Gefahr. Ich bin froh, dass das Auswärtige Amt alles unternimmt und seine diplomatischen Kanäle nutzt, um den Fortbestand dieses wichtigen Abrüstungsvertrags zu sichern.\n\nEs gibt einen weiteren Vertrag, für den sich Deutschland ganz klar in den letzten Jahren engagiert hat: das nukleare Teststoppabkommen. Der Vertrag ist ein einmaliger Fall; denn er ist noch nicht in Kraft getreten, er zeigt aber trotzdem schon Wirkung, weil die Überprüfungsorganisation, die CTBTO, bereits arbeitet, was zum Beispiel dazu führt, dass wir genau wissen, ob Nordkorea Atomwaffentests durchführt oder nicht. Die Unterstützung der Bundesregierung auch für diesen Vertrag ist eindeutig. Wir haben uns in dieser Legislaturperiode hier im Bundestag mit ihm beschäftigt. Wir spielen aber auch international eine wichtige Rolle.\n\nIch wünsche den drei Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die in dieser wichtigen Debatte über Abrüstung ihre letzte Rede hier im Bundestag gehalten haben, alles Gute. Ansonsten freue ich mich auf eine weitere gute Zusammenarbeit. Ich gehöre zu denen, die darauf hoffen können, dem nächsten Bundestag wieder anzugehören. Ich hoffe, dass wir in der nächsten Legislaturperiode auf dem aufbauen können, was wir in dieser Legislaturperiode abrüstungs- und rüstungskontrollpolitisch geleistet haben, und das trotz eines schwierigen internationalen Umfelds.\"\n12062,britta-haßelmann,\"Schade, dass Sie Ihre Position nach dem Russlandbesuch nicht laut und vernehmlich artikuliert haben.\n\nAber das kann ja jeder für sich beurteilen. - Wenn sich der Ministerrat am 18. Oktober treffen soll und bis zum Ausschuss der Ständigen Vertreter am 12. Oktober dieses Jahres alle vermeintlichen Klarstellungen zu CETA vorliegen sollen: Wieso liegen dann dem Deutschen Bundestag bis heute, 14 Tage vor Abschluss, keine Entwürfe über Beschlüsse oder Klarstellungen vor? Oder plant die Bundesregierung, dem Deutschen Bundestag dahin gehend nichts vorzulegen?\n\nIch frage das vor dem Hintergrund, dass hier in der letzten Woche in der CETA-Debatte das Thema einer dringend notwendigen Klarstellung einen so breiten Raum eingenommen hat, dass der Tenor war: Entweder ist CETA abzulehnen oder nur mit Klarstellungen und Präzisierungen anzunehmen. Daher gehe ich davon aus, dass Sie das dem Deutschen Bundestag noch vorlegen wollen. Aber wir haben bis dahin gar keine Sitzung mehr.\n\nDanke, Herr Präsident. - Herr Minister, ich möchte gern auf die Frage von Frau Dröge zurückkommen. Sie haben auf das gemeinsame Papier von Frau Freeland und Bundeswirtschaftsministerium hingewiesen. In dem Dokument, das uns vorliegt, sind die Klarstellungen, die Sie angesprochen haben, nicht enthalten. Vielleicht kennen wir das Dokument, über das Sie sprechen, nicht. Deshalb bitte ich Sie, uns das zur Verfügung zu stellen. Das, was im Wirtschaftsausschuss vorlag, enthält jedenfalls die nun angeführten Punkte nicht.\n\nSehr schön.\n\nDa ist das nicht drin.\"\n14486,andreas-lenz,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Die Agenda 2030 der Vereinten Nationen ist ein wichtiger Schritt auf dem Weg zu einer nachhaltigen, einer nachhaltigeren Welt. Es geht um nicht weniger als das Ziel eines Lebens in Würde für alle Menschen auf dieser Erde, und dies unter Wahrung der planetaren Grenzen. Deutschland hat sich unter der Bundesregierung das Ziel gesetzt, eine führende Rolle bei der Transformation der Weltgemeinschaft hin zu mehr Nachhaltigkeit einzunehmen. Ich will betonen, dass Nachhaltigkeit national mit Bundesminister Peter Altmaier und international mit Bundesminister Gerd Müller - beide sind anwesend - in Verbindung gebracht wird. Dafür herzlichen Dank.\n\nDie Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie stellt eine ehrliche Bestandsaufnahme dar. Wir haben schon die Symbolik von Sonne und Wolken vernommen. Ich denke, dass die Darstellung die Beschreibung „heiter bis wolkig“ verdient. Das Erreichte wird berücksichtigt und gewürdigt. Trotzdem werden ambitionierte Ziele für die Zukunft gesetzt. Unsere Nachhaltigkeitspolitik wird in vielerlei Hinsicht anspruchsvoller, zum einen, weil die Zahl der Nachhaltigkeitsindikatoren von 38 auf nunmehr 63 steigt, und zum anderen, weil die Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie dynamisch und zukunftsoffen angelegt ist. Bereits 2018 werden die Indikatoren fortgeschrieben.\n\nWenn es um die Beurteilung der Strategie geht, ist mir eines in Erinnerung geblieben. Die grüne Obfrau Valerie Wilms hat in dieser Woche gesagt, wir seien bei der Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie einen wichtigen Schritt vorangekommen und es sei eine passable Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie geworden. Wer Frau Wilms kennt, weiß, dass das in ihrem Vokabular fast einem Superlativ gleichkommt. An dieser Stelle ganz herzlichen Dank für das Lob der Grünen.\n\nDas zeigt aber auch, dass Nachhaltigkeitspolitik keine Erfindung der Grünen ist.\n\nWir als größtes und wirtschaftlich stärkstes Land der Europäischen Union gehen bei der Nachhaltigkeit voran und werden natürlich weiterhin Vorbild sein. Das zeigt sich bei zahlreichen Einzelbeispielen: bei der Etablierung des Textilsiegels und der Fortschreibung des Ressourceneffizienzprogramms, aber auch bei den Anstrengungen hinsichtlich einer höheren Transparenz bei den internationalen Lieferketten. Deutschland betreibt eine Nachhaltigkeitspolitik mit globalem Anspruch. Die Welt rückt zusammen. Was in Deutschland geschieht, hat unmittelbare Auswirkungen auf die Welt, und andersherum. Deshalb ist es richtig, dass die Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie verstärkt eine globale Perspektive einnimmt.\n\nDie Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie geht in diesem Kontext in einem Beispiel auf die nationale, die europäische und die globale Dimension von Flucht ein. Erst wenn wir es schaffen, auch in den Herkunftsländern eine nachhaltige Entwicklung zu ermöglichen, leisten wir einen effektiven Beitrag zur Bekämpfung der Fluchtursachen. Das zeigt, was es bedeutet, die Agenda in den einzelnen Zielen in Deutschland, mit Deutschland und durch Deutschland voranzubringen. Frau Göring-Eckardt, nachhaltige Politik ist mehr als tagespolitischer Aktionismus.\n\nNachhaltigkeit ist nach wie vor Chefsache im Kanzleramt. Zukünftig werden in allen Ressorts Stellen für Nachhaltigkeitskoordinatoren eingerichtet. Das Thema Nachhaltigkeit bekommt so auch in den einzelnen Ressorts ein höheres Gewicht. Dabei werden Zielkonflikte um den Begriff der Nachhaltigkeit bestehen bleiben. Wenn ich mir die Strategie genau anschaue, dann stelle ich fest, dass beispielsweise einerseits der Besitz eines Farbfernsehers als Wohlstandsindikator gilt - zu Recht - und dass andererseits die Bekämpfung von Adipositas, von starkem Übergewicht, als Gesundheitsziel aufgeführt wird. Da stellt sich schon die Frage, ob hier nicht gewisse Kreuzkorrelationen bestehen, die den Zielen vielleicht zuwiderlaufen. Aber das ist nur ein kleines Beispiel dafür, welches Ringen um den Begriff der Nachhaltigkeit zuweilen notwendig ist.\n\nDer Parlamentarische Beirat für nachhaltige Entwicklung wird die Umsetzung der Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie intensiv begleiten und bei der Weiterentwicklung mitwirken. Wir wollen, dass dieses Thema Ausgangspunkt politischen Handelns wird und nicht Anhang. Mit der neuen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie ist ein Aufschlag gemacht, die planetaren Grenzen im politischen Handeln zu berücksichtigen und damit die Zukunftsfähigkeit unseres Landes insgesamt zu stärken. Jetzt gilt es, das Ganze politisch zu unterfüttern.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n7400,elisabeth-motschmann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! „Militärische Intervention stoppen“, das ist die erste Forderung im Antrag der Grünen. Natürlich, Herr Nouripour, muss es das Ziel sein, diese Intervention zu stoppen. Niemand kann wollen, dass dort dauerhaft Krieg herrscht oder dass dort gebombt wird, von wem auch immer. Täglich sterben im Jemen Soldaten, Zivilisten und Kinder. Das muss aufhören.\n\nHuthi-Rebellen kämpfen gegen die staatlichen jemenitischen Strukturen und haben diese weitgehend lahmgelegt und zerstört. Al-Qaida-Terroristen kämpfen mal gegen den Staat, mal gegen die Huthis. Zu allem Überfluss sind nun auch noch IS-Terroristen im Land und an den Kämpfen beteiligt. Präsident Hadi ist von Sanaa nach Aden und später nach Saudi-Arabien geflüchtet; das ist ja hier erwähnt worden. Eine Regierung besteht de facto nicht. Es besteht eine große Unsicherheit im Land, eine humanitäre Katastrophe; das haben Sie ja richtig beschrieben. Auch in dieser völlig verfahrenen, desolaten Situation müssen erneut Friedensverhandlungen beginnen. Da sind wir ganz bei Ihnen; niemand wird das ernsthaft bestreiten.\n\nEs stellt sich aber die Frage: Wer soll denn hier eigentlich mit wem verhandeln? Wer erkennt denn den jeweils anderen als Verhandlungspartner an? Das ist die erste Schwierigkeit. Bei den Friedensverhandlungen in Genf war es so, dass der UN-Sonderbeauftragte mehr Zeit mit dem Pendeln zwischen den Hotels verbracht hat als in den Sitzungen selber. So einfach ist das also nicht. Trotzdem müssen diese Verhandlungen möglichst schnell - da würde ich Sie voll unterstützen - wiederaufgenommen werden, um eine politische Lösung, wenn es sie denn gibt - wir hoffen das alle; das ist doch klar -, überhaupt zu ermöglichen.\n\nIch denke, wir sind uns auch alle einig, dass wir nicht tatenlos zusehen können, wie ein Anschlag nach dem anderen das Land im Chaos versinken lässt. Allein in den letzten Tagen gab es wieder zahlreiche Tote. 17. Juni: 30 Tote, 20. Juni: 3 Tote, 30. Juni: 28 Tote.\n\nDarüber hinaus war der Jemen auch Ausgangspunkt für die feigen Attentäter, die im Januar in Paris die Redaktion von Charlie Hebdo und einen jüdischen Supermarkt angegriffen haben und dabei 17 unschuldige Menschen töteten.\n\nDer Jemen steht also vor einem totalen Zerfall und wird in seinem jetzigen Zustand natürlich auch zur leichten Beute des sogenannten „Islamischen Staats“ sowie von al-Qaida auf der Arabischen Halbinsel. Das muss man einfach sehen.\n\nWir müssen davon ausgehen, dass die Aggressionen der Huthis - Sie haben es auch gesagt - zusätzlich aus dem Iran befeuert, unterstützt und gegebenenfalls sogar gesteuert werden. Saudi-Arabien spielt in der Arabischen Liga und im Golfkooperationsrat eine entscheidende Rolle. Das kann niemand bestreiten. Trotz aller Kritik, die wir alle an diesem Staat haben, brauchen wir sicher die Saudis. Hier denke ich allein an die mittelalterliche Rechtsordnung, die dort herrscht. Sie alle haben noch die tausend Stockschläge für Raif Badawi in Erinnerung und wissen, dass wir es mit einem Staat zu tun haben, der mit unseren demokratischen Maßstäben überhaupt nicht zu messen ist; es gibt auch nichts zu beschönigen. Trotzdem werden wir ohne Saudi-Arabien Sicherheit und Stabilität in der Region schwer herstellen können.\n\nAuch das ist die Wahrheit. An dieser Stelle berühren wir ein grundsätzliches Problem der Ethik. Es gibt Konflikte, in denen man sich auf keine Seite stellen möchte.\n\nGenau das ist hier der Fall. Wir stellen uns auf die Seite der Menschen, die in dem Land leben -\n\n- nein, ich stelle mich gar nicht auf irgendeine Seite -\n\n- hören Sie einmal gut zu -, und müssen trotzdem in der Abwägung dann das kleinere Übel wählen; denn ohne Saudis wird es keine Lösung des Konfliktes geben. - Ich bin sofort fertig, Frau Präsidentin.\n\nEntscheidend wird sein, Angriffe auf das Militär und die terroristischen Anschläge auf die Zivilbevölkerung zu beenden. Darin sind wir uns einig.\n\nDass dies ohne eine militärische Intervention gelingen kann, muss zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt mindestens bezweifelt werden. Das wird sehr schwer, auch wenn das von jedem gewünscht wird. Ich wünschte auch, wir könnten das mit gutem Zureden oder allein mit Verhandlungen schaffen. Befriedete Zonen sind unerlässliche Voraussetzungen zu humanitärer Hilfe.\n\nDas ist das Nächste, was wir tun müssen: humanitäre Hilfe, die dringend erforderlich ist. Hier müssen wir Saudi-Arabien auch fordern. Sie müssen natürlich auch Flüchtlinge aufnehmen.\n\n- Sie müssen humanitär helfen, das wäre besser als bombardieren. Da bin ich ganz bei Ihnen.\n\nBei diesem Vorhaben dürfen wir keine Zeit vergeuden. Auch das ist richtig. Die menschliche Katastrophe ist in vollem Gange. Sie haben es gesagt: Vier Fünftel der Bevölkerung, so die Vereinten Nationen, sind auf Hilfe angewiesen, unter ihnen etwa 1,8 Millionen Kinder, was uns zutiefst bedrücken muss.\n\n- Was lachen Sie eigentlich? Es gibt hier nichts zu lachen.\n\nDie Rede ist zu Ende, Frau Präsidentin.\n\n- Ich rede mich hier gar nicht raus. Ich sage nur, wie die Lage ist und wie schwer es ist.\n\n- Das habe ich Ihnen doch gesagt, aber Sie müssen einmal zuhören. Für Sie gibt es nur eine einfache Lösung. Die gibt es hier aber nicht, gerade hier nicht. Die Lage ist so verworren, und Sie meinen, man könnte mit gutem Zureden oder mit Hände-in-den-Schoß-Legen den Jemen befrieden. So einfach ist das nicht. Deshalb sind wir, die Bundesrepublik Deutschland, verpflichtet, uns hier nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen einzubringen. Aber dass es so einfach wäre, wie es sich manche wünschen - ich übrigens auch, Herr Nouripour -, ist nicht der Fall.\n\nDanke schön, Frau Präsidentin.\"\n1322,stephan-stracke,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der allgemeine gesetzliche flächendeckende Mindestlohn in Höhe von 8,50 Euro kommt. So haben wir es im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart, und so wird es umgesetzt. Die Ressortabstimmung über den Gesetzentwurf läuft. Wir machen Politik für die Menschen in unserem Land. Es macht Sinn, die Lebenswirklichkeit der Menschen in den Blick zu nehmen. Wir sind für praxisgerechte Lösungen. Deshalb sind wir mit den Gewerkschaften und Arbeitgebern in einen Dialog getreten, den die Bundesministerin angestoßen hat. Auch wir, die CDU/CSU-Fraktion, stehen mit den betroffenen Branchen im Dialog.\n\nFür uns gilt: Harte Arbeit und Leistungswille müssen sich lohnen. Wir als CSU haben immer gesagt: Wer Vollzeit beschäftigt ist, sollte von seiner Arbeit angemessen leben können. Die Menschen in unserem Land sollen von der derzeit positiven wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung profitieren.\n\nUnd so ist es auch: In keinem Industrieland ist die Arbeitslosigkeit zwischen 2007 und 2013 so schnell zurückgegangen wie in Deutschland.\n\nDas ist das Ergebnis unionsgeführter Politik, das ist das Ergebnis guter Wirtschaftspolitik, und genau die wollen wir fortsetzen.\n\nDie Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer in Deutschland profitieren von der guten wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung. Die Gehälter in Deutschland sind in den letzten beiden Jahren um rund 7 Prozent gestiegen bei einer Inflationsrate von 3,5 Prozent. Das zeigt: Die Teilhabe funktioniert sehr gut.\n\nLeistung muss fair bezahlt werden. Wir sind entschieden gegen jegliches Lohndumping und Billiglöhne. Aber es ist und bleibt Aufgabe der Sozialpartner, eine faire Bezahlung zu gewährleisten. Dass die Sozialpartnerschaft funktioniert, wurde aktuell in Bezug auf die Fleisch-industrie deutlich. Wir haben viele Diskussionen politisch begleitet und gesagt: „Es muss hier zu Veränderungen kommen“, und genau das ist passiert. Wir werden nun die Fleischindustrie in das Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetz aufnehmen, in dem ein entsprechender Mindestlohn verankert ist. Das zeigt: Die Sozialpartnerschaft funktioniert. Vielleicht muss man an der einen oder anderen Stelle politischen Druck ausüben. Das haben wir in der letzten Legislaturperiode getan. Es ist ein großer Erfolg, dass uns das gelungen ist.\n\nDie Sozialpartnerschaft entscheidet über Wohlstand und sozialen Frieden in unserem Land. Sie ist die tragende Säule und darf auch in Zukunft nicht infrage gestellt werden. Deshalb gilt für uns: Einen einheitlichen flächendeckenden Mindestlohn gibt es nur bei Wahrung der Tarifautonomie; beides gehört zusammen. Nicht von ungefähr heißt das Gesetz, das die Ministerin auf den Weg gebracht hat, Tarifautonomiestärkungs- und nicht \u001eschwächungsgesetz.\n\nWir wollen die Tarifbindung und die Ordnung des Arbeitslebens durch Tarifverträge stärken. Deshalb werden wir die Allgemeinverbindlicherklärung erleichtern. Wir wollen das Interesse der Tarifpartner möglichst hochhalten und die Voraussetzungen entsprechend erleichtern. Das ist ein guter Ansatz. Die Branchenmindestlöhne liegen derzeit überwiegend über 8,50 Euro; sie haben sich bewährt. Deswegen werden wir das Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetz entsprechend ändern. Wir werden es für alle Branchen öffnen. Sie wissen, dass das Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetz bislang auf einen bestimmten Katalog begrenzt ist. Diesen Katalog werden wir erweitern. Es ist gut, dass wir hinsichtlich der Branchenmindestlöhne eine große Breite vorsehen.\n\nBei dem Mindestlohn von 8,50 Euro ist entscheidend, dass die zukünftige Anpassung über eine Mindestlohnkommission stattfinden soll. Sie wird mit Vertretern der Tarifvertragsparteien paritätisch besetzt werden. Wir wollen keinen politischen Mindestlohn, sondern einen, bei dem die Tarifvertragsparteien in der Verantwortung stehen. Genau das werden wir garantieren. Dabei gilt es, die nachlaufende Tariflohnentwicklung im Blick zu behalten und die entsprechenden Anpassungen vorzunehmen. Es wird so sein, wie wir es im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart haben: Wenn die Mindestlohnkommission gesprochen hat, wird das eins zu eins umgesetzt. So stellen wir uns das vor. Darauf haben wir uns verständigt.\n\nWir brauchen einen Mindestlohn mit Augenmaß. Deshalb wurde im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart, dass mögliche Probleme bei der Umsetzung berücksichtigt werden; beispielhaft genannt wurde die Saisonarbeit. Wir wollen Arbeit schaffen, nicht Arbeitslosigkeit. Wir wollen keine Verwerfungen in den Betrieben, zum Beispiel im Rahmen der Landwirtschaft. Wir müssen immer darauf achten, dass wir die richtige Balance schaffen und wahren. Deswegen haben wir uns mit dem Koalitionspartner verständigt. Wir sind uns im Grundsatz einig, was die Ausnahmen - Auszubildende, Ehrenamtliche und Praktikanten - angeht.\n\nWir müssen aber auch darauf achten, dass der Mindestlohn im Ergebnis nicht nach hinten losgeht. Deshalb gilt es, keine Anreize dafür zu setzen, dass auf eine Berufsausbildung zugunsten einer Beschäftigung mit Mindestlohn verzichtet wird. Wir haben in Deutschland derzeit ein hervorragendes Ausbildungsniveau. Genau das wollen wir erhalten, gerade vor dem Hintergrund des bestehenden Fachkräftemangels. Über die Altersgrenze von 18 Jahren müssen wir sicherlich noch einmal diskutieren. Wenn das Durchschnittsalter der Auszubildenden derzeit bei knapp 20 Jahren liegt, müssen wir darüber reden, ob es sachgerecht ist, die Grenze bei 18 Jahren anzusetzen.\n\nFür Langzeitarbeitslose müssen wir besondere Chancen für einen Wiedereinstieg in den Arbeitsmarkt schaffen. Deswegen ist es richtig, dass wir sie zumindest für eine Beschäftigungszeit von sechs Monaten vom Mindestlohn ausnehmen. Wir müssen darüber diskutieren, ob und inwieweit weitere Regelungen zielführend wären.\n\nEntscheidend wird auch sein - so haben wir es im Rahmen des Koalitionsvertrages vereinbart -, dass wir Branchentarifverträge weiterhin berücksichtigen. Bestehende Tarifverträge sollen nicht verdrängt werden. Das gilt für die Übergangszeit bis Ende 2016. Darauf lege ich Wert.\n\nDeutschland hat sich in den vergangenen Jahren wirtschaftlich hervorragend entwickelt. Kein anderes Land steht so gut da wie Deutschland. Deswegen ist es verantwortbar, dass wir den Mindestlohn einführen. Ich weiß, dass damit arbeitsmarktpolitische Unwägbarkeiten verbunden sind, insbesondere in den Regionen, die schwächer aufgestellt sind als die starken Regionen, beispielsweise in Süddeutschland. Aber auch Personengruppen wie Geringqualifizierte und Langzeitarbeitslose müssen wir besonders in den Blick nehmen. Wir müssen hier die richtige Balance schaffen. Das tun wir im Rahmen des Prozesses, der nun ansteht.\n\nIch bedanke mich ganz herzlich.\"\n5646,harald-weinberg,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! 280 Seiten Versorgungsstärkungsgesetz mit sehr vielen Vorschlägen: Ich kann in vier Minuten mit Sicherheit nicht alle würdigen. Ich halte mich da eher an den Tagesspiegel, der vorgestern schrieb:\n\nEs ist auch seine\n\n- Minister Gröhes -\n\nAntwort auf zwei der drängendsten Systempro-bleme: den immer bedenklicher werdenden Ärztemangel in strukturschwachen Regionen und die Benachteiligung von gesetzlich Versicherten gegenüber Privatpatienten, die sich in überlangen Wartezeiten manifestiert.\n\nMit diesem Gesetzentwurf ist die Koalition also angetreten, die Zweiklassenmedizin in den Wartezimmern zu beseitigen. Ich wäre froh, wenn ich Sie heute kritisieren könnte, dass Sie hierbei auf halber Strecke stehen geblieben sind. Bei der Hälfte des Weges sind Sie aber längst nicht angekommen; denn Sie beschäftigen sich in dem Gesetzentwurf ausschließlich mit den gesetzlich Versicherten. Die Hauptursache für die Zweiklassenmedizin ist aber die Privatversicherung. Mit der beschäftigt sich der Gesetzentwurf aber überhaupt nicht.\n\nMinister Gröhe, dem auch ich von hier aus noch gute Besserung wünschen möchte, sagt selbst - sehr zur Beruhigung der privaten Versicherungswirtschaft -:\n\nIch gehe nicht davon aus, dass die Verbesserungen für Kassenpatienten zu Lasten der Privatversicherten gehen.\n\nDie Terminservicestellen sind ja eine nette Idee, aber sie werden nicht das Problem lösen, das sie vorgeben lösen zu wollen. Solange die Ärzteschaft für dieselbe Leistung bei Privatversicherten doppelt und dreimal so viel abrechnen kann wie bei gesetzlich Versicherten, so lange wird es eine Zweiklassenbehandlung in der Arztpraxis geben. Das ist klar, und das sagen auch die Ärztinnen und Ärzte. Wer die Wartezeiten für gesetzlich Versicherte verringern will, muss die Zweiklassenmedizin beseitigen und an die private Krankenversicherung heran.\n\nEs heißt dann, das ginge nicht, weil in der Großen Koalition das Thema Bürgerversicherung im Koalitionsvertrag ausgeklammert werden musste. Das sehe ich anders. Wenn man es sozusagen zurückverfolgt, sieht man: Herr Spahn hat seine Bedenken gegen die Geschäftspraktiken der PKV ja schon 2012 öffentlich zum Ausdruck gebracht und die Branche ermahnt, sich selber zu reformieren, wozu sie allerdings nicht in der Lage ist. Bei der SPD, den Grünen und bei der Linken gibt es in dieser Frage zwar im Detail Unterschiede, aber ansonsten eine gemeinsame ablehnende Haltung. Die einzige hundertprozentige Lobbyorganisation der PKV, die FDP, ist nicht mehr im Bundestag vertreten.\n\nGleichzeitig nimmt die Akzeptanz und Attraktivität der privaten Krankenversicherung in der Bevölkerung offensichtlich ab. 2013 wanderten rund 37 000 Personen mehr in die gesetzliche ab als umgekehrt von der gesetzlichen in die private. Immer mehr Versicherte wissen, dass die in jungen Jahren oft geringen Beiträge in der PKV mit hohen Beitragssteigerungen im Alter erkauft werden. Ebenso hat es sich herumgesprochen, dass es auch Lücken in den Leistungsversprechen der privaten Krankenversicherung gibt und dass man im Falle von Einkommensverlusten mit der Privatversicherung sehr schlecht dasteht. Viele Beamte und kleine Selbstständige sind mehr oder weniger unfreiwillig in der privaten Krankenversicherung und verfügen über keine hohen Einkommen. Sie drückt die Beitragsentwicklung besonders. Kurz: Es hat sich herumgesprochen, dass die Privatversicherung nicht die erste Wahl ist. Dies ist eigentlich ein günstiges Umfeld, diese Frage wieder auf die Tagesordnung zu setzen und damit tatsächlich einen großen Schritt gegen eine Mehrklassenmedizin zu tun.\n\nNun kommt immer wieder das Argument, das sei verfassungsrechtlich gar nicht möglich und entsprechend ausgestaltbar.\n\nDa empfehle ich Ihnen: Lesen Sie unseren Antrag einmal genau! Wir gehen auf diese Bedenken durchaus ein. Im Übrigen sind diese Bedenken hinsichtlich der verfassungsrechtlichen Problematik nicht ganz nachvollziehbar, wenn Sie bei anderen Gesetzesvorhaben dieses -Risiko der Verfassungstauglichkeit ziemlich vorsätzlich ignorieren.\n\nHeute Mittag beraten wir beispielsweise über das Gesetz zur Tarifeinheit, das ein sehr schönes Beispiel dafür ist. Es gibt zwei Gutachten, die sehr starke verfassungsrechtliche Bedenken formulieren. Es gibt auch Unionsabgeordnete, die in einer anderen Eigenschaft dagegen klagen werden. Ich erinnere auch an das Bundeswahlgesetz und die Hartz-IV-Regelsätze. Beides wurde gegen Bedenken durchgesetzt und vom Bundesverfassungsgericht kassiert. Das geht mehrmals im Jahr so.\n\nIch nehme Ihnen also nicht ab, Sie würden Anträge deshalb nicht unterstützen, weil verfassungsrechtliche Bedenken bestehen; denn da haben Sie wenig Skrupel. Wenn es Ihnen also nicht um Lobbyinteressen für die private Krankenversicherung geht, dann sollten wir jetzt die Chance nutzen, dieses international einmalige und absurde Nebeneinander von zwei Krankenversicherungssystemen zu beenden.\n\nDas ginge auch unterhalb oder außerhalb eines Modells einer Bürgerversicherung. Dazu haben wir den Antrag vorgelegt. Wir freuen uns auf die weiteren Beratungen.\"\n15085,matthias-birkwald,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Zunächst begrüße ich Frau Barbara Riechert und ihre Mitstreiterinnen vom Verein der in der DDR geschiedenen Frauen e. V. ganz herzlich auf der Besuchertribüne.\n\nDiese bemerkenswerten Frauen haben vor dem UN-Ausschuss für die Beseitigung der Diskriminierung der Frau recht bekommen. Dieser UN-Ausschuss fordert den Gesetzgeber - also uns - auf, ein staatliches Entschädigungssystem zur Ergänzung der Renten von in der DDR geschiedenen Frauen zu errichten. Die SPD-Kollegin Kolbe hat das in einer Presseerklärung zum Internationalen Frauentag aufgegriffen. Ich sage mal: Falls die SPD nach der Wahl noch regieren sollte und falls sie dann diese Forderung vergessen sollte, werden wir sie daran erinnern.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, lassen Sie uns dieses Unrecht und diese Diskriminierung der in der DDR geschiedenen Frauen schnell beenden.\n\nNun zu unserem Rentenkonzept. Das Rentenkonzept der Linken umfasst elf Bausteine. Jeder dieser elf Bausteine dient den zwei Zielen unserer Rentenpolitik: Erstens soll die gesetzliche Rente wieder den einmal erreichten Lebensstandard angemessen sichern, und zweitens soll niemand im Alter in Armut leben müssen.\n\nDie zwei wichtigsten Bausteine stelle ich Ihnen jetzt vor. Zum Jahrtausendbeginn haben SPD, Grüne und die Union das Rentenniveau in den Sinkflug geschickt. Meine Damen und Herren, dieser Sinkflug muss in einem ersten Schritt gestoppt werden.\n\nUnd wie? Die Linke will die unsäglichen Kürzungsfaktoren aus der Rentenanpassungsformel streichen. Zweitens muss das Rentenniveau dringend wieder auf die lebensstandardsichernden 53 Prozent angehoben werden,\n\nalso auf das Niveau des Jahres 2000.\n\nDann erhielte eine Kölner Erzieherin mit einem Bruttogehalt von circa 3 100 Euro nach 45 Jahren Arbeit 130 Euro mehr Rente - netto! Diese Frau müsste dann für eine lebensstandardsichernde Alterssicherung - wie auch ihre Arbeitgeberin - nur 32 Euro mehr in die gesetzliche Rentenkasse einzahlen.\n\nDa sage ich: Das muss doch drin sein.\n\n- Jetzt. Im Jahr 2030 wären es 92 Euro. Dann, sagt die Ministerin, würden aber auch schon 4 337 Euro durchschnittlich verdient. Das alles kann man berechnen. Es ist auf jeden Fall günstiger als Ihr Dreisäulensystem. - Meine Damen und Herren, Sie sehen: Die Anhebung des Rentenniveaus ist finanzierbar. Sie ist der richtige Weg, damit wieder gilt: Die Rente muss zum Leben reichen.\n\nWas fordert die Linke außerdem?\n\nErstens. Wir wollen Zeiten niedriger Löhne und der Erwerbslosigkeit deutlich besser in der Rente anerkennen, wir wollen die sogenannte Mütterrente erhöhen, und wir wollen bei Erwerbsminderungsrenten die Abschläge abschaffen\n\nund die Rente verbessern, und zwar nicht, wie Sie es wollen, erst 2025, sondern schon heute. Das soll auch für die Menschen gelten, die schon eine Erwerbsminderungsrente beziehen.\n\nZweitens. Wir wollen, dass für alle Erwerbseinkommen Beiträge in die Rentenkasse eingezahlt werden, und wir wollen, dass auch auf hohe Erwerbseinkommen Rentenbeiträge gezahlt werden müssen.\n\nDrittens. Statt Riester und schlechter betrieblicher Altersvorsorge wollen wir gute Betriebsrenten, und wir wollen, dass alle Arbeitgeber und alle Beschäftigen bis zu einer Grenze freiwillig zusätzliche Beiträge auf ihr persönliches Rentenkonto einzahlen können.\n\nViertens. Wir wollen die Rente erst ab 67 abschaffen und die Ostrenten deutlich schneller und vollständig steuerfinanziert an das Westniveau angleichen.\n\nFünftens. Wenn das alles nicht reicht, um Menschen eine existenzsichernde Rente im Alter zu sichern, dann, und nur dann, sollen über 65\u001eJährige einen Zuschlag auf ihre Alterseinkommen erhalten, der ihnen nicht nur das Überleben, sondern ein würdevolles Leben ohne Altersarmut ermöglicht.\n\nDamit niemand im Alter von weniger als 1 050 Euro netto leben muss, wollen wir eine von der Rentenversicherung auszuzahlende einkommens- und vermögensgeprüfte solidarische Mindestrente einführen, die als Zuschlag gezahlt wird, zum Beispiel auf eine kleine Rente.\n\nWer also wegen Krankheit, Leiharbeit, eines viel zu niedrigen gesetzlichen Mindestlohns oder wegen Teilzeitarbeit und Kindererziehung beispielsweise nur eine Rente von 800 Euro erhielte, bekäme von der Rentenversicherung einen steuerfinanzierten Zuschlag von 250 Euro. - Die 1 050 Euro entsprechen übrigens exakt der Armutsrisikogrenze des Sozio-oekonomischen Panels für einen Einpersonenhaushalt im Jahr 2014. Wir meinen es ernst mit dem Kampf gegen Altersarmut. Deshalb darf die exakt berechnete Armutsschwelle von 1 050 Euro nicht unterschritten werden.\n\nBei der Vermögensprüfung bleiben bis zu 68 750 Euro anrechnungsfrei, damit die Menschen bis weit in die Mittelschicht keine Angst vor Altersarmut haben müssen. Auch Menschen mit kleinen Renten sollen nicht gezwungen werden, ihre Häuser oder ihre Wohnungen zu verlassen. Deshalb wollen wir selbstgenutzte Wohnungen oder Häuser bis zu 130 Quadratmeter nicht berücksichtigen.\n\nUnd ich sage Ihnen: Die solidarische Mindestrente ist finanzierbar. Dazu muss sich allerdings etwas ändern: Wenn das Rentenniveau wieder bei 53 Prozent und der gesetzliche Mindestlohn bei armutsfesten 12 Euro läge, wenn Frauen jederzeit von Teilzeit in Vollzeit zurückkehren dürften und für Geringverdienende die Rente nach Mindestentgeltpunkten gälte, es keine Abschläge bei Erwerbsminderungsrenten gäbe und manches mehr, dann prophezeie ich Ihnen, dass die Zuschläge der solidarischen Mindestrente mit einem einstelligen Milliardenbetrag zu finanzieren wären.\n\nLiebe Bundesregierung, hören Sie auf, Steuergelder für Riester, für Rüstung oder für Reiche zu verpulvern. Das Mindeste im Alter sind 1 050 Euro im Monat, und das garantiert nur die solidarische Mindestrente der Linken.\n\nDie Garantierente der Grünen würde die Grundsicherung im Alter nur um ein paar Euro anheben: von durchschnittlich 804 Euro auf gerade einmal 830 Euro. Das ist nur weiße Salbe. Nein, in diesem reichen Land darf niemand von weniger als 1 050 Euro leben müssen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n12000,barbara-hendricks,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrter Herr Botschafter, schön dass Sie da sind. - Ich weiß nicht, wie es Ihnen geht. Aber in einer Zeit, in der die Nachrichten voll sind von Krieg und Gewalt, erscheint mir das Pariser Abkommen als ein großes Hoffnungszeichen. Bei einem der wichtigsten Probleme unserer Zeit haben die Staaten dieser Erde erkannt, dass es in ihrem eigenen Interesse ist, gemeinsam zu handeln.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, der 12. Dezember 2015 wird als das Datum in die Geschichte eingehen, an dem sich 195 Staaten der Erde auf einen gemeinsamen Weg zum Schutz unseres Klimas verständigt haben. Wir werden die Erderwärmung auf maximal 2 Grad begrenzen, möglichst auf 1,5 Grad. Wir werden unsere Weltwirtschaft im Laufe des Jahrhunderts klimaneutral machen. Und wir werden die armen Länder dabei unterstützen, den Weg in Richtung Treibhausgasneutralität gemeinsam mit uns zu gehen, damit diese Länder sich umweltfreundlich entwickeln können und damit die neuen Technologien allen Menschen zugutekommen; denn der Klimaschutz ist schon heute ein ökonomisches Erfolgsmodell.\n\nWir haben im vergangenen Dezember das Jahr 2020 ins Auge gefasst, ab dem das Abkommen gelten sollte. Die Unterschriften von 55 Staaten, die zudem mindestens 55 Prozent der Treibhausgase emittieren, sind dafür notwendig.\n\nGemessen am Kioto-Protokoll, das über sieben Jahre von der Vereinbarung bis zum Inkrafttreten gebraucht hatte, erschien das durchaus ehrgeizig. Jetzt hat sich gezeigt: Wir werden das Quorum voraussichtlich schon in den kommenden Wochen erreichen. Anfang des Monats haben China und die USA ratifiziert. Gestern sind in New York 31 weitere Staaten hinzugekommen. Bislang liegen damit 60 Ratifizierungen vor. Diese umfassen schon knapp 48 Prozent der globalen Emissionen. Das zeigt: Das Übereinkommen von Paris ist alles andere als nur geduldiges Papier. Im Gegenteil: Weite Teile der Staatengemeinschaft sind bereit, ihren Versprechen jetzt auch Taten folgen zu lassen. Wir sollten diese Bereitschaft nutzen, um in Marrakesch die nächsten Schritte zu gehen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es ist unser gemeinsamer Anspruch, dass das Abkommen so schnell wie möglich in Kraft tritt und dass Deutschland von Anfang an dabei ist. Wir haben viele Jahre für dieses Abkommen gekämpft. Lassen Sie uns jetzt einen Beitrag dazu leisten, dass es auch wirklich unumkehrbar wird.\n\nIch danke Ihnen allen, den Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Koalition genauso wie den Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Opposition, dass Sie bereits heute über diesen Gesetzentwurf beschließen und damit den Weg dafür freimachen, dass Deutschland seine Ratifikationsurkunde rechtzeitig hinterlegen kann. Auch der Bundesrat wirkt bei der Beschleunigung mit, indem er das von uns zu beschließende Gesetz auf die Tagesordnung der morgigen Sitzung gesetzt hat. Sie sehen: Der Klimaschutz ist uns mindestens so wichtig wie die Stabilisierung des Weltfinanzsystems; denn nur in Ausnahmefällen können wir ja so rasch agieren.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir sollten weiterhin leidenschaftlich über unsere nationale Klimaschutzpolitik diskutieren und, wo nötig, dann auch streiten. Wir sollten aber mit der gleichen Leidenschaft heute ein entschlossenes Signal an unsere internationalen Partner senden. Der Klimaschutz in Deutschland steht auf dem breiten Fundament aller Parteien in diesem Hohen Haus.\n\nIch bin zuversichtlich, dass auch die Europäische Union ihre Ratifikation in den kommenden Wochen bei der UN wird hinterlegen können. Ich bin dazu in enger Abstimmung mit meinen europäischen Kolleginnen und Kollegen und mit Kommissar Cañete. Wir werden auf einem Sonder-Umweltrat am 30. September 2016 die rasche Ratifizierung vereinbaren und hoffen in der darauffolgenden Woche auf die Zustimmung des Europäischen Parlaments.\n\nDas Pariser Abkommen ist ja nicht das Ende, es ist der Beginn eines langen Weges. Die Geschwindigkeit, mit der es jetzt in Kraft tritt, zeigt aber, dass der Wandel schneller kommt, als wir uns das lange Zeit vorstellen konnten. Wir sollten uns deshalb zu Hause nicht ausruhen. Wir sollten weiter vorangehen. Der Klimaschutzplan 2050, den ich meinen Kolleginnen und Kollegen im Kabinett zur Abstimmung zugeleitet habe, ist dafür die richtige Gelegenheit. Und ich füge hinzu: Es ist auch ein Test für unsere Glaubwürdigkeit. Die Ratifikation des Pariser Übereinkommens bedeutet die Verpflichtung, es auch im eigenen Land umzusetzen. Kritik am Klimaschutzplan ist selbstverständlich in Ordnung. Allerdings ändert man die Realität nicht dadurch, dass man sie ignoriert.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, lange Jahre haben die Kritiker unserer Klimaschutzpolitik gerufen, wir gingen zu schnell voran, uns folge ja niemand. - Nach Paris ist klar: Alle folgen uns, oder sie gehen uns sogar voraus. Viele holen jedenfalls auf.\n\nWas für einen Grund gibt es also noch, langsamer zu laufen? Oder wollen wir warten, bis wir überholt werden? Das kann sich niemand für unsere starke Volkswirtschaft wünschen. Die Menschen in unserem Land erwarten von uns, dass wir eine klare Orientierung geben, dass wir sagen, wo die Reise hingeht.\n\nAm Beispiel Chinas und der USA sehen wir, wie sich das Bewusstsein wandelt: Zwei ehemalige Bremser gehören zu den größten Unterstützern des Abkommens. Und wir sollten nicht glauben, dass das Engagement der beiden größten Volkswirtschaften der Welt keinen Einfluss auf unsere wirtschaftliche Entwicklung haben wird. Wir sollten nicht so tun, als sei Strom aus fossilen Brennstoffen auf Dauer zukunftsfähig oder als würden Autos noch lange von Diesel und Benzin angetrieben werden.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, der Erfolg unserer Volkswirtschaft liegt seit jeher in ihrer Kraft, Neues zu entwickeln. Wir haben nicht die billigsten, wir haben die besten, die hochwertigsten und die innovativsten Produkte. Darin wird auch unsere Zukunft in einer dann klimaneutralen Welt liegen. Lassen Sie uns diskutieren, wie diese Zukunft aussehen kann, nicht, wie wir sie hinauszögern können.\n\nDas Abkommen der 195 Staaten von Paris war ein großes Geschenk, ein Geschenk für uns, weil Paris gezeigt hat, dass Stillstand und Streit eben nicht die letzten Worte sind, ein Geschenk für die, die nach uns kommen, weil es ihnen die Hoffnung auf ein besseres Leben gibt. Ich bitte Sie, lassen Sie uns gemeinsam dieses Geschenk annehmen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n13578,michaela-engelmeier,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Steiniger, hier steht eine von 53 richtig guten Leuten aus Nordrhein-Westfalen; Sie haben ja gerade Nordrhein-Westfalen angesprochen. Hier sind wir!\n\nMan kann vielleicht sagen: Was lange währt, wird endlich gut. Herr Steiniger, Sie haben es gerade angesprochen: Es ist ja nicht erst in dieser Legislaturperiode dafür gesorgt worden, dass diese SALVO jetzt endlich ans Netz geht. Ich möchte darauf hinweisen: Ich glaube, seit neun Jahren sind wir zugange und versuchen, die SALVO zu verändern. Ich bin unserer Ministerin Barbara Hendricks und allen, die daran beteiligt waren, wirklich unfassbar dankbar dafür, dass sie es hinbekommen haben, dass wir diese SALVO heute verabschieden können.\n\nIch glaube, dass wir mit dieser SALVO, also der Sportanlagenlärmschutzverordnung - das ist schon ein Zungenbrecher -, einen deutlichen Fortschritt für den Sport und auch für die Vereine erzielt haben. Ich glaube, dass diese SALVO - ich werde jetzt immer die Abkürzung benutzen; denn sonst reicht meine Redezeit von drei Minuten nicht - ein gutes Miteinander von Anwohnern und Sport ermöglicht.\n\n- Sportanlagenlärmschutzverordnung.\n\nDie Ausübung von Sport gehört zum guten Zusammenleben einfach dazu. Mit dieser Verordnung - wir haben es heute schon in der einen oder anderen Rede gehört - schaffen wir Klarheit, zum Beispiel bei der Randbebauung; das ist heute noch gar nicht erwähnt worden. So können die Abstände zwischen Sportanlagen und heranrückender Wohnbebauung fast halbiert werden. Das finde ich großartig. Das gilt auch für die Dezibelerhöhung; das ist gar keine Frage. Wir haben uns vorher gar nicht vorstellen können, dass wir das hinbekommen. Wir haben auch den Altanlagenbonus - dieser gilt für Sportanlagen, die vor 1991 gebaut wurden - konkretisiert. Das alles ist gut.\n\nEines wünsche ich mir: Die Kinderlärmprivilegierung wurde heute schon mehrfach erwähnt. Ich finde schon allein das Wort „Kinderlärm“ schrecklich. Kinder machen Lärm, Kinder schreien, Kinder brüllen, Erwachsene auch; das ist gar keine Frage. Ich würde mir wünschen, dass wir gar keine Regelungen mehr schaffen müssten, um Kinderlärm zu verhindern. Es wäre schön, wenn man zum Beispiel nicht mehr klagen könnte, wenn Kinder in Sportanlagen Lärm machen. Im Bundes-Immissionsschutzgesetz - Ulrike hat gerade vom BImSchG gesprochen; auch ich will es einmal kurz ansprechen - in § 22 steht leider, dass Sportanlagen genau davon ausgenommen sind.\n\nDaher sollte man Kinderlärm privilegieren oder festlegen, dass Kinderlärm unschädlich ist. Deswegen glaube ich auch, dass wir vielleicht beim BImSchG - wir haben in dieser Großen Koalition ja noch eine ganze Menge vor; also bis September arbeiten wir voll durch -\n\nschauen sollten, ob wir nicht, wie du es so schön gesagt hast, noch ein bisschen nachbessern können. Denn ich glaube, dass Kinderlärm etwas ist, das wir alle akzeptieren müssen. Dann wäre es auch egal, ob ein Anwohner klagt oder nicht. Das kann doch wirklich nicht sein. Wir wollen doch nicht unseren Ruf als kinderunfreundliches Land weiter stärken. Wir müssen zusehen, dass wir ein bisschen darauf schauen, wie wichtig es ist, was Kinder machen.\n\nDeswegen bleibe ich dabei: Die heutige Verabschiedung der SALVO-Änderung bedeutet einen Fortschritt für den Sport. Wenn wir beim Bundes-Immissionsschutzgesetz im Hinblick auf Kinder noch ein bisschen nachsteuern, dann kann ich nur sagen: Kinderlärm ist Zukunftsmusik.\n\nIn diesem Sinne wünsche ich Ihnen noch einen schönen Tag.\"\n4750,elisabeth-motschmann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Bündnistreue ist ein ganz hohes Gut. Keiner, der hier für diesen Einsatz spricht, benutzt leichtfertig den Artikel 5 des Nordatlantikvertrages, um diesen Einsatz zu rechtfertigen.\n\nWas ich aber leichtfertig finde, ist die Argumentation der Linken im Zusammenhang mit diesem Einsatz. Ich habe mir dazu die Rede von Alexander Neu vom letzten Mal angesehen. Ich will Ihnen vortragen, mit welcher Polemik er über diesen Einsatz spricht. Er sprach von einem - ich zitiere - „lächerlichen Dauereinsatz“, vom „Irrsinn“ der Sicherheitspolitik, von einer „Legende der Selbstverteidigung“, von „Heuchelei“ und\n\nvon „im imperialen Sinne des antiken Roms“; er sprach weiterhin von einem „Verdummungsversuch“ und sagte, es würden „Steuergelder verbraten“ und alles sei „rechtlich absurd“.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, abgesehen davon, dass dies ein Stresstest für die Leidensfähigkeit verantwortungsbewusster Abgeordneter ist, muss ich hier ganz klar sagen: So geht man nicht mit einem Bündnis um.\n\nAuf dieses Bündnis sind wir selber angewiesen, mal mehr und mal weniger. Aber ich kann nur sehr davor warnen, es leichtfertig aufs Spiel zu setzen.\n\nNatürlich ist die Begründung für diesen Einsatz 2014 eine andere als 2001.\n\nDie Bedrohung durch maritimen Terrorismus ist eine abstrakte Bedrohung; da sind wir uns einig. Das kann aber schon morgen anders sein. Wir haben es ja eben gehört: Natürlich ist es möglich, dass der Terrorismus, der sich im Augenblick in schlimmer Weise ausbreitet, auch in den Mittelmeerraum Einzug hält. Aber der Einsatz soll ja von Artikel 5 des Nordatlantikvertrages entkoppelt werden. Die Bemühungen sind fast abgeschlossen. -Deshalb kann man unserer Verteidigungsministerin und dem Außenminister nur dafür danken, dass sie diesen Prozess aktiv begleiten.\n\nIm Augenblick gibt es faktisch eine Seeraumüberwachung und einen Lagebildaustausch. Diese Operation hat sich zu einem präventiven Ordnungsfaktor entwickelt, dient also zur Vorbeugung im Bereich der maritimen -Sicherheit, und ist eine Aufklärungs- und Beobachtungsmission.\n\nDas ist nicht nichts; das ist nur etwas anderes. Dafür muss eine neue Begründung gefunden werden. In Wales hat man den Artikel 5 des Nordatlantikvertrages ja gar nicht mehr herangezogen. Es ist eben nicht so einfach, mit 28 NATO-Staaten Einigkeit zu erzielen. Mit Ihrer Polemik werden Sie das ganz sicher nicht schaffen. Insofern kann man nur froh sein, dass Sie keine Verantwortung tragen.\n\nHerr Liebich, wenn Sie sagen, dass diese Mission von Anfang an falsch war, und von imaginärem Terrorismus sprechen, dann sage ich Ihnen ganz deutlich: In diesen krisenhaften Zeiten von einem imaginären Terrorismus zu sprechen, ist schon bemerkenswert abwegig. Deshalb kann man das nur ablehnen.\n\n- Sie lehnen das Mandat ab. Wir lehnen es nicht ab. Wir wollen es weiterführen, und zwar so lange, wie es vom Bündnis verantwortet und gewünscht wird. Wir wollen eine neue rechtliche Grundlage schaffen.\n\nAbschließend danke ich den Soldaten, die dort ihren Dienst tun, und wünsche Ihnen allen ein frohes Weihnachtsfest.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8165,franziska-brantner,\"Verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Damen und Herren! Wir haben in den letzten Tagen und Wochen viel diskutiert: über unsere Werte, über den menschenwürdigen Umgang mit Flüchtlingen. Wir haben gesehen, wie Orbán mit Flüchtlingen umgegangen ist, eben nicht menschenwürdig. Wir haben die Weigerung mehrerer Mitgliedstaaten der EU erlebt, Flüchtlinge überhaupt aufzunehmen. Wir erleben ein öffentliches Zerlegen bei diesen Themen, als ob es nicht um Menschen ginge, sondern um irgendwelche Waren, die man hin und her schiebt. Es gab über den Sommer ein öffentliches Zerlegen - das war es fast schon - in der Griechenland-Debatte: Wer gewinnt? Wer verliert? Wer zahlt wie viel? Wir haben in unserer Nachbarschaft im Süden Länder, die eigentlich zerfallen, und trotzdem keine gemeinsame effektive Außenpolitik.\n\nIn diesen Tagen stelle ich mir immer wieder die Frage: Was hält uns in der Europäischen Union eigentlich noch zusammen? Was verbindet uns noch? Was haben wir gemeinsam? Ich finde, das sind relevante Fragen, die man stellen muss. Ich glaube nicht, dass die Antwort „der Euro“ oder „der Binnenmarkt“ ausreicht, um die Bürgerinnen und Bürger auch in Zukunft mitzunehmen.\n\nIn Artikel 2 des EU-Vertrages heißt es:\n\nDie Werte, auf die sich die Union gründet, sind die Achtung der Menschenwürde, Freiheit, Demokratie, Gleichheit, Rechtsstaatlichkeit und die Wahrung der Menschenrechte einschließlich der Rechte der Personen, die Minderheiten angehören.\n\nDas ist es, was uns zusammenhält und was es durchzusetzen gilt.\n\nSie alle wissen - das hat Herr Dörflinger auch schön gesagt -: Bis zum Beitritt ist das alles relevant. Da gibt es Kriterien, Untersuchungen, Überprüfungen. Manchmal macht man ein Auge halb zu, aber es wird überprüft. Wenn man dann Mitglied ist, kann man sich eigentlich wieder alles erlauben. Man kann es schlecht finden, dass es eine liberale Demokratie gibt. Man kann die Medien- und Kartellgesetze so weit dehnen, dass es eigentlich keine Pressefreiheit mehr gibt. Man kann Verfassungsgerichtsrechte beschneiden.\n\nDas Einzige, was wir haben, ist die sogenannte Nuklearbombe - Sie haben sie erwähnt -, die bis jetzt noch nie genutzt wurde: der Artikel 7. Wir haben in dem Bereich nichts Vergleichbares zum Stabilitätspakt, zu der Überprüfung der einzelnen Haushalte. Man kann kaum jemandem erklären, warum wir mitbestimmen oder mitdiskutieren, wie hoch die Mehrwertsteuer auf einer griechischen Insel ist, aber nichts tun können, wenn Menschen unwürdig behandelt werden. Den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern zu erklären „Das ist die Europäische Union. Das eine können wir; bei dem anderen haben wir keine Instrumente“, ist sehr schwierig.\n\nDer bisherige Weg, nämlich „Wir hauen ein bisschen mehr Geld raus oder üben Druck aus, damit die Länder sich bewegen“, wird in Zukunft, glaube ich, nicht mehr funktionieren. Man wird einen Monsieur Hollande nicht durch mehr Geld dazu bringen, mehr Flüchtlinge aufzunehmen, weil er Angst vor Marine Le Pen hat. Das Gleiche gilt in England für Cameron. In Osteuropa ist es eine andere Debatte, aber auch dort wird man wegen Geld nicht mehr Flüchtlinge aufnehmen.\n\nWorum es geht - das Problem liegt doch wesentlich tiefer -, ist dieses gemeinsame Verständnis unserer Grundwerte und ihrer Bedeutung auch für unsere politischen Entscheidungen. Da braucht es gemeinsame Anstrengungen, zu überzeugen und nicht nur anzuprangern. Ich glaube, wir brauchen Instrumente, um dort hinzukommen, eine Neubesinnung oder Rückbesinnung auf das, was uns eigentlich ausmacht. Ich glaube, dass die Kommissionsinstrumente und das, was der Rat jetzt macht, in die richtige Richtung gehen - Herr Roth, ich weiß, dass Sie sich dafür eingesetzt haben -, aber das ist trotzdem zu zahnlos, zu vage.\n\nDeswegen wollen wir ein unabhängiges Gremium. Übrigens: Wenn Sie den Text gelesen hätten, Herr Dörflinger, hätten Sie gesehen, dass das Gremium mit einem Entsandten aus jedem nationalen Parlament besetzt sein soll. Das heißt, wir würden über den Verfassungsexperten abstimmen, den wir in dieses Gremium senden. Das Europäische Parlament würde zehn weitere Experten benennen. Das heißt, die Parlamente wären genau diejenigen, die über die Zusammensetzung dieses Gremiums bestimmen. Der Vorteil eines solchen Gremiums wäre, dass Herr Orbán nicht mehr sagen könnte: Ach, den Gutachter hat sich ja die Kommission ausgesucht; der hat mit mir nichts zu tun. - Es wäre der große Vorteil eines solchen Gremiums, dass es eben unparteiisch wäre, dass jeder mit in der Verantwortung stünde und man nicht einfach sagen könnte: „Das kommt wieder aus Brüssel“, sondern für jeden wäre klar: Da sind auch unsere Leute mit drin, die wir entsandt haben.\n\nDas ist ein großer Unterschied. Und genau das brauchen wir: eine gemeinsame Anstrengung.\n\nVon Ihrer Seite kam nun der Einwand, ein solches Gremium stelle eine Konkurrenz zum Europarat dar. Sie wissen doch, der Europarat braucht eine EU, die diese Rechte auch umsetzen kann, und je stärker wir nach innen werden, desto glaubwürdiger ist der Europarat. Deswegen handelt es sich nicht um eine Dopplung oder um eine Konkurrenz, sondern beides ist absolut komplementär.\n\nNötig ist auch, dass die Zivilgesellschaft basisdemokratisch in diesen Prozess eingebunden wird, dass die Debatten transparent verlaufen und nicht nur im Ministerrat geführt werden, der in kleiner Runde darüber diskutiert. Dieser repräsentiert ja nicht die europäische Familie; die Familie ist größer als die Runde der Minister, die irgendwo zusammensitzen. Deshalb muss man auch eine gemeinsame Debatte führen.\n\nSchließlich haben Sie noch auf den Juristischen Dienst des Europäischen Rates verwiesen. Sie wissen doch, dass dieser eh nichts einstufen darf. Ich weiß nicht, wie viele Gesetze in dieser Legislaturperiode schon gegen den Rat des Wissenschaftlichen Dienstes dieses Hauses verabschiedet wurden. Von daher würde ich auch nicht sagen, dass das unbedingt der Maßstab aller Dinge ist. Wenn schon, dann wäre das am Ende eines Entscheidungsprozesses der EuGH.\n\nIch glaube, dass es notwendig ist, diese Debatten öffentlich, transparent und unabhängig, mit Experten und trotzdem politisch geleitet zu führen. Wir brauchen solche Debatten in Europa.\n\nAm Ende möchte ich aus der Rede der Bundeskanzlerin vor einer Woche in Straßburg zitieren. Sie hat gesagt: „Europa ist eine Wertegemeinschaft, eine Rechts- und Verantwortungsgemeinschaft.“ Als Richtschnur nannte sie: „Menschenwürde, Rechtsstaatlichkeit, Toleranz, die Achtung von Minderheiten, Solidarität.“\n\nIch finde, dass unser Antrag eine gute Handhabe bietet, um ohne Vertragsveränderungen diesen europäischen Werten mehr Geltung zu verschaffen. Herr Roth, nach Ihren Worten bin ich ganz zuversichtlich, dass die SPD vielleicht zustimmt. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Union, geben Sie sich einen Ruck. Es wäre, wie ich glaube, ein schönes Signal aus diesem Hause, wenn wir auf diese Weise mehr Diskussionen und eine stärkere Verankerung der Grundwerte europaweit einfordern.\"\n14434,jurgen-coße,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Krisenprävention ist besser, als einen Konflikt lösen zu müssen, wenn er schon ausgebrochen ist. Aktive Krisenprävention und Friedensförderung sind jede Mühe von uns allen in diesem Haus wert und braucht die breiteste Unterstützung, die wir bekommen können.\n\nAber was ist, wenn die Krise schon da ist? Wir alle kennen die schockierenden Bilder der Hungernden aus Somalia. Von der Wasserknappheit sind dort zurzeit 6,2 Millionen Menschen betroffen. Das ist über die Hälfte der Bevölkerung.\n\nMitte März hat das Auswärtige Amt die humanitäre Hilfe für das Horn von Afrika verdoppelt. Es stimmt: Humanitäre Hilfe ist unabdingbar, aber für eine langfristige Stabilisierung müssen wir viel mehr tun. Ja, wir müssen die somalische Regierung in die Lage versetzen, das Land effektiv zu regieren und auch die humanitäre Hilfe zu schützen. Anders gesagt: Ohne Frieden und Sicherheit kann es keine tragfähige Entwicklung in Somalia geben.\n\nDeswegen bildet die EU seit 2010 Soldaten der somalischen Armee in der Mission EUTM Somalia aus. Sie stützt sich auf eine Einladung der somalischen Regierung und auf eine Resolution des Sicherheitsrates. Diese Ausbildungs- und Trainingsmission leistet mit 155 Soldaten einen zahlenmäßig kleinen, aber wichtigen Beitrag zur Stabilisierung Somalias. So konnten bereits mehr als 5 400 somalische Soldaten ausgebildet werden.\n\nVielen Dank an die elf deutschen Soldaten, die derzeit dort ihren Dienst tun! Sie leisten unter schwierigen Bedingungen sehr, sehr gute Arbeit.\n\nJa, die Sicherheitslage in Somalia ist zwar immer noch angespannt, hat sich aber verbessert. Auch der politische Prozess macht Hoffnung. Gemessen an den Umständen waren die letzten Monate ein kleiner Erfolg. Nach einem komplizierten Auswahlprozess und der friedlichen Machtübernahme ist Mohamed Abdullahi als Präsident vereidigt worden. Er ist demokratisch legitimiert; er hat vielleicht sogar die höchste demokratische Legitimation, die ein Präsident in Somalia je hatte.\n\nDer neue Präsident kommt aus dem Exil und hat sich bereits 2010 als Premierminister mit seinem Eintreten gegen Korruption einen Namen gemacht. Er sorgte damals dafür, dass die Soldaten regelmäßig ihren Sold erhielten. Lassen Sie uns ihm und seiner Regierung jetzt und auch weiterhin eine Chance geben.\n\nEine Chance hat die Regierung aber nur, wenn sie über ein gut ausgebildetes Militär verfügt. Dafür vermittelt EUTM Somalia Spezialwissen, hauptsächlich an Offiziere. Der Lehrplan umfasst unter anderem zivil-militärische Zusammenarbeit, humanitäres Völkerrecht und Menschenrechte. Damit wird ein Grundstein für eine Armee gelegt, die Zivilisten schützen kann.\n\nZweifellos gibt es bei der Ausbildung einiges zu verbessern. Das tut die EU aber auch. 2016 beschloss die EU, die Ausbildung stärker stammübergreifend auszurichten. Bereits Anfang dieses Jahres hat die Mission die Ausbildung einer stammübergreifenden Infanteriekompanie abgeschlossen. Diese Fortschritte können sich sehen lassen, auch wenn sie klein sind.\n\nTrotzdem macht sich heute keiner meiner Kolleginnen und Kollegen in diesem Haus die Entscheidung leicht.\n\nWer gegen den Antrag stimmt, muss eine Frage beantworten: Was ist denn die Alternative? Wenn wir uns nicht in Somalia engagieren, überlassen wir das Land auf jeden Fall den Terroristen von al-Schabab. Das kann niemand in diesem Hause ernsthaft wollen.\n\nSicherlich: Die Parole „Afrikanische Lösungen für afrikanische Probleme“ ist ein gutes Ziel. Es zu erreichen, liegt auch im europäischen Interesse. Aber so weit sind wir noch nicht. Noch gibt es eine geteilte Verantwortung bei der Bewältigung von Krisen und Konflikten auf unserem Nachbarkontinent. Was nicht nationalstaatlich gelöst werden kann, wird auf Ebene der afrikanischen Regionalorganisationen oder der Afrikanischen Union gehoben, und es wird versucht, eine Lösung anzustreben. Erst danach kommen die Vereinten Nationen und die Europäische Union ins Spiel.\n\nIm Bundestag, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, reden wir häufig über Krisen und Konflikte in Afrika, die bislang noch nicht gelöst worden sind. Aber es gibt auch Erfolge. Über diese sollten wir vielleicht öfter reden. Erst Anfang des Jahres gelang es der westafrikanischen Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft ECOWAS, in Gambia einen letztlich friedlichen Machtwechsel durchzusetzen. Auch die Afrikanische Union macht Fortschritte. Für den neuen Generalsekretär der Afrikanischen Union stehen Sicherheit und Frieden ganz oben auf der Agenda. Er hat sich in Somalia ein Bild von der Lage vor Ort gemacht. Auf jeden Fall müssen wir anerkennen, welche Entwicklung die afrikanische Sicherheitsarchitektur bereits genommen hat. Die Afrikanische Union gibt es erst seit 15 Jahren. Ihre Vorgängerin, die Organisation für Afrikanische Einheit, stand noch klar unter dem Prinzip der Nichteinmischung. Interventionen, wie sie die Afrikanische Union heute vornimmt, wären damals undenkbar gewesen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wenn wir etwas umfassender zurückblicken, sehen wir: Die afrikanische Sicherheitsarchitektur ist auf dem Weg nach vorne, auch wenn es langsam vorangeht. Bis das Ziel „Afrikanische Lösungen für afrikanische Probleme“ erreicht ist, wird allerdings noch viel Wasser Nil, Kongo und Niger hinunterfließen. Bis es so weit ist, sollten wir uns nicht verweigern, wenn wir helfen können. Genau deswegen stimmt die SPD diesem Antrag zu.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n1091,axel-knoerig,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der amerikanische Ökonom Robert Solow hat einmal geschrieben: „Die entscheidende Triebfeder für Wirtschaftswachstum ist nicht Arbeit und Kapital, sondern technologischer Fortschritt.“ - Und genau da setzen wir mit diesem Antrag an. Wollen wir also der Solow’schen Logik folgen, dann müssen wir Technologien und Innovationen massiv fördern.\n\nVor dem Hintergrund begrenzter Ressourcen bei uns in Deutschland muss es nur ein Ziel geben: Wir sind digitales Wachstumsland Nummer eins bis 2017.\n\nDie entscheidende Schlüsselbranche dafür ist die Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologie. Sie muss jetzt mit Hochdruck gefördert werden, damit modernste Soft- und Hardware sowie Dienstleistungsangebote entwickelt werden, um die Digitalisierung wirklich in allen Wirtschaftsbereichen voranzutreiben.\n\nWenn wir uns die Entwicklung des IKT-Sektors in Europa und in der Welt anschauen, dann stellen wir fest, dass in Amerika und auch in Asien, zum Beispiel in Indien und Brasilien, Marktzuwächse von 9 bis 14 Prozent möglich sind, während die Rate in Europa bedenklich tief liegt, nämlich bei unter 1 Prozent. Wie können wir also das Innovationspotenzial unserer IKT-Branche optimal ausschöpfen? Bevor wir die Frage beantworten können, müssen wir, wie ich denke, uns als Erstes die speziellen Eigengesetzlichkeiten dieser Branche anschauen und sie entsprechend berücksichtigen.\n\nPunkt eins: Im Vergleich zu vielen anderen Wirtschaftszweigen ist hier der Zeitrahmen für Innovationen erheblich enger. Bei Internetunternehmen dauern die Projekte oft nur wenige Wochen. Dadurch entstehen natürlich hohe Forschungs- und auch Entwicklungskosten. Da ist die Frage aufzuwerfen: Liegt es nicht in unserem eigenen Interesse, steuerliche Förderung zur Unterstützung anzubieten? Die Zeit drängt, und wir sollten die Programmförderung diesen schnellen Prozessen entsprechend anpassen.\n\nPunkt zwei: Im Vergleich zu den USA und Asien sind die meisten IKT-Unternehmen hierzulande kleinere Betriebe. Nur 1 Prozent der Softwarefirmen hat über 100 Mitarbeiter. Wir haben in Deutschland nun einmal keine Internetriesen wie Facebook oder Google. Also sind wir im Grunde genommen gezwungen, uns auf unsere eigenen Stärken zu konzentrieren. Und das sind die klassischen Wirtschaftsbereiche: unsere kleinen und mittelständischen Unternehmen. Sie betreiben ebenfalls Forschung und Entwicklung auf einem internationalen Spitzen-niveau. Das sollten wir auch entsprechend herausstellen.\n\nIch stelle fest, dass allein in den letzten vier Jahren 8 Millionen Euro an Forschungsförderung in meinen Wahlkreis geflossen sind. Da sage ich: Das ist nur ein Anfang. Die Mittelstandsförderung muss zukünftig noch intensiver mit der Innovationspolitik verbunden werden.\n\nPunkt drei: Wir müssen die IKT-Branche als weltweites soziales Netzwerk begreifen. Da reichen nationale Regelungen nicht aus, insbesondere was die Sicherheit betrifft. Ein Schritt in die richtige Richtung ist das geplante Freihandelsabkommen mit den USA. Daraus werden sich, denke ich, viele wirtschaftliche Impulse für unsere Branche ergeben. Dabei ist entscheidend, wie die Bundeskanzlerin festgehalten hat, dass wir hierbei unsere hohen Sicherheitsstandards beibehalten möchten.\n\nPunkt vier: Mehr als andere Branchen ist die IKT-Branche vom Risikokapital abhängig. Gerade Asien und Amerika bieten hier den jungen Hightechunternehmen weitaus günstigere Voraussetzungen. Damit kommt es zur schnelleren Anschlussfinanzierung, um neue Produkte auf die Märkte zu bringen. Daher müssen wir hinterfragen: Warum ist das bei uns nicht annähernd möglich? Sollten nicht auch unsere Banken gerade diesen kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen solche Risikofinanzierungen erleichtern?\n\nDieses muss in Crowdfunding, meinem fünften Punkt, eingebunden werden. Dieses Thema ist erwähnenswert, weil damit die digitale Wirtschaft eine neue Form der Eigenkapitalbeschaffung umgesetzt hat. Es ist zu hoffen, dass diese private Form der Finanzierung von den Start-ups weiter ausgebaut wird und sich damit wirklich eine Alternative zur öffentlichen Finanzierung etabliert.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es geht hierbei aber nicht nur um die IKT-Branche als Kernbranche, sondern sie strahlt wie eine Querschnittstechnologie auch in andere Bereiche hinein: in den Automobilbau, die Elektrotechnik, die chemische Industrie und sogar die Landwirtschaft. Ein Beispiel: Schon heute besteht ein Auto zu 30 Prozent aus elektronischen Bauteilen. Dieser Anteil wird in den nächsten 15 Jahren bis auf 50 Prozent ansteigen. Oder schauen wir uns den Maschinen- und Anlagenbau an: Deutschland ist der führende Fabrikausstatter in der Welt. Hier werden bis zu 200 Milliarden Euro umgesetzt, und dieses Ergebnis sichert fast 15 Millionen Menschen direkt und indirekt Beschäftigung.\n\nDeswegen war es zielgerichtet, Frau Staatssekretärin Zypries, dass hier das BMBF über die Forschung gerade das Projekt „Industrie 4.0“ mit unterstützt. Auf 15 Jahre ist dieses Programm angelegt und hat einen besonders hohen Stellenwert, weil wir uns davon versprechen, die Marktführerschaft vor Asien und Amerika zu sichern.\n\nIch denke, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, das ist vorausschauende und verantwortliche Innovationspolitik zur Sicherung von Leitbranchen an unserem Wirtschaftsstandort Deutschland. Deswegen ist es wichtig, dass wir den Ordnungsrahmen der digitalen Wirtschaft international wettbewerbsfähig ausrichten. Dazu gehört natürlich im Allgemeinen, die digitale Infrastruktur in den Bereichen Verkehr, Energie, Gesundheit und öffentliche Verwaltung entsprechend auszubauen. Ich sage als Vertreter des ländlichen Raumes immer wieder gern: Genauso wie es in Ballungszentren selbstverständlich ist, muss es im Grunde genommen auch im ländlichen Raum selbstverständlich sein, dort auf das schnelle Internet zurückgreifen zu können.\n\nHier ist das Stichwort CeBIT gefallen. Allein auf der CeBIT sind dieses Jahr 1 500 Veranstaltungen und Workshops zu IT-Sicherheit und Datenschutz abgehalten worden. In Hannover wurden heute 30 mittelständische Unternehmen im Bereich IT und Softwareentwicklung ausgezeichnet.\n\nTrotz alledem stellen wir fest, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, dass - man höre und staune - durch Cybercrime der deutschen Wirtschaft tagtäglich Schäden in Höhe von einer Viertelmilliarde Euro entstehen. Deswegen müssen wir die mittelständischen Betriebe weiter sensibilisieren und vor allem das neue IT-Sicherheitsgesetz zügig voranbringen. Das ist ein politischer Impuls, der aus den Reihen der Politik kommen muss. Wir brauchen keine Verbundnetze, sondern diesen politischen Impuls.\n\nAber es ist auch wichtig, dass wir die Mitarbeiter mitnehmen. Wir brauchen interkulturelle Kompetenzen. Immer mehr Berufsschulen - zum Beispiel auch die in Syke in meinem Wahlkreis - bieten europäische Ausbildungsangebote an. Die Bundesregierung hat sich ja zum Ziel gesetzt, die Zahl der Auszubildenden, die einen Auslandsaufenthalt absolvieren, zu verdoppeln.\n\nMeine Zeit ist abgelaufen.\n\nIch fasse zusammen: In dem ersten Antrag der Großen Koalition zur digitalen Wirtschaft geht es darum, dass wir unsere Ziele in Bildungs-, Forschungs- und Arbeitsmarktpolitik intensiv miteinander verknüpfen müssen. Dann bleibt auch unsere deutsche IKT-Wirtschaft wettbewerbsfähig.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n12259,maria-bohmer,\"Gerne, Herr Kollege Mutlu. Ich habe das auch jetzt erst erfahren und bin genauso überrascht wie Sie, gestehe ich Ihnen. Damit Sie eine gründliche Antwort erhalten, würde ich das gerne im Auswärtigen Amt überprüfen lassen und Ihnen dann die Antwort zukommen lassen.\n\n- Ja. Nicht jeder liest vielleicht die Zeitungen so schnell wie Sie, vor allen Dingen wenn man auf Dienstreise ist.\"\n13226,ernst-dieter-rossmann,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich will gerne auf das zurückkommen, womit Staatssekretär Spahn eingeleitet hat: die bildungspolitische Betrachtung. 10 Millionen Kinder, Jugendliche und junge Erwachsene sind in Schulen in Deutschland - 33 000 allgemeinbildende Schulen, 8 000 berufsbildende Schulen -, und die Investitionen in den Erhalt und die Pflege der baulichen Substanz sind wesentlich von den Kommunen getragen worden. Die Investitionen liegen bei 2,9 Milliarden Euro jährlich, und zwar in allen Kommunen, auch den finanzschwachen. Der Bund ist jetzt bereit, die finanzschwachen Kommunen mit einer Summe von 3,5 Milliarden Euro über dreieinhalb Jahre zu unterstützen. Das bedeutet, dass auf die 2,9 Milliarden Euro jährlich 1 Milliarde Euro für Investitionen obendrauf kommt. Das ist für die finanzschwachen Kommunen wirklich eine große Nummer.\n\nEs wird gezielt dort angesetzt, wo die Bedarfe sind.\n\nKollege Rehberg, ja, wir haben mit dem Kommunalinvestitionsförderungsgesetz den ersten Einstieg gemacht; aber das war an die energetische Sanierung gebunden. Was wir jetzt machen, geht weiter. Das zeugt von einer guten Qualität, die über die Länder, über Minister Gabriel, über die Bundesregierung mit in die Debatte eingebracht worden ist. Die Schulen laden zu einer hohen Identifikation mit der Kommune ein. Wir wollen eben nicht, dass hier reiche Kommunen und da arme Kommunen sind und dass man dies an der Unterschiedlichkeit ihrer Schulen erkennen kann. Das ist nicht nur wichtig für die 10 Millionen Kinder und Jugendlichen, die direkt an den Schulen sind, sowie für die Eltern und Großeltern. Es ist auch wichtig für die Kommunen, dass man an den Schulen nicht mehr merkt, ob sie arm oder reich sind, ob sie mit dem letzten Cent rechnen müssen, sondern dass dort positiv gestaltet werden kann.\n\nNoch einmal: Es ist wichtig, dass es die direkten Finanzierungen gibt, mutmaßlich bis zu einen Schlüssel von 90 Prozent vom Bund und 10 Prozent von den Ländern oder Kommunen, was eine gute Unterfütterung ist. Es ist eben etwas anderes, wenn das Geld direkt dorthin fließt - auch ab einer Summe von 40 000 Euro. Ich bin sicher: Es wird dann von den Kommunen aufgegriffen werden. Es wird auch deshalb aufgegriffen werden, weil zwingende bildungspolitische Argumente dafürsprechen. Wir wissen aus lernpsychologischen Studien, dass bessere Leistungsergebnisse erzielt werden, wenn die Schulen in Ordnung sind, wenn sie modern ausgestattet sind, wenn sie eine Wertschätzung ausdrücken. Das überträgt sich. Es gibt lernpsychologische Erkenntnisse, die besagen: Da, wo die Lichtverhältnisse, die Lernverhältnisse und die räumliche Gestaltung animierend sind, sind die Leistungen noch einmal besser. Insofern ist es wichtig, dass wir uns an den Kosten beteiligen.\n\nWir wissen aus PISA-Studien, dass es leider einen verhängnisvollen Zusammenhang von Armut, Arbeitslosigkeit und Strukturschwäche in den Kommunen gibt mit den Rückwirkungen auf die Bildungsergebnisse. Von daher spreche ich es noch einmal an: Es ist gut, dass sich diese Große Koalition an dieser Stelle nicht nach den Paragrafen, sondern nach den Bedarfen, nicht nach dem, was war, sondern nach dem, was wir für die Zukunft gewinnen wollen, richtet. Das schließt eine gewisse Veränderung in der Verfassung ein, auch wenn wir sagen: Wir wollen das Kooperationsverbot nicht vollständig lockern, aber wir wissen einen ganz gezielten Zugang, wie wir Gutes tun können für die Bildungsrepublik Deutschland mit der Perspektive, dass es mehr Bildungsgerechtigkeit gibt.\n\nWir freuen uns, dass zumindest der Staatssekretär - bei Herrn Rehberg klang das auch durch - heute gesagt hat: Ja, da geht auch der Koalitionspartner CDU/CSU mit. - Uns als Bildungspolitiker hat diese Debatte schon etwas erschrocken gemacht. Wir erinnern uns an eine frühere Debatte zum Thema BAföG, in der der Kollege Kaufmann ein Bombardement gegen diese Regelung angestoßen hat, was wir gar nicht verstehen konnten. Es wäre viel naheliegender gewesen, zu sagen: Donnerwetter, unser Finanzminister macht 3,5 Milliarden Euro locker für die Bildung. - Beim Kollegen Kaufmann klang das so, als ob es ein ganz großer Irrweg wäre. Heute, Herr Rehberg, musste der Kollege Liebing die gleiche Nummer singen, und zwar pro Mehrwehrtsteuerverteilung, zu der Sie gerade die Gegenargumente genannt hatten. Wir begreifen es fast nur psychologisch, dass Sie irgendwie nicht mitgehen können, weil Sie das Gefühl haben: Da ist zu viel Sozialdemokratie drin.\n\nJa, in diesen 3,5 Milliarden Euro ist Sozialdemokratie drin; aber das muss doch nicht dazu führen, dass Sie das nur verschwiemelt darstellen.\n\nHerr Spahn, es war schon gut, dass Sie sich voll dahintergestellt haben. Sie haben damit Haltung pro Bildung, pro Investition, pro kommunale Entwicklung bewiesen. Wir sagen auch: Mit der Änderung der Verfassung sind wir noch nicht am Ende; denn Ihre Bildungsministerin hat 5 Milliarden Euro in Aussicht gestellt, um 40 000 Schulen mit digitaler Infrastruktur auszustatten. Donnerwetter, da werden wir die Verfassung noch einmal ändern müssen.\n\nWir verstehen in dem Zusammenhang Bund-Länder-Kommunal-Zusammenarbeit nicht, weshalb Sie sich hier so schwertun. Auf die Tatsache, dass wir es zusammen geschafft haben, 125 Millionen Euro für ein Hochbegabtenförderprogramm zwischen Bund und Ländern auf den Weg zu bringen, singt auch der konservative Teil dieses Parlaments Lobeshymnen. Das ist eine neue Form der Bund-Länder-Zusammenarbeit. Singen Sie doch auch eine Lobeshymne darauf, dass wir mehr soziale Gerechtigkeit in der Bildungspolitik schaffen.\n\nDie ganze Palette besingen wir positiv. Deshalb finden wir: Schöne Weihnacht, tolle 3,5 Milliarden Euro! Daraus kann etwas werden.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13881,maria-klein-schmeink,\"Danke schön für den Bericht, Herr Minister. Ohne Zweifel ist es ein Fortschritt, dass wir jetzt eine zentrale Gutachtenstelle für die Gesundheitsberufe haben; denn es hat im Vorfeld große Unterschiede gegeben. Dabei stellt sich aber auch die Frage, inwiefern dadurch ein Nadelöhr entsteht. Inwiefern reichen die Kapazitäten der zentralen Gutachtenstelle für Gesundheitsberufe aus, um den Behörden bei der Prüfung und Bewertung der Bewerbungsunterlagen beratend zur Seite zu stehen? Und, sollten die Kapazitäten nicht ausreichen, welche Maßnahmen werden Sie ergreifen, um den Ausbau der Gutachtenstelle für Gesundheitsberufe zu fördern?\n\nDanke schön. - Der Bericht weist aus, dass es in den Ländern sehr unterschiedliche Umgangsweisen mit denjenigen gibt, die einen Antrag zur Anerkennung ihrer Kompetenzen trotz fehlender oder unvollständiger Unterlagen stellen möchten. Mindestens in einem Bundesland gibt es Kompetenzfeststellungsverfahren mit anschließendem Anpassungslehrgang, der eine gewisse Qualitätskontrolle darstellt. Andere Länder scheinen sich dazu nicht in der Lage zu sehen. Dadurch haben wir sehr unterschiedliche Ausgangsvoraussetzungen.\n\nWelche Entwicklung gibt es beim Umgang mit Personen, die trotz fehlender oder unvollständiger Unterlagen einen Antrag auf Berufsanerkennung stellen, und mit welchen Maßnahmen wird in diesen Fällen der Patientenschutz gewährleistet, auch im Hinblick auf eine bundesweit einheitliche oder angepasste Regelung? Das ist unter anderem auch wichtig, um viele von denen, die geflüchtet sind und die oft ihre Unterlagen nicht mitnehmen konnten, einbeziehen und integrieren zu können.\n\nDanke schön, Frau Präsidentin. - Ich habe ebenso eine Frage zum Arzneimittelversorgungsstärkungsgesetz. Wir mussten heute im Ausschuss erfahren, dass die Umsatzschwelle zur Kostendämpfung für neue Arzneimittel ersatzlos gestrichen wurde. Sie hatten als Minister einen entsprechenden Gesetzentwurf vorgelegt, da Sie es durchaus für notwendig gefunden haben, ein Instrument zur Reglementierung als Schutz gegen Mondpreise vorzusehen. Mittlerweile ist dieses Instrument ersatzlos gestrichen. Welche anderen Maßnahmen wollen Sie ergreifen, damit wir die Versichertengemeinschaft in Zukunft vor Mondpreisen schützen können?\"\n10654,peter-meiwald,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Herr Minister, ich habe eine Frage. Der Presse war zu entnehmen, dass die Ressortabstimmung zum Entwurf des Bundesverkehrswegeplans im Rahmen der Öffentlichkeitsbeteiligung durchgeführt werden soll. Am 2. Mai dieses Jahres ist die Frist abgelaufen. Deswegen lautet meine Frage, inwieweit die Öffentlichkeitsbeteiligung bei den Vorschlägen, die das Umweltbundesamt und das Umweltministerium - möglicherweise aber auch weitere Ministerien - einbringen wollen bzw. eingebracht haben, Berücksichtigung findet.\n\nWir haben gelesen, dass das Umweltbundesamt vorschlägt, 41 Straßenprojekte komplett aus dem Bundesverkehrswegeplan zu streichen, weil die Umweltbilanz und der Nutzen-Kosten-Faktor in verheerendem Ausmaß auseinanderklaffen. Haben Sie diese Projekte bereits aus Ihrem Entwurf gestrichen, bzw. wie wird das Ministerium weiter damit umgehen? Meine weiter gehende Frage lautet: Wie viele Stellungnahmen aus der Bevölkerung sind zum Entwurf des Bundesverkehrswegeplans innerhalb der Frist insgesamt eingegangen?\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n7745,franziska-brantner,\"Sehr geehrte Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Am 21. Juli 2015 erklärte das Bundesverfassungsgericht das Betreuungsgeld für verfassungswidrig. Seither gibt es den Streit darüber, was mit dem Geld passiert. Für 2016 sind es 500 Millionen Euro und für 2017 1 Milliarde Euro. Für uns müssen dabei drei Dinge im Vordergrund stehen: Erstens. Das Geld muss im Familienhaushalt bleiben. Zweitens. Es darf nicht für den Mehrbedarf beim Elterngeld genutzt werden. Drittens. Es muss dorthin gehen, wo es gebraucht wird, nämlich in die Kitas.\n\nHerr Schäuble möchte den Zuwachs beim Elterngeld gerne mit den Mitteln für das Betreuungsgeld decken. Der zusätzliche Bedarf ist aber nicht über Nacht gekommen, sondern deshalb, weil wir hier gemeinsam neue gesetzliche Ansprüche geschaffen haben. Die Partnerschaftsmonate gibt es eben nicht für umsonst, und wenn mehr Väter das Elterngeld nutzen, was wir uns alle wünschen, dann wird es teurer. Das hängt mit dem Lohnunterschied zwischen Männern und Frauen zusammen. Das Geld hätte also ohnehin im Haushalt gefunden werden müssen, egal ob das Betreuungsgeld abgeschafft wird oder nicht. Wenn wir jetzt das wegfallende Betreuungsgeld dafür nehmen würden, dann würden wir den Familienhaushalt dafür bestrafen, dass das Elterngeld erfolgreich ist. Das kann ja wohl nicht die Logik sein, die wir hier vertreten.\n\nEigentlich sind wir uns doch sicher, dass das Geld in den Kitas gut angelegt ist und dass das auch das ist, was die Eltern brauchen und sich wünschen.\n\nIhr Haus, Frau Marks, hat nicht nur festgestellt, dass wir in Deutschland ohnehin noch 185 000 Kitaplätze brauchen, sondern auch, dass wir für die Kinder, die jetzt zu uns kommen, 68 000 Plätze zusätzlich brauchen werden. Diese Lücke besteht, und sie ist groß. Ich würde sagen: Ihre Zahlen sind ziemlich gut geschätzt, aber sie könnten auch gut noch ein bisschen höher liegen. Es ist doch in unserem Interesse, dass diese Kinder früh in die Kitas gehen und dort Deutsch lernen, ankommen und teilhaben können. Es ist doch wirklich unser originäres Interesse, dass das möglich ist.\n\nLassen Sie uns deswegen jetzt doch vorausschauen - dieser Bedarf wird entstehen - und nicht erst wieder dann handeln, wenn die Schlangen vor den Kitas in sechs Monaten existieren und sich die Frage stellt, wer den Kitaplatz bekommt, nämlich das Flüchtlingskind oder das Kind, das schon hier geboren wurde. Ich möchte nicht, dass sich diese Frage stellen wird. Deswegen möchte ich, dass wir jetzt vorausschauen und die Gelder jetzt, da wir sie haben, in die Kitas investieren.\n\nWir alle wissen, dass das nicht einfach wird.\n\nWir brauchen auch mehr Sprachförderung. Wir haben in Ihrem Haus angefragt, ob Sie vorhaben, im nächsten Jahr mehr Geld für die Sprachförderung auszugeben. Ich finde, auch hier kann man schon ziemlich sicher davon ausgehen, dass das notwendig sein wird. Die Antwort von Ihnen war bis jetzt, dass es bei den 100 Millionen Euro bleiben wird. Auch hier ist klar: Wir brauchen mehr Geld für weitere Sprachförderung im Jahr 2016 und in den Jahren danach.\n\nWir können die Kommunen und die Länder damit nicht alleinlassen. Manche werden es vielleicht schaffen, andere haben aber einfach nicht die Kapazitäten und Gelder dafür.\n\nVor allem dürfen wir auch die Erzieherinnen und Erzieher damit nicht alleinlassen.\n\nDie leisten ja heute schon Enormes, machen auch heute schon unglaublich viel. Sie machen viel mehr als das, was ursprünglich ihr Auftrag war, und sie werden immer noch viel zu gering bezahlt.\n\nEine Erzieherin für sieben Kinder unter drei Jahren ist doch schon heute kaum vorstellbar. Schon heute brauchen wir kleinere Gruppen. Die brauchen wir in Zukunft, wenn es um diese Integrationsaufgabe geht, doch erst recht.\n\nWenn wir wollen, dass das klappt, müssen wir jetzt hier rechtzeitig ansetzen. Unsere Aufgabe ist es, dass Kinder - egal ob sie neu zu uns kommen oder hier geboren sind - gute Förderung, Bildung und Betreuung bekommen. Es ist unsere Aufgabe, dafür zu sorgen. Denn für alle Kinder gilt: Was sie in jenen jungen Jahren lernen, das entscheidet über ihre Chancen später. Diese Chancen müssen wir allen - denen, die hier geboren sind, und denen, die jetzt zu uns kommen - geben.\n\nDeswegen lassen Sie uns heute für morgen investieren. Liebe SPD, kämpfen Sie! Damit Sie heute zustimmen können, haben wir für Sie den Antrag auch wirklich ganz einfach gemacht.\n\n- Nein. - Damit Sie - man kennt das ja - nicht sagen können, dass Ihnen ein Halbsatz nicht gefallen hat, haben wir es so formuliert:\n\nDer Deutsche Bundestag fordert die Bundesregierung auf, die frei werdenden Mittel aus dem Betreuungsgeld in Kindertageseinrichtungen zu investieren.\n\nIch würde mich sehr freuen, wenn Sie uns unterstützen und mit uns kämpfen, liebe SPD, und wir hier gemeinsam investieren.\n\nIch freue mich darauf, das hinzubekommen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n13383,henning-otte,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Die heutige Aktuelle Stunde gibt uns die Möglichkeit, noch einmal deutlich darauf hinzuweisen, warum diese Truppenverlegung notwendig ist, warum sie richtig ist und warum wir sie auch unterstützen. Sie zeigt ganz klar die Verbundenheit der Vereinigten Staaten gegenüber der Sicherheit und Freiheit in Europa. Sie ist ein deutlicher Ausdruck von Präsenz, von Transparenz. Sie ist im Übrigen seit dem Jahr 2014 schon fest vereinbart. Sie signalisiert die Verlässlichkeit und Glaubwürdigkeit der NATO hinsichtlich der Absicherung ihrer Ostgrenzen.\n\nDies, meine Damen und Herren, ist notwendig geworden. Wir hier in Deutschland, in Europa und auch innerhalb unseres NATO-Bündnisses sagen sehr deutlich, dass die Annexion der Krim völkerrechtswidrig war, dass die Einflussnahme in der Ostukraine ein Angriff auf die Souveränität des Landes war,\n\ndass sie außerhalb des Rechtsrahmens vollzogen wurde. Insofern ist hier ein deutliches Zeichen Europas und der NATO-Partner notwendig.\n\nMit hybriden Provokationen, mit Völkerrechtsbruch, mit Alarmierungsübungen, mit Einschüchterungspolitik, mit drei neuen Divisionen an der Grenze untergräbt die Kremlführung ganz bewusst die europäische Integration, und sie befördert damit den Extremismus in der politischen Debatte, nicht nur in Frankreich bei Frau Le Pen, nicht nur bei der AfD, sondern leider auch bei der Fraktion Die Linke - man sieht es an Ihrer Argumentation, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDas alles beunruhigt uns hier in Deutschland, und es beunruhigt vor allem die Menschen in den baltischen Staaten, in Rumänien, in Bulgarien, in Polen und - ich füge hinzu - auch in Schweden und in Finnland. Wir lassen sie nicht allein, sondern stehen aktiv und sichtbar an ihrer Seite.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Anbindung an Europa, an die NATO soll untergraben werden, indem von russischer Seite eine Einschüchterungspolitik vollzogen wird. Deswegen ist es wichtig, den Schutzdeich an der osteuropäischen NATO-Grenze zu erhöhen. Denn es gibt die klare Strategie des Kreml, die Einflusssphäre zu erweitern, die Souveränität von Staaten zu untergraben und anzugreifen. Insofern ist Atlantic Resolve eine gut angelegte multinationale Unternehmung, und wir sind den Vereinigten Staaten für dieses sichtbare Zeichen für Frieden und Stabilität in Europa dankbar.\n\nDeutschland unterstützt diese Maßnahmen im Rahmen des sogenannten Host Nation Supports, indem 4 000 US-amerikanische Soldaten Deutschland als Drehscheibe logistisch nutzen können,\n\num von hier aus die baltischen Staaten und Polen zu unterstützen. Das geschieht auf Grundlage des NATO-Truppenstatuts und damit im Rahmen von Recht und Ordnung\n\nund ist Ausfluss der NATO-Gipfel von Wales und Warschau.\n\nWir unterstützen dies auch mit einer Enhanced Forward Presence, einer sogenannten Vorne-Präsenz, um deutlich zu machen: Wir sind bei den baltischen Staaten, wir sind bei Polen. Denn wir sagen: Bündnisverteidigung ist auch Landesverteidigung. Auch deswegen leistet Deutschland einen Beitrag in Litauen, wo wir ab 2017 mit 450 Soldaten zusammen mit den Niederländern, mit den Norwegern, mit den Belgiern ein Zeichen für diese Einigkeit setzen.\n\nDeutschland leistet einen Beitrag zur sogenannten schnellen Speerspitze der NATO, allein, um mit einer schnellen Präsenz in einer Phase der Beunruhigung innerhalb des NATO-Gebietes deutlich zu machen, dass wir zusammenstehen und dass ein Überschreiten der Grenze durch den Kreml ein Angriff auf alle souveränen Staaten wäre. Auch hier sind wir uns der Rückendeckung, der Rückversicherung durch Kanada und die Vereinigten Staaten im Rahmen der wichtigen, notwendigen transatlantischen Beziehungen sicher.\n\nDas alles geschieht im Rahmen der Ergebnisse der Zwei-plus-Vier-Gespräche und der NATO-Russland-Grundakte. Wir stehen zu diesem Recht, auch um deutlich zu machen, dass es Unrecht war, die Krim zu annektieren. Wir setzen uns ein für ein geeintes Europa, für eine starke NATO mit dem klaren Ziel von Frieden und Freiheit, einer friedlichen Entwicklung hier in Europa.\"\n1814,alexander-neu,\"Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Es wurde gesagt, dass ich gesagt hätte, die Bundeswehrsoldaten seien „Spione“ gewesen. Weder ich noch irgendjemand anderes aus der Linksfraktion hat die Soldaten dort als „Spione“ bezeichnet.\n\nWas ich gesagt habe, ist - zur Klarstellung -: Die Mission als solches, die sehr viele Widersprüche und Unklarheiten enthält, gibt Nahrung für einen Spionageverdacht. - Das ist etwas ganz anderes, als zu sagen, diese Leute seien „Spione“ gewesen. Das ist eine Rückweisung.\"\n323,britta-haßelmann,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren Besucher! Herr Braun vom Kanzleramt, da haben Sie ja gerade noch einmal Glück gehabt. Ich glaube, wenn ich nicht darauf hingewiesen hätte, dass wir Sie sonst herbeizitieren, hätte hier wahrscheinlich niemand vom Kanzleramt gesessen.\n\nDabei ist völlig klar: Bei dem Thema, über das wir jetzt diskutieren, nämlich einer gesetzlichen Regelung zur Karenzzeit, hat die Bundesregierung auch eine Verantwortung. Die Bundesregierung und mit ihr die Bundeskanzlerin haben eine Verantwortung, sich zu positionieren.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, nach den ersten Veröffentlichungen zur Frage, was Ronald Pofalla eigentlich nach seiner Tätigkeit im Kanzleramt macht und ob er vielleicht in den Vorstand der Deutschen Bahn AG wechselt, fand ich es unerträglich, die Erklärungen der Bundesregierung und der Bundeskanzlerin zu hören, dazu gebe es nichts zu sagen, schließlich sei Ronald Pofalla seit Wochen nicht mehr Mitglied dieser Bundesregierung. Ich glaube, inzwischen haben Sie selber gemerkt, dass weder die Öffentlichkeit noch wir im Parlament Ihnen eine solche Argumentation durchgehen lassen. Das war einfach nur peinlich.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Berufsperspektiven von ehemaligen Spitzenpolitikerinnen und -politikern sorgen bei Wechseln in die Wirtschaft immer wieder für absolut berechtigte Kritik und stoßen auch auf Ablehnung. Öffentlich herrscht großes Unverständnis. Wir kennen die mediale Berichterstattung - nicht nur im Fall Pofalla, sondern auch in anderen Fällen - sehr genau und wissen, dass wir in der Bevölkerung um Akzeptanz für Wechsel von Politik in Wirtschaft zu werben haben. Die bekommen wir aber nur hin, wenn es dafür angemessene Regeln gibt. Hier im Deutschen Bundestag verweigern Sie sich leider seit Jahren, dies zu tun. Die Akzeptanz ist aber absolut notwendig.\n\nDass wir jetzt endlich zu einer gesetzlichen Regelung kommen, hat nicht zuletzt mit dem umstrittenen Wechsel von Eckart von Klaeden - vorher übrigens auch Kanzleramt - zu Daimler zu tun. Bei Ronald Pofallas Wechsel tappen wir noch ein bisschen im Dunkeln, ob etwas daraus wird oder nicht. Ich weiß nicht, ob Herr Pofalla heute hier ist oder vielleicht im CDU-Kreisverband Kleve ist, um sich dort zu erklären.\n\nDeshalb zitiere ich ihn an dieser Stelle gleich einmal. Wir Grünen sind nämlich nicht die Einzigen, die sagen, es braucht klare gesetzliche Regelungen. Die Zeit einer Selbstverpflichtung ist längst vorbei, und wir als Parlament haben sie vertan. Denn darüber reden wir seit 2005, meine Damen und Herren. 2005 war es Ronald Pofalla, der angesichts des Wechsels von Gerhard Schröder sagte - ich zitiere -:\n\nJetzt kommen wir an einer rechtlichen Regelung wohl nicht vorbei: Es ist offensichtlich eine Illusion, zu glauben, dass der Appell an politischen Anstand alleine ausreicht, um solche Fälle zu verhindern.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich stimme nicht oft mit Ronald Pofalla überein, aber in dieser Frage ausnahmsweise ja.\n\nTrotz jahrelanger Debatte im Deutschen Bundestag haben wir das als Bundestag insgesamt bisher versäumt. Das lag nicht an uns Grünen. Wir haben diverse Antragsinitiativen zur Einrichtung eines Lobbyregisters gestartet - auch die Linke; das weiß ich -, und zwar zum Schutz aller: zum Schutz derjenigen, die hier sitzen, und zum Schutz derjenigen, die von außen Beratertätigkeiten ausüben. Wir haben jahrelang mit Ihnen darüber gestritten, endlich das UN-Abkommen gegen Korruption zu unterzeichnen. Das ist auf massiven Widerstand der Union und auch der FDP gestoßen. Immer noch hat Deutschland dieses Abkommen nicht ratifiziert. Wir streiten mit Ihnen seit Jahren auch über gesetzliche Regelungen zu einer Karenzzeit. Die sind überfällig.\n\nSo wie wir Grünen denken auch viele, viele andere Menschen. Sehen Sie sich einmal die EU-Kommission an! Günther Oettinger kommentierte den geplanten Wechsel von Ronald Pofalla mit dem Satz:\n\nGrundsätzlich bin ich der Meinung, dass es klare Regeln für einen Wechsel von Regierungsmitgliedern in die Wirtschaft geben sollte.\n\nDie SPD empörte sich öffentlich über den Fall Pofalla. Stegner forderte klare gesetzliche Regelungen. Meine Damen und Herren, was ist daraus heute geworden? Ich höre, die Lösungsperspektive für die Große Koalition ist jetzt das Zauberwort „Selbstverpflichtung“. Und was machen wir dann im Deutschen Bundestag? Dann reden wir wieder drei Jahre in den Ausschüssen darüber, dass wir uns vielleicht selbst verpflichten. Ja, wo sind wir denn, meine Damen und Herren?\n\nWir brauchen für die Zukunft endlich klare gesetzliche Regelungen, und zwar damit es Politikerinnen und Politikern möglich ist, im Anschluss an ihre politische Biografie, an ihre politische Tätigkeit hier im Deutschen Bundestag in die Wirtschaft zu wechseln. Niemand will so etwas grundsätzlich verweigern; aber dafür braucht es eine Karenzzeit und eine gesetzliche Regelung. Die Zeit der Selbstverpflichtung ist vorbei. Ich bin gespannt, wann SPD und Union da liefern.\n\nVielen Dank, dass Sie die Frage gestatten. Das geht im Übrigen nicht von Ihrer Redezeit ab. Das sage ich für die Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die neu sind. Daher wundert es mich immer, wenn man keine Fragen zulässt.\n\nIch möchte Sie zu Folgendem fragen: Sie haben eben gesagt, es gebe einen Wechsel vom Bund zum Bund. Deshalb sei das Ganze gar kein Problem. Sie wissen aber schon, dass uns im Parlament und insbesondere den Mitgliedern des Verkehrsausschusses sämtliche Auskunftsrechte, was die Deutsche Bahn AG angeht, verweigert werden, und zwar mit dem Hinweis darauf, dass die Bahn ein Konzernunternehmen, also ein ganz eigenständiges Unternehmen ist. Damit ist das kein Wechsel von der einen Seite der Regierungsbank auf die andere. Vom Bund zum Bund würde bedeuten, dass wir hier alle in einem Haus sind.\n\nDie Regeln für die Deutsche Bahn AG sind vollkommen klar. Die Deutsche Bahn AG ist ein Konzern, und wir als Deutscher Bundestag haben nicht einmal ausreichende Kontrollrechte, Eingriffsrechte und Informationsrechte. Das alles haben wir sogar rechtlich prüfen lassen. Deshalb stimmt doch Ihre Analyse an diesem Punkt nicht. Dazu möchte ich gerne von Ihnen eine Aussage haben.\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. Ich habe eine Kurzintervention angemeldet, weil meine Frage nicht zugelassen wurde. - Vielen Dank, Herr Brandt, dass Sie sich kurzzeitig zurückziehen.\n\nFrau Steffen, Sie haben uns von den Grünen und unseren Antrag mehrfach angesprochen. Ich erwarte daher, dass Sie sich mit unserem Antrag auseinandersetzen. Sie haben mehrfach Beispiele genannt, in denen es um Fachpolitikerinnen und Fachpolitiker ging, die zu Vereinen wechseln. Wir haben uns in unserem Antrag zu den Karenzzeiten auf Regierungsmitglieder sowie Staatssekretärinnen und Staatssekretäre bezogen.\n\nWir haben auch nicht einfach irgendetwas formuliert, was irgendwelche Verbände vorschlagen, sondern wir beziehen uns auf § 105 des Bundesbeamtengesetzes. Man sollte sich einmal vor Augen führen, dass für Bundesbeamtinnen und Bundesbeamte heute längst genau solche Regeln, und zwar sehr klar und sehr scharf formuliert, gelten. Das weiß jede Bundesbeamtin und jeder Bundesbeamte, die oder der nach Ausübung der Beamtentätigkeit etwas anderes machen will. Von daher bitte ich Sie, sich mit unserem konkreten Vorschlag der Bezugnahme auf dieses Gesetz auch einmal in der Sache auseinanderzusetzen.\n\nWir haben nicht von Politikerinnen und Politikern geredet, die ausscheiden - das hat auch 18 Abgeordnete meiner Fraktion beim Wechsel von der 17. zur 18. Wahlperiode getroffen, die hoffentlich alle zeitnah eine neue Berufsperspektive finden -, sondern es geht um Interessenverflechtung und Interessenkonflikte, um die Ausübung einer neuen Tätigkeit von Regierungsmitgliedern sowie Staatssekretärinnen und Staatssekretären in der Wirtschaft. Da bitte ich Sie, dann auch einmal präzise zu sein und dazu zu argumentieren und nicht zu fragen, ob Politikerinnen und Politiker, die hier sitzen, woanders - eventuell ehrenamtlich - tätig sein dürfen.\"\n5786,harald-ebner,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Kollegin, dass Sie meine Zwischenfrage am Ende zulassen. - Sie haben in Ihrer ganzen Rede von Ideologie gesprochen und schwarz-weiß gemalt, statt auf unseren Antrag und auf das Grundpro-blem, das wir am Anfang skizziert haben, einzugehen. Es ist das Problem des andauernden - „Höfesterben“ will ich es gar nicht erst nennen, „Strukturwandel“ schon gar nicht - Strukturbruchs, der uns allen wehtut. Er tut der Landwirtschaft weh. Ich hätte gerne eine Antwort darauf gehört. Welche Antwort haben Sie darauf? Statt permanent die Ideologienummer zu ziehen, möchte ich eine Antwort auf die Frage des Strukturwandels. Was tun Sie da politisch? In welche Richtung geht Ihr Weg?\"\n7351,norbert-muller,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Zuschauerinnen und Zuschauer auf den Tribünen! Die Koalition hat sich seit der ersten Lesung des Antrages auf Sicherstellung der Aufarbeitung von sexuellem Kindesmissbrauch leider nicht bewegt. Die berechtigten Forderungen und Kritiken aus den Verbänden, vom Unabhängigen Beauftragten zur Aufarbeitung des sexuellen Missbrauchs und die Hinweise der gemeinsam agierenden Opposition aus Grünen und Linken wurden von Ihnen schlicht ignoriert. Mit dem hier vorliegenden Antrag schaffen Sie einen zahnlosen Tiger. Das Traurige ist: Das wissen Sie auch. Es wurde Ihnen oft genug gesagt.\n\nSie bleiben weit unter Ihren Möglichkeiten. Da Sie sich guten Argumenten verweigern, lässt das den Schluss zu, dass Sie keine vollumfassende Aufklärung wollen, jedenfalls keine, die besonders auffällt, und das müssen Sie am Ende auch verantworten.\n\nIch erkläre Ihnen gern noch einmal, warum Sie mit diesem Antrag einen Fehler begehen und warum Linke und Grüne einen eigenen gemeinsamen Antrag einbringen mussten. Aufklärung sexuellen Kindesmissbrauchs erfordert Überparteilichkeit und Unabhängigkeit, und hierfür bedarf es einer gesetzlichen Grundlage.\n\nOrganisationen, in denen sich Täterinnen und Täter - es waren überwiegend Täter - manchmal über Jahrzehnte ungehindert bewegen konnten, stoßen bei der Aufklärung von innen heraus selbst bei bestem Willen - auch das haben wir erlebt - schnell an ihre Grenzen. Sie neigen zu Verzögerungen und zu Vertuschungen. Das haben wir bei den Kirchen gesehen, die mehrere Anläufe gebraucht haben - nicht nur in Deutschland -, oder bei der Odenwaldschule. Aufklärung muss ab einem bestimmten Härtegrad unabhängig geschehen, und das geht eben nur von außen.\n\nDie Koalition hat die Kooperationsangebote von Linken und Grünen ausgeschlagen - wir haben sie im Februar nochmals unterbreitet - und damit die Chance vertan, eine parteiübergreifende Position zusammen mit dem Unabhängigen Beauftragten zu suchen und zu finden. Wir bedauern das. Wir wollen den Aufklärern der Kommission echte Ermittlungsinstrumente an die Hand geben: Akteneinsicht und das Recht zur Vorladung von Zeugen. Wir sehen, dass Täter in betroffenen Organisationen sich der internen Anhörung in der Vergangenheit verweigert haben. Wenn die Aufarbeitungskommission klare Ermittlungskompetenzen bekäme - das geht nur mit einer gesetzlichen Grundlage -, könnten sich Zeugen nicht mehr so leicht entziehen.\n\nDer CDU/CSU und der SPD geht es um eine billige Variante der Aufklärung - billig im doppelten Wortsinn: Es soll möglichst wenig kosten - das merken wir jetzt bei dem Verschiebebahnhof in der Frage, von welchem Ministerium wie viel Geld kommt; stattdessen sollten Sie nach einem halben Jahr der Diskussion darüber, wie die finanziellen Grundlagen sichergestellt werden sollen, endlich einen konkreten Vorschlag auf den Tisch legen -, und die Ergebnisse sollen auch bitte nicht zu unbequem werden. Eine Aufarbeitungskommission muss aber unbequem sein, auch wenn uns das in Einzelfällen möglicherweise nicht gefällt.\n\nDafür darf auf keinen Fall Zeit- und Legitimationsdruck aufgebaut werden, gerade dann, wenn der Politik nahestehende Institutionen betroffen sind. Deshalb ist es erforderlich, die Aufarbeitungskommission auf eine gesetzliche Grundlage zu stellen und sie unbefristet arbeiten zu lassen. Ich begrüße den Vorschlag, auch die Amtszeit des Unabhängigen Beauftragten nicht irgendwann zu beenden, nach einem Bericht, sondern die Institution unbefristet arbeiten zu lassen. Das ist, finde ich, eine gute Idee. Aber warum sollte man ausgerechnet die Aufarbeitungskommission, Kollegin Rüthrich, befristen? Dafür gibt es überhaupt keinen sachlichen Grund.\n\nAufklärung geht nur umfassend. Hierfür ist eine zusätzliche, langfristige und angemessene Finanzierung vonnöten. Klar ist auch: Das Thema darf bei den anstehenden Haushaltsverhandlungen nicht der schwarzen Null untergeordnet werden. Hier darf es kein Geschacher um die eine oder andere Million geben.\n\nDen Umgang der Koalition mit uns Linken, aber auch mit den Grünen und dem Unabhängigen Beauftragten halte ich für einen unfreundlichen und unkollegialen Akt. Uns wurde an einem Mittwochabend im Januar ein substanzloser Antrag vorgelegt, der schon kurz darauf im Plenum verhandelt wurde. Das mag im parlamentarischen Verfahren völlig üblich sein - das machen alle Fraktionen im Parlament; das ist nicht ungewöhnlich -, aber bei dem gemeinsam formulierten Willen, sexuellen Missbrauch aufzuklären und Missbrauchsstrukturen in der Gesellschaft aufzudecken - dieser Wille ist im Januar von allen Rednern formuliert worden -, ist es völlig unangemessen, so ein eigenbrötlerisches Vorgehen durchzuziehen.\n\nIch halte das insbesondere gegenüber den Opfern für einen Affront.\n\nEigentlich wäre es angemessen, diesen dünnen Antrag aus den genannten Gründen abzulehnen. Aber das werden wir aus Respekt vor den Opfern und aus Respekt vor der herausragenden Arbeit von Herrn Rörig und seinen Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern - ich finde es übrigens sehr gut, dass sie auch heute wieder hier sind - nicht machen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Sie müssen sich darüber im Klaren sein, dass die heutige Debatte von einer breiten interessierten Öffentlichkeit aus engagierten Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern, Pädagoginnen und Pädagogen und vor allen Dingen von Opfern sexuellen Missbrauchs verfolgt wird. Sie sollten sich bewusst machen, dass diese Menschen zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass der hier von der Koalition vorgelegte Antrag, dieser Beschluss, einen bitteren Beigeschmack verursacht.\n\nIch kann mich des Gefühls nicht erwehren, dass der erklärte Wille zur Aufklärung - ich habe es auszuführen versucht - nicht so umfassend ernst gemeint ist, wie wir uns das gewünscht hätten. Also überzeugen Sie uns vom Gegenteil! Lassen Sie Ihren Worten Taten folgen, damit der Schleier des Verschweigens und Vergessens von sexuellem Kindesmissbrauch sich nicht wieder ausbreitet. Vielleicht versuchen Sie es in Zukunft wieder, wie in der Vergangenheit bereits geübt, fraktionsübergreifend im Deutschen Bundestag.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5880,christoph-bergner,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Der Frühjahrsrat der Europäischen Union findet zu einem Zeitpunkt statt, zu dem wir in diesem Parlament in den Ausschüssen die Ratifikation der Assoziierungsabkommen mit Georgien, der Republik Moldau und der Ukraine beraten und beschließen. Aus diesem Grunde möchte auch ich die Aufmerksamkeit noch einmal auf diesen Tagesordnungspunkt der Ratssitzung lenken und die damit verbundenen Fragen erörtern. Dabei bin ich der Bundeskanzlerin sehr dankbar, dass sie heute in ihrer Regierungserklärung im Hinblick auf die völkerrechtswidrige Annexion der Krim, aber auch im Hinblick auf das Infragestellen der Integrität der Ukraine durch die Aktivitäten der Separatisten im Donbass klare Worte der Bewertung gefunden hat. Ich glaube, dass so klare Bewertungen Voraussetzung für erfolgreiche Politik in der Sache sind. Ich hoffe, dass es nun auch auf der Ratssitzung gelingt, die unter großem diplomatischem Aufwand erzielten Vereinbarungen von Minsk entsprechend zu begleiten und ihre Durchsetzung zu unterstützen. Das heißt vor allem, dass alle Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Union einen unauflösbaren Zusammenhang sehen zwischen der Aufrechterhaltung der Sanktionen auf der einen Seite und einer vollständigen Umsetzung des Minsker Abkommens auf der anderen Seite.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, bei all diesen Dingen, die wichtig sind - auch bei der Notwendigkeit einer Deeskalation der militärischen Konfliktlage -, sollten wir immer wieder betonen, dass die europäische Nachbarschaftspolitik und damit auch die Östliche Partnerschaft ein Instrument der Friedenskonsolidierung ist.\n\nFrau Wagenknecht, ich habe mich nach Ihrer Rede bemüßigt gefühlt, den Artikel 8 des Vertrages von Lissabon, auf dem unsere Nachbarschaftspolitik beruht, noch einmal auszudrucken, und ich will ihn hier verlesen:\n\nDie Union entwickelt besondere Beziehungen zu den Ländern in ihrer Nachbarschaft, um einen Raum des Wohlstands und der guten Nachbarschaft zu schaffen, der auf den Werten der Union aufbaut und sich durch enge, friedliche Beziehungen auf der Grundlage der Zusammenarbeit auszeichnet.\n\nFrau Wagenknecht, es gehört schon eine große Portion demagogischer Hemmungslosigkeit dazu, dieses Anliegen in ein Aggressionskonzept des Westens umzudeuten.\n\nDies sollten wir Frau Wagenknecht nicht durchgehen lassen, und das sollten wir aber auch Putin nicht durchgehen lassen, der mit seiner Politik - es geht um militärische und sicherheitspolitische Fragen - unserem nachbarschaftspolitischen Anliegen immer wieder begegnet.\n\nUm das Konzept der Friedenskonsolidierung wirklich zur Geltung zu bringen, scheinen mir einige Überlegungen wichtig:\n\nErstens. Wenn wir in der nächsten Woche die Asso-ziierungsabkommen mit Georgien und der Republik Moldau ratifiziert haben, dann sollten wir darangehen, diese Vereinbarungen auch konsequent umzusetzen. Dies sind wir diesen Völkern und Staaten schuldig, aber dies ist auch im Interesse unserer eigentlichen Intention.\n\nZweitens. Wir sollten pragmatisch nach angemessenen Partnerschaftsformen mit den Programmländern suchen, die, aus welchen Gründen auch immer, kein Assoziierungsabkommen angestrebt haben: Armenien, Weißrussland und Aserbaidschan. Auch das wäre im Sinne des Artikels 8 des Lissabon-Vertrages.\n\nDrittens. Wir müssen auch deshalb ein besonderes Interesse daran haben, dass das Minsker Abkommen über die Ukraine erfolgreich umgesetzt wird, weil die Ukraine dringend die Freiräume braucht, die mit der Reduzierung der militärischen Konfrontation erst geschaffen werden können, um die notwendigen staatlichen, wirtschaftlichen und finanziellen Konsolidierungen betreiben und die Reformen mit der Konsequenz angehen zu können, die notwendig ist, um die enormen Probleme zu lösen.\n\nNein, meine Damen und Herren, wir dürfen nicht vergessen: Die Probleme im Zusammenhang mit der Östlichen Partnerschaft mit den ehemaligen Sowjetrepubliken und die Herausforderungen, die damit verbunden sind, ergeben sich nicht allein, obwohl das schwer genug ist, aus dem hegemonialen Anspruch Russlands, sondern auch aus der postkommunistischen Verfasstheit dieser Staaten, ihrer Ökonomien, ihrer Zivilgesellschaften und ihrer politischen Kulturen. Die Östliche Partnerschaft ist eine Transformationshilfe, die diese Länder von uns erwarten. Es gibt keine einfachen Lösungen, aber wir sollten uns dieser Aufgabe verpflichtet fühlen.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund sehe ich auch die Debatte um die Reform und die Überarbeitung der Östlichen Partnerschaft und der europäischen Nachbarschaftspolitik, die in den Vorlagen zum Frühjahrsrat deutlich wird. Wir sollten dabei die friedenskonsolidierende Intention unseres Artikels 8 nicht infrage stellen, sondern uns fragen, wie sie gestärkt werden kann. Dies bedeutet, dass das Prinzip „More for more“ zukünftig nicht in starren Forderungskatalogen und abstrakten Pflichtenheften abgearbeitet wird, sondern dass die Nachbarschaftspolitik statt allgemeiner Bürokratie mehr länderbezogene Diplomatie braucht,\n\nund dass auch die Länder, die unterhalb des Assoziierungsabkommens sind, angemessene Lösungsangebote und angemessene Partnerschaftsangebote bekommen werden.\n\nEinen letzten Punkt will ich kurz ansprechen, weil in diesem Zusammenhang ein Stichwort auftaucht, das ich nicht missverstanden sehen möchte. Es heißt in den Arbeitspapieren, wir sollten die Nachbarn der Nachbarn beachten; Kollege Spinrath sprach von der Einbeziehung der russischen Interessen. Meine Damen und Herren, es ist selbstverständlich, dass wir uns bemühen, wieder eine EU-Russland-Partnerschaft aufzubauen. Aber es wäre ein Widerspruch zur Schlussakte von Helsinki, wenn wir die Art unserer Partnerschaft mit Nachbarstaaten Russlands von der vorherigen Zustimmung Russlands abhängig machten. So kann „Nachbarn von Nachbarn“ nicht verstanden werden. Darüber sollten wir uns klar sein. - In diesem Sinne wünsche ich der Bundeskanzlerin ein herzliches Glückauf für die Ratstagung.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n10978,katja-keul,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Samenspende ist ein seit über vier Jahrzehnten praktiziertes Verfahren. Tausende von Familien sind auf diesem Wege gegründet worden. Dennoch fehlt es bis heute an einer gesetzlichen Regelung und damit an einer rechtlichen Absicherung aller Beteiligten. Mit unserem heutigen Antrag machen wir konkrete Vorschläge für eine solche gesetzliche Regelung. Im Zentrum unserer Überlegungen stehen zunächst einmal die Interessen des durch die Samenspende entstandenen Kindes, das aufgrund der Rechtsunsicherheit noch immer vor der Schwierigkeit steht, die erforderlichen Informationen über seine Abstammung zu erhalten. Seit Jahren ist unbestritten, dass die Kenntnis der eigenen Abstammung zentral bei der eigenen Identitätsfindung sein kann und die Unkenntnis zu gravierenden psychologischen Belastungen führen kann. Deswegen ist eine anonyme Samenspende auch nicht zulässig. Klar ist auch, dass nicht jede oder jeder diese Kenntnis haben will oder haben muss. Aber denjenigen, für die es wichtig ist, müssen wir zur Durchsetzung ihres Anspruches verhelfen.\n\nDas Verfassungsgericht hat seit den 80er-Jahren mehrfach klargestellt, dass die Kinder einen verfassungsrechtlich geschützten Anspruch auf Auskunft gegenüber ihren Eltern haben. Was sie bisher nicht haben, ist ein Anspruch gegen einen Dritten auf Durchführung eines Vaterschaftsfeststellungsverfahrens. Der einzige rechtliche Weg liegt bislang in der Anfechtung ihres rechtlichen Vaters und der Geltendmachung von Ansprüchen gegen den vermutlichen biologischen Vater, soweit bekannt. Genau dort liegt das Problem.\n\nDas Recht der Kinder auf Anfechtung der Vaterschaft kontrahiert deren Anspruch auf Auskunft über ihre Abstammung. So müssen die Samenbanken zwar gewisse Daten vorhalten; in der Praxis machen sie aber alles, um aus ihrer Sicht ihre Kunden zu schützen und ihr Geschäftsmodell zu erhalten. Es gibt daher einen sehr unterschiedlichen Umgang mit den Auskunftspflichten gegenüber den Kindern, bis hin zur gezielten praktischen Verhinderung. Dabei geht es den Kindern so gut wie nie um die Durchsetzung von Unterhaltsansprüchen oder Erbansprüchen gegen den Samenspender, sondern schlicht um die Kenntnis ihrer Abstammung.\n\nWas also tun? Wie können wir gleichzeitig Rechtssicherheit für die Spenderkinder, Wunscheltern und Spender schaffen? Unser Vorschlag:\n\nAls Allererstes sollte der bislang verfassungsrechtlich unbestrittene Auskunftsanspruch der Kinder gesetzlich verankert werden, auch gegenüber den Samenbanken.\n\nAls Zweites sollte es schon vor der Zeugung möglich werden, in einer Elternschaftsvereinbarung die rechtliche Elternschaft des Wunschvaters vertraglich und verbindlich zu regeln. Das schafft nicht nur Sicherheit bei Spenden über Samenbanken, sondern gerade auch bei sogenannten vertraulichen Spenden im privaten Umfeld, vor allen Dingen, wenn die Eltern nicht verheiratet sind.\n\nDiese Vereinbarung sollte beim Jugendamt protokolliert und mit einer entsprechenden Belehrung über den zukünftigen Umgang mit dem Auskunftsrecht gegenüber dem Kinde zu dessen Wohl verbunden sein.\n\nDrittens müssen wir künftig dem Kind einen gesetzlichen Weg verschaffen, die biologische Vaterschaft des Spenders feststellen zu lassen, ohne dabei die rechtliche Vaterschaft infrage zu stellen.\n\nEine solche gerichtlich festgestellte biologische Vaterschaft ohne Statusänderung haben wir bereits vor einigen Jahren ins Gesetz eingeführt, als es um die Durchsetzung von Umgangsrechten des biologischen Vaters ging. Es handelt sich also nicht um eine völlig neue Konstruktion. Nur wenn dem Kind ein solcher Weg zur Verfügung steht, ist es verfassungsrechtlich vertretbar, im Gegenzug das Anfechtungsrecht des Kindes gegenüber dem rechtlichen Vater mittels einer Elternschaftsvereinbarung auszuschließen. Im Ergebnis wirkt die Elternschaftsvereinbarung wie eine Adoption, bei der das Kind ebenfalls kein Anfechtungsrecht erhält.\n\nNach diversen Gesprächen im Vorfeld mit den Verbänden sowohl der Eltern als auch der Kinder kann ich Ihnen sagen, dass der Ausgleich der durchaus gegenläufigen Interessen alles andere als banal ist. Die Eltern wünschen keinen zusätzlichen Druck hinsichtlich der Aufklärung ihrer Kinder durch einen Eintrag im Geburtenregister, während die Spenderkinder ins Feld führen, dass die Aufklärungsrate mit geschätzten 10 Prozent nach wie vor viel zu niedrig sei. Auf der anderen Seite wollen die Spenderkinder gern an ihrem Anfechtungsrecht gegenüber dem rechtlichen Vater festhalten, was aber die Rechtsunsicherheit aufseiten der Spender nicht aufheben würde.\n\nIch glaube, dass unser Vorschlag das ausgewogene Ergebnis eines Abwägungsprozesses zwischen Auskunftsanspruch auf der einen Seite und Anfechtungsrecht auf der anderen Seite ist. Ich bin gespannt auf die weiteren Beratungen und die entsprechenden Vorschläge der Regierungsseite.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Kollegin, dass Sie die Zwischenfrage zulassen. Es ist erfreulich, dass es eine Kommission aus Juristen und Medizinern gibt, die sich damit beschäftigt. Ich frage Sie: Sind denn die Vereine der Wunscheltern und der Verein Spenderkinder an diesem Prozess beteiligt, und wenn nein, warum nicht?\"\n2590,andreas-lammel,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Als Vorwort ist festzustellen: Der Haushaltsplan des Bundesministeriums für Wirtschaft und Energie ist auch 2014 solide finanziert. Er setzt auf Investitionen und Innovationen. Insofern steht er in der Kontinuität der letzten Jahre. Wir alle können diesem Haushalt mit gutem Gewissen zustimmen.\n\nNun wurde in der Diskussion um diesen Haushalt immer wieder das Thema Luft- und Raumfahrt erwähnt, das einen großen Teil der Ausgaben für Forschung und Technologie subsumiert. Natürlich muss man sagen: Das Bundeswirtschaftsministerium ist kein Luft- und Raumfahrtministerium. Deswegen muss man sehen, dass die Ausgewogenheit bei der Technologieförderung gewahrt bleibt; denn es gibt weitere Technologiefelder, die genauso innovativ und genauso wichtig für die Zukunft unseres Landes sind.\n\nEs hat auf der europäischen Ebene im letzten Jahr Empfehlungen der „High-Level Group“ zur Weiterentwicklung der Schlüsseltechnologien gegeben, also der Mikroelektronik, der Nanotechnologien und zweier weiterer Technologien. Man kann anhand der Mikroelektronik sehen, dass in Europa 200 000 Arbeitsplätze direkt an dieser Branche hängen und knapp 1 Million Arbeitsplätze indirekt mit ihr verbunden sind.\n\nDie IT-Industrie und die Forschung und Entwicklung in diesem Bereich gewinnen immer mehr an Bedeutung. Das hängt ganz einfach mit der nächsten industriellen Revolution zusammen, wenn ich es einmal so sagen darf, die vor der Türe steht. Das ist die sogenannte Industrie 4.0, wie sie heute modern wie beim Internet bezeichnet wird.\n\nWenn man einen Blick zurück wirft, erkennt man, dass die Industrie 3.0 ein technologischer Schritt gewesen ist, bei dem es um die Digitalisierung der Industrie und um den Einsatz von Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologien ging. Diese Entwicklung hat Europa im Wesentlichen verschlafen. Die Folgen davon sind jetzt, dass die Amerikaner und die Asiaten mit ihren übermächtigen Konzernen die Märkte dominieren. Beim Eintritt in die Industrie 4.0 haben wir jetzt die große Chance, dass Europa und damit Deutschland an der Spitze mitmarschieren. Diese Chance müssen wir ergreifen. Letztendlich geht es darum, den Kampf um die industrielle Produktion im 21. Jahrhundert zu gewinnen.\n\nDas wurde auch von der Bundesregierung frühzeitig erkannt. Man muss dafür nur einen Blick in die Hightech-Strategie werfen, die schon vor Jahren entworfen wurde. Darin kann man sehen, dass Deutschland zum Leitmarkt für internetbasierte Technologien für die industrielle Produktion - das ist praktisch der Schritt in die Industrie 4.0 - werden soll. Diese Industrie 4.0 ist eben nicht mehr nur Sache des Wirtschaftsministeriums, sondern das ist mittlerweile zur Querschnittsaufgabe der ganzen Bundesregierung geworden. Es geht letztlich um die Vernetzung der Industrie. Dafür braucht man den Breitbandausbau. Man braucht schnelle und leistungsfähige Netze, um den Schritt zur Industrie 4.0 zu ermöglichen, einen entsprechenden Rechtsrahmen und einen hohen Standard in den Informationstechnologien. Dies alles können wir in Deutschland und in Europa gut.\n\nDas Bundeswirtschaftsministerium hat schon auf diese technologische Entwicklung reagiert. Vielleicht ist das den Grünen entgangen, sonst wären sie sicherlich darauf eingegangen. Es gibt ein neues Förderprogramm, das sich „Autonomik für Industrie 4.0“ nennt. Normale Bürger verstehen die Begriffe aus der Industrie 4.0 wahrscheinlich nicht; man muss deshalb eine Übersetzung mitliefern. Bei dem Programm Autonomik 4.0 geht es genau darum, den Weg in die Industrie 4.0 zu beschreiten. Es sind schon 14 Verbundprojekte aus diesem neuen Förderprogramm genehmigt worden. Seitens des Bundeswirtschaftsministeriums werden 40 Millionen Euro bereitgestellt, um diese Projekte voranzubringen. Weitere 40 Millionen müssen übrigens die Industriepartner selbst dafür aufbringen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, was ist die nächste industrielle Revolution, an der wir gemeinsam arbeiten? Das ist im Prinzip ein Verbund aus intelligenten Komponenten. Früher hat die Maschine gedacht. In der Industrie 4.0 denkt nicht nur die Maschine, sondern es denkt sozusagen auch das Werkstück mit: Es gibt Befehle, wie es bearbeitet werden möchte und was daraus entstehen soll.\n\nWenn wir als Politiker angehalten sind, mittel- und langfristig zu denken, heißt das für uns: Industrie 4.0 muss in den nächsten Jahren im Mittelpunkt unserer Überlegungen stehen. Deswegen finde ich es zum Beispiel gut, dass das Bundesforschungsministerium nächste Woche eine erste Mikroelektronikstrategie für Deutschland in Brüssel präsentieren wird. Das ist aus meiner Sicht ein erster Schritt in diese Richtung. Ich denke, Herr Minister, wir werden in den nächsten Monaten darüber diskutieren müssen, wie wir in Deutschland und natürlich auch in Europa - das wird Deutschland nicht alleine leisten können - in diesen Schlüsseltechnologien zu einer Gesamtstrategie kommen können, um den Märkten in Asien und Nordamerika Paroli zu bieten.\n\nDie Energiepolitik ist ein ganz wichtiger Bereich für die Sicherung der Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der deutschen Industrie. Aber der Blick in die Zukunft, das heißt das Umsetzen von Konzepten für die Industrie 4.0, ist mindestens genauso wichtig. Denn wenn dieser Zug an uns vorbeifährt, dann müssen wir nicht mehr solche Debatten führen, weil dann die Wertschöpfung abwandern wird und die Sicherung des Wohlstands in Deutschland infrage gestellt wird.\n\nIch hoffe, dass wir nach der Verabschiedung des Haushaltes 2014 über die Eckpunkte 2015 und auch über die mittelfristige Entwicklung des Haushaltes des Bundeswirtschaftsministeriums diskutieren. Ich bin mir sicher, dass wir gemeinsam eine Strategie entwickeln, um uns den Herausforderungen stellen zu können.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5659,renate-kunast,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Das war jetzt wohl die Märchenstunde der Großen Koalition.\n\n- Ja, ich kann wahrscheinlich sagen, was ich will, es kommt immer ein „Oh!“, ein Aufstöhnen. Machen Sie das ruhig. - Ich muss wirklich sagen: Was hier erzählt wurde, entspricht nicht dem Gesetzentwurf, der vorliegt.\n\nHerr Luczak zum Beispiel hat gestern im Ausschuss und auch hier eigentlich nur über Investitionssicherheit und über das Kapital geredet, um sich dann fast in den Satz zu versteigen, das sei jetzt ein guter Tag für die Mieterinnen und Mieter.\n\nSie haben außerdem erzählt, nur durch Neubau könne das Problem gelöst werden.\n\n- Ja, natürlich. Ich höre Ihnen immer zu,\n\ndamit ich das, was Sie sagen, hinterher bewerten kann.\n\nIch sage Ihnen Folgendes: Neubau ist ein wichtiger Faktor, wenn es darum geht, für bezahlbaren Wohnraum zu sorgen. Dieser Wohnraum ist allerdings so zu gestalten, dass Otto Normalverbraucher die Mieten nachher bezahlen kann.\n\nWie Sie das gewährleisten wollen, haben Sie hier nicht dargelegt. Wo sind denn Ihre Vorgaben und die entsprechenden Kriterien, zum Beispiel beim Verkauf der BImA-Häuser in der Großgörschenstraße und der Katzlerstraße?\n\nHier hat sich der Berliner Senat erst in die Büsche geschlagen, und dann ist er zu spät aufgestanden. Wollen Sie die BImA vielleicht noch auffordern, die Mieten zu erhöhen, bevor verkauft wird? Nein, irgendwann müssen Sie sagen, wie Sie das, was Sie hier erzählen, umsetzen wollen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\n(Zuruf von der CDU/CSU: Das haben wir doch\n\ngemacht! Sie müssen schon zuhören!)\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Verglichen mit einem Schweizer Käse ist dieses Gesetz mehr Loch als Käse.\n\nDeshalb spreche ich lieber von der sogenannten Mietpreisbremse.\n\nWas kritisiere ich? Der gesamte Vorgang und die von Ihnen als produktiv bezeichneten Diskussionen haben viel zu lange gedauert. Zwar hat diese Koalition von Beginn an gesagt - man dachte, es gilt schon -, man wolle für bezahlbare Mieten sorgen, ab sofort, demnächst oder in 100 Tagen. Aber bis heute gilt diese Regelung noch immer nicht.\n\nWas ist passiert? Viele Vermieter haben die Mieten nach bisherigem Recht sicherheitshalber schon einmal kräftig erhöht. Zu Ihrer sogenannten Mietpreisbremse sagen der Deutsche Mieterbund und die Mietervereine erstens, dass Sie damit aufgrund des Zeitverlusts das Gegenteil erreicht haben, und zweitens, dass diese sogenannte Bremse kaum eine Wirkung hat; manchmal hieß es in der Anhörung im Ausschuss sogar, sie habe gar keine Wirkung. Auf die Veränderungsvorschläge dieser Verbände sind Sie überhaupt nicht eingegangen. Sie haben immer nur pro Kapital argumentiert, meine Damen und Herren. Aber unser Grundgesetz besteht nicht allein aus Artikel 14. Zu unserem Grundgesetz gehören auch alle anderen Artikel, zum Beispiel das Sozialstaatsprinzip. Zwischen den verschiedenen Zielen ist nicht hinreichend abgewogen worden.\n\nIch muss der Koalition sagen: Sie haben keine robuste Mietpreisbremse vorgelegt. Ich denke, die Befristung sollte, damit sie eine Wirkung entfaltet, für mindestens zehn Jahre gelten. Sie wollen, dass die Mietpreisbremse für Wohnungen, in denen umfassende Modernisierungsarbeiten durchgeführt werden, deren Kosten 30 Prozent vergleichbarer Neubaukosten betragen, nicht gilt. Angesichts all der Tricks, die Vermieter bei der Modernisierung anwenden können - einschließlich des Vermischens und des Hin- und Herschiebens von Sanierungs- und Instandsetzungskosten -,\n\nsage ich Ihnen: Diese Regelung wird einige Mieter hart treffen.\n\nErstvermietete Neubauwohnungen haben Sie grundsätzlich ausgenommen,\n\nstatt für sie eine Detailregelung zu treffen. Außerdem haben Sie Kriterien zur Einführung von Mietpreisbremsen in den Ländern entwickelt. Ich sage Ihnen: Was die qualifizierte Begründungspflicht angeht, sollten Sie sich einmal fragen, wie denn Ihre qualifizierte Begründung lautet, warum sich zum Beispiel bei der BImA nichts ändert.\n\nDer BImA könnten Sie andere Regeln auferlegen, und zwar solche, durch die sich der Umgang mit Stadtentwicklung und sozialen Fragen verändert. Herr Luczak, schönen Dank, dass Sie immer wieder Briefe schreiben und Ankündigungen machen. Aber geliefert haben Sie an dieser Stelle noch nie.\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Ihre sogenannte Mietpreisbremse ist allenfalls ein Bremschen. Sie haben nicht einmal ein Paket geschnürt, das auch Regelungen zum qualifizierten Mietspiegel, zum sozialen Wohnungsbau und zu einem BImA-Gesetz enthält. Außerdem würden wir es be-grüßen, wenn die Modernisierungsumlage nur 9 statt 11 Prozent betragen würde; auch die IHK meint, das würde für Investoren reichen. Sie haben noch nicht einmal die Einschränkung eingeführt, dass Modernisierungen nur dann zu dulden sind, wenn sie der Barrierefreiheit und der Energieeffizienz zugutekommen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich habe die Freude, zwischen Herrn Luczak und Herrn Maas zu reden. Ich weiß, beide werden dieses Gesetz gutreden; das ist ihre Strategie.\n\nAber aus Verbrauchersicht sage ich Ihnen: Was draufsteht, muss auch drin sein. Dieses Gesetz ist eine Mogelpackung; denn es beinhaltet keine wirkliche Bremse, sondern allenfalls ein Bremschen. Insgesamt haben Sie Ihre Hausaufgaben nicht gemacht. Darauf warten wir.\"\n9566,annette-sawade,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen aus dem südbadischen Raum der SPD-Fraktion, Elvira Drobinski-Weiß, Johannes Fechner und unsere Staatssekretärin Rita Schwarzelühr-Sutter,\n\nich danke ganz herzlich, dass Sie alle mitgemacht haben, dass ihr alle mitgemacht habt und dass wir dieses Projekt nach vorn gebracht haben. Danken möchte ich an dieser Stelle natürlich auch unserer Sprecherin der AG Verkehr, Kirsten Lühmann, die sich heftigst dafür eingesetzt hat, dass wir zu diesem Ergebnis gekommen sind.\n\n- Frau Hagedorn wird erwähnt; sie wird nachher auch noch reden, keine Sorge.\n\nLiebes Publikum auf der Tribüne, liebe IG BOHR, liebe andere Mitstreiter für dieses große Projekt, eine kleine Frage an Sie alle: Kennen Sie das Märchen vom Froschkönig oder vom eisernen Heinrich?\n\nDem eisernen Heinrich sind nämlich vor Freude über die Rückwandlung seines Chefs in einen Menschen die eisernen Bänder um sein Herz mit lautem Knall gesprungen. Ich glaube, uns allen ging es ein wenig so, als endlich diese beiden Anträge vor uns lagen, sodass wir heute darüber beschließen können.\n\nAber zurück zur Realität; denn zum Glück befinden wir uns nicht im Märchenland, sondern in der Realität der Umsetzung eines wichtigen Verkehrsprojektes. Im letzten Jahr stand ich mit meinem Kollegen Johannes Fechner in Herbolzheim. Für die geografisch in Baden-Württemberg nicht so ganz Fitten: Das ist ein schönes Städtchen an der Rheintalbahnstrecke im südlichen, badischen Teil von Baden-Württemberg. Ich stand aber nicht nur einfach da, sondern ganz hoch oben auf einer Feuerwehrleiter. Diesen technischen Aufwand haben der Bürgermeister und die Anwohner extra für mich inszeniert, weil sie mir zeigen wollten, wie hoch die Lärmschutzwände für einen absoluten Lärmschutz sein müssten, wenn die Gleise 3 und 4 der Rheintalbahn für den Güterverkehr gebaut werden. Deshalb freue ich mich umso mehr, dass ich heute hier vor Ihnen allen stehe und nicht auf einer Feuerwehrleiter und zu diesem wichtigen Projekt reden darf.\n\nWir halten ein Ergebnis in den Händen, an dem sehr viele beteiligt waren. Bei diesen vielen möchte ich mich ausdrücklich bedanken; denn ohne sie, ohne die Bürgerinitiativen und ohne die zahlreichen Gespräche - hier schließe ich meine Kollegen in den einzelnen Fraktionen mit ein -, ohne zahlreiche Kompromisse, Verhandlungen und Schulterschlüsse wären der Beschluss des Projektbeirates und in Folge diese Anträge nicht zustande gekommen.\n\n- Herr Strobl, dass das klar ist: Das geht alles zulasten meiner Redezeit.\n\nEs geht beim Ausbau der Rheintalbahn natürlich um viel Geld; aber es geht noch um etwas ganz Entscheidendes: Es geht darum, dass wir jetzt und in Zukunft eine neue Nachhaltigkeit in der Verkehrspolitik wollen. Ich spreche als Verkehrspolitikerin zu Ihnen, und ich habe sehr konkrete Vorstellungen von nachhaltiger Politik im Verkehrsbereich. Ich meine damit: im Prozess mehr Bürgerbeteiligung in betroffenen Regionen und im Ergebnis dadurch mehr Schutz für Mensch und Umwelt.\n\nEin Kernanliegen der Politik - von uns im Koalitionsvertrag auch so beschlossen - ist: Ja, wir wollen mehr Güter und Verkehr auf die Schiene bekommen. Und wer würde sich einem Lärmschutz, der diesen Namen auch verdient, entgegenstellen? Genau an diesem Punkt, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, müssen wir das Paradoxon auflösen. Mehr Züge machen mehr Lärm. Also brauchen wir auch mehr Lärmschutz.\n\nWir wollen nicht, dass wichtige Verkehrsprojekte ohne Rückhalt und Akzeptanz aus der Bevölkerung umgesetzt werden.\n\nBeim Ausbau der Rheintalbahn, um den es im ersten Antrag geht, sollen die Anwohnerinnen und Anwohner Lärmschutz über das gesetzliche Maß hinaus erhalten. Das heißt im Klartext: nicht nur Lärmschutz, wie gesetzlich vorgeschrieben, sondern darüber hinaus. Wir stellen in diesem Fall die haushaltsrechtlichen Vorgaben zur Wirtschaftlichkeit, wie es auf Amtsdeutsch so schön heißt, zurück. Das grün-rote Kabinett und der Landtag von Baden-Württemberg haben bereits am 1. Dezember den Landesbeitrag für die erhöhten Lärmschutzkosten in Höhe von circa 280 Millionen Euro beschlossen.\n\nNun stehen wir als Bund in der Pflicht.\n\nEs ist festzuhalten: Die Rheintalbahnstrecke gehört zu den transeuropäischen Netzen, den TEN. Deutschland ist wirtschaftlich stark - der Wirtschaftsminister hat es heute Morgen in seiner Rede betont -, und es ist ein Transitland: sechs Korridore von insgesamt neun TEN-Strecken durchkreuzen unser Land. Es muss doch in unser aller Interesse sein, diese Strecken einerseits auszubauen, andererseits aber die unmittelbar Betroffenen nicht mit dem verstärkten Verkehrslärm alleinzulassen.\n\nJa, ich bin gleich fertig.\n\nWir dürfen gerade in der Verkehrspolitik das große Ganze nicht aus den Augen verlieren. Es geht hier nicht um einzelne autarke Baustellen und Projekte. Nein, wir brauchen ein funktionierendes Netz, und dafür brauchen wir ein Gesamtkonzept und vorausschauendes Denken.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich die Worte der IG BOHR aus dem Jahr 2008 aufgreifen - ich zitiere -:\n\nAn ALLE, die sich angesprochen fühlen, geht dafür\n\n- für diese Zusammenarbeit -\n\nein herzliches Dankeschön! Dank für Ihre Geduld und den Zeitaufwand, Dank für Ihre Offenheit und Ihr Vertrauen. Und als Fortsetzung wünschen wir uns: Mögen Sie uns bis zu einem erfolgreichen Abschluss in Berlin begleiten!\n\nJa, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, liebe Mitstreiterinnen und Mitstreiter, es sind Jahre vergangen; aber wir haben es geschafft. Nun schließen wir erfolgreich ab und unterstützen eine rasche Umsetzung.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13525,thomas-lutze,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Dass der Minister natürlich voll des Lobes über die wirtschaftliche Situation der Bundesrepublik ist, verwundert nicht. Die Zahlen hören sich zuerst einmal gut an. Aber er hat auch richtigerweise gesagt, dass Euphorie nicht angebracht ist. Die Probleme Binnennachfrage und Exportüberschüsse wurden bereits von mehreren Rednern angesprochen, allerdings unterschiedlich bewertet. Wir sagen ganz deutlich: Wer seine eigene Wirtschaft so einseitig auf den Export ausrichtet und die reine Wachstumslogik propagiert, kann ein böses Erwachen erleben, nämlich dann, wenn sich die politische Großwetterlage verändert. Genau das passiert gerade. Weil Deutschland so abhängig vom Welthandel ist, müsste die Bundesregierung viel mehr dafür tun, ihn fairer und damit stabiler zu gestalten.\n\nGlobaler Austausch von Waren und Dienstleistungen muss fair, sozial gerecht und umweltpolitisch verantwortlich gestaltet werden.\n\nDie riesigen Überschüsse im innereuropäischen Handel haben ganze Volkswirtschaften in Europa an den Rand des Ruins geführt. Es gibt nämlich keine Überschüsse ohne entsprechende Defizite auf der anderen Seite. Jahrzehntelang haben wir unseren Nachbarn mehr verkauft, als sie uns verkauft haben. Damit zum Beispiel die Länder Südeuropas unsere Produkte kaufen, leihen wir ihnen auch noch das Geld, damit sie diese Produkte und Dienstleistungen bezahlen können. Was passiert, wenn sie ihre Kredite und Zinsen nicht mehr zahlen können? Dann diktieren wir ihnen unter unseren Bedingungen die Sanierung ihrer Haushalte. Die Folgen sind dramatischer Sozialabbau und Massenarbeitslosigkeit in vielen Ländern Südeuropas. Übrigens stand der zukünftige SPD-Boss Schulz in der ersten Reihe der Befürworter einer solchen Politik.\n\nAuch hierzulande haben viele Menschen und ganze Regionen Angst davor, von der aktuellen positiven Wohlstandsentwicklung abgehängt zu werden. Die Zahl der Langzeitarbeitslosen, die in der Statistik gar nicht mehr auftauchen, steigt. 2016 war auch ein Rekordjahr für Leiharbeit und befristete Beschäftigung. Die Quote derer, die akut von Armut bedroht sind, steigt. Das ist eine politische, eine wirtschaftliche und eine sozialpolitische Entwicklung, die dringend korrigiert werden muss.\n\nDie Bundesrepublik muss aber endlich auch mehr für den Schutz bestimmter Branchen unternehmen. Die einheimische Stahlindustrie zum Beispiel konkurriert unter verschärften Bedingungen mit der chinesischen Stahlindustrie. Diese hat derzeit weit schwächere Umweltauflagen, und viele Produkte werden de facto vom chinesischen Staat subventioniert. Wollen wir diesen industriellen Kern in Deutschland in unserer Wirtschaft erhalten, dann müssen wir handeln und dürfen nicht nur über die Probleme reden.\n\nWenn ich von meiner Heimatstadt Saarbrücken aus 20 Kilometer nach Norden fahre, dann sehe ich Hütten, Stahlwerke, Walzwerke, Maschinenbau- und Fahrzeugindustrie und viele Zulieferer. Hier arbeiten Zehntausende Menschen zu guten tariflichen Bedingungen. Fahre ich aber 20 Kilometer von Saarbrücken aus nach Westen, dann sehe ich im benachbarten Frankreich die verrosteten Überreste einer untergegangenen Epoche. Im Gegensatz zu Ostdeutschland war hier noch nicht einmal das Geld vorhanden, um das Alte wenigstens wegzuräumen.\n\nViele Menschen in unserem Land haben Ängste, die es ernst zu nehmen gilt. Die Rattenfänger auf der ganz rechten Seite haben hier leichtes Spiel, wenn nichts oder zu wenig passiert. Überall gingen industrielle Kerne verloren, weil man tatenlos zugesehen hat, wie sich die Märkte weltweit veränderten. Es ist die Aufgabe der Politik, einzugreifen, und zwar im Interesse der Beschäftigten und der kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen.\n\nDabei muss man auch den Mut haben, den Weg der reinen Lehre des Neoliberalismus und des Freihandels - es gibt nämlich wirklich einen Unterschied, Herr Lämmel, zwischen Freihandel und fairem Handel - zu verlassen. Ansonsten sitzen dort drüben - nicht auf der Bank der Bundesregierung, sondern ganz rechts - demnächst Typen, die hier keiner haben will. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, denken Sie wenigstens einmal darüber nach.\n\nVielen Dank. Glück auf!\"\n9239,dagmar-schmidt,\"Sehr geehrte Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen und liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Fraktion Die Linke! Niemand bestreitet, dass das Rentenniveau in der von Ihnen beschriebenen Weise sinken wird. Das hat bisher niemand getan.\n\nDas Rentenniveau sinkt auch nicht erst, wie gerne und auch dieses Mal wieder von Ihnen behauptet, seit Gerhard Schröders Kanzlerschaft, sondern bereits seit Anfang der 80er-Jahre. Dass es nicht endlos weitersinken kann, ist auch klar. Ich glaube, alle Fraktionen - nicht nur Sie - beschäftigen sich mit dieser Frage.\n\nWenn wir aber sagen, dass das Rentenniveau sinkt, dann meinen wir das theoretische Modell mit dem sogenannten Eckrentner. Die Wahrheit über die reale soziale Lage der Rentnerinnen und Rentner in Deutschland erzählt uns der Eckrentner aber nicht; denn seine Erwerbsbiografie gibt es nicht. 45 Jahre Vollzeit und Durchschnittsverdienst, das ist ein zutiefst hypothetisches Arbeitsleben. Einige arbeiten länger. Viele schaffen keine 45 Jahre. Manche verdienen mehr, andere weniger. So ist das nun einmal mit dem Durchschnitt.\n\nDas Standardrentenniveau kennzeichnet als statistische Maßzahl die relative Einkommensposition der Rentnerinnen und Rentner im Vergleich zu den Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern. Es sagt uns aber nichts über die realen Altersrenten realistischer und tatsächlicher Erwerbsbiografien. Diese sehen anders aus. Denn zur ganzen Wahrheit der Rente gehört: Schlechte Löhne führen zu schlechten Renten. Deswegen haben wir den Mindestlohn eingeführt und haben damit 4 Millionen Menschen die Löhne erhöht.\n\nDer Mindestlohn allein reicht aber nicht. Deswegen stärken wir die Tarifpartnerschaft. Das haben wir zum Beispiel getan mit der Erleichterung der Allgemeinverbindlichkeitserklärung von Tarifverträgen.\n\nWir wollen die Tarifpartnerschaft aber auch im Zuge der Regelungen von Leiharbeit und Werkverträgen stärken.\n\nKlare und starre gesetzliche Regelungen als Grundlage, aber flexible Handhabungsmöglichkeiten im Rahmen von Branchentarifverträgen, also Mindestlohn als Anstandsgrenze und starke Anreize, tarifpartnerschaftlich zu agieren, das stärkt die Löhne insgesamt.\n\nTeilzeitarbeit und kurze Erwerbsbiografien führen ebenfalls zu schlechten Renten. Wie Sie bereits gesagt haben, beschreibt das die Situation vieler Frauen. Deswegen werden wir noch in dieser Legislaturperiode das Recht auf Rückkehr von Teilzeit in Vollzeit umsetzen.\n\nWir fördern Partnerschaftlichkeit und Flexibilität bei der Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf zum Beispiel durch das Elterngeld Plus und verringern damit die Rentenlücke zwischen Männern und Frauen.\n\nGenauso führen gebrochene Erwerbsbiografien, Arbeit ohne Alterssicherung, zum Beispiel Soloselbstständigkeit, oder andere schlecht versicherte oder unversicherte selbstständige Arbeit zu schlechten Renten. Wir wollen erreichen, dass keine Erwerbstätigkeit ohne Absicherung im Alter bleibt. Das betrifft vor allem Soloselbstständige. Aber am Ende steht für uns als SPD eine Erwerbstätigenversicherung für alle, auch wenn wir das in dieser Legislaturperiode noch nicht erreichen werden.\n\nAuch Krankheit und früher Renteneintritt führen zu schlechten Renten. Deshalb haben wir im Rahmen der AG „Flexible Übergänge“ vieles beschlossen, was die Gesundheitsprävention und die Unterstützung von Menschen mit besonders schwerer Arbeit verbessert.\n\nDas alles verbessert die Basis für die Rente deutlich. Von alledem haben viele Menschen in der Vergangenheit aber noch nicht profitieren können. Deswegen verstehe ich nicht, wieso Sie in Ihrem Antrag abschätzig über unser Vorhaben der Einführung einer Solidarrente reden.\n\nDenn Sicherheit vor Altersarmut erlangt man nicht über die Anhebung des Rentenniveaus. Bei der solidarischen Lebensleistungsrente werden wir geringe Anwartschaften aufwerten. Das kann zu Anhebungen von bis zu 50 Prozent führen für diejenigen, die es am meisten brauchen. Das erreichen Sie mit Ihrer Forderung nach 53 Prozent Rentenniveau, also einer Steigerung um 11 Prozent, für alle aber nicht.\n\n- Legen Sie einmal alles vor und erklären uns dann, wie Sie das finanzieren. Dann diskutieren wir noch einmal.\n\nIch verstehe auch nicht, warum Sie in Ihrem Antrag abschätzig darüber schreiben, dass wir die betriebliche Altersversorgung stärken, verbessern und verbreitern wollen. Aber dazu wird mein Kollege Ralf Kapschack gleich noch etwas sagen.\n\nRentenpolitik ist eine dauerhafte Aufgabe. Kein Rentenkonzept dieser Welt wird auf alle Zeiten für alle eine gute Antwort geben. Unsere Gesellschaft, unsere Wirtschaft und unser Arbeitsleben verändern sich nicht nur durch die Digitalisierung. Frauen arbeiten mehr, Männer wollen weniger arbeiten. Der demografische Wandel hat seine schwierigen Auswirkungen. Genauso kann aber die Zuwanderung unsere Gesellschaft positiv beeinflussen. Wir haben viel Gutes auf den Weg gebracht. Seien Sie versichert: Genauso erfolgreich werden wir alle weiteren Herausforderungen in der Rentenpolitik annehmen.\n\n„Ein gutes Gewissen ist ein ständiges Weihnachten“, sagte Benjamin Franklin. Wir haben nicht nur ein gutes Gewissen; wir sind auch stolz auf das, was wir in den letzten zwei Jahren erreicht haben. Ich wünsche Ihnen allen ein schönes, fröhliches und vor allem ein friedliches Weihnachtsfest.\"\n1032,enak-ferlemann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Frau Kollegin, ich beantworte Ihre Frage gerne wie folgt: Die Bundesregierung wird den 181-seitigen Untersuchungsbericht sorgfältig auswerten und sodann dem Ausschuss für Verkehr und digitale Infrastruktur des Deutschen Bundestages berichten, welche Folgerungen aus dem Bericht zu ziehen sind.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ich weise darauf hin, dass uns der Bericht erst am 28. Februar 2014 zugegangen ist. Daher konnte der Bericht nicht in allen Einzelheiten ausge-wertet und umgesetzt werden. Es geht dabei um komplizierteste Vorgänge im Rahmen des EU-Rechts, aber -natürlich auch der IMO und anderer mehr. Die Schlussfolgerung, die Sie erwarten, kann eine mögliche Konsequenz des Berichts sein, muss es aber nicht.\n\nFrau Kollegin, man kann sicherlich an die EMSA denken. Man kann sich auch vieles andere denken. Das, was wir vorschlagen, werden Sie unserem Bericht entnehmen können.\"\n10750,axel-troost,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Seit Jahren wissen wir von massiven Defiziten im Steuervollzug. In der Finanzverwaltung fehlen laut den Bedarfsberechnungen der Länder bis zu 16 000 Beschäftigte. Durch Personalmangel und schlechte Ausstattung wird vielerorts nur schlecht oder zeitweise gar nicht geprüft. Vor allem Gutverdiener und gewinnstarke kleinere und mittlere Unternehmen haben dadurch gute Chancen, bei ihren Steuererklärungen zu tricksen und durch schlechte Kontrollen zu wenig Steuern zu zahlen.\n\nAnscheinend nehmen gerade die reichen Bundesländer dies gerne in Kauf, um im Steuerwettbewerb mit anderen Bundesländern besonders attraktiv für Reiche und Unternehmen dazustehen.\n\nDas ist nicht nur unfair gegenüber denjenigen, die ehrlich ihre Steuern zahlen, sondern auch schlecht für das Gemeinwesen, weil Geld fehlt und die Steuermoral untergraben wird.\n\nIch weiß natürlich, dass in erster Linie die Länder für den Steuervollzug zuständig sind und nicht der Bund. Deswegen lassen sich die genannten Probleme auch nicht durch ein Bundesgesetz beheben.\n\nWir müssen sie aber trotzdem zu einem zentralen Aspekt der Verhandlungen bei den Bund-Länder-Finanzbeziehungen machen.\n\nEine gute Lösung - dabei bleiben wir - wäre eine Bundessteuerverwaltung; ein guter erster Schritt wären aber schon einheitliche Standards bei der Personalausstattung.\n\nWenn die Bundesregierung in den Verhandlungen statt auf einen einheitlichen und gerechten Steuervollzug aber lieber auf mehr Kompetenzen beim Bau von Autobahnen setzt, dann zeigt das, was ihr wichtig und was ihr nicht so wichtig ist.\n\nDie Bundesregierung verfolgt mit diesem Gesetz das Ziel, die unzureichende Personalausstattung durch den verstärkten Einsatz von Computerprogrammen zu kompensieren.\n\n- Wir kommen schon noch dazu.\n\n- Hören die doch einmal zu! Sie verstehen doch gar nichts davon.\n\nDas bisher geltende Prinzip der Gleichmäßigkeit der Besteuerung wird nun ergänzt um die Prinzipien der Wirtschaftlichkeit und Zweckmäßigkeit.\n\nDadurch wird der Vollzug der Steuergesetze noch stärker abhängig vom vorhandenen Personalbestand: Habe ich zu wenig Personal, kann ich nicht mehr eine Gleichmäßigkeit der Besteuerung durchsetzen. Unter Wirtschaftlichkeits- und Zweckmäßigkeitsaspekten nehme ich jetzt mehr Computer, habe aber keinerlei Gelegenheit mehr, das mit Personal entsprechend zu begleiten.\n\nDie Linke hält den Grundansatz des Gesetzentwurfes für verfehlt. Ein gleichmäßiger und gesetzmäßiger Steuervollzug ist nur durch den verstärkten Einsatz von Computertechnologie und durch mehr Personal zu erreichen.\n\nWir haben heute also keinen guten, sondern einen schlechten Tag, weil mit diesem Gesetz nur der verstärkte Computereinsatz und die Unterausstattung des Personals in der Steuerverwaltung zementiert werden sollen.\n\nZu kurz kommt auch die Kontrolle. Die Risikoparameter, die hier eingeführt werden, sind nicht einsehbar, sind sozusagen geheim. Wir als Gesetzgeber und die Öffentlichkeit können nicht beurteilen, wie gut und wie schnell Steuerfälle wirklich bearbeitet werden. Selbst bei der Festlegung von Mindeststandards bleibt der Bundestag außen vor. Deswegen glauben wir, dass ein Großteil des automatisch vollzogenen Steuervollzugs zu einer Blackbox wird, und das ist ein unhaltbarer Zustand.\n\nAus unserer Sicht ein weiterer Grund, den Gesetzentwurf abzulehnen: Zukünftig soll bei verspätet abgegebenen Steuererklärungen ein verpflichtender Zuschlag erhoben werden; Herr Michelbach hat das angesprochen. Zum Glück hat es eine Absenkung um die Hälfte gegeben. Aber mit 25 Euro pro Monat ist der Säumniszuschlag immer noch viel zu hoch, da er vor allen Dingen Steuerpflichtige mit niedrigen und mittleren Einkommen treffen wird.\n\nAus diesen Gründen werden wir den Gesetzentwurf - wir haben uns das lange überlegt - komplett ablehnen. Es gibt sicherlich auch positive Aspekte, beispielsweise, dass sich der Bund stärker in die Modellierung der Steuererhebung einbringen kann. Aber letztlich ist der zunehmende Computereinsatz ohne Personaleinsatz nicht zielführend und wird dazu führen, dass es um die Steuergerechtigkeit in unserem Land noch schlechter steht und der Steuervollzug nicht verbessert wird.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n9270,hermann-grohe,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich greife gleich die Bemerkung des Präsidenten auf: Ich spreche natürlich lieber von einer gemeinsamen als von einer geteilten Federführung. Es ist so, dass die Verantwortung für den Bereich der Kinderkranken- und Krankenpflege im Gesundheitsministerium und die Verantwortung für den Bereich der Altenpflege im Familienministerium liegt und zugleich die Finanzierung der zukünftigen Ausbildung wesentlich aus dem Rechtskreis der Kranken- und Pflegeversicherungen gestaltet wird. Daraus resultiert diese gemeinsame Federführung.\n\nSie wissen: In dieser Legislaturperiode haben wir sowohl mit der Krankenhausreform als auch mit den Pflegestärkungsgesetzen wichtige Schritte unternommen, um die Pflege in diesem Land zu stärken. Jetzt geht es um einen weiteren wichtigen Schritt: die Stärkung der Ausbildung und damit die Steigerung der Attraktivität der Pflegeberufe. Denn wir werden in den nächsten Jahren angesichts der wachsenden Zahl pflegebedürftiger Menschen mehr Pflegekräfte brauchen.\n\nWir haben einen Gesetzentwurf auf den Weg gebracht, der die Stärkung der Berufsausbildung in der Pflege in Form der sogenannten Generalistik vorsieht. Dabei handelt es sich um die Zusammenführung von Alten-, Kinderkranken- und Krankenpflege. Das ist etwas, was über Jahre in Modellprojekten erprobt worden ist und wiederholt von den zuständigen Fachministerkonferenzen der Länder und vielen Verbänden gefordert wurde.\n\nDie Zusammenführung trägt den Berufsanforderungen besser Rechnung, weil sich die Gesellschaft zunehmend dahin gehend verändert, dass wir etwa im Bereich der Altenpflege aufgrund wachsender Zahlen chronisch Erkrankter krankenpflegerische Kenntnisse und im Bereich der Krankenpflege aufgrund wachsender Zahlen demenziell erkrankter Patientinnen und Patienten altenpflegerisches Know-how brauchen.\n\nDiese Zusammenlegung stärkt aber auch die Attraktivität der Pflegeberufe, weil weiter gehende Aufstiegs- und Weiterentwicklungsperspektiven in den einzelnen Pflegeberufen existieren. Es gibt eine gemeinsame Grundausbildung, und es gibt einen sogenannten Vertiefungseinsatz, etwa im Bereich der Kinderkrankenpflege, in dem dann der wesentliche Teil der praktischen Ausbildung erfolgt; auch dies ist wichtig.\n\nWir waren uns mit den Ländern darin einig, dass wie bisher sowohl ein mittlerer Schulabschluss als auch ein Hauptschulabschluss mit einer besonderen Qualifikation, etwa der zehnjährigen Schulausbildung, im Rahmen der entsprechenden EU-Vorgaben zum Zugang zu dieser Ausbildung berechtigen sollen. Ergänzt - auch dies ist im Modellvorhaben erprobt - wird die große Säule der gestärkten Berufsausbildung zukünftig durch die Möglichkeit der Länder, dies durch ein Angebot an akademischer Pflegeausbildung zu ergänzen, um den Transfer der pflegewissenschaftlichen Erkenntnisse in die Pflegepraxis zu stärken, aber auch, um für besondere Leitungsaufgaben und spezialisierte Aufgaben auszubilden.\n\nDas ist ein großer Schritt, der Fragen, aber auch manche Sorgen auslöst. Wir werden - hier bin ich zuversichtlich - dies im parlamentarischen Verfahren intensiv diskutieren und gemeinsam zu guten Lösungen für alle Tätigkeitsfelder in der Pflege kommen.\n\nMit den im Bündnis für Altenpflege zusammengeschlossenen Gruppen finden regelmäßig Gespräche statt, so auch heute. Ja, es ist so: Das Gesetz benennt sehr viel klarer, als es manchmal in der Öffentlichkeit zum Ausdruck kommt, die Kompetenzen, die vermittelt werden müssen. Das steht in § 5 des Entwurfes. Aber es erfolgt dann eine Ausfächerung in eine Ausbildungsverordnung. Wir arbeiten hier unter Hochdruck an den Eckpunkten, die zum Zeitpunkt des ersten Durchlaufs durch den Bundesrat - ich schätze, das ist Anfang März - vorliegen sollen. Ich bitte um Verständnis. Wir arbeiten unter Hochdruck, aber wir wollen bei den Eckpunkten auch mehr als Überschriften liefern, die dann neue Nachfragen auslösen würden. Insofern soll es sich um eine substanzielle Beteiligung handeln.\n\nUns ist daran gelegen, parallel zur Erarbeitung dieses Gesetzentwurfes auch deutlich zu machen, in welche Richtung die Verordnung geht, die Grundlage für spätere curriculare Entwicklungen ist. Den Zeitrahmen habe ich Ihnen genannt.\n\nKollege Beermann, soweit die Sorgen hinsichtlich der Kinderkrankenpflege angesprochen wurden, erlaube ich mir den Hinweis, dass es heute keine separate Kinderkrankenpflegeausbildung über drei Ausbildungsjahre hinweg gibt, sondern diese Ausbildung in die ersten zwei Jahre der Krankenpflegeausbildung integriert ist und im dritten Ausbildungsjahr eine Differenzierung stattfindet. Wenn zukünftig gilt, dass in dem gewählten Vertiefungsbereich über die Hälfte der praktischen Ausbildung stattfindet, dann wird sich dort keine Verschlechterung ergeben.\n\nZweitens. Die Evaluierungsberichte zu den genannten Projekten, die Sie übrigens bereits im Informationsangebot des Deutschen Bundestages finden, zeigen, dass ungefähr 70 Prozent der Ausbildungsinhalte identisch sind oder sich weithin überschneiden. Auch das spricht dafür, dass es leistbar ist.\n\nIch erlaube mir den Hinweis, dass sich der Berufsverband Kinderkrankenpflege Deutschland e. V. im September für eine Integration der Kinderkrankenpflege als Spezialisierung in die generalistische Pflegeausbildung ausgesprochen hat.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ich habe darauf hingewiesen, dass der Gesetzentwurf natürlich bereits weit mehr als nur irgendeine generalistische Berufs- oder Ausbildungsbezeichnung enthält. Er enthält - wie bei allen Berufsausbildungsgesetzen üblich - eine konkrete Aufzählung der Kompetenzfelder, die entwickelt werden müssen. Es geht darum, die Dinge, die wir in der Vergangenheit im Zusammengehen mit den unterschiedlichsten Verantwortlichen der Länder im Kultusbereich, im Hochschulbereich, im Arbeits- und Sozialbereich und im Gesundheitsbereich entwickelt haben, weiterzuentwickeln und zu Beginn der Beratungen, also bevor es hier zur ersten intensiveren Beratung kommt, substanziierte Eckpunkte vorzulegen.\n\nAb dem heutigen Kabinettsbeschluss ist das Parlament Herr des Verfahrens. Das heißt, wir werden fortlaufend aus den Eckpunkten den konkreten Verordnungstext entwickeln, und wir werden weitere Gespräche mit den unterschiedlichsten Verbänden führen, auch denen, die sich jetzt kritisch eingelassen haben. Es liegt in Ihren Händen, in den Händen des Parlamentes, der parlamentarischen Mehrheit, über die Frage zu entscheiden, in welchem Stadium der Text einen Grad an Konkretheit erreicht hat, der es erlaubt, zu sagen: Ja, jetzt können wir in die zweite und dritte Lesung gehen.\n\nWir werden alsbald substanziierte Eckpunkte vorlegen.\n\nFrau Kollegin Vogler, das ist in der Tat eine der Fragen, die immer wieder gestellt werden. Wenn es um das Ziel geht, später in diesem Berufsbild zu arbeiten, geht es nicht nur um die Frage, ob für den Vertiefungseinsatz im Bereich Kinderkrankenpflege ausreichend Ausbildungskapazitäten zur Verfügung stehen. Es geht auch um diejenigen, die einen Vertiefungseinsatz in der Altenpflege oder in der allgemeinen Krankenpflege wünschen. Für diesen Teil sind im Rahmen der praktischen modularen Ausbildung nicht alleine Einsätze in Kinderkliniken vorgesehen. Vielmehr sollen diese Pflichteinsätze zur Erlernung des richtigen Umganges mit Kindern, auch mit erkrankten und behinderten Kindern, beispielsweise auch in Einrichtungen der Kinder- und Jugendhilfe angeboten werden. Auch in Ausbildungsorten jenseits der Kinderkrankenpflege wird ein entsprechender Vertiefungseinsatz angeboten.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ein Teil dieser Herausforderungen besteht unabhängig davon, ob wir die Systematik der Ausbildung ändern. Ohne Zweifel werden wir allein in der Altenpflege in den nächsten 15 Jahren 1 Million mehr Pflegebedürftige haben. Insofern werden wir einen Aufwuchs an Pflegekräften dringend benötigen und damit verbunden auch entsprechende schulische Angebote. Diese Herausforderung besteht unabhängig vom Ausbildungsmodell.\n\nWir sind davon überzeugt, dass durch die Kombination die Attraktivität erhöht werden kann. Wir unterbreiten ein akademisches Angebot, zum Beispiel für Lehrkräfte. Hinzu kommt das, was wir bereits entwickelt haben: Stärkung der Betreuungsassistenz, der Pflegehelferberuf. Jetzt kommt eine moderne Berufsausbildung im Bereich Pflege hinzu. Damit steigern wir insgesamt die Attraktivität.\n\nDas wird zu Mehrkosten führen. Im Gesetzentwurf ist von den Mehrkosten ja auch die Rede. Wir schlagen eine Fondslösung vor, die dafür sorgt, dass diejenigen, die jetzt in der Verantwortung stehen, in Verantwortung bleiben. Bei einer steigenden Zahl der Schülerinnen und Schüler - derzeit haben wir einen Ausbildungsrekord; wir hoffen, dass das so weitergeht - haben sie die Kosten entsprechend zu tragen.\n\nAuch wenn die Ausbildung verändert wird, wird die bisherige Qualifikation für die Arbeit in diesem Tätigkeitsfeld natürlich in keiner Weise entwertet. Diejenigen, die in der Alten-, der Kranken-, der Kinderkrankenpflege mit den bisherigen Abschlüssen arbeiten, werden im Rahmen ihrer Qualifikation - auf die Ausbildung folgen ja häufig Weiterbildungen und Spezialisierungen - weiterhin arbeiten können.\n\nEs wird eine Übergangszeit geben. Wenn wir dieses Gesetz 2018 einführen, werden die dann bestehenden Ausbildungsgänge selbstverständlich fortgesetzt, damit all diejenigen, die unter den Bedingungen der heutigen Rechtslage eine Ausbildung begonnen haben, sie bis zum Ende fortsetzen können. Der Gesetzentwurf sieht die Umstellung zum 1. Januar 2018 vor. Letztlich wird aber bis 2022 eine Vollendung der Ausbildung nach dem alten Modell mit den entsprechenden Ausbildungsschwerpunkten und Tätigkeitsfeldern möglich sein.\n\nHerr Kollege Henke, bei der Kinderkrankenpflege, auf deren zahlenmäßig kleineren Anteil an der Gesamtausbildung Sie hingewiesen haben, ist heute schon entscheidend, dass zwei Drittel der Ausbildung voll integriert in die Krankenpflege stattfinden. Das liegt an der großen Schnittmenge des erforderlichen Grundwissens. Für diejenigen, die in Zukunft den Vertiefungseinsatz wählen, ändert sich - einmal abgesehen von einer stärkeren Orientierung der Ausbildung in Richtung der Beschäftigung mit Kindergesundheit - insofern nichts. Wie ich gerade ausgeführt habe, müssen diejenigen, die diesen Vertiefungseinsatz wählen, wie andere auch ihre Ausbildungsstelle finden. Insofern ist es für die entsprechenden Einrichtungen durchaus attraktiv, hier werben zu können, um junge Menschen zu gewinnen.\n\nFür diejenigen, die mit dem Vertiefungseinsatzziel Altenpflege, Krankenpflege sozusagen eher im ergänzenden Bereich tätig werden, brauchen wir eine Ausweitung der Praxisorte. Das geschieht durch die Hinzuziehung der Orte der Kinder- und Jugendhilfe. In den stationären Jugendhilfeeinrichtungen finden Sie eine Fülle von Erfahrungen, die gerade mit den gesundheitlichen Bedürfnissen von Kindern und Jugendlichen zusammenhängen. Auch das sind geeignete Ausbildungsorte für diesen Teil der Praxisausbildung.\n\nEs hat dazu ja Untersuchungen gegeben, etwa zur Mindestgröße und zu anderem mehr. Wir werden in dem Prozess, den ich geschildert habe, eine Überführung gerade jener Ausbildungsorte im schulischen Bereich durchführen, die sich allein auf einen Ausbildungsgang fixiert haben. Sie werden sich verändern; das Ziel ist hier ein generalistisches Schulangebot. Gerade darüber sind wir deswegen mit den Ländern, den für die schulischen Angebote Zuständigen, aber auch mit den Anbietern entsprechender schulischer Angebote im Gespräch. Natürlich führt die generalistische Ausbildung dazu, dass sich, während die Vielfalt der Einsatzorte uneingeschränkt bleibt, der Charakter der Schulen in der breiteren Ausbildung weiterentwickelt.\n\nFrau Kollegin Wöllert, wie Kollegin Schwesig schon ausgeführt hat, gehen wir davon aus, dass mit der Stärkung der Berufsausbildung in der Pflege deutlich wird: Diese duale Berufsausbildung ist auch weiterhin das zentrale Ausbildungsangebot für die Pflege. Die Länder haben in akademischen Pilotprojekten ergänzend Pflegestudien eingeführt. Hier gibt es jetzt die Verabredung, den Ländern generell zu ermöglichen, diese anzubieten; sie entscheiden dann über den Umfang. Es gibt einen gemeinsamen Abschluss, der sicherstellen muss, dass es eine gleiche Qualifizierung gibt, auch für die praktische Arbeit in der Pflege. Diese sicherzustellen, wird Aufgabe der Studiengestaltung mit praktischen Zeiten sein.\n\nDas kennen wir ja auch aus anderen Fachberufen mit akademischem Teil, auch in Gesundheitsberufen. Auch bei Physiotherapeuten beispielsweise gibt es bereits heute neben der Berufs- und der schulischen Ausbildung eine fachhochschulspezifische Ausbildung. Diese wird vor allen Dingen im Hinblick auf die Tätigkeiten angeboten, bei denen es um den schnellen Transfer von pflegewissenschaftlichen Kenntnissen in die Pflegepraxis und andere Bereiche, etwa die Leitungsverantwortung, geht. Dann wird der Verantwortung entsprechend bezahlt. Aber zunächst wird durch die Ausbildung sichergestellt, dass die Einsatzfähigkeit in gleicher Weise unter gleichen Bedingungen in der normalen Pflege gegeben ist.\n\nFrau Kollegin Pahlmann, das ist - deswegen sind wir ja in einem so engen Diskussionsprozess mit den Ländern - natürlich auch Aufgabe der Länder. Es ist, glaube ich, nicht so, dass man sagen kann: Die kleineren Schulen sind alle im ländlichen Raum. - Zum Teil gibt es im städtischen Raum mehr Anbieter entsprechender Leistungen und damit möglicherweise auch stärker zersplitterte Angebote an kleineren Schulen. Wir brauchen insgesamt mehr Schulplätze. Deswegen ist, glaube ich, die Sorge, dass da in großem Umfang Schulen gefährdet werden, unbegründet. Aber im Hinblick auf die Stadt-Land-Verteilung der schulischen Angebote sind in besonderer Weise natürlich auch die Länder gefordert; das sage ich sehr deutlich.\n\nEs gibt heute eine Kombination von Betreuungsassistenz und Pflegehelfern. Wir haben großartige Pflegefachkräfte, die nach der Hauptschule eine Pflegehelferausbildung gemacht haben und dann unter Teilanerkennung der Leistungen eine Fachausbildung absolvieren. All dies wird weiterhin stattfinden. Ich bin davon überzeugt, dass dieser Zugang, der von europäischer Seite immer wieder in Frage gestellt wurde, sogar erleichtert und diese Regelung deswegen auch entfristet werden kann, wenn wir diese Ausbildung insgesamt stärken.\n\nHerzlichen Dank, Frau Kollegin Scharfenberg. - Zunächst einmal: Bereits heute findet nach der Grundausbildung in vielen Fällen eine Weiterbildung statt, die in der Verantwortung der Länder und der dafür zuständigen Selbstorganisationen liegt; das erwähnten Sie ja auch selber. Daran wird sich nichts ändern. Schon heute wird eine Krankenschwester - oder auch ein Krankenpfleger -, die sich nach ihrer Grundausbildung für den intensivmedizinischen Einsatz, für den Einsatz im OP, für Palliative Care oder für anderes weiterbilden will, ein solches Weiterbildungsangebot wahrnehmen, und dabei bleibt es auch.\n\nIm Übrigen: Ich habe darauf hingewiesen, dass es in den Projekten zu einer 70-prozentigen Überschneidung der Inhalte kommt, und dass die überwiegende Ausbildung im gewählten Vertiefungseinsatz stattfindet. Insofern sind die Voraussetzungen dafür, in den unterschiedlichen Tätigkeitsfeldern tätig zu werden, durchaus mit denen von heute vergleichbar.\n\nZur Entwicklung neuer Perspektiven in der Funktionspflege oder anderswo wird sich daran in der Tat in vielen Fällen eine Weiterbildung nach den bisherigen Regularien anschließen.\n\nFrau Kollegin Pantel, ich hoffe, dass ich Ihre Frage richtig verstanden habe. - Wenn ich heute ohne einen qualifizierten Hauptschulabschluss in der Altenpflege arbeite, dann werde ich zukünftig nach dem jetzigen Zugang in die Fachausbildung - so stelle ich mir Ihren Fall vor - als Pflegehelfer tätig sein. Diese Pflegehelfertätigkeit ermöglicht es bereits heute, eine Weiterbildung zu durchlaufen, und daran ändert sich nichts. Diese Weiterentwicklungsperspektive aus dem Helferberuf in den Fachkraftberuf wird es also auch weiterhin geben.\n\nIch will in einer ersten Antwort zu dem heute ohne Aussprache im Kabinett beschlossenen Gesetzentwurf etwas sagen. Für weitere Nachfragen wäre dann das BMAS - ich sehe aber gerade, dass es nicht vertreten ist - zuständig.\n\nIch gebe nur folgenden Hinweis: Es geht um eine Modernisierung im Rahmen der bisherigen Zuständigkeiten des Behindertengleichstellungsgesetzes, das an die Sprache bzw. Begrifflichkeit der UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention angepasst wird. Es geht ferner darum, dass die Barrierefreiheit in der Bundesverwaltung auch unter besonderer Stärkung des Aspekts der leichten Sprache verbessert wird. Vor allen Dingen geht es darum, dass entsprechende Fachstellen eingerichtet werden, um zu einer besseren Schlichtung zu kommen, wenn es Auseinandersetzungen gibt. Insofern wird die bisherige Rechtsmaterie durch neue Vorgaben weiterentwickelt. Daraus erklärt sich diese Fokussierung.\"\n15079,michael-gerdes,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Zuhörer! Ich habe zwar nur drei Minuten und versuche auch, sie einzuhalten, aber bevor ich zum Inhalt dieser Debatte komme, gestatten Sie mir ein Wort zur Kollegin Gabriele Lösekrug-Möller. Das war heute ihre letzte Rede hier im Haus. Wir schätzen unsere Parlamentarische Staatssekretärin für ihr diplomatisches Geschick, ihr ausgleichendes Wesen und ihre fachliche Kompetenz.\n\nLiebe Gabriele, du hast großes Einfühlungsvermögen. Das hast du uns in dieser Legislaturperiode nicht nur dadurch bewiesen, dass du Plenarreden zum Beispiel zum Teilhabebericht über die Lebenslagen von Menschen mit Beeinträchtigungen in einfacher Sprache gesprochen hast. Das war definitiv ein Highlight. Liebe Gabriele, genieße den Ruhestand und bleibe gesund! Herzlichen Dank.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, zum Thema Rentenüberleitung wird gleich die Kollegin Wolff reden. Es ist gut, dass wir heute erneut etwas für die erwerbsgeminderten Menschen tun. Wir verbessern die Leistungen, weil wir wissen, wie schwierig die finanzielle Lage derer ist, die aufgrund von Krankheit nicht mehr arbeiten können. Wir halten hier keine Wahlkampfrede. Hier geht es um jeden Euro für die Betroffenen.\n\nDie Anhörung zum vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf hat uns in unserer Meinung bestätigt, lieber Kollege Birkwald: Es ist absolut notwendig, Verbesserungen herbeizuführen. Mit der Verlängerung der Zurechnungszeiten erreichen wir laut Deutscher Rentenversicherung eine Steigerung der Rentenzahlbeträge von circa 7 Prozent. Das ist zugegebenermaßen kein großer Sprung, aber es ist ein Schritt in die richtige Richtung bzw. ein Beitrag zur sozialen Absicherung.\n\nMit der Verlängerung der Zurechnungszeiten beginnen wir bereits im nächsten Jahr. Die Koalition geht mit diesem Gesetz über die im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbarten Schritte hinaus. Das ist ein gutes Zeichen für die Betroffenen und macht Hoffnung für künftige Problemlösungen.\n\nUnsere fleißige Bundesarbeitsministerin Andrea Nahles hat in ihrem Gesamtrentenkonzept deutlich gemacht, dass der Kampf gegen Altersarmut für die SPD eine zentrale Säule der Altersversorgung ist und immer war.\n\nDie Erwerbsminderungsrente wird uns sicherlich auch in den kommenden Legislaturperioden beschäftigen, und trotz der guten Beschlüsse gibt es noch genügend Herausforderungen.\n\nIch denke dabei zum Beispiel an die Zugänge zur Erwerbsminderungsrente. Da gibt es noch deutlich zu hohe Hürden.\n\nGleiches gilt für die jetzige Trennung zwischen voller und teilweiser Erwerbsminderung, die sich an der möglichen Zahl der Arbeitsstunden orientiert. Wie sind teilweise Erwerbsgeminderte eigentlich geschützt, und haben sie überhaupt Chancen am Arbeitsmarkt?\n\nDann komme ich zum wichtigen Teil Reha. Sind die Potenziale im Rehabereich ausgeschöpft? Oder sollten die Leistungen zur Teilhabe am Arbeitsleben stärker in den Fokus rücken? Wie minimieren wir Risikofaktoren, die zur Erwerbsminderung führen? Hier lohnt sich auf jeden Fall ein vertiefender Blick.\n\nAbschließend noch ein Wort zu den Mitfahrern dieses Omnibusgesetzes. Wir verlängern die aktuelle Regelung, wonach die Aufwandsentschädigung aus kommunalen Ehrenämtern keinen Einfluss auf den Hinzuverdienst bei Alters- und Erwerbsminderungsrenten hat. Damit stärken wir das politische Ehrenamt in den Gemeinden, Städten und Kreisen. Meine Hoffnung ist, dass wir in naher Zukunft zu einer dauerhaften Lösung in dieser Frage kommen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank und Glück auf! Ich habe die drei Minuten knapp eingehalten, Frau Präsidentin.\"\n3857,oliver-krischer,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Vor wenigen Tagen hat der Weltklimarat seinen zusammenfassenden Bericht vorgelegt, der zwei zentrale Botschaften enthält.\n\nDie eine Botschaft ist: Der Klimawandel schreitet voran, und zwar viel stärker, als es die Forscher noch vor wenigen Jahren erwartet hätten. Es ist längst klar: Wir können eigentlich nicht mehr, wie es auf dem Bericht vorne draufsteht, vom Klimawandel reden, sondern wir müssen von der Klimakatastrophe sprechen.\n\nDiese Katastrophe findet nicht nur irgendwo in der Arktis statt. Sie findet ganz real auch bei uns hier in Deutschland statt. 2014 wird wahrscheinlich das Jahr werden, das als das wärmste in die Geschichte der Wetteraufzeichnung eingeht. Die sogenannten Jahrhundertfluten kommen inzwischen alle fünf Jahre, also in immer schnellerer Folge, und verursachen Milliardenschäden.\n\nDie zweite Botschaft des Weltklimarates ist positiv. Wir können, wenn wir wollen, das Schlimmste noch verhindern, wenn wir konsequent handeln, wenn die Weltgemeinschaft etwas unternimmt. Das Allerbeste ist: Sie muss dafür weniger als 0,1 Prozent des Weltbruttoinlandsprodukts, der Wertschöpfung, aufwenden, um den Klimawandel aufzuhalten. Das bietet eine riesige Chance für Entwicklung und Wohlstand auf der ganzen Welt. Diese positive Botschaft sollten wir aufgreifen.\n\nDass es bis heute noch kein globales Klimaschutzabkommen gibt, liegt daran, dass es viele nationale Egoismen gibt. Wenn wir endlich vorankommen wollen, dann braucht es Vorreiter, die die Sache in die Hand nehmen. Man kann es nicht anders sagen: Deutschland war über viele Jahre hinweg Vorreiter, angefangen - und ich hätte nicht gedacht, dass ich das hier einmal sage - bei Helmut Kohl über die rot-grüne Bundesregierung bis hin zur letzten Großen Koalition.\n\nWir erinnern uns alle daran, wie Angela Merkel und Sigmar Gabriel in schönen roten Anoraks vor Gletschern standen. Von da an ging es mit dem Klimaschutz in Deutschland nur noch bergab. Die Anoraks sind längst in der Abfallmitverbrennung in einem Braunkohlekraftwerk zu CO2 verbrannt worden; diese Geschichte ist vorbei.\n\nDeutschland ist schon lange kein Vorreiter mehr. Wir haben Jahre des Nichthandelns, des Stillstandes und des Rückschrittes erlebt. Die Bundesregierung steht vor dem Scherbenhaufen ihrer Klimapolitik. Es sieht ganz so aus, dass wir das Klimaschutzziel, die Verringerung der Treibhausgasemissionen bis 2020 um 40 Prozent, krachend verfehlen werden. Das liegt vor allen Dingen daran, dass die Emissionen aus dem Energiesektor immer weiter steigen, weil Uraltkraftwerke und Kohlekraftwerke rund um die Uhr laufen, weil wir im Wärmebereich nur in Trippelschritten vorankommen. Mit Klimaschutz in der Verkehrspolitik haben wir noch gar nicht angefangen. Mit der Industrialisierung der Landwirtschaft steigen auch die Emissionen in diesem Sektor immer weiter.\n\nHätten wir nicht die Wall-Fall-Profits - das ist der Rückgang der CO2-Emissionen durch den Niedergang der DDR-Wirtschaft, Stichwort „25 Jahre Mauerfall“ - und hätten wir nicht das Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetz, das Sie vor der Sommerpause noch verstümmelten, dann wären Deutschlands Emissionen gegenüber 1990 noch gestiegen. Das ist die Bilanz. Wir stehen vor einer schwierigen Situation. Aber Sie liefern keine Antworten auf die drängenden Fragen.\n\nIch kann nur sagen: Ich finde es absolut zynisch, dass Sie trotz der schlechten Bilanz und der vor uns stehenden Herausforderungen die Vorlage des Weltklimaberichtes dafür nutzen, eine Debatte darüber anzustoßen, ob man das Ziel nicht streichen solle nach dem Motto „Wir schaffen es nicht, dann canceln wir das ganze Ziel“. Nun schicken Sie Herrn Homann, den Präsidenten der Bundesnetzagentur, vor, um die Reaktion der Öffentlichkeit auf einen solchen Vorschlag zu testen. Meine Damen und Herren von der Großen Koalition, liebe Frau Hendricks, ich kann Ihnen nur eines sagen: Wenn Sie das Klimaschutzziel 2020 beerdigen, dann ist das nicht nur der Abschied von der Vorreiterrolle - die ist schon lange weg -, dann ist das das Ende jeder Klimaschutzpolitik in Deutschland. Das müssen Sie sich dann ins Stammbuch schreiben.\n\nEines ist klar: Man könnte handeln. Es gäbe in Deutschland die Möglichkeit, das Klimaschutzziel bis 2020 noch zu erreichen. Dazu müsste man das „dreckige Dutzend“, die schmutzigsten Kohlekraftwerke aus den 1960er-Jahren, die im Moment rund um die Uhr laufen, abschalten. Die Möglichkeiten dazu haben Sie. Das wäre im Sinne der Energiewende und im Sinne eines modernen Strommarktes erforderlich, um der klimafreundlichen Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung, den Gaskraftwerken und dem Bereich der erneuerbaren Energien eine Chance zu geben. Diesbezüglich kommt von Ihnen aber gar nichts.\n\nIch erwarte, dass das Maßnahmenprogramm, das einst mittelfristiges Sofortprogramm hieß, das dann den Namen geändert hat und vielleicht irgendwann im Dezember kommt, klare Vorschläge enthält. Ich erwarte, dass wir in diese Richtung gehen und die schmutzigsten Kohlekraftwerke endlich vom Markt nehmen.\n\nVor allen Dingen - das ist das Allerwichtigste - sollten Sie Klimaschutz endlich als Chance begreifen. Es geht um Effizienz, Nachhaltigkeit und grüne Wirtschaft. Mit grüner Wirtschaft schwarze Zahlen schreiben, das ist die Zukunft. Der Klimaschutz liefert uns die richtige Vorlage dafür. Darauf müssen Sie sich einstellen. Auf diesem Gebiet müssen Sie Maßnahmen liefern. Frau Hendricks, ich erwarte, dass das, was am 3. Dezember 2014 endlich vorgelegt werden soll, mit konkreten Maßnahmen hinterlegt ist, damit wir das Klimaschutzziel erreichen. Eine Aufgabe des Klimaschutzziels wäre eine Versündigung am Weltklima.\n\nDas wäre eine Versündigung an der nachhaltigen Wirtschaft. Das wäre eine Versündigung an unseren Kindern und Enkeln.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n8481,uli-grotsch,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Waren es wirklich nur Zschäpe, Mundlos und Böhnhardt, die jahrelang vermeintlich unbemerkt von den Behörden mordend durch Deutschland gezogen sind, oder hatten sie überall Helfer? Wurden die Opfer doch nicht zufällig ausgewählt? Gibt es vielleicht ein größeres Neonazi-Netzwerk, das das Trio unterstützt hat und vielleicht immer noch dessen Ideologie verbreitet? Gibt es Verbindungen zur organisierten Kriminalität? Haben die Behörden - so, wie es scheint - Hinweise übersehen? - Ich für mich persönlich würde diese und andere Fragen wohl mit „Ja, so scheint es; aber wir müssen es beweisen“ beantworten. Diese und viele weitere Umstände sind auch vier Jahre nach der Selbstenttarnung des Nationalsozialistischen Untergrundes ungeklärt. Das ist ein Zustand, den wir so nicht hinnehmen werden.\n\nIch bin fest davon überzeugt, dass wir, wie auch schon meine Kolleginnen und Kollegen im ersten NSU-Untersuchungsausschuss, alle an einem Strang ziehen werden. Das Thema ist zu wichtig für Parteibefindlichkeiten, und es eignet sich schon gar nicht für Grabenkämpfe oder persönliche Profilierung.\n\nDer erste NSU-Untersuchungsausschuss des Bundestages und die Untersuchungsausschüsse der Landtage haben schon vieles aufgeklärt und wichtige Arbeit geleistet. Dafür möchte ich mich an dieser Stelle ausdrücklich bei allen Beteiligten bedanken.\n\nWir wollen nun das leisten, was der erste NSU-Untersuchungsausschuss des Deutschen Bundestages schlichtweg nicht leisten konnte, zum Teil aus Zeitgründen, zum Teil auch deshalb, weil wir heute Erkenntnisse haben, die damals noch völlig unbekannt waren. Jetzt können wir auf die bisherigen Ergebnisse zurückgreifen und da ansetzen, wo noch Fragen offen sind. Diese offenen Fragen - möglichst alle - wollen wir abräumen.\n\nAnders als meine Vorgängerinnen und Vorgänger können wir heute in unserer Arbeit auch auf die Rechercheergebnisse von Journalisten, Vereinen, Organisationen und Stiftungen wie etwa der Amadeu-Antonio-Stiftung zurückgreifen, die sich in den letzten vier Jahren intensiv mit dem NSU beschäftigt haben. Wir müssen nicht bei null anfangen. Ich glaube, das wird ein großer Vorteil sein.\n\nMir ist auch wichtig, dass wir im Untersuchungsausschuss nicht nur die Fragen aufarbeiten, die sich uns Abgeordneten stellen. Ich möchte auch den Fragen nachgehen, die sich etwa den Opferanwälten oder den Medienvertretern stellen.\n\nOhnehin spielen die Medien in diesem Komplex eine besondere Rolle. Vieles ist erst durch ihre Recherche überhaupt ans Tageslicht gekommen. Von einer medialen „Hexenjagd“, wie ein Mitarbeiter des Verfassungsschutzes in Baden-Württemberg die Arbeit der Presse vor dem dortigen Untersuchungsausschuss bezeichnet hat, kann meiner Meinung nach überhaupt keine Rede sein.\n\nAber da zeigt sich wieder: Von einer Fehlerkultur sind wir in manchen Behörden noch weit entfernt.\n\nWir werden uns nicht schon frühzeitig auf die eine oder andere Theorie festlegen; das hat schon mein Vorredner unterstrichen. Für die Behörden stand damals von Anfang an fest: Die Täter müssen aus dem familiären Umkreis kommen. Von „Döner-Morden“ und der „Mordserie Bosporus“ war die Rede. Mit diesen Beschuldigungen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wurden die Angehörigen zum zweiten Mal Opfer. Dass die Täter aus der rechten Szene kommen und Rassismus das Tatmotiv sein könnte, wurde damals bei den Ermittlungen nicht in Erwägung gezogen. Es konnte nicht sein, was nicht sein durfte. Heute wissen wir es besser.\n\nDass das Trio mit rechtsextremen Gruppierungen wie etwa Blood & Honour, Combat 18 oder der Oidoxie Streetfighting Crew vernetzt war, scheint uns heute ziemlich eindeutig zu sein. Schon im ersten NSU-Untersuchungsausschuss wurde klar, dass das Netzwerk größer war, als die Ermittlungsbehörden zunächst glaubten und zum Teil wohl heute noch glauben. Ich frage mich, ob der NSU vielleicht sogar ein noch größeres, straffer organisiertes und umfassenderes Monstrum war, als wir es uns zum heutigen Zeitpunkt vorstellen können.\n\nDas alles, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wollen wir klären - mit allen Mitgliedern, auf Augenhöhe und fraktionsübergreifend -, weil wir es den Opfern schuldig sind. Abdulkerim Simsek, der Sohn des ersten NSU-Opfers Enver Simsek, brachte es auf den Punkt, als er sagte:\n\nIch möchte meinen Kindern erzählen können, was mit ihrem Opa passiert ist. Ich würde dafür sorgen, dass sie trotz allem ohne Hass aufwachsen. Aber ich möchte ihnen die Wahrheit erzählen können - die ganze.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5074,stefan-liebich,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Kollege, dass Sie die Zwischenfrage zulassen. - Ich verstehe, dass Fragen an die neue griechische Koalition gerichtet werden, weil das ja keine Selbstverständlichkeit ist.\n\nJa. - Sie haben dazu ja eine klare Haltung formuliert, die allerdings nicht auf dem Blick in die eigene Vergangenheit basiert. Es war ja die Pasok, also Ihr sozialdemokratischer Partner, die im griechischen Kabinett im Jahr 2012 mit der Partei Laos - einer rechtspopulistischen, zum Teil sogar ultrarechten Partei - zusammen regiert hat. Das heißt, diese Diskussionen, die wir hier führen müssen, die wir auch führen, sollten Sie nicht vom hohen Ross herunter führen.\n\nVielmehr sollten Sie sich Ihre eigene Geschichte in Griechenland anschauen. Da gäbe es eine ganze Menge zu sagen. Aber diesen Aspekt wollte ich hier wenigstens hinzugefügt haben.\n\nJa, bitte.\"\n4545,andreas-lenz,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir beraten heute den Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Änderung des Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetzes. Mit dem Gesetzentwurf stellen wir sicher, dass die Verkehrsunternehmen in Deutschland auch weiterhin die Besondere Ausgleichsregelung für Schienenbahnen in Anspruch nehmen können. Davon profitieren in erster Linie die Fahrgäste. Deshalb ist es richtig, dass wir diese Änderung noch vor Jahresende verabschieden. Außerdem bereinigen wir redaktionelle Fehler im Bereich der Biomasse.\n\nDie Reform des Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetzes im Juli war ein wichtiger Schritt. Wir haben damit einen verlässlichen Ausbaupfad für die erneuerbaren Energien geschaffen. So wird der Anteil der erneuerbaren Energien am Bruttostromverbrauch im Jahr 2025 40 Prozent bis 45 Prozent und im Jahr 2035 55 Prozent bis 60 Prozent betragen.\n\nDer gesetzliche Ausbaukorridor und die verpflichtende Direktvermarktung bringen die erneuerbaren Energien weiter voran und führen sie gleichzeitig stärker an den Markt heran. Außerdem konnten wir die Besondere Ausgleichsregelung für stromintensiv produzierende Betriebe, die im internationalen Wettbewerb stehen, europarechtskonform reformieren. Die hohen Energiekosten haben bereits zu einer chronischen Investitionsschwäche der energieintensiv produzierenden Industrie in Deutschland geführt. Vor allem Erweiterungsinvestitionen werden an Standorten getätigt, an denen die Energiekosten günstiger sind. Wir schaffen einen stabilen Rahmen für diese Unternehmen. Wir wollen Deutschland als wettbewerbsfähigen Industriestandort erhalten. Wir schaffen so eine verlässliche Perspektive für Tausende von hochwertigen Arbeitsplätzen in der Grundstoffindustrie.\n\nDie EEG-Umlage konnte stabilisiert werden. Im Jahr 2015 sinkt sie voraussichtlich auf 6,17 Cent pro Kilowattstunde.\n\nZahlreiche Stromversorger haben angekündigt, im nächsten Jahr ihre Strompreise zu senken. Die am 1. August in Kraft getretene Reform des EEG leistet zukünftig einen Beitrag zur langfristigen Preisstabilität. Letztlich werden diese Maßnahmen auch zur langfristigen Akzeptanz der Energiewende beitragen.\n\nDie Europäische Kommission hat zwar am 23. Juli das novellierte EEG mit den Besonderen Ausgleichsregelungen für besonders stromintensiv produzierende und im internationalen Wettbewerb stehende Unternehmen genehmigt, nicht jedoch die Besonderen Ausgleichsregelungen für Schienenbahnen. Hierzu hat die Kommission ein eigenes Notifizierungsverfahren eingeleitet. Zudem fordert die Kommission Anpassungen, um die Genehmigung erteilen zu können.\n\nAus Sicht der Kommission ist die Besondere Ausgleichsregelung für Schienenbahnen in ihrer ursprünglichen Form nicht mit europäischem Wettbewerbsrecht vereinbar. Die Kommission sah für neu in den deutschen Markt eintretende Schienenverkehrsunternehmen einen Wettbewerbsnachteil. Nach der bisherigen Regelung können am Markt neue Unternehmen keinen Antrag auf Ermäßigung der EEG-Umlage stellen. Der Grund hierfür ist, dass zum Nachweis der Überschreitung der Schwelle von mindestens 2 Gigawattstunden selbstverbrauchter Strommenge bislang nur Istdaten vorgelegt werden konnten. Vor allem ausländische Marktteilnehmer könnten so laut Kommission Nachteile erlangen. Zukünftig wird eine Antragstellung bereits vor Aufnahme des Fahrbetriebs möglich sein. Die Basis der Antragstellung bildet der prognostizierte Stromverbrauch für das Jahr der Aufnahme des Fahrbetriebs. Die tatsächlich verbrauchte Strommenge wird nachträglich überprüft.\n\nWürden wir den Forderungen der Kommission nicht nachkommen, könnte die Kommission die Genehmigung der Besonderen Ausgleichsregelung für die Schienenbahnen verweigern. Die Folgen wären eine massive Erhöhung der Fahrpreise zum 1. Januar 2015 und eine Verschlechterung der Wettbewerbssituation der Bahn gegenüber dem Straßenverkehr. Die Gesetzesänderung ist deshalb vor allem für die Fahrgäste des Schienennah- und -fernverkehrs notwendig. Wir wollen die Pendler und Bahnfahrer eben nicht mit zusätzlichen Fahrpreis-erhöhungen im Jahr 2015 belasten.\n\nAußerdem berichtigen wir mit der Änderung redak-tionelle Fehler im Bereich der Biomasse.\n\nNach dem EEG 2014 waren Bioenergieanlagen, wenn sie ihren Strom direkt vermarktet haben, von Mindestanforderungen hinsichtlich der Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung befreit. Durch einen fehlenden Verweis in den Übergangsvorschriften des neuen EEG standen Hunderte Betreiber von Biogasanlagen vor der Frage, ob sie diese sinnvolle Regelung weiter nutzen können. Ohne diese Richtigstellung hätte Anlagebetreibern der Verlust der Einspeisevergütung gedroht, obwohl sie genau das gemacht haben, was sinnvoll ist, nämlich sich mit ihrer Stromproduktion an den Markterfordernissen zu orientieren. Dies wäre in vielen Fällen existenzbedrohend gewesen.\n\nAußerdem wird ein redaktioneller Fehler hinsichtlich der Definition der Bemessungsleistung behoben. So ist für Anlagen nach dem EEG 2009 auch weiterhin die in das Netz eingespeiste Leistung und nicht die erzeugte Leistung maßgebend. Diese Regelungen gelten rückwirkend zum 1. August dieses Jahres, um einen tatsächlichen Bestandsschutz zu gewährleisten.\n\n- Auch das ist ein Unterschied zu Ihrem Antrag, in dessen erster Version das Datum „1. August“ nicht enthalten war.\n\nSo ärgerlich solche Fehler auch sind, so richtig ist es, das als richtig Erkannte nun umzusetzen. Das tun wir heute. Wir werden die Energiewende voranbringen und dabei die Bürgerinnen und Bürger nicht überfordern. Uns ist die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit unserer Unternehmen wichtig. Mehr als 80 Prozent der Bevölkerung stehen hinter der Energiewende. Wir schaffen die Voraussetzungen dafür, dass das so bleibt. Die Novellierung des Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetzes war hierfür ein erster wichtiger Schritt. Ebenso wichtig ist der Ausbau der Übertragungs- und Verteilnetze hinsichtlich der Integration der erneuerbaren Energien. Wir sind auch dabei, die Neuausrichtung des Strommarktdesigns zu erarbeiten.\n\n- Für die anteilige Direktvermarktung werden wir, wie die Kollegen der SPD schon erläutert haben, eine handwerklich gut gemachte Regelung finden.\n\nDafür nehmen wir uns die notwendige Zeit. Dabei vertrauen wir nicht nur auf Ihre Anträge, obwohl diese natürlich, wenn sie der Sache dienen, berücksichtigt werden.\n\nDas Ministerium hat bereits ein Grünbuch vorgelegt, das jetzt intensiv diskutiert wird. All das spielt zusammen und muss europäisch koordiniert werden.\n\nUnsere französischen Nachbarn haben uns gestern im Ausschuss eindrucksvoll von ihren Anstrengungen berichtet. So will Frankreich seinen Anteil an erneuerbaren Energien bis 2030 auf 32 Prozent steigern. Wir sind also mit unseren Bemühungen nicht ganz allein.\n\nDie Reform des EEG im Juli dieses Jahres war richtig. Das Richtige muss man auch richtig machen; dazu tragen wir heute bei. - Herr Krischer, wir sind der Meinung, das sich Ehen entwickeln und im Laufe der Zeit besser werden können.\n\nWenn Sie in Ihrem Leben andere Erfahrungen gemacht haben, ist das Ihre Sache.\n\nIch bitte um Zustimmung zu diesem Gesetzentwurf.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n2891,matthias-miersch,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich glaube, die Debatte hat gezeigt, dass wir hier mit einem sehr kontrovers diskutierten Thema beschäftigt sind. Es handelt sich um ein Thema, das letztlich zentrale Menschheitsfragen berührt. Wir machen das hier alles nicht zum Selbstzweck. Ich glaube, wir erkennen alle an, dass das, was wir augenblicklich erleben - den konti-nuierlichen Anstieg der CO2-Emissionen und darüber hinaus viel gefährlicherer Gase -, dringend gestoppt werden muss. Ich glaube, da sind wir alle uns in diesem Haus einig, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nWenn wir ehrlich miteinander umgehen, dann stellen wir fest, dass sowohl auf der internationalen Ebene wie auf der europäischen Ebene wie auf der nationalen Ebene - in diesem Parlament, aber auch, das sage ich ganz deutlich, innerhalb der einzelnen Fraktionen, innerhalb der einzelnen Parteien, in den Bundesländern, im Bundestag - unterschiedliche Konzepte existieren. Nach meiner Auffassung gibt es niemanden, der heute sagen kann: Wir haben ein Patentrezept, um diese große Menschheitsherausforderung tatsächlich in den Griff zu bekommen. Das festzustellen, gehört, finde ich, zur Ehrlichkeit einer solchen Debatte.\n\nUmso begrüßenswerter finde ich es, dass wir hier heute diese Debatte führen. Frau Baerbock, ich weiß nicht, ob ich die grünen Anträge in den Strandkorb - wenn ich im Urlaub einen in Anspruch nehme - mitnehme. Da die Bundesregierung diesbezüglich gerade Vorarbeiten leistet, bin ich mir sehr sicher, dass wir im Herbst darum ringen müssen, wie wir auf dieses Problem zumindest mit einer nationalen Antwort reagieren.\n\nIch will mich über die Ziele nähern und fragen, ob wir dort miteinander gehen können. Ich glaube, niemand kann mit der heutigen Situation, wie wir sie vorfinden, zufrieden sein. Niemand darf damit zufrieden sein, dass hocheffiziente Gaskraftwerke augenblicklich durch Kohlekraftwerke verdrängt werden. Das darf nicht sein, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nIch finde, es kann auch niemandem in diesem Hause recht sein, dass der europäische Emissionshandel und damit das, was wir durch ihn erreichen wollten, nämlich die Verteuerung von klimaschädlicher Energiegewinnung, am Boden liegt und der Energie- und Klimafonds praktisch leer ist. Auch das darf uns in diesem Haus nicht zufriedenstellen.\n\nWir dürfen auch nicht damit zufrieden sein, dass die CO2-Emissionen in Deutschland im vergangen Jahr gestiegen und nicht gesunken sind. Damit darf keiner in diesem Haus zufrieden sein, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nIch habe Sie aufmerksam beobachtet und gesehen, es haben irgendwie alle geklatscht.\n\n- Jetzt müssen wir gucken, Herr Krischer, wie wir es von der Metaebene auf die konkrete Ebene kriegen. Ich bin mir sicher, dass wir über die eine oder andere Frage diskutieren müssen. Aber - das will ich vorweg sagen - es muss klar sein, dass wir Ökologie, Ökonomie und soziale Gerechtigkeit nicht gegeneinander ausspielen können und dürfen.\n\n- Jetzt hören Sie doch erst einmal zu, und dann regen Sie sich auf! Aber ich komme gleich noch dazu.\n\nAls Umweltpolitiker liegt mir daran, zu sagen: Der Gleichsatz dieser drei Werte geht nicht;\n\ndenn die industrielle Überlebensfähigkeit in Deutschland und der soziale Ausgleich gehen nicht zusammen, wenn die Natur unwiderruflich zerstört wird.\n\nDiese Sache müssen wir auch als Umweltpolitiker immer wieder berücksichtigen.\n\nJetzt, Herr Krischer, kommen wir zu der Frage, welche Antworten wir geben. Ich glaube, dass das Handeln der internationalen Staatengemeinschaft entscheidend ist. Das soll nicht heißen, dass wir auf nationaler Ebene nichts tun sollen.\n\nAber wir brauchen auch die anderen. Mit dem Emissionshandel wurde ein System entwickelt, um mit marktwirtschaftlichen Instrumenten zu versuchen, diese Herausforderung in den Griff zu bekommen. Nach meiner persönlichen Auffassung müssen wir im Herbst in diesem Haus als Erstes darüber diskutieren, ob dieser europäische Emissionshandel überhaupt reanimierbar ist.\n\nDiese Grundsatzfrage, finde ich, müssen wir diskutieren.\n\nWenn wir die Anträge von Linken und Grünen, die wir heute diskutieren, lesen, dann stellen wir fest, dass die Antworten von beiden Seiten unterschiedlich sind,\n\nalso auch die Opposition unterschiedliche Wege vorschlägt, und darüber müssen wir diskutieren.\n\nIch glaube aber, Frau Baerbock und Herr Krischer, eines hat sich im Vergleich zu den letzten vier Jahren massiv geändert: Wir haben eine Bundesregierung, die nach Brüssel fährt und erstmals dort sagt: Der Emissionshandel geht so, wie er augenblicklich aufgestellt ist, nicht. - Endlich gibt es eine deutsche Bundesregierung, die in Brüssel ambitioniert für die Reform wirbt, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nAndere Länder sind anders unterwegs. Dazu muss man sehen, dass die Briten das locker machen können. Der Kollege Becker hat zu Recht darauf hingewiesen. Nur, der britische Weg, in die Atomkraft wieder einzusteigen, ist nicht unser Weg und darf nicht unser Weg sein!\n\nDeswegen, finde ich - da, lieber Kollege Pfeiffer, müssen wir wahrscheinlich noch alle zusammen miteinander ringen -, ist das, was Professor Edenhofer und andere vorschlagen, nämlich über CO2-Mindestpreise zu reden, eine Möglichkeit. Dies greifen die Grünen in ihrem Antrag ja auch auf. Wir müssen überlegen, Marktwirtschaft und - Sie sagen jetzt: Planwirtschaft; ich sage: Ordnung - Mindestpreise in irgendeiner Form zusammenzubringen; denn nur Markt bringt nichts. Das ist jedenfalls meine Überzeugung, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nAber darüber hinaus werden wir uns die Frage stellen müssen, ob das ausreicht. Deswegen plädieren wir So-zialdemokratinnen und Sozialdemokraten in unseren Energiekonzepten auch für eine Mehrwegestrategie. Ja, wir brauchen ein internationales Abkommen, spätestens in Paris im nächsten Jahr. Ja, wir brauchen europäische Antworten. Aber wir brauchen auch nationale Wege.\n\nDer Kollege Jung hat die Gebäudesanierung und die Mobilität angesprochen. Ich nenne noch die Landwirtschaft. Aber auch ordnungspolitische Maßnahmen sind zumindest zu diskutieren.\n\nIch war bis vor kurzem ein Verfechter der CO2-Steuer. Nach der Rechtsprechung zur Brennelementesteuer muss ich allerdings sagen, dass das juristisch wohl nicht ganz einfach werden wird.\n\nDeswegen werden wir uns nach meiner Auffassung auch über weitere ordnungsrechtliche Ansätze unterhalten müssen, wenn wir beispielsweise um Effizienzstandards von Kraftwerken ringen.\n\nIch glaube, das wäre eine Maßnahme, die wir flankierend einsetzen könnten, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nWir werden darüber hinaus noch über ganz andere Maßnahmen reden, an denen Barbara Hendricks gerade im Rahmen der Nationalen Klimaschutzinitiative arbeitet. Wir werden auch darüber im Herbst diskutieren können. Da wird es eine Fülle von kommunalen, nationalen und Ländermaßnahmen geben, und wir werden die Frage stellen müssen, ob unser Ziel „40 Prozent Reduktion bis 2020“ mit diesen Maßnahmen erreicht wird.\n\nHerr Krischer, dann werden wir um die einzelnen Maßnahmen miteinander ringen müssen. Sie haben einige genannt; Barbara Hendricks hat andere genannt. Ich hoffe sehr, dass es uns gelingt, bei diesem großen Thema einen Konsens zu finden.\n\nÄhnlich wie bei der Atomkraft ist es hier sehr einfach, als Opposition etwas in die Debatte zu werfen. Damit kann man super bestehen. Das ist ja auch Ihre Aufgabe. Aber letztlich werden wir nur eine Lösung finden, wenn wir alle mitnehmen. Das haben wir beim Atomkonsens geschafft. Etwas Ähnliches ist dringend notwendig beim Thema Kohle.\n\nLassen Sie uns das gemeinsam machen! Lassen Sie uns die Sommerpause meinetwegen als schöpferische Pause begreifen und dann im Herbst miteinander die Maßnahmen diskutieren! Ich glaube, hier haben wir einen langen Weg vor uns. Aber wir haben bei der Atomenergie gezeigt: Es geht gemeinsam. - Das würde ich mir auch hier wünschen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n11932,binski-weiß,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen!\n\nJetzt beginnt eine neue Zeit in der Landwirtschaft - eine Zeit mit bedeutenden Herausforderungen, die neue nachhaltige Lösungen und Technologien verlangt, …\n\nWenn es mir nicht direkt im Halse stecken bleiben würde, würde ich über diesen Teil der Pressemitteilung aus dem Hause Bayer zur Fusion mit Monsanto lachen; denn Monsantos Geschäftsmodell ist ja bekanntermaßen sehr weit von allem entfernt, was tatsächlich nachhaltig ist.\n\nDas betrifft vor allem das gentechnisch veränderte Saatgut, mit dem der Konzern einen großen Teil seines Geldes verdient.\n\nSeit Jahrzehnten verspricht Monsanto, dass damit der Hunger in der Welt besiegt werden kann. Genau das steht jetzt auch wieder in der eingangs zitierten Pressemitteilung: Man könne nun die Herausforderungen unserer Zeit besser meistern und bis zum Jahr 2050 zusätzlich 3 Milliarden Menschen ernähren. - Ich bin es so leid, ständig diese Versprechen zu hören. Es gibt sie nämlich nicht, diese wunderbaren neuen Pflanzen, die Dürren besser überstehen oder Kleinbauern in Entwicklungsländern höhere Erträge bringen.\n\nMonsanto macht sein Geld bisher vor allem mit gentechnisch veränderten Pflanzen, die gegen das ebenfalls von Monsanto verkaufte Glyphosat unempfindlich sind,\n\nmit gentechnisch veränderten Pflanzen, die - bestimmt für die Fleisch- und Milchproduktion in Industrieländern - vor allem ins Tierfutter gehen. Das hilft nirgendwo auch nur irgendeinem hungernden Kind.\n\nDie „Wir besiegen den Hunger“-Slogans sind reine PR - mehr nicht. Diese Gentechnik, die weltweit den Bauern, den Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern bzw. einer gesamten Gesellschaft nutzt, gibt es nicht.\n\nDer Bayer-Konzern, der immerhin 60 Milliarden Euro für Monsanto bezahlt hat - ich habe gelesen, dass das Geld eigentlich gar nicht da ist -, muss dieses Geld jedenfalls wieder hereinholen. Gerade weil ich mich schon seit einiger Zeit mit Gentechnik und mit Monsanto beschäftige, habe ich erhebliche Zweifel daran, dass dies tatsächlich auch auf nachhaltigem Wege und zum Nutzen von Bauern, von Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern und der Umwelt passieren wird und nicht ausschließlich zum Nutzen der Aktionäre. Nachhaltigkeit bedeutet, Vielfalt zu fördern und nicht auf Patente zu setzen, die sich Kleinbauern gar nicht leisten können. Nachhaltigkeit bedeutet auch, den Einsatz von Pflanzenschutzmitteln in der Landwirtschaft so gering wie möglich zu halten und nicht Landwirte noch abhängiger von einem Anbieter zu machen.\n\nDer Presse entnehme ich, dass die Kartellbehörden den Zusammenschluss als unproblematisch bewerten könnten. Monsanto sei ja vor allem in Amerika aktiv, Bayer in Europa. Allerdings hätte Bayer offenbar nach der Fusion einen Marktanteil von 90 Prozent bei gentechnisch verändertem Saatgut. Und das soll kein Monopol sein? Ich hoffe, dass die Kartellbehörden sehr genau hinschauen.\n\nIch sehe hier eine massive Marktkonzentration und damit Marktmacht. Je weniger Konzerne den Markt dominieren, desto weniger haben wir - ich meine uns alle als Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher - eine Chance, selbst zu bestimmen, was wir essen.\n\nGleichzeitig laufen wir Gefahr, dass unser aller politisches Engagement für eine nachhaltigere Landwirtschaft schlicht verpufft, weil wir eine solche Marktmacht und Dominanz einiger weniger Konzerne im Nachhinein gar nicht mehr eingrenzen können.\n\nIch bin deshalb höchst besorgt über diese Fusion, und ich kann nur an die Aufsichtsbehörden appellieren, besonderes Augenmerk auf die Folgen dieses Deals für uns alle, für die Landwirte und für die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher, sowie für die Umwelt zu richten.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3199,gerhard-schick,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Bundesfinanzminister hat seine Ausführungen mit dem Hinweis darauf begonnen, dass eines der Kernprobleme bei der Euro-Staatsschuldenkrise war, dass die einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten für die Rettung ihrer Banken zuständig waren, dass also aus Bankenschulden Staatsschulden wurden. Da stimme ich mit ihm völlig überein. Das ist ein zentrales Problem, das die Steuerzahlerinnen und die Steuerzahler in Europa viele, viele Milliarden gekostet hat, uns noch bis heute beschäftigt und die Haushalte auch noch zukünftig belasten wird.\n\nMan muss aber wissen, dass der Zusammenhang zwischen den Bankproblemen und den nationalen Haushalten in der Euro-Zone nicht zwangsläufig so hätte sein müssen oder gar vom Himmel gefallen ist. Es war 2008 vielmehr eine politische Entscheidung, dass es so sein sollte. Im Herbst 2008, als die Bankenkrise auf einen ihrer Höhepunkte zusteuerte, hat die niederländische Regierung nämlich einen Vorschlag gemacht und eine europäische Lösung aufgezeigt, wie man ein gemeinsames Bollwerk gegen die wackeligen Finanzmärkte schaffen könnte. Damals hat es viel Unterstützung für diesen Vorschlag gegeben, aber eine Regierung hat Nein gesagt: die deutsche Bundesregierung unter Angela Merkel. Es ist überliefert - sehr gut dargestellt in dem Buch von Cerstin Gammelin und Raimund Löw -, dass Nikolas Sarkozy bei den Verhandlungen Anfang Oktober 2008 sehr enttäuscht über Angela Merkel und ihr Nein war - ich zitiere -:\n\nBei der Verabschiedung … an den Stufen des Élysée lässt er seiner Enttäuschung freien Lauf: „Wenn wir keine europäische Lösung zusammenbringen, dann wird das ein Debakel sein“, klagt Sarkozy … „Aber nicht meines, sondern Angelas Debakel …\n\nUnd weiter:\n\nAngela Merkel habe im Élysée-Palast schlicht Johann Wolfgang Goethe zitiert: „Ein jeder kehr’ vor seiner Tür, und rein ist jedes Stadtquartier“.\n\nDas war die Logik 2008. Wir haben in den letzten Jahren gesehen, wie sauber der Bankensektor in Europa geworden ist. Bis heute ist er voll von Schmodder, weil man damals dem genannten Prinzip der deutschen Bundesregierung gefolgt ist. Und dafür müssen Sie auch Verantwortung übernehmen.\n\nEs ist ja toll, sich als Kanzlerin immer als große Managerin und Retterin und als Finanzminister als großer Europäer darzustellen. An dieser Stelle haben Sie zum Schaden ganz Europas antieuropäisch gehandelt. Und das belastet uns bis heute.\n\nJeder einzelne Staat sah sich nämlich gefangen in der Logik: Wenn ich meinen Banken kein Steuergeld gebe, dann fließt das Geld aus meinem Finanzsektor ab, und dann ist das für meine Wirtschaft ein großes Problem. Diese Logik hat alle Staaten gezwungen, entsprechend zu handeln. Wenn man dies anders gemacht hätte, wäre vieles anders gelaufen.\n\nNun kann man sagen: Das ist vergossene Milch. Aber das Problem ist, dass Sie aus dem Fehler von damals nichts gelernt haben, sondern in den Jahren bis 2012, als das ganze Desaster, das Nikolas Sarkozy vorhergesagt hat - Angelas Desaster -, eingetroffen ist, immer noch gegen die Bankenunion gearbeitet haben und alles getan haben, dass sie nicht kommt. 2012 sind sie nur durch den Druck der anderen europäischen Regierungen gezwungen worden, dem zuzustimmen, was Sie heute vorlegen. Sie haben das nie gewollt.\n\nEs geht noch weiter: Sie haben nachher in den Verhandlungen alles getan, damit man gemäß dieser falschen Logik weiterarbeitet. Die Bankenunion tritt aufgrund der Verhandlungen der Bundesregierung später in Kraft, als sie in Kraft treten könnte. Deswegen bleiben die Steuerzahler noch länger im Risiko, als es nötig wäre. Auch das ist ein Fehler, der Ihnen anzukreiden ist.\n\nUnd Sie haben dafür gesorgt, dass der Abwicklungsfonds noch viele Jahre, nämlich noch bis 2024, nationale Abteilungen und nationale Verantwortung hat und damit erst später ein wirkliches europäisches Konstrukt entsteht.\n\nDas muss man sich einmal auf der Zunge zergehen lassen: Sie begannen Ihre Rede mit der Fehleranalyse, indem Sie sagten: Dass die nationalen Haushalte verantwortlich sind für die Banken, ist eines der zentralen Probleme. - In Verhandlungen haben Sie sich jedoch dafür eingesetzt, dass die nationalen Haushalte noch länger verantwortlich sind für die Bankenrettung. Das passt doch überhaupt nicht zusammen.\n\nSie bleiben aber auch, leider, bei dem Vorliegenden an ein paar Stellen in einer zweiten gefährlichen Logik. Wenn Banken Schwierigkeiten haben, kann man entweder sagen, man rettet sie - im Zweifelsfall mit Steuergeldern -, oder, man wickelt sie ab. Der Grundsatz des jetzt vorliegenden Gesetzentwurfes ist richtig. Wir wollen in Zukunft abwickeln. Es gibt allerdings drei Stellen, an denen dieser Grundsatz leider nicht durchgesetzt wird, sondern Sie in der alten, falschen Logik bleiben:\n\nErstens. Es gibt eine Klausel - darauf ist schon hingewiesen worden -, die regelt, dass man, wenn es eine Gefahr für die Finanzmärkte gibt, doch wieder retten kann. Genau diese Begründung musste immer wieder für die Bankenrettungen in Irland, Spanien und Zypern herhalten. Insofern ist es eine sehr gefährliche Lücke.\n\nZweitens bei der Frage der direkten Bankenkapitalisierung. Es ist ja richtig, dass es irgendwo das gibt, was Experten einen Backstop nennen, also sozusagen eine Möglichkeit, im Zweifelsfall noch einzugreifen. Aber da gibt es jetzt zwei verschiedene Wege: Der eine Weg wäre, eine Kreditlinie für den Abwicklungsfonds festzulegen, sodass der ESM den Banken Geld ausleihen kann, das sie später zurückzahlen müssen. Die Verantwortung bliebe so bei den Banken. Vor allem bliebe man so in der Logik des Abwicklungsfonds und seiner Expertise, dass Banken wirklich abgewickelt würden. Oder man kann es wie Sie über die direkte Bankenkapitalisierung machen. Dann wird wieder Steuergeld ins Schaufenster gestellt. Das wollen wir nicht.\n\nDa sind Sie in der alten, falschen Logik.\n\nDrittens wird der Grundsatz nicht auf nationaler Ebene umgesetzt. Warum wird jetzt die Bankenrettung in Deutschland gemäß der alten Logik, dass man Steuergeld ins Schaufenster stellt, noch einmal verlängert? Warum denn? Sie haben doch gerade gesagt, dass es richtig ist, Banken abzuwickeln. Warum wollen Sie in Deutschland noch einmal die Möglichkeit schaffen, im Zweifelsfall Steuergeld für die Bankenrettung einzusetzen? Wir Grünen sind überzeugt: Das Prinzip „Wenn eine Bank ein Problem hat, löst man es mit Steuergeld“ muss endlich der Vergangenheit angehören.\n\nEs gibt noch eine Reihe von Fragen zur Ausgestaltung: Kann das Europäische Parlament überhaupt kontrollieren, was dieser Fonds macht? Wie ist die Bankenabgabe im Einzelnen ausgestaltet? Das werden wir diskutieren müssen.\n\nInsgesamt aber ist das Projekt einer europäischen Bankenunion richtig. Wir Grüne haben das seit langem gefordert. Wir müssen heute feststellen, dass der Finanzminister das, was er heute vorlegt, nie gewollt hat. Aber es ist gut, dass er sich nicht durchgesetzt hat.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n8958,nina-warken,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir sprechen hier heute über zwei Anträge von Linken und Grünen, die die Lage in Afghanistan, die Situation von Flüchtlingen aus Afghanistan und die Überlegungen und Vorschläge der Koalition hierzu zum Inhalt haben. Ich denke, es ist passend, dass wir das gerade heute tun können, nachdem die Kanzlerin gestern den afghanischen Staatspräsidenten zu Gast hatte.\n\nDies gibt mir auch die Gelegenheit, die Vorschläge der Koalition zu den aufgeworfenen Fragen darzustellen, und das ist gut so; denn ich glaube, wir befinden uns derzeit noch immer - das sieht man, wenn man in die Kommunen blickt - in einer Art Notfallsituation bzw. im Notfallmodus.\n\nVielerorts kann die Unterbringung nur in provisorischen Unterkünften, wie Turnhallen, erfolgen, und die Versorgung findet durch Ehrenamtliche statt. Nach wie vor kommen trotz des Wintereinbruchs täglich Tausende Menschen zu uns nach Deutschland. Laut der EASY-Statistik sind in diesem Jahr schon über 129 000 Asylsuchende aus Afghanistan zu uns eingereist. Afghanistan steht somit an zweiter Stelle.\n\nEs ist daher wichtig, dass man über Lösungsansätze für einzelne Personengruppen, die zu uns kommen, nachdenkt und dass Maßnahmen ergriffen werden. Das haben die Parteivorsitzenden von CDU, CSU und SPD in den Beschlüssen vom 5. November 2015 getan, und das tun auch wir als Koalition.\n\nEin wichtiger Schritt ist, dass in jedem Einzelfall genau geprüft werden muss, wer schutzbedürftig ist und wer nicht - auch wenn jemand aus Afghanistan oder Syrien kommt. Nur das ist angesichts der aktuellen Lage gerecht und vermittelbar.\n\nGenau das, was die Kollegin Amtsberg gesagt hat, nämlich im Einzelfall maßvoll und umsichtig zu prüfen, wollen wir tun. Verbunden damit müssen dann auch Rückführungen sein, wenn sie im Einzelfall angezeigt und vertretbar sind. Von pauschalen Abschiebungen spricht niemand.\n\nForderungen nach einem pauschalen Abschiebestopp und einer pauschalen Anerkennung von Asylbewerbern aus Afghanistan sind weder gerecht noch vermittelbar. Dennoch verstehe ich die Intention Ihrer Anträge. Weite Teile Ihrer Fraktionen lehnen Abschiebungen generell und grundsätzlich ab. Es fehlt Ihnen die Einsicht, dass Abschiebungen notwendig sind, um Entscheidungen im Asylverfahren auch durchzusetzen und ein faires und vermittelbares Asylsystem zu erhalten. Es muss ja schließlich einen Unterschied machen, ob jemand bleiben darf oder nicht.\n\nIhre Parteikollegen, die in den Kommunen und in den Ländern politische Verantwortung tragen, wissen das.\n\nEs verwundert daher nicht, dass sie aus dieser grundsätzlichen Ablehnung heraus auch die Dinge bezüglich der Situation der Migranten aus Afghanistan teilweise einseitig darstellen. So wird pauschal von einer prekären Sicherheitslage gesprochen, weshalb niemand nach Afghanistan abgeschoben werden könne.\n\nDas trifft keineswegs zu. Vielmehr ist es so, dass die Sicherheitslage in Afghanistan von Region zu Region sehr unterschiedlich ist.\n\nEs ist unbestreitbar: In bestimmten Gebieten - das haben wir eben auch gehört - ist die Lage sehr gefährlich. Afghanistan hat in vielen Bereichen Probleme. Aber wie das Auswärtige Amt schon mehrmals betont hat, gibt es auch Gebiete, in denen die Situation anders, besser ist, nämlich dort, wo unterschiedliche Volksgruppen wie Paschtunen, Usbeken oder andere weitestgehend unter sich bleiben. Es kommt stets auf den Einzelfall an, ob eine Rückführung in eine sichere Region möglich ist. Das und nichts anderes soll angesichts der steigenden Zahlen von Asylbewerbern aus Afghanistan künftig genauer geprüft werden.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, eine weitere Tatsache sollten wir in der heutigen Debatte nicht ausblenden. Deutschland und andere Länder unterstützen Afghanistan bei der Bewältigung der vorhandenen Probleme massiv. Allein Deutschland stellt dafür jedes Jahr Hunderte Millionen Euro als Entwicklungshilfe zur Verfügung und unterstützt die afghanischen Streitkräfte. Für 2016 sind das 250 Millionen Euro Entwicklungshilfe. Weitere 180 Millionen Euro kommen für den zivilen Wiederaufbau und 150 Millionen Euro für die nationalen Sicherheitskräfte hinzu. Die Unterstützungsmission der Bundeswehr, wodurch vor Ort die Sicherheitskräfte ausgebildet werden, wurde auf 980 Soldaten erhöht. Auch darüber haben wir eben gesprochen.\n\nInsgesamt ist das ein deutliches Signal an die afghanische Regierung und an die afghanische Bevölkerung. Wir lassen Afghanistan jetzt und auch in Zukunft nicht im Stich, weder in der Übergangsphase noch beim Wiederaufbau. Wir lassen Afghanistan nicht allein. Im Gegenzug - da pflichte ich dem Bundesinnenminister vollkommen bei - können wir erwarten, dass die Afghanen selbst und vor allem die Jugend am Wiederaufbau des Landes mitwirken. Wie wichtig das ist, zeigt eine Kampagne einer Gruppe junger Afghanen mit dem Namen „Afghanistan needs you“. Die Initiatoren sagen selbst: Es kann nicht sein, dass der Wegzug der Jungen das Land in die Krise stürzt. Die letzten 15 Jahre dürfen nicht umsonst gewesen sein.\n\nEs trifft sehr wohl zu, auch wenn die Opposition das immer wieder bestreitet: Seitdem es den massiven Zustrom von Flüchtlingen nach Deutschland gibt und in den Medien pausenlos darüber berichtet wird, machen sich immer mehr Menschen aus Afghanistan auf den Weg, darunter auch viele, die nicht gefährdet sind, die der Mittelschicht angehören und für den Wiederaufbau dringend gebraucht werden. Wie die Bundeskanzlerin und auch der afghanische Präsident gestern gemeinsam betont haben, müssen wir gegen diesen Trend der illegalen Migration vorgehen.\n\nDeutschland wird seiner humanitären Verantwortung gerecht. Selbstverständlich helfen wir Afghanen, die für die Bundeswehr oder andere deutsche Einrichtungen gearbeitet haben und deswegen nun in Gefahr sind. Diejenigen jedoch, die allein aus wirtschaftlichen Gründen nach Deutschland kommen, müssen wir nach Afghanistan zurückschicken.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, lassen Sie mich in diesem Zusammenhang einen weiteren Punkt ansprechen. Unsere Aufgabe ist es doch auch, die Menschen, die sich zu uns auf den Weg machen, über alle Folgen der Flucht aufzuklären. Das hat nichts mit Abschreckung zu tun, sondern ist ehrlicher und menschlicher, als falsche Hoffnungen zu wecken.\n\nEs ist nicht von der Hand zu weisen, dass ein Grund für die gestiegenen Zahlen von Asylbewerbern aus Afghanistan falsche Gerüchte und Lügen über die Flucht nach Deutschland sind. Schleuser streuen insbesondere in den sozialen Medien gezielt Falschinformationen, um ihr kriminelles Geschäft zu beleben. Dazu gehört etwa die falsche Behauptung, dass Flüchtlinge in Deutschland sofort eingebürgert werden. Richtigerweise geht das Auswärtige Amt dagegen mit einer Aufklärungskampagne vor; denn es ist wichtig, die Menschen darüber zu informieren, was sie auf der Flucht und in Deutschland erwartet.\n\nWir müssen verhindern, dass sie mit völlig falschen Erwartungen ihre Existenz und ihre Heimat aufgeben. Auch Staatspräsident Ghani hat gestern betont, seine Landsleute müssten „ein realistisches Bild von Deutschland erhalten, wo die Straßen mitnichten mit Gold gepflastert sind“.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, lassen Sie mich deshalb noch einmal ganz deutlich sagen: Ein Abschiebestopp und eine pauschale Anerkennung für Asylbewerber aus Afghanistan mit mindestens subsidiärem Schutz wären ein völlig falsches Signal. Ich möchte nicht bestreiten, dass es in Afghanistan Gegenden gibt, in denen geschlechtsspezifische Gewalt und die Ausgrenzung von Frauen oder andere schlimme Dinge geschehen. Doch das trifft eben nicht bei jedem zu, der nach Deutschland kommt. Deswegen brauchen wir genaue und zügige Einzelfallprüfungen sowohl bei der Schutzbedürftigkeit als auch bei der Rückführung. Falsch wäre auch der Verzicht auf Widerrufsprüfungen durch das Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge, den die Opposition ebenfalls fordert.\n\nZu einem gerechten Asylsystem gehört, dass in regelmäßigen Abständen überprüft wird, ob die Schutzgründe im Einzelfall weiterhin vorliegen oder ob eine Rückkehr unter Würdigung aller Umstände möglich ist. Das ist nicht mehr und nicht weniger als die Anwendung unseres geltenden Rechts.\n\nNeben diesen Aspekten müssen wir dazu beitragen, dass die Menschen in Afghanistan innerstaatliche Flucht­alternativen haben. Das tun wir bereits durch unser Engagement zur Stärkung der afghanischen Sicherheitskräfte, durch Entwicklungshilfe und nicht zuletzt auch durch eine von Deutschland mitinitiierte und vom UNHCR koordinierte Strategie zur Verbesserung der Situation von Flüchtlingsrückkehrern und Binnenvertriebenen. Dazu gehören unter anderem beschäftigungsorientierte Bildungsprogramme für bis zu 180 000 junge Menschen sowie Alphabetisierungskurse für Frauen.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund ist auch das europäische Rückübernahmeabkommen mit Afghanistan zu sehen. Hier geht es um ein geordnetes Verfahren, womit wir den Menschen eine Möglichkeit geben, in ihre Heimat zurückzukehren, und wodurch sie die notwendige Unterstützung bekommen, dort auch wieder Fuß zu fassen. Viele andere Länder haben solche Abkommen bereits mit Afghanistan geschlossen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, das ist der Kurs, den wir, die Union, in Bezug auf Afghanistan verfolgen. Es ist ein Kurs, der stets die humanitäre Verantwortung Deutschlands, aber genauso auch die Akzeptanz unseres Asylsystems durch unsere Bürgerinnen und Bürger im Blick hat.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n2498,volker-kauder,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Auch ich möchte mich zunächst einmal ausdrücklich bei unserem Bundestagspräsidenten dafür bedanken, dass er klargestellt hat, was unser Bundespräsident gesagt hat und was nicht. Ich möchte Thomas Oppermann zustimmen, der sagte, dass die Art und Weise, wie die Linke mit solchen Themen umgeht, nicht akzeptabel ist.\n\nHerr Kollege Gysi, da muss ich Sie auch persönlich ansprechen. Es geht nämlich nicht, dass man hier im Deutschen Bundestag - oder, wie heute Morgen bekannt geworden ist, einer Ihrer Parteikollegen in Brandenburg - Attacken loslässt und sich dann entschuldigt.\n\nFrau Da?delen beispielsweise hat sich hier im Deutschen Bundestag durch Verleumdungen und Angriffe in einer Art und Weise aufgeführt,\n\ndie diesem Haus nicht angemessen war. Danach entschuldigen Sie sich zwar öffentlich, aber nachher geht es wieder so weiter.\n\nDas ist kein Umgang, Herr Gysi, das muss ich Ihnen klipp und klar sagen.\n\nDeswegen akzeptiere ich ein solches Verhalten auch nicht. Ich erwarte schon: Bevor Sie andere Fraktionen und Parteien kritisieren, räumen Sie in Ihrem eigenen Laden auf und nicht woanders. Dazu haben Sie allen Grund, Herr Gysi.\n\nWir legen heute den Haushalt 2014 vor und diskutieren in der Regierung bereits den Haushalt 2015. Beide Haushalte müssen zusammen gesehen werden, weil es in dieser Großen Koalition zu einem Paradigmenwechsel in der Haushaltspolitik kommt.\n\nSchon der Haushalt 2014 ist strukturell ausgeglichen, und ab dem Haushalt 2015 werden keine neuen Schulden mehr gemacht. Das ist tatsächlich der entscheidende Hinweis darauf, dass wir Generationengerechtigkeit und Nachhaltigkeit ernst nehmen. Denn nichts ist für eine junge Generation wichtiger, als dass sie Handlungsspielraum hat.\n\nMan kann viel über Nachhaltigkeit in anderen Bereichen reden, aber hinter dem Projekt „Keine neuen Schulden mehr“ steht die Aussage: Wir wissen um die Verantwortung für unsere junge Generation.\n\nDafür sage ich Wolfgang Schäuble und unseren Haushältern herzlichen Dank, die diese schwere Aufgabe vo-rangebracht haben.\n\nDer von uns eingeschlagene Weg ist der richtige, wenn es darum geht, dass wir in unserem Land Wohlstand und Sicherheit erhalten können. Wenn wir uns die Situation in Europa anschauen - die Bundeskanzlerin hat ja heute darüber berichtet, wie die Situation in einzelnen Ländern ist -, dann stellen wir fest: Diese Situation ist nicht irgendwie vom Himmel gefallen, sondern sie ist das Ergebnis falscher politischer Ansätze.\n\nLieber Thomas Oppermann, ich sehe das genauso, dass wir mit Sorge nach Frankreich blicken und uns fragen: Wer könnte der nächste Gesprächspartner sein? Aber natürlich hat jedes Land seine Hausaufgaben zu machen.\n\nDeswegen finde ich es völlig richtig, dass auf dem Gipfel in Paris als Ergebnis nicht herauskam: „Wir werden den Stabilitätspakt aufweichen“, sondern dass herauskam - Herr Gabriel, ich bin Ihnen dankbar, dass Sie das so klar gesagt haben -: Es bleibt dabei, der Kurs dieser Bundesregierung, der Kurs von Angela Merkel, ist der einzige, der dazu führen wird, dass Europa wieder ganz gesund werden kann.\n\nDass Thomas Oppermann heute bestätigt hat, dass der Stabilitätspakt nicht angegriffen wird und die notwendigen Reformen in den Ländern durchgeführt werden, das ist eine gute Botschaft.\n\nEuropa ist für uns aber nicht nur eine Frage der wirtschaftlichen Sicherheit, sondern Europa ist für uns auch eine Frage von Frieden und Sicherheit. Wenn man sich die Situation in der Welt anschaut, kann man nur sagen: Wir können wirklich dankbar dafür sein, dass wir in diesem Europa leben dürfen. Wenn dieses Europa nicht mehr erreicht hätte, als dass in diesem Europa Frieden herrscht, dann wäre das schon Grund genug, um jeden Tag diesem Europa von Herzen dankbar zu sein, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nDieses Europa muss natürlich offen sein für Menschen, die in ihren eigenen Herkunftsländern verfolgt werden und deswegen dort, zumindest für eine bestimmte Zeit, keine Perspektive haben. Deswegen ist es richtig, dass es in Europa eine gemeinsame Asylpolitik gibt, dass die Belastungen in Europa auf die Länder angemessen verteilt werden. Dass wir in Deutschland einen entsprechenden Beitrag leisten, habe ich an diesem Rednerpult erst vor kurzem festgestellt: Wir nehmen die meisten Asylbewerber auf. Aber wir haben ein Problem - Thomas Oppermann hat zu Recht darauf hingewiesen -: Wir nehmen Asylbewerber aus Ländern auf, die in der nächsten Zeit ganz zu Europa gehören wollen. Wir nehmen zurzeit Asylanträge von Menschen entgegen, die in ihren Herkunftsländern sehr wohl leben können, weil sie dort nicht verfolgt werden. Diese Herkunftsländer haben ein massives Interesse daran, in Europa nicht als Verfolgerländer verunglimpft zu werden. Sie sagen: Wir sind sichere Herkunftsländer.\n\nDeswegen wollen wir in dieser Koalition ein Gesetz verabschieden, in dem wir definieren, welche Länder in Europa sichere Herkunftsländer sind. Dann wird gesagt: Das können Sie doch machen. Ja, in der Großen Koalition haben wir überhaupt kein Problem damit, dieses Thema zu erledigen. Aber - und jetzt kommt der Punkt - wir brauchen dafür auch im Bundesrat eine Mehrheit. Ich appelliere an die Grünen, dass sie sich dieser Verantwortung bewusst werden. Wir werden in den nächsten Tagen mit Vertretern der Grünen in den Landesregierungen reden. Wir meinen, dass wir noch mehr Flüchtlinge aus Ländern, in denen es wirkliche Probleme gibt, beispielsweise aus Syrien, aufnehmen sollten.\n\nAber wir können doch nicht die Augen vor der Wirklichkeit verschließen: Eine ganze Reihe von Städten und Kommunen hat im Augenblick erhebliche Probleme damit, Asylbewerber aufzunehmen und unterzubringen, die zu 99 Prozent nachher nicht anerkannt werden und eigentlich wieder in ihre Heimatländer müssten. Wir sollten doch für diejenigen Platz schaffen, die wirklich in tiefster Not aus Syrien zu uns kommen.\n\nDeswegen habe ich die herzliche Bitte - Frau Kollegin Roth, ich spreche insbesondere Sie an, da Sie mich vorhin so angeschaut haben -, dass wir uns diesem Thema gemeinsam stellen und dafür sorgen, dass wir dafür im Bundesrat eine Mehrheit bekommen können.\n\nIch sage dies auch voller Sorge aus einer Erfahrung heraus, die wir in den 90er-Jahren gemacht haben. Damals, noch im Parlament in Bonn, haben wir uns mit der Frage schwergetan, wie wir das Asylrecht neu ordnen. Das Thema Asyl wurde zu einem parteipolitischen Kampfthema, an dem sich alle, wir eingeschlossen, beteiligt haben. Das Ergebnis davon war nicht, dass wir der Problemlösung nähergekommen sind, sondern das Ergebnis war, dass Rechtsradikale in diesem Land in Landtage eingezogen sind.\n\nDeswegen ist der Appell völlig richtig: Lassen Sie uns das Asylthema, das Flüchtlingsthema noch in den nächsten Tagen sachgerecht lösen, damit es nicht ein Nährboden für rechtsradikale Entwicklungen in unserem Land wird.\n\nWir sind dazu bereit. Wir sind auch bereit, mit Ihnen über den einen oder anderen Wunsch in der Diskussion zu sprechen.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Diese Große Koalition hat, wie ich finde, eine bemerkenswerte Arbeit geleistet - und dies, obwohl nach dem Wahlergebnis die Freude auf beiden Seiten - sowohl bei der SPD als auch bei uns - nicht besonders ausgeprägt war, schon wieder in eine Große Koalition zu gehen. Die SPD musste sich sogar zunächst einmal mit einem Mitgliederentscheid vergewissern, dass das alles auch klappen kann.\n\n- Wollten Sie! Okay! Dann formuliere ich neutral: Sie haben sich in einem Mitgliederentscheid vergewissert. - Dafür, dass der Start gar nicht so ganz einfach war, haben wir, finde ich, Bemerkenswertes geleistet - nicht für uns, nicht für diese Koalition, sondern für unser Vaterland und für die Menschen, die in diesem Vaterland leben. Ich sage dir, lieber Thomas Oppermann, und der SPD-Bundestagsfraktion dafür einen herzlichen Dank, dass dies möglich war.\n\nIch kann sagen - das ist auch so -, dass wir uns nicht immer leichttun, zu Entscheidungen zu kommen. Gerade für die nächste Zeit haben wir wichtige Aufgaben vor uns, bei deren Bewältigung wir noch miteinander ringen müssen. Diese müssen wir jetzt aber schnell angehen. Wir müssen jetzt ganz schnell eine Antwort in Bezug auf ein Thema finden, das uns alle schwer belastet. Das ist das Thema Kinderpornografie: Wir in dieser Koalition haben versprochen, dass wir schnell zu Ergebnissen kommen werden. Das Versprechen sollten wir jetzt auch einhalten, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von beiden Fraktionen.\n\nNach der Sommerpause muss hier ein Ergebnis auf den Tisch.\n\nEs gibt ein weiteres Thema, das uns großen Kummer macht. In unserem Land ist vieles wirklich sehr gut. Ich würde sogar sagen: Das meiste ist sehr gut. Es ist aber für uns eine unerträgliche Belastung, dass man in ganz Europa darüber spricht, dass wir das Land sind, in dem am meisten Zwangsprostitution und Frauenhandel stattfinden. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das darf uns nicht ruhen lassen. Deswegen gilt auch hier: Wir können da nicht noch ewig zuwarten. Wir wollen und müssen zwar die Menschenhandelsrichtlinie der EU umsetzen. Das reicht aber nicht, um dieses Problem zu lösen, sondern wir müssen auch dafür sorgen, dass Deutschland nicht das Land ist, in dem in erster Linie in Europa Frauenhandel und Zwangsprostitution stattfinden.\n\nAuch da können wir nicht mehr lange warten. Ich erwarte auch bei diesem Thema, dass wir im September zu entsprechenden Ergebnissen kommen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen, wenn ich sage, dass wir viel voranbringen, dann kann ich, glaube ich, auch die Entscheidung zur Energiepolitik nennen, die wir gestern in den Koalitionsfraktionen und dann auch im Wirtschaftsausschuss getroffen haben. Das war keine leichte Aufgabe. Ich weiß sehr genau, wovon ich rede; denn in meiner Zeit als Fraktionsvorsitzender war es der vierte Anlauf zur Änderung des EEG. Jeder Anlauf war noch schwerer als der vorhergehende, weil unterschiedliche Interessen aufeinanderstoßen. Da haben wir schon einen entscheidenden Schritt getan. Wir versuchen, zu verhindern, dass die Kosten für die Stromverbraucher weiter anwachsen, und sorgen dafür, dass die deutsche Wirtschaft trotzdem wettbewerbsfähig bleiben kann. Diese beiden entscheidenden Punkte sind es, die dieses EEG in besonderer Weise auszeichnen. Ich sage Ihnen, Frau Bundeskanzlerin, aber auch Ihnen, Herr Bundeswirtschaftsminister, einen herzlichen Dank für Ihren Einsatz in Brüssel. Ohne diesen Einsatz wäre es nicht gelungen, im Rahmen der Reform des EEG Arbeitsplätze in Deutschland im Wettbewerb zu halten. Danke schön dafür!\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, an diesem Beispiel wird deutlich, dass diese Große Koalition auch schwierige Aufgaben anpackt und schultert.\n\nDer letzte Hinweis: Es dürfte für die Zukunft dieses Landes von größter Bedeutung sein, was wir in der Bildungspolitik machen. Darauf ist hingewiesen worden. Dazu gehört aber auch, dass wir junge Menschen ausbilden, die unseren Ruf als die Nation der Erfinder neuer Produkte vorantreiben. Das heißt, wir brauchen an unseren dualen Hochschulen, Fachhochschulen und Universitäten Spitzenausbildungen. Dafür stellen wir jetzt Geld zur Verfügung. Ich möchte die Länder bitten, dass das Geld, das wir für die Hochschulen und Universitäten zur Verfügung stellen, auch dort landet und nicht im allgemeinen Länderhaushalt verschwindet.\n\nMan kann auch nicht sagen, dass wir Geld für die Allgemeinbildung brauchen. Denn auch dafür wird Geld zur Verfügung gestellt. Noch keine Bundesregierung hat so viel für Bildung getan. Jetzt kommt es darauf an, dass die Länder ihre Aufgabe in dieser Hinsicht ernst nehmen.\n\nIch bin also mit dem, was wir bisher in der Großen Koalition erreicht haben, durchaus zufrieden. Aber wir wissen auch, dass noch große Anstrengungen von uns gefordert sind, um unser Ziel zu erreichen, dass es den Menschen nach dieser Großen Koalition besser geht als zu ihrem Start. Dafür werden wir arbeiten. Dafür müssen wir in dieser Koalition auch zusammenhalten und die Projekte, die wir uns vorgenommen haben, jetzt schnell umsetzen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n11868,christian-kuhn,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Besucherinnen und Besucher auf der Tribüne! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Frau Dött, ich muss wirklich sagen: Dadurch, dass Sie 14 Minuten lang eine so nette Oppositionsrede gehalten haben, haben Sie uns fast den Job weggenommen;\n\naber ob das für eine Koalitionsfraktion angemessen ist, weiß ich wirklich nicht.\n\nFrau Hendricks, Sie legen hier heute einen Haushaltsentwurf vor, mit dem Sie die Probleme auf den angespannten Wohnungsmärkten nicht lösen werden. Sie legen einen Haushaltsentwurf vor, mit dem Sie Ihr Versprechen, das Sie uns allen hier am Anfang dieser Legislaturperiode gegeben haben, nämlich dass Sie Baupolitik und Umweltpolitik miteinander verbinden, nicht einlösen. Sie scheitern mit diesem Haushalt an diesem selbstgesteckten Ziel.\n\nSie stocken den Etat auf, bleiben aber hinter den Erwartungen in den Bereichen Wohnungs-, Umwelt-, Klima- und Baupolitik zurück. Dieser Haushalt ist ebenso wie die anderen Haushalte ein Haushalt der verpassten Chancen. Sie nehmen sehr viel Geld in die Hand, wissen zum Teil aber gar nicht, wo Sie es ausgeben sollen.\n\nWenn man in den Haushaltsentwurf schaut, stellt man fest, dass es ein Programm mit einem Volumen von 500 Millionen Euro gibt - es ist als Platzhalter tituliert -, bei dem es um die Beseitigung sozialer Brennpunkte geht. Man hört jetzt, dass dieses Programm ganz in die soziale Wohnraumförderung übernommen werden soll, aber im Haushaltsplan ist das noch nicht vorgesehen. Ich finde, das zeigt, wie diese Regierung arbeitet: Das ist ein bisschen geschludert und wenig durchdacht; man hat viel Geld in die Hand genommen, es aber nicht konzeptionell unterlegt.\n\nSie loben sich jetzt für die Mittel, die Sie für die soziale Wohnraumförderung ausgeben. Dabei haben doch die Länder in dem Treffen, in dem es um die Flüchtlingsfrage ging, der Kanzlerin und dem Finanzminister diese Gelder abgerungen. Die Länder haben doch einen Hilfeschrei von sich gegeben und gesagt: Wir können diese Aufgabe angesichts der jetzigen Situation nicht bewältigen. - Ich finde, Sie schmücken sich hier mit fremden Federn. Außerdem reichen die Gelder, die Sie hierfür in den Haushalt einstellen - das sagen auch die Vertreter der kommunalen Spitzenverbände -, nicht aus. Die Negativspirale - minus 60 000 Sozialwohnungen pro Jahr - bekommen Sie mit dieser Politik nicht gestoppt.\n\nIm Sommer waren Sie viel unterwegs. Sie haben eine gute Pressearbeit gemacht - das kann man als Opposition mal loben -, aber man muss sich am Ende auch am Kabinettstisch durchsetzen. Wir erwarten, dass Sie die Ansagen zur Baupolitik, die Sie diesen Sommer gemacht haben - zur Privilegierung von Ställen im Außenbereich und zu anderen Fragen -, einhalten, dass Sie sich also nicht nur medial in Szene setzen, sondern sich auch am Kabinettstisch durchsetzen.\n\nSie haben diesen Sommer eine Verfassungsänderung im Hinblick auf den sozialen Wohnungsbau gefordert; auch hier und heute haben Sie das getan. Ich sage es einmal so: Das kann man fordern. Dass es wirklich etwas ändert, glaube ich aber nicht. Der Bund kann bei der sozialen Wohnraumförderung bereits heute viel mehr tun, als Sie sagen. Ich glaube, auf eine Verschiebung auf den Sankt-Nimmerleins-Tag einer Verfassungsreform, verbunden mit schwierigen Verhandlungen zwischen Bund und Ländern, können die Menschen angesichts der angespannten Situation auf den Wohnungsmärkten in Deutschland nicht warten.\n\nDeswegen: Hätten Sie die Negativspirale wirklich stoppen wollen, dann, glaube ich, hätten Sie diesen Sommer sagen müssen: Wir wollen, dass es in Deutschland die Wiedereinführung der Wohnungsgemeinnützigkeit gibt. - Ich glaube, das wäre ein wirklich guter Debattenbeitrag gewesen.\n\nEs braucht wieder öffentliches Geld für öffentliche Güter. Es braucht eine neue Wohnungsgemeinnützigkeit. Wir haben das abgebildet, auch in unseren Vorschlägen zu diesem Haushalt. Wir werden diese Forderung weiterhin erheben. Dafür braucht es keine Verfassungsänderung. Hier können Sie schnell handeln. Hier können Sie auch ein Sofortprogramm auflegen. Wir Grünen haben in unseren Anträgen gezeigt, wie das gehen kann. Wir sagen: Mit der Schaffung von 1 Million bezahlbarer Wohnungen in den nächsten zehn Jahren ist die Spirale zu stoppen. - Hier sind wir ein ganzes Stück weiter als diese Bundesregierung.\n\nBaupolitisch ist dies ein Haushalt der verpassten Chancen. Ich finde kein Programm zur energetischen Quartierssanierung. Michael Groß und ich haben dieses Thema sehr oft debattiert, im Ausschuss und anderswo. Wo in diesem Haushalt ist denn der Impuls für den Klimaschutz im Quartier? Ich kann ihn nicht finden. Die Sanierungsrate liegt immer noch bei unter 1 Prozent. Die erneuerbaren Energien im Gebäudebereich dümpeln bei einem Anteil von unter 10 Prozent vor sich hin. Das reicht nicht aus. Deswegen ist dieser Haushalt ein Haushalt der verpassten Chancen, auch beim Klimaschutz im Gebäudebereich.\n\nJa, auch mir fehlt eine ehrliche Analyse beim Wohngeld. Ich finde, dieser Haushalt ist ein Offenbarungseid. Ich sage nur: minus 13 Prozent. Das zeigt doch, dass Ihre Wohngeldnovelle ein Rohrkrepierer war, dass die Dynamisierung fehlt und dass Sie nun die Kommunen belasten, weil viele Menschen aus dem Wohngeldbezug herausfallen und wieder in den Bezug der Kosten der Unterkunft rutschen. Das belastet die Kommunen in Deutschland, hilft denjenigen, die aus dem Wohngeldbezug herausfallen, aber nicht. Deswegen, glaube ich, ist dieses Reformprojekt in dieser Legislaturperiode ein Offenbarungseid. Dieser Haushalt zeigt, dass es gescheitert ist. Das weiß jetzt jeder.\n\nWir werden Ende dieses Monats HBCD, einen Brandhemmer, der im Wärmedämmverbundsystem verbaut ist, als Sondermüll einstufen. Damit werden Tonnen von Sondermüll an deutschen Wänden kleben. Diese Bundesregierung reagiert darauf in diesem Haushalt überhaupt nicht, anstatt ein entsprechendes Programm aufzulegen und deutlich zu machen, wie man ökologische, nachwachsende Baustoffe fördern und im Rahmen der Baupolitik Umwelt- und Klimaschutz wirklich miteinander verbinden will. Die Antwort auf diese Fragen bleiben Sie schuldig. Ich finde, ein solches Programm fehlt. Deswegen versagen Sie bei dieser Kernfrage auch in der Umwelt- und Baupolitik.\n\nFrau Dött, wer Bauland mobilisieren will, der muss die Kategorie „urbanes Gebiet“ auf den Weg bringen. Wir werden die Regierung, aber auch Sie von der Union daran messen, ob Sie in dieser Frage wirklich zu Potte kommen oder nicht. Ich hoffe, dass Sie hier nicht blockieren. Denn das ist die eigentliche Baulandfrage: Wie kann man im Innenbereich die Nachverdichtung organisieren, ohne dabei die letzten Freiflächen zu opfern? Deswegen braucht es das „urbane Gebiet“. Ich hoffe, dass die Union hier nicht, wie bei anderen bau-, klima- und wohnungspolitischen Fragen, auf der Bremse steht.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dies ist der letzte Haushalt in dieser Legislaturperiode. Er sagt viel über den Zustand dieser Koalition aus. Sie sind längst beim kleinsten gemeinsamen Nenner angekommen - dafür ist die Rede von Frau Dött, wie ich finde, ein gutes Beispiel -, Sie blockieren sich, Sie befinden sich im Dauerstreit, und Sie bekommen in der Wohnungs- und Baupolitik wenig gebacken. Deswegen ist dieser Haushalt ein Haushalt der verpassten Chancen.\"\n8421,rudolf-henke,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Frau Zypries hat daran appelliert, sorgfältig zu arbeiten. Deswegen, liebe Frau Dr. Barley, gestatten Sie mir einen Hinweis zu der Frage der Rechtmäßigkeit von Berufsordnungen von Ärztekammern. Das ist in den Bundesländern durch die jeweiligen Aufsichtsministerien zu prüfen, in Nordrhein-Westfalen also durch die Landesregierung von Nordrhein-Westfalen. Das Ergebnis dieser Prüfung ist dann eventuell eine Korrektur der Berufsordnung, wenn sie vom geltenden Recht abweicht. Die Berufsordnung kann erst danach im Ministerialblatt veröffentlicht werden. Sie ist dann also von der jeweiligen Landesregierung rechtlich geprüft.\n\nAber das ist nicht der zentrale Punkt. Der zentrale Punkt ist die Frage: Müssen wir überhaupt etwas regeln? Ich habe jetzt viele gehört, die gesagt haben: Eigentlich regen sich bei uns inzwischen ein bisschen Zweifel. Der Deutsche Ethikrat und seine Vorsitzende sind schon erwähnt worden. Ich glaube, man muss zwischen der Vorsitzenden des Deutschen Ethikrats und dem Deutschen Ethikrat differenzieren. Ich will aus einer im Dezember 2014 vom Deutschen Ethikrat vorgelegten Ad-hoc-Empfehlung zitieren:\n\nEine Suizidbeihilfe, die keine ... Hilfe in tragischen Ausnahmesituationen, sondern eine Art Normalfall wäre, etwa im Sinne eines wählbaren Regelangebots von Ärzten oder im Sinne der Dienstleitung eines Vereins, wäre geeignet, den gesellschaftlichen Respekt vor dem Leben zu schwächen.\n\nNatürlich kann man sagen, dass die Zahlen nicht explodiert sind, seit Kusch und andere unterwegs sind. Aber das hat doch auch damit zu tun, dass die Debatte darüber, wie wir gesetzmäßig darauf reagieren müssen, seit 2008 in der Politik geführt wird. Das hat natürlich eine generalpräventive Wirkung gehabt; sonst wären vielleicht mehr Vereine entstanden.\n\nIm Jahre 2010 hatte der Bundesgerichtshof die Frage zu klären, ob sich ein Anwalt strafbar macht, der einer Mandantin, die weiß, dass ihre schwerkranke Mutter nicht zeitlebens künstlich ernährt werden will, rät, den Versorgungsschlauch durchzuschneiden. Der Bundesgerichtshof hat diesen Anwalt freigesprochen. Die Richterin, die dafür gesorgt hat, dass der Bundesgerichtshof so geurteilt hat, Frau Rissing-van Saan, hat auch in der Anhörung zu diesem Thema Stellung genommen. Das sage ich nur, um einmal einzuordnen, wie sie hinsichtlich des Strafrechts zu dieser Frage steht.\n\nSie hat auch zu der Frage der Geschäftsmäßigkeit Stellung genommen. Sie kommt in der Bewertung des Entwurfs von Brand/Griese zu dem Ergebnis:\n\nStrafbar sollen solche Verhaltensweise ... jedoch nur sein, wenn sie „geschäftsmäßig“ begangen werden, was nach herkömmlichem strafrechtlichen Verständnis ein auf Wiederholung angelegtes gleichartiges Handeln und den Willen des Täters voraussetzt, dieses zu einem wiederkehrenden Bestandteil seiner beruflichen oder wirtschaftlichen Betätigungen zu machen, ohne dass es dabei auf eine Gewinnerzielungsabsicht ankäme.\n\nSie ist in der Anhörung und in vielen weiteren Stellungsnahmen mehrfach zu der Auffassung gekommen, dass die Verabschiedung dieses Gesetzentwurfs die Autonomie von Ärzten, die in der Palliativmedizin oder in der Hämatologie und Onkologie tätig sind, nicht bedroht.\n\nAnders wäre es auch nicht erklärbar, dass sich die Bundesärztekammer und die Palliativorganisationen bis auf den heutigen Tag dafür einsetzen, eine solche Gesetzgebung zu verabschieden.\n\nIch will nur daran erinnern, dass jemand wie Thomas Sitte, der in führender Rolle bei der Deutschen PalliativStiftung ist, einigen von uns noch in diesen Tagen einen Brief geschrieben hat, in dem es heißt: Ich habe keine Angst vor einem Verbot geschäftsmäßiger Selbsttötungshilfe. Im Gegenteil: Ich bin dafür, obwohl ich suizidwillige Schwerkranke so berate, wie sie es wollen, und ihnen so zur Seite stehe, wie sie es brauchen, so wie ich es derzeit mehr als einmal im Monat tue. - Er hat davor keine Angst. Dann sollten auch wir keine Angst davor haben, dass wir diese Entscheidung treffen, so wie sie dort vorgeschlagen wird.\n\nEine letzte Bemerkung. Hier ist viel von autonomen, selbstbestimmten Entscheidungen die Rede gewesen. Ich bin mir nicht sicher, ob ein verstärktes Unterwegssein von Suizidassistenten - das muss ja nicht jemand vom Format eines Herrn Kusch sein; das kann ja morgen oder übermorgen jemand ganz anderes sein - wirklich hilft, Autonomie zu verteidigen.\n\nIch verrate Ihnen etwas: Ich habe als, ich glaube, 22- oder 23-Jähriger am Fenster gestanden und mich in einer Beziehungskrise gefragt: Was mache ich jetzt? - Wenn da einer gewesen wäre, der noch ein bisschen geschubst hätte, der das noch ein bisschen befördert hätte, dann wäre ich vielleicht nicht mehr hier.\n\nUnser Ziel muss sein, die Zahl erfolgreicher Suizide weiter zu senken, aber nicht, das Vollbringen und Durchführen von Suiziden zu erleichtern. Deswegen brauchen wir keine Suizidassistenten, die den Hunderttausend, die versuchen, einen Suizid durchzuführen - 10 000 erfolgreich -, dafür noch eine zusätzliche Motivation und eine Erfolgsgarantie geben.\n\nBitte stimmen Sie mit mir für den Entwurf von Brand, Griese, Vogler und Terpe.\n\nIch bedanke mich für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n14352,uwe-beckmeyer,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Am Anfang dieser Legislaturperiode haben wir uns zum Ziel gesetzt, dass wir in diesen vier Jahren die maritime Wirtschaft stärken und Deutschland zu einem maritimen Hightechstandort ausbauen wollen;\n\ndenn diese Branche - ich glaube, da sind wir uns einig - ist eine Schlüssel- und Zukunftsbranche der deutschen Wirtschaft. Sie vereint Hochtechnologie mit erheblichem Innovationspotenzial. Forschung, Entwicklung und Innovation sind dabei unsere Schwerpunkte; denn wir haben - und das ist gut so - einen sehr innovativen Mittelstand. Deshalb hat sich diese Bundesregierung für diese Legislaturperiode ein sehr ambitioniertes Programm vorgenommen - und wir haben viel erreicht.\n\nErstens. Schiffbau und Meerestechnik sind integraler Bestandteil der Hightech-Strategie der Bundesregierung.\n\nMit den maritimen Technologieförderprogrammen setzen wir wichtige Anreize, damit die Unternehmen noch mehr in Forschung und Entwicklung investieren; denn wir wollen, dass die maritime Wirtschaft ihre internationale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit erhält und ausbaut. Deshalb haben wir seitens der Bundesregierung und seitens des Parlaments für Innovationen an deutschen Werften sehr viel Geld in die Hand genommen. Es sind alleine 35 Millionen Euro pro Jahr aus Bundesmitteln. Hinzu kommen die Komplementärmittel der Länder. Weiterhin wenden wir für Forschung und Entwicklung jährlich rund 32 Millionen Euro auf, ebenfalls mehrere Millionen Euro pro Jahr für die maritime Sicherheit.\n\nWenn man sich das anschaut und auf die Legislaturperiode hochrechnet, kommt man alleine auf Bundesmittel von gut 280 bis 290 Millionen Euro, die hier eingesetzt werden. Wenn man die Landesmittel und noch die Investitionskraft der einzelnen Unternehmen hinzunimmt, dann ist das ein x-Faches. Das zeigt: Wir haben es mit einer sehr potenten Industrie zu tun, und wir tun seitens des Bundes und der Länder vieles, um diese Innovationsfähigkeit noch stärker herauszubilden.\n\nZweitens. Die Bundesregierung bietet exportorientierten Industrien verlässliche Unterstützung durch Hermesdeckung und Investitionsgarantien. Bis Ende 2016 hat der Bund für den Export deutscher Schiffe ein Entschädigungsrisiko von rund 29 Milliarden Euro abgesichert. Ich will das an dieser Stelle deutlich unterstreichen.\n\nDrittens. Wir helfen unserem Mittelstand bei der Erschließung von Auslandsmärkten. Unterschätzen Sie das nicht. Wir tun das durch Geschäftsanbahnungsreisen und durch Auslandsmessen. Wir sind dort Gott sei Dank international mit den Unternehmen sehr aktiv.\n\nViertens. Wir haben im Rahmen der Energiewende die Novelle des EEG sowie auch das Windenergie-auf-See-Gesetz hier im Hause verabschiedet. Wir haben damit einen verlässlichen Ausbaupfad festgelegt. Die maritime Energiewende ist zudem ein wesentlicher Baustein auch unserer Industriepolitik. Weniger Schadstoffemissionen, mehr Energieeffizienz, das sind wesentliche Ziele auch für die Schifffahrt.\n\nIm Februar hat das Bundeswirtschaftsministerium daher die Förderinitiative „Energiewende im Verkehr“ gestartet. In unserem maritimen Forschungsprogramm ist Green Shipping zukünftig eines von vier oberzentralen Querschnittsthemen. Sie sehen: Wir setzen auf konsequente Technologieförderung, aber auch auf passgenaue Lösungen.\n\nDas gilt auch für neue Themen, deren Behandlung wir hier im Parlament verabredet haben und die sinnvollerweise so gestaltet werden, dass keine Einzelinteressen bedient werden, dass keine Doppelförderung entsteht, dass ein kluges Konzept und kein Wettlauf von Finanzierungswünschen dabei herauskommt. Ich spreche vom Deutschen Maritimen Zentrum.\n\nAls Koordinator für die maritime Wirtschaft setze ich mich gleichermaßen für die Schifffahrt wie für die Interessen der See- und Binnenschifffahrt, aber auch der See- und Binnenhäfen ein. Prioritäres Ziel hier ist und bleibt die Sicherung des Schifffahrtstandortes selbst. Mit den Kollegen aus dem Bundesverkehrsministerium haben wir deshalb ein Maßnahmenpaket verabredet, das sich sehen lassen kann: Die Anhebung des Lohnsteuereinbehaltes auf 100 Prozent - wir haben uns darüber unterhalten -, die vollständige Erstattung der Lohnnebenkosten, die Weiterführung der Zuschüsse zu den Ausbildungsplatzkosten, die Anpassung der Schiffsbesetzungsordnung, die Befreiung von Schiffserlöspools von der Versicherungsteuer - der Strauß ist riesengroß.\n\nNun müssen aber auch die Reeder ihren Beitrag leisten. Wir werden uns diese Entwicklung sehr genau anschauen und vor allen Dingen auch evaluieren. Die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der deutschen Häfen gilt es zu stärken. Wir haben hierzu das Nationale Hafenkonzept, wir fördern intelligente Hafentechnologien.\n\nDas Letzte, was ich ansprechen möchte, ist die Maritime Agenda 2025. Hier haben wir zum ersten Mal eine ressortübergreifende Strategie für die Branche vorgelegt. Sie definiert klare Handlungsfelder: mit Blick auf die steigenden Anforderungen des Klima- und Umweltschutzes und in Bezug auf die Sicherheit im Seeverkehr, die schärferen Wettbewerbsbedingungen auf globalen Märkten, die zunehmende Automatisierung und Digitalisierung von Produktions- und Logistikprozessen sowie Produkten und Dienstleistungen. Die maritime Wirtschaft ist in vielen Bereichen Vorreiter des digitalen Wandels.\n\nAber die Transformation läuft rasant. Insofern ist die Digitalisierung Schwerpunkt der 10. Nationalen Maritimen Konferenz nächsten Dienstag in Hamburg. Wir müssen und wollen die maritime Branche hier weiter voranbringen. Deshalb, so ist meine Hoffnung, haben wir alle ins Boot geholt, auch um mit Bund, Ländern, Verbänden und Gewerkschaften eine gemeinsame Erklärung zu verabschieden. Denn: Wer rastet, der rostet. Das gilt nicht nur für Schiffe.\n\nEs freut mich daher, dass sich viele von uns bei der 10. Nationalen Maritimen Konferenz in Hamburg wiedersehen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n14629,alexander-neu,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Kollegin Beck, als Obmann der Linksfraktion im Verteidigungsausschuss habe ich schon zu Anfang der Legislaturperiode in der Obleuterunde darum gebeten, dass der Verteidigungsausschuss doch eine Delegationsreise nach Russland machen möge, um die dortigen Duma-Kollegen zu treffen. Das wurde mit einem Lächeln abgelehnt: Wir fahren nicht nach Russland. - Das war noch vor der Krise. Wie viele Anfragen haben Sie eigentlich in der Obleuterunde gemacht, ob der Auswärtige Ausschuss sich mit den russischen Kollegen des Auswärtigen Ausschusses in Moskau treffen möge?\"\n8199,julia-verlinden,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Wir sprechen heute, fast ein Jahr nachdem der Nationale Aktionsplan Energieeffizienz verabschiedet wurde, über eine sogenannte Sofortmaßnahme, die hier zur Umsetzung steht. Das, finde ich, ist sehr amüsant.\n\nIn dieser Sofortmaßnahme, nämlich in dem vorgelegten Gesetzentwurf, steht, dass die Bundesregierung mit diesem Aufkleber für Heizungen das Ziel verfolge, dass sich die „Inanspruchnahme einer weiter gehenden Energieberatung“ erhöhe und dass sich die Motivation der Verbraucher erhöhe, um alte, ineffiziente Heizgeräte auszutauschen. - Ja, Anreize zum Austausch von alten Heizungen fordern wir Grüne ja schon lange, um den Energieverbrauch zu verringern und um natürlich auch das Klima zu schützen.\n\nSchauen wir uns einmal genauer an, was die Bundesregierung hier vorlegt. Die Schornsteinfeger sollen je nach Energieeffizienzkategorie ein Label auf die Heizung im Keller kleben. Und sie sollen die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher auf weiterführende Beratungsangebote aufmerksam machen. - Das war’s. Das ist doch nur ein Tropfen auf den heißen Stein. Diese Maßnahme entspricht nicht den notwendigen Klimaschutz- und Energieeinsparbemühungen in Gebäuden und wird den vorhandenen Energieeffizienzpotenzialen auch nicht annähernd gerecht.\n\nIm Vergleich zum Jahr 2008 will die Bundesregierung bis 2020 insgesamt 20 Prozent Energie einsparen. Geschafft sind bisher genau 6,4 Prozent. Es bleiben also gerade einmal noch fünf Jahre Zeit. Die Bundesregierung muss hier ganz schön flott noch sehr viel in Bewegung setzen, um diese Menge Energie einzusparen. Der Grund dafür ist nicht nur, dass sie es sich selbst vorgenommen hat. Vielmehr steckt die Bundesregierung mitten in einem EU-Vertragsverletzungsverfahren, weil sie die EU-Energieeffizienz-Richtlinie bisher nicht zufriedenstellend umgesetzt hat.\n\n- Ich weiß nicht, was Sie daran so lustig finden. Das wird für die Bundesregierung ziemlich teuer.\n\nIm Zweifel können das ziemlich hohe Strafzahlungen werden. Aber gut, Sie erklären dann den Steuerzahlern, dass Sie eben nicht nur die Energiewende riskieren, sondern eben auch die Strafzahlungen vor dem EuGH.\n\nEs ist echt tragisch, wie schwer Sie sich mit einer vernünftigen Energieeffizienzpolitik tun. Wenn dieser bunte Heizungsaufkleber seine prognostizierte Wirkung erzielt - das muss sich erst noch zeigen -, dann trägt dieses Instrument mit sage und schreibe - aufgepasst! - 0,3 Prozent zum Einsparziel bei. Das ist zwar besser als nichts, aber zu einer wirksamen Energieeffizienzpolitik, die den Klimaschutz wirklich ernst nimmt, gehören weitere politische Maßnahmen. Denn durch die Etikettierung der Heizkessel werden insbesondere Vermieter überhaupt keinen Anreiz haben, alte Kessel auszutauschen. Dass die alten Heizungen viel zu viel Energie verbrauchen, ist den Vermietern egal. Denn die Heizkosten zahlen die Mieterinnen und Mieter, und diese erfahren nicht einmal - wir haben es gerade gehört -, ob ihr Vermieter eine völlig ineffiziente und veraltete Heizungsanlage im Keller stehen hat.\n\nDer Bundesrat hatte vorgeschlagen, das Instrument zu verbessern, indem man hier mehr Transparenz für die Mieter herstellt. Aber dem wollte die Bundesregierung nicht folgen. Das finde ich äußerst bedauerlich.\n\nAuch eine bessere Verschränkung des neuen Instruments mit der existierenden Energieeinsparverordnung haben Sie leider nicht umgesetzt. Denn die Energieeinsparverordnung - Herr Durz hat sehr viel von Freiwilligkeit gesprochen; ich weiß nicht, ob er die Energieeinsparverordnung kennt - sieht bereits seit längerem eine Austauschpflicht für Heizkessel vor, die älter als 30 Jahre sind.\n\nIch glaube nicht, dass es Ihnen mit der Modernisierung des Heizungsbestands so ernst ist wie uns Grünen. Denn wir Grünen wollen einen wirksamen Instrumentenmix für die Gebäudesanierung. Dazu gehört aus unserer Sicht vor allem eine massive Förderung von Quartierssanierungen dort, wo viele einkommensschwache Haushalte zur Miete wohnen. Denn wir wollen nicht, dass diese Menschen den stetig steigenden Heizkosten quasi ausgeliefert sind. Und für Hauseigentümer und -eigentümerinnen eignet sich eine ausführliche, qualitativ hochwertige Beratung wie ein individueller Gebäudesanierungsfahrplan deutlich besser zur Planung der Erneuerung der Heizungsanlage als ein Aufkleber.\n\nKommen Sie endlich in die Puschen!\n\nEs wäre doch beschämend, wenn wir beim Thema Gebäudesanierung weiter nur in kleinen Tippelschritten vorankommen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12612,harald-petzold,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Besucherinnen und Besucher auf den Besuchertribünen! Die Bundeskanzlerin hat gestern dem neu gewählten amerikanischen Präsidenten Donald Trump gratuliert. Sie hat dabei auf gemeinsame Werte hingewiesen, die Deutschland und die USA verbinden. Sie nannte Demokratie, Freiheit, Respekt vor dem Recht und der Würde des Menschen, unabhängig von Herkunft, Hautfarbe, Religion, Geschlecht, sexueller Orientierung oder politischer Einstellung, und sagte: Dafür stehen wir in Deutschland. - Angesichts der Äußerungen, die Donald Trump im Wahlkampf unter anderem in Bezug auf Homosexuelle gemacht hat, ist das richtig. Ich finde es sehr in Ordnung, dass sie das so betont hat. Ich würde mir allerdings wünschen, dass diese Werte auch in Deutschland gelebt werden, und zwar ohne Einschränkungen, so wie die Bundeskanzlerin es fordert.\n\nDie Realität ist nach wie vor eine andere. Lesben, Schwule, trans- und intergeschlechtliche Menschen werden in Deutschland immer noch nicht gleichbehandelt. Sie haben mit Ungleichbehandlung und Vorurteilen zu kämpfen, und sie sind Anfeindungen ausgesetzt, und das nicht zuletzt auch aufgrund des Bauchgefühls der Kanzlerin und der Blockadehaltung ihrer eigenen Partei, der Union.\n\nMeine Fraktion hat heute diese Debatte verlangt, damit die Vorsitzende des Ausschusses für Recht und Verbraucherschutz zum zweiten Mal darüber berichten muss, wie in diesem Ausschuss mit Gesetzentwürfen, die zur Behandlung überwiesen worden sind, umgegangen wurde. Aufgrund dieser Umgehensweise im Ausschuss führen wir heute die mindestens 14. Debatte zu diesem Thema. Auch wenn der Kollege Brunner meint, es lohne nicht, dass wir als Opposition immer wieder neue Anträge einbringen: Wir werden Sie so lange mit Anträgen konfrontieren, bis Sie endlich dafür gesorgt haben, dass Lesben und Schwule in der Gesellschaft gleichbehandelt werden.\n\nWir haben in diesen mindestens 14 Debatten immer wieder eines erlebt: dass auf der einen Seite die Opposition für gleiche Rechte gekämpft und auf der anderen Seite die Koalition verhindert hat. Sie hat verhindert, dass über den Gesetzentwurf der Linken im Ausschuss überhaupt diskutiert worden ist. Sie hat verhindert, dass über den Gesetzentwurf der Grünen zur Öffnung der Ehe im Ausschuss überhaupt diskutiert worden ist. Sie hat verhindert, dass über den Antrag der Linken zur Annahme der Entschließung des Bundesrates im Ausschuss diskutiert worden ist. Sie hat verhindert, dass es mehr Schutz für Menschen mit HIV und Aids vor Diskriminierung gibt. Sie hat verhindert, dass es gleiche Rechte für Regenbogenfamilien gibt. Sie hat verhindert, dass es das volle Adoptionsrecht für Menschen in einer eingetragenen Lebenspartnerschaft gibt.\n\nDer absolute Treppenwitz der Geschichte ist, lieber Kollege Brunner, dass ihr es gewesen seid, die ihr euch im Ausschuss für diese Verhinderung hergegeben habt. Mindestens 15 von 17 Mal ist in den Ausschusssitzungen von dir der Antrag gestellt worden, Beratungsgegenstände von der Tagesordnung zu nehmen, sie zu vertagen oder aber gar nicht erst mit der Diskussion anzufangen.\n\nEuer Fraktionskollege Johannes Kahrs kneift heute ja ganz. Bei der letzten Beratung dieses Gegenstands hat er hier vollmundig erklärt:\n\nEs reicht. Ich habe einfach keine Lust mehr. Ich verspreche Ihnen eines: Wenn das Thema hier im Deutschen Bundestag noch einmal aufkommt, dann werden wir in der SPD-Fraktion darüber abstimmen, wie wir hier abstimmen. ... Entweder Sie raffen sich jetzt mal auf\n\n- das hat er in Ihre Richtung gesagt, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Union -\n\nund kriegen es hin, dass die Abstimmung geöffnet wird, oder Sie werden hier im Deutschen Bundestag eine Abstimmungsniederlage erleiden!\n\nNatürlich. Da ich nur noch vier Sekunden Redezeit habe, ist es mir sogar sehr recht, dass der Kollege Brunner noch eine Frage stellt. - Bitte schön.\n\nLieber Kollege Brunner, ich nehme Ihnen persönlich ja durchaus ab, dass Sie mit Herzblut für die Angelegenheit kämpfen, und Sie machten uns dies ja auch mit entsprechender Emotionalität in jeder der von mir genannten mindestens 14 Debatten deutlich. Ich finde das in Ordnung; das Anliegen hat diese Emotionalität auch verdient.\n\nIch sage Ihnen zu Ihrer Bemerkung aber: Sie haben die Absetzungsanträge jedes Mal verbunden mit der Zusage gestellt, dass es eine Lösung vonseiten der Koalition geben werde und dass Sie darüber verhandeln würden. Nur wurde diese Lösung nicht vorgelegt.\n\nWenn Sie wenigstens 10 Prozent der Energie, die Sie hier für die Verhinderung aufgebracht haben, einmal dafür aufbrächten, dass wir endlich zu einer Lösung kommen,\n\ndann können Sie doch von mir aus auch unseren Gesetzentwurf ablehnen. Aber dann nehmen Sie wenigstens den Gesetzentwurf des Bundesrates an. Dann hätten wir das Problem erledigt.\n\n- Dafür könnt ihr selber werben, liebe Kollegen von den Grünen.\n\nWenn wir zumindest den Gesetzentwurf des Bundesrates annehmen würden, dann hätten wir das Problem vom Tisch. Sie wissen genau, wie der Weg geht. Dazu bedarf es etwas Mutes seitens Ihrer Fraktion und nicht nur der Ankündigungen des Kollegen Kahrs - das können Sie ihm auch ausrichten -; dass er heute hier bei dieser Sitzung kneift, finde ich oberdaneben, aber das muss er mit sich selber ausmachen.\n\n- Schade.\n\nIch will zusammenfassen: Geben Sie endlich Ihre Blockadehaltung auf! Dann werden wir auch keine weiteren Anträge dazu einbringen müssen. Sorgen Sie endlich dafür, dass Lesben, Schwule, Bisexuelle, Transsexuelle, Intersexuelle in diesem Land gleichbehandelt werden. - Das sage ich auch in Richtung Union. Denn die Kollegen von der SPD sind dafür nicht alleine zuständig; das wissen wir auch.\n\nNehmen Sie ernst, was Ihre Bundeskanzlerin gesagt hat. Es geht um den Respekt, um die Freiheit und um das Recht und die Würde der Menschen, unabhängig von der sexuellen Identität.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3004,roland-claus,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Da der Bundeswirtschaftsminister gleich zu Beginn seiner Rede die Infrastrukturkompetenz der Linkspartei hervorgehoben hat, muss ich den Ball natürlich aufnehmen. Es geht um die Frage der privaten Beteiligung an öffentlichen Infrastrukturinvestitionen. Da will ich von einem Vorgang erzählen, an dem ich intensiv beteiligt war.\n\nVor fast zwei Jahren hat ein Chemieunternehmen in Wittenberg dem Bund 35 Millionen Euro für den Ausbau einer Umgehungsstraße angeboten - ohne Bedingungen -, weil sich dort Bürgerinitiativen und mehrere Unternehmen einig waren. Der Bund war bis heute nicht in der Lage, mit dieser Schenkung auch nur umzugehen. Deshalb zweifle ich an den Infrastrukturkapazitäten dieser Bundesregierung, Herr Minister, und das müssen Sie sich dann auch gefallen lassen.\n\nIch denke, Wirtschaftspolitik steht in diesen bewegten Tagen in der besonderen Verantwortung, einen Beitrag zu Frieden, einer gerechten globalen Entwicklung und Abrüstung zu leisten. Ich glaube, wenn ich diesen Satz vor einem Jahr gesagt hätte, hätte ich noch den Zwischenruf geerntet: Wovon träumen Sie nachts?\n\nAber ich will mit der Verflechtung von Wirtschafts-, Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik beginnen. Bekanntlich hat die EU weitere Sanktionen gegen Russland beschlossen, hat sie zunächst angedroht. Jetzt will ich nur einen einzigen Fakt benennen, um die Absurdität dieses Vorgangs zu kennzeichnen.\n\nSie haben vor einer Woche mit großer Mehrheit Waffenlieferungen in den Irak beschlossen. Im Moment ist die Fluggesellschaft Wolga-Dnjepr damit befasst, diese Waffen in den Irak zu fliegen. Der Dnjepr ist bekanntlich der größte Strom in der Ukraine, und die Wolga ist der größte Strom im Westen Russlands. Nun muss man wissen, dass Wolga-Dnjepr ein russisches Flug-, Logistik- und Handelsunternehmen ist - mit ukrainischer Beteiligung. Dann muss man noch wissen, dass Wolga-Dnjepr vor kurzem 49 Prozent der Air Cargo Germany, also einer deutschen Luftfrachtgesellschaft, erworben hat. Diese Verflechtung von Wirtschaftsstrukturen macht kenntlich, wie absurd die Vorstellung ist, man könnte Sicherheits-, Friedens- und Außenpolitik mit Wirtschaftssanktionen beeinflussen.\n\nDeshalb ist Sanktionspolitik in aller Regel kontraproduktiv. Sie ist aber auch eine Irreführung der Öffentlichkeit. Ich hätte gar nichts gegen die Idee einer Sanktionspolitik, wenn Sie mal darauf kämen, wenn es um Rüstungsexporte nach Saudi-Arabien und Katar geht, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nIch will noch einen Fall internationaler Wirtschaftspolitik ansprechen: die Verhandlungen über die transatlantischen Freihandelsabkommen zwischen der Europäischen Union und den USA, Kanada und anderen, die im Moment im Wesentlichen als Geheimverhandlungen stattfinden. Der Bundesfinanzminister hat gestern bei der Einbringung seines Etats einen sehr bemerkenswerten Satz zu den Abkommen gesagt: Wir wollen sie zu einem guten Ergebnis verhandeln, aber auf Augenhöhe. - So etwa Schäuble.\n\nNeben mir saß zu dem Zeitpunkt eine junge Kollegin aus München, und die fragte mich: Du kennst doch den Finanzminister schon länger. Glaubt der das wirklich? Glaubt der das angesichts einer Situation, in der Abhör- und Ausspähaktionen durch die NSA unvermindert fortgesetzt werden? - Ich bin ihr die Antwort noch schuldig geblieben und hoffe auf Unterstützung durch den Bundesfinanzminister. Ich bin übrigens froh, dass gestern aus den Reihen der SPD eine ganze Reihe kritischer Äußerungen zu den Freihandelsabkommen gemacht wurden.\n\nZu einigen Elementen Ihres Etats für das nächste Jahr:\n\nHerr Wirtschaftsminister, wir wissen: Fast die Hälfte dieses Etats wird für Subventionen bei Steinkohle sowie Luft- und Raumfahrt aufgebraucht. Gewiss, bei der Kohle stehen wir im Wort; aber bei Luft- und Raumfahrt handelt es sich um die Subventionierung staatsnaher Monopolisten. Nur ein Drittel dessen, was in die Luft- und Raumfahrt geht, verwenden wir für Innovationsforschung und Innovationsförderung bei kleinen und mittelständischen Unternehmen - und das alles vor dem Hintergrund der Tatsache, dass wir uns alle mit schöner Regelmäßigkeit vor dem deutschen Mittelstand verneigen. Natürlich ist das Zentrale Innovationsprogramm Mittelstand gut und unterstützenswert. Es findet auch unsere Unterstützung. Aber angesichts der Herausforderungen, vor denen wir stehen, ist es viel zu gering. Ich will darauf verweisen, dass uns in diesem Jahr nur drei Monate für die Umsetzung dieses Programms zur Verfügung stehen, weil bekanntlich der Etat 2014 erst spät verabschiedet wurde und der Dezember ja der Kassenmonat ist.\n\nDas Bundeswirtschaftsministerium hat uns, die wir nachgefragt haben, bislang immer gesagt: Du musst keine Sorge haben, das wird in Ordnung kommen. - Trotzdem schlagen wir für den Fall, dass es doch klemmen sollte, vor - in diesem Fall und auch bei großen Verkehrsinfrastrukturvorhaben -, im Haushalt Vorsorge zu treffen und Überjährigkeit zu beschließen. Wenn wir sie nicht brauchen, umso besser.\n\nIch will zum Schluss noch auf die Wirtschaft im Osten zu sprechen kommen, wohl wissend, dass es inzwischen schick geworden ist, nicht mehr über den Osten zu reden. Selbstverständlich weiß ich auch, welche Probleme im Ruhrgebiet und in Bremen zu finden sind. Selbstverständlich weiß ich, dass es inzwischen manche Leuchttürme im Osten gibt, über die wir reden. Das ist im Detail alles richtig, aber insgesamt falsch. Sie können das beispielsweise ablesen am Industrieatlas der DAX-Unternehmen, den die Beauftragte für die neuen Bundesländer vor kurzem veröffentlicht hat. Oder Sie -können sich die Veröffentlichung über die Zahl der Millionäre, also die Einkommensverteilung, im Osten anschauen. Deshalb werden wir weiter vorschlagen, die Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“ zu fördern, wohl wissend, wie kompliziert es bei der Kofinanzierung ist. Wir werden Einsparungen beim Luft- und Raumfahrtzentrum zugunsten des Zentralen Innovationsprogramms Mittelstand vorschlagen.\n\nIch bedanke mich, Frau Präsidentin, für den Hinweis und habe das auch als Mahnung verstanden. - Wir brauchen eine zukunftsfähige Wirtschaftspolitik. Dies geht mit diesem Etat nicht. Wir wollen eine sozialökologische Gerechtigkeitswende. Davon sind wir noch weit entfernt, aber da wollen wir hin.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n14996,hans-joachim-fuchtel,\"Der Bundesregierung und dem Finanzierungskonsortium, dem auch die DEG angehört, ist durch die angesprochene Berichterstattung im Kommuniqué das Folgende bekannt: Im Jahr 2015 kam ein Ehepaar aus Boteka ums Leben. Dabei handelt es sich um einen Vorgang zwischen der lokalen Polizei und dem Ehepaar aufgrund eines Konflikts zwischen den Ehepartnern. Das Unternehmen Feronia war daran nicht beteiligt. Der Mann war als Gärtner bei dem Unternehmen unter Vertrag.\n\nDie Bundesregierung und die DEG bedauern diesen Vorgang sehr. Dem darüber hinausgehenden Vorwurf eines repressiven Verhaltens ist die DEG nach Kenntnis der Bundesregierung nachgegangen. Belege oder konkrete Ansatzpunkte liegen uns nicht vor.\n\nIch darf hier noch einmal betonen, dass wir allen konkreten Hinweisen und Ansatzpunkten über die DEG bzw. die anderen Finanziers des Konsortiums nachgehen, und zwar schon aus Reputationsgründen. Wir legen Wert darauf, dass solche Dinge aufgeklärt werden, auch wenn in diesem Fall der Vorwurf, der hier vorgetragen wurde, möglicherweise nicht zutrifft. Es geht auch darum, dass deutsche Firmen, die am Konsortium beteiligt sind, oder hier die DEG daran interessiert sind, in solche Dinge nicht hineingezogen zu werden.\n\nIch darf Ihnen sagen: Die DEG steht im engen Austausch mit Feronia. Das Unternehmen zeigt sich sehr kooperativ bei der Aufklärung. Aus dem Kommuniqué geht kein Fehlverhalten eines Feronia-Mitarbeiters hervor. Vielmehr wird deutlich, dass die Sicherheitskräfte von Feronia nicht an Folterung oder Erschießung beteiligt gewesen sind. Das ist bereits sehr gründlich untersucht worden. Ich bitte darum, das zur Kenntnis zu nehmen.\n\nDas ist zunächst einmal an der Zeit gescheitert. Wir sind bis jetzt noch nicht dazu gekommen.\n\nWas das Zweite angeht, das hier im Raum steht, müssen die Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer Folgendes wissen: Die DEG ist der private Zweig der KfW. Sie finanziert Firmen im Ausland und trägt dazu bei, Arbeitsplätze zu schaffen. Hier ging es darum, dass im Jahr 2015 9 000 Arbeitsplätze zur Disposition standen. Die DEG ist gemeinsam mit anderen bzw. mit einem Konsortium in die Finanzierung hineingegangen, um diese Arbeitsplätze zu erhalten.\n\nWir haben heute Diskussionen der Qualität, wie sie gerade vorgetragen wurde, was wir als Demokraten natürlich akzeptieren. Aber wir möchten auch darauf hinweisen, dass es für manche politischen Kräfte, die in solchen Diskussionen mitwirken, offensichtlich erst dann interessant wurde, als sich die DEG aus Deutschland an der Finanzierung beteiligt hat. Wir haben das nicht gemacht, um Ärger zu haben,\n\nsondern wir haben es gemacht, um die Arbeitsplätze von 9 000 Menschen zu sichern.\n\nWenn wir darüber reden, dass wir nicht noch mehr Flüchtlinge und andere aufnehmen möchten, dann ist es auch eine große Aufgabe, darauf hinzuwirken, dass es Arbeitsplätze vor Ort gibt. Wir mussten dieses Signal setzen, um einen Beitrag dazu zu leisten, dass die Menschen vor Ort Arbeit und Perspektiven haben.\n\nDie anderen Fragen können wir gerne in anderen Dialogen noch einmal erörtern.\"\n3717,sebastian-hartmann,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Kein Donnerstagabend ohne Lkw-Maut. Es ist wieder so weit, und auch das Stichwort Pkw-Maut darf nicht fehlen. Es wird ebenso wie die Frage der ausreichenden Einnahmen regelmäßig angesprochen.\n\nAber was beraten wir heute tatsächlich? Wir wollen heute die Änderung des Bundesfernstraßenmautgesetzes beschließen. Darauf möchte ich mich in meinen Ausführungen konzentrieren.\n\n- Die CSU ist begeistert. Danke, Herr Kollege. Wir können uns auch an der Sachpolitik und an den Realitäten orientieren, statt allgemeine Ausführungen zu machen, die heute Abend gar nicht zur Diskussion stehen.\n\nHinter uns liegen gute Beratungen. Wir haben eine spannende Anhörung von Expertinnen und Experten durchgeführt, und wir haben damit einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Weiterentwicklung der Maut geleistet.\n\nTatsächlich erhebt Deutschland einen Beitrag von schweren Lkw. Dieser orientiert sich nicht an irgend-etwas, sondern an der Berechnung eines wissenschaftlichen Wegekostengutachtens. Das wird nicht einfach im Raum stehen gelassen - das reicht nicht aus -, sondern wir werten es auch politisch. Damit kann sich das Gewerbe auf eine verlässliche und berechenbare Umsetzung dieser entsprechenden Erkenntnisse verlassen. Darauf hat das Gewerbe einen Anspruch, und darauf müssen wir im Interesse unseres Landes auch dringend achten.\n\nDaher fällt die Senkung der Mautsätze nicht vom Himmel, sondern sie ist das Ergebnis dieser Systematik. Wir orientieren uns an den tatsächlichen Wegekosten bzw. daran, was wissenschaftlich ermittelt worden ist, aber wir übernehmen es nicht unpolitisch. Denn wir haben darauf geachtet, dass wir bei den Bundesstraßen und Bundesautobahnen nicht willkürlich entscheiden, sondern auch beachten, was das für Auswirkungen haben kann. Denn wir wollen nicht, dass entlegene Regionen einfach abgehängt werden und damit Erreichbarkeitsdefizite noch weiter verschärft werden. Darauf können sich alle verlassen.\n\nWir werden uns aber an einigen Stellen dem zugrunde liegenden EU-Richtlinienregime zuwenden müssen. Tatsächlich ist es ein Problem, wenn wir uns aufgrund der niedrigen Kapitalverzinsung bzw. der niedrigen Zinsen daran orientieren müssen, das hier gebundene Kapital abzubilden. Ironie der Geschichte ist, dass sich die Verkehrsmenge, die für die Einnahmen ursächlich sein muss, nicht wesentlich verändert hat. Auch das Gegen-argument, dass wir niedrigere Baukosten bei der Wiederherstellung verschlissener Straßen zu verzeichnen haben, reicht nicht aus, um die Abbildung dieses Effekts zu rechtfertigen. Das ist einer der Punkte, an dem wir die Maut zukünftig dringend weiterentwickeln müssen.\n\nZunehmender Verkehr bedeutet zunehmenden Verschleiß. Doch das ist ein klassischer Zielkonflikt. Denn jede Maut hat zwei Ziele: Auf der einen Seite wollen wir dauerhaft verlässliche Einnahmen erzielen, um unsere Infrastruktur auf gutem, europaweit hohem Niveau zu erhalten. Auf der anderen Seite entfaltet jede Maut eine ökologische, ökonomische und möglicherweise auch eine soziale Lenkungswirkung. Das sind Zielkonflikte. Die Ziele stehen miteinander in Konkurrenz. Wenn wir zu erfolgreich sind, weil sich die ökologische Lenkungswirkung entfaltet, weil beispielsweise die Spediteure ganz bewusst in umweltfreundlichere Lkw investieren, die weniger Luftbelastung und Lärmbelastung verursachen, und ihre Flotten so umstellen, dass Umwelt und Anwohner geschont werden, dann erzielen wir automatisch weniger Einnahmen. Wir sind dann Opfer des eigenen Erfolgs und befinden uns in einem klassischen Zielkonflikt, weil wir darauf angewiesen sind, dauerhaft hohe Investitionen, zu denen die Einnahmen aus der Lkw-Maut neben der Steuerfinanzierung zu einem Drittel beitragen, in die deutsche Infrastruktur zu tätigen.\n\n- Der Donnerstagabend dient dazu, einiges aufzuklären, auch wenn es zuvor hoch herging. Da kann man sich dann in Nordrhein-Westfalen auf pragmatische Art dem nähern, was der Kollege Oßner aus Bayern so schön eingeleitet hat.\n\nTatsächlich verbleiben 460 Millionen Euro weniger an Einnahmen. Das liegt aber nur daran, dass wir uns auf den Weg gemacht haben, die Maut entsprechend weiterzuentwickeln. Bei uns ist das nicht nur Theorie. Wir lasten die externen Kosten tatsächlich an. Wir kümmern uns um die Luftschadstoffbelastungen. Auch hier muss die EU-Richtlinie dringend weiterentwickelt werden. Wir können bislang nur 13 Prozent anlasten. Wir werden uns zukünftig auch um den Aspekt Lärm kümmern. Doch hier ist die EU-Richtlinie so kompliziert aufgestellt, dass wir zuerst ein Lärmkataster erstellen müssen. Da das einen enormen Kostenaufwand erforderlich macht, müssen wir uns fragen, ob das nicht einfacher und günstiger geht.\n\nTatsächlich werden wir zwei wesentliche Schritte gehen, indem wir im nächsten Jahr die Maut vertiefen und verbreitern werden. Wir werden mehr Tonnage und vierstreifige Bundesstraßen in die Bemautung einbeziehen. Das wird im Gegensatz zu den Schritten, die wir nun gehen, eine wirkliche Ausweitung bedeuten. Auch hier werden wir als Koalition nicht innehalten. Tatsächlich sind weitere 30 000 Kilometer Bundesstraße fest eingeplant. Wir werden das so ausgestalten, dass es rechts-sicher und verlässlich ist. Wir werden alles tun, um 2018 wiederum einen höheren Beitrag zur Finanzierung der deutschen Infrastruktur zu erreichen.\n\nDas ist kein Selbstzweck. Wir brauchen dauerhaft hohe Investitionen in unsere Infrastruktur. Wir werden das auf einem Weg machen, der sich an den tatsächlichen Gegebenheiten orientiert und nicht nur an Theorie und gutachterlichen Erkenntnissen, die in der EU-Richtlinie nicht abgebildet sind. Das ist etwas, wozu ich ernsthaft einlade.\n\nDie Linke hat für heute Abend angekündigt - deshalb musste dieser Punkt aufgerufen werden -, einen weiteren wesentlichen Aspekt in die Debatte einzubringen. Sehr geehrter Kollege von der Linken, Ihre Rede ist zwar beendet, aber diesen wesentlichen Aspekt habe ich nicht erkennen können.\n\n- Dann sind wir schon mehrere. - Vielleicht liegt es daran, dass Sie keine Zeit hatten, diesen Aspekt einzubringen. Wir laden Sie zu Folgendem ein: Wenn Sie den Grünen zustimmen und ihren Weg mitgehen, dann müssen Sie den Weg der Großen Koalition - sie ist auf einem sehr guten Weg, was die Fortentwicklung der Lkw-Maut angeht - auch mitgehen. Denn der umfasst einige Punkte, den die Grünen benannt haben. Daher gehe ich nach Ihrem Beitrag von Ihrer Zustimmung zur Änderung des Bundesfernstraßenmautgesetzes aus.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n1628,tobias-lindner,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Herr Steinmeier, Sie haben heute eine durchaus bemerkenswert engagierte Rede gehalten. Sie haben einiges gesagt, bei dem Sie unsere Unterstützung haben. Sie haben aber auch einiges gesagt, bei dem Sie - das liegt in der Natur von Opposition und Regierung - mit Sicherheit nicht unsere Unterstützung haben. Sie haben außerdem einiges gesagt, was mich ein bisschen verwirrt.\n\nSie haben über Auslandsschulen, auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik sowie Krisenprävention gesprochen. Das ist durchaus zu begrüßen. Schaut man dann aber in den Etat des Auswärtigen Amts, stößt man auf Widersprüche. Es wird sich zeigen, ob sich diese in den Haushaltsberatungen auflösen lassen. Heute wurde schon vielfach über die Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz und über Ihre Äußerung gesprochen, dass Deutschland mehr Verantwortung übernehmen soll und dass die außen- und sicherheitspolitische Handlungsfähigkeit der Vereinten Nationen und der Europäischen Union gestärkt werden soll. Wenn Sie mehr Verantwortung nicht mit mehr militärischem Engagement gleichsetzen, dann haben Sie hierfür durchaus unsere Unterstützung. Mehr Verantwortung bedeutet, dass Sie auch mehr Geld in Ihrem Etat zur Verfügung haben. Zum ersten Mal seit Jahren wächst der Etat des Auswärtigen Amts signifikant an. Aber mehr Geld alleine hilft noch nicht, wenn es nicht an den richtigen Stellen eingesetzt wird.\n\nAn dieser Stelle möchte ich auf die humanitäre Hilfe eingehen, die heute schon vielfach - auch vom Kollegen Liebich - angesprochen wurde. Den Ansatz für die humanitäre Hilfe erhöhen Sie um 117 Millionen Euro auf insgesamt 303 Millionen Euro. In diesen Tagen beraten wir über einen interfraktionellen Antrag betreffend Syrien. Dieser enthält noch keine Summe für humanitäre Hilfe. Im letzten Jahr gab es nachträglich 243 Millionen Euro für die humanitäre Hilfe dazu. Berechnungen der Vereinten Nationen gehen von einem steigenden Mittelbedarf aus. Die Krise in Syrien hat nicht plötzlich aufgehört. Es gibt weiterhin Flüchtlinge. Die katastrophalen Zustände halten an. Wenn wir einen gleichbleibenden -Finanzierungsanteil Deutschlands unterstellen, dann brauchen wir in diesem Jahr mindestens 353 Millionen Euro, also 50 Millionen Euro mehr als im Etatansatz enthalten sind, um Syrien auf angemessene Art und Weise helfen zu können. Hier, lieber Herr Steinmeier, wird in den Haushaltsberatungen noch nachzusteuern sein. Es reicht eben nicht, ständig nur eine Schüppe draufzulegen. Wir brauchen von Anfang an einen richtigen Mittelansatz.\n\nDa ich über verlässliche Finanzierung rede, will ich auf den Punkt der Krisenprävention eingehen, den Sie ebenfalls erwähnt haben. Leider wird im Titel für Krisenprävention, der sowieso mehr gebrauchen könnte, leicht gekürzt. Auch an dieser Stelle wird meine Fraktion in den Haushaltsberatungen Vorschläge machen, aus denen hervorgeht, wie sich Strukturen und Mittelansätze verstetigen lassen; denn auch Hilfsorganisationen können nur tätig sein, wenn sie eine verlässliche Planungsgrundlage haben. Zu einer verlässlichen Planungsgrundlage gehören auch verstetigte Mittel im Haushaltsplan.\n\nWie bereits erwähnt, werden auch die Mittel im Bereich Abrüstung und Rüstungskontrolle gekürzt. Das ist ein falsches Signal. Man sollte nicht vergessen, dass wir anschließend über den Einsatz der „Cape Ray“ und darüber beraten werden, was Deutschland tun kann, dass es auf diesem Planeten weniger Chemiewaffen gibt. Ich fordere Sie auf, meine Damen und Herren von der Koalition: Arbeiten Sie mit uns gemeinsam daran, dass diese Mittel mehr und nicht weniger werden!\n\nIch will in der kurzen Zeit, die mir für diese Rede noch bleibt, über die oft gelobte dritte Säule der Außenpolitik sprechen, über die auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik. Einigkeit haben wir darüber, dass auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik eine wichtige Säule unserer Außenpolitik ist, aber leider bildet sich das im Etatentwurf nicht ab. Die Mittel für Auslandsschulen sinken um 19 Millionen Euro, die Mittelkürzung für das Goethe-Institut - Mittel in Höhe von 10 Millionen Euro wurden unter Schwarz-Gelb gekürzt - schreiben Sie fort. Nein, Herr Steinmeier, das hat nichts mit einer engagierten Kultur- und Bildungspolitik im Außenministerium zu tun.\n\nLieber Herr Außenminister, Sie wollen der deutschen Außenpolitik mehr Gewicht verleihen. Genauso wie mehr Gewicht sind auch mehr Mittel an sich kein Selbstzweck; es kommt darauf an, wo man dieses Gewicht einbringt und wo man diese Mittel einsetzt. Sie müssen an der richtigen Stelle und an den richtigen Strukturen eingesetzt werden. Meine Fraktion wird in den jetzt anstehenden Haushaltsberatungen an den Stellen, die ich heute kritisiert habe, Vorschläge machen, wie man mit mehr Mitteln tatsächlich zu verantwortungsvollerer und verantwortungsbewussterer Außenpolitik in Deutschland kommt.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\n\nHerr Präsident! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Zu Beginn Ihrer Amtszeit, liebe Frau von der Leyen, hatte ich den Eindruck, dass Sie erst ein bisschen gezögert haben, ob Sie dieses Amt, diesen neuen Verantwortungsbereich übernehmen sollen. Aber kurz danach haben Sie viele Dinge angekündigt. Sie haben selbst die Ansprüche definiert, an denen Sie sich messen lassen wollen. Das betrifft die Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Dienst sowie eine Reform des Beschaffungsprozesses. Diese Ansprüche haben Sie selbst definiert, und an diesen werden Sie sich messen lassen müssen.\n\nSie haben nicht nur Veränderungen angekündigt, sondern vielfach auch über Transparenz gesprochen, darüber, dass zu Beginn einer politischen Debatte eine ehrliche und vollständige Bestandsanalyse stehen muss. Sie haben heute hier Ausführungen zu den drei Zielen der Bundeswehrreform gemacht, unter anderem zum Thema Finanzen.\n\nIch habe mir eben von meinem Büro geben lassen, was Ihr Vorvorgänger, Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, am 26. Mai 2010 vor der Führungsakademie gesagt hat. Er sprach darüber, dass der mittelfristig höchste strategische Parameter, quasi als Conditio sine qua non, für die Zukunft der Bundeswehr die im Grundgesetz verankerte Schuldenbremse sei. Zur Ehrlichkeit gehört nun einmal, liebe Frau Ministerin, wenn Sie heute hier stehen und über einen Etat von 32 Milliarden Euro reden, auch, zu sagen, dass dieser Etat mittlerweile 5 Milliarden Euro über dem liegt, was Karl-Theodor zu Gutenberg damals in seiner mittelfristigen Finanzplanung für das Jahr 2010 veranschlagt hat. Das Ergebnis dieser Analyse kann somit nur lauten, dass die Bundeswehrreform zumindest an ihren finanziellen Vorgaben, an dem Ziel, Einsparungen zu leisten, bitter gescheitert ist.\n\n- Darauf komme ich noch zu sprechen.\n\nEin zweiter Punkt, den Sie hier nur am Rande gestreift haben, ist der Aufwuchs von 800 Millionen Euro in der mittelfristigen Finanzplanung, der darauf zurückgeht, dass Rüstungsprojekte zu spät zulaufen. Wir haben es also nicht mit einem Absinken des Etats in diesem Jahr zu tun, sondern in Wirklichkeit schieben Sie eine Welle von fehlgeschlagenen Rüstungsprojekten vor sich her.\n\nWenn Kollege Arnold hier Ideen präsentiert, wie man MEADS weiter verwenden könnte, wie man ein taktisches Luftverteidigungssystem machen könnte, wenn wir also in Zukunft für Rüstungsprojekte von heute zahlen sollen, die teurer werden und später kommen, kann ich dazu nur sagen: Wir können Geld nur einmal ausgeben. Dieses Geld fehlt dann nicht nur innerhalb der Bundeswehr für notwendige Beschaffungen, zum Beispiel Schutzwesten, oder für die Verbesserung der Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Dienst, sondern dieses Geld fehlt dann auch in dem vorgelegten, strukturell ausgeglichenen Etatentwurf für andere wichtige Zukunftsausgaben wie Bildung, Forschung und Teilhabe. Das ist alles andere als eine zukunftsgerichtete Finanzplanung, liebe Frau von der Leyen.\n\nAn einem Thema haben Sie sich heute ein bisschen vorbeigemogelt, nämlich um die Beschaffungspolitik. Neben der Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Dienst ist dies das zweite große Thema Ihrer bisherigen Amtszeit. Sie haben sich bei einer Rüstungsklausur über die größten 15 Beschaffungsvorhaben informieren lassen. Sie haben ausdrücklich keinen der Ihnen vorgelegten Projektstatusberichte gebilligt. Sie haben den verantwortlichen Staatssekretär in den einstweiligen Ruhestand versetzt und den verantwortlichen Abteilungsleiter von seinen Aufgaben entbunden. Wohl wahr, ich habe den Eindruck, Sie haben erkannt, dass im Beschaffungsbereich der größte Risikoposten im Bundeswehrhaushalt liegt.\n\nSie holen nun externe Berater in Ihr Haus. Sie kaufen sich Zeit. Bisher ist aber noch nicht zu erkennen, welche Lehren Sie aus diesen Erkenntnissen ziehen, liebe Frau Ministerin. Sie verschieben mehr als 1 Milliarde Euro aus 2013 in die Zukunft. In 2013 sind beispielsweise von über 1 Milliarde Euro, die für den Eurofighter eingestellt waren, gerade einmal 47 Millionen Euro abgeflossen. Sie legen heute im Wissen darum, dass bei den Rüstungsprojekten der größte Problemberg in Ihrem Haus liegt, einen Haushalt vor, der alles andere als Haushaltsklarheit und Haushaltswahrheit für das Jahr 2014 aufweisen wird. So geht das nicht.\n\nEs geht auch nicht, dass Sie zwar Projektstatusberichte nicht billigen, Staatssekretäre in den Ruhestand versetzen und Abteilungsleiter von ihren Aufgaben entbinden, aber gleichzeitig die Projekte weiterlaufen lassen, als wäre nichts geschehen. Sie billigen den Statusbericht nicht, leiten aber keine Schlussfolgerungen zu konkreten Auswirkungen auf das Projekt ab! Frau von der Leyen, ich will Ihnen an dieser Stelle ganz ehrlich sagen: Wenn Sie es ernst damit meinen, dass Sie neue Verhältnisse schaffen wollen, dass das Material, das die Soldatinnen und Soldaten der Bundeswehr benötigen, das beste sein soll, dass Mittel effizient verwendet werden sollen und dass das Beschaffungswesen neu strukturiert werden muss, dann müssen Sie diese 15 Rüstungsprojekte jetzt unterbrechen, und zwar mindestens so lange, bis Ihrem Hause die Ergebnisse der Untersuchungen zu den neuen Strukturen vorliegen.\n\n- Ich danke der Koalition für diesen Zwischenruf, dass sie sich noch länger verzögern würden. Die Ministerin hat ja selbst angekündigt, dass im Herbst die Ergebnisse der Untersuchungen eines Beratungsunternehmens vorliegen und dass dann Entscheidungen folgen werden. Ich bin gespannt, ob dieser Zeitplan eingehalten werden kann.\n\nMeine Fraktion, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, wird in den anstehenden Haushaltsberatungen für diese 15 größten Rüstungsprojekte ein Moratorium beantragen.\n\nWir wollen, dass die Mittel im Haushalt so lange gesperrt bleiben, bis die Ergebnisse der Untersuchung, die Sie selbst in Auftrag gegeben haben, vorliegen. Wir wollen nicht, dass weiterhin auch nur ein Cent an Steuergeldern in Projekte fließt, die risikobehaftet sind, während man im Ministerium ganz klar erkannt hat, dass man etwas ändern muss. Deshalb werden wir uns für dieses Moratorium starkmachen.\n\n- Lieber Kollege Arnold, wenn ich über den Haushalt des Verteidigungsministeriums rede, dann sorge ich mich dabei um die Soldatinnen und Soldaten unserer Bundeswehr und weniger um die Beschäftigten und die Aktionäre von deutschen Rüstungsunternehmen. Wenn wir Projekte mit einer Mehrheit im Parlament beschließen - ganz gleich, wie diese aussieht -, dann liegt es im Interesse aller, dass die Gelder in der Höhe und dafür ausgegeben werden, wofür sie veranschlagt sind, und dass die Produkte pünktlich, mängelfrei und in der bestellten Eigenschaft zulaufen.\n\nIch möchte noch auf einen allerletzten Punkt eingehen, von dem ich mir in den kommenden Monaten etwas erhoffe. Sie haben selbst gesagt, dass Sie die Transparenz des Rüstungsbereichs im Parlament verbessern wollen; im Koalitionsvertrag finden sich dazu entsprechende Formulierungen. Es ist klar, dass, wenn es um Rüstungsprojekte geht, die Hauptbaustelle der Verteidigungshaushalt ist. Meine Fraktion erwartet von Ihnen darüber hinaus regelmäßige proaktive Unterrichtungen durch das Ministerium und nicht nur Berge von Akten und das Beantworten von Anfragen, die zu stellen unser gutes parlamentarisches Recht sind. Wir erwarten also, dass Sie uns regelmäßig Ihre Einschätzungen über Risiken im finanziellen, technischen und rechtlichen Bereich mitteilen, damit das Parlament im Zweifel auch gegensteuern kann. Ich denke, das Euro-Hawk-Desaster aus dem letzten Sommer ist uns da Lehre genug.\n\nWir werden uns gemeinsam mit allen im Haus, die das wollen, in Form von vielen Anträgen engagiert in diese Debatte einbringen. Wir schauen gespannt auf die Beratungen zum Verteidigungshaushalt 2014.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\n\nVielen Dank, Herr Kollege. - Ich muss die Union enttäuschen. Es geht nicht um ein Herzensanliegen, sondern um eine Frage, die ich Ihnen stellen möchte, Herr Kollege, da Sie die Kolleginnen und Kollegen bei der IG Metall angesprochen haben. Stimmen Sie mir zu, dass es beim Einzelplan 14 vorrangig um das Interesse an der Ausrüstung der Soldatinnen und Soldaten der Bundeswehr geht und darum, dieses Interesse bei Beschaffungsentscheidungen wahrzunehmen? Halten Sie es angesichts der Tatsache, dass die Ministerin Projekte und den Beschaffungsprozess an sich überprüfen möchte, und angesichts dessen, dass auch im letzten Jahr keine Gelder abgeflossen sind - was zeigt, dass die Projekte nur wenige Fortschritte machen, wie man auch an den Istzahlen des Ministeriums ablesen kann und für 2014 annehmen bzw. befürchten muss -, nicht für angezeigt, zumindest bis zum Herbst, wenn Ergebnisse vorliegen, innezuhalten?\"\n10211,philipp-lengsfeld,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, ich habe zu Ihrem Gesetzentwurf als Forschungspolitiker zwei grundsätzliche Anmerkungen.\n\nAber eine andere Bemerkung vorab. Dieser Gesetzentwurf zielt - das ist in dieser Debatte an den Stichworten „Forschung“, „Innovation“, „Mittelstand“ ganz deutlich geworden - vor allem Richtung Union.\n\nIch nehme dies einmal als Kooperationsangebot, obwohl bis zur nächsten Bundestagswahl und zu den nächsten Koalitionsverhandlungen noch etwas Zeit ist.\n\nBis dato war diese Art von Anträgen eher eine Masche der Linkspartei gegenüber der SPD; ich habe es hier oft genug miterlebt.\n\nEs ist schon ein gutes Gefühl, wenn Sie uns umwerben - das gebe ich zu -, aber es ist auch ein bisschen komisch. Leider, wie ich ausführen werde, ist es auch nicht so originell, wie Sie tun.\n\nZum Inhalt. Ich bin der festen Überzeugung, dass eine steuerliche Forschungsförderung im Prinzip eine gute Sache ist - so wie es in unserem Wahlprogramm steht. Aber man muss auch konstatieren, dass wir in der Vergangenheit und in dieser Legislatur eine andere Politik gemacht haben. Wir haben dies anlässlich des diesjährigen EFI-Gutachtens an dieser Stelle schon diskutiert; es ist auch in der Debatte hier gesagt worden. Deutschland steht mit dieser Politik der aktuell rein direkten Forschungsförderung international sehr ansehnlich da. Das ist ein Fakt.\n\nJa, diesen Weg gehen in Europa nur zwei Staaten - auch das haben Sie erwähnt -: Deutschland und Estland. Aber schadet Estland der Verzicht auf steuerliche Forschungsförderung? Nein. Auch die Forschungslandschaft in Estland ist in keinem schlechten Zustand. Im Gegenteil: Estland, eine ehemalige Sowjetrepublik, hat seit über einem Jahrzehnt eine der höchsten FuE-Intensitäten aller osteuropäischen Staaten und ist einer der digitalen Vorreiter Europas; das kann man hier auch ruhig einmal erwähnen.\n\nZurück zu unserer Situation. Wir sind eine Nation, die mit ihrem Geld umsichtig umgeht; zumindest steht die Union dafür.\n\nDa wir Geld nur einmal ausgeben können, sollte unser jetziges Fördersystem in seinen Stärken geachtet werden. Dass Sie die Steuermindereinnahmen nicht unerwähnt lassen, ehrt Sie. Aber Sie drücken sich um die Frage, woher wir die Mittel nehmen. Ein gewisser Umbau der momentanen direkten Projektförderung - auch das ist erwähnt worden - wäre sicherlich unumgänglich. Das sollte gut überlegt sein. - Das ist mein erster Punkt.\n\nTrotzdem wiegen die Argumente für eine steuerliche Forschungsförderung als zweite Säule schwer. Steuerliche Forschungsförderung - Sie von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen wissen vielleicht schon alles, aber Sie können mir ruhig zuhören - ist themenoffen, branchenoffen, breitenwirksam und generiert eine starke Hebelwirkung. Ich habe keine Angst davor. Ich finde das richtig: themenoffen, branchenoffen, breitenwirksam und eine starke Hebelwirkung. - Um die sehr aufmerksamen Beobachter von LobbyControl zu beruhigen: Ja, diese Argumentation habe ich direkt aus einem Verbandspapier von BDI/BDA.\n\nDiese Argumente klingen nicht nur überzeugend; ich halte sie auch für vollkommen richtig. BDI/BDA verweisen auf Studien - auch das ist hier erwähnt worden -, die belegen, dass zu jedem Euro Förderung mindestens 1 Euro an zusätzlichen FuE-Ausgaben eingesetzt wird.\n\nDas deckt sich übrigens auch mit meinen eigenen Erfahrungen im Bereich Forschung und Entwicklung, wo beileibe nicht alles nur nach reiner Notwendigkeit gemacht wird oder gemacht werden kann. Ich habe deshalb vor Mitnahmeeffekten auch nicht so große Sorgen wie andere.\n\nAber, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, Ihr Antrag greift zu kurz - zu kurz! -;\n\ndenn Sie bleiben auf halber Strecke stehen. Frau Sitte will ich erwähnen; sie ist, glaube ich, nicht mehr hier.\n\nWenn sie noch hier wäre, dann könnte sie sich freuen; denn sie hat es schon angekündigt: Wenn wir nach der nächsten Wahl tatsächlich eine steuerliche Forschungsförderung einführen, warum sollten wir sie auf KMUs, auf kleine und mittlere Unternehmen, beschränken? Warum?\n\nWeil die Forschungsförderung von KMUs der Kompromiss der Großen Koalition ist? Da sage ich ganz deutlich: Nein.\n\nWenn dieses Instrument eingeführt wird - ich bin im Prinzip dafür -, dann richtig, dann für alle!\n\nÜbrigens - das müssen Sie sich dann schon anhören, Frau Andreae -: Eine steuerliche FuE-Förderung ausschließlich für KMUs findet sich in keinem anderen Land, übrigens aus guten Gründen. Das können Sie in einem Gutachten der Wissenschaftlichen Dienste nachlesen. Vielleicht haben Sie es selber in Auftrag gegeben; wenn nicht, sage ich es Ihnen: WD 4 - 3000 - 059/15. Darin wurde herausgearbeitet, dass es in keinem einzigen Land eine ausschließliche steuerliche Forschungsförderung von KMUs gibt. Das heißt: Was Sie hier vorschlagen, ist eigentlich wieder eine deutsche Sonderposition in Europa.\n\nDarüber sollten Sie einmal nachdenken. Sie würde am Grundgedanken vorbeiführen, Standortanreize zu schaffen oder Standortnachteile einzudämmen, und könnte im Zweifel sogar kontraproduktiv sein. Das muss man sich einfach einmal überlegen.\n\nWenn zum Beispiel eine größere Firma ein kleines innovatives deutsches Unternehmen stützen will - das soll ja gelegentlich vorkommen; auch in Sachsen-Anhalt -, dann hätten wir große Probleme, wenn wir diese Unterscheidung einführen.\n\nWir brauchen eine steuerliche Forschungsförderung ohne zusätzliche Bürokratie und ohne willkürliche Grenzen.\n\n- Haben Sie einmal in einer großen Firma gearbeitet, Frau Andreae? Ich habe es. Ist es ein schlechterer Arbeitsplatz als in einem mittelständischen Unternehmen? Ich glaube nicht.\n\nIch finde, Sie machen es sich sehr leicht, wenn Sie fordern, dass wir die großen Arbeitgeber in diesem Land einfach zur Seite lassen. Ich glaube, da machen Sie es sich ziemlich leicht.\n\nAber ich sage Ihnen auch - das ist Ihnen natürlich klar -: Wenn wir es so machen, dann kostet es sehr viel mehr Geld, als Sie prognostiziert haben.\n\nDie zwangsläufige Konsequenz wäre - ich sage es noch einmal -,\n\ndass es zu Verschiebungen in unserer Förderpolitik käme; das muss uns klar sein. Das wäre zu bedenken.\n\nLassen Sie uns noch einmal im Detail darauf schauen, weil Sie ja offensichtlich von dieser Unterscheidung „KMU und große Arbeitgeber“ so tief überzeugt sind. Ich sage Ihnen ganz deutlich: Gute und schlechte Forschung hängt ganz sicher nicht von der Unternehmensgröße ab. Das haben Sie zwar nicht behauptet; aber das steckt mit in dieser Logik.\n\nIch freue mich.\n\nFrau Lemke, Sie können es mir noch mehr versüßen, indem Sie mir noch eine weitere Frage stellen.\n\n- Dann eben nicht. Dann belasse ich es bei Frau Andreae.\n\nFrau Kollegin Andreae, vielen Dank für die Frage. Im Prinzip beantworte ich sie gleich in meinem folgenden Redetext, aber ich sage es auch direkt. Ich habe in einem von den Großunternehmen gearbeitet, in einem von denen, die von Ihnen, ich will nicht sagen: schlechtgeredet, aber irgendwie so ein bisschen separiert betrachtet wurden. Ist Ihnen eigentlich klar, Frau Kollegin, dass auch in Großunternehmen Substrukturen vorhanden sind, dass bestimmte Produktbereiche sehr klein sind und fast total autonom gemanagt werden, dass da auch geforscht wird?\n\nKönnen Sie sich diese Situation vorstellen? Übrigens ist das eine ziemlich reguläre Geschichte nach Übernahmen. Wenn man eine kleine Firma kauft, behält man die Marke bei, hat eine große Dachmarke darüber; aber gemanagt wird das Ganze wie ein kleines und mittleres Unternehmen.\n\nDann erzählen Sie mal den Forschern in diesem Produktbereich, dass sie keine Forschungsförderung kriegen, während eine ganz ähnlich strukturierte Firma, zu der sie in direkter Konkurrenz stehen, ein echtes KMU, Ihre Spezialförderung genießen darf. Da sage ich: Ich bin nicht dafür. Ich bin dafür, dass dieses Instrument, wenn wir es einführen, allen zugutekommt. Natürlich können wir eine Ausdifferenzierung vornehmen, aber der Grundsatz ist - das sagt übrigens auch die EFI -, dass wir diese zweite Säule für alle einführen. Die Einführung einer steuerlichen FuE-Förderung hält die EFI für dringend erforderlich; das ist von Ihnen zitiert worden. Dann kommt eine Einschränkung, die ich aber übrigens als rein taktisch sehe:\n\nWenn Budgetrestriktionen im Bundeshaushalt nur eine begrenzte steuerliche Förderung ermöglichen, sollte sie zunächst vornehmlich für KMU eingeführt werden.\n\nDas steht in dem EFI-Gutachten.\n\nGanz ehrlich: Da haben sich die Wissenschaftler einfach die reale Situation in dieser Legislaturperiode und die politische Diskussion angeschaut und gesagt: Wenn wir schon nicht durchsetzen können, dass es richtig gemacht wird, dann wird wenigstens über die KMUs der Fuß in die Tür gesetzt. - Ich sage: Nein; wenn, dann sollten wir es richtig machen.\n\nZusammengefasst - meine Redezeit ist noch nicht ganz abgelaufen, aber fast vorbei -: Wir haben eine starke Forschungsförderung - auch ohne die zweite Säule der steuerlichen Entlastung. Aber wenn wir die zweite Säule einführen - darüber können wir reden; ich bin dafür -, dann sollten wir es richtig machen und sie für alle Unternehmen, die Innovationen in diesem Land leisten, die Arbeitsplätze schaffen und uns voranbringen, einführen.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n5625,enak-ferlemann,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Ich gebe folgende Antwort auf die Frage:\n\nIm Straßenverkehr nimmt die digitale Kommunikation einen zunehmend größeren Stellenwert ein. Durch den Einzug neuer Technologien und Kommunikationssysteme in moderne Fahrzeuge findet eine Vernetzung statt, die neue Möglichkeiten eröffnet und Mobilität im Individualverkehr verändert. Um die sich daraus ergebenden Herausforderungen strukturiert und zielgerichtet analysieren zu können, wird ein digitales Testfeld Autobahn eingerichtet, auf dem die Wirkungen von Innovationen einzeln, aber auch im Zusammenspiel bewertet werden können. Unter anderem sollen hier automatisierte Fahrfunktionen erprobt werden. Das ist nicht das autonome Fahren; das fahrerlose Fahren ist nicht Gegenstand dieser Erprobung.\n\nDas Testfeld soll auf der BAB 9 zwischen München und Nürnberg eingerichtet werden. Bei der BAB 9 handelt es sich um eine hochbelastete Autobahn, die zwei Metropolregionen miteinander verbindet. Sie ist auf zahlreichen Abschnitten mit moderner Verkehrsbeeinflussung ausgestattet, die von einer leistungsfähigen Verkehrsrechnerzentrale aus gesteuert wird.\n\nDas Projekt „Schnellladen auf der A 9“ wird im Rahmen des Schaufensters Bayern-Sachsen ELEKTRO-MOBILITÄT VERBINDET umgesetzt. Es war nicht Gegenstand einer individuellen Vorauswahl durch das Bundesministerium für Verkehr und digitale Infrastruktur, sondern Teil eines umfassenden Gesamtpakets der Bewerbung der Bundesländer Bayern und Sachsen im Rahmen des Wettbewerbs zum Schaufensterprogramm des Bundes 2012. Vergleichbare Projekte bzw. Maßnahmen gibt es auch in anderen Regionen bzw. an anderen Bundesautobahnen.\n\nWir können die Versuche - da haben Sie recht - auch auf anderen Streckenabschnitten machen. Es gibt auf anderen Strecken andere Versuche zur Elektromobilität. Hier ist es so, dass wir elektronisch versuchen wollen, Geisterfahrer vom Falschfahren abzuhalten. Weil wir die technologische Ausstattung an dieser Strecke haben und das sehr gut darstellen können, wollen wir es an dieser Strecke ausprobieren. Das schließt aber nicht aus, dass wir Modellprojekte auch noch an anderen Autobahnstrecken machen, wo gegebenenfalls ähnliche technologische Voraussetzungen bestehen. Nur: Hier ist es besonders gut für diese Modellprojekte.\n\nDas Auskunftsrecht des Parlaments ist unendlich. Der Aufgabe wollen wir uns gerne stellen. Es handelt sich allerdings um eine sehr große Arbeit. Ich gebe ein Beispiel: An der A 2 testen wir, ob wir mit Telematik nicht deutlich geringere Unfallzahlen erreichen und die Verkehrsmenge deutlich stärker beeinflussen können. Das geschieht in diesem Streckenzug über ein ganzes Bundesland - in diesem Fall das schöne Niedersachsen - hinweg.\n\nEs gibt viele Projekte, die wir auf den Autobahnen durchführen. Ich bin aber gerne bereit, Ihnen alle möglichen Modellprojekte aufzuzeigen. Das ist allerdings, wie schon gesagt, eine erhebliche Arbeit.\"\n2633,oswin-veith,\"Ich bin jetzt wohl der Letzte hier heute. Schön, dass Sie noch da sind.\n\nVerehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich freue mich, heute als Innenpolitiker für meine Fraktion im Zuge der Haushaltsberatungen sprechen zu können. Es ist das erste Mal, dass ich an der Verabschiedung eines Haushaltes auf Bundesebene teilnehmen darf. Die letzten fast 20 Berufsjahre habe ich am Hessischen Rechnungshof, als Bürgermeister und als Vizelandrat und Kämmerer meines Wahlkreises verbracht und weiß also, wie das ist: Es ist immer das Ringen zwischen Haushältern und Fachpolitikern, zwischen mehr Geld für den eigenen Politikbereich und strenger Haushaltsdisziplin.\n\nDiese Haushaltswoche aber markiert eine finanzpolitische Zäsur von, wie ich meine, geradezu historischer Dimension. Wir durchbrechen mit dem jetzt vorgelegten Haushalt den seit über 45 Jahren andauernden Schuldenkreislauf, an dem alle Bundesregierungen mehr oder weniger fröhlich beteiligt waren. Dieser Haushalt ist daher ein starkes Signal an die Menschen in unserem Land und vor allem an die junge Generation.\n\nNatürlich ist der Entwurf ein Kompromiss zwischen unserem innenpolitischen Gestaltungsspielraum und der vom Grundgesetz abverlangten Haushaltsdisziplin. Aber er ist, wie ich finde, ein guter Kompromiss. Ich will den Haushältern der Großen Koalition, insbesondere den Kollegen Dr. Brandl und Dr. Berghegger, für die im Vorfeld der heutigen Lesung geleistete Arbeit sehr herzlich danken.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, Deutschland ist eines der sichersten Länder. Wir setzen heute die Rahmenbedingungen, die nötig sind, damit es morgen noch sicherer wird. Zwei Drittel der Ausgaben im Innenressort entfallen auf die innere Sicherheit, der Großteil davon auf die Arbeit unserer Bundespolizei. Das ist unser klares Bekenntnis zur hervorragenden Arbeit unserer Sicherheitsbehörden. Wir als Große Koalition stehen hinter den Beamtinnen und Beamten. Ihr Einsatz für die Bürger unseres Landes verdient Anerkennung und Wertschätzung. Dafür danke ich hier öffentlich sehr herzlich.\n\nEin Blick auf die Kriminalstatistik zeigt, dass wir auf einem guten Weg sind. Wir haben es gehört: Die Zahl der Straftaten nimmt kontinuierlich ab, vor allem die Zahl der Straftaten gegen Leib und Leben und die Zahlen der Gewaltkriminalität. Dies zeigt, dass der Trend positiv ist. Das ist auch das Ergebnis von richtigen politischen Entscheidungen und entschlossenem Handeln unserer Sicherheitsbehörden. Ich sage hier auch: Ohne die Bemühungen der CDU/CSU-Bundestagsfraktion der letzten Jahre und ohne die Arbeit unserer Bundesinnenminister Dr. de Maizière und Dr. Friedrich wäre dieser Erfolg nicht möglich gewesen. Auch ihnen gilt an dieser Stelle unser besonderer Dank.\n\nZur inneren Sicherheit gehört auch der Brand- und Katastrophenschutz. Bereits in der Vergangenheit hat das Innenministerium die Feuerwehren in den Ländern bei dieser wichtigen Aufgabe deutlich unterstützt, und es wird dies auch in Zukunft tun. Hinzu kommt die Unterstützung des Technischen Hilfswerks. Ich freue mich, dass es gelungen ist - wir haben heute schon mehrfach davon gehört -, den Etat des THW um weitere 10 Millionen Euro auf 190 Millionen Euro zu erhöhen. Das ist ein gutes Signal an die 80 000 freiwilligen THW-Helfer in unserem Land und zugleich, wie ich meine, ein gutes Signal für das gesamte Ehrenamt, das die Sicherheitsarchitektur in unsere Städten und Gemeinden maßgeblich mitträgt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir wollen Menschen, die sich legal in Deutschland aufhalten, hier arbeiten und ihren Beitrag zum Gemeinwesen leisten, bei der Integration besser unterstützen. Wir wollen es allen Interessenten ermöglichen, einen Integrationskurs zu besuchen, dort die deutsche Sprache zu erlernen, um sich mit den Lebensverhältnissen in Deutschland vertraut machen zu können. Dafür haben wir den Mittelansatz um 40 Millionen Euro erhöht. Wir stellen dem Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge 300 zusätzliche Stellen zur Verfügung und wollen damit die Zeit der Bearbeitung von Asylanträgen spürbar verkürzen. Hier durch mehr Personal zu einer beschleunigten Bearbeitung der Anträge zu kommen, ist für alle Beteiligten notwendig und auch sinnvoll.\n\nEines gebe ich jedoch gern zu: Die Aufstockung von Personal allein kann nur ein Baustein sein, wenn es darum geht, der Antragsflut Herr zu werden. Ein anderer wichtiger Baustein ist die Anerkennung von Serbien, Mazedonien und Bosnien-Herzegowina als sichere Herkunftsstaaten. Denn rund 25 Prozent der in Deutschland gestellten Asylanträge stammen von Bewerbern aus den genannten Ländern. Obwohl ihre Erfolgsaussichten sehr gering sind - sie liegen im Schnitt bei unter 1 Prozent -, werden sie im Rahmen der bestehenden Quotenregelung zur Unterbringung auf die Kommunen verteilt. Das verstärkt die großen Probleme unserer kommunalen Familie, geeignete Unterkünfte bereitzustellen. Das wollen wir ändern. Ein entsprechender Gesetzentwurf liegt vor; aber der Bundesrat muss mitziehen. Mein Appell geht daher an alle Landesregierungen, sich auch zum Wohle der Kommunen einzusetzen.\n\nÖffentliche Dienstleistungen haben in Deutschland eine hohe Qualität. Das ist nur möglich, weil wir einen leistungsfähigen und verlässlichen öffentlichen Dienst in unserem Land haben, auf den wir alle stolz sein können. Wir wollen diesen leistungsbereiten und leistungsstarken öffentlichen Dienst trotz des demografischen Wandels und trotz des sich verschärfenden Wettbewerbs mit der Wirtschaft weiter zukunftsfähig halten. Einen ersten Beitrag dazu leistet der Bund in diesem Jahr, indem er den Tarifabschluss für die Beschäftigten des öffentlichen Dienstes eins zu eins umsetzen wird. Der Gesetzentwurf liegt vor, und das Gesetz wird in Kürze verabschiedet.\n\nMeine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich komme zum Schluss. Wir haben es uns mit diesem Haushalt nicht leicht gemacht. Wir wollen den Pfad der Verschuldung schnellstens verlassen und haben keine Forderungen gestellt, die nicht seriös gegenfinanziert sind. Das, meine Damen, meine Herren, unterscheidet uns als Koalition von der Opposition,\n\nund das ist auch unsere Verantwortung den Menschen in unserem Land gegenüber. Trotz der knappen finanziellen Mittel ist es uns gelungen, in der Innenpolitik auch diesmal klare politische Akzente zu setzen. Das ist der richtige Weg.\n\nVielen Dank. - Uns allen ein spannendes Spiel!\"\n4158,marcus-weinberg,\"Vielen Dank. - Herr Präsident! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn es denn so ist, dass die Menschlichkeit einer Gesellschaft daran zu messen ist, wie man mit den Kleinsten, den Schwachen, den Kranken und auch den Alten umgeht, dann kann man, glaube ich, mit Blick auf diese Debatte und dieses Gesetz, mit Blick auf die Debatte zuvor und auch mit Blick auf das Gesetz zur Elternzeit, zum Elterngeld sagen, dass wir es geschafft haben, den Mensch wieder in den Mittelpunkt unserer Politik zu stellen. Das ist gut so für dieses Land. Ich glaube, das zeigt auch eine neue Form des Umgangs und von Menschlichkeit.\n\nFrau Zimmermann, zwei Bemerkungen zu Ihrem Debattenbeitrag.\n\nErstens. Dieses Gesetz ist tatsächlich etwas Konkretes. Es ist mehr als nur Symbolpolitik oder Rhetorik, dass wir es unterstützen, wenn Menschen sich einsetzen und ihre nahen Angehörigen pflegen. Es wird konkrete Veränderungen mit sich bringen. Wir stärken damit die Menschen, die sich gerade im Bereich der Pflege engagieren.\n\nZweitens. Sie sagen, dass wir die Pflege ins Private verschieben wollen. Nein, die Menschen wollen zu Hause gepflegt werden. Es gibt viele Menschen, die zu Hause andere pflegen. Wir unterstützen sie stärker dabei. Das ist unser Ziel. Das ist mit dem Gesetzentwurf intendiert.\n\nInsoweit bin ich froh über diese Debatte. Dem Leitgedanken, den Menschen in den Mittelpunkt zu stellen, kommen wir in dieser Frage etwas näher. Es ist so, dass der Wandlungsprozess bzw. der demografische Wandel, wie es heißt, einige Veränderungen mit sich bringen wird.\n\nSie darf mir immer Fragen stellen, gerne.\n\nIch glaube, keiner von uns sagt, dass es einfach ist, Menschen zu Hause zu pflegen. Das ist, glaube ich, die größte Herausforderung für unsere Gesellschaft. Deswegen sollten wir dankbar sein, dass es viele Menschen gibt, die nahe Angehörige zu Hause pflegen wollen.\n\nIch will dazu nur zwei Dinge sagen:\n\nErstens. Für 87 Prozent der Menschen ist es wichtig oder sehr wichtig, dass ihre Erwerbstätigkeit im Sinne des Zeitmanagements erleichtert wird, weil sie sich entschieden haben, einen nahen Angehörigen zu Hause zu pflegen.\n\nZweitens. Fast alle alten Menschen wünschen sich, in ihren letzten Lebensjahren in ihrer vertrauten Umgebung bleiben zu können;\n\ndas ist unter dem Gesichtspunkt von Selbstbestimmtheit und Selbstständigkeit wichtig.\n\nDas heißt, es gibt einen Antrieb, innerhalb der Familie zu pflegen. Unsere Aufgabe ist es - ich komme gleich auf die einzelnen Punkte, die Sie angesprochen haben, zu sprechen, auch im Hinblick auf die gesetzlichen Veränderungen, die es schon gab, nämlich Pflegezeit und Familienpflegezeit -, die Veränderungen so zu skizzieren und sie so zu gestalten, dass sie in sich schlüssig und klar sind und wir gewisse Defizite, auf die ich gleich ebenfalls zu sprechen komme, ausräumen können. - Ich glaube, damit habe ich Ihre Frage beantwortet. Die einzelnen Aspekte würde ich Ihnen gerne anhand der Struktur des Gesetzentwurfs verdeutlichen; ich werde mich dann immer auf Ihre Frage beziehen.\n\nFür uns als CDU/CSU-Fraktion und für die Große Koalition steht fest, dass es ein Leitgedanke sein muss, die Menschen zu stärken, die zu Hause nahe Angehörige pflegen. Dies ist ein Zeichen des familiären Zusammenhalts, der für unsere Gesellschaft wichtig ist. Das gilt überall dort, wo Menschen füreinander Verantwortung übernehmen, und betrifft den Umgang mit den Kleinsten und den Umgang mit den Älteren.\n\nJetzt komme ich auf den ersten Ansatzpunkt von Frau Zimmermann zu sprechen. Man muss sich fragen: Was gab es bisher? Wir haben bereits 2008 und 2012 Bausteine zur Unterstützung der familiären Pflege auf den Weg gebracht, nämlich mit dem Pflegezeitgesetz 2008 und mit dem Familienpflegezeitgesetz 2012. Dabei spielten drei Komponenten, die die Ministerin schon angesprochen hat, eine Rolle. Es gibt drei verschiedene Phasen, die für diejenigen, die andere Menschen zu Hause pflegen wollen, wichtig sind.\n\nDie erste Phase ist eine kurzzeitige: die zehntätige Pflegeauszeit. Sie ist beim unerwarteten Eintritt einer Pflegesituation von Bedeutung, da eine solche Situation die Menschen immer überfordert. Sie kommt nämlich immer zum ungünstigsten Zeitpunkt. Außerdem befinden sich die Menschen dann in der schwierigen Situation, viele Dinge für einen Angehörigen schnell regeln und organisieren zu müssen. Hier wurde der Rechtsanspruch geschaffen, zehn Tage von der Arbeit fernzubleiben.\n\nWas es aber nicht gab, war finanzielle Unterstützung; jetzt komme ich auf den nächsten Punkt, den Sie erwähnt haben, zu sprechen. Gerade für viele Menschen mit niedrigem Einkommen war das ein Problem, weil sie zehn Tage lang kein Geld verdient haben. In Zukunft wird es die Möglichkeit geben, diese Lücke durch eine Lohnersatzleistung zu schließen. Das ist eine Verbesserung. Insofern verbessert der Gesetzentwurf gerade die Situation derer, die in einer prekären Situation sind und kein hohes Einkommen haben.\n\nDer zweite Punkt. Mittelfristig konnten sich Menschen für bis zu sechs Monate von der Arbeit freistellen lassen. Auch hier gab es einen Rechtsanspruch; das ist gut so. Wenn man sich sechs Monate lang freistellen lassen will, was möglich ist, gibt es aber ein Problem. Jetzt komme ich wieder auf den von Ihnen genannten Punkt zu sprechen. Sie haben nämlich gesagt: Viele können sich das gar nicht leisten. - In Zukunft wird es die Möglichkeit geben, ein zinsfreies Darlehen über das Bundesamt für Familie und zivilgesellschaftliche Aufgaben aufzunehmen. Das heißt, auch die finanzielle Absicherung wird gestärkt, und zwar zusätzlich zu dem bereits bestehenden Rechtsanspruch. Auch das ist eine Verbesserung des geltenden Gesetzes.\n\nDer dritte Punkt betrifft die Familienpflegezeit. Hier gab es zwar keinen Rechtsanspruch, aber die Möglichkeit, über einen Kredit - allerdings verbunden mit sehr bürokratischen Hindernissen - zumindest die finanzielle Situation abzusichern.\n\nMit der neuen Regelung wird es in Zukunft einen Rechtsanspruch geben. Das heißt, es werden hier zwei Dinge zusammengeführt: der Rechtsanspruch und der finanzielle Ausgleich. Dies geschieht unter dem Gesichtspunkt: Wie kann ich mehr Zeit und mehr Flexibilität in der Frage der Vereinbarkeit von Beruf, Pflege und Familie erreichen? Diese drei Komponenten werden nun zusammengebracht.\n\nEs war unser Ansatz in der Großen Koalition, zu sagen: Wir haben drei Bausteine, die für sich genommen gut sind. Aber wir müssen sie jetzt zusammenbringen. Pflege kann nicht alleine gesehen werden, sondern Pflege muss von einer kurzfristigen Wahrnehmung der Dinge bis hin zu einer langfristigen Aufgabe in der Familie organisiert werden. Deswegen haben wir gesagt: Wir müssen Rechtsansprüche definieren, finanzielle Sicherheiten schaffen und als dritte Komponente die gesellschaftliche Veränderung mit aufnehmen.\n\nEin Beispiel hierfür ist die Pflege des Stiefvaters als nahem Angehörigen. Es ist etwas paradox, zu sagen: Der Vater kann gepflegt werden, aber der Stiefvater nicht. Es gibt leider Fälle, in denen der Vater, als die Kinder drei oder vier Jahre alt waren, die Familie verlassen und möglicherweise nie Unterhalt gezahlt hat. Trotzdem besteht für die Kinder die Möglichkeit, den Vater als nahen Angehörigen zu pflegen. Aber die Pflege des Stiefvaters, der sich um die neue Familie gekümmert hat, durch die Stiefkinder fiel bisher nicht unter die Pflege eines nahen Angehörigen. Deswegen ist es eine gute Erweiterung, dass auch Stiefeltern in die Regelung mit den nahen Angehörigen aufgenommen werden.\n\nPflegebedürftige Kinder brauchen oftmals eine besondere Pflege. Diese besondere Pflege wird in erster Linie in Einrichtungen angeboten. Da ist es richtig und konsequent, zu sagen: Auch bei pflegebedürftigen Kindern kann die Familienpflegezeit genommen werden, selbst wenn sie nicht zu Hause, sondern in einer Einrichtung betreut werden, weil da die Kombination aus professioneller Pflege und Unterstützung der Betreuung durch die Eltern wichtig ist. Auch diese Erweiterung war richtig und wichtig. Damit haben wir ein Problem behoben.\n\nAls Ergebnis der Verhandlungen zum Koalitionsvertrag haben wir uns darauf verständigt, diese drei wesentlichen Bereiche zusammenzuführen.\n\nIch möchte am Ende noch eine Sache ansprechen, nämlich die Auswirkungen der Familienpflegezeit auf die Arbeitgeberschaft. Man muss überlegen: Wie kann man es schaffen, dass auch die Wirtschaft, gerade der Mittelstand, diese Pflegezeit positiv begleitet?\n\nDazu zwei Dinge: Erstens. Man hat erkannt, dass es wichtig ist, die Menschen mit ihren Kompetenzen - sie sind schließlich Fachkräfte - im Unternehmen zu halten. Dem wird mit den jetzigen Regelungen Rechnung getragen. Deswegen ist für uns der Ansatz der Teilzeit wichtig. Wenn man in der Familienpflegezeit 15 Stunden in der Woche arbeitet und die restliche Zeit freigestellt wird, ist das auch für das Unternehmen gut, weil es über die Teilzeit seine Fachkräfte im Unternehmen halten kann. Das heißt, den Unternehmen geht das Know-how der Mitarbeiter nicht verloren.\n\nZweitens. In der realen Betrachtung haben wir gesehen, dass durch die Pflege eines Angehörigen nicht nur die Familie aus der Bahn geworfen wurde, sondern dass diese neue Situation auch Konsequenzen auf das Verhältnis zum Arbeitgeber hat. Wir wissen, dass sich viele Arbeitnehmer in den ersten Tagen haben krankschreiben lassen, weil sie mit der Situation nicht mehr zurechtkamen. Ihre Motivation am Arbeitsplatz ließ durch die neue Situation nach. Deswegen sind die Planungssicherheit und die Stabilisierung finanzieller und zeitlicher Art gut für die Unternehmen, weil die Motivation und die Zufriedenheit mit der Arbeit bei den Arbeitnehmern steigen; denn sie wissen, dass es verbindliche Regeln gibt, an die sich alle halten müssen. Dadurch bekommen sie es besser hin - das wird niemals perfekt werden -, ihren nahen Angehörigen zu pflegen.\n\nAuch für die Unternehmen bedeutet es eine Entlastung, dass wir so die Beiträge zur Pflegeversicherung stabil halten können. Man könnte ja sagen: Wenn wir die familiäre Pflege nicht stärken, müssen wir möglicherweise die professionelle Pflege stärken, was durch eine Erhöhung der Beiträge zur Pflegeversicherung geschehen könnte. Ich glaube, es ist nicht im Sinne des Mittelstandes und der deutschen Wirtschaft, die Beiträge zu erhöhen. Daher ist unser Gesetz ein gutes Zeichen.\n\nZurzeit sind 2,6 Millionen Menschen pflegebedürftig, über 1 Million Menschen wird zu Hause betreut. Für das Jahr 2050 müssen wir mit der doppelten Anzahl an pflegebedürftigen Menschen rechnen. In wenigen Jahren wird die Wahrscheinlichkeit größer sein, auf der Straße einen 80-Jährigen zu treffen als eine junge Mutter oder einen jungen Vater mit einem Kinderwagen. Das heißt, auf diese Entwicklung müssen wir uns einstellen.\n\nHier sind zwei Dinge zu nennen. Das eine ist der Wunsch der Menschen, zu Hause in ihrer Umgebung gepflegt zu werden. Es ist gut, dass Menschen das in unserer Gesellschaft machen und auch machen wollen.\n\nDas andere ist die Gewissheit, die sie brauchen - Stichwort Zeitmanagement -, dass sie sich in dieser schwierigen Situation die Zeit besser einteilen können und dass sie zumindest ein wenig finanziell entlastet werden. Kein Pflegefall und kein Mensch, der sich in der Pflege engagiert, sieht das als Geschäftsmodell oder will damit irgendwie Missbrauch treiben. Es hinzubekommen, die Familie zu versorgen, der Erwerbstätigkeit nachzugehen und sich um einen Pflegefall zu kümmern: Das ist der höchste Anspruch, den man haben kann. Deswegen ist es, glaube ich, wichtig, dass wir mit dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf jetzt auch den nächsten Schritt gehen.\n\nIch komme noch einmal zum Anfang zurück. Die Menschlichkeit einer Gesellschaft spiegelt sich darin wider, wie wir mit den Schwachen, den Kleinen, den Kranken und auch den Alten umgehen. Deswegen ist es gut, dass wir uns dieses Themas angenommen haben. Denn ich glaube, die Vereinbarkeit von Pflege, Familie und Beruf wird eine große Herausforderung sein. Dabei sind wir auf einem guten Weg, der sicherlich noch einige weitere Schritte mit sich bringen muss. Aber der Gesetzentwurf ist gut, und ich bitte um Unterstützung dafür.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n9101,birgit-wollert,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Aufgrund mehrerer verabschiedeter Gesetzentwürfe in diesem Jahr, die die Koalition sowie die Bundesregierung hier vorgelegt haben, kommen auf die Krankenkassen in den nächsten Jahren einige Milliarden Euro an zusätzlichen Ausgaben zu, was zu einem massiven Anstieg der Zusatzbeiträge führt. Kann die Bundesregierung präzisieren, wie hoch die Summe ist, die die Krankenkassen durch das Präventionsgesetz in 2016 aufwenden müssen, zum Beispiel für erweiterte Ausgaben der Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung? Was spricht dagegen, dass Privatversicherte an diesen gesamtgesellschaftlichen Aufgaben durch eine Finanzierung über Steuermittel beteiligt werden?\"\n12313,bernhard-daldrup,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Das Meiste ist gesagt worden, nur nicht von jedem, könnte man jetzt sagen. Deswegen erlauben Sie mir, dass ich jetzt keine Bilanz vortrage, sondern mich auf das beziehe, was Florian Pronold, Michael Groß und andere bereits vorgetragen haben. Ich glaube, dass in der Bilanz für Investoren, Mieter, Länder und übrigens auch für Kommunen im Bereich des Wohnungsbaus durchaus etwas getan worden ist.\n\nLassen Sie mich zwei andere Aspekte ansprechen.\n\nStädte sind steingewordene Gesellschaftspolitik. Aus ihren Grundrissen, aus ihren Strukturen kann man Wertordnungen ablesen.\n\nVielleicht hat Frau Göring-Eckardt so etwas Ähnliches gemeint, als sie ganz zu Anfang über Zentrum und Peripherie gesprochen hat. Das Zitat stammt von einem großen Oberbürgermeister und Städtebauminister, nämlich Hans-Jochen Vogel. Er wollte damit zum Ausdruck bringen, dass die Wohnungsbaupolitik nicht eine Frage des Geldes allein ist, sondern dass Wohnungsbaupolitik immer auch Teil einer integrierten Stadtentwicklungspolitik und einer regional abgestimmten Raumordnungs- und Regionalplanung sein muss. Das heißt mit anderen Worten, dass beispielsweise auch das Verhältnis von Suborganisierung und Quartiersentwicklung, dezentraler Konzentration und Revitalisierung von Innenstädten dazugehört.\n\nDetlev Pilger hat dankenswerterweise darauf hingewiesen, was im Rahmen des Programms „Soziale Stadt“ und der Städtebauförderung getan worden ist, dass es dabei auch um kleinere und mittlere Städte geht und dass es nicht nur ein Problem von Ballungsräumen und Unistädten ist, über das wir zum gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt reden. Wer also, bei allem Druck, den es in manchen Städten gibt, Wohnungen zu bauen, nicht auch gleichzeitig auf die Stabilisierung stagnierender oder schrumpfender Teilregionen achtet, verschärft gesellschaftliche Segregation durch Abwanderung. Darüber muss man sich im Klaren sein.\n\nEin zweiter Aspekt, den ich ansprechen will, bezieht sich auf die Finanzen. Wir haben heute Morgen schon darüber gesprochen: Finanzielle Stabilität gehört auch zu Stadtentwicklungspolitik und zu kommunaler Wohnungsbaupolitik. Wir haben zum gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt einen ziemlich spannenden Aspekt, der nicht ganz ungefährlich ist, weil er eine sehr wichtige Einnahmequelle der Städte darstellt, nämlich die Grundsteuer. Das ist die dritthöchste Einnahmequelle der Kommunen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland; denn die Einnahmen daraus betragen ungefähr 13 Milliarden Euro. Es ist wichtig, dass diese Einnahmequelle für die Kommunen erhalten bleibt.\n\nAber die Grundsteuer ist zum gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt aller Voraussicht nach verfassungswidrig. Sie ist es deswegen, weil extrem unterschiedliche Einheitswerte zugrunde gelegt werden. Dieses Extrem kann man in Berlin gut deutlich machen. Hier - in anderen Teilen des Landes auch - haben wir Einheitswerte auf der Basis von 1964 im Westen und von 1935 im Osten. Das führt dazu, dass für ein 1 500 Quadratmeter großes Grundstück eine Grundsteuer in Höhe von 8 300 Euro im Westen und von 4 800 Euro im Osten gezahlt werden muss. Das ist ein eindeutiger und klarer Verstoß gegen das Gleichheitsgebot des Grundgesetzes. Das muss geklärt werden.\n\nMieter in neuen Gebäuden zahlen deutlich mehr als Eigentümer von Jugendstilvillen - so kann man das auch thematisieren. Deswegen ist die Modernisierung der Grundsteuer eine wirklich wichtige Frage gerechter Politik - gerechter Kommunalpolitik und übrigens auch gerechter Wohnungsbaupolitik. Deswegen hoffe ich sehr, dass Sie das unterstützen.\n\nSie alle haben die Gelegenheit, an einem fundamentalen Reformprojekt teilzunehmen. Nach ungefähr 30 Jahren sind die Länder zielgerichtet dabei, sich auf einen Gesetzentwurf zu verständigen. Alle machen mit, aber Bayern natürlich nicht. Deswegen müssen wir uns darum kümmern, dass diese Reform auf den Weg gebracht wird, bevor die jetzige Regelung vom Bundesverfassungsgericht für verfassungswidrig erklärt wird und damit eine wichtige Einnahmequelle der Kommunen entfällt.\n\nDarum lautet meine Bitte: Wenn Sie etwas für integrierte Stadtentwicklung und für Wohnungsbaupolitik jenseits der Frage, woher man eigentlich zusätzliches Geld bekommt, tun wollen, dann helfen Sie mit, dass diese Reform der Grundsteuer zielgerichtet durchgeführt wird. Das hilft den Menschen in den Städten und Gemeinden sowie den Kommunen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n6917,hermann-grohe,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Umfragen belegen: Die Menschen in unserem Land vertrauen dem Gesundheitswesen. Sie wissen: Bei Krankheit, bei Pflegebedürftigkeit, bei einem Unfall werden sie gut versorgt. Dies gilt dank eines solidarischen Gesundheitswesens unabhängig vom Einkommen und unabhängig vom Wohnort.\n\nWir spüren aber auch, dass sich die Menschen Sorgen machen, ob das so bleibt, ob der medizinische Fortschritt also auch weiterhin für alle zur Verfügung steht und -bezahlbar bleibt. Deswegen ist es wichtig, dass wir den wirklichen Patientennutzen zum entscheidenden Maßstab des Fortschritts in diesem Bereich machen.\n\nDie Menschen haben auch die Sorge, ob auch dies gilt: unabhängig vom Wohnort eine gute Versorgung zu finden. Damit bin ich bei einem zentralen Thema, nämlich der Versorgung im ländlichen Raum und der Frage, ob es gelingt, auch hier eine gute ambulante und Krankenhausversorgung sicherzustellen.\n\nIch komme gerade von einem Gespräch mit der NRW-Landrätekonferenz. Da war das natürlich ein Thema, und das ist auch längst nicht mehr nur ein Thema in den noch wenigen Gebieten mit einer manifestierten Unterversorgung, sondern kluge Kommunalpolitikerinnen und -politiker schauen auf das Durchschnittsalter der niedergelassenen Ärztinnen und Ärzte und bedenken die Sorgen, die mancher hat, einen Praxisnachfolger zu finden,\n\nund prüfen, wie es in zehn Jahren aussehen wird und wo sie dann stehen werden, wenn es ihnen nicht gelingt, mehr Niederlassungen zu ermöglichen.\n\nWir stellen mit dem Versorgungsstärkungsgesetz, über das wir heute entscheiden, wichtige Weichen, um unser Gesundheitswesen fit für die Zukunft zu machen:\n\nErstens. Wir stärken die Versorgung im ländlichen Raum. Zweitens. Wir stärken die Rechte der Patientinnen und Patienten. Drittens. Wir stärken Innovation in der Versorgung.\n\nZum Ersten. Ich habe erwähnt, dass den Kommunalpolitikern nicht nur die Unterversorgung Sorgen macht. Deswegen ist es richtig, dass wir den Kassenärztlichen Vereinigungen mit diesem Gesetzentwurf die Möglichkeit einräumen, mit Versorgungsstrukturfonds überall im Land Anreize für eine Niederlassung zu schaffen. Das zeigt, dass wir es mit dem Leitbild der niedergelassenen Ärztin bzw. des niedergelassenen Arztes als Rückgrat der ambulanten Versorgung ernst meinen.\n\nSolche Anreize in unterversorgten Gebieten werden durch Strukturfonds bereits heute geschaffen, und zwar so, dass es vor Ort dann auch passt. Einmal ist es ein Stipendium, das mit der Verpflichtung verbunden ist, später als niedergelassene Ärztin bzw. als niedergelassener Arzt in einem konkreten Raum tätig zu werden. In einem anderen Fall sind das Hilfen bei der Niederlassung und bei der Übernahme einer Praxis. Das können aber auch Vergütungsanreize bei besonders nachgefragten Tätigkeiten sein, etwa bei Hausbesuchen in Räumen mit großen Entfernungen.\n\nSolche Möglichkeiten wird es zukünftig überall in -unserem Land geben. Überall werden Strukturfonds die Möglichkeit schaffen, solche tatsächlichen Niederlassungsanreize zu schaffen. Das ist ein klares Bekenntnis zur Freiberuflichkeit und zur Selbstverwaltung, das mit der Erwartung verbunden ist, dass der Sicherstellungsauftrag konkret umgesetzt wird.\n\nWir tragen auch dem Umstand Rechnung, dass junge Medizinerinnen und Mediziner zunehmend sagen: Wir wollen mehr Formen gemeinschaftlicher Berufsausübung. Deswegen sieht unser Gesetzentwurf verbindliche Reformen zur Unterstützung von Praxisnetzwerken und mehr Möglichkeiten für Medizinische Versorgungszentren - beispielsweise auch bestehend aus einer Arztgruppe, zum Beispiel den Hausärzten - vor.\n\nSchließlich - um nur beispielhaft Dinge zu erwähnen - stärken wir die Weiterbildung im Bereich der All-gemeinmedizin und auch - einem Änderungsantrag der Koalitionsfraktionen zufolge - im Bereich der grund-versorgenden Fachärzteschaft durch eine entsprechend attraktivere Gestaltung der Weiterbildungsstellen.\n\nWer über Unterversorgung redet, muss auch über Überversorgung reden. Das hat die Gemüter in den letzten Wochen natürlich erhitzt. Da ist manches gesagt worden, was - mit Verlaub - schlichter Unsinn war.\n\nWer etwa gegen Bedarfsplanung und Feststellung von Überversorgung polemisiert, der muss auch bekennen, wer in diesem Land die Verantwortung für die Bedarfsplanung trägt. Das ist nämlich die Selbstverwaltung. Deswegen beauftragen wir sie - die Kritik aus diesem Bereich ernst nehmend -, diese Bedarfsplanung bis Ende 2016 zu überprüfen und gegebenenfalls neu festzulegen.\n\nAuch bei einer Überversorgung oberhalb von 140 Prozent werden wir keineswegs vom Rasenmäher sprechen und auch keine zentralistischen Vorgaben aus Berlin machen, sondern vor Ort muss in Zulassungs-ausschüssen entschieden werden, ob eine aufgegebene Praxis weiter erforderlich ist. Dann bleibt sie selbstverständlich erhalten. Kein Angebot, das wirklich nötig ist, wird gestrichen, sondern vor Ort wird entschieden. Wenn wir aber nicht einen moderaten und an der Versorgungswirklichkeit orientierten Abbau der Überversorgung angehen, dann werden wir nicht erfolgreicher gegen drohende Unterversorgung sein.\n\nZum Zweiten. Wir stärken die Rechte der Patientinnen und Patienten. Das war das nächste Aufregerthema: die Terminservicestellen. Die Debatte war insofern typisch, als wir schnell dabei sind, zwischen Alarmismus - alles ist schrecklich - und Schönfärberei - es gibt gar kein Problem - hin und her zu pendeln. Tatsache ist: Wir sind in der Versorgung mit Facharztterminen besser als viele unserer Nachbarn. Tatsache ist aber auch: Es ist keine kleine Minderheit der gesetzlich Versicherten, die immer wieder klagt, dass sie zu lange auf einen Termin warten muss.\n\nSelbstverständlich schränkt eine Terminservicestelle nicht die Freiheit der Arztwahl ein. Das ist purer Unsinn. Wer zu seiner Ärztin und seinem Arzt gehen will und dafür eine längere Wartezeit in Kauf nimmt, dem ist dies unbenommen. Wer aber Hilfe braucht, hat in Zukunft einen verlässlichen Ansprechpartner, der für die Vermittlung eines Facharzttermins in zumutbarer Entfernung oder, wenn das nicht möglich ist, auch für eine fachärztliche Untersuchung oder Behandlung im Krankenhaus Sorge trägt.\n\nEs wird viel lamentiert und manche Anzeige geschaltet. Die fixen Sachsen haben es einfach gemacht, und siehe da: Es funktioniert, sogar ohne dass wir es vorgeschrieben haben. Deswegen bin ich sicher: Schon bald wird diese Stärkung der Patientenrechte in diesem Land selbstverständlich sein.\n\nUm Patientenrechte geht es auch, wenn wir mit einem strukturierten Zweitmeinungsverfahren für besonders mengenanfällige Operationen in Zukunft sicherstellen - damit das klar ist -: Eine notwendige Operation wird durchgeführt. In manchen Fällen ist es aber klug, wenn sich ein besonders qualifizierter Kollege bzw. eine Kollegin ein Bild macht und eine Zweitmeinung mit besonderer Expertise zur Verfügung stellt, und zwar nicht als Verpflichtung, sondern als Angebot, auf das die Patientin und der Patient hinzuweisen ist. Auch das ist eine Stärkung von Patientenrechten.\n\nSchließlich geht es um die Stärkung der Innovation. Wir sind eine älter werdende Gesellschaft. Mehrfacherkrankungen und chronische Erkrankungen fordern verstärkt das Zusammenspiel über Sektorengrenzen in unserer Gesundheitsversorgung. Wir haben zu lange Mauern zwischen den Sektoren gebaut. Wir müssen jetzt Brücken bauen. Das wird die Aufgabe eines Innovationsfonds sein, der gerade die sektorübergreifende Versorgung ermöglicht, befördert, Anreize schafft und mit einer entsprechenden Versorgungsforschung begleitet und damit einen Beitrag dazu leistet, unser Gesundheitswesen fit zu machen.\n\nDas Letztgenannte ist ein Beispiel dafür - das sage ich angesichts der Debatte in den letzten Tagen -, dass wir keineswegs als Große Koalition einfach abstrakt mehr Geld in irgendein System geben. Vielmehr sind unsere Reformen, ob es um Prävention, Krankenhaus-reformen oder E-Health geht, stets mit Anregungen und Incentives für eine Modernisierung unseres Gesundheitswesens verbunden, das heute das Vertrauen der Menschen in diesem Land hat, es aber auch zukünftig verdient. Dafür stellen wir heute wichtige Weichen.\n\nIch bitte Sie um Zustimmung zu dem Gesetzentwurf.\"\n2560,michaela-noll,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Frau Ministerin, die heutige Debatte war für Sie, glaube ich, nicht ganz so einfach. Wir hatten eine Debattenzeit von 96 Minuten angedacht. Mittlerweile dauert die Debatte aber schon weit über 100 Minuten.\n\nDer Einzelplan 14 ist wichtig. Das, was die Ministerin und der Kollege Otte angesprochen haben, sind wichtige Punkte: Die sicherheitspolitische Lage, die Erwartungshaltung der Bündnispartner, die Investitionen in gutes Personal und die globale Minderausgabe sind angesprochen worden. Das heißt, dass wir einen relativ großen Bogen gespannt haben. Das, was Ingo Gädechens eben sagte, kann ich zu 100 Prozent unterstreichen: Freiheit gibt es nicht umsonst.\n\nDiese Meinung teilen wir, glaube ich, alle.\n\nHerr Kollege Arnold, ich freue mich, wenn Kollegen eine ausgewogene Rede halten. In Bezug auf einen Punkt kann ich Sie hundertprozentig unterstützen; da sind wir ganz an Ihrer Seite. Zur Attraktivitätsoffensive haben Sie gesagt, sie sei der Schlüssel zum Erfolg. Da gebe ich Ihnen recht. Ich bin zuversichtlich, dass wir sie entsprechend begleiten werden.\n\nWir sprechen heute zwar über Zahlen. Ich möchte aber auf das, was meine sehr geschätzte Kollegin Henn angesprochen hat, zurückkommen, nämlich auf den Inhalt der Attraktivitätsoffensive. Wir waren gemeinsam, Sie, ich und unser Kollege Dr. Felgentreu, in Masar-i-Scharif. Es gab diverse Kommentare, zum Teil in Zeitungen, in denen die Attraktivitätsoffensive etwas kritisch betrachtet wurde. Anscheinend haben die Kommentatoren aber nicht mit den Soldaten gesprochen. Die Kollegin Henn und ich hatten die Gelegenheit, mit den Soldaten abends in der Oase zu sitzen und einfach einmal zu fragen: Was haltet ihr davon? Die Soldaten haben uns gesagt, dass sie an dieser Attraktivitätsoffensive schätzen, dass sie zum ersten Mal im Mittelpunkt der Betrachtung stehen. Die sicherheitspolitische Lage ist das eine. Den Soldaten geht es aber darum, dass man einmal den Blick auf sie richtet und sich um sie kümmert. Die Kultur des Sichkümmerns kommt meiner Meinung nach durch diese Attraktivitätsoffensive sehr deutlich zum Ausdruck.\n\nIch habe auch die Gelegenheit genutzt - so oft kommt es im Alltag nicht vor, dass wir Soldaten begegnen -, um einfach einmal zu fragen: Warum sind Sie überhaupt zur Bundeswehr gegangen? Was hat die Bundeswehr für Sie so attraktiv gemacht? - Das wurde mit einem Wort beantwortet: Kameradschaft. Dabei geht es um Kameradschaft nicht nur im Sinne des § 12 Soldatengesetz. Es geht um mehr. Viele von Ihnen können sich vielleicht noch an den TV-Beitrag von Kerner erinnern. In dessen Verlauf bekam ein junger Sanitäter, Ralf Rönckendorf, einen Sonder-Bambi für seinen Einsatz in Kunduz am 2. April. Bei diesem Einsatz setzte er sich für die Rettung eines Kameraden ein und verlor dabei sein Augenlicht. Er antwortete auf die entsprechende Frage, dass er es immer wieder tun würde.\n\nLeider ist unser Kollege Dr. Jung, ehemaliger Verteidigungsminister, heute nicht hier. Er war mit einer derjenigen, die das Einsatz-Weiterverwendungsgesetz auf den Weg gebracht haben. Nach diesem Gesetz muss der Soldat, der im Einsatz verwundet wurde, die Truppe nicht verlassen. Er wird weiter seine Heimat in der Bundeswehr haben. Auch das war schon ein Signal des Sichkümmerns. Deswegen glaube ich, dass dieser Weg der richtige ist.\n\nEin Satz des Sanitäters ist bei mir besonders hängen geblieben. Er machte eine kleine Pause und sagte: Als aktiver Soldat hoffe ich einfach auf ein kleines bisschen mehr Anerkennung in unserer Gesellschaft für die Soldaten. - Meine Damen und Herren, das ist etwas, was nichts kostet. Es ist eine Frage der Empathie mit den Soldaten. Diese Empathie sollten wir haben; denn wenn sich die Soldaten von der Gesellschaft im Stich gelassen fühlen - vielleicht auch gelegentlich an der einen oder anderen Stelle von der Politik; nicht von uns hier, aber wenn ich nach links schaue, könnte das hin und wieder passieren -, gibt es dringenden Handlungsbedarf. Wir müssen ihnen das Gefühl geben, dass sie Teil unserer Gesellschaft sind.\n\nDurch die Wehrpflicht war die Verankerung der Bundeswehr in der Gesellschaft vorhanden. Durch die Aussetzung der Wehrpflicht haben wir jetzt ein anderes Bild. Oft findet die Bundeswehr bzw. das Leben in der Bundeswehr in den Familien nicht mehr statt, weil die jungen Menschen nicht mehr gezogen werden. Sie gehen jetzt freiwillig. Ich glaube, da gibt es dringenden Handlungsbedarf; denn mittlerweile gibt es in der öffentlichen Diskussion manchmal eine ungute Mischung von Missverständnissen und Vorurteilen, meistens gespeist aus Unwissenheit.\n\nEs ist nicht Aufgabe der Soldaten, zu erklären, warum sie in einen Auslandseinsatz gehen, sondern es ist unsere Aufgabe, zu erklären, warum wir sie dahin schicken, damit sie wissen, dass sie mit unserer Rückendeckung gehen. Das erhoffe ich mir.\n\nVielleicht noch ein kleiner Hinweis: Wir haben morgen wieder ein Fußballspiel. Das ist schön und gut. Wenn die jungen Fußballer zurückkommen, ist ganz Deutschland euphorisch und feiert sie. Wissen Sie, was ich mir manchmal wünsche? Ich wünsche mir, dass die Soldaten, wenn sie von einem Einsatz nach Hause kommen, das Gefühl, in der Heimat willkommen zu sein, genauso vermittelt bekommen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n10676,katrin-werner,\"Danke schön. - In der Tat habe ich Nachfragen. Sie haben viele Bereiche und die Befürchtungen der Selbstvertretungsorganisationen angesprochen. Unter anderem wurde Ihnen ja mitgeteilt, dass man im Moment große Angst hat, dass es in vielen Bereichen zu Verschlechterungen kommt, dass man eher in die Richtung tendiert, zu sagen: „Lieber gar kein Gesetz“, und die kleinen Veränderungen und Verbesserungen im SGB IX zu regeln. Es gibt also immer mehr Menschen, die sagen: Wir sagen zu diesem Gesetz Nein; das ist nicht mein Gesetz. - Insofern ist meine Nachfrage, wie Sie mit diesen Ängsten umgehen. Sie müssen ja nicht nur aktiv daran arbeiten, die Menschen zu beteiligen, sondern auch daran, tatsächlich Dinge zu ändern. Welche konkreten Maßnahmen werden dabei ergriffen? Das ist mir ziemlich unverständlich. Als das Gespräch am 4. Mai dieses Jahres bei Ihnen im Ministerium stattgefunden hat, waren auch die Kollegin Rüffer und ich da, und man hat den Frust der Menschen gespürt.\n\nIch habe eine zweite Nachfrage. Man konnte nachlesen und auch hören, dass unter anderem auch noch einmal über den Zeitplan gesprochen wurde. Danach finden die Länderanhörung am 23. Mai 2016 und die Verbandsanhörung am 24. Mai 2016 statt, und unter anderem wurde auch der 23. September 2016 erwähnt.\n\nAllerdings habe ich auch gehört und wahrgenommen, dass es sein könnte, dass der Gesetzentwurf das Kabinett bzw. den Kabinettstisch bis zum Sommer gar nicht erreichen wird. Das würde ja heißen, dass es bis zum 23. September 2016 durchaus gar keine Vorlage geben könnte. Gibt es einen zweiten Fahrplan, also einen Plan B, dafür, wie wir in dem ganzen Verfahren weiter verfahren wollen, oder müssen wir uns darauf einstellen, dass es in dieser Wahlperiode kein Bundesteilhabegesetz geben wird?\"\n3146,sven-christian-kindler,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir sind hier zwar im Deutschen Bundestag, aber wir haben eine Gesamtverantwortung für den Bund, für die Länder und für die Kommunen.\n\nDas bedeutet dann eben auch, Johannes Kahrs, dass man für gerechte Finanzbeziehungen zwischen Bund, Ländern und Kommunen sorgen muss.\n\nNatürlich hat Herr Schäuble einen Testballon in Richtung Solidaritätszuschlag gestartet. Das macht doch nicht ein einfacher Verwaltungsbeamter im BMF. Natürlich wurde das von Herrn Schäubles Pressestelle an die Süddeutsche Zeitung gegeben.\n\nIch sage auch klar: Das ist eine Debatte zur falschen Zeit. Das ist eine Scheindebatte, eine Nebelkerze. Auch in der Substanz ist der Vorschlag wenig aussagekräftig. 4 Milliarden Euro entsprechen einem Verschuldungsspielraum von 0,15 Prozent für die Länder. Das ist weniger als das, was Sie den Kommunen bis 2018 bei der Eingliederungshilfe versprochen haben. Das ist sehr wenig.\n\nDarüber hinaus muss man sich doch fragen: Wie kann man diese Finanzbeziehungen ordentlich regeln? Wie kann man dafür sorgen, dass Länder entlastet und strukturschwache Regionen richtig unterstützt werden? Dabei geht es auch um die Problematik der Altschulden, für deren Tilgung der Soli in Zukunft genutzt werden muss, gerade im Hinblick auf die Zinskosten. Das wäre ein richtiger Vorschlag für die Bund-Länder-Finanzbeziehungen.\n\nSie als Große Koalition haben sich in dieser Woche in den Debatten die ganze Zeit für Ihren Haushalt gelobt. Es gab viel Selbstlob. Davon, dass man es oft wiederholt, wird es nicht wahrer, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen. Man muss immer noch feststellen: Sie nehmen zwar keine neuen Schulden bei der Bank auf, aber Sie nehmen immer noch Schulden auf bei den Krankenversicherungen. Sie nehmen Schulden auf bei der Rentenversicherung.\n\nSie nehmen Schulden auf bei der Infrastruktur, bei den Investitionen. Das ist nicht generationengerecht.\n\nStichwort „Investitionen“. Man hat ja an den Reden der Kollegen Kampeter und Kahrs gemerkt, dass der Angriff ordentlich getroffen hat. Obwohl Sie Einzelpläne genannt haben, bei denen Sie kleine und mittlere Summen draufpacken, konnten Sie nicht erklären, warum der Bund von 2014 bis 2018 in der Summe 111 Milliarden Euro mehr Steuern einnimmt, die Ausgaben um rund 10 Prozent auf rund 330 Milliarden Euro steigen, aber gleichzeitig die Investitionsquote von 10 auf 8 Prozent sinkt. Wieso? Wieso versickert das Geld im Etat? Warum wird da nicht investiert? Das ist doch ein Armutszeugnis für Ihre Haushaltspolitik.\n\nJa, es ist richtig, es geht natürlich auch um private Investitionen, die wir anregen müssen. Da muss man sich aber auch einmal fragen: Was macht diese Bundesregierung eigentlich sonst noch? Viele private Investitionen sind in den letzten Jahren vor allen Dingen in die Stärkung der erneuerbaren Energien bzw. in die Energiewende geflossen. Von 2000 bis 2012 waren es 166 Milliarden Euro. 370 000 neue Arbeitsplätze wurden geschaffen. Was haben Sie gemacht? Sie haben einen riesigen Anschlag auf das EEG verübt und fahren die Energiewende mit Ihrem Kohlekurs an die Wand. Da kann ich einfach nur sagen: Das ist nicht nur ökologisch, sondern vor allen Dingen auch wirtschafts- und finanzpolitisch schädlich.\n\nWir müssen, glaube ich, diese Debatte zur Haushaltspolitik im europäischen Kontext sehen; darauf hat Herr Kampeter ja auch abgezielt. Man muss aber sagen: Die Initiativen der Bundesregierung haben in den letzten Jahren nicht dazu geführt, dass in Europa oder auch in Deutschland Investitionen gesteigert wurden, sondern dazu, dass sie gesunken sind.\n\nWir haben schwierige Probleme in der Euro-Zone. Diese muss man sehr differenziert betrachten. Ich kann nicht auf alles im Einzelnen eingehen. Wir wissen auch: Es gibt eine Stagnation in der Euro-Zone. Es gibt eine große Massenarbeitslosigkeit. Es gibt gerade eine Investitionsschwäche in der Euro-Zone, aber auch in Deutschland. Natürlich muss Deutschland nicht alle diese Probleme allein lösen, aber Deutschland kann als größte Volkswirtschaft in der Währungsunion seinen Teil tun, indem man gerade jetzt Investitionen fördert und sich anschaut, was eigentlich mit dem Leistungsbilanzüberschuss passiert. Deutsche Ersparnisse in Höhe von 400 Milliarden Euro wurden in den letzten Jahren im Ausland verbrannt, weil sie schlecht angelegt waren. Das ist weder gut für die deutschen Sparer noch für -Europa. Was wir in der jetzigen Krise brauchen, ist eine konkrete sozial-ökologische Investitionsstrategie. Da muss Deutschland noch viel mehr machen - auch im eigenen Land.\n\nIch will noch etwas zu den privaten Investitionen im Verkehrsbereich sagen. Herr Kampeter, der Finanzminister hat unsere Unterstützung, wenn er diese unsinnige Ausländermaut torpediert. Die bringt nichts. Die gehört gestoppt.\n\n- Ja, wir arbeiten konstruktiv zusammen, Kollege Kampeter; das ist schön.\n\nAber der Alternativplan - das ist ja das Problem - von Herrn Schäuble ist noch viel schlimmer. Sie wollen flächendeckend eine allgemeine Pkw-Maut für alle Autofahrer einführen und flächendeckend die Infrastruktur bei Verkehrswegen privatisieren. Dabei wissen wir schon jetzt: ÖPP im Verkehrsbereich - das hat der Bundesrechnungshof klar aufgezeigt - ist ein Milliardengrab, eine milliardenschwere Verschwendung von Steuergeldern. Das wird auch bei ÖPP 2.0 von Herrn Gabriel und Herrn Schäuble so sein. Denn die großen Versicherungskonzerne erwarten eine hohe Rendite, aber haben viel höhere Zinskosten als der Bund. Diese milliardenschwere Verschwendung von Steuergeldern ist nicht die richtige Antwort auf den Investitionsstau in Deutschland.\n\nKonkret, Kollege Kahrs: Man kann Investitionen in die Zukunft solide finanzieren und das auch konkret im Haushalt darstellen, nämlich mit einer Gegenfinanzierung. Gehen Sie doch einmal an die Ausgaben ran! Streichen Sie 2015 1 Milliarde Euro beim Betreuungsgeld! Und was ist mit der Verschwendung durch Rüstungsprojekte? - Da sind Milliarden zu holen. Und was ist mit einem Subventionsabbau im umweltschädlichen Bereich? - Der Staat gibt jedes Jahr 50 Milliarden Euro für umweltschädliche Subventionen aus. Um 8 Milliarden Euro könnte man sie sofort abbauen.\n\n- Konkret: In den Bereichen stoffliche Nutzung von Erdöl, schwere Dienstwagen, Flugindustrie, Agrardiesel, Ausnahmen bei der Ökosteuer ist sehr viel zu holen. Da müssen Sie rangehen! Trauen Sie sich endlich auch an den Subventionsabbau!\n\nAuch auf der Einnahmeseite besteht Potenzial; zum Beispiel gehört die ungerechte Abgeltungsteuer abgeschafft. Wir wollen Kapitaleinkommen endlich wieder progressiv wie Arbeitseinkommen besteuern. Das ist gerecht, und das ist notwendig.\n\nWir werden Ihnen gute, solide und gegenfinanzierte Alternativen für Zukunftsinvestitionen vorlegen. Wir freuen uns auf die Haushaltsberatungen. Hoffentlich folgen Sie unseren Vorschlägen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3626,joachim-poß,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Wir stehen in Europa, auch in Deutschland, im Epochenjahr 2014, wie es Heinrich August Winkler nennt, vor großen Aufgaben und Weichenstellungen. Zwar haben wir seit der Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise 2008/2009 und den nachfolgenden Turbulenzen im Euro-Raum unsere Handlungsfähigkeit verbessert. Aber ich fürchte, dass wir für die nun kommende Zeit mit den bisherigen Fortschritten, einschließlich der Bankenunion, nicht auskommen, dass wir uns in Europa weiter für das rüsten müssen, was da auf uns zukommt. Das sollten wir ganz realistisch ins Auge fassen und auch bei allen Fortschritten nicht verschweigen.\n\nDeswegen möchte ich die Bundeskanzlerin, die jetzt ihren Flug nach Mailand antreten musste, wie sie mir sagte, in einem Punkt ergänzen. Sie sprach davon, dass Irland, Portugal und Spanien ihre Programme erfolgreich abgeschlossen hätten. Es mag, technokratisch gesehen, richtig sein, die Programme abzuschließen. Die Kanzlerin hätte aber hinzufügen sollen: Die wesentlichen Probleme in diesen Ländern sind damit noch nicht gelöst, vor allen Dingen nicht das Problem der Arbeitslosigkeit, insbesondere der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit.\n\nDies zeigen auch andere Strukturdaten. Die Verschuldung in Spanien zum Beispiel wird bis 2015 noch steigen. Das sollten wir nicht aus den Augen verlieren.\n\nWir als Bundesrepublik Deutschland sollten unseren Beitrag dazu leisten, dass eine teilweise unfruchtbare Debatte in Europa - auf der einen Seite die Forderung nach mehr Investitionen, auf der anderen Seite die nach mehr Strukturreformen - in der bisherigen Form beendet wird. Sie führt in eine Sackgasse. Wir brauchen mehr Investitionen in den einzelnen Ländern Europas, und wir brauchen auch mehr Strukturreformen in den einzelnen Ländern; das ist nicht zu leugnen.\n\nStrukturreformen bedeuten ja nicht nur, Arbeitsgesetze zu ändern. Strukturreformen bedeuten vor allen Dingen, ein vernünftiges Berufsausbildungssystem einzurichten. Strukturreformen bedeuten auch, dass die staatlichen Institutionen ihre Aufgaben wahrnehmen, dass etwa die Jugendgarantie tatsächlich umgesetzt wird. Ich habe nicht verstanden, warum Hollande in Mailand gesagt hat, wir bräuchten noch 20 Milliarden Euro mehr. Wir sind aus ganz unterschiedlichen Gründen noch nicht einmal in der Lage, 6 Milliarden Euro im Rahmen der Beschäftigungsinitiative kollektiv auszugeben. Das ist Teil der europäischen Realität.\n\nMit dieser Realität müssen wir uns beschäftigen, ebenso mit der Praxis. Angesichts der Transparenz und Effizienz in manchen Ländern muss ich sagen: Da ist noch viel Luft nach oben; da ist man gelegentlich sogar erschrocken über das Ausmaß. Ich verschweige auch nicht das Ausmaß der Korruption, das in einigen Ländern erschreckend hoch ist. Auch das muss thematisiert werden, das können wir nicht so ohne Weiteres tolerieren.\n\nDeswegen ist die wichtigste Reform in vielen Ländern, Rechtssicherheit herzustellen. Matteo Renzi sagt nicht umsonst: Ich will eine Justizreform. - Wenn man in Italien innerhalb von fünf Jahren kein Urteil bekommt - egal in welcher Angelegenheit -, fördert das nicht die Rechtssicherheit und auch keine langfristigen Investitionen. Das sind Punkte, über die wir uns verständigen müssen. Da müssen auch die vorhandenen Möglichkeiten genutzt werden.\n\nWenn Bulgarien, Italien, die Slowakei und Rumänien weniger als 56 Prozent der Strukturfördermittel in der Periode 2007 bis 2013 abgerufen haben, bedeutet das einen Verzicht auf viele Arbeits- und Ausbildungsplätze in den jeweiligen Ländern. Das muss die Linkspartei auch einmal zur Kenntnis nehmen, bevor sie mit Schuldzuweisungen arbeitet, die an der Realität in Europa vorbeigehen.\n\nStrukturmittel in Höhe von 102 Milliarden Euro sind nicht abgerufen worden. Wir müssen unseren Beitrag dazu leisten, das konkret zu ändern, und zwar auf der europäischen Ebene. Das muss die neue Kommission leisten. Der Bewilligungsprozess ist in der Tat sehr bürokratisch, und es bestehen Unterschiede in den einzelnen Ländern, was die Fähigkeit angeht, diese Mittel abzurufen.\n\nNur nebenbei: Die Jugendarbeitslosigkeit ist nicht nur ein Problem in den südlichen Ländern. In 18 EU-Ländern liegt sie über 20 Prozent, zum Beispiel in Schweden bei 27,6 Prozent und in Irland bei 26,9 Prozent.\n\nDas sind die Probleme, mit denen wir uns in den nächsten Jahren auseinandersetzen müssen mit einem Policy Mix, der konkrete Fortschritte bei Investitionen und Strukturreformen sowie eine angemessene Konsolidierung umfasst. Deswegen brauchen wir auch Finanzierungsmittel. Wir brauchen praktische Fortschritte im Kampf gegen Steuerhinterziehung und Steuervermeidung. Starbucks, Google und Co. und auch große deutsche Konzerne müssen von uns gezwungen werden, endlich Steuern in Europa zu zahlen, damit wir diese Initiativen finanzieren können.\n\nDie Aufhebung des sogenannten Bankgeheimnisses, die jetzt im Ecofin beschlossen wurde - dafür haben einige wie ich jahrzehntelang gekämpft -, kommt zwar etwas spät, aber sie ist gleichwohl richtig und eine wesentliche Voraussetzung, um in diesem Kampf erfolgreicher zu sein. Man muss es offen sagen: Dagegen gab es in diesem Parlament massiven Widerstand von Konservativen und Liberalen über Jahre und Jahrzehnte. Das hat sich geändert. Das halte ich für einen Fortschritt.\n\nDie Möglichkeiten der Europäischen Investitionsbank zur Ankurbelung der Investitionen sind genannt worden. Da müssen wir durch Anhebung des Eigenkapitals ein Vielfaches an Investitionsvorhaben fördern.\n\nIn den Gesprächen, die ich in den letzten Monaten in Europa geführt habe - sei es mit Ökonomen und Vertretern der Wirtschaft oder mit Politikern -, bin ich auf ein Problem gestoßen, das mir nicht unbekannt ist: Das ist die wachsende Ungleichheit hier in Europa und auch in den USA. Auch das ist ein Problem, das durch die Europäische Union und das, was Juncker bisher gesagt hat, nicht adressiert worden ist.\n\nWir haben also viel zu tun. Dieses deutsche Parlament sollte einen wirklich konstruktiven Beitrag leisten.\"\n11010,monika-lazar,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Heute stimmen wir über einen Gesetzentwurf ab, der auch mir persönlich sehr am Herzen liegt, nämlich das Zweite Dopingopfer-Hilfegesetz. Für uns Grüne ist es ein wichtiges Ergebnis, über das wir wirklich sehr froh sind. Selbstverständlich hätten wir uns dieses Gesetz schon sehr viel früher gewünscht, aber manchmal muss man eben etwas länger Überzeugungsarbeit leisten und die Koalition zu ihrem Glück zwingen.\n\nAber besser spät als nie. Wir werden diesem Gesetzentwurf selbstverständlich zustimmen.\n\nDie Politik hat also ihre Hausaufgaben gemacht. Anders sieht es leider beim organisierten Sport aus. Es ist ja von allen anderen Rednerinnen und Rednern schon angesprochen worden: Wir würden uns eine konkrete finanzielle Beteiligung des DOSB durchaus wünschen. Doch bis jetzt gibt es leider nur Sonntagsreden. Die Rede von DOSB-Präsident Alfons Hörmann beim Festakt am 20. Mai ist von Frau Freitag schon zitiert worden. Auch ich zitiere daraus, weil der vorherige Satz ebenfalls interessant ist:\n\nWir ...\n\n- sprich: der DOSB -\n\nhaben schon vor zehn Jahren die Initiative ergriffen und mit Hilfe des Bundes und unter Einbeziehung des Herstellerunternehmens Jenapharm viele Dopingopfer entschädigen können. Jetzt sind wir froh, dass Bundesregierung und Bundestag eine weitere Entschädigungswelle durchführen wollen. Der DOSB hat diese Bemühungen auf politischer Ebene stets aktiv unterstützt.\n\nMit Verlaub, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich finde diese Aussage einfach nur dreist.\n\nNachdem sich die Politik zu einer Neuauflage entschieden hat, steht der DOSB immer noch auf der Bremse. Der Verein Doping-Opfer-Hilfe bezeichnet die Aussagen Hörmanns auch als „Offensivlügen“. Ganz falsch ist das leider nicht. Aber es ist für den DOSB noch nicht zu spät. Vielleicht sollte man das zehnjährige Jubiläum, auch wenn es ein paar Tage oder Wochen her ist, noch nutzen, um die Dopingopfer nicht im Regen stehen zu lassen.\n\nAber auch wir sollten uns nicht zurücklehnen. Denn, so schön wie die Zahlungen sind, es sind Einmalzahlungen. Viele Opfer können jetzt erst daran teilhaben, weil sie bei der ersten Auflage 2003 nicht erfasst waren. Diese Entschädigungen sind für einige auch eine moralische Anerkennung des Unrechts, das ihnen in der DDR widerfahren ist. Deshalb bleibt für uns Grüne klar: Bleibende Schäden benötigen auch bleibende Hilfen. Wir bleiben daher dabei, dass wir uns eine Rentenzahlung für Schwerstfälle im DDR-Doping wünschen.\n\nDazu müssten die DDR-Dopingopfer nur mit ins SED-Unrechtsbereinigungsgesetz aufgenommen werden. Vielleicht lässt sich die Koalition ja noch zu diesem Schritt bewegen.\n\nZum Schluss möchte auch ich noch etwas zum Änderungsantrag der Linksfraktion sagen. Auf den ersten Blick klingt es nachvollziehbar. Allerdings können wir diesem Antrag nicht zustimmen. Natürlich gab es auch in Westdeutschland Doping, und das gibt es in ganz Deutschland heute noch. Dennoch ist es eine besondere Sache, wenn ein Staat Doping von oben verordnet. Der Staatsplan 14.25 des ZK der SED vom Oktober 1974 ist schon angesprochen worden. Für Westdeutschland wissen wir bisher noch nichts von einer flächendeckenden Dopinganordnung durch Politik oder Sport.\n\nIn den letzten Jahren wurde von Historikern der Begriff des systemischen Dopings in der Bundesrepublik bis 1990 verwendet. Das bedeutet Doping im kleinen Kreis und mit großen individuellen Varianten des Dopingmissbrauchs durch Sportler, Trainer und Mediziner. Noch gibt es keinen Beweis für ein staatlich verordnetes Doping. Aber glauben Sie uns: Wenn sich herausstellen sollte, dass es auch in Westdeutschland eine Dopinganordnung von oben gegeben haben könnte, wären wir sicherlich die Letzten, die sich von einem weiteren Entschädigungsfonds, dann für West-Dopingopfer bis 1990, nicht überzeugen lassen würden. Das müsste dann neu beraten werden.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6676,thomas-strobl,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Kollege Korte, jetzt haben Sie so viel von Staatsverantwortung geredet.\n\nManchmal habe ich den Eindruck, dass Ihr Verständnis von Staatsverantwortung vor allem darin besteht, dass die von Parlamentariern selbst gesetzten Regeln, etwa bezogen auf die Vertraulichkeit von Sitzungen, ständig durchbrochen und Dinge durchgestochen werden,\n\ndie besser in den Gremien blieben. Das ist Ihr Verständnis von Staatsverantwortung!\n\nSie haben sich hier ereifert, weil der Vorschlag für einen Sonderbeauftragten gemacht worden ist. Im PKGr ist dazu noch nichts beschlossen.\n\nSie schlagen seit Tagen und Wochen die Trommeln, dass einem die Ohren dröhnen.\n\nGanz zu Beginn - da lag noch gar nichts vor - haben Sie „Verrat“ und dann „Landesverrat“ gerufen. Jetzt können Sie nur noch Hochverrat, Lüge und Rücktritt rufen.\n\nBei all diesem - Sie haben sich aufgeblasen und sind lauter und lauter geworden -\n\ngibt es eine seltsame Disproportionalität zwischen der Lautstärke der Vorwürfe und den Fakten, die Sie tatsächlich in der Hand haben. Das ist nämlich nichts.\n\nVielleicht nutzen Sie ja die Pfingstfeiertage,\n\num sich ein bisschen abzukühlen; denn Sie verkennen eines: Das sind komplexe Sachverhalte, die die innere und die äußere Sicherheit unseres Staates und die Sicherheit unserer Bürgerinnen und Bürger berühren,\n\nund es ist besser, mit solchen Themen nicht zu spielen, sondern sich ernsthaft und seriös damit zu beschäftigen, wie das diese Bundesregierung und die Koalition aus SPD und\n\nCDU/CSU auch tun.\n\nWenn Sie sich etwas beruhigt haben, dann können wir uns auch ganz gerne darüber unterhalten: Was dürfen unsere Dienste? Welche gesetzlichen Grundlagen für unsere Dienste müssen wir ändern?\n\n- Das ist gar nichts Neues; das haben wir schon oft getan. -\n\nWo müssen wir das Recht anpassen? Wir können auch eine Debatte darüber führen: Müssen wir unserer Polizei und unseren Diensten die Möglichkeit geben, mit weiterer Technik zu arbeiten? Was für Regeln gelten?\n\nIch erneuere mein Angebot und sage: Lassen Sie uns darüber reden, ob wir eine klare Rechtsgrundlage für die strategische Fernmeldeüberwachung des BND brauchen. Sie sind hier eingeladen, mitzudiskutieren,\n\nsodass wir gemeinsam vernünftige Regeln finden.\n\nDas gilt auch für die parlamentarische Kontrolle. Die parlamentarische Kontrolle, das PKGr, haben wir in der Vergangenheit durch mehr Personal und eine neue Geschäftsordnung durchaus optimiert.\n\nHier gibt es weitere Vorschläge, zum Beispiel den Vorschlag zur Einsetzung eines Nachrichtendienstbeauftragten, der sich hauptamtlich, ständig und mit weitreichenden Kompetenzen im Auftrag des PKGr mit diesen Dingen beschäftigt. Ich finde, über all diese Verbesserungen können wir doch in aller Ruhe reden.\n\nIm Übrigen können wir vielleicht auch einmal darüber reden, was eigentlich alles geheim ist. Ich habe manchmal den Eindruck, dass in manchen Behörden -alles geheim ist. Selbst die Essensmarken kommen in -einer Mappe an, die mit „VS-Vertraulich“ gestempelt ist. Dabei tritt die seltsame Kuriosität auf, dass alles, was geheim ist, am Ende des Tages öffentlich wird.\n\nVielleicht sprechen wir auch einmal darüber, wie wir zu mehr Transparenz in unseren Diensten kommen.\n\nEine hundertprozentige Transparenz kann es bei Nachrichtendiensten selbstverständlich nie geben. Vielleicht kann es aber mehr Transparenz geben.\n\n- Frau Kollegin Göring-Eckardt, es wäre indessen schon gut, wenn die Dinge, die wirklich geheim sein müssen, dann auch geheim bleiben, und wenn sie auch in den parlamentarischen Gremien geheim bleiben, wenn die Parlamentarier vereinbaren, dass sie geheim bleiben müssen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren von der Opposition, Sie sind eingeladen, mit uns eine Debatte darüber zu führen: Brauchen wir unsere Dienste? Brauchen wir die Polizei?\n\nWie sind die Aufgaben?\n\nDa möchte ich für die Unionsfraktion eine sehr klare Antwort geben:\n\nAngesichts der Bedrohungen durch die Terrororganisation „Islamischer Staat“, angesichts der Lagen in Syrien, im Irak, in der Ukraine und im Nahen Osten, angesichts der Gefahren durch den internationalen Terrorismus\n\nbrauchen wir die Arbeit unserer Polizistinnen und Polizisten. Wir brauchen auch die Arbeit unserer Dienste, auch die internationale Zusammenarbeit unserer Dienste mit anderen Diensten.\n\nWir, die CDU/CSU-Bundestagsfraktion, stehen insofern hinter der Arbeit unserer Polizistinnen und Polizisten und unserer Dienste,\n\ndass wir sie nicht fortwährend von Leuten diskreditieren lassen, die vergangenheitsbedingt ein Problem mit Polizei und Diensten haben.\"\n10628,eva-bulling-schroter,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ja, lange hat es gedauert. Es gab ja, wie ich denke, eine Verschleppung dieses wichtigen Themas der Vergabe der Verteilnetze bei Strom und Gas. Wir als Linke haben dazu schon vor langer Zeit einen Antrag eingebracht.\n\nBereits der Koalitionsvertrag enthält das Versprechen, bei Neuvergabe der Verteilnetze die Rechtssicherheit zu verbessern; denn die Regelung im Energiewirtschaftsgesetz hierzu ist mehrdeutig und liefert die Kommunen einem großen Prozessrisiko aus; Sie haben es kurz angesprochen, Kollege Saathoff.\n\nViele Vergaben sind jetzt leider schon gelaufen - auch so kann man Probleme lösen - und oft zuungunsten der Kommunen entschieden worden. Es ist ja ein offenes Geheimnis, dass bei diesem Thema die CDU ein Problem mit ihren eigenen Bürgermeistern hat, allen voran dem CDU-Bürgermeister von Titisee-Neustadt, Armin Hinterseh, der derzeit vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht klagt. Ich wünsche ihm alles Gute und viel Erfolg.\n\nEr will es sich einfach nicht gefallen lassen, dass seine Kommune das Verteilnetz nicht an sich selbst vergeben darf. CDU-Kollege Bareiß aus dem benachbarten Wahlkreis - er wohnt nämlich sozusagen direkt nebenan - hat ganz deutlich gesagt, dass für ihn nicht die kommunalen Interessen im Mittelpunkt stehen, sondern angeblich die Kunden. Hört! Hört! Ich sehe da aber keinen Widerspruch,\n\nsondern eher besondere Interessen gewisser Herren und ein Misstrauen gegenüber den Kommunen. Das finde ich schade, denn - das kann ich nur noch einmal sagen - hier werden die Interessen der Kommunen ignoriert. Wir halten das für falsch und für ignorant.\n\nAuch die Chefin des baden-württembergischen Städtetags und Mitglied des Bundesvorstands der CDU - sie ist also nicht irgendjemand - kritisiert ganz massiv Ihr Vorgehen. Wir kritisieren das auch. Deswegen haben wir im Bundestag Anträge dazu eingebracht und das Thema immer wieder angesprochen. Wir lehnen es ab, dass Kommunen heute gezwungen sind, die Konzession ihres Verteilnetzes ohne Berücksichtigung kommunaler Belange auszuschreiben und zu vergeben.\n\nSeitdem sind ja bereits etliche Konzessionen neu vergeben worden - auf einer gesetzlichen Grundlage, die überaus unklar und schwierig ist. Der Regelungsbedarf an dieser Stelle ist himmelschreiend. Aber Sie sitzen das Thema aus. Ich halte das für peinlich und schlimm; das zeigt nur, dass Sie von der CDU/CSU gerade nicht an der Seite der Kommunen stehen.\n\nBürgerenergie, regionale Wertschöpfung, Ökostadtwerke, Stärkung der Kommunen, Regionalisierung der Energieversorgung - all das ist für Sie von der Union anscheinend kein Thema. Denn der Besitz des Verteilnetzes ist eine wichtige Voraussetzung für Kommunen, die eine eigenständige Energieversorgung, zum Beispiel ein Ökostadtwerk, entwickeln wollen. Aber diese Entwicklung wollen Sie offensichtlich nicht. Das sehen wir auch am EEG-Entwurf, mit dem Sie die dezentrale Energiewende torpedieren und durch Ausschreibungspflicht zentralistische Tendenzen unterstützen. Zwischen 2007 und 2014 sind 85 Prozent der rund 1 400 Verteilnetze an den alten Konzessionär vergeben worden. Hier sind Chancen für eine dezentrale Energiewende vertan worden, weil in Berlin nicht gehandelt wurde - vertan für weitere 20 Jahre! Man muss wissen: Die Konzessionen laufen 20 Jahre. Vorher kann man sie nicht kündigen.\n\nIn dem Gesetzentwurf sprechen Sie sich ausdrücklich gegen Inhousevergaben aus, wofür wir, Die Linke, uns entschieden einsetzen. Wir sind dafür von Ihnen von der Union ja immer gegeißelt worden - mit dem alten Vorwurf, wir wollten Staatswirtschaft und lehnten Wettbewerb ab. Wir sagen: Das ist Unsinn und blanker Hohn gegenüber den Kommunen. Inhousevergaben gibt es in den Niederlanden, und zwar sehr erfolgreich; sie sind vollständig durch das Europarecht gedeckt. Ja, und dort - jetzt erschrecken Sie vielleicht - gibt es sogar ein Privatisierungsverbot für Verteilnetze, das 2013 als europarechtskonform vom Europäischen Gerichtshof bestätigt wurde.\n\nWir, die Linke, finden innovative Ökostadtwerke gut - dafür gibt es viele Beispiele; da gibt es wirklich tolle Sachen - so wie das im hessischen Wolfhagen. Dort hat man sogar einen Teil des Stadtwerks in eine Bürgerenergiegenossenschaft ausgelagert, die wiederum Anteile am Stadtwerk besitzt. Das ist eine Form von Bürgerbeteiligung, und Bürgerbeteiligung wollen viele Menschen. Es gibt eine ganze Reihe von Politikern, die in ihren Wahlkreisen ständig über Bürgerbeteiligung reden. Wenn es aber in Berlin wirklich ernst wird, dann stimmen sie dagegen. Ich sage: Wir brauchen eine solche Bürgerbeteiligung. Auch im Sinne der Klimabeschlüsse sind Bürgerenergie und örtliche Netze eine ganz wichtige Sache. Das vorliegende Gesetz verhindert leider die Vergabe an die Kommunen. Deshalb sagen wir Nein.\n\nDanke schön, Kollege Liebing. - Ich habe hier die Zeitung Kontext:Wochenzeitung, bestimmt kein linkes Propagandablatt. In einem Artikel geht es genau um diese Kommunalverfassungsbeschwerde, die der Bürgermeister von Titisee - Sie kennen den Fall sicher - eingereicht hat. Zu dem grundgesetzlich verbrieften Recht auf Selbstbestimmung, um das es vor dem Verfassungsgericht geht, schreibt diese Zeitung:\n\n… „weil das Thema fast alle Städte und Gemeinden betrifft“, so das geschäftsführende Vorstandsmitglied Gudrun Heute-Bluhm auf Kontext-Anfrage. Die ehemalige Oberbürgermeisterin von Lörrach\n\n- sie ist Mitglied des Präsidiums des CDU-Vorstandes, also nicht irgendjemand -\n\nführt die Kritik an der herrschenden Rechtsprechung weiter aus: „Es ist für uns nicht nachvollziehbar, weshalb es der Kommune nicht möglich sein soll, parallel in einem Verfahren nach einem Konzessionär oder nach einem Kooperationspartner zu suchen und die jeweiligen Angebote gegeneinander abzuwägen.“ Stattdessen seien die Kommunen heute gezwungen, die Konzession ohne Berücksichtigung kommunaler Belange auszuschreiben und zu vergeben. Erst dann dürfe sich die Kommune überlegen, ob sie sich eine Kooperation mit dem Neu-Konzessionär vorstellen könne.\n\nDas ist doch eine deutliche Kritik von Vertretern Ihrer Partei. Dabei geht es doch um genau das, was ich angesprochen habe. Dennoch sagen Sie, dergleichen gebe es überhaupt nicht. Das ist ein Widerspruch. Ich verstehe Sie jetzt gar nicht.\"\n14783,harald-petzold,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Besucherinnen und Besucher! 16-mal haben wir jetzt das Thema „Öffnung der Ehe für alle“ allein in dieser Wahlperiode hier im Plenum diskutiert. Kein Thema - mit Ausnahme vielleicht der Auslandseinsätze der Bundeswehr - hat hier öfter im Zentrum unserer Diskussion gestanden als dieses.\n\nEs ist der dritte Bericht der Vorsitzenden des Rechtsausschusses, in dem sie zum dritten Mal den Fraktionen der Großen Koalition ins Stammbuch schreiben muss, dass sie ihren verfassungsrechtlichen Auftrag, nämlich überwiesene Gesetzentwürfe zu behandeln, nicht erfüllen.\n\nWir haben inzwischen die paradoxe Situation, dass der Bundestagspräsident - für die Besucherinnen und Besucher: der kommt aus der CDU/CSU-Fraktion - an alle Fraktionsvorsitzenden geschrieben hat, dass er darum bittet - das möge man sich auf der Zunge zergehen lassen -, dass die Fraktionen dafür sorgen mögen, dass der Gesetzentwurf des Bundesrats in angemessener Frist, so wie es im Grundgesetz vorgesehen ist - sprich: noch in dieser Wahlperiode -, wenigstens behandelt wird. Schlimmer können Sie Ihren eigenen Präsidenten nicht vorführen, als ihn zu nötigen, so einen Brief zu schreiben, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der CDU/CSU-Fraktion.\n\nDas geht nicht, und das sollten wir heute endlich beenden.\n\nWir werden nachher eine Geschäftsordnungsdebatte führen, in der sich die Kolleginnen und Kollegen der SPD-Fraktion dazu bekennen können, ob das Wirklichkeit wird, was der Kollege Kahrs versprochen hat, nämlich dass sie dann, wenn die nächste Abstimmung zu diesem Thema hier im Plenum stattfindet und sich die Union immer noch nicht durchgerungen haben sollte, freiwillig mit abzustimmen, der Unionsfraktion eine Abstimmungsniederlage beibringen wollen.\n\nIch bin gespannt, wie die Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der SPD-Fraktion hier abstimmen.\n\nIch sage Ihnen auch: Am letzten Sonntag war Landtagswahl in Nordrhein-Westfalen. Es kann sein, dass Sie solche Ergebnisse kalt lassen. Es kann aber auch sein, dass Sie sich fragen, wie solche Ergebnisse zustande kommen. Ich kann Ihnen zumindest meine Wahrnehmung mitteilen: indem Sie den Wählerinnen und Wählern vor der Wahl versprechen, 100 Prozent Gleichstellung gebe es nur mit Ihnen, aber nach der Wahl zu denjenigen gehören, die die hundertprozentigen Verhinderer dieser Gleichstellung sind. Das lassen sich Wählerinnen und Wähler nicht gefallen, und dann gibt es solche Wahlergebnisse.\n\nDer heutige Tag - die Kollegin Göring-Eckardt hat darauf hingewiesen - ist auch der Internationale Tag gegen Homo- und Transphobie. Ich möchte meine Rede nicht beenden, ohne wenigstens auf diesen Anlass hingewiesen zu haben.\n\nDer Kollege Hirte hat sich mit der liberalen Antidiskriminierungspolitik der Bundesrepublik gebrüstet. Ich war in der vorigen Woche in Guatemala und habe mich dort mit Regierungsvertretern, mit Parlamentariern über die Frage unterhalten, ob es dort einen Gesetzentwurf geben soll, der schon das Sprechen über Homosexualität in der Öffentlichkeit unter Strafe stellen soll. Ich war peinlich berührt davon, dass diese Kolleginnen und Kollegen sich genau auf die Verweigerungshaltung von Ihnen berufen, was die Frage der Öffnung der Ehe und der Gleichstellung und die Frage einer konsequenten Antidiskriminierungspolitik betrifft.\n\n- In Guatemala. Die kennen Ihre Position ziemlich gut.\n\nDas ist etwas Schlimmes, wie ich finde, weil es deutlich macht, dass wir mit diesem schlechten Beispiel genau denjenigen Vorschub leisten, die, wie in Tschetschenien, so mit Homosexuellen umgehen, wie es die Kollegin Göring-Eckardt geschildert hat. Wir leisten denen Vorschub, die sich darauf berufen, dass es eben keine Gleichstellung für alle in der Gesellschaft gibt. Ich werde mich damit nicht abfinden. Ich werde mich somit auch mit Lesben, Schwulen, Bi-, Trans- und Intersexuellen weltweit solidarisieren.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nFrau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Besucherinnen und Besucher! Wir diskutieren jetzt über einen Geschäftsordnungsantrag von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, gemäß dem wir sofort in die zweite und dritte Beratung von drei Gesetzentwürfen gehen sollen, die diesem Parlament seit Dezember 2013, seit Juni 2015 und seit Frühjahr 2016 zur Behandlung vorliegen.\n\nErster Punkt. Das bisherige Vorgehen hat dazu geführt, dass sich die Landesregierung von Rheinland-Pfalz, die im Moment den Vorsitz im Bundesrat innehat, inzwischen an den Deutschen Bundestag gewandt hat und im Auftrag des Bundesrates energisch darauf gedrungen hat, dass mit dem entsprechenden Gesetzentwurf des Bundesrates so verfahren wird, wie in Artikel 76 Absatz 3 Grundgesetz vorgeschrieben:\n\nDer Bundestag hat über die Vorlagen in angemessener Frist zu beraten und Beschluss zu fassen.\n\nIch finde, dass sich der Bundestag ein Armutszeugnis ausstellen würde,\n\nwenn er dem energischen Appell der Vorsitzenden des Bundesrates, einen Gesetzentwurf des Bundesrates zu behandeln, nicht wenigstens Gehör schenken würde. Wenn Sie schon nicht die Gesetzentwürfe der Oppositionsfraktionen behandeln wollen, haben Sie wenigstens Respekt vor dem Bundesrat und behandeln Sie dessen Gesetzentwurf.\n\nZweitens. Mit dem Geschäftsordnungsantrag versuchen wir Oppositionsfraktionen durchzusetzen, dass das Recht auf das freie Mandat für die Abgeordneten wirklich zum Tragen kommt. Natürlich, Herr Kollege Fechner, macht es mich nicht froh, dass meine Fraktion hier nicht zahlreicher vertreten ist; die Kritik ist sicherlich berechtigt. Ich sage Ihnen aber auch: Sie zwingen uns kleine Oppositionsfraktionen - wie jetzt -, an sinnlosen Anhörungen teilzunehmen. Mitglieder unserer Fraktion müssen anwesend sein, obwohl wir schon festgestellt haben: Es geht um Anhörungen zu Gesetzentwürfen, die überhaupt nicht strittig sind, bei denen die Zustimmung überhaupt nicht infrage steht bzw. wir sie signalisiert haben. Aber Sie bestehen trotzdem darauf, dass diese Anhörungen durchgeführt werden, und verhindern damit, dass unser Personal an den Plenarsitzungen teilnehmen kann. Das kann nicht sein. Da das auf Veranlassung Ihrer Fraktion geschieht, muss ich daher Ihren Vorwurf zurückweisen.\n\nMir geht es darum, dass die im Grundgesetz festgeschriebene Definition „Vertreter des ganzen Volkes, an Aufträge und Weisungen nicht gebunden und nur ihrem Gewissen unterworfen“ tatsächlich zur Geltung kommen kann. Das sage ich auch, damit auch Ihre Abgeordneten genau das tun können, was sie in der Öffentlichkeit und hier im Parlament ständig zusagen und was mindestens 40 bis 45 Kolleginnen und Kollegen aus der Unionsfraktion, zumindest in der Öffentlichkeit, immer sagen, nämlich dass sie dafür sind, dass die Abstimmung freigegeben wird. Was hindert uns denn daran, die Abstimmung freizugeben? Die Union kann ihren Meinungsbildungsprozess doch trotzdem fortsetzen. Niemand von Ihnen muss unsere Meinung übernehmen. Sie können weiter in Ihrem Sandkasten buddeln, aber Sie können uns nicht verweigern, bei einer Abstimmung im Parlament von unserem Recht auf freies Mandat, nur unserem Gewissen unterworfen, Gebrauch zu machen. Darum geht es in dem Geschäftsordnungsantrag. Deswegen wird meine Fraktion dafür stimmen, dass wir die zweite und dritte Lesung hier gleich durchführen.\n\nEs geht schließlich auch darum, deutlich zu machen, dass die Zusagen, die von einzelnen Abgeordneten der Großen Koalition hier ständig gegeben werden, Bestand haben und diejenigen, die am lautesten rufen, dass sie dafür sind, endlich die Chance haben, dafürzustimmen und diesen Gesetzentwürfen eine Chance zu geben.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n10219,olav-gutting,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir wollen Mietwohnungsneubau in Gebieten mit angespannter Wohnungslage gerade im unteren und mittleren Preissegment ankurbeln.\n\nWir erleben, dass gerade in Großstädten und in Universitätsstädten in den letzten Jahren sowohl die Wohnungsnachfrage als auch die Mieten und die Kaufpreise gestiegen sind. Das macht es für immer mehr Haushalte schwieriger, eine bezahlbare Wohnung zu finden. Der Zuzug von Flüchtlingen in hoher Zahl und deren Integration in den Wohnungsmarkt sind eine zusätzliche Herausforderung. Deswegen müssen wir jetzt handeln.\n\nEs ist richtig: Die Anzahl der neugebauten Wohnungen steigt bereits seit 2009 deutlich. Aber gerade aufgrund der Zuwanderung rechnen wir mit einem zusätzlichen jährlichen Bedarf von mindestens 350 000 neuen Wohnungen. Wir haben das Ziel, den Bau dieser Wohnungen unter anderem - nicht allein, aber auch - mit privaten Investoren zu erreichen. Deswegen wollen wir den Bau von preiswerten Mietwohnungen in Gebieten mit angespannter Wohnungslage anregen. Das soll durch die Einführung einer befristeten - das ist wichtig -, degressiv ausgestalteten Sonderabschreibung erreicht werden. Diese zusätzliche Sonderabschreibung von 10 Prozent im ersten, 10 Prozent im zweiten und 9 Prozent im dritten Jahr - in Verbindung mit der linearen Abschreibung also insgesamt 35 Prozent in drei Jahren im Vergleich zu sonst 6 Prozent - wird am Markt Wirkung zeigen.\n\nWir müssen aus beihilferechtlichen Gründen - das hat der Herr Staatssekretär vorhin schon ausgeführt - darauf achten, dass wir das Ganze räumlich begrenzen. Es geht um Gebiete mit Wohnraummangel. Deswegen können wir auch nicht mit der Gießkanne arbeiten, sondern müssen gezielt fördern. Wir haben uns darauf geeinigt, dass die Gebiete, in denen gefördert wird, drei Kriterien entsprechen müssen: Es müssen Gebiete mit den Mietenstufen IV bis VI, mit Mietpreisbremse sowie mit abgesenkter Kappungsgrenze sein.\n\nDa hier ja immer wieder über die 3 000 Euro gesprochen wird: Die 3 000 Euro je Quadratmeter sind die Obergrenze für die Anschaffungs- oder Herstellungskosten; die Förderobergrenze aber sind 2 000 Euro. Das muss man klarstellen. Das heißt, Beträge über 2 000 Euro je Quadratmeter werden nicht gefördert. Deswegen besteht doch für die Investoren der Anreiz, beim Bauen unter 2 000 Euro je Quadratmeter zu bleiben.\n\nUnd wenn dann unter 2 000 Euro je Quadratmeter gebaut wird, wird sich das auf die Mietpreise entsprechend auswirken.\n\nWir haben auch eine zeitliche Begrenzung vorgesehen: Die Förderung ist auf Baumaßnahmen begrenzt, die in den Jahren 2016 bis 2018 begonnen werden. Das heißt, es muss jetzt gebaut werden, nicht irgendwann in der Zukunft.\n\nFür uns in der Union hat Wohn- und Lebensqualität der Menschen in Deutschland einen hohen Stellenwert. Mehr Wohnraum und bezahlbare Mieten sind ein wichtiges Ziel unserer Politik. Allerdings ist es allein mit steuerlicher Förderung nicht getan. Das ist - der Staatssekretär hat es vorhin gesagt - ein Baustein von vielen. Wenn man sich die Ursachen anschaut, warum dieser Wohnungsmangel herrscht, dann stellt man fest - auch das gehört zur Wahrheit -: Es ist oft nicht genug Bauland vorhanden, und in der Politik erhöhen wir seit Jahren die Baukosten und machen Vermietung unattraktiver.\n\nIm Übrigen ist hierfür die grün geführte Landesregierung in meinem Heimatbundesland Baden-Württemberg ein gutes Beispiel:\n\nMan nimmt erst einmal eine Grunderwerbsteuererhöhung um über 40 Prozent vor. Dann schreibt man in der Landesbauordnung fest, dass die Vermieter, also die Investoren, wettergeschützte Luxus-Fahrradabstellplätze errichten müssen. Wenn sie keinen Garten haben, müssen sie Fassaden- oder Dachbegrünung vornehmen. In Studentenwohnheimen müssen Abstellflächen für Gehhilfen geschaffen werden - ich weiß nicht, ob die Studenten mit Rollatoren an die Uni gehen. All das ist jedenfalls widersinnig und erhöht die Baukosten.\n\nWir haben die Bestimmungen der Energieeinsparverordnung verschärft. Das wird zu einer weiteren Erhöhung der Baukosten führen. Wir haben Mietpreisbremse, Maklerkostenverteilung, Begrenzung der Umlage von Modernisierungskosten. Auch all das schreckt Vermieter ab.\n\nDas heißt, man tut alles, um Bauen teurer zu machen und das Vermieten zu erschweren, und anschließend heult man dann Krokodilstränen. Das passt irgendwie nicht zusammen. Ich glaube, da sollte man manches noch einmal überdenken.\n\nKlar ist aber auch: Dieses Gesetz muss jetzt kommen. Denn wenn es nicht kommt, richten wir Schaden an. Es gibt schon jetzt einen Attentismus am Markt. Das heißt, die Investoren warten auf dieses Gesetz und halten sich bei Neubauten zurück. Deswegen muss das Gesetz jetzt kommen.\n\nWir werden sicherlich im Laufe der weiteren Beratungen zu diesem Gesetzentwurf noch die eine oder andere Detailfrage genauer besprechen.\n\nWir wollen vor allem, dass auch kinderreiche Familien insbesondere in Ballungszentren die Chance haben, bezahlbaren Wohnraum zu bekommen. Das heißt, wir wollen eine stärkere Familienkomponente.\n\nWir werden auch erörtern, inwiefern wir das in diesem Entwurf nicht berücksichtigte Ziel, selbstgenutztes Wohneigentum zu fördern, verstärken können. Dazu müssen wir uns mit der Frage befassen, ob die bisherige Eigenheimrente nicht noch stärker pointiert werden kann.\n\nIch freue mich jedenfalls auf die weiteren Beratungen und wünsche an dieser Stelle den Kolleginnen und Kollegen schon einmal schöne Osterfeiertage.\"\n752,matthias-ilgen,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Herr Kollege Gambke, weil Sie so viel von Besoffenreden gesprochen haben, würde ich gerne nachher mit Ihnen einen Schnaps trinken, auf dass wir uns gemeinsam an den guten Zahlen dieses Jahres erfreuen können. Denn ich finde, sie geben Anlass zur Freude.\n\nWir reden heute über das ERP-Sondervermögen und die Frage, wie man damit umgeht. Ich möchte mit einem Zitat des damaligen US-Außenministers George Marshall einsteigen, der in einer Rede am 5. Juni 1947 an der Harvard University folgende Worte sprach:\n\nUnsere Politik richtet sich … gegen Hunger, Armut, Verzweiflung und Chaos. Ihr Zweck ist die Wiederbelebung einer funktionierenden Weltwirtschaft, damit die Entstehung politischer und sozialer Bedingungen ermöglicht wird, unter denen freie Institutionen existieren können.\n\nDas war damals nach dem Krieg - Sie haben das angesprochen, Herr Kollege - die Grundlage für den Wiederaufbau auch in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland.\n\nEs ist aber gut und klug, dass wir schon damals in einigen Nuancen anders mit den Mitteln aus dem Marshallplan umgegangen sind, als unsere europäischen Nachbarn dies vielleicht getan haben. Wir haben nämlich einen großen Teil dieses Vermögens erhalten und schütten seit sechseinhalb Jahrzehnten im Grunde genommen lediglich Zinsgewinne aus, die wir für die Verbilligung von Krediten einsetzen, wie wir eben schon mehrfach gehört haben, womit wir über die Jahre eine, wie ich finde, hervorragende Mittelstands- und Kleinunternehmerförderung in diesem Land aufgebaut haben. Das wollen wir auch in diesem Jahr fortsetzen.\n\nWie wir gehört haben, bewirken circa 340 Millionen Euro einen Hebel von 6,7 Milliarden Euro an Krediten in diesem Bereich. Wenn man sich die volkswirtschaftlichen Effekte, die dadurch entstehen - vom gesamten Kreditvolumen werden oft nur 10 bis 15 Prozent durch eine Hausbank gewährt -, und die gesamte volkswirtschaftliche Wertschöpfung anschaut, dann stellt man fest, dass es sich um einen gewaltigen Hebel handelt, der mit diesem im Vergleich zu den Mitteln des Bundeshaushalts kleinen Geld ausgelöst wird.\n\nIch stimme ausdrücklich der Bewertung unseres Bundesministers Sigmar Gabriel zu, der in den vergangenen Tagen gesagt hat: Es ist richtig, dass wir einen Schwerpunkt auf Unternehmensgründungen und Innovationen setzen, dass wir aber auch schauen müssen, was wir in Zukunft in der Wachstumsphase von Unternehmen machen werden. - Hier wird man sehen, ob das Programm in den nächsten Jahren anzupassen ist. Wir haben schließlich Aufholbedarf gegenüber den angelsächsischen Ländern, wenn es um Beteiligungskapital bzw. Venture Capital geht. Wir müssen darüber nachdenken, wie wir es schaffen, Risikofinanzierung auch in Wachstumsphasen sicherzustellen, also dann, wenn die Unternehmen über die erste Schwelle der Gründung hinweg sind und meistens die größten Schwierigkeiten haben, entsprechende Angebote auf dem Markt zu finden, wenn sie wachsen wollen. Wir werden als SPD-Fraktion im Wirtschaftsausschuss darauf achten, dass wir hier in Zukunft ein Stück aufholen.\n\nEbenso wichtig wird es sein, auf den Forschungsbereich zu achten. Auch hier kann man von den Angelsachsen manchmal lernen. Wir sollten genau hinschauen, was die Angelsachsen in ihren Exzellenzclustern rund um Universitäten - bei uns auch rund um Fachhochschulen - tun, um Existenzgründungen zu erleichtern und beispielsweise einen jungen Hochschulabsolventen zu motivieren, nach seinem Studium eine marktreife Produktidee zügig in eine Geschäftsidee umzusetzen, ein Unternehmen zu gründen und so wirtschaftliche Effekte zu erzielen. Ein Mangel in Deutschland ist, dass das zu lange dauert. Es gibt gute erste Modellansätze, zum Beispiel das Business-Angels-Modell. Die Schwierigkeit ist, dass wir in Deutschland zu langsam sind. Auf diese Art Venture Capital zu generieren, ist zwar erfolgreich. Aber das Problem ist einfach, dass es bis zu fünf Jahre dauert. Das ist eine Innovationsbremse. Ich hoffe, dass wir das in den nächsten Jahren ein Stück weit korrigieren können. Dabei müssen wir auch über andere Maßnahmen nachdenken.\n\nIch möchte auch schließen mit einem Zitat von Herrn Marshall, das ich ganz gut finde: „Kleine Taten, die man ausführt, sind besser als große, die man plant.“ In diesem Sinne wird die SPD-Fraktion dem Gesetzentwurf zustimmen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n127,martin-patzelt,\"Herr Abgeordneter Ernst, ich will in Ihre Begründung hinein nur zu meiner Vergewisserung die Frage stellen: Würden Sie mit diesem Gesetzentwurf tatsächlich wissentlich das Risiko eingehen, dass Sie eine ganze Reihe von jungen Unternehmern und Dienstleistern in strukturschwachen Gebieten - ich weiß, wovon ich rede - in die Insolvenz treiben oder zur Aufgabe ihres Unternehmens zwingen? Würden Sie gleichzeitig, da Sie immer für die Arbeitnehmer eintreten, eine ganze Reihe, Hunderte, ja vielleicht Tausende Arbeitnehmer, die zumindest einen Teil ihres Lebensunterhaltes selber bestreiten und auch bestreiten wollen, dann in die völlige Abhängigkeit von Sozialtransfers schicken?\n\nWenn Ihre Argumente stimmen: Warum wollen Sie das Ganze jetzt mit einer Hauruckaktion durchziehen, anstatt die Vereinbarung zwischen den Koalitionären abzuwarten und dann in einem kontrollierten Zeitraum mit abgefederten Folgen zu diesem Ziel zu kommen?\"\n2447,roland-claus,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Frau Bundesministerin Hendricks, Sie haben sich im Kabinett der schwierigen Aufgabe gestellt, die Umweltaktivistin und die Baulöwin in einer Person zu sein. Jetzt erfahre ich, dass Sie auch noch die Planstelle zum Weltretten innehaben wollen. Wir werden Sie sehr kritisch begleiten, und Sie sollten, glaube ich, dafür dankbar sein.\n\nAls wir im April den Etat, über den wir nun abschließend beraten, besprochen haben, wurden zu den Themen „sozialer Wohnungsbau“ und „Städtebauförderung“ insbesondere von den Kolleginnen und Kollegen der SPD, der Linken und der Grünen Veränderungen angemahnt und Vorschläge gemacht. Wir haben nun erreicht, dass immerhin 150 Millionen Euro für „Soziale Stadt“ und 10 Millionen Euro für den altersgerechten Umbau im Etat stehen. Das ist ein schöner, gemeinsamer Erfolg. Das ist etwas. Links wirkt. Links mehr könnte noch viel mehr wirken.\n\nIch will Ihnen auch zusichern, Frau Bundesministerin: Immer dort, wo Sie, wie Sie es eben beschrieben haben, das Ökologische mit dem Sozialen in Einklang bringen, können Sie mit unserer Unterstützung rechnen. Aber wir müssen uns auch die Realitäten anschauen; denn die Vorgängerregierung hat die Städtebauförderung gründlich und nachhaltig kaputt gemacht. Sie selbst haben den Begriff der „Wiederbelebung“ eingeführt. Wenn man etwas wiederbeleben will, gibt man zu, dass es tot bzw. fast tot war. Die Mittel für den altersgerechten Umbau sind sicherlich wichtig. Wenn ich die Summe aber umrechne, dann komme ich zu dem Ergebnis, dass sich damit beispielsweise gerade einmal 15 angebaute Fahrstühle in einer Plattenbausiedlung realisieren lassen.\n\nWir müssen uns natürlich auch das Problem des Etats 2014 vor Augen führen. Wir haben für Investitionen nur einen Korridor von vier Monaten, von August bis November, zur Abfinanzierung des Haushalts zur Verfügung. Da kann ich den Bundesminister mit seiner Verliebtheit in die schwarze Null und seinem Ansinnen, auf die Haushaltsreste zu spekulieren, ein bisschen verstehen. Aber wir sind verdammt noch mal auch dafür zuständig, dass die Mittel, die wir für vernünftige Vorhaben einplanen und einsetzen, abfinanziert werden.\n\nDa hilft es nichts, dass der Bundesfinanzminister auf den Einwand von Dietmar Bartsch entgegnet: Herr Bartsch, haben Sie eigentlich nicht mitbekommen, dass wir Wahlen hatten? - Das haben wir sehr wohl mitbekommen. Aber dass Sie danach monatelang im Koalitionsbildungskoma verharrt haben, lassen wir Ihnen nicht durchgehen.\n\nLeider gibt es erneut keine Bewegung bei den Altschulden von Wohnungsunternehmen. Man muss inzwischen erklären, was das überhaupt ist. Altschulden gehen auf Außenhandelsdefizite der DDR zurück, die ohne sachlichen Bezug auf werthaltige Unternehmen der Wohnungswirtschaft und der Landwirtschaft im Jahre 1990 umgelegt wurden und seitdem den Banken riesige Profite ohne eigene Leistungen beschert haben.\n\nNun habe ich das in der Volkskammer vor x Jahren kritisiert, aber dass das im 25. Jahr des Mauerfalls, dem wir entgegengehen, immer noch ein Thema ist, hätte ich nicht für möglich gehalten. Ich wollte schon sagen: Das ist ein Treppenwitz der Geschichte. Aber nein, ich muss sagen: Das ist eine Treppentragödie der Geschichte, für die auch Sie Verantwortung tragen.\n\nDas kann man sich in verschiedenen Städten anschauen. Ich nehme als Beispiel eine Wohnungsgenossenschaft in Röblingen am See. Das ist der Wohnort einer Landrätin, die vor einer Woche mit über 80 Prozent der Stimmen gewählt wurde. Sie hat gegen den Amtsinhaber der CDU gewonnen. Sie gehört der Partei Die Linke an und muss sich jetzt mit dem Problem herumschlagen.\n\nDie Röblinger Genossenschaft hat 17 solcher Plattenbauten. Sie schafft es gerade einmal, eine pro Jahr zu sanieren, weil die Altschuldenproblematik sie bedrückt und ihr den Freiraum nimmt, den sie eigentlich brauchte.\n\nInsofern bleiben wir bei unserer Kritik. Es ist ein Haushalt der Ignoranz gegenüber dem Osten und auch ein Haushalt der sozialen Spaltung. Deshalb brauchen wir auch mit Blick auf künftige Aufgaben einfach viel mehr Mut, ein regionales Gemeinwesen zu denken. Wir werden Ihnen auch weiterhin kritisch vorrechnen, dass Sie mit dem Verkauf der Treuhand Liegenschaftsgesellschaft bundeseigene Wohnungen an eine Heuschrecke verkauft haben. Alle Befürchtungen, die wir von dieser und anderen Stellen geäußert haben, sind in der Realität übertroffen worden. Das ist eine Negativbilanz, die auf Ihr Konto geht.\n\nBeim Hochwasserschutz - mein letzter Punkt - haben wir leider immer noch kein abgestimmtes nationales Konzept. Die Konzepte enden im Moment an den Landesgrenzen. Da macht aber bekanntlich das Hochwasser nicht halt. Als finanzielle Quelle haben Sie, Frau Bundesministerin, bislang lediglich die Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der Agrarstruktur und des Küstenschutzes“. Die ist aber im Agrarministerium angesiedelt. Das klingt so ein bisschen nach dem spanischen Sprichwort: Auf fremdem Arsch ist gut durchs Feuer reiten.\n\nWir brauchen also in der Tat andere Vorschläge, die wir eingebracht haben. Im Übrigen ist Besserung nur in Sicht, wenn Sie auf die Linke hören. Frau Ministerin, wer heute sein Heil im Gestern sucht, ist an der Seite der CDU gut aufgehoben, wer Morgen will, der braucht links.\"\n14534,sibylle-pfeiffer,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Herr Minister, wir sind uns grundsätzlich darüber einig, dass Afrika zweigeteilt ist: die fragilen Länder, die sogenannten LDC, auf der einen Seite und die etwas weiter entwickelten Länder auf der anderen Seite. Wir wissen auch, dass wir es alleine über die öffentliche Hilfe - Stichwort ODA - nicht schaffen, die Entwicklung der Länder auf diesem Kontinent voranzubringen, sondern dass wir dafür auch die privaten Investitionen brauchen, vor allen Dingen von den hervorragenden deutschen mittelständischen Unternehmen.\n\nWir werden das aber nur erreichen, wenn wir im Bereich Good Governance, im Bereich der Rechtsstaatlichkeit und der Rechtssicherheit, aber auch im Bereich der Infrastruktur und der Dezentralisierung Erfolge aufweisen können. Ist dies das Programm der Zukunft, auch um die Basis dafür zu schaffen, diese Investitionen überhaupt zu bekommen?\"\n19,marieluise-beck,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Gipfel von Vilnius erinnert uns daran, dass die Vereinigung Europas noch lange nicht vollendet ist und dass wir gerade im Westen immer noch Gefahr laufen, Europa mit der Europäischen Union gleichzusetzen. Aber Europa ist größer. Dieser vielfältige Kontinent ist immer noch dabei, die Wunden des vergangenen Jahrhunderts zu schließen. Im kommenden Jahr, im Jahre 2014, werden wir sicherlich noch häufig Gelegenheit haben, über dieses katastrophale vergangene Jahrhundert zu sprechen, in dem Europa für viele Jahre gespalten war.\n\nWir können diese Spaltung nun überwinden. Aber viele von uns müssen das ganze geografische Europa erst wieder kennenlernen. Ich verkneife mir jetzt einen Kommentar zu der Linken, die, wo wir doch über den Osten sprechen, einen Antrag zu Portugal einbringt.\n\n23 Jahre nachdem diese Spaltung begonnen hat, sich aufzulösen, sind Warschau, Prag und Riga wieder bekannte Namen. Für Städte wie Baku und Kischinau gilt das weniger. Aber Europa reicht auch bis dorthin. Deswegen, Frau Bundeskanzlerin, widerspreche ich Ihnen entschieden, wenn Sie sagen, die Östliche Partnerschaft enthalte keine EU-Beitrittsperspektive.\n\nSie nehmen damit die Gründungserklärung der Östlichen Partnerschaft von 2009 zurück, die diese Frage explizit offengelassen hat. Auch Sie, Herr Roth, haben eben gesagt, es sei keine Beitrittsperspektive enthalten. Das ist in der Sache nicht richtig.\n\nAußerdem möchte ich daran erinnern, dass Art. 49 des EU-Vertrages ganz klar festhält, dass alle europäischen Staaten das Recht haben, einen Antrag auf Aufnahme zu stellen, sofern sie dem Wertekanon der EU entsprechen. Ich meine auch, dass Sie mit dieser Aussage, Frau Bundeskanzlerin, die Instrumente der Östlichen Partnerschaft schwach machen - man möchte fast sagen: noch schwächer, als sie schon sind.\n\nEs kann bei der Östlichen Partnerschaft nicht darum gehen, die betroffenen Länder zwischen Brüssel und Moskau zu zerreiben. Mit Blick auf Moskau sage ich: Alle sechs Länder der Östlichen Partnerschaft sind souverän. Sie haben das Recht, selbst zu entscheiden, welche Verträge sie schließen wollen und welche sie nicht schließen wollen.\n\nDa verbieten sich massiver Druck, wie ihn Russland derzeit ausübt, und eine Erpressung mithilfe von Gaspreisen und Handelskriegen, um die Länder in einen eurasischen Block zu zwingen und sie vom Zugang zur EU fernzuhalten. Das ist inakzeptabel, und das müssen wir sehr deutlich sagen.\n\nAber Nachbarschaft hat auch eine Geschäftsgrundlage. Unsere Geschäftsgrundlage heißt: Rechtsstaatlichkeit, Meinungsfreiheit und Toleranz gegenüber Vielfalt. Das ist gerade auch bei den Entwicklungen in Russland sehr wichtig.\n\nWir haben gelernt, dass demokratische Gesellschaften, wenn sie Bestand haben sollen - von Ungarn und Rumänien war eben die Rede -, nicht von oben eingeführt werden können. Demokratie muss wachsen und braucht dazu aktive Bürgerinnen und Bürger. Ja, in Belarus herrscht der letzte Diktator Europas. Ich füge hinzu: In Aserbaidschan sieht es nicht sehr viel besser aus. Aber die Menschen dort wollen Freiheit. Sie wollen reisen. Deswegen ist die Visumfreiheit eines der wenigen wirklich wirkungsvollen Instrumente, das wir in der Hand haben. Wir dürfen dem Präsidenten Lukaschenko nicht mehr helfen, seine Menschen einzusperren, indem wir 60 Euro für ein Visum verlangen. 60 Euro sind in einem Land wie Belarus nämlich sehr viel Geld.\n\nAlso muss der erste große wirkungsvolle Schritt sein: Aufgabe der Zögerlichkeit bei Visumfreiheit. Das gilt natürlich auch mit Blick auf die Ukraine.\n\nDie EU ist derzeit nicht in bester Verfassung. Das ist richtig. Aber es ist ein wunderbares Ziel, das ganze Europa zu vereinen. Das braucht Geduld, Klugheit und eine echte Mitgliedsperspektive für alle Länder Europas. Ich wünsche mir, dass das ganze Haus in der 18. Legislaturperiode bei dieser Herausforderung zusammenarbeitet.\n\nSchönen Dank.\n\nHerr Kollege, ich möchte Ihnen gerne noch zwei -Minuten Redezeit verschaffen, weil Sie nichts zu Aserbaidschan gesagt haben. Über Aserbeidschan zu sprechen, halte ich aber auch deswegen für wichtig, weil gerade aus Ihrer Fraktion heraus der Verlauf der Wahlen in Aserbaidschan als durchaus annehmbar bezeichnet worden ist, die Menschenrechtslage dort katastrophal ist und wir davon ausgehen müssen, dass es viele politische Gefangene gibt, wobei aus der CDU/CSU-Fraktion immer wieder eine gewisse Unschärfe kommt, um es vorsichtig zu formulieren.\"\n12074,michael-meister,\"Frau Präsidentin! Herr Kollege Beck, Zuwiderhandlungen gegen materiellrechtliche Beschränkungen im Zusammenhang mit Sanktions- und Embargomaßnahmen der Vereinten Nationen und der Europäischen Union stellen bei vorsätzlicher Begehungsweise grundsätzlich Straftaten nach § 17 Absatz 1 oder § 18 Absatz 1 des Außenwirtschaftsgesetzes dar. Werden sie fahrlässig begangen, sind sie grundsätzlich als Ordnungswidrigkeit zu ahnden und bußgeldbewehrt nach § 19 des Außenwirtschaftsgesetzes. Eine Ausnahme hiervon stellen leichtfertige Verstöße gegen Waffenembargomaßnahmen dar, bei denen es sich nach § 17 Absatz 5 Außenwirtschaftsgesetz ebenfalls um Straftaten handelt.\n\nLiegen Hinweise vor, die einen strafrechtlichen Anfangsverdacht begründen, werden diese durch die betreffenden Ermittlungsbehörden an die jeweils zuständigen Staatsanwaltschaften übermittelt. Die in Betracht kommenden Strafnormen gelten für alle länderbezogenen Embargomaßnahmen in gleichem Maße.\n\nZur Beantwortung Ihrer Frage wären insoweit umfangreiche statistische Daten in Bezug auf das Bestimmungsland Iran auszuwerten, was wegen des damit verbundenen Aufwands allerdings in der Kürze der Zeit nicht realisierbar gewesen ist. Zudem wären umfangreiche Erhebungen, unter anderem bei den zuständigen Staatsanwaltschaften und beim Generalbundesanwalt, erforderlich. Darüber hinaus wäre eine Konkretisierung hinsichtlich etwaiger Tatzeiträume, auf die sich die Auswertung der statistischen Daten beziehen soll, zwingend erforderlich.\n\nFrau Präsidentin, Herr Kollege Beck, die Regularien für die Zeiträume zur Beantwortung mündlicher Fragen legt nicht die Bundesregierung fest, sondern der Deutsche Bundestag. Eine nachhaltige Bekämpfung der Proliferation von Massenvernichtungs- und Kriegswaffen sowie Dual-Use-Gütern zählt zu den Eckpfeilern deutscher Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik und ist integrativer Bestandteil der deutschen Exportkontrolle. Die pauschal von Ihnen angefragten Angaben liegen derzeit nicht als kurzfristig abrufbare und aufbereitete Informationen vor, da statistische Erhebungen über Fallzahlen und inhaltlich zu unterscheidende Fallgruppen nicht verfügbar sind. Dort müssten umfangreiche Recherchen mit den zuständigen Landesbehörden, die ich angesprochen habe, stattfinden.\n\nFrau Präsidentin, Herr Kollege Beck, das liegt in der Zuständigkeit des Bundesministeriums für Wirtschaft.\n\nIm Bundesamt für Wirtschaft und Ausfuhrkontrolle werden Genehmigungen beantragt und, falls die Gesetzeslage es zulässt, auch erteilt. Das im Bereich des Bundeswirtschaftsministeriums zuständige Amt befasst sich allerdings nicht mit der Aufklärung von Straftaten und Verstößen gegen das Außenwirtschaftsrecht. Insofern liegen Zahlen, wie Sie sie hier ansprechen, der Bundesregierung nicht vor.\"\n3912,hubertus-zdebel,\"Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Das Atomabkommen zwischen Deutschland und Brasilien wurde vor nunmehr 39 Jahren während der Militärdiktatur in Brasilien unterzeichnet. Alle fünf Jahre verlängert sich der Vertrag automatisch um weitere fünf Jahre, solange ihn keiner der zwei Staaten kündigt.\n\nZum 18. November dieses Jahres, also in einigen Tagen, könnte die Bundesregierung das Abkommen per diplomatischer Note kündigen. Es würde dann zum 18. November nächsten Jahres auslaufen. Das sind die Fakten.\n\nDas deutsch-brasilianische Atomabkommen von 1975, das nach wie vor in Kraft ist, sieht sowohl die Gewinnung und Aufbereitung von Uranerzen als auch die Herstellung von Kernreaktoren und die Urananreicherung vor. Es ist also in dem Sinne ein Atomförderungsabkommen. Insgesamt acht Atomkraftwerke, eine Urananreicherungsanlage und eine Wiederaufbereitungsanlage sollten in Brasilien mit deutscher Technik gebaut werden. Dieser Atomvertrag war zu Beginn der 80er-Jahre für rund ein Drittel der brasilianischen Auslandsschulden verantwortlich und führte mithilfe einer deutschen Hermesbürgschaft zum Bau des Atomkraftwerks Angra 2, das weniger als 2 Prozent aller in Brasilien erzeugten Elektrizität produziert, obwohl es 14 Milliarden US-Dollar gekostet hat. Siemens/KWU freute sich damals über den Milliardenauftrag. Es war ein „Bombengeschäft“, wie es damals wörtlich hieß.\n\nStets hatten Kritikerinnen und Kritiker gemahnt, das brasilianische Militär habe versucht, mittels Urananreicherung in den Besitz von Atombomben zu gelangen. Nach dem Übergang zur Demokratie Anfang der 90er-Jahre bestätigte die brasilianische Regierung dies indirekt durch bestimmte Äußerungen. Auch das muss man wissen, weil die Rolle des Militärs in Brasilien immer noch sehr stark ist.\n\nSehr geehrte Damen und Herren, die Linke meint: Atomausstieg in Deutschland und weitere Atomförderung im Ausland passen nicht zusammen.\n\nDeutschland verweist gern auf den Atomausstieg. Bis 2022 sollen alle kommerziellen Reaktoren abgeschaltet werden. Das ist aber leider nur die halbe Wahrheit. Deutschland ist weiter ein Atomstaat. Nach 2022 wird weiter Uran aus aller Welt nach Deutschland geliefert, wie es auch jetzt immer noch der Fall ist. In den Anreicherungsanlagen in Gronau und der Brennelementefabrik in Lingen wird das radioaktive Material weiterverarbeitet und angereichert. Auch aus Brasilien treffen dort nach wie vor Lieferungen ein, nach wie vor. Das geschieht auf Basis des Atomabkommens von 1975, das weiterhin in Kraft ist.\n\nWer ankündigt, sich im eigenen Land aus der Atomkraft verabschieden zu wollen, sollte keine doppelten moralischen Standards anwenden und kann deswegen auch nicht weiter den Ausbau der Atomkraft im Ausland unterstützen. Das ist nicht länger hinnehmbar.\n\nDie Große Koalition will aber an dem deutsch-brasi-lianischen Abkommen festhalten. Deutschland und deutsche Konzerne sollen im internationalen Atomgeschäft weiter mitmischen können. Das finden wir auch völlig unakzeptabel.\n\nBesonders schwierig und opportunistisch finde ich das Verhalten der SPD an dieser Stelle. Ich habe nicht vergessen, dass sich die SPD in der vergangenen Legislaturperiode und auch schon vorher, als sie in der Opposition war, dafür starkgemacht hat, dass keine Hermesbürgschaften für das geplante Atomkraftwerk Angra 3 in Brasilien erteilt werden - teilweise mit gutem Erfolg. Jetzt, wo Sie wieder mit der CDU/CSU in der Regierung sind, machen Sie wieder alles mit. Das finden wir extrem opportunistisch.\n\nDeshalb fordert die Linke ganz klar: Das deutsch-brasilianische Abkommen zur Förderung von Atomenergie muss gekündigt werden, und zwar sofort. Wir werden den Antrag der Grünen unterstützen und entsprechend die Beschlussempfehlungen der Ausschüsse ablehnen.\n\nIn diesem Sinne herzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n8229,stefan-rebmann,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren auf der Zuschauertribüne! Wir reden heute über einen Antrag, der das Liebste und das Wichtigste betrifft, das wir haben. Wir reden über einen Antrag, der sich um unsere Kinder dreht. Wir alle haben hoffentlich diesen Urinstinkt, diesen Beschützerinstinkt, wenn es um Kinder geht.\n\nGleichwohl müssen wir leider feststellen, dass weltweit 168 Millionen Kinder zwischen 5 und 17 Jahren täglich arbeiten müssen, 85 Millionen davon in gefährlichen Arbeitsverhältnissen. Das sind Zahlen der ILO. 85 Millionen - die Bundesrepublik Deutschland hat im Moment 81,4 Millionen Einwohner. 85 Millionen Kinder arbeiten, wie gesagt, laut ILO in gefährlichen Arbeitsverhältnissen. Die Schätzungen der Vereinten Nationen besagen, dass 215 Millionen Kinder täglich arbeiten müssen, davon 115 Millionen Kinder in gefährlichen Arbeitsverhältnissen. Das ist die Bevölkerungsanzahl der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Österreichs, der Schweiz und der Niederlande zusammengenommen.\n\nGefährliche Arbeit bedeutet: Das sind Kinder barfuß in Gießereien, das sind Kinder barfuß in Gerbereien in der Lauge, wo edles Leder hergestellt wird, das wir hier teuer erwerben können, der coolste neueste Style. 7 Prozent dieser Kinder arbeiten unter gefährlichen Arbeitsbedingungen, in Schuldknechtschaft in Minen, beispielsweise in Pakistan. 50 000 Kinder arbeiten allein im Kongo in sogenannten Mineralminen, wo Coltan gefördert wird, damit wir unser neuestes hippstes Smartphone - Galaxy Trallala - und sonst irgendwas haben. Aus unseren Handys, aus unseren Smartphones fließt zum Teil Blut. Den stillen Schrei dieser Kinder überhören wir, wenn wir die Kopfhörer, aus denen das Wummern irgendwelcher Bässe kommt, aufgesetzt haben.\n\nWenn wir uns vergegenwärtigen, dass 59 Prozent der Kinder in der Landwirtschaft arbeiten, dass ganz viele Kinder in Kambodscha, in Indien, in Nepal und in Bangladesch in den Nähstuben der Industriestaaten schuften, dann wird auch klar, dass der Catwalk, der hier in der Nähe immer für die Fashion Week aufgebaut wird, eigentlich in Bangladesch beginnt - blutig, schmutzig und mit Leichen gepflastert. Das ist die Realität.\n\nWir befassen uns nun mit einem Antrag, der zum Teil kritisiert und zum Teil gelobt wird. Ich will den Kollegen Kekeritz und Movassat sagen: Sie beide wissen, dass wir im Ausschuss für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung eine ganze Reihe kritischer Geister haben, die sich auch kritisch zu Wort melden. Wir hatten schon die eine oder andere Debatte, in der wir ganz klar gesagt haben, dass das nicht ausreicht und dass wir mehr Verbindlichkeit und mehr finanzielle Mittel brauchen. Ich finde, das müssen wir schon hinzufügen.\n\nWir müssen den Teufelskreis durchbrechen, der daraus besteht, dass Kinder arbeiten müssen, deshalb nicht zur Schule gehen können, deshalb eine schlechte Ausbildung haben, deshalb schlechte Arbeitsverhältnisse haben, dann schlecht bezahlt werden, wieder schlechte Arbeitsbedingungen haben und dadurch wieder krank werden. Das setzt sich dann von Generation zu Generation fort. Diesen Teufelskreis müssen wir durchbrechen.\n\nWenn wir die Ende September in New York verabschiedeten SDGs ernst nehmen, dann müssen wir fragen, was wir hier bei uns zum Erreichen dieser Ziele tun können. Wir erarbeiten im Moment einen nationalen Aktionsplan zu Sorgfaltspflichten von Unternehmen. Ich hoffe, dass wir auf diese Weise für wesentlich mehr Verbindlichkeit sorgen werden. Der Kollege Raabe hat lange dafür gekämpft, dass das Thema Konfliktmineralien deutlicher hervorgehoben wird.\n\nWir haben einen hervorragenden Antrag mit dem Titel „Gute Arbeit weltweit“ vorgelegt. Hier geht es um gute, faire Arbeitsbedingungen. Niemand ist ein schlechter Mensch, weil er in einem Discounter Schokolade kauft; denn kaum jemand weiß, dass weniger als 1 Prozent der Schokolade, die in Deutschland gehandelt wird, fair produziert wurde. Es ist unsere Aufgabe, im Zusammenhang mit dem vorliegenden Antrag, über den wir erstmalig beraten, dafür zu sorgen, dass verbindliche Regeln eingeführt werden und Kinderarbeit verboten wird.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss, Frau Präsidentin. Mit Blick auf die folgende Debatte über die Modernisierung des Vergaberechts sage ich: Auch hier können wir verbindliche Regeln schaffen.\n\nWenn eine öffentliche Verwaltung Handys kauft, dann sollte sie darauf achten, dass es sich um Handys handelt, die fair produziert und gehandelt wurden, die kein Coltan enthalten und nicht durch Kinderarbeit hergestellt wurden.\n\nDas ist möglich. Diese Handys sind sogar preiswerter als andere, von vielen als cool angesehene Handys.\n\nIch wünsche Ihnen allen noch eine schöne Debatte.\n\nReden Sie, wenn Sie zu Hause in Ihren Wahlkreisen sind, darüber, wie engagiert im Bundestag debattiert wird.\n\nHerzlichen Dank, Frau Präsidentin.\"\n14971,michael-gerdes,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Seit knapp zwei Wochen liegt die Standortbestimmung der Bundesanstalt für Arbeitsschutz und Arbeitsmedizin zur psychischen Gesundheit in der Arbeitswelt auf dem Tisch. Wir müssen festhalten, dass sich arbeitsbedingter Stress negativ auf die Gesundheit von Erwerbstätigen auswirkt. Die Zahlen derer, die aufgrund psychischer Erkrankungen am Arbeitsplatz fehlen oder eine Erwerbsminderungsrente beantragen, sprechen leider für sich.\n\nWir sollten dringend über Gegenmaßnahmen nachdenken, wenn wir vermeiden wollen, dass sich psychische Leiden aufgrund von Arbeit ausbreiten und gegebenenfalls ein Fall für die Berufskrankheiten-Liste werden.\n\nAnknüpfend an die lange Tradition des Arbeitsschutzes in Deutschland sind wir gut beraten, unsere Vorschriften an die Arbeitswelt 4.0 anzupassen. Technischer und psychosozialer Arbeitsschutz müssen stärker miteinander verknüpft werden. Am Beispiel betrachtet: Das Messen von übermäßigen Geräuschen und zu schwachen Lichtquellen in Büroräumen reicht allein nicht mehr aus. Wohlbefinden in der digitalisierten Arbeitswelt hängt mehr und mehr davon ab, ob wir Zeitdruck haben oder ob wir beispielsweise von permanent eingehenden E-Mails gestört werden. Bisher hat sich der Arbeitsschutz auf den Betrieb bzw. den Arbeitsort konzentriert. Moderner Arbeitsschutz muss auch den Feierabend in den Blick nehmen. Die Studien sagen uns nämlich, dass es darauf ankommt, wie gut wir von der Arbeit abschalten können.\n\nEs liegt nun an uns und an den Sozialpartnern, die 10 Empfehlungen der BAuA politisch zu bewerten und Konsequenzen daraus zu ziehen. Das wird wohl angesichts der zu Ende gehenden Legislaturperiode noch einige Zeit dauern. Trotzdem möchte ich eines vorwegnehmen: Die SPD-Fraktion ist von der Idee einer Anti-Stress-Verordnung überzeugt. Entscheidend dabei ist: Psychische Belastungen im Erwerbsleben müssen raus aus der Tabuzone.\n\nVielerorts werden stressbedingte Arbeitsausfälle und Unfälle unterschätzt. Wir dürfen arbeitsbedingten Stress nicht mit einem herausfordernden Arbeitsalltag verwechseln. Umgekehrt finde ich es auch wichtig, Arbeit positiv zu besetzen.\n\nArbeit ist kein grundsätzlicher Stressfaktor. Arbeit schafft materielle und immaterielle Werte, die uns Menschen guttun.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Stress heißt, mit etwas nicht fertig zu werden. Stress am Arbeitsplatz entsteht durch eine psychische Überlastung. Das empfindet jeder Mensch anders. Die gute Nachricht ist, dass wir Stress bewältigen können, wenn wir den Menschen die richtigen Mittel zur Verfügung stellen. Dazu gehört zum Beispiel auch eine Gefährdungsbeurteilung, in der danach gefragt wird, ob jemand genügend Zeit für die Erledigung seiner Arbeit hat und ausreichend Wissen für die jeweilige Aufgabe hat.\n\nMir ist klar, dass wir als Gesetzgeber gesunde Arbeitsprozesse nicht bis ins kleineste Detail gestalten und regeln können. Wir benötigen praxistaugliche Ansätze direkt im Betrieb.\n\nEinerseits ist das Zusammenspiel zwischen Arbeitgebern und Arbeitnehmern sowie unter Kolleginnen und Kollegen gefragt. Andererseits müssen sich die gesetzlich vorgesehenen Akteure des Arbeitsschutzes stärker auf die psychischen Belastungen am Arbeitsplatz fokussieren. Hier kommen auch strukturelle Fragen auf uns zu: Haben wir ausreichend Betriebsärzte und Arbeitsmediziner? Wie bilden wir Arbeitsschutzakteure weiter? Wie bringen wir das neue Arbeitsschutzwissen besser in die Betriebe? Gibt es ausreichend Kontrollen?\n\nMir geht es nicht darum, Sanktionen auszusprechen. Gerade in kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen fehlt es schließlich nicht an der Bereitschaft zur Fürsorge, sondern es mangelt eher an technischen, finanziellen und personellen Ressourcen. Sie brauchen externe Hilfen.\n\nZiel muss sein, dass weitaus mehr Betriebe als bisher die notwendige Gefährdungsbeurteilung durchführen, und zwar nicht für den Aktenschrank, sondern um herauszufinden, welche Maßnahmen die körperliche und mentale Gesundheit des Arbeitnehmers schützen. Die Gefahr der Überregulierung durch eine eigenständige Verordnung zur psychischen Gesundheit sehe ich momentan nicht. Wir brauchen Verbindlichkeit und Konkretisierung.\n\nPsychosoziale Risiken am Arbeitsplatz - das ist für viele ein diffuses und abstraktes Thema. Was meinen wir denn eigentlich? Welche Risiken gibt es konkret? Worauf müssen Arbeitgeber und Arbeitnehmer achten? Im Rahmen der Gemeinsamen Deutschen Arbeitsschutzstrategie wurden bereits gute Empfehlungen zur Umsetzung der Gefährdungsbeurteilung bei psychischer Belastung zusammengetragen. Hiermit müssen wir in die Fläche.\n\nGute Praktiken beim Sicherheits- und Gesundheitsschutzmanagement in den Unternehmen bedeuten nicht nur Aufwand, sondern geben auch erkennbare Vorteile: Eine gesunde und motivierte Belegschaft ist produktiv. Sie ermöglicht es den Unternehmen, wettbewerbsfähig und innovativ zu bleiben. Wer gesunde Mitarbeiter hat, hält wertvolle Qualifikationen und Berufserfahrung im Unternehmen.\n\nGeringere Fehlzeiten und Krankenstände bedeuten weniger Kosten infolge von Erwerbsunfähigkeit. Wir müssen also gemeinsam mit den Unternehmen darauf abzielen, Erwerbstätige vor Berufsunfähigkeit zu bewahren. Das Gesundheitsmanagement der Betriebe und die Eingliederung nach langer Krankheit sind daher eine große Herausforderung. Ohne Prävention wird es vor dem Hintergrund der älter werdenden Gesellschaft nicht gehen.\n\nWir brauchen eine neue Regelung, eine Regelung, die den Namen Anti-Stress-Verordnung trägt.\n\nDas würde der Bedeutung der mentalen Gesundheit in der modernen Arbeitswelt Rechnung tragen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank und Glück auf!\"\n7072,katrin-goring-eckardt,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und liebe Kollegen! Ich glaube, ehrlich gesagt, dass die Situation zu ernst ist, um mit solchen Aktionen zu versuchen, Europa weiter in Misskredit zu bringen.\n\nFrau Merkel, Sie haben hier heute nur einen Satz zum G-7-Gipfel gesagt. Sie haben sich damit einer Debatte über die Ergebnisse des G-7-Gipfels in diesem Hause verweigert - ich hoffe, man kann sagen: nur bisher verweigert. Wenn Sie sich aber hierhinstellen und sagen: „Wir müssen im Rahmen von G 7 und G 20 sehr viel umsetzen“, doch schon zwei Tage nach dem Gipfel im eigenen Land die Kohleabgabe versenken, die notwendig wäre, um das umzusetzen, was Sie auf der großen Bühne beschlossen haben, also auf weltpolitischer Ebene groß vom Klimaschutz sprechen, in Deutschland aber Denkmalschutz für die Braunkohle betreiben, ist das alles andere als glaubwürdig.\n\nFrau Merkel, Sie haben einen Satz, den Sie hier schon sehr oft gesagt haben, heute nicht wiederholt, nämlich: Wenn der Euro scheitert, dann scheitert Europa. - Es ist ziemlich genau fünf Jahre her, dass Sie das zum ersten Mal gesagt haben. Heute darf man nicht nur, sondern muss man die Frage stellen: Haben Sie eigentlich noch das gesamte Europa im Blick, oder geht es nur noch um den nächsten Kredit, nur noch um den nächsten Showdown, nur noch um Haltungsnoten? Hat die Union - nach den Äußerungen in dieser Woche und vor allen Dingen nach Ihrer Rede, Herr Oppermann, muss man das allerdings auch die SPD fragen -, hat die SPD das gemeinsame Europa eigentlich noch als gemeinsame Werte- und Solidargemeinschaft im Blick, oder geht es nur noch um Gezerre, um Hin und Her?\n\nVielleicht ist es ja so, dass Sie das im Blick haben; aber dann wird offenbar nicht öffentlich darüber geredet. Es wird ausgewichen, es wird über zentrale Fragen gar nicht gesprochen. Es wird so getan, als sei es wirklich offen, ob es die 7 Milliarden Euro, über die wir in dieser Woche reden, gibt.\n\nWarum wird nicht darüber gesprochen, was tatsächlich los ist? Sie haben vorhin gesagt, das alles müsse nachhaltig wirken können. Dann müssen Sie Ihren eigenen Leuten aber auch sagen: Natürlich wird es ein nächstes Hilfspaket für Griechenland geben. - Das wäre ehrlich, und das wäre auch konsequent in dieser Diskussion.\n\nAber was passiert, wenn wir so viel Schindluder mit Europa treiben, wenn wir so viel darüber reden, was alles nicht geht? Wenn Sie heute Zwanzigjährige fragen, woran sie bei Europa denken, dann sagen diese nicht „Frieden“ oder „Freiheit“, dann denken sie noch nicht einmal an Erasmus. Nein, dann sagen sie heute: Krise.\n\nSoll das denn die Zukunft dieses Europas sein? Wir sind dabei, sie zu verscherbeln, auch in der Emotionalität der Europäerinnen und Europäer.\n\nDeswegen: Reden Sie endlich darüber, was ist. Wenn Griechenland aus dem Euro stürzt, dann wäre das eine Bruchlandung für die gesamte Europäische Union. Wenn Griechenland aus dem Euro stürzt, dann wären die Kosten für Deutschland immens, dann hätten wir eine humanitäre Katastrophe in Europa. Griechenland aus dem Euro zu stürzen, würde aber auch bedeuten, dass man 70 Milliarden Euro sofort in den Wind schießt - das sind die deutschen Kredite, die gegeben wurden -, statt 7 Milliarden Euro in die Hand zu nehmen. Ich glaube nicht, dass das glaubwürdig ist. Wenn es um deutsche Interessen geht, dann muss man auch darüber reden, und zwar ehrlich, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nEuropa - das ist nicht nur etwas für Sonntags- und Schaufensterreden. Europa soll ja eine Solidar- und Wertegemeinschaft sein. Mit diesem Ziel ist es gegründet worden. Europa stärkt man, indem man eine klare Haltung einnimmt, aber nicht mit Deals und nicht mit Muskelspielen. Das gilt übrigens für beide Seiten. Man muss auch Herrn Varoufakis sagen: Man kann in Griechenland keine Renten, keine Medikamente und keine Schulbücher damit bezahlen, dass man sich für schlauer hält als der Rest.\n\nHerr Bosbach - ich weiß gar nicht, ob er heute da ist -, ich will das noch einmal wiederholen: Sie spielen ganz bewusst mit dem Feuer. Sie bringen nämlich die Menschen gegen dieses gemeinsame Europa auf, wenn Sie so über Europa, wenn Sie so über Griechenland reden, wie Sie es in den letzten Tagen getan haben. Nein, das reale Renteneintrittsalter in Griechenland liegt bei den Frauen gerade einmal ein Jahr unter dem in Deutschland. Wenn man da ein falsches Spiel spielt, dann wird man nur weiter dafür sorgen, dass die Verunsicherung in der Bevölkerung, auch in unserer, wächst. Wenn man dieses Spiel spielt, Herr Oppermann, macht das keine Freude, sondern das wird dazu führen, dass sich demnächst noch mehr als 70 Prozent fragen, ob wir eigentlich diese weiteren Hilfen brauchen. Wir brauchen Ehrlichkeit, und wir müssen sagen: Es geht auch um uns. Deshalb müssen wir Griechenland nicht nur retten, sondern auch dafür sorgen, dass es eine echte Perspektive hat.\n\nWir brauchen eine Lösung für dieses Land, für die Bevölkerung in diesem Land. Die griechische Regierung muss zugleich mit Klientelsystemen und Günstlingswirtschaft aufräumen. Ja, sie muss gegen Steuerhinterziehung vorgehen, und die oberen 10 Prozent müssen ihren gerechten Beitrag leisten. Sie muss auch Prioritäten setzen. Es kann nicht sein, dass man auf der einen Seite für eine OP in einem Krankenhaus in Griechenland das Verbandszeug selber mitbringen muss und dass auf der anderen Seite Rüstungsgüter mit dem wahnsinnigen Wert von 11 Milliarden Dollar nach Griechenland importiert werden. Mich wundert übrigens, dass unsere Bundesregierung dies nicht auf den Prüfstand stellen will. Möglicherweise liegt es daran, dass die Rüstungsgüter auch aus Deutschland kommen.\n\nDas gilt natürlich auch andersherum. Auch die Gläubiger müssen realistische Vorschläge machen. Wenn die Griechen schon diesen steinigen Weg gehen müssen, den übrigens auch andere Länder in der Europäischen Union gehen mussten, dann kann man ihnen nicht gleichzeitig noch die Schnürsenkel zusammenbinden. Griechenland muss nämlich beides können: auf der einen Seite den Haushalt ohne noch größere soziale Verwerfungen konsolidieren und auf der anderen Seite in die Zukunft investieren. Deswegen wäre es doch sehr klug, zu sagen: Wir machen ein Umschuldungsprogramm mit dem ESM. Dann geht nämlich beides. Dann können die Reformen erst einmal greifen. Dann gibt es auch neues Vertrauen in der griechischen Bevölkerung. Dann kann man auch weitere Reformen ansetzen, weil es wieder Sicherheit gibt, weil dann auch tatsächlich Investitionen gemacht werden können, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nIch bin fest überzeugt: Griechenland braucht eine realistische Chance. Investitionen - das kennen wir doch. Wir können doch nicht so tun, als ob wir nicht wissen, wie sich das damit verhält. Es ist sechs Jahre her, da hat die Große Koalition hier unter der Führung von Angela Merkel kein Problem damit gehabt, 10 Milliarden Euro für die Abwrackprämie und für das Kurzarbeitergeld lockerzumachen, um der Wirtschaft auf die Sprünge zu helfen. Wenn Sie jetzt so tun, als sei unsere gute Konjunktur nur mit dem Sparschwein in der Hand gemacht worden, dann zeugt das von Arroganz und Geschichtsklitterung zugleich. Man muss eben beides machen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ja, es geht um das europäische Projekt als Ganzes. Wir haben in der Tat noch andere große Herausforderungen. Wir haben die Flüchtlingsfrage. Es ist gut, dass Sie die Seenotrettung angesprochen haben. Das ist ein sehr wichtiger Teil. Ich hoffe übrigens auch, dass das nicht wieder aufhört, wenn die Scheinwerfer aus sind. Aber das wird natürlich nicht reichen. Wir haben hier die Helfer beklatscht, die Menschen gerettet haben. Aber gleichzeitig brauchen wir endlich eine realistische Lösung. Wir brauchen endlich sichere Wege nach Europa. Was wir bestimmt nicht brauchen, sind Auffanglager, weil sie nämlich weder ein rechtssicheres Verfahren gewährleisten noch dafür sorgen werden, dass weniger Flüchtlinge hierherkommen.\n\nDas ist eine Chimäre und nichts anderes als eine Scheinlösung.\n\nJa, es ist und bleibt notwendig, dass Europa gegenüber Russland eine klare gemeinsame Haltung hat. Die europäische Außenpolitik muss sich eben darauf konzentrieren, dass friedliche Mittel funktionieren; wir dürfen nicht die militärische Option in den Vordergrund stellen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, leider gibt es auch hierzulande nicht wenige, die bereit sind, europäische Werte für eine populistische Schlagzeile in die weiß-blaue Tonne zu treten. Die CSU muss endlich damit aufhören, auf Kosten von Flüchtlingen am rechten Rand Stimmen sammeln zu wollen.\n\nWenn Herr Söder das Grundrecht auf Asyl in Lehrerstellen umrechnet, dann hat er unser Grundgesetz nicht verstanden. Sagen Sie ihm das bitte, und zwar in aller Klarheit, meine Damen und Herren!\n\nWenn der Euro scheitert, dann scheitert Europa - ich wiederhole diesen Satz. Zur Wahrheit gehört auch: Europa ist nicht irgendwo in Brüssel; wir sind es selbst. Nach 50 Jahren wäre das zum ersten Mal weniger Europa statt mehr. Unabhängig von Mehrheiten und von Regierungen war eines in diesem Europa immer klar: Es war nie Verhandlungsmasse. Wir sollten es auch nicht dazu machen.\n\nEuropa war und ist Grundlage für Frieden, für unsere Freiheit und für unseren Wohlstand. Deswegen mein Appell am Schluss: Hören Sie auf mit dem Pokern! Hören Sie auf mit der Showdown-Politik! Machen Sie klar: Europa ist so stark wie seine Mitglieder, und zwar wie alle seine Mitglieder! Machen Sie das in Ihren eigenen Reihen klar! Machen Sie das in der CSU klar, machen Sie das in der CDU klar, und machen Sie das auch in der SPD klar! Europa funktioniert nicht, wenn man es in Gewinner und Verlierer spaltet.\n\nWir haben jetzt die große Chance, für dieses gemeinsame Europa zu stehen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3818,volker-ullrich,\"Begreifen … bedeutet … die Last, die uns durch die Ereignisse auferlegt wurde, zu un-tersuchen und bewußt zu tragen … Begreifen bedeutet, sich aufmerksam und unvoreinge-nommen der Wirklichkeit, was immer sie ist oder war, zu stellen und entgegenzustellen.\n\nHerr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Diese Worte stammen von Hannah Arendt. Sie sind in einem anderen, aber nicht we-sensfremden Zusammenhang formuliert worden. Auch heute beschreiben diese Worte unsere Her-ausforderung, der wir uns drei Jahre nach Aufde-ckung des Terrors des NSU zu stellen haben. Wir haben zu begreifen, dass sich ein Schatten auf das friedliche Zusammenleben in unserem Land gelegt hat. Verbrechen sind geschehen, die durch ihre Skrupellosigkeit und Menschenverachtung unser Land erschüttert haben. Der Schatten be-kommt ein Gesicht durch den Schmerz und die Trauer der Angehörigen. Ihnen gehören auch heu-te unser tiefes Mitgefühl und unsere aufrichtige Anteilnahme.\n\nWir haben neben mitfühlenden Worten und Ges-ten eigene Wut zu verspüren. Es ist die Wut über sprachlos machende Versäumnisse bei denen, die von Berufs wegen unsere Verfassung schützen sollten und es nicht konnten. Unbehagen, ja, mehr noch, tiefe Scham haben wir zu empfinden, dass in der Öffentlichkeit die Opfer und ihre Angehöri-gen über lange Jahre oftmals mit nur wenig Mitge-fühl und mit - was sich als zynisch herausgestellt hat - an sie selbst gerichteten Verdächtigungen zu kämpfen hatten. Wer also heute keine Fas-sungslosigkeit über die Abgründe der Taten und das Umfeld, in denen sie geschehen konnten, be-sitzt, der hat die Dimension ihrer Angriffe auf die Menschlichkeit und das Miteinander in unserem Gemeinwesen nicht verstanden.\n\nWir haben die Pflicht, verlorengegangenes Ver-trauen in den Rechtsstaat und die ihn schützenden Einrichtungen wiederherzustellen und zu festigen. Wesentlich dafür ist die Suche nach Wahrheit. Das meint „Begreifen“.\n\nAufklärungsinteresse ist kein Spielball politi-schen Taktierens. Es ist daher ermutigend, dass der Bundestag und einige Landtage über Partei-grenzen hinweg Untersuchungsausschüsse ein-gesetzt und erfolgreich zu Ergebnissen geführt haben, die wir vollständig umsetzen werden. Wir suchen nach der Wahrheit nicht aus Interesse an einer historisch richtigen Geschichtsschreibung, sondern weil sich der wehrhafte Rechtsstaat die Pflicht zur allumfassenden Aufklärung zu eigen machen muss. Auch wenn dadurch nichts unge-schehen wird und Wunden vielleicht nicht heilen können: Die Wahrheitsfindung ist ein wichtiger Beitrag, damit die Angehörigen die Möglichkeit haben, einen inneren Frieden mit ihrer Trauer und mit ihrem Verlust zu finden.\n\nEs sind wesentliche Fragen, die noch der Be-antwortung harren, beispielhaft sei genannt: Aus wie vielen Mitgliedern bestand das Terrornetzwerk tatsächlich? Ist die These, dass nur jene drei be-kannten Personen den NSU gebildet haben, tat-sächlich haltbar? Es ist zu fragen, wie es sein konnte, dass das Trio trotz zahlreicher V-Leute in der rechtsextremen Szene über ein Jahrzehnt un-entdeckt blieb. Wir wollen wissen, was am 25. Ap-ril 2007 und am 4. November 2011 in Eisenach tatsächlich passiert ist und wie sich die vielen Ungereimtheiten erklären lassen.\n\nDie Beantwortung von Fragen ist aber nicht ausreichend. Wir benötigen Vertrauen in die Gel-tung des Rechts und den Schutz unserer Verfas-sung. Dazu brauchen wir fortwährend eine von al-len gelebte Kultur der Wehrhaftigkeit unserer frei-heitlichen demokratischen Grundordnung. Das Wissen um die Bedrohung der menschlichen Würde und die Zerbrechlichkeit unserer Freiheit zwingt uns stets zur Wachsamkeit. Das gilt in diesen Tagen besonders.\n\nEs darf zu keinem Zeitpunkt eine Situation ent-stehen, in welcher die tatsächliche Fähigkeit des Staates, unsere freiheitlich-demokratische Grund-ordnung zu schützen, ernsthaft infrage gestellt wird. Gleichwohl ist es keine allein staatliche Auf-gabe. Der Einsatz gegen Gleichgültigkeit und Vorurteile, das Aufstehen für Toleranz und das Eintreten für eine demokratische und offene Ge-sellschaft gehen uns alle an. Es ist eine notwen-dige Anstrengung der gesamten Zivilgesellschaft.\n\nDiese Anstrengung für Demokratie und ein friedliches Miteinander ist nicht immer bequem. Manchmal sind Passivität und Gleichgültigkeit bei oberflächlicher Betrachtung ein einfacher Weg. Es ist aber der Weg des süßen Giftes. Wer sich nicht für die Werte einsetzt, die unsere Gemeinschaft begründen, wird morgen nicht mehr die Umge-bung vorfinden, die ihm seine Bequemlichkeit erst ermöglicht hat.\n\nManche mögen - abschließend - einwenden, dass keiner abzuschätzen vermag, ob unsere An-strengungen von Erfolg gekrönt sein werden. Zweifel dürfen uns aber nicht erschüttern. Wir werden erfolgreich sein, weil das Vertrauen in die Idee der Unverletzlichkeit der Würde des Men-schen unerschütterlich ist. Es ist die beste Idee, die wir haben. Hannah Arendt hat die Hoffnung in das Gelingen so formuliert: Es ist nur möglich „im Vertrauen auf die Menschen. Das heißt, in einem - schwer genau zu fassenden, aber grundsätzli-chen - Vertrauen auf das Menschliche aller Men-schen. Anders könnte man es nicht.“\"\n13450,jurgen-hardt,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die CDU/CSU-Bundestagsfraktion unterstützt den Antrag der Bundesregierung auf Verlängerung und Erweiterung des MINUSMA-Mandats. Ich freue mich, dass diese Debatte zeigt, dass die verantwortungsvollen Kräfte dieses Hauses mit großer Geschlossenheit hinter diesem Einsatz stehen.\n\nDeutschland hat Mali nicht umsonst ins Zentrum seiner Bemühungen um Frieden im westlichen Afrika gerückt. Wir haben durch zahlreiche Besuche von Ministern, aber auch der Bundeskanzlerin unterstrichen, wie sehr uns daran liegt, dass in diesen Ländern eine positive demokratische und stabilisierende Entwicklung vorangeht und dass insbesondere in Mali der Friedensprozess zu einem guten Ergebnis führt. Denn der innere Frieden eines Landes ist natürlich Voraussetzung, dass man sich gegen äußere Feinde bzw. Gegner wirksam schützen kann.\n\nWer die geografische Lage Malis betrachtet, sieht auf den ersten Blick, dass Mali für den gesamten westafrikanischen Raum ein enorm wichtiges Land ist. Wir haben die Weiten der Sahara mit nahezu unkontrollierbaren Transportwegen für Waffen- und Menschenschmuggel. Wir haben im westlichen Afrika eine ganze Reihe von Staaten, die positive Erfolge zeitigen mit Blick auf die Demokratisierung. Islamistische Kräfte könnten aber natürlich jede Instabilität und jedes Wanken sofort nutzen, um diese Staaten zu destabilisieren. Wie fragil manchmal die demokratische Entwicklung ist, sehen wir in Gambia. Wir haben in Gambia die Situation, dass ein Präsident sein Amt nicht verlassen will. Es gibt einen demokratisch gewählten neuen Präsidenten - von beiden Präsidentschaftskandidaten ist die Wahl ja als richtig anerkannt worden -, während der alte Präsident nicht weichen will. Ich kann hier nur appellieren, dass Präsident Yahya Jammeh das Amt an den neuen legitimen Präsidenten Barrow übergibt. Das zeigt, wie wichtig es ist, dass die Region stabil bleibt und dass wir verhindern, dass der Islamismus in dieser Region Fuß fasst.\n\nDer Einsatz in Mali ist ein gefährlicher Einsatz. Wir haben bei jeder Bundestagsdebatte hier vorgetragen, dass wir unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten wirklich gut schützen müssen und dass wir uns auch nichts vormachen dürfen. Wir haben gesehen, dass die Zahl der Anschläge in den letzten Jahren weiter zugenommen hat. Das Problem hat sich vor allem Richtung Süden entwickelt, weil genau dort die Wege sind, auf denen der Terrorismus in andere Regionen Westafrikas vorzudringen versucht. Deswegen ist es eine gute Entscheidung der Bundesregierung, dass wir dort voraussichtlich ab März Hubschrauberunterstützung haben.\n\nIch sage ganz konkret an die Adresse der Linken, die das kritisiert hat: Sie wären doch die Ersten, die hier Theater machen würden - vermutlich in diesem Punkt zu Recht -, wenn wir darauf verzichten würden, unsere Soldaten durch die MedEvac-Hubschrauber zu unterstützen und durch die Kampfhubschrauber wiederum diese möglichen Lufteinsätze zu begleiten. Deswegen ist es eine gute Maßnahme der Vorsorge für uns und für alle anderen UN-Kräfte in der Region, dass wir die Hubschrauber dorthin verlegen.\n\nWir hatten diese Einsatzkombination bereits zum Ende des ISAF-Einsatzes in Afghanistan. Dort gab es Fragezeichen, ob es klappen könnte. Es gab viele Gerüchte über den neuen Transporthubschrauber und den neuen Kampfhubschrauber. Diese Hubschrauber haben im Afghanistan-Einsatz gezeigt, dass sie auch in dieser Kombination die Aufgabe wahrnehmen können. Deswegen ist es gut, dass wir das jetzt auch in Mali machen.\n\nIch finde es eine richtige Entscheidung der Bundesregierung, dass die Soldatinnen und Soldaten im Einsatz auch entsprechend besser bezahlt werden. Ich glaube, dass wir den Angehörigen und den Soldaten selbst sagen müssen, dass sie unsere gesamte Unterstützung haben und wir alles, was wir tun können, auch leisten, damit alle aus diesem Einsatz wieder wohlbehalten nach Hause kommen können. Es wird der gegenwärtig größte und vielleicht auch gefährlichste Bundeswehreinsatz sein. Ich wünsche allen Soldaten Glück, dass sie wieder heil nach Hause kommen. Die CDU/CSU-Bundestagsfraktion wird dieses Mandat unterstützen.\"\n15350,ge,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Kollegen von der CDU, die Mehrheit der Redner und Rednerinnen hier im Raum hat erkannt, welche Probleme der hohe Pestizideinsatz in der Landwirtschaft verursacht. Es hat mich nicht überrascht, dass Sie nicht zu diesen Menschen gehören, die das erkannt haben. Was mich allerdings wirklich überrascht hat, ist, dass es ein Thema gibt, das Sie und Herr Bleser in Ihren Reden komplett ignoriert haben. Das ist das, was auf dem Markt für Agrochemiekonzerne passiert. Was wir dort erleben, ist eine gigantische Fusionswelle in einem Ausmaß, das wir bislang noch nicht beobachten konnten. Die größten der Großen - Bayer, Monsanto, Syngenta, ChemChina, Dow und DuPont - fusionieren gerade miteinander. Ihnen ist das noch nicht mal eine Erwähnung wert. Das wundert mich schon.\n\nDas, was im Bereich für Pestizide und Saatgut passiert, ist ein gigantisches Anwachsen von Marktmacht. Wenn eine Handvoll Unternehmen zwei Drittel des Marktes für Pestizide und Saatgut dominiert, dann ist das ein Problem, mit dem Sie sich beschäftigen müssen.\n\nWas ist die Folge? Bauern werden von den gigantischen Konzernen unter Druck gesetzt: sowohl beim Angebot als auch bei den Preisen. Beim Angebot setzen die Konzerne auf Totalherbizide wie Glyphosat. Es gibt weniger Innovationen im Markt. Das belegen Studien. Es wird am Ende auf Monokulturen hinauslaufen im Bereich des Saatgutes. Am Ende bedroht die Marktmacht dieser Agrochemiegiganten sogar die Ernährungssouveränität ganzer Volkswirtschaften.\n\nInsofern ist es für uns ein Handlungsauftrag, uns die Fusionskontrolle auf europäischer Ebene ganz genau anzuschauen, und zwar nicht nur aus den wettbewerbspolitischen Gründen, aus denen wir als grüne Bundestagsfraktion sagen, dass die Fusion sowieso untersagt werden müsste. Wir haben bei den Fusionen, die jetzt schon genehmigt wurden, gesehen, dass die Kommission die Fusionen durchwinkt. Deswegen sagen wir: Wenn eine Fusion in so einem Ausmaß Umweltschutzaspekte betrifft, wie es im Agrochemiebereich der Fall ist, dann müssen Aspekte des Umweltschutzes gleichwertig neben der Fusionskontrolle und den Wettbewerbsaspekten stehen. Dazu haben wir als grüne Bundestagsfraktion ein Rechtsgutachten vorgelegt. Wir als Bundestagsfraktion haben Sie zigmal dazu befragt, was Sie dafür tun, ob Sie nach Brüssel gehen, ob Sie gegebenenfalls klagen wollen. Sie haben kein einziges Mal darauf geantwortet. Sie haben dieses Problem überhaupt nicht auf dem Schirm. Deshalb ist es notwendig, dass es heute eine klare Stellungnahme des Deutschen Bundestages gibt. Denn es geht um nicht weniger als unsere Gesundheit und unsere Ernährung.\"\n12741,gerda-hasselfeldt,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Bei manchen Reden der Opposition von gestern und heute - insbesondere von der ersten heute Morgen - habe ich den Eindruck gewonnen: Da fehlt jeder Sinn für die Realität im Land.\n\nRealität, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ist nun einmal, dass wir seit zehn Jahren eine steigende Zahl von Erwerbstätigen haben. Realität ist, dass wir den tiefsten Stand der Arbeitslosigkeit haben. Bei den Erwerbstätigen haben wir übrigens eine wesentliche Zunahme gerade bei den sozialversicherungspflichtig Beschäftigten. Das ist Fakt, meine Damen und Herren!\n\nZur Realität gehört, dass die Löhne und Einkommen sowie die Renten gestiegen sind und weiter steigen. Das ist genauso Realität wie die Tatsache, dass unsere Wirtschaft auf gesunden, kräftigen Beinen steht, sowohl was die Binnennachfrage als auch den Export betrifft, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDas alles ermöglicht, dass wir den sozial Schwachen - denjenigen, die sich entweder zeitweise oder längere Zeit selber nicht helfen können - Leistungen gewähren können, wie sie andere mit uns vergleichbare Staaten eben nicht gewähren können. Auch das gehört zur Realität in diesem Land.\n\nIch finde, das erste und allerwichtigste Gebot für die Politiker ist, dass man den Leuten wenigstens ehrlich sagt, wie die Lage ist und wo Probleme liegen.\n\nEs ist ein Gebot der Ehrlichkeit, die Dinge und die Situation aber auch nicht schlechter zu reden, als sie tatsächlich sind.\n\nZur politischen Verantwortung gehört natürlich auch, dass wir das Erreichte nicht mutwillig gefährden dürfen. Damit komme ich zu einem Thema, das gerade in den letzten Tagen wieder eine Rolle gespielt hat, nämlich der Vorschlag der Grünen, die Vermögensteuer wieder einzuführen.\n\nMit diesem Vorschlag machen Sie genau das, was Sie nicht machen dürfen. Dadurch würden nämlich die Struktur und die Substanz unserer Wirtschaft - insbesondere der mittelständischen Wirtschaft - und damit Arbeitsplätze gefährdet. Das ist der völlig falsche Weg.\n\nIn diesen Tagen war mehrfach die Rede davon, dass wir auch in diesem Jahr wieder einen Haushalt ohne neue Schulden vorlegen. Ich bin jetzt seit fast 30 Jahren in diesem Haus und glaube, wir sollten uns wirklich immer wieder bewusst machen, dass es bis jetzt noch in keiner Legislaturperiode gelungen ist, vier Jahre hintereinander Haushalte ohne neue Schulden vorzulegen. Das ist eine grandiose Leistung, die man gar nicht hoch genug einschätzen kann.\n\nEin Haushalt ohne Schulden ist auch kein Selbstzweck, sondern macht auf verschiedenen Ebenen und aus verschiedenen Gründen Sinn. Es zeigt: Auf diese Regierung ist Verlass. Das, was am Anfang der Regierungszeit versprochen wurde, ist eingehalten worden, und zwar gegen viele Versuchungen; auch das muss man in Rede stellen.\n\nNicht alles, was wir in dieser Legislaturperiode finanziell zu schultern hatten, war am Anfang vorauszusehen. Es war eine großartige Leistung, das durchzuhalten. Das zeigt unsere Verlässlichkeit.\n\nDurch diese Stabilitätspolitik wird außerdem auch der Grundstein dafür gelegt, dass für die notwendigen Maßnahmen auch die entsprechenden Mittel vorhanden sind und dass für Investitionen - auch für Zukunftsinvestitionen - Spielraum ist. Das Allerwichtigste ist: Es wird deutlich, dass wir verantwortungsvolle Politik nicht für uns und die ältere Generation, sondern für unsere Kinder und Enkelkinder machen. Sie brauchen diese Chancen in diesem Land.\n\nEs ist uns gelungen, den Ländern die entsprechenden Mittel für die Kommunen an die Hand zu geben, damit diese ihre Aufgaben gut bewältigen können. Noch nie hat es eine Bundesregierung und ein Parlament gegeben, die so viel für die Kommunen und auch die Länderhaushalte gegeben haben wie diese Bundesregierung und dieses Parlament in dieser Legislaturperiode.\n\nDas ist wirklich einmalig und war auch notwendig; das ist richtig.\n\nIch will aber auch darauf hinweisen: Es kommt jetzt schon darauf an, dass diese Gelder, die den Ländern und den Kommunen in einer Größenordnung wie nie zuvor gegeben wurden, auch richtig und für den Zweck ausgegeben werden, für den sie vorgesehen sind, beispielsweise für den sozialen Wohnungsbau. Es macht wenig Sinn, die Mittel im sozialen Wohnungsbau zu verdreifachen, wie wir es mittlerweile getan haben, wenn diese Mittel von den Ländern nicht entsprechend ausgegeben werden, sondern im allgemeinen Haushalt untergehen und für irgendetwas anderes verwendet werden. Und auf der anderen Seite schimpft man dann darüber, dass es zu wenige Wohnungen gibt. Nein, hier müssen auch die Länder und die Kommunen ihre Verantwortung wahrnehmen.\n\nDas Gleiche gilt übrigens auch für die Integrationspauschale. Auch diese Mittel erhalten die Kommunen und die Länder, um ihre Aufgaben im Zusammenhang mit der Integration von Flüchtlingen erfüllen zu können. Sie dürfen nicht im allgemeinen Haushalt verschwinden.\n\nZweitens aber gehört neben dieser zielgerichteten Verwendung auch dazu, dass die Länder ihre Aufgabe und ihre Verantwortung wirklich wahrnehmen. Da stellt sich mir schon die Frage, warum zum Beispiel die Schulen in Bayern in einem wesentlich besseren Zustand sind als die Schulen in Nordrhein-Westfalen. Das liegt doch nicht an uns.\n\nEs stellt sich auch die Frage, warum die Kriminalität in manchen Ländern größer oder kleiner ist, warum die Aufklärungsquote in der Kriminalitätsbekämpfung in Bayern wesentlich höher ist als in anderen Ländern. Man kann sich auch die Frage stellen, warum in Bayern beispielsweise die Arbeitslosenquote in ländlichen Regionen teilweise sogar niedriger ist als in Ballungsgebieten. Das, meine Damen und Herren, hängt alles mit einer richtigen Politik in den jeweiligen Ländern zusammen.\n\nDas muss auch einmal gesagt werden.\n\nDefizite in der Schulausstattung, Defizite in der Polizeiausstattung, Defizite in der regionalen Wirtschaftsförderung können nicht allein vom Bund beseitigt werden, weil der Bund dafür gar nicht verantwortlich ist, sondern sie müssen vor Ort in den Ländern beseitigt werden. Da ist die Verantwortung der Bundesländer, der Länderregierungen.\n\nEine gemeinsame Aufgabe ist zweifellos der Umgang mit den Flüchtlingen. Es ist völlig richtig, dass dieser Haushalt einen großen Schwerpunkt auf die Bekämpfung der Fluchtursachen legt, mit einer deutlichen Steigerung der Mittel beim Auswärtigen Amt und beim Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit. Das ist der richtige Ansatz; denn da wird dafür gesorgt, dass sich die Menschen erst gar nicht auf den lebensgefährlichen Weg machen, sondern dass sich die Bedingungen in ihren Heimatregionen verbessern. Trotzdem wissen wir, dass wir da noch eine gewaltige Aufgabe vor uns haben, und die Krisen und Kriege in der Welt zeigen uns dies ja auch jeden Tag.\n\nFür uns ist ein Dreiklang wichtig, der erstens Humanität, zweitens Integration und drittens Begrenzung bedeutet, und diese drei Punkte gehören zusammen. Zur Humanität gehört die Bekämpfung der Fluchtursachen; zur Humanität gehören aber auch die Betreuung und die Versorgung der Flüchtlinge, die zu uns kamen und kommen. Da haben wir alle miteinander in diesem Land, haben die Menschen in diesem Land, die hauptamtlich und ehrenamtlich Tätigen in den vergangenen Monaten eine hervorragende Visitenkarte der Humanität abgegeben. Dafür herzlichen Dank!\n\nBei der Integration lassen wir die Länder und Kommunen nicht im Stich. Wir haben gerade jetzt wieder die für die Integration an die Länder und Kommunen auszureichenden Mittel erhöht. Wir haben uns große Mühe dabei gegeben.\n\nKlar ist aber auch: Mit Geld allein geht das nicht - Integration in die Sprache, in die Arbeitswelt, aber auch Integration in die Gesellschaft. An dieser Stelle, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, müssen wir schon immer wieder darauf hinweisen: Es gilt unsere Werteordnung, es gilt die Art und Weise, wie wir miteinander leben, miteinander umgehen, uns begegnen, miteinander reden, die Werteordnung, die im Grundgesetz verankert ist. Das muss das Maß dessen sein, woran sich Integration in dieses Land zu orientieren hat.\n\nDas Dritte ist dann: Wir können diese Aufgabe des humanitären Umgangs, der Versorgung und Betreuung der Flüchtlinge und die Integrationsarbeit nur gemeinsam leisten, wenn wir auch eine Begrenzung dabei haben. Daran arbeiten wir, daran haben wir auch gemeinsam gearbeitet, mit internationalen Abkommen - das wurde besprochen -, so mit der Türkei, aber auch mit Maßnahmen auf europäischer Ebene zur Sicherung der EU-Außengrenzen. Die Schließung der Balkanroute hat dazu beigetragen, und auch unsere nationalen Entscheidungen haben dazu beigetragen, die Zahl zu begrenzen. Wenn wir dann auch noch die Blockade der Grünen im Bundesrat in Bezug auf die sicheren Herkunftsstaaten in Nordafrika auflösen könnten, dann wären wir auch hier ein Stück weiter, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nEine weitere Herausforderung ist natürlich die Sicherheit unseres Landes. Die Terrorgefahren - das wurde mehrfach angesprochen - sind nicht irgendwo in der Welt, sondern auch bei uns. Die Kriminalitätsbekämpfung ist eine Aufgabe, der wir uns immer wieder zu stellen haben. Deshalb ist auch hier der richtige Ansatz, im Haushalt das deutliche Signal zu setzen: Das ist ein Schwerpunkt. Es geht um Personal, es geht um Ausstattung, und es geht um Befugnisse. Bei Letzterem haben sich die Sicherheitspolitiker der Koalition gerade in den letzten Tagen auf einige Maßnahmen verständigt. Ich bin dafür sehr dankbar; denn es macht deutlich: Nicht alles ist mit Geld zu leisten. Es geht auch darum, die Befugnisse zu verbessern und alle Möglichkeiten auszuschöpfen, um Kriminalität zu bekämpfen und für die Sicherheit der Bürger das Bestmögliche zu tun.\n\nIch habe gehört, dass in Niedersachsen den Polizisten auf eine Initiative der Grünen hin vorgeschrieben werden soll, zu dokumentieren, wann und warum der Einsatz von Pfefferspray notwendig war. Dazu muss ich sagen: Das ist nicht mein Verständnis einer Unterstützung von Polizeibeamten. Ich danke den Polizeibeamten und allen Sicherheitskräften bei uns im Land für ihren Einsatz für unsere Sicherheit. Dahinter müssen wir auch politisch stehen.\n\nPolitische Verantwortung in dieser Zeit bedeutet aber auch, die Weichen für die Zukunft zu stellen. Ein ganz wesentlicher Punkt ist dabei das, was wir unseren Kindern und Jugendlichen mitgeben können. Wenn wir über Investitionen sprechen, dann haben die meisten von uns zunächst einmal im Kopf: Investitionen in Straße, in Schiene, in Breitband. All das ist richtig. Auch das gehört dazu. Auch dafür setzt dieser Haushalt deutliche Akzente. Aber daneben geht es auch um Investitionen in die Köpfe. Die Kinder und Jugendlichen sind das eigentliche Kapital in unserem Land. Für sie darf uns nichts zu schade und nichts zu viel sein. Wir müssen immer wieder danach trachten: Sind sie gut erzogen?\n\nSind sie gut ausgebildet? Sind sie fit für das, was auf sie im Leben zukommt?\n\nDeshalb haben wir schon in den letzten Jahren einen so großen Schwerpunkt auf Bildung und Forschung gelegt. In den letzten zehn Jahren sind die Mittel dafür in dem entsprechenden Haushalt verdoppelt worden. Dieser Trend ist in diesem Jahr fortgesetzt worden. Das ist ein wichtiger Schwerpunkt in der Zukunftsgestaltung, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nNun wissen wir bei all den positiven Entwicklungen in unserem Land um die Sorgen der Menschen, um die Befindlichkeit und die zum Ausdruck gebrachte Unsicherheit. Ich habe Verständnis für so manches: Unsicherheit aufgrund der rasant veränderten Arbeitswelt - das wurde vorhin angesprochen -, Unsicherheit aufgrund der Krisen und Kriege in der Welt und der Konsequenzen daraus.\n\nWas antworten wir darauf? Ich sage Ihnen, meine Damen und Herren: Unsere Antwort ist eine realistische und ehrliche Politik. Wir wollen den Leuten nichts vormachen, sondern ganz offen diskutieren. Unsere Antwort ist aber auch Stabilität und Verlässlichkeit. Wir haben in den letzten Jahren unter der Führung von Angela Merkel mit dieser Bundesregierung und den Mehrheiten im Parlament gezeigt, dass wir das Land auch in schwierigen Situationen gut regieren, dass wir die vielen schwierigen Situationen, ja Krisen hervorragend gemeistert haben: mit Stabilität und Verlässlichkeit, mit einem klaren Wertekompass. Das ist unsere Antwort. Darauf können sich die Menschen auch künftig verlassen.\"\n5856,iris-gleicke,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! - Ich beziehe in diese Anrede die Abgeordnetenkollegen der letzten und der einzigen frei gewählten Volkskammer ein. - Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Die Volkskammerwahl vom 18. März 1990 war ein Ereignis von historischer Tragweite, nicht nur, weil sie die erste und zugleich einzige freie, gleiche und geheime Volkskammerwahl war, die in der DDR je stattgefunden hat. Alle vorherigen Volkskammerwahlen waren eine lächerliche Farce. Dazu ist im Mai des vergangenen Jahres alles und sehr viel Richtiges gesagt worden.\n\n1990 gab es eine Wahlbeteiligung, von der wir heute nur noch träumen können. Damals sind über 93 Prozent der Wahlberechtigten an die Urnen gegangen. Über 93 Prozent: Eine so hohe Wahlbeteiligung hat es bei Bundestagswahlen in der alten Bundesrepublik nie gegeben.\n\n1972, nach dem berühmten Willy-Brandt-Wahlkampf, erreichte man 91,1 Prozent. Nur zum Vergleich: Bei der letzten Bundestagswahl haben wir gerade einmal 71,5 Prozent erreicht. Mich macht das sehr nachdenklich, auch im Hinblick darauf, welche großen Hoffnungen wir Ostdeutschen damals mit der ersten und einzigen freien Volkskammerwahl verbunden haben.\n\nDie Demokratie war uns unglaublich wichtig. Schließlich hatten wir sie mit einer friedlichen Revolution erstritten und die Mauer niedergerissen, die damals die Deutschen von Deutschen trennte. Wie man eine Diktatur abschüttelt, wie man Mauern überwindet, das hatten wir gelernt; das wussten wir im März 1990. Von der ganz praktischen Arbeit in einem Parlament, von parlamentarischen Verfahren und von der knochenharten Auseinandersetzung mit den Details einer Gesetzgebung wussten die meisten von denen, die 1990 in die Volkskammer gewählt wurden, nicht allzu viel. Umso größer muss heute unser Respekt vor diesen Frauen und Männern sein, die zum Teil Tag und Nacht geschuftet haben, um sich einzuarbeiten, um ihre Ideen zu verwirklichen, um den großen Ansprüchen gerecht zu werden, die mit ihrer Wahl verbunden waren.\n\nAuch darin sind sie uns ein Vorbild.\n\nEs wurde damals sehr schnell klar, dass das wichtigste Ziel des Parlaments eigentlich darin bestand, sich selbst abzuschaffen, so paradox das auch klingen mag. Denn nur fünf Monate später war es so weit. Da erklärte die Volkskammer den Beitritt der DDR zum Geltungsbereich des Grundgesetzes zum 3. Oktober 1990. Die innerste und tiefste Bedeutung dieser historischen Entscheidung vom 23. August 1990 liegt für mich darin, dass das eine Entscheidung in Freiheit war. Für mich ist deshalb der 23. August 1990 der eigentliche Tag der deutschen Einheit. Die Ostdeutschen sind nicht erst durch die staatliche Wiedervereinigung zu freien Bürgern geworden. Man hat uns diese Freiheit nicht geschenkt oder gnädig zugestanden. Wir haben sie uns selbst erkämpft.\n\nDas - vielleicht vor allem das - ist es, worauf wir Ostdeutsche stolz sein dürfen und worauf wir eigentlich über alle Parteigrenzen hinweg stolz sein müssen.\n\nWir haben in Ostdeutschland in den letzten 25 Jahren unglaublich viel erreicht, trotz einiger Fehler im Einigungsvertrag, trotz Treuhand, trotz Deindustrialisierung, trotz Massenarbeitslosigkeit, trotz Abwanderung. Es ist noch längst nicht alles gut, aber vieles ist in den zurückliegenden 25 Jahren gut geworden. Bei der Wirtschaftskraft, bei den Löhnen, beim Steueraufkommen, überall hinkt der Osten dem Westen hinterher. Aber es gibt eine gute Perspektive, immer unter der Voraussetzung, dass man den Osten nach den Einheitsfeiern nicht im Regen stehen lässt.\n\nEs geht aber nicht immer nur ums Geld, auch wenn man manchmal fast den Eindruck gewinnen könnte. Wir haben bei der Aufarbeitung der Vergangenheit viel erreicht. Aber auch hier ist noch nichts beendet und vorbei. Wir müssen weiter über die Opfer der Diktatur reden. Wir müssen vor allem mit diesen Opfern reden, mit den Opfern von staatlicher Willkür, von Stasi und Zwangsarbeit. Das Geschrei der Feinde kann man vielleicht vergessen. Den Verrat der Freunde, der Nachbarn, der Kollegen, der Lehrer, ja selbst den der eigenen Eltern, einen solchen Verrat vergisst man nie. Es ist nämlich auch da wirklich noch längst nicht alles gut. Es sind noch längst nicht alle Wunden verheilt. Bei manchen, bei viel zu vielen, weiß ich, dass sie niemals verheilen werden. Das sind Wunden, die eitern und schwären und immer wieder aufbrechen. Das liegt auch daran, dass viele nach 25 Jahren endlich zur Normalität und zur Tagesordnung übergehen möchten. Da sage ich laut und deutlich: Nein.\n\nIch höre sie doch, diese subtilen und versteckten Botschaften. Diese Botschaften lassen sich im Grunde doch so zusammenfassen: Das alles tut uns wirklich leid, aber wir können und wir wollen das Reden über das Leid nicht mehr ertragen, jedenfalls nicht außerhalb der würde- und weihevollen Feierstunden. - Das kann und das darf nicht sein. Das darf diese Gesellschaft, das darf dieses gesamtdeutsche Parlament nicht zulassen. Auch das gehört zum Erbe der Volkskammer, dass wir nicht aufhören dürfen, uns zu erinnern.\n\nIch habe vor kurzem die Studie „Deutschland 2014“ vorgestellt, die klare Belege dafür liefert, wie sehr Ost und West seit der Wiedervereinigung ganz im Sinne Willy Brandts schon zusammengewachsen sind. Aber diese Studie stellt leider auch fest, dass das Vertrauen in Politiker und Parteien in beiden Teilen Deutschlands gleich schlecht ist. Das ist schon eine ziemliche Klatsche für uns Volksvertreter. Die Ostdeutschen sind da durchweg noch skeptischer, kritischer und distanzierter als die Westdeutschen. Die Politik hat im Osten nur 25 Jahre nach der Volkskammerwahl ein massives Glaubwürdigkeitsproblem. Das sollte uns alle sehr nachdenklich machen.\n\nDas würde ich mir jedenfalls wünschen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, meine Damen und Herren, die frei gewählten Abgeordneten der Volkskammer haben eine Entscheidung in Freiheit getroffen, für freie Bürgerinnen und Bürger, die in ihrer ganz großen Mehrheit schon in den Zeiten der Diktatur versucht haben, ein anständiges Leben zu führen. Das gilt es endlich anzuerkennen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n4445,sabine-leidig,\"Ich habe noch zwei Nachfragen, aber ich hatte mir natürlich gewünscht, dass meine eigentliche Frage beantwortet wird. Die Antwort war zu kurz. Ich fände es schade, wenn die Bitte um Beantwor-tung von der Zeit für meine Nachfragen abgehen würde.\n\nIch stelle jetzt sozusagen eine Nachfrage, die ich im Zusammenhang mit der Tätigkeit des Ei-senbahn-Bundesamtes bedeutsam finde. Im Jahr 2010 hat es eine Anhörung gegeben, die sich mit den kaputten Radsatzwellen bei ICE beschäftigt hat. Sie erinnern sich wahrscheinlich, dass es da echte Unfälle und Beinahe-Unfälle gab. Bei dieser Anhörung hat der Präsident des Eisenbahn-Bundesamtes gesagt, dass sie die Konstruktion zugelassen hätten, obwohl die „auf Kante“ genäht war, und dass sie die Sicherheit von solchen Kon-struktionen anhand der Unterlagen der Hersteller und der Betreiber prüfen und geprüft hätten.\n\nIch frage Sie jetzt, wer nach Ihrer Auffassung eigentlich für die Sicherheit im Eisenbahnverkehr verantwortlich ist. Ist es das Eisenbahn-Bundesamt, ist es das Bundesverkehrsministeri-um, also die Bundesregierung, oder ist es die Deutsche Bahn AG?\n\nGenau.\n\nEntschuldigung, Herr Präsident.\n\nUnser Anliegen ist tatsächlich, eine Klärung darüber herbeizuführen, wer für die Eisenbahnsi-cherheit zuständig ist und was geschieht, wenn sich das Eisenbahn-Bundesamt selber nicht aus-reichend in der Lage sieht, die Eisenbahnsicher-heit zu garantieren.\n\nIch möchte jetzt noch einmal mit einer weiteren Frage das Thema quasi untersetzen, nämlich mit der Frage: Bei welchen Planfeststellungen im Zu-sammenhang mit dem Projekt Stuttgart 21 hat das Eisenbahn-Bundesamt eine Befreiung von Min-destanforderungen gewährt, die sich aus der Ei-senbahn-Bau- und Betriebsordnung oder aus der Eisenbahn-Sicherheitsverordnung oder aus ande-ren Vorschriften ergeben? Also: In welchen Fällen hat das Eisenbahn-Bundesamt in Bezug auf das Projekt Stuttgart 21 Ausnahmen genehmigt?\n\nIch möchte nachfragen, welche weiteren Son-dergenehmigungen im Zusammenhang mit Stutt-gart 21 erteilt worden sind. Sie haben gesagt, es ist möglich, solche Sondergenehmigungen zu er-teilen. Ich würde gerne wissen, um welche es sich dabei handelt.\n\nIch möchte noch nachfragen, wie es sich mit der Neigung der Gleise im unterirdischen Bahnhof in Stuttgart verhält und ob und unter welchen Be-dingungen dort eine Ausnahmegenehmigung er-teilt worden ist. Denn die dort geplante Gleisnei-gung ist um ein Vielfaches höher als die ansons-ten genehmigungsfähige Gleisneigung.\n\nIch möchte Sie, Frau Staatssekretärin, einfach fragen, wie Sie es denn interpretieren würden, wenn Sie als Parlamentarier am 12. November in der Fragestunde die Antwort erhalten hätten: „Was Toll Collect betrifft, sind alle Optionen offen“, dann feststellen, dass am 5. November bereits eine Op-tion im Haushaltsplan verankert wurde, und am 14. November erfahren, dass der Minister die Ent-scheidung getroffen hat und jetzt die zuständigen Ausschüsse informiert. Können Sie vielleicht nachvollziehen, dass wir uns da als Parlamentari-er nicht ganz umfassend und auch nicht ganz auf-richtig informiert fühlen?\"\n3811,heiko-maas,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine sehr ver-ehrten Damen und Herren! Als die Verbrechen des NSU vor drei Jahren bekannt wurden, waren alle von uns vor allen Dingen eines, nämlich fas-sungslos: fassungslos angesichts der brutalen Taten, aber auch fassungslos, weil es uns nicht gelungen war, die Morde früher zu stoppen und unsere Mitbürger besser zu schützen, fassungs-los auch wegen des Versagens unseres Staates und seiner Behörden. Wir waren aber auch fas-sungslos, dass neben dem Leid des Verlustes ei-nes nahen Angehörigen anschließend noch das Leid durch Demütigung hinzukam, weil man viel-fach aus Opfern Täter gemacht hat, etwa als sie in den Ermittlungen in den Zusammenhang mit der organisierten Kriminalität gestellt worden sind. Man muss ganz klar sagen, sehr geehrte Frau Pau: Das Leid, das Terroristen angerichtet haben und das durch das Staatsversagen verstärkt wur-de, können wir nicht wiedergutmachen. Aber was wir tun müssen, ist, dafür zu sorgen, dass sich das nie wiederholt.\n\nDamit sich solche Taten nicht wiederholen, sind alle gefordert, die Rechtsprechung, die Gesetzge-bung, die Exekutive, aber auch unsere Gesell-schaft, wir alle.\n\nDie Rechtsprechung handelt zurzeit in Mün-chen. Dort findet vor dem Oberlandesgericht der NSU-Prozess statt. Das ist kein einfaches Verfah-ren. Wir befinden uns beim 155. Verhandlungstag. Die Beteiligten bei Gericht sind mit großer Sorg-falt dabei, die schrecklichen Verbrechen aufzuar-beiten. Dies ist nicht nur sinnvoll, sondern bitter notwendig; denn es trägt dazu bei, neben der Ab-urteilung von Straftaten auch die Wahrheit ans Licht zu bringen, vor allen Dingen das, was noch nicht das Licht der Welt gesehen hat. Das ist wichtig für die Angehörigen der Opfer, und es hilft vor allen Dingen uns, verloren gegangenes Ver-trauen in den Rechtsstaat zurückzugewinnen.\n\nWie wir die Gesetze ändern müssen, damit ras-sistische oder fremdenfeindliche Taten künftig früher erkannt und vor allen Dingen auch verhin-dert werden, darüber werden wir zum Beispiel in der nächsten Woche hier im Plenum miteinander diskutieren. Der Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregie-rung liegt vor. Er hat vor allen Dingen ein Ziel: In Zukunft sollen die Extremismusexperten vom Ge-neralbundesanwalt häufiger und früher in Ermitt-lungen eingreifen und sie auch übernehmen kön-nen.\n\nSchließlich müssen wir darüber hinaus auch die ganz alltägliche Zusammenarbeit der Sicherheits-behörden verbessern. Auch das ist ein Ergebnis des Untersuchungsausschusses gewesen. Staatsanwaltschaften müssen über die Arbeit des Verfassungsschutzes besser informiert werden und häufiger den Kontakt mit diesen Ämtern su-chen. Außerdem wird der Generalbundesanwalt auch der Länderjustiz helfen, rechtsterroristische Zusammenhänge besser erkennen zu können: Welche Codes und Symbole nutzen die Rechts-extremisten? Wie erkennt man, dass sich Ver-dächtige auf ein Leben in der Illegalität vorberei-ten? Diese und viele weitere Informationen müs-sen und werden wir innerhalb der Justiz besser aufarbeiten, weiter verbreiten und einfacher nutz-bar machen, damit rechtsextreme Taten als sol-che rechtzeitig erkannt und auch verhindert wer-den können.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, vor drei Jahren wur-den die NSU-Verbrechen aufgedeckt. Ein Jahres-tag - das klingt ein bisschen nach Geschichte. Tatsache ist aber leider: Rechte Gewalt ist keine Geschichte, sondern brennend aktuell. Rechte Hooligans und militante Neonazis haben das kürz-lich mitten in Deutschland deutlich gemacht; Herr de Maizière hat es bereits angesprochen. Diese Gewalttaten - auch das will ich in aller Deutlich-keit sagen - waren auch eine Kampfansage an unseren Rechtsstaat. Ich sage deshalb sehr deut-lich: Wer die Gewalt auf unsere Straßen trägt, der wird die ganze Härte unseres Rechtsstaates zu spüren bekommen.\n\nWer die Versammlungsfreiheit für Gewaltexzesse missbraucht, für den wird es im Rechtsstaat keine Toleranz geben. Wir werden deshalb aber ganz sicherlich nicht das Demonstrationsrecht ein-schränken müssen. Es ist als Verlängerung der Meinungsfreiheit in einer Demokratie unantastbar.\n\nWir brauchen auch nichts einzuschränken; denn Verabredungen zur Gewaltausübung stehen ganz sicherlich nicht unter dem Schutz von Artikel 8 des Grundgesetzes. Ganz im Gegenteil: Landfrie-densbruch ist die bessere Bezeichnung, und Land-friedensbruch kann mit Freiheitsstrafe bis zu drei Jahren geahndet werden. Ich bin mir absolut si-cher, dass Polizei und Justiz diese Gewalttäter entschlossen ermitteln und auch bestrafen wer-den.\n\nUnd ja, wenn das zutrifft, was wir in den letzten Wochen wahrgenommen haben, wenn Hooligans und Rechtsextreme zukünftig nachhaltig gemein-same Sache machen, dann werden wir auch über-legen müssen, ob auch Hooligans zukünftig ein Thema für den Verfassungsschutz werden kön-nen. Wir brauchen ein gutes und funktionierendes Frühwarnsystem gegen solche Gewalt.\n\nGleichzeitig müssen wir aber auch verhindern, dass junge Leute in die rechte Szene abdriften. Deshalb ist die Präventionsarbeit so wichtig. An-fang 2015 startet das neue Bundesprogramm „Demokratie leben!“. Es ist mit mehr als 30 Millio-nen Euro ausgestattet und schafft Planungssi-cherheit für die kommenden fünf Jahre. Dafür hat die Kollegin Schwesig mit gesorgt.\n\nRechtstaatliche Härte gegen Gewalttäter und kluge Prävention, damit niemand zum Täter wird - ich meine, das sind die richtigen Antworten auf die rechte Gewalt. Diese Antworten sind wir den Op-fern des NSU auch bitter schuldig.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n14092,ralph-lenkert,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Abfallwirtschaft muss schon aus Hygienegründen funktionieren. Das ist klassische kommunale Daseinsvorsorge. Die Linke lehnt jede Privatisierung der Daseinsvorsorge ab.\n\nEs nervt wirklich, dass ich die gleiche Rede halten könnte wie vor drei, zwei oder einem Jahr.\n\nSeit es das Verpackungsgesetz gibt, stiegen die Mengen an Verpackungen Jahr für Jahr. Vermeidung ist der beste Umweltschutz, und das leistet dieses Gesetz nie.\n\nSie von der Koalition schwören auf Produktverantwortung. Welche Produktverantwortung übernehmen denn Hersteller von Verpackungen, wenn sie stets die billigste Entsorgung wählen, wenn nicht Verpackungsvermeidung, sondern Umsatzsteigerung das Unternehmensziel ist? Welche Produktverantwortung gibt es beim Handel, der mithilfe der Dualen Systeme große Kostenbestandteile der Entsorgung des verkauften Verpackungsmülls den Kommunen und damit den Müllgebührenzahlern aufhalst? Gleichzeitig lässt sich dieser Handel von Kundinnen und Kunden die komplette Entsorgung bezahlen. Ob die Koalition dieses geplante Schröpfen von Kommunen und Bürgerinnen und Bürgern als Wertstofftonne oder als Verpackungsgesetz bezeichnet, ist egal. Es ist eine Privatisierung der Abfallwirtschaft und kein Umweltschutz.\n\nDieser Gesetzentwurf entspricht Ihrem Mantra „Privat geht vor Staat“, „Konzernwohl vor Gemeinwohl“. Aber irgendwann müssen Sie von der Koalition endlich einmal Marktwirtschaft begreifen. In der Marktwirtschaft streben Firmen immer nach Gewinn. Kein privates Unternehmen kann ohne Gewinne überleben. Das gilt auch in der Abfallwirtschaft oder bei der Verpackungsentsorgung der Dualen Systeme.\n\nWenn Rewe und Edeka mit einer zweistelligen Millionenspritze die erst betrügerischen und dann konkursbedrohten Dualen Systeme retten, dann machen sie das natürlich nur als Samariter. Wenn Rewe, Procter & Gamble, Edeka und andere die Zentrale Wertstoffstelle Projektgesellschaft über Jahre bezahlen und die Aufsicht über die Stelle führen, die sie später kontrollieren sollen, dann machen sie das natürlich nur aus Idealismus. Wenn diese Projektgesellschaft dann erklärt, eine privatwirtschaftliche Lösung für die Verpackungsentsorgung sei das Beste, dann macht sie das natürlich nur für die Umwelt. Und wenn das Bundeskartellamt dann erklärt, diese private Lösung lade zu Missbrauch ein, dann ist diese Warnung für Sie natürlich nur die Meinung von neidischen Beamten. Begreifen Sie den Widerspruch eigentlich, oder muss ich Sie erst an den Veolia-Müllskandal in Sachsen-Anhalt erinnern, wo Hausmüll unter Bauschutt gemischt wurden, oder an die illegalen Exporte gelber Säcke nach Tschechien oder die Elektrogeräteexporte nach Ghana, alles privat organisiert?\n\nSie wollen mit diesem Gesetz ernsthaft Organisation und Überwachung der Verpackungsentsorgung unter die Kontrolle einer Stiftung stellen, die von den Firmen bezahlt und beaufsichtigt wird, die für die Entsorgung zahlen sollen. Noch mal Marktwirtschaftsschule für die Koalition: Kostensenkung bei der Entsorgung steigert auch die privaten Gewinne und damit die Boni der Manager. Das ist der Markt. Wer da an Selbstkontrolle glaubt, hat Marktwirtschaft nicht begriffen.\n\nEs geht um Gewinnsteigerungen privater Konzerne zulasten der Umwelt und der Kommunen. Den Kommunen drückt dieser Entwurf Pflichten auf, und er beschränkt ihre Entscheidungskompetenz. Ich höre schon Ihre Einwände: Die Kommunen dürfen ja im Beirat mitreden. - Mitreden ja, aber eben nicht mitbestimmen! Klar können die Kommunen Auflagen zur Art und Weise der Verpackungssammlung machen; aber die Auflagen können gekippt werden, sobald sie Geld der Konzerne kosten. Als Krönung gibt diese Koalition noch die Zugriffsrechte auf Altpapier und Altglas an die privaten Entsorgungssysteme. Damit stehlen Sie von der Koalition den kommunalen Unternehmen die Einnahmen aus deren Verkauf.\n\nLiebe Bürgerinnen und Bürger, diese Koalition greift in Ihre Tasche. Sie müssen dann etwa 10 Euro pro Jahr und Person mehr zahlen. Denn um diese Summe steigen dann die Müllgebühren, weil die Einnahmen aus Altpapier und Altglas fehlen. Wir Linken lehnen diese Privatisierung, den Griff in unsere Taschen ab.\n\nLiebe Koalitionäre, noch können wir in den Beratungen diese Privatisierung verhindern. Wenn Sie es mit der Umwelt ernst meinen, wenn Sie ein gutes Verpackungsgesetz verabschieden wollen, Frau Ministerin Hendricks, dann arbeiten Sie mit den Kommunen zusammen und nicht gegen diese.\n\nDavor entsorgen wir diesen Gesetzentwurf - in der blauen, kommunalen Tonne natürlich.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9671,tobias-lindner,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. Vielen Dank, Herr Minister, für Ihren Bericht. - Sie haben eben in einem sehr freundlichen Ton davon gesprochen, dass man die Effizienz in den sozialen Sicherungssystemen erhöhen müsse. Mir ist dabei schlagartig die Frage nach der Finanzierung der geänderten gesetzlichen Grundlagen der Rentenversicherung zu Beginn der Legislaturperiode - ich nenne als Stichwort die Rente mit 63 - eingefallen. Die Erkenntnis ist nicht neu, dass zum Beispiel die Rücklagen in der Rentenkasse in den kommenden Jahren aufgebraucht sein müssten. Welche Schlussfolgerungen ziehen Sie als Finanzminister daraus? Würden Sie die gesetzlichen Änderungen, die getroffen worden sind, eher rückgängig machen, oder würden Sie eine andere Finanzierung wählen?\"\n11394,lisa-paus,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Um es gleich ganz klar zu sagen:\n\nWenn wir als Gesetzgeber noch ernst genommen werden wollen, Herr Kauder, und nicht nur als Erfüllungsgehilfe von Lobbyisten, dann darf dieser Gesetzentwurf den Deutschen Bundestag heute nicht passieren.\n\nDer Gesetzentwurf ist verfassungswidrig.\n\nEr ist ungerecht, er ist unfassbar kompliziert und ein Konjunkturprogramm für Steuerberater. Deswegen werden wir diesen Gesetzentwurf hier heute ablehnen.\n\nDabei ist es eigentlich ganz einfach. Das Bundesverfassungsgericht - wir haben es schon gehört - hat im Dezember 2014 verkündet: Eine pauschale Befreiung von der Erbschaftsteuer für Unternehmenserben, wie es sie bisher gab, darf es zukünftig nicht mehr geben. Es darf sie für Erben von kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen geben, wenn sie Arbeitsplätze erhalten, aber für alle anderen Fälle, so das Gericht, müsse zukünftig eine individuelle Bedürfnisprüfung des Unternehmenserben stattfinden, um festzustellen, ob er nicht doch - und wenn ja, wie viel - Erbschaftsteuer zahlen kann. So weit, so klar.\n\nWas passierte dann? Minister Schäuble legte vor genau einem Jahr einen Referentenentwurf vor, nach dem weiterhin 99 Prozent der Unternehmenserben pauschal von der Erbschaftsteuer befreit sein sollten. Das heißt, dass im Schnitt ganze 95 Personen pro Jahr - ich wiederhole: 95 Personen; das sind nicht meine Zahlen, sondern die Zahlen der Bundesregierung - von der Erbschaftsteuer nicht mehr pauschal befreit werden sollten, weil sie ein Betriebsvermögen von mehr als 20 Millionen Euro geerbt haben. 95 Personen! Ich fand das schon damals zu wenig.\n\nAber was passierte dann? Ein Jahr lang wurde zwischen CDU, CSU und SPD verhandelt, aber nicht etwa darüber, wie die Basis der Steuerzahlenden verbreitert werden könnte. Nein, es wurde zwölf Monate lang daran gearbeitet, dass auch diese 95 Personen weiterhin keine Erbschaftsteuer zahlen müssen. Dazu kann man heute nur sagen: Dieses Ziel haben Sie fast bis auf den letzten Erbfall erreicht. Das war aber nicht die Forderung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts.\n\nSo wird es bei diesem Gesetzentwurf dabei bleiben, dass die, die mehr als 20 Millionen Euro in Deutschland erben, effektiv 3 Prozent Steuern zahlen, während diejenigen, die zum Beispiel zwischen 100 000 und 200 000 Euro erben, effektiv das Fünffache an Erbschaftsteuer zahlen müssen, nämlich 15 Prozent. Das nenne ich ungerecht, meine Damen und Herren und Herr Schneider.\n\nDeshalb, Herr Schneider, wäre eine Flat Tax, zum Beispiel 15 Prozent für alle und nicht nur für die Mittelschicht, jedenfalls im Vergleich zu diesem Gesetzentwurf deutlich gerechter.\n\n- Er war ja vorher da. - Dieses Gesetz wird in den nächsten Jahren übrigens auch zu weniger Einnahmen führen und nicht zu mehr. Auch das ist völlig klar.\n\nJetzt gibt es das Argument, man müsse das Gesetz trotzdem unbedingt wegen der ansonsten drohenden Rechtsunsicherheit beschließen. Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, zunächst hat das Bundesverfassungsgericht selbst schon klargestellt, dass das nicht der Fall ist. Im Übrigen: Was kann es Rechtsunsichereres geben als ein neu beschlossenes Gesetz, von dem alle eines ganz genau wissen, nämlich dass es verfassungswidrig ist? Das Einzige, was wir nicht wissen, ist, wann genau was wie für verfassungswidrig erklärt wird. Das ist wirklich die Königsdisziplin der Rechtsunsicherheit, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nUm es noch einmal konkret zu erläutern - auch für Herrn Schneider -, dass doch mehr Änderungen gekommen sind, als Sie es eben behauptet haben: Dieses Gesetz ist verfassungswidrig, insbesondere weil Sie auf den letzten Metern Bewertungsregeln eingeführt haben, durch die Betriebsvermögen im Vergleich zu sonstigem Vermögen deutlich gesenkt werden. Dabei war genau das schon 2006 vom Verfassungsgericht für verfassungswidrig erklärt worden.\n\nDas heißt konkret: War ein Familienunternehmen nach den Regeln des Ursprungsgesetzes noch 80 Millionen Euro wert, so ist es nach dem vorliegenden Entwurf plötzlich bis zu 60 Prozent weniger wert, also nur noch 32 Millionen Euro. Auf die darauf fälligen Steuern gibt es dann auch noch einen mindestens 30-prozentigen Rabatt, weil die Steuer bei Betriebsvermögen zehn Jahre zinslos gestundet werden kann. Dann gilt noch eine Extraregelung für Investitionen. Und dann kommt noch durch die pauschale Verschonung nach dem sogenannten Abschmelzmodell für Vermögen zwischen 26 und 90 Millionen Euro ein reduzierter Steuersatz dazu.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, lassen Sie uns diesen Irrsinn heute nicht beschließen. Lassen Sie das nicht zu. Lehnen Sie den Gesetzentwurf ab, sonst wird es der Bundesrat tun.\"\n2174,halina-wawzyniak,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Alle Jahre wieder reden wir über die Möglichkeit von Einwohnerinnen und Einwohnern, über Gesetze oder Gegenstände der politischen Willensbildung selbst und direkt zu entscheiden. Alle bis auf die Union wollen, dass Einwohnerinnen und Einwohner direkt entscheiden können. Die Linke hat nun heute hier einen Gesetzentwurf vorgelegt, mit dem dies praktisch umgesetzt werden kann.\n\nDer Gesetzentwurf - darauf hat die Frau Präsidentin schon hingewiesen - enthält sowohl die Änderungen des Grundgesetzes, um Volksinitiativen, Volksbegehren und Volksentscheide zu ermöglichen, aber er enthält auch - und das ist eine Neuerung - ein Bundesabstimmungsgesetz.\n\nIn dem Bundesabstimmungsgesetz regeln wir konkret das Verfahren einer Volksabstimmung. Wir haben hier einen Vorschlag von „Mehr Demokratie e. V.“ aufgenommen - das haben wir im Gesetzentwurf auch transparent verzeichnet -\n\nund diesen leicht verändert übernommen.\n\nWir wollen, dass 100 000 Wahlberechtigte Initiativen in den Bundestag einbringen können. Wir wollen, dass ein Volksbegehren zustande gekommen ist, wenn mindestens 1 Million Wahlberechtigte binnen neun Monaten diesem zugestimmt haben. Bei einem das Grundgesetz ändernden Volksbegehren müssen 2 Millionen Wahlberechtigte unterschreiben.\n\nWir wollen - und das ist uns besonders wichtig -, dass alle seit fünf Jahren in Deutschland lebenden Menschen abstimmungsberechtigt sind.\n\nWir wollen, dass auch 16-Jährige abstimmen dürfen.\n\nAusgeschlossen sind Volksinitiativen zu den in den Artikeln 1 und 20 Grundgesetz niedergelegten Grundsätzen und zum Haushaltsgesetz, und natürlich darf kein Grundrecht in seinem Wesensgehalt angetastet werden.\n\nWir wollen auch, dass diejenigen mit entscheiden können, die derzeit nach § 13 Bundeswahlgesetz ausgeschlossen sind. Das betrifft zum Beispiel die Menschen, die unter Vollbetreuung stehen.\n\nUm vorwegzunehmen, was an Gegenargumenten kommen könnte: Die Todesstrafe ist damit einem Volksentscheid entzogen; denn sie verstößt unzweifelhaft gegen die Menschenwürde.\n\nUnser Gesetzentwurf ist ein Angebot. SPD und Grüne haben sicherlich Änderungsbedarf. Ich kann Sie nur auffordern: Äußern Sie den! Wir sind bereit, mit Ihnen in Gespräche einzutreten. Unser Gesetzentwurf ist ein Angebot. Wir wollen es gemeinsam schaffen, Volksbegehren, Volksinitiativen und Volksentscheide zur Realität werden zu lassen. Wir kleben nicht an Semikolons, wir kleben nicht an Kommas. Wir laden Sie ein: Diskutieren Sie mit uns gemeinsam.\n\nNun führen wir diese Debatte nicht zum ersten Mal. Ich will deshalb präventiv auf einige Argumente eingehen, die insbesondere der Kollege Helmut Brandt, der heute gar nicht spricht, in der Vergangenheit vorgetragen hat.\n\nAm 8. Juli 2010 sagte er, „dass durch diese Form des Plebiszits in der Weimarer Zeit das Volk aufgewühlt und gespalten und das Vertrauen in das Parlament zusätzlich erschüttert wurde.“ Ich finde es, ehrlich gesagt, etwas bedauerlich, dass das Argument Weimar immer wieder vorgetragen wird. Dieses Argument ist nicht tragfähig.\n\nJens Kersten weist in dem sehr lesenswerten Buch Weimars lange Schatten - „Weimar“ als Argument nach 1945 nach, dass nach Memoiren und rückschauenden Schriften politischer Akteure der damaligen Zeit das Institut der direkten Demokratie überwiegend positiv bis wohlwollend neutral besetzt war. Kann es nicht vielleicht sein, dass die Weimarer Republik daran gescheitert ist, dass es zu wenige Demokratinnen und Demokraten gegeben hat, die bereit waren, sie zu verteidigen? Mir kommt es immer so vor, als würde Weimar zitiert, weil das gut ankommt. Aber das Kernproblem des Scheiterns der Weimarer Republik wurde nicht begriffen.\n\nEine Demokratie muss von Demokratinnen und Demokraten demokratisch verteidigt werden.\n\nAm 14. Juni 2013 erklärte der Kollege, dass ein Volksentscheid „ein auf einen Punkt reduziertes Verfahren, bei dem die gestellte Frage nur mit Ja oder Nein zu beantworten ist“, sei. Ich muss Ihnen - mit Verlaub - ehrlich sagen: Das ist kein Argument gegen direkte Demokratie. Wenn wir hier im Plenum sitzen, tun wir nichts anderes, als eine gestellte Frage regelmäßig mit Ja, Nein oder Enthaltung zu beantworten.\n\nDas Verfahren der direkten Demokratie ist nicht reduziert. Bis es zu einem Volksentscheid kommt, dauert es eine Weile, und das Für und Wider kann öffentlich abgewogen werden. Wer sich die Realität der Behandlung von Vorlagen in Ausschüssen und hier im Plenum vor Augen führt, der könnte möglicherweise sogar zu der Annahme kommen, dass bei einem Gesetzgebungsverfahren über Volksentscheide eine umfassendere Behandlung mit einer Sachfrage vorliegt als bei einer Abstimmung hier im Bundestag.\n\nAm 14. Juni 2013 sagte der Kollege Brandt, es müsse bedacht werden, „dass bei Volksentscheiden die Gefahr besteht, dass wichtige Sachfragen nicht nach sachbezogenen Gesichtspunkten entschieden werden, sondern danach, wie schlagwortartig und populistisch Parolen unter das Volk gebracht werden“.\n\nAm 8. Juli 2010 ergänzte er, „dass wichtige Fragen nicht nach sachbezogenen Gesichtspunkten entschieden werden, sondern danach, welche Interessengruppe die bessere Lobbyarbeit macht“.\n\nEhrlich gesagt: Das finde ich schon wieder lustig; denn es suggeriert, dass wir alle hier im Parlament völlig frei von Schlagworten und völlig frei von populistischen Parolen Entscheidungen treffen, und es suggeriert, dass das Parlament ein Raum frei von Lobbyarbeit von Inte-ressengruppen ist. Wir wissen alle, dass dem so nicht ist. Wir sollten einfach zur Kenntnis nehmen: Wir sind nicht die besseren Menschen. Wir sollten auch nicht so tun, als wären wir es.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss.\n\nMit unserem Gesetzentwurf wollen wir ein ganz besonderes Maß an Transparenz herstellen; denn die Einflussnahme Dritter soll dadurch deutlich werden, dass Geld- und Sachspenden zur Unterstützung eines Volksentscheids ab 2 000 Euro offengelegt werden sollen. Ich bitte Sie also: Prüfen Sie unseren Gesetzentwurf - ich meine nicht Sie von der CDU/CSU; Sie machen da eh nicht mit -, kommen Sie mit uns ins Gespräch, und lassen Sie uns gemeinsam mehr direkte Demokratie einführen.\n\nHerr Frieser, ich bin mit Ihnen einer Meinung, dass wir uns in einzelnen Punkten durchaus verständigen und einigen könnten. Ich frage Sie deshalb, wie Sie es sich erklären, dass es uns bei bestimmten Themen, in denen wir uns einig sind und wir als Linke Formulierungen vorlegen, die wortgleich mit Ihren sind, unmöglich ist, einen gemeinsamen Antrag zustande zu bringen, weil es in Ihrer Fraktion offensichtlich eine Kauder-Doktrin gibt, nach der wir nicht mit Ihnen gemeinsam Anträge vorlegen können. Können Sie mir das erklären, wenn Sie sagen, dass alles so gut funktioniert?\"\n6822,karamba-diaby,\"Frau Ministerin, wir sind uns darüber einig, dass das Anerkennungsgesetz ein hervorragendes Mittel ist, um dem Fachkräftemangel zu begegnen. Die positiven Ergebnisse, die Sie erwähnt haben, zeigen das. Allerdings gibt es einige Herausforderungen, die auch im Bericht erwähnt wurden. Wir wissen, dass von den erwarteten 500 000 Fachkräften, die wir brauchen, bis 2012 lediglich 25 000 über Bluecard kamen. Von den 26 000 Anträgen, die wir bis 2013 hatten, sind lediglich 9,4 Prozent aus dem Ausland und davon 2,3 Prozent aus Drittstaaten gestellt worden. Wir wissen auch, dass es einige Benachteiligungen und Ungleichbehandlungen gegenüber Menschen aus Drittstaaten gibt; das wird auf Seite 26 des Berichts erwähnt. Deshalb meine Frage an Sie: Welche Maßnahmen sind vorgesehen, um diese Lücke zu schließen, damit wir das erwartete Ergebnis demnächst erreichen können?\"\n7949,alexander-neu,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Ich finde, es ist vielsagend, wenn nur halbherzig über die Fluchtursachen gesprochen wird. Das eine Mal hört man, das „Schleusertum“ sei eine Fluchtursache. Das andere Mal hört man, die unzureichende Finanzierung der Flüchtlingslager sei ein Grund. Zu der Vielzahl der Gründe, die genannt werden, gehört auch die fragile Staatlichkeit. Aber die Gründe für die Fragilität der Staatlichkeit einiger Staaten werden nicht genannt. Es ist kein Zufall, dass die meisten Flüchtlinge, die derzeit nach Europa kommen, aus Syrien, Libyen, Afghanistan, dem Kosovo oder dem Irak kommen. Das hat etwas mit der westlichen Kriegsführung in diesen Ländern zu tun, die dazu dient, die eigenen Interessen durchzusetzen. Das schafft Fragilität.\n\nWir hören auch von sogenannten Wirtschaftsflüchtlingen. Ich würde eher sagen: Es sind Armutsflüchtlinge. Die Ursache für deren Flucht liegt darin begründet, dass es Handelsabkommen gibt, die Handelsliberalisierungen vorsehen, die die Wirtschaft in deren Heimat - sei es die Landwirtschaft, sei es die Industrie - vollends kaputtmachen. Jüngst wurden EPA verabschiedet, sogenannte neue Handelsabkommen mit Afrika, die erneut einen Armutsschub auf dem afrikanischen Kontinent hervorrufen werden und weitere Flüchtlinge produzieren werden.\n\nDeutschland ist Exportvizeweltmeister. Damit exportiert Deutschland aber auch Armut. Die wirklichen Fluchtursachen zu benennen, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, trauen Sie sich nicht; denn das würde bedeuten, dass wir die Außenpolitik, die Sicherheitspolitik und die Außenwirtschaftspolitik gründlich überdenken müssten.\n\nDie zur Beratung anstehende Mission EUNAVFORMED ist keine Ursachenbekämpfung, noch nicht einmal in Ansätzen. EUNAVFOR MED ist lediglich und ausschließlich Symptombekämpfung. Man hat den Eindruck, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, dass es unter betriebswirtschaftlichen Gesichtspunkten günstiger ist, eine Symptombekämpfung vorzunehmen, als das westliche Wirtschaftssystem, den Neoliberalismus, zu einem solidarischen Wirtschaftssystem auf globaler Ebene umzubauen.\n\nKommen wir ganz konkret zu EUNAVFOR MED. Laut dem Schreiben des Auswärtigen Amtes und des Verteidigungsministeriums vom 14. September an den Bundestag sind die Ziele: erstens Seenotrettung, zweitens Bekämpfung der Schleusernetzwerke. In dem uns nun vorliegenden Antrag der Bundesregierung steht nur noch Schleuserbekämpfung.\n\nDie Seenotrettung wird gewissermaßen abgetan mit dem Hinweis: Das ist eine völkerrechtliche Verpflichtung; das muss man nicht als Ziel formulieren. - Ich frage: Warum denn nicht? Warum keine Aufwertung der Seenotrettung als Ziel in dem Antrag? Damit würden zumindest durch die Bundesregierung und dann durch den Bundestag das Rückgrat und die Position der Soldatinnen und Soldaten auf den deutschen Schiffen gestärkt. Aber genau das machen Sie nicht. Die Aussagen über Seenotrettung, die in den letzten Wochen in den Vordergrund geschoben wurden, erscheinen vor diesem Hintergrund eher als Propagandatrick.\n\nDie Flüchtlingsrettung ist weder prioritäres Ziel noch überhaupt ein Ziel von EUNAVFOR MED. Dies belegen noch zwei weitere Punkte:\n\nDer Kollege Nouripour hat in der letzten Woche darauf hingewiesen, dass in dem Moment, als das nationale Kommando auf das EU-Kommando übergegangen ist, die Zahl der geretteten Flüchtlinge von 6 000 auf 2 500 gesunken ist. Um kein Missverständnis aufkommen zu lassen: Es gab nicht weniger Flüchtlinge; es gab nur weniger Gerettete. Die Frage ist: Wo sind die Übrigen geblieben? Sind sie ertrunken?\n\nDer zweite Aspekt. Im Begründungsteil des Antrags der Bundesregierung wird auch nicht auf die Seenotrettung verwiesen, sondern es heißt - ich zitiere -:\n\n… Umleitung von Schleuserschiffen im südlichen und zentralen Mittelmeer, seewärts der Küstenmeere der betroffenen Küstenstaaten …\n\nEine sehr verquaste Formulierung! Auch ich habe überlegt: Was könnte das heißen? Für mich heißt das letztendlich: Es geht darum, die Schiffe aufs offene Meer Richtung Süden abzudrängen, Richtung afrikanischer Kontinent. Sollte diese Interpretation zutreffen, dann wäre das nicht nur ein Skandal, sondern ein Verbrechen an den Menschen, die man auf diese Weise abschiebt.\n\nIch fasse zusammen:\n\nErstens. EUNAVFOR MED ist Symptombekämpfung und kein Beitrag zur Ursachenbekämpfung. Die Flüchtlinge werden auf anderen Wegen nach Europa kommen, wenn die Ursachen nicht bekämpft werden.\n\nZweitens. EUNAVFOR MED bedient sich einer humanitären Rhetorik, um öffentliche Zustimmung zu gewinnen. Das tatsächliche Ziel ist es, Flüchtlinge davon abzuhalten, nach Europa zu kommen; darin eingeschlossen ist auch die Umleitung der Schiffe zurück in Richtung Afrika.\n\nDrittens. Die Mission EUNAVFOR MED soll in „Sophia“ umbenannt werden. Sophia ist ein Mädchen, das am 24. August auf einer deutschen Fregatte im Mittelmeer geboren wurde. Angesichts dessen, was der wirkliche Zweck dieser Mission ist, finde ich es wirklich pietätlos, diese Mission in „Sophia“ umzubenennen.\n\nIch möchte keine Zweifel aufkommen lassen: Ich kritisiere nicht die Soldatinnen und Soldaten auf den deutschen Schiffen. Im Gegenteil: Ich bin überzeugt: Sie wollen helfen, und sie helfen.\n\nAber ich habe ein Problem mit dem Zynismus der Politik der Bundesregierung und der Europäischen Union im Umgang mit Flüchtlingen. Daher lehnen wir den Antrag der Bundesregierung ab.\n\nZu dem Entschließungsantrag der Grünen enthalten wir uns. Er zielt darauf ab, dass die Bundeswehr nicht als Teil von EUNAVFOR MED agiert, sondern nationale Flüchtlingsrettung betreibt. Das ist temporär in Ordnung, aber dabei wird vergessen, dass wir zivile Seenotrettungskapazitäten aufbauen müssen.\n\nDas ist das, was wir fordern, um auf diese Weise die Bundeswehr aus dem Mittelmeer abzuziehen.\n\nDanke.\"\n9238,peter-weiß,\"Herr Präsident! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn man das System der Rentenversicherung richtig in den Blick nehmen will, dann muss man auch ein bisschen zurückgucken. Die gesetzliche Rentenversicherung ist eine tolle Erfindung gewesen, aber sie hat über Jahrzehnte hinweg nie zu finanziellen Leistungen geführt, die wirklich den Lebensstandard der älteren Generation gesichert haben; sie war nur ein Beitrag.\n\n1957 ist es mit der Einführung der dynamischen Rente zum ersten Mal gelungen, die Rentenversicherung so umzubauen, dass sie Leistungen erbringt, durch die wirklich der Lebensstandard im Alter gesichert werden kann. Der Zeitpunkt der Einführung der dynamischen Rente ist das entscheidende Geburtsdatum.\n\nDas war deswegen möglich, weil wir nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg ein Wirtschaftswunder erlebt haben und weil in Deutschland Jahr für Jahr mehr Kinder geboren wurden, wodurch die Zahl der Beschäftigten in Deutschland angestiegen ist. Das war damals möglich mit dem Höhepunkt 1964, als die meisten Kinder in Deutschland geboren wurden, nämlich 1,35 Millionen, und das hat natürlich auch dazu geführt, dass das Rentenniveau steigen konnte, weil eine große Zahl von Beitragszahlerinnen und Beitragszahlern einer damals vergleichsweise geringen Zahl von Rentnerinnen und Rentnern gegenüberstand.\n\nSeither hat sich die Welt aber geändert: 1960 haben die Menschen, die in Rente gingen, im Durchschnitt 10 Jahre lang Rente beziehen können, bis sie verstorben sind. Heute beträgt die durchschnittliche Rentenbezugsdauer 20 Jahre. Man profitiert also doppelt so lang von seinem Anspruch auf eine gesetzliche Rente. Daneben hat sich seitdem die Zahl der Kinder verringert. Seit 1964 nimmt die Zahl der Kinder, die jährlich geboren werden, Jahr für Jahr ab.\n\nDeswegen hat sich auch das Verhältnis zwischen der Zahl der Menschen, die eine Rente beziehen, und der Zahl derjenigen, die aufgrund ihrer Arbeit Beiträge in das Rentenversicherungssystem zahlen, verändert.\n\nWir haben ein umlagefinanziertes Rentenversicherungssystem. Das, was heute eingezahlt wird, wird morgen für die Rentnerinnen und Rentner ausgegeben. 1960 kamen auf einen Rentner noch drei Erwerbstätige.\n\nHerr Birkwald, egal welche Zahl Sie nehmen, der Punkt ist der: Die Zahl derjenigen, die mit ihren Beiträgen das finanzieren müssen, was die Rentnerinnen und Rentner an Rente bekommen, nimmt kontinuierlich ab und wird auch in den kommenden Jahren kontinuierlich abnehmen.\n\nEinerseits wird die Rentenbezugsdauer länger - es ist ja schön, dass wir alle länger leben können und dürfen -, andererseits nimmt die Zahl derjenigen ab, die diese Rente für die große Zahl von Rentnerinnen und Rentnern aktuell finanzieren. Diese beiden Entwicklungen müssen in einem Rentenversicherungssystem, das auf Generationengerechtigkeit und dem Generationenvertrag fußt, Konsequenzen haben, und eine Konsequenz kann nur sein, dass die Belastungen und Entlastungen zwischen den Generationen gerecht verteilt werden. Das ist die Philosophie unserer Rentenpolitik: Generationengerechtigkeit.\n\nWas die Grünen vorschlagen, bedeutet nichts anderes, um es mit einem Satz zu sagen, als den Ausstieg aus der Generationengerechtigkeit und eine Entsolidarisierung unserer Gesellschaft.\n\n- Was die Linke vorschlägt, ist Entsolidarisierung. So ist es richtig, danke.\n\nWir haben noch etwas gemacht, was ebenfalls zur Generationengerechtigkeit beiträgt, hier bisher aber nicht erwähnt worden ist: Die gesetzliche Rente wird längst nicht mehr nur aus Beiträgen finanziert, sondern wir haben durch einen ständig steigenden Zuschuss aus dem Bundeshaushalt, aus dem Steueraufkommen, alle Einkunftsarten und damit alle Mitbürgerinnen und Mitbürger an der Finanzierung der gesetzlichen Rente beteiligt. Mit dem kürzlich verabschiedeten Bundeshaushalt 2016 steigen diese Beiträge des Bundes zur Rentenversicherung auf insgesamt 86,2 Milliarden Euro an. Wir finanzieren also die solidarisch finanzierte Rente zusätzlich aus Steuermitteln. Das ist der größte Ausgabenblock in unserem Bundeshaushalt.\n\nUm die Vergleichsziffer zu nennen: Die Gesamtausgaben werden sich, so der Haushaltsplan der Deutschen Rentenversicherung, im kommenden Jahr auf 283,3 Milliarden Euro belaufen, davon stammen eben 86,2 Milliarden Euro aus Steuermitteln. Das heißt, wir haben die Solidarität in der Rentenversicherung zusätzlich gestärkt.\n\nNun ist es richtig: Wenn man im Alter auskömmlich leben will, wird alleine das, was man aus der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung bekommt, nicht ausreichen. Deswegen ist es übrigens auch schon in der Vergangenheit richtig gewesen - das hat auch ein Großteil der Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer in Deutschland gemacht -, sich fürs Alter etwas anzusparen. Für viele in Deutschland gilt: Ich schaue, dass ich zu Wohneigentum komme. Auch das ist ein Stück Alterssicherung.\n\nWir haben Instrumente entwickelt, um die betriebliche Altersversorgung und die private kapitalgedeckte Altersversorgung attraktiver zu machen, nicht deshalb, weil in dem einen oder anderen System die Rendite höher ist - Sie haben mich dazu aus dem Handelsblatt zitiert -, sondern weil es sinnvoll ist, neben einer umlagefinanzierten Altersvorsorge, die darauf aufgebaut ist, dass die nächste Generation finanziell für einen einsteht, auch ein Element einer Altersvorsorge zu haben, das man selber angespart hat - mit staatlicher Unterstützung und mit Unterstützung des Arbeitgebers. Das ist der Sinn eines Alterssicherungssystems, das damit eben nicht auf einem, sondern auf zwei Beinen steht. Diese Lebensweisheit gilt immer: Es ist besser, auf zwei Beinen zu stehen als nur auf einem. Das ist die Philosophie unseres Rentensystems.\n\nNun ist mittlerweile der einzige Faktor, der diesen Ausgleich zwischen Alt und Jung, also zwischen den Generationen, schafft, der sogenannte Nachhaltigkeitsfaktor. Dieser Nachhaltigkeitsfaktor muss aber nicht zwingend, wie von den Linken dargestellt, zu einem sinkenden Rentenniveau führen.\n\nIm Jahr 2015 zum Beispiel hat der Nachhaltigkeitsfaktor bei der Rentenanpassung zum 1. Juli positiv gewirkt.\n\nDas heißt, er hat zu einer höheren Rentenanpassung geführt, weil aufgrund der hervorragenden wirtschaftlichen Lage in unserem Land die Zahl derjenigen, die arbeiten und Sozialversicherungsbeiträge zahlen, so deutlich stärker gestiegen ist als die Zahl derjenigen, die in Rente gegangen sind. Es ist doch offenkundig, dass die Frage, wie sich das Rentenniveau in Zukunft entwickelt, zuallererst und eigentlich ausschließlich mit der Frage zusammenhängt: Wie entwickelt sich die Wirtschaft in unserem Land, und wie viele sozialversicherungspflichtig Beschäftigte gibt es, die Beiträge zahlen? Wenn deren Zahl nach oben geht, dann bedeutet das: Der Nachhaltigkeitsfaktor wirkt positiv. Wenn deren Zahl nach unten geht, wirkt er negativ.\n\nVerehrte Damen und Herren, die beste Rentenpolitik, die beste Politik, um auch für die Zukunft gute Renten zu sichern, ist gute Beschäftigung und gutes Wirtschaftswachstum.\n\nBitte schön.\n\nHerr Kollege Birkwald, in Ihrer Rede vorhin haben Sie gesagt, es gebe auch aus Ihrer Sicht positive Entwicklungen. Zum Beispiel würden Sie davon ausgehen, dass die Flüchtlinge, die derzeit zu uns ins Land kommen, alle einmal Rentenbeitragszahlerinnen und \u001ebeitragszahler würden. Das haben Sie vorgetragen.\n\nDas ist richtig. Das ist genau die Wirkung, die ich beschrieben habe. Wenn die Zahl der Menschen, die bei uns in Deutschland Arbeit haben und Beiträge zahlen, in Relation zu der Zahl der Rentnerinnen und Rentner nicht sinkt, sondern steigt, dann ist die Berechnung des Ministeriums nicht mehr richtig; dann korrigiert sie sich ins Gegenteil. Das habe ich vorgetragen.\n\nDas beweist nur, dass eines richtig ist: Der Nachhaltigkeitsfaktor und auch der früher von der CDU und Norbert Blüm vorgeschlagene demografische Faktor haben einen Ausgleich geschaffen zwischen der Generation, die arbeitet und Beiträge zahlt, und der Generation, die im Ruhestand ist und Rente bezieht.\n\nWenn wir dafür sorgen, wie wir es zurzeit in der glücklichen Situation in Deutschland machen, dass sozialversicherungspflichtige Beschäftigung zunimmt, dann wirkt der Nachhaltigkeitsfaktor positiv. Das ist das, was ich sagen wollte.\n\nVerehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen und auch alle Bürgerinnen und Bürger, die fragen, wie es weitergeht: Entscheidend sind die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung, die Lohnentwicklung und die Frage, wie viele Beschäftigte wir haben. Aber bei unserer demografischen Entwicklung gibt es nur eine Lösung: Belastungen und Entlastungen müssen generationengerecht aufgeteilt werden, statt eine Generation einseitig zu bevorzugen oder einseitig zu belasten.\n\nWir haben als Große Koalition, die aus einer sehr starken CDU/CSU-Bundestagsfraktion und einer etwas kleineren SPD-Bundestagsfraktion besteht - um Ihnen die Dimensionen zu erklären -,\n\ndie gute Lage, die wir in Deutschland wirtschaftlich und in der Rentenversicherung haben - der Kollege Rosemann hat in seiner Rede zu Recht darauf hingewiesen -, dazu genutzt, erstmals seit 25 Jahren keine Leistungseinschränkungen, sondern Leistungsverbesserungen in das Rentenrecht einzuführen. Ich finde das bemerkenswert. Ja, eine gute wirtschaftliche Lage kann man auch dazu nutzen, etwas Gutes für unsere Rentnerinnen und Rentner zu tun, und das haben wir gemacht.\n\nUns als Union war besonders wichtig, dass wir etwas für diejenigen tun - das sind vor allem Frauen -, die wegen der Kindererziehung früher meist aus dem Erwerbsleben ausgestiegen sind. Sie bekommen mit der Mütterrente eine stärkere Anerkennung.\n\nGenauso wichtig war es uns, etwas für diejenigen zu tun, die wegen Krankheit oder eines Unfalls vorzeitig aus dem Erwerbsleben austeigen müssen und Erwerbsminderungsrente beziehen.\n\nVerehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, diese gute Entwicklung der Rentenversicherung führt auch dazu, dass wieder Rentenerhöhungen für die aktuellen Rentnerinnen und Rentner möglich sind, die deutlich über der Inflationsrate liegen.\n\nWir stehen jetzt am Jahresende 2015 und blicken dem Weihnachtsfest und dem Jahreswechsel entgegen. Die gute Nachricht für die Rentnerinnen und Rentner für das kommende Jahr ist, dass voraussichtlich die Rentenanpassung 2016 zwischen 4 und 5 Prozent liegen wird. Das ist die höchste Rentenanpassung seit Jahren und eine gute Aussicht für die Rentnerinnen und Rentner in Deutschland für das kommende Jahr. Darauf können wir stolz sein.\n\nAber ich möchte nicht nur den Rentnerinnen und Rentnern ein gutes neues Jahr wünschen, sondern auch Ihnen, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ein frohes und gesegnetes Weihnachtsfest und ein erfolgreiches Jahr 2016.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n1361,inge-hoger,\"Herr Staatsminister Roth, gibt es vonseiten der Bundesregierung Konsequenzen, zum Beispiel in Sachen Sicherheitskooperation, der Zusammenarbeit bei der Polizei, mit dem Militär und mit dem Geheimdienst, um die ägyptische Regierung zu veranlassen, die Todesstrafen auszusetzen und in Zukunft keine mehr zu verhängen?\n\nUnterstützt die Bundesregierung die Forderung von Amnesty International nach einem Moratorium für Ägypten?\n\nHerr Staatsminister Roth, ist Ihnen nicht bekannt, dass die türkische Regierung schon seit längerem jihadistische Gruppen unterstützt, Waffenlieferungen über die Grenze zulässt und ihnen die Türkei als Rückzugsgebiet zur Verfügung stellt? Wie kann man da noch von einer neutralen Rolle der Türkei sprechen?\"\n15617,daniela-kolbe,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich bin bei dieser Rede heute ein bisschen aufgeregt. Das liegt nicht so sehr an der Debatte selber, sondern ich habe gerade das erste Mal überhaupt meine kleine Tochter in der Kinderbetreuung des Deutschen Bundestages untergebracht und hoffe, dass das alles gut klappt. Deswegen bin ich an einem zügigen Verlauf der Diskussion interessiert.\n\nIch will mich aber bei der Verwaltung des Bundestages bedanken, dass das möglich ist. Das ist totaler Luxus, wenn es um die Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf geht.\n\nWir sind damit schon ein bisschen beim Thema der in der DDR Geschiedenen. Denn es ist klar, dass die staatlichen Rahmenbedingungen sehr wohl die Umstände beeinflussen können, wie Frauen - und insbesondere Mütter - ihr Leben gestalten bzw. was für ein Leben sie während der Zeit des Rentenbezugs führen können.\n\nIch will mich deswegen heute auf die in der DDR Geschiedenen fokussieren. Im Antrag wird zutreffend geschildert, dass Frauen, die sich zu DDR-Zeiten haben scheiden lassen - gerade wenn sie viele Kinder erzogen haben und, was durchaus vorgekommen ist, auch ausgestiegen sind -, bei der Wiedervereinigung zum Teil massive, frappierende Nachteile erlitten haben. Sie haben quasi das Schlechte aus beiden Systemen abbekommen. Das DDR-Rentenrecht kannte Bevorzugungen von Frauen und Müttern. Diese sind mit der Wiedervereinigung weggefallen. Die DDR kannte aber keinen Versorgungsausgleich. Das heißt, die betroffenen Frauen haben keine Anwartschaften von ihren Exmännern übertragen bekommen.\n\nDas führt dazu, dass wir heutzutage sehr viele schlimme Geschichten hören. Ich selber beheimate sozusagen die Treffen meiner lokalen Gruppe des Vereins. Es wird einem mulmig, es wird einem ganz anders, wenn man die Geschichten von einem Leben voller Arbeit, voller Kindererziehung hört. Man vertraute voll auf die Ehe und arbeitete im Betrieb mit. Und heute stehen diese Frauen mit Niedrigstrenten da und gehen aus Scham nicht zum Sozialamt.\n\nTatsächlich hat uns der UN-Ausschuss zur Beseitigung der Diskriminierung der Frau ins Stammbuch geschrieben, der Bundestag solle tätig werden. Wir als SPD wollen das auch tun, und zwar nicht nur bezogen auf die in der DDR Geschiedenen, sondern auch auf andere betroffene Gruppen. Uns ist das wichtig. Denn wir wissen: Ganz viele Menschen in der ehemaligen DDR haben noch heute das Gefühl, dass ein Teil ihrer Lebensleistung überhaupt nicht anerkannt wird. Sie fühlen sich sozusagen so, als würde vieles von dem, was sie geleistet haben, überhaupt nicht wichtig genommen.\n\nWir wollen dieses Thema angehen und haben deswegen in unser aktuelles Regierungsprogramm eine Fondslösung hineingeschrieben. Wir sind damit - ich habe es noch einmal nachgelesen - im Vergleich zum Programm der Linken konkreter. In deren Programm steht lediglich, man wolle Lebensleistung anerkennen. Auch in Ihrem Antrag ist es nebulös. Wir wollen Fehler korrigieren.\n\nAlso ich finde, wir als SPD können durchaus stolz sein. Wir sind hier sehr konkret und wollen das Thema angehen.\n\nUns ist klar: Es ist kompliziert.\n\nEs kann nicht wirklich nicht Ihr Ernst sein, dass Sie uns in Bezug auf den Antrag hinsichtlich der in der DDR Geschiedenen heute beschließen lassen wollen, dass die Bundesregierung morgen, am 30. Juni 2017, einen Masterplan vorlegen soll. Das ist wirklich ein bisschen albern.\n\nIch fände es vielmehr gut, wenn Sie einmal ganz konkret formulieren würden, was Sie für diese Gruppe tun wollen. Herr Weiler, ich habe Ihren Vorschlag noch nicht richtig verstanden.\n\n- Den können Sie mir erklären. Erklären Sie ihn aber vor allen Dingen der Bundeskanzlerin, erklären Sie ihn denjenigen, die beim nächsten Mal bei den Koalitionsverhandlungen mit dabei sind. Wir haben nämlich bei den letzten Koalitionsverhandlungen das Thema Härtefallfonds behandelt. Der ist - jetzt verrate ich einmal ein Geheimnis - nicht an meiner Fraktion gescheitert.\n\nEs ist also kompliziert, hier wirklich etwas zu tun. Das ist - ich komme noch einmal auf die in der DDR Geschiedenen zurück - aus verschiedenen Gründen so, aber auch deshalb, weil die Gruppe sehr heterogen ist.\n\nHier im Raum sitzt zum Beispiel eine in der DDR Geschiedene, nämlich Iris Gleicke. Um die müssen wir uns sicherlich keine Sorgen machen. Aber für viele der Frauen, die sich organisieren und für ihre Rechte kämpfen, müssen wir wirklich etwas tun.\n\nIch nutze die Gelegenheit, über diese in der DDR geschiedene Frau noch etwas zu sagen. Sie hat ihre letzte Rede irgendwann spätnachmittags am letzten Freitag gehalten. Ich muss sagen, das ist mir ein bisschen zu wenig. Sie haben hier sehr viel schwarzgemalt, was das Thema Ostdeutschland und Ost-West-Beziehungen angeht. In den letzten vier Jahren war Iris Gleicke eine emotionale, authentische und hartnäckige Kämpferin für die ostdeutschen Belange. Und Iris - das sage ich ganz persönlich -: Du wirst in diesem Hohen Haus sehr fehlen. Ganz herzlichen Dank für dein tolles Engagement.\n\nSie sehen, Sie können sich darauf verlassen, dass die SPD in Bezug auf die in der DDR Geschiedenen und die anderen Gruppen tätig werden wird. Wir werden das Thema in seiner ganzen Komplexität und nicht mit so einem Federstrich, wie die Linke das heute mit dem Antrag tun möchte, angehen.\n\nInsofern freue ich mich auf eine neue Runde und hoffentlich auf ein Wiedersehen - der Wähler hat natürlich das letzte Wort - im Herbst -, und dann mit einem Koalitionsvertrag, wer auch immer ihn macht, in dem das Thema Niederschlag findet. Wichtig wäre es.\"\n5180,renate-kunast,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Geschenkt worden ist uns Frauen nichts. Das knüpft vielleicht gut an die Rede von Carola Reimann an, die am Ende über die Solidarität geredet hat. Es waren am Ende immer die Frauen, die ihre Rechte und ihre Möglichkeiten in dieser Gesellschaft selbst erkämpft haben.\n\nWenn beim Parlamentarischen Rat, der das Grund-gesetz 1949 erarbeitet hat, nicht eine Frau, nämlich Elisabeth Selbert, die Bereitschaft gehabt hätte, allen anderen Herren auf die Nerven zu gehen, hätten wir die Gleichstellung im Grundgesetz nie gehabt. Uns hätte ein Ausgangspunkt gefehlt.\n\nWir haben viele Frauen gehabt, Abgeordnete, aber auch Juristinnen, ob Anwältinnen oder Richterinnen, die in den Jahren danach zum Beispiel für eine Familienrechtsreform gekämpft haben, die, man glaube es kaum, erst Ende der 70er-Jahre kam. Diese große Familienrechtsreform hat in der alten Bundesrepublik überhaupt erst den Mann als Haushaltsvorstand und das Recht des Mannes, den Arbeitsvertrag der Frau kündigen zu können, abgeschafft. Das muss man bzw. frau sich einmal überlegen. Das war hart erkämpft, weil es in der juristischen Szene viele Frauen gab, die gesagt haben: Wir machen das gemeinsam und bleiben dran.\n\nOder denken Sie an das Thema der häuslichen Gewalt. Wie oft wurde in dieser Gesellschaft über Gewalt geredet. Wie oft haben sich Männer über die Frauen lustig gemacht, die gesagt haben, dass 60 Prozent der Gewaltdelikte, also die Mehrheit, im häuslichen Nahbereich ausgeübt werden und nicht irgendwo. Sie haben dafür gesorgt, dass Frauenhäuser und Frauenprojekte -finanziert werden und die Polizei entsprechend ausgebildet wird und diese diesbezüglich Schwerpunkte bildet.\n\nWelche Mühen hat es gekostet, den § 218 in der jetzigen Fassung hinzubekommen! Das ging auch nur, weil sich Frauen innerhalb und außerhalb des Parlaments -zusammengetan und gesagt haben: Mein Bauch gehört mir. - Welche Mühen hat es gekostet, ein Gleichstellungsgesetz hinzubekommen! Auch das wurde von Frauen erkämpft.\n\nUnd heute, nach all den jetzt benannten und vielfältigen anderen strukturellen Benachteiligungen bis hin zur mangelnden Entgeltgleichheit, reden wir über ein Quotengesetz. Oder besser: Heute haben wir zwei. Ich bin natürlich realistisch und weiß, dass das der Großen Koalition, das 30 Prozent Frauen in Aufsichtsräten vorsieht, das für circa 100 Betriebe gilt, ein wenig mehr Chancen hat, durchzukommen, als das der Grünen mit 40 Prozent Frauen in Aufsichtsräten für 3 000 Betriebe.\n\nAber ich kann damit leben, weil ich mittlerweile gelernt habe, dass man Politik auch über Umwege machen muss. Insofern finde ich diesen Teil schon einmal gut.\n\nIch wundere mich, wie sich in dieser Debatte jetzt alle loben. Herr Weinberg, es stimmt: Die erste Kanzlerin kommt aus den Reihen der CDU.\n\nAber, Herr Weinberg und alle die, die jetzt klatschen: Wenn später Leute Bücher schreiben, dann werden sie auch schreiben, wie sie es wurde. Sie wurde es nicht, weil Herr Weinberg Mut hatte und gesagt hat: Es soll einmal eine Frau werden. - Vielmehr wurde sie es, weil es einfach keinen Mann in der Führungsetage gab, der nicht mit dem Spendenskandal der CDU belastet war.\n\nIch gebe zu: Wenn ich auch bei weitem nicht immer mit ihr einer Meinung bin, so ist sie doch ein Rollenvorbild für viele Frauen, und sie ist eine starke Kanzlerin, was in den heutigen Tagen in Europa nicht unwichtig ist. Aber neun Jahre Merkel hieß auch, dass Merkel sich nie für die Gleichstellung der Frauen eingesetzt hat. Es gibt die eine oder andere Rede in dieser Richtung. Aber ich will an der Stelle sagen: Es waren die Frauen selbst, die das erkämpft haben.\n\nAuch wenn andere es schon gelobt haben, so will ich es doch noch einmal sagen: Hier in diesem Haus und draußen war es FidAR, Frauen in die Aufsichtsräte, mit Monika Schulz-Strelow und Jutta von Falkenhausen, es war der Deutsche Juristinnenbund mit Ramona Pisal an der Spitze,\n\nBusiness and Professional Women, auch die Landfrauen, die in ihrer Szene wissen, wie es mit der Männerherrschaft ist, und viele andere.\n\nWas mich eigentlich fasziniert, ist, dass dieser Monat schon historisch ist, selbst wenn nur eine kleine Quote beschlossen wird und bei der Gleichstellung eine Verschlechterung eintritt. Denn wir haben den Blick geschärft und eine gewisse Ermutigung in dieser Gesellschaft geschaffen. Die Frauen schauen überall hin. Als das ARD-Studio nach Berlin umzog - ich weiß nicht genau, wann das war -, war ich dort zu Gast. Ich war entgeistert; denn dort waren nur Intendanten, nur Männer. Nachdem fünf, sechs oder sieben Männer geredet hatten, dachte ich: Jetzt kommt Musik, und dann spricht vielleicht eine Frau. Nein! Dann spielte eine Gruppe, die die Comedian Harmonists imitiert hat; auch diese Gruppe bestand nur aus Männern. All das hat sich geändert. Zum Erfolg von Initiativen wie „Pro Quote“ und „Pro Quote Medizin“ haben auch wir beigetragen. Mittlerweile sind immer mehr Frauen in Aufsichtsräten vertreten, und darüber hinaus gibt es Ermutigung in anderen Bereichen.\n\nZur Liste derer, die für mehr Frauen in Führungspositionen eingetreten sind, gehört natürlich auch Manuela Schwesig; sie war in der letzten Legislaturperiode noch nicht hier. Wir alle wissen spätestens seit einer Äußerung von Herrn Kauder, dass sie erfolgreich darin ist, sich durchzusetzen. Glückwunsch!\n\nDer Dinosaurier des Tages heißt Kramer und ist Präsident der Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände. Er hat gerade erst gesagt, die Quote müsse entbürokratisiert werden. Ich bin bereit, über alles zu diskutieren. Man lernt ja, dass man offen sein muss. Ich bin allerdings gespannt, wie er mir erklärt, inwiefern bei dem Auftrag eines Vorstandsvorsitzenden „Suchen Sie mir jemanden für den Aufsichtsrat!“ eine Entbürokratisierung nötig ist. Mir erschließt sich das noch nicht.\n\nWir sind wieder einmal einen Schritt weiter. Ich denke, wir werden einen Dominoeffekt auslösen und für eine Ermutigung sorgen, die Kultur zu ändern. Die gute Botschaft, meine Damen und Herren, insbesondere meine Damen, ist: Solidarität innerhalb und außerhalb des Bundestages hat sich gelohnt. Wir sollten uns das für die Zukunft bewahren; denn wir haben mit dem Kampf um die Gleichstellung erst angefangen. Wenn wir dieses Gesetz verabschiedet haben, könnten wir zum Beispiel bei der Entgeltgleichheit weitermachen.\"\n11650,barbara-lanzinger,\"Sehr verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer hier im Deutschen Bundestag! Ich möchte zu Beginn eines festhalten: Berücksichtigt man alle Gesetze, alle Regelwerke, die wir haben, stellt man fest, dass die Gesamtthematik, über die wir jetzt diskutieren, sicher zu den politisch, menschlich und auch emotional schwierigsten im Parlament gehört. Ich glaube, da sind wir uns alle einig. Es bedarf der Ausgewogenheit und auch der Abwägung zwischen kluger Diplomatie, Verteidigungsbereitschaft und Rüstungsexporten. Dass das ohne Verstand gemacht wird, wie Sie es vorhin sagten, weise ich ganz entschieden zurück.\n\nWir haben strenge Regeln für Rüstungsexporte - das wiederhole und verdeutliche ich jetzt -, vor allem für den Export von Waffen. In jedem Einzelfall wird streng darauf geachtet, wer welche Güter wann bekommt. Deutschland hat sich für die Ausfuhr von Rüstungsgütern, und hier vor allem bei Waffen, mit die strengsten Regeln weltweit auferlegt. Diese sind beispielsweise festgehalten im Grundgesetz, im Kriegswaffenkontrollgesetz, im Außenwirtschaftsgesetz und in den „Politischen Grundsätzen der Bundesregierung für den Export von Kriegswaffen und sonstigen Rüstungsgütern“ aus dem Jahr 2000, die - das wurde schon erwähnt - von der damaligen rot-grünen Bundesregierung überarbeitet wurden. Letztere geben ganz klar vor, dass die Rüstungspolitik restriktiv gestaltet werden soll, dass sie sich aber auch am Sicherheitsbedürfnis und den außenpolitischen Interessen der Bundesregierung zu orientieren habe. Es wird immer der jeweilige Einzelfall geprüft. Die letztendliche Entscheidung trifft der Bundessicherheitsrat. Dieses Gremium der Bundesregierung ist aus Vertretern des Bundeskanzleramts, des Auswärtigen Amts, des Innenministeriums, des Wirtschaftsministeriums, des Entwicklungsministeriums, des Justiz- und Verbraucherschutzministeriums und weiteren zusammengesetzt.\n\nIch möchte der Ehrlichkeit halber noch erwähnen: Nachgeordnet spielen natürlich auch wirtschaftspolitische Interessen eine Rolle. Wir sind auch im Hochtechnologiebereich der Wehrtechnik Exportland. Wichtig zu erwähnen ist auch, dass die Prüfungen bei uns oftmals länger als ein Jahr dauern und dass bei internationalen Rüstungsverträgen teilweise mit dem Label „German-free“ geworben wird. Das sind durchaus enorme Standortnachteile für unsere Industrie.\n\nAuch hier wird ganz deutlich: Die außen- und sicherheitspolitische Bewertung möglicher Empfängerländer hat immer Vorrang. Unter anderem im international anerkannten Wassenaar-Abkommen ist definiert und im Außenwirtschaftsgesetz rechtlich festgehalten, was Rüstungsgüter sind. Rüstungsgüter, wie sie im Rüstungsexportbericht aufgeführt werden, sind eben nicht nur Kriegswaffen, sondern zum Beispiel auch Nachtsichtgeräte, Feldkrankenhäuser in geschützten Containern, Boote zum Küstenschutz, gepanzerte Fahrzeuge und vieles mehr.\n\nDas wird auch mit Blick auf den Rüstungsexportbericht deutlich. Es stimmt, dass für Katar auch Einzelgenehmigungen für Panzer ausgesprochen wurden. Das muss auf Dauer sicher differenziert betrachtet werden. Bei genauerer Betrachtung der Liste wird aber auch deutlich, dass auch ganz andere Güter exportiert werden und wurden.\n\nLassen Sie mich zwei Beispiele nennen: Die Lieferungen an Saudi-Arabien umfassen beispielsweise Fahrgestelle für unbewaffnete Transporter, Lkws und Geländewagen mit Sonderschutz. Lieferungen an Oman umfassen unter anderem Teile für Feuerleiteinrichtungen, Lkws, Dekontaminationsausrüstungen, Kommunikationsausrüstungen, Teile für gepanzerte Fahrzeuge.\n\nWir haben internationale Verpflichtungen und tragen auch außen- und sicherheitspolitische Verantwortung. Unsere außen- und sicherheitspolitischen Instrumente sind vielfältig. Rüstungsexporte sind eines davon. Nur so können wir in diesem hochsensiblen Bereich unsere wehrtechnischen Kernkompetenzen und somit Handlungssouveränität bewahren. Das ist wichtig.\n\nNur so können wir unsere internationalen Partner inner- und außerhalb der EU und der NATO befähigen, beispielsweise Grenzen zu sichern und gegen Terrorgruppen vorzugehen.\n\nWir können und wollen unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten nicht überallhin schicken.\n\nNiemand macht sich die Entscheidung zu Rüstungsexporten leicht. Die Entscheidung muss unter Einbezug außen- und sicherheitspolitischer Überlegungen immer sorgfältig abgewogen werden, und das wird getan. Ihr Antrag wird dem nicht gerecht. Daher lehnen wir ihn ab.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6057,michael-roth,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Lieber Herr Kollege Gehrcke, sollten Sie mit Ihrer Frage eine Neuausrichtung unserer Syrien-Politik insinuieren, muss ich Ihnen deutlich widersprechen. Das ist nicht der Fall.\n\nUnser Bundesaußenminister hat mehrfach deutlich gemacht, dass wir den furchtbaren Bürgerkrieg in Syrien militärisch nicht werden lösen können. Insofern sind umfassende politische und diplomatische Anstrengungen gefordert. Selbstverständlich spielen dabei Verhandlungen die herausragende Rolle.\n\nEs gibt bereits jetzt durch Staffan de Mistura, den Syrien-Gesandten der Vereinten Nationen, direkte politische Gespräche mit dem Assad-Regime in Damaskus. Im Übrigen hat der Gesandte auch ein eigenes Büro in Damaskus. Syrien selbst ist durch einen ständigen Vertreter bei den Vereinten Nationen in New York präsent. Um diese politischen Gespräche geht es. Auf diese politischen Gespräche, die bereits mit dem Assad-Regime geführt werden, hat der Bundesaußenminister hingewiesen.\n\nDiese Frage verwundert mich jetzt ein wenig, lieber Herr Kollege Gehrcke; denn die Haltung der Bundesregierung ist nicht neu. Bereits im Genfer Kommuniqué vom Juni 2012 sind politische Verhandlungen selbstverständlich auch mit dem Assad-Regime vorgesehen. Anders kann ich mir solche politischen Gespräche auch nicht vorstellen. Die zentrale Rolle dabei nehmen die Vereinten Nationen und insbesondere der Sonderbeauftragte der Vereinten Nationen für Syrien, Staffan de -Mistura, wahr.\n\nHerr Präsident! Lieber Kollege Gehrcke, wir unterstützen uneingeschränkt die Implementierung des Genfer Kommuniqués. Wir unterstützen nach Kräften die Vereinten Nationen und den Sonderbeauftragten. Wir sind in einer Reihe von Gesprächen involviert. Wir wünschen uns nichts sehnlicher, als dass dieser furchtbare Bürgerkrieg des Diktators gegen sein eigenes Volk beendet wird, dass hoffentlich irgendwann einmal Millionen von Flüchtlingen wieder in ihre Heimat zurückkehren können und das Morden endlich ein Ende hat.\n\nHerr Präsident! Lieber Herr Kollege Gehrcke, diese Frage kann ich ganz kurz beantworten: Nein, für eine diplomatische Aufwertung des Assad-Regimes sieht die Bundesregierung derzeit keinerlei Veranlassung.\n\nIch füge hinzu: Syrien ist in Berlin durch eine Botschaft vertreten, die von einer Geschäftsträgerin geleitet wird. Diese Botschaft nimmt in erster Linie konsularische Angelegenheiten wahr. Die deutsche Botschaft in Damaskus ist seit 2012 geschlossen.\"\n14504,alexander-neu,\"Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Gestern wie heute sprechen wir über Somalia. Gestern ging es um die Verlängerung von EUTM Somalia, heute reden wir über die Verlängerung von Atalanta.\n\nAtalanta läuft seit 2008. Wir befinden uns also jetzt im zehnten Jahr der Mission Atalanta. Ein Ende der Mission ist nicht abzusehen, es gibt ein paar vage Andeutungen. Das wurde gerade gesagt, aber es sind Zweifel angebracht.\n\nFür den Mandatszeitraum 2017 bis 2018 wird diese Mission die Steuerzahler - Sie da oben also -\n\nerneut 63 Millionen Euro kosten. Fragen wir einmal nach Erfolg oder Misserfolg der Mission Atalanta. Atalanta, so sagt die Bundesregierung, habe dazu beigetragen, die Piraterie am Horn von Afrika erfolgreich zurückzudrängen. Die Symptombekämpfung war also erfolgreich. Hier kann man zustimmen. Demgegenüber ist die Ursachenbekämpfung nach wie vor nicht angegangen worden. Nach wie vor finden illegale Fischereien fremder Flotten statt, auch im Binnenmeer, auch im Küstenmeer von Somalia. Das raubt den Fischern die Lebensgrundlage, die sich dann anderen Erwerbstätigkeiten wie der Piraterie zuwenden. Diese Duldung unter den Augen von Atalanta, dass dort fremde Flotten illegal fischen, kann ich nicht nachvollziehen. Das wäre eine Ursachenbekämpfung. Das heißt, der einzig richtige Weg, den es gibt, das zu verhindern, wird nicht beschritten. Ich habe bisher noch keine einzige zufriedenstellende Erklärung gehört, warum Atalanta hier nichts unternimmt. Man könnte den Eindruck gewinnen, es geht nicht um die Menschen, es geht auch nicht um die Stabilität des Landes,\n\nsondern es geht in erster Linie um Interessen - das wurde gerade auch dargelegt -, es geht um Handelswege.\n\nDie Lebenssituation der Menschen in Somalia verbessert sich derzeit nicht, sondern verschlimmert sich dramatisch angesichts der anhaltenden Dürre, auch verursacht durch den Klimawandel, der vor allem von den Industriestaaten und somit auch von Deutschland mit zu verantworten ist. Nigeria, Südsudan, Somalia - die Menschen dort sind akut vom Hungertod bedroht: Frauen, Kinder, Männer. Insgesamt leiden rund 20 bis 25 Millionen Menschen an Hunger, sind vom Hungertod bedroht, rund 6,2 Millionen Menschen allein in Somalia, etwa die Hälfte der Einwohner Somalias.\n\nDie Bundesregierung kommt daher, und Staatsminister Roth prahlt vor zwei Wochen: Wir tragen doch 16,5 Millionen Euro gegen den Hungertod bei. 16,5 Millionen Euro bei 6,2 Millionen Menschen, die akut vom Hungertod bedroht sind, das sind umgerechnet 2,60 Euro für einen einzigen Tag, Herr Roth, nicht täglich 2,60 Euro, sondern für einen einzigen Tag. Steigt da nicht die Schamesröte in Ihr Gesicht, bei einer solchen Aussage und einer solch großzügigen Spende? Das ist ein Skandal, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren.\n\nAllein das geplante Einsatzjahr 2017/2018 von Atalanta soll 63 Millionen Euro kosten, also das Vierfache dessen, was Sie spenden wollen. Ich finde, so ein Zahlenverhältnis sagt mehr aus als tausend moral- und wertegeschwängerte Sonntagsreden seitens der Bundesregierung.\n\nWenn es um Militär geht, sprudeln die Steuergelder. Wenn es um zivile Hilfe geht, weiß man nicht, wo Geld ist. Künftig sollen bis zu 35 Milliarden Euro zusätzlich in die Bundeswehr investiert werden, weil US-Präsident Trump es will, weil sich die Rüstungsindustrie freut, um das 2\u001eProzent-Ziel der NATO zu erreichen. Warum sage ich das? Das Verhältnis 35 Milliarden Euro zu 16,5 Millionen Euro, die die Bundesregierung großzügig nach Somalia spendet, beträgt 2 150 : 1, also nicht 3\u001emal so viel, nicht 7\u001emal so viel, sondern 2 150\u001emal so viel. Ich finde, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, verantwortungsvolle Außenpolitik sieht anders aus.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nGeschätzte Kollegin Obermeier, wir reden gerade wieder über Symptombekämpfung: World Food Programme etc. Aber es geht doch darum, dass das Land, dass die Gesellschaft in Somalia zumindest mittel- und langfristig wieder auf eigenen Beinen stehen kann. Ich habe es gerade angesprochen - der Kollege Trittin auch -: Warum wird Atalanta nicht in die Lage versetzt, die Raubfischerei im Hoheitsgebiet des somalischen Küstenmeeres zu unterbinden? Warum duldet man das? Warum schaut man zu? Haben Sie dafür eine Begründung?\"\n5998,kordula-schulz-asche,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Lie-be Bürgerinnen und Bürger! Liebe Frau Kühn-Mengel, ich möchte Ihnen an dieser Stelle bereits sagen, dass Sie für viele der Vorschläge, die Sie hier gerade gemacht haben, auf unsere volle Un-terstützung zählen können.\n\nDas ist genau der Ansatz von Gesundheitsförde-rung und Prävention, den wir für längst überfällig halten.\n\nIch kann Ihnen auch sagen, warum. Ich möchte meine Rede damit beginnen, dass ich eine Schü-lerin einer Förderschule zitiere. Sie hat gesagt: Wir haben keine Chance, und wir kriegen auch keine. - Meine Damen und Herren, das ist die Re-alität: 10 bis 15 Prozent der Kinder und Jugendli-chen in Deutschland befinden sich, wie die Lang-zeitstudie des renommierten Robert-Koch-Instituts darstellt, in keinem guten gesundheitlichen Zu-stand.\n\nIn dieser Woche wurde eine Studie der Ber-telsmann Stiftung zum Einfluss von Armut auf die Entwicklung von Kindern vorgestellt. Da konnten Sie zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass in Deutschland je-des sechste Kind in Armut lebt, davon die Hälfte dauerhaft, also nicht nur für kurze Zeit. Arme Kin-der wachsen in der Regel ohne Vater oder mit El-tern auf, die nur geringe schulische und berufliche Abschlüsse haben. Diese Kinder - das zeigt die Bertelsmann-Studie - haben bei allen schulrele-vanten Entwicklungsmerkmalen Defizite, und das meistens schon im zweiten oder dritten Lebens-jahr, also wenn sie noch sehr klein sind. Sie ha-ben Probleme bei der Motorik, sie haben Probleme beim Gleichgewicht, bei der Konzentration, beim Sprechen und beim Verstehen. Und, meine Damen und Herren, auch das stellt die -Bertelsmann-Studie fest: Diese Kinder werden von fast allen existierenden Präventionsangeboten nicht er-reicht. Sie werden nicht erreicht durch eine gute Betreuung in der Kita. Sie werden nicht erreicht von Vorsorgeuntersuchungen. Sie werden zum Beispiel auch im Bereich der Kariesprophylaxe nicht erreicht. Es sind immer die gleichen Kinder, die von diesen Präventionsmaßnahmen nicht er-reicht werden.\n\nDer bedenkliche Anstieg der Zahl derer, die von zum Teil extremem Übergewicht und Diabeteser-krankungen im Kindesalter betroffen sind, ist ein Zeichen von unzureichendem Zugang zu gesunder Ernährung. Hinzu kommen schlechte Wohnver-hältnisse, Umweltbelastungen wie Lärm und Luft-verschmutzung. Die Freizeitangebote sind gering, wenn man sich nicht einmal die Mitgliedschaft in einem Verein leisten kann. So zieht sich ein direk-ter Zusammenhang von Armut und Krankheit durch das ganze Leben hindurch bis zum Tod.\n\nIn Deutschland sterben ärmere Männer fast elf Jahre früher als wohlhabende, und bei den Frauen beträgt der Unterschied fast achteinhalb Jahre.\n\nAuch in Deutschland gilt: Wer weniger hat, stirbt früher. Darf das in Deutschland, einem der reichs-ten Länder der Welt, im 21. Jahrhundert sein?\n\nMeine Damen und Herren von der Großen Koa-lition, daher finde ich die Frage berechtigt, ob Ihr Entwurf eines Präventionsgesetzes, den Sie hier vorlegen, ein großer Wurf ist. Ich sage: Nein. Denn Sozialprosa allein reicht nicht aus. Wir müs-sen auch an die Umsetzung gehen. Hier bleiben Sie leider bei dem schwarz-gelben Vorgängermo-dell.\n\nUnsere Umwelt, unser Alltag - das ist unserer Gesundheit Schmied. Dies hat diese Bundesregie-rung noch nicht verstanden. Wenn wir die Ge-sundheit aller dauerhaft fördern wollen, müssen wir in langfristige Maßnahmen an den Orten in-vestieren, an denen die Menschen ihr Leben, ihren Alltag verbringen: in der Kindertagesstätte, in der Schule, im Betrieb, in Krankenhäusern, in Heimen und vor allem auch im Stadtteil, wo sie wohnen.\n\nDas sind die Orte, an denen Gesundheitsförde-rung erlernt, gemeinsam organisiert und vor allem auch tatsächlich gelebt werden kann. Ziel muss es sein, jede Einzelne und jeden Einzelnen zu stärken, Gesundheitsrisiken zu reduzieren und damit am Ende auch Krankheiten zu vermeiden.\n\nWir müssen endlich umdenken! Die Aufklärung über gesunde Ernährung und gesundes Leben führt häufig nicht zu einer Verbesserung. Oft scheitert es an der Umsetzung, an der Realität: an Billigpamps, an zu hohen Kosten für gesundes Essen in der Kita, in der Schule und im Betrieb, an mangelnden Sportmöglichkeiten oder an einer miesen Arbeitskultur in Unternehmen mit hoher psychischer Belastung.\n\nBei älteren Menschen führen Einsamkeit und das Wohnen in einem Umfeld voller Barrieren zu Pflegebedürftigkeit. Lassen Sie mich dies sagen: Nicht erst im Pflegeheim müssen wir mit Gesund-heitsförderung und Prävention beginnen, sondern schon im Stadtteil, wo die Menschen leben; denn hier kann man ansetzen und Pflegebedürftigkeit tatsächlich vermeiden. Deswegen ist die Arbeit im Stadtteil von besonderer Bedeutung.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir müssen umden-ken! Wir setzen bei der Gesundheitsförderung auf Chancengerechtigkeit, auf einen konkreten Bezug zu den Alltagswelten der Menschen, auf die Betei-ligung aller, auf Langfristigkeit statt der heute vorherrschenden Projektitis\n\nund auf die Einbeziehung wesentlicher Akteure und vor allem auch der Bürgerinnen und Bürger vor Ort.\n\nWir wollen das in den Kitas, wir wollen das in den Schulen, wir wollen das in den Betrieben - nicht nur in den großen, wofür es schon gute Beispiele gibt, sondern auch in den kleinen -, und wir wollen das besonders im Stadtteil. Wir wollen kein natur-wissenschaftlich-medizinisches Konzept, sondern wir brauchen ein breites sozialpolitisches Projekt für mehr Gerechtigkeit und mehr Gesundheit.\n\nDafür setzen wir auf eine breite Finanzierung, an der sich alle Sozialversicherungsträger, natür-lich die gesetzlichen und die privaten Kranken- und Pflegeversicherungen, zu beteiligen haben, aber auch die Rentenversicherung, die Unfallver-sicherung und die Berufsgenossenschaften. Alle haben ein Interesse daran, dass ihre Mitglieder nicht erkranken,\n\nund natürlich gehören auch der Bund, die Länder und die Kommunen dazu.\n\nFrau Kühn-Mengel hat die Bedeutung der Kommunen zu Recht hervorgehoben; denn die Kommunen und die Kreise sind der Dreh- und An-gelpunkt gelingender Gesundheitsförderung. Kei-ne Ärztin, kein Arzt, keine Krankenkasse, auch keine Politikerin und kein Politiker weiß, wie in ei-ner Kita, in einer Schule, in einem Betrieb und in einem Stadtteil Gesundheitsförderung am besten gestaltet und gelebt werden kann. Das wissen die Menschen vor Ort am besten; denn sie sind die Experten ihres Stadtteils und ihres Alltags. Des-halb ist uns die Beteiligung aller an diesem Pro-zess so wichtig.\n\nIn den Kommunen laufen diese Fäden zusam-men, und die Konzepte werden dort gemeinsam mit den Menschen entwickelt. Auch das fehlt im Gesetzentwurf der Großen Koalition bisher leider völlig.\n\nIndividuelle, zeitlich begrenzte Kursangebote führen nicht zu besserer Gesundheit; das ist be-wiesen. Auf diese wird in Ihrem Gesetzentwurf aber weiter geschworen. Nicht das Werben der Krankenkassen um Versicherte aus der Mittel-schicht kann das Leitbild von Prävention sein, sondern das Wissen und die Kompetenz für alle, gesund zu leben, und vor allem die Möglichkeit, das auch zu tun, wenn man möchte.\n\nDas gilt auch für die Schülerin, die ich eingangs zitiert habe. Wir sind davon leider in Deutschland noch sehr weit entfernt. Daran ändert auch der vorgelegte Entwurf eines Präventionsgesetzes der Bundesregierung bisher leider nichts. Der Bun-desrat hingegen - das möchte ich ausdrücklich loben - hat eine ganze Reihe wichtiger Hinweise gegeben und hätte sicher auch noch mehr zu sa-gen, vor allem wenn es um die Beteiligung der Kommunen geht. Von daher bin ich auch nach der Rede von Frau Kühn-Mengel auf die weiteren Be-ratungen dieses Gesetzentwurfs gespannt.\n\nIch danke Ihnen für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\n\nVielen Dank, dass Sie die Zwischenfrage zu-lassen. - Sie haben gerade zu Recht von den po-sitiven Erfahrungen mit dem betrieblichen Ge-sundheitsmanagement gesprochen. Es gibt in großen Unternehmen schon sehr viele gute Bei-spiele. Die Frage ist eher, wie man die 90 Prozent der kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen erreichen kann. Welche Vorstellungen haben Sie, um gera-de die kleinen Unternehmen, zum Beispiel eine Kraftfahrzeugwerkstatt oder einen kleinen Laden, zu erreichen?\"\n913,cem-ozdemir,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir begrüßen, dass die Bundesregierung eine öffentliche Debatte über die Verantwortung und das internationale Engagement Deutschlands angestoßen hat. Richtig ist auch, dass die Bundesregierung eine neue Afrika-Strategie entwickelt. Aber wenn Sie eine neue Afrika-Strategie entwickeln wollen, dann müssen Sie uns, dem Hohen Haus, auch die Ziele und vor allem die Interessen benennen. Das gehört zu einer ehrlichen Debatte dazu.\n\nIch habe eine herzliche Bitte: Wir dürfen die Debatte - das gilt für die Befürworter, zu denen ich mich ausdrücklich zähle, ebenso wie die Mehrheit unserer Fraktion, als auch die Gegner - nicht auf die militärischen Mittel und die Militäreinsätze reduzieren. Aus dem umfassenden Werkzeugkasten der Außenpolitik darf eben nicht immer nur der Hammer der militärischen Intervention benutzt werden; manchmal brauchen wir auch den Schraubenzieher oder den Lötkolben.\n\nZu verantwortungsvollem Engagement gehören Diplomatie, Demokratieförderung, zivile Konfliktprävention, humanitäre Hilfe und schließlich die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit.\n\nDie Trainings- und Ausbildungsmission der EU in Mali ist ein positives Beispiel dafür. Sie hat bislang einen hilfreichen Beitrag zur Stabilisierung geleistet und damit auch mitgeholfen, den erneuten politischen Dialog und den Versöhnungsprozess in Mali zu ermöglichen. Der Aufbau des Sicherheitssektors in Mali ist noch längst nicht abgeschlossen; das wissen wir. Wir wissen auch, dass die Situation im Norden des Landes gerade für die Zivilbevölkerung nach wie vor angespannt ist. Wir, Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, werden mehrheitlich dem Mandat zustimmen, gerade weil dieses Mandat eine klare Aufgabenbegrenzung für die deutschen Soldatinnen und Soldaten vorsieht.\n\nFrau Buchholz, die Argumente der Linken hätten mehr Glaubwürdigkeit, wenn Sie sagen würden: Bei diesem Einsatz, den die UN, die Gemeinschaft afrikanischer Staaten, die Nachbarstaaten und die Menschen im Land befürworten, sind auch wir dafür; bei anderen sind wir dagegen. Dann wäre es spannend, Ihnen zuzuhören und Argumente auszutauschen. Aber bei einer Fraktion, die zu jedem Einsatz, egal was die Vereinten Nationen sagen, prinzipiell Nein sagt,\n\nlohnt es sich auch nicht, die Argumente anzuhören.\n\nDenn dann ist das einfach Ideologie pur und hat mit den Menschen vor Ort nichts zu tun. Ich bin nicht bei der Linkspartei, sondern bei den Grünen, aber ich habe in den linken Lehren Internationalismus anders gelernt. Es geht um Internationalismus, nicht um Nationalismus, meine Damen und Herren von der Linkspartei.\n\nIch sehe den Einsatz der Deutsch-Französischen Brigade auch im Rahmen dieser Mission als einen Schritt hin zu mehr Abstimmung in der Europäischen Union, und die brauchen wir. Frau Ministerin, allerdings hätten wir da noch eine Frage. Die Brigade ist ja bekannt als eine schnelle Eingreiftruppe. Da würden wir gerne wissen, was genau die konkrete Aufgabe dieser Brigade in Mali sein soll.\n\nIch finde - das muss in einer solchen Debatte ehrlich gesagt werden -, dass zu jedem Einsatz, also auch zu diesem, eine Evaluierung durchgeführt werden muss. Wir wollen wissen, wie viele Soldatinnen und Soldaten in Mali konkret von der Bundeswehr ausgebildet worden sind, und natürlich auch, wie der weitere Bedarf hinsichtlich der militärischen Kapazitäten der malischen Armee ist. Es muss künftig zu jeder Debatte in diesem Haus gehören, dass wir anschließend gemeinsam auswerten und ehrlich sagen, was richtig gelaufen ist, was falsch gelaufen ist und wo möglicherweise Konsequenzen gezogen werden müssen.\n\nFrau Ministerin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir haben eine weitere Bitte an Sie. Vergessen Sie bitte nicht: Der Demokratisierungsprozess in diesem Land ist noch längst nicht abgeschlossen. Es stehen noch Kommunalwahlen an. Die Arbeitsfähigkeit des Parlamentes in Mali muss noch hergestellt werden. Der Versöhnungsprozess im Land muss endlich in Gang gebracht werden. Bei diesen Aufgaben muss die Bundesrepublik Deutschland mindestens dasselbe Engagement zeigen wie bei der Ausbildungsmission.\n\nSchließlich müssen wir uns um die Flüchtlinge kümmern. Es handelt sich um mehr als eine halbe Million Menschen, wenn wir die Binnenvertriebenen mitzählen. Dies birgt ein hohes Störpotenzial für die Region und kann die Region destabilisieren. Auch hier sind wir gefordert. Darum wünsche ich, dass wir auch zur humanitären Hilfe aktiv beitragen. Die Vereinten Nationen haben uns als Bedarf 6,73 Prozent der entsprechenden Hilfe mitgeteilt. Es wird Zeit, dass wir unseren Beitrag leisten und uns nicht hinter anderen verstecken.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. Wir brauchen eine strategische Koordination der Maßnahmen unter Einbeziehung der Zivilgesellschaft in Mali. Das betrifft insbesondere die Frauen, weil vor allem sie über die Zukunft des Landes entscheiden werden. Wir brauchen ausdrücklich eine Einbeziehung der Nachbarländer - ich nenne nur Algerien und Mauretanien -; ohne sie gibt es keine Friedenslösung. Frau Ministerin, wir wollen auch, dass die Trainings- und Ausbildungsmission der EU in die Afrika-Strategie eingebunden wird. Was wir im Land brauchen, ist Ernährungssicherheit, Demokratisierung, Bestärkung der Rolle der Frauen und Korruptionsbekämpfung.\n\nWir stimmen diesem Einsatz zu. Das ist unser Beitrag, unsere Verantwortung gegenüber Mali. Das machen wir auch aus der Opposition heraus; denn wenn etwas gemacht wird, was richtig ist, dann fällt uns kein Zacken aus der Krone, das auch zu sagen.\"\n732,heike-hansel,\"Danke schön, Frau Präsidentin. - Herr Strässer, wir hören jetzt ständig, eigentlich schon gebetsmühlenartig in den letzten Wochen, den Satz: Wir müssen mehr Verantwortung übernehmen. - Ich möchte einmal fragen:\n\nErstens. Haben eigentlich die Bundesregierungen der letzten Jahre oder Jahrzehnte keine Verantwortung übernommen?\n\nIst das die Schlussfolgerung? Ist es so, dass wir in Deutschland - die letzte Große Koalition, die rot-grüne Bundesregierung usw. - keine Verantwortung übernommen haben und jetzt Verantwortung übernehmen müssen? Was ist denn das für eine Bewertung Ihrer eigenen Politik der letzten Jahre? Erklären Sie mir diesen Satz doch einmal!\n\nZweitens. Frau von der Leyen selbst hat gesagt: Die Bundeswehr hat jetzt nach dem Abzug aus Afghanistan mehr Kapazitäten frei für Afrika. - Jetzt möchte ich nachfragen: Wieso unterstellen Sie uns, wir würden das militärisch interpretieren? Das sind doch die Worte von Frau von der Leyen. In der Stuttgarter Zeitung können Sie es nachlesen: „Bundeswehr hat noch Kapazitäten“. Könnten Sie das bitte einmal bewerten?\"\n12611,karl-heinz-brunner,\"Sehr verehrter Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Vielen Dank an die Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer, die heute zu dieser späten Stunde zu diesem Tagesordnungspunkt noch anwesend sind,\n\nder mir wichtig ist und den hier Anwesenden sicherlich ebenso. Als ich mich auf die heutige Rede vorbereitete, fragte ich mich: Was soll ich sagen? Wir haben ja die Gesetzentwürfe von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen und den Linken im Ausschuss immer wieder abgesetzt. Wir haben sie vertagt, obwohl das Thema für uns, für die SPD und für mich im Besonderen eine Herzensangelegenheit ist.\n\nIch erinnere mich noch sehr genau - die Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die dabei waren, auch -, wie Abgeordnete und Vertreterinnen und Vertreter des LSVD am 25. September vergangenen Jahres vor dem Bundesrat standen, um den Beschluss zur Ehe für alle zu unterstützen. Ich war mir damals nicht sicher, jedoch hoffte ich, dass der Entwurf, den ich im vollen Umfang für gut erachte, schnell in die parlamentarischen Beratungen einfließt und im Ergebnis umgesetzt wird. Doch seither diskutieren wir nur. Wir sind zwar bei der Rehabilitation der nach § 175 StGB verurteilten Männer, einem Schandparagrafen dieses Landes, nunmehr auf einem guten Weg, doch bei der Ehe für alle sind wir noch keinen Schritt weitergekommen.\n\nEs hilft auch nicht, immer wieder mit neuen Anträgen oder Gesetzentwürfen der Oppositionsparteien konfrontiert zu werden.\n\nDenn der Bundesratsentwurf ist gut. Es ist ein guter Entwurf - eigentlich ein guter Wurf -, weil er die Realität in Deutschland widerspiegelt. Er rückt den Menschen ins Zentrum, keine Gruppe, keine Minderheit, keine Mehrheit, sondern Menschen. Der Entwurf erneuert Grundprinzipien unserer Solidargemeinschaft, nämlich füreinander einzustehen, einander zu respektieren, einfach da zu sein. Das ist toll und muss für uns alle gelten.\n\nDoch leider gibt es immer noch Strömungen in unserer Gesellschaft, die diese Grundprinzipien nur für eine Gruppe reklamieren wollen: nur für die Heteros. Dadurch kommt es dann zu so etwas wie dem, was am 4. November auf dem CSU-Parteitag passiert ist. Das Grundsatzprogramm der CSU ist ein Scherz, oder? Wäre es nicht November, hätte ich es als Aprilscherz durchgehen lassen. Die Ehe von Mann und Frau wollen Sie vor Relativierungsversuchen schützen. Niemand relativiert hier etwas. Aber eine eingetragene Lebenspartnerschaft wird durch Ihren Vorschlag dauerhaft diskriminiert. Dann die Härte in dem Programm: Es ist von Ideologie, Gender-Ideologie die Rede. Wo ist sie denn im Umgang mit der deutschen Sprache gelandet? Das Wort „Ideologie“ benutzen meines Wissens nur diejenigen, die selbst Ideologen sind. Ich traue Ihnen ja vieles zu, aber das dachte ich eigentlich nicht von Ihnen.\n\nSie verteidigen Geschlechterrollen, nicht moralische Prinzipien. Sie verteidigen nicht das, was zusammenhält, also Liebe und Fürsorge. Sie lassen sich nicht an die Beziehung von Mann und Frau binden. Sie sind ein hohes Gut in unserer Gesellschaft, nämlich das Gut, dass Menschen füreinander sorgen. Kapieren Sie doch endlich, dass Sie die Ehe für alle nicht aufhalten können, dass Sie zu einem Lager der Scheinheiligen gehören, wenn Sie die Ehe weiterhin nur für Mann und Frau vorsehen.\n\nIch möchte, dass das natürliche Recht des Menschen auf gleiche Würde und gleiche Behandlung endlich gleichrangig für alle in Deutschland gilt.\n\nIch möchte ein Gesetz, das Rechte nicht nach Gruppen unterscheidet, das nicht separiert. Ich möchte ein Gesetz, das die Gesellschaft draußen schon lange formuliert hat. Wir müssten es eigentlich nur noch abtippen und veröffentlichen: Gleiches Recht, gleiche Pflichten, Ehe für alle. Ich finde, dass der Bundesrat mit seinem Entwurf genau ins Schwarze getroffen hat.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Union, wir sollten uns endlich zusammenraufen, das Thema abräumen und nicht über Wochen, Monate und Jahre zetern. Lassen Sie uns dieses Kapitel mit Würde beenden, und zwar mit der Ehe für alle!\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit und einen schönen Abend.\n\nDas Folgende habe ich mir eigentlich erst für eine Kurzintervention gedacht, aber ich kann es auch als Zwischenfrage stellen. Verehrter Kollege Petzold, Sie haben angesprochen, dass wir uns dafür hergegeben haben, die Beratung zu verhindern. Sie wissen aber durchaus und werden mit Sicherheit bestätigen, dass wir, wenn wir das Verfahren im Ausschuss, so wie es Grüne und Linke gern gewollt hätten, umgesetzt hätten, letztendlich nur zu dem Ergebnis gekommen wären, das Sie nicht wollten, nämlich zu einer Ablehnung der entsprechenden Anträge und damit zu einem Scherbenhaufen für diejenigen Menschen, für die wir da sein wollen, für die wir nämlich die Ehe für alle schaffen wollen. Deshalb haben wir die Anträge abgesetzt, zur weiteren Verhandlung mit dem Koalitionspartner, um den Menschen auch weiterhin die Chance zu geben, in dieser Legislaturperiode eine Entscheidung zu bekommen.\"\n4441,britta-haßelmann,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Vielen Dank, Frau Staatssekretärin. Ich habe eine Nachfrage dazu. Mich würde vor dem Hintergrund Ihrer gera-de dargelegten Bewertung interessieren, welche Konsequenzen insbesondere das Bundesministe-rium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend und die Ministerin aus den drei Klagen vor dem Verwaltungsgericht Berlin und den bestehenden Anwürfen ziehen, dass Regelungen zur Gleichstel-lung und Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf im entsprechenden Bundesministerium nicht ausrei-chend umgesetzt werden, und wie sie dies bewer-ten.\n\nIch habe keine zweite Nachfrage, sondern nur die Bitte, dass dann, wenn die Erhebung abge-schlossen ist, Sie, Frau Staatssekretärin, uns die Ergebnisse zur Verfügung stellen.\n\nJa, die habe ich. - Es ist bedauerlich, dass Sie sich zu anderen EU-Parlamenten nicht äußern. Aber das haben wir ja neulich schon erlebt, als wir Sie hier gefragt haben, ob sich Deutschland der Nichtigkeitsklage von -Österreich gegen die Bei-hilfeentscheidung der EU-Kommission im Zu-sammenhang mit dem Bau des Atomkraftwerks Hinkley Point C anschließt.\n\nZu den Schiedsgerichtsverfahren. Sie haben gesagt, Sie bleiben als Bundesregierung bei der Position, dass Sie Schiedsgerichtsverfahren ne-ben unserer bestehenden Rechtsordnung für nicht erforderlich halten. Der Bundeswirtschaftsminister hat uns in der letzten Woche hier im Parlament etwas anderes erzählt. Deshalb lautet meine Fra-ge: Geht die Bundesregierung in Brüssel weiter mit der Position - keine Schiedsverfahren neben unseren bestehenden Rechtsordnungen - in die Gespräche und Konsultationen zu CETA und TTIP, oder gibt es nach den Einlassungen von Herrn Gabriel in der Plenardebatte am letzten Donnerstag und seinem grundsätzlichen Bekennt-nis zu Schiedsverfahren in TTIP oder CETA eine Änderung in der Auffassung, und vertreten Sie diese offensiv in Brüssel?\n\nJa. - Mich interessierte nicht so sehr, was die anderen europäischen Länder machen - da hatte ich ja schon in Ihrer ersten Antwort gehört, dass Sie darauf hier nicht eingehen -, sondern meine Frage war konkret: Mit welcher Haltung in Bezug auf die Klageprivilegien für Konzerne geht die jet-zige Bundesregierung in die weiteren Gespräche? Da haben Sie gesagt: Grundsätzlich halten wir sie nicht für erforderlich. - Der Wirtschaftsminister hat letzten Donnerstag aber etwas anderes ge-sagt. Deshalb meine Frage noch einmal - und zwar nicht in Bezug auf die schwarz-gelbe Regie-rung; da weiß ich, welche Auffassung sie vertre-ten hat -: Welche Position vertritt die Große Koali-tion, Ihr Wirtschaftsministerium in den Konsultati-onen? Halten Sie Klageprivilegien für Konzerne für sinnvoll und richtig oder für grundsätzlich nicht er-forderlich, wie hier dargelegt wurde? Dann würde das aber nicht mit dem zusammenpassen, was der Bundeswirtschaftsminister hier geäußert hat.\n\nHerr Staatssekretär, Sie haben jetzt Fragen be-antwortet, die mein Kollege Ströbele gar nicht ge-stellt hat. Er hat Sie nicht aufgefordert, darüber zu spekulieren, sondern er hat Sie aufgefordert, uns den Stand Ihrer Informationen zu geben. Darum bitte ich Sie jetzt noch einmal.\n\nAnsonsten würden wir das sicherlich gegenüber der Bundesregierung insgesamt schriftlich tun. Das können wir über den Bundestagspräsidenten selbstverständlich veranlassen.\"\n15536,angela-merkel,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Der Europäische Rat hat in der vergangenen Woche in Brüssel ein Signal der Tatkraft und der Zuversicht abgegeben. Wir haben bei diesem Rat alle spüren können, dass Europa bei den wichtigen Fragen unserer Zeit vorankommt und wieder optimistischer in die Zukunft schaut. Das ist auch der intensiven Abstimmung zwischen Deutschland und Frankreich zu verdanken, aber auch dem Geist der Zusammenarbeit und des Zusammenhalts, der bei allen Beteiligten zu spüren war.\n\nWir haben uns beim letzten Europäischen Rat mit einer ganzen Reihe wichtiger Themen beschäftigt, die alle eines gemeinsam haben: Sie sind alle mitentscheidend für die Frage, welche Rolle Europa zukünftig in der Welt spielen wird. Der Kampf gegen den Klimawandel, die Bedrohung durch den internationalen Terrorismus, die Chancen von Globalisierung und Digitalisierung, die Ursachen von Flucht und Migration - keine dieser Herausforderungen macht heutzutage vor irgendwelchen Ländergrenzen halt.\n\nDeshalb gilt heute mehr als je zuvor: Wer glaubt, die Probleme dieser Welt mit Isolationismus und Protektionismus lösen zu können, der unterliegt einem gewaltigen Irrtum.\n\nNur gemeinsam wird es uns gelingen, die richtigen Antworten auf die zentralen Fragen unserer Zeit zu finden. Das gilt für die G 20 genauso wie für die Europäische Union. Deshalb war es sehr wichtig, dass sich der Europäische Rat in der vergangenen Woche nicht nur mit dem erforderlichen Ehrgeiz, sondern auch mit der gebotenen Ruhe und Konzentration den bevorstehenden Aufgaben gewidmet hat.\n\nSpätestens seit dem Referendum in Großbritannien zum Austritt des Landes aus der Europäischen Union vor einem Jahr spürt man einen neuen Geist des Zusammenhalts der zukünftig 27 Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Union. Nach den oft schwierigen und manchmal auch dramatischen Situationen, die wir in Europa in den vergangenen Jahren erlebt haben, ist dies für mich ein klarer Ausdruck der Tatkraft unserer Union. Europa hat in der Vergangenheit bewiesen, dass es immer wieder gemeinsame überzeugende Lösungen finden kann, und seien die Verhandlungen noch so zäh und noch so mühsam.\n\nHeute können wir feststellen, dass es Europa wirtschaftlich wieder deutlich besser geht. Das haben sowohl Herr Draghi von der Europäischen Zentralbank als auch Jean-Claude Juncker so eingeschätzt. Dieses Jahr können alle 28 Mitgliedstaaten wieder mit positivem Wachstum rechnen. Die Arbeitslosenquote ist in der Europäischen Union so niedrig wie seit acht Jahren nicht mehr. Nach Angaben der Europäischen Kommission wurden seit 2013 europaweit 10 Millionen neue Arbeitsplätze geschaffen. Die Beschäftigungsquote ist auf dem höchsten Stand aller Zeiten angelangt. Das sind Erfolge, die Europa noch vor wenigen Jahren kaum jemand zugetraut hätte. Das sind Erfolge, die darauf gründen, dass Europa immer dann, wenn es tatsächlich darauf ankommt, in der Lage ist, gemeinsam zu handeln.\n\nEs ist genau diese Fähigkeit zu gemeinsamen Lösungen, zu Kompromissen, bei denen die Vorteile die Nachteile überwiegen, die Europa ausmacht. Diese Fähigkeit zeigt, dass es um den Zusammenhalt der Europäischen Union deutlich besser bestellt ist, als es manche hitzige Debatte vermuten lässt.\n\nIm März haben wir dieses Gemeinschaftsgefühl bei den Feierlichkeiten zum 60. Jahrestag der Unterzeichnung der Römischen Verträge deutlich erfahren können. Genauso ist es mit den gerade begonnenen Verhandlungen zum Austritt Großbritanniens aus der Europäischen Union. Auf diese Verhandlungen sind wir, die zukünftig 27 Mitgliedstaaten, und die europäischen Institutionen hervorragend vorbereitet. Wir stehen eng zusammen. Doch so intensiv wir die Verhandlungen mit Großbritannien auch führen werden, so sehr sind wir gemeinsam auch davon überzeugt, dass für uns Vorrang hat, die eigene Zukunft in der Europäischen Union zu gestalten - Brexit hin oder her.\n\nGerade wir in Deutschland haben im Übrigen ein ureigenes Interesse daran, dass Europa auch in Zukunft zusammenhält. Wir wissen, dass es auch Deutschland auf Dauer nur dann gut geht, wenn es auch Europa gut geht.\n\nParallel zu den Austrittsverhandlungen mit Großbritannien müssen und werden wir nach vorne blicken und gemeinsam intensiv daran arbeiten, die Europäische Union weiter zu verbessern. Deshalb haben wir uns beim Europäischen Rat für eine Vertiefung des Binnenmarktes ausgesprochen, und zwar insbesondere in dem wichtigen Bereich der Digitalisierung. Das umfasst auch die hohe Bedeutung, die wir anspruchsvollen Freihandelsabkommen beimessen; denn der Welthandel ist für den Wohlstand in Europa von überragender Bedeutung. Mit den Freihandelsabkommen kann es gleichzeitig gelingen, uns auch künftig besser vor unfairen Handelspraktiken zu schützen.\n\nEntscheidend für den Erfolg Europas ist und bleibt die deutsch-französische Zusammenarbeit. Wie gut die Zusammenarbeit zwischen Deutschland und Frankreich, aber auch mit anderen europäischen Partnern funktioniert, das hat sich beim zurückliegenden Europäischen Rat auch gezeigt. Alle zukünftigen 27 Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Union haben sich beispielsweise nach intensiver gemeinsamer Vorbereitung mit Frankreich unmissverständlich zum Pariser Klimaschutzabkommen bekannt.\n\nDie Europäische Union steht uneingeschränkt zu ihrer Zusage von Paris und wird das Abkommen zügig und entschlossen umsetzen. Mehr noch: Seit der Entscheidung der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika, das Klimaabkommen von Paris zu verlassen, sind wir entschlossener denn je, es zum Erfolg zu führen. Es steht außer Zweifel: Wir alle, auch Deutschland, haben dazu selbstverständlich unsere Hausaufgaben zu machen. Und da gibt es auch bei uns noch einiges zu tun. Das weiß ich sehr wohl. Das Entscheidende aber ist doch, dass wir unsere Ziele erreichen wollen, weil wir wissen, dass wir sie erreichen müssen, weil wir davon überzeugt sind, dass der Klimawandel eine der größten Menschheitsherausforderungen ist, eine für uns alle auf der Welt existenzielle Herausforderung.\n\nWir wollen und müssen diese existenzielle Herausforderung bewältigen. Und wir können und werden nicht darauf warten, bis auch der Letzte auf der Welt von den wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnissen in Bezug auf den Klimawandel überzeugt werden konnte. In einem Wort: Das Pariser Abkommen ist unumkehrbar, und es ist nicht verhandelbar.\n\nWir wollen und wir werden gemeinsam unsere Erde schützen und damit zugleich die wirtschaftlichen Chancen für Wohlstand und nachhaltiges Wachstum erkennen und nutzen, die sich aus der Umsetzung dieses Abkommens ergeben. Wir werden als Europäische Union unserer Verantwortung dabei gerecht werden, vorneweg die besonders betroffenen ärmsten und verletzlichsten Länder bei der Anpassung an den Klimawandel und beim Klimaschutz zu unterstützen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, beim Europäischen Rat haben wir darüber hinaus auch vereinbart, dass Europa bei der Bekämpfung des internationalen Terrorismus und in der Gemeinsamen Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik mehr Verantwortung übernehmen und noch enger zusammenarbeiten muss. Auch hier arbeiten Deutschland und Frankreich sehr eng zusammen. Eine stärkere europäische Zusammenarbeit in der Sicherheitspolitik geschieht ausdrücklich - und zwar im besten eigenen europäischen Interesse - nicht in Konkurrenz, sondern in Ergänzung zur NATO. Unser europäischer sicherheitspolitischer Ansatz geht weit über den rein militärischen der NATO hinaus. Er umfasst, dass immer auch ziviles und entwicklungspolitisches Engagement nötig ist, um Krisen zu bewältigen, Konflikte zu befrieden und Fluchtursachen zu bekämpfen.\n\nDeshalb ist es von großer Bedeutung, dass wir beim letzten Europäischen Rat auch den gegenwärtigen Stand unserer Migrations- und Flüchtlingspolitik beraten haben. Dieser Bereich gehört ohne jeden Zweifel zu denen, in denen Europa weit, weit hinter seinen Möglichkeiten bleibt. Es sind weitere gemeinsame Schritte sowohl innerhalb der Europäischen Union als auch bei der Zusammenarbeit mit den Herkunfts- und Transitstaaten nötig. Darauf werde ich auch weiter drängen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, der französische Präsident Emmanuel Macron und ich haben darüber hinaus vereinbart, einen Fahrplan für die mittelfristige Perspektive einer Vertiefung der Europäischen Union und insbesondere auch einer Vertiefung der Euro-Zone zu entwickeln. Mir ist sehr wichtig, dass hierfür die Rahmenbedingungen stimmen. Das bedeutet: Risiken, Haftung und Entscheidungsmöglichkeiten sollten weiterhin in einer Hand bleiben.\n\nNatürlich wird es bei einer Vertiefung der Euro-Zone viele Fragen geben, die sich nicht über Nacht klären lassen. Wichtig ist aber, dass wir gemeinsam mit Frankreich daran arbeiten; denn wir sind uns beide im Klaren, dass die Interessen Deutschlands und die Interessen Frankreichs auf das Engste miteinander verbunden sind, wenn es um die Zukunft Europas geht.\n\nVorgelebt hat das im Übrigen der große Europäer Helmut Kohl, ohne den das heutige Europa überhaupt nicht vorstellbar wäre.\n\nHelmut Kohl wusste, dass auch Deutschland nur dann erfolgreich sein kann, wenn auch Europa erfolgreich ist. Er wusste, dass ein erfolgreiches Europa auf ein starkes Frankreich und auf eine enge deutsch-französische Zusammenarbeit angewiesen ist. Helmut Kohl war ein Glücksfall für uns Deutsche, und er war ein Glücksfall für Europa.\n\nHelmut Kohl verstand, dass die Einheit Deutschlands in Frieden und Freiheit untrennbar mit der Einheit Europas in Frieden und Freiheit verbunden war, und er hat sich um beide Ziele wie kaum ein anderer verdient gemacht. Ich finde es deshalb eindrucksvoll und sehr berührend, dass übermorgen in Straßburg erstmals in der europäischen Geschichte ein europäischer Trauerakt im Gedenken an einen großen europäischen Staatsmann stattfindet, an den Kanzler der Einheit und Ehrenbürger Europas Helmut Kohl.\n\nIch meine, wir sollten versuchen, die Zukunft Europas mit demselben Mut und derselben Entschlossenheit in Angriff zu nehmen, wie er dies einst getan hat. Das verstehe ich als das Vermächtnis, das er uns und nachfolgenden Generationen hinterlässt. Dieses Vermächtnis ist umso bedeutender, als wir heute in einer globalisierten Welt leben, in der wir uns immer weniger darauf verlassen können, dass andere die Probleme für uns lösen.\n\nDie Welt wartet nicht auf uns Europäer, und Europa wird nicht umhinkommen, sein Schicksal stärker in die eigene Hand zu nehmen und in Zukunft deutlich mehr Verantwortung in der Welt zu übernehmen als in der Vergangenheit. Wenn uns dies als Europäischer Union gelingt, dann können wir umso glaubhafter und überzeugender darauf hinwirken, dass andere sich ebenfalls engagieren.\n\nAuch deshalb freue ich mich ganz besonders über die große Unterstützung, die wir von unseren europäischen Partnern für die Agenda des G\u001e20-Gipfels erhalten haben. Wir werden heute noch ein Treffen mit all den Teilnehmern an dem G\u001e20-Gipfel aus der Europäischen Union haben, um unsere Vorhaben noch einmal zu besprechen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich freue mich, am 7. und 8. Juli 2017 erstmals die Staats- und Regierungschefs der G 20 zu einem Gipfel in Hamburg zu empfangen. Der G\u001e20-Gipfel findet in diesem Jahr unter besonders herausfordernden Bedingungen statt. Ich nenne nur die größten Herausforderungen: Terrorismus, Klimawandel, Protektionismus. All diese Themen stehen auf der Tagesordnung.\n\nDie Welt ist in Unruhe, sie ist uneiniger geworden. Die G 20 stehen für fast zwei Drittel der Weltbevölkerung, sie erwirtschaften über vier Fünftel des weltweiten Bruttoinlandsproduktes, und sie wickeln drei Viertel des weltweiten Handels ab.\n\nIch habe mir für den Gipfel das Ziel gesetzt, dass von ihm ein Signal der Entschlossenheit ausgeht, mit dem die Staats- und Regierungschefs der G 20 zeigen, dass sie ihre überaus große Verantwortung für die Welt verstanden haben und dass sie diese Verantwortung auch übernehmen.\n\nZum Gipfel werden neben den G\u001e20-Staaten Spanien, Norwegen, die Niederlande und Singapur sowie die Vertreter der Regionalorganisationen kommen, konkret: Vietnam für die Asiatisch-Pazifische Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft, Guinea für die Afrikanische Union und Senegal für die Neue Partnerschaft für Afrikas Entwicklung. Insgesamt wird somit ein wirklich großer Teil derer, die die Weltbevölkerung repräsentieren, am Tisch sitzen. Ich bin überzeugt: Wir brauchen die G 20 dringender denn je, weil wir nur gemeinsam etwas bewegen können, und zwar schneller und effektiver, als dies mit nationalen Alleingängen auch nur im Ansatz jemals möglich wäre.\n\nDas Erlebnis gründet sich auf die erste Sitzung der G 20 während der Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise 2008/2009, als sich die G 20 zum ersten Mal auf der Ebene der Staats- und Regierungschefs getroffen haben. Wir haben damals unter Beweis gestellt: Gemeinsames Handeln kann die schrecklichen Auswirkungen der Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise zumindest lindern.\n\nWir haben viele Gremien, in denen es um die richtigen Strategien geht. Das gilt nicht nur für die Europäische Union, sondern auch für die Vereinten Nationen; Gremien wie die Welthandelsorganisation, die Weltgesundheitsorganisation, Weltbank, OECD, FSB, ILO oder IWF. Alle diese Organisationen sind von übergroßer Bedeutung. Sie alle unterstützen uns in der G 20.\n\nDas macht den Kern des Treffens der G 20 aus: Nur gemeinsam können wir etwas bewegen. Den Multilateralismus zu stärken, das ist der Gedanke, der sich daher wie ein roter Faden durch die Gipfelerklärung zieht, an der wir arbeiten. Genau dieser Gedanke liegt auch dem Motto unserer deutschen G\u001e20-Präsidentschaft und des Gipfels zugrunde, nämlich: Eine vernetzte Welt gestalten.\n\nDas bedeutet zweierlei: Erstens. Nachhaltiges Handeln ist vernetzt und deshalb nur miteinander möglich. Zweitens. Wir halten unsere Zukunft selbst in unseren Händen. Das heißt, wir gestalten unsere Werte und Interessen. Wir sollten und werden auch nicht getrieben sein, solange wir die Themen gemeinsam angehen, die uns alle betreffen. Also: In einer globalisierten Welt können wir nur gemeinsam etwas erreichen. Kein Land kann die Herausforderungen unserer Zeit allein bewältigen.\n\nIch freue mich, dass die deutsche G\u001e20-Präsidentschaft durchaus auf großes Interesse stößt. Das zeigt sich an der Resonanz auf unseren breiten Dialog mit der Zivilgesellschaft. Ich war erst letzte Woche in Hamburg zu Gast bei Nichtregierungsorganisationen und habe mit ihnen die Themen Klima, Entwicklung, Nachhaltigkeit und Gesundheit diskutiert. Auch hier wurde von den Nichtregierungsorganisationen die übergroße Bedeutung multilateraler Zusammenarbeit noch einmal in den Fokus gerückt.\n\nDie multilaterale Zusammenarbeit hat drei Zielen zu dienen: erstens Stabilität sicherzustellen, zweitens die Zukunftsfähigkeit zu verbessern und drittens Verantwortung zu übernehmen. Wir erreichen eine stabile Weltordnung dann, wenn wir weiterhin für eine zunehmende ökonomische Integration und einen grenzüberschreitenden Handel arbeiten; denn beides hat weltweit Wachstum und Wohlstand gebracht, Arbeitsplätze geschaffen und zur Reduzierung von Armut beigetragen.\n\nGleichzeitig erleben wir jedoch, dass Verunsicherung und Sorgen zunehmen; denn viele Menschen können an den Vorteilen der Globalisierung nicht teilhaben oder sie fühlen sich von der Entwicklung abgehängt. Dabei spielt weniger eine Ablehnung von Handelsbeziehungen als eine Verunsicherung gegenüber neuen Technologien eine Rolle.\n\nObwohl der Wohlstand in Deutschland mit einer exportorientierten Wirtschaft auf offenen Märkten mit transparenten Regeln begründet ist, gibt es auch bei uns viele kritische Stimmen zu Handelsabkommen. Einzelne Staaten reagieren auf diese Sorgen mit verstärkten Rufen nach Abschottung und Handelsbeschränkungen. Ich bin jedoch überzeugt, dass Protektionismus keine Lösung sein kann. Er schadet allen Beteiligten, und deshalb brauchen wir offene Märkte. Mein Ziel ist es daher, dass vom G\u001e20-Gipfel ein deutliches Signal für freie Märkte und gegen Abschottung sowie ein klares Bekenntnis zum multilateralen Handelssystem ausgeht.\n\nDie G 20 hat sich das Ziel gesetzt, das Wachstum ihrer Volkswirtschaften so auszurichten, dass davon alle profitieren können. Einen wichtigen Beitrag dazu leistet die internationale Zusammenarbeit in Steuerfragen. Durch den internationalen Druck ist es gelungen, die Zahl der als nicht kooperativ eingestuften Jurisdiktionen stark zu reduzieren. Ohne die Zusammenarbeit im Format der G 20 wäre uns dies so nicht gelungen.\n\nWir wissen, eine stabile Wirtschaft braucht funktionierende Finanzmärkte. Deshalb setze ich mich dafür ein, die G\u001e20-Finanzmarktreformagenda weiter mit Nachdruck umzusetzen. Uns wird zum Beispiel der Finanzstabilitätsrat zum Gipfel einen Bericht zur Wirksamkeit der bisherigen Arbeiten zu Schattenbanken vorlegen, auf dessen Basis dann mögliche weitere Regulierungsvorschläge erarbeitet werden sollen.\n\nWirtschaftliche Entwicklung und Nachhaltigkeit gehen Hand in Hand. Deshalb ist die G 20 das richtige Format, um auch die Umsetzung der Agenda 2030 für nachhaltige Entwicklung voranzutreiben. Wir wollen mit unseren G\u001e20-Partnern hier eine Vorreiterrolle bei der Umsetzung einnehmen, und ich möchte die G\u001e20-Partner beispielsweise für die Verpflichtung gewinnen, rasch über unsere nationalen Umsetzungsstrategien zu berichten. Denn die Zeit drängt. Wir müssen unsere Weltordnung zukunftsfähig machen. Multilaterales Handeln muss dem zweiten Ziel dienen, die Zukunftsfähigkeit eben auch zu verbessern.\n\n1995 waren lediglich 4 Prozent der Menschen weltweit mit dem Internet verbunden; heute sind es bereits 40 Prozent. Diese Entwicklung geht weiter und weiter. Sie betrifft nicht nur Menschen, sondern immer mehr auch Dinge. Wir erleben eine digitale Revolution unseres Lebens, eine digitale Transformation unserer Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Diese digitale Transformation braucht, wie alles, was wir tun, Regeln.\n\nMittelfristiges Ziel dazu ist zum Beispiel eine Verständigung über technische Standards. Wir wollen und wir müssen in der G 20 unsere Zusammenarbeit hierzu weiter ausbauen. Es gab in diesem Jahr unter deutscher Präsidentschaft zum ersten Mal ein Treffen der Digitalminister. Diese gesamte Zusammenarbeit steckt noch in den Anfängen; ich halte sie aber für absolut wichtig.\n\nEs gibt wenige Themen wie die Menschheitsherausforderung des Klimaschutzes - ich sagte es zu Beginn -, bei denen so spürbar wird, wie sehr wir alle auf der Erde schicksalhaft miteinander verbunden sind und wie wichtig es ist, die Zukunftsfähigkeit zu verbessern. Nachdem die USA nun angekündigt haben, das Pariser Abkommen zu verlassen, können wir in Hamburg keine einfachen Gespräche erwarten. Der Dissens ist offenkundig, und es wäre unaufrichtig, wenn wir ihn übertünchen würden. Das werde ich jedenfalls nicht tun.\n\nAls G 20 können wir die Herausforderung, die mit dem Klimawandel für uns alle auf der Welt verbunden ist, nicht ignorieren. Wir müssen dabei auch die Hoffnungen vieler Länder, gerade auch vieler Entwicklungsländer wie zum Beispiel die kleinen Inselstaaten, im Blick haben, gerade weil in der G 20 die wirtschaftlich stärksten Länder der Welt zusammenkommen.\n\nIch kann natürlich den Beratungen des Gipfels gerade zum Klimaschutz heute nicht vorgreifen. Aber ich bin entschlossen, sie so zu führen, dass sie dem Inhalt und Ziel des Pariser Abkommens dienen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, in Hamburg wollen wir uns darüber hinaus auch für menschenwürdige Arbeitsbedingungen in globalen Lieferketten einsetzen. Eng damit zusammen hängt die Stärkung der Frauen, insbesondere bei der Integration in den Arbeitsmarkt. Wir wollen weiter daran arbeiten, das auf dem G\u001e20-Gipfel im australischen Brisbane gesetzte Ziel zu erreichen, die Lücke der Erwerbsbeteiligung von Frauen bis 2025 um 25 Prozent zu reduzieren und die Qualität der Frauenerwerbstätigkeit zu verbessern.\n\nDaneben wollen wir den Zugang von Frauen in Entwicklungsländern zu Unternehmertum und ihren Zugang zu Bildung fördern, insbesondere auch in den Bereichen Digitalisierung und Informationstechnologie. Dazu wollen wir bei der Weltbank ein Finanzierungsinstrument aufsetzen, um den Zugang von Unternehmerinnen zu Krediten zu vereinfachen.\n\nEin neues und aus meiner Sicht äußerst wichtiges Thema der G 20 ist die globale Gesundheit. Wir brauchen dringend eine bessere Kooperation, um uns besser gegen Gesundheitsrisiken und insbesondere auch Pandemien zu wappnen. Übertragbare Krankheiten kennen keine Grenzen. Die menschlichen, aber auch die ökonomischen Auswirkungen können enorm sein. Das wurde uns etwa bei dem Ebolaausbruch sehr deutlich vor Augen geführt. Gleiches gilt auch für die Verbreitung von Antibiotikaresistenzen.\n\nDas Thema Gesundheit gehört auf unsere Agenda. Wir brauchen eine starke Weltgesundheitsorganisation und eine bessere Zusammenarbeit gerade auch mit Afrika.\n\nIn unserer Präsidentschaft haben wir deshalb erstmals Afrika zu einem Schwerpunkt der G 20 gemacht. Ich danke allen Ministerien der Bundesregierung, die dabei mitgewirkt haben. Dabei geht es vor allem darum, wie wir es gemeinsam schaffen können, dass sich mehr private Investoren in Afrika engagieren und so zu wirtschaftlicher Entwicklung und Beschäftigung beitragen; denn wir müssen ganz klar konstatieren: Wenn in vielen afrikanischen Ländern Jahrzehnte nach der Unabhängigkeit die Zugangsrate zu elektrischem Strom um die 20 Prozent liegt, also 80 Prozent der Menschen dort keinen Zugang zu elektrischem Strom haben, dann kann wirtschaftliche Entwicklung in breitem Umfang gar nicht funktionieren. Deshalb danke ich dafür, dass sich die Bundesregierung mit dem Compact with Africa und anderen Initiativen wirklich mit diesem Thema neben der Entwicklungshilfe, nicht anstelle der Entwicklungshilfe, stark beschäftigt hat.\n\nDie Philosophie unseres Engagements ist folgende: Mit reformbereiten Ländern wollen wir Investitionspartnerschaften, eben solche Compacts, abschließen, die sich an der Nachfrage und an den Prioritäten der Länder orientieren. Ich will in dem Zusammenhang darauf hinweisen, dass die Afrikanische Union mit ihrer Agenda 2063 zum ersten Mal ein eigenes Entwicklungskonzept erarbeitet hat. An diesem Entwicklungskonzept sollten wir uns auch orientieren und nicht ständig sagen, dass wir besonders gut wüssten, was Afrika braucht. Es geht nämlich auch darum, dass die Verantwortlichkeit in Afrika für die eigenen Projekte gestärkt wird.\n\nDas heißt nichts anderes, als dass es wichtig ist, dass wir für den Erfolg bei der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung Afrikas umdenken und auch verstehen müssen, dass neben den öffentlichen Investitionen der Entwicklungshilfepolitik das Engagement des Privatsektors steht. Wir sind da schon ein ganzes Stück vorangekommen. Ich hoffe auf die Unterstützung durch weitere G\u001e20-Partner bei unserer Partnerschaft mit Afrika.\n\nDarüber hinaus ist es ein großes Anliegen, dass die G 20 in der Frage von Flucht und Migration erheblich enger zusammenrücken und zusammenarbeiten; denn es geht hier um eine globale Herausforderung von immenser Bedeutung. Weltweit sind so viele Menschen auf der Flucht wie noch nie. Wir brauchen verbesserte globale Strukturen, um Fluchtursachen zu bekämpfen. Diese Diskussion wird zwar seit Jahren geführt - sie ist nicht einfach -, aber auch hier gilt, dass wir ohne gemeinsame Strategie nicht zu Lösungen kommen werden, die den Menschen wirklich helfen und dienen.\n\nFluchtursachen zu bekämpfen, das bedeutet auch, Fortschritte in der nachhaltigen Entwicklung und bei der Beschäftigung zu erreichen. Nur so können wir vor Ort den Menschen bessere Perspektiven verschaffen. Das wird dann auch dazu beitragen, dass weniger Menschen ihre Heimat verlassen müssen.\n\nZum Kampf gegen Fluchtursachen gehört darüber hinaus der Kampf gegen den weltweit grassierenden Terrorismus. Auch den Kampf gegen den Terrorismus können wir nur gemeinsam gewinnen. Dazu haben wir in einer Financial Action Task Force internationale Standards entwickelt, die jetzt von allen zügig umgesetzt werden müssen. Das heißt also, Prävention, das Austrocknen der Geldquellen und die engere Zusammenarbeit der Sicherheitsbehörden sind es, die wir im Kampf gegen den Terrorismus brauchen.\n\nHerr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren, nur gemeinsam können wir in all diesen Fragen etwas erreichen. Gerade weil die G 20 ein informelles Format sind, ist diese Gruppe besonders geeignet, sich diesen wichtigen Fragen zu widmen. Aber ich sage auch sehr schwierige Diskussionen in Hamburg voraus; denn nur wenn sich die G 20 einig sind, kommen wir auch in den formellen Gremien, wie zum Beispiel in den Vereinten Nationen, voran.\n\nIch bin überzeugt, wir werden diese Aufgaben dann erfolgreich bewältigen können, wenn wir alle gemeinsam Verantwortung übernehmen und auch mutig voranschreiten. Das gilt für Deutschland, für Europa, für die G 20 und für die ganze Welt. Wir werden dann erfolgreich sein, wenn unsere Arbeit auf all diesen Ebenen gut und sinnvoll ineinandergreift. Das ist das Ziel, das wir gemeinsam mit Frankreich und unseren anderen europäischen Partnern beim Europäischen Rat verfolgt haben und das wir auch in der weiteren Debatte über die Zukunft der Europäischen Union verfolgen werden. Es ist auch das Ziel, dem das Vorbereitungstreffen heute dient, und es ist das Ziel, das die Bundesregierung bei den weiteren Vorbereitungen für den G\u001e20-Gipfel in Hamburg fest im Auge behalten wird.\n\nWir wissen - das als letzte Bemerkung -, dass für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger Hamburgs die Gipfeltage und auch die Tage davor eine hohe Herausforderung sind. Und wir wissen, dass die Polizisten und Sicherheitskräfte vor harten Einsätzen stehen. Wir wissen, dass es Proteste geben wird, und das ist mehr als legitim in einer Demokratie. Aber ich wünsche zur Unterstützung der Bürgerinnen und Bürger in Hamburg und zur Unterstützung der Sicherheitskräfte, die einen hohen Einsatz zeigen, dass diese Proteste friedlich sind. Ich hoffe dabei auf Ihre Unterstützung.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n1391,sabine-zimmermann,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn man die Debatte hier so verfolgt, dann muss man einfach denken: Sie kennen die Realität in diesem Land nicht, Sie wissen nicht, dass Millionen von Menschen im Niedriglohnbereich arbeiten, teilweise mit 4,50 Euro die Stunde nach Hause gehen, Sie wissen nicht, dass viele Menschen die Grundsicherung im Alter brauchen, weil sie in den ganzen Jahren so niedrige Löhne hatten. Ich denke, dass Sie die Realität gar nicht kennen.\n\nSie sprechen hier vollmundig über die Anerkennung der Lebensleistung und das Schließen von Gerechtigkeitslücken. Ich sage Ihnen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Mein Kollege Matthias W. Birkwald hat recht, wenn er sagt: Bei den von Ihnen angekündigten Maßnahmen handelt es sich nicht um ein Rentenpaket, es handelt sich allenfalls um ein Rentenpäckchen und noch dazu um eine Mogelpackung.\n\n„Rente muss zum Leben reichen“, das fordert auch der Deutsche Gewerkschaftsbund zu Recht in seiner Kampagne. Dank Ihrer Senkung des Rentenniveaus und Ihrer Rente ab 67 werden aber immer mehr Menschen sagen müssen: Meine Rente reicht nicht zum Leben. - Hier ist Altersarmut vorprogrammiert. Und was tun Sie? Sie tun nichts, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nIhre Maßnahmen haben mit Gerechtigkeit definitiv nichts zu tun. Schauen wir uns die sogenannte Mütterrente einmal an: Sie wollen die Erziehungszeiten für vor 1992 geborene Kinder richtigerweise besser anerkennen. Statt ein Jahr lang soll künftig zwei Jahre lang der Durchschnittsbeitrag in die Rentenversicherung fließen. Bei den Eltern, deren Kinder nach 1992 geboren sind, werden aber drei Jahre anerkannt. Ich frage Sie: Ist das gerecht? Gibt es für diese Ungleichbehandlung irgendeinen sachlichen Grund? Ich höre keinen, und ich kann das niemandem erklären, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nIhnen fehlen der Wille und der Mut, das für eine gerechte Lösung nötige Geld durch eine andere Steuerpolitik aufzubringen. Sie lassen die Verkäuferin, die Krankenschwester, den Müllwerker und prekär beschäftigte Menschen diese Mütterrente bezahlen, während der praktizierende Arzt, die Rechtsanwältin oder wir alle als Abgeordnete des Deutschen Bundestages fein raus sind und dort keinen müden Euro beisteuern müssen. Das ist ungerecht.\n\nWas mich nicht nur als Frau aus dem Osten besonders empört: Sie halten auch an der Ungleichbehandlung zwischen Ost und West fest. Ich frage Sie, meine Damen und Herren - wir sind im 25. Jahr der deutschen Einheit -: Wie lange wollen Sie Ost und West noch unterschiedlich behandeln? Soll es noch in 100 Jahren so sein? So kann es doch nicht weitergehen!\n\nErklären Sie der Frau in Dresden doch einmal, warum ihre Erziehungsleistung weniger wert sein soll als die einer Frau oder eines Mannes in Hamburg? Ich bin mir sicher, auch das können Sie nicht erklären.\n\nNoch eines zur Rente ab 63 für langjährig Versicherte: Für diese Reform brennen Sie hier ein Riesenfeuerwerk ab; dabei handelt es sich um nicht mehr als eine eigentlich selbstverständliche Übergangsregelung, die schon bei der Einführung der Rente ab 67 ins Gesetz gehört hätte. Gleichzeitig zeigt Ihr Umgang mit Zeiten der Arbeitslosigkeit einmal mehr, dass es Ihnen um manches gehen mag, aber definitiv nicht um Rentengerechtigkeit.\n\nSie wollen nur kurzfristige Zeiten der Arbeitslosigkeit anerkennen; das ist schlimm genug. Aber ein starkes Stück ist es, wenn Sie auch noch argumentieren, es gehe hier um die Lebensleistung. Nun frage ich Sie - da möchte ich das Beispiel meines Kollegen noch einmal aufgreifen -: Was unterscheidet einen Maurer, der viermal ein Jahr arbeitslos war, von einem Maurer, der einmal vier Jahre arbeitslos war?\n\n- Ja, Sie können sich aufregen; es ist aber so, und das müssen Sie den Leuten draußen erklären. - Die gleiche Frage können Sie bei einer Altenpflegerin stellen, die auch hart arbeitet. Wo soll in diesen Fällen der Unterschied in der Lebensleistung liegen? Da gibt es keinen. Dennoch verurteilen Sie Menschen, die langzeitarbeitslos sind, mit saftigen Abschlägen in Rente zu gehen oder aber länger zu arbeiten. Das hat nichts mit Gerechtigkeit zu tun.\n\nSo bleibt als Fazit des Rentenpäckchens eigentlich nur: Manches wird besser, nichts wird gut, und das wird auch so bleiben. Von einer Rentenreform sollten Sie erst wieder sprechen, wenn Sie sich den eigentlichen Baustellen widmen. Statt das Rentenniveau weiter abzusenken, muss es endlich wieder angehoben werden.\n\nAn der Rente mit 67, meine Damen und Herren, sollten Sie nicht länger herumdoktern, sondern sie einfach beerdigen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n10029,margaret-horb,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Machen wir eine kleine Zeitreise ins Jahr 1919: Der Erste Weltkrieg war gerade zu Ende gegangen, auf den Straßen gab es mehr Pferdedroschken als Autos, und noch gab es längst nicht in allen Amtsstuben Telefon oder Schreibmaschine, aber es gab schon Finanzämter.\n\nHeute beginnen wir die grundlegendste Reform der Abgabenordnung seit 1977. Und das ist dringend notwendig; denn die Welt hat sich verändert. Demografischer Wandel, Digitalisierung und Globalisierung stellen auch unsere Finanzverwaltung vor neue Herausforderungen. In einer Welt, in der in Sekundenschnelle Milliarden von Euro, Dollar und Yen transferiert werden, in einer Welt, in der die Steuersysteme verschiedener Länder gegeneinander ausgespielt werden, in einer Welt, in der sozusagen Millionen von Daten aus verschiedenen Steuersystemen zugeordnet und ausgewertet werden müssen, in dieser Welt muss auch unsere Finanzverwaltung technisch auf der Höhe der Zeit sein. Die Finanzverwaltung des 21. Jahrhunderts wird eine digitale sein, oder sie wird scheitern. Wir sorgen dafür, dass sie nicht scheitert. Wir sorgen dafür, dass sie funktioniert.\n\nDie Abgabenordnung ist sozusagen der Werkzeugkasten all derjenigen, die am Besteuerungsverfahren beteiligt sind, also der Steuerzahler, der Finanzverwaltung und der steuerberatenden Berufe. Mit dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf legen wir einige neue, modernere Werkzeuge in diesen Werkzeugkasten hinein. Auf die Finanzverwaltung übertragen heißt das zum Beispiel: Die Millionen Steuerbescheide der Arbeitnehmer oder Rentner sollen künftig vollautomatisch erstellt werden können.\n\nDass wir Effizienz und Wirtschaftlichkeit in den Blick nehmen, heißt aber nicht, dass wir Abstriche bei der Rechtssicherheit, bei der Gleichmäßigkeit der Besteuerung oder bei der Steuergerechtigkeit machen. Ganz im Gegenteil: Die Finanzverwaltung soll sich auf die komplizierten, die komplexen Fälle und auf die Bekämpfung von Steuerbetrug konzentrieren können.\n\nSie soll serviceorientierter, effizienter und schneller werden. Der Bund kann dazu neue Werkzeuge in diesen Werkzeugkasten hineinlegen. Aber er ist nicht derjenige, der diese Werkzeuge benutzt. Die Personalhoheit in der Finanzverwaltung liegt aufseiten der Länder. Es geht nicht darum, Finanzpersonal zu ersetzen, sondern es geht darum, Personal effektiver einzusetzen. Selbst die modernsten Werkzeuge nützen nichts, wenn ein gut ausgebildeter Handwerker fehlt, der diese bedienen kann. Und wir machen dieses Gesetz auch nicht allein für die Länder und für die Finanzverwaltung. Ein Steuergesetz ist dann ein gutes Steuergesetz, wenn es die Interessen aller berücksichtigt, die am Besteuerungsverfahren beteiligt sind.\n\nFast die Hälfte aller Steuererklärungen wird nicht von den Steuerpflichtigen selbst gemacht, sondern von den beratenden Berufen. Es geht gerade um diese komplexen Fälle, die auf diese Weise vorstrukturiert und professionell aufbereitet bei der Finanzverwaltung eingehen. Wenn wir die Lohnsteuerhilfevereine und die Steuerberater nicht hätten, dann könnten wir unsere Finanzämter dichtmachen. Das wird sich auch in der Gesetzesberatung widerspiegeln.\n\nDas Bundesfinanzministerium ist hier mit sehr gutem Beispiel vorangegangen. Länder, Kammern, Verbände, Gewerkschaft und Finanzrichter sind bei der Formulierung mit einbezogen worden. Das Modernisierungsgesetz ist im Dialog entstanden, und so sieht moderne Regierungsarbeit aus.\n\nZuallererst sind es aber natürlich die Steuerzahler selbst, die im Fokus unserer Arbeit stehen: die Bürgerinnen und Bürger und die Unternehmen. Ein faires und ein einfaches Steuerrecht ist nicht nur eine Frage von Steuersätzen oder der Höhe von Pauschbeträgen, sondern es ist auch eine Verfahrensfrage. Wir geben den Ländern die Werkzeuge in die Hand, Steuererklärungen künftig schneller zu bearbeiten. Daten, die von Versicherungen, Arbeitgebern und vielen mehr an die Finanzverwaltung übermittelt werden, sollen auch den Steuerpflichtigen zur Verfügung stehen.\n\nDie vorausgefüllte Steuererklärung werden wir weiter ausbauen. Belege müssen künftig nur noch auf Anfrage eingereicht werden. Am Ende steht auch hier die elektronische Belegübermittlung. Das ist gut, das ist richtig und das ist wichtig. Aber das setzt voraus - das sage ich in aller Klarheit -, dass dafür die notwendige IT vorhanden ist, dass sie schnell eingeführt wird und dass sie vor allem funktioniert. Die Länder müssen die Entwicklung der Steuer-IT mit stärkerem Tempo und mit größerer Entschlossenheit vorantreiben. Es kann nicht sein - da gebe ich Kollegen Pitterle recht -, dass die Unternehmen seit 2013 ihre Bilanzen detailliert aufgeschlüsselt elektronisch einreichen müssen, die Finanzverwaltung aber die Änderung nicht elektronisch zurückübermitteln kann. Die Unternehmen haben ein Recht auf diese Abweichungsanalyse.\n\nDigitalisierung ist und darf keine Einbahnstraße sein. Als Bund können wir die Abgabenordnung anpassen, wo es sinnvoll und notwendig ist. Aber die Länder sind für den Steuervollzug zuständig. Wir, die CDU/CSU, würden gerne das Gesetzgebungsverfahren dazu nutzen, im Bereich der Steuervereinfachung noch weiter voranzukommen. Wir haben der SPD eine Liste mit Vereinfachungsvorschlägen unterbreitet, die wir für finanzierbar und notwendig erachten. Wir sind koalitionsintern noch in den Beratungen. Trotzdem möchte ich zwei der Vorschläge kurz vorstellen.\n\nErstens. Wir wollen die verbindliche Auskunft als Instrument stärken. Deshalb wollen wir in der Abgabenordnung festschreiben, dass über die Anträge auf Erteilung einer verbindlichen Auskunft innerhalb von sechs Monaten entschieden werden soll. Die Unternehmen sollen damit schneller Rechtssicherheit und Planungssicherheit erhalten.\n\nZweitens. Wir haben vorgeschlagen, den Vollverzinsungssatz von derzeit 6 Prozent im Rahmen des haushalterisch Machbaren befristet abzusenken. Klar ist aber auch: Wir brauchen dafür die Zustimmung unseres Koalitionspartners und die der Länder.\n\nAuf eine Änderung wollen wir uns in der Koalition verständigen. Der Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung sieht vor, dass es künftig vollautomatische Verspätungszuschläge geben soll. Wir wollen, dass es für Nullbescheide und Steuererstattungen bei der bestehenden Regelung bleibt. Auf dieser Linie wollen wir weitermachen.\n\nIch freue mich auf die Gesetzesberatung mit dir, lieber Frank Junge, aber auch mit den Kollegen der Opposition im Sinne und zum Wohle der Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n10648,volker-beck,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Die Antidiskriminierungsstelle des Bundes hat heute ein Rechtsgutachten zur Rehabilitierung der nach § 175 StGB verurteilten homosexuellen Männer vorgestellt. Der Bundesjustizminister hat heute per Presseerklärung mitgeteilt, er wolle hierzu einen Gesetzentwurf erarbeiten und vorlegen, der die Aufhebung von Verurteilungen und auch einen entsprechenden Entschädigungsanspruch regelt. Ich möchte wissen, ob dieser Vorstoß des Bundesjustizministers von der Bundesregierung insgesamt unterstützt wird und wie der Zeitplan für die Vorlage des Gesetzentwurfs aussieht.\n\nIch gehe davon aus, dass der Minister das, was er der Presse erklärt, selbstverständlich vorher mit seinen Kollegen im Kabinett erörtert hat.\n\nVielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Meine Damen und Herren von der Bundesregierung, diese Frage geht wahrscheinlich an das Innenministerium. Der Guardian berichtete in seiner gestrigen Ausgabe von drei Europaabgeordneten, die sich in Griechenland und in der Türkei aufgehalten und 40 Flüchtlinge befragt haben, die aus Griechenland in die Türkei verbracht wurden. Diese Flüchtlinge erzählten, dass sie bislang weder in Griechenland noch in der Türkei die Möglichkeit hatten, einen Antrag auf Asyl zu stellen.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund frage ich Sie nach einem konkreten Fall, den wir schon im Ausschuss kurz angesprochen haben. Sollten Sie zwischenzeitlich immer noch nicht mehr wissen, bitte ich darum, dem Parlament nachzuberichten. Am 4. April dieses Jahres sind 13 Afghanen und Kongolesen von Griechenland in die Türkei abgeschoben worden, die vorher einen Asylantrag stellen wollten, der aber von den griechischen Behörden nicht entgegengenommen wurde. Vertreter der Partnerorganisation von Pro Asyl, Mülteci-Der, versuchten, zu den Flüchtlingen in den Abschiebelagern Zugang zu bekommen. Das wurde ihnen von der Generaldirektion für Migrationsmanagement in Ankara untersagt.\n\nWelche Kenntnisse hat die Bundesregierung über diese Vorfälle? Waren Vertreter der Bundesregierung und deutsche Beamte von diesen Vorgängen unterrichtet oder an den Abschiebungen von Griechenland in die Türkei in irgendeiner Weise beteiligt?\"\n13713,daniela-kolbe,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und liebe Kollegen! Altersarmut hat viele Gesichter. Einige fallen mir ganz konkret ein bzw. sind mir in Erinnerung:\n\nIch erinnere mich zum Beispiel an das Gesicht der Frau, die mit ihrem GEZ-Bescheid bei mir im Wahlkreisbüro gesessen und sich beklagt hat, dass sie den GEZ-Beitrag nicht bezahlen kann. Eine Prüfung der ganzen Geschichte ergab, dass die Frau eigentlich Grundsicherung im Alter hätte beantragen müssen. Ich habe ihr das geraten, und die Reaktion war: Nein, das mache ich nicht. Nach einem Leben voller Arbeit gehe ich nicht zum Amt. Das ist unter meiner Würde. - Ich konnte das sehr gut nachvollziehen.\n\nMir ist auch das Gesicht des Mannes in Erinnerung, der wegen einer Mieterhöhung zu mir gekommen ist, die ihm richtig wehtat. Ja, steigende Mieten sind ein Problem. Das dahinterliegende Problem bei ihm war aber: Er war Selbstständiger und hatte bei seiner Alterssicherung auf seinen unternehmerischen Erfolg gesetzt. Er ist in die Insolvenz gegangen und konnte dementsprechend nur wenige Rentenpunkte ansammeln. - Pech gehabt nach einem Leben voller Arbeit!\n\nDaneben fällt mir der EU-Rentner ein, der bei mir saß und relativ direkt gefragt hat: Wann beachtet die Politik eigentlich mal wieder Leute wie mich? Ich wollte und will arbeiten, ich kann es aber nicht mehr.\n\nIch will mich gar nicht mit den Zahlen und auch nicht mit der Frage aufhalten, ob die Armutsgefährdungsquote jetzt der richtige Indikator ist und ob man sich nicht besser relative anstatt der absoluten Zahlen angucken sollte. Fakt ist: Viel zu viele Menschen in Deutschland sind von Altersarmut betroffen oder bedroht.\n\nNach meiner Ansicht werden die Zahlen noch weiter steigen. Das wird womöglich zunehmend auch Menschen betreffen, die ein ganzes Leben lang gearbeitet haben oder arbeiten wollten. Das ist schreiend ungerecht, und deswegen sind wir zum Handeln aufgefordert.\n\nDiese Bundesregierung hat auch einiges getan. Gerade heute hat das Kabinett zum zweiten Mal in dieser Legislaturperiode beschlossen, die Erwerbsminderungsrente deutlich zu erhöhen; und das ist richtig so.\n\n- Aufwachsend! Du weißt es genau, Matthias: Wir gehen hier Schritt für Schritt, und das wird eine massive Verbesserung für die Menschen sein. Gerade weil sie so geringe Auszahlbeträge bekommen, sind die Summen signifikant, und sie werden den Leuten wirklich helfen.\n\nBei anderen Themen ringen wir noch um eine Einigung. Es kann aber sein, dass wir uns in der Koalition nicht einigen können. Dann werden die Wählerinnen und Wähler am 24. September 2016 entscheiden können und müssen, in welche Richtung es gehen soll.\n\nBeispiel Selbstständige. Diese Gruppe ist schon jetzt besonders von Altersarmut betroffen. Fast die Hälfte der ehemaligen Selbstständigen hat im Alter weniger als 1 000 Euro monatlich zur Verfügung. Von den jetzigen Solo-Selbstständigen haben 25 Prozent Stundenlöhne, die unterhalb des Mindestlohnes liegen. Etwa 3 Millionen Selbstständige haben keine verlässliche Altersvorsorge.\n\nWir sagen: Das kann nicht so bleiben. Wir wollen diese Versorgungslücke schließen, und wir wollen, dass sie endlich in die Solidargemeinschaft der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung einbezogen werden.\n\nDas ist auch eine Forderung des Rentenkonzepts von Andrea Nahles.\n\nNächster Punkt. Um die jetzt arbeitende Generation vor Altersarmut zu schützen, müssen wir an vielen Punkten gegensteuern. Vor allen Dingen in Ostdeutschland laufen wir hier sehenden Auges in ein Riesenproblem. Viele Menschen waren zu lange arbeitslos oder hatten zu lange sehr niedrige Löhne.\n\nIch bin stolz darauf, dass wir heute endlich beschlossen haben, die Rentenangleichung in Ost und West hinzubekommen. Das ist ein riesiger Schritt in Richtung innerdeutsche Einheit. Die SPD sagt aber auch: Wir wollen nicht nur die Angleichung der Rentensysteme, sondern wir brauchen auch die Angleichung der Löhne. Es muss in Deutschland gelten: „Gleicher Lohn für gleiche Arbeit, egal ob in Ost oder West“, und dafür muss es dann auch gleiche Rentenanwartschaften geben.\n\nWir müssen weiter gegen prekäre Beschäftigung und Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit vorgehen. Wir müssen aber auch zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass die letzten Jahrzehnte auch im Bereich Rente noch länger nachwirken werden. Viele Menschen haben ihr Leben lang gearbeitet und waren aufgrund niedrigerer Löhne nicht in der Lage, ausreichend Rentenpunkte anzusammeln. Wir brauchen etwas für diese langjährig Beschäftigten; denn es kann nicht sein, dass diese Menschen in der Grundsicherung landen wie die Menschen, die nie eingezahlt haben. Das widerspricht jeder Leistungsgerechtigkeit.\n\nWir sagen deshalb: Wir brauchen eine Solidarrente. Andrea Nahles hat hier mit ihrem Rentenkonzept einen Vorschlag gemacht. Lassen Sie ihn uns diskutieren! Das ist ein Schritt in die richtige Richtung, ein Schritt, um dieses Land gerechter zu machen und den Menschen zu helfen, die ein Leben lang gearbeitet und es verdient haben, im Alter vernünftig leben zu können.\n\nWir werden über dieses Thema weiter diskutieren, spätestens beim Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht. Mich würde aber noch viel mehr freuen, wenn wir über einen gemeinsamen Gesetzentwurf der Koalition zum Thema Solidarrente diskutieren würden. Insofern geht mein Blick in Richtung Koalitionspartner: Geben Sie sich einen Ruck! Sehr viele Menschen in diesem Land würden es Ihnen danken.\"\n1868,andrea-lindholz,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Seit meiner ersten Rede zum Thema Syrien im März dieses Jahres hat sich die Situation leider kaum verändert. Nach wie vor überschattet die Eskalation in der Ukraine die humanitäre Katastrophe in Syrien. In den deutschen Medien taucht die katastrophale Lage in dem vom Bürgerkrieg zerstörten Land nur ganz selten auf.\n\nDer Zerfall des syrischen Staates fordert nach wie vor täglich neue Todesopfer. Zahllose Menschen werden verletzt, während 40 Prozent der syrischen Krankenhäuser nicht mehr funktionsfähig sind. 9,3 Millionen Syrer sind innerhalb und außerhalb ihrer Heimat auf der Flucht. Sie alle benötigen dringend humanitäre Hilfe.\n\nDeutschland erfüllt seine humanitären Verpflichtungen und hilft massiv. Seit 2012 hat die Bundesregierung über eine halbe Milliarde Euro für syrische Flüchtlinge bereitgestellt. Damit gehört Deutschland zu den größten bilateralen Geldgebern. Hieran wollen wir festhalten, und wir dürfen da auch nicht nachlassen.\n\nUnser Technisches Hilfswerk liefert praktische Hilfe in den Flüchtlingslagern in Jordanien und im Nordirak. Die Mitarbeiter des THW und aller anderen Hilfsorganisationen vor Ort leisten einen unschätzbaren Dienst für Millionen von Flüchtlingen. Ihnen gebührt unser Dank.\n\nAuch im Asylbereich macht sich das Engagement -bemerkbar. In Deutschland werden inzwischen rund 1 700 neue syrische Asylanträge pro Monat registriert. Seit 2012 gibt es einen Stopp von Abschiebungen nach Syrien. In den letzten Jahren sind über 36 000 Syrer nach Deutschland gekommen. Damit hat sich die syrische Gemeinschaft in Deutschland mehr als verdoppelt. Zusätzlich haben wir zwei Sonderprogramme aufgelegt, mit denen 10 000 besonders schutzbedürftige Syrer bei uns Asyl erhalten. Deutschland nimmt damit zwei Drittel aller syrischen Flüchtlinge auf, die außerhalb der Region Schutz finden.\n\nBayern, Herr Kollege Post, nimmt im Rahmen des Bundesprogramms 1 520 Syrer auf. Das sind 15 Prozent der Gesamtzahl und damit mehr, als jedes andere Bundesland aufnimmt. Staatsminister Herrmann hat bereits angekündigt, dass Bayern auch weiterhin über das Maß hinaus Syrer aufnehmen wird und statt auf unflexible Landesprogramme auf eine Ausweitung des Bundes-programms setzen will. In Bayern leben 4 600 Syrer. Das sind 7 Prozent aller Angehörigen der syrischen Community in Deutschland.\n\nUnsere europäischen Partnerstaaten haben zwar ebenfalls Sonderprogramme aufgelegt. Allerdings kommen alle EU-Staaten zusammen gerade mal auf ein Kontingent von 3 900 Sonderplätzen. Selbst große Länder wie Frankreich und Großbritannien stellen nur 500 Plätze bereit. Das, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, ist nicht länger hinnehmbar.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund bittet die Koalition die Bundesregierung, unsere europäischen Nachbarn aufzufordern, mehr Verantwortung angesichts der humanitären Katastrophe zu übernehmen. Das gilt sowohl in Bezug auf die Ausweitung der Sonderkontingente außerhalb der gewöhnlichen Asylverfahren als auch in Bezug auf die Hilfe vor Ort in Syrien und den Nachbarstaaten. Hier müssen insbesondere mehr Gelder für die humanitäre Unterstützung zur Verfügung gestellt werden. Wir brauchen auf europäischer Ebene - das hatte ich im März schon gesagt - endlich eine Syrien-Flüchtlingskonferenz. Auch wenn die schrecklichen Bilder der syrischen Flüchtlingskinder nicht in unseren Medien auftauchen: Es gibt sie doch. Das Elend ist groß, und Europa darf hier nicht wegsehen.\n\nEs kann nicht sein, dass unsere europäischen Partner die Verantwortung speziell für Syrien und allgemein im Asylbereich auf Deutschland abwälzen. Im letzten Jahr wurden fast 30 Prozent aller Asylanträge innerhalb Europas in Deutschland gestellt. Binnen eines Jahres stieg in Deutschland die Zahl der Asylanträge um 70 Prozent.\n\nAngesichts dieser Zahlen ist es wichtig, dass wir die im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbarte Beschleunigung der Asylverfahren zügig umsetzen. Aussichtslose Asyl-verfahren müssen schneller als bisher abgeschlossen werden. Wir würden damit zusätzliche Kapazitäten schaffen, um für syrische Flüchtlinge schnell eine -Lösung zu finden, und wir würden die Situation in den Kommunen verbessern. Die Kommunen erbringen nämlich die Hauptleistung bei der Aufnahme der Flüchtlinge, was nicht immer ganz einfach ist. Auch ich gehe davon aus, dass wir weitere Flüchtlinge aus Syrien bei uns aufnehmen werden und aufnehmen müssen.\n\nDaher wollen wir Serbien, Mazedonien, Bosnien-Herzegowina, aber auch Albanien und Montenegro zu sicheren Herkunftsstaaten erklären. Aus diesen Ländern stammt heute mehr als ein Viertel aller Asylbewerber, obwohl die Anerkennungsquote für diese Länder seit Jahren bei quasi 0 Prozent liegt. Diese Länder sind sicher. Serbien bewirbt sich um eine EU-Mitgliedschaft. Die serbische Regierung bittet selber darum, auch von Deutschland endlich als sicheres Herkunftsland eingestuft zu werden.\n\nAsyl in Deutschland, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, kann aber immer nur in begrenztem Umfang eine Lösung für Flüchtlingskrisen bieten. Angesichts von 43 Millionen Flüchtlingen weltweit wird der tatsächliche Bedarf an Asyl nie zu decken sein.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund ist es richtig, dass wir den Fokus auf die Unterstützung vor Ort legen, den Menschen direkt vor Ort helfen und für ein Dach über dem Kopf, für sauberes Trinkwasser, für Essen und für medizinische Versorgung Sorge tragen.\n\nLangfristig wird sich die Situation der syrischen Flüchtlinge aber nur verbessern, wenn der Krieg in ihrer Heimat beendet wird. Der Friedensprozess muss daher mit allem Nachdruck und trotz aller Rückschläge weiterverfolgt werden. Wo die Gespräche enden und wo die Waffen sprechen, da hat die Politik versagt, und das dürfen wir nicht akzeptieren.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8383,antje-tillmann,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Die europäische Zusammenarbeit auf dem Gebiet der Finanzmarktregulierung war in den letzten Jahren äußerst erfolgreich. So konnten wir uns im Juni 2012 darauf einigen, eine Bankenunion mit gemeinsamer Aufsicht und gemeinsamen Krisenmechanismen zu gründen.\n\nBegonnen hat dieser Prozess mit dem Stresstest. Die EZB hat die 130 größten Banken in der Euro-Zone einem Stresstest unterzogen, der Kapitallücken bei 25 Banken aufgedeckt hat. Dieses Kapital haben die Banken inzwischen aufgebracht. Seit November 2014 stehen diese Großbanken unter der Aufsicht der EZB. Bankenschieflagen sollen so in Zukunft durch frühzeitiges Eingreifen verhindert werden. Sollte trotzdem eine Bank in Bedrängnis geraten, haben wir sichergestellt, dass der europäische Steuerzahler in Zukunft weitestgehend als Retter außen vor bleibt. Banken und Aufsicht erstellen außerdem Sanierungs- und Abwicklungspläne für den Ernstfall.\n\nWir haben auch dem Prinzip „Wer die Chancen hat, hat auch die Risiken zu tragen“ wieder zur Geltung verholfen. Statt auf den Steuerzahler zurückzugreifen, haften in Zukunft die Eigentümer und Gläubiger selbst vorrangig für Sanierung und Abwicklung. Für den Fall, dass die Mittel der Eigentümer und Gläubiger für eine Sanierung oder Abwicklung nicht reichen, gibt es den Abwicklungsfonds, der von den Banken selbst mit 55 Milliarden Euro gefüllt werden muss. Erst als letzter müsste der jeweilige Staat einspringen, in dem die Bank ihren Sitz hat.\n\nDanach haben wir im letzten Jahr beschlossen, die nationalen Einlagensicherungssysteme in Europa zu harmonisieren. Alle Banken müssen einem nationalen Einlagensicherungssystem angehören, das mit einem Mindestvermögen von 0,8 Prozent der gedeckten Einlagen ausgestattet sein muss. Hierdurch werden auf nationaler Ebene Sicherheiten für europäische Sparer geschaffen. Im Fall des Zusammenbruchs einer Bank kann die Auszahlung des Guthabens auch über Landesgrenzen hinweg bis 100 000 Euro sicher und zügig erfolgen. Wir haben die Auszahlungsfristen verringert und haben für Sondersituationen, zum Beispiel bei einer Abfindung oder einer Veräußerung des privaten Hauses, die gesicherte Summe sogar auf 500 000 Euro erhöht.\n\nAlso: Bei den rechtlichen Grundlagen sind wir auf dem Weg zu mehr Sicherheit auf den Finanzmärkten einen guten Schritt weitergekommen. Wir haben gute gesetzliche Regelungen geschaffen. Aber bei der Umsetzung konnten nicht alle in Europa Schritt halten. In Deutschland sind wir auf einem guten Weg. Wir waren Vorreiter bei der Umsetzung der Abwicklungsrichtlinie; auch bei der Umsetzung der Einlagensicherungsrichtlinie waren wir ganz vorne dabei. Viele andere EU-Staaten haben diese Richtlinien bisher aber noch nicht umgesetzt. Nach den letzten Informationen haben bisher 17 Staaten die Abwicklungsrichtlinie umgesetzt, obwohl die Frist eigentlich schon Ende 2014 auslief. Auch die Einlagensicherungsrichtlinie wurde trotz Fristendes im Juli 2015 erst von rund der Hälfte der betroffenen Länder umgesetzt.\n\nMit der Umsetzung und Implementierung in nationales Recht an sich ist es aber noch nicht getan. Tatsächlich müssen die damit einhergehenden Pflichten erfüllt werden. Erst 2016 sind die ersten Einzahlungen in den Abwicklungsfonds vorgesehen. Für die vollständige Umsetzung der Einlagensicherungsrichtlinie haben die Banken sogar bis zum Jahr 2024 Zeit. Erst dann müssen die geforderten Mittel in Höhe von 0,8 Prozent der gedeckten Einlagen im System hinterlegt sein. Nötig ist daneben auch noch, die Risiken zu verringern, die von Staaten auf Banken ausgehen und umgekehrt. Deshalb wollen wir als Nächstes die regulatorische Behandlung von Staatsanleihen überprüfen.\n\nVor dem Hintergrund, dass viele der Maßnahmen noch gar nicht mit Leben erfüllt sind, kommt der Vorschlag der fünf Präsidenten, eine europäische Einlagensicherung in Form einer Rückversicherung zu installieren, zur Unzeit. Wir sollten erst einmal abarbeiten, was wir beschlossen haben. Wir sollten erst einmal das mit Leben erfüllen und wirken lassen, was wir bisher gemeinsam verabredet haben.\n\nIn der Reihenfolge der noch abzuarbeitenden Aufgaben müssen Sorgfalt und Vorsicht vor Geschwindigkeit gehen. Lassen Sie uns gemeinsam mit aller Kraft das System der Einlagensicherung, das wir schon geschaffen haben, mit Leben erfüllen und erst dann, wenn die nationalen Systeme funktionieren, über weitere Schritte diskutieren. Wir fordern Sie heute mit diesem Antrag auf, nichts Neues zu implementieren, bevor die Instrumente in den anderen Bereichen funktionieren.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n10804,ute-finckh-kramer,\"Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer auf der Tribüne! Liebe Präsidentin! Der Antrag der Linken vermischt das schon fünf Jahre alte Projekt von Oskar Lafontaine, das Technische Hilfswerk neu zu erfinden, mit der aktuellen Diskussion über den weltweit dramatisch angestiegenen Bedarf an humanitärer Hilfe. Einen solchen Missbrauch seines Namens hat Willy Brandt nicht verdient; denn das Technische Hilfswerk verbindet auf vorbildliche Weise das Engagement im Katastrophenschutz im Inland mit verlässlicher technischer und logistischer Unterstützung humanitärer Hilfe im Ausland. Die Kapazitäten dafür wurden in den letzten Jahren ausgebaut.\n\nDas Technische Hilfswerk muss also nicht durch ein Konversionsprogramm „Soldaten zu humanitären Helfern“ und „Rüstungsgüter zu Katastrophenschutzgütern“ ersetzt werden. Bevor wir Soldaten zu humanitären Helfern umschulen und pannenanfällige Militärtechnik in Technik für humanitäre Hilfe umwidmen, sollten wir uns ansehen, welche Strukturen die humanitäre Hilfe in Deutschland derzeit hat.\n\nHumanitäre Hilfe - das ist zu Recht gesagt worden - ist den vier humanitären Prinzipien verpflichtet: Menschlichkeit, Unparteilichkeit, Neutralität und Unabhängigkeit. Das unterscheidet sie von der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, die anhand politischer oder ökonomischer Kriterien parteilich sein darf und es oft auch ist. Organisationen, die in beiden Bereichen tätig sind, ordnen aus gutem Grund ihre Projekte möglichst eindeutig dem einen oder anderen Bereich zu.\n\nWas haben wir also aktuell für Strukturen in der humanitären Hilfe in Deutschland? Wir haben die zivilgesellschaftlichen Organisationen, die größtenteils sowohl im Katastrophenschutz im Inland als auch in der internationalen humanitären Hilfe tätig sind. Sie sind oft zusätzlich Wohlfahrtsorganisationen wie die Johanniter, die Malteser, die Diakonie Katastrophenhilfe, Caritas International und der Arbeiter-Samariter-Bund.\n\nWir haben die deutschen Sektionen zivilgesellschaftlicher Organisationen, die auf humanitäre Hilfe spezialisiert sind, wie Ärzte ohne Grenzen, die manchmal eine sehr eigene Sicht auf die Dinge haben, was gut und notwendig ist. Schließlich haben wir die deutschen oder internationalen Organisationen, die sowohl im Bereich der humanitären Hilfe als auch im Bereich der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit tätig sind.\n\nDiese drei Gruppen zusammengenommen sind größtenteils Mitglieder im Verband Entwicklungspolitik und Humanitäre Hilfe, VENRO. Dazu kommt das Deutsche Rote Kreuz als Teil der internationalen Rotes Kreuz/Roter Halbmond-Strukturen, die über das Internationale Komitee vom Roten Kreuz koordiniert werden. Das Rote Kreuz hat drei weitere Prinzipien, die auch wichtig sind: Freiwilligkeit, Einheit und Universalität.\n\nDie Bundesanstalt Technisches Hilfswerk wird übrigens aus dem Etat des BMI finanziert, und sie erhält für ihre Auslandseinsätze Projektgelder vom Auswärtigen Amt oder aus internationalen Quellen. Das Technische Hilfswerk taucht bezeichnenderweise in dem Antrag nicht auf; denn sonst würde deutlich, was da für Dopplungen vorkommen.\n\nSchließlich gibt es - das sage ich der Vollständigkeit halber - noch Firmen und Organisationen, die auf humanitäres Minenräumen spezialisiert sind. Auch das ist keine Aufgabe, die die Bundeswehr oder andere Militärs in der Regel wahrnehmen.\n\nEin Großteil all dieser Organisationen trifft sich mindestens viermal im Jahr zum Koordinierungsausschuss Humanitäre Hilfe, der vom Referat für Humanitäre Hilfe im Auswärtigen Amt koordiniert wird. Der Koordinierungsausschuss arbeitet ausgesprochen effektiv, ergebnisorientiert und mit hoher fachlicher Kompetenz. Die Leitung teilen sich das Auswärtige Amt und ein Vertreter aus dem NGO-Bereich. Warum er durch ein neues Gemeinschaftswerk oder eine Kooperationsgesellschaft, was immer die Antragsteller darunter verstehen, ersetzt werden soll, erschließt sich mir nicht.\n\nGenerell gilt: Hilfe von außen ist nur notwendig, wenn die eigenen Kapazitäten eines Landes zur Bewältigung einer Katastrophe oder zum Umgang mit einer sehr großen Anzahl von Flüchtlingen oder Binnenvertriebenen nicht ausreichen. Der Aufbau eigener Fähigkeiten und die Unterstützung von Vorsorgemaßnahmen in Gebieten, in denen zum Beispiel das Risiko schwerer Erdbeben, von Stürmen und Hochwasser etc. hoch ist, werden daher ein wichtiges Thema des Humanitären Weltgipfels sein.\n\nIn Istanbul findet jetzt im Mai ein Humanitärer Weltgipfel statt, und im September findet in New York - und das wird im Antrag weder erwähnt noch diskutiert - ein Weltgipfel zum Thema Flüchtlinge statt. Deswegen können und müssen wir nicht alles, was sich mit dem Thema Flucht und Flüchtlinge befasst, in die Diskussion um den Humanitären Weltgipfel hineinpacken. Ein Stück weit wird das Argument, dass Istanbul ein sehr schlechter Ort ist, um über Flüchtlinge und den Umgang mit ihnen zu diskutieren, auch dadurch relativiert, dass der Flüchtlingsweltgipfel in New York stattfinden wird.\n\nIch sehe auch keinen Grund dafür, die humanitäre Hilfe vollständig ins BMZ zu verlagern. Die Zuständigkeit für die Vereinten Nationen und ihre Unterorganisationen und damit auch die Federführung für Geberkonferenzen oder Veranstaltungen wie den Humanitären Weltgipfel oder den Flüchtlingsgipfel liegt in jedem Fall beim Auswärtigen Amt. Die Zusammenarbeit auf Fachebene zwischen den Referaten, die im BMZ für die entwicklungsorientierte Übergangshilfe und die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit zuständig sind, und denen, die im Auswärtigen Amt für die humanitäre Hilfe Verantwortung tragen und die Mittel dafür verwalten, funktioniert nach Ansicht vieler Vertreterinnen und Vertreter der Hilfsorganisationen sehr gut. Aus gutem Grund wird von den Zuständigen daher von Verzahnung oder Komplementarität und nicht von einer „Zusammenlegung der Instrumente“ gesprochen, wie es der Antrag formuliert;\n\ndenn damit würde es sehr schwierig, wenn nicht unmöglich, die humanitären Prinzipien und die entwicklungspolitischen Ziele auseinanderzuhalten.\n\nIch möchte mit einem Zitat aus der Süddeutschen Zeitung vom 7. Oktober 2011 schließen: „Als Pazifistin sehe ich das Willy-Brandt-Korps skeptisch“. Das habe nicht ich gesagt, das hat Katja Kipping gesagt, und dieser Einschätzung schließe ich mich voll an.\"\n811,katja-keul,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Staatssekretär. Auch ich muss da noch einmal nachfragen: Warum ist, wenn Sie nicht ausschließen können, dass nebenbei auch Telekommunikation, in diesem Fall in der Eifel, mit aufgenommen werden könnte, der Datenschutzbeauftragte nicht einbezogen worden, um die ordnungsgemäße Löschung und Vernichtung dieser Daten sicherzustellen?\n\nVielen Dank. - Frau Staatsministerin, mich würde interessieren, wie eigentlich unsere europäischen Partner darauf reagiert haben, dass wir zunächst dezidiert aus Sicherheitsgründen aus einer EU-Mission aussteigen, und zwar mit der Begründung, nach Mogadischu könnten wir wegen mangelnder Sicherheit nicht mitgehen, und es uns sieben Wochen später wieder anders überlegen und sagen: Vielleicht ist die Sicherheitslage doch gar nicht so schlecht. - Wie haben unsere europäischen Partner darauf reagiert?\"\n7884,katja-keul,\"Auch mich interessieren die Sanktionen. Unter anderem wurden nun strafrechtliche Ermittlungen gegen einzelne Manager eingeleitet. Ich möchte fragen, ob die zuständigen Behörden zugleich auch entsprechende Verfahren gegen die juristische Person VW nach §§ 30 und 130 Ordnungswidrigkeitengesetz einleiten.\n\nIch muss an der gleichen Stelle nachfragen. Wenn Westernstiefel tragende Leute aus der Tuner-Szene irgendwie an ihren mit Fuchsschwänzen behängten Maschinen rumschrauben, um die Maschinen irgendwie lauter und dreckiger zu machen, und damit die Abgaswerte ändern, dann ist die Konsequenz relativ klar: Dann erlischt die Betriebserlaubnis, und zwar sofort.\n\n(Zuruf der Abg. Britta Haßelmann [BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN]\n\n- Ich wollte hier keine weiteren Automarken nennen, Kollegin Haßelmann. - Deswegen frage ich jetzt noch einmal: Warum gilt dann nicht für die möglicherweise Tausende oder Zehntausende von deutschen Autos, um die es jetzt geht, dass in kürzester Zeit die Betriebserlaubnis erlöschen könnte und die Leute ihre Fahrzeuge dann nicht mehr auf der Straße bewegen können?\"\n1988,richard-pitterle,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Besucher! Mit dem heute vor-liegenden Gesetzentwurf soll der Zahlungsverzug im Geschäftsverkehr zwischen Unternehmen bekämpft werden. Künftig sollen Vereinbarungen über Zahlungstermine eine bestimmte Frist nicht überschreiten dürfen. Das Zahlen von Rechnungen kann dann nicht mehr bis zum Sankt-Nimmerleins-Tag verschoben werden. Das sollte auch und vor allem kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen helfen. Die Fraktion Die Linke begrüßt dieses Ziel ausdrücklich. In der Regel ist es nämlich so, dass bei den Verhandlungen darüber, wann eine bestimmte Leistung zu bezahlen ist, das kleine Unternehmen der Marktmacht des großen Unternehmens ausgeliefert ist.\n\nIch will Ihnen das an einem Beispiel verdeutlichen. Der kleine Handwerker oder der kleine Zulieferer, der mit einem Großabnehmer Geschäfte macht, ist häufig auf Folgeaufträge angewiesen und will es sich daher mit seinem größeren Geschäftspartner nicht verscherzen. Das heißt, dass er bei den Verhandlungen über Zahlungsfristen eher einknicken wird und natürlich der größere Geschäftspartner seine Überlegenheit voll ausspielen kann.\n\nDas Schlimme ist, dass gerade kleine und mittlere Unternehmen oft wenig bis gar keine finanziellen Polster haben, um lange auf Zahlungseingänge warten zu können. Der Malermeister von nebenan zum Beispiel kann auf diese Weise im schlimmsten Fall in die Pleite getrieben werden. Hingegen dürfte es den größeren Unternehmen in der Regel nichts ausmachen, auf die Belange der kleineren einzugehen. In der Realität sieht es jedoch oft anders aus. Hier muss den kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen daher der Rücken gestärkt werden.\n\nZurück zum Gesetzentwurf. Meine Damen und Herren von der Bundesregierung, der ganz große Wurf ist Ihnen hier leider nicht gelungen. Jetzt mögen Sie zwar sagen, dass Sie hier wenig Spielraum hatten, da dem Entwurf eine EU-Richtlinie zugrunde liegt, die zwingend in nationales Recht umzusetzen ist.\n\nDennoch wäre hier Luft nach oben gewesen. In der dem Entwurf zugrundeliegenden EU-Richtlinie heißt es in Artikel 12 nämlich - ich zitiere -:\n\nDie Mitgliedstaaten können Vorschriften beibehalten oder erlassen, die für den Gläubiger günstiger sind als die zur Erfüllung dieser Richtlinie notwendigen Maßnahmen.\n\nDas hätten Sie, meine Damen und Herren von der Bundesregierung, beherzigen sollen. In der nun schon länger andauernden Diskussion um den vorliegenden Entwurf ist bereits mehrfach die Befürchtung geäußert worden, die nunmehr festzulegenden Höchstfristen könnten das bisherige Leitbild im deutschen Zivilrecht verdrängen. Bisher ist nach § 271 BGB nämlich grundsätzlich sofort nach Erhalt der Leistung zu zahlen, auch wenn abweichende Vereinbarungen getroffen werden können. Wenn nun aber, wie durch Ihren Entwurf vorgesehen, auf einmal die Höchstfrist von 60 Tagen ausdrücklich im Gesetz genannt ist, so liegt es durchaus nahe, dass dann diese Höchstfrist auch gern als Richtwert genommen wird und der Gläubiger entsprechend lange auf sein Geld warten muss. Hier hätten Sie sich dazu durchringen müssen, über die EU-Richtlinie hinauszugehen und kürzere Fristen festzulegen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren von der Bundesregierung, auch darüber hinaus schwächelt Ihr Entwurf. Er ist nämlich unübersichtlich und mit Detailregelungen überfrachtet. Zwar will ich Ihnen zugestehen, dass bereits die zugrundeliegende EU-Richtlinie nicht gerade als leichte Bettlektüre bezeichnet werden kann. Aber dennoch: Eine übersichtlichere Umsetzung in das deutsche Zivilrecht wäre angebracht gewesen. Wer sich im Recht der Schuldverhältnisse auskennt, weiß, dass hier eine ohnehin umfangreiche und komplizierte Regelungsmaterie vorliegt. Diese wird durch die im Entwurf vorgesehenen Änderungen nicht gerade übersichtlicher gestaltet. Auslegungsschwierigkeiten und entsprechende Differenzen scheinen jetzt schon vorprogrammiert. Versetzen Sie sich nun bitte wieder in die Lage des kleinen Unternehmers, also zum Beispiel des Malermeisters von nebenan. Dieser wird mit höchster Wahrscheinlichkeit keine eigene Rechtsabteilung haben, die ihm bei den Vertragsverhandlungen mit Rat und Tat zur Seite steht und ihn durch die Niederungen des Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuches führt.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren von der Bundesregierung, an anderer Stelle betonen Sie gern die Bedeutung des Mittelstands. Seien Sie konsequent, und zeigen Sie dies auch durch entsprechende Verbesserungen des vorliegenden Entwurfs. Kleine und mittlere Unternehmen dürfen von der Politik nicht im Stich gelassen werden. Setzen Sie sich also für deren Belange ein. Die Linke wird das jedenfalls weiterhin tun.\"\n168,hans-peter-friedrich,\"Ich schwöre es, so wahr mir Gott helfe.\"\n2974,gesine-lotzsch,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Frau Schmidt, wieder haben Sie bei einem Gesundheitsthema die Leitung. Wer weiß, vielleicht bereiten Sie sich ja auf neue Aufgaben vor; aber ich will meine Zeit damit nicht vertrödeln.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren! Der Bundesrechnungshof hat uns gerade darauf hingewiesen, dass die Ausgaben für den Gesundheitsfonds in den letzten Jahren fast doppelt so schnell gestiegen sind wie die Einnahmen. Die Lösung kann aber nicht darin bestehen, immer weiter die Krankenkassenbeiträge zu erhöhen. Meine Fraktion findet: Wir müssen grundsätzlicher an die Dinge herangehen. Wir müssen hier im Bundestag über krankmachende Arbeit sprechen und gemeinsam etwas dagegen tun.\n\nDie Chefs mehrerer Krankenkassen haben den deutschen Arbeitgebern pauschal eine Mitschuld am dramatischen Anstieg der sogenannten Burn-out-Erkrankungen und Depressionsfälle in deutschen Unternehmen zugesprochen.\n\nDeutsche Arbeitnehmer leisten nach Erkenntnissen der EU-Kommission im Durchschnitt mehr Überstunden als ihre Kolleginnen und Kollegen in den europäischen Nachbarländern.\n\nIn keinem Land der Eurozone gibt es einen so großen Unterschied zwischen der tarifvertraglich vereinbarten Wochenarbeitszeit und der tatsächlichen Wochenarbeitszeit wie in Deutschland.\n\nDas stellte der zuständige EU-Kommissar fest. Ich finde, das sollte uns zu denken geben.\n\nIn Deutschland entstehen durch arbeitsbedingte psychische Belastungen volkswirtschaftliche Kosten in Höhe von 6,3 Milliarden Euro im Jahr. Laut aktueller Studie der Betriebskrankenkassen sind darin 3 Milliarden Euro direkte Kosten für die Krankheitsbehandlung und 3,3 Milliarden Euro Produktionsausfallkosten enthalten. Die Vorstandsvorsitzenden mehrerer Krankenkassen forderten nun eine Stärkung der Gesundheitsvorsorge in den Betrieben. Sie, Herr Minister Gröhe, haben diesen Appell der Krankenkassen unterstützt. Das ist gut, aber Appelle reichen nicht. Ich finde, wir müssen handeln.\n\nDie Art und Weise, wie wir in unserer Gesellschaft leben und arbeiten, macht immer mehr Menschen krank. Wer auf knallharte Konkurrenz, maximale Arbeitsverdichtung und 24-Stunden-Flexibilität setzt, der überfordert jeden einzelnen Menschen, aber auch unser Gesundheitssystem. Darum, finde ich, muss es uns gelingen, unsere Arbeits- und Lebenswelt solidarischer und gerechter zu gestalten. Dann könnten auch die Gesundheitskosten bzw. Krankheitskosten rapide sinken.\n\nVielleicht sollten wir auch einmal ernsthaft darüber diskutieren, wie wir die Arbeitgeber stärker an den Gesundheitskosten beteiligen, die sie direkt verursachen. Man könnte zum Beispiel für jede geleistete Überstunde den Krankenkassenbeitrag des Arbeitgebers um 50 Prozent erhöhen. Ich glaube, eine solche Maßnahme würde mit Sicherheit mehr Wirkung zeigen als alle mündlichen Appelle.\n\nDamit der Finanzminister mit einer „schwarzen Null“ in die Geschichte eingehen kann, hat er sich vorgenommen, ab 2015 ohne neue Schulden auszukommen. Das ist ja heute sehr oft erwähnt worden. An dieser Stelle möchte ich allerdings den Kollegen Norbert Brackmann von der Union - ich glaube, er ist gerade nicht im Saal - aus dem Haushaltsausschuss besonders lobend hervorheben. Er war, glaube ich, der Einzige, der heute darauf verwiesen hat, dass wir noch jede Menge alte Schulden haben. Das sollte bei aller Euphorie über die „schwarze Null“ nicht vergessen werden.\n\n- Wenn Sie eine Zwischenfrage stellen, gehe ich gerne darauf ein; ansonsten geht es auf meine Redezeit.\n\nWie wird der Bundeshaushalt vom Bundesfinanzminister entlastet? Dies gelingt mit willkürlichen Hin- und Herschiebungen. Zum Beispiel wird der Zuschuss für den Gesundheitsfonds um insgesamt 6 Milliarden Euro für zwei Jahre gekürzt. Ab 2017 soll der Zuschuss dann wieder auf 14,5 Milliarden Euro steigen. Ich finde, mit diesem Hin- und Herschieben wird kein einziges Problem wirklich gelöst.\n\nDie Verschiebung in die Sozialsysteme geht natürlich vor allen Dingen auf Kosten der Geringverdiener, die durch höhere Krankenkassenbeiträge für diese Art der kreativen Buchführung zahlen müssen. Das finde ich ungerecht. Das lehnen wir Linke ab.\n\nZum Abschluss möchte ich noch auf zwei Kürzungspositionen, die vorgeschlagen sind - wir beschließen den Haushalt ja erst Ende des Jahres -, eingehen, die ich für nicht sachgerecht halte. Zum einen soll bei der gesundheitlichen Aufklärung gekürzt werden und zum anderen bei internationalen Aufgaben. Für die gesundheitliche Aufklärung steht ein Posten, der sowieso nicht übertrieben groß ist, zur Verfügung. Ich will daran erinnern, dass immer mehr Menschen krank werden, weil sie sich zum Beispiel falsch ernähren.\n\nDarum ging es gerade auch beim Thema Verbraucherschutz. Die Lebensmittelindustrie steckt ein Vielfaches in die Werbung für versalzene, überzuckerte und fettige Produkte. In dieser Situation ist es, glaube ich, nicht richtig, die Mittel für die Aufklärung zu kürzen. Es wäre geradezu absurd.\n\nLetzter Punkt. Herr Gröhe, Sie haben sehr eindrucksvoll berichtet, wie sich die Bundesrepublik, insbesondere das Robert-Koch-Institut, in der Ebola-Frage engagiert. Darum ist es umso verwunderlicher, dass gerade die Mittel für die internationalen Aufgaben gekürzt werden sollen. Denn in Zeiten einer globalisierten Welt muss auch ein Gesundheitsminister global denken und schnell handeln. Ich glaube, das gelingt nicht mit einer Kürzung auf genau diesem Gebiet.\n\nDer Haushaltsentwurf bedarf aus Sicht der Linken einer grundsätzlichen Überarbeitung. Aber dafür haben wir ja bis November Zeit. Wir werden mit Elan und vielen Vorschlägen an die Sache gehen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5324,volker-beck,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Die letzten Worte der Kollegin Steinbach fand ich beschämend für unser Haus, und ich möchte mich bei den Völkern der ehemaligen Sowjetunion ausdrücklich für diese Worte entschuldigen.\n\nWir haben letzte Woche gemeinsam im Bundestag - ein Kollege und ich auch gemeinsam mit dem Bundespräsidenten in Auschwitz - des 70. Jahrestages der Befreiung von Auschwitz gedacht. Wir werden am 8. Mai dieses Jahres auch des 70. Jahrestages der Befreiung Europas aus den Fängen des nationalsozialistischen Terrors gedenken. Dabei gilt es Dank zu sagen den Soldatinnen und Soldaten der ehemaligen Westalliierten und den Soldatinnen und Soldaten der Roten Armee. Diese haben es ermöglicht - gerade die Rote Armee hat den höchsten Blutzoll dafür gezahlt -, dass Hitlerdeutschland niedergerungen wurde. Dafür schulden wir Dank.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich will das Schicksal eines Menschen schildern, um das ein bisschen greifbar zu machen. Iwan Dmitrijewitsch Solonowitsch wurde im November 1940 zur Roten Armee eingezogen, 19 Jahre alt. Er wurde zunächst eingesetzt, konnte sich dann beim Überfall auf die Sowjetunion dem deutschen Angriff entziehen, wurde neun Monate später an der Front auf der Krim von der deutschen Armee eingekesselt und in ein Kriegsgefangenenlager in Hagen verschleppt. Er berichtet: Die Menschen waren dünn und entkräftet, mit weißen Gesichtern. Täglich gab es Tote. Das Essen war kalorienarm, sehr bescheiden. Es wurden ein bisschen Rüben geschnitten, dazu Wasser; das war’s. Die Gefangenen wurden geschlagen mit einem Gummistock oder mit einem Eisenstab.\n\nDer Kollege Korte hat es angesprochen: Durch Sonderbefehle war das Genfer Konventionsrecht für sowjetische Kriegsgefangene ausdrücklich außer Kraft gesetzt. Das hatte ganz konkrete Bedeutung. Während die Sterbequote bei westalliierten Kriegsgefangenen bei 3,5 Prozent lag, lag sie bei den sowjetischen Kriegsgefangenen bei 50 Prozent. Das zeigt - dazu kann man auch jede Menge schriftliche Quellen anführen -: Die Behandlung der sowjetischen Kriegsgefangenen war Teil des nationalsozialistischen rassistischen Vernichtungskampfes gegen die slawischen Völker im Osten. Der Krieg und die Behandlung der Kriegsgefangenen hatte das Ziel der Dezimierung dieser Völker. Das war ein Vernichtungswunsch, ein Vernichtungswille, und das ist klassisches nationalsozialistisches Unrecht.\n\nDas muss der Deutsche Bundestag endlich anerkennen.\n\nKollegen von der SPD, da dürfen Sie klatschen. Den Antrag, den wir gestellt haben, haben wir in der letzten Wahlperiode gemeinsam eingebracht. Bloß wegen der Rede von Frau Steinbach müssen Sie sich nicht fürchten, zu dem Richtigen Ja zu sagen.\n\nIch möchte Sie auch ausdrücklich auffordern - denn es geht hier nicht um Parteipolitik -,\n\ndass wir das dieses Jahr, im 70. Jahr, über die Bühne bringen, gemeinsam, würdig und historisch angemessen.\n\nLassen Sie uns zwischen den vier Fraktionen über diese Fragen offen miteinander reden. Es geht nicht primär um Geld, Frau Steinbach, sondern es geht um eine Geste der Versöhnung, es geht vor allen Dingen um das Anerkennen des Unrechts, das diesen Menschen zugefügt wurde. Sie haben die Geschichte der Verfolgung geschildert. Das war im Wesentlichen alles richtig.\n\nDas begründet die Aussage des Bundestages: Das war nationalsozialistisches Unrecht, und das erkennen wir jetzt an.\n\nEs ist richtig, erst 1995 hat übrigens Russland diese Menschen rehabilitiert.\n\nDas war für diese Menschen viel wichtiger als ein paar Cent. Ehre und Würde am Ende eines Lebens lassen sich nicht mit Geld erkaufen. Wir sollten meines Erachtens eine Geste finden. Es geht nicht um das Geld. Es geht darum, den Menschen die Hand zu reichen.\n\nGerade in der jetzigen außenpolitischen Situation, finde ich, wäre es klug, zu sagen: Wir kritisieren Putin für das völkerrechtswidrige Vorgehen in der Ukraine, aber wir reichen den Völkern der ehemaligen Sowjetunion, und zwar gleichermaßen den Russen, den Ukrainern, den Weißrussen, den Kasachen und den ehemaligen asiatischen Republiken der Sowjetunion, die Hand mit der Bitte um Entschuldigung und um Versöhnung.\n\nDas könnten wir jetzt tun. Dann ist klar: Wir kritisieren Putin, aber wir wollen Frieden zwischen den Völkern in Europa, und wir wissen um die Verantwortung für die deutsche Vergangenheit im 20. Jahrhundert.\n\nIch wollte dazu Stellung nehmen, dass die Koalition beantragt, die Anträge federführend an den Haushaltsausschuss zu überweisen. Es fällt auf, dass hier im Hohen Hause - zu Recht - nur Innenausschussmitglieder gesprochen haben. Das hat auch Tradition. Der Innenausschuss hat sich seit Bestehen des Deutschen Bundestages mit den Fragen der Anerkennung von NS-Unrecht, der Rehabilitierung und der Entschädigung beschäftigt: vom Bundesentschädigungsgesetz über die Rehabilitierung der Zwangssterilisierten, der Euthanasiegeschädigten, der Homosexuellen bis zur Stiftung „Erinnerung, Verantwortung und Zukunft“, die Frau Steinbach vorhin erwähnt hat. All das wurde im Innenausschuss abgehandelt. Warum dieser Antrag jetzt in den Haushaltsausschuss gehen soll, erschließt sich mir nicht und vermutlich, abgesehen von den Geschäftsführern der Koalitionsfraktionen, auch sonst niemandem hier im Saal. Die Leute, die sich mit diesen Fragen beschäftigen - von Frau Steinbach bis Jan Korte -, sind alles Innenausschussmitglieder. Deshalb beantragen wir Federführung beim Innenausschuss.\n\nDas Einzige, was man wegen der außenpolitischen Aspekte alternativ machen könnte, wäre, den Auswärtigen Ausschuss damit zu betrauen. Wegen 5 Millionen Euro - das wurde gerade von den Rednern der Koalitionsfraktionen vorgerechnet - den Haushaltsausschuss zu bemühen, ist lächerlich. Außerdem geht das an dem Kern dieses moralischen, ethischen und historischen Anliegens vorbei.\n\nGeben Sie sich einen Ruck und lassen Sie uns das würdig gemeinsam beraten.\"\n1983,peter-weiß,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist in der Tat unvorstellbar für uns, für die heute lebende Generation, was das Leben in Ghettos, in die die Nazidiktatur und ihre Helfershelfer Menschen gepfercht haben, wirklich bedeutet hat. Deswegen möchte ich noch einmal daran erinnern, dass vor zwei Jahren, am 27. Januar 2012, Marcel Reich-Ranicki von dieser Stelle aus uns allen mit seiner Rede einen sehr beeindruckenden und tiefen Einblick in die Situation des Warschauer Ghettos damals gegeben hat.\n\nDass wir im Deutschen Bundestag 2002 ein Gesetz beschlossen haben, mit dem wir den Menschen, die im Ghetto einer Arbeit nachgingen, um zu überleben, einen eigenen Rentenanspruch zugesprochen haben, war, wie ich finde, eine richtige, gute und nicht nur symbolträchtige Entscheidung. Ich glaube, wir können gemeinsam ein Stück stolz darauf sein, dass wir das geschafft haben. Ja, die Menschen, die im Ghetto einer Arbeit nachgingen, erhalten einen eigenen Rentenanspruch: Das war die Entscheidung des Bundestages. Sie war richtig, gut und wegweisend.\n\nAuf das, was anschließend geschehen ist, können wir nicht wahnsinnig stolz sein; das ist richtig. Die Deutsche Rentenversicherung hat die Bestimmungen des Ghettorentengesetzes in der Praxis nämlich so eng ausgelegt, dass rund 90 Prozent der Anträge abgelehnt worden sind. Ich will ganz klar sagen: Es war 2002 nicht die Absicht der deutschen Parlamentarier, ein Gesetz zu verabschieden, bei dem 90 Prozent der Betroffenen anschließend gar keine Leistung bekommen, weil die meisten Anträge durch die Behörden abgelehnt werden.\n\nDie damalige rot-grüne-Bundesregierung, die ich als CDU-Abgeordneter nicht unbedingt verteidigen muss - in diesem Fall tue ich das aber gerne -, hat damals übrigens schnell reagiert, indem sie eine eigene Entschädigungsleistung in Höhe von 2 000 Euro eingeführt hat, die jeder, dessen Antrag abgelehnt wurde, beantragen konnte und auch unbürokratisch und schnell erhalten hat. Um das deutlich zu machen: Es gab anschließend also kein Nichtstun, sondern es ist schnell reagiert worden.\n\nDann kam im Jahr 2009 - das ist schon erwähnt worden - die wegweisende Entscheidung des Bundessozialgerichts, mit der die Möglichkeit eröffnet wurde, dieses Gesetz praxisnäher umzusetzen und wesentlich mehr Anträge zu genehmigen. Deswegen richte ich noch einmal einen Dank für diese wegweisende Entscheidung an die damaligen Sozialrechtler, mit der sie unser Gesetz so zur Anwendung gebracht haben, wie es eigentlich gedacht war.\n\nIm deutschen Sozialrecht gibt es aber eine Bestimmung, die für alle Sozialleistungen gilt, nämlich dass man eine Sozialleistung nur vier Jahre rückwirkend genehmigt bekommen kann. Das führt im Fall der Bezieher einer Ghettorente ab 2005 allerdings dazu, dass deren monatliche Rente wesentlich höher ist - um bis zu 45 Prozent höher - als die Rente, die ab dem Jahr 1997 monatlich ausgezahlt wird.\n\nMan ging davon aus, dass das, was einem entgangen ist, weil der ursprüngliche Rentenantrag nicht genehmigt wurde, durch diesen höheren monatlichen Zahlbetrag der Rente ungefähr ausgeglichen wird. In vielen Gesprächen mit Betroffenen haben wir allerdings feststellen müssen, dass das subjektive Gerechtigkeitsbefinden trotzdem massiv gestört ist,\n\nweil sich die Betroffenen fragen: Warum bekommt der eine die Rente rückwirkend ab 1997 ausgezahlt und ich erst ab 2005?\n\nWir haben dann darüber diskutiert, ob man denjenigen, die erst ab 2005 eine Rente erhalten, für den Zeitraum von 1997 bis 2005 nicht einfach einen Einmalbetrag als Entschädigung zahlen könnte. Wir haben das sehr ernsthaft erwogen, aber feststellen müssen, dass die Betroffenen auch mit einer solchen Regelung nicht zufrieden gewesen wären, sondern das nach wie vor als relativ ungerecht empfunden hätten.\n\nDeswegen bin ich froh, dass wir jetzt eine klare Regelung treffen. Mit der Änderung machen wir Folgendes möglich: Derjenige, der damit einverstanden ist, dass er erst ab 2005 diese Rente bekommt - dafür erhält er aber einen höheren monatlichen Zahlbetrag -, kann dabei bleiben. Wer dagegen eine Neuberechnung seiner Rente möchte, die dann rückwirkend ab 1997 ausgezahlt wird - dafür erhält er aber einen niedrigeren monatlichen Zahlbetrag -, der kann diese Lösung wählen.\n\nIch glaube, damit kann jeder Betroffene für sich persönlich eine Entscheidung treffen, und ich hoffe, dass das subjektive Ungerechtigkeitsempfinden, das mit der bisherigen Praxis verbunden ist, damit der Vergangenheit angehört. Das ist ein wichtiger Schritt, um dem Gerechtigkeitsempfinden der Betroffenen nach ihrem schweren Schicksal, das sie erlebt haben, ein Stück weit zu entsprechen.\n\nWir eröffnen die Möglichkeit, Anträge jetzt oder auch erst in Zukunft zu stellen. Diejenigen, die bislang zum Beispiel aufgrund der Befürchtung, bei der bisherigen Genehmigungspraxis ohnehin keine Chance zu haben, keinen Antrag gestellt haben, sollten jetzt den Mut aufbringen - dazu möchte ich sie auch ausdrücklich auffordern -, einen Antrag auf eine Ghettorente zu stellen, wenn die Voraussetzungen bei ihnen vorliegen.\n\nBei selbstkritischer Betrachtung - so müssen wir sagen - hat es viel zu lange gedauert, bis bei der Auslegung dieses Gesetzes die Erkenntnis Platz gegriffen hat, dass eine Ghettobeschäftigung nicht mit den Maßstäben eines allgemeinen versicherungspflichtigen Beschäftigungsverhältnisses klassischer Art gemessen werden kann.\n\nIch glaube, dass wir jetzt insgesamt eine Regelung treffen, die dem Gerechtigkeitsempfinden der Menschen tatsächlich entspricht und mit der dafür gesorgt wird, dass jeder für sich selbst ermessen kann, mit welcher Regelung er gerne seine Ghettorente beantragt und mit welcher finanziellen Regelung er glaubt, besser zu fahren. Logischerweise spielt auch die Frage, wie hoch der Zahlbetrag ist, eine große Rolle, auch wenn es, ehrlich gesagt, mehr um geringe Rentenansprüche geht. Es sind keine Riesensummen, die da monatlich ausbezahlt werden.\n\nIch finde, dass man bei einer solchen Debatte auch auf Folgendes hinweisen sollte. Der finanzielle Beitrag einer Ghettorente ist nur der eine Aspekt. Der andere Aspekt ist ein eher moralischer. Ich darf seit einigen Jahren Präsident des Maximilian-Kolbe-Werks sein, einer Institution, die aus der katholischen Versöhnungsarbeit heraus entstanden ist. Dieses Werk steht mit den heute noch unter uns lebenden Menschen, die einst von den Nazis in KZs, Ghettos oder in Lager verbracht worden waren, im Dialog und gewährt ihnen Hilfe.\n\nFür mich ist beeindruckend: Dass die Frauen und Männer, die sich nach den schrecklichen Erfahrungen in der Nazidiktatur einstmals geschworen hatten, nie mehr deutschen Boden zu betreten, nie mehr die deutsche Sprache zu benutzen, die zusammengezuckt sind, wenn irgendwo Deutsch gesprochen worden ist, weil sie sich dadurch automatisch an die Nazischergen erinnert fühlten, heute - hochbetagt! - bereit sind, nach Deutschland zu kommen, an Universitäten und Schulen als Zeitzeugen für Gespräche zur Verfügung zu stehen und ihre Gastgeber in Deutschland als „unsere Freunde“ bezeichnen, ist für mich das eigentliche Wunder der Aussöhnung. Für dieses Wunder der Aussöhnung können wir Deutsche nur dankbar sein.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8458,volker-beck,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Ich möchte eine Frage stellen - vielleicht war es auch Gegenstand der Kabinettssitzung; ich weiß es nicht - zum Tohuwabohu in der Flüchtlingspolitik in der letzten Woche, wo der Troublemaker de Maizière nach der Einigung der Parteivorsitzenden für einige Unruhe gesorgt hat. Wir haben dies auch im Innenausschuss gerade kurz erörtert. Der zuständige Staatssekretär, Herr Schröder, sagte uns, dass in der 43. Kalenderwoche, also zwischen 19. Oktober und 25. Oktober, ein Gespräch des zuständigen Abteilungsleiters des Bundesinnenministeriums mit dem Vizepräsidenten des BAMF - das ja keinen Präsidenten mehr hat - stattgefunden hat mit der Zielrichtung, Asylverfahren von syrischen Flüchtlingen in Zukunft anders zu behandeln als bisher. Nun möchte ich wissen: Wann wurden welche Stellen in der Bundesregierung über die Tatsache dieses Gesprächs und das Ziel dieses Gesprächs informiert, namentlich Stellen im Bundesjustizministerium und Stellen im Bundeskanzleramt?\n\nEs ging ja darum, dass der Bundesinnenminister erklärt hat, er strebe an, dass für syrische Flüchtlinge in Zukunft nur noch subsidiärer Schutz mit den Folgen beim Familiennachzug, die in dem Papier der Parteivorsitzenden beschrieben sind, erteilt wird und damit die schriftlichen Verfahren für die Zukunft entfallen. Der Bundeskanzleramtschef hat gegenüber der Presse erklärt, ihm sei dieser Vorstoß nicht bekannt.\n\nDeshalb frage ich Sie noch einmal: Wann wurde welche Stelle im Bundeskanzleramt von diesem beabsichtigten Vorstoß des Bundesinnenministers in Form des Gespräches zwischen Abteilungsleiter und Vizepräsident des BAMF unterrichtet? Da das letzte Woche öffentlich umfangreich erörtert wurde, erwarte ich, dass ein Mitglied der Bundesregierung, vielleicht auch jemand vom Kanzleramt, sagen kann, wann das Kanzleramt damit befasst war.\n\nGeschätzter Herr Kollege Braun, ein Mitglied der Bundesregierung, das auch Mitglied des Hohen Hauses ist, sagt dann die Unwahrheit. Das Innenministerium hat gerade im Innenausschuss erklärt, das Bundeskanzleramt sei über das Gespräch in der 43. Kalenderwoche zwischen dem Abteilungsleiter des Innenministeriums und dem Vizepräsidenten des BAMF informiert gewesen, in dem das Ziel verfolgt wurde, die Regeln für syrische Flüchtlinge wieder auf den Status quo ante und zusätzlich die entsprechenden Beschränkungen beim Familiennachzug zurückzuführen. Dieses Gespräch ging dem 4. November und der Einigung der drei Parteivorsitzenden voraus. Das Innenministerium behauptet, in verschiedenen Gremiensitzungen sei das Bundeskanzleramt über das Gespräch und das Gesprächsziel informiert gewesen. Jetzt sagen Sie mir: Waren Sie als Bundeskanzleramt über das Gespräch und das Gesprächsziel informiert? Dann sagen Sie bitte, wann. Oder sagen Sie, das Innenministerium lügt?\n\nWaren Sie über dieses Gespräch, das ja eine Realität ist, informiert oder nicht? Unabhängig davon, was Sie später vereinbart haben: Waren Sie als Bundeskanzleramt über das Gespräch in der 43. Kalenderwoche mit diesem Gesprächsziel informiert?\"\n6078,wolfgang-gehrcke,\"Herr Präsident! Exzellenzen! Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Man muss schon über die Ziele sprechen - verständigen kann man sich nicht unbedingt -, wenn man diese Abkommen beurteilen will. Ich möchte Ihnen die Ziele der Linken vorstellen und begründen, weswegen wir glauben, dass die Abkommen nicht in eine vernünftige Richtung führen.\n\nUnser Ziel ist nach wie vor die Verfolgung der Idee von Michail Gorbatschow eines gemeinsamen Hauses Europa. Dieses Ziel haben wir doch einmal zusammen gehabt, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Sozialdemokratie: das gemeinsame Haus Europa. Wir glauben und wollen, dass in diesem gemeinsamen Haus jeder seinen Platz findet. Es sind viele Zimmer zu vergeben. Da werden auch die Bevölkerungen der Ukraine, Moldawiens und Georgiens und die Bevölkerungen vieler anderer Länder ihren Platz finden. Die Einrichtung des anderen muss uns nicht gefallen und auch nicht die Art, wie er die Feten in seinen Räumen feiert. Aber wir müssen in einem gemeinsamen Europa zusammenleben wollen; das muss die Zielsetzung sein.\n\nWir haben versucht, uns Gedanken darüber zu machen, ob diese drei Abkommen zu einem gemeinsamen Haus Europa hinführen oder davon wegführen. Ich sage Ihnen: Diese drei Abkommen vertiefen die Spaltung in Europa. Deswegen werden wir ihnen nicht zustimmen.\n\nIch meine die Spaltung zwischen oben und unten - das kann man anhand der Abkommen nachvollziehen -, die Spaltung zwischen Ost und West, eine Spaltung, die wir endlich überwinden müssen, statt sie wieder zuzulassen.\n\nMan wartet da auf Signale. Ich habe in Ihrer Rede, Herr Jung, und auch in der Rede des Außenministers gehört - die Grünen haben dazu nichts gesagt; das ist -typisch -, dass für Sie Sicherheit in Europa nur mit Russland und nicht gegen Russland möglich sein kann. Das haben wir Ihnen immer vorgetragen. Ich freue mich ja, dass Sie auch etwas von der Linken lernen. Von uns kann man viel lernen, wenn man genau hinhört.\n\nFragen Sie doch einmal, ob Ihre Politik in diese Richtung angelegt ist. Ich sage Ihnen eins: Wenn Sie den Mut gehabt hätten, die Debatte über die Assoziierung mit dem Vorschlag zu verbinden, einige Sanktionen gegen Russland aufzuheben, wenn Sie beides miteinander gekoppelt hätten, dann hätten Sie einen Schritt in diese Richtung gemacht und wir hätten trotz aller Bedenken vielleicht zustimmen können.\n\nDas haben Sie nicht gemacht. Sie haben im Gegenteil die Sanktionen gegen Russland verschärft. Deswegen sage ich Ihnen: Sie reden von Verständigung; dafür finden Sie unseren Beifall. Ihre praktische Politik aber bedeutet eine Verschärfung der Situation in Europa; das finde ich schlimm. Hier möchte ich eine andere Regelung haben.\n\nIch bin es leid, dass jeder hier von Visafreiheit redet. Wir reden seit ein paar Jahren darüber. Aber wenn es dazu kommt, sich für diese Visafreiheit zu entscheiden, blockiert die CDU/CSU jeden Schritt in diese Richtung.\n\nSie reden zwar davon, aber handeln anders: Das ist Ihre Politik. Diese sollten Sie endlich überwinden.\n\nIch möchte gern, dass Sie in Richtung eines gemeinsamen Hauses Europa einen Weg finden, um die schweren sozialen Verwerfungen oder zumindest die sozialen Auseinandersetzungen, die in der Ukraine mit Sicherheit kommen werden, unblutig zu überwinden und humanitäre Hilfe in Europa gemeinsam zu gestalten. Ich möchte auch, dass endlich mehr Demokratie gewagt wird. Es ist kein gutes Zeichen, wenn in Moldawien kurz vor den Wahlen eine unliebsame Partei einfach verboten wird.\n\nHätte diese Partei kandidieren können, wäre es in Moldawien zu einem anderen Ergebnis gekommen. Auch das gehört zu einem gemeinsamen Kampf für Demokratie in Europa dazu.\n\nJetzt müssen Sie schon stehen bleiben, Herr Vaatz. Es gehört zum Prozedere, sich die Antwort im Stehen anzuhören. - Was ich in diesem Parlament wagen kann oder nicht wagen kann, das entscheiden Gott sei Dank nicht Sie, sondern in erster Linie die Wählerinnen und Wähler.\n\nMit denen bin ich im Dialog. Wir sind hier doch nicht in einer Erziehungsanstalt, in der einer sagen kann, was der andere sich wagen kann. Jeder darf sich wagen, seine politische Überzeugung hier im Parlament auszudrücken. Das ist Teil der Demokratie.\n\nAnsonsten danke ich Ihnen für die Zwischenfrage. So ein glänzendes Beispiel von Antikommunismus, von Verkennen der Realität in Europa, wie Sie es hier vorgeführt haben, hätte ich mir gar nicht ausdenken können. Herzlichen Dank, Herr Vaatz! Ich bin Ihnen dankbar für diese Intervention.\"\n12652,susann-ruthrich,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die rechtsextreme Terrorgruppe NSU hat zehn Menschen umgebracht, mit Bomben Menschen verletzt und Banken überfallen. Davon wissen wir jetzt genau seit fünf Jahren.\n\nAber sind das alte Geschichten? Na ja, eher nicht. Es gab über 800 Angriffe allein in diesem Jahr. Es wird im Moment Anklage gegen eine mutmaßliche Terrorgruppe aus Freital erhoben, die rassistische Überfälle umgesetzt, politische Gegner angegriffen, Angst verbreitet hat. Mitglieder der Gruppe Oldschool Society sind angeklagt. Sie haben Angriffe auf Kirchen, Kindergärten und Einrichtungen für Menschen mit Behinderungen geplant. Diese Angriffe wollten sie Musliminnen und Muslimen und politischen Gegnern in die Schuhe schieben, um einen Krieg in Deutschland anzustacheln. Diese Gruppen konnten Gott sei Dank daran gehindert werden, Menschen zu töten. Ist das ein Beleg dafür, dass wir aus den Fehlern im Zusammenhang mit dem NSU gelernt haben? Reagieren unsere Behörden schneller? Ich will es hoffen.\n\nTrotzdem, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, bleibt bei mir ein flaues Gefühl. Wie würden wir reagieren, wenn diese Taten nicht von rechten Menschenfeinden geplant worden wären, sondern etwa von Islamisten? Wie würden wir reagieren, wären Kirchen oder Kindergärten von denen bedroht worden, wären Bomben in Freital vom IS gelegt worden, wären in diesem Jahr 800 weiße Deutsche aus Hass angegriffen worden? Meine Vermutung ist: Dieses Land würde kopfstehen, und zwar völlig zu Recht. Das wäre in Politik und Medien das Topthema. Wir würden es als das erkennen und benennen, was es ist: als Terror.\n\nDieser rechte Terror sendet eine Botschaft an die eh schon oft an den Rand gedrängten Gruppen: Ihr seid hier nicht sicher. Geht! - Aber wir fühlen uns viel zu oft nicht angegriffen, sondern das sind Menschen, die zu viele von uns für „andere“ halten. Genau das ist das Problem.\n\nDie Taten des NSU können wir nicht rückgängig machen. Wir können die Toten nicht lebendig machen, genauso wenig wie die vielen anderen Opfer rechtsextremer Gewalt. Was wir aber den Opfern, den Angehörigen und Freunden schuldig sind, ist, aus den Taten zu lernen. Wir mögen seit der Selbstenttarnung des NSU aufmerksamer geworden sein und vieles verändert haben, wir mögen auch vieles aufgeklärt haben: Aber haben wir bereits genug getan? Ich denke: nein.\n\nIch nenne zwei Bereiche, in denen ich noch Handlungsbedarf sehe. Zum einen sehe ich ihn bei der Stärkung der Zivilgesellschaft; dies ist eine der Handlungsempfehlungen. Denn was den NSU zu einer solchen Tragödie gemacht hat, ist aus meiner Sicht, dass nicht nur die Behörden versagt haben, sondern wir alle. Die dafür nötige Haltung, um es zu erkennen, ist zu ändern. Dies fördern viele Vereine, viele Initiativen, viele Organisationen mit seit Jahren wirksamer Aufklärung und Bildung quer durch die Republik. Betroffene rechter Gewalt können sich an Opferberatungen wenden. Damit wurden unverzichtbare Strukturen geschaffen, um nach einem Angriff handlungsfähig zu sein. Zum Glück wird der Wert all dieses Engagements zunehmend verstanden und anerkannt. Wir sagen dafür Danke.\n\nDemokratieförderprogramme gehören deswegen auch für uns mittlerweile zum Repertoire, um gegen menschenverachtende Gewalt vorzugehen. Das ist selbstverständlich. Wir werden die Mittel allein für das Programm „Demokratie leben!“ in diesem Jahr von 50 Millionen Euro auf 100 Millionen Euro verdoppeln. Damit ist eine wesentliche Forderung aus dem NSU-Abschlussbericht erfüllt. Das ist auch nötig; denn wir wissen mittlerweile, was funktionieren kann. Vieles ist vor Ort entstanden. Jetzt müssen wir dafür sorgen, dass das, was in Kommune A funktioniert, auch in die Gemeinde B übertragen werden kann, und zwar ohne dass Kommune A aus der Förderung fällt, weil kein Geld mehr da ist. Außerdem sind die Bedrohungen der Demokratie vielfältig, und neue Phänomene entstehen. Darauf müssen wir reagieren können, und zwar nicht auf Kosten des Bewährten.\n\nViele der Träger klagen seit Jahren darüber, dass eine Daueraufgabe in zeitlich begrenzte Projekte gepresst werden muss. Beratungsarbeit, Bildungsarbeit, Demokratieentwicklung, Radikalisierungsprävention - das alles ist Beziehungsarbeit. Vertrauen zwischen den Menschen und zwischen den Gruppen muss wachsen können. Daueraufgaben müssen daher dauerhaft gefördert werden.\n\nDer nächste Schritt muss also noch in dieser Legislaturperiode eine gesetzliche Lösung sein: ein Demokratiefördergesetz. Das haben wir einstimmig im NSU-Abschlussbericht bestätigt, und das steht auch im Koalitionsvertrag. Also machen wir das jetzt bitte auch.\n\nEin weiterer Punkt wurde am Fall NSU deutlich, und er ist bis heute problematisch. Es geht mir um die Opfer und Betroffenen von rassistischer Gewalt nach einem Angriff. Viele Punkte im Abschlussbericht beziehen sich auf einen angemesseneren Umgang mit den Opfern und Hinterbliebenen. Eines aber bleibt offen - das wurde im Gesetzentwurf der Linksfraktion erwähnt -: die Frage, ob die Menschen, die angegriffen wurden, oder die Hinterbliebenen, wenn es denn zum Strafprozess kommt, überhaupt noch in unserem Land sind, überhaupt noch hierbleiben dürfen. Es geht also um die Frage, ob ein Heilen der oftmals auch unsichtbaren Wunden überhaupt möglich ist, wenn die Bleibeperspektive unsicher ist. Das ist tatsächlich ein Problem. Zum Teil wird die Bleibeperspektive genau durch den Angriff erst genommen. Wenn etwa eine eigenständige Existenzgrundlage Voraussetzung für ein Bleiberecht ist und genau diese durch den Angriff zerstört wurde, dann drängen wir Opfer leider wieder an den Rand. Wie oft geschieht das, ohne dass eine so engagierte Ombudsfrau wie Frau John im Fall der NSU-Hinterbliebenen darauf hinweisen kann?\n\nDer Verband der Beratungsstellen für Betroffene rechter, rassistischer und antisemitischer Gewalt macht in einem Papier, das mich gestern erreicht hat, auf genau diese Frage der Bleibeperspektive aufmerksam. Allzu oft sind diejenigen, die in einem Strafprozess gegen einen rassistisch motivierten Täter aussagen könnten, zum Zeitpunkt des Prozesses bereits zur „freiwilligen“ Ausreise bewegt oder abgeschoben worden. Die strafprozessualen Rechte der Betroffenen können so nicht mehr verwirklicht werden. Die Verurteilung des Täters wird massiv beeinträchtigt.\n\nIch weiß nicht, ob dieses Problem über das Aufenthaltsrecht zu lösen ist, wie Sie es vorschlagen. Strafrechtliche Probleme über das Aufenthaltsrecht zu lösen, erscheint mir zumindest fragwürdig. Man kann die Situation aber auch nicht so belassen, wie sie ist. Es geht darum, Schlagkraft durch die so oft erwähnte ganze Härte des Rechtsstaates gegen die Täter zu entfalten. Deswegen brauchen wir mindestens eine Regelung, die Opfern rechter Gewalt zusichert, dass sie während des laufenden Strafverfahrens hierbleiben können. Es muss das klare Signal an Täter und potenzielle Täter geben: Ihr erreicht euer Ziel nicht! Eure Gewalt wird bestraft!\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, auch wenn bereits viel erreicht wurde, haben wir noch viel zu tun. Immer noch werden Menschen wie ich am Bahnhof so gut wie nie kontrolliert, Menschen mit dunklem Bart oder Kopftuch aber schon eher. Dieses Racial Profiling ist nicht in Ordnung. Immer noch wird bei Hakenkreuzschmierereien, zum Beispiel bei einem Angriff auf ein Bürgerbüro, nach einem Beleg für eine rechtsmotivierte Straftat gesucht, als wenn nicht die Tat an sich das Bekenntnis wäre. Immer noch werden Menschen, die angegriffen wurden, im Anschluss gefragt, wie sie die Nazis denn provoziert hätten, worauf sie sie angegriffen haben. Teilweise werden Jugendliche, die sich zum Zwecke der Gewalt zusammentun, auch als eventorientierte Jugendliche bezeichnet.\n\nNein, es ist nicht erst dann jemand wirklich rechts, wenn er den Staat angreift. Nazis und Rassisten greifen Menschen an. Deren Würde ist durch Artikel 1 des Grundgesetzes geschützt. Da sie geschützt ist, müssen wir jeden einzelnen Menschen gleich schützen.\n\nSolange sich nicht alle Menschen durch Gesetze und Strukturen gleich geschützt fühlen, müssen wir weiter vermuten, dass es institutionellen Rassismus gibt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, denen, die ich gestern im Untersuchungsausschuss gesehen habe, muss ich nicht erklären, warum ich das so betone: Unsere Aufgabe ist es, nicht nur staatliche Institutionen zu schützen, sondern Menschen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n76,matthias-miersch,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich bin den Grünen dankbar, dass sie diesen Antrag hier eingebracht haben, weil wir damit zu Beginn dieser Legislaturperiode die Möglichkeit haben, über eines der zentralen politischen Themen zu sprechen, die uns sicherlich nicht nur die nächsten vier Jahre, sondern viele Jahrzehnte beschäftigen werden.\n\nJeder, der schon einmal an einer Klimakonferenz teilgenommen hat, weiß, wie unterschiedlich die Interessen zwischen den Industriestaaten, zwischen den Entwicklungsländern, zwischen den Schwellenländern sind, ja auch zwischen den Ländern der Europäischen Union und, wie wir angesichts dieser Debatte auch wieder feststellen konnten, auch in diesem Haus. Hier hat eben ein Kollege von der CDU/CSU die Frage gestellt: Wie ist das mit dem Klimawandel und seine Auswirkungen auf die Philippinen? Ich glaube, diese Frage illustriert, dass auch wir hier in diesem Parlament eigentlich noch nicht die Voraussetzung dafür erfüllen, diese Menschheitsaufgabe wirklich zu begreifen.\n\nEs ist leider immer so, dass in der Vergangenheit erst die großen Katastrophen passieren mussten, bevor die Politik gehandelt hat. Hier haben wir es mit einem Phänomen zu tun, bei dem wir als Politiker beweisen müssen, ob wir tatsächlich nachhaltig denken können, ob wir Folgen viel größeren Ausmaßes volkswirtschaftlicher Art heute verhindern und das kurzfristige Denken überwinden können. Insofern gehört der Klimaschutz natürlich ins Zentrum unserer Überlegungen.\n\nJa, in jeder Koalition gibt es Kompromisse. Ja, möglicherweise würde der Koalitionsvertrag völlig anders aussehen, wenn nur Umweltpolitiker an ihm gearbeitet hätten. Ja, Frau Bulling-Schröter, es gibt auch bei den Linken Kohlebefürworter. Ich nenne hier beispielsweise den brandenburgischen Wirtschaftsminister, der deutlich macht, wie wichtig der Übergang vom fossilen ins erneuerbare Zeitalter ist. Ich bin mir sicher, Sie stimmen nicht mit allem überein.\n\nDas, was wir in den nächsten vier Jahren in dieser Großen Koalition schaffen müssen, ist - das ist auch die Messlatte, die wir uns alle gefallen lassen müssen -, ob wir als Bundesrepublik Deutschland - da haben die Grünen recht, wenn sie sagen, man braucht nationale Vorbilder - weiter ein nationales Vorbild darstellen. Das muss unsere Messlatte sein.\n\nDazu gehört, dass wir versuchen, mit einer Stimme zu sprechen, Herr Kollege Altmaier. Die erste Große Koalition mit einem sozialdemokratischen Umweltminister hat bewiesen - das jedenfalls sagen alle großen Umweltorganisationen -, dass diese vier Jahre für Klima- und Umweltschutz nicht schlecht gewesen sind. Aber das, was wir die letzten vier Jahre erlebt haben - nun hatten Sie die Sozis nicht an Ihrer Seite -, war eben genau das Gegenteil. Wir haben diese Vorbildfunktion nicht länger einnehmen können, sondern wir haben uns hier als Bundesrepublik Deutschland kein gutes Zeugnis ausgestellt, weil wir uns blockiert haben, weil Wirtschaftsminister und Umweltminister keine einheitliche Vorgehensweise hatten.\n\nÜber den Koalitionsvertrag kann man an vielen Stellen diskutieren.\n\n- Das müssen wir, im Übrigen auch hier im Parlament, weil das Parlament nicht die Bundesregierung ist. Deswegen müssen wir das Ganze an der einen oder anderen Stelle auch vorantreiben, glaube ich. - Der Koalitionsvertrag gibt eines wieder: Es wird im Bereich Klima und Energie eine Sprachregelung geben; Backloading ist da nur ein kleiner Bereich. Ich bin froh, dass der Bereich Effizienz ein ganzes Kapitel hat. Insofern: Nehmen wir es heute als Auftakt, dieses Thema ganz oben auf die Tagesordnung zu setzen!\n\nWir werden, Herr Krischer, im Fachausschuss sicherlich über diesen Antrag und über die Möglichkeiten, zu gemeinsamen Empfehlungen zu kommen, sprechen; denn es geht darum, Lösungen gemeinsam zu entwickeln, weil es gerade im Bereich Energie und Umwelt wenig bringt, alle vier Jahre etwas Neues zu machen. Lassen Sie es uns deshalb als Auftakt nehmen. So verstehe ich die Debatte heute. Vier Jahre liegen vor uns. Ich glaube, die Große Koalition kann durchaus auch im Bereich Klima und Energie beweisen, dass Dinge positiv zu verändern sind. In diesem Sinne freue ich mich auf eine gute Zusammenarbeit von uns allen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12995,dietmar-nietan,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte gar nicht darum herumreden: Das in der Berichterstattung der Sendung Frontal 21 geschilderte Geschäftsgebaren innerhalb der SPD-eigenen Medienagentur Network Media ist unakzeptabel und mit sozialdemokratischen Prinzipien nicht vereinbar. Damit wurde nicht nur dem Ansehen meiner eigenen Partei, sondern auch der Politik insgesamt großer Schaden zugefügt.\n\nIch habe deshalb als Schatzmeister der SPD veranlasst, dass dieser Vorgang intern untersucht wird, um dann aus den gewonnenen Erkenntnissen auch Konsequenzen zu ziehen. Unabhängig von dieser Aufarbeitung habe ich umgehend sichergestellt, dass es die sogenannten Vorwärts-Gespräche nicht mehr geben wird.\n\nIch weiß, dass wir uns nicht nur der berechtigten Kritik an dem, was passiert ist, sondern auch unberechtigten Unterstellungen stellen müssen. Deshalb will ich es hier noch einmal in aller Deutlichkeit sagen: Trotz der Berichterstattung über unsere Agentur bleibt es für die SPD weiter dabei: Mit Sponsoringleistungen kann kein Zugang zu Amtsträgern, Abgeordneten oder Parteifunktionären erkauft werden.\n\nIch will hier noch einmal betonen, dass die Politikerinnen und Politiker, die in der Vergangenheit an Vorwärts-Gesprächen teilgenommen haben, nicht über Details etwaiger Absprachen zwischen Sponsoren und der Agentur ins Bild gesetzt wurden; ihnen war auch die Höhe etwaiger Zahlungen nicht bekannt.\n\nAuch wenn wir davon ausgehen können, dass in dem in Rede stehenden Fall kein Verstoß gegen das Parteiengesetz vorliegt, hat Bundestagspräsident Lammert recht, wenn er sagt:\n\nVöllig unabhängig von der Frage, ob das rechtlich relevant ist oder nicht, es ist jedenfalls selten dämlich.\n\nIch weiß, dass das, was hier geschehen ist, zu einem weiteren Vertrauensverlust bei den Menschen in unserem Land geführt hat. Aber ich will an dieser Stelle auch deutlich sagen: Auch wenn es ein langer und schwerer Weg sein wird, sollten wir jetzt gemeinsam im Bundestag alles dafür tun, das verlorengegangene Vertrauen wieder zurückzugewinnen. Aus diesem Grund begrüße ich die hier eingebrachte Initiative der Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen ausdrücklich.\n\nEs wäre aus meiner Sicht ein gutes Signal, wenn wir noch in dieser Legislaturperiode Regelungen in das Parteiengesetz aufnehmen, die das Parteiensponsoring transparenter machen.\n\nWir hätten dem vorliegenden Antrag heute gerne zugestimmt. Da aber unser Koalitionspartner bisher nicht dafür zu gewinnen war, werden wir zu Beginn des kommenden Jahres unsere eigenen Vorschläge für mehr Transparenz beim Sponsoring vorlegen.\n\nIch will es hier sehr deutlich sagen, weil ich es auch belegen kann: Die Vorschläge, die wir machen, fordern wir als SPD seit 2010. Sie können das in unseren Wahlprogrammen, in den Statements meiner Vorgängerin, Dr. Barbara Hendricks, nachlesen. Es ist keine Erfindung, die uns jetzt einfällt, weil wir Mist gebaut haben.\n\nIch will kurz schildern, was aus unserer Sicht wichtig wäre und was, ohne eine überbordende Bürokratie aufzubauen, getan werden könnte.\n\nErstens. Wir brauchen im Parteiengesetz eine sehr präzise Definition davon, was wir unter Sponsoring verstehen, damit es keine Missverständnisse gibt. Ich glaube, dass die Definition, wie sie im Erlass des Bundesfinanzministeriums zur steuerlichen Behandlung von Sponsoring zu finden ist, eine gute Orientierung wäre.\n\nZweitens. In den Rechenschaftsberichten der Parteien sollten Einnahmen aus Sponsoring mit einer neuen eigenen Einnahmeposition ausgewiesen werden und nicht wie bisher in eine Sammelposition eingehen, die einen, wie ich finde, schönen Titel hat.\n\nEr lautet: „Einnahmen aus Veranstaltungen, Vertrieb von Druckschriften und Veröffentlichungen und sonstiger mit Einnahmen verbundener Tätigkeit“. Ich glaube, es ist sinnvoll, im Sinne der Transparenz Sponsoring nicht in einer solchen Sammelposition zu verstecken, sondern deutlich auszuweisen.\n\nDrittens. Es ist auch sinnvoll, eine Veröffentlichungspflicht, vergleichbar mit den Regelungen zu Parteispenden im jetzigen Parteiengesetz, zu verankern.\n\nViertens. Hier gebe ich allen recht, die es angesprochen haben. Wir sollten uns darüber verständigen, dass wir, wenn wir eine neue Regelung schaffen, uns überlegen, wie wir sie so ausgestalten können, dass wir örtliche, lokale Parteiorganisationen vor einer überbordenden Bürokratie bewahren. Wenn Sie zum Beispiel vom örtlichen Metzger die Grillwürstchen für ein Sommerfest gesponsert bekommen, dann müssen Sie nicht ellenlange bürokratische Wege auf sich nehmen.\n\nUnabhängig von der Frage, wie wir uns hier im Parlament einigen, haben wir - meine Kollegin Fograscher hat das schon gesagt - uns auf freiwilliger Basis entschieden, ab dem nächsten Jahr sicherzustellen, dass wir nicht nur wie bisher die Liste der Sponsoren unserer Parteitage veröffentlichen, sondern für jede SPD-Veranstaltung die exakte Höhe des Betrages des jeweiligen Sponsors veröffentlichen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Sie können mir wirklich glauben: Die jetzt bekanntgewordenen Vorfälle sind nicht nur peinlich. Sie ärgern mich deshalb, weil sie Wasser auf die Mühlen von Populisten sind, deren Parteien selbst mit dubiosesten Methoden zur Geldbeschaffung auffällig geworden sind.\n\nDeshalb, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, damit es keinen Zweifel gibt, will ich noch einmal betonen: Für das, was bei Network Media passiert sein soll oder passiert ist - wir untersuchen es -, tragen wir als SPD eine Verantwortung. Wir müssen dieser Verantwortung zukünftig durch ein besseres Handeln gerecht werden. Auf der anderen Seite halte ich es für richtig, dass wir für die Verteidigung einer pluralistischen, an den Werten unseres Grundgesetzes orientierten Parteiendemokratie hier in diesem Hause eine gemeinsame Verantwortung tragen.\n\nWir sollten deshalb das Anliegen in dem hier vorliegenden Antrag von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen nicht nur ernst nehmen, sondern auch sicherstellen, dass wir eine entsprechende Regelung möglichst in großer Gemeinsamkeit noch in dieser Legislaturperiode umsetzen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nIch kann Ihnen jedenfalls versichern, dass an der SPD-Fraktion die Verabschiedung einer guten Regelung zum Sponsoring im Parteiengesetz noch in dieser Legislaturperiode nicht scheitern wird. Hier müssen jetzt andere Farbe bekennen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5825,steffen-kampeter,\"Herr Kollege Ströbele, die Bundesregierung hat wiederholt verdeutlicht - beispielsweise zuletzt und sehr umfassend in der Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage der Fraktion Die Linke, Bundestagsdrucksache 18/451 vom 6. Februar 2014 -, dass der Vertrag über die abschließende Regelung in Bezug auf Deutschland vom 12. September 1990, der sogenannte Zwei-plus-Vier-Vertrag, die endgültige Regelung der durch den Krieg entstandenen Rechtsfragen enthält und diese nach unserer Auffassung damit gelöst sind, da der genannte Vertrag in der KSZE-Charta von Paris aus dem Jahre 1990 zustimmend - weit über den ursprünglichen Teilnehmerkreis hinaus - zur Kenntnis genommen wurde.\n\nDie Intention des Zwei-plus-Vier-Vertrages, Herr Kollege Ströbele, war eine umfassende Regelung zum Abschluss des Kalten Krieges. Auf dem Treffen der KSZE-Außenminister am 1. Oktober 1990 wurden diese Sachverhalte innerhalb der KSZE zustimmend zur Kenntnis genommen.\n\nHerr Kollege Ströbele, ich habe Ihnen hier die Auffassung der Bundesregierung zum Geltungsbereich des Zwei-plus-Vier-Vertrages und der Charta von Paris dargelegt. Sie unterscheidet sich von Ihrer Interpretation. Damit haben wir in dieser Frage unterschiedliche Auffassungen. Aber die Auffassung der Bundesregierung ist diejenige, die ich hier zu vertreten habe.\n\nFrau Kollegin Haßelmann, ich habe darauf hingewiesen, dass wir in der Drucksache 18/451 auf eine Reihe von Nachfragen aus der Fraktion Die Linke umfassend und auf breiter Front geantwortet haben. In 60 Sekunden kann ich nicht all das, was in dieser differenzierten und umfassenden Rechtsdarlegung steht, wiederholen. Aber zusammenfassend sehe ich juristisch keine Grundlage, auf der wir mit anderen Staaten verhandeln können.\n\nAndere Fragen, die Sie in einem nichtjuristischen Kontext stellen, können im politischen Bereich und durch Mehrheitsentscheidungen des Deutschen Bundestages jederzeit geklärt werden. Aber die Bundesregierung sieht keinerlei rechtliche Grundlage für Verhandlungen.\n\nIch halte Ihren Vergleich zwischen dem Sachverhalt, den Sie als „Zwangsanleihe“ charakterisieren, und der Kreditvereinbarung zwischen Ländern der Euro-Zone und den griechischen Autoritäten für nicht zutreffend. Folgerichtig glaube ich, dass Gleiches unterschiedslos und Ungleiches unterschiedlich behandelt werden muss. Dies ist die Auffassung der Bundesregierung.\n\nFrau Kollegin Baerbock, die Entscheidung zählt zum operativen Geschäft der Lausitzer und Mitteldeutschen Bergbau-Verwaltungsgesellschaft, welches die Geschäftsführung dieser GmbH zu verantworten hat.\n\nFolgende Gründe spielten bei dieser Entscheidung eine Rolle: Infolge des Grundwasserwiederanstiegs in den ehemaligen Braunkohlebergbaugebieten und des Zutritts in Fließgewässern kommt es zum Eintrag von Eisenfrachten, die zu der bekannten Verockerung der Fließgewässer und zu Verschlammungen der Gewässersohlen führen. Eine Beräumung der eisenhaltigen Sedimente ist oft unerlässlich zur Verhinderung einer Verschlechterung des Gewässerzustandes. Des Weiteren fallen bei der Behandlung eisenbelasteter Wässer in technischen oder in naturräumlichen Anlagen Eisenhy-droxidschlämme verschiedener Konsistenz und Reinheit an, welche einer gesicherten Verbringung bedürfen.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund hat die LMBV alle technischen und wirtschaftlich umsetzbaren Maßnahmen zur Entnahme, zur Behandlung, zum Transport und zur sicheren Verbringung von Eisenhydroxidschlämmen untersucht. Als eine mögliche wirtschaftliche Variante wurde neben der Verwertung oder der Entsorgung auf einer Deponie auch eine Verspülung der Eisenhydroxidschlämme in den Altdöberner See herausgearbeitet.\n\nFrau Kollegin, die chemische Veränderung der Wasserqualität von Seen durch die Einleitung von neutralen Eisenhydroxidschlämmen ist als sehr gering einzuschätzen und liegt meist im Bereich unterhalb der Nachweisgrenze. Neutrale Wasserkörper verhindern dabei eine Rücklösung von Schlammbestandteilen. Großvolumige und tiefe Seen sind aus ökologischer Sicht daher für eine Einspülung zu bevorzugen. Die ökologische Beeinflussung durch Trübstoffe hat allenfalls eine sehr geringe Relevanz.\n\nDie Eisenhydroxidschlammeinleitung erfolgt über eine Schlammleitung in die tiefen Bereiche des Sees. Aufgrund der jahrzehntelangen Erfahrungen bei der Einspülung solcher Schlämme in Bergbaufolgeseen sind keinerlei negative Auswirkungen bekannt. Deswegen hat die Geschäftsleitung diese Option vorgeschlagen.\n\nFrau Kollegin, im Rahmen einer Gesamtabwägung hat sich diese Vorgehensweise als eine mögliche herausgestellt. Selbstverständlich werden stets neue Erkenntnisse zu berücksichtigen sein; aber unter den bekannten Optionen ist dies eine zulässige.\n\nDie LMBV als die operative und zuständige Geschäftsführung hat mir hierzu Folgendes mitgeteilt:\n\nDer aus einem Tagebaurestloch entstehende Altdöberner See befindet sich im Eigentum der LMBV. Die beabsichtigte Einleitung von Eisenhydroxidschlamm kann erst nach Vorliegen der erforderlichen Genehmigungen erfolgen. Die Einleitung von Eisenhydroxidschlämmen in den Altdöberner See ist durch folgende Gutachten abgedeckt: Gutachten von Herrn Professor Luckner aus dem Juli 2013 und Gutachten aus dem August 2014 von Dr. Uhlmann. Eine anderweitige Verwertung der anfallenden Mengen ist nach dem derzeitigen Stand der Technik entweder nicht möglich oder nicht finanzierbar.\n\nFrau Kollegin Baerbock, die LMBV hat namens der Geschäftsführung mitgeteilt, dass es sich um eine Gesamtabwägung handelt und dass sie die Einleitung unter Berücksichtigung der verschiedenen Dimensionen, die ich hier auch dargestellt habe, als Instrument der Wahl akzeptiert. Genauere Kostenabschätzungen oder Grenzwertbetrachtungen liegen mir leider nicht vor.\n\nFrau Kollegin Baerbock, zu den beiden angesprochenen Sachverhalten gibt es derzeit noch keine abschließende Festlegung innerhalb der Bundesregierung.\n\nIch gehe davon aus, dass im Rahmen des Genehmigungsverfahrens, das ich angesprochen habe, alle notwendigen nationalen wie internationalen für das Gebiet des Sees geltenden rechtlichen Anforderungen erfüllt werden.\n\nDie LMBV lässt auch keinen Zweifel daran, dass sie sich selbstverständlich an das geltende Recht hält.\"\n11176,christian-flisek,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Staatssekretär Lange, ich bin froh, dass wir heute hier das zweite große urheberrechtliche Reformprojekt dieser Koalition in erster Lesung verhandeln. Es ist ein gutes Zeichen. Ich betone noch einmal: Die Lethargie im Urheberrecht ist vorbei.\n\nFrau Kollegin Rößner, wo gearbeitet wird, da fallen nun einmal auch Späne, da wird diskutiert. Man holt sich deswegen nicht gleich eine blutige Nase, sondern man ist mittendrin in intensiven Debatten. Und es ist auch gut für das Urheberrecht, dass man all diese Debatten führt. Nur wer nichts tut, holt sich keine blutige Nase, weil eben auch nicht diskutiert werden kann mangels irgendwelcher gesetzgeberischen Aktivitäten.\n\nDas ist jetzt vorbei. Wir sind mittendrin im Reformprozess. Wenn insbesondere über das Urhebervertragsrecht und über das Urheberrecht geredet wird, dann hört man immer ganz gerne Formeln wie: Na ja, da geht es um einen fairen und angemessenen Ausgleich zwischen Nutzern, Verwertern und Kreativen. - Dann gibt es in der Regel Applaus - momentan nicht. Sie wissen schon: Ich bin kein Freund von solchen wolkigen Formulierungen, weil sie eines verdecken: Man muss irgendwo mal Farbe bekennen.\n\nWir haben im Koalitionsvertrag Farbe bekannt. Wir haben gesagt: Wir wollen beim Urhebervertragsrecht etwas für die Urheber tun. Wir wollen die Position der Kreativen in diesem Land stärken, weil wir in der Praxis mittlerweile einige Exzesse - das kann man durchaus sagen - erleben, die dazu führen, dass Urheber und Verwerter nicht auf Augenhöhe miteinander verhandeln. Die sogenannte Vertragsparität ist gestört.\n\nDeswegen sagen wir, die Koalition, und insbesondere wir, die SPD-Bundestagsfraktion: Wir wollen die Position der Urheber hier stärken.\n\nWenn wir das Urheberrecht verhandeln, verhandeln wir nichts anderes als die Lohnbedingungen unzähliger kreativ tätiger Menschen in diesem Land, und das ist aller Mühe und Anstrengungen wert.\n\nIn den Reden ist schon angesprochen worden, welche Kräfte und welche unterschiedlichen Interessen im Urheberrecht schalten und walten. Sie müssen in der Tat nur den Referentenentwurf und den Kabinettsentwurf gegenüberstellen, um zu sehen, was das Ergebnis ist. Ich sage es deutlich: Der Referentenentwurf, das war Justizministerium pur. Nachdem dieser Entwurf im Kabinett war, haben wir jetzt halt eine etwas andere Situation.\n\nIch kann hier nur sagen: Wir befinden uns in der ersten Lesung. Wir werden ein intensives parlamentarisches Verfahren durchführen. Wir werden diesen Reformprozess intensiv begleiten. Wir werden uns um viele Dinge kümmern, und wir werden sie uns genau anschauen. Das betrifft die Mehrfachvergütung. Das betrifft die Reichweite des Auskunftsanspruchs, die Frage des Zweitverwertungsrechts. Wir werden uns mit der Situation der Total Buy-outs beschäftigen, und wir werden uns die Frage stellen, ob die Regelungen hierzu derzeit nicht tatsächlich dazu führen, dass Menschen in solche Buy-outs getrieben werden. Das soll nicht heißen, dass manche es wollen. Aber wir werden es sicherlich nicht komplett verbieten. Die Option muss offen bleiben. Aber sie sollen nicht hineingetrieben werden. Wir werden uns auch intensiv mit der Frage beschäftigen, wie die kollektiven Vergütungsregelungen - sie sind wichtig - zustande kommen.\n\nIch bin Herrn Staatssekretär Lange ausdrücklich dankbar dafür, dass er in seiner Rede hier noch einmal deutlich gemacht hat, dass das Ganze nicht in Stein gemeißelt ist, dass wir auch in enger Kooperation mit der Expertise Ihres Hauses, Herr Staatssekretär, dieses Verfahren hier im Parlament offen führen können. Das werden wir auch tun.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, der rote Faden, wenn Sie so wollen, aus meiner Sicht ist der, dass wir den einzelnen Urheber bei allem, was er verhandelt, ein wenig aus der Schusslinie nehmen wollen. Der einzelne Kreative, der sich einem großen Verwerter gegenübersieht, einem Verlag, einem Filmproduzenten, der einzelne Drehbuchautor, der einzelne Kameramann - ich denke an all die Menschen, die zu dem Gelingen eines kreativen Werkes beitragen -, hat nicht die Position - es sei denn, er ist einer der großen Stars; aber das ist ein ganz anderes Thema; um die brauchen wir uns nicht zu kümmern -, Bedingungen zu verhandeln, sondern bekommt sie vorgesetzt. Er muss sie akzeptieren, oder er ist aus dem Geschäft. In der Praxis in einigen Branchen ist es so, dass oft noch nicht einmal die Rechtsprechung des BGH, des Bundesgerichtshofs, eingehalten wird.\n\nDeswegen haben wir gesagt: Wir wollen, dass die einzelnen Kreativen gestärkt werden, dass sie in der Lage sind, die Bedingungen gemeinsam über ihre Verbände zu verhandeln. Dazu gehört auch, ehrlich gesagt - das an die Adresse all der Kreativen, die uns jetzt vielleicht zuhören -, dass sie sich in Zukunft stärker organisieren. Das ist eine der wesentlichen Voraussetzungen für das Funktionieren kollektiver Vergütungsregelungen. Wir werden dafür sorgen, dass dort, wo diese Regelungen verletzt werden, nicht der Einzelne klagen muss, sondern seine Rechte über seinen Verband geltend machen kann.\n\nWenn Sie so wollen: Das, was im Arbeitsrecht seit vielen Jahren gut und vernünftig funktioniert, soll auf die Kreativbranche übertragen werden. Ich persönlich verspreche mir davon auch einen Schritt hin zu einem branchenspezifisch ausdifferenzierten Urheberrecht. Das werden wir positivrechtlich gar nicht regeln können. Ich bin überzeugt: Das würde jeden Gesetzgeber überfordern. Wer, wenn nicht diejenigen aus der jeweiligen Branche, die sich da gegenübersitzen, weiß am besten, was Sache ist? Ich habe große Hoffnung, dass uns das gelingt.\n\nEin letzter Satz.\n\nEin allerletzter Satz, Frau Präsidentin. - Wir werden bei dem Reformprojekt auch im Auge behalten, wie es um die Einnahmen aus der Geräteabgabe in Zukunft bestellt ist. Sie kennen das Thema: Reprobel, Vogel. Es geht um die Frage: Wie ist zwischen Urhebern und Verlagen zu verteilen? Das hat zu einer enormen Schieflage in der deutschen Verlagslandschaft geführt. Wir werden das intensiv im Auge behalten. Wenn nationale Lösungen möglich sind, werden wir uns sicherlich nicht scheuen, diese anzugehen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n12592,wolfgang-strengmann-kuhn,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben diesen Antrag bereits am 26. Februar 2015 hier im Plenum diskutiert. Das ist deutlich über anderthalb Jahre her. Ich habe mir noch einmal das Protokoll vorgenommen. Frau Glöckner, Sie haben es damals schon ähnlich gesagt. Sie haben Ihre Rede damit beendet, nachdem Sie gesagt haben, dass noch Dinge geprüft werden müssen:\n\nDiese Zeit möchte ich der Regierung und vor allem auch dem Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales unter Führung meiner Kollegin Andrea Nahles zugestehen.\n\nDann kommt der letzte Satz:\n\nAm Ende dieser Prüfung muss aber noch in dieser Legislaturperiode ein Ergebnis stehen.\n\n„Muss“ - die Legislaturperiode geht langsam zu Ende, es wird allmählich Zeit, dass Sie diesem Parlament etwas vorlegen.\n\nEs reicht nicht, es bei Lippenbekenntnissen zu belassen. Zur sozialen Situation in Deutschland reicht es nicht, aufzuzählen, was man gemacht hat, sondern wichtig ist, was am Ende herauskommt. Im nächsten Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht wird wahrscheinlich sehr deutlich, dass in Deutschland die Schere zwischen Arm und Reich weiterhin auseinanderklafft, dass in Deutschland weiterhin Millionen Kinder in Armut leben, dass die Altersarmut in Deutschland steigt. Es gibt noch wahnsinnig viel zu tun. Da darf man sich nicht rausreden und es nicht schönreden. Das reicht an dieser Stelle nicht, sondern man muss etwas tun.\n\nDas gilt auch für die sozialen Menschenrechte und ein soziales Europa. Wir müssen als Deutschland eigentlich Vorreiter sein und nicht Schlusslicht. Es reicht nicht aus, wenn man, wie es die Bundesministerin macht, in Sonntagsreden oder in einem Gastbeitrag über das soziale Europa redet, sondern man muss Butter bei die Fische geben und tatsächlich voranschreiten. Das fängt bei uns zu Hause an. Wir behandeln morgen zum Beispiel einen Gesetzentwurf, mit dem der Zugang zu Sozialleistungen für Unionsbürgerinnen und -bürger wiederum drastisch eingeschränkt wird. Das geht genau in die falsche Richtung; das ist das falsche Signal.\n\nWir müssen da in die andere Richtung gehen. Wir brauchen eine bessere Sicherung, wir brauchen mehr soziales Europa.\n\nIch komme zu Vereinbarungen in der EU und erinnere an den EU-2020-Prozess, in dem ein Armutsbekämpfungsziel vereinbart worden ist. Die Bundesregierung stellt sich einfach hin und sagt: Die dort festgelegten Armutsindikatoren kümmern uns nicht; wir wählen einen eigenen Indikator. - Wir müssen uns auch an die Vereinbarungen in der Europäischen Union halten. Auch da wünschte ich mir, dass Deutschland Vorreiter und nicht Schlusslicht wäre -\n\nganz abgesehen von vielen anderen Maßnahmen auf europäischer Ebene, beispielsweise endlich dafür zu sorgen, dass es eine Mindesteinkommensrichtlinie oder Mindeststandards in den sozialen Sicherungssystemen gibt. All das taucht in Reden immer mal wieder auf - in der praktischen Politik fehlt es.\n\nDie Probleme sind natürlich nicht allein durch die Ratifizierung der Europäischen Sozialcharta zu lösen; da haben Sie völlig recht. Aber was ist das für ein Signal, dass wir die revidierte Fassung nach 20 Jahren immer noch nicht ratifiziert haben? Was sagen wir der Türkei und Russland, die sie ratifiziert haben, aber die Rechte nicht umsetzen? Wir haben doch überhaupt kein Argument, wenn wir sagen: Ihr setzt das nicht um. - Die können dann doch sagen: Ja, ihr ratifiziert das noch nicht mal. - Es würde doch eine Stärkung unserer Position bedeuten, wenn wir das endlich machten - deswegen noch einmal der Appell. Es wäre ein starkes Symbol, wenn wir das noch in dieser Legislaturperiode hinbekämen. Ich richte die dringende Aufforderung an die Bundesregierung, an das Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales, etwas vorzulegen, damit wir die revidierte Europäische Sozialcharta endlich ratifizieren können.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n14738,renate-kunast,\"Herr Minister, ich habe noch eine Frage zum Fall Franco A., der mittlerweile vielleicht auch ein Fall Bundeswehr ist. Ich möchte gerne von Ihnen wissen, wie die Bundesregierung eigentlich sicherstellen will, dass sowohl der Deutsche Bundestag und seine Gremien als auch die Staatsanwaltschaften umfassend informiert werden.\n\nIch will Ihnen den Kontext dieser Frage erklären. Man hört in diesen Zusammenhängen ja immer wieder, dass Disziplinarvorgesetzte nicht „in completto“ die Unterlagen und damit den ganzen Vorgang an die Staatsanwaltschaften abgeben, sondern nach eigenem Ermessen offensichtlich Dinge zurückhalten. Ich möchte von Ihnen wissen: Wie stellen Sie sicher, dass es im Fall Franco A. nicht so sein wird und dass bei der Bundeswehr in Zukunft grundsätzlich etwas gilt, was meines Erachtens Voraussetzung für das Vertrauen der Bürgerinnen und Bürger ist - das gilt gerade hier; immerhin sollte der Bundespräsident umgebracht werden -, dass nämlich tatsächlich immer die ordentliche Strafgerichtsbarkeit eingeschaltet wird.\n\nIch füge einen kurzen Gedanken hinzu. Ich finde es unsäglich, dass über einen solchen Vorgang auch der Deutsche Bundestag nicht umfassend informiert wird. Heute hat der Rechtsausschuss auf Antrag des Abgeordneten Luczak mehrheitlich beschlossen, sich nicht mit diesem Thema zu befassen, weil man erst einmal abwarten wolle. Man wollte also keine Debatte über die Wehrdisziplinarordnung, das Thema Strafrecht und strafrechtliche Ermittlungen führen. Ich würde gerne Ihre Vorstellungen zu beiden Teilen hören.\"\n5407,hans-christian-strobele,\"Danke. - Frau Staatssekretärin, ich habe gerade mitbekommen, dass die Firma Heckler & Koch auch an den Gesprächen beteiligt gewesen ist. Bestehen bei der Bundesregierung nicht Bedenken gegenüber der Firma Heckler & Koch, gegen die ein strafrechtliches Ermittlungsverfahren läuft und von der gerade in den letzten Wochen immer neue Verfehlungen bei Rüstungsexporten und der Einhaltung der gegebenen Zusagen über die Verwendung der exportierten Waffen auch in der Öffentlichkeit bekannt geworden sind? So wurde festgestellt, dass Waffen, die entgegen der Absprachen von Heckler & Koch nach Mexiko geliefert worden sind, vermutlich sogar bei den Morden an mehr als 43 Studenten benutzt worden sind. Jedenfalls wurden sie auf der Polizeiwache in dem Ort gefunden, in dem die Studenten verschwunden sind.\n\nDie Frage ist, ob die Bundesregierung nicht Bedenken hat, eine solche Firma an solchen Gesprächen in Indien zu beteiligen, und ob die Bundesregierung nicht Anlass dazu hat, diese Firma von weiteren Exportverhandlungen und -gesprächen auszuschließen?\n\nDanke, Frau Staatssekretärin. - Davon, dass es eine Verletzung der Abmachung ist, bin ich auch ausgegangen. Das ergibt sich schon aus dem Text des Abkommens. Mich interessieren dabei mehr die Haltung und die Tätigkeit der Bundesregierung. Die Bundeskanzlerin hat gemeinsam mit dem französischen Präsidenten intensive Verhandlungen geführt. Bezüglich der Dauer haben wir sie alle sehr bewundert, dass sie so gut durchgehalten hat. Aber mich interessiert: Ist, nachdem auch der Bundesregierung bekannt war, dass mindestens eine kritische Situation in Debalzewe besteht, eine Regelung getroffen worden? Da sitzen sie nun zusammen und wissen: Da ist ein Kessel. Wie eng er ist und wie schnell diese Lage möglicherweise zu einer Aufgabe führt, war vielleicht nicht bekannt; aber es war bekannt, dass die Situation kritisch ist. Hat man denn da gesagt: „Das muss jetzt sofort aufhören“, oder hat man gesagt: „Ihr habt jetzt noch drei Tage Zeit, da könnt ihr praktisch vollendete Tatsachen schaffen, und wir werden mit denen soundso umgehen“? Was ist denn da geregelt worden?\n\nDanke, Frau Staatsministerin. Das war sogar schon ein bisschen mehr als das, was ich vorhin im Auswärtigen Ausschuss erfahren habe.\n\nIch habe Sie jetzt so verstanden, dass Sie froh darüber sind, dass jedenfalls ein Teil der Soldaten abziehen konnte oder nur gefangen genommen wurde, aber nicht getötet wurde. War das Gegenstand der Vereinbarung? Hat man vereinbart, dass man, wenn ein solcher Abzug aus dem Kessel ermöglicht wird, die Tatsache hinnimmt, dass der Kessel gefallen ist?\n\nIch weiß nicht, ob ich mich für die Antwort bedanken soll, Herr Staatssekretär, weil Sie meine Frage nicht beantwortet haben. Ich habe Sie gefragt - das kommt auch in dem Interview mit dem Präsidenten des Bundesamtes für Verfassungsschutz zum Ausdruck -, was zulässige szenetypische Straftaten von V-Leuten im Milieu etwa von ISIS in Syrien oder des IS im Irak sein können. Herr Maaßen befürwortet in dem Interview den Einsatz von V-Leuten dort. Es gibt Bedenken, ob er im Ausland überhaupt zulässig ist; es handelt sich schließlich um einen Inlandsgeheimdienst, aber sehen wir einmal davon ab.\n\nV-Leute, die hier geworben werden, gehen nach Syrien und begehen dort szenetypische Straftaten im IS-Milieu. Da gruselt es mich. Was könnte das denn sein? Was kommt da Ihrer Auffassung nach in Betracht? Sie müssen das jetzt nicht umfassend aufzählen, mich interessiert ein konkretes Beispiel: Was könnte es sein, was mich nicht gruselt?\n\nSie haben hier den entsprechenden Gesetzentwurf zitiert. Ich fürchte, es hat hier kaum einer verstanden, was Sie damit zum Ausdruck bringen wollten. Dieser Gesetzentwurf ist nun einmal vorhanden. Sie sagen, er befinde sich in der Länderabstimmung. In ihm findet sich ein bemerkenswerter Satz: Wenn in Zukunft Straftaten von erheblicher Bedeutung verübt werden, muss der Behördenleiter - also der Präsident des Bundesamtes für Verfassungsschutzes - oder sein Stellvertreter entscheiden, ob der Einsatz abgebrochen wird. Mit anderen Worten: Es gibt auch Fälle, wo der Einsatz nicht abgebrochen wird und das lediglich intern - das heißt vom Präsidenten bzw. Vizepräsidenten - entschieden wird. Kann es sein, dass dann da etwas außer Kontrolle gerät?\"\n12477,kordula-schulz-asche,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Demenzielle Erkrankungen breiten sich immer mehr aus. Inzwischen sind ungefähr 1,6 Millionen Menschen in Deutschland betroffen. Diese Erkrankungen bedeuten unendliches Leid für die Betroffenen, aber auch für ihre Familien. Vor der Diagnose Demenz haben viele Menschen große Angst. Demenz ist bisher nicht heilbar. Umso intensiver suchen Forscherinnen und Forscher weltweit nach geeigneten Therapien. Alle hier im Haus, meine Damen und Herren, wollen die Forschung dabei unterstützen, geeignete Therapien zu finden.\n\nSowohl meine Mutter als auch mein Vater waren an einer Demenz erkrankt. So können Sie mir wirklich glauben, dass ich alles Interesse daran habe, dass wir so schnell wie möglich mehr wissen über diese Erkrankung, ihre Ursachen, ihre Prävention, ihre Diagnostik und ihre Therapie. Ja, meine Damen und Herren, wir brauchen medizinischen Fortschritt in diesem Bereich, aber wir brauchen dafür eine Forschung, die den Schutz der Studienteilnehmerinnen und \u001eteilnehmer in jeder Phase einer Arzneimittelstudie in den Vordergrund stellt.\n\nUnsere derzeitige Rechtslage macht das. Sie leistet beides. Arzneimittelstudien mit nicht mehr einwilligungsfähigen Erwachsenen sind heute möglich, allerdings unter der Voraussetzung, dass sie selbst von einer Studie einen individuellen Nutzen haben. Das ist die aktuelle Rechtslage, und sie ist auch mit dem EU-Recht vereinbar.\n\nDaraus ergibt sich die Frage: Wird aufgrund der aktuellen Rechtslage Forschung verhindert? Auf mehrfache Nachfragen, die wir an die Bundesregierung gestellt haben - auch in den Anhörungen -, konnte uns keine einzige Forschung in Deutschland genannt werden, die unter den heutigen Bedingungen nicht durchgeführt werden könnte. Im Gegenteil: Klinische Forschungen mit Demenzkranken finden in Deutschland seit langem statt. Das Deutsche Register Klinischer Studien führt aktuell acht interventionelle Arzneimittelstudien allein zu Alzheimer-Demenz auf. Die überwältigende Mehrzahl der bereits heute durchgeführten klinischen Studien zu Demenzerkrankungen konzentriert sich aber auf geringe bis mäßige Schweregrade, also auf noch einwilligungsfähige Patientinnen und Patienten, auch und gerade, um das Voranschreiten in ein späteres Stadium der Nichteinwilligungsfähigkeit hinauszuzögern oder sogar zu verhindern.\n\nNatürlich ist auch Forschung mit Menschen mit einer Erkrankung im fortgeschrittenen Stadium möglich. Aber mit welchem Ziel? Das Ziel muss doch sein, dass es zur erhofften Erleichterung oder Verbesserung des Krankheitszustandes kommt, es also einen individuellen Nutzen gibt. Das ist eine andere Definition des Eigennutzes als die Definition, die Sie, Herr Nüßlein, hier eingeführt haben und die wirklich unanständig ist.\n\nWenn es aber so ist, wie ich es gerade gesagt habe, nämlich dass Forschung derzeit auf breiter Basis möglich ist, dann ist doch jetzt die nächste Frage: Warum soll ein bewährtes Gesetz überhaupt geändert werden?\n\nErst 2013 hat sich der Bundestag explizit dafür ausgesprochen, den hohen Schutzstandard in Deutschland aufrechtzuerhalten und entsprechend mit der EU zu verhandeln. Noch im Referentenentwurf der Bundesregierung war die Erhaltung dieses Schutzstandards vorgesehen. Aber - Minister Gröhe, das hat mich persönlich, ehrlich gesagt, sehr erstaunt - ohne jede Not und jede Vorankündigung ist nun dieser tiefgreifende Einschnitt in die Rechtslage in Bezug auf Nichteinwilligungsfähige erfolgt - zwischen dem Referentenentwurf und der Kabinettsvorlage. Diese rasante Kehrtwende konnten Sie bisher nicht erklären.\n\nWir befürchten, dass sie auf Zuruf einer einzelnen Interessengruppe erfolgt ist. Was anfangs lediglich als kleine Anpassung an EU-Recht ausgegeben wurde, entpuppt sich jetzt in Wahrheit als eine bedeutende ethische Frage.\n\nEs gibt gleich mehrere Gründe, die gegen eine Neuregelung sprechen:\n\nErstens. Es gibt aus Sicht der Forschung keine Notwendigkeit, die Personengruppe für Arzneimittelstudien auszuweiten. Die bisherige Gesetzeslage führt im Bereich Demenzforschung weder aktuell noch in der Zukunft zur Behinderung eines wesentlichen Fortschritts, noch koppelt sie die Demenzkranken vom medizinischen Fortschritt ab - was ja auch ein Argument für eine Änderung wäre. Die gegenwärtige Gesetzeslage ist völlig ausreichend, um die ethisch gebotene Forschung in diesem Bereich zu ermöglichen.\n\nZweitens. Es gibt keine renommierte Forschergruppe, die neue Rahmenbedingungen gefordert hat, um laufende oder geplante Forschungsvorhaben erfolgreich aufsetzen und fortsetzen zu können. Deutschland nimmt trotz des hohen Schutzniveaus für Probandinnen und Probanden international einen Spitzenplatz in der klinischen Forschung ein.\n\nDrittens. Die beiden anderen Änderungsanträge, die hier heute zur Abstimmung stehen, gehen mit einer immensen Rechtsunsicherheit einher. Hier gilt umso mehr: Wir alle im Bundestag sollten dem Prinzip folgen, dass man keine bewährten Gesetze ändern sollte, wenn es dafür keine triftigen Gründe gibt.\n\nWeder die im Gesetzentwurf vorgesehene Patientenverfügung noch die in den beiden zur Abstimmung stehenden Anträgen vorgesehene Probandenverfügung schaffen mehr Rechtssicherheit. Im Gegenteil: Während eine Patientenverfügung ja wenigstens noch ein klar definiertes, eingeführtes und an sehr hohe Anforderungen unserer jetzigen Rechtsprechung geknüpftes Instrument ist, ist die Probandenerklärung ein neu erfundenes Instrument, für das überhaupt kein Rechtsrahmen vorgegeben ist. Sie unterscheiden in Ihren Anträgen lediglich, ob ärztliche Beratung stattfinden soll oder nicht. So schafft man keine Rechtssicherheit. Aber gerade in diesem Bereich brauchen wir eine sehr hohe Rechtssicherheit, um Menschen zu schützen.\n\nWas Sie mit Ihren Änderungsanträgen einführen wollen, ist eine Vorausverfügung mit einer Unterschrift zu einem sehr frühen Zeitpunkt. Das ist eine Blankounterschrift, die zu einem Zeitpunkt gegeben wird, zu dem der Proband noch einwilligungsfähig ist, zu dem aber das Ziel und das Design der Studie, an der er teilnehmen soll, überhaupt nicht bekannt sind. Was soll das denn für eine Verfügung sein? Was soll denn in der Verfügung stehen, wenn sie einigermaßen rechtssicher sein und die Probanden vor Eingriffen schützen soll, die sie nicht wollen?\n\nDeshalb mein Fazit: Forschung, von der nichteinwilligungsfähige Patienten nicht selbst profitieren, ist nicht nur unnötig, sondern medizinisch, juristisch und ethisch fragwürdig.\n\nHerr Kollege Nüßlein, Sie haben auf die Ethikkommissionen verwiesen. Wir werden am Freitag über das gesamte Gesetz abstimmen, und das beinhaltet leider auch die Entmachtung der Ethikkommissionen, die sich auf Länderebene bewährt haben. Auch das steht neben anderen Punkten im Gesetz.\n\nAußerdem: Es wird nicht heute endgültig darüber abgestimmt, sondern am Freitag. Auch das muss man der Ehrlichkeit halber sagen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich bitte Sie um Ihre Unterstützung für den Änderungsantrag von Schummer, Schmidt, Vogler und mir. Ich glaube, dass wir ein gutes Werk tun, wenn wir die seitens der Bundesregierung vorgesehene Gesetzesänderung und die in den anderen Änderungsanträgen enthaltenen Vorschläge verhindern und bei der bewährten Rechtslage bleiben.\n\nIch danke Ihnen für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n7047,astrid-freudenstein,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Frau Ministerin, Sie hatten eben die hohe Jugendarbeitslosigkeit in Kroatien angesprochen. Meine Frage wäre, ob Ihnen darüber hinaus Push-Faktoren bekannt sind, die eine Abwanderung kroatischer Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer nach Deutschland begünstigen könnten.\n\nEine Nachfrage bezüglich der Überweisungen: Ist Ihnen die genaue Höhe bekannt? In welcher Höhe sind Überweisungen in Deutschland tätiger kroatischer Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer nach Kroatien getätigt worden?\"\n11290,herlind-gundelach,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Klimaschutz - ich denke, darin sind wir uns einig - gibt es nicht erst seit dem Abkommen von Paris. Seit Jahrzehnten treiben wir den Klimaschutz in Deutschland, in Europa und in der Welt voran. Paris ist allerdings ein Meilenstein - das haben wir heute schon mehrfach gehört -, aber nicht nur für die deutsche Politik. Paris ist ein Zeichen für mehr Klimaschutz in der ganzen Welt.\n\nDieser Umstand und auch diese Erkenntnis sind relevant für die Weiterentwicklung unserer nationalen Klimapolitik. Bei uns macht sich immer wieder - manchmal leicht versteckt, manchmal etwas offener - die Haltung breit - über die Motive will ich jetzt gar nicht spekulieren -, dass Deutschland dem Klimawandel auch alleine begegnen oder als Vorreiter vorangehen könnte, während wenige andere folgen.\n\n- Das kommt immer wieder. - Wenn ich mir den Antrag der Grünen so durchlese, dann kann ich nur sagen: Das ist zum Teil offensichtlich auch ihre Auffassung.\n\nIch bin in der Zwischenzeit seit über drei Jahrzehnten in der Politik und habe zeitweise in dem gleichen Haus gearbeitet, das jetzt den Klimaschutzplan entwickelt. Meine Umweltminister hießen Töpfer und Merkel. Beiden gemein war die Erkenntnis, dass Klimaschutzpolitik nur im internationalen Maßstab wirklich erfolgreich gestaltet werden kann. Wir als schwarz-rote Koalition haben daher aus gutem Grund im Koalitionsvertrag festgehalten, dass wir den Klimaschutz europäisch denken und dass unser zentrales Instrument - der Kollege Jung hat das schon gesagt - im Kampf gegen den Klimawandel der europäische Emissionshandel ist. Deswegen möchte ich hier ausdrücklich mit einer immer wiederkehrenden Fehlinterpretation aufräumen.\n\nDer europäische Zertifikatehandel gibt dem klimaschädlichen CO2 einen Preis, zugegebenermaßen im Augenblick nur einen sehr geringen. Das ändert aber nichts daran, dass die Emissionen im vereinbarten Maße zurückgehen, auch wenn der Ertrag für die öffentliche Hand geringer ist als erwartet und deswegen aus Steuergeldern in einem Fonds nachgesteuert werden muss. Insofern entfaltet der europäische Emissionshandel durchaus seine Wirkung für den Bereich, für den er gedacht ist.\n\nDiese europäische Lösung, der wir alle in diesem Hause zugestimmt haben, führt aber zu einem Problem, wenn wir im gleichen Feld eigene rationale Lösungen einführen wollen. Alles, was wir zusätzlich einsparen, kann an anderer Stelle - auch das ist schon mehrfach gesagt worden - wieder verbraucht werden, direkt oder mit einer gewissen Verzögerung. Das heißt, eine zusätzliche deutsche Maßnahme in Sektoren, in denen der Zerfitikatehandel wirkt, hätte keinen Effekt auf die insgesamt für diesen Bereich zur Verfügung stehende Menge an CO2. Ich glaube, das kann man nicht häufig genug betonen.\n\nMeine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Energiewende, ein wichtiger Baustein in der Klimapolitik, hat noch immer eine große Unterstützung in der Bevölkerung. Aber wenn wir ehrlich sind, stellen wir fest: Diese hat in den vergangenen Monaten durchaus gelitten. Hintergrund ist: Die gestiegene EEG-Umlage, die Kosten für den Netzausbau, der Netzausbau insgesamt, Mangel an Netzanschlüssen, zu wenig Marktwirtschaft und zu viel Planwirtschaft sowie steigende Redispatch-Kosten fordern durch dramatisch gestiegene Kosten ihren Tribut.\n\nÄhnliches kann uns auch - darauf möchte ich hinweisen - bei einer falschen und vermeintlich gutgemeinten Klimapolitik passieren. Denn Klimapolitik ist - ich glaube, das zeigen auch viele Diskussionen, die wir vor Ort führen - für die meisten Menschen nach wie vor abstrakt und sehr schwer zu fassen. Theoretisch gefragt, unterstützt jeder die Klimapolitik, vor allem wenn das mit so einfachen Fragen wie „Sind Sie für oder gegen Klimaschutz?“ einhergeht.\n\nDie Bürgerinnen und Bürger in Deutschland leisten bereits ihren Beitrag zum Klimaschutz, und zwar auf sehr unterschiedliche Weise. Denn die Durchführung von energieeffizienten Maßnahmen zum Beispiel ist auch Klimaschutzpolitik. Wir haben dazu in Deutschland eine ganze Menge geleistet: Wir haben heute effizientere Kühlschränke, Energiesparlampen, Null-Energie-Häuser und vieles andere mehr.\n\n- Ja, und damit wollen wir auch weitermachen.\n\nWenn Sie aber fragen, ob zum Beispiel Mietsteigerungen aufgrund energetischer Sanierung oder der Wegfall bzw. die Verlagerung von Arbeitsplätzen aufgrund höherer Energiekosten akzeptiert werden, käme vermutlich eher eine negative Antwort. Das sollten wir auch und gerade im Interesse des Klimaschutzes zu vermeiden wissen. Deswegen ist für mich ganz wichtig: Wir müssen die Menschen bei unserer Politik mitnehmen, und sie müssen sie verstehen.\n\nDie CDU hat sich 1994 - das ist schon lange her - in ihrem Grundsatzprogramm nach intensiver Diskussion zur ökologischen und sozialen Marktwirtschaft bekannt. Das heißt, wir haben uns zu marktwirtschaftlichen Strukturen mit ökologischen und sozialen Leitplanken bekannt. Das ist auch heute noch unsere Maxime.\n\nIm Prinzip ja, aber ich habe momentan wahnsinnige Probleme mit meiner Stimme,\n\nund deswegen bin ich froh, wenn ich gut zum Ende komme.\n\nDanke. - Denn wir sind eben nicht davon überzeugt, dass Menschen sich aufgrund von staatlichen Vorgaben ändern. Sie ändern ihr Verhalten aus Überzeugung oder aus Eigeninteresse. Und das ist unser Weg: Wir wollen überzeugen und sie durch Anreize dafür gewinnen, den richtigen Weg zu gehen. Das Stichwort NAPE ist heute schon gefallen. Dabei waren wir durchaus erfolgreich. Von 1990 bis 2015 sank der Treibhausgasausstoß um mehr als 27 Prozent.\n\nZeitgleich ist es uns gelungen - auch das möchte ich betonen -, den Anteil der industriellen Bruttowertschöpfung bei rund 23 Prozent zu halten; in Europa beträgt dieser Anteil 17 Prozent. Daraus resultiert nicht zuletzt unsere Wirtschaftskraft.\n\nDie Energiewirtschaft und die Industrie setzen heute immer stärker auf eine Verzahnung von Energieumwandlung, Industrie, Mobilität, Gebäude, Wärme und flexible Speicherlösungen. Durch Digitalisierungsmärkte werden die Energieeffizienz und die Flexibilität des Energiesystems gestärkt und neue Wachstumsfelder erschlossen. Die Umstellung auf ein intelligentes, effizientes Energiesystem kann allerdings nur gelingen, wenn Planungssicherheit und ein verlässlicher Ordnungsrahmen mit gemeinsamen Standards geschaffen werden, damit Unternehmen für Innovationen Sorge tragen können.\n\nDaher sollten nach unserer Auffassung die in den Klimaschutzplan aufzunehmenden Maßnahmen unter folgenden Prüfkriterien ausgewählt werden: Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse, Auswirkung auf die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und die Arbeitsplätze, Technologieoffenheit, Rechts- und Investitionssicherheit, EU-Kompatibilität und letztendlich auch die Einbettung in ein globales Regime.\n\nIch bin sicher: Wenn wir so vorgehen, dann wird die Regierung einen guten Klimaschutzplan vorlegen und dann brauchen wir Ihr Klimaschutzgesetz definitiv nicht.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n8961,andrea-lindholz,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Beide Anträge der Opposition zielen im Kern darauf ab, jedem afghanischen Asylbewerber pauschal ein Bleiberecht einzuräumen. Sie begründen das mit der prekären Sicherheitslage in Afghanistan. Ich frage mich, warum Sie diese Forderung nur für Afghanistan aufstellen. Genauso gut könnten Sie auch ein pauschales Bleiberecht für alle Asylbewerber aus Nigeria oder Mali fordern.\n\nSchließlich werden auch manche Gebiete in diesen Ländern von islamistischen Milizen beherrscht.\n\nLaut dem heute in Berlin vorgestellten UN-Weltbevölkerungsbericht leben weltweit 1 Milliarde Menschen in Konfliktgebieten. Ein pauschales Bleiberecht, wie Sie es für bestimmte Staatsangehörige fordern, ist unverantwortlich.\n\nDeutschland wird dieses Jahr wohl 1 Million Asylbewerber aufnehmen. Das sind fünfmal mehr als im Vorjahr. Eine der Ursachen ist auch, dass wir für syrische Flüchtlinge ein pauschales Bleiberecht umgesetzt haben, das wir jetzt zu einer Einzelfallprüfung hin korrigieren müssen. Inzwischen sollte jedem klar sein, dass Deutschland den Flüchtlingszustrom, den wir in diesem Jahr erlebt haben, nicht dauerhaft bewältigen kann. Viele deutsche Kommunen haben längst ihre Belastungsgrenze erreicht.\n\nSogar die humanitäre Großmacht Schweden hat inzwischen die Notbremse gezogen. Stockholm hat die Asylrechtsverfahren extrem verschärft und strikte Grenzkontrollen eingeführt. Der schwedische Botschafter hat in dieser Woche hier vor den Europapolitikern der Union ausdrücklich für ein Umdenken in der Asylpolitik plädiert. Schweden kann, so seine Aussage, keine Flüchtlinge mehr aufnehmen. Auch Schweden hat erkannt, dass man Fehlanreize, die die Menschen dazu veranlassen, zu uns zu kommen, abschaffen muss.\n\nIhre Anträge würden die Politik der Fehlanreize fortsetzen, anstatt sie zu korrigieren. Sie würden weiterhin falsche Signale aussenden, sie würden Hoffnungen wecken, die wir so nicht erfüllen können.\n\nJeden Monat verlassen Tausende Afghanen ihr Land und zahlen für die Reise nach Europa bis zu 10 000 Dollar an die Schleusermafia. Mit Ihren Anträgen spielen Sie auch den kriminellen Schleusern in die Hände.\n\nEs gibt weltweit über 60 Millionen Flüchtlinge. Wir müssen angesichts dieser Dimension ganz eindeutig klarstellen, dass unser Asylrecht - hierum geht es - nur im begründeten Einzelfall helfen kann.\n\n- Da nützt Ihre Schreierei auch nichts.\n\nAsyl ist und bleibt ein Individualrecht, und es ist kein Recht, auf das sich ganze Völker berufen können. Deswegen fordert weder der Bundesinnenminister noch die Unionsfraktion, das Asylrecht oder gar die Einzelfallprüfung für bestimmte Gruppen aufzuheben. Im Gegenteil: Wir fordern eine Einzelfallprüfung für alle Asylbewerber, egal ob Afghanen oder Syrer. Wir wollen, dass endlich wieder europäisches und nationales Asylrecht konsequent angewendet wird.\n\nDas bedeutet im Übrigen, dass Schutzberechtigte natürlich bei uns bleiben dürfen und die, die abgelehnt wurden, unser Land verlassen müssen.\n\nJa, die Sicherheitslage in Afghanistan ist schwierig. Die Bundeswehr unterrichtet den Innenausschuss darüber regelmäßig. Auch der letzte Bericht betont, dass die Bedrohungslage landesweit sehr unterschiedlich ist. Die aktuell tagende Innenministerkonferenz ist sich darüber einig - zumindest sind das die ersten Pressemeldungen -, dass eine Rückführung in sichere Gebiete Afghanistans grundsätzlich möglich ist.\n\nDie Sicherheitslage erlaubt dies in einigen Gebieten, und die Innenministerkonferenz bittet die Bundesregierung ausdrücklich, die Rahmenbedingungen für Rückführungen und freiwillige Ausreisen durch Absprachen mit der afghanischen Regierung und dem UNHCR zu verbessern und auch zu Einzelfallprüfungen zurückzukehren.\n\nAn dieser Innenministerkonferenz nehmen meines Wissens nicht nur Innenminister der Union teil.\n\nDeutschland engagiert sich darüber hinaus massiv für mehr Sicherheit und Stabilität in Afghanistan. Den zivilen Wiederaufbau unterstützen wir mit 430 Millionen Euro pro Jahr. Deutschland hat die Leitung der EU-Polizeiausbildungsmission übernommen und stellt eines der größten Kontingente der insgesamt 12 000 Mann starken NATO-Unterstützungsmission in Afghanistan.\n\nAm Dienstag hat der NATO-Rat beschlossen, den Truppenabzug weiter zu verzögern und die aktuellen militärischen Kräfte mindestens bis Ende 2016 im Land zu belassen. Auch wir werden unser Kontingent aufstocken. Denn es muss unser Ziel bleiben, dass die Afghanen eigenverantwortlich für die Sicherheit ihres Landes sorgen. Auch das ist eine aktive Bekämpfung von Fluchtursachen.\n\nDie Bewertung, ob eine Abschiebung zulässig ist oder nicht, obliegt aus gutem Grund nicht uns, sondern in jedem Einzelfall der Entscheidung des Bundesamtes für Migration und Flüchtlinge.\n\nDie Schutzquote für afghanische Bewerber lag bis Oktober bei rund 45 Prozent. Aktuell sind rund 7 700 Afghanen ausreisepflichtig. Der Kollege von der SPD hat gerade die Zahlen zur tatsächlichen Abschiebung in diesem Jahr und in den vergangenen Jahren ausgeführt. Man sieht daran eben ganz genau, dass wir unserer Verantwortung im Rahmen der Einzelfallentscheidung nachkommen und daher auch keine pauschalen Behandlungen einzelner Gruppen beschließen sollten.\n\nDie mangelhafte Durchsetzung der Ausreisepflicht ist ein strukturelles Problem, das wir aktuell im deutschen Asylsystem haben. Das Rückübernahmeabkommen der EU mit Afghanistan, das im Übrigen auch andere Länder schon abgeschlossen haben, wäre ein weiterer sinnvoller Schritt, der in erster Linie der Durchsetzung unseres Asylrechts dienen würde.\n\nIn unserer Debatte sollte es grundsätzlich nicht darum gehen, pro oder kontra Flüchtlinge zu argumentieren.\n\nEntscheidend ist die Frage, wie wir unsere begrenzten Mittel einsetzen. Die Wirtschaftsweisen prognostizieren uns, dass die Versorgung der Asylbewerber im nächsten Jahr bis zu 14,3 Milliarden Euro kosten könnte. Das wiederum wäre fast doppelt so viel wie der Etat des Bundesentwicklungsministeriums. Die Hilfe vor Ort ist - das weiß wirklich jeder von uns - um ein Vielfaches effektiver als die Hilfe in Deutschland. Wir müssen daher immer wieder schauen, wo und in welchem Umfang wir Hilfe leisten und worauf wir unseren Fokus richten. Deutschland engagiert sich deshalb auch in Mali, im Irak und in Afghanistan.\n\nBundeswehrsoldaten riskieren ihre körperliche und seelische Gesundheit nicht nur für ihr Land, sondern vor allem auch für die Sicherheit der Bevölkerung vor Ort. Ihnen gebühren heute unser Dank und unsere Anerkennung. Ihre Anträge ignorieren diesen Einsatz vollständig. Wir haben im Tagesordnungspunkt zuvor über eine Verlängerung des Einsatzes gesprochen. Insgesamt sind Ihre Anträge an vielen Stellen nicht zielführend und werden von uns daher abgelehnt.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8762,jurgen-klimke,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Vor einigen Wochen wurde die deutsche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit durch einen Prüfbericht der OECD untersucht, und ihr wurde ein sehr gutes Zeugnis ausgestellt. Deutschland sei auf dem richtigen Wege, verkündete der Zusammenschluss der wichtigsten Industriestaaten. Der OECD-Bericht legt dar, dass wir es in den letzten Jahren, und zwar insbesondere im Jahr 2010, geschafft haben, durch die Evaluierung eine ganze Reihe von Verbesserungsmaßnahmen im Bereich der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit auf den Weg zu bringen. So wird hier insbesondere darauf hingewiesen, dass es eine verbesserte Steuerungsfähigkeit des zuständigen Ministeriums gegeben hat. Es sei eine starke Präsenz der Durchführungsorganisationen in den Partnerländern sichergestellt worden. Die Abstimmung mit den multilateralen Akteuren sei in einer sehr viel besseren Form erfolgt. In sämtlichen Bereichen zeigen sich also gute Erfolge. Das ist das Urteil der Prüfkommission.\n\nDas zeigt, dass die Wirksamkeit der deutschen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit in den letzten Jahren schrittweise erhöht worden ist, und das sehr konsequent. Dies geht auch - das muss man deutlich sagen - auf die Effektivierungsmaßnahmen zurück, die unter der letzten Bundesregierung auf den Weg gebracht worden sind.\n\nUnsere heutige Aussprache zum Etat des Ministeriums ist auch eine Fortschreibung dieses Erfolges. Es ist mehrfach gesagt worden: Im kommenden Jahr werden wir rund 7,4 Milliarden Euro für diesen Aufgabenbereich zur Verfügung stellen. Das sind 13,2 Prozent mehr als im laufenden Jahr. Zur historischen Einordnung: Es ist der höchste Etat des Ministeriums seit seinem Bestehen.\n\n7,4 Milliarden Euro und kontinuierliche Verbesserungen im Wirkungsgrad deutscher Entwicklungszusammenarbeit: Das zusammen eröffnet einen sehr viel größeren Handlungsspielraum. Das ist gerade auch aufgrund der Problematik in der Flüchtlingssituation bitter notwendig. Es ist an dieser Stelle schon mehrfach angesprochen worden: Die weltweite Bekämpfung und Beseitigung von Fluchtursachen sehen Minister Müller und die Entwicklungspolitiker in der Koalition als das Thema der Stunde an. Entwicklungspolitik kann und muss ihren Beitrag leisten, um die große Zahl von Flüchtlingen in den kommenden Jahren zu reduzieren. Entwicklungspolitik ist unsere Hilfe, unser Werkzeug für die Arbeit vor Ort. Deswegen begrüße ich den Mittelzuwachs um 190 Millionen Euro auf 300 Millionen Euro für die Sonderinitiative „Fluchtursachen bekämpfen - Flüchtlinge reintegrieren“ ausdrücklich.\n\nMachen wir uns noch einmal die Bandbreite bewusst, in der die deutsche Entwicklungspolitik ihre Wirkung entfaltet. Das Europäische Jahr für Entwicklung 2015 neigt sich dem Ende zu. Es war ein entscheidendes Jahr für die große globale Entwicklungsagenda. Deutschland hat diesen Prozess maßgeblich mitgestaltet. Auch hier möchte ich der Bundeskanzlerin noch einmal ausdrücklich Dank für ihren Einsatz im Dienste der Entwicklungspolitik aussprechen. Insbesondere auf dem G-7-Gipfel auf Schloss Elmau im Juni dieses Jahres hat sie entwicklungspolitische Themen propagiert, vorangebracht und ihnen auf diesem Gipfel eine Plattform gegeben. Das ist nicht selbstverständlich. Sie, Minister Müller, haben im Anschluss an dieses Treffen gesagt: So viel Entwicklungspolitik war noch nie. - Das ist völlig richtig.\n\nEinen entwicklungspolitischen Meilenstein haben wir dieses Jahr auch mit der Verabschiedung der UN-Nachhaltigkeitsziele erreicht. Die sogenannte Post-2015-Agenda wird Deutschland und die Welt in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit bis zum Jahr 2030 begleiten. Im Rahmen zukünftiger Debatten über diesen Haushalt wird die Finanzierung der nachhaltigen Entwicklungsziele natürlich auch nachhaltig auf der Agenda stehen. Denn eines muss deutlich kommuniziert werden: Mit den neuen Entwicklungszielen wird der Finanzierungsbedarf enorm steigen, vor allem für Infrastruktur und klimarelevante Investitionen.\n\nIm Juli dieses Jahres konnte ich Minister Müller auf die Financing-for-Development-Konferenz nach Addis Abeba begleiten. Aufbauend auf den Konferenzen in Monterrey und Doha wurde dort über die Grundlagen der internationalen Finanzarchitektur und vor allen Dingen über die Umsetzung der UN-Nachhaltigkeitsziele diskutiert. Von dort konnte ich, konnten wir das Ergebnis mitnehmen, dass ein globaler Konsens darüber besteht, alle Möglichkeiten der Entwicklungs- und Klimafinanzierung zu nutzen und einheitlich zu erfassen, sowohl öffentliche als auch private Ressourcen.\n\nDie Klimakonferenz in Paris wird im Gipfelkalender 2015 nun den Abschluss bilden. Auch hier soll Wegweisendes verkündet und ein Nachfolgeabkommen für das Kioto-Protokoll beschlossen werden. Ich erinnere an dieser Stelle sehr gerne daran, dass das BMZ mit einer Haushaltszuständigkeit für 90 Prozent der globalen Klimamittel Deutschlands eine wachsende Verantwortung trägt; auch das muss hier deutlich gesagt werden. Die Mittel im Kampf gegen die globale Erderwärmung sollen um 250 Millionen Euro steigen. Denn die Folgen des Klimawandels sind vor allem für die Menschen in den Schwellen- und Entwicklungsländern spürbar - Bangladesch ist genannt worden -, und sie werden in absehbarer Zeit viele Tausende Klimaflüchtlinge verursachen, wenn wir nicht handeln, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nAber auch in Deutschland sind wir einen guten Schritt weitergekommen; das darf ich in einer Bilanz, die im Zusammenhang mit dem Haushalt notwendig ist, deutlich sagen. Das von Minister Müller initiierte Bündnis für nachhaltige Textilien hat seine Mitgliederzahl ein Jahr nach seiner Gründung verfünffacht - eine gute Entwicklung, die uns Hoffnung gibt, dass das Bündnis auch sichtbare Erfolge für die Verbraucher erarbeitet.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wie schaffen wir es nun, in diesem breiten Aufgabenfeld mit den uns zur Verfügung stehenden Finanzmitteln möglichst viel zu erreichen? Lassen Sie mich an dieser Stelle auf die von mir bereits angesprochene strategische Ausrichtung der Entwicklungspolitik eingehen. Jedem von uns investierten Euro, der in den betroffenen Ländern für die Bekämpfung von Fluchtursachen, für die Begrenzung des Klimawandels oder zur Förderung der Gleichberechtigung von Frauen in Entwicklungsländern eingesetzt wird, steht ein Mehrwert gegenüber, den wir nicht für die Folgen von Flucht, von Klimaschäden und zur Beseitigung von Ungleichheit aufbringen müssen. Das sind eben Investitionen in die Zukunft; das ist wichtig.\n\nMinister Müller hat dies an einem Beispiel deutlich gemacht: 1 Euro, den wir im Libanon investieren, kann dort einen Nutzen von bis zu 30 Euro entfalten. Er nützt dort also 30-mal mehr; das müssen wir sehen.\n\nDoch nicht selten steht die Entwicklungspolitik in der Kritik. Ihr Nutzen wird nicht nur von Politikern, sondern auch von der Bevölkerung - wir alle wissen das - immer wieder hinterfragt. Von einem Fass ohne Boden ist die Rede. „Kommt das denn eigentlich auch unten an?“, ist die Frage. Die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit und wir als Entwicklungspolitiker, wenn wir an unseren Ständen auf den Märkten stehen, befinden uns in einer besonderen Rechtfertigungssituation und stehen unter einem besonderen Erfolgsdruck. Denn wir geben - oder schleudern; wie auch immer - die Steuergelder ins Ausland.\n\nDie gute Nachricht ist, meine Damen und Herren: Meines Erachtens hat sich in den vergangenen Monaten in der deutschen Öffentlichkeit auch hier eine positivere Einschätzung zur Notwendig von nachhaltiger Entwicklungszusammenarbeit verbreitet. Aus diesem Grunde ist die Politik verpflichtet, mit größter Sorgfalt zu überprüfen, wie wir unsere entwicklungspolitischen Projekte zum größtmöglichen Erfolg führen können. Jeden Tag müssen wir aufs Neue auswerten, was gut läuft und wo Verbesserungen notwendig sind. Um dem Vertrauen in die Entwicklungspolitik ein solides Fundament zu geben, ist es meines Erachtens von großer Bedeutung, aus Erreichtem zu lernen und die richtigen Schlüsse zu ziehen.\n\n2012 haben wir deshalb das Deutsche Evaluierungsinstitut der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit gegründet und damit ein nützliches Instrument geschaffen. Es hat das Potenzial, uns auf unsere Fehler aufmerksam zu machen, unsere Erfolge zu bewerten und die Misserfolge deutlich und transparent zu machen und sachlich zu analysieren. Das DEval kann uns durch seine Evaluierungsempfehlungen eine effektivere Entwicklungszusammenarbeit ermöglichen und uns helfen, zukünftige Projekte auf den richtigen Kurs zu bringen.\n\nEvaluierung erhöht den Druck auf uns, die Nachhaltigkeit von Projekten noch ernster zu nehmen. Doch leider spielt das DEval nicht immer die Rolle, die man ihm bei seiner Gründung zugedacht hat. Bisher ist lediglich eine überschaubare Anzahl an Evaluierungsberichten fertiggestellt worden. Wir nutzen dieses Potenzial des Institutes noch in einem zu geringen Umfang; das muss man auch selbstkritisch sagen.\n\nNeben dem DEval gibt es eine Reihe weiterer Organisationen, zum Beispiel die KfW, die eigenständig eine sehr breit angelegte Evaluation von entwicklungspolitischen Projekten durchführen. Wir brauchen eine stärkere Verzahnung zwischen dem DEval und diesen Organisationen. Wir müssen die Kräfte besser bündeln und koordinieren und einen Weg finden, aus dieser Vielzahl an Evaluationen und Erkenntnissen strategisch zu lernen und einen Mehrwert zu erzielen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, lassen Sie mich auch noch einige Sätze zur Flüchtlingsthematik sagen. Derzeit beschäftigen wir uns ja mit dem Thema Obergrenze und damit, wie viele Menschen zu uns kommen und welche Kosten entstehen werden. Das alles ist hier schon mehrfach gesagt worden. Diese Fragen beschäftigen die Menschen natürlich deutschlandweit, und wir müssen Antworten darauf geben. Vor allen Dingen müssen wir die Menschen auch vor Demagogen schützen und deutlich machen, dass sie nicht missbraucht werden dürfen. Beispiele dafür hat es in der jüngsten Zeit ja sehr viele gegeben. Nichtsdestotrotz darf unsere Unterstützung für diese Krisenregion nicht aus dem Fokus verschwinden. Deshalb müssen die Anliegen der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit Gehör finden.\n\nVergessen wir nicht: Staaten wie die Türkei, der Libanon oder Jordanien haben Hunderttausende Flüchtlinge aus Syrien und dem Irak aufgenommen. Deshalb geht mein Appell hier nochmals in Richtung Intensivierung der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit.\n\nDie politische Ressortabgrenzung in Deutschland gibt vor, dass das Auswärtige Amt für den gesamten Bereich der humanitären Hilfe verantwortlich ist. Der Einzelplan 05 - Auswärtiges Amt - zeigt: Für humanitäre Hilfsmaßnahmen im Ausland sind im kommenden Jahr rund 730 Millionen Euro veranschlagt. Diese Summe ist aufgrund der aktuellen Lage auch dringend notwendig. Wir müssen versuchen, das gemeinsam mit dem Auswärtigen Amt effektiv umzusetzen und hier eine gute Synthese der beiden Ministerien zu erreichen.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich noch einmal die Gelegenheit nutzen, auf die historische Steigerung im Haushaltsentwurf hinzuweisen. Dieses Mehr an Entwicklungsmitteln brauchen wir auch dringend, um die maßgeblichen Verbesserungen der Lebensbedingungen der Menschen in den Krisenregionen zu bewirken. Noch einmal: Sie leisten einen wichtigen, wenn nicht sogar den wichtigsten Beitrag dafür, Flucht und Vertreibung abzumildern.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n11035,nicole-gohlke,\"Herr Präsident! Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Heute geht es also um die Pakte, die Bund und Länder zur Finanzierung von Vorhaben an den Hochschulen geplant haben. Die Opposition hätte sich gerne einzeln und intensiver mit den verschiedenen Ansätzen auseinandergesetzt; denn diese Wissenschaftspakte sind ja keine Fußnoten und auch keine Kleinigkeit, sondern es geht um Milliardenbeträge und darum, wie sie verteilt werden.\n\nWenn wir jetzt aber über alles zusammen diskutieren, dann möchte ich gerne mit der Frage der Verhältnismäßigkeit beginnen; denn da hat die Bundesregierung aus unserer Sicht wirklich den größten Nachholbedarf. Man hat das Gefühl, die Regierung hat jedes Gespür für das Verhältnis von Spitzen- und Breitenförderung verloren.\n\nSie macht Milliarden für die Elitenförderung locker, und der große Rest wird am Katzentisch mit ein paar Almosen abgespeist.\n\nSie nennen das dann Elite und Exzellenz. Ich nenne das verantwortungslos; denn es wird den Herausforderungen, vor denen die Hochschulen stehen, einfach nicht gerecht. Das ist das große Problem dieser Regierung.\n\nDas große und ungelöste Problem an den Hochschulen heißt Unterfinanzierung, chronische und dauerhafte Unterfinanzierung.\n\nIch gebe Ihnen gerne auch noch einmal einen Einblick in die Situation vor Ort, falls die Regierung das jetzt gerade aus den Augen verloren haben sollte.\n\nDa ist zum einen die völlig prekäre soziale Infrastruktur. Der BAföG-Satz, der zum Oktober endlich einmal erhöht wird, ist bereits zum Zeitpunkt seiner Erhöhung wieder überholt und unzureichend.\n\nDie Studierenden lernen in völlig überfüllten Seminaren, Bibliotheken müssen ihre Öffnungszeiten einschränken, und die Mensen sind so unterfinanziert, dass sie das Essen verteuern.\n\nDas ist doch die Situation vor Ort.\n\nDas zweite, seit Jahren ungelöste Problem ist die schlechte Situation für die Beschäftigten und für die Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler. Ändern wird sich daran erst etwas, wenn wirklich Geld in die Hand genommen wird, um verlässliche Karrierewege und Dauerstellen in der Wissenschaft zu schaffen\n\ndurch die Einrichtung von zusätzlichen Professuren, aber vor allem doch durch dauerhafte Stellen im Mittelbau.\n\nUnd was macht die Bundesregierung? Ehrlich gesagt, Ihre Taktik ist: Scheuklappen an und weiter so, ein einfaches Weiter-so mit der Politik der befristeten Pakte statt endlich ein Einstieg in eine verlässliche Grundfinanzierung.\n\nJetzt gibt es also drei Pakte: die Exzellenzinitiative zur Förderung von wenigen Spitzenunis, einen Pakt zur Förderung des wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchses an Universitäten und das Programm „Innovative Hochschule“ unter anderem für Fachhochschulen. Wenn Sie sich auch noch so sehr bemühen, das jetzt als ausgewogenes Gesamtpaket zu verkaufen: Es ist das Gegenteil von ausgewogen. Es ist völlig aus dem Lot geraten.\n\n5,4 Milliarden Euro für die Spitze, davon 30 Prozent für nur zehn Eliteunis, und gerade einmal ein Fünftel dessen, was Sie für die Spitzenförderung mobilisieren, für die Förderung des wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchses:\n\nWeniger als ein Zehntel der Summe bleibt dann für die Forschung an Fachhochschulen.\n\nWer das als ausgewogen bezeichnet, der hat wirklich den Schuss nicht gehört.\n\nIhre Milliarden, die Sie für die Exzellenzinitiative ausgeben, gehen auf Kosten der Breite, und das ist das Problem.\n\nDer Bericht der Imboden-Kommission hat gerade sehr differenziert deutlich gemacht, was so ein einseitiges Förderprogramm wie die Exzellenzinitiative bedeutet. Es wäre schön, wenn man sich mit den Befunden auch einmal etwas detaillierter auseinandersetzen würde.\n\nEs bedeutet nämlich - das steht alles in diesem Bericht - eine Zunahme von befristeten Beschäftigungsverhältnissen. Es bedeutet eine Verschlechterung von Studienbedingungen, und das übrigens auch und gerade an den sogenannten Exzellenzstandorten. Daneben hat der Bericht auch aufgezeigt, dass es nie eine Chancengleichheit für Hochschulen im Bewerbungsverfahren gegeben hat. Dieses Prinzip treiben Sie jetzt noch auf die Spitze, wenn Sie die kleinen und mittleren Universitäten gleich ganz vom Wettbewerb ausschließen. Das ist wirklich der völlig falsche Weg.\n\nAuch das ohnehin sehr krude Argument, das Sie immer bemüht haben, dass durch die wettbewerbliche Spitzenförderung auch die Breite gestärkt würde, wurde von der Imboden-Kommission als reine Chimäre entlarvt. Noch einmal zum Mitschreiben: Eine Breitenförderung ist durch die Exzellenzinitiative nicht eingetreten.\n\nStattdessen hat sich die Spaltung in der Hochschullandschaft vertieft. Das politische Verständnis dieser Regierung, dass sich Exzellenz immer nur auf besonders wenige beziehen soll, ist, ehrlich gesagt, weder fortschrittlich noch besonders ambitioniert.\n\nIch sage Ihnen, was wirklich exzellent wäre: Exzellent wäre es, wenn man von guten Studienbedingungen und hervorragenden wissenschaftlichen Bedingungen in der Breite und für alle sprechen könnte. Das muss doch das Ziel von Wissenschaftspolitik sein.\n\nKolleginnen und Kollegen, wenn es so weit ist, dass Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler berichten, dass die Antragstellung für das Einwerben von Drittmitteln den größten Teil ihrer Tätigkeit ausmacht,\n\nwenn um des Publizierens willen publiziert wird, weil die entsprechende Kennzahl für das Einwerben von Exzellenzmitteln wichtig ist, oder wenn es so weit ist, dass Forschungsfragen eher danach ausgesucht werden, was förderfähig ist,\n\nals danach, was die größte wissenschaftliche Erkenntnis bringt, dann kann man ja wohl behaupten, dass da etwas aus dem Lot geraten ist.\n\nDas ist eine Meinung, die gerade aus den Reihen der Wissenschaft selbst kommt. Das zeigt doch die Petition, die von Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern, von Professorinnen und Professoren gestartet wurde und die den Stopp der Exzellenzinitiative fordert.\n\nAuch beim Pakt für den wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchs fehlt der Bundesregierung der Blick für die Probleme vor Ort. Wir reden davon, dass sich 90 Prozent der Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler von einem prekären Kurzzeitvertrag zum nächsten hangeln. Wir reden von 160 000 wissenschaftlichen Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern im Mittelbau, und wir reden von einer Betreuungssituation, in der auf einen Professor 70 Studierende kommen. Da kann man nur zu dem Schluss kommen, dass die von der Regierung geplanten 1 000 Tenure-Track-Stellen an den Bedarfen vorbeigehen.\n\nHeruntergebrochen auf die einzelne Hochschule bedeutet das gerade einmal zwei bis drei neue Stellen. Damit ist doch an eine tatsächliche Verbesserung des Betreuungsverhältnisses für die Studierenden wirklich nicht zu denken.\n\nDie Idee, sich an den Hochschulen endlich einmal um die Entwicklung neuer Personalstrukturen, neuer Personalkategorien zu kümmern, taucht in Ihrem Konzept eigentlich gar nicht mehr auf.\n\nDabei wäre das doch der entscheidende Punkt, wenn man wirklich von einem Kulturwandel an den Hochschulen sprechen möchte.\n\nDenn nicht alle, die in der Wissenschaft arbeiten, wollen oder müssen das auf einer Professur tun. Es ist höchste Zeit, auch in Deutschland im 21. Jahrhundert anzukommen und anzuerkennen, dass es nicht nur die Professur und darunter den Nachwuchs gibt,\n\nsondern dass selbstständige Wissenschaft schon die ganze Zeit von den vielen Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern geleistet wird und dass dieser Bereich endlich einmal als dauerhafte Personalkategorie gefördert und honoriert gehört.\n\nJa.\n\nDas kann ich Ihnen erklären. Wir haben Rücksprache gehalten. Ich habe im Übrigen auch gerade mit den Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern und Professorinnen und Professoren gesprochen, die den Stopp der Exzellenzinitiative fordern.\n\n- Nein, aber sie haben sozusagen auf einen Mechanismus hingewiesen: Es gibt eine derart gravierende Unterfinanzierung, dass sich viele Leute nicht trauen, sich öffentlich gegen die Exzellenzinitiative auszusprechen.\n\nUnd auch die Länder sagen bei aller Kritik in der Tat: Wir können in der jetzigen Situation nicht auf Gelder verzichten.\n\nDas ist die Situation.\n\nTrotzdem würden sich viele einen Einstieg in eine andere Finanzierung wünschen. Ich glaube, es wäre höchste Zeit, dass man einmal eine Debatte darüber ermöglichen würde. Aber sie kann offenbar selten transparent geführt werden, nicht einmal hier im Deutschen Bundestag.\n\nEinigermaßen vorsintflutlich finde ich, ehrlich gesagt, auch, dass Gleichstellung in Ihren Pakten gar nicht auftaucht. Auch hier sage ich: Von Kulturwandel dürfte die Regierung erst reden, wenn aktive Gleichstellungspolitik und Familienfreundlichkeit in ihren Konzepten einmal eine wirkliche Rolle spielen würden. 50 Prozent der Tenure-Track-Stellen müssten eigentlich mit qualifizierten Frauen besetzt werden. Alles andere ist wirklich ein schlechter Witz.\n\nKolleginnen und Kollegen, für die Linke stellt sich die Situation so dar: Die Hochschulen, und zwar alle, brauchen zwei Dinge, nämlich eine Finanzierung nach Bedarfen sowie Planungssicherheit. Wir brauchen nicht noch einen Wettbewerb und noch einen Pakt und noch ein Programm.\n\nDie Hochschulen brauchen eine solide Grundfinanzierung, verlässliche Studienplätze, unbefristete Stellen für Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler und eine neue Gemeinschaftsaufgabe Hochschulbau. Das wären die richtigen Prioritäten und die richtigen politischen Botschaften in dieser Zeit.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8414,anton-hofreiter,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir debattieren heute darüber, wie viel Freiheit wir den Menschen in ihrer letzten Lebensphase lassen wollen. Ich plädiere dafür, dass wir als Gesetzgeber uns da so weit wie möglich zurücknehmen und den Menschen ihre Selbstbestimmung überlassen. Ich kann ja das Argument verstehen, dass man die Sorge hat, dass Menschen in den Tod gedrängt werden, weil es heißt: Man sollte niemandem mehr zur Last fallen. - Aber das steht doch heute überhaupt nicht zur Debatte.\n\nWenn ich mir die einzelnen Gesetzentwürfe anschaue, stelle ich fest: Wir haben auf der einen Seite den Vorschlag, alles so zu lassen, wie es ist. Dann gibt es ein unterschiedliches Ausmaß der Verschärfung: von Totalverbot bis Abstufungen. Ich plädiere für den Antrag Künast/Sitte, der ganz klar davon spricht, dass wir den Ärzten, den nahen Angehörigen und auch nichtgewerblichen, nicht auf Gewinnerzielung gerichteten Vereinen diese Möglichkeit geben sollen.\n\nDas heißt, die Befürchtungen, die geäußert werden - dass alles viel schlimmer wird, dass die einzelnen Menschen unter Druck kommen -, halte ich angesichts der Debatte und angesichts der Auswahl von Fragestellungen, die wir haben, für völlig ungerechtfertigt; denn niemand will eine stärkere Liberalisierung, sondern man will entweder den Status quo oder unterschiedliche Formen der Verschärfung. Deswegen halte ich dieses Argument für nicht stichhaltig.\n\nWenn wir die Frage angehen, wie wir den Menschen am besten helfen können, wie wir den Menschen am besten die Ängste nehmen können, dann zeigt sich: Wir brauchen eine gute Palliativmedizin und eine gute Hospizversorgung. Da sind wir gestern einen guten Schritt vorangekommen. Aber wir brauchen auch deutliche Verbesserungen der Zustände in den Pflegeheimen. Ich glaube, da haben wir noch sehr viel Arbeit vor uns. Das wird klar, wenn man sich die Zustände in vielen Pflegeheimen ansieht.\n\nEs ist davon die Rede gewesen, insbesondere von Vertretern des Vorschlags Brand/Griese, dass ihnen zu Unrecht vorgeworfen wird, dass sie die Ärzte kriminalisieren wollen. Dazu meine ich: Niemand wirft ihnen vor, dass sie die Ärzte kriminalisieren wollen. Aber wenn man sich die Anhörung und die Auseinandersetzung, die es dabei gab, vergegenwärtigt, dann kommt man zu dem Schluss: Es ist offensichtlich umstritten - ich bin selbst kein Jurist, habe aber nachgelesen, was unterschiedliche Juristen darüber gesagt haben -, ob das durch diesen Gesetzentwurf passieren kann, wenn auch von Ihnen unbeabsichtigt. Bei so einer schwierigen Frage, finde ich, dürfen wir nicht das Risiko eingehen, am Ende - wenn auch von den Antragstellern unbeabsichtigt - zu einer Kriminalisierung der Ärzte zu kommen.\n\n- Auch wenn Sie dazwischenrufen: „Das ist ausgeschlossen!“, Herr Brand: Eine ganze Reihe von Strafrechtsprofessoren ist anderer Meinung, und damit besteht das Risiko, dass es nicht ausgeschlossen ist.\n\nDeshalb bitte ich Sie, diesen Gesetzentwurf abzulehnen und von den anderen Gesetzentwürfen dem Gesetzentwurf Künast/Sitte zuzustimmen.\n\nEtwas Weiteres kommt hinzu. Frau Nahles sagte in ihrer Rede: Ich will, dass dies so geregelt wird. - Ja, auch ich will bestimmte Regelungen in dem Bereich; aber ich sehe nicht, dass wir Menschen entsprechende Regelungen aufdrücken sollten. Es war davon die Rede, dass die Sterbehilfe nahen Angehörigen, Verwandten oder Ärzten überlassen bleiben soll. Wenn ich einmal in so einer Situation bin, möchte ich das nahen Verwandten oder einem Arzt als Vertrauensperson vielleicht nicht zumuten. Vielleicht will ich, dass mich bei dieser letzten Handlung ein Mensch unterstützt, der mir gerade nicht nahesteht. Mit welchem Recht nehmen wir als Gesetzgeber jemandem diese Entscheidungsfreiheit? Mit welchem Recht würden Sie oder würde die Mehrheit mir diese Entscheidungsfreiheit nehmen? Ich kann keinen Schutzgrund erkennen, der es rechtfertigt, mir diese Entscheidung zu nehmen.\n\nIch bitte Sie deshalb eindrücklich: Lassen Sie es bei den liberalen Gesetzentwürfen, die eine Klarstellung zur jetzigen Gesetzeslage und nicht die befürchtete Liberalisierung zur jetzigen Gesetzeslage enthalten! Lassen wir den Menschen in dem Bereich die Entscheidungsfreiheit, und lassen wir sie entscheiden, ob sie diesen letzten Schritt einem nahen Angehörigen, einem Arzt, dem sie vertrauen, oder einer Fachperson in einem nicht auf Gewinnerzielung ausgerichteten Verein überlassen wollen! Darum bitte ich Sie.\"\n3298,richard-pitterle,\"Viele kleine und mittlere Unternehmen in der EU kennen das folgende Problem: Man erfüllt einen Auftrag für ein größeres Unternehmen aus einem anderen EU-Staat, und dieses lässt sich danach ewig Zeit, die Rechnung zu bezahlen. Das Schlimme ist: Das kleine Handwerksunternehmen oder der kleine Zulieferbetrieb kann dadurch schnell in eine finanzielle Schieflage geraten. Möglichkeiten zur Zwischenfinanzierung gibt es für diese nämlich kaum, und auch Aufträge in der Größenordnung von nur ein paar Tausend Euro können hier von existenzieller Bedeutung sein. Im schlimmsten Fall kann sogar die Pleite drohen.\n\nEin anderes Beispiel: Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher bestellen sich immer mehr Waren online aus allen Ecken der EU und bekommen diese per Post. Die bezahlte Ware wird dann aus irgendeinem Grund retourniert, und der gezahlte Kaufpreis muss von der Verkäuferseite zurückerstattet werden. In manchen Fällen passiert das aber leider nicht, und die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher gucken in die Röhre.\n\nSowohl das kleine Handwerksunternehmen als auch die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher aus diesen -Beispielen könnten nun versuchen, ihren Anspruch gerichtlich durchzusetzen. Aber das ist zumeist auf-wendig und langwierig, gerade wenn es um grenz-überschreitende Streitigkeiten geht. Insbesondere Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher werden es sich zwei- oder dreimal überlegen, ob sie diese Strapazen wirklich wegen ein paar Hundert Euro auf sich nehmen wollen.\n\nDie vorgeschlagene Verordnung könnte für genau solche Fälle zumindest ein Stück weit Abhilfe schaffen. Gläubigerinnen und Gläubiger sollen im Europäischen Mahnverfahren künftig einfacher an ihr Geld gelangen. Zu diesem Zweck soll das Verfahren bei Forderungen bis 10 000 Euro, statt wie bisher bis 2 000 Euro anwendbar sein. Das kommt insbesondere kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen entgegen.\n\nDarüber hinaus sollen Telefon- und Videokonferenzen das persönliche Erscheinen bei mündlichen Verhandlungen überflüssig machen, was wiederum Reisekosten spart.\n\nZudem soll das Europäische Mahnverfahren künftig bei deutlich mehr Streitigkeiten anwendbar sein, auch zwischen inländischen Streitparteien, solange ein bestimmter Auslandsbezug besteht, zum Beispiel bei der Vermietung eines Ferienhauses im Ausland.\n\nSoweit die vorgeschlagene Verordnung hierdurch dem kleinen Handwerksunternehmen oder den geprellten Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern hilft, an ihr Geld zu kommen, begrüße ich das ausdrücklich.\n\nAllerdings gibt es auch hier zwei Seiten der Medaille. Was für die Gläubigerinnen und Gläubiger gut ist, ist für die Schuldnerinnen und Schuldner naturgemäß eher schlecht. Das Mahnverfahren nach dem deutschen Zivilrecht ist mehrstufig ausgestaltet und bietet der Schuldnerseite daher mehr Reaktionsmöglichkeiten und somit mehr Schutz. Insbesondere wenn auf Schuldnerseite Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher stehen, kann die im Europäischen Mahnverfahren quasi automatisch folgende Vollstreckbarkeit der Forderung unangemessen sein. Hier müsste noch nachgebessert werden.\n\nUnd bei dieser Gelegenheit noch einmal etwas ganz Grundsätzliches, meine Damen und Herren von der Bundesregierung: Das hehre Ziel, die Mühlen der Justiz schneller und reibungsloser laufen zu lassen, erreicht man nicht nur durch Verfahrensvereinfachungen, die zudem irgendwann an die Grenzen der Rechtsstaatlichkeit stoßen können. Der grundgesetzlich garantierte Zugang der Bürgerinnen und Bürger zu den Gerichten darf nämlich keinesfalls missachtet werden. Viel wichtiger ist daher eine endlich ausreichende finanzielle und personelle Ausstattung der Gerichte und Justizbehörden. Und hier, sehr geehrter Herr Maas, liegt leider noch ein ganzes Stück Arbeit vor Ihnen und den Landesregierungen.\"\n2509,rudiger-kruse,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Von einigen Vorrednern wurden die Haushälter ja gelobt; da haben Sie natürlich recht. Es ist aber so, dass wir im Rahmen zwischen dem Wünschbaren und dem Vertretbaren geblieben sind. Das ist auch die Aufgabe von Haushältern.\n\nBei Kultur fällt es leicht, mit relativ wenig Geld gute Akzente zu setzen. Für mich ist das vielzitierte Denkmalschutzprogramm die Einstiegsdroge in die Kulturförderung. Man muss ja mit irgendetwas anfangen, und es ist am leichtesten, mit diesem Thema Zustimmung zu gewinnen; denn es gibt eine breite Zustimmung - nicht nur hier im Hause, sondern in der ganzen Republik -, dass wir das Vergangene vor dem Vergehen bewahren wollen.\n\nDarin darf sich Kulturpolitik aber nicht erschöpfen. So haben wir auch andere Akzente gesetzt, zum Beispiel beim Reformationsjubiläum, mit dem wir über ein die deutsche Geschichte prägendes Thema reflektieren.\n\nNeu ist der Akzent, den wir mit „100 Jahre Gegenwart“ setzen. Wenn 100 Jahre zur Gegenwart erklärt werden, kommt man ins Nachdenken, wie das denn gehen soll. Damit ist nicht gemeint, dass wir uns nach langen Sitzungen so fühlen, als wären wir 100 Jahre alt. 100 Jahre können jedem Menschen tatsächlich gegenwärtig sein; denn das ist der Zeitraum, aus dem er direkte Informationen bezieht. Meine Großmutter zum Beispiel ist 1903 geboren; somit war sie am Ende des Ersten Weltkriegs 15 Jahre alt. Das heißt, ich hatte einen Zugang zu einer direkten Zeitzeugin aus dieser Zeit. Was sie mir erzählt hat, ist ganz anders in meinem Bewusstsein verankert als der mir natürlich auch bekannte Krieg von 1870/71; das ist für mich ein geschichtliches Datum, bei dem ich nur auf geschichtliche Quellen zurückgreifen kann, weil niemand mir davon direkt berichten konnte. So geht es jeder Generation: Die Dinge in einem Erlebnisraum von etwa 100 Jahren sind uns tatsächlich gegenwärtig und prägen damit unser aller Entscheidungen.\n\nDas Narrativ der Europäischen Union setzt bei der Jahrhundertkatastrophe des Ersten Weltkriegs und den Veränderungen in der Gesellschaft auf. Es war übrigens auch der Erste Weltkrieg, der als Erster mit der Armbanduhr geführt worden ist; erst dadurch konnte er überhaupt so werden, wie er war, das heißt, die Industrialisierung war dort angekommen. Dies zu reflektieren und die Entscheidungen zu sehen, die wir vor diesem Hintergrund treffen, ist eine spannende Aufgabe.\n\nEin wichtiger Akzent ist auch, dass wir zum zweiten Mal - nachdem wir das Anthropozän-Projekt gemacht haben, also die Frage, inwieweit der Mensch die Erde inzwischen so dominiert, dass es rein geologisch schon ein Zeitalter des Menschen geben müsste - einen offenen Diskurs anregen. Es ist ja nicht üblich, dass Politiker Sachen in Auftrag geben, bei denen sie vorher noch keine Meinung haben, was hinterher dabei herauskommt. Aber bei beiden Prozessen machen wir das so. Wir haben einen offenen Prozess für vier Jahre gestaltet, und wir haben ihn jetzt sehr auskömmlich ausgestattet: mit 15 Millionen Euro. Das Ganze findet statt im Haus der Kulturen der Welt, das nicht zufällig in absoluter räumlicher Nähe zu diesem Haus liegt und zum Bundeskanzleramt. Das heißt, wir haben hier eine Möglichkeit, einen Denkraum zu fördern, zu entwickeln, der uns Impulse liefert und dem wir Impulse geben können, in dem wir einen gesellschaftlichen Diskurs führen können. Ich glaube, es steht dieser Republik sehr, sehr gut an, dass wir in dieser Art und Weise mit Themen umgehen, die auch internationales Interesse berühren.\n\nIch glaube, dass dieser Prozess auch etwas verändert, so wie in dieser langen Linie seit der Wiedervereinigung das Verhalten dieser Nation sich verändert hat: dass wir jetzt - das muss man sich ja einmal vorstellen! -, nach 100 Jahren, eine neue Debatte über den Ersten Weltkrieg führen. Wenn wir es schaffen, dass wir eine Institution haben, der wir als Parlament uns, der sich aber auch die Bundesregierung und alle Bürger dieses Landes und auch die Bürger anderer Länder bedienen können, um sich intellektuell den Themen der Zeit zu nähern, dann haben wir etwas geleistet, was über unsere sonstige Vierjahresplanung weit hinausgeht. Das ist die eigentliche Leistung: dass aus diesem Haus, dass vom Parlament dieser Impuls ausgegangen ist, dass wir uns diese Möglichkeit schaffen, wir gleichzeitig aber gute Haushälter und gute Abgeordnete sind, die die Nachhaltigkeit des Haushaltes nicht infrage stellen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6793,norbert-muller,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Und insbesondere möchte ich jetzt die noch zu Zehntausenden streikenden Kitaerzieherinnen und Kitaerzieher grüßen, die für eine Aufwertung ihrer Berufe - Sozialarbeiterinnen, Sozialarbeiter, Kitaerzieherinnen, Kitaerzieher - eintreten, die eine hervorragende Arbeit für viel zu wenig Geld machen und die hoffentlich auch nach Pfingsten kraftvoll weiter streiken und - wie ich auch hoffe - den Verband der kommunalen Arbeitgeber zu einem Einlenken bewegen können. Die Linke steht an ihrer Seite.\n\nSehr geehrte Frau Staatssekretärin Marks, Sie feiern Ihre Erfolge. Das sei Ihnen gegönnt. Feste soll man ja bekanntlich feiern, wie sie fallen. Aber ich möchte Ihnen einen Rat geben - Sie haben es in Ihrer Rede selbst anklingen lassen -: Lassen Sie den Sekt im Schrank\n\n- oder auch das Wasser -, und lassen Sie uns da, wo die Probleme sind, anfangen! Kommen wir dahin, dass Kitaausbau und -qualität einen deutlichen Sprung nach vorn machen! Die Erfolge sind bei Weitem nicht so groß, wie Sie sie hier dargestellt haben.\n\nEs fehlen 185 000 Plätze, und die Plätze, die wir in den letzten Jahren ausgebaut haben, haben eine - sagen wir es einmal freundlich - höchst unterschiedliche Qualität in der Betreuung. Den Ausbau so, wie er in den vergangenen Jahren geschehen ist - bei allen Erfolgen, die es gegeben hat -, haben Sie zwar durch den Bund unterstützt, aber er ist im Wesentlichen auf dem Rücken der Kommunen, der Länder und der Beschäftigten, die in den Kitas arbeiten, geleistet worden. Dazu möchte ich Ihnen vier Punkte sagen.\n\nErstens. Ein Mehr an Kitaplätzen bedeutet nun einmal nicht, dass die Qualität der Plätze dem entspricht, was wir uns alle vorstellen. Stichwort hierzu ist eine spürbare Absenkung des Betreuungsschlüssels, und zwar flächendeckend. Er ist in vielen Kindertagesstätten in vielen Ländern viel zu hoch. Stichwort ist ferner ein kostenfreies Mittagessen für die Kinder oder überhaupt ein Mittagessen, das wir ja in vielen Betreuungseinrichtungen überhaupt nicht haben. Stichwort ist eine Ertüchtigung der baulichen Substanz. Da haben wir einige Schritte getan, aber auch da ist noch viel zu tun. Und schließlich ist am Ende ein weiteres Stichwort die Aufwertung der Berufe.\n\nSie wollen nicht über ein Kita-Qualitätsgesetz sprechen. Deswegen werden Sie unseren Antrag dazu hier heute ablehnen. Wir haben beantragt - nichts weiter als das -, dass sich der Bund in die Spur begibt, ein Kita-Qualitätsgesetz zu verabschieden, das genau diese Punkte anpackt. Aber genau diese Punkte - die Grünen sind in eine ähnliche Richtung gegangen - wollen Sie eben bundesrechtlich nicht vereinheitlichen, und Sie wollen da auch keine weiteren Schritte gehen. Das ist sehr bedauerlich.\n\nZweitens. Der Ausbau der Kitaplätze geht einher mit einem massiv erhöhten Personalbedarf. Das ist richtig. Die Bundesregierung spricht hier in ihrem Bericht von „pädagogisch Tätigen“ und eben nicht von „Erzieherinnen und Erziehern“. Warum ist das so? Weil nach Angaben der Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft von 522 000 Beschäftigten in den Kitas 354 000 Erzieherinnen und Erzieher sind und der Rest eben nicht vollwertig ausgebildete Erzieherinnen und Erzieher, sondern Vertreter anderer Berufe sind, schlechter qualifiziert, schlechter bezahlt. Damit kann gute Qualität in frühkindlicher Bildung nicht funktionieren. Wir brauchen beste Ausbildung, wir brauchen in den Kitas durchgängig Erzieherinnen und Erzieher, die in diesem Beruf auch ausgebildet worden sind, und nicht anderes Personal mit schlechterer Ausbildung.\n\nDrittens - hier sind wir bei dem Anliegen der derzeit streikenden Erzieherinnen und Erzieher -: Verdi und die GEW streiken für eine deutlich höhere Eingruppierung. Das ist auch berechtigt, weil wir - das geht auch aus Ihrem Bericht hervor - inzwischen ganz andere Anforderungen an diesen Beruf haben, weil wir inzwischen unter Kitaerzieherinnen und -erziehern nicht mehr die verstehen, die auf die Kinder aufpassen, damit sie nicht weglaufen und nicht zu Schaden kommen. Vielmehr haben sie einen pädagogischen Auftrag; sie haben einen Auftrag, der bedeutet, dass frühkindliche Bildung am Ende mehr mit Bildung als mit Betreuung zu tun hat.\n\nDieser Berufszweig, der noch immer überwiegend ein Frauenberuf ist, soll für die Gesellschaft geöffnet werden; der Zugang soll breiter werden. Auch Männer sollen sich für diesen Beruf stärker interessieren. Das heißt, wir brauchen hier eine vernünftige Entlohnung. Das geht eben nur, wenn am Ende die Berufe aufgewertet werden und deutlich mehr Geld bei den Erzieherinnen und Erziehern bleibt.\n\nViertens. Wir alle sprechen lieber von „frühkindlicher Bildung“ als von „Kinderbetreuung“. An diesem Punkt begegnet uns eine Entwicklung, die aktuell die Republik umtreibt: Warum müssen Eltern Geld, teilweise viel Geld, für die Erfüllung ihres Rechtsanspruchs auf frühkindliche Bildung ihrer Kinder zahlen? Bundesweit gibt es die Forderung, die Elternbeiträge für Kindertageseinrichtungen abzuschaffen. Wir als Linke halten diese Forderung für berechtigt. Wir wissen, dass das nicht von heute auf morgen geht. Aber wir finden, wir sollten uns darauf als Fernziel verständigen. Wenn es um Bildung geht, dann dürfen Elternbeiträge für Kitas nicht mehr erhoben werden.\n\nIch fasse zusammen: Der Ausbau der Kitaplätze, die Verbesserung des Betreuungsschlüssels durch massive Neueinstellungen, die Verbesserung der Qualität frühkindlicher Bildung sowie die Aus- und Weiterbildung und die Abschaffung der Elternbeiträge, diese Prozesse müssen parallel angegangen werden. Das alles kostet Geld. Damit kommen wir zum Kern des Problems. Im Jahre 2011 gab die gesamte öffentliche Hand 17,3 Milliarden Euro oder 0,6 Prozent des BIP für Kindertagesbetreuung aus. Selbst die OECD geht davon aus, dass der Gesamtbedarf bei etwa 26 Milliarden Euro liegen würde - die OECD erhebt ähnliche Forderungen wie wir -, um wenigstens das Versorgungsniveau Frankreichs oder der skandinavischen Länder zu erreichen. Das Deutsche Kinderhilfswerk hat heute 5 Milliarden Euro mehr pro Jahr gefordert, die allein der Bund in die Hand nehmen soll, um diese Ziele zu erreichen.\n\nWir brauchen hier den Einstieg des Bundes in die Personalkostenfinanzierung. Wir brauchen eine viel breitere Beteiligung. Das muss mehr sein als im Wesentlichen nur die Übernahme der Investitionskosten - das haben wir jetzt -, damit der Kitaausbau und die Qualitätsverbesserung eben nicht mehr auf dem Rücken der Länder und Kommunen und am Ende auf dem Rücken der schlecht entlohnten Beschäftigten ausgetragen wird. Vielmehr ist hier der Bund in der Pflicht. Er hat den Rechtsanspruch erlassen; das war gut und richtig.\n\nAber die Konsequenzen dürfen dann nicht nur halbherzig gezogen werden, sondern man muss da ein bisschen mehr Butter bei die Fische geben.\n\nIn diesem Sinne: Vielen Dank.\"\n2361,lisa-paus,\"Das Spannendste bei diesem Gesetzentwurf, den die Bundesregierung hier vorlegt, sind die Baustellen, die mit diesem Gesetz nicht berührt werden.\n\nDie Bundesregierung schlägt auf über 80 Seiten Änderungen in 15 Gesetzen und 3 Durchführungsver-ordnungen vor, und am Ende kostet dieses Paket lediglich 20 Millionen Euro pro Jahr? Und selbst diese 20 Millionen beruhen allein auf den Änderungen im Umsatzsteuer- und Gewerbesteuergesetz. Das Kroa-tienanpassungsgesetz kommt im Mantel eines Jahressteuergesetzes daher, doch die sehr begrenzte Aufkommenswirkung zeigt, wie wenig ambitioniert die vorgeschlagenen Maßnahmen sind. Statt dringende Themen anzugehen, präsentieren Sie einen Wust von Vorschriften, die nichts kosten, aber auch niemandem etwas bringen.\n\nSie haben angekündigt, im Baubereich das Reverse-Charge-Verfahren einführen zu wollen. Wer sich einmal ausführlich mit den Empfehlungen des Bundesrechnungshofes zur Reform der Umsatzsteuer oder mit dem Katalog der Steuersubventionen auseinandersetzt, stößt auf sehr viel weiter gehende Empfehlungen. Die Erhebungslücke der Umsatzsteuer gefährdet die öffentlichen Haushalte. Betriebsprüfungen und Umsatzsteuersonderprüfungen kommen regelmäßig zu Mehrergebnissen in Höhe von 4 Milliarden Euro pro Jahr, die ohne diese Prüfungen im Erhebungsverfahren unter den Tisch gefallen wären. Allein die Steuerfahndung sorgt noch für weitere Umsatzsteuermehreinnahmen im Umfang von etwa 2 Milliarden Euro. Diese prüfungsbedingten Mehreinnahmen sind ein -Indiz für den unentdeckt gebliebenen Bereich wirtschaftlicher Tätigkeiten, die der Umsatzbesteuerung entgehen. Zählt man die Niederschlagungen und Insolvenzen dazu, zeigt sich, wie groß das Ausfallrisiko im Umsatzsteuersystem ist. Setzen Sie sich intensiver mit dem Reverse-Charge-Verfahren auseinander, und Sie werden dem Bundesrechnungshof vielleicht zustimmen, dass damit erhebliche Ausfälle vermieden werden könnten.\n\nDie Hotelsteuer ist eine ungerechtfertigte Steuersubvention, die zu Steuerausfällen von etwa 1 Milliarde Euro jährlich führt. Ansatzpunkte haben Sie genug, und parlamentarische Mehrheiten finden Sie dafür sogar jenseits der Koalitionsmehrheit.\"\n13276,kirsten-luhmann,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kollegen! Liebe Kolleginnen! Ein Bekannter hat mir letztens gesagt: Wenn er eingeladen wird und sich als Mitarbeiter der Bahn outet, sind die Themen für den Abend gerettet. - Das kennen wir alle. Wir alle können Geschichten von Wildfremden erzählen, mit denen wir Diskussionen über Fußball oder Kochrezepte geführt haben. Ich gebe zu: Wir alle können, wie die Kollegin Leidig eben, auch Geschichten von Dingen erzählen, die nicht ganz so gut gelaufen sind. Dann ist es schön, wenn die Bahn-Mitarbeitenden mit Humor reagieren.\n\nDirk Fischer, ich bin sicher: Wenn du in dem Zug gesessen hättest, der folgende Durchsage gemacht hätte, dann hättest du die Notbremse gezogen. Die Durchsage an alle HSV-Fans in der ersten Klasse mit nicht entsprechenden Tickets lautete nämlich: Bitte verlassen Sie den Wagen! Schließlich ist der Punktestand Ihres Vereins auch nicht erstklassig.\n\nAllerdings glaube ich nicht, dass solche Durchsagen der Grund dafür sind, dass in diesem Jahr die Zahl der Personenkilometer im Schienenverkehr doppelt so stark gestiegen ist wie die Zahl der Personenkilometer im motorisierten Individualverkehr, und das trotz Fernbuskonkurrenz. Ein Grund, warum so viele Menschen mehr den Zug nutzen, liegt im Fernverkehr mit Sicherheit auch in den Initiativen der Deutschen Bahn AG zu besonderen Sparpreisen, Pünktlichkeit und Bahnhofsmanagement. Ich weiß, dass wir hier noch lange nicht am Ende sind. Aber schon die ersten Maßnahmen zeigen deutliche Verbesserungen.\n\nZum Nahverkehr. Die Gelder, die wir im Rahmen der Regionalisierungsmittel zur Verfügung gestellt haben, zeigen schon in diesem Jahr erste Erfolge. Es gab mehr Bestellungen. Wenn das Angebot für Pendlerinnen und Pendler größer ist, dann überlegt sich der eine oder die andere, das Auto stehen zu lassen und mit der Bahn zur Arbeit zu fahren. Das ist unser Ziel.\n\nWir alle wissen aber auch: Das kann nicht das Ende sein. Wenn wir mehr Personen auf die Schiene bringen wollen, dann brauchen wir den Deutschland-Takt und ein klar definiertes Netz für Fernverkehrszüge, auf das der Nahverkehr abgestimmt ist. Wir haben die ersten Schritte dazu eingeleitet. Man kann beim Deutschland-Takt jedoch nicht einfach den Schalter umlegen, und dann funktioniert es. Wir haben im ersten Schritt Gutachten in Auftrag gegeben, in denen untersucht wird, wie ein solcher Takt auf ein Flächenland wie Deutschland - oft wird die Schweiz als Beispiel genannt; mein Bruder lebt dort; die Schweiz ist ein wunderschönes Land; aber sie ist kein Flächenland - übertragen werden kann. Im zweiten Schritt haben wir im Bundesverkehrswegeplan die Infrastrukturprojekte aufgeführt, die wir brauchen, um den Deutschland-Takt zu verwirklichen.\n\nNicht zufriedenstellend ist allerdings die Entwicklung im Güterverkehr. Der Güterverkehr in Deutschland wird in diesem Jahr vermutlich um 0,4 Prozent zunehmen. Allerdings wird der Güterverkehr im Lkw-Bereich um 2,3 Prozent zunehmen. Woran liegt das? Die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der Bahn muss gesteigert werden. Wir werden dazu die Lkw-Maut auf alle Bundesstraßen ausweiten. Aber das wird nicht reichen. Wir brauchen dringend eine Reduzierung der Trassenpreise; das wurde schon angesprochen. Darüber hinaus muss die Trassenbestellung für den Güterverkehr flexibler werden. Auch der Güterverkehr muss pünktlicher sein. Niemand wird auf die Bahn umsteigen, wenn er befürchten muss, dass der Zug zwei, drei Tage abgestellt wird, bevor er den Endort erreicht. Da gibt es deutlichen Optimierungsbedarf.\n\nBei der Cargo-Sparte der Deutschen Bahn gibt es allerdings noch eine besondere Herausforderung. Auch bei den Privaten ist nicht alles Gold, was glänzt. In meinem Wahlkreis wird die OHE, die Osthannoversche Eisenbahnen AG, den Güterverkehr Ende dieses Jahres einstellen. Aber die Entwicklung der Cargo-Sparte der Deutschen Bahn ist dramatisch. Gegen den Trend verliert sie seit Jahren Kunden und Waren. Mit kleinen Programmen an der einen oder anderen Ecke muss Schluss sein. DB Cargo braucht ein handlungsfähiges Konzept. Sie muss es mit den Menschen, die Ahnung davon haben, und den Gewerkschaften entwickeln. Die Gewerkschaften sind dazu bereit; es hat erste Gespräche gegeben. Hier muss es dringend ein vernünftiges, tragfähiges Konzept geben.\n\nAbschließend ist zu sagen: Die Eisenbahn in Deutschland ist auf einem guten Weg - nicht nur, aber auch aufgrund der Politik dieser Bundesregierung. Wir stehen vor Herausforderungen, die wir im nächsten Jahr gemeinsam bewältigen sollten. Die Forderungen in den vorliegenden vier Anträgen sind in Teilen schon umgesetzt. Anderes ist weniger geeignet, um die Herausforderungen anzugehen. Lösungen sollten genauso kreativ sein wie die Ansage in einem ICE: Der Regionalexpress nach Bamberg wartet offiziell nicht. Allerdings ist der Lokomotivführer mein Schwiegersohn, und Sie werden den Zug erreichen.\n\nIn diesem Sinne wünsche ich uns, dass wir heute alle unsere Züge zu unseren Schwiegersöhnen oder sonstigen Familienmitgliedern erreichen und dass wir uns im nächsten Jahr hier wiedertreffen, um kreative Lösungen für unsere Bahn zu finden.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n10354,hiltrud-lotze,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der letzte Kinofilm, den ich gesehen habe, war der Film Mustang, eine türkisch-französisch-deutsche Kooperation, die mit Mitteln der Filmförderungsanstalt, also der FFA, gefördert wurde. Dieser Film handelt von fünf jungen Schwestern in der Türkei, die nach und nach von ihrer Familie in ihrer Freiheit eingeschränkt werden, bis hin zur Zwangsverheiratung.\n\nDer Film hat unterschiedliche Kritiken bekommen. Bei der Vorstellung, die ich im Rahmen der Berlinale gesehen habe, hat er die Zuschauerinnen und Zuschauer sehr berührt. Ich glaube, man kann sagen, er hat sie auch aufgewühlt. Dieser Film hat eine Botschaft transportiert.\n\nRegie geführt hat bei diesem Film eine Frau. Die Frage, ob ein männlicher Regisseur die Geschichte genauso oder anders erzählt hätte, ob er ebenfalls diese Emotionen ausgelöst hätte, ist müßig. Interessant ist aber, was Dieter Kosslick, der Direktor der Berlinale, gestern im Kulturausschuss gesagt hat. Er hat gesagt: Die künstlerischen Gesichtspunkte stehen bei einem Film immer im Vordergrund. Die erfolgreichsten Hollywood-Produktionen zurzeit sind von Frauen gemacht worden. Frauen hatten bei der Berlinale die Hauptslots, wie man neudeutsch sagt, also die besten Vorführzeiten.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, das Kino ist ein Kulturort. Filme sind Kulturgüter. Es ist bereits gesagt worden, dass Kino und Filme natürlich auch Wirtschaftsgüter sind. Deswegen brauchen wir ein starkes, aber natürlich auch ein modernes Filmförderungsgesetz, um unsere wertvolle Filmlandschaft zu erhalten und zu fördern. Wie erfolgreich diese ist, hat mein Kollege Burkhard Blienert gerade gesagt. Film ist letztendlich auch Bildung.\n\nFrau Staatsministerin Grütters hat mit ihrem Gesetzentwurf zur Förderung des deutschen Films einen guten Vorschlag gemacht.\n\nAuch das hat der Kollege Blienert schon ausgeführt. Ich möchte besonders auf den Teilaspekt der Gendergerechtigkeit eingehen.\n\nIm Gesetzentwurf aus dem Hause der BKM werden erste Schritte eingeleitet, um die Situation der Produzentinnen, Drehbuchautorinnen und Regisseurinnen zu verbessern.\n\nSo soll der Frauenanteil in den Gremien der Filmförderanstalt erhöht werden.\n\nFür den Verwaltungsrat und das Präsidium der Filmförderanstalt soll ab Inkrafttreten des Gesetzes eine Frauenquote von 30 Prozent gelten, ab 2018 dann eine paritätische Besetzung. Auch für die einzelnen Förderkommissionen der FFA soll ab Inkrafttreten eine paritätische Besetzung gelten.\n\nIch möchte erwähnen, dass man im Königreich Schweden sehr gute Erfahrungen mit einer paritätischen Besetzung gemacht hat. Ich glaube, Frau Kollegin Freudenstein, Schweden ist von der Planwirtschaft relativ weit entfernt.\n\nEntscheidend ist aber, dass der Gesetzentwurf die Filmförderungsanstalt im Ganzen dazu verpflichtet - ich zitiere -, „bei der Wahrnehmung ihrer Aufgaben auf die Belange der Geschlechtergerechtigkeit“ hinzuwirken. Das wird der FFA nun ins Stammbuch geschrieben. Für uns als SPD-Fraktion ist es Verpflichtung und Auftrag, darauf zu achten, ob das auch umgesetzt wird.\n\nWenn sich dann allerdings nichts ändert und nicht mehr Filmprojekte von Regisseurinnen, Drehbuchautorinnen oder Produzentinnen gefördert werden, dann müssen wir über weitere Maßnahmen nachdenken und sie ergreifen.\n\nEs ist Fakt, dass es ein Ungleichverhältnis zwischen Frauen und Männern gibt.\n\nDas zeigt die derzeitige Förderkulisse. Unser Ansatz ist aber, Schritt für Schritt vorzugehen, und die jetzt zu beschließende gendergerechte Gremienbesetzung ist ein erster guter Schritt.\n\nWas Sie in Ihrem Antrag fordern, nämlich die Hälfte der Fördergelder an Projekte zu vergeben, an denen Frauen maßgeblich mitwirken, können wir in den Blick nehmen, wenn die jetzt ergriffenen Maßnahmen nicht zum Ziel führen.\n\nNoch eine Anmerkung zum Schluss: Eine staatlich verordnete Quote steht im Widerspruch zur künstlerischen Freiheit; das ist richtig. Aber eine Realität, die Frauen aufgrund ihres Geschlechts strukturell benachteiligt, schränkt die künstlerische Freiheit ebenso ein. Und die Freiheit gilt nun einmal für Männer und Frauen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n11441,luise-amtsberg,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Heute ist vermutlich einer der traurigsten, aber vielleicht auch wichtigsten Tage, um über die Zukunft der Europäischen Union zu sprechen. Ich denke mir, dass es vielen hier im Parlament ähnlich geht, wenn ich sage, dass wir heute Morgen alle einen ziemlich großen Kloß im Hals hatten, als wir von dem Ergebnis des Referendums gehört haben, als wir erfahren haben, dass Großbritannien die Europäische Union verlassen wird.\n\nMich macht es besonders betroffen, dass die Zustimmung zu Europa unter den jüngeren Menschen besonders hoch war. Drei Viertel der unter 40-Jährigen wollten den Verbleib in der Europäischen Union. Viele von diesen jungen Europäerinnen und Europäern wollten für sich eine andere Zukunft; aber sie haben diese Abstimmung verloren.\n\nEs stimmt mich auf der anderen Seite aber auch hoffnungsvoll, dass gerade die jungen Menschen ihre Hoffnung in die Europäische Union setzen. Es zeigt, welche Verantwortung wir und die Regierungen der einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten den kommenden Generationen gegenüber haben.\n\nAuf die Fragen von heute, aber auch der Zukunft gibt es eben keine Antworten mit nationalstaatlicher Kleingeisterei. Die Herausforderungen, die wir am dringendsten angehen müssen, sind global und kennen keine nationalen Grenzen.\n\nWas führt uns das besser vor Augen als die europäische Flüchtlingspolitik? Meine Fraktion hat sich lang und ausführlich mit dieser Frage beschäftigt, auch unbequeme Fragen aufgegriffen, vielleicht sogar für Grüne unbequeme Antworten gefunden. Das war aber auch notwendig; denn was uns vollkommen klar ist - das haben wir auch hier im Parlament mehrfach angemahnt -, ist, dass die Vereinbarung mit der Türkei zwar zu weniger Flüchtlingen in Europa geführt hat - manch einer von Ihnen findet das gut -, dass sie aber mitnichten eine Lösung für und in Europa darstellt. Diese Vereinbarung hat nicht zu mehr Solidarität in Europa geführt, sondern das Thema vor unsere Grenzen verlagert. Diese Vereinbarung trifft vor allen Dingen Schutzsuchende, die damit vor den Toren Europas stehen gelassen werden, im Stich gelassen werden. Für sie heißt es: Aus den Augen, aus dem Sinn.\n\nDeshalb ist es für uns vollkommen unverständlich, dass die Bundesregierung diese Vereinbarung, diesen Deal als langfristige europäische Lösung verkaufen will, sogar - das macht es ganz besonders absurd - als Stärkung der Politik der legalen Zugangswege. Wahr ist: Die Vereinbarung mit der Türkei schafft täglich neue Probleme, nicht nur wegen der Politik eines Erdogan, der Oppositionelle wegsperren lässt, einen blutigen Krieg gegen die eigene Bevölkerung führt und den Staat mehr und mehr autokratisch regiert und in dessen Abhängigkeit wir uns begeben, sondern auch, weil wir wiederholt von Schüssen auf Flüchtlinge, sogar auf Flüchtlingskinder, hören, weil ein Großteil der syrischen Flüchtlingskinder dort im Land nicht beschult wird, weil die Zukunft vieler Menschen dort ungewiss ist und die Lebensverhältnisse prekär sind. Wir wissen, dass Erdogan die Rolle, die wir ihm zugeschrieben haben, nicht ewig so konditionslos weiterspielen wird.\n\nDie Vereinbarung mit der Türkei hat aber auch dazu geführt, dass wichtige Schritte - das macht es wirklich ganz besonders dramatisch -, die Europa im vergangenen Jahr gegangen ist und zu durchdenken angefangen hat, nicht weiterverfolgt werden. Die europäischen Hotspots in Griechenland sind zu Haftzentren geworden. Wenn nun Frau Kollegin Lindholz im Innenausschuss behauptet, dass die Menschen in den Hotspots nicht inhaftiert werden - das habe ihr der griechische Integrationsminister gesagt -, dann beruhigt das vielleicht sie, mich aber nicht; denn ich war vor Ort, und ich weiß, wie die Realität dort ist. In Europa wird jetzt akzeptiert, dass Frauen, Kinder und Kranke wochen- und monatelang inhaftiert werden.\n\nDas wussten wir auch vorher. Das gibt diesen Menschen keine Perspektive; denn das griechische Asylsystem ist nicht in der Lage, die Asylverfahren adäquat und in absehbarer Zeit zu bearbeiten.\n\nEine europäische Umverteilung von Flüchtlingen - das ist das andere - ist nicht gelungen. Der Europäische Rat hat im September des letzten Jahres die verbindliche Umverteilung von 160 000 Flüchtlingen beschlossen. Von den rund 28 000 Schutzsuchenden, die hierbei auf Deutschland entfallen, wurden bisher - es beschämt mich wirklich, das zu sagen - keine 60 Personen umgesiedelt.\n\nDeswegen haben wir einen Antrag gestellt; das ist genau der Grund. Wir sagen: Hier fehlt ein Konzept. Die Bundesregierung hat keine Idee, wie sie auf die europäischen Staaten zugehen möchte, wie sie alle wieder an einen Tisch holen kann.\n\nWir haben in unserem Konzept dargestellt, dass legale Wege der richtige Weg sind, nämlich: Familienzusammenführung stärken, nicht abbauen; das Resettlement-Programm ausbauen, damit Menschen nicht den Weg über das Mittelmeer nehmen müssen. Wir wollen einen echten Seenotrettungsdienst. Wir wollen die Aufgabe nicht von anderen Agenturen und Institutionen nebenbei erledigen lassen. Wir wollen europäische Erstaufnahmeeinrichtungen - keine Hotspots, liebe Linke -, in denen Menschen nach ihren Zielstaatsvorstellungen befragt werden und über ihre familiären Bindungen in europäische Länder berichten können, sodass wir als Europäische Union in der Lage sind, auf der einen Seite diesen Wünschen Rechnung zu tragen, auf der anderen Seite aber auch für eine solidarische Verteilung innerhalb der Europäischen Union zu streiten.\n\nWir wollen, dass die Menschen bezüglich ihrer eigenen Zukunft eingebunden werden und beteiligt werden; es soll nicht durch Zwang, sondern unter Beteiligung und Information erfolgen.\n\nWir wollen flexible Lösungen. Wir wollen, dass die Beiträge von Staaten nicht nach Schema F funktionieren und daran gemessen werden. Wenn Griechenland die Verteilung von allen Flüchtlingen, die in Europa ankommen, übernimmt und organisiert und sie im eigenen Land adäquat und menschenwürdig unterbringt, dann ist das ein starker Beitrag zur europäischen Flüchtlingspolitik. Dann braucht man am Ende des Tages nicht zu zählen, wie viele Flüchtlinge Griechenland dauerhaft aufnimmt.\n\nEs ist auch ein eigenständiger Beitrag, wenn ein europäisches Land sagt: Wir bauen unser Resettlement-Programm aus. - Die europäische Verteilung wird daran gemessen, wie viele Flüchtlinge wir im Rahmen dieses Programms aufnehmen, um den Menschen zu ersparen, über das Mittelmeer zu kommen.\n\nEs ist auch in Ordnung, wenn Deutschland am Ende sagt: Wir nehmen mehr Flüchtlinge auf als andere EU-Mitgliedstaaten. Wir, die wir diese Geschichte haben und diese Verantwortung empfinden, nehmen verhältnismäßig mehr Flüchtlinge auf als beispielsweise Polen oder Ungarn.\n\nEs ist auch eine große Chance für die Europäische Union, in dieser Auseinandersetzung die europäischen Institutionen wie das EASO oder die Grundrechteagentur zu stärken. Hier liegt auch eine große Chance, Europa dahin zu bringen, wo es wirklich wehtut, wo Menschen Europa brauchen.\n\nMein letzter Gedanke. - Dass es nicht leicht ist, die Verfehlungen der Vergangenheit rückgängig zu machen und alle wieder an einen Tisch zu holen, ist uns vollkommen klar. Aber es braucht einen Plan, und vor allen Dingen - davon ist meine Fraktion überzeugt - braucht Europa eines, nämlich Menschen, die die europäische Idee und die Solidarität verteidigen. Damit sollten wir in der Flüchtlingspolitik möglichst schnell beginnen.\n\nHaben Sie herzlichen Dank.\"\n12647,armin-schuster,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! 4. November - nicht lange her -: fünfter Jahrestag des Auffliegens der NSU-Mordserie. Das ist ein guter Termin für diese Debatte, drei Jahre nach dem Abschlussbericht, den der erste NSU-Untersuchungsausschuss erarbeitet hat, und gut drei Jahre nachdem wir uns hier in aller Form persönlich bei den Angehörigen der Opfer entschuldigt haben. Wir haben im September 2013 zwei Versprechen abgegeben, nämlich erstens, alles zu unternehmen, damit sich das nicht wiederholt, und zweitens, alles zu unternehmen, um diese Serie aufzuklären.\n\nDas erste Versprechen mündete in 47 Empfehlungen des NSU-Untersuchungsausschusses für Exekutive, Legislative und Judikative. Alle hatten ihr Päckchen zu tragen. Heute ziehen wir Bilanz.\n\nDas zweite Versprechen, alles zu tun, um aufzuklären: Das sehen Sie in München vor Gericht. Das sehen Sie in zwölf NSU-Untersuchungsausschüssen von Ländern und im Bund. Sie sehen es an der akribischen intensiven Arbeit des Bundeskriminalamts, des Bundesamts für Verfassungsschutz und vieler Ländersicherheitsbehörden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, diametral anders als Sie, Frau Pau, halte ich das, was wir seit Ende 2011 in diesem Land tun, um das alles zu klären, für historisch beinahe einmalig. Ich hätte mir gewünscht, dass wir so konsequent auch nach der RAF-Mordserie oder nach dem Oktoberfest-Attentat gehandelt hätten; da wäre das vielleicht auch notwendig gewesen.\n\nWas wir in Sachen NSU-Aufklärung tun, ist ein ganz schlechter Anlass, Frau Pau, um uns selbst zu beschimpfen. Sie haben sich ja gerade eben selbst beschimpft. Das halte ich nicht für angemessen. Es ist über Parteigrenzen hinweg, gerade im Untersuchungsausschuss, in den Untersuchungsausschüssen, alles unternommen worden. Warum? Wir haben alle regiert, Sie auch. Wir waren alle betroffen, nicht nur der Verfassungsschutz. Ich sage es Ihnen ganz offen: Es ist ein Ausdruck von Feigheit, wenn wir hier mit dem Finger auf den Verfassungsschutz zeigen und selbst nie in einem Innenausschuss eines deutschen Parlaments die Mordserie als Tagesordnungspunkt aufgerufen haben. Wer selbst so viel Grund hat, über sich nachzudenken, sollte nicht mit dem Finger andauernd auf andere zeigen.\n\nIch habe damals, im September 2013, von einem kompletten Systemversagen gesprochen: der Justiz, der Exekutive, aber auch der Legislative. Deswegen finde ich die Schuldzuweisungen ein bisschen billig, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nLassen Sie uns mal über die 47 Empfehlungen sprechen! Wir haben in diesem Haus 47 Empfehlungen verabschiedet. Ich kenne keinen anderen Politikbereich, in dem man in einem solchen Fall nach drei Jahren sagen kann: Beinahe alles abgeräumt, meine Damen und Herren. - Ein Mammutreformprogramm haben wir gemacht.\n\nWie Frau Pau kann auch ich nicht alles aufzählen. Ich bräuchte 90 Minuten Redezeit, um zu erklären, was wir alles getan haben. Sie haben auch nur 3 Punkte von 47 herauspicken können.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, das ist auch ein Stück Erfolg: konsequente Umsetzung. Ich nenne es eine staatliche Entschuldigung. Wir haben uns bei den Angehörigen der Opfer persönlich entschuldigt. Es gibt aber auch eine staatliche Entschuldigung, weil wir wahrmachen, was wir versprochen haben: mit der Einrichtung von Abwehrzentren gegen rechts, mit der Rechtsextremismusdatei, mit anderen polizeilichen Informations- und Analysesystemen, mit der Verfassungsschutzreform.\n\nDie Abschaffung von V-Leuten, Frau Pau: Nicht mal Ramelow setzt das um.\n\nSeien Sie ehrlich: Er ist als großer Tiger gestartet und landet jetzt als Bettvorleger. Ich bin froh darüber, dass Sie das Amt für Verfassungsschutz nicht aufgelöst haben. Ich bin auch froh darüber, dass die Thüringer erkennen, dass es V-Leute braucht. Das war ein Vorschlag zur Unzeit.\n\nKein Mensch mit gesundem Menschenverstand draußen versteht, dass Sie das Amt jetzt, zur Hochzeit des Terrorismus, auflösen wollen.\n\nBundesjustizminister Maas hat ein umfangreiches Justizreformpaket verabschiedet. Wir haben hier letzte Sitzungswoche die Reform des Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremiums verabschiedet. Das Parlamentarische Kontrollgremium schon wieder zu reformieren, war nicht leicht. Aber es war eine Kernforderung des Empfehlungskatalogs des NSU-Untersuchungsausschusses aus der letzten Legislaturperiode. Meine Damen und Herren, so schlimm all das, was passiert ist, war - wir sind in der Lage, zu sagen: Wir haben enorm viel geleistet. Deswegen ist mein Befund ein völlig anderer als der der Linken.\n\nJetzt gehe ich auf die Frage ein: Was bringt eigentlich der NSU-Untersuchungsausschuss dieser Legislaturperiode? Meine Damen und Herren, es geht um die Ehre der Opfer. Es geht um Schmerz, Wut und Trauer von Angehörigen, und es geht um die Frage der Haltung unseres Staates. Solange wir nicht wissen, warum diese Menschen zu Opfern wurden, solange wir nicht genau wissen, ob es genau diese drei Täter waren, solange wir nicht genau wissen, wer wirklich geholfen hat, ist es eine Frage der Haltung, niemals aufzugeben, diese Fragen beantworten zu wollen.\n\nMit einem kleinen Augenzwinkern richte ich mich jetzt an die Mitarbeiter vom Bundeskriminalamt, vom Generalbundesanwalt, vom Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz und vieler Länderbehörden. Ja, wir Untersuchungsausschussmitglieder sind manchmal verdammt müde. Es ist hart, vor allen Dingen donnerstagabends; das gebe ich zu. Auch ich habe dann Selbstzweifel. Aber ich glaube, wir tun das Richtige. Wir werden uns nicht wie bei der RAF in 10 oder 15 Jahren davon überraschen lassen, dass plötzlich noch drei dieser Täter in der Gegend herumlaufen und ein paar Raubüberfälle begangen werden. Das wird uns nicht passieren.\n\nDer Auftrag, den wir uns gegeben haben, ist nicht, das x-te Behördenversagen zu identifizieren. Nein, wir wollen jede Chance nutzen, dass eine der spektakulärsten und schlimmsten Mordserien der deutschen Nachkriegsgeschichte nicht unaufgeklärt bleibt.\n\nNoch ein Augenzwinkern. Wir wissen nicht, wie viele Nachermittlungen wir durch unsere Arbeit im Untersuchungsausschuss auslösen. Aber wir ahnen es. Allein die Tatsache, dass es Nachermittlungen gibt, ist ein Erfolg, ebenso die Tatsache, dass wir mit etlichen Theorien, teilweise auch Verschwörungstheorien, aufräumen können. Auch ich hatte Theorien, die sich zerbröselt haben. Und es ist wichtig, dass sie sich zerbröseln. Es ist wichtig, dass wir auf den Kern der Sache kommen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, Wolfgang Wieland, der Fraktionssprecher der Grünen in der letzten Legislaturperiode, sagte - ich gebe ihn sinngemäß wieder -: Wir haben uns alle Mühe gegeben, herauszufinden, ob die Sicherheitsbehörden auf dem rechten Auge blind sind. - Sein Befund war: Sie sind nicht auf dem rechten Auge blind, aber in einem gehörigen Maße betriebsblind, ja. Frau Dr. Högl, die hier sitzt, sagte damals, es sei ein Versagen mit strukturellen Ursachen gewesen; Rechtsextremismus sei als Gefahr nicht gesehen worden. Aber die SPD-Fraktion und auch wir, die Union, haben nicht den Befund erhoben: Hier gibt es institutionellen Rassismus.\n\nDas ist ein ganz schlimmer Vorwurf, der von den Grünen und Linken leider immer wieder erhoben wird.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, in diesen Zeiten braucht es Politiker in Regierungen und Parlamenten, die Verantwortung vor Gesinnung stellen. Verantwortung vor Gesinnung heißt, Frau Pau, dass Sie sich hier am Rednerpult genauso verhalten wie im Ausschuss. Warum Sie hier teilweise anders sprechen, weiß ich nicht.\n\nIch weiß auch nicht, welche Kundschaft Sie bedienen müssen. Aber die kooperative und konstruktive Zusammenarbeit im Ausschuss gefällt mir sehr gut. Es passt aber nicht zu dem, wie Sie hier reden.\n\nZum Abschluss. Meine Damen und Herren, ein wahrscheinlich in diesem Haus einmaliger Reform- und Aufklärungsmarathon im Bereich Rechtsextremismus und Rechtsterrorismus erfordert Ausdauer und Geduld. Diese sollten wir bewahren. Ich glaube, dass das angesichts des Leids, das die Menschen, die Opfer wurden, erfahren haben, nicht zu viel verlangt ist.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n12876,birgit-kompel,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Nachdem wir jetzt schon viel Grundsätzliches zum Verkehrshaushalt gehört haben, möchte ich Ihre Aufmerksamkeit auf ein sehr wichtiges Thema lenken: die Verkehrssicherheit. Verkehrssicherheit betrifft uns alle. Wir alle kennen jemanden, der oder die schon einmal in einen Unfall verwickelt war, oder vielleicht hat es uns sogar selbst getroffen. In den letzten beiden Jahren stieg die Anzahl der Verkehrstoten erstmalig wieder, nachdem sie sich über viele Jahre hinweg reduziert hatte. Aber was heißt das für uns in der Politik? Wir können solche Zahlen nicht einfach hinnehmen. 3 459 Verkehrstote in unserem Land im Jahr 2015, das sind 3 459 gute Gründe, um zu handeln.\n\nFür das Haushaltsjahr 2017 gibt es 1,1 Millionen Euro mehr für Maßnahmen der Verkehrssicherheit.\n\n- Genau, danke. - Das ist ein wichtiger Erfolg; denn insgesamt stehen uns nun 14 Millionen Euro für Aufklärungs- und Erziehungsmaßnahmen zur Bekämpfung der Verkehrsunfälle zur Verfügung. Dafür danke ich auch Ihnen, lieber Kollege Storjohann; denn Sie haben sich ebenfalls für die Erhöhung des Titels sehr starkgemacht.\n\nDie Mittel werden in bewährter Art und Weise dem Deutschen Verkehrssicherheitsrat, der Deutschen Verkehrswacht und für Maßnahmen des Bundesministeriums zur Verfügung stehen.\n\nWer mehr Geld fordert und es bekommt, der muss auch Rechenschaft darüber ablegen, wofür er es braucht. Hierzu haben wir uns in der SPD-Fraktion ausführlich Gedanken gemacht. Das Ergebnis war:\n\nWir fordern erstens eine stärkere Zielgruppenorientierung. Wir müssen genauer auf die einzelnen Zielgruppen zugehen. Junge Fahranfänger müssen anders angesprochen werden und werden auf anderem Wege erreicht als ältere Verkehrsteilnehmer. Eine besonders gefährdete Zielgruppe sind die geflüchteten und asylsuchenden Menschen. Hier müssen wir neben den erfreulich rasch übersetzten Leitfäden zur deutschen Verkehrsordnung vor allem verstärkt durch Schulungen in Kindergärten, Schulen und innerhalb der Sprach- und Integrationskurse die wichtigsten Verkehrsregeln vermitteln.\n\nZweitens setzen wir auf straßenbautechnische Lösungen. Wir müssen in zweierlei Richtungen denken. Zum einen müssen bestimmte Zielgruppen besser geschützt werden, zum Beispiel Motorradfahrer durch einen sogenannten Untergleitschutz entlang der Leitplanken. Zum anderen setzen wir auf verkehrspsychologische Maßnahmen wie zum Beispiel künstliche Hindernisse, die den Verkehr verlangsamen und die Aufmerksamkeit der Fahrzeugführerinnen und -führer erhöhen.\n\nWir brauchen drittens eine verstärkte Erprobung und schrittweise Einführung von Fahrzeugassistenztechnik Richtung automatisiertes, autonomes Fahren. Die Mittel für das automatisierte Fahren wurden um 17 Millionen Euro auf nunmehr 37 Millionen Euro erhöht. Das ist wichtig; denn Fahrassistenzsystemen und autonomem Fahren gehört die Zukunft.\n\nZu Fahrassistenzsystemen noch ein Wort in eigener Sache: Wir von der SPD wollen und fordern, dass Fahrassistenzsysteme, die sich bewährt haben, nicht ein Phänomen der gehobenen Fahrzeugklassen bleiben, sondern verpflichtend für alle Fahrzeugklassen werden.\n\nAuch noch ein Wort zur Verkehrssicherheit und deren Kontrolle: Wir brauchen eine bessere Ausstattung der Polizei; denn nur wenn wir kontrollieren, sind wir auch erfolgreich. Das haben Untersuchungen ergeben. Eine hohe Geschwindigkeit bedeutet immer noch ein hohes Risiko. Aber zunehmend gefährden Handys und iPads am Steuer unser aller Leben; denn wir sind nicht multitaskingfähig - ja, auch wir Frauen nicht.\n\nJeder im Straßenverkehr Getötete oder Verletzte ist einer zu viel. Deshalb: Packen wir es an!\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n9371,agnieszka-brugger,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kollegin Buchholz, ich finde, das, was Sie gesagt haben, kann man hier nicht so stehen lassen. Erstens war es - das gehört zur Wahrheit dazu - auch das Eingreifen der USA, das dazu beigetragen hat, dass die Jesiden aus dem Sindschar-Gebirge fliehen konnten.\n\nZweitens bekomme ich Folgendes in meinem Kopf nicht zusammen: Eine Vertreterin der Linkspartei hat sich gerade hier vorne hingestellt und eine VN-Friedensmission wahrheitswidrig als Kriegseinsatz diffamiert. Sie teilte rundum aus, lobte aber die PKK und war blind gegenüber der Gewalt, für die diese verantwortlich ist. Ich muss sagen: Das wird immer gruseliger.\n\nFrau Ministerin, Sie haben die Ausbildung der Peschmerga neulich als Erfolgsmodell bezeichnet. Mit dem uns vorgelegten Mandat will die Bundesregierung diesen Einsatz um ein weiteres Jahr verlängern. Dazu gehört auch die Ausbildung irakischer Sicherheitskräfte und anderer Gruppen. Frau Ministerin, ich finde, die Bewertung „Erfolgsmodell“ erfolgt zu früh bzw. etwas vorschnell. Ausbildungsmissionen sind nicht per se gut. Sie sind auch nicht per se schlecht. Ob sie erfolgreich waren oder nicht, kann man oft erst nach einer längeren Zeit bewerten. Der Erfolg hängt immer von den politischen Rahmenbedingungen ab. Wer ausbildet, hat eine Verantwortung dafür, was dann mit dem vermittelten Wissen bzw. den erworbenen Fähigkeiten geschieht. Die Geschichte kennt leider viele Beispiele, bei denen die Unterstützung einer Seite in einem Konflikt wirkungslos oder im schlimmsten Fall sogar kontraproduktiv war.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, nicht dass Sie mich falsch verstehen: Die kurdischen Kräfte sind unser wichtigster und bester Partner in der Region. Es ist den Peschmerga-Kräften gemeinsam mit den Jesiden gelungen, ISIS empfindliche Niederlagen zuzufügen und zum Beispiel Sindschar zurückzuerobern. Das war natürlich ein großer Erfolg. Deshalb halten wir die Ausbildung auch grundsätzlich für richtig und sinnvoll.\n\nWenn die Bundesregierung aber die entscheidenden politischen Fragen vernachlässigt, dann droht dieses Ausbildungsengagement zu scheitern oder wirkungslos zu bleiben. Ausbildung alleine reicht eben nicht aus. Die Unterstützung darf sich nicht auf das Militärische beschränken.\n\nAngesichts der dramatischen Flüchtlingszahlen und der wirtschaftlichen Probleme in der Region Kurdistan-Irak muss die Bundesregierung ihre humanitäre und politische Unterstützung deutlich verstärken. Die Entwicklungen in den kurdischen Gebieten geben aktuell auch Anlass zur Sorge. Es gibt große Spannungen zwischen den verschiedenen Gruppen. Vor diesem Hintergrund ist es von großer Bedeutung, dass Sie genau schauen, wen Sie unter welchen Bedingungen womit und woran ausbilden.\n\nJedes Mal, wenn wir Sie bzw. die Bundesregierung fragen, wen genau Sie eigentlich ausbilden, dann scheinen Sie es selbst nicht so genau zu wissen. Sie, Frau Ministerin, aber auch Außenminister Steinmeier sprechen immer von den Peschmerga. Aber die Peschmerga gibt es so nicht, sondern hinter diesem Namen verbergen sich verschiedene Gruppen, die teilweise miteinander konkurrieren. Das ist eine sehr komplizierte Lage. Mit der Beschreibung in Ihrer Rede sind Sie ihr nicht gerecht geworden. Das war an dieser Stelle doch reichlich unterkomplex.\n\nVielmehr haben gerade auch die Bundesregierung und die Bundeswehr angesichts der intensiven Zusammenarbeit hier die Pflicht, genau hinzuschauen und darauf hinzuwirken, dass Konkurrenz und Konflikte ohne Gewalt ausgetragen werden. Wenn demokratische Prinzipien ausgehebelt werden, wenn die Zivilgesellschaft und Journalisten sowie Jesiden bedrängt und bedroht werden, dann darf man an dieser Stelle nicht einfach wegschauen.\n\nAber nicht nur die Herausforderungen in der Region Kurdistan-Irak sind immens. Stabilität im Irak und ein Zurückschlagen von ISIS wird es nur geben, wenn alle Bevölkerungsgruppen, Sunniten, Schiiten, Kurden und andere, die tiefen Gräben untereinander überwinden können und ihre Konflikte beilegen und sich aussöhnen. Die Regierung von al-Abadi hat zwar viel guten Willen gezeigt. Die realen Fortschritte aber sind bisher leider sehr bescheiden geblieben. Deutschland genießt als Staat, der sich aus guten Gründen nicht am Irakkrieg beteiligt hat, ein hohes Ansehen und eine große Glaubwürdigkeit. Es ist schade und ein Versäumnis, dass Sie aus diesem wertvollen Kapital so wenig machen. Sie müssen auch den Weg der Aussöhnung viel stärker unterstützen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, auch wenn ich die Ausbildung der Peschmerga trotz der angesprochenen Probleme für sinnvoll halte, empfehle ich meiner Fraktion, nicht mit Ja zu stimmen. Wir Grüne haben uns bei der letzten Abstimmung mit großer Mehrheit enthalten, weil wir ein gravierendes juristisches Problem in Ihrem Mandat sehen. So, wie Sie die Ausbildungsmission konzipiert haben, entspricht sie nicht den Grundsätzen, die das Bundesverfassungsgericht in mehreren Entscheidungen zu den Auslandseinsätzen der Bundeswehr in der Auslegung unseres Grundgesetzes aufgestellt hat.\n\nSo darf die Bundeswehr nur im Rahmen eines Systems kollektiver Sicherheit eingesetzt werden. Dazu zählen Institutionen wie die Vereinten Nationen, die OSZE, die Europäische Union oder die NATO. Die Bundeswehr wird hier aber im Rahmen einer Koalition der Willigen eingesetzt, obwohl Sie diesen Einsatz sehr gut als europäische Mission auf den Weg hätten bringen können. Unserer Auffassung nach ist das Mandat deshalb verfassungswidrig. Das ist nicht nur eine Formalie, und das ist auch keine Lappalie.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir können die Bundesregierung nur nochmals auffordern: Machen Sie diesen Fehler rückgängig, und sorgen Sie für einen verfassungsgemäßen Rahmen. Aber tun Sie vor allem noch viel mehr, um die politischen Weichen in der Region so zu stellen, dass es langfristig eine Chance auf Stabilität, Frieden und Sicherheit gibt. Dann, Frau Ministerin, können Sie hoffentlich in ein paar Jahren wirklich sagen, dass die Ausbildung im Nordirak ein Erfolgsmodell war.\"\n3568,martin-patzelt,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Gäste! Ich möchte zunächst meine Freude darüber zum Ausdruck bringen, dass diese Debatte geführt wird. Sie ist richtig und wichtig, und meine Vorredner haben bereits ausgeführt, warum das so ist. Uns obliegt die Aufgabe - auch wenn wir an diesem Freitagnachmittag in relativ kleiner Zahl versammelt sind -, die Aufmerksamkeit, zumindest in unserem Land, auf die Problematik zu richten, die vielfach mit Fakten, Zahlen und Daten beschrieben wurde.\n\nEs kann einen grausen. An die vorhergehende Debatte über die Todesstrafe schließt sich nun die Debatte über den Weltmädchentag an. Ich gebe Ihnen recht, Herr Kekeritz: Es ist ein Anlass zur Freude, dass es Mädchen gibt.\n\nIch bin sehr dankbar, dass ich als Mann hier reden darf. Ich tue das aus ganzem Herzen, weil wir alle unser Leben einer Frau verdanken\n\nund weil ich glaube, dass die Frauen eine gewisse Verantwortung dafür tragen, wie Männer werden.\n\nDie primäre Sozialisation, die wir alle erfahren, wird von unseren Müttern geleistet. Wenn man das Übel an der Wurzel packen will - meine Vorredner haben richtige und empfehlenswerte Vorschläge gemacht, die ich aufgreifen will -, dann muss man meiner Meinung nach den Fokus auf die Rolle der Mutter richten; denn Frauen leisten Sozialisationshilfe für ihre Kinder.\n\nDas Thema Bildung ist diskutiert worden. Herr Kekeritz, ich denke, das ist doch etwas vielschichtiger; denn wer lesen und schreiben kann, der hat auch die Möglichkeit, sich zu informieren und über Medien und Literatur andere Bilder von Welt, von Gesellschaft und von Selbstverständnis zu entwickeln. Das ist die Voraussetzung dafür, dass eine Frau, die ein Kind zur Welt bringt und in seinen ersten Lebensjahren begleitet, für sich selbst ein Gefühl der Würde und des Wertes entwickelt.\n\nIch will all die Zahlen und Fakten, die genannt worden sind, nicht wiederholen. Der Report von „Plan International“ ist wirklich eine sehr umfängliche und hilfreiche Analyse dessen, was sich im Moment in der Welt abspielt. Ich kann dem Verein „Plan International“ nur danken, dass er damals die Initiative ergriffen hat. „Plan Canada“ hat dafür gesorgt, dass die UN diesen Aktionstag initiiert haben. Wir als Deutsche haben uns ein paar Jahre später diesem Mahntag angeschlossen.\n\nMit dem Report hat der Verein „Plan International“ den Ball wieder aufgenommen. Er bleibt kontinuierlich dran, und dafür wollen wir danken. Das macht einmal mehr das Zusammenspiel von zivilen Trägern und von Initiativen aus der Gesellschaft heraus deutlich, die solche Themen im Zusammenwirken mit der Politik immer wieder ins Bewusstsein rücken. So können wir einen größtmöglichen Effekt erzielen.\n\nDa hier schon vieles gesagt wurde, was ich nicht wiederholen möchte, will ich den Blick auf die gegenwärtige Situation richten: Jeder Mann, der mordet, der tötet, der ein schlechtes Bild von Frauen hat, der sich Massenbewegungen anschließt und sich unkontrolliert verhält, ist - das habe ich schon gesagt - irgendwann einmal erzogen worden. Wir haben in den letzten Tagen von Minister Müller gehört, was er durch Augenzeugen erfahren hat; er war sichtlich berührt davon. Eine Frau hat ihm berichtet, wie ein ganzes Dorf von der IS-Truppe behandelt wurde: 500 Männer mussten beiseitetreten und wurden vor den Augen der Kinder, ihrer Kinder, erschossen. Die Frauen mit Kindern wurden ausgesondert. Alle jungen Frauen, alle Mädchen wurden an die Soldaten vergeben, jeweils zwei oder drei, und die übrig gebliebenen wurden in vergitterten Autos davongefahren, zum Verkauf auf dem Sklavenmarkt weitergeschickt. - Das alles passiert gegenwärtig, heute und jetzt. Deswegen ist auch die Frage nach den Waffen nicht so einfach zu beantworten, Frau Groth. Wir haben alle die Pflicht, das nach unserem Selbstverständnis und vor dem Hintergrund unseres Grundgesetzes Mögliche zu tun, um solchen entarteten, archaischen, furchtbaren Geschehnissen entgegenzutreten, notfalls auch mit Gewalt, mit international abgestimmter Gewalt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, auch der Blick nach innen, in unser Land, ist wichtig. Die Medienberichte aus den Flüchtlingslagern zeigen, dass dort auch kleine Mädchen leben, dass Kinder und Frauen in Massenlagern unter Männern leben. Personen, die sich fremd waren, müssen vielleicht jahrelang zusammen weiterleben. Wir haben auch die Aufgabe, in unserem Land, in unserer unmittelbaren Nähe zu schauen, wo es Mädchen und Frauen gibt, die unter menschenunwürdigen Zuständen leben; denn auch sie stehen unter dem Schutz unseres Grundgesetzes. Wir haben alle Anstrengungen darauf zu richten, dass die Rechte und die Würde von Frauen und Mädchen auch in unserer unmittelbaren Nähe gewahrt bleiben. Alle Appelle, die wir in die weite Welt hinaussenden, was wir richtigerweise tun, verpuffen und verlieren ihre Wirkung, wenn wir nicht ganz deutlich und für alle nachvollziehbar sagen: Dort, wo wir Verantwortung übernommen haben, handeln wir unter Achtung der Menschenwürde.\n\nIn diesem Zusammenhang möchte ich an meinen Appell erinnern, darüber nachzudenken, Frauen und Kinder - vornehmlich - in privaten Verhältnissen unterzubringen, um sie so schnell wie möglich aus den Massenunterkünften zu befreien. Das ist nur eine Anregung. Das kann aber nur, wer dazu in der Lage ist. Das ist aber ein Baustein in der Palette möglicher Initiativen. Ich bin froh, dass es jetzt, wo sich die Nachrichten über die Situation in den Flüchtlingslagern verdichten, in Deutschland in vielen Städten und Gemeinden bürgerliche und kirchliche Initiativen und Hilfen für die Flüchtlinge gibt, die hoffentlich nur vorübergehend, aber vielleicht auch dauerhaft bei uns bleiben.\n\nDie Hilfe für bedrängte Mädchen und Frauen in der Welt ist ein ethisches Gebot. Das ist auch etwas, was wir für uns tun; denn die furchtbaren Geschehnisse, die wir alle jetzt zur Kenntnis nehmen müssen, beängstigen uns zunehmend, die einen mehr, die anderen weniger. Grund für all diese Geschehnisse ist, dass es in den Entscheidungsetagen Männer gibt und auch Frauen, die mit Gewalt Konflikte lösen wollen, die mit alten, archaischen Weltbildern agieren, die den Krieg und die Gewalt als Lösungsmuster bei Konflikten und Ungleichheiten betrachten.\n\nIch kann nur immer wieder nachdrücklich und aus tiefster Überzeugung dafür werben, Folgendes zu bedenken: Die Entwicklungshilfe, die wir leisten, alle Gelder, die wir für Bildungsinitiativen in Ländern ausgeben, in denen es kein funktionierendes Bildungssystem gibt, dienen dazu, den Frieden auf der Welt zu mehren und die Situation von Frauen und Kindern zu verbessern. Wir müssen mit unseren NGOs Gespräche darüber führen, in welcher Weise sie in den Ländern Unterstützung leisten, an welche Bedingungen sie ihre Unterstützung knüpfen und - auch das wurde schon genannt - wen sie für ihre Aufgaben in Anspruch nehmen und zu Hilfe rufen.\n\nWir alle sagen: Bildung kostet Geld. Das ist wahr. In vielen Ländern mangelt es auch deshalb an Bildung, weil die Länder das dazu notwendige Geld nicht haben. Bei den Preisen, die wir für Produkte aus Entwicklungsländern zahlen, schließt sich der Kreis. Wenn wir als einer der reichsten Teile dieser Welt so wenig für Produkte zahlen, dann kann die Armut, die letzten Endes auch Bildungsarmut bedeutet, nicht beseitigt werden.\n\nJa. - Sie sehen also, hier schließt sich der große Kreis. Wir müssen Verständnis dafür schaffen, dass es nicht dabei bleiben kann, dass wir nur die eine Gruppe im Auge behalten.\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Heute Nachmittag feiern wir unser jährliches Herbstfest. Meine sechs Enkeltöchter werde ich dort wiedersehen. Ich freue mich darauf. Ich werde dies auch vor dem Hintergrund der Diskussion, die wir hier geführt haben, erleben. Ich glaube, wir alle haben genug zu tun, um hier am Ball zu bleiben.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n13219,frank-steffel,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Ich habe die 34 Fragen von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen gelesen und am Anfang gar nicht verstanden, worum es Ihnen eigentlich geht. Der wesentliche Teil der Fragen beschäftigt sich mit ziemlich pauschalen Verdächtigungen dahin gehend, dass es irgendeine Einflussnahme von Unternehmen oder von Bürgerinnen und Bürgern gibt, indem sie vermeintlich gemeinnützigen Organisationen Geld zur Verfügung stellen und damit offenkundig parteipolitisch missbräuchlich Ziele verfolgen.\n\nDas haben Sie hier jetzt nicht zum Mittelpunkt gemacht, aber zumindest erschließt sich nun für mich, worum es Ihnen im Wesentlichen geht. Sie wollen, dass alle politischen Vorfeldorganisationen, egal welches Ziel sie verfolgen, in Deutschland relativ pauschal die Gemeinnützigkeit zugesprochen bekommen.\n\nIch glaube, das kann nicht unser gemeinsames Ziel sein. Es ist so, dass sehr viele NGOs und sehr viele Organisationen im vorpolitischen und im gesellschaftlichen Raum in der Tat gemeinnütziges Engagement zeigen und sich auch für das Wohl des Gemeinwesens einsetzen, aber das kann nicht pauschal für jede Organisation gelten. Insofern bin ich dem Kollegen von den Sozialdemokraten sehr dankbar. Auch wir sind der Auffassung, dass wir uns die Abgabenordnung anschauen müssen, dass wir schauen müssen, ob da alles noch zeitgemäß ist. Das ist übrigens ein permanenter Prozess, da die Gesellschaft sich ja auch sehr dynamisch entwickelt.\n\nAber ich will genauso klar sagen, liebe Frau Paus: Es ist nicht jede NGO, die sich politisch engagiert, nur weil sie eine Vorfeldorganisation der Grünen ist, gleich gemeinnützig. Hier muss von den Finanzämtern sehr genau hingeguckt werden. Wenn die Finanzämter eine Entscheidung treffen - und ich freue mich darüber, dass das in Deutschland offenkundig funktioniert -, dann ist es in einem Rechtsstaat normal, dass ein Gericht diese Entscheidung überprüft und in vielen, vielen Fällen dem Finanzamt sagt: Nein, ihr seid über das Ziel hinausgeschossen. - Das ist im Fall Attac und in vielen anderen Fällen so geschehen. Insofern können wir positiv feststellen: Unser Rechtsstaat funktioniert.\n\nWir haben viele Themen, um die wir uns kümmern müssen. Ich glaube, dass gerade in der Weihnachtszeit - mein Kollege von Stetten hat darauf hingewiesen - bürgerschaftliches Engagement und gemeinnütziges Engagement von Bürgerinnen und Bürgern, aber natürlich auch von Organisationen und Unternehmen erwünscht sind. Ich sehe hier überhaupt keinen gesellschaftlichen Dissens darüber, dass auch Unternehmen sich bekennen und dass auch Unternehmen sich engagieren.\n\nSie haben in einem Großteil Ihrer Fragen ja eine sehr kritische Position eingenommen. Ich bin der Bundesregierung dankbar, dass sie deutlich gemacht hat, dass Gesicht-Zeigen und Sich-Bekennen in einem Gemeinwesen dazu gehören und dass es für die Parteien gut ist, wenn wir wissen, dass Bürgerinnen und Bürger, aber auch Unternehmen sich in der Öffentlichkeit mit ihrer Meinung klar und vernehmbar artikulieren.\n\nIch glaube, es ist zu dem Thema im Plenarsaal heute alles gesagt. Ich bin in der Tat der Auffassung, wir sollten uns im Finanzausschuss mit dem Thema noch einmal beschäftigen. Wir sollten noch einmal schauen, wo hier nachzujustieren ist, aber ich mache einen Vorschlag: Sie ersparen uns in Zukunft Anfragen mit 34 Fragen und diversen Unterpunkten, ich erspare Ihnen meine letzten zwei Minuten Redezeit. Wir haben dann gemeinsam heute etwas früher Feierabend und hoffentlich eine schöne Weihnachtszeit.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n4827,jorn-wunderlich,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Herr Minister, Sie haben gerade gesagt, die roten Balken seien viel stigmatisierender. Also geben Sie zu, dass dieses Ersatzpapier stigmatisierend ist; denn wenn man zum Beispiel eine Wohnung mieten möchte, wenn man sich in Geschäften ausweisen muss, wenn man ein Konto eröffnen möchte und man nur ein solches Ausweispapier vorlegt, dann legt das schon den Verdacht nahe, dass irgendetwas nicht stimmt. Das entspricht nicht der Unschuldsvermutung.\n\nSie begründen die Notwendigkeit einer solchen Maßnahme mit der UN-Resolution vom September zur Bekämpfung der Terrorgruppe ISIS. Es gibt eine Ausarbeitung des Wissenschaftlichen Dienstes des Deutschen Bundestages, in der es heißt - ich teile diese Einschätzung voll und ganz -, aufgrund der Resolution sei eine Änderung des Pass- und Personalausweiswesens bei uns in Deutschland nicht erforderlich.\n\nZum Thema Verhältnismäßigkeit. Sie haben einige Beispiele genannt. Ich frage mich: Gibt es überhaupt eine Evaluation, aus der hervorgeht, wie wirksam so ein Verfahren ist, wie viele Fälle es schon gegeben hat? Ich frage mich auch: Woran erkennen Sie überhaupt die betroffenen Personen? Wenn meine Frau sich ein Kopftuch aufsetzt, wird ihr dann auch der Pass oder der Personalausweis entzogen?\n\nVielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Herr Minister, Sie haben gerade gesagt, eine Ausschreibung im SIS, also im Schengener Informationssystem, sei nicht möglich. Wenn man abfrage: „Wer ist das?“, dann komme die Antwort: Fritz Müller. - In der Antwort auf eine Kleine Anfrage meiner Fraktion vom 29. Dezember 2014 - die Druckerschwärze ist also noch nicht getrocknet - hat die Bundesregierung in Nummer 10 ausgeführt, die Mitgliedstaaten des Schengen-Raums hätten sich darauf verständigt, dass national ausgestellte Dokumente, die nicht zur Ausreise berechtigen, künftig im Schengener Informationssystem auszuschreiben sind. Sie haben das als Spezifizierung des bestehenden Rechts dargestellt, über die bislang vorhandenen Möglichkeiten hinaus, dass Dokumente gestohlen wurden, für ungültig erklärt wurden usw.; das ist ja gesagt worden. Jetzt ist das also machbar; es ist möglich. Meine Frage lautet: Wird diese verabredete Änderung derzeit schon von den Mitgliedstaaten umgesetzt, und wenn nein, für wann ist die Umsetzung geplant?\"\n3463,renate-kunast,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Herr Minister, wenn ich ein Beispiel für „links blinken, danach aber rechts fahren“ brauchte, würde ich sagen: Minister Müller.\n\nDa stellt er sich hier hin und sagt: So haben wir uns Globalisierung nicht vorgestellt. - Seit 1994, seit Gründung der WTO, haben Sie Globalisierung genau so zugelassen und unterstützt. Was reden Sie denn da?\n\nWo war denn Ihr Aufschrei? Sie haben unter einem Kanzler Kohl und unter Ihren Regierungen für diese internationalen Regeln der WTO gesorgt. Man soll sich dafür nicht schämen müssen, wenn man in die Green Box soziale Kriterien hineinnimmt.\n\nSie machen hier ein Ding auf, das heißt: Der eine Teil passiert immer freiwillig. Ich sage Ihnen: Mit „freiwillig“ waren wir eigentlich durch. Freiwillig haben wir schon alles. Freiwillig haben wir Frauen in den Vorständen und Aufsichtsräten - nichts passiert! -, freiwillig werden Umwelt- und Sozialstandards eingehalten - nirgendwo ist was passiert.\n\nDas ist Ihr einer Teil. Und das wollen Sie uns hier jetzt als ganz dicke Nummer verkaufen.\n\nDas andere ist die WTO. Sie sagen: So haben wir uns Globalisierung nicht vorgestellt; WTO, CSR - das muss irgendwie alles verändert werden.\n\nDas finde ich geschickt. Denn bei der „Freiwilligkeit“ dauert es noch fünf Jahre - da sind Sie lange nicht mehr Minister -, bis man feststellt: Auch da hat sich nichts getan. - Bei der WTO kann man immer sagen: Wir mühen uns, aber die anderen haben nicht gewollt. Man brauchte da Einstimmigkeit, um die Regeln zu verändern. - Eine wirklich interessante Strategie, die Sie hier fahren, Herr Müller.\n\nZwischendurch sprechen Sie noch ein bisschen vom IOC; auch die sollen Arbeitsrechte einhalten.\n\n- Ja, das steht auch drin. Das habe ich dort gefunden.\n\nZu dem, was Sie hier vortragen, kann ich nur sagen: Der Worte sind genug gewechselt, ich will jetzt Taten sehen.\n\nIhr Antrag - sorry! - ist eine Kiste voller weißer Salbe. Wo steht denn zum Beispiel, wer Produkte in die EU importieren will, muss sofort, ab 1. November 2014, „living wages“, existenzsichernde Gehälter, zahlen? Nein, da sprechen Sie von 2020. Was ist eigentlich in den nächsten sechs Jahren mit dem Hunger? Bei der Erzeugung von Baumwolle ist das dann 2024. Was ist da eigentlich in den nächsten zehn Jahren mit dem Hunger? - Nichts als weiße Salbe.\n\nDazwischen, zwischen Freiwilligkeit und WTO, in dieser Erdumlaufbahn, in der das verhandelt wird, ist die Europäische Union. Da sage ich: Hic Rhodus, hic salta. Da springen Sie nicht.\n\nWie wäre es mit einer europäischen Transparenzrichtlinie, nach der jedes Unternehmen für die gesamte Kette darstellen muss -\n\nvon Dhaka in Bangladesch bis hier vor die Haustür -, wie die sozialen und ökologischen Bedingungen sind, damit jeder von uns ins Netz gehen und sehen kann - jede NGO oder ich selber, wenn ich mit einer Gewerkschafterin in Bangladesch kommuniziere -: Stimmt denn diese Angabe? Sie haben nicht einmal gesagt, dass Sie sich dafür jetzt einsetzen werden. Aber das wären in der EU gleiche Bedingungen. Das wäre gut für die Menschen in den Herstellerländern und für die Menschen und Unternehmen hier.\n\nWie wäre es mit klaren Kennzeichnungspflichten? „Made in …“ muss auch heißen - ich komme zum Schluss -, es ist dort wirklich hergestellt worden. Wie wäre es mit einer Kennzeichnungspflicht „GMO-Cotton enthalten“? Wie wäre es mit einer klaren Regelung der zivilrechtlichen Haftbarkeit und ordentlich geregelten Sorgfaltspflichten? Mit der Beschwerdebox, die Sie hier vorstellen, ist es wie mit einer Dienstaufsichtsbeschwerde: formlos, fristlos, fruchtlos.\n\nWir brauchen ein richtiges Klagerecht vor Gerichten in Europa.\n\nMein letzter Satz: De Gucht - über den ich sonst nicht viel Positives zu sagen habe, wegen TTIP -\n\n- wirklich mein allerletzter Satz - hat den Außenminister von Bangladesch vorgeladen und klar gesagt: Ihr verliert eure Präferenzen als „least developed -country“, wenn ihr jetzt nicht die Löhne erhöht und 200 Kontrolleure für die Statik und Sicherheit in den Firmen einstellt. - So macht man Politik und nicht mit Freiwilligkeit oder mit „irgendwo in hundert Jahren bei der WTO“.\"\n12149,elisabeth-winkelmeier-becker,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Crime does not pay. Auf Deutsch: Verbrechen darf sich nicht lohnen. So weit sind wir uns jedenfalls einig. Das ist ein Kernsatz eines jeden Rechtsstaats; das ist quasi ein Teil der DNA auch in Deutschland. Das beschreibt den Anspruch, den die Gesetze schon heutzutage erheben. Deshalb werden Verbrecher verfolgt und bestraft, und die Beute wird eingezogen. Alle drei Bereiche sind wichtig, vor allem dann, wenn es um die Bekämpfung der organisierten Kriminalität geht. Wir dürfen hier nicht zu naiv sein. Das Ausmaß der organisierten Kriminalität gerade in Deutschland dürfen wir nicht unterschätzen. Gerade in dieser Woche konnten wir wieder Berichte über Schlepper lesen, die skrupellos und zynisch Menschen das Geld abnehmen. Es geht um Menschenhandel. Das war ein Schwerpunkt unserer Arbeit vor der Sommerpause.\n\nEs geht des Weiteren um die Bekämpfung von Einbruchsbanden, deren Aktivitäten zugenommen haben, oder auch um die Mafia. Die italienische Abgeordnete Laura Garavini, die Mitglied des Antimafiaausschusses in Rom ist und einen Wohnsitz in Berlin hat, hat gesagt, dass die Mafia ihre Milliarden aus Drogen- und Waffenhandel sowie aus Erpressung dort investiert, wo die Bedingungen am günstigsten sind, die Profite am höchsten sind und das Risiko am kleinsten ist - und das ist in Deutschland der Fall. Deutschland ist ein Rückzugsraum zum Geldwaschen. Es geht hier um erhebliche Verbrechen, viel Leid und große Schäden. Hier müssen wir einen noch beherzteren Kampf führen. Dazu sind effektivere Ermittlungsmaßnahmen notwendig. Laura Garavini mahnte aufgrund der Erfahrungen in Italien mehr Möglichkeiten zur Kommunikationsüberwachung - allein aufgrund der Zugehörigkeit zu einem bestimmten Clan - an. Erforderlich sind zielgenaue Straftatbestände. Für solche haben wir in den vergangenen Wochen und Monaten schon bei Geldwäsche, Terrorismusfinanzierung und Menschenhandel gesorgt. Hinzu kommt die Formulierung verschiedener Korruptionstatbestände.\n\nWir brauchen als letztes Element effektive Möglichkeiten zur Abschöpfung von Gewinnen aus Straftaten. Allen Straftaten, um die es hier geht, liegt nämlich das Motiv zugrunde, Geld zu verdienen und Gewinn zu erzielen. Das Streben nach Profit ist die wichtigste Triebfeder der grenzüberschreitenden organisierten Kriminalität einschließlich mafiaähnlicher, krimineller Organisationen. Das besagt die europäische Richtlinie, die wir mit diesem Gesetz umsetzen. Das besagen auch unsere Gesetze. Aber der Blick in die Praxis zeigt, dass hier noch vieles besser werden muss. Das sagt in aller Deutlichkeit auch die Mafiaexpertin Garavini, nach deren Einschätzung die Mafia ihren Rückzugsraum in Deutschland sucht. Die Zahlen des Bundeslagebildes Organisierte Kriminalität besagen, dass nur etwa in einem Viertel der Fälle Verfahren eröffnet werden, in denen Vermögen abgeschöpft wird. Es gibt Schätzungen, dass wir in Deutschland ein illegales Vermögen von über 3 Milliarden Euro haben, und nur ein Bruchteil davon ist sichergestellt. Was sind hier die Gründe? Es gibt - sie wurden ja auch schon genannt - unterschiedliche Gründe: Teilweise gibt es eine Konkurrenz zu Opferansprüchen, die natürlich vorgehen sollen. Diese Ansprüche halten häufig ein Verfahren auf, werden zu oft dann aber nicht wirklich durchgesetzt. Des Weiteren gibt es Verschiebungen der Beute hin zu Ahnungslosen oder auch kollusiv handelnden Dritten.\n\nDer wichtigste Grund, dass eine Vermögensabschöpfung nicht erreicht werden kann, besteht darin, dass die volle Beweislast dafür erbracht werden muss, dass eine Beute aus einer bestimmten kriminellen Tat resultiert. Dieser Beweis muss von der Staatsanwaltschaft erbracht werden. Er ist häufig nur sehr aufwendig zu führen. In der Praxis führt das dazu, dass offenkundig gelogene Ausreden hingenommen werden müssen bzw. nicht widerlegt werden. Das kann so nicht stehen bleiben.\n\nWer überführter Straftäter ist, hat eine andere Darlegungs- und Beweislast. Er muss erklären, woher unerklärliches Vermögen kommt. Das gilt zum Beispiel für jemanden, bei dem auf dem Dachboden Bargeld in Eimern gefunden wird, der aber kein geregeltes legales Einkommen hat. Wer zehn Rolex-Uhren hat, der kann sich nicht damit herausreden, dass er sie von seinem Onkel geschenkt bekommen hat, und dergleichen mehr.\n\nWir machen deshalb einen Vorschlag für eine deutliche Erleichterung im Hinblick auf die Beweislast. Hier müssen wir uns - weil wir uns dabei natürlich auch im Schutzbereich von Artikel 14 Grundgesetz bewegen - sehr genau anschauen, welche Voraussetzungen gegeben sein müssen, welcher Grad von Verdacht bestehen muss und bei welchem Stand der Ermittlungen man zu einer Beweislastumkehr kommen kann. Das ist für einen Katalog von sehr schweren Straftaten vorgesehen. Ich glaube, den müssen wir uns auch noch einmal anschauen. Dabei geht es auch um die Frage: Gehören dazu nicht auch Zuhälterei und Einbruchdiebstahl?\n\nWichtig ist, dass wir eine Regelung hinbekommen, die in der Praxis klappt und natürlich auch den verfassungsmäßigen Anforderungen genügt. Wir müssen aber auch noch - ich glaube, der Hinweis des Richterbundes ist wichtig - eines im Blick haben: Die Ressourcen bei Polizei, Staatsanwaltschaft und Gerichten sind an dieser Stelle sehr begrenzt. Deshalb muss man vielleicht dazu auch sagen, dass Behörden, die eigene Durchgriffsrechte haben, diese auch selber nutzen und ihre Probleme nicht bei der Staatsanwaltschaft abladen sollten.\n\nWeiter müssen wir überlegen, ob nicht eventuell, wenn es um aufwendige Ermittlungen geht, eine Priorisierung schwerer Straftaten möglich ist. Wir werden also gut daran tun, uns da auch weiterhin ganz eng mit der Praxis abzustimmen, damit wir eine gute Regelung hinbekommen. In dem Sinne freue auch ich mich auf unsere Beratungen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8829,gitta-connemann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! „Back mit Hack! - Endlich Plätzchen aus Fleisch.“ Dies titelt aktuell eine Kochzeitschrift für Männer mit Geschmack. Zur selben Zeit verschleudert ein Großdiscounter 500 Gramm Schweinehack für 1,59 Euro. Noch nie wurde so viel über Essen geredet, geschrieben, gesendet - für jede Zielgruppe etwas. Das ist die eine Seite der Medaille. Aber auf der anderen Seite werden Lebensmittel verramscht. Dies spüren unsere Landwirte und ihre Familien jeden Tag. Der wirtschaftliche Druck ist enorm; das ist hier mehrfach zu Recht gesagt worden. Was hinzu kommt: Sie fühlen sich immer mehr an den Rand der Gesellschaft gedrängt. Beispiele gefällig? „Wer ist krasser als Nazis, Scientologen oder Geheimdienste? Die deutsche Agrarlobby.“ So postete kürzlich ein Reporter einer großen deutschen Wochenzeitung.\n\n„Sklavenhalter“, so brandmarkte Animal Peace einen Landwirt, der von einem Bullen getötet worden ist. Für diese Organisation ist das Tier - ich zitiere - ein „Held der Freiheit“. Bauern als Vogelfreie - das sind sicherlich Extrembeispiele, aber sie beschreiben ein Klima, in dem sich jede Bäuerin, jeder Bauer und ihre Familien bewegen müssen, und zwar tagtäglich. Und dabei sollen sie die Lebensmittel erzeugen, die wir uns wünschen - höchste Standards, kleine Preise, eigentlich eine Quadratur des Kreises. Dank harter Arbeit gelingt es ihnen. Noch nie waren Lebensmittel so sicher, bezahlbar, allzeit verfügbar wie heute. Aber die Anerkennung bleibt aus.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund beraten wir heute den Haushalt für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft. Es geht dabei um mehr als Geld. Es geht um ein Signal. Wir, die Mitglieder der CDU/CSU-Fraktion, sagen: Es muss endlich Schluss sein mit der Diffamierung einer ganzen Branche.\n\nWir bekennen uns zu unseren bäuerlichen Betrieben. Wir stehen an ihrer Seite, in guten wie in schlechten Zeiten.\n\nDies stellen wir unter Beweis, auch heute, unter anderem durch die Erhöhung der Mittel für die landwirtschaftliche Sozialversicherung, für den Export in Schwellenländer, für Forschung, für Energieeffizienz, auch im Gartenbau. Dafür sage ich unserem Bundeslandwirtschaftsminister Christian Schmidt und unserem Haushälter Cajus Julius Caesar herzlichen Dank.\n\nDas sind wichtige betriebliche Hilfen, aber es geht auch um das Ganze. Landwirtschaft wird nicht mehr verstanden. In Werbung und Medien wird ein romantisches Bild inszeniert, das mit der Realität nichts mehr zu tun hat. Immer weniger erleben diese Realität unmittelbar in ihren Dörfern. Natürlich gibt es auch offene Fragen: Wie wollen wir uns ernähren? Wie soll Tierhaltung zukünftig stattfinden? Wir stellen fest: Es gibt keinen gesellschaftlichen Konsens. Darüber müssen wir reden - gemeinsam, nicht übereinander, sondern miteinander. Dabei setzen wir übrigens auf Dialog statt auf Konfrontation. Das unterscheidet uns, liebe Ingrid Pahlmann, von unserem grünen Agrarminister in Niedersachsen. Er spricht nur mit wenigen und orientiert sich an Nischen. Das ist der falsche Weg. Wir wollen alle Beteiligten an einen Tisch bringen: Verbraucher, Wirtschaft, Wissenschaft, Verbände, Kirchen. Dafür brauchen wir eine Dialogplattform beim Bundeslandwirtschaftsministerium. Es geht uns um den Austausch auf Augenhöhe. Die Mittel dafür stehen jetzt bereit. Nur zu!\n\nMit seinem Lebensmittelgipfel macht unser Minister Christian Schmidt einen Anfang. Es wird um Verantwortung gehen, auch der Landwirtschaft, ja, aber auch der Verbraucher, der Hersteller und des Handels, ja: des Handels. Vier große Anbieter teilen sich heute noch Zweidrittel des Marktes. Sie liefern sich einen ruinösen Preiswettbewerb auf Kosten Dritter, nämlich auf dem Rücken der Erzeuger von Tieren, der kleinen Mittelständler. Ich sage sehr deutlich: Eine weitere Konzentration des Marktes muss verhindert werden.\n\nSo sagen es übrigens Bundeskartellamt und Monopolkommission. Ich persönlich sage: Eine Erlaubnis des Bundeswirtschaftsministers für die Übernahme von Tengelmann durch Edeka wäre ein fatales Signal.\n\nAn diesem Fall wird sich zeigen, wie wehrhaft das Kartellrecht ist.\n\nDies betrifft übrigens auch die Verbraucher, ihre Versorgung, ihre Ernährung - Lebensthemen. Kaum etwas bewegt die Menschen so sehr wie ihre Ernährung, und zwar zu Recht; denn am Ende geht es immer um ihre Gesundheit. Für all diese Themen trägt unser Ministerium Verantwortung. Es ist für mich, für uns das Lebensministerium. Dies ist in der Rede von Ihnen, lieber Herr Minister, ganz deutlich geworden. Wir stellen Ihnen heute die Mittel für die Umsetzung Ihrer politischen Agenda mit den Schwerpunkten Ernährung und gesundheitlicher Verbraucherschutz zur Verfügung. Glück auf!\n\nEs handelt sich hier um einen bedeutenden Betrag. Da bin ich etwas anderer Meinung als Sie, Frau Thissen. Wir waren als Koalitionsfraktionen eigentlich gemeinsam sehr stolz darauf, dass wir hierfür 150 Millionen Euro einbringen können. Das ist ein Spitzenwert. Vielleicht schauen Sie sich den Haushalt noch einmal an. Dann werden Sie erkennen, dass viele Mittel durch die landwirtschaftliche Sozialversicherung gebunden sind.\n\nDas ist ähnlich wie beim Sozialhaushalt und der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung. Ich denke, dann kommen wir das nächste Mal hier wieder zusammen.\n\nEs ist unsere Aufgabe, die Menschen in unserem Land vor gesundheitlichen Gefahren und vor Täuschung zu schützen. Dieser Aufgabe stellen wir uns übrigens seit zehn Jahren, und zwar erfolgreich. Lebensmittel sind so sicher wie nie zuvor, nicht zuletzt dank der hervorragenden Arbeit von Bundesbehörden wie dem Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung, lieber Harald Ebner. Es bewertet Risiken und leitet Grenzwerte ab. Wir wünschen uns, dass es bleibt, wie es ist, dass es nicht auf Wunsch oder den Zuruf der Politik,\n\nsondern ausschließlich auf wissenschaftlicher Basis tätig wird; denn wir brauchen Aufklärung und Fakten\n\nstatt Empörung und Vermutungen. Es geht um Menschen, und da müssen wir, da müsst ihr der Verantwortung besser gerecht werden als bisher.\n\nDie Entscheidung darüber, was auf den Teller kommt, überlassen wir den Menschen. Deshalb lehnen wir eine staatliche Bevormundung durch Verbote oder Strafsteuern ab. Dies wurde übrigens gestern Abend bei einem Kongress unserer Fraktion noch einmal deutlich. Es ging um die Volkskrankheit Diabetes. Verbote, so die Wissenschaft, verlocken oder führen zur Umgehung, und Lenkungssteuern sind schon in anderen Ländern gescheitert. Deswegen ist es richtig, dass wir als Koalition einen anderen Weg gehen und sagen: Wir nehmen 2 Millionen Euro zusätzlich in die Hand, um damit eine Strategie zur Reduktion von Zucker, Fetten und Salz in Fertigprodukten zu entwickeln. Das ist der richtige Weg. Um wirklich entscheiden zu können, braucht der Verbraucher eines: Klartext. Es muss draufstehen, was drin ist, und drin sein, was draufsteht.\n\nImmerhin kann der Verbraucher zwischen 170 000 Produkten mit klangvollen Namen wählen.\n\nSehr gern.\n\nLieber Harald Ebner, du weißt, dass ich dich persönlich wirklich schätze. Aber du versuchst jetzt, von dem abzuweichen, was du bei der Anhörung zum Thema Glyphosat geliefert hast, und das war ein wirklich trauriges Schauspiel. Das BfR ist nämlich nicht fachlich, sondern politisch-ideologisch angegriffen worden, weil es zu einem Ergebnis gekommen ist, das dir nicht passt.\n\nWenn wissenschaftliche Behörden am Ende die Ergebnisse so gestalten müssen, dass sie nur noch Applaus von der Politik erhalten, dann ist das falsch. Es geht ausschließlich um Wissenschaftlichkeit.\n\nDass das BfR nicht danebengelegen hat, zeigt die Entscheidung der EFSA, der europäischen Gesundheitsbehörde, gerade in Sachen Glyphosat.\n\nWenn du jetzt unterstellen willst, dass sich auch die EFSA und die Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler dort in den Befunden, die über Jahre hinweg geliefert worden sind, und den vielen Gutachten, die vorliegen, getäuscht haben, kann ich nur sagen: Du machst dir so ein Stückchen deine Welt, wie sie dir gefällt.\n\nOder um es mit Karl Marx zu sagen: Niemand ist so taub, dass er es nicht hören will.\n\nSehr gern, Frau Präsidentin.\n\nIch war nicht bei der Anhörung.\n\nIch habe das Protokoll gelesen, und ich habe die Anhörung gesehen, die aufgezeichnet worden ist.\n\n- Noch einmal: Ich habe die Anhörung gesehen, auch wenn ich nicht dagewesen bin. - Die Wissenschaftler, die Sie anführen, haben gesagt - da haben Sie natürlich recht -: Das BfR hat an dieser Stelle Fehler gemacht. - Es gab aber andere Wissenschaftler, die genau das Gegenteil gesagt haben.\n\nAm Ende ist für mich die Bewertung durch die EFSA wichtig, und die oberste europäische Gesundheitsbehörde - das sage ich noch einmal - hat gesagt, dieser Bewertung durch das BfR sei nichts hinzuzufügen. Ich bitte einfach darum: Nur die Tatsache, dass Ihnen ein Ergebnis nicht gefällt, darf nicht dazu führen, dass am Ende die Politik die Seriosität einer ganzen Behörde in Abrede stellt.\n\nDie Leitsätze im Lebensmittelbuch sollen Orientierung geben. Viele sind aber nicht mehr nachvollziehbar. Zucker darf sich nicht hinter chemischen Formeln verstecken. Auch ein Muskatwürzer ohne Muskat stiftet Verwirrung. Das beweisen die Beiträge auf dem Internetportal Lebensmittelklarheit. Auch um dessen Finanzierung zu sichern, stellen wir den Verbraucherzentralen 3 Millionen Euro bereit. Das ist gut investiertes Geld. Wir arbeiten auch an einer Reform des Lebensmittelbuchs, liebe Kollegin Vogt, liebe Kollegin Drobinski-Weiß, lieber Kollege Rainer. Es hat sich bewährt, aber es ist in die Jahre gekommen. Eines wünschen wir uns schon heute, lieber Minister: eine bessere personelle und finanzielle Ausstattung. Dafür müssten sich doch entsprechende Kapazitäten in der BLE finden lassen.\n\nInformationen dürfen aber auch nicht überfordern. Ein Karottensaft braucht keinen Beipackzettel, die Cortisonsalbe schon, und zwar lesbar und auf Deutsch. Dafür haben Sie, lieber Herr Minister, bei Lebensmitteln gesorgt. Aber es gibt noch einiges zu tun. Ich nenne als Beispiel die verlässlichen Herkunftsangaben. Nur was aus deutschen Landen kommt, darf diese Kennzeichnung auch tatsächlich tragen. Der Anfang ist getan. Wir müssen noch mehr tun, zum Beispiel beim verarbeiteten Fleisch. Wir setzen hier auf die EU; sie muss sich bewegen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, in drei Tagen ist der erste Advent. Wir begannen mit Plätzchen, und ich wünsche Ihnen eine besinnliche Adventszeit mit selbstgebackenen Plätzchen - ob nun aus Hack oder aus Mürbeteig; über Geschmack lässt sich bekanntlich nicht streiten.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n10543,uwe-schummer,\"Frau Kollegin Werner, ein Teilhabegesetz zu beerdigen, bevor es parlamentarisch beraten wurde, ist ein bisschen arg flott.\n\nDer Referentenentwurf für das Teilhabegesetz liegt jetzt vor, und ich denke, dass wir, wenn der Gesetzentwurf eingebracht wird, im Parlament eine gute Entwicklung auf den Weg bringen werden.\n\nWas Sie vor einem Jahr in Ihrem Antrag zusammengeschrieben haben, ist ein Sammelsurium von mehr oder weniger guten Ideen. Wichtig ist aber, dass man nicht nur Ideen sammelt, sondern dass auch konkrete Gesetzentwürfe und Maßnahmen im Parlament und in der Bundesregierung beschlossen werden. Wir haben derzeit 1,3 Millionen anerkannt schwerbehinderte Menschen auf dem ersten Arbeitsmarkt. Damit ist der größte Teil der betroffenen Menschen auf dem ersten Arbeitsmarkt tätig. 300 000 Menschen, die wesentlich behindert sind, arbeiten in Werkstätten. In den letzten Jahren war ein Aufwuchs an beschäftigten Menschen, die anerkannt schwerbehindert sind, auf dem ersten Arbeitsmarkt zu verzeichnen. Aufgrund des demografischen Wandels steigt die Zahl derer, die eine solche Behinderung aufweisen. Wenn sie arbeitslos werden, dann ist es umso schwieriger, sie wieder in den Arbeitsprozess zu bringen. Das müssen wir gemeinsam angehen.\n\nArbeit ist der Schlüssel für eine gelungene Teilhabe. Wir alle wollen den Paradigmenwechsel im Sinne der UN\u001eBehindertenrechtskonvention. Das heißt, es stehen nicht mehr die Defizite im Vordergrund, sondern die Potenziale, die die Menschen mitbringen. Unternehmen, die das Potenzial der Menschen nicht nutzen, behindern. Sie behindern nicht nur die betroffenen Menschen, sondern auch ihren eigenen wirtschaftlichen Erfolg. Wir müssen nicht mehr darum betteln, dass sie behinderte Menschen einstellen. Wir müssen den Unternehmern sagen: Wenn ihr nicht die Gelegenheit und die Förderinstrumente nutzt, um diese motivierten Menschen einzustellen, dann behindert ihr euer eigenes Unternehmen. - Das betrifft auch die Vorsorge, indem gutes Arbeitnehmerpotenzial frühzeitig in die Unternehmen geholt wird. Das ist das Entscheidende, und das ist auch im Sinne der Behindertenrechtskonvention der UN.\n\nWichtig ist, dass wir entsprechende Informationen stärker an die Unternehmen herantragen. Wichtig ist auch, dass wir gute Geschichten erzählen und Beispiele anführen, damit die Unternehmen, die noch keine Erfahrungen gemacht haben, von denen, die bereits seit Jahren in diesem Bereich aktiv sind und Inklusion leben, positive Eindrücke vermittelt bekommen und merken, dass dies ein Potenzial ist, das in die Unternehmen einzustellen ist.\n\nWir müssen mit dem Teilhabegesetz ein weiteres zentrales Thema angehen. 60 Prozent der Zugänge in die Werkstätten sind Menschen mit einer psychischen Erkrankung bzw. einer psychischen Behinderung, die vom ersten Arbeitsmarkt kommen; das sind jährlich 13 000 Zugänge in die Werkstätten. Die eigentliche Kostendynamik auch bei der Eingliederungshilfe besteht darin, dass allein diese 13 000 zusätzlichen Werkstattplätze für psychisch behinderte Arbeitnehmer zu einer Kostensteigerung um jährlich etwa 300 Millionen Euro führt. Deshalb ist es so wichtig, dass wir die Schwerbehindertenvertretungen stärken.\n\nDie Schwerbehindertenvertretungen sagen uns immer wieder, dass sie mehr Zeit brauchen. Das bedeutet in der Konsequenz mehr Freistellungen, damit sie in den Unternehmen ein Eingliederungsmanagement nach chronischen Erkrankungen und ein Frühwarnsystem in den Betrieben und Verwaltungen organisieren und betriebliche Gesundheitsprävention anschieben können, damit das Potenzial in den Unternehmen gehalten werden kann. Insofern sind Schwerbehindertenvertretungen keine Belastung, sondern eine Entlastung der Unternehmen und der Gesellschaft,\n\nweil sie das wichtigste Kapital im Unternehmen stärken, nämlich die Menschen.\n\nWerkstätten bleiben wichtig; aber sie müssen sich wandeln und verändern. Es gibt interessante Konzepte wie die virtuellen Werkstätten im Saarland. Es gibt auch verstärkt Ausgliederungen aus den Werkstätten durch Integrationsfirmen, die wir mit einem Förderprogramm von 150 Millionen Euro ausbauen wollen.\n\nEs gibt aber auch Probleme. Beispielsweise hatten viele Werkstätten in Niedersachsen das Problem, dass die Umsatzsteuerermäßigung nur noch für Produkte und nicht mehr für personelle Dienstleistungen von den Finanzämtern berechnet wurde. Das hatte zur Konsequenz, dass die Werkstätten, die besonders kreativ sind und in Betrieben Wahlfreiheit und Möglichkeiten auf dem ersten Arbeitsmarkt entwickeln, steuerlich bestraft wurden. Ich danke unserem Bundesfinanzminister Herrn Schäuble, dass er gemeinsam mit den Finanzministern der Bundesländer diese falsche Steuerpolitik beendet hat und durch eine entsprechende Neuformulierung des Anwendungserlasses dafür gesorgt hat, dass nicht nur Produkte aus den Werkstätten, sondern auch personelle Dienstleistungen - auch auf dem ersten Arbeitsmarkt - steuerlich positiv bewertet und nicht diskriminiert werden.\n\nDie 850 Integrationsunternehmen sind Lotsenboote auf dem ersten Arbeitsmarkt. Diese Unternehmen - das sind Druckereien, Hotels, Gaststätten, Gartenbaubetriebe; sie stellen einen Querschnitt unserer Wirtschaft dar - zeigen, wie man auch mit einer Quote von 25 bis 30 Prozent behinderte Menschen wirtschaftlich arbeiten kann. Diese Unternehmen weisen in der Regel eine geringere Insolvenzrate auf als Betriebe in der übrigen Wirtschaft. Es gibt natürlich einen Minderleistungsausgleich durch einen Lohnkostenzuschuss. Diesen wollen wir mit dem Budget für Arbeit, über das wir im Zusammenhang mit dem Teilhabegesetz debattieren werden, dauerhaft gewähren. Nach unserer Auffassung sollten sich andere Unternehmen diese Integrationsunternehmen zum Vorbild nehmen, wenn sie schwerbehinderte Menschen einstellen oder sie länger beschäftigen wollen.\n\nWir wollen die Integrationsunternehmen nicht nur quantitativ, sondern auch qualitativ zu Inklusionsunternehmen weiterentwickeln. Dazu gehört beispielsweise eine präventive Öffnung dieser Unternehmen für psychisch erkrankte Arbeitnehmer ohne eine anerkannte Schwerbehinderung. Wir wollen nicht erst dann tätig werden, wenn eine entsprechende Diagnose vorliegt, sondern schon im Vorfeld, damit die betroffenen Arbeitnehmer erst gar nicht in die Werkstätten kommen, sondern in Integrationsunternehmen untergebracht werden, um eine Perspektive auf dem ersten Arbeitsmarkt zu erhalten.\n\nWir wollen zudem Arbeitszeitmodelle entwickeln und fördern, die kurzzeitig sind. Wir wollen Hinzuverdienstmöglichkeiten für psychisch erkrankte Arbeitnehmer schon ab zwölf Stunden pro Woche schaffen, damit sich diese langsam auf dem ersten Arbeitsmarkt weiterentwickeln können. Wir wollen des Weiteren den Ausbildungsort „Integrationsunternehmen“ stärken, damit junge Menschen nicht mehr den klassischen Weg von der Förderschule in die Werkstatt einschlagen, sondern durch assistierte, begleitete und vernetzte Ausbildung Ausbildungsmöglichkeiten in den Integrationsunternehmen nutzen können. Dafür wollen wir Arbeitsassistenz und Jobcoaching mitfinanzieren.\n\nDie Beauftragten der einzelnen Fraktionen für Menschen mit Behinderung haben eine Idee aus Österreich aufgegriffen. Ich finde das dortige Mentorenprogramm sehr spannend. Die Assistenz kommt dort nicht erst mit dem behinderten Arbeitnehmer von außen in das Unternehmen hinein. Vielmehr gibt es dort in den Unternehmen Mentoren, die sich um die Arbeitnehmer mit Handicap, die neu im Unternehmen sind, kümmern. Diese Mentoren, die die Belegschaften und die Arbeitsabläufe kennen, stehen den behinderten Arbeitnehmern zur Seite. Wir können, wenn es um konkrete Unterstützung in Unternehmen durch ein solches Mentorenprogramm geht, durchaus von Österreich lernen und sollten ein ähnliches Programm hier bei uns umsetzen. Diesen Aspekt sollten wir in den kommenden Debatten, die wir über die Schwerbehindertenvertretungen und das Bundesteilhabegesetz führen werden, aufgreifen.\n\nStärkung der Schwerbehindertenvertretung, Zahl der Integrationsunternehmen verdoppeln und diese qualitativ weiterentwickeln, die Durchlässigkeit der Werkstätten verbessern und ein Budget für Arbeit als dauerhaften Zuschuss auf dem ersten Arbeitsmarkt gewähren, das alles sind gute Dinge. Das, was im Antrag der Linken gut ist, machen wir. Was wir nicht machen, das ist nicht gut.\n\nIch freue mich auf die weitere Debatte.\"\n319,doris-wagner,\"Frau Präsidentin! Frau Ministerin! Herr Wehrbeauftragter! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich freue mich, dass auch ich heute das erste Mal das Wort an Sie richten darf.\n\nLiebe Kollegen, stellen Sie sich einmal Folgendes vor: Sie und Ihre Partnerin erwarten ein Kind. Sie freuen sich. Das Kinderzimmer ist eingerichtet, und dann steht die Geburt unmittelbar bevor. Ausgerechnet an dem Tag sollen Sie die Abschlussprüfung für einen zuvor absolvierten Lehrgang ablegen. „Gut“, denken Sie, „ich fahre mit dem Auto zur Prüfung, gleich anschließend ins Krankenhaus, und dann kann ich hoffentlich rechtzeitig bei der Geburt dabei sein.“ Sie bitten Ihren Vorgesetzten, ausnahmsweise nicht gemeinsam mit den anderen Prüfungsteilnehmern mit dem Bus zu fahren, und die Antwort lautet: Seien Sie froh, wenn das Kind von Ihnen ist. Sie fahren mit dem Bus. - Die Beschwerde des betroffenen Soldaten ist nur eine von zahlreichen aus dem Jahr 2012, doch sie zeigt exemplarisch, wie viel in Sachen Familienfreundlichkeit bei der Bundeswehr noch im Argen liegt.\n\nWenn wir den Vorabberichten der Presse glauben dürfen, wird uns Herr Königshaus Ende Januar berichten, dass die Zahl der Beschwerden, insbesondere beim Thema Familie, in 2013 noch erheblich gestiegen ist.\n\nInzwischen entscheiden sich immer mehr Soldatenfamilien dafür, nicht mit jedem Standortwechsel auch den Familienwohnort zu ändern. Das heißt, dass etwa 70 Prozent der Soldatinnen und Soldaten zwischen Dienst- und Wohnort pendeln, oft über mehrere Hundert Kilometer. Das hat gesundheitliche Folgen und führt häufig zur Entfremdung gegenüber den Kindern oder auch der Partnerin oder dem Partner. Nicht umsonst liegt - das haben wir gerade schon gehört - die Scheidungsrate bei Bundeswehrangehörigen bei bis zu 75 Prozent.\n\nNoch immer fehlt es an vielen Standorten an Kinderbetreuungseinrichtungen. Soldatinnen und Soldaten, die Elternzeit beantragen oder in Teilzeit arbeiten möchten, werden mit dem Hinweis auf die allzu dünne Personaldecke abgewiesen. Schließlich - ein wirkliches Unding in meinen Augen - sehen sich Bundeswehrfamilien manchmal gezwungen, Darlehen aufzunehmen, weil ihre Anträge auf Beihilfe zur Begleichung von Arztrechnungen über Monate nicht bearbeitet werden können. Ich frage Sie, meine Damen und Herren: Wer möchte in einer solchen Armee dienen?\n\nHerr Königshaus verweist in seinem Bericht mehrfach auf konkrete Verbesserungsvorschläge, die er dem Bundesverteidigungsministerium unterbreitet hat. Das unter Rot-Grün schon 2004 verabschiedete Gesetz zur Gleichstellung von Soldatinnen und Soldaten verpflichtet die Bundeswehr dazu, familiengerechte Arbeitszeiten und sonstige Rahmenbedingungen anzubieten, um die Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Dienst zu erleichtern. Leider belegt der Bericht des Wehrbeauftragten einmal mehr, dass die Umsetzung des Gesetzes im Alltag sehr zu wünschen übrig lässt.\n\nWas ist eigentlich so schwierig daran, die Vorgaben und Vorschläge für eine familienfreundlichere Bundeswehr in die Tat umzusetzen? Ich frage mich: Hat Herr de Maizière in den vergangenen Jahren wirklich die nötige Initiative gezeigt, um an den bekannten Missständen etwas zu ändern? Was ist so schwierig daran, einer Soldatin oder einem Soldaten verbindlich zu erklären, welche Verwendungen und Versetzungen sie oder ihn in den kommenden Jahren erwarten, damit die Familie auch in Bezug auf die Karriere der Ehepartner und die Schullaufbahn der Kinder vernünftige Entscheidungen treffen kann? In Ihren ersten Medienauftritten, Frau Ministerin, haben Sie erklärt, alle diese Versäumnisse schnell aufholen zu wollen. Meine Kollegin sagte es schon: Dieses Vorhaben begrüßen wir ausdrücklich.\n\nSie selbst haben zuletzt immer wieder den quantitativen Aspekt des mangelnden Nachwuchses thematisiert. Als Freiwilligenarmee muss die Bundeswehr um die besten Arbeitnehmer konkurrieren, wobei aufgrund der demografischen Entwicklung der Anteil von Soldatinnen deutlich erhöht werden muss. Angesichts der dokumentierten Familienunfreundlichkeit verwundert es allerdings nicht, dass die Zahl der Frauen insbesondere in Führungsfunktionen bisher noch weit unter der selbstgesetzten Marke von 15 Prozent liegt.\n\nHerr Königshaus hat wiederholt den qualitativen Aspekt des sozialen Rückhalts für die Soldatinnen und Soldaten betont, ganz besonders, wenn belastende Erfahrungen aus Auslandseinsätzen verarbeitet werden müssen. Eine Armee, die die privaten Strukturen von Familie und Freunden zerstört, riskiert, irgendwann als Gruppe von seelisch verletzten Menschen ohne Bindung zu enden. Die Zeit drängt; denn die Frage, ob es der Bundeswehr auf absehbare Zeit gelingen wird, familienfreundlichere Strukturen zu schaffen, wird mit über die zentrale Frage entscheiden, ob Deutschland in Zukunft überhaupt noch eine funktionsfähige Armee hat.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n7240,matthaus-strebl,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Ministerin, derzeit wird das Umsetzungsgesetz zur Pensionsfonds-Richtlinie in der EU verhandelt. Meine Frage lautet: In welchem Verhältnis steht dies zur EU-Mobilitäts-Richtlinie? Meine zweite Frage: Muss das Betriebsrentengesetz dadurch noch einmal angepasst werden?\"\n13763,maria-klein-schmeink,\"Sehr geehrte Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In der Tat, Politik beginnt mit der Betrachtung der Wirklichkeit. Das ist ein guter Ansatz.\n\nDiesen Ansatz haben wir mit vier Anträgen zu unterstützen versucht. Beginnen wir mit dem Antrag zur besseren Versorgung der Menschen mit Behinderungen aus dem Jahr 2014. Zentraler Baustein darin: die Verbesserung der Heil- und Hilfsmittelversorgung.\n\nHerr Sorge als Hauptredner hat damals infrage gestellt, dass es überhaupt Handlungsbedarf gibt.\n\nEin weiterer Antrag zielte darauf, eine Untersuchung durchzuführen, wie die Situation der Heilmittelversorger insgesamt ist, und zwar sowohl bezüglich ihres Versorgungsanteils als auch der ökonomischen Situation und der Ausbildungssituation.\n\nDieser Antrag wird hier heute abgelehnt.\n\nWeiterer Punkt: Wir haben Ihnen einen Vorschlag unterbreitet, wie man die Situation in der Heilmittelversorgung tatsächlich verbessern könnte, und zwar, indem man nämlich nicht nur einen beschränkten Zugang zur Blankoverordnung schafft, sondern das regelhaft ins Gesetzbuch übernimmt. Das werden Sie gleich ablehnen, obwohl gut belegt ist, dass das der richtige Ansatz ist.\n\nSie haben es sogar genau so bestätigt.\n\nDes Weiteren erwähne ich, dass wir mit der Direktverordnung weiter vorankommen müssen. Auch da haben Sie sich nur zu einer kleinen, modellhaften Geschichte durchringen können.\n\nSchließlich haben Sie die Aufhebung der Grundlohnsummenbindung, also die Ursache der sehr schlechten Einkommenssituation in diesen Bereichen, nur befristet verändert.\n\nAll das zeigt doch: Bei der Betrachtung der Wirklichkeit haben wir noch viel Potenzial nach oben.\n\nWenn Sie immer so betonen, dass genau dieser Bereich für die Versorgung von vielen Patienten mit chronischer Erkrankung und Behinderung tatsächlich von ganz großer Bedeutung ist - wir reden von insgesamt 17 Millionen Menschen, die mit Beeinträchtigungen zu kämpfen haben -, dann müssen wir mit der Heilmittelversorgung sehr viel mutiger umgehen, als wir es heute tun. Genau das wird in der nächsten Wahlperiode ein großes Thema sein.\n\nKommen wir zur Hilfsmittelversorgung - auch ein sehr entscheidender Bereich für die Lebensqualität der betroffenen Patientinnen und Patienten -: Welche Situation haben wir denn dort vorgefunden? Vor zehn Jahren haben Sie - vereint als erste Große Koalition - mehr Wettbewerb im Gesundheitswesen geschaffen. Damit haben Sie die Grundlage dafür gelegt, dass bei der Versorgung mit Hilfsmitteln hauptsächlich bzw. ausschließlich\n\nder Preis und nicht mehr die Lebensqualität der betroffenen Menschen eine Rolle spielt.\n\nDas heilen Sie heute ein klein wenig, indem nämlich gesagt wird, dass das Kriterium Qualität zu 50 Prozent bei der Ausschreibung eine Rolle spielt. Meinen Sie, dass das der Quantensprung ist, den wir da brauchen? Wir haben da unsere Zweifel.\n\nWir werden jedenfalls nachprüfen, ob Hilfsmittel tatsächlich so zur Verfügung gestellt werden, dass sie erstens die nötige Qualität bringen und zweitens auch tatsächlich teilhabeorientiert gewährt werden; denn das ist ja ein weiterer wichtiger Punkt.\n\nDie Umsetzung einer ganz zentralen Forderung zur Qualitätssicherung wäre gewesen, im Gesetz festzuhalten, dass regelmäßig Patientenbefragungen, Verbraucherbefragungen durchgeführt werden, die zeigen, ob die Qualität der Ausschreibung stimmt oder nicht. Was haben Sie gemacht? Sie schaffen eine Regelung, nach der das erst einmal ins Benehmen des G-BA gestellt wird. Wir werden sehen, was an dieser Stelle passiert. Wir haben also auch für diesen Bereich keine Sofortlösung.\n\nIch sage es noch einmal: Bei der Betrachtung der Wirklichkeit haben wir noch ganz viel Potenzial nach oben.\n\nDann kommen wir zum Bereich des Risikostrukturausgleichs. Auch dazu haben wir Ihnen einen Antrag vorgelegt, der Ihnen auf die Sprünge helfen sollte. Aber auch da trauen Sie sich nicht, tatsächlich den entscheidenden Punkt anzugehen, nämlich zuzusehen, dass wir ein Gutachten bekommen, das nicht nur die schon vorhandenen Kriterien, die wir im Risikostrukturausgleich haben, verbessern und bewerten hilft, sondern auch äußere, neue Faktoren einbezieht wie soziodemografische Faktoren - also: wie ist eigentlich die Lebenslage in einer Region? - und ein Regionalkennzeichen, das frühzeitig vorliegt, damit wir Erkenntnisse haben und sofort entsprechende Maßnahmen in der nächsten Legislaturperiode umsetzen können. Auch das haben Sie mit diesem Gesetz nicht ermöglicht.\n\nWir können zwar sagen: Es sind Schritte in die richtige Richtung. Aber der Mut für entscheidende Schritte hat an dieser Stelle gefehlt. Deshalb werden wir uns nur enthalten können.\n\nZusätzlich muss man sagen: Sie haben mit der Ausnahmeregelung hinsichtlich der Sozialversicherungspflicht von Notärzten einen entscheidenden und systemwirksamen Fehler gemacht, der uns wahrscheinlich in der nächsten Legislaturperiode massiv beschäftigen wird.\n\nFrau Wöllert hat es deutlich gemacht: Es kann doch nicht sein, dass wir für Notärzte eine Extraregelung schaffen, während Rettungsassistenten, Feuerwehrleute und alle anderen nicht einbezogen werden. Hier wird der falsche Weg gewählt. Das muss man ganz deutlich sagen.\n\nDas wird ein Thema sein, dass uns wahrscheinlich in der nächsten Legislaturperiode massiv beschäftigen wird.\n\nIn diesem Sinne: Wir haben noch viel Potenzial, die Wirklichkeit unter dem Aspekt zu betrachten, wie eine patientengerechte und -orientierte Versorgung ermöglicht werden kann.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n4628,susanne-mittag,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Das Bundeskriminalamt vermeldete in seinem Bundeslagebild Menschenhandel 2013 - damit wollen wir wieder zu den Fakten kommen - 603 Opfer des Menschenhandels in Deutschland. 542 davon sind Opfer des Menschenhandels zum Zweck der sexuellen Ausbeutung geworden. Dabei handelt es sich fast ausschließlich um Frauen. Ihr Anteil beträgt 96 Prozent. Weiter registrierte das BKA 61 Opfer des Menschenhandels zum Zweck der Ausbeutung der Arbeitskraft. Wenn man sich die Zahlen anschaut, dann sieht man, dass es sich also in erster Linie um sexuelle Ausbeutung handelt.\n\nInsgesamt sind es 603 Menschen, die wie ein Handelsgut von Kriminellen über Staatsgrenzen hinweg verkauft und ausgenutzt werden. Diese Straftaten gehen oftmals mit Gewalttaten, Freiheitsberaubung, Schleusungs- und Fälschungsdelikten sowie anderen Delikten einher, also der gesamten Bandbreite organisierter Kriminalität. Das findet nicht in der Dritten Welt oder sonst wo statt, sondern hier in Deutschland. Das sind erschreckende Zahlen, aber sie zeigen leider nur die ermittelte Spitze des Eisbergs; denn das BKA listet nur die abgeschlossenen polizeilichen Ermittlungsvorgänge auf. Es gibt also noch jede Menge mehr. Es gibt ein riesiges Dunkelfeld.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund finde ich es gut, dass wir jetzt diese Diskussion führen. Ich finde es auch gut, dass Sie - damit meine ich die Kollegen von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen - hier einen Gesetzentwurf zur Verbesserung der Situation von Opfern des Menschenhandels in Deutschland eingebracht haben. Wir brauchen eine breite gesellschaftliche Diskussion darüber, wie es sein kann, dass Hunderte Menschen wie Sklaven verkauft und ausgebeutet werden - genau das findet nämlich dabei statt -, Hunderte oftmals unerkannt, Hunderte, vor denen wir als Gesellschaft die Augen verschließen. Sie leben mitten unter uns, mit falschen Versprechungen angelockt, in teils unwürdigen Unterkünften, müssen sich prostituieren oder werden als billige Arbeitssklaven ausgebeutet, werden um ihr Einkommen betrogen. Sie fühlen sich nicht nur alleine, sie sind es auch. Sie wissen oftmals nicht einmal, in welchem Land sie leben, da sie so häufig über Landesgrenzen hinweg verkauft werden. Sie trauen sich kaum, Hilfe bei staatlichen Stellen oder sonstigen Organisationen zu suchen; denn die staatlichen Behörden in ihren Herkunftsländern sind weiß Gott oftmals keine Hilfe.\n\nDas ist, denke ich, erschreckend und nicht länger hinnehmbar. Deswegen sind die Diskussionen, die heute und im Anschluss stattfinden, sehr gut und sehr wichtig. Wir als Große Koalition haben uns im Koalitionsvertrag vorgenommen, den Opfern des Menschenhandels in Deutschland zu helfen. Das wollen wir jetzt tun. Die Bundesregierung hat am Mittwoch im Kabinett einen entsprechenden Gesetzentwurf beschlossen. Dieser Gesetzentwurf zur Neubestimmung des Bleiberechts und der Aufenthaltsbeendigung wird uns bald hier im Bundestag beschäftigen, nicht nur heute, sondern auch im Rahmen einer größeren Diskussion. Ich gebe zu, dass wir als SPD uns für alle Opfer einen eigenständigen Aufenthaltstitel unabhängig von einer Aussage in einem Strafverfahren gewünscht hätten.\n\nDarüber müssen wir vielleicht noch ein bisschen verhandeln. Das haben wir nicht für alle, aber zumindest für minderjährige Menschenhandelsopfer erreicht; das ist doch schon mal ein Schritt in die richtige Richtung.\n\nGleichwohl sind in diesem Gesetzentwurf jede Menge Verbesserungen enthalten: Eine Aufenthaltserlaubnis soll nun für ein Jahr erteilt werden bzw. verlängert werden bei Strafverfahren und soll nach Abschluss des Verfahrens aus humanitären oder persönlichen Gründen für zwei Jahre erteilt werden. Das waren vorher nur sechs Monate; das ist schon mal ein Riesenunterschied. Damit geben wir den Menschen hier eine aufenthaltsrechtliche Perspektive. Nur so können wir erreichen, dass die Opfer vielleicht doch bereit sind, in einem Prozess auszusagen; das ist nicht unbedingt zwingend.\n\nVerbessert wurde auch, dass die oben beschriebene Vorschrift zur Aufenthaltserlaubnis eine Soll- und nicht mehr eine Kannbestimmung ist; das ist ebenfalls ein riesiger Unterschied.\n\nDas schafft sehr wohl Klarheit und verbessert die Sicherheit der Betroffenen.\n\n- Da arbeiten wir noch dran.\n\nWir haben ja noch Zeit zum Diskutieren, da steigen wir noch ein.\n\nJetzt kommt der Punkt für Sie: Verbessert wurde auch der Familiennachzug der Opfer, schon während des Verfahrens. Herr Beck, das ist ganz wichtig für die Diskussion mit Ihnen; das fehlt nämlich gänzlich in dem Gesetzentwurf der Grünen. Der Familiennachzug ist aber entscheidend für die Opfer von Menschenhandel. 30 Prozent der Opfer geben laut Lagebericht des BKA an, dass auf ihre Aussagebereitschaft bei Polizei oder Gericht durch die Täter oder deren Umfeld eingewirkt wurde. Das ist nicht zu unterschätzen; denn „eingewirkt“ ist ein sehr milder Ausdruck für das,\n\nwas da abgeht: dass entweder direkt, auf die Opfer selbst, oder indirekt, auf ihre Familien, eingewirkt wurde. Ich denke, jeder kann sich gut vorstellen, dass Frauen - ich erinnere an die Zahl, die ich zu Anfang genannt habe: 96 Prozent der Opfer von Menschenhandel sind Frauen - um die Sicherheit ihres Kindes besorgt sind, wenn sie wissen, dass ihr Kind in der Reichweite der Täter ist und bleibt, und das machen die Täter den Opfern auch sehr deutlich klar. Es ist also existenziell für die Opfer von Menschenhandel, mit ihren Familien in einem sicheren Umfeld - das heißt: nicht wieder in dem Dorf oder in der Gegend, aus der sie kamen - zusammen leben zu können. Es ist auch ein Gebot der Menschlichkeit, dass wir uns hier auch darum kümmern.\n\n- Schön. - Und es hilft den Ermittlungsbehörden, weil dadurch die Bereitschaft der Opfer zur Aussage gegen die Täter wahrscheinlicher wird. Mit dem Familiennachzug nimmt man den Tätern ein erhebliches Druckpotenzial, endlich.\n\nIch freue mich auf die anstehenden parlamentarischen Beratungen zu diesem Thema; sie sind ja heute schon ordentlich losgegangen. Ich denke, im Ziel - der Verbesserung der Situation der Opfer - sind wir uns parteiübergreifend einig. Ich bin mir sicher, dass wir hier im Parlament eine konstruktive Diskussion darüber führen werden, wie wir den Opfern von Menschenhandel insgesamt am besten helfen können.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Mitarbeit schon mal im Voraus.\"\n616,franz-thonnes,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen!\n\nSo wie kein Mieter das Recht hat, in seiner Wohnung Feuer anzuzünden, mit der Berufung auf die Heiligkeit des Heims, so wenig dürfen Staaten ohne Gefährdung des Friedens Innenpolitik auf eigene Faust machen, soweit diese den Frieden in Frage stellt. Wir wohnen nicht mehr in einzelnen Festungen des Mittelalters, wir wohnen in einem Haus. Und dieses Haus heißt Europa.\n\nSo hat es der große deutsche Schriftsteller Kurt Tucholsky 1926 formuliert. Heute sind wir an dem Punkt, dass wir uns 25 Jahre nach dem Fall des Eisernen Vorhangs erneut mit einer sehr brisanten Situation auseinandersetzen müssen, über die wir hier im Plenum schon einmal in dieser Woche diskutiert haben, über die wir im Ausschuss diskutiert haben und über die wir heute auch in dieser gemeinsamen Debatte diskutieren. Es geht erneut darum, den Prozess der Einigung Europas zu behandeln und kritisch zu betrachten und dabei eine gute, friedliche Perspektive zu finden.\n\nSeit dem 21. November demonstrieren Menschen in der Ukraine für Menschenrechte, Freiheit und Demokratie, gegen Korruption und soziale Ungerechtigkeit und für eine gute Zukunft ihres Landes. Die Demonstrationen waren am Anfang gewaltfrei. Wir wissen aber: Je länger so etwas dauert, umso gereizter werden die Gemüter und umso eher verbreitet sich auch Gewalt.\n\nIch glaube, uns eint hier die gemeinsame Auffassung, dass eine friedliche Lösung gefunden werden muss, dass eine gewaltfreie Lösung gefunden werden muss und dass die Ukraine eine gute, demokratische, den Menschenrechten gerecht werdende Perspektive in Europa haben muss.\n\nDie Bundesregierung und Außenminister Steinmeier haben mit der notwendigen Klarheit und, ich sage auch, mit der gebotenen Sensibilität reagiert, Telefonate und Gespräche mit Staatspräsident Janukowitsch und den Oppositionsvertretern geführt. Ich denke, dass es gut war, den Einfluss Deutschlands wahrzunehmen. Die heute beginnende Sicherheitskonferenz in München wird eine weitere Gelegenheit sein, Versuche zu unternehmen, die Konflikte zu lösen. Ich glaube, dass diese Perspektive der Ukraine so ausgerichtet sein muss, dass Freiheit, Demokratie und Menschenrechte eine Zukunft haben. Ich sage auch ganz deutlich: Rechtsextremistische und nationalistisch orientierte Kräfte, die gegen diese Werte kämpfen, werden dabei nicht hilfreich sein.\n\nErste Schritte sind gemacht, repressive Gesetze zurückgenommen worden, insbesondere was die Demonstrations- und Versammlungsfreiheit angeht. Die Regierung ist zurückgetreten. Das sind gute Zeichen, wenn sie nicht Taktik sein sollen, wenn es nicht darum geht, Zeit zu schinden. Das, was versprochen und zugesagt worden ist, muss jetzt auch belastbar eingehalten und darf nicht mit neuen Bedingungen verknüpft werden. Ich denke, es gilt ganz klar: Die Verhafteten sind freizulassen. Das Schicksal der Verschleppten, deren Situation bis heute nicht geklärt ist, ist aufzuklären. 2 000 Verletzte, 500 aufseiten der Polizei, 6 Tote, 30 Vermisste sind genug. Jetzt muss Schluss sein.\n\n- Ja, richtig. Es sind zu viele.\n\nBei dem jetzigen Prozess brauchen wir keine Fackelträger nach dem Motto „Augen zu und durch“, weil nur der kleinste Funke dazu führen kann, dass etwas entsteht, was wir alle nicht wollen. Deswegen ist Zurückhaltung angesagt. Es gilt, auch ein bisschen Vorsicht bei den Vermittlern walten zu lassen, die jetzt schon Schlange stehen. Die Betroffenen selbst müssen entscheiden, wer vermittelt. Aber wenn sie Hilfe brauchen, dann sollen sie es sagen. Wir haben ihnen an dieser Stelle dabei Rat zu geben.\n\nIch glaube, dass es auch darum geht, Russland zu sagen, dass das, was mit wirtschaftlichem Druck versucht worden ist, genauso wenig tolerierbar ist wie die Kreativität, mit der Russland hinsichtlich der Zollformalitäten und der Gesundheitsvorschriften für den Warenimport nach Russland agiert.\n\nEs ist notwendig, hier zu realisieren: Die Welt in der Ukraine ist nicht schwarz-weiß. Es ist eine schillernde Welt. Die Opposition ist geeint hinsichtlich ihrer Forderung nach Neuwahlen, nach Abdankung des Präsidenten und nach Freilassung der Verhafteten, aber nicht hinsichtlich der Perspektive einer guten Zukunft in der Ukraine. So ähnlich sieht es bei den Oligarchen aus, die ebenfalls unterschiedliche Interessen haben. So ähnlich sieht es auch in der Gesellschaft aus.\n\nDeswegen glaube ich, dass auch die Europäische Union sich fragen muss: Haben wir alles richtig gemacht in der Phase der Assoziierungsverhandlungen? Ist nicht leichtfertig übersehen worden, welche ökonomischen und mentalen Verbindungen zu Russland bestehen, wenn man weiß, dass die Geburtsstunde Russlands im Kiew des 8. Jahrhunderts liegt?\n\nDas alles zu berücksichtigen wäre wichtig gewesen. Genauso hätte man sich die Fragen stellen müssen: Welche finanziellen Herausforderungen kommen auf uns zu und wie können wir sie gemeinsam schultern? Das bringt mich, wenn ich den Blick nach vorne richte, zu der Frage: Sind nicht Europa und Russland gemeinsam gefordert, eine gute Perspektive für die Ukraine in guter Kooperation zu erarbeiten und zu gestalten, wenn es jetzt zu einer friedlichen und gewaltfreien Lösung gekommen ist? Wir müssen wegkommen von der Schaukel des Entweder-oder, mit der Janukowitsch in den letzten Jahren gespielt hat. Es geht darum, sich Gedanken darüber zu machen, ob an dieser Stelle nicht mehr Kooperation entstehen kann. Europa und Russland sollten mit der Ukraine im wirtschaftlichen Bereich eigentlich große gemeinsame Interessen haben. Es geht darum, der Ukraine dabei zu helfen, eine gute wirtschaftliche Perspektive zu finden: im Energiesektor, bei der Produktion von Stahl und Eisen, aber auch bei der Kooperation im menschenrechtlichen und im zivilgesellschaftlichen Bereich. Es geht darum, dies gemeinsam zu organisieren und die großen ökonomischen Chancen zu realisieren. Es geht darum, zu schauen, wie man, wenn auf der einen Seite eine Europäische Union steht, die sich wieder stabilisieren muss, und auf der anderen Seite eine eurasische Union im Entstehen ist, gemeinsam Verträge machen kann.\n\nWir reden heute über ein Transatlantisches Freihandelsabkommen. Wir reden an anderer Stelle darüber, eine Freihandelszone zu schaffen, die von San Francisco bis Wladiwostok reicht. Ich denke, was vor der eigenen Haustür liegt, sollte Vorrang haben. Das ist die gemeinsame Aufgabe, die sich uns allen heute stellt: zu helfen in unserem gemeinsamen Haus Europa, und zwar gewaltfrei, lösungsorientiert und kompromissbereit.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n8959,ulla-jelpke,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Kollegin Warken, ich muss sagen: Das ist einfach zynisch, wenn man vorher die Debatte verfolgt hat und mitbekommt, dass der Bundeswehreinsatz verlängert wird, weil die Lage in Afghanistan unsicher ist,\n\ngleichzeitig aber darüber nachgedacht wird, Massenabschiebungen nach Afghanistan vorzunehmen.\n\nDas ist jedenfalls die bisherige Ansage, und Sie haben sie hier nicht klar dementiert.\n\nIch will auch deutlich sagen: Der Lagebericht des Auswärtigen Amtes spricht von relativ sicheren Regionen. Da muss man - zusammengefasst - ganz einfach sagen: Es kann eigentlich nicht schlimmer sein. Deswegen sagen wir ganz klar: Abschiebungen nach Afghanistan dürfen nicht stattfinden.\n\nEs ist heute schon gesagt worden: Im ersten Halbjahr hat es 5 000 Tote und Verletzte in Afghanistan gegeben. Die Zahl ist seit 2001 die höchste, und die Dunkelziffer ist wahrscheinlich sehr hoch. Noch nie hat es seit Beginn des westlichen Interventionskrieges so viele zivile Opfer gegeben wie heute. Und ausgerechnet in dieser Situation wird die Abschiebefrage diskutiert. Wir sagen ganz klar: Nein, es darf keine Abschiebungen geben, weil Afghanistan nicht sicher ist.\n\nIch habe noch einmal nachgesehen, was Vertreter der Bundeswehr vor zwei Jahren nach dem Abzug aus Kunduz erklärt haben. Man sprach ausdrücklich von einer Erfolgsgeschichte. Die Sicherheit in Kunduz sei nun gewährleistet. Das war die reinste Schönfärberei. Tatsächlich werden die Taliban immer stärker. Erst kürzlich überrannten sie Kunduz. Das zeigt wirklich: Afghanistan ist nicht sicher.\n\nHier ist eben schon über den Zynismus der Bundeskanzlerin gesprochen worden, die so tut, als würden die Flüchtlinge aus Afghanistan nur hierherkommen, weil sie besser leben wollen. Andererseits verhandelt sie mit dem Präsidenten aus Afghanistan um sichere Schutzzonen. Ist das nicht ein Eingeständnis Ihrer Kanzlerin, dass es in Afghanistan nicht sicher ist? Im Übrigen: Auch die Gebiete, die in Afghanistan von der Regierung kontrolliert werden, sind keine alternativen Fluchtziele. 15 Prozent der geschädigten Zivilisten fielen nach UN-Angaben Übergriffen afghanischer Sicherheitskräfte zum Opfer. Nach diesem Bericht der UN berichten 35 Prozent, dass sie durch die Polizei Folter erlitten haben. Das ist für die Bevölkerung in der Tat kein Schutz, sondern eher eine Bedrohung. Das Auswärtige Amt hält im aktuellen Lagebericht fest: Vor allem in den Rängen von Armee und Polizei ist der sexuelle Missbrauch von Kindern und Jugendlichen in weiten Teilen Afghanistans nach wie vor ein Problem. Die uniformierten Täter genießen völlige Straffreiheit.\n\nDa finde ich es eigentlich nur noch zynisch, dass der Bundesinnenminister vor kurzem gesagt hat, wir hätten Millionen an Entwicklungshilfe nach Afghanistan geschickt, jetzt sollten die Afghanen gefälligst einmal dankbar sein und ihr Land aufbauen, statt zu uns zu fliehen.\n\nDoch Deutschland hat auch Milliarden in den Krieg gesteckt und will jetzt erneut Soldaten nach Afghanistan schicken: in einen Krieg, der vielen Menschen nur die Wahl zwischen Tod und Flucht lässt. Es ist kein Wunder, dass sich unter den Flüchtlingen aus Afghanistan besonders viele unbegleitete Minderjährige befinden; denn es sind oft Kinder, die Angst vor Zwangsrekrutierung der Warlords, der Taliban, aber auch der afghanischen Armee haben. Deswegen haben wir die verdammte Pflicht, diesen Flüchtlingen hier Schutz zu gewähren.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, selbst dort, wo die afghanische Verfassung Menschenrechte gewährt, ist sie das Papier nicht wert, auf dem sie steht. Glaubensfreiheit ist eine völlige Fehlanzeige. Auf die Abkehr vom Islam steht die Todesstrafe. Homosexuelle können - in Anführungsstrichen - „froh“ sein, wenn sie nicht 20 Jahre im Gefängnis landen. Staatliche Akteure denken überhaupt nicht daran, Frauenrechte zu schützen. Die Justiz ist korrupt bis zum Gehtnichtmehr. 36 Prozent der Bevölkerung in Afghanistan leben unterhalb der Armutsgrenze, und 1 Million Kinder sind unterernährt.\n\nDas alles weiß auch das Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge. Deswegen liegt die Anerkennungsquote bei Asylanträgen von Afghanen derzeit auch bei 86 Prozent.\n\nDas lässt nur einen vernünftigen Schluss zu: Es darf keine Abschiebung nach Afghanistan geben.\n\nEs ist doch völlig absurd, dass afghanische Flüchtlinge 13 Monate lang warten müssen, bis ihr Asylantrag entschieden wird. Sie müssen zumindest von Anfang an das Recht haben, Integrationskurse zu besuchen und unsere Sprache zu lernen. Das wird ihnen gegenwärtig verwehrt. Das ist ein Skandal, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDie Bundesregierung muss endlich der Realität ins Auge sehen und damit aufhören, die von Deutschland mitverschuldete Hölle in Afghanistan schönzureden. Stimmen Sie den Anträgen von Grünen und Linken zu, damit die Menschen keine Angst mehr haben! Ich habe mit vielen Jugendlichen gesprochen, die Angst haben, abgeschoben zu werden. Deshalb bitte ich Sie: Stimmen Sie diesen Anträgen zu!\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n534,jens-spahn,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Frau Kollegin Mattheis, ob wir uns annähern, weiß ich nicht, aber dass wir uns in den letzten Wochen so nahe gekommen sind wie selten, weiß ich auf jeden Fall.\n\nDas ist vielleicht auch eine Basis für die Arbeit in den nächsten Jahren.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir haben über das wichtige Thema Pflege gesprochen. Hinter der Diskussion über den Begriff der Pflegebedürftigkeit verbirgt sich ja eigentlich die Frage: Ist Zeit da, ist Betreuung da, ist Unterstützung da, insbesondere für Menschen mit Demenz und für Menschen, die im Alter jenseits körperlicher Unzulänglichkeiten, des körperlichen Unvermögens, dass man sich nicht bewegen kann, Unterstützung brauchen? Wir sind uns doch einig, dass wir das umsetzen wollen.\n\nSie wissen aber genauso gut wie wir, dass eine Umsetzung dessen, was bisher vorgelegt worden ist, von einem Tag auf den anderen schlicht und ergreifend nicht möglich ist.\n\nDas sagen selbst alle Sachverständigen. Wir würden den Menschen einen Tort antun, wenn wir etwas, das bisher nur in der Theorie, in dicken Gutachten, aufgeschrieben worden ist, von einem Tag auf den anderen in die Realität umsetzen würden,\n\nohne zu wissen, was es für Folgen hat, wer möglicherweise schlechtergestellt wird, wer anschließend weniger Unterstützung bekommt, und ob es wirklich gelingen kann, dass die Unterstützung dort ankommt, wo sie ankommen soll. Das wäre fatal. Deswegen braucht es eine Erprobung in der Praxis. Eine solche Erprobung haben wir miteinander vereinbart; wir werden sie jetzt zeitnah angehen.\n\nUnd Sie wissen eigentlich, dass es eine Erprobung braucht, bevor man es umsetzen kann.\n\nDann sagen Sie, wir würden erst einmal mit kleinen Dingen anfangen. Wissen Sie, für die Pflegebedürftigen, die darauf angewiesen sind, dass jemand für sie Zeit zum Gespräch, zum Essen oder zum Spazierengehen hat, ist das, was wir in den letzten Jahren eingeführt haben, nämlich einen Anspruch auf entsprechende Betreuung - wir haben ja klar geregelt, dass es in den stationären Einrichtungen auch sogenannte Betreuungskräfte gibt, also Menschen, die genau dabei Unterstützung leisten -, eine enorme Hilfe. Das Gleiche gilt für den von uns vereinbarten Ausbau dieser Leistungen zum 1. Januar 2015, wo insbesondere zusätzliche Zeit für Betreuung vorgesehen wird. Den betroffenen Menschen muss es doch wie Hohn vorkommen, wenn Sie sich hier hinstellen und sagen, dass die 2 Milliarden Euro, die wir schon gleich im nächsten Jahr zusätzlich dafür ausgeben wollen, den Menschen nichts bringen. Das bringt ihnen eine ganze Menge, nämlich jeden Tag mehr Unterstützung und mehr Zeit der Betreuung im Alltag. Deswegen wollen und werden wir das umsetzen, und ich glaube, die Menschen wissen bzw. werden schnell merken, dass es ihnen hilft.\n\nWenn Sie etwas zur Frage der Personalsituation und des Fachkräftebedarfs sagen, klingt das erst einmal gut. Aber ich muss Ihnen sagen: Mich nervt es langsam schon. Ich habe auch gelesen, was Ihre Parteikollegin, Frau Ministerin Steffens, gefordert hat, nämlich dass wir bestimmte Personalschlüssel für Krankenhäuser und Pflegeeinrichtungen festlegen sollen. Wir alle, die wir hier sitzen, wissen, dass der Bund aus verfassungsrechtlichen Gründen keine Personalschlüssel festlegen kann. Für Krankenhäuser wie für Pflegeeinrichtungen können nur die Länder verbindliche Personalvorgaben machen. Es geht nicht, dass sich die Landesminister alle paar Wochen hinstellen und uns auffordern, da etwas zu regeln, obwohl sie eigentlich ihre Hausaufgaben machen müssten. Machen Sie in Nordrhein-Westfalen mit Frau Ministerin Steffens die Hausaufgaben, anstatt sich so wohlfeil hier hinzustellen, wie Sie es gerade gemacht haben.\n\nDas gilt im Übrigen auch für Schulgeld. Die Regelungen zum Schulgeld finden sich vor allem im Landesrecht. Sie stellen sich hier hin und klatschen mit uns, wenn wir uns dafür aussprechen, das Schuldgeld abzuschaffen. Das werden wir auch tun. Ich wäre sogar bereit, jenseits ordnungspolitischer Vorstellungen unterstützend mehr Kassenmittel dafür einzusetzen, um die Pflegeausbildung in die richtige Richtung zu bringen. Aber während Sie hier so reden und klatschen, macht Frau Ministerin Steffens in Nordrhein-Westfalen Folgendes: Sie sorgt dafür, dass für die Ausbildung zur pharmazeutisch-technischen Angestellten und in anderen Berufen überhaupt erst Schulgeld gezahlt werden muss. Hier über Fachkräftemangel jammern und in den Ländern etwas anderes tun - das passt nicht zusammen. Da muss man als Opposition hier im Bundestag am Ende konsistent bleiben und berücksichtigen, was man woanders tut.\n\nJederzeit.\n\nWir haben in anderen medizinischen Berufen in Nordrhein-Westfalen die Situation, wie ich sie gerade dargestellt habe. Es geht jetzt auch nicht darum, das von einem Land auf das andere zu schieben.\n\n- Bleiben Sie doch mal ganz ruhig. Sie wissen doch gar nicht, was ich jetzt sagen will. - Ich stimme Ihnen zu, dass das Modell, das Nordrhein-Westfalen umsetzt, gut ist\n\nund es auch ein mögliches Modell - -\n\n- Aber ich erzähle nicht zunächst das eine, so wie Sie es getan haben, um anschließend, was etwa das Schulgeld für angehende PTA in Nordrhein-Westfalen anbelangt, etwas anderes zu tun. Ich sage doch nur: Wir wollen in dem Bereich etwas tun. Aber es geht eben nicht, immer wohlfeil etwas zu fordern, ohne anschließend bei der konkreten Umsetzung - da, wo man Verantwortung hat - auch Entsprechendes zu tun.\n\nWie gesagt: Im Bereich Pflege ist das in Nordrhein-Westfalen gut gelungen. Das ist sicherlich ein Modell, das man weiterentwickeln kann. Wir wären froh, wenn das auch in anderen Pflegeberufen umgesetzt werden könnte. Das geht aber nicht ohne die Länder. So brauchen wir Ihre Hilfe; denn ohne entsprechende Mehrheiten geht es nicht.\n\nZur Frage der gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung. Die Finanzierung der gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung - darauf hat Herr Kollege Lauterbach bereits hingewiesen - beschäftigt uns seit gut zehn Jahren; es gab sehr unterschiedliche Konzepte. Das hat vor allem dazu geführt, dass bei Diskussionen zur Gesundheitspolitik im Mittelpunkt immer Finanzdebatten standen.\n\nDas hat oft von den Themen abgelenkt, die die Menschen eigentlich bewegen. Es ist uns in den Koalitionsverhandlungen gelungen, zu einem, wie ich finde, tragfähigen Kompromiss in Bezug auf die Finanzierung zu kommen. Einerseits wird nun sichergestellt, dass die Lohnnebenkosten nicht steigen, sodass steigende Gesundheitskosten die Arbeit in Deutschland nicht teurer machen. Andererseits wird sichergestellt, dass die Krankenkassen miteinander im Service-, Qualitäts- und Preiswettbewerb stehen.\n\nAm Ende haben wir natürlich auch ein Finanzierungsmodell gewählt, das alle drei Koalitionsparteien mittragen können.\n\nWir sind nun in der Situation, dass wir die Fragen, die die Menschen wirklich bewegen, zum Beispiel die Versorgung, in den Mittelpunkt unserer Debatten stellen können. Wir haben heute schon begonnen, über diese Themen zu sprechen. Es geht um Fragen wie: Habe ich eigentlich noch einen Hausarzt vor Ort, insbesondere auf dem Land? Wie lange muss ich auf einen Facharzttermin warten? Wie ist es eigentlich, wenn ich am Freitagnachmittag aus dem Krankenhaus entlassen werde? Dabei geht es um die ganz praktische Frage, ob sich jemand darum gekümmert hat, wie es weitergeht, etwa wenn Pflege oder weitere Medikation nötig sind? Es geht aber auch um die Frage der Regresse. Viele haben die Befürchtung, dass ihnen ihr Arzt nicht wirklich das verschreibt, was nötig ist, weil er ansonsten möglicherweise selbst dafür haften muss. Das sind die konkreten Themen, die die Menschen im Alltag bewegen.\n\nDie christlich-liberale Koalition hat mit dem Versorgungsgesetz angefangen, an wichtigen Stellschrauben zu drehen und hier etwas zu ändern. Wir werden in der Großen Koalition genau diesen Kurs fortsetzen. Wir beenden nach vielen Jahren den Finanzierungsstreit und legen alle Kraft in eine gute, vor allem auch im Alltag spürbare Versorgung der Menschen. Genau das wollen wir in den nächsten vier Jahren angehen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nZu Ihrem Argument, die Abschaffung der privaten Krankenversicherung löse alle Probleme der gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung: Als ob der Umstand, dass auch Privatversicherte in Zukunft länger auf einen Termin warten müssten, für die gesetzlich Versicherten irgendetwas besser machen würde! Ich verstehe die Logik nicht, die dahinter stecken soll. Es geht doch darum: Wie können wir dafür sorgen, dass gesetzlich Versicherte schneller einen Facharzttermin bekommen?\n\nDa ich gerade „jederzeit“ gesagt habe - -\n\nJa, die Probleme innerhalb der privaten Krankenver-sicherung gibt es, sie wurden auch schon vielfach adressiert. Sie haben aber wenig mit Ihrer Ausgangsthese zu tun.\n\nIch bin der festen Überzeugung, dass auch der Systemwettbewerb zwischen privater und gesetzlicher Krankenversicherung in der Vergangenheit dazu geführt hat, dass beide Systeme besser geworden sind, zum Beispiel, was das Leistungsangebot betrifft. Das wäre nicht der Fall, wenn wir nur ein System hätten.\n\nIch bin auch der festen Überzeugung - die Zahlen zeigen es -, dass die Leistungen, die die PKV erbringt, auch die Infrastruktur bei den Ärzten unterstützt, die auch gesetzlich Versicherte behandeln,\n\nund dass so die Versorgung aller, privat wie gesetzlich Versicherter, gewährleistet wird.\n\nDie Frage, wie schnell ich einen Facharzttermin bekomme - um diese geht es ja eigentlich - hat mit dem Facharztangebot in der Region zu tun. Das hängt wiederum davon ab, wie attraktiv es ist, sich in einer bestimmten Region niederzulassen. Das hat nun vor allem mit den Vergütungsregelungen im gesetzlichen Bereich zu tun, aber auch mit den Rahmenbedingungen, den Arbeitsbedingungen vor Ort. Schließlich hat das auch etwas mit dem Medizinstudium zu tun. Der Minister hat darauf hingewiesen. Genau an diesen Stellschrauben haben wir zu drehen begonnen, und wir wollen weiter daran drehen. Sie lösen das Problem der langen Wartezeiten für gesetzlich Versicherte aber nicht, indem Sie die Privatversicherung abschaffen. Diese Logik ist, mit Verlaub, Humbug, Frau Kollegin Klein-Schmeink.\n\nAbschließend will ich kurz das aufgreifen, was Sie, Frau Zimmermann, zu den Zuzahlungen, prozentual bezogen auf das jeweilige Einkommen, gesagt haben. Ich weiß, es fällt Ihnen schwer, sich dem Gedanken zu nähern, aber wenn jemand im Rahmen seiner Möglichkeiten einen angemessenen Beitrag zu den Kosten leistet, sehe ich darin eine Form der Solidarität in einem Gesundheitswesen, in dem ich mich darauf verlassen kann, dass mir die Solidargemeinschaft hilft, egal wie krank ich bin, egal wie hoch die Kosten sind, egal wie teuer und aufwendig die Behandlung wird. Angesichts dessen sind prozentual auf die Leistungsfähigkeit des Einzelnen bezogene Zuzahlungen eine Form gegenseitiger Solidarität. Darüber mögen wir unterschiedlich denken. Deswegen sind wir ja auch in unterschiedlichen Parteien. Da an dieser Stelle der Unterschied zwischen den verschiedenen politischen Richtungen deutlich wird, wäre es der Mühe wert, das weiter auszuführen. Doch ich kann jetzt leider nicht darauf eingehen, da die Frau Präsidentin mich schon auf das Ende meiner Redezeit hinweist.\n\nAbschließend sage ich daher Folgendes: Sie denken - das hat Ihre Forderung nach einer Anti-Stress-Verordnung gezeigt -, man könne die Dinge nur durch Regeln, Verordnungen, durch den Staat lösen. Am Ende hilft eine Verordnung aber niemandem.\n\nEs geht darum, die Realität zu ändern und die Lebenswirklichkeit in den Blick zu nehmen. Hier geht es um Entschleunigung. Es ist zu fragen, welche Präventionsmaßnahmen die Menschen in der jeweiligen Situation brauchen. Genau damit wollen wir uns in den nächsten vier Jahren beschäftigen.\n\nWir wollen nicht mehr Bürokratie. Wir wollen nicht mehr Regeln, sondern wir wollen den Menschen und seine alltäglichen Erlebnisse im Bereich des Gesundheitswesens in den Mittelpunkt stellen. So kann diese Große Koalition für Gesundheit und Pflege tatsächlich Großes leisten.\"\n3343,renate-kunast,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Sommerpause ist noch nicht allzu lange vorbei. Erinnern Sie sich doch zum Beispiel einmal daran, ob Sie eine Bahn- oder Flugreise unternommen und dabei enorme Verspätungen erlebt haben. Sie haben sich dann vielleicht gefragt: Wie ist das denn mit der Entschädigung? Äußere ich mich? Frage ich einmal nach? Oder soll ich vielleicht sogar klagen? Mag sein, dass die Deutsche Bahn diesbezüglich nicht so schlecht ist wie ihr Ruf, sondern schon selbstverständlicher und geduldig Vordrucke verteilt. Ich glaube, dass das bei manchen Fluggesellschaften viel schwieriger ist, weil diese sich zieren und versuchen, das Ganze erst einmal zeitlich zu strecken.\n\nOder stellen Sie sich eine andere Situation vor: Sie haben den Stromanbieter gewechselt. Der neue Stromanbieter hat Ihnen angeboten, Ihnen nach zwölf Monaten einen Wechselbonus auszuzahlen. Nach exakt zwölf -Monaten wechseln Sie schon wieder, weil ein anderer Anbieter einen niedrigeren Tarif hat. Der bisherige -Stromanbieter zahlt daraufhin die Prämie nicht. Klagen Sie?\n\nOder: Sie haben eine Lebensversicherung abgeschlossen und aus persönlichen Gründen vorzeitig gekündigt. Von Ihrem eingezahlten Geld bekommen Sie kaum etwas zurück, weil irgendwo im Vertrag in den Tiefen des Kleingedruckten versteckt ist, dass man erst Verwaltungs- und Bearbeitungsgebühren zahlen muss und diese von dem eingezahlten Geld abgezogen werden. Die Frage ist wieder: Klagen Sie?\n\nAll diese Fälle - man könnte noch mehr nennen - haben eines gemeinsam, nämlich folgendes Ungleich-gewicht: Sie haben auf der einen Seite den einzelnen, wirtschaftlich schwächeren Verbraucher oder die Verbraucherin und auf der anderen Seite mächtige Firmen und Unternehmen mit ganzen Rechtsabteilungen und Horden von Anwälten. Der Verbraucher, die Verbraucherin steht allein mit dem Schaden da. Sie müssen sich jetzt entscheiden: Klage ich?\n\nAus Verbrauchersicht ist es so: Je kleiner der Schaden, desto größer die Scheu. Wer möchte schon wegen 2,95 Euro klagen, viel Zeit verlieren und Ärger ris-kieren? Das gilt aber reziprok proportional für die Unternehmen. Während für den Verbraucher gilt: „Je kleiner der Schaden, desto größer die Scheu“, sagen die Unternehmen: Je kleiner der Schaden, desto besser die -Aussicht, dass 10 000 Betroffene eben nicht klagen. 10 000-mal 2,95 Euro ist ein schöner Gewinn. Kleinvieh macht auch Mist, wäre eine andere Variante, um diesen Zustand aus der Sicht der Unternehmen zu beschreiben. - Die Ansprüche werden nicht geltend gemacht; das ist das, was wir sehen.\n\nDeshalb haben wir uns die Mühe gemacht, für dieses Problem eine Lösung vorzulegen. Wir stellen fest, dass so etwas in den unterschiedlichsten Varianten immer wieder vorkommt: beispielsweise bei einer angemessenen Entschädigung für einen verspäteten Flug oder bei den schon genannten 2,95 Euro, zum Beispiel beim E-Commerce oder bei Apps und Ähnlichem.\n\nWir meinen, dass wir an dieser Stelle - ich formuliere das einmal so unter uns Juristen - das Skalpell in die Hand nehmen und an das Herzstück des deutschen Zivilrechts herangehen müssen, an die Zivilprozessordnung. Das ist ja angeblich die Krone des Rechts. Wie man darauf kam, weiß ich auch nicht. Aber darin stehen die wichtigen Dinge. Wir müssen Waffengleichheit herstellen. Wir müssen dafür Sorge tragen, dass es hier keine Schieflage gibt, deshalb die OP an der Zivilprozessordnung.\n\nWas wir brauchen, sind Formen kollektiver Rechtsdurchsetzung, so nennt man das. Das deutsche Recht kennt das bisher schon. Beim Unterlassungsklagegesetz überlegt die Bundesregierung zum Beispiel gerade völlig zu Recht - das wird schon lange von einigen, auch von uns gefordert -, eine Verbandsklagemöglichkeit bei Datenschutzverletzungen zu ermöglichen. Wenn eine Information über Sie ohne Ihre Erlaubnis weitergegeben wird, dann überlegen Sie: Mache ich da etwas, oder lasse ich es, obwohl ich unzufrieden bin? - Es ist also richtig, dass es da Verbandsklagemöglichkeiten geben soll. Warum? Weil nur so Interessenvertretungen des Vertragsschwächeren gewährleistet werden.\n\nBei diesem Fall und den anderen, die ich gerade aufgezählt habe, ist es so - das will ich klar sagen -: Es betrifft eine Vielzahl von Personen. Das ist quasi ein Massenereignis. Es handelt sich um gleichgelagerte Verträge, gleiche Lebenssachverhalte. Alle Betroffenen erfahren eine mehr oder weniger geringe Schädigung. Da brauchen wir jetzt eine prozessuale Lösung.\n\nWir haben einen Gesetzentwurf, der das Zivilrecht betrifft, vorgelegt. Ausnahmen stellen das Familienrecht und die freiwillige Gerichtsbarkeit dar; dort muss nach anderen Regeln vorgegangen werden. Wir sagen: Es muss eine Klagemöglichkeit geben, bei der dann allerdings Teilnehmer des Verfahrens nur wird, wer in diesen Gruppenverfahren gegenüber dem Gericht erklärt: Ich will an diesem Verfahren teilnehmen. - Wir sagen: Die Anwalts- und Gerichtsgebühren kann man dann auf vier Gebühren reduzieren, damit nicht 20- oder 30-mal die Gebühr erhoben wird, ohne dass dafür etwas getan wird. Für diejenigen, die klagen und an dem Gruppenverfahren teilnehmen, heißt das aber: Die Höhe des Prozessrisikos ist relativ begrenzt.\n\nWir wollen an dieser Stelle aber auch ein praktikables Verfahren. Das heißt: Diejenigen, die am Gruppenverfahren teilnehmen - das können bis zu 20 Personen sein -, sind dann vor dem Zivilgericht nicht alle zu Prozesshandlungen ermächtigt, sondern der oder die Gruppenklägerin nimmt treuhänderisch die Rechte der anderen wahr, damit das Verfahren praktikabel ist. Wir sagen: Eine solche Gruppenklage kann auf Leistung, also Schadenersatz bzw. Entschädigung für Verspätung, abzielen; sie kann sich aber auch als Feststellungsklage gegen rechtswidrige AGB richten.\n\nWir wollen aber kein Gruppenverfahren im Sinne einer Sammelklage nach US-amerikanischem Vorbild. Dort ist es so, dass ein Anwalt klagt, der zunächst alle angeblich Betroffenen sozusagen im Hinterkopf hat und dann später aus dem, was er erstritten hat, erst einmal 10 bis 20 Prozent als Anwaltsgebühr und Kostenerstattung für sich abzieht. Das wollen wir nicht. Wir wollen vielmehr ein Opt-in-Verfahren. Das heißt, das Verfahren gilt nur für Personen, die ausdrücklich gesagt haben: Ich will mit meinem Fall an diesem Verfahren teilnehmen.\n\nIch glaube, dass wir damit eines schaffen, nämlich dass die kleinen Fälle, bei denen die Verbraucher kein Recht bekommen, endlich mit in die Steuerungsfunktion des Rechts aufgenommen werden. Denn das Recht hat auch eine Aufgabe: am Ende sozusagen subkutan faire Marktbedingungen zu ermöglichen und zu gewährleisten, dass man nicht über den Tisch gezogen wird.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss, Frau Präsidentin. Die Europäische Kommission hat uns im Juni 2013 aufgefordert, kollektive Rechtsschutzverfahren einzuführen. Auf eine Kleine Anfrage hat die Bundesregierung neulich geantwortet: Sie prüft, ob zur Verbesserung des kollektiven Rechtsschutzes gesetzgeberische Schritte nötig sind.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich erlaube mir an dieser Stelle einen kostenlosen Rechtsrat: Wenn Sie nichts tun, verstoßen wir gegen die Empfehlung der Kommission. Ich bitte Sie deshalb, unseren Vorschlag zur Einführung von Gruppenverfahren aufmerksam zu lesen und ihm dann auch zuzustimmen.\n\nKönnten Sie mir mit Blick auf die anwaltliche Gebührenordnung erklären, was günstiger ist: 20 Mandanten mit einer kleinen Summe zu vertreten, bei denen die Anzahl der Anwaltsgebühren auf vier begrenzt ist, oder 20 Mandanten einzeln zu vertreten und jeweils ein, zwei Gebühren zu erheben? Sie machen gerade eine Milchmädchenrechnung auf, glaube ich.\n\n- Richtig, Milchjungenrechnung. Danke, Caren Lay.\n\nSie tun so, als würden wir mit unserer Formulierung zum Rechtsstreit animieren. Tatsächlich ist es doch viel schlimmer, wenn 20, 30 oder 100 Menschen einzeln vertreten werden müssen. Als Anwalt braucht man sich dann in die Sache nicht immer wieder materiell einzuarbeiten, kann aber jedes Mal eine Gebühr einschließlich Mehrwertsteuer, die man natürlich abführt, erheben.\"\n12337,susanna-karawanskij,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Finanzminister Schäuble hat in den Haushaltsberatungen angekündigt, bis 2020 die schwarze Null zu halten. Obwohl an dieser Staatsdoktrin krampfhaft festgehalten wird, werden auf einmal für 2017 Steuersenkungen versprochen. Der Finanzminister hatte zwar recht, als er sagte, dass wir in widersprüchlichen Zeiten leben, aber wir als Linke würden es gut finden, wenn das Gesagte belastbar wäre und sich nicht fünf Wochen später neue Widersprüche auftun.\n\nDenn nun sind Steuersenkungen geplant, und zwar nicht etwa für Privatleute - für den kleinen Mann oder die Alleinerziehende -, sondern für Unternehmen, genauer gesagt für private Investoren in sogenannte Start-ups. Das klingt erst einmal positiv und innovativ - das haben wir auch gerade von Herrn Dr. Meister gehört -, und man denkt dabei an Unternehmensgründungen: von einer Idee zur Umsetzung, wo Geldgeber entsprechend einsteigen können. Das ist auch in einigen Fällen so.\n\nAber schauen wir uns das einmal genauer an: Start-ups machen gerade in den ersten Jahren große Verluste, und der Großteil der Start-ups überlebt die ersten Jahre gar nicht. Ein beträchtlicher Teil dieser Start-ups soll nämlich möglichst schnell hohe Profite erwirtschaften und dann, wenn die Profitaussichten gut sind - was erst einmal Spekulation ist -, an große Unternehmen weiterverkauft werden. Damit sind Start-ups eben keine gute Adresse für nachhaltiges Wirtschaften, sondern sie sind vor allen Dingen für Investoren und Wagniskapitalgeber interessant. „Venture Capital“ und „Business Angels“ sind entsprechende Stichworte in diesem Zusammenhang.\n\nDie Investoren und Wagniskapitalgeber sollen vor allen Dingen dadurch angelockt werden - neben den Profitaussichten -, dass sie ihre Verluste mit späteren Gewinnen verrechnen können. Damit müssen sie weniger Gewinne versteuern, und damit fällt auch die Körperschaftsteuer geringer aus.\n\nNach derzeitigem Rechtsstand können noch nicht steuerlich genutzte Verluste rasch verfallen. Das wurde gerade schon gesagt. Bei einer Übertragung von 25 Prozent der Anteile geht der Verlust anteilig unter. Bei über 50 Prozent der Anteile kommt es dann zum vollständigen Untergang der vorhandenen Verluste. Diese können dem Finanzamt gegenüber nicht mehr geltend gemacht werden, wenn sich die Anteilseignerstruktur verändert. Das geschieht häufiger, weil man frisches Kapital für ein Start-up anlocken und anwerben möchte. Diese Regelung macht Sinn. Es sollen nämlich genau solche Spekulationen mit Unternehmen, die aufgrund ihrer Verluste für Investoren attraktiv werden, verhindert werden.\n\nBei den Start-ups ist es so, dass Verluste aus den Vorjahren nicht berücksichtigt werden können, wenn ein Wagniskapitalgeber in einem bestimmten Umfang einsteigt und sich damit die Anteilseignerstruktur bedeutsam ändert. Damit sind die Start-ups uninteressanter für solche Kapitalgeber.\n\nZukünftig sollen unabhängig von dieser Anteilseignerstruktur Verluste fortgeschrieben werden können, wenn ein - das ist die Einschränkung - seit mindestens drei Jahren bestehender Geschäftsbetrieb erhalten bleibt und eine anderweitige Nutzung ausgeschlossen ist.\n\nDer Wermutstropfen dabei ist nämlich, dass die Klauseln „bestehender Geschäftsbetrieb“ und „Ausschluss der anderweitigen Nutzung“ kaum werden verhindern können, dass Betriebe allein wegen ihrer steuerlichen Verlustverrechnung ausgeschlachtet werden.\n\nAus meiner Sicht gestaltet sich genau diese Abgrenzung, was ein bestehender Geschäftsbetrieb ist, sehr schwierig. Aus linker Sicht muss hierbei gründlich nachgebessert werden.\n\nWir haben es nicht mit einer zielgenauen Förderung von Start-ups zu tun. Denn diese neuen Regelungen gelten auch für Investitionen in bereits etablierte Unternehmen, die jetzt von der Verlustverrechnung und dem Steuersparmodell profitieren. Das hat das Finanzministerium unumwunden in der Antwort auf eine Frage zugegeben, die ich vor einer Woche erhalten habe. Es gibt eine gegen Missbrauch gerichtete Beschränkung der Verlustverrechnung bei Unternehmenserwerben gegen sogenannte Mantelverkäufe. Diese untergraben Sie mit diesem Gesetzesvorhaben selbst. Das ist im Prinzip ein Care-Paket für Geldhaie und Zocker.\n\nIch will ganz klar sagen: Es sind Steuermindereinnahmen oder -verluste in Höhe von 600 Millionen Euro jährlich. Allein der kommunalen Familie werden damit 235 Millionen Euro aus dem Säckel gezogen. Das machen wir von der Linken nicht mit.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, Sie wollen mit diesem Gesetzentwurf die Start-up- und Wagniskapitalszene fördern. Aber ebenso fördern Sie damit größere Unternehmen. Das ist tatsächlich mal wieder ein Kniefall vor der Lobby.\n\nDas Tragische ist, dass Sie eigentlich jahrelang bei den wichtigsten Start-ups in der Bundesrepublik versagen, nämlich bei den Kindern. Gerade einmal schlappe 2 Euro mehr Kindergeld soll es geben. Wagniskapitalgeber werden gleichzeitig mit Millionenbeträgen gepampert.\n\nDas ist die falsche Prioritätensetzung. Wir Linke haben einen umfassenden Aktionsplan gegen Kinderarmut eingebracht, um Steuereinnahmen sozial gerechter zu verteilen. Das wäre der richtige Ansatzpunkt, anstatt weiterhin Lobbyismuspolitik zu betreiben.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13095,wolfgang-schauble,\"Herr Präsident! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Bundesregierung hat heute mit dem Gesetzentwurf zur Änderung des Grundgesetzes und - das will ich gleich hinzufügen - mit einem Gesetzentwurf zur Neuregelung des bundesstaatlichen Finanzausgleichssystems ab dem Jahr 2020 umgesetzt, was wir nach langen Verhandlungen zwischen den Regierungen von Bund und Ländern über die Neugestaltung der Finanzbeziehungen im bundesstaatlichen System am 14. Oktober vereinbart haben.\n\nIm Wesentlichen beinhalten die vorgeschlagenen Änderungen des Grundgesetzes und die dazu entsprechend parallel notwendigen einfachgesetzlichen Regelungen, dass das bundesstaatliche Finanzausgleichssystem ein Stück weit umgestellt wird. Der Umsatzsteuervorabausgleich entfällt durch die vorgeschlagene Änderung des Artikels 107. Zugleich erfolgt die Verteilung des Länderanteils an der Umsatzsteuer grundsätzlich nach der Einwohnerzahl der Länder, aber modifiziert durch Zu- und Abschläge zum angemessenen Ausgleich der Unterschiede in der Finanzkraft.\n\nDarüber hinaus werden Sondertatbestände für die Einbeziehung der Einnahmen aus der bergrechtlichen Förderabgabe bei der Ermittlung der Finanzkraft sowie für die Gewährung neuer Zuweisungen des Bundes geregelt. Weiterhin schlagen wir vor, durch die Änderung des Artikels 125c die verfassungsrechtlichen Voraussetzungen für eine Fortführung der Finanzhilfen des Bundes für Seehafenlasten und auch für die besonderen Programme nach § 6 Absatz 1 des Gemeindeverkehrsfinanzierungsgesetzes zu schaffen.\n\nDarüber hinaus schlagen wir mit dem Gesetzentwurf vor, durch eine Änderung des Artikels 143d die Möglichkeit zu eröffnen, den Ländern Saarland und Freie Hansestadt Bremen angesichts ihrer schwierigen Haushaltssituation Sanierungshilfen des Bundes zu gewähren, damit sie zukünftig in die Lage versetzt werden, die Vorgaben des Artikels 109 Absatz 3 zur Kreditaufnahme eigenständig einzuhalten. Die Länder ergreifen in diesem Zusammenhang Maßnahmen zum Abbau der übermäßigen Verschuldung sowie zur Stärkung der Wirtschafts- und Finanzkraft. Die Einhaltung dieser Maßnahmen durch die Länder wird einfachgesetzlich geregelt. Dies soll durch die Bundesregierung überwacht werden.\n\nIch füge die Bemerkung hinzu, dass bisher diese beiden Haushaltsnotlagenländer Konsolidierungshilfen zur Hälfte jeweils vom Bund und den Ländern bekommen. Das gesamtstaatliche System wird in Zukunft, ab 1. Januar 2020, dahin gehend geändert, dass nur der Bund in voller Höhe die Sanierungshilfen - so heißen sie in Zukunft - für die beiden Länder bezahlen wird.\n\nDie Kosten für den Bund aus diesen und einer Reihe von weiteren Maßnahmen, die ich wegen der Begrenztheit der zur Verfügung stehenden Zeit nicht alle vortragen kann, belaufen sich ab 2020 auf 9,7 Milliarden Euro. Diese Kosten werden im Laufe der Jahre ansteigen. Sie haben vielleicht verfolgt, dass schon nach der jüngsten Steuerschätzung, die am 14. Oktober 2016 angenommene Größenordnung von etwa 9,5 Milliarden Euro sich auf 9,7 Milliarden Euro in 2020 erhöht hat. Dieser Prozess wird sich, je nachdem, wie sich die Steuereinnahmen von Bund und Ländern in den nächsten Jahren entwickeln, fortsetzen.\n\nWir haben im gesamtstaatlichen Bereich einige strukturelle Verbesserungen vereinbart. Das bedeutet, dass die Bundesregierung für den Bund Gesetzentwürfe in den Bundestag einbringt, die dann anschließend auch der Zustimmung des Bundesrates bedürfen. Dazu gehört, dass wir die Verwaltung der Bundesautobahnen, die in Zukunft auch so heißen sollen - heute heißen sie im Grundgesetz noch „Reichsautobahnen“ -, auf den Bund übertragen und dass der Bund dazu eine Gesellschaft privaten Rechts gründen kann, die allerdings im vollständigen Eigentum des Bundes bleibt. Auch dies soll im Grundgesetz festgeschrieben werden.\n\nWir haben mit den Ländern vereinbart, dass wir dem Gesetzgeber vorschlagen, dass wir durch eine in Artikel 91c Grundgesetz einzufügende Gesetzgebungskompetenz die Einrichtung eines verbindlichen übergreifenden Portalverbundes ermöglichen. Das bedeutet, dass alle Nutzer - alle Bürgerinnen und Bürger und auch sonstige Personen, also auch Nichtstaatsangehörige der Bundesrepublik Deutschland - einfach und sicher online auf die Verwaltungsleistungen von Bund und Ländern zugreifen können. Dazu braucht der Bund eine entsprechende Gesetzgebungsbefugnis. Wir wollen auch für den Vollzug der Steuergesetze, was die Vereinbarung einer einheitlichen Software für die Steuerverwaltungen der Länder anbetrifft, dem Bund eine Kompetenz verschaffen.\n\nIm Übrigen soll in Zukunft bei der Auslegung von Fachfragen durch die Finanzministerien von Bund und Ländern der Bund ein Weisungsrecht in allgemeinen fachlichen Fragen haben, dem nur mit einer Mehrheit von zwei Dritteln der Länder widersprochen werden kann; bisher reicht ein Anteil von 50 Prozent für den Widerspruch aus.\n\nDem Bundesrechnungshof soll die Kompetenz übertragen werden, die Verwendung der Bundesmittel bei Mischfinanzierungen im Benehmen - ich lege Wert auf die Betonung des Wortes „Benehmen“; es heißt nicht „im Einvernehmen“ - mit den Rechnungshöfen der Länder zu überprüfen. Der Stabilitätsrat soll Befugnisse bekommen, in Zukunft die Einhaltung der Schuldenbremse, die im Grundgesetz geregelt ist, auch in den einzelnen Ländern zu überwachen.\n\nDas sind einige der grundlegenden Veränderungen im Bund-Länder-Verhältnis, bezüglich derer wir mit den Regierungschefs der Länder verabredet haben, dass wir sie in die Gesetzgebung einbringen. Die entsprechenden Gesetzentwürfe hat das Kabinett heute beschlossen.\n\nFrau Kollegin Hajduk, das Ergebnis der Gespräche zwischen Bund und Ländern über die notwendige Neugestaltung der Finanzbeziehungen im bundesstaatlichen Bereich ist nach langwierigen intensiven Verhandlungen zustande gekommen. Dieses einvernehmlich erzielte Ergebnis setzen die Gesetzentwürfe um, die die Bundesregierung heute beschlossen hat.\n\nIch habe gesagt: Die bisherigen Konsolidierungshilfen für die Haushaltsnotlagenländer werden durch Sanierungshilfen ersetzt, die zu zahlen die Länder in dieser Vereinbarung großzügig ausschließlich dem Bund überlassen haben.\n\n- Ja, so war es. Ich habe auch von Ministerpräsidenten gehört, dass es eine Stärkung der Solidarität der Länder sei, dass sie gemeinsam den Bund auffordern, das in der Zukunft zu leisten. - Ich gebe das so wieder.\n\nDarüber hinaus ist es natürlich so: Die Gemeinschaftssteuern - die großen Steuerblöcke sind die Einkommensteuer, die Körperschaftsteuer und die Mehrwertsteuer - stehen nach dem Grundgesetz Bund und Ländern zu. Wie sie verteilt werden, ist nun nicht eine Frage des Gebens und Nehmens, sondern eine grundsätzliche Frage der Gestaltung der bundesstaatlichen Finanzbeziehungen. Sie wissen, dass das Grundgesetz den Bundesländern eine zentrale Bedeutung beimisst. Das war eine Grundentscheidung schon im Parlamentarischen Rat. Das unterliegt der sogenannten Ewigkeitsgarantie des Artikels 79 Absatz 3. Die Staatlichkeit ist nach dem Grundgesetz zwischen Bund und Ländern aufgeteilt, und dem entspricht diese Regelung.\n\nFrau Kollegin, es wird die unterschiedliche Finanzkraft der Länder durch Zu- und Abschläge bei der Verteilung der Umsatzsteuer berücksichtigt. Wir haben Kriterien für die Bemessung der Finanzkraft der Länder. Dabei wird in Zukunft stärker als im bisherigen System auch die kommunale Finanzkraft berücksichtigt. Sie wird im jetzigen System, wenn ich es richtig im Kopf habe, mit 66 Prozent oder 67 Prozent berücksichtigt, in Zukunft mit 75 Prozent. Das nicht ganz einfache, aber auch schon jetzt nicht ganz einfache System der Verteilung - Umsatzsteuervorwegausgleich, Bundesergänzungszuweisungen und Sonderbedarfs-Bundesergänzungszuweisungen - wird ein Stück weit komplettiert dadurch, dass das im Grundgesetz geregelt und damit insbesondere für finanzschwache Gemeinden festgeschrieben wird.\n\nHerr Kollege Kindler, nach dem bisherigen Stand der Gespräche auch innerhalb der Bundesregierung ist die Ausgestaltung der Gesellschaft so, dass sie das Kriterium der Staatsferne nicht erfüllt, sodass sie nicht die Möglichkeit zur Aufnahme von Krediten hat.\n\nHerr Kollege Schipanski, der Bundestagspräsident hat zu Recht darauf hingewiesen, dass der Regelungsgehalt beider Gesetzentwürfe so umfassend ist, dass er in fünf Minuten nicht darzustellen ist. Deswegen bitte ich um Nachsicht, dass ich die vorgeschlagene Ergänzung in Form von Artikel 104c nicht erwähnt habe.\n\nWir haben Anfang der Legislaturperiode im Deutschen Bundestag einen Fonds für Investitionshilfen des Bundes für finanzschwache Gemeinden beschlossen. In dem entsprechenden Gesetz haben wir auch einen Schlüssel für die Verteilung vereinbart. Die Mittel müssen nach der Struktur des Grundgesetzes, wie ich auf die Frage von Frau Kollegin Hajduk bereits erwähnt habe, über die Länder verteilt werden. Wir haben in der Vereinbarung mit den Ministerpräsidenten am 14. Oktober dieses Jahres gesagt, dass wir die Verteilung der Mittel aus dem Fonds nach dem bisherigen Schlüssel vornehmen wollen. Aber das ist etwas, was wir in dem Begleitgesetz, zu dem jetzt der Entwurf vorliegt, regeln müssen.\n\nEs gibt ja das Struck’sche Gesetz, über das wir auch bei den Haushaltsberatungen im November gesprochen haben. Das ist Sache der Länder. Einige Länder, nämlich die Stadtstaaten, sind mit dem bisherigen Schlüssel für die Verteilung schon deswegen nicht einverstanden, weil sie keine Kassenkredite haben, die bei der Ermittlung der Finanzschwäche eine Rolle spielen. Anderen geht es nicht nur um die Verteilung auf die Länder, sondern sie möchten auch sichergestellt haben, dass das Geld in den Ländern wirklich finanzschwachen Gemeinden zugutekommt, was allerdings aufgrund der Struktur des Grundgesetzes nicht ganz einfach sicherzustellen ist.\n\nWenn Sie zwei Fragen gestellt hätten, würde die rote Lampe jetzt nicht leuchten. Zu der Zweckerweiterung müssten Sie also eine weitere Frage stellen.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nDer Eigenanteil der Gemeinden ist so gering, dass er kein Hindernis für die Inanspruchnahme dieser Mittel ist. Das haben wir schon bei der bisherigen Bereitstellung der 3,5 Milliarden Euro zu Beginn der Legislaturperiode gesehen. Wir mussten allerdings die Laufzeit des Fonds verlängern, weil die Mittel nicht schnell genug abgerufen worden sind. Das hat damit zu tun, dass der Bund ohne die vorgeschlagene Änderung oder Ergänzung des Grundgesetzes Finanzhilfen nur für Zwecke geben darf, für die der Bund eine Förderkompetenz hat. Deswegen schlagen wir jetzt vor, dass Mittel generell für die Bildungsinfrastruktur in einer finanzschwachen Kommune bereitgestellt werden können. Insofern ist das sicherlich eine Hilfe für finanzschwache Kommunen, um Bundeshilfen gezielt geben zu können.\n\nWir hatten bei den Gesprächen zwischen Bund und Ländern von vornherein nicht die Absicht - weder die Bundesregierung noch die Regierungschefinnen und \u001echefs der Länder -, die grundsätzliche föderale Struktur, wie sie im Grundgesetz festgelegt ist, abzuschaffen. Ich will in diesem Zusammenhang darauf aufmerksam machen, dass der Ministerpräsident des Landes Baden-Württemberg - ich bin Baden-Württemberger, gehöre aber nicht derselben Partei wie Herr Kretschmann an -\n\neinen ausdrücklichen Vorbehalt gegen diese Bestimmung geäußert hat. Er hat gesagt, eigentlich sei die Zuständigkeit der Länder in der Bildungspolitik ein Punkt, an dem er überhaupt keine Einschränkungen machen möchte.\n\nIch habe den Vorschlag gemacht, weil ich der Auffassung bin, dass es richtig ist, dass wir finanzschwachen Gemeinden mit Investitionsmitteln helfen. Die enge Zweckbegrenzung, die wir bisher im Programm hatten, wird ein Stück weit erweitert, zum Beispiel dass man nicht nur Wärmedämmung in Schulen machen kann, sondern auch andere Sanierungsmaßnahmen durchführen kann. Das scheint mir richtig, um das Verständnis der betroffenen Bürger für die Rationalität unserer Entscheidungen zu gewinnen.\n\nHerr Kollege Troost, wenn ich mich recht erinnere, habe ich dem Kollegen Kindler auf die Frage, auf die Sie Bezug nehmen, geantwortet, dass eine solche Kreditermächtigung nach dem derzeitigen Stand der Gespräche zwischen den Ressorts nicht vorgesehen ist.\n\nFrau Kollegin, am 14. Oktober haben die Regierungschefinnen und -chefs von Bund und Ländern einvernehmlich vereinbart, dass bei einem solchen Unterhaltsvorschussgesetz, das von der Bundesregierung, insbesondere von der dafür zuständigen Frau Kollegin Schwesig, vorgeschlagen wird und von der Bundesregierung insgesamt gemacht werden soll, die Finanzierung so bleiben soll, wie sie ist. Der Bund hat ausdrücklich zugesagt, dass darüber hinaus die Finanzierung in der Zuständigkeit der Länder verbleibt.\n\nEs gibt also kein Geschachere, sondern es gibt den Versuch der Länder, in Abstimmung mit der Bundesregierung über diesen Punkt zu reden. Deshalb haben wir eine Arbeitsgruppe vereinbart. Wir bringen dieses Gesetz, wie es den Vorstellungen der Bundesregierung entspricht, in dem Begleitgesetz ein und haben vereinbart, dass bis zur ersten Lesung im Bundestag - bei Regierungsentwürfen gibt es eine Stellungnahme des Bundesrates und eine Gegenäußerung der Bundesregierung - weitere Gespräche geführt werden sollen, um sich über die Vorstellungen der Länder in Bezug auf das Inkrafttreten, die Finanzierungslasten und dergleichen auszutauschen. Aber den Vorwurf, dass es da ein Geschachere gibt, kann ich namens der Bundesregierung nicht akzeptieren.\n\nHerr Kollege, ich beziehe mich ein wenig auf die Frage Ihrer Kollegin und meine Antwort darauf. Wir hatten nicht die Absicht, das Grundgesetz grundsätzlich neu zu gestalten. Ich weise darauf hin, dass wir, selbst wenn wir die Absicht gehabt hätten, durch Artikel 79 Absatz 3 in unserer Gestaltungskraft sehr eingeschränkt gewesen wären. Darüber hinaus wiederhole ich den Hinweis des baden-württembergischen Ministerpräsidenten - er ist nicht in meiner Partei, aber ich bin Baden-Württemberger -, der gesagt hat, die Bildungspolitik sei tabu.\n\nWir wollen nicht das Kooperationsverbot aufheben. Wir wollen lediglich die Zwecksetzung der Finanzhilfen des Bundes für Investitionen finanzschwacher Gemeinden in diesen drei Jahren um Maßnahmen der Bildungsinfrastruktur ergänzen. Wenn ich die Tagesordnung des Bundestages richtig im Kopf habe, soll morgen die erste Lesung des Nachtragshaushalts sein, mit dem wir die Mittel von 3,5 auf 7 Milliarden Euro aufstocken wollen.\n\nFrau Kollegin, die vorgeschlagene Änderung des Artikels 90 soll die Verwaltung der Bundesautobahnen auf die Bundesverwaltung überführen; das ist der Regelungsgehalt. Darüber hinaus soll der Bund sich dazu einer Gesellschaft privaten Rechts bedienen können. Ob sich der Bund einer solchen Gesellschaft privaten Rechts bedient oder nicht, ist nicht Gegenstand der Grundgesetzänderung, sondern der einfachgesetzlichen Gestaltung.\n\nIn dem Begleitgesetz schlagen wir vonseiten der Bundesregierung in der Tat vor, eine solche einfachgesetzliche Regelung zu treffen und eine Gesellschaft privaten Rechts zu gründen, weil der dafür zuständige Bundesminister für Verkehr und digitale Infrastruktur der Überzeugung ist, dass damit - durch die Überführung in Bundesverwaltung und durch die Schaffung einer Gesellschaft privaten Rechts - Planung, Bau und Betrieb der Bundesautobahnen effizienter gestaltet werden können, als es heute der Fall ist. Sie wissen aus der Haushaltsdebatte, dass wir keine weiteren baureifen Projekte für Bundesautobahnen haben; sie sind alle mit Mitteln belegt. Da wir weiterhin einen großen Sanierungsbedarf haben - ich kann allerdings die Zahlen, die genannt worden sind, nicht bestätigen -, muss es irgendwo im Vollzug ein Problem geben.\n\nWir haben heute im Kabinett einen entsprechenden Gesetzentwurf beschlossen. Jetzt vertrauen wir auf die gesetzgebenden Körperschaften, und das sind Bundestag und Bundesrat.\n\nIn der Endphase der Verhandlungen über die Neugestaltung der Bund-Länder-Finanzbeziehungen hat dieses Thema keine Rolle gespielt; in der Anfangsphase der Gespräche in dieser Legislaturperiode sehr wohl. Sie wissen, dass wir uns in der Großen Koalition dafür entschieden haben, den Solidaritätszuschlag nicht ganz oder teilweise in die Gemeinschaftsteuern, auf die er erhoben wird, einzubeziehen. Daraus folgt, dass irgendwann - man kann darüber streiten, wie schnell - die verfassungsrechtliche Grundlage für diese Sonderabgabe des Bundes obsolet wird. Darüber gibt es unterschiedliche Vorstellungen. Meine persönliche Meinung ist, dass wir den Solidaritätszuschlag, beginnend ab 2020, in Schritten abbauen sollten, aber das ist nicht die Position der Bundesregierung. Über die unterschiedlichen Vorstellungen werden die Wählerinnen und Wähler im kommenden Jahr entscheiden. Nach der nächsten Bundestagswahl wird es sicher eine neue Bundesregierung geben.\n\nDie von uns vorgeschlagene Möglichkeit einer grundgesetzlichen Ergänzung durch Artikel 104c - Finanzhilfen des Bundes für finanzschwache Gemeinden - ermöglicht dem Bund keine weiter gehenden Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten in der Bildungspolitik. Sie ist Gegenstand der grundgesetzlichen und sonstigen Regelungen zwischen Bund und Ländern und wird dadurch nicht verändert.\n\nFrau Kollegin, wenn ich es richtig in Erinnerung habe, ist im Rahmen der Förderalismusreformen I und II vereinbart worden, dass die Zuständigkeit für den sozialen Wohnungsbau schrittweise auf die Länder übergeht. Für die Übergangszeit hat der Bund Mittel gewährt, wobei der Bund keinerlei Kontrolle über die Verwendung dieser Mittel hat. Der Kollege Rehberg hat in den Haushaltsdebatten gelegentlich kritisch angemerkt, dass man nicht wisse, ob die Mittel von den Ländern auch tatsächlich für den sozialen Wohnungsbau verwendet worden seien. Es gibt wenig Anhaltspunkte dafür, dass das in allen Ländern so gewesen ist.\n\nIm Zuge der starken Zuwanderung im vergangenen Jahr haben wir gleichwohl die Mittel, die in den nächsten Jahren hierfür zur Verfügung gestellt werden, noch einmal deutlich erhöht. Aber es gibt keinen Vorschlag, eine Zuständigkeit des Bundes für die Finanzierung des sozialen Wohnungsbaus ab dem 1. Januar 2020 im Grundgesetz festzuschreiben.\n\nJedenfalls enthalten die Gesetzentwürfe, die wir heute im Kabinett beschlossen haben, keine Einschränkung der Möglichkeiten, Verkehrsinfrastrukturprojekte in öffentlich-privaten Partnerschaftsprojekten umzusetzen. Das machen wir ja auch bisher. Diese Möglichkeiten werden in der Zukunft nicht eingeschränkt. Der Gesetzentwurf sagt, die Verwaltung der Bundesautobahnen kann in eine Gesellschaft privaten Rechts überführt werden; aber er regelt auch, dass sie im 100-prozentigen Eigentum des Bundes verbleibt. Damit ist aber nicht ausgeschlossen, dass sich diese Gesellschaft, wenn sie eingeführt wird, oder ansonsten die Verwaltung des Bundes zur Finanzierung von einzelnen Projekten des Instruments der öffentlich-privaten Partnerschaften bedienen kann.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ich glaube, der vorgeschlagene Artikel 104c trifft dazu keine Aussage. Das ist eine Frage des Begleitgesetzes. Da bin ich im Moment überfordert. Da kann ich Ihnen im Moment keine verlässliche Antwort geben. Außerdem ist das Begleitgesetz noch nicht verabschiedet, sondern es wird erst noch beraten.\n\nDieser Fonds, durch den finanzschwache Gemeinden Investitionshilfen des Bundes erhalten, den wir Anfang der Legislaturperiode - ich weiß nicht mehr den genauen Zeitpunkt, aber es war im ersten Teil der Legislaturperiode - eingerichtet haben und den wir jetzt durch den Nachtragshaushalt aufstocken wollen, war in der Tat von vornherein auf den Zeitraum bis zum Inkrafttreten der Neuregelungen des Bund-Länder-Finanzverhältnisses angelegt. Denn ab 1. Januar 2020 erhalten die Länder 9,7 Milliarden Euro mehr - und dies ansteigend - aus der Verteilung der Gesamtsteuereinnahmen von Bund, Ländern und Kommunen. Deswegen ist dieser Fonds ausdrücklich für diese Übergangszeit bis zum Inkrafttreten der Neuregelung ausgestaltet. Deswegen sind die 7 Milliarden Euro, wenn der Bundestag den Nachtragshaushalt so beschließen sollte, wie ihn die Bundesregierung vorgeschlagen hat, auf die Zeit bis Ende 2019 befristet.\n\nHerr Kollege Troost, erstens konnte ich an der Sitzung des Finanzausschusses nicht teilnehmen. Ich bedaure dies.\n\nZweitens habe ich solche Einwendungen aus der CDU/CSU-Fraktion in der Sitzung des Plenums seit 13 Uhr nicht vernehmen können.\n\nDrittens gilt das Struck’sche Gesetz. Die Bundesregierung hat heute beschlossen, einen Gesetzentwurf einzubringen. Dazu wird es jetzt eine Stellungnahme des Bundesrates geben und dann eine Gegenäußerung der Bundesregierung. Dann bekommt der Bundestag den Gesetzentwurf und ist Herr des Verfahrens.\n\nIch gehöre diesem Deutschen Bundestag übrigens schon länger an als die meisten anderen Anwesenden, um nicht zu sagen, als alle anderen Anwesenden.\n\nIch glaube, Frau Kollegin, der Vergleich der beiden Bereiche ist irrig. Was die Steuerverwaltung anbetrifft, hat die Bundesseite mit viel Überzeugungskraft, aber mit wenig Hoffnung für eine grundlegende Änderung argumentiert. Denn die Lage ist so: Sie werden vielleicht wissen - wenn nicht, erfahren Sie es jetzt in diesem Augenblick -, dass es schon eine Vorgabe der drei Besatzungsmächte an den Parlamentarischen Rat war, dass es keine einheitliche Bundessteuerverwaltung geben dürfe. Aus diesem Grund sehen die Länder eine eigene Steuerverwaltung als Teil ihrer im Grundgesetz garantierten unabänderlichen Staatlichkeit an. Das wird nicht in allen Ländern gleich gesehen, aber in den großen Ländern mit leistungsstarker Steuerverwaltung wie zum Beispiel dem schon genannten Baden-Württemberg - ich habe der dortigen Steuerverwaltung einmal angehört - wird es so gesehen. Es ist überhaupt nicht verhandlungsfähig. Deshalb ist das Ergebnis so. Es war ein mühsames Ringen, die begrenzten Verbesserungen, die wir jetzt wenigstens für die Software und auch beim Weisungsrecht erreicht haben, zu erzielen. Dagegen gibt es übrigens auch noch Protokollerklärungen, zum Beispiel des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, dass man das nicht akzeptieren will.\n\nNein.\n\n- Ihre Frage war, ob Sie in der Annahme richtigliegen. Die Antwort lautet: Nein.\n\nFrau Kollegin, am Anfang der Überlegungen, die jetzt in diesen Vorschlag einer Grundgesetzänderung gemündet sind, standen unterschiedliche, zum Teil auch weiter gehende Überlegungen. Das ist zutreffend. Sie werden sich vielleicht erinnern, dass der Bundeswirtschaftsminister aufgrund der Vorschläge einer von Professor Fratzscher geleiteten Kommission vor einem Jahr nachdrücklich gefordert hat, man müsse die Möglichkeiten für Investitionen privater Investoren in öffentliche Infrastruktur deutlich verbessern. Davon ist in dem, was wir Ihnen jetzt vorschlagen, nicht mehr die Rede.\n\nDarüber hinaus haben wir, die einzelnen Teilnehmer, sicher über vieles diskutiert. Wir haben übrigens heute in unserer Kabinettssitzung auch den Klimaschutzbericht 2016 beraten. Aber einen unmittelbaren Zusammenhang zwischen der vorgeschlagenen Grundgesetzänderung bezüglich der Verwaltung der Bundesautobahnen und dem Klimaschutzbericht haben wir nicht hergestellt.\n\nHerr Kollege, es gibt zum Kooperationsverbot, das wir im Zuge der Föderalismusreform II, wenn ich dies recht erinnere, in das Grundgesetz eingeführt haben, unterschiedliche Vorstellungen. Das ist weder neu noch irgendetwas sonst. Ich habe dazu auch nicht weiter Kommentare abzugeben. Ich habe auf die Frage meines Kollegen gesagt: Eine Veränderung der Zuständigkeit des Bundes in der Bildungspolitik ist mit der vorgeschlagenen Ergänzung durch Artikel 104c nicht vorgesehen.\n\nNatürlich kann man sagen: Wenn der Bund Finanzhilfen für finanzschwache Gemeinden gibt, dann hat dies immer auch eine Auswirkung. Aber eigentlich ist dies doch für die Länder vielleicht auch eine Ermutigung, sich selber stärker um ihre finanzschwachen Gemeinden zu kümmern. Ich füge hinzu: Das Land Baden-Württemberg - ich bin stolz, ein Badener zu sein - hat relativ wenige finanzschwache Gemeinden. Andere Länder haben mehr.\n\n- Was ist? Haben Sie etwas dagegen?\n\n- Gleich gibt es Ärger.\n\nHerr Kollege Beck, die Bundesregierung hat sich in ihrer Sitzung heute\n\nnicht mit Beschlüssen von Parteitagen - nicht einmal mit solchen der Partei Die Grünen - beschäftigt. Deswegen kann ich Ihnen zur Berichterstattung aus dem Kabinett nur sagen, dass dieses Thema im Zusammenhang mit dem vom Bundeskabinett verabschiedeten Migrationsbericht, den der Bundesinnenminister vorgelegt hat, keine Rolle gespielt hat.\n\nHerr Kollege Ströbele, diese Frage hat in der Kabinettssitzung heute keine Rolle gespielt. Ich kann Ihnen Ihre Frage deswegen nicht beantworten, außer dass ich sage: Das hat keine Rolle gespielt. Nach meiner Kenntnis gibt es für die Unterrichtung des Parlaments über solche Fragen ein spezielles Gremium. Mein Vorschlag ist, dass Sie diese Fragen in diesem Gremium stellen. Dort werden sie von der Bundesregierung sicherlich beantwortet.\n\nHerr Kollege, ich kann Ihnen diese Frage nicht beantworten; denn sie ist im Kabinett heute nicht behandelt worden.\n\nIch bin darüber hinaus für diese Frage nicht zuständig und habe keine Kenntnis. Ob Herr Schröder eine Antwort darauf geben kann und mag, kann ich nicht beurteilen; das ist Sache des Bundestagspräsidenten und des Kollegen Schröder.\"\n13132,ute-finckh-kramer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer oben auf den Tribünen! Ich möchte einige Punkte nennen, die in der bisherigen Debatte noch nicht angesprochen wurden.\n\nImplizit wurde angesprochen, dass Militär keinen Beitrag zur Bekämpfung des Terrorismus leistet. Ich möchte das hier noch einmal ausdrücklich und explizit sagen. Alle Versuche, sei es durch Russland in Tschetschenien, sei es durch die USA in Afghanistan, sei es durch die türkische Regierung im Kurdengebiet, mit militärischen Mitteln Terrorismus zu bekämpfen, sind krachend gescheitert. Ich glaube, darüber sollten wir uns alle im Klaren sein.\n\nDer Kampf gegen Terrorismus hat zwei Teile, die funktionieren können: Das eine ist die Prävention, die sehr vielseitig aussehen kann. Herr Hardt hat einen Bereich genannt, nämlich dass man gegen soziale Ungerechtigkeiten in den Ländern, wo Terrorismus im Augenblick ein besonders dringendes Problem ist, vorgehen sollte. Es gibt aber auch andere präventive Maßnahmen, zum Beispiel Maßnahmen gegen die Radikalisierung von Menschen im eigenen Land, nicht nur als Dschihadisten. Denken wir an den Anschlag von Utoya in Norwegen. Der Terrorist hatte nichts mit internationalem Dschihadismus zu tun. Es war keine diktatorische Regierung, die ihn zum Terroristen gemacht hat, sondern eine verquere Weltsicht. Die Prävention, die es im eigenen Land geben sollte, die es auch in demokratischen Ländern geben muss, um zu verhindern, dass Menschen sich radikalisieren, sei es rechtsextremistisch, sei es dschihadistisch, sei es auf andere Weise gewaltbereit, das ist etwas, was wir ernst nehmen sollten und wo wir uns auch mit anderen Ländern austauschen sollten.\n\nInnerhalb der OSZE ist bei dem Abschlusstreffen der deutschen Präsidentschaft in Hamburg genau dieses Thema auf die Tagesordnung gesetzt worden. Mehrere Staaten, von denen wir hier gesprochen haben - Russland und die Türkei -, sind in derzeitigem Zustand keine demokratischen Länder, aber sie haben trotzdem ein Interesse daran, dass sich Menschen in ihrem Land nicht radikalisieren und Terroranschläge machen, die so schrecklich sind wie der am Wochenende in Istanbul.\n\nDeswegen kann es eine Zusammenarbeit geben, indem wir unsere Erfahrungen mit polizeilichen Maßnahmen, Rechtsstaatlichkeit und Prävention, die die entscheidenden Mittel gegen Terrorismus sind, weitergeben können. Wir haben auch im eigenen Land Erfahrungen mit Terrorismus gemacht, nicht nur mit Dschihadisten, die nach Syrien ausgereist sind. Wir haben vor Jahrzehnten - ich bin alt genug, um das als Studentin miterlebt zu haben - die Anschläge der RAF gehabt. Wir hatten im Jahr 1980 den Oktoberfestanschlag. Wir hatten den NSU, bei dem es lange gedauert hat, trotz Kontakte der Geheimdienste in das Umfeld des NSU, bis entdeckt wurde, dass eine Reihe von scheinbar isolierten Mordanschlägen eine terroristische Serie war. Insofern gibt es einiges, was wir an Erfahrungen beisteuern können.\n\nWenn so schreckliche Ereignisse wie in Ägypten, in Nigeria, in Somalia, in der Türkei dazu führen, dass ein Raum entsteht, in dem wir argumentieren können, warum Rechtsstaatlichkeit, warum eine an den Interessen der Bevölkerung und nicht der Machterhaltung eines Staates orientierte Polizei so wichtig ist, dann besteht in allem Unglück, in aller Trauer, in allem Mitgefühl mit den Opfern und ihren Angehörigen eine winzige Chance, um zu verhindern, dass es in Zukunft zu genauso viel oder noch mehr schrecklichen Anschlägen kommt.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n2963,tobias-lindner,\"Geschätzte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Wahrlich, wir diskutieren hier einen besonderen Etat. Der Kollege Roland Claus sprach von Milde der Opposition. Keine Sorge: Ich werde sparsam damit umgehen.\n\nDer Minister und Sie, Frau Winkelmeier-Becker, haben erwähnt, dass wir über den mit Abstand kleinsten Etat eines Ministeriums in der Bundesregierung reden. Ich will den Zuschauerinnen und Zuschauern ein illus-tratives Beispiel geben: Allein die Kürzung, die die Große Koalition im letzten Haushalt in der Nacht der Bereinigungssitzung an den Mitteln für das Verteidigungsressort vorgenommen hat - das waren 400 Millionen Euro -, entspricht fast den Ausgaben, die Heiko Maas im Jahr 2015 tätigen können soll, nämlich 414 Millionen Euro. Man könnte versucht sein, zu denken, wir würden hier über einen Geschäftsbereich der Bundesregierung reden, der unbedeutend wäre.\n\nIn dieser Debatte - das will ich auch als Hauptberichterstatter für diesen Etat sagen - ist bereits deutlich geworden: Es geht nicht nur um Geld. Wir alle - egal von welcher Fraktion - haben Interesse an einem funktionierenden Justizsystem. Natürlich braucht es hier vor allem kluge und gut gemachte Regeln. Ich will der Koalition an einer Stelle entgegenkommen: Man braucht im Bereich des Verbraucherschutzes sogar kluge Regeln und Normen.\n\nJetzt kommt das große Aber. In einem Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz, dessen Teile erst noch zusammenwachsen müssen, ist Geld vielleicht nicht alles, aber, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, da geht ohne Geld manchmal auch nichts. Da reicht es nicht aus, dass nur ein Drittel der Mittel für den Verbraucherschutz bei dem Neuzuschnitt der Ministerien in das BMJV gelangt ist. Der Verbraucherschutz ist, wie auch im Haushalt 2014, leider immer noch chronisch unterfinanziert.\n\nIch will dies an zwei Themen deutlich machen. Die Marktwächter wurden bereits angesprochen. Im letzten Haushalt hat die Koalition Mittel für eine Anschubfinanzierung für einen Marktwächter im Bereich des Finanzmarkts in Höhe von 2,5 Millionen Euro eingestellt. Sie haben sich in Ihrem Koalitionsvertrag vorgenommen, Marktwächter für den Finanzmarkt und für die digitale Welt zu schaffen. Damit Sie mich richtig verstehen: Das ist auch bitter notwendig.\n\nWenn wir eine Lehre aus der Finanzkrise ziehen sollten, dann ist es, dass wir die Lobby der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher stärken müssen. Heute Morgen sprach Wolfgang Schäuble über die Industrie 4.0, über die Digitalisierung unserer Wirtschaft und über neue Geschäfts- und Nutzungsmodelle. Wenn wir auch daraus eine Lehre ziehen wollen, dann muss die Lehre heißen, dass die Lobby, die Interessenverbände und die Macht der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher in diesem Bereich unbedingt gestärkt werden müssen.\n\nEs reicht eben nicht aus, wenn Sie die Mittel im Etatansatz nur um 800 000 Euro erhöhen wollen. Der Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband selbst spricht von einem Bedarf für eine Anschubfinanzierung in Höhe von 7 Millionen - und nicht von 3,3 Millionen Euro, die es dann eigentlich wären. Wenn beide Marktwächter dann hoffentlich aktiv sind, kommt mittelfristig ein Finanzbedarf von insgesamt etwa 14 bis 15 Millionen Euro auf uns zu.\n\nBevor die geschätzten Kollegen Gröhler und Rohde mir später entgegnen, dieses Geld sei in Zeiten einer schwarzen Null nur schwer im Einzelplan zu finden, will ich schon jetzt erwidern: Was Sie eben nicht tun können, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Großen Koalition, ist, einen Koalitionsvertrag zu verabschieden und zu sagen: Alle nicht prioritären Vorhaben müssen aus den Einzelplänen finanziert werden. - Dann schneiden Sie die Ministerien neu zu - das können Sie ja tun; es gibt durchaus Gründe dafür, das so zu sehen, wie Sie es sehen -, statten dann die Häuser aber nicht mit den Mitteln aus, die erforderlich sind, um diesen Koalitionsvertrag umsetzen zu können.\n\nNein, ich will es viel deutlicher sagen: Sie haben ein Ministerium geschaffen, auf das Ihr eigener Koalitionsvertrag nicht anwendbar ist, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nIch will einen zweiten Punkt im Bereich des Verbraucherschutzes erwähnen: die institutionelle Förderung. Jetzt steht zwar ein Grüner vor Ihnen, aber ich habe mich in meinem Studium viel mit Ludwig Erhard\n\nund den Vätern der sozialen Marktwirtschaft befasst.\n\nIch habe mich lange gefragt: Was würde wohl Ludwig Erhard in einer Situation wie der heutigen sagen,\n\nin der wir es zunehmend mit Lobbyinteressen, Digitalisierung und Internationalisierung unserer Wirtschaft zu tun haben? - Wenn man in Schriften von Erhard und -Eucken schaut, dann sieht man, dass dort sehr wohl davon gesprochen wird, dass wir mündige Konsumentinnen und Konsumenten brauchen, dass wir das abbauen müssen, was der Fachmann oder die Fachfrau als Informationsasymmetrie bezeichnet.\n\nWenn wir mündige und mächtige Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher brauchen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dann geht es eben nicht, was Sie in Ihrem Haushaltsentwurf bei den Mitteln für den Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband und die Stiftung Warentest vorsehen. Die Mittel für den Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband erhöhen Sie nur in sehr geringem Maße; damit kann man nicht einmal Tarifsteigerungen auffangen. Bei der Stiftung Warentest toppen Sie das noch: Sie setzen nicht nur das, was in Ihrem Koalitionsvertrag auf Seite 125 steht, nämlich dass die Zuwendungen erhöht werden sollen, nicht um - nein, Sie kürzen die Mittel sogar. Das ist ein Widerspruch zu dem, was Sie vor einem Jahr verabredet haben. Da werden wir Grüne Ihnen in den Haushaltsberatungen aufzeigen, was wir anders machen würden und wie wir die institutionelle Förderung der Arbeit für die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher stärken würden.\n\nIch will zum Schluss kommen. Als Hauptberichterstatter freue ich mich auf die Zusammenarbeit mit den Kolleginnen und Kollegen hier im Hause, im Haushaltsausschuss, mit Roland Claus, Dennis Rohde und Klaus-Dieter Gröhler; ich freue mich auf die Zusammenarbeit mit dem Ministerium. Ich hoffe, dass wir am Ende dieser Haushaltsberatungen nicht nur - wie heute - irgendwie fröhlich sind, dass wir einen Haushaltsplan ohne neue Schulden vor uns haben, sondern dass wir in ein paar Wochen auch einen Verbraucherschutz- und Justizetat endberaten werden, der den Herausforderungen der Zeit wirklich gerecht wird und ein wirklicher Etat für den Verbraucherschutz ist.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n953,agnieszka-brugger,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Am 8. Juli 2011 forderte Sigmar Gabriel hier im Plenum in Bezug auf die Panzerlieferungen nach Saudi-Arabien die Vorgängerregierung dazu auf - ich zitiere -, „die Genehmigung zur Ausfuhr entweder zurückzuziehen oder, wenn sie noch nicht endgültig gefallen ist, nicht zu erteilen“.\n\nNoch im Februar 2013 griff Herr Oppermann Schwarz-Gelb massiv an, weil es Saudi-Arabien - auch hier wieder ein Zitat - „total hochrüsten“ wolle und „aus den öffentlichen Protesten gegen Waffenlieferungen in dieses Land nichts gelernt“ habe. Ich würde sagen: Damit haben die beiden völlig recht.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der SPD, lassen Sie diesen schönen Ankündigungen jetzt, wo Sie Teil der Regierung sind, konkrete Taten folgen. Heben Sie den Vorbescheid für den Export von Patrouillenbooten und insbesondere auch den für die Panzerlieferung an das Königreich Saudi-Arabien auf.\n\nIch könnte noch viel mehr Zitate der SPD anführen, die belegen: Eigentlich sind Sie - soll ich besser sagen: waren Sie? - gegen Rüstungsexporte\n\nin Länder, wo Menschenrechte mit Füßen getreten werden.\n\nNun versuchen Sie, sich hinter Schwarz-Gelb zu verstecken, und verweisen auf die in der Vergangenheit getroffenen Beschlüsse. Aber das lassen wir Ihnen nicht durchgehen. Denn jenseits schöner Ankündigungen in Interviews besteht Ihre erste wahrnehmbare Handlung in Regierungsverantwortung bei den Rüstungsexporten darin, dass Sigmar Gabriel federführend und aktiv Hermesbürgschaften für die Lieferung von Patrouillenbooten nach Saudi-Arabien auf den Weg bringt.\n\nStatt dieses von Ihnen kritisierte Geschäft zu stoppen, geben Sie nun also auch noch ganz bewusst die Zustimmung, diesen Deal mit deutschen Steuergeldern durch Hermesbürgschaften abzusichern. Liebe Genossinnen und Genossen, Sie verhalten sich wie ein Fähnchen im Wind.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren von Union und SPD, hören Sie endlich auf, Rüstungsexportpolitik als Wirtschaftspolitik zu betreiben! Denn das ist ein ziemlich kurzsichtiger und riskanter Kurs.\n\nZu den Hauptabnehmern deutscher Waffen gehören neuerdings vor allem die zahlungskräftigen Staaten der Arabischen Halbinsel. Die Kanzlerin bezeichnet diese Länder als strategische Partner, die wir mit deutschen Waffen ertüchtigen müssen. Doch damit rüstet Deutschland eine sicherheitspolitisch höchst instabile Region hoch und heizt die Rüstungsspirale an. Neben dem Risiko, dass diese Waffen für innere Repression eingesetzt werden, wissen wir doch alle auch, dass islamistische Kämpfer von diesen Regimen auf der Arabischen Halbinsel finanziert und ausgerüstet werden, wie zum Beispiel in Syrien und Mali. Sie sehen, meine Damen und Herren: Diese sicherheitspolitische Kurzsichtigkeit von Kanzlerin Merkel ist aus vielen Gründen höchst gefährlich.\n\nAuch die Forderung nach mehr Transparenz und parlamentarischer Beteiligung bei der Kontrolle von Rüstungsexporten müsste den Kolleginnen und Kollegen aus der SPD-Fraktion ebenso wie die Äußerungen zu den Rüstungsexporten nach Saudi-Arabien doch sehr bekannt vorkommen. Denn bis vor ein paar Monaten waren dies noch Ihre eigenen Vorschläge. Aber auch hier sind Sie sehr schnell eingeknickt und haben der Union nachgegeben. Nun wird es aufgrund Ihrer Untätigkeit kein gesondertes Gremium im Bundestag geben, das über Rüstungsexporte unterrichtet wird und die Regierung an dieser Stelle kontrollieren kann.\n\nGerade solche sensiblen und kritischen Entscheidungen wie die Genehmigung von Waffengeschäften muss eine Regierung doch begründen.\n\nSie kann sich dabei nicht hinter den verriegelten Türen des Bundessicherheitsrates verstecken. Es muss endlich Schluss sein mit dieser Geheimniskrämerei. Ich finde, das ist ein unwürdiger Zustand in einer Demokratie, auch im Hinblick auf uns Abgeordnete.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen in der Koalition, halten Sie sich an Ihre eigenen Rüstungsexportrichtlinien, halten Sie sich an Ihre Versprechen und Ihre moralischen Ansprüche! Seien Sie kein Fähnchen im Wind, sondern eine verlässliche Beschützerin der Menschenrechte, egal ob Sie regieren oder ob Sie opponieren!\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n2569,philipp-mißfelder,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Leutert, zu Ihren Einschätzungen zur Europapolitik und zu den Aktivitäten des Auswärtigen Amts möchte ich nur so viel sagen: Die Bundesregierung bemüht sich, beispielsweise den Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienst weiter zu stärken und damit der europäischen Außenpolitik ein Gesicht zu geben. Die Bundesregierung und der Deutsche Bundestag beteiligen sich aktiv an den Bemühungen, die gemeinsame Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion weiter aufrechtzuerhalten.\n\nIch glaube, die Euro-Krise bzw. die Verschuldungskrise in Europa hat gezeigt, dass gerade die Bundesrepublik Deutschland zu Europa steht und mit großen Beträgen dafür einsteht. Gradmesser der Europapolitik ist nicht, wie viele Broschüren zur Europapolitik man druckt, sondern ob man bereit ist, in allen Feldern der Politik Vergemeinschaftungen voranzutreiben, und ob man bereit ist, demokratische Kontrolle zu gewähren, was wir im Deutschen Bundestag tun. Ich glaube, die Zahl, die Sie genannt haben, stimmt nicht ganz.\n\nAls die Amerikaner ihre Idee, den Fokus ihrer Außenpolitik vornehmlich auf Asien zu richten, präsentiert haben, haben sie sich wahrscheinlich nicht träumen lassen, dass dieses Vorhaben - Pivot to Asia - so schnell und so rasant gestoppt würde. Der Arabische Frühling ist nur ein Grund, warum man mit dieser geplanten Neuprogrammierung der amerikanischen Außenpolitik strandete. Auch wir haben, als wir unsere Schwerpunktsetzung vornahmen, sicherlich mit vielen Krisen auf der Welt gerechnet, aber vor zwölf Monaten hätte kaum jemand prognostiziert, dass wir uns heute so intensiv mit der Ukraine beschäftigen müssen. Vor sechs Monaten hätte kaum jemand prognostiziert, dass wir bezüglich des Irak heute nicht über die Förderung staatlicher Strukturen reden, sondern über die Gefahr der Errichtung eines Gottesstaates diskutieren müssen.\n\nDas sind die Fragen, mit denen sich Außenpolitik beschäftigen muss. Deshalb gilt jetzt, da wir den Etat des Auswärtigen Amts beraten, der Dank den vielen Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern, die ihren Dienst im Auswärtigen Amt und im Diplomatischen Korps leisten und die daran beteiligt sind, dass wir als Friedensmacht Deutschland Schwerpunkte setzen. Ich danke allen, die für unser Land ihren Dienst tun, und insbesondere ihren Familien, die häufig über Jahre Entbehrungen hinnehmen, um die Tätigkeit ihres Ehe- bzw. Lebenspartners zu unterstützen. Deshalb gilt mein ganz herzlicher Dank all denjenigen, die ihren Dienst für Deutschland an dieser Stelle tun.\n\nDie Expertise, die wir hier im Haus haben, die Parlamentarier sammeln, die aber auch die uns nahe stehenden Stiftungen und die all diejenigen sammeln, die in der Außenpolitik Deutschlands aktiv sind, reicht bei weitem nicht aus, um Ereignisse zu prognostizieren. Die wechselhaften Ereignisse im Rahmen des Arabischen Frühlings sind nur ein Beispiel dafür. Deshalb finde ich es richtig - der Kollege Karl hat es angesprochen -, dass wir in diesem Bereich weiterhin einen Schwerpunkt, auch einen finanziellen Schwerpunkt setzen, um auf Ereignisse reagieren zu können. Dabei ist zu berücksichtigen, dass die Situation in den einzelnen Ländern sehr unterschiedlich ist.\n\nDeutschland stand der Intervention in Libyen sehr reserviert gegenüber. Sicherlich wäre es besser gewesen, wenn man einen Plan für die Zeit nach Gaddafi gehabt hätte. Gleiches gilt natürlich für die Intervention im Irak. Deshalb ist es besonders wichtig, jetzt nicht so zu tun, als hätte das alles nicht stattgefunden. Vielmehr müssen wir die Länder, die sich im Transformationsprozess befinden oder in denen der Transformationsprozess vollkommen ins Stocken geraten ist, weiterhin besonders unterstützen. Ich finde, die politischen Stiftungen, die aus meiner Sicht eine hervorragende Expertise gesammelt haben und sehr gute Arbeit leisten, werden zu Recht besonders unterstützt.\n\nWas die wechselhaften Ereignisse in der arabischen Welt angeht, möchte ich nur darauf verweisen, dass in der vergangenen Woche der tunesische Premierminister hier war. Trotz aller Schwierigkeiten, die in Ägypten vorhanden sind, und trotz aller Herausforderungen, die wir in Libyen sehen, sollte nicht vergessen werden, dass Tunesien gerade einen sehr großen Fortschritt macht. Das sollten wir an dieser Stelle erwähnen. Wir sollten auch dort genau hinschauen, wo es gut läuft. Das will unsere Fraktion auch tun.\n\nWas den Irak angeht, möchte ich an das anknüpfen, was gerade gesagt worden ist. Ich begrüße es ausdrücklich, dass unser Außenminister, der im Moment wichtige Telefonate führt, mit den Kurden gesprochen hat. Die schlechte Nachricht, die heute aus Bagdad kam, möchte ich sehr stark kritisieren. Maliki weigert sich, eine Einheitsregierung zu bilden. Ich halte es für einen sehr großen Fehler, die Sunniten systematisch von der Macht fernzuhalten und die Kurden systematisch an den Rand zu drängen. Ich glaube, das wird nicht zur Stabilisierung des Landes beitragen, ganz im Gegenteil.\n\nZur Genese dieses Konfliktes muss aktuell gesagt werden: Wir sollten uns vielleicht um die Länder, in denen wir nicht besonders stark diplomatisch und auch nicht durch Militär vertreten sind, intensiver kümmern. Das gilt insbesondere für den Irak. Unsere Fraktion kümmert sich, was die humanitäre Hilfe angeht, um die Binnenflüchtlinge. Es gibt also nicht nur das Engagement von Volker Kauder, der sich vor allem für die Christen in aller Welt einsetzt. Innerhalb des Irak gibt es 2,5 Millionen Binnenflüchtlinge. Es gibt sowohl aus Syrien als auch aus dem Süden des Irak einen Riesenandrang auf Kurdistan. Das zeigt doch, dass dieses Land eventuell vor einer weitaus größeren humanitären Katastrophe steht, als uns die momentanen Kämpfe um einige Ölhochburgen erahnen lassen.\n\nWenn heute überlegt wird, was wir konkret tun können und wo Deutschland mehr Verantwortung zeigen kann, kann man nicht von einer Militarisierung der Außenpolitik sprechen, sondern ich glaube, dass wir den humanitären Beitrag ganz klar in den Mittelpunkt unserer Außenpolitik stellen. Das tun wir auch mit diesem Bundeshaushalt und mit dem, was wir im Etat von Herrn Müller - und zwar jedes Jahr - mobilisieren.\n\nWas die Situation in Kurdistan und im Irak insgesamt angeht, ist es, glaube ich, schon vonnöten, dass sich Deutschland stärker einbringt. Das gilt auch gerade für eines der wichtigsten außenpolitischen Ziele, das wir verfolgen, nämlich für das Existenzrecht des jüdischen Staates Israel aktiv einzutreten.\n\nGerade das, was sich im Unruheherd Mittlerer Osten tut, zeigt uns doch eigentlich, dass von einer Verschiebung des Schwerpunktes unserer Außenpolitik nach Asien überhaupt keine Rede sein kann. Ganz im Gegenteil: Wir werden in Zukunft wahrscheinlich genauso viel Aufmerksamkeit wie in der Vergangenheit - wenn nicht sogar mehr - in die Regionen Nordafrika und Mittlerer Osten investieren müssen. Das wird viele Ressourcen binden, die uns eventuell an anderer Stelle fehlen werden.\n\nIn den letzten Wochen ist häufig gesagt worden, dass sich die europäische Außenpolitik immer nur um einen großen Konflikt kümmern kann. Das bereitet mir natürlich große Sorgen. Ich frage mich: Was sind unsere Kapazitäten? Wie können wir sie am effizientesten einsetzen? Ich glaube, dass in dieser Hinsicht der Haushalt gelungen ist.\n\nHerr Minister, auch die unter Ihrem Vorgänger Guido Westerwelle angestoßenen Organisationsreformen haben das Auswärtige Amt fit gemacht, auf diese Herausforderungen reagieren zu können. Wir als Parlament wollen das Auswärtige Amt dabei unterstützen.\n\nIch komme zum letzten Punkt. Das kleine Zaunkönigtum der Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik ist gerade schon angesprochen worden. Auch ich freue mich darüber, dass es gelungen ist, etwas mehr Geld zu mobilisieren. Es wäre schön, wenn wir es bis zum Herbst schaffen würden, noch deutlich mehr Geld dafür auszugeben.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n6537,gabi-weber,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Kollegen und Kolleginnen! Zunächst eine Feststellung: Ich habe sieben Minuten, um in der Debatte zur Einbringung des Mandats - es wird noch eine abschließende Debatte geben - über ein Mandat zu sprechen, das maximal fünf Soldatinnen und Soldaten umfassen wird.\n\nVerstehen Sie mich nicht falsch: Unsere Rolle und die Rolle des Parlamentes insgesamt sind beim Einsatz bewaffneter deutscher Streitkräfte im Ausland entscheidend, auch wenn es bloß um den Beschluss geht, einen stellvertretenden Befehlshaber inklusive persönlichem Mitarbeiterstab zu entsenden. Allerdings sieht das Parlamentsbeteiligungsgesetz für Fälle wie diesen andere Möglichkeiten vor, nämlich das vereinfachte Zustimmungsverfahren. Das wissen Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Linken, und trotzdem wollten Sie unbedingt über diesen Einsatz debattieren.\n\nAls Unterstützerin unserer Parlamentsarmee bin ich ausdrücklich für eine umfassende Beteiligung des Deutschen Bundestages beim Einsatz der Bundeswehr. -Debatten wie diese relativieren aber aus meiner Sicht andere, sehr viel größere Einsätze der Bundeswehr, was Umfang und Auswirkung betrifft, zum Beispiel in Mali, im Kosovo oder in Afghanistan. Andererseits gibt mir das nun die Möglichkeit, verstärkt über nichtmilitärische Maßnahmen zu sprechen, die Deutschland in Liberia durchführt. Dafür dann doch vorab meinen herzlichen Dank an die Damen und Herren der Linken.\n\n- Danke!\n\nSeit Ende des Bürgerkrieges 2003 unterstützen die Vereinten Nationen Liberia beim Wiederaufbau. UNMIL hat den Auftrag, Zivilpersonen zu schützen, humanitäre Hilfsleistungen zu erleichtern und die Regierung bei der Reform der Justiz- und Sicherheitsinstitutionen zu unterstützen. Die Zahl der UNO-Soldaten und -Soldatinnen reduzierte sich in den vergangenen Jahren von 15 000 auf nun 4 400, dazu 1 400 Polizistinnen und Polizisten. Ein Wermutstropfen an dieser Stelle: Bisher beteiligte sich Deutschland mit immerhin 5 Polizisten. Da würde ich mir eine stärkere Beteiligung unsererseits wünschen. Denn gerade Polizeiarbeit ist in Nachbürgerkriegsländern ein unglaublich wichtiger Beitrag.\n\nEines der größten Hemmnisse bei der Entwicklung des Landes ist die zerstörte Infrastruktur.\n\n- Danke für die Unterstützung an dieser Stelle. - Deutschland fördert besonders den Auf- und Ausbau von Straßen und den Verkehrssektor insgesamt. Mit deutscher Technik und gefördert durch die KfW entsteht zurzeit ein Wasserkraftwerk, das Ende 2016 ans Netz gehen soll und die Stromkosten für die Menschen in Liberia erheblich senken wird. Der nachhaltige und wirtschaftlich günstige Betrieb wird in der Zukunft Mittel freisetzen, die anderenorts für einen weiteren Ausbau der Infrastruktur verwendet werden können. Hier machen wir -sozusagen eine Entwicklungsförderung durch die Hintertür, die diesem Land tatsächlich helfen wird. Dies ist eine gelungene Anschubfinanzierung zur Selbsthilfe.\n\nSeit letztem Jahr richtet sich das Hauptaugenmerk der deutschen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit auf die Bekämpfung der Ebolaepidemie in Liberia und den angrenzenden Staaten Westafrikas. Aufgrund dieser Epidemie ging das Wirtschaftswachstum zurück. Die liberianische Regierung rechnet mit Einnahmeausfällen in Höhe von 25 Prozent des Haushalts. Stellen Sie sich das einmal hier bei uns in Deutschland vor. Ausländische Unternehmen zogen ihr Personal sowie Investitionen ab. 46 Prozent der arbeitenden Menschen in Liberia verloren ihre Arbeit, insbesondere in der Landwirtschaft. Sie wissen genau wie ich, dass die Aussaat auch aufgrund des Personalmangels nicht rechtzeitig erfolgen konnte und in diesem Jahr erhebliche Ernteausfälle erwartet werden. Das heißt, zwölf Jahre nach Ende des Bürgerkriegs ist die Stabilität des Landes mehr durch die Folge der Epidemie als durch die Folgen des Bürgerkriegs gefährdet. Das können wir so nicht zulassen.\n\nDeshalb möchte ich an dieser Stelle etwas zu vorsorgender Gesundheitspolitik und internationaler Verantwortung sagen. Liberias Gesundheitssystem ist wie das der meisten Staaten der Region bereits ohne Ebola strukturell unterfinanziert. Anfang vergangenen Jahres, also vor dem Ausbruch der Ebolaepidemie, verlangte der IWF von Liberia eine striktere Sparpolitik. Laut einem Bericht der Welt vom Dezember letzten Jahres führte dies zwangsläufig zu einer Reduzierung der Gesundheitsausgaben. Ärzte konnten nicht mehr in ausreichender Zahl eingestellt und Krankenhäuser nicht mehr mit dem notwendigem Material ausgestattet werden. Das -Ergebnis auch davon war die Ausbreitung von Ebola in dem jetzt bekannten Maß, die wir seither mit vereinten Kräften zu bekämpfen versuchen. Der IWF musste für seine strikten Anforderungen nachträglich erhebliche Mittel aufwenden. Er stellte im September 130 Millionen Dollar zur Verfügung. So kann man nicht zielführend Entwicklungsarbeit machen, ein Land stabilisieren und Aufbauarbeit leisten. An dieser Stelle müssen wir wirklich überlegen, wie wir das zielführender und sauberer machen können.\n\nAufgrund der Bedingungen der Ebolaepidemie erfolgte der nun beschlossene Truppenabbau von UNMIL ein Jahr später als geplant. Trotzdem soll Liberia bis Juni 2016 die gesamte Sicherheitsverantwortung im Land übernehmen. Mein Fazit: Notfalls steht das Militär im Hintergrund und sorgt für Sicherheit und Stabilität. -Besser und günstiger wären aber eine vorausschauende Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, Wirtschaftspolitik sowie faire europäische Handelspolitik, die an den richtigen Stellen ansetzend erst gar keine Notwendigkeit für Militäreinsätze aufkommen lassen.\n\nUnserem Soldaten und seinem Stab wünsche ich viel Erfolg und eine glückliche Hand. Diese Mission ist seit vielen Jahren sehr erfolgreich und wird es hoffentlich mit unserer Beteiligung bis zu ihrem Ende im nächsten Jahr auch bleiben. Noch mehr hoffe ich allerdings, dass eine gute und verantwortungsvolle Entwicklungszusammenarbeit für die Menschen vor Ort mehr erreichen kann als jedes Militär und damit nachhaltig faire und stabile Zustände schafft. Daher - das ist mir wichtig - ist es dringend geboten - so viel zum Schluss -, dass Deutschland seine ODA-Quote auf 0,7 Prozent erhöht.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5822,oliver-krischer,\"Herzlichen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Ministerin, ich möchte auf die Frage der Kollegin Verlinden zum Thema Klimakomponente zurückkommen. Ich habe gerade einmal im Klimaaktionsprogramm der Bundesregierung nachgesehen. Im Kapitel 4.5.4 steht in der Tat, dass Sie die Einführung einer Klimakomponente prüfen wollen. Allerdings steht auch darin, dass diese Prüfung bis 2017 abgeschlossen werden soll, und es wird auch schon ein konkreter Emissionsminderungsbeitrag dieser Klimakomponente in diesem Zeitraum mit eingerechnet. Dies widerspricht diametral dem, was Sie uns gerade hier erklärt haben, dass nämlich dieser Prüfauftrag zwar abgearbeitet wird, es definitiv aber keine Klimakomponente in dieser Legislaturperiode mehr geben wird.\n\nMuss ich also davon ausgehen, dass das Klimaak-tionsprogramm an dieser Stelle - möglicherweise an anderen dann auch - schon von vornherein mit Ankündigungen und Maßnahmen arbeitet, die Bundesregierung gar nicht umzusetzen beabsichtigt?\n\nFrau Ministerin, ich muss noch einmal auf das Thema Klimakomponente und das Kapitel 4.5.4 des Aktionsprogramms Klimaschutz zurückkommen. In diesem Kapitel mit der Überschrift „Klimafreundliches Wohnen für einkommensschwache Haushalte“ formulieren Sie das Ganze; in der Tat wird da all das beschrieben. Am Ende des Kapitels steht:\n\nTreibhausgasreduktion\t0,4 Mio. t CO2-Äq.\n\nZeitplan\tbis 2017\n\nIch kann das nur so verstehen, dass Sie in Ihrem Klimaaktionsprogramm den Eindruck erwecken, eine Maßnahme in dieser Wahlperiode umzusetzen, obwohl überhaupt nicht beabsichtigt ist, sie umzusetzen, wie Sie uns jetzt hier ja erklärt haben. Daher ist für mich eindeutig, dass das Klimaaktionsprogramm hier falsche Tatsachen vorspiegelt; denn Sie sagen uns jetzt ja etwas anderes. Ich möchte deshalb an Sie die Frage richten: An welchen anderen Stellen im Klimaaktionsprogramm müssen wir davon ausgehen, dass die Maßnahmen nicht umgesetzt werden?\"\n1918,jutta-eckenbach,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Frau Rüffer, lassen Sie mich zu Beginn meiner Rede und -meiner Ausführungen einige Klarstellungen vornehmen, die mir an dieser Stelle wichtig sind. Sie wissen und es ist gemeinsam vereinbart worden, dass es in -dieser Woche eine Aktuelle Stunde zu genau der jetzt zu behandelnden Fragestellung hier im Bundestag geben sollte. Es ist dann, und das auch gemeinsam, mit allen vereinbart worden,\n\ndass diese vorgesehene Aktuelle Stunde zugunsten einer über die Lage in der Ukraine - ich fand diese Debatte sehr wichtig, denn es ging um die momentan wichtigste Frage, die wir neben der in dieser Debatte anstehenden angehen müssen - abgesetzt wurde. Wir legen also sehr großen Wert darauf, dass hier im Bundestag Wahrheiten zur Sprache kommen; aber Sie werfen hier einfach -Floskeln in den Raum und stellen die Dinge nicht richtig dar. Es gab jedoch eine Vereinbarung aller Fraktionen, es genau so zu machen.\n\nUnd das geschah nicht erst nach diesem Montag, sondern es war bereits im Vorfeld klar, dass diese Aktuelle Stunde durchgeführt werden sollte.\n\nAlso stellen Sie hier bitte nicht all die Dinge, die wir gemeinsam vereinbart haben, auf den Kopf!\n\nIch glaube aber, es gibt am heutigen Tag Wichtigeres, als sich mit dem auseinanderzusetzen, was Frau Rüffer hier nicht sachgemäß vorgetragen hat. Wir haben hier im Deutschen Bundestag bereits am 4. April eine sehr interessante Debatte geführt und haben kontrovers diskutiert. Zugleich konnten wir feststellen, dass wir uns eigentlich darüber einig sind, wie wir vorgehen wollen: Wir wollen nämlich alles Menschenmögliche tun und vor allen Dingen entsprechende gesetzliche Regelungen finden, damit den Menschen mit Behinderungen mehr Teilhabe zugestanden wird. Das hat dieses Haus am 4. April in aller Gemeinsamkeit festgestellt. Ich denke, es ist wichtig, das zu wiederholen.\n\nDie Frage, die wir heute wieder diskutieren, ist: Wie gehen wir dabei vor? An dieser Stelle haben Sie, Frau Tack, vollkommen recht: Es geht nicht scheibchenweise. - Aber die Veranstaltung am Montag, an der ich leider nicht sehr lange teilnehmen konnte, aber lange genug, um einerseits Frau Bentele kennenzulernen und mir andererseits einen Rap anzuhören, den ich übrigens auf meiner Facebook-Seite eingestellt habe, hat uns gezeigt: Auch die Kultur bietet eine Möglichkeit, viele Menschen zu erreichen. Was wir da gehört haben, ist natürlich eine tolle Geschichte. Ich empfehle jedem, sich das anzuhören, um zu erkennen, was zwischen Menschen mit -Handicap und Menschen, die nichts haben, die normal sind - wobei das falsch ausgedrückt ist, denn wer weiß schon, wer normal ist! -, möglich ist.\n\nEtwas Weiteres, was mich bei dieser Veranstaltung sehr beeindruckt hat, waren die fünf Ziele, die Frau -Bentele benannt hat. Lassen Sie mich an dieser Stelle ein Ziel herausnehmen - es war heute schon einmal Gegenstand der Debatte -: Es geht um die Frage, wie man -eigentlich damit umgeht, wenn jemand wie zum Beispiel die Richterin Frau Poser, über die jetzt im MDR zum zweiten Mal ein Bericht lief, einem ganz normalen Beruf nachgeht, aber bei der Arbeit auf eine Assistenz angewiesen ist. Sie kann von dem, was sie verdient, nur 2 600 Euro ansparen; höher darf ihr Vermögen nicht sein. Wenn es uns wichtig ist, die Teilhabe von Menschen mit Behinderung am Arbeitsleben zu gewährleisten, müssen wir hier dringend etwas ändern. Ich finde, das ist eine der ersten Forderungen, die wir hier aufstellen müssen.\n\nMich hat auch beeindruckt, was Frau Bentele bei der Veranstaltung am Montag unter dem Bild des bunten Adlers ausgeführt hat. Sie hat sich des Symbols des Bundesadlers angenommen und gefragt, was das Bild vom bunten Adler bedeutet. In ihren Ausführungen hat sie dann deutlich gemacht, wie wichtig es ist, sich vor -Augen zu führen, dass so bunt und einzigartig wie wir alle als Einzelne sind, uns symbolisch doch der Bundesadler eint, der ein Zeichen für Stärke, Freiheit und -Unabhängigkeit ist. Unsere Aufgabe in diesem Hause ist es, diese Stärke, Freiheit und Unabhängigkeit für einen jeden in unserer Gesellschaft zu gewährleisten.\n\nInsofern werden wir Frau Bentele bei ihrer Arbeit -unterstützen, so wie wir Herrn Hüppe unterstützt haben. Wir sagen den vielen Menschen mit Handicap: Kommt zu uns! Wir sind alle gleich, und wir wollen alle das Gleiche erreichen, nämlich die Teilhabe am Leben.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n5676,albert-stegemann,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Sehr verehrte Damen und Herren! Als der Antrag der Linken zur Umsetzung des Mindestlohngesetzes gestern bei mir eintraf, habe ich mir, ehrlich gesagt, die Augen gerieben. Ich habe mir die banale Frage gestellt: Was wollen Sie eigentlich? Noch nicht einmal zwei Monate in Kraft, wird schon seitens der Linken versucht, die erreichten Kompromisse im Mindestlohngesetz infrage zu stellen.\n\nDabei haben die Mindestlohnkommission und der Zoll mit seiner Abteilung Finanzkontrolle Schwarzarbeit erst in der letzten Woche ihre Arbeit aufgenommen. An dieser Stelle sei erwähnt, dass es die CDU war, die sich seit Jahren auf zig Kreis-, Landes- und Bundesparteitagen für eine Lohnuntergrenze eingesetzt hat,\n\nund zwar eine, die nicht vom Parlament, sondern von den Tarifparteien festgelegt wird. Deshalb können Sie die Bemerkungen in Ihrem Antrag, mit denen Sie unterstellen, die CDU habe den Mindestlohn nicht verwunden, ruhigen Gewissens streichen. Schließlich sind wir in der Regierungsverantwortung, und deshalb haben wir zusammen mit den Kollegen der SPD-Fraktion dieses Gesetz beschlossen und setzen es jetzt auch nach und nach um.\n\nAber machen wir uns nichts vor: Es wird an der einen oder anderen Stelle Anlaufschwierigkeiten beim Mindestlohngesetz geben. Schließlich ist der Mindestlohn eines der Projekte der Koalitionsfraktionen und eine der größten sozialen Errungenschaften in dieser Legislaturperiode. Dass es bezüglich der Dokumentationspflichten zu Befürchtungen seitens der Wirtschaft kommt, sollte einen genauso wenig verwundern wie die Befürchtung, dass der Mindestlohn nicht korrekt ausbezahlt wird. Schließlich ist der Mindestlohn sowohl für die Arbeitgeber als auch für die Arbeitnehmer in einem neuen Gesetz festgelegt,\n\ndas die Bezahlung - es geht schließlich um das liebe Geld - regelt und deshalb mit so viel Aufmerksamkeit verfolgt wird.\n\nNun aber bereits von Missbrauch und Umgehungstatbeständen, die landauf, landab grassieren, zu sprechen, halte ich doch sehr stark für politisch interpretiert. Ich kann nicht ausschließen, dass es einzelne Arbeitgeber gibt, die versuchen, den Mindestlohn zu umgehen. Aber warten wir doch erst einmal die Ergebnisse der Finanzkontrolle Schwarzarbeit ab.\n\nDennoch wehre ich mich zutiefst dagegen, welches Bild in Ihrem Antrag von Unternehmern in unserem Land versucht wird zu zeichnen, nach dem Motto: Jeder versucht nur, zu tricksen. - Sicherlich: Ohne Kontrolle, kein Gesetz. Das heißt im Umkehrschluss aber nicht, dass das Gesetz umso besser wird, je totaler man kontrolliert.\n\nNicht ohne Grund hat sich über Jahrzehnte das Prinzip der Vertrauensarbeitszeit in Deutschland bewährt.\n\nDeswegen bin ich zutiefst davon überzeugt - und ich weiß es auch aus eigener Erfahrung -, dass das Verhältnis zwischen Arbeitgebern und Arbeitnehmern in Deutschland in der ganz überwiegenden Zahl sehr gut funktioniert. Mit solchen Anträgen und Forderungen nach immer strengeren Kontrollen nun einen Keil in diese gewachsenen Strukturen treiben zu wollen, halte ich für höchst destruktiv und kontraproduktiv. Sie setzen damit ein fatales Zeichen der Politik an diejenigen Menschen in unserem Land, die es erst mit ihrem persönlichen Risiko und ihrem ganzen Einsatz ermöglichen, dass Menschen Arbeit haben und unser Land über den Wohlstand und den sozialen Frieden verfügt, den wir heute haben.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen von der Linken, wissen Sie, was Robert Bosch gesagt hat? Er sagte:\n\nIch zahle nicht gute Löhne, weil ich viel Geld habe, sondern ich habe viel Geld, weil ich gute Löhne bezahle.\n\nMit diesem Antrag zeigen Sie erneut Ihr mangelndes Verständnis vom Zusammenspiel von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft.\n\nWelch ein Menschenbild, welch ein Weltbild Sie haben! Die Wirtschaft ist kein zerstörerisches Element unserer Gemeinschaft, welches bekämpft werden muss.\n\nEine wettbewerbsfähige Wirtschaft ist Grundvoraussetzung für eine Gesellschaft, in der die Menschen nicht nur Arbeit, sondern auch eine Aufgabe, einen Sinn haben. Nur so sind ein selbstbestimmtes Leben und sozialer Ausgleich möglich. Nur mit Auflagen, Verboten und Einschränkungen, wie sie in Ihrem Wahlprogramm zur letzten Bundestagswahl zu lesen waren, werden wir im internationalen Wettbewerb nicht bestehen können. Das ist eine Tatsache. Sie müssen auch einsehen, dass das Ideal des ehrbaren Kaufmannes für die meisten Unternehmer in unserem Land auch im 21. Jahrhundert noch Bestand hat.\n\nDa können Sie noch so oft schreiben, dass die Marktwirtschaft ein auf Profitmaximierung ausgerichtetes System ist.\n\nZugleich geht mit Ihrem Antrag ein falsches Verständnis der Arbeit des Zolls einher. Die zusätzlichen 1 600 Beschäftigten stellen die ordentliche Abführung der Sozialabgaben sicher und schützen Arbeitnehmer sowie die Wirtschaft vor unfairem Wettbewerb. Allerdings - das möchte ich ausdrücklich betonen - haben diese Überprüfungen einen stark präventiven Charakter. Es geht hierbei nicht um die totale Kontrolle, sondern ganz bewusst um Risikoanalyse mit abschreckender Wirkung. In vielen Gesprächen mit den Verantwortlichen der Zollverwaltung habe ich hiervon einen sehr guten Eindruck bekommen. Die Beamten kennen darüber hinaus ihre Pappenheimer. In Ihrem Antrag fordern Sie nun, dreimal so viele Kontrolleure einzustellen, wie es die Bundesregierung tun wird. Das Motto „Kontrolle gut, alles gut!“ wird ganz sicher nicht in den Hafen der arbeitsmarkt-politischen Glückseligkeit führen.\n\nFür die Koalitionsfraktionen ist eines ganz klar: Jeder Arbeitnehmer, der Anspruch auf den Mindestlohn hat, soll ihn auch bekommen. Im Bereich des Sportes oder des Ehrenamtes werden wir noch einmal schauen, wie sich die Situation in der Praxis gestaltet und ob wir hier überhaupt von Arbeit sprechen können. Ein Verbandsklagerecht für Gewerkschaften, wie Sie es fordern, wäre dagegen wohl eher ein Konjunkturprogramm für Arbeitsrechtler als ein konstruktiver Beitrag zu unserer Tariflandschaft.\n\nWir werden in den kommenden Wochen mit kühlem Kopf schauen, was funktioniert und wo es hakt. Das möchte ich auch Ihnen, sehr verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Linken, empfehlen. Auch wenn es nicht Ihrer parlamentarischen Aufgabe entspricht, empfehle ich Ihnen, mit etwas Geduld und einem gesunden Vertrauen in die Koalitionsfraktionen abzuwarten. Sie werden sehen: Am Ende wird alles gut.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8150,eva-bulling-schroter,\"Danke schön, Herr Minister. - Ich möchte Sie Folgendes fragen: Ich habe in einem Zeitungsartikel gelesen, dass die USA Zölle auf Butterprodukte aus der EU verhängen. Der Hintergrund ist, dass nach Auffassung der USA alles zu billig ist und dass die USA beispielsweise Milch- und Joghurtprodukte selber herstellen wollen. Wie stehen Sie denn dazu?\"\n9948,klaus-brahmig,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Für mich steht außer Frage: Die planmäßige Vertreibung und Vernichtung von über 1 Million ethnischer Armenier durch das jungtürkische Regime 1915 war ein Völkermord. Leider ist er nicht der einzige geblieben, an dem Deutschland im 20. Jahrhundert direkt oder indirekt beteiligt war. Wir als Regierungskoalition und wahrscheinlich das ganze Hohe Haus gedenken in Respekt der Opfer und wissen um die Verantwortung, die damaligen Verbrechen weder zu verdrängen noch zu beschönigen. Als Mitglied im Stiftungsrat der Stiftung Flucht, Vertreibung, Versöhnung werde ich mich persönlich mit meinen Kollegen bei der Konzeption der Dauerausstellung im Deutschlandhaus dafür einsetzen, dass diese historische Katastrophe für das stolze armenische Volk eine angemessene Würdigung erhält.\n\nSelbstverständlich dürfen wir als Deutsche niemanden über den Umgang mit seiner Vergangenheit belehren. Allerdings können wir auf unsere Erfahrung hinweisen, und alle Völker, die Schuld auf sich geladen haben, ermutigen, sich der eigenen Geschichte zu stellen.\n\nDas haben wir Deutsche nach anfänglich heftigen Verdrängungsversuchen wie kein anderes Volk getan. Insofern können wir uns heute beim Thema „Aufarbeitung von Vergangenheit“ durchaus als Vorbild sehen,\n\naber mit verflixt viel Abstand zum Kriegsende. Deswegen können wir sagen, dass nur ein selbstkritisches Bekenntnis zur Wahrheit eine Chance auf Versöhnung eröffnet.\n\nJa, bitte.\n\nHerr Kollege Liebich, das ist heute nicht das Thema. Ich denke, zu gegebener Zeit kann man auch darüber sprechen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, zugleich ist dieses Verhalten Grundvoraussetzung, aus der Geschichte für die Zukunft zu lernen und die Fehler nicht zu wiederholen. Dabei verweise ich ausdrücklich auf die aktuelle Situation in der Levante. Wir als Deutsche können in diesem Fall schon gar nicht mit erhobenem Zeigefinger auftreten, da die deutsche Reichsregierung über die türkischen Gräueltaten umfassend informiert war,\n\ndem Massaker aber tatenlos zusah. Wer diese Mitschuld leugnet, verliert seine Glaubwürdigkeit gegenüber den beteiligten Nationen Armenien und Türkei.\n\nBereits in der Plenardebatte des letzten Jahres haben sich alle demokratischen Parteien deutlich zu den Geschehnissen positioniert. Unzweifelhaft haben alle Fraktionen die damaligen Geschehnisse historisch als Völkermord eingeordnet. Insofern mag zwar der heutige zusätzliche Antrag von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen durch Verschriftlichung der weiteren Klarheit dienen. Gleichzeitig bezweifle ich aber, dass ein Beschluss zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt unserem gemeinsamen Ziel - dem einer sachlichen Aufarbeitung in der Türkei durch die Türkei - dienen wird.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, eine Realität in der Diskussion lautet: Wer sich mit dem Thema „Völkermord an den Armeniern“ auseinandersetzt, klagt niemanden an, der heute noch lebt. - So wie wir Deutsche uns gegen die Erbschuldthese nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg gewehrt haben, so müssen die Türkei und die Türken nicht befürchten, dass ihnen und ihren Enkelkindern die Schuld aufgeladen wird.\n\nDie heutige Regierung in der Türkei ist nicht für das verantwortlich, was vor 100 Jahren geschah. Sie kann aber dafür Sorge tragen, dass eine unrühmliche Vergangenheit in eine gute Zukunft gewendet werden kann. Diese Sensibilität für Geschichte könnte der Türkei auch bei der Lösung innenpolitischer Probleme behilflich sein.\n\nVon uns muss auch ausdrücklich anerkannt werden, dass gerade die Türkei mit der Aufnahme von weit über 2 Millionen syrischen Flüchtlingen eine gewaltige humanitäre Hilfeleistung erbringt. Dies kann meines Erachtens aber nicht dazu führen, dass wir völlig unkritisch miteinander umgehen. Aber Diplomatie ist auch eine Anerkennung des Machbaren und eine Analyse der eigenen Interessen. Deshalb brauchen wir keine Anträge, die einseitig zum türkeikritischen Signal hochstilisiert werden könnten. Wir als deutsche Volksvertreter haben derzeit doch ein besonderes Interesse daran, die Zusammenarbeit mit der Türkei zur Bewältigung der Flüchtlingskrise fortzusetzen. Damit meine ich nicht nur, dass die Türkei beim Stopp des Flüchtlingsstroms Verantwortung übernimmt.\n\nZur Wahrheit gehört doch auch, dass sich der Großteil der Syrer immer noch Hoffnung auf eine Zukunft im eigenen Land macht. Insofern sollten wir durch eine schnelle Bereitstellung von deutlich höheren Finanzmitteln den Menschen einen menschenwürdigen Verbleib in der Türkei ermöglichen, bis Syrien befriedet ist.\n\nNach meinen Informationen sieht auch die Genfer Flüchtlingskonvention idealtypisch immer eine krisennahe Unterbringung für Flüchtlinge vor. Das wäre ein Erfolg, denn die risikoreiche Reise würden sich die Menschen - gerade auch Familien - ersparen, und nach einer erfolgreichen Befriedung fiele die Rückkehr viel leichter. Auch könnte damit den Schleusern, Schleppern und kriminellen Organisationen das Handwerk gelegt werden.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, angesichts unserer eigenen Geschichte kann ich nur sagen: Aufarbeitung der Vergangenheit ist besonders effizient und nachhaltig, wenn sie aus eigenem Antrieb geschieht. Insofern dürfen wir die Türkei zu einer kritisch-historischen Selbstreflexion einladen. Erfolg wird dieses Projekt aber erst dann zeigen, wenn die türkische Bevölkerung selber Fragen stellt und trotzdem selbstbewusst in die Zukunft schaut.\n\nSie als Angehörige der Partei der Grünen, die immer alles hofft und an das Gute im Menschen appelliert, sollten hier einmal mehr auf Hoffnung setzen. Ich habe die Hoffnung, dass in zukünftigen Jahren auch in der Türkei eine Jugend vorhanden ist, die mehr Offenheit für historische Wahrheit und Versöhnung zeigt.\n\nDas geschieht jedoch nur dann, wenn kein Druck von außen ausgeübt wird.\n\nDem Ziel des Antrages bleiben wir aufgeschlossen gegenüber und sehen es als notwendig an. Gleiches gilt für die Partnerschaft mit dem armenischen Volk und seinen aktuellen Herausforderungen.\n\nAus den oben genannten Gründen können meine Fraktion und ich diesem Antrag heute nicht zustimmen.\"\n4582,axel-knoerig,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der deutsche Meisterbrief ist das Gütesiegel unseres Handwerks. Er steht für erfolgreiche Tradition und höchste fachliche Qualität. Diese besondere berufliche Qualifikation ist einzigartig in der Welt. Auf dem Meistertitel beruht der wirtschaftliche Erfolg vieler mittelständischer Betriebe, die ja bekanntlich das Rückgrat unserer Wirtschaft bildet. Insgesamt gibt es in Deutschland rund 1 Million Handwerksfirmen. Die meisten von ihnen sind kleine Unternehmen und haben maximal vier bis acht Mitarbeiter. Als Beispiel nenne ich meinen Wahlkreis Diepholz/Nienburg. Dort gibt es etwa 2 000 Handwerksbetriebe, die rund 10 000 Menschen beschäftigen. Gerade in unserer ländlichen Region kommt dem Handwerk damit eine erhebliche Bedeutung zu, zum einen in der Sicherung von Arbeitsplätzen, zum anderen in der beruflichen Bildung; denn ein Drittel unserer heimischen Auszubildenden erlernen ihren Beruf in Handwerksbetrieben.\n\nInsgesamt hat das deutsche Handwerk im vergangenen Jahr über 500 Milliarden Euro erwirtschaftet. Die Betriebe haben rund 5 Millionen Menschen einen Arbeitsplatz gegeben. Dazu gehören 380 000 Lehrstellen. Die Ausbildungsquote ist mit 8 Prozent doppelt so hoch wie in der gesamten Wirtschaft. Damit trägt das Handwerk maßgeblich dazu bei, dass wir die geringste Jugendarbeitslosigkeit in Europa verzeichnen.\n\nDie niedrige Quote von 7,5 Prozent kommt auch dadurch zustande, dass die duale Ausbildung häufig eine anschließende Übernahme in den Betrieb ermöglicht. Auf diese Weise leistet unser Handwerk einen ganz wesentlichen Beitrag zur Fachkräftesicherung in unserem Land.\n\nDafür, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, liefert der Meisterbrief die Grundlage.\n\nWir müssen uns fragen: Warum ist der Meisterbrief so erfolgreich? Lassen Sie uns bitte einen kurzen Rückblick in die Geschichte werfen: Im 19. Jahrhundert wurde die Gewerbefreiheit eingeführt und damit auch eine staatliche Regelung der Handwerkerausbildung. Gleichzeitig gründeten sich die Innungen als Interessenvertretungen der verschiedenen Handwerksberufe. Mit dieser frühen Organisation wurde ein einmaliges Aus- und Weiterbildungsmodell geschaffen, das noch heute als zukunfts- und krisensicher gilt.\n\nAuch hier muss die Frage gestellt werden: Warum ist das so? Weil sich dieses Modell ständig den aktuellen Entwicklungen des Arbeitsmarktes anpasst und weil es in der Abstimmung von Berufskammern, Tarifpartnern und Politik laufend modernisiert wird. Dabei gilt es, das richtige Verhältnis zwischen Tradition und Moderne, aber auch zwischen Theorie und Praxis zu erwähnen. Heute wie damals basiert die Meisterqualifikation auf zwei Pfeilern:\n\nErstens. Grundvoraussetzung ist eine duale Berufsausbildung mit abschließender Gesellenprüfung. Inzwischen wird auch eine erfolgreiche Abschlussprüfung in einem ähnlichen Ausbildungsberuf anerkannt.\n\nZweitens. Wer die Meisterprüfung bestanden hat, wird in die Handwerksrolle eingetragen. Nur dann ist man berechtigt, als selbstständiger Unternehmer einen Handwerksbetrieb zu führen. Einzig die Meister dürfen in ihrem Beruf den Nachwuchs ausbilden. Ganz wichtig dabei ist auch, dass die Meister aufgrund dieser pädagogischen Erfahrungen und der gesammelten Kenntnisse auch als Berufsschullehrer bestens geeignet sind.\n\nDiese strenge Reglementierung beim Berufszugang dient von jeher einem Ziel, und zwar der Sicherung der Qualität und damit der Wettbewerbsfähigkeit. Mit der Handwerksnovelle von 2003 wurde der Berufszugang jedoch gelockert. Die rot-grüne Bundesregierung erhoffte sich davon mehr Unternehmensgründungen. Über die Hälfte der zulassungspflichtigen Gewerke wurde daher als zulassungsfrei eingestuft. Seither kann man diese Handwerksbetriebe auch ohne Meisterbrief führen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir müssen heute leider festhalten, dass diese Liberalisierung unserem Handwerk eher geschadet hat.\n\nDenn Fakt ist: In den vergangenen elf Jahren wurden Handwerksberufe erster und zweiter Klasse geschaffen. Wie die Zahlen belegen, sind Neugründungen ohne Meisterbrief relativ schnell insolvent: Schon zwei Jahre nach dem Start in die Selbstständigkeit gibt es deutlich mehr Registerlöschungen als bei den Meisterbetrieben. Insofern hat Rot-Grün genau das Gegenteil vom damaligen Ziel erreicht: Gefördert wurden Einmannbetriebe, die als Unternehmen nicht ausreichend qualifiziert sind. Genauso wenig tragen diese zur Nachwuchssicherung im Handwerk bei; denn 95 Prozent der Lehrlinge werden in den zulassungspflichtigen Berufen ausgebildet.\n\nDie Union hat dagegen in ihrer Bildungspolitik Schwerpunkte gesetzt, die gerade unserem Handwerk zugutekommen: So haben wir uns bereits in der letzten Wahlperiode dafür eingesetzt, die berufliche und akademische Bildung besser vergleichbar zu machen. Dazu wurde der Deutsche Qualifikationsrahmen eingeführt. Dieses Einstufungssystem ermöglicht einen objektiven Vergleich der verschiedenen Berufs- und Studienabschlüsse. Der Meisterbrief ist hier auf Niveau 6 eingestuft, genau wie der akademische Grad des Bachelors. Damit wurde die Meisterprüfung als Berufsqualifikation sichtbar aufgewertet.\n\nSeit Anfang dieses Jahres ist die Meisterqualifikation auch im europäischen Qualifikationsrahmen der Stufe 6 zugeordnet. Hiermit haben wir ebenfalls eine erhebliche Aufwertung des deutschen Meisterbriefes in Europa erzielt.\n\nImmer wieder gibt es Bestrebungen, die duale Ausbildung zu reformieren und damit die solide Basis für die Meisterqualifikation infrage zu stellen, und dem ist entgegenzuwirken. Von meiner Kollegin Lena Strothmann ist heute schon einmal der Münchener Philosoph und ehemalige Kulturstaatsminister Julian Nida-Rümelin zitiert worden. Er hat ein Buch veröffentlicht mit dem -Titel Der Akademisierungswahn - Zur Krise beruflicher und akademischer Bildung. Darin warnt er davor, die berufliche Bildung allzu wissenschaftlich zu gestalten. Die duale Ausbildung sollte praxisorientiert zwischen Betrieb und Berufsschule eingebunden bleiben.\n\nSchließlich beruht der Schwerpunkt auf dem Berufsalltag - und nur so kann die Qualität dieses erfolgreichen Bildungsmodells langfristig gehalten werden.\n\nDie Grünen haben in der letzten Wahlperiode gefordert, das duale Ausbildungssystem um eine weitere Komponente zu ergänzen.\n\nDualPlus - so haben Sie das genannt; ich will das gar nicht als Konzept bezeichnen - bedeutete eigentlich nur mehr bürokratischen Aufwand. Die Grünen wollten neben Betrieb und Berufsschule noch eine weitere überbetriebliche Einrichtung an der Ausbildung beteiligen.\n\nDie Betriebe sollten sogar Träger dieser Einrichtung werden.\n\nDa, meine Damen und Herren von den Grünen, ist, denke ich, auch die Sicht von Verbänden wie IHK und ZDH maßgeblich; denn die haben damals überhaupt keinen Reformbedarf gesehen. Wieso auch? Warum sollte man dieses gut funktionierende Modell aus betrieblicher Praxis und begleitender Theorie aus dem Gleichgewicht bringen?\n\nEs ist doch so: Wenn man die Zuständigkeit, zum Beispiel für Praktika, an überbetriebliche Ausbildungsstätten überträgt, dann werden doch die Betriebe aus der Verantwortung gedrängt.\n\nDoch gerade ihre intensive Beteiligung sichert die praxisnahe und am Arbeitsmarkt orientierte Ausbildung.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir müssen nicht an etwas herumdoktern, was bereits bestens funktioniert. Genau deshalb ist unser Bildungssystem ja in aller Welt hochangesehen. Insbesondere seit der Wirtschafts- und -Finanzkrise dient es in Europa sogar als Vorbild: Zahlreiche Länder der Europäischen Union sind bemüht, die besonderen Vorzüge der dualen Ausbildung in Deutschland nachzuahmen. So soll die hohe Jugendarbeits-losigkeit, zum Beispiel in Spanien, bekämpft werden. 38 000 junge Spanier und Griechen haben über die Bildungskooperation in Deutschland schon einen Ausbildungsplatz bekommen. Auch mit Italien wurde solch eine Vereinbarung getroffen. Seit 2012 unterstützt Deutschland bereits mehrere Länder mit Kooperationen zur Berufsbildung. Ich denke, das ist eine gute Grundlage, um die Zukunftschancen junger Menschen in ganz Europa zu verbessern.\n\nDie Aufstiegsmöglichkeit zum Meister wird seit Jahren konstant genutzt: 2013 wurden über 23 000 Meisterprüfungen erfolgreich abgelegt. Es ist erfreulich, dass der Frauenanteil mittlerweile auf 20 Prozent gestiegen ist. Der Bund unterstützt diese Fortbildung mit dem sogenannten Meister-BAföG. Seit dem Start im Jahr 2008 ist die Zahl der Antragsteller kontinuierlich gestiegen - auf nunmehr rund 170 000. Die Förderzusagen beliefen sich im vergangenen Jahr auf 576 Millionen Euro.\n\nGenauso wie in der akademischen Bildung wollen wir auch in der beruflichen Bildung Karrieren fördern. Daher werden wir die Leistungen beim Meister-BAföG, wie wir das im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart haben, weiter verbessern. Ähnlich wie beim BAföG für Studierende sollen auch Meister mit guten Noten bei den Rückzahlungen entlastet werden.\n\nIn vielerlei Hinsicht haben wir berufliche und akademische Bildung damit schon gleichgestellt. Doch, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wäre es nicht eine logische Konsequenz, die Meisterqualifikation genau wie das Studium nun kostenfrei anzubieten? Das wäre, denke ich, ein weiterer bedeutender Beitrag zur Qualitätssicherung im Handwerk und in der dualen Ausbildung.\n\nDanke schön für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n4981,klaus-ernst,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Herr Pfeiffer, machen wir es gleich am Anfang: Sie haben davon gesprochen, die Europäer müssten ein Interesse an solchen Schiedsverfahren haben, weil es auch entsprechende europäische Verfahren gibt. Es gibt eines, da werden wir, die Bundesrepublik Deutschland, von Vattenfall wegen des Atomausstiegs verklagt. Können Sie mir bitte sagen, welches Interesse der deutsche Bürger an so einem Verfahren haben soll? Welches Interesse?\n\n- Sie können mir gerne eine Zwischenfrage stellen, wenn Sie wollen. - Es geht aber nicht einmal darum, sondern es geht darum, dass nicht der Bürger klagen darf, weil das in den Schiedsverfahren gar nicht vorgesehen ist. Bei diesen Verfahren hat der Bürger kein Klagerecht, übrigens hat auch die Bundesrepublik Deutschland kein Klagerecht, auch kein Verband hat ein Klagerecht, sondern ausschließlich die Unternehmen haben ein Klagerecht gegen die Staaten. Warum ein Staat daran Interesse haben sollte, entzieht sich wirklich meiner Logik, Herr Pfeiffer.\n\nJetzt kommen wir gleich zum nächsten Punkt. Sie sagen: Sie mit Ihrer Angstmacherei! Die ist ja unerträglich! - Wir werden abgehängt, weil die Chinesen Abkommen schließen. - Ja, glauben Sie wirklich, dass der deutsche Export von den Regelungen zwischen China und den Amerikanern abhängt?\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Wenn das so wäre, dann dürften ja die Amerikaner ohne entsprechende Abkommen gar nicht erst bei uns investiert haben und wir ohne entsprechende Abkommen nicht in den USA. Aber das läuft.\n\nIch sage Ihnen, was den Fortschritt ausmacht - das sind nicht die Abkommen -: Innovationen, vernünftig ausgebildete Leute, neue Technologien. Das macht aus, ob wir Handel treiben können, und nicht das Aufgeben von Prinzipien des deutschen Rechtsstaats in Form von solchen Handelsabkommen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDas musste einfach einmal gesagt werden, weil es mir langsam wirklich auf den Senkel geht, wie hier argumentiert wird.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wo ist das Neue bei diesen Schiedsverfahren? Sie sagen immer, wir hätten ja inzwischen Abkommen mit Kroatien und mit was weiß ich für Ländern. Ich sage Ihnen: Das Neue ist, dass wir zwischen Wirtschaftsblöcken mit Rechtssystemen, die funktionieren, Abkommen schließen wollen. Ich möchte gerne von Ihnen wissen, warum wir unter solchen Voraussetzungen eine Paralleljustiz brauchen.\n\nAber genau darum geht es: um den Aufbau einer Paralleljustiz, bei der der Bürger selbst ausschließlich der Benachteiligte ist, weil er als Steuerzahler zahlt, aber selber gar nicht klagen darf.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, Sie haben vor, den Anwendungsbereich dieser Schiedsgerichte massiv gegenüber dem zu erweitern, was vorher war. Massiv! Ich sage Ihnen: Da gibt es berechtigte Kritik. Eine Kritik stammt von der Neuen Richtervereinigung. Das interessiert Sie vielleicht nicht, weil - diesen Eindruck habe ich - Sie eher Interessenvertretung für die Großindustrie und die Exportindustrie machen.\n\nAber hören Sie sich einmal an, was die Richter dazu sagen. Sie sagen, dass sie gegen solche Schiedsgerichte sind,\n\nweil hierdurch demokratisch legitimierte Schutzgesetze ohne Einhaltung grundlegender Verfahrens-prinzipien und ohne wirksame Kontrolle in Frage gestellt werden.\n\nUnabhängigkeit, Öffentlichkeit, rechtliches Gehör und Überprüfbarkeit von Entscheidungen sind elementare Errungenschaften unseres Rechtsstaats. Diese dürfen nicht durch Schiedsgerichtsklauseln ausgehöhlt werden.\n\nRecht haben die Richter! Recht haben sie, die Richter, Herr Pfeiffer!\n\nDer DGB und seine Einzelgewerkschaften sind strikt dagegen. Selbst Heiko Maas, der Justizminister, hat sich in der Süddeutschen Zeitung positioniert - ich möchte das zitieren -:\n\nIch bin eindeutig gegen diese Schiedsgerichte. Wir brauchen so etwas zwischen OECD-Staaten nicht.\n\nRecht hat er.\n\nFrau Hendricks, die Bundesumweltministerin, hat sich positioniert. Sie sagt - Zitat -:\n\nEin solches Schlupfloch würde die Errungenschaften von 150 Jahren Arbeiterbewegung, 100 Jahren Frauenbewegung und 50 Jahren Umweltbewegung mit einem Federstrich zerstören.\n\nAuch sie hat recht.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, Ihre Ministerin hat an dieser Stelle vollkommen recht.\n\nJetzt haben wir das Problem, dass die SPD-Basis dem Braten nicht so richtig traut. Deshalb der Beschluss auf dem SPD-Konvent, wo gesagt wird: Es sind Schiedsverfahren abzulehnen und Begriffe wie „faire und gerechte Behandlung“ oder „indirekte Enteignung“. - Jetzt sind Schiedsverfahren und diese Begriffe aber enthalten, wie man bei CETA lesen kann. Das ist Bestandteil von CETA. Deshalb müsste eigentlich logischerweise - -\n\nJa, von wem auch immer. - Bitte schön.\n\nTja.\n\nDas ist genau das Problem. Sie machen Politik nach dem Motto: Das war schon immer so. Dann machen wir so weiter.\n\nSie sind nicht bereit, zur Kenntnis zu nehmen, dass es ein wesentlicher Unterschied ist, ob es um Schiedsverfahren geht, an denen Gleiche mit gleichen Rechten beteiligt sind - was in vielen Schiedsverfahren üblicherweise der Fall ist, übrigens auch bei anderen in der Justiz üblichen Verfahren.\n\nEs geht hier um Sonderrechte für eine kleine Gruppe.\n\n- Natürlich, wenn es nicht um Sonderrechte für eine kleine Gruppe gehen würde, dann sagen Sie mir, warum nur Unternehmen in diesen Verfahren Klagerecht haben.\n\n- Ich bin noch nicht fertig, Herr Heider. Ich bin immer noch bei der Beantwortung Ihrer Frage. Sie dürfen sich aber gerne setzen. Stehen ist ja auch fade. - Ich sage Ihnen nur: Genau das ist das Problem. Es sind vollkommen andere Verfahren als die, die Sie ansprechen. Es geht ausschließlich um ein Recht für die großen Unternehmen. - So, jetzt bin ich mit der Beantwortung Ihrer Frage fertig.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich habe gerade angesprochen, dass große Teile der Bundesregierung selbst Bedenken gegen diese Abkommen haben. Das ist gut und richtig. Aber ich muss ehrlich sagen: Ich kenne mich nicht mehr mit dem aus, was Herr Gabriel eigentlich will. Einmal sagt er so, dann sagt er wieder das Gegenteil. Ich frage mich: Wo ist die Haltung der Bundesregierung in dieser Frage, Frau Zypries?\n\nIch habe den Eindruck, die Aussagen unseres Bundeswirtschaftsministers in der Frage der Handelsabkommen haben die Halbwertszeit von Einwegunterwäsche.\n\nSo schnell kann man gar nicht gucken, dann ist die Position geändert. Die SPD-Basis muss sich doch veräppelt vorkommen bei dem, was sie beschließt, was aber in der praktischen Frage keine Bedeutung hat.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, 97 Prozent derjenigen, die sich an der Debatte beteiligt haben, die von der Europäischen Union angeregt wurde, lehnen die Verfahren ab. Jetzt spielen Sie das herunter, Herr Pfeiffer, und sagen: Es waren nur 150 000, die sich beteiligt haben, und es war auch keine Volksbefragung.\n\nKennen Sie den Unterschied? Ich kann es Ihnen sagen. Schon der frühere Handelskommissar hat gesagt: Ich verhandele für 500 Millionen Europäer. Und es gibt nur 400 000 Unterschriften dagegen. - Was soll denn das? Sie nehmen den Bürger nicht ernst. Die 500 Millionen in Europa hat niemand gefragt, ob sie solche Abkommen wollen. Das will ich Ihnen nur sagen.\n\nNun heißt es von der Bundesregierung mit Blick auf TTIP:\n\nDie endgültige Entscheidung über die Einbeziehung von Investitionsschutz und Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren in TTIP wird erst nach Abschluss der Verhandlungen und Prüfung des Verhandlungsergebnisses getroffen werden.\n\nDann läuft es im Ergebnis genauso wie bei CETA. Dort ist es enthalten; dort steht es drin. Trotzdem hat die Bundesregierung keine vernünftige Haltung. Meine Damen und Herren, Sie veräppeln nicht nur Ihre Mitglieder, sie veräppeln die ganze Republik, wenn Sie so herumeiern.\n\n- Wollen Sie noch eine Frage stellen? Bitte.\n\nSelbst der Beirat der Bundesregierung, Ihr Beirat, den Sie vom Wirtschaftsministerium ins Leben gerufen haben, hat sich zu dem, was dort läuft, sehr deutlich kritisch geäußert.\n\n- Nein, nein, dafür ist er nicht da. Er stellt nämlich das Verfahren infrage, dass Sie sich nämlich festgelegt haben, ohne den Beirat ernst zu nehmen.\n\nIn diesem Brief steht - ich zitiere es -:\n\nEine solch apodiktische Haltung löst bei uns die Frage aus, welche Funktion ein TTIP-Beirat hat, wenn die Bundesregierung entweder sich den Entscheidungen der anderen Mitgliedstaaten anschließt oder aber in ihrer Haltung bereits festgelegt ist.\n\nDas ist der Eindruck des Rates, der offensichtlich kritisiert, was dort eigentlich läuft.\n\nIm Übrigen wird immer wieder argumentiert: Die Bundesrepublik Deutschland ist das einzige Land, das dagegen ist. Wie ist es denn wirklich? In den Niederlanden, in Österreich, in Frankreich und in anderen Ländern gibt es massive substanzielle Vorbehalte gegen diese Abkommen. Die Regierungen von Australien, Argentinien, Bolivien, Brasilien, Ecuador, Indien, Südafrika und Venezuela zeigen, wie man es machen kann.\n\nSie haben entweder Investitionsschutzverträge aufgekündigt, gar nicht erst unterschrieben oder bekannt gegeben, keine weiteren Abkommen zu unterzeichnen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, der Bundesminister verläuft sich momentan in eine fragwürdige Argumentation. Wenn auch noch ein Gutachter beauftragt wird, der auf der Schlichterliste bei internationalen Schiedsverfahren ist, dann fragt man sich doch: Ist der denn unabhängig? - Sie fragen doch auch keinen Metzger wegen eines Gutachtens,\n\nob Vegetarismus vielleicht besser ist als Fleischkonsum. Aber Sie nehmen hier einen Gutachter, der selber an Schiedsverfahren beteiligt ist! Der ist wirklich sehr unabhängig.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, selbst Ihre eigenen Sachverständigen haben bezogen auf die Schiedsgerichte massive Bedenken gehabt.\n\nAngeblich geht es bei den Abkommen um mehr Investitionen. Es gibt nicht den geringsten Beweis dafür, dass dem so ist. Aber es gibt eine Frage, die wir als Abgeordnete ernst nehmen sollten.\n\nDanke für den Hinweis; ich bin gleich fertig. - Der Volksmund sagt: Vor dem Gesetz sind alle gleich, aber einige sind gleicher.\n\nDass man diesen Gleichen aber auch noch ein eigenes Rechtssystem gibt, ist unerträglich.\n\nHerzlichen Dank. - Die Behauptung, dass wir uns hier nicht mit Inhalten auseinandersetzen, muss ich in aller Deutlichkeit zurückweisen. Wir haben uns mit diesem Thema schon auseinandergesetzt, als der Großteil der SPD mit diesem Thema noch gar nicht vertraut war, als Sie noch gar nicht wussten, was da überhaupt laufen soll. Die Art und Weise, wie die Diskussion geführt wird, ärgert mich.\n\nUm was geht es eigentlich? Es geht um die Frage: Welche Art von Gutachten lassen Sie erstellen? Ich habe nichts dagegen, dass man mit Interesse ein Gutachten erwartet; das macht jeder. Aber das Wirtschaftsministerium ist nicht einmal in der Lage, einen neutralen Gutachter zu benennen. Wissen Sie denn, was Herr Schill gemacht hat, wo er gearbeitet hat? Wissen Sie, dass er indirekt über seinen früheren Chef selber an Verfahren beteiligt war? Können Sie sich vorstellen, dass jemand, der auf einer Schlichterliste eines internationalen Schiedsgerichts steht, keinesfalls der Auffassung sein wird, dass ein Schiedsgericht überflüssig ist? Er lebt doch davon. Er verdient sein Geld damit, und wie Sie wissen, verdienen Schiedsrichter ausgezeichnet. Angesichts dieser Tatsache, Herr Barthel, können Sie doch nicht behaupten, das sei seriös.\n\nNatürlich versucht man, auf der wissenschaftlichen Ebene Experten zu finden, die alle Aspekte berücksichtigen. Aber wenn jemand selber an diesem Verfahren beteiligt ist, dann ist er doch nicht neutral. Das ist die Kritik, die wir in unserem Antrag formuliert haben. Herr Barthel, wir sagen klipp und klar: Neutral ist Ihr Gutachten nicht. Nehmen Sie andere, wirklich neutrale Gutachter! Dann werden Sie zu einem ganz anderen Ergebnis kommen.\n\nKollege Straubinger, das, was Sie eben angesprochen haben, ist genau der Punkt: Wer kann wo klagen? Während deutsche Unternehmen vor den deutschen Gerichten klagen müssen, wenn sie glauben, ungerecht behandelt worden zu sein, können ausländische Unternehmen vor Schiedsgerichte ziehen, und zwar ohne die Möglichkeit, dass der Staat dagegen in Revision gehen kann.\n\nIm Übrigen verlaufen die Verfahren dort, wie wir gerade bei Vattenfall sehen, unter sehr großer Geheimhaltung. Selbst wir als Abgeordnete sind bis heute nicht alle umfassend informiert worden, was genau in der Klageschrift steht usw. Genau das ist der Unterschied. Ich bin ja wie Sie der Auffassung - da sind wir uns vollkommen einig -, dass ein Unternehmen in einem Rechtsstaat auch das Recht hat, gegen staatliche Entscheidungen zu klagen.\n\nDie Frage ist allerdings, wo. Wir debattieren hier über diese unterschiedliche Gerichtsbarkeit und nicht darüber, dass es Unternehmen nicht mehr möglich sein soll, eine Klage gegen einen Staat zu führen.\n\nSie haben zum Schluss gesagt, dass es keine großen Unterschiede gibt. Dann haben Sie gesagt: Wenn jemand vor ein ordentliches Gericht geht, dann bekommt er einen Schein. Dieser Schein ist üblicherweise ein Urteil, und in Rechtsstaaten werden Urteile vollstreckt. Das heißt, wenn funktionierende Rechtssysteme vorhanden sind, reicht das aus. Denn wenn es anders wäre, Kollege Straubinger, müssten wir uns und müsste sich das ganze Hohe Haus sehr schnell Gedanken darüber machen, wie wir unser Rechtssystem so verändern können, dass Richtersprüche auch durchgesetzt werden.\"\n9259,ole-schroder,\"Verehrter Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich will mit drei Blickwinkeln, die alle etwas mit den Ereignissen in der Silvesternacht in Köln zu tun haben, beginnen.\n\nIch beginne mit der Aussage einer angegriffenen Frau in der Silvesternacht in Köln - ich zitiere -:\n\nWir liefen dann durch diese Männergruppe. Es tat sich eine Gasse auf, durch die wir liefen. Plötzlich spürte ich eine Hand an meinem Po, dann an meinen Brüsten, schließlich wurde ich überall begrapscht. Es war der Horror. Obwohl wir schrien und um uns schlugen, hörten die Typen nicht auf. Ich war verzweifelt und glaube, dass ich rund 100 Mal auf den knapp 200 Metern angefasst wurde.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Politik und die Polizeien des Bundes und der Länder müssen und werden gemeinsam alles dafür tun, dass sich so etwas in unserem Land nicht wiederholt.\n\nEs wird keine rechtsfreien Räume in unserem Land geben. Ich danke an dieser Stelle allen Polizeibeamtinnen und Polizeibeamten, die sich in dieser Nacht in ihrem Einsatz schützend vor die Frauen gestellt haben, auch unter eigenem Opfer. Auch daran müssen wir denken.\n\nEin zweiter Blickwinkel zeigt sich in den Geschehnissen rund um die Facebook-Gruppe „Nett-Werk Köln“. Etwa eine Woche nachdem dort die ersten Informationen zu den sexuellen Übergriffen vor dem Kölner Hauptbahnhof gepostet wurden, musste die Seite vorübergehend geschlossen werden. Der Administrator schrieb dazu am 7. Januar auf der Seite - ich zitiere -:\n\nDas Nettwerk ist derzeit nahezu ein Kriegsschauplatz verbaler Gewalt, gegenseitiger Schuldzuweisungen, Aufrufe zur Lynchjustiz, Beleidigungen, Pöbel, Hetze und Rassismus.\n\nAuch das ist ein Teil der Geschichte. Auch das ist ein Teil der Konsequenzen, die wir gemeinsam ziehen müssen: Niemand darf die furchtbaren Straftaten der Silvesternacht mit Hass und Rassismus beantworten.\n\nDen dritten Blickwinkel bilden die vielen Hunderttausend Flüchtlinge in unserem Land, die sich nichts zuschulden kommen lassen. In einem offenen Brief an die Bundeskanzlerin schreiben einige Flüchtlinge aus Syrien und Pakistan - ich zitiere -:\n\n... sind wir entsetzt über das, was sich in der Silvesternacht in Köln und anderen Städten zugetragen hat. Wir verabscheuen die sexuellen Übergriffe und Diebstahldelikte ... und verurteilen sie auf das Schärfste.\n\nDie Straftaten in Köln und anderswo betreffen uns alle, auch die Flüchtlinge, die sich anständig verhalten, und das ist die große Mehrheit.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Ereignisse der Silvesternacht haben vor allem unser Land als Ganzes getroffen. Mich als Vater von zwei kleinen Töchtern haben - das bekenne ich ganz offen - diese Taten wütend und fassungslos gemacht. Ich möchte nicht, dass meine Töchter in einem Land aufwachsen, in dem sie sich auf öffentlichen Plätzen nicht sicher fühlen.\n\nHeute sprechen wir über die Konsequenzen, und jetzt richte ich meinen Blick auf die Täter. Ihnen, den Tätern der Silvesternacht, sagen wir heute Folgendes: Wenn Sie nach Deutschland kommen, vielleicht auch, um Schutz zu suchen, hier aber schwere Straftaten begehen, dann haben Sie in unserem Land nichts zu suchen.\n\nWir haben nun die Aufgabe, die Täter schnell zu finden, sie vor ein Gericht zu bringen und sie zu bestrafen. Einige fordern, dass wir härtere Gesetze machen. Andere fordern einen besseren Vollzug der bestehenden Gesetze. Ich sage: Wir brauchen beides. Die Bevölkerung erwartet von uns, dass wir schnell reagieren.\n\nGestern haben sich Bundesinnenminister de Maizière und Bundesjustizminister Maas darauf verständigt, die Ausweisung krimineller Ausländer zu erleichtern. Wir wollen die Hürden für die Ausweisung ausländischer Straftäter deutlich absenken. Das machen wir bei Straftaten gegen das Leben, gegen die körperliche Unversehrtheit, gegen die sexuelle Selbstbestimmung, gegen Eigentum und auch bei Angriffen auf Polizisten. Zukünftig liegt ein schwerwiegendes Ausweisungsinteresse dann vor, wenn ein Straftäter wegen dieser Delikte zu einer Freiheitsstrafe verurteilt wurde, unabhängig davon, ob diese Strafe zur Bewährung ausgesetzt ist. Ein besonders schwerwiegendes Ausweisungsinteresse - das ist die nächsthöhere Stufe - liegt zukünftig bei einer Verurteilung zu einer Freiheitsstrafe von mindestens einem Jahr vor.\n\nAsylsuchenden, die Straftaten begehen, werden wir künftig konsequenter die rechtliche Anerkennung als Flüchtling versagen. Bei der Frage, ab wann jemand nicht mehr als Flüchtling anerkannt wird, haben wir uns darauf verständigt, die Schwelle für die genannten Straftaten von drei Jahren Freiheitsstrafe auf ein Jahr Freiheitsstrafe zu senken.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, das ist eine harte Reaktion des Staates gegenüber den Menschen, die zu uns kommen und meinen, hier Straftaten begehen zu können, ohne dass das Auswirkungen auf ihre Anwesenheit in Deutschland hätte. Der Rechtsstaat muss und wird seine Bürger schützen. Schutz des Rechtsstaates heißt härtere Gesetze, wenn es nötig ist. Schutz des Rechtsstaates heißt auch, dass wir Strafgesetze an neue Arten der Tatbegehung anpassen müssen. Schutz des Rechtsstaates bedeutet aber vor allem Vollzug unserer Gesetze. Für den Bereich der Polizei heißt das mehr Personal und bessere Ausrüstung. Wir haben in den Haushaltsverhandlungen für dieses Jahr 3 000 zusätzliche Stellen für die Bundespolizei erhalten. Ich gehe davon aus, dass auch die Länder ihre Polizeien jetzt wieder verstärken werden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, zu den Konsequenzen aus der Silvesternacht gehört auch, dass wir nicht verschweigen, aus welchen Ländern die Täter kamen, und darüber reden, dass auch kulturelle Hintergründe bei den Taten eine Rolle spielen. Die Silvesternacht macht deutlich, wie schwer es ist, gerade junge, alleinstehende Männer mit arabischer Herkunft hier in unserem Land zu integrieren. Die Silvesternacht macht auch deutlich, dass jede Integrationskraft einer Gesellschaft endlich ist.\n\nKein Generalverdacht, aber auch kein Verschweigen oder Relativieren von Tatsachen, Integration der zu uns kommenden Menschen, aber keine Toleranz gegenüber Straftätern - das ist die Aufgabe, nicht nur in Köln, sondern überall in unserem Land.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13785,markus-tressel,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Die Unterschiede zwischen den Regionen in Deutschland nehmen nicht ab, sondern weiter zu. Wenn wir uns die wirtschaftliche Produktivität oder die Arbeitslosenquote anschauen, dann stellen wir fest: Viele ländliche Räume, aber auch altindustrielle Regionen sind gegenüber Ballungsräumen benachteiligt; das hat der Kollege Metzler schon ausgeführt. Eine wirkungsvolle Regionalpolitik ist deshalb wichtiger denn je. Das ist kein Nebenschauplatz, sondern eine zentrale Frage für die Zukunft des Landes. Es geht um neue Perspektiven für die Menschen in Regionen, die manche als abgehängt bezeichnen. Für sie braucht es gemeinsames Engagement von EU-, Bundes- und auch von Länderseite. Deshalb ist die entscheidende Frage, wie die Regionalpolitik in Zukunft aussehen könnte.\n\nWir führen derzeit sehr gute Gespräche darüber, auch im Unterausschuss; aber bisher hat die Bundesregierung kein durchgängiges Konzept für die Zeit nach 2020 vorgelegt, wenn die ostspezifische Förderung ausläuft. Das Eckpunktepapier, das vorliegt, reicht unseres Erachtens nicht aus. Wir können deshalb Ihrem vorliegenden Antrag zustimmen. Wir verstehen ihn als Aufforderung der Koalitionäre an die eigene Bundesregierung, endlich ein Konzept für die zukünftige Förderpolitik vorzulegen.\n\nDas fordern auch wir. Das muss endlich geschehen. Wenn der Antrag dabei hilft, ist das sehr gut.\n\nViele Regionen treten trotz Fördermillionen auf der Stelle. Der Förderdschungel ist in den letzten Jahren nicht überschaubarer geworden. Das überfordert insbesondere kleine und mittelständische Unternehmen seit langem. Die Forderungen in Ihrem Antrag sind nicht neu. Ich verstehe ja, dass so ein komplexes Vorhaben wie die Weiterentwicklung der Förderpolitik Zeit und Sorgfalt braucht; aber die Zeit läuft uns davon. Diese Legislaturperiode neigt sich dem Ende zu. Wenn der Bundestag frühestens Anfang 2018 wieder über die Förderpolitik diskutiert, steht die neue Förderperiode unmittelbar vor der Tür. Unserer Auffassung nach wäre etwas mehr Nachdruck gefragt, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, nicht nur im Parlament, sondern auch bei der Umsetzung nachher.\n\nWir alle wissen - die Kollegen haben das angesprochen -: Die Herausforderungen sind immens. Drei Megatrends beeinflussen die Entwicklung regionaler Wirtschaft und damit die Attraktivität ganzer Regionen. Da ist zuallererst der demografische Wandel zu nennen. Er verändert unsere Gesellschaft, aber besonders stark im ländlichen Raum. Das heißt, wir brauchen sozial nachhaltige Ansätze in der Regionalentwicklung. Zweitens gibt es einen großen Bedarf an Innovationen in unserer Wissensgesellschaft. Wir brauchen mehr Forschung und Entwicklung. Drittens besteht die Notwendigkeit, Ressourcen endlich effizient zu nutzen. Wir brauchen eine ökologischere Wirtschaftsweise. Diese Herausforderungen muss künftige Förderpolitik berücksichtigen.\n\nDie GRW soll dazu dienen, gleichwertige Lebensverhältnisse in allen Landesteilen herzustellen. Für uns heißt das: gleiche Startchancen für alle, auch unabhängig von der Herkunftsregion. Wie ein Lebensweg verläuft, darf doch nicht der geografische Zufall entscheiden; das hat der Kollege Lutze schon gesagt. Daher brauchen wir Chancengleichheit und Teilhabe an der Arbeitswelt, an Bildung, an Gesellschaft, an Politik und nicht zuletzt an der Digitalisierung. Dafür müssen wir gerade in den ländlichen Räumen Jobs erhalten, aber genauso regionale Infrastruktur stärken. Wir brauchen dafür - auch das ist mehrfach angesprochen worden - einen integrierten Politikansatz. Genau hier muss die GRW weiterentwickelt werden, um nach 2020 zukunftsfähig zu sein.\n\nIch glaube, wir sind uns im Kern einig: Das Ziel der Förderung muss der Mittelstand sein. Das muss sich auch im Mittelabfluss widerspiegeln. Im Moment ist das noch ein bisschen anders: Der Mittelstand wirkt für die Region; er setzt auf regionale Belieferungs- und Vermarktungsstrukturen. Wir wollen nachhaltige Strukturen fördern und in Köpfe und Netzwerke investieren. Es gilt, die Potenziale der ländlichen Räume zu erschließen.\n\nWir sagen: Die Energiewende muss durch eine Wirtschaftsförderung flankiert werden, weil zum Beispiel die Lausitz Arbeitsplätze für die Zeit nach der Kohle braucht. Die Wirtschaftsförderung muss aktiven Klimaschutz durch kurze Wege unterstützen und schließlich durch eine bessere Verzahnung mit der GAK auch die Agrarwende hin zur bäuerlich-ökologischen Landwirtschaft begleiten. Hier kann die GRW einen großen Beitrag leisten.\n\nIhr Ansatz, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ist richtig: Die Antworten auf diese globalen Fragen liegen in regionalen Lösungen. Hier liegt noch ein weiter Weg vor uns.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n12447,karl-schiewerling,\"Im Koalitionsvertrag haben wir vereinbart, Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dass wir die missbräuchlichen Entwicklungen im Bereich von Leiharbeit und Werkverträgen angehen wollen. Das machen wir mit diesem Gesetz. Dieses Gesetz ebnet neue Wege. Ich halte das für richtig. Allerdings fangen wir damit nicht erst an; wir haben bereits in der letzten Koalition unter den damaligen Bedingungen eine ganze Menge organisiert. Wir setzen das fort. Wir wollen faire Bedingungen - daran arbeiten wir -, aber wir wollen auch die Chancen nutzen, die die Leiharbeit bietet.\n\nLieber Herr Kollege Ernst, ich finde es schon abenteuerlich, wie Sie „Gemeinwohl“ definieren. Für uns heißt Gemeinwohl, dass wir Menschen, die sonst keine Perspektive haben, in Beschäftigung bringen. Für uns heißt Gemeinwohl, dass wir den Menschen, die Hilfe brauchen, Hilfe geben. Für uns heißt Gemeinwohl nicht unbedingt, ein starres System zu schaffen, in dem sich keiner mehr bewegen kann und in dem die Wirtschaft hinterher keine Luft mehr bekommt.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, das Arbeitnehmerüberlassungsgesetz, das wir hier verändern, richtigerweise verändern, ist ein Schutzgesetz, es muss aber auch Chancen eröffnen, dass Menschen über diesen Weg in Beschäftigung kommen. Dass Sie das hier ständig so darstellen, als sei das alles Ausbeutung, dazu muss ich sagen: Das ist purer Unfug. Viele der Menschen, die jetzt in Leiharbeit tätig sind, wären sonst möglicherweise nicht erwerbstätig, weil nämlich keineswegs gesichert wäre, dass sie über andere Wege im Arbeitsmarkt untergekommen wären.\n\nDiese Fragen sind hinten und vorn nicht geklärt. Dies so darzustellen, wie Sie es getan haben, halte ich für grundfalsch.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir wollen die Chancen für die Menschen nutzen. Wir wollen mit der Reform des Arbeitnehmerüberlassungsgesetzes gleichzeitig Dinge in Ordnung bringen. Frau Kramme hat das eingangs dargestellt. Das kann ich nur unterstreichen und sagen, dass das auch unsere Ziele sind. Unser Ziel ist allerdings auch, dass wir an bestimmte Dinge mit Augenmaß herangehen. Die Frage, wie und wann Sanktionen greifen, haben wir im Ausschuss noch einmal vernünftig geklärt.\n\nIch will nur sagen, dass von allen Menschen, die in Zeitarbeit tätig sind, 98 Prozent unter einem Tarifvertrag arbeiten, 90 Prozent in Vollzeit arbeiten, 70 Prozent aus der Arbeitslosigkeit kommen und 29 Prozent keinen Berufsabschluss haben. Ich sage Ihnen: Für diese Menschen brauchen wir auch weiter den Weg über die Zeitarbeit in Beschäftigung.\n\nWir werden erleben, dass wir dieses Instrument auch in Zukunft benötigen, wenn uns zum Beispiel die Aufgabe gestellt ist, viele Flüchtlinge auf dem Arbeitsmarkt unterzubringen. Ich möchte gern, dass wir dieses Instrument dafür nutzen können.\n\nViele Betriebe halten sich daran, haben eigene Dinge entwickelt und eigene Schwerpunkte gebildet. In meinem Wahlkreis zahlt zum Beispiel die Firma Schmitz Cargobull 2 000 Beschäftigten, knapp 560 Leiharbeitnehmern, Zeitarbeitnehmern, bereits ab dem ersten Tag Equal Pay.\n\nWarum hat die Firma das so gemacht? Nicht deshalb, weil sie Auftragsspitzen auffangen will, sondern deshalb, weil sie aus den Erfahrungen mit der Finanzkrise 2008 gelernt hat, dass die gesamte Firma in Gefahr ist, wenn sie die Flexibilität für die Beschäftigten nicht hat. Die Bedingungen, die für die Menschen gelten, die dort als Leiharbeitnehmer tätig sind, sind fair und tarifvertraglich abgesichert. Das wird mitgetragen. Der Betriebsrat - mit dem habe ich mich heute Morgen noch einmal ausführlich unterhalten - hat diese Dinge ausdrücklich mitgetragen.\n\nAuch wir haben Verleiharbeitsfirmen, die entsprechende klare Regelungen haben. Ich glaube, dass das, was dort tarifvertraglich geregelt ist, vernünftig angepackt ist.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, Inhalt des Gesetzentwurfes ist: nach 9 Monaten Einsatzdauer Equal Pay; Überlassungshöchstdauer von 18 Monaten. In Fortführung anderer Gesetze, die wir in dieser Legislatur miteinander beschlossen haben, machen wir auch hier etwas, worauf wir als Koalition großen Wert legen: Wir stärken die Tarifautonomie. Wir lassen nämlich Ausnahmen nur zu, sofern tarifvertragliche Vereinbarungen dies ermöglichen. Ich halte das für einen richtigen Schritt, weil wir auf diesem Wege den Arbeitgebern sagen, dass es sich lohnt, im Arbeitgeberverband zu sein und über Tarifverträge die Bedingungen am Arbeitsmarkt gemeinsam mit den Gewerkschaften ordentlich und vernünftig auszuhandeln. Deswegen halte ich diesen Schritt auch für richtig.\n\nNoch ein Punkt lag uns sehr am Herzen. Wir alle kennen die Fälle: Einsatzbetriebe schließen einen Werkvertrag, und erst wenn die Finanzkontrolle Schwarzarbeit kommt, fällt ihnen ein, dass das eine Arbeitnehmerüberlassung sein könnte. - Diesen Spurwechsel wollen wir nicht. Es muss klar sein, was Werkvertrag, was Zeitarbeit und Leiharbeit ist, schon alleine, um die Arbeitnehmer zu schützen. Mit diesem Gesetz führen wir dies ein.\n\nViele haben übrigens die Sorge, sie könnten plötzlich unter die Regelungen des Arbeitnehmerüberlassungsgesetzes fallen. Wir haben im Ausschuss noch einmal deutlich erklärt und dargelegt, dass zum Beispiel alle, die Beratungsdienstleistungen erbringen oder Implementierungen von neuen Projekten in einem Betrieb vornehmen, nicht darunterfallen, sondern für sie weiterhin die werkvertragliche Regelung gilt. Das ist vernünftig und klug. Wir sollten an dieser Stelle auch sagen: Ja, wir wollen, dass faire Bedingungen am Arbeitsmarkt herrschen; wir wollen aber auch das Kind nicht mit dem Bade ausschütten, sondern Beschäftigung ermöglichen. Ja, wir als CDU/CSU-Fraktion wollen vor allen Dingen mit diesem Gesetzentwurf, den wir gemeinsam mit unserem Koalitionspartner, der SPD, auf den Weg gebracht haben und heute beschließen, Menschen Wege in Beschäftigung eröffnen und damit eine Grundlage für eine gute wirtschaftliche Entwicklung schaffen. Ich bin sicher, dass wir mit diesem Gesetz gemeinsam einen wichtigen Schritt nach vorne gehen.\"\n5655,karin-maag,\"Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Es wurde jetzt schon viel Richtiges zu diesem Gesetz gesagt. Vor allem geht es uns darum, den Versorgungsalltag der Patientinnen und Patienten zu verbessern. Kollegin Mattheis hat exemplarisch auf das Entlassmanagement im Krankenhaus hingewiesen. Selbstverständlich soll niemand mehr freitagmittags ohne seine Medikamente nach Hause gehen. Das werden wir ebenso in Angriff nehmen wie zum Beispiel - das liegt mir persönlich sehr am Herzen - die Verbesserungen für pflegebedürftige Menschen sowie Menschen mit Behinderungen und eingeschränkter Alltagskompetenz. Kinder und Jugendliche werden bereits heute in den sozialpädiatrischen Zentren behandelt. Wir gewähren jetzt den Erwachsenen einen vernünftigen Anschluss.\n\nDa gibt es eine Vielzahl an vernünftigen, guten Maßnahmen. Es wurde schon gesagt: Es ist ein Paket; nur die eine zentrale Maßnahme zu ergreifen, wäre sicher zu kurz gesprungen.\n\nIch will mich an dieser Stelle auf die ärztliche Versorgung konzentrieren. Wir haben eine zunehmende Behandlungsintensität in einer alternden Gesellschaft, den medizinischen Fortschritt - das wissen Sie -, eine zunehmende Spezialisierung, aber auch eine Besinnung der Ärztinnen und Ärzte auf die eigene Work-Life-Balance. Den Mediziner, der 16 Stunden am Tag behandelt, den Landarzt wird es künftig nicht mehr geben. Deswegen sind wir auf den Nachwuchs angewiesen. Es wurde vorhin schon davon gesprochen: Gute Versorgung darf keine Frage des Wohnorts sein; wir müssen sie überall in Deutschland gewährleisten.\n\nBeim Versorgungsstärkungsgesetz geht es uns jetzt vor allem auch darum, an das anzuknüpfen, was wir bereits 2012 geregelt haben, also die Rahmenbedingungen für die Ärzte weiter zu flexibilisieren und dafür zu sorgen, dass eine flächendeckende Versorgung möglich ist. Wenn wir die Situation der Patientinnen und Patienten tatsächlich verbessern wollen - das ist mir ganz wichtig -, dann brauchen wir vor allem motivierte Ärzte. Ich bin mir sicher - das ist jetzt die Conclusio -, dass wir mit unserem Paket die Lebenswirklichkeit der Ärzte, insbesondere der jüngeren Ärztinnen und Ärzte und der nicht verfassten Ärzteschaft, deutlich besser widerspiegeln als bisher.\n\nWir fördern zum Beispiel die Allgemeinmedizin. Die jungen Ärztinnen und Ärzte sollen sich in der Praxis vor Ort ein Bild machen können. Deswegen erhöhen wir nicht nur die Zahl der geförderten Stellen von 5 000 auf 7 500 - das sind 50 Prozent mehr -, sondern wir streben auch eine höhere Vergütung für den Praxisassistenten an. Er muss sich also nicht überlegen: Wenn ich meine Weiterbildung im Krankenhaus mache, dann werde ich besser bezahlt und habe somit mehr Geld zur Verfügung, um meine Miete zu zahlen. - Wir setzen auf die Praxis.\n\nMit dem Strukturfonds erhalten die KVen zusätzliche Mittel, um den Ärzten die Niederlassung auf dem Land durch eine höhere Vergütung schmackhaft zu machen.\n\nDie Angst vor Regressen - das Thema hat uns in den letzten Jahren heftig beschäftigt - hält sich hartnäckig, obwohl zum Beispiel bei mir in Baden-Württemberg in den letzten Jahren lediglich 0,2 Prozent der Ärzte in Regress genommen worden sind. Eine solche unbegründete Angst verhindert, dass junge Menschen den Beruf des niedergelassenen Arztes wählen. Deswegen heben wir die bundeseinheitlichen Vorgaben für die Wirtschaftlichkeitsprüfung von ärztlich verordneten Leistungen auf und ersetzen diese durch regionale Vereinbarungen. Das ist ein ganz zentraler Punkt.\n\nWir gehen sogar noch weiter. Wir müssen auch nichtärztliche Leistungen, also delegierte Leistungen, vergüten. Das betrifft nicht nur die unterversorgten Gebiete und nicht nur die häusliche Versorgung von Patienten. Wir ermöglichen es, dass die Fachassistentin, der Fachassistent in der niedergelassenen Praxis Leistungen erbringen kann, die der Arzt nachher abrechnen kann.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, einer fehlerhaften Ressourcenallokation kann man mit Anreizen begegnen. Wenn das nicht funktioniert, dann muss eine Regulierung erfolgen. Mit der Bedarfsplanungs-Richtlinie 2013 des G-BA wird der tatsächliche Bedarf bei der regionalen ärztlichen Versorgung zumindest deutlich besser als zuvor abgebildet, Frau Klein-Schmeink.\n\nJetzt haben die KVen tatsächlich Maßnahmen gegen die drohende Unterversorgung ergriffen; Maßnahmen gegen Überversorgung - und das ärgert mich - spielen bislang aber keine Rolle. Wir wollen eine Umsteuerung - ärztliche Ressourcen weg von Gebieten, die ohnehin überversorgt sind, hin zu Gebieten, die unterversorgt sind -, und das braucht Zeit. Da bisher nicht die nötigen Schritte eingeleitet wurden, sind wir als Gesetzgeber zum Eingreifen gezwungen. Das heißt, dort, wo tatsächlich Überversorgung herrscht und - ganz wichtig - wo Ärzte ihre Praxen aus eigenem Entschluss aufgeben wollen - wir nehmen niemandem irgendetwas weg -, soll nicht mehr nachbesetzt werden. In diesem Zusammenhang sind uns drei Dinge wichtig. Erstens. Keine bestehende Praxis wird vom Netz genommen. Zweitens. Bei besonderem Versorgungsbedarf wird nachbesetzt. Drittens. Das letzte Wort hat der Zulassungsausschuss, also auch die Ärzte.\n\nDie Kritik an den von mir genannten Maßnahmen ist schrill. An die KBV gerichtet sage ich: Sie müssen aufpassen, dass Sie - ähnlich wie beim Thema Regress - nicht noch den letzten gutwilligen jungen Arzt, der überlegt, ob er in die Niederlassung geht, abschrecken.\n\nEs ist die ureigene Aufgabe der KVen, die Versorgung sicherzustellen. Wenn sich nun der Vorsitzende der KBV, gefragt nach eigenen Ideen, die er vielleicht haben könnte,\n\nzitieren lässt mit den Worten: „Alle sollten sich ‚eingestehen, dass nicht mehr jedes Dorf seinen Hausarzt haben wird‘“, dann ist das eine standespolitische Geisterfahrt. Das ist eine persönliche Bankrotterklärung. Damit hat er sich als Ansprechpartner, für mich jedenfalls, völlig disqualifiziert.\n\nIch finde das deshalb schade, weil wir uns mit vielen Landes-KVen und vielen Verbänden in guten Gesprächen darüber befinden, wie wir den Versorgungsbedarf vielleicht noch sachgerechter abbilden können und wie wir eine zeitnahe Terminvergabe gemeinsam mit den Ärzten besser hinbekommen können. Es gibt hierzu auf regionaler Ebene viele gute Ideen.\n\nIch bin auch schon am Ende, Herr Präsident. - Ich freue mich auf die Anhörung. Wir haben heute vieles von Ihnen gehört. Wir können aus dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf sicher ein noch runderes Werk basteln.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n950,jeannine-pflugradt,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Mit der Verabschiedung des deutschen Schulobstgesetzes Ende September 2009 fand Deutschland eine Antwort auf das von der Europäischen Union eingeführte Schulobstprogramm. Das Schulobstgesetz ist die Voraussetzung dafür, dass sich deutsche Schulen an dem von der EU mitfinanzierten Programm beteiligen können. In Deutschland sind, wie schon erwähnt, die Bundesländer für die Umsetzung des Programms zuständig. Momentan beteiligen sich sieben Bundesländer - Baden-Württemberg, Bayern, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Rheinland-Pfalz, Saarland, Sachsen-Anhalt und Thüringen - am EU-Schulobstprogramm. Ab dem Schuljahr 2014/2015 wird voraussichtlich Niedersachsen in das Programm mit einsteigen.\n\nHeute sprechen wir über das Schulobstgesetz, weil die EU ab 2014 die Mittel für das Schulobstprogramm für alle Mitgliedstaaten auf 150 Millionen Euro erhöht. Das sind 60 Millionen Euro mehr als im vorigen Jahr; das ist eine ganze Menge. Für Deutschland werden für das nächste Schuljahr voraussichtlich 19,7 Millionen Euro zur Verfügung stehen. Die EU übernimmt 75 Prozent der Kofinanzierung statt bisher 50 Prozent. Der Eigenanteil der Länder sinkt somit auf - in Anführungszeichen - „nur noch“ 25 Prozent.\n\nDamit die Mitgliedstaaten von den Änderungen auf EU-Ebene profitieren können, wurde die Frist für die Einreichung der Strategien von Ende Januar 2014 auf Ende April 2014 verschoben. Der vorliegende Gesetzentwurf des Bundesrates nimmt diese Neuerungen auf und passt sie an das deutsche Recht an. Bis zum 3. April dieses Jahres haben die Bundesländer nun noch Zeit, ihr Interesse beim Bundesministerium zu bekunden. Bis Ende April muss der Bund schließlich seine regionale Strategie bei der EU-Kommission eingereicht haben. Ohne die vorgeschlagenen Veränderungen könnten die teilnehmenden Bundesländer die erwartete Erhöhung des Kofinanzierungsanteils nicht in Anspruch nehmen.\n\nZusätzlich enthält der vorliegende Entwurf eine Verordnungsermächtigung für das zuständige Bundesministerium für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft, das in Zukunft durch Rechtsverordnung auf solche Mittel- und Friständerungen der EU zeitnah reagieren soll. Die zur Verfügung gestellten Mittel sollen für den Ankauf von Obst und Gemüse und dessen Verteilung an Schulen, Kindergärten und anderen Vorschuleinrichtungen sowie - ganz wichtig - für begleitende Informationsmaßnahmen verwendet werden.\n\nZiel ist eine dauerhafte Erhöhung des Konsums von Obst und Gemüse bei Kindern, um einen Beitrag zur gesunden Ernährung zu leisten. Momentan haben 1,9 Millionen Kinder in Deutschland Übergewicht. Meine Damen und Herren, das ist eine besorgniserregende und, wie ich finde, eine erschreckende Zahl.\n\nNeben dem Angebot einer gesunden Ernährung müssen deshalb auch die Ernährungsbildung verbessert und vor allem das Bewegungsangebot optimiert werden; denn das Wissen um eine ausgewogene Ernährung allein reicht nicht aus, um das tatsächliche Ernährungsverhalten zu verändern. Beispielsweise sollten die Kinder lernen, woher die Nahrung kommt, die gerade verzehrt wird, wie gesunde und ausgeglichene Ernährung funktioniert oder wie mit Lebensmitteln umgegangen werden soll.\n\n90 Prozent der Lehrerinnen und Lehrer, der Schulleiterinnen und Schulleiter der in Deutschland beteiligten Schulen sagen übereinstimmend, dass ein Schulobstprogramm ohne große Probleme in den Schulalltag integriert werden kann. Wichtig ist jedoch ein kostenfreies Angebot für die Kinder, damit niemand aus sozialen Gründen ausgeschlossen wird.\n\nEin gemeinschaftlicher Verzehr beeinflusst maßgeblich sowohl das Zusammengehörigkeitsgefühl als auch die Denkweise über die Ernährung. Ich persönlich halte gesunde Essgewohnheiten von klein auf für enorm wichtig und auch für eine Grundlage für einen gesunden Lebensstil. Obst und Gemüse sind dabei unentbehrlich für eine vollwertige und ausgeglichene Ernährung. Diese Lebensmittel enthalten neben Vitaminen, Mineralstoffen, Ballaststoffen sowie Kohlenhydraten auch einen hohen Wasseranteil. Ein hoher Verzehr von Obst und Gemüse hat eine positive Wirkung bei der Vorbeugung von zahlreichen Erkrankungen.\n\nSchulobstprogramme können und sollen einen direkten Einfluss auf die Ernährungsgewohnheiten der Schüler nehmen. Sie sollen helfen, Kindern Obst und Gemüse schmackhaft zu machen. Gerade in der heutigen Zeit ist die Schule auch ein Lernort für gesellschaftliche Aufgaben geworden. Schulen müssen mehr Verantwortung übernehmen, da viele Eltern sich leider aus dieser Verantwortung aus den verschiedensten Gründen zurückziehen. Wertevorstellungen werden nicht nur von den Eltern weitergegeben, sondern auch von Lehrern und Mitschülern. Wenn in einer Familie nicht regelmäßig Obst und Gemüse auf dem Tisch stehen, kann der Verzehr als geplante Routine während der Schulzeit neue Essgewohnheiten schaffen.\n\nDurch die Einführung von Schulobstprogrammen übernimmt der Staat eine wichtige Mitverantwortung für eine gesunde Ernährung von Schulkindern. Deshalb sehe ich auch den Vorschlag der EU-Kommission zur Zusammenlegung der beiden EU-Programme „Schulobst“ und „Schulmilch“ sehr positiv. Wie Sie bereits wissen, haben die ersten Beratungen im Europäischen Rat stattgefunden. Es wird vorgeschlagen, einen gemeinsamen rechtlichen und finanziellen Rahmen für die Verteilung von Obst und Gemüse sowie Milch an Schulkinder zu generieren und durch verstärkte pädagogische Maßnahmen zu unterstützen. Die bereitgestellten Mittel sind sicherlich nicht ausreichend, um das Gesamtproblem von Übergewicht und Fettleibigkeit in den Griff zu bekommen. Programme wie die Verteilung von Obst, Gemüse und Milch an Schulen sind da sicherlich nur ein Anstoß. Aber dieser ist meiner Meinung nach sehr wichtig.\n\nIch appelliere hier an dieser Stelle an alle Bundesländer, sich an diesem für unsere Kinder und Jugendlichen sehr wichtigen Programm zu beteiligen. Und an Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, appelliere ich, sich in Ihrem jeweiligen Bundesland und Wahlkreis über dieses - gute - Programm weiter intensiv zu informieren.\n\nMeine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir müssen heute dieses Geld in unsere Kinder investieren; denn dadurch minimieren wir unkalkulierbare hohe Kosten aufgrund gesundheitlicher Probleme unserer Mitmenschen, die unsere Gesellschaft auf Dauer belasten können. Nur gesunde Kinder sind leistungsfähig, und die Wahrscheinlichkeit, ein dauerhafter Leistungsempfänger zu werden, sinkt durch eine gesunde Ernährung.\n\nEinen persönlichen Wunsch habe ich anschließend: Lassen Sie uns gemeinsam nach Wegen suchen, dieses Programm zu erweitern, und beziehen wir die vielen Sportvereine ein. In diesen Sportvereinen betätigen sich die Kinder in ihrer Freizeit oder im Rahmen von Ganztagsschulen. Auch das fördert ihre Gesundheit.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n3014,karl-holmeier,\"Sehr verehrter Herr Präsident! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Ganz Europa schaut bewundernd auf Deutschland. Unsere Wirtschaft ist unter der Regierungsverantwortung der Union und unserer Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel wieder zur schwarzen Lokomotive in Europa geworden. Die Wirtschaft verlangt nach Vertrauen. Dieses notwendige Verlangen der deutschen Wirtschaft haben wir vor allem während und nach der weltweiten Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise mit Inhalt und mit Rückhalt erfüllt. Deutschland steht heute im europäischen Vergleich hervorragend da. Wir haben unsere Hausaufgaben gemacht, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren.\n\nGanz Europa blickt auf Deutschland. Deutschland ist die unumstrittene Lokomotive für Wachstum und Beschäftigung. Den Aufschwung in Deutschland haben wir nicht mit Worten herbeigeredet. Es waren vielmehr umfassende Anstrengungen auf allen Ebenen des Staates und in der Wirtschaft, die die Weichen für die Wachstumslokomotive Deutschland gestellt haben. Die Zahlen geben uns Recht. Die wirtschaftlichen Aussichten in Deutschland sind weiterhin gut. Die Schätzungen erwarten in diesem Jahr ein Wachstum von etwa 1,8 Prozent. Auch die Prognose für 2015 ist hervorragend.\n\nEs wurde schon oft angesprochen: 42,7 Millionen Menschen sind in Deutschland erwerbstätig, ein Rekordwert. Seit 2005 sind mehr als 3 Millionen Menschen in Arbeit gekommen. Die Zahl der sozialversicherungspflichtig Beschäftigten ist auf über 30 Millionen gestiegen, ein Plus von über 540 000 im Vergleich zum Vorjahr.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, der europäische Durchschnitt bei der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit liegt bei 22,5 Prozent, mit Spitzenwerten in Spanien und Griechenland von über 50 Prozent. Deutschland - das bescheinigt uns das europäische Amt für Statistik - hat mit 7,9 Prozent die geringste Jugendarbeitslosigkeit in ganz Europa, ein großartiger Erfolg.\n\nIn meiner Region finden alle jungen Leute eine Lehrstelle. Wir helfen auch, indem wir auch in diesem Jahr wieder zahlreiche Lehrstellen für junge Spanier und Spanierinnen anbieten. Das wird dankend angenommen.\n\nDer in Deutschland eingeschlagene Weg aus Wachsen, Konsolidieren und Reformieren zeigt, dass er richtig ist. Dieser Weg sollte Vorbild für ganz Europa sein.\n\nMit dem vorliegenden Bundeshaushalt 2015 tragen wir dazu bei, diese guten Aussichten weiter zu verfestigen. Der klare Kurs der Haushaltskonsolidierung wird sich in den nächsten Jahren fortsetzen. Der Haushalt 2015 weist erstmals seit 45 Jahren wieder eine schwarze Null auf. Der Erfolgsweg aus Wachsen und Konsolidieren wird fortgesetzt.\n\nWir fördern den Mittelstand. Wir fördern Innovationen und investieren weiter in Forschung und Entwicklung. Wir unterstützen die Energiewende und setzen auf Energieeffizienz. Wir erhöhen die Fördermittel für die Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“ und werden sie, wie im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart, weiter bedarfsgerecht steigen lassen.\n\nDeutschland, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, ist ein Gründerland. Daher werden wir auch in Zukunft Unternehmensgründungen unterstützen, den innovativen Mittelstand fördern und die regionale Wirtschaft weiter stärken. Familienunternehmen, kleine und mittelständische Unternehmen sind die Stütze unserer Wirtschaft. Unser gesunder Mittelstand hat bei der Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise gezeigt, wie stark und zukunftsfest er aufgestellt ist. Unsere gesunde mittelständische Wirtschaft war und ist der Garant, dass Deutschland die Krise schneller als andere Staaten bewältigt hat. Gerade der Mittelstand schafft Arbeitsplätze, vor allem Lehrstellen, und erhält sie in Krisenzeiten. Die Vergangenheit hat das ganz klar bewiesen.\n\nDie Bundesregierung unterstützt innovative Unternehmensgründungen im Jahr 2015 mit einer Gesamtsumme von 67 Millionen Euro. Dies sind wichtige Zukunftsinvestitionen in den Standort Deutschland. Für den Ausbau der Forschungsinfrastruktur stellen wir dem Mittelstand rund 200 Millionen Euro zur Verfügung. So sollen vorwettbewerbliche Forschungsaufgaben mit hohem Umsetzungspotenzial unterstützt werden.\n\nWir fördern die deutsche Wirtschaft ressortübergreifend. Eine gesunde und intakte Infrastruktur ist der Schlüssel zum Erfolg eines jeden Unternehmens. Daher ist es richtig und wichtig, dass wir den Breitbandausbau in Deutschland vorantreiben. Bis zum Jahr 2018 wollen wir bundesweit ein schnelles Internet mit einer Geschwindigkeit von 50 Megabit pro Sekunde etablieren, auch und vor allem im ländlichen Raum. Darüber hinaus stellt die Bundesregierung bis 2017 zusätzlich 5 Milliarden Euro zur Stärkung der Verkehrsinfrastruktur zur Verfügung. Ein schnelles Internet und eine gesunde Verkehrsinfrastruktur sind für unsere deutsche Wirtschaft von großer Bedeutung. Indem wir beides ausbauen, stärken wir den Wirtschaftsstandort Deutschland.\n\nWesentlicher Schwerpunkt der Förderung des Mittelstands als Innovationsmotor ist auch in der Zukunft das bislang sehr erfolgreiche, technologieoffene Zentrale Investitionsprogramm Mittelstand, ZIM. Aufgrund des großen Erfolges - es wurde bereits angesprochen - werden die Mittel 2015 um 30 Millionen auf insgesamt 543 Millionen Euro steigen. Mit der Erhöhung der Mittel für ZIM und der Förderung innovativer Unternehmensgründungen sind die Weichen für künftiges Wachstum und künftige Beschäftigung somit richtig gestellt.\n\nErhöht werden auch die Mittel für die Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“, GRW, auf insgesamt knapp 600 Millionen Euro. Zusammen mit den Mitteln aus der Kofinanzierung durch die Bundesländer stehen somit 1,2 Milliarden Euro für strukturschwache Regionen zur Verfügung. Von den GRW-Mitteln profitieren in erster Linie die Grenzregionen. Ich möchte, weil meine Region betroffen ist, der Bundesregierung an dieser Stelle einen herzlichen Dank dafür sagen, dass die ostbayerische Region an der Grenze zur Tschechischen Republik wieder Fördergebiet geworden ist. Dies ist wichtig und vor allem für die künftige, gute Weiterentwicklung unserer ostbayerischen Region von hoher Bedeutung.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, der herausragende Stellenwert von Energie als Bestandteil einer intakten und erfolgreichen Wirtschaft ist unbestritten. Die Energiewende ist beschlossen, sie ist auf den Weg gebracht, und sie wird im Jahre 2022 sicherlich erfolgreich enden.\n\nWir haben ein neues EEG beschlossen, das die langfristige Bezahlbarkeit von Strom für Unternehmen und Verbraucher sowie die Konkurrenzfähigkeit der deutschen Wirtschaft gewährleistet. Die Energiewende ist ein richtiger und notwendiger Schritt auf dem Weg in eine Industriegesellschaft der Nachhaltigkeit. Mit der Energiewende verfestigen wir den nachhaltigen Umwelt- und Klimaschutz. Wir machen uns damit auch unabhängiger von Energieimporten.\n\nDie Energiewende, meine Damen und Herren, sichert Arbeitsplätze und Wertschöpfung in Deutschland, gerade im ländlichen Raum. Die Energiewende ist eine riesige Chance für den ländlichen Raum in Deutschland. Eine der Herausforderungen der Großen Koalition ist natürlich auch, den engagierten Klimaschutz zum wirtschaftlichen Fortschrittsmotor zu entwickeln und dabei Wohlstand und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit zu stärken. Wir wollen die Entwicklung zu einer Energieversorgung ohne Atomenergie und mit stetig wachsendem Anteil erneuerbarer Energien konsequent und planvoll fortführen.\n\nWir müssen uns aber auch klar darüber sein, dass die Energiewende nicht von alleine kommt. Die Verabschiedung des EEG 2014 war ein erster Schritt. Weitere Schritte müssen und werden folgen: Wir brauchen ein neues Marktdesign, mehr Energieeffizienz, Speicherkapazitäten und ein leistungsfähiges Stromnetz. In unseren Haushaltsplanungen wird daher den Projekten zur Energieeffizienz und zur energetischen Gebäudesanierung ein besonderer Stellenwert eingeräumt. Wir werden alleine für die Forschung und Entwicklung in den Bereichen der Energieeffizienz, der erneuerbaren Energien und der Sicherheitsforschung 324 Millionen Euro für 2015 bereitstellen. Das Marktanreizprogramm zur Förderung von Anlagen zur Nutzung erneuerbarer Energien verfügt zusammen mit der Finanzierung des Betriebs der Clearingstelle EEG über Mittel von insgesamt 255 Millionen Euro.\n\nSchwerpunkte des Marktanreizprogramms sind der Wärmemarkt und die Energiegewinnung. Wir werden die Energiewende auch in Zukunft mit dem Energie- und Klimafonds als zentralem Finanzierungsinstrument unterstützen und voranbringen.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, mit dem vorliegenden generationengerechten Haushalt stellt die Bundesregierung unter Beweis, dass sie einen Zukunftsplan hat. Wir planen und gestalten mit diesem Haushalt die Zukunft unseres Landes. Wir stärken damit die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung Deutschlands, nachhaltig und langfristig. Diese Stärkung wird auf unsere Nachbarn in Europa sicherlich abstrahlen. Auch sie werden von unserer Stärke in Deutschland profitieren. Deutschland ist damit ein starkes Herz im Zentrum Europas.\n\nNach Jahren, in denen in Deutschland ohne Rücksicht auf nachfolgende Generationen aus dem Vollen geschöpft wurde, befinden wir uns heute im Zeitalter der konsolidierten Staatsfinanzen. Wir schließen somit einen Kreis zu Franz Josef Strauß, der 1969 den letzten schuldenfreien Haushalt in Deutschland vorlegen konnte. Im Jahr 2015 legen wir wieder einen schuldenfreien Haushalt in Deutschland vor. Das ist nach 45 Jahren ein Riesenerfolg. Darauf können wir stolz sein, genauso wie auf unsere Wirtschaft, genauso wie auf unser Land.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n6795,rosemarie-hein,\"Vielen Dank, dass Sie die Frage zulassen. - Herr Weinberg, ich habe in meiner Zeit als Landespolitikerin viele Jahre den Bereich Kinderbetreuung in meinem politischen Profil gehabt. Sie haben vorhin wiederholt darauf hingewiesen - auch die Staatssekretärin hat es gesagt -: Die Qualität und die Personalstandards haben sich nicht verschlechtert. - Sie sind nicht schlechter geworden, das stimmt. Sie sind aber auch nicht besser geworden. Aber wir haben ein Gefälle zwischen Ost und West. Ich muss sagen: Im Osten haben wir heute einen Personalschlüssel, der im Durchschnitt bei 1 : 12 liegt. Er war einmal deutlich besser, nämlich Anfang der 1990er-Jahre. Damals gab es Vorwürfe aus den alten Bundesländern, dass wir uns den Luxus der flächendeckenden Kinderbetreuung leisten. Im Zuge dieser Vorwürfe sind die Betreuungsschlüssel schlechter geworden. Nun kann ich auch für den Osten sagen, dass die Qualität der Kinderbetreuung unter dem schlechteren Betreuungsschlüssel nicht gelitten hat, dass das Aufrechterhalten dieser Qualität aber auf dem Rücken der Erzieherinnen und Erzieher ausgetragen wird.\n\nIch möchte Sie fragen, ob Sie angesichts dessen nicht finden - es sind ja neue Aufgaben hinzugekommen -, dass die Arbeit der Erzieherinnen und Erzieher und aller in diesem Bereich Tätigen deutlich aufgewertet werden muss. Unterstützen Sie aus diesem Grunde auch die Aufwertungskampagne, die derzeit läuft?\"\n3278,reinhard-brandl,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrter Herr Wehrbeauftragter! Lassen Sie mich am Anfang Ihnen und Ihren Mitarbeitern für Ihre Arbeit danken. Sie sind für uns im Verteidigungsausschuss ein unverzichtbares Instrument. Sie sind unser Ohr an der Truppe und geben uns und dem Ministerium wichtige Hinweise, wo etwas schiefläuft und wo wir gegebenenfalls politisch oder vonseiten des Ministeriums nachsteuern müssen.\n\nEin Thema, das Sie in Ihrer Amtszeit immer wieder aufgegriffen haben - das gefällt nicht jedem; das ist aber wichtig -, ist die Frage der Ausrüstung. Ausrüstung ist Teil der Attraktivität. Ausrüstung ist Teil der Verantwortung des Dienstherrn und des Parlamentes. Eine gute Ausrüstung ist auch eine sicherheitspolitische Notwendigkeit.\n\nWir erleben gerade eine unglaubliche Gleichzeitigkeit von verschiedenen Krisenherden in der Welt. Dies macht es notwendig, dass die Bundeswehr zum Beispiel im Irak und bei der Bekämpfung von Ebola plötzlich und schnell reagiert. Wir haben unsere Bundeswehr schon reduziert; das ist das Konzept „Breite vor Tiefe“. Wir haben aber die Breite vorgehalten. Damit dieses Konzept funktioniert, ist es unerlässlich, dass die Ausrüstung, die wir haben, funktioniert und für Einsatzzwecke zur Verfügung steht. Lieber Herr Wehrbeauftragter, ich möchte Ihnen dafür danken, dass Sie da den Finger in die Wunde gelegt haben.\n\nEs ist aber auch wichtig für uns im Parlament. Wir beschließen hier jedes Auslandsmandat der Bundeswehr. Ein Auslandsmandat ist immer auch mit Risiken für Leib und Leben der Soldaten verbunden. Wenn wir das beschließen, ist von unserer Seite damit die Verpflichtung verbunden, dass wir den Soldaten die entsprechende Ausrüstung zur Verfügung stellen, damit diese Risiken für Leib und Leben minimiert werden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich will in dem Zusammenhang auf eine Debatte hinweisen, die heute noch nicht angesprochen worden ist, aber die der Wehrbeauftragte vor der Sommerpause sehr intensiv geführt hat: die Beschaffung von möglicherweise bewaffnungsfähigen Drohnen. Sie ermöglichen auf der einen Seite bessere Aufklärung, auf der anderen Seite, wenn es nötig ist, einen zielgenaueren Waffeneinsatz, damit das Risiko für die eigenen Soldaten und für möglicherweise beteiligte Zivilisten minimiert werden kann.\n\nWenn wir hier im Parlament mit Mehrheit einen Einsatz beschließen, dann ist es auch ethisch geboten, eine angemessene Ausrüstung zur Verfügung zu stellen. Wir haben gerade bei den Drohnen, aber auch bei anderen Waffensystemen immer wieder diese Debatte geführt: Verleiten wir die Soldaten zum Schießen oder vielleicht auch zu unethischem Handeln, wenn wir solche Waffensysteme zur Verfügung stellen? Ich habe mir den Jahresbericht des Wehrbeauftragten unter diesem Gesichtspunkt angesehen. Im Bericht des Wehrbeauftragten steht viel drin; wir haben 200 000 Soldaten, und da läuft nicht alles rund. Da gibt es manchmal Verfehlungen, auch im persönlichen Bereich; Sie haben Verfehlungen im Führungsverhalten angesprochen. Es ist aber bezeichnend, dass im Bericht des Wehrbeauftragten kein Satz, kein Wort darüber steht, dass Soldaten bei der Anwendung von militärischer Gewalt in irgendeiner Form verantwortungslos oder völkerrechtswidrig gehandelt haben.\n\nIch kann Ihnen sagen: Die Soldaten sind hervorragende Botschafter unseres Landes im Ausland. Sie verdienen das Vertrauen, das wir ihnen hier im Parlament entgegenbringen. Sie verdienen auch die bestmögliche Ausrüstung.\n\nWir haben in dieser Woche eine wichtige Debatte zum Thema Einsatzbereitschaft geführt. Da gibt es Themen, bei denen wir nachsteuern müssen. Für jeden einzelnen Bereich gibt es immer Begründungen - die In-spekteure haben viele Begründungen geliefert -, warum dieses oder jenes nicht funktioniert. Aber in der Summe ist es für uns natürlich unbefriedigend. Wir wollen eine gut ausgerüstete Bundeswehr, die jederzeit einsatzbereit ist. Dafür kämpft der Wehrbeauftragte, dafür kämpfen wir.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n9482,hans-christian-strobele,\"Frau Staatsministerin, gilt die Antwort, die Sie gerade gegeben haben, auch für die Gebiete im Norden von Syrien, an der Grenze zur Türkei, die unter der Kontrolle der Kurden stehen, und ist der Bundesregierung bekannt, dass unser NATO- und inzwischen auch wieder sonstiger Partner, die Türkei, die Einfuhr humanitärer Güter und vor allen Dingen auch von Aufbauhilfsgütern, die über die türkisch-syrische Grenze ins Land gebracht werden sollen - die Menschen dort leiden immer noch -, an der Grenze unterbindet, selbst wenn diese Hilfe aus Europa kommt? Was unternimmt die Bundesregierung, um diesem Missstand abzuhelfen?\n\nJa, danke. - Frau Staatsministerin, ich habe nicht nach der Geschichte dieses Abkommens gefragt. Diese kann ich nachlesen, darüber bin ich auch informiert. Ich möchte von Ihnen konkret wissen, warum die Annahme im Augenblick gescheitert ist. Sie erzählen hier nur schöne Dinge. Warum ist die Annahme dieses Abkommens im Parlament, und zwar in dem vom Westen unterstützten Parlament, gescheitert?\n\nKann es sein, dass es gegen die Verhandler, also die Abgeordneten und die Regierungsmitglieder von beiden Seiten - dem vom Westen anerkannten und dem vom Westen nicht anerkannten Parlament -, Vorwürfe gibt, zum Beispiel den, dass sie aus dem Ausland finanzielle Zuwendungen erhalten und Ähnliches, welche sie so diskreditieren, dass man dieses Abkommen nicht akzeptiert?\n\nFrau Staatsministerin, ich stelle solche Fragen nicht aus dem Blauen heraus, sondern weil es Informationen gibt. Kann es sein, dass Sie - die Bundesregierung und der Vermittler, vielleicht auch die UN - mindestens zum Teil die falschen Verhandlungspartner haben, dass es sich dabei um diskreditierte Personen handelt? Deshalb ist meine ganz konkrete Frage: In welchem Maße sind beispielsweise Stammesführer, die in Libyen eine ganz besondere Rolle spielen, in solche Verhandlungen einbezogen? Denn wenn die Vereinbarung akzeptiert werden soll - und ich stimme Ihnen zu: die Bevölkerung will Frieden und ein Ende des Waffenganges -, dann muss man ein Angebot machen, das von vertrauenswürdigen Leuten, die nicht solchen Vorwürfen ausgesetzt sind, ausgehandelt wird. Sonst ist das von Anfang an bemakelt und wird nicht angenommen.\n\nDeshalb ist meine klare Frage: Was ist zum Beispiel mit den Stammesführern, und ist die Bundesregierung Vorwürfen nachgegangen, dass es Leute gibt, zum Beispiel einzelne Abgeordnete, die finanzielle Zuwendungen aus dem Ausland beziehen?\"\n12994,michael-frieser,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Wir erleben eine Sternstunde: Immer dann, wenn in der Presse mit entsprechenden Schlagzeilen von einer Verfehlung berichtet wird, muss das grundsätzliche Regel- und Gesetzeswerk herangezogen werden. - Frau Kollegin Fograscher: „Tapfer!“, würde ich mal sagen. Dass die SPD nach diesem „Lapsus“ - ich bezeichne das ganz vorsichtig mal so - genau das nicht weiter tut, nämlich einen Minister zu vermieten, versteht sich von selbst. Dazu brauche ich kein Gesetz und kein Regelwerk.\n\nDeshalb halte ich es auch für etwas schwierig, im Augenblick vor dem Hintergrund dieser Frage einen Hase-und-Igel-Wettbewerb zu veranstalten in dem Sinne: Der eine will etwas zum Thema Sponsoring, und der andere will etwas zum Thema Lobbyismus machen. - Das, was passiert ist, hat nichts mit Sponsoring oder Parteienfinanzierung im Rahmen von Spenden zu tun. Ich bitte darum, das im Sinne der Demokratie fein säuberlich auseinanderzuhalten.\n\nSponsoring bedeutet, dass sich Menschen innerhalb eines Rechtsstaates, einer Demokratie dem politischen Prozess zuwenden und erkennbar machen, dass sie wirklich daran teilhaben wollen. Alle Einnahmen aus diesen Geschäften - das gilt nicht nur für Parteitage - können eingesehen werden. Die Rechenschaftsberichte liegen beim Bundestagspräsidenten. Auf Ersuchen sind wir selbstverständlich auch persönlich bereit, darüber Bericht zu erstatten. Wir laden jeweils auch gegenseitig zu den Parteitagen ein.\n\nIch habe Verständnis dafür, dass die SPD, die diesen Fehler eingesteht und auch Besserung lobt, jetzt nicht nur sagt, dass sie das nicht mehr tut, sondern auch versucht, mit einem eigenen Vorschlag politisch in die Vorhand zu geraten. Ich glaube nur, dass wir uns damit in dieser Frage, um die es im Zentrum geht, keinen Gefallen tun. Denn weder eine Änderung beim Thema Lobbyismus noch beim Thema Sponsoring wird etwas daran ändern, dass man vor falsches Verhalten bei der Frage, wie man Einfluss auf die Politik gewinnen kann, keine Regeln setzen kann; denn in diesem Parlament ist jeder Einzelne von uns seinem Gewissen unterworfen - sofern der Einzelne denn eines hat.\n\nAber im Ergebnis muss doch jeder selbst verantworten, wie er sich in dieser Frage verhält. Und ich bin darüber erstaunt, dass es doch immer wieder jemanden gibt, der sich tatsächlich für eine solche Aktion hergibt - egal mit welchen gesellschaftspolitischen, gesellschaftsrechtlichen Verschachtelungen man versucht, das in irgendeiner Weise zu camouflieren.\n\nAber es bleibt dabei: Der Anteil des Sponsorings - wir haben es gehört - ist wirklich verschwindend gering. Deshalb kann man nur sagen: Die Ordnung, die wir in § 24 des Parteiengesetzes gefunden haben, beinhaltet auch die Pflicht, alle Sponsoringleistungen auszuweisen. Das bedeutet eindeutig, dass man das ablesen kann. Nicht umsonst hat die europäische Staatengruppe GRECO zum Thema Parteienfinanzierung gesagt: Dies ist in Ordnung. Es ist in Deutschland ordnungsgemäß - wie in anderen europäischen Staaten auch - geregelt.\n\nDas sagt übrigens auch die in diesem Land immer noch verbindliche Rechtsprechung: Alles, was zu dem Thema Sponsoring an Ausweisung notwendig ist, ist geleistet worden.\n\nIch verstehe, dass man in so einer aufgeheizten Diskussion versucht, mit tollen Vorschlägen wieder nach vorn zu kommen. Aber ich kann nur sagen: Wir haben zwei Jahre zum Thema Parteienfinanzierung verhandelt. Erst in der letzten Sitzung haben die Grünen gesagt: Zum Thema Sponsoring könnten wir noch etwas machen.\n\nDie entscheidende Botschaft muss doch sein, dass wir in der Demokratie dankbar sein müssen für Menschen, für Firmen, die sich nicht nur zu Parteien bekennen, sondern auch zur Funktion von Parteien, nämlich an der Willensbildung teilzunehmen. Das bedeutet, dass sie sich nicht hinter Masken verbergen. Das bedeutet, dass man sich nicht im Hinterzimmer trifft, wo es keiner mitbekommt, sondern das bedeutet, dass man mit offenem Visier sagt, welche Firma an welcher Stelle Parteien mit einer Art von Sponsoring unterstützt.\n\nDarum geht es. Deshalb: Am Ende des Tages hilft alles Gerede nicht. Am Ende des Tages geht es darum, ob wir das, was wir an Regeln für die Parteienfinanzierung haben, anwenden. Es geht darum, dass wir als Parlamentarier in den Parlamenten, als Funktionäre in den Parteien - und das geht bis hinunter zu den Ehrenamtlichen - uns rechtstreu verhalten. Es muss gelten: Wir füllen diese Funktionen aus und versuchen dabei, unsere Arbeit aufrechtzuerhalten.\n\nNatürlich ist Sponsoring bei zurückgehenden Einnahmen ein zunehmend wichtig werdender Aspekt. Wer wüsste das besser als Parteienvertreter? Gegen dieses Problem im Zusammenhang mit Sponsoring helfen keine neuen Gesetze und auch kein neues Regelwerk; da hilft nur ein funktionierender moralischer Kompass.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4773,stephan-mayer,\"Sehr verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr verehrte Kolleginnen! Sehr geehrte Kollegen! Mit dem Gesetzentwurf zur Novellierung des Bundesdatenschutzgesetzes und dem Änderungsantrag unserer Regierungskoalition setzen wir zum einen zwei Urteile des Europäischen Gerichtshofs um, die gegen Deutschland und Österreich ergangen sind, und zwar einmal das vom 9. März 2010 und einmal das vom 16. Oktober 2012, und zum anderen stärken wir die Unabhängigkeit der Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragten. Das ist aufgrund dieser beiden Urteile erforderlich.\n\nIch möchte aber darauf hinweisen, dass die Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragte schon bisher unabhängig war. Es gab zwar formal eine Dienstaufsicht des Bundesinnenministeriums und eine Rechtsaufsicht der Bundesregierung. Aber von beidem ist nie Gebrauch gemacht -worden. Aufgrund der Vorgaben des Europäischen Gerichtshofs wird die Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragte ab dem Jahr 2016 zu einer vollkommen eigenständigen, unabhängigen obersten Bundesbehörde. Damit wird die bisherige organisatorische Anbindung an das Bundesinnenministerium aufgehoben. Ich denke, dass wir damit zum einen den Vorgaben des Europäischen Gerichtshofs Rechnung tragen und zum anderen ein laufendes Vertragsverletzungsverfahren der Europäischen Kommission zum Abschluss bringen können. Es ist uns als CDU/CSU sehr wichtig, dass diese Novellierung des Bundesdatenschutzgesetzes noch im laufenden Jahr abgeschlossen wird, um ein klares Signal Richtung Brüssel zu -senden, dass wir die Vorgaben des Europäischen Gerichtshofs umsetzen und die Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragte aufwerten.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir haben am 1. Dezember eine Sachverständigenanhörung durchgeführt. Teilweise wird uns vorgeworfen, Sachverständigenanhörungen hätten nur einen Placeboeffekt oder hätten nur therapeutische Bedeutung. Wir haben, meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ganz konkrete Rückschlüsse aus dieser Anhörung gezogen, insbesondere was die Stärkung der Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragten im Bereich ihrer Zeugenaussagemöglichkeiten anbelangt. Wir werden § 23 Absatz 6 des Bundesdatenschutzgesetzes dahin gehend ändern, dass bei einer gerichtlichen oder außergerichtlichen Zeugenaussage der Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragten nicht das „Einvernehmen“ der Bundesregierung einzuholen ist für den Fall, dass der Kernbereich exekutiver Eigenverantwortung der Bundesregierung betroffen sein könnte, sondern es wird lediglich erforderlich sein, dass die Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragte „im Benehmen“ mit der Bundesregierung entscheidet, ob der Kernbereich exekutiver Eigenverantwortung betroffen ist oder nicht.\n\nIch möchte hinzufügen, man kann auch mit guten Gründen die gegenteilige Position vertreten, dass letzten Endes nur die Bundesregierung selbst festlegen kann, ob der Kernbereich exekutiver Eigenverantwortung tangiert ist oder nicht. Um es klar zu sagen und um jeglichen Spekulationen und Gerüchten den Boden zu entziehen: Es wird kein Maulkorberlass verfügt. Die Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragte ist in Zukunft sogar unabhängiger und stärker in ihrer Position als Richter, wenn sie Zeugenaussagen vornehmen müssen, weil für diese durchaus das Erfordernis des Einvernehmens gilt. Ich glaube, das ist ein klares Signal und stärkt die Stellung der Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragten.\n\nNoch ein Wort zur Sach- und Personalausstattung. Uns ist es wichtig, dass die Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragte amtsangemessen ausgestattet wird. Mit diesem Gesetz ist eine Stellenerhöhung um sechs Stellen beabsichtigt. Das wird auch entsprechend vorgenommen. Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Opposition, im Vorfeld ist behauptet worden, das sei viel zu wenig, man müsse der Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragten noch mehr Stellen zur Verfügung stellen. Ich habe schon darauf hingewiesen, dass der Status der obersten Bundesbehörde erst im Jahr 2016 wirksam wird.\n\nWir haben also noch genügend Zeit, lieber Herr Kollege Korte, uns im Rahmen der Haushaltsberatungen für das Jahr 2016 und dem entsprechenden Stellenplan Gedanken zu machen, wie die Stellensituation der Bundes-datenschutzbeauftragten auszugestalten ist. Ich sage Ihnen an dieser Stelle zu: Wir werden hierbei in Zukunft ein offenes Ohr haben. Auch wenn sich der Aufwuchs aus meiner Sicht durchaus schon jetzt sehen lassen kann, wird dies mit Sicherheit nicht das letzte Wort sein.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, in der Debatte der vergangenen Sitzung des Innenausschusses war das dominierende Thema der Dienstsitz. Wenn sich die Debatte in erster Linie darum dreht, ob der Dienstsitz der Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragten in Zukunft Bonn oder Berlin sein soll, dann kann - mit Verlaub - das Gesetz wirklich nicht so schlecht sein.\n\nWir werden festlegen, dass die Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragte in Zukunft ihren Dienstsitz in Bonn hat. Das ist auch sachgerecht, weil die meisten Unternehmen, die die Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragte zu kontrollieren hat, nämlich die Telekommunikationsunternehmen, entweder in Bonn oder in der Umgebung von Bonn ihren Sitz haben. Es gibt also handfeste, sachgerechte Gründe, die -dafür sprechen, dass der Dienstsitz der Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragten Bonn sein wird. Auch der Bundesrechnungshof ist in Bonn angesiedelt. Ich glaube, -niemand wird unterstellen oder vorwerfen, dass der Bundesrechnungshof aufgrund des Dienstsitzes Bonn seiner Kontrollfunktion nicht ausreichend nachkommen kann.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, zum Schluss kann ich nur feststellen: Wir haben einen guten Gesetzentwurf vorgelegt. Wir dürfen es aber nicht bei dem Gesetzentwurf belassen, sondern wir müssen vor allem auch bei den laufenden Verhandlungen in Brüssel, was die Datenschutz-Grundverordnung anbelangt, dafür sorgen, dass die Datenschutzaufsicht auch in Zukunft so stark und unabhängig bleibt, wie wir sie mit diesem Gesetzentwurf und dem entsprechenden Änderungsantrag machen.\n\nIch bitte um Zustimmung.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n13407,renate-kunast,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Lieber Herr Professor Hirte\n\n- ja, man muss mal Haltung annehmen -, ich komme gleich gerne auf Ihre Rede zurück. Wenn ich Sie mit Professor anspreche, haben Sie das Gefühl „Jetzt kommt es gleich“, nicht wahr?\n\nDie Mode ist schön. Das ist eine total tolle Sache. Gerade ist wieder Fashion Week in Berlin. Ich war gestern Nachmittag einmal dort. Dort sieht man wunderschöne Sachen, tolle Stoffe, tolle Farben. Das ist richtig schön.\n\n- Ich bin dienstlich hingegangen.\n\nDas ist der Vorteil, wenn man sich mit diesem Thema beschäftigt. Das kann ich allen Kolleginnen und Kollegen sagen; auch Männer interessieren sich dafür.\n\nWissen Sie, die andere Seite des Themas Mode ist die Frage: Auf wessen Rücken und unter welcher Ausbeutung wird Mode hergestellt? Wo werden Menschenrechte eingehalten? Wo werden internationale Umweltvereinbarungen eingehalten? Herr Hirte hat gerade so schön auf den freien Markt und den aufgeklärten Verbraucher verwiesen. Das finde ich toll. Denn wenn Sie für den aufgeklärten Verbraucher sind, müssten Sie diesem Antrag zwingend zustimmen.\n\nDenn sonst redet niemand über Aufklärung, jedenfalls nicht in dem Maße; auch Frau Drobinski-Weiß hat das gesagt.\n\nIch will noch eines hinzufügen, weil Sie auf den Markt hingewiesen haben. Der Markt, dieses unbekannte Wesen, das scheue Reh, wer ist das?\n\nJa, wir sind Marktteilnehmer. Ich muss Ihnen einmal sagen: Als Marktteilnehmer denke ich gar nicht daran, dass, während alle untereinander Rechte und Pflichten ausmachen, nur ich als Verbraucher darauf warten soll, dass ein Unternehmen gnädigerweise eine Information abwirft. Nein, die Verbraucher, die Kundinnen und Kunden, die in den Laden gehen, haben als Wirtschaftsteilnehmer das Recht, zu wissen, woher etwas kommt und wie es produziert wurde,\n\nso wie jeder andere auch wissen darf, woher zugeliefert wird. Das wäre ein Markt.\n\nSie reden über Aufklärung. Herr Professor Hirte, wenn Sie mir sagen können, ob Ihr Anzug, Ihre Krawatte und Ihr Hemd unter Einhaltung aller ILO-Normen und aller Umweltabkommen hergestellt wurden, melden Sie sich. Ich würde die Zwischenfrage dann zulassen, und Sie könnten es mir darlegen.\n\n- Das stimmt doch überhaupt nicht.\n\n- Das ist doch vollkommen gaga. Der Anzug würde nicht 4 000 Euro kosten. Solch einen Anzug würden Sie allerdings auch bekommen, wenn Sie wollen würden. Wissen Sie, wenn es Living Wages in Bangladesch geben würde und man nach europäischem Standard das Wasser nach dem Färben der Stoffe reinigen würde, wenn man ein Krankenhaus in der Nähe hätte und gute Fluchtwege vorhanden wären, würde Ihr Anzug, wenn er in Asien produziert wird, immer noch nicht 4 000 Euro kosten,\n\nweil das angesichts der Margen bei Ihrem Anzug nur ein paar Euros ausmachen würde. Ich sage Ihnen: Das ist auch kein Argument. Sie haben das C im Namen, nicht wir.\n\nWie ist es mit Sumangali in Indien? Eine Situation wie in Sumangali in Indien wollen Sie nicht ernsthaft; da müssen Sie etwas tun. Frauen werden angelockt, dort zu arbeiten, indem man sagt, sie würden später ein Aussteuergeld bekommen. Ihnen wird dann kurz vor der Frist gekündigt, und sie werden um ihr Geld betrogen.\n\nSchauen Sie nach Bangladesch! Es ist übrigens mittlerweile auf einem etwas besseren Weg. Warum? Weil Kommissar De Gucht nach dem Zusammenbruch des Gebäudes bei Rana Plaza gesagt hat: Wir machen jetzt einen Bangladesch Accord, mit dem wir klare Vorgaben zur Statiküberprüfung, zu Kontrollen und Ähnlichem machen.\n\nSchauen Sie nach Myanmar! Ich war da. Die machen sich ein bisschen auf den Weg. Warum?\n\nSie haben in der Zeit der Militärdiktatur für Japan und Südkorea gnadenlos, ohne irgendeine Rücksicht auf ILO-Arbeitsnormen gegen Kinderarbeit oder gegen Sklavenarbeit produziert. Nur weil unsere Industrie den recht niedrigen - aber immerhin - BSCI-Standard voraussetzt, haben sie gemerkt, dass sie für Europa nur mit diesem Mindeststandard produzieren können. Da müssen wir ihnen helfen. Sie haben sich immerhin vorgenommen, Kinderarbeit innerhalb von zehn Jahren abzuschaffen, aber nur, wenn es Regeln gibt und sie wissen, dass darauf geachtet wird.\n\nWenn Sie Herrn Müller loben, der leider nicht hier ist, sage ich Ihnen: Die Initiative von Herrn Müller geht nicht einmal bis Prato, Italien. Ich war im letzten Jahr da. Als die Industrie aus Europa nach China ging, hieß es: Dann holen wir ein paar Chinesen zu uns. - Da herrschen aber auch chinesische Verhältnisse. Auf meine Nachfrage antwortet die Bundesregierung: Dazu wissen wir nichts. - Ich sage: Zeitunglesen bildet, nicht nur ein Blick ins Gesetzbuch.\n\nEinige haben die CSR-Richtlinie gelobt, deren Umsetzung nach dem jetzigen Beratungsstand immer noch dünn ist, weil sie auch keine Vergleichbarkeit und Überprüfbarkeit schafft. Die Beschaffungsrichtlinie der Bundesregierung wurde dünn umgesetzt. Wir meinen, die Produktions- und Lieferkette muss offengelegt werden, und es muss klar definierte Sorgfaltspflichten geben. Man kann nicht für jeden Fehler verantwortlich sein, aber es muss definierte und nachprüfbare Sorgfaltspflichten geben. Nur Deutschland, nur freiwillig und nicht einklagbar - das geht nicht.\n\nDas ist im Übrigen kein fairer Wettbewerb. Sie sind doch die Wettbewerbspartei und reden ständig darüber. Dann erklären Sie uns doch einmal, wie sie einem Unternehmen, das sich fair verhält, keine Sklaven- und Kinderarbeit zulässt, vermitteln wollen, wie es im Wettbewerb bestehen soll.\n\nEin letzter Gedanke, Herr Hirte: Der Zettel wird nicht so lang. Wir leben im digitalen Zeitalter. Die wissen genau, wo all ihre Knöpfe, Reißverschlüsse usw. herkommen. Da legen sie eine neue Maske an. Im 21. Jahrhundert finden sie das alles sehr schnell heraus.\n\nIch finde, wir brauchen einen fairen Wettbewerb. All die ILO-Arbeitsnormen und Menschenrechtsvereinbarungen kreisen heute wie Satelliten um den Globus. Wir müssen sie mal runterholen, damit sie unten auf der Erde tatsächlich als Menschenrechte anerkannt werden. Das macht unsere Vorlage.\n\nLetzter Halbsatz. - Im Übrigen erkennt sie das Recht der Marktteilnehmer, Verbraucher und Kunden, an, zu wissen, und zwar ohne dass sie sich beim Suchen der Informationen einen Wolf laufen. Das ist eine Bringschuld.\"\n573,britta-haßelmann,\"Guten Morgen, Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In der Tat: Gestern sollte kurzerhand per amtlicher Mitteilung dieser Vorgang beschlossen werden. Dagegen haben wir Widerspruch eingelegt, weil wir finden: Das muss heute hier diskutiert werden.\n\nIch sage ausdrücklich: Das richtet sich nicht gegen die Personen, die Sie als Mitglieder vorschlagen. Das wissen auch alle handelnden Personen. Es geht uns hier um das Verfahren.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, worum geht es? Es geht darum, dass der Verwaltungsrat der Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau zum ersten Mal in dieser Legislaturperiode heute teilweise neu besetzt werden soll. Er wird nicht legislaturperiodenscharf besetzt, sondern es werden heute drei Plätze von ausscheidenden Mitgliedern nachbesetzt, die ihren Sitz bis zum 31. Dezember 2013 innehatten. Für die 18. Legislaturperiode - darauf haben wir uns in einem gemeinsamen Antrag zur Geschäftsordnung und zu den Stellenanteilen für die Fraktionen verständigt - haben wir als grüne Fraktion den Anspruch, in diesem Verwaltungsrat der Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau vertreten zu sein.\n\nDas ist richtig und wichtig; denn dort geht es um ganz viele Förderprogramme und ganz viele Bundesgelder. Deshalb ist es selbstverständlich, dass wir als eine von vier Fraktionen einen Vertretungsanspruch haben - dieser Auftrag ist uns zugebilligt nach der gemeinsamen Vereinbarung nach Sainte-Laguë/Schepers - und dass wir unseren Sitz dort wahrnehmen können.\n\nWir haben gegenüber den Fraktionen von SPD und Union deutlich gemacht, dass, wenn jetzt diese erste Besetzung stattfindet, wir die einzige Fraktion sind, die im Moment nicht in diesem Verwaltungsrat vertreten ist. Wir wollen einen dieser Sitze wahrnehmen, um unserem Auftrag gerecht zu werden, gemeinsam mit den anderen Fraktionen Kontrolle auszuüben.\n\nDieses Recht wird uns jetzt verweigert, und zwar mit dem Argument, die Besetzung des Verwaltungsrats wäre nicht an den Beginn der Legislaturperiode gebunden.\n\nOkay, meine Damen und Herren, dann lassen Sie uns dieses Argument mal durchgehen. Warum sagen Sie dann in Ihrer Argumentation: Heute beginnt hier sozusagen die 18. Legislaturperiode, und angesichts der Zusammensetzung des Bundestags in der 18. Legislaturperiode besetzt die Union zwei und die SPD einen der freiwerdenden Sitze? Meine Damen und Herren, da kann doch etwas nicht in Ordnung sein. Sie widersprechen sich doch selbst.\n\nSie beziehen sich bei diesem Benennungsverfahren auf einen Rechtsvermerk der Bundestagsverwaltung. Das halte ich schon mal für ein Unding, weil die Frage der Unterrepräsentanz der Grünen in diesem Rechtsvermerk überhaupt nicht erörtert wird. Wenn man diesem Verfahren und Ihrer Logik folgte, dass jetzt sozusagen die 18. Wahlperiode beginnt und deshalb der Union zwei Sitze und der SPD ein Sitz zustehen, dann wären wir erst 2015 dran. Denn bei der nächsten Besetzung nach dem Sainte-Laguë/Schepers-Verfahren wären erst mal wieder die SPD und die Linken dran, und die Grünen folgen erst auf Platz sechs, im Jahr 2015.\n\nDas kann nicht richtig sein. Das ist politisch falsch, und es ist rechtlich höchst zweifelhaft. Wir melden hier ganz deutlich unseren Widerspruch an und werden dieser Besetzung heute auf gar keinen Fall zustimmen.\"\n12392,franziska-brantner,\"Herzlichen Dank, dass Sie die Zwischenfrage zulassen. - Sie weisen auf ein anderes, ebenfalls richtiges Problem hin, nämlich dass die Mittel für das World Food Programme und andere Organisationen nicht ausreichen. Wie stehen Sie dazu, dass der Haushaltsansatz der Bundesregierung für 2017 unter dem liegt, was 2016 schon nicht gereicht hat, und daher Millionenbeträge fehlen? Das müsste man angehen. Da sind wir gar nicht gegen Sie. Das schließt einander nicht aus.\n\nWir machen es kurz. - Herr Zech, Sie haben darauf hingewiesen, dass das World Food Programme sagt: Wir brauchen Sicherheit. - Das ist alles gut.\n\nUns geht es darum, Assad und Russland damit zu konfrontieren und zu sagen: Wir sind bereit, Hilfe zu liefern. Dann müssen wir schauen, wie die Reaktion ist. Uns geht es nur darum, wenigstens diesen Schritt zu machen und zu sagen, dass wir bereit sind, das zu tun. Dann werden wir sehen, wie die Reaktion ist.\"\n5150,philipp-lengsfeld,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Vor uns liegt ein besonders interessanter Bericht des Büros für Technikfolgen-Abschätzung. Er handelt vom Aufregerthema Klimawandel und ist aus meiner Sicht Technikfolgenabschätzung im besten Sinne.\n\nDie momentane Grundstrategie beim Thema Klimawandel fokussiert auf die Minderung des Ausstoßes von Treibhausgasen. Diese Strategie ist die Mitigation, also Dämpfung. Sie steht auch im Zentrum unserer aktuellen politischen Diskussion in Deutschland. In dem vorliegenden Bericht geht es dagegen um Intervention, also um ein aktives großtechnisches globales Gegensteuern. Die international üblichen Fachtermini heißen Climate oder Geoengineering. Der Bericht behandelt die möglichen Wirkungen und Nebenwirkungen von solchen Interventionstechniken, die momentan aber nur diskutiert und noch nicht angewendet werden. Technikfolgenabschätzung ist hier so wichtig;\n\ndenn wir reden von hochmanipulativen globalen Eingriffen des Menschen in die Natur mit dem Ziel, befürchtete Klimaveränderungen zu verhindern.\n\nMein Fazit aus dem Bericht möchte ich gleich an den Anfang stellen: Wir sollten vom Climate Engineering auf jeden Fall die Finger lassen. Ich will dies natürlich kurz begründen.\n\nWas wird konkret unter dem Terminus Climate Engineering diskutiert? Zunächst einmal gibt es eine ganz zentrale Grundannahme, die man verstehen muss. Diese zentrale Grundannahme besagt, dass der CO2-Ausstoß in die Luft und die damit verbundene Erderwärmung einen Punkt erreicht haben oder bald erreichen werden, an dem nur durch manipulative Eingriffe, also durch Climate Engineering, der gewünschte stabile klimatische Zustand bewahrt werden kann.\n\nDie diskutierten manipulativen Maßnahmen gliedern sich in zwei Hauptgruppen. Eine Hauptgruppe sind direkte Interventionen zur Dämpfung der Erderwärmung durch Temperaturmanipulation, zum Beispiel - und das ist kein Witz - durch die Anbringung großer Spiegel im All oder durch großflächige Aufhellung der Wolken durch Aerosole, um deren Reflexionseigenschaften zu erhöhen. Ziel ist es natürlich, den Wärmeeintrag in die Atmosphäre zu verringern und so die Erdtemperatur zu senken. Hier ist eigentlich intuitiv schon klar, dass diese Arten der Manipulation zu gefährlich, zu teuer und in ihrer Wirkung äußerst zweifelhaft sind.\n\nInsgesamt etwas gefälliger wirken die indirekten Interventionen. Dies sind Vorschläge zum Entzug von CO2 aus der Atmosphäre. Ich will ein größeres Beispiel kurz näher diskutieren: Eine Idee, die, wie ich finde, zumindest oberflächlich betrachtet relativ attraktiv wirkt, ist die großflächige Aufforstung von Wüstenflächen, zum Beispiel die Aufforstung der Sahara. Bei näherer Betrachtung sind aber auch hier ungeheure lokale und globale Risiken verborgen; denn für eine großflächige Wüstenaufforstung braucht man Unmengen von Wasser. Hier möchte ich an ein warnendes historisches Beispiel für Geoengineering erinnern, unter dessen Folgen die betroffene Region noch heute ganz massiv leidet. Ich rede vom Aralsee. Das ist ein Beispiel für menschgemachte Naturmanipulationen mit katastrophalen Folgen. Damals ging es zwar nicht um die Rettung des Weltklimas, sondern um den Siegeszug des Kommunismus; aber die Methoden waren ähnlich. Man hat riesige Mengen Wasser in die Wüste umgeleitet, um eine extensive Baumwollproduktion zu ermöglichen. Leider ging darüber der Aralsee kaputt, wurde das Herz einer großen Region zerstört.\n\nDamit könnten wir es bewenden lassen. Wir haben, was die Kommunisten nicht interessiert hat, nämlich eine Abschätzung der Technikfolgen. Der Bericht zeigt uns, dass die Technologien zu unkontrollierbar sind, also lassen wir es. Climate Engineering zur Klimarettung ist keine Option.\n\nDas heißt ja nicht, dass wir auf dem Gebiet nicht mehr forschen sollen. Aber wir können und müssen vielleicht noch mehr lernen; denn der Bericht macht deutlich, dass die momentanen Vorgaben in der internationalen Klimaforschung durch Mitigation vermutlich gar nicht mehr zu erreichen sind.\n\nDarüber muss man aber aus meiner Sicht nicht verzweifeln. Vielmehr sollten wir daraus die richtigen Schlüsse ziehen; denn es gibt eine dritte Strategie, und das ist die Adaption. Wir konzentrieren global mehr Kräfte auf das Verständnis der kommenden Veränderungen und die Entwicklung nachhaltiger Strategien zur Anpassung, zur Adaption an diese Veränderungen. Hier sind unsere Kräfte richtig verwendet. Darauf sollten wir uns konzentrieren, meine Damen und Herren. Diesen Weg weist uns dieser Bericht.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n4437,markus-kurth,\"Natürlich. - Ich persönlich empfinde diese Ant-wort als etwas dürftig. In der vorherigen Debatte über die Politik für Menschen mit Behinderung hat sich die Kollegin Rüffer in ihrer Rede über die Auskunftsfreudigkeit bzw. Nichtauskunftsfreudig-keit der Bundesregierung beklagt, wenn es um die Benennung zumindest von Zielperspektiven geht. Insofern meine genaue Nachfrage: Der Abgeord-nete Carsten Linnemann, der sowohl Mitglied der CDU-Fraktion als auch dieser Arbeitsgruppe ist, hat laut Süddeutscher Zeitung vom vergangenen Samstag mitgeteilt, dass 15 sehr komplexe The-men diskutiert worden seien. Wenn Sie schon kei-ne Ergebnisse mitteilen können, können Sie dann wenigstens sagen - schließlich nehmen Vertreter der Bundesregierung auch an den Sitzungen die-ser Koalitionsarbeitsgruppe teil -, welches die wichtigsten dieser komplexen Themen sind?\n\nJa. - Ergänzend zunächst noch der Hinweis zu Ihrer Antwort: Sie sind ja schon fast auf 15 The-men gekommen. Wenn Sie die noch fehlenden Themen schriftlich nachreichen könnten, wäre ich Ihnen dankbar.\n\nKommen wir zu einem konkreten Vorschlag, den Sie vorhin auch genannt haben. Die Junge Union und auch die Gruppe der jungen Abgeord-neten der Union, zu denen Herr Linnemann auch gehört, wollen eine bestimmte Regelung strei-chen, nämlich die Regelung, wonach befristete Arbeitsverträge mit Arbeitnehmern über 52 Jahren nur über fünf Jahre geschlossen werden können, dies aber nur dann, wenn sie zuvor mindestens vier Monate arbeitslos waren.\n\nWelche Gründe sprechen aus Sicht der Bun-desregierung dafür, an dieser Regelung festzuhal-ten?\n\nZunächst vielen Dank für die umfassende Ant-wort. - Sie sagen, dass die 6,4 Millionen Perso-nen, die die volle Förderung in Anspruch nehmen, nicht Gradmesser sein können, weil es noch an-dere, etwa ungeförderte private Altersvorsorge-bemühungen der Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeit-nehmer gibt.\n\nGleichwohl ist es notwendig, separat noch ein-mal nach den Absicherungen durch die Riester-Rente zu fragen, wie ich es in meiner Frage getan habe. Denn: Anders als bei der freiwilligen priva-ten Vorsorge über Lebensversicherungen oder Immobilien ist es so, dass die staatliche Förde-rung der Riester-Rente gekoppelt war mit einem Absenken des Rentenniveaus, mit der sogenann-ten Riester-Treppe. Darum die Frage: Ist die Bun-desregierung vor dem Hintergrund der Inan-spruchnahme der vollen Förderung durch nur 6,4 Millionen Personen von 35 Millionen aktiv in der Rentenversicherung Versicherten, die allesamt vom Absenken des Rentenniveaus betroffen sind, der Auffassung, dass dies ausreicht, um den ur-sprünglich formulierten Sicherungszielen von 2001 gerecht zu werden?\n\nDas ist schön. Danke. - Herr Staatssekretär Meister, Sie haben jetzt sozusagen die möglichen Motivlagen für die nicht vollständige Inanspruch-nahme der Förderung aufgefächert. Dann will ich an dieser Stelle nicht verschweigen, dass die Antwort der Bundesregierung auf meine schriftli-chen Fragen gezeigt hat, wer ohne Förderung o-der mit gekürzter Förderung spart; das sind mehr als doppelt so viele Verträge. Über 12 Millionen werden bespart. Das sind gegenüber, wie gesagt, 35 Millionen aktiv Versicherten, die von der Ni-veauabsenkung betroffen sind, immer noch weni-ger als die Hälfte. Wir sehen insbesondere, dass von denjenigen, die über ein geringes Einkommen verfügen, mehr als die Hälfte gar keine Verträge haben; aber auch sie sind von der Niveauabsen-kung betroffen. Wird die Bundesregierung vor die-sem Hintergrund - Sie haben schon angekündigt, dass Sie das prüfen werden - Maßnahmen ergrei-fen, um insbesondere Geringverdienerinnen und Geringverdienern die Inanspruchnahme einer pri-vat geförderten Altersvorsorge zu erleichtern?\"\n8544,mathias-middelberg,\"Herzlichen Dank. - Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kollegen! Obwohl wir hier in diesen Tagen auch viele andere wichtige Themen zu besprechen haben, sollten wir dieses Feld der Steuerpolitik und der Finanzpolitik nicht aus den Augen verlieren; denn wir gehen hier heute einen ganz grundlegenden Schritt in Sachen Bekämpfung der Steuerhinterziehung und Bekämpfung der illegalen Steuervermeidung. Den gehen wir höchstwahrscheinlich - da setze ich die Zustimmung aller einmal voraus, die wir gestern in der Ausschussberatung hatten - gemeinsam und in wesentlicher Übereinstimmung. Ich finde, das ist heute ein Tag, den man feiern kann.\n\nDen Auftakt hat das im Oktober letzten Jahres genommen, als 51 Staaten die Vereinbarung über den automatischen Informationsaustausch über Finanzkonten in Berlin - in unserem Bundesfinanzministerium - unterschrieben haben, wesentlich initiiert durch unser Finanzministerium, durch Wolfgang Schäuble an der Spitze. Aber auch weitere Länder waren maßgeblich daran beteiligt: Frankreich, Großbritannien, Italien, Spanien, aber eben auch wir Deutsche.\n\nWenn man verfolgt hat, wie lange es gedauert hat und wie mühsam es war, sich über die EU-Zinsrichtlinie zu verständigen, dann ist es bemerkenswert, wie schnell wir es geschafft haben, uns über diesen internationalen und automatisierten Austausch von Daten über Finanzkonten in Europa auch weit über Europa hinaus zu verständigen. Ich finde, das ist ein höchst bemerkenswertes Ergebnis.\n\nAb 2017 werden die Steuerbehörden in den Unterzeichnerstaaten - es waren zuerst 51, jetzt sind es schon 74, und 96 Staaten haben sich politisch schon fest dazu bekannt, dass sie dieses Abkommen unterstützen - in einem automatisierten Verfahren Kontoinformationen von den in ihrem Staat ansässigen Banken erhalten und untereinander austauschen. Das ist - ich habe es eben gesagt - ein maßgeblicher und grundlegender Schritt zur Bekämpfung der Steuerhinterziehung. Länder, die dieses Abkommen unterzeichnet haben und dieses Abkommen dann exekutieren, stehen in Zukunft als Fluchtort, als Ort, wo man Kapitalvermögen verstecken kann, nicht mehr zur Verfügung.\n\nAb 2018 gilt das auch für die Schweiz. Die Schweiz wird dieses Abkommen ein Jahr später exekutieren. Wir können uns an viele Debatten erinnern, in denen wir uns hier über Steuerhinterziehung und Steuerbetrüger - ich will jetzt keine Namen mehr nennen, aber es waren prominenteste Namen dabei - unterhalten haben. Das wird in Zukunft nicht mehr der Fall sein. In Zukunft werden wir solche Fälle nicht mehr haben. Fälle dieser Art können sich bei dieser neuen Rechtslage nicht wiederholen. Das ist ein ganz großer Erfolg für Deutschland, für Europa und weit darüber hinaus, und es ist ein ganz grundlegender Beitrag für mehr Steuergerechtigkeit.\n\nZu den Anträgen der Opposition nur so viel: Wir können bei aller Einigkeit heute im Kern diesen freundlichen Anträgen leider die Zustimmung nicht erteilen. Es bedarf keiner schrankenlosen Transparenz über alle Kapitaleinkünfte und auch keiner vollständigen Auflösung unseres Bankgeheimnisses. Die Finanzbehörden - das ist entscheidend - werden in Zukunft die Informationen über Kapitaleinkünfte im Ausland durch den Informationsaustausch umfassend erhalten. Im Inland werden Kapitaleinkünfte bereits heute durch die flächendeckende Kapitalertragsteuer erfasst. Schlupflöcher bestehen da nicht;\n\ndenn die Kapitalertragsteuer wird automatisch durch die Banken erhoben und in anonymisierter Form an die Finanzverwaltung abgeführt.\n\nDarüber hinaus haben Sie die Abschaffung der Abgeltungsteuer beantragt.\n\nHierüber kann man durchaus einmal grundsätzlich diskutieren; das ist gar keine Frage. Allerdings sollte man darüber erst dann diskutieren, wenn wir den Informationsaustausch auch wirklich haben, und nicht schon dann, wenn wir ihn beschließen. Wenn wir feststellen, dass er von sämtlichen Unterzeichnerstaaten wirklich exekutiert wird, dann macht es Sinn, in diesem Kontext auch über die Abgeltungsteuer zu diskutieren. Dann haben wir eine tatsächliche Handlungsalternative. Unter dieser Prämisse stehen im Übrigen auch alle rechtlichen Betrachtungen, die Sie uns wahrscheinlich gleich vorhalten werden. Wenn es nämlich diese Alternative in der Tat noch nicht gibt, machen diese rechtlichen Bewertungen wenig Sinn.\n\nEs gilt, was Wolfgang Schäuble - im Übrigen unter Bezugnahme auf seinen Vorgänger Steinbrück - gesagt hat:\n\nDie Abgeltungsteuer ist mit dem Argument eingeführt worden ...: 25 Prozent von X ist mehr als 45 Prozent von nix.\n\nWolfgang Schäuble hat hinzugefügt:\n\nSolange man die Informationen nicht hat, ist eine Abgeltungsteuer in der Abwägung der Argumente - pro und kontra - zumindest eine mit guten Argumenten versehene Lösung.\n\nDiese Einschätzung war und ist richtig.\n\nAn dieser halten wir so lange fest, bis wir den Informationsaustausch wirklich exekutieren. Wir sollten deshalb nicht den zweiten vor dem ersten Schritt tun und deshalb in diesem Punkt noch zuwarten.\n\nIm Übrigen - das sei an dieser Stelle schon angemerkt -: Wenn wir darüber diskutieren, zu einer normalen Besteuerung überzugehen, dann müssen wir natürlich auch über die Kompensationstatbestände reden, die damals zusammen mit der Abgeltungsteuer eingeführt wurden.\n\nDann müssen wir nämlich über den vollständigen Werbungskostenabzug reden. Auch müssen wir über das Teileinkünfteverfahren bei der Körperschaftsteuer reden. Wenn, dann ist das ein Paket, aber keine getrennte Veranstaltung.\n\nAbschließend möchte ich gern eine Bemerkung zu dem Änderungsantrag machen, den Bußgeldrahmen, den das BMF auf 5 000 Euro gesetzt hat, zu verhundertfachen. Also, es lag der Antrag vor, den Bußgeldrahmen zu verhundertfachen. Wir in der Koalition haben uns darauf verständigt, dass wir den vorgesehenen Bußgeldrahmen verzehnfachen. Das halten wir für absolut angemessen und zureichend. Sie müssen sich vor Augen halten, meine Damen und Herren: Dieser Bußgeldrahmen betrifft gerade auch kleine Fälle. Betroffen ist der normale Sachbearbeiter in einem Finanzinstitut, der Fehler macht. Ihn wollen wir nicht mit einem Bußgeld von 500 000 Euro praktisch kriminalisieren. Auch da muss man eine Grenze setzen.\n\n- Genau, das ist richtig. Vielen Dank an Lothar Binding für den freundlichen Hinweis. Das wäre mein nächster Punkt gewesen. - Auch das muss man sehen: Jeder Fall, bei dem ein Fehler gemacht wird, wird demnächst mit 50 000 Euro bebußt. Wenn es also Fälle fehlerhafter Angaben gibt, dann gibt es in der Regel noch mehr solcher Fälle. Das summiert sich. Dadurch kommt es zu ganz anderen Bußgeldsummen. Wenn es hier um systematisch falsche Angaben geht, so wie das in der Ausschussberatung von einigen, - ich sage einmal, - beispielhaft vorgetragen wurde, dann wird in aller Regel strafbares Verhalten vorliegen. Dann gibt es Betrugssachverhalte oder auch Untreue. Das führt zu einem ganz anderen Strafrahmen, zum Beispiel zu Freiheitsstrafen.\n\nIch glaube, wir haben den vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf insgesamt sehr gut gestaltet. Wir gehen einen Riesenschritt in Sachen mehr Steuergerechtigkeit. Ich sage an dieser Stelle ganz persönlich, dass ich mich für die tolle Vorarbeit meines Kollegen Uwe Feiler, der in den letzten Monaten an der Arbeit gehindert wurde, sehr herzlich bedanke.\n\nIch stehe nur deshalb an dieser Stelle, weil du leider verhindert warst. Ich wünsche dir weiterhin allerbeste Besserung und danke dir für deine Arbeit. Ich bedanke mich auch bei allen anderen, auch beim Bundesfinanzministerium, für die hervorragende Zusammenarbeit.\n\nDanke.\"\n11786,roland-claus,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Es ist schon bemerkenswert: Immer wenn Bundestagswahlen in vermeintliche Nähe rücken, übernehmen hier Teile der Koalition den Job der Opposition und klagen die eigene Regierung an.\n\nLiebe Koalitionäre, wir können euch sagen: Die Opposition ist nicht amtsmüde. Wir machen unseren Job selber.\n\nSie hätten wahrlich genug damit zu tun, dieses Land vernünftig zu regieren, statt sich untereinander zu streiten.\n\nHerr Bundesminister, erwartungsgemäß und keineswegs falsch haben Sie die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung positiv bewertet. Aber wir müssen auch zur Kenntnis nehmen: Die Früchte dieser positiven Entwicklung sind leider sehr ungerecht verteilt. Wir haben uns in dieser Woche oft über die sehr ungleiche Einkommensverteilung unterhalten. Wenn man das früher kritisiert hat - das war noch vor zwei, drei Jahren so -, wurde man meistens der Gleichmacherei bezichtigt. Dabei wurde immer noch ein bisschen der Vergleich mit der DDR herangezogen.\n\nHeute stellen wir fest: Über 80 Prozent der Bevölkerung finden die soziale Verteilung von Einkommen und Vermögen äußerst ungerecht. Das muss Ihnen doch zu denken geben, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nEin guter Wirtschaftsminister sorgt sich nicht nur um die sprudelnden Gewinne; ein guter Wirtschaftsminister muss sich auch immer um Verteilungsgerechtigkeit kümmern.\n\nDamit habe ich nicht gesagt, dass er das nicht machte. Aber dass da noch sehr viel Luft nach oben ist, werden Sie wohl nicht bestreiten können.\n\nArm trotz Arbeit ist kein Phantomschmerz, den die Opposition erfunden hat. Arm trotz Arbeit ist für Millionen Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer beschämende Realität. Niedriglohn und Leiharbeit haben sich breitgemacht und verfestigt. Im Osten ist der Anteil übrigens doppelt so hoch wie im Bundesdurchschnitt. Nun haben Sie das möglicherweise als Fehlentwicklung erkannt. Tatsache ist aber doch, dass Langzeitverträge abgeschlossen worden sind. Im Osten gibt es einen Windradbauer, der inzwischen das Problem erkannt hat, dass er mit seinen Leiharbeiterinnen und Leiharbeitern den Auftragsboom, den er hat, überhaupt nicht bewältigen kann. Er ist aber nicht in der Lage, jetzt aus den geschlossenen Langzeitleiharbeitsverträgen auszusteigen.\n\nWas die Wirtschaftsförderung angeht, Herr Bundesminister, steht natürlich auch viel Gutes und Vernünftiges in Ihrem Haushaltsentwurf, zu dem Sie verdammt wenig gesagt haben. Wir müssen Ihnen aber die Tatsache vorwerfen, dass die Verhältnisse nicht stimmen. Das von uns allen vielgelobte Zentrale Innovationsprogramm für den Mittelstand, ZIM, ist mit etwa einer halben Milliarde Euro ausgestattet. Für die Subventionierung von Luft- und Raumfahrt geben Sie in Ihrem Etat aber etwa 1,5 Milliarden Euro aus. Das ist eine Subventionierung von staatsnahen Monopolisten, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nEs gibt also 1 Euro für die vielen kleinen Unternehmen und 3 Euro für die großen Konzerne. Wenn die Verhältnisse wenigstens umgekehrt wären, Herr Bundesminister - wenn 1,5 Milliarden Euro für die KMU und 0,5 Milliarden Euro für die großen Konzerne vorgesehen wären -, würde ich ja vielleicht aufhören, zu meckern. Diese Unverhältnismäßigkeit aber können wir Ihnen hier nicht durchgehen lassen.\n\nEnde 2014 haben Sie, Herr Bundesminister, hier über die Institutionalisierung eines Bündnisses unter dem Titel „Zukunft der Industrie“ berichtet.\n\nWir haben uns angeschaut, was dort vorgesehen ist, und gesagt: Okay, die Probleme sind ausgesprochen präzise analysiert, da wird der Finger in die Wunde gelegt. Im Haushalt für 2017 haben Sie für die Begleitung dieses Bündnisses wieder 5 Millionen Euro eingestellt. Ich muss Sie aber einmal fragen: Wann gedenken Sie, zu liefern? Wann wollen Sie Ergebnisse vorlegen? In den Unterlagen des Bundeswirtschaftsministeriums findet man die Ankündigung einer „Woche der Industrie“, die am 17. September beginnen soll. In den Unterlagen steht: In der „Woche der Industrie“ wollen Vertreter von Unternehmen - also Geschäftsführungen und Betriebsräte - mit Bundestagsabgeordneten, Landräten und Bürgermeistern über genau diese Probleme diskutieren. Einladungen an Bundestagsabgeordnete, Herr Bundesminister, sind uns bislang nicht bekannt.\n\nEs kann aber nicht nur immer bei einer Ankündigungspolitik bleiben, Sie müssen in der Tat auch Ergebnisse abliefern.\n\nIch will auch auf die Entwicklung der ostdeutschen Wirtschaft eingehen. Wir beobachten ja seit langem eine Verfestigung des wirtschaftlichen Rückstandes im Vergleich zum Bundesdurchschnitt. Das hat damit zu tun, dass es nach wie vor keine einzige große Firmenzentrale in Ostdeutschland gibt. Auf der anderen Seite aber gibt es auch Erfolge bei wirtschaftlichen Transformationsprozessen, die bemerkenswert sind. Die finden aber leider noch zu wenig Nachahmung und werden, was die gesamtdeutsche Betrachtung angeht, nicht genügend gewürdigt. Die Akteure vor Ort - egal wo sie herkommen - sagen: Das war nur im Osten so möglich.\n\nNun sind Sie ja auch - das merkt man nicht immer so - der Ost-Minister. Bei dem Titel „Schwerpunktvorhaben der Beauftragten für die neuen Bundesländer“ kürzen Sie aber um mehr als 25 Prozent.\n\nDa geht es nicht um viel Geld, Herr Bundesminister; aber das geht ganz eindeutig in die falsche Richtung. Ich denke, das ist ein Punkt, den wir unbedingt korrigieren müssen. Und wir werden ihn auch korrigieren können.\n\nDie ostdeutsche Wirtschaft leidet besonders unter den Russlandsanktionen. Dafür kennen Sie viele Beispiele. Zur gleichen Zeit kooperiert die Bundesregierung mit russischen und - man höre - ukrainischen Luftfahrtunternehmen beim Transport von NATO-Militärgütern. Genau diese Zweierlei-Maß-Politik ist es, die kleine Unternehmen auf die Palme bringt.\n\nZum Schluss: Dieser Haushalt, Herr Bundesminister, kann so nicht bleiben. Er kann ja auch noch besser werden, wenn wir im Parlament mutig an ihn herangehen. Weil Sie, Herr Bundesminister, bekanntlich so zurückhaltend und bescheiden sind und niemals öffentlich um Hilfe bitten würden, bieten wir Ihnen diese Hilfe von hier aus schon einmal aktiv an.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6087,frank-steffel,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Frau Göring-Eckardt, auch wenn Sie mittlerweile etwas weiter hinten Platz genommen haben, möchte ich Ihnen sagen, dass ich Sie für Ihre differenzierte und zumeist sehr sachliche Argumentation sehr schätze. Heute war das, was Sie hier vorgetragen haben, allerdings außergewöhnlich oberflächlich, billig und ziemlich plump.\n\nDas war eine Verallgemeinerung, mit der wir in dieser Debatte überhaupt nicht weiterkommen.\n\nEine differenzierte Betrachtung beginnt damit, dass man FIFA, IOC und allen anderen Verbände nicht in einen Topf schmeißt. Beim IOC wird - übrigens unter einem deutschen Präsidenten - der schwierige Versuch unternommen, Veränderungen herbeizuführen und viele Länder im Bereich des Sports zu verändern. Die Gesellschaften in diesen Ländern verändern sich ja nicht etwa schneller - eher im Gegenteil.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die FIFA hat 209 Mitglieder. Davon ist, wenn überhaupt, die Hälfte demokratisch. In 70 Ländern gibt es noch heute per Gesetz ein Verbot von Homosexualität. Der Sport kann einen Beitrag dazu leisten, dass darüber in diesen Gesellschaften diskutiert wird. Aber er wird die Gesetze in diesen Ländern nicht ändern können. In 57 Ländern dieser Erde gibt es die Todesstrafe, die wir Deutsche aus guten Gründen ablehnen. Wir können für die Veränderungen, die wir uns wünschen, werben; aber wir werden sie in diesen 57 Ländern nicht alleine durch den Sport herbeiführen. Von Frauenrechten und Minderheitenrechten, wie wir sie in Mitteleuropa kennen, können wir in den meisten Ländern dieser Erde nicht sprechen. Wir können nur daran arbeiten, dass es in diesem Jahrhundert zu vielen Veränderungen kommt, auch durch den Sport und auch durch die Sportverbände.\n\nWenn wir über die FIFA reden, eint uns sehr viel Kritik. Ich bin sehr sicher, dass es heute auch in der FIFA keine Entscheidung mehr mit drei Stimmen Mehrheit - 13 : 7 war das Ergebnis für Russland - geben würde, sondern eine Mehrheit für Spanien und Portugal, die sich damals auch beworben haben. Nur, zur Wahrheit gehört natürlich auch, dass die Eskalation, die wir heute in Russland erleben, zum Zeitpunkt der Entscheidung der FIFA überhaupt nicht absehbar war.\n\nEs war überhaupt nicht erkennbar, dass es zu einer militärischen Auseinandersetzung in Europa kommen würde. Insofern ist Ihre Forderung, die uns wahrscheinlich eint - wir brauchen Regeln, wir brauchen Standards, wir brauchen Verbände, die definieren, unter welchen Bedingungen sportliche Großereignisse auf diesem Planeten stattfinden können -, völlig berechtigt. Sie hat nur den falschen Adressaten; denn nicht die Bundesregierung kann das umsetzen - wir können alle dazu beitragen -, sondern die Sportverbände müssen ihre Standards diskutieren.\n\nNehmen Sie das Beispiel Katar: Ich halte es für einen absoluten Skandal und wundere mich über die Ruhe der Mitbewerber Japan, USA und Australien, dass sie akzeptieren, dass man sich um eine Fußballweltmeisterschaft, die im Sommer stattfinden soll, bewirbt und nach der Entscheidung skrupellos gesagt wird: Na, dann machen wir es eben kurz vor Weihnachten. - Das hat mit Transparenz und mit vernünftigen Entscheidungsprozessen nun überhaupt nichts zu tun.\n\nWahrscheinlich werden die USA und Japan und Australien ihre Chancen, die nächste Fußballweltmeisterschaft austragen zu dürfen, nicht schmälern wollen und sich deswegen bei diesem Thema so zurückhalten.\n\nWir sind uns einig, dass mitten in der Weihnachtszeit aus deutscher, europäischer, christlicher Sicht generell ein schwieriger Zeitpunkt für eine Fußballweltmeisterschaft ist; das wird uns wohl einen.\n\nZur Wahrheit gehört allerdings auch: Die ganze Welt ist nicht Weihnachten unterwegs, sondern es gibt auch andere Feste in anderen Religionen. Aber dann, meine Damen und Herren, muss man das vor der Abstimmung sagen, es vor der Entscheidung zum Kriterium machen und darf nicht danach sagen: Jetzt verlegen wir das Ganze mal schnell in den November und in den Dezember.\n\nInsofern sind wir gut beraten, von den internationalen Verbänden immer wieder Regeln einzufordern und auch lautstark - ich bin den Grünen dankbar für die Debatte, die wir heute hier führen können - zu artikulieren, welche Erwartung wir als deutsche Demokratie an Verbände haben, aber auch an Länder, die internationale Großsportereignisse ausrichten dürfen. Natürlich ist Hamburg der demokratische, der moralische, der sportpolitische, der gesellschaftliche Gegenentwurf zu anderen Orten, an denen wir Großveranstaltungen erlebt haben und in Zukunft erleben werden.\n\nIch rate uns sehr - da wäre übrigens auch die Linke gefordert, mal ihr eigenes Bild zu klären -, in der Frage Russland nicht doppelzüngig zu argumentieren: einerseits Maßstäbe einzufordern, dann aber einer Fußballmannschaft der Ukraine zuzumuten, dass sie möglicherweise in Moskau bei der Fußballweltmeisterschaft spielen muss, während ihre Verwandten von russischen Soldaten niedergeschossen werden.\n\nDas muss dann auch kritisiert werden, lieber Herr Kollege Hahn. Das gehört dann auch zur Wahrheit: Dann kann man nicht dort weggucken, weil einem die russische Position aus politischen Gründen näher ist als vielleicht die mitteleuropäische oder die deutsche.\n\nInsofern, meine Damen und Herren, empfehle ich Glaubwürdigkeit. Ich empfehle, dass wir uns sehr differenziert damit beschäftigen. Im Übrigen empfehle ich auch, Frau Göring-Eckardt, dass wir dann Deutsche in die Gremien schicken. Ich war sehr froh, dass Sie bei Ihrer Rede ab und zu Ihre Kollegin Roth angeschaut haben - ich hatte den Eindruck, das hat besänftigend auf Ihr Manuskript gewirkt -,\n\nweil es natürlich richtig ist, dass Frau Roth sich in den Gremien engagiert,\n\nanders als die Grünen, die sich der Debatte über die Olympiabewerbung Deutschlands verweigern, an ihr nicht teilnehmen, aber vorher und hinterher schlaue Nachrichten verkünden; das ist sicherlich der falsche Weg. Transparenz ist wichtig, Dialog ist wichtig. Beides setzt übrigens voraus, dass wir mit den Verbänden reden, dass wir mit den Verantwortlichen reden und für unsere Werte werben. Ich bin mir ganz sicher: Wir werden kontinuierlich in diesem Jahrhundert in den Sportverbänden eine Entwicklung haben, die auch in der Gesellschaft weitergeht: zu mehr Demokratie, zu mehr Menschenrechten, zu mehr Transparenz. Dazu soll und muss der Sport einen Beitrag leisten. Dafür werden wir uns einsetzen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n2449,peter-meiwald,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Frau Ministerin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir beraten heute einmal an prominenter Stelle in der Tagesordnung über den Einzelplan 16: Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reaktorsicherheit. Es ist eine gute Nachricht, dass wir einmal nicht abends um neun oder um zehn über dieses wichtige Thema reden.\n\nWas dürfen die Menschen in unserem Land von dieser Debatte erwarten? Antworten zu den Aktivitäten der Regierung, Ihres Ministeriums, werte Frau Hendricks, zu den drängenden Herausforderungen, vor denen Deutschland im globalen Kontext in diesem Rumpfjahr 2014 in den Bereichen Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reaktorsicherheit noch steht!\n\nWas sind diese drängenden Herausforderungen? Der Klimaschutz ist schon verschiedentlich angesprochen worden. Ein Klimahaushalt sieht allerdings anders aus als das, was wir jetzt hier angeboten bekommen haben.\n\nUnsere Fraktion hat einen entsprechenden Antrag eingebracht, in dem wir unter Einhaltung der nötigen Haushaltsdisziplin zeigen, wie ein Umsteuern zurück auf den Pfad des Klimaschutzes möglich ist. Doch diese Regierung will offensichtlich weder ein Klimaschutzgesetz noch einen Klimahaushalt. Dienstwagenprivileg - bleibt unangetastet. Kerosinbesteuerung im Inland - offenbar unerwünscht. CO2-Mindestpreis - nicht angedacht.\n\nLiebe Frau Dött, den von Ihnen postulierten Mittelanstieg im Klimaschutz hat nicht einmal die Ministerin in ihrer aktuellen Aufstellung, von der sie gerade sprach, in ihrem eigenen Haushalt gefunden. Das ist ein Optimismus, den wir nicht teilen können.\n\nDazu kommt eine klare Niederlage - das ist heute schon angesprochen worden - des Umweltministeriums gegen die Spielgemeinschaft aus Wirtschaftsministerium, großen alten Stromkonzernen und der IG BCE bei dem in diesen Wochen hier durchgepeitschten EEG. Wir kennen die verschiedenen Änderungsanträge, die uns vielleicht heute noch erwarten, noch nicht. Aber nach dem, was wir bisher kennen, sieht es so aus, als ob es eine klare Niederlage des Umweltministeriums gegenüber den anderen Interessen gibt.\n\nKohleausstieg: Deutschlands Klimagasausstoß steigt seit zwei Jahren wieder an, dank der dreckigen Kraftwerke, die mit Braun- und Steinkohle befeuert werden. Das schadet Klima und Gesundheit. Im Einzelplan 16 ist dies ein wichtiges Thema. Führen Sie doch wenigstens die Quecksilbergrenzwerte der USA ein.\n\nDann müssten die Kohlekraftwerke schon jetzt abgeschaltet oder zumindest anders befeuert werden. Und was ist mit CO2-Jahreshöchstlasten, einem CO2-Mindestpreis und, und, und?\n\nEin Wort zum Fracking, liebe Frau Ministerin, weil Sie es gerade angesprochen haben. Die Frackingmethode zur Erschließung von Erdgas ist nicht nur bei Schiefergaslagerstätten oder unter Kohleflözen unverantwortbar. Wassergefährdungen durch die Chemikaliencocktails im Frackfluid und in den Flowbacks sind auch bei der Stimulation von Gasaustritten aus anderen Lagerstätten gefährlich. Das Vorsorgeprinzip zugunsten der nachfolgenden Generationen muss unabhängig von der Lagerstätte gelten. Wir würden uns freuen, wenn Sie diese Position innerhalb der Regierung durchsetzen könnten. Hier ist natürlich der Wirtschaftsminister gefragt.\n\nWelche Herausforderungen drohen uns noch? Ressourcenschutz ist ein wichtiges Thema. Konferenzen dazu finden allenthalben im In- und Ausland statt. Anreize für echten Ressourcenschutz in der Produktion, aber auch im Bergbau oder in der Weiterentwicklung einer echten Kreislauf- und Kaskadenwirtschaft fehlen weiterhin in diesem Haushalt. Wir brauchen ein Wertstoffgesetz mit dynamischen, ambitionierten Recyclingquoten. Wir brauchen endlich ein modernes Bergrecht, das den Schutz unserer natürlichen Lebensgrundlagen ins Zentrum bergbaulicher Genehmigungen stellt. Und wir brauchen eine weiterentwickelte Ressourcenstrategie, die es für Produzenten endlich attraktiv macht, nicht mehr Wergwerfprodukte herzustellen, sondern ressourcensparend zu produzieren.\n\nZu alledem findet sich in diesem Haushaltsentwurf nichts.\n\nLuftreinhaltung: Auch das ist ein wichtiges Thema; es ist eben schon angesprochen worden. Feinstaubemissionen durch Baumaschinen, Dieselloks und Schiffe - dazu sehe ich keinerlei Aktivitäten in dieser Regierung, die hier gegensteuern.\n\nAmmoniak aus der Agrarindustrie: Gemeinsam mit dem Landwirtschaftsausschuss hatten wir im Umweltausschuss eine sehr gute Anhörung dazu. Aber gute Erkenntnisse im Umweltausschuss und im Ministerium -reichen nicht aus. Es braucht Konsequenzen. Diese Konsequenzen müssen gegen das Landwirtschaftsministerium und die Agrarlobby durchgesetzt werden.\n\n- Ich habe nichts gegen Bauern - danke für den Hinweis -, ganz im Gegenteil.\n\n- Es geht um die Großagrarindustrie und nicht um Bauern. Mit unseren diversen Anträgen haben wir deutlich gemacht, dass wir sehr wohl auf der Seite der bäuerlichen Familienbetriebe stehen.\n\nAber es kann nicht sein, dass zulasten unserer Natur, der Trinkwasserversorgung, der Luftreinhaltung und ähnlicher Dinge eine Produktion ausgeweitet wird, die an den Bedürfnissen der Menschen vorbeigeht.\n\n- Oh doch, ich kann einiges dazu beitragen, aber das gehört nicht in den Einzelplan. Das machen wir später.\n\nÖkologischer Hochwasserschutz: Auch der großen Ankündigung eines nationalen Hochwasserschutzprogramms fehlt leider bisher die materielle Hinterlegung im Haushalt. Das ist eben schon angeklungen. Ein Konzept, das über rein technischen Hochwasserschutz durch Deicherhöhungen hinausweisen könnte - Stichworte: Auenrenaturierung, großflächige Retentionsräume und Ähnliches -, ist für uns bisher noch nicht einmal im Ansatz erkennbar.\n\nWas ist mit dem ökologisch-sozialen Umbau im Wohnungsbestand? Frau Dött hat gerade viel Lob geäußert. Was wird aus dem Wohngeld, das Sie überarbeiten wollten? Mit welchen Haushaltsmitteln soll die aus Klimaschutzgründen notwendige Quote von 3 Prozent energetischer Sanierung im Gebäudebestand erreicht werden? Wo ist der Heizkostenzuschuss, den Ihre Fraktion, Frau Ministerin, noch in der letzten Legislatur vehement gefordert hat? Nicht einmal ein Miniförderprogramm für ökologische Baustoffe finden wir im hier vorgelegten Haushalt.\n\nReaktorsicherheit: Auch das gehört zu diesem Ministerium; dann habe ich meinen Rundumschlag beendet. Was passiert in Ihrem Haus, um international den Atomausstieg voranzubringen? Sogar auslaufende Atomverträge mit Indien und Brasilien werden verlängert; zum Nutzen der Atomindustrie, nicht aber zum Schutz der Menschen vor den Gefahren der Atomindustrie.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. Gute Politik setzt insbesondere im Umweltbereich klare Prioritäten auf Klimaschutz, Energiewende, Ökologie und Gesundheitsschutz. Dafür braucht es deutlich mehr Grün. Wir würden uns freuen, wenn wir in den zukünftigen Beratungen der Haushalte dieser Regierung etwas mehr davon wiederfinden würden.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n708,johann-wadephul,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! An diese Worte möchte ich anknüpfen und der Hoffnung Ausdruck verleihen - nach der Debatte kann man das eigentlich auch, mit einer kleinen Einschränkung hinsichtlich der Rede des Kollegen von Notz -, dass wir doch zu einer einvernehmlichen Regelung kommen.\n\n- Ich komme gleich zu Schleswig-Holstein.\n\nErstens. Es ist hier über Qualität gesprochen worden. Jeder für sich ist von der jeweiligen Qualität seiner Fraktion, seiner Partei sehr überzeugt. Qualität in einer Demokratie wird aber durch Wählerstimmen entschieden. Da hilft es überhaupt nicht, zu sagen: Wir liefern hinterher die qualitativ besseren Beiträge. - Frau Kollegin Sitte, so konnte man Sie verstehen. Nein, wer sich für qualitativ besonders gut hält, der soll seine Arbeit entsprechend fortsetzen und danach streben, diese Qualität bei den nächsten Wahlen auch in Wählerstimmen umzusetzen. Bei der letzten Wahl hat es eine eindeutige Qualitätsentscheidung gegeben, die die Unionsfraktion sogar an die Grenze zur absoluten Mehrheit gebracht hat.\n\nWir haben das gute demokratische Recht, diese Entscheidung hier auch umzusetzen.\n\nZweitens. Mehrheitsbildung im Parlament - ich komme jetzt gleich zu Schleswig-Holstein - ist das Ergebnis von Koalitionsverhandlungen. Herr Kollege von Notz, es ist schon ein Aspekt - sicherlich nicht der maßgebliche, aber ein Aspekt - der Koalitionsverhandlungen gewesen, und zwar auf allen Seiten, dass durch diese Große Koalition eine übergroße Parlamentsmehrheit entsteht, die für einen lebendigen Parlamentarismus\n\n- Sie sagen: nicht schön ist - an sich jedenfalls nicht erstrebenswert ist. Ich glaube, darin sind wir uns wahrscheinlich fast alle einig. Das heißt, es ist durchaus ein Aspekt gewesen, der dafür gesprochen hat, dass man eine kleine Koalition bildet. Man kann nicht alle Bedenken zurückstellen, aber wir müssen bei der Geschichtsschreibung - wenn wir ein Jahr zurückgehen - genau bleiben: Es waren die Grünen,\n\ndie die Koalitionssondierungen mit der Union beendet haben.\n\nEs war insbesondere der Kollege Robert Habeck aus Schleswig-Holstein. Von ihm haben Sie sich in einer Klausur ausführlich beraten lassen. Insofern ist er einer der Vordenker der Grünen. Im Spiegel hat er am 25. September des vergangenen Jahres gesagt:\n\nWir sind weder personell noch konzeptionell auf Schwarz-Grün vorbereitet.\n\nDas ist das eigene Urteil. Davor können wir Sie nicht retten. Das ist Ihre Eigenanalyse.\n\nDritter Punkt. Minderheitenschutz hat eine große Bedeutung. Das haben die Redner der Unionsfraktion und der sozialdemokratischen Fraktion unterstrichen. Minderheitenschutz heißt - das hat das Bundesverfassungsgericht einmal in einem schönen einfachen Satz gesagt - nicht Schutz vor Sachentscheidungen der Mehrheit.\n\nDas muss man ganz eindeutig dazusagen. Das heißt, wir haben das demokratische Recht, das, was wir als Mehrheitsentscheidung durchsetzen können und wollen, auch in aller Differenziertheit, durchzusetzen. Ich bitte, das nicht zu bezweifeln.\n\nVierter Punkt. Ich glaube, wir sollten im Parlament Wert darauf legen, dass die Mandate gleichwertig sind. Das wird gerade seitens der Linksfraktion immer wieder betont. Hier erwähne ich zum zweiten Mal Schleswig-Holstein, Herr Kollege von Notz: Auf diese Gleichwertigkeit legen beispielsweise die Abgeordneten der dänischen Minderheit im Parlament von Schleswig-Holstein großen Wert. Wenn Sie das ernst nehmen, dann können Sie nicht sagen: Alle Redebeiträge, die nach mir kommen, sind Selbstgespräche. - Ich nehme es einmal persönlich: Ich halte hier eine genauso wichtige Rede, wie Sie sie gehalten haben. Da sollten wir keine Unterschiede machen.\n\nAber auch innerhalb einer Koalition kann es un-terschiedliche Auffassungen geben. Der Kollege Straubinger beispielsweise hat in einem mutigen Moment einen Vorgriff auf die Stromtrassendebatte gemacht.\n\nDamals bei Rot-Grün gab es das möglicherweise auch.\n\n- Frau Kollegin Roth dementiert es jetzt. Frau Kollegin Roth, Sie standen immer stromlinienförmig hinter Gerhard Schröder. Genau!\n\nDas Parlament ist schon wichtig.\n\n- Im Grundgesetz steht: „der Deutsche Bundestag“ und nicht: „die Opposition“. Wir nehmen unsere parlamentarischen Rechte sehr ernst im Sinne des Struck’schen -Gesetzes, aber auch in dem Sinne, dass wir in Redebeiträgen - das merken Sie, wenn Sie hinhören - unterschiedliche Akzente setzen. Das findet doch ständig statt, wenn die Mitglieder der Regierungsfraktionen reden. Es gibt auch unterschiedlichen Beifall. Diese Unterschiede gibt es natürlich auch weiterhin.\n\nNatürlich üben wir unsere Rechte als Bundestag aus: unsere Kontrollrechte, unsere Rechte der Bestärkung, unsere Rechte des Einwirkens auf die Regierung in mannigfacher Art und Weise. Das machen wir schon gemeinsam; aber das machen auch Sie, und das sollten Sie gut machen. Aber wir kontrollieren ebenso.\n\nLetzter Punkt. Sie haben gesagt, das soll nicht von irgendwelchen Launen abhängig sein.\n\nAbgesehen davon, dass der Fraktionsvorsitzende der Union, Volker Kauder, und der Fraktionsvorsitzende der SPD, Thomas Oppermann, im Allgemeinen nicht zu Launen neigen\n\n- es gibt jetzt einen etwas stärkeren Widerspruch aus der SPD-Fraktion;\n\nden wollte ich damit aber nicht verursachen -, will ich in aller Ernsthaftigkeit sagen: Es haben alle - Präsident Lammert ist im Hause zugegen - gesagt, dass wir Oppositionsrechte wahren wollen und dass wir die Opposition mit Möglichkeiten ausstatten wollen, die sich aus dem bisher niedergelegten Recht nicht ergeben. Sie sollten uns bitte nicht unterstellen, dass wir bei der nächstbesten Laune das alles vergessen. Das werden wir nicht. Wir stehen zu unseren Aussagen; wir werden das umsetzen. Ich setze darauf, dass wir im Geschäftsordnungsausschuss zu einer einvernehmlichen Regelung kommen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n7959,tino-sorge,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Ich wollte keine Frage stellen, sondern lediglich etwas richtigstellen, weil die Kollegin Kipping bei einem Zwischenruf, den ich getätigt habe, meinte, ich bzw. meine Fraktion teile die Auffassung, dass die Drohung, die Regelsätze zu kürzen, zu Recht erfolge.\n\nIch möchte nur darauf hinweisen, dass Sie den Zwischenruf offensichtlich nicht richtig verstanden oder bewusst missverstanden haben. Weil Sie darauf hinwiesen, dass es Rechte gibt,\n\nhabe ich lediglich gesagt, dass zu Rechten auch Pflichten gehören. Das wollte ich hier nur richtiggestellt haben.\"\n7236,eckhardt-rehberg,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich bin Bundesfinanzminister Schäuble ausdrücklich dankbar für seinen Hinweis, dass wir am 1. Juli vor 25 Jahren die D-Mark eingeführt haben. Ich bin ja einer derjenigen, die das im Ostteil unseres Vaterlandes miterleben durften. Die Menschen haben vorher bei den Demonstrationen gerufen: Kommt die D-Mark nicht zu uns, dann gehen wir zu ihr. - Wir haben es getan. Ich glaube, eines der wesentlichen Momente bei der Einführung der D-Mark war, neben dem Materiellen und Fiskalischen, das Gefühl der Menschen in der ehemaligen DDR: Wir gehören jetzt dazu. - Das war das Gemeinschaftsgefühl, das sich in der D-Mark ausgedrückt hat.\n\nIch kann den Menschen in Griechenland nur zurufen: Stimmen Sie am Sonntag mit Ja, weil Sie zum Euro und zu Europa gehören wollen! Ein Nein wäre an dieser Stelle das Gegenteil davon. - Das ist meine Bitte an die Menschen in Griechenland.\n\nHerr Kollege Gysi, Sie sprachen von „Ultimatum“. Machen Sie sich einmal folgende Mühe: Heute Mittag ist allen Mitgliedern ein Dokument des Europareferates des Deutschen Bundestages zugeleitet worden, in dem eine Synopse zwischen dem laufenden Programm, zwischen dem Verhandlungsstand der Institutionen, der Troika, und dem, was die griechische Regierung angeboten hatte, dargestellt wurde. Wenn jetzt Herr Tsipras, wenige Stunden vor dem Referendum, immer wieder neue Angebote macht, aber gleichzeitig die Griechen auffordert, mit Nein zu stimmen - also: keine Konditionierung, Geld ohne Konditionen -, dann ist das schizophren, Herr Kollege Gysi.\n\nEs ist wahr, dass die Angebote der Troika und der griechischen Regierung ziemlich nahe beieinanderlagen. Beim Primärüberschuss hätten wir - das sage ich für meine Fraktion - in der Tat Probleme gehabt. Im alten Programm waren 3,5 Prozent für dieses Jahr und 4,5 Prozent für nächstes Jahr vorgesehen. Das Angebot der Troika und der griechischen Regierung lautete 1 Prozent für dieses Jahr und 2 Prozent für nächstes Jahr. Das ist das wesentliche Moment. Aber wissen Sie, woran das unter anderem gescheitert ist? Bei der Kürzung der Militärausgaben lagen die Vorschläge um 200 Millionen Euro auseinander. Die Troika wollte 400 Millionen Euro; die griechische Links-rechts-Regierung wollte nur 200 Millionen Euro.\n\nDas sind die Probleme, über die wir reden müssen, Herr Kollege Gysi.\n\nWir müssen präzise sein, Herr Kollege Gysi: Die Regierung in Athen ist keine Linksregierung. Sie ist eine Regierung aus Linkspopulisten, Linksextremen, Linksradikalen und Rechtspopulisten, Rechtsextremen und Nationalisten. Das ist die Wahrheit.\n\nAllein um der Macht willen hat sich Herr Tsipras mit Herrn Kammenos ins Bett gelegt, damit sie eine Regierung bilden konnten. Das ist die ganze Wahrheit an dieser Stelle. Deswegen konnte man bei den Militärausgaben nicht zusammenkommen, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren von den Linken.\n\nMit Blick auf die Zukunft darf ich aus dem ESM-Vertrag zitieren. Manche meinen offenbar - man muss nur Herrn Hofreiter und Herrn Gysi zuhören -, es wäre ganz einfach, so mal ein paar Milliarden Euro rüberzuschieben. Die EFSF-Welt ist um Mitternacht abgelaufen; IWF-Kreditrate: nicht gezahlt. Wir sind jetzt in der ESM-Welt. Ich darf aus Artikel 3 des ESM-Vertrages, den wir im Deutschen Bundestag ratifiziert haben, zitieren: Mitgliedstaaten der Euro-Zone, denen schwerwiegende Finanzprobleme drohen, werden unter strikten Auflagen Stabilitätshilfen gewährt, „wenn dies zur Wahrung … des Euro-Währungsgebiets insgesamt und seiner Mitgliedstaaten unabdingbar ist“.\n\nDazu ist ein Antrag der jeweiligen Regierung notwendig. Wenn jetzt Herr Tsipras zu seinen Bürgern sagt: „Stimmt mit Nein! Wir wollen neues Geld ohne Konditionen“, dann kann er, jedenfalls nach meinem Verständnis, keinen Antrag nach dem ESM-Vertrag stellen. Das ist keine saubere, seriöse und solide Politik; das ist schlichtweg verantwortungslos gegenüber dem eigenen Volk.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, man hat manchmal Glück. Manchmal gibt es auch Zufälle. Ich habe mich diese Woche mit einer jungen Rumänin unterhalten, die mir gesagt hat: Herr Rehberg, wir verstehen überhaupt nicht, dass Sie den Griechen so weit entgegenkommen wollen. Es ist bei uns so, dass wir als Erntehelfer und Gastarbeiter in Griechenland arbeiten, weil die Griechen ihre Oliven und Pistazien nicht selber ernten wollen. Sie lassen ernten. - Die junge Rumänin kam dann noch darauf zu sprechen: Die Griechen haben viel höhere Renten; sie haben viel mehr Beschäftigte im öffentlichen Dienst.\n\nIch spreche das an dieser Stelle an; denn die Bundeskanzlerin hat hundertprozentig recht. Wir haben, Herr Sarrazin - ja -, eine Verantwortung für alle 28 in der -Europäischen Union, ja, wir haben eine Verantwortung für alle 19 in der Euro-Zone. Aber gerade wir als Deutsche, wir als 80-Millionen-Volk haben eine besondere Verantwortung für die Slowakei, Slowenien, die baltischen Länder, die ein deutlich niedrigeres Sozial- und Wohlstandsniveau haben als die Griechen, und das, was wir ihnen zugemutet haben, müssen wir auch den Griechen zumuten. Anders geht es nicht.\n\nKein Problem. Bitte.\n\nHerr Kollege Sarrazin, ich möchte Ihnen gerne erwidern. Wenn ich die Entwicklung in Griechenland in den letzten zehn Jahren sehe, dann stelle ich fest, dass Griechenland seit Anfang 2000, bedingt durch den Beitritt zur Euro-Zone, weit über seine Verhältnisse gelebt und die Schulden in die Höhe gefahren hat, um die Sozialsysteme zu finanzieren. 2010 war Griechenland, regiert von Sozialdemokraten und Konservativen, nicht mehr in der Lage, sich auf dem Kapitalmarkt zu refinanzieren. Dann haben wir das erste und das zweite Hilfsprogramm aufgelegt. Wenn ich mich recht erinnere - darauf sind schon einige Redner in der Debatte eingegangen -, war Griechenland im Dezember letzten Jahres fast wieder kapitalmarktfähig. Griechenland kam aus der Rezession heraus und hatte Aussicht, die Arbeitslosigkeit abzubauen. Ich behaupte nicht, dass die Regierungen in -Griechenland zwischen 2010 und 2015 alles richtig gemacht haben, aber Griechenland war, wie es Kollegin Hasselfeldt formuliert hat, auf einem guten Weg, genauso wie Spanien, Irland, Portugal und Zypern; wir haben gerade heute im Haushaltsausschuss eine Tranche für Zypern freigegeben.\n\nDeswegen, Herr Kollege Sarrazin, muss man schon die Frage stellen: War das verantwortungsvoll, was die griechische Regierung seit Ende Januar bis heute gemacht hat? Sie hat gezockt bis zum Letzten - das hat gerade die letzte Woche gezeigt -, immer in dem Wissen, dass Solidarität heißt: Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe. Trotzdem kannten sie nur zwei Themen in den letzten fünf Monaten: einen Schuldenschnitt, und: Gebt uns neues Geld ohne Konditionen! - So kann Europa - auch im Hinblick auf die Länder, die Sie gerade genannt haben - nicht funktionieren, Herr Kollege Sarrazin.\n\nStändig werden zusätzliche Finanzpakete für Wachstum und Beschäftigung gefordert. Griechenland hat von 2007 bis heute aus europäischen Strukturfonds 35 Milliarden Euro erhalten. Griechenland hat bis heute von der Europäischen Investitionsbank noch einmal 11 Milliarden Euro zu günstigsten Konditionen erhalten. Griechenland steht in den nächsten fünf Zeitjahren, in der nächsten Förderperiode bis 2020, der gleiche Betrag wie in der vorangegangenen Förderperiode zur Verfügung. In 13 Jahren sind das über 70 Milliarden Euro aus europäischen Strukturfonds wie dem Europäischen Fonds für regionale Entwicklung, dem Europäischen Sozialfonds und ELER einschließlich Direktbeihilfen für die Landwirtschaft.\n\nWas hat man daraus gemacht? Wie wurde das in Anspruch genommen? Ist das alles versickert, oder ist das dort angekommen, wohin es sollte, nämlich beim Mittelstand, bei Forschung und Bildung, bei den jungen Leuten? Ich muss Ihnen ehrlich sagen: Ich habe große Zweifel - auch nach einem Besuch in Griechenland vor zwei Monaten -, dass die Gelder für das verwendet wurden, wozu sie gedacht waren. Die Syriza-Regierung wollte ja alles besser machen. Aber ich konnte nicht erkennen, dass sie auch nur an einer Stelle etwas besser gemacht hat und dass das Geld, das Europa zur Verfügung stellt, für die Förderung von Wachstum und Beschäftigung sowie zur Bekämpfung der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit eingesetzt wird.\n\nHerr Kollege Gysi, Sie haben beklagt, dass in den „Prior Actions“ der Troika nicht die Sonderabgabe auf Unternehmensgewinne steht. Was Sie aber nicht gesagt haben, ist, dass die Links-rechts-Regierung in Athen eine Steueramnestie für die Reichen gemacht hat.\n\nDas ist für mich völlig unerklärlich. Wie kann man grundsätzlich auf die Idee kommen, einmal Steuerausfälle von 70 Milliarden Euro in den Wind zu schlagen und als Zweites einen Cut bei 1 Million Euro anzusetzen? Ich kann mich an einen Artikel im Spiegel erinnern, in dem aufgezeigt wird, wie die Vetternwirtschaft unter Syriza und Anel läuft. Das ist keine andere als die unter der ND oder der Pasok, überhaupt keine andere. Syriza ist aber mit dem Anspruch angetreten, alles besser zu machen. Ich habe am 27. Februar hier gesagt: Ich gebe dieser Regierung eine Chance. - Jetzt kann ich Ihnen ganz ehrlich sagen: Allein die Steueramnestie für Reiche ist reinste Klientelpolitik. Das, was Syriza und Anel gemacht haben, ist nicht akzeptabel. Das muss erst einmal in Griechenland abgestellt werden, bevor wir über weitere Dinge reden.\n\nDie Bundeskanzlerin hat gesagt: Wo ein Wille ist, da ist auch ein Weg. - Zum Willen gehören immer zwei. Ich kann nur noch einmal das sagen, was ich eingangs gesagt habe: Griechen, seid klug, wählt die gemeinsame Währung, wählt damit Europa! Zwingt eure Regierung, endlich eine solide, vertrauensvolle und seriöse Politik mit den Partnern in Europa zu machen!\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n13796,maria-flachsbarth,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In den vergangenen Sitzungswochen hat der Deutsche Bundestag häufig zentrale Themen aus dem Bereich der Landwirtschaft, der Ernährung und der ländlichen Räume debattiert. Mich freut, dass damit diese für unser Land und unsere Gesellschaft so wichtigen Themen in die Mitte der parlamentarischen Aufmerksamkeit gerückt wurden. Denn genau dahin, in die Mitte, gehört auch die Landwirtschaft selbst - in die Mitte der Gesellschaft.\n\nWir verdanken der deutschen Landwirtschaft viel. Noch nie in unserer Geschichte hatten wir so gesunde, so sichere und so vielfältige Lebensmittel wie heute.\n\nDas leisten in erster Linie unsere Bäuerinnen und Bauern. Unsere Bauernfamilien haben deshalb unsere Unterstützung und unsere Wertschätzung verdient.\n\nGleichwohl, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wissen wir: Die deutsche Landwirtschaft kann nur dann erfolgreich arbeiten, wenn sie von einer breiten gesellschaftlichen Akzeptanz getragen ist. Zu einer gesellschaftlich akzeptierten landwirtschaftlichen Nutztierhaltung leistet die Einigung beim Düngepaket, über das wir heute sprechen, einen wesentlichen Beitrag.\n\nWir müssen unser Grundwasser vor übermäßigen Nitrateinträgen schützen und die Ammoniakemissionen aus der Landwirtschaft reduzieren. Aber wir müssen unseren Landwirten auch die Möglichkeit geben, ihre Pflanzen bedarfsgerecht mit Nährstoffen zu versorgen.\n\nIch freue mich deshalb, dass uns mit der neuen Düngeverordnung ein ausgewogener Ausgleich zwischen den Umweltinteressen, Frau Höhn,\n\nund einer praxistauglichen Lösung für unsere Bauern gelungen ist. Das Düngegesetz, das wir heute beraten, bildet die gesetzliche Grundlage für die Düngeverordnung und damit auch für die Umsetzung der EU-Nitratrichtlinie in Deutschland. Damit ist ein Paket geschnürt, das der bäuerlichen Landwirtschaft ein ökonomisch tragfähiges und zugleich ressourcenschonendes Wirtschaften ermöglicht. Gemeinsam mit dem Bundesumweltministerium und den Ländern haben wir uns darauf verständigt, die Steuerung und Überwachung von Nährstoffströmen deutlich zu verbessern. Hier schafft der Bund die gesetzlichen Vorgaben; bei der Kontrolle sind aber die Länder gefordert.\n\nMit der Düngegesetzgebung haben wir eine stärkere Regionalisierung und damit standortangepasste Differenzierung des Düngerechts vereinbart. Es sieht beispielsweise zusätzliche Vorgaben für Gebiete mit kritischen Nitratwerten vor, aber eben auch Entlastungen für unproblematische Gebiete. In der Novelle der Düngeverordnung vorgesehene Maßnahmen sind unter anderem die bundeseinheitliche Regelung der Düngebedarfsermittlung für Stickstoff auf Acker- und Grünland, die Verlängerung der Zeiträume, in denen keine Düngemittel ausgebracht werden dürfen, sowie die Ausweitung der Abstände für die Stickstoff- und Phosphatdüngung in der Nähe von Gewässern.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Novelle der Düngeverordnung zielt darauf ab, den Stickstoff effizienter zu verwerten und die Emissionen von Ammoniak bei der Düngung zu reduzieren. Zudem wird das Verfahren zur Ermittlung des Stickstoffdüngebedarfs der Pflanzen weiterentwickelt, konkretisiert und bundesweit vereinheitlicht. Der ermittelte Düngebedarf darf in der Regel nicht überschritten werden. Damit die landwirtschaftlichen Betriebe die notwendigen Vorgaben aber leichter umsetzen können, werden wir neue Techniken fördern, zum Beispiel die bodennahe Ausbringung von Gülle. Ich denke, das ist ausgesprochen sinnvoll.\n\nMit der Einigung beim Düngepaket setzen wir auch das Bekenntnis aus dem Koalitionsvertrag um, eine flächengebundene landwirtschaftliche Nutztierhaltung in Deutschland anzustreben.\n\nSehr herzlich danke ich allen beteiligten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, insbesondere aus den Koalitionsfraktionen und aus den Ländern, für wirklich konstruktive Beiträge. Es hat lange gedauert, aber jetzt ist es endlich gut. Ich bin zuversichtlich, dass wir die Beratungen im Bundesrat voraussichtlich im März dieses Jahres abschließen können.\n\nLieber Kollege Priesmeier, es waren tatsächlich nicht immer ganz einfache Verhandlungen.\n\nAber es hat sich gezeigt, dass nur im konstruktiven Miteinander und in einem fairen Dialog sinnvolle Lösungen erreicht werden können. Daran sollten wir für den Rest der Legislaturperiode gemeinsam festhalten. Wir drücken uns nicht vor schwierigen Themen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, sondern wir steuern mit Augenmaß nach und gehen die Akzeptanzprobleme der landwirtschaftlichen Nutztierhaltung damit wirkungsvoll an. Die Menschen erwarten von uns, dass wir liefern, und mit dem Düngepaket haben wir geliefert. Ich bitte Sie daher, dem von Bundesminister Christian Schmidt vorgelegten Düngegesetz zuzustimmen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n11592,tankred-schipanski,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Das ist eine sehr unterhaltsame Urheberrechtsdebatte; man kann nicht sagen, dass irgendetwas trocken wäre. Frau Sitte, das war eine schöne, launige Rede; das muss man einfach sagen.\n\nKollege Flisek hat schon, lieber Kai Gehring, sehr deutlich gemacht, dass die Koalition beim Thema Urheberrecht in drei großen Blöcken arbeitet; so möchte ich es ausdrücken. Wir haben das Verwertungsgesellschaftengesetz im ersten großen Block gehabt und sind jetzt beim Urhebervertragsrecht. Der dritte Block wird - wie angekündigt und wie es auch im Koalitionsvertrag steht - die Bildungs- und Wissenschaftsschranke sein. Nichtsdestotrotz, lieber Kai Gehring, bin ich den Grünen ausdrücklich dankbar, dass wir das heute debattieren.\n\nWenn wir als Forschungspolitiker in den Antrag schauen, stellen wir fest, dass wir inhaltlich nicht weit voneinander entfernt sind. Man kann Ihre Ungeduld schon verstehen.\n\nIch gestehe offen, dass ich der Meinung bin, dass das Bundesjustizministerium den Arbeitsauftrag aus dem Koalitionsvertrag ruhig etwas schneller bearbeiten könnte.\n\nDer Gesetzentwurf, so hörte ich, liegt dem BMJV mittlerweile vor, und ich erwarte, dass er in Kürze in die Ressortabstimmung geht\n\nund dann zügig hier im Parlament in erster Lesung behandelt wird.\n\nAllerdings waren weder die Bundesregierung noch der Bundestag bei dem Thema Wissenschaftsschranke in den letzten knapp drei Jahren untätig. So hat - es wurde angesprochen - Frau Katharina de la Durantaye im Auftrag des BMBF ein vielbeachtetes Gutachten vorgelegt und damit in der Tat den fundiertesten Diskussionsvorschlag für eine Allgemeine Bildungs-, Wissenschafts- und Bibliotheksschranke eingebracht.\n\nWorum geht es bei diesem Thema? Wir wollen eine technologieoffene Regelung haben, die wir nicht nach jeder technischen Neuentwicklung wieder anpassen müssen. Wir wollen eine lesbare, verständliche Regelung aus einem Guss; das haben meine Vorredner betont. Wir wollen auch langfristige Rechtssicherheit für alle Beteiligten erreichen.\n\nDass solche Regelungen möglich sind, zeigt im Übrigen ein völkerrechtliches Abkommen im Urheberrecht: die Berner Übereinkunft von 1886. Hier wurde der sogenannte Drei-Stufen-Test eingeführt, welcher bis heute Gültigkeit hat und Leitlinie für unsere Schrankenregelungen im Urheberrecht ist.\n\nDen sogenannten Schrankendschungel hat Kollege Flisek bereits angesprochen.\n\nEs wurde auch gesagt, dass nicht alle Wissenschaftler oder Bibliothekare auch Juristen sein müssen, um das Ganze zu verstehen. Von daher, denke ich, ist das Gutachten von Frau de la Durantaye ein sehr guter Diskussionsvorschlag. Sie arbeitet mit einer Generalklausel und dem Rechtsbegriff der Gebotenheit. Die Schranke bleibt selbstverständlich vergütungspflichtig. Das möchte ich von unserer Seite aus noch einmal ausdrücklich betonen.\n\nMeines Erachtens ist das Ziel der Neufassung dieser Schranke nicht, dass sie möglichst oft und umfassend angewendet wird. Denn dort, wo es leicht auffindbare und preislich fair gestaltete Lizenzangebote gibt, werden diese sicherlich auch in Zukunft die erste Wahl sein.\n\nGleichwohl brauchen wir diese Wissenschaftsschranke. Wir kennen die stark gestiegenen Preise und die Bündelung in Datenbanken, die oft dazu führen, dass wissenschaftliche Werke für unsere Hochschulbibliotheken schwerer zu lizenzieren sind. Die Hochschulbibliotheken beschweren sich über Marktversagen und punktuelle Monopolbildung durch wissenschaftliche Großverlage. Die Länder wiederum beklagen die enormen Preissteigerungen bei wissenschaftlicher Literatur.\n\nHier kann die Wissenschaftsschranke quasi als Überdruckventil dienen. Wenn nämlich die Verlage keine angemessenen Lizenzangebote machen, hat der Wissenschaftler die alternative Möglichkeit, den Zugang zu Literatur eben über diese Schranke zu erhalten. Ohne diese Wissenschaftsschranke bekämen wir meines Erachtens einen asymmetrischen Markt.\n\nIch darf festhalten, dass wir natürlich insbesondere die Bibliotheken nicht vergessen sollten. Auch diese sollten wir in diese neue Regelung einbeziehen. Es ist sehr wichtig, dass die Bibliotheken und Archive angemessen Berücksichtigung finden. Vielleicht - wir kennen ja den Vorschlag des BMJV noch nicht - kann man auch noch im Bibliotheksbereich die eine oder andere Anpassung in diesem Rahmen vornehmen. Ich denke an die Fernleihe, die elektronischen Archivierungsmöglichkeiten oder auch neue technische Möglichkeiten wie das Data-Mining, das wir gesetzlich natürlich noch ein ganzes Stück voranbringen müssen zum Wohle unserer Bibliotheken.\n\nAls Bildungs- und Forschungspolitiker bin ich überzeugt, dass sich Wissen und wissenschaftlicher Fortschritt möglichst schnell und unkompliziert verbreiten sollten. Das wollen wir mit einer Wissenschaftsschranke sicherstellen. Daher führen wir heute diese Debatte. Daher gibt es den Druck auf das BMJV.\n\nIch danke ganz herzlich dafür.\"\n9823,annette-groth,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Zuhörerinnen auf der Tribüne! Herr Roth, Sie haben leider vergessen, die Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention zu erwähnen; denn die EU ist vertraglich verpflichtet, dieser Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention beizutreten. Aber der Prozess wird blockiert - erst von den Mitgliedstaaten und jetzt vom Europäischen Gerichtshof. Was heißt das? Es gibt derzeit und auch in absehbarer Zukunft keinen individuellen Rechtsschutz gegen Menschenrechtsverletzungen durch EU-Organe. Das muss wirklich dringend korrigiert werden. Ich bitte Sie: Setzen Sie sich dafür ein!\n\nEs ist nicht neu, dass der EU-Menschenrechtsbericht insbesondere die Menschenrechtsverletzungen außerhalb der EU anprangert. Dagegen werden die Menschenrechtsverletzungen in den EU-Mitgliedstaaten weithin unter den Tisch gekehrt. Das nenne ich heuchlerisch. Heute sind in nahezu allen EU-Staaten Armut, Ausgrenzung und Arbeitslosigkeit für viele Menschen Realität. Allein in Griechenland sind mehr als 3,5 Millionen Menschen direkt von Armut bedroht. Über 20 Prozent der Kinder und älteren Menschen leben unterhalb der Armutsgrenze. Das ist doch ein Skandal im reichen Europa.\n\nDie Schere zwischen Arm und Reich wird immer größer, weil das neoliberale Wirtschaftssystem einige wenige bevorteilt - zum Beispiel Banken und Großkonzerne - und andere - die Mehrheit, wie Kleinbäuerinnen, Rentnerinnen und Arbeitnehmerinnen - stark benachteiligt. Auch das muss geändert werden.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, an mehreren Stellen des Menschenrechtsberichts ist von Flüchtlingen die Rede - wir hatten gerade die Debatte dazu -, aber kein Wort davon, dass 2014 über 3 400 Menschen im Mittelmeer ertrunken sind, weil sie in die EU wollten. Das ist doch der große Skandal vor unserer eigenen Tür, der sich seit der Zeit immer weiter verschlimmert hat. Seit dem Jahr 2000 sind mindestens 25 000 Menschen im Mittelmeer gestorben. Das ist entsetzlich. Es wird so weitergehen, wenn wir keine legalen Einreisemöglichkeiten in die EU schaffen.\n\nDas Dublin-System muss endlich durch eine solidarische Flüchtlingspolitik ersetzt werden. Stattdessen werden immer neue Polizei- und Militäreinsätze zur Flüchtlingsbekämpfung beschlossen, als könnte die Bekämpfung von Schleppern oder die Zerstörung von Booten die Flüchtlinge davon abhalten, über das Meer zu uns zu kommen. Wir brauchen legale und sichere Fluchtwege und Einreisemöglichkeiten. Das ist eine Forderung, die die Linke schon lange stellt.\n\nJetzt werden an den EU-Außengrenzen „Hotspots“ eingerichtet. In ihnen wird eine Klassifizierung der Geflüchteten in „gute“ und „schlechte“ Flüchtlinge vorgenommen. Ziel dieser Klassifizierung ist, viele daran zu hindern, überhaupt zu uns zu kommen. Aber wohin sollen sie denn gehen? In meiner Funktion als Berichterstatterin für den Europarat war ich letzte Woche im Libanon und in Jordanien. Diese beiden Länder haben, wie allgemein bekannt, die meisten Geflüchteten aus Syrien aufgenommen. Viele Flüchtlinge leiden an Hunger, weil die Nahrungsmittelversorgung aufgrund fehlender Gelder nicht ausreicht. Ich habe gerade viele Frauen getroffen, die sichtlich unterernährt waren. In den letzten beiden Wochen eines Monats reicht das Geld von der internationalen Gemeinschaft nur noch für Brot. „Wir haben Hunger“, haben mir viele gesagt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wenn es um die sogenannte Abwehr der Flüchtlinge geht, scheint für die EU die Einhaltung der Menschenrechte keine Rolle zu spielen. Das zeigt sich insbesondere an der unerträglichen Taktiererei mit dem türkischen Ministerpräsidenten Erdogan. Jetzt soll die deutsche Polizei sogar mit der türkischen bei der Fluchtabwehr zusammenarbeiten. Skandalös!\n\nErdogan führt einen furchtbaren Krieg gegen die eigene Bevölkerung, insbesondere gegen die Kurdinnen und Kurden, und er schiebt sogar Flüchtlinge nach Syrien ab. Wissen Sie, dass in etlichen kurdischen Gebieten seit Wochen ein 24-stündiges Ausgehverbot besteht? Das heißt, Menschen erhalten keine medizinische Versorgung, können nicht einkaufen. Teilweise ist die Wasser- und Stromversorgung unterbrochen. Das ist ein Verbrechen, das wir wirklich lautstark anprangern müssen!\n\nDarum empfinde ich es mehr als schändlich, dass der Türkei Visaerleichterungen für türkische Staatsangehörige und 3 Milliarden Euro als Belohnung für die Flüchtlingsabwehr versprochen wurden. Stattdessen sollten wir Druck auf die türkische Regierung ausüben und sie nachdrücklich auffordern, die Kampfhandlungen und die extralegalen Hinrichtungen, die es auch gibt, sofort einzustellen und den Dialog mit den Kurdinnen und Kurden wieder aufzunehmen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wie bei der Türkei werden die Menschenrechtsverletzungen, die auch von anderen EU-Partnern begangen werden, teilweise schweigend hingenommen. So werden im aktuellen EU-Forschungsrahmenprogramm Horizon 2020 Projekte der EU-Sicherheitsforschung gemeinsam mit Israel betrieben und finanziert, obwohl Israel massiv Menschenrechtsverletzungen in den palästinensischen Gebieten begeht. Israelische Rüstungsunternehmen, die von der Besatzungspolitik im großen Stil profitieren und dazu beitragen, werden im Rahmen von Horizon 2020 gefördert. So sind auch wir mit unseren europäischen Steuergeldern an den Menschenrechtsverletzungen in der Region beteiligt.\n\nViele NGOs und kirchliche Organisationen fordern darum schon seit Jahren die Aussetzung des EU-Israel-Assoziierungsabkommens, das in Artikel 2 alle Vertragspartner zur Einhaltung der Menschenrechte verpflichtet. Wir machen uns mitschuldig, wenn wir zu diesen Menschenrechtsverletzungen in Israel/Palästina schweigen. Wir sollten wirklich alles versuchen, dieses EU-Assoziierungsabkommen mit Israel auszusetzen.\n\n- Das wäre das richtige Signal! Das hatten wir schon einmal bei Sri Lanka.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir unterstützen ausdrücklich die Aussagen im Bericht zur Todesstrafe. Die Linke fordert seit vielen Jahren die Bundesregierung auf, sich in allen Gesprächen mit Staaten, die die Todesstrafe verhängen, klar für ihre Abschaffung einzusetzen. Doch stattdessen scheinen wirtschaftliche Interessen immer mehr vor Menschenrechte gestellt zu werden. Die Waffenlieferungen an Saudi-Arabien sind dafür ein besonders krasses Beispiel; sie sollten sofort aufhören.\n\nNicht erwähnt wird der völkerrechtswidrige Einsatz von Kampfdrohnen zur Tötung von Menschen. Seit vielen Jahren verletzen die USA die Souveränität anderer Staaten und bringen Menschen durch Kampfdrohnen um, ohne Anklage, ohne Gerichtsurteil und ohne den Betroffenen die Möglichkeit zu geben, sich zu verteidigen. Besonders skandalös ist, dass für dieses Morden die US-amerikanischen Stützpunkte in Deutschland missbraucht werden. Die US-Basis in Ramstein spielt dabei eine besonders große Rolle.\n\nNicht genug: Jetzt will die Bundesregierung auch noch waffenfähige Drohnen anschaffen. Will sie sich an diesen völkerrechtswidrigen Morden beteiligen, oder wozu brauchen wir überhaupt Kampfdrohnen?\n\nDas ist eine echte Frage, auf die ich eine Antwort haben möchte.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir fordern seit langem die Bundesregierung auf, sich für eine grundlegende Weiterentwicklung des EU-Menschenrechtsberichts einzusetzen. Wir erwarten, dass in einem solchen Bericht auch die Menschenrechtsverletzungen aufgrund der EU-Handels- und Finanzpolitik sowie der Waffenexporte der EU-Mitgliedstaaten klar benannt werden. Solange aber mit zweierlei Maß gemessen wird und unsere geopolitischen und wirtschaftlichen Interessen im Vordergrund stehen, ist es um die Menschenrechte nicht gut bestellt. Das müssen wir alle zusammen ändern.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n11409,bernd-westphal,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich freue mich, dass wir den vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf zur Erdgasförderung in Deutschland mit den vorgesehenen Änderungen im Wasserhaushaltsgesetz und im Berggesetz endlich zum Abschluss bringen können. Frau Baerbock und Frau Verlinden, wir haben nie ein komplettes Verbot der Erdgasförderung und des Fracking in Deutschland gefordert. Übrigens machen Sie das dort, wo Sie in Landesregierungen politische Verantwortung tragen, auch nicht.\n\nDie Grünen in Niedersachsen haben das gemeinsam mit der SPD genauso vertreten wie wir.\n\nDas Bundeswirtschaftsministerium und das Bundesumweltministerium hatten bereits im Mai des vergangenen Jahres ein Regelungspaket vorgelegt. Von daher kann von Durchpeitschen überhaupt keine Rede sein. Ziel war von Anfang an, die strengsten Rahmenbedingungen für Erdgasförderung zu beschließen. Es ging uns immer darum, mit den Sicherheits- und Umweltstandards den Schutz der Menschen, der Gesundheit, der Umwelt und vor allen Dingen des Lebensmittels Nummer eins, des Trinkwassers, zu gewährleisten.\n\nWir mussten im letzten Jahr viel Kritik einstecken - von Unternehmen, aus der Wirtschaft, von Bürgerinitiativen, von Umweltschutzverbänden und aus der Wasserwirtschaft - und wurden gefragt, warum wir so lange für diese Entscheidung brauchen. Ja, es war ein intensiver Dialog notwendig, um den Gesetzentwurf letztendlich durchzubringen. Aber wir als SPD haben es immer für wichtig und richtig befunden, dass wir mit dieser Gesetzesvorlage als Basis an vielen Stellen noch Nachbesserungsbedarf gesehen haben. Auch mussten wir - damit verrate ich kein Geheimnis - mit unserem Koalitionspartner viele Punkte intensiv beraten.\n\nDeshalb freut es mich umso mehr, dass die Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Union in intensiven Gesprächen zu den wichtigen Punkten, insbesondere beim unkonventionellen Gas, überzeugt werden konnten. Dieser Gesetzentwurf ist allemal besser als gar keine Regelung.\n\nDiese Regierungskoalition zeigt mit dem Gesetzentwurf, dass wir auch bei schwierigen Themen Regelungen hinbekommen. Das hat bisher keine Vorgängerregierung geschafft. Deshalb bin ich auch Sigmar Gabriel und Barbara Hendricks für den Vorschlag vom letzten Jahr dankbar.\n\nDie Regelungen zur Verschärfung und die Rahmenbedingungen - das haben meine Vorredner schon angesprochen - sind durchaus vorzeigbar. Auch dass das Parlament das letzte Wort hat, ist richtig, denke ich.\n\nAber wir brauchen - das will ich an dieser Stelle betonen - im Zusammenhang mit den vier Probebohrungen auch eine entsprechende Technologieoffenheit, um bei dem Bodenschatz, den wir haben, den Unternehmen die Chance zu geben, zu investieren und Erdgasförderung auch im Schiefergestein, im Kohleflöz und in anderen geologischen Formationen zumindest ausprobieren zu können. Dann entscheiden wir im Parlament, ob die Risiken beherrschbar sind und ob das eine Option für Deutschland ist. Wir müssen doch in Deutschland zumindest in der Lage sein, so eine Technologie ausprobieren zu können.\n\nAber auch im konventionellen Fracking, das in Deutschland seit über 50 Jahren erfolgreich durchgeführt wird, gibt es jetzt eine Öffentlichkeitsbeteiligung. Es gibt Schutzgebiete, die davon ausgenommen werden, und vor allen Dingen strengere Regelungen gerade bei der Entsorgung von Abfällen und eine Beweislastumkehr bei Bergschäden. Um es auf den Punkt zu bringen: Oberstes Ziel ist immer, Umwelt und Trinkwasser zu schützen.\n\nErdgas ist für den Wirtschaftsstandort Deutschland wichtig. Wir brauchen Erdgas als Energieträger, aber auch als Rohstoff für die chemische Industrie. Es ist unser zweitgrößter Primärenergieträger. Deshalb brauchen wir ihn auch als Brücke in das Zeitalter der erneuerbaren Energien. Erdgas wird wegen seiner günstigen Werte, was den CO2-Ausstoß angeht, in Zukunft eine wichtige Rolle einnehmen. Deshalb ist es wichtig, dass wir zusätzlich zu den Importen auch die heimischen Lagerstätten zugänglich machen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich denke, wir haben ein gutes Regelungspaket geschaffen, und ich bitte Sie, diesem Regelungspaket zuzustimmen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n2275,rudolf-henke,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Ich bin Ihnen, Frau Klein-Schmeink und Herr Weinberg, dankbar, dass Sie dem Parlament sagen, was es mit diesem Gesetzentwurf tun soll. Sie sagen, das Parlament solle diesen Gesetzentwurf ablehnen.\n\nJetzt muss man sich einmal fragen, was eigentlich passiert, wenn das Parlament Ihrer Empfehlung in dieser Debatte folgt. Sie haben gesagt, Sie fänden es richtig, dass die unabhängige Patientenberatung eine stärkere Grundlage erhalte. Da reden Sie, und wir handeln.\n\nSie haben gesagt, Sie fänden es richtig, dass wir mit den Monopolverträgen bei Impfstoffen für Schutzimpfungen Schluss machen und keine Exklusivverträge mehr haben. Jedenfalls haben Sie das im Ausschuss gesagt. Hier im Plenum haben Sie es nicht gesagt. Ihre Empfehlung würde dazu führen, nichts zu tun; wir handeln.\n\nSie haben davon gesprochen, dass die Versorgung der Hebammenhilfe verbessert werden müsse.\n\nSie haben recht damit, aber wenn man so handelt, wie Sie das wollen, dann bedeutet das, nichts zu tun; wir handeln.\n\nSie haben von der Notwendigkeit gesprochen, das PEPP-Entgeltsystem für zwei Jahre auszusetzen und die Chancen in der Zwischenzeit zu nutzen. Wenn man Ihrer Empfehlung folgt, wird das nicht geschehen, sondern es bleibt, wie es ist. Sie tun nichts, wir handeln.\n\nDeswegen muss man sich die Frage stellen, aus welchem Grund Sie das alles fordern. Da nennen Sie beide eine einzige Begründung. Die Begründung ist, dass Sie das Finanzierungssystem, das Schwarz-Gelb eingeführt hat, behalten wollen, während Sie das Finanzierungssystem, das wir von der CDU/CSU jetzt mit der SPD im Kompromiss ausgehandelt haben, ablehnen. Weil Sie an der schwarz-gelben Politik festhalten wollen, lehnen Sie die Änderungen bei der UPD, bei den Hebammenhilfen, bei den Impfstoffen und bei der Frage der PEPP-Systematik ab.\n\nDas müssen Sie einmal Ihren Wählerinnen und Wählern erläutern. Sie drehen doch Pirouetten, wie es schlimmer nicht sein kann.\n\nDas hätten Sie mit uns vor den Koalitionsverhandlungen mit der SPD diskutieren müssen. Dann wären wir vielleicht zusammengekommen. Aber das wollten Sie nicht. Sie haben gesagt: Das machen wir nicht. - Dass Sie jetzt unseren guten Kompromiss mit der SPD torpedieren, weil Sie an schwarz-gelber Politik festhalten wollen - damit torpedieren Sie die ganzen anderen Verbesserungen -, ist wirklich nicht zu fassen. Die Linke macht dabei mit, obwohl sie den Änderungsanträgen gestern im Ausschuss sogar zugestimmt hat. Das ist wirklich nicht zu fassen.\n\nJa, gerne.\n\nNein, da verstehen Sie mich völlig falsch. Das glauben Sie auch nicht im Ernst.\n\nDie Welt dreht sich natürlich weiter. Ich habe Sie an Ihren eigenen Ansprüchen gemessen. Ich finde, das ist ein wesentlicher Punkt.\n\nLassen Sie mich noch auf das Thema „Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Transparenz im Gesundheitswesen“ zu sprechen kommen. Ich möchte auf etwas aufmerksam machen, was in den bisherigen Debatten vielleicht nicht ausreichend berücksichtigt worden ist. Herr Kollege Lauterbach hat bei der Einbringung dieses Gesetzentwurfs von einem Quantensprung gesprochen. Die Aufgabe, Qualität zu bewerten, ist natürlich sehr komplex. Das kann in der Praxis zu riesigen Problemen führen, beispielsweise beim Vergleich von Krankenhäusern.\n\nDerzeit gibt es in Deutschland ungefähr 30 Listen, die die Qualität von Krankenhäusern zu vergleichen beanspruchen. Die besten dieser Listen - Krankenhaus-Directory, Weiße Liste, Qualitätskliniken.de - sind einmal einer Untersuchung unterzogen worden. Dabei ist folgendes Dilemma zutage getreten: Wenn man die Empfehlungen dieser drei Listen, die alle beanspruchen, das jeweils beste Krankenhaus zu nennen, miteinander vergleicht, dann stellt man fest, dass es nur für sehr wenige Krankenhäuser übereinstimmende Empfehlungen gibt. Das heißt, der eine Führer empfiehlt eine bestimmte Klinik und der andere rät vom Besuch des gleichen Krankenhauses ab.\n\nWir haben etwas Wichtiges getan: Durch unsere gestrigen Änderungsanträge wurde ein Punkt in die Aufträge an das Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Transparenz im Gesundheitswesen aufgenommen, nämlich die Risikoadjustierung der Daten. Sie ist von zentraler Bedeutung; denn nur mit einer solchen Risikoadjustierung verhindert man, dass man Äpfel mit Birnen vergleicht. Schließlich vergleicht man auch nicht die Leistungskraft eines Läufers, der in der Ebene läuft, mit der eines Läufers, der eine 10\u001eprozentige Steigung zu überwinden hat. Beide unterliegen nämlich einer unterschiedlichen Aufgabensetzung. Die Risikoadjustierung, auf die wir uns als Auftragsbestandteil für die Vergleiche und für die Untersuchungen des Instituts verständigt haben, ist ein enormer Schritt.\n\nIch will angesichts der Tatsache, dass in der Ärzteschaft noch der eine oder andere ein bisschen zurückhaltend hinsichtlich dieses Instituts ist, sagen: Ich glaube, dieses Institut hat die Chance, den Ärztinnen und Ärzten, den Pflegekräften, den Angehörigen anderer Gesundheitsberufe, etwa den Physiotherapeutinnen und -therapeuten, dabei zu helfen, ihr Ziel einer Qualitätsorientierung der Arbeit in den Krankenhäusern leichter zu erreichen und davon wegzukommen, dass man sich ausschließlich an Preisen orientiert.\n\nIch bitte alle darum, sich für dieses Institut einzusetzen. Wie für die Patientenvertretung besteht auch für andere die Möglichkeit, sich im Beirat daran zu beteiligen, konstruktive Vorschläge für die Beauftragung dieses Instituts zu machen. Ich glaube, dass dieses Institut die Chance bieten wird, denen zu helfen, auf die es in der Versorgung eigentlich ankommt, nämlich denen, die sich für die Patientinnen und Patienten direkt einsetzen.\n\nIch bedanke mich sehr, dass Sie mir zugehört haben.\"\n13981,erich-irlstorfer,\"Sehr verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Anträge der Fraktionen der Grünen und der Linken befassen sich mit einem sehr wichtigen und ernstzunehmenden Thema: mit der Personalbemessung in Pflegeeinrichtungen und den Mitspracherechten von Pflegekräften. Wir wissen, dass das wichtig ist.\n\nIch möchte, bevor ich mit meinen Ausführungen beginne, verehrte Frau Rawert, sagen: Ich bin froh, dass Sie viele Dinge gesagt haben, die durchaus richtig sind. Sie sagen, dass Pflege ein Zukunftsthema ist. Das ist richtig. Aber ich bin etwas verwundert und frage mich, was die Zukunft unseres Landes mit der Person Schulz zu tun hat. Das überrascht mich.\n\nDas möchte ich an dieser Stelle sagen.\n\nIch möchte darauf hinweisen, dass ich bei den Begründungen der Anträge und bei den Problemlösungsvorschlägen der Linken und auch der Grünen gewisse Zweifel habe, wie das Ganze funktionieren soll.\n\nKollegin Scharfenberg hat gesagt, dass unsere Krankenhäuser, unsere Altenheime und unsere Senioreneinrichtungen nur deshalb so gut und so ordentlich funktionieren, weil wir engagierte Menschen haben, die in der Pflege\n\narbeiten. Das wissen wir. Wenn ich mich mit den Bediensteten in den Krankenhäusern unterhalte, geht es nicht nur um eine ordentliche Bezahlung, wobei das eine Grundvoraussetzung sein muss; das haben wir in dieser Legislaturperiode noch einmal zementiert und verfestigt. Es geht einfach darum, dass wir auf unseren Stationen ordentlich aufgestellt sind.\n\nMan kann natürlich in der Theorie darüber sprechen. Man kann das Ganze natürlich immer wieder gesetzlich einfordern; das ist alles vollkommen klar.\n\nAber ich glaube, es ist notwendig, dass wir bei der Praxis - hören Sie lieber zu - ansetzen, statt fiktive Zahlen in den Raum zu werfen. Es fehlt auch nicht an Geld, sondern es fehlt an der Motivation. Es geht darum, dass wir die Menschen dazu bringen, diesen Beruf zu ergreifen.\n\nEs ist unsere politische Aufgabe, hier zu motivieren. Das werden wir nicht mit Ihrer destruktiven Haltung, die Sie hier immer wieder zeigen, schaffen.\n\nZur Pflege in den Einrichtungen erzählen Sie - vor allem Sie, Frau Zimmermann - Woche für Woche hier irgendetwas, was so nicht stimmt. In Deutschland wird hervorragende Pflege geleistet. Das ist die Situation.\n\nIch kann Ihnen nur eines sagen: Ich habe viele, viele dieser Einrichtungen besucht. Ein Hauptthema ist, dass wir zu wenig Menschen auf den Stationen haben. Ein anderes Hauptthema ist das ganze Dokumentationswesen. Wir brauchen Digitalisierung auf den Stationen und Digitalisierung am Bett. Das ist notwendig und wichtig.\n\nIch muss Ihnen sagen: Ich habe in den letzten anderthalb Jahren all diese Dinge, über die wir hier in der Theorie abgestimmt haben, im privaten Bereich erleben dürfen und müssen. Ich kann Ihnen nur sagen, dass das, was hier in den letzten Jahren im Rahmen der Pflegestärkungsgesetze entschieden worden ist, vor Ort greift. Der Dreiklang - wir haben hier eine neue Melodie aufgesetzt -, dass wir uns um die zu Pflegenden kümmern, dass wir auch die Angehörigen mitnehmen und natürlich auch die Beschäftigten, ist erfolgreich. Den Erfolg dieses Dreiklangs können Sie nicht abstreiten; denn er kommt draußen an. Das ist die Wahrheit.\n\nWenn wir hier über die Ausbildungszahlen sprechen, kann ich nur das Statistische Bundesamt zitieren. Wenn wir die Situation in 2005 und in 2015 betrachten, sehen wir Folgendes: Wir hatten in der Altenpflege 2005 45 000 Auszubildende; jetzt haben wir 66 285. In der Krankenpflege hatten wir damals 57 257 Ausbildungsverträge; jetzt haben wir über 64 000. Das sind Zahlen, das sind Fakten, das sind Realitäten. Deshalb liegen wir richtig. Trotzdem machen wir weiter und sagen: Wir wollen und brauchen ein ordentliches Ausbildungssystem. Wir sind auch hier komplett beieinander und sagen: Wir wollen eine generalistische Ausbildung in den Bereichen, in denen man generalistisch ausbilden kann.\n\nWarum denn nicht? Aber wir möchten auch, dass die Spezialisierung in den einzelnen Berufen bestehen bleibt, weil sie ein Qualitätsmerkmal ist.\n\nDeshalb werden wir auch weiterhin in diese Richtung verhandeln. Ich glaube, wir sind auf einem guten und ordentlichen Weg, das hoffentlich auch hinzubekommen. Ich würde mich freuen, Frau Rawert, wenn auch Sie in dieser Richtung mitmachen würden.\n\nIn diesem Sinne: Herzlichen Dank.\"\n7675,martina-renner,\"Ich gehe davon aus, Herr Dr. Krings, dass Sie zuerst die erste Frage beantwortet haben. Deswegen würde ich mich dann auf die Thematik „Erkenntnisse im Vorfeld“ beziehen.\n\nSie haben im Zusammenhang mit einer Kleinen Anfrage von mir zur Neonazi-Kleinstpartei Der Dritte Weg, die möglicherweise eine Blaupause für rassistische Hetze, aber auch für Anschläge liefert durch ihr Netzangebot „Leitfaden ‚Kein Asylantenheim in meiner Nachbarschaft!‘“ und einer entsprechenden Google-Maps-Karte, die Gott sei Dank mittlerweile vom Netz genommen wurde, auf die Frage, ob sich in dieser Neonazi-Kleinstpartei auch V-Leute befinden, geantwortet - ich zitiere -, „dass die Partei Der Dritte Weg nur über etwa 200 Mitglieder verfügt, was das Risiko einer Enttarnung erhöhen würde“, und somit die Frage nach den V-Leuten nicht beantwortet werden könnte. Ich schließe daraus sozusagen im Umkehrschluss, dass wir davon ausgehen dürfen, dass es in dieser Organisation auch Zuträger gibt. Daher rührt meine Verwunderung, da diese Organisation auch in Bayern ganz maßgeblich an der Vorbereitung der Pogromstimmung beteiligt ist, dass man im Vorfeld von entsprechenden aggressiven Tätigkeiten, aber auch Angriffen und Anschlägen im Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz keine Kenntnis hat. Wie kommt dann eigentlich das Attribut Frühwarnsystem zustande?\n\nIm Zusammenhang mit der Frage, ob Vorbereitungshandlungen zu Anschlägen auf Flüchtlingsunterkünfte führen, spielt auch die Oldschool Society, eine Organisation der Neonazis, eine gewisse Rolle. Gegen diese Organisation hat es intensive Exekutivmaßnahmen von Bund und Ländern gegeben. Es soll konkrete Anschlagspläne gegeben haben. Die Beschaffung von Sprengstoff zum Beispiel sei vorbereitet gewesen. Kann ich daraus schließen, dass es sich bei dieser Organisation um einen Beobachtungsgegenstand handelt, bei dem keine V-Leute eingesetzt wurden?\n\nHerr Staatssekretär, ich möchte gerne zugespitzt fragen. Wir haben heute Morgen grobe Analysen zu den Täterhintergründen gehört. Die Aussagekraft ist dabei eingeschränkt, weil sich bei einer Quote von unter 10 Prozent Ermittlungserfolge keine Aussage zu der Gesamtzahl der Täter treffen lässt. Aber es hieß, 30 Prozent der Tatverdächtigen hätten einen PMK-rechts-Hintergrund. Da wir davon ausgehen, dass dieser Phänomenbereich beobachtet wird, und aus der Geschichte des Bundesamtes wissen - ich erinnere an die Anti-Antifa in den 90er-Jahren -, dass es einen intensiven Quelleneinsatz in der militanten Szene gibt, lautet meine konkrete Frage: Können Sie ausschließen, dass Erkenntnisse im Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, die durch Quellen zu bevorstehenden oder durchgeführten Anschlägen auf Flüchtlingsunterkünfte gewonnen wurden, nicht an die Sicherheitsbehörden, also die Polizeien und die Staatsanwaltschaften, weitergereicht wurden?\n\nIst jede Erkenntnis, die das Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz durch den Einsatz von Quellen in der neonazistischen Szene zu durchgeführten oder geplanten Anschlägen auf Flüchtlingsunterkünfte gewonnen hat, an die Sicherheitsbehörden weitergegeben worden?\"\n9870,maria-flachsbarth,\"Herr Kollege Ostendorff, herzlichen Dank für Ihre Fragen. Gerne trage ich aus dem Ressortbereich des Bundesministeriums für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft etwas bei.\n\nSie wissen, dass sich die Tierwohlinitiative des Bundesministers „Eine Frage der Haltung“ seit September 2014 in vielen konkreten Projekten verifiziert,\n\ndass zum Beispiel der breite Bereich von Modell- und Demonstrationsvorhaben von Netzwerken von Betrieben, die sich an solchen Vorhaben beteiligen, unter anderem zur Vermeidung nichtkurativer Eingriffe, vom Bundesministerium mit erheblichen Millionenbeträgen unterstützt wird. Sie wissen, dass wir einen sehr guten, konkreten Austausch haben, dass - ganz konkret - Betrieb für Betrieb beraten wird, um in diesem Bereich letztendlich eine Umstellung zu ermöglichen.\n\nSie wissen, dass wir auch im Bereich der Prüf- und Zulassungsverfahren auf guten, konkreten Wegen sind, um zum Beispiel Tierhaltungssysteme zu standardisieren und letztendlich auch die Tierhaltungsbedingungen zu verbessern. Sie wissen, dass wir im vergangenen Sommer im Bereich der freiwilligen Vereinbarungen, zum Beispiel mit der Geflügelbranche, wesentliche Schritte nach vorne gemacht haben. So verifiziert und konkretisiert sich dieses Programm, das wir hier zusammengefasst haben, in vielen einzelnen Schritten tatsächlich im Detail.\n\nIhre zweite Nachfrage betraf die Ernährung bzw. die Ernährungsbildung. Die Bundesinitiative Ernährungsbildung ist eine der großen Prioritäten, die sich Bundesminister Christian Schmidt auf die Fahne geschrieben hat. Der Minister fordert deshalb einen festen Platz in den Lehrplänen für das Fach Ernährungsbildung. Er ist diesbezüglich in Kontakt mit seinen Kolleginnen und Kollegen auf Länderebene. Wir als Bundesministerium unterstützen Schulen und Kitas mit kostenlosen Bildungspaketen, die im Rahmen von „IN FORM“, also Deutschlands Initiative für gesunde Ernährung und mehr Bewegung, entwickelt wurden.\n\nDarüber hinaus plant das BMEL, eine Studie zum Thema „Ernährungsbildung in Kita und Schule“ in Auftrag zu geben. Ziel ist es, erstmals nach 15 Jahren systematisch zu erarbeiten, wie derzeit der Stand des Ernährungswissens bei Kindern in Kita und Schule ist.\n\nAußerdem informiert die Kampagne „Macht Dampf!“, warum gutes Essen für Kinder und Jugendliche sowohl zu Hause als auch in Kita und Schule so wichtig ist und was eine ausgewogene Ernährung ausmacht, und klärt über die Kriterien des DGE-Qualitätsstandards auf. Auch in diesem Bereich gibt es also eine Vielzahl von Konkretisierungen und konkreten Projekten.\"\n12428,gabriele-fograscher,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In dieser Auseinandersetzung um die Nachrichtendienste geht es im Kern um drei Fragen. Die erste: Brauchen wir Nachrichtendienste? Da sagen wir von den Koalitionsfraktionen uneingeschränkt Ja. Angesichts von mehr als 1 000 Toten in den letzten Jahren durch Anschläge in Deutschland und Europa, angesichts der weiterhin hohen Bedrohungslage durch den internationalen Terrorismus, zunehmender Cyberattacken, international organisierter Kriminalität und nicht zuletzt zum Schutz unserer Soldatinnen und Soldaten im Ausland können wir auf die Erkenntnisse der Nachrichtendienste nicht verzichten.\n\nDie zweite Frage ist: Was dürfen diese Dienste? Im demokratischen Rechtsstaat gilt auch für die Dienste das Prinzip: Maßnahmen müssen erforderlich, verhältnismäßig und geeignet sein. Dieses Prinzip setzen wir jetzt für die strategische Fernmeldeaufklärung um. Für die unverzichtbare Zusammenarbeit mit anderen Diensten schaffen wir klare Voraussetzungen.\n\nDie dritte Frage: Wer kontrolliert, und ist diese Kontrolle effektiv? Auch darüber haben wir vorhin schon diskutiert. Wir schaffen einen ständigen Bevollmächtigten mit einem Arbeitsstab, der die Mitglieder des Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremiums bei ihren Kontrollaufgaben unterstützt.\n\nMit beiden Gesetzen, die wir heute beschließen, ziehen wir die Konsequenzen aus den durch den NSA-Untersuchungsausschuss, aber auch durch die PKGr-eigenen Untersuchungen aufgedeckten Fehlentwicklungen der letzten Jahre. Wir schaffen mit dem Gesetz zur Ausland-Ausland-Fernmeldeaufklärung klare Regelungen für den Bundesnachrichtendienst. Wir verbieten Wirtschaftsspionage, wir schützen alle EU-Bürger und -Institutionen, wir schaffen die Voraussetzung für effektive Kontrolle und definieren die Verantwortlichkeiten. Damit sind wir Vorreiter. Kein anderes Land in Europa, ja weltweit, hat bisher solche gesetzlichen Regelungen für seine Dienste.\n\nWas die Verfassungsmäßigkeit anbetrifft, die von Ihnen, Herr von Notz, und einigen Organisationen angezweifelt wird - Sie haben sie alle genannt -,\n\nso sehen wir dem gelassen entgegen. Die Verfassungsmäßigkeit stellen nicht die Grünen oder die Linken fest, sondern das Bundesverfassungsgericht.\n\nDas Bundesverfassungsgericht wird darüber entscheiden müssen, wie weit das Grundgesetz und damit auch Artikel 10, das Fernmeldegeheimnis, geht.\n\nWenn man die Notwendigkeit von Nachrichtendiensten bejaht, dann muss man auch dafür sorgen, dass sie personell, technisch und finanziell so ausgestattet sind, dass sie ihren Beitrag zur Sicherheit der deutschen Bürgerinnen und Bürger im In- und Ausland leisten können. Auch dafür sorgt die Koalition im Haushalt 2017.\n\nMit den Gesetzen zur Fortentwicklung der parlamentarischen Kontrolle und der Fernmeldeaufklärung des BND schaffen wir mehr Rechtssicherheit, mehr demokratische Kontrolle und für die Zukunft weniger Anlass zu Skandalisierungen. Ich bitte Sie um Zustimmung.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n4065,ingbert-liebing,\"Die heutige erste Orientierungsdebatte im Deutschen Bundestag zum Thema Sterbebegleitung ist gut und sinnvoll - ich empfinde es auch persönlich als gut, heute einmal die unterschiedlichsten Argumente hören und nachvollziehen zu können. Ich gestehe offen: Meine Meinungsbildung habe ich noch nicht abgeschlossen. Schließlich ist es keine leichte Frage, über die wir sprechen und entscheiden müssen, wenn es um das Ende des Lebens, um den Tod geht.\n\nEs ist ein Thema, was viele Menschen zutiefst umtreibt. Dabei haben viele Menschen vor allem Angst vor einem qualvollen Tod. Die Würde des Menschen muss auch für den Tod gelten. Ein Sterben in Würde ist ein wichtiges Anliegen für viele Menschen, dem wir Rechnung tragen müssen.\n\nAber wie? Wo beginnt, wo endet die staatliche Verantwortung, hier einzugreifen?\n\nDarüber müssen wir sprechen und am Ende entscheiden, jeder nach seinem Gewissen.\n\nMeine persönliche Meinungsfindung orientiert sich dabei an zwei Leitplanken:\n\nErstens. Das Leben steht nicht in der Verfügungs-gewalt von uns Menschen. Das Leben ist uns von Gott gegeben. In dieser Verantwortung vor Gott handeln wir, handle ich persönlich auch in meiner christlichen Verantwortung. Dies ist für mich die eine Seite der Diskussion über Sterbebegleitung, über Sterbehilfe, über den Übergang vom Leben in den Tod.\n\nZweitens. Auf der anderen Seite steht der Wunsch, sicherlich auch das Recht eines jeden Menschen, selbstbestimmt sein Leben zu führen - und es gegebenenfalls auch zu beenden. Die Zeiten sind vorbei, in denen die Selbsttötung ein christliches Begräbnis ausschloss. Der Freitod ist nicht verboten.\n\nDie Frage nach dem richtigen Umgang mit dem Sterben ist keine leichte Frage. Die heutige Debatte zeigt dies. Jeder Standpunkt hat seine Berechtigung, seine individuelle ethische Begründung. Hier gibt es kein Richtig, hier gibt es kein Falsch: Hier gibt es nur sehr persönliche Auffassungen, die oft genug auch geprägt sind von persönlichem Erleben. Ich denke an die letzten Stunden meines Vaters, als ich an seiner Seite war - es war gut, dass er im Kreise seiner Familie aus dem Leben scheiden konnte.\n\nNun erleben wir aber auch eine ganze Reihe von Organisationen, gewerblicher oder halbgewerblicher Art, die Menschen beim Übergang vom Leben in den Tod unterstützen. Für mich ist eines klar: Gewerbliche oder organisierte Sterbehilfe ist nicht akzeptabel. Auf keinen Fall darf es ein Geschäft mit dem Tod geben.\n\nWenn ich eingangs davon gesprochen habe, dass viele Menschen beim Thema Sterbebegleitung vor -allem von der Angst getrieben werden, dass ihr Sterben mit Qual und Leid verbunden sei, so ist dies der Auftrag für uns, in erster Linie Palliativmedizin und Hospizarbeit zu unterstützen. Ich habe vor wenigen Jahren den Aufbau eines Hospizes in meinem Wahlkreis als Mitglied im Förderverein unterstützt und tue dies weiter. Schmerz und Leid zu lindern, Qual zu verhindern und stattdessen menschliche Nähe im Sterben sicherzustellen, das ist für mich die erste und wichtigste Aufgabe echter Sterbebegleitung.\n\nUnd dennoch mag es die Fälle geben, in denen auch dies alles nicht ausreicht, um Menschen Angst und Qual zu nehmen. Allen Beteiligten, den Sterbenden wie den Angehörigen und den Ärzten, dabei Sicherheit und Gewissheit verantwortungsbewussten und rechtssicheren Handelns zu geben, das ist unsere Aufgabe in der jetzt anstehenden Diskussion.\"\n5153,rene-rospel,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe vier Vertreter des deutschen Volkes auf der Besuchertribüne!\n\nSeien Sie herzlich gegrüßt! Der französische Romanautor Jules Verne - die Älteren unter uns kennen noch -Kapitän Nemo und die Nautilus - hat 1889 den Roman Der Schuss am Kilimandscharo veröffentlicht. Dort beschreibt er im Prinzip das erste Geoengineering-Projekt der Welt. Seine Protagonisten versprechen den Menschen, die Jahreszeiten abzuschaffen, damit man es immer schön warm hat, jedenfalls auf der Nordhalbkugel. Sie arbeiten an einem Plan, den sie auch ausführen. Sie bauen eine große Kanone am Kilimandscharo und hoffen, dass sie mit dem Rückstoß beim Abschuss die Erdachse verschieben, sodass die Nordhalbkugel immer in der Sonne liegt. Das geht alles schief. Am Ende heiratet der Held wenigstens.\n\nDas kann auch schief gegangen sein. Aber soweit ich mich erinnere, ist es das erste Mal, dass ein Romanautor einen technischen Eingriff in das Klima beschreibt.\n\nEs hat mehr als 100 Jahre gedauert, bis die Überlegung von Climate Engineering, also die Veränderung des Klimas, durch eine Umweltkatastrophe wieder Eingang in die öffentliche Diskussion fand. 1991 - auch daran erinnern sich vielleicht die Älteren unter uns - brach der Vulkan Pinatubo auf den Philippinen aus. Dadurch wurden 17 Millionen Tonnen Schwefeldioxid in die Stratos-phäre getragen. Dies führte dazu, dass die Sonnenstrahlen in Teilen reflektiert wurden und die Erde sich weniger stark erwärmte. In den darauffolgenden zwei Jahren hat man tatsächlich eine Absenkung der globalen Temperatur um fast ein halbes Grad gemessen. Das heißt, die Partikel, die sich in der Stratosphäre infolge des Vulkanausbruches befanden, haben dazu geführt, dass weniger Sonnenlicht den Boden erreichte und erwärmte.\n\nDer Nobelpreisträger für Chemie Paul Crutzen hat das im Jahr 2006 in einer wissenschaftlichen Arbeit aufgegriffen und überlegt, ob man den Klimawandel, der schon damals diskutiert wurde, nicht über eine solche Methode beeinflussen könnte. Er hat vorgeschlagen, Schwefeldioxid in großen Mengen in die Stratosphäre einzubringen, um die Erderwärmung zu reduzieren.\n\nIn Deutschland hat 2009 ein deutsch-indisches Projekt die Diskussion um Climate Engineering öffentlich gemacht und beschleunigt, nämlich das deutsch-indische Eisendüngungsprojet Lohafex. Das deutsche Forschungsschiff „Polarstern“ hat im südatlantischen Raum 20 Tonnen Eisensulfat ausgebracht. Eisensulfat ist ein Mikronährstoff für Algen, den sie zum Wachstum brauchen. Man hat über die Ausbringung in einem begrenzten Gebiet versucht, das Algenwachstum anzuregen mit dem Hintergedanken: Wo Algen wachsen - das ist ein natürlicher Prozess -, binden sie Kohlendioxid aus dem Wasser und damit indirekt aus der Atmosphäre; wenn sie zu Boden sinken, nehmen sie das gebundene CO2 mit und reduzieren so den Kohlendioxidgehalt in der Atmos-phäre.\n\nDamals erschien ein Spiegel-Artikel dazu. Sowohl die Wissenschaft als auch die Politik waren von dieser Methode sehr überrascht, und in der Gesellschaft begann eine Diskussion darüber, ob man so etwas darf und welche Auswirkungen es hat. Dies führte am Ende zur Beauftragung des Büros für Technikfolgen-Abschätzung des Deutschen Bundestages, das ein sehr bewährtes Instrument ist. Ich bedanke mich für die Gelegenheit, dass erstmals in den letzten Jahren ein TAB-Bericht einzeln diskutiert wird und nicht angehängt an ein anderes Thema. Dieser TAB-Bericht zeigt, welche Auswirkungen, welche Folgen und welche Potenziale Climate -Engineering haben kann bzw. hat.\n\nNeben den beiden genannten Beispielen möchte ich die beiden Methoden ansprechen, die im Vordergrund stehen: Das eine ist die Strahlungsabschirmung, Radiation Management, also Strahlungsmanagement. Das andere ist das Einfangen von Kohlendioxid, wie es bei -Lohafex geplant war, dass man also versucht, Kohlendioxid aus der Atmosphäre oder dem Wasser zu binden und dann zu entfernen. Bei beiden Arten von Climate Engineering wissen wir, bestätigt durch den TAB-Bericht, dass die Auswirkungen völlig unklar sind.\n\nEs gibt zwar keine Anwendung solcher Ideen bzw. Projekte. Aber wir wissen überhaupt nicht, was passiert, wenn wir in großem Maße Kohlendioxid, beispielsweise über Eisendüngung im Ozean, binden. Wir verzeichnen seit dem Klimawandel, seit dem Anstieg der Temperatur eine zunehmende Versäuerung der Ozeane. Wir wissen nicht, welche ökologischen Katastrophen es nach sich zieht, wenn die Ozeane nicht mehr als Brutstätte, als Geburtsort für Fische und andere Lebewesen zur Verfügung stehen, weil die natürlichen Bedingungen nicht mehr existieren.\n\nBeim Radiation Management vermuten wir, dass eine der Auswirkungen sein könnte, dass zum Beispiel die mittleren Niederschläge nachlassen. Das wird einige Regionen freuen - Lüdenscheid wird sich freuen, weil es im Sauerland weniger regnen wird -, aber in anderen Breitengraden wird es katastrophale Folgen haben, wenn weniger Regen fällt.\n\nEine Schlussfolgerung des vorliegenden Berichtes ist, dass die Fragen, die wir haben, völlig ungeklärt sind. Wir wissen nicht, was im internationalen Kontext passiert, wenn ein Land Climate Engineering betreibt, aber die Auswirkungen in einem anderen Land zutage treten. Was bedeutet das völkerrechtlich? Wie ist das zu regeln? Im vorliegenden TA-Bericht werden entsprechende Vorschläge aufgeführt. Wir sollten uns überlegen, wie wir uns in Deutschland gegenüber Anwendungen wappnen können, und Verhandlungen auf internationaler Ebene aufnehmen, um dies endlich zu regeln.\n\nIm TA-Bericht wird dazu aufgefordert, dass Deutschland im Bereich Climate Engineering weiter forschen sollte, aber nicht, um Anwendungen voranzutreiben. Vielmehr geht es darum, die Auswirkungen besser beurteilen zu können, um bei Diskussionen im internationalen Kontext kompetent mitreden zu können. Diese Aufforderung nehmen wir an.\n\nDie größte Gefahr von Climate Engineering, die ich sehe, ist allerdings - damit komme ich zum Schluss -, dass wir uns in Sicherheit wiegen könnten, dass es irgendwann eine Anwendung gibt, mit der wir den Klimawandel, der sich bereits vollzieht, beherrschen können. Das Konzept, dass man für den Notfall gewappnet sein und bestimmte Technologien vorhalten sollte, ist der falsche Weg.\n\nUns allen sollte klar sein, dass es nur eine Lösung zur Begrenzung des Klimawandels gibt: die Vermeidung von Kohlendioxid und die Vermeidung von Treibhausgasen. Das heißt, mehr Investitionen in erneuerbare Energien, in Energieeffizienz und einen Umstieg in eine andere Energiepolitik. Das sind wir den künftigen Generationen schuldig. Das ist auch die Schlussfolgerung aus diesem Bericht.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6031,konstantin-notz,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Herr Minister, wir reden über die Konsequenzen aus dem NSU-Skandal, und zwar vor dem Hintergrund, dass man Konsequenzen aus den gemachten Fehlern ziehen möchte. Meine erste Frage lautet: Teilen Sie die Einschätzung, dass es bei den Vorkommnissen und Geschehnissen um den NSU auch ein erhebliches Behördenversagen gegeben hat? Wenn Sie diese Einschätzung teilen: Könnten Sie mir konkret einen einzigen Fall im Zusammenhang mit dem NSU-Komplex benennen, der aufgrund des Gesetzentwurfs, den Sie heute vorlegen, so nicht wieder passieren würde? Welcher V-Mann genau würde heute nicht wieder rekrutiert werden? Welche Informationsdefizite zwischen den Behörden würden aufgrund welcher konkreten Regelung, die wir hier besprechen, behoben? Nur wenn das geklärt ist, kann man sich gegen den Vorhalt schützen, dass die Behörde für ihr extremes Versagen noch belohnt wird, indem man ihr nämlich massiv mehr Geld gibt.\n\nHerr Minister, ich wollte zu meiner Frage von vorhin etwas sagen. Ich habe nicht gefragt: „Welche Tat hätte verhindert werden können?“, sondern: „Welcher V-Mann würde heute auf der Grundlage dieses vorliegenden Gesetzentwurfes nicht geführt werden?“ Das ist zugegebenermaßen eine schwierige Frage, aber vor dem Hintergrund der NSU-Geschehnisse eine relevante Frage. Es geht darum, ob wir wirklich Lehren daraus gezogen haben. Deswegen frage ich noch einmal: Welchen V-Mann würden wir heute aufgrund der neuen Gesetzeslage nicht führen?\n\nNoch einmal ganz kurz zu dem, was Sie eben über Thüringen gesagt haben: Ich muss das aber nicht so verstehen, dass Sie im Verbund der Landesämter für Verfassungsschutz dem Land Thüringen sicherheitsrelevante Informationen vorenthalten würden und dieses Land über vorliegende Erkenntnisse nicht informiert würde?\n\n- Herr Binninger, ich frage einfach: Ist es so zu verstehen, dass man sicherheitsrelevante Informationen, die man selber hat, nicht an Thüringen weitergeben würde?\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Herr Minister, ich habe eine Nachfrage im Hinblick auf die Gesetzesänderung beim BND. Sie ändern, soweit ich es richtig verstehe, in dem Paket unter dem Begriff der Cybersicherheit die strategische Rasterfahndung des BND.\n\nIch will auch etwas zur Maut fragen. Ein 21 Seiten umfassender Änderungsantrag hat uns heute Morgen um 7.54 Uhr erreicht. Das kann man so machen, hilft aber nicht. Im Innenausschuss haben wir lebhaft unter Datenschutzgesichtspunkten diskutiert - das fällt in Ihren Zuständigkeitsbereich -, wie es um Bildlöschungen und Standortdaten von 42 Millionen Pkws in Deutschland bestellt ist.\n\nDas Innenministerium hat gesagt, diejenigen, die die Maut nicht zahlen wollten, müssten ein Fahrtenbuch führen.\n\nJeder Autofahrer, der einen Rückerstattungsanspruch hat, müsste also ein Fahrtenbuch führen. Daher frage ich, ob das so sein kann oder, wenn das nicht der Fall ist, wie der Rückerstattungsanspruch gewährleistet sein soll, wie also nachgewiesen werden soll, dass jemand auf einer Autobahn oder einer anderen mautpflichtigen Straße nicht gefahren ist.\"\n9909,carola-stauche,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In Deutschland gibt es Millionen Raucherinnen und Raucher. Ich gebe zu: Auch ich gehöre zu ihnen. Ich genieße es, zu rauchen und immer wieder festzustellen, dass man in Raucherecken sehr gut Kommunikation betreiben kann, mit anderen Menschen ins Gespräch kommt. Gleichzeitig möchte ich klarstellen: Ich weiß, welche Gesundheitsgefahren vom Rauchen ausgehen, besonders für Kinder und Jugendliche. Ich will hier nicht dem Rauchen das Wort reden; aber wir sollten anerkennen, dass Tabak zu den Genussmitteln gehört, die in Deutschland geschätzt, genutzt und erlaubt sind.\n\nEin Blick in die Geschichte zeigt, dass viele der heutigen Konflikte zum Rauchen nicht neu sind, sondern immer wieder auftreten. Wie allgemein bekannt ist, stammt die Tabakpflanze vom amerikanischen Kontinent; vielleicht hätten wir den nicht entdecken sollen.\n\nSchon lange vor der Ankunft der Europäer am Ende des 15. Jahrhunderts wurde Tabak auf verschiedenen Wegen konsumiert, und nach 1492 verbreitete er sich schnell im Rest der Welt. Es gab immer wieder Versuche, den als schädlich empfundenen Tabakgenuss zu unterbinden: massive Tabaksteuererhöhungen, Verbot des Rauchens mit Androhung von drastischen Strafen, Warnungen vor Verwahrlosung. Auch religiöse Begründungen gab es. Doch alle Versuche, das Rauchen zu verbieten, scheiterten.\n\nEs existiert ein berühmtes Zitat von Goethe zum Thema Rauchen. Er sagte:\n\nDas Rauchen macht dumm, es macht unfähig zum Denken und Dichten. Es ist auch nur für Müßiggänger, für Menschen, die Langeweile haben.\n\nEr war ein erklärter Gegner des Rauchens. Niemand durfte in seiner Nähe dieser Leidenschaft nachgehen - bis auf eine Ausnahme: Seinem guten Freund Schiller gestattete er das Rauchen in seiner Umgebung, wenn er ihn auch für den Tabakgenuss kritisierte. Und Schiller war, wie wir alle wissen, ein ebenso bedeutender Künstler wie Goethe. Keinesfalls war er unfähig zum Denken und Dichten oder ein gelangweilter Müßiggänger, sondern er gilt bis heute zu Recht als einer der größten Dichter Deutschlands.\n\nWas lernen wir daraus? Seit der Einführung des Tabakrauchens gibt es eine Debatte über das Für und Wider. Es gibt Versuche, das Rauchen einzuschränken, es stärker zu besteuern oder ganz zu verbieten. Auch abseits von staatlichen Regulierungen stritten und streiten Befürworter und Gegner des Rauchens bis heute. Mir ist natürlich bewusst, dass zwischen Tabakkonsum damals und heute Unterschiede bestehen, gerade auch in puncto Herstellungsverfahren und Verfügbarkeit. Die wesentlichen Konfliktpunkte sind jedoch die gleichen. Es ist ein Problem, das sich wohl auf Dauer nicht lösen lässt, auch nicht mit dem heute hier zu behandelnden Gesetzentwurf oder mit zukünftigen Gesetzen. Die Aufgabe des Staates muss es aber sein, Gesundheit und Aufklärung zu fördern, ohne unnötig in die Freiheitsrechte von Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern und auch der Wirtschaft einzugreifen.\n\nGerade der Jugendschutz ist uns sehr wichtig. Deshalb haben wir bereits in der zurückliegenden Sitzungswoche E-Zigaretten für Kinder und Jugendliche verboten. Aber wir müssen uns fragen: Wenn sich Erwachsene aus freien Stücken für das Rauchen entscheiden, sind wir es dann, die sie daran hindern wollen? Wir können und dürfen den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern nicht alles vorschreiben. Aufklärung und Jugendschutz sind wichtig. Der mündige Verbraucher aber ist uns ebenso wichtig.\n\nIch freue mich, dass wir mit dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf eine sinnvolle Umsetzung der EU-Tabakproduktrichtlinie erreicht haben. Es war ein langes und hartes Ringen, um das umzusetzen, was die EU vorschreibt. Allerdings muss ich Kritik an der EU üben: Bestimmte konkrete Informationen zur Umsetzung wurden uns erst sehr spät bekannt gegeben. So konnten wir das Gesetz nicht früher endgültig behandeln. In der Konsequenz bleibt den Tabakherstellern nur eine sehr kurze Frist zur Umsetzung der neuen Regelungen. Das ist ein Punkt, wo vonseiten der EU gewisse Härten gerade für die mittelständischen Zigarettenhersteller hätten vermieden werden können.\n\nDoch insgesamt können wir festhalten: Nach langem Arbeiten an diesem Thema sind wir nun zu einer Umsetzung gelangt. Das ist gut und wichtig. Wir haben eins zu eins umgesetzt, was uns die EU-Richtlinie vorgibt. Ich danke ausdrücklich Herrn Bundesminister Christian Schmidt und seinem Haus für den Entwurf, den wir heute beschließen werden. Ich denke, wir haben hier einen tragfähigen Kompromiss gefunden zwischen Jugendschutz und Gesundheitsschutz einerseits und der Wahlfreiheit der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher andererseits. Ich danke Ihnen recht herzlich und bitte, dem Gesetzentwurf zuzustimmen.\n\nDanke.\"\n9830,albert-weiler,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Verehrte Damen und Herren auf der Tribüne! Liebe Fernsehzuschauer! Bevor ich inhaltlich starte, muss ich hier meine Bestürzung und Ablehnung zum Ausdruck bringen: Der Abgeordnete Diether Dehm, Linkspartei, beschäftigt seit einigen Jahren aus Steuermitteln den Ex-RAF-Terroristen und verurteilten Mörder Christian Klar. Dieser sollte uneingeschränkt Zugang zum Bundestag bekommen.\n\nDer Feind der Demokratie hat nichts im Herzstück unserer Demokratie zu suchen, meine Damen und Herren!\n\nDie Linkspartei sollte sich gut überlegen, wen sie auf Ihre Listenplätze setzt. Herr Dehm sollte sich überlegen, ob er hier im Deutschen Bundestag an der richtigen Stelle ist.\n\nNun zum eigentlichen Thema. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Linksfraktion, unter dem Deckmantel Ihres Antrags zur Stärkung der Schutzfunktion der Arbeitslosenversicherung steckt mal wieder jede Menge düstere Wahlkampfpolemik,\n\ndie nicht widerspruchslos hingenommen werden kann.\n\nIhre Antragsbegründung ist derart widersprüchlich und - Märchenhaftigkeit - teilweise realitätsfern, dass es einem die Socken auszieht.\n\nIn Ihrem Antrag monieren Sie, dass die Senkung der Arbeitslosenversicherungsbeiträge von 6,5 Prozent im Jahr 2006 auf heute 3 Prozent die Arbeitgeber in Deutschland entlastet habe. Das stimmt. Allerdings sind die vielen Millionen Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer ebenso Nutznießer dieser Senkung. Ich sage da nur: mehr Netto vom Brutto. Dass diese Beitragssenkung natürlich auch mit der enormen Reduzierung der Arbeitslosigkeit in Deutschland zu tun hatte, verschweigen Sie. Ebenso verschweigen Sie, dass die Unternehmen in Deutschland die eingesparten Gelder investiert und Arbeitsplätze geschaffen haben.\n\nDer aktuelle Jahreswirtschaftsbericht der Bundesregierung bestätigt dies eindrucksvoll. 43,3 Millionen Erwerbstätige, eine solche Zahl gab es in der Geschichte der Bundesrepublik noch nie, und die Tendenz ist steigend. Ihre Mär von der Zunahme unsicherer Arbeitsverhältnisse ist schlichtweg falsch. Das Gegenteil ist aktuell der Fall.\n\nRichtig ist - hier muss ich mich wiederholen -: Es gibt immer mehr Normalarbeitszeitverhältnisse. Seit 2010 gab es eine Zunahme regulärer Arbeitsverhältnisse um 1,5 Millionen. Dagegen sind die Zahlen bei befristeter und geringfügiger Beschäftigung sowie bei der Zeitarbeit gesunken. Das bestätigt das Statistische Bundesamt. Wenn Sie in Ihrem Antrag davon schreiben, dass ein Viertel aller Beschäftigten, die nach einer sozialversicherten Arbeit arbeitslos werden, direkt in das Hartz-IV-System fallen, dann heißt das doch im Umkehrschluss, dass die Arbeitslosenversicherung für drei Viertel aller Beschäftigten funktioniert.\n\nDie Schutzfunktion der Arbeitslosenversicherung ist also stark.\n\nSie argumentieren in Ihrem Antrag vom Januar 2016 mit Zahlen von 2014. Damit verblenden Sie die Wahrheit, weil Sie anscheinend der Bundesregierung den Erfolg nicht gönnen.\n\nDurch unsere gute und stabile Politik hat sich auch die Zahl der ALG-I-Bezieher mit zusätzlichem Hartz-IV-Bezug verringert. Die Zahlen der BA belegen das deutlich. Aktuell sind 85 500 ALG-I-Bezieher auf zusätzliche Leistungen aus dem SGB II angewiesen. Es sind also nicht, wie Sie mit Ihrer veralteten Zahl von 2014 vortäuschen wollen, 96 593. Aktuell sind es zwar immer noch zu viele ALG-I-Bezieher, aber die Tendenz geht deutlich nach unten.\n\nMan muss stark bezweifeln, dass mit Ihren Vorschlägen die Arbeitslosenversicherung gestärkt wird. Sie fordern unter anderem ein Recht auf Arbeit.\n\nAber wo bleibt die Pflicht zur Arbeit? Sie wollen Sperrzeiten und Sanktionen abschaffen;\n\nentsprechende Vorlagen bringen Sie immer wieder in den Bundestag ein. Jeder Arbeitnehmer - und auch jeder Bundestagsabgeordnete - wird sanktioniert, wenn er seiner Arbeit nicht nachkommt oder die Arbeit ablehnt. Sie fordern das generelle Recht für Arbeitslose, sanktionslos auch gute Arbeit ablehnen zu dürfen. Das kann nach meinem gesellschaftlichen Verständnis nicht richtig sein, und es ist beschämend für jeden, der arbeitet.\n\nZudem wollen Sie die Arbeit in Deutschland teurer machen, indem Sie die - in Anführungszeichen - „kapitalistischen Arbeitgeber“ Sonderabgaben zahlen lassen wollen. Die Absenkung der Hürden für den Bezug von Arbeitslosengeld wäre mit Kosten in dreistelliger Millionenhöhe verbunden. Ihre Vorschläge zur Änderung der Rahmenfristen würden der Agentur für Arbeit zwischen 300 Millionen und 450 Millionen Euro Mehrkosten auferlegen. Diese Vorschläge schaden der Arbeitslosenversicherung. Deshalb müssen wir den Antrag ablehnen.\n\nWir sollten aber gemeinsam unsere Bemühungen darauf konzentrieren - das gebe ich Ihnen als Rat mit -, dass wir die Menschen aus der Arbeitslosigkeit in Arbeit bringen. Deshalb ist es gut und richtig, dass die Bundesregierung mit dem Arbeitslosenversicherungsschutz- und Weiterbildungsstärkungsgesetz den Zugang zur beruflichen Weiterbildung insbesondere für Geringverdiener, für Geringqualifizierte, für Langzeitarbeitslose und für ältere Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer verbessern will und wird.\n\nDas macht den entscheidenden Unterschied aus: Sie wollen möglichst viele Menschen in die Arbeitslosenversicherung hineinziehen. Wir wollen den Menschen Wege aus der Arbeitslosigkeit ermöglichen und sie in Arbeit bringen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13055,herbert-behrens,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wer heute über Verkehrspolitik spricht, der kann über den angeblichen Kompromiss bei der Pkw-Maut nicht schweigen. Wir müssen feststellen, dass ein weiterer Vorhang aufgegangen ist für die Fortsetzung einer unendlichen Geschichte, einer ungeheuerlichen Geschichte. Sie hatte ihren Anfang genommen, als der CSU-Stammtisch meinte, mit der österreichischen Pkw-Maut ein Ärgernis zu haben, und sich deshalb überlegt hat, wie man es hinbekommt, dass auch die Österreicher zahlen müssen. Das hat der damalige Generalsekretär der CSU - Dobrindt mit Namen - in ein parteipolitisches und wahlkampfpolitisches Konzept umgesetzt; dieses hat er in den Bundestag hineingetragen. Es wurde Bestandteil des Koalitionsvertrages von CDU, CSU und SPD. Es hat nach einem über Jahre dauernden unsäglichen und quälenden Prozess das Ergebnis, dass am Ende keiner zufrieden ist: weder die, die es richtig wollten, noch die, die es schon immer abgelehnt haben.\n\nWenn jetzt die Nachricht kommt, man habe sich in Brüssel geeinigt, dann müssen wir sehr genau hinschauen, auf was man sich da wirklich geeinigt hat. Wir haben gesehen, dass wir weiterhin ein Bürokratiemonster vor uns haben. Dieses Bürokratiemonster wächst sogar noch. Es wird künftig nicht nur drei Staffelungen bei der Maut geben, sondern fünf. Es wird weiteren Bearbeitungsaufwand geben, um genau abwickeln zu können, wer eigentlich welche Vignette kaufen muss. Der Ertrag wird noch kleiner.\n\n- Ja, die Vielfalt muss aber bewirken, dass die Leute mehr davon haben und möglicherweise auch der Staat mehr davon hat. - Wir haben nichts davon. Wir haben Belastungen für die Bürger, und wir haben weniger Einnahmen für den Staat. Wer in der Koalition kann eigentlich damit zufrieden sein? Das ist mir völlig unverständlich.\n\nEin weiterer wichtiger Punkt ist, dass die Beziehung zu unseren Nachbarstaaten in Europa schwer gefährdet ist. Es hat großen Schaden angerichtet, so brachial vorzugehen. Das wird sicherlich noch Folgen haben, die wir alle nicht wollen. Dieses Projekt muss sofort gestoppt werden.\n\nMeine Forderung an die SPD lautet: Nehmen Sie sich selber ernst, und tun Sie jetzt im Zuge dieses Verfahrens wirklich etwas dafür, dass die Maut blockiert werden kann, so wie es der Verkehrsminister in Niedersachsen gefordert hat.\n\nWir sind dabei.\n\nZur Verkehrspolitik gehört Weitsicht. Die haben Sie bei der Pkw-Maut nicht gezeigt. Sie haben sie beim Bundesverkehrswegeplan nicht gezeigt. Sie haben sie auch bei den Ausbaugesetzen nicht gezeigt.\n\nZur Weitsicht in der Verkehrspolitik gehört, dass wir uns darüber klar sein müssen: Ein Bundesverkehrswegeplan legt die Schwerpunkte für die nächsten 15 Jahre Verkehrspolitik fest. Was heute dort hineingeschrieben wird, wird uns, wird die Bürgerinnen und Bürger die nächsten 15 Jahre begleiten. Entweder sie bekommen versprochen, dass eine Entlastung gebaut wird, oder sie haben die Chance, dass es relativ schnell durchgesetzt wird.\n\nDieses Hinhängen an eine lange Frist - Leute, beruhigt euch, wir kommen mit dem Projekt in dem einen oder anderen Jahr zu euch - führt dazu, dass in der Zwischenzeit keine Alternative überlegt wird, nicht weiter geplant werden darf, immer mit dem Hinweis: Aber es steht doch im Bundesverkehrswegeplan, setzt euch wieder hin, wir lösen das schon. - Das ist keine Politik mit Blick auf die gegenwärtigen Probleme, und schon gar keine Verkehrspolitik mit Weitsicht, in die Zukunft.\n\n- Die Leute lassen sich nicht vertrösten, sagt der Kollege Herzog - in der Tat. Darum sind sie vielfach in Bürgerinitiativen aktiv geworden. Sie haben eingefordert, in diesen Verfahren beteiligt zu werden, und haben vor Ort ihre Alternativen eingebracht. Das hat nicht nur etwas mit Blockadepolitik zu tun, das hat etwas mit kreativen verkehrspolitischen Vorstellungen zu tun, die wir an allen Stellen gesehen haben.\n\nIch nenne das Beispiel A 39. Dort haben sich die Bürgerinnen und Bürger an verschiedenen Orten entlang der Trasse über Jahre zusammengesetzt und Pläne für Alternativen geschmiedet. Dabei kommt heraus: Die A 39 ist verzichtbar\n\ndurch kleine Maßnahmen, durch Ausbaumaßnahmen und teilweise durch Neubaumaßnahmen, wenn ein Ort dringend umgangen werden muss.\n\nDas ist Planungsfantasie bei den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern. Sie ist aber nicht im Bundesverkehrsministerium zu finden. Das muss auf jeden Fall ein Ende haben.\"\n1816,norbert-spinrath,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Die Freilassung der unversehrten OSZE-Beobachter aus der Geiselhaft am vergangenen Wochenende gibt Hoffnung, dass Diplomatie Konflikte friedlich lösen kann, auch die Konflikte in der Ukraine. Vor dem Hintergrund der zunehmenden Gewalt in der Ukraine müssen wir den Menschen unermüdlich klarmachen, dass wir in Deutschland, wir in der Europäischen Union weiterhin eine gewaltfreie Lösung der Konflikte in der Ukraine wollen und uns dafür engagieren.\n\nWir müssen auch klarmachen, dass wir in Deutschland und wir in der Europäischen Union seit geschätzt 25 Jahren das Wort „Blockdenken“ abgelegt haben. Wir sprechen seit 25 Jahren von „Partnerschaften“. Ich finde, auch die Damen und Herren hier ganz links sollten sich an diesen neuen Sprachgebrauch gewöhnen.\n\nEine friedliche Lösung in der Ukraine muss vor allen Dingen vom überwiegenden Teil der Menschen dort mitgetragen werden. Sie braucht ein demokratisches Fundament.\n\nLassen Sie mich zunächst auf die Zustände innerhalb der Ukraine eingehen. Natürlich muss Russland einen großen Beitrag leisten. Es muss seinen Einfluss auf die Separatisten im Osten der Ukraine geltend machen und sie dazu bringen, ihre Waffen kampflos niederzulegen und die Besetzung von öffentlichen Gebäuden, Straßen und Plätzen zu beenden. Die Meldung von n-tv heute Nachmittag zeigt: Ein erster Schritt auf diesem Weg ist immerhin getan.\n\nIn der Woche vor Ostern ist eine siebenköpfige Delegation des Europaauschusses nach Kiew und Donezk gereist. Wir haben wichtige Gespräche mit den Menschen in der Ukraine geführt. Dabei habe ich gelernt, dass es zur Lösung der Probleme im Lande eines grundsätzlichen Wandels bedarf. Insbesondere muss die in allen gesellschaftlichen Ebenen der Ukraine vorherrschende Korruption bekämpft und endgültig unterbunden werden.\n\nWer hat denn noch Vertrauen in eine solche Gesellschaft, wenn der Platz an einer weiterführenden Schule oder der Studienplatz für das Kind, wenn der Führerschein für den Enkel, wenn die Grabstätte für die Oma nur noch gegen harte Griwnas zu bekommen ist, wenn kein öffentlicher Auftrag vergeben, keine Baugenehmigung ohne Schmiergeld erteilt wird, wenn ein großer Teil der Parlamentarier im nationalen Parlament über Privatvermögen im Wert von zwei- bis dreistelligen Millionen Dollar oder Euro verfügt?\n\nDa ich diese Zustände als Erkenntnisse von der Reise mitbrachte, wundert es mich nicht, dass sich die Jugend in der Ukraine im Herbst des letzten Jahres zum Maidan aufmachte. Sie waren dort schon vor dem 21. November des letzten Jahres, also bevor sich der ehemalige Staatspräsident Janukowitsch weigerte, das EU-Assoziierungsabkommen zu unterzeichnen. Erst als dies geschah, wurde aus dem Protest der Schüler und Studenten gegen die Korruption und gegen die Ausplünderung des Landes der sogenannte Euromaidan.\n\nAber ohne die Beseitigung der Korruption, die bis in den Alltag der Menschen geht, ohne die Beseitigung der Ausbeutung der Wertschöpfung des Landes durch einige wenige, kann dieses Land nicht zur Ruhe kommen.\n\nOhne die Beseitigung der Korruption kann kein funktionstüchtiger Verwaltungsapparat aufgebaut werden. Der Aufbau einer ordentlichen Verwaltung und eines funktionierenden Steuersystems sind aber unerlässlich für ein demokratisches Land. Nicht zuletzt dafür haben die Menschen, haben die Schüler und Studenten auf dem Maidan demonstriert.\n\nEs bleibt richtig, dass die Europäische Union mithilfe von insgesamt 11 Milliarden Euro und der Internationale Währungsfonds mit weiteren Milliarden den Staatsbankrott vermeiden wollen. Genauso richtig ist es aber, die Milliarden, um die sich das alte Regime Janukowitsch durch den Griff in die Staatskassen persönlich bereichert hat, aufzuspüren und dem Staatshaushalt wieder zuzuführen. Und genauso richtig bleibt es, die Oligarchen, die unter zweifelhaften Umständen ein persönliches Vermögen in Milliardenhöhe angehäuft haben, nicht nur an der politischen, sondern gerade eben auch an der finanziellen Sanierung des Landes zu beteiligen.\n\n- Sie müssen mit demokratischen Mitteln dazu gebracht werden, sich an der finanziellen Stabilisierung des Landes zu beteiligen.\n\nDies wäre ein wichtiges Signal an die Menschen in der Ukraine, damit sie selbst an ihr Land glauben können, damit sie selbst friedlich dafür eintreten können. Dazu müssen wir aber mit allen Menschen in allen Teilen der Ukraine reden, mit ihnen Ideen entwickeln und umsetzen, zum Beispiel durch Städtepartnerschaften, durch die Arbeit der politischen Stiftungen\n\noder die Zusammenarbeit mit anderen NGOs.\n\nDie am 25. Mai 2014 anstehenden Präsidentschaftswahlen sind wichtig. Sie dürfen nicht verschoben werden. Aber es muss auch nach dem 25. Mai 2014 schnell zu Parlamentswahlen kommen, damit es einen wirklichen Neuanfang gibt; denn viele Menschen in der Ukraine zweifeln sicherlich zu Recht daran, dass einige der alten Köpfe in der Lage sind, die alten Missstände zu überwinden und komplett neu zu denken.\n\nNachdem sich während unseres Kiew-Aufenthalts die Meldungen über die Zuspitzung der Lage in Donezk häuften, wurde angesichts der Sicherheitslage mehrfach der Verzicht auf eine Weiterreise nach Donezk diskutiert. Unsere Entscheidung, doch zu fliegen, erwies sich als richtig. Bei der Ankunft in Donezk, abends um 22 Uhr, fanden wir eine ruhige Stadt vor. Bei der Vorbeifahrt am von Separatisten besetzten Hochhaus des Provinzparlaments hätten wir die weniger als 20 Vermummten am Eingang vermutlich gar nicht bemerkt, wenn nicht ein Heer von Journalisten und Kameraleuten aus der ganzen Welt aus gebührendem Abstand ihre Objektive auf die Szene gerichtet hätte. 50 Meter weiter nahmen Leute in einem Straßencafé Getränke zu sich. 200 Meter weiter, in unserem Hotel, und in einem nahegelegenen Restaurant war genauso wenig davon zu spüren wie am nächsten Tag auf den Straßen der Millionenstadt Donezk, wo die Menschen ohne Hast und Eile ihrem Alltag nachgingen. Am Abreisetag kam die Gruppe an dem eine Stunde zuvor gestürmten und besetzten Rathaus der Stadt vorbei. Alles war friedlich. Auf dem Spielplatz unmittelbar neben dem Rathaus spielten Kinder.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, keine Lektüre kann eigene Wahrnehmung bei einer Reise ersetzen. Bei dem nächtlichen Zappen durch diverse TV-Sender in dem Hotel in Donezk, durch westliche, östliche, europäische, deutsche, russische, russischsprachige und ukrainischsprachige, habe ich fürs Leben gelernt: Es gibt viele Wahrheiten. Aber es gibt auch das, was ich selbst gesehen, gehört und in Gesprächen mit Menschen erfahren habe.\n\nIch komme sofort zum Schluss. - Wichtig ist, dass der Fünf-Punkte-Plan von Frank-Walter Steinmeier umgesetzt wird, um weiteres Blutvergießen zu verhindern. Wichtig ist, einen beständigen Dialog mit den politischen Spitzen aller beteiligten Staaten und mit den Bürgern der Ukraine zu führen. Gerade jetzt müssen die 45 Millionen Menschen in der Ukraine wieder hoffen können auf gute Perspektiven, auf ein funktionierendes Staatswesen, auf eine gute und eine sichere Zukunft, auf ein friedliches Zusammenleben in einem souveränen Staat Ukraine.\n\nDanke.\"\n11127,uda-heller,\"Sehr verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Gäste! Der uns vorliegende Berufsbildungsbericht 2016 beinhaltet erstmals eine Zusammenfassung der Bildungsintegration von Flüchtlingen. Vielen Dank dafür. Wir wissen, dass die Zuwanderung schutzsuchender und vor allem junger Menschen die Lage auf dem Ausbildungsmarkt verändern wird. Es ist eine Herausforderung, bei der wir aus Fehlern lernen müssen. Wir haben aber auch die Chance, es besser zu machen.\n\nDie Allianz für Aus- und Weiterbildung hat sich dieser Aufgabe als weiteren Schwerpunkt gewidmet. Bereits im September 2015 haben wir im Zuge unserer Erklärung „Gemeinsam für Perspektiven von Flüchtlingen“ erste Maßnahmen für eine erfolgreiche Integration eingeleitet. Dazu gehören beispielsweise der Ausbau der Integrationskurse oder die berufsbezogene Sprachförderung. Die zuständigen Ministerien haben spezielle Programme, aber auch die Bündnisse sowie der Arbeitskreis Integration der CDU/CSU-Fraktion haben weitere Handlungsfelder erarbeitet.\n\nSo hat das Ministerium für Bildung und Forschung ein Maßnahmepaket für Flüchtlinge geschnürt. Damit investieren wir besonders in die berufliche Bildung. 130 Millionen Euro haben wir Ende 2015 für Programme und Initiativen bereitgestellt.\n\nSo konnten die KAUSA-Servicestellen auf 24 Standorte erweitert werden. Sie informieren und beraten junge Asylbewerber, aber auch die Betriebe zu Ausbildungs- und Arbeitsmöglichkeiten.\n\nAußerdem haben wir Lernbegleiter für den Einsatz in den Einstiegskursen Deutsch beim Deutschen Volkshochschul-Verband qualifiziert, zusätzliche Bildungskoordinatoren für Flüchtlinge eingesetzt und regionale Servicebüros gegründet. Junge Flüchtlinge können so beim Übergang in das Berufsleben von uns gut begleitet werden.\n\nWenn wir davon sprechen, dass im Jahr 2016 die Berufsausbildung fit für die Zukunft gemacht und dass Bildung für alle ermöglicht werden soll, müssen wir weiter an dieser Integrationsstrategie arbeiten. Das hat auch der Kollege Diaby bereits gesagt.\n\nEin Schritt zur weiteren Rechtssicherheit ist das Integrationsgesetz, das wir bereits in erster Lesung behandelt haben. Es enthält Änderungen, die jungen Asylbewerbern und Geduldeten mit hoher Bleibeperspektive den Zugang zu den Maßnahmen „ausbildungsbegleitende Hilfen“, „Aktivierungshilfen für Jüngere“ und „Berufsvorbereitende Bildungsmaßnahmen“ öffnen. In den Berufsvorbereitenden Bildungsmaßnahmen können sie fachspezifische Erfahrungen sammeln und gleichzeitig die deutsche Sprache lernen. Ich denke, das ist besonders wichtig. Aus diesem Grund haben wir die Mittel dafür von 270 Millionen auf etwa 560 Millionen Euro fast verdoppelt.\n\nZusätzlich wurden mehr als 5 000 Deutschlehrer zertifiziert. Auch die Kursstunden und die Vergütung für Integrationslehrkräfte werden erhöht.\n\nAsylbewerber mit guter Bleibeperspektive und auch Geduldete erhalten künftig die Sicherheit, nach erfolgreicher Ausbildung und bei einem nachfolgenden Beschäftigungsverhältnis weitere zwei Jahre in Deutschland bleiben zu können. Auch das ist vorhin gesagt worden: Das ist die Drei-plus-zwei-Regelung. Ich halte sie für gut. Sie gibt uns Planungssicherheit.\n\nSehr geehrte Damen und Herren, im März wies das Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft darauf hin, dass viele Unternehmen und Betriebe bereit sind, den Flüchtlingen Ausbildungs- und Arbeitsplätze anzubieten. Das sind positive Signale an uns. Unterstützen wir die Wirtschaft und das Handwerk in ihrem Bemühen!\n\nFür meinen Wahlkreis ist die Wohnsitzauflage ein Schritt in die richtige Richtung. Denn hier verlassen etwa 70 Prozent der Personen mit einem Aufenthaltsstatus bzw. mit bewilligtem Asylantrag wieder die Region; und das ist schade.\n\nWas die Berufsausbildung aller jungen Menschen betrifft - das haben bereits mehrere Redner erwähnt; ich halte es aber für wichtig, es auch noch einmal zu sagen -, wünsche ich mir, dass zukünftig auf Länderebene und kommunaler Ebene die Belange von Berufsschulen besser wahrgenommen werden und deren Attraktivität gesteigert wird. Ich selbst habe auch einmal in einer gearbeitet.\n\nDazu gehört nicht nur eine moderne technische Ausstattung, sondern vor allem auch eine angemessene personelle Ausstattung.\n\nZusätzlich müssen wir die Voraussetzungen dafür schaffen, dass Sprachlehrer flexibel und zeitnah - ich betone besonders „zeitnah“ - in der Berufsausbildung von jungen Flüchtlingen eingesetzt werden und jede Berufsschule Förderangebote für Benachteiligte sowie Angebote für Leistungsstärkere vorhält.\n\nIch rufe die Länder auf, im Ranking ihrer Schullandschaft den Berufsschulen einen vorderen Platz einzuräumen.\n\nEine deutliche Qualitätssteigerung in den Berufsschulen sowie gut ausgebildete Lehrer tragen maßgeblich dazu bei, die duale Berufsausbildung in Deutschland zu stärken. Ich denke, meine Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das ist - das unterstelle ich einmal - unser aller Ziel.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n1204,eva-bulling-schroter,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich habe am Sonntagabend das Interview gelesen und gedacht: Ich bin einfach baff! - Dann habe ich gedacht: Irgendwo habe ich das schon gelesen. Ich habe dann überlegt und verstanden, wo ich das gelesen habe: bei der Vereinigung der Bayerischen Wirtschaft.\n\nVorher wurde hier über soziale Strompreise gesprochen. Ich möchte das mit dem, was im Interview steht, in einen Zusammenhang bringen. Agenda 2010: Super! Wenn die Regierung etwas anderes macht, ist das ein Verrat an Schröders Erbe. Keinen Schluck mehr aus der Pulle der Sozialleistungen. Der Mindestlohn ist eher schlecht. Vor ihm wird gewarnt, weil das Auswirkungen auf das ganze Gefüge hat und weil das Ganze nicht der Beschäftigung dient. Rente mit 63 Jahren und Mütterrente sind eigentlich auch schädlich für den Wettbewerb und für den Standort Deutschland.\n\nDann geht es um Strompreise: Wettbewerbsfähigkeit über alles. Dann kommt der Satz: Wir müssen entscheiden, ob wir uns die Energiewende so leisten können und wollen.\n\nWir müssen entscheiden. - Wen er damit meint, sagt er nicht: sich, die CSU, die Unternehmen, die Konzerne oder Otto Normalverbraucher. „Wer die Preise wieder senken will, der muss zurück zur Atomkraft.“ So steht es wortwörtlich im Spiegel.\n\nHier wurde von alten Reflexen gesprochen. Es stimmt: Das sind die alten Reflexe der CSU, die da wieder zum Vorschein kommen.\n\nKomischerweise ist das Interview erst am Montag veröffentlicht worden, nicht an dem Wochenende davor; denn am Sonntag waren Kommunalwahlen in Bayern.\n\nJetzt reden wir einmal über die Kosten der Atomkraft in Deutschland. Von 1950 bis 2010 wurde sie mit circa 198 Milliarden Euro subventioniert. Das hat das Forum Ökologisch-Soziale Marktwirtschaft schon vor Jahren errechnet. Darin enthalten sind Steuervergünstigen, die Stilllegung von Meilern, Forschung inklusive Kernfusionsforschung und die Mitgliedschaft in internationalen Organisationen wie Euratom. Würde man die Kosten konventioneller Energie, also Kohle und Atomkraft, nach der Methode des Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetzes in Form einer Umlage von den Stromverbrauchern bezahlen lassen, hätte diese Energieumlage im Jahre 2012 umgerechnet 10,2 Cent pro Kilowattstunde betragen.\n\nMüssten die Betreiber von Atomkraftwerken eine Haftpflichtversicherung abschließen, wenn sie denn eine bekämen, müssten sie für jedes Atomkraftwerk 72 Milliarden Euro jährlich bezahlen. Das haben Finanzmathematiker der Versicherungsbranche ausgerechnet. Derzeit ist die Haftpflicht der Betreiber auf knapp 250 Millionen Euro begrenzt. Ein weiterer Vorteil der Atombranche: Wenn etwas passiert, bezahlen es natürlich die Verbraucher und die Steuerzahler; das ist klar.\n\nAuch Professor Hirschhausen vom Deutschen Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung konstatiert:\n\nAtomkraft ist noch nie wettbewerbsfähig gewesen und wird es auch nie sein … Weder in Europa, noch an einem anderen Ort dieser Welt ist jemals ein Atomkraftwerk unter marktwirtschaftlichen Bedingungen gebaut worden. … Übliche Kostenschätzungen für Atomkraft beinhalten oft nicht den Rückbau der Anlagen sowie die Endlagerung …, ganz zu schweigen von den enormen Kosten möglicher Großunfälle wie in Fukushima oder Tschernobyl.\n\n- Darüber haben wir heute im Umweltausschuss Berichte gehört. Sie waren erschütternd. -\n\n… Das finanzielle Risiko wird vom Staat, also uns allen getragen.\n\nEnde 2016 läuft die Brennelementesteuer aus. Dann werden die Atomkraftwerke noch mehr zu Gelddruckmaschinen, und die Gewinne werden natürlich nicht umverteilt, sondern die kassieren die großen Konzerne.\n\nJetzt reden wir noch über die Störfälle in deutschen AKW. 2013 gab es in deutschen AKW 52 Störfälle. Das ist jede Woche einer. Ich zähle sie Ihnen auf. Brokdorf: 6, Grafenrheinfeld: 3, Grohnde: 3, Gundremmingen B: 3, Isar 2: 5, Emsland: 3, Neckar 2: 9, Philippsburg 2: 20. Das sind insgesamt 52 Störfälle. Erklären Sie bitte einmal den Menschen, dass ihr Strom vielleicht billiger wird, dass sie aber eventuell einen Störfall in Kauf nehmen müssen! Reden wir auch über Isar 2 in Ohu, das zurzeit heruntergefahren wird. Es gibt wieder einmal große Probleme, und die Menschen sind wieder verunsichert.\n\nUnd dann wollen Sie in Gundremmingen in Bayern die Kapazitäten hochfahren.\n\nEs gibt genug Studien darüber, dass das Kernkraftwerk das nicht aushält. Ich halte diese Politik für verantwortungslos, und ich bitte Sie und hoffe, dass Sie sich an die Koalitionsvereinbarung und zumindest an das Gesetz zum Atomausstieg 2022 halten.\n\nIch kann Ihnen nur sagen: Die Demonstrationen beginnen. Am Samstag gibt es die ersten.\n\n- Das werden nicht die letzten sein. Das beginnt jetzt erst, auch in Ihrem Gebiet. - Wir stehen dahinter. Wir unterstützen diese Initiativen, und wir sagen: Atomausstieg möglichst schnell! Wir müssen die Menschen vor solchen Ideen bewahren.\"\n10997,kees-de-vries,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist wohl unbestritten: Der Milchmarkt befindet sich in einer sehr ernsten Marktkrise. Diese - ich glaube, da sind wir uns auch einig - kann nur gelöst werden, indem weniger Milch produziert wird oder die Nachfrage steigt. Es gibt keine Anzeichen, dass die Nachfrage schnell wieder steigen wird. Also muss es zu einer Verringerung der Produktion kommen.\n\nNun hat die Europäische Kommission mit Rechtsakten vom 11. April 2016 für sowohl anerkannte als auch nicht anerkannte Erzeugerorganisationen die befristete Möglichkeit geschaffen, die Rohmilchproduktion auf freiwilliger Basis zu regulieren. Die Regelungen sehen vor, dass der Milchsektor befristet für eine Zeit von sechs Monaten - mit der Option, einmal um sechs Monate zu verlängern - freiwillige gemeinsame Vereinbarungen treffen und Beschlüsse fassen kann, die die Planung der Milchproduktion zum Gegenstand haben.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, die Mitgliedstaaten haben nun die erforderlichen Maßnahmen zu ergreifen, um sicherzustellen, dass die Vereinbarungen und Beschlüsse die Funktionsfähigkeit des Binnenmarktes nicht untergraben und auf die Stabilisierung des Milchmarktes abzielen. Die Umsetzung ist also rechtlich zwingend. Mit dem Entwurf eines Ersten Gesetzes zur Änderung des Agrarmarktstrukturgesetzes der Fraktionen der CDU/CSU und SPD, Bundestagsdrucksache 18/8235, wird der Branche die Möglichkeit gegeben, auf freiwilliger Basis zur Begrenzung der Milchmenge zu kommen. Zusätzlich werden mit dem Änderungsantrag der Fraktionen von CDU/CSU und SPD Regelungen über die Allgemeinverbindlichkeit in den Gesetzentwurf aufgenommen.\n\nUnter Einbeziehung der im Änderungsantrag enthaltenen Regelungen eröffnet der Gesetzentwurf die Chance, dass deutlich weniger Milch produziert wird. Der Gesetzentwurf ist zielführend, weil wir mit ihm die Voraussetzungen schaffen, dass für einen begrenzten Zeitraum Mengenabsprachen zur Reduzierung der Rohmilchproduktion innerhalb der Branche getroffen werden können. Damit nutzen wir eine Möglichkeit des europäischen Rechts, die allerdings nur zeitlich begrenzt, nämlich für sechs Monate mit der Option auf weitere sechs Monate, zur Verfügung steht. Deshalb ist eine zügige Verabschiedung dringend geboten, um der betroffenen Milchwirtschaft jetzt die Möglichkeit zu geben, die Rohmilchproduktion auf freiwilliger Basis zu regulieren.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dass sich die Oppositionsfraktionen trotz des Wunsches der Bundesländer nach einer zeitnahen Verabschiedung des Gesetzentwurfes der Abstimmung verweigert haben, ist angesichts der existenziellen Marktkrise einfach verantwortungslos.\n\nNur mit weniger Milch auf dem Markt können die Preise steigen. Für die CDU/CSU-Bundestagsfraktion steht, nachdem sich auch der Sektor für einen Ausstieg aus der Quotierung ausgesprochen hat, außer Frage, dass es nicht Aufgabe der Politik ist, jetzt den Markt zu regulieren. Hier sind die Wirtschaftsakteure selbst gefordert, kurzfristig Lösungen zu finden. Mit der Änderung des Agrarmarktstrukturgesetzes schaffen wir dafür den rechtlichen Rahmen. Nun ist es an der Branche selbst, ein deutliches Signal für eine bessere Steuerung des Milchangebots und eine eventuelle Flexibilisierung der Marktstrukturen zu setzen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8780,jan-metzler,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Es ist schon eine ehrenvolle Aufgabe, als letzter Redner in einer so vielseitigen Debatte reden zu dürfen. Zweifelsohne hat dies einen Nachteil, aber auch Vorteile. Der Nachteil ist, dass jetzt schon vieles gesagt worden ist. Ich hoffe, dass ich noch den einen oder anderen Aspekt hinzufügen kann, ohne zu viel zu wiederholen. Aber einiges möchte ich zum Abschluss auch noch einmal unterstreichen.\n\nOhne Frage, dieser aktuelle Haushalt wurde unter besonderen Herausforderungen aufgestellt. Diese Herausforderungen können wir aber deswegen so gut angehen - das wurde in vielen Vorreden deutlich -, weil wir gut aufgestellt sind. Das liegt nicht zuletzt und insbesondere an der wirtschaftlichen Lage; sie ist robust und zukunftsfähig. Damit sie zukunftsfähig bleibt, ist es notwendig, dass wir unsere Hausaufgaben machen. Deswegen - da bin ich der Bundesregierung sehr dankbar - atmet dieser Haushalt den Geist von Stabilität und Nachhaltigkeit. Ich möchte diese Stabilität an drei Punkten festmachen.\n\nErstens: Stabilität durch nachhaltige Finanzpolitik. Kollege Hauptmann hat dies, denke ich, eben schon im Namen der jüngeren Generation unterstrichen. Er hat klargemacht, dass der dritte Haushalt ohne Neuverschuldung nach 40 Jahren auch ein besonderes Zeichen in puncto Generationengerechtigkeit ist. Ich möchte das noch einmal unterstreichen. Ein besonderes Dankeschön gilt hier unserem Bundesfinanzminister Wolfgang Schäuble. Dies sage ich jetzt stellvertretend an den Kollegen Spahn adressiert.\n\nZweitens: Stabilität durch richtige Anpassungen. Da, wo es sinnvoll ist und unserem Land dient, scheuen wir uns nicht davor, mehr Mittel in die Hand zu nehmen, so zum Beispiel 1 Milliarde Euro mehr für die innere Sicherheit: für die Bundespolizei, für das BKA, für das Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge und für das THW.\n\nDrittens - jetzt kommen die Wirtschaftspolitikerinnen und Wirtschaftspolitiker ins Spiel -: Stabilität durch verlässliche Wirtschaftspolitik. Der starke Arbeitsmarkt ist Rückgrat und Gradmesser für das Wohlergehen unseres Landes; das habe ich eingangs betont. Deshalb investieren wir an den entscheidenden Stellen, um weiteres Wachstum und mehr Beschäftigung zu generieren. Wir wollen gute Rahmenbedingungen schaffen und so die Leistungsfähigkeit der deutschen Wirtschaft nachhaltig unterstützen.\n\nDas ist auch die grundlegende Idee bei der Bewertung des vorgelegten Etats für Wirtschaft und Energie. Nicht umsonst lauten zwei Überschriften: „Innovation, Technologie und Neue Mobilität“ und „Mittelstand: Gründen, Wachsen, Investieren“. Diese Kapitel machen mit rund 3,5 Milliarden Euro ungefähr die Hälfte des Gesamtetats für Wirtschaft und Energie aus. Das sind übrigens einige Millionen mehr als noch in diesem Jahr. Das schlägt sich positiv auf beinahe alle Posten nieder. Ziel der aufgelegten Instrumente ist es, die Leistungsfähigkeit unserer Wirtschaft zu fördern und dabei die richtigen Anreize zu setzen. Das nenne ich Stabilität durch verlässliche Wirtschaftspolitik.\n\nBesonders bewährt hat sich in diesem Zusammenhang - auch das ist bereits betont worden - das Zentrale Innovationsprogramm Mittelstand, ZIM, mit einem Volumen von mehr als einer halben Milliarde Euro. Einen herzlichen Dank möchte ich in diesem Zusammenhang an den Kollegen Mattfeldt und den Kollegen Jurk adressieren, die sich erneut in besonderem Maße für dieses Programm eingesetzt haben.\n\nMit dem Zentralen Innovationsprogramm Mittelstand fördern wir Neuentwicklungen, besonders im Mittelstand. Dieser stellt das Rückgrat der stabilen wirtschaftlichen und konjunkturellen Situation dar. Deswegen: Gut, dass wir hier drangeblieben sind, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Das gilt übrigens auch für die Industrieforschung, die mit weiterhin mehr als 200 Millionen Euro einzubeziehen ist.\n\nAuf eines können wir ganz besonders stolz sein, auf die Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“ von Bund und Ländern. Dahinter verbirgt sich eine auf Nachhaltigkeit angelegte Philosophie, nämlich keine Region in Deutschland zurückzulassen. Wie gelingt das? Indem wir Potenziale in strukturschwachen Regionen fördern, Standortnachteile abbauen, Wettbewerbsfähigkeit herstellen und so neue Arbeitsplätze schaffen oder vorhandene erhalten.\n\nDa ich selbst Mitglied in dem zuständigen Unterausschuss sein darf, liegt mir dieser Bereich besonders am Herzen. Die gute Nachricht ist: Im Koalitionsvertrag hat man sich auf eine Erhöhung der Mittel bis auf das Förderniveau vorheriger Jahre geeinigt. Das wird mit diesem Haushalt nun erreicht. Das ist ein exzellentes Zeichen.\n\n(Beifall bei der CDU/CSU sowie des Abg. Thomas Jurk [SPD]\n\nAb nächstem Jahr stehen für die regionale Wirtschaftsförderung also wieder 624 Millionen Euro jährlich zur Verfügung. Aufgrund der Kofinanzierung mit den Ländern sind es insgesamt sogar mehr als 1,2 Milliarden Euro. Vom Erfolg konnte sich der Unterausschuss kürzlich bei Unternehmensbesuchen überzeugen. Wir haben sehen können, was es letztlich heißt, das hier Beschlossene mit einem nachhaltigen Erfolg für ganze Regionen in die Praxis umzusetzen. Ich möchte an dieser Stelle ein Wort des Dankes an den gesamten Unterausschuss loswerden, in dem über alle Fraktionsgrenzen hinweg in wirklich konstruktiver Art und Weise zusammengearbeitet wird.\n\nEin Wort zur Zukunft der regionalen Wirtschaftsförderung möchte ich auch noch loswerden. Die Mittel stehen zur Verfügung. Zukünftig geht es noch mehr als in der Vergangenheit um deren Einsatz. Dabei ist in besonderem Maße wichtig, dass wir die altindustriellen Regionen und die strukturschwächeren ländlichen Regionen in Deutschland insgesamt nicht vergessen. Ich möchte hervorheben, dass es dazu im Unterausschuss keinerlei anderslautende Meinung gab; das wird, denke ich, auch so bleiben.\n\nIch möchte noch kurz auf ein anderes Thema eingehen - es ist eine Art Lieblingsthema, ganz allgemein, aber auch eines der Opposition -, auf die angeblich fehlenden Investitionen. Ich sehe das ganz anders: Erstens. Wir haben die Mittel im Etat für Wirtschaft und Energie erhöht. Zweitens. Wir haben die Mittel im Etat für Bildung und Forschung erhöht. Im Etat für Bildung und Forschung kommt es übrigens zu einer Verdopplung der Mittel, wenn man das Jahr 2005 als Vergleichsgrundlage nimmt. Parallel dazu stellen wir mehr Geld für innere Sicherheit, Integrationsmaßnahmen, humanitäre Hilfe und Krisenprävention zur Verfügung. „On top“ kommen weitere 10 Milliarden Euro, die im Rahmen des Investitionspaketes bereitgestellt werden. Das alles leisten wir in einem ausgeglichenen Haushalt, ohne Neuverschuldung, und das zum dritten Mal. - Wenn man das kleinreden will, kann man das tun. Aber die Fakten sprechen eine andere Sprache. Diese Regierung, diese Koalition hat ihre Hausaufgaben gemacht und ein Zeichen der Stabilität ausgesandt. Sie macht nachhaltige Wirtschafts- und Finanzpolitik. Dieses Zeichen sollte von den Haushaltsberatungen und von den Beratungen über diesen Einzeletat heute abschließend ausgesendet werden.\n\nGanz nebenbei: Der Bund entlastet die Kommunen in Milliardenhöhe - auch das ist mit einzubeziehen -, und zwar in der Größenordnung von 20 Milliarden Euro. Auch das hat es bisher nicht gegeben.\n\nAlles in allem denke ich, dass sich an diesem Punkt für die Zukunft eines sagen lässt: Wir machen unsere Hausaufgaben, und wir setzen Zeichen der Stabilität. Das ist gerade in Zeiten, in denen die Wogen ein wenig höher schlagen, das absolut richtige und ein wichtiges Signal. Insofern blicke ich mit Zuversicht in die Zukunft. Auch wenn ich der letzte Redner war, hoffe ich, dass ich noch den einen oder anderen interessanten Punkt habe hinzufügen können.\n\nIch bedanke mich recht herzlich für die Aufmerksamkeit und wünsche weiterhin gute Beratungen.\"\n8440,matthias-birkwald,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Die ganz große Koalition aus Union, SPD, Grünen und FDP hat im Jahr 2001 das Niveau der gesetzlichen Rente auf Talfahrt geschickt. Um beinahe 20 Prozent wird die Rente bis 2030 gekürzt werden.\n\nNun frage ich Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Was raten Sie den Menschen, wenn Sie gefragt werden, wie man für das Alter vorsorgen soll? Mit der Riester-Rente wohl eher nicht; denn sie ist der totale Flop.\n\nNein, jetzt soll es die betriebliche Altersvorsorge richten. Sie steht im Koalitionsvertrag. Viel passiert ist da bisher nicht.\n\nDer Kollege Peter Weiß von der Union hat dazu gesagt - ich zitiere aus der FAZ vom 8. September -, er wolle, dass die Arbeitgeber mit Freude und Begeisterung ihren Arbeitnehmern eine betriebliche Altersvorsorge anbieten. Tja, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, nur, was die Arbeitgeberinnen und Arbeitgeber dann konkret mit Freude anbieten, welche schlechten Angebote sie ihren Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern dann oft machen und zu welchen Konditionen dann etwas angeboten wird: Dazu habe ich von der Koalition bisher noch nichts gehört. Genau das ist das Problem.\n\nZahlen die Arbeitgeber und Arbeitgeberinnen nämlich nichts dazu, wie das heute leider oft üblich ist, dann ist die betriebliche Altersversorgung ein reines Minusgeschäft. Das sage nicht ich, sondern das sagt Georg Plötz, der Altersvorsorgespezialist der Verbraucherzentrale Bayern. Das betone ich besonders für die CSU-Kolleginnen und -Kollegen im Saal.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Koalition, wenn Sie die Arbeitgeber aus der Verantwortung und aus der Haftung entlassen, dann kümmern sie sich gar nicht mehr um die Konditionen der Betriebsrenten ihrer Beschäftigten. Schon heute sind Direktversicherungen bei den Chefs am beliebtesten; denn damit hat der Arbeitgeber nicht viel Arbeit. Er oder sie schließt dann zum Beispiel bei der Allianz oder AXA einfach eine Lebensversicherung für die Beschäftigten ab, mehr nicht.\n\nViele Beschäftigte verstehen gar nicht, was daran noch betriebliche Altersversorgung sein soll. Denn der Arbeitgeber macht gar nichts mehr, gerade bei Direktversicherungen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, im März dieses Jahres habe ich mich mit Vertretern des Vereins Direktversicherungsgeschädigte e. V. getroffen. GMG-Geschädigte haben sie sich vorher genannt. 7,6 Millionen solcher Verträge gibt es. GMG, liebe SPD, steht für Ihr Gesundheitsmodernisierungsgesetz von 2004.\n\nSchade, dass die Kollegin Ulla Schmidt nicht im Saal ist. Sie hat das GMG damals ja mit dem heutigen Ministerpräsidenten Seehofer verhandelt. In diesem Zusammenhang erinnere ich mich an einen Satz von Herrn Seehofer. „Das war eine der schönsten Nächte meines Lebens“, sagte er.\n\nFür die Betroffenen sollte es aber ein böses Erwachen geben. Sie hatten nämlich bereits Direktversicherungen abgeschlossen und ihre Versicherungsprämien aus verbeitragtem Einkommen gezahlt, also aus ihrem Nettoeinkommen. Und dann beschließt Gesundheitsministerin Ulla Schmidt aus Geldnot, dass diese Beschäftigten auch bei der Auszahlung im Alter volle Beitrage zur gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung zahlen müssen. Zum zweiten Mal volle Beiträge! Was heißt das? Das sind knapp 20 Prozent; denn die Rentnerin bzw. der Rentner zahlen den Arbeitnehmer- und den Arbeitgeberbeitrag, und dann ist das häufig eine dreifache Belastung. Das nenne ich kalte Enteignung, und das ist extrem ungerecht.\n\nEin Beispiel: Giuseppe Burcheri, ein ehemaliger Ford-Mitarbeiter, zahlte während seines Arbeitslebens, und er zahlt im Alter noch einmal. Was zahlt er? Er zahlt den eigenen und den Krankenversicherungsbeitrag des Arbeitgebers für eine sogenannte Betriebsrente. Hätte er eine private Zusatzversicherung abgeschlossen, hätte er aus seiner Zusatzrente gar keinen Krankenversicherungsbeitrag gezahlt, nicht einen Cent. „Hätte ich das damals gewusst, hätte ich die Versicherung nie abgeschlossen“, sagte Giuseppe Burcheri völlig zu Recht. Aber er konnte nicht wissen, was die damalige Gesundheitsministerin Ulla Schmidt eiskalt, rückwirkend, ohne jeglichen Vertrauensschutz und für alle Altverträge beschließen würde. Das hat sie aber. Deshalb musste Peter Weber von seinen 21 874 Euro nun 5 131 Euro an seine Krankenkasse zahlen, so ein Beispiel aus der Wirtschaftswoche von gestern. Darum, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von SPD und Union, fordere ich Sie auf: Lassen Sie den Menschen endlich Gerechtigkeit widerfahren! Schaffen Sie die Doppelverbeitragung ab!\n\nLegen Sie einen Gesetzentwurf vor, der klipp und klar regelt, dass Sozialversicherungsbeiträge für Betriebsrenten nur einmal abgeführt werden müssen.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss, Frau Präsidentin. - Wenn bereits in der Ansparphase Sozialversicherungsbeiträge abgeführt werden, dann dürfen in der Leistungsphase bzw. auf die Kapitalabfindung keine Krankenversicherungs- und Pflegeversicherungsbeiträge mehr fällig werden. Alles andere ist ungerecht und Garantiert beschissen! Das ist übrigens der Titel eines druckfrischen Buches über den ganz legalen Betrug mit den Lebensversicherungen.\n\nDanke. Schönes Wochenende!\"\n15045,antje-tillmann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Gäste! Der Auftrag für diese Legislaturperiode lautete, die Bund-Länder-Finanzbeziehungen neu zu ordnen, unter anderem, weil der Solidarpakt II für die neuen Länder 2019 ausläuft. Wir haben es geschafft, einen bruchlosen Übergang für die neuen Länder in den künftigen Länderfinanzausgleich zu erreichen. Mein Land Thüringen zum Beispiel bekommt 2020 aus diesem Länderfinanzausgleich 172 Millionen Euro mehr als 2019 aus dem Solidarpakt. Der Teil hat gut geklappt.\n\nEigentlich müsste man von Bund-Länder-Kommunen-Finanzbeziehungen sprechen; denn wir haben es geschafft - das haben wir uns als Zweites vorgenommen -, auch die Finanzen der Kommunen auf sichere Füße zu stellen. Diese Legislaturperiode war geprägt von vielen Entlastungsprogrammen für die Kommunen. 95 Milliarden Euro sind vom Bund an die Kommunen geflossen. Ich erinnere an Kitaausbauprogramme, Schulsanierungen, das Bildungspaket und die Übernahme der Kosten für die Grundsicherung. Das führte dazu - ohne den heute zu beschließenden Pakt -, dass die Kommunen 2016 einen Überschuss von 5,4 Milliarden Euro erzielt haben. Angesichts dessen mutet ein Gesetzentwurf mit dem Ziel der Sicherung finanzschwacher Kommunen eigenartig an; aber natürlich ist mir klar, was das Problem mit Durchschnitten ist.\n\nWir werden heute weitere Entlastungen für die Kommunen beschließen, unter anderem werden wir 3,5 Milliarden Euro zur Verbesserung der Schulinfrastruktur zur Verfügung stellen. Damit erhöhen wir diesen Posten auf 7 Milliarden Euro. Ich verstehe sehr gut, dass es den Eltern völlig egal ist, wo das Geld herkommt, wenn die Schule ihrer Kinder saniert werden muss. Ich sage aber allen heute Beteiligten: Jetzt muss erst einmal Schluss damit sein, dass solche Investitionen zulasten des Bundes gehen; denn jeden Euro, der ins Schulklo geht - das ist eigentlich eine Länderaufgabe -,\n\nkann der Bund nicht in seinen eigentlichen Aufgabengebieten investieren, zum Beispiel in den Bereichen „innere Sicherheit“ oder „Bekämpfung der Fluchtursachen“. Das sind die eigentlichen Bundesaufgaben, und auf die müssen wir uns jetzt auf jeden Fall wieder konzentrieren. Nach diesem Pakt muss jeder seine Aufgaben erfüllen, und Bildungspolitik ist eindeutig Ländersache.\n\nBei diesem Gesetzentwurf geht es aber nicht nur um Geld, auch wenn man das meinen könnte, wenn man die Reden hier hört. Es geht auch darum, dass wir die Bürgerinnen und Bürger an den Erfolgen dieser Verabredung teilhaben lassen. Ein ganz wesentlicher Punkt sind die zusätzlichen Kompetenzen des Bundes im Bereich der Finanzverwaltung, der Steuerpolitik. Das ist ein sehr sprödes Thema. Ich erkläre Ihnen aber sehr gerne, was auch die Bürgerinnen und Bürger damit zu tun haben. Wir müssen die Digitalisierung in den Finanzverwaltungen vorantreiben, damit die Bürgerinnen und Bürger demnächst dank einer vorausgefüllten automatischen Steuererklärung Lebenszeit sparen können. Aber auch für die Verwaltungen der Länder ist das wichtig; denn jeder Finanzbeamte, der für diese Aufgaben dann nicht mehr gebraucht wird, kann sich für wichtigere Aufgaben Zeit nehmen, zum Beispiel für die Bekämpfung von Steuerhinterziehung in großem Umfang. Jeder dadurch gewonnene Euro kann dann wieder in Projekte fließen, zum Beispiel in die Schulsanierung. Wir brauchen ein gemeinsames Vorgehen im Bereich der Finanzverwaltung, um zu einer gerechteren und gleichmäßigeren Besteuerung in diesem Land zu kommen.\n\nDie Voraussetzungen dafür haben wir im Konsens-Gesetz - auch das ist ein spröder Titel - geschaffen. Demnächst ist es möglich, dass der Bund zusammen mit den meisten Ländern wesentlich schneller entscheidet. Das hat auch auf die Bürgerinnen und Bürger Auswirkungen.\n\nBeispiel eins. Die Unternehmerinnen und Unternehmer haben wir vor einiger Zeit verpflichtet, dem Finanzamt eine elektronische Bilanz zu übermitteln. Das hat die Unternehmerinnen und Unternehmer und ihre Steuerberater viel Geld gekostet. Wir haben ihnen damals versprochen, dass sie die korrigierten Daten nach einer Betriebsprüfung in digitaler Form zurückübersandt bekommen. Dadurch hätten sie massiv Geld gespart, und die Finanzverwaltungen hätten sehr viel schneller arbeiten können. Dieses Verfahren liegt jedoch seit Jahren brach, weil es an entsprechender IT-Technik mangelt. Wir müssen da besser werden. Das nützt den Steuerpflichtigen, und das nützt den Finanzverwaltungen der Länder.\n\nEin ähnliches Problem gibt es im Privatbereich. 2015 haben wir beschlossen, dass die gerechtere Verteilung des Splittingvorteils über die Steuerklasse IV mit Faktorverfahren durch Antrag zwei Jahre gewährt werden kann. Auch das scheitert an technischen Voraussetzungen. Das heißt, die Bürgerinnen und Bürger sind überflüssigerweise jedes Jahr wieder aufgefordert, neue Anträge zu stellen, und das nur, weil die Technik nicht funktioniert.\n\nDas waren nur zwei Beispiele, die zeigen, warum wir die neue IT-Technik unbedingt brauchen. Wir brauchen sie, um allen die Arbeit, die Erfüllung ihrer Aufgaben zu erleichtern. Wir brauchen sie, um eine gerechtere und einheitliche Besteuerung in diesem Land, in allen 16 Bundesländern, zu ermöglichen. Ich bin sicher, dass die Länder nach Anfangsschwierigkeiten gerade bei diesem Punkt mit dem Kompromiss sehr zufrieden sein können, weil es jetzt vorangeht. Wir sind uns einig, dass da für alle eine Win-win-Situation entstehen kann.\n\nSie sehen an den genannten Punkten, dass diese Reform für mehrere Seiten ein Gewinn sein kann. Deshalb werde ich dieser Reform heute zustimmen, auch wenn ich mir an einigen Stellen andere Lösungen hätte vorstellen können. Wir gehen diesen Weg. Ich sage aber: Danach muss sich der Bund wieder auf seine Aufgaben konzentrieren, das Geld für Bundesaufgaben ausgeben, für innere Sicherheit, für die Bekämpfung von Fluchtursachen, für Aufgaben der Bundesverwaltung. Das machen wir nach der heutigen Verabschiedung des Gesetzes. Ich plädiere für eine Zustimmung.\"\n13077,alexander-neu,\"Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Montenegro soll also der NATO beitreten. Damit wird die NATO ein weiteres Mal ihren Einfluss- und Kontrollbereich erweitern, hier um ein Balkanland. Die NATO-Erweiterung insgesamt ist einem politischen Ansatz geschuldet, der davon ausgeht, dass Sicherheit in Europa ohne Russland oder vielleicht auch gegen Russland möglich und wünschenswert ist. Es ist ein konfrontatives Sicherheitskonzept.\n\nEs geht aber auch anders, und zwar mit einem kooperativen Sicherheitskonzept, das vorsieht, Sicherheit in Europa mit Russland herzustellen. Das ist nachhaltiger.\n\nNach den Verlautbarungen der CDU oder der SPD, also der Regierungsparteien, favorisieren sie sogar das kooperative Sicherheitskonzept,\n\nzumindest verbal.\n\nSo heißt es beispielsweise in dem außenpolitischen Positionspapier der SPD-Bundestagsfraktion vom Juli 2016 - ich zitiere -: „Stärke zeigen allein genügt nicht“. - Was für eine Einsicht! - „Für eine glaubwürdige und kooperative Sicherheits- und Friedenspolitik in und für Europa“.\n\nAuch Kanzlerin Merkel steht dem nicht hinterher. In ihrer Regierungserklärung vor dem NATO-Gipfel in Warschau sagte sie - ich zitiere -:\n\nWir als NATO-Partner sind uns einig, dass dauerhafte Sicherheit in Europa nur mit und nicht gegen Russland zu erreichen ist.\n\nSchöne Worte.\n\nDie Wirklichkeit sieht anders aus, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren. Da tun Sie genau das Gegenteil. Statt einer friedensichernden, statt einer sicherheitspolitischen Kooperation bauen Sie den NATO-Einflussraum aus, zum Beispiel mit Hilfe der NATO-Osterweiterung. Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, das ist nichts anderes als primitive Geo- und Machtpolitik, die Sie hier betreiben.\n\n- Hören Sie einfach einmal zu! - Montenegro ist ein Staat mit der Einwohnerzahl von Düsseldorf. Ich bin im Sommer dieses Jahres mit der Kollegin Höger nach Montenegro geflogen. Wir haben uns dort mit politischen Parteien und Vertretern der Zivilgesellschaft getroffen.\n\nErgebnis: Montenegro ist ein zutiefst zerrissenes Land zwischen NATO-Gegnern und NATO-Befürwortern. Die Oppositionsparteien und auch zivilgesellschaftliche Gruppen haben uns erklärt, dass die Mehrheit der Menschen gegen einen NATO-Beitritt und für die Neutralität Montenegros sei. Aber einen Volksentscheid darüber lehnt das autoritäre Djukanovic-Regime ab - er ist zwar jetzt nicht mehr Ministerpräsident, aber das Regime ist nach wie vor an der Macht -, wohl wissend, dass dieses Referendum in einer Niederlage enden würde und ein NATO-Beitritt passé wäre.\n\nDie parlamentarische und die außerparlamentarische Opposition gegen den NATO-Beitritt sind Repressionen ausgesetzt. Der Sprecher der NGO „Nicht in die NATO“ - so heißt diese Organisation - wurde von der Polizei misshandelt. Andere werden willkürlich verhaftet. Was sagt der Westen? Was sagt Berlin dazu? Man drückt wieder einmal alle Augen zu.\n\nDie „Bewegung für Neutralität“ Montenegros - auch eine NGO - verfügt über Informationen von WikiLeaks,\n\nnach denen klare Anweisungen aus Washington, Brüssel und Berlin kommen, wie eine effektive Öffentlichkeitsarbeit gemacht werden kann, um die Stimmung in Montenegro zugunsten der NATO umzudrehen. So soll die Bevölkerung, die noch vor 17 Jahren von der NATO bombardiert wurde, jetzt dazu gebracht werden, die NATO lieb zu haben. Das ist unfassbar, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren.\n\nUnser Fazit ist: Die Äußerungen der CDU und der SPD zur kooperativen Sicherheitspolitik bleiben Lippenbekenntnisse; denn die NATO-Osterweiterung ist ein geo- und sicherpolitisches Konfrontationsprojekt, das weiter vorangetrieben wird. Montenegro fehlt als letzter Staat der europäischen Mittelmeeranrainer, um das nördliche Mittelmeer zum NATO-Meer zu machen. Dafür schaut man auch großzügig über die Verletzung westlicher Werte hinweg - wie so häufig, wenn es um Interessen und Machtpolitik geht, siehe Türkei.\n\nWir als Linke fordern ein Umdenken. Beenden Sie die NATO-Osterweiterung, und fangen Sie endlich mit einem Kurswechsel an! Beginnen Sie mit einer ehrlichen sicherheitspolitischen Kooperation für den gesamten europäischen Kontinent!\n\nDanke.\"\n5944,stefan-schwartze,\"Danke schön. - Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Unsere Bundesfamilien-ministerin hat bei der Verabschiedung des Quotengesetzes von einem Kulturwandel gesprochen, einem Kulturwandel, der das gesamte Arbeitsleben erfasst und aufbaut auf einem modernen Begriff der Familie; denn das traditionelle Familienmodell mit Vater, Mutter, Kind ist seltener geworden: Von den 8,1 Millionen Familien sind aktuell knapp 20 Prozent Einelternfamilien. Im Jahr 2012 waren 1,6 Millionen Menschen allein für ihre Kinder verantwortlich. In neun von zehn Fällen tragen diese Verantwortung Frauen.\n\nMit diesen Zahlen im Hinterkopf können wir fragen: Wie muss der eingangs erwähnte Kulturwandel aussehen? Ich möchte hier einen konkreten Blick auf das Arbeitsleben richten. Gerade in diesem Lebensbereich offenbaren sich immer wieder alte Rollenbilder - in den Köpfen der Arbeitgeber, aber auch bei manchen Kolleginnen und Kollegen. Immer noch kämpfen Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer, die allein für ihre Kinder sorgen, gegen Vorurteile, bekommen nicht die Anerkennung und Wertschätzung, die sie verdienen.\n\nWir müssen endlich hin zu einem flexibleren Arbeitsleben, in dem Kinder mitgedacht werden, einem Arbeitsleben, in dem Menschen, die um 16 Uhr ihr Kind von der Schule oder der Kita abholen, nicht mehr schräg angeschaut werden, einem Arbeitsleben, in dem wichtige Meetings nicht exakt auf die Schließzeiten der Kitas gelegt werden, einem Arbeitsleben, in dem es keinen Nachteil darstellt, in Personalgesprächen nach flexiblen Arbeitszeitmodellen und Heimarbeit zu fragen, einem Arbeitsleben, in dem die Betreuungszeiten der Kinder bei der Personalplanung der Betriebe positiv mitgedacht werden; denn Alleinerziehende sind Heldinnen und Helden des Alltags.\n\nMehr als zwei Drittel von ihnen sind erwerbstätig - und davon fast die Hälfte in Vollzeit. Wie sollte das auch anders sein? Sie müssen alleine dafür sorgen, dass das Essen auf dem Tisch steht, dass die Schulsachen für das Lernen vorhanden sind und dass die Kinder etwas Ordentliches zum Anziehen haben. Von der Organisation und Finanzierung der Freizeitaktivitäten sei hier einmal noch gar nicht gesprochen.\n\nDiese Heldinnen und Helden, die alleine für ihre Kinder sorgen, werden jedoch nicht entsprechend wahrgenommen, geschweige denn bezahlt. Weiterhin gilt der Status „alleinerziehend“ als Indikator für Armut. Das darf nicht so bleiben.\n\nSolange in unserer Gesellschaft noch immer das Bild vom arbeitenden Mann und von der Frau, die zu Hause für die Kinder sorgt, für normal gehalten wird, solange Menschen, die in Teilzeit arbeiten, im Verhältnis geringer bezahlt werden als ihre Kollegen und Kolleginnen in Vollzeit, solange die Arbeit dieser Menschen also als weniger wert eingeschätzt wird - genau das wird durch ein geringeres Gehalt ausgedrückt -, so lange bleibt der Status „alleinerziehend“ Ausdruck eines Armutsrisikos.\n\nIch möchte konkret bleiben und aufzeigen, welcher Fachkräfteverlust in Kauf genommen wird: Laut der Prognos-Untersuchung von diesem Januar sind Alleinerziehende überwiegend gut ausgebildet. 79 Prozent verfügen über einen mittleren oder einen hohen Bildungsabschluss. Wir brauchen diese Fachkräfte in unserem Land. Deswegen haben wir im Koalitionsvertrag auch konkrete Entlastungen für Alleinerziehende vereinbart. Dafür wird die SPD hier im Parlament hart kämpfen.\n\nWir wollen, wenn möglich rückwirkend zum 1. Januar 2015, den Entlastungsbetrag für Alleinerziehende im Einkommensteuergesetz erhöhen und nach der Kinderzahl staffeln.\n\nHier gilt es, unserer Ministerin für die Verhandlungen mit dem Finanzministerium den Rücken zu stärken.\n\nDen Appell von Paul Lehrieder an den Staatssekretär Kampeter eben fand ich an dieser Stelle ganz hervorragend.\n\nDie Bundesregierung hat aber auch jetzt schon entscheidende Schritte hin zum nötigen Kulturwandel gemacht. Die Frauenquote, der gesetzliche Mindestlohn, die Mietpreisbremse und die Stärkung von Tarifverträgen gehören dazu, und das Entgeltgleichheitsgesetz ist in Arbeit. Diese Gesetze haben wir gegen viele Widerstände durchgesetzt.\n\nDas Ziel ist, eine Arbeitswelt und Strukturen zu schaffen, die es Alleinerziehenden ermöglichen, gleichwertig am Arbeitsleben teilzunehmen - auch gegen den Widerstand antiquierter Betonköpfe. Zu diesen Strukturen gehört auch, dass wir eine Ausbildung in Teilzeit ermöglichen. Diese Ausbildung in Teilzeit darf sich nicht nur auf einige Leuchtturmprojekte beschränken, sondern muss wirklich in der Fläche eine Chance bekommen.\n\nEin letzter struktureller Aspekt darf nicht unerwähnt bleiben: Das, was wir im Bund beschließen, muss in den Ländern und in den Kommunen ankommen. Es müssen vor Ort die finanziellen Spielräume vorhanden sein, um diese Maßnahmen umzusetzen.\n\nDeshalb ist auch die Entlastung der Kommunen so wichtig.\n\nDer von Manuela Schwesig angesprochene Kulturwandel kommt. Wir schaffen den Rahmen dafür. Ich freue mich auf die Beratungen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13189,johannes-fechner,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer auf den Tribünen! Die Pressefreiheit ist eines der wichtigsten Güter unserer Verfassung und eine entscheidende Grundlage für unsere Demokratie. Zur Pressefreiheit gehört, dass keine staatliche Stelle auch nur im Ansatz in irgendeiner Form Einfluss auf journalistische Tätigkeit nimmt. Deshalb darf nicht einmal der Anschein entstehen, eine Behörde würde Druck auf Journalisten ausüben.\n\nWir in der SPD-Fraktion haben die Art der Strafanzeige des Bundesamtes für Verfassungsschutz für einen Fehler gehalten. Deren Zielrichtung war formal gegen Unbekannt; tatsächlich wurden in der Anzeige Journalisten namentlich genannt, und der Verdacht war damit gegen sie gerichtet. Dabei war es offensichtlich, dass keine Strafbarkeit wegen Landesverrats vorliegt; denn es war ohne größere juristische Prüfung erkennbar, dass schon der für die Verwirklichung des Landesverrattatbestands erforderliche Vorsatz, nämlich die Gefahr eines schweren Nachteils für die äußere Sicherheit der Bundesrepublik, fehlte. Ich halte fest, dass diese Anzeige in dieser Form nie hätte gestellt werden sollen und dass das Bundesinnenministerium dieser Strafanzeige niemals hätte zustimmen dürfen. Das hätte von dort gestoppt werden müssen.\n\nIm ersten Antrag der Grünen wird behauptet, dass Journalisten immer wieder Ermittlungen von Strafverfolgungsbehörden ausgesetzt seien. Das kann ich für Deutschland jedenfalls in dem Ausmaß, wie Sie es in Ihrem Antrag darstellen, nicht feststellen. Und es wird eine präzisere Definition gefordert, was ein Staatsgeheimnis ist. Publizistische Veröffentlichungen von Staatsgeheimnissen erfüllen schon heute in der Regel nicht den Straftatbestand des Landesverrates, weil es an der Absicht fehlt, Deutschland zu benachteiligen oder eine fremde Macht zu begünstigen. Das war früher anders. Nach der Spiegel-Affäre haben wir die entsprechende Vorschrift geändert. Damals hätte der einfache Dolus eventualis ausgereicht; seit 1966 bedarf es der Absicht. Wir haben also schon damals Ihrem Anliegen entsprochen.\n\nIch finde, Ihr Vorschlag ist viel zu unbestimmt. Nach Ihrem Vorschlag soll ein Staatsgeheimnis nicht vorliegen, wenn das öffentliche Interesse am Bekanntwerden der Information „das öffentliche Interesse an deren Geheimhaltung erheblich überwiegt“. Was ist „erheblich“?\n\nSo ungenau sollten wir keine Strafnormen formulieren, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nIch finde, die Qualifizierung einer Information als Staatsgeheimnis sollte davon abhängen, ob tatsächlich eine Gefahr für die Sicherheit der Bundesrepublik Deutschland besteht. Sie schlagen vor, dass Voraussetzung für die Strafbarkeit sein soll, dass die Information als Geheim eingestuft ist. Das könnte dazu führen, dass eine Information die äußere Sicherheit der BRD gefährdet, aber aus irgendwelchen Gründen nicht eingestuft ist. Dieses formale Kriterium halte ich deshalb für schwierig.\n\nJa klar. Natürlich.\n\nAus meiner Sicht ist es nach wie vor zu unbestimmt. Es wird auch durch die Nachsätze, die Sie vorgetragen haben - ich habe das auch in Ihrem Antrag gelesen -, nicht besser. Sie eröffnen eine Diskussion über die Erheblichkeitsschwelle dieser wichtigen Norm. Das alles halte ich für zu unbestimmt. Deswegen bin ich von Ihrem Vorschlag nicht überzeugt.\n\nLanger Rede kurzer Sinn: Die Lehre aus der Affäre netzpolitik.org muss sein, dass Sicherheitsbehörden keine offensichtlich haltlosen Strafanzeigen gegen Journalisten stellen. Wo das geplant ist, müssen die Ministerien einschreiten und solche Anzeigen stoppen. Es darf wegen der überragenden Bedeutung der Pressefreiheit in Deutschland nicht einmal der Anschein erweckt werden, dass in Deutschland Sicherheitsbehörden durch Strafanzeigen Druck auf Journalisten ausüben.\n\nIm zweiten Antrag fordern Sie, liebe Kollegen von den Grünen, im Einzelfall das externe Weisungsrecht des Justizministers zu beschränken. Ich halte fest: Sie wollen es nicht abschaffen, wie es der Deutsche Richterbund fordert, sondern Sie wollen es beschränken, und zwar auf „evident rechtsfehlerhafte Entscheidungen“. Auch das ist aus meiner Sicht viel zu unbestimmt. Wie und nach welchen Kriterien wollen Sie das bitte bestimmen? Das Weisungsrecht ist aus meiner Sicht sinnvoll und sollte nicht abgeschafft werden. Der bekannte Rechtsanwalt Gerhard Strate hat es in einem Beitrag für die Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik 2014, wie ich finde, sehr prägnant zusammengefasst. Er verweist zu Recht darauf, dass das Grundgesetz keine Unabhängigkeit der Justiz, sondern „nur“ die Unabhängigkeit der Richter kennt. Den Staatsanwalt zum Teil der dritten Gewalt zu erklären, wäre - so Strate - der Abschied von dem fein austarierten System unserer rechtsstaatlichen Justiz. Das externe Weisungsrecht, von dem sowieso nie Gebrauch gemacht wird - Herr Maas hat es nicht getan, Kollege Sensburg -, sollte zumindest in der Theorie bestehen. Das ist wichtig, weil ansonsten keinerlei parlamentarische Kontrolle der Ermittlungsarbeit möglich ist. Dass das erforderlich ist, hat der Fall Mollath sehr deutlich gezeigt. Letztlich gibt es Argumente für die Abschaffung des Weisungsrechts, und es gibt Argumente für die Beibehaltung. Aber nach meiner Meinung gibt es keine Argumente für Ihren Mittelweg. Ich halte es für zu schwammig und unbestimmt, zu sagen, nur bei evident bedeutsamen Fehlleistungen solle das Weisungsrecht bestehen. Da ist Rechtsunsicherheit vorprogrammiert.\n\nZum Antrag der Linken. Er enthält die berechtigte Forderung, Hinweisgeber besser zu schützen. Ja, das stimmt. Die SPD hatte in der letzten Legislaturperiode genau zu diesem Zweck einen eigenen Gesetzentwurf eingebracht. Auch wir wollen Hinweisgeber besser schützen. Etwa die Lebensmittelskandale in den letzten Jahren wären niemals aufgeklärt worden, wenn es nicht mutige Arbeitnehmer gegeben hätte, die sich gegen ihre Vorgesetzten gestellt und viele persönliche Nachteile in Kauf genommen hätten. Weil sie den Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern dadurch einen großen Dienst erwiesen und dafür gesorgt haben, dass lebensgefährliche Geschäftspraktiken aufgedeckt und verhindert werden konnten, müssen wir den Schutz solcher Hinweisgeber auf jeden Fall verbessern. Da teilen wir Ihr Ziel.\n\nDie Anträge enthalten viele richtige Ansätze, etwa den besseren Schutz der Whistleblower oder die Idee, das Weisungsrecht nur schriftlich zuzulassen. Aber weil sehr viel unklar ist und weil insbesondere bei den Anträgen der Grünen die zentralen Punkte zu unbestimmt sind, habe ich erhebliche Bedenken gegen Ihre Anträge.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n14368,sarah-ryglewski,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr verehrte Damen und Herren! Lieber Herr Radwan, ja, das ist ein guter Tag für Familien und Seniorinnen und Senioren in Deutschland; das ist in der Tat so. Ich finde es richtig, dass wir hier diese Änderungen vornehmen. Wir tragen diese Änderungen gemeinschaftlich, genauso wie wir auch die erste Umsetzung der Wohnimmobilienkreditrichtlinie gemeinsam getragen haben. Aber ich finde, wir müssen aufpassen, dass wir die Debatte nicht verzerren. Es gibt Gründe, warum wir die Regelungen der Wohnimmobilienkreditrichtlinie auch in Deutschland brauchen. Natürlich sind wir nicht Spanien, nicht Griechenland und auch nicht die USA. Aber auch in Deutschland gibt es Gefahren.\n\nEs wurde ja in der Debatte über den ersten Teil des Gesetzentwurfs, als es um die Makroebene ging, deutlich, dass es auch auf einem stabilen Markt schnell Entwicklungen geben kann, die zu einer Blasenbildung führen, eben weil Kredite unsauber vergeben werden oder weil wir in eine Situation kommen, wo Kredite vielleicht nicht mehr so tragfähig sind. Deswegen war es richtig, dass wir die Wohnimmobilienkreditrichtlinie hier auch umgesetzt haben. Wir haben das also nicht nur gemacht, weil es EU-Recht ist, sondern auch, weil es Sinn macht, Leute vor Krediten zu schützen, die sie am Ende nicht mehr bedienen können.\n\n- Danke schön. - Insofern, finde ich, müssen wir schauen, dass wir die Debatte versachlichen.\n\nWir verfolgen hier zwei Zielsetzungen: Wir wollen, dass Menschen, die einen Kredit brauchen und sich leisten können, ihn auch bekommen, aber wir wollen eben auch die Menschen schützen, die möglicherweise im Zuge des Immobilienbooms dazu verlockt werden, sich ein Haus zu kaufen oder zu bauen, und dann am Ende vor dem Nichts stehen. Wir haben hier entsprechende Klarstellungen vorgenommen; darauf muss ich im Detail nicht mehr eingehen.\n\nMir ist es aber noch einmal ganz wichtig, zu sagen, dass wir aufpassen müssen, in der Diskussion nicht aus dem Auge zu verlieren, dass wir jetzt eine Klarstellung vorgenommen haben, damit die Banken anhand klarer Kriterien, die wir in der Verordnung regeln werden, die Kreditwürdigkeit feststellen können. 110-Prozent-Finanzierungen, wie es sie in Deutschland auch gibt, bei denen zusätzlich zum Immobilienkredit noch einmal der Dispo ins Exorbitante erhöht wird, will ich dann aber auch nicht mehr sehen; die passen nicht dazu. Wir haben jetzt klare Kriterien. Das heißt, auch die Banken sind in der Verpflichtung und auch in der Haftung, wenn sie Kredite vergeben, die für Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher nicht tragfähig sind.\n\nMan bekommt natürlich, Herr Kollege Schick, immer viel Applaus draußen, wenn man über Lobbyismus und über die Abgeordneten schimpft, die sich allzu leicht davon beeindrucken lassen. Aber wir haben doch das Ansinnen der Banken in diese Richtung abgelehnt. Wir haben gesagt: Ihr bekommt eure Verordnung, ihr bekommt Rechtssicherheit, aber ihr seid auch in der Verpflichtung, entsprechend vernünftig zu prüfen. Wenn ihr das nicht tut, dann seid ihr in der Haftung. - Das ist richtig, und dazu stehen wir auch.\n\nEinen letzten Satz möchte ich zum Thema Vorfälligkeitsentschädigung sagen. Hier ist die Lage aktuell in der Tat so, dass das Ganze sehr zulasten der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher geht: einmal aufgrund von Intransparenz, zum anderen deswegen, weil die Gebühren, die dafür erhoben werden, teilweise massiv überzogen sind. Hier hätte ich mir deutlich mehr gewünscht. Das habe ich auch im Ausschuss gesagt. Ich glaube, das Problem ist hinlänglich bekannt. Die Arbeitsgruppe hätte hier zügig zu einem Ergebnis kommen sollen. Deswegen finde ich es wichtig - wir müssen da dranbleiben, Herr Kollege Hauer, und dafür sorgen, dass die vielleicht noch ein bisschen Gas geben -, dass wir hier noch in dieser Legislaturperiode zu einem Ergebnis kommen.\n\n- Ich habe nur gesagt, wir als Abgeordnete sollten ein Auge darauf haben, dass die gemeinsame Arbeitsgruppe jetzt auch gründlich arbeitet und zu einem guten Ergebnis kommt,\n\ndamit wir am Schluss einen noch besseren Tag für Familien und für Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher haben.\"\n888,christine-buchholz,\"Herr Kollege Beyer, Sie haben hier über Verantwortung gesprochen. Sie wissen wie ich, dass es in der Nacht vom 3. auf den 4. September 2009 auf Befehl der Bundeswehr einen Angriff gab, durch den in der Region Kunduz bis zu 142 Menschen zu Tode gekommen sind. Sie wissen wie ich, dass es bisher keine angemessene Entschädigung der Opfer gibt, und Sie wissen wie ich, dass es keine Entschuldigung seitens der Bundesrepublik Deutschland gegenüber den Hinterbliebenen und ihren Familien gegeben hat. Ich frage Sie: Was werden Sie tun, damit die Hinterbliebenen endlich eine angemessene Entschädigung bekommen?\n\nHerr Otte, Sie wissen ganz genau, dass meine Kollegin auf der Delegationsreise nach Afghanistan an der Gedenkveranstaltung teilgenommen hat. Das ist auch richtig so; denn die Linke trauert selbstverständlich um jeden einzelnen Soldaten, der in Afghanistan zu Tode gekommen ist.\n\nAllerdings messen wir nicht mit zweierlei Maß. Wir trauern genauso um die Soldatinnen und Soldaten, die im Einsatz auf Ihre politische Entscheidung hin ihr Leben lassen oder traumatisiert, an Seele oder Körper verwundet nach Hause kommen, wie wir auch um die Menschen trauern, die als Zivilistinnen und Zivilisten in Afghanistan gestorben sind - durch ISAF, durch die Bundeswehr. Deswegen haben wir uns selbstverständlich auch an den Gesprächen über ein Gedenken für die gestorbenen Soldaten beteiligt.\n\nGleichzeitig sagen wir aber auch: Wir beteiligen uns nicht an einer Zweiteilung dieses Gedenkens. Wir wollen, dass derer, die den Einsatz durchführen, und der zivilen Opfer gleichermaßen gedacht wird. Wir nehmen zur Kenntnis, dass unsere Vorschläge, beispielsweise der Vorschlag, hier im Bundestag eine Gedenkveranstaltung für die Opfer von Kunduz durchzuführen, von Ihnen vom Tisch gewischt wurden. Von daher: Versuchen Sie nicht, uns so darzustellen, als gingen die Opfer unter denjenigen, die letztendlich die politischen Entscheidungen, die Sie hier vorbereiten, ausführen, an uns vorbei! Auch wir möchten, dass die Soldatinnen und Soldaten unversehrt bleiben. Das Beste ist, Sie holen sie zurück, und zwar sofort. Dann wird nämlich niemand weiter traumatisiert, und dann wird auch niemand weiter zu Tode kommen.\"\n13296,volker-beck,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren!\n\nEs begab sich aber zu der Zeit, dass ein Gebot von dem Kaiser Augustus ausging, dass alle Welt geschätzet würde… Und jedermann ging, dass er sich schätzen ließe, ein jeglicher in seine Stadt.\n\nDa machte sich auf auch Joseph aus Galiläa aus der Stadt Nazareth in das judäische Land zur Stadt Davids, die da heißt Bethlehem, darum, dass er von dem Hause und Geschlechte Davids war,\n\nauf dass er sich schätzen ließe mit Maria, seinem vertrauten Weibe, die war schwanger.\n\nJoseph war Galiläer, und er stammte aus Judäa, eine Zugehörigkeit zu zwei Provinzen, zu zwei Teilen des jüdischen Königreichs, sozusagen ein judäisch-galiläischer Doppelstaatler. Jetzt sagen die Historiker unter Ihnen vielleicht: Ja, aber das alles waren nur römische Provinzen, und es regierte der König Herodes, den wir alle wegen des Kindermordes von Bethlehem kennen. - Ja, dieser König Herodes regierte Judäa, Galiläa und Samaria zusammen. Nach seinem Tod zerfiel das Reich wieder und wurde von drei Königen regiert. Diese Herrschaft ähnelte der von Königin Elisabeth II., die Australien und das Vereinigte Königreich als Staatsoberhaupt regiert. Keiner würde daran zweifeln, dass es hier um zwei Staatsangehörigkeiten geht.\n\nOder nehmen wir Paulus, einen griechisch gebildeten Juden, geboren in Tarsus in Kilikien,\n\nvom israelischen Stamm Benjamin und römischer Staatsbürger. Wir wissen viel über Paulus, zum Beispiel dass ihn seine Identität damals vor Damaskus fast zerrissen hätte, seine Doppelstaatlichkeit allerdings nicht. Paulus hinterlässt uns das, worauf es ankommt - da möchte ich Sie, die Sie das C im Namen Ihrer Partei führen, doch dran erinnern -:\n\nDa nun der Glaube kommen ist, sind wir nicht mehr unter dem Zuchtmeister.\n\nUnter säkularen Aspekten könnte man sagen: Es kommt auf die Menschenrechte, die Gottesebenbildlichkeit oder die Menschenwürde aller an. Paulus gibt uns mit auf den Weg:\n\nHier ist nicht Jude noch Grieche, hier ist nicht Sklave noch Freier, hier ist nicht Mann noch Frau; denn ihr seid allesamt einer in Christus Jesus.\n\nOder: Es kommt am Ende auf die Haltung zu Demokratie, Rechtsstaatlichkeit und Menschenrechten an und nicht darauf, ob man zwei Pässe hat.\n\nVor einigen Jahren hat sich die Bild-Zeitung gefreut: „Wir sind Papst“. Wir konnten aber nur Papst sein, weil wir in unserem Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht hingenommen haben, dass Benedikt XVI. zugleich Staatsbürger des Vatikan und Deutscher war. Ansonsten wären wir nie Papst geworden.\n\nDa sehen wir doch: Doppelstaatlichkeit kann zu Erfolgen eines Landes beitragen und am Ende zum Guten dienen.\n\nAber was haben Sie auf Ihrem CDU-Parteitag beschlossen? Sie haben beschlossen, das, was Sie mit der SPD mühsam vereinbart haben, nämlich den Optionszwang, weitgehend einzudampfen, wenn auch leider nicht völlig abzuschaffen, und das Ganze mit einer Philippika gegen die doppelte Staatsangehörigkeit. Mike Mohring, Thüringer CDU-Landesvorsitzender, sagte dem Münchner Merkur, es sei nötig - das müsse Schwerpunktthema des Wahlkampfes sein -, dass unser Land die uneingeschränkte staatsbürgerliche Loyalität seiner Bürger genießt, und dazu gehöre für ihn die Pflicht, sich für einen Pass entscheiden zu müssen.\n\nSie haben damit 4,3 Millionen Doppelstaatlern in unserem Land den Fehdehandschuh hingeworfen und sie durch den Verdacht der Illoyalität gegenüber unserem Staat und den Werten unseres Grundgesetzes denunziert.\n\nDas spaltet das Land; das treibt auseinander. Das ist so etwas von 19.\u001eJahrhundert-Denken. So kann man die Zukunft im 21. Jahrhundert, in der Zeit der Globalisierung, in der Zeit von Migration, Immigration und Emigration, einfach nicht gestalten.\n\nDieser Beschluss war ja nicht nur ein Tritt in die Kniekehlen der Kanzlerin. Nein, er ist auch eine Chiffre für eine Koalitionsoption Richtung AfD.\n\nWer dieses Thema zum Wahlkampfschlager machen will, weiß, dass er weder bei uns Grünen noch bei der SPD auch nur einen Abgeordneten findet, der dabei mithilft, ein entsprechendes Gesetz über die 50\u001eProzent-Hürde im Deutschen Bundestag zu bringen.\n\nDas ist Spaltung, und das dürfen wir nicht zulassen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir bräuchten eigentlich eine Reform der Staatsangehörigkeit, die nach vorne geht und Einbürgerung erleichtert. Lassen Sie uns damit Schluss machen, dass jedes zweite Kind, das von Ausländerinnen in Deutschland geboren wird, nicht als Deutscher geboren wird. Die Willkommenskultur muss im Kreißsaal beginnen. Wer hier zur Welt kommt als Kind von Eltern, die hier legal sich aufhalten und leben, dem muss von Anfang an die Zugehörigkeit zu unserem Land garantiert werden.\n\nZum Schluss, Frau Präsidentin: Weihnachten, Adventszeit, das ist die Zeit der Besinnlichkeit.\n\nDeshalb fordere ich Sie auf: Besinnen Sie sich. Denken Sie dabei auch an das Kind in der Krippe, in Windeln gewickelt. Besinnen Sie sich auf das C, und lassen Sie die Philippika gegen den Doppelpass einfach stecken.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6091,axel-schafer,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist gut, dass wir heute dieses Thema diskutieren. Es ist wichtig, fast am Ende dieser Debatte darauf hinzuweisen, dass es hier in vielen Punkten Übereinstimmung zwischen den Fraktionen gibt. Deshalb könnte ich eine Reihe von Punkten der Kollegin Göring-Eckardt und des Kollegen Hahn durchaus unterschreiben, die SPD insgesamt sicherlich auch.\n\nEin Punkt wurde aber leider völlig ausgeblendet: So richtig Kritik an Verbänden ist, es darf die Selbstkritik nicht fehlen, also die Kritik am eigenen Parlament. Ich möchte deshalb daran erinnern, dass 1980 der Deutsche Bundestag - von den damals Beteiligten ist niemand mehr im Saal - den dümmsten Beschluss seiner Geschichte gefasst hat: Er hat die Sportverbände veranlasst, die Olympischen Spiele in Moskau zu boykottieren.\n\nDas war dumm, weil wir fast die Einzigen waren, weil der Sport in eine Abhängigkeit geriet und weil dieser Beschluss irreparabel war: Anders als bei einer Rentenreform konnte man nichts mehr ändern, sondern die Spiele waren gelaufen. Dieser dumme Beschluss wurde vier Jahre später durch den ebenso dummen Beschluss der Volkskammer noch getoppt: Wie viele andere Staaten auch boykottierte die DDR die nächsten Spiele in Los Angeles. Das sollte uns eine Lehre sein. Wenn es um das Verhältnis zwischen Sport und Politik geht, sollten wir immer die Balance wahren sowie auch über die eigenen Fehler, Schwächen und Erfahrungen reflektieren. Es war wichtig, dass man auch hierüber einmal redet.\n\nEs ist, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, notwendig, auf Folgendes hinzuweisen: Man darf bei keinem Groß-ereignis - so wie es damals der Sportausschussvorsitzende Peter Danckert in Bezug auf die Fußballweltmeisterschaft in Deutschland sagte -, bei diesen wichtigen und auch wirklich schönen Spielen und Wettkämpfen, zu keinem Zeitpunkt den Eindruck haben, dass in unserem Land - durch die Regeln, die uns die FIFA oder das IOC oktroyiert; die Host-City-Verträge wurden angespro-chen - die Demokratie zum Teil außer Kraft gesetzt wird. Das geht in Demokratien nicht.\n\nDeshalb ist es wichtig, dass wir mit unseren Bewerbungen - das gilt auch für das, was wir jetzt im Hinblick auf Hamburg beschlossen haben - ein gutes Beispiel - auch was unser Verständnis in Europa und mit Europa angeht - geben, ohne dass wir den anderen Teilen der Welt vorschreiben wollen, wie etwas zu sein hat. Vielmehr sollten wir das im positiven Sinne machen.\n\nKollege Grindel, da bin ich anderer Meinung als Sie: Wenn es in vier Städten in Bayern eine Mehrheit gegen Olympische Winterspiele gibt - was ich sehr bedauere -, dann ist das auch Teil der Demokratie, von der wir und mit der wir leben. Der DOSB ist heute der Meinung, dass man eine Vergabe nur noch durchführen kann, wenn das auch von den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern - genauso wie von den parlamentarischen Gremien - akzeptiert wird. Und das ist auch gut so.\n\nDa ich gerade beim Kollegen Grindel war, kann ich nun direkt auf etwas sehr Positives zu sprechen kommen. Man muss auch im Deutschen Bundestag einmal darauf hinweisen, dass das Verhältnis zwischen Sport und Politik keine Einbahnstraße sein darf. Es ist gut und richtig, dass wir ehrenamtlich engagierte Funktionsträger haben. Das sind auf der einen Seite die Kollegen Gienger und Grindel sowie auf der anderen Seite die Kolleginnen Freitag und Engelmeier. Sie stehen in ihren Verbänden mit an der Spitze. Sie sind von ihren Wählerinnen und Wählern demokratisch legitimiert, haben entsprechende Verantwortung und können die Belange des Sports hier kompetent einbringen. Auch das gehört dazu. Des Weiteren gehört dazu, dass wir als Politikerinnen und Politiker unsere Meinung öffentlich klar kundtun, wenn es um streitige Fragen geht.\n\nIch finde es wichtig, dass wir über Menschenrechte in Katar und auch über Diskriminierung in Sotschi reden. Das finde ich richtig. Genauso richtig finde ich es, dass einige von uns - das gilt für mich genauso - sagen: Wenn die FIFA jetzt einen neuen Präsidenten wählt, ist es gut, wenn sich die europäischen Verbände - es sind 54 - abstimmen und einen gemeinsamen Kandidaten kraftvoll unterstützen.\n\nIch sage Ihnen - nach den Erfahrungen der letzten Jahre und Jahrzehnte - aber auch ganz offen: Ich wäre froh, wenn diese Abstimmung zu dem Ergebnis führen würde: Joseph Blatter ist weg. Es ist an der Zeit.\"\n4011,margaret-horb,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Worüber haben wir gerade geredet? Wir diskutierten über legale, aber aggressive Steuervermeidungsmodelle von Unternehmen im internationalen und nationalen Bereich. In Luxemburg sollen fast 350 Unternehmen sogenannte Tax Rulings genutzt haben, um ihre Steuerlast zu senken. Tax Rulings sind verbindliche Zusagen einer Finanzbehörde an ein Unternehmen zur Anwendung des Steuerrechts, also Verwaltungsentscheidungen. Dass diese Tax Rulings jedoch der dringenden Prüfung und Transparenz bedürfen, geht aus Dokumenten hervor, die in der vergangenen Woche veröffentlicht wurden. So weit die Fakten.\n\nDoch in der aktuellen Debatte geht es um weit mehr als um Steuergestaltung. Es geht auch um Fairness und Gerechtigkeit. Es zeichnet eine Marktwirtschaft aus, dass Unternehmen Gewinne erzielen wollen und miteinander im Wettbewerb stehen. Aber ein funktionierender Wettbewerb, egal ob national oder international, braucht Regeln und ein Spielfeld, das niemanden benachteiligt. Ein Fußballspiel wäre höchst ungerecht, wenn der Fußballplatz an einem Hang liegen würde und eine Mannschaft immer bergauf spielen müsste.\n\nDas Gleiche muss auch für den Steuerwettbewerb gelten. Es kann also nicht sein, dass die Global Player verschiedene nationale Steuerrechte gegeneinander ausspielen und sich die Regeln aussuchen, nach denen sie spielen wollen, während die Local Player, also unsere Mittelständler, Handwerksmeister, Bäcker, Metzger vor Ort diese Möglichkeit nicht haben. Die können nämlich keine Tochtergesellschaften auf den Cayman Islands oder in Luxemburg gründen, und - wahrlich und gottlob - das wollen die auch nicht.\n\nBeim Fußball gelten bei der Weltmeisterschaft auch keine anderen Regeln als bei den Spielen in der Bezirksliga. Deshalb muss jeder Bürger und jede Bürgerin, jeder Selbstständige, jeder Gewerbeleistende, jedes Unternehmen, egal ob groß oder klein, nach der steuerlichen Leistungsfähigkeit seinen fairen Beitrag zur Finanzierung unseres Gemeinwesens leisten. Das ist eine Selbstverständlichkeit und sollte eine Selbstverständlichkeit sein.\n\nWenn wir dieses Prinzip nicht durchsetzen, dann schadet das am Ende uns allen. Wir brauchen die Steuereinnahmen. Wir brauchen sie für unsere Straßen in den Städten, Gemeinden und Ortschaften. Wir brauchen die Steuereinnahmen für unsere Kinder, für die Kindergärten, für die Schulen, für die Universitäten, für unser Gesundheitswesen und für vieles mehr.\n\nEs schadet im Übrigen nicht nur dem deutschen Staat, sondern allen Staaten weltweit, wenn sie sich bei der Besteuerung von Großkonzernen gegeneinander ausspielen lassen. Aggressive Steuergestaltung können wir in einer globalisierten Welt nur durch internationale Abstimmung verhindern. Nationale Alleingänge gehören in das 19. Jahrhundert und somit der Vergangenheit an.\n\nKaum jemand treibt den Kampf gegen Steuerhinterziehung und Steuervermeidung so voran wie wir, nicht nur innerhalb der EU, sondern auch im Rahmen der OECD und der G 20 weltweit. Daher geht auch mein Dank ganz besonders an unseren Bundesfinanzminister Dr. Wolfgang Schäuble.\n\nDie Fragen, auf die eine Antwort zu geben ist, sind komplex und alles andere als trivial: Wie verhindern wir, dass Betriebsausgaben in zwei Ländern doppelt abgezogen werden? Wie stellen wir sicher, dass Gewinne dort versteuert werden, wo sie erwirtschaftet werden? Es geht hier um Verrechnungspreise, hybride Gestaltungen und um das Zusammenspiel ganz unterschiedlicher internationaler Steuersysteme. Etwas Komplizierteres im Steuerrecht gibt es kaum.\n\nTrotzdem haben wir in unglaublich schneller Zeit schon erste Ergebnisse erreicht, weitere werden und müssen folgen. Der G-20-Gipfel am kommenden Wochenende in Brisbane wird gerade bei den Tax Rulings für mehr Transparenz sorgen. Zum speziellen Fall dieser Rulings in Luxemburg prüft die Bundesregierung, inwieweit deutsche Unternehmen involviert und betroffen sind. Auch die EU-Kommission sieht sich die Unterlagen sehr genau an, und das ist gut so. Diese Prüfungen werden wir abwarten und daraus unsere Konsequenzen ziehen.\n\nWir haben in diesem Bereich der Steuerpolitik eine ganz klare Linie: Steuerhinterziehung verhindern, Steuervermeidung bekämpfen, internationale Abstimmung mit unseren Partnern, Steuereinnahmen sichern - das Ganze mit Beharrlichkeit und Konsequenz. Diese Linie werden wir weiter fahren.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n7319,maria-klein-schmeink,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich muss sagen: Die Vorrednerin hat eigentlich mehr als deutlich gemacht, woran bisher eine menschenwürdige gesundheitliche Versorgung in Deutschland gescheitert ist.\n\nAls jemand, der aus einer Gegend kommt, die sehr christlich geprägt ist, muss ich auch sagen, dass es mir ein bisschen die Sprache verschlagen hat, hier eine solche Positionierung zu hören, bei der der Mensch, der Flüchtling an und für sich nicht vorkommt. Dass jemand in solch einer menschenverachtenden Art und Weise über die gesundheitliche Versorgung spricht, habe ich selten gehört. Das muss man einmal vorwegsagen.\n\nEs ist auch bezeichnend, dass die Union als ersten Redner nicht einen gesundheitspolitischen Sprecher oder eine gesundheitspolitische Sprecherin gesandt, sondern lieber ihre grundsätzlich restriktive Flüchtlingspolitik deutlich gemacht hat.\n\nWorüber reden wir? Wir reden darüber, dass auch Deutschland grundsätzlich menschenrechtliche Verpflichtungen eingegangen ist. Zu diesen Menschenrechten gehört nach dem Schutz zuallererst die Gewährung von gesundheitlicher Versorgung, wenn der Bedarf da ist.\n\nDiese Form der Verpflichtung haben Sie in keiner Weise auch nur angesprochen.\n\nWer muss Ihnen eigentlich noch ins Gebetbuch schreiben, was alles fehlt? Der Ärztetag hat in diesem Jahr erneut deutlich gemacht, dass die restriktiven Vorgaben des Asylbewerberleistungsgesetzes zu Mangelversorgung, Chronifizierung und einer insgesamt schlechten gesundheitlichen Versorgung führen, die uns oft sogar noch teurer kommt, weil die Flüchtlinge und betroffenen Erkrankten am Ende stationär versorgt werden müssen;\n\ndas ist ein Zustand, den man nicht hinnehmen kann. Auch das Bundesverfassungsgericht hat Ihnen ins Stammbuch geschrieben: Das Menschenrecht ist aus migrationspolitischen Erwägungen nicht zu relativieren. - Das muss hier gelten.\n\nKommen wir einmal zu den einzelnen Fragen, die hier eine Rolle spielen. Wo haben wir denn überall eine Unterversorgung? Wir haben sie im Bereich der Reha, der Prävention, der Kuren, bei notwendigen Anschlussbehandlungen, beispielsweise nach einer Krebsbehandlung, aber auch dort, wo es um ganz schlichte Fragen geht, zum Beispiel bei der Kariesversorgung von Kindern. Nur die Behandlung einer festgestellten Karies wird heute bezahlt, aber nicht das Anrecht auf Prävention. Meine Damen und Herren, dass es so etwas heute noch gibt, kann doch nicht wahr sein.\n\nVon daher ist die Forderung der Linken ganz richtig; wir haben sie auch schon in vielen anderen Anträgen bekräftigt.\n\nWir führen eine Diskussion, an der sich deutlich zeigt, dass die Bevölkerung, die Bundesländer und die Kommunen in ganz vielen Regionen weiter sind als Sie. Sie alle fordern die Einführung der Gesundheitskarte, und zwar auch deshalb, um den Ablauf der Versorgung vernünftiger zu gestalten, nämlich so, dass man eben nicht erst zum Sozialamt rennen muss, um einen Antrag auf eine notwendige Behandlung zu stellen.\n\nDadurch würden alle gewinnen. Wir würden eine unter menschenrechtlichen Gesichtspunkten ordentliche Versorgung gewährleisten, wir würden dafür sorgen, dass die Kommunen entlastet werden, und wir würden gleichzeitig zum Bürokratieabbau beitragen. Dieses Geld könnten wir sehr, sehr gut in eine bessere Versorgung investieren.\n\nWir haben es mit einem Versagen des Gesundheitsministeriums auf ganzer Linie zu tun, weil es längst, seit November letzten Jahres, die Verpflichtung gibt, eine Regelung zu schaffen, die es den Ländern ermöglicht, die Gesundheitskarte, wenn sie es denn wollen - das ist ja bisher an der CSU gescheitert -,\n\neinzuführen. Eine solche Regelung liegt über sechs Monate später immer noch nicht vor. Im Gegenteil: Sie wird beim zweiten Flüchtlingsgipfel wieder einmal zum Verhandlungspfund gemacht. Ich finde das schäbig.\n\nEin weiteres Trauerspiel: Wie sieht es mit der Finanzierung der Traumazentren, der Zentren für Menschen, die Folter erlebt haben und traumatisiert sind, aus? Auch da ist ein Scheitern auf ganzer Linie festzustellen. Von den 21 Zentren, die auf Mittel der EU angewiesen sind und Anträge auf Weiterfinanzierung gestellt haben, haben bisher nur 12 überhaupt Aussicht auf Erfolg. Die psychosoziale Versorgung von Flüchtlingen mit schwersten Traumata ist nicht gesichert; sie findet auf Spendenbasis statt. Auch da müssen wir eine Lösung finden.\n\nWir müssen auch eine Lösung für all diejenigen finden, die mehr als 15 Monate hier sind und Anspruch auf eine Regelversorgung haben; denn sie ist auf die besonderen Bedarfe der Flüchtlinge gar nicht ausgerichtet. Auch da muss das Gesundheitsministerium endlich tätig werden und dafür sorgen, dass das Regelsystem auf diese neue Aufgabe ausgerichtet wird. Das muss passieren.\n\nIch hoffe sehr, dass wir in dieser Hinsicht bis Herbst ordentlich Dampf machen können. Die Bevölkerung, meine Damen und Herren, ist sehr viel weiter hinsichtlich Hilfsbereitschaft und Willkommenskultur. Sie kann all diese Dinge nicht verstehen.\n\nFrau Mattheis, stimmen Sie mit mir überein, dass es durchaus helfen würde und besser wäre, wenn wir die Einschränkungen aus den §§ 4 und 6 des Asylbewerberleistungsgesetzes - danach ist nur eine Mindestgesundheitsversorgung vorgesehen - abschaffen - das wäre doch genau in Ihrem Sinne - und eine Überführung in die Leistungsgewährungen nach den GKV-Finanzierungsgesetzen vornehmen würden, die ja auch nur die notwendige, wirtschaftliche und zweckmäßige Behandlung vorsehen?\n\nHerr Kühne, Sie haben noch einmal betont, wie weitreichend auch in Ihrer Heimatstadt und in Ihrem Wahlkreis die Hilfsbereitschaft der Bevölkerung und die -Unterstützungsbereitschaft sind. Ist es da nicht auch notwendig, dass wir diesen Menschen zeigen, dass wir bei der gesundheitlichen Versorgung, die ein ganz grundlegendes Recht ist - da ist auch unsere Fürsorgepflicht gefragt -, nicht mit zweierlei Maß messen? Müsste man nicht dafür Sorge tragen, dass die gesundheitliche Versorgung nicht auf ein Mindestmaß reduziert wird, wie es das Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz bisher leider vorsieht, und die Gesundheitskarte so einführen, dass das Leistungsspektrum der GKV abgedeckt wird? Es ist ja gesetzlich fest vorgegeben - das wiederhole ich -, dass die GKV an gesundheitlicher Versorgung nur das zur Verfügung stellt, was notwendig, zweckmäßig und wirtschaftlich ist. Wo, bitte schön, machen wir sonst den Schnitt? Was ist denn dann das, was den Asylbewerbern nicht zusteht? Wie wollen Sie das so definieren, dass man nicht nur im Akutfall eine Behandlung bekommt?\n\nWäre das nicht ein weitreichendes Zeichen auch in Ihre Mitgliedschaft hinein?\n\nIch jedenfalls kann für Münster feststellen, dass wir uns im Rat der Stadt über alle Fraktionen hinweg dafür ausgesprochen haben, dass die Gesundheitskarte eingeführt werden soll. Ist das nicht genau das richtige Zeichen, das wir eigentlich brauchten, und müssten Sie da nicht umdenken?\"\n1161,jana-schimke,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Mit einem der heute diskutierten Anträge will die Linke die Ursachen für Altersarmut bekämpfen. Das ist zumindest erklärtes Ziel. Beim Lesen folgt dann ein Ausflug in ein rentenpolitisches Schlaraffenland. Das Rentenniveau soll dauerhaft um mindestens 5 Prozentpunkte auf 53 Prozent ansteigen.\n\n40 Beitragsjahre sollen künftig genügen, um mit 60 Jahren abschlagsfrei in Rente zu gehen, und zusätzlich soll durch eine neue geförderte Altersteilzeit die Frühverrentung vorangetrieben werden.\n\nJetzt fehlt mir leider die Redezeit, Ihnen darzulegen, inwiefern das Rentenniveau unserer demografischen Entwicklung geschuldet ist\n\nund dass wir momentan alles andere als eine neue Frühverrentungswelle brauchen. Doch lassen Sie mich einen zentralen Punkt aufgreifen.\n\nDer letzte Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht der Bundesregierung stellte fest: Die Hauptursache für Armut und auch Altersarmut sind Arbeitslosigkeit und insbesondere Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit. - Wenn wir also ernsthaft über die Risiken von Armut sprechen wollen, dann brauchen wir Lösungen, die definitiv nicht in Ihren Anträgen zu finden sind und die nicht in teuren Versprechungen liegen, die nachfolgende Generationen zu finanzieren haben.\n\nNur eine dauerhafte Beschäftigung kann Altersarmut vorbeugen.\n\nDer demografische Wandel zwingt uns dazu, das Rentenniveau abzusenken.\n\nDas ist die richtige Antwort auf die über Jahrzehnte sinkende bzw. stagnierende Geburtenrate und eine älter werdende Gesellschaft. Was wäre unser Rentensystem, basierend auf dem Generationenvertrag und der Umlagefinanzierung, denn sonst noch wert? Wenn immer weniger Junge für immer mehr Ältere in die Rentenkasse einzahlen, dann gibt es keine sinnvollere Alternative, als Anpassungen auch beim Rentenniveau vorzunehmen.\n\nWas wir aber tun können und auch tun müssen, ist, über die Familienfreundlichkeit in unserer Gesellschaft zu sprechen. Sinkende Geburtenraten kommen schließlich nicht von ungefähr und können unser Rentensystem auf den Kopf stellen. Hier hat die Union mit dem Ausbau der Kinderbetreuung, der Schaffung von Mehrgenerationenhäusern sowie dem Elterngeld Entscheidendes getan. Auch die Wirtschaft hat längst erkannt, dass man gute Arbeitskräfte nur gewinnt, wenn man sie entsprechend entlohnt und ihnen gleichzeitig gute Rahmenbedingungen bei der Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf bietet.\n\nWir müssen aber auch darüber sprechen, was die gesetzliche Rente künftig leisten kann und leisten soll und wie wir die private und die betriebliche Altersvorsorge weiter stärken können.\n\nWenn ich in meinem Wahlkreis in Schulen, Jugendklubs und Sportvereinen unterwegs bin, weise ich die Jugendlichen immer auf Folgendes hin: Heute kommt es nicht mehr nur auf einen guten Schulabschluss und eine solide Ausbildung an. Genauso wichtig ist es, frühzeitig in die Altersvorsorge zu investieren und sie im Blick zu haben.\n\nDiese Verantwortung tragen junge Menschen sich selbst gegenüber, und unsere Aufgabe ist es, ihnen dafür den notwendigen Spielraum einzuräumen. Eine Rentenpolitik, der die Weitsicht fehlt und die neue Belastungen schafft, ist dafür der denkbar schlechteste Weg.\n\nEines sollte in der heutigen Debatte aber auch noch gesagt werden: Der heutigen Rentnergeneration geht es gut. Nur 2,6 Prozent der über 65-Jährigen sind auf die Grundsicherung im Alter angewiesen. Wir wissen auch, dass insbesondere in Ostdeutschland die Menschen trotz Abschlägen früher in Rente gehen - und das aus gutem Grund; denn gerade Frauen waren und sind dort öfter und länger erwerbstätig. Mit Blick auf die Debatte zum Internationalen Frauentag, die soeben stattgefunden hat, sollte deshalb auch die Integration von Frauen in den Arbeitsmarkt zentraler Punkt unser Sozial- und Arbeitsmarktpolitik sein.\n\nAbschließend noch ein Letztes: In keiner anderen Altersgruppe ist die Zahl der Erwerbstätigen zwischen 2001 und 2011 so deutlich angestiegen wie bei den Erwerbstätigen im Rentenalter. Grund für diesen Anstieg ist aber nicht etwa Altersarmut; viele Rentnerinnen und Rentner fühlen sich fit und haben die Bereitschaft, etwas zu tun. Was spricht also dagegen, die Rahmenbedingungen auch dafür weiter zu optimieren? Das wäre ein denkbarer Weg, die Vielfalt von Interessen, von Lebensläufen und von Berufswegen abzubilden.\n\nDeshalb habe ich mich auch mit Interesse Ihren Vorschlägen zum flexiblen Renteneintritt gewidmet. Doch was die Linke anbietet, ist nichts weiter, als flexible Übergänge in die Frühverrentung zu fördern. Die eigentlichen Potenziale bei der Aktivierung und Beschäftigung älterer Arbeitnehmer - und wohlgemerkt auch die darin liegende Notwendigkeit für Innovation in Deutschland, für soziale Sicherheit und Wohlstand - werden darin nicht aufgezeigt. Wer Verantwortung in Deutschland tragen will, muss mehr bieten.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n542,binski-weiß,\"Frau Präsidentin! Herr Minister! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In den letzten Jahren hat die Verbraucherpolitik der Bundesregierung unter ihren falschen -Voraussetzungen gelitten; denn auf dem Markt der schwarz-gelben Vergangenheit bewegten sich ausschließlich mündige Verbraucher. Bei der Kollegin Mortler ist das auch hängen geblieben, wie wir vorhin gehört haben. Das sind nämlich solche, die jederzeit und überall in der Lage sind, informierte und rein rationale Konsumentscheidungen zu treffen, ob beim Zehnminuteneinkauf im Supermarkt, im Internet oder auch beim Abschluss eines Versicherungsvertrages. Dem widersprechen jedoch die Ergebnisse der Verbraucherforschung. Wir wissen alle, alle, wie wir hier sitzen, aus unserem eigenen Alltag, dass zwischen diesem Ideal und der Realität eine große Lücke klafft.\n\nDie Verbraucherpolitik gehört zu den Bereichen, in denen es mit der neuen Bundesregierung die größten Neuerungen geben wird. Damit meine ich jetzt weniger die neue Ressortaufteilung. Ich sehe, Herr Landwirtschaftsminister, Ihr Kollege Verbraucherminister ist auch da. Ich meine damit, dass die Politik auf eine neue Basis gestellt wird. Das gilt unabhängig davon, ob es um Lebensmittel geht, um die digitale Welt oder um Finanzdienstleistungen. Ich bin sehr froh, dass unsere neue Bundesregierung im Koalitionsvertrag den realen Verbraucher, die reale Verbraucherin mit ihren unterschiedlichen Voraussetzungen, Interessen und Problemen im Blick hat. Damit können wir gemeinsam eine Verbraucherpolitik gestalten, die bei den Menschen ankommt und ihren Alltag erleichtert.\n\nEs ist eine Verbraucherpolitik mit dem Ziel, für Schutz zu sorgen, wo Verbraucher sich nicht selbst schützen können - dafür haben wir genügend aktuelle Beispiele -, sie zu unterstützen durch gezielte und umfassende Information, Beratung und Bildung, Trans-parenz zu schaffen durch Vergleichbarkeit, Möglichkeiten zu schaffen für eine effektive Rechtsdurchsetzung. Zusammengefasst: Dieser Verbraucherpolitik geht es -darum, Interessen, Bedürfnisse und Vorbehalte zu berücksichtigen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Sie haben bestimmt Verständnis dafür, dass ich, wie meine Kollegin Ute Vogt, noch ein Wort zur Agrogentechnik verliere. Ute Vogt hat bereits darauf hingewiesen, dass wir diese Technologie nicht brauchen.\n\nHerr Bundeslandwirtschaftsminister, Ihr Haus hat erst im Dezember eine Studie veröffentlicht, die Ihr Haus in Auftrag gegeben hatte. Diese Studie zeigte, dass 83 Prozent der Menschen diese Technik ablehnen. Deshalb ist es für uns klar, dass die Zulassung der gentechnisch veränderten Maislinie 1507 in Brüssel abgelehnt werden muss.\n\nMit dem Koalitionsvertrag haben wir ein gutes, aber auch ein ehrgeiziges Programm, bei dem wir die Bundesregierung nach Kräften unterstützen wollen, zumal, wie wir wissen, gerade die Verbraucherpolitik sich -dadurch auszeichnet, dass das Leben täglich neue Tagesordnungspunkte auf die Agenda setzen kann. Ich sage „das Leben“ und erinnere an Schufa, an ADAC oder an einen neuen Lebensmittelskandal. Wie wir wissen, kommt der nächste bestimmt.\n\nDie im Koalitionsvertrag skizzierten Vorgaben ergeben eine anspruchsvolle Agenda, aus der ich wegen der Kürze der Zeit nur wenige Punkte herausgreifen kann. So gilt es insbesondere, im Lebensmittelbereich verlorengegangenes Vertrauen vom Verbraucher zurückzugewinnen. Ich sehe das nicht so optimistisch, wie es einige Vorrednerinnen und Vorredner formuliert haben. Denn Anlässe zum Misstrauen gab es beispielsweise durch die großen Lebensmittelskandale wie Gammelfleisch oder Dioxin im Ei. Allzu oft fühlen sich Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher von Verpackungsaufmachungen oder von Bezeichnungen hinters Licht geführt. Das Internetportal lebensmittelklarheit.de zeigt Fälle, in denen die Erwartungen von Verbrauchern an Produkte nicht erfüllt wurden.\n\nWir finden auch, dass die Verbraucher endlich eine echte Wahlfreiheit haben müssen, zum Beispiel durch eine EU-weit verpflichtende Kennzeichnung für Produkte von Tieren, die mit gentechnisch veränderten Pflanzen gefüttert worden sind.\n\nDie Lebensmittelüberwachung soll besser vernetzt und ihre Standards sollen vereinheitlicht werden. Außerdem soll eine sachgerechte Kontrolldichte für mehr -Sicherheit sorgen. Im Verbraucherinformationsgesetz - dessen Umsetzung liegt ja in Ihrem Haus, Herr Minister Friedrich - und im Lebensmittel- und Futtermittelgesetzbuch sollen Änderungen endlich eine rechtssichere Veröffentlichung von Verstößen ermöglichen. Ich finde, Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher haben ein Recht darauf, zu erfahren, in welchen Betrieben geschmuddelt wird und welche Betriebe vorbildlich sind.\n\nUnser Ziel - ich denke, unser aller Ziel - ist ein verbraucherfreundlicher, transparenter Markt, auf dem sichere und gute Produkte unter fairen und nachhaltigen Bedingungen hergestellt und angeboten werden. Dafür werden wir uns einsetzen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5587,volker-ullrich,\"Vielen Dank. - Herr Kollege Koenigs, Sie haben gerade gesagt, dass der Kollege Peter Tauber von Menschenrechten nichts hielte.\n\nWie kommen Sie auf diese absurde Behauptung, und woher haben Sie dieses Zitat?\"\n12601,marlene-mortler,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Wenn es um regionale Erzeugung, Verarbeitung und Vermarktung geht, dann haben Sie mich sicherlich auf Ihrer Seite, insbesondere heute, wenn es um transparente regionale Kennzeichnung geht. Ich sage aber Ihnen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, gleich vorweg: Wer so respektlos über Landwirtschaft redet wie Sie in den letzten Wochen und Monaten, hat es nicht verdient, dass wir seinem Antrag zustimmen.\n\n- Ihr wisst genau, was ich meine. Die Botschaft ist angekommen.\n\nWo stehen wir in Sachen Regionalvermarktung? In Bayern gibt es 175 Bauernmärkte. Die Hälfte aller Bauernmärkte befindet sich also in Bayern. In Bayern gibt es zudem über 50 zentrale Bauernladengeschäfte, 4 000 Direktvermarkterinnen und Direktvermarkter sowie viele Regionalinitiativen, die bei den Verbrauchern hohes Vertrauen genießen. Der Verbraucher hat also schon heute die Wahl bzw. die Chance, dieses Angebot zu nutzen und kleine Strukturen zu unterstützen. Bayern unterstützt außerdem mit einem breiten Maßnahmenpaket ein kostenloses Internetportal, das über Bauernmärkte, Regionalinitiativen und Gastroportale, also über die Zusammenarbeit von Gastronomen und Anbietern regionaler Produkte, informiert.\n\nDamit bin ich bei Ihrem Antrag.\n\nWie wir wissen, ist das Regionalfenster damals von Ilse Aigner eingeführt worden. Das war ein guter Ansatz und ein wichtiger Schritt in Richtung Kennzeichnung.\n\nIch gebe gerne zu, dass es sich um ein reines Herkunftskennzeichen handelt. Es macht keinerlei Aussagen zur Qualität; auch das gehört zur Wahrheit.\n\nIch gebe Ihnen recht, wenn Sie darauf hinweisen, dass der Anteil regionaler Rohstoffe bislang zu niedrig ist. Im Moment beträgt er 51 Prozent. Sie fordern 70 Prozent. Da haben Sie mich durchaus auf Ihrer Seite. Das Institut für Demoskopie in Allensbach hat kürzlich veröffentlicht, dass der Anteil der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher, die sich für nachhaltige Produktion aussprechen und der Regionalität eine große Bedeutung beimessen, im Vergleichszeitraum von 2009 bis 2015 von 42 auf 51 Prozent gestiegen ist. Zu ähnlichen Erkenntnissen kommt der Ernährungsreport des BMEL. Danach legen 76 Prozent der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher Wert auf regionale Lebensmittel.\n\nWir haben die Vorteile gehört: kurze Wege, mehr Frische und Vielfalt sowie Transparenz. Aber Hand aufs Herz: Wer von uns kauft denn regelmäßig regionale Produkte ein? Bin ich die Einzige?\n\nEs gibt noch immer eine große Kluft zwischen Reden und Handeln. Deshalb sind wir in Bayern einen eigenen Weg gegangen. Es gibt in Bayern ein umfassendes System mit zwei Siegeln, die aussagekräftig und transparent sind. Sie sind transparent, weil die Qualitäts- und Herkunftssicherungssysteme sichtbar sind. Das Siegel „Geprüfte Qualität - Bayern“ und das bayerische Biosiegel ermöglichen es dem Verbraucher, zu beweisen, dass er es mit regionalen Produkten ernst meint; das ist überfällig.\n\nEs wird vom LEH stark nachgefragt. Es wird auch vom Verbraucher stark nachgefragt. Das ist zwar eine Momentaufnahme. Aber für mich ist wichtig: Es ist klar definiert, objektiv neutral, es ist kontrolliert, und die Herkunft und die Verarbeitung der Rohstoffe müssen durchgängig und zu 100 Prozent aus Bayern kommen.\n\nIch weiß, dass es das auch in anderen Bundesländern gibt, allerdings längst nicht flächendeckend. Deshalb ist meine Forderung: Erstens. Jedes Bundesland soll erst einmal seine Hausaufgaben machen. Zweitens. Es ist sicherlich an der Zeit, dass das BMEL die Weiterentwicklung des Regionalfensters wissenschaftlich überprüft\n\n- nicht mit Gelächter; da kommt man zu keinem guten Ergebnis -, und zwar seriös. Auf dieser Basis werden wir entscheiden, inwieweit wir dieses Regionalfenster verbessern. Aber das muss dann mit Respekt und nicht mit Klamauk geschehen.\n\nIch bedanke mich für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n8529,christoph-bergner,\"Herr Präsident! Herr Generalsekretär! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Als letzter Redner einer solchen Debatte steht man in der Pflicht, die eigenen Aussagen in das Licht des schon Gesagten zu rücken. Ich will dies versuchen.\n\nIch stelle fest: Alle Fraktionen des Deutschen Bundestages begrüßen den Vorsitz Deutschlands in der OSZE im nächsten Jahr. Ich würde aus dieser Begrüßung auch gerne eine Unterstützung der Bundesregierung ableiten.\n\nZweiter Punkt. Wir alle wissen - deshalb ist mir diese Unterstützung so wichtig -, dass dieser Vorsitz mit einer ungewöhnlichen Verantwortung verbunden ist - ungewöhnlich deshalb, weil wir uns in kritischen Zeiten befinden. Der Bundesaußenminister hat an anderer Stelle von stürmischen Zeiten gesprochen, in denen wir die Kommandobrücke betreten. Die Zeiten sind konfliktbeladen. Zu diesem Schluss kommen wir, wenn wir den Raum außerhalb der OSZE betrachten. So wird die Forderung an die OSZE erhoben, im Rahmen des Outreachings konfliktregulierend über den eigenen Raum hinaus tätig zu werden. Die Konferenz von Jordanien, die der Bundesaußenminister erwähnte, zeigt, dass wir in diesem Zusammenhang aufgrund der Kooperationserfahrungen der OSZE durchaus entsprechende Angebote machen können.\n\nNoch kritischer in diesen unruhigen Zeiten ist die Krise innerhalb der OSZE. Frau Keul hat die Parlamentarische Versammlung von Helsinki, die eigentlich eine Jubiläumsveranstaltung war, in Erinnerung gerufen, die tatsächlich symptomatisch für die innere Krise der OSZE gewesen ist. Wer die mehrheitlich beschlossenen Texte liest, der findet Stichworte wie zum Beispiel „tiefe Missbilligung der russischen Aggression gegen die Ukraine einschließlich der Annexion und Besetzung der Krim“ oder „Bedauern über den Austritt Russlands aus dem Vertrag über konventionelle Streitkräfte“, um nur zwei Beispiele zu nennen.\n\nVielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Ich möchte dazu auffordern, dass das, was ich als innere Krise der OSZE bezeichne, von uns ernst genommen wird, und zwar in dem Sinne, dass wir uns darüber klar werden, dass es hier um die geistigen Fundamente der OSZE geht. Wir werden in wenigen Tagen, am 21. November, den 25. Jahrestag der Charta von Paris für ein neues Europa als zentrales Grundsatzdokument der jüngeren OSZE-Geschichte begehen können. Wenn wir da lesen, dass die Vision eines Europas aus lauter demokratischen Staaten von Vancouver bis Wladiwostok gepflegt wurde, und das mit der heutigen Wirklichkeit vergleichen, dann haben wir festzustellen, dass sich ganz offensichtlich Risse in den Wertgrundlagen zeigen. Diese dürfen wir nicht ignorieren.\n\nViele Mitgliedstaaten sind beim Aufbau nachhaltiger demokratischer Strukturen gescheitert. Die Sicherung der Menschenrechte hat sich als nicht überall durchsetzbar erwiesen. Von prominentester Bedeutung ist die Entwicklung in der Russischen Föderation, wo nach meinem Eindruck Systemerhalt und Systemstärkung eindeutig Priorität vor den persönlichen Rechten der Bürger bekommen haben und wo im Interesse eines starken Staates das Wohl des Einzelnen auf grundsätzliche Weise der Staatsräson untergeordnet ist. Vor diesem Hintergrund brauchen wir uns nicht darüber zu wundern, dass - ausgehend von einem solchen Bild eines starken Staates - auch die Einhaltung völkerrechtlicher Normen dem Interesse des starken Staates untergeordnet wird. Auf diese Weise würde ich gerne die gegenwärtigen Konflikte innerhalb der OSZE sehen, nicht um die OSZE zu schwächen, sondern um den Stärkungsprozess der OSZE, der mit der deutschen Ratspräsidentschaft verbunden sein soll, auf ein ehrliches Fundament zu stellen.\n\nDie Kunst des deutschen OSZE-Vorsitzes wird deshalb darin bestehen, dass wir auf der einen Seite für die Stärkung der OSZE - das bedeutet für mich die Stärkung aller Dimensionen der OSZE - eintreten und auf der anderen Seite die Risse und die Konflikte betreffend die Wertgrundlagen der OSZE nicht bagatellisieren und nicht ignorieren.\n\nNur auf ehrlichen Wertgrundlagen werden wir in der Lage sein, eine wirkliche Stärkung der OSZE herbeizuführen. Dies ist keine einfache Aufgabe. Ich wünsche unserer Bundesregierung und unserem Bundesaußenminister dafür viel Erfolg.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n11052,daniela-kolbe,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Zum Abschluss der Sitzungswoche diskutieren wir drei Anträge der Fraktion Die Linke. Deren Inhalt war bereits mehrfach Thema hier im Plenum. Nichtsdestotrotz freue ich mich, dass wir dieses Thema erneut diskutieren. Es ist ja für viele Menschen von großer Bedeutung.\n\nSie haben einen Antrag zum Thema Mütterrente in Ostdeutschland und zum niedrigeren Rentenwert eingebracht. In den zwei anderen Anträgen geht es um Gruppen, die durch die Rentenüberleitung, also die Zusammenführung der beiden Rentensysteme in Ost und West, Regelungen verloren haben, mit denen sie im DDR-Rentenrecht bessergestellt worden waren, und zwar aus nachvollziehbaren Gründen, nämlich wegen der Gesundheitsgefährdung und der Belastungen der Betroffenen bei der Arbeit. Zum einen sind das die Bergleute in der Braunkohleveredlung und zum anderen die Beschäftigten im Gesundheits- und Sozialwesen der DDR.\n\nViele hier im Plenum, die an diesem Freitagnachmittag noch da sind, haben schon zahlreiche Gespräche mit Betroffenen geführt. Auch ich habe das getan und werde das weiterhin tun. Bei aller Sympathie für die Anliegen plädiere ich für eine sehr ehrliche Debatte. Diese ehrliche Debatte führt für uns als Sozialdemokraten dazu, dass wir den drei Anträgen in der vorliegenden Form nicht zustimmen können, sondern sie ablehnen werden.\n\nDas will ich kurz ausführen, zunächst zur Mütterrente. Die Verbesserungen bei der Mütterrente, also die Einführung des zusätzlichen Rentenpunktes, war für diese Große Koalition ein Riesenerfolg.\n\nGut, wir als SPD hätten diese Maßnahme gerne anders finanziert; das sei auch jetzt bei diesem Thema noch einmal erwähnt. Aber es bleibt ein großer Erfolg.\n\nDer von der Linken beschriebene Unterschied kommt dadurch zustande, dass wir nach wie vor unterschiedliche Rentenwerte haben: Der Rentenwert in Westdeutschland liegt höher als der in Ostdeutschland. In Ostdeutschland haben wir dafür einen Höherwertungsfaktor; damit ist ein Rentenpunkt leichter zu erwerben.\n\nWir sagen deshalb: Wir wollen die pauschal bewerteten Versicherungszeiten jetzt nicht unmittelbar höher bewerten. Wir hatten das in unserem Regierungsprogramm stehen, haben uns damit aber nicht durchsetzen können. Vielmehr wollen wir jetzt den Weg gehen - darauf konnten wir uns mit unserem Koalitionspartner verständigen -, die Rentenwerte weiter anzunähern, also die Angleichung der Rentensysteme zu erreichen.\n\nAber natürlich, wenn es schnell geht.\n\nDanke für die Zwischenfrage. - Erstens will ich klarstellen: Für uns als SPD ist die Erziehung von Kindern gleich viel wert, egal ob im Osten, Westen, Norden oder Süden dieses Landes.\n\nDeswegen wollen wir diese Angleichung hinbekommen.\n\nZweitens. Iris Gleicke hat meines Wissens die Unterschriften entgegengenommen. Wir als SPD sind als Regierungsfraktion Adressat dieser Forderung und fühlen uns auch verpflichtet, uns dafür einzusetzen. Wir hatten das in unser Regierungsprogramm aufgenommen. Wir hatten vorgeschlagen, die pauschal bewerteten Versicherungszeiten sofort anzugleichen, haben uns aber damit nicht durchsetzen können. Das ist in einer parlamentarischen Demokratie manchmal so.\n\nWir gehen deswegen einen anderen Weg, nämlich den der Angleichung der Rentensysteme. An dieser Stelle will ich das mit Blick auf die Union ein bisschen deutlicher formulieren: Da auch unser Koalitionspartner gute Mütter und Väter in seinen Reihen hat, haben wir uns darauf verständigt, die Angleichung der Rentensysteme in Ost und West hinzubekommen. Genau das werden wir auch tun. Dieses Jahr geht es los. In diesem Sinne werden wir genau die Forderung erfüllen, dass die Erziehungszeiten in Ost und West gleich viel wert sein müssen.\n\nSie haben einen zweiten Aspekt zum Thema Mütterrenten angesprochen, und zwar den Übergangszuschlag bei den sehr hochbetagten Frauen, der dazu führt, dass diese Frauen sowohl von den Änderungen bei der Mütterrente nicht unbedingt profitieren - je nachdem, wie hoch der Zuschlag ist - und sie auch so lange nicht von Rentenerhöhungen profitieren, wie der Zuschlag diese Erhöhungen übersteigt.\n\nWir haben die Rentenreform 2014 ganz bewusst im Rahmen des bestehenden Rentenrechts gestaltet. Das führt an der einen oder anderen Stelle tatsächlich dazu, dass Menschen, die sich etwas von der Mütterrente erhofft haben, nicht so massiv in ihren Genuss kommen wie erwartet. Aber es war eine bewusste Entscheidung. Entweder erkennt man die Wirkungsweise des Rentensystems an, oder man macht für alles und jedes eine Ausnahme. Wir haben uns an der Stelle dazu entschieden, in der Rentensystematik zu bleiben und eine ehrliche Debatte zu führen.\n\nWas die Anträge zu den Bergleuten und den Beschäftigten im Gesundheitswesen angeht, sind die Hintergründe schon ausgeführt worden. Wie bei den meisten anderen Fällen ist es so, dass die Sachverhalte vor Gerichten ausverhandelt sind. Aber Sie haben natürlich recht: Politische Lösungen sind möglich. Da gibt es unterschiedliche Ansätze.\n\nDie Linke sagt: Wir regeln jede Gruppe einzeln und geben den Forderungen nach. - Das hat den Nachteil, dass man an verschiedenen Stellen zu Ungerechtigkeiten gegenüber bestimmten westdeutschen Gruppen oder auch anderen ostdeutschen Gruppen kommt.\n\nWir als SPD haben einen anderen Ansatz. Wir wollen einen Härtefallfonds auflegen. Denn - da bin ich, glaube ich, anderer Auffassung als Kollegin Schimke - es sind reale Ungerechtigkeiten entstanden; es sind massive Härtefälle entstanden, weil sich Menschen auf das DDR-Rentenrecht verlassen haben und dann durch Wegfall von Regelungen sozial wirklich heruntergefallen sind. Wir wollen deswegen einen steuerfinanzierten Härtefallfonds auflegen für diejenigen, für die durch die Rentenüberleitung besondere soziale Härten entstanden sind. Das wird einige Bergleute betreffen, aber noch mehr die Krankenschwestern oder die in der DDR geschiedenen Frauen, die alle davon profitieren können.\n\nDas ist ein Ansatz, der sozialen Frieden schafft und der vor allen Dingen keine neuen Ungerechtigkeiten hervorruft. Für diesen Fonds streiten wir.\n\nAbschließend will ich noch einmal sagen: Wir als SPD stehen zu unserer Verantwortung. Wir stellen uns auch immer wieder der Debatte mit Betroffenen und auch hier im Plenum. Wir wollen - das ist Punkt eins - die zügige Rentenangleichung in Ost und West. Das steht im Koalitionsvertrag, und das wissen wir als SPD auch. Darauf werden wir pochen, und das werden wir ganz genau begleiten.\n\n- Aber im Koalitionsvertrag steht ein Datum, das noch in der Zukunft liegt. Das werden Sie zugestehen, Herr Kurth, dass wir an der Stelle noch nicht im Verzug sind. Richtig?\n\nUnd wir wollen - Punkt zwei - einen Härtefallfonds für die Gruppen, die durch die Rentenüberleitung gravierende Nachteile erfahren haben. Das steht nicht im Koalitionsvertrag. Da konnten wir uns nicht durchsetzen. Für uns bleibt das Thema dennoch auf der Agenda, und wir werden weiter dafür kämpfen und streiten, auch streiten, dass wir dafür Mehrheiten gewinnen können.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5960,sabine-leidig,\"Herr Präsident! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Das Problem haben wir gerade schon gehört: lange Zulassungszeiten für Schienenfahrzeuge. Dass das Problem schon weitgehend gelöst ist, haben wir ebenfalls gehört. Da es unterschiedliche Schuldzuweisungen gibt, möchte ich feststellen: Die Bahnindustrie sagt, das Eisenbahn-Bundesamt sei schuld. Das Eisenbahn-Bundesamt erklärt, dass die Prüfunterlagen der Bahnunternehmen oft nicht rechtzeitig vorliegen, nicht vollständig sind oder in sich nicht schlüssig sind, und bemängelt außerdem, dass nicht genug Personal vorhanden ist, um schnell zu prüfen, wie es verlangt wird.\n\nIch glaube, dass es ein noch tieferes Problem gibt, das ein bisschen aus den Augen geraten ist. In früheren Zeiten gab es eine ganz enge Zusammenarbeit zwischen der Bahnindustrie und der - damals noch - Deutschen Bundesbahn. Diese Zusammenarbeit bot ausreichend Zeit für lange Testphasen, in denen neue Züge auf der Schiene, also in der Praxis, ausprobiert wurden. Man hat gemeinsam geschaut, was wo verbessert werden muss.\n\nHeute steht die Deutsche Bahn AG als Konzern den Fahrzeugherstellern gegenüber. Jede Seite will Gewinn machen, muss Gewinn machen. Es passiert immer wieder, dass die Züge, die bereitgestellt werden, nicht alle Anforderungen erfüllen. Wir haben in der Anhörung den Ausdruck gehört, dass die Fahrzeuge beim Kunden reifen wie Bananen. Aber Schienenfahrzeuge - Eisenbahnen, Straßenbahnen - sind keine Bananen, und deshalb muss man andere Maßstäbe anlegen.\n\nDie Bundesregierung schlägt nun nicht vor, dass wie bisher einzelne spezielle Aufträge vom Eisenbahn-Bundesamt an Spezialwerkstätten vergeben werden können - das wäre nicht so schlimm -, sondern Sie schlagen vor, dass das Zulassungsverfahren insgesamt weitgehend privatisiert wird und dass das EBA am Schluss nur noch den Stempel draufdrückt. Dazu sagen wir Nein.\n\nDie Unternehmen, die Sie ins Spiel bringen, sind gewinnorientiert und müssen bei ihrer Arbeit 6 bis 10 Prozent Gewinnmarge erwirtschaften. Das kann man ihnen gar nicht vorwerfen. So sind sie konstruiert. Deshalb wird die Arbeit entweder nachher um diesen Gewinn teurer, oder die Anbieter drücken die Kosten, indem sie beim Personal sparen. Wir kennen dieses Problem. Wir haben es übrigens auch bei der Deutschen Bahn AG erlebt. Gerade für diese sicherheitsrelevanten Bereiche ist es eine gefährliche Konstruktion, wenn an solchen Dingen gespart wird. Deshalb lehnen wir eine Privatisierung dieser eigentlich hoheitlichen Aufgabe ab.\n\nMan kann auch die Zulassung von Automobilen nicht unbedingt als gutes Vorbild nehmen; denn Sie alle wissen, dass sich die Rückrufaktionen auch der großen Autohersteller in den letzten Jahren häufen. Wir wissen, dass die immer komplexere Technik eine besonders sorgfältige und eine unabhängige Prüfung notwendig macht, ohne Zeit- und Kostendruck.\n\nDeshalb fordern wir, dass das Eisenbahn-Bundesamt eine starke Rolle als Aufsicht für die Deutsche Bahn AG haben und behalten muss und dass deshalb auch mehr Personal beim Eisenbahn-Bundesamt eingestellt werden muss. Wir brauchen ebenfalls eine Veränderung der Abläufe. Die Beschäftigten im EBA wissen sehr genau, wo es klemmt. Es wäre sehr sinnvoll, viel stärker mit den Beschäftigten aus der Praxis zusammenzuarbeiten.\n\nIch bin gespannt, Kollege Burkert von der SPD, ob Sie uns in dieser Linie unterstützen. Vor zwei Jahren, als Sie als Vorstandsmitglied der Eisenbahn- und Verkehrsgewerkschaft an den früheren Verkehrsminister geschrieben haben, haben Sie genau diese Position vertreten. Ich glaube, dass sie richtig ist und war.\n\nIch will noch einige Vorschläge machen, wie man die Probleme lösen kann und neue Züge und Straßenbahnen schneller und besser auf die Schiene bringt:\n\nErstens - das sagte ich bereits -: mehr Personal für das EBA.\n\nZweitens soll die Bahn wieder enger mit den Zugherstellern zusammenarbeiten, anstatt gegen sie zu arbeiten. Es gibt schon eine Tendenz in diese Richtung: Beim neuen ICx wird es besser gemacht.\n\nDrittens. Es muss ausreichend Zeit zwischen der Bestellung und der Auslieferung von Zügen bleiben. Bei Ausschreibungen für den öffentlichen Nahverkehr muss ein solcher Zeitplan möglich sein, das heißt, die Finanzierung muss sichergestellt sein.\n\nSchließlich könnte man auch die Sonderwünsche der Nahverkehrsträger ein bisschen reduzieren. Warum muss die Zugtoilette in Hessen vorne sein und in Sachsen hinten? Wenn man die Standards und die Ausstattung einheitlicher gestaltet, dann braucht man weniger Geld und Zeit und hat einen geringeren Zulassungsaufwand.\n\nKurz gesagt, kommt es für uns als Linke auf Folgendes an:\n\nErstens. Prüfung und Zulassung von Eisenbahnfahrzeugen sollen öffentliche Aufgaben bleiben. Das Eisenbahn-Bundesamt muss für diese Aufgabe besser ausgestattet werden.\n\nZweitens. Es braucht mehr Zusammenarbeit und nicht Konkurrenz zwischen den beteiligten Unternehmen. Diese Zusammenarbeit kann und soll auch politisch unterstützt werden.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n10538,doris-wagner,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Frau Ministerin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Bundeswehr hat von allem zu wenig - so bringen Sie, lieber Herr Bartels, auf den Punkt, was zur Ausrüstung der Bundeswehr zu sagen ist. Wir alle wissen, dass es der Bundeswehr nicht nur an vielen Ausrüstungsgegenständen fehlt. Seit Jahren hören wir: Die Bundeswehr hat zu wenig Personal und natürlich viel zu wenig Geld.\n\nWoran es aber der Bundeswehr, glaube ich, ganz besonders mangelt, ist eine konkrete Vorstellung davon, was sie eigentlich ist und wozu sie dienen soll. Solange Sie, Frau Ministerin, dieses konzeptionelle Defizit nicht beheben, wird sich auch an den Missständen, die der Wehrbericht auflistet, nichts ändern.\n\nHerr Bartels kritisiert, dass sich die Soldatinnen und Soldaten nur unzureichend auf den Einsatz vorbereiten können. Die Truppeneinheiten müssen sich die Ausrüstung erst einmal ausleihen, um üben zu können. Der Wehrbeauftragte hat es gerade schon erwähnt: 15 000 Ausrüstungsgegenstände musste sich das Panzergrenadierbataillon 371 ausborgen, um an einer NATO-Übung teilnehmen zu können. Das ist doch wirklich absurd. Dieses Bataillon bildet den Kern des deutschen Beitrags zur schnellen NATO-Eingreiftruppe in Osteuropa.\n\nWenn sogar eine international derart bedeutsame Einheit nicht ohne Weiteres für den Einsatz üben kann, zeugt das vor allem davon, dass die Bundesregierung keine Prioritäten setzt.\n\nFrau Ministerin, ich habe nicht den Eindruck, dass die Bundesregierung eine klare Vorstellung hat, welche Aufgaben die Bundeswehr eigentlich erfüllen soll. Dient die Bundeswehr vor allem der Bündnisverteidigung, oder soll sie Krisenmanagement in Afrika betreiben?\n\nWelche Rolle soll die Bundeswehr im Verbund mit den Partnern, der EU und der NATO, spielen?\n\nAuf all diese Fragen hat die Bundesregierung keine klare Antwort. Deshalb hilft es auch nicht, einfach mehr Geld für die Rüstung anzukündigen. Nur wenn Klarheit über die Aufgaben der Streitkräfte besteht, lässt sich die Ausrüstung beschaffen, die unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten zur Vorbereitung auf den Einsatz brauchen.\n\nDeshalb warten wir ganz dringend darauf, dass Sie im Weißbuch endlich einen klaren Auftrag für die Bundeswehr entwickeln. Auch beim Personal sollten Sie sich noch ein paar grundlegende konzeptionelle Gedanken machen.\n\nDer Bericht von Herrn Bartels zeigt: Einzelne Attraktivitätsmaßnahmen reichen nicht aus, um das Gesamtklima in der Bundeswehr zu verbessern. Aber genau das ist das Problem. Wieder lesen wir im Wehrbericht, wie schleppend das Personalamt Anträge auf Elternzeit oder eine Verlängerung der Dienstzeit bearbeitet. Wieder lesen wir von der Gleichgültigkeit, mit der ein riesiger bürokratischer Apparat den Anliegen der Bundeswehrangehörigen begegnet - egal, ob es um Schutzwesten für Soldatinnen und Soldaten geht, um die Pflegebedürftigkeit von Eltern oder die Finanzierung von Vätermonaten. Die Bundeswehrverwaltung hat den Schalter immer noch nicht umgelegt.\n\nAuch das Miteinander in den Kasernen entspricht offenbar nicht dem Bild, das die schicken Rekrutierungskampagnen der jüngsten Zeit vermitteln sollen. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir haben gerade schon ein Zitat aus dem Stern-Artikel „Bundeswehr undercover“ gehört. Ich muss sagen: Ich war nach der Lektüre gleich doppelt baff. Einerseits scheint die Grundausbildung noch immer dem gängigen Klischee zu entsprechen. In dem Artikel werden junge Rekrutinnen und Rekruten angeschrien, sie sollten nicht denken, sondern die „Fresse halten“. Frauen werden von den Ausbildern als „Schlitzbevölkerung“ verunglimpft - unterirdisch.\n\nAndererseits zeigt der Text aber auch, wie verunsichert die Bundeswehr mittlerweile eigentlich ist. Ein Ausbilder erzählt den Rekrutinnen und Rekruten, er habe Angst, sie während der Grundausbildung zu über- oder auch zu unterfordern. Denn:\n\nIhr könnt ja sofort aufhören, wenn ihr keine Lust mehr habt.\n\nWas der Bundeswehr also ganz offensichtlich eigentlich fehlt, ist eine eindeutige Identität. Eine Organisation, die weiß, wofür sie steht, hat es nicht nötig, Menschen kleinzumachen. Sie hat es aber auch nicht nötig, um die Zuneigung potenzieller Mitglieder zu betteln.\n\nDie Bundeswehr ist von einer solchen klaren Identität mittlerweile meilenweit entfernt. Deswegen, Frau Ministerin, ist in meinen Augen eine Ihrer vordringlichsten Aufgaben, dafür zu sorgen, dass die Bundeswehr eine solche Identität wiedergewinnt.\n\nWas muss also passieren? Am wichtigsten ist, dass wir die Innere Führung im Alltag wieder stärker lebbar machen; sie bildet den Kern der Identität der Bundeswehr. Herr Bartels hat in seinem Bericht mehrfach einen Hinweis darauf gegeben, wie das gelingen kann.\n\nWir müssen wieder mehr Vertrauen, Verbindlichkeit und Verantwortlichkeit in der Bundeswehr schaffen. Dazu müssen wir die Stehzeiten auf den Dienstposten verlängern und mehr Raum für die politische Bildung vorsehen. Vorgesetzte und Untergebene müssen ausreichend Zeit miteinander verbringen. Nur dann können Gespräche stattfinden, in denen wirklich Grundsätzliches besprochen und auch verstanden wird. Warum zum Beispiel geht die Bundeswehr nach Mali? Lohnt es sich wirklich, Leib und Leben dafür zu riskieren? Ich glaube, ein Soldat oder eine Soldatin kann es ertragen, von vielem zu wenig zu haben, nicht zu ertragen ist aber ein Mangel an Identität und Sinn.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n14108,christian-lange,\"Kollege Beck, zunächst herzlichen Dank, dass Sie den Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung so würdigen. Sie wissen, Bundesminister Maas war es ein Herzensanliegen, hierzu auf jeden Fall in dieser Wahlperiode noch zu einem Ergebnis zu kommen.\n\nZu Ihrer ersten Frage, was mit denjenigen passiert, die kein Strafurteil bekommen haben, aber deren Existenz trotzdem zerstört worden ist, und dies in vielfacher Hinsicht, worauf Sie zu Recht hingewiesen haben: Sie wissen, dass wir insbesondere, was ihre soziale Existenz und ihre Anerkennung in unserer Gesellschaft anbelangt, ein Verfahren der Kollektiventschädigung vorgesehen haben.\n\nDieses Verfahren der Kollektiventschädigung ist freilich nicht im Gesetz normiert, sondern in anderer Form.\n\nDeshalb darf ich Ihnen darauf wie folgt antworten: Ergänzend und parallel zum Gesetzentwurf der vorgesehenen Individualentschädigung ist diese Kollektiventschädigung vorgesehen. Für viele Betroffene steht der Wunsch nach einer Kollektiventschädigung im Vordergrund, während eine Individualentschädigung eher nachrangig betrachtet wird. Das haben wir insbesondere in vielen Gesprächen in Erfahrung gebracht, die wir geführt haben.\n\nAußerdem haben auch ohne Verurteilung bereits die Existenz der Strafvorschrift und die damit verbundene Stigmatisierung, auf die Sie hingewiesen haben, zu einer Einschränkung der Lebensführung geführt.\n\nDie Kollektiventschädigung soll haushaltsrechtlich in Form einer institutionellen Förderung der Bundesstiftung Magnus Hirschfeld erfolgen. Der Haushaltsgesetzgeber hat im Haushaltsplan für das Haushaltsjahr 2017 vorgesehen, dass aus dem Haushalt des Bundesministeriums der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz im Jahr 2017 eine institutionelle Förderung der Magnus-Hirschfeld-Stiftung in Höhe von 500 000 Euro erfolgt. Es ist beabsichtigt, dass diese institutionelle Förderung auch in den Folgejahren in gleicher Höhe wie in 2017 fortgesetzt wird. Ziel der Förderung ist es, die Arbeit der Bundesstiftung langfristig zu stärken und auf eine gesicherte Grundlage zu stellen.\n\nDie Stiftungszwecke der Bundesstiftung erfassen gerade auch die wissenschaftliche Aufarbeitung der Strafverfolgung nach dem damaligen § 175 Strafgesetzbuch sowie die Durchführung von Bildungsprojekten zu diesem Thema. Die Bundesstiftung führt nicht nur eigene Projekte wie etwa ein Zeitzeugenprojekt durch, „Archiv der anderen Erinnerungen“ genannt, sondern fördert auch Projekte Dritter.\n\nDer Gesetzentwurf knüpft an ein Strafrechtsurteil an; das ist richtig. Aber wir haben eben auch Kollektiventschädigung für die Fälle vorgesehen, in denen wir ein solches Strafrechtsurteil nicht als Anknüpfungspunkt haben. Darauf habe ich ausdrücklich hingewiesen. Das ist die Antwort auf die Frage.\n\nHerr Kollege Beck, im Respekt vor dem Deutschen Bundestag sage ich Ihnen, dass die Bundesregierung heute im Kabinett entschieden hat. Wir leiten diesen Gesetzentwurf dann im Anschluss dem Bundestag, also Ihnen, zu. Dann obliegt es den Fraktionen, darüber zu entscheiden, ob unser Gesetzentwurf Ihre Zustimmung findet oder nicht oder ob er ergänzt werden soll. Die Bundesregierung beteiligt sich an diesen Gesprächen immer sehr konstruktiv.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ich habe ausgeführt, dass wir an eine strafrechtliche Verurteilung anknüpfen und dass wir für alle anderen Fälle, die wir sehr wohl im Blick haben - so hatten wir es sowohl bei den Eckpunkten als auch in unseren öffentlichen Äußerungen dargestellt -,\n\neine Kollektiventschädigung vorsehen.\"\n15416,markus-paschke,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Ich möchte mit meinem herzlichen Dank an dich, Karl Schiewerling, für die gute und faire Zusammenarbeit beginnen. Das ist meine erste Legislaturperiode, und ich habe dich immer als harten, aber fairen Verhandlungspartner erlebt. Es hat Spaß gemacht.\n\nMein Dank gilt auch zwei Kolleginnen, die heute voraussichtlich ihre letzte Rede halten, nämlich Brigitte Pothmer und Waltraud Wolff. Auch mit euch hat die Zusammenarbeit riesigen Spaß gemacht.\n\nBevor ich in das Thema einsteige, muss ich gestehen, dass ich mir vorhin echt Sorgen gemacht habe. Lieber Klaus Ernst, diese Sorgen hast du mir mit deinem Redebeitrag bereitet. Ich hatte das Gefühl, ein großer Teil deiner Rede zeugte davon, dass ihr Angst vor Verantwortung und Verlässlichkeit habt.\n\nIch wünsche euch, dass ihr auch einmal die Chance habt, die Erfahrung zu machen, etwas im Interesse der Menschen umzusetzen, statt immer nur darüber zu reden.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, rufen wir uns doch noch einmal in Erinnerung: Was ist ein Normalarbeitsverhältnis? Nach einem erfolgreichen Bewerbungsverfahren bekommt man einen unbefristeten Arbeitsvertrag mit einer Probezeit. Wenn man die überstanden hat, dann hat man ein wenig Sicherheit für sich, für seine Lebensplanung und seine Familie. Das ist normal oder sollte es zumindest sein. Aber viele junge Menschen, insbesondere bis Mitte 30, kennen das gar nicht mehr. Im Gegenteil: Sie gucken mich ungläubig an, wenn ich „alter Mann“ erzähle, dass es so etwas einmal gab. Sie kennen nur Unsicherheit durch Befristungen und andere prekäre Beschäftigungsformen. Das müssen und werden wir ändern.\n\nEs mangelt der SPD nicht an der Erkenntnis und auch nicht am Willen zur Umsetzung. An der Einsicht mangelt es leider nur unserem Koalitionspartner. Ich erinnere mich noch gut an die Feststellung des Kollegen Oellers, der in der Debatte im September 2015 gesagt hat: Schaut man sich die Zahlen des Statistischen Bundesamtes an, so stellt man fest, dass keine Schieflage und kein Handlungsbedarf bestehen. - Das sehe ich völlig anders.\n\nWenn ich mich recht erinnere, haben alle Redner der Union die Brückenfunktion der sachgrundlosen Befristung betont. Im Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht der Bundesregierung wird dagegen eindeutig festgestellt: Je länger eine Befristung dauert, desto größer ist die Wahrscheinlichkeit, arbeitslos zu werden. Man kann hier also weniger von Brückenfunktion, sondern mehr von Einsperrfunktion reden. Prekäre Arbeit führt zu prekärer Arbeit und nicht zum Normalarbeitsverhältnis.\n\nLeider konnten wir die Abschaffung der sachgrundlosen Befristung bei der Union nicht durchsetzen. Diese Forderung haben wir bei der letzten Bundestagswahl im Wahlprogramm gehabt, und wir haben sie jetzt wieder aufgenommen. Sie hat für uns einen sehr hohen Stellenwert. Was wir aber durchsetzen konnten, waren zahlreiche andere und lange nötige Verbesserungen für Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer. Wir haben die Generation Praktikum beendet. Wir haben den Mindestlohn eingeführt. Wir haben das Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetz ausgeweitet sowie Leiharbeit und Werkverträge stärker reguliert. Wir haben vieles getan, um eine gute Arbeit zu gewährleisten.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. Ich sehe, meine Redezeit ist abgelaufen.\n\nHeute stimmen wir in einer namentlichen Abstimmung ab, aber die wahre Abstimmung, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, findet am 24. September statt. Da ist Bundestagswahl. Wer gute Arbeit und eine Perspektive für junge Menschen möchte, der gibt beide Stimmen der SPD.\n\nDanke.\"\n10350,marco-wanderwitz,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Antrag der Linken sieht einen riesigen „Problemberg“ in der Filmförderung. So wird es dort benannt. Ich sehe ihn nicht.\n\nIch sehe ihn vor allem deshalb nicht, weil das, was wir im Jahr 2015 in den Kinos vom deutschen Film gesehen haben, irgendwie gar nicht dafür spricht, dass wir einen riesigen Problemberg haben.\n\nIch will zu Beginn einige Zahlen nennen: Mit 27,5 Prozent hatten wir 2015 den höchsten Marktanteil des deutschen Films seit Erfassung der Besucherzahlen. Es gab 37,1 Millionen Besucher von deutschen Filmen. Knapp 1,2 Milliarden Euro Umsatz gab es für die Kinos, und - und das freut mich besonders - das Leinwandsterben scheint gestoppt. Wir hatten im Jahr 2015 ein Plus von 55 Kinosälen. Ich finde nicht, dass so ein riesiger Problemberg aussieht.\n\nIch finde vielmehr, dass die Verfassung, in der sich der deutsche Film befindet, eine gute Basis ist, auf die wir mit der turnusgemäßen Novelle des Filmförderungsgesetzes, die jetzt ansteht, draufsatteln können. Insbesondere die Umwälzungen im Bereich der Digitalisierung und des Internets fordern auch den Film und das Kino seit vielen Jahren heraus. Deshalb geht der Regierungsentwurf diese Aufgabe an.\n\nIch für meine Fraktion sehe die Hauptaufgabe in Bezug auf die Novelle darin, zunächst einmal das hohe Abgabenniveau zu sichern. Wir brauchen weiterhin 50 Millionen Euro plus X für diesen Teil der Filmförderung. Es gibt ja nicht nur die Förderung, die sich durch das Filmfördergesetz ergibt. Wir müssen es schaffen, dass wir diese 50 Millionen Euro plus X mindestens für die fünf Jahre gewährleisten können, für die wir das neue Filmfördergesetz planen.\n\nIch finde es sehr gut, dass sowohl die Videowirtschaft als auch der private Rundfunk als große Einzahlergruppen an dieser Stelle weiteres Entgegenkommen signalisiert haben. Liebe Frau Staatsministerin Monika Grütters, ich finde es auch sehr gut, dass es zusammen mit dem BKM gelungen ist, zu einer Vereinbarung mit dem öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunk zu kommen, die ihren Zweck erfüllt, nämlich die Erhöhung des Abgabesatzes auf 3 Prozent und zusätzliche Leistungen auf freiwilliger Basis.\n\nWichtig ist, dass wir die werbefinanzierten Video-on-Demand-Anbieter als neue Einzahlergruppe einbeziehen. Ich bin zuversichtlich, dass wir dies gerichtsfest hinbekommen. Wir müssen natürlich auch an der Abgabepflicht der ausländischen Video-on-Demand-Anbieter festhalten. Das haben wir bereits vor drei Jahren in der kleinen Novelle des Filmfördergesetzes angelegt. Ich bin zumindest ziemlich traurig, dass dies seit nunmehr drei Jahren bei der EU-Kommission liegt und dass wir es immer noch nicht geschafft haben, an dieser Stelle eine Modifizierung hinzubekommen, oder, anders formuliert, dass die Kommission es nicht geschafft hat, unser deutsches Gesetz an dieser Stelle zu notifizieren. Wir brauchen diese Einnahmen; denn diese Anbieter profitieren von dem Content Film, und deshalb müssen auch sie zukünftig zu den Einzahlern gehören.\n\nIch für meinen Teil tue mich schwer damit, zwischen dem Kulturgut Film und dem Wirtschaftsgut Film zu unterscheiden, wie Sie das nach meiner Wahrnehmung tun. Ich will eines nicht stärker betonen als das andere. Für mich ist der Film mindestens genauso sehr Kulturgut, wie er Wirtschaftsgut ist, und mindestens genauso sehr Wirtschaftsgut, wie er Kulturgut ist.\n\n- Vielleicht haben wir uns an der Stelle ja nur missverstanden. - Im Übrigen gibt es viele künstlerisch wertvolle Filme, die sich an der Kinokasse ziemlich gut behauptet haben. Erinnern wir uns beispielsweise an Filme wie „Das weiße Band“, „Victoria“ oder „Oh Boy“. Das sind Filme, denen wohl niemand die künstlerische Klasse absprechen will, die es gleichwohl geschafft haben, Kassenschlager zu werden.\n\nIch finde, dass natürlich auch Blockbuster gefördert werden sollen und dürfen.\n\nWenn Blockbuster gewinnträchtig sind, profitieren alle: Produzenten, Verleiher, vor allen Dingen die Kinos - wir sind uns völlig einig, dass die Kinos wichtige Stätten der Kultur sind -, die Kreativen und die Videobranche. Es geht um viele Arbeitsplätze, und die großen Filme bringen natürlich eine ganze Menge ein.\n\nNun ist sowohl beim Thema „künstlerische Qualität des Films in der Breite“ als auch beim Thema Marktanteil noch nicht alles eitel Sonnenschein. Wir haben uns 30 Prozent Marktanteil vorgenommen. Da sind wir jetzt relativ nah dran. Diese 30 Prozent wollen wir erreichen, und deswegen wollen wir noch das eine oder andere ändern.\n\nIch komme zu den Hebeln, die unsere Staatsministerin mit dem Entwurf aufgezeigt hat:\n\nDie Verstärkung und Zweistufigkeit der Drehbuchförderung zielt, glaube ich, in die richtige Richtung. Genauso richtig ist es, glaube ich, die Mindestfördersummen zu erhöhen; denn wir haben derzeit eine Vielzahl von - so will ich es einmal sagen - Miniförderungen, die mit der Gießkanne ausgeschüttet werden. Natürlich sagt jeder, der in den Genuss einer solchen Miniförderung kommt: Das ist eine schöne Sache; das ist ein Baustein, damit ich diesen Beitrag machen kann. Auf der anderen Seite führt diese Art der Förderung aber dazu - darüber wird immer wieder diskutiert -, dass wir viele Filme haben, die nur ein sehr kleines Publikum erreichen, und in der Summe entspricht diese Gießkannenförderung einer ganzen Menge Geld. Wenn wir diesbezüglich zu einer gewissen Konzentration kommen, ist für andere Projekte schlicht ein bisschen mehr Geld da.\n\nIch finde auch die Vorschläge der Staatsministerin zur Rückzahlquote der Förderung und zur Verkleinerung der Fördergremien richtig. Wenn wir über Gremien sprechen, sind wir auch beim Thema - so sage ich es einmal - Männerüberlast. Auch dazu gibt es ja Vorschläge der BKM. Völlig klar ist: Wir müssen an der Stelle mehr tun, etwas tun. Wir müssen bei den Jurys etwas tun, und wir müssen bei den Gremien, beispielsweise bei der Filmförderungsanstalt, etwas tun. Wovon ich überhaupt nicht überzeugt bin, ist der Vorschlag, dass die in Bälde, so hoffe ich, entsprechend angepassten Jurys bei ihren Förderentscheidungen, bei ihren Vergabeentscheidungen Quotierungen vornehmen, beispielsweise abhängig davon, ob ein Regisseur oder eine Regisseurin diesen Film gemacht hat, ob ein Produzent oder eine Produzentin diesen Film gemacht hat. Ich glaube, wir müssen sicherstellen, dass Frauen in den Jurys mitentscheiden. Ich kann mir aber schwer vorstellen, dass wir die Vergabeentscheidung im Regelfall daran festmachen, ob Männer und/oder Frauen in dieser oder jener Position am Film beteiligt sind.\n\nDarüber sollten wir noch einmal reden. Bezogen auf den zuerst genannten Teil, auf die Jurys und Gremien, kann ich für meine Fraktion sagen: Wir sind absolut willens, da etwas zu tun.\n\nBezüglich einiger anderer Punkte, die in Ihrem Antrag genannt sind, haben wir ja bereits eigene Anträge vorgelegt bzw. sind darauf im Rahmen der letzten Novelle zum Gesetz eingegangen. Das gilt beispielsweise für das Thema Kinderfilm und das Thema Barrierefreiheit. In diesen Bereichen haben wir schon eine ganze Menge getan.\n\nStichwort: getan haben. Begonnen unter Kulturstaatsminister Bernd Neumann, fortgeführt unter Monika Grütters haben wir als Deutscher Bundestag, als Haushaltsgesetzgeber, beispielsweise das Förderprogramm zur Kinodigitalisierung angelegt. Ich glaube, das war ein ganz wichtiger Baustein. Dabei ging es um die Frage - dieses Thema sprechen Sie in Ihrem Antrag auch an -: Wie sorgen wir dafür, dass Kinos in der Fläche erhalten bleiben? Ich glaube, uns allen ist klar: Wenn es dieses Förderprogramm zur Kinodigitalisierung nicht gegeben hätte, dann wären die Zahlen, die ich vorhin genannt habe, nicht so, wie sie sind, dann würde es eine ganze Menge Kinos im ländlichen Bereich nicht mehr geben.\n\nIch finde es deswegen auch völlig richtig, als Auflage für die Verleihförderung festzulegen, dass Kinos im ländlichen Raum angemessen mit Kopien - natürlich nur von geförderten Filmen - versorgt werden müssen. Die Frage, wie wir es schaffen, Kinos darüber hinaus in der Fläche zu halten, kann man nicht damit beantworten, dass man anordnet: In diesem oder jenem Bereich muss es eines geben.\n\nWie soll das praktisch funktionieren? Es gibt beispielsweise kommunale Kinos, die das ein Stück weit auffangen.\n\n- Ja, es ist gut, dass es sie gibt. - Das ist kommunale Selbstverwaltung im besten Sinne. Aber es ist nicht Aufgabe des Bundesgesetzgebers, dafür Regelungen zu treffen.\n\nUm noch ein paar Stichpunkte zu nennen: Ich finde, wir sollten uns noch einmal sehr genau das anschauen, was die Produzenten unter dem Stichwort „Produzentenkorridor“ vorgeschlagen haben. Ich glaube, man kann und sollte darüber sprechen. Wir werden natürlich auch an der Baustelle „soziale Lage der Filmschaffenden“ dranbleiben müssen, nur glaube ich, dass das Filmförderungsgesetz dafür nicht das richtige Mittel ist.\n\nFilmpolitik erschöpft sich nicht nur in der Novelle des Filmförderungsgesetzes, sondern umfasst beispielsweise auch ein Instrument, das durch unsere Entscheidung als Haushaltsgesetzgeber jetzt wesentlich größer geworden ist, nämlich die kulturelle Filmförderung; die Mittel dafür sind um 15 Millionen Euro erhöht worden und wurden damit mehr als verdoppelt. Das ist das große Instrument, durch das insbesondere die kulturell besonders wertvollen Filme gefördert werden. Wir haben daneben die Förderung des BMWi in Form des German Motion Picture Fund als kleine Schwester oder kleinen Bruder des DFFF.\n\n2016 sind die Filmpolitik und die Förderinstrumente mächtig im Fluss. Ich freue mich, dass wir dies mitgestalten können. Ich freue mich auf die Diskussionen rund um die Novelle. Dafür hätten wir jetzt nicht unbedingt diese Debatte heute gebraucht, aber es schadet auch nicht, wenn wir sie führen.\"\n9401,ulrike-bahr,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Prostitution - ein Thema, das auch im 21. Jahrhundert und mehr denn je von kontroversen Debatten begleitet wird, ein Thema, das, obwohl es viele Emotionen weckt und manche auch in Rage bringt, zumeist und vor allem von außen betrachtet wird, ein Thema, das nach wie vor nicht selten neben oder gar außerhalb der Gesellschaft zu laufen scheint. Dieses Außenstehen war ein Antrieb für das Prostitutionsgesetz, das 2002 unter Rot-Grün in Kraft trat. Dieses Gesetz war ein wichtiger Schritt und ein Paradigmenwechsel. Sein Ziel war es, die Prostituierten aus der Schattenwelt der Sittenwidrigkeit herauszuholen und ihnen mit der Möglichkeit regulärer Beschäftigungsverhältnisse den Weg in unser soziales Sicherungssystem zu öffnen.\n\nHeute wissen wir, dass sich die Erwartungen, die die Mütter und Väter dieses Gesetzes damals hatten, nur zum Teil erfüllt haben. Hier besteht weiterhin großer Handlungsbedarf. Insbesondere betrifft dies die Notwendigkeit, Prostitutionsstätten besser zu regulieren.\n\nDarin besteht sowohl in der Regierung als auch in den Koalitionsfraktionen durchaus große Einigkeit. Der Blick auf die Anträge aus Ihren Reihen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Fraktionen von Grünen und Linken, signalisiert mir ebenfalls Zustimmung für eine durchdachte Konzessionierung von Prostitutionsstätten.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, wir sind uns in der Großen Koalition durchaus bewusst, dass hier politisches Handeln notwendig ist. Genau vor diesem Hintergrund hatten wir uns bereits im Koalitionsvertrag darauf verständigt, dass wir das Prostitutionsgesetz von 2002 mit Blick auf eine bessere Regulierung der Prostitution überarbeiten wollen. Das ist für uns ein Arbeitsauftrag, der schon damals ganz klar in Richtung einer Prostitutionsstättenregelung zum Schutz der dort tätigen Frauen und Männer zielte. Dass wir hier zusammen mit dem Frauenministerium bessere Regelungen einführen wollen, steht völlig außer Frage.\n\nDazu gehört unter anderem auch eine Erlaubnispflicht für den Betrieb von Prostitutionsstätten. Diese Erlaubnispflicht, die auf der Einhaltung von Mindeststandards fußt, ist ein ganz zentrales Element des geplanten Prostituiertenschutzgesetzes. So soll und darf künftig die Erteilung einer Erlaubnis zum Betrieb einer Prostitutionsstätte erst erfolgen, wenn hygienische, räumliche oder gesundheitliche Mindestanforderungen ausreichend erfüllt sind und wenn zudem die Zuverlässigkeit des Betreibenden oder der Betreibenden zweifelsfrei feststeht. Sofern sich anhand des vorzulegenden Betriebskonzepts Hinweise ergeben, dass beispielsweise das Recht auf sexuelle Selbstbestimmung eingeschränkt werden könnte, darf eine Erlaubnis natürlich gar nicht erst erteilt werden. Es steht außer Frage, dass im Falle rechtskräftiger Verurteilungen beispielsweise wegen Straftaten gegen die sexuelle Selbstbestimmung oder gegen die körperliche Unversehrtheit die Zuverlässigkeit einer Betreiberin oder eines Betreibers nicht gegeben ist. Natürlich muss eine Betriebserlaubnis auch widerrufen werden, sollten beispielsweise im Nachgang zur Erteilung der Erlaubnis Verstöße offenkundig werden.\n\nDarüber hinaus soll es ein Werbeverbot für ungeschützten Geschlechtsverkehr geben. Selbstverständlich wird es auch die Pflicht geben, Kondome bereitzuhalten und in den Räumen auf die verpflichtende Verwendung von Kondomen hinzuweisen.\n\nWie Sie sehen, gibt es durchaus Überschneidungen zwischen unserem Vorhaben und Ihren Anträgen. Gleiches gilt bei der geplanten Präzisierung des § 3 des Prostitutionsgesetzes. Wir wollen und werden ganz in Ihrem wie auch im ursprünglichen Sinne noch einmal klarstellen: Weisungen im Rahmen abhängiger Beschäftigungsverhältnisse, die Art oder Ausmaß der Erbringung sexueller Dienstleistungen vorschreiben, sind absolut unzulässig.\n\nIn diesem Zusammenhang ist mir wichtig, noch einmal zu betonen, dass sich dieses Gesetzesvorhaben ganz konkret auf den Bereich der legalen Prostitution bezieht. Zweifellos helfen transparente Rahmenbedingungen und bessere Kontrollmöglichkeiten in diesem Gewerbe dabei, die Trennlinien zwischen freiwilliger, legaler Prostitution auf der einen Seite und Zwangsverhältnissen auf der anderen Seite scharf zu ziehen. Der konkrete Kampf gegen verabscheuungswürdige Verbrechen wie Zwangsprostitution und sexuelle Ausbeutung sowie Menschenhandel ganz generell muss jedoch vor allem mit anderen Mitteln, letztendlich mit den Waffen des Rechtsstaates, geführt werden.\n\nIm bereits laufenden Gesetzgebungsverfahren zum Prostituiertenschutzgesetz ist es mir und meiner Fraktion wichtig, ein Prostituiertenschutzgesetz auf den Weg zu bringen, das seinem Namen gerecht wird. Der Ansatz des Bundesfrauenministeriums, hier mit einer klareren Regulierung von Prostitutionsstätten mehr Rechtssicherheit und damit einen besseren Schutz vor Ausbeutung zu schaffen, ist ein ganz zentraler Schritt, den wir vollends unterstützen - am besten natürlich im Zusammenspiel mit ausreichenden niedrigschwelligen und vertraulichen Beratungsangeboten und Anlaufstellen in den Ländern.\n\nAls zuständige Berichterstatterin ist mir im Laufe der letzten beiden Jahre vor allem eines sehr stark aufgefallen: Wir beschäftigen uns hier mit einem politischen Handlungsfeld in einem Bereich, in dem nach wie vor mehr über als mit den zentralen Akteuren gesprochen wird. Damit meine ich vor allem die Prostituierten selbst, Fachberatungsstellen, Gesundheitsämter, Polizei und Kommunalverantwortliche. In der SPD-Bundestagsfraktion war es uns stets ein Anliegen, möglichst breitflächig Raum für Gespräche und gegenseitigen Austausch zu eröffnen; denn wie so oft ist auch hier das Schubladendenken weder angebracht noch spiegelt es die Realität wider.\n\nDabei unterscheidet sich dieses Thema sehr wesentlich von anderen Bereichen, über die wir hier in der Sozial- und Gesellschaftspolitik in der Regel entscheiden. Familien- und Generationenpolitik betrifft jede und jeden von uns oft unmittelbar. Über Familienleistungen, Gleichstellung oder die bessere Vereinbarkeit von Familie, Pflege und Beruf wird in aller Offenheit gesprochen und diskutiert. Anders beim Thema Prostitution: Nur wenige bekennen sich öffentlich dazu, Prostituierte genauso wie Freier. Nur wenige reden wirklich mit den Betroffenen statt über sie. Gesellschaftliche Stigmatisierung und Diskriminierung sind hier nach wie vor sehr deutlich zu spüren. Nur wenigen ist die große Bandbreite, die sich unter einem weiten Begriff von Prostitution wiederfindet, tatsächlich bewusst.\n\nDieser Vielschichtigkeit mit gesetzlichen Regelungen gerecht zu werden, ohne erneut die Stigmatisierung von Betroffenen zu fördern, ist sicherlich uns allen ein Anliegen. Klar ist, dass das Gelingen dieses Vorhabens letztlich auch von den Kapazitäten der Länder und vor allem der Kommunen vor Ort abhängt. Der Bund kann und darf hier nicht mit tauben Ohren auf Äußerungen und Hinweise aus den Kommunen reagieren. Deren Blickwinkel und deren Expertise sind ohne Zweifel unverzichtbar, damit in der Praxis schließlich das herauskommt, worauf der Titel des Gesetzes zielt: eine Regulierung des Prostitutionsgewerbes, die allem voran auch dem Schutz der in der Prostitution tätigen Personen dient.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n3661,christian-schmidt,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Danke, dass der Deutsche Bundestag in einer Stellungnahme gemäß Artikel 23 Absatz 3 des Grundgesetzes mir etwas für die Verhandlungen nach Brüssel mitgibt, und zwar einstimmig! Das ist nicht selbstverständlich. Das ist anerkennenswert und unterstreicht den Konsens, den wir in Deutschland zum ökologischen Landbau erreicht haben.\n\nDie Zeiten des Gegeneinanders von konventioneller und ökologischer Landwirtschaft sind längst vorbei. Ich bin auch gegen ideologische Gräben. Wir brauchen beide Formen der Landwirtschaft. Beide müssen viele Regeln beachten - das ist die Grundlage für sichere und gesunde Lebensmittel -, aber beide brauchen keine Überregulierung.\n\nDie Biobranche ist eine Wachstumsbranche. Der Markt zeigt dies unzweifelhaft. Wir sind führend in Europa, was den Marktanteil der Ökobranche angeht. Sie hat zwischenzeitlich einen Jahresumsatz von etwa 7,5 Milliarden Euro erreicht und führt damit längst kein Nischendasein mehr. Sie ist ein Teil des Nahrungsmittelmarkts, die den Bedarf in sehr anspruchsvoller Art und Weise deckt. Das sind Kennzahlen des Erfolgs, der noch weiter gehen kann. Zusammen mit dem aktuellen Regionaltrend stehen die Zeichen für einen weiteren Spurt der Biobranche eigentlich gut. Ich möchte allerdings, dass das Marktpotenzial des gesamten Lebensmittelmarktes mehr von deutschen Bioprodukten beschickt wird als bisher. Hier ist noch Spielraum vorhanden.\n\nUnsere ökologische Landwirtschaft stellt sich bereits heute hohen Anforderungen, die nicht nur von den Verbrauchern, sondern auch von der Politik an sie herangetragen werden. Auch bedient sie eine überdurchschnittlich sensible Verbraucherschicht, die sehr genau darauf achtet, was ihr angeboten wird und ob alle Regeln eingehalten worden sind. Diese Auflagen bzw. Regeln werden von den Bauern bzw. den Organisationen erfüllt, denen sie weit überwiegend angeschlossen sind, sodass sie ausgezeichnete Produkte anbieten können.\n\nNun hat die EU-Kommission eine vollständige Revision der Öko-Basisverordnung vorgeschlagen. Normalerweise macht man dann etwas komplett Neues, wenn das Alte nicht mehr funktioniert. Jetzt frage ich mich eigentlich, was an der geltenden Verordnung, die schon jetzt wesentliche Grundlage für die Zukunft des ökologischen Landbaus ist, so fundamental nicht funktioniert. Ich meine, es gibt sehr viele Punkte, die weiterentwickelt werden müssen; aber im Kern ist die Öko-Basisverordnung nach wie vor tragfähig.\n\nMit dem nun vorliegenden Brüsseler Legislativvorschlag wird ein Kurswechsel - ich muss sagen: weg von der Praktikabilität - vollzogen. Ich meine, dass die Kommission weit über das gemeinsame Ziel hinausschießt, Verlässlichkeit und Verbrauchervertrauen zu sichern. Seit ich mir die Vorschläge der Kommission genauer angesehen habe - auch Sie haben das in den Beratungen und bei der Erstellung Ihres Antrags getan -, bin ich skeptisch. Die drastische Verschärfung der Produktionsvorschriften bereitet mir Sorgen. Es bereitet mir Sorgen, wenn erforderliche Flexibilitätsregelungen - beispielsweise beim Saatgut oder dem Einsatz von Zuchttieren - unreflektiert gestrichen werden sollen. Weiter geht es um die Einführung gesonderter Schwellenwerte für Rückstände bei Biolebensmitteln. Das ist ebenso problem-behaftet und meiner Meinung nach nicht notwendig.\n\nMit solchen Maßnahmen würde die Kommission hohe Hürden aufbauen, vor denen viele im ökologischen Landbau nur kapitulieren können. Das betrifft dann die gesamte Wertschöpfungskette vom Bauern über die Verarbeitung bis zum Handel. Dieser Kommissionsentwurf birgt leider die Gefahr, dass er den Ökolandbau nicht stärkt, sondern schwächt. Das können wir nicht zulassen.\n\nIn einer ersten Stellungnahme im Ministerrat sowie gegenüber der Kommission habe ich mich für eine gezielte, problembezogene Weiterentwicklung der Rechtsvorschriften ausgesprochen. Wir müssen dabei aber im System bleiben. Es bleibt meine Skepsis, ob das mit dem vorliegenden Entwurf wirklich machbar ist. Die gesetzlichen Vorgaben müssen erfüllbar bleiben sowie eine stabile und verlässliche Grundlage bilden. Wir brauchen die Transparenz der Kontrollsysteme. Allerdings gibt es bei den Kontrollsystemen einen Punkt, der meiner Ansicht nach zu wenig beachtet wird. Dabei geht es um die Baustelle der Drittlandsimporte. Für sie wollen wir die gleiche Sicherheit wie für Binnenprodukte.\n\nIch teile die Auffassung des Deutschen Bundestages zu den von ihm genannten Punkten, die geändert werden müssen. Auch ich bin der Meinung, dass wir die Übertragung in die horizontalen Kontrollmechanismen nicht notwendigerweise brauchen. Eigentlich brauchen wir sie gar nicht. Vielmehr sollte das bewährte System der Ökokontrollen beibehalten werden. Sollte sich zeigen, dass diese und andere Verbesserungen nicht in den bestehenden Entwurf eingepflegt werden können, muss ein völlig neuer Anfang gemacht werden. Ich werde jedenfalls nicht dabei helfen, ein totgerittenes Pferd zu satteln. Das heißt, dass wir mit einer ganzen Anzahl von Kollegen aus anderen Mitgliedsländern, die dieselbe Skepsis haben wie ich, sehr an die Kommission - das werden wir auch im Rat zum Ausdruck bringen - appellieren, dass es nicht zu einer Veränderung um der Veränderung willen kommt. Vielmehr sind wir für eine Flexibilisierung im Sinne der Marktgängigkeit der Ökoprodukte sowie für allgemeine, gleiche Vertrauens- und Kontrollgrundsätze für alle Produkte - seien sie in Deutschland, in anderen EU-Ländern oder in Drittstaaten hergestellt.\n\nNationale Instrumente müssen natürlich wirken. Ich will kurz darauf hinweisen: Sie sind in der Ökoverordnung nicht verboten und nicht angesprochen worden.\n\nSie wissen, dass wir die Prämiensätze in den letzten Jahren ständig erhöht haben. In den Jahren 2013 bis 2015 haben wir uns zu einem Prämienanstieg um fast 25 Prozent für diejenigen, die im Ökolandbau aktiv bleiben, entschlossen. Ökolandbau ist bei uns gegenwärtig eher rückläufig. Mancher Landwirt überlegt sich, ob er eine teilökologische Umstellung noch halten kann oder ob er von den Auflagen nicht ein Stück erdrückt wird.\n\nWir müssen die Branche kontinuierlich und verlässlich unterstützen. Wir haben hierzu das BÖLN--Programm. Sie kennen das. Das Programm werden wir verstetigen. So sieht es der Koalitionsvertrag vor. Aus dem Programm haben wir die neue Eiweißpflanzenstrategie herausgenommen. Damit schaffen wir im BÖLN-Programm neue Förderspielräume. An der Begrifflichkeit möchte ich allerdings festhalten, und zwar nicht nur ökologisch; denn es gibt noch andere Formen, die sinnhaft, vertrauenswürdig und vertrauenserheischend sind. Auch sie werden von dem Programm unterstützt. Natürlich liegt der Fokus bei der Ökologie.\n\nWir sind außerdem entschlossen, unangemessene Bürokratie zu verhindern. Diesen Satz sage ich gerne. Ich bitte Sie, dass Sie das als einen Programmsatz von mir verstehen. Ich weiß nach genauerer Lektüre dessen, was uns in Europa auf den Tisch gelegt wird, manchmal sehr genau, dass die Umsetzung nicht einfach wird. Trotzdem muss man damit beginnen und für gute Ergebnisse ackern.\n\nIch bin mit den Bioverbänden im Gespräch. Wir haben vor, einen Strategieplan zur Stärkung der ökologischen Landwirtschaft zu entwickeln. Die Politik soll nicht an den Erzeugern vorbeigehen. Sie soll Politik für die Wertschöpfungskette sein. Ich denke, dass der Antrag - sollte er eine Mehrheit im Deutschen Bundestag finden, was bei der Zustimmung aller Fraktionen nicht ganz ausgeschlossen werden kann - für mich eine Rückendeckung bei den schwierigen Verhandlungen sein wird, die wir in den nächsten Monaten in Brüssel führen werden. Ich zweifle daran, dass es in diesem Kalenderjahr noch zu entscheidenden Regelungen und Vorlagen kommen kann. Wir sollten uns darauf vorbereiten, dass wir dieses Thema intensiv begleiten. Es ist noch nicht durch. Wir haben im Sinne eines pragmatisch orientierten ökologischen Landbaus in unserem eigenen Land sehr gut an Boden gewonnen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n525,carsten-linnemann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen! Meine Herren! Frau Schimke, herzlichen Glückwunsch zu Ihrer ersten Rede. Ich möchte daran anknüpfen und auch etwas zum Thema Beschäftigung sagen. Wir haben jetzt viel über Sozialpolitik gesprochen. Ich bin der Überzeugung, dass die Beschäftigungspolitik dieses Landes, die Arbeitsmarktpolitik der letzten zehn Jahre erfolgreich war. Die Beschäftigungsschwelle, der entscheidende Indikator für gute Beschäftigungspolitik, ist von 2 Prozent auf 1 Prozent gesunken. Früher brauchte man 2 Prozent Wachstum, um Beschäftigung zu erzielen, heute nur noch 1 Prozent. Das ist das Ergebnis der Politik der Arbeitsminister und -ministerin der letzten zehn Jahre. Darauf sollte man an dieser Stelle hinweisen. Diese Politik war gut und richtig. Wir sollten die Arbeit so fortführen.\n\nFrau Schimke, Sie haben tolle Zahlen genannt. Ich möchte diese ergänzen. Vor neun Jahren - ich glaube, die Zahlen wurden sogar auf den Tag genau vor neun Jahren genannt - gab es in Deutschland Rekordarbeitslosigkeit. Mehr als 5 Millionen Menschen hatten keine Arbeit. Exakt neun Jahre später gibt es Rekordbeschäftigung. Ähnlich sieht es bei der Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit aus. 2005 verharrten 2,4 Millionen Menschen in der Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit. Jetzt sind es 1,2 Millionen Menschen.\n\nFrau Nahles, das Thema Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit wird - ich beziehe mich hier auch auf die Rede von Frau Pothmer - ein Schwerpunkt unserer Arbeit sein. Das sollte man mehr hervorheben. Im Koalitionsvertrag steht explizit, dass wir dieses Thema in den nächsten vier Jahren angehen werden.\n\nDas finde ich richtig, und das sollten wir auch tun.\n\nEin weiterer wichtiger Indikator ist die Höhe der Sozialversicherungsbeiträge. Diese sind von 42 Prozent Anfang der 2000er-Jahre auf jetzt unter 40 Prozent gesunken. Der Beitrag zur Arbeitslosenversicherung ist von 6,5 Prozent auf jetzt 3 Prozent gesunken. Gleichzeitig hatten wir mehr Steuereinnahmen und haben die Neuverschuldung zurückgefahren. Diesen erfolgreichen Weg sollten wir weitergehen. Wir erkennen, dass die Situation in Deutschland insgesamt unmittelbar mit der Beschäftigung zusammenhängt. Deswegen sollte unser Fokus ganz klar bei der Beschäftigungspolitik liegen. Sie muss im Sinne der Arbeitnehmer und Arbeitgeber dieses Landes erfolgreich sein.\n\nUm das zu schaffen, müssen wir mehrere Schwerpunkte legen; einige wurden schon angesprochen. Ein Schwerpunkt ist natürlich das Thema Mittelstand. Die meiste Beschäftigung in Deutschland wird im Mittelstand geschaffen. Rund 70 Prozent der sozialversicherungspflichtig Beschäftigten und 80 Prozent der Auszubildenden sind im Mittelstand. Wir in Deutschland haben am industriellen Mittelstand festgehalten, während viele Länder sich davon verabschiedet haben. Das muss auch Ziel der Arbeitsmarktpolitik sein.\n\nDamit sind wir beim Thema Fachkräftemangel. Erst vor wenigen Minuten hat der Deutsche Industrie- und Handelskammertag das Ergebnis der aktuellen Umfrage 2014 veröffentlicht. Dies zeigt, dass das Thema Fachkräfte für jedes dritte Unternehmen essenziell für die Zukunft ist. Deswegen freue ich mich, dass auch beim Thema Fachkräftemangel ein Schwerpunkt gesetzt wird. Dieser ist ebenso wichtig wie die Bekämpfung der Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit.\n\nWir müssen auch das inländische Potenzial - damit bin ich beim Thema Meisterbrief - stärken. Es reicht nicht, nur die Akademikerquote zu erhöhen, sondern wir müssen auch das duale Ausbildungssystem stärken. Denn wir wissen, dass in Zukunft nicht nur im industriellen Mittelstand, sondern auch im Handwerk junge Leute fehlen. Deswegen ist es gut, dass der Meisterbrief explizit im Koalitionsvertrag verankert ist. Daran halten wir fest; denn es ist richtig. Er garantiert nicht nur die Qualität in den Betrieben, sondern bietet auch eine Karrieremöglichkeit für junge Leute. Er gibt ihnen den Anreiz, den Weg der dualen Ausbildung zu gehen.\n\nZu guter Letzt - Frau Schimke, da haben Sie völlig recht -: Die Maßnahmen, die wir hier beschließen, müssen immer unter der Prämisse ablaufen: Schadet oder nutzt es der Beschäftigung? Der Koalitionsvertrag liegt vor; daran werden wir uns halten. Aber der Koalitionsvertrag lässt natürlich insoweit Spielräume zu, als es auch Diskussionen und harte Debatten über das Thema „Nutzt oder schadet es der Beschäftigung?“ geben wird.\n\nInsofern finde ich es gut, dass wir bei der Frage der Höchstüberlassungsdauer beim Thema Zeitarbeit eine Öffnungsklausel haben und beim Thema Werkverträge die Informationsrechte. Niemand hat auch ein Interesse daran, dass der Mindestlohn zu einer Schwächung der dualen Ausbildung führt. Niemand will, dass die jungen Leute keinen Anreiz mehr haben, in die duale Ausbildung zu gehen. Über all das müssen wir diskutieren, genauso wie über das Thema „Rente mit 63“. Ich bedanke mich bei dem Kollegen Karl Schiewerling, der auf die Idee gekommen ist, eine Stichtagsregelung einzuführen, um das Thema Frühverrentung nicht auf den Plan zu rufen. Das sollten wir seriös prüfen; denn wir alle haben kein Interesse an Frühverrentungen, genauso wenig daran, bei der Rente mit 63 unbegrenzt Zeiten der Arbeitslosigkeit zuzulassen. Wir haben vielmehr ein Interesse daran, uns hier an die vereinbarte Deckelung zu halten.\n\nIn diesem Sinne werden wir eine harte Debatte führen. Das gehört dazu, weil wir alle ein Ziel haben, nämlich die Beschäftigung in Deutschland nicht nur stabil zu halten,\n\nsondern in den nächsten vier Jahren noch auszubauen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n9229,matern-marschall,\"Vielen herzlichen Dank. - Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es gibt ein wenig Kritik vorab und dann ein wenig Lob hintenan. Die Kritik betrifft die Präsenz der beiden maßgeblichen Ministerien, des Umweltministeriums und des Ministeriums für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung. Ich kann nicht erkennen, dass die beiden zuständigen Minister anwesend sind;\n\nFrau Hendricks war wohl vorhin anwesend.\n\nWas mich erfreut - das ist das Lob hintenan -, ist die Präsenz unseres Fraktionsführers. Vielen Dank, Herr Kauder! Die übrigen Fraktionsführer kann ich, soweit ich das im Moment überblicke, nicht erkennen.\n\nDas ist angesichts der Prime Time, zu der wir über diesen Tagesordnungspunkt diskutieren, noch bedauerlicher.\n\n- Ja, jetzt kommen wir zum Thema. Welche Bedeutung das Thema für manche hat, wird symbolisiert durch ihre Präsenz.\n\nWeil der Einwurf von der Linken kam: Frau Kollegin Menz, wenn ich mich richtig erinnere, haben Sie davon gesprochen, dass es gilt, den Wachstumszwang zu überwinden.\n\nAber ohne Wachstum gibt es leider keinen wirtschaftlichen Erfolg, und ohne wirtschaftlichen Erfolg können auch keine Steuereinnahmen erzielt werden. Ohne Steuereinnahmen besteht nicht die Möglichkeit, 1 Million Flüchtlingen in diesem Land zu helfen.\n\nInsofern ist es schon hilfreich, dass wir mit annähernd 700 Milliarden Euro Steuereinnahmen maßgeblich in Deutschland und wesentlich in Europa einen Beitrag leisten.\n\nSie brauchen gar nicht zu schimpfen; denn uns in Deutschland ist es immerhin gelungen, die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung vom Ressourcenverbrauch zu entkoppeln. Im Übrigen sind wir führend beim Aufbau der Nutzung erneuerbarer Energien, und wir sind dank unserer Forschung maßgeblich verantwortlich für den Technologietransfer. Das ist ein nennenswerter Beitrag zur Nachhaltigkeit insgesamt.\n\nIn dieser Nachhaltigkeitsdebatte beziehe ich mich symbolisch auf einen Punkt, um klarzumachen, wie schwierig es ist, die Balance herzustellen, nämlich auf den Baubereich, für den wir im Umweltausschuss ebenfalls Verantwortung tragen. Zu uns kommen Hunderttausende von Menschen und brauchen, etwa in Universitätsstädten wie meiner Heimatstadt Freiburg, neuen Wohnraum. Hier müssen wir eine Balance zwischen ökologischen Ansprüchen an das Bauen, notwendiger Baugeschwindigkeit und Kosteneffizienz finden. In dieser Balance befindet sich unsere praktische Politik. Wenn wir zusätzlich eine halbe Milliarde Euro für den sozialen Wohnungsbau ausgeben, aber ohne Priorisierung von Flüchtlingen oder von Bedürftigen, die in unserem Land schon leben, dann ist auch das ein gutes Symbol dafür, wie wir Nachhaltigkeit begreifen.\n\nIch würde ganz gern noch, sehr geehrter Herr Präsident, auf unser Haus und seine Arbeit zu sprechen kommen. Herr Präsident, Sie haben ja am 1. September 2015 auf der Welt-Parlamentspräsidentenkonferenz in New York eine Ansprache gehalten. Wir hatten die Freude, während des Klimagipfels in Paris mit dem Präsidenten der Interparlamentarischen Union, mit Saber Chowdhury, zusammenzutreffen, von dem wir Ihnen - das darf ich an diesem Platz vielleicht sagen - ganz herzliche Grüße übermitteln sollen.\n\nEs ist für uns von außerordentlicher Bedeutung, den interparlamentarischen Austausch voranzubringen, um festzustellen, wie in anderen Parlamenten der Erde sozusagen fachausschussübergreifend die Arbeit der Nachhaltigkeitsentwicklung vorangebracht wird oder wie sie im Moment vielleicht auch noch nicht vorangebracht wird. Insofern begreifen wir diese Möglichkeit des interparlamentarischen Austausches, auch auf solchen globalen Konferenzen, als eine Möglichkeit, anderen diesbezüglich hilfreich zur Seite zu stehen und Anregungen zu geben.\n\nLiebe Frau Dr. Wilms, ich möchte auf Ihren stets pragmatischen Ansatz zurückkommen. Sie haben vollkommen Recht: Dopplungen sind an sich nicht sinnvoll.\n\nWir brauchen die Integration der Arbeit in die Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie wegen der Lebensqualität; darüber hinaus muss die Integration der globalen, der noch nicht vorhandenen europäischen und der nationalen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie vollzogen werden. Das gehört für uns zusammen.\n\nIch will Ihnen aber schon noch ein bisschen Wasser in den Wein schütten. Es ist nämlich so, dass das Nachhaltigkeitsthema leider kein Privileg einer Fraktion oder Partei ist. Ich freue mich, dass am Montag und Dienstag der Bundesparteitag der CDU stattgefunden hat. In dessen Zentrum stand die umfangreiche Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie der CDU.\n\nEs lohnt sich, das Ganze nachzulesen, auch weil diese Strategie eine Fortsetzung der bereits begonnenen Politik ist, etwa unseres Ministers Müller, zum Beispiel im Zusammenhang mit dem Textilbündnis, durch das eine durchgängige Lieferkette gewährleistet werden soll.\n\nIch möchte zum Abschluss auf die Weihnachtstage blicken, die ja naturgemäß Tage des Abarbeitens von Wunschlisten sind. Wir können alle zusammen etwas für Nachhaltigkeit tun, indem wir - Andreas Jung hat es schon angesprochen - auf zuverlässige Label achten, auf Label, die wir noch entwickeln müssen. Da, wo bei diesen Labeln geschummelt wird, müssen wir kräftig auf die Finger klopfen. Solche Label gibt es bereits im Bereich der Schokolade und des Tees; Sie kennen das. Mit solchen Produkten lässt sich das Weihnachtsfest mit gutem Gewissen, was die Nachhaltigkeit angeht, feiern.\n\nMan kann auch darauf achten, inwieweit Produkte regional sind. Auch der Lebensmitteleinzelhandel in Deutschland achtet sehr darauf - ich verweise da vor allen Dingen auf das Vorgehen von Edeka im Südwesten -, dass regionale Lebensmittel zur Verfügung gestellt werden. Wir müssen versuchen, in den nächsten Jahren durch das nationale Parlament - das ist schon wichtig bei der Verzahnung der verschiedenen Ebenen; nicht nur horizontal ist ein Austausch nötig, etwa der interparlamentarische Austausch - auf die Bildung, die ja Sache der Länder ist, einzuwirken, um den Menschen eine bessere Möglichkeit zu bieten, selber nachzufragen, selber zu lernen, was es eigentlich für sie selbst bedeutet, im Alltag konkret Nachhaltigkeit zu leben. Und daran wollen wir arbeiten.\n\nIch wünsche Ihnen, uns allen am heutigen letzten Sitzungstag eine gute und erholsame Weihnachtszeit und freue mich auf eine wunderbare Zusammenarbeit im kommenden Jahr.\"\n5650,maria-klein-schmeink,\"Danke schön. - Herr Nüßlein, Sie haben auf die Pro-blematik der Versorgungsplanung hingewiesen. Sie haben in Ihrem Gesetzentwurf eine sehr deutliche Regelung vorgesehen, nämlich dass Praxissitze nicht wieder besetzt werden können, wenn die Unterversorgungsfeststellung überschritten wird.\n\nSie haben die Probleme schon angeführt. Es liegen in der Tat keine wissenschaftlichen Studien dazu vor, wie sich die Versorgung in den Regionen abbildet. Wir haben vielmehr einen historischen Aushandlungsstand. Das wird beispielsweise im Bereich der Psychotherapeuten sehr deutlich, wo man einfach die Versorgung an einem bestimmten Stichtag als Hundertprozentversorgung definiert und das danach nicht weiterverfolgt hat.\n\nWie wollen Sie jetzt damit umgehen - Sie haben eine Diskussion darüber angekündigt, um zu einer sachgerechteren Lösung zu kommen -, wenn Sie sich gar nicht darum bemühen, ein anderes Kriterium für die Versorgungsplanung auf den Weg zu bringen? Davon ist in Ihrem Gesetzentwurf nämlich nicht die Rede; Sie haben vielmehr eine Sollregelung geschaffen, nach der Praxissitze nicht wieder besetzt werden können. Sie haben aber keine Regelung vorgesehen, derzufolge Sie sich um bessere Versorgungswerte bemühen, indem Sie die Krankheitslast in einer Region erfassen und die demografischen Anforderungen berücksichtigen.\n\nHaben Sie vor, das in dem Gesetz zu regeln? Das würde uns freuen. Es würde uns auch sehr freuen, wenn Sie insbesondere die Frage der psychotherapeutischen Versorgung aus diesem Kontext ausklammern würden. Denn das, was derzeit dazu im Gesetzentwurf vorgesehen ist, ist geradezu aberwitzig.\"\n3546,patricia-lips,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die BAföG-Novelle, die wir gestern debattiert haben, vor allen Dingen auch hinsichtlich der künftig alleinigen Zuständigkeit des Bundes, wie auch die Änderung des Grundgesetzes für eine bessere Zusammenarbeit mit den Hochschulen sind, auch schon für sich allein genommen, von großer Bedeutung. Beides zusammengenommen entwickelt jedoch ganz neue Möglichkeiten für unser nationales Bildungssystem, aber auch - das wurde deutlich und ist uns mindestens ebenso wichtig - für die internationale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit unseres Landes.\n\nLassen Sie mich an dieser Stelle eines ergänzen, weil es gestern ein bisschen kritisch anklang: Hier werden zeitgleich zwei Projekte umgesetzt, die vor allem den jungen Menschen in unserem Land zugutekommen.\n\nMehr als 50 Prozent eines Geburtenjahrgangs beginnen heute ein Hochschulstudium - Tendenz steigend. Die Schere zwischen den Förderungen im außeruniversitären Bereich und der Hochschulen geht systematisch immer weiter auseinander. Wir wissen das.\n\nBereits seit Jahren steht deshalb zu Recht die Forderung im Raum, genau an dieser Stelle mehr zu tun. Das geschah ja auch schon. Es wurden bereits mehrfach die gemeinsamen Projekte wie Exzellenzinitiative, Hochschulpakt, Qualitätspakt Lehre und Professorinnen-Programm erwähnt. Sie haben diesen Aufwuchs zunächst gezielt, aber halt auch begrenzt, erfolgreich begleiten können. Dennoch müssen wir die Frage beantworten: Reicht dieses Engagement unter den bisherigen Möglichkeiten aus, um heute und in Zukunft im europäischen und internationalen Wettbewerb dauerhaft zu bestehen? Ich gebe Ihnen ja recht: Eine Grundgesetzänderung macht man nicht einfach so, so lapidar. Aber die Antwort auf diese Frage lautet: Nein.\n\nEs bedarf einer Weiterentwicklung. Deshalb streben wir - dagegen kann ja niemand etwas einwenden - eine Erweiterung planbarer und verlässlicher Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten für Hochschulen und Forschungseinrichtungen an. Dies gilt auch für junge Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler. Damit ist eine Verbesserung der Leistungsfähigkeit und am Ende auch - das wurde heute noch nicht erwähnt; aber ich sage dies ausdrücklich - ein tatsächlicher Mehrwert für das Wissenschaftssystem verbunden. Es ist und kann nicht unser Ziel sein, dass ein stetiger Einsatz des Bundes an dieser Stelle künftig zum Ausfall von Anteilen des einen oder anderen Landes führt.\n\nDie Basis, um zu diesem Mehrwert zu kommen, stellt die geplante Grundgesetzänderung dar.\n\nLassen Sie mich noch einmal auf das Stichwort „Kooperationsverbot“ zurückkommen. Man gewinnt ja in manchen Diskussionen wirklich den Eindruck, dass in unserem Bildungssystem ein Stoppschild zwischen Bund und Ländern steht,\n\ndas es aber so nicht gibt. Es wurden bereits einige Beispiele wie die Projekte im Hochschulbereich genannt. Aber ich möchte doch auch noch die Milliarden erwähnen, die inzwischen seitens des Bundes unabhängig von Mittelaufstockungen für Betriebskosten, Sondervermögen und vielem anderen mehr in die frühkindliche Bildung, in Kitas und Krippen geflossen sind.\n\nDas ist ein nicht unerheblicher Anteil.\n\nIch möchte als Beispiel auch an das gemeinsame Programm „Qualitätsoffensive Lehrerbildung“ zur Verbesserung der Lehramtsausbildung erinnern und nicht zuletzt auch an die finanziellen Freiräume, die durch die Komplettübernahme des BAföG durch den Bund bei den Ländern entstehen.\n\nMit Interesse haben wir zur Kenntnis genommen, dass je nach Bundesland ein Großteil des Geldes nicht nur in die Hochschulen, sondern wiederum auch in Kitas fließt, aber auch in viele Bereiche der Schulen.\n\n- Ich möchte jetzt keine Bewertung im Detail vornehmen, Herr Mutlu. Sie haben nachher noch Zeit, darauf zu antworten. - Aber das kommt doch nicht von ungefähr. Das ist doch jetzt erst möglich geworden: eine verbesserte Finanzierung des Bildungssystems mit knapp 1,2 Milliarden Euro jährlich, über diese Legislaturperiode hinaus, aber insgesamt in Länderzuständigkeit.\n\nIch wollte mit diesen Beispielen nur zeigen: Wir leisten also bereits einen erheblichen Beitrag über unsere eigentliche Zuständigkeit hinaus.\n\nBei allen Forderungen nach einem Mehr an Finanzierung: Wir wissen um die Unterschiedlichkeit und Differenziertheit in den Zielsetzungen der Länder. Am Ende kann es nicht das Ziel sein, dass der eine das Ziel der Reise bestimmt und der andere vielleicht nur und für immer die Reisekosten übernimmt.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, selbstverständlich ist Bildung auch eine gemeinschaftliche Aufgabe; aber jeder an seiner Stelle. Da wird uns hier und heute auch kein Kultusminister widersprechen. Im Gegenteil: Wir stehen zur Kulturhoheit der Länder und zur föderalen Kompetenzzuordnung.\n\nDies gilt im Übrigen auch für den heutigen Gesetzentwurf, der die Überregionalität von Projekten betont und in bestimmten Fällen die Zustimmung aller Länder erfordert; der Kollege Rupprecht hat es ja angesprochen. Deutschland ist ein großes Land mit teilweise völlig unterschiedlichen Regionen und damit verbundenen Herausforderungen. Dies gilt für viele Bereiche, auch für den weiten Raum der Bildung, vor allen Dingen aber für den Bereich der frühkindlichen und schulischen Bildung. Aus gutem Grund liegen deshalb die Zuständigkeiten der Länder gerade dort, wo sie sich besser auskennen, Entscheidungen treffen können und im Übrigen auch wollen.\n\nKolleginnen und Kollegen, die BAföG-Novelle und die vorgelegte Grundgesetzänderung gehören zusammen. Sie bieten die Chance, eine Strahlkraft in alle Bildungsbereiche hinein zu entfalten, nach innen wie nach außen. Sie bieten darüber hinaus Wissenschaft und Forschung ganz neue und verlässliche Perspektiven. Insofern ist es eine gute Situation für alle Beteiligten: für den Bund und die Länder, für die Hochschulen und Forschungseinrichtungen und vor allem für junge Menschen, die unser Land mit einer guten Ausbildung nach vorne bringen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9343,erich-irlstorfer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! CDU, CSU und liebe Kollegen der SPD: Ich kann mich noch an die Bundestagswahl 2013 erinnern. Im Anschluss an die Wahl haben wir in den Koalitionsverhandlungen gemeinsam den Rahmen für die Gesundheitspolitik der Koalition für diese Wahlperiode beschlossen.\n\nDer Koalitionsvertrag umfasst Vereinbarungen zur Sicherstellung und Verbesserung einer flächendeckenden ärztlichen Versorgung in der Bundesrepublik. Diese Vereinbarungen haben wir in erster Linie im GKV-Versorgungsstärkungsgesetz konkretisiert. Infolgedessen werden zum Beispiel in zehn Tagen die Terminservicestellen ihre Arbeit aufnehmen.\n\nMit dem Krankenhausstrukturgesetz haben wir wiederum die Ziele des Koalitionsvertrages in Bezug auf die Weiterentwicklung der stationären Versorgung in ein Gesetz gegossen. Im Zentrum der Reformen steht die Sicherstellung und Steigerung der Qualität in den Kliniken - all diese Dinge, die uns sehr wichtig sind. Ebenso gab es Reformen in der Pflege. Ich möchte schon daran erinnern, dass all diese Dinge keine Schnellschüsse waren, sondern wir das sauber und ordentlich miteinander vorbereitet haben. Mit den Reformen setzen wir eines der für mich wichtigsten und vielleicht auch komplexesten Vorhaben dieser Großen Koalition um, und das gilt auch für das GKV-Finanzstruktur- und Qualitäts-Weiterentwicklungsgesetz, das die unmögliche Abkürzung GKV-FQWG trägt und ein wahrer Zungenbrecher ist. All das basiert auf Vereinbarungen des Koalitionsvertrages, und darauf setzen wir auch.\n\nAllen genannten Gesetzen ist gemeinsam, dass sie das Ergebnis bewusster Entscheidungen sind. Ich möchte einmal grundsätzlich erläutern, weshalb die Finanzierung der gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung in der heutigen Form aus meiner Sicht richtig ist. Die Zahlen des Statistischen Bundesamtes und von Eurostat zu den Lohnnebenkosten in der Privatwirtschaft zeigen für 2014 folgendes Bild: Auf 100 Euro Bruttoverdienst entfielen in Deutschland zusätzlich 28 Euro Lohnnebenkosten. Im EU-Durchschnitt waren es 31 Euro. Im Durchschnitt der Länder der Euro-Zone waren es 35 Euro. Deutschland liegt also unter dem Durchschnitt, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren. Ich sage in aller Deutlichkeit: Das ist auch gut und notwendig.\n\nNeben den Lohnnebenkosten spielt natürlich eine Vielzahl anderer Faktoren für den wirtschaftlichen Erfolg eines Landes eine Rolle. Beispielsweise betragen die Lohnnebenkosten in Schweden 46 Prozent, in Dänemark nur 15 Prozent, doch beides sind durchaus wirtschaftlich starke Länder. Ich gestehe: Ich bin der Auffassung, dass wir uns nicht an den Lohnnebenkosten Frankreichs in Höhe von 47 Prozent oder Italiens in Höhe von 39 Prozent ein Beispiel nehmen sollten. Ich möchte hier keine wirtschaftliche Diskussion führen. Es scheint mir jedoch offenkundig, dass eine Begrenzung der Lohnnebenkosten durchaus sinnvoll und notwendig ist, um die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der deutschen Wirtschaft aufrechtzuerhalten und zu gewährleisten.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren der Opposition, Sie können mit Sicherheit vieles kritisieren und aus Ihrem Blickwinkel sehen; aber ich glaube, Sie können der Großen Koalition hier nicht vorwerfen, dass unsere Wirtschaftsdaten nicht in Ordnung wären, dass sie nicht gut wären.\n\nIch möchte auch sagen: Ein weiteres Indiz für die Relevanz der Lohnnebenkosten ist die Tatsache, dass die Parität in der Finanzierung der gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung - das wurde schon erwähnt - unter Rot-Grün aufgegeben wurde, als Deutschland noch als kranker Mann Europas tituliert wurde. Soweit es in einer solchen Situation möglich und wirtschaftlich sinnvoll ist, sollte man die Arbeitgeber von Belastungen durch hohe Lohnnebenkosten etwas verschonen.\n\nMan kann sich jetzt fragen, ob eine paritätische Finanzierung der gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung aus einem anderen Grund geboten wäre - Sie tun das -, etwa weil die Parität in allen anderen Bereichen der Sozialversicherung besteht, nur in der Krankenversicherung nicht, also aus ordnungspolitischen Gründen, oder weil die Parität ein Wert an sich ist. Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, ich bin mir nicht hundertprozentig sicher, ob die Parität ein Wert an sich ist. Im Allgemeinen bin ich aber der Auffassung, dass eine allzu unausgewogene Verteilung der Finanzierung von Sozialversicherungssystemen weder wirtschaftspolitisch noch gesellschaftspolitisch richtig wäre.\n\nAllerdings befinden wir uns in Deutschland heute nicht in der Lage, dass die Sozialversicherung unausgewogen finanziert wäre. Ich finde im Gegenteil, dass sie ziemlich ausgewogen finanziert ist, auch unter Berücksichtigung der aktuellen Steigerung der Krankenversicherungsbeiträge.\n\nGerne. - Bitte.\n\nFrau Kollegin, diese Aufstellung entspricht mit Sicherheit der Wahrheit. Aber ich glaube, das wäre ein falsches Signal zum falschen Zeitpunkt. Deshalb ist es richtig, dass wir so handeln, wie wir es vorhaben. Das ist eine politische Entscheidung.\n\nIm Übrigen sind die Beitragsanpassungen nicht unerklärlich oder in irgendeiner Form beliebig getroffen worden, sondern sie ergeben sich aufgrund der Verbesserungen in der Gesundheitsvorsorge, des medizinischen Fortschritts und auch der demografischen Entwicklung, die sich im solidarischen System der GKVen widerspiegelt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Linken, Sie fordern, genauso wie der Kollege Lauterbach, nahezu in jedem zweiten Antrag, den wir im Gesundheitsausschuss beraten und im Plenum besprechen, die Einführung der Bürgerversicherung. Wie das konkret und sinnvoll aussehen soll, das habe ich von Ihrer Seite bis heute leider noch nicht erfahren. Ich kann nur sagen: Aus dem vorliegenden Antrag geht das ebenfalls nicht hervor.\n\nAußerdem wird im vorliegenden Antrag der Linken die Abschaffung der Zusatzbeiträge gefordert. Diese Zusatzbeiträge haben allerdings einen bestimmten Sinn und Zweck. Wir als CDU/CSU wollen einen Versorgungswettbewerb zwischen den Kassen. Ebenso wollen wir die Krankenkassen zur Wirtschaftlichkeit anhalten. Dafür nutzen wir eine ganze Reihe von Instrumenten. Der Zusatzbeitrag ist eines davon. Die Abschaffung des Zusatzbeitrags würde daher erfordern, eine Alternative anzubieten. Sie verweisen auf Ungenauigkeiten im Morbi-RSA, doch dies ist in meinen Augen eine andere Baustelle. Morbi-RSA und Zusatzbeitrag stehen zwar in einem Zusammenhang, sie sind aber nicht austauschbar, auch nicht, wenn man am Morbi-RSA Änderungen vorgenommen hätte.\n\nAbschließend noch ein letzter Gedanke. Wenn die Parität als Prinzip beschworen wird und die Unausgewogenheit der Sozialversicherungsbeiträge thematisiert wird, dann bitte ich, die Situation insgesamt zu betrachten. Es ist doch so, dass eine paritätische Finanzierung der Sozialversicherungssysteme nicht unbedingt von Vorteil für alle Arbeitnehmer wäre. Beispielsweise werden die Beiträge zur Unfallversicherung allein von der Arbeitgeberseite getragen. Auch im Fall von Krankheit wird die Entgeltfortzahlung allein vom Arbeitgeber getragen, bevor die Krankenkasse nach sechs Wochen einspringt und Krankengeld zahlt. Es gibt auch noch andere Beispiele.\n\nSelbstverständlich achte ich auf die Zeit. - Ich komme zum Schluss. Ab einem gewissen Grad des Ungleichgewichts der Anteile der Arbeitnehmer und Arbeitgeber stellt sich gewiss die Frage nach einer Korrektur. Ich möchte aber sagen, dass das heute nicht der Fall ist. Es ist daher nicht der richtige Zeitpunkt.\n\nAn die Kollegen der SPD gerichtet möchte ich sagen: Wir haben den Arbeitgeberanteil im Koalitionsvertrag aus guten Gründen so festgeschrieben. Daran halten wir uns auch. Es wäre schön, wenn Sie uns hier unterstützen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n5803,eva-bulling-schroter,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Bürgerinnen und Bürger geben heute für das Heizen und für Warmwasser 10 Milliarden Euro im Jahr mehr aus als noch vor zehn Jahren. 40 Prozent des Energiebedarfs in Deutschland entfällt auf den Gebäudebestand.\n\nTrotzdem sind die Gebäude weiterhin nicht auf der Höhe der Zeit. Über die Hälfte aller Fassaden und mehr als ein Drittel aller Dächer älterer Gebäude haben keine Dämmung. Mehr als jede zweite Heizungsanlage wurde vor 1997 eingebaut. - Das hat in dieser Woche die Deutsche Energie-Agentur gesagt.\n\nAuch die Koalition scheint nicht ganz auf der Höhe der Zeit zu sein.\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Dieses Hickhack in der Regierung muss aufhören. Das versteht kein Mensch da draußen. Fragen Sie doch einmal die Leute! Sie wollen nämlich Taten und Erfolge sehen. Es tut sich aber nichts.\n\nEs gibt wirklich keinen schlechteren Moment als jetzt, den Steuerbonus für die energetische Gebäudesanierung auszubremsen. Bei den Bestandssanierungen beklagt die Dämmstoffbranche nach einem Minus von 4 Prozent im Vorjahr einen weiteren Umsatzrückgang um fast 9 Prozent. Das hat allerdings auch etwas mit billigem Heizöl und Risiken bei den Dämmstoffen zu tun.\n\nDer Heizungsmarkt stottert ebenfalls. 2014 verkaufte die Branche 4 Prozent weniger als 2013, und der Anteil der erneuerbaren Energien im Wärmebereich stagniert derweil bei 9,9 Prozent.\n\nDas alles sind Alarmsignale, die wir nicht einfach ignorieren dürfen. Wir brauchen eine Sanierungsquote von mindestens 2 Prozent; das wurde schon gesagt. Seit Jahren liegen wir aber unter diesem Wert. Jetzt streiten Sie, und währenddessen wird die Erderwärmung sicher keine Pause einlegen, sondern natürlich weitergehen.\n\nAn dieser Stelle möchte ich einmal klar sagen, warum der Ärger bei uns Linken so groß ist: Die Bundeskanzlerin persönlich hat der Öffentlichkeit den Steuerbonus versprochen,\n\nund zwar Ende letzten Jahres, am 11. Dezember 2014, nach ihrem Treffen mit den Länderchefs. Wenige Tage davor war die steuerliche Förderung auch in den Nationalen Aktionsplan Energieeffizienz und das Aktionsprogramm Klimaschutz 2020 aufgenommen worden.\n\nIch erinnere mich noch, dass Ministerpräsident Haseloff aus Sachsen-Anhalt gleich nach der Spitzenrunde den Durchbruch ausgerufen hat. Endlich, nach Jahren der Verhandlungen, sei man so weit - Zitat -, „dass dieses Gesetz im nächsten Jahr … auf den Weg gebracht wird“. 40 Petajoule Energieeinsparung sollte der Steuerbonus bis 2020 bringen. Das wäre ja schon einmal nicht schlecht.\n\nNur 100 Tage hat es dann aber gedauert, bis eine der wichtigsten Säulen des Klimaplans weggebrochen ist. Ich finde, das geht überhaupt nicht; das können wir Ihnen nicht durchgehen lassen.\n\nMit dem Umweltausschuss war ich auf der UN-Klimakonferenz in Lima; einige waren dabei. In Gesprächen haben Kollegen aus Dänemark nicht nur über die Massivbauweise der deutschen Häuslebauer geschmunzelt und uns darauf hingewiesen, wir würden unökologisch und teuer für die Ewigkeit bauen: viel Stein statt Holz. Vor allem aber haben sie darüber berichtet, wie man Gebäudeeffizienz richtig machen kann. Am selben Tag hat übrigens Umweltministerin Hendricks vor der Weltgemeinschaft erklärt, dass Deutschland in Sachen Klimaschutz Wort hält. - Haha!\n\nIch finde es schädlich, was die Große Koalition hier für ein Bild abgibt. Ich frage mich: Was ist da los? Lassen sich SPD und CDU von Bayern an der Nase herumführen? Oder wollte Herr Oppermann Herrn Seehofer nur auflaufen lassen? Hat dessen Festhalten am Handwerkerbonus zur Absage an das ganze CO2-Gebäudesanierungsprogramm geführt? Das sagt jedenfalls die Staatskanzlei in München. Wie auch immer: Die Öffentlichkeit tappt im Dunkeln. Ich finde, das geht überhaupt nicht. Die Menschen haben ein Recht darauf, zu erfahren, was da los ist.\n\nAuf der internationalen Ebene wird es ganz schwierig. Wenn die Energiewende im Gebäudebereich in Deutschland scheitert, ob an Regionalpolitikern oder an Koalitionsgezänk: Wie sollen wir da vom Rest der Welt glaubhaft einfordern, sich der globalen Energiewende anzuschließen, meine Damen und Herren?\n\nWir sagen: Steuerliche Förderung ist ein geeignetes Instrument. Auch der Handwerkerbonus macht für viele Sinn. Ich bin der Meinung, dass auch Eigentümer mit einem geringen Einkommen vom Handwerkerbonus profitieren sollten. Das kommt für Sie leider nicht infrage. Diese Förderung können nur Eigentümer ab einem bestimmten Einkommen in Anspruch nehmen. Aber auch andere haben ein Recht darauf.\n\nHerr Krischer hat gesagt: Wir können Putin dadurch bekämpfen, indem wir weniger Öl und Gas kaufen. - Dazu kann ich nur sagen: Führen Sie doch einmal im Gebäudebereich Krieg, und sanieren Sie. Nehmen Sie die Gelder aus der Rüstungskasse. Das wäre wirklich sinnvoll.\n\nDann hätten wir genügend Geld, sowohl zur Finanzierung des Handwerkerbonus als auch für die anderen Dinge. Da muss man gucken, wie man das Geld verteilt. Sie alle miteinander wollen das offensichtlich nicht. Das ist einfach schädlich.\"\n1376,barbara-hendricks,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Bericht des Weltklimarates IPCC ist erneut ein Weckruf an uns alle, an die gesamte Menschheit, wenn man so will. Wir wissen alle: Die Folgen des Klimawandels sind bereits heute mehr als deutlich zu beobachten. In den kommenden Jahrzehnten drohen durch Zunahme von Hitze und Extremereignissen immer stärkere Nachteile für Menschen und Ökosysteme. Ohne raschen und ambitionierten Klimaschutz wäre ein globaler Temperaturanstieg um durchschnittlich 4 Grad Celsius oder mehr wahrscheinlich. Das wäre eine Welt, in der wir uns gar nicht vorstellen können zu leben. Deswegen ist natürlich das Ziel, den Anstieg auf maximal 2 Grad zu begrenzen, das größte Ziel, das wir in diesem Zusammenhang haben. Die Möglichkeiten zur Anpassung an den Klimawandel würden bei einem Anstieg von 4 Grad nämlich schwinden oder sehr viel teurer werden. Es steigt auch die Gefahr von abrupten, unumkehrbaren Klimaänderungen, sogenannten Kipppunkten. Der IPCC betont auch, dass angesichts des zu erwartenden Klimawandels die gegenwärtigen Anpassungsmaßnahmen schon nicht mehr ausreichen.\n\nFür mich sind die politischen Konsequenzen aus den neuen IPCC-Berichten - einen Teilbericht haben wir heute vorliegen, und schon in anderthalb Wochen bekommen wir hier in Berlin einen weiteren Teilbericht überreicht - vollkommen klar: Eine verantwortungsvolle Klimapolitik muss immer auf zwei Säulen stehen: Sie muss erstens dafür sorgen, dass die Erderwärmung die 2\u001eGrad-Marke nicht übersteigt. Sie muss aber zweitens auch Risiken erkennen und sich auf die nicht vermeidbaren Folgen von Klimaveränderungen vorbereiten und einstellen.\n\nAnpassung ist jedenfalls weder leichter noch billiger als Vermeidung. Trotzdem müssen wir auch an Anpassungsstrategien denken. Wir wissen aber, wie gesagt, dass Anpassung ganz gewiss nicht leichter oder billiger ist als Vermeidung, im Gegenteil: Je zögerlicher die Staatengemeinschaft bei der Minderung der Treibhausgase ist, desto mehr wird schließlich für Anpassungen zu zahlen sein.\n\nDie IPCC-Ergebnisse sind eine Bestätigung für die ehrgeizigen Klimaschutzziele der Bundesregierung. Bis zum Jahr 2050 wollen wir in der EU die Emissionen um 80 bis 95 Prozent absenken, und wir in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland haben schon den Ehrgeiz, bei der Absenkung eher am oberen als am unteren Rand zu liegen, also eher an 95 Prozent zu kommen, als bei 80 Prozent zu verbleiben.\n\nUnser nächstes Etappenziel ist es, die Treibhausgasemissionen hier in Deutschland bis 2020 um mindestens 40 Prozent gegenüber 1990 zu senken.\n\nIch habe mir nach meinem Amtsantritt aufarbeiten lassen, wo wir mit den bisher von der Bundesregierung beschlossenen Maßnahmen stehen. Die nüchterne Eröffnungsbilanz zu Beginn dieser Legislaturperiode ist, dass wir mit den Maßnahmen, die wir bislang ergriffen haben, eine Minderung der Treibhausgase um etwa 33 bis 35 Prozent bis zum Jahr 2020 erreichen können. Da ich mir eine verhältnismäßig schlechte Wirtschaftsentwicklung, die dazu führen würde, dass wir die Reduzierung um 35 Prozent erreichen, nicht wünschen kann und ich nicht glaube, dass wir damit zu rechnen haben, müssen wir davon ausgehen, dass tatsächlich bis zum Jahr 2020 eine Lücke von 7 Prozentpunkten verbleibt, die wir mit den bisher ergriffenen Maßnahmen nicht schließen können. Ich werde deswegen, wie schon angekündigt wurde - es wurde eben angesprochen -, auf der Basis dieser Ausgangsanalyse, nach der wir noch 7 Prozentpunkte mehr erreichen müssen, mit den Ressorts der Bundesregierung ein Sofortprogramm abstimmen, mit dem wir die Politiklücke, die wir bisher offenbar haben, schließen können. Dabei ist klar:\n\nErstens. Das Umwelt- und Bauministerium kann, auch wenn es einen großen Teil erbringen kann, die zusätzlichen Minderungen nicht alleine erbringen. Wir brauchen das Mittun aller Ressorts, die ihre Verantwortung für die jeweiligen Sektoren, für die sie zuständig sind, übernehmen müssen.\n\nJeder muss also zusätzliche Klimaschutzmaßnahmen erbringen.\n\nZweitens. Wir dürfen uns und auch der Öffentlichkeit nichts schönrechnen. Die Minderungsmaßnahmen müssen geeignet sein, die notwendigen Erfolge zu bringen.\n\nDrittens. Auch ein Sofortprogramm gelingt leider nicht im Hauruckverfahren, sondern muss sorgfältig mit den betroffenen Ministerien ausgearbeitet werden.\n\nIch werde noch vor Ostern erste Eckpunkte des Programms an die Ressorts versenden. In einer ressortübergreifenden Arbeitsgruppe werden wir auf der Basis dieser Eckpunkte die konkreten Maßnahmen verabreden.\n\nIm Herbst sollten wir das Programm im Kabinett verabschieden können. Ich glaube, dass wir dann endlich wieder die Vorreiterrolle zurückerobert haben, die uns in der Vergangenheit etwas abhandengekommen ist. Aber es ist schon richtig: Wir gelten immer noch als beispielhaft. Nur, der Ehrgeiz hat in Europa insgesamt etwas nachgelassen. Dann muss es unser Ziel sein, nicht nur selber wieder ehrgeiziger zu werden, sondern auch den Ehrgeiz der anderen gleichsam mitzuziehen.\n\nIch will dem skizzierten Prozess nicht vorgreifen; aber es ist völlig klar - das haben der Bundeswirtschaftsminister und ich in den letzten Wochen immer wieder gesagt -, dass eine Reform des Emissionshandels einen bedeutenden Teil der zusätzlichen Minderungen ermöglichen muss. Denn dieses Instrument steuert ja die Emissionsminderungen im gesamten Bereich der Energiewirtschaft und der Industrie.\n\nKollege Hofreiter, Sie machen es sich ein bisschen zu leicht, wenn Sie so tun, als würden alle Menschen, die aus Nordrhein-Westfalen kommen, nicht begreifen, dass beim Verbrennen von Kohle CO2 entsteht. Das wissen wir sehr wohl, keine Sorge.\n\n- Herr Krischer kommt sogar aus dem Aachener Kohlerevier, ich nicht.\n\nDie Energiewende mit dem Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien und mehr Energieeffizienz kann nur in Kombination mit einer solchen Reform des Emissionshandels ihre volle Wirksamkeit für den Klimaschutz erbringen. Selbstverständlich muss auch der Verkehrssektor seinen Beitrag für mehr Klimaschutz leisten. Und im Gebäudebereich werden wir gemeinsam mit dem Energieminister unter anderem dafür sorgen, dass die bereitstehenden Fördermittel eine maximale Wirksamkeit für den Klimaschutz erreichen. Im Übrigen ist dies auch die vernünftigste Strategie, um unsere Abhängigkeit von Gasimporten zu mindern.\n\nIch bin in den letzten Tagen häufiger auf ein Interview angesprochen worden, das ich gegeben habe. Ich will dazu nur so viel sagen: Ich weiß auch, dass wir das Klima nicht dadurch retten, dass wir Pullover anziehen.\n\nAber ich weiß - und das wollte ich zum Ausdruck bringen; ich hoffe, dass das die meisten auch so verstanden haben -, dass auch wir in Mitteleuropa unsere Lebensweise überprüfen müssen. Es geht hier nicht allein um staatliche Maßnahmen, die wir selbstverständlich brauchen: Vorgaben im Ordnungsrecht, Fördermaßnahmen und vieles andere mehr. Es geht auch darum, dass wir unsere eigene Lebensweise überprüfen. Wir sollten nicht vergessen, dass die Menschen in den Tropen oder in den Subtropen ihr Leben sozusagen total auf den Kopf stellen - oder es sogar verlieren. Im Gegensatz dazu sind die Anpassungsmaßnahmen, die von uns erwartet werden, verhältnismäßig überschaubar.\n\nIn der EU setzen wir uns dafür ein, dass ehrgeizige Ziele für das Jahr 2030 beschlossen werden; das ist heute schon angesprochen worden. Selbstverständlich setzen wir uns für die Zieltrias ein: 40 Prozent Emissionsminderung, Zunahme des Anteils der erneuerbaren Energien an der Stromversorgung um 30 Prozent und ein wirklich spürbares Ziel bei der Energieeffizienz.\n\nEs ist nicht so einfach, das in der Europäischen Union zum Gemeingut zu machen, aber - Kollege Jung und andere haben darauf hingewiesen - dies ist unser gemeinsames Ziel. Nur auf diese Weise können wir bei den Vereinbarungen, die auf uns zukommen werden, voranschreiten. Wir wissen ja, dass wir die Ziele auf europäischer Ebene erreichen müssen; denn nur durch unser entschlossenes Handeln auf europäischer Ebene können wir wiederum auf internationaler Ebene voranschreiten.\n\nWir haben die Verantwortung, die Klimakonferenz Ende des Jahres 2015 zu einem Erfolg zu bringen. Dafür arbeiten wir auf allen Ebenen. Wir haben zum Beispiel so etwas wie eine „Klimaaußenpolitik“ angestoßen. Ich bin meinem Kollegen Frank-Walter Steinmeier außerordentlich dankbar, dass er dafür gesorgt hat, dass sich diejenigen, die sowieso für uns im Ausland tätig sind, nämlich im Diplomatischen Dienst, dieses zu ihrer Aufgabe gemacht haben und viele notwendige Gespräche führen.\n\nSelbstverständlich geschieht das auch auf der Leitungsebene meines Ministeriums. Aber wir können natürlich nicht in der ganzen Welt unterwegs sein; denn irgendwie müssen wir die Arbeit zu Hause auch noch erledigen. Diese Klimaaußenpolitik ist gerade im Hinblick auf 2015 von hoher Bedeutung; denn die Interessenlagen in der Welt sind nun mal außerordentlich unterschiedlich.\n\nDanke. - Im Juli werden wir zum Petersberger Klimadialog einladen. Wir tun alles, um voranzuschreiten. Wir wissen, dass wir das nicht alleine können. Wir sind darauf angewiesen, dass die Weltgemeinschaft das ebenso sieht wie wir. Wir sind auch auf das Verständnis und das Engagement unserer Bürgerinnen und Bürger angewiesen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n5783,rita-hagl-kehl,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wie mein Kollege Wilhelm Priesmeier gerade erläutert hat, besteht die Basis einer zukunftsfähigen -Agrarpolitik nach unserer Auffassung aus lebendigen ländlichen Räumen und einer nachhaltigen Landbewirtschaftung. Ziel der SPD-Bundestagsfraktion ist es, eine Landwirtschaft zu fördern, die flächendeckend wirtschaftet, multifunktional ausgerichtet ist und ressourcenschonend produziert. In diesem Sinne fördern wir das nachhaltigste Produktionssystem, nämlich den ökologischen Landbau. Deswegen finde ich es sehr schade, dass im Antrag der Grünen auf diesen Punkt nicht konkret eingegangen wird. Viele Themen, die im Antrag angesprochen worden sind, hängen sehr eng mit dem ökologischen Landbau zusammen. Genau aus diesem Grund halte ich es für sinnvoll, die Förderung des ökologischen Landbaus nicht nur im Rahmen der heutigen Debatte, sondern allgemein für die Zukunft der deutschen Landwirtschaft in den Vordergrund zu stellen.\n\nDie ökologische Landwirtschaft ist ein Produktionssystem, welches qualitativ hochwertige und gesunde -Lebensmittel herstellt. Darüber hinaus erbringt der Ökolandbau eine Vielzahl gesellschaftlich erwünschter Leistungen. Er erhält und schont die natürlichen Ressourcen im besonderen Maße und hat vielfältige positive Auswirkungen auf den Boden-, Gewässer- und Tierschutz sowie auf die Artenvielfalt. Diese nachhaltige Form der Landwirtschaft verzichtet auf leichtlösliche mineralische Stickstoffdüngemittel, chemisch-synthetische Pflanzenschutzmittel und gentechnisch veränderte Organismen. Damit vermeidet er Verunreinigungen von Grund- und Oberflächenwasser mit zu viel Nitrat und Phosphaten. An dieser Stelle landen wir wieder bei der laufenden Novellierung der Düngeverordnung und der Umsetzung der EU-Nitratrichtlinie, zu der ich hier bereits des Öfteren gesprochen habe.\n\nIm Hinblick auf diese Argumente sollte uns daran gelegen sein, die ökologische Land- und Lebensmittelwirtschaft in Deutschland zu stärken. Nur so kann die Agrarwende in der Tat realisiert werden. Immer mehr Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher entscheiden sich für gesunde und ökologisch erzeugte regionale Lebensmittel, wodurch sich der Biolebensmittelmarkt dynamisch entwickelt und ständig wächst. Es wurde zum SPD-Anliegen, die Tätigkeit der heimischen Biobauern zu fördern, damit diese ebenfalls vom Wachstum profitieren können. Die Nachfrage ist da; aber auch ein passendes Angebot soll vorhanden sein. Unser politisches Ziel ist, dass immer mehr Betriebe mit unterschiedlicher Größe, Produktionsausrichtung und Beschäftigungsstruktur auf eine ökologische Produktionsweise umstellen - und nicht nur kleine Betriebe, wie im Antrag gefordert wird.\n\nEine Ausweitung der Ökoanbaufläche käme Landwirten, Verbrauchern, landwirtschaftlichen Nutztieren und der Umwelt gleichermaßen zugute.\n\nDamit das alles möglich wird, müssen noch einige Schritte unternommen werden. Als Erstes bedarf es eines verlässlichen und eindeutigen europäischen Rechtsrahmens.\n\nBereits im September letzten Jahres haben wir auf unsere Initiative hin zusammen mit dem Koalitionspartner einen Antrag zur Novellierung der EU-Öko-Verordnung erarbeitet, dem fraktionsübergreifend zugestimmt wurde. Dieser Antrag unterstützt die Bundesregierung bei den Verhandlungen mit der Kommission zur Weiterentwicklung des europäischen Rechtsrahmens.\n\nAls Zweites bedarf es eines abgestimmten Maßnahmenbündels zur Förderung des ökologischen Landbaus auf europäischer, aber natürlich auch auf nationaler Ebene. Damit diese Maßnahmen umgesetzt werden, muss eine ausreichende Finanzierung zur Verfügung stehen. Bislang gibt es in Deutschland keine einheitliche und auf Dauer angelegte Strategie zur Förderung der ökologischen Land- und Lebensmittelwirtschaft. Wenn wir das 20-Prozent-Ziel erreichen wollen, das Minister Schmidt in seinem „Zukunftsplan Öko“ angekündigt hat, müssen wir diese Fördermaßnahmen strategisch besser koordinieren. Daher fordern wir für den Haushalt 2016 mehr Geld für das Bundesprogramm „Ökologischer Landbau und andere Formen nachhaltiger Landwirtschaft“.\n\nDamit die ökologische Land- und Lebensmittelwirtschaft in Deutschland zu einem Erfolg wird, halte ich es für notwendig, dass alle an diesem Produktionssystem Beteiligten kooperieren. Wir als Gesetzgeber legen den Rechtsrahmen fest, bezogen auf die Interessen der Verbände, der Landwirtschaft und der Verbraucher. Die anderen Teilnehmer in diesem System haben aber auch eine sehr wichtige Rolle. Die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher sollen darauf achten, was sie essen und auf welche Art und Weise es produziert wurde. Der Preis eines Produkts entspricht meistens der Qualität, und die Qualität entspricht meistens einer gerechten Landwirtschaft. Auch die Produzenten sollten darauf achten, dass sie mit dem Boden und den Ressourcen schonend umgehen. Die Nachhaltigkeit ist wichtig, damit auch in Zukunft regionale und gesunde Lebensmittel zur Verfügung stehen. Wir alle müssen dabei auf unsere Rolle achten und diese auch wahrnehmen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n12412,wolfgang-gehrcke,\"Danke sehr, Frau Präsidentin. - Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben uns sehr darum bemüht, die Bundesregierung zu ermuntern, zu dem geplanten EU-Lateinamerika-Gipfel, wenngleich auch nicht auf der Ebene der Regierungschefs, sondern der Außenminister, eine Regierungserklärung abzugeben. Wenn man weiß, welche Bedeutung Lateinamerika in der Zusammenarbeit und bei den Anstrengungen zur Bekämpfung von Hunger und Armut hat, wäre das durchaus angemessen gewesen. Man muss den Ländern Lateinamerikas mehr anbieten können als nur diese unsäglichen Debatten über Freihandelsverträge.\n\nDas hätten wir gerne gehabt. Die Regierung wollte das nicht. Deswegen haben wir mit einem eigenen Antrag im Vorwege ein paar Vorschläge eingebracht. Ich will das zuspitzen auf drei Länder, die aber exemplarisch stehen.\n\nDas erste Land ist Kuba. Die Beziehungen zwischen Deutschland und Kuba haben sich grundlegend verbessert. Das ist ein großer Vorteil. In Kuba findet ein Prozess von wirtschaftlichen Reformen statt, von denen ich sehr hoffe, dass sie nicht die sozialen Bindungen der Gesellschaft aufsprengen. Es ist ja noch nicht alles ausgemacht. Ich glaube, dass wir auf dem Wege sind, eine kulturell engere Zusammenarbeit zustande zu bringen, und ich hoffe auch, dass das soziale Netz in Kuba immer tragfähiger wird - für alle Teile der Gesellschaft.\n\nWäre es nicht gut, das Beispiel Kubas, das auch damit verbunden ist, dass dieser sogenannte Gemeinsame Standpunkt der Europäischen Union erledigt worden ist, öffentlich zu diskutieren? Ich würde es gut finden. Ich möchte auch ein klares Wort der Bundesregierung, dass sie sich künftig bei Abstimmungen über die Frage, ob die Blockade der USA gegenüber Kuba vollständig aufgehoben wird, auf die Seite der Gegner einer solchen Blockade schlägt. Das wollen wir hier diskutieren. Ich habe es ungeheuer genossen, dass Obama Kuba besucht hat.\n\nBei diesem großen Konzert der Rolling Stones in Havanna wäre ich gerne dabei gewesen und viele andere auch. Lassen Sie uns das gemeinsam ausbauen.\n\nVon Kuba komme ich zum zweiten Land und kann nur appellhaft sagen: Lassen Sie uns alles tun, um den Regierungschef Kolumbiens, den Präsidenten Santos, und die FARC-Rebellen zu ermuntern, bei dem geschlossenen Abkommen, das ja nicht von der Bevölkerung ratifiziert worden ist, zu bleiben. Diese Wunde des Krieges in Lateinamerika muss unbedingt geschlossen werden.\n\nDa könnten Deutschland und die Europäische Union wirklich Einfluss nehmen und sagen: Wir wollen das, wir unterstützen das.\n\nIch komme zum dritten Land - da appelliere ich insbesondere an die Fraktion der SPD -: Die Absetzung von Dilma Rousseff in Brasilien war kein reguläres Verfahren. Die Putschisten in Lateinamerika kommen heute nicht mehr in Offiziersuniformen und Stiefeln daher, sondern es sind Menschen in Nadelstreifenanzügen.\n\nZu dem neuen Präsidenten - ein illegaler Präsident, wie ich finde - muss sich die Bundesregierung auch einmal erklären. Im Ausschuss ist meine Formulierung „Das war ein Putsch“ von fast allen bis auf die CDU/CSU geteilt worden. Das habe ich auch nicht anders erwartet.\n\nDer neue Präsident hat als Erstes angekündigt, die öffentlichen Ausgaben für die kommenden 20 Jahre einzufrieren und dadurch im Bildungs- und Sozialbereich mehr als 100 Milliarden Euro einzusparen. Wissen Sie, was das für ein Land wie Brasilien bedeutet, wo unter Rousseff und Lula die Armut endlich bekämpft worden ist? Wenn man die öffentlichen Ausgaben einspart, schlägt man wieder auf die Armen und Benachteiligten der Gesellschaft ein. Ich finde, ein europäischer Protest wäre mehr als angemessen. Ich hätte gerne von der Bundesregierung gehört, ob sie es macht oder nicht. Hoffen wir einmal, dass sie sich einiges zu Herzen nimmt. Man kann nicht in Kuba die Bedingungen verbessern und dann sagen: Das größte Land der ganzen Region, das prägend ist, interessiert uns nicht. - Ich meine, dass wir gemeinsam in diese Richtung überlegen sollten.\n\nDanke sehr.\"\n4965,kerstin-tack,\"Herr Präsident! Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Seit jeher wissen wir: Bildung ist der Schlüssel und die Eintrittskarte zu einem selbstbestimmten Leben, zu gesellschaftlicher Teilhabe und zu ökonomischer Unabhängigkeit. Weder die soziale oder ethnische Herkunft noch die religiöse Weltanschauung, das Geschlecht, das Alter, die Sexualität oder der Umstand einer Behinderung sollen hier beeinflussend wirken. Deshalb möchte ich mich in meiner Rede auf das Schwerpunktthema des Berichtes fokussieren, nämlich auf die Menschen mit Behinderung.\n\nSchauen wir uns die aktuelle Datenlage an, so sehen wir, dass wir in unserer Verantwortungsgemeinschaft beim Umgang mit Menschen mit Behinderung, bei der Umsetzung der UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention und hinsichtlich eines inklusiven Bildungssystems noch einen langen Weg vor uns haben.\n\n35 Prozent der Kindertagesstätten in Deutschland arbeiten im Moment inklusiv, das heißt, dort werden Kinder mit und ohne Behinderung gemeinschaftlich betreut, erzogen und gebildet. 35 Prozent: Diese Zahl ist nicht klein, aber deutlich ausbaufähig.\n\nIm Bereich der Schule haben 6,6 Prozent der Kinder einen sonderpädagogischen Förderbedarf. Das sind eine halbe Million Kinder und Jugendliche. 72 Prozent von ihnen gehen in die Förderschule. Lediglich 28 Prozent werden also in einer allgemeinbildenden Schule beschult. Auch das ist deutlich steigerungsfähig.\n\nZwar besuchen immer mehr Kinder und Jugendliche mit und ohne Behinderung gemeinsam unsere Kitas und Schulen, doch diese Zahl nimmt mit steigendem Alter ab, das heißt, vom Besuch einer Kita an wird mit jedem weiteren Übergang - von der Kita zur Grundschule, von der Grundschule zur weiterführenden Schule - erneut selektiert, wodurch junge Menschen - insbesondere mit Behinderung - aus dem Bildungssystem herausfallen. Das kann nicht unser Anspruch an ein inklusives, gemeinsames Bilden und Lernen in Schulen sein.\n\nFast drei Viertel der Förderschülerinnen und -schüler haben überhaupt keinen Schulabschluss. Auch da ist unser Anspruch ein anderer.\n\nEin großes Defizit - Frau Wanka hat es erwähnt - besteht auch in der Fortbildung der Lehrkräfte. Obwohl 70 Prozent der Grundschullehrkräfte - Sie hatten es erwähnt - einen Bedarf an Fort- und Weiterbildung an-gemeldet haben, haben real aber nur 9,5 Prozent ein -solches Angebot angenommen. Bei den Gymnasiallehrkräften sind es gerade einmal 2 Prozent. Das heißt, selbst wenn eine Schule Fortbildung anbietet, so ist die Wahrnehmung dieses Angebots doch immer noch sehr überschaubar.\n\nAusbildungsuchende junge Menschen müssen eine doppelte Einschränkung hinnehmen. Zum einen gingen zwischen 2009 und 2012 sowohl die Zahl der neu abgeschlossenen Ausbildungsverträge als auch das Angebot und die Nachfrage nach Ausbildungsverhältnissen um jeweils circa 30 Prozent zurück. Zum anderen steht ihnen sowieso nur ein begrenztes, institutionell definiertes Berufsspektrum zur Verfügung.\n\nIm Bereich der akademischen Ausbildung waren 2012 lediglich ein Siebtel aller Studierenden durch eine Behinderung oder eine chronische Erkrankung beeinträchtigt und haben aufgrund ihrer Beeinträchtigung Nachteile im Studium erfahren. Häufig wechseln sie die Hochschule und ihr Studienfach. Häufig kommt es zu Abbrüchen, und es gibt Schwierigkeiten bei den Prüfungsordnungen. Häufig brauchen sie mehr Zeit, um ihr Studium zu absolvieren. Die Prüfungssituation erleben sie als schwieriger, als es für Studierende ohne Beeinträchtigung der Fall ist. Deshalb muss die Unterstützung für diese Studierenden eine ganz besondere sein.\n\nWir sehen also: Wir sind im Bildungssystem noch eine ganze Ecke von den von uns erklärten Zielen entfernt. Ich denke, es reicht auch nicht, ein Kind aus einer Förderschule in eine allgemeinbildende Schule zu stecken und ihm einige wenige Förderstunden zu geben. Das ist, wenn man es bei Lichte betrachtet, nicht mehr als eine Einzelintegration. Was wir wollen, ist Inklusion. Wir wollen die Veränderung der Systeme. Wir wollen, dass durch unsere Systeme allen Kindern und Jugendlichen eine gute Förderung organisiert wird, eine gute Unterstützung, die jedem, völlig unabhängig davon, ob mit oder ohne Behinderung, einen erfolgreichen Bildungsweg ermöglicht.\n\nAber wir sehen - das macht auch der Bericht deutlich -: Es gibt Hürden bei der Umsetzung. Natürlich sind die unterschiedlichen Regelungen in den Schulsystemen der Bundesländer nicht immer hilfreich. Es ist kein Geheimnis, wenn ich sage, dass wir uns als SPD-Fraktion hier eine stärkere Beteiligung des Bundes bei der Standardsetzung, aber auch bei der finanziellen Unterstützung der Umsetzung wünschen.\n\nSosehr wir uns über den Wegfall des Kooperationsverbotes im Hochschulbereich freuen, so sehr wünschen wir uns natürlich, dass weiter gehende Maßnahmen ergriffen werden.\n\nDie Definition von inklusiver Bildung ist in den Bundesländern sehr unterschiedlich. Das ist ein Problem, wenn wir unsere einheitlichen Standards, die wir für richtig halten, umsetzen wollen. Auch die sehr uneinheitlichen Diagnoseverfahren führen in der Regel dazu, dass es wenig einheitliche Lebensbedingungen für Kinder und Jugendliche mit Behinderungen im deutschen Bildungssystem gibt. Deshalb möchten wir einen Schwerpunkt in der Bildungsforschung setzen, insbesondere wenn es darum geht, gute Rahmenbedingungen für eine erfolgreiche inklusive Bildung zu definieren und sie über alle Länder hinweg in einer Gemeinschaftsverantwortung umzusetzen.\n\nWir brauchen dringend auch eine Forschung dahin gehend, welche digitalen und analogen Instrumente hilfreich sind, um Menschen mit Behinderung im Bildungssystem eine gute Chance zu gewährleisten.\n\nWir brauchen eine andere Form der Vernetzung der Akteure: der Ärztinnen und Ärzte, der Pädagoginnen und Pädagogen, der Logopädinnen und Logopäden und anderer, die in Schulen gemeinschaftlich wirken sollen, um für die Begleitung der Kinder konzeptionell das Bestmögliche herausarbeiten zu können.\n\nKlar ist aber auch: Auch Betriebe und Unternehmen müssen sich stärker in der Ausbildung für Jugendliche mit Behinderungen öffnen.\n\nWir nehmen wahr: Es gibt große Defizite in dem Wissen darüber, welche Unterstützung ein Unternehmer bekommt, wenn er sich entscheidet, einem jungen Menschen mit Beeinträchtigung in seinem Unternehmen eine Ausbildung zu ermöglichen. Das heißt, wir haben ein Aufklärungsproblem. Wir haben aber auch das Problem, dass viele Betriebe das immer noch als Benachteiligung, teilweise sogar als Belastung erleben. Wir haben die gesellschaftliche Aufgabe, verstärkt über dieses Thema zu informieren und den Wert der Vielfalt in Unternehmen viel deutlicher herauszustellen.\n\nDie Initiative Bildungsketten - auch sie hat Frau Wanka bereits erwähnt - wollen wir gerne fortgeführt sehen. Aber wir wissen auch, dass bei Menschen mit Behinderung, die in Ausbildung sind, die Abbrecherquote sehr hoch ist. Daraus leiten wir den Auftrag ab, genauer darauf zu achten, welcher Ausbildungsbereich für die jeweilige Person der richtige ist und was zu schaffen, zu leisten und mit einer guten Unterstützung und gegebenenfalls auch mit ausbildungsbegleitenden Hilfen dann auch bis zum Ende durchhaltbar ist.\n\nIm Hochschulbereich stehen wir vor der Herausforderung, andere Formen der Studienangebote und Studienbedingungen zu ermöglichen. Die Möglichkeiten der Nachteilsausgleiche müssen flexibler eingesetzt werden.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich mich ganz herzlich bei all den Fachkräften und Lehrkräften bedanken, die sich trotz manchmal unzureichender Rahmenbedingungen tagtäglich darum bemühen, dass Inklusion durch gemeinsame Beschulung und konzeptionelle Arbeit in den Einrichtungen möglich ist. Diesen Anstrengungen gilt mein ganz herzlicher Dank.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n9777,gerhard-schick,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Bei diesem Gesetzgebungsvorhaben möchte ich nicht auf alles eingehen - das lässt die Zeit nicht zu -, sondern drei Punkte in den Vordergrund rücken.\n\nDer erste ist die Vorfälligkeitsentschädigung. Anders als es der Kollege Heck gerade gesagt hat, ist die Forderung der Opposition nicht, diese Entschädigung abzuschaffen, sondern es geht darum, sie zu deckeln oder zumindest - das ist wirklich die Grundanforderung - dafür zu sorgen, dass sie nicht immer wieder zulasten der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher falsch berechnet wird. Der Anreiz dafür ist gerade in dieser Niedrigzinssituation für die Banken sehr groß. Ich finde, das kann man nun wirklich nicht durchgehen lassen: dass die Leute selber nachrechnen müssen, weil hier immer wieder und komischerweise immer zulasten des Verbrauchers falsch gerechnet wird. Dagegen müsste man etwas tun. Sinnvollerweise geht es auch um eine Begrenzung der Höhe. Wenn die Höhe exzessiv ist, dann wird es für die Kunden völlig inflexibel. Dementsprechend ist unsere Forderung. Wir fordern nicht die Abschaffung der Entschädigung. Bauen Sie da keinen Pappkameraden auf.\n\nDer zweite Punkt betrifft das Widerrufsrecht. Wer die Anhörung dazu verfolgt hat, hat wahrnehmen müssen, dass der Vertreter der Bankenbranche auf eine Frage hin nicht sagen konnte oder wollte, wie viele Fälle es eigentlich wirklich gibt, in denen Verbraucher dieses Recht in einer nicht legitimen Weise nutzen. Wenn es sehr viele Missbrauchsfälle gäbe, hätte man es ja sagen können. Aber auf diese Frage gab es keine Antwort, wahrscheinlich weil die Fallzahlen ziemlich niedrig sind und sich das Ganze deswegen als ein ziemlicher Popanz herausgestellt hätte.\n\nVor allem ist eines zu fragen: Wenn es Rechtsunsicherheit für Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher gibt, an welchen Stellen haben wir denn in den letzten Jahren rückwirkend in die vertraglichen Vereinbarungen eingegriffen? An dieser Stelle wird das getan. Ich finde, man sollte sich schon überlegen, was für ein Präzedenzfall das ist. Wir teilen auf jeden Fall nicht die Ansicht, dass an dieser Stelle eine faire Interessenabwägung vorgenommen wird.\n\nBitte.\n\nErstens haben Sie die Anhörung sehr geschickt gelegt, auf den Montagabend, zudem ganz kurzfristig anberaumt. Das war wieder ein super Zeitablauf.\n\nZweitens zur Sache. Die Frage ist, ob man etwas nach vorn hin anders regelt. Was den Rechtsfrieden angeht: Wir haben ständig rechtliche Auseinandersetzungen zwischen Verbrauchern und Verbraucherinnen auf der einen Seite und Banken oder Versicherungen auf der anderen Seite. Ich erinnere mich an die Käuferinnen und Käufer von Lehman-Zertifikaten. Da wurde im Nachhinein deutlich, dass man die Verjährungsfrist auf eine Art und Weise bestimmt hat, die nicht gut war. Da hat es aber auch keine rückwirkende Änderung gegeben. Deswegen ist die Frage, ob man den Rechtsfrieden hier nicht sehr einseitig definiert und einen Maßstab anlegt, den Sie selber an vielen anderen Stellen nicht anlegen würden, und das ist genau unser Kritikpunkt.\n\nIch will zu einem dritten Punkt kommen, den Pensionsrückstellungen. Ja, die Niedrigzinssituation ist eine Herausforderung für viele wirtschaftlich Beteiligte; das ist richtig. Aber die Frage ist: Was ist jetzt die richtige gesetzgeberische Antwort darauf?\n\nSie haben vorgeschlagen, dass man die Höhe des durchschnittlichen Zinses über einen längeren Zeitraum berechnet. Was macht das eigentlich? Das macht nichts anderes, als ein Problem in die Zukunft zu schieben, und das geschieht gegen die ausdrückliche Empfehlung der Deutschen Bundesbank. Denn es löst das wirtschaftliche Problem nicht wirklich.\n\nSie haben einen Vorschlag gemacht, der sich zunächst einmal gar nicht schlecht angehört hat, nämlich dass die Unternehmen die eingesparten Rückstellungen nicht ausschütten dürfen. Es ist aber in der von Ihnen gerade angesprochenen Anhörung deutlich geworden - wir haben uns darüber auch im Finanzausschuss noch einmal unterhalten -, dass das für die Personengesellschaften nicht funktioniert und dass sich das in einem Konzern durch Gewinnverschiebung umgehen lässt, sodass das, was sich zunächst nach einer guten Regelung angehört hat, in der Praxis voraussichtlich nicht funktionieren wird. Vielmehr laufen wir Gefahr, dass kurzfristig nur der Shareholder Value maximiert wird, und zwar auf Kosten der Sicherheit der Pensionsansprüche der Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer.\n\nDeswegen halten wir das nicht für eine taugliche Lösung.\n\nEine andere Frage ist, ob der tatsächliche Aufwand auch im Steuerrecht zu berücksichtigen ist. Das, finde ich, ist eine durchaus denkbare Position.\n\nMit Ihrem Vorschlag wird ein Problem nur in die Zukunft geschoben und kein Problem wirklich gelöst.\n\nIn der Summe können wir diesem Gesetz deswegen nicht zustimmen und werden das durch unsere Ablehnung zum Ausdruck bringen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4397,tabea-roßner,\"Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Herr Minister, Ihr Haus ist ja das Ministerium für Verkehr und digitale Infrastruktur. Deshalb beraten wir heute abschließend auch über den Haushalt für die digitale Infrastruktur. Nur, da gibt es nichts zu beraten. Sie haben zwar einen Titel geschaffen, aber da steht nichts drin. Sagen wir es offen und ehrlich, wie es ist: Sie stellen keinen Cent für den Breitbandausbau in Deutschland für das nächste Jahr zur Verfügung.\n\nWo also investieren Sie in die Zukunft?\n\nSie setzen den technologischen Fortschritt aufs Spiel. Sie lassen die ländlichen Regionen zurück, und Sie riskieren sogar den Erfolg der Energiewende. Das ist verantwortungslos.\n\nDafür, dass die digitale Agenda ein Schwerpunkt dieser Bundesregierung sein soll, ist das nicht nur wenig, sondern gar nichts. Sie pokern mit Einnahmen aus einer Frequenzversteigerung, von der noch keiner weiß, wann sie kommt und wie viel sie bringen wird. Vom Gewinn müssen Sie auch noch Entschädigungen zahlen, zum Beispiel an Mikrofonanlagenbetreiber, die sich neue Anlagen zulegen müssen. Und Sie müssen die Einnahmen mit den Ländern teilen. Da bleibt von dem Ungefähren nicht mal die Hälfte. Ich frage Sie: Was ist das eigentlich für eine unseriöse Politik, mit ungewissen Einnahmen aus einer Versteigerung in der Zukunft zu planen? Sie können doch auch nicht Ihr Eigenheim mit einem möglichen Lottogewinn finanzieren. Das haut Ihnen doch jeder Buchhalter um die Ohren.\n\nSie können es drehen und wenden, wie Sie wollen: Sie, Herr Dobrindt, sind der große Verlierer dieser Haushaltsrunde. Das, was Sie hier machen, ist mutlos und zukunftsvergessen. Wir können nicht immer nur warten: auf die Unternehmen und ihre Investitionen, auf Erlöse aus Versteigerungen, auf ein Wunder, das weiße Flecken tilgt. Wir müssen handeln, und zwar jetzt! Wenn wir nicht wollen, dass dieses Land den Anschluss komplett verliert, müssen wir das jetzt endlich tun.\n\nWir Grüne haben vorgelegt: 1 Milliarde Euro für den Breitbandausbau. Diese eine Milliarde hatten Sie ursprünglich einmal eingeplant, aber dann aus dem Koalitionsvertrag gestrichen. Mit dieser Milliarde, die wir nun über unseren Entschließungsantrag zur Verfügung stellen wollen, machen wir Ihre Hausaufgaben.\n\nWir wollen in die Förderung investieren. Damit können erste Regionen, wo sich Investitionen für die Unternehmen nämlich nicht lohnen, angeschlossen werden, vielleicht sogar im Wahlkreis des Ministers in Bayern. Des Weiteren stellen wir Bürgschaften über die KfW in Aussicht, damit investitionswillige Unternehmen bessere Chancen auf Kredite von ihrer Hausbank haben. Wenn Sie Ihren Job nicht tun, dann muss halt die Opposition ran.\n\nAußerdem wollen wir einen Baustellenatlas, auf dem geplante größere Tiefbauarbeiten verzeichnet sind. Wenn bei ohnehin aufgerissenen Straßen Kabel oder Leerrohre mitverlegt werden, können die Kosten für den Breitbandausbau deutlich gesenkt werden.\n\nWir sind der Meinung: Deutschland braucht Breitband. Ohne schnelles Netz wird die Wirtschaft abgehängt. Ohne Anschluss verlieren viele Bürgerinnen und Bürger den Anschluss. Wir meinen es ernst mit der Energiewende. Wir brauchen mehr Energieeffizienz. Dazu brauchen wir Breitband, zum Beispiel um Smart Metering, energieeffiziente Serverparks oder eine effizientere Logistik voranzubringen.\n\nEine konkrete Milliarde Euro für eine konkrete Zukunft statt Konjunktive mit Frequenzversteigerungen - das legen wir vor. Nun sind Sie am Zug.\"\n8965,tobias-lindner,\"Geschätzte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Wohl jeder von uns weiß noch, wo er am 11. September 2001 war, als die schrecklichen Bilder über die Fernsehmonitore kamen. Ich will für mich persönlich sagen: Es mag individuell nachvollziehbar sein, dass die NATO kurz danach den Bündnisfall nach Artikel 5 des Nordatlantikvertrags festgestellt hat; aber ich habe heute, mit einer gewissen zeitlichen Distanz, deutliche Zweifel daran, dass es wirklich die richtige Entscheidung war. Ich will hinzufügen: dass heute, mit diesem zeitlichen Abstand, der Bündnisfall nach Artikel 5 immer noch nicht aufgehoben ist, ist schlichtweg anachronistisch.\n\nDass wir hier alle Jahre wieder über Bundeswehrmandate reden, ist gut und vernünftig. Aber, Herr Staatsminister, meine Damen und Herren von der Bundesregierung, dass Sie uns nun zum wiederholten Male im Jahresturnus ein Mandat mit einer anachronistischen Begründung vorlegen, ist alles andere als vernünftig. Sie schreiben ja selbst in der Begründung des Mandats, dass Sie die Einsatzgrundlage für überholt halten. Sie schreiben, dass sowohl die ursprüngliche Ausrichtung der Mission nach Auffassung der Bundesregierung der Einsatzrealität nicht mehr gerecht wird als auch die Kopplung an Artikel 5 des Nordatlantikvertrages nicht sinnvoll ist.\n\nAußenminister Steinmeier hat bei der letzten Beratung des Mandates hier in diesem Hohen Haus gesagt - ich zitiere wörtlich -:\n\nDer Bündnisfall kann heute, mehr als zwölf Jahre nach 9/11, nicht mehr dauerhaft tragfähige Rechtsgrundlage sein …\n\nDieser Auffassung schließen wir uns an.\n\nJetzt haben Sie angekündigt, dass Sie das Mandat auf ein halbes Jahr beschränken wollen, dass sich die Bundesregierung für die Entkopplung des Mandats von Artikel 5 einsetzt. Das tun Sie seit mehreren Jahren und holen sich dabei in verschiedenen europäischen Hauptstädten regelmäßig Abfuhren ab, was schade ist.\n\nAber wenn sich die Hoffnung, dass es vorangeht, im Sommer tatsächlich erfüllt und es zu einer Entkopplung des Mandats kommt, dann ist das ein Ergebnis, das wir nicht bedauern, sondern begrüßen. Nur muss man dann immer noch fragen, ob das entkoppelte Mandat in sich eine vernünftige Lösung für die Herausforderungen hinsichtlich der Sicherheitssituation im Mittelmeerraum ist. Sie haben es selbst gesagt: Das, was heute im Rahmen des Mandats stattfindet - Lagebildgenerierung, Seeraum­überwachung -, sind Routineaufgaben, die die NATO im Normalfall sowieso durchführt.\n\nKollege Kiesewetter, Sie erwähnen, was man alles unterhalb von Einsätzen tun kann, wie man diesen Raum mit Kooperationen, Austausch und anderen Maßnahmen sicherer gestalten kann. Da klingt für mich persönlich einiges durchaus sympathisch; man kann in eine Diskussion darüber eintreten. Nur, brauchen wir dann zwingend ein solches Mandat dafür? Warum führen wir dieses Mandat nicht wirklich auf die Routineaufgaben zurück? Warum beenden wir nicht gar dieses Mandat, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen?\n\nEin letzter Punkt. Artikel 5 des Nordatlantikvertrages zwingt uns nicht zum Handeln. Auch wenn immer wieder so getan wird: Es gibt hier keinen Automatismus. Nachdem alle Redner in dieser Debatte unsere Auffassung teilen, dass der Artikel-5-Fall als Grundlage für dieses Mandat nicht mehr zeitgemäß ist, würde ich mich freuen, wenn auch Sie sich unserer Auffassung anschließen könnten.\n\nDas vorliegende Mandat ist nicht mehr zeitgemäß, nicht einmal seine Begründung. Alle Jahre wieder legen Sie uns das Mandat mit einer anachronistischen Begründung vor. Aber wie in den Vorjahren wird meine Fraktion dafür werben, das Mandat abzulehnen.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n9153,annalena-baerbock,\"Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Frau Hendricks, auch von unserer Seite einen ganz herzlichen Dank an Sie persönlich, an die Staatssekretäre und an Ihr Team, das zum Teil hier anwesend ist. Das ist wirklich ein historischer Vertrag, der in Paris geschlossen wurde.\n\nDiesem Dank kann man aus unserer Sicht am besten gerecht werden, indem man den Vertrag jetzt mit Leben erfüllt. Wer in Paris gesagt hat „Raus aus den Fossilen“, der muss das auch im Deutschen Bundestag sagen.\n\nDaher gilt jetzt: Butter bei die Fische. Wenn wir die Vereinbarungen umsetzen und mit Leben erfüllen wollen - Andreas Jung, Sie sprechen von der High Ambition Coalition; HAC hört sich für mich eher wie eine Droge an, aber sei’s drum -,\n\ndann brauchen wir einen Klimaschutzplan, ein Klimaschutzgesetz.\n\nDer erste Punkt. Frau Hendricks, mich hat schon sehr verwundert, dass Sie sagen, dass sich aus dem Vertrag eigentlich keine neuen Verpflichtungen für uns ergeben.\n\nNatürlich ergeben sich daraus für uns Verpflichtungen. Sie haben es doch selber erwähnt: Dieser Klimavertrag wird alle fünf Jahre daraufhin überprüft, ob die nationalen Beiträge umgesetzt werden. Diese Frage muss sich auch die Europäische Union stellen. Unser nationaler Beitrag, mit dem wir nach Paris gefahren sind, liegt deutlich über dem 2-Grad-Pfad. Das heißt, die erste Hausaufgabe hier in Deutschland und in Europa ist, das europäische Ziel nachzuschärfen.\n\nDer zweite Punkt. Es muss ein Klimaschutzplan, am besten ein Klimaschutzgesetz, vorgelegt werden, damit wir diese Aufgabe in Deutschland meistern können. Es reicht nicht, von einer Jahrhundertaufgabe mit Blick auf das Jahr 2050 zu sprechen. Die dringlichste Aufgabe ist vielmehr, dafür zu sorgen, dass das deutsche Klimaschutzziel für das Jahr 2020 erreicht wird. Das bedeutet eine Reduktion um 40 Prozent.\n\nUm dieses Ziel zu erreichen, ist der Kohleausstieg in Deutschland einfach unerlässlich. Diesen Fakt haben Sie als Ministerin immer wieder angesprochen. Aber hier, lieber Matthias Miersch, kommen wir zum entscheidenden Punkt. Da reicht es eben nicht, liebe Frau Hendricks, dass man sagt - ich habe gestern im Ausschuss genau hingehört -, es sei in den nächsten 20 bis 25 Jahren möglich, ohne Strukturbrüche aus der Kohle auszusteigen, aber nötig sei es nur bis 2050. Nein, Sie sind die Ministerin, und die Bundesregierung trägt hier die Verantwortung. Es reicht nicht, zu sagen, was man für möglich hält, sondern Sie müssen mit entsprechenden Gesetzen dieses Ziel verfolgen. Das ist Ihre Aufgabe als Bundesregierung.\n\nEs kann aber nicht nur um den Kohleausstieg in Deutschland gehen; es geht auch um den Ausstieg aus der internationalen Kohlefinanzierung. Ja, liebe Frau Weisgerber, wir haben darüber oftmals gesprochen. Ja, Matthias Miersch, es sind lediglich 3 Milliarden Euro, die an Finanzhilfen fließen. In Paris haben Sie sich für eine Initiative in Afrika für erneuerbare Energien stark engagiert. Aber diese Initiative wird konterkariert, wenn es zeitgleich nicht nur KfW IPEX, sondern auch Hermesbürgschaften für Kohleprojekte gibt. Es gibt Zusagen an Australien, Russland, die Ukraine und Südafrika. Man kann nicht aus den Fossilen rausgehen, wenn man weiterhin in diesen Bereich investiert. So ist das nun einmal.\n\nDer dritte Punkt umfasst das Divestment. Frau Hendricks, Sie haben in Paris völlig zu Recht gesagt - da stimmen wir Ihnen zu -, wir sähen das Ende des Zeitalters von Kohle und Öl, und das sei ein sehr klares Signal an die Investoren. Etliche Investoren haben sich auch schon aufgemacht, ihre Strategie zu ändern. Das ist gut und richtig. Aber es ist auch ein Signal an die Bundesrepublik Deutschland, weil wir ebenfalls Geld in diesen Bereich investieren. Der Bund legt 100 Millionen Euro in fossile Anlagen an als Rücklagen für die Beamtenpensionen. Wenn Sie also von Divestment für Investoren reden, dann reden Sie auch von Divestment im Bundeshaushalt, dann geben Sie diese Anlagen in fossile Energien auf, meine Damen und Herren!\n\nHier hat die Bundesregierung auch wirklich die Möglichkeit - es wurde ja über Vorreiter gesprochen; wir sind ganz bei Ihnen: wir wollen wieder Vorreiter werden -, zum Vorreiter zu werden. Sie müssen sich nur schleunigst beeilen. Die Kommunen haben sich hier schon auf den Weg gemacht. Münster ist die erste Stadt, die nicht mehr in fossile Energien investiert. Andere Kommunen werden folgen. Machen Sie sich also auf die Socken, damit Sie hier hinterherkommen!\n\nDer fünfte Punkt ist der Verkehr. Es ist einfach so: Wenn wir sagen: „Wir steigen aus den fossilen Energien aus“, dann müssen wir das auch im Verkehrsbereich tun. Deswegen ist die Ansage von Paris: Die Tage des Verbrennungsmotors sind gezählt.\n\nWenn wir nicht aufpassen, dann werden wir auch hier kein Vorreiter sein; denn China macht sich auf den Weg. Es wird nur noch ein paar Jahre dauern, bis man in China sagen wird: Keine Verbrennungsmotoren mehr in den großen Städten wegen der Luftreinheit. - Beispiel Norwegen: Dort liegt der Anteil der Elektroautos bei den Erstzulassungen bei 17 Prozent. So sehen Vorbilder aus.\n\nZum Abschluss, meine Damen und Herren, möchte ich sagen: Wir haben in Paris wahrlich Geschichte geschrieben. Wir sollten das zum Anlass nehmen, auch in Deutschland Geschichte zu schreiben. Lassen Sie der Energiewende eine Klimawende folgen. Um es mit den Worten von François Hollande zu sagen: „Vive la planète, vive l‘humanité et vive la vie!“\n\nIn diesem Sinne: Eine schöne Weihnachtszeit und vielen Dank.\"\n7477,heinz-joachim-barchmann,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Über die verschiedenen Inhalte des ESM-Programms für Griechenland wurde heute schon in aller Breite diskutiert. Es ist viel über die zahlreichen Maßnahmen gesprochen worden, die Griechenland in den kommenden drei Jahren umsetzen muss, als Gegenleistung für die -Finanzmittel von bis zu 86 Milliarden Euro. Als Berichterstatter der SPD-Fraktion für Griechenland im Europaausschuss möchte ich hier nicht noch einmal auf die Zahlen eingehen, die mit dem Programm zusammenhängen, obwohl sie sehr wichtig sind. Ich möchte stattdessen auf Punkte eingehen, die mir zum einen als Sozial-demokrat und alter Gewerkschafter wichtig sind und mir zum anderen als einfacher, normaler europäischer Bürger am Herzen liegen.\n\nAus sozialdemokratischer Sicht möchte ich hier noch einmal deutlich machen, dass wir das Programm, wie es jetzt ausgehandelt wurde, als deutlich ausgereifter ansehen können als frühere Vorschläge, vor allem deshalb, weil bei diesem Programm viel stärker auf die sozialen Auswirkungen der Maßnahmen geachtet wurde, die von der griechischen Regierung nun umzusetzen sind. Diese Reformen können die Grundlage für eine vernünftige soziale Basisabsicherung der griechischen Bevölkerung und auch für einen vernünftigen Zugang der Bevölkerung zur Gesundheitsversorgung legen. Die Strukturen, um diese Grundfunktionen sicherzustellen, werden mit dem vorliegenden Programm geschaffen. Es geht nicht mehr nur ums Sparen. Auch die Auswirkungen auf die Menschen vor Ort werden nun endlich in den Blick genommen. Dies ist aus meiner Sicht eine klare Abkehr von der strikten Austeritätspolitik, die über einen viel zu langen Zeitraum in ganz Europa den Umgang mit der Finanzkrise beherrscht hat und die auch von der letzten Bundesregierung mit geprägt wurde.\n\nDass es hier nun endlich zu Veränderungen mit einem viel stärkeren Fokus auf soziale Aspekte gekommen ist, ist nach meinem Dafürhalten ganz besonders den Stimmen der deutschen und der europäischen Sozialdemokraten zu verdanken. Dafür haben wir uns seit Jahren starkgemacht.\n\nDie Abkehr von einem strikten Sparkurs und das Eröffnen von Perspektiven für die griechischen Bürgerinnen und Bürger ist der entscheidende Punkt. Mit dem neuen Programm werden dringend notwendige Strukturveränderungen in Gang gesetzt, von denen Griechenland hoffentlich langfristig profitieren wird. Mit dem Ziel, effizientere Verwaltungsstrukturen zu schaffen und ein transparentes, funktionierendes Steuersystem zu etablieren, werden genau die richtigen Akzente gesetzt. Das Aufbrechen des oligarchischen und teilweise verkrusteten Wirtschaftssystems wird zu mehr Berechenbarkeit, mehr Stabilität, aber auch zu funktionierenden staatlichen Strukturen führen, an denen es in der Vergangenheit oft gefehlt hat.\n\nNur so können Staatseinnahmen generiert und Investitionen nach Griechenland geholt werden; denn eine politische und verwaltungstechnische Stabilität ist hierfür notwendig. Das kann zum Abbau von Massenarbeitslosigkeit führen. Ein weiteres großes Problem, was ich dabei sehe, ist die hohe Jugendarbeitslosigkeit, die weiter abgebaut werden muss, von der heute aber überhaupt noch nicht gesprochen wurde; darauf möchte ich noch einmal besonders hinweisen.\n\nAls letzten Punkt möchte ich die aktuelle Situation der Flüchtlinge auf den griechischen Inseln ansprechen. Jeder von uns hat mitbekommen, was auf der Insel Kos los ist. Die Frage der Flüchtlinge im Mittelmeer ist ein gesamteuropäisches Problem, das von allen gemeinsam gelöst werden muss. Griechenland ist aufgrund seiner geografischen Lage besonders davon betroffen. Die Finanz- und Verwaltungskrise trägt allerdings zu einer weiteren Verschärfung der Situation bei. Wenn kein Geld da ist, können Menschen, die vor Krieg und Elend geflüchtet sind, nicht einmal mit dem Lebensnotwendigen versorgt werden. Hier ist die europäische Solidarität gefragt, und da müssen auch wir in Deutschland uns fragen, ob wir als europäische Bürger an der einen oder anderen Stelle nicht noch mehr tun können. Da bitte ich um Ihre Unterstützung. Ich denke, das ist eine ganz notwendige Sache, bei der wir Griechenland unterstützen müssen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n1311,frithjof-schmidt,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Drei große Themen werden beim vierten EU-Afrika-Gipfel in Brüssel im Zentrum der Gespräche über die politischen Konflikte stehen - es ist wichtig, dass man darüber spricht, dass es da richtige Konflikte gibt -: Viele afrikanische Länder wollen erneut über ihre Kritik an den Verhandlungen über die Wirtschaftspartnerschaftsabkommen reden. Sie erinnern sich vielleicht: Der Gipfel 2007 wäre darüber fast geplatzt. Seitdem gibt es hierzu eine lange Geschichte der Auseinandersetzung; sie kommt zurück und holt uns ein. Die afrikanischen Länder wollen keine zu große Marktöffnung, weil sie dann die Existenz ganzer Wirtschaftszweige und damit ihre Stabilität gefährdet sehen; mein Kollege Uwe Kekeritz ist darauf schon ausführlich eingegangen.\n\nDie Europäische Union will eigentlich nicht darüber sprechen. Sie wird es aber tun müssen. Sie wird begreifen müssen, dass es dabei auch um Stabilität geht. Die EU will unter anderen Aspekten über Stabilität reden: zum einen über afrikanische Sicherheitsstrukturen - und da im Kern über militärische Fragen - und zum anderen über Migration, das heißt über die große Zuwanderungswelle über das Mittelmeer nach Europa mit ihren vielen Opfern.\n\nDass es wieder einmal im Vorfeld diese Konflikte über die Tagesordnung gegeben hat, zeigt schon vorab, dass der Dialog mit den afrikanischen Staaten seit 2007 durch die Handelspolitik schwer belastet wird.\n\nDas belastet natürlich auch die notwendige Debatte über Frieden und Sicherheit.\n\nEs ist sinnvoll, mit der Afrikanischen Union gemeinsam an einem sicherheitspolitischen Konzept für den Krisenbogen in Subsahara-Afrika von Mali über Zentralafrika bis nach Somalia und bis zur Region der Großen Seen und dem Kongo zu arbeiten. Aber eine gemeinsame europäische politische Idee oder Initiative dafür ist bisher nicht erkennbar. Stattdessen soll anscheinend einfach die African Peace Facility umgebaut werden: zu einem Instrument der verstärkten Militärausbildung und einer anderen Lastenteilung bei Militäreinsätzen im Auftrag der Afrikanischen Union oder vielleicht auch der Europäischen Union. Frau Merkel hat das gestern „Ertüchtigungsinitiative“ genannt - ein interessantes Wort.\n\nDas ist eine politische Sackgasse.\n\nDas treibt ein jahrelanges Umfunktionieren dieser ehemaligen Institution zur Friedensförderung zu einer Art Dachverband der Militärkooperation auf die Spitze. Die African Peace Facility wird aus dem Europäischen Entwicklungsfonds finanziert. Ihre Aktivitäten gelten als Entwicklungshilfeleistung, zertifiziert vom DAC in Paris. Es ist in der Europäischen Union schlicht rechtswidrig, solche Gelder für Militärausbildung zu verwenden.\n\nIm Antrag der Koalitionsfraktionen kann man dazu konkret kein Wort lesen. Sie ignorieren diesen zentralen Streit. Wie stehen Sie zu diesem Umfunktionieren? Unterstützen Sie das? Herr Minister Müller, was ist denn Ihre Meinung? Wollen Sie das wirklich mitmachen? Das wäre absurd; denn dann würden wir mit Entwicklungshilfegeldern direkt Soldatinnen und Soldaten finanzieren. Das geht doch nicht.\n\nSicherheitspolitik und Entwicklungspolitik dürfen nicht finanziell vermischt werden, und die Kooperation in beiden Feldern darf auch nicht indirekt mit handelspolitischem Wohlverhalten verbunden werden.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich will noch zum dritten großen Streitthema des Gipfels kommen: zum Umgang mit der rasch wachsenden Migration zwischen Afrika und Europa. Dass Sie auf dieses wichtige Thema in Ihrem Antrag fast gar nicht eingehen, sagt schon etwas aus. Auch diesen Konfliktpunkt des Gipfels ignorieren Sie, wenn es konkret wird. Dabei sterben nach wie vor täglich Menschen im Mittelmeer. Da gibt es massiven Handlungsbedarf. Die Grenzüberwachung durch Frontex muss grundlegend verändert werden. Es ist notwendig, dass sich Frontex an die internationale Seenotrettungskonvention hält. Das muss durchgesetzt werden.\n\nEs ist hier vorhin gesagt worden: Das machen sie. - Aber wir alle wissen: Das machen sie eben nicht konsequent, nicht immer und nicht wirklich. Wenn die Frage gestellt wird: „Wann ist ein Schiff in Seenot?“, dann sagen die Polizeioffiziere von Frontex: Wir haben eine Richtlinie; es ist in Seenot, wenn es unter der Wasserlinie ist. - Aber wenn es kurz vorm Sinken ist, dann darf man es nicht retten? Da läuft etwas ganz grundlegend schief.\n\nWir brauchen zusätzlich eine Agentur, die sich europaweit um die Aufnahme von Flüchtlingen und Migranten kümmert und sich als deren Anwältin versteht.\n\nDoch bei Migration geht es nicht nur um die Frage der Flüchtlinge. Den afrikanischen Staaten ist es wichtig, die positiven Seiten einer legalen Arbeitsmigration nach Europa in den Vordergrund zu stellen.\n\nEine legale, befristete Arbeitsaufnahme in Europa muss möglich sein. Das ist eine Frage der Ursachenbekämpfung. Wir müssen es deutlich erleichtern, eine begrenzte Arbeitserlaubnis zum Beispiel für Saisonarbeiter zu erteilen. Der Bedarf ist da, auf beiden Seiten des Mittelmeers. Wir müssen hier dringend neue Wege gehen.\n\nDavon ist bei der Vorbereitung des Gipfels in Brüssel leider wenig zu erkennen. Wir hoffen, dass im direkten Dialog mit den afrikanischen Staaten doch noch Bewegung in diese Richtung aufkommt. Dafür hätten Sie auch unsere Unterstützung.\n\nDanke.\"\n12109,cansel-kiziltepe,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Herr Luczak, ich meine, ich hätte seit langem nicht so viel widersprüchlichen Unfug gehört, wie von Ihnen vorhin.\n\nWenn man Ihrer Analyse folgt, könnte man meinen, Sie hätten die Alarmsignale gehört. Aber Pustekuchen! Sie wollen nichts tun gegen die soziale Verdrängung infolge von Mietsteigerungen. Sie tun nichts gegen das Herausmodernisieren, und Sie tun auch nichts gegen die exorbitanten Mietsteigerungen. Der eigentliche Populist und Gauner sind Sie, Herr Luczak.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich möchte zu einem konkreten Beispiel kommen, zum Dragoner-Areal in meinem Wahlkreis, in Kreuzberg. Es gibt eine Entscheidung des Finanzausschusses des Bundesrats, und zwar seit dem 10. September 2015, den Verkauf des Dragoner-Areals zu stoppen. Doch vonseiten des Bundes ist nichts passiert. Es heißt, die Willensbildung sei noch nicht abgeschlossen. Für mich als Kreuzberger Abgeordnete drängt sich die Frage auf: Wie lange dauert es denn, bis sich eine Meinung gebildet hat?\n\nNach einem Jahr sollte das Finanzministerium doch zu der Erkenntnis gekommen sein, dass die Entscheidung des Bundesrates eine bindende ist.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, meine Forderung ist die logische Konsequenz daraus: Ich fordere die Rückabwicklung der Verträge.\n\nWir alle wissen, nicht nur in Kreuzberg, nicht nur in Berlin haben wir einen angespannten Mietwohnungsmarkt. Viele Menschen sind nach unnötigen Sanierungen gezwungen, ihre Wohnungen zu verlassen. Wir haben einen riesigen Missstand. Es gibt nicht genügend bezahlbare Wohnungen, und zwar in unserem ganzen Land. Der Bund ist gefordert, die Voraussetzungen für eine soziale Stadtentwicklungspolitik zu schaffen.\n\n- Der Bund, Herr Michelbach.\n\nDas Dragoner-Areal muss der Wegweiser für eine Liegenschafts- und Stadtentwicklungspolitik sein, die nicht auf den Mammon setzt, sondern auf eine Politik, die erstens und letztens das Wohlergehen der Bevölkerung zum Ziel hat.\n\nFür uns als SPD-Fraktion steht fest: Das BImA-Gesetz und die Bundeshaushaltsordnung müssen geändert werden.\n\nErstens. Bundeseigentum darf nicht länger zum Höchstpreis verkauft werden; denn nur so ist es möglich, bezahlbaren Wohnraum zu schaffen. Und da wir von finanzstarken Spekulanten nicht wirklich ein soziales Konzept erwarten, fordere ich zweitens für die Kommunen ein Erstzugriffsrecht zum Wohle einer gut durchdachten Stadtentwicklungspolitik.\n\nSo müssen wir drittens auch die Zustimmungspflicht des Bundesrates bei BImA-Verkäufen mit einem Umfang von über 15 Millionen Euro selbstverständlich beibehalten. An eine Abschaffung wage ich nicht zu denken. Herr Schäuble dachte daran; aber jetzt, nach meinen Ausführungen, denke ich, dass Herr Schäuble mir auch zustimmen wird.\n\n- Ich habe ihn im Finanzausschuss in der letzten Woche getroffen, und ich denke, er wird zur Vernunft kommen, Herr Luczak. - Erst durch das Mitspracherecht des Bundesrates bei den BImA-Verkaufsentscheidungen ist ein Verkaufsstopp überhaupt möglich gewesen. An dieser Stelle möchte ich auch unserem Finanzsenator Matthias Kollatz-Ahnen für seinen Einsatz im Bundesrat ganz herzlich danken.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das Dragoner-Areal zum Sanierungsgebiet zu erklären, ist die bisher beste Entscheidung. Das ist SPD-Politik. Die Auflagen hierzu zielen nämlich auf die Schaffung sozialverträglicher Mieten. Bei einem anvisierten Höchstpreis von 36 Millionen Euro sind dies keine realisierbaren Auflagen. Deshalb möchte ich die Rückabwicklung. Es ist zwar entschuldbar, wenn Fehler gemacht werden; aber wenn wir jetzt erkennen, dass wir Fehler gemacht haben, ist es unverzeihlich, diese fortzuführen.\n\nDeshalb wollen wir das BImA-Gesetz ändern; wir wollen nicht, dass Tafelsilber verscherbelt wird.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Linken, Ihr Antrag ist überflüssig; denn die darin enthaltenen Inhalte sind schon längst in unserer Politik auf Landesebene,\n\naber auch auf Bundesebene festgelegt, und dafür setzen wir uns auch ein.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3662,kirsten-tackmann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Gäste! Ich möchte daran erinnern: Es geht heute um die Zukunft von 35 000 Betrieben, die über 1 Million Hektar Fläche bewirtschaften, also um nicht wenig.\n\nIch kann mich noch gut erinnern, dass EU-Kommissar Ciolos uns am Rande der Grünen Woche darüber informierte, dass er die EU-Öko-Verordnung novellieren möchte, also den Rechtsrahmen für den Ökolandbau. Seine Begründung war zunächst einmal durchaus nachzuvollziehen. Natürlich ist auch der Ökolandbau keine heile Welt. Der mächtige Lebensmittelhandel knebelt auch hier die Erzeugerbetriebe. Manchmal riecht es auch bei Bio ein bisschen sehr nach Werbekampagne. Es gibt Ausnahmeregelungen, die unterdessen eher zur Regel geworden sind. Die Ökobilanz eines argentinischen Apfels ist vielleicht in Argentinien noch gut, aber im deutschen Supermarkt eher übersichtlich. Deshalb ist die Diskussion richtig und wichtig, wie wir das Vertrauen in Bio wieder stärken können.\n\nDie Glaubwürdigkeit von Bio ist genau die harte Währung, die Bio braucht. Ich finde den Anspruch vollkommen richtig, dass natürlich auch bei Importen in die EU Bio drin sein muss, wenn Bio draufsteht.\n\nDer Entwurf der neuen EU-Öko-Verordnung, den der Kommissar dann vorgelegt hat, geht allerdings am selbst gesteckten Ziel vollkommen vorbei. Er legt sogar die Axt an die Wurzeln des Ökolandbaus. Diese Kritik teilen zum Glück wirklich alle Fraktionen hier im Bundestag. Der wichtigste Streitpunkt für uns ist der Plan, quasi die Definition des Ökolandbaus zu ändern. Grundidee des Ökolandbaus ist nämlich, Lebensmittel ökologischer zu produzieren. Es geht also um umweltverträgliche Prozessqualität. Das muss auch dringend so bleiben. Die Kommission dagegen will eine Neudefinition über die Produktqualität. Dazu will sie für Lebensmittel aus ökologischer Produktion andere Grenzwerte als für Lebensmittel aus konventioneller Produktion festlegen. Das widerspricht nun wieder der grundsätzlichen Aufgabe von Grenzwerten; denn natürlich müssen Grenzwerte in jedem Fall sicherstellen, dass der Verzehr von Lebensmitteln unbedenklich ist.\n\nSie sind kein Qualitätssiegel, und sie dürfen es auch nicht werden - egal aus welcher Produktionsrichtung.\n\nIm Ergebnis würde diese neue Verordnung - der Minister hat schon darauf hingewiesen - den Ökolandbau schwächen und nicht stärken. Ökobetriebe und konventionelle Betriebe würden in diesem Fall sogar gegeneinander ausgespielt. Auch das dürfen wir nicht zulassen. Deshalb sage ich für die Linke ganz klar: Dieser Entwurf muss vom Tisch. In dieser Frage gibt es sogar einen ungewöhnlich breiten Schulterschluss, nicht nur hier im Haus, sondern sogar zwischen dem Deutschen Bauernverband und den Ökolandbauverbänden. Das ist nach meiner Kenntnis ein Novum in der Geschichte des Ökolandbaus.\n\nWir hatten der Koalition angeboten, mit einem gemeinsamen Antrag zu signalisieren, dass wir alle dieser Meinung sind. Leider ist dieser nicht zustande gekommen. Das ist parlamentarischer Kindergarten. Damit wird aus meiner Sicht in Brüssel eine Chance verspielt. Das ist einerseits schade. Andererseits werden wir natürlich erstens dem Antrag der Koalition zustimmen, und zweitens hatten wir die Gelegenheit, mit den Grünen gemeinsam einen sehr viel qualifizierteren und umfassenderen Antrag vorzulegen.\n\nDenn zur Stärkung des Ökolandbaus muss natürlich viel mehr getan werden, als in Brüssel nach einem neuen und besseren Entwurf zu rufen. Die Stärkung des Ökolandbaus ist dabei für die Linke nicht Klientelpolitik, sondern ein Gebot der Vernunft, wobei wir zumindest wichtig finden, dass die nachhaltige Produktion auf allen Flächen, auf allen Wiesen und in allen Ställen stattfindet.\n\nDer Ökolandbau hat unbestritten viele positive -Effekte. Es ist doch zum Beispiel ökologisch vernünftig, wenn Tierhaltung und Flächenbewirtschaftung aneinander gekoppelt sind und das benötigte Futter vor Ort angebaut wird.\n\nÖkolandbau ist nicht nur schonender für Boden, Gewässer, Klima und biologische Vielfalt, sondern auch sozial vernünftig, weil er mehr Menschen beschäftigt, und zwar mit guter Arbeit.\n\nBiolebensmittel erfreuen sich einer so schnell wachsenden Beliebtheit, dass die einheimische Produktion überhaupt nicht hinterherkommt. Deswegen ist es auch volkswirtschaftlich sinnvoll, den Ökolandbau zu stärken.\n\nEs ist also in unser aller Interesse, einen vernünftigen und vor allen Dingen verlässlichen Rechtsrahmen für den Ökolandbau zu organisieren. Nach unserer Einschätzung werden noch mehr Forschungsmittel gebraucht, um einige Fragen im Ökolandbau besser zu beantworten, und bessere regionale Verarbeitungs- und Vermarktungsmöglichkeiten. Heute aber spielen wir zunächst einmal den Ball zum designierten EU-Agrarkommissar Hogan. Die Iren haben ja gerade bewiesen, dass sie in der Nachspielzeit noch Tore schießen können. Insofern bin ich da sehr optimistisch.\n\nUnsere Unterstützung hätte er, die vieler europäischer Parlamentarier auch. Jetzt ist Nachspielzeit.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n11880,caren-lay,\"Vielen lieben Dank, dass Sie die Zwischenfrage zulassen, verehrter Herr Kollege. - Ich teile ja Ihre Einschätzung, dass sich die Liegenschaftspolitik des Bundes dringend ändern muss und nicht mehr nach dem Höchstgebot vergeben werden darf, weil das die Spekulation antreibt. Vielmehr sollten wir mit unserer Liegenschaftspolitik im Bundestag eine gute Entwicklung beim sozialen Wohnungsbau befördern. Auch das Dragoner-Areal muss natürlich an die Stadt Berlin gehen.\n\nAber können Sie mir bitte beantworten, warum erstens Ihre Fraktion im Haushaltsausschuss des Bundestages und hier im Plenum für den Verkauf des Dragoner-Areals an einen Großinvestor gestimmt hat, warum zweitens Ihre Fraktion bei jeder Gelegenheit Anträge der Linken, aber auch der Grünen, in denen gefordert wurde, endlich das Vorkaufsrecht der Kommunen einzuführen, abgelehnt hat? Und drittens: Stimmen Sie mir zu, dass es doch irgendwie verdächtig ist, wenn die SPD knapp zwei Wochen vor der Abgeordnetenhauswahl in Berlin plötzlich zu einer späten Einsicht kommt.\"\n15222,sylvia-kotting-uhl,\"Herr Beckmeyer, die Frage stellt sich andersherum. Die Frage ist nicht, ob Sie keine Anhaltspunkte haben, sondern ob Sie ausschließen können, dass es Anhaltspunkte gibt. Deutschland ist Mitglied des Kontrollorgans auf der Grundlage des Vertrags von Almelo und hat damit die Verantwortung, dafür zu sorgen, dass eine missbräuchliche Verwendung ausgeschlossen wird. Können Sie also ausschließen, dass von Urenco angereichertes Uran in die besagten vier Atomkraftwerke in den USA geliefert wird, um dort mithilfe dieses Urans Tritium für Atomsprengköpfe zu produzieren?\"\n7116,kerstin-griese,\"Liebe Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir behandeln heute einen fraktionsübergreifenden Antrag, mit dem wir einen Bericht zur weltweiten Lage der Religions- und Glaubensfreiheit fordern. Ich bin froh, dass wir zwischen drei Fraktionen zu einer guten Einigung gekommen sind, und freue mich, dass auch die Linksfraktion zustimmen will.\n\nAuch ich will mich zuerst ganz herzlich bei Volker Beck bedanken, dem religionspolitischen Sprecher der Grünen, der diese Initiative ergriffen und die anderen Fraktionen eingeladen hat. Ich bedanke mich auch herzlich bei meinem Kollegen Franz Josef Jung, dem Beauftragten für Kirchen und Religionsgemeinschaften der CDU/CSU-Fraktion, bei den Menschenrechtspolitikerinnen und -politikern meiner Fraktion, bei Frank Schwabe, Rolf Mützenich und vielen anderen für die konstruktive Zusammenarbeit bei der Erstellung dieses sicherlich etwas ungewöhnlichen Antrags.\n\nWir bitten das Auswärtige Amt, einen Bericht vorzulegen, in dem die Lage und die Bemühungen der Bundesregierung um die Religions- und Glaubensfreiheit weltweit dargestellt sind. Ich danke auch unserem Außenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier herzlich dafür, dass er eine große Sensibilität für dieses Thema beweist, indem er auf seinen Reisen immer wieder auf die Einhaltung der Menschenrechte drängt, und möchte aus einer Rede zitieren, die er zuletzt an der Universität in Tunis bewusst als Christ in einem muslimischen Land gehalten hat. Dort hat er gesagt - ich zitiere -:\n\nWer mit Religion Feindbilder schafft, liegt genauso falsch wie, wer gegen Religion Feindbilder schafft! Wer mit Religion aufhetzt, tut genauso übel wie, wer gegen Religion aufhetzt!\n\nIch denke, damit hat er sehr klug das Problem beschrieben, das in vielen Ländern der Region besteht.\n\nDass dieser Antrag von mehreren Fraktionen gestellt worden ist, zeigt die überparteiliche Bedeutung dieses elementaren Menschenrechts, der Religions- und Glaubensfreiheit, das sich in allen internationalen Menschenrechtsvereinbarungen auf der Ebene der Europäischen Union, des Europarats und der Vereinten Nationen findet. Mir ist wichtig, dass der Begriff der Religions- und Glaubensfreiheit dabei in einem umfassenden Sinn zu verstehen ist - so haben wir es auch im Antrag angelegt -: Es geht zum Ersten um das Recht, einen Glauben zu bilden und Religion zu leben und auszuüben. Es geht zum Zweiten darum - das ist aktuell in vielen Ländern ein lebensgefährliches Problem -, seine Religion wechseln zu dürfen.\n\nZum Dritten geht es um die negative Religionsfreiheit. Auch das Nichtglauben muss selbstverständlich geschützt und erlaubt sein. Gleichzeitig umfasst die Reli-gions- und Glaubensfreiheit zwei Dimensionen: die individuelle, die des Einzelnen, der seinen Glauben lebt, und die kollektive Ausübung, zum Beispiel den Bau von Gotteshäusern. Dabei ist die Religionsfreiheit nicht -abhängig von der Größe der Gruppe, der diese Freiheit gewährt wird; sie gilt immer.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Menschen, die ihren Glauben leben, und ihre Religionsgemeinschaften sind leider weltweit einer Vielzahl von Bedrohungen ausgesetzt. Sie werden schikaniert, bedrängt, unterdrückt, repressiv behandelt, verfolgt und angegriffen, und es geht so weit, dass sie an Leib und Leben bedroht werden. Deshalb sage ich ganz klar: Unsere Solidarität gilt denjenigen, die von diesen Bedrohungen und Verfolgungen betroffen sind.\n\nIn unserem Antrag nehmen wir Menschenrechtsverletzungen wie in Afrika, in Asien oder im Nahen und Mittleren Osten in den Blick. Wir wollen aber ausdrücklich nicht davon absehen, dass auch in Europa das Recht auf Religionsfreiheit immer wieder eingefordert und geschützt werden muss. Deshalb soll es in diesem Bericht ausdrücklich um die Religionsfreiheit generell gehen und nicht ausschließlich um verfolgte und bedrängte Christen, auch wenn sie eine sehr große Gruppe der aufgrund ihrer Religion Verfolgten sind. Wir wissen - das ist schon angeführt worden -, dass zurzeit vor allem in den Gebieten, in denen der IS herrscht und Menschen bedroht, die Lage ganz besonders gefährlich ist. Der IS bedroht gleichermaßen Schiiten, Jesiden und Christen - alle, die in seinen Augen andersgläubig sind. Die Berichte über Verfolgung, Vertreibung, Zerstörung von Gotteshäusern, Gefangenschaft und massenhafte Vergewaltigungen von Mädchen und Frauen erschüttern uns zutiefst.\n\nWir erleben, dass die Zahl der gewalttätigen Übergriffe, für deren Begründung die Religion instrumentalisiert wird, zugenommen hat. Heiner Bielefeldt, der -Sonderberichterstatter der Vereinten Nationen über Religions- und Weltanschauungsfreiheit, hat in seinem sehr lesenswerten Bericht vor dem UN-Menschenrechtsrat zum „Umgang mit kollektiven Erscheinungsformen religiösen Hasses“ darauf aufmerksam gemacht. Er hat deutlich gemacht, dass Religion nie die alleinige Ursache für Konflikte ist, dass sie oft instrumentalisiert und zur Begründung von Hass und Gewalt herangezogen wird. Das führt zu massiven Menschenrechtsverletzungen. Wichtig ist hier, die Ursachen von Gewalt zu untersuchen, um Gewalt im Namen der Religion zu verhindern. Es geht auch darum, immer wieder zu betonen, dass Gewalt im Namen der Religion nicht historisch in einer Religion angelegt ist - leider haben das viele Religionen in ihrer Geschichte erlebt -, sondern sich Menschen dafür entscheiden und daher auch die Verantwortung für diese Gewalt tragen. Deshalb müssen wir, wenn wir zu einer nachhaltigen Prävention und zu Lösungsansätzen gelangen wollen, die Faktoren untersuchen, die zu dieser Gewalt führen.\n\nAls typische Faktoren nennt Heiner Bielefeldt den Vertrauensverlust in den Rechtsstaat, aber auch eine engstirnige, oft patriarchalische und polarisierende Auslegung religiöser Texte sowie die ökonomische und politische Diskriminierung einer religiösen Gruppe.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Religionsfreiheit heißt immer auch die Religionsfreiheit der anderen, um ein Zitat zu bemühen. Es geht darum, ein Leben in Toleranz und Respekt voreinander zu führen. Ein gutes Miteinander der Religionen ist der Schlüssel zum Frieden. Da hilft es auch nicht, wenn Angehörige einer Religion zu Opfern und Angehörige einer anderen Religion zu Tätern gemacht werden. Religionen dürfen nicht gegeneinander ausgespielt werden. Unser Ziel muss es sein, im Sinne der Religionsfreiheit ein gutes und friedliches Miteinander zu fördern und es in einen menschenrechtlichen Zusammenhang zu setzen.\n\nSeit 2013 gibt es von den beiden großen Kirchen den „Ökumenischen Bericht zur Religionsfreiheit von Christen weltweit“, der in Deutschland von der EKD und der Bischofskonferenz herausgegeben wird und den ich ausdrücklich loben möchte. Er ist wichtig, weil es eine wissenschaftliche Ausarbeitung ist. In anderen Berichten werden eher populistisch Indizes und Rankinglisten dargestellt. Der Bericht der Bundesregierung, den wir mit unserem Antrag fordern, soll eine sinnvolle Ergänzung dieses Ökumenischen Berichts sein. Durch die genauere Untersuchung der Ursachen kann geholfen werden, die Religions- und Glaubensfreiheit weltweit zu stärken.\n\nZum Abschluss mein herzlicher Dank an alle, die sich in verschiedenen Regionen dieser Welt für die Durchsetzung von Menschenrechten und ganz besonders für die Durchsetzung der Religionsfreiheit engagieren. Meine Solidarität gilt allen, die wegen ihres Glaubens bedrängt oder verfolgt werden. Auf ihr Schicksal wollen wir aufmerksam machen, damit so etwas nicht wieder passiert.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3877,ulla-jelpke,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Mit dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf zur Änderung des Asylbewerberleistungsgesetzes will die Koalition an der sozialrechtlichen Sonderbehandlung von Asylsuchenden, Flüchtlingen und geduldeten Menschen festhalten. -Dagegen fordert die Linke, dass diese Menschen wie alle anderen auch Zugang zu regulären Sozialleistungen -erhalten und dass Beschränkungen - egal welcher Art - beim Zugang zu Arbeit und Ausbildung unbedingt abgeschafft werden müssen.\n\nSoziale Rechte dürfen nicht unter aufenthaltsrechtlichen Vorbehalt gestellt werden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, das Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz besteht seit über 20 Jahren. Keine Bundes-regierung wollte daran rütteln. Geboren ist es übrigens aus dem Gedanken der Abschreckung von Flüchtlingen. Das Bundesverfassungsgericht hat im Juli 2012 klargestellt, dass auch Asylsuchende ein Recht auf ein menschenwürdiges Existenzminimum haben.\n\nDer zentrale Satz des Urteils lautet: Die Menschenwürde ist „migrationspolitisch nicht zu relativieren“.\n\nDas sollte auch die Koalition in diesem Haus endlich einmal ernst nehmen.\n\nDas Bundesverfassungsgericht hat unter anderem gefordert, das Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz nur auf jene anzuwenden, die sich voraussichtlich nur vorübergehend in Deutschland aufhalten. Doch wenn man sich den vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf genau anschaut, muss man feststellen, dass auch Menschen mit humanitären -Aufenthaltstiteln aus den regulären sozialen Sicherungssystemen herausgehalten werden.\n\nDas betrifft zum Beispiel die syrischen Flüchtlinge. Über drei Jahre dauert dieser Krieg inzwischen an, und leider ist nicht abzusehen, wann er beendet wird. Und trotzdem unterliegen diese Flüchtlinge dem Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz, als könne man davon ausgehen, dass sie spätestens nächste Woche das Land wieder verlassen können. Das ist doch schlicht Realitätsverweigerung und obendrein zynisch gegenüber diesen Menschen.\n\nDas Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz soll auch weiter für Menschen gelten, deren Asylantrag abgelehnt wurde, deren Aufenthalt in Deutschland aber weiter geduldet wird, weil sie auf längere Sicht nicht abgeschoben werden können. Auch deren Aufenthalt ist weder kurzzeitig noch vorübergehend. Deswegen müssen auch sie aus diesem Gesetz herausgenommen werden.\n\nIn einer Anhörung des Ausschusses für Arbeit und Soziales wurden von einer Reihe von Sachverständigen Verbesserungen - das ist ein ganz wichtiges Thema - bei der Gesundheitsversorgung angemahnt. Derzeit erhalten Menschen, die unter das Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz fallen, allenfalls Hilfe in akuten Notsituationen. Chronische Erkrankungen werden nicht behandelt; die Folgen sind oft Verschlimmerungen der Erkrankung bis hin zu schweren Behinderungen. Auch Todesfälle hat es schon gegeben. In der Expertenanhörung des Sozialausschusses wurden schlimme Beispiele geschildert. In einem Fall verweigerte das Sozialamt die Operation von -Augenkrebs bei einem Kind. In einem anderen Fall wurde die medizinisch notwendige Nachsorge einfach nicht geleistet, weil das Sozialamt Rechnungen nicht bezahlt hatte. Das Recht auf Gesundheit und körperliche Unversehrtheit darf nicht von einem Aufenthaltsstatus abhängig gemacht werden, meine Damen und Herren. Deswegen darf es so nicht weitergehen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, besonders eklatant ist, dass die Bundesregierung daran festhalten will, geduldeten Flüchtlingen das Taschengeld zu streichen, wenn sie an ihrer Abschiebung angeblich nicht mitwirken. Dieses Strafregime verletzt ganz klar das Recht auf ein -menschenwürdiges Existenzminimum. Sie müssen sich vorwerfen lassen, die Vorgaben des Bundesverfassungsgerichts nicht ernst genommen zu haben.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, dasselbe gilt für den Vorrang von Sachleistungen vor Bargeld. Die Asylsuchenden erhalten fertig gepackte Esspakete, die oft nur mangelhafte Waren enthalten. Diese Form der Versorgung ist absolut entmündigend.\n\nAuch hier wird die Würde der Betroffenen mit Füßen getreten. Damit muss endlich Schluss sein!\n\nDeshalb fordert die Linke, das System der sozialen Diskriminierung von Flüchtlingen endlich zu beenden und Sondergesetze wie das Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz abzuschaffen. Auch das hat das Bundesverfassungsgericht als Option durchaus im Sinn gehabt, und das wäre eigentlich auch das Richtige.\n\nSchönen Dank.\"\n15140,sonja-steffen,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir beraten und beschließen heute die Änderung der Geschäftsordnung des Deutschen Bundestages. § 1 der Geschäftsordnung soll dergestalt geändert werden, dass zukünftig nicht mehr das lebensälteste Mitglied des Bundestages als Alterspräsident vorgesehen ist und damit die Eröffnungsrede in dem neu gewählten Bundestag hält, sondern das am längsten dem Bundestag angehörende Mitglied, das hierzu bereit ist.\n\nWarum nun empfiehlt der Ausschuss für Wahlprüfung, Immunität und Geschäftsordnung diese Änderung? Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, bei der Vorbereitung dieser Rede habe ich einen Blick in die Geschichte des Amtes des Alterspräsidenten geworfen. Erlauben Sie mir, dass ich Sie zu dieser späten Stunde zu einer kleinen Geschichtsstunde einlade.\n\nSeinen Ursprung hat das Amt des Alterspräsidenten in der Französischen Revolution. Der Kollege Kaster hat vorhin auf die Briten hingewiesen, die den Monarchen oder die Monarchin dazu in Anspruch nehmen. Genau das wollte man in der Französischen Revolution vermeiden. Deshalb hat man damals beschlossen, dass es ein Parlamentarier sein muss, der mit möglichst viel Autorität und Würde die Eröffnungsrede hält.\n\nIn deutschen Versammlungen und Parlamenten haben wir die sogenannte Lebensaltersregelung schon seit dem Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts. Nun hat es aber in der Geschichte des Alterspräsidenten seit der Weimarer Republik einige erstaunliche Fälle gegeben. 1932 war die Alterspräsidentin Clara Zetkin.\n\nSie war damals schon hochbetagt, und sie war sehr krank. Sie musste eigens aus Moskau anreisen, um die Eröffnungsrede zu halten. Sie hat damals eine sehr erstaunliche Rede gehalten; das hat der NSDAP überhaupt nicht gefallen. Ein paar Monate später, im November des Jahres 1932, war das Parlament aufgelöst. Als ein neues Parlament gewählt wurde, hat die NSDAP Folgendes gemacht: Sie hat ein 82-jähriges Parteimitglied in den Reichstag wählen lassen, damit die Eröffnungsrede nicht mehr von Clara Zetkin gehalten werden konnte. Dieser hat die Rede gehalten und ist nach neun Tagen zurückgetreten.\n\nAber auch die jüngere Vergangenheit zeigt Beispiele, die belegen, wie das Amt durch die Regelung nach dem Lebensalter zum Spielball werden kann. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, ich kann auch Ihnen eine kleine Geschichte nicht ersparen. 1983 gab es den Kandidaten Werner Vogel, der ebenfalls relativ betagt war. Er hat in Kandidatenbriefen dafür geworben, dass er in seiner ersten Rede eine grüne Rede halten werde. Nicht nur, aber auch mit dieser Argumentation hat er es tatsächlich in NRW auf Listenplatz 1 geschafft. Er musste aber noch vor Antritt des Amtes zurücktreten, weil ihm eine NS-Vergangenheit nachgewiesen werden konnte.\n\nEinen weiteren bemerkenswerten Höhepunkt fand das Amt des Alterspräsidenten schließlich bei der Wahl 1994, als Stefan Heym, über die Liste der PDS in den Bundestag eingezogen, zum lebensältesten Parlamentarier bestimmt wurde. Schon im Vorfeld ist diese Personalie öffentlich und zum Teil recht unschön diskutiert worden. Den traurigen Höhepunkt fand die Diskussion schließlich in dem sich später als unbegründet erwiesenen Vorwurf - übrigens einen Tag vor der Eröffnungsrede -, dass Stefan Heym für die Stasi gearbeitet habe. Es war übrigens unser ehrenwerter ehemaliger Kollege Wiefelspütz, der den GO-Ausschuss leitete und der sich, soweit meine Recherchen zurückgehen, schon damals dafür ausgesprochen hat, über diese Regelung nachzudenken.\n\nZu welchem Ergebnis führt uns denn nun der Blick in die Geschichte? Er zeigt, dass das Amt des Alterspräsidenten in der öffentlichen Wahrnehmung sehr bedeutend ist; denn er hat eine herausragende Position. Der Alterspräsident vertritt den Bundestagspräsidenten, und der Bundestagspräsident steht in der protokollarischen Rangfolge direkt unter dem Bundespräsidenten. Das heißt also, für diese kurze Zeit ist der Alterspräsident der zweitwichtigste Mann bzw. - hoffentlich werden wir auch das einmal erleben - die zweitwichtigste Frau in der Republik.\n\nEr leitet die konstituierende Sitzung des neuen Bundestages und ebnet damit den Weg in eine neue Legislaturperiode.\n\nWahltaktische Spielereien und breite Diskussionen über Personen im Vorfeld sollte es nicht geben. Deshalb haben wir uns jetzt darauf verständigt, dem Abgeordneten oder der Abgeordneten, der oder die am längsten dem Bundestag angehört, den Vorsitz zu übertragen. Dies ermöglicht, dass ein erfahrener Parlamentarier oder eine erfahrene Parlamentarierin die konstituierende Sitzung leitet, jemand, der die parlamentarischen Gepflogenheiten kennt, mit den Abläufen vertraut und in der Lage ist, seine Erfahrungen in das Amt mit einzubringen; denn wir wollen an dieser Stelle nichts dem Zufall überlassen. Es ist völlig richtig, dass eben nicht zufällig der älteste Abgeordnete diesen feierlichen Moment der Plenumseröffnung prägen sollte, sondern einer, der lange Erfahrung hat und weiß, worauf es im Parlamentsbetrieb ankommt.\n\nNun könnte man allenfalls noch über den Zeitpunkt streiten: Ist die vorgesehene Änderung der Geschäftsordnung zwar eine gute Idee, aber der Zeitpunkt nicht der richtige? Dazu hat mein Kollege Kaster vorhin schon ausgeführt: Der Blick geht in die Zukunft, in die nächste Wahlperiode.\n\nIch möchte das Ende meiner Rede dazu nutzen, aus der Eröffnungsrede von Willy Brandt zu zitieren, der übrigens 1983 Alterspräsident wurde. Willy Brandt hat damals gesagt:\n\nGemeinsam wollen wir darüber wachen, daß sich die Schrecken der Vergangenheit, in welcher Form auch immer, nicht wiederholen.\n\nDann hat er angemahnt:\n\nDas Parlament in seiner Gesamtheit - und jeder Abgeordnete für sich - ist dazu berufen, darüber zu wachen, daß die auf Zeit vergebene demokratisch-politische Macht zum Wohle aller gebraucht wird.\n\nIch möchte Folgendes hinzufügen: Wir sollten daran denken, dass wir eine streitbare Demokratie sind, die sich gegen ihre Feinde zur Wehr setzt. Dabei sollten wir alle demokratischen Mittel nutzen, um die Würde dieses Hauses zu verteidigen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n11483,uwe-beckmeyer,\"Herr Abgeordneter Beck, herzlichen Dank für die Frage. - Wir werden immer wahrheitsgemäß antworten. Wir werden diesen in der Presse zu lesenden Aussagen der verschiedenen Verfassungsschutzämter nachgehen.\n\n- Keine Entrüstung. - Wir werden diesen Dingen nachgehen und sie aufklären.\n\nSie sprachen zu Recht von Beschaffungsversuchen. Es ist zu hinterfragen, bei wem das versucht worden ist und ob es mit Erfolg versucht worden ist. Diese Frage werden wir ebenfalls aufklären.\n\nFrau Kollegin, Ihre Frage zielt auf die Debatte zu CETA im Rahmen der Aktuellen Stunde ab. Wir haben gestern die Entscheidung der Kommission zur Kenntnis nehmen dürfen, dass entgegen ihrer bisherigen Haltung es kein EU-only-Abkommen werden soll, sondern ein gemischtes. Wir werden uns also auch hier in Deutschland auf einen Abstimmungsprozess zubewegen. Es werden sicherlich entsprechende Vorklärungen in Richtung des Handelsministerrates auch hier im Parlament stattfinden. Auf diese Art und Weise wird es, so denke ich, eine Meinungsbildung des Deutschen Bundestages und vielleicht auch des Bundesrats geben. Das wird sicherlich auch ein Fingerzeig für das entsprechende Verhalten der Bundesregierung im jeweiligen Rat sein.\n\nDann wird das Europäische Parlament über diesen Vorgang zu entscheiden haben. Damit haben wir ein Verhalten des Europaparlaments zu dem gesamten Abkommen. Danach wird darüber in den entsprechenden Parlamenten der Mitgliedstaaten entschieden. Das ist ein längerfristiger Prozess, an dem wir uns sicherlich in Deutschland beteiligen werden.\n\nIch habe eben zum Ausdruck gebracht, dass wir uns um den Verfassungsschutzbericht, den Sie zitiert haben, kümmern werden; wir werden dem nachgehen.\n\nDer entscheidende Punkt ist, dass nach meinem Kenntnisstand die Aussagen von Verfassungsschützern rückwärtsgewandt waren. Diesen Punkt werden wir aufklären. Einige Abgeordnete dieses Hauses haben sich dazu auch in den letzten Tagen öffentlich geäußert. Ich bin nicht in den Gremien, in denen dies besprochen worden ist. Wir werden dieser Sachlage nachgehen, und wir werden sie auch aufklären. Wenn dieser Aufklärungsprozess abgeschlossen ist, werde ich Ihnen schriftlich auf Ihre Frage antworten.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n1899,tobias-zech,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! „Heute ist ein guter Tag …“, so begannen Anfang April fast alle Reden, die in der ersten Lesung über die Aufnahme der Fleischindustrie in das Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetz gehalten wurden. In der Tat: Heute ist ein guter Tag. Es geht heute für manche Arbeitnehmer in der Fleisch-industrie sprichwörtlich um die Wurscht.\n\nAber es geht nicht nur um heute, es geht auch um die Umsetzung des Gesetzes, das heute beschlossen werden soll, es geht darum, dass wir aus einem guten Tag eine noch bessere Zukunft machen. Lassen Sie mich daher einen positiven Blick in die Zukunft richten. Die Erfahrungen mit dem Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetz sind gut: Die Branchenmindestlöhne haben nicht nur zu Beschäftigungsgewinnen geführt, sondern auch zu mehr Fairness im Wettbewerb der Unternehmen beigetragen.\n\nDiese Vorteile kommen nun auch endlich bei den Arbeitnehmern in der Fleischindustrie an. Dabei geht es zum einen darum, den Arbeitnehmern einen gerechten Lohn zu garantieren. Ein angemessener Lohn für die harte körperliche Arbeit ist das absolute Minimum. Es müssen aber auch alle anderen Umstände gewährleistet werden, um den Menschen ein Leben und ein Arbeiten in Würde zu ermöglichen. Nur wenn auch die äußeren Rahmenbedingungen stimmen, kann man diese körperlich harte Arbeit bewältigen und hygienische Umstände für Mensch und Tier und für die Produkte garantieren. Daher geht es auch um bezahlte Überstunden, um Urlaub, Höchstarbeitszeiten und Mindestruhezeiten, Bedingungen für die Überlassung von Arbeitskräften, Sicherheit, Gesundheitsschutz und Hygiene am Arbeitsplatz sowie last, but not least Nichtdiskriminierungsbestimmungen.\n\nEine Branche mit über 170 000 Arbeitnehmern soll nun davon profitieren dürfen. Für viele Arbeitgeber ist die Gewährleistung solcher Rahmenbedingungen eine Selbstverständlichkeit. Im Hinblick auf diejenigen, für die sie es bisher nicht waren, ist es unsere Aufgabe, sie zu einer Selbstverständlichkeit zu machen. Dieser Industrie wird somit ein Rechtsrahmen gesetzt werden, der für einen fairen Wettbewerb sorgen kann, national wie international.\n\nNational, weil wir nicht vergessen dürfen: Wir sind hier das gesetzgebende Organ. Es gab immer wieder Rechtsstreite, in denen auf Werkvertragsbasis ausgebeutete Beschäftigte erfolgreich eine Festanstellung eingeklagt haben. Sie konnten nachweisen, dass es sich um Scheinwerkverträge handelte. Es darf aber nicht Aufgabe der Gerichte sein, durch Rechtsprechung Gesetze zu schaffen, wo wir keine Ordnung hergestellt haben. Zudem beschreiten zu wenige den Weg der Gerichtsbarkeit und müssen folglich mit den katastrophalen Umständen leben, gerade bei den schwarzen Schafen, die es wie in allen Industriezweigen auch in der Fleischindus-trie gibt. Deshalb ist es so wichtig, dass wir diesen Schritt gehen und diesen Menschen nun einen deutlich besseren Schutz bieten - präventiv und nicht lediglich erst im Vollzug.\n\nAber auch international ist dieser Schritt wichtig, da nur bei entsprechendem Schutz aller europäischen Arbeitnehmer die Vision der Arbeitnehmerfreizügigkeit weiter verfolgt werden kann. Damit garantieren wir -einen guten Standard an Arbeitnehmerrechten und erweitern so die Möglichkeiten für freie Arbeitnehmerwanderung und -zuwanderung und Wechsel innerhalb der Europäischen Union.\n\nIn der Umsetzung bestehen zwei essenzielle Schwerpunkte. Zum einen - das haben wir heute schon mehrmals diskutiert - geht es um die Kontrolle. Es bringt kein noch so guter Wille etwas, wenn es an der Umsetzung und an der Kontrolle scheitert.\n\nMit der Aufnahme der Arbeitnehmer in der Fleisch-industrie ist unsere Arbeit also nicht getan, sondern wir müssen die Aufsichtsbehörden tatkräftig unterstützen und alle Möglichkeiten der Kontrollen ermöglichen.\n\nErst wenn diese einen effektiven Druck auf die Arbeitgeber ausüben können, erfüllt das Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetz auch seine Zwecke.\n\nZum anderen geht es um die Generalunternehmerhaftung nach § 14 Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetz. Dazu sei zunächst gesagt, dass diese nicht neu ist und mit der Aufnahme der Fleischindustrie auch nicht geändert wird. Zudem ist diese Regelung verfassungskonform und konform mit dem Europarecht.\n\nWir können diese Problematik nicht auf dem Rücken der Arbeitnehmer austragen, die wir gerade schützen wollen. Damit würden wir Gefahr laufen, neue Lücken aufzureißen, die zu erneutem Missbrauch führen könnten.\n\nEs liegt in der Macht des Unternehmens und der Unternehmer, sich die Subunternehmen aussuchen zu können und dabei auf Zuverlässigkeit und entsprechende Mindestmaßstäbe zu achten. Die Unternehmen haben dabei mehr Möglichkeiten der Kontrolle als die Arbeitnehmer, und diese Kontrolle soll gerade genutzt werden, um Subunternehmer genauer unter die Lupe zu nehmen. Nur so können die schwarzen Schafe vom Markt verdrängt werden, die Arbeitnehmer mit falschen Versprechungen locken und ausbeuten.\n\nDennoch verstehe ich die Bedenken der Unternehmen, die Doppelzahlungen befürchten, ohne sich vollständig absichern zu können. Die Einführung eines Hilfsfonds erachte ich jedoch nicht für sinnvoll. Dieser würde zu einer höheren Belastung für die Gemeinschaft und zu einem erheblichen Verwaltungsaufwand führen. Vor allem aber würden damit auch diejenigen Unternehmen zur Kasse gebeten werden, die zuverlässige Nachunternehmer gewissenhaft auswählen und sich somit schützen, und gerade das ist ja auch das Ziel des Gesetzes.\n\nDennoch sollten gerade die Konstellation des Pfändungs- und Überweisungsbeschlusses näher beleuchtet und weitere Lösungsvorschläge bedacht werden. Diese Thematik werden wir insbesondere auch im Zusammenhang mit § 13 des Mindestlohngesetzes noch genauer betrachten müssen.\n\nNichtsdestotrotz ist heute ein guter Tag für die Arbeitnehmer in der fleischverarbeitenden Industrie. Wir treffen heute eine gute und zukunftsfähige Entscheidung. Wir sollten aber auch weiterhin weitere Branchen sensibel und aufmerksam im Blick behalten und diesen Schutz gegebenenfalls ausweiten.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n13337,dietmar-bartsch,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Durch einen feigen Anschlag sind zwölf Menschen getötet worden, viele wurden verletzt. Ihrer Anteilnahme, Herr Minister, dem Anliegen der Unterstützung für die Opfer, dem Gedenken schließe ich mich ausdrücklich an; das teilen wir. Ich möchte auch für die Fraktion Die Linke den Hinterbliebenen der Opfer und den Verletzten des Anschlages in Berlin mein Mitgefühl aussprechen. Ich möchte, dass wir alle immer auch über die Opfer reden, dass das nicht unter dem Fall Amri subsumiert wird. Und ich möchte auch, dass wir trotz dieses Anschlages unsere Art, zu leben, nicht kaputtmachen lassen, dass wir mehr Menschlichkeit, mehr Freiheit fordern und dabei bleiben und dass wir denen keine Siege gönnen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nJa, es ist so, dass man nicht alle Fragen sofort beantworten kann; es hat lange gedauert, bis erste Fragen beantwortet wurden. Ich will Heiko Maas zitieren, der dann gesagt hat:\n\nEs kann sich nach dem, was da geschehen ist, und nach dem, was man mittlerweile weiß, niemand hinsetzen und sagen, es sind keine Fehler gemacht worden.\n\nIch will dem ausdrücklich zustimmen; bloß, ich möchte natürlich auch wissen: Wer hat denn Fehler gemacht, welche Verantwortung gibt es da? Und da gibt es bisher sehr, sehr wenige Antworten. Seit Montag liegt Ihrer beider Bericht - Sie haben darauf hingewiesen - an das PKGr vor, und trotzdem bleiben viele Fragen. Das Fehlen von Antworten auf diese Fragen - das ist das, was die Menschen in unserem Land verunsichert, Herr Minister.\n\nWie kann es sein, dass Amri diesen feigen Anschlag durchführen konnte, obwohl er seit 2015 wöchentlich Thema deutscher Behörden war? Wie kann es sein, dass trotz Information eines V-Manns, dass ein „gewisser Anis“ Anschlagspläne hegt, hier Informationen nicht zusammengeführt worden sind? Woher hatte Amri seit Februar 2016 die Information, dass die Behörden ihn auf dem Schirm hatten? Wie kann es sein, dass die Observierung Amris ab April 2016 nur noch lückenhaft durchgeführt worden ist? Wieso wurde die Beschattung, obwohl er Thema im Gemeinsamen Terrorismusabwehrzentrum war, im September eingestellt, und das, meine Damen und Herren, zu einem Zeitpunkt, zu dem der marokkanische Geheimdienst Informationen hierhergegeben hat, dass er eben ein Gefahrenpotenzial hat? Wie kann denn das sein? Wie kann es zu dieser Einschätzung kommen, dass er nicht gefährlich ist? Dafür gibt es keine Erklärung.\n\nKurz danach wurde er übrigens in der Polizeidatenbank INPOL europaweit als ausländischer Kämpfer aufgeführt. Warum? Wie passt das zusammen, meine Damen und Herren? Warum sind alle Verfahren gegen Amri - alle -, wegen Drogen, Betrugs usw., eingestellt worden, obwohl ihm Dutzende Straftaten vorgeworfen worden sind? Das alles, meine Damen und Herren, stinkt gen Himmel. Das ist keine Schuldzuweisung; aber da ist etwas nicht in Ordnung.\n\nIch will einfach wissen: Wer hat was warum irgendwie gedreht? Was ist da in Nordrhein-Westfalen konkret passiert? Von dort sehe ich nur einen Fingerzeig in Richtung Berlin. Es ist eine Aneinanderkettung von Fehlurteilen der Sicherheitsbehörden. Geschah dies im Übrigen planmäßig, weil er vielleicht als Quelle genutzt werden sollte, oder ist es Versagen?\n\nWir haben, wie Sie wissen, einen Untersuchungsausschuss gefordert. Interessanterweise hat sich Herr Kauder dem angeschlossen, offensichtlich - es ist ja Ihr Fraktionschef - weil es offene Fragen gibt; denn einen Untersuchungsausschuss macht man dann, wenn die Antworten bisher nicht ausreichen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Voraussetzung für neue Gesetze ist natürlich zuallererst Aufklärung. Und bei Ihnen höre ich nur: Verschärfung, Verschärfung, Verschärfung. - Ich sage ganz klar: Wir haben ausreichend Mittel und Gesetze, mit denen dieser Anschlag vielleicht hätte verhindert werden können, wenn sie nur vernünftig und konsequent angewendet worden wären. Sie aber haben meines Erachtens den Überblick über Ihre eigenen Behörden und über die Sicherheitsgesetze längst verloren.\n\nÜber Ihre konkreten Vorschläge können wir alle noch reden, aber bisher wird vor allen Dingen über Verschärfung geredet, und da haben wir eine ganze Menge durch: Zweimal das Asylrecht verschärft; das Gemeinsame Terrorabwehrzentrum ist gegründet worden. Aber die Arbeit scheint dort nicht zu funktionieren.\n\nVideoüberwachung. Wir haben auch nichts gegen vereinzelte Videoüberwachung. Aber: Der Mann ist 14-mal gefilmt worden. Festgehalten und zur Strecke gebracht haben ihn dann zwei Polizisten bei einer normalen Kontrolle. Deswegen sollten wir mehr über die Stärkung der Polizei nachdenken und nicht über flächendeckende Videoüberwachung; ich hoffe, dass auch Sie das nicht wollen.\n\nBevor Sie zu solchen Forderungen kommen, wollen wir, dass alle Fakten auf dem Tisch liegen, und dabei geht es nicht um Schuldzuweisung, sondern darum, zukünftig entsprechende Fehler zu verhindern. Das ist doch der entscheidende Punkt.\n\nZwei Dinge zum Abschluss. Wir sollten dafür sorgen, dass die Moscheen, die von Saudi-Arabien finanziert werden - wo Herr Amri offensichtlich vorher war -, zugemacht werden, damit hier nicht in irgendeiner Art und Weise Terrorismus gefördert wird.\n\nUnd zum Satz: Wir müssen die Fluchtursachen bekämpfen. - Wir sollten darüber nachdenken, wie wir dem Terrorismus real den Boden entziehen können. Wir sollten keine Interventionskriege führen, keine Waffen exportieren und Ähnliches. Dann ergreifen wir die richtigen Maßnahmen, damit dem Terrorismus der Boden entzogen wird.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n14340,florian-pronold,\"Wie Sie wissen, gibt es einen Bericht von 2016, aus dem hervorgeht, dass es seit 2008 keine Verbesserung der Trinkwassersituation gibt. Sie ist in etwa gleich geblieben. Rund 18 Prozent der Trinkwasserbrunnen weisen eine Nitratbelastung über dem Grenzwert auf. Wir als Bundesregierung versprechen uns eine deutliche Verbesserung durch die Novellierung der Düngeverordnung, die, wenn ich es richtig im Kopf habe, diese Woche im Bundesrat abschließend behandelt wird.\n\nIhre Frage bezieht sich auch darauf, was darüber hinaus getan werden soll und kann. Das obliegt im Regelfall den Ländern. Die Länder haben umfangreiche Möglichkeiten und haben auch bisher schon davon Gebrauch gemacht. Es gibt entsprechende landesspezifische Vereinbarungen, zum Beispiel zwischen den für das Wasser und den für die Landwirtschaft zuständigen Stellen.\n\nAußerdem gibt es die Möglichkeit, dass die Länder weitere Trinkwassergebiete ausweisen können, für die sie dann verbindliche Richtlinien vorschreiben können. Das Zentrale aber wird sein, dass wir nun die Düngeverordnung in Kraft setzen. Wir hoffen, dass es dadurch mittelfristig zu signifikanten Verbesserungen kommen wird.\n\nWie Sie aus den Debatten, die wir im Ausschuss für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reaktorsicherheit hatten, wissen, war zum Beispiel keine Einigung über die Frage einer baulichen Stärkung der kommunalen Seite zu erzielen, was die Massentierhaltung angeht. Natürlich hatten wir während des gesamten Prozesses der Beratung der Düngeverordnung intensive Gespräche. Ich finde, dass wir mit dieser Düngeverordnung nun wesentliche Verbesserungen erzielen werden. Das ist ein guter Schritt in Bezug auf die Sicherheit des Trinkwassers in Deutschland.\n\nWie Sie zu Recht schildern, betreffen die Einträge nicht nur die Landwirtschaft, sondern es gibt auch noch andere Quellen für den Eintrag von Nitraten. Da spielen - das haben Sie richtig wiedergegeben - Verkehr und Industrie eine Rolle. Das bewegt sich im Geleitzug der allgemeinen Debatte, die wir dazu führen, bzw. der Maßnahmen insgesamt, was zum Beispiel den Klimaschutz angeht. Wenn wir beispielsweise insgesamt eine Reduzierung der fossilen Energieträger im Verkehrsbereich erreichen, wird es auch weniger Einträge ins Grundwasser geben. Deswegen hat die Bundesregierung, wie Sie wissen, zum Beispiel auch eine Elektromobilitätsstrategie entwickelt. Wir bemühen uns, auch hier so schnell wie möglich von fossilen Energieträgern wegzukommen.\n\nIch vermute, dass sich das auf einen kürzlich in der Welt erschienenen Artikel bezieht, der einen bekannten Sachverhalt aufgreift, nämlich dass es durch die dualen Systeme zu einer unvollständigen Lizenzierung von Verpackungen gekommen ist, die in den Verkehr gebracht worden sind; es wurden geringere Mengen lizenziert. Wir haben mit der siebten Novelle zur Verpackungsverordnung diesen Missstand beseitigt. Hier ist es zu einer Situation gekommen, die zwar nicht dazu führt, dass im Zweifel die nichtlizenzierten Mengen in diesem Bereich irgendwo verschwinden oder im Restmüll landen. Aber ihre Entsorgung wurde nicht dem Verursacherprinzip entsprechend finanziert. Das war eine nicht hinzunehmende Situation, die wir bereits mit der siebten Novelle zur Verpackungsverordnung abgestellt haben. Darüber hinaus beraten wir in dieser Woche abschließend über den Entwurf eines Verpackungsgesetzes. Danach wird es eine zentrale Stelle geben, die eine bessere Überwachung und Koordinierung der dualen Systeme - auch gegenüber den Kommunen - bringen wird. Auch davon versprechen wir uns Verbesserungen.\n\nStreng genommen ist kein Müll verschwunden. Vielmehr wurden - fast strafrechtlich relevant - falsche Angaben gemacht. Das hätte übrigens einen Teil der dualen Systeme fast an die Grenze des Ruins gebracht. Deswegen sind wir dort eingeschritten.\n\nNein, das können wir nicht belegen; denn so schnell kann man empirische Daten nicht erfassen. Aber von zentraler Bedeutung ist in diesem Kontext, dass wir nicht von virtuellen Mengen, die lizenziert werden sollen, ausgehen, sondern dass wir mit der siebten Novelle zur Verpackungsverordnung überprüfbare Mengen zugrunde legen; das ist der entscheidende Unterschied. Damit ist die Missbrauchsanfälligkeit sehr stark reduziert worden, zumindest in den bekannten Fällen. Da es schon sieben Novellen zur Verpackungsverordnung gegeben hat und bei mir ein gesundes Misstrauen gegen manche Marktbeteiligte verbleibt, will ich nicht ausschließen, dass wir auch nach dem Verpackungsgesetz, wenn es neue Umgehungsvarianten oder Missbräuche gibt, eine achte Novelle brauchen. Derzeit sind wir aber zu der Erkenntnis gekommen, dass wir das Modell aus Falschlizenzierung von Müll, Kostenersparnis und Konkurrenzkampf durch die siebte Novelle ausschalten konnten.\n\nDie von Ihnen angesprochenen Sachverhalte sind vorgekommen und kommen wahrscheinlich zum Teil weiterhin vor. Die empirische Datengrundlage, die wir dazu haben, ist relativ gering. Wir haben deswegen vor einiger Zeit eine Studie zu den Altautobeständen in Auftrag gegeben und erwarten demnächst entsprechende Erkenntnisse. Da es sich aber um einen illegalen Bereich handelt, der bereits gegen bestehendes Recht verstößt, ist es besonders schwierig, aussagekräftige Zahlen zu bekommen. Wir halten uns an die EU-Vorgaben zu den Altautos. Es handelt sich hier primär um ein Überwachungsproblem, weil sich die Unterscheidung zwischen Schrott und Gebrauchtwagen in der Praxis schwierig gestaltet.\n\nDasselbe haben wir nun verstärkt bei der Frage der Elektroaltgeräte. Sie wissen, dass wir jüngst hier im Parlament die Voraussetzungen dafür geschaffen haben. Es geht insbesondere darum, dass nun auch die Verbringer dokumentieren müssen, dass es sich tatsächlich um Gebrauchtgeräte handelt, die auch funktionsfähig sind, und nicht um falsch deklarierten Elektroschrott. Da haben wir die Anforderungen erhöht. Auch hier kommt es gerade in der Konstellation mit dem Export darauf an, dass dann auch die zuständigen Behörden diese neuen Vorgaben überprüfen. Das ist die einzige Voraussetzung, wie man diese Missbräuche und diese nicht hinnehmbaren Zustände abstellen kann. Die gesetzlichen und die vollzugsrechtlichen Voraussetzungen dafür haben wir geschaffen.\n\nSehr geehrter Herr Kollege Ebner, die Bundesregierung hat zu den Vorwürfen gegen Herrn Professor Greim bereits in den Antworten auf die schriftlichen Fragen 10/138 vom 21. Oktober 2016, veröffentlicht in der Drucksache 18/10202, und 11/253 vom 30. November 2016, veröffentlicht in der Drucksache 18/10596, Stellung genommen. Dem ist nichts hinzuzufügen.\n\nEs geht um einen Artikel, soweit ich das weiß, der aus dem Jahr 2013 resultiert und der mit mehreren Universitäten gemeinsam und unter Einbeziehung auch der Industrie erstellt worden ist. Das ist der Gegenstand der Kritik, soweit ich das wahrnehme. Ich kann allerdings nicht sehen, dass dieser Artikel in irgendeiner Form Eingang in die jüngste Entscheidung der zuständigen Stellen auf europäischer Ebene gefunden hat.\n\nEs gibt meiner Kenntnis nach in den entsprechenden Gremien auf EU-Ebene wie auch auf nationaler Ebene die Verpflichtung, Interessenskollisionen offenzulegen. Wenn dies unterbleibt, ist es ein Verstoß gegen die Vorgaben. Ich bin jetzt nicht in der Lage, hier im Einzelnen solche Vorwürfe zu prüfen oder zu bewerten; da bitte ich um Verständnis. Insgesamt will ich aber schon festhalten, dass wir davon ausgehen, dass wir ein bewährtes System der Überprüfung haben und dass es eine wissenschaftliche Bewertung der Fragen gibt - nach wissenschaftlichen Standards.\n\nDass man über einzelne Bewertungen immer wieder trefflich streiten kann, das ist so. Die Bundesregierung hat sich bei der Frage entsprechender Prüfungen zum Beispiel dagegengewandt, dass die Beweislast umgekehrt wird. Wir sind nach wie vor der Auffassung - wir werden das auch gegenüber der EU vertreten -, dass diejenigen, die wollen, dass ein Produkt zugelassen wird, erst einmal alle notwendigen Belege vorlegen müssen, dass das Verhältnis nicht umgekehrt wird und dass das Ganze durch die infragekommenden Institutionen wissenschaftlich geprüft wird.\n\nIch bin mir als Parlamentarier und als Vertreter des Ministeriums nicht sicher, ob wir für Sachverständige, die vor Untersuchungsausschüssen aussagen, vergleichbare Offenlegungspflichten haben; ich habe davon keine Kenntnis. Aber wenn es eine entsprechende Vorschrift gibt, müsste man ihr Rechnung tragen. Ich kann aber nicht die Dinge bewerten, die Sie hier jetzt als Vorhalt machen. Ich glaube, das steht der Bundesregierung auch nicht zu. Es handelt sich um einen parlamentarischen Untersuchungsausschuss; insofern ist das dort zu klären.\n\nDie Verleihung, die im Jahr 2015 auf Vorschlag des BMUB vorgenommen worden ist, hat damit zu tun, dass Herr Greim über viele Jahre und Jahrzehnte hinweg in vielen Expertengremien auf nationaler und internationaler Ebene ehrenamtlich tätig gewesen ist und auch den Vorsitz von Gremien innegehabt hat. Das - die ehrenamtliche Tätigkeit, die er dort wahrgenommen hat - war die Voraussetzung dafür, dass er für diese Verleihung vorgeschlagen worden ist.\n\nEs entzieht sich meiner Kenntnis, ob es üblich ist, dass diejenigen, die einen Vorschlag für die Verleihung des Bundesverdienstkreuzes machen, eine Evaluierung vornehmen, wenn nach der Verleihung Vorwürfe im Raum stehen. Ich nehme an, dass es im Zusammenhang mit der Verleihung eines Bundesverdienstkreuzes und der damit verbundenen Ehrung ein Verfahren gibt, wenn angezweifelt wird, dass die Ehrung noch verdient ist. Das kann ich nicht beurteilen, und das will ich auch nicht beurteilen. Vielmehr bin ich dafür, dass man das zum Gegenstand macht, wenn es nicht nur um Vorwürfe geht, sondern wenn an dieser Stelle Erkenntnisse vorliegen.\n\nWir haben das zum Teil schon bei den Nachfragen zur vorangegangenen Frage behandelt.\n\nDie Bewertung von Pflanzenschutzmittelwirkstoffen erfolgt in Deutschland durch wissenschaftlich unabhängige Behörden auf der Grundlage der in der EU festgelegten Verfahren.\n\nDie Bundesregierung - das habe ich schon ausgeführt - wendet sich derzeit auch gegen Vorschläge, die Beweislast dahin gehend umzukehren, dass Behörden und nicht Unternehmen für die Erbringung von Studien verantwortlich sind, die anschließend, wie es derzeit geregelt ist, von unabhängigen Sachverständigen der europäischen und der nationalen Behörden geprüft und bewertet werden.\n\nZuständige EU-Behörden im Bereich Pflanzenschutz sind insbesondere die Europäische Behörde für Lebensmittelsicherheit und die Europäische Chemikalienagentur. Auf der nationalen Ebene prüfen und bewerten das Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung, das Julius-Kühn-Institut und das Umweltbundesamt Pflanzenschutzmittel und ihre Wirkstoffe.\n\nWir haben ein System der wissenschaftlichen Überprüfung bei der Zulassung entsprechender Wirkstoffe oder Pflanzenschutzmittel. Was Pflanzenschutzmittel angeht, fällt das übrigens in den Zuständigkeitsbereich des BMEL.\n\nJa, es gibt diese Debatte über die Frage: Welche wissenschaftlichen Sicherungen sind zusätzlich einzubauen im Hinblick darauf, was an Studien gar nicht vorgelegt wird? Das ist ein sehr alter Streit, wenn es zum Schluss um die Frage von wissenschaftlichen Bewertungen geht. Aber ich finde, dass wir zu wissenschaftlich basierten Erkenntnissen kommen - wenn Sie sich nur anschauen, was wir insgesamt an Vorgaben in unseren Prüfungsverfahren haben! Im Einzelfall kann man diese Erkenntnisse dann auch wieder anders sehen - dafür habe ich Verständnis -; aber ich sehe jetzt keinen Anlass dafür, dass wir von dem System, das wir bei der Risikoprüfung sowohl in Deutschland wie auch in der EU haben, abgehen.\n\nMir persönlich ist dieser Bericht gestern Abend im Fernsehen nicht bekannt. Ich nehme das mit, und ich glaube, dass wir in der weitergehenden Debatte über Glyphosat und ähnliche Stoffe auch die Frage weiter erörtern werden, nach welchen Kriterien dies in Zukunft stattfinden wird.\n\nNoch einmal, wir sind nicht federführend in diesen Zulassungsfragen, und ich kann auch die Antwort auf diese Frage nicht aus dem Ärmel schütteln, weil ich die Detailkenntnis tatsächlich nicht habe. Ich glaube, dass es in all diesen Fragen angemessen ist, sich immer die wissenschaftlichen Standards anzuschauen. Es gibt dort eine große Verunsicherung, auch in der Frage, ob dies alles korrekt abgeht. Die entsprechenden Vorwürfe wurden im Rahmen der vorhergehenden Frage angesprochen. Diesen muss man nachgehen und den Sachverhalt aufklären. Das halte ich für selbstverständlich.\n\nNatürlich halte ich es auch für selbstverständlich, dass man diese Abläufe verändert, wenn man zu Erkenntnissen kommt, dass hier wissenschaftliche Standards verletzt werden. Ich habe aber zumindest bisher noch keine Anhaltspunkte dafür, dass man durch das aktuelle System nicht zu wissenschaftlichen Überprüfungen und zu einer vernünftigen Risikobewertung kommt.\n\nWir haben in der gesamten Debatte deutlich gemacht, dass das BMUB zuständig ist für die Frage der Auswirkungen von Glyphosat auf die Biodiversität und dass die Frage einer krebserregenden Wirkung von Glyphosat in der Zuständigkeit des Landwirtschaftsministeriums liegt.\n\nWir haben, wie Sie wissen, damals bezüglich einer Gesamtbewertung keine Einigung innerhalb der Bundesregierung erzielt, was zu den entsprechenden Auswirkungen auf der europäischen Ebene geführt hat. Das entsprechende Institut ist nun jüngst zu der Einschätzung gekommen, dass dieses Mittel nach seiner Auffassung nicht die Kriterien für eine Einstufung als „krebserregend“ erfüllt, und die EU-Kommission wird demnächst die Entscheidung treffen. Damit wird das Verfahren der Legaleinstufung von Glyphosat abgeschlossen. Die EU-Kommission hat angekündigt, dass sie die Biodiversitätsüberlegungen, die von uns angeregt worden sind, aufnehmen wird. Das ist für uns ein wichtiger Punkt auf EU-Ebene.\"\n3253,hubertus-zdebel,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Es ist sehr zu begrüßen, dass wieder verstärkt über Tierschutz und Tierwohl geredet und diskutiert wird, auch hier im Deutschen Bundestag. Gesellschaftlicher Druck konnte zwar bereits einige Verbesserungen zum Wohl der Tiere durchsetzen, doch wir sind noch weit von einem wirksamen Tierschutz entfernt. Die Linke ist der Meinung, dass Tiere als Wesen zu akzeptieren sind und nicht wie Sachen behandelt werden dürfen.\n\nDarüber haben wir in der Vergangenheit immer wieder gestritten. In der vergangenen Legislaturperiode haben wir viele Anträge dazu eingebracht, zum Beispiel Eindämmung von Megaställen, zum Ausstieg aus der Qualzucht, zur Einführung eines Verbandsklagerechts für Tierschutzverbände und vieles mehr. Ich füge hinzu: Wäre in der vergangenen Legislaturperiode nur einer unserer Vorschläge tatsächlich aufgegriffen worden, wären wir, was das Tierwohl angeht, jetzt sicherlich ein erhebliches Stück weiter.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund ist es nicht verwunderlich, dass die Akzeptanz in der Bevölkerung gegenüber der Agrar- und Lebensmittelindustrie schwindet.\n\nEigentlicher Hintergrund für die heutige Diskussion - das ist deutlich geworden - ist die in der vergangenen Woche angekündigte sogenannte Tierwohlinitiative des Landwirtschaftsministers. Wir werden diese Tierwohl-initiative in den Punkten unterstützen, wo den Ankündigungen auch Taten folgen, die zu spürbaren Verbesserungen für das Tierwohl führen. Das ist völlig klar. Wir werden den Minister aber auch scharf kritisieren und stellen, wenn es bei der jetzigen Ankündigungspolitik bleibt.\n\nWir finden es erst einmal gut, dass in dem Eckpunktepapier einige Probleme erkannt und angesprochen werden, aber dennoch gibt es von unserer Seite Kritik; denn die sogenannte Tierwohlinitiative droht zu einem Scheinriesen, vergleichbar mit dem bei Jim Knopf, zu werden: Je näher man diesem Riesen kommt, desto kleiner wird er.\n\nDas Eckpunktepapier des Ministers setzt auf die Freiwilligkeit der Agrar- und Lebensmittelindustrie. Dass aber Modelle der freiwilligen Selbstverpflichtung nichts bringen, zeigen Erfahrungen aus der Vergangenheit. Dafür gibt es zahlreiche Beispiele, egal ob bei der Dispo-abzocke der Banken oder bei der Korruption im Gesundheitswesen. Ohne vernünftige gesetzliche Regelung setzen sich eben nicht jene Betriebe durch, die auf sozial-ökologische Verantwortung setzen. Sie werden schlicht von denjenigen verdrängt, die ausschließlich ihre Profite im Blick haben.\n\nWir brauchen vernünftige - ich betone: vernünftige - gesetzliche Regelungen und wirksame Kontrollen, doch diese sind in der Tierwohlinitiative nicht zu finden. Die taz hat dies zu Recht mit „Warme Worte, keine Taten“ kommentiert. In der Tat: Das Abschneiden von Schwänzen bei Schweinen, das Kupieren von Schnäbeln bei Geflügel oder das millionenfache Töten männlicher Küken werden zwar angesprochen, aber gehandelt wird nicht. Mit dieser Tierquälerei muss aber sofort Schluss sein.\n\nDaher ist der vorliegende Antrag der Grünen zu begrüßen, weil er konkrete gesetzliche Maßnahmen in diesem Bereich vorschlägt.\n\nInteressant ist auch, was in der sogenannten Tierwohlinitiative nicht erwähnt wird, etwa dass in deutschen Tierfabriken millionenfach und ohne Betäubung Ferkel kastriert werden oder dass Wildtiere in Wanderzirkussen unter nicht artgerechten Bedingungen gehalten und eingesetzt werden. Diese Liste ließe sich weiter fortsetzen und zeigt: Wir brauchen endlich gesetzliche Schritte und Verbote statt Absichtserklärungen und Selbstverpflichtungen.\n\nAuch bei der Eindämmung von Tierversuchen herrscht Zahnlosigkeit. Die jüngst heimlich gefilmte Dokumentation der Folter von Menschenaffen am Max-Planck-Institut in Tübingen - leider geduldet durch eine grün-rote Landesregierung - zeigt: Das ist nur die Spitze des Eisberges, mit der wir es im Moment zu tun haben.\n\nLaut Tierwohlinitiative soll nun die Ersatzmethodenforschung ausgebaut werden, und der Landwirtschaftsminister erklärt, die Zahl der Versuchstiere eindämmen zu wollen. Konsequent wäre es aber, die Logik umzukehren, nämlich Tierversuche grundsätzlich zu verbieten und nur noch in Ausnahmefällen zuzulassen.\n\nDer Landwirtschaftsminister verweist auf die Verantwortung der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher. Dieses Argument wird oft gebracht, wenn die Politik, wie auch jetzt, nicht oder nicht konsequent handelt. Doch von der Verantwortung der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher zu reden und zugleich zu sinkenden Löhnen, Hartz IV und millionenfacher Armut in Deutschland zu schweigen, ist zynisch. Soziale Gerechtigkeit und nachhaltiges Kaufverhalten müssen zusammen diskutiert werden.\n\nZusammengefasst: Die Tierwohlinitiative des Ministers ist eine Mischung aus Absichtserklärungen und wirkungslosen Appellen an die Wirtschaft. Hier müssen Taten folgen. Daran werden wir Sie messen. Ich freue mich auf weitere spannende Diskussionen im Ausschuss und darauf, dass wir es tatsächlich schaffen, in dieser Legislaturperiode, an einigen Stellen vielleicht sogar gemeinsam, etwas Vernünftiges auf den Weg zu bringen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n13843,sahra-wagenknecht,\"Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren!\n\nMillionen Menschen fühlen, dass es in diesem Staat nicht gerecht zugeht …\n\nWenn ein Konzernchef verheerende Fehlentscheidungen trifft, dafür noch Millionen an Boni kassiert, eine Verkäuferin dagegen aber für eine kleine Verfehlung rausgeschmissen wird, dann geht es nicht gerecht zu.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der SPD, ich wundere mich, dass Sie jetzt nicht alle geklatscht haben. Das waren Aussagen Ihres Kanzlerkandidaten und künftigen Parteichefs.\n\nMartin Schulz hätte natürlich ehrlicherweise dazusagen können, dass die SPD in ihren letzten 15 Jahren Regierungszeit erhebliche Mitverantwortung für die von ihm zu Recht kritisierten Zustände trägt. Aber egal, späte Einsicht ist besser als gar keine Einsicht.\n\nNatürlich ist es ein Skandal, dass in diesem Land immer mehr Menschen trotz harter Arbeit auch nicht ansatzweise einen halbwegs gesicherten Wohlstand erreichen können, während am oberen Ende der Einkommenspyramide Millionen eingestrichen werden, die jeden Bezug zur persönlichen Leistung verloren haben, wo elementare Prinzipien von Haftung und persönlicher Verantwortung völlig außer Kraft gesetzt sind. Das sind himmelschreiende Ungerechtigkeiten.\n\nUnd das empfinden die meisten Menschen zu Recht so.\n\nDeswegen ist es gut, dass Sie von der SPD das inzwischen auch so sehen. Darüber freuen wir uns.\n\nDie Freude wäre allerdings ungetrübter, wenn wir das Gefühl hätten, den Reden von Herrn Schulz würden jetzt auch reale Taten folgen. Es klang ja zunächst gut, als die SPD-Fraktion angekündigt hat, im März einen Gesetzentwurf vorzulegen mit einem festgeschriebenen Maximalverhältnis zwischen Vorstandsgehältern und durchschnittlichem Einkommen im Unternehmen.\n\nDas wäre vernünftig. Deshalb haben wir als Linke genau das schon mehrfach in diesem Parlament beantragt. Allerdings hat sich Ihre eigene Wirtschaftsministerin davon schon wieder abgewandt und die Forderung auf eine Begrenzung der steuerlichen Abzugsfähigkeit von Managergehältern reduziert - also das, was jetzt auch die Grünen beantragt haben.\n\nJa, glauben Sie denn im Ernst, dass die Begrenzung der steuerlichen Abzugsfähigkeit irgendeinen Konzern davon abhalten wird, weiter seine Gehaltsexzesse auszuleben? Das ist doch völlig absurd, das hätte doch gar keinen Effekt.\n\nUnd dann will die SPD ihren Gesetzentwurf natürlich auch nur dann im Parlament einbringen, wenn sie sich mit der CDU geeinigt hat. Nun hat zwar die Kanzlerin diese Woche, wie ich der Presse entnommen habe, ihre Fraktionskollegen sogar ermuntert, sie könnten ruhig über die Begrenzung von Managergehältern diskutieren - das finden wir wirklich großzügig von ihr -,\n\naber für den Fall, dass es um mehr als ums Diskutieren geht, hat Herr Schäuble schon einmal vorsorglich verfassungsrechtliche Bedenken angemeldet. Ich muss sagen: Es ist eigentlich schade, dass Herrn Schäuble solche verfassungsrechtlichen Bedenken bei Milliardenbetrügereien mit Cum/Cum- und Cum/Ex-Geschäften von Banken komischerweise nie gekommen sind. Das hätte dem Staat und damit dem Steuerzahler Mindereinnahmen in Höhe mehrerer Milliarden ersparen können; aber das nur nebenbei.\n\nSo oder so: Jede Erfahrung, und auch der Redebeitrag von Herrn Meister natürlich, spricht dagegen, dass die SPD mit der CDU in dieser Frage eine vernünftige Regelung erreichen wird.\n\nDeshalb möchten wir in Erinnerung rufen, dass es im Bundestag längst eine Mehrheit von SPD, Linken und Grünen gibt.\n\nSie brauchen also gar nicht Frau Merkel oder Herrn Schäuble zu überzeugen, Sie müssen allenfalls einige allzu wirtschaftsliberale Grüne überzeugen. Aber ich finde: Das sollte machbar sein, und es ist auch dringend notwendig, wenn man sich die Entwicklungen ansieht.\n\n- Ich habe gesagt: „einige“ Grüne, da müssen Sie sich nicht so sehr aufregen.\n\nAnfang der 90er-Jahre lag das Verhältnis der Managerbezüge zu dem Einkommen eines durchschnittlichen Arbeitnehmers bei 1 : 28, das heißt, ein Manager bekam in einem Jahr so viel wie ein Arbeitnehmer in 28 Jahren. Das war schon ziemlich viel. Aber heute ist es völlig anders. Heute liegt das Verhältnis im Schnitt bei 1 : 83, das heißt, ein Manager streicht in einem Jahr doppelt so viel ein wie ein durchschnittlicher Arbeitnehmer in seinem ganzen Erwerbsleben. Und dieser absurden Entwicklung haben Sie alle jahrelang zugeschaut.\n\nWährend Herr Schulz Gerechtigkeitsreden hält, stimmt Herr Weil der viel diskutierten 12-Millionen-Euro-Abfindung bei VW zu, und obendrauf - das ist noch nicht erwähnt worden - gibt es auch noch eine Rente von rund 8 000 Euro für Frau Hohmann-Dennhardt bis zum Lebensende, und das Ganze für eine 13-monatige Tätigkeit. Angesichts dieser schamlosen Selbstbereicherung möchte ich Sie daran erinnern, wie hoch die Durchschnittsrente ist, die ein Arbeitnehmer nach 40 bis 45 Beitragsjahren erhält. Sie beläuft sich dank Ihrer Rentenkürzung auf etwa 1 000 Euro. Und dann wundern Sie sich, dass die Menschen empört sind und dass viele den Politikbetrieb nur noch für korrupt und verlogen halten? Wenn Ihnen der Zusammenhalt unserer Gesellschaft wirklich am Herzen liegt, dann tun Sie doch endlich etwas dafür, dass diese Schere nicht immer weiter auseinandergeht.\n\nTun Sie etwas dafür, dass die Durchschnittsrente steigt; man kann es nicht oft genug betonen. In Österreich zum Beispiel bekommt ein Durchschnittsrentner 800 Euro mehr Rente, und zwar im Monat. Tun Sie etwas dafür, dass diese Boniexzesse nicht mehr möglich sind. Der einzig effektive Weg dazu ist tatsächlich eine Koppelung der Managervergütungen an die Lohnentwicklung im Unternehmen, etwa in der Relation 1 : 20 zur unteren Lohngruppe, so wie wir das ja auch beantragt haben. Das wäre übrigens nicht nur sozial gerechter, es würde vor allem ganz andere Anreize setzen; denn statt in erster Linie auf den Aktienkurs zu schielen, würden Manager dann belohnt, wenn sie ein Unternehmen so führen, dass auch die Arbeitnehmer von der Entwicklung profitieren.\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Der Ehrgeiz in den Vorstandsetagen, jede sich bietende Möglichkeit zur Lohndrückerei auszunutzen, würde ganz schnell gravierend ermatten; und das wäre ja vielleicht auch nicht schlecht.\n\nEs gibt übrigens sehr erfolgreiche Unternehmen, in denen es eine solche Regelung gibt. Die Carl-Zeiss-Stiftung etwa hat seit dem 19. Jahrhundert eine Begrenzung der Managergehälter auf das Zehnfache des Durchschnittslohns in ihrem Statut. Und das ist ein Unternehmen, das seit etwa 150 Jahren erfolgreich ist.\n\nWir sollten natürlich auch darüber reden, weshalb es sich die großen Konzerne überhaupt leisten können, Jahr für Jahr auf der einen Seite Rekorddividenden auszuschütten und auf der anderen Seite ihr Management in Millionen zu baden. Dafür gibt es Gründe, und die Gründe haben ganz wesentlich mit den Gesetzen der letzten 20 Jahre zu tun. Sie haben etwas zu tun mit der schlechten Lohnentwicklung dank Leiharbeit und Werkverträgen, woran auch diese Koalition wieder nichts verändert hat. Sie haben zu tun mit der Deckelung der Sozialversicherungsbeiträge, weil die abhängig Beschäftigten einen immer größeren Teil für Kranken- und Rentenversicherung inzwischen selber zahlen müssen. Sie haben zu tun mit den Steuergesetzen, die bewirken, dass inzwischen 80 Prozent des Steueraufkommens ausschließlich aus Lohn- und Verbrauchsteuern stammen, während sich die Konzerne immer leichter um ihre Steuerpflichten drücken können. Das alles muss dringend geändert werden, wenn es in diesem Land wieder gerecht zugehen soll.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der SPD, wenn Sie die vorhandene Mehrheit jetzt nicht nutzen, wer soll Ihnen glauben, dass Sie das nach der Wahl tun werden? Die Linke jedenfalls redet nicht nur von sozialer Gerechtigkeit, sondern wir stimmen und streiten auch dafür.\"\n2064,matthias-heider,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir sind bereits in der Schlussrunde unserer Debatte, in der stellenweise sehr emotional vorgetragen wurde. Aber das scheint mir doch an dem bevorstehenden Wochenende zu liegen. Ich freue mich, dass ich Gelegenheit habe, auf die wichtigsten Punkte unserer Debatte einzugehen.\n\nMit der EU und den USA stehen sich heute die beiden wichtigsten und größten Binnenmärkte dieser Erde gegenüber. Die Geschichte, die einst im 16. Jahrhundert mit dem Import von Baumwolle, von Erdnüssen, von Kartoffelpflanzen aus Amerika und umgekehrt mit dem Export von Karotten, Rindern, Hühnern, aber auch von Werkzeugen und Schiffen nach Amerika begann, geht auch heute noch, viele Jahrhunderte danach, weiter. Heute stellen die Vereinigten Staaten und die EU fürei-nander die wichtigsten Handelspartner dar.\n\nIn früheren Jahrhunderten waren es eher Portugal und Spanien, heute ist es Deutschland innerhalb der EU, das die meisten Exporte in die USA erreicht. Im Jahr 2012 wurden aus Deutschland Waren im Wert von 87 Milliarden Euro nach Amerika ausgeführt. Das entspricht fast 30 Prozent der EU-Exporte in die USA. Wichtigste Exportgüter waren Fahrzeuge und Fahrzeugteile mit 28 Prozent. Auf dem zweiten Platz lagen Maschinen mit 17 Prozent, und auf Platz drei pharmazeutische Erzeugnisse mit rund 10 Prozent. An diesen Zahlen kann man die Bedeutung eines Freihandelsabkommens für Deutschland und die Europäische Union erkennen. Das Ziel der Verhandlungen muss sein, ein innovations- und ein investitionsfreundliches Klima zu erzeugen.\n\nBei dem geplanten Freihandelsabkommen geht es zunächst um den Abbau von Zöllen und von nichttarifären Handelshemmnissen. Zwar sind die Zölle bereits relativ niedrig; jedoch kann jede noch so kleine Senkung des Zolltarifs Impulse geben. Wenn mehrere Millionen Euro an Einsparungen zusammenkommen, dann ist das ein Impuls für den gesamten Handelsraum.\n\nBesonders werden europäische und deutsche Unternehmen von dem Abbau der nichttarifären Handelshemmnisse profitieren. Damit meine ich nicht die von den Linken immer wieder ins Feld geführten Großkonzerne; vielmehr werden es vor allem die kleinen und mittleren Unternehmens sein, die sich keine großen Exportabteilungen und keine teuren Apparate leisten können.\n\nDiese wagen derzeit den Schritt über den Atlantik deshalb nicht, weil die unterschiedlichen Standards, Regulierungen und Zulassungsverfahren hohe Hürden im Handel bedeuten. Der damit verbundene bürokratische Aufwand ist nicht so einfach zu erledigen.\n\nDoppelte Produktzulassungen, Testverfahren und Konformitätsprüfungen erhöhen bei der Einfuhr in die EU laut der Studie eines niederländischen Instituts die Zulassungskosten bereits um durchschnittlich 21 Prozent. Bei Nahrungsmitteln sind es sogar 57 Prozent, bei Kosmetika 35 Prozent und bei Fahrzeugen 26 Prozent Mehrkosten. Durch solch ein Freihandelsabkommen haben wir die Chance, Standards und Zertifizierungsverfahren auf ein gleich hohes Schutzniveau zu bringen.\n\nBeispiele für die unterschiedlichen Regelungen sind heute schon genannt worden. Selbst dem Kollegen Ernst ist aufgefallen, dass die Fahrzeuge in den USA mit roten Blinkergläsern fahren müssen, während die in der EU mit orangefarbenen unterwegs sind. Deutsche Autobauer müssen Sonderanstrengungen für den amerikanischen Markt erbringen, obwohl die orangefarbenen Blinkergläser genauso sicher sind wie diejenigen, die dort verwandt werden. - Es gibt weitere Beispiele: Nebelschlussleuchten sind in den USA nicht obligatorisch. Seitenspiegel müssen dort nicht einklappbar sein. Sondersignale von Einsatzfahrzeugen sind anders. Will man das ändern, muss man über das Schutzniveau sprechen und ein Angleichungsverfahren festlegen. Man darf das aber nicht in Bausch und Bogen verurteilen, wie Sie es heute in Ihren Reden und mit Ihren Anträgen tun.\n\nDie Beispiele lassen sich fortsetzen; es geht um Medikamente, Kosmetika und chemische Substanzen. Hier helfen nur der Abgleich in Verhandlungen und das Prinzip der gegenseitigen Anerkennung der gelisteten Stoffe.\n\nMit der Diskussion um die Angleichung von Standards sind in der Bevölkerung Ängste entstanden, dass, wie Sie kundtun, Verbraucher- und Umweltstandards, also geltendes Recht in der Europäischen Union, abgesenkt würden. Ich kann deshalb die Sorgen der Bürger gut verstehen. Jedoch basieren diese Sorgen keineswegs auf guten Informationen; vielmehr haben Sie gezielte Fehlinformationen unter die Bevölkerung gebracht.\n\nEine Senkung von Standards durch dieses Freihandelsabkommen wird es nicht geben; das hat EU-Handelskommissar De Gucht in Gesprächen mit diesem Parlament in der vorletzten Woche klipp und klar gesagt. Insofern bin ich dem Bundeswirtschaftsminister ausgesprochen dankbar, dass er in seinem Haus einen Beirat installiert hat, der die Kommunikation all dieser Informationen verbessern wird.\n\nBerechtigte Fragen zu dem Abkommen gibt es natürlich, zum Beispiel zum Investitionsschutz. Das Thema muss sehr sorgfältig behandelt werden; denn kein Investitionsabkommen ist wie das andere. Viele Abkommen, die abgeschlossen worden sind - es sind 120, 130 an der Zahl, die für Deutschland gelten -, haben eine völlig andere Geschäftsgrundlage. Da muss man etwas differenzieren.\n\nEs muss klar sein, dass ein Investitionsschutz nur für solche Sektoren gelten kann, wo ein besonderes Bedürfnis besteht und wo die Verhandlungspartner ein beidseitiges besonderes Interesse daran haben. Auch das brauchen wir bei dem Rechtsstandard, der in den USA und in Deutschland vorherrscht, sicherlich nicht in Zweifel zu ziehen.\n\nLeider wird in Deutschland über wirklich konstruktive Verbesserungsvorschläge wenig gesprochen.\n\nSchon in den Einladungen für Veranstaltungen wird wahllos auf das Freihandelsabkommen eingedroschen. Schauen Sie sich diese Einladung hier einmal an: „TTIP: Angriff auf Demokratie, Löhne, Soziales und Umwelt“. Da steckt alles drin, was man braucht, um möglichst große Verunsicherung in der Bevölkerung zu verursachen.\n\nEs geht Ihnen gar nicht um Impulse für den Binnenmarkt. Es geht Ihnen mit Ihren Anträgen gar nicht um Beschäftigung. Es geht Ihnen auch gar nicht um Innovationen.\n\nSie suchen eine Trägerrakete für Ihre gesellschaftspolitischen Botschaften. Das ist Ihr Ziel, das Sie hier im Bundestag kurz vor einem Wahlwochenende verfolgen.\n\nSie rühren sich einen Cocktail aus Themen mit hohen Aufmerksamkeitswerten in der Bevölkerung zusammen und garnieren das auch noch mit dem Vorwurf der Geheimniskrämerei von Regierungsstellen.\n\nSie sind sich auch nicht zu schade, das in einem Atemzug mit dem NSA-Skandal, dem Abhören unserer Bundeskanzlerin und der Mordserie des NSU in Verbindung zu bringen. Glauben Sie nicht? Schauen Sie einmal auf die Website Ihres Kollegen Troost! Da werden Sie fündig werden.\n\nAufmerksamkeit kriegen, Angst machen, Agitation betreiben - und das unter der Überschrift „TTIP“, das hat schon bei der Bundestagswahl nicht funktioniert. Ich hoffe im Interesse der Bürger dieses Landes, meine Damen und Herren, dass das auch bei der Europawahl am kommenden Wochenende nicht funktionieren wird.\n\nMan kann von Glück sagen, dass diese Botschaften nicht alle Bürger erreichen. Nach einer Meinungsumfrage eines Instituts zusammen mit der Bertelsmann-Stiftung\n\nsind 53 Prozent der Amerikaner und der Deutschen der Auffassung, dass das Abkommen grundsätzlich eine gute Sache ist. Nur 25 Prozent der Bevölkerung sind skeptisch. Sie wollen uns heute hier genau das Gegenteil glauben machen. Das ist eine asymmetrische Mobilisierung. So nennt man das.\n\nLassen Sie mich abschließend auf die positiven -Aspekte des Abkommens zurückkommen. Wir wollen einen Mehrwert für die Bürger und die Unternehmen generieren. Unabhängige Studien haben gezeigt, dass das Abkommen im europäischen Markt über die Jahre ein Wirtschaftswachstum im Wert von bis zu 120 Milliarden Euro erbringen kann. Das ist ein kostenloses Konjunkturpaket. Das müssten Sie doch eigentlich gut finden.\n\nIch glaube - jedenfalls bei uns ist das so -, unser Finanzminister wird das gut finden.\n\nWir schaffen zahlreiche Arbeitsplätze. Wir erleichtern dem deutschen Mittelstand, vor allem kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen, den Zugang zum amerikanischen Markt. Nicht jedes Unternehmen hatte bisher diese Chance. Wir setzen gemeinsame Standards als große Binnenmärkte in einer Handelswelt, die immer komplexer wird und deren Volumen mehr zu den Schwellenländern driftet. Ich glaube, Produkte mit der Bezeichnung „Gemeinsamer EU/US-Standard“ wären ein Vorbild für diese Länder, und das wäre auch ein Impuls für das globale Wachstum.\n\nIch bin davon überzeugt, dass wir am Ende der Verhandlungen über ein ausgewogenes Abkommen abstimmen können. Für den Abstimmungsprozess hat der Kollege Tiefensee gerade schon deutliche Hinweise gegeben. Ob es sich um ein gemischtes oder ein anderes Abkommen handelt, das kann man erst am Ende der Verhandlungen bei einem Vertragsdokument feststellen.\n\nBei den meisten Abkommen - die meisten Abkommen waren auch gemischt - haben hinterher die Mitgliedstaaten in ihren parlamentarischen Verfahren zugestimmt. So gehört sich das, meine Damen und Herren. Ich glaube, wir haben keinen Grund, von diesem Verfahren abzuweichen. Die CDU/CSU befürwortet das.\n\nWir als Parlament haben die Möglichkeit, selbst über das Abkommen zu entscheiden. Die Mehrheit dieses Hauses wird sich dabei von vernünftigen Argumenten leiten lassen. Das passt zu einem freiheitlichen Binnenmarkt, zu einem starken Rechtsraum, so wie er in den USA und in der EU vorliegt. Wenn das Verhandlungsergebnis vorliegt, dann werden wir es uns in aller Ruhe ansehen und uns unsere endgültige Meinung dazu bilden. Einige gute Gründe dafür habe ich Ihnen aus Sicht der CDU heute bereits genannt.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n8115,andrea-lindholz,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren!\n\nSeit Monaten sorgen die Verantwortungsträger in den Kommunen, unsere Polizisten und Soldaten, die Mitarbeiter in den Ausländerbehörden und Hilfsorganisationen und die vielen ehrenamtlichen Helfer in einem beispiellosen Kraftakt dafür, dass Deutschland seinen hohen humanitären Ansprüchen in dieser Ausnahmesituation gerecht wird. Sie sind die stillen Helden in dieser historischen Flüchtlingskrise, und wir können ihnen gar nicht oft genug Danke sagen.\n\nWer diese beeindruckende Leistung ernsthaft anerkennt, der muss aber auch erkennen, dass diese Leistung auf Dauer nicht tragbar ist und dass die Menschen in unserem Land in diesen Tagen von uns Lösungen erwarten.\n\nVorrangiges Ziel des Asylpaketes ist die Entlastung der Kommunen. Die kommunalen Spitzenverbände halten die finanziellen Hilfen für ausreichend,\n\nund ich hoffe sehr, dass die Leistungen, die der Bund zusätzlich zur Verfügung stellt, auch umfassend an die Kommunen weitergegeben werden. Bayern ist da ein Vorbild.\n\nBevor ich auf den Gesetzentwurf eingehe, möchte ich den Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern in den Ministerien danken, die in den letzten Wochen und Tagen Tag und Nacht an der Umsetzung gearbeitet haben. Hierfür heute einmal ein herzliches Dankeschön.\n\nNein, ich rede weiter.\n\nDer Gesetzentwurf soll im Grunde fünf Vorhaben umsetzen: erstens die Asylverfahren weiter beschleunigen, zweitens Fehlanreize minimieren, drittens die Ausreisepflicht konsequent durchsetzen, viertens die Unterbringung der Asylbewerber erleichtern und fünftens die Integrationshilfen für Menschen mit guter Bleibeperspektive verbessern. Der letzte Punkt ist entscheidend, um die gesellschaftlichen Folgen dieser Krise zu meistern. Wir wollen den Menschen, die tatsächlich schutzbedürftig sind, die Chance geben, sich schnell zu integrieren und sich schnell selbst zu versorgen. Deshalb heben wir auch das Leiharbeitsverbot auf und öffnen früher die Integrationskurse.\n\nWichtig ist - das wird heute zum wiederholten Male nicht gesagt -, dass künftig nur Menschen mit guter Bleibeperspektive auf die Kommunen verteilt werden und nur aussichtslose Asylbewerber bis zum Verfahrensabschluss in der Erstaufnahmeeinrichtung verbleiben sollen, und das ist auch richtig so. Darum bitten uns im Übrigen auch Kommunen und Ehrenamtliche, weil sie ihren Fokus im Wesentlichen auf diejenigen richtigen wollen, die ein Bleiberecht bei uns erhalten werden.\n\nMit diesem Gesetzespaket stufen wir auch Albanien, Kosovo und Montenegro als sichere Herkunftsstaaten ein. Schon im letzten Jahr hatte die Union dies gefordert. Das ist richtig so; denn allein in diesem Jahr wurden rund 80 000 Asylanträge aus dem Kosovo und aus Albanien registriert, aber zu 99 Prozent abgelehnt. Selbst Oberbürgermeister, die den Grünen oder der SPD angehören, schließen sich mittlerweile unserer Meinung an, weil sie nah an der Realität, nah an den Menschen vor Ort sind.\n\nMit dem Asylpaket setzen wir heute auch die bayerische Forderung nach einer bundesweiten Verteilung von unbegleiteten Minderjährigen um. Auch das ist richtig so. Bayern wird bis zum Jahresende rund 15 000 Flüchtlinge in der Jugendhilfe versorgen. Bundesweit sind das aktuell rund 35 000 Flüchtlinge. Es ist wichtig, dass auch diesbezüglich die Solidarität der Bundesländer untereinander endlich greift. Der Bund unterstützt mit 350 Millionen Euro pro Jahr die Versorgung. Ich will an dieser Stelle nochmals sagen, dass auch diesbezüglich unter anderem Bayern die Hauptlast trägt.\n\nNatürlich müssen abgelehnte Asylbewerber ihrer Ausreisepflicht nachkommen. Wir können nicht hinnehmen, dass nur rund 10 Prozent aller Ausreisepflichtigen zurückgeführt werden.\n\nEs ist gerechtfertigt, die Leistungen für Menschen, die nicht ausreisen, die sich der Ausreise entziehen oder widersetzen, in Zukunft konsequent zu kürzen. Das wird auch verfassungsrechtlich standhalten. Insgesamt ist der Gesetzentwurf ein wichtiger Zwischenschritt, mit dem wir auf nationaler Ebene nach der Reform des Bleiberechts und der Aufenthaltsbeendigung vom Juli 2015 für wichtige Verbesserungen sorgen.\n\nAber auch die Länder müssen noch nachbessern. Wir brauchen an den Verwaltungsgerichten noch mehr Richter, noch mehr Personal, damit dort nicht der nächste Flaschenhals entsteht. Das Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge hat allein im September 23 000 Asylanträge entschieden. Wir wollen - das ist auch richtig -, dass mehr Entscheidungen erfolgen. Da aber jeder zweite Bescheid beklagt wird, brauchen wir an den Gerichten mehr Richter, damit dort nicht der nächste Stau entsteht.\n\nAll diese Maßnahmen, die wir heute beschließen, werden nicht ausreichen. Sie sind ein wichtiger Zwischenschritt. Wir müssen auch alles daransetzen, die unkontrollierte Zuwanderung von bis zu zehntausend Menschen pro Tag nach Deutschland einzudämmen, und zwar zügig und spürbar. Nach Niederbayern und Oberbayern strömen seit Wochen tagtäglich Tausende von Menschen. Die Kommunen und alle Verantwortlichen sind an ihren Belastungsgrenzen angekommen. Es ist daher nachvollziehbar, dass der bayerische Ministerpräsident vom Bund, der die Entscheidungen hierzu zu treffen hat, erwartet, dass richtige Entscheidungen getroffen werden, Entscheidungen, die Bayern entlasten. Ich appelliere an dieser Stelle auch an die Solidarität der anderen Bundesländer. Sie müssen zügig und gemäß dem Königsteiner Schlüssel im erforderlichen Maß Flüchtlinge aufnehmen und Bayern entlasten.\n\nDeutschland ist stark wie kein anderes Land, und es hilft wie kaum ein anderes Land, auch in der Flüchtlingskrise. Aber auch unsere Aufnahmefähigkeit ist nicht unbegrenzt. Ein Bevölkerungswachstum von jährlich 1 bis 2 Prozent kann kein Land, auch Deutschland nicht, schultern. Das wäre weder gegenüber der deutschen Bevölkerung noch gegenüber den Helfern noch gegenüber den Flüchtlingen verantwortungsvoll.\n\nUnsere Bundeskanzlerin hat heute Morgen in ihrer Regierungserklärung eindrucksvoll dargestellt, dass es keine einfache Lösung gibt. Die Menschen vor Ort fragen uns - zumindest mich und viele meiner Kollegen aus der CDU/CSU-Fraktion - tagtäglich: „Was könnt ihr machen, was könnt ihr tun?“, und uns erreichen Hunderte von E-Mails. Wir müssen den Menschen erklären, dass es sich nicht um eine einfache Lösung handelt. Es wird, wie Angela Merkel gesagt hat, keinen Schalter geben, den man einfach umlegen kann. Diese Herausforderung ist vielschichtig, und sie kann nur auf europäischer Ebene bewältigt werden, nur mit Maßnahmen der Außen- und Entwicklungspolitik, nur vor Ort und in den Anrainerstaaten.\n\nTrotzdem kann es nicht sein, dass Deutschland in Europa die Hauptlast trägt. Trotzdem kann es nicht sein, dass wir den effektiven Grenzschutz quasi aufgegeben haben; das gilt für Europa wie für Deutschland. Der Schutz der eigenen Grenzen ist kein Ausdruck von Menschenfeindlichkeit, sondern er ist die verfassungsgemäße Pflicht eines jeden Staates.\n\nAuch unser Bundespräsident hat in Mainz klargestellt, dass unsere Hilfsbereitschaft groß ist, aber unsere Kapazitäten begrenzt sind. Ja, die Kanzlerin hat recht: Das faktische Limit wird sich wohl nur schwer beziffern lassen. Aber die Lage in den Kommunen ist dramatisch. In Bayern gibt es Kommunen, die an der Belastungsgrenze sind. Es kann daher kein Weiter-so geben. Das haben auch die kommunalen Spitzenverbände in der Anhörung am Montag eindrucksvoll bestätigt. Wir müssen dieser Entwicklung Rechnung tragen.\n\nNatürlich lassen sich Grenzen nicht per Kabinettsbeschluss schließen. Natürlich will niemand Grenzen schließen oder eine Abschottung Deutschlands oder Europas. Das bedeutet aber noch lange nicht, dass wir in der aktuellen Ausnahmesituation nicht auch effektivere Kontrollen und Zurückweisungen an den eigenen Grenzen erwägen sollten. Das Landgrenzenverfahren, das in der EU-Asylverfahrensrichtlinie vorgesehen ist, kann neben der Sicherung der Außengrenzen und der Einführung von Hotspots ein Baustein sein.\n\nGemeinsam müssen wir es schaffen, in Deutschland und Europa ein tragfähiges Asylsystem unter den aktuellen Bedingungen für die Zukunft zu gestalten. Daran müssen wir alle gemeinsam verantwortlich mitarbeiten. Aber auch innerhalb Deutschlands können wir diese Herausforderung nur gemeinsam bewältigen. Das geht nur, wenn wir ohne Hysterie und ohne Dramatik weiterhin mit überlegtem Handeln auf allen Ebenen zusammenarbeiten und nicht vergessen, dass es um Menschen mit individuellen Schicksalen geht, die aus unterschiedlichen Gründen bei uns Schutz suchen.\n\nWir können stolz sein auf die vergangenen Monate und Wochen, in denen die Menschen in Deutschland Herausragendes geleistet haben. Ich wünsche mir, dass wir in diesem Sinne und in dieser Rhetorik weitermachen und gut zusammenarbeiten. Ich werbe heute um die Zustimmung zu diesem Gesetzespaket, dem sicherlich noch weitere Schritte folgen müssen.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nJa. - Ich habe die kommunalen Spitzenverbände sehr wohl so verstanden, dass sie die jetzt weiter zugesagten finanziellen Hilfen für ausreichend halten. An dieser Stelle lobe ich Bayern, das die Leistungen eins zu eins an die Kommunen weitergibt - im Gegensatz zum Beispiel zu Nordrhein-Westfalen -, noch einmal ausdrücklich, und ich wünsche mir, dass das in anderen Bundesländern ebenso erfolgt.\"\n14678,daniela-kolbe,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Geschätzte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich bin richtig froh und auch stolz, dass wir heute über die Rentenangleichung Ost-West und über die Verbesserung der Erwerbsminderungsrente für diejenigen, die es gesundheitlich nicht bis zur Rente schaffen, sprechen. Ich will zuallererst Andrea Nahles und ihrem Haus ganz herzlich Danke sagen.\n\nHier wird die gute Arbeit fortgesetzt, die während der gesamten Legislatur darauf ausgerichtet war, die gesetzliche Rente zu stärken und zu verbessern. Es wird deutlich: Das Arbeiten hört erst am Wahltag auf. Also, hier wird bis zum Schluss gearbeitet. Ich finde, hier wird richtig gute Arbeit vorgelegt.\n\n- Wir regieren dann weiter. Aber die Ministerin muss sich natürlich erst einmal bestätigen lassen. Das wird auch so passieren, Herr Bartsch, keine Sorge.\n\nIch war neun Jahre alt, als die Berliner Mauer gefallen ist. Ich war Grundschülerin und habe noch Kopfnoten in Betragen und Fleiß bekommen.\n\n- Sie waren nicht so ganz schlecht. Das tut hier aber nichts zur Sache.\n\nIch bin jetzt 37 Jahre alt, und ich lebe immer noch in einem Land mit zwei Rentensystemen. Die funktionieren zwar nach den gleichen Prinzipien, aber in Ostdeutschland war und ist es einfacher, einen Rentenpunkt zu verdienen. Dafür war und ist der Rentenpunkt aber auch weniger wert.\n\n27 Jahre nach dem Mauerfall treibt das Blüten; Herr Kurth hat das bereits angesprochen. Vor wenigen Tagen wurde zum Beispiel festgestellt, dass bei der Rentenberechnung von Bundestagsmitarbeitern der ganz genaue Ort des Büros ausschlaggebend ist. Ich muss mir in meinem Büro Diskussionen anhören, warum ich nicht in das Jakob-Kaiser-Haus umziehen könnte, wo der Rentenpunkt einfacher zu erlangen ist als in meinem jetzigen Büro im Paul-Löbe-Haus, das etwa 30 Meter zu weit westlich gebaut ist.\n\nAber das Gesetz ist nicht wegen dieser Blüten wichtig, sondern wegen etwas ganz anderem: Kaum ein anderes Thema wird bei älteren Ostdeutschen so tief emotional verhandelt. Der rationale Fakt, dass der Rentenwert niedriger ist, löst bei ganz vielen das tief empfundene Gefühl aus, dass ihre Lebensleistung weniger wertgeschätzt wird als die der Westdeutschen. Seit 27 Jahren wird im Rentenrecht für viele Ostdeutsche das Gefühl am Leben erhalten und verstärkt, Bürger zweiter Klasse zu sein. Für viele ist es eine Kränkung. Das mag objektiv alles nicht so sein, und es ist garantiert auch nicht so gemeint, aber das Gefühl, verknüpft mit mancher negativer Erfahrung, die viele nach der Wiedervereinigung gemacht haben und über die eigentlich bisher kaum öffentlich gesprochen wird, ist da,\n\nund dieses Gefühl ist einer der größten Hemmschuhe für eine echte, vollendete Wiedervereinigung. Insofern machen wir einen riesengroßen Schritt in Richtung innere Einheit, wenn wir die Angleichung der Renten endlich abschließen.\n\nEs ist gut, dass wir nicht auf den Tag X warten, an dem die Angleichung von allein passiert. Schon aufgrund der unterschiedlichen Wirtschaftsstruktur wäre das nämlich am Sankt-Nimmerleins-Tag. Deswegen ist es richtig, dass wir sie politisch angehen.\n\nFür ostdeutsche Rentnerinnen und Menschen, die schon die Hälfte ihres Erwerbslebens oder mehr hinter sich haben, ist es nicht nur eine ideelle Anerkennung, sondern sie werden es auch finanziell spüren. Wir müssen aber auch klar sagen: Für jüngere Menschen wird es durch den Wegfall der Umwertung - ich rede über die ostdeutschen - nicht mehr so leicht sein, einen Rentenpunkt zu erlangen.\n\nBei im Durchschnitt niedrigeren Löhnen ist das eine Herausforderung. Da müssen wir ran. Wir dürfen gerade die Jüngeren nicht vergessen. Auf sie kommen sowieso große Herausforderungen zu.\n\nInsofern lohnt sich jede Anstrengung für gute Löhne. Das heißt ganz konkret: gute Tariflöhne, eine hohe Tarifbindung, speziell in Ostdeutschland. Andrea Nahles ist auch hier viele richtige Schritte gegangen.\n\nAußerdem wird es so oder so - ob wir die Rentenangleichung vornehmen oder nicht - viele Menschen geben, die die Auswirkungen der Massenarbeitslosigkeit und der verheerend niedrigen Löhne der vergangenen Jahre bei der Rente zu spüren bekommen. Deswegen brauchen wir dringend eine echte Solidarrente, damit Menschen, die jahrzehntelang gearbeitet und eingezahlt haben oder arbeiten wollten, im Alter nicht dumm dastehen.\n\nIch sage es offen, lieber Koalitionspartner: Ich bin richtig sauer, dass wir den Koalitionsvertrag an dieser Stelle nicht umsetzen. Aber ich bin auch motiviert und sage: Als SPD bleiben wir da dran. Das ist eines unserer ganz wichtigen Themen.\n\nWir sehen aber auch: Der Abstand zwischen den Löhnen in Ost und West ist kein Naturgesetz. Durch den Mindestlohn hat sich eine richtig tolle Dynamik entwickelt, und das sollte man manchem Mindestlohnskeptiker vielleicht einmal vor Augen führen.\n\nAm Anfang der Legislatur betrug der Unterschied bei den Rentenpunkten 8,5 Prozent, und es hatte sich lange Zeit eigentlich nichts bewegt. Am 1. Juli wird der Abstand nur noch 4,3 Prozent betragen. Auch bei der Umwertung sehen wir solch einen Effekt: Anfang der Legislatur waren es knapp 18 Prozent Umwertung - sie wird häufig auch „Aufwertung“ genannt -, jetzt liegen wir bei unter 12 Prozent. Das ist eine riesengroße Dynamik, und sie ist ein großer Grund zur Freude. Aber sie ist so groß, dass wir noch mal an den Gesetzentwurf ran müssen. Er wird nämlich gerade im positivsten Sinne von der Realität überholt. Ich hoffe, wir tun das gemeinsam in einer Art und Weise, die dazu beiträgt, dass wir die Angleichung zügiger auf den Weg bekommen. Ich hoffe auch, dass wir die Angleichung mit großer Einigkeit hier im Haus angehen. Sie ist nämlich ein wichtiges Signal an die Ostdeutschen, dass ihre Lebensleistung vom gesamten Deutschen Bundestag wertgeschätzt und respektiert wird.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n2828,rudiger-veit,\"Vor ziemlich genau einem Jahr haben wir es noch geschafft, hier mit den Stimmen aller Fraktionen des Hauses eine einheitliche Position mit dem Titel „Syrische Flüchtlinge schützen“ zu verabschieden. Das war ein Zeichen der humanitären Anteilnahme mit den Opfern des Konflikts, und wir haben auch - wie gesagt, gemeinsam - die damalige Bundesregierung auf diesem Gebiet unterstützt.\n\nIn diesem Jahr war das leider nicht möglich: Wir entscheiden hier heute nur über Anträge von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen und der Partei Die Linke.\n\nWarum es also dieses Jahr nicht wieder gemeinsam möglich ist, kann ich Ihnen zwar berichten, nachvollziehen und verstehen kann ich es aber nicht. Nur so viel sei gesagt: An der Bereitschaft zur konstruktiven Mitarbeit aus der sozialdemokratischen Fraktion heraus hat es nicht gefehlt.\n\nEs hat sich auch an der Sachlage eigentlich nichts geändert, sondern im Gegenteil: Die humanitäre Katastrophe innerhalb Syriens und in den an Syrien angrenzenden Staaten hat sich dramatisch vergrößert. 2,8 Millionen Syrer sind ins Ausland geflohen, und weitere 9,3 Millionen sind in Syrien selbst auf der Flucht und jedenfalls dringend auf humanitäre Hilfe angewiesen. Im Libanon halten sich mittlerweile mehr als 1 Million Flüchtlinge auf. Bei einer Einwohnerzahl dieses Staates, die nur knapp fünfmal so hoch liegt, kann sich jeder auch ohne Aufbietung von besonderer Fantasie vorstellen, dass der Libanon kurz vor einem Kollaps seiner Infrastruktur und vielleicht des ganzen Staatswesens steht.\n\nDeutschland leistet mit mittlerweile schon über 400 Millionen Euro Unterstützung für die Lage vor Ort. Beispielhaft nicht nur in Europa, sondern in der ganzen Welt - natürlich ausgenommen die unmittelbaren Anrainerstaaten - ist auch unsere Bereitschaft, Flüchtlinge aus Syrien bei uns aufzunehmen. Seit Ausbruch des Bürgerkrieges haben 34 000 Asylsuchende bei uns Schutz gefunden. Mit Aufnahmeprogrammen des Bundes - zunächst 5 000, dann 10 000, jetzt nach der letzten Innenministerkonferenz 20 000 Personen - und verschiedenen Länderaufnahmeprogrammen - nur Bayern macht hier leider eine Ausnahme - sind mittlerweile weitere 10 000 syrische Flüchtlinge in Deutschland eingetroffen.\n\nIm Februar dieses Jahres hat der UNHCR die gesamte internationale Staatengemeinschaft aufgerufen, 30 000 Plätze für die dauerhafte Neuansiedlung oder humanitäre Aufnahme von besonders schutzbedürftigen syrischen Flüchtlingen bereitzustellen. Für 2015 und 2016 rechnet er mit einem Bedarf für weitere 100 000 Plätze.\n\nInnerhalb Europas hat sich Deutschland - diesmal und erfreulicherweise - nicht auf den Standpunkt zurückgezogen, man wolle zunächst abwarten, was andere tun, um sich dann erst selbst der Verantwortung zu stellen. Wir haben im Gegenteil versucht, mit der Aufnahme syrischer Flüchtlinge bei uns auch für die anderen Mitgliedstaaten ein ermunterndes Beilspiel zu geben. Diese Hoffnung war leider bisher vergeblich, und es wird nunmehr allerhöchste Zeit, dass die neu zu wählende Europäische Kommission sich dieser Frage engagiert annimmt. Um es klar und deutlich zu sagen: Die bisherige Untätigkeit der anderen europäischen Mitgliedstaaten halte ich, gelinde gesagt, für einen Skandal und mit unseren ansonsten immer viel beschworenen europäischen Grundwerten für nicht vereinbar.\n\nSelbst die frühere Opposition von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, Linkspartei und Sozialdemokraten hat die damalige Bundesregierung nachdrücklich unterstützt, und zwar sowohl bezüglich der finanziellen Hilfen in der Krisenregion als auch im Bezug auf die Flüchtlingspolitik, und wir sollten auch heute mit allem Nachdruck die Verhandlungsposition der jetzigen Regierung und hier namentlich unserer Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier und Thomas de Maizière unterstützen, um auf europäischer Ebene weiterzukommen.\n\nIn diesem Zusammenhang muss ich wiederholen, was ich vor zwei Tagen in einer anderen Debatte erwähnt und beklagt hatte. Für den 27. Juni 2014 hatte der UNHCR zu einem High-Level-Meeting nach Genf eingeladen. Dort vertreten waren 42 Staaten. Herausgekommen ist: Aufnahmebereitschaft für weitere 565 Personen - wohlgemerkt nicht am Tag, in der Woche oder im Monat, sondern insgesamt! Ich betrachte das als eine Schande. Mutmaßlich werden die Kosten dieser angeblichen High-Level-Veranstaltung höher gewesen sein als der mehrmonatige Aufwand für die Aufnahme von diesen 565 Personen.\n\nIch finde, unser Bundespräsident Joachim Gauck hat in seiner bemerkenswerten Rede von Anfang dieser Woche zu Recht darauf hingewiesen, man werde nie genug tun können, um dem Flüchtlingselend in der Welt überall entgegenwirken zu können, man kann aber wesentlich mehr tun, als man gemeinhin glaubt. Das betrifft Deutschland genauso wie die europäische und die internationale Staatengemeinschaft. Um den notwendigen politischen und moralischen Druck aufzubauen und von einer glaubwürdigen Position aus verhandeln zu können, sollten wir weiterhin mit gutem Beispiel vorangehen.\n\nWir haben dabei im Übrigen - was bei diesen Themen nicht immer der Fall ist - in der großen Mehrheit unserer Bevölkerung mit mitfühlendem Verständnis und Hilfsbereitschaft zu rechnen.\n\nLassen Sie uns hier in diesen Fragen beieinander bleiben - auch wenn es heute zu einem gemeinsamen Antrag noch nicht wieder gereicht hat.\"\n12499,sylvia-kotting-uhl,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Staatssekretärin, für die Antwort. - Sie können mir, nehme ich an, doch bestätigen, dass RWE unmittelbar und Eon mittelbar an der THTR-Betriebsgesellschaft beteiligt sind und die THTR-Kosten - das war ja die Vereinbarung - von Anfang an zu je einem Drittel von Bund, NRW und Gesellschafterverbund, der sogenannten THTR-Betriebsgesellschaft, getragen wurden und dass es von daher - ich sage einmal: eigentlich - Rückstellungen bei RWE und Eon geben müsste.\n\nDanke schön. - Frau Staatssekretärin, zunächst zum ersten Teil. Ich hatte ja schon einmal schriftlich gefragt und habe darauf auch die Antwort bekommen, dass man das nicht im Einzelnen aufschlüsseln könne, aber dass es sich insbesondere um Vorausleistungen auf Beiträge nach der Endlagervorausleistungsverordnung, Umlagen nach dem Standortauswahlgesetz und Betriebskosten für die standortnahen Zwischenlager handele. Von diesen drei Posten stellt zwei Posten der Bund in Rechnung, nämlich die Vorausleistungsbescheide - da dreht es sich um Schacht Konrad; ich wüsste nicht, was das sonst sein sollte - und die Umlagen nach dem Standortauswahlgesetz - das können derzeit nur die Offenhaltungskosten für Gorleben sein. Beides sind also Posten, die Sie benennen können müssten. Deshalb würde ich gerne noch einmal danach fragen bzw., wenn Sie es nicht beantworten können, Sie fragen, ob Sie bereit wären, das dann zu eruieren und es mir schriftlich zukommen zu lassen.\n\nGut. - Nun zu der Frage der realitätsnäheren Barwertermittlung, die wirklich ziemlich kompliziert ist. Ich hatte darüber in der Tat schon mit einem Ihrer Gutachter gesprochen. Aber was sich mir noch nicht erschließt - und das möchte ich Sie jetzt gerne fragen -: Handelt es sich dabei um eine Korrektur der von Warth & Klein Grant Thornton vorgenommenen Berechnungen?\n\nUnd in dem Zusammenhang: Diese Ausgaben belaufen sich ja immerhin auf etwas über eine halbe Milliarde Euro. Werden diese noch mal dezidiert aufgeschlüsselt vorgelegt? Wer prüft sie am Ende? Das ist alles ein bisschen vage. Es handelt sich ja immerhin um gewaltige Abzüge von den Geldern, aus denen schließlich der Fonds für die Endlagerung und die Zwischenlagerung gebildet werden soll. Also, war das ein Fehler, den Warth & Klein Grant Thornton in ihren Berechnungen gemacht haben?\n\nJa.\"\n8232,herlind-gundelach,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir sprechen heute über ein Thema, das in der Regel eigentlich nur Spezialisten interessiert und von dem vermutlich auch die meisten Bürgerinnen und Bürger noch nie etwas gehört haben, nämlich über das Vergaberecht.\n\n- Die meisten nicht. - Oder wie kürzlich jemand so treffend formulierte: Das ist ein Rechtsbereich im Wesentlichen von Juristen für Juristen.\n\n- Aber es beschäftigen sich meistens die Juristen damit.\n\nDas Vergaberecht strukturiert und regelt die Vergabe von Aufträgen und die Beschaffung von Waren und Leistungen durch die öffentliche Hand. Und da, Herr Ernst, möchte ich Ihnen schon einmal gleich energisch widersprechen: Das Vergaberecht ist keine verkappte Gesellschafts- und Sozialpolitik. Das sind zwei getrennte Paar Stiefel. Das muss man einmal ganz klar sehen. Man kann nicht immer alles durcheinandermischen.\n\nAnlass für die Reform sind die im März 2014 veröffentlichten drei EU-Vergaberichtlinien; das hat ja der Kollege Held schon gesagt. Wir stehen heute deswegen auch vor dem bisher umfangreichsten vergaberechtlichen Gesetzgebungsverfahren. Die Umsetzung wird weiterhin im GWB erfolgen, wie es jetzt auch schon der Fall ist; ich denke, das ist auch vernünftig. Es wird also kein eigenes Vergabegesetz geben. Warum das so ist, darauf möchte ich später noch einmal eingehen.\n\nUnser erklärtes Ziel bei der Gesetzgebung ist es, das Vergaberecht einfacher, unbürokratischer, anwenderfreundlicher und rechtssicherer zu gestalten. Außerdem wollen wir insbesondere die Möglichkeiten des Zugangs für kleinere und mittlere Unternehmen verbessern. Insgesamt - und da stimme ich dem Kollegen Held absolut zu - ist der Regierungsentwurf aus meiner Sicht gelungen. Die Vorschläge gehen in die richtige Richtung. Ich denke, es gibt aber auch noch ein paar Punkte, bei denen wir nachbessern könnten. Dazu würde ich gerne ein bisschen ausholen.\n\nOberstes Prinzip bei der Vergabe ist, dass öffentliche Auftraggeber zu den wirtschaftlichsten und sachlich besten Konditionen beschaffen sowie Wettbewerb, Gleichbehandlung und transparente Verfahren gewährleisten. Diese Grundsätze sind wie bisher in § 97 GWB geregelt. Dadurch verhindern wir Korruption und Vetternwirtschaft. Alle zusätzlichen Regelungen im Vergaberecht müssen im Prinzip diesen Grundprinzipien folgen.\n\nAus meiner Sicht gibt es zwei wesentliche Punkte im Regierungsentwurf, die nicht ganz konform mit diesen Grundsätzen sind. Ich denke, auf diese müssen wir im weiteren Gesetzgebungsverfahren eingehen.\n\nDa ist zunächst einmal die Einbeziehung der sogenannten strategischen Ziele. Früher wurden diese übrigens als vergabefremde Kriterien bezeichnet. Ich denke, das zeigt auch schon die Problematik, die dahinterliegt. Die europäische Richtlinie gibt nämlich ausdrücklich vor, dass geltende umwelt-, sozial- und arbeitsrechtliche Verpflichtungen eingehalten werden müssen - ich denke, das ist in einem Rechtsstaat eine schiere Selbstverständlichkeit - und zusätzliche Auflagen, die allerdings in direktem Zusammenhang mit dem Auftrag stehen müssen, gemacht werden können. Diesen Vorstoß begrüße ich außerordentlich; denn das gibt der Exekutive insgesamt einen deutlich breiteren Handlungsspielraum.\n\nDer Regierungsentwurf formuliert nun aber wie bei den sozial- und umweltbezogenen Aspekten „werden“, das heißt in dem Fall ein Muss. Sozial- und umweltbezogene Aspekte erhalten insoweit auch die gleiche Wertigkeit wie die Aspekte Qualität und Innovation. Die Maßgabe in Artikel 67 der Richtlinie ist aber, dass ein direkter Bezug dieser Kriterien - und darauf müssen wir Wert legen - zum Auftragsgegenstand bestehen muss. Außerdem liegt es im Ermessen des Auftraggebers, ob er strategische Ziele verfolgen möchte oder nicht. Er muss es nicht, aber er kann es machen.\n\nIch sehe hier ein praktisches Problem und vor allen Dingen auch ein Problem der Rechtssicherheit; denn in der Vergangenheit hat der EuGH mehrfach Landesvergabegesetze wegen vergabefremder Kriterien gekippt: 2008 das niedersächsische Vergabegesetz im sogenannten Rüffert-Urteil und 2014 das NRW-Vergabegesetz. Nun ist es so, dass diese beiden Landesvergabegesetze damals vornehmlich den Bereich Mindestlohn geregelt haben. Dieser ist in der Zwischenzeit Gott sei Dank geregelt.\n\nEs bleibt aber dabei: Aus europarechtlicher Sicht werden an die Einbeziehung strategischer Ziele ganz klare Anforderungen gestellt. Das ist aber so im Regierungsentwurf nicht verankert und sollte daher aus meiner Sicht im Sinne einer Eins-zu-eins-Umsetzung entsprechend angepasst werden.\n\nKommen wir zum zweiten Aspekt, der meines Erachtens wichtig ist und tiefer gehend betrachtet werden muss. In Artikel 12 Absätze 1 und 4 der Richtlinie werden die vom EuGH entwickelten Ausnahmen vom Anwendungsbereich des Vergaberechts bei sogenannten Inhouse-Geschäften - das ist die vertikale Ebene - und bei der sogenannten interkommunalen Zusammenarbeit - das ist die horizontale Ebene - erstmals geregelt. Demnach fällt ein zwischen zwei oder mehr öffentlichen Auftraggebern geschlossener Vertrag nicht unter das Vergaberecht, wenn die Zusammenarbeit ein gemeinsames Ziel verfolgt und dem öffentlichen Interesse dient - das ist gerade schon dargelegt worden - und die Beteiligten auf dem offenen Markt weniger als 20 Prozent der durch die Zusammenarbeit erfassten Tätigkeiten erbringen. Der damalige Vorschlag der Kommission sah übrigens 10 Prozent vor und entsprach auch einem Urteil des EuGH.\n\nNun ist es so: Auch wenn wir die europäische Vergaberichtlinie noch nicht abschließend in deutsches Recht umgesetzt haben, ist sie dennoch bereits geltendes Recht. Daher beschäftigen sich zum Teil auch schon unsere Gerichte damit. Dieser Bereich ist eben sehr kompliziert. Das Oberlandesgericht Koblenz hat sich vor diesem Hintergrund im Dezember 2014 mit der Definition des Wortes „Zusammenarbeit“ beschäftigt. Das Gericht hat ganz klar zum Ausdruck gebracht, dass es sich bei der interkommunalen Zusammenarbeit um eine echte Zusammenarbeit handeln muss - die Betonung liegt auf „Arbeit“ und nicht auf „zusammen“ -, das heißt, es kann sich nicht nur um die Erbringung einer Leistung gegen Bezahlung handeln. Das ist in den Kommunen momentan eigentlich eher gängige Praxis. Ich denke, auch darüber müssen wir im laufenden Gesetzgebungsverfahren noch einmal nachdenken.\n\nDarüber hinaus hat das OLG Celle ebenfalls im Dezember 2014 um eine Vorabentscheidung beim EuGH zum Thema Zweckverband gebeten. Die Gründung eines Zweckverbandes ist nämlich häufig die Folge, wenn die soeben beschriebene interkommunale Zusammenarbeit in die Kritik gerät. Das OLG Celle möchte ganz konkret wissen, ob die Aufgabenübertragung auf einen Zweckverband ein öffentlicher Auftrag sein kann, und falls ja, ob dieser Vorgang als Fall der Inhouse-Vergabe oder der interkommunalen Zusammenarbeit in den Anwendungsbereich des Vergaberechts fällt und daher ausgeschrieben werden muss.\n\nDie Kommunen vertreten in der Regel die Ansicht, dass die Gründung eines Zweckverbandes und die damit verbundene Aufgabenübertragung ausschreibungsfrei ablaufen kann, da es keinen Vertrag zwischen dem öffentlichen Auftraggeber und dem Unternehmer und somit auch keinen Beschaffungsvorgang gebe. Die Gründung eines Zweckverbandes wird als Aufgabenbewältigung durch Eigenleistung der beteiligten öffentlichen Auftraggeber betrachtet, durch die nur öffentliche Interessen berührt werden und die durch das kommunale Selbstverwaltungsrecht nach Artikel 28 Absatz 2 des Grundgesetzes geschützt ist. Ich finde es deswegen äußerst spannend, wie der Europäische Gerichtshof diesbezüglich entscheiden wird; denn daran werden wir uns dann halten müssen. Grundsätzlich denke ich aber, dass wir national so oder so das Wort „Zusammenarbeit“ im Zuge des Gesetzgebungsverfahrens klar definieren sollten, damit in der Zukunft schlicht keine vielfältigen Interpretationen stattfinden.\n\nInsgesamt halte ich die Vorlage, wie gesagt, für ausgewogen, wobei ich zugeben muss, dass ich mir auch noch weiter gehende Regelungen hätte vorstellen können. Denn mit der Vergaberechtsreform - das haben wir gehört - erhalten wir weder ein eigenes Vergabegesetz noch führen wir einen konsequenten Systemwechsel durch. Das Kaskadensystem bleibt in Teilen erhalten, anderes geht im Gesetz und in der dazugehörigen Verordnung auf. Mir ist klar, dass diese Forderungen vielleicht manchmal ein bisschen zu weit gehen, aber ich denke, wir nähern uns mit dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf diesen Vorstellungen an. Vielleicht gelingt uns ja dann bei der nächsten Novellierung des Vergaberechts der große Wurf.\n\nGestatten Sie mir zum Abschluss noch eine persönliche Bemerkung. Sie zielt auch ein bisschen auf das ab, was der Kollege Held schon gesagt hat. Wir alle reden immer von Bürokratieabbau. Es wäre mit Sicherheit eine große Erleichterung, vor allem für unsere KMUs, wenn die Länder ihre Landesvergabegesetze an das neue Recht anpassen würden, vor allem vor dem Hintergrund, dass die elektronische Vergabe die Vergabe der Zukunft sein wird. 16 verschiedene Softwares und Regularien sind mit Sicherheit nicht das, was unsere Unternehmen brauchen können. Der Bund regelt mit diesem Gesetz - auch das ist schon erwähnt worden - ja nur die Vergabe oberhalb bestimmter Schwellenwerte; denn nur diesen Bereich geben auch die Richtlinien vor. Insofern wäre es ein Gewinn für die Wirtschaft, wenn man sich auch unterhalb dieser Schwellenwerte auf ein einheitliches Vergaberecht verständigen könnte, und vermutlich sogar auch eine Vereinfachung für die ausschreibenden Behörden; denn die Bundesländergrenzen sind für Bieter und Auslober aus meiner Sicht eine unliebsame und bürokratische Hürde, die wir mittel- und langfristig beseitigen könnten. Das wäre aus meiner Sicht einer der besten Beiträge zum Bürokratieabbau, den Bund und Länder gemeinsam leisten können.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n13280,burkhard-blienert,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Petzold, die Öffentlichkeit ist hier. Es kann keinen besseren Ort für eine Debatte geben als den Deutschen Bundestag. Deshalb sollten wir dies auch so belassen. Ich empfehle allen, den Antrag sorgfältig zu lesen. Das geht auch in Richtung Medien. Ich habe mich heute Morgen darüber geärgert, dass eine deutsche Zeitung mit vier großen Buchstaben die Schlagzeile hatte: „DAS IST DEUTSCH - Bundestag will Leitkultur beschließen“. Genau das steht gar nicht in unserem Antrag. Es geht in diesem Antrag nicht um den Begriff „Leitkultur“. Er findet sich in dem Antrag kein einziges Mal wieder. Olaf Zimmermann sagt zu Recht zu einer solchen Nachricht: Das sind Fake News. - Das sollte uns zu denken geben.\n\nDass wir zum Teil ein unterschiedliches Kulturverständnis haben - auch zwischen den Regierungsfraktionen -, war durchaus ein Reibungspunkt bei den Verhandlungen zu diesem Antrag. Wir haben ihn nicht vorgelegt, weil demnächst Weihnachten ist, sondern weil wir schon lange darüber diskutiert haben. Anfang des Jahres - meine Kollegin ist eben schon darauf eingegangen - haben wir diesen Diskussionsprozess angestoßen.\n\nFür uns ist Multikulturalismus keine Ideologie, sondern gelebte Realität in Deutschland. Unser Land ist „geprägt vom Zusammenleben verschiedener Kulturen, von unterschiedlichen Lebenswelten, Werten und Traditionen“. Unsere Gesellschaft „entwickelt sich … stetig weiter und ist offen für andere kulturelle Einflüsse“. - Das waren übrigens direkte Zitate aus dem Antrag.\n\nKultur ist kein starres, in sich geschlossenes Konzept; Kultur wird von Menschen gemacht. Deshalb ist Kultur immer einem ständigen Wechsel unterzogen. Eine Politik hingegen, die eine sogenannte Leitkultur propagiert, hierarchisiert, grenzt Kulturen aus und versteht Integration als Annahme der dominanten Kultur bei gleichzeitiger Aufgabe der Herkunftskultur. Das entspricht nicht unserem sozialdemokratischen Verständnis von Kultur.\n\nWir verstehen Kultur nicht als Mittel der Abgrenzung, sondern als Mittel der Inklusion.\n\nKulturen konstituieren sich in einem Prozess der Überlagerung, Vermischung und Verschmelzung verschiedener kultureller Einflüsse. Im Rahmen permanenter Austauschprozesse verwischen die Grenzen zwischen Eigen- und Fremdkultur. Wenn wir kulturelle Unterschiede verstehen, andere kulturelle Ausdrucksweisen kennen und Respekt vor anderen Kulturen haben, wird aus dem Fremden das vertraute Andere. Dieser dynamische, hybride und heterogene Kulturbegriff findet sich in diesem Antrag wieder. Wer den Antrag liest, wird ganz klar erkennen: Das ist sozialdemokratische Handschrift.\n\nDas sage ich ganz ohne Häme. Im Gegenteil: Ich freue mich darüber, dass es uns in einem Diskussionsprozess gelungen ist, die Union mitzunehmen und sie von verkrusteten Denkmustern ausgrenzender Leitkultur wegzubewegen, hin zu einem Bekenntnis zu kultureller Vielfalt. Deshalb sind wir nach einem Jahr zähen Ringens um jede Formulierung ja auch so weit gekommen.\n\nAls Berichterstatter war es mir wichtig, dass in dem Antrag zum Ausdruck kommt, dass Integration keine Einbahnstraße ist, sondern ein dynamischer und wechselseitiger Prozess, bei dem es darum geht, sich über die gemeinsamen Grundlagen und Regeln des Zusammenlebens zu verständigen. Das ist aus meiner Sicht gelungen.\n\nMein Verständnis und das Verständnis meiner Partei von Integration lassen sich auf den ursprünglichen Begriff „integrare“, der aus dem Lateinischen kommt, zurückführen. Das bedeutet „erneuern, ergänzen, geistig auffrischen“. Auf diese ursprüngliche Bedeutung sollten wir uns in diesem gesellschaftlichen Diskurs wieder besinnen.\n\nUnser beeindruckendes kulturelles Erbe hat sich überhaupt erst aus dieser Heterogenität entwickelt. Dieses kulturelle Erbe verpflichtet uns auch zu Humanität - einer Humanität, die im letzten Jahr von vielen Ehren- und Hauptamtlichen in unserem Land auch im kulturellen Sektor mit Leben erfüllt wurde. Deshalb gehört die Stärkung des bürgerschaftlichen Engagements zu den Kernforderungen des Antrags.\n\nEine weitere zentrale Forderung des Antrags ist die Stärkung der soziokulturellen Zentren, die als Orte der Begegnung fungieren und somit kulturelle Teilhabe und kulturellen Austausch fördern. Schauen wir nach NRW! Dort funktioniert das hervorragend. Das sollte man an dieser Stelle einmal betonen.\n\nKulturelle Bildung kann vor allem geflüchtete Kinder dabei unterstützen, Erlebtes zu verarbeiten und Neues zu verstehen. Deshalb hat sich die SPD-Bundestagsfraktion auch dafür eingesetzt, „Kultur macht stark“, das größte Förderprogramm der kulturellen Bildung des Bundes, auch nach 2017 fortzusetzen.\n\n„Kultur baut Brücken“ - hinter diesem Titel steckt die Überzeugung, dass kultureller Austausch dazu beitragen kann, Vorurteile abzubauen und ein besseres Verständnis füreinander zu entwickeln. Kulturelles Miteinander kann Integration fördern und die Gemeinschaft festigen.\n\nWie sagte es ein sehr bekannter Sozialdemokrat: „Der beste Weg, die Zukunft vorauszusagen, ist, sie zu gestalten.“ Willy Brandt, einst selbst Flüchtling, wurde vor 45 Jahren für seinen Einsatz für Versöhnung und die europäische Einigung mit dem Friedensnobelpreis ausgezeichnet. Brandts Ziel war es, die Menschen zu einen und nicht zu spalten. Dieser Grundsatz ist Teil unserer Identität, eine Tradition, die wir als Sozialdemokraten weiter aufrechterhalten wollen und die sich auch in dem vorliegenden Antrag wiederfindet.\n\nIch danke für die Aufmerksamkeit und wünsche allen ein frohes Fest.\"\n10074,florian-pronold,\"Kollege Kühn hat gefragt, ob Produkte wie Polystyrol, Textilien, Polstermöbel und Kunststoffe mit HBCD - das ist ein Stoff, der dazu dient, dass die Brandgefahr geringer ist - als Sondermüll eingestuft bzw. klassifiziert werden, und, wenn ja, ab wann. Nach § 3 Absatz 1 der Abfallverzeichnis-Verordnung sind die Abfallarten im Abfallverzeichnis, deren Abfallschlüssel mit einem Sternchen versehen ist, gefährlich im Sinne des § 48 des Kreislaufwirtschaftsgesetzes. Für Textilien und für Möbel sind keine Einträge bei Abfällen vorgesehen. Bei einigen Abfällen, für die sowohl ein nichtgefährlicher als auch ein gefährlicher Abfallschlüssel gelistet ist, kommt es darauf an, ob ein bestimmter Grenzwert überschritten wird. Das ist zum Beispiel bei polystyrolhaltigem Dämmmaterial oder Kunststoffen je nach Herkunftsbereich der Fall.\n\nDer Grenzwert für HBCD in Anhang IV der Verordnung der Europäischen Union 850/2004, mit dem das Ziel verfolgt wird, HBCD aus dem Wertstoffkreislauf auszuschließen, wird voraussichtlich ab Herbst 2016 rechtswirksam sein.\n\nDer erste Punkt ist, dass wir es bei der Frage der Dämmung bisher immer den Bauherren überlassen haben, welche Stoffe sie einsetzen, und dass wir das nicht bewertet haben.\n\nDer zweite Punkt ist, dass nach jetzigem Kenntnisstand - auch nach intensiven Untersuchungen des Umweltbundesamtes - keine Gesundheitsgefährdung vom Einsatz dieser Stoffe, zum Beispiel auch in Dämmplatten, für die Bewohner von Wohnungen oder Häusern ausgeht.\n\nDer dritte Punkt ist, dass wir EU-weit eine Verordnung haben, die, wie ich vorhin schon gesagt habe, das Ziel verfolgt, dass wir diesen Stoff ab einer bestimmten Konzentration aus dem Wertstoffkreislauf ausschließen und als Sondermüll behandeln. Bisher war es so, dass diese Dämmplatten recycelt worden sind, auch wenn sie einen erhöhten Konzentrationswert hatten. Im Zuge dieses Entscheidungsprozesses, der auf der EU-Ebene begann, wurde diese Verordnung auf Wunsch des Bundesrates auch bei uns zügig umgesetzt; unsere nationale Verordnung ist unterschrieben und tritt im Herbst 2016 in Kraft.\n\nMeine Ministerin hat sich bereits vor über anderthalb Jahren an die KfW gewandt, um auch in der Frage der Förderkriterien auf diese Problematik, über die wir hier diskutieren, aufmerksam zu machen. Es gibt - das sage ich aus dem Gedächtnis heraus, nicht aus meiner Vorbereitung - im Etat des Landwirtschaftsministeriums einen Fördertatbestand für nachwachsende Rohstoffe in der Dämmung. Auch wir unterstützen das in vielfältigen Forschungsvorhaben. Ich bin mir relativ sicher - das zeigen übrigens auch die ersten Reaktionen aus der Wohnungswirtschaft -, dass die Klassifizierung von mit HBCD behandelten Dämmplatten als Sondermüll dazu führen wird, dass auch die Beteiligten in der Wirtschaft diese Dinge nicht mehr in dem Umfang einsetzen werden, wie sie das bisher machen, selbst wenn sie preislich ein Stück weit günstiger sind.\n\nIch gebe Ihnen recht, dass es eine ganze Menge Alternativen gibt. Das Problem ist, dass bisher alle preislich etwas höher liegen als diese Materialien. Unser Ziel ist es, auch insgesamt nachhaltig zu wirtschaften. Der Bund geht, was den eigenen Gebäudebestand betrifft, positiv damit um, indem er ein sehr umfassendes Zertifizierungslabel anwendet, das insbesondere die nachhaltige Verwendung von Baustoffen sehr deutlich ausweist und zum Nachahmen anregt.\n\nDie Antwort der Bundesregierung auf Ihre Frage lautet, dass der Vollzug des Abfallrechts ausschließlich der Länderkompetenz unterliegt. Das gilt auch für die hier in Rede stehende Entsorgung von Bohrschlämmen.\n\nEbenso ist es die alleinige Aufgabe der Länder, im Rahmen der Abfallwirtschaftsplanung für ausreichende Entsorgungsanlagen zu sorgen, um eine gemeinwohlverträgliche Beseitigung zu gewährleisten. Die im länderübergreifenden Verbund stattfindende Entsorgung von gefährlichen Abfällen - wie bei der Entsorgung von Bohrschlämmen - ist üblich. Sie ermöglicht eine ordnungsgemäße Entsorgung dieser Abfälle in dafür spezialisierten Anlagen. Nach den Informationen der Bundesregierung ist es so, dass sie im Einklang mit den abfallrechtlichen Vorgaben steht.\n\nHerr Zdebel, ich würde Ihnen auf diese Frage gerne detailliert schriftlich antworten. Mir ist aus vergangener Zeit - nicht aber aufgrund meiner Vorbereitung - nur im Gedächtnis, dass natürlich bei verschiedensten Deponien in unterschiedlichen Ländern Sanierungen stattgefunden haben. Wenn ich es richtig im Kopf habe, ist das übrigens auch ein Grund dafür, dass es keine Möglichkeiten mehr gibt, die Deponierung in Niedersachsen vorzunehmen. Ich werde erfragen, ob wir Kenntnisse haben, wie das in den einzelnen Bundesländern ist, und werde Ihnen die Antwort schriftlich geben.\n\nDarüber hinaus will ich darauf hinweisen, dass zumindest nach unserem Kenntnisstand eine Verbringung von Bohrschlamm aus Niedersachsen in zwei andere Bundesländer stattfindet, und zwar in dafür geeignete Deponien, die auch werkseigen sind. Das heißt also, es findet eine Verbringung in andere Bundesländer statt.\n\nWichtig ist aber, dass diese Abfälle sach- und fachgerecht entsorgt bzw. deponiert werden. Sowohl den Transport als auch die Deponierung müssen die Länder - so ist es nun einmal - gewährleisten.\n\nHerr Zdebel, ich komme, wie Sie sich vorstellen können, zu einer völlig anderen Bewertung als die, die Sie in Ihre Frage eingekleidet haben.\n\nDie Bundesregierung hat einen Gesetzentwurf vorgelegt, der den bisherigen Rechtszustand beseitigt, wonach beim Thema Fracking keine Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfung vorgesehen war und es auch keine anderen Handhabungen gab, wenn eine Fracking-Aufsuchungserlaubnis beantragt worden ist. Dieser Gesetzentwurf, mit dem zum Beispiel auch die Sorgen um den Schutz des Wassers oder die Gesundheit von Menschen ernst genommen werden, wird im Bundestag demnächst sicher abschließend beraten werden. Wir haben damit eine der härtesten Regulierungen vorgelegt, die es in Europa dazu gibt.\n\nWeil die wirtschaftliche Nutzung von Fracking darin überhaupt nicht vorgesehen ist und es nur um Probebohrungen zur wirtschaftlichen Erprobung dieser Dinge geht, ist dort nicht von größeren Mengen Bohrschlamm auszugehen. Bis zum heutigen Tage ist auch noch nicht entschieden, in welchem Umfang es solche wissenschaftlichen Probebohrungen überhaupt geben wird.\n\nWir haben auch noch keinerlei Mutmaßungen darüber angestellt, welche Mengen Bohrschlamm bei einer wirtschaftlichen Nutzung der Fracking-Technologie möglich wären, weil es das Ziel unseres Gesetzentwurfes ist, dass genau dies nicht stattfindet.\n\nBei aller Liebe zu Ihren Fragen, glaube ich, dass Sie Ihr Fragerecht an dieser Stelle ein bisschen überdehnen, weil Fracking nicht Gegenstand der Frage insgesamt ist.\n\nIch will trotzdem zunächst einmal darauf hinweisen, dass in dem Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung steht, dass beim Fracking zukünftig allenfalls nur leicht wassergefährdende Stoffe eingesetzt werden dürfen. Daneben reden wir über die Frage, was hier insgesamt herauskommt und wie man das wieder entsorgen kann.\n\nTheoretisch besteht zum Beispiel die Möglichkeit, eine höhere Salzbelastung des dortigen Lagerstättenwassers mit hohem Energieaufwand wieder zu beseitigen. Es gibt aber niemanden - auch nicht vonseiten der Umweltexperten -, der eine solche Behandlung fordert. Dies gilt vor allem dann, wenn das in sichere Regionen zurückgepresst wird, in denen sich Wasser befindet, welches auch eine höhere Salzbelastung aufweist. Deswegen ist nach meinem Kenntnisstand beim Fracking bisher eine Reinigung, die zum Beispiel den Salzgehalt verändert, nicht verpflichtend vorgesehen. Sie wird so wohl nicht praktiziert. Sehr wohl unterfällt das aber, wenn toxikologische Belastungen von Bohrschlämmen vorhanden sind, nach meinem Kenntnisstand den abfallrechtlichen Vorschriften und ist dann natürlich anders zu behandeln.\"\n13156,martin-patzelt,\"Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Gäste in unserem Haus! Über die Relativität des Armutsbegriffes möchte ich mich nicht mehr äußern; das haben meine Vorredner zur Genüge getan.\n\n- Das ist Ihre Meinung. - Ich möchte auch nicht über die Armut an sich reden. Ich will aber bei all dem, was ich Ihnen jetzt sagen werde, betonen: Natürlich bin ich davon überzeugt, dass ein Minimum an materieller Ausstattung nötig ist, um ein menschenwürdiges Leben zu führen - genau darüber entscheidet in Deutschland aber nicht nur der Bundestag, sondern auch das oberste Gericht -, und dieses Geld reicht nicht.\n\nWenn Eltern im Rahmen ihrer persönlichen Möglichkeiten, der Angebote, die ihnen gemacht werden, und vor allen Dingen der Kompetenz, die sie haben, zusätzliche Hilfsangebote suchen und nutzen - ein Beispiel ist die Tafel -, dann geschieht das, weil sie die Grundleistungen, die sie bekommen, um leben zu können und das Frühstücksbrot für ihre Kinder finanzieren zu können, optimieren. Und wenn sie in Secondhandläden einkaufen - auch einmal ein Paar teure Skier und Markenklamotten -, dann tun sie das, weil sie ihr - zugegebenermaßen niedriges - Einkommen optimieren wollen. Daraus zu schließen, dass sie in lebensbedrohlicher Not sind, ist einfach falsch, sondern ihnen gelingt es, zu optimieren.\n\nWissen Sie, wenn ich am Wochenende mal einkaufen gehe und an der Kasse im Supermarkt stehe und sehe, was mir bekannte Menschen - ich war einmal Bürgermeister der Stadt; man kennt sich - in ihren Einkaufskörben haben, dann überkommt mich bitter, dass sie das wenige Geld, das sie haben, für Artikel ausgeben, die nicht nachhaltig sind, die bald kaputt sind und ihren Kindern nicht lange Freude machen werden.\n\nWas will ich damit sagen? Ich will sagen, dass wir nicht nur eine Armut an materieller Ausstattung unserer Familien haben.\n\nDie haben wir; das ist unbestritten. Ich will nicht missverstanden werden. Meine Vorredner haben bereits darauf hingewiesen, was die Regierungskoalition und auch die CDU/CSU in den vergangenen Jahren, auch in den Jahren vor dieser Koalition, an wirklich entscheidenden und nachhaltigen finanziellen Förderungen auf den Weg gebracht haben. Finanzielle Förderung scheint immer das Einzige zu sein, was wir anzubieten haben, wenn es um Nöte in der Gesellschaft geht. Lassen Sie mich auf eine Armut hinweisen, die Kinder auch haben. Das ist die Armut an Selbstbewusstsein. Von Ihnen wird dann immer gleich gesagt: Ja, wenn sie mehr hätten, ein neues Handy oder eine bessere Schultasche und bessere Kleidung, dann wäre ihr Selbstbewusstsein sofort aufgewertet. Aber, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das ist doch eine Spirale.\n\nIn dem Moment, in dem sie das Neueste haben, haben die anderen schon wieder etwas Neueres. Das ist eine Spirale, die in die Irre führt, weil unsere Kinder diesem Trend - diesem Trend, dem wir alle mehr oder weniger folgen - immer nachlaufen werden.\n\nEs geht um das Glück von Kindern. Es geht nicht darum, immer mehr zu haben. Die Armutsgrenze wird sich doch ständig verändern. Warum haben wir wieder mehr Armut nach der Statistik? Weil das allgemeine Einkommen gestiegen ist. Immer wenn das allgemeine Einkommen steigt, wird natürlich sofort die Zahl der Armen größer, weil wir nicht schnell genug nachkommen, die entsprechenden Anpassungen der unterschiedlichen Leistungen im Parlament vorzunehmen.\n\nDieser Zusammenhang ist von meinen Vorrednern deutlich gemacht worden.\n\nIch möchte den Kindern, für die ich auch als Mitglied des Familienausschusses Verantwortung habe - es sind die Kinder unseres Landes -, helfen, dass sie einen sicheren Selbststand haben, einen Selbststand, der nicht nur davon abhängt, welche materielle Ausstattung sie haben. Sie sollen Wissen erwerben können, sich kulturell engagieren können, konfliktfähig sein. Ich habe in den letzten Tagen in der Presse wieder gelesen, was auf unseren Schulhöfen los ist, dass immer mehr Sozialarbeiter und Psychologen eingestellt werden müssen, weil die Kinder in einer Weise miteinander umgehen, dass die Lehrer es nicht mehr schaffen, die Konflikte zu regeln.\n\nEs geht um die Kompetenzen der Kinder, ihre Ausstattung mit Empathie, die Erfahrungen, die sie in ihrem Leben machen, und ihre Lebensräume. Wie machen wir denn Urlaub? Wir packen sie in die Kiste und fahren Hunderte von Kilometern mit ihnen an einen Urlaubsort, statt den Nahraum um unseren Wohnort, unser Land zu erkunden. Ich kenne viele Kinder, die nicht einmal ihre nähere Heimat kennen. Wir glauben, wir müssen ihnen immer mehr und mehr geben, statt die Welt, in der sie leben, mit den Mitteln, die wir haben, auszugestalten.\n\nIch sage das aus eigener Erfahrung. Ich habe mit Kollegen im Vorgriff auf diese Debatte gesprochen. Ein Kollege sagte mir gestern: Ich war zwar arm; aber ich konnte mich wenigstens ausschlafen. - Ich komme jeden Tag mit der U-Bahn und sehe, wie die Mütter die Kinderwagen in die U- und S-Bahnen zwängen. Sie haben kaum Platz, auch wegen der vielen Fahrräder, und es ist kalt und nass. Dann denke ich: Ein reiches Land; aber die Kinder können nicht einmal ausschlafen. - Und wenn sich Frauen in dieser sensiblen Phase des Lebens entscheiden, die Infrastrukturangebote noch nicht wahrzunehmen und zu Hause zu bleiben, und die Fraktion von CDU/CSU sagt, diesen Frauen ein Betreuungsgeld zu zahlen, damit wir ihnen eine Anerkennung für diese gesellschaftliche Leistung geben, dann wird das ideologisch verfemt, dann ist das eine Herdprämie.\n\n- Ich sage das nicht aus parteipolitischen Gründen. Ich sage das, weil ich ernste Sorge habe, wenn wir weiter so mit unseren Kindern umgehen, wenn wir sie in einer sensiblen Phase hemmungslos der öffentlichen Erziehung ausliefern, wenn wir sie nicht mehr ausstatten mit der Nähe von Eltern, die ihnen Märchen vorlesen, die noch nicht kaputt sind vom Karrierekampf und vom Kampf um noch mehr Geld, das sie verdienen können für ihre persönliche Entwicklung.\n\nDas alles ist wichtig und richtig; verstehen Sie mich nicht falsch. Aber wer sich für Kinder entscheidet, der muss wissen, dass diese Kinder die Eltern brauchen, dass sie Zeit mit ihnen brauchen, Empathie, Zuwendung und Zuhören.\n\nIch habe mich einmal damit beschäftigt, welche Jugendlichen eigentlich in rechten und linken extremistischen Gruppen landen. Zum großen Teil sind das heimatlose junge Menschen, die eine Ersatzfamilie suchen und in dieser strengen und für uns alle fast unerträglichen wertbildenden Gruppe dann ein Stück weit ein Ersatzzuhause finden. Warum ist das so? Weil sie dieses Zuhause in ihrer Kindheit nicht erleben konnten, weil wir außenorientiert sind und sagen: Wir müssen mehr Knete machen! Wir müssen Karriere machen! - Wer sich für Kinder entscheidet, der sollte einberechnen, dass das für bestimmte Zeiten ein Stückchen Karriere kosten kann.\n\nWir haben in unserem Parlament, in der Regierung und in der Wirtschaft viele Kinderreiche. Die Managerin der Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe hat, glaube ich, sieben Kinder.\n\nNein, danke. Ich möchte in meinen Gedanken jetzt nicht unterbrochen werden. - Es gibt genug Beispiele von Frauen, die sogar überdurchschnittlich viele Kinder hatten, bei ihren Kindern geblieben sind und sie mit hoher Kompetenz ins Leben geführt haben.\n\nDenken Sie doch selber daran: Wir Älteren kommen nicht alle aus vermögenden Haushalten. Ich komme aus einer armen Familie und verschiedene Kolleginnen und Kollegen auch, wie sie mir gesagt haben - Marcus Weinberg gerade eben. Wenn es wirklich so wäre, dass alles am Geld liegt, dann wären wir nicht hier gelandet. Viele aus armen Verhältnissen wären dann nicht in der Wissenschaft, der Kultur oder der Kunst gelandet. Ich möchte nur eines anmahnen, nämlich dass wir miteinander den Blick weiten und sagen: Es liegt nicht alles am Geld.\n\nWir werden mit Geld nicht alles erreichen, was wir brauchen, damit diese Gesellschaft Zukunft und Bestand hat.\n\nIch bin ganz nah bei einigen Vorschlägen, die Sie in Ihrer Vorlage gemacht haben, vor allen Dingen auch bei den strukturellen Vorschlägen der Grünen. Ja, wir brauchen eine gute Infrastruktur. Ich weiß, ich bin ein bisschen weg vom Fenster; aber ich würde sogar eine Schuluniform fordern. In meinem Wahlkreis gibt es ein Spitzengymnasium. Dort haben sich die Eltern für eine Schuluniform entschieden. Warum? Weil sie die Stigmatisierung der Kinder untereinander, die auf dem Schulhof „Assi, Assi!“ schreien, vermeiden wollten. Wenn wir in diese Strukturen investieren, für Lehrbuchfreiheit sorgen und bestimmte Ausstattungsgrade für die Schulen fordern wollen, weil wir hier in einer Gemeinschaft lernen und leben, dann haben wir ein weites Feld der Gestaltung vor uns. Darauf freue ich mich.\n\nDanke.\"\n12044,claudia-lucking-michel,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ein Blick auf die Stellenbesetzungen in unserer Forschungs- und Hochschullandschaft zeigt: Wir haben ein Problem. Frauen sind viel zu oft unterrepräsentiert, und immer gilt: Je höher die Karrierestufen und je höher die Besoldung, desto niedriger der Anteil der Frauen. Diese Situation - darin stimme ich Ihnen vollkommen zu - ist nicht akzeptabel. So weit gebe ich Ihnen recht.\n\nDie Gründe für diese Situation sind allerdings absolut vielfältig, und wer etwas dagegen tun will, muss entsprechend vielfältig - mit verschiedenen Instrumenten - ansetzen. Vieles geschieht auch schon. Deswegen ziehe ich aus der wahrlich nicht erfreulichen Situation ganz andere Schlüsse als Sie in Ihrem Antrag.\n\nGleich der erste Satz Ihres Antrages ist eine, wie ich finde, einseitige Beurteilung; denn Sie ignorieren all die Aktivitäten, die weit über Appelle und Selbstverpflichtungen hinausgehen und die an Hochschulen und Forschungseinrichtungen mittlerweile stattfinden, um die Chancengerechtigkeit für alle, auch und gerade für Frauen, zu verbessern.\n\nLeitungsebene und Gleichstellungsbeauftragte ziehen in der Regel an einem Strang.\n\nIm zweiten Satz des Antrags geht es gleich weiter: Sie behaupten pauschal, dass Frauen in ganzen Fachrichtungen diskriminiert würden. Wahrscheinlich meinen Sie die MINT-Fächer und meinen, dass der Frauenanteil hier in den Führungspositionen immer noch viel langsamer steigt als anderswo. Sie erwähnen allerdings nicht, dass nach wie vor viel weniger Frauen ein Studium in diesen Fächern aufnehmen. Erst recht findet sich mit keinem Wort, was die Bundesregierung gegen die Studienfachwahl im Sinne der klassischen Rollenbilder mittlerweile auch schon unternimmt. Das beginnt beim Girls’ Day und geht weiter zum Nationalen Pakt für Frauen in MINT-Berufen. Diese Initiativen wirken. Die Zahl der Studienanfängerinnen in den MINT-Fächern ist von rund 45 000 im Jahr 2000 auf immerhin 105 000 im Jahr 2014 gestiegen - mehr als doppelt so viele.\n\nIch stelle das so ausführlich dar, weil ich erklären möchte, warum wir von den geforderten fixen Quoten für Frauen, die bei Ihnen an verschiedenen Stellen vorkommen, nicht viel halten. Man muss, so finde ich, die konkreten Zahlenverhältnisse berücksichtigen. Deshalb kommt man auf die Idee des sogenannten Kaskadenmodells.\n\nEs trägt den Gegebenheiten der jeweiligen Fachrichtung und Institution nämlich Rechnung und - das ist mir wichtig - setzt das Prinzip der Bestenauslese gerade nicht außer Kraft, nutzt aber die Potenziale und die Verpflichtungen zum Nutzen der bisherigen Karrierestufe in vollem Umfang.\n\nIch erinnere - Sie erwähnten sie als „echte Wegmarke“, und ich finde, das sind sie auch - an die forschungsorientierten Gleichstellungsstandards, auf die sich die DFG verpflichtet hat - immerhin schon 2008. Ein solcher Kulturwandel, der mit diesen Gleichstellungsstandards eingeleitet wurde, braucht Zeit - sicher mehr, als uns lieb ist, aber immerhin. Ich finde, wir sind auf dem richtigen Weg.\n\nWenn Politik etwas tun soll, dann gehört dazu, mehr Anreize und verbindlichere Standards zu setzen. Wir sollten also Institutionen, Universitäten und außeruniversitäre Forschungseinrichtungen, die hier besonders gut abschneiden, belohnen. Dabei könnten wir auch bei den Maßnahmen noch viel kreativer werden.\n\nIch nenne die Anerkennung von gendersensibler Rekrutierung, die Förderung von Mentoring-Programmen, den Aufbau von Netzwerken und auch den Gedanken, Dienstleistungen für Doppelkarrierepaare auszubauen.\n\nSchließlich schlage ich einen verpflichtenden Berichtspunkt Familienquote vor, um nicht nur die Familienfreundlichkeit der verschiedenen Einrichtungen klarer erfassen zu können, sondern auch, um da einen Negativwettbewerb auszuschließen. Professorinnenprogramm, Personalentwicklungs- und Gleichstellungskonzepte als Kriterium für Exzellenzstrategie und Tenure-Track-Programme: Da passiert doch etwas. Das sind wirksame Anreizsysteme.\n\nViele der Überlegungen in Ihrem Antrag sind dagegen, wie ich finde, Ladenhüter; über sie haben wir schon an so vielen Stellen miteinander diskutiert. Dazu gehört die Forderung nach Bundesfinanzierung von Aufgaben in Länderzuständigkeit oder die ständig wiederholte Kritik am Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz, das wir doch gerade erst novelliert haben.\n\nZum Schluss sei gesagt, dass auch in der Wissenschaft - aus purem Eigeninteresse - längst angekommen ist: Gleiche Zugangschancen zu Spitzenfunktionen für alle sind nicht nur eine Frage der Gerechtigkeit, sondern auch eine Frage der Exzellenzsicherung. Diversität von Fragestellungen und Forschungsansätzen ist Bedingung für echte Spitzenforschung. In einem Punkt sind wir uns hoffentlich einig: Wir brauchen die Kreativität von allen, die Talente der besten Männer und vor allen Dingen der besten Frauen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3284,christian-lange,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Der Bundestag entscheidet heute über die Zustimmung zum Übereinkommen der Vereinten Nationen vom 31. Oktober 2003 gegen Korruption. Korruption untergräbt das Vertrauen in die Integrität und Funktionsfähigkeit von Verwaltungen und Regierungen. Sie behindert einen freien und fairen Wettbewerb und verursacht erhebliche volkswirtschaftliche Schäden. Die Verhinderung und Bekämpfung von Korruption in allen Ausprägungen gehört daher zu den zentralen staatlichen Aufgaben.\n\nKorruption ist freilich kein nationales Phänomen. Sie macht vor staatlichen Grenzen bekanntlich nicht halt. Gründe hierfür sind die Öffnung von Grenzen, die enge Zusammenarbeit vieler Staaten auf dem Weltmarkt und die Globalisierung der Wirtschaft. Dem internationalen Phänomen Korruption ist deshalb auch durch ein international abgestimmtes Vorgehen der Staatengemeinschaft entgegenzutreten.\n\nDas Übereinkommen der Vereinten Nationen gegen Korruption wurde am 31. Oktober 2003 von der Generalversammlung der Vereinten Nationen verabschiedet. Es ist das erste weltweite Regelungswerk zur Bekämpfung der in- und ausländischen Korruption. Es wurde mittlerweile von 170 Vertragsstaaten ratifiziert und hat damit bei einer Mitgliederzahl der Vereinten Nationen von 193 Staaten nahezu universelle Geltung. Deutschland hat das Übereinkommen bereits am 9. Dezember 2003 unterzeichnet und gehört damit zu den Erstunterzeichnern des Übereinkommens.\n\nIn den vergangenen Jahren hat Deutschland erhebliche Anstrengungen im Kampf gegen Korruption unternommen.\n\nBestechungsfälle im In- und Ausland können verfolgt werden und werden verfolgt. Das Bewusstsein für die Sozialschädlichkeit von Korruption ist heute sehr viel höher als früher.\n\nIn einem Punkt blieb Deutschland allerdings hinter den Vorgaben des Übereinkommens zurück: bei der Abgeordnetenbestechung. Die Kritik, die dies, wie ich meine, zu Recht hervorgerufen hat, dürfte uns allen wohl noch in Erinnerung sein. Ich möchte an dieser Stelle ganz bewusst keine inhaltlichen Ausführungen zum Straftatbestand der Abgeordnetenbestechung machen. Der Bundestag hat entschieden. Der erweiterte Straftatbestand der Abgeordnetenbestechung ist seit dem 1. September dieses Jahres in Kraft. Ich möchte die Gelegenheit nutzen, den Koalitionsfraktionen für ihre Initiative herzlich zu danken. Dadurch ist es möglich, die Vorgaben des Übereinkommens zu erfüllen. Das ist heute der Fall. Heute geht es also darum, den Weg für die Ratifikation frei zu machen, damit Deutschland dem Übereinkommen der Vereinten Nationen als einem der wichtigsten internationalen Instrumente gegen Korruption endlich angehören kann. Genau darum bitte ich Sie heute Abend.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n13437,katarina-barley,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Gäste! Das vorliegende Arbeitsprogramm der Europäischen Kommission für das Jahr 2017 ist Anlass für unsere heutige Debatte. Aber die Fragen, die uns beschäftigen, gehen weit darüber hinaus. Es geht im Moment um nichts weniger als um die Frage, wohin sich Europa entwickeln wird, wohin sich die Europäische Union entwickeln wird. Wir haben ja ein Jahr der Zäsuren hinter uns, ein Jahr mit Brexit-Referendum, ein Jahr mit Wahlkampf und Wahl in den USA; und Donald Trump wird heute als Präsident der Vereinigten Staaten vereidigt werden. All das wird die Architektur der Welt und die Architektur innerhalb der Europäischen Union verändern.\n\nGenauso wie für viele von Ihnen bedeutete für mich die Idee der Europäischen Union, zusammenzuwachsen und einander besser zu verstehen, indem man zusammenarbeitet und sich austauscht. Es ist schon bestürzend, zu sehen, dass die bisherigen Entwicklungen umkehrbar sind. Wir sind mit zwei Entwicklungen konfrontiert, die mich und, wie ich vermute, die meisten hier im Saal sehr besorgt machen.\n\nDie eine Entwicklung ist, dass sich Menschen von Europa, von der Idee der Europäischen Union abwenden, weil sie sich nicht mehr erreicht fühlen, sich nicht verstanden fühlen, weil sie sich nicht als Ziel europäischer Politik fühlen. Ich nenne als Beispiel eine Begegnung bei einer Wanderung in Bayern. Ein selbstständiger Metzger, der das Geschäft in fünfter Generation fortführt, sagte mir: Es ist schon wieder eine neue Regelung aus Brüssel gekommen. Ich muss schon wieder neue Hygienevorschriften beachten und müsste bauliche Veränderungen vornehmen, wenn ich meinen Betrieb an die nachfolgende Generation übergeben will. Das lohnt sich nicht mehr. Irgendwann werden wir dichtmachen müssen. - Das ist nur eine kleine Begebenheit. Es gibt viele davon, bei denen die Menschen das Gefühl haben: Europa wird zu sehr von der Logik der Märkte her gedacht, aus der Logik der Wirtschaft gedacht und eben zu wenig aus der Logik von Menschen.\n\nDie zweite sehr besorgniserregende Entwicklung ist die der wachsenden nationalen Egoismen. Das ist keine ganz neue Entwicklung. Das hatten wir schon bei Maggie Thatcher. Insofern ist es wahrscheinlich auch kein Zufall, dass nun Großbritannien das Land ist, welches die Grundsatzfrage gestellt hat. Die Idee aber, dass man nicht gemeinsam zu etwas beiträgt, sondern sich das größte Stück herausbrechen will, haben wir schon lange.\n\nWas wir jetzt aber zusätzlich sehen - zusätzlich zu Unterbietungswettbewerben, die wir leider immer noch haben in Form von Steuerdumping und auch Dumping bei Sozialstandards -, ist noch etwas Weiteres: Es kommt jetzt ein neuer Nationalismus, ein neuer Egoismus mit einer ganz anderen Qualität und einer ganz anderen Zielrichtung dazu. Deswegen ist es so wichtig, dass sich diejenigen, welche die EU nach wie vor als ein Projekt der Zukunft, als ein Projekt der Versöhnung, als ein Projekt des gemeinsamen Wohlstandes ansehen, jetzt ernsthaft überlegen, wie sich diese EU in Zukunft aufstellen soll. Ich glaube, dass wir nach diesem Jahr der Zäsuren einen neuen Aufschlag brauchen. Die EU ist ein Projekt, das von Menschen gemacht wird. Deswegen haben wir es auch in der Hand, Europa zu verändern. Und das müssen wir tun.\n\nWir müssen die Rechtspopulisten bekämpfen, die eine 180-Grad-Wende hin zu einem neuen säbelrasselnden, autoritären Nationalismus wollen. Das hat mit einem freiheitlichen Europa in einem aufgeklärten Kontinent überhaupt nichts mehr zu tun. Damit begänne eine Zeit des Nationalismus, des Protektionismus und der autoritären Regime. Das kann wirklich keiner wollen. Man blicke einmal auf Polen und Ungarn und schaue sich an, wem es da zuerst an den Kragen geht: der unabhängigen Justiz, der freien Presse, der kritischen Kultur, den Rechten der Frauen. Es sind immer die Gleichen, die darunter zu leiden haben. Das kann wirklich kein Mensch wollen, der an einem freiheitlichen Europa interessiert ist.\n\nAber wir können und müssen Europa besser machen. Das heißt für uns Sozialdemokratinnen und Sozialdemokraten vor allen Dingen, Europa sozialer zu machen. Deswegen bin ich froh, dass die Europäische Kommission eine europäische Säule einziehen will. Das darf aber keine reine Worthülse bleiben. Wir fordern das schon lange; denn das bietet die Chance, wirklich ein Europa der Bürger aufzubauen. Das heißt soziale Sicherungsstandards, faire Mindestlöhne, das heißt ein Ende von Steuerflucht und Steuerdumping.\n\nDas heißt auch ein Europa der Jugend; denn wir sehen doch, dass wir vor allen Dingen in Südeuropa eine ganze Generation für die europäische Idee verlieren. Die Idee des Juncker-Plans, Investitionen zu stärken, ist der richtige Ansatz. Aber Investitionen alleine werden uns nicht helfen, wenn sie nicht in Beschäftigung münden, vor allen Dingen in Beschäftigung von jungen Menschen; denn sie sind unsere Zukunft im Kampf für ein geeintes Europa.\n\nEuropa ist das, was wir daraus machen. Wir haben es in der Hand. Unsere Generation wird sich später daran messen lassen müssen, was wir aus dieser europäischen Idee gemacht haben. Wir wollen einen neuen Aufbruch in Europa für eine gute und eine gemeinsame Zukunft.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3410,christine-buchholz,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Wir diskutieren heute über den Rüstungsprüfbericht und den Umgang von Frau von der Leyen mit demselben. Meine These ist: Die Antworten, die Frau von der Leyen und die Vertreter der Regierung geben, gehen an den eigentlichen Problemen vorbei. Frau von der Leyen, Sie räumen nicht auf, sondern Sie bedienen weiter die Profitinteressen der Rüstungsindustrie. Das hängt natürlich, Herr Arnold, damit zusammen, dass Sie gemeinsam die Bundeswehr auf Biegen und Brechen in globale Einsätze schicken wollen.\n\nSchauen wir uns das Ganze genau an. Wir reden über die Verträge, die das Bundesverteidigungsministerium mit der Rüstungsindustrie schließt. Es wird hier immer so technisch über die Verträge und die Vertragsstrafen geredet. Ich will es einmal konkret machen: Der Eurofighter kostet den Steuerzahler am Ende 60 Milliarden Euro. Und an so vielen anderen Ecken und Enden fehlt das Geld! Nachdem der Preis pro Stück weiter explodierte, reduzierte das BMVg das Auftragsvolumen. Der Wert der Bestellung blieb gleich; doch der Triebwerkhersteller MTU erhielt im Dezember 2013 55 Millionen Euro Kompensationszahlungen für Triebwerke, die niemals gebaut worden sind. Airbus Defence fordert 900 Millionen Euro als Ausgleich für die Reduzierung der georderten Stückzahl.\n\nAber umgekehrt gilt das Ganze nicht. Wenn sich infolge von Schwachstellen an den ersten 33 ausgelieferten Flugzeugen die Lebensdauer verkürzt, dann werden die Ansprüche an den Hersteller wegen der Vertragslage womöglich nicht geltend gemacht werden. Meine Damen und Herren, es kann nicht sein, dass mit Steuergeld so umgegangen wird.\n\nEs ist nicht so, dass es in allererster Linie handwerkliche Probleme gibt; nein, das Problem hat System:\n\nErstens. In allen Projektgruppen, die diesen Beschaffungsprozess prägen, saßen von Anfang an Vertreter der Rüstungsindustrie. Sie werden mit daran beteiligt, die sogenannten Fähigkeitslücken zu definieren. So war beispielsweise EADS Hauptauftragnehmer für die Erstellung der Systemkonzeptstudie zum Euro Hawk.\n\nZweitens. Ministerium und Rüstungsindustrie teilen das Interesse, die Bundeswehr global in Einsatz zu bringen, und dies bei größtmöglicher Eigenständigkeit gegenüber amerikanischen Partnern und russischen Rivalen.\n\nDrittens. Über Personen kann man das Ganze auch plastisch machen. Ich verweise auf den ehemaligen Minister für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung Dirk Niebel, der nun Rüstungslobbyist bei Rheinmetall wird, oder auf Tom Enders, den jetzigen Vorstandsvorsitzenden der Airbus Group, der in der Vergangenheit als Beamter im Verteidigungsministerium gewirkt hat und bis 2011 Mitglied der CSU war. Es wundert nicht, dass die Regelung der Regierung zu Karenzzeiten ein zahnloser Tiger ist.\n\nWie geht die Rüstungsindustrie mit dem Bericht um? Sie jammert ja immer viel; dabei ist die Realität, dass deren Jahresumsatz 2013 knapp 30 Milliarden Euro betrug. Seit 2005 wächst die Rüstungsindustrie jährlich im Schnitt um 4,3 Prozent. Sie ist gierig. Sie verlangt mehr. Adamowitsch, der Hauptgeschäftsführer des Bundesverbandes der Deutschen Sicherheits- und Verteidigungs-industrie, fordert jetzt, dass die Deckelung von Gewinnmargen aufgebrochen wird. Meine Damen und Herren, das kann doch nicht wahr sein!\n\nFrau von der Leyen produziert weiter Kosten für den Steuerzahler. Denn anstatt die ausufernden Kosten einzudämmen, kündigt das BMVg jetzt im Begleitschreiben zum KPMG-Bericht an, dass noch in diesem Jahr mehrere wichtige Rüstungsbeschaffungsentscheidungen auf den Weg gebracht werden sollen.\n\nIn diesem Zusammenhang kurz ein Wort zum Euro Hawk: Ich halte es für eine absolute Schnapsidee, den Euro Hawk, der bereits eine halbe Milliarde Euro verschlungen hat, aus der Mottenkiste zu holen.\n\nDie Kostenexplosion ist vorprogrammiert. Von daher: Ersparen Sie dem Steuerzahler dieses weitere Milliardengrab.\n\nDie Regierung, Frau von der Leyen, die CDU nutzen die jetzige Debatte,\n\num eine weitere Diskussion voranzutreiben, nämlich die über die perspektivische Erhöhung des Rüstungsetats. Sie fordern mehr Geld für Rüstung in der Zukunft. Wir sagen Nein. Nutzen Sie jetzt nicht die Diskussion über die aufgetretenen Mängel, um an dieser Stelle Druck zu machen. Eine Erhöhung des Rüstungsetats werden wir, die Linke, nie mitmachen.\n\nInternationale Verantwortung bedeutet die Abkehr von immer mehr militärischen Einsätzen. Internationale Verantwortung heißt Abrüstung. Sie setzt auf zivile Krisenlösungen. Internationale Verantwortung heißt auch, endlich den Filz zwischen Rüstungsindustrie und Politik aufzulösen.\"\n13402,astrid-freudenstein,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen! Verehrte Kollegen! Archive sind langweilig. - Sind Archive langweilig? In jedem Fall ist es so, dass in der öffentlichen Meinung Archive nicht besonders gut wegkommen. Oft werden sie mit grauen Mäusen, dicken Brillen, Aktenstapeln oder auch mit Strafversetzungen in Verbindung gebracht. In Spielfilmen und Romanen jedenfalls tauchen solche Klischees gern auf.\n\nFür viele Menschen aber sind Archive natürlich genau das Gegenteil. Auch ich finde, sie sind Goldgruben. Sie können spannend und lehrreich sein, und sie können vor allem helfen, Wahrheit von Lüge zu unterscheiden. Ein gutes Beispiel dafür ist die Überprüfung der angeblichen Hitler-Tagebücher des Sterns. Das Bundesinnenministerium gab damals, im April 1983, dem Bundesarchiv den Auftrag, die Tagebücher auf ihre Echtheit hin zu überprüfen. Die intensive Recherche - textkritisch und archivfachlich - brachte dann ja auch das bekannte Ergebnis: Es war eine Fälschung.\n\nDieser kurze Exkurs in die Geschichte des Bundesarchivs zeigt, welch hohe Fachkompetenz, aber auch welch hohe Verantwortung beim Bundesarchiv liegt. Und das sind auch noch nicht einmal die Kernaufgaben dieser Einrichtung. Die zentralen Aufgaben sind, das Archivgut des Bundes auf Dauer zu sichern und nutzbar zu machen. Das klingt jetzt wieder nicht so besonders spannend. Aber das Bundesarchiv bewahrt in der Tat viele Herzstücke unserer Geschichte auf und macht sie für Bürger, Wissenschaftler und Journalisten sichtbar und nutzbar.\n\nDas nun neu gefasste Bundesarchivgesetz trat 1988 in Kraft. Beschreibbare digitale Speichermedien gab es damals schon, zum Beispiel Disketten mit einer Kapazität von 1,44 Megabyte. Auch CDs waren schon verbreitet mit noch deutlich höheren Kapazitäten von mehreren 100 Megabyte. Und doch hat sich seitdem vieles getan. Wir rechnen fast nur noch in Giga- und Terabyte. Unser ganzes Leben ist digitalisiert. Wir schreiben elektronisch. Manches gibt es gar nicht mehr als Printversion. Die Kernaufgaben, das Archivgut des Bundes auf Dauer zu sichern und nutzbar zu machen, unterliegen mittlerweile völlig anderen Voraussetzungen. Deshalb wollen wir mit dem heutigen Beschluss das Bundesarchivrecht neu regeln und an die neuen Voraussetzungen anpassen.\n\nWir erreichen, auch wenn Sie nur die Lücken aufgezählt haben, durchaus eine Reihe von Verbesserungen.\n\nWir passen das Gesetz so an, dass das Bundesarchiv im elektronischen Zeitalter seine Aufgaben wieder einfacher wahrnehmen kann. Das bedeutet konkret: Wir schaffen Regelungen zur Übernahme elektronischer Unterlagen und zur digitalen Zwischenarchivierung.\n\nWir entlasten die Bundesbehörden von IT-technischen Aufgaben bereits bei der Zwischenarchivierung.\n\nVor allem aber - das ist, glaube ich, ganz wichtig - verbessern wir die Benutzer- und Wissenschaftsfreundlichkeit des Bundesarchivs durch die Verkürzung oder die Streichung von Schutzfristen. Gerade das wird positive Auswirkungen auf die Forschung haben.\n\nNur ein Beispiel: In letzter Zeit wird vermehrt über die Weiterbeschäftigung von Nationalsozialisten in der damals noch jungen Bundesrepublik diskutiert. Viele Akten können durch die Verkürzung der Schutzfristen nun deutlich früher eingesehen werden. Das erleichtert die Aufarbeitung, und mit Sicherheit kommt so auch einiges früher ans Licht.\n\nEs ist richtig, dass das vorliegende Gesetz keine Maximalanforderungen erfüllt. Es bringt nicht alles, was man sich wünschen könnte. Dem steht an einigen Stellen der Datenschutz im Weg. An anderer Stelle geht es darum, das System praktikabel zu halten.\n\nIch finde aber, dass das neue Bundesarchivgesetz uns einen guten Schritt voranbringt. Es ist ein fairer Kompromiss und ein Gewinn. Das Bundesarchiv ist für unsere gesamte Gesellschaft eine Art Kultur- und Gedächtnisgoldgrube. Wir sind eine Kulturnation, und wir sichern das, was uns jetzt ausmacht, für die, die nach uns kommen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n66,peter-weiß,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Lassen Sie uns zum Abschluss dieser Debatte doch einmal zurückschauen, woher wir kommen. Vor vier Jahren hatten wir einen Rentenversicherungsbeitrag von 19,9 Prozent. Diesen haben wir in den vergangenen vier Jahren um insgesamt 1 Prozentpunkt auf heute 18,9 Prozent absenken können.\n\nWir werden in dieser Legislaturperiode, so alle Prognosen, diesen Beitrag weiter stabil bei 18,9 Prozent halten können.\n\nGleichzeitig werden wir zum Ende dieses Jahres in der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung voraussichtlich eine Rücklage - sprich: ein Guthaben - von über 31 Milliarden Euro haben, die höchste Rücklage seit über zwanzig Jahren. Man kann überall, in jeder Debatte, ein Haar in der Suppe finden; aber ich meine, wir können eigentlich doch stolz darauf sein, dass wir in der Rentenversicherung einen relativ niedrigen Beitrag und gleichzeitig die höchsten Rücklagen seit über zwanzig Jahren haben.\n\nDas verdanken wir einer gut laufenden Wirtschaft, gut laufenden Unternehmen und einer wachsenden Zahl von Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern, die mit einem guten Lohn auch gute Sozialversicherungsbeiträge bezahlen. Wenn es ein Ziel zu Beginn einer neuen Legislaturperiode gibt, das uns einen sollte, dann sollte es das sein, diese gute Entwicklung auf dem Arbeitsmarkt, in der Wirtschaft weiter zu beflügeln, damit unsere Rentenversicherung, der Kern des deutschen Sozialstaates, auch in Zukunft gut finanziert ist, nicht ins Minus läuft und trotzdem die Beiträge für die Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer und die Unternehmen stabil bleiben. Das muss unser gemeinsames Ziel sein.\n\nVerehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich finde es richtig und auch notwendig, dass wir in einer solch guten Situation, in der wir uns befinden, die Handlungsmöglichkeiten nutzen, um allfällig notwendige Reformen im Rentenrecht durchzuführen. Dazu gehört, dass wir die Leistung derjenigen, die die Zukunft der Rentenversicherung gewährleisten, indem sie Kinder großziehen, in der Rente besser bewerten. Dafür war es höchste Zeit. Wir haben verabredet, das jetzt endlich zu machen.\n\nDer zweite Punkt. Gerade Menschen, die wegen Krankheit oder einem Unfall vorzeitig aus dem Erwerbsleben ausscheiden müssen und die liebend gerne länger gearbeitet hätten, sind heute in der Gefahr, dass sie mit der Erwerbsminderungsrente, die sie erhalten, nicht auskommen können.\n\nBereits 10 Prozent der Rentner in Deutschland, die Erwerbsminderungsrente erhalten, müssen ergänzend Grundsicherung beziehen. Deswegen ist es richtig, dass wir die Handlungsmöglichkeiten nutzen, durch ein besseres Berechnungsverfahren dafür zu sorgen, dass auch jemand, der vorzeitig wegen Krankheit oder Unfall aus dem Erwerbsleben ausscheiden muss, eine Rente erhält, die ihn möglichst nicht dazu zwingt, um zusätzliche staatliche Stütze anstehen zu müssen.\n\nJa, bitte schön.\n\nFrau Kollegin Andreae, Frau Bundesministerin von der Leyen hat in ihrer Rede bereits darauf hingewiesen, dass die gesetzliche Rentenversicherung schon heute in einem hohen Maß, nämlich zu einem Drittel ihrer Ausgaben, aus Steuermitteln finanziert ist.\n\nDas heißt, die Beiträge der Beitragszahlerinnen und Beitragszahler bestreiten nur zwei Drittel der jährlichen Ausgaben; ein Drittel kommt aus den Steuermitteln.\n\n- Frau Ferner, dieser Betrag ist mehr als das, was wir für sogenannte versicherungsfremde Leistungen aus der Rentenversicherung ausgeben.\n\nIch komme zu einem zweiten Punkt und möchte das, was die Frau Ministerin bereits vorgetragen hat, wiederholen: Es ist verabredet, dass ein zusätzlicher Bundeszuschuss in Höhe von 2 Milliarden Euro hinzukommen soll, um den Beitrag des Bundes zur Stabilisierung des Rentenniveaus und zur Stabilisierung des Rentenbeitragssatzes auch in Zukunft zu gewährleisten.\n\nIch finde: Zusammengerechnet ist es eine großartige Leistung, die wir aus dem Steueraufkommen erbringen. Das macht es uns möglich, die Leistungen so auszugestalten, wie wir es im Koalitionsvertrag miteinander verabredet haben.\n\nWeil wir hier über den Beitragssatz diskutieren und weil Sie, Frau Kollegin Andreae, sich als mittelstandspolitische Sprecherin der Grünen gern bei Unternehmen in unserem Lande aufhalten,\n\nmöchte ich eines sagen: Für die Unternehmer in unserem Land ist eine Beitragssatzstabilität das Allerwichtigste, sodass sie wissen: Ich muss nicht mit Sprüngen nach unten oder nach oben rechnen, sondern kann stabil kalkulieren.\n\nWürden wir den Beitragssatz jetzt senken, dann wäre klar, dass er in wenigen Jahren wieder deutlich nach oben gehen würde. Deswegen ist alles, was wir tun, einem Ziel verpflichtet: der Beitragssatzstabilität für die Unternehmen und für die Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer in Deutschland.\n\nUnsere Bundeskanzlerin hat gestern bei der Vorstellung des Koalitionsvertrages erklärt, dass es bei erfolgreicher Umsetzung dieses Koalitionsvertrages eine gute Chance gibt, dass es uns in vier Jahren, also 2017, besser gehen wird als heute. Diese Botschaft gilt uneingeschränkt auch für die Rentenpolitik. Ja, wir wollen für stabile Beiträge, eine ausreichende Finanzierung, Rücklagen in der Rentenversicherung und dort, wo es notwendig ist, für rentenpolitische Verbesserungen sorgen, damit es den Menschen 2017 besser geht als heute.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13297,peter-tauber,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen! Meine Herren! Herr Kollege Beck, wenn es an der Stelle einen zentralen Unterschied zwischen Ihnen und uns gibt - es gibt ja viele Unterschiede zwischen Ihnen und uns und Gott sei Dank zwischen Ihnen und mir auch -, dann ist es der, dass das Staatsbürgerschaftsrecht für die Union keine religiöse Frage ist. Sie haben es zu einer solchen gemacht und es damit völlig überhöht.\n\nMan könnte antworten: Gebt des Kaisers, was des Kaisers ist.\n\nWir reden über eine ganz sachliche Frage,\n\nnämlich über die Frage, nach welchen Rechtsnormen man Teil eines Staatsvolkes ist. Die CDU hat - das freut mich an der Stelle - auf ihrem Parteitag über diese Frage gestritten und an einer Stelle etwas bestätigt, was unsere Grundhaltung vorher war und auch jetzt ist, nämlich dass wir die generelle doppelte Staatsbürgerschaft nicht für richtig halten.\n\nWir haben Regelungen für Bürger der Europäischen Union, und wir haben in der Großen Koalition, wie ich finde, jetzt eine Regelung gefunden, die auch wir in dieser Koalition nicht infrage stellen, nämlich junge Menschen, die in Deutschland geboren werden,\n\nnicht vor die Entscheidung zu stellen, zwischen dem Land ihrer Väter und ihrem Vaterland wählen zu müssen.\n\nDiese Regelung halte ich in der Tat auch für klug.\n\nTrotzdem - und das ist ein zweiter wesentlicher Unterschied zwischen Ihnen und uns in der Debatte - sind wir der Überzeugung, dass man die Frage von Identität, Loyalität und auch Zusammengehörigkeitsgefühl nicht allein an einem Stück Papier festmachen kann.\n\nDeswegen springt man auch zu kurz, wenn man sich festlegen soll, ob man für oder gegen die doppelte Staatsbürgerschaft ist.\n\nDenn in der Vergangenheit haben wir gelernt, dass die Option nicht dazu geführt hat, dass jeder, der sich für den deutschen Pass entschieden hat, sich auch als Bürger dieses Landes fühlt.\n\nOb die Regelung, die wir gefunden haben und die jetzt gilt, in Zukunft einen anderen Effekt haben wird, müssen wir uns erst anschauen.\n\nOb der Wegfall der Option dazu führt, dass es eine stärkere Identifizierung bei denen, die dann zwei Staatsbürgerschaften haben, gibt, bleibt, glaube ich, offen.\n\n- Lieber Herr Beck, weil Sie immer dazwischenrufen: Wenn Sie zuhören würden, würden Sie vielleicht selbst in Ihrem Alter noch etwas lernen.\n\n- Ich habe Ihnen sehr aufmerksam zugehört, und das fiel sehr schwer, lieber Herr Beck.\n\nUnser Parteitag hat - da zeigt sich der dritte große Unterschied zwischen Ihnen und uns - eine große Überschrift gehabt. Wir haben gesagt: „Unsere Werte. Unsere Zukunft.“, darum geht es.\n\nSie aber verteilen Papiere und verleugnen Werte. Auf der Basis von Werten und nicht auf der Basis eines Stücks Papier entstehen Zusammengehörigkeitsgefühl und Identität.\n\nWenn Sie sagen, dass, wenn Menschen, die hier leben, kein Deutsch können, wir halt ihre Sprache lernen müssen,\n\ndann ist das das falsche Signal.\n\nWenn aus Ihren Reihen Menschen kommen und sagen: „Ach, wir könnten jemanden beschweren. Darum nennen wir den Martinsumzug nicht mehr Martinsumzug, sondern Sonne-Mond-und-Sterne-Umzug“, dann ist das das falsche Signal.\n\nWenn man Weihnachtsmärkte in Lichtermärkte oder Lichterfeste umbenennt, dann ist das ebenfalls das falsche Signal.\n\nWissen Sie, was ich noch bemerkenswerter finde? Diese Vorschläge kommen nie von Menschen, die nach Deutschland eingewandert sind, sondern immer nur aus dem linken politischen Spektrum,\n\nweil Sie in Wahrheit mit der eigenen Geschichte und den Traditionen dieses Landes nicht viel am Hut haben.\n\nMan kann also die linke Politik dieses Hauses in einem kurzen Satz zusammenfassen: Fahne doof, Hymne doof, Sprache doof. - Das ist Ihr Bild von Deutschland.\n\nIch muss Ihnen ehrlich sagen: Ich glaube nicht, dass wir auf dieser Basis Menschen dafür begeistern, sich stolz Bürger dieses Landes zu nennen, egal woher die Eltern kommen.\n\nDer entscheidende Punkt ist: Es braucht ein Bekenntnis zu diesem Land, zu seinen Werten und Überzeugungen, zu seiner Geschichte, auch zu diesen drei Farben Schwarz, Rot, Gold.\n\nDeswegen reicht es nicht, nur die Frage zu stellen: Hat jemand zwei Pässe oder nicht? Man muss die Frage stellen: Was fühlt er?\n\n- Ich war nie kaisertreu, Herr Röspel, im Gegensatz zu Ihnen.\n\n- Entschuldigung: Sie tragen die rote Fahne, nicht ich. Ich trage nur Schwarz- Rot-Gold. Ich habe keine andere Fahne.\n\nInsofern brauchen wir an dieser Stelle von Ihnen keine Nachhilfe.\n\nWir haben ein Gesetz zur Integrationspflicht auf den Weg gebracht. Wir laden Menschen ein, dieses Land zu ihrem eigenen zu machen. Ob man dies tut, ist die entscheidende Frage, die man beantworten muss.\n\nLieber Herr Beck, Sie haben Ihre Rede mit einer wunderschönen Stelle aus der Heiligen Schrift begonnen. Deswegen rufe ich Ihnen am Ende meiner Rede zu: Bleiben Sie fröhlich - schöne Weihnachten!\"\n8464,matthias-gastel,\"Frau Präsidentin, vielen Dank. - Herr Staatssekretär, besonders verwundert war ich über Ihren ersten Versuch, eine Antwort zu geben, als Sie nämlich auf die Frage von Kollege Kühn gesagt haben, es werde noch entschieden, ob und, wenn ja, welcher Handlungsbedarf überhaupt bestehe. Vor allem dieses „ob“ irritiert mich doch gewaltig.\n\nIrritiert es Sie nicht, dass ausgerechnet der ADAC sehr klare Konsequenzen aus dem Abgasskandal ziehen möchte und auch konkret formuliert, welche Konsequenzen gezogen werden sollen? Er sagt: strenge Grenzwerte, strenge Kontrollen, auf der Straße müsse geprüft werden, niedriger Korrekturfaktor. Der ADAC macht das natürlich nicht selbstlos, sondern er macht es aus der Angst heraus, dass dann, wenn Sie nicht handeln, Fahrverbote in den Städten drohen, in denen die Grenzwerte seit langer Zeit deutlich und gesundheitsgefährdend überschritten werden. Sehen Sie nicht ebenfalls wie der ADAC die Gefahr, dass Fahrverbote kommen werden, wenn Sie mit dem Handeln zu lange warten?\n\nKönnen wir etwas Neues und Konkretes von Ihnen erfahren, Herr Staatssekretär?\n\nWenn Sie gefragt werden, wie denn die Bundesregierung diese Vorgänge um die Manipulationen aufklären möchte, dann verweisen Sie immer wieder auf eine Kommission, die vom BMVI eingerichtet worden ist. Jetzt verraten Sie uns doch bitte einmal, wie sich diese Kommission zusammensetzt, welchen Auftrag und welche Kompetenzen sie hat und wie oft sie bisher schon getagt hat.\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Herr Barthle, ich habe an Sie folgende Frage: Auf eine Nachfrage meiner Kollegin Verlinden nach dem Einsparziel der Bundesregierung in Sachen CO2 haben Sie geantwortet, die Bundesregierung schnüre ein ganzes Bündel an Maßnahmen, um dieses Ziel zu erreichen. Ein Bündel an Maßnahmen kann erst dann entstehen, wenn es mehrere Maßnahmen gibt. Ich kann aber keine Maßnahmen erkennen, aus denen ein Bündel geschnürt werden könnte.\n\nSie haben ferner gesagt, dass Sie die Dekarbonisierung voranbringen wollen. Tatsächlich sind Sie in Sachen Elektromobilität aber krachend gescheitert; denn Ihr Ziel, 1 Million Elektroautos auf die Straße zu bringen, haben Sie ganz offensichtlich eindeutig verfehlt. Sie sind weit hinter Ihrem Ziel zurück. Ich glaube, Sie verfolgen es gar nicht mehr. Wie wollen Sie dieses Ziel der Dekarbonisierung erreichen, und wie soll dieses Bündel an Maßnahmen, von dem Sie gesprochen haben, aussehen?\n\nDas ist natürlich eine super Antwort.\n\nIch habe mehrere Nachfragen. Deswegen muss ich mir jetzt gut überlegen, welche zwei Nachfragen ich stelle.\n\nGenau. - Meine erste Frage ist: Steht nach Erkenntnis der Bundesregierung der Inbetriebnahmetermin Herbst 2017?\n\nMeine zweite Nachfrage: Die Deutsche Bahn hat ihre Strecke zum BER und ihren Bahnhof unter dem BER schon vor einiger Zeit fertiggestellt. Logischerweise kann sie dort aber noch keinen Betrieb durchführen. Trotzdem muss sie dort regelmäßig Züge fahren lassen, damit die Metalle, die dort verbaut wurden, nicht rosten, wodurch Kosten entstehen.\n\nDie DB hat jetzt eine Klage gegen die Betreibergesellschaft des Flughafens eingereicht, weil der Bahnhof nicht in Betrieb gehen kann. Was ist dazu die Meinung der Bundesregierung?\"\n10605,oliver-krischer,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Kollegen Kanitz und Oßner, Sie haben in Ihren Reden Risiken verharmlost und die Errungenschaften der Atomkraft hochgelobt.\n\nAm 30. Jahrestag von Tschernobyl habe ich fast das Gefühl, dass nun noch eine Forderung nach Laufzeitverlängerung kommt. Sie sind noch immer nicht im Nachatomkraftzeitalter angekommen.\n\nWer hier solche Reden hält, hat die Lehren aus Tschernobyl und Fukushima nicht verstanden; aber das gehört dazu.\n\nMan muss gar nicht weit schauen und nur an die Westgrenze unserer Republik, nach Belgien gehen. Genau zum Jahrestag von Tschernobyl hat die Regierung von Belgien angekündigt, dass sie nun flächendeckend Jodtabletten verteilen lässt. Die Regierung von Belgien weiß offensichtlich, warum sie das tut. Dort werden nämlich Atomkraftwerke betrieben, deren Weiterbetrieb unverantwortlich ist. Diese Atomkraftwerke gehören genauso abgeschaltet wie die Atomkraftwerke in Cattenom, Fessenheim, Beznau und Temelin.\n\nIch finde es richtig, dass die Städteregion Aachen mit Unterstützung Dutzender Kommunen aus Deutschland, Luxemburg und den Niederlanden sowie mit Unterstützung der Landesregierung von Nordrhein-Westfalen nun gegen Belgien klagt. Da wird Neuland beschritten.\n\nFrau Hendricks, bei aller gebotenen Zurückhaltung anlässlich Ihres Geburtstags finde ich, dass bei Ihrem Engagement gegen die grenznahen AKW-Standorte noch Luft nach oben ist. Ich würde mich freuen, wenn die Bundesregierung die Klage der Städteregion Aachen unterstützen würde. Das wäre das richtige Zeichen.\n\nWir müssen mit unseren Nachbarstaaten darüber reden, wie wir unsere Energiewende auch in diesen Staaten umgesetzt bekommen. Es ist doch verrückt, dass wir in den Niederlanden, in Belgien und Deutschland massenweise Gaskraftwerke haben, deren Kapazitäten nicht genutzt werden und die stillstehen, und gleichzeitig Schrottreaktoren, die Risse aufweisen und deren Betrieb auch nach Einschätzung der Bundesregierung unverantwortlich ist, weiterbetreiben. Es wäre doch Aufgabe dieser Bundesregierung, in den Nachbarstaaten nach Lösungen zu suchen, wie zumindest diese Schrottreaktoren abgeschaltet werden können. Da vernehme ich aber nichts.\n\nDas Problem dieser Bundesregierung ist, dass sie AKWs in Deutschland abschalten - auch wenn man manchmal bei ihren Reden daran zweifeln kann -, aber den Atomausstieg nicht ins Ausland tragen will. Da gibt es in Ihrem Antrag einen verräterischen Satz.\n\nEr lautet, Deutschland könnte für die Energiewende im Ausland werben. Nein, meine Damen und Herren von der Großen Koalition, Deutschland muss für die Energiewende im Ausland werben.\n\nDas ist die notwendige Konsequenz aus 30 Jahren Tschernobyl und fünf Jahren Fukushima. Nur wenn Sie das tun, ist das, was Sie hier machen, auch authentisch.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n9140,ute-finckh-kramer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer oben auf den Tribünen! Als ich die beiden Anträge, über die wir jetzt hier diskutieren, gelesen habe, hatte ich das Gefühl, ich habe es kurz vor Weihnachten mit Wunschzetteln ohne Priorisierung und ohne Überlegungen dazu zu tun,\n\nwie sich die verschiedenen Forderungen eigentlich zueinander verhalten und wie sie in endlicher Zeit umsetzbar sind. Aus meiner Sicht wäre weniger mehr gewesen.\n\nIch möchte mit einer Situation beginnen, die uns allen vertraut klingt: eine gescheiterte Revolution in mehreren nebeneinander liegenden Ländern. Die Regierungen setzen Militär gegen die Revolutionäre ein. Viele von ihnen fliehen in Nachbarländer, um einer politischen Verfolgung zu entgehen, und dann, als die Repression in ihren Heimatländern anhält, weiter in ein Land, das seine Grenzen für diese Menschen weit öffnet. Viele von ihnen sind akademisch gebildet, stammen aus wohlhabenden Familien und integrieren sich schnell in die aufnehmende Gesellschaft. „Wo Freiheit ist, ist Heimat“ ist ihr Grundsatz. Wer die Staatsbürgerschaft des neuen Heimatlandes erhält, mischt sich als Demokrat kräftig in die Politik ein. Einer von ihnen wird Innenminister.\n\nSpätestens hier ist klar, dass es nicht um den Arabischen Frühling geht, sondern um ein historisches Beispiel. Die Rede ist von der gescheiterten Revolution 1848 in Deutschland. Das Zielland waren die USA. Der bekannteste 48er, wie sie bis heute genannt werden, der Innenminister wurde, war Carl Schurz. Wenn man Texte über ihn liest, wird er nicht als Flüchtling, sondern aus deutscher Perspektive als „Auswanderer“ oder aus US-amerikanischer Perspektive als „Einwanderer“ bezeichnet. Nach heutigen Kriterien wären die 48er eindeutig politische Flüchtlinge. Einen Teil des demokratischen Denkens, das sie mit in die USA genommen haben, haben wir im 20. Jahrhundert im Dialog mit den USA zurückbekommen.\n\nDas Deutsche Institut für Entwicklungspolitik hat gerade eine kompakte Stellungnahme dazu vorgelegt, was Entwicklungspolitik zur Bekämpfung von Fluchtursachen beitragen kann. Dabei wird - das ist für unsere Diskussion wichtig - folgende Definition von Flucht zugrunde gelegt. Danach\n\nist Flucht eine Reaktion auf eine Bedrohung der physischen oder psychischen Integrität, die durch Krieg und Bürgerkrieg, Terror, Gewalt, Repression, Nahrungsmangel oder Naturkatastrophen verursacht werden kann.\n\nDer Begriff wird gegen den Begriff der Migration oder der Aus- und Einwanderung, wie es früher hieß, abgegrenzt:\n\nAuch wenn die Abgrenzung zu Flucht nicht immer eindeutig ist, sollte man von Migration sprechen, wenn Menschen gezielt außerhalb ihrer Heimat nach Möglichkeiten suchen, um ihre sozioökonomischen Lebensbedingungen zu verbessern.\n\nIch bin dem Deutschen Institut für Entwicklungspolitik außerordentlich dankbar dafür, dass es eine klare Definition von Flucht in die aktuelle Debatte um Fluchtursachen einbringt. Denn leider vermischen die vorliegenden Anträge Flucht und Migration und damit auch die Frage nach Flucht- und Migrationsgründen.\n\nUnsere Debatte darüber, wie wir kurz-, mittel- und langfristig die Zahl der Flüchtlinge, aber nicht unbedingt die Zahl der Migranten weltweit verringern können, gewinnt an Schärfe und wird erschwert, wenn wir die Begriffe nicht klar definieren.\n\nDie meisten Flüchtlinge und intern vertriebenen Menschen kommen aus Regionen, in denen Krieg und Bürgerkrieg herrschen. Sie hoffen auf ein Ende der Gewalt und eine Rückkehr in ihre Heimat. Daher bleiben die meisten im eigenen Land oder in der Region. Um ihnen kurzfristig zu helfen, gibt es drei wichtige Ansätze, und dabei spielt Außenpolitik eine große Rolle.\n\nEin Ansatz ist die Unterstützung von Waffenstillstands- und Friedensprozessen. In der Ukraine und in Libyen ist Deutschland sehr aktiv dabei, solche Waffenstillstandsprozesse als Voraussetzung für Friedensprozesse zu unterstützen. Auch in Syrien und im Irak spielt Deutschland zumindest auch eine wichtige diplomatische Rolle, unabhängig davon, wie der einzelne oder die einzelne von uns über die Militäreinsätze und die Unterstützung durch Waffenlieferungen in den Irak denkt.\n\nDer zweite wichtige Punkt - das ist schon angesprochen worden und kommt auch in beiden Anträgen vor - ist die humanitäre Hilfe für die Flüchtlinge. Da hat Deutschland nicht nur die eigenen Mittel im Bundeshaushalt 2016 deutlich erhöht, sondern Deutschland ist auch immer wieder Gastgeber für Geberkonferenzen und bemüht sich darum, dass andere Staaten oder die EU unserem Beispiel folgen.\n\nDie Unterstützung der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung der Aufnahmeregionen in einer Form, die den Flüchtlingen und den Aufnahmegemeinden gleichermaßen zugutekommt, wird wiederum nicht nur von der Bundesregierung, also überwiegend vom BMZ, betrieben, sondern auch Kulturinstitutionen, Nichtregierungsorganisationen oder Landesregierungen sind dort aktiv, ganz aktuell die baden-württembergische Landesregierung mit einem Projekt für die Region Dohuk im Nordirak oder das Deutsche Archäologische Institut, das in Zusammenarbeit mit jordanischen Einrichtungen Qualifizierungsmaßnahmen für syrische Flüchtlinge in den Bereichen Restaurierung und Konservierung anbietet, und zwar in Zusammenarbeit mit jordanischen Handwerkern. Dieses Projekt wird aus Mitteln des Auswärtigen Amtes finanziert.\n\nMittelfristig brauchen wir keine Liste von Einzelmaßnahmen, sondern einen umfassenden Neuansatz für die Regionen, aus denen Flüchtlinge stammen. Dazu bedarf es eines internationalen Ansatzes, in dem alle, die irgendetwas dazu beitragen können - von internationalen Organisationen bis zur Zivilgesellschaft in den entsprechenden Ländern -, beteiligt werden. Es werden aber nicht nur demokratische und aus unserer Sicht vollakzeptable Gesprächspartner dabei sein können, sondern wir werden auch mit Regimen wie dem von Saudi-Arabien und des Iran verhandeln müssen - im Interesse der Menschen, die von Krieg und Bürgerkrieg betroffen sind.\n\nDanke.\"\n9991,friedrich-ostendorff,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Seit über vier Jahren ist Deutschland als europäischer Tabellenletzter gefordert, die Nichteinhaltung der EU-Nitratvorgaben abzustellen.\n\nVor allen Dingen die massierte Schweinehaltung mit den hohen Güllemengen ist der Hauptverursacher der hohen Nitratwerte.\n\nDie Trinkwasserkunden erwarten, dass der Minister die Probleme nicht länger aussitzt, sondern endlich reagiert.\n\nNachdem Minister Schmidt vollmundig erst für Weihnachten 2014 und dann für Weihnachten 2015 das Düngegesetz angekündigt hatte, liegt es nun seit Dienstag völlig abrupt und überraschend auf dem Tisch, um die für heute drohende Einleitung der Klage in Brüssel abzuwenden. Anscheinend wurde sie aber in Brüssel wieder vertagt, und zwar für eine Woche, wie wir gehört haben.\n\nDie grün mitregierten Länder haben den vorliegende Gesetzentwurf tatkräftig erkämpft. Wir sehen trotzdem die Gefahr, dass Sie von der CDU/CSU alles versuchen werden, ihn vor der Bundestagswahl nicht mehr zu beschließen.\n\nDen Schweinemästern wurde immer wieder signalisiert: Die Trias Minister Schmidt, Ministerpräsident Seehofer und Bauernverband wird es schon verhindern. Der Minister hat zwar die Partitur schreiben lassen, aber der Dirigent des Verfahrens sitzt in München und heißt Seehofer. Lassen Sie sich doch nicht länger von den Blockaden aus Bayern ausbremsen, Herr Minister Schmidt. Wenn sich die Bayern einmauern wollen, dann wollen wir sie dabei nicht aufhalten. Aber wir Grüne sind bereit, über Asyl für sie zu sprechen.\n\nDie Menschen sind nicht mehr bereit, mit ihrer Wasserrechnung die Exzesse und Sünden einer falschen industriellen Tierhaltung zu bezahlen. Sie erwarten auch in den viehdichten Regionen sauberes Trinkwasser. Trinkwasser ist Allgemeingut. Niemand hat das Recht, es zu verschmutzen, auch nicht mit Gülle.\n\nUm genau zu erfassen, wie viele Nährstoffe einen landwirtschaftlichen Betrieb verlassen und auf die Flächen gelangen, brauchen wir mindestens in den roten Gebieten, den sogenannten Hotspots, die Hoftorbilanz.\n\nDas sind Gebiete mit besonders hoher Viehdichte und folglich besonders hoher Nitratbelastung. Darin sind sich alle Beiräte der Bundesregierung einig. Die Länder brauchen endlich für wirksame Kontrollen den Zugriff auf die Nutzung der Daten, die zum Beispiel von InVeKos, dem Datensystem der Landwirtschaft für die Flächenanträge, und der Tierseuchenkasse erhoben werden, um festzustellen, wo die Gülleseen verbracht werden, und wo wie viele Tiere in den Ställen stehen. Ohne diese Daten kann eine wirksame Kontrolle nicht funktionieren. Ohne Datenabgleich lassen sich Verstöße und ihre Ursachen nicht feststellen. Es geht um die schwarzen Schafe. Es geht nicht um die verantwortlich handelnden Bäuerinnen und Bauern, die Tiere und Fläche im Einklang halten.\n\nWollen Sie denn zig Millionen Euro Strafzahlungen aus dem Agrarhaushalt für Ihr Nichtstun aus dem Fenster werfen? Bei Frankreich haben wir erlebt, wie viele Millionen fällig werden, wenn man hier säumig ist. Dieses Geld brauchen wir dringend, um den gebeutelten, notleidenden Milchbäuerinnen und Milchbauern, den Sauenhalterinnen und Sauenhaltern sowie dem gesamten ländlichen Raum zu helfen.\n\nHeute ist die drohende Klage nochmals um eine Woche vertagt worden. Wer weiß, wie lange sich die EU-Kommission noch mit Nichtstun abspeisen lässt. Wir alle wissen es nicht. Stattdessen beschäftigt sich das Ministerium damit, wie man Unbeteiligte zu Tätern stilisiert. Wir fordern Sie auf: Lassen Sie die Verschärfung für die Weidehaltung! Kühe gehören auf die Weide, nicht in den Stall.\n\nLassen Sie doch endlich die durch nichts begründeten Ausbringungssperrfristen für Festmist und Kompost. Damit machen Sie viele bäuerliche Betriebe, die nichts mit dem Nitratproblem zu tun haben, zu Tätern. Festmist und Kompost stellen für die Wasserqualität kein Problem dar. Kümmern Sie sich doch endlich um die wahren Probleme: 28 Millionen Schweine auf zu wenig Fläche, hohe Gülleüberschüsse, die zu hohen Nitratwerten führen, weil die Pflanzen diese Fluten nicht mehr aufnehmen können. Nicht mehr nichts tun und aussitzen! Herr Minister, fangen Sie endlich an, zu regieren! Doch wir Grüne befürchten: Auch das ist wieder vergossene Milch bei Ihnen.\"\n8504,ingo-gadechens,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Geburtstage sind immer schön, besonders runde.\n\nBei den Menschen geht damit einher, dass wir älter werden, der eine oder die andere erfahrener, und hoffentlich werden wir mit jedem Lebensjahr auch ein gut Stück schlauer.\n\nWir begehen heute den 60. Geburtstag unserer Bundeswehr und können sagen: Unsere Streitkräfte sind erwachsen geworden; der heutige Tag gilt als die offizielle Geburtsstunde. Seit ihrer Gründung garantiert sie die Sicherheit Deutschlands und hat sich gleichzeitig zu einer international respektierten Armee entwickelt.\n\nDie Bundeswehr musste sich in den vergangenen sechs Jahrzehnten immer wieder auf neue Sicherheitslagen einstellen und vielfältige Aufgaben bewältigen. Sie hat den Wandel - wir hörten es - von einer reinen Verteidigungsarmee über die Armee der Einheit zur Armee im Einsatz vollzogen und sich dabei international bewährt.\n\nAuch bei nationalen Katastrophen konnten und können wir uns auf die helfenden Hände der Soldatinnen und Soldaten der Bundeswehr verlassen. Bei dem Thema Katastrophenhilfe erinnere ich mich an meinen eigenen Einsatz als sehr junger Soldat bei der Schneekatastrophe 1978/79, von der meine Heimatinsel Fehmarn und ganz Norddeutschland in besonderer Weise betroffen waren.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir begehen heute den 60. Jahrestag der Gründung der Bundeswehr. Dies ist für mich auch Teil einer sehr persönlich erlebten Geschichte. Über 30 Jahre, also mehr als die Hälfte dieser Zeit, diente ich in dieser unserer Bundeswehr. Meine Zeit als Berufssoldat hat mich nicht nur erfüllt, sondern mir persönlich auch viel gegeben. Sie hat mich geprägt und auch ein Stück weit zu dem Menschen werden lassen, der ich heute bin.\n\nDer Soldatenberuf ist kein Beruf wie jeder andere. Er ist viel weniger Beruf als vielmehr Berufung. Meine Dienstzeit war prägend, weil ich mit meinen Kameraden in vielen Bereichen an Leistungsgrenzen herangeführt wurde, und dabei habe ich schnell erkannt, dass es in der Bundeswehr zwar durchaus Einzelkämpfer gibt, Teamgeist und Teamarbeit aber grundsätzlich schneller und besser zum Erfolg führen.\n\nIn meiner Dienstzeit habe ich Kameradschaft erleben dürfen, die so in unserer Gesellschaft nur noch sehr selten erlebbar ist. Dafür bin ich heute noch überaus dankbar.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es ist nicht nur sehr komfortabel, in einer Demokratie wie unserer leben zu dürfen, es ist auch wichtig, zu erkennen, dass man zur Sicherung unserer Werte und unserer freiheitlichen Grundordnung etwas leisten muss. Viele Soldatengenerationen folgten und folgen dem Ruf: „Tu was für dein Land“. Alle haben einen aktiven Beitrag zur Sicherung unserer Demokratie geleistet. Mit ihrem Eid haben sie sich verpflichtet, der Bundesrepublik Deutschland treu zu dienen und das Recht und die Freiheit des deutschen Volkes tapfer zu verteidigen.\n\nDer Soldatenberuf ist somit kein Beruf wie jeder andere. 180 000 Kameradinnen und Kameraden haben sich derzeit an diesen Eid gebunden und dienen heute gemeinsam mit weit über 70 000 Zivilangestellten, um Deutschlands Sicherheit zu gewährleisten.\n\nJede Soldatin und jeder Soldat ist bereit, im schlimmsten Fall sein Leben für unser Land und unsere Sicherheit zu riskieren. Deshalb haben unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten auch nicht nur die Anerkennung der deutschen Bevölkerung, sondern auch die uneingeschränkte Hochachtung unserer ganzen Gesellschaft mehr als verdient.\n\nEine erfolgreiche Sicherheitspolitik mit der Bundeswehr kann nur gelingen, wenn das Volk hinter den Bundeswehrsoldaten steht. Es geht gerade auch um die positive geistige Haltung des Volkes zu seinen Streitkräften.\n\nTatsächlich verfolgt ein Teil der Gesellschaft in Deutschland die Einsätze der Bundeswehr leider nur mit freundlichem Desinteresse. Deshalb werbe ich als Abgeordneter unermüdlich dafür, dass sich der Geist, mit dem wir als Bürger der Bundeswehr gegenübertreten, ein gut Stück ändert. Die Bundeswehr gehört - das ist die feste Meinung meiner Fraktion, der CDU/CSU - in die Mitte unserer Gesellschaft. Sie gehört an die Schulen, an die Hochschulen, in die Universitäten und auf öffentliche Plätze, wie gestern hier vor dem Reichstagsgebäude.\n\n„Unsere Soldaten“: Das sagt sich leicht. Das heißt aber auch, wir müssen Anteil an ihren Leistungen, an ihren Ängsten und an ihren Sorgen und Nöten nehmen. Wir müssen viel mehr öffentliche Debatten über Einsätze der Bundeswehr führen. Und wir sind aufgefordert, uns noch mehr um unsere Soldaten, aber auch um die Familienangehörigen zu kümmern, die diesen besonderen Dienst an unserem Land auf ihre Weise mittragen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, als ich vor mehr als 30 Jahren meinen Dienst in der damaligen Bundesmarine antrat, die sich heute „Deutsche Marine“ nennt, war die Bundeswehr noch eine reine Verteidigungsarmee. Die Entwicklung der Bundeswehr zu einer weltweit operierenden Einsatzarmee war und ist unausweichliche Folge der derzeitigen Konflikte und Kriege, welche teils direkt an Europas Grenzen stattfinden. Wir sehen an der aktuellen Flüchtlingskrise, wie die Folgen dieser Konflikte auch dramatische Auswirkungen in Europa und gerade hier in Deutschland haben. Die internationale Staatengemeinschaft erwartet, dass sich Deutschland auch militärisch einbringt.\n\nDie hohe Motivation unserer Soldatinnen und Soldaten ist auch dem Selbstverständnis der Bundeswehr geschuldet: „Wir. Dienen. Deutschland.“ Dieses Selbstverständnis galt schon zu meiner Dienstzeit.\n\nNach wie vor gilt das zentrale Leitbild des Staatsbürgers in Uniform: Bürger dienen in der Bundeswehr Bürgern. Die Bundeswehr gründet ebenfalls auf dem Prinzip der Inneren Führung. Diese Art der Führung, die unsere Soldaten von Beginn an verinnerlichen, beantwortet Fragen nach Sicherung der Grundrechte des Soldaten und setzt notwendige militärische Erfordernisse in ein vernünftiges Verhältnis dazu. Beide Prinzipien hat die Bundeswehr verinnerlicht, und beide haben ihr Selbstverständnis geprägt.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, als ehemaliger Berufssoldat ist es mir jetzt als Abgeordneten besonders wichtig, immer wieder mit jungen Kameradinnen und Kameraden ins Gespräch zu kommen. Ich bin stets tief beeindruckt von ihrer Ernsthaftigkeit, von ihrem Selbstbewusstsein, von ihrem Pflichtgefühl und von ihrer Verbundenheit mit unserem Land und seinen Werten, aber auch von ihrer Gelassenheit in Kenntnis aller Risiken. Sie sind sich der Gefahren bewusst, dabei voller Mut und Zuversicht. All das gibt uns die Gewissheit: Wir können uns auf unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten, wir können uns auf unsere Bundeswehr verlassen.\n\nHerzlichen Glückwunsch deutsche Bundeswehr!\"\n14297,johanna-wanka,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Am Mittwoch, also vorgestern, war Weltwassertag, ein Tag, der uns daran erinnern soll - und erinnert hat -, dass als sechstes Nachhaltigkeitsziel der Vereinten Nationen angestrebt wird, dass alle Menschen auf der Welt sauberes Trinkwasser haben. Das ist eine gigantische Aufgabe. Wenn man sich die Zahlen anschaut, weiß man, wie schlimm es darum bestellt ist. Eine solche Aufgabe kann man nur international, in Kooperation, lösen.\n\nIch will das große Projekt der Bundesregierung zum Wasserressourcenmanagement in Jordanien als Beispiel nennen. Es handelt sich um eine Region mit sehr wenig Wasser und großen Problemen. In diesem Projekt arbeiten jordanische, deutsche, palästinensische und israelische Wissenschaftler, Wirtschaftsvertreter, NGO-Vertreter und Behördenvertreter zusammen. Dort geht es auch um Brücken zwischen Ländern und Menschen, die sonst kaum miteinander reden.\n\nIch bleibe beim Thema Wasser. Wir haben in Deutschland zu diesem Thema eine hohe Expertise, Frau Hein, weil wir seit Jahren Grundlagenforschung betreiben. Unsere Expertise ist gefragt. Wasserprojekte gibt es in Israel, Indien, Afrika und China. Das heißt, die Lösung der globalen Probleme gehen wir an. Wer kommt denn auf die Idee, zu sagen, wir machen keine Grundlagenforschung? Genau das machen wir. Wir machen aber nicht nur Grundlagenforschung. Vielmehr versuchen wir auch, direkt die Lebensbedingungen der Menschen in den jeweiligen Regionen positiv zu beeinflussen, zum Beispiel mit den beiden Klimainitiativen SASSCAL im südlichen Afrika und WASCAL im westlichen Afrika, dem Forschungsnetzwerk zu Gesundheitsinnovationen in Afrika, oder der PRIMA-Initiative, bei der es um den Mittelmeerraum geht. In diesem Bereich gehören wir zu den Ländern, die sich weltweit am stärksten engagieren.\n\n- Danke schön, Herr Rossmann.\n\nFrau Hein, Sie haben die Formulierung gewählt: Fusionsforschung kostet viel Geld. - Dazu kann ich nur sagen: Das ist ein Egoismus sondergleichen. Da wird mir schlecht.\n\nNatürlich kommen wir in Deutschland damit aus, unsere Energie aus Kohle - und was weiß ich nicht noch - zu beziehen, und das auch noch in 30 Jahren.\n\nAber das gilt nicht für die Megacitys der Welt.\n\nWir müssen dort forschen. Die Länder können es zum Teil nicht. Aber gerade deswegen ist das international und nicht egoistisch. Es ist genau das Gegenteil von egoistisch.\n\nIch würde gern erst einmal zu Ende reden. - FONA ist das große Programm für nachhaltige Entwicklung. Mit 2,1 Milliarden Euro werden dort beträchtliche Summen eingesetzt. Ich habe mir den Antrag von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen angeschaut. Das, was Sie fordern, machen wir schon. Man kann natürlich immer noch mehr verlangen. Noch mehr ist immer gut, aber das ist nicht das Problem dabei.\n\nDie Bundesregierung hat 2008 erstmals eine Internationalisierungsstrategie entwickelt. Diese Internationalisierungsstrategie hatte vier Schwerpunkte. Der erste: Lösung der globalen Probleme der Welt. Der zweite: Zusammenarbeit mit den Besten und Leistungsstärksten der Welt. Der dritte: international Innovationspotenziale erschließen. Der vierte: Schwellen- und Entwicklungsländer stützen und stärken. Diese Schwerpunkte gelten immer noch, und zwar unvermindert. Das sind ganz entscheidende Ziele.\n\nAber die Welt hat sich gedreht, sie hat sich verändert. Es müssen neue Dinge hinzukommen und neue Schwerpunkte gesetzt werden. Ich will einige wenige nennen.\n\nEin Schwerpunkt ist Europa - den globalen Schwerpunkt habe ich eben genannt - und der europäische Forschungsraum.\n\nWir haben null Chance, wenn wir denken, uns als Deutschland, vielleicht noch mit Frankreich und ein, zwei anderen Ländern zusammen, gegen die großen Zentren in Amerika und in China behaupten zu können. Das geht nur mit einem europäischen Forschungsraum.\n\nWir haben vor kurzem als allererstes Land in Europa eine Strategie vorgelegt, in der wir nicht nur darlegen, wie wir uns vorstellen, was die anderen machen sollen, sondern vor allen Dingen, was wir selbst dazu machen sollen. Es geht gerade darum - da sind wir oft alleine in Europa -,\n\ndass wir uns engagieren. Es geht dabei nicht nur darum, wie viel Geld wir oder andere zurückwollen, sondern darum, wie wir in den Ländern in Europa, die nicht so leistungsstark sind, exzellente Forschung ankurbeln können. Deswegen ist das ganz entscheidend.\n\nDer zweite Punkt: internationale Mobilität. Die Studentenzahlen in diesem Bereich sind bestens. Wie kommen Sie denn auf die Idee, zu behaupten, dass wir in dieser Hinsicht nicht besonders gut seien? Haben Sie sich einmal irgendwelche Zahlen angeschaut?\n\nBei uns gehen 37 Prozent aller Studenten einmal ins Ausland. Die Niederlande, ein kleines und international vernetztes Land, streben in den nächsten Jahren einen Anteil von 20 Prozent an. Wir hingegen marschieren in Richtung 50 Prozent. Wie kann man da sagen, das ist nicht besonders gut? Das ist klasse.\n\nEine Bemerkung zum BAföG. In Ihrem Antrag steht, die Bearbeitungsdauer beim Auslands-BAföG sei zu lange und die armen Studenten müssten einen Vorschuss leisten. Sie wissen - davon gehe ich aus -, dass wir null Einfluss darauf haben und dass das reine Ländersache ist - Sie können Ihre Ministerin fragen -, wie BAföG verwaltet wird. Das heißt, wir können das nicht beeinflussen. Aber wir sehen natürlich, dass die Bearbeitung manchmal zu lange dauert. Deswegen hat die Bundesregierung im BAföG einen Passus verankert, dass wir einen Vorschuss zahlen, wenn die Bearbeitung zu lange dauert. Also: erfolgt, erledigt.\n\nBei der Mobilität geht es uns nicht nur um den Austausch, sondern es geht uns auch immer darum - Beispiel Ukraine -, die Wissenschaft in den Ländern zu stärken, damit die Wissenschaftler nicht alle weggehen, damit sie nur temporär bei uns sind und dann wieder zurückgehen. Oder sie sollen in ihrem Land gestärkt werden. Das ist unsere Strategie. Wir haben einige Programme aufgelegt. Die Philipp-Schwartz-Initiative ist genannt worden; ich nenne jetzt noch: Integra, das Stipendienprogramm Leadership for Syria etc. Wir haben aber auch Maßnahmen mit einem Volumen von 18 Millionen Euro für Integrations- und Migrationsforschung auf den Weg gebracht - der 1. März war Bewerbungsschluss für die aktuelle Ausschreibung -; denn wir brauchen viele Erkenntnisse in diesem Bereich. Auch das läuft.\n\nVorletzter Punkt: Wettbewerbsfähigkeit Deutschlands. Da bin ich bei Jürgen Mlynek. Die Grundvoraussetzung für Wettbewerbsfähigkeit ist Internationalisierung, ganz klar.\n\nDeswegen ist eine Einschränkung auf Wissenschaftseinrichtungen und bilaterale Hochschulabkommen falsch. Die 2+2-Projekte, die Frau Lücking-Michel erwähnt hat, sind richtig, ebenso Spitzencluster im Rahmen der Internationalisierung.\n\nDas heißt auch, Möglichkeiten über wirtschaftliche Kontakte zu nutzen.\n\nDer letzte Punkt. 2008 war die Attraktivität der deutschen Berufsausbildung noch nicht das Thema. Die Wertschätzung dafür ist gestiegen. Kein Mensch glaubt - das finden Sie in keinem Papier -, dass wir das, was wir in Deutschland haben, eins zu eins in irgendein Land übertragen können. Das ist absoluter Blödsinn.\n\nEs geht nur darum, dass wir Elemente, die gut sind, übertragen. Das ist schwierig genug. Der indische Ministerpräsident beispielsweise ist immer noch dafür, die gesamte Ausbildung staatlich zu organisieren, ohne die Wirtschaft.\n\nDas sind Dinge, über die wir diskutieren.\n\nFür die berufliche Bildung in Deutschland ist Folgendes bei Erasmus wichtig: Dieses Programm ist bei vielen Studenten angekommen; das weiß jeder, es machen viele. Wir haben Gelder ohne Ende in der EU; das gilt auch für unseren Teil. Wichtig ist nun, dass wir diejenigen, die in der Berufsausbildung sind, auch ins Ausland schicken,\n\nzum Beispiel nach Italien, wenn sie Koch oder so etwas lernen. Wir müssen das nur noch mehr zur Nutzung bringen. Das Geld ist schließlich da; es ist keine Frage des Geldes.\n\nWas den Transport von guten Elementen angeht, machen wir in diesem Sommer eine neue Förderung: Wir bieten den deutschen Bildungsanbietern, die die entsprechenden Voraussetzungen haben, Unterstützung durch öffentlich-private Partnerschaften an, damit sie in anderen Ländern tätig sein können. Warum denn nicht? Diese Anbieter haben das nötige Know-how, und dieses Betätigungsfeld ist für sie eine Chance. Das funktioniert ab dem Sommer.\n\nEine kleine Nebenbemerkung. ÖPP-Projekte sind nicht per se gut - nein, das kann man nicht sagen -; sie sind aber auch nicht per se schlecht. Ein gutes Beispiel ist natürlich unser Haus. Schauen Sie es sich an: Sein Bau als ÖPP-Projekt blieb sowohl im Zeit- als auch im Kostenplan. Da, wo rote Landesregierungen sind - Stichwort „Flughafen“; kein ÖPP-Projekt -, dauert alles länger.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich glaube, mehr denn je brauchen wir eine freie Wissenschaft. Wissenschaftsfreiheit ist das A und O. Sie ist das wesentliche Element unserer Internationalisierungsstrategie. Wir brauchen eine Wissenschaft, die Grenzen überwindet, die kluge Köpfe verbindet und die international daran arbeitet, die großen Herausforderungen unserer Zeit zu bewältigen. Ich denke, wir haben die Strategie dafür, und wir setzen sie um.\n\nDanke.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Natürlich machen wir das. Natürlich fördern wir jetzt schon in Afrika und an anderer Stelle. Ich will gar nicht über Forschungsfragen im Zusammenhang mit diesen Energien reden; das will ich jetzt gar nicht thematisieren.\n\nAber die Frage „Wann ist Kernfusion einsatzbereit?“ können wir alle nicht genau beantworten. Es dauert auf jeden Fall. Experten sprechen von einem Zeitraum von 30 Jahren. Das ist egal. Ich habe zwei Enkeltöchter. Auch ich bin dafür, dass wir Voraussetzungen dafür schaffen, dass die Welt in Ordnung ist, wenn sie erwachsen sind.\n\nEs ist gerade ein Ausdruck von Deutschlands Größe, dass wir nicht nur auf die kurzfristige Verwertbarkeit schauen. Das zu tun, ist völlig falsch.\n\nDeswegen gilt es, die Grundlagenforschung zu fördern, und dazu gehört die Fusionsforschung.\n\nDas ist ein Gebiet, in dem wir Weltspitze sind. Wenn die Chinesen sagen, sie wollten da jetzt Milliardensummen investieren, stelle ich fest: Wir investieren weniger Geld; aber wir machen es exzellent. Das lasse ich mir nicht unter dem Aspekt „Es passiert nicht gleich morgen“ zerreden.\"\n8563,heribert-hirte,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe verbliebene Zuhörer!\n\nWas lange währt, wird endlich gut. Es wurde schon ein paarmal angesprochen: Hier geht es um die Wiedereinbringung eines Gesetzentwurfs, der als Aktienrechtsnovelle 2011 schon einmal dieses Haus erblickt hatte und dann liegen geblieben ist. Er ist lange gereift; aber das, was übrig geblieben ist, Frau Keul, ist kein „Gerippe“. Das, was hier vorliegt, enthält eine ganze Reihe wichtiger und wesentlicher Änderungen des Aktienrechtes. Diese wesentlichen Änderungen fokussieren zu einem ganz erheblichen Teil auf Fragen der Verbesserung der Eigenkapitalausstattung der deutschen Aktiengesellschaften. Dass es hiermit am Ende nicht ganz so eilig war, wie es am Anfang schien, hängt damit zusammen, dass die Finanz- und Bankenkrise überwunden wurde und wir es mit vielen anderen Maßnahmen geschafft haben, die damit verbundenen Probleme erst einmal in den Griff zu bekommen.\n\nWir fügen jetzt in diesem Bereich ein weiteres Puzzleteil ein. Das ist ein weiterer wichtiger Schritt. Es geht um die Verbesserung der Eigenkapitalausstattung der Unternehmen. Dabei muss man in Erinnerung rufen: Eigenkapital ist, was die Finanzierung von Unternehmen angeht, der Puffer, der die Verluste auffängt, wenn es zu einer Krise kommt. Deshalb ist es wichtig, dass wir hier zur Stärkung des Eigenkapitals beitragen.\n\nWir tun das insbesondere bei Kreditinstituten, bei Banken, und zwar in zwei Bereichen.\n\nZum einen geht es - Kollege Fechner hat es eingangs schon angesprochen - um die Vorzugsaktien ohne Stimmrecht. Solche Aktien kann man ausgeben. Jemand, der ein bisschen mehr Dividende bekommen oder sie ein bisschen schneller bekommen will als andere - wir stellen klar, dass beides möglich ist -, darf nicht abstimmen, wenn die entsprechenden Vorzüge gezahlt wurden. Im Augenblick ist es so: Um ein Aufheben des Stimmrechts zu vermeiden, muss der Vorzug nachgezahlt werden. Die Vorzugsaktien werden dann im Bankenaufsichtsrecht nicht als sogenanntes regulatorisches Eigenkapital angesehen, wie es der Kollege Fechner eben zu Recht bezeichnet hat. Das heißt, hier haben wir - nach unserer Vorstellung - Eigenkapitaltitel, die trotzdem nicht als Bankeigenkapital angesehen werden. Wir ändern das und sagen: Der Vorzug muss nicht mehr nachgezahlt werden. Das ist ein wichtiger Schritt zur Stärkung der Bankenbilanzen.\n\nWir machen in diesem Zusammenhang einen zweiten Schritt, nämlich im Bereich der sogenannten Wandel- und Optionsanleihen. Was ist das? Unternehmen, insbesondere Banken, können Anleihen ausgeben; das ist Fremdkapital. Bisher ist es jedenfalls nach dem Gesetzestext so, dass es die Gläubiger in der Hand haben, zu irgendeinem Zeitpunkt zu sagen: Wir switchen rüber, wir wandeln um und werden dann zu Aktionären. - Aber im Hinblick auf die Stärkung der Solvenz der Gesellschaften wäre es wichtig, das dann zu machen, wenn die Banken es brauchen. Deshalb drehen wir das Wahlrecht jetzt um: Wir schaffen die Möglichkeit, dass auch die Gesellschaften, vor allen Dingen die Kreditinstitute, dafür sorgen können, dass die Gläubiger dann, wenn es nötig ist, wenn die Aufsichtsbehörden es erzwingen oder verlangen, auf die Seite des Eigenkapitals geholt werden. Auch das ist ein wichtiger Schritt zur Stärkung der Solvenz unserer Banken.\n\nDamit komme ich zu einigen kleineren Punkten. Einer der Detailpunkte - Frau Keul hat es angesprochen - ist die Frage, wie Aufsichtsratsmitglieder, die von öffentlich-rechtlichen Körperschaften entsandt sind, ihrerseits Bericht erstatten können. Wir machen auch hier einen wichtigen Schritt nach vorne, indem wir klarstellen, wann sie solche Berichte weitergeben können und dürfen.\n\nIn einem Punkt bin ich völlig anderer Meinung als Sie: Die Verschwiegenheitspflicht bleibt bestehen, und da bedarf es auch keiner Klarstellung; denn es ist selbstverständlich, dass Angelegenheiten des Aufsichtsrates anschließend nicht öffentlich in irgendeinem Gemeinderat diskutiert werden können. Das stünde aktienrechtlichen Prinzipien entgegen.\n\nEin letzter Punkt: Vorstandsvergütungen. Sie sagen, wir hätten diesbezüglich noch einiges tun müssen. Wir haben das in der letzten Legislaturperiode getan. Sie haben dadurch, dass Sie den Vermittlungsausschuss angerufen haben, blockiert und damit verhindert, dass die Änderung, die wir am Ende der letzten Legislaturperiode vorgeschlagen haben, Gesetz werden konnte. Deshalb können Sie jetzt guten Gewissens zustimmen. Ich hoffe auch auf die Zustimmung aller anderen zu dem Gesetzentwurf.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12288,gesine-lotzsch,\"Vielen Dank. - Herr Präsident! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Monatelang haben Bund und Länder laut und öffentlichkeitswirksam über die Verteilung der Kosten gestritten. Man kann über diesen Streit vieles sagen, aber eines, finde ich, muss man sagen: Er war vor allen Dingen gefährlich, und zwar brandgefährlich im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes. Das dürfen wir nicht zulassen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nWir haben gesehen, dass es in dem monatelangen Streit zu Annäherungen kam. Aber ich will daran erinnern, dass wir auch schon Situationen hatten, in denen wir schwierige Fragen in ganz kurzer Zeit gelöst haben. Ich darf Sie daran erinnern, wie schnell wir die Bankenrettung beschlossen haben. Da haben wir eine einzige Woche gebraucht, um die entsprechenden Maßnahmen umzusetzen. Ich finde, diesen Vergleichsmaßstab muss man schon anlegen. Eine Lösung in der Frage der Kosten war überfällig. Ob diese Lösung die richtige ist, müssen wir noch kritisch diskutieren, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDiese Diskussion war doch Wasser auf die Mühlen derjenigen in unserem Land, die für jedes der Probleme, die wir haben und die wir auch schon hatten, bevor Menschen vor Krieg, Not und Hunger zu uns geflohen sind, die Geflüchteten verantwortlich machen. Das zuzulassen, das ist politische Verantwortungslosigkeit, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDenn die Probleme waren doch schon vorher da: Wohnungsmangel, marode Schulen, marode Gebäude und Brücken sowie Investitionsstau an allen Ecken und Enden. Der IWF, der Internationale Währungsfonds, der nun bestimmt keine Vorfeldorganisation der Linken ist, hat die Bundesrepublik mehrmals deutlich aufgefordert, mehr zu investieren. Das müssen wir endlich tun. Wir brauchen in dieser Gesellschaft keine Sündenböcke. Es geht nicht nur um die Geflüchteten, sondern es geht um unsere Gesellschaft insgesamt. Es geht um uns alle. Das müssen wir endlich begreifen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nHerr Schäuble, Sie haben zu Recht gesagt: Man muss jetzt dafür sorgen, dass das Geld in den Kommunen ankommt, und es muss dafür gesorgt werden, dass das Geld, was da ist, auch dafür verwendet wird, wofür es bereitgestellt wurde. - Wenn jetzt aber mit einem kleinen ironischen Unterton gesagt wird: „Die schaffen das nicht in den Kommunen. Die Kommunen haben dafür nicht das Personal. Warum haben sie nichts vorbereitet?“, möchte ich und muss ich Sie alle daran erinnern, dass systematisch mit den Schlagworten „schlanker Staat“, „Privatisierung“, „die Privaten können alles besser“ die kommunalen Verwaltungen und auch Landesverwaltungen kaputtgespart wurden. Wir stehen jetzt vor einem Trümmerhaufen. Dieser muss schnellstens aufgeräumt werden, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nWir haben im Bundeshaushalt Geld für viele Bauprojekte zur Verfügung gestellt, die jetzt nicht umgesetzt werden können. Gestern im Haushaltsausschuss sagte die Bauministerin - ich sage es einmal höflich - ein bisschen hilflos, es gebe auch bei Studiengängen einen Schweinezyklus, es gebe halt nicht genug Bauingenieure und Architekten und sie wisse nicht, was man da machen solle. Was man da machen soll, kann ich Ihnen sagen: Wir brauchen eine nachhaltige und vorausschauende Politik und keine Politik, die von einem Monat zum anderen hechelt. Wir müssen unser Gemeinwesen so ausgestalten, dass wir nicht in eine Situation kommen, dass der Staat schwach ist. Wir brauchen einen starken Staat; denn nur Reiche können sich einen schwachen Staat leisten - und das wollen wir nicht, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nNatürlich wird viel über Ängste und Herausforderungen gesprochen, und manchmal wird gesagt, dass die Leute sich bestimmte Bedrohungen nur einbilden. Wir müssen aber, wie ich glaube, die Menschen nicht mit Worten, sondern mit Taten überzeugen. Wenn Menschen vergeblich eine bezahlbare Wohnung suchen, dann sind wir alle in der Verantwortung und können nicht einfach sagen, sie bildeten sich das nur ein. Die Wohnungsfrage ist eine ganz zentrale Frage bei der Bewältigung der Probleme, vor denen wir stehen, und hier müssen wir ansetzen und zu guten Entscheidungen kommen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nIch will Ihnen aber abschließend sagen, dass der Schlüssel für die Bewältigung aller dieser Probleme in der Lösung einer zentralen Frage, nämlich der Gerechtigkeitsfrage, liegt. Vor knapp drei Wochen ist ein Erbenverschonungsgesetz beschlossen worden. Große Teile der Gesellschaft finanzieren die gesamte Gesellschaft, und es wird den Reichen erlaubt, sich aus der Verantwortung zu stehlen. Das dürfen wir nicht länger mitmachen. Wir brauchen eine gerechte Besteuerung, wir brauchen eine Erbschaftsteuer, wir brauchen eine Vermögensbesteuerung. Es kann nicht sein, dass 1 Prozent der Bevölkerung in unserem Land über ein Drittel des Eigentums verfügt. So können wir unsere Gesellschaft nicht gerecht gestalten. Gerechtigkeit ist die Schlüsselfrage, nicht nur für die Geflüchteten, sondern für alle Menschen in unserem Land.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12196,dieter-janecek,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Sehr geehrter Herr Lenkert, auf Ihre Äußerungen möchte ich direkt eingehen. Ich finde ja, dass Sie in diversen Debatten immer einen sehr technikverständigen und manchmal auch sehr kreativen Ansatz pflegen. So war es beim Smart-Metering-Gesetz, wo es um das Thema Schwarmintelligenz ging, und so ist es jetzt auch. Ich finde es richtig und gut, dass Sie hier explizit auf die Einwendungen der 70 000 Amateurfunker eingehen, weil wir sie in der Tat ernst nehmen sollen; das tun wir auch.\n\nAllerdings heißt das nicht zwangsläufig, dass wir dann zur gleichen Abwägung kommen wie Sie und im Sinne der Äußerungen bei einer Anhörung einzelne Interessen über das Gemeinwohlinteresse stellen. Wir haben gelesen, was der Deutsche Amateur-Radio-Club e. V. über den Runden Tisch Amateurfunk geschrieben hat. Wir haben allerdings auch Gerichtsurteile gelesen - vom Oberverwaltungsgericht Nordrhein-Westfalen, Bezug nehmend auf den Verwaltungsgerichtshof Gelsenkirchen, wo jemand versucht hat, gegen die Bundesnetzagentur zu klagen; am Ende hat das Gericht entschieden, dass die momentanen Regelungen sachgemäß sind. Das ist die Ausgangslage. Noch einmal das klare Signal von hier aus: Wir schätzen es wert, was die Amateurfunker machen, und wollen wirklich jegliche Diskriminierung abwehren.\n\nAber das wird mit diesem Gesetz gewährleistet. Deswegen sind die Bedenken so nicht berechtigt.\n\nNatürlich gibt es auch kein Recht auf Störungsfreiheit in jeder Region Deutschlands; das ist nicht möglich, einfach aufgrund der Betriebsmittel, die wir heute haben. Ihre Zahl wird weiter zunehmen. Vielleicht werden wir in einigen Jahren neue Diskussionen führen müssen, weil die Strahlungsintensität in Deutschland natürlich nicht abnimmt; das ist so. Aber auch deswegen nehmen wir heute eine Novellierung vor. Sie ist im Kern auch richtig. Es ist übrigens eine europäische Richtlinie, die wir hier im Sinne der Vereinheitlichung umsetzen wollen. Insofern ist das EMVG in der jetzigen Umsetzung im Kern zu begrüßen.\n\nIch will jetzt auch gar nicht mehr im Detail ausführen, was Sie zu den Umsetzungstatbeständen gesagt haben. Vielleicht ganz kurz ein paar Punkte.\n\nEntscheidend bei den Neuerungen für bestimmte Wirtschaftsakteure ist, dass alle Akteure einer Handelskette formal als Hersteller gelten und zum Beispiel alle Dokumente wie Betriebsanleitungen zu einem Produkt vorhalten müssen. Damit soll gewährleistet werden, dass sich Zwischenhändler nicht durch einen Verweis auf Produzenten in Übersee entlasten können, wenn ein Verstoß gegen die Vorgaben des EMVG vorliegt. Ganz entscheidend ist auch, dass die Händler dadurch zur Kooperation mit der Bundesnetzagentur als Marktüberwachungsbehörde verpflichtet sind. Das bedeutet zum Beispiel: Sobald ein Händler bei Inbetriebnahme eines Gerätes ein Risiko feststellt, muss er unverzüglich die Bundesnetzagentur informieren. Das ist in dieser Form gut geregelt.\n\nWir achten, was den Amateurfunk angeht, natürlich trotzdem darauf, dass wir hier nicht in eine Schieflage geraten. Die ist momentan aber nicht gegeben. In diesem Sinne sind wir bei Ihnen, dass das im Kern der richtige Weg ist.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n10935,anja-karliczek,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine sehr geehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Linke! Den Antrag, den Sie uns heute vorlegen, können Sie nicht wirklich ernst meinen.\n\n- Nein. - Die Linke will ein Instrument, das ganz gezielt Kleinstverdienern und auch Kleinstverdienern mit Kindern überproportional unter die Arme greift, nicht reformieren - eine Reform kann ich mir ja noch vorstellen -, sondern abschaffen. Ihr Antrag zeugt entweder von blinder Ideologie oder von Unkenntnis in der Sache. Alles, was Sie vortragen, blendet den demografischen Wandel aus. Auch von der Tatsache, dass zwei Drittel der Zulagenempfänger ein Bruttoeinkommen von weniger als 30 000 Euro haben, habe ich hier noch nichts gehört.\n\nSie verunsichern die Menschen in unserem Land immer wieder mit unausgereiften Ideen, ohne eine nachhaltige Lösung, wie wir der Herausforderung des demografischen Wandels begegnen können, zu nennen.\n\n- Ich habe gut zugehört.\n\nUnsere umlagefinanzierte Rente, der Sie alle Herausforderungen der Zukunft aufs Auge drücken wollen, kommt aus einem Dilemma nicht heraus: Spätestens ab dem Jahr 2029 gehen die Babyboomer in Rente. Das ist die Zeit, in der auf anderthalb Beitragszahler ein Rentner kommt. Umlagefinanziert bedeutet das, dass anderthalb Beitragszahler einen Rentner finanzieren müssen.\n\nDass es unserer umlagefinanzierten Rente heute gerade gut geht, das bestreitet niemand. Aber woran liegt das denn? Es liegt daran, dass wir erstens in unserem schönen Land so viele sozialversicherungspflichtige Arbeitsplätze wie noch nie haben\n\nund dass zweitens die Lohnsteigerungen in der letzten Zeit so hoch waren.\n\nDie Wirtschaft floriert, und daran sollen alle teilhaben. Deshalb bekommen unsere Rentner ab 1. Juli eine saftige Rentenerhöhung.\n\nSo hat es sich schon Ludwig Erhard vorgestellt, und so funktioniert es bis heute.\n\nDank umfangreicher Rentenreformen in den vergangenen Jahren steht die soziale Absicherung, die umlagefinanzierte Rente, auf soliden Füßen. Wir können uns darauf verlassen, dass das System funktioniert. Darauf können wir sehr stolz sein.\n\nDie Sorgen, über die wir heute reden, liegen in der Zeit nach 2030. Dann gehen 1,3 Millionen Menschen in den Ruhestand; Gott sei Dank oft recht fitte Menschen, die dann noch auf einige Jahre erfüllten Ruhestand hoffen dürfen. In den Arbeitsmarkt hinein kommen aber nur knapp halb so viele junge Menschen. Eine immer kleiner werdende Gruppe von Beitragszahlern muss dann die Rente für immer mehr Rentner erwirtschaften. Das ist die Perspektive. So funktioniert unsere umlagefinanzierte gesetzliche Rente.\n\nEine lebensstandardsichernde Rente aber würde unsere Kinder überfordern.\n\n- Sie sind ganz schön aufgeregt. - Deswegen haben wir vor 15 Jahren begonnen, eine zusätzliche kapitalgedeckte Vorsorge zu unterstützen. Diesen Zusammenhang endlich einmal zur Kenntnis zu nehmen, ist die Basis für eine ehrliche Diskussion darüber, wie es weitergehen soll. Dann kommen wir auch ganz schnell zu der Erkenntnis, dass wir den Aufbau einer kapitalgedeckten Vorsorge intensiver unterstützen müssen. Es geht nicht um das Entweder-oder - umlagefinanziert oder kapitalgedeckt? -, sondern um das Sowohl-als-auch. Das ist hier das Thema.\n\nWir brauchen die umlagefinanzierte Rente als Basis unserer Altersabsicherung und mindestens eine kapitalgedeckte Säule. Den immer weniger werdenden jungen Menschen dürfen wir nicht die Finanzierung der Rente der immer größer werdenden Zahl von Rentnern aufbürden. Deshalb wollen wir gerade den Menschen mit kleinen Einkommen dabei helfen - das ist unser oberstes Ziel -, dass auch sie eine anständige Rente erreichen können.\n\nIch könnte gut verstehen, wenn Sie heute sagen würden: Lassen Sie uns darüber reden, wie wir das Riester-Sparen in Zeiten niedriger Zinsen attraktiver machen können. Wie können wir Vertrauen zurückgewinnen, das im Zuge der Finanzkrise und durch das Verhalten mancher Anbieter verloren gegangen ist? Das sind die richtigen Fragen.\n\nNein, ich rede erst zu Ende. Die Kollegin kann gleich etwas sagen.\n\nEigene Vorsorge für das Alter muss selbstverständlicher werden; nur so können wir dauerhaft und langfristig steigende Altersarmut verhindern. Das muss sich eben auch für Geringverdiener lohnen. Wer vorsorgt, muss mehr haben als der, der es nicht tut. Das muss das Maß unserer Bemühungen sein.\n\nDeshalb kann es zum Beispiel eine Möglichkeit sein, einen Freibetrag auf die Grundsicherung einzurichten für alle diejenigen, die kapitalgedeckt Eigenvorsorge leisten. Dann schaffen wir Mehrwert gerade für die Menschen in unserer Gesellschaft, die die Hilfe am nötigsten haben.\n\nEine weitere richtige Frage ist die nach dem Umgang mit den niedrigen Zinsen. Wenn Zinsen keine Ertragsquelle mehr sind, weil sie so niedrig sind, dann ist zu fragen: Wie können wir Menschen über die Altersvorsorge einen Anteil an der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung in unserem Land zukommen lassen, ohne dem Einzelnen ein hohes Risiko zumuten zu müssen?\n\nDas, was Sie machen, ist billig. Es verunsichert gerade die Menschen, die eine kapitalgedeckte Vorsorge am nötigsten haben. Es ist in der aktuellen Situation sogar brandgefährlich.\n\nNoch eine Bemerkung am Rande. Sie beziehen sich in Ihrem Antrag auf eine Aussage des bayerischen Ministerpräsidenten. Dazu kann ich nur sagen: Wir sind alle Menschen. Menschen sind nicht unfehlbar, Menschen können irren. Deswegen werden wir diesen Antrag ablehnen.\"\n13130,jurgen-hardt,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich verweise auf die schrecklichen Bilder der Terroranschläge der letzten Tage: In Nigeria rissen Grundschulkinder 17 Menschen in den Tod, weil sie als Selbstmordattentäter von mutmaßlichen Islamisten missbraucht worden waren. In Somalia war die sunnitische Terrormiliz al\u001eSchabab für mindestens 30 Tote verantwortlich. Außerdem gab es die beiden Anschläge in Istanbul, über die eben schon gesprochen wurde. Hinzu kam der Anschlag in Kairo gegen das Gotteshaus der koptischen Christen und damit gegen die Religionsfreiheit in Ägypten. All das waren schreckliche Ereignisse, die uns immer wieder mahnen, dass der Terrorismus offensichtlich die Geißel des 21. Jahrhunderts ist und dass wir alles dafür tun müssen, um dem Terrorismus und der terroristischen Bedrohung Herr zu werden. Deswegen ist es gut, dass wir heute hier darüber reden.\n\nDie Waffe des Terrors ist die Ausnutzung der Arglosigkeit des Opfers. Jeder Mensch hat das Gefühl, er könnte theoretisch Opfer eines solchen Anschlags werden, egal wo er steht und geht. Deswegen müssen wir viel tun, um unseren Bürgerinnen und Bürgern, den Menschen in Europa und in der ganzen Welt die Angst vor diesem Terror zu nehmen; denn das ist sozusagen die Entwaffnung derjenigen, die Terror ausüben.\n\nWas können wir tun? Ich glaube, wir müssen in erster Linie verstärkt fünf Maßnahmen ergreifen, um Terror einzudämmen und vielleicht sogar zu verhindern:\n\nErstens. Wir müssen im eigenen Land wachsam sein gegenüber denjenigen, die unter dem Deckmäntelchen religiöser Überzeugung andere Menschen zu radikalen Handlungen verführen wollen. Wenn ich mir anschaue, was in unseren Städten passiert, namentlich in meiner Heimatstadt Wuppertal - dort waren junge Männer als sogenannte Scharia-Polizei unterwegs und lauerten jungen Frauen vor Diskotheken auf, um sie mahnend daran zu erinnern, dass Diskothekenbesucher eigentlich nicht der richtige Umgang für sie sind; diese jungen Männer wurden wegen Verstoßes gegen das Uniformverbot vor Gericht gestellt; das Gericht hatte offensichtlich keine Handhabe, sie zu verurteilen -, dann stellt sich schon die Frage, ob wir in unserer Rechtsordnung möglicherweise nachsteuern und nachbessern müssen. Ich gehe einmal davon aus, dass die nächste Instanz ein Urteil trifft, durch das die sogenannte Scharia-Polizei auf deutschen Straßen keinen Platz hat, also verboten wird.\n\nEin zweiter Aspekt - ihn hat der Kollege Binninger bereits angesprochen - ist die Intensivierung der Polizei- und Geheimdienstzusammenarbeit. Es geht darum, dass wir uns optimal austauschen mit befreundeten Regierungen, aber auch mit Regierungen von Ländern, mit denen wir nicht so gute und intensive Beziehungen unterhalten, sodass wir uns rechtzeitig warnen können, wenn irgendwo Terroristen unterwegs sind, etwa wenn sich Heimkehrer nach Europa auf den Weg machen oder wenn irgendwelche Schläfer hier in Europa aktiviert werden durch Terrorführer im Ausland. Ich glaube, dass wir da bereits eine Menge tun und dass das insbesondere unter NATO- und EU-Partnern gut funktioniert. Aber wir müssen da sicherlich noch mehr Geld und Kraft hineinstecken.\n\nWir müssen die Rekrutierung und die Hetze im Netz wirksam unterbinden. Wenn man im Internet unterwegs ist, erlebt man ja selbst, wie undifferenziert, wie unübersichtlich und vor allem wie polemisch und radikal dort argumentiert wird. Das würde niemals in einer öffentlichen Versammlung stattfinden, wo man sein Gesicht zeigen muss. Im Netz fallen offensichtlich alle Hemmungen, und es gibt ein enormes Potenzial an Verhetzung dort. Wir müssen schauen, ob unsere Rechtsordnung wirklich darauf vorbereitet ist.\n\nSprengstoff gibt es überall in der Welt in großen Mengen. Aber wenn jemand offensichtlich eine ganze Lastwagenladung in einer Großstadt wie Istanbul zusammenkarren kann, um sie dann in einem Terroranschlag zu zünden, dann ist für mich die Frage, ob wir nicht die Möglichkeit intensiver nutzen sollten, zum Beispiel die Verbreitung oder den Vertrieb von Sprengstoff stärker in den Blick zu nehmen, nicht deshalb, weil wir damit das alles vielleicht verhindern, aber deshalb, weil wir damit die Schwelle erhöhen, an solche Stoffe heranzukommen, es ein Stück weit schwerer machen, sich, wie in Istanbul mutmaßlich geschehen, mit 400 Kilogramm Sprengstoff - das ist immerhin die Beladung eines Kleinlasters - auszustatten.\n\nDas Wichtigste ist, dass wir dem Terrorismus den Nährboden entziehen. Omid Nouripour hat es richtig gesagt. Immer dann, wenn Terrorismus sich ausbreiten kann, gibt es irgendeinen Resonanzboden dafür, eine Zivilbevölkerung, die sich benachteiligt fühlt, die sich zurückgesetzt fühlt, die sich gedemütigt fühlt, die vielleicht nicht terroristisch wird, aber den Terroristen Rückzugsorte und Rückzugsgelegenheiten bietet. Das haben wir im Norden des Irak erlebt. Das erleben wir in vielen anderen Regionen, zum Beispiel auch im Norden Malis.\n\nDurch vorausschauende und nachhaltige Entwicklungszusammenarbeit und Außenpolitik müssen wir einen Beitrag dazu leisten, dass dieser Nährboden ausgetrocknet wird. In diesem Sinne, glaube ich, sollten wir das, was wir in den letzten Tagen erlebt haben, als Ansporn und Aufforderung nehmen, noch mehr gegen Terrorismus zu tun.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n4125,stefan-kaufmann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Vor 23 Jahren habe ich in Tübingen einen BAföG-Antrag gestellt. Das war mit enorm viel Papierkram verbunden, und ich musste monatelang auf eine Entscheidung warten. Es gab bis zur Entscheidung kaum Übergangsgeld. Damals sagte ich mir: Das geht besser. Heute, 23 Jahre später, wird es besser. Ich bin dankbar, dass ich dabei mithelfen konnte.\n\nAb 1. August 2016 wird es ein obligatorisches Onlineantragsverfahren geben. Es wird schon bei vorläufiger Zulassung zum Master BAföG geben. Die Vorauszahlung während der Wartezeit auf die Zulassung wird erhöht. Der Maßstab war auch für mich im Rahmen dieser Diskussion über die BAföG-Reform immer: Was hilft den Studierenden eigentlich wirklich? Der Kollege Kaczmarek hat dies auch angedeutet. Wenn man sich dies fragt, ist ganz schnell klar: Es geht nicht nur um die Erhöhung der Bedarfssätze. Es geht vielmehr um Bürokratieabbau und um Vereinfachung. Es geht um Beschleunigung und Planbarkeit. Das sind die Meilensteine dieser BAföG-Reform, und das, lieber Kai Gehring, lassen wir uns nicht schlechtreden, auch nicht von der Opposition.\n\nDer andere Leitgedanke dieser BAföG-Reform lautet: Wie bekommen wir mehr bedürftige junge Menschen in die Förderung? Dazu gibt es zwei Wege: zum einen die Erleichterung bei der Antragstellung - das erhöht die Zahl der Antragsteller; es nehmen ja nicht alle BAföG in Anspruch, die es dürften - und zum Zweiten - das hat die Ministerin gesagt - die signifikante Erhöhung der Freibeträge. Das hilft insbesondere den Mittelstandsfamilien. Die Prognose besagt, lieber Kai Gehring, dass diese Novelle über 110 000 mehr junge Menschen in die BAföG-Förderung bringen wird. Das ist ein Wort.\n\nDeshalb freue ich mich, dass wir heute in zweiter und dritter Lesung eine große dreistufige BAföG-Reform verabschieden. In langer Detailarbeit haben wir diese große Reform in den letzten Jahren ausgearbeitet. Diese Reform im Umfang von 2 Milliarden Euro - das wurde jetzt gesagt - kann sich wirklich sehen lassen. In sieben Wochen - auch das wurde gesagt - werden durch diese Reform in den Ländern nun 1,17 Milliarden Euro jährlich für Bildung frei, und zwar für Schulen und Hochschulen.\n\nDamit könnten wir den Grundetat aller Hochschulen inklusive Fachhochschulen um satte 5 Prozent erhöhen, oder wir könnten - das ist ein Punkt, der der Ministerin auch sehr wichtig war - Dauerstellen für Nachwuchswissenschaftler schaffen. Auch dieses Thema begleitet uns hier schon eine ganze Weile. Alternativ könnten wir Schulen mit IT ausstatten oder zusätzliche Lehrer einstellen. Das Beste: Dieses Geld ist nicht befristet oder an ein Programm gebunden, nein, es steht den Ländern dauerhaft zur Verfügung.\n\nDas ist aber nur die erste Stufe der Reform. Auf eine zweite Stufe haben wir uns hier im Parlament im Rahmen der Ihnen auch vorliegenden Änderungsanträge bei der Gesetzesberatung geeinigt. Ich zähle es noch einmal auf:\n\nErstens. Die Vorauszahlungen bei nicht kurzfristig zu bearbeitenden Erstanträgen werden wir auf 80 Prozent des jeweils zustehenden Förderungsbetrages erhöhen.\n\nZweitens. Die Förderung von Masterstudierenden wird bereits ab einer zunächst nur vorläufigen Zulassung zum Studium unter Rückforderungsvorbehalt ermöglicht.\n\nDrittens. Die Studierenden haben Anspruch auf eine Vorabentscheidung über die Förderungsfähigkeit eines geplanten Masterstudiums dem Grunde nach.\n\nViertens. Wir streichen den Leistungsnachweis vor dem dritten Semester.\n\nDiese zweite Stufe der Reform, die keine zusätzlichen Kosten verursacht, werden wir zum 1. August 2015 vorziehen. Erste Erleichterungen kommen den Studierenden damit schon im nächsten Wintersemester zugute. Zum Wintersemester 2016/17 zünden wir dann die dritte Stufe der Reform, und das ist ein wahres Feuerwerk an Verbesserungen; das wurde hier schon gesagt.\n\n- Ja, das ist ein Feuerwerk an Verbesserungen. Das ist ein Hammer! Das kann man wirklich so sagen.\n\nIch zähle auf: Anhebung der Bedarfssätze und der Freibeträge um 7 Prozent, für auswärts wohnende Studierende sogar Höchstsatzsteigerungen um fast 10 Prozent auf 735 Euro monatlich, Erhöhung des Wohngeldes auf 250 Euro monatlich, Anhebung des Vermögensfreibetrages auf 7 500 Euro, Anhebung des Kinderbetreuungszuschlags auf einheitlich 130 Euro, Schließung der Förderlücke zwischen Bachelor- und Masterstudium, und für die Minijobber wird die Hinzuverdienstgrenze auf 450 Euro angehoben. Wir stärken Mobilität und -Internationalität durch die Umsetzung von EuGH--Entscheidungen. Hinzu kommen Maßnahmen zur Entbürokratisierung, Verfahrenserleichterungen, auch das Thema „Onlineanträge für alle“ und vieles mehr. Das elektronische Antragsverfahren war mir auch persönlich besonders wichtig. Wir verpflichten die Länder, die elektronische Antragstellung bis zum 1. August 2016 zu ermöglichen. Das, meine Damen und Herren, ist mehr als überfällig und ein richtig großer Fortschritt.\n\nInsgesamt bedeutet die dritte Stufe der Reform für die Studierenden weitere 825 Millionen Euro pro Jahr zusätzlich, und das auf Dauer.\n\n- Lieber Kai Gehring, 825 Millionen Euro pro Jahr, und das auf Dauer: Wenn das eine kleine Reform ist, dann weiß ich es nicht.\n\nLieber Kai Gehring, in diesem Punkt sind wir unterschiedlicher Meinung.\n\nDas sind beeindruckende Investitionen in Hochschulen und Schulen durch die CDU-geführte Bundesregierung. Da soll mal einer erzählen, die schwarze Null blockiere alles. Sie blockiert nichts. Diese Koalition kann beides.\n\nWir können solide haushalten und in Bildung und Forschung investieren. Das ist zukunftsorientierte Politik, die den jungen Menschen und damit uns allen in Deutschland hilft.\n\nDafür, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen Bildungspolitiker, haben wir jahrelang gekämpft.\n\nNun ist das eine gemeinsame Leistung der CDU/CSU und unseres Koalitionspartners, der SPD. Ich danke Frau Ministerin Wanka und Staatssekretär Rachel für die hervorragende Vorbereitung.\n\nLassen Sie mich noch einen Satz zu denjenigen sagen, die ein Haar in der Suppe finden. Ja, natürlich wird auch diese Reform nicht alles perfekt machen; keine Reform macht alles perfekt. Aber sie ist ein großer Wurf und ein großer Fortschritt im Hinblick auf die Chancengerechtigkeit in Deutschland, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nWeitergehende Forderungen gibt es natürlich immer; sie wurden hier heute ja auch schon benannt. Wir nehmen diese auf dem Weg zu einer neuen BAföG-Reform gerne mit, die wir dann - ohne die Länder; darüber hatten wir gesprochen - in Eigenregie planen können. Da geht es dann zum Beispiel um die Berücksichtigung des Ehrenamtes und um die Anforderungen an das BAföG im Lichte des lebensbegleitenden Lernens.\n\nZum Vorschlag der Grünen noch ein letztes Wort. Lieber Kai Gehring, Ihr Vorschlag, den Wohnkostenzuschlag regional zu verändern, ist undurchdacht; denn auch der Standort einer Universität ist beim Werben um Studierende ein Faktor. Bei Ihrem Vorschlag würden Studierende in München deutlich mehr BAföG erhalten als Studierende in Essen. Das entspricht jedenfalls nicht meinen Vorstellungen von Chancengleichheit.\n\nJetzt wollen wir sehen, meine Damen und Herren, was die Länder mit diesem gigantischen finanziellen Paket für die Bildung in wenigen Wochen anfangen. Ich kann nur sagen: Die Schüler und Studierenden haben es verdient. Zusätzliche Investitionen in Bildung zahlen sich immer aus. Wie sagt man so schön? Es gibt nur eines, das teurer ist als Bildung, nämlich keine Bildung.\n\nWir jedenfalls, Herr Kollege Kaczmarek, werden die Länder bei der Umsetzung ganz genau beobachten. Denn es muss schon für jeden nachvollziehbar sein, welche Prioritäten eine Landesregierung setzt, wenn es um die Übernahme der Mittel geht. Sich in die Büsche schlagen, das gibt es, jedenfalls aus unserer Sicht, nicht mehr.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir von der Regierungskoalition zeigen heute, dass wir Leistung bringen und zu unserem Wort stehen. Jetzt sind die anderen am Zuge.\n\nIn diesem Sinne, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, freue ich mich über unsere große dreistufige BAföG-Reform, die sich wirklich sehen lassen kann. Ich bin gespannt, ob die Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Opposition bei der nachfolgenden Abstimmung über ihren Schatten springen und zustimmen; denn es gibt objektiv keinen Grund, gegen diese BAföG-Reform zu stimmen.\n\nDanke sehr.\"\n1283,stefan-liebich,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Kollege Mützenich, dass Sie diese Zwischenfrage zulassen. Wir hatten uns in meiner Fraktion nicht abgesprochen, wer sich alles meldet.\n\nVielleicht erledigt sich das auch in der Folge; das weiß ich nicht.\n\nDas Angebot an uns, dass wir in dieser Kommission zusammenarbeiten können, klang sehr schön. Das -Problem ist allerdings: Sie haben in der letzten Sitzungswoche, als wir darüber gesprochen haben, gesagt: Wir überweisen das an die Ausschüsse; da kann man ja noch einmal beraten. - Nun saßen wir alle gemeinsam im Auswärtigen Ausschuss, und es lagen Vorschläge von drei Seiten vor. Dann ist zwar verbal bekundet worden, man könne aus den Vorschlägen der Grünen zum Einsetzungsbeschluss - aus unseren vielleicht auch; das ist nicht ganz deutlich geworden - etwas in den Antrag, den Sie vorgelegt haben, aufnehmen. Das ist aber nicht passiert. Sie haben den Vorschlag, der hier letzte Woche vorlag, vollkommen unverändert zur Abstimmung gestellt, ohne ein einziges Angebot für einen etwas ergebnisoffeneren Text zu machen.\n\nDa muss ich schon sagen: Ich kann das Klagen, man hätte uns einbeziehen wollen, nicht richtig ernst nehmen. Im Ausschuss war davon nichts zu merken. Sie haben einfach abgestimmt über das, was von Ihnen vorlag, und unsere Anregungen beiseitegeschoben.\"\n15173,ralf-brauksiepe,\"Vielen Dank. - Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben soeben über die Operation Sophia debattiert. Es ist deutlich geworden, dass die Situation in Libyen einen Krisenherd in der Region darstellt. Wir sehen täglich das Leid der syrischen Bevölkerung und die unzähligen Flüchtlinge, die das schreckliche Regime und der Bürgerkrieg dort auslösen. Es ist gerade vor diesem Hintergrund überhaupt nicht selbstverständlich, dass wir im Libanon, in diesem dicht besiedelten sehr kleinräumigen Gebiet, seit Jahren eine Situation haben, die vergleichsweise stabil ist. Das hat etwas mit der internationalen Gemeinschaft und ihrem Engagement zu tun und damit, dass wir anerkannter und geachteter Teil dieses internationalen Engagements sind.\n\nDie Mission UNIFIL mit derzeit rund 11 000 Soldatinnen und Soldaten aus 40 Staaten ist ein besonders wichtiger Stabilitätsfaktor im Nahen und Mittleren Osten, gerade in dieser Region. Mit dieser Mission unterstützen wir seit vielen Jahren die Friedensentwicklung des Libanon. Sie ist bereits seit dem Jahr 1978 dort aktiv. Es ist ihr auch zu verdanken, dass im Libanon positive politische Entwicklungen zu verzeichnen sind. Die Wahl von Michel Aoun zum neuen libanesischen Präsidenten nach einer langen Periode des Vakuums an dieser Stelle und die sich anschließende Regierungsbildung sind ein gutes jüngeres Beispiel dafür.\n\nDie Mission UNIFIL und ihre substanzielle Verstärkung bereits im Jahr 2006 haben hierzu einen wichtigen Beitrag geleistet. Aber wir dürfen uns nicht täuschen lassen: Der Libanon ist weiterhin keineswegs eine Insel der Stabilität. Er ist ein Land, das natürlich auch von anderen Krisenfaktoren in der Region massiv betroffen ist, insbesondere durch den Krieg in Syrien, durch die Terrororganisationen IS und al-Qaida und auch dadurch, dass die Hisbollah im Süden des Landes agiert und sich auf syrischem Boden militärisch zugunsten Assads engagiert. All dies sind ernsthafte Herausforderungen für Frieden und Stabilität im Libanon. Die vergleichsweise stabile Situation dort ist alles andere als selbstverständlich.\n\nWir sollten auch nicht vergessen, dass derzeit nahezu 2 Millionen Flüchtlinge in diesem Land leben, das selbst lediglich rund 6 Millionen Einwohner umfasst. Der libanesische Staat ist damit verständlicherweise an die Grenzen seiner Leistungsfähigkeit gelangt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, unser Engagement im Rahmen von UNIFIL ist weiter gefordert und in der Region auch ausdrücklich erwünscht. Ich will in Erinnerung rufen, dass sich Libanon und Israel offiziell nach wie vor im Kriegszustand befinden. UNIFIL bleibt deswegen ein ganz wichtiger Rahmen auch zum Austausch zwischen diesen beiden Nachbarländern, deren friedliches Zusammenleben auch für uns so wichtig ist.\n\nSeit dem Jahr 2006 beteiligen wir uns mit der Bundeswehr an der Marinekomponente von UNIFIL. Ziel unseres Einsatzes ist und bleibt die Befähigung der libanesischen Marine zum Schutz ihrer eigenen Seegrenzen. Darunter fällt die Unterstützung bei der Seeraumüberwachung genauso wie die Ausbildung der libanesischen Marine. Deutschland stellt derzeit eine Korvette und hält rund 120 Soldatinnen und Soldaten im Einsatz. Die bisher geltende Obergrenze von 300 Soldatinnen und Soldaten soll bestehen bleiben. Damit wird es uns auch im nächsten Jahr möglich sein, ohne Einschränkungen auf dem bereits Erreichten aufzubauen und weiterhin unseren wichtigen Beitrag zu dieser Mission zu leisten.\n\nUnsere Beteiligung an UNIFIL ist eingebettet in das ganzheitliche Engagement der Bundesregierung für den Libanon und die Region. Das knüpft auch an das an, was wir schon im Zusammenhang mit der Mission Sophia heute Morgen diskutiert haben und worauf der Bundesaußenminister und der Bundesentwicklungshilfeminister schon hingewiesen haben. Es ist klar und unbestreitbar: Wir werden uns ganzheitlich beteiligen, nicht nur mit Soldatinnen und Soldaten. Unser Ansatz umfasst politische, entwicklungspolitische und natürlich sozioökonomische Maßnahmen in der Region.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir brauchen uns für den Einsatz unserer Soldatinnen und Soldaten nicht zu entschuldigen. Ich sage das nicht rechtfertigend. Es bedarf all dieser Komponenten, und dazu gehört auch die Komponente der Soldatinnen und Soldaten. Wir können stolz sein auf ihren Einsatz; wir können ihnen dankbar sein für den Einsatz, den sie leisten. Sie sind Teil eines ganzheitlichen Ansatzes, ein wichtiger Teil, keiner, den wir verstecken müssten. Es ist ein Einsatz, der in der Region gewünscht wird und um dessen Fortsetzung ich Sie herzlich bitte.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n7855,sabine-leidig,\"Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Besucherinnen und Besucher! Ich will zunächst darüber sprechen, warum dieser Abgasskandal eigentlich so gewaltig ist. Dann stelle ich einige Sofortmaßnahmen vor, die wir als Linksfraktion fordern.\n\nZunächst also: Was ist Sache? In den USA wurde nachgewiesen, dass VW mit einem technischen Eingriff seine Dieselmotoren manipuliert hat, und zwar bei 11 Millionen Autos; das hat VW zugegeben. Die meisten Autos sind in Europa, viele auch in Deutschland, unterwegs. VW hat dafür gesorgt, dass bei den standardisierten Messverfahren niedrige Abgaswerte vorgetäuscht werden. Im wirklichen Fahrbetrieb aber kommt das Zigfache aus dem Auspuff. Andere Autokonzerne haben das Gleiche gemacht. BMW ist in den Schlagzeilen. Die Firma Bosch hat bekannt gegeben, dass sie das Förder- und Dosiermodul zur Abgasnachbehandlung an fast alle Autohersteller geliefert hat.\n\nAuch die Werte von Benzinmotoren werden mit verschiedenen Eingriffen so manipuliert, dass sie auf dem Prüfstand deutlich weniger verbrauchen oder ausstoßen als auf der Straße. Das weiß man seit Jahren; die Deutsche Umwelthilfe hat es akribisch nachgewiesen. Ich war auf einem Seminar zu diesem Thema. Einige Fraktionen von hier haben dort komplett gefehlt - schade. Heute veröffentlichte der VCD, dass diese Abweichungen 2001 noch bei 8 Prozent lagen. Mittlerweile liegen sie bei 40 Prozent. Das heißt, das Ganze hat System. Die Autofahrerinnen und Autofahrer, die auf sparsamen Verbrauch achten, werden belogen und betrogen.\n\nSeit Jahren wird darüber gesprochen. Die Umweltverbände haben es öffentlich kritisiert.\n\nSeit Jahren werden unabhängige Prüfungen gefordert. Passiert ist nichts. Der Verkehrsminister hat nicht reagiert. Das zuständige Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt hat keine einzige eigene Kontrollmessung durchgeführt. Dabei geht es ja nicht irgendwie um gewisse Abweichungen. Die Verantwortlichen in der Automobilindustrie haben veranlasst, dass Schadstoffe weit über das verträgliche Maß hinaus in die Landschaft und in die Städte geblasen werden, und zwar, weil sie noch mehr Profit machen wollen. Was in den Chefetagen der Automobilindustrie organisiert wurde, ist gewerbsmäßiger Betrug.\n\nSie tragen bewusst und systematisch zur Schädigung von Gesundheit, Umwelt und Klima bei, und das ist der eigentliche Skandal, den wir nicht länger hinnehmen dürfen.\n\nEs reicht nicht, wenn ein paar Herren aus den Vorständen zurücktreten. Die Verantwortlichen müssen strafrechtlich verfolgt werden. Die Bundesregierung muss alle rechtlichen Möglichkeiten ausschöpfen, um die milliardenschweren Eigentümer der Autokonzerne für den finanziellen Schaden haftbar zu machen, der den Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern, dem Fiskus und der Allgemeinheit entstanden ist.\n\nDamit bin ich bei unseren Forderungen für ein Sofortprogramm:\n\nErstens. Es muss eine neue und unabhängige Untersuchungskommission eingesetzt werden. Die Expertinnen und Experten, die da zum Einsatz gebracht werden, müssen von den Umwelt- und Verbraucherorganisationen oder vom VCD und anderen benannt werden, von den Organisationen, die tatsächlich seit Jahren gegen diesen Abgasbetrug vorgehen. Herr Dobrindt hat die eigenen Fachleute eingesetzt, aus seinem Ministerium und aus dem Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt.\n\nAber genau die Leute haben diese Machenschaften seit Jahren einfach nicht gekontert.\n\nSie haben sie durchgehen lassen, als Helfershelfer quasi, und jetzt sollen sie der Sache auf den Grund gehen. Das ist der ungeeignete Mechanismus.\n\nZweitens. Die Kommission, deren Einsetzung wir fordern, muss bei allen in Deutschland produzierenden Autoherstellern, beim Automobilverband VDA und bei Autozulieferern wie Bosch zu den Manipulationen an Fahrzeugmotoren ermitteln, und sie muss dabei umfassend mit der Staatsanwaltschaft zusammenarbeiten.\n\nEs geht nicht nur darum, herauszufinden, mit welchem technischen Modul es VW gemacht hat.\n\nDrittens. Die Kommission muss eine unabhängige Überprüfung der tatsächlichen Abgas- und Verbrauchswerte veranlassen. Das muss für alle Pkw repräsentativ durchgeführt werden. Da darf man auch nicht auf das neue europäische Prüfverfahren warten, das ja die Bundesregierung bisher immer verzögert hat.\n\nEs ist überhaupt nicht sinnvoll, darauf zu warten. Man kann sofort etwas tun. Und dann muss die Kommission aus diesen Überprüfungen errechnen, wie hoch die gesellschaftlichen Schäden sind, die die Automobilkonzerne verursacht haben.\n\nSchließlich muss diese Kommission dem Bundestag berichten, und nicht dem Minister; denn der Bundestag ist dafür verantwortlich, Schaden von der Bevölkerung und auch von der Umwelt abzuwenden.\n\nZum Schluss noch eine Anmerkung. Dieser Skandal ist kein einzigartiges Ereignis. Die Bundesregierung hat immer wieder ihre schützende Hand über die Automobilindustrie gehalten. Auch in dieser Legislatur gehen die Spitzenvertreter der Automobilindustrie im Kanzleramt und im Verkehrsministerium ein und aus. Das nützt aber den Menschen in diesem Land nichts.\n\nEs ist höchste Zeit, dass die Verkehrspolitik auf andere Füße gestellt und sozialökologisch umgebaut wird,\n\nund das geht nicht mit diesem Verkehrsminister.\"\n1350,karamba-diaby,\"Vielen Dank. - Frau Ministerin, ich habe zwei Fragen. Die erste Frage bezieht sich auf das IQ Netzwerk; Sie haben es mehrfach erwähnt. Im Rahmen des IQ Netzwerks gab es eine Fachgruppe Migration. Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund haben sich hier engagiert, um einen Beitrag zur effektiven Umsetzung des BQFG zu leisten. Wie bewerten Sie diesen Beitrag der Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund in diesem Bereich?\n\nMeine zweite Frage ist: Welche Möglichkeiten sieht die Bundesregierung, Sozialpartner und Betriebe bei der Anerkennung ausländischer Berufsabschlüsse zu unterstützen, um auch in diesem Bereich potenzielle Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter zu gewinnen? Wenn wir gemeinsam mehrere gesellschaftliche Kräfte bündeln, haben wir mehr Erfolg; deshalb diese Frage.\"\n5523,astrid-freudenstein,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrter Herr Staatssekretär Bucior! Verehrte Gäste! Meine Damen und Herren! Nach vielen parlamentarischen Beratungen und wechselnden Regierungskoalitionen können wir heute sagen: Wir machen gemeinsam einen Punkt hinter das Kapitel Ghettorente. Nun endlich können auch die in Polen lebenden ehemaligen Ghettobeschäftigten diese Rente beziehen. Wir hoffen jetzt auf eine rasche Umsetzung nach der Ratifizierung; Frau Staatssekretärin hat uns das ja schon zugesichert. Dafür herzlichen Dank!\n\nBis heute gab und gibt es Kritik daran, dass es viel zu lange gedauert habe, bis alle Berechtigten die Ghettorente beziehen können. In der Tat: Es hat lange gedauert. Es gab auch immer wieder den mehr oder weniger offenen Vorwurf, dass es vielleicht sogar von staatlicher Seite die Absicht gegeben haben könnte, dass gar nicht so viele Menschen die Ghettorente bekommen. Ich glaube, es ist deshalb wichtig, hier noch einmal festzuhalten: Als alle Parteien dieses Hauses im Jahre 2002 das Gesetz zur Zahlbarmachung von Renten aus Beschäftigungen in einem Ghetto beschlossen, hatten sie ganz sicher nicht die Motivation und das Ziel, dass es möglichst wenige sein mögen, die diese Ghettorente bekommen. Gerade die „Zahlbarmachung“ war ja der Hauptgrund für das Gesetz.\n\nAuch die Reformen in den folgenden Jahren, die in die Änderungen des Gesetzes im vergangenen Jahr mündeten, gingen in diese Richtung: So haben wir beispielsweise die ansonsten im Sozialrecht geltende Vierjahresfrist bei den Ghettorenten ausgesetzt. Diese Regelung war zu Recht von den heute hochbetagten ehemaligen Ghettobeschäftigten als Unrecht empfunden worden. Auch die für einen Rentenbeginn im Jahr 1997 einzuhaltende Antragsfrist bis 2003 wurde gestrichen.\n\nEbenfalls können die Betroffenen nun entscheiden, ob sie die neu festgestellte Rente mit Rentennachzahlung beziehen wollen oder ob sie die bisherige Regelung mit Zuschlag beibehalten wollen. Die berechtigten Interessen der ehemaligen Ghettobeschäftigten haben wir also berücksichtigt und mehr Wahlmöglichkeiten eingeräumt.\n\nDer Prozess, der bis heute andauerte, war vieles: Er war in der Tat lang. Fast 18 Jahre sind seit dem Urteil des Bundessozialgerichts vergangen. Dieser Prozess war von Umdenken geprägt - von einer juristisch sehr strengen und engen zu einer weiteren Auslegung des Gesetzes. Er war natürlich auch tragisch, weil viele Berechtigte in der Zwischenzeit gestorben sind. Doch eines war dieser Prozess sicher nicht: Er war nicht einfach, er war nicht eindimensional. Es gab nämlich sehr viele verschiedene Akteure, von den Antragstellern über Anwälte und Staaten bis hin zu den Sozialversicherungen, und es gab die Gesetze verschiedener Länder. Es gab nicht zuletzt eine Zeitspanne von 70 Jahren, die das Erlebte von dem Heute trennt.\n\nMit diesen Rahmenbedingungen steht das Verfahren stellvertretend für viele Verfahren im Rahmen der Wiedergutmachung und Entschädigung. Erlebtes und Erlittenes musste mit objektiv begründbaren Gesetzen in Einklang gebracht werden. Gerade im Bereich der Sozialversicherungen stellte sich das als schwierig dar. Hier prallten eben juristische und alltagsweltliche Sprache und Bedeutung aufeinander.\n\nWas bedeutete zum Beispiel das Wort „freiwillig“ im Sozialrecht? Für die Ghettoarbeiter war die Gesamtsituation, in der sie ihre Arbeit verrichteten, selbstverständlich nicht freiwillig. Das Erzählen aus der eigenen Lebenswirklichkeit hatte deshalb für viele Menschen zur Folge, dass sie keine Ghettorente bekamen; denn die Ghettorente setzte eine Freiwilligkeit der Arbeit voraus. Begrifflichkeiten wie „Zwangsarbeit“ waren ein zentraler Ablehnungsgrund. Erst die Schilderungen von Historikern bewogen das Sozialgericht, die strenge Auslegung zu beenden. Das alles hinterlässt bei uns heute kein gutes Gefühl. Ich meine aber, dass Schuldzuweisungen angesichts der Komplexität des Verfahrens nicht angebracht sind.\n\nFür die in Polen lebenden ehemaligen Ghettobeschäftigten war es zuletzt aber gar kein Problem der Semantik mehr, das ihnen die Rente nicht ermöglichte, sondern ein - es wurde schon erwähnt - 40 Jahre altes Sozialversicherungsabkommen. Das Abkommen selbst hat seine Bedeutung und seinen Sinn. Für die Ghettobeschäftigten aber war es ein Hindernis. Diesen Missstand beheben wir heute, und das ist auch gut so.\"\n14601,susanne-mittag,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrter Herr de Maizière! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Mit der heute zu beschließenden Neustrukturierung des Bundeskriminalamtgesetzes haben wir es mit einem, wie man bei uns im Norden - da sind die richtigen Bundesländer - sagt, echten Dickschiff zu tun, und zwar nicht nur, was den Tiefgang der Beratungen angeht - wir haben uns damit ordentlich beschäftigt -, sondern auch, welche Bugwelle das Ganze gesetzgeberisch und besonders organisatorisch für das BKA vor sich herschiebt. Denn wir haben es nicht nur mit einer vollkommenen Umstrukturierung - das ist schon erwähnt worden - des Datenbestandes des BKA zu tun, die auch die Länder betrifft, nein, in diesem Geleitzug werden wir heute auch das Datenschutz-Anpassungs- und \u001eUmsetzungsgesetz und das Europol-Gesetz beschließen. Alle drei Gesetze haben Bezüge zueinander. Das Europol-Gesetz wird heute Abend ebenfalls im Plenum behandelt und wurde hinsichtlich der Umsetzungsfristen dem BKA-Gesetz angepasst.\n\nBei der Diskussion und Prüfung wurde deutlich, dass die Gesetze nur bedingt aufeinander bzw. auf die Bundesländer abgestimmt waren. Wir haben nochmals Experten aus den Polizeien der Länder zu Rate gezogen. Dabei stellte sich heraus, dass das BKA-Gesetz in seinem ersten Entwurf in der Praxis gar nicht hätte umgesetzt werden können.\n\nDie Daten der Länderpolizeien hätten nicht automatisiert in das neue System übernommen werden können, sondern hätten erst überprüft und katalogisiert werden müssen. Das wäre nur mit einem immensen Personalaufwand möglich gewesen und war damit indiskutabel. Ich möchte mich deswegen ganz ausdrücklich bei den Länderpolizeien aus Niedersachsen, Baden-Württemberg und Bayern bedanken, die uns innerhalb kürzester Zeit mit ihrer Expertise geholfen und zu einer praktikablen Lösung beigetragen haben, wie auch beim Kollegen Binninger. Sie haben das Gesetz zusammen mit der SPD gemacht, damit es umsetzbar ist und sich nicht die Länder fragen, was wir hier im Bund beschlossen haben.\n\nAusgangspunkt für die komplette Umstrukturierung der Datensysteme war das Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichtes - das ist hier schon erwähnt worden -, das das BKA-Gesetz in der bisherigen Form in Teilen als nicht rechtmäßig ansah.\n\nDas hat dazu geführt, dass das BMI uns sicherheitshalber - wie passend - einen Entwurf vorgelegt hat, der sich zum Teil wortwörtlich an den Vorgaben des höchsten deutschen Gerichtes orientiert. In Anhörungen haben einige Sachverständige bemängelt, so genau hätte man das gar nicht machen müssen, das wäre gar nicht nötig gewesen. Das mag sein, verhindert, wie ich denke, aber sicherlich eine neue Verfassungsrechtsproblematik.\n\nDenn wir müssen dem BKA die nötige Zeit und Sicherheit geben, um die so wichtige Aufgabe der Umstrukturierung neben den bereits erheblich gewachsenen Aufgaben erfüllen zu können. Dabei fangen sie jedoch nicht bei Null an.\n\nIch habe gerade schon die Zusammenarbeit mit den Länderpolizeien bei den Beratungen gelobt. Diese Zusammenarbeit wird sich in den nächsten Jahren noch vertiefen, und zwar als gleichberechtigte Partner.\n\nIch möchte hier klarstellen, dass das Bundeskriminalamt eine Zentralstellenfunktion für das polizeiliche Nachrichten- und Auskunftswesen hat und Dienstleister ist. Das heißt nicht, dass sich daraus eine übergeordnete Vorgesetztenfunktion ergibt. Ziel ist eine informationstechnische Verknüpfung in einem föderalen System. Wir alle haben es mitgekriegt: Das hat in den letzten Jahren nicht immer gut geklappt.\n\nBei endlichen finanziellen und personellen Ressourcen, wachsenden Aufgaben und neuen Phänomenen können wir uns 19 Parallelstrukturen in diesem Land nicht leisten. Man denke nur an das Ausmaß der Netzkriminalität, die zu bearbeiten ist. Bei den Verfahren geht es derzeit locker um Daten im Terabyte-Bereich.\n\nAls Beispiel möchte ich hier auch einmal das Hinweisportal des BKA nennen, die sogenannte Boston Cloud. Diese vom BKA betriebene Infrastruktur wird anlassbezogen und für einen begrenzten Zeitraum, in dem die Bürgerinnen und Bürger Fotos und Videos hochladen können, freigeschaltet. Diese Daten stehen dann den Polizeibehörden in den Ländern für ihre Ermittlungen zur Verfügung. Das ist zuletzt nach den Angriffen bei dem Bundesligaspiel des BVB gegen Leipzig am 4. Februar 2017 der Fall gewesen.\n\nDas sind wichtige Strukturen, die die Polizei für ihre länderübergreifende Arbeit benötigt. Durch die flächendeckende Verbreitung und den andauernden Gebrauch von Smartphones kommen hier riesige Datenmengen zusammen, die den Behörden übermittelt werden. Diese müssen auch erst einmal verarbeitet und geschützt werden; denn es gab auch schon Hackerangriffe auf dieses Portal.\n\nEs ist zukunftsorientiert, dass das BKA als Zentralstelle diesen Service anbietet und die Arbeit der Polizei vernetzt und unterstützt. Das gilt auch in Bezug auf die Informations-, Einsatz- und Kriminaltechnik in der bisherigen Form - diese ganze Arbeit läuft ja weiter -, in Bezug auf die neuen Bereiche wie die elektronische Aufenthaltsüberwachung - so heißt das nämlich - und in Bezug auf die Organisation des Inneren Sicherheitsfonds - unter anderem zur Bekämpfung der organisierten Kriminalität -, was nämlich auch beim BKA stattfindet.\n\nIch denke, dieser Gesetzentwurf ist ein wichtiger Schritt zur Verbesserung unserer Sicherheitsstrukturen und zur effizienten Kriminalitätsbekämpfung. Über die haushalterischen Auswirkungen unterhalten wir uns demnächst noch einmal; denn dazu gibt es auch noch einiges zu beschließen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n11813,andrea-nahles,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Mit fast 140 Milliarden Euro umfasst das Budget für Arbeit und Soziales, Einzelplan 11, in diesem Jahr 42 Prozent des Bundeshaushalts. Das sage ich nicht, um zu kokettieren, sondern das ist eine wichtige Botschaft für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger dieses Landes; denn es zeigt, dass wir in unserem Land Ernst machen mit dem, was Auftrag der Verfassung ist.\n\nDie Bundesrepublik Deutschland ist ein demokratischer und sozialer Rechtsstaat. Das Soziale ist nicht nur Garnitur obendrauf, sondern das Soziale ist eine wesentliche Kernaufgabe unseres Landes. Das zeigt auch dieser Haushaltsentwurf. Darum ist es weder so, dass die Regierung unsere Zukunft verpulvert, wie es Die Welt kürzlich postulierte, noch müssten „alle Alarmglocken läuten“, wie der Herr Kollege von Stetten meint. Nein, die Alarmglocken müssten läuten, wenn wir als Staat nachlassen würden, für Ausgleich zu sorgen, wenn wir nachlassen würden, für Gerechtigkeit, für soziale Sicherung und Zusammenhalt zu sorgen. Das wäre alarmierend.\n\nGerade jetzt erleben wir, dass der Zusammenhalt in unserem Land auf die Probe gestellt wird. Gerade jetzt wird spürbar, dass Solidarität eben keine Selbstverständlichkeit ist. Gerade in diesen Tagen fühlen sich die obenauf, die einen Keil zwischen die Menschen in unserem Land treiben wollen, die die Sorgen ausnutzen und Ressentiments und Ängste schüren - mit anderen Worten: die spalten.\n\nAngst schüren und aus der Unsicherheit der Menschen politisches Kapital schlagen - das ist der Weg der AfD. Die Bundesregierung macht genau das Gegenteil: Wir setzen auf die Zukunft. Wir wollen gestalten: Fortschritt und soziale Gerechtigkeit. Diese Regierung hat gerade in den letzten Jahren sehr viel getan, um das Leben der Menschen in diesem Land im Alltag ganz konkret zu verbessern.\n\nMindestlohn, Mietpreisbremse, Rentenreform, aber auch die Stärkung der Tarifautonomie und nicht zuletzt eben unser Versuch, in schwierigen Zeiten einfach vernünftig und auf einem klar demokratischen und integrativen Kurs zu bleiben: Das ist die Politik, die wir machen; denn unsere Kraft liegt im Zusammenhalt.\n\nDort, wo sich Frauen und Männer, Arbeitnehmer und Arbeitgeber, junge und alte Menschen, Menschen mit und ohne Behinderung, Alteingesessene und neu Hinzugekommene zusammentun, kommen die Dinge in Bewegung und erreichen wir dauerhaft sozialen Frieden und Wohlstand. Für mich ist es ganz einfach: Zusammen ist man eben am stärksten. Wer mit dem Finger auf andere zeigt und Politik gegen Schwächere und Minderheiten macht, wer Ausgrenzung statt Zusammenhalt propagiert, der schwächt unser Land und damit am Ende auch uns selbst.\n\nFür mich ist ganz klar - das ist für die Opposition in diesen Tagen natürlich sehr schwer -, dass wir stark sind.\n\nDie wirtschaftliche Lage unseres Landes ist gut. Wir haben schon über Jahre stetiges Wachstum.\n\nDie Beschäftigung - ich kann mich als Abgeordnete auch noch an andere Zeiten erinnern -\n\nboomt. Ich betone: boomt!\n\nTrotz der Belastungen auch durch die Hinzugekommenen haben wir weiterhin mehr offene Stellen und eine höhere Beschäftigung. Wir hatten seit Jahrzehnten nicht eine so hohe Anzahl an Erwerbstätigen;\n\nseit 25 Jahren war die Arbeitslosigkeit nicht so niedrig wie jetzt.\n\nEs ist aber manchmal eben schwer, das einfach mal zu würdigen, obwohl es schnell gesagt wäre. Wenn es anders wäre, dann hätten wir hier Debatten. Für die Leute draußen im Land ist das aber vielleicht die wichtigste Nachricht überhaupt.\n\nIch sage deswegen im Übrigen auch: Das heißt nicht, dass wir die Hände in den Schoß legen und dass es nichts mehr zu tun gibt. - Das ist ja Quatsch. Wir nehmen uns gerade für diesen Herbst und Anfang des nächsten Jahres große Gesetzespakete vor.\n\nIn wenigen Wochen werde ich ein Gesamtkonzept zur Alterssicherung vorlegen, in dem es darum geht, die gesetzliche Rente als tragenden Pfeiler des Rentensystems in Deutschland zu stabilisieren. Das wird ganz klar ein ganz zentraler Punkt.\n\nDarüber hinaus werden wir, wie ich hoffe, nach 30 Jahren - in 2020 wird das der Fall sein - das letzte Sozialsystem, bei dem die Ost-West-Angleichung noch nicht gelungen ist, reformieren und ein gleiches Rentenrecht in Ost und West durchsetzen. Ich sage aber: Ich warte noch darauf, dass die Meinungsbildung der CDU und der CSU in dieser Frage abgeschlossen wird.\n\nVor allem in Richtung der Linkspartei sage ich aber auch: Es geht natürlich nicht, nur die Rosinen herauszupicken. Gleiches Recht bedeutet zwar, dass der Rentenwert von 94 auf 100 Prozent erhöht wird, gleichzeitig ist dann aber auch eine Höherbewertung der Entgeltpunkte nicht mehr möglich.\n\nDas muss man ganz eindeutig sagen. Gleiches Recht heißt gleiches Recht und nicht gleiches Recht mit Ausnahmen für einige in Ostdeutschland. Das kann es am Ende nicht geben.\n\nDarüber müssen wir dann hier streiten; das kann es aber auf keinen Fall sein.\n\nWir werden daneben dafür sorgen - Herr Schäuble und ich sind hier in intensiven Gesprächen -, dass auch kleine und mittlere Unternehmen - in diesen ist die betriebliche Altersvorsorge noch nicht sehr weit verbreitet - ihren Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern in Zukunft eine betriebliche Altersvorsorge anbieten können. Da arbeiten wir eng und vertrauensvoll zusammen.\n\nEs geht natürlich auch um Armutsprävention. Die Gruppe, die zurzeit das größte Armutsrisiko trägt, sind die Erwerbsgeminderten, 1,8 Millionen Menschen. Sie dürfen nicht vergessen werden. Außerhalb von Fachzirkeln höre ich über diese Gruppe faktisch nie etwas. Aber es sind diejenigen, die am meisten von Altersarmut betroffen sein werden. Auch das wird auf jeden Fall ein Teil des Gesamtkonzeptes werden.\n\nSie sehen also: Allein in diesem Bereich gibt es eine ganze Menge zu tun.\n\nWir werden darüber hinaus in der nächsten Sitzungswoche zwei wesentliche Gesetzentwürfe einbringen. Auf unserer Grundphilosophie „Stärkung der Tarifautonomie“ basiert unser Gesetzentwurf zu Leiharbeit und Werkvertragsarbeit, mit dem zum ersten Mal eine Höchstverleihdauer geregelt wird und der zum ersten Mal dafür sorgt, dass die Betriebsräte Bescheid wissen, weil sie ein Recht auf Information erhalten.\n\nIch sage noch etwas. Dieses Gesetz wird mit dem Missstand Schluss machen, dass Unternehmen Leiharbeiter gezielt als Streikbrecher einsetzen, um damit Tarifverhandlungen zu ihren Gunsten zu beeinflussen. Es ist kein Zufall, dass in dem Jahr, in dem bei der Post massenweise Streikbrecher eingesetzt wurden, der niedrigste Tarifabschluss des ganzen Jahres genau in diesem Bereich abgeschlossen wurde. Damit ist Schluss, wenn wir dieses Gesetz gemeinsam verabschieden.\n\nWir müssen nicht darüber reden, dass wir in diesem Zusammenhang auch mit dem Mindestlohn Zeichen gesetzt haben. Zum neuen Jahr 2017 wird der Mindestlohn auf 8,84 Euro steigen. Das haben nicht wir entschieden, sondern das haben wir, wie es unserer Überzeugung entspricht, den Tarifparteien im Rahmen einer Mindestlohnkommission überantwortet. Das ist kein politischer Mindestlohn, sondern er basiert auf dem, was die Sozialpartner uns vorschlagen. Ich bleibe dabei: Es hilft nichts - das sage ich besonders in Richtung Linkspartei -, den Menschen immer etwas von 10, 12 Euro oder anderen Fantasiezahlen zu erzählen. Der neu festgesetzte Mindestlohn basiert auf Fakten und Sozialpartnerschaft.\n\nDas ist der richtige Weg, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nWir werden in den nächsten Wochen den Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht in seiner ersten Fassung auf den Weg bringen. Was heißt das? Es werden erst einmal die statistischen Grundlagen vorgelegt. Wir haben hier von Anfang an eine klare Politik gemacht. Wir haben diese Zahlen transparent und allen zugänglich gemacht. Es gab in diesem Zusammenhang viele Verschwörungstheorien. Sie entbehren aber jeder Grundlage. Wir werden Ihnen und allen, die dies wollen, die Gelegenheit geben, sich die Daten anzusehen.\n\nReichtum kommt in Deutschland immer weniger aus eigener Arbeit - das bedrückt mich -, sondern wird heute meist vererbt. Das mag für manche erfreulich sein; für unser Land insgesamt ist es sehr bedenklich. Es führt dazu, dass sich Schichten verfestigen, dass Aufstieg, die Triebfeder für den Einsatz in Beruf und Wirtschaft, seltener und schwerer wird. Deswegen ist das eine Sache, die wir so nicht stehen lassen können. Dafür wird uns dieser Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht wichtige Argumente liefern.\n\nIch bin daran besonders interessiert, weil es Zusammenhänge mit anderen Programmen, zum Beispiel von Barbara Hendricks, gibt. Wir wollen mit Blick auf die soziokulturellen Verfestigungen in bestimmten Stadtteilen, die jeder von uns kennt, selbst in kleineren und mittelgroßen Städten, an die Wurzel des Übels gehen, um zu verhindern, dass bestimmte Gruppen und Stadtteile völlig abgehängt werden. Das wird einer der Punkte sein, die uns beschäftigen.\n\nWir haben in diesem Zusammenhang auch über Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit zu reden. Ich bin froh, dass wir in diesem Haushalt den Ansatz für das Programm „Soziale Teilhabe am Arbeitsmarkt“, das auf den öffentlichen Beschäftigungssektor zielt, verdoppeln können. Immerhin: Das ist eine Möglichkeit - -\n\n- Frau Pothmer, da haben Sie vollkommen recht. Ich bin immer offen für eine weitere Mittelsteigerung. Immerhin: Der Ansatz wird verdoppelt. Wir können nun ganz konkret mit diesem Programm Langzeitarbeitslose, die einen Neustart verdienen, besser unterstützen.\n\nDaneben haben wir auch die Integration von Flüchtlingen zu leisten. Dazu haben wir bereits das Integrationsgesetz durch den Bundestag gebracht. Aber auch in diesem Haushalt stehen zusätzlich 3,25 Milliarden Euro zur Sicherung des Lebensunterhaltes und - vor allem das ist wichtig - 1,9 Milliarden Euro für die aktive Eingliederung der Flüchtlinge bereit.\n\nWir werden die Anzahl der berufsbezogenen Sprachkurse bis Anfang des nächsten Jahres von 20 000 auf 200 000 verzehnfachen. Wenn noch mehr Bedarf besteht, dann - da bin ich sicher -, wird diese Bundesregierung auch handeln. Deutsch lernen ist nun einmal der zentrale Dreh- und Angelpunkt. Wir schaffen außerdem in diesem Haushalt für Flüchtlinge die Möglichkeit, über die Integrationsmaßnahmen etwas Sinnvolles zu tun, solange sie faktisch leider noch zu lange im Regelkreis des Asylbewerberleistungsgesetzes festhängen, weil es mit der Statusklärung so lange dauert. Dieses Programm gilt bereits ab August dieses Jahres. Es wird also bereits umgesetzt. Das sind wichtige Punkte.\n\nAber am meisten knabbern wir zurzeit daran, dass wir auch den Nachweis vorhandener Qualifikationen klären müssen. Oft heißt es nur: Sie haben keine Urkunde der IHK in der Tasche. - Wenn Flüchtlinge von Syrien hierherkommen, ist das auch nicht zu erwarten. Trotzdem können sie etwas. Umso wichtiger ist es, dass wir es anbieten, sie zu erproben, und dass die IHK und Handwerkskammern mitspielen. Das läuft auch. Diese Erprobungs- und Anerkennungsverfahren halte ich für ganz zentral, um die vorhandenen Potenziale zu heben.\n\nNicht zuletzt haben wir Hürden abgebaut, zum Beispiel die Vorrangprüfung. Wir haben den Ländern die Entscheidung selber überlassen, auch regional. Das Ergebnis ist, dass in 133 der 156 Agenturbezirke der Bundesagentur für Arbeit die Vorrangprüfung ausgesetzt wurde. Das ist sehr gut, weil es wieder eine Hürde weniger ist, um diese Menschen in Arbeit zu integrieren, und gleichzeitig auf regionale und landesspezifische Bedürfnisse eingeht. Denn es gibt nun einmal auch Regionen, für die das keine schlaue Idee ist, und diese werden damit auch berücksichtigt.\n\nWir werden in diesem Herbst - das ist mein letzter Satz - neben dem, was ich bereits genannt habe, auch das Bundesteilhabegesetz anpacken.\n\nDafür werden zusätzliche Mittel zur Verfügung gestellt, von 157 Millionen Euro für 2017 aufwachsend bis auf 700 Millionen Euro. Die Entlastung der Kommunen um 5 Milliarden Euro findet statt - auf anderem Wege; diese Mittel sind „on top“. Damit können wir die Umsetzung der UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention auf neue, wie ich finde, bahnbrechende Weise weiterbringen. Auch darüber werden wir gesondert beraten.\n\nSie sehen also: Diese Regierung ist handlungsfähig. Wir arbeiten mit ganz konkreten Anstrengungen für die Menschen. Die nötigen Mittel dafür stehen bereit. Das ist auch der guten wirtschaftlichen Lage zu verdanken, sonst würden wir über ganz andere Fragen diskutieren. Umso besser; das fügt sich gut. In diesem Sinne haben wir noch einen heißen Herbst.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n14100,wolfgang-strengmann-kuhn,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich will noch einmal sagen, worum es geht. Es geht hier um die Kinder, die in zwei verschiedenen Haushalten aufwachsen, weil die Eltern getrennt voneinander leben. Es geht um deren Existenzminimum, das durch die gegenwärtigen Leistungen nicht abgesichert ist. Wenn ein Kind in zwei Haushalten lebt - die Kollegin Kipping hat das eben an einigen Beispielen plastisch deutlich gemacht -, dann entstehen höhere Kosten. Im Steuerrecht gibt es einen Steuerfreibetrag für doppelte Haushaltsführung. Für Kinder, die im Hartz-IV-Bezug leben, gibt es kein entsprechendes Gegenstück, um diesen Mehrbedarf zu decken. Das wäre unbedingt notwendig.\n\nIch kann hier die Position der Union überhaupt nicht verstehen; denn es geht darum, das Existenzminimum der Kinder zu decken, und das möglichst unbürokratisch. Eigentlich sollte es doch auch im Interesse der Union sein, das zu erreichen.\n\nNun zur SPD. Es geht hier um einen unbürokratischen Vorschlag. Der Vorschlag, den die Linke in ihrem Antrag macht - wir haben ihn schon im letzten Jahr in zwei Anträgen formuliert, sowohl im Bereich Rechtsvereinfachungen als auch hinsichtlich des Regelsatzes; es gab schon zweimal die Möglichkeit, entsprechende Regelungen einzuführen -, ist genau der richtige Weg: Die Person, die die Kinder überwiegend betreut, soll den Regelsatz bekommen, und zwar in voller Höhe, unabhängig davon, ob das Kind einmal ein paar Tage bei dem Elternteil ist, der das Kind nicht überwiegend betreut. Der andere Elternteil soll einen pauschalen Umgangsmehrbedarf geltend machen können. Die Linken schlagen hierfür 50 Prozent des Regelsatzes vor. Das ist eine vernünftige Größenordnung. Das wäre eine ganz unbürokratische, einfache Regelung, die man heute per Beschluss einführen könnte.\n\nIch will noch einmal sagen: Um Armut zu bekämpfen, reicht das natürlich nicht aus. Es geht darum, das Existenzminimum für diese spezielle Gruppe zu decken. Zur Gewährung eines menschenwürdigen Existenzminimums fordert eigentlich sogar die Verfassung auf. Dazu gehört das Existenzminimum von Kindern, auch wenn die Eltern, ob verschuldet oder nicht verschuldet, getrennt leben. Das ist ein Grundrecht der Kinder, dem wir nachkommen müssen. Wenn wir Kinderarmut bekämpfen wollen, dann braucht es natürlich viel mehr. 20 Prozent Kinderarmut in Deutschland sind definitiv zu viel. Auch das müssen wir angehen.\n\nWir Grünen haben an dieser Stelle einen Vorschlag vorgelegt. Wir sagen: Wir brauchen eine Kindergrundsicherung in Höhe des höchsten Regelsatzes. Diese Grundsicherung muss einkommensunabhängig sein und für alle Kinder gelten. Für Menschen mit geringem Einkommen brauchen wir einen einkommensabhängigen Kindergeldbonus, der das sächliche Existenzminimum abdeckt. Außerdem brauchen wir eine Neuberechnung und Anhebung der Kinderregelsätze. Mit diesem Dreiklang können wir das Existenzminimum für alle Kinder in Deutschland vernünftig absichern und Kinderarmut effizient und unbürokratisch bekämpfen.\n\nDas ist das, was jetzt ansteht. Geben Sie sich also einen Ruck, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der SPD, aber vor allen Dingen von der Union! Lassen Sie uns mit dieser kleinen Gruppe anfangen; sie ist besonders betroffen. Lassen Sie uns das Existenzminimum der Kinder, deren Eltern getrennt leben, durch einen Umgangsmehrbedarf decken! Stimmen Sie dem Antrag der Linken zu!\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n1538,philipp-mißfelder,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich finde es richtig, dass die Bundesregierung dieses Mandat einbringt, und ich bin der Meinung, dass wir uns am Schutz der „Cape Ray“ beteiligen sollten. Damit zeigen und dokumentieren wir, dass es uns wichtig ist, bei der Konfliktlösung - ich betrachte die Vernichtung der Chemiewaffen als Teil der Konfliktlösungsstrategie - nicht nur am Rand zu stehen, sondern auch ein aktiver Partner zu sein, einen aktiven Beitrag zu leisten. Ich finde es gut, dass man diesen Weg gefunden hat.\n\nNatürlich ist das grausame, schreckliche Verbrechen, das mit dem Einsatz der Chemiewaffen geschehen ist, bis heute nicht restlos aufgeklärt worden, und die westliche Gemeinschaft ist auch mit Sicherheit nicht so entschlossen aufgetreten, wie sich das viele von ihr gewünscht haben. Aber die Paradoxie unseres Handelns an dieser Stelle, auch die Ankündigungen seitens der Amerikaner, was rote Linien angeht, ist vor allem der Komplexität des Bürgerkrieges in Syrien geschuldet.\n\nWir haben häufig gesagt - auch ich habe es schon einmal an diesem Platz gesagt -, dass eine Konfliktlösung nur ohne Assad möglich ist; das war zu Beginn der Dreh- und Angelpunkt fast aller Wortmeldungen hier im Hause. Wir sehen aber, dass sich die militärische Situation aufgrund der massiven Intervention seitens Irans und der Hisbollah verändert hat und sich das Blatt in militärischer Hinsicht gewendet hat. Insofern haben wir alles darangesetzt, eine politische Lösung voranzubringen, und haben, anders als andere, einen militärischen Lösungsansatz ausgeschlossen. Vor diesem Hintergrund glaube ich, dass man dieses Mandat nicht als Teil irgendwelcher militärischen Konstrukte missverstehen darf; denn hier geht es in der Tat darum, Abrüstungsmaßnahmen voranzubringen. Nur aus Sicherheitsüberlegungen heraus muss der Transport der Chemiewaffen militärisch begleitet werden. Um ein entsprechendes Mandat wirbt die Bundesregierung an dieser Stelle.\n\nIch bin der festen Überzeugung, dass es richtig ist, die Gespräche über die Zukunft Syriens fortzusetzen; aber ich glaube auch - das ist vorhin in der Debatte mehrfach gesagt worden -, dass gerade die öffentliche Fokussierung auf andere Problemfelder und Konfliktherde der Welt dazu geführt hat, dass Syrien und die entsprechenden Verhandlungen in den letzten Wochen und Monaten etwas in den Hintergrund getreten sind.\n\nWenn man versucht, zu bilanzieren, welche substanziellen Fortschritte es gegeben hat, dann kommt man leider zu dem Ergebnis, dass es in den letzten Wochen und Monaten keine substanziellen Fortschritte gegeben hat. Die Situation ist eher festgefahren.\n\nWenn Sie sich angeschaut haben, mit welcher Kritik der amerikanische Präsident, als er Saudi-Arabien besuchte, konfrontiert worden ist - Saudi-Arabien sagt nach wie vor, man habe großes Interesse daran, dass Amerika die Dschihadisten und die Aufständischen, die sich aus diesem Teil der Opposition rekrutieren, unterstützt -, sehen Sie, wie weit die Position auch unserer Verbündeten teilweise von unserer abweicht.\n\nWir müssen die politische Aufmerksamkeit nach wie vor darauf richten: Wie kann der Bürgerkrieg gestoppt werden? Welche Zukunft soll das Land haben? Da ist der Frontverlauf in keiner Weise klar. Denn sosehr wir auch Sympathie für die syrischen Oppositionellen in Syrien hegen: Wir können nicht die Augen davor verschließen, dass viele Dschihadisten von außen eingesickert sind und dass wir auch im Falle eines Friedensschlusses damit konfrontiert sein werden, dass Dschihadisten, die vielleicht die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit haben, trainiert, ausgebildet und kampferprobt zurück nach Deutschland kommen. Vor diesen Hintergrund sage ich: Die Komplexität dieses Problems ist nicht zu überschätzen. Deshalb sollte man sachlich argumentieren; ich fand allerdings, dass das bei den Wortbeiträgen der Linkspartei nicht der Fall war.\n\nWir werben für dieses Mandat. Wir wollen uns weiterhin politisch engagieren, damit Syrien eine friedliche Zukunft hat. Ich traue mir keine Prognose darüber zu, in welcher personellen Konstellation das stattfinden wird und wer die Ansprechpartner sein sollen. Ich habe mit zahlreichen Vertretern der syrischen Opposition Gespräche geführt. Manche waren mir außerordentlich sympathisch; sie setzen sich für eine friedliche, demokratische und freie Zukunft ihres Landes ein. Andere hingegen sehe ich eher als zwielichtige Personen, die etwas ganz anderes im Schilde führen.\n\nInsgesamt ist festzustellen: Sosehr uns die Ereignisse auf der Krim, die deutsch-russische Partnerschaft oder auch das Hickhack um die Zukunft des deutsch-russische Verhältnisses beschäftigen, sollten wir nicht vergessen, dass in Syrien ein Bürgerkrieg tobt, der bisher sehr viele Opfer gekostet hat. Er verdient nach wie vor unsere politische Aufmerksamkeit.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n1240,kordula-schulz-asche,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Herr Kollege Dr. Lauterbach, ich möchte mit Nachdruck -Ihren Vorwurf zurückweisen, unser Antrag sei populistisch.\n\nIch verbitte mir auch Ihren Vorwurf, wir würden Lösungen zulasten der Eltern und ihrer betroffenen Kinder vorschlagen.\n\nIch verbitte mir diesen Vorwurf und fordere Sie ausdrücklich auf, zu der sachlichen Ebene zurückzukehren, die heute dankenswerterweise der Gesundheitsminister, Herr Gröhe, beschritten hat.\n\nSie haben über die letzte Legislaturperiode geredet. Aber das Problem, das heute auf der Tagesordnung steht, nämlich die steigenden Haftpflichtversicherungsprämien für Hebammen, ist viel älter. Sie waren schon einmal an einer Großen Koalition beteiligt und hätten agieren können. Die Haftpflichtversicherungsprämien für Hebammen haben sich in den letzten zehn Jahren vervielfacht. Es ist daher billig, dass Sie nur auf die letzte Legislaturperiode zurückschauen und denjenigen, die konkrete Vorschläge machen, Aktionismus vorwerfen.\n\nWir sind nun in einer Situation, wo schnell gehandelt werden muss; denn wenn nicht schnell gehandelt wird, dann bedeutet das, dass sich das Problem dadurch löst, dass alle freiberuflich tätigen Hebammen ihre Arbeit aufgeben werden. Das kann nicht im Interesse einer guten Geburtshilfe in Deutschland liegen.\n\nLassen Sie mich angesichts der heutigen Diskussion einen Dank an die Hebammen aussprechen, die nicht erst seit gestern, sondern schon seit Jahren mit zunehmend einfallsreicheren Aktionen auf ihre Situation hinweisen. Dazu gehört auch diese Petition. Herzlichen Dank an die Hebammen, die immer wieder bereit waren, auf dieses Problem hinzuweisen, und nicht aufgegeben haben.\n\nAber es geht nicht nur um den Beruf der Hebammen, sondern es geht auch um die gesellschaftliche Grundfrage: Haben Eltern in unserem Land die Wahlfreiheit,\n\nin welcher Art und Weise sie Kinder auf die Welt bringen wollen?\n\nDie Wahlfreiheit der Eltern ist ein hohes Gut. Dazu gehört die Hausgeburt, dazu gehört die Geburt im Geburtshaus, und dazu gehört die Geburt in der Klinik. Das ist das, was heute entschieden wird; denn wenn die Geburt im Geburtshaus und die Hausgeburt wegfallen, dann gibt es keine Wahlfreiheit mehr.\n\nIch beantworte sie gleich; denn ich habe sie schon gehört. Es geht um die Frage, was jetzt konkret zu tun ist.\n\nGut, dann lasse ich ihn sie stellen.\n\nIch antworte gerne auf die Bemerkung. Selbstverständlich werde ich Ihre Bitte weitergeben. Vielleicht wird in dem Antwortschreiben einiges von dem stehen, was ich gleich sage.\n\nEs stellt sich jetzt die Frage: Was ist zu tun? Ich glaube, dass es verschiedene Ebenen gibt. Wir müssen zum einen kurzfristig handeln. Herzlichen Dank, Herr Minister Gröhe, dass Sie darauf eingegangen sind; denn die Krankenkassen und die Berufshaftpflichtversicherungen müssen doch ihrer gesellschaftlichen Verantwortung in ihrem Bereich nachkommen und den Beruf der Hebamme kurzfristig finanziell absichern. Wir brauchen zum anderen mittelfristige Lösungen, wie das im -Zusammenhang mit dem Haftungsfonds oder anderen Lösungen diskutiert wurde. Wir brauchen ferner eine Berufshaftpflicht für alle Gesundheitsberufe, wie es hier besprochen wurde. Natürlich brauchen wir eine regelmäßige Bestandsaufnahme, die zeigt, ob die flächendeckende und gute geburtshilfliche Versorgung in Deutschland gesichert ist.\n\nDas mache ich auch. - Das sollte unser Ziel sein: eine flächendeckende, gute Versorgung in der Geburtshilfe. Ich freue mich auf die Zusammenarbeit und die Diskussion unseres Antrags.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n3079,wolfgang-strengmann-kuhn,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Gute Sozialpolitik bemisst sich nicht einfach daran, wie viel Geld ausgegeben wird. In diesem Bundeshaushalt wird in der Tat viel Geld ausgegeben. Aber entscheidend ist, was hinten rauskommt.\n\n- „Da hatte Helmut Kohl völlig Recht“, sagt der Kollege Birkwald von den Linken. - Gute Sozialpolitik ist vor allem danach zu bewerten, wie wir mit denen umgehen, die am Rand der Gesellschaft stehen oder ausgegrenzt werden.\n\nDiesbezüglich ist die Bundesregierung eine einzige schwarz-rote Null.\n\nHeute ist Tag der Wohnungslosen. Wir haben die Bundesregierung aus diesem Anlass befragt. Das Ergebnis war: Erstens. Die Bundesregierung hat keine eigenen Zahlen, sondern verweist auf die Zahlen der BAG Wohnungslosenhilfe, die zwangsläufig a) nicht aktuell genug sind und b) nur grobe Schätzungen sind. Wir brauchen endlich eine offizielle Wohnungslosen- und Obdachlosenstatistik, um zielgenau helfen zu können.\n\nZweitens wurde an Ihrer Antwort deutlich: Sie haben überhaupt kein Interesse am Thema Obdachlosigkeit. Sie haben auch kein Interesse daran, etwas dagegen zu unternehmen. Überhaupt ist Armut für Sie kein Thema. Auch diesmal haben wir nichts zu diesem Thema gehört. Die armen Menschen sind Ihnen schlicht egal.\n\nWir haben eben gehört, Sie seien - angeblich - eine christlich-sozialdemokratische oder christlich-soziale Koalition. Wenn man sich nicht einmal ein kleines bisschen um die Bekämpfung der Armut bemüht, ist das weder sozial noch christlich.\n\nEin paar Beispiele dazu. Die Bund-Länder-Arbeitsgemeinschaft zur Rechtsvereinfachung der passiven Leistungen im SGB II - ein fürchterlicher Name - ist von der Kollegin Katja Kipping schon angesprochen worden. So wie sich der Titel anhört, war auch ihre Arbeit. Es ging um Rechtsvereinfachung und Verwaltungsvereinfachung, allerdings nur aus Sicht der Verwaltung bzw. der Behörde und überhaupt nicht aus Sicht der betroffenen Menschen. Das wäre aber das, was unbedingt nötig ist. Wir brauchen tatsächlich Vereinfachungen, weniger Hürden, einfachere Regeln, aber aus Sicht der Betroffenen, damit sie leichter an die Leistungen kommen.\n\nWir brauchen auch ein konsistentes, transparentes Grundsicherungssystem. Sechs verschiedene Grundsicherungsleistungen sind in vier verschiedenen Gesetzen geregelt. Zählt man das BAföG dazu, haben wir sogar fünf Gesetze und sieben Leistungen. Das alles ist nicht wirklich konsistent. Das führt dazu, dass Menschen Leistungen gar nicht in Anspruch nehmen, teilweise von einem System in das andere geschoben werden, durch das Netz fallen. Hier müsste man ansetzen, um tatsächlich ein stabiles Grundsicherungsnetz hinzubekommen.\n\nWas wir natürlich auch brauchen, ist ein höherer Regelsatz. Es kann nicht sein, dass der Regelsatz immer weiter unter das Niveau der Armutsrisikogrenze sinkt.\n\nZu diesem Thema gab es in dieser Woche zwei Nachrichten.\n\nErstens gab es ein Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts zum Regelsatz. Wenn man es genau liest, stellt man fest: Es ist eine Ohrfeige für die vorige Bundesregierung. Das gilt aber auch im Hinblick auf die Berechnungen, die zuvor angestellt worden sind. Alle Rechentricks, die angewendet worden sind, um den Regelsatz niedrig zu halten, sind in diesem Urteil aufgeführt. Das Bundesverfassungsgericht hat gesagt: Der Regelsatz ist trotzdem verfassungsgemäß, aber nur noch so gerade eben. - Es hat die Bundesregierung aufgefordert, nachzuweisen, dass die einzelnen Bestandteile des Regelsatzes tatsächlich existenzsichernd sind. Diesen Nachweis müssen Sie jetzt erbringen. Sie müssen belegen, ob seine Bestandteile existenzsichernd sind oder nicht, und entsprechende Studien in Auftrag geben.\n\nDie zweite Nachricht dieser Woche lautet: Der Regelsatz wird um 8 Euro erhöht - um sage und schreibe 8 Euro.\n\nDie Bild-Zeitung hat daraus gleich einen Skandal gemacht, weil dadurch der Regelsatz stärker steigt als die Rente.\n\nDer Peter Weiß, den ich ja sonst sehr schätze, sagte dann:\n\nEs war nicht die Politik, sondern das Bundesverfassungsgericht, das entschieden hat, die Leistungssätze für die Grundsicherung von Arbeitslosen von der Entwicklung der Renten abzukoppeln.\n\nDas sei „bedauerlich“, sagte er weiter.\n\nDabei geht es, wie gesagt, um 8 Euro. Ich fordere Sie auf: Hören Sie endlich auf mit diesen Neiddebatten, und hören Sie auf mit dem Bashing des Bundesverfassungsgerichts!\n\nApropos Bundesverfassungsgericht. Vor über zwei Jahren hat das Bundesverfassungsgericht das Asyl-bewerberleistungsgesetz für verfassungswidrig erklärt. Jetzt gibt es nach über zwei Jahren immerhin einen Gesetzentwurf.\n\nDas ist ja schon einmal etwas. Aber die eigentlich konsequente Lösung, nämlich die einfachste und sozialste, die Abschaffung des Asylbewerberleistungsgesetzes, findet wieder nicht statt. Das Gesetz gehört abgeschafft.\n\nDas wäre auch ein Beitrag zum Abbau von Bürokratie und zur Rechtsvereinfachung, und das würde der Diskriminierung von Asylbewerbern als Menschen zweiter Klasse ein Ende setzen.\n\nWer Asyl beantragt hat, sollte auch arbeiten dürfen, und wenn sie oder er keine Arbeit findet oder zu wenig verdient, dann gibt es Hartz IV. Punkt! Es gibt keinen Grund für eine Grundsicherung zweiter Klasse und keinen Grund dafür, Asylbewerber anders zu behandeln als andere Menschen, die hier leben.\n\nDas gilt auch für Unionsbürgerinnen und -bürger, die vor Armut und Diskriminierung fliehen. Wir müssen Menschen, die zu uns kommen, die vor Armut und Diskriminierung geflohen sind, helfen und unterstützen, dürfen sie nicht diskriminieren und wieder in Armut stürzen.\n\nWeiter müssen wir an den Ursachen der Armutsflucht ansetzen. Dafür bräuchte es einen stärkeren Einsatz -dieser Bundesregierung für Armutsbekämpfung auf europäischer Ebene. Aber auch an dieser Stelle ist diese Regierung eine schwarz-rote Null. Auch ein soziales -Europa, bessere Armutsbekämpfung insgesamt, ist kein Thema. Ein „soziales Europa“ werden wir sicherlich an anderer Stelle noch ausführlicher diskutieren.\n\nKlar ist: Die Politik der Bundesregierung geht tatsächlich an den Schwächsten in diesem Land vorbei, und, wie gesagt, das ist eine einzige schwarz-rote Null an dieser Stelle.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n6806,matthaus-strebl,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Wir sprechen heute über die Problematik Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit, die bedauerlicherweise weiterhin aktuell ist. Dazu haben wir schon eine ganze Reihe von Zahlen gehört.\n\nWir sollten uns bei diesem Thema stets bewusst sein, dass Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit oft zu finanzieller und vor allem zu sozialer Ausgrenzung führt. 1 Million Menschen, die seit mindestens einem Jahr arbeitslos sind, ist eine zu hohe Zahl. Bereits im vergangenen November hatten wir in diesem Hohen Hause darüber gesprochen, und wir waren uns einig: Der Abbau der Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit in Deutschland ist eine wichtige Herausforderung, der wir uns stellen müssen und der wir uns stellen werden. Diese Aufgabe geht jetzt das Ministerium für Arbeit und Soziales mit uns gemeinsam an.\n\nWir sollten uns nicht damit zufriedengeben, dass wir trotz der letzten Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise - ich darf an die Jahre 2008 und 2009 erinnern - heute mit fast 43 Millionen Beschäftigten in Deutschland eine gute Arbeitsmarktsituation haben. Gleichwohl stagniert die Zahl der Langzeitarbeitslosen seit 2009 wie festbetoniert.\n\nLangzeitarbeitslose haben meistens mehrere Hemmnisse, die die Arbeitsaufnahme erschweren. Ich nenne hier die gesundheitlichen Einschränkungen, Suchtpro-bleme, Schulden und wenig gefestigte Familienstrukturen. Es gibt sicher mehrere Gründe. Für diese Menschen müssen wir eine individuelle Betreuung und Lösungen bieten.\n\nAuch wenn die Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter in den Jobcentern eine hervorragende Arbeit leisten, gibt es natürlich Verbesserungsbedarf, wie bereits genannt worden ist. Arbeitsmarktpolitische Instrumente müssen stetig angepasst und verbessert werden. Auch eine angemessene Kontaktdichte muss festgelegt werden. Das Profiling und die Gespräche in Jobcentern müssen individuell und einzelfallbezogen sein. Hier müssen finanzielle Mittel für effektive Programme eingesetzt werden. Ausschließlich höhere Ausgaben zu fordern, reicht eben nicht aus.\n\nVon Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit sind besonders Gering-qualifizierte, ältere Menschen, Alleinerziehende und -Behinderte betroffen. Insbesondere Bedarfsgemeinschaften mit Kindern haben ein erhöhtes Risiko, von Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit betroffen zu sein. Unsere Aufgabe ist es, zu verhindern, was häufig für ganze Familien gilt: einmal Hartz IV, immer Hartz IV. Hier müssen die flankierenden Maßnahmen einsetzen, damit eine Arbeitsaufnahme nicht an mangelnder Kinderbetreuung scheitert.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, ich begrüße deshalb das Bundesprogramm „Soziale Teilhabe am Arbeitsmarkt“, mit dem insbesondere Langzeitarbeitslose in einer Bedarfsgemeinschaft mit Kindern besonders gefördert werden. Damit erhalten nicht nur die erwerblosen Eltern eine gezielte Förderung, sondern es dient auch dazu, das Vorleben von sogenannten Sozialhilfekarrieren weitestgehend zu reduzieren.\n\nIn Ihrem Antrag fordern Sie von der Fraktion Die Linke die Errichtung eines auf Dauer angelegten öffentlich geförderten Arbeitsmarktes mit 200 000 Stellen. Öffentlich geförderte Beschäftigung und Arbeitsgelegenheiten halte ich für eine sinnvolle Idee für Menschen, die Alltagsstrukturen wieder neu erlernen und an den Arbeitsmarkt herangeführt werden müssen. Gleichwohl dürfen öffentliche Beschäftigung und Arbeitsgelegenheiten nicht in Konkurrenz und im Wettbewerb zu privaten Unternehmen stehen. Auch sollten Langzeitarbeitslose nicht dauerhaft in diese Programme verlagert werden. Bestehende Arbeitsplätze dürfen nicht durch öffentlich geförderte Beschäftigung verloren gehen.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, der Antrag der Linken beinhaltet viele Ideen. Einige, wie die Abschaffung der Sanktionen, haben wir schon wiederholt gehört. Und diesbezüglich werden wir wohl immer unterschiedlicher Auffassung sein. Mir bleibt aber die Frage der Finanzierung Ihres Fünf-Punkte-Programmes unbeantwortet. Dazu gehört auch die von Ihnen geforderte Entlohnung von 10 Euro pro Stunde, während der Mindestlohn in Deutschland bei 8,50 Euro liegt, wie wir alle wissen. Diese Erklärung bleiben Sie uns schuldig.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir müssen uns gemeinsam der Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit annehmen. Das Konzept des Bundesministeriums ist ein erster, wichtiger Schritt in die richtige Richtung. Das Fünf-Punkte-Programm der Linken überzeugt mich nicht. Deswegen lehne ich es ab.\n\nIch bedanke mich recht herzlich für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n11131,christel-voßbeck-kayser,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Heute zur Hauptkernzeit im Parlament über den Jahresbericht des Petitionsausschusses zu sprechen, zeigt, welche Bedeutung das Petitionswesen im Deutschen Bundestag hat. Es macht ferner deutlich, wie wichtig uns, dem Parlament, den Abgeordneten, diese Petitionen als Instrument der direkten Demokratie sind und dass wir die Menschen, die sich mit ihren Anliegen an uns wenden, sehr ernst nehmen.\n\nDies zeigt sich auch in unseren Ausschusssitzungen, in denen wir sehr leidenschaftlich die vielfältigen Anliegen der Bürger und Bürgerinnen diskutieren und wo wir auch wiederholt, über die Fraktionsgrenzen hinweg, zu einer gemeinsamen Meinung und damit auch Entscheidung kommen.\n\nDie Kollegin Steinke hat es schon erwähnt: Über 13 000 Petitionen wurden im vergangenen Jahr eingereicht. Auf 252 Arbeitstage im letzten Jahr bezogen, sind dies pro Tag etwa 52 Zuschriften. Ich finde, das ist schon eine Menge. Bei den Eingaben geht es um Themen aus allen Bereichen des täglichen Lebens, wo Bürger durch Gesetze direkt betroffen sind, sich benachteiligt fühlen oder eingeschränkt sehen.\n\nEs gibt - das erwähnte die Kollegin Steinke auch schon - zwei Möglichkeiten, wie die Bürger ihre Anliegen einbringen können, entweder schriftlich oder über die Onlineplattform des Deutschen Bundestages. Leider gibt es inzwischen viele vermeintliche Petitionsplattformen im Internet. Sie suggerieren, dass die Rechte der Bürger dort vertreten werden und dass die Bürger mit einer Unterschrift dort etwas bewirken können. Aber man kann auf diesen Plattformen nichts bewirken.\n\nIch will hier ganz klar sagen: Es gibt nur eine echte Petitionsplattform, und das ist die des Deutschen Bundestages.\n\nNur hier werden die Anliegen parlamentarisch geprüft und bearbeitet. Nur hier können Gesetze und Gesetzesänderungen auf den Weg gebracht werden.\n\nMehr als 2 Millionen registrierte Bürgerinnen und Bürger nutzen unsere Onlinepetitionsplattform. Ich sage: Nutzen Sie, liebe Bürgerinnen und Bürger, auch weiterhin dieses echte Angebot; denn nur wo „Petitionsausschuss“ draufsteht, ist auch Petitionsausschuss drin.\n\nBei über 13 000 Petitionen waren die Schwerpunkte der Bereich Arbeit und Soziales, der Bereich des Innern und der Bereich Gesundheit. Ich möchte exemplarisch auf zwei Beispiele eingehen.\n\nEin Beispiel aus dem Bereich Arbeit und Soziales: Eine Petentin forderte die Anerkennung von Kindererziehungs- und Berücksichtigungszeiten in der Rentenversicherung für ihre zwei in Polen geborenen Kinder. Dies war von der Rentenversicherung Bund zunächst abgelehnt worden. Die eingeleitete Prüfung ergab, dass die Kindererziehungszeiten im Ausland in dem Fall der Petentin jedoch angerechnet werden können. Die Rentenversicherung erkannte die Zeiten rückwirkend an. Dieses Beispiel macht deutlich, dass alleine die Prüfung, die der Petitionsausschuss veranlasst hat, zu einer Änderung zugunsten der Petentin führte. Und dies war kein Einzelfall.\n\nEin Beispiel aus dem Bereich Gesundheit will ich benennen. Hier kann man sagen, dass der Petitionsausschuss so etwas wie ein Seismograf, also ein Bewegungsmelder, für Gesetze ist. - Viele Petitionen befassten sich inhaltlich mit der Betreuung und Versorgung von pflegebedürften Menschen. Es ging um Forderungen wie eine individuellere Betrachtungsweise bei der Feststellung von Pflegebedürftigkeit oder um die bessere Absicherung von pflegenden Angehörigen bei der Rente. Mit dem Zweiten Pflegestärkungsgesetz, welches der Bundestag am 13. November 2015 beschlossen hat, wurden diese beiden Anliegen aufgegriffen, und dadurch wurde den Bedürfnissen von Pflegebedürftigen und ihren Angehörigen weiter Rechnung getragen.\n\nDiese zwei Beispiele zeigen: Unser Petitionswesen ist ein starkes Instrument - ein Instrument, das etwas bewirken kann, sowohl im Einzelfall als auch im Großen und Ganzen der Gesetzgebung. Und selbst wenn wir einem Bürger bei seinem Anliegen nicht helfen können, so werden ihm die Gründe dieser Entscheidung in einem persönlichen Schreiben mitgeteilt. Im Deutschen Bundestag bleibt keine Eingabe unbeantwortet.\n\nIch sage auch Danke für die Zusammenarbeit. Ich bedanke mich bei allen Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern des Ausschussdienstes, der Fraktionen und der Abgeordnetenbüros. Lassen Sie uns diese Arbeit im Sinne der Bürgerinnen und Bürger, im Sinne unseres Verständnisses von Demokratie, in der jedes Anliegen gehört wird, weiterhin gemeinsam fortsetzen!\"\n10117,sevim-dagdelen,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Damen und Herren! Wieder einmal soll der Bundestag einen neuen Auslandseinsatz der Bundeswehr beschließen. Nach Angaben der Bundesregierung haben diese Einsätze der Bundeswehr allein in den letzten beiden Jahrzehnten 17 Milliarden Euro gekostet. Das sind nur die reinen Entsendekosten. Wenn man die tatsächlichen Kosten zusammenrechnet, dann sieht man, dass allein für den deutschen Afghanistan-Krieg bis zu 47 Milliarden Euro verausgabt wurden.\n\nHeute soll es zwar lediglich, wie Sie sagen, um 3,9 Millionen Euro für diese Ausbildungsmission in Somalia gehen, aber auch das ist doch Geld, das uns anderswo hier im Land fehlt.\n\nWährend die Bundesregierung das Geld für ihre Militäreinsätze geradezu aus dem Fenster schmeißt, ist kein Geld für Kitaplätze, bezahlbare Wohnungen oder eine auskömmliche Rente da. Das finden wir ungeheuerlich.\n\nWir Linke sagen: Das muss sich dringend ändern. Wir brauchen Ihre Kriegs- und Militärmilliarden für eine Erneuerung des Sozialstaats hier in diesem Land.\n\nSie werden nun antworten, dass gerade diese Millionen für den Somalia-Einsatz doch sehr sinnvoll angelegt sind. Schauen wir uns doch einmal an, wen Sie mit diesem Geld eigentlich unterstützen.\n\nMeine Vorrednerin hat gesagt, Sie unterstützten die Regierung in Somalia, um gegen die Al-Schabab-Miliz zu kämpfen, die in Somalia die Scharia einführen wolle. Ich kann Sie beruhigen, Frau Kollegin: Die Scharia wird von der Regierung, die Sie mit diesem Bundeswehreinsatz unterstützen, schon angewandt.\n\nSie unterstützen mit dieser Ausbildungsmission ein islamistisch-autoritäres Regime, das die Scharia über alle Gesetze im Land, also auch über die Verfassung, gestellt hat. Schauen Sie sich die dortige Verfassung an: Sie unterstützen ein Regime, Herr Kauder, in dem sogenannte Gerichte die Todesstrafe verhängen, in dem Angehörige sexueller Minderheiten verfolgt werden, in dem ein Abtreibungsverbot herrscht und in dem es keine Religionsfreiheit gibt,\n\nalso ein autoritäres Regime.\n\nDieses Jahr beispielsweise hat die somalische Regierung alle Weihnachtsfeiern der wenigen Christen im Land verboten. Die Sicherheitskräfte, die Sie mit diesem Bundeswehreinsatz ausbilden, werden jetzt also dazu angewiesen werden, Weihnachtsfeiern im ganzen Land zu unterbinden. Ich wende mich ganz besonders an die christliche Partei hier in diesem Bundestag bzw. an die Union - und ganz besonders an Sie, Herr Volker Kauder. Sie geben vor, verfolgten Christen in aller Welt helfen zu wollen. In Somalia aber unterstützen Sie eine Regierung, die selbst Weihnachtsfeiern verbietet. Ist das nicht eine moralische Bankrotterklärung für die Politik dieser Regierung, meine Damen und Herren?\n\nSie lachen und sagen: Ja, was ist denn schon Weihnachten?\n\n- Natürlich geht es nicht nur um Weihnachten. Es wird aber klar, dass alle Andersdenkenden in diesem Land von der Regierung, die Sie militärisch unterstützen, drangsaliert bzw. gequält werden.\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Was hier passiert, ist ein Zeichen dafür, welch menschenverachtende Schergen in dieser Region bzw. in aller Welt Sie bereit sind zu unterstützen, wenn es Ihnen geopolitisch in den Kram passt. Ich finde, da müssten Sie doch wenigstens bitte einmal einen Moment innehalten und nicht einfach in diesem Saal hier quasi darüber hinwegpöbeln. Ist es denn richtig, so ein Schurkenregime wie das in Somalia zu unterstützen, meine Damen und Herren? Es ist, finde ich, nicht richtig und schon gar nicht christlich, solch ein Regime zu unterstützen.\n\nWeil diese Schurken Ihnen aber nützlich sind, finden Sie es in Ordnung, solch ein Regime zu unterstützen.\n\nJedes Mal, wenn wir hier zusammenkommen und über Somalia debattieren, sprechen Sie auch von den Fortschritten in diesem Krieg. Dabei ist alles, was Sie erreicht haben, dass die Kampfzone nicht nur in Somalia, sondern auch in den Nachbarländern - beispielsweise in Kenia - ausgeweitet wurde. Durch die Beteiligung am US-Drohnenkrieg in Somalia macht sich die Bundesregierung zudem auch noch an der Tötung von Zivilisten mitschuldig. Es ist eine Legende, dass die US-Drohnen lediglich Kämpfer der Al-Schabab-Milizen treffen würden. Mit diesem Einsatz verlängern Sie diesen abenteuerlichen und schmutzigen Krieg in Somalia, den Sie mit führen, ins Unendliche. Deshalb fordern wir Sie auf: Ziehen Sie die Bundeswehr ab, und setzen Sie sich endlich für eine politische Lösung in Somalia bzw. in der Region ein.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Herr Kauder, Ihr Einsatz für verfolgte Christen weltweit in allen Ehren, aber ich möchte Ihnen da widersprechen. Auch wir als Linksfraktion setzen uns dafür ein, dass Menschen ihre Religion frei ausleben können.\n\nErst kürzlich war ich mit einem Kollegen aus Ihrer Fraktion, Herrn Patzelt, im Libanon und habe gemeinsam mit ihm den Korbischof der assyrischen Gemeinde im Libanon, also der christlichen Gemeinde aus Syrien, und auch die syrischen Flüchtlinge und die vertriebenen Christen aus Syrien besucht.\n\nWir setzen uns dafür ein, dass nicht nur die Assyrer, also die Christen in der Region, sondern auch Armenier, Aleviten und alle anderen Minderheiten ihre Religion frei ausüben können.\n\nAber ich stelle fest: Es gibt doch einen Unterschied zwischen Reden und der Tatsache, eine Militärmission zur Unterstützung eines islamistischen Regimes, das in Somalia die Scharia über die Verfassung gestellt hat, hinzuschicken und damit natürlich auch Militär und Sicherheitskräfte auszubilden, die Christen daran hindern, Weihnachten zu feiern. Das ist doch ein großer Unterschied.\n\nWissen Sie, das, was Sie sagen, muss für die Christinnen und Christen in der Region wie Hohn klingen. Für sie macht es keinen Unterschied, ob sie Opfer einer Terrormiliz wie der Al-Schabab, die sie quält und foltert, oder eben einer Pseudoregierung werden, die nicht gewählt ist und in Somalia keine staatlichen Strukturen aufweisen kann. Wenn Sie möchten, können wir uns zusammen dorthin begeben. Es gibt keine staatlichen Strukturen. Es gibt nur einen Flughafen und einen Teil der Hauptstadt Mogadischu, die von der Regierung organisiert und kontrolliert werden. Den Menschen ist es egal, ob es nun eine Regierung oder eine Terrormiliz ist, die sie quält und foltert. Sie haben die Wahl zwischen Pest und Cholera.\n\nIch frage Sie: Wenn Sie die Christen unterstützen und schützen wollen: Wollen Sie sich nicht dafür einsetzen, dass die Bundeswehr eben nicht die Sicherheitskräfte ausbildet, die die Menschen in Somalia daran hindern wird, Weihnachten zu feiern? Sprechen Sie zum Thema, Herr Kauder. Reden Sie hier nicht nur in Allgemeinplätzen, sondern sagen Sie etwas zu dem Militäreinsatz in Somalia.\"\n3932,katja-dorner,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Mit dem Elterngeld Plus wird tatsächlich eine Gerechtigkeitslücke geschlossen - das sehen wir auch so -, die für eine Gruppe von Eltern relevant ist, nämlich für diejenigen, die schon relativ kurz nach der Geburt ihres Kindes wieder Teilzeit arbeiten wollen. Dieser Webfehler im alten Gesetz, der dazu führte, dass diese Eltern in der Summe weniger Elterngeld bekamen als diejenigen, die ihren Alltag anders gestalteten, ist wirklich überhaupt nicht nachzuvollziehen. Insofern werden wir zustimmen. Wir selbst haben lange gefordert, dass diese Gerechtigkeitslücke geschlossen wird. Deshalb ist es selbstverständlich - das ist der Kern dieses Gesetzes -, dass wir auch zustimmen werden.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen, Sie können sich vorstellen, dass es jetzt leider mit einem großen Aber weitergeht.\n\nBegeistert sind wir von diesem Gesetzentwurf nämlich mitnichten. An einigen Stellen wurde schon angesprochen, dass eine ganz große Gerechtigkeitslücke in diesem Gesetzentwurf bleibt, nämlich die Anrechnung des Elterngeldes im ALG II. Gerade die Eltern, die eine finanzielle Unterstützung besonders nötig haben, werden weiterhin vom Elterngeldbezug faktisch ausgeschlossen. Das ist eine riesige Gerechtigkeitslücke, die weiterhin unbearbeitet bleibt.\n\nZu dieser ganz strikten Argumentation, das sei eine Lohnersatzleistung, muss ich sagen: Das Elterngeld ist ausdrücklich nicht allein als Lohnersatzleistung eingeführt worden,\n\nsondern wir haben immer gesagt, es müsse für alle Familien, also auch für arme Familien und für Familien im ALG-II-Bezug, diesen Schonraum von mindestens einem Jahr geben.\n\nDas Elterngeld hat an das Erziehungsgeld angeschlossen, das eine ganz andere Struktur hat. Ich finde es immer noch gut, dass man das umgestellt hat; das war zweifelsfrei richtig. Aber dass wir jetzt am Ende der Strecke da landen, dass die Anrechnung des Elterngeldes beim ALG II das Einzige ist, was vom damals so groß angekündigten Sparpaket der schwarz-gelben Regierung übrig bleibt, ist eine riesige Gerechtigkeitslücke. Ich hätte mir wirklich gewünscht, dass die Koalition die Kraft gefunden hätte, das an dieser Stelle zu beheben. Deshalb bleibt das Gesetz zum Elterngeld weiterhin unbefriedigend.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ein gutes Jahr nach der Bundestagswahl verstärkt sich der Eindruck, dass die Familienministerin zwar gute kleine Schritte geht, die großen Herausforderungen aber geflissentlich ignoriert.\n\nWir haben unlängst die Ergebnisse der Evaluation der ehe- und familienbezogenen Leistungen vorgelegt bekommen. Wir wissen, dass in der Ehe- und Familienförderung Milliarden ausgegeben werden, die zentrale familienpolitische Zielsetzungen - beispielsweise Armutsprävention, materielle Stabilität von Familien, Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf sowie partnerschaftliche Aufteilung von Erwerbs- und Familienarbeit - gerade nicht fördern, sondern ihnen sogar zuwiderlaufen. Das haben wir mittlerweile schwarz auf weiß. Und was passiert? Wir müssen leider sagen: Es passiert nichts. Auch das ist aus unserer Sicht ausgesprochen unbefriedigend.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, gestern hat der Kitagipfel stattgefunden; das hat die Ministerin auch angesprochen. Zukünftig soll es einheitliche Qualitätsstandards geben. Das finden wir gut und richtig. Aber die Familienministerin ist mit leeren Händen zu diesem Gipfel gefahren. Ich habe die große Sorge, dass eben die dringend notwendigen Qualitätsverbesserungen in den Kitas nicht nur jetzt auf die lange Bank geschoben werden, sondern dass die Finanzierung allein an den Ländern und den Kommunen hängen bleibt, weil der Bund nicht bereit ist, sich stärker zu engagieren. Das, finden wir, darf auf keinen Fall der Plan für die nächsten Jahre sein. Der Bund muss deutlich mehr für die Kitas tun und da mehr investieren. Auch das ist eine zentrale Frage von besserer Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, gestern war der Kitagipfel, vorgestern konnten wir in der Zeitung lesen, dass das Betreuungsgeld ein Rohrkrepierer ist,\n\nder fast im gesamten Bundesgebiet von den Eltern gar nicht nachgefragt wird. Die Bundesregierung sollte endlich ein Einsehen haben. Wir haben in der letzten Legislaturperiode lange Diskussionen zum Betreuungsgeld geführt. Es sprach schon immer alles gegen das Betreuungsgeld. Es wurde wider alle Vernunft eingeführt. Jetzt zeigt sich überall in der Republik, dass in der Breite die Eltern diese Leistung gar nicht haben wollen. Deshalb mein Appell: Halten Sie nicht an diesem unsinnigen Betreuungsgeld fest. Die vorgesehene Milliarde wäre in den Kitas deutlich besser aufgehoben.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen, wir hatten eine Legislaturperiode unter Schwarz-Gelb, in der familienpolitisch so gut wie alles in die falsche Richtung gelaufen ist. Wir können uns jetzt keine Legislaturperiode leisten, in der wir nur in Trippelschritten vorankommen. Wir stimmen heute einem richtigen Schritt zu. Aber wenn wir wirklich etwas für die Kinder und Familien in unserem Land tun wollen, dann muss in den nächsten Jahren deutlich mehr kommen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5369,ge,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Antrag der Linken zur Rüs-tungskonversion wirft einige Fragen auf, über die wir hier im Bundestag tatsächlich diskutieren soll-ten. Allerdings - das muss ich vorwegschicken -: Ihre Antwort in diesem Antrag überzeugt mich so nicht.\n\nRichtig ist, dass wir hier im Bundestag darüber diskutieren müssen, dass es auf dem europäi-schen Rüstungsmarkt veränderte Rahmenbedin-gungen gibt. Seit langem ist der Trend festzustel-len, dass sowohl die europäischen Staaten als auch die NATO-Staaten insgesamt ihre Verteidi-gungsetats konsolidieren wollen und angekündigt haben, ihre Militärausgaben zu kürzen. Aus grüner Sicht ist das eine gute und richtige Entwicklung.\n\nDie Frage ist nur: Wie lautet die Antwort der Bundesregierung darauf? In keinster Weise - we-der sicherheitspolitisch noch menschenrechtlich - wäre es verantwortlich, wenn die deutsche Rüs-tungsindustrie, weil der Umfang ihrer Ausfuhren gegebenenfalls stagniert, ihre Ausfuhren in soge-nannte Drittstaaten, insbesondere in autoritäre Regime im Nahen Osten, steigern würde. In keinster Weise wäre es verantwortlich, wenn der Bundessicherheitsrat diese Exportpolitik durch ei-ne gezielte Missinterpretation der Rüstungsex-portrichtlinien auch noch unterstützt.\n\nGenau diese Entwicklung ist bei Genehmigungen des Bundessicherheitsrates jedoch immer wieder zu beobachten. Erst diese Woche hat die Bundes-regierung im Wirtschaftsausschuss die neueste Ausfuhrliste des Bundessicherheitsrates vorge-stellt. Auf dieser Liste stehen Radargeräte, Soft-ware und Technologien für Grenz-sicherungssysteme, Zieldarstellungsgeräte und Schieß-simulationssysteme, die nach Saudi-Arabien geliefert werden.\n\nHerr Willsch, Sie haben hier gesagt, dass all die Güter, die wir nach Saudi-Arabien liefern, nicht zum Zwecke der Repression gegenüber der eige-nen Bevölkerung eingesetzt werden. Schauen Sie sich die Schießsimula-tionssysteme, die zur Aus-bildung von Scharfschützen eingesetzt werden können, einmal an. Können Sie mir wirklich mit Sicherheit sagen bzw. mir garantieren, dass diese Ausbildung nicht auch für Repressionen im eige-nen Land genutzt werden kann? Die Bundesregie-rung konnte mir diese Frage im Wirtschaftsaus-schuss nicht klar beantworten.\n\nZur Bilanz Ihrer noch sehr kurzen Regierungs-zeit gehört auch - das muss man einfach so fest-stellen -, dass die Lieferung einer Panzerfabrik nach Saudi-Arabien genehmigt wurde, ebenso die Lieferung Tausender Kleinwaffen in den Jemen, nach Saudi-Arabien, Indonesien, in den Oman und in die Vereinigten Arabischen Emirate, sowie die Bürgschaft für Patrouillenboote für Saudi-Arabien. All das gehört zur Bilanz Ihrer Regierungszeit. Da helfen auch die Berichte von vor zwei Wochen nicht, dass Sie einen Stopp für Rüstungsexporte nach Saudi-Arabien verhängen wollen. Die Zahlen, die Sie uns immer wieder präsentieren, sprechen eine andere Sprache, und nur die können wir in-terpretieren.\n\nAus meiner Sicht missachten Sie mit Ihrer Poli-tik in verantwortungsloser Weise Ihre eigenen Rüstungsexport-richtlinien, zu deren Einhaltung Sie sich im Koalitionsvertrag verpflichtet haben. Ich kann Sie nur daran erinnern: Rüstungsexporte in Drittstaaten müssen eine Ausnahme bleiben. Solche Exporte dürfen keinesfalls genehmigt wer-den, wenn die Sorge besteht, dass diese Güter im Landesinneren für Repressionen gegen die -eigene Bevölkerung oder in einer bedenklichen Menschenrechtslage genutzt werden. Ich muss Sie ganz ernsthaft fragen: Wollen wir wirklich mit-einander über die Menschenrechtslage in Saudi-Arabien diskutieren? Besteht für irgendwen in die-sem Parlament ein Zweifel an der Menschen-rechtslage in Saudi-Arabien?\n\nAus meiner Sicht passiert hier etwas anderes. Aus meiner Sicht stellen Sie, obwohl es Ihre eige-nen Grundsätze ausschließen, doch Wirtschaft und Arbeitsplatzeffekte vor menschenrechtliche Erwägungen. Dabei hat selbst Ihr Wirtschaftsmi-nister gesagt, diese Argumente dürften im Kern nicht Leitlinie unserer Außen- und Sicherheitspoli-tik sein.\n\nDeshalb kann ich wirklich nur an Sie appellieren: Entwickeln Sie eine vernünftige Gesamtstrategie für die Rüstungspolitik und die europäische Rüs-tungswirtschaft! Analysieren Sie: Welche sind die betroffenen Industrien und die Zulieferunterneh-men, die von einem Absatzrückgang gegebenen-falls betroffen wären? Welche Industrien und wel-che Technologien sind in der Europäischen Union sicherheitspolitisch relevant? Wo ergeben sich auch auf europäischer Ebene Synergieeffekte? Denn wir brauchen mit Sicherheit nicht in jedem EU-Mitgliedstaat eigene Werften, um den be-grenzten Bedarf an Schiffen und Marine innerhalb der EU zu befriedigen.\n\nWenn Sie all das analysieren, dann ergibt sich daraus, dass man auch den Umbau der Rüstungsindustrie in zivile Wirtschaftszweige för-dern kann. Darüber reden wir selbstverständlich - das hat die IG Metall ja auch gefordert - mit den Gewerkschaften und den Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern in diesen Betrieben.\n\nDen Vorschlag der Linken, hierfür 2,5 Milliarden Euro an öffentlichen Geldern in die Hand zu neh-men, halte ich allerdings für völlig verfehlt. Wir können das Geld der Steuerzahler schon für sinn-vollere Investitionen in Deutschland ausgeben.\n\nWichtig ist, die Rüstungsindustrie selbst in die Verantwortung zu nehmen, einen entsprechenden Umbau zu gestalten. Dazu braucht es endlich kla-re Signale von der Bundesregierung, dass wir die eigenen Rüstungsexport-richtlinien ernst nehmen. Dann hat nämlich auch die Rüstungsindustrie Pla-nungssicherheit, weil klar ist, dass es keine neuen Absatzmärkte in Drittstaaten geben wird und somit auch ein entsprechender Umbau dieser Betriebs-teile notwendig ist.\"\n4482,aydan-ozoguz,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Es wurde schon einige Male zu Recht gesagt, Frau Amtsberg: Deutschland und Europa stehen als große Wirtschaftskräfte vor großen flüchtlingspolitischen Herausforderungen. Wenn man auf die Menschenrechtskrisen in Syrien, aber auch im Irak, in Afghanistan und Eritrea schaut - wenn ich den Blick weiterschweifen lassen würde, könnte ich noch mehr Staaten aufzählen -, dann ist unbestritten, dass wir uns mittelfristig auf mehr Asylsuchende einstellen und den bevorstehenden Herausforderungen gerecht werden müssen. Wer aus purer Not wegen Krieg, Terror oder Verfolgung flieht, muss bei uns Schutz finden.\n\nEr muss menschenwürdig behandelt werden, muss seine Fluchtgeschichte darlegen können und gegebenenfalls auch dauerhaften Schutz erhalten.\n\nIch empfinde die heutige Debatte als sehr angenehm. Ich möchte aber daran erinnern, dass das im Deutschen Bundestag nicht immer so gewesen ist. Wir haben lange Jahre anders gesprochen. Wir haben über Asylrecht und Asylmissbrauch gesprochen, und zwar auch in Fällen, in denen das nicht gerechtfertigt war. Es wurden Gesetze verschärft und Arbeitsverbote verhängt. Die Unterbringung in Sammelunterkünften wurde sogar vorgeschrieben; denn das erklärte Ziel war, den Schutzsuchenden eben nicht hier eine Heimat zu bieten, sie hier nicht heimisch werden zu lassen. Wir haben nicht gesagt: Kommt zu uns! - Ja, wir lernen aus der Vergangenheit. Wir tun gut daran und sollten deutlich zum Ausdruck bringen, dass jeder, der hier Schutz für sich, seine Familie und seine Kinder sucht, eine Perspektive erhält. Es ist also richtig, den betreffenden Menschen sehr früh die Zugänge zu unserer Gesellschaft zu öffnen, zu Arbeit und Beschäftigung, zu Sprachkursen und Schulen. Dann können aus Flüchtlingen tatsächlich neue Nachbarn werden.\n\nIch bin dankbar für die große Hilfsbereitschaft und Solidarität in unserer Bevölkerung. Die Kirchen, Flüchtlingsinitiativen, insbesondere die vielen Ehrenamtlichen - das habe ich hier schon einmal erwähnt - leisten in diesen Wochen und Monaten Großartiges. Wir müssen dieses Engagement noch stärker wertschätzen, und wir müssen es auch unterstützen.\n\nDer Grund dafür, dass ich dieser Debatte ausnahmsweise nicht bis zum Ende folgen kann, ist - ich sage es bewusst an dieser Stelle -: Ich habe schon vor Wochen Flüchtlingsinitiativen und Ehrenamtliche genau zu 11 Uhr ins Bundeskanzleramt eingeladen,\n\num mit ihnen gemeinsam zu erörtern, was wir tun können, um sie zu unterstützen, um sie besser zu vernetzen. Sie waren natürlich sofort einverstanden, dass ich hier noch meine Rede halte. Ich bitte um Verständnis dafür, dass ich wegen dieser Einladung heute etwas früher gehe.\n\nWenn wir über die Große Anfrage und den Antrag der Grünen debattieren - meine Kolleginnen und Kollegen werden noch darauf eingehen -, dann müssen wir auch festhalten, dass unser Land über Bundeskontingente bereits 20 000 syrische Staatsangehörige aufgenommen hat. Es sind mittlerweile, seit 2011, 70 000 syrische Staatsangehörige hier. Bund und Länder handeln gemeinsam, erfreulicherweise in großem Einvernehmen und über Parteigrenzen hinweg. Das Auswärtige Amt hat die Mittel für humanitäre Hilfe in der Region gestern noch einmal um 40 Millionen Euro erhöht - Frau Amtsberg hat das erwähnt -; denn wir wissen alle, dass einige Millionen Menschen in der Region - in der Türkei, in Jordanien, im Libanon - auf der Flucht sind.\n\nWir dürfen aber auch unsere europäischen Partner nicht aus der Verantwortung entlassen, für die Flüchtlinge und Vertriebenen des syrischen Bürgerkrieges einzustehen.\n\nAuch als ich zur Europäischen Grundrechtecharta reden durfte, wurde mir klar: Es reicht nicht, zu hören, dass Deutschland und Schweden eine tolle Arbeit machen. Das wird immer wieder gesagt, und dafür wird auch gedankt. Wir müssen schon sagen, dass auch von anderen EU-Staaten ähnliche Anstrengungen erwartbar sind.\n\nDer Zustand, dass in der EU fünf Staaten 75 Prozent der Schutzsuchenden aufnehmen, kann uns nun nicht dazu verleiten, von einer europäischen Solidarität zu sprechen. Sagen wir es einmal positiv: Die Solidarität ist ausbaufähig.\n\nInsofern überzeugt es nicht, wenn wir mit Blick auf Italien die dortigen Registrierungsdefizite als größtes Problem des gemeinsamen europäischen Schutzsystems ausmachen. Wir müssen da einfach zu mehr Verantwortung aufrufen. Klar ist auch: Wir müssen in Europa alles tun, damit die Asyldiskussion nicht und niemals mehr auf dem Rücken der Schutzsuchenden ausgetragen wird.\n\nDie Große Koalition hat bereits im ersten Jahr viele Maßnahmen umgesetzt. Einige sind schon genannt worden; deswegen mache ich es ganz kurz: Das Personal des Bundesamts für Migration und Flüchtlinge wurde aufgestockt. Es reicht immer nicht - das wissen wir alle -; aber 300 Leute einzuarbeiten, das geht nicht in drei Monaten. Das muss man ein bisschen realistisch sehen. Die Asylverfahren werden mit Blick auf Asylsuchende mit hohen Anerkennungschancen optimiert. Aussichtsreiche Verfahren sollen vorgezogen werden können. Das hatte ich übrigens auch in meinem zehnten Bericht zur Lage der Ausländerinnen und Ausländer gefordert. Die Verbesserungen beim Arbeitsmarktzugang sind wichtig; er ist nun nach 15 Monaten Aufenthalt zum Teil sogar ohne Vorrangprüfung möglich. Das Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz passierte final den Bundesrat. Damit ist die Zusage verbunden, dass der Bund die Länder mit bis zu 1 Milliarde Euro entlastet. Hoffentlich kommt diese Entlastung am Ende auch bei den Kommunen an. - Ohne die Unterstützung der Grünen wären viele der genannten Punkte nicht möglich gewesen; das möchte ich an dieser Stelle noch einmal deutlich sagen.\n\nGestern haben wir im Bundeskabinett die stichtagsunabhängige Bleiberechtsregelung für Geduldete verabschiedet. Für diesen Teil des Gesetzes haben viele hier im Haus Jahre und Jahrzehnte gekämpft, übrigens gemeinsam mit Kirchen und Sozialverbänden.\n\nDas parlamentarische Verfahren steht noch an. Deswegen müssen wir die Diskussion darüber nicht heute führen.\n\nDie Residenzpflicht wird ebenfalls abgeschafft. Dazu möchte ich nur sagen: Sie wissen, dass ich am 18. Dezember 2014, am von den Vereinten Nationen ausgerufenen Internationalen Tag der Migranten, einen Empfang gebe. Ich bin all denen von Ihnen sehr dankbar, die jeweils eine Person angemeldet haben, die sich besonders für Flüchtlinge engagiert. Die Veranstaltung ist mittlerweile voll; das haben die gemerkt, die mit ihrer Anmeldung zu spät kamen. Es ist eine schöne Sache, wie ich finde, dass zufällig - das konnte man nicht voraussehen - gleichzeitig eine weitere Syrien-Konferenz im Auswärtigen Amt tagt. Wir sind guter Dinge, dass wir dort allen wirklich ein sehr schönes Dankeschön sagen können.\n\nEs wurden auch einige angemeldet, die selber Flüchtlinge sind, aber schon lange im Land leben und der Residenzpflicht unterliegen. Nun muss ich allen Ernstes Briefe schreiben des Inhalts, dass das hier eine ordentliche Veranstaltung ist und doch bitte die Residenzpflicht für diese Menschen aufgehoben wird. Die Absurdität wird da einfach noch einmal besonders deutlich. Ich bin froh, dass wir das nun bald hinter uns lassen werden.\n\nZu guter Letzt möchte ich die Aufmerksamkeit noch auf eine Gruppe lenken, nämlich auf die unbegleiteten minderjährigen Flüchtlinge. Sie sind, wie es naheliegt, ohne Erziehungsberechtigte eingereist. Wir dürfen, glaube ich, nicht vergessen, dass es sich bei den Beweggründen für das Verlassen der Heimat um sogenannte kinderspezifische Fluchtgründe handelt. Solche Begriffe sagen eigentlich wenig über das aus, was dahintersteht: drohende Zwangsrekrutierung als Kindersoldat, Gefahr von Entführung, bei Mädchen die anstehende Genitalverstümmelung oder Zwangsverheiratung. Wir alle kennen das. Deswegen sind wir in der Pflicht, dem Kindeswohl und den besonderen Bedürfnissen dieser jungen Menschen - es sind zum Teil stark traumatisierte Minderjährige - gerecht zu werden.\n\nJa, es gibt auch Kriminalität bei einigen; das will ich überhaupt nicht verhehlen. Nur, was mich nach wie vor ärgert, ist: Wenn das einmal vorkommt, dann entsteht das Bild, alle seien so oder latent so. Dabei gibt es die anderen, die nun gerade darum kämpfen, etwas Besseres zu machen. Wir wissen, wie viele ihre Chance wahrnehmen, hier ein geregeltes Leben zu führen, eine Ausbildung zu machen. Wir haben soeben die Ausbildungsförderung auch für diese Gruppe viel schneller möglich gemacht. Gerade für diejenigen müssen wir einfach deutlich machen: Wir wollen, dass sie ein halbwegs faires und gutes Leben führen können und nicht immer mit den anderen unter einen Generalverdacht gestellt werden.\n\nWir wissen, dass die Zahlen kontinuierlich zugenommen haben und dass wir auch noch eine Debatte darüber führen müssen, wie wir das Kindeswohl im Blick behalten und gleichzeitig dafür sorgen, dass wir die Regelungen, die bestehen und die in meinen Augen dem Kindeswohl nicht gerecht werden - ich denke an den Fall, dass sich furchtbar viele an einem Ort tummeln -, verändern.\n\nWenn Sie es mir erlauben, möchte ich als Beauftragte an dieser Stelle noch einen Satz sagen, der gar nichts oder fast nichts mit diesem Thema zu tun hat. Es ist mir ein Bedürfnis, heute Morgen hier einmal den Namen Tugce Albayrak zu nennen,\n\nden Namen der Frau, die für unsere Werte eingestanden ist und so Furchtbares erlebt hat. Der Familie, die wirklich unermessliches Leid erfahren hat, möchte ich hier unser Mitgefühl aussprechen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9210,alexandra-dinges-dierig,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Lieber Herr Gehring, wir sind mit Sicherheit nicht zu kurz gesprungen, sondern wir sind knapp unter dem Weltrekord gelandet.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir stehen heute Abend um 20.15 Uhr nach Monaten - man kann schon sagen Jahren - der Diskussionen hier. Wir haben uns ausgetauscht. Meine Kollegin Simone Raatz hat schon gesagt: Wir haben verschiedene Anhörungen gehabt, wir haben viele Experten aus verschiedensten Bereichen der Hochschulen und außeruniversitären Forschungseinrichtungen zu Rate gezogen, um ein Ergebnis zu bekommen, das uns ein richtig großes Stück weiterbringt.\n\nIch bin der Meinung - das ist auch die Meinung meiner Fraktion, der CDU/CSU-Fraktion -, dass wir hier eine sehr gute Novelle zum Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz haben.\n\nIch gebe offen und ehrlich zu: Eine einfache Lösung gibt es nicht, sonst hätten wir auch nicht so lange gebraucht. Die gibt es schon gar nicht, wenn wir über das Befristungsrecht in der Wissenschaft reden. Jetzt werden einige fragen: Warum ist das eigentlich so schwierig?\n\nDazu ganz kurz: Es ist relativ einfach, sich das vorzustellen. Wir haben ein Spannungsfeld zwischen dem Wunsch der Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler auf eine zuverlässige Perspektive einerseits und der Notwendigkeit der Flexibilität im Bereich der Wissenschaft andererseits. Warum ist die Flexibilität so wichtig? Ohne diese wären wir bei den Innovationen und bei der Spitzenforschung nicht vorne, sondern hinten. Deshalb müssen wir darauf achten, dass wir bei jeder Regelung, die wir neu einführen oder überarbeiten, diese Flexibilität beibehalten.\n\nAber ich gebe auch zu: In den letzten Jahren - die Evaluation stammt aus dem Jahr 2011; die Daten sind also ein bisschen älter - ist die Verlässlichkeit für den Werdegang der Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler etwas kurz gekommen. Deshalb haben wir genau diesen Weg gefunden, lieber Herr Gehring, nämlich dass sich die Vertragslaufzeiten an der benötigten Zeit für die Qualifizierung orientieren müssen. Eine Mindestlaufzeit, lieber Herr Gehring und liebe Frau Gohlke, nützt überhaupt nichts.\n\nSo gibt es auch Promovierende, die ihre Dissertation in einem Jahr schreiben. Was mache ich dann mit einer Mindestlaufzeit von 24 Monaten? Das ist völliger Unsinn. Die Vertragslaufzeiten müssen sich sachgerecht an der Zeit, die jemand für die Qualifizierung braucht, orientieren. Das kann auch bei einer Verlängerung einer Doktorarbeit um beispielsweise sechs Monate geschehen. Die Vertragslaufzeit kann sich auch an der Laufzeit eines Drittmittelprojektes orientieren. Ich glaube, das kann man gar nicht oft genug sagen. Das bedeutet Zuverlässigkeit für unsere Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler.\n\nGleichzeitig brauchen wir, wie ich schon sagte, die Flexibilität. Wir als Gesetzgeber können nun wirklich nicht wissen, welches die Bedingungen des einzelnen Arbeitsvertrags vor Ort sind. Wie soll das funktionieren? Deshalb brauchen die Vertragspartner Spielraum. Aber ich sage an dieser Stelle auch ganz deutlich: Dieser Spielraum ist nicht beliebig, sondern er muss sich an der Qualifikation orientieren. Man kann das gar nicht oft genug sagen. Das bedeutet aber auch, dass sich die Vertragspartner zusammensetzen und sich darüber einigen müssen, worüber sie eigentlich reden. Das fand bisher nicht statt. Jetzt wird endlich festgehalten, um welche Qualifizierung es sich handelt und wie viel Zeit jemand braucht. Dafür gibt es dann einen Vertrag, und das garantiert die Zuverlässigkeit und Planbarkeit des Weges.\n\nLassen Sie mich noch zu einem Punkt kommen, der heute ganz kurz schon einmal angesprochen worden ist. Es geht um die studentischen Hilfskräfte. Auch da gab es viele Diskussionen. Wichtig ist für uns, dass endlich Klarheit besteht, wann ihre Hilfstätigkeiten auf den Höchstbefristungsrahmen angerechnet werden und wann nicht. Deshalb gibt es jetzt in der Novelle zum Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz einen eigenen Befristungstatbestand. In dem entsprechenden Passus wird ganz klar, dass Hilfstätigkeiten nicht auf den Höchstbefristungsrahmen angerechnet werden.\n\nDamit dieser Rahmen nicht ausgenutzt wird, müssen wir ihn irgendwie definieren, auch weil das EU-Recht dies vorschreibt. Ursprünglich waren im Gesetzentwurf vier Jahre vorgesehen. Dieser Zeitraum war uns eindeutig zu kurz. Frau Ministerin Wanka hat es schon gesagt: Denken wir nur daran, dass der ganz normale Weg zum Master in der Regelstudienzeit fünf Jahre dauert. - Zudem gibt es verschiedene Arbeitsmöglichkeiten, etwa Teilzeitarbeit und Ähnliches. Wir sind also fest davon überzeugt, dass wir mit der Entscheidung für die sechs Jahre den richtigen Zeitraum getroffen haben.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir sind davon überzeugt, dass diese Novelle tatsächlich einen Ausgleich zwischen Flexibilität und Verlässlichkeit gebracht hat. Gleichzeitig sage ich ganz klar: Das Gelingen der Umsetzung liegt jetzt in der gemeinsamen Verantwortung der Wissenschaft und der Länder. Wir werden also sehr achtsam sein. In vier Jahren wird das Gesetz evaluiert. Ich bin fest davon überzeugt: Die Arbeitsbedingungen werden sich verbessern, und der Wissenschaftsstandort Deutschland wird gestärkt werden.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n7729,johann-wadephul,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Der syrische Bürgerkrieg geht in sein fünftes Jahr. Bisher wurden 240 000 Todesopfer gezählt, 4 Millionen Menschen sind auf der Flucht und halten sich in den Nachbarländern Syriens auf, sind Binnenflüchtlinge oder begeben sich nach Europa bzw. nach Deutschland. Das ist Anlass genug, dass wir die Außenpolitik in den Mittelpunkt der Flüchtlingsdiskussion in Deutschland rücken; denn die Flüchtlinge, die hierherkommen, haben Gründe, zu fliehen. Wir sollten uns diesen Gründen ehrlich stellen. Wir sollten auch darüber nachdenken, was wir in der Vergangenheit vielleicht verkehrt gemacht haben, was wir versäumt haben.\n\nEs ist notwendig, dass wir hier in der Diskussion über Ursachen der Flucht aus dem Mittleren Osten sprechen. Aber natürlich zwingt uns auch unsere humanitäre Verantwortung, darauf zu schauen, was dort geschieht. Denn die Städte und Dörfer in Syrien sind zerstört. Schon jetzt ist dieses Land durch die Konfliktparteien um Jahrzehnte zurückgebombt worden. Es wird Jahrzehnte dauern, das Land wieder aufzubauen. Ich denke insbesondere an die vielen jungen Menschen, deren Zukunft brachliegt und denen wir kaum helfen können. Wir tragen hier eine große Verantwortung.\n\nIn dieser Situation, lieber Herr Gehrcke, muss man internationale Organisationen stärken. Was aus dem Prinzip der Schutzverantwortung konkret folgt, darüber kann man im Einzelfall streiten. In der vergangenen Legislaturperiode hat sich Deutschland bei einem Votum über einen Militäreinsatz in Libyen enthalten. Das hat uns sogar die Kollegin Wieczorek-Zeul damals vorgehalten; ich sage das ohne Vorwurf. Auch Herr Gehrcke hat uns damals in der Diskussion unterstützt; das war richtig.\n\nAber man muss genauso sagen, dass ein Prinzip der Schutzverantwortung seine Glaubwürdigkeit verliert, wenn am Ende die internationale Gemeinschaft einem fünfjährigen Morden, Krieg, Fassbomben- und Chemiewaffeneinsatz schlicht und ergreifend tatenlos zusieht. Das kann nicht die Lehre aus Srebrenica oder Ruanda sein. Wir als internationale Gemeinschaft müssen in der Lage sein, zu handeln.\n\nMan muss die internationale Gemeinschaft unterstützen, Herr Gehrcke. Ich finde es ein bisschen bedauerlich, dass Sie dazu nichts gesagt haben.\n\nHinsichtlich der Zerstörung von Chemiewaffen gab es wenig Konsens. Sie müssen mir wirklich erklären, Herr Gehrcke, wie man unter Zurückhaltung aller ideologischen Argumente irgendeinen humanitären Grund finden kann, sich gegen die Vernichtung von Chemiewaffen auszusprechen. Das ist schlicht und ergreifend unverständlich gewesen.\n\nWir haben hier ein Minimum erreicht, und da muss man doch Unterstützung leisten.\n\nDie Situation in den Nachbarländern ist angesprochen worden. Ich halte es für einen internationalen Skandal, dass der UNHCR das Fehlen von 2,8 Milliarden Dollar beklagt hat. So wenig wir bei diesem Konflikt auch tun können, kann es aber nicht angehen, dass es am Ende am Geld fehlt. Hier sind wir alle gefordert, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren. Insofern kann ich uns nur auffordern, dafür zu sorgen.\n\nDerzeit laufen die Haushaltsberatungen. Es gibt einen ersten Ansatz in Höhe von 400 Millionen Euro. Geld ist nicht alles, aber wenn wir Probleme mit Geld lösen oder zumindest lindern können, dann müssen wir auch Geld in die Hand nehmen.\n\nWir sind uns doch gewiss, dass wir in dieser Situation in Deutschland und in Europa für manches Geld brauchen. Nach meiner Überzeugung muss aber auch der Haushalt des Auswärtigen Amtes hinreichend ausgestattet werden. Ich glaube, dass diese 400 Millionen Euro nicht ausreichen werden angesichts der großen Probleme, die wir haben.\n\nDeswegen ermutige ich uns alle, an dieser Stelle mehr Geld in die Hand zu nehmen und dem Auswärtigen Amt und all denjenigen, die humanitäre Hilfe für Flüchtlinge vor Ort leisten, mehr Mittel zuzuweisen, damit sie mehr Möglichkeiten haben, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren. Dieses Signal des Hauses ist meines Erachtens insgesamt erforderlich.\n\nNoch ein Wort zu Herrn Assad. Politik beginnt mit der Wahrnehmung der Realität. Deswegen ist es vollkommen richtig, was die Bundeskanzlerin gesagt hat. Da hat es auch nie eine andere Position gegeben, Herr Gehrcke. Die Verhandlungen in Genf haben durchaus auch unter Beteiligung des Regimes stattgefunden. Es ist aber am Ende so, dass dieser Mensch nicht nur den Einsatz von Fassbomben, sondern auch und insbesondere - das finde ich nach den Erfahrungen des Ersten und Zweiten Weltkriegs besonders erschreckend - den Einsatz von Chemiewaffen zu verantworten hat.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, so sehr wir Realitäten anerkennen und auch mit Machthabern verhandeln müssen - das ist selbstverständlich -, darf es nicht hingenommen werden, dass dieser Mensch, der den Einsatz von Chemiewaffen zu verantworten hat, am Ende straflos davonkommt. So darf kein Abkommen aussehen. Die internationale Strafgerichtsbarkeit muss an dieser Stelle handlungsfähig sein.\n\nIch glaube, wenn wir diese Möglichkeiten miteinander nutzen, dann besteht die Chance, endlich etwas zu erreichen. Ich glaube, es ist den Einsatz jeder Diplomatie wert, dass wir für die Menschen in Syrien etwas tun.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n3122,anja-weisgerber,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In meiner Haushaltsrede konzentriere ich mich heute auf die Klimapolitik. Der Klimawandel ist nach wie vor eine der größten globalen Herausforderungen des 21. Jahrhunderts. Die nächsten 15 Monate werden entscheidend dafür sein, wie es mit unserer Klimapolitik weitergeht. Bei der Klimakonferenz im nächsten Jahr in Paris muss es uns gelingen, eine ambitionierte internationale Klimapolitik zu beschließen. Nur so haben wir eine realistische Chance, das 2-Grad-Ziel zu erreichen; vielleicht ist es die letzte Chance.\n\nMit entscheidend für einen Erfolg kann sein, dass Kanzlerin Merkel die Klimapolitik bei der G-7-Präsidentschaft in 2015 zum Thema machen will. Damit hält sie den Druck auf internationaler Ebene aufrecht und kämpft dafür, dass auch die anderen Staaten ihren Beitrag leisten. Das ist gut so; denn nach wie vor gilt: Allein wir Deutsche können das Klima nicht retten. Wir brauchen die anderen Staaten dieser Welt.\n\nDie Staaten, die es selbst nicht schaffen, unterstützen wir mit deutschen Mitteln für internationale Klimaschutzinitiativen, die sich auch in diesem Haushalt wiederfinden. In diesem Zusammenhang gibt es zum Beispiel Projekte in Peru, Kolumbien oder Ghana. Das alles sind wichtige Signale für unser gemeinsames Ziel einer ambitionierten internationalen Klimapolitik, für die Deutschland kämpft.\n\nEin politisches Zeichen setzen wir auch in Brüssel, wo sich die Mitgliedstaaten im Oktober dieses Jahres auf die europäischen Klimaziele bis 2030 einigen werden. Wir treten in Brüssel für eine ambitionierte Klimapolitik mit ambitionierten und ehrgeizigen Klimazielen ein und gehen mit unseren Forderungen weiter als andere Mitgliedstaaten; auch das muss man ganz klar sagen. Persönlich habe ich mich sehr darüber gefreut, dass sich der neue EU-Kommissionspräsident Jean-Claude Juncker bei seiner Vorstellungsrede im Europäischen Parlament für ein Energieeffizienzziel von mindestens 30 Prozent ausgesprochen hat. Denn da gibt es nach wie vor wirklich sehr große Potenziale, die wir in ganz Europa heben müssen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nNun zu der Frage: Was machen wir national? Zu einer glaubhaften Klimapolitik gehört neben dem Hauptprojekt, dem Klimaaktionsplan, zu dem ich gleich noch kommen werde, dass wir, die Bundestagsabgeordneten, und die Mitglieder der Bundesregierung etwas für unser Klima tun. Deshalb freue ich mich besonders, dass die fraktionsübergreifende Initiative der Klimapolitiker, Dienstreisen klimaneutral zu kompensieren, in diesem Haushalt erste Früchte getragen hat. Der aktuelle Haushaltsentwurf sieht 2 Millionen Euro für klimaneutrale Dienstreisen der Bundesregierung vor. Das ist ein guter Anfang, ein erster Erfolg. Nun müssen auch wir hier im Bundestag eine Vorbildfunktion übernehmen. Daher wünsche ich mir ebenso eine Kompensation der Flugreisen der Mitglieder des Deutschen Bundestages.\n\nIch appelliere hier an die Kollegen aus dem Haushaltsausschuss: Lassen Sie uns gemeinsam ausschuss- und fraktionsübergreifend Möglichkeiten ausloten, wie wir unsere Mandatsflugreisen klimaneutral kompensieren können! Das wäre eine kleine Geste mit großer Wirkung. Auf diese Weise können wir als Politiker ein klimapolitisches Zeichen setzen und gleichzeitig vielleicht auch Unternehmen ermutigen, über eine Kompensation von Geschäftsreisen nachzudenken.\n\nAktuell arbeitet das Umweltministerium an einem Klimaaktionsprogramm. Alle betroffenen Ministerien sind aufgefordert, Minderungspotenziale aufzuzeigen und konkrete Maßnahmen vorzuschlagen. Ziel ist, das Aktionsprogramm noch in diesem Jahr zu verabschieden. Es ist richtig, dass alle Ressorts mit einbezogen werden und ihren Beitrag leisten. Damit stellen wir die richtigen Weichen, um unsere Klimaschutzziele erreichen zu können - trotz schwieriger Rahmenbedingungen.\n\nWarum sind es schwierige Rahmenbedingungen? Wir haben immer gesagt, dass es nicht funktionieren wird, aus der Kernenergie auszusteigen und diese dann komplett durch CO2-neutrale Technologien zu ersetzen. Damit keine Missverständnisse entstehen: Wir alle wollten den Ausstieg aus der Kernenergie, und wir wollen ihn nach wie vor; keine Frage. Damit wir unsere Klimaziele trotz des Ausstiegs aus der CO2-neutralen und grundlastfähigen Kernenergie erreichen, müssen wir den Anteil der erneuerbaren Energien stark ausbauen. Herr Kollege Kindler, das tun wir auch nach der EEG-Reform. Wir bauen den Anteil der erneuerbaren Energien weiter aus. Wir steuern ihn.\n\nAber man muss dazusagen: Nicht alle erneuerbaren Energien - außer der Biomasse - sind grundlastfähig. Deshalb brauchen wir auch weiterhin fossile Energien.\n\nUm zu gewährleisten, dass möglichst wenig CO2 ausgestoßen wird, bevorzugen wir Klimapolitiker von der Union Gaskraftwerke. Dafür müssen wir die richtigen Anreize setzen.\n\nDamit bin ich schon beim nächsten und letzten Thema meiner Rede: Kernstück der EU-Klimapolitik ist und bleibt der Emissionshandel. Er ist das wirkungsvollste, kosteneffizienteste und, wenn Sie so wollen, gerechteste Instrument in der Klimapolitik,\n\nweil er gleiche Wettbewerbsbedingungen in ganz Europa schafft.\n\nEines möchte ich an dieser Stelle einmal ganz klar sagen: Wenn es um die Maßnahmen geht, die wir ergreifen, um die Klimaziele zu erreichen, dann ist eine nationale CO2-Steuer, wie sie Herr Krischer von den Grünen erst wieder kürzlich bei einer Veranstaltung hier in Berlin gefordert hat - Sie erinnern sich vielleicht -,\n\nsicherlich nicht die richtige Antwort auf den internationalen Klimawandel.\n\nEin rein nationales Vorgehen bringt uns nicht weiter. Es benachteiligt nur unsere Industrie, gefährdet Arbeitsplätze und hilft uns nicht, auf europäischer Ebene mit unseren Klimazielen weiterzukommen.\n\nDeshalb setzen wir uns - ich sage das, um auf Ihre Bemerkung einzugehen - in Europa für eine rasche und nachhaltige Stärkung des Emissionshandelssystems ein.\n\nGanz aktuell haben wir den Vorschlag der EU-Kommission für eine Marktstabilitätsreserve auf dem Tisch. Wir Deutschen fordern, im Unterschied zum EU-Vorschlag, dass diese vorher greift. Der Vorschlag der EU-Kommission ist meiner Meinung nach eine gute Grundlage; aber wir müssen noch viel darüber diskutieren. Unser Ziel muss es sein, dass der Emissionshandel marktbasiert bleibt, weiterhin CO2-Emissionen reduziert und - das sage ich als Klimapolitikerin ganz ehrlich und klar dazu - gleichzeitig Investitionen in die richtige Richtung lenkt.\n\nIch freue mich auf die Diskussionen dazu mit der Ministerin und den Kolleginnen und Kollegen des Bundestages.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9407,rosemarie-hein,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich hätte auch nichts dagegen gehabt, wenn die anderen geblieben wären. - Wir haben es Ihnen vor Weihnachten versprochen, und wir halten Wort. Wir bieten Ihnen erneut einen Anlass, um über die notwendige Verbesserung der Zusammenarbeit von Bund und Ländern in Bildungsfragen im Ausschuss und hier im Plenum zu diskutieren.\n\nIch weiß, dass viele von Ihnen darauf brennen, endlich diesen unbefriedigenden Zustand zu beenden, dass der Bund immer wieder mal über Bildung reden, aber wenig verändern kann. Insbesondere in der schulischen Bildung ist der Druck inzwischen sehr groß, und alle Welt erwartet von uns, dass wir endlich etwas tun.\n\nDerzeit sind aber auch die Chancen groß, endlich das Verbot der Zusammenarbeit in der Bildung aufzuheben. Wir - Bund, Länder und Kommunen - haben eine gemeinsame Verantwortung, die Substanz des Bildungssystems zu erhalten und es auf den neuesten Stand zu bringen. Sonst bleibt nämlich von der viel gepriesenen Bildungsrepublik bald nichts mehr übrig.\n\nEs wird uns dann auch nicht mehr helfen, dass wir uns immer in Zahlen sonnen. Die Koalition macht das ja so gerne, heute früh auch wieder;\n\ndenn die aufgewendeten Mittel reichen ja nicht, um die grundlegenden Probleme zu lösen. Ich weiß schon, dass Sie das wieder machen werden, aber es wird nicht helfen. Wir haben das alles schon oft debattiert, und eigentlich könnte man es leid sein. Darum möchte ich heute versuchen, das mit einem Beispiel zu erläutern, das vielleicht ein bisschen ungewöhnlich ist. Vielleicht macht es aber deutlich, was wir wollen und was wir nicht wollen.\n\nStellen Sie sich vor, Sie sind Verwalter eines Hauses mit 16 Eigentumswohnungen, und Sie dürfen immer nur für die Malerarbeiten im Treppenhaus sorgen. In die Wohnungen dürfen Sie nicht hinein.\n\n- Nein, da gab es keine Eigentumswohnungen - jedenfalls nicht so viele. - Nun begibt es sich aber - es handelt sich um ein altes und ehrwürdiges Haus -,\n\ndass es vom Keller aus feucht wird. Und im Souterrain, wo die Stadtstaaten wohnen, sind schon nasse Flecken an den Wänden zu sehen. Die kann man noch einmal überstreichen, aber die Nässe kommt immer wieder durch. Eine grundlegende Sanierung kann aber nicht stattfinden; denn die Eigentümer des Lofts - also die aus Bayern - merken von der Feuchtigkeit noch nichts. Die werden erst munter, wenn es durchs Dach regnet. Und die Hessen merken es erst, wenn es durch die Fenster zieht.\n\nDabei wäre es ganz einfach: Man könnte die Substanz des Hauses gemeinsam erhalten, es auch noch energetisch sanieren und barrierefrei machen.\n\nDas würde allen nutzen. Der Aufzug ginge dann auch bis nach oben zu den Bayern. Dann blieben immer noch die Eigentumswohnungen. Man könnte dann aber Durchbrüche zwischen den Zimmern schaffen, Parkett oder Teppichboden legen. Man kann die Möbel selber wählen und so fort. Nur die tragenden Wände darf man nicht einreißen. Dann wäre es immer noch ein föderalistisches Haus, aber eines mit einer soliden Substanz.\n\nGenau das wollen wir.\n\nDie Aufzählung der Hausaufgaben in unserem Antrag, die sehr umfangreich ist, macht nur deutlich, wie groß die Aufgabe ist, die vor uns liegt. Wir sollten darum endlich den Mut beweisen und selbst etwas vorlegen, was die Länder nicht ablehnen können. Dies könnte man dann durch eine Bildungsrahmenvereinbarung oder ein Bildungsrahmengesetz, wie Sie es lieber nennen würden, Herr Rabanus, sichern,\n\nin dem Rechtsansprüche wie Qualitätsstandards festgeschrieben werden; eben ein Rahmen, der Vielfalt ermöglicht und Vergleichbarkeit und Anerkennung sichert. Das wäre doch für alle etwas. Deshalb schlagen wir Ihnen heute vor, das Thema wieder auf die Tagesordnung zu nehmen und die komplette Aufhebung des Kooperationsverbotes in der Bildung in Angriff zu nehmen. Ich glaube, die Länder wären gut beraten, dem zu folgen.\n\nGEW und VBE, die Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft und der Verband Bildung und Erziehung, haben das kurz vor Weihnachten in ihren Pressemitteilungen erklärt. Ich glaube, ihnen kann man glauben, weil sie von Bildung etwas verstehen. Sie wollen diese Aufhebung. Udo Beckmann, Vorsitzender des Verbandes Bildung und Erziehung, hat in seiner Presseerklärung vorgeschlagen, das Jahr 2016 zum Jahr der Bildungsgerechtigkeit zu machen. Na, das wäre doch mal was.\n\nDem könnten wir gut folgen.\n\nPolitik, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wird am Ende nicht danach beurteilt, wie gut die Zahlen sind, die man nennen kann, sondern sie wird danach beurteilt, welche Probleme gelöst werden können; da brauchen wir einen langen Atem. Das müssen wir jetzt angehen und dürfen nicht mehr warten.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nVielen Dank, dass Sie sie noch zulassen. - Herr Schipanski, ich kann mich noch gut erinnern, dass Sie uns immer mit wehenden Fahnen vorgeworfen haben, wir wollten den alten Einheitsbrei wiederhaben. Heute werfen Sie uns vor, dass wir genau das nicht wollen, sondern dass wir Vielfalt wollen. Sie müssen sich schon entscheiden, was Sie uns vorwerfen wollen.\n\nIch habe in meiner Rede ausdrücklich gesagt, dass es uns um Vielfalt und darum geht, den Föderalismus zu erhalten. Ich weiß nicht, ob Sie - Entschuldigung - die Ohren nicht frei hatten oder sich mit anderen Dingen beschäftigt haben, aber es war nicht so. Ich glaube, dass Sie mit jedem Ihrer Sätze und jedem Beispiel, das Sie gebracht haben, unsere Forderungen eigentlich bestätigt haben.\"\n622,maria-bohmer,\"Herzlichen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der 17. Bericht der Bundesregierung zur Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik stand heute zur Beratung im Bundeskabinett an. Bevor ich darüber berichte, möchte ich eine kurze Vorbemerkung machen, die Sie alle sicherlich nicht überrascht. Ich habe das Amt neu übernommen und freue mich auf eine gute Zusammenarbeit. Mir wurde von vielen berichtet, wie intensiv die Zusammenarbeit gerade im Bereich der Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik ist. Vor diesem Hintergrund habe ich mit besonderer Neugierde diesen Bericht gelesen. Ich muss sagen, ich fand ihn nicht nur spannend, sondern ich bin begeistert. Sie sehen, ich freue mich, mit Ihnen, und zwar nicht nur mit den Personen, die ich gut kenne, zusammenzuarbeiten. Ich glaube nämlich, dieser Bericht ist eine gute Grundlage für die weitere Zusammenarbeit.\n\nDieser Bericht zeigt in der Tat gerade angesichts großer Konfliktsituationen und Krisen, wie wichtig die Beiträge der Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik sind: Denn die Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik kann zur Bewältigung von Krisen- und Konfliktsituationen beitragen. Es geht uns dabei um eine langfristige und nachhaltige Partnerschaft.\n\nNatürlich ist es auch wichtig, den Bildungs- und Wissenschaftsstandort Deutschland zu fördern. Denn damit wird unsere wichtigste Ressource, nämlich Bildung, gesichert.\n\nWir haben - das dürfte uns alle sehr freuen - jüngst durch mehrere Studien erneut erfahren, dass Deutschland in der Welt sehr angesehen ist. Dieses Ansehen müssen wir weiter stärken. Vertrauenswürdigkeit, Verlässlichkeit und Zukunftsorientierung, aber auch Innovationsfreundlichkeit werden uns zugeschrieben.\n\nIch lege ein besonderes Augenmerk auf die Willkommenskultur. Nachdem wir in der letzten Legislaturperiode die Weichen dafür hier im Land gestellt haben, ist es auch sehr sinnvoll, mit aller Kraft und Kreativität die Möglichkeiten der Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik auszuloten und zu nutzen, um die Willkommenskultur weiter voranzubringen. Für die Arbeit im Bundestag ist eines entscheidend: Manch einer hat mir gesagt: Es gibt hier eine sogenannte Große Koalition, wenn es um Kultur- und Bildungspolitik geht. - Ich würde sagen: Es gibt hierbei eine Allparteienkoalition. Ich sage rückblickend herzlichen Dank an alle, die sich so intensiv eingebracht haben.\n\nAuswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik zielt auf nachhaltige Netzwerke und langfristige Partnerschaften. Gerade wenn es um Globalisierung geht, ist dies besonders wichtig.\n\nFür mich war der Ausbau der Schulen im Ausland sehr beeindruckend. Die Partnerschulinitiative PASCH gibt es seit 2007. Sie wurde damals von der Großen Koalition ins Leben gerufen und hat sich sehr gut weiterentwickelt. Sie nimmt eine wichtige Brückenfunktion ein. Dazu gehört auch die Verabschiedung des Auslandsschulgesetzes in der letzten Legislaturperiode. Hier erinnere ich an meine Vorgängerin, Cornelia Pieper, die mir dieses Thema noch einmal in den Blick gerückt hat. Ich weiß, dass sie hier viel Unterstützung erfahren hat.\n\nEine Brückenfunktion nimmt auch der Studentenaustausch ein. Jetzt richte ich den Blick ganz besonders auf die Kolleginnen und Kollegen hier im Parlament. Es geht ja darum, dass wir ausreichende finanzielle Mittel zur Verfügung haben. Es sollte - das hat sich ja sehr bewährt - alles darangesetzt werden, dass es hier nicht zu den Kürzungen kommt, die bisher im Haushaltsentwurf vorgesehen sind.\n\nDie Anziehungskraft des Wissenschaftsstandorts Deutschland weiter zu erhöhen, ist ein Ziel unserer Arbeit. Wir stehen im globalen Wettbewerb um die klugen Köpfe. Ich finde, wir müssen alle Anstrengungen unternehmen, um in diesem Wettbewerb gut abzuschneiden. Dazu gehört auch die von Bund und Ländern entwickelte Strategie für die Internationalisierung der Hochschulen in Deutschland, die darauf zielt, diese Internationalisierung weiter zu stärken.\n\nWas mich immer wieder freut, ist die starke Nachfrage nach Deutsch als Fremdsprache. Die Goethe-Institute setzen sich mit viel Begeisterung und viel Kraft dafür ein. Ich selbst habe es an etlichen Goethe-Instituten hautnah verfolgen können und war sehr angetan von der Initiative „DEUTSCH 3.0“, die jetzt ergriffen worden ist. Ob es um Asien, um Lateinamerika oder aktuell um die Vorbereitung des deutsch-russischen Jahres der Sprache und Literatur geht: All das hat, wie ich glaube, eine große Bedeutung.\n\nDie größte Zahl der Deutschlerner findet sich, wenn wir den Blick auf die europäischen Nachbarländer richten, in Polen. Russland und Frankreich folgen in harter Konkurrenz. In Südeuropa ist die Nachfrage wirklich überschäumend: Die Goethe-Institute in Madrid und Barcelona platzen aus allen Nähten. Das relativiert vielleicht auch so manche Deutschland-Kritik, die wir in den Medien wahrnehmen. Die Menschen wenden sich in der Tat Deutschland zu, setzen auf uns als starken Partner. Das halte ich für eine ganz wichtige Botschaft. Das bedeutet natürlich auch, dass wir gerade in Zeiten, in denen in Europa eine Finanzkrise herrscht und man sich fragt, wie es weitergeht, die europäische Idee immer weiter tragen müssen. Dazu dient auch die Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik, die wir entsprechend mit Leben füllen müssen.\n\nIch halte es für spannend, wenn man die Perspektiven der anderen kennenlernt, sie einbindet und damit ein größeres Verständnis erzeugt. Ich würde gerne den Satz, den ich in der deutschen Integrationspolitik gesetzt habe: „Wir reden miteinander und nicht übereinander“, auf die Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik übertragen, bei der es schließlich darum geht, die Willkommenskultur zu festigen.\n\nWir haben 2014 ein wichtiges Gedenkjahr vor uns. Wir sollten es zur Erinnerung an den Ersten Weltkrieg, den Zweiten Weltkrieg und den Mauerfall vor 25 Jahren nutzen; denn Europa ist in der Tat die Antwort auf die damaligen Konflikte.\n\nWir sollten auch den arabischen Transformationsprozess weiter mit aller Kraft unterstützen.\n\nIch komme zu einem Thema, das gerade gestern im Gespräch mit dem marokkanischen Kulturminister noch einmal eine Rolle gespielt hat, nämlich die berufliche Bildung. Die Einrichtung der Zentralstelle für internationale Berufsbildungskooperation ist gelungen. Ich glaube, wir sollten offensiv unterstützen, dass berufliche Bildung in anderen Ländern zu einem Exportschlager wird, aber nicht im Sinne eines Überstülpens. Vielmehr sollten wir nach den jeweiligen Bedingungen fragen und daran anknüpfen.\n\nIch will auch hier im Deutschen Bundestag einen herzlichen Dank an alle Mittlerorganisationen sagen. Dazu gehören die sogenannten Flaggschiffe, das Goethe-Institut und der DAAD.\n\nWeil wir in die Haushaltsberatungen gehen, zum Schluss dazu noch ein Wort: Die Haushaltseckwerte für 2013 wiesen den stolzen Betrag von 1,65 Milliarden Euro für die Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik aus. Das Auswärtige Amt verfügte über einen Anteil von 787 Millionen Euro. Das sind Rekordwerte! Wir wissen, dass die Ansätze im ersten Entwurf des Haushalts 2014 jetzt nicht mehr so hoch sind. Das sollte uns gemeinsam herausfordern, genau hinzuschauen und zu einer vernünftigen, wirklich guten Grundlage für die Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik zu kommen. Ich sage noch einmal: Ich freue mich auf die Zusammenarbeit. Jetzt bin ich gespannt auf die Diskussion.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\n\nHerr Präsident! - Herr Kollege Dehm, auch ich habe immer wieder von diesem Paradigmenwechsel gehört und versucht, dem nachzuspüren. In zahlreichen Gesprächen ist mir jedoch versichert worden, dass die Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik von einer sehr großen Kontinuität gekennzeichnet ist. Was Sie mit Paradigmenwechsel meinen, ist - so verstehe ich Sie - das Indienstnehmen der Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik. Ich glaube, die Mittler, ob das die Goethe-Institute sind, die deutschen Auslandsschulen, der DAAD oder die Alexander-von-Humboldt-Stiftung, würden das weit zurückweisen. Sie machen vielmehr eine sehr eigenständige Arbeit. Das halte ich auch für wichtig.\n\nAuch den Brückenschlag, den man macht, indem man sich mit den Ländern austauscht, ist wichtig. Ich habe eben ja sehr bewusst gesagt: Wir reden nicht übereinander, sondern miteinander. Dieser Austausch und das Aufeinanderzugehen ist für mich entscheidend in der Kulturpolitik.\n\nLassen Sie mich als Beispiel das gestrige Gespräch mit dem Kulturminister aus Marokko anführen. Es zeigte sich, wie wichtig es ist, wechselseitig die Wurzeln auszuloten, sich besser kennenzulernen, auch dort das jüdische Erbe in den Blick zu rücken und dann nach Möglichkeiten zu suchen, wie man es sowohl in Deutschland, aber auch in Marokko über Wertediskussionen, über den Austausch von Künstlern und über den Jugendaustausch wieder fruchtbarer macht. Das ist ein wichtiger Ansatzpunkt; an diesem sollten wir gemeinsam weiterarbeiten.\n\nIch achte auf die Ampel und bemühe mich, zu antworten, solange es grün ist. Ich beeile mich.\n\nIch fange mit dem letzten Punkt an. Uns treibt natürlich die Frage um, wie wir den Menschen in Syrien in dieser katastrophalen Not, in dieser Ausweglosigkeit helfen können. Es geht um Nahrungsmittel, um Hilfestellungen für Flüchtlinge, die das Land verlassen wollen, und es geht um die medizinische Versorgung. Nichtsdestotrotz müssen wir uns auch um den Kultur-gütererhalt kümmern. Ich habe darüber mit der Generaldirektorin der UNESCO gesprochen. Ich nehme an, dass dieses Thema auch Ihnen am Herzen liegt. Man muss auch in diese Richtung denken, denn wir haben erlebt, wie in anderen Ländern Kulturgüter zerstört worden sind und nun unwiederbringlich verloren sind. Wir wollen Hilfestellung leisten, zum Beispiel bei der Registrierung, bei der Aufnahme dieser Güter. Das wird der erste Schritt sein. Darüber können wir uns gerne noch einmal austauschen. Ich glaube, das ist abgesehen von der aktuellen Nothilfe ein sehr wichtiger Punkt.\n\nZum Zweiten haben Sie nach dem deutsch-russischen Sprachenjahr gefragt. Der Deutschunterricht genießt in Russland offenbar einen sehr hohen Stellenwert. Es gibt dort 2,3 Millionen Schülerinnen und Schüler, die Deutsch lernen; davon bin ich begeistert. Das bedeutet aber auch, dass man die Deutschlehrer in Russland unterstützt, um die Qualität des Unterrichts zu verbessern. Es gibt dort jetzt auch einen eigenen Verband. Das andere ist, dass die russische Seite ein Interesse daran hat, dass die russische Sprache hier in Deutschland einen guten Stellenwert hat.\n\nDamit kommen wir zum Punkt Jugendaustausch. Das war mir ganz wichtig. Ich finde Begegnungen von Jugendlichen mit Politikern und insbesondere, dass sie bei ihnen zur Sprache kommen und Gehör finden, sehr wichtig. Das habe ich bei Gesprächen mit Kollegen aus Russland sehr in den Blick gerückt.\n\nWenn es um Sotschi geht, sollten wir uns nicht nur über die Goldmedaillen freuen - ich finde es klasse, wie gerade die Frauen abgeschnitten haben -, sondern wir sollten auch sehen, wie es mit den Menschenrechten und den Rechten sexueller Minderheiten aussieht.\n\nAn der Stelle halte ich es für wichtig, voneinander zu lernen. Viele der Mittlerorganisationen sind hautnah vor Ort. Mir ist vonseiten der Goethe-Institute berichtet worden, welche Erfahrungen sie gerade in Ägypten gesammelt haben. Dort sind sie nach wie vor sozusagen die Anlaufstelle. Das ist wichtig, weil unsere politischen Stiftungen dort leider andere Erfahrungen machen mussten. So kommen die Menschen zu ihnen, wenn es um Fragen der Demokratisierung geht: Wie bauen wir ein rechtsstaatliches System auf?\n\nMit Blick auf den Transformationscharakter ist aber auch die Unterstützung des universitären Bereichs in Ägypten wichtig. Das gilt übrigens auch für Tunesien. Ein entscheidender Gesichtspunkt wird sein, jungen Menschen eine Perspektive zu geben. Sie müssen wissen, dass sie auch in ihrem Land eine Chance haben, und sie müssen die Möglichkeit bekommen, diese zu nutzen. Deshalb ist der Austausch, den wir über Stipendien für junge Wissenschaftler fördern können, wichtig. Aber wenn die jungen Leute in ihr Land zurückkehren, müssen sie sehen, dass sich dort Strukturen aufbauen.\n\nAußerdem wichtig für mich ist der Dialog der Kulturen. Denn viele der Konflikte - das sehen wir, wenn wir in die arabische Welt schauen - haben auch kulturelle und historische Hintergründe. Diesen Dialog müssen wir fortführen und intensivieren. Auch damit leisten wir einen Beitrag in den Transformationsländern, geben wir jungen Menschen eine Chance.\n\nIch glaube, jeder hat eine besondere Nähe zu der einen oder anderen Mittlerorganisation. Ich sehe es so, wie es Kollegin Schmidt gesagt hat, dass alle wichtig sind. Denn sie haben auch unterschiedliche Funktionen.\n\nMir wurde berichtet, dass es sozusagen eine klassische - ich will jetzt nicht sagen gute - Tradition ist, dass sich die Haushälter, aber auch diejenigen Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die im Unterausschuss Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik sind, bei den Haushaltberatungen dafür starkmachen, dass der Haushaltstitel später entsprechend ausfällt. Darauf setze ich. Das war wohl nicht nur in der letzten Legislaturperiode so, sondern auch in vorausgehenden. Ich registriere jetzt, dass es, wenn wir vom ersten Regierungsentwurf 2014 ausgehen, in absoluten Zahlen gesehen immerhin der dritthöchste Titel ist. Aber ich sage auch: Da ist Luft nach oben, und diese wollen wir gemeinsam nutzen.\n\nIch habe gesehen, dass es drei Bereiche gibt, wo wir besonders hinschauen sollten. Einer ist die deutsche Sprache. Momentan besteht dort auch noch finanzieller Handlungsbedarf. Wenn die Nachfrage so groß ist, sollte man sie auch befriedigen können. Das Stipendienprogramm liegt uns allen, glaube ich, sehr am Herzen. Das habe ich auch am Kopfnicken gemerkt. Denn gerade wenn es um Fachkräfte geht, um die Brückenfunktion, ist dieses Thema wichtig. Wir sollten auch ein Auge auf den Schulfonds haben, damit sich die gute Entwicklung im Bereich der PASCH-Schulen fortsetzen kann.\n\nIch will das an drei Punkten verdeutlichen:\n\nErster Punkt. Wir haben ein großes Netz von Auslandsschulen. Diese Schulen sind in der Regel allgemeinbildende Schulen, auf denen man Abitur macht, auch das internationale Abitur. Dieses Netz verstärkt um berufliche Qualifizierung zu ergänzen, wäre sehr sinnvoll. Das müssen wir mit den Partnerschulen aushandeln, aber auch mit den entsprechenden Ländern. Das Interesse daran ist allerdings, so sage ich es einmal, sehr unterschiedlich ausgeprägt.\n\nDamit komme ich zum zweiten Punkt: Wir müssen auch in Ländern, die nicht mit unserem dualen System vertraut sind, für unsere Art der beruflichen Bildung - auch ein duales Studium kann dabei ein spannender Ansatz sein - und dafür, dass man auch dort diesen Weg gehen kann, werben. Das heißt, wir müssen die Eltern stärker einbinden. Die Goethe-Institute haben dabei schon einige Erfahrung. Diese Erfahrung sollte ausgebaut werden.\n\nDritter Punkt. Wir müssen vor Ort alle Kräfte bündeln. Deutsche Unternehmen, die im Ausland tätig sind und die Ausbildung dort entsprechend dem deutschen Ansatz dual organisieren - auch im Austausch mit den Unternehmen vor Ort -, zeigen, dass man damit erfolgreich sein kann, dass das eine Perspektive ist. Das zu konzentrieren, indem man vor Ort Netzwerke aufbaut und Runde Tische organisiert, scheint mir ein guter Weg zu sein. Wir können ja nicht von heute auf morgen das duale System sozusagen in Reinkultur exportieren - das wollen wir auch nicht. Es geht jedoch um den Geist, der sich damit verbindet: Erfahrungen in der Schule und Erfahrungen im Unternehmen miteinander zu kombinieren, um damit bessere Chancen zu haben. Das scheint mir ein guter Weg zu sein.\n\nDie Erfahrungen mit der Ausstattung der Auslandsschulen dürften sehr unterschiedlich sein. Sie haben von einem schwierigen baulichen Zustand gesprochen, vielleicht verbunden mit Schwierigkeiten, den Unterricht so zu gestalten, wie wir uns das vorstellen. Ich habe vor -einiger Zeit eine Auslandsschule in Istanbul besucht. Da muss ich sagen: Was die Ausstattung dieser Schule angeht, würde manche Schule in Deutschland vor Neid erblassen. Ich will damit sagen: Die Unterschiede sind groß.\n\nVon entscheidender Bedeutung für uns ist die Qualität des Unterrichts. Unser Ansatz ist deshalb, Möglichkeiten der Lehrerfortbildung zu eröffnen und auch moderne Formen des Lehrens und Lernens zu unterstützen, zum Beispiel die neuen Technologien sehr viel stärker zu nutzen. Manche Schulen in Deutschland setzen begeistert Whiteboards ein, auch wenn nicht jede Lehrkraft davon begeistert ist. Das sind Möglichkeiten, die man nutzen muss. Wir sollten das schwerpunktmäßig voranbringen, und zwar über die Exzellenzinitiative.\n\nMit dem Auslandsschulgesetz haben wir jetzt schließlich eine sicherere Grundlage für die Finanzierung sowohl baulicher Art als auch, was den Unterricht anbetrifft. Da muss man jetzt genau schauen. Gerne können wir Einzelfälle, die Ihnen aufgefallen sind, in den Blick nehmen.\n\nDanke. - Ich finde die Idee gut. Ich glaube, man sollte beides tun. Ein Klassiker in Deutschland ist die Fernuniversität Hagen. Es gibt an dieser Stelle aber noch viele andere Angebote.\n\nWas ich auch für wichtig halte, ist der unmittelbare Kontakt hier in Deutschland. Denn wer in Deutschland studiert, macht sich nicht nur in einem Fach fit, sondern erfährt hoffentlich durch den Kontakt zu Kommilitonen, wie das Leben in Deutschland läuft und wie wir ticken, und kann dann umgekehrt seine Erfahrungen einbringen. Ich selbst habe diese Erfahrung in meiner Studentenzeit gemacht. Damals habe ich in einem Studentenwohnheim zusammen mit einer Studienkollegin aus Afrika und mit einer Studienkollegin aus Persien - heute Iran - gewohnt. Das hat mich sehr geprägt, muss ich sagen. Deshalb finde ich, dass man beide Wege beschreiten sollte.\n\nIch bin sehr gespannt, ob Sie noch weiter gehende Ideen diesbezüglich haben und auch Vorschläge, wie man das umsetzen könnte. Wir sollten einmal die Köpfe zusammenstecken.\n\nDer Zuspruch zu den Deutschkursen an den Goethe-Instituten ist in der Tat sehr gut. Ich glaube, sie haben nicht nur das Ziel, Deutsch als Alltagssprache zu vermitteln. Was zunehmend in den Blick rückt, ist auch die berufsbezogene Sprache. Wenn unser Land für Menschen attraktiv sein soll, die herkommen, um hier ihren Lebensmittelpunkt zu finden und ihren beruflichen Weg zu gehen, dann ist dieser Ansatz natürlich wichtig. Das Netzwerk der Goethe-Institute sichert außerdem auch den Sprachenaustausch.\n\nEs gibt einen Punkt, an dem ich gerne gemeinsam mit Ihnen arbeiten würde - es handelt sich um ein Thema, das uns beiden wie auch vielen Kolleginnen und Kollegen sehr vertraut ist -: der Ehegattennachzug und der Spracherwerb im Herkunftsland. Hier brauchen wir einen schnelleren Übergang von den guten Sprachkursen, die man im Herkunftsland besucht, zu dem dann anschließenden Sprachangebot hier in Deutschland, damit die erworbenen Kenntnisse in der Zwischenzeit - nur weil es so lange dauert, bis man ein Visum bekommt - nicht verschwinden.\n\nSie haben nach der Willkommenskultur gefragt. Ein Umsteuern allein reicht nicht. Man muss das Ganze mit Leben erfüllen. Ein Bereich, den das betrifft, ist der Hochschulbereich. Wenn ausländische Studierende zu uns kommen, dann ist die Situation nicht immer die, dass man Tür an Tür lebt, so wie ich es erlebt habe. Es ist daher wichtig, dass man an den Hochschulen ein Netz des Willkommens und des Miteinanders aufbaut. Dies wollen wir hier in Deutschland entsprechend unterstützen.\n\nEin weiterer Gedanke, den ich mit der Willkommenskultur verbinde, lautet: Willkommenskultur beginnt nicht erst, wenn man in Deutschland einreist, sondern schon im Ausland. - Wir haben mit dem Gesetz zur Anerkennung von im Ausland erworbenen Abschlüssen in der letzten Legislaturperiode einen Meilenstein gesetzt. Das muss aber im Ausland entsprechend vermittelt werden. Diese Einladung muss daher vonseiten der deutschen Botschaften, der Goethe-Institute und aller Beteiligten gestaltet werden.\n\nIch finde, diesen Gedanken müssen wir einfach einmal ausloten. Es gibt viele junge Frauen und Männer aus dem Ausland, die hier in Deutschland mit großer Begeisterung studieren. Der Spracherwerb hilft dabei eine ganze Menge. Sie haben jetzt den wichtigen Punkt angesprochen, wie es finanziell aussieht, und das würde ich gerne ausloten.\n\nDie Frage muss ich eigentlich an das Parlament zurückgeben; denn die Budgethoheit liegt beim Parlament. Selbst wenn die Bundesregierung das so machen wollte, wie Sie es jetzt unterstellen, träfe das Parlament die letzte Entscheidung.\n\nIch wünsche mir, dass die Mittel für die Goethe-Institute stimmen.\n\nNach meiner Kenntnis gibt es in Santiago de Chile drei deutsche Auslandsschulen in unterschiedlicher Trägerschaft. Ich frage einmal zurück: Sind es mehr?\n\nDaran erkennen wir auch den Unterschied, den ich eben schon bei der Beantwortung der vorherigen Frage angesprochen habe. In der Tat ist die Situation unterschiedlich: Eine Schule in Santiago hat, glaube ich, weit über 2 000 Schüler, eine andere Schule über 1 000 Schüler. Die kleinere Schule ist die der Ursulinen, die dem Thema Inklusion besonders verbunden sind. An Schulen in anderen Orten sieht es wiederum anders aus.\n\nDa muss man sehr genau hinschauen. Ich bitte um ein bisschen Zeit, um mir das genauer ansehen zu können, um dann auch gerne mit Ihnen zu überlegen: Wie finden wir einen sinnvollen Weg, um ein solches Schulangebot aufrechtzuerhalten?\"\n14475,rita-schwarzeluhr-sutter,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sicherheit von Atomkraftwerken im In- und Ausland - was sind die notwendigen Maßnahmen? Auf diese Frage haben wir nach Fukushima national eine eindeutige Antwort gegeben, die das Bundesverfassungsgericht in allen wesentlichen Teilen bestätigt hat. Deshalb werden wir den Ausstieg aus der Atomenergie fortsetzen und vollenden. Daneben treffen wir mit dem Gesetz, über dessen Entwurf wir heute abschließend beraten, die notwendigen Maßnahmen zur lückenlosen Umsetzung des geltenden Europarechts im Hinblick auf die zurzeit noch betriebenen Anlagen in Deutschland.\n\nMit dem Gesetz gehen wir aber auch einen Schritt weiter, indem wir den Topical-Peer-Review-Mechanismus der EU-Richtlinie über nukleare Sicherheit im deutschen Recht verankern. Über diesen Mechanismus wird auf EU-Ebene in den nächsten sechs Jahren eine Untersuchung zu Fragen des Alterungsmanagements von Atomkraftwerken durchgeführt. Wir wirken für die Restlaufzeit der Atomkraftwerke in Deutschland entschlossen darauf hin, diese mit höchstmöglicher Sicherheit zu betreiben. Aber - und das ist besonders wichtig - das Fachwissen muss auch für die Phase der Stilllegung erhalten bleiben.\n\nDarüber hinaus müssen wir aus gutem Grund die Entwicklungen in unseren Nachbarstaaten und auf internationaler Ebene kritisch begleiten. Zwar liegt die Entscheidung für oder gegen die Nutzung der Atomkraft bei jedem einzelnen Staat; es muss aber in unserem gemeinsamen Interesse liegen, dass diese Nutzung unter Beachtung des internationalen Wissenstandes in der Kerntechnik erfolgt. Dies gilt insbesondere für die grenznahen Atomkraftwerke in unseren Nachbarstaaten. Unsere Bürgerinnen und Bürger erwarten völlig zu Recht, dass wir, gestützt auf unsere Expertise und unsere Sachverständigenorganisationen, Fragen zu den technischen Bewertungen stellen.\n\nHier haben wir im Vergleich zu anderen Staaten, die der Atomenergienutzung kritisch gegenüberstehen, den Vorteil, dass wir über großes Know-how verfügen und dass wir das auch erhalten wollen.\n\nDieses Fachwissen nutzen wir heute und werden es auch in Zukunft nutzen, um andere Staaten davon zu überzeugen, dass mit der Kernenergienutzung inakzeptable Risiken verbunden sind.\n\nWir müssen das Fachwissen auch nutzen, um in den technischen Diskussionen, Herr Krischer, zu überzeugen und einen Betrieb auf höchstem technischem Niveau zu erreichen, wenn wir ihn schon nicht verhindern können.\n\nWie die Fälle in jüngster Vergangenheit zeigen, ist diese Diskussion durch einen Austausch zum konkreten Fall zu führen. Abstrakte Regeln auf EU-Ebene, die wie ein Sicherheitszertifikat wirken und verbindlich festlegen sollen, wie sicher „sicher genug“ ist, sind da nicht förderlich.\n\nBundesministerin Hendricks hat sich deshalb intensiv für eine Vereinbarung mit Belgien über eine bilaterale Kommission eingesetzt, zu deren Abschluss wir jüngst gekommen sind. Auch mit den Nachbarländern, in denen Atomkraftwerke betrieben werden, wurden solche bilateralen Kommissionen eingesetzt.\n\n- Ach, wissen Sie, Herr Krischer, ich frage mich eigentlich, warum nicht schon 2002 und in den Folgejahren eine solche Kommission mit den Belgiern eingerichtet wurde. Das müssen Sie vielleicht auch einmal erklären.\n\nWenn in unseren Nachbarländern Laufzeitverlängerungen vorgesehen werden, dann setzen wir uns für eine verpflichtende grenzüberschreitende Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfung ein. Soweit es noch nicht rechtsverbindlich vorgeschrieben ist, werden wir uns außerdem für freiwillige Beteiligungen der betroffenen Öffentlichkeit auch über die Staatsgrenzen hinweg einsetzen. Das tun wir zum Beispiel bei der Suche des Endlagers an der deutsch-schweizerischen Grenze. Da unterstützt die Bundesregierung die Kommunen und die Landkreise vor Ort mit der Expertengruppe Schweizer Tiefenlager.\n\n- Ich will Ihnen einmal etwas sagen, Herr Krischer: Ich wohne - man hört es am Dialekt - in Südbaden. Dort sind Atomkraftwerke nicht 60, sondern 5 Kilometer entfernt.\n\nWir nehmen die Ängste der Menschen sehr ernst.\n\nWir setzen uns dafür ein, dass unsere Bedenken und kritischen Fragen auch von den jeweiligen Aufsichtsbehörden aufgegriffen werden. Wir schlagen durchaus auch kritische Töne an, wenn zum Beispiel ein Reaktor wie Leibstadt nach einem Dryout-Effekt wieder angefahren wird.\n\nLassen Sie mich abschließend sagen, dass aus meiner Sicht das beste Argument gegen die Kernenergie der erfolgreiche Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien in Deutschland ist.\n\nDeshalb lehnen wir eine EU-Förderung für AKWs entschieden ab. Aus unserer Sicht darf es eine EU-Förderung nur für die Technologien geben, die sicher, nachhaltig und kohlenstoffarm sind.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n6522,simone-raatz,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Gehring, Sie haben recht: Es ist nun fast ein Jahr her, dass die SPD-Bundestagsfraktion ein -Eckpunktepapier mit Forderungen zur Novellierung des Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetzes vorgelegt hat. Aber wie hat die Opposition - abgesehen von heute, mit Falten auf der Stirn und mit Nörgeln - darauf reagiert?\n\nDie Antwort der Grünen war ein von der SPD-Fraktion abgeschriebener Gesetzentwurf aus der vergangenen -Legislatur.\n\nWir haben hier vor ein paar Monaten darüber debattiert.\n\nNun, fast ein Jahr später, liegt ein Antrag der Linken zum Thema „Gute Arbeit in der Wissenschaft“ vor. Prima! Sehr schön, dass auch Sie jetzt die große Relevanz des Themas für sich entdeckt haben.\n\nDaher freue ich mich, dass wir heute einen Antrag beraten, über den wir in der Sache parteiübergreifend - unserem Koalitionspartner müssen wir noch ein bisschen unter die Arme greifen - nahezu einer Meinung sind. Ich denke, das Thema ist es wert.\n\n- Ich bin am Anfang meiner Rede. Das wird schon alles noch.\n\nWir sind uns darin einig, dass unsere Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler planbare und verlässliche Karriereperspektiven sowie attraktive Arbeitsbedingungen benötigen; das wurde heute schon von mehreren Rednern betont. Nur so gelingt es, dass wir die besten Köpfe in unserem Land halten und auch wettbewerbsfähig bleiben.\n\nWir sind uns sicher darin einig, dass es nicht sein kann, dass über 80 Prozent der wissenschaftlichen Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter an unseren Hochschulen befristete Verträge haben, Frau Gohlke, noch dazu mit einer Laufzeit von unter einem Jahr bei über der Hälfte der Verträge. Das ist keine gute Situation.\n\nWir sind uns auch darin einig, dass es nicht zielführend ist, dass selbst in unseren außeruniversitären Forschungseinrichtungen - das verstehe ich noch weniger als bei den Hochschulen - noch 2012 fast 60 Prozent aller Wissenschaftler befristet beschäftigt waren, davon viele sogar über Stipendien.\n\nEs ist gut und wichtig, dass sich diese Große Koalition endlich des Problems der prekären Arbeitsbedingungen in unserem Wissenschaftssystem annimmt und dies noch in dieser Legislatur mit entsprechenden Ergebnissen untermauern wird. Es freut mich, dass wir, die SPD-Bundestagsfraktion, mit unserem Eckpunktepapier die Debatte über den Umgang mit unserem wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchs maßgeblich angestoßen haben.\n\nWas steht nun in unserem Eckpunktepapier? Für uns sind insbesondere drei Punkte bei der Novellierung des Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetzes wesentlich. Das ist erstens die Befristungsdauer eines Arbeitsvertrages, die sich am Qualifizierungsziel orientieren muss.\n\nDas heißt, wenn für eine Promotion üblicherweise drei Jahre benötigt werden, dann erwarten wir, dass der Vertrag eine Laufzeit von drei Jahren hat.\n\nDas betrifft zweitens die Drittmittelbefristungen, die an die Dauer der Drittmittelförderung bzw. der Projektlaufzeit zu koppeln sind.\n\nDrittens sind wir der Auffassung - Frau Gohlke, hören Sie bitte genau hin -, dass das nicht wissenschaftliche bzw. das wissenschaftsunterstützende Personal, welches in der Regel Daueraufgaben übernimmt, im Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz fehl am Platz ist.\n\nHier sollten üblicherweise unbefristete Verträge abgeschlossen werden. Herr Gehring hat es schon gesagt: Zu Daueraufgaben gehören Dauerstellen. Ich denke, da sind wir uns einig.\n\nWir können als Koalition stolz sein, dass seit der Veröffentlichung des SPD-Eckpunktepapiers in unseren wissenschaftlichen Einrichtungen viel in Bewegung geraten ist. Ich freue mich, dass das auch den Grünen und der Linken aufgefallen ist.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Linken, ich hoffe, Sie merken, dass die Novellierung des Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetzes bei der Großen Koalition ganz oben auf der Agenda steht,\n\nund das nicht erst seit heute, auch nicht erst seit der Vorlage des abgeschriebenen Antrags bzw. des vorgelegten Antrags, über den wir heute debattieren. An den Details wird derzeit gearbeitet. Ich gehe davon aus, dass das geänderte Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz zum 1. Januar 2016 in Kraft tritt.\n\n- Ich spüre viel Zustimmung, auch von meinem Koalitionspartner; das freut mich.\n\nIm vorliegenden Antrag heißt es treffend: Das Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz ist nicht die alleinige Ursache für die prekären Beschäftigungsverhältnisse in unserem Wissenschaftssystem. Ja, das stimmt. Mit der Novellierung stellen wir insbesondere die Befristungspraxis wieder vom Kopf auf die Füße. Das alleine kann es aber nicht sein. Das ist nur ein Baustein, wenn es um das übergreifende Thema „Gute Arbeit in der Wissenschaft“ geht.\n\nEin zweiter Baustein ist zum Beispiel der vierte Pakt für den wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchs und akademischen Mittelbau - meine Kollegin Frau Dinges-Dierig ist schon kurz darauf eingegangen -, den wir bereits im Herbst vergangenen Jahres thematisiert und gefordert haben. Das äußerst Erfreuliche ist doch - und darauf sind Sie, Herr Gehring und Frau Gohlke, überhaupt nicht eingegangen; das hätte mich aber gefreut -, dass unsere Forderung erhört wurde. So konnten wir unsere geschäftsführenden Fraktionsvorstände davon überzeugen, über einen Zeitraum von zehn Jahren zusätzlich - ich betone: zusätzlich - 1 Milliarde Euro für unseren wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchs und akademischen Mittelbau zur Verfügung zu stellen.\n\n- Dass Sie sich nicht freuen! 1 Milliarde Euro für unseren wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchs, das ist doch toll. Das ist doch was.\n\nDafür auch von dieser Stelle noch einmal einen ganz herzlichen Dank, insbesondere an Hubertus Heil und Michael Kretschmer, die sich ganz intensiv dafür eingesetzt haben. Ich finde, das ist ein tolles Ergebnis.\n\nUnsere Vorstellungen zur Ausgestaltung des vierten Paktes haben wir vor zwei Wochen präsentiert. Im Wesentlichen geht es darum, dass sich unsere Hochschulen und außeruniversitären Forschungseinrichtungen endlich als gute Arbeitgeber verstehen, das Potenzial ihrer Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler frühzeitig erkennen und fördern sowie klare Perspektiven aufzeigen. Ich denke, Personalentwicklungskonzepte und attraktive Personalkategorien mit Tenure-Track-Option auch unterhalb der Professur sollten zukünftig selbstverständlich sein.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. Sie sehen, das Ergebnis von anderthalb Jahren Großer Koalition im Bereich „guter Arbeit in der Wissenschaft“ ist erstens eine anstehende Novellierung des Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetzes und zweitens 1 Milliarde Euro zusätzlich für den wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchs und akademischen Mittelbau. In den nächsten Monaten geht es nun um die konkrete Ausgestaltung des Paktes und um die Abstimmung zwischen Bund und Ländern. Sie alle sind herzlich eingeladen, sich an der Diskussion zu beteiligen.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n6424,karamba-diaby,\"Herr Bundesminister, Sie haben die europäischen Dimensionen und die Zusammenarbeit angesprochen. Wir wissen, dass im Bereich Forschung internationale Zusammenarbeit eine ganz große Rolle spielt. Deshalb meine Frage: Welche internationalen Kooperationen wurden im Jahr 2014 im Bereich Energieforschung unterstützt?\n\nHerr Minister, die Bürgerinnen und Bürger interessieren sich für das Thema selbstverständlich immer noch sehr. Deshalb meine Frage: Welche Rolle spielt der gesellschaftliche Dialog im Bereich Energieforschung?\"\n9502,matthaus-strebl,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Reichtum und Armut zu thematisieren, bietet zweifelsfrei Raum für eine emotionale Debatte. Bereits im Juni und im Oktober letzten Jahres haben wir hier im Plenum über den zukünftigen Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht diskutiert. Der neue Bericht liegt zwar immer noch nicht vor, aber wir widmen uns erneut weiteren Armuts- und Reichtumsstudien. Vorgestellt wurden sowohl die neue Einkommens- und Verbrauchsstichprobe des Statistischen Bundesamtes als auch die Oxfam-Studie. Natürlich werden die Zahlen der Einkommens- und Verbrauchsstichprobe auch in den Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht einfließen.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, neben Themen wie „potenzielles Armutsrisiko“ oder auch „soziale Sicherheit“ wird sich der Bericht auch mit neuen Fragestellungen befassen, ja befassen müssen. Konkret meine ich damit - erstens - die Auswirkungen atypischer Beschäftigungsformen und - zweitens - das Armutsrisiko von jungen Erwachsenen. Ich kann nur begrüßen, dass wir neben den allgemeinen Themen diese zwei zusätzlich in den Fokus nehmen. Und wir wollen erreichen, dass insbesondere junge Menschen gute Startmöglichkeiten haben. Eine fehlende berufliche Ausbildung oder Qualifikation kann dazu führen, dass ein sozialer Aufstieg erschwert wird oder schneller ein Arbeitsplatzverlust droht. Deshalb wollen wir erreichen, dass immer mehr jüngere Menschen eine Ausbildung absolvieren, statt Hilfstätigkeiten auszuüben.\n\nWerte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ein weiterer Bericht, der in den letzten Tagen ausführlich in den Medien thematisiert wurde, ist die Oxfam-Studie. Diese Studie, die zweifelsfrei auch in Deutschland sehr umstritten ist, stellt die These auf, dass wenigen Reichen die halbe Welt gehört. Es ist natürlich unstreitig, dass es in Deutschland Menschen gibt, die ein erhebliches Vermögen haben. Ich möchte aber in dieser Debatte ausdrücklich darauf hinweisen: Was dabei oft vergessen wird, ist, dass die meisten reichen Menschen durch ihre Unternehmen vielen Beschäftigten Arbeitsplätze sichern - gute Arbeitsplätze sichern, Ausbildungsplätze sichern. Und das muss auch in dieser Debatte einmal gesagt werden.\n\nEin unschlagbares Werkzeug gegen Armut und sozialen Abstieg sind eine gut funktionierende Wirtschaft und in erster Linie ein Arbeitsplatz.\n\nDurch den von der Großen Koalition beschlossenen Mindestlohn - es wurde schon gesagt - haben wir einen weiteren Schritt zur Stärkung der sozialen Sicherheit getan. Seit der Einführung des Mindestlohns ist die Anzahl der sozialversicherungspflichtig Beschäftigten gestiegen.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, deshalb freue ich mich - alle sollten sich freuen - über die auch im europäischen Vergleich guten Zahlen zum Arbeitsmarkt:\n\nDie Arbeitslosigkeit ist 2015 erneut gesunken. Sie lag im letzten Jahr bei 6,4 Prozent und ist damit im Vergleich zum Vorjahr um 0,3 Prozentpunkte gesunken.\n\nDie Nachfrage nach neuen Mitarbeitern ist gestiegen. Im Dezember 2015 waren 93 000 offene Stellen mehr bei der Bundesagentur für Arbeit gemeldet als im Vorjahr.\n\n2015 waren so wenige Menschen arbeitslos wie im Jahr 1991. Die Zahl der Erwerbstätigen erreichte im Jahresdurchschnitt 43 Millionen und damit den höchsten Stand seit der Wiedervereinigung.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, das sind die Ergebnisse der Arbeitsmarktpolitik dieser Koalition.\n\nBei der ganzen Diskussion über Indikatoren wie soziale Sicherheit, Einkommensverteilung und Investitionen in soziale Bildung dürfen wir nicht vergessen, dass es eine Gleichheit in der Gesellschaft, im Arbeitsleben und beim Vermögen nicht gibt. Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer haben unterschiedliche Fähigkeiten, Erwartungen und auch Motivationen.\n\nSie bewerten Ihre Ziele im Leben unterschiedlich, also was Sie erreichen wollen und können, und auch, wie viel Zeit und wie viel Engagement sie in ihre Bildung und Weiterbildung investieren wollen. Hier lautet das Stichwort - das dürfen wir bei der ganzen Diskussion nicht vergessen; auch darüber müssen wir hier reden -: Chancengerechtigkeit. Das sollten wir uns vor Augen halten.\n\nLetztendlich sind wir von der Großen Koalition genauso an dem Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht interessiert wie die Opposition. Ich hoffe, dass bei unserer nächsten Diskussion zu diesem Thema im Plenum der Bericht dann vorliegt.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n14589,sabine-leidig,\"Herr Präsident! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Gäste! Fast alle Autohersteller - von VW über Daimler, Fiat, Peugeot und BMW - haben über Jahre bei den Abgaswerten ihrer Automobile betrogen, und sie tun es weiter. Es ist etwa eineinhalb Jahre her, dass dieser Skandal aufgeflogen ist - das wurde gerade schon angesprochen -, aber passiert ist nichts oder nur relativ wenig bzw. nichts Spürbares.\n\nWir haben jetzt die Situation, dass gerade heute, am selben Tag, an dem wir tagen, vor dem Landgericht Stuttgart ein Strafverfahren stattfindet, das die Deutsche Umwelthilfe gegen Daimler angestrengt hat, weil dieser Automobilkonzern für ein Fahrzeug mit den niedrigstmöglichen Emissionswerten wirbt und sich bei einer Überprüfung durch unabhängige Teststellen herausgestellt hat, dass auch dieses Fahrzeug die Grenzwerte um ein Mehrfaches überschreitet.\n\nDer Betrug geht also weiter, und Sie brüsten sich mit irgendwelchen Spitzfindigkeiten, mit denen Sie vielleicht irgendwann irgendetwas regeln. Ich finde, dass der Skandal damit fortgesetzt wird. Und der größte Skandal ist eigentlich, dass es die Bundesregierung ermöglicht, dass sich an den tatsächlichen Emissionen nichts geändert hat.\n\nKollege Carsten Müller hat gerade gesagt, dass das ja nicht so schlimm sei, weil die Leute sich zu 80 Prozent im Haus aufhalten\n\nund sich von daher diese Grenzwertüberschreitung ohne Probleme verschmerzen ließe. Das kommt mir ein bisschen so vor wie in der Zeit, als die Atomkraft noch sehr umstritten war und man gesagt bekam, wenn es ernst wird, müsse man die Aktentasche über den Kopf halten und sich ansonsten mit Alufolie zudecken; das sei alles nicht so schlimm.\n\nEs ist schlimm, und es ist deshalb schlimm, weil die unterschiedlichen Schadstoffe, die aus den Autoauspuffen ausgestoßen werden, eben nicht nur Klima und Umwelt schädigen, sondern auch die Gesundheit. Die Atemwege werden angegriffen. Die Schleimhäute werden gereizt. Husten, Augenreizungen, Kreislauf- und Herzerkrankungen können die Folge sein. Besonders betroffen sind Menschen, die mit Asthma geschlagen sind, und Kinder, die einen viel höheren Luftumsatz haben als Erwachsene. Es ist unverantwortlich, dass zugelassen wird, dass die Atemluft permanent vergiftet wird.\n\nWenn wir es mit einer Gruppe von habgierigen Menschen zu tun hätten, die es sich in den Kopf gesetzt haben, tröpfchenweise unser Trinkwasser zu vergiften, um daraus Profit zu schlagen, dann - da bin ich mir sicher - wäre der Aufschrei auch in diesem Hause groß, und es würde alles darangesetzt werden, diese Leute dingfest zu machen, ihnen das Handwerk zu legen, das Trinkwasser sofort zu reinigen und die Verantwortlichen zu bestrafen.\n\nBei dem Abgasskandal geht es um die Atemluft. Sie ist genauso relevant für die Menschen wie das Trinkwasser, und ich finde, es müssen genauso harte, starke und sichtbare Konsequenzen ergriffen werden.\n\nLeider ist das nicht der Fall.\n\nSchauen Sie sich einmal die ziemlich populäre Kabarettsendung Die Anstalt vom 7. März dieses Jahres an. Darin werden die Zusammenhänge beleuchtet, wie das Management der Automobilindustrie systematisch die winzigen Gesetzeslücken ausnutzt, wie systematisch nicht nur Herr Dobrindt, sondern auch die Bundeskanzlerin dafür sorgen, dass das möglich ist, wie sie systematisch dafür sorgen, dass es keine unabhängigen Kontrollen gibt, dass es auf europäischer Ebene keine schärferen Maßnahmen gibt, dass selbst die bestehenden Abgasgrenzwerte deutlich zu hoch sind, weil die Bundesregierung darauf Einfluss genommen hat.\n\nDies alles kann man dort hervorragend nachvollziehen. Einer der Sätze, die mir aus dieser Sendung haften geblieben sind und den ich hier gerne zitiere, ist: „Dobrindt organisiert das Verbrechen.“\n\n- Ich kann Sie nur anregen, sich diese Sendung anzuschauen. Sie ist noch bis Mitte nächsten Jahres in der Mediathek des ZDF abzurufen.\n\n- Dann können Sie sich ja mit einer Beschwerde an die Sendungsmacher wenden.\n\nIch habe das hier nur zitiert.\n\n(Carsten Müller [Braunschweig] [CDU/CSU]: Da klatschen ja noch nicht einmal Ihre eigenen Leute!\n\nOkay. Ich gebe ihn dann an das ZDF weiter.\n\nWir haben vor anderthalb Jahren mit einem umfangreichen Antrag der Linken eine ganze Palette von Vorschlägen gemacht, wie mit diesem Abgasskandal konsequent umgegangen werden muss. Eine klitzekleine, aber wirksame Konsequenz wäre zum Beispiel, die Geschwindigkeit zu begrenzen; denn je schneller die Autos fahren, desto mehr Abgase werden ausgestoßen. Angesprochen haben wir aber natürlich auch das ganze Thema der unabhängigen Kontrolle, die Bestrafung der Verantwortlichen und die Pflicht, an die Betrogenen Entschädigungen zu zahlen.\n\nDas alles haben Sie nicht in Angriff genommen. Deshalb ist unser Antrag nach wie vor aktuell. Wir werden weiter darum ringen, dass mit solchen ungerechten Verhältnissen gerecht umgegangen wird.\"\n11506,michael-fuchs,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Diese Aktuelle Stunde hat den Titel „Keine CETA-Ratifizierung ohne Beteiligung von Bundestag und Bundesrat“. Erstens. Der Bundestag wird in jedem Fall beteiligt. Zweitens. Den Bundesrat werden wir nicht beteiligen. Das ist Sache dieses Parlaments und nicht des Bundesrates. Deswegen sehen wir das auch gar nicht ein.\n\nDie Wirtschaftsleistung, die Beschäftigungslage und der soziale Wohlstand Deutschlands hängen massiv vom Außenhandel ab. Machen wir uns bitte nichts vor: Rund 40 Prozent unseres Bruttoinlandsprodukts erwirtschaften wir im Außenhandel. Ohne diese 40 Prozent - ich habe das Gefühl, dass Ihnen, Herr Ernst, Arbeitsplätze nicht wichtig sind -\n\nwürden wir ein riesiges Problem bekommen; denn gerade der Außenhandel trägt erheblich zu unserem Wohlstand bei.\n\nNach Kanada exportieren wir Waren im Wert von 9,9 Milliarden Euro, und aus Kanada importieren wir Waren im Wert von 4 Milliarden Euro. Das zeigt, wie stark die deutsche Wirtschaft ist. Das funktioniert aber nur mit vernünftigen Außenhandelsabkommen, sonst eben nicht.\n\nJahrzehntelang hat sich in diesem Hohen Hause niemand - Sie erst recht nicht - um Freihandelsabkommen gekümmert. Das war Ihnen immer völlig egal. Ich bin ja nun Außenhändler von Berufs wegen und mache das seit Jahrzehnten. Ich habe an all den Runden teilgenommen. Ich habe es überhaupt nicht erlebt, dass sich die Linke mit diesen Sachen beschäftigt hat,\n\nschon gar nicht, als es um Korea gegangen ist. Wir haben 2005 mit den Verhandlungen über das Korea-Abkommen begonnen. Rund fünf Jahre später war es fertig, im Jahr 2011. Kein Mensch hat sich darum gekümmert. Es gab einen Einzigen, der bei mir war und gesagt hat: Da müssen wir vorsichtig sein; das ist gefährlich. - Ich will in diesem Hohen Hause keinen Namen nennen, aber ich kann sagen, dass es ein Vertreter der Vereinigung der Automobilindustrie war. Diese Vereinigung hatte Angst, dass zu viele koreanische Autos nach Deutschland importiert werden. Es kann sein, dass ein paar mehr importiert wurden. Diese Hyundais und Daewoos haben aber französische und italienische Autos verdrängt. Unsere Industrie hat von dem Abkommen erheblich profitiert: 55 Prozent Zuwachs an Exporten nach Korea. Das ist die Folge dieses Abkommens. Davon profitiert nicht nur unsere Industrie. Dadurch werden auch Arbeitsplätze gesichert, und genau das wollen wir mit diesen Abkommen erreichen.\n\nDen Linken und den Grünen ist anscheinend völlig unbekannt, dass wir über 200 aktive Freihandelsabkommen in der WTO haben. Allein die EU hat bereits 35 Abkommen abgeschlossen, seitdem wir dieses Mandat an die EU übertragen haben, was jetzt ja zum Teil wieder zurückgenommen werden soll; daran mache ich einmal ein Fragezeichen. Dann haben wir auch noch 130 Investitionsschutzabkommen abgeschlossen. - Oh Grauen! Nichts funktioniert! - Oh Wunder, natürlich funktioniert es. Es funktioniert bestens, Herr Ernst. Sie haben das nur nicht gemerkt.\n\nLassen Sie mich kurz noch einiges zu dem CETA-Abkommen sagen. Wenn Sie behaupten, das sei nicht transparent, dann sind Sie des Lesens englischer Texte anscheinend nicht mächtig. Seit Herbst 2014 gibt es ein fertig ausgehandeltes Abkommen in englischer Sprache, das zu 100 Prozent vorliegt. Das sogenannte Legal Scrubbing, die rechtsförmliche Bereinigung, ist seit April dieses Jahres fertig und liegt vor. Die deutsche Variante - dann wird es für Sie deutlicher und einfacher - wird Ende dieses Monats vorliegen.\n\nWer jetzt behauptet, das sei nicht transparent, der erzählt schlicht Märchen. Das ist das, was Sie die ganze Zeit bei den Freihandelsabkommen machen, und das ärgert mich.\n\nWer dann behauptet, das Recht beider Vertragsseiten, eigene Regulierungen zum Schutz von öffentlicher Sicherheit, Umwelt etc. zu treffen, würde verändert, der bleibt wirklich außerhalb der Wahrheit; denn das bleibt völlig unangerührt. Gar nichts wird da verändert. Auch das ist Ihnen bekannt. Sie sind schlau genug, um all das zu wissen, Herr Ernst. Ich ärgere mich darüber, dass Sie so tun, als wäre das nicht wahr.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Abschluss noch einige Sätze dazu sagen, warum diese Abkommen so wichtig sind. Sie sind wichtig, weil wir dadurch Klarheit haben und Standards gegenseitig anerkennen. Wenn Sie Zweifel an den Umweltstandards haben, dann schlage ich vor, dass Sie einmal bei VW anrufen; denn die amerikanischen Umweltstandards sind die kanadischen Umweltstandards, und die sind in der Automobilindustrie wesentlich deutlicher und schärfer als in Deutschland und in Europa. Ich empfehle also ein Telefongespräch mit Ihren Gewerkschaftskollegen bei VW. Die werden Sie darüber aufklären. Ich denke, das wird Ihnen vielleicht ein Stück weit erläutern, wie wichtig solche Abkommen für uns sind.\"\n12751,hiltrud-lotze,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Zunächst eine Anmerkung an die Adresse von Herrn Kollegen Wanderwitz. Herr Wanderwitz, Sie haben ja zu Recht gelobt, dass der Etat der BKM aufwächst. Dass es aber überhaupt eine Bundesbeauftragte für Kultur und Medien gibt, das ist der SPD zu verdanken.\n\nDiese Funktion wurde 1998 von der Regierung Schröder überhaupt erst eingeführt, und der erste Amtsinhaber war Michael Naumann. - Das nur einmal zur Vervollständigung der Debatte.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Kunst und Kultur sind mehr als schmückendes Beiwerk; sie sind wichtig für jeden einzelnen Menschen und für uns als Gesellschaft insgesamt. Deswegen ist es gut, dass dieser Etat aufwächst. Ich danke auch noch einmal ausdrücklich unseren beiden Haushaltspolitikern Johannes Kahrs und Rüdiger Kruse, dass sie sich mit uns gemeinsam dafür eingesetzt haben.\n\nIch greife drei Punkte heraus, die im Bereich der Kultur wichtig sind, weil sie für die Bewusstseinsbildung unserer Gesellschaft identitätsstiftend sind.\n\nErstens: das Sonderprogramm zum Schutz unserer Denkmäler. Es gibt in der Bundesrepublik 1,3 Millionen Denkmäler, ein Teil davon ist in seiner Substanz gefährdet. Mit den Mitteln in Höhe von 70,5 Millionen Euro, die jetzt in den Topf kamen, können sie erhalten und gesichert werden.\n\nZweitens: die Bundesstiftung zur Aufarbeitung der SED-Diktatur. Sie erhält in den nächsten Jahren 1,3 Millionen Euro mehr und kann damit ihre wichtige und hervorragende Arbeit sowie die bundesweiten Projekte finanziell abgesichert fortsetzen.\n\nVielen Dank. - Drittens: die Gedenkstätten, die an die Gewaltherrschaft des Nationalsozialismus und an die SED-Diktatur erinnern und damit auch mahnen. Es ist ungeheuer wichtig, dass Menschen, besonders junge Menschen, sich an diesen authentischen Orten wie den Gedenkstätten mit unserer Geschichte auseinandersetzen können.\n\nDie jungen Menschen wollen das auch. Ich habe das erst neulich wieder in einem Schulprojekt erfahren, als ich mit Schülerinnen und Schülern einer zehnten Klasse am Gymnasium Lüchow in meinem Wahlkreis zur Erinnerungspolitik gearbeitet habe. Die Forderung der Schüler ist: Jede Schulklasse muss mindestens einmal eine Gedenkstätte besuchen, und dieser Besuch sollte öffentlich gefördert werden.\n\nDafür brauchen die Gedenkstätten Geld für pädagogisches Personal, besonders vor dem Hintergrund, dass eben immer mehr Menschen dort hinkommen. Das ist ein Erfolg. Die Besuchergruppen, die dort hinkommen, werden immer bunter: Es gibt Menschen mit unterschiedlichen Nationalitäten, mit unterschiedlichen Religionen und mit unterschiedlichen Geschichtsbildern. Deswegen ist es wichtig, dass die Gedenkstätten über ausreichend finanzielle Mittel verfügen.\n\nEs ist uns gelungen, einige personell besser auszustatten, zum Beispiel die KZ-Gedenkstätte Flossenbürg.\n\nAndere Gedenkstätten sind leider leer ausgegangen, zum Beispiel die Gedenkstätte Bergen-Belsen. Sie macht eine hervorragende internationale Arbeit. Ich weiß, dass auch hier zu wenig Geld vorhanden ist, um die Arbeit so ausführen zu können, wie es die Besucherströme eigentlich erfordern.\n\nDas Wichtige an dieser Erinnerungsarbeit ist doch nicht nur, dass wir zurückschauen. Erinnerungsarbeit ist immer auch zukunftsgewandt; denn die Arbeit in den Gedenkstätten ist im besten Sinne Demokratie- und Menschenrechtsbildung.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, eines fehlt aber im Bundeshaushalt: Das sind die Mittel für das Freiheits- und Einheitsdenkmal. Der Haushaltsausschuss hat den Bau aufgrund der Kostensteigerungen gestoppt. Diese Entscheidung akzeptieren wir SPD-Kulturpolitikerinnen und \u001eKulturpolitiker. Wir sind uns aber einig, dass dadurch die Idee eines Freiheits- und Einheitsdenkmals, dessen Errichtung auf einem Bundestagsbeschluss beruht, nicht gestorben sein darf.\n\nIch freue mich, dass ich die Gelegenheit habe, vor vollem Haus zu sprechen. Worum geht es? Es geht darum, ein Denkmal zu errichten, das an die friedliche Revolution von 1989 erinnert. Mutige Menschen haben damals die Mauer von innen niedergerissen. Sie haben gezeigt, dass die Kraft der Freiheit, der Demokratie und der Verantwortung stärker ist als die Kraft der Unterdrückung. Ich bin mir sehr sicher, dass wir uns alle hier mehrheitlich darin einig sind: Es ist uns etwas wert, dieses positive und schöne Ereignis der deutschen Demokratiegeschichte mit einem eigenen und neuen Denkmal zu würdigen.\n\nFreiheit und Einheit - das ist uns allen klar - sind nicht selbstverständlich. Auch deswegen ist dieses Denkmal ein in die Zukunft gerichtetes Denkmal. Ich würde mich also sehr darüber freuen und setze mich dafür ein, dass wir im nächsten Haushaltsentwurf für dieses Freiheits- und Einheitsdenkmal wieder Mittel einstellen werden.\n\nDamit danke ich für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n12739,volker-kauder,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Ja, was heute mehrfach angesprochen wurde, stimmt: Deutschland steht gut da. - Und was Thomas Oppermann gesagt hat, stimmt auch: Das ist nicht vom Himmel gefallen, sondern Ergebnis einer großen Gemeinschaftsarbeit von fleißigen Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern, von risikofreudigen Unternehmern, vor allem unseren mittelständischen Familienbetrieben in diesem Land, und einer richtigen Politik der letzten Jahre. Für diese richtige Politik der letzten Jahre steht natürlich Angela Merkel als Bundeskanzlerin.\n\nDeshalb haben wir mit der Erklärung der Bundeskanzlerin, für weitere vier Jahre zur Verfügung zu stehen, alle Chancen, diese gute Position für unser Land auszubauen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen, das wird nicht einfach werden; denn wir stehen vor großen Herausforderungen und müssen das den Menschen in unserem Land auch sagen - nicht um sie zu belehren, sondern um ihnen mitzuteilen, welche Herausforderungen wir sehen und was wir glauben tun zu können, um diese Herausforderungen zu meistern.\n\nDie erste große Herausforderung ist die demografische Entwicklung. Wir stehen nicht unmittelbar davor, sondern sind mittendrin in diesem Prozess. Die demografische Entwicklung hat dramatische Konsequenzen - nicht nur für die Frage, wie viele Arbeitskräfte in Zukunft in unserem Land zur Verfügung stehen, sondern auch für die Frage, welche Infrastruktur wir in den nächsten Jahren brauchen, und vor allem für die Frage, welche Infrastruktur wir uns leisten können und uns auch zu leisten bereit sind. Sind wir beispielsweise bereit, den in unseren ländlichen Räumen lebenden Menschen, auch wenn ihre Zahl dort zurückgeht, zu sagen: „Wir werden in den ländlichen Räumen auch dieselbe Qualität wie in den Ballungsgebieten zur Verfügung stellen“?\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, wenn wir dies nicht machen, hat dies Folgen. Das Ergebnis können wir in Frankreich besichtigen. Dort gibt es kilometerweise ländliche Räume, in denen sich nichts mehr bewegt, weil dort genau dieser Weg nicht gegangen wurde. Deswegen brauchen wir nicht nur Geld für Kommunen, denen es schlechter geht, sondern Investitionen in unsere ländlichen Regionen, dass sie nicht den Eindruck haben, sie würden abgehängt, wie es in Amerika der Fall gewesen ist, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nDafür bietet dieser Haushalt auch alles.\n\nDass die Grünen an dieser Stelle nicht klatschen, hängt damit zusammen, dass sie nicht die Partei der ländlichen Räume, sondern der Universitäts- und Großstädte sind. Das ist natürlich etwas ganz anderes, um das einmal deutlich zu machen\n\n- Lieber Herr Hofreiter, das ist wahrscheinlich auch der einzige Punkt, an dem ich Sie jetzt attackiere. Ich könnte auch sagen: Sie sind nicht einmal bereit, Ihren einzigen Ministerpräsidenten zu verteidigen. Das ist mir eine schöne Truppe hier, die das nicht tut.\n\nDas kann ich auch nur sagen. Aber damit will es bleiben lassen.\n\nDafür bietet dieser Haushalt auch eine ganze Menge. Da geht es nicht nur - Sie haben es zu Recht angesprochen - um die Infrastruktur für ein schnelles Internet, also die Leitungen. Im ländlichen Raum sind wir auch darauf angewiesen, Güter, die dort produziert werden, schnell woandershin zu transportieren. Der ländliche Raum lebt natürlich vom schnellen Internet. Er lebt aber auch davon, dass in diesen Regionen nach wie vor Produktion stattfindet. Und von dort, wo Produktion stattfindet, müssen die Güter, wenn sie nicht am Verwendungsort aus dem 3D-Drucker fallen, irgendwohin gefahren werden. Deswegen ist eine gute Straßen- und Eisenbahnverbindung etwas Zentrales.\n\nDafür schafft dieser Haushalt die geeigneten Voraussetzungen. Ich bin jetzt über 20 Jahre Mitglied des Deutschen Bundestages und kann mich nicht erinnern, dass jemals so viel Geld für Verkehrsinfrastruktur zur Verfügung gestellt worden wäre wie in dieser Legislaturperiode, liebe Kollegen. Das ist eine gute Botschaft für das Land.\n\nDie Demografie ist also eine der ganz großen Herausforderungen. Hier sind jetzt schnell Antworten fällig. Zur Demografie gehört auch: Ein älter werdendes Land birgt immer die Gefahr, dass Innovationen nicht mehr so ernst genommen werden. Aber auch ein älter werdendes Land kann dann ein modernes Land sein und bleiben, wenn es sich die Freude am Neuen erhält, am Entdecken, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen. Damit dieses auch in Zukunft möglich ist und vor allem in einer immer schneller werdenden Zeit möglich ist, müssen wir uns einmal ernsthaft darüber unterhalten - „ernsthaft“ sage ich und nicht im schnellen Vorbeireden -: Welche Veränderungen müssen wir vornehmen, dass das Entdecken und dass die Freude am Neuen möglich werden? Ich erkenne manche bürokratische Hürde, die es den Leuten erschwert, das Neue zu entdecken und Freude am Neuen zu haben, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen. Darüber müssen wir einmal reden.\n\nDann geht es natürlich auch darum, Start-up-Unternehmen zu unterstützen. Es geht nicht nur darum, dass Geld zur Verfügung gestellt wird, sondern auch darum, dass Möglichkeiten geschaffen werden, ohne dass Bürokratie alles gleich mit Mehltau belegt und die jungen Leute die Freude daran verlieren.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wenn wir sagen: „Die Demografie ist eine der großen Herausforderungen“, dann müssen wir klar und deutlich sagen, dass wir in unserer politischen Arbeit einen Schwerpunkt auf die junge Generation legen müssen. Ich weiß natürlich, dass wir das, was an Ansprüchen erworben wurde, auch schützen und sichern werden. Aber wenn wir in diesen Tagen über die Zukunft unserer Sozialversicherungssysteme und über die Rente diskutieren, dann ist der Hinweis von Thomas Oppermann richtig, dass wir sowohl auf das Rentenniveau achten müssen als auch auf die Belastbarkeit der jungen Generation. Ich finde sogar, dass wir noch deutlicher machen müssen: Eine alternde Gesellschaft braucht fitte junge Menschen, und zwar nicht nur körperlich fitte, sondern mental fitte junge Menschen, Menschen, die den Eindruck haben, dass man sie unterstützt und nicht belastet, wenn sie in diesem Land bereit sind, Verantwortung zu übernehmen. Das gehört bei der Rentendiskussion in den Vordergrund. Darauf werden wir auch achten.\n\nSo richtig es ist, was wir gemacht haben, dass wir für die Pflege einiges getan haben - nicht nur einiges, sondern eine ganze Menge -, so richtig war es auch - darüber ist schon gar nicht mehr gesprochen worden -, dass wir auch für Kinder und junge Familien mit unseren Betreuungsmöglichkeiten, die wir geschaffen haben, eine Menge getan haben. Das Traurige an der ganzen Geschichte ist nur, dass sowohl bei der Ganztagesbetreuung wie auch in der Schule die Länder in vielen Bereichen nicht in der Lage waren, das anzustoßen, sondern immer nur der Bund eingreifen muss, obwohl er dafür eigentlich gar nicht zuständig ist. Ich muss sagen: Ich bin leidenschaftlicher Verfechter des Föderalismus. Aber dann muss der Föderalismus auch seine Aufgaben erfüllen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen,\n\nund darf nicht immer nur im Deutschen Bundestag nach Geld rufen.\n\nWir haben jetzt noch einmal ein Programm für finanziell notleidende Kommunen aufgelegt, mit dem auch in der Schulpolitik einiges getan wird. Das machen wir. Aber ich habe grundsätzlich Verständnis für den baden-württembergischen Ministerpräsidenten, der sagt: Wir müssen aufpassen, dass die Kompetenzen, die zwischen Bund und Ländern föderal getrennt worden sind, auch in Zukunft so erhalten bleiben. - Hier kommt der entscheidende Punkt, Kollege Oppermann: Wir haben keinen Umverteilungsföderalismus, sondern wir haben einen Wettbewerbsföderalismus, und bei dem muss auch deutlich werden, wer seine Aufgaben besser macht und wer sie weniger gut macht. Ich erkenne relativ wenig Freude an einer solchen Diskussion.\n\nWenn wir sagen: „Wir müssen gerade für die junge Generation mehr tun“, dann betrifft das natürlich die Bildung. Da ist natürlich klar, dass wir entsprechende Bildungseinrichtungen haben müssen. Das können wir vom Bund unterstützen. Aber ich sehe mit großer Sorge, wie in einigen Bundesländern die Qualität in der Schulausbildung dramatisch zurückgeht. Da kann ich nur sagen: Die Bildungspolitik darf von ihren Ergebnissen her nicht Teil einer Sozialpolitik sein. Wenn wir nicht bereit sind, den Leistungsgedanken in der Bildung zu fördern, werden wir unser blaues Wunder erleben, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nIch kann mich darüber nur wundern: Wenn hier in Berlin die Frage gestellt wird: „Frau Schulsenatorin, sagen Sie uns doch mal, wie es denn möglich war, dass die Ergebnisse beim Abitur wieder wesentlich besser waren als im letzten Jahr“, dann sagt die Dame mit einem Lächeln auf den Lippen, das sei ganz einfach, man habe die Anforderungen nach unten genommen. - Da kann ich nur sagen: So werden wir den immer schwerer werdenden Wettbewerb in unserer Welt nicht gewinnen. Wenn wir die Besten sein wollen, mit den besten Löhnen, mit den besten Ergebnissen, dann brauchen wir in unserem Land auch die beste Ausbildung, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, und die sehe ich in manchem Bundesland nicht mehr.\n\nWenn wir unsere jungen Menschen qualifiziert ausbilden, dann brauchen sie auch, damit sie in unserem Land bleiben und zu unserem Wohlstand beitragen, qualifizierte Arbeitsplätze. Es ist schon bemerkenswert, wie da in den einzelnen Reden über das Soziale gesprochen wurde, aber so wenig darüber, dass zunächst einmal in der Wirtschaft das erwirtschaftet werden muss, was wir nachher im sozialen Bereich einsetzen können.\n\nDa würde ich mir schon ein bisschen mehr Verständnis auch für die Fragen und die Sorgen in der Wirtschaft wünschen. Es ist nicht nur richtig, dass wir auf das hören, was die Menschen bewegt, sondern es ist auch richtig, dass wir auf die hören, die in der Wirtschaft Arbeitsplätze zur Verfügung stellen.\n\nWir haben in dieser Legislaturperiode ein Gesetz für weniger Bürokratie gemacht, mit dem schönen deutschen Grundsatz „One in, one out“: Wenn durch eine Maßnahme mehr Bürokratie beschlossen wird, muss sie woanders zurückgenommen werden. - Wir haben jetzt noch ein paar Gesetzgebungsvorhaben vor uns, die für die Wirtschaft nicht ganz einfach sind. Da erwarte ich dann aber auch - darauf werden wir großen Wert legen -, dass jede zusätzliche bürokratische Belastung woanders zurückgenommen wird. Wir sind nicht glaubwürdig, wenn wir ein solches Gesetz machen und dann sagen: Das bisschen Bürokratie nehmen wir auch noch mit. - Nein, da muss nun konsequent gehandelt werden. Ich bitte auch die Bundesregierung, uns dabei zu helfen und es nicht einfach zu verniedlichen.\n\nDie Bundeskanzlerin hat darauf hingewiesen, Kollege Hofreiter auch - mit unterschiedlichem Akzent, was bemerkenswert ist, aber nicht verwundert -, dass es natürlich große Herausforderungen in unserer Wirtschaft gibt. Da spielt die Automobilindustrie eine große Rolle. Auch da dürfen wir die Dinge nicht verniedlichen. Es ist völlig unstreitig, dass die notwendige Entwicklung hin zum Elektroauto dazu führen wird, dass die Wertschöpfung in den großen Automobilwerken auf 40 Prozent dessen zurückgehen wird, was wir bisher haben; das ist von Daimler-Benz, von VW und auch von anderen so gekommen.\n\nDas heißt, dass wir uns, lieber Kollege Oppermann, jetzt in erster Linie nicht darüber Gedanken machen müssen, von wo Fachkräfte hierherkommen könnten, sondern darüber, wo diejenigen, die ihren Arbeitsplatz in diesem Bereich in Zukunft nicht mehr haben werden, Arbeitsplätze finden. Das wird das zentrale Thema sein.\n\nDas erwarten die Menschen als Antwort - nicht, dass wir pauschal auf Zuwanderung setzen.\n\nIm Übrigen haben wir in Europa als einzige große Wirtschaftsregion in der Welt ein unglaubliches Potenzial. Es wird schon einiges getan. Aber ich würde mir wünschen, dass wir noch viel mehr Wert darauf legen, dass junge Menschen aus dem gesamten europäischen Raum, wo sie keine Arbeit haben, zu uns kommen und hier Arbeit finden können. Ich muss nicht nach Asien oder sonst wohin schauen, um Arbeitskräfte für unsere Wirtschaft zu erhalten.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich wünsche mir, dass sich vor allem die großen Aktiengesellschaften ein bisschen sensibler in der Öffentlichkeit bewegen; denn sie sind es, die erheblich zur Irritation in unserer Gesellschaft beitragen, und es sind nicht die Familienbetriebe. Das, was wir in diesen Tagen bei VW erlebt haben - 23 000 Stellen streichen und den Bonus für Leute zu erhöhen, die sich wirklich nicht verdient gemacht haben, und das mit Zustimmung des Aufsichtsrates, in dem die Landesregierung von Niedersachsen sitzt -, ist kein gutes Beispiel für Kultur in unserem Land, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nOder wenn ich an die Diskussion über die Deutsche Bank denke. Heute Morgen war zu lesen, was Wolfgang Schäuble dazu in einem Satz gesagt hat. Wenn dort Leute sagen, sie können den Bonus nicht zurückbezahlen - obwohl sie wirklich nicht erfolgreich waren -, weil das schlecht für andere wäre, dann kann ich nur den Satz von Wolfgang Schäuble wiederholen: Das hat etwas mit Fastnacht und Karneval, aber nicht mit ernsthafter Wirtschaft in unserem Land zu tun, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Schluss noch einen Hinweis geben. Wir wollen nicht nur auf andere schauen, sondern auch auf uns. Auch wir, der Deutsche Bundestag, hat noch eine Aufgabe vor sich, die Norbert Lammert völlig zu Recht angemahnt hat. Es geht darum, ein Wahlrecht vielleicht doch noch hinzubekommen, das den 19. und 20. Deutschen Bundestag arbeitsfähig hält. Wir müssen diese Frage klären, und zwar nicht nur, weil Populisten dann fragen: Warum sitzen hier 750 Abgeordnete? - Das Problem ist doch vielmehr, dass in Ausschüssen in der Größenordnung von 50 oder noch mehr Kolleginnen und Kollegen eine sinnvolle politische und parlamentarische Arbeit nicht mehr möglich ist. Deswegen unterstütze ich, dass wir zu einem Ergebnis kommen müssen. Wir sind uns alle einig, dass da etwas geschehen soll. Und wenn wir uns alle einig sind, dann sollten wir doch auch etwas hinbekommen. Es ist immer schlecht, wenn man selber ein Problem hat und es nicht lösen kann, aber mit dem Finger auf andere zeigt, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nDeswegen ermuntere ich alle, hier mitzumachen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n3479,lothar-binding,\"Herr Präsident! Sehr verehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn wir über die Abgeltungsteuer sprechen, meinen wir drei verschiedene Steuerkategorien: erstens die Steuern auf Zinseinkünfte, zweitens die Steuern auf Dividenden aus Aktien und drittens die Steuern auf Veräußerungsgewinne. Jetzt frage ich einmal die Zuschauer auf der Tribüne, ob sie eher Aktienpakete oder Sparbücher haben.\n\nWenn Sie ein Sparbuch haben und Zinseinkünfte erzielen, dann bedeutet der Vorschlag der Linken, dass Ihre Steuerlast steigt. Wenn Sie aber Aktienpakete besitzen und Dividenden bekommen, dann geht es Ihnen künftig besser. Allen, die dicke Aktienpakete haben und hohe Dividenden erzielen, geht es künftig besser. Das wollen die Linken.\n\nMan muss Folgendes auseinanderhalten: Wenn Sie die Dividendenbesteuerung abschaffen, vergessen Sie die Vorbelastung im Unternehmen. Dieses Vergessen rächt sich bei der Gesetzgebung natürlich.\n\nGleichwohl wollen auch wir über die Abgeltungsteuer nachdenken. Das ist auch vernünftig, denn das Bankgeheimnis erodiert. Es ist noch nicht abgeschafft. Sie schreiben:\n\nDie … Aufdeckungen von Steuerhinterziehungen durch den Ankauf von Steuer-CDs haben eindrücklich den Zerfall des … Bankgeheimnisses aufgezeigt.\n\nNein! Wenn jemand ein Geheimnis verrät, heißt das doch nicht, dass der Betroffene dann keine Geheimnisse mehr hat. Der wird sich darum kümmern, dass er sie umso besser geheim hält.\n\n- Nein, Vorsicht! Da muss man schon auf eine gewisse Systematik achten. Die Reaktionen auf die CDs sind angstgetriebene Bekenntnisse der Steuerzahler. Daraus kann man nicht die Erkenntnis ziehen, dass das Bankgeheimnis fallen soll.\n\nDas Bankgeheimnis erodiert. Sie schreiben, dass der automatische Informationsaustausch geplant ist. Ich kann aber doch nicht auf etwas, was geplant ist, jetzt schon gesetzgeberisch reagieren.\n\nErst wenn der automatische Informationsaustausch implementiert ist, ist es in erhöhtem Maße klug, über die Abgeltungsteuer nachzudenken. Dann werden wir das auch machen.\n\nEs gibt etwas Systematisches. Deshalb gefällt uns der Antrag in gewisser Weise doch.\n\n- Tja! - Die Abgeltungsteuer ist eine Schedule. Wir nennen das „Schublade“. Immer wenn es im Steuersystem verschiedene Schubladen - A, B und C - gibt, sucht sich jeder Steuerbürger die Schublade aus, bei der er die meisten Steuern spart. Da legt er den meisten Gewinn und das höchste Einkommen - alles, was er so hat - hinein. Aber da, wo hoch besteuert wird, hat er plötzlich keine Einkünfte mehr. Deshalb ist eine Schedulen-Besteuerung immer schlecht. Sie gehört abgeschafft. Was ist das Gegenteil? Synthetische Steuern! Das bedeutet, dass alles, was jemand bekommt, einheitlich besteuert wird. - Wenn es doch nur so einfach wäre! Leider ist es nicht so einfach. Das wissen Sie in Wahrheit ganz genau.\n\nDeshalb muss man einmal schauen, was damals nach Einführung der Abgeltungsteuer passiert ist. Das müssten Sie dann entweder rückgängig machen, ergänzen oder anpassen. Wir haben zum Beispiel die Spekula-tionsfrist für private Veräußerungsgewinne abgeschafft. Das heißt, dass jemand, der künftig einen Veräußerungsgewinn erzielt, besteuert wird. Sie sagen jetzt: Die Vermögen sind gestiegen, die Steuern aber nicht. Warum nicht? Das Vermögen wird nur dann, bezogen auf den Veräußerungsgewinn, versteuert, wenn es verkauft wird. Solange es jemand nur in Besitz hat, wird es nicht besteuert.\n\nDeshalb hatten wir eine ganz andere Idee: Vermögensteuer. Darüber reden wir heute aber nicht.\n\nInsofern ist es klar, dass verschiedene Dinge in den Blick genommen werden müssen. Zum Beispiel gab es früher diskontierte Rentenpapiere ohne Zinsertrag. Auch das wurde im Zuge der Abgeltungsteuer abgeschafft. Mit der Zinsrichtlinie war es noch komplizierter. Wir hatten ausländische Konstruktionen, die zinsfrei waren. Auch diese Möglichkeiten - das waren Schlupflöcher - haben wir abgeschafft. Darüber müsste man ebenfalls nachdenken.\n\nZur Abgeltungsteuer, bezogen auf die Spekulationsfrist, habe ich schon etwas gesagt.\n\nJetzt sagen Sie in Ihrem Antrag - darauf ist schon mehrfach Bezug genommen worden -, dass das Aufkommen aus der pauschalen Besteuerung von Dividenden, Zinsen und Veräußerungsgewinnen gesunken sei. Dies habe mit der Krise aber nichts zu tun. Sie sagen, dass das Aufkommen 2013 etwa 14 Prozent niedriger als 2008 gewesen sei. Sagen Sie ganz ehrlich: Wollen Sie die Krise wirklich außen vor lassen?\n\n- Finden Sie nicht, dass die Zinsen - und deshalb natürlich auch die Steuereinnahmen - exorbitant gesunken sind?\n\nNehmen Sie die Staatsanleihen. Sie waren früher mit über 5 Prozent rentierlich. Heute sind sie es nur noch mit unter 3 Prozent. Glauben Sie nicht, dass sich dies bei der Menge an Staatsanleihen, die wir - in der Dimension von etwa 2 Billionen Euro; diese Summe kann man bei dieser Betrachtung aber nicht komplett nehmen - ausgegeben haben, auf die Einnahmen auswirkt? Ich finde, wenn Sie das so halbherzig betrachten, haben Sie mit allem Recht. Denn Sie wissen ja: Eine Implikation ist so lange ohne Wert, wie über den Wahrheitsgehalt der Prämisse nichts gesagt werden kann. Darüber aber können Sie nichts sagen, weil sie falsch ist.\n\nJa.\n\nWir haben die Finanztableaus, die zu antizipieren versuchen, ob sich eine steuerliche Maßnahme positiv oder negativ auswirkt. Es ist allerdings so, dass wir das im Regelfall später nie nachvollziehen können. In diesem Fall war es eine kluge und vorsichtige Schätzung;\n\ndenn man konnte überhaupt nicht wissen, wie die Banken im Ausland darauf reagieren, ihr Bankgeheimnis an dieser Stelle zu durchbrechen. Deshalb müssten weitere Maßnahmen ergriffen werden.\n\nDass es nicht mehr Einnahmen gegeben hat, ist für bestimmte Steuerarten richtig.\n\nAber wenn Sie ein System ändern, ist es doch klug, bei Aussagen über die Einnahmeseite vorsichtig zu sein. Hätte damals im Tableau gestanden, es würden 5 Milliarden Euro mehr eingenommen, dann hätten Sie das heute auch nicht verifizieren können. Interessant ist, dass Sie die Auswirkung einer einzelnen steuerlichen Maßnahme nie im Nachhinein im Steuerblock verifizieren können. Das gab es unter Rot-Grün nicht, das gab es in der Großen Koalition nicht, das gab es unter Schwarz-Gelb nicht, und das gibt es auch heute nicht. Deshalb haben Sie recht und unrecht zugleich.\n\nDas ist eine vernünftige Frage, auf die weder Sie noch wir noch das Ministerium eine Antwort haben. Die Frage ist eher etwas demagogisch, nach dem Motto: Schaut einmal, der Redner weiß es nicht. - Die Antwort ist: Der Redner weiß es nicht, aber auch keiner sonst hier im Raum. So viel Ehrlichkeit gehört dazu. Ich denke, damit können wir umgehen.\n\nIch will noch eine letzte Frage stellen, weil das in dem Antrag völlig verloren geht. Was stellen Sie sich eigentlich vor, was geschieht, wenn ein Franzose, um ein Beispiel zu nennen, in Deutschland investiert, er Aktien kauft und die Dividende nach Frankreich ausgeschüttet wird? Muss er die in Frankreich versteuern? Was würden Sie mit der Vorbelastung in Deutschland machen? Würden Sie diesem Franzosen eine Steuerlast von über 60 Prozent zumuten? Das hätte zum Ergebnis, dass er nichts mehr in Deutschland investiert. Wäre das Ihre Konsequenz? Es wäre klug, sich noch einmal mit dem Außensteuerrecht und mit dem internationalen Steuerrecht zu grenzüberschreitenden Geschäften ein bisschen genauer zu befassen, um solche negativen Wirkungen zu vermeiden.\n\nDeshalb ist unsere Antwort: Wir glauben, dass wir in absehbarer Zeit über die Abgeltungsteuer nachdenken müssen, aber das geht nicht so liederlich, wie Sie es jetzt gemacht haben.\"\n14348,maria-flachsbarth,\"Herzlichen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Kollegin Vogler, zur Beantwortung Ihrer Frage verweise ich auf die Antwort der Bundesregierung auf Drucksache 18/11368 auf die Kleine Anfrage der Fraktion Die Linke mit dem Titel „Tabaklobby und Tabakregulierung“ und insbesondere auf die dortige Vorbemerkung sowie auf die Antwort der Bundesregierung auf Frage 6.\n\nMitglieder der Bundesregierung, Parlamentarische Staatssekretärinnen bzw. Staatssekretäre und beamtete Staatssekretärinnen bzw. Staatssekretäre der Bundesministerien pflegen aufgabenbedingt in jeder Wahlperiode Kontakte mit einer Vielzahl von Akteuren. Auch unterhalb der Leitungsebene gab es aufgabenbedingt über die bisherige Dauer der Wahlperiode dienstliche Kontakte von Vertreterinnen und Vertretern der Ressorts zu Unternehmen der Tabakwirtschaft.\n\nNach § 47 Absatz 3, auch in Verbindung mit § 62 Absatz 2 der Gemeinsamen Geschäftsordnung der Bundesministerien sind zum Beispiel Zentral- und Gesamtverbände sowie Fachkreise, die auf Bundesebene bestehen, bei der Erstellung von Gesetz- und Verordnungsentwürfen zu beteiligen. Zu den so hinzuzuziehenden Verbänden und Fachkreisen zählen im Tabakbereich Vertreter aus dem Gesundheitsbereich, von Verbraucherverbänden, von Forschungsinstituten und der Wirtschaft.\n\nDie Bundesregierung steht daher grundsätzlich auch mit Vertretern der Tabakwirtschaft und ihren Verbänden im Austausch. Eine Auflistung der Gesprächstermine der vergangenen zwölf Monate befindet sich in der Antwort auf Frage 6 der zitierten Kleinen Anfrage. Eine Auskunft über Termine unterhalb der Leitungsebene der Bundesministerien erfolgte nicht.\n\nDer Auflistung kann entnommen werden, ob jeweils auch die Ausweitung der Werbeverbote für Tabakerzeugnisse und elektronische Zigaretten besprochen wurde. Grundsätzlich wurden hierzu lediglich allgemeine Positionen ausgetauscht.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ich widerspreche Ihrer Aussage, in den Schubladen der Bundesregierung schlummere ein Gesetzentwurf. Ich will dem entgegensetzen, dass der Gesetzentwurf am 17. Dezember 2015 gegenüber der EU-Kommission notifiziert wurde, das Kabinett in der Sitzung am 20. April 2016 diesen Gesetzentwurf beschlossen hat, der Bundesrat in seiner Sitzung am 17. Juni 2016 dazu Stellung genommen hat und die Gegenäußerung der Bundesregierung am 28. Juni 2016 im Kabinett beschlossen wurde. Die Beratungen im Deutschen Bundestag haben allerdings noch nicht begonnen. So liegt das Verfahren jetzt beim Parlament.\n\nFrau Kollegin, die Bundesregierung hat diesen Gesetzentwurf vorgelegt. In der Begründung kann ausführlich nachgelesen werden, welche Gründe die Bundesregierung hatte, diesen Gesetzentwurf in dieser Form vorzulegen. Es gibt darüber hinaus einen gemeinsamen Brief der Bundesminister Hermann Gröhe und Christian Schmidt an die Regierungsfraktionen, der ebenfalls bereits das Licht der Öffentlichkeit, insbesondere der Presseöffentlichkeit, erblickt hat. Von daher ist in diesem Zusammenhang alles Notwendige gesagt.\"\n11099,konstantin-notz,\"Herr de Maizière, vielleicht können Sie, wenn Sie das schon so antizipieren, abschließend kurz ausführen, was denn für Gründe, gemäß denen Dateien angelegt und Daten ausgetauscht werden können, ausreichend sind. Es steht zwar „Terror“ darüber, aber ich glaube, wir sind uns einig, dass es nicht nur um Terror geht. Vielleicht können Sie abschließend aufzählen, worum es gehen kann und was diese Sicherheitsbereiche umfasst, die Sie eben angesprochen haben.\"\n2307,artur-auernhammer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Deutschland ist Weltklasse im Fußball, wie wir in den nächsten Wochen sicherlich erleben werden.\n\nWir sind aber auch Weltklasse, wenn es darum geht, Rohstoffe zu recyceln.\n\nMan erkennt, dass die Kreislaufwirtschaft funktioniert und dass sie bei einem Jahresumsatz von 50 Milliarden Euro auch ökonomisch Sinn macht. Recycling ist zu einem echten Wirtschaftsfaktor geworden. Das erste dieser Systeme besteht bereits seit den 90er-Jahren; wir haben das schon gehört.\n\nAn das damals zugrunde gelegte System, die Trennung von Abfällen, hat sich auch der Verbraucher grundsätzlich gewöhnt, und er nimmt es erfolgreich an. An dieser Stelle sollten wir auch einmal ein großes Lob an die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher aussprechen, die ihren Müll trennen und diese Systeme erfolgreich nutzen. Herzlichen Dank dafür.\n\nUm diese bewährten Systeme zu erhalten, müssen wir aber auch da nachsteuern, wo ein System in Schieflage geraten ist, und das ist bei der Verpackungsverordnung der Fall. Heute zeigt sich: Das Zusammenspiel von Lizenzsystem, Eigenrücknahme und Branchenlösungen funktioniert nicht. Die Eigenrücknahme wird missbraucht.\n\nEin Teil der Branche macht Gewinne, die anderen zahlen die Zeche. Hersteller und Vertreiber nutzen dieses Zusammenspiel anscheinend gezielt, um das System zu umgehen. Klar erkennbar ist dies am deutlichen Rückgang der lizenzierten Verpackungsmengen, während die tatsächlich gesammelten verwertbaren Mengen konstant bleiben.\n\nDie vor allem in den vergangenen Jahren beobachteten Folgen waren ein hohes finanzielles Defizit und -teilweise ein drohender Zusammenbruch des gesamten Systems. Sowohl Branchenlösungen als auch die Eigenrücknahme werden wohl teilweise genutzt, um Verpackungsmengen aus den lizenzierungspflichtigen Mengen herauszurechnen - wahrscheinlich, um Kunden attraktivere Angebote zu machen.\n\nDieses bewusste Umgehen hat auch einen Nebeneffekt, der nicht so häufig diskutiert wird und auch heute noch nicht angesprochen wurde. Ich selbst bin Landwirt und Milcherzeuger. Unsere Molkerei muss natürlich wie jeder andere Hersteller auch ihre Beiträge an das Duale System zahlen. Leider können diese Beiträge nicht an die Handelsketten weitergereicht werden, sondern im Endeffekt zahlen wir Milcherzeuger das. Deshalb muss es ein Anliegen von uns sein, hier eine vernünftige Regelung zu finden. Dabei ist es wichtig, dass wir die schwarzen Schafe in der Abfallwirtschaft erkennen und benennen und diesen Missstand beseitigen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, mit dieser siebten Verordnung streichen wir den Tatbestand der Eigenrücknahme, weil wir das bewährte Gesamtsystem erhalten, stärken und ausbauen wollen. Gerade deshalb ist es wichtig, dieses Schlupfloch zu schließen.\n\nWir schaffen die Branchenlösung nicht ab, konzentrieren sie aber auf die Bereiche, in denen wirklich funktionierende Systeme bestehen und sich ein Missbrauch ausschließen lässt; denn der Ansatz „Wettbewerb bei der Entsorgung“ ist und bleibt auch in Zukunft wichtig. Deshalb geht es hier vor allem darum, die Möglichkeit eines Mengenabgleichs zu schaffen.\n\nKurz gesagt: Unser Ziel ist, eine flächendeckende Entsorgung von Verkaufsverpackungen unter Beibehaltung des Prinzips der Produktverantwortung zu sichern und faire Wettbewerbsbedingungen zu schaffen. Das, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, leistet die heute zur Abstimmung stehende Novelle. Sie wird dazu beitragen, dass Deutschland auch in Zukunft Weltklasse bleibt: bei der Mülltrennung und beim Fußball.\n\nVielen herzlichen Dank.\"\n6,peter-hintze,\"Ich bedanke mich. Ich nehme die Wahl an.\n\nAuf den Kollegen Johannes Singhammer sind bei 6 ungültigen Stimmen 442 Jastimmen, 115 Neinstimmen und 63 Enthaltungen entfallen. Auch er hat damit die notwendige Mehrheit eindeutig und klar erreicht. Ich darf ihn fragen, ob er die Wahl annimmt.\"\n11439,hans-christian-strobele,\"Herr Kollege Grötsch, danke, dass Sie meine Frage zulassen. Ich freue mich, dass gerade Sie sie zulassen, weil auch Sie Jurist sind.\n\nSie wollen also den Datenaustausch mit dem Ausland fördern. Nun wissen wir beide, dass das Bundesverfassungsgericht am 20. April dieses Jahres zum BKA-Gesetz eine ganze Reihe von sehr wichtigen Anmerkungen gemacht hat und dieses Gesetz in Teilen für verfassungswidrig erklärt hat. Das Verfassungsgericht hat insbesondere zum Datenaustausch mit dem Ausland viele wichtige Sätze gesagt. Ich will Ihnen davon zwei Sätze vorhalten.\n\nDas Bundesverfassungsgericht meint nämlich:\n\nEine Übermittlung von Daten ins Ausland verlangt ..., dass ein hinreichend rechtsstaatlicher Umgang mit den Daten im Empfängerstaat zu erwarten ist. ... Geboten ist in diesem Sinne die Gewährleistung eines angemessenen materiellen datenschutzrechtlichen Niveaus für den Umgang mit den übermittelten Daten im Empfängerstaat ...\n\nIch weiß, dass der Minister von diesem Urteil nicht viel hält. Aber da steht nun einmal für Sie alle bindend als Schlussfolgerung auf Seite 112:\n\nDer Gesetzgeber hat insgesamt Sorge zu tragen, dass der Schutz der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention und der anderen internationalen Menschenrechtsverträge … durch eine Übermittlung der von deutschen Behörden erhobenen Daten ins Ausland … nicht ausgehöhlt wird.\n\nJetzt sagen Sie mir bitte, wo dieser Schutz in den Paragrafen zur Einrichtung von Dateien im Ausland, in die auch deutsche Daten aufgenommen werden sollen, geregelt ist.\"\n12624,harald-weinberg,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Zu später Stunde sprechen wir über dieses Thema. Die Historie ist dabei nicht ganz unwichtig. Kaum jemand erinnert sich noch an Herrn Bahr, der als FDP-Gesundheitsminister das pauschale Entgeltsystem für Psychiatrie und Psychosomatik einführen wollte, eine Art Fallpauschalen, die wir mit allen problematischen Wirkungen bereits in den normalen Krankenhäusern kennen. Das war natürlich hochgradiger Unsinn; denn es ist klar, dass dies gerade bei den psychischen Erkrankungen nicht funktionieren kann.\n\nBei einer gleichen Diagnose, zum Beispiel Depression, kann es extrem unterschiedliche Behandlungsverläufe geben, die sich einer Pauschalisierung völlig entziehen. Es funktioniert ja eigentlich auch schon jetzt nicht in den somatischen Krankenhäusern.\n\nEs gab daher erheblichen Widerstand von Fachgesellschaften, Patientenorganisationen, Gewerkschaften, Klinikleitungen usw. Das führte zunächst zu einer Aussetzung des Vollzugs, zu einem Moratorium, und anschließend zu diesem Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Weiterentwicklung der Versorgung und der Vergütung für psychiatrische und psychosomatische Leistungen. Dies ist ein wunderbarer Titel. Die Tatsache, dass uns das sozusagen aufgegeben werden musste, war und ist ein großer Erfolg dieses Widerstands. Es zeigt sich einmal mehr: Widerstand lohnt sich.\n\nAllerdings folgte der Freude über diesen Erfolg eine gewisse Ernüchterung. Von vielen Akteuren war die Einschätzung zu hören, dass sie zwar die krankenhausindividuellen Entgeltverhandlungen begrüßen würden, dass aber der leistungsgerechte Vergleich der Einrichtungen, bei dem nach wie vor die durch PEPP ermittelten Daten verwendet werden, zu einer Art PEPP durch die Hintertür führe. Diese Einschätzung teilen wir.\n\nTrotz Verbesserungen in Einzelheiten - nicht zuletzt durch die Anhörung - bleibt also die Grundausrichtung dieser Finanzierungsreform aus unserer Sicht falsch. Sie setzt nicht auf eine Finanzierung, die sich am notwendigen Behandlungsbedarf orientiert, sondern setzt ähnliche Fehlanreize, wie sie durch PEPP zu befürchten waren und wie wir sie aus den normalen Krankenhäusern schon kennen. Frühe Entlassungen, Drehtüreffekte und Ähnliches sind hier zu nennen.\n\nDie Personalregelungen, die als Vorgaben immerhin im Gesetzentwurf enthalten sind, sind aus unserer Sicht unzureichend. Zusätzliche Mittel dafür - so geht es aus einer Antwort der Bundesregierung auf eine Frage von mir hervor - werden nicht eingestellt, und die Entwicklung der Personalvorgaben alleine in die Hände von Kassen und Krankenhäusern zu legen, ist nicht zielführend.\n\nWichtige Gruppen wie Patientenorganisationen, Fachgesellschaften und die Wissenschaften sind außen vor.\n\nEine Behandlung von psychisch erkrankten Menschen im häuslichen Umfeld statt auf Station zu ermöglichen, ist grundsätzlich positiv, und immerhin haben Sie geregelt, dass kein Zwang mehr besteht, im gleichen Umfang Stationsbetten abzubauen. Es bleibt allerdings das Problem einer sinnvollen Verzahnung mit bereits bestehenden ambulanten Versorgungsstrukturen, also von möglichen Doppelungen, von möglicher Konkurrenz und des Abbaus von Versorgungsnetzen.\n\nDie Schlussfolgerung für uns lautet: Der Gesetzentwurf enthält einige gute Ansätze. Er ist letztendlich aber nicht nur unzureichend geblieben - dann würden wir uns enthalten -, sondern hält auch noch an der falschen Logik eines pauschalierten Entgeltsystems fest. Deswegen werden wir ihn ablehnen, und deshalb haben wir einen Entschließungsantrag eingebracht,\n\nmit dem das eigentlich gute Projekt wieder auf ein vernünftiges Gleis gesetzt werden soll.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich noch zum Thema Omnibus kommen. Der Gesetzentwurf ist ein Transportmittel für ganz andere Dinge. Besonders hervorzuheben ist der Griff in die Rücklagen des Gesundheitsfonds von 1,5 Milliarden Euro. Es handelt sich dabei um ein klassisches Wahlkampfgeschenk, das dazu dienen soll, im Wahljahr 2017 einen weiteren Anstieg der Zusatzbeiträge, die die Versicherten ja alleine tragen müssen, zu vermeiden. Das ist allerdings ein Einmaleffekt. Der Zusatzbeitrag wird in 2018 umso stärker ansteigen müssen. Aber das ist dann ja nach der Wahl. Insofern ist das der jetzigen Regierung offensichtlich egal.\n\nEin richtiger politischer Skandal ist die Begründung für diesen Griff in den Gesundheitsfonds. Sie lautet nämlich, dass durch die Zusatzkosten das Nachrücken von Flüchtlingen in die GKV abgedeckt werden müsse. Das ist meines Erachtens relativ problematisch und ein echter Skandal.\n\nSpäter ist Minister Gröhe von dieser Begründung teilweise wieder abgerückt, vor allen Dingen deswegen, weil mehrere Kassen öffentlich erklärt haben, dass sie das Geld zwar nehmen, für diesen Zweck aber eigentlich nicht benötigen würden.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. - Dieser falsche Zusammenhang, der hier hergestellt wurde, ist im Raum und wirkt in einer Zeit, in der wir gemeinsam Verantwortung dafür haben, dass der Rechtspopulismus nicht weiter bedient wird, schlecht, und ich meine, hier müssen wir alle miteinander aufpassen.\"\n6186,philipp-murmann,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr geehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Frau Wilms, dass Sie die Frauenquote als\n\ndicke fette Kröte bezeichnen,\n\ndas hätten wir von Ihnen so nicht erwartet.\n\nWir kennen Sie sonst als sachlich orientiert. Das, was Sie gerade von sich gegeben haben, war von Frust gekennzeichnet.\n\nWir sprechen heute sicherlich über eines der spannenderen Projekte dieser Koalition.\n\nEs gibt Leute, die es lieben; es gibt Leute, die es hassen - nicht in unserer Koalition, aber darüber hinausgehend.\n\nWir haben uns dieses Thema vorgenommen, weil damit einige wichtige Aspekte verbunden sind. Ich möchte gerne im Wesentlichen über die Chancen sprechen, die mit diesem Projekt verbunden sind.\n\nWir haben gesagt, es soll keine Doppelbelastung -geben. Das wird auch nicht der Fall sein. Die Infrastrukturabgabe fällt für alle an: für Inländer und für Ausländer. Diejenigen, die Kfz-Steuer bezahlen - das sind nicht nur Inländer; es gibt auch Ausländer, die Kfz-Steuer bezahlen -, werden an gleicher Stelle entlastet. Insofern liegt da überhaupt keine Diskriminierung vor. Wir haben das ja auch in den verschiedenen Anhörungen differenziert diskutiert. Wir sind fest davon überzeugt, dass das so, wie wir es jetzt konstruiert haben, auch gut und sinnvoll ist. Die Höhe der Infrastrukturabgabe - auch das ist ja wichtig - bemisst sich am CO2-Ausstoß und am Hubraum, genauso wie wir das bisher in unserer Struktur vorgesehen haben. Man muss also auch an dieser Stelle sagen: Wir sind sehr konsequent geblieben, und auch das ist sinnvoll. Wir wollen alle Nutzer fair beteiligen. Da geht es einfach - Sie haben viel über Gerechtigkeit -gesprochen - um eine faire Beteiligung an der Nutzung unserer Infrastruktur. Ich denke, man kann nicht behaupten, dass die Regelung, wie sie jetzt vorliegt, in irgendeiner Form unfair ist. So, wie der Minister das jetzt vorgeschlagen hat, ist das für uns absolut zu -machen. Es entspricht auch dem, was wir als fair empfinden.\n\nWir haben natürlich eine neue Chance, Infrastruktur über solch eine Nutzerbeteiligung und über eine -zweckgebundene Abgabe zu finanzieren. Gerade diese zweckgebundene Finanzierung bedeutet natürlich schon eine Umstellung und eine neue Welt; denn wir gehen weg von der Steuerfinanzierung hin zu einer zweck-gebundenen, für die Infrastruktur selber angelegten -Nutzerfinanzierung. Ich denke, daraus ergeben sich eine Menge Chancen.\n\nGibt es auch Nachteile? Natürlich. Es ist eine einmalige Umstellung. Diese ist natürlich erst einmal mit Aufwand verbunden. Wir müssen 43,5 Millionen Steuerbescheide verschicken. Das muss man sich einmal vorstellen.\n\n- Sie können das nachlesen. Insgesamt werden Kosten von 65 Millionen Euro anfallen, davon etwa 22 Millionen Euro für diese Bescheide und 20 Millionen Euro für Auskunftsbedarf. - Ich denke, ein wichtiger Aspekt ist auch, dass wir den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern das, was wir machen, gut erklären, damit sie wissen, was auf sie zukommt, nämlich dass sie die Infrastrukturabgabe -leisten, die mit der Kfz-Steuer, die sie bisher bezahlen, gegengerechnet wird, und dass wir natürlich auch einige zusätzliche Beamte beim Zoll brauchen, die das den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern erklären, wenn sie denn Fragen haben.\n\nDazu hat uns die Deutsche Zoll- und Finanzgewerkschaft in der Anhörung gesagt, dass das im Wesentlichen ein Einmalaufwand ist, aber natürlich noch nicht abzusehen ist, wie schnell der Bedarf abnimmt. Insofern haben wir gemeinsam mit dem Finanzministerium gesagt: Wir wollen nach einem Jahr einen Zwischenbericht haben, um zu sehen: Ist denn das, was wir erwarten, auch in etwa so eingetreten? Müssen wir irgendwo nachsteuern? Insofern ist, denke ich, diese zusätzliche Evaluierung auch im Sinne der Mitarbeiter des Zolls, aber auch in -unser aller Sinne; denn wir wollen ja die Maut zu einem erfolgreichen Projekt machen.\n\nDrei Behörden sind beteiligt: Das Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt ist als Infrastrukturbehörde für die Erhebung zuständig, das Bundesamt für Güterverkehr soll die Über-wachung übernehmen - das macht es ja bisher schon für den Bereich des Lkw-Verkehrs -, und der Zoll soll einschreiten, wenn es denn Vollstreckungstatbestände gibt, also wenn sich jemand weigert, die Infrastrukturabgabe zu bezahlen. Es gibt ja auch bisher schon Leute, die sich weigern, die Kfz-Steuer zu bezahlen. Das werden etwa 120 zusätzliche Zollbeamte machen müssen, die dann in einer Vereinbarung mit dem Verkehrsministerium eingesetzt werden, um das zu vollstrecken. Ich denke, auch das ist sinnvoll. Insofern sehen Sie schon an diesen vielen Details: Es ist gut durchdacht. Sehr geehrter Herr Minister Dobrindt, insofern sind auch viele von uns, die vielleicht am Anfang nicht begeistert waren, inzwischen durchaus überzeugt, dass wir da in eine richtige Richtung kommen.\n\nLetzter Punkt: neue Chancen für die Nutzerfinanzierung. Wir sind natürlich darauf angewiesen - auch das wurde schon gesagt -, dass wir zusätzliche Mittel für die Infrastrukturfinanzierung generieren können. Dafür müssen natürlich nach wie vor Haushaltsmittel eingesetzt werden. Dafür brauchen wir aber auch diese Infrastrukturabgabe, und wir brauchen institutionelle Investoren oder andere, die sich an solchen Projekten beteiligen. Diese wissen: Da gibt es keine Riesenzinsen, keine Riesengewinne zu machen, sondern das sind, ich sage einmal, solide Projekte mit einem mittleren Zinsniveau. Der Gewinn aus diesen Projekten bemisst sich am Ende natürlich auch nach dem Erfolg. Wir müssen sicherstellen, dass diese Projekte volkswirtschaftlich vernünftig sind, aber auch, dass sie betriebswirtschaftlich ordentlich gemanagt werden und aus Sicht des Bürgers kundenfreundlich und effizient sind.\n\nAlle diese Parameter sind sehr geeignet, sie mit Hilfe einer Infrastrukturgesellschaft durchzuführen. Wir haben im Moment mehrere Projekte, die auf diese Weise durchgeführt werden. Es gab auf der A 1 das Projekt zwischen Hamburg und Bremen; ich weiß nicht, wer dort ab und zu fährt. Es wurde innerhalb der vorgesehenen Zeit bzw. sogar noch etwas schneller fertiggestellt. Es ist von der Qualität überwiegend ordentlich. Es gab einige kleine Qualitätsmängel, die beseitigt wurden. Inzwischen ist es eine Superautobahn.\n\n- Frau Wilms, ich weiß nicht, wann Sie dort zuletzt gefahren sind. Ich fahre dort ab und zu. Es ist ein gutes Beispiel für ein erfolgreiches Projekt.\n\nBei uns in Schleswig-Holstein haben wir jetzt die A 7.\n\nSchauen Sie sich einmal an, wie es dort organisiert wird. Durch die Baustellen kommt man relativ gut hindurch. Bisher haben wir dort fast keine Staus.\n\nEs ist genau so, wie wir uns erhoffen, dass solche Projekte abgewickelt werden.\n\nWir diskutieren, ob wir eine Bundesautobahninfrastrukturgesellschaft gründen, eine staatliche Gesellschaft, die wiederum zusätzlich privates Kapital für Projekte einsammeln kann.\n\nIch denke, auch über dieses Thema sollten wir diskutieren.\n\nAuch darin stecken viele Chancen.\n\nAbschließend möchte ich darauf hinweisen: Wir sind ein Land des Mittelstands. Mittelstand bedeutet nicht, dass große Firmen in einem großen Zentrum sind, sondern viele kleine Firmen über das Land verstreut sind. Das Nervensystem unseres Mittelstandes ist die Infrastruktur. Deswegen sind wir alle gehalten, gute Lösungen zu finden und auch konstruktiv zu diskutieren und nicht alles in Stammtischmanier herunterzubügeln, wenn einer einen ordentlichen Vorschlag hat.\n\nInsofern ist diese Infrastrukturabgabe eine Chance, unsere mittelständische Struktur sicherzustellen.\n\nIch danke Ihnen für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit. Stimmen Sie unserem Gesetzentwurf zu.\"\n9331,nicole-maisch,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Arbeit der Lebensmittelbuch-Kommission und ihre Leitsätze, die häufig völlig an den Erwartungen der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher vorbeigehen, stehen seit Jahren zu Recht in der Kritik. Deshalb ist es gut, dass sich die Koalition des Themas annimmt und einen Antrag vorgelegt hat, den auch wir nicht komplett schlecht finden. Ich finde es total interessant, dass der Minister seine Eckpunkte heute der Öffentlichkeit, aber offensichtlich weder dem Koalitionspartner noch dem Parlament präsentieren will.\n\nEs wurde gesagt, er hätte wichtige Termine auf der Grünen Woche. Wir haben noch einmal nachgefragt, wann diese dann anfangen. Das ist um 12 Uhr. Offensichtlich hat sich der Minister zu Fuß auf den Weg in die Messehallen gemacht. Wir finden das ökologisch gut, aber angesichts der Tatsache, dass wir als Parlament das Recht haben, mit dem Minister zu sprechen, finde ich es eine ziemliche Frechheit.\n\nEin letzter Satz dazu: Die offizielle Eröffnung der Grünen Woche beginnt heute Abend. Es wird auch über Nacht noch an den Ständen geschraubt. Baut der Minister den Stand des BMEL selbst? Was macht er jetzt eigentlich auf der Grünen Woche? Warum diskutiert er nicht mit uns hier?\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Kolleginnen und Kollegen haben viele absurde Beispiele gebracht: Zitronenlimo ohne eine Spur von Zitrone, Seelachs, der kein Lachs, sondern ein dorschartiger Kohlfisch ist. Es gibt eine ganze Menge zu verändern. Das ist natürlich keine sinnvolle Verbraucherinformation, sondern quasi staatlich abgesicherte Verbrauchertäuschung. Dass das nicht so bleiben kann, sehen Sie auch selbst. Deshalb haben Sie einen Antrag vorgelegt. Dort stehen positive Sachen drin. Wir haben noch zwei grundsätzliche Punkte, die man verbessern müsste, damit mehr Klarheit und Wahrheit herrschen.\n\nDer erste Punkt ist eine grundsätzliche Orientierung der Bezeichnung an den Verbrauchererwartungen. Das heißt, man muss hinterher die Verbraucher befragen: Ist die Bezeichnung wirklich das, was ihr zum Beispiel unter Schokocreme, Zitronenlimo und Schinkenbrot versteht, oder ist es anders? Wenn die Bezeichnung an den Verbrauchererwartungen vorbeigeht, dann ist sie nicht brauchbar, dann muss eine neue gefunden werden.\n\nNatürlich brauchen wir Transparenz darüber, was in diesem Gremium passiert. Dazu gehört auch: Wer hat welches Interesse vertreten? Das heißt: Ist eine bestimmte Verkehrsauffassung von der Industrie gepusht worden oder von den Verbraucherschützerinnen und Verbraucherschützern? Auch dazu gehören Klarheit und Wahrheit. Hier springt Ihr Antrag ein bisschen zu kurz.\n\nEs gibt einige gute Vorschläge von der Koalition. Im letzten Jahr haben wir vor der Grünen Woche einen ganz guten Antrag zum Thema Ernährung beraten. Das war wunderbar. Was haben Sie nicht alles gefordert: gesündere Lebensmittel im Supermarkt, Reduzierung von Zucker, Salz und Fett, Verbesserung der Kita- und Schulverpflegung, Eindämmung der Lebensmittelverschwendung und - weil Sie so schön dabei waren - keine Quengelkassen mehr in Supermärkten. Ich würde den Minister gerne fragen - das geht jetzt nicht, deswegen frage ich die Staatssekretärin -: Was ist seitdem umgesetzt worden? Ich kann Ihnen sagen: Nichts. Dieser Minister betreibt Arbeitsverweigerung seit zweieinhalb Jahren.\n\nWenn Sie mehr Transparenz und Täuschungsschutz für Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher wollen: Warum gammelt dann der Gesetzentwurf zum Lebens- und Futtermittelgesetzbuch seit Monaten auf dem Ministerschreibtisch? Ich habe gestern die Staatssekretärin gefragt, wie lange er da noch Staub ansetzen soll. Sie hat mir gesagt - Zitat -: Dies lässt sich im Moment in einer weiteren Konkretisierung noch nicht darstellen. - Auf Deutsch: Der Minister wird sich nicht damit beschäftigen, er weiß auch nicht, wann; wir lassen es einfach liegen und hoffen, dass die Bevölkerung es nicht merkt. - So, finde ich, kann man keine Politik machen.\n\nWas ist bei der Qualitätsoffensive zur Verbesserung des Schulessens in Deutschland eigentlich wirklich in den Bundesländern, in den Schulen angekommen? 290 000 Euro machen Sie für alle 16 Vernetzungsstellen Schulverpflegung locker - das haben Sie der Kollegin Binder in einer E-Mail geschrieben. Ich finde, das ist ziemlich wenig. Die Studie, mit der sich Herr Schmidt erzählen lassen hat, dass das Essen in den Schulen schlecht ist, hat fast genauso viel gekostet. Da frage ich mich doch: Gibt es in der Ernährungspolitik eine vernünftige Prioritätensetzung? Die Antwort muss leider lauten: Nein.\n\nWir finden: Wenn man es mit Transparenz für Verbraucher wirklich ernst meint, dann braucht man eine gesetzliche Pflicht zur Kennzeichnung der Art der Tierhaltung. Ich habe der Presse entnommen, dass sich seit drei Tagen auch der Minister mit diesem Thema beschäftigt. Er hat in einem Interview erwähnt, es wäre doch ganz nett, wenn die Verbraucher wüssten, wie das Schwein oder das Kalb, von dem das Schnitzel stammt, gehalten würde. Nur hat man im Ministerium noch nicht wirklich Ideen dazu entwickelt. Das ist schade; denn die entsprechende Arbeitsgruppe der Länder tagt seit über einem Jahr, und der Tierschutzbund hat schon vor zwei Jahren eine Tierschutzkennzeichnung eingeführt. Die Debatte läuft und läuft und läuft, nur immer ohne den Minister.\n\nZum Schluss. Ich finde, wenn wir über Klarheit und Wahrheit reden, dann kommen wir an der Nährwertampel nicht vorbei.\n\nSie dachten, die Debatte ist tot. Das ist sie nicht. Wir werden das immer wieder beantragen, werden die Debatte weiter führen,\n\nda wir finden: Jahresanfänge sind eine Zeit für gute Vorsätze. Für Klarheit und Wahrheit zu sorgen, ist ein guter Vorsatz. Nur muss man als Minister auch entsprechend dafür arbeiten.\"\n8373,dirk-vopel,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Eines ist sicher: Afrika rückt näher an Europa heran. Langsam, aber unaufhaltsam wandert die afrikanische Kontinentalplatte jedes Jahr Zentimeter für Zentimeter Richtung Norden. Aufgrund dieser geologischen Entwicklung wird das Mittelmeer irgendwann verschwunden und Afrika mit Europa und Asien zu einem neuen Superkontinent verschmolzen sein.\n\nNatürlich wird Afrika die Zukunft Europas schon in weit kürzerer Frist beeinflussen. Auch dies hat mit einer drückenden wie bedrückenden Wanderungsbewegung zu tun. Millionen und Abermillionen Menschen in Afrika haben jede Hoffnung auf eine Besserung ihrer verzweifelten Lage verloren. Ihr gelobtes Land heißt Europa, dem sie mit aller Macht zustreben, koste es auch das eigene Leben oder gar das der Familie.\n\nViele haben sich auf den Weg gemacht. Mehr werden kommen. Der Druck im afrikanischen Kessel wird nicht nachlassen. Dafür sorgt schon die weltweit einzigartige demografische Entwicklung, die Afrika im 21. Jahrhundert nehmen wird. Von aktuell knapp 1,2 Milliarden Einwohnern soll sich die Bevölkerung laut jüngster UNO-Prognose bis 2050 auf 2,4 Milliarden verdoppeln, bis zum Ende des Jahrhunderts auf 4,5 Milliarden fast vervierfachen. Bereits jetzt sind in den Ländern südlich der Sahara 540 Millionen Afrikanerinnen und Afrikaner unter 18 Jahre alt; zur Mitte des Jahrhunderts wird es 1 Milliarde sein.\n\nWas wir derzeit als Flüchtlings- und Migrationsbewegung aus Afrika wahrnehmen, ist ein Rinnsal verglichen mit dem Tsunami an Not und Elend, auf den wir in Europa gefasst sein müssen, wenn es nicht gelingt, in Afrika endlich eine fundamentale und tiefgreifende Wende zum Besseren einzuleiten. Dabei geht es gar nicht darum, größte Fortschritte in kürzester Zeit zu erreichen. Entscheidend ist aber: Der erwartete Trend, die gefühlte Richtung muss stimmen. Wenn Menschen darauf vertrauen können, dass sich ihre Lebensverhältnisse langsam, aber stetig verbessern, dass der absolute Nullpunkt des Elends endlich durchschritten ist, wenn es mit ihnen und ihren Ländern allmählich, aber erkennbar bergauf geht und sie sich selbst als handelnde Akteure einer Aufstiegsgeschichte begreifen können, dann wird die absolute Wohlstandsdifferenz zwischen Europa und Afrika als Wanderungsmotiv rasch an Bedeutung verlieren.\n\nDamit es besser werden kann, darf es aber zunächst nicht schlechter werden. Damit komme ich zu Darfur und UNAMID. Der kriegerische Konflikt, der seit 2003 in der westsudanesischen Region Darfur tobt und der bisher weit über 300 000 Menschenleben gekostet und zu millionenfachem Flüchtlingselend geführt hat, gehört zu den bekannteren Schauplätzen der afrikanischen Tragödien. Trotz regelmäßiger schwerer Dürreperioden hat sich die Bevölkerung in Darfur seit 1950 fast verachtfacht. Dass ein solch rapides Bevölkerungswachstum im Rahmen einer tradierten Subsistenzwirtschaft bei knapper werdenden landwirtschaftlichen Nutzflächen das friedliche Zusammenleben von Menschen nicht begünstigt, liegt auf der Hand. Hinzu kommen in Darfur etliche zusätzliche Konfliktherde und Konfliktlinien, Konfliktanlässe und Konfliktparteien, die sich nahezu unauflösbar miteinander verknotet haben.\n\nWir haben es unter anderem zu tun mit dem Kampf der sudanesischen Zentralregierung gegen die Autonomie- oder Separationsbestrebungen verschiedener Rebellengruppen, Konflikten entlang ethnischer Spaltung zwischen arabischen und afrikanischen Bevölkerungsgruppen, lokalen Auseinandersetzungen über konkurrierende Formen der Landnutzung zwischen sesshaften Ackerbauern und viehweidenden Nomadenstämmen, Konflikten über die Kontrolle von Bodenschätzen, Kleinkriegen zwischen kriminellen Banden und vor allem immer wieder neu aufbrechenden Konflikten zwischen den Rebellengruppen, aber auch zwischen verschiedenen Fraktionen und Abspaltungen von Abspaltungen innerhalb der Rebellengruppen.\n\nWir haben es hier mit einem extrem zersplitterten Konflikt zu tun, mehr Schwelbrand als flammendes Inferno. Kaum noch jemand hat auch nur annähernd einen Überblick über die widerstreitenden Interessen und die beteiligten Akteure. Unter solchen Umständen an einer politischen Lösung zu arbeiten, der alle Parteien und Gruppierungen zustimmen könnten, dürfte im Moment zu den frustrierendsten Aufgaben der internationalen Diplomatie gehören. Vor diesem Hintergrund relativiert sich aus meiner Sicht das überwiegend schlechte Zeugnis, das der UNAMID-Mission oft ausgestellt wird.\n\nDer Sicherheitsrat der Vereinten Nationen hat jedenfalls als Reaktion auf die geringen Fortschritte bei der Umsetzung des Doha-Friedensabkommens und angesichts der nach wie vor katastrophalen humanitären Lage in Darfur im letzten Jahr eine Neuausrichtung der UNAMID-Friedenstruppe beschlossen. Absolute Priorität haben der Schutz von Zivilpersonen und humanitärem Personal sowie die Sicherung der Nahrungsmittellieferungen, von denen das Leben von Millionen Menschen abhängt. Die Patrouillenfahrten wurden verstärkt, Schutzzonen für die Zivilbevölkerung geschaffen, und es wird mehr Präsenz in den Flüchtlingslagern gezeigt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ohne Einsätze wie diesen, ohne das Engagement der internationalen Gemeinschaft würden sich die Verhältnisse drastisch verschlechtern. Die harte Wahrheit ist: Zwischen einem erneuten Abdriften Darfurs in das totale Chaos, dem jederzeit denkbaren Rückfall in die Schreckensjahre des systematischen Massenmordes, stehen nur diese knapp 21 000 Frauen und Männer der UNAMID-Mission. Sie haben unseren größten Respekt und unseren Dank verdient.\n\nAber vor allem haben sie und die Menschen in Darfur verdient, dass wir alles in unserer Macht Stehende unternehmen, um einer politischen Lösung des Darfur-Konflikts endlich näherzukommen.\n\nIch bedanke mich für ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n9678,richard-pitterle,\"Herr Minister, ich kenne den Bericht leider auch nicht.\n\nAus den Gründen, die Sie genannt haben. - Deswegen möchte ich nachfragen. Wir werden am Freitag die Einsetzung des Parlamentarischen Untersuchungsausschusses zu den Cum-ex-Geschäften beschließen. Welche Annahmen liegen dem Bericht zugrunde, was Rückzahlungen im Zusammenhang mit diesen Cum-ex-Geschäften betrifft? Wie viele Millionen oder Milliarden Euro werden der Staatskasse als Rückzahlung im Zusammenhang mit solchen Geschäften zugutekommen?\"\n5384,astrid-freudenstein,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kol-legen! Meine Damen und Herren! Wir nähern uns in großen Schritten dem Wochenende. Ich will Ihnen hier kurz von einem gelungenen Fall von Provenienzforschung berichten.\n\nIm Kunstforum Ostdeutsche Galerie, ein durch-aus renommiertes Museum in meiner Heimatstadt Regensburg, hängt ein Ölgemälde von Lovis Co-rinth, die Drei Grazien. Das Motiv kennen Sie: drei nackte Frauen, die sich berühren und umarmen. Raphael hat sie gemalt, ebenso Rubens. Im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert war dieses Thema in der Kunst sehr beliebt. Insofern ist das Werk von Lo-vis Corinth ein bisschen aus der Zeit gefallen. Co-rinth war schon in der Moderne ein großer Kon-servativer. Seine Drei Grazien sind erst vor hun-dert Jahren entstanden.\n\nDieses Bild hängt als Dauerleihgabe der Baye-rischen Staatsgemäldesammlungen in Regens-burg. Das dortige Kunstforum Ostdeutsche Gale-rie ist ein Spezialmuseum mit einem bundesweit einzigartigen Auftrag. Es bewahrt das Kunsterbe der ehemals deutsch geprägten Kulturräume in Osteuropa. Das ist interessant, weil der Bund an diesem Haus finanziell ganz wesentlich beteiligt ist.\n\nSeit einigen Monaten nun hängt neben diesem Gemälde ein kleines Schild mit Anmerkungen zur Provenienz der Drei Grazien. Die Geschichte, die hier zu lesen ist, ist eine ausgesprochen span-nende; denn das Gemälde ist mit dem tragischen Schicksal einer jüdischen Familie eng verbunden, der Familie Levy. Clara Levy, eine Tuchfabrikantin hier aus Berlin, war seit 1921 die Eigentümerin dieses Bildes. Das Gemälde gelangte 1939, als sie Deutschland verlassen musste, mit ihrem Um-zugsgut nach Luxemburg, wo Clara Levy wenig später starb. Ihre Erben ließen die Drei Grazien zu Verwandten nach New York verschiffen.\n\nHier wird es dann unübersichtlich: Die Erben-gemeinschaft von Clara Levy beantragte nämlich 2002 von den Bayerischen Staatsgemäldesamm-lungen die Rückgabe dieses Bildes. Aussage stand gegen Aussage: Die Familie Levy behaupte-te, dass das Bild nie in Amerika angekommen sei. Ihrer Meinung nach haben die NS-Behörden das Gemälde noch vor der Verschiffung nach New York beschlagnahmt. Bei den Verwandten in Ame-rika sei das Bild jedenfalls nie angekommen. Die Bayerischen Staatsgemäldesammlungen wider-sprachen: Sie sehen sich als rechtmäßige Eigen-tümer, also ein klassischer Fall für die Prove-nienzforschung. Sie erforscht die Herkunft eines Kunstwerkes, recherchiert die Besitzverhältnisse, stellt rechtmäßige und unrechtmäßige Eigentümer fest.\n\nNun beschäftigen wir uns heute mit einem An-trag der Grünen, der die Defizite in der Prove-nienzforschung darlegt. Sie sehen ein generelles Informationsdefizit und verlangen eine intensivere Auseinandersetzung mit dem Kulturgutverlust, auch anderer Opfergruppen als der NS-Opfer, und sind der Meinung, dass Privatleute beim Thema Provenienzforschung immer noch recht alleine ge-lassen werden. In Ihrem Antrag steht:\n\nAuch die von der Bundesregierung geplante Gründung eines „Deutschen Zentrums für Kulturgutverluste“ wird diese wesentlichen Problemfelder nicht abfangen und beheben können.\n\nIch möchte Ihnen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kolle-gen von den Grünen, doch ans Herz legen, die Satzung des neu gegründeten Zentrums zu lesen. Ich gebe gerne zu, dass es Spannenderes als dieses neunseitige Papier gibt. Aus der Satzung des „Deutschen Zentrums Kulturgutverluste“ geht jedoch klar hervor, was unter Staatsministerin Grütters geschaffen wird. Ein Großteil Ihrer For-derungen ist in dieser Satzung bereits realisiert. Die Gründung des Deutschen Zentrums Kultur-gutverluste markiert auch längst nicht den Anfang der Bemühungen um Provenienzforschung und Restitution.\n\nSeit dem Jahr 2008 wurden über die Arbeits-stelle für Provenienzforschung 170 Projekte in 89 Museen und Dutzenden Bibliotheken, wissen-schaftlichen Institutionen und universitären Ein-richtungen gefördert. Fördergelder in Höhe von rund 12 Millionen Euro wurden zur Verfügung ge-stellt. In den geförderten Projekten wurden und werden mehr als 90 000 Objekte - überwiegend Gemälde, Zeichnungen und Grafiken - und mehr als 520 000 Bücher und Drucke überprüft, bei de-nen ein Verdacht auf NS-verfolgungsbedingten Entzug nicht ausgeschlossen werden konnte.\n\nDie Fundmeldungen öffentlicher Einrichtungen in der Lost-Art-Datenbank haben sich seit dem Jahr 2008 mehr als vervierfacht, und zwar auf jetzt gut 29 000. Nach Erkenntnissen der Koordi-nierungsstelle in Magdeburg wurden in Deutsch-land allein im Bereich NS-Raubkunst seit der Washingtoner Erklärung von 1998 mehr als 12 000 Objekte restituiert. Diese Zahlen beeindru-cken, und doch - darin sind wir uns alle einig - liegt noch ein ganzes Stück Arbeit vor uns.\n\nKlar ist, dass die Debatte um Provenienzfor-schung durch den Schwabinger Kunstfund eine neue Dynamik bekommen hat. Klar ist aber auch, dass Sie Ihren Antrag besser vor zehn Jahren eingebracht hätten: Im Spätsommer 2005 wäre er genau richtig gewesen. Denn damals neigte sich gerade die zweite Legislaturperiode dem Ende zu, in der Rot-Grün die Mehrheit hatte.\n\nZwei Legislaturperioden lang, und zwar genau die sieben Jahre nach der Washingtoner Erklärung, ist nämlich in Sachen Provenienzforschung in un-serem Land reichlich wenig passiert.\n\nErst mit der Amtsübernahme durch Bernd Neumann und nun mit Monika Grütters wurde der Provenienzforschung die herausgehobene Stel-lung eingeräumt, die sie jetzt hat.\n\nDie Drei Grazien - um die Geschichte zu Ende zu bringen - sind übrigens noch immer im Re-gensburger Kunstforum Ostdeutsche Galerie zu sehen. Nicht nur deshalb lege ich Ihnen einen Be-such dieses Hauses besonders ans Herz. Die Limbach-Kommission, von der vorhin schon die Rede war, die sich strittigen Fällen der Prove-nienzforschung widmet, hat unmissverständlich empfohlen, das Gemälde bei den Bayerischen Staatsgemäldesammlungen zu belassen. Sie sind der rechtmäßige Eigentümer.\n\nDie Wissenschaftler der Koordinierungsstelle Magdeburg haben Frachtzettel unter die Lupe ge-nommen, Unterschriften verglichen, Stempel in-spiziert und Verkaufsurkunden überprüft. Die Drei Grazien wurden nämlich tatsächlich wie geplant von Luxemburg nach Amerika verschifft und dort von den Verwandten entgegengenommen. Sie verkauften das Bild an den New Yorker Galleristen Curt Valentin, der die Drei Grazien 1949 zurück nach Europa verkaufte, und zwar an das Kunst-museum Bern. Im März 1950 erwarben die Baye-rischen Staats-gemäldesammlungen das Bild wie-derum vom Kunstmuseum Bern.\n\nDer Fall ist beklemmend, weil die Eigentümer-familie tatsächlich wegen der Nationalsozialisten Deutschland verlassen musste. Das Bild wurde aber weder von den NS-Behörden beschlagnahmt noch unter dem Druck der politischen Lage unter Wert verkauft. Beides war nicht der Fall. Die An-zahl der Restitutionen sagt also nichts darüber aus, wie gut Provenienzforschung funktioniert.\n\nDie Geschichte der Drei Grazien ist im Übrigen in der Lost-Art-Datenbank nachzulesen. Auch die-se Lektüre möchte ich Ihnen fürs Wochenende ans Herz legen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n12432,carsten-linnemann,\"Herzlichen Dank. - Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben uns fast exakt vor drei Wochen hier getroffen und den vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf ins parlamentarische Verfahren eingebracht. Vor einigen Tagen fand eine entsprechende Sachverständigenanhörung statt. Herr Rosemann hat sich eben auf die Themen Prävention und Rehabilitation bezogen.\n\nIch möchte Zitate aus der Anhörung wiedergeben, die sich auf das Thema längeres Arbeiten beziehen und die belegen, dass es attraktiv ist, im Renteneintrittsalter zu arbeiten. Die Deutsche Rentenversicherung sagt: Wir werden mit dem neuen Gesetz „sicherlich einen Anreiz bekommen, jenseits der Regelaltersgrenze länger zu arbeiten“. Die BDA, die Bundesvereinigung Deutscher Arbeitgeberverbände, sagt: „Auf jeden Fall hat dieses Gesetz Potenzial, das Denken der Menschen und ein längeres Arbeiten zu fördern.“ Der ZDH, der Zentralverband des Deutschen Handwerks, hat über die neue Teilrente gesagt, dass die neue Teilrentenregelung auf jeden Fall besser sei als die alte. Die Caritas hat die Prävention gelobt. Kerstin Griese - sie ist keine Sachverständige, sondern die Ausschussvorsitzende - hat zum Schluss gesagt: So viel Lob haben wir selten gehört.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Herr Birkwald, ich will gar nicht verhehlen, dass es in der Anhörung auch Kritik gab, zum Beispiel in Bezug auf die eben genannte Spitzabrechung. Aber ich muss sagen: Ich habe selten eine Anhörung erlebt, die so positiv war, auch was die Zielsetzung angeht - das müssen auch Sie zugeben; Sie sind ja auch schon ein paar Jahre im Parlament -, und deshalb bin ich der festen Überzeugung, dass wir heute ein Gesetz beschließen werden, das gut ist für unser Land. Es ist richtig, dass wir dies tun werden.\n\nZum Schluss, nicht während der Rede; nein, danke. Herr Birkwald hat eben gesprochen. Herr Birkwald, ich sage sofort noch etwas zu Ihrer Rede, dann können Sie im Anschluss gern erwidern.\n\nNatürlich wird dieses Gesetz - das muss man frank und frei zugeben - keine Wunder bewirken. Natürlich ist es ein erster Schritt hin zu einem Paradigmenwechsel. Alter neu denken - ich denke, es muss das Ziel sein, dass die Menschen die Freiheit haben, selbst zu entscheiden, wann Schluss ist und wann nicht. Dafür haben wir drei Dinge umgesetzt.\n\nErstens den arbeitsrechtlichen Teil: dass es in Zukunft erlaubt ist, befristete Verträge im Rentenalter zu verabschieden. Das gilt schon seit einiger Zeit, und es gehört auch zur Flexirente.\n\nZweitens - Herr Rosemann hat es angesprochen -, dass diejenigen, die länger arbeiten, ihre Rente durch die zusätzliche Arbeit erhöhen können; dafür arbeiten sie ja. Im Moment geht das noch nicht. Die meisten Menschen wollen Rente beziehen und zusätzlich arbeiten. Im Moment zahlen die Arbeitgeber Beiträge, die kommen in einen großen Topf und sind weg. In Zukunft gibt es zusätzliche Rentenerhöhungen für zusätzliche Arbeit.\n\nDrittens. Die Deutsche Rentenversicherung wird neu und besser über die Möglichkeiten des längeren Arbeitens informieren. Im Moment ist es leider noch so - es ändert sich gerade -, dass die Rentenversicherung so tut, als ob es gar keine Alternative gebe als die des Renteneintritts, und das wird sich jetzt ändern.\n\nHerr Birkwald, wenn Sie sagen, der Geist der Flexirente sei Arbeiten bis zum Umfallen, so muss ich schlicht sagen, dass das erstens falsch ist, und zweitens irritiert es mich, weil ich Ihnen nicht zugetraut hätte, dass Sie dieses Gesetz überhaupt so falsch verstehen können.\n\nDenn bei diesem Gesetz geht es darum, erstens die Menschen in die Lage zu versetzen, durch präventive Maßnahmen überhaupt länger arbeiten zu können, und zweitens das längere Arbeiten attraktiver zu machen.\n\nDie Menschen - damit muss endlich Schluss sein - dürfen nicht den Eindruck haben, dass wir ihnen einreden, dass es alle nur deshalb machen, um mehr Geld zu verdienen. Ja, diese wird es geben, aber es geht im Kern beim längeren Arbeiten um Wertschätzung, um soziale Teilhabe. Man will nicht zum alten Eisen gehören. Man will keine Vollbremsung in der Rente, und nicht von hundert auf null.\n\nDiesen Geist müssen wir leben und nicht den Geist der Linken, dass es hier um Zwangsarbeit geht, sondern es geht um freiwillige Arbeit im höheren Alter.\n\nDeshalb muss sich die Rentenpolitik der Zukunft an zwei Polen orientieren: erstens für diejenigen da sein, die nicht länger arbeiten können, aus psychischen, körperlichen oder welchen Gründen auch immer, zweitens Anreize zum längeren Arbeiten setzen, damit wir irgendwann einmal dorthin kommen - weil wir länger leben -, die Lebensarbeitszeit an die Lebenserwartung zu koppeln. Die Rentenbezugsdauer beträgt heute 20 Jahre, 1960 betrug sie 10 Jahre und 1965 15 Jahre. Heute leben wir 20 Jahre länger.\n\nEine Gruppe habe ich jetzt nicht angesprochen, die von diesem Gesetz auch überhaupt nicht tangiert wird: Das sind beispielsweise die 50- bis 60-Jährigen, die unverschuldet in die Arbeitslosigkeit schlittern. Hier haben wir offenkundig ein Problem, und dazu gibt es auch von meiner Seite einen Appell an die Wirtschaft, hier ganz klare Signale zu setzen, dass man den Menschen zwischen 50 und 60 Jahren, die unverschuldet in die Arbeitslosigkeit geraten sind, eine Chance gibt. Viele wissen nicht, dass es beispielsweise eine sogenannte 52er\u001eRegel gibt: dass jene, die mit 52 Jahren in die Arbeitslosigkeit gehen, auf fünf Jahre befristete Arbeitsverträge mit den Arbeitgebern abschließen können.\n\nDie Flexirente ist eine Brücke in die Zukunft der Rentenpolitik, und ich möchte mich sowohl bei unserer Fraktion als auch beim Koalitionspartner bedanken. Gerade auf der Zielgeraden war die Abstimmung konstruktiv. Ich möchte mich bei den Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern der Fraktionen bedanken; ich denke dabei an Thomas Rogowski und andere.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\n\nHerzlichen Dank. - Herr Birkwald, ich kenne in unserer Fraktion und auch, wenn ich das sagen darf, in der Fraktion der Kollegen niemanden, der gesagt hat, dass wir mit diesem Gesetz Altersarmut verhindern. Darum geht es überhaupt nicht. Altersarmut verhindern wir, indem wir zum Beispiel die betriebliche Altersvorsorge - Frau Nahles und Herr Schäuble bringen dies jetzt auf den Weg - verbessern, indem wir Zuschläge für Geringverdiener geben. Das sind Konzepte. Die Flexirente hat damit nichts zu tun. Verunsichern Sie nicht die Menschen.\n\nDas betrifft auch einen weiteren Punkt. Auch das sollten Sie eigentlich wissen, Herr Birkwald. Es irritiert mich, dass Sie das so darstellen. Die Schreiben der Deutschen Rentenversicherung werden nicht vom Deutschen Bundestag beschlossen und erst recht nicht formuliert.\n\nDie Schreiben kommen von der Selbstverwaltung. Da sitzen Arbeitnehmer und Arbeitgeber. Glauben Sie mir, dass wir mit denen gesprochen haben. Das ist übrigens der Grund, warum die Formulierungen bereits vor zwei Jahren geändert wurden. Früher bekam derjenige, der 55 wurde, einen Brief, und in diesem Brief stand: Du musst jetzt Altersrente beantragen. Heute steht in diesem Brief: Du kannst Altersrente beantragen, du kannst aber auch, wenn du willst, länger arbeiten und bekommst zusätzliche Zuschläge.\n\nDas muss doch entscheidend sein.\n\nHerr Birkwald, wer etwas will, findet Wege. Wer etwas nicht will, findet Argumente. Das ist die Flexirente.\"\n9377,lars-castellucci,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen hat vorgeschlagen, das Asylverfahrensgesetz zu verändern und dort die obligatorische Widerrufsprüfung zu streichen. Dahinter steht eine Zielsetzung. Die eigentliche Zielsetzung ist, zu einer Beschleunigung unserer Asylverfahren zu kommen.\n\nIn dieser Zielsetzung stimmt die Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen mit den Zielstellungen der Koalition und dem Koalitionsvertrag überein. Auch wir sind dafür, die Verfahren zu beschleunigen. Ich will die Gelegenheit nutzen, zunächst einmal zu schauen, wo wir nach etwas mehr als der Hälfte unserer Regierungszeit mit Blick auf die Verfahren stehen.\n\nWenn ein Fahrstuhl für 20 Personen ausgelegt ist, braucht man sich nicht zu wundern, wenn er mit 400 Personen stecken bleibt. So ähnlich ist es mit unseren Asylverfahren. In den Jahren 2008 und 2009 hatten wir 23 000 bzw. 28 000 Asylsuchende in Deutschland - und auch schon 20 000 aufgelaufene, also unerledigte Verfahren. Es brauchte also nicht die knappe halbe Million Anträge vom vergangenen Jahr, um diesen Apparat zu überfordern. Der Apparat war längst überfordert. Wahrscheinlich wusste man noch nicht einmal, für wie viele Personen - auf das Bild übertragen - der Fahrstuhl eigentlich ausgelegt war.\n\nDie Verfahrensdauer betrug in den Jahren 2008 und 2009 im Durchschnitt rund 15 Monate. Heute - das kann man an dieser Stelle sachlich sagen - liegen wir trotz der gewaltig gestiegenen Zahlen erheblich darunter. Je nach Bundesland bewegte sich die Verfahrensdauer im ersten Halbjahr 2015 - das sind die Zahlen, die mir vorliegen - zwischen 3,3 Monaten, nämlich in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, und 7,9 Monaten, nämlich in Schleswig-Holstein. Die Jahreszahlen werden aufgrund der Dynamik im zweiten Halbjahr wahrscheinlich schlechter ausfallen. Der Durchschnitt verdeckt dabei, dass es natürlich eine Vielzahl von Einzelfällen gibt, bei denen die Verfahrensdauer deutlich über diesem Mittelwert liegt.\n\nDarüber hinaus gibt es die aufgelaufenen Fälle. Das sind mit Stand Ende letzten Jahres - ich sage das jetzt einmal sehr langsam - 364 664. Diese 364 664 Fälle gehen nicht in die Berechnung der durchschnittlichen Verfahrensdauer ein; denn in diesen Fällen ist ja noch nicht einmal ein Verfahren eröffnet worden. All denjenigen, die über Obergrenzen sprechen und begonnen haben, dafür sogar Unterschriften zu sammeln, möchte ich sagen: Mit diesen 364 664 Fällen ist für mich längst eine Obergrenze erreicht. Das kann so nicht bleiben. Wir müssen unbedingt zu einem Abbau dieser aufgelaufenen Fälle kommen.\n\nWas weiterhin nicht eingerechnet wird, ist die Zeit, die es braucht, bis überhaupt ein Verfahren eröffnet wird. Es ist mittlerweile kein Geheimnis mehr, dass wir an dieser Stelle den Koalitionsvertrag unterschiedlich interpretieren. Es heißt dort - ich zitiere -:\n\nVor dem Hintergrund der erheblich gestiegenen Zugangszahlen im Asylbereich setzen wir uns - auch im Interesse der Schutzsuchenden - mit besonderem Vorrang für die Verkürzung der Bearbeitungsdauer bei den Asylverfahren ein.\n\nJetzt kommt der entscheidende Satz:\n\nDie Verfahrensdauer bis zum Erstentscheid soll drei Monate nicht übersteigen.\n\nEgal wie man diesen Satz also interpretiert, müssen wir feststellen: Wir verfehlen nach wie vor dieses Ziel. Für mich und meine Fraktion ist völlig klar: Es ist natürlich Unsinn, von einer dreimonatigen Verfahrensdauer beim BAMF zu sprechen und die Zeit, die es braucht, bis überhaupt ein Verfahren eröffnet wird, nicht mit einzurechnen. Wir müssen von einer Zahl ausgehen, und wir müssen die Verfahren so verkürzen, dass niemand länger als drei Monate in Deutschland warten muss, bis eine Asylentscheidung gefallen ist.\n\nGleichzeitig gibt es bemerkenswerte Fortschritte beim Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge. Daran sind die Große Koalition und die Politik natürlich nicht unschuldig. Die Zahl der Entscheidungen ist im letzten Jahr verdoppelt worden, obwohl es da noch gar nicht die Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter gab, deren Stellen wir mit dem letzten Haushalt genehmigt haben. Der neue Leiter des Bundesamtes stellt uns auch in Aussicht, dass in diesem Jahr die Einhaltung der dreimonatigen Verfahrensdauer und der Rückbau der aufgelaufenen fast 370 000 Verfahren gelingen können.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wenn wir das einmal in der Zwischenbilanz anschauen, dann ist es sehr berechtigt, hier Vorschläge zu unterbreiten, die zu einer weiteren Verkürzung und Beschleunigung der Verfahren führen können, und zwar im Interesse aller Beteiligten. Denn überlange Verfahren sind für alle eine Belastung. Sie sind nicht Ursache der Belastung. Die Ursache liegt darin, dass die Menschen überhaupt fliehen müssen. Aber wenn man nur einmal die Zeit ab dem Grenzübertritt nimmt und unterstellt, dass eine Verfahrensdauer von drei Monaten erreicht würde, dann könnten wir uns die Beschäftigung mit einigen Problemen, die in der Folge entstehen, sparen. Sie wären abgemildert oder würden gar nicht entstehen. Damit meine ich die Probleme, die einfach entstehen, wenn Menschen in Massen in Unterkünften zusammengepfercht sind, wenn sie keine klare Zukunftsperspektive haben, wenn sie im Grunde immer noch weitgehend zur Untätigkeit verdammt sind, wenn sie nicht für sich selber sorgen können, wenn sie nicht wissen, was mit ihren Angehörigen in der Heimat gerade ist. Lange Verfahren bedeuten einen unsicheren Aufenthaltsstatus. Sie bedeuten geringere Chancen auf Ausbildung und Arbeit. Sie bedeuten auch, dass die Menschen, die sich für die Integration engagieren, mit ihrer Arbeit häufig ins Leere laufen; denn es werden Erfolge erreicht, und irgendwann wird den Menschen dann gesagt, dass sie nicht bleiben können. Das ist kein sinnvoller Zustand. Im Interesse von allen Beteiligten - den Ehrenamtlichen, den Hauptamtlichen, den Flüchtenden selbst - müssen wir zu einer Verkürzung der Verfahren kommen, so wie wir uns das im Koalitionsvertrag vorgenommen haben.\n\nDazu gibt es verschiedene Stellschrauben. Eine Stellschraube ist das Personal. Wir haben die Zahl der Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter im Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge mehr als verdoppelt. Das muss jetzt erst einmal bewältigt werden. Sie müssen eingearbeitet werden, und dann müssen wir sehen, ob es reicht.\n\nEine weitere Stellschraube ist die Organisation. Dazu wird es heute, am späteren Nachmittag, noch eine weitere Debatte hier geben, nämlich zur Einführung des sogenannten Ankunftsnachweises. Wir haben ja miterleben müssen, dass in Deutschland bis zu viermal registriert worden ist, aber gleichzeitig die eine Behörde nicht die Daten der anderen nutzen konnte. Diesen Zustand wollen wir mit dem sogenannten Ankunftsnachweis beenden. Das ist eine überfällige und sehr richtige Maßnahme.\n\nAuch die Flüchtlinge selbst können natürlich zur Beschleunigung der Verfahren beitragen. Eines der größten Hindernisse für schnelle Verfahren ist die fehlende oder mangelnde Mitwirkung bei der Identitätsfeststellung. Auch hier sind kreative Ideen gefragt, wie wir das verbessern können. Wir müssen den Behörden möglicherweise mehr Mittel in die Hand geben, damit das funktionieren kann.\n\nAls Stellschraube gehört natürlich auch dazu, zu überlegen, ob das Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge nicht von Aufgaben entlastet werden kann, die es eigentlich zu erledigen hat, die aber im Moment keinen Beitrag dazu leisten, die Verfahren zu beschleunigen. Deswegen bin ich dankbar - das diskutieren wir schon seit längerem - für den Antrag der Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen. Ich wünsche mir, dass wir darüber im Ausschuss offen beraten.\n\nWelche Dinge sind relevant? Wir haben jetzt Vorschläge dazu. Zum einen müssen sie - das ist klar - der Sache dienen; das würde dieser Vorschlag. Zum Zweiten muss die Sicherheit gewährleistet sein. Wir wollen weder Hoppladihopp-Verfahren, die die Rechtsstaatlichkeit infrage stellen, was die Verfahren der Flüchtlinge angeht, noch wollen wir zu weiterer Unsicherheit beitragen. Auch hier besteht nicht die Gefahr, dass der Antrag einen Beitrag in die falsche Richtung leistet.\n\nWir sind auch gefordert, in andere Länder zu schauen. Der Kollege Meier hat die Schweiz genannt. Ich hatte heute Gesprächspartner aus den Niederlanden im Büro. Dort ist die Rechtsberatung eingewoben in das Asylverfahren. Damit spart man sich auf lange Sicht, dass die Verfahren infrage gestellt werden und sich nach hinten verzögern.\n\nKurzum: Alles, was helfen kann, sollte in der Situation, in der wir sind, ohne Schaum vor dem Mund und ohne ideologische Scheuklappen betrachtet werden. Deswegen glaube ich, dass es sinnvoll ist, dass wir im Ausschuss noch einmal darüber reden.\n\nUm wen geht es? Ich komme einmal auf die langen Linien zu sprechen. Es geht um diejenigen, die hier als Flüchtlinge anerkannt sind. Es geht um diejenigen, die bereits drei Jahre hier leben. Es geht um diejenigen, die ihre Kinder hier schon zur Schule schicken, die die Sprache bereits können - bei den Kindern geht das erstaunlich schnell -, die ihren Lebensunterhalt bereits selbst finanzieren können, die in eigenen Wohnungen leben können. Mit anderen Worten: Es geht um diejenigen, die als Flüchtlinge zu uns gekommen sind, aber schon auf dem besten Weg sind, die Freunde, die Nachbarn und die Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Zukunft zu werden. Mit Blick auf die langen Linien prophezeie ich, dass wir den Tag erleben - er wird nicht so schrecklich fern sein -, wo sich die Lage insgesamt beruhigt. Dann werden wir angesichts unserer demografischen Entwicklung froh sein über jeden, der nach drei Jahren mit Kindern in der Schule, mit Arbeit und Wohnung integriert ist. Abseits von der humanitären Verpflichtung, die wir haben, droht uns, dass wir, wenn wir Menschen nach drei Jahren zurückschicken, gerade diejenigen zurückschicken, die wir hier am besten brauchen können, die hier schon auf dem Wege der Integration sind.\n\nHier sind wir schlecht beraten.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, Montesquieu hat den berühmten Satz gesagt: „Wenn es nicht notwendig ist, ein Gesetz zu machen, dann ist es notwendig, kein Gesetz zu machen.“ Er hat auch gesagt: „Überflüssige Gesetze tun den notwendigen an ihrer Wirkung Abbruch.“ Das ist kein genialer Satz, aber ein richtiger.\n\nIch wünsche uns gute Beratungen im Ausschuss.\"\n13645,claudia-tausend,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Manchmal hilft es, darauf zu schauen, woher man kommt, um zu wissen, wohin man will. - Ich möchte Sie einladen, diesen Weg für die nächsten fünf Minuten konzentriert mit mir zu gehen.\n\nLassen Sie mich einen Blick zurück auf die Anfangszeit dieser Diskussion werfen, nämlich auf den Winter 2013/2014. Damals wurden die beiden transatlantischen Handelsabkommen TTIP und CETA erstmals in der breiten Öffentlichkeit diskutiert. Auch hier im Deutschen Bundestag haben wir uns seitdem mit den Abkommen intensiv und kritisch auseinandergesetzt.\n\nEs ist richtig: Es gab auf jeden Fall ein beklagenswertes Demokratie- und Transparenzdefizit. Verhandlungen wurden in der europäischen Handelspolitik bisher hinter verschlossenen Türen geführt. Auch wir als Abgeordnete waren ungenügend eingebunden. Es gab private Schiedsgerichte, bei denen internationale Anwälte, die sonst für Großkonzerne arbeiten, über Milliardenentschädigungen von Unternehmen entscheiden sollten. Es gab schwammige Formulierungen, die nicht sicherstellten, dass Sozial-, Umwelt- oder Arbeitnehmerstandards ausreichend geschützt sind. Es gab Klauseln, die es hätten ermöglichen können, Bereiche der Daseinsvorsorge zu privatisieren. Es gab also sehr wohl Dinge, mit denen wir uns intensiv auseinandersetzen mussten.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Linken und der Grünen, keine Partei hat sich so intensiv mit beiden Abkommen - zunächst mit TTIP, das im Blickpunkt der Öffentlichkeit stand, aber später auch mit CETA - auseinandergesetzt wie die bundesdeutsche Sozialdemokratie.\n\nIch glaube, wir waren die einzige Partei, die zwei Themenparteitage - bei uns werden sie „Parteikonvente“ genannt - veranstaltet hat und sich gemeinsam mit der Zivilgesellschaft und den Gewerkschaften, aber auch mit der neuen kanadischen sozialliberalen Regierung und Cecilia Malmström intensiv mit dem Thema auseinandergesetzt hat. Wir haben vieles durchgesetzt.\n\nFrau Kollegin Höhn, ich hätte eine Synopse\n\nunserer Parteikonventbeschlüsse und der Umsetzungen vonseiten der Europapolitiker im Angebot. Gerne könnte ich das eine oder andere zitieren, wenn Sie eine Nachfrage haben.\n\nKolleginnen und Kollegen, ich bitte Sie: Vergleichen Sie ernsthaft die Situation 2013 mit der 2017! Wir haben jetzt ein CETA, das zum ersten Mal mit den privaten Schiedsgerichten bricht. ISDS gibt es so nicht mehr. Stattdessen werden wir einen multilateralen Handelsgerichtshof schaffen - mit ordentlichen Richtern, Berufungsinstanz und transparenten Verhandlungen.\n\nDas ist ein außerordentlicher Erfolg unseres mittlerweile ehemaligen Wirtschaftsministers Sigmar Gabriel,\n\nder sich zusammen mit den sozialdemokratischen Amtskollegen und der Zivilgesellschaft gegen alle Widerstände durchgesetzt hat.\n\nWir haben durchgesetzt, dass die Daseinsvorsorge umfassend geschützt ist. Wir können Unternehmen der öffentlichen Hand und Dienstleistungen ohne Einschränkungen wieder rekommunalisieren. Kanada hat zugesagt, die letzte der acht ILO-Kernarbeitsnormen - sieben sind bereits ratifiziert - demnächst zu ratifizieren. Das sind große Erfolge.\n\nKolleginnen und Kollegen, ich bitte Sie, das anzuerkennen. Es sind unsere Erfolge, die Erfolge der Zivilgesellschaft, der Nichtregierungsorganisationen, der Verbände und der Gewerkschaften. Aber schlussendlich sind es auch Ihre Erfolge. Sie haben oft den Finger in die Wunde gelegt. Wir haben uns intensiv damit auseinandergesetzt und sehr viele Kritikpunkte aufgegriffen. Wir haben jetzt ein sehr gutes Abkommen und übrigens ein Modell für weitere Handelsabkommen. Cecilia Malmström hat zugesagt, künftig alle Verhandlungsmandate für Handelsabkommen sofort zu veröffentlichen, sofort in die nationalen Parlamente einzubringen und alle Dokumente ins Netz einzustellen. Das ist ein großer Erfolg. Ich bitte Sie, das anzuerkennen.\n\nWir haben daran gearbeitet, der Globalisierung faire Regeln zu geben und die internationale Handelspolitik weiterzuentwickeln. Die handelspolitische Weltordnung war - ich blicke noch einmal auf den Winter 2013/14 zurück - stabil. Wir hätten das Endergebnis vielleicht ablehnen müssen, wenn wir diesen guten Weg nicht hätten gehen können. Aber heute - das ist mehrfach angeklungen - hat sich die bisher als sicher erachtete Grundordnung des Welthandels eklatant verändert. Wir haben es mit einem amerikanischen Präsidenten zu tun, der China einen Handelskrieg androht und der Unternehmer mit Strafzöllen belegen will, wenn sie nicht in den USA produzieren wollen. Selbst deutsche Unternehmen wie BMW sind nicht ausgenommen. Donald Trump hat angekündigt, aus der WTO auszutreten. Damit müssen wir uns auseinandersetzen. Das wäre das Ende des freien Welthandels. Das wäre die Rückkehr zum Protektionismus und zum Recht des Stärkeren. Das kann doch niemand von uns wirklich wollen.\n\nGerade deshalb muss Europa jetzt in diesen Zeiten handlungsfähig sein. CETA kann ein Impuls für das Welthandelssystem sein; es kann ein Vorbild sein. Es bietet mittel- und langfristig die Möglichkeit für weitere faire Handelsabkommen, die auch den Partnerstaaten nutzen.\n\nZum Antrag der Linken. Wir müssen uns jetzt entscheiden, Herr Kollege Ernst: Wollen wir das protektionistische Modell Trump zulassen? Wollen wir der Handelsmacht China die Führung überlassen, oder wollen wir die Globalisierung mit europäischen Werten prägen? In Ihrem Antrag geht es um pure Verzögerung. Wir wissen: Ein Rechtsgutachten des Europäischen Gerichtshofs, wie von Ihnen gefordert, würde zwei, drei Jahre in Anspruch nehmen. So lange wären die parlamentarischen Verhandlungen gestoppt.\n\nDer Juristische Dienst - das kam ja auch im Beitrag von Ihnen vor - hat die Zusatzabkommen noch einmal geprüft und hat festgestellt, dass sie sowohl integraler Bestandteil von CETA als auch juristisch verbindlich sind.\n\nInsofern ist es, glaube ich, in der Tat nicht nötig, ein weiteres Rechtsgutachten einzufordern.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss.\n\nLassen wir bitte die politische Verantwortung in den Parlamenten! Schieben wir sie nicht auf den EuGH ab! Schieben wir sie nicht auf Gutachten ab! Und lassen Sie uns in diesen Zeiten für eine fortschrittliche Handelspolitik streiten!\n\nIch danke fürs Zuhören.\"\n13262,frank-heinrich,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Frei - das steht auf einem Armband, das uns eine NGO vor wenigen Wochen vorgestellt hat. Damit können wir möglicherweise ein Statement setzen: Ich bin frei. Aber Millionen von Männern, Frauen und Kindern sind es eben nicht. Sie können ihre Meinung nicht frei äußern. Sie können ihren Glauben nicht so ausleben, wie sie es wünschen. Viele sind sehr menschenunwürdigen Arbeitsbedingungen ausgesetzt. Das hat in der globalen vernetzten Welt - das entnehme ich auch Ihrer Rede - natürlich auch immer mit uns zu tun.\n\nDenken wir einmal 26 Jahre zurück. Die Welt ist im Aufbruch. Es kommt zur Wende. In der Folge stehen sich die großen Blöcke nicht mehr wie im Kalten Krieg feindlich gegenüber. Diktaturen sind gefallen, auch in Afrika. Viele der Indizes für die Not, für das Leid haben sich in den meisten Ländern gravierend verbessert, weil man sich nicht mehr in diesem Dualismus gegenübersteht. Extreme Armut, Zugang zu Wasser, Mütter- und Kindersterblichkeit, Gesundheitsversorgung, Bildung für Mädchen, die Todeszahlen in Konflikten - wir denken heute, das alles hätte sich verschlechtert. Aber die Indizes sind damals kontinuierlich gefallen. Wir haben Freiheit neu erlebt, für manche vielleicht das erste Mal definiert. Die Hoffnung pfiff sich durch den Gorki Park. „Glasnost“ und „Perestroika“ waren die Wörter des Jahrzehnts. Etwas später gab es Mandela.\n\nUnd heute? Die Menschenrechte scheinen auf dem Rückzug zu sein. In vielen Ländern werden Menschenrechtsverteidiger zurückgedrängt. Gestern trafen wir mit Kollegen Herrn Fred Bauma aus der Demokratischen Republik Kongo. Viele von uns haben ähnliche Begegnungen. Diese Menschen sagen uns, dass sie bereits am Flughafen verhaftet werden, wenn sie in ihr Land zurückkehren. Es wirkt fast wie eine alte Rollback-Strategie: Land für Land, Gesetz für Gesetz wird es enger, und zwar oft unter dem Vorwand der Terrorbekämpfung. Das hat auch mit uns zu tun.\n\nWenn man sich mit dem Jahresbericht von 2015, den wir heute behandeln, beschäftigt und mit Menschenrechtsverteidigern redet, wie gerade genannt, dann wird einem ganz anders. Ich vermute, der Bericht für 2016 wird eher noch schlimmer ausfallen. Wenn ich von solchen Terminen komme oder wenn ich abends in mein Zimmer in Berlin komme, dann ist es nicht selten der Fall, dass ich entweder weinen muss oder dass mir zum Kotzen zumute ist. Das ist nicht erst seit Aleppo so, wenn auch seitdem noch besonders.\n\nWas passiert mit unserer Welt? Was lassen wir zu? Was darf auch mit uns passieren hier in Deutschland? Die drei Stichworte, die ich in meiner Rede noch nennen möchte, sind Kinder, Rechtlosigkeit und Religionsfreiheit.\n\n45 Millionen Menschen leben zurzeit in Sklaverei oder sklavenähnlichen Verhältnissen; das zeigt der Global Slavery Index. Nur einmal zum Vergleich: Wie stolz konnte die Menschheit sein, als William Wilberforce und Abraham Lincoln, der eine in England, der andere in den Vereinigten Staaten, die Sklaverei abgeschafft haben. Das ist viele Jahre her. Aber ganz ehrlich: Ist uns bewusst, dass wir heute mehr Sklaven haben als damals? Millionen davon sind Kinder. Sie bekommen keinen Zugang zu Schulbildung, müssen unter schwersten Bedingungen auf Baumwollfarmen oder in Minen arbeiten und erleben täglich Gewalt und Krieg am eigenen Leib, oft für die Produkte, die wir hier billig kaufen wollen. Freiheit ist für sie eine Worthülse, deren wirkliche Bedeutung sie wahrscheinlich nur erahnen können.\n\nIm Südsudan kämpfen 17 000 Kinder - das wurde uns vorgestern berichtet - in einem verheerenden Bürgerkrieg. Das findet hier wenig Beachtung. Wir schauen woanders hin. Etwas weiter westlich auf dem Kontinent Afrika ernten 1,2 Millionen Kinder einen Großteil des Kakaos für die Schokolade, die wir und viele andere zu Weihnachten und über das Jahr verteilt konsumieren. Sie gehen deshalb auch nicht oder viel zu selten in die Schule. Durch Bildung könnten sie aus Armut und Abhängigkeit herauskommen.\n\nWeiter im Osten auf dieser Welt beim philippinischen Amt für Internetverbrechen gingen bislang 10 000 Hinweise auf sexuelle Ausbeutung von Kindern im Internet ein. Wer sind die User? Der Menschenrechtsbericht der EU geht davon aus, dass die Gefahr besteht, dass viele Minderjährige, die sich in den letzten Monaten auf der Flucht befunden haben, Opfer von Gewalt und Menschenhandel geworden sind, auch auf der Flucht zu uns.\n\nWenn ich das alles sehe, fällt mir wieder dieser Begriff ein: Ich könnte kotzen. Dafür fällt mir auch kein politisch korrekterer Begriff ein. Ich höre noch, wie letzte Woche Frau Merkel in einer Regionalkonferenz in Thüringen sagte: „Ich weiß nicht, wie es Ihnen geht, aber ich schlafe nicht gut, wenn ich an die Kinder in Aleppo denke.“ Als Menschenrechtler frage ich mich: Was können wir tun, um ihnen und anderen mehr Freiheit zu ermöglichen?\n\nIch bin dankbar, dass Deutschland und die EU - das wird in dem Bericht auch deutlich gemacht - sich dafür einsetzen, dass in den letzten Jahren Gesetze entstanden sind, und ich wünsche mir, dass wir uns, dass sich die Bundesregierung in unseren Beziehungen zu den anderen Ländern noch mehr und aktiver dafür einsetzt. Da bin ich Herrn Steinmeier sehr dankbar für das Engagement in diesem Bereich, damit Kinder vor Krieg und Terror geschützt werden. Danke dafür!\n\nDer zweite Begriff, den ich genannt habe, ist Rechtlosigkeit. Es muss Opfern von Menschenrechtsverletzungen - je länger, je näher - in diesen Ländern möglich sein, Zugang zum Rechtssystem zu bekommen. Sonst wird aus Armut Rechtlosigkeit, und aufgrund der Rechtlosigkeit bleiben sie in der Armut. Das ist eine stille Menschenrechtsverletzung, die so allerdings nicht explizit in dem Bericht auftaucht. Der fehlende Zugang zum Rechtssystem hat meist eine grundlegende Ursache, nämlich die Armut, und dann mündet das vielfach in Sklaverei; ich habe das bereits erwähnt.\n\nDie moderne Sklaverei macht auch vor unseren Türen in Deutschland nicht halt. Wir haben vor einem halben Jahr das Gesetz zu Zwang und Ausbeutung im Prostitutionsgewerbe beschlossen, das dann nächstes Jahr in Kraft treten wird. Das sind einige Schritte, wenn auch noch lange nicht genug. Ich bin dankbar, dass wir einen Überprüfungsmechanismus haben, wonach wir dies dann in zwei, drei Jahren noch einmal unter die Lupe nehmen können.\n\nEin weiterer Bereich, der dritte, ist die Religionsfreiheit. In immer mehr Staaten wird sie grundsätzlich garantiert; aber die Wirklichkeit sieht eben oft ganz anders aus. Auch in meinem Land frage ich mich hin und wieder: Ist uns das noch präsent?\n\nMillionen von Menschen werden weltweit in dieser Freiheit eingeschränkt. Sie werden verfolgt, gedemütigt, gefoltert, oft zu Tode gebracht. Dabei müssen wir an alle Religionen denken. Da sind es die Ahmadiyya-Muslime in Pakistan, da sind es die Aleviten, teilweise jetzt auch in Syrien, da sind es Buddhisten, da sind es die Bahai im Iran, und da sind es als größte Gruppe auch die Christen.\n\nDie aktuellen Entwicklungen im Irak und in Syrien werfen Schatten voraus, bis zu uns nach Europa, und Hunderttausende machen sich auf den Weg. Auf der Flucht vor ihren Peinigern, oft auch dann beim Ankommen hier in unseren Schutzunterkünften passiert das Gleiche wieder, selbst hier in Deutschland. Da passieren Diskriminierung und Benachteiligung, auch Bedrohung; ich weiß um Fälle in meiner Stadt.\n\nAnfang der Woche konnten einige von uns den Pater Jacques Mourad treffen. Er befand sich fünf Monate in Geiselhaft des IS, bevor er mit seiner katholischen Gemeinde von muslimischen Mitbürgern befreit wurde. Trotz seiner Erfahrungen wirbt er dafür, dass wir in Europa für Muslime offen bleiben, dafür, dass uns nicht die Angst leitet. Und doch wünsche ich mir, dass besonders Muslime in Deutschland, auch wenn die Anschläge in Paris, in Nizza und in Brüssel geschahen, noch lauter und öfter sagen: „Das sind wir nicht“,\n\nund dass wir uns dem Terror gemeinsam mutig entgegenstellen.\n\nDazu gehört auch, dass wir genau die Menschen unterstützen, die Demokratie fördern wollen, wie es das Ziel des von Frank Schwabe genannten Programms „Parlamentarier schützen Parlamentarier“ ist, dass wir an der Seite derer stehen, die Menschenrechte verteidigen. Deshalb appelliere ich, dass wir diesen Menschen vorher Gehör verschaffen, bevor sie möglicherweise in Extremismus abgleiten oder extremisiert werden.\n\nWelche Schlussfolgerungen ziehen wir denn aus diesem Bericht? Gesetze und Richtlinien haben wir teilweise; daran müssen wir aber weiter arbeiten: Dazu dient das Parlamentarische Patenschaftsprogramm, dazu tragen kleine, sichtbare Gesten im Miteinander und Begegnungen bei. Ich für meinen Teil werde für diese Freiheit weiter kämpfen, auch wenn mich diese Ohnmacht, die ich gerade beschrieben habe, immer wieder gefangene, gebundene oder versklavte Menschen zu sehen, oft überfällt.\n\nIch wünsche Ihnen und uns allen\n\nbesinnliche und gesegnete Weihnachtstage. Ich tue mich schwer, Ihnen fröhliche Weihnachten zu wünschen. Das wird auch ein wenig davon abhängen, ob es die Weltgemeinschaft hinbekommt, dass die Waffen weiter schweigen werden. Sonst wünsche ich uns auch Scham. Ich kann nicht einfach fröhlich feiern, wenn uns als Weltgemeinschaft diese Kinder von Aleppo irgendwie doch nur interessieren, als wäre es Scheißdreck, wenn sie links liegen bleiben.\n\nWeihnachten erinnert an die Geburt eines Kindes in genau der Region, von der ich gerade geredet habe: verrückt genug, als Kind in einer Krisenregion geboren zu werden, irgendwie weniger romantisch als bei uns, neben Kuh- und Eselkacke - im Stall eben -, in einer brisanten Situation. Ich habe einfach keinen Bock, dann am Weihnachtstag aufzuwachen, wieder zu hören, dass die Waffen nicht geschwiegen haben, und wieder denken zu müssen: Ich könnte kotzen.\n\nIch will mich mit dem Status quo nicht zufriedengeben; das wollen wir Menschenrechtler nicht. Aber es gibt noch eine Menge zu tun - aber eben zu tun und nicht nur zu reden.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n10431,markus-kurth,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Schlecht, auch ich muss sagen: Streckenweise hatte ich bei Ihrer Rede das Gefühl, mich verirrt zu haben, als sei ich nicht im Plenum des Deutschen Bundestages, sondern bei irgendeiner Veranstaltung von Verdi.\n\nMan muss schon überlegen, was man von hier aus sagt.\n\nIch kann Ihnen das spiegeln und eine andere Position aufzeigen. Ich bin ja schon ein bisschen länger dabei und kann mich an Aktuelle Stunden erinnern, die die FDP im Bundestag beantragt hat, beispielsweise bei Streiks der IG Metall. In dem Fall hat die FDP auf die Gewerkschaften draufgeschlagen. Sie ist dabei mit einer ähnlich groben, teils platten Rhetorik gegen Arbeitszeitverkürzungen vorgegangen, wie Sie jetzt umgekehrt auch. Damals habe ich mich genauso gegen Eingriffe in die Tarifautonomie vonseiten der Arbeitgeber, indirekt vertreten durch die FDP, gewehrt. Jetzt finde ich vor allen Dingen die Form, wie Sie hier Ihre Kritik äußern, zumindest fragwürdig.\n\n- Ich höre den Zwischenruf, dass der öffentliche Dienst ein bisschen was anderes ist. Wir reden hier in erster Linie über Tarifautonomie. Da es um den öffentlichen Dienst geht, gibt es jenseits der aktuellen Tarifverhandlungen natürlich einiges dazu zu sagen. Zum Beispiel kann man sehr wohl etwas zur Finanzausstattung der Kommunen anmerken. Diesbezüglich stelle ich mit Blick auf mein Land Nordrhein-Westfalen fest, dass 40 Prozent der Kommunen ein Haushaltssicherungskonzept aufstellen mussten und die Große Koalition ihre Versprechen, die Kommunen finanziell zu entlasten, nicht wahrgemacht hat.\n\nDas ist ein Grund, warum Kämmerer berechtigte Tarifforderungen nur noch mit Bauchschmerzen oder gar nicht mehr erfüllen können. Das ist ein eminent politischer Punkt, und der gehört in den Deutschen Bundestag.\n\nDie Große Koalition hat beispielsweise bei der Eingliederungshilfe im Zuge des Bundesteilhabegesetzes ein 5-Milliarden-Paket versprochen, was eine Entlastung für die Kommunen bedeutet hätte. Dieses Paket hat sich in den verschiedenen Verhandlungssträngen der Bund-Länder-Finanzverhandlungen verflüchtigt. Das ist das Problem, über das wir hier reden müssen; denn eine vernünftige Finanzausstattung der Länder und nicht zuletzt der Kommunen ist die Grundlage dafür, dass die Arbeitgeber bei Tarifverhandlungen auf berechtigte Forderungen der Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer eingehen können.\n\nWenn wir schon über Tarifautonomie sprechen, so muss ich doch daran erinnern, dass es die Große Koalition war, die mit dem Tarifeinheitsgesetz ihrerseits die Voraussetzungen dafür geschaffen hat, auch in Tarifautonomie einzugreifen. Das, denke ich, sollte man im Hinterkopf behalten, wenn noch weitere Rednerinnen und Redner der Koalition die Linke zeihen, die Tarifautonomie zu beschädigen. Da sind Sie selbst nicht ganz unschuldig und unbeteiligt.\n\nAls rentenpolitischer Sprecher der Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen muss ich jetzt doch noch auf einen inhaltlichen Punkt der Tarifverhandlungen eingehen, nämlich die Altersversorgung. Das ist ja einer der zentralen Streitpunkte: die Zusatzversorgung des öffentlichen Dienstes. Was macht diese Bundesregierung? Sie versucht - zumindest verbal, ein Gesetz hat sie ja noch nicht eingebracht -, die Betriebsrente zu stärken; das behauptet sie zumindest. Sie möchte, nachdem sie eingesehen hat, dass die Riester-Rente ihre hoch gesteckten Erwartungen nicht erfüllt, die zweite Säule stärken. Es kann ja wohl nicht sein, dass Sie hier auf der einen Seite bundespolitisch etwas aufzubauen versuchen und das dann während der Tarifverhandlungen mit dem Hintern wieder einreißen, indem Sie die Zusatzversorgung im öffentlichen Dienst schwächen. Das kann nicht funktionieren. Das ist hochgradig widersprüchlich.\n\nMit Blick darauf muss man schon sagen, dass gerade die Zusatzversorgung im Alter beim öffentlichen Dienst auch ein wesentliches Element der Nachwuchsgewinnung ist. In der Nachbarstadt meines Wahlbezirkes, in Essen, gehen in den nächsten 15 Jahren 40 Prozent in der öffentlichen Verwaltung in den Ruhestand. Die haben schon jetzt ein richtig großes Nachwuchsproblem. Systemadministratoren und gute Verwaltungsjuristen bekommen Sie nicht für ein Butterbrot. Sie verdienen in der freien Wirtschaft teilweise sogar ein Mehrfaches.\n\nNeben der Arbeitsplatzsicherheit ist eine vernünftige Altersversorgung für diese Fachkräfte eben auch ein Argument, für den öffentlichen Dienst zu arbeiten. Wir alle, auch wir hier als Gesetzgeber, sind darauf angewiesen, dass wir einen guten und funktionierenden öffentlichen Dienst haben. Wer sonst sollte unsere Gesetze umsetzen?\n\nIch bin allerdings guter Hoffnung, dass die Sozialpartner, dass Verdi das eigenständig hinbekommt, ohne dass wir hier Geleitzugdebatten dieser Art führen müssen, wie Sie sie, Herr Schlecht, eröffnet haben. Wir sollten uns auf die politischen Sachen konzentrieren.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n116,katja-keul,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Vor zehn Jahren brach in der sudanischen Region Darfur ein grauenhafter Bürgerkrieg um knapper werdende Lebensgrundlagen wie Weideland und Wasser aus. Menschenrechtsverletzungen, Kriegsverbrechen und massive Vertreibungen waren die Folge. Schätzungsweise 300 000 Menschen verloren ihr Leben. 2 Millionen Menschen befinden sich bis heute allein innerhalb des Landes auf der Flucht.\n\nEine nicht unerhebliche Ursache dieses Elends ist der von uns mit verursachte Klimawandel. Schon deswegen sind wir als Teil der internationalen Gemeinschaft mit in der Verantwortung. Wir können nur hoffen, dass die von Dürre, Krieg und Hunger geplagten Menschen von dem Desaster in Warschau nicht zu viel mitbekommen haben.\n\nEine weitere Ursache ist die Brutalität des Regimes in Khartoum. Umar al-Baschir, gegen den ein Haftbefehl des Internationalen Gerichtshofs vorliegt, unterstützt nach wie vor Milizen, die mit äußerster Brutalität gegen die Zivilbevölkerung vorgehen, und behindert gleichzeitig die Arbeit von Hilfsorganisationen.\n\nVor sechs Jahren hat UNAMID die afrikanische Vorgängermission AMISOM II abgelöst. Mit 19 700 Soldaten, Militärbeobachtern und Polizisten ist sie eine der größten Friedensmissionen weltweit. Daran beteiligt sich Deutschland laut Mandat mit aktuell neun Soldaten und vier Polizisten. Mal ganz im Ernst, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Linken: An der übermäßigen Beteiligung Deutschlands liegt es mit Sicherheit nicht, dass sich das Waffenstillstandsabkommen bislang nicht umsetzen ließ.\n\nAn alle anderen auf der anderen Seite des Hauses: Wir sollten endlich die Kapazitäten für Peacekeeping-Missionen der UN verstärken, statt mit bis zu 700 Soldatinnen und Soldaten im Mittelmeer Terroristen zu jagen. Beenden Sie endlich diesen Quatsch! Die NATO wird es verkraften, und die UNO dagegen kann durchaus mehr deutsche Unterstützung gebrauchen.\n\nSeit Anfang dieses Jahres konstatiert der UN-Generalsekretär wieder eine Zunahme bewaffneter Auseinandersetzungen in Darfur. Allein 2013 wurden 300 000 Menschen vertrieben und mindestens 800 getötet. Angesichts der aktuellen Herausforderung fordert der UN-Sicherheitsrat eine Stärkung der logistischen und operativen Fähigkeiten von UNAMID.\n\nWas kann Deutschland im Rahmen der EU dazu beitragen? Die Gemeinsame Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik ist der große Schwerpunkt des EU-Rates im Dezember. Konkrete Vorschläge für die bessere Unterstützung der Vereinten Nationen auf dem Gebiet der Friedenssicherung finden sich allerdings nicht auf der Tagesordnung. Statt dessen beschäftigen sich die EU-Staatschefs lieber damit, wie der europäische Rüstungsmarkt so gestaltet werden kann, dass die Rüstungsbetriebe in Zukunft trotz der Überkapazitäten überleben können, und wie Europa endlich zu einer eigenen Drohne kommt.\n\nFür die deutsche Rüstungsindustrie hat Merkel den Weg zu neuen zahlungskräftigen Kunden in aller Welt ohnehin schon freigemacht. Dabei sind Waffenexporte in Krisenregionen immer eine Gefahr für den Frieden. Im Sudan sind es vor allen Dingen China und Russland, die mit Waffenlieferungen Öl ins Feuer gießen. Nehmen Sie also den im Sommer von uns ratifizierten UN-Waffenhandelsvertrag ernst, und gehen Sie mit gutem Beispiel voran!\n\nDen Rüstungsexportbericht jetzt zweimal im Jahr vorzulegen, Herr Mißfelder, reicht dabei sicher nicht. Liebe Genossinnen und Genossen von der SPD, hierzu hatten wir im letzten Jahr schon ganz andere konkrete Vorschläge auf dem Tisch liegen.\n\nWenn wir unseren Blick auf Darfur, auf die Region und die Nachbarstaaten erweitern, fällt mir noch ein weiteres Thema ein, das auf dem Gipfel im Dezember Thema sein sollte. Der Nachbarstaat, die Zentralafrikanische Republik, versinkt derzeit in einer Welle der Gewalt und destabilisiert die gesamte Region. Manche Beobachter sprechen von einem drohenden Genozid. Es würden bereits Macheten in der Bevölkerung verteilt.\n\nWas macht unsere zivile Krisenprävention? Was machen denn unsere Frühwarnsysteme? Die Franzosen hatten es nach dem Putsch Anfang dieses Jahres dieses Mal abgelehnt, die für Afrika zuständige Weltpolizei zu spielen. Jetzt entsenden sie in diesen Tagen doch wieder 1 000 Soldaten, um das Schlimmste zu verhindern. Wo ist denn da bitte die europäische Strategie? In einer solchen Situation kann man doch auf einem Gipfel zur Gemeinsamen Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik nicht allen Ernstes über die wirtschaftlichen Interessen der eigenen Rüstungsindustrie sprechen.\n\nFür die Menschen in Darfur hat UNAMID noch keinen Frieden sichern können, aber ohne UNAMID hätten die Hilfsorganisationen noch größere Schwierigkeiten, den Menschen die humanitäre Hilfe zukommen zu lassen, die sie so dringend benötigen.\n\nDen Mitarbeitern, die sich trotz der anhaltenden Gewalt vor Ort für UNAMID und die zivilen Hilfsorganisationen einsetzen, gebührt unser aller Dank und Respekt.\n\nMeine Fraktion ist von der Sinnhaftigkeit von UNAMID überzeugt und wird dem Mandat wie auch in den vergangenen Jahren die Zustimmung erteilen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12451,wilfried-oellers,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir beraten heute in zweiter und dritter Lesung den Gesetzentwurf zu den Werkverträgen und der Zeitarbeit. Im Koalitionsvertrag haben wir seinerzeit vereinbart, dem Missbrauch von Werkverträgen und Zeitarbeit entgegenzuwirken. Dabei bestand die Besonderheit der Gesetzesinitiative darin, dass auf der einen Seite dem Missbrauch entgegengewirkt werden sollte und auf der anderen Seite die Werkverträge und die Zeitarbeit als Flexibilisierungsinstrument in handhabbarer Weise erhalten bleiben sollten, da sie in der heutigen Arbeitswelt und für unsere Wirtschaft einfach unverzichtbar sind.\n\nAnzuerkennen ist, dass gerade die Zeitarbeitsbranche bzw. die Tarifpartner in den letzten Jahren viele Maßnahmen umgesetzt haben, um diesen Bereich zu regeln und Missbrauch entgegenzuwirken.\n\nZudem weise ich auch an dieser Stelle ausdrücklich auf die positiven Aspekte der Zeitarbeit hin: Brückenfunktion für Arbeitslose in den Arbeitsmarkt,\n\nder hohe Klebeeffekt hin zur festen Anstellung beim Entleiher, auch Fahrdienste für Mitarbeiter gerade in ländlichen Bereichen mit ungünstigen Verbindungen im öffentlichen Nahverkehr, Qualifizierung der Mitarbeiter durch die Zeitarbeitsunternehmen. Kleine Unternehmen ohne Personalabteilung bedienen sich der Zeitarbeitsunternehmen im Wege des Personalrecruitings, und junge Menschen und Absolventen finden über Zeitarbeitsunternehmen zum Teil schneller eine feste Anstellung bei Unternehmen.\n\nZeitarbeitsunternehmen können in diesen Fällen passgenaue Lösungen bieten. Das hilft nicht nur den Unternehmen, sondern allen voran den Menschen, in Arbeit zu kommen. Diese positiven Effekte der Zeitarbeit wurden mir im Rahmen meiner Sommertour durch meinen Wahlkreis häufig bestätigt.\n\nNeben all den positiven Auswirkungen verkenne ich selbstverständlich nicht, dass es an der einen oder anderen Stelle auch Missbrauch gibt. Diesem werden wir mit diesem Gesetz weiter entgegenwirken. Neben den bereits genannten Regelungen möchte ich ergänzend Folgendes erwähnen: Als Jurist sei es mir erlaubt, zunächst auf die Regelung des § 611a BGB hinzuweisen, die im parlamentarischen Verfahren überarbeitet wurde und nun in der Systematik des BGB hilft, den Arbeitsvertrag vom Werkvertrag besser abzugrenzen.\n\nIm Betriebsverfassungsgesetz haben wir die Informationsrechte des Betriebsrates konkretisiert. Nach § 80 Absatz 2 Satz 3 Betriebsverfassungsgesetz hat der Unternehmer dem Betriebsrat den Vertrag vorzulegen, den er mit dem Werkunternehmen bzw. mit dem Zeitarbeitsunternehmen geschlossen hat. Nicht gemeint sind damit jedoch die Arbeitsverträge, die der Werkunternehmer wiederum mit seinen Mitarbeitern geschlossen hat.\n\nNun zu den Regelungen in der Zeitarbeit. Equal Pay nach 9 Monaten und eine Höchstüberlassungsdauer von 18 Monaten gepaart mit einer tariflichen Öffnungsklausel eröffnen Möglichkeiten, branchenspezifische Regelungen zu treffen, und stärken die Tarifautonomie.\n\nEine wichtige Rechtsklarstellung wurde in die Protokollerklärung des Ausschusses dahin gehend aufgenommen, dass Beratungsunternehmen und Unternehmen im Bereich der IT, die zum Beispiel bei Optimierungs-, Entwicklungs- und IT-Einführungsprojekten eingesetzt werden, nicht unter die Arbeitnehmerüberlassung des § 1 AÜG fallen. Gleiches gilt auch klarstellend für die DRK-Schwesternschaft.\n\nDas aufgenommene Streikbrecherverbot ist so gestaltet, dass Zeitarbeitnehmer, die vor Beginn eines Streiks bereits in dem bestreikten Entleiherunternehmen arbeiten, weiter ihre Tätigkeit verrichten dürfen, wenn sie es wollen, und in Betriebsteilen, die nicht bestreikt werden, auch weiter neue Zeitarbeitnehmer eingesetzt werden dürfen. Vorausgesetzt ist allerdings stets, dass sie nicht die Arbeitsleistung der streikenden Mitarbeiter übernehmen.\n\nDie Sanktionen haben unter anderem mit dem Entzug der Verleiherlaubnis ein sehr scharfes Schwert. Im Rahmen der Protokollerklärung wurde auch hier klarstellend darauf hingewiesen, dass ein erstmaliger oder geringfügiger Verstoß nicht zum Entzug der Verleiherlaubnis führt. Mit dem Inkrafttreten des Gesetzes erst zum 1. April nächsten Jahres wird allen Beteiligten die Gelegenheit gegeben, sich auf das Gesetz einzustellen. Es wäre sicherlich nicht angemessen gewesen, wenn wir uns hier im Parlament zwei Jahre Zeit nehmen, um das Gesetz zu verabschieden, und das Gesetz dann einen Monat später vollständig umgesetzt werden muss.\n\nNeben vielen Klarstellungen ist es mir ein besonderes Anliegen, darauf hinzuweisen, dass hinsichtlich des Widerrufsrechts nach § 9 AÜG im parlamentarischen Verfahren noch ein weiteres Verfahren gesetzlich geregelt werden konnte, mit dem dem Missbrauch von vorzeitig abgegebenen Blankoerklärungen entgegengewirkt werden kann. Somit konnte im parlamentarischen Verfahren mehr Rechtsklarheit erreicht werden, eine Schutzregelung gegen Missbrauch aufgenommen werden, der Übergang in das neue Gesetz praxisfreundlicher und § 611a BGB rechtssystematisch korrekt gestaltet werden.\n\nMit der gesetzlich aufgenommenen Evaluation für das Jahr 2020 macht der Gesetzgeber deutlich, dass er die Entwicklung des Gesetzes aufmerksam beobachten und er gegebenenfalls korrigierend eingreifen wird. Es ist in meinen Augen nun geboten, die Wirkung des Gesetzes zunächst einmal abzuwarten, anstatt die Zeitarbeit und die Werkverträge stets an den Pranger zu stellen. Es sollte nach den langen und intensiven Diskussionen, die wir geführt haben, nun einmal auch Ruhe im Rahmen dieser Thematik eintreten können.\n\nAbschließend bedanke ich mich ausdrücklich bei Ministerin Nahles, bei der Staatssekretärin Kramme, bei den Mitarbeitern des BMAS - namentlich darf ich hier Frau Loskamp erwähnen - sowie bei unseren Kolleginnen und Kollegen des Koalitionspartners für die konstruktiven Gespräche.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n12399,julia-obermeier,\"Vielen Dank. - Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Biologische Waffen sind kein neues Phänomen. Sie sind wohl so alt wie die Geschichte des Krieges selbst. Bereits vor 2 000 Jahren bewarfen die alten Römer ihre Feinde mit Kot, um Krankheiten auszulösen.\n\nAuch nutzten sie Tierkadaver oder Leichen, um das Trinkwasser in Brunnen zu vergiften. Heute können biologische Waffen um ein Vielfaches tödlicher sein. Sie zählen deshalb zu den Massenvernichtungswaffen. Die bekanntesten sind wohl Anthrax und Pocken.\n\nBiologische Waffen sind gerade in den Händen von Terroristen besonders gefährlich. Ein Angriff wäre unsichtbar und lautlos. Erst Tage nach dem Freisetzen der tödlichen Viren oder Bakterien würden die ersten Menschen erkranken. Bioterrorismus ist ein Spiel mit dieser Angst; denn die Anzahl der möglichen Opfer ist sehr hoch.\n\nIm vergangenen Jahr warnte Frankreichs Premierminister nicht nur vor der Gefahr von Terroranschlägen mit chemischen, sondern auch vor der mit biologischen Waffen. Nur wenige Tage nach dem blutigen Terror in Paris sagte er: „Wir dürfen heute nichts ausschließen.“ Er verwies zwar nicht auf konkrete Pläne für Anschläge mit biologischen Waffen, doch machte seine Aussage deutlich, dass diese Bedrohung greifbar ist. Bedauerlicherweise wird dieser Gefahr nicht wie bei chemischen Waffen mit einer starken internationalen Konvention begegnet. Es gibt zwar ein Übereinkommen, das die Entwicklung, die Herstellung, den Besitz, die Weitergabe und den Einsatz biologischer Waffen verbietet, doch ist dieses, anders als die Chemiewaffenkonvention, noch ein zahnloser Tiger.\n\nDies birgt ernstzunehmende Risiken, wie das Beispiel Syrien zeigt. Das Potenzial syrischer Chemiewaffen ist sachkundig aufgearbeitet und steht sowohl im Fokus der internationalen Gemeinschaft als auch im Fokus der breiten Öffentlichkeit. Die Gefahren von biologischen Waffen, die sich möglicherweise in den Händen des syrischen Regimes befinden, liegen jedoch im Dunkeln. So wird seit längerem spekuliert, dass Assad an einsatzfähigen Erregern wie Milzbrand, Pest, Botulinum, Cholera, Ricin, Kamelpocken und Aflatoxin arbeitet oder diese bereits besitzt. Im chaotischen Bürgerkriegsgebiet Syriens wäre das besonders problematisch. Biologische Waffen könnten, auch wenn dies laut vieler Experten eher unwahrscheinlich ist, gegen die Zivilbevölkerung eingesetzt werden. Sie könnten auch in die Hände von Terroristen gelangen, und das, meine Damen und Herren, gilt es unbedingt zu verhindern. Es liegt daher im deutschen Interesse, das Biowaffenübereinkommen zu stärken. Dies würde die Verbreitung von biologischen Waffen zurückdrängen. Und: Es wäre ein wichtiger Schritt, um zu verhindern, dass terroristische Gruppen und andere böswillige Akteure an Biowaffen gelangen. Wir brauchen also dringend Fortschritte beim Biowaffenübereinkommen.\n\nIm November dieses Jahres findet die achte Überprüfungskonferenz des Übereinkommens statt, und diese Chance gilt es zu nutzen. Daher fordern wir in unserem Antrag die Bundesregierung auf, in den Verhandlungen klare Positionen zu beziehen und unter anderem folgende Punkte zu unterstützen: Mehr Staaten sollen das Übereinkommen unterzeichnen, mit dem Ziel einer weltweiten Umsetzung. Dazu braucht es vertrauensbildende Maßnahmen, um Vertragstreue zu stärken. Auch soll der UN-Generalsekretär künftig Verdachtsfälle besser untersuchen können. Und wir wollen die wissenschaftlichen und technologischen Entwicklungen, Herr Kollege Röspel, im Bereich der Biowaffen besser im Blick haben, um auf Entwicklungen reagieren zu können.\n\nLangfristig soll das Biowaffenübereinkommen dem Chemiewaffenübereinkommen in nichts nachstehen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die im Antrag vorgeschlagenen Maßnahmen tragen dazu bei, die Gefahren von Biowaffen einzudämmen. Es wäre ein starkes Signal, wenn wir dieses hohe Ziel heute mit dem Votum aller Fraktionen unterstützen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6446,christian-flisek,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist gut, dass wir aus Anlass einer Aktuellen Stunde im Plenum wieder einmal Gelegenheit haben, über die Arbeit des NSA-Untersuchungsausschusses zu reden; denn der NSA-Untersuchungsausschuss hat seit seiner Konstituierung im letzten Jahr, wie ich finde, seine Arbeit gemacht, und er hat - auch das betone ich ausdrücklich - durch die gemeinsame Arbeit aller Fraktionen in diesem Ausschuss Beachtliches geleistet. Wenn man ein erstes Zwischenfazit ziehen will, dann kann es aus meiner Sicht nur lauten, dass die parlamentarische Kontrolle über die Geheimdienste in Deutschland im Grundsatz funktioniert.\n\nEs ist die Kontrolle dieses Parlaments und seiner Abgeordneten in diesem Untersuchungsausschuss und im Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremium, die aktuell dafür Sorge getragen hat, dass offensichtliche Missstände in den deutschen Geheimdiensten und bei der Aufsicht über die deutschen Geheimdienste auf den Tisch kommen. Wir werden das vollständig weiterhin aufklären, wir werden das sachlich politisch bewerten, und wir werden uns dann auch darüber unterhalten und verständigen, welche Konsequenzen hieraus zu ziehen sind.\n\nMan kann in dieser Aktuellen Stunde - ich sage es einmal so - tüchtig auf die Pauke hauen, aber dafür sind die Dinge eigentlich zu ernst. Es ist eine ganze Reihe von Fragen, die den Anlass für diese Aktuelle Stunde bildet.\n\n- Wir nehmen sie ernst, Frau Göring-Eckardt.\n\nEine ganze Reihe von Fragen steht auf der Tagesordnung. Hat der Bundesnachrichtendienst über Jahre hinweg bei seiner Fernmeldeaufklärung Suchbegriffe der NSA verwendet, die gegen deutsches Recht oder - was gleichbedeutend wäre - gegen deutsche Interessen massiv verstoßen haben? In welchem Umfang ist das geschehen? Welche Qualität haben die Informationen, die auf der Grundlage dieser Suchbegriffe an andere Geheimdienste gegeben worden sind? Waren es Informa-tionen über deutsche Unternehmen, europäische Unternehmen, deutsche Politiker, europäische Politiker, europäische Institutionen? Wie konnte es dazu kommen? Wie können wir sicher sein, dass aktuell, also heute, -sichergestellt ist, dass auf der Grundlage solcher Suchbegriffe keine Informationen mehr an amerikanische Geheimdienste weitergegeben werden?\n\nUnd auch das ist eine Frage: Warum haben offensichtlich Mitarbeiter im Bundesnachrichtendienst über einen längeren Zeitraum diesen Umstand nicht nach oben, an die Hausspitze, gemeldet, und warum ist dieser Umstand nicht an das Bundeskanzleramt als Aufsichtsbehörde weitergegeben worden? Offensichtlich - davon müssen wir ausgehen - ist nur aufgrund der Arbeit des Untersuchungsausschusses dem Bundeskanzleramt überhaupt zur Kenntnis gelangt, dass es solche Selektorenlisten gibt. Das alles deutet auf Organisationsdefizite, vielleicht auch auf Aufsichtsdefizite hin. Aber, meine Damen und Herren - das sage ich gezielt an die Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Opposition -, wir müssen das sachlich aufklären, und zwar genau in dieser Reihenfolge.\n\nIch sage eines deutlich, zumindest für meine Fraktion in diesem Untersuchungsausschuss: Wir sind ein Aufklärungsgremium und kein Rücktrittsforderungsgremium. Aber weil das genau so ist, weil wir - das wiederhole ich gern - ein Aufklärungsgremium sind\n\n- seien Sie nicht so hysterisch, bleiben Sie nüchtern -,\n\nmüssen die Selektorenlisten dem Untersuchungsausschuss so schnell wie möglich zur Verfügung gestellt werden. Sie sind ein Kernbereich für unsere Aufklärungsarbeit, Herr Gysi. Wir brauchen diese Listen. Es gibt für die Vorlage auch geeignete abgestufte Verfahren. Da gibt es nicht nur Schwarz und Weiß; da gibt es Graubereiche. Das muss dem Bundesnachrichtendienst klar sein. Das ist mit Sicherheit dem Kanzleramt klar. Notfalls müssen wir davon auch unsere amerikanischen Freunde überzeugen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir werden als SPD bei der Reform, die ansteht, klare Schwerpunkte setzen. Wir werden die Ausland-Ausland-Überwachung - da stehen wir an der Seite des ehemaligen Bundesverfassungsgerichtspräsidenten Papier - regeln. Ich bin davon überzeugt, dass wir das tun müssen; denn das, was wir gerade hier diskutieren, betrifft genau den Kernbereich. Wir können nicht immer nur empört mit dem Zeigefinger über den Atlantik zeigen und Standards für den Schutz deutscher Bürger und Unternehmen einfordern und selber genau das nicht leisten.\n\nWir müssen hier in Vorleistung gehen. Wenn dieser Untersuchungsausschuss ein Ergebnis haben sollte, dann ist es das, dass wir als Deutsche bereit sind, diese Pionierarbeit zu leisten.\n\nIn globalen Zeiten und angesichts global tätiger deutscher Unternehmen, in denen Menschen vieler Nationen arbeiten, macht der Unterschied zwischen Inländern und Ausländern überhaupt keinen Sinn mehr, schon gar nicht in Bezug auf unsere europäischen Partner. Deswegen müssen wir das auf eine solide rechtsstaatliche Basis stellen und die Ausland-Ausland-Überwachung aus dem Graubereich herausholen. Wir müssen sie vor allen Dingen einer parlamentarischen Kontrolle zuführen. Das ist unsere Überzeugung. Die SPD-Kolleginnen und -Kollegen im PKGr und im Untersuchungsausschuss werden ihren Beitrag dazu leisten.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n12162,harald-terpe,\"Herr Kollege Riebsamen, es ist mir eine Freude, Ihnen eine Zwischenfrage zu stellen. Ich bin sehr dankbar, dass Sie sie zulassen.\n\nDa Redner von der Union zum zweiten Mal auf den Wettbewerb zwischen den Krankenkassen hingewiesen haben und das eine große Rolle spielt: Stimmen Sie mir zu, dass ein Wettbewerb zwischen den Krankenkassen auch möglich ist, wenn man die Parität einführt?\"\n481,hubertus-heil,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Weil wir gerade über Redlichkeit gesprochen haben, habe ich noch einen Nachtrag zum Kollegen van Aken, der bedauernswerterweise dem Minister Zwischenfragen gestellt und sich dann aus der Debatte entfernt hat.\n\nAber vielleicht richten Sie ihm das aus.\n\nWas er vorhin bei seiner Zwischenfrage gemacht hat, nämlich den Eindruck zu erwecken, dass er als Abgeordneter dem Minister bzw. Vertretern des Ministeriums Fragen zum Thema Rüstungsexporte gestellt hätte, die diese nicht beantworten wollten, ist nach meinen Recherchen - ich habe gerade im Bundesministerium nachgefragt - nicht die Wahrheit.\n\nDie Wahrheit ist: Er hat eine Anfrage gestellt und die Antwort bekommen, dass die Zahlen für 2013 gerade aufgearbeitet und im Frühsommer veröffentlicht werden.\n\nDem Kollegen Rösler hat er dieselbe Frage gestellt, allerdings im Mai; da konnte er sie beantworten. Wer hier den Eindruck erweckt, dass das Ministerium, das beim Thema Rüstungsexportkontrolle einen neuen Kurs einschlägt, nämlich mehr Transparenz herzustellen, wissentlich Abgeordneten vorliegende Zahlen verschweigt, der sagt die Unwahrheit, und dem geht es offensichtlich nicht um das Thema, sondern um billige Linksparteiprofilierung in diesem Land.\n\nDas ist umso bedauerlicher, als ich Herrn Kollegen van Aken zumindest in seiner Einschätzung europäischer Themen leider für eine Minderheit in Ihrer Fraktion halte\n\nnach dem, was Frau Wagenknecht macht, aber das ist ein anderes Thema.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, wir Sozialdemokraten unterstreichen den Satz von Herrn Kollegen Fuchs, dass es Deutschland gut geht. Aber es gilt auch der Satz: Wer morgen sicher leben will, der muss heute für Reformen sorgen.\n\nWir haben große Aufgaben vor uns. Wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass in diesem Land die Investitionsquote steigt. Darauf hat der Bundesminister hingewiesen. Herr Ernst, an dieser Stelle sind wir nicht diejenigen - im Gegensatz zu Ihnen -, die bemängeln, dass wir exportstark sind. Dieses Land ist exportstark. Es soll wettbewerbsfähig bleiben. Aber gleichzeitig müssen wir die Binnennachfrage in diesem Land stärken. Das tun wir mit einer neuen Ordnung am Arbeitsmarkt und damit auch für die Kaufkraft.\n\nWir müssen auch für Investitionen - öffentliche und private - in Deutschland sorgen. Deshalb wird diese neue Bundesregierung 23 Milliarden Euro mehr in Verkehrsinfrastruktur, aber vor allem in Bildung und Forschung investieren: 9 Milliarden Euro allein in diesem Bereich. Das macht unser Land zukunftsfähig. Wir müssen exportfähig bleiben. Aber wir brauchen auch starke Heimspiele auf dem Binnenmarkt. Das ist die Balance, auf die der neue Wirtschaftsminister Wert legt. Wir tun das ebenfalls.\n\nBitte schön.\n\nHerr Kollege Ernst, sind Sie vielleicht bereit, zur Kenntnis zu nehmen, dass monokausale Argumenta-tionsketten die Probleme, die wir in Europa haben, nicht abbilden?\n\nEs ist schlimm, wenn man jemandem antworten muss, der zum Teil recht hat, aber das gesamte Bild verschweigt. Richtig ist: Handelsbilanzunterschiede stellen ein ökonomisches Problem dar. Deshalb habe ich gesagt - vielleicht haben Sie das zur Kenntnis genommen -: Wir arbeiten daran, wettbewerbsfähig zu bleiben. Um es in der Fußballsprache zu sagen: Man kann nur erfolgreich sein und Meister werden, wenn man stark in Auswärtsspielen, also in diesem Fall im Export, ist. Aber man muss auch starke Heimspiele haben. Das heißt, wir brauchen einen stärkeren Binnenmarkt. Das ist ein ökonomisches Problem. Aber in Ihrer Argumentation tun Sie gerade so, als wäre der Exporterfolg der Bundesrepublik Deutschland schuld an der gesamten Krise in Europa. Das hat mit der Wahrheit nichts zu tun.\n\nDafür gibt es durchaus andere Gründe. Es gibt strukturelle Probleme und Verwerfungen auf den Finanzmärkten. Das dürfen Sie nicht ausblenden.\n\nHerr Ernst, im Gegensatz zu Ihren Parolen tun wir als Regierung etwas, um die Binnennachfrage in diesem Land tatsächlich zu stärken. Wir sorgen für eine Neuordnung auf dem Arbeitsmarkt.\n\nDas stärkt die Kaufkraft. Dazu gehören der gesetzliche Mindestlohn und Regeln gegen den Missbrauch von Zeitarbeit. Davon quatschen Sie nur. Aber wir tun es. Das ist der Unterschied, Herr Ernst.\n\nHerr Ernst, wir sorgen dafür, dass mehr investiert wird, und zwar sowohl privat als auch öffentlich. Bei den privaten Investitionen müssen wir mehr für Planungs- und Investitionssicherheit tun. Hier steht das Thema Energiewende ganz oben auf der Agenda. Aber die öffentlichen Investitionen von Bund, Ländern und Kommunen in Bildung, Forschung und Infrastruktur sind ein Markenzeichen dieser Regierung. Daran kann man uns auch messen.\n\nIch will zum Thema Energie sprechen, weil das die größte Baustelle ist, vor der der Bundesminister, die Regierung und das Parlament, aber auch Deutschland insgesamt stehen. Herr Kollege Krischer, wir sind uns in der Analyse wahrscheinlich in vielem einig. Der Anteil der erneuerbaren Energien liegt bei 25 Prozent. Das EEG war als Markteinführungsinstrument vernünftig. Sonst hätten wir nicht 25 Prozent erreicht. Aber nun geht es nicht mehr um Markteinführung, sondern um Marktdurchdringung. Deshalb kann man das bisherige Fördersystem nicht perpetuieren. Wer die Energiewende zum Erfolg führen will, der muss jetzt für eine grundlegende Reform sorgen, Herr Krischer; das ist der entscheidende Punkt. Nachdem Sie zuerst alles in Grund und Boden geredet haben, haben Sie am Ende ein Verhandlungsangebot gemacht. Meine Bitte ist, dass Sie im Sinne einer gelingenden Energiewende konstruktiv mitwirken.\n\nDer deutschen Öffentlichkeit und vielleicht auch vielen in diesem Hause ist offensichtlich noch nicht ganz klar, in welcher dramatischen Situation wir uns aufgrund mehrerer Entwicklungen, die zusammenkommen, befinden. Klar ist: Wir müssen das EEG ohnehin reformieren, um die Kostendynamik beim Zubau tatsächlich in den Griff zu bekommen. Wir wollen übrigens weiterhin ausbauen. Sie tun dagegen so, als würden die Erneuerbaren überhaupt nicht mehr gefördert. Das ist nicht der Fall. Wir fördern bislang mit 24 Milliarden Euro jährlich. Wir werden weiter fördern. Wir haben sehr ambitionierte Ausbauziele. Wir sind jetzt bei 25 Prozent. Wir werden den Weg hin zu den erneuerbaren Energien weiterhin konsequent gehen. Dafür brauchen wir übrigens auch Planungs- und Investitionssicherheit. Wenn wir aber nicht zu einer grundlegenden Reform kommen, dann - das dürfen Sie der Öffentlichkeit nicht verschweigen - wird es zwei parallele europäische Entwicklungen geben, die uns wirtschaftlich schaden können. Das eine ist das Beihilfeverfahren in Bezug auf die Ausnahmetatbestände für energieintensive Betriebe. Wenn wir nicht zu einer grundlegenden Reform auch bei den Ausnahmetatbeständen kommen - ich komme gleich dazu; hierbei müssen wir übrigens eine Verständigung mit Brüssel herbeiführen; es darf nicht zu einer Eskalation kommen -, dann haben die Grundstoffindustrien in Deutschland ab dem 1. Januar 2015 ein Riesenproblem. Für -chemische Unternehmen, Stahlunternehmen, Aluminiumunternehmen, für die Unternehmen, die bei ihren Prozessen alles tun, um energieeffizient zu sein, aber einen hohen Energieaufwand haben, und die miteinander im Wettbewerb stehen, wird das ein wirkliches Problem. Das Elektrostahlwerk in meiner Heimatstadt beispielsweise wäre dann weg. Das will keiner. Deshalb müssen wir diese Ausnahmeregelungen reformieren.\n\nAber es geht noch weiter. Es gibt ja noch einen anderen Prozess, der mit Herrn Almunia zu tun hat und der in Brüssel stattfindet: Das ist die Reform der Umwelt- und Energiebeihilfen. Herr Kollege Krischer, wenn Sie das nicht im Blick haben, dann riskieren Sie nicht nur, dass die Ausnahmetatbestände abhandenkommen, sondern auch, dass die Förderung erneuerbarer Energien, das EEG insgesamt, zum Kippen kommt.\n\nIch sagen Ihnen: Deshalb machen wir uns auf den Weg grundlegender Reformen. Wer erneuerbare Energien will, der muss heute für Reformen sorgen,\n\nder darf an dieser Stelle nicht nur zugucken, und der darf sich auch nicht zum Anwalt von Partikularinteressen machen. Das finde ich wirklich schwierig. Ich kann verstehen, dass Ministerpräsidenten die Interessen ihres Landes vertreten und Wertschöpfungsanteile im Rahmen der Energiewende für sich beanspruchen. Das ist auch deren Job. Aber es ist nicht die Summe dieser Einzelinteressen, die zu einem Gesamtbild führt.\n\nIch kann nicht verstehen, dass sich Ministerpräsidenten, die sehr unterschiedliche Interessen haben, verbünden, um sie jeweils einzeln durchzusetzen. Ich meine ganz konkret Herrn Kretschmann in Baden-Württemberg und Herrn Seehofer in Bayern. Der eine will in Bayern offensichtlich die Biomasse schützen, und der andere hat ein Interesse daran - das kann man diskutieren -, die Onshorewindenergie in Baden-Württemberg auszubauen. Das sind aber sehr gegensätzliche Interessen. Denn Herr Seehofer in Bayern ist ja ein Gegner von Onshorewindenergie; und Herr Kretschmann sieht mit Sicherheit das Thema Biomasse kritischer als Herr Seehofer. Und jetzt treffen sich beide und tun so, als hätten sie die gleichen Interessen. Das geht nicht! Wir brauchen Vernunft und nicht eine Koalition von Teppichhändlern; denn wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass die Energiewende tatsächlich zu einem Erfolg wird.\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Wir haben an dieser Stelle eine Riesenchance. Die Energiewende ist eine Chance für unser Land. Dabei bleibe ich. Wir können in einer Welt mit wachsendem Energiehunger und einer wachsenden Bevölkerung Ausrüster für moderne Technologien im Energiebereich sein. Wir sind in vielen Bereichen führend. Aber dafür brauchen wir die Referenz, dass wir die Energiewende im eigenen Land hinbekommen. Wir werden hart dafür arbeiten, eine sichere, eine saubere, eine bezahlbare Energieversorgung zu gewährleisten. Dazu werden wir auch alle Interessen anhören.\n\nAber ich sage auch: Wir dürfen nicht zu kurz springen! Wir müssen bis Mitte des Jahres eine grundlegende EEG-Reform auf den Weg bringen. Das ist noch nicht das Ende der Energiepolitik - gar keine Frage. Wir müssen auch für Energieeffizienz in diesem Land sorgen. Wir müssen für ein neues Strommarktdesign und für gesicherte Kapazitäten sorgen. Das alles sind große Aufgaben, die vor uns liegen.\n\nAber meine ganz herzliche Bitte an alle, die sich ein bisschen damit auskennen, ist: Wirken Sie mit! Gehen Sie nicht in die Schützengräben! Mauern Sie nicht! Es geht tatsächlich darum, die Energiewende zum Erfolg zu führen, aber vor allen Dingen auch darum, dadurch einen Beitrag dazu zu leisten, dass Deutschland wirtschaftlich erfolgreich bleibt. Es geht um Wohlstand, Arbeitsplätze, Lebensqualität in diesem Land. Auch den Weg zu mehr Klimaschutz werden wir mit einem neuen Bundeswirtschaftsminister gehen, der die Durchschlagskraft hat, die seinem Vorgänger gefehlt hat.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\n\nFrau Präsidentin! Herr Kollege Riesenhuber, ich habe mich zu Wort gemeldet, weil ich eine Scharte auswetzen muss, die aus dem Jahre 2005 stammt. Sie waren damals Vorsitzender des Wirtschaftsausschusses des Deutschen Bundestages. Ich war damals das jüngste Mitglied dieses Ausschusses. Am Ende der Legislaturperiode 2005 meldete ich mich in der letzten Sitzung zu Wort, dankte Ihnen ganz herzlich für Ihre faire Sitzungsführung, für die unterhaltsame Art und Weise, mit der Sie die Sitzungen gestaltet haben, und wünschte Ihnen für die Zeit nach dem Parlament alles Gute.\n\nSie hörten sich die warmen Worte, die man da so sagt, ganz fröhlich an, um hinterher zu sagen: Herr Heil, das ist Ihr Wunschdenken, gell?\n\nIch wollte nur sagen, Herr Riesenhuber: Ihre heutige Rede beweist, dass es wichtig ist, dass Sie als Alterspräsident in dieser Legislaturperiode bei guter Gesundheit bleiben. Da wir beide immer für die steuerliche Forschungsförderung gekämpft haben, sie aber auch in diesem Koalitionsvertrag nicht durchgesetzt haben, sodass sie mutmaßlich auch in dieser Legislaturperiode nicht kommt, würde ich anregen, dass Sie sich überlegen, auch für die nächste zu kandidieren. Alles Gute!\"\n2832,philipp-graf-lerchenfeld,\"Der Gesetzentwurf, den wir heute verabschieden, enthält Änderungen des Einkommensteuergesetzes und des Tabaksteuergesetzes, die wegen des Beitritts Kroatiens zur EU notwendig geworden sind. Die Änderungen sind zwingend, um die europäische Richtlinie 2013/13/EU in nationales Steuerrecht umzusetzen. Gleichzeitig werden mit diesem Gesetz weitere Änderungen des Steuerrechts vorgenommen, die teils aufgrund höchstrichterlicher Entscheidungen, teils aufgrund besonderer Anliegen der Bundesländer und teils zur Sicherung der Steuerquellen in Deutschland erforderlich sind. Mit diesem Gesetz werden über 100 Absätze im Einkommensteuer-, Körperschaftsteuer- und Gewerbesteuergesetz gestrichen. Damit wird eine Straffung der Anwendungsregelungen erreicht.\n\nHier könnte ein wenig Hoffnung aufkeimen, dass dies ein erster Schritt zur Vereinfachung und Entbürokratisierung des deutschen Steuerrechts sein könnte. Ich würde mich sehr freuen, wenn dies tatsächlich auch der Fall wäre; denn wir wären gut beraten, die dringend notwendigen Schritte zur Vereinfachung des Steuerrechts energisch weiter fortzusetzen. Allerdings fürchte ich, dass der Schwung zur Steuervereinfachung wieder einmal schnell erlahmen wird.\n\nVon den zahlreichen Änderungen, die mit diesem Gesetzentwurf verbunden sind, möchte ich nur einige herausgreifen und im Folgenden darstellen.\n\nDurch eine neue Bestimmung in § 50 i EStG wird es in Zukunft nicht mehr möglich sein, dass in Deutschland entstandene stille Reserven durch steuerliche Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten bei einem Wegzug des Steuerpflichtigen ins Ausland der deutschen Steuer entzogen werden. Mit dieser Vorschrift soll unter anderem auf das BFH-Urteil aus dem Jahr 2009 reagiert werden, in dem entschieden wurde, dass eine Veräußerung oder Entnahme von Wirtschaftsgütern durch einen im Ausland ansässigen Steuerpflichtigen nur vom Ansässigkeitsstaat besteuert werden kann. Mit der Klarstellung in § 50 i EStG wird nun dem deutschen Fiskus wieder die Möglichkeit gegeben, diese Sachverhalte unabhängig von Doppelbesteuerungsabkommen nach deutschem Steuerrecht zu behandeln und das entsprechende Steueraufkommen für Deutschland zu sichern.\n\nMit der Änderung des Umsatzsteuergesetzes bezüglich des Leistungsorts bei Telekommunikationsleistungen und ähnlichen Leistungen wird eine weitere Regelung getroffen, damit der deutsche Fiskus ihm zustehende Steuereinnahmen erhält. Zukünftig gilt in diesen Fällen als Leistungsort bei Leistungen an Nichtunternehmer der Ort, an dem der Leistungsempfänger seinen Sitz hat. Damit wird eine zutreffende Besteuerung am tatsächlichen Verbrauchsort erreicht. Diese Regelung wird zu einem zusätzlichen Steueraufkommen von schätzungsweise 400 Millionen Euro führen.\n\nIm Ausschuss wurde von der Opposition behauptet, dass diese Regelungen tatsächlich Steuererhöhungen seien und wir damit unser Wahlversprechen brechen würden. Liebe Kollegen der Opposition, sehen Sie doch bitte von so billiger Polemik ab, denn hierdurch werden nur Steuern in Deutschland erhoben, die bisher im Ausland anfielen und nun zu Recht dem deutschen Staat zugutekommen.\n\nEine weitere Änderung betrifft die Umkehrung der Steuerschuldnerschaft für Bauleistungen und Gebäudereinigerleistungen sowie für Fälle des Metallhandels und des Handels von Tablets und Spielekonsolen. Damit wird wieder der Zustand hergestellt, wie er vor der Entscheidung des BFH vom 22. August 2013 herrschte. Hier entsprechen wir einem Anliegen der Bundesländer und auch den Forderungen der Betroffenen. Neben diesen Änderungen enthält das Gesetz eine weitere Reihe von Änderungsregelungen für eine Vielzahl von Vorschriften von der Steuerfreiheit von Un-fallentschädigungen für Beamte über den Zweiterwerb von Lebensversicherungen bis hin zur Reduzierung des Mehrwertsteuersatzes für Hörbücher.\n\nWie eingangs gesagt, entsprechen wir mit diesem Gesetz auch bestimmten Anliegen der Bundesländer und stellen Sachverhalte wieder klar her, die durch Urteile des BFH geändert wurden. Wir sichern dem deutschen Fiskus das ihm zustehende Steueraufkommen und straffen das Steuerrecht in einigen Vorschriften. Deshalb bitte ich Sie, dem Gesetz heute Ihre Zustimmung zu geben.\"\n2247,volker-beck,\"Verehrter Herr Staatssekretär, Sie haben gerade davon gesprochen, dass man sich zwischen den beiden Staatsangehörigkeiten entscheiden soll, wenn keine intensivere Beziehung zu Deutschland besteht. Haben Sie dabei bedacht, dass die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit auch zur EU-Freizügigkeit berechtigt und dass es sein kann, dass jemand seine EU-Bürgerschaft und damit auch sein Aufenthaltsrecht innerhalb der EU aus dem deutschen Pass ableitet? Ihre Regelung hätte zur Folge, dass jemand, der sich mit seinen Eltern in Griechenland, in Frankreich, in Portugal aufgehalten hat und deshalb nicht die Zeiten erreicht, die in Ihrem Gesetz stehen, den deutschen Pass verlieren würde. In einigen Mitgliedstaaten würde sich dann unter Umständen die Frage stellen, ob er als Drittstaatler überhaupt innerhalb der Europäischen Union noch aufenthaltsberechtigt ist. Halten Sie diese Konsequenz nicht auch wie ich für unverhältnismäßig?\n\nHerr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Sie haben mit dem Bundespräsidenten geschlossen, Frau Özo?uz. Ich will mit ihm beginnen. Der Bundespräsident sagte am 22. Mai:\n\nDer größte Schritt war wahrscheinlich 1999 die Reform des Staatsbürgerschaftsrechts.\n\nNeben das ius sanguinis trat das ius soli. Seitdem kann Deutscher werden, wer in Deutschland geboren wurde, auch wenn seine Eltern es beide nicht sind. Inzwischen wächst auch die Gelassenheit, doppelte Staatsbürgerschaften als selbstverständlich hinzunehmen.\n\nSo weit der Bundespräsident. - Ihrem Gesetzentwurf und der Rede von Herrn Krings merkt man die Gelassenheit, von der der Bundespräsident spricht, aber nicht an.\n\nSie setzen eine Diskriminierungspolitik fort; die schwarze Pädagogik der Integrationspolitik der Union führt die Feder. Für ein kleines Häuflein von Menschen, wie der Deutsche Anwaltverein schreibt, bauen Sie ein bürokratisches Monstrum auf, um den jungen Deutschen, die hier geboren sind, deren Eltern aber aus dem Ausland stammen, weiter zu sagen: Ihr seid Deutsche auf Bewährung. Ihr seid Deutsche mit Verfallsdatum. Ihr seid Deutsche auf Probe. - Das ist das Gegenteil von Willkommenskultur. Deshalb muss die Optionspflicht ganz fallen. Erst das wäre ein richtiger Schritt nach vorne.\n\nIch will noch eines sagen. Der Bundespräsident spricht davon, dass man dann, wenn man in Deutschland geboren ist, auch Deutscher ist. Das ist allerdings etwas, was wir noch verwirklichen müssen. Das fassen Sie überhaupt nicht an. Nach dem heutigen Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht müssen die Eltern erst acht Jahre eine Aufenthaltserlaubnis haben, bevor ihre hier geborenen Kinder auch als Deutsche geboren werden. Ich frage: Warum reicht es nicht aus, einen legalen Aufenthalt in Deutschland zu haben, damit der, der hier Kinder bekommt, Deutsche und keine Ausländer gebiert?\n\nIn anderen Ländern besteht darüber Konsens. In Frankreich sind sich von den Gaullisten bis zu den Kommunisten alle einig. Die Einzigen, die dagegen sind, sind die Anhänger des Front National; die wollen wir uns politisch wohl nicht zum Vorbild nehmen.\n\nVor dem Hintergrund Ihrer Argumentation bezüglich des Kriteriums „aufgewachsen sein“, Frau Kollegin, sollten Sie sich vielleicht einmal den Artikel von Professor Zimmermann zu Ihrem Gesetzentwurf durchlesen. Er legt nämlich dar, dass das Kriterium „aufwachsen“ bzw. „aufgewachsen sein“ im Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht eigentlich schon dann zutrifft, wenn die Eltern dauerhaft hier leben und das Kind hier geboren ist, da man dann davon ausgehen kann, dass es in der Regel hier aufwachsen wird. Insofern setzen Sie hier ein Kriterium zweimal ein.\n\nIch fand Ihren Koalitionsvertrag in dem Punkt vollkommen in Ordnung. Was Sie dann umgesetzt haben, finde ich allerdings nicht mehr in Ordnung. Es ist auch lebensfremd.\n\nSie reden sich ja bei allen Problemen auf die Härtefallklausel heraus. Ich habe vorhin schon Herrn Krings gefragt: Was machen wir eigentlich mit Menschen, die mit ihrem deutschen Pass die EU-Freizügigkeit wahrnehmen und, wenn sie im Ausland womöglich noch nicht einmal erfahren haben, dass sie optionspflichtig sind, plötzlich die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit verlieren und dann Drittstaatausländer in einem anderen europäischen Land sind und sich damit die aufenthaltsrechtlichen Fragen für diese jungen Menschen auf einmal neu stellen? Das zeigt: Ihr Gesetzentwurf ist national gedacht. Sie sind nicht in Europa angekommen.\n\nAuch Migrantenkinder können innerhalb Europas mi-grieren und ihre Freizügigkeit wahrnehmen.\n\nWir haben bei der Bundesregierung ein paar Fälle abgefragt. Was ist zum Beispiel mit denen, die sieben Jahre in Deutschland gelebt haben, hier fünf Jahre zur Schule gegangen sind und dann in Österreich Matura gemacht haben? Nach Ihrem Gesetzentwurf ist nicht klar, was mit denen passiert. Was ist mit denen, die im Ausland waren und eine deutsche Auslandsschule besucht haben? Die haben keinen inländischen Schulabschluss gemacht. Was ist mit denjenigen, die in Frankreich das Baccalauréat machen und dann zurückkommen, aber erst nach dem 21. Lebensjahr ihr Bachelorstudium in Germanistik aufnehmen? Haben sie keinen Bezug zu Deutschland? Nach dem Wortlaut Ihres Gesetzes sind sie alle draußen. Die Bundesregierung sagt: Das könnten Sachverhalte für einen Härtefall sein. Aber welche Gesetzgebung ist das, wo der Bürger nicht weiß, unter welche Regelung er fällt, und alle konkreten Einzelfälle unter eine Härtefallklausel fallen, bei der keiner von Ihnen hier sagen kann, was das Ausländeramt damit konkret macht,\n\nund Sie hoffen können, dass das Bundesverwaltungsgericht das irgendwann in zehn Jahren klarstellt? Das ist keine Integrationspolitik. Das ist schlechte Gesetzgebung!\n\nSie müssen auch einmal sagen, warum wir bei Kindern zwei Klassen von deutschen Doppelstaatlern haben. Wir haben einerseits die Kinder, von denen beide Elternteile Ausländer sind. Sie werden durch Geburtsrecht Deutsche. Dann haben wir die Kinder von binationalen, also deutsch-ausländischen Ehepaaren, die, weil eine Deutsche oder einer Deutscher ist, sie also eine deutsche Abstammung haben, auch beide Pässe haben. Die kommen für die Optionspflicht freilich nicht infrage. Ich muss Ihnen sagen: Das ist eine ethnische Diskriminierung derjenigen, die keine deutsche Abstammung haben, weil ihnen eine Pflicht auferlegt wird, die für alle anderen Bürgerinnen und Bürger richtigerweise nicht gilt.\n\nWas muten Sie damit eigentlich dem Bundesrat zu, der in seinem NPD-Verbot-Schriftsatz gesagt hat, dass der ethnische Volksbegriff überkommen ist, und sich da ausdrücklich auf die Staatsbürgerschaftsdiskussion bezogen hat, wenn Sie ihm einen solchen Gesetzentwurf vorlegen? Deshalb rate ich Ihnen: Denken Sie noch einmal gut nach! Lohnt es den Verwaltungsaufwand wirklich, für eine Handvoll Leute - ein Häuflein Menschen, wie der DAV sagt - hier dazu zu kommen, dass wir ihnen die Staatsbürgerschaft wieder aberkennen und dafür jedes Jahr 40 000 Verwaltungsverfahren durchführen?\n\nDer Deutsche Städtetag hat Ihnen ins Stammbuch geschrieben, dass Sie mit den Begriffen beim Härtefall und mit der Auslegung des „sonstigen Bezugs zu Deutschland“ nicht zurechtkommen, und Ihnen dann noch dar-gelegt, dass die von Ihnen verlangten Daten der Mel-debehörden nach Nummer 4 und 5 bei den Gemeinden gegenwärtig gar nicht zur Verfügung stehen\n\nund sie keine Antwort haben für den Fall, dass jemand zwischendrin seine Meldekarriere in Deutschland durch einen Auslandsaufenthalt unterbrochen hat; denn dann sind die Meldedaten nicht mehr miteinander verbunden und es kommt ein riesiger Sermon an Verwaltung auf sie zu.\n\nDer Städtetag, die beiden großen Kirchen und der Deutsche Anwaltverein sagen Ihnen allen: Es ist unverhältnismäßig, wegen dieser kleinen Gruppe einen solchen Verwaltungsaufwand zu betreiben. Sie betreiben ihn ja auch gar nicht wegen dieser kleinen Gruppe; Sie wollen allen hier sagen: Ihr müsst euch bewähren. - Nein, Deutsche müssen sich nicht bewähren. Allen Deutschen steht nach unserer Verfassung gleiches Recht zu. Das gilt auch für die Kinder von Menschen, die im Ausland geboren sind. Deshalb: Machen Sie einen Schritt in Richtung Integration! Schaffen Sie die Optionspflicht ab! Liebe SPD, Sie haben das noch im Zusammenhang mit dem Koalitionsvertrag Ihren eigenen Mitgliedern versprochen, als es um die Abstimmung ging. Nehmen Sie sich unseren Gesetzentwurf oder den des Bundesrates zum Vorbild, und sagen Sie: Wir beseitigen die Optionspflicht ganz. Das bringt nichts, kostet nur und funktioniert am Ende nicht, sondern führt nur zu vielen Verfahren.\n\nEs wäre schön, wenn die Union, die sonst immer gegen Bürokratie ist - ich erinnere mich noch an die -Diskussion über das Allgemeine Gleichbehandlungsgesetz -, hier einmal zu ihrem Wort stünde und sagte: weniger Bürokratie, mehr Bürgerrechte, mehr Welt-offenheit. - So käme Deutschland tatsächlich voran.\n\nIch möchte jetzt nicht auf die Argumente von Ihnen eingehen, Herr Brandt, sondern nur eine Sache klarstellen. Giovanni di Lorenzo konnte zweimal abstimmen, nicht weil er einen deutschen und einen italienischen Pass hat, sondern weil er einen italienischen Pass hat und in Deutschland lebt. Gegenwärtig ist es so, dass wir, obwohl das nach dem Europäischen Wahlakt und auch nach dem Europawahlgesetz nicht zulässig ist, keine organisatorischen Vorkehrungen getroffen haben, um solche Doppelabstimmungen durch ein einheitliches Wahlregister zu verhindern. Das ist ein Defizit bei der Exekution des Gesetzes durch die Verwaltung. Das hat mit dem Besitz von zwei oder drei Pässen oder einem Pass überhaupt nichts zu tun.\n\nDamit die Bürgerinnen und Bürger das wissen, wollte ich das hier richtigstellen.\n\nSie haben auch den Auftritt von Herrn Erdogan in Köln angesprochen. Frau Da?delen und ich haben auf der Gegendemonstration zusammen mit Ihrem Kollegen Hirte gesprochen und mit 50 000 Deutschen, Türken und Kurden gegen diesen Auftritt demonstriert. Aber ich habe auch schon deutsche Politiker Wahlkampf in Spanien machen sehen. Schauen Sie einmal in den Gazetten nach, was die FDP im Wahlkampf alles gemacht hat. Ich weiß, dass das auch manche bei uns machen. Das ist nicht ehrenrührig. Die Politik, die Herr Erdogan macht, ist anzugreifen, nicht aber die Tatsache, bei einer Gemeinde im Ausland aufzutreten und mit den Menschen zu diskutieren. Wir sollten dies auseinanderhalten. In Ihrer Rede klang das so: Wenn das ein Türke macht, ist es schlimm. Wenn das ein deutscher Politiker auf Mallorca macht, ist es nicht mehr so schlimm. - Das erschließt sich mir nicht, es sei denn, Türken und Deutsche unterscheiden sich doch so wesentlich.\"\n2668,wolfgang-schauble,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Gegen Ende dieser Haushaltsdebatte möchte ich mich zunächst einmal bei den Mitgliedern des Haushaltsausschusses, vor allem bei der Vorsitzenden, für die bei allem notwendigen Streit gute, kollegiale Zusammenarbeit bedanken. Ich möchte mich auch bei allen Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern im Sekretariat des Haushaltsausschusses und in den Ministerien der Bundesregierung bedanken. Das war eine intensive Arbeit. Wir mussten unter Hochdruck arbeiten. Ich habe zu Anfang der Debatte schon angesprochen, dass wir in diesem Jahr wegen der Wahlen im vergangenen Jahr den Haushalt später verabschieden müssen als normalerweise. Die Bundesregierung wird den Haushaltsentwurf 2015 in der kommenden Woche im Kabinett beschließen.\n\nMit diesem Haushalt haben wir einen wichtigen Schritt getan. Mit der Konsolidierung des Bundeshaushaltes kommen wir voran. Das ist auch ein notwendiger Schritt. Ich will daran erinnern, dass wir seit 2010 die Ausgaben im Bundeshaushalt insgesamt nicht erhöht haben,\n\nsondern immer noch unter dem Ausgabenniveau des Haushaltes 2010 liegen. Des Weiteren haben wir eine Menge von Anstrengungen unternommen, um mit einem Haushalt, der zukunftsfest ist bzw. Vorsorge für die Zukunft leistet, unserer Verantwortung gerecht zu werden. Wir wissen, dass wir bei der gegebenen demografischen Entwicklung bzw. bei dem vorhandenen Altersaufbau der Bevölkerung nicht immer mehr Schulden aufhäufen dürfen, wenn wir unserer Verantwortung für die Zukunft gerecht werden wollen.\n\nHerr Kollege Kindler, Sie sind noch ein junger Mann; aber wenn Sie einmal eine Glatze haben, hätten wir mit den Entscheidungen, die wir jetzt treffen, immer noch Vorsorge getroffen.\n\nDaran müssen wir bei unseren Entscheidungen denken.\n\n- Das ist ein Vorteil der Jugend, der aber von Monat zu Monat kleiner wird. Daran ist leider nichts zu ändern.\n\nAber jetzt im Ernst: Mit unserer Politik der Haushaltskonsolidierung - das ist das entscheidende Element der Vorsorge für die Zukunft - leisten wir einen notwendigen, unverzichtbaren Beitrag, um unserer Verantwortung für nachhaltiges Wachstum in unserem Land gerecht zu werden. Wir dürfen uns überhaupt keine Illusionen machen: Die Weltwirtschaft verändert sich. Damit ändern sich auch die Rahmenbedingungen für das Wirtschaften bzw. für die wirtschaftliche Wettbewerbsfähigkeit. Durch den rasend schnellen Innovationswandel in allen Bereichen der technischen Entwicklung, insbesondere natürlich bei der Informationsverarbeitung bzw. der modernen Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologie, gibt es - das haben viele nicht begriffen - in starkem Maße Veränderungen.\n\nWeltweit verändern sich Arbeitsmärkte in starkem Maße durch die Tatsache, dass es in immer mehr Branchen - gerade auch durch diese Veränderungen - ein globales Angebot an Arbeitskräften zu völlig anderen Wettbewerbspreisen als in unseren relativ geordneten Wohlstands- und Sozialgesellschaften in Europa gibt. Unter diesen Wettbewerbsbedingungen müssen wir Vollbeschäftigung und Perspektiven für junge Menschen ermöglichen. Wir müssen die Jugendarbeitslosigkeit überall in Europa erfolgreicher bekämpfen. Das sind die eigentlichen Herausforderungen. Dafür müssen wir in der Finanzpolitik die Weichen entsprechend stellen.\n\nEs gibt unter den Ökonomen einen großen Streit zwischen zwei Schulen. Die einen glauben, man könne die Probleme der Ökonomie am besten dadurch lösen, dass man immer mehr öffentliche Nachfrage schafft, egal wie sie finanziert wird. Dann gibt es die andere Meinung - die auch von international angesehenen Ökonomen vertreten wird -, dass in Wahrheit ein Übermaß an Verschuldung Wachstum nicht mehr ermöglicht, sondern gefährdet und sogar zerstört.\n\nMan muss wissen, dass die Industrieländer - die öffentliche und die private Verschuldung, also die Verschuldung der Unternehmen und die der privaten Haushalte, zusammengenommen - ein Verschuldungsniveau haben, das im Verhältnis zur gesamtwirtschaftlichen Leistungskraft beinahe einen historischen Höchststand erreicht. Es herrscht große internationale Übereinstimmung, auch im Kreise der G-20-Finanzminister, dass die nachhaltige Rückführung der zu hohen Verschuldung eine notwendige, unerlässliche Voraussetzung ist, wenn wir dauerhaftes Wachstum in der Welt gewährleisten wollen; darum geht es. Es geht nicht um kurzfristige Blasen, sondern um dauerhaftes Wachstum.\n\nMan kann das im Übrigen auch an Deutschland sehen. Es ist kein Zufall, sondern es hat Gründe, dass wir in Europa nicht nur Stabilitätsanker, sondern auch Wachstumslokomotive sind. Wir hatten als Folge der Finanz- und Bankenkrise 2009 mit den größten Einbruch der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Leistungskraft zu verzeichnen. Das ist auch völlig logisch, weil wir stärker als andere vom Export abhängig sind, sodass wir von einer weltwirtschaftlichen Krise natürlich auch stärker betroffen sind. Es kam damals zu einem Rückgang unseres Volkseinkommens um über 5 Prozent. Wir sind aber besser und schneller aus der Krise herausgekommen als andere. Daran zeigt sich: Finanzpolitische Solidität ist nicht das Gegenteil von Wachstum, sondern eine Voraussetzung dafür. Heute haben wir bessere Wachstumsraten als andere.\n\nWir liegen, was das nachhaltige Wachstum betrifft, am oberen Rand dessen, was in Deutschland unter den gegebenen Voraussetzungen möglich ist; darüber haben wir am Dienstag schon gemeinsam diskutiert. Wir haben das Vertrauen der Investoren zurückgewonnen; auch das ist ein Grund, warum die Zinsen so niedrig, im langfristigen Vergleich fast zu niedrig sind. Wir haben das Vertrauen der Konsumenten. Wir haben eine private Nachfrage, die wir lange nicht in diesem Maße hatten. Das trägt den Aufschwung in Deutschland; denn das Wachstum in Deutschland ist nicht von Exportüberschüssen getragen, sondern basiert zu mehr als 90 Prozent auf der Steigerung der Inlandsnachfrage.\n\nWenn man diese Zusammenhänge zur Kenntnis nimmt, dann erkennt man, was unsere Finanzpolitik ausmacht. Sie ist vielleicht nicht gerade kreativ in dem Sinne, dass wir jeden Tag etwas anderes machen. Wir machen nicht jeden Tag das Gegenteil dessen, was wir gestern gemacht haben - das müsste man dann auch eher Zickzackpolitik nennen -, sondern wir handeln stetig und verlässlich. Wenn wir uns vornehmen, diesen Weg konsequent zu gehen, dann tun wir das. Wir schaffen damit Vertrauen. Vertrauen wiederum ist die wichtigste Ressource für eine nachhaltig verlässlich wachsende Wirtschaft.\n\nWir dürfen übrigens nicht glauben, dass die Situation einfacher wird. Auch ich habe mir Gedanken über Ihre Kritik im Hinblick auf den Griff in die Sozialkassen gemacht. Wissen Sie, dieses Argument ist so ermüdend, dass man gar nicht mehr darauf eingehen mag.\n\n- Je nachdem, wie man es sieht. Allein der Zuschuss zur gesetzlichen Renten- und Krankenversicherung macht ein Drittel des Bundeshaushalts aus. Ein Drittel!\n\n- Ja, gut. Ich meine, wenn er über 100 Prozent beträgt, haben wir ein Problem. Darauf muss ich Sie aufmerksam machen, falls Sie die Grundrechenarten noch beherrschen.\n\nWenn wir unser Niveau an Wohlstand und sozialer Sicherheit aufrechterhalten wollen, muss die Wirtschaft wettbewerbsfähig bleiben, müssen die öffentlichen Haushalte leistungsfähig sein; sonst ist es nicht aufrechtzuerhalten. Das ist die notwendige Voraussetzung. Wir müssen das, was wir uns an sozialer Sicherheit leisten wollen und müssen, auch erwirtschaften. Deswegen müssen wir darauf achten, dass unsere Wirtschaft wettbewerbsfähig bleibt. Deswegen ist es auch richtig - das passt zusammen -, dass wir heute einen wichtigen Schritt in der Energiepolitik gemacht haben; denn ohne wettbewerbsfähige Energiepreise wären wir natürlich nicht wettbewerbsfähig.\n\nWir haben uns in dieser Regierung bzw. in der Großen Koalition gemeinsam vorgenommen, durch eine abgestimmte, kohärente Politik Schritt für Schritt dafür zu sorgen, dass wir unter weltwirtschaftlich schwierigen Rahmenbedingungen dauerhaftes Wachstum gewährleisten, den erreichten Lebensstandard zukunftsfest machen und unser Niveau an sozialer Sicherheit halten, auch in einer Zeit voller Veränderungen. Das schafft Vertrauen, und das spüren die Menschen in unserem Lande. Die Menschen haben das Gefühl: Es wäre gut, wenn wir das Niveau, das wir erreicht haben, für die kommenden Jahre sicherstellen könnten.\n\nDazu meine letzte Bemerkung in dieser Haushaltsdebatte. Gerade an dem Tag, an dem die europäischen Staats- und Regierungschefs darum ringen, welche Weichenstellungen für die Zukunft, für die kommenden fünf Jahre, in Europa vorgenommen werden, möchte ich deutlich machen: Wir werden in Deutschland und für Deutschland keinen Erfolg erzielen, wenn es uns nicht gelingt, auch Europa auf diesem Kurs zu halten. Kein europäisches Land ist in dieser so eng vernetzten Welt in der Lage, seine Interessen alleine durchzusetzen und seine Verantwortung alleine wahrzunehmen. Wir können das nur gemeinsam schaffen. Dafür brauchen wir kein deutsches Europa, sondern ein starkes Europa. Deswegen kämpfen wir dafür, auch in Europa Nachhaltigkeit, Verlässlichkeit und neues Vertrauen zu schaffen: durch Strukturreformen, durch Verbesserungen der institutionellen Rahmenbedingungen dort, wo notwendig - in einigen Ländern ist das dringend notwendig - und auch durch die Rückführung der zu hohen Verschuldung der öffentlichen wie der privaten Haushalte und der Unternehmen.\n\nDas ist der Weg, den wir Schritt für Schritt gehen. Damit leisten wir die beste Vorsorge dafür, dass wir die Demokratie in Europa und in diesem Lande, die wir errungen haben - genau vor 100 Jahren begann das Elend mit einem Attentat in Sarajevo -, nicht wieder den Rattenfängern und den Demagogen überlassen, sondern dass es stabil bleibt.\n\nAuch dazu leistet unsere Finanzpolitik einen Beitrag, und darum bemühen wir uns im demokratischen Wettbewerb. Das haben wir jetzt eine Woche lang getan, und ich glaube, wir alle haben das in dem Gefühl getan, dass wir in gemeinsamer Verantwortung darum ringen, das Beste für unser Land zu erzielen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n13613,reiner-meier,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir führen heute die erste Debatte zu Patientenrechten in diesem Jahr, und sie betrifft wieder einmal die Unabhängige Patientenberatung. Das ist in mehrfacher Hinsicht bemerkenswert. Zunächst einmal beeindruckt das Alter der Vorlage, die unverändert aus dem vorletzten Jahr datiert. Des Weiteren haben wir die UPD und ihre Neuvergabe im Ausschuss und im Plenum zwischenzeitlich so oft behandelt, dass eigentlich alles darüber gesagt ist, insbesondere weil Ihr Antrag auch keine wirklich neuen Gedanken formuliert. Schließlich wird im Antrag bereits eine Neuausrichtung der UPD gefordert, noch bevor der Träger seine Arbeit aufgenommen hatte. Diese Fähigkeit zur Hellseherei finde ich bemerkenswert.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich möchte daran erinnern, dass es die Regierungskoalition war, die im Jahr 2014 die Laufzeit der UPD von bisher fünf auf sieben Jahre verlängert hat. Gleichzeitig wurde die Finanzausstattung von 5 Millionen auf 9 Millionen Euro fast verdoppelt.\n\nWir haben das Angebot der UPD nicht nur deutlich ausgeweitet, sondern haben auch ganz entscheidende Schritte unternommen, es zu verstetigen. Das ändert aber nichts an meiner festen Überzeugung, dass die Ausschreibung auch bei einer dauerhaft gesicherten Finanzierung das richtige Instrument zur Weiterentwicklung der UPD ist und auch bleibt.\n\nEin gesunder Wettbewerb bringt Innovationen und einen Anreiz, immer wieder besser als der Status quo zu sein. Dieses Potenzial sollten wir den Patienten nicht vorenthalten. Aus demselben Grund kann ich auch Ihrem Vorschlag wenig abgewinnen, die UPD dauerhaft an die Organisationen nach § 140f SGB V zu vergeben. Es stellt sich nämlich schon ganz grundsätzlich die Frage, ob die Unabhängige Patientenberatung - dabei handelt es sich um einen öffentlichen Auftrag - überhaupt ohne Ausschreibung vergeben werden dürfte. In jedem Fall ist es ein ganz fragwürdiges Vorgehen, wenn man eine Ausschreibung abschaffen will, nur weil einem das Ergebnis nicht passt.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, lassen Sie mich noch kurz auf den Patientenbeauftragten eingehen. Wenn man sich Sinn und Zweck des Amtes vor Augen führt, muss jedem klar werden, dass es nur in der Bundesregierung richtig verortet ist. Es gilt nämlich auch hier der Grundsatz der Gewaltenteilung. Ein Patientenbeauftragter des Bundestages dürfte keine Kompetenzen haben, die über jene des Bundestages hinausgehen. Auch mit dem Wehrbeauftragten des Deutschen Bundestages wäre ein solcher Patientenbeauftragter in keiner Weise vergleichbar. Das Amt des Wehrbeauftragten folgt aus der besonderen verfassungs- und dienstrechtlichen Stellung unserer Soldatinnen und Soldaten. Das lässt sich ganz offensichtlich nicht auf unser Gesundheitswesen übertragen. Und ein rein symbolisches Organ des Bundestages zu schaffen, das erscheint mir deshalb, mit Verlaub, völlig überflüssig.\n\nIch hoffe im Übrigen, dass der aktuelle Patientenbeauftragte mit seinem unermüdlichen Einsatz für die Patienten in unserem Land Ihren Antrag inzwischen entbehrlich gemacht hat. Gestatten Sie mir an dieser Stelle, unserem Patientenbeauftragten Karl-Josef Laumann, der ein leidenschaftlicher Anwalt des Patientenrechtes in unserem Land ist, den gebührenden Dank zukommen zu lassen.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, wir haben mit der UPD eine gute und effektive Institution, die vielen Bürgern in unserem Land tagtäglich wertvolle Unterstützung und Orientierung gibt. Ich bin überzeugt, dass die Strukturen der UPD schon heute dazu beitragen, dass sie sich stetig weiterentwickelt und stetig besser wird. Für Ihre Forderungen sehe ich deshalb aktuell keine Grundlage. Aus diesem Grund werden wir Ihren Antrag heute ablehnen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13838,gerold-reichenbach,\"Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Zuschauer! Ich grüße auch die, um die es heute im Besonderen geht, nämlich die Polizeibeamten, die Feuerwehrleute, die Mitglieder der Hilfsorganisationen und der Rettungsdienste, die uns vielleicht zuschauen.\n\nEinen Teil dessen, worüber wir reden, kenne ich aus eigenem Erleben. Ich war und ich bin noch beim Technischen Hilfswerk aktiv. In meinem Landkreis hat mir im letzten Jahr mein Stellvertreter erzählt, dass er zu einem brennenden Objekt, zu dem das THW zu Hilfe gerufen wurde, trotz Blaulicht nicht durchdringen konnte, weil er von der Gafferschar behindert wurde. Ich selber habe erlebt, als ich bei einem Hochwassereinsatz versucht habe, Gaffer vom Deich zu verweisen, weil sie nicht nur die Rettungskräfte behindert, sondern auch sich selbst gefährdet haben, dass ich nicht nur nach dem Motto: „Wir als Steuerzahler bezahlen doch dich und deinen Laden“ beschimpft wurde, sondern dass mir auch Prügel angedroht wurde.\n\nNatürlich gebe ich Ihnen recht: All die Straftatbestände wären auch jetzt schon unter Umständen strafrechtlich verfolgbar. Wir erleben aber auch, dass Sanitäter oder Brandwachen der Freiwilligen Feuerwehr auf Festen, wo sie Bereitschaftsdienst leisten, bei Schlägereien plötzlich Objekt der Aggression sind.\n\nEs gibt allerdings einen Riesenunterschied zwischen dem Bürger und Politiker, der ich bin, und mir als THW-Helfer. Als normaler Bürger kann ich versuchen, mich einer solchen Situation deeskalierend zu entziehen oder, wenn ich weiß, dass dort eine gefährliche Situation droht, sie zu vermeiden. Genau das können Polizeibeamte, Feuerwehrleute, Sanitäter und andere Rettungskräfte nicht. Sie müssen sich oft sogar dieser Situation aussetzen, um helfen zu können. Das ist der fundamentale Unterschied.\n\nDeswegen können wir sie beim Schutz, auch beim strafrechtlichen Schutz, nicht so behandeln wie jemanden, der durch eigenes Zutun auch dazu beitragen könnte, dass die Gefährdung bzw. der Straftatbestand nicht eintritt.\n\nIch kann, Herr Ströbele - das ist Ihre graue Theorie -, auf dem Deich nicht zu demjenigen, der mich angreift, sagen: „Ich gehe, dann hast du deinen Frieden, und ich habe meine Ruhe“ und damit den Konflikt vermeiden. Ich muss dableiben, weil ich das Ziel habe, zu helfen. Der Sanitäter kann nicht sagen: „Auf das Fest gehe ich nicht“, weil dort üblicherweise Schlägereien und andere Zwischenfälle drohen. Er hat den Auftrag, ob als Ehrenamtlicher oder als Hauptamtlicher, dort helfen zu müssen.\n\nEr hat auch das Ethos, dort zu helfen, und das will er auch.\n\nDeswegen kann ich nicht sagen, dass da der gleiche Schutz wie der für einen Bürger reicht, der sich auf andere Weise solch einer Situation entziehen kann.\n\nDann kommen wir zu einem zweiten Punkt und reden über den Strafrahmen.\n\nGerne, das verlängert meine knappe Redezeit.\n\nVielen Dank, Kollege Ströbele, für die Zwischenfrage. Ich denke, Sie offenbaren damit ein wenig Praxisferne. Ich spreche eben nicht über den Feuerwehrmann,\n\nder zu Hilfe eilt, weil er einen Brand löschen muss, oder über den Polizisten, der einschreitet, weil es zu einer Schlägerei kommt, oder den Sanitäter, der einen Verletzten zu versorgen hat. Ich spreche von denen, die Bereitschaft haben, die am Rande des Festes stehen und Brandwache leisten. Das ist noch keine Vollstreckungshandlung in Ihrem Sinne. Sie können eben nicht, wie man es als Privatperson tun könnte, sagen: „Nein, auf dem Fest wird es mir langsam zu brenzlig und zu gefährlich. Ich gehe jetzt“, sondern sie haben dazubleiben.\n\nSie haben weiter Brandwache zu leisten und weiter als Sanitäter in Bereitschaft zu stehen. Ich glaube, Sie verkennen diesen Unterschied.\n\nDer letzte Punkt: der Strafrahmen. Mir hat ein Sanitäter, der angegriffen wurde - es kam dann auch zu einer Verhandlung und einer Verurteilung -, berichtet, dass er sehr enttäuscht war, da die Strafe aufgrund des Strafrahmens relativ niedrig ausfiel. Er sagte: Ich habe nach dem Urteil das Gefühl gehabt, ich sei so etwas wie Freiwild. - Ich denke, auch darum geht es, wenn wir dieses Gesetz hier beraten.\n\nDeshalb bin ich der festen Auffassung, dass wir dies tun sollten. Ich war übrigens schon immer dieser Auffassung.\n\nAußerdem sollten wir im Zuge der Beratungen auch das Problem der Gaffer, die zunehmend das Leben Dritter gefährden, indem sie die Einsatzkräfte behindern -\n\nich erinnere nur an die Rettungsgasse -, aufnehmen.\n\nIch danke für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n2039,sabine-zimmermann,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Spiering, erst einmal zu Ihnen: Ich weiß, wovon ich rede. Ich bin seit 20 Jahren Vorsitzende des Berufsbildungsausschusses der IHK Chemnitz und der Handwerkskammer Chemnitz. Das sage ich Ihnen, damit Sie nicht davon ausgehen müssen, wir wüssten nicht, wovon wir reden.\n\nIhre Sichtweise ist natürlich die der Berufsschullehrer als eine Säule der dualen Ausbildung. Das ist zwar richtig, aber dazu gehört noch ein bisschen mehr. Sie wissen, dass auch die Unternehmen und die Kammern dazugehören. Sie alle muss man im Blick haben und nicht nur die Sicht der Berufsschullehrer.\n\nIch muss Ihnen auch sagen: Es gibt noch große Unterschiede zwischen Ost und West. Wir schieben im Osten immer noch eine ziemliche Bugwelle vor uns her, nämlich die Altbewerber aus den vorhergehenden Entlassjahren, die immer noch in sogenannten Warteschleifen sind. Deswegen hat meine Kollegin durchaus zu Recht gesagt, dass sie teilweise ziemlich lange in solchen Warteschleifen bleiben. Dazu hat übrigens Frau Ministerin Wanka überhaupt nichts gesagt.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, Sie alle wissen, dass Auszubildende ein Berichtsheft zu führen haben. In diesem dokumentieren sie die wichtigen Dinge ihrer Ausbildung. Wenn sie wesentliche Inhalte vergessen oder Nebensächlichkeiten zu sehr in den Vordergrund stellen, dann gibt es von den Ausbildern die Rückmeldung: Neu schreiben!\n\nIch kann diesen Auszubildenden nur raten, sich kein Beispiel an der Bundesregierung zu nehmen. Sie nimmt alles in den Bericht auf, was die berufliche Ausbildung in Deutschland in einem richtig schönen Licht erscheinen lässt, aber die zentralen Fragen wie die hohe Zahl unversorgter Bewerber, die Qualität der Ausbildung und die Perspektiven nach der Ausbildung werden weitestgehend ausgeblendet. Ich finde, das ist ein starkes Stück; denn in allen diesen Fällen gibt es erheblichen Handlungsbedarf. Auch hier bleibt eigentlich nur das Urteil: Neu schreiben oder wenigstens nächstes Mal besser machen!\n\nWenn Sie wirklich wissen wollen, was in der Ausbildung leider alles möglich ist, besuchen Sie doch das Onlineforum „Dr. Azubi“ auf der Internetseite des Deutschen Gewerkschaftsbundes. Hier suchen Auszubildende Rat und Hilfe. Schauen Sie sich diese Meldungen dort einmal an!\n\nJanek, ein Auszubildender, schreibt:\n\nIch mache in einem Gartencenter meine Ausbildung zum Kaufmann im Einzelhandel. Da nun sozusagen Saison ist, verlangt mein Arbeitgeber, dass ich bis zu 10 und möglicherweise sogar 11 Stunden am Tag und 6 Tage die Woche für die nächsten Wochen arbeiten muss, ohne freien Tag. Ist das rechtens? Eigentlich bin ich nur noch zum Essen und Schlafen zu Hause, was deutlich an meiner Substanz zehrt … Zum Lernen ist keine Zeit mehr da.\n\nDas ist die Realität, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nSabrina, eine Auszubildende, schreibt:\n\nIch bin im dritten Lehrjahr als Hotelfachfrau und habe in 32 Tagen Prüfung. Habe noch 32 Tage Urlaubsanspruch … Ich habe meinen Chef gefragt, wann ich dann meinen Resturlaub nehmen kann, er meinte, das geht nicht, es ist viel zu tun und er habe wenig Personal. Ich weiß nicht, was mit meinem Resturlaub wird.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das sind keine Einzelfälle. Es gibt eine Fülle von Problemen in der Ausbildung selbst. Nach dem Ausbildungsreport des DGB macht ein Drittel aller Auszubildenden regelmäßig Überstunden. Sie wissen, dass Auszubildende keine Überstunden machen dürfen, erst recht nicht, wenn sie unter 18 Jahre alt sind. 10 Prozent üben ausbildungsfremde Tätigkeiten aus, also das sogenannte Hofkehren oder auch Kopieren. 33 Prozent besitzen noch nicht einmal einen Ausbildungsplan.\n\nWas sagt die Bundesregierung dazu, dass Auszubildende als billige Arbeitskräfte missbraucht werden und ihnen eine fachgerechte und umfassende Ausbildung einfach vorenthalten wird? Nichts findet sich dazu im Berufsbildungsbericht. Wenn es insgesamt diese Mängel bei der Ausbildungsqualität und beim Jugendarbeitsschutz gibt, kann sich die Bundesregierung nicht einfach davonstehlen und den Ländern und Kammern die Schuld in die Schuhe schieben. Arbeitgeber können nicht über einen angeblichen Fachkräftemangel klagen, wenn es solche gravierenden Ausbildungsmängel gibt. Nicht zuletzt deswegen werden Ausbildungsplätze oft nicht besetzt oder Ausbildungsverträge aufgelöst.\n\nWir müssen uns fragen: Wie wirksam sind denn die derzeitigen Kontrollen? Im Jahr 2011 gab es in den Betrieben gerade einmal 3 400 Kontrollen zum Jugendarbeitsschutz. Das ist nicht viel im Vergleich zu 1,4 Millionen Ausbildungsverhältnissen. Es gibt offensichtlich Reformbedarf. Aber davon will unsere Regierung nichts wissen.\n\nEin zweiter Punkt, der im Berufsbildungsbericht der Bundesregierung fehlt, ist die Frage der Perspektive nach der Ausbildung. Im dualen System geht ein Drittel der Auszubildenden nach der Ausbildung in die Arbeitslosigkeit. Diejenigen, die übernommen werden, haben oft nur befristete Verträge. Deshalb ist auch hier die politische Botschaft klar: Befristungen sind einzudämmen, und unbefristete Übernahmen sollten eigentlich die Regel werden.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Großen Koalition, gute Politik beginnt mit einer kritischen und schonungslosen Analyse der Ausgangssituation. Oder um es für die Sozialdemokraten unter Ihnen mit Ferdinand Lassalle zu sagen: „Alle große politische Aktion besteht im Aussprechen dessen, was ist, und beginnt damit.“ Was dieser Bericht alles nicht ausspricht, lässt leider nichts Gutes für Ihre Politik im Bereich der Ausbildung erahnen. Das ist keine gute Botschaft für unsere Jugend, aber für uns als Linke Anlass genug für den Appell, umso nachhaltiger für das Recht auf gute Ausbildung weiterhin zu streiten.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n1081,ralph-lenkert,\"Vielen Dank, Kollege Bareiß. - Ich möchte Sie fragen: Sie schlugen gerade vor, Solarenergie nicht in Deutschland, sondern in Spanien zu produzieren, weil es dort mehr Sonnenstunden gibt. Das stimmt. Aber ist Ihnen bekannt, dass die Entfernung zwischen Spanien und der Bundesrepublik Deutschland etwa 2 500 bis 3 000 Kilometer beträgt und dass pro 1 000 Kilometer mit Übertragungsverlusten in Höhe von 30 Prozent beim Strom zu rechnen ist? Ist Ihnen weiterhin bekannt, dass diese Übertragungsverluste mitnichten von den Solarstromproduzenten und der Großindustrie in Deutschland - diese sind schließlich von den Netzentgelten befreit -, sondern von den Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern getragen werden müssen, die an den Stromtrassen leben? Wenn der Stromverlust beim Transport von Spanien nach Deutschland drei mal 30 Prozent beträgt, die Kosten aber nur auf die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher umgelegt werden und neue Stromtrassen notwendig werden, ist es dann aus Ihrer Sicht wirtschaftlich noch sinnvoll, Solarstrom aus Spanien mithilfe der bestehenden Netze nach Deutschland zu transportieren?\"\n1109,gerhard-schick,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ihre Rede, Herr Steffel, war voller Appelle an Unternehmen, an Familien und an alle möglichen Leute. Der Teil, in dem Sie sich damit beschäftigt haben, was hier im Parlament zu tun wäre, ist in Ihrer Rede relativ kurz gekommen.\n\nWichtig ist aber, dass wir uns über folgende Frage verständigen: Warum müssen wir uns eigentlich in regelmäßigen Abständen mit dem Grauen Kapitalmarkt beschäftigen? Das ist offensichtlich der Fall, weil die letzten Runden der Beschäftigung des Hauses mit diesem Thema nicht ausreichend waren. Wir müssen deshalb die bestehenden Lücken und das, was konkret zu tun ist, ansprechen, statt auf allgemeine Appelle auszuweichen.\n\nEs gibt eindeutig Lücken bei der Aufsichtspraxis und der Rechtsdurchsetzung. Die BaFin hat bereits 2008/2009, als sie gegenüber Prokon das Erbringen eines unerlaubten Bankgeschäftes monierte, Handlungsspielräume gehabt. Sie hätte sie - so sagen mir Juristen - nutzen können, um die Geschäftstätigkeit zu untersagen. Stattdessen aber hat sie eine leichte Veränderung des Geschäftsmodells, und zwar in Form einer erlaubnisfreien Ausgestaltung, angeregt. Es heißt, das sei ständige Verwaltungspraxis. Mich würde an dieser Stelle schon interessieren, in wie vielen anderen Fällen die BaFin das Abtauchen in erlaubnisfreie Geschäfte angeregt hat. Ich meine, wir müssen der Aufsicht hier genauer auf die Finger schauen.\n\nDas gilt auch für die Frage, warum man eigentlich vonseiten der BaFin noch 2013 einen Prospekt von Prokon durchgehen ließ, in dem keine Angaben darüber zu finden waren, dass die Geschäftsführer dieses Unternehmens früher schon Ärger mit der Aufsicht hatten. Ein Prospekt ist doch genau dafür da, dass der Kunde sich ein Bild machen kann. Das kann er aber nur, wenn relevante Aspekte auch wirklich erwähnt werden.\n\nEs gibt auch Lücken, die in der Gesetzgebung selbst liegen. Wir müssen zum Beispiel kritisch auf das im Jahr 2012 in Kraft getretene Gesetz zur Novellierung des Finanzanlagenvermittler- und Vermögensanlagenrechts zurückblicken. Da gibt es einige Probleme. Im Antrag der Linken wird eine ganze Reihe von Maßnahmen vorgeschlagen, von denen ich zwei hervorheben möchte:\n\nZum einen wird ein Finanz-TÜV gefordert, der alle Finanzinstrumente daraufhin untersuchen soll, ob sie - ich zitiere - „gesamtwirtschaftlich keine unerwünschten Nebenwirkungen haben, ob das gesamt- und betriebswirtschaftliche Risiko beherrschbar ist und ob sie verbraucherfreundlich sind“. Das klingt schön. Ich denke aber, dass es nicht umsetzbar ist. Denn eine solche Wirtschaftlichkeitsprüfung hätte hohe Prognoserisiken. Außerdem könnte ein positives Urteil eines solchen -Finanz-TÜVs praktisch als eine Erfolgsgarantie missverstanden werden. Das halte ich, ganz zu schweigen von der Amtshaftung, die damit einhergehen würde, für problematisch. Es gehört auch nicht zur Aufgabe der BaFin, bei jeder Vermögensanlage eine Wirtschaftlichkeitsprüfung durchzuführen. Denn ob das Geschäftsmodell betriebswirtschaftlich sinnvoll ist oder nicht, müssen schon die Anleger selbst überprüfen.\n\nEs gibt aber etwas, das die Aufsicht tun muss. An dieser Stelle muss man genau unterscheiden. Ich nenne als Vergleich gern den Lebensmittelbereich, um das klarzumachen. Die eine Seite des Hauses sagt häufig, der Kunde solle bitte mündig sein. Im Antrag wird aber gefordert, dass die Aufsicht praktisch alles überprüfen soll. Hier ist es aber wie im Lebensmittelbereich: Es gibt Sachen, die der Kunde nicht erkennen kann. Die Salmonelle im Eierprodukt oder die Trichine im Fleisch kann der Kunde nicht sehen. Deswegen brauchen wir eine Lebensmittelaufsicht, die sicherstellt, dass hygienisch sauber gearbeitet wird und dass sich der Kunde, wenn Mängel nicht erkennbar sind, darauf verlassen kann, dass er korrekte Produkte bekommt. Es wird zwar nicht jedes einzelne Produkt von der Lebensmittelaufsicht am Verkaufsschalter gegengecheckt. Es gibt aber ausreichend Stichproben, die sicherstellen, dass das Hygieneniveau insgesamt stimmt.\n\nEin solches Verfahren ist genau das, was wir im Finanzaufsichtsbereich brauchen. Gerade das, was ein Kunde nicht sehen kann, muss die BaFin verstärkt in den Blick nehmen, zum Beispiel, wenn Interessenkonflikte bestehen, wenn Partner unter einer Decke stecken, sodass die Erträge nicht dem Kunden zugutekommen, oder wenn ein Geschäftsführer nicht verlässlich ist, weil er schon mehrfach Ärger mit der Aufsichtsbehörde hatte. Wir erwarten, dass es auch hier eine laufende Aufsicht gibt, die sich mit der materiellen Produktprüfung befasst. Wir brauchen aber keinen umfassenden Finanz-TÜV; denn ich glaube nicht, dass das leistbar ist.\n\nIch möchte auf einen weiteren Punkt eingehen. Wir brauchen dringend eine Korrektur in Bezug auf die Aufsicht über den freien Finanzbetrieb. Hier liegt ein Fehler der alten Gesetzgebung vor, der dringend korrigiert werden muss. Ich erinnere an eine Sachverständigenanhörung, in der ein Mitarbeiter der Bremer Gewerbebehörde deutlich gemacht hat, dass er als einzelner Mitarbeiter, der auch noch für alle möglichen anderen Bereiche zuständig ist, zum Beispiel für Eisdielen, für etwa 1 000 Finanzvermittler zuständig ist. So ist ein relevanter Schutz für Kundinnen und Kunden undenkbar. Deswegen bedarf es hier dringend einer Korrektur.\n\nDas muss die Finanzaufsicht machen.\n\nEinen letzten Satz zur Ankündigung des Justiz- und Verbraucherschutzministers, dass es einen stärkeren Anlegerschutz im Bereich des Grauen Kapitalmarktes geben soll. In den letzten vier Jahren hatten wir im Bereich Verbraucherschutz lediglich eine Ankündigungsministerin. Für die nächsten vier Jahre hoffen wir, dass es nicht bei Ankündigungen bleibt, sondern dass es zu relevanten Änderungen in der Praxis kommt. Die Erwartung ist da. Den Kollegen der SPD möchte ich sagen: Ich hoffe, dass manche Forderungen aus der letzten Legislaturperiode nicht plötzlich in irgendeiner Schublade verschwinden, sondern wirklich durchgesetzt werden.\n\nDanke.\"\n10390,peer-steinbruck,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Ich würde gerne einige Bemerkungen machen, die über den Text des Antrages von CDU/CSU und SPD hinausgehen. Dazu gehört am Beginn das Eingeständnis, dass die transatlantischen Beziehungen und namentlich auch die deutsch-amerikanischen Beziehungen nicht frei von mancher Befremdung und auch manchen Differenzen sind.\n\nAus europäischer und deutscher Sicht spielt dabei die Entwicklungsgeschichte des Irakkriegs mit den fatalen Folgen einer Destabilisierung der ganzen Nahostregion eine erhebliche Rolle. Die NSA-Überwachungsaktivitäten haben uns empört, jedenfalls so lange, bis der BND bei ganz ähnlichen Aktivitäten erwischt wurde.\n\nDie inzwischen sehr starke ideologische Aufladung des politischen Systems in den USA mit einer scharfen Polarisierung der Parteien im amerikanischen Kongress befremdet uns. Sie geschieht ausgerechnet in dem Land, das uns Deutschen die Demokratie, die Bedeutung von Checks and Balances und die zentrale Bedeutung, einen Kompromiss zu finden, maßgeblich beigebracht hat.\n\nWir beobachten zusammen mit vielen Amerikanern im derzeitigen Präsidentschaftsvorwahlkampf eine Art Verwahrlosung der politischen Sitten. Gelegentlich geht jedenfalls mir die Frage durch den Kopf, ob die viel zitierte Wertegemeinschaft auf Donald Trump noch zutrifft. Die gesellschaftliche und politische Vorbildrolle, die die USA über lange Nachkriegsjahrzehnte gerade in Deutschland gehabt hat, ist jedenfalls deutlich getrübt.\n\nFairerweise wird man allerdings auch sagen müssen, dass es aus US-amerikanischer Sicht ebenfalls einiges an Befremdung und Kritik gibt, was Europa und namentlich Deutschland angeht. Die Amerikaner können bis heute ein außen- und sicherheitspolitisch kohärentes Konzept Europas, in dem es selber Verantwortung für seine Sicherheit übernimmt, nicht erkennen. Auch wehren sie sich - teilweise nachvollziehbar, teilweise nicht - gegen erhebliche Vorwürfe, die ihnen gelegentlich wegen ihrer Polizistenrolle gemacht werden, die sie in vielen Regionen ausüben, während sie gleichzeitig für europäische Sicherheitsinteressen einspringen müssen.\n\nWir sind zwar gelegentlich befremdet und halten das enorme amerikanische militärische Potenzial und seinen Einsatz für suspekt, aber wenn dann die sechste Flotte der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika vor der östlichen Mittelmeerküste patrouilliert und Präsenz zeigt und Einsätze auch gegen den IS fliegt, ist uns dies ganz recht. Gelegentlich ist in dieser Debatte eine gewisse Heuchelei festzustellen.\n\nNamentlich auch die deutsche sicherheits- und bündnispolitische Zuverlässigkeit ist jedenfalls manchmal von den Amerikanern hinterfragt worden, nicht aktuell, aber in der Rückbetrachtung des letzten Jahrzehnts. Die Untätigkeit und Unwilligkeit der Europäer, die USA, die immerhin 70 Prozent des Verteidigungsbudgets der NATO finanzieren, gelegentlich auch zu entlasten, führt jedenfalls zu gewissen Missstimmungen in den USA. Das erstreckt sich aus der amerikanischen Sicht auch auf die Unfähigkeit der Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Währungsunion, den Euro zu stabilisieren und damit Ansteckungsgefahren für das globale Finanzsystem einzudämmen. Das führt zu dem nicht sehr schmeichelhaften politischen Attest, dass die Europäer selbst nicht in der Lage seien, sich zu organisieren.\n\nSo sind die transatlantischen Beziehungen Mitte des zweiten Jahrzehnts des 21. Jahrhunderts keineswegs frei von Belastungen und Vorhaltungen. In Deutschland ist deshalb in manchen Debatten - wir werden das zugeben müssen - auch gelegentlich ein Antiamerikanismus festzustellen. Umgekehrt ist in den USA ein zunehmendes Desinteresse an Europa festzustellen mit einer deutlicheren Hinwendung zum asiatisch-pazifischen Raum.\n\nAll dies vorausgeschickt und dessen unbenommen bleibt richtig, dass es keine andere so eng verbundene Staatengemeinschaft gibt wie die Europas und der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika,\n\nund zwar historisch, wirtschaftlich, zivilisatorisch, kulturell und mit den enormen Errungenschaften der beiden atlantischen Revolutionen von 1776 und 1789 mit den Prinzipien von Demokratie, Rechtsstaatlichkeit, Freiheit, Menschenrechten und Marktwirtschaft. Das hat der deutsche Historiker Heinrich August Winkler das normative Projekt des Westens genannt.\n\nJa, die Praxis mit ihren Unvollkommenheiten, mit ihren Defiziten, mit ihren Ungerechtigkeiten und auch gelegentlich mit den Verletzungen dieser Prinzipien entsprach und entspricht nicht durchweg diesem normativen Projekt. Aber die Grundrechtserklärung von Virginia 1776 und die französische Erklärung der Menschen- und Bürgerrechte von 1789 sind und bleiben einzigartige Errungenschaften, auf denen die Staatswesen in Europa und in den USA und unser gemeinsames Gesellschaftssystem des Westens nach wie vor aufbauen.\n\nDiese Errungenschaften finden sich nicht in einem eurasischen Modell des russischen Präsidenten Putin. Diese finden sich nicht in einem staatskapitalistischen System mit einem kommunistischen Überbau in China. Diese finden sich nicht in islamischen Staaten. Diese finden sich nicht in all den anderen Staaten autokratischer oder diktatorischer Provenienz, sondern diese finden sich hier.\n\nWer auch immer deshalb die Frage - auch aufgrund gelegentlich auftauchender Kritik - nach einem anderen Partner, nach einem anderen Alliierten, mit dem wir in Europa unsere Werte und beständigen Interessen verfolgen können, auch nur unterschwellig stellt, der muss passen. Wer auch immer die Frage hinzufügt, ob Europa eines Partners auf der anderen Seite des Atlantiks bedarf, dem antworte ich mit einem klaren Ja.\n\nIn einer gefährlichen Welt, in der einige Kräfte ihr Unwesen treiben, die nicht verhandlungsfähig und nicht verhandlungsbereit sind, mit den diversen Konflikten und auch neuen sogenannten hybriden Kriegen an der Peripherie Europas, bleibt eine transatlantische Rückversicherung für Europa von zentraler Bedeutung.\n\nEine solche Rückversicherung verlangt von uns Europäern und auch von uns Deutschen aber auch einen Beitrag, der sich gewiss auf diplomatische, humanitäre, wirtschaftliche und entwicklungspolitische Anstrengungen erstrecken muss, der sich aber eben auch auf die Abschreckungsfähigkeit der NATO und die Einsatz- und Bündnisfähigkeit der Bundeswehr erstrecken muss.\n\nDieser Satz ist in der deutschen Öffentlichkeit nicht sehr populär, aber er gehört in diese Debatte. Man kann nicht nach einer globalen Ordnung rufen, die uns möglichst viel Chaos, Anarchie und menschliches Leid erspart und dann der uns aus westlicher Sicht zwar nicht mehr singulären, aber jedenfalls immer noch dominant erscheinenden Ordnungsmacht, nämlich den USA, die Unterstützung verweigern. Dies ist widersprüchlich.\n\nAll denjenigen - möglicherweise auch in diesem Hause -, die bei diesem Satz zögern oder sogar Zweifel an seiner Richtigkeit erwecken, stelle ich die Frage: Welche andere Ordnungsmacht hätten Sie denn lieber?\n\nÜber die Sicherheitsaspekte, die ich bisher erwähnt habe, hinaus werden sich Europa und die USA mit massiven globalen Verschiebungen beschäftigen müssen. Der Anteil der Bevölkerung dieser beiden Kontinente bzw. Teilkontinente an der Weltbevölkerung ist in den letzten 40 Jahren auf 10 Prozent zurückgegangen, und er wird weiter schrumpfen. Der gemeinsame Anteil der USA und Europas am globalen Bruttonationaleinkommen ist in dieser Zeit von 60 Prozent auf 45 Prozent zurückgegangen, und er wird weiter abnehmen. Der Anteil dieser beiden Kontinente bzw. Teilkontinente am Welthandel ist von rund 30 Prozent auf inzwischen 20 Prozent zurückgegangen, und er wird weiter abnehmen. Das ist ein Indiz dafür, dass wir es mit globalen tektonischen Verschiebungen zu tun haben. Die Welt wird multipolarer mit dynamisch aufsteigenden Regionen. Darüber darf sich der atlantische Raum mit seinen politischen, gesellschaftlichen, wirtschaftlichen und auch technischen Errungenschaften nicht marginalisieren.\n\nSchließlich sind die globalen Herausforderungen wie der Klimawandel sowie die Bekämpfung von Terrorismus, organisierter Kriminalität, Pandemien und Steuerbetrug mit keiner anderen Macht zu lösen als mit den USA. Ohne das Gewicht der USA an der europäischen Seite werden diese Probleme nicht bewältigt werden können.\n\nAuf die aktuellen zentralen Probleme und kritischen Einwände zu dem Projekt, das uns am meisten in den transatlantischen Beziehungen beschäftigt - das ist das Freihandelsabkommen TTIP -, will ich nur wenige Worte verwenden, nicht aus Geringschätzung gegenüber den Problemen und kritischen Einwendungen, sondern aus Zeitgründen. Mir sind - genauso wie Ihnen und weiten Teilen der Bevölkerung - alle diese Probleme bewusst. Ich will diese gar nicht in Abrede stellen. Aber ich möchte auf drei Aspekte in der Debatte über dieses Freihandelsabkommen aufmerksam machen.\n\nErstens. Wer mit einem sehr skeptischen Blick auf die teilweise anarchische Entwicklung der Globalisierung schaut, wird für Leitplanken und Verkehrsregeln im weltweiten Handel eintreten und sich die Frage stellen müssen, ob in diesem Sinne TTIP nicht eine Chance ist.\n\nZweitens. Wenn sich die Europäer und die Amerikaner nicht auf ein solches Freihandelsabkommen einigen - das kann passieren -, dann stellt sich die Frage, wer stattdessen die Spielregeln global bestimmen wird,\n\nund das vor dem Hintergrund der Dynamik anderer Weltregionen, die mit Sicherheit zu Ergebnissen kämen, die europäischen Standards und europäischen Vorstellungen nicht entsprechen würden. Die augenblickliche Debatte, die wir zur Lage der europäischen und deutschen Stahlindustrie führen, ist ein leichtes Indiz dafür, was es bedeuten würde, wenn andere die Leitplanken und Verkehrsregeln im weltweiten Handel bestimmen würden.\n\nDrittens. Ist TTIP über seine ökonomische Bedeutung hinaus nicht auch von einem erheblichen strategischen Stellenwert im Verhältnis von Europa zu den USA, oder wie würden sich die transatlantischen Beziehungen in ihrer Qualität entwickeln, wenn TTIP scheitern sollte?\n\nDiese drei Fragen möchte ich über die ziemlich niveaulose Debatte über das Chlorhähnchen hinaus stärker öffentlich debattiert haben.\n\nMein Plädoyer für eine Revitalisierung der transatlantischen Beziehungen folgt keinem Verständnis eines subalternen oder bedenken- und kritiklosen Verhältnisses Europas zu den USA, sondern einer sehr nüchternen Sicht auf unsere beständigen europäischen und deutschen Interessen, getreu einem Zitat des ehemaligen britischen Premierministers Lord Palmerston aus dem 19. Jahrhundert, der einmal sinngemäß, bezogen auf England, gesagt hat, dass England weder ewige Freunde noch ewige Feinde, sondern nur beständige Interessen hat. Die beständigen Interessen Deutschlands und Europas gelten einem guten transatlantischen Verhältnis.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4165,petra-crone,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Gäste auf den Tribünen! Jetzt haben wir festgestellt, dass nicht nur die Opposition, sondern auch die Koalitionsfraktionen recht haben. Wunderbar. Es ist alles geregelt.\n\nIch habe mir Ihren Änderungswunschkatalog und Ihre Kritik zu dem heute eingebrachten Gesetzentwurf genau angehört, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Opposition. Einiges davon ist bedenkenswert - ohne Frage -, aber einiges - das muss ich schon sagen - ist reichlich überzogen. Wenn Sie ganz genau hinschauen, dann müssen Sie zugeben: Dieser Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur besseren Vereinbarkeit von Familie, Pflege und Beruf hat seinen Namen wirklich verdient.\n\nDas kann ich gleich auch noch belegen.\n\nDas ist keine Luftnummer. Wir haben vor drei Jahren das Gesetz über die Familienpflegezeit verabschiedet. Das allerdings war ein zahnloser Tiger: Es gab keinen Rechtsanspruch und stattdessen jede Menge Kleingedrucktes.\n\nWer die Not kennt, die Angehörige umtreibt, die dem Wunsch von pflegebedürftigen Angehörigen nachkommen und sie pflegen wollen, der muss zugeben, dass Ministerin Manuela Schwesig den vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf richtig angegangen ist, indem sie einen Rechtsanspruch und Lohnersatzleistungen während einer zehntägigen Auszeit verankert hat, zudem einen Kündigungsschutz und die Möglichkeit, die Arbeitszeit bis zu 24 Monate lang zu verringern. Das ist ein Riesenunterschied.\n\nEs ist kein Wunder, dass die Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer dieses Angebot vorher nicht angenommen haben. Jetzt geben wir ihnen ganz andere Möglichkeiten. Deswegen finde ich die Kritik überzogen.\n\nEndlich wird die wichtige Aufgabe, die Angehörige mit der Pflege übernehmen, erleichtert. Pflege ist eine Aufgabe, die unsere allergrößte Hochachtung verdient. Mit dem heute vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf schaffen wir endlich realistischere Bedingungen. Arbeitnehmer und Arbeitnehmerinnen müssen ihre finanziellen Einbußen nicht länger alleine tragen. Der aufgezwungene Abschluss einer privaten Versicherung wird zurückgenommen. Damit wird privates Engagement von Angehörigen nicht länger bestraft. Außerdem kommen wir dem Wunsch vieler Angehöriger entgegen, die gerne zu Hause pflegen möchten.\n\nAuch in meinem Wahlkreis ist es so - wir haben das Thema vorhin schon angesprochen -, dass viele Unternehmen schon einen Schritt weiter gegangen sind und betriebsinterne Vereinbarungen anbieten. Ich komme aus Südwestfalen, einer ganz starken Wirtschaftsregion. Für die mittelständischen Unternehmen dort ist das ein ganz wichtiges Thema, weil sie ihre Fachkräfte nicht verlieren wollen.\n\nDeswegen unterstützen sie Vorhaben für eine bessere Vereinbarkeit von Pflege und Beruf.\n\nSolche Regelungen gibt es aber auch überregional. Rewe und Real zum Beispiel bieten auch betriebsinterne Vereinbarungen an.\n\nLebensnah und realistisch ist es auch, entferntere Angehörige zum Empfang von Pflegegeld zu berechtigen. Immer öfter wohnen Kinder nicht mehr in der Nähe, sind Pflegebedürftige alleinstehend. Wir müssen verlässliche Strukturen fördern, damit Angehörige gepflegt werden können, auch unabhängig vom ehelichen Status. Ehrlich gesagt - da gebe ich meiner Kollegin Carola Reimann recht -: Vielleicht müssen wir den Personenkreis noch ausweiten.\n\nIch freue mich aber auch besonders über die Möglichkeit für Arbeitnehmer und Arbeitnehmerinnen, ihre Angehörigen in den letzten Wochen zu begleiten, auch wenn diese in Hospizen leben. Wir haben gestern eine Debatte darüber geführt und immer wieder betont, wie wichtig es ist, Angehörige auf dem letzten Weg zu begleiten und sie würdevoll sterben zu lassen.\n\nIch glaube, wir alle sind uns einig, dass die bisherigen Regelungen zur Vereinbarkeit von Pflege, Familie und Beruf nicht ausreichend waren. Mit Blick auf die Zukunft brauchen wir deutlich mehr Maßnahmen. Die Betroffenen brauchen flexible Lösungen für ihre individuellen pflegerischen und beruflichen Herausforderungen.\n\nLiebe Kollegen und Kolleginnen, das Thema Pflege ist durch die demografische Entwicklung in unserem Land eine riesengroße Herausforderung. Die Familienpflegezeit ist da ein Baustein eines ganzen Pakets. Wir brauchen und schaffen weitere Bausteine. Wir haben jetzt das Erste Pflegestärkungsgesetz vereinbart, mit dem die Pflegeversicherung und ihre Leistungen modernisiert werden. Wir werden die Pflegeausbildung reformieren und attraktiver machen. Durch die Zuschussva-riante bei der Förderung altersgerechten Umbaus werden die Menschen in ihrem Wunsch unterstützt, so lange wie möglich in den eigenen vier Wänden bleiben zu können.\n\nLetztendlich aber ist ein Familienpflegezeitgesetz nur so gut wie die Pflegestruktur in den Städten und Kommunen. Da brauchen wir eine gute, unabhängige Beratung, die betroffene Bürger aufsucht, haushaltsnahe Dienstleistungen sowie ambulante Betreuung und Pflege, auch Tagespflege. Wir benötigen weiter ein dichtes Netz von Ärzten, Anbietern der Wohlfahrtspflege, privaten und kommunalen Anbietern, Ehrenamt, Palliativmedizin und Hospizen. Eine gute Sozialplanung sollte unser Ziel sein.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n5969,harald-ebner,\"Das Mikro möchte nicht.\n\nHerr Kollege Stier, Sie hatten gesagt, Minister Remmel in Nordrhein-Westfalen wollte das mit der Brechstange machen und sei deshalb dann auch vom Gericht zurückgepfiffen worden. Meine Frage ist, ob Sie bereit wären, zur Kenntnis zu nehmen, dass das Gericht lediglich festgestellt hat, dass für diese Verfügung eine spezielle Ermächtigungsgrundlage gefehlt hat. Das Gericht hat also gar nicht festgestellt, dass insgesamt mit der Brechstange vorgegangen worden ist, sondern nur, dass eine spezielle Ermächtigungsgrundlage gefehlt hat, die das Bundesministerium für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft schaffen müsste. Damit ist der Ball wieder bei Ihnen. Wären Sie bereit, das zur Kenntnis zu nehmen?\"\n12515,eva-bulling-schroter,\"Herr Präsident! Frau Ministerin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Am letzten Freitag ist das Pariser Klimaschutzabkommen in Kraft getreten, in Rekordtempo. Am Montag hat in Marokko die UN-Klimakonferenz begonnen, um die Staatenwelt auf 2-Grad-Kurs zu bringen, um die Länder des Südens mit ausreichenden Mitteln zur Anpassung an die Folgen des Klimawandels auszustatten, damit sie die Kosten der Schäden begleichen können und eine Energiewende hinbekommen.\n\nUnd trotzdem ist diese Woche keine gute Woche für den Klimaschutz. Im Gegenteil: Die Große Koalition hat es nicht geschafft, sich auf eine Strategie für mehr Klimaschutz in Deutschland zu einigen. Der Klimaschutzplan 2050 des Umweltministeriums ist im Getriebe der Ministerien und des Kanzleramtes gnadenlos zerschreddert worden. Zum klimapolitisch notwendigen Kohleausstieg finden sich keine konkreten Termine und Maßnahmen mehr. Statt endlich ein Ausstiegsdatum zu nennen, wird mit einer Klimaschutzkommission ein neuer Arbeitskreis gegründet. Statt die Energiewende zu beschleunigen, einen Strukturwandel einzuleiten und mit sozialen Maßnahmen abzufedern, wird ein Mindestpreis für Emissionszertifikate des EU-CO2-Handels vorgeschlagen. Der Zertifikathandel funktioniert doch seit Jahren nicht, und auf EU-Ebene ist ein Mindestpreis leider nicht durchsetzbar. Ich sage: Das ist alles ein Spielen auf Zeit. Das ist Augenwischerei. Es ist keine Klimaschutzpolitik gemäß Pariser Abkommen.\n\nWarum musste die Klimaschutzforderung zum Ende von Neuzulassungen von Verbrennungsmotoren - darüber muss man doch einmal diskutieren - oder zur Finanzierung einer Elektrifizierung des Verkehrs über - ich zitiere - den „sukzessiven Abbau der bisherigen bestehenden Steuerprivilegien bei Diesel-Pkw“ herausgenommen werden? Warum finden sich keine konkreten Termine mehr für eine Gebäude- und Wärmewende, die den Namen auch verdient? Warum so wenig Substanzielles zu ökologischer Landwirtschaft und zu weniger Fleischkonsum? Das alles in einem Klimaschutzplan, der - daran möchte ich erinnern - ein Kuhhandel war, um ein echtes Klimaschutzgesetz zu verhindern, wie es die SPD im letzten Wahlkampf noch gefordert hat.\n\nJa, und dann am späten Dienstagabend das: Der zu einer Absichtserklärung verkommene Fata-Morgana-Klimaplan schafft es nicht einmal ins Kabinett. Die Klimakonferenz findet ohne deutschen Beitrag statt. „Klimapolitisches Horrorkabinett“ könnte man das nennen. Da fällt der Wirtschaftsminister Gabriel seiner eigenen Parteigenossin aus dem Umweltministerium in den Rücken, was er jetzt natürlich wieder abstreitet, und setzt den Klimaschutzplan endgültig in den Sand von Marrakesch.\n\nDass dann gestern auch noch der Klimawandelleugner Trump die US-Präsidentschaftswahlen gewonnen hat, hat mir als Klimapolitikerin, ehrlich gesagt, fast den Rest gegeben. Wer den Klimawandel zu einer Erfindung der Chinesen erklärt, eine Rettung der Kohle ankündigt und das Pariser Klimaschutzabkommen aufkündigen will, der muss sich in Zukunft einiges sagen lassen, und es ist die Frage, ob er noch enger Partner sein kann.\n\nUnd so liest sich der heute vorliegende Antrag der Koalition zur Klimakonferenz: Worthülsen, Wischiwaschi, keine konkreten Vorschläge. Ich sage es noch mal: Es geht um das Ziel, die weltweite Klimaerwärmung auf 2 Grad zu begrenzen; aber momentan steuern wir auf 4 Grad zu. Das ist unerträglich, und da müssen wir etwas tun.\n\nWir machen in unserem Antrag konkrete Vorschläge: Bis 2050 brauchen wir mindestens 95 Prozent weniger CO2-Emissionen. Dazu müssen alle Sektoren einen fairen Beitrag leisten. Für Weggucken und Wegducken ist keine Zeit mehr, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen. Wer es mit den Beschäftigten in den Industrien der Braunkohle und des Verkehrs ehrlich meint, der beginnt jetzt sofort, den Wandel einzuleiten. Alles andere ist Augenwischerei.\n\nEs bedeutet, dass man ein Wahlversprechen nicht einlöst und die Beschäftigten ins Messer laufen lässt. Sie warten auf Zukunftspläne und brauchen Sicherheit.\n\nWas wir jetzt brauchen, ist ein politischer Klimawandel. Diese Regierung ist zu echtem Klimaschutz anscheinend einfach nicht in der Lage. Das muss sich ändern, spätestens ab nächstem Jahr.\"\n3047,heike-hansel,\"Danke schön, Herr Präsident. - Herr Kollege Schockenhoff, Sie haben gerade von der „offenen militärischen Intervention Russlands in der Ukraine“ gesprochen. Ich höre das ständig. Das hat auch die Kanzlerin gestern gesagt. Ich frage mich: Wo sind die konkreten Beweise für diese Behauptungen? Wo sind Ihre Quellen? Wir haben in meinen Augen keine tatsächlichen Beweise für diese offene militärische Intervention.\n\n- Dann legen Sie sie mir bitte schön vor, und zwar autorisiert.\"\n7030,lars-castellucci,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Es ist daran erinnert worden, dass im April schätzungsweise 800 Menschen im Mittelmeer zu Tode gekommen sind. Es ist gesagt worden, dies sei der Fall gewesen, weil sie sich auf diesen Weg begeben hätten. Sie hätten sich auf den Weg über das Mittelmeer begeben müssen, und sie seien im Inneren dieses Bootes zusammengepfercht worden.\n\nZur Ehrlichkeit gehört aber auch: Sie sind umgekommen, weil Europa nicht geholfen hat.\n\nUnsere Verabredung in der Bundestagsdebatte war, dass wir das nicht noch einmal zulassen wollen. Jetzt ist die Frage: Haben wir heute eine Seenotrettung, die der Lage angemessen ist, ja oder nein? Ich weiß es nicht.\n\nIch sehe, dass sich viel bewegt hat. Ich sehe, dass viele europäische Staaten Schiffe entsenden.\n\nIch sehe, dass die italienische Regierung das Programm Mare Sicuro gestartet hat, das Rettungseinsätze bis vor die libysche Küste umfasst.\n\nEs ist nicht so, Frau Jelpke, dass Flüchtlinge nur im Notfall gerettet werden, sondern im Notfall müssen Flüchtlinge gerettet werden. Das bedeutet Seenotrettung. Ich weiß nicht, was Sie an dieser Stelle kritisieren wollten.\n\nZurzeit ist es so, dass die Dichte von Schiffen im Mittelmeer zugenommen hat und damit die Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass Flüchtlinge, die in Seenot geraten, rechtzeitig aufgefunden werden können, gestiegen ist.\n\nIch habe einige befremdliche Sitzungen hinter mir, in denen es um Listen ging, wie hoch die Zahlen bei Mare Nostrum waren und wie hoch sie jetzt sind und wie viele Fregatten und Helikopter im Einsatz waren. Ich muss Ihnen sagen: Das ist mir völlig egal.\n\nDenn die einzige politische Frage, die wir zu beantworten haben, ist: Ist das, was zurzeit vorhanden ist, der aktuellen humanitären Lage angemessen? Wir müssen uns dafür einsetzen, dass es angemessen ist.\n\nWir waren mit der Deutsch-Italienischen Parlamentariergruppe in Italien und haben dort mit Verantwortlichen gesprochen. Sie haben uns klar gesagt, im Moment sähen sie, dass die Ressourcen gestiegen sind und dass es viel europäische Unterstützung gibt. Das sind gute Nachrichten. Dazu muss man sagen: Diese Aufstockung erfolgte erst nach der Katastrophe. Jeder, der in der Kommunalpolitik ist, kennt das: Bevor ein Zebrastreifen aufgemalt wird, muss erst etwas passieren.\n\nDie Kapazitäten werden aber möglicherweise nicht reichen, wenn es noch einmal zu einer solchen Katastrophe wie im April kommt, bei der die Menschen gerettet und an Land transportiert werden müssen, und im gleichen Moment ein Signal vom anderen Ende des Mittelmeers gesendet wird. Das war auch eine Aussage, die wir von den Verantwortlichen auf den Schiffen gehört haben. Mit anderen Worten: Wir werden in den nächsten Wochen immer weiter und minutiös beobachten müssen, ob die Kapazitäten reichen. Wenn sie nicht reichen, muss dort auch mehr passieren; denn unsere erste Aufgabe ist, Leben zu schützen.\n\nWenn die Menschen an Land transportiert worden sind, dann stellt sich die Frage: Was passiert dann? Die Präfektin von Catania hat uns sehr eindrücklich gesagt: Vielen Dank, dass die Dänen, die Briten und die Deutschen Schiffe entsenden, aber sie bringen all diese Menschen zu uns nach Catania, einer Stadt mit 300 000 Einwohnern. - Deswegen kämpfen wir auch dafür, dass es einen europäischen Verteilungsschlüssel gibt.\n\nDas ist selbstverständlich. Es muss eine größere europäische Solidarität geben.\n\nMan kann sich in Europa nicht immer nur das heraussuchen, wovon man etwas hat und profitiert, sondern man muss auch die Lasten teilen. Es wäre sogar gut, wenn wir Flüchtlinge nicht als Lasten begreifen würden; denn die Bevölkerung unseres Kontinents altert und schrumpft. Wenn Menschen zu uns kommen, die einen großen Lebenshunger haben, die sich mit ihren Familien ein neues Leben aufbauen wollen und die Kompetenzen besitzen, die vielleicht hier oder dort gebraucht werden, dann ist das auch eine Chance für unseren Kontinent, und diese Chance müssen wir auch bestmöglich nutzen.\n\nEinen Punkt will ich noch verstärkt betonen, nachdem ich für den Rückweg von Italien diese Zeitschrift, den aktuellen L‘Espresso, mitgenommen habe.\n\n- Ja, so heißt sie. Das hat aber einen sehr ernsten Hintergrund, weil sie eine Fotoserie von Menschen enthält, die sich auf Flüchtlingsbooten auf dem Meer befinden. - Ich muss wirklich klar sagen: Ich bitte alle in diesem Haus darum, hier kein Aber oder irgendwelche anderen Relativierungen zu gebrauchen, wenn es um Schleuser und Schlepper geht, sondern mit uns gemeinsam dafür zu kämpfen, dass wir diesen Verbrechern das Handwerk legen. Das steht auf der Tagesordnung.\n\nSie können sich die Bilder in dieser Zeitschrift anschauen. Die Menschen haben nichts am Leibe, das Holzboot geht unter, und das Schlauchboot nebenan entfernt sich immer weiter. Es hatte nicht genügend Platz für alle Menschen und ist gar nicht mehr für alle erreichbar. - Die Menschen werden von schlimmsten Verbrechern ins Elend und in den Tod gestürzt. Denen müssen wir selbstverständlich das Handwerk legen. Das ist eine ganz zentrale Aufgabe,\n\nund hier darf es wirklich keine Relativierungen geben, zu denen es in diesem Hause immer wieder kommt.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n989,halina-wawzyniak,\"Herr Wendt, können und wollen Sie zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass es auf dem Sonderparteitag, auf dem es um die Umbenennung der SED in SED-PDS ging, eine Entschuldigung gegeben hat?\n\nKönnen und wollen Sie zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass es eine umfassende und lang andauernde Debatte zur Aufarbeitung der eigenen Vergangenheit gegeben hat bis hin zu Beschlüssen zur Offenlegung der eigenen Biografie?\n\nKönnen und wollen Sie zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass wir uns mit unserer Vergangenheit um unserer selbst willen auseinandergesetzt haben, während Sie Mitglieder der SED, Mitglieder der Blockparteien in Ihren Reihen haben und deren unrechtmäßig erworbenes Geld?\"\n15268,hans-peter-uhl,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Zu Recht hat die Europäische Union 2012 den Friedensnobelpreis erhalten. Die EU-Mitgliedstaaten tragen wesentlich zu den Friedens- und Stabilisierungsprozessen in verschiedenen Staaten der Welt bei. Auch der verstorbene Bundeskanzler Helmut Kohl hat immer wieder die Verantwortung des vereinigten Deutschlands für das friedliche Zusammenleben der Völker und die friedensstiftende Wirkung des europäischen Einigungsprozesses hervorgehoben. In der Tat verlangt die konfliktgeladene Realität von heute eine stärkere Zusammenarbeit der Mitgliedstaaten der EU. Kriege, Krisen und Konflikte, die heutzutage häufig hybrid sind und durch Cyberangriffe begleitet werden, haben die aktuelle Weltlage komplexer und gefährlicher gemacht als zu Zeiten des Kalten Krieges. Nicht nur in Syrien tobt ein Bürgerkrieg. Der ganze Nahe Osten ist ein Pulverfass, Stichwort „Katar“.\n\nDie amerikanische Administration wird heute von einem irrlichternden Präsidenten geführt, der von der Europäischen Union erkennbar nicht viel hält. Unter dem russischen Präsidenten Putin erleben wir die Rückkehr zu einer aggressiven und destabilisierenden Weltmachtpolitik Russlands. Die Maghreb-Staaten sind Transitländer für afrikanische Armutsmigration und befinden sich selbst in einem labilen Zustand. Schauen Sie auf Libyen, dann wissen Sie, wovon ich rede. In unmittelbarer Nachbarschaft zur Europäischen Union entwickelt sich die Türkei unter Erdogan weg vom Prinzip eines demokratischen Rechtsstaates. Das ist die Realität, in der wir heute leben.\n\nWie können wir auf diese sicherheitspolitischen Herausforderungen reagieren? Da unterscheiden wir uns, Frau Jelpke. Mit verstärkten zivilen und militärischen Mitteln müssen wir Krisenprävention, Krisenbewältigung und Konfliktnachsorge ermöglichen, mit beiden Mitteln zusammen.\n\nZugegeben, mit militärischen Interventionen allein werden wir Konflikte nicht lösen. Sie werden dadurch teilweise eher vergrößert. Das haben wir in Afghanistan, in Libyen und im Irak erfahren. Daher ist die derzeitige 2-Prozent-Diskussion über den isolierten Anteil von Rüstungsausgaben ausgesprochen töricht.\n\n- Ich freue mich, dass ich hier die Zustimmung von den Grünen bekomme. Es hat lange gedauert in meinem politischen Leben, bis ich die Zustimmung von dieser Seite bekomme.\n\nNation-Building, Friedenserhaltung und Konfliktverhütung, Armutsbekämpfung durch Berufsausbildung, umweltschützende, nachhaltige Entwicklung sind die wichtigsten Ziele eines umfassenden Ansatzes; um diesen müssen wir uns kümmern. Seit 25 Jahren dienen deutsche Polizisten dem Frieden und der Sicherheit im Rahmen verschiedener internationaler Missionen. Zusammen mit zivilgesellschaftlichen Akteuren und humanitären Missionen arbeiten sie friedensstiftend gemeinsam dort, wo Hilfe gebraucht wird, wo die Demokratisierungsprozesse und die Transformationsprozesse langsam und schmerzhaft und natürlich auch nicht immer erfolgreich verlaufen; das geben wir gerne zu.\n\nAlle Welt fordert die Bekämpfung von Fluchtursachen. Ich möchte deshalb betonen: Die internationalen Polizeimissionen sind ein Schlüssel zur Bekämpfung der Fluchtursachen.\n\nDiktatorische Regime, Armut, Minderheitenverfolgung, religiöse Konflikte, Korruption und organisierte Kriminalität treiben Millionen von Menschen aus Afrika weg. Sie verlassen ihre Heimat und sind auf der Suche nach einem besseren Leben in Europa. Diese Probleme sind der Grund zur Flucht, und sie können nur vor Ort erfolgreich bekämpft werden.\n\nHilfe zur Selbsthilfe ist also das Gebot der Stunde. Lassen Sie es mich mit dem chinesischen Philosophen Konfuzius sagen:\n\nGib einem Mann einen Fisch, und du ernährst ihn für einen Tag. Lehre einen Mann, zu fischen, und du ernährst ihn für das ganze Leben.\n\nDarum geht es.\n\nDas Gewaltmonopol des Staates, ausgeübt durch die Polizei - durch wen sonst? -, verhindert Selbstjustiz, garantiert Sicherheit und Ordnung. Im Rechtsstaat unterliegt jeder staatliche Zwang dem Verhältnismäßigkeitsprinzip. Dieses praktizierend gewinnt die Polizei das Vertrauen der Bürger, und der Polizist wird zum Freund und Helfer.\n\nIn vielen Staaten der Welt - das gebe ich zu - finden wir ein völlig anderes Polizeibild. Wir finden Polizisten, die eher Feind als Freund sind. Dort gibt es eine Polizei, die Teil der organisierten Kriminalität ist. Dort wird die Staatsgewalt zum eigenen Vorteil missbraucht. Das alles gibt es auf der Welt. Unser gesamtes Staatsverständnis wird durch die ersten beiden Sätze unseres Grundgesetzes auf wunderbare Weise postuliert:\n\nDie Würde des Menschen ist unantastbar. Sie zu achten und zu schützen ist Verpflichtung aller staatlichen Gewalt.\n\nBesser kann man unser Verständnis vom Gewaltmonopol des Staates, unser Staatsverständnis nicht beschreiben. Dieses Staatsverständnis ist der Exportartikel Deutschlands. Dieses Staatsverständnis in die ganze Welt zu tragen, ist die Aufgabe der Polizeimissionen. Dafür wollen wir Ihnen ganz herzlich danksagen.\n\nEs ist richtig, dass auch die internationalen Militärmissionen als ein Friedensinstrument hervorgehoben werden. Ebenso wichtig sind aber auch internationale Polizeimissionen. Wie zwei Seiten einer Medaille sind sie Teil eines komplexen, multidimensionalen Ansatzes zur Sicherung von Frieden und Stabilität in der Welt.\n\nAuch der Deutsche Bundestag sollte sich - ich bin für die heutige Debatte dankbar - mit diesen Einsätzen viel häufiger befassen.\n\nWir befassen uns mit jedem Militäreinsatz. Auch wenn es dabei nur um ein Dutzend Soldaten geht, wird namentliche Abstimmung gefordert. Aber für diese Polizeieinsätze, die genauso wichtig sind, haben wir im Parlament viel zu wenig Zeit.\n\nMit dem Dank an die Polizisten möchte ich meine Rede schließen. Es ist meine letzte Rede, die ich im Bundestag halte. Ich wünsche Ihnen allen, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Gesundheit. Gehen Sie entspannt in den bevorstehenden Wahlkampf.\n\nZwar sollten wir Politiker möglichst viele Menschen auf unserem Weg mitnehmen. Andererseits erwarten diese Menschen von uns politische Lösungen und klare Standpunkte, zu denen wir stehen, auch wenn wir wissen, dass wir nicht 100 Prozent der Wähler damit hinter uns bringen. Aber es ist schön, dass man - das ist das Beruhigende an der Demokratie - keine 100-prozentige Zustimmung der Wähler braucht; es reicht die einfache Mehrheit, um eine Regierung bilden zu können. Das wünsche ich insbesondere meiner Fraktion, weniger den anderen Kollegen.\n\nMir ist es immer wieder, über 40 Jahre lang, gelungen, die Mehrheit der Wähler zu überzeugen. Dafür möchte ich zum Schluss meiner Rede meinen Wählern von dieser Stelle ganz herzlich danken.\"\n7165,hans-christian-strobele,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Diese Diskussion leidet unter einem grundlegenden Mangel: Sie ziehen sich immer auf die Rechtsprechung zurück. Sie haben kein Wort dazu gesagt, wie lange es braucht, bis man recht bekommt. Bei dem Beispiel, das Sie genannt haben, hat die Frau jahrelang gewartet und gelitten. Ihre Existenz wurde völlig kaputt-gemacht, bis sie vor dem Europäischen Gerichtshof letztendlich recht bekommen hat.\n\nWir sind der Gesetzgeber und dürfen uns nicht hinter der Rechtsprechung verstecken.\n\nEs ist Aufgabe des Gesetzgebers, solche Fälle zu regeln. Sie drücken sich, weil Sie sich nicht trauen und sich mit bestimmten Teilen der Industrie und der Unternehmen nicht anlegen wollen.\n\nDeshalb verweigern Sie sich. Diese Verweigerung ist nicht in Ordnung. Sie sollten Ihren Standpunkt ändern.\n\nDer SPD sage ich: Man muss offenbar warten, bis Sie wieder in der Opposition sind. In der letzten Legislaturperiode waren Sie nämlich durchaus auch für eine solche Gesetzgebung.\n\nJetzt können Sie nicht. Sie trauen sich nicht oder wollen nicht. Wenn Sie sagen, dass Ihnen das, was wir vorgelegt haben, nicht reicht: Wir sind zu jedem Gespräch bereit. Es hat aber keinen einzigen Ansatz eines Änderungsantrages oder Ähnliches gegeben, sondern Sie verweigern sich aus Koalitionsräson und kommen Ihren eigenen Vorstellungen, die Sie hier vorhin ja auch angesprochen haben, nicht nach, sondern verraten diese damit. So kann man mit dem Problem nicht umgehen.\n\nIch will jetzt gar nicht über die Paragrafen reden, die im Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch und im Bundesbeamtengesetz geändert werden sollten - darüber ist immer wieder einmal, auch in der Anhörung, gesprochen worden -, sondern ich rede jetzt über einen Teil, zu dem Sie jede Diskussion verweigern. Ich habe versucht, im Rechtsausschuss darüber zu diskutieren. Ich habe die Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Koalition gebeten, sich doch wenigstens kurz dazu zu äußern, was sie dagegen haben.\n\nDa kam leider null und nichts. Sie verweigern die Debatte über ein Gesetzesvorhaben zu einem Thema, das in der Öffentlichkeit breit diskutiert wird.\n\nNicht nur Transparency International, sondern auch die Mitglieder des Rechtsausschusses und des Menschenrechtsausschusses des Europarates fordern von den Mitgliedsländern, eine gesetzliche Regelung zu schaffen; Sie aber hören überhaupt nicht zu. Sie sitzen hier im Bundestag, in dem Sie alles Mögliche regeln. Aber über das, was auch die Netz-Community immer wieder anmahnt: „Wann kommt ein Whistleblower-Schutzgesetz?“, reden Sie nicht einmal, geschweige denn, dass Sie etwas vorlegen oder uns helfen, einen vernünftigen Entwurf vorzulegen.\n\nDeshalb haben wir jetzt einen Gesetzentwurf zu einem Whistleblower-Schutzgesetz vorgelegt. Dieses Gesetz ist dringend erforderlich, und zwar auch in Bezug auf das Strafrecht. Auf der Grundlage des Strafrechts wird auch Edward Snowden wegen des Verrats von Staats- und Dienstgeheimnissen verfolgt. Es muss eine Möglichkeit geben, bei der Abwägung höhere Interessen zu berücksichtigen, nämlich die Schutzgüter des Grundgesetzes, die Interessen der Gesamtgesellschaft, schwere Verbrechen und Straftaten zu verhindern, sodass sich Menschen, die aus solchen Gründen handeln und denen das zugerechnet werden muss, nicht strafbar machen.\n\nWir schlagen vor, dass in diesen Fällen ein Rechtfertigungsgrund vorliegt bzw. dass sie befugt handeln.\n\nWir können über jede Einzelheit reden. Aber dringend erforderlich ist die Diskussion in Deutschland und im Bundestag dazu. Der Gesetzgeber muss hier handeln.\n\nAls kleines Aperçu am Rande weise ich Sie auf den § 97 d StGB hin.\n\nDer Inhalt dieses Paragrafen stand nach Verabschiedung durch den Deutschen Bundestag im Jahr 1951 schon einmal im Gesetz, also unmittelbar nach dem Erlass des Grundgesetzes. Dieser Paragraf im Strafgesetzbuch erlaubte es Abgeordneten, im Plenum oder in Ausschüssen Geheimnisse, die die freiheitliche demokratische Ordnung infrage stellten, benennen zu dürfen. Dieser Paragraf wurde 1968 wieder aus dem Strafgesetzbuch gestrichen. Wir sind dafür, dass dieser Paragraf wieder eingeführt wird. Er könnte gerade in den Zeiten der NSA-Affäre und des Whistleblowers Edward Snowden heilsam sein.\n\nLieber Kollege, warum reden Sie hier nicht darüber - Sie haben vorhin eine Rede gehalten und es mit keinem Wort erwähnt -, warum verweigern Sie die Diskussion darüber in den Ausschüssen? Warum nur in einem Vieraugengespräch?\n\nWas steckt eigentlich dahinter?\n\nWir werden von der Gesellschaft aufgefordert, zu handeln, und Sie beraten nicht einmal. Ich bin Mitglied im Rechtsausschuss. Ich weiß nicht, ob darüber in anderen Ausschüssen geredet worden ist.\n\nAber gerade zu diesen entscheidenden Bestimmungen im Strafgesetzbuch muss doch wenigstens eine Diskussion stattfinden. Sie können doch sagen, warum Sie dagegen sind und wo Sie Handlungsbedarf sehen oder auch nicht. Aber überhaupt nichts zu sagen, mit der Folge, dass in der Gesellschaft der Eindruck entsteht, wir würden die Probleme gar nicht wahrnehmen, das werfe ich Ihnen vor.\"\n6289,mahmut-ozdemir,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich kann nur mutmaßen, was der Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Verwirklichung des Geburtsrechts im Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht zu diesem Zeitpunkt bewirken soll. Die Rezitation des SPD-Regierungsprogramms benötige ich als Sozialdemokrat jedenfalls nicht. Dennoch freue ich mich natürlich jederzeit über die vielfältigen Anträge und Gesetzentwürfe vonseiten der Opposition, die eine Ableitung des sozialdemokratischen Regierungsprogramms darstellen.\n\nIch frage mich jedoch, was Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen vom Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, heute von sozialdemokratischen Rednern erwarten. Erwarten Sie wieder eine solche Phrase wie „Der Gesetzentwurf stößt bei uns auf große Sympathie, aber im Koalitionsvertrag ist das leider nicht geregelt“? Erwarten Sie gar in dieser Wahlperiode von uns eine Zustimmung zu Ihrem Gesetzentwurf?\n\nSo langsam wird es doch langweilig und ungebührlich.\n\nSind wir Sozialdemokraten etwa in Hessen politisch unterbelichtet, wenn die hessischen SPD-Landtagskollegen denselben Antrag, den Sie hier stellen, nicht als Gesetzentwurf im dortigen Landtag einbringen?\n\nUnd sind sie politisch so unterbelichtet, dass sie die folgende Formulierung im schwarz-grünen Koalitionsvertrag nicht einzuschätzen in der Lage sind? Ich zitiere aus dem schwarz-grünen Koalitionsvertrag:\n\nAuf bundespolitischer Ebene werden wir die Aufhebung der Optionspflicht und die Akzeptanz von Mehrstaatigkeit im Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht für in Deutschland geborene und aufgewachsene Kinder ausländischer Eltern unterstützen.\n\nDas steht im Koalitionsvertrag in Hessen, den auch die Grünen mit unterzeichnet haben.\n\nSolche Spielchen gibt es mit uns nicht. Deshalb erwarte ich in Bezug auf die Kompromisse, die wir als große Volksparteien im Koalitionsvertrag gefunden haben, auch keine Verschonung durch die Opposition.\n\nIch erwarte jedoch, dass Sie nicht die Mechanismen unserer Demokratie für kurzfristige Presseerfolge instrumentalisieren und gleichzeitig so tun, als würden durch diese Mechanismen der Demokratie Ideale verkauft. Je mehr wir, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, den Kompromiss als Ausverkauf von Aufrichtigkeit in der Parteiendemokratie darstellen, desto größer wird die Zahl derer, die glauben, dass durch Wahlen nichts mehr bewegt werden kann. Zwei gewichtige Ideale von uns Sozialdemokraten sind seit mehr als zwei Jahrzehnten die Verwirklichung des Geburtsrechtes im Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht ebenso wie das Bekenntnis zur Mehrstaatigkeit. Wir liefern uns diesbezüglich vielleicht viele Wortgefechte im Plenum.\n\nIch würde gerne im Zusammenhang vortragen.\n\nAber draußen bei den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern bringen Sie, werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Grünen, nicht nur die SPD in Misskredit, sondern auch den politischen Prozess als solchen, indem Sie das Vorurteil bedienen, dass nach der Wahl Versprechen nichts mehr wert seien. Besonders verwerflich ist es hierbei, einen politischen Weggefährten in diese Situation zu bringen, der 1999 das Geburtsrecht im Zusammenhang mit der Mehrstaatigkeit erstmals gesetzlich billigte und damit dann teilweise das Abstammungsprinzip verdrängte. Das Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht eignet sich deshalb nicht unbedingt für solche Spielchen. Das Spiel mit der Identität hier geborener junger Menschen, deren Eltern ausländische Staatsangehörige sind, aber auch das Spiel mit der Lebensleistung derer, die als sogenannte Gastarbeiter kamen und dem Wirtschaftswunder mit Geistes- und Körperkraft Auftrieb verschafften, eignen sich nicht für die politische Bühne,\n\nerst recht nicht, wenn die letztere Gruppe bei völlig überlasteten Ausländerbehörden im hohen Alter auf die Abwicklung ihrer Anträge warten muss. Das Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht ist die notarielle staatliche Beurkundung eines Bandes, des Bandes, das mich mit meiner Geburt im Krankenhaus Duisburg-Homberg vor 27 Jahren mit diesem Land, meiner Heimat, verbunden hat, eine Verbindung, die stärker ist als jedes Dokument. Gerade deshalb war die Zeit des Wartens auf diese Beurkundung für mich und viele andere bis zur richtigen politischen Mehrheit in diesem Land erträglich.\n\nWir haben als Sozialdemokraten den Weg gewählt, lieber ein kleines Licht anzuzünden, als die Dunkelheit zu verfluchen.\n\nWir erwarten nicht mehr, dass hier geborene junge Menschen mit einer Entscheidung, spätestens mit dem 23. Lebensjahr, den Beweis antreten, ob sie der Beurkundung der Staatsangehörigkeit wert sind. Damit tragen wir ihrer Identität, ihrer Lebenssituation und ihrem inneren Frieden Rechnung. Dies tun wir mit einem Koalitionspartner, der auf Landesebene in Hessen mit einer Kampagne gegen den Doppelpass das Ende einer rot-grünen Bundesratsmehrheit einläutete.\n\nIm Übrigen ist die reine Debatte um das Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht auch nicht geeignet, die Lebensrealitäten der betroffenen Menschen tatsächlich abzubilden. Frau Staatsministerin Özoğuz machte bereits in mehreren Reden darauf aufmerksam,\n\nwie dringend notwendig es ist, die Realitäten im Bildungsbereich und der Arbeitswelt im Hinblick auf die Chancengleichheit auf die politische Agenda zu setzen.\n\nIm Grundgesetz heißt es in Artikel 116:\n\nDeutscher im Sinne dieses Grundgesetzes ist vorbehaltlich anderweitiger gesetzlicher Regelung, wer die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit besitzt.\n\nDieser Status ist wichtig für die Berechtigung spezifischer deutscher Grundrechte. Dieses Statut ist mittlerweile im Hinblick auf die Grundrechtsberechtigung von Unionsbürgern aufgrund eines Diskriminierungsverbotes europarechtlich überlagert und dem faktischen Wandel unterworfen worden. Selbst ein aktives und passives Kommunalwahlrecht für Unionsbürger wird davon getragen. Ich möchte darauf hinaus, dass die Formulierung im Grundgesetz bewusst auf eine einfache gesetzliche Definition durch den Bundestag setzt, damit wir auf -gesellschaftlichen Wandel reagieren können. Der gesellschaftliche Wandel ist im Bundestag insoweit angekommen, als die Optionspflicht durch die aktuelle Bundes-regierung aufgehoben wurde als Beginn - ich betone: als Beginn - exakt des Wandels, den Sie - genauso wie wir - vollumfänglich im Gesetzentwurf zu beschreiben versuchen. Für Ihren Gesetzentwurf in der vorliegenden Form besteht aber derzeit leider keine politische Mehrheit in diesem Hause,\n\naber eben nicht aus Gründen mangelnder Ideale, sondern aus Gründen zwingender demokratischer Mechanismen. Wenn wir hier im Deutschen Bundestag über Gesetze oder deren Änderung reden, dann denken wir an die Staatsgewalt, die auf unserem Staatsgebiet die rechtsstaatliche Ordnung durchsetzt. Den Begriff des Staatsvolkes behandeln wir hierbei jedoch recht stiefmütterlich, obwohl uns das Grundgesetz neben der Möglichkeit, das Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht sukzessive anzupassen, zumindest die Hausaufgabe aufgibt, gesellschaftliche Realitäten abzubilden. Die SPD-Fraktion ist allzeit bereit, sich diesen Hausaufgaben in aller gebotenen Vernunft und Ernsthaftigkeit zu stellen. Zugleich - hier besteht kein Widerspruch, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen - gelten unser Wort und das Versprechen aus dem bestehenden Koalitionsvertrag, jedenfalls bis 2017. Denn schon bei Immanuel Kant galt, dass der öffentliche Gebrauch von Vernunft durch die Übernahme eines Amtes eingeschränkt wird.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit und Glück auf!\"\n13326,jorn-wunderlich,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Herr Staatsminister, Sie sagten gerade - genau das ist der Kern des Ganzen -: „Lassen Sie uns einfach im Gespräch bleiben.“ Die Frage bezog sich ja auf konkrete Maßnahmen. Unter konkreten Maßnahmen stelle ich mir vor: Es werden Winterdecken geliefert. Es werden Heizgebläse geliefert, solange noch keine winterfesten Unterkünfte da sind.\n\nSie sagen jetzt: Wir haben angeboten, das THW zu schicken. - Wem ist das konkret angeboten worden? Wer hat es abgelehnt, oder wer hat es angenommen? Was wird sonst noch konkret in dieser Situation, wo die Menschen noch nicht erfroren sind, von der Bundesrepublik geleistet? Konkret, nicht abstrakt!\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Haben Sie Kenntnis davon, auf welcher rechtlichen Grundlage die DITIB-Imame hier in Deutschland tätig sind oder waren, und gab es dafür vielleicht sogar ein bilaterales Abkommen?\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Um diese religiöse Selbstbestimmung und um das Recht, sich als Religionsgemeinschaft anerkennen zu lassen, geht es.\n\nNach meinem Kenntnisstand sind im Bundesvorstand von DITIB auch türkische Staatsbedienstete, und der Präsident ist wohl regelmäßig auch Botschaftsrat in der türkischen Botschaft. Haben Sie auch aufgrund dieses engen staatlichen Zusammenhangs Kenntnis darüber, wie viele DITIB-Bundesvorstandsmitglieder Diplomatenpässe haben?\n\nHaben Sie daneben Kenntnis darüber - das klingt jetzt vielleicht ein bisschen albern -, welche Farbe die Pässe dieser Bundesvorstandsmitglieder haben? Ich frage das deshalb, weil unsere Dienstpässe knallrot sind, während die Pässe der türkischen Staatsbediensteten grün sind. Durch die Farbe könnte man ein Indiz dafür haben, dass es Staatsbedienstete und nicht Religionsvertreter sind.\"\n1641,ursula-leyen,\"Vielen Dank. - Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte jetzt den Haushalt 2014 des Verteidigungsministeriums einbringen.\n\nAusgangspunkt aller Überlegungen zur Finanzausstattung der Bundeswehr bildet die Neuausrichtung. Wir befinden uns jetzt im dritten Jahr der Neuausrichtung. Mir ist wichtig, in Erinnerung zu rufen, was die drei Grundziele der Neuausrichtung waren, nämlich eine Bundeswehr, die sicherheitspolitischen Herausforderungen gewachsen ist, eine Bundeswehr, die demografiefest ist, und eine Bundeswehr, die nachhaltig finanziert ist. Dafür steht auch dieser Haushalt. Er fordert uns.\n\nIch möchte zunächst einmal auf das Thema der sicherheitspolitischen Herausforderungen eingehen, denen die Bundeswehr und die Ausstattung der Bundeswehr gewachsen sein müssen.\n\nWir hatten Anfang dieses Jahres eine intensive Debatte darüber, wie Deutschland seine Verantwortung in den Bündnissen wahrnimmt. Ich bin und bleibe überzeugt davon, dass Indifferenz keine Option für uns ist. Das bedeutet aber nicht automatisch, wie manch einer insinuiert, dass es um mehr Auslandseinsätze geht. Das kann es bedeuten; das muss es aber nicht bedeuten. Es bedeutet vor allem eine klare Positionierung innerhalb unserer Bündnisse, und zwar dadurch, dass wir klarstellen, ob wir bei einem Einsatz dabei sind und wie wir uns ihn vorstellen. Das sind wir nicht nur unseren eigenen Interessen schuldig, das sind wir nicht nur unseren Verbündeten schuldig, sondern das sind wir auch, wie ich finde, der Bevölkerung schuldig. Denn es ist wichtig, über die Art und Weise, wie die Bundeswehr eingesetzt wird und wie sie arbeitet, offen zu sprechen.\n\nIch finde es auch wichtig, über die Breite des Auftrags, des Tätigkeitsprofils und der Leistungstiefe der Bundeswehr zu reden. Wir sind zurzeit in rund 15 Auslandseinsätzen rund um den Globus mit der Bundeswehr vertreten. Aber nur drei davon sind Kampfeinsätze: der Einsatz in Afghanistan, die Piratenbekämpfung am Horn von Afrika und der Einsatz im Kosovo. Bei allen anderen Einsätzen geht es um Ausbildung, Beratung, Unterstützung oder den Schutz der Bevölkerung.\n\nWir sollten auch darüber sprechen, was die Bundeswehr in der Breite tut: Soldatinnen und Soldaten bauen Feldkrankenhäuser auf. In Afghanistan, im Kosovo und in Mali versorgt unsere Sanität die anderen Partnernationen medizinisch mit. In Afghanistan bildet die Bundeswehr auch Fluglotsen und die Feuerwehr aus. Wir stellen Personal an der Pionierschule in Masar-i-Scharif und an der Logistikschule in Kabul. In Mali sind deutsche Soldatinnen und Soldaten in der Fährausbildung am Niger im Einsatz, im türkischen Trabzon im Bereich der Logistik. All das leisten unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten. Darüber sollten wir mehr sprechen, weil wir das wertschätzen.\n\nDer Entwurf des Verteidigungshaushalts für 2014 entspricht diesen Anforderungen. Der Haushalt umfasst rund 32,8 Milliarden Euro. Die Verteidigungsausgaben sinken damit gegenüber dem Haushaltssoll von 2013 nominal um rund 422 Millionen Euro. Diese Senkung entsteht zum einen durch unseren solidarischen Anteil an der Gegenfinanzierung des Betreuungsgeldes in Höhe von 147,3 Millionen Euro. Zum anderen konnten wir den Haushaltsansatz reduzieren, weil der Personalumfang der Bundeswehr, wie es mit der Neuausrichtung beschlossen worden ist, weiter abgenommen hat. Wir haben auch innerhalb des Plafonds einige Akzente anders gesetzt, zum Beispiel im Bereich Betrieb, in dem die Position Materialerhalt aufwächst. Das gilt sowohl für das wartungsintensive Gerät als auch für die neuen, technologisch hochkomplexen Systeme.\n\nDieses Thema leitet den Blick auf den zweiten großen Komplex, mit dem wir uns im Bündnis beschäftigen, nämlich auf die aktuelle Diskussion in der NATO. Auch wenn die Lösung des Konflikts um die Ukraine und die Annexion der Krim einzig und allein auf diplomatischem Wege gefunden werden kann, ist es wichtig, dass die NATO-Mitglieder im Osten Sicherheit haben.\n\nDeshalb sind die Sorgen der baltischen NATO-Mitglieder und des NATO-Mitglieds Polen, die aus historischer Erfahrung erwachsen, auch unsere Sorgen. Gerade wir Deutschen haben über Jahrzehnte die Erfahrung gemacht, was für ein hoher Wert es ist, wenn man ein verlässliches Bündnis um sich herum weiß und darin fest verankert ist. Wir wissen, dass diese Sicherheit und dieser Rückhalt erst den Gesprächsraum öffnen, den man braucht, um aus einer Position der Sicherheit heraus wieder Dialogbereitschaft zu zeigen.\n\nDeshalb haben die NATO-Außenminister mit ihren Beschlüssen in der vergangenen Woche kluge Zeichen der Solidarität mit unseren östlichen Partnern gesetzt. Sie haben die Zeichen gesetzt, dass die NATO ihre Routineaktivitäten auf dem Gebiet der östlichen Mitgliedstaaten verdichtet - auch Deutschland ist gefragt, seinen Beitrag zu leisten - und parallel dazu den Gesprächsraum mit Russland offenhalten wird. Diese Dualität, meine Damen und Herren, ist der richtige Weg, um mit dieser Krise umzugehen.\n\nAuf einem weiteren Blatt steht die Frage, wie sich die NATO auf mittlere Sicht organisiert. Die NATO wird im Lichte der Krim-Krise, im Lichte der Krise um die Ukraine natürlich intensiv darüber diskutieren, ob und in welchem Maße sie sich auf das veränderte Verhalten Russlands einstellen wird. Das wird sicherlich auch die Diskussion im Bündnis mit Blick auf den NATO-Gipfel im Sommer bestimmen.\n\nFür uns ist klar, dass wir in Deutschland mit der Bundeswehr, gerade mit der Neuausrichtung, gut aufgestellt sind. Der höchste Anteil dessen, was wir in der Bundeswehr vorhalten, ist für die Landes- und Bündnisverteidigung. Wir gehören innerhalb der Europäischen Union und der NATO zu den größten Truppenstellern. Das heißt, wir haben vorgesorgt.\n\nDas alles ist nachhaltig finanziert. Das zeigt dieser Haushalt. Das zeigt auch der durch den Finanzminister Wolfgang Schäuble gestern eingebrachte Gesamthaushalt ohne strukturelle Neuverschuldung. Das bedeutet, das zweite Ziel der Neuausrichtung, die nachhaltige -Finanzierung, ist durch diesen Haushalt auch gesichert.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die verteidigungsinvestiven Ausgaben werden gegenüber dem Vorjahr um rund 7 Prozent abgesenkt. Sie wissen, dass es 2013 Minderausgaben gab: wegen Verzögerungen, Minderleistungen, Stückzahlreduzierungen. Diesen verteidigungsinvestiven Ausgaben oder - so muss ich besser sagen - Ansätzen auf dem Papier stehen reale Projekte gegenüber, die aus ganz unterschiedlichen Gründen erst verspätet vollzogen werden; einige habe ich eben genannt.\n\nDa absehbar ab dem Haushalt 2016, wenn die Projekte realisiert werden, Nachholeffekte wirksam werden, haben wir gemeinsam mit dem Bundesministerium der Finanzen durch Absenkung der Verstärkungsmöglichkeiten für das zivile Überhangpersonal - das ist im Einzelplan 60 enthalten - um 500 Millionen Euro in 2014 und um 300 Millionen Euro in 2015 erreicht, dass diese Nachholeffekte finanzplanerisch aufgefangen werden. Das bedeutet, im Entwurf des 48. Finanzplans ist ein entsprechender Aufwuchs des Einzelplans 14 um die eben genannten 800 Millionen Euro ab 2016 vorgesehen. Somit wird eine Plafondverschiebung auf der Zeitachse realisiert.\n\nDas bedeutet - um das Komplexe, was ich eben gesagt habe, etwas einfacher auszudrücken -: Wir sparen sozusagen heute für morgen aufgrund der einmaligen Verzögerungen, die gestern stattgefunden haben.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, das dritte Ziel der Neuausrichtung ist Demografiefestigkeit. Ein Drittel des Verteidigungshaushalts, nämlich 10,6 Milliarden Euro, sind für Personalausgaben veranschlagt. Dieser Block hängt von ganz vielen Faktoren ab. Ich möchte auf eine besondere Entwicklung eingehen.\n\nEs gibt seit 2003 beim zivilen Personal innerhalb der Bundeswehr einen Einstellungsstopp mit dem Ergebnis, dass beim zivilen Personal sehr viele ältere Beschäftigte immer weniger jungen Beschäftigten gegenüberstehen. Das ist klar: Wenn wir seit zehn Jahren nicht mehr eingestellt haben, dann tut sich mit dem Ausscheiden der Älteren unweigerlich ein ernst zu nehmender Engpass auf. Wenn die Älteren ausscheiden und in den Ruhestand gehen, bedeutet das, dass Fachwissen verloren geht, dass Kompetenzen verloren gehen, ohne dass Jüngere mit modernisiertem Wissen und Fachwissen nachgewachsen sind.\n\nWir halten das für eine bedenkliche Entwicklung. Wir haben deshalb den Einstellungsstopp aufgehoben. Wir brauchen junge Leute in der Verwaltung.\n\nWir werden in diesem Jahr mehr Beamtinnen und Beamte einstellen bzw. einsetzen - bis zu einer Obergrenze von 1 600. Wir werden auch mehr Auszubildende behalten - ich finde, das ist elementar für die Rekrutierung von Nachwuchs - und mit großem Nachdruck daran arbeiten, dass die Übernahmequote deutlich erhöht wird. Da bilden wir ja die Fachkräfte für die Zukunft im eigenen Hause aus.\n\nWir werden uns selbstverständlich auch weiter bemühen müssen, die Nachwuchswerbung für Soldatinnen und Soldaten, also im militärischen Teil, zu verbessern. Da sehen die Zahlen in diesem Jahr, das noch jung ist, bisher sehr gut aus. Aber mittel- und langfristig müssen wir immer wieder darum werben - das wissen wir -, Talente für die Bundeswehr zu gewinnen, und deshalb müssen wir als Arbeitgeber viel attraktiver werden.\n\nWir verlangen von den jungen Menschen, die zu uns kommen, auch viel. Die Bundeswehr erfüllt ihren Auftrag mit hochmoderner, sehr komplexer Technologie. Sie kooperiert eng mit Dutzenden von internationalen Partnern. Also ist selbstverständlich Internationalität genauso wie Technikverständnis gefragt. Sie denkt zunehmend in den Kategorien der vernetzten Sicherheit, das heißt verzahnt mit Diplomatie, mit wirtschaftlicher Zusammenarbeit. Auch diese Felder sind gefragt. Für diese Aufgaben brauchen und wollen wir die besten jungen Frauen und Männer unseres Landes begeistern.\n\nAber genau diese Zielgruppe, also die besten jungen Männer und Frauen dieses Landes, kann künftig mehr auswählen denn je. Sie will eine anspruchsvolle und spannende Aufgabe. Das kann die Bundeswehr zweifelsohne bieten. Aber sie schaut auch auf die Arbeitsbedingungen und vergleicht diese mit anderen Angeboten. Hier muss die Bundeswehr auf etlichen Feldern aufholen. Das gilt insbesondere für die Karriereperspektiven für Frauen wie für Männer in unseren Streitkräften.\n\nWir wollen ein Konzept für die Steigerung der Attraktivität der Bundeswehr als Arbeitgeber auf den Weg bringen. Dies wird in diesem Sommer geschehen und im Herbst durch ein Gesetzgebungsverfahren flankiert werden. Deshalb sind die Kosten für die Umsetzung der ersten Maßnahmen im Haushalt noch nicht detailliert wiederzufinden. Überhaupt wird das Gesamtpaket zur Steigerung der Attraktivität ohnehin nicht am Volumen eines einzelnen Postens zu messen sein. Die Veränderungen müssen sich quer durch den ganzen Haushalt und über eine Vielzahl von Maßnahmen ziehen.\n\nDer mit Abstand wichtigste Teil der Attraktivitäts-offensive wird sich allerdings niemals im Haushalt abbilden lassen. Dieser Teil betrifft die Veränderung in den Köpfen. Es geht um die Veränderung der Haltung, der Einstellung des Arbeitgebers. Mit Arbeitgeber meine ich alle Vorgesetzten in der Bundeswehr. Wenn diese Initiative Erfolg haben soll, dann müssen jeder und jede in der Bundeswehr die Einstellung verändern, und zwar vom Spieß bis zum General. Die Frage, wie die Rolle als Führungskraft ausgestaltet wird, wird maßgeblich darüber entscheiden, ob diese Attraktivitätsoffensive erfolgreich sein wird oder ob sie scheitern wird.\n\nWenn ich von Haltung und Einstellung sowie von Veränderung in den Köpfen spreche, dann muss man auch berücksichtigen, dass sich die Sicht der Gesellschaft auf die Bundeswehr ändert. Ich habe am Anfang über die vielfältigen Einsätze der Bundeswehr gesprochen. Die Bundeswehr ist bereit, sich zu öffnen und Transparenz darüber zu schaffen, was sie leistet und wie sie ihre Aufgaben erfüllt. Das ist eine ganz große Vielfalt. Vieles, was an etlichen Orten der Welt, aber auch in unserem Land geleistet wird, ist der Öffentlichkeit eher wenig bekannt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es ist unsere Parlamentsarmee. Wir wollen mit diesem Haushalt dazu beitragen, dass die Leistungen, aber auch die Attraktivität unserer Bundeswehr sichtbar werden. Auch dafür steht dieser Haushalt.\n\nIch danke für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n4553,rudiger-veit,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich will jetzt, Frau Lindholz, nicht vom Bleiberecht reden. Nur so viel sei gesagt: Ich bin froh - das ist für mich das entscheidende Wort in dieser Legislatur-periode -, dass an einer Stelle, was die Lebensunterhaltsicherung angeht, aus einem „und“ wieder ein „oder“ geworden ist, so wie wir es auch vereinbart haben. Darüber werden wir noch einmal reden, wenn das Gesetz dann letztlich hier zur Beratung vorliegen wird.\n\nEin Hinweis vielleicht noch aus der Praxis - ich habe ja einmal auf der anderen Seite, sozusagen in der Exekutive, sitzen dürfen -: Die Frage, welche Abschiebungen all derjenigen letztendlich vollzogen werden, die hätten vollzogen werden können, ist eine Frage, die uns nicht erst im Jahr 2014 begegnet, sondern die ist, soweit ich den Sachverhalt überblicke, mindestens so alt wie das Gesetz, weil die verschiedensten Hinderungsgründe - manchmal sind es auch Mitmenschlichkeit, Mitleid, und manchmal ist es auch bürgerschaftliches Engagement - dazu führen, dass viele Abschiebungen nicht vollzogen werden.\n\nAber jetzt zu diesen Gesetzen. Wir haben als Sozialdemokraten - ich gebe übrigens unumwunden zu, dass das nicht immer ganz so einfach war, und manchmal hat es auch eine Weile gedauert - im Ergebnis dann doch unstreitig in unseren Reihen gesagt: Die Residenzpflicht in der uns bekannten Form muss weg, und das Sachleistungsprinzip und der Zwang zur Unterbringung in Gemeinschaftsunterkünften müssen es auch. Wir haben das im Beschluss des Parteivorstandes vom Montag letzter Woche noch einmal bekräftigt. Ich bin froh, dass das hier und heute, wenn allerdings vielleicht auch nicht so stark beachtet, wie man es diesem Thema eigentlich hätte zubilligen wollen, von uns auch vollzogen wird.\n\nIch bin froh darüber, liebe Ulla Jelpke, dass es gelungen ist, im Bundesrat, aus Anlass einer allerdings schwierigen, von mir auch nicht befürworteten Gesetzgebung, zu einer solchen Vereinbarung zu kommen, wie sie der Ministerpräsident von Baden-Württemberg schlussendlich erzielt hat. Denn uns war es in den Koalitionsverhandlungen trotz intensiven Bemühens eben nicht ganz gelungen, bei der Residenzpflicht noch weiter zu kommen und das Sachleistungsprinzip anzufassen. Insofern haben wir uns da nach dem Motto „getrennt marschieren, vereint schlagen“ ein bisschen auf der gleichen Linie bewegt wie der Ministerpräsident des Landes Baden-Württemberg. Den Grünen sei zum Trost gesagt: Nach meinem Dafürhalten ist das, was er an dieser Stelle im Sinne der Flüchtlinge herausgehandelt hat, eine beachtliche Leistung, und ich glaube, jenseits der Schmerzgrenze auf der anderen Seite, bei der Union, ist auch wirklich nicht mehr zu erreichen gewesen.\n\nNun kommen wir zu den einzelnen Maßnahmen. Wegfall des Vorrangprinzips ist bereits in der Beschäftigungsverordnung vor etwa 14 Tagen, wenn ich mich richtig erinnere, umgesetzt worden. Wegfall der Residenzpflicht, jedenfalls nach drei Monaten, und des Sachleistungsprinzips machen wir heute. Das ist deswegen ganz bedeutsam für die betroffenen Menschen, weil ich nicht selten den Eindruck hatte, dass viele durch die problematischen Unterbringungsbedingungen und durch den Sachleistungsbezug genauso wie durch die Beschränkungen, die ihnen die Residenzpflicht auferlegt hat, in einer Weise - Sie entschuldigen bitte die Wortwahl - nicht nur gegängelt, sondern vielleicht auch schikaniert worden sind, wie das unserem Menschenbild und unserer Position von menschenwürdiger Flüchtlingspolitik jedenfalls nicht immer entsprochen hat. Dass das jetzt wegkommt, ist gut. Darüber freue ich mich. Darüber sollten wir uns vielleicht auch alle freuen.\n\nDann zu dem, was die einzelnen Regelungen angeht: Ich persönlich - das sage ich jetzt an die Adresse von Ulla Jelpke - bin durchaus der Auffassung, dass eine Zeit „bis zu“ drei Monaten in Erstaufnahmeeinrichtungen und die Versorgung mit Sachleistungen dort auch unter humanen Gesichtspunkten der vielleicht bessere Weg ist, als die betroffenen Flüchtlinge, die vielleicht aus einem völlig anderen Kulturkreis kommen und sich bei uns überhaupt nicht allein orientieren könnten, so ohne Weiteres in die Fläche eines großen Landes zu schicken, wo sie keinerlei Kontakt haben, keinerlei Unterweisung, keinerlei Anleitung, wie man sich hier bei uns zurechtfinden kann. Ich persönlich jedenfalls halte diese Zeit für vernünftig, für richtig, auch und gerade im Interesse der Flüchtlinge, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nWenn jetzt kritisiert wird, wir hätten an einer Stelle da noch einmal eine Verschärfung angebracht, will ich zum allgemeinen Trost auch Folgendes sagen dürfen: In dem Bundesratsbeschluss - das kann man nicht sagen -, in der Vereinbarung steht, dass derjenige sozusagen wieder in die Residenzpflicht zurückfällt, von dem bekannt geworden sei, er habe etwas mit Betäubungsmitteln zu tun gehabt. Das ist ja nun, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, eine noch schwächere Kategorisierung als etwa ein Anfangsverdacht, der zur Einleitung eines Ermittlungsverfahrens führt. Von daher gesehen war die Formulierung im ursprünglichen Gesetzentwurf mit dem „hinreichenden Tatverdacht“, der nach der Definition der Strafprozessordnung voraussetzt, mit mindestens 50-prozentiger Wahrscheinlichkeit ist nach Anklageerhebung eine Verurteilung zu erwarten, sozusagen fast das andere Extrem. Wir haben nun einen Mittelweg gefunden, von dem ich glaube, dass er im Ergebnis ganz vernünftig ist.\n\nNicht einfach nur einmal so, irgendetwas Vages, vom Hörensagen her oder wie auch immer - sondern wir -setzen schon ein bisschen mehr voraus. Das halte ich im Ergebnis für richtig.\n\nIch will noch ein Wort des Trostes an die vielleicht immer noch verzweifelten Anhänger der Residenzpflicht und des Sachleistungsprinzips richten. Ich erinnere mich an ein Parlamentsseminar mit Mitarbeitern von Ausländerbehörden aus der ganzen Bundesrepublik. Diese haben uns gesagt - übrigens zu meiner Überraschung, das hatte niemand bestellt -: Wenn wir als Gesetzgeber in Berlin etwas Vernünftiges tun wollten, dann sollten wir doch bitte die Residenzpflicht abschaffen, die mache ihnen nämlich nur Arbeit und bringe weder für sie noch für die Sache noch für die Flüchtlinge irgendeinen vernünftigen Vorteil. Ich bin froh, dass das heute passiert. Wir sollten uns von Praktikern aus allen Teilen unseres -Staates leiten lassen und festhalten: Jetzt haben wir umgesetzt, was die in der Praxis schon immer als unnötig und lästig empfunden haben.\n\nWas das Sachleistungsprinzip angeht: In der Gesetzesbegründung heißt es jetzt, für die Kommunen entstehe kein höherer Aufwand, weil die Kosten nicht höher werden. Ich will Ihnen von einer persönlichen Erfahrung berichten, die jetzt schon 28 Jahre zurückliegt; ich hoffe, ich muss davon hier zum letzten Mal berichten, weil es dann nicht mehr relevant sein wird. Als ich damals die letzte große Erstaufnahme-Gemeinschaftsunterkunft bei uns im Landkreis zugunsten von wohnähnlicher Unterbringung bzw. Unterbringung in Wohnungen zugemacht habe, haben wir als Landkreis gespart. Als das Land Hessen seine Kostenerstattung auf Pauschalen umstellte, hatten wir in unserer Kreiskasse - ich weiß das noch ganz genau - über 900 000 DM. Aber wir hatten natürlich nicht lange etwas davon. Wir sollten nämlich nichts verdienen; das hat der damalige Ministerpräsident Eichel auch erkannt.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum guten Schluss auf die kommunalen Finanzen zu sprechen kommen. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir sind heute in der, wie ich finde, glücklichen Lage, dass die Flüchtlinge, die bei uns Schutz -suchen, in der Bevölkerung auf große Akzeptanz stoßen. Vor 22 Jahren, Anfang der 90er-Jahre, war das eher umgekehrt. Damals aber hatten wir vonseiten des Staates - und das war nicht nur in Hessen so - wenigstens das Geld, um diese Aufgabe vor Ort vernünftig regeln zu können. Ich halte es für außerordentlich problematisch - deswegen haben wir jetzt mit der Bereitstellung von zusätzlich 500 Millionen Euro die ersten richtigen Schritte getan -\n\n- jawohl -, wenn heute Städte, Gemeinden und Landkreise auf den Kosten für die Unterbringung und für die Versorgung von Flüchtlingen sitzen bleiben.\n\nDas darf nicht sein. Daran sollten wir arbeiten, und zwar auf allen staatlichen Ebenen zugunsten der kommunalen Seite. Es wäre schön, wenn wir so in der Frage einer vernünftigen und akzeptablen Flüchtlingspolitik ein weiteres Stück vorankommen würden.\n\nIhnen vielen Dank für die Geduld und der Frau Präsidentin auch.\"\n1663,roland-claus,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Herr Bundeswirtschaftsminister Gabriel und Herr Bundesostminister - auch das darf ich sagen, weil Sie im Kabinett für die ostdeutschen Bundesländer zuständig sind; Sie sind im Zusammenhang mit der Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“ auch darauf eingegangen -, ein bisschen mehr Selbstbewusstsein für den Osten hätte ich mir von Ihnen in dieser Funktion schon gewünscht. Es mangelt Ihnen doch sonst nicht daran.\n\nIch will einmal die Bibel bemühen,\n\ndie ja einen Gabriel kennt, zwar nicht den Bundesminister, aber den Erzengel.\n\nDort heißt es:\n\nÜber dem Ulai-Kanal hörte ich eine Menschenstimme, die da rief: Gabriel, erkläre ihm die Vision!\n\nIch glaube, diese Stimme muss es gewesen sein, die der Bundesminister gehört hat, als er seine Rede hier vorbereitet hat.\n\nWir wollen natürlich von der Vision wieder auf den Boden der Tatsachen kommen. Da lohnt ein Blick in den Haushalt. Sie stellen uns einen Haushalt mit einem Volumen von 7,5 Milliarden Euro vor. Das ist jede Menge Geld. Wenn man sich das aber näher anschaut, dann sieht man, dass über die Hälfte davon für die Nachsorge im Steinkohlebergbau und für die Subventionierung von Luft- und Raumfahrt abgezogen werden muss. Es bleibt also gerade einmal 1 Prozent des gesamten Bundesetats für Wirtschaftsförderung übrig,\n\nund damit, meine Damen und Herren, kann man in dieser Republik nicht wirklich Wirtschaftspolitik machen.\n\nAngesichts eines von niemandem bezweifelten Investitionsstaus wäre in der Tat erforderlich, was die Linke seit Jahren fordert: ein großes Zukunftsinvestitionsprogramm. Aber dann müsste man natürlich auch über neue Einnahmemöglichkeiten reden, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nNun muss ich einmal erklären, was es mit der Subventionierung staatsnaher Monopolisten auf sich hat, die ich immer kritisiere. Ich greife einmal ein Beispiel heraus: das Deutsche Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt. Für diese Institution sind im Einzelplan 09 etwa 1,5 Milliarden Euro veranschlagt. Jetzt kommen die Tricks dieser Bundesregierung. Das ist nämlich längst nicht alles, was in diese Institution fließt. Es gibt auch Zuwendungen aus dem Einzelplan Verkehr, es gibt Zuwendungen aus dem Einzelplan Verteidigung, und es gibt - das erscheint mir doch ganz besonders interessant - auch aus dem Bildungsetat eine Zuwendung.\n\nUnd unter den Projektträgern, die das Bundesbildungsministerium auszuwählen hat, nimmt dieses Zentrum eine Monopolstellung ein und hat mehr als die Hälfte der Projektträgerschaften inne. Wir sagen Ihnen: Solche Tricks, aus mehreren Etats immer die gleichen Institutionen zu bedienen, werden wir Ihnen nicht durchgehen lassen.\n\n- Das werden Sie noch bezweifeln müssen; denn der Dank dieser Institution ist immer wie folgt: Wenn der Bund einmal etwas verlangt, dann kommt das in aller Regel zeitverzögert und mit ganz großer Sicherheit überteuert. Dazu können Sie sich ganz viele Beispiele angucken.\n\nDas Zentrale Innovationsprogramm Mittelstand ist natürlich ein gutes Programm. Es hat aber - ich vergleiche es jetzt einmal mit dem Raumfahrtzentrum, über das ich eben gesprochen habe - nur etwa ein Drittel des Volumens, das wir für die Subventionierung dieser Monopolisten einstellen, und es ist noch immer zu bürokratisch konstruiert. Deshalb haben wir alle zurzeit mit den Briefen der Industrie- und Handelskammern zu tun, in denen wir darauf aufmerksam gemacht werden, dass es aufgrund der vorläufigen Haushaltsführung in diesem Jahr schwer sein wird, dieses Innovationsprogramm wirklich abzufinanzieren. Da kann ich nur uns alle dazu aufrufen: Das müssen wir gemeinsam anpacken! Wir müssen auch in den Ausschüssen dafür sorgen, dass diese Mittel ankommen.\n\n- Doch, wir waren dabei. Aber Sie wissen, Herr Kollege, dass unser Tun nicht ausreichen wird, um den Erfordernissen tatsächlich gerecht zu werden. Davor kann man doch nicht die Augen verschließen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nNun haben Sie den Titel „Fachkräftesicherung für kleine und mittlere Unternehmen“ in den Haushalt eingestellt. Das klingt gut. Für entsprechende Programme stehen 14 Millionen Euro zur Verfügung. Das ist weniger als der viel zitierte Tropfen auf den heißen Stein. Ich weiß, dass Sie damit keine Stellen schaffen wollen, aber bloß zum Vergleich: Wenn man das in Stellen umrechnen würde, käme man auf 200 Stellen. Meine Damen und Herren, ein solches Pillepalleprogramm ist Augenwischerei. Es wird den Erfordernissen, um die es geht, in keiner Weise gerecht.\n\nNach wie vor verschärft sich in Deutschland die Kluft zwischen Regionen mit hoher Wirtschaftskraft und solchen mit geringer Wirtschaftskraft, also auch zwischen Ost und West. Es ist inzwischen fast wie im Profifußball: Wo das große Geld ist, wird auch Leistungskraft gekauft. - Da müssen wir mit der Gemeinschaftsaufgabe\n\nund anderen Instrumenten wirklich gegensteuern, meine Damen und Herren!\n\nEs ist halt noch immer so, dass der Osten in einer anderen wirtschaftspolitischen Liga spielt. Die 100 größten ostdeutschen Unternehmen zusammengenommen haben nicht einmal die Hälfte der Leistungskraft von Daimler; das ist die eine Seite. Auf der anderen Seite haben wir hervorragende Chemieparks in Ostdeutschland, die noch wachsen könnten. Dafür müssen wir etwas tun, meine Damen und Herren!\n\nZum guten Schluss: Herr Minister Gabriel, hier ist nicht der Erzengel gefragt, sondern der Bundesminister, und deshalb bedarf Ihr Etat noch jeder Menge Änderungen. Da sind wir dabei.\"\n12383,martin-rabanus,\"Vielen Dank. - Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Werte Damen und Herren auf den Besuchertribünen! Es ist zwar schon dunkel draußen, aber es scheint ja tatsächlich noch eine Sternstunde zu werden, wenn wir auch die Zustimmung der Linken zu unseren Antrag sicher haben. Das finde ich ausgesprochen erfreulich.\n\nIch finde es auch ausgesprochen erfreulich, dass wir einen so breiten Konsens hier im Haus haben. Erfreulich finde ich aber auch, dass die kulturelle Bildung in der öffentlichen Wahrnehmung eine so breite Unterstützung hat, wie wir das, glaube ich, in früheren Jahren nicht hatten. Da hat sich einiges bewegt, wahrscheinlich auch durch das Programm „Kultur macht stark“, durch die Laufzeit, aber auch schon vorher durch viele Weichenstellungen und pädagogische Diskussionen und durch das, was die Länder gemacht haben. Die haben 2013 ihre Empfehlungen für die kulturelle Bildung in der KMK auf den neuesten Stand gebracht und dem eine stärkere Bedeutung beigemessen, als das vorher der Fall gewesen ist.\n\nDenn klar ist ja: Kulturelle Bildung ist ein wichtiger Beitrag zur Persönlichkeitsbildung - das ist genannt worden -, aber auch ein wichtiger Beitrag zur Orientierung in der Gesellschaft, gerade vielleicht auch in den heutigen gesellschaftspolitischen Zeiten, denen wir uns gegenübersehen, in einer Gesellschaft, die ausdifferenziert ist in unterschiedlichste Milieus, in unterschiedliche kulturelle, religiöse Hintergründe. Das meine ich tatsächlich jetzt nicht nur vor dem Hintergrund einer Migrationsbewegung, die wir nicht nur in den letzten Monaten, sondern auch in den letzten zwei Jahren erlebt haben.\n\nEs ist schon darauf eingegangen worden: Das Programm hat sich auch darauf ein Stück weit eingestellt und für junge Geflüchtete geöffnet. Das ist gut und richtig so.\n\nWichtig ist es aber auch vor dem Hintergrund sozioökonomischer Unterschiede in der Gesellschaft. Über dieses größte Programm, das wir in dieser Art je hatten, ermöglichen wir vielen den Zugang zu kulturellen Angeboten - und das im Rahmen eines breiten und weit gefächerten Kulturbegriffs; Frau Kollegin Lücking-Michel hat darauf schon Bezug genommen. Interkulturelle, interreligiöse Bildung, Theater, Tanz, Visuelles, bildende Kunst, Film, Musik, Literatur, Architektur, all das sind Aspekte, die dieses Programm beinhaltet, und das ist auch gut so. Dabei überhebt sich das Programm aber auch nicht, weil es fokussiert ist. Auch das ist gesagt worden. Es ist fokussiert auf die benachteiligten Kinder und Jugendlichen, ohne andere auszuschließen. Auch das ist eine Stärke dieses Programms.\n\nIch will gar nicht verhehlen, dass Anfang 2012, als die Bundesregierung damals mit dem Programm um die Ecke kam,\n\nauch an der einen oder anderen Stelle Skepsis bestand: wegen der Zeit, wegen des Programmdesigns, aber nicht, weil man gegen kulturelle Bildung war; jedenfalls würde ich das für meine Fraktion so reklamieren.\n\nWir jedenfalls haben uns sehr intensiv mit der Frage des Programmdesigns und mit diesem Programm auseinandergesetzt. Der Antrag, den wir vorgelegt haben, ist natürlich nicht vom Himmel gefallen, sondern wir haben schon im letzten Jahr auch die Verbände und die beteiligten Programmpartner sehr intensiv in die Gespräche einbezogen. Wir haben uns Anfang des Jahres in der Koalition intensiver damit auseinandergesetzt. Dann kam auch das Signal der Bundesregierung. Also, es gibt an dieser Stelle noch nicht einmal zwischen dem sozialdemokratischen Teil und dem christdemokratisch geführten BMBF irgendwelche Misstrauensgründe,\n\nsondern größte Harmonie an der Stelle. Über die Ausschussbefassung im Mai sind wir jetzt zu der Beratung im Plenum gekommen. Das ist auch gut so.\n\nIch will kurz zusammenfassen, was dieses Programm erreicht hat: 12 700 lokale Bündnisse mit 430 000 Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmern. Das ist eine Größenordnung, die wir so noch nicht hatten. Das hat im Bereich der kulturellen Bildung zu einer Kooperation, einer Dynamik und einer Strukturbildung vor Ort geführt, die wir so auch noch nicht hatten. Das ist einer der wesentlichen Gründe, warum wir sagen: Wir wollen dieses Programm über 2017 hinaus fortsetzen.\n\nIch sage auch „fortsetzen“ und nicht „ein neues Programm machen“; denn es haben sich verschiedene Strukturelemente bewährt. Das ist genannt worden; das alles muss ich nicht wiederholen. Aber das Gute wollen wir natürlich noch ein bisschen besser machen. Sicherlich gilt das für die Budgets. Wir stellen uns 50 Millionen Euro plus X im Jahr vor. Ich glaube, das ist auch fraktionsübergreifend der Fall. So muss es weitergehen.\n\nWir wollen auch den Administrationsaufwand reduzieren. Das ist gesagt worden. In diesem Zusammenhang wollen wir die Frage der Verwaltungspauschale aufgreifen. Das ist auch einer der Gründe, warum wir dem Antrag der Linken nicht zustimmen werden. Er legt sich fest, ohne evaluiert zu haben, was bedarfsorientiert wäre, um das an diesem einen Beispiel festzumachen.\n\nIch konstatiere, dass in anderen Zeiten der Antragsentwurf der Linken möglicherweise auch eine Basis gewesen wäre, auf den man sich hätte konsentieren können.\n\nAber da die Zeiten im Deutschen Bundestag nicht anders sind und wir in einer erfolgreichen Koalition arbeiten - jenseits der Frage, was in anderen Räumen des Bundestagskomplexes passiert -, ist die Sachlage so, dass wir diesen hervorragenden Antrag der Koalition natürlich heute abstimmen und ihm zustimmen werden. Dem Antrag der Linken, der eine Basis wäre, aber auch der Verbesserung bedürfte, können wir so nicht zustimmen.\n\nZurück zu dem, was wir noch besser machen wollen. Wir wollen den administrativen Aufwand reduzieren. Wir wollen den Aspekt der Inklusion noch einmal verstärken. Das ist uns als Koalition sehr wichtig. Dass man die erworbenen Kompetenzen bei den Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmern anders dokumentiert, anders sichert - Stichwort „Bildungspässe“, Stichwort „Bildungsnachweise“ -, ist nur sinnvoll und nur vernünftig.\n\nZusammenfassend, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Das Programm „Kultur macht stark“ ist ein hervorragendes Programm, das sich bewährt hat und das wir noch ein bisschen besser machen wollen. Es ist zwar schon ein wenig dunkel draußen; dennoch können wir heute Abend eine Sternstunde für die kulturelle Bildung in Deutschland, für benachteiligte Kinder und Jugendliche, für Inklusion und für Chancengleichheit in unserem Land erleben.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n6312,michael-meister,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Das Bundeskabinett hat am 28. Januar 2015 den 10. Existenzminimumbericht beschlossen. In diesem Bericht wird die Höhe des steuerfrei zu stellenden Existenzminimums für Erwachsene und Kinder in den Jahren 2015 und 2016 hergeleitet. Mit dem heute eingebrachten Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung wird die verfassungsrechtlich gebotene Anhebung der steuerlichen Freibeträge - also sowohl des Grundfreibetrages wie auch der Kinderfreibeträge - für die Jahre 2015 und 2016 umgesetzt.\n\nZur Förderung der Familien, bei denen sich der Kinderfreibetrag nicht auswirkt, wird das Kindergeld in gleichem Verhältnis für 2015 und 2016 angehoben. -Außerdem wird der Kinderzuschlag erhöht. Der Kinderzuschlag wird denjenigen Eltern gewährt, die mit ihrem Erwerbseinkommen zwar den eigenen Bedarf nach dem Sozialgesetzbuch II decken, bei denen dieses Erwerbseinkommen aber nicht ausreicht, um den Bedarf ihrer Kinder hinreichend zu decken. Dieser Kinderzuschlag wird zusammen mit dem anteiligen Wohngeld und dem Kindergeld gewährt, um einen Ausgleich zu schaffen.\n\nDurch die regelmäßig gestiegenen Regelbedarfe in der Grundsicherung für Arbeitsuchende reicht die aktuelle Höhe des Kinderzuschlags - zusammen mit dem Kindergeld und dem anteiligen Wohngeld - nach unserer Einschätzung in immer weniger Fällen aus, um den durchschnittlichen Bedarf eines Kindes zu decken. -Deshalb wollen wir die Erhöhung des Kinderzuschlags vornehmen und damit einen größeren Teil der Eltern aus den Leistungen der Grundsicherung herausnehmen. Wir werden im Jahr 2016 den Grundfreibetrag von 8 354 Euro auf 8 652 Euro anheben, den Kinderfreibetrag von derzeit 7 008 Euro auf 7 248 Euro und das Kindergeld von aktuell 184 Euro für das erste und zweite Kind auf dann insgesamt 190 Euro. Der Kinderzuschlag wird zum 1. Juli 2016 um 20 Euro auf dann höchstens 160 Euro erhöht. Wenn wir dieses Maßnahmenpaket in seiner Gänze sehen, dann merken wir: Es hat in der vollen Jahreswirkung ein Gesamtvolumen von 3,7 Milliarden Euro, was den Steuerzahlern und insbesondere den Familien in diesem Lande zugutekommt. Ich glaube, es ist ein gutes Signal, dass wir in dieser Situation Steuerzahler und insbesondere Familien in Deutschland entlasten.\n\nWir sollten nicht so tun, als seien wir als Bund der -alleinige Wohltäter. Es entfallen 1,8 Milliarden Euro auf die Bundeskasse, 1,5 Milliarden Euro zahlen die Länder und eine halbe Milliarde Euro die Kommunen. Ich glaube, dass Deutschland damit im internationalen Vergleich ein hohes Niveau der Familienförderung hat. Wir haben - Frau Kollegin Schwesig ist ja anwesend - in der vergangenen Wahlperiode die Familienleistungen in Deutschland evaluiert und festgestellt, dass wir ein Volumen von rund 200 Milliarden Euro pro Jahr für Familien aufwenden. Ich glaube dennoch, dass wir hiermit ein -gutes Signal setzen, weil wir ja nicht nur über die Leistungen im Rahmen dieses konkreten Gesetzes reden, sondern darüber hinaus auch sehen müssen, was wir im Bereich der Kinderbetreuung - das geschieht außerhalb dieses Gesetzes - aufwenden oder was wir etwa beim -Elterngeld den Menschen zugutekommen lassen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich glaube, wir führen -damit den familienfreundlichen Kurs der Bundesregierung fort. Das dokumentiert auch der Finanzplan, den wir diskutiert und im Kabinett beschlossen haben. Dort ist für 2016 beim Haushalt des Bundesministeriums für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend zum ersten Mal die 9-Milliarden-Euro-Grenze überschritten worden. Ich will aber hier zur Vorsicht mahnen: Wir befinden uns momentan, wenn wir die Beschäftigung in diesem Lande und die Wachstumszahlen unserer Wirtschaft anschauen, in einer extrem guten Lage. Deshalb ist auch der Bundeshaushalt jetzt in einer entspannteren Situation, als wenn Beschäftigungslage und Wirtschaftswachstum nicht ganz so gut wären. Dennoch haben die Sozialausgaben einen Anteil von 52 Prozent am Bundeshaushalt. Ich glaube, wir müssen schon sehen: Wenn die Zeiten schwieriger werden, werden die Sozialausgaben mit -Sicherheit nicht sinken, sondern in absoluten Zahlen -tendenziell steigen. Das würde bedeuten, dass auch die entsprechenden Prozentzahlen im Bundeshaushalt wachsen. An dieser Stelle will ich einfach zur Vorsicht raten. Angesichts dieser 52 Prozent müssen wir nicht sagen: Hier sind Kürzungen oder Reduzierungen notwendig. - Ich glaube vielmehr, wir müssen mit Blick auf eine nachhaltige Haushaltswirtschaft auch darauf achten, dass die Balance innerhalb des Bundeshaushalts gewahrt wird. Deshalb sollten wir gerade mit Blick auf Kinder sagen: Wir müssen in Zukunft in unserer Haushaltsgesetzgebung auch auf schwierigere Zeiten vorbereitet sein.\n\nLassen Sie mich abschließend noch eine Bemerkung zum Entlastungsbetrag für Alleinerziehende machen. Auch dazu steht etwas im Koalitionsvertrag, nämlich dass wir hier Veränderungen vornehmen wollen, allerdings nicht in dem Sinne, dass es zur Ausweitung von Leistungen kommen soll, sondern dass wir hier eine -Prioritätensetzung vonseiten der Politik vornehmen. -Prioritätensetzung vonseiten der Politik heißt nicht, dass all das, was man sich wünschen kann, gemacht wird, sondern dass man das, was man für wichtig und notwendig hält, aus dem, was man verfügbar hat, finanziert. -Deshalb ist unsere Abrede an dieser Stelle, dass wir über die Veränderungen beim Entlastungsbetrag für Alleinerziehende gerne sprechen können, dass aber die Mittel hierfür aus dem Etat des Ministeriums für Familien, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend kommen müssen.\n\nDieser Entlastungsbetrag hat heute eine Höhe von 1 308 Euro. Diese Höhe ist seit dem Jahre 2004 unverändert. Wir müssen allerdings, wenn wir darüber debattieren, auch berücksichtigen, dass wir auf der einen Seite etwa 1,6 Millionen Alleinerziehende in diesem Land -haben, dass auf der anderen Seite dieser Entlastungs-betrag nur 1,1 Millionen Menschen zugutekommt.\n\nDenn man muss immer daran denken: Eine Vergünstigung im Steuerrecht kommt nur demjenigen zugute, der auch Steuern zahlt. Deshalb müssen wir bei dieser Debatte aufpassen. Es kann nicht sein, dass wir alle meinen, aber an dieser Stelle nur für einige wenige etwas tun.\n\nIch wünsche mir, dass wir hier im Deutschen Bundestag zu konstruktiven Beratungen kommen. Ich glaube, dass wir ein gutes Gesetz für die Bürger und die Familien in diesem Land auf den Weg bringen werden.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n9154,klaus-mindrup,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Es gibt Momente im Leben, die vergisst man nicht. Für mich gehören die Tage in Paris dazu. Das waren die Gespräche mit den Klimazeugen, mit den Bewohnern der pazifischen Inseln, die Sorge haben, dass sie ihre Heimat verlieren und dass sie umgesiedelt werden müssen, aber auch mit den Bauern aus Afrika, die nicht mehr wissen, wann sie säen sollen, weil sie nicht mehr wissen, wann der Regen kommt. Das hat deutlich gemacht, dass das Thema des Klimaschutzes ein Thema ist, das wirklich an die Existenz der Menschen geht. Im Gedächtnis werden bei mir aber auch die letzten Minuten dieser Konferenz bleiben, in denen wir nicht wussten, ob es am Ende ein Abkommen geben würde oder nicht, und in denen Laurent Fabius noch nicht im Saal war. Als er am Ende dann doch kam und mit dem grünen Hammer die Einigung vollzogen hat, gab es einen beispiellosen Jubel, dass dieser Vertrag zustande gekommen ist.\n\nEs ist daher auch für mich an dieser Stelle Zeit, Dank zu sagen, Dank an die deutsche Delegation, Dank vor allen Dingen auch an Barbara Hendricks für ihre Arbeit. Ohne diese deutsche Delegation wäre das nicht zustande gekommen. Ich hoffe, dass Sie bald Ihr Schlafdefizit ausgleichen können.\n\nDie Rolle Deutschlands - da muss ich der Kollegin Annalena Baerbock widersprechen - ist ja nicht nur die, dass wir dort verhandelt haben, sondern wir werden international auch als glaubwürdiger Partner gesehen mit der internationalen Klimafinanzierung. Es ist eben so, dass 95 Prozent unserer Gelder nicht in fossile Energien gehen, sondern in die Wende zu den erneuerbaren Energien, dass die Internationale Klimaschutzinitiative vorbildlich ist für die ganze Welt und dass wir dort Vorreiter sind.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es gibt noch eine andere Botschaft, die von dieser Konferenz ausgeht: 195 Staaten haben sich auf ein verbindliches Ziel geeinigt. Das heißt für uns: Die Vereinten Nationen sind wieder da. Die Vereinten Nationen sind wieder ein handelnder Akteur, und das ist etwas ganz Wichtiges für alle die, die erklärt haben, der Multilateralismus sei tot. Wir müssen diese Vereinten Nationen stärken und weiter auf sie bauen.\n\nDas Abkommen hat eine Tür zu einer besseren Welt geöffnet. Jetzt müssen wir durch diese Tür gehen. Das ist der Punkt, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Linken: Wenn Sie nicht verstehen, dass diese Tür eine Chance ist, und sagen, dass man da nicht durchgehen kann, dann ist das wirklich eine Form von Blindheit, die man kaum noch ertragen kann.\n\nWir sind hier an zwei Stellen gefordert - da hoffe ich auch auf einen Konsens -: Das Erste ist, dass wir natürlich zur Ratifizierung unsere Zustimmung geben müssen. Das Zweite ist, dass ich natürlich davon ausgehe, dass wir hier in diesem Haus dafür sorgen, dass diese Ziele eingehalten werden. Das gilt in erster Linie für die 2020-Ziele, und das werden wir mit dem Aktionsprogramm Klimaschutz 2020 auch schaffen. Es ist doch nur gut, dass wir uns hier ehrlich machen und dass wir sagen, was zu tun ist. Das haben wir auch schon vor einigen Wochen getan. Wir wissen doch alle, dass die Minderungsbeiträge, die die Staaten eingereicht haben, nicht ausreichen, um das 1,5-Grad-Ziel zu erreichen, noch nicht einmal, um das 2-Grad-Ziel zu erreichen. Deswegen gilt auch für uns: Klimaschutz muss Vorrang haben. Das gilt für alle Politikfelder, insbesondere für die Landwirtschaft und den Verkehr.\n\nWenn wir allerdings hören, dass die Kollegin Annalena Baerbock das Ende des Verbrennungsmotors ausruft, gebe ich ihr, wenn er fossil betrieben ist, recht. Aber einen Verbrennungsmotor kann man auch mit Wasserstoff betreiben, und am Ende kommt Wasser heraus. Es kommt doch darauf an, dass es erneuerbar ist, dass es klimaverträglich ist. An dieser Stelle sollten wir die Technologien öffnen.\n\nEs geht aber im Kern - das ist vereinbart worden - um eine grundsätzlich andere Form der Wirtschaftsweise. Wir müssen mit der Natur anders umgehen. Wir müssen im Einklang mit der Natur leben; denn sonst wird dieser Planet nicht überleben. Wir müssen in erster Linie die natürlichen Kohlenstoffsenken, wie Wälder und Moore, erhalten, auch in Deutschland. Es ist schwierig, wenn man in Deutschland Moore abbaut und dann erklärt, man muss tropische Regenwälder erhalten. Hier sind wir nicht glaubwürdig. Das muss anders werden. Aber - das ist eben angeklungen - die fossilen Rohstoffe, das fossile Kohlendioxid, was wir in der Erde haben, wird überwiegend in der Erde bleiben müssen. Das ist ein dramatischer Paradigmenwechsel. Das wird unsere gesamte Rechtskultur verändern müssen. Nicht mehr der Abbau von Rohstoffen ist wichtig für den Erhalt der Erde, sondern dass sie in der Erde bleiben. Dafür müssen wir gemeinsam streiten.\n\nFür Deutschland gilt, dass wir im Jahr 2050 eine Vollversorgung aus erneuerbaren Energien brauchen. Das ist vollkommen klar; denn sonst können wir die Klimaziele nicht einhalten. Wir brauchen einen Stufenplan. Dieser Stufenplan muss so gemacht werden, dass wir die Menschen in den betroffenen Regionen mitnehmen. Es ist eine Chance für den Strukturwandel, auch für neue Industrien. Wenn ich die Stellungnahme des BDI höre, dann kann ich nur sagen: Sorry, das ist strukturkonservativ, das wird uns allen nicht helfen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Steinzeit ist nicht aus einem Mangel an Steinen zu Ende gegangen. Das fossile Zeitalter wird auch nicht an einem Mangel an Öl, Gas und Kohle zu Ende gehen. Insofern ist das eine optimistische Botschaft. Ich wünsche Ihnen allen frohe Weihnachten und ein gutes neues Jahr. Wir werden dann gemeinsam dafür sorgen, dass dieses Klimaabkommen hier in Deutschland dazu führt, dass wir uns weiter verbessern und dass wir unseren Beitrag leisten, diese Erde zu schützen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n8805,michael-leutert,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Frau Ministerin! Für das nächste Jahr stehen dem Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend etwas mehr als 9 Milliarden Euro zur Verfügung. Das klingt sehr viel, aber man muss dazusagen: Nur 9 Prozent, also circa 800 Millionen Euro, sind für die Programmarbeit vorgesehen. 85 Prozent des Etats werden für gesetzliche Leistungen ausgegeben, allen voran für das Elterngeld mit 6 Milliarden Euro, Tendenz steigend.\n\nFakt ist - und das ist positiv zu bewerten -, dass wir in den Haushaltsverhandlungen die Programmarbeit stärken konnten. Insbesondere die Jugendhilfe wird 27 Millionen Euro mehr bekommen. Das Programm „Demokratie leben!“, das gegen Rechtsextremismus aufgelegt wurde, erhält noch einmal 10 Millionen Euro mehr, und auch die Mittel für die Mehrgenerationenhäuser - die möchte ich nicht vergessen - sind aufgestockt worden.\n\nWir müssen uns allerdings fragen, ob die Mittel ausreichen angesichts der Aufgaben, vor denen wir stehen. Ich möchte das am Beispiel des Programms „Demokratie leben!“ skizzieren. Das Programm „Demokratie leben!“ hatte im Jahr 2014 30 Millionen Euro zur Verfügung, dieses Jahr 40 Millionen Euro, nächstes Jahr werden es 50 Millionen Euro.\n\nDas ist eine gute Tendenz. Man sollte sich aber einmal anschauen, wofür dieses Programm vorgesehen ist. Es soll sich gegen Rechtsextremismus, gegen Antisemitismus, gegen Islamismus, gegen Muslimfeindlichkeit, gegen Gewalt und Menschenfeindlichkeit im Allgemeinen richten. Das alles soll mit vielen verschiedenen Maßnahmen umgesetzt werden, mit Demokratiezentren, lokalen Partnerschaften, Strukturförderung oder auch Modellprojekten. Was heißt das in der Praxis? Das bedeutet, dass ein Landkreis oder eine Kommune im Rahmen eines lokalen Aktionsplanes 60 000 Euro im Jahr bewilligt bekommt.\n\nIch frage mich: Was soll ein Landkreis in Sachsen, der zum Beispiel über 2 000 Quadratkilometer groß ist, 300 000 Einwohner und circa 60 Gemeinden hat - damit der Vergleich klar ist: das ist die Dimension des Saarlandes -, mit diesem Geld anfangen? Da in diesen 60 000 Euro auch Personalkosten enthalten sind, würden jeder Gemeinde nicht einmal 500 Euro pro Jahr für das Programm übrig bleiben.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir alle wissen, was derzeit in unserem Land los ist. Die Situation spitzt sich zu. Das Bundesministerium des Innern warnt, der Verfassungsschutz warnt, und das Bundeskriminalamt warnt. Wir haben allein in diesem Jahr bis jetzt 600 Angriffe auf Flüchtlingsunterkünfte und Flüchtlinge zu verzeichnen - das ist dreimal so viel wie letztes Jahr -, und es gab rund 223 Verletzte. Leider ist Sachsen auch hier wieder das Negativbeispiel. Dort finden besonders viele fremdenfeindliche Demonstrationen statt; Pegida ist die bekannteste. Dort erleben wir besonders heftige Angriffe; Heidenau und Freital stehen exemplarisch dafür. Die Volksverhetzung nimmt zu. Die Angegriffenen sind nicht nur Flüchtlinge oder ihre Helfer, es sind auch Politikerinnen und Politiker. Es werden Autos angezündet und Büros verwüstet. Das betrifft im Übrigen nicht mehr nur Politiker der Linken oder der Grünen, sondern jetzt auch Politiker der CDU und der FDP: Das prominenteste Opfer ist der sächsische Justizminister, dessen Wohnung vor ein paar Tagen angegriffen wurde. Er war mit seinen Kindern zu Hause; ein Kind ist noch nicht einmal ein Jahr alt. Vor der Wohnung des Dresdner Oberbürgermeisters, FDP, hat sich mehrere Stunden ein Mob versammelt und „Volksverräter“ geschrien. - Das, was zwei Spitzenpolitiker in Sachsen erlebt haben, erleben viele Ehrenamtliche in Sachsen allerdings seit vielen Jahren.\n\nUm es noch einmal in Erinnerung zu rufen: Die NPD hat in Sachsen bei der Landtagswahl 2004 9,2 Prozent bekommen, die SPD damals 9,8 Prozent. Das zeigt doch, wie die Gesellschaft positioniert ist. Auch der NSU war in Sachsen zu Hause. Pegida hatte ich schon erwähnt. - Das alles zusammen schafft ein gesellschaftliches Klima, das es der Zivilgesellschaft sehr, sehr schwer macht, dagegenzuhalten. Das bedroht unsere Gesellschaft im Kern, und zwar ernsthaft. Das ist kein Spaß mehr. Aus diesem Grund sage ich: Wir müssen die Zivilgesellschaft in der Breite stärken, und zwar dauerhaft.\n\nEs gibt so viele kleine Vereine, die sich mit ganz normalen Angeboten in der täglichen Stadtteilarbeit und der Jugendarbeit an die Bevölkerung richten. Da zu unserer Bevölkerung jetzt auch Flüchtlinge gehören, richten sich diese Angebote auch an Flüchtlinge, die zum Teil ihrerseits in den Vereinen mithelfen. Wenn die Projekte dieser Vereine bedroht werden, wenn die Vereine nicht einmal vom Staat ausreichend Unterstützung bekommen, dann werden sie diese Angebote einstellen. Jedes Mal, wenn das passiert, bricht uns ein Stück Zivilgesellschaft weg. Das müssen wir verhindern. Dafür brauchen wir dringend mehr Geld.\n\nWenn wir uns hier im Bundestag einig sind, dass eine Aufgabe wichtig ist - das gab es schon mehrmals -, dann können wir dafür auch Geld mobilisieren. Ich möchte ein Beispiel nennen, ohne irgendetwas gegeneinander ausspielen zu wollen: Wir sind uns im Bundestag einig, dass wir das Elterngeld wollen. Es ist in diesem Etat enthalten und kostet uns 6 Milliarden Euro im Jahr. Das ist es uns wert, weil es uns wichtig ist, dass mehr Kinder geboren werden und diese in gesicherten Verhältnissen aufwachsen können.\n\nAber was nützt uns das, wenn unsere Kinder, weil wir nur 50 Millionen Euro aufwenden, um gegen Rechtsextremismus vorzugehen, in einem durch Fremdenfeinde und Rassisten vergifteten gesellschaftlichen Klima aufwachsen? Das dürfen wir nicht zulassen.\n\nWeil ich den Kollegen Spahn hier gerade sehe, möchte ich noch eines sagen. In der Buchhandlung habe ich Ihr neues Buch gesehen. Ich darf daraus kurz zitieren. Sie schreiben:\n\nObgleich Zigtausende Menschen jeden Tag haupt- und ehrenamtlich fast Übermenschliches leisten, um der Lage Herr zu werden, erleben wir doch in vielen Bereichen eine Art Staatsversagen.\n\nIch möchte Ihnen sagen: Helfen Sie bitte mit - Sie sind Staatssekretär des Finanzministers Schäuble -, dieses Staatsversagen zu beenden, und geben Sie den Ehrenamtlichen das Geld, das sie benötigen.\n\nLieber Herr Kollege, ich habe in meinem Redebeitrag sehr wohl gesagt, dass sich das infragestehende Programm für Demokratie unter anderem gegen Gewalt und Menschenfeindlichkeit insgesamt wendet. Das schließt meines Erachtens jede Form von Extremismus ein. Ich habe mich aber bewusst auf den Rechtsextremismus konzentriert, weil er unser aktuelles Problem darstellt. Die Flüchtlinge und ihre Heime, die Ehrenamtlichen sowie Politikerinnen und Politiker werden derzeit von Fremdenfeinden und Rassisten angegriffen. Es ist die Aufgabe der Politik, auf aktuelle Ereignisse zu reagieren und Probleme vorausschauend zu lösen. Derzeit warnen die Sicherheitsbehörden vor dem Problem des Rechtsextremismus bzw. der Fremdenfeindlichkeit. Aufgrund dieses aktuellen Anlasses habe ich darauf hingewiesen.\"\n15707,herbert-behrens,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Millionen Menschen tragen gesundheitliche Schäden davon, wenn sie Stickoxidschadstoffen ausgesetzt sind. Wir wissen, dass das Klimagas CO2 dazu beiträgt, dass es zu einem dramatischen Klimawandel kommt. Wir stellen fest, dass die Automobilindustrie bei beiden, bei dem Schadstoff NOx und beim Klimagas CO2, die Werte manipuliert und damit gesundheitliche Schäden und die Klimaschädigung billigend in Kauf nimmt. Das darf es auf keinen Fall weiterhin geben.\n\nEin Mitarbeiter von Volkswagen in den USA musste im September 2015 zugeben, dass VW eine Abschalteinrichtung verwendet, die erkennt, wenn ein Auto auf dem Prüfstand im Labor steht. Diese Art Abschalteinrichtung ist in Kalifornien, aber auch in Europa verboten. Dieser Betrug kostete das Unternehmen bis heute in den USA 23 Milliarden Euro.\n\nWas ist geschehen? Umweltschutzorganisationen, aber auch der Automobil-Club ADAC haben frühzeitig immer wieder darauf hingewiesen, dass offiziell angegebene Abgaswerte im normalen Fahrbetrieb, teilweise aber auch im Prüflabor nicht eingehalten werden. Das war lange vor dem Auffliegen des VW-Betrugs. Ministerien und Behörden, wie zum Beispiel das Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt, KBA, wurden informiert. Dort allerdings stieß man auf ein Verhalten, das eher dem Verhalten der drei Affen gleicht: nichts sehen, nichts hören, nichts sagen. Oder: nichts sehen, nichts hören und nichts sagen wollen. Das können wir auf jeden Fall keinen Tag länger dulden.\n\nBetrogen hat aber nicht nur VW. Auch andere Autohersteller haben ihre Dieselmotoren frisiert und mit angeblich zulässigen Abschalteinrichtungen auf den Markt gebracht. Der Verkehrsminister setzte eine Untersuchungskommission „Volkswagen“ ein, aber der Abgasskandal ist damit nicht aufgeklärt.\n\nAll dies machte den Untersuchungsausschuss nötig. Der begann seine Arbeit am 7. Juli 2016. Bis zur letzten Zeugenvernehmung am 8. März 2017 wurden 57 Zeugen vernommen, 13 Sachverständige gehört und 4 Gutachten erarbeitet. Bei der Bewältigung dieser Arbeit wurden die engagierten Mitglieder des Ausschusses von ihren Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern intensiv unterstützt. Als Ausschussvorsitzender gilt mein zusätzlicher Dank den Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern des Ausschusssekretariats, die unter einem großen Zeitdruck eine tolle Arbeit geleistet haben.\n\nEs war richtig, diesen Ausschuss einzusetzen, und es war wichtig; denn wir decken Schwachstellen in den Behörden auf, die den Abgasbetrug nicht erkennen wollten oder konnten. Wir zeigen auf, wie die Automobilindustrie Einfluss auf politische Entscheidungen nimmt. Wir haben erreicht, dass wir hier die Debatte führen, wie wir umweltgerechte, wirtschaftliche und nachhaltige Mobilität gestalten können.\n\nIch kann jetzt aufgrund der kurzen Redezeit leider nur auf zwei Punkte direkt eingehen.\n\nErstens. Das KBA ist für die Zulassung von Fahrzeugen verantwortlich. Beharrlich ignorierten die Verantwortlichen dort und auch das vorgesetzte Verkehrsministerium Hinweise, dass die genehmigten Abgaswerte nicht eingehalten werden. Im Untersuchungsausschuss haben Vertreter des KBA bestritten, dass sie entsprechende Nachprüfungen hätten vornehmen können. Das stimmt aber nicht. Auch für das KBA gilt das Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetz. In § 24 Absatz 1 dieses Gesetzes heißt es:\n\nDie Behörde ermittelt den Sachverhalt von Amts wegen. Sie bestimmt Art und Umfang der Ermittlungen ...\n\nSie ist also frei.\n\n2011 gab es einen sogenannten Feldtest der Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen, abgekürzt: BASt. In dem vom Bundesumweltministerium initiierten und damals vom Verkehrsministerium immer wieder gebremsten Projekt wurden auch mehrere VW-Motoren getestet, unter anderem der Betrugsmotor EA189. Einem Mitarbeiter fiel zunächst ein erhöhter CO2-Wert auf. Der BASt-Mitarbeiter wollte klären, woher dieser Wert komme, wurde dann aber von einem Mitarbeiter des KBA ausgebremst. Ich zitiere:\n\nDa die CO2-Ermittlung nicht direkter Bestandteil des Projekts ist ... , ist meine Empfehlung, derzeit keine weitere Klärung von VW abzuverlangen.\n\nDie Devise war: Nichts hören.\n\nAls dann am gleichen Motor auch erhöhte Stickoxidwerte gemessen wurden, hieß es ebenfalls, es handele sich um einen Einzelfall. Zitat:\n\nFür mich ergibt sich hieraus nicht die Notwendigkeit weiterer Fragestellungen an die VW AG.\n\nDas damalige Verkehrsministerium hatte Kenntnis von dieser Angelegenheit. Die Devise war: Nichts sehen, nichts sagen.\n\nHätte man die Ereignisse damals hinterfragt und auch das umfassende Testprogramm des Umweltbundesamtes angewendet, so hätte man den Dieselskandal möglicherweise bereits im Jahre 2011 aufdecken können, und es hätte nicht die schweren Verwerfungen, beispielsweise bei VW, gegeben.\n\nDas KBA muss deshalb verpflichtet werden, künftig Hinweisen auf Manipulationen an Fahrzeugen oder einem entsprechenden Verdacht nachzugehen und dem aufsichtführenden Bundesverkehrsministerium unverzüglich zu melden.\n\nZweitens. Aus Antworten auf zahlreiche Anfragen der Linksfraktion geht hervor, dass die Automobilindustrie einen besonders guten Zugang zu dem politischen Spitzenpersonal hat. Die Industrie führt im Kanzleramt Gespräche, während die Umweltverbände und Verbraucherschutzorganisationen ihre Belange kaum bis auf die Ministerialebene vermittelt bekommen. Im Untersuchungsausschuss konnten wir nachweisen, dass wesentliche Entscheidungen faktisch von der Industrie vorgegeben werden konnten.\n\nNur ein Beispiel. Bei den Verhandlungen zum neuen Prüfzyklus Real Driving Emissions, RDE, haben die Konzerne durchgesetzt, dass bei den Grenzwerten für Stickoxide der Faktor der Überschreitung 2,1 betragen darf und nicht 1,6, wie von der EU-Kommission vorgeschlagen worden war. Dieser skandalöse Sachverhalt ist im Sondervotum der Linksfraktion ausführlich dargestellt. Um den Einfluss der Hersteller auf Regierung und Behörden zulasten der Belange der Umwelt und der Gesundheitsinteressen der Menschen zu begrenzen, müssen Lobbykontakte von der Bundesregierung offen dargelegt werden, und zwar ab sofort.\n\nDer Skandal ist nicht beendet, leider. Wir sehen es am Beispiel der hohen CO2-Überschreitungen, die immer noch gemessen werden. Der Skandal ist nicht beendet, weil sich der Verkehrsminister weigert, wirklich umfassende Abgasmessungen vorzunehmen, weil er sich weigert, Verbraucherrechte zu stärken. Es gibt also noch viel zu tun.\n\nDer Ausschuss hat eine wesentliche Aufklärung geleistet. In der nächsten Wahlperiode können diese Erkenntnisse genutzt werden für Entscheidungen, die die Interessen der Beschäftigten, der Verbraucher und die Gesundheit der Allgemeinheit und nicht einseitig die wirtschaftlichen Interessen der Automobilkonzerne ins Zentrum stellen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n11611,roderich-kiesewetter,\"Ich weiß nicht. - Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich gebe Ihnen gerne ein bisschen von meiner Redezeit ab, wenn es dem Fortkommen im Bundestag dient.\n\nWir, die CDU/CSU, unterstützen die Ausweitung der Mission Sophia. Wir haben heute den ganzen Tag über die schwarze Seite der Linken erlebt, heute früh beginnend mit einer Rede der Fraktionsvorsitzenden. Selbst Russland trägt die Unterstellungen, die wir gerade gehört haben, nicht mit; denn wir haben mit Blick auf Libyen eine Resolution der Vereinten Nationen, die von Russland unterstützt wird. Das, was wir bei Libyen erreicht haben, wünschen wir uns auch für Syrien. Die dunkle Seite der Linken, die uns heute in düsteren Farben vorgeführt wurde, verkennt vollkommen, worum es geht.\n\nDer Einsatz Sophia ist eingebettet in ein strategisches Konzept der Vereinten Nationen, das alles bietet, was wir brauchen: erstens eine Resolution der Vereinten Nationen und zweitens regionale Partner, die mithelfen und stabilisieren. Ich möchte ausdrücklich - das hat schon Kollege Arnold getan - das Engagement des Sonderbeauftragten Martin Kobler würdigen. Er hat es durch unermüdlichen Einsatz über viele Monate geschafft, die Konfliktparteien in Libyen weitestgehend zu einigen. Ein großes Kompliment aus diesem Hause an Martin Kobler!\n\nDes Weiteren ist es gelungen, dass sich Marokko intensiv am Shikrat-Prozess beteiligt hat. Außerdem unterstützt Tunesien, das die europäischen Werte ausdrücklich teilt und verteidigt und massiv unter dem Terror leidet, die europäische Grenzsicherungsmission.\n\nIch will die drei Schritte aufzeigen, die für unsere politische Arbeit wichtig sind. Erstens. Die Ausweitung von Sophia bedeutet, dass wir gemeinsam mit den Vereinten Nationen versuchen, das Waffenembargo durchzusetzen. Ich gestehe den Grünen zu, dass wir Lücken haben. Das betrifft die Landgrenzen im Süden, wo der Großteil des Waffenschmuggels stattfindet. Aber wir müssen beginnen und dürfen kein Vakuum hinterlassen. Dass man mit der zivilen Seeschifffahrt kein Waffenembargo durchsetzen kann, dürfte jedem einleuchten, nur nicht der Linken.\n\nDer zweite Schritt, der erforderlich ist, ist die Bildung einer libyschen Zentralregierung. Diese wird, wenn es mehrheitlich gewünscht wird, dafür sorgen, dass die europäische Mission im Auftrag der Vereinten Nationen bis an die Küste geht. Ein weiterer Schritt wäre, dass die Mission Sophia dem Einsammeln von Kleinwaffen dient. 6 Millionen Einwohner, 20 Millionen Kleinwaffen - hier sind wir gefordert. Die Europäische Union hat Erfahrungen in Bosnien und im Kosovo gesammelt. Wir wissen, wie das geht,\n\nund kennen auch die Tücken.\n\nDer dritte Schritt ist dann, dass die europäische Mission, wenn die Einladung durch die libysche Zentralregierung erfolgt, Grenzsicherungskräfte in Libyen ausbildet und möglicherweise auch attestiert.\n\nWenn das erreicht ist, haben wir innerhalb Libyens eine Grundstabilität, aber noch lange nicht die Sicherheit, die wir brauchen, um das durchzusetzen, was wir letztlich wünschen, nämlich eine starke Regierung und eine wieder aufwachsende Zivilgesellschaft, die sich um Bildung, Ausbildung und Aussöhnung im eigenen Land kümmern kann. Ich nenne als weiteren Punkt die Durchsetzung der Menschenrechte, die zwingend erforderlich ist. Aber es bedarf dieses schrittweisen Ansatzes.\n\nEin Letztes: Vergangenes Jahr, im November, hatten wir den EU-Afrika-Gipfel. Auf diesem La-Valletta-Gipfel wurde sehr deutlich, wohin die Reise geht. Es geht um die Unterstützung der Afrikanischen Union, auch der Arabischen Liga, zumindest der Maghreb-Staaten, damit wir eine Marktöffnung erreichen und eine Aussöhnung innerhalb der Zivilgesellschaften hinbekommen. Ferner müssen die Themen Bildung und Tagesstrukturen in aufzubauenden Flüchtlingslagern wieder auf die Tagesordnung.\n\nAll das zusammen ist das Konzept, das die Europäische Union gemeinsam mit den Vereinten Nationen und den regionalen Partnern im Wesentlichen mitgestaltet. Lassen Sie mich deshalb an dieser Stelle deutlich unterstreichen: Unsere Marine leistet im Verbund mit den anderen europäischen Staaten Außergewöhnliches. Unser Dank gilt der deutschen Marine. Wir müssen aber auch durch öffentliche Information unserer Bevölkerung erklären, dass diese Soldaten einen sinnvollen Dienst leisten.\n\nIn diesem Sinne wünsche ich uns eine weitere Debatte. Die CDU/CSU unterstützt die Ausweitung des Mandats.\n\nDanke für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n1822,michael-kretschmer,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Vielen Dank für die freundlichen Wünsche. - Ich habe nur eine Erinnerung an den 7. Mai 1989, nämlich die, dass ich Klaus Feldmann abends im Fernsehen gesehen habe und mit allem gerechnet habe: mit 80 Prozent, mit 85 Prozent, vielleicht auch mit 90 Prozent. Ich als 14-Jähriger war sprachlos, als dann 99 Prozent verkündet wurden. Ich glaube, in diesem Moment war auch mir klar: Hier wird übel betrogen. Das letzte Mäntelchen von Legitimität, das es noch gab und das für die DDR so wichtig war, ist an diesem Tag weggerissen worden. In der Tat hat an diesem Tag alles begonnen, was dann im Wendeherbst endete.\n\nIch verstehe die Rede der Kollegin Lemke nicht. Ich verstehe nicht, wie man das, was 1989 endete, Gott sei Dank endete - jedes Mal, wenn ich zum Brandenburger Tor komme, ist es für mich ein unglaublicher Moment, dort durchgehen zu können; ich erinnere mich, wie wir davor gestanden und dieses Unverständnis verspürt haben, dass da das eigene Land endet, dass es da nicht weiter geht, dass man eingesperrt ist -, in irgendeinen Zusammenhang mit den Einsätzen in Bosnien und der schwierigen Entscheidung, die wir verantwortlich getroffen haben, bringen kann.\n\nIch verstehe nicht, wie man in diesem Moment, in dem es darum geht, diese Diktatur in einer friedlichen Revolution zu überwinden, über Internetüberwachung reden kann, ohne sich Gedanken darüber zu machen, was eigentlich gewesen wäre, wenn die DDR über diese Möglichkeiten verfügt hätte. Hätte es dann diese friedliche Revolution überhaupt gegeben, oder wären all diese Leute, die sich wie auch meine Eltern engagiert haben, irgendwo im Gefängnis oder im Nirgendwo gelandet?\n\nDeswegen kann ich nur sagen: Gott sei Dank ist das alles vorbei. Was für ein Glück für mich, für meine Schwester, die zwei Jahre jünger ist, und für meinen Bruder, der sieben Jahre jünger ist! Was für eine gigantische Lebenschance, die wir alle bekommen haben, in Bezug auf den Zuwachs an Lebenserwartung, die Gesundheit, die Umwelt! Wir stehen heute in der Verantwortung, daraus etwas zu machen. Wir müssen den jungen Leuten in den neuen Bundesländern sagen: Ihr habt alle Chancen, macht etwas daraus! Wir haben großartige Chancen in der Wissenschaft, in der Bildung, in der Wirtschaft.\n\nWenn ich lese, dass die deutsche Einheit 2 Billionen Euro gekostet hat, dann muss ich sagen: Ich finde, das ist gut angelegtes Geld.\n\nDenn 1989/90 endeten nicht nur ein Land und eine Diktatur; vielmehr ist auch ein neues Deutschland entstanden. Der Satz ist richtig: Ein besseres Deutschland als das, das wir heute haben, gab es nie. - Das, was die deutsche Einheit gekostet hat, ist gut angelegtes Geld.\n\nIch bin froh darüber, dass wir mit unserem Koalitionsvertrag auch einen Beitrag dazu leisten, dass die DDR nicht in Vergessenheit gerät. Mit DDR meine ich ein System der Unterdrückung, eine Ideologie des Sozialismus und des Kommunismus. Darum geht es im Kern: deutlich zu machen, dass diese Ideologie zu Unfreiheit und zu großen Verbrechen führt. Es geht nicht um die DDR als irgendetwas, sondern es geht um eine wirklich schlimme, linke, kommunistische, sozialistische Ideologie. Wir sind dafür dankbar, dass die Robert-Havemann-Gesellschaft eine wichtige Aufgabe erfüllt. Wir werden sie in diesem Jahr und in der Zukunft mit zusätzlichen Mitteln unterstützen.\n\nWir sind froh darüber, dass Rainer Eppelmann mit der Bundesstiftung zur Aufarbeitung der SED-Diktatur klarmacht und auch heute noch Erkenntnisse dazu produziert, wie die SED-Diktatur im Kern gewirkt hat. Ich habe nullkommanull Verständnis dafür, dass man hier berichtet, dass man am 7. Mai 1989 erlebt hat, wie die eigenen SED-Leute die Wahlergebnisse gefälscht haben, und dass man nonchalant dazu übergeht, zu erzählen: Dann saß ich am Runden Tisch und habe da mitdiskutiert.\n\nEine richtig gute Aussage wäre doch gewesen, Herr Kollege Hahn: Deswegen bin ich am 7. Mai 1989 aus der SED ausgetreten.\n\nDas Ganze ist auch eine Frage des Umgangs mit der Geschichte. Natürlich gab es in der DDR eine CDU. Aber was hat diese Partei nach der Wiedervereinigung an Aufarbeitung, an einer Bewertung von Geschichte geleistet?\n\nDas alles sind Dinge, die Sie als direkte Nachfolgepartei der SED,\n\nals Partei, die sich bewusst die Stasi als Machtinstrument gehalten hat, nie geleistet haben. Von Ihnen gab es keine Entschuldigung für die Opfer,\n\nkein Anerkenntnis für das Unrecht in der DDR,\n\nübrigens auch heute nicht in Ihrer Rede.\n\nInsofern besteht hier ein großer Unterschied im Umgang mit der Geschichte.\n\nBitte.\n\nIch nehme zur Kenntnis, dass es keine andere Partei im Deutschen Bundestag oder in einem Länderparlament gibt, in dem Stasimitarbeiter Parlamentsabgeordnete sein können.\n\nDas ist etwas, was ich zur Kenntnis nehme und was ich in vielen Länderparlamenten gesehen habe.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wie wichtig es ist, die eigene Geschichte aufzuarbeiten und ein klares Verhältnis dazu zu haben, sehen wir meines Erachtens gerade in Russland und in der Ukraine. Es ist total wichtig, Klarheit zu haben und dem entgegenzutreten, dass der russische Präsident sagt: Der Untergang der Sowjetunion ist die größte Katastrophe des 21. Jahrhunderts. - Nein, so ist es nicht. Für uns ist es wichtig, dass die Geschichte vernünftig aufgearbeitet wird und auch lebendig bleibt. Deswegen werden wir in den nächsten Wochen eine Kommission einberufen, die für die zukünftige Arbeit der Stasi-Unterlagen-Behörde Empfehlungen ausspricht. Uns ist wichtig, dass es diese Institution weiter gibt. Wir sind froh darüber, dass wir im Koalitionsvertrag gemeinsam vereinbaren konnten, dass die ehemalige Stasizen-trale in Berlin-Lichtenberg zu einem Ort der Aufklärung über Diktatur und Widerstand wird.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, noch einmal: Am 7. Mai 1989 begann etwas Großartiges, eine große Geschichte für unser Land. Es ist ein großer Tag, und es ist gut, dass wir ihn heute so miteinander begehen.\n\nFrau Kollegin, Sie haben mit Bezug auf Gerhard Schröder diesen Hinweis gebracht. Ich habe da nichts zurückzunehmen.\n\nNoch einmal: Ich finde, was wir 1989 überwunden haben\n\n- ja, was wir miteinander überwunden haben -, war etwas so Schlimmes und es hätte so furchtbar geendet, dass man es mit nichts in Verbindung bringen kann oder mit nichts abwägen kann, was in einer Demokratie an schwierigen Entscheidungen, auch unangenehmen Entscheidungen zu treffen ist, an schwierigen Prozessen zu bewältigen ist. Gott sei Dank können wir hier im Haus miteinander diskutieren, können schwierige Entscheidungen treffen, ohne Angst haben zu müssen, was uns passiert, wenn wir nach Hause gehen.\n\nDas, finde ich, sollte man nicht durcheinanderbringen.\"\n62,ursula-leyen,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Deutsche Rentenversicherung ist keine kapitalgedeckte individualisierte Versicherungsform, sondern eine Sozialversicherung. Deshalb hat sie auch besondere Merkmale. Ich möchte auf vier dieser besonderen Merkmale eingehen, weil sich darin auch widerspiegelt, was wir in der Rente warum verändern wollen - die Reihenfolge ist keine Wertung -:\n\nErstens. Wir haben eine umlagefinanzierte Rente. Das heißt, in dem Monat, in dem eingezahlt wird, wird gleichzeitig auch die Rente an die ältere Generation ausgezahlt. Das bedeutet im Klartext: Die Rente lebt von Kindern. Ohne Kinder keine Rente!\n\n- „Kinder zahlen keine Beiträge“, aber Kinder sind die Beitragszahlerinnen und Beitragszahler von morgen. Das heißt, wenn wir auch morgen eine Rente haben wollen, dann müssen heute Kinder erzogen werden. Das war in der Vergangenheit so, und das wird in der Zukunft so sein. Das ist das zentrale Merkmal einer umlagefinanzierten Rente.\n\nDas ist auch einer der Gründe, warum wir die Mütterrente verbessern.\n\nDie Deutsche Rentenversicherung hat gerade aktuelle Zahlen herausgegeben. Wenn man sich die Zahlbeträge anschaut, dann sieht man, dass Erziehende - das sind klassischerweise die Mütter - im Durchschnitt 50 Euro pro Kind weniger im Monat haben. Ein Teil dieser Diskrepanz wird durch die Mütterrente gemindert, die übrigens für die Vergangenheit und für die Gegenwart zu einem Ausgleich führt. Selbstverständlich gibt es diesen Ausgleich auch in der Zukunft; denn auch dann gibt es die Mütterrente für die jetzt junge Generation.\n\nZweites Merkmal einer Sozialversicherung: Alle, die sozialversicherungspflichtig arbeiten, müssen in die Rentenkasse einzahlen. Bis zur Beitragsbemessungsgrenze werden ihnen im Augenblick 9,45 Prozent des Arbeitnehmerbruttolohns abgezogen. „Bis zur Beitragsbemessungsgrenze“ heißt, dass insbesondere Menschen mit kleinem Einkommen ihren Beitrag zur Rentenversicherung leisten. Es bedeutet, dass diese Beiträge typischerweise die Steuern der „kleinen Leute“ sind. Je größer ein Einkommen ist, desto mehr wirkt die Beitragsbemessungsgrenze dämpfend, da die Abzüge für die Menschen mit größerem Einkommen nicht so relevant sind.\n\nDas ist einer der Hauptgründe, warum es in einer Sozialversicherung selbstverständlich sein muss, dass sich auch Menschen mit kleinem Einkommen darauf verlassen können, dass sie, wenn sie ein Leben lang Pflichtbeiträge eingezahlt haben, am Ende des Tages auch eine Rente haben, von der sie leben können. Das ist der zweite Punkt, den wir in diesem Koalitionsvertrag fest verankert haben, nämlich die Einführung einer solidarischen Lebensleistungsrente, die genau dieses Prinzip erfüllt.\n\nDrittens. Die Rente ist keine Versicherungssumme, die einfach nur einmal ausbezahlt wird, sondern die gesetzliche Rente ist eine Versicherungsleistung, die bis zum letzten Lebenstag ausbezahlt wird. Das bedeutet für uns aber auch, dass wir als Gesellschaft klug einteilen müssen - insbesondere wenn sich die Lebenserwartung erhöht: Wie viel Zeit wird in Arbeit investiert, sprich: in die Beitragszahlung, und wie viel Zeit ist für den wohlverdienten Ruhestand da? Das ändert sich mit einer längeren Lebenserwartung.\n\nDeshalb haben wir auch das schrittweise Zugehen auf die Rente mit 67 bis zum Jahr 2029 eingeführt. Es gibt Menschen - und das wissen alle hier in diesem Raum -, bei denen der Berufseinstieg relativ spät erfolgt: Man besucht die Schule, man absolviert ein Studium, und es dauert eine ganze Weile, bevor man im Beruf ist und in die Rentenkasse einzahlt. Es gibt andere, die schon sehr viel früher arbeiten müssen - mit 16, 17, 18 Jahren. Diese haben typischerweise körperlich harte, anstrengende, auszehrende Berufe.\n\nWeil das so ist und weil wir eine soziale Rentenversicherung haben, die einen Ausgleich zum Beispiel zwischen den Generationen, zwischen den verschiedenen Funktionen „Kindererziehung“ und „harte körperliche Arbeit“ und zwischen den Menschen mit großem und kleinem Einkommen schafft, werden wir die abschlagsfreie Rente mit 63 Jahren einführen. Sie gilt genau für diese Menschen, die lange eingezahlt, hart körperlich gearbeitet und im Durchschnitt sehr viel mehr Beitragsjahre haben, als das bei Akademikern oder Akademikerinnen typischerweise der Fall ist. Für diese Menschen wollen wir in dieser Großen Koalition etwas tun.\n\nViertens. Es ist eine Selbstverständlichkeit: Wen das Schicksal schwerer Krankheit ereilt, den lassen wir nicht hängen. Das ist das Grundprinzip der Erwerbsminderungsrente. Wir wissen, dass es hier ein Defizit gibt und dass sie verbessert werden muss. Auch das werden wir in der Großen Koalition tun.\n\nJa, das alles muss finanziert werden. Es musste in der Vergangenheit finanziert werden, es muss heute finanziert werden und auch in Zukunft. Deshalb stabilisieren wir den Beitragssatz bei 18,9 Prozent. Deshalb wird es im Jahre 2018 zusätzlich zu den Bundesmitteln von 80 Milliarden Euro, die es schon heute gibt, weitere 2 Milliarden Euro zur Finanzierung der Mütterrente geben. Deshalb wird die solidarische Lebensleistungsrente durch Einsparungen bei der Grundsicherung im Alter - das ist Steuergeld - und die Abschmelzung des Wanderungsausgleichs an die Bundesknappschaft finanziert.\n\nDas sage ich alles vor dem Hintergrund, dass heute in den rund 250 Milliarden Euro, die für die Rente ausgegeben werden, 80 Milliarden Euro Bundesmittel enthalten sind. Damit leistet der Bund schon heute einen wesentlichen Beitrag zur Finanzierung der gesetzlichen Rente.\n\nDas ist das Wichtigste, und das ist auch das Ende. All das, was ich eben beschrieben habe, funktioniert nur, wenn die Wirtschaft brummt und wenn die Menschen eine gute Arbeit haben. Das ist das Entscheidende.\n\nHeute sind die neuen Arbeitsmarktzahlen herausgekommen. Die Zahl der sozialversicherungspflichtigen Erwerbstätigen liegt bei 29,8 Millionen. Das sind alleine im Vergleich zum Vorjahresmonat 380 000 mehr. Das ist das Entscheidende für solide Sozialkassen. Deshalb ist das große Ziel dieser Großen Koalition, die Vollbeschäftigung zu erreichen und den Menschen gute Arbeit und mehr Arbeit zu ermöglichen. Denn das ist die Basis unseres Wohlstandes.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n422,monika-grutters,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Von dem wunderbaren, gelegentlich ein wenig satirisch daherkommenden Mark Twain stammt der Satz: Kultur ist das, was übrig bleibt, wenn der letzte Dollar ausgegeben ist. - Hier ist er einmal ganz nüchtern gewesen. In der Tat, Mark Twain hat recht: Kultur ist eben mehr als alles andere, Kultur ist ein Wert an sich. Geld ist nicht alles; das wissen wir hier besser als alle anderen. Ohne Dollars und Euros geht es halt nicht. Zum Glück haben Bundestag und Bundesregierung in der vergangenen Legislaturperiode den Etat des Staatsministers für Kultur immer wieder ein wenig aufwachsen lassen. Es wäre schön, wenn es dabei bliebe.\n\nGerade in Zeiten ökonomischer Krisen, wie wir sie nicht nur in Europa, sondern weltweit seit Jahren erleben, wird die Wertegemeinschaft, wird das, was wir das Kulturprojekt Europa nennen, immer wichtiger. Wo, wenn nicht in der Kultur, können Antworten gesucht werden auf die Frage, was uns zusammenhält? Die Frage stellt sich einmal mehr in einem so intensiven Gedenkjahr wie 2014. Welche Werte erkennen wir eigentlich als gemeinsames Fundament an? Eine Kulturnation wie Deutschland, die in ihren Traditionen so reich, aber in ihren Brüchen auch so radikal ist - mehr als alle anderen -, muss sich mehr denn je nach ihrer Rolle im heutigen und im zukünftigen Europa fragen. Ich glaube, Antworten auf diese Fragen sind wir schuldig, und zwar vor Deutschland, vor Europa und auch vor den Augen der Welt.\n\nEin Blick auf unsere ja so sperrige Geschichte macht deutlich, dass die Kultur in den vergangenen Jahrhunderten in Deutschland immer eine besondere Rolle gespielt hat. Sie war und ist bis heute das geistige Band, das uns auch über manche föderalen Schwierigkeiten hinweg zusammenhält. Deutschland war zuerst eine Kultur- und dann eine politische Nation. Nationale Identität wächst eben auch zuallererst aus dem Kulturleben eines Landes. Aus den Zusammenbrüchen unserer Geschichte mit zwei Diktaturen in einem Jahrhundert haben wir eine Lehre gezogen. Bereits in Art. 5 Abs. 3 unseres Grundgesetzes heißt es: „Kunst und Wissenschaft, Forschung und Lehre sind frei“. Das ist der oberste Grundsatz jeder verantwortlichen Kulturpolitik.\n\nFrei sein können Kunst und Wissenschaft nur, wenn der Staat ihre Freiheiten schützt. Diese staatliche Fürsorge für die Kultur und ihre Freiheit, die mit dem Mut zum Experiment natürlich auch das Risiko des Scheiterns einschließt, hat immer wieder weltweit beachtete Leistungen hervorgebracht. Dieses hartnäckige Engagement für die Künste, die ja nicht immer leicht zu ertragen sind, hat entscheidenden Anteil am mittlerweile wieder hohen Ansehen Deutschlands in der Welt. Eine solche Kultur ist eben nicht das Ergebnis des Wirtschaftswachstums; sie ist vielmehr dessen Voraussetzung. Kulturelle Existenz in Deutschland ist keine Ausstattung, die sich unsere Nation leistet, sondern eine Vorleistung. Wir haben dafür Sorge zu tragen, dass sie allen zugutekommt.\n\nEine so verstandene Kultur ist auch kein dekorativer Luxus, sondern Ausdruck eines menschlichen Grundbedürfnisses. Sie ist nicht allein Standortfaktor, sondern auch Ausdruck von Humanität. Deshalb ist es mir besonders wichtig, neben der Fürsorge für unser kulturelles Erbe, also für die Institutionen, ganz besonders auch die Künstler in den Blick zu nehmen, die Kreativen, und Sorge für die Rahmenbedingungen zu tragen, unter denen sie leben.\n\n- Danke, ich habe auch Sie persönlich gemeint.\n\nDenn es sind ja die Künstler, die uns immer wieder mit ihren herausragenden Leistungen beglücken. Ich finde, das, was von den Kreativen kommt, darf auch mal wehtun, darf auch unbequem sein. Sie sind das kritische Korrektiv, das wir brauchen und von dem eine vitale Gesellschaft lebt. Sie dürfen uns zum Nachdenken und auch zur Kritik herausfordern. Ich bin Ihnen ausdrücklich dankbar dafür, dass das immer wieder und so hartnäckig passiert.\n\nBei einem solchen Verständnis von Kultur verbieten sich eine allzu kleinliche Steuerung und ein staatliches Kriterienkorsett. Künstler brauchen keine autoritativen Vorgaben; was sie brauchen, sind Inspiration, Anstöße und unseren gemeinsamen Diskurs.\n\nLassen Sie mich an dieser Stelle als Münsteranerin in Berlin und als Berlinerin in diesem Amt ein Wort zu Berlin sagen.\n\nMein Berliner Kollege Swen Schulz, meine Kollegin Högl, mir wird immer unterstellt, ich würde jetzt nur noch Berlin sehen.\n\nAber Berlin ist eben die Hauptstadt, und das, was in dieser Hauptstadt kulturell gelingt, wird in den Augen der Welt dem ganzen Land gutgeschrieben.\n\nAndererseits wird - jedenfalls in den Augen der Öffentlichkeit - für das, was hier schiefgeht, auch das ganze Land verantwortlich gemacht. Kulturpolitik in Berlin ist also, ob man das will oder nicht, immer auch Bundespolitik,\n\nund die Bundeskulturpolitik in und für Berlin ist Ausdruck der Anerkennung der besonderen Rolle der Hauptstadt für die Nation.\n\nGleich wird es Ihnen nicht so gefallen. - In der Kulturpolitik muss den Ländern klargemacht werden, dass Berlin kein konkurrierendes Bundesland, kein Bundesland wie jedes andere ist, sondern unser aller Mittelpunkt. Berlin selbst muss dem Bund aber auch klarmachen, dass er als Erster von einer kulturell blühenden Hauptstadt profitiert. Ich würde mich schon freuen - da können Sie mir alle helfen -, wenn Berlin auch einmal Danke sagen würde oder einfach nur erkennen ließe, dass Hauptstadt sein auch eine dienende Funktion ist.\n\nUm also allen Mutmaßungen entgegenzutreten: Ich verstehe mich als Kulturstaatsministerin für ganz Deutschland, nicht nur, aber ganz besonders auch für Berlin, unsere Hauptstadt. Deshalb hat mich meine erste Dienstreise nach Frankfurt geführt und dort nicht in einen Tempel der Hochkultur, sondern ins Jüdische Museum.\n\nDort wird nämlich gerade sehr eindrucksvoll in einer kleinen Kammerausstellung gezeigt, dass es den Nazis 1938 nicht nur und nicht in erster Linie darum ging, die Kunst der Moderne als entartet zu diffamieren, sondern dass das Hauptziel war, auch im Kunstbetrieb jüdische Mitbürger und Akteure zu eliminieren. Deshalb bleiben Provenienzrecherche und Restitution, also die Rückgabe geraubter Güter, für uns ein ganz wichtiges Anliegen.\n\nEs gehört zu unseren großen Verantwortungen, uns unserer Geschichte und ihren Folgen immer wieder und auch auf diesem bitteren Feld zu stellen, damit das geschehene Unrecht nicht auch noch latent fortdauert. Ich finde es schlicht unerträglich, dass sich immer noch Naziraubkunst in deutschen Museen befindet.\n\nAllerdings ist in puncto Provenienzrecherche in den vergangenen Jahren sehr viel geschehen. Die Arbeitsstelle für Provenienzforschung hat 2008 ihre Arbeit aufgenommen; finanziert wird sie übrigens vom Bund und von den Ländern. Seitdem sind 14,5 Millionen Euro in die Herkunftssuche geflossen. Was häufig nicht gesehen wird: 90 000 Objekte in 67 Museen und mehr als 520 000 Bücher und Drucke in 20 Bibliotheken wurden mittlerweile überprüft. Nach unseren Erkenntnissen wurden bis September letzten Jahres mehr als 12 200 Objekte - meist diskret - zurückgegeben.\n\nDie Koordinierungsstelle Magdeburg, die Arbeitsstelle für Provenienzforschung und die Limbach-Kommission leisten eine hervorragende Arbeit, die übrigens im Ausland sehr wohl anerkannt wird. Aber es fehlt ein erkennbarer Ansprechpartner. Darum sollen die Aktivitäten von Bund, Ländern und Kommunen in den Bereichen Provenienzforschung und Restitution, also tatsächliche Rückgabe, künftig gebündelt und nachhaltig - ich spreche von einer Verdopplung der Bundesleistungen - gestärkt werden. Ich habe dazu viele Gespräche mit Länderkollegen geführt und nur positive Rückmeldung bekommen.\n\nEs geht uns um mehr als um Kunstobjekte. Es geht um das große Unrecht, um geraubte Identität, um den Verlust von Erinnerungen, die ja mit diesen Stücken verbunden waren, an geliebte Menschen. Ich finde, hier darf sich keine öffentliche Institution wegducken. Bei der Restitution geht es nicht in erster Linie um materielle Werte. Den Anspruchstellern ist besonders wichtig, dass sie, die Opfer, auch als Opfer anerkannt werden. Sie möchten, dass wir alle ihre zerstörten Lebensläufe kennen und dass durch die Anerkennung das Unglück und das Leid, das sie erlitten haben, wenigstens nachträglich sichtbar werden. Ich finde, es ist unsere moralische Pflicht, genau das zu leisten.\n\nDeshalb ist auch klar, dass die Museen künftig nicht nur, wie bisher, an ihrer Ankaufs- und Ausstellungspolitik, sondern auch daran gemessen werden, wie sie mit ihrer Geschichte und mit der Geschichte ihrer Sammlung umgehen. Weil das nur gemeinsam gelingt, habe ich ein zweites wichtiges Thema auf meiner Agenda: Wir möchten enger mit den Ländern zusammenarbeiten.\n\nIch habe mit den 16 Länderministern inzwischen verabredet, dass wir uns, wenn es irgendwie geht, zweimal im Jahr treffen. Das erste Treffen soll auf meine Einladung hin stattfinden. Dazu möchte ich dann auch die kommunalen Spitzenverbände einladen, weil immerhin 44 Prozent der Kulturleistungen in Deutschland von den wackeren Kommunen erbracht werden.\n\nDer zweite Besuch - ich respektiere ja mit großer Begeisterung die Kulturhoheit der Länder - soll dann von der KMK selber ausgehen. Wir wollen gemeinsam Strategien dafür entwickeln, wie wir unsere kulturelle Infrastruktur retten können; denn sie wird sich ja vor dem Hintergrund der Demografie und der ethnischen Durchmischung verändern.\n\nDazu gehört eben auch die Stabilisierung der Künstlersozialversicherung; denn der Erfolg der Kreativwirtschaft, die in Deutschland hinter der Automobilindustrie mittlerweile immerhin an zweiter Stelle rangiert, darf nicht darüber hinwegtäuschen, dass die allerwenigsten Künstler und Kreativen Großverdiener sind. Die Einführung der Künstlersozialversicherung vor 31 Jahren war ein sozial- und kulturpolitischer Meilenstein.\n\nDie Künstlersozialkasse garantiert bis heute ganz wesentlich die soziale Absicherung der freiberuflich tätigen Künstler und Publizisten, und ich finde, wir dürfen bei aller immer wieder laut werdenden Kritik aus einschlägigen Kreisen nicht zusehen, wie diese Errungenschaft jetzt beschädigt wird.\n\nDas hat nämlich auch etwas mit Gerechtigkeit zu tun. Wer künstlerische Leistungen in Anspruch nimmt, der muss eben auch ein bisschen dafür Sorge tragen, dass Künstler von ihrer Arbeit leben und nicht nur knapp überleben können, also angemessen bezahlt werden.\n\nAndererseits sollen die, die regelmäßig Abgaben entrichten, eben nicht zu Zahlmeistern werden, weil sich die anderen drücken. Deshalb ist eine stärkere, intensivere Prüfung notwendig. Im vergangenen Sommer waren wir kurz davor, das durchzusetzen. Ich bin meiner Kollegin Nahles sehr dankbar, dass auch sie das Thema Künstlersozialkasse ganz oben auf ihre Agenda gesetzt hat. Vielleicht schaffen wir es jetzt.\n\n- Ja, ich finde, das ist einen Applaus wert.\n\nDie Absicherung ist das eine, noch wichtiger ist es aber, dass Künstler von ihrer kreativen Arbeit überhaupt leben können - auch im digitalen Zeitalter. In der kommenden Legislaturperiode wird es deshalb darum gehen, das Urheberrecht weiter an das digitale Umfeld anzupassen.\n\nEs gilt vor allem, den Wert geistigen Eigentums besser zu vermitteln. Künstlerische Leistungen sind im Internet ja frei verfügbar; das ist unbestritten. Umsonst dürfen sie aber nicht sein.\n\nUrheberrechtsverletzungen im Netz verursachen gravierende Schäden, nicht nur volkswirtschaftlich. Deshalb müssen wir in der Rechtsdurchsetzung konsequenter sein, und die Rechteinhaber stehen für mich dabei im Mittelpunkt. Wir wollen die Verbraucher nicht sanktionieren, sondern sensibilisieren und aufklären.\n\nMit den digitalen Techniken sind nicht nur Risiken verbunden, sondern sie eröffnen auch einen ganz anderen Zugang zu Kultur und Bildung. Deshalb ist es uns ein wichtiges Anliegen, das kulturelle Erbe zu digitalisieren. Ich möchte hier aber nicht verschweigen, dass das vor allen Dingen sehr teuer ist. Trotzdem ist es bitter, dass wir hier im Vergleich zu anderen Ländern, wie Frankreich, weit hinterherhinken. Das betrifft vor allen Dingen unser nationales Filmerbe, das nicht nur digitalisiert, sondern auch viel besser aufbewahrt werden muss. Als Kulturpolitikerin ist es mir in diesem Kontext wichtig, dass wir auch hier nach den gesellschaftlichen Veränderungen und den Werten fragen, die nicht im Rausch des technisch Machbaren untergehen dürfen.\n\nErlauben Sie mir zum Schluss bitte noch ein Wort zu meinem Herzensanliegen, zum größten Kulturprojekt Europas; denn das entsteht in Berlins Mitte auf dem zentralen Platz der Republik: Es ist das Humboldt-Forum. Das ist schon lange kein Luftschloss mehr. Sie sehen, dass der Keller gedeckt ist und dass es auf starken Fundamenten steht. Ich traue der Stiftung auch zu, dass am Jahresende der Rohbau zu sehen sein wird.\n\nIch möchte versuchen, anhand von zehn einfachen Punkten zu sagen, warum ich eine so leidenschaftliche Verfechterin bin.\n\nErstens. Deutschland hat als einzige Nation der Welt die historische Chance, den zentralen Platz der Republik am Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts neu zu definieren. Wir machen kein Parkhaus, kein Hotel und auch kein Central Park East, sondern wir laden die Kunst ein.\n\nZweitens. In einer einzigartigen Verbindung werden die Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz, die Universität und die Bibliothek die Mitte der Hauptstadt bespielen.\n\nDrittens. Hier sollen sich vor allen Dingen die außereuropäischen Künste selbstbewusst darstellen.\n\nViertens. Das Ganze geschieht im direkten Dialog mit unserer eigenen Kunstgeschichte, gegenüber auf der Museumsinsel.\n\nFünftens. Es soll um die Betrachtung der großen Menschheitsthemen gehen, wie die Grenzen des Lebens, Geburt, Tod, Gott, die Bedeutung der Religion, Identität und Migration. Hier erfahren wir das, was wir alle über unser Leben wissen wollen.\n\nSechstens. Wir alle erleben immer wieder, was es heißt, als Minderheit in einer Diaspora zu leben, zum Beispiel ich als Katholikin in Marzahn oder die Schwaben in Prenzlauer Berg.\n\nKosmopolitische Städte wie Berlin sind unsere Zukunft. In Museen gilt dieser Unterschied nicht; da sind alle Menschen gleich. Die Unterschiede sind kleiner als die Gemeinsamkeiten.\n\nSiebentens. Ich finde, es muss eine Vision für Berlin, die Hauptstadt, her, für Deutschland, eine der bedeutendsten Kulturnationen der Welt. Ich glaube, das kann an diesem Platz in aufregenden Kunstpräsentationen seinen Ausdruck finden.\n\nAchtens. Wir wollen die Diskussion interdisziplinär und auf hohem Niveau führen.\n\nNeuntens. Berlin ist der Sehnsuchtsort für viele junge Menschen, die Deutschland attraktiv finden. Wir laden die Jugend ein, denn dort sprechen wir eine neue, junge Sprache.\n\nZehntens und last, but not least. Das Humboldt-Forum ist mit einer einzigartigen Idee verbunden. Es geht dabei ja nicht um ein besseres Völkerkundemuseum oder um die pragmatische Unterbringung unserer Sammlung. Es geht um neuartige Kunst- und Kulturerfahrung und um das Wissen über gleichberechtigte Weltkulturen und neue Kompetenzen im Weltverständnis. Damit das gelingt, müssen wir nicht nur das bauliche Entstehen begleiten, sondern wir müssen sehr schnell die Inhalte durch eine Intendanz profilieren, um die ich mich sehr zügig kümmern möchte.\n\nLetzter Satz. Der Name „Humboldt-Forum“ steht für die Tradition der Aufklärung, für die weltoffene und selbstbewusste Annäherung der Völker und für das Ideal eines friedlichen Dialogs. Für diese Ideen müssen wir werben. Sie sind von grundlegender Bedeutung für uns in der Gegenwart und in der Zukunft; denn Kultur ist ein Modus für das Zusammenleben.\n\nKultur darf, ja, sie muss zuweilen Zumutung sein. Wenn sie darüber hinaus noch unterhält, umso besser. Wenn wir für all das Sorge tragen, dann bleibt sie uns, selbst wenn Mark Twains letzter Dollar ausgegeben ist.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n9,ulla-schmidt,\"Herr Präsident, Sie haben wie meistens recht. Ich nehme die Wahl an und bedanke mich für das große Vertrauen. Danke schön!\"\n10200,karl-lauterbach,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich will zunächst einmal auf den Schwerpunkt dieses Gesetzentwurfs zu sprechen kommen. Ich möchte in Erinnerung rufen, worum es hier eigentlich geht.\n\nErstens. Wir haben in der Pflege im Großen und Ganzen drei zentrale Problembereiche. Schon zum gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt gelingt es uns nicht mehr, genügend junge Menschen für Pflegeberufe zu gewinnen. Viele derer, die in einem Pflegeberuf arbeiten, verlassen ihn zu früh. Unser Personalbedarf kann schon jetzt nicht mehr gedeckt werden. Dieses Problem wird sich vergrößern.\n\nZweitens. Es ist bekannt: Es gibt große Qualitätsdefizite in der Pflegeausbildung. Das möchte ich hier nicht vertiefen.\n\nDrittens. Die Anforderungen werden immer größer. Die Bereiche überschneiden sich immer stärker: In der Altenpflege ist es notwendig, immer mehr medizinischen Anforderungen gerecht zu werden. Die Medizin, die im Krankenhaus praktiziert wird, hat zum Teil geriatrisch-altenpflegerische Herausforderungen zu bewältigen, was früher nicht der Fall war.\n\nDie mit den drei beschriebenen Punkten verbundenen Probleme wollen wir mit der Verabschiedung dieses Gesetzentwurfs lösen.\n\nIch will nur der Fairness halber sagen, dass das, was eben vorgetragen wurde - ich weiß gar nicht mehr, von wem; ich glaube, es war von einer Kollegin von den Grünen, Maria Klein-Schmeink -, dass wir nämlich für die Pflege bisher zu wenig gemacht haben, ungerecht ist. Wir haben in dieser Legislaturperiode mehr gemacht, als in acht Jahren zuvor geschehen ist.\n\nIch bringe dafür vier Beispiele. Wir haben 20 000 zusätzliche Betreuungsplätze in der Altenpflege ermöglicht.\n\nWir haben ein Pflegeförderprogramm im Umfang von 660 Millionen Euro aufgelegt. Wir haben einen Pflegezuschlag im Umfang von 500 Millionen Euro gewährt. Wir haben die Tarifbindung in die Wirtschaftlichkeitsprüfung der kompletten ambulanten und stationären Altenpflege hineingenommen. Derjenige, der nach Tarif bezahlt wird, kann nicht mehr als unwirtschaftlich qualifiziert werden. All das sind wichtige Maßnahmen.\n\nDas ist auf jeden Fall mehr, als in den acht Jahren zuvor geschehen ist. Daher ist es einfach unfair, zu sagen, da sei zu wenig gemacht worden.\n\nIch verweise als jemand, der das Problem der Pflege gut kennt - ich bin mit vielen Kinderkliniken in engem Kontakt; ich kenne die Ausbildungsdefizite genau -, auf den Bereich Kinderkrankenpflege, um zu zeigen, dass die geplante Ausbildungsreform eine gute ist.\n\n- Nur ganz kurz. Ich bin gleich fertig.\n\nDer Bereich Kinderkrankenpflege wird ja oft kritisch besprochen. Der allergrößte Teil der praktischen Ausbildung wird in der jeweiligen Einrichtung selbst durch den dualen Träger der Ausbildung durchgeführt. 300 Ausbildungsstunden entfallen auf die stationäre Grundpflege. 120 Ausbildungsstunden,\n\nPflichtstunden, entfallen auf die pädiatrische Versorgung. Wir haben 500 Stunden Vertiefung. Wir haben 400 Stunden Orientierung. Wir haben dann noch 80 Stunden zur freien Verfügung. Das sind 1 400 Stunden.\n\nDie jetzige Ausbildung in der Kinderkrankenpflege ist qualitativ schlechter, weil bestimmte Bereiche komplett fehlen. Die besonderen Bedingungen bei Migrantenkindern, die besonderen Anforderungen für die moderne pädiatrische Onkologie sind nicht berücksichtigt. Kinderpsychiatrie ist in den jetzigen Curricula kaum enthalten. Also: Wir haben Defizite.\n\nWir haben bisher nur 900 Stunden. Wenn man den Vorschlag aufgreift, den die Kolleginnen von der Linkspartei hier vorgetragen haben - ein Jahr Vertiefung, nämlich das letzte Jahr -, dann käme man niemals auf die 1 400 Stunden; das ist schlicht ausgeschlossen. In der Praxis ist das so.\n\nHier wurde von irgendjemandem kritisiert, dass wir diese Inhalte nicht ins Gesetz schreiben, zum Beispiel mit Blick auf die besonderen Stoffwechselerkrankungen von Kindern mit Migrationshintergrund. So etwas machen wir in keinem Gesetz. Wir können in kein Gesetz hineinschreiben, wie beispielsweise die Ausbildung in den Informatikassistenzberufen genau aussehen muss; das bestimmt die entsprechende Fachkommission. Das machen hier die Pflegeschulen. Die Fachgesellschaften arbeiten bereits an dieser Reform. Sie nutzen die Gelegenheit, jetzt die modernen Inhalte zu definieren,\n\ndie, ehrlich gesagt, vielleicht nicht jedem im Hause - bei allem Respekt - bekannt sind; das ist zumindest mein Eindruck nach den Reden.\n\nSomit: Die Ausbildung kann man verbessern, wenn man pragmatisch herangeht. Es hat sich nirgendwo erwiesen, dass das alte Modell - zwei Jahre Grundausbildung, dann ein Jahr Vertiefung - funktioniert. Die Vertiefung muss viel früher beginnen. Das gleiche Problem haben wir beim Medizinstudium. Auch da fangen wir mit der Vertiefung viel zu spät an. Dass wir hier jetzt die Vertiefung und die Spezialisierung ganz nach vorn nehmen, schon in die Orientierung hinein - man kann schon in der Orientierung, in den ersten 400 Stunden, in die Pädiatrie gehen, man kann schon in die stationäre oder in die ambulante Altenpflege gehen -, ist genau der richtige Schritt, weil man darauf in den drei Jahren aufbauen kann.\n\nIch bin jetzt nur auf die 2 500 Stunden der praktischen Ausbildung eingegangen. Die 2 100 Stunden umfassende theoretische Ausbildung wird auch überarbeitet. Wir überarbeiten das Curriculum komplett und schmeißen dabei - Herr Kollege Henke wird das wissen - zahlreiche Dopplungen raus. Wir geben zudem vor - das gab es bisher nicht -, dass Personen unterrichten, die darin ausgebildet sind, die das hauptberuflich machen. Bisher ist das zum Teil im Nebenberuf gemacht worden. Ganz ehrlich - das darf man heute gar nicht mehr laut sagen -, wir haben zum Teil während des Medizinstudiums, ohne von der Pflege damals viel verstanden zu haben, Pflegeausbildung gemacht. Das ist nach der neuen Regelung überhaupt nicht mehr erlaubt.\n\nSomit: Alles kann man verbessern. Aber dann muss man in die Details einsteigen.\n\nLetzte Bemerkung. Ich finde es traurig, dass der Protest, der am stärksten von den privaten Pflegeverbänden kommt,\n\nim Prinzip von den großen französischen Konzernen, die die Privatisierung der Altenpflege betreiben, ausgerechnet von der Linken und von den Grünen hier aufgenommen wird.\n\nSie suchen sich hier die falschen Verbündeten. Das sind die härtesten Gegner unserer Reform, weil sie eine bessere Vergütung der Altenpflege fürchten. Das halte ich für nicht ehrenhaft.\"\n3772,charles-huber,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Zu Recht wurde gesagt: Wenn wir über Afrika reden, sprechen wir nicht in erster Linie über Hochtechnologie, sondern wir sprechen über Krisenszenarien jeglicher Provenienz, im Moment gerade auch über Ebola. Nichtsdestotrotz ist es dem einen oder anderen bewusst, dass es in Afrika durchaus und besonders unter der Jugend eine Affinität zur Technik gibt. Das spiegelt sich unter anderem in der Häufigkeit der Nutzung von Internet und Mobiltelefonen wider. In einigen afrikanischen Ländern liegt die Zahl abgeschlossener Handyverträge pro 100 Einwohner deutlich über dem deutschen Wert.\n\nWir haben gerade über die M-Pesa-Initiative gesprochen. Dieses System erlaubt es einem, kleinere oder größere Geldbeträge per Mobiltelefon zu überweisen. Ich habe jüngst, als ich in Tansania war, über einen Bekannten meine Fähre nach Sansibar auf diese Weise bezahlt. Es gibt die Bill-Gates-Cashew-Initiative - sie ist sehr sinnvoll -, mit deren Hilfe Bauern die Erzeugerpreise auf dem Weltmarkt per Handy abrufen können.\n\nIch möchte mit Ihnen hier über die Technikfolgenabschätzung hinsichtlich der Fernerkundung sprechen. Sicherlich wissen die wenigsten, dass dies bereits in den 80er- und 90er-Jahren in den afrikanischen Ländern angekommen ist. Hier war nämlich ein erster Trend zur Anwendung dieser Technik im Rahmen der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit zu verzeichnen.\n\nIch möchte kurz auf die Wirkungsweise dieser Technik eingehen und darauf, was es mit den daraus gewonnenen Erkenntnissen auf sich hat. Stellen Sie sich vor, Sie haben die Sonne oder einen anderen künstlichen Sender als Quelle, von der aus elektromagnetische Strahlung, EMS genannt, gesendet wird. Diese trifft dann auf ein Objekt und wird von diesem, je nach Beschaffenheit, absorbiert, transmittiert oder reflektiert. Daraus erhalten Sie dann Daten, die Sie anschließend unter verschiedenen Gesichtspunkten auswerten können und die Ihnen schließlich hilfreiche Informationen liefern.\n\nDas heißt, die Technologie unterteilt sich in den Aspekt der Infrastruktur und den Zugang zu Satellitendaten etc. einerseits und die weitere Datenaufbereitung, also Nutzbarmachung der gewonnenen Informationen, andererseits. Gerade Letztere muss vor dem Hintergrund eines nachhaltigen Technologietransfers an afrikanische Länder erfolgen. In der Vergangenheit ist, wie bereits angesprochen wurde, dieser Punkt jedoch eher zu kurz gekommen.\n\nFatal wird dies meines Erachtens, wenn man sich die künftige Entwicklung Afrikas vor Augen führt: Der Kontinent steht unter einem enormen demografischen Druck und unter dem Druck enormer klimatischer Veränderungen, deren Auswirkungen akuten Handlungsbedarf implizieren. Ich nenne als Beispiele die Entwicklung und Planung urbaner Räume, die Erkundung von Wasser- und auch Rohstoffvorkommen und deren Management, aber auch Erntevorhersagen in der Landwirtschaft und das Katastrophenmanagement. Es sei hier angemerkt: Die Daten müssen auch genutzt werden.\n\nDie mittels Fernerkundung erfassten und aufbereiteten Daten könnten und müssten schon jetzt genutzt werden, damit man sich perspektivisch auf die Herausforderungen einstellen kann. Staaten müssen, wie gesagt, darauf reagieren. Herr Kekeritz, Sie haben vorhin Hungersnöte angesprochen. Es ist nicht immer so, dass wir hier von Europa aus primär auf die Hungersnöte reagieren müssen, sondern die Staaten müssen auch selbst reagieren. Ich nenne Ihnen als Beispiel die Hungersnot in Äthiopien unter Kaiser Haile Selassie. Da hat die Regierung eine aufkommende Hungersnot in der Öffentlichkeit negiert.\n\nEs geht also letztendlich darum, die Chancen der Fern-erkundung konsequent zu nutzen. Am meisten beeindruckt an dieser Technik hat mich - ich versuche, die -positiven Möglichkeiten herauszustellen, und nicht, wie manch anderer Kollege, die negativen -, dass man heute durch die Erfassung des Klimas, des Zusammenwirkens verschiedener klimatischer Parameter die Bedingungen feststellen kann, unter denen sich Malariamücken am besten vermehren. Wenn Sie sich vor Augen halten, wie viele Menschen pro Jahr an Malaria sterben - etwa 1 Million -, erkennen Sie, wie wichtig das Verständnis dieser Zusammenhänge ist. Allein daher ist diese Initiative des Bundesministeriums für Bildung und Forschung, die hier auch auf Anregung des BMZ auf den Weg gebracht wurde, mehr als unterstützenswert.\n\nAus meiner Sicht stellt die Fernerkundung einen der besten strategischen Ansätze der deutschen Entwicklungspolitik überhaupt dar. Sozialer Frieden, wirtschaftliche Entwicklung und die Stabilisierung von Strukturen erfordern eine dezidierte und detaillierte Bestandsaufnahme relevanter Informationen, die mit diesen Themen in Verbindung stehen; denn man halte sich vor Augen: Künftig werden Kriege nicht nur um Öl und sonstige -Bodenschätze geführt werden, sondern vermehrt auch um Ressourcen wie Wasser und nutzbare Lebensräume. „Capacity Building vor Ort“ ist daher das zentrale Stichwort. Es braucht die Ausbildung von Fachkräften aus der einheimischen Bevölkerung, die über die Spezifika - das könnte sich auch noch einmal auf das Thema Ebola beziehen - der jeweiligen Region Bescheid wissen, damit eine sinnvolle Anpassung der Technologie an die Gegebenheiten vor Ort gewährleistet ist.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich bin schon am Ende meiner Rede. Ich freue mich, dass EUMETSAT und das ESOC der ESA ihren Sitz in meinem Wahlkreis, Darmstadt, haben. Ich wünsche Ihnen noch einen schönen Tag.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n15151,petra-sitte,\"Danke schön, Herr Präsident. - Guten Morgen, meine Damen und Herren! Mit der Vorlage des Legislaturberichts Digitale Agenda ruft uns die Bundesregierung in Erinnerung, dass sie eine digitale Agenda hat.\n\nDies in Erinnerung zu rufen, scheint tatsächlich notwendig zu sein; denn viel zu spüren ist davon eigentlich nicht. Damit will ich nicht sagen, dass sich nicht in verschiedenen Bereichen eine ganze Menge abgespielt hat; aber manches läuft eher als Trauerspiel. Die Zeiten, in denen man sich noch auf die Schulter klopfen lassen konnte, wenn man überhaupt Digitalpolitik gemacht hat, sind lange vorbei. Es geht darum, wie diese Politik aussehen soll. Eine Agenda muss deutlich mehr bieten als schöne Worte und ein Sammelsurium vieler einzelner Projekte, die sich in diesem Papier wiederfinden.\n\nWie wenig der vorliegende Bericht mit Strategie zu tun hat, zeigt sich daran, dass darin beispielsweise zum Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz nicht ein Wort steht, und das ist nun wirklich ein gewichtiges Vorhaben. Das wird auch an dem deutlich, was Frau Ministerin gerade gesagt hat. Sie weiß nicht, ob Herr Dobrindt zu diesem Thema redet. Nun mag man das als Kleinigkeit bezeichnen. Aber es zeigt, dass die Ministerien nebeneinanderher arbeiten, ohne tatsächlich koordiniert und abgestimmt zu wirken.\n\nDas heißt, Ihre Digitalisierungspolitik schleppt sich ein wenig visionslos dahin. Aber in der Mitte von Schwierigkeiten liegen Möglichkeiten. Lassen Sie mich die drei Kernziele, die Sie sich selbst gesetzt haben, anhand von Beispielen durchgehen.\n\nErstens: Wachstum und Beschäftigung; Sie hatten es gerade erwähnt. Da ist von gutem Arbeiten in der digitalen Welt die Rede. Gekommen ist jetzt erst einmal nur ein Dialogprozess. Es fehlen nach wie vor konkrete Antworten, etwa auf die Frage: Wie sollen die Gewinne der Digitalisierung später auch den Beschäftigten zugutekommen können, statt die Lage der Beschäftigten, wie befürchtet wird und wie Studien zum Teil zeigen, noch prekärer zu machen? Die Antwort auf diese Frage drängt, weil man das nicht dem freien Markt überlassen kann, weil wir bei diesen Themen auch ordnungspolitisch denken müssen und weil wir dazu eine gemeinsame Grundsatzentscheidung inhaltlicher Art herbeiführen müssen.\n\nZweitens: Zugang und Teilhabe. Den Zirkus, den Sie hier in den letzten Jahren zur Störerhaftung bei WLAN veranstaltet haben, hatten wir gestern Nacht gerade erst auf der Tagesordnung; ich will da nur auf meine Rede verweisen. Zur Netzinfrastruktur wird mein Kollege Herbert Behrens nachher noch etwas sagen; auch das ist nicht unbedingt ein Ruhmesblatt für die Bundesregierung.\n\nIch beschränke mich mit Blick auf Teilhabe auf die Frage, warum die Reform des Urheberrechts auf halbem Wege stehen bleibt, obwohl der Koalitionsvertrag mehr versprochen hat. Jetzt kommen zwar endlich Regelungen für den Bildungs- und Wissenschaftsbereich; aber diese Kuh ist noch nicht vom Eis. Ich hoffe, dass Sie bzw. wir das noch hinbekommen. Aber wir haben nur noch zwei Sitzungswochen, und mir scheint, dass mit den Verlagen im Hintergrund eine Menge verhandelt wird.\n\nDas wäre zumindest ein Baustein der dringend notwendigen Modernisierung. Wir bräuchten zudem eine Reform des Urhebervertragsrechts, um die Urheber ausdrücklich besserzustellen, und ein Urheberrecht, das die Nutzungsformen des digitalen Zeitalters konsequent anerkennt.\n\n- Das habe ich leider nicht verstanden; aber das klären wir später.\n\n- Aha, okay.\n\nDrittens: Vertrauen und Sicherheit. Weiter kann die Schere zwischen Anspruch und Realität wirklich nicht mehr auseinandergehen als in Ihrem Regierungshandeln. Auf der einen Seite betonen Sie - völlig zu Recht - die Bedeutung von IT-Sicherheit und vertraulicher Kommunikation. Auf der anderen Seite soll sie so sicher dann doch nicht sein, wenn es einem politisch in den Kram passt. Warum halten Sie also daran fest, dass deutsche Behörden IT-Sicherheitslücken sammeln können, statt sie zu schließen? Das wäre doch originäre Aufgabe des Staates.\n\nSogar den Einsatz von Staatstrojanern wollen Sie jetzt umfassend freigeben. Ich finde diese Entwicklung völlig absurd.\n\nDass sich dieser Widerspruch nicht einfach auflösen lassen wird, zeigt beispielsweise der große Angriff der Schadsoftware WannaCry vor wenigen Wochen. Das war der größte je erfolgte Angriff, und zwar unter Verwendung einer Technologie, mit der die NSA eine Sicherheitslücke ausgenutzt hat, die schon vor Jahren hätte geschlossen werden können.\n\nWie müsste also eine digitale Agenda aussehen, die ihren Namen verdient?\n\nZunächst einmal müsste sie den Mut haben, politische Verantwortung zu tragen. Wir brauchen jetzt Entscheidungen, um die gesellschaftlichen Auswirkungen der Digitalisierung in allen Politikbereichen zu gestalten.\n\nSie müsste konsequent die Planung und Koordinierung des Regierungshandelns umfassen, anstatt die teilzuständigen Ministerien - es sind vier bis sechs; man streitet sich hier - nebeneinander und gegeneinander arbeiten zu lassen.\n\nFür den Bundestag hieße das weiterführend, dass der Ausschuss Digitale Agenda mehr Verantwortung tragen müsste. Dieser Ausschuss müsste mit den anderen Ausschüssen auf Augenhöhe arbeiten und demzufolge hier die Federführung haben. Das wäre ein längst fälliger Schritt. Vielleicht wird es der erste in der nächsten Legislatur.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n5835,harald-ebner,\"Danke, Frau Präsidentin. - Herr Staatssekretär, ich versuche heute Mittag etwas, was heute Morgen erfolglos war. Im Bericht des Bundesministeriums für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft zum Agrar- und Fischereirat bezüglich der internationalen Handelsfragen war zu lesen, eine weitere Liberalisierung des Agrarhandels bleibe ohne Wirkung auf die Agrarwirtschaft in Deutschland. Meine Frage an Sie ist: Wie kommen Sie zu dieser Auffassung, und wie wollen Sie sie begründen angesichts der Tatsache, dass wir erhebliche Unterschiede haben - ich verweise nur auf das Vorsorgeprinzip und das Haftungsprinzip -, auch hinsichtlich der Zulassung von gentechnisch veränderten Organismen und der Kennzeichnungsfrage? Wie kommen Sie angesichts dessen zu der Auffassung, dass eine weitere Liberalisierung ohne jede Wirkung bleibt?\n\nDanke, Herr Staatssekretär. - Sie haben allerdings nicht auf die explizite Frage nach erweiterten Abstandsregelungen und weiteren Koexistenzmaßnahmen geantwortet. Ich hätte auch ganz gern noch gewusst, ob Sie denn vor dem Hintergrund der genannten Studienergebnisse Ihren Plan überdenken, bei der Umsetzung der Opt-out-Klausel die Entscheidung über Gentechnikanbauverbote ausschließlich den Ländern zu überlassen. Natürlich ist das Risiko einer unerwünschten Verunreinigung durch GVO-Pollenflug wesentlich größer, wenn es zu einem Flickenteppich von Regionen mit und ohne Gentechnikanbau kommt, als wenn es zu der von uns favorisierten bundeseinheitlichen Lösung kommt. Werden Sie daraus Konsequenzen ziehen?\n\nLieber Herr Staatssekretär, Sie haben jetzt von Juni gesprochen. Sie haben aber zur Umsetzung der Freisetzungsrichtlinie einen Gesetzentwurf zur Novellierung des Gentechnikgesetzes vorgelegt. Wenn ich den Zeitplan dazu richtig im Kopf habe, dann hilft die Bewertung der EFSA im Juni nichts mehr. Deshalb frage ich Sie jetzt noch einmal, wie schon in der ersten Nachfrage: Welche Konsequenzen werden Sie für das aktuell laufende Gesetzgebungsverfahren ziehen? Werden Sie die Verschiebung der Zulassung beispielsweise der Mais-linie auch zum Anlass nehmen, zu sagen: „Jetzt ist dieser Druck erst einmal raus; jetzt können wir nicht nur neue Erkenntnisse, sondern auch Gutachten, die noch nicht vorliegen, berücksichtigen“?\n\nIch frage insbesondere deshalb, weil das Umwelt-ministerium nach Aussage der Frau Staatssekretärin Schwarzelühr-Sutter erst vor kurzem ein eigenes Gutachten zur rechtssicheren bundeseinheitlichen Umsetzung der Gentechnikanbauverbote in Auftrag gegeben hat. Da wäre es doch nur recht und billig, wenn Sie mit Blick auf neue Erkenntnisse so viel Zeit einräumten, dass man darauf Rücksicht nehmen kann.\n\nDanke, Frau Präsidentin. - Herr Staatssekretär, spannend wird es, wenn wir einen Schritt zurückgehen und die Ursachen dafür betrachten, warum man überhaupt der Meinung ist, diese Pflanzenschutzmittel im Wald zu benötigen. Deshalb frage ich Sie, welche Initiativen und Maßnahmen die Bundesregierung ergreifen wird, um den Ausbau des ökologischen Waldumbaus zu fördern und so dank einer erhöhten ökologischen Stabilität des Waldökosystems dem Auftreten der extrem großen Baumschädlingspopulationen in Wäldern vorzubeugen.\n\nÜber die Waldstrategie haben wir schon mehrmals diskutiert. Da gibt es offenbar unterschiedliche Auffassungen. Ich bin nicht der Meinung, dass die Waldstrategie meine Fragen beantwortet; sonst hätte ich nicht fragen müssen, Herr Staatssekretär. Ich habe nach weiteren Schritten gefragt. Dann müssten wir uns die Frage nach den Pflanzenschutzmitteln an dieser Stelle nicht stellen, sondern könnten sagen, dass alles auf einem guten Wege ist.\n\nSie haben die Kriterien angesprochen, die die Bundesumweltbehörden vorgelegt haben, beispielsweise die naturschutzfachlichen Kriterien; diese sind zu beachten. Ich frage Sie: Durch welche Maßnahmen wird der Bund sicherstellen, dass die vorgelegten Kriterien von den zuständigen Länderbehörden bei ihrer Entscheidung über die Anwendung in der Praxis uneingeschränkt umgesetzt werden?\n\nDanke, Frau Präsidentin. - Herr Staatssekretär, haben die Bundesbehörden denn Möglichkeiten, auf die Entscheidungen der Landesbehörden Einfluss zu nehmen, sollten die genannten naturschutzfachlichen Kriterien nicht im erforderlichen Maße beachtet werden? Wenn ja, welche haben sie? Wenn nein, warum haben sie diese Möglichkeiten nicht, und wäre das nicht höchst bedenkenswert?\n\nWenn ich darf, gerne. - Ich bin jetzt etwas verwirrt. Ich hatte ja gefragt: Haben die Bundesbehörden die Möglichkeit, auf eine Entscheidung, bei der die naturschutzfachlichen Kriterien nicht beachtet wurden, direkt Einfluss zu nehmen? Wenn diese Kriterien nicht beachtet werden, hat das für den Naturhaushalt erhebliche Konsequenzen. Dann muss man doch nachjustieren können, und das nicht erst in zwei Jahren, wenn der Bericht vorliegt.\"\n8956,reinhard-brandl,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Für kaum ein anderes Land auf der Welt hat Deutschland so viel Verantwortung übernommen wie für Afghanistan. Wir reden heute über einen Einsatz der Bundeswehr. Gerade eben war ich auf der Webseite des BMZ. Man kann dort über die Projektdatenbank abfragen, wo und wie wir uns weltweit engagieren. Im Moment laufen in Afghanistan 101 Projekte mit einem Volumen von 1,1 Milliarden Euro. Ich betone das, weil wir den Eindruck haben, dass in manchen öffentlichen Debatten unser Engagement in Afghanistan einzig und allein an der Anzahl der Soldatinnen und Soldaten gemessen wird. Der Schwerpunkt unseres Engagements in Afghanistan - das ist die eigentliche Herausforderung - liegt im zivilen Bereich. Wir haben gerade schon einige Beispiele gehört. Die Aussöhnung mit den Taliban, die guten nachbarschaftlichen Beziehungen mit Pakistan - auf der Konferenz von Paris gab es in den letzten Tagen Annäherungen -, Fragen der guten Regierungsführung, der Kampf gegen die Korruption, die Beschäftigungspolitik, die Wirtschaftspolitik, der Aufbau von Infrastruktur, Energie, Wasser, Bildung - das sind die Themen, bei denen Afghanistan vorankommen muss. Der Kollege Kiesewetter hat dargestellt, wie lang der Weg Afghanistans ist, bis es das Niveau eines - in Anführungszeichen - „normalen“ Entwicklungslandes erreicht.\n\nDer ISAF-Einsatz von 2001 bis 2014 hat die Grundlage dafür gelegt, dass diese 101 Projekte heute laufen können. 2001 gab es dort null Projekte. Unser Engagement dort war quasi nicht vorhanden. Das Land war auf dem Weg ins Mittelalter. Diesen Weg haben wir gestoppt. Auch wenn es nur kleine Fortschritte sind, können wir stolz auf das sein, was wir in den letzten Jahren in Afghanistan erreicht haben.\n\nWir reden im Moment auch mit Blick auf Afghanistan viel über die Bekämpfung von Fluchtursachen. Dafür sind zwei Dinge wichtig: Erstens müssen die Menschen eine wirtschaftliche Perspektive in ihrem Land haben, und zweitens müssen sie in Sicherheit leben können. Genau an diesen Punkten arbeiten wir in Afghanistan mit schwankendem Erfolg.\n\nDass die Afghanen heute die Sicherheitsverantwortung in ihrem Land haben und selbst wahrnehmen, ist natürlich ein Erfolg. Der Resolute Support beschränkt sich nur noch auf die Beratung und Unterstützung höherer Führungsebenen. Die Afghanen und die afghanischen Sicherheitskräfte haben gezeigt, dass sie grundsätzlich in der Lage wären, diese Verantwortung wahrzunehmen. Leider sind sie an manchen Stellen auch krachend gescheitert.\n\nDie Nachrichten aus Kunduz waren natürlich für viele von uns, die sich seit langem mit diesem Land, mit diesem Einsatz beschäftigen, ein Stich ins Herz. Auch den Anstieg der Anzahl der zivilen Opfer haben wir uns natürlich nicht so gewünscht; das haben wir uns nicht so vorgestellt. Aber es wäre die falsche Antwort, jetzt angesichts dieser Lage zu resignieren und zu sagen: Mein Gott, es hat halt nicht funktioniert, wir lassen das Land im Stich. - Wir müssen eine gegenteilige Antwort geben.\n\nIch bin froh, dass die USA angesichts dieser Rückschläge entschieden haben, länger in Afghanistan und auch mit einer größeren Personalstärke zu bleiben, weil sie damit die Grundlage dafür legen und die Infrastruktur dafür stellen, dass auch wir unser Engagement fortführen können. Wir weiten unsere Mandatsobergrenze jetzt leicht von 850 auf 980 aus. Natürlich ändert das nichts. Es ist eine kleine Anzahl von Soldaten. Aber es hat natürlich eine hohe symbolische Wirkung. Die Wirkung ist, dass wir dem afghanischen Volk demonstrieren, dass wir nicht auf einem automatischen unumkehrbaren Abbau­pfad sind, der irgendwann bei null ankommt, sondern dass wir unser Engagement der Lage anpassen. Ich finde dieses Signal wichtig.\n\nDas zweite Signal, das wir in diesen Tagen genauso gut senden müssen, ist, dass wir der afghanischen Regierung sagen: Für diese Leistung, für dieses Entgegenkommen der internationalen Koalition erwarten wir im Gegenzug, dass sie ihren Verpflichtungen, die sie in den letzten Wochen, Monaten und Jahren der internationalen Gemeinschaft immer wieder zugesagt hat, zum Beispiel bei der Frage der Regierungsführung, zum Beispiel im Umgang innerhalb des Landes mit der Koalition, nachkommt.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, heute ist ein guter Tag, die beiden Signale zu senden, zum einen hier im Parlament mit der Verlängerung des Mandates und zum anderen in den Gesprächen, die Präsident Ghani im Moment in Berlin führt. Nutzen wir diesen Tag, um Signale zu senden.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n10175,arno-klare,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Wenn man die Frage stellt - die wird ja in diesem Hause sehr oft gestellt -, wer eigentlich der Böse hier im Spiel ist, dann ist sie chemisch sehr leicht zu beantworten. Kollege Kühn, ein Cocktail ist das eigentlich nicht; das ist C3H2F4. Die chemische Formel ist relativ simpel; da wird nichts zusammengeschüttet, das großartig an einen Cocktail erinnerte.\n\nDer Bösewicht ist dieser Formel ist das F, nämlich Fluor. Das ist in der Tat ein Mittel, mit dem man ganz viel hexen kann, zum Beispiel, wenn es brennt und mit Wasser in Berührung kommt usw. Es ist richtig: Da entstehen Fluorwasserstoff und Carbonylfluorid - ein Analogon zu Phosgen -; das ist gerade schon genannt worden. Das ist also in der Tat nicht ganz ungefährlich.\n\nDas neue Mittel hat den gewaltigen Vorteil, dass es in die Altanlagen, die Bestandsanlagen eingefüllt werden kann, in denen im Moment der Klimakiller drinsteckt, das Verhältnis ist 1 430 zu 4,4. Das ist schon ein gewaltiger Unterschied - darauf ist gerade schon einmal hingewiesen worden -, was die Klimawirksamkeit angeht. Das gelingt mit CO2 natürlich nicht. Insofern ist die Frage, wer eigentlich politisch verantwortlich bzw. der Böse ist, schon etwas komplizierter zu beantworten. Die EU hat den durchaus sinnvollen Schritt beschlossen, das Limit bei einem Wert von 150 zu ziehen. Dann hat man ein Mittel entwickelt, dessen GWP-Wert bei 4,4 liegt. Die Industrie bedient sich nun dieses Mittels, zumal es in die bestehenden Anlagen eingebaut werden kann. Wer sich die neuen CO2-Anlagen einmal anschaut, die bis 100 Bar gesichert sind, wird feststellen: Wenn diese 100 Bar sich entspannen, wie man so schön sagt, dann ist das ein ziemlich explosiver Vorgang. Das muss man sich nicht so ganz ungefährlich vorstellen.\n\nIch bin durchaus der Meinung, dass man zum Einsatz von CO2 kommen muss. Ich bin jetzt nicht gerade ein Verfechter von R1234yf, also von Tetrafluorpropen, so heißt das Mittel. Aber ich bin auch nicht dafür, dass man dieses Limit, 1. Januar 2017, verschiebt, sondern ich bin dafür, dass man das jetzt erst einmal einbaut. VW und andere Hersteller haben ja gesagt, sie werden eine Löschanlage einbauen, die mit Argon arbeitet und die Flammen löscht, wenn etwas passiert. Übrigens hat sich bei allen anderen Herstellern außer Daimler, die Versuche bei den brennenden Fahrzeugen gemacht haben, das, was bei Daimler passiert ist, nicht wiederholt. Es ist also nicht verifiziert worden. Das scheint auch mit der Bauart der Motoren von Daimler und mit der Aufteilung des Motorraums zu tun zu haben.\n\nInsofern wird die Zukunft sicherlich dem CO2 gehören. Aber im Moment ist dieses alte Mittel vorübergehend, denke ich, noch einmal einsetzbar, und es hat, was die Klimawirksamkeit angeht, auf jeden Fall einen wesentlich geringeren Impact. Deshalb werden wir diesen Antrag ebenfalls ablehnen.\"\n795,katja-keul,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Konzern-insolvenzrecht, das hört sich so an, als gäbe es kaum ein Thema, das weniger Menschen vor Spannung vom Hocker reißen könnte. Die wenigsten dürften Insolvenzverwalter zu ihrem Bekanntenkreis zählen; und dann geht es hier auch noch um Konzerninsolvenzverwalter. Ganz anders wirken dagegen folgende Zahlen: 2007 entfielen rund 70 Prozent des Umsatzes und 53 Prozent der Beschäftigten aller Unternehmen in Deutschland auf konzernverbundene Unternehmen. Das heißt, dass jeder zweite privat Beschäftigte von einer Konzerninsolvenz betroffen sein könnte - vielleicht doch ein Grund, sich genauer anzusehen, was hier geregelt werden soll.\n\nUm was geht es also? Als Konzern bezeichnet man den Zusammenschluss mehrerer Unternehmen zu einer wirtschaftlichen Einheit unter der Leitung eines herrschenden Unternehmens. Rechtlich bleiben die Unternehmen selbstständige juristische Personen mit eigener Buchführung und eigener Bilanz. Ihre wirtschaftliche und finanzielle Unabhängigkeit haben sie allerdings zugunsten der gemeinsamen Konzernleitung abgegeben. Sie haften nicht füreinander, sondern jeder für sich. Dieser Grundsatz der Haftungstrennung soll mit dem vorliegenden Gesetz nicht angetastet werden. Das lässt sich zwar durchaus begründen, gottgegeben ist dieses Gebot allerdings nicht. Man könnte schon auf die Idee kommen, einmal zu hinterfragen, warum Unternehmen, die ihre wirtschaftliche und finanzielle Unabhängigkeit an eine gemeinsame Leitung abgeben, nicht auch bei Fehlern dieser Leitung gemeinsam den Schaden tragen sollen.\n\nEs ist auf der anderen Seite durchaus nachvollziehbar, dass bei einer Insolvenz eines Unternehmens nicht immer gleich eine Insolvenz des ganzen Konzerns angeordnet werden soll. Schließlich treten die Einzelunternehmen ja auch selbstständig gegenüber den Kunden und Banken auf. Die sollten sich schon auf die Solvenz des jeweiligen Vertragspartners verlassen dürfen und nicht erst den ganzen Konzern unter die Lupe nehmen müssen.\n\nAus ähnlichen Gründen lässt sich auch nachvollziehen, dass für jedes insolvente Unternehmen ein eigenständiges Verfahren vorgesehen ist. In der Praxis wurde allerdings schon bisher oft ein und derselbe Verwalter für die unterschiedlichen Verfahren eingesetzt. Die Frage war, ob dies zum Regelfall gemacht werden sollte. Sie haben sich entschieden, dies dem Ermessen des Gerichts zu überlassen. Aufgrund der zahlreichen denkbaren unterschiedlichen Fallkonstellationen finde ich auch dies durchaus schlüssig.\n\nGanz offensichtlich macht es aber in der Praxis Sinn, die verschiedenen Insolvenzverfahren innerhalb eines Konzerns an einem Gerichtsstand zu bündeln. Dann verstehe ich allerdings nicht, warum wir als Gesetzgeber nicht auch eindeutig festlegen, welches Gericht das sein soll. Gerichtsstand am Konzernsitz - das wäre eine eindeutige und klare Regelung, die sich allen Versuchen des Rosinenpickens und der Manipulation entziehen würde.\n\nHier sehe ich für die Zurückhaltung in Ihrem Entwurf keinen wirklich überzeugenden Grund.\n\nNoch mutloser wird es dann, wenn es um die Koordination der unterschiedlichen Verfahren geht. Sie wollen die Insolvenzverwalter verpflichten, das zu tun, was die im Sinne bestmöglicher Verwertung ohnehin tun sollten: kooperieren. Der künftige Koordinationsverwalter soll aber nicht übergeordnet oder gar weisungsbefugt sein. Das hört sich für mich so an wie: Wasch mir den Pelz, aber mach mich nicht nass!\n\nEntweder haben die Insolvenzverwalter auch bislang schon aus purer Vernunft kooperiert - dann bräuchte es dafür keine gesetzliche Änderung -, oder sie haben es in der Praxis gerade nicht so wirklich hinbekommen. Dann aber braucht es deutlich mehr als ein „Bitte! Bitte!“ ohne jedwede Durchschlagskraft.\n\nDie EU-Kommission war da mit ihrem Vorschlag wechselseitiger Mitwirkungsrechte deutlich mutiger. Wenn Sie so etwas aus Angst vor Blockaden nicht wollen, können Sie ja stattdessen den Weg über eine Stärkung des Koordinationsverwalters gehen.\n\nBevor Sie allerdings ein wirkungsloses Gesetz verabschieden, weil Ihnen nichts Besseres einfällt, sollten Sie lieber gar kein Gesetz machen.\n\nDenn letztlich, Herr Kauder, ist jede Rechtsänderung eine Belastung für die Praxis und sollte gut begründet sein. Ihre Gesetzesbegründung enthält allerdings mehr Gründe, warum Sie alle möglichen Regelungen gerade nicht vornehmen. Noch haben Sie Gelegenheit, nachzubessern. Wir werden Sie dabei kritisch begleiten.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4619,michael-brand,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist eine gute Tradition, dass der Deutsche Bundestag am Tag der Menschenrechte eine Debatte zur Lage der Menschen auf unserem Planeten führt.\n\nDie heutige Debatte will ich dazu nutzen, als Vorsitzender des Ausschusses für Menschenrechte und Humanitäre Hilfe auf konkrete Fälle im Bereich Menschenrechte und im Bereich humanitäre Hilfe hinzuweisen. Diese Beispiele werfen auch ein Licht auf die umfangreiche Arbeit in unserem Ausschuss, der von dem gemeinsamen Bemühen geprägt ist, den Krisen auf dieser Welt etwas entgegenzusetzen und die Menschenrechte zu stärken.\n\nMan kann diese Debatte heute nicht führen, ohne auf die großen humanitären Katastrophen im Irak, in Syrien und die Folgen für die Gesamtregion hinzuweisen. Aus Gesprächen mit Jesiden und auch mit Angehörigen der christlichen Minderheiten in den letzten Wochen möchte ich ausdrücklich auf die Situation in Syrien und im Irak hinweisen. Wir alle wissen, dass diese humanitären Katastrophen durch Krieg, Terror und Menschenrechtsverletzungen brutalster Art verursacht wurden. Wir alle spüren auch, dass wir mit den Mitteln Deutschlands und der EU sowie der internationalen Gemeinschaft an Grenzen stoßen, weil die Katastrophen erstens lange anhalten und zweitens dabei Millionen von Menschen betroffen sind. Zahlreiche Staaten in der Nachbarschaft sind in Mitleidenschaft gezogen, und eine rasche Lösung ist nicht in Sicht.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, was folgt daraus für uns? Ich möchte zunächst die Frage damit beantworten, davor zu warnen, was es nicht geben kann: Es kann keinen kalten Zynismus geben, es darf keine Gewöhnung geben, und es darf auch keine Verzweiflung geben. - Die Antworten auf diese Krise bleiben schwer, und sie bleiben unvollständig. Dazu ist die Krise in ihrer Breite und ihrer Tiefe zu komplex und zu gefährlich, im Übrigen nicht nur für die Betroffenen, sondern mittelfristig und manchmal sogar kurzfristig auch für uns alle.\n\nWir alle wissen, dass die Terrorgruppe IS nicht für den Islam steht, sondern dass sie die Welt ins dunkelste Mittelalter zurückbomben will, manche sagen sogar: in die Steinzeit. Wir alle wissen, dass der syrische Diktator Assad, der erheblich zum Erfolg der Terrorgruppe beigetragen hat, dieser in ihrer Brutalität kaum nachsteht. Damit stehen diejenigen, die den Opfern helfen wollen, nicht selten vor der Wahl zwischen Pest und Cholera. Das kann uns aber nicht davon abhalten, den Blick auf die Opfer zu richten.\n\nDer bevorstehende und zum Teil schon angebrochene Winter bringt für Millionen Flüchtlinge eine tödliche Gefahr. Die Kinder sind dabei neben den Kranken und den Alten am meisten gefährdet. Ich will Ihnen nicht vorenthalten, was mich weniger politisch als sehr persönlich mitgenommen hat. Eine Gruppe von Jesiden aus Köln, darunter übrigens langjährige deutsche Staatsbürger, hat mir vor wenigen Tagen von der Lage berichtet. Sie berichteten mir, dass der IS nach seinem brutalen Vorgehen die Jesiden im Sindschar-Gebirge nicht mehr aktiv bekämpft. Der IS hat sich stattdessen darauf verlegt, Tausende Flüchtlinge in das nackte Gebirge zu treiben und sie dort notfalls den Hungertod sterben zu lassen. Die Terrorgruppe hat ihren Terror rund um das für die Jesiden heilige Gebirge verbreitet und setzt darauf, dass Tausende unschuldiger Menschen dort oben - man muss es so drastisch sagen, wie es der IS auch meint - elendig verrecken.\n\nAls mir Jesiden vom Fall eines kleinen Kindes berichteten, das dort oben vor den Augen seiner Familie schmerzvoll und langsam an einem eigentlich behandelbaren Schlangenbiss sterben musste, weil inmitten des Terrors keine Hilfe möglich war, da war ich - das bekenne ich offen - auch persönlich betroffen. Wenn ein Vater sagt: „Ich hätte lieber meine Tochter angesteckt, als sie so elendig leiden und krepieren zu sehen“, dann ist das kaum zu ertragen.\n\nIch sage es für mich und für die allermeisten hier im Haus ganz klar: Es ist nicht hinnehmbar, dass wir angesichts eines solchen mörderischen Treibens nur zuschauen. Es ist bei allen Schwierigkeiten im Zusammenhang mit dem Haushalt dringend geboten, dass wir noch vor der harten Winterzeit mehr als bisher mobilisieren,\n\num nicht nach dem Winter viele Verstorbene beklagen zu müssen, deren Tod wir durchaus hätten verhindern können. Der Ausschuss für Menschenrechte und Humanitäre Hilfe hat sich jüngst darauf verständigt, dass wir angesichts dieser besonderen Lage einen aktuellen Schwerpunkt auf die Debatte über die humanitäre Lage legen werden. Der jüngste Bericht der Bundesregierung über die deutsche humanitäre Hilfe im Ausland bietet einen sehr guten Anlass dazu, sich intensiver mit dieser in qualitativer und quantitativer Hinsicht neuen Herausforderung zu befassen. Die Antworten - das ist klar - werden sicher nicht einfach sein, und nicht jede Frage werden wir zufriedenstellend beantworten können. Aber es bleibt richtig, die Augen vor der Realität auch oder gerade dann nicht zu verschließen, wenn es besonders schwierig wird.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, so ist es gut, dass Deutschland seinen humanitären Verpflichtungen in diesen Tagen vorbildlich nachkommt; auch das will ich in der Debatte unterstreichen. In einem einzigartigen Krisenjahr wie dem Jahr 2014 - man weiß ja gar nicht mehr, wo man hinschauen soll; es brennt an allen Ecken - belaufen sich allein die Mittel für humanitäre Hilfe in diesem Jahr auf weit über 400 Millionen Euro; das sind über 100 Millionen Euro mehr, als zu Beginn des Jahres im Haushalt standen. Es ist eine besondere Sache, wenn Bundesregierung und Bundestag in diesen Tagen noch mal eins draufpacken, um die Versorgung der Flüchtlinge in Syrien und den Nachbarländern vor dem Winter sicherzustellen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ein ärgerliches Thema will ich nicht aussparen. Besonders ärgerlich ist es nämlich - alle Fraktionen waren im Ausschuss in dieser Woche völlig zu Recht darüber empört -, dass das Ernährungsprogramm der Vereinten Nationen die Hilfe eingestellt hatte. Es muss auch von diesem Parlament ein Signal ausgehen: Wenn die UN trotz monatelanger Warnungen nicht rechtzeitig vor dem Winter die Versorgung der Opfer von Krieg und Massenmord sicherstellen können, dann ist das schlicht ein Armutszeugnis.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es kann nicht sein, dass auf Geberkonferenzen vollmundige Versprechungen im Sinne der Menschlichkeit abgegeben werden und dann einzelne Regierungen die Menschen in höchster Not im Stich lassen und ihre Zusagen nicht einhalten. Wir bitten die Bundesregierung ausdrücklich, den internationalen Partnern diese Haltung des Deutschen Bundestages zu vermitteln. Das geht so nicht, und das wollen wir im Sinne der Menschen nicht noch einmal erleben.\n\nIch habe eben meine Anerkennung gegenüber der Bundesregierung ausgedrückt. Ich will ihr Respekt dafür zollen, dass sie auf nationaler Ebene, innerhalb der EU und im Rahmen der Vereinten Nationen bei denjenigen an vorderster Stelle steht, die versuchen, die Auswirkungen dieser gewaltigen Katastrophe auf die Menschen zu lindern.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich möchte bei dieser Gelegenheit einmal auf ein anderes Gebiet unserer Arbeit zu sprechen kommen, nämlich auf den konkreten Einsatz für Menschenrechte und politische Gefangene, den Abgeordnete des Deutschen Bundestages leisten. Viele von Ihnen kennen aus der eigenen Arbeit unser Programm „Parlamentarier schützen Parlamentarier“. Dieses Programm haben wir aus guten Gründen auf Menschenrechtsaktivisten in aller Welt ausgeweitet.\n\nDer Einsatz von Abgeordneten für einzelne Verfolgte - das wissen wir - ändert nicht die gesamte Lage der Menschenrechte in einem Land. Aber es bleibt ein wichtiges Signal an Tausende und Abertausende unschuldig Inhaftierte, dass sich das Parlament eines der wichtigsten Länder in Europa und in der Welt mit darum kümmert, dass in den Kerkern von Diktaturen die Menschen nicht einfach vergessen werden. Denn es gilt immer noch der Satz: Wer dort vergessen ist, der ist auch verloren. - Ich bin deshalb sehr froh, dass es so viele Kolleginnen und Kollegen gibt, die mit dabei helfen, dass Menschenrechte und die Aktivistinnen und Aktivisten eben nicht vergessen werden. Dafür allen ein herzliches Dankeschön.\n\nLassen Sie mich kurz ein aktuelles Beispiel konkret schildern. Vor wenigen Monaten hatte ich das Glück und die Ehre, die Mutter einer vietnamesischen Aktivistin hier in Berlin zu sprechen, deren Tochter im kommunistischen Vietnam ausgerechnet wegen ihres Einsatzes für die Rechte der Arbeiterschaft willkürlich inhaftiert worden war. Sie wurde im Gefängnis gefoltert und brutalen Behandlungen ausgesetzt. Es haben viele dazu beigetragen - die Bundesregierung, Abgeordnete des Deutschen Bundestags; ich nenne hier ausdrücklich unseren Kollegen Frank Heinrich, der vor Ort war und die Aktivistin im Gefängnis besucht hat -, diese tapfere Frau aus dem Gefängnis freizubekommen.\n\nIch weiß, dass es viele Tausend Fälle gibt, die nicht so gut ausgegangen sind. Aber ich erwähne das Beispiel deswegen, weil es uns bei unserer Arbeit motiviert und zeigt, dass dieser Einsatz für einzelne Schicksale nicht sinnlos ist, sondern dass er notwendig ist. Inzwischen konnten wir hier in Berlin in der letzten Sitzungswoche die Tochter begrüßen. Sie hat mit Tränen in den Augen berichtet, dass sie nie geglaubt hätte, ihre Mutter wiederzusehen. Sie kämpft jetzt für ihre ehemaligen Mitinsassen. Auch dort sind wir weiter mit Unterstützung von Kollegen aus den Parlamenten und aus der Regierung dabei, diesen Frauen und Männern zu helfen.\n\nDamit konnten wir gemeinsame und lange Bemühungen zu einem glücklichen Ende führen. Wir müssen nicht stolz sein, dass dies gelungen ist. Aber wir dürfen uns freuen, dass unser Patenschaftsprogramm konkrete Erfolge für Menschenrechtler erreichen konnte.\n\nSo nehme ich abschließend die Gelegenheit wahr, weitere Kolleginnen und Kollegen dazu einzuladen, sich an diesem wunderbaren Programm aktiv zu beteiligen. Melden Sie sich bei uns im Ausschuss für Menschenrechte! Wir helfen gern weiter, damit Sie anderen noch effektiver helfen können.\n\nDer Tag der Menschenrechte ist ein wichtiger Tag. Er ist nie nur ein Tag der Freude. Das liegt in der Natur der Sache. Dass wir im Deutschen Bundestag in jedem Jahr im Umfeld des Tages der Menschenrechte in würdiger Form eine Debatte um die Würde des Menschen führen, zeichnet das Thema und ein wenig auch dieses Parlament aus.\n\nIch danke Ihnen ganz herzlich.\"\n1110,carsten-sieling,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Zunächst möchte ich den letzten Satz des Kollegen Schick aufnehmen und ihm versichern: Darauf können Sie sich verlassen. Schon der Blick in den Koalitionsvertrag hilft; denn dann werden Sie feststellen, dass wir eine ganze Reihe von wichtigen Maßnahmen vereinbart haben, die in der Tat noch umgesetzt werden müssen. Alle hier im Hohen Hause wissen das. Deswegen braucht man das nicht besonders zu betonen.\n\nGegenstand der heutigen Debatte ist der Antrag der Fraktion Die Linke. Dazu möchte ich Folgendes sagen: Es ist sicherlich gut, dass das Thema Prokon und die damit zusammenhängenden Schwierigkeiten, die es nach wie vor gibt, im Bundestag öffentlich debattiert werden. Wenn man sich den Antrag durchliest, dann gewinnt man aber schon den Eindruck, als hätten Sie unter dem Stichwort „Anlegerschutz“ ein wenig gegoogelt, eine Reihe von Stichwörtern gefunden und diese dann alle in Ihrem Antrag untergebracht.\n\nEhrlich gesagt, habe ich nicht ganz verstanden, was die Themen Deckung von Verbraucherkreditverträgen, Dispozinsen, Vorfälligkeitsentschädigung und anderes mehr mit dem Fall Prokon zu tun haben. Wir müssen bei unserer Arbeit schon zielgerichteter vorgehen.\n\nIch brauche nicht zu betonen, dass ich die Einschätzung des Kollegen Schick zum Thema Finanz-TÜV teile. Dieses Instrument ist zu unscharf. Wir müssen uns auf Maßnahmen verständigen, die mehr leisten können. Es kann auch nicht sein, dass die Verantwortung an staatliche Behörden delegiert wird. Das ist jedenfalls unsere Herangehensweise in dieser Angelegenheit.\n\nKollege Steffel hat sehr deutlich auf die Beschlüsse und Verabredungen, die in der letzten Legislaturperiode getroffen bzw. durchgesetzt wurden, hingewiesen. Sie werden mir zugestehen, dass ich diesbezüglich naturgemäß nicht ganz so optimistisch bin. Wir brauchen das aber nicht weiter zu vertiefen. Allein die Tatsache, dass wir in unserem Koalitionsvertrag einige Maßnahmen zur Regulierung des Anlegerschutzes und des Grauen Kapitalmarktes vereinbart haben, zeigt doch, dass wir noch nicht so weit sind, alle Märkte, alle Akteure und alle Produkte zu regulieren. Das ist die Aufgabe, vor der wir jetzt stehen, und ich bin froh, dass wir das in dieser Großen Koalition gemeinsam angehen werden.\n\nEs wurde behauptet, dass hier nur allgemein geredet und lediglich Appelle formuliert werden. Nein, das ist nicht der Fall. Werfen Sie einen Blick in den Koalitionsvertrag. Ich will Ihnen drei Punkte nennen, die wir konkret vereinbart haben.\n\nErstens - das ist neu - wird die BaFin künftig auch für den Verbraucherschutz zuständig sein. Diese Maßnahme ist notwendig. Die BaFin wird sich quasi als öffentliche Einrichtung darum kümmern und ihre Kompetenzen, die sie in diesem Bereich hat, einsetzen; denn Finanzmarktregulierung und Ordnung an den Finanzmärkten bedeutet auch Schutz für die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher in unserem Land.\n\nZweitens. Wir brauchen einen Finanzmarktwächter. Das haben wir als Sozialdemokraten in der letzten Legislaturperiode mehrfach thematisiert. Ich bin froh, dass dieser Aspekt im Koalitionsvertrag verankert wurde. Kollege Steffel hat das eben positiv hervorgehoben. Der Finanzmarktwächter dient als Frühwarnsystem für den Markt. Dies wird weiterentwickelt werden müssen, damit die Ungleichgewichte zwischen den Anbietern und den Anlegern, den Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern, behoben werden.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, lassen Sie mich auch den dritten Punkt nennen. Wir haben im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart, dass besonders riskante und risikoreiche Produkte verboten werden müssen und verboten werden können.\n\nDas sind die drei Schritte, mit denen diese Koalition beim Verbraucherschutz vorangeht: BaFin als Aufsicht, Marktwächter und Verbot von gefährlichen Produkten. Kollege Schick, das sind mehr als Parolen. Das sind klare Aufträge, an denen sich diese Koalition auch messen lassen wird.\n\nIch möchte zum Schluss noch den Fall Prokon ansprechen, weil das, glaube ich, ein ganz wichtiger Punkt ist. Auch da finde ich, dass der Antrag die Gefahr beinhaltet, zu viele Erwartungen zu wecken. Der Fall Prokon ist ja kein Thema des Grauen Kapitalmarktes im -engeren Sinne. Im Fall von Prokon - Frau Kollegin Karawanskij hat das angesprochen - ist Anlegern massenhaft Kapitalbeteiligung über sogenannte Genussrechte verkauft worden. Das ist größtenteils über den Direktvertrieb von Prokon geschehen. Hier geht es eher nicht um die Frage der Aufsicht, nicht um den Grauen Kapitalmarkt. Es wird vielmehr Aufgabe der Staats-anwaltschaft sein, zu prüfen, ob hier nicht Schwarzer Kapitalmarkt vorherrscht, ob hier nicht gegen Recht und Gesetz verstoßen worden ist, ob hier nicht eine Straftat vorliegt.\n\nProkon ist sicherlich ein richtiger Anstoß, um mehr zu tun. Ich will zum Schluss sagen: Es steht unserer Koalition gut an - ich bin sicher, dass wir da gemeinsam Seit’ an Seit’ stehen -, dass wir aktuelle Entwicklungen aufnehmen, um weiterzudenken und weiterzugehen. Natürlich müssen wir uns auch mit den Aufsichtsfragen -beschäftigen, beispielsweise mit der Tatsache der Zersplitterung der Aufsicht, zum einen gegenüber den Banken und zum anderen gegenüber den freien Vermittlern und Beratern. Ich wäre froh, wenn wir zu dem zurückkämen, was Bundesminister Schäuble Anfang der letzten Legislaturperiode einmal in einen ersten Gesetzentwurf geschrieben hat. Ich glaube, wir haben da viel zu tun und müssen etwas voranbringen.\n\nDiese Koalition wird den Verbraucherschutz stärken. Wir als SPD wollen die Rolle wahrnehmen, Motor für die Rechte der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher zu sein.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13814,ute-finckh-kramer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer oben auf den Tribünen! Es ist immer spannend, über Anträge, die vor über einem Jahr gestellt wurden, hier im Plenum auf Basis der Beschlussempfehlung zu diskutieren,\n\nweil sich einerseits manches als nach wie vor aktuell erweist - da haben Sie recht - und weil sich andererseits bestimmte Dinge verändert haben und der Fokus auf anderen Dingen liegt als noch vor über einem Jahr. Als Beispiel dafür, was nach wie vor aktuell ist, dienen in beiden Anträgen, über die wir heute diskutieren, die globalen Aspekte von Flucht, Vertreibung und Migration. Daran wird sich so schnell auch nichts verändern, weil hier langfristige Entwicklungen - wie es im Erläuterungsteil der beiden Anträge dargestellt wird; darüber sind wir uns alle im Großen und Ganzen einig - eine entscheidende Rolle spielen.\n\nDa, wo es um kurzfristige Entwicklungen ging, zum Beispiel um die Frage, wie viel wir für humanitäre Hilfe ausgeben müssen, wenn sich die Zahl der Flüchtlinge, die sich auf den Weg nach Europa machen, dramatisch erhöht, hat sich im Vergleich zu der Situation vor über einem Jahr einiges verändert. Einige Herausforderungen, auf die in den Anträgen hingewiesen wird, haben wir inzwischen bewältigt. Dabei bestand manchmal die Notwendigkeit, die CDU/CSU-Kollegen zu überzeugen; das ist uns gelungen. Wir haben die Mittel für humanitäre Hilfe drastisch aufgestockt, und zwar über den Betrag hinaus, der in den beiden Anträgen gefordert wird, nämlich auf 1,2 Milliarden Euro im vergangenen Jahr. Es ist uns zudem dank der Zuarbeit der Haushälter gelungen, diesen hohen Betrag für humanitäre Hilfe in diesem Jahr zu verstetigen. Dementsprechend haben wir die Zusammenarbeit mit den internationalen Organisationen, die Menschen, die direkt von Krieg und Bürgerkrieg betroffen sind, in Nachbarländer geflohen sind und in Flüchtlingslagern leben, humanitäre Hilfe leisten, deutlich verstärkt. UNHCR und World Food Programme bekommen nun deutlich mehr Geld aus dem Bundeshaushalt als noch vor zwei Jahren.\n\nEntwicklungen, die zum Zeitpunkt der Antragstellung noch nicht sichtbar waren, gab es im Bereich der internationalen Diskussion über humanitäre Hilfe und Flüchtlinge. Im letzten Jahr haben zwei Gipfel stattgefunden, an denen sich Deutschland intensiv beteiligt hat. Der eine war der World Humanitarian Summit in Istanbul. Der andere war ein Gipfel zur Flüchtlingshilfe in New York im Herbst letzten Jahres. Man kann, glaube ich, mit gutem Gewissen sagen, dass sich die deutsche Bundesregierung und ganz besonders das Auswärtige Amt als federführendes Ministerium intensiv beteiligt haben. In Istanbul war die Kanzlerin eine der wenigen Regierungschefs, die dort teilgenommen haben. Auch das finde ich gut und richtig. Das ist eine Konsequenz aus den Diskussionen, die wir hier im Plenum immer wieder geführt haben.\n\nEs stellt sich die Frage, wie wir mit den längerfristigen Entwicklungen umgehen. Einige der großen Entwicklungen sind in Ihren Anträgen genannt, die auch und gerade Afrika betreffen, obwohl ein Großteil der Flüchtlinge, die in den letzten Jahren Europa erreicht haben, gar nicht aus Afrika kommt, auch wenn die Bilder von den Seelenverkäufern, die in Afrika starten, und die Zahlen über die ertrunkenen Flüchtlinge uns allen zu schaffen machen.\n\nEin Großteil der Flüchtlinge kam aus den Bürgerkriegsregionen des Nahen Ostens, und ein Teil kam vom Balkan. Das heißt, da ist humanitäre Hilfe in den Nachbarländern Syriens und des Irak gefragt. Inzwischen ist die Frage viel aktueller, wie wir die Flüchtlinge, die jetzt für mehrere Jahre hier bleiben werden, vielleicht sogar auf Dauer, in unsere Gesellschaft integrieren, wie wir sie unterstützen, wie sie Ausbildungsplätze bekommen, wie ihre Ausbildung, wenn sie schon ausgebildet sind, anerkannt wird, wie diejenigen, die ihre Schule noch im Heimatland abgeschlossen haben, hier in die Universitäten kommen usw. Das heißt, wir diskutieren inzwischen über andere Themen.\n\nAber in Bezug auf Afrika diskutieren wir immer noch dasselbe. Ich möchte einen Punkt ansprechen, der auch aufgrund der Debatte, die wir seit zwei Jahren über Flucht und Migration führen, jetzt von Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern erwähnt wird, nämlich die Frage, wie eigentlich innerhalb Afrikas nicht nur mit der Afrikanischen Union und den Regierungen diskutiert wird, sondern auch mit denen, die gezwungenermaßen oder weil sie keine Lebensperspektive in ihrem eigenen Land sehen, ihr Heimatland verlassen.\n\nDas ist einer der Punkte, den ich Ihnen und euch noch mitgeben möchte. Wir müssen in der Diskussion darauf dringen, dass nicht nur über Flüchtlinge und Migranten geredet wird, nicht nur von außen Vorschläge gemacht werden, wie mit ihnen umgegangen werden kann oder soll, sondern auch gemeinsam mit der Europäischen Union und gemeinsam mit der Afrikanischen Union eine Debatte darüber begonnen wird, was eigentlich die Wünsche, die Erwartungen und die Hoffnungen der Menschen sind, die sich auf direkter Flucht vor Krieg und politischer Verfolgung oder auf der Suche nach besseren Lebensperspektiven befinden.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n11371,julia-verlinden,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Ohne Zweifel ist die Digitalisierung der Stromversorgung ein wichtiger Baustein der Energiewende, und Deutschland hat hier Nachholbedarf.\n\nErfahrungen aus anderen Ländern zeigen, dass digitale Systeme den Strombedarf während der Verbrauchsspitzenzeiten senken können. Das erhöht natürlich die Flexibilität, und die Stromversorgung wird sicherer.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren von der Koalition, Sie beschreiten hier aber den falschen Weg; denn Sie wollen die Stromkunden weitestgehend mit sogenannten Smart Metern zwangsbeglücken.\n\n- Ich wundere mich ja auch.\n\nEs ist ja so: Wenn die Verbrauchswerte transparent gemacht werden, dann kann damit Energie eingespart werden, und das spart dann auch Geld. Lohnen tut sich die Investition in die Technik aber nur, wenn der Stromverbrauch dann auch entsprechend hoch ist. Das ist also nur für größere Verbraucher, wie Unternehmen, sinnvoll.\n\nFür kleinere Verbraucher, wie die privaten Haushalte, stiften diese intelligenten Messsysteme aber keinen messbaren Nutzen.\n\nHinzu kommt - darauf wurde hingewiesen -, dass es bisher noch keine zeitvariablen Tarife für die Haushalte gibt, die einen ökonomischen Anreiz setzen könnten, zum Beispiel den, die Waschmaschine dann anzustellen, wenn gerade viel Strom produziert wird.\n\nWir kritisieren, dass die Mieterinnen und Mieter beispielsweise nicht gefragt werden, wenn der Hausbesitzer auf Smart Meter umstellt.\n\nAuch die Hausbesitzer können sich in Zukunft nicht wehren, wenn der grundzuständige Messstellenbetreiber die neuen Zähler zur Pflicht macht. Bezahlen müssen sie die teuren Zähler dann dennoch, und das gefährdet die Akzeptanz der neuen Technologie und letztlich auch der Energiewende.\n\nDieser Plan zur Markteinführung von sogenannten intelligenten Zählern, den Sie haben, ist also unintelligent.\n\n- Ja, aber auch sie eröffnet verschiedene Möglichkeiten, damit umzugehen. Das kann man feststellen.\n\nAkzeptanz ist die Grundbedingung dafür, dass die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher auf die Impulse, die von den Smart Metern ausgehen, reagieren. Hier wäre also Wahlfreiheit statt Einbauzwang die richtige Strategie, wenn es um den Einbau dieser intelligenten Messsysteme geht. Warum lassen Sie also die Privathaushalte nicht selbst entscheiden, ob sie Smart Meter haben wollen oder nicht? Sie haben doch hoffentlich keine Angst vor mündigen Verbrauchern!\n\nWer weniger als 6 000 Kilowattstunden Strom im Jahr verbraucht, ist nicht derart systemrelevant, dass sich eine sogenannte Lastverschiebung lohnt. Wir Grüne wollen deshalb die freie Entscheidung für Kunden mit einem Verbrauch von bis zu 6 000 Kilowattstunden im Jahr und ein Widerspruchsrecht zum Einbau eines intelligenten Messsystems für private Haushaltskunden mit einem Stromverbrauch zwischen 6 000 und 10 000 Kilowattstunden im Jahr.\n\nDer Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung wurde mit dem Änderungsantrag der GroKo für die Betreiber von Anlagen für erneuerbare Energien verschlechtert, indem es nun in Zukunft den verpflichtenden Einbau von Smart Metern auch schon für Kleinstanlagen von 1 kW geben soll.\n\nDas betrifft vor allem Betreiber von kleinen Solarstromanlagen. Dieser Zwangseinbau von Smart Metern ist netztechnisch überflüssig und kostet nur unnötig Geld. Aus meiner Sicht ist das eine weitere Schikane der Großen Koalition. Sie wollen jetzt das Engagement der Bürgerinnen und Bürger für die Energiewende mit Steuern, Abgaben und Bürokratie bestrafen.\n\nSo schaffen Sie Politikverdruss.\n\nDas gilt erst recht auch deshalb, weil mit den digitalen Zählern das Internet Einzug in die Stromversorgung jedes Einzelnen hält. Durch den flächendeckenden Einbau der digitalen Messsysteme werden sensible Daten generiert; das ist schon angesprochen worden. Der Einbau ermöglicht eine übergreifende Auswertung nach Personengruppen, Straßenzügen oder ganzen Stadtteilen.\n\nFür uns als grüne Bundestagsfraktion ist wichtig, dass die hohen Verbraucher- und Datenschutzstandards, die wir normalerweise in Deutschland haben, und die höchsten Anforderungen an die Datensicherheit auch bei diesem Gesetz gelten müssen.\n\nMit Ihrem Gesetz nähren Sie aber Zweifel, dass dies erreicht wird; denn die Grundprinzipien wie Datensparsamkeit und der Erforderlichkeitsgrundsatz sind bei der Erhebung, der Nutzung und auch bei der Übermittlung dieser Verbrauchsdaten vermutlich nicht vernünftig eingehalten.\n\n- Dazu gab es Hinweise vom Datenschutzbeauftragten.\n\nZusammenfassend lässt sich sagen: Die Koalition hat den internationalen Trend hin zur Digitalisierung in der Vergangenheit lange verschlafen. Damit haben wir vor allem in Industrie und Gewerbe große Potenziale für mehr Effizienz und Stabilisierung der Netze brachliegen lassen. Jetzt wachen Sie auf und verfallen in Aktionismus. Damit vergeben Sie eine große Chance und werden bei den betroffenen Stromkunden Frust und Ärger ernten.\"\n6524,martin-rabanus,\"Vielen Dank. - Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Ich glaube, die Debatte hat deutlich gemacht, dass wir anhand dieses Antrags ein grundsätzlich wichtiges und richtiges Thema diskutieren. Der Antrag geht allerdings in die völlig falsche Richtung; auch das ist an der einen oder anderen Stelle der Debatte schon deutlich geworden. Ich will das an wenigen Punkten noch einmal pointieren:\n\nDa liest man auf Seite 2 des Antrags unter anderem, der Hochschulpakt 2020 und die Exzellenzinitiative seien wesentliche Ursachen der prekären Situation im Wissenschaftsbereich. Das muss man sich einmal auf der Zunge zergehen lassen,\n\nauch im Lichte der Diskussion, die wir heute Mittag geführt haben, und auch im Lichte der Tatsache, dass es ohne den Hochschulpakt und ohne die Exzellenzinitiative überhaupt nicht möglich gewesen wäre, die Herausforderungen, vor denen wir in den letzten Jahren im Wissenschaftssystem und an den Hochschulen standen, zu meistern.\n\nDas ist ein Einstieg, den dieser mit der heißen Nadel genähte, ein Sammelsurium beinhaltende Antrag liefert, mit dem Ziel, sozusagen ein bisschen Anschluss an die Diskussion zu finden, die in der SPD, die in der Koalition insgesamt zu diesem Thema längst läuft.\n\nIch kann auch gut verstehen, dass die Antragsteller die Bedeutung der Exzellenzinitiative und vor allen Dingen des Hochschulpakts für das Hochschulsystem nicht an erster Stelle sehen; denn sie sind die einzige Fraktion, die nicht in Regierungsverantwortung daran beteiligt war.\n\nIch kann auch verstehen, dass die Antragsteller nicht besonders laut über das Thema „Entlastung der Länder“, auch über die BAföG-Millionen bzw. -Milliarden sprechen wollen. Aber Fakt ist, dass die Große Koalition wie seit Jahren nicht die Länder entlastet, damit sie ihre Aufgaben - auch in der Finanzierung des Hochschul- und Wissenschaftssystems - besser erfüllen können.\n\nDer Antrag zeigt aber auch eines sehr klar - darauf haben Frau Kollegin Dinges-Dierig und andere schon hingewiesen -: Sie haben ein grundsätzlich anderes Verständnis, wie das Wissenschaftssystem organisiert werden soll, als es die SPD, als es die Koalition insgesamt hat; ich glaube, auch da kann man die zweite Oppositionspartei einbeziehen.\n\nSie wollen Förderung von Exzellenz abschaffen. Gut. Sie wollen themenspezifische Forschungsförderung abschaffen. Okay.\n\nSie wollen auch den Pakt für Forschung und Innovation abschaffen. Auch okay. Danke, dass das in dieser Form wieder einmal deutlich geworden ist; denn dann ist das auch ganz klar. Ebenso klar kann ich sagen: Das wollen wir eben nicht.\n\nWir wollen Spitzenleistungen und Exzellenz, die wir -übrigens vielerorts in unserem Hochschul- und Wissenschaftssystem haben, gezielt weiterentwickeln. Wir wollen themenspezifische Forschungsprogramme. Wir wollen damit auch Steuerungsfunktionen behalten und Gestaltungsanspruch untermauern.\n\nWir wollen Forschung und Innovation sichern, weil wir uns als Wissensnation - nur als Wissensnation - im globalen Wettbewerb behaupten können und dies am Ende des Tages allen Menschen in Deutschland zugutekommt.\n\nIch komme zurück: Es ist grundsätzlich ein richtiges und wichtiges Anliegen, das dieser Antrag thematisiert. Wie er es thematisiert, hilft nicht weiter. Wir werden hingegen - wir haben das in sehr intensiven Gesprächen in der Koalition begonnen - die Fehlentwicklungen, die wir auch zu konstatieren haben, anpacken. Das ist benannt worden: Wir wollen den Befristungsanteil reduzieren. Wir wollen die Dauer von Befristungen verlängern, die Vertragslaufzeiten den tatsächlichen Lebensbedingungen anpassen. Wir wollen dem wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchs eine Perspektive geben und haben den Pakt für den wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchs auf Koalitionsebene beschlossen.\n\nDer herzlichen Einladung des Antrages, dass auch die Länder ihre eigenen Finanzierungssysteme überprüfen - es geht um den Grundfinanzierungsanteil und die -sogenannten erfolgsabhängigen Faktoren, die dort niedergelegt sind -, schließen wir uns sehr gerne an. Ich persönlich könnte viel über diesbezügliche Fehlentwicklungen in meinem Heimatland Hessen und nur relativ wenig über dortige Aktivitäten, dem gegenzusteuern, erzählen.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss: Die Koalition ist und bleibt am Thema dran, und sie wird an den richtigen Stellschrauben drehen. In dem Antrag steht allerdings vieles, was nicht in die richtige Richtung führt. Er erweist dem Wissenschaftssystem insgesamt einen Bärendienst.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n3886,herlind-gundelach,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Die Große Koalition hat in ihrem Koalitionsvertrag ausdrücklich festgehalten, dass die Gleichstellung von Frauen und Männern für uns eine hohe Priorität hat. Wir haben schon wichtige Punkte beschlossen und bringen derzeit weitere wichtige Gesetze auf den Weg. Allein in dieser Woche werden wir das Elterngeld Plus in zweiter und dritter Lesung beraten. Die flexibleren Lösungen beim Elterngeld und bei der Elternzeit bedeuten für viele Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer eine ganz erhebliche Erleichterung.\n\nJede Frau und jeder Mann sollten grundsätzlich jeden Beruf ergreifen können. Das müssen wir ihnen ermöglichen. Das ist für mich Gleichstellung. Ich weiß aber auch, dass das einfacher klingt, als es tatsächlich ist. Für mich bedeutet Gleichstellung außerdem, dass Frauen und Männer für die gleiche Arbeit auch den gleichen Lohn bekommen. Die Problematik der Entgeltgleichheit ist übrigens besonders paradox; denn in der Praxis sind Frauen häufig besser ausgebildet, haben oft die besseren Noten und bekommen trotzdem weniger Gehalt für die gleiche Arbeit. Das ist auf Dauer nicht zu akzeptieren.\n\nFür mich bedeutet Gleichstellung aber auch, dass Frauen ihre Entscheidungsfreiheit nicht selber begrenzen. Ich war immer eine berufstätige Mutter. Ich weiß, dass es für Frauen reale Barrieren in der Berufswelt gibt. Aber es ist auch entscheidend, ob wir diese als Frauen hinnehmen oder aktiv dagegen angehen. Ich beobachte nämlich auch, dass junge Frauen oftmals Berufe danach auswählen, ob sie geeignet sind, Familie und Beruf miteinander zu verbinden. Das ist selbstverständlich absolut legitim; aber ich möchte Frauen ausdrücklich dazu ermutigen, ihre Wünsche laut zu äußern und sich selber zu erlauben, reale Entscheidungsfreiheit zu leben.\n\nDie Grenzen, die Frauen im Berufsleben erleben, sind über viele Jahrzehnte durch Geschlechter- und Rollenbilder entstanden und gewachsen. Wenn Frauen sich selber begrenzen, dann zementieren sie diese Bilder, und wir werden weiterhin zwischen Frauen- und Männerberufen unterscheiden.\n\nIch habe aus meiner Meinung nie einen Hehl gemacht: Ich bin eigentlich keine Befürworterin der Quote. Aber wie die Erfahrung zeigt, ist sie zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt leider immer noch notwendig. Es wäre aber falsch, zu glauben, dass wir dadurch die Geschlechter- und Rollenbilder ändern können; denn das können nur wir selbst. Das fängt früh an, nämlich schon in der Art, wie wir unsere Kinder erziehen. Da finde ich übrigens selbst bei manchen Feministinnen ganz traditionelle Erziehungsmuster. Also, es gibt genug zu tun.\n\nEs gibt aber Branchen - ich glaube, darin sind wir uns einig -, in denen die Verbesserung der Arbeitsbedingungen und auch der Karrierechancen für Frauen nicht so einfach umzusetzen ist, wie wir das gerne hätten. Eine dieser Branchen ist zweifellos der Kulturbereich. Grundsätzlich begrüße ich daher den Antrag der Grünen, der die Gleichstellung von Frauen im Kulturbetrieb thematisiert. Ich bin aber doch etwas verwundert darüber, dass der Antrag die besonderen Aspekte dieser Branche aus meiner Sicht überwiegend verkennt, dass dieser Antrag Themen adressiert, bei denen der Bund schlichtweg der falsche Ansprechpartner ist, und dass dieser Antrag die künstlerische Freiheit zum Teil völlig außer Acht lässt. So können und so sollten wir die Verbesserung der Arbeitsbedingungen von Frauen im Kulturbereich nicht erreichen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, Sie sprechen in Ihrem Antrag explizit durch Bundesmittel geförderte Filmprojekte an. Ja, es ist schade, dass die Zahl der Filme von Regisseurinnen niedriger ist als die von Regisseuren. Ich würde aber keine Kausalität zwischen Geschlecht und Förderung unterstellen. Das halte ich in diesem Fall schlichtweg für falsch.\n\nEinen ähnlichen Zusammenhang stellen Sie auch bei Theaterinszenierungen fest. Ja, die Stücke beim Berliner Theatertreffen haben zu großen Teilen männliche Regisseure. Auch wenn ich die Spielpläne der deutschen Theaterlandschaft insgesamt durchforste, stelle ich fest: Die meisten Stücke werden von Männern inszeniert. Aber ich stelle auch fest, dass es immer mehr Autorinnen und mehr weibliche Bühnen- und Kostümbildner und auch Co-Regisseurinnen gibt, vor allem an vielen kleineren, aber auch durchaus bedeutenden Theatern. Dass vor allem auch Intendantinnen wie Karin Beier und Shermin Langhoff besondere Aufmerksamkeit bekommen, ist zweifellos richtig und geschieht meiner Meinung nach völlig zu Recht. Denn diese Frauen leisten großartige Arbeit.\n\nIch möchte aber in diesem Zusammenhang noch eine Bemerkung machen. Wenn ich mir in den letzten Jahren beim Berliner Theatertreffen manche Stücke angeschaut habe, konnte ich zum Teil Geschlechterbilder erkennen, die mir sonst eher durch meine Großmutter vorgelebt worden waren. Aber diese Inszenierungen wurden gefeiert, und zwar von beiden Geschlechtern. Das ist auch in Ordnung; denn über Geschmack lässt sich bekanntlich nicht streiten. Vielleicht müssen wir eher die Rollenbilder in der Gesellschaft hinterfragen. Warum finden auch Frauen solche klischeehaften Darstellungen gut? Aber an dieser Stelle möchte ich ausdrücklich betonen: Für Inszenierungen und Produktionen muss die künstlerische Freiheit immer oberstes Gebot bleiben.\n\nBerufe im Kunst- oder Kulturbereich haben meistens besondere Arbeitsbedingungen, die sich nicht wegdiskutieren lassen. Manche Theater haben zum Beispiel Hausregisseure. Diese inszenieren dann vielleicht drei Stücke in einer Spielzeit und sind somit schätzungsweise sechs Monate eines Jahres an einen Ort gebunden. Die allermeisten Regisseure inszenieren aber im gesamten deutschsprachigen Raum und sind so meist nicht länger als zwei Monate in einer Stadt.\n\nIch glaube nicht, dass bei der Verpflichtung eines Regisseurs das Geschlecht grundsätzlich eine Rolle spielt. Aber die Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf spielt bei der Berufswahl in diesem Fall ganz sicher eine Rolle. Denn Regisseurinnen und Regisseuren hilft auch eine Kita mit den besten Öffnungszeiten nichts, wenn sie alle zwei Monate umziehen müssen. Dann ist die Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf schwer zu erreichen. Ähnliche Probleme haben übrigens beispielsweise auch freie Bühnen- und Kostümbildner.\n\nDie in dieser Woche zu beschließenden Änderungen beim Elterngeld Plus können für diese Frauen Erleichterung schaffen. Ich bin daher froh, dass wir damit mehr Flexibilität für alle schaffen. Denn so können nicht nur Frauen, sondern auch Paare im Kulturbereich ihre Elternzeit an die besonderen Gegebenheiten ihrer Berufe anpassen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, Quoten im Kulturbereich können beim besten Willen kein Weg sein. Wenn Menschen mehr Bilder von männlichen Malern kaufen, obwohl es genauso viele weibliche wie männliche Maler gibt, können wir ihnen letztendlich nichts anderes vorschreiben. Wir können den Geschmack nicht beeinflussen. Deswegen finde ich Ihre Vorschläge für die Vergabe von Preisen oder die Zusammenstellung von Ausstellungen nicht zielführend, vor allem, da selbstverständlich im Bereich der institutionellen Förderung durch Bund und Länder gleichermaßen - darauf haben auch Sie abgehoben - das Gleichstellungsgesetz und die Gremienbesetzungsgesetze durchaus Anwendung finden. Hier setzen wir uns für weitere Verbesserungen ein. Eine Novellierung dieser Gesetze ist in Arbeit.\n\nAußerdem sind die dauerhaft durch den Bund geförderten Einrichtungen gehalten, die Gleichstellungsanforderungen zu beachten. Auch gibt es konkrete Projektförderung mit frauenspezifischem Hintergrund. Ich bin durchaus dafür, dass solche Dinge ausgeweitet werden.\n\nIch bin auch Ihrer Auffassung, dass es mit Blick auf weitere Maßnahmen, die zu ergreifen sind, vielleicht ganz sinnvoll wäre, zu einer Aktualisierung der Daten zu kommen. Sie sind in der Tat etwas zu alt, um von der heutigen Warte aus ein Urteil darüber zu erlauben, was tatsächlich nottut.\n\nAber für mich und, wie ich glaube, auch für die CDU/CSU insgesamt ist es ganz wichtig, dass im Bereich der Kunst immer künstlerische und kulturelle Kriterien maßgeblich sein müssen.\n\nVielen herzlichen Dank.\"\n7695,thomas-oppermann,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Auch nach Monaten ist die große Bereitschaft der Deutschen, Flüchtlinge bei uns aufzunehmen und freundlich zu behandeln, ungebrochen. Der ehemalige polnische Botschafter Janusz Reiter spricht in einem Zeitungsbeitrag von einem „Triumph der Menschlichkeit“. Ich glaube, wir können uns damit viel Respekt und eine große Wertschätzung in der Welt erarbeiten.\n\nAber viele Bürgerinnen und Bürger sind auch verunsichert. Sie sind verunsichert, weil so viele Flüchtlinge in so kurzer Zeit kommen. Ich denke, die Menschen glauben, dass wir es schaffen können, 800 000 oder 1 Million Flüchtlinge aufzunehmen und zu integrieren. Aber sie fragen natürlich auch: Wie geht es weiter? Können wir die Zahl der Flüchtlinge verringern? Kommen im nächsten Jahr wieder 1 Million Menschen, oder werden es sogar noch mehr? Wie verändert das unser Land, und wie verändert das das Leben der Menschen in diesem Land? - Die Ungewissheit erzeugt Angst, und ich finde, diese Angst müssen wir ernst nehmen.\n\nDeshalb gilt es jetzt, mit aller politischen und finanziellen Kraft, zu der wir in der Lage sind, dafür zu sorgen und dazu beizutragen, dass weniger Menschen die Flucht ergreifen, sodass wir die Geschwindigkeit des Flüchtlingszuzugs in Deutschland deutlich verringern.\n\nZuallererst müssen wir die Lage der Flüchtlinge in den Nachbarländern Syriens verbessern. Viel zu lange haben wir über die dramatische Verschlechterung der Lage der Flüchtlinge dort hinweggesehen. Was Sigmar Gabriel von seiner Reise nach Jordanien berichtet hat, ist niederschmetternd. Die Menschen leben unter erbärmlichen Verhältnissen: Es gibt keine Zukunftsperspektive, wegen Geldmangels muss das Welternährungsprogramm die Rationen kürzen, es gibt keine Arbeit, die Hälfte der Kinder geht nicht zur Schule, und in den Lagern ist von einer verlorenen Generation die Rede.\n\nImmer mehr Menschen sitzen jetzt auf gepackten Koffern. Wenn wir die humanitäre Situation und die Bildungsmöglichkeiten für Kinder in diesen Ländern nicht schnell verbessern, dann werden sich viele auf die Reise machen.\n\nIch finde die Entscheidung der Staats- und Regierungschefs von gestern Abend, mindestens 1 Milliarde Euro bereitzustellen, gut. Das wird aber nicht reichen. Deshalb ist es notwendig, dass die USA und die Golfstaaten diese Summe verdoppeln.\n\nWenn wir erreichen wollen, dass die Menschen ihre Fluchtentscheidung noch einmal überdenken oder aufschieben, dann brauchen wir auch ein weiteres Signal der Hoffnung. Ein starkes Signal für die Menschen wäre es, wenn Russland und die USA gemeinsam mit den Europäern und den Regionalmächten Gespräche aufnähmen, um für Syrien eine Lösung zu finden.\n\nDass man mit Russland in der Syrien-Frage konstruktiv zusammenarbeiten kann, haben wir im Sommer 2013 gesehen. Damals haben Russland, die USA und weitere Staaten vereinbart, das syrische Chemiewaffenarsenal unter internationale Kontrolle zu stellen. Auch die Bundeswehr hat einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Vernichtung der Chemiewaffen geleistet. Das könnte eine Blaupause für neue Syrien-Gespräche sein.\n\nIch bin Frank-Walter Steinmeier für seine Syrien-Initiative dankbar. Es ist gut, dass jetzt möglicherweise alle an einen Tisch kommen. Vielen Dank dafür.\n\nEbenfalls finde ich gut, dass die Bundeskanzlerin gestern klar gesagt hat: Wir müssen auch mit Assad reden, auch wenn das schwerfällt. Wir müssen mit allen reden, die dazu beitragen können, dass dieser Konflikt gelöst wird.\n\nNatürlich kann sich niemand vorstellen, dass Assad eine dauerhafte Rolle bei der Herstellung von Frieden in Syrien spielen kann. Die meisten der 250 000 Toten dieses Bürgerkriegs gehen auf seine Verantwortung, und wir wissen, dass ein Kriegsverbrecher nicht der Garant für Frieden sein kann. Wir müssen jetzt aber mit allen reden, um zu einer Befriedung dieses Konfliktes zu kommen.\n\nEines steht für mich auch eindeutig fest, Frau Wagenknecht - da bin ich ausnahmsweise Ihrer Meinung; allerdings haben Sie kein Wort darüber gesagt, dass Russland gerade Kampfflugzeuge nach Syrien gebracht hat -: Eine Eskalation der militärischen Auseinandersetzung kann diesen Konflikt ganz sicher nicht befrieden.\n\nNicht nur bei der Bekämpfung der Fluchtursachen, sondern auch bei der Gestaltung einer neuen europäischen Flüchtlingsordnung müssen wir die Unterstützung aller Länder in Europa haben. Wenn wir Freizügigkeit und offene Grenzen erhalten wollen, dann brauchen wir sichere EU-Außengrenzen, und wir brauchen Aufnahmezentren in den Hauptankunftsländern Italien und Griechenland.\n\nIch bin froh, dass der Europäische Rat bzw. die Staats- und Regierungschefs gestern informell eine klare Entscheidung für die Sicherung der Außengrenzen und die Einrichtung von Hotspots getroffen haben. Die Sicherung der Außengrenzen wird aber nur dann funktionieren, wenn wir auch legale Möglichkeiten des Zuzugs von Flüchtlingen schaffen.\n\nAnders werden wir nicht in der Lage sein, den Zuzug der Flüchtlinge besser zu steuern und vor allen Dingen den Schleusern ihr menschenverachtendes Handwerk zu legen.\n\nIch finde, Kontingente von Flüchtlingen zu übernehmen, wie es Herr de Maizière formuliert hat, ist kein schlechter Gedanke.\n\nDie Resettlement-Programme der Vereinten Nationen sind insbesondere für Frauen und Kinder oft die einzige Möglichkeit, wirklichen Schutz zu finden. Deshalb sollten wir darüber nachdenken. Dass Artikel 16 a Grundgesetz davon nicht beeinträchtigt werden darf, halte ich für selbstverständlich.\n\nEuropa muss seine humanitären Verpflichtungen aus der Genfer Konvention erfüllen. Das geht aber nur, wenn wir die Flüchtlinge in Europa fair verteilen. Dass sich die Innenminister am Dienstag - wenn auch nur mit Mehrheitsentscheidung - auf die Verteilung von 120 000 Flüchtlingen verständigt haben, ist ein erster Schritt. Ich bin froh, dass auch Polen dem Kompromiss zugestimmt hat. Bundesinnenminister de Maizière hat daran entscheidenden Anteil gehabt.\n\nWir können aber natürlich bei diesem Kompromiss nicht stehen bleiben. Bei der Flüchtlingsfrage brauchen wir - genauso wie in der Griechenland-Krise - ein Mindestmaß an europäischer Solidarität. Es steht nicht in Einklang mit europäischem Recht, wie in den letzten Wochen in Ungarn, Serbien und Kroatien die Flüchtlinge hin- und hergeschoben worden sind.\n\n- Auch in der Slowakei, auch in Slowenien. - Noch immer gibt es EU-Mitglieder, die eine solidarische Verteilung der Flüchtlinge kategorisch ablehnen - ausgerechnet die Länder, die so sehr von der Solidarität der Europäischen Union profitieren. Tschechien bekam 2013 knapp 3,4 Milliarden Euro mehr, als es eingezahlt hat. Ungarn verbuchte ein Plus von 5 Milliarden Euro. Wer so viele Vorteile von der EU hat, der muss auch Verantwortung übernehmen und helfen, um humanitäre Katastrophen abzuwenden.\n\nWenn in Europa im Augenblick nur kleine Fortschritte möglich sind, dann brauchen wir in der deutschen Innenpolitik einen großen Fortschritt. Heute Abend beim Treffen der Bundesregierung mit den Ministerpräsidenten werden die Grundlagen dafür geschaffen, dass wir in diesem Jahr 800 000 Flüchtlinge aufnehmen und versorgen, aber auch integrieren können - jedenfalls die meisten derjenigen, die bei uns bleiben werden. Diese Menschen müssen in Kitas und Schulen. Wir brauchen Sprachkurse, Lehrstellen, Arbeitsplätze und menschenwürdige Wohnungen. All das ist ein Kraftakt.\n\nWas die Menschen deshalb zuallererst von uns erwarten, sind ein tatkräftiges Krisenmanagement und eine zügige Bearbeitung der Asylverfahren.\n\nDie Menschen, die bei uns Asyl suchen, brauchen schnell Gewissheit, ob sie bleiben können oder nicht. Abgelehnte Bewerber, die keine Perspektive haben, müssen schnell in ihre Heimatländer zurückgeführt werden.\n\nWir haben bereits vor dem heutigen Treffen verabredet, dass der Bund die Kapazitäten in der Erstaufnahme deutlich erhöht. Wir müssen aber auch die ungeregelte Einreise der Flüchtlinge an den Grenzen wieder unter Kontrolle bringen. Ich war in der letzten Woche in Passau und habe mir das angesehen. Ich habe gesehen, wie die Bundespolizei dort die Flüchtlinge an unterschiedlichen Stellen aufgreift, sie einsammelt und auch registriert. Das ist hervorragend organisiert. Vor allen Dingen geht die Bundespolizei mit den Flüchtlingen respektvoll und sensibel um. Ich muss sagen: Bei dem ganzen Durcheinander in dieser Krise, in der vieles nicht, jedenfalls noch nicht, rundläuft, ist die Bundespolizei ein stabiler Faktor, auf den man sich absolut verlassen kann. Deshalb bin ich froh, dass wir hier 3 000 neue Stellen bewilligt haben.\n\nAber die Registrierung, die zunächst durch die Bundespolizei erfolgt, wird anschließend noch einmal und in manchen Fällen ein drittes Mal gemacht: Die Registrierung der Polizei landet am Ende im Papierkorb, weil die Erstaufnahmeeinrichtung sie noch einmal durchführt; dann macht das BAMF diese Arbeit unter Umständen noch einmal. Ich finde, wir können uns in diesen schwierigen Zeiten doppelte und dreifache Arbeit nicht leisten.\n\nHeute Abend geht es vor allem um die finanzielle Entlastung der Kommunen und der Länder. Wir wollen, dass sich die Finanzhilfe an der tatsächlichen Entwicklung orientiert. Dabei geht es nicht um eine einmalige großzügige Unterstützung, sondern es geht um eine auf Dauer angelegte und dynamisch an der Zahl der Flüchtlinge orientierte Mitfinanzierung des Bundes bei der Aufnahme und Integration von Flüchtlingen.\n\nDabei handelt es sich um eine doppelte Integration: eine Integration in unsere Gesellschaft und eine Integration in unseren Arbeitsmarkt. Bei der Integration in unsere Gesellschaft ist klar, dass die Flüchtlinge das Wertesystem, das unserer Verfassung zugrunde liegt, akzeptieren müssen. Bei der Integration in den Arbeitsmarkt geht es darum, dass die Flüchtlinge möglichst bald ihren Lebensunterhalt mit Arbeitseinkünften bestreiten können. Angesichts dieser doppelten Integrationsanforderung ist es ein Glücksfall, dass wir mit Frank-Jürgen Weise künftig jemanden haben werden, der sowohl die Bundesagentur als auch das BAMF leitet. Ich glaube, das wird gut.\n\nAuch wenn wir gewaltig investieren müssen, dürfen wir nicht nur die Belastungen sehen, sondern wir müssen auch die Chancen für eine alternde Gesellschaft erkennen. Deutschland hat nach Japan die älteste Bevölkerung aller Industrieländer. Ein Land, in dem schon heute über 1 Million Stellen vakant sind und über 40 000 Ausbildungsplätze nicht besetzt werden können, ist auf Einwanderung dringend angewiesen. Wir wollen die Flüchtlinge schnell in Arbeit bringen. Dabei müssen wir auf eine Sache ganz besonders aufpassen, nämlich dass die Flüchtlinge nicht eine billige Reservearmee für den Arbeitsmarkt werden.\n\nDer Vorschlag, dass der Mindestlohn für Flüchtlinge ausgesetzt werden soll, ist unverantwortlich. Genau das dürfen wir nicht tun.\n\nWenn jemand, der lange darauf warten musste, dass er endlich 8,50 Euro in der Stunde verdient, sieht, dass Flüchtlinge für 6,50 Euro die gleiche Arbeit anbieten, dann muss er logischerweise Angst um seinen Arbeitsplatz haben. Genau das ist der Weg, diese Gesellschaft zu spalten. Den sollten wir nicht gehen.\n\nWir brauchen ein kräftiges Wohnungsbauprogramm, und zwar nicht nur für Flüchtlinge. Es gibt in Ballungszentren und Universitätsstädten in diesem Land auch unter Nichtflüchtlingen genügend Menschen, die auf der Suche nach einer bezahlbaren Wohnung sind. Deshalb ist ein Wohnungsbauprogramm die entscheidende Voraussetzung für die Integration der Flüchtlinge, aber auch für alle anderen auf der Suche nach menschenwürdigen Wohnungen.\n\nIch möchte kurz etwas zum Sicherheitsproblem sagen. Der Kollege Hans-Peter Friedrich hat gesagt: Wir haben die Kontrolle verloren.\n\nZigtausende strömen unkontrolliert ins Land. Wir können nicht abschätzen, wer ein islamistischer Schläfer ist.\n\nRichtig ist, dass wir an den Grenzen die Kontrolle über die einreisenden Menschen zurückgewinnen müssen. Wir dürfen es nicht zulassen, dass die staatliche Ordnung aus den Fugen gerät. Dass unter den Flüchtlingen auch Islamisten sein können, kann niemand ausschließen.\n\nDeshalb müssen wir auch wachsam sein. Aber für viel gefährlicher halte ich es, wenn die 800 deutschen Gotteskrieger, die auf der Seite des „Islamischen Staates“ kämpfen, wieder nach Deutschland zurückkehren.\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Die allermeisten Menschen, die aus Syrien kommen, haben die Nase gestrichen voll von Gotteskriegern und gewalttätigen religiösen Eiferern. Damit das so bleibt, sollten wir sicherstellen, dass die radikalen Salafisten in Deutschland jetzt nicht die Betreuung der Flüchtlinge übernehmen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nSo gesehen ist unsere Gastfreundschaft eine gute Integrationspolitik und eine Investition in die innere Sicherheit. Muslime sagen vor laufenden Kameras: Die Dschihadisten sagen uns, ihr seid Ungläubige; aber in Wirklichkeit seid ihr es, die den Muslimen in Not helfen. - So ganz nebenbei führen wir wahrscheinlich gerade den effektivsten Kampf gegen den Islamismus, der möglich ist. Auch das sollten wir sehen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nEs ist gut, dass inmitten der größten Flüchtlingskrise seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg am Wochenende die UN\u001eVollversammlung in New York stattfindet. Auf der Tagesordnung steht die Verabschiedung einer nachhaltigen, weltweit gültigen Entwicklungsagenda, und die Kanzlerin hat zu Recht darauf hingewiesen: Die Agenda 2030 richtet sich nicht nur an Entwicklungsländer, sondern sie verpflichtet alle Länder auf diesem Globus, ihre Aufgaben zu erfüllen.\n\nWie viele Flüchtlinge in den nächsten 10 oder 20 Jahren nach Deutschland und Europa kommen, hängt ganz wesentlich auch davon ab, ob die Verhandlungen in New York gut laufen. Deshalb, Frau Bundeskanzlerin, wünsche ich Ihnen gutes Gelingen bei der UN\u001eVollversammlung.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n14667,ralph-lenkert,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Internetnutzerinnen und Mobildatennutzer! Meine Kollegin wollte mehr als 6 Mbit/s im Internet. Die Ansage im Shop nach Adressencheck klang gut: Flatrate mit 50 Mbit/s kein Problem. Sie freute sich, vertraute auf die Zusage und unterschrieb. 50 Mbit/s hat sie bis heute nicht. Nach ewigem Hin und Her konnte sie zum alten Vertrag zurück. Fast jeder kennt solche Beispiele.\n\nWenn Internetprovider, die bis zu 16 Mbit/s verkaufen, wissen, dass jeder dritte Kundenanschluss aus technischen Gründen nicht einmal 8 Mbit/s erreicht, dann ist das Betrug. Wenn Mobilfunkanbieter eine Downloadrate von 20 Mbit/s verkaufen und wissen, dass aus technischen Gründen die Hälfte der Nutzer nicht einmal eine Mindestübertragungsrate von 4 Mbit/s erhält, dann ist das Betrug.\n\nDie Linke fordert: Wer den vollen Preis für eine angebotene Leistung bezahlt, hat auch ein Anrecht auf die volle Leistung.\n\nStellen Sie sich einmal vor, Sie wollten mit dem ICE von Berlin nach München fahren.\n\nGemäß dem Maßstab der Mobilfunkanbieter würde man bei jeder zweiten Fahrt erst nach 30 Stunden in München ankommen. Schon bei 60 Minuten Verspätung könnten Sie die Reise abbrechen und den vollen Fahrpreis zurückverlangen. Bei Ihrem Provider erhalten Sie derzeit nicht einmal eine Entschädigung, und das ist eine Sauerei.\n\nImmerhin sieht der Gesetzentwurf für die Zukunft wenigstens Bußgelder und Vertragsanpassungen vor. Aber das reicht nicht. Betrug gehört in den Bereich des Strafrechts. Wir fordern zusätzlich zu saftigen Bußgeldern Schadenersatz für Kundinnen und Kunden.\n\nDarum unterstützt die Linke den Entschließungsantrag der Grünen.\n\nDie Linke fordert mehr Transparenz in den Verträgen. Wir fordern, dass Anbieter offenlegen müssen, in welchen Regionen sie welche Leistungen tatsächlich anbieten können, und wir wollen eine rigorose Verfolgung von falschen Versprechungen durch die Bundesnetzagentur und durch Strafverfolgungsbehörden.\n\nKolleginnen und Kollegen, Netzneutralität, die Gleichbehandlung aller Nutzer und Inhalte im Netz, ist für die Linke unerlässlich. Ich zitiere jetzt aus dem Gesetz:\n\nEine angemessene Verwaltung des Datenverkehrs (Verkehrsmanagement) ist zulässig, um die Netzwerkressourcen effizient zu nutzen und die Qualität der Dienste entsprechend den Anforderungen zu gewährleisten. Dabei dürfen die Internetzugangsanbieter zwischen Verkehrskategorien unterscheiden, soweit diese verschiedene Anforderungen beispielsweise in Bezug auf Verzögerung, Verzögerungsschwankung, Paketverlust und Bandbreite stellen.\n\nDas ist der Anfang vom Ende der Netzneutralität.\n\nDiese genehmigten Ausnahmen zum sogenannten Verkehrsmanagement, wie auch beispielsweise StreamOn der Telekom, lehnt die Linke ab.\n\nDie Bundesnetzagentur, die nach diesem Gesetzentwurf möglichen Missbrauch unterbinden soll, hat schon heute zu viele Aufgaben und zu wenig Personal. Die kann kommenden Betrug nicht wirksam bekämpfen.\n\nDeshalb fordert die Linke mehr Personal für die Bundesnetzagentur.\n\nLiebe Bürgerinnen und Bürger, diese Koalition hat es in vier Jahren nicht geschafft, eine vernünftige Novelle des Telekommunikationsgesetzes vorzulegen. Wenn der Betrug bei Übertragungsraten Ihres Handyvertrages enden soll, wenn Sie die Netzneutralität im Internet sichern wollen, dann haben Sie eine Chance: Wählen Sie die Linke!\n\nSehr geehrter Herr Kollege Lämmel, ich weiß nicht, wer in der Industrie mehr Erfahrung hat: jemand, der seit seinem Studium in Verwaltungen und im Ministerium gearbeitet hat, oder jemand, der 20 Jahre lang in Deutschland, in Tschechien und in China in der Industrie gearbeitet hat. Die kleinen Unterschiede können Sie mir vielleicht mal erklären. Wahrscheinlich hat man am Schreibtisch mehr Ahnung von Wirtschaft als in der Wirtschaft selber.\n\nUm jetzt zu den technischen Fakten zu kommen: Sie haben behauptet, ich hätte Sie falsch dargestellt. Ich zitiere jetzt aus dem Bericht „breitbandmessung“:\n\nStationäre Breitbandanschlüsse\n\nÜber alle Bandbreiteklassen und Anbieter hinweg erhielten im Download 70,8 % der Nutzer mindestens die Hälfte der vertraglich vereinbarten maximalen Datenübertragungsrate ...\n\nDas heißt im Umkehrschluss: Die 30 Prozent, die ich genannt habe, sind korrekt. Das ist keine falsche Aussage, wie Sie es hier dargestellt haben.\n\nIch zitiere weiter, jetzt zu den mobilen Breitbandanschlüssen:\n\nErreichten im Download bei den stationären Breitbandanschlüssen knapp über 70 % der Nutzer 50 % der vertraglich vereinbarten maximalen Datenübertragungsrate oder mehr, lag der entsprechende Wert bei den mobilen Breitbandanschlüssen unter 30 %.\n\nDas heißt im Umkehrschluss, wenn man nur andersherum rechnet, genau das, was ich gesagt habe.\n\nIch bitte Sie also, nicht nur die eigentlichen Zahlen zu nehmen, sondern auch die Gegenrechnung zu machen. Das sollten Sie gelernt haben.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6542,jan-korte,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Morgen, am 8. Mai, danken wir den Alliierten für die Befreiung Europas von der Herrschaft des Haken-kreuzes. Wir gedenken der Opfer. Heute aber wollen wir einen Blick auf die Täter richten; denn diese prägten maßgeblich die Geschicke der frühen Bundesrepublik.\n\nDie frühe Bundesrepublik war geprägt von der Rückkehr der alten Eliten in Staat, Wirtschaft, Militär und, -besonders verheerend, in die Justiz; denn sie kehrten nicht nur zurück als Täter und Massenmörder, sondern sie prägten die Rechtsprechung in der Bundesrepublik, zum Beispiel bei der Gehilfenrechtsprechung. Selbst der Adjutant von Auschwitz, der an Vergasungen selber beteiligt war, wurde nicht als Täter verurteilt, sondern als Gehilfe.\n\nIn der Gesellschaft damals, bei der Masse der Bevölkerung dominierte Verdrängung. Die großen Sozial-psychologen Alexander und Magarete Mitscherlich nannten es „die Unfähigkeit zu trauern“. Erst durch minoritäre Gegenpositionen bewegte sich etwas. Ich denke dabei an Martin Niemöller und das Stuttgarter Schuldbekenntnis, an Eugen Kogon und natürlich an den großartigen Fritz Bauer. Noch in den 50er-Jahren galt Stauffenberg übrigens aufgrund seines Attentatsversuchs am 20. Juli als Landesverräter bei den Eliten und weiten -Teilen der Gesellschaft. Erst im Remer-Prozess führte Fritz Bauer den brillanten Nachweis, dass ein Unrechtsregime wie der Nationalsozialismus gar nicht hochverratsfähig sein kann. Er brachte es auf die Formel: Unrecht kennt keinen Verrat.\n\nErst durch diese Gegenpositionen und viele andere änderte sich etwas. Ich erinnere an den vom hessischen Generalstaatsanwalt Fritz Bauer initiierten Auschwitz-Prozess. Ich erinnere an Emigranten wie Willy Brandt, die damals übrigens in der Politik als Landesverräter -beschimpft wurden, und insbesondere Willy Brandts großartige Geste, den Kniefall im Warschauer Ghetto. Willy Brandt tat das als Opfer; er war kein Täter. Die -Täter haben sich nicht entschuldigt. Schließlich erinnere ich an die 68er, die maßgeblich zur Aufarbeitung beigetragen haben durch unzählige Geschichts- und Gedenkinitiativen. So gab es vor 20 Jahren - auch das ein Jubiläum - die erste Wehrmachtsausstellung. Auch daran sollten wir uns erinnern, und wir sollten den Machern von damals noch einmal einen großen Dank für diese Tat der Aufklärung zollen.\n\nDie Kehrseite ist allerdings, dass die Deserteure erst im Jahre 2002 rehabilitiert wurden, die Kriegsverräter erst im Jahre 2009, und die sowjetischen Kriegsgefangenen bis dato immer noch eine vergessene Opfergruppe sind und bis heute immer noch nicht entschädigt worden sind. Auch das wird höchste Zeit. Es leben nur noch wenige.\n\nAll diese Gegenpositionen, all diese Initiativen und das Insistieren von kritischer Wissenschaft, von engagierten Journalisten führten zu einem Umdenken. Die Erfolge will ich auch benennen.\n\nDie Studie Das Amt und die Vergangenheit über den verbrecherischen Charakter des Auswärtigen Amtes innerhalb des NS-Regimes ist ein Meilenstein gewesen, nicht nur weil dort sehr viel Neues stand - es stand auch vieles drin, was schon bekannt gewesen ist -, sondern vor allem deswegen, weil ein damaliger Außenminister - in diesem Fall Joschka Fischer - eine solche Historikerkommission offiziell eingesetzt hat und diese von Guido Westerwelle als weiterem Außenminister fortgesetzt wurde. Das ist gar nicht hoch genug anzurechnen.\n\nAuch die unabhängige Historikerkommission zur Erforschung der Geschichte des BND hat entgegen meinen Annahmen - ich hätte das gar nicht für möglich gehalten - extrem viel Gutes, Neues und Kritisches über die braunen Wurzeln beim BND hervorgebracht. Auch das war eine gute Sache.\n\nHeute muss es um die damalige politisch-administrative Schaltzentrale gehen, nämlich um das Kanzleramt. Wer die anderen aktuellen Projekte, auch das beim BMI, für sinnvoll hält, kann nicht allen Ernstes gegen die Einsetzung einer unabhängigen Historikerkommission zur Geschichte des Kanzleramts sein;\n\ndenn im Kanzleramt wurde politisch entschieden, dass die alten Eliten zurückkommen, und von dort aus wurde das kollektive Schweigen politisch organisiert und gesteuert. Hans Globke war ja nur die Spitze des Eisbergs. Um es noch einmal in Erinnerung zu rufen: Globke war von 1953 bis 1963 Chef des Kanzleramtes, und er war zuvor Mitverfasser und Kommentator der Nürnberger Gesetze; das sollte man nicht vergessen.\n\nAdenauer, der nun gewiss kein Nazi war, nicht einmal ansatzweise,\n\nhat diese Politik willentlich in Kauf genommen; denn sie hat bei Wahlen in der Bevölkerung Mehrheiten gebracht - und das ist das eigentlich Traurige. Wer für lückenlose Aufarbeitung ist, kann um diese exekutive Schaltzen-trale keinen Bogen machen.\n\nDas Beste wäre natürlich, wenn die Initiative dafür vom Kanzleramt selbst ausgehen würde. Im Übrigen, Kollege Lengsfeld, ist das auch eine Gelegenheit für die CDU, über ihre Rolle bei der Politik der 50er- und 60er-Jahre nachzudenken.\n\nZum Schluss. Ralph Giordano, der kürzlich verstorbene große Publizist, hat in seinem Buch Die zweite Schuld oder Von der Last Deutscher zu sein zu dieser Zeit Folgendes gesagt - ich zitiere -:\n\nAls sei die Adenauerära bis hinein in die sechziger Jahre so etwas gewesen wie eine gigantische -Korrumpierungsofferte der konservativen Herrschaft an ein mehrheitlich auseinandersetzungsunwilliges Wahlvolk, eine Art Stillhalteangebot, das sich teils wortlos aus der allgemein konspirativen Atmosphäre ergab, teils aber auch kräftig organisiert war. Diese Offerte lautete: Für die kollektiven Wiedereinstellungen selbst schwerstbelasteter -Berufsgruppen, für Pensionskontinuität, für die Exkulpierungsagitation - für all das: demokratisches Wohlverhalten! Diese Offerte ist akzeptiert worden - der große Frieden mit den Tätern.\n\nPolitisch trägt dafür in besonderer Weise das Kanzleramt von damals die Verantwortung. Daher sollte die Geschichte des Kanzleramtes jetzt aufgearbeitet werden. Das wäre ein ganz kleiner Schritt zur Abtragung der „zweiten Schuld“.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nEs ist in der Tat die Frage, ob es sich lohnt, darauf einzugehen. Aber das steht ja nun einmal im Raum, und zumindest drei Anmerkungen will ich dazu machen.\n\nErstens. Kollege Lengsfeld, man muss im Kopf schon wirklich sehr schräg drauf sein, um bei diesem Antrag zu dieser Debatte darauf zu kommen, dass das eine Fortsetzung von SED-Propaganda aus dem Kalten Krieg wäre. So schräg muss man erst einmal drauf sein.\n\nZweitens. Es interessiert mich ja schon: Was bitte hatte die SED, über die wir zu Recht immer wieder kritisch diskutieren und deren Geschichte wir aufarbeiten\n\n- ich war nicht in der SED; ich bin wie die Kollegin Högl in Osnabrück geboren; also bitte, was soll das denn? -, mit der Vergangenheit von Hans Globke zu tun? Was hatte die SED damit zu tun, dass Hans Globke an der Verfassung der Nürnberger Gesetze beteiligt war? Das ist doch aberwitzig, was Sie hier erzählen.\n\nDrittens. Das sei dann schon noch einmal gesagt: Wir reden hier über schwerstbelastete NS-Täter, die maßgeblich durch das Kanzleramt, durch die politische Weichenstellung damals, wieder in Amt und Würden kamen. Ich finde es nicht angemessen, das Thema so zu behandeln. Denn es geht hier um eine Vergangenheit als Einsatzgruppenleiter, die Zehntausende von Frauen, Kindern und Männern hingemetzelt haben. Es geht um Auschwitz, um Treblinka und vieles andere mehr. Wie kommen Sie eigentlich bei so einem Thema auf eine solche Argumentation?\n\nWenn hier irgendjemand im Kalten Krieg voll hängen geblieben ist, dann sind es Sie.\"\n5679,andrea-nahles,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Mit dem hier vorliegenden Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Tarifeinheit vervollständigen wir unsere Bemühungen, die Tarifautonomie in unserem Land zu stärken. Das Haus der Sozialpartnerschaft steht damit auf einem guten Fundament: Mit der Öffnung des Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetzes für alle Branchen, mit der verbesserten Möglichkeit, Tarifverträge allgemeinverbindlich zu erklären, und mit dem Mindestlohn, den wir für die Zukunft in der Mindestlohn-Kommission wieder in die Hände der Sozialpartner gelegt haben, gibt es bereits drei Bausteine. Der vierte Baustein, die Tarifeinheit, folgt nun.\n\nDie Tarifeinheit hat in Deutschland als fester Bestandteil der Tarifautonomie eine sehr lange Tradition. Viele Jahrzehnte galt in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland der klare Grundsatz: „Ein Betrieb - ein Tarifvertrag“. Erst vor wenigen Jahren, nämlich im Jahre 2010, hat das Bundesarbeitsgericht seine ständige Rechtsprechung dazu geändert. Es waren damals, 2010, Arbeitgeber und Gewerkschaften gemeinsam, die uns als Politik aufgefordert haben, die Tarifeinheit gesetzlich zu regeln und damit die Funktionsfähigkeit der Tarifautonomie zu sichern, und sie haben diese Aufforderung 2013 während der Koalitionsverhandlungen wiederum gemeinsam erneuert. Mit dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf, der auch nach intensiver Anhörung und Beteiligung der Sozialpartner entstanden ist, kommen wir dieser wiederholten und dringlichen Aufforderung nach.\n\nVerehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, mancher hat nun Sorge, es würden Rechte der Arbeitnehmer, der Gewerkschaften beschnitten. Mancher hofft auch - heimlich oder öffentlich -, es würden Streiks kleiner Gewerkschaften verboten, weil sie den Bahn- oder Flugverkehr stören oder die Gesundheitsversorgung treffen. Fakt ist: All das tut dieses Gesetz nicht.\n\nEs geht vielmehr darum, das Funktionieren der im Grundgesetz verankerten und unsere Wirtschafts- wie Gesellschaftsordnung prägenden Tarifautonomie zu ermöglichen. Nach dem Grundgesetz sind die Sozialpartner zur Regelung der Arbeits- und Wirtschaftsbedingungen berufen. Mit dieser Aufgabe geht auch eine große Verantwortung einher. Ich erwarte, dass die Sozialpartner diese auch annehmen. Streikrecht und Koalitionsfreiheit tasten wir nicht an. Das sind Grundrechte, für die lange gekämpft wurde. Ich stehe zu diesen Rechten. Mit diesem Gesetz werden wir daran nicht rütteln.\n\nAber das Koalitionsrecht ist nicht allein ein Freiheitsrecht. Es so eng zu führen, entspricht nicht unserer Verfassungsordnung: Den Koalitionen kommt die im öffentlichen Interesse liegende Aufgabe zu, innerhalb ihres Bereichs das Arbeitsleben sinnvoll zu ordnen und zu befrieden, so hat es das Bundesverfassungsgericht festgehalten.\n\nDie Tarifautonomie darf in ihrer zentralen wirtschaftlichen und gesellschaftlichen Funktion nicht bedroht oder beeinträchtigt werden. Es ist Aufgabe des Staates, einen Rahmen zu schaffen, der das Funktionieren der Tarifautonomie sichert. Daher brauchen wir auch eine Regelung zur Tarifeinheit.\n\nWir sind überzeugt: Unser Vorschlag ist verfassungsgemäß. Klar ist: Bei juristischen Fragen gibt es immer auch andere, abweichende Meinungen, und es gibt keine absolute Sicherheit.\n\nDas weiß jeder hier, auch ich. Aber unser Gesetzentwurf ist so solide erarbeitet und sehr, sehr sorgfältig geprüft, auch mit den Verfassungsressorts zusammen, sodass nach allem Ermessen den Maßgaben unserer Verfassung voll Genüge getan wird.\n\nDenn wir setzen bei den verfassungsgemäßen Rechten und Pflichten an. Es ist und bleibt grundsätzlich in der Verantwortung der Tarifvertragsparteien, durch eigene, autonome Entscheidungen Tarifkollisionen zu vermeiden. Nur nachrangig, als Ultima Ratio, wirkt das Gesetz.\n\nWas ist nun unter solch einer Tarifkollision zu verstehen? Sie entsteht, wenn verschiedene Gewerkschaften für dieselbe Beschäftigtengruppe eines Betriebes unterschiedliche Regelungen mit der Arbeitgeberseite vereinbaren. Auch dann allerdings greift nicht automatisch das Gesetz, sondern es gibt eine ganze Fülle von Möglichkeiten, dieses Problem auf der Ebene zu lösen, auf der es auftritt: Die Gewerkschaften können untereinander Zuständigkeiten abstimmen und so dafür sorgen, dass ihre Tarifverträge nicht kollidieren. Oder sie können übereinkommen, dass der Tarifvertrag einer Gewerkschaft durch den einer anderen Gewerkschaft ergänzt werden kann, etwa durch zusätzliche Regelungen für eine bestimmte Arbeitnehmergruppe. Die Gewerkschaften können sich auch abstimmen, ihre Forderungen in einer sogenannten Tarifgemeinschaft gemeinsam aufzustellen. Das ist sehr häufig im öffentlichen Dienst der Fall. Sie können auch inhaltsgleiche Tarifverträge abschließen. Schließlich gibt es immer auch die Möglichkeit, Konflikte untereinander zu lösen, etwa innerhalb eines gemeinsamen Dachverbandes.\n\nAll diese Formen sind bekannt, weil es ja bis 2010 die Tarifeinheit gab. Unterm Strich bedeutet das mehr Kooperation;\n\ndenn all diese Möglichkeiten gehen vor. Unser Gesetzentwurf entfaltet eben nur im äußersten Fall seine Wirkung. Dafür haben wir ein klares Kriterium geschaffen:\n\nIm Fall einer Tarifkollision gilt der Tarifvertrag der Gewerkschaft, die im Betrieb die meisten Mitglieder hat.\n\nWelcher Tarifvertrag gilt, entscheiden also die Beschäftigten selbst. Die gemeinsame Leistung aller soll wichtiger sein als eine bestimmte Machtposition im Betriebsablauf, die sich bisher für die Durchsetzung von Einzelinteressen nutzen lässt.\n\nIch höre jetzt schrille Töne: Von der Vernichtung kleiner Gewerkschaften ist die Rede. Ich sage da ganz klar: So wie es vor 2010 und zwischen 2010 und 2015 kleine Gewerkschaften gegeben hat, wird es sie auch in Zukunft geben; und das ist auch gut so.\n\nTarifautonomie und Sozialpartnerschaft sind konstitutiv für unser Gesellschafts-, Wirtschafts- und Sozialstaatsmodell. Wir sorgen für einen Rahmen, in dem sie wirken und sich entfalten können. Am Ende können aber für eine funktionierende Sozialpartnerschaft nur Arbeitgeber und Arbeitnehmer selbst sorgen, gerade indem sie sich in Verbänden und Gewerkschaften engagieren. Verantwortung für das Ganze übernehmen, den Zusammenhalt stärken und mit am künftigen Erfolg unseres Landes und unserer Wirtschaft bauen: Darum geht es. Das wollen wir mit dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf fördern.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n14497,erich-irlstorfer,\"Herr Präsident! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen!\n\nDie Kollegin Rawert schafft es immer wieder, mich beim Thema „generalistische Ausbildung“ zu reizen. Gratulation!\n\nIch erwähne das Ganze nur mit wenigen Sätzen - denn heute geht es ja um ein anderes Thema -: Verehrte Kollegin, Sie kennen den Kompromissvorschlag.\n\nIch weiß, dass er Ihnen nicht in Gänze gefällt - uns auch nicht, aber so ist das bei Kompromissen nun einmal. Glauben Sie mir: Ich bin wirklich davon überzeugt, dass es wichtig wäre, Ministerin Schwesig dazu zu bringen, ihre Eitelkeiten zu vergessen\n\nund zuzustimmen; bitte erlauben Sie mir, das zu sagen.\n\n- Das ist eine nette Person. Das habe ich auch nicht anders gesagt.\n\nWerte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Frau Zimmermann hat gerade den Antrag der Linken begründet. Darunter waren ja Äußerungen, die wirklich unterirdisch waren.\n\nDeshalb schenke ich es mir, darauf näher einzugehen.\n\nIch möchte nur darauf hinweisen: Nach 20 Jahren Bestehen der gesetzlichen Pflegeversicherung hat die unionsgeführte Bundesregierung in der laufenden Legislatur eine umfassende Reform der Pflege in Angriff genommen.\n\nDas ist unbestreitbar. Dabei war uns klar, dass Strukturverbesserungen zwar wichtig, aber nicht ausreichend sein würden.\n\nDeshalb haben wir deutliche und spürbare Leistungsausweitungen beschlossen, die nicht nur die Versorgung von Pflegebedürftigen verbessert, sondern vor allem auch den Kreis der Leistungsbezieherinnen und Leistungsbezieher deutlich vergrößert haben.\n\nDie dadurch entstehenden zusätzlichen Kosten - Frau Klein-Schmeink hat darauf hingewiesen - können wir nur deshalb rechtfertigen, weil wir für eine stabile wirtschaftliche Lage in Deutschland mit einer Rekordbeschäftigung gesorgt haben, von der nun auch der Sozialstaat und die Sozialsysteme profitieren.\n\n- Das ist die Wahrheit. - Die finanziellen Mittel werden zielgerichtet eingesetzt und kommen bei den Betroffenen an, die Verbesserungen sind für die Menschen erlebbar und werden angenommen.\n\nIm Sechsten Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Entwicklung der Pflegeversicherung werden die Bemühungen, Bedürfnisse und Wünsche der Pflegebedürftigen hinsichtlich der Reform der Pflegeversicherung beleuchtet. Diesen wollen wir gerecht werden. Neben Verbesserungen für die Pflegebedürftigen wollten wir gleichermaßen aber auch sicherstellen - das ist uns auch gelungen -, dass die Angehörigen, die in Deutschland bei der Pflege noch immer eine enorme Leistung schultern, entlastet werden und die Verbesserungen auch spüren. An dieser Stelle sei die Möglichkeit der Inanspruchnahme von Lohnersatzleistungen oder der Reduzierung der Arbeitszeit von bis zu zwei Jahren erwähnt. Dazu kommt, dass wir für die Angehörigen auch den Schutz in der Arbeitslosenversicherung verbessert haben. Das dürfen wir nicht vergessen.\n\nIn den letzten beiden Jahren ist der Anteil der durch Angehörige versorgten Bedürftigen wieder leicht angestiegen, auf 67 Prozent, beeinflusst durch diese und weitere Verbesserungen in diesem Bereich.\n\nDer Dreiklang der Pflege - ich sage es zum wiederholten Male - bliebe aber aus meiner Perspektive ohne Verbesserungen für die Pflegekräfte unvollständig. Deshalb ist es notwendig, dass wir auch in diesem Bereich den nächsten Reformschritt machen. Uns war wichtig, einer übermäßigen Arbeitsbelastung durch den Einsatz zusätzlicher Kräfte sowie den Abbau von überflüssiger Bürokratie entgegenzuwirken. Das sind erste Schritte, die hier gegangen wurden. Gleichermaßen spielt für die Attraktivität des Berufes natürlich die Vergütung eine sehr wichtige Rolle. Die Bezahlung von Tariflöhnen - hier sind wir uns einig - muss eine Selbstverständlichkeit sein. Auch hier sind wir schon Schritte in die richtige Richtung gegangen.\n\nWerte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es ist der Größe der Aufgabe geschuldet, dass wir das Pflegereformvorhaben in eine Reihe von einzelnen Gesetzen gepackt haben, in die Pflegestärkungsgesetze I bis III. Die Leistungen der Pflegeversicherung und die pflegerische Versorgung konnten durch das Erste Pflegestärkungsgesetz bereits im ersten Jahr seiner Wirksamkeit deutlich ausgebaut werden. Es gibt zusätzliche Leistungen für die Betreuung im Rahmen der häuslichen Pflege sowie für Rehabilitation und Prävention. Mit dem Pflegestärkungsgesetz I wurde erstmals die Vergütung sämtlicher Leistungen der Pflegeversicherung an die Preisentwicklung der vergangenen drei Jahre angepasst und in einem Umfang von 4 Prozent angehoben. Auch das dürfen wir nicht verschweigen.\n\nPersonen mit erheblich eingeschränkter Alltagskompetenz haben seit Januar 2015 Zugang zu allen Leistungen der häuslichen Pflegeversicherung, einschließlich der Tages-, Nacht- und Kurzzeitpflege.\n\nUmgekehrt können auch Pflegebedürftige, die vorrangig körperlich beeinträchtigt sind, besondere Angebote der allgemeinen Anleitung und Betreuung, der hauswirtschaftlichen Versorgung oder von den Ländern anerkannte niedrigschwellige Betreuungs- und Entlastungsangebote in Höhe von bis zu 208 Euro im Monat von ihrer Pflegekasse erstattet bekommen. Auch das sind Verbesserungen.\n\nEs handelt sich hierbei um nicht gerade wenige Menschen; wir sprechen für das Jahr 2015 - das sollten wir uns vor Augen halten - von 1,5 Millionen Pflegebedürftigen. Dementsprechend haben sich auch die Ausgaben für zusätzliche ambulante Betreuungsleistungen von 437 Millionen Euro im Jahr 2013 auf 684 Millionen Euro im Jahr 2015 erhöht. Bringen Sie die Information über diese niedrigschwelligen Betreuungsangeboten bitte unter die Leute, geschätzte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, und verunsichern Sie mit solchen Anträgen nicht die Menschen!\n\nDie mit dem Ersten Pflegestärkungsgesetz eingeführten Leistungsausweitungen im Bereich des Wohnumfeldes kommen bei den Betroffenen an. Die Zahlen sprechen hier eine deutliche Sprache: Gab die Pflegeversicherung im Jahr 2011 rund 103 Millionen Euro dafür aus, stieg dieser Betrag bis 2015 auf knapp 305 Millionen Euro.\n\nAuch das sind Verbesserungen. Das kann man nicht einfach unter den Teppich kehren und so tun, als wäre nichts passiert.\n\nWenn wir über Solidarität in der Pflege sprechen, gehört zur Betrachtung der aktuellen Situation nicht nur der finanzielle Aspekt, also die finanziellen Mittel, die in die Pflege investiert werden, sondern auch die Ausweitung des Pflegebedürftigkeitsbegriffs, die wir durch das Pflegestärkungsgesetz II ermöglicht haben. Es sind nun nicht mehr nur Menschen mit körperlichen Einschränkungen erfasst, sondern auch geistig und seelisch beeinträchtigte Menschen.\n\nMit dem Pflegestärkungsgesetz III haben wir schließlich die kommunale Ebene gestärkt, damit dort eine bessere Koordination, Kooperation und Steuerung erfolgen können.\n\nDadurch, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wollen wir eine unabhängige und zentral gesteuerte Beratung ermöglichen, die den Pflegebedürftigen die bestmöglichen Angebote aus einer Hand offeriert. Dabei soll es zu einer Verzahnung der kommunalen Angebote und der Beratungsangebote der Pflegekassen kommen.\n\nAm Ende wollen wir es den pflegebedürftigen Menschen vor allem ermöglichen, so lange wie möglich in ihrem gewohnten Umfeld zu bleiben. Ambulant vor stationär - das ist der Wunsch der Menschen und somit unser Auftrag.\n\nEin Wort an die Linke. Es gibt Gott sei Dank jüngere Kolleginnen und Kollegen - ich habe darüber Gespräche gehabt -, die wahrnehmen, dass man hier den ersten richtigen Schritt getan hat. Aber, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Linken, so, wie wir es gemacht haben, ist es in meinen Augen politische Solidarität. Mit dem, was Sie in Ihrem Antrag darstellen, gaukeln Sie den Versicherten ein Schlaraffenland vor. Das Ganze soll bei Ihnen auch noch zum Nulltarif funktionieren. Ich kann nicht nachvollziehen, wie Sie in Ihrem Antrag bei einem gleichbleibenden Beitragssatz auf Mehreinnahmen in Höhe von 12 Milliarden Euro kommen.\n\nDieser Betrag wird in der Regel als jährliche Verlustspanne angegeben.\n\nWürde es die Privatversicherungen nicht geben, würde es sicherlich anders ausschauen. Das ist der Konstruktionsfehler Ihres Allheilmittels, der Bürgerversicherung. Wir müssen dieses gute und wirklich einzigartige sowie hervorragend funktionierende System von gesetzlicher und privater Krankenversicherung immer wieder an die Realität anpassen.\n\nErlauben Sie mir eine letzte Bemerkung. Allein durch Privatversicherte fließen jedes Jahr fast 29 Milliarden Euro in unser Gesundheitssystem.\n\nDieses Geld benötigen wir.\n\nMit allem anderen, was zum Thema Bürgerversicherung hier gesagt wurde und im Wahlkampf noch angesprochen werden wird, werden wir uns sehr kritisch auseinandersetzen. Nur die Begrifflichkeit in den Raum zu werfen, ohne Fleisch am Knochen, wird nicht funktionieren.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n9305,omid-nouripour,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! 10 Tote bei Anschlag auf belebten Platz in der Innenstadt; mindestens 20 Tote bei Luftangriff auf ein Schwimmbad; etwa 400 Menschen, die fast zu Tode verhungert sind; die zeitweise Verhaftung einer prominenten Bloggerin; 20 Tote bei Bombenangriff auf ein Café - das ist nur ein Ausschnitt der Meldungen, die uns alleine gestern aus dem Nahen Osten erreicht haben.\n\nDabei wissen wir: Zehn Deutsche sind bei dem Anschlag in Istanbul gestorben, viele sind verletzt worden, einige sehr schwer. Ihren Angehörigen gilt unser Mitgefühl genauso wie den anderen Opfern, die nicht in Istanbul waren, sondern im Jemen, in Syrien, in Saudi-Arabien oder im Irak.\n\nDie wichtigsten Exportprodukte des Nahen Ostens, schreibt vor diesem Hintergrund gestern der großartige Satiriker Karl Sharro, sind Öl und Schlagzeilen. - In dieser Stimmung fragen sich natürlich sehr viele Menschen: Was kann man denn eigentlich tun? - Es gibt viele, die nach einem großen Plan rufen. Der letzte wirklich wirksame große Plan für den Nahen Osten wird im Mai dieses Jahres 100 Jahre alt. Es ist der Plan von Sykes und Picot, ein Gebilde, unter dessen Trümmern mittlerweile Millionen von Menschen begraben sind. Die Zeiten der Masterpläne für den Nahen Osten sind vorbei.\n\nDie Region ist dafür viel zu vielschichtig. Die meisten Probleme haben sehr individuelle und lokale Ursachen. Deshalb muss man da immer sehr genau hinschauen und darf nicht das Gerede von den angeblich großen Linien nachplappern. Manchmal ist das wirklich kontraproduktiv. Wenn man dieses Tremolo von Teheran und Riad, von Schia und Sunna immer nachplappert, dann befeuert man einen konfessionellen Krieg, obwohl es eigentlich nur um Machtverhältnisse geht. Das sollte man nicht tun.\n\nWir brauchen einen klaren Blick, wir brauchen Rückgrat und Standfestigkeit. Haben wir das denn? Ich will einige Beispiele nennen. Irakisch-Kurdistan war sehr lange eine Oase der Stabilität im Norden des Irak. Wir haben den großen Widerstand gegen den Ansturm der Barbaren des ISIS erlebt. Dieser Widerstand ist zu begrüßen, und den sollten wir auch weiterhin unterstützen. Nur, seit Monaten wird die Brüchigkeit dieser Stabilität im Nordirak immer klarer. Würden wir genau hinschauen, dann würden wir sehen, was da eigentlich gerade los ist.\n\nEs gibt eine massive Wirtschaftskrise, die so manche Sollbruchstellen, die älter sind als die durch den ISIS hervorgerufenen, offenlegt. Wir erleben, dass die Regierung Barzani gewaltsam versucht, demokratische Debatten zu verhindern, Parlamentarier aussperrt und Journalisten verfolgt. Auch die sind aber unsere Partnerinnen und Partner, nicht nur Barzani. Ich frage mich, wo eigentlich der laute Protest unserer Ministerinnen und Minister in Erbil geblieben ist. Ich habe nichts davon gehört.\n\nWenn wir von Prinzipien und Rückgrat sprechen, dann, so glaube ich, muss man auch über das Positive sprechen und Stärken stärken. Dazu wirklich nur ein Satz: Es ist mehr als ein Wunder, dass der Libanon bei den Flüchtlingszahlen noch nicht zusammengebrochen ist. Die Libanesen brauchen nicht nur unsere verbale Solidarität, sondern sie brauchen politische Unterstützung und deutlich mehr materielle Hilfe. Ich wünschte mir, dass es deutlich mehr wäre als das, was wir jetzt tun. Ich freue mich, dass die Hilfe schon angewachsen ist.\n\nIm Falle von Syrien geht es nicht um die großen Friedenslösungen. Die gibt es so nicht. Das ist uns bekannt. Auch wir freuen uns über die Verhandlungen in Wien. Die sind richtig, auch wenn wir nicht mit allem, was dort aufgeschrieben worden ist, einverstanden sind, auch wenn wir nicht ganz so viel Dynamik wie der Außenminister an mancher Stelle sehen.\n\nEs gibt vier Resolutionen, die den Zugang der Menschen zu humanitärer Hilfe fordern, alle mit der Stimme Russlands im Sicherheitsrat verabschiedet. Wenn es nicht die großen Lösungen gibt, dann ist es doch offenkundig, dass man das tut, was man tun kann, und das ist, Hilfslieferungen zu bringen. Es ist wirklich nicht leicht heutzutage, den Syrern zu erklären, wie es denn sein kann, dass wir dort Flieger haben, aber keine Hilfslieferungen bringen können. Das ist für niemanden klar. Im Übrigen könnte die Bundesregierung mit einer Initiative in diese Richtung auch den Finger in die Wunde des russischen Beistands für Assad legen, der sich stets so pompös auf die Vereinten Nationen bezieht.\n\nWir würden im Übrigen auch zeigen, auf wessen Seite wir stehen. In Syrien gibt es Millionen von Menschen, die unsere Partner sein können.\n\nZu Saudi-Arabien. Herr Außenminister, lieber Frank, du weißt, ich schätze dich sehr. Aber was ich nicht verstehe, ist, wie du immer wieder bei Kritik einen Pappkameraden rhetorisch aufbaust und damit die Kritik umgehst. Wir haben nicht gesagt, dass du nicht nach Saudi-Arabien fahren sollst. Wir haben nicht gesagt, dass man nicht mit den Saudis sprechen soll. Natürlich brauchen wir sie. Wir sind wirklich dankbar, dass du einen großen Beitrag geleistet hast, dass Iran und Saudi-Arabien in Wien wieder zusammengekommen sind.\n\nWir würden uns freuen, wenn du drei Tage vor diesem Festival oder drei Tage nach diesem Festival dahin fahren würdest, am besten verbunden mit einer Pendeldiplomatie zwischen Riad und Teheran. Niemand sagt, dass der Chefdiplomat Deutschlands mit den Schurken der Welt nicht reden soll. Das ist dein Job. Das wissen wir. Wir freuen uns, wenn du das tust. Die Frage ist nur: Gehört in diesen Zeiten ein Kulturfestival und die Normalität, die damit suggeriert wird, wirklich dazu? Wollen wir das Land wirklich mit dem Besuch eines Kabinettsmitglieds aufwerten?\n\nIch kann nur sagen: Das Land Baden-Württemberg - auch dort beteiligt - hat sich weise verhalten. Es hat beschlossen, genau diese Aufwertung nicht mitzumachen und keine Kabinettsmitglieder hinzuschicken. Ich wünschte mir, dass die deutsche Bundesregierung das genauso macht.\n\nDas heißt nicht, dass man mit Saudi-Arabien nicht reden soll.\n\nIm Übrigen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Union - letzter Satz -, ich freue mich sehr, dass es bei Ihnen ein Umdenken in der Frage des Umgangs mit Saudi-Arabien gibt; das ist die letzten Tage spürbar gewesen. Allerdings sind jetzt zwei Gesichtspunkte zu beachten.\n\nErstens. Man sollte um Gottes willen nicht eine strategische Partnerschaft mit Saudi-Arabien, die falsch ist, gegen eine falsche strategische Partnerschaft mit dem Iran austauschen.\n\nZweitens. Der Tod von 47 Menschen, durch den so viele wachgerüttelt worden sind, ist wahrscheinlich leider nicht das Ende einer ganz langen Kette ähnlicher Menschenrechtsverletzungen in Saudi-Arabien.\n\n- Und im Iran. - Ich frage mich, wohin Sie die letzten Jahre geschaut haben.\"\n8848,ekin-deligoz,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Minister, wo stehen wir? Gute Konjunktur, robuste Sozialversicherung, sprudelnde Steuereinnahmen, Niedrigzinsen, maximal gute Bedingungen.\n\nSich unter diesen Voraussetzungen zu rühmen, dass Sie die schwarze Null einhalten, ist ehrlich gesagt keine Kunst.\n\nEs wäre verwunderlich, wenn Sie dies nicht täten.\n\nDie Frage ist aber, was Sie daraus machen, ob es Ihnen unter diesen Voraussetzungen gelingt, in die Zukunft zu investieren, ob es Ihnen gelingt, den Substanzverzehr zu verhindern, ob es Ihnen gelingt, den ökologischen Umbau, den Klimaschutz voranzutreiben und soziale Gerechtigkeit und Teilhabe in diesem Land umzusetzen. Daran müssen Sie sich messen lassen. Ehrlich gesagt ist der Haushalt in diesen Punkten leider nicht ausreichend ausgestattet.\n\nSie alle sind bibelfest.\n\nIch ergänze diese Bibelfestigkeit mit den Worten eines Geistlichen meiner Glaubensrichtung, Hadschi Bektasch, der sagt: „Gelobt sei der, der Licht in die Dunkelheit trägt.“ - Genau hier liegt der Grund, warum ich Ihnen an dieser Stelle unsere Änderungsanträge vorstellen will: In ihnen ist nämlich viel Licht.\n\nBeginnen wir mit dem Thema Zukunftsinvestitionen: Für uns gehört zum Thema Zukunftsinvestitionen unabdingbar die Frage der sozialen Gerechtigkeit dazu.\n\nDas ist auch der Grund, warum wir in Kitas, warum wir in Bildung, in Infrastruktur investieren, warum wir Arbeitsmarktintegration so hochhalten und warum wir mehr sozialen Wohnungsbau ohne Reduktion der Standards durchsetzen wollen. Das ist der Grund, warum wir die Alleinerziehenden nicht alleinlassen, und das ist der Grund, warum wir nicht aufhören, Maßnahmen gegen Altersarmut zu fordern. Auch wenn es aus Ihren Sprechzetteln längst verschwunden ist: In dieser Gesellschaft ist Altersarmut vorhanden, und da tragen wir Verantwortung.\n\nWir Grüne wissen nicht erst seit gestern, dass soziale Gerechtigkeit in unserem Land mit globaler Gerechtigkeit einhergeht. Deshalb sind wir entschieden für die Einhaltung des 0,7-Prozent-Ziels bei den ODA-Mitteln, und zwar nicht in kleinen Schritten und auch nicht nach dem Motto „Wenig tun und viel reden“. Es muss vielmehr konkret gehandelt werden; denn an der Frage der sozialen Gerechtigkeit werden wir uns auch in Deutschland messen lassen müssen.\n\nKommen wir zu dem Thema „ökologischer Umbau“: Ja, Sie produzieren da sehr viele Überschriften. Unsere Anträge aber bieten Ihnen dazu Inhalte. Diese Inhalte lauten konkret: Wir brauchen einen Energiesparfonds. Wir brauchen den Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien. Wir brauchen den internationalen Klimaschutz nicht nur, weil Paris vor der Tür steht. Wir brauchen all das. Warum? Weil grüne Ideen schwarze Zahlen produzieren. Diese schwarzen Zahlen sind gut für die Wirtschaft, gut für den Arbeitsmarkt und gut für den Standort Deutschland. Deshalb setzen wir uns dafür ein.\n\nGut für den Standort Deutschland ist aber auch verantwortliches Handeln. Wir haben kein Geld zu verschwenden. Das sollten Sie ernst nehmen.\n\nWas machen Sie denn im Bereich Verkehr? Sie bauen eine neue Straße nach der anderen, ein Großprojekt nach dem anderen.\n\nDas, was der Bundesrechnungshof dazu sagt, das geht bei Ihnen rechts rein und links wieder raus. Das interessiert Sie gar nicht. Was ist denn mit den vielen kaputten Straßen? Was ist mit den vielen kaputten Brücken?\n\nWer kümmert sich um sie? Substanzverzehr trägt einen Namen, und das ist der Name dieser Großen Koalition. Nicht anders verhält sich das!\n\nSie verschwenden Geld. Sie handeln verantwortungslos.\n\nNatürlich stellt sich auch die Frage: Wie finanzieren Sie das alles? Verantwortung zu übernehmen, heißt manchmal auch, eine Steueränderung vorzunehmen, um zu gestalten. Und tatsächlich heißt Verantwortung zu übernehmen bei uns: Ja, wir wollen die ökologisch schädlichen Subventionen abbauen. Ja, wir wollen die Beschaffungsmisswirtschaft in diesem Land abbauen. Und ja, wir wollen eine Reform der Abgeltungsteuer.\n\nHerr Minister Schäuble, ich habe gestern der Stuttgarter Zeitung entnommen, dass auch Sie der Meinung sind, dass die Abgeltungsteuer erneuert werden muss. Sie sind doch der Minister! Warum machen Sie es nicht?\n\nEine entsprechende Botschaft in der Stuttgarter Zeitung haben Sie schon gesetzt. Unsere Unterstützung dabei hätten Sie.\n\nIch komme zu dem wichtigsten Punkt. Es ist gut, dass wir für die Flüchtlingspolitik so viel Geld in die Hand nehmen. Das ist letztlich auch ein Produkt der gemeinsamen Verhandlungen mit den Ländern. Aber auch an dieser Stelle rechnen Sie an essenziellen Punkten die Belange schön. Ich gebe Ihnen ein paar Beispiele.\n\nIm SGB II setzen Sie die Verweilrate der Menschen mit 65 Prozent an; das ist viel zu niedrig. Das können Sie durch nichts, aber auch durch gar nichts rechtfertigen. Sie orientieren sich hier eher am Finanzrahmen statt am tatsächlichen Bedarf, und am Ende werden wir hier nachfinanzieren müssen. Das ist nicht ehrlich. Das zeigt: Sie haben keinen Mut, die Dinge tatsächlich anzupacken.\n\nEin anderes Beispiel. Von der Teilnahme an Integrationskursen schließen Sie alle Asylbewerber aus Ländern mit immerhin noch nennenswerten Schutzquoten aus, also bei einer erwarteten Quote von 25 bis 46 Prozent. Sie vernichten damit die Perspektiven dieser Menschen. Sie sorgen dafür, dass sich diese Menschen nicht integrieren können. Finden Sie nicht, dass Sie genau für diese Menschen an dieser Stelle etwas mehr Herz haben sollten?\n\nKommen wir zu dem Bereich der Infrastruktur. Alle Länder, alle Kommunen rufen: Wir brauchen Investitionsmittel! Wir brauchen die Lehrer, wir brauchen die Kindergärten, und wir brauchen die Erzieherinnen! Was machen Sie? Sie berufen sich darauf, dass die Mittel, die ursprünglich für das Betreuungsgeld vorgesehen waren und dank des Bundesverfassungsgerichts freigeworden sind, dafür verwendet werden, aber Sie machen das nicht verbindlich. Es ist nirgendwo eine Zweckbindung vorgesehen mit der Konsequenz, dass in Bayern kein Cent davon in der Infrastruktur ankommen wird.\n\nSie haben keinen Plan. Sie handeln willkürlich.\n\nIch möchte nun sichergehen, dass Sie all das verstehen, was ich gesagt habe,\n\nund bediene mich deshalb eines Bibelzitats. In 1 Korinther 10 steht: „Wer meint, er stehe, mag zusehen, dass er nicht falle!“ Das gilt insbesondere für Sie, meine Damen und Herren.\"\n9791,florian-hahn,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Um die Fortschritte messen zu können, die in den vergangenen Jahren in Somalia gemacht wurden, müssen wir uns a) in Erinnerung rufen, wie wir angefangen haben, und müssen wir b) das ins Verhältnis zu den doch sehr ambitionierten Zielen setzen. Die Ziele sind, zunächst einmal eine Basissicherheit und langfristig funktionsfähige somalische Sicherheitsstrukturen und Streitkräfte aufzubauen.\n\nJahrelang galt Mogadischu als einer der gefährlichsten Orte der Welt. Es wurde im Volksmund „Stalingrad Ostafrikas“ genannt. Noch immer ist das Land am Horn von Afrika eine der unsichersten und ärmsten Regionen. Dürreperioden, wie jetzt durch das Wetterphänomen El Niño ausgelöst, treffen den Krisenstaat hart. Fast die Hälfte der Einwohner, fast 5 Millionen Menschen sind auf Nahrungsmittelhilfe angewiesen. Die Vereinten Nationen schlagen deshalb entsprechend Alarm.\n\nSomalia wird sich sicherlich noch lange als fragiler Staat darstellen und auf Hilfe der internationalen Gemeinschaft angewiesen bleiben. Doch wird eine rein pessimistische Bewertung dem Land nicht gerecht. Teile erholen sich langsam, auch wenn die Entwicklung sicherlich nicht geradlinig verläuft. Mogadischu ist heute die am zweitschnellsten wachsende Stadt der Welt. Obwohl man die Sicherheitslage weiterhin als schwierig bewerten muss, erholt sich die Stadt langsam, baut sich aus Ruinen wieder auf, versucht, wieder normal zu sein.\n\nSo minimal die Fortschritte sind - ich will das nicht überzeichnen -: Die Menschen suchen nach Perspektiven. Erste qualifizierte Arbeitskräfte aus der ganzen Welt sind nach Somalia zurückgekommen, um beim Wiederaufbau des Staates zu helfen. Mehr als 20 Hochschulen wurden in den letzten Jahren in der Stadt eröffnet. Restaurants und Läden entstehen. Manche sprechen von einer Art Gründungssituation. Wie gesagt: Man muss alles ins richtige Verhältnis setzen. Wir werden im Februar ein GIZ-Büro eröffnen und Vorhaben zur staatlichen Wasserversorgung und Ernährungssicherung beginnen.\n\nNeben den strukturellen Fortschritten geben die politischen Entwicklungen Grund zu ein bisschen Hoffnung. So einigte sich das somalische Kabinett am 27. Januar dieses Jahres auf ein gesamtstaatliches Wahlsystem für die anstehenden Wahlen, die im August 2016 durchgeführt werden sollen. Das sind insgesamt schon ein paar gute Zeichen, wenn wir auf die Anfänge zurückblicken. Erste Fortschritte zeigen den richtigen Ansatz der Mission EUTM Somalia, aber eben auch vernetzt mit EUCAP NESTOR und EU NAVFOR. Mittlerweile wurden im Rahmen von EUTM Somalia über 5 000 Soldatinnen und Soldaten ausgebildet - wir haben es schon gehört -, 1 500 davon seit Anfang 2014 in Mogadischu. Die entsprechend ausgebildeten Kräfte gelten als vergleichsweise zuverlässig und schlagkräftig. Auch hier muss man das ins richtige Verhältnis setzen. Seit dem Beginn der Mission hat sich die Sicherheitslage in Somalia insgesamt verbessert. War Somalia vor Kurzem noch das gefährlichste Seegebiet weltweit für Handelsschiffe, gab es 2015 keine Entführungen mehr.\n\nAuch im Kampf gegen al-Schabab zeichnen sich Erfolge ab. Wir dürfen nicht vergessen: Die afrikanische Terrororganisation hatte einst ähnliche Strukturen wie heute der sogenannte IS im Mittleren Osten. AMISOM und Teile der somalischen Armee haben die Islamisten aus zentralen Gebieten vertrieben. Entscheidend hierbei: Mit dem Territorium verliert die Terrororganisation auch zunehmend an Steuereinnahmequellen und lokaler Unterstützung. Mehrere schwierige Wahrheiten ergeben sich daraus für uns, die für Somalia wie auch teilweise ähnlich für andere Krisenregionen gelten.\n\nErstens. Al-Schabab verbindet ihre politische Agenda mit einer dschihadistischen Doktrin, die über Somalia hinausgeht. Zudem besteht laut der somalischen Regierung die Möglichkeit, dass Mitglieder von Boko Haram auch durch al-Schabab-Milizen in Somalia trainiert wurden. Eine solche potenzielle panafrikanische Allianz zeigt, wie wichtig die Stabilisierung Somalias für West- und Ostafrika ist.\n\nZweitens. Mit ihrer medialen Strategie, Tweets, YouTube-Videos usw. wirbt al-Schabab weiterhin auch über Somalia hinaus viele Dschihadisten an. Narrative wie das Feindbild der westlichen und afrikanischen Kreuzzügler beherrschen diesen Diskurs, gegen den wir bisher kaum erfolgreich agieren.\n\nDrittens. Die somalische Terrormiliz kann rein militärisch nicht besiegt werden. Viele Kämpfer der al-Schabab-Miliz sind nicht aus ideologischen Gründen dort, sondern aus wirtschaftlichen. Die Wechselwirkung ist offenkundig. Sicherheit bedingt Entwicklung wie Entwicklung Sicherheit bedingt.\n\nViertens. Somalia wird im Kampf gegen die al-Schabab-Miliz einen langen Atem benötigen. Eine einfache territoriale Eindämmung wird aufgrund der Anpassungsfähigkeit nicht funktionieren. Die Organisation wird auch in nächster Zeit eine terroristische Bedrohung bleiben.\n\nKlar ist auch, dass Kräfte der Afrikanischen Union sowie die Ausbildungsunterstützung der Europäischen Union auf absehbare Zeit notwendig bleiben. Unser Engagement in Somalia war und bleibt daher weiterhin notwendig.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8991,johann-saathoff,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Stromleitungsbau ist ein Eckpfeiler der Energiewende. Leider ist der Ausbau in den letzten Jahren nicht so erfolgt, wie wir uns das vorgestellt hatten,\n\nund auch nicht so, wie wir es nötig gehabt hätten angesichts der erfreulichen Fortschritte im Bereich Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien.\n\nSpätestens seit den Beschlüssen der Parteivorsitzenden vom 1. Juli mit dem Vorrang für Erdverkabelung im Gleichstromsektor kann der notwendige Leitungsausbau wieder Fahrt aufnehmen.\n\nDie Idee des Primats der Erdverkabelung wurde allerdings nicht erst am 1. Juli 2015 geboren. Bereits bei der ersten Lesung des Gesetzes am 24. April haben wir darüber gesprochen. Während die Linken den SuedLink damals gar nicht erdverkabeln wollten, habe ich für meine Fraktion für den Erdkabelvorrang im Gleichstromsektor plädiert.\n\nDer zentrale Begriff im Zusammenhang mit dem Ausbau der Energieleitungen lautet: Bürgerakzeptanz. Nur wenn die Bürgerinnen und Bürger den Leitungsausbau genauso unterstützen wie die Energiewende an sich, kann die Energiewende auch gelingen.\n\nIch habe, wie viele Kollegen auch, überall in Deutschland viele Gespräche mit Bürgerinitiativen vor Ort geführt, auch hier in Berlin. Ich traf auf Menschen, die durchweg für die Gestaltung der Energiewende waren. Man hatte auch Verständnis für die Notwendigkeiten des Leitungsbaus. Diese Menschen baten aber auch um Verständnis für ihre Situation und um die Beachtung ihrer Interessen. Die Gründe, die sie genannt haben, haben wir in der erfolgten Anhörung noch einmal aufnehmen können.\n\nDie Menschen haben in Bezug auf den oberirdischen Leitungsausbau Sorge: Sorge um das Landschaftsbild, Sorge um den Werterhalt ihrer Immobilien, Sorge um den Erhalt der Wertschöpfung in den ländlichen Regionen, in denen sich der Tourismus gerade erst etablieren konnte - er ist manchmal die einzige Möglichkeit, sich wirtschaftlich zu entwickeln -, und es gab auch die Sorge um gesundheitliche Auswirkungen hinsichtlich des Baus von Stromleitungen. Diese Sorgen muss man ernst nehmen, und wir haben sie ernst genommen.\n\nDie Lösung des Zielkonfliktes zwischen notwendigem Leitungsbau und Sorge der betroffenen Bürgerinnen und Bürger lautet: Erdkabel. Jetzt haben wir den Vorrang und werden den SuedLink und die Süd-Ost-Passage zu 80 bis 90 Prozent unterirdisch verlegen.\n\nAls Argument gegen die Erdverkabelung habe ich oft gehört, die Erdkabel seien acht- bis zehnmal teurer. Dazu kann ich nur auf Ostfriesisch sagen: Wenn Geld anfangt tau prooten, kann man de Minsken neet mehr raken. Geld ist wichtig, aber nicht alleine entscheidend; die Belange der Menschen sind mindestens genauso wichtig. Man darf nicht zulassen, dass alleine das Geld entscheidet.\n\nAuch im Drehstrombereich wollen wir mehr Erdkabel, allerdings nur bei insgesamt elf Pilotstrecken, und dort auch nur, wenn die Abstände zu Wohnbebauungen unterschritten oder Naturschutz- oder Artenschutzbelange betroffen sind. Wir haben darüber diskutiert, ob wir die Liste der Pilotvorhaben nicht nur um die Empfehlungen des Bundesrates erweitern wollen, sondern noch weitere Strecken hinzufügen sollten. Dabei ging es nicht um den Regionalproporz - ich gebe zu: Niedersachsen kommt in der Liste der Pilotprojekte eigentlich ganz gut weg -, sondern darum, dass wir bestimmte dringend notwendige Leitungen eventuell gar nicht bekommen, wenn wir sie nicht an den jeweils neuralgischen Punkten unterirdisch verlegen.\n\nIch wurde in diesem Zusammenhang in den vergangenen Wochen und Monaten von vielen Kolleginnen und Kollegen angesprochen und darum gebeten, dass wir den Fokus im Gesetzgebungsverfahren auf bestimmte Leitungen richten. Ich bedauere, dass uns das aus Sicht dieser Kolleginnen und Kollegen nur unzureichend gelungen ist. Ich kann mir deshalb vorstellen, dass wir uns in Zukunft mit der einen oder anderen Leitung zusätzlich werden beschäftigen müssen; denn was wir nicht wollen, ist das, was gerade in der Uckermark-Leitung passieren könnte. Diese Leitung ist nicht als Erdkabelleitung vorgesehen. Das Bundesverwaltungsgericht hat gerade gestern in mündlicher Verhandlung die Klage gegen den Planfeststellungsbeschluss verhandelt. Solche Verfahren können wir uns ersparen, wenn die Leitungen an neuralgischen Punkten per Erdverkabelung realisiert werden können.\n\nWir sind uns, denke ich, darin einig, dass die Redispatchkosten bei Netzengpässen deutlich steigen werden und wir diese nur durch konsequenten Netzausbau begrenzen und beseitigen können. Kurzum: Wenn keine Leitungen gebaut werden, kommt uns das insgesamt wesentlich teurer, als wenn man eine Leitung an den schwierigen Punkten unterirdisch verlegt.\n\nWenn wir wissen, dass bestimmte Leitungen komplett als Freileitungen wahrscheinlich gar nicht realisiert werden können, wäre es also nur folgerichtig, diese Leitungen mit einem „F“ für Erdkabelpilotprojekt zu kennzeichnen.\n\nIm Gegensatz zur technisch einfacheren Erdverkabelung wie bei SuedLink im Gleichstrombereich haben wir im Drehstrombereich einen Pilotcharakter für einige Leitungen normiert. Der Pilotcharakter kann meiner Meinung nach im Drehstrombereich heute noch nicht aufgegeben werden, da hier noch besondere technische Herausforderungen bestehen. Auch das wurde uns in der Anhörung ausführlich berichtet. Wir werden mit den Pilotstrecken Erfahrungen mit dieser Technik sammeln können. Wenn alles gut funktioniert, kann anschließend der Pilotcharakter aus meiner Sicht locker gestrichen werden. Dann kann auch im Drehstrombereich die Erdverkabelung generell an den schwierigen Stellen zum Wohle der Menschen in unserem Lande umgesetzt werden.\n\nIch bedanke mich abschließend herzlich beim Koalitionspartner. Ich kann sagen, dass wir hart, aber immer fair miteinander um den besten Weg gerungen haben. Mit dem Ergebnis können wir alle sehr zufrieden sein, stellt es doch einen weiteren wichtigen Meilenstein auf dem Weg zur Realisierung der Energiewende dar und damit natürlich auch zum Erhalt der Bürgerakzeptanz. Weitere Meilensteine folgen kurzfristig, als da wären: Strommarktdesign, Digitalisierung, EEG 3.0. Es wird uns also nicht langweilig werden in den nächsten Monaten, wenn es um die Energiepolitik geht. Auch bei der Bewältigung dieser Herausforderungen freue ich mich auf eine gute weitere Zusammenarbeit.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n6623,maria-bohmer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kollegin Brantner, die Bundeskanzlerin Dr. Angela Merkel hatte den ägyptischen Präsidenten el-Sisi bereits im September 2014 zu einem Besuch nach den Parlamentswahlen in Ägypten eingeladen. Die zuletzt für März/April 2015 geplanten Wahlen wurden inzwischen aufgrund eines Urteils des obersten Verfassungsgerichts verschoben. Ein neues Datum wurde noch nicht festgelegt. Aufgrund diverser Krisenherde und der prekären Lage in der Region hält es die Bundesregierung für wichtig, das Gespräch nicht länger zu verschieben.\n\nFrau Kollegin Brantner, es ist zunächst angezeigt, dies abzuwarten. Aber ich möchte Ihnen zwei Dinge sagen:\n\nWie Sie wissen, ist das eine ausgesprochen schwierige Entscheidung. Ich war mit Sicherheit genauso bestürzt wie Sie, als ich von den Todesurteilen in der vergangenen Woche erfahren habe. Sie betreffen nicht nur Mursi, sondern weit mehr Menschen. Das ist etwas, was uns zutiefst erschüttert, was aber auch immer wieder unseren Protest und Widerstand gegen Todesurteile hervorruft.\n\nSie wissen aber auch, wie sich die Bundesregierung für Menschenrechte in Ägypten einsetzt. Ein solcher Besuch gibt natürlich die Chance, gerade über diese kritischen Punkte zu sprechen. Ich habe vorhin über den ägyptischen Botschafter erfahren, dass der ägyptische Präsident die Bitte bzw. das Interesse geäußert hat, mit Mitgliedern des Deutschen Bundestages zu sprechen. Es ist jetzt an Ihnen, zu entscheiden, ob Sie unmittelbar das Gespräch mit ihm suchen wollen.\n\nIch glaube, es geht nicht darum, den roten Teppich auszurollen. Das will niemand von uns. Es geht darum, das Gespräch zu führen, gerade angesichts einer außerordentlich schwierigen Situation in der Region.\n\nDer Bundesaußenminister war anfangs persönlich dort und hat keine Möglichkeit ausgelassen, mit Vertretern der Zivilgesellschaft zu sprechen. Natürlich werden uns all diese Punkte, die Sie eben genannt haben, ebenfalls umtreiben, wenn der Präsident nach Deutschland kommt. Ich kann Ihnen nur anheimstellen, ebenfalls das unmittelbare Gespräch zu suchen. Aber das ist eine Entscheidung, die jeder und jede Abgeordnete für sich zu treffen hat.\n\nGerne, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Kollegin, die Region rund um Ägypten ist von Krisen geschüttelt, die sich direkt auf das Land auswirken. So ermöglicht zum Beispiel die instabile Lage in Libyen Waffenschmuggel über die Grenze nach Ägypten zu extremistischen Gruppen, die weiterhin regelmäßig Terroranschläge durchführen, insbesondere im Norden des Sinai, aber auch auf dem Festland.\n\nÄgypten bleibt ein wichtiger und unverzichtbarer Partner bei der Lösung der Konflikte in der Region, sei es in Libyen, im Gazastreifen oder im Jemen. Das heißt nicht, dass wir mit dem innenpolitischen Vorgehen der ägyptischen Regierung einverstanden sind. Wir befürchten vielmehr, dass das repressive Vorgehen gegen die Opposition und die Zivilgesellschaft und insbesondere die Ausgrenzung der gewaltfreien Teile der Muslimbrüder die Spaltung der ägyptischen Gesellschaft vertieft.\n\nAus unserer Sicht sind die Wahrung der Menschenrechte und eine freie und unabhängige Zivilgesellschaft Voraussetzung für die langfristige Stabilität und Entwicklung des Landes. Die Bundesregierung bringt in allen Gesprächen mit Ägypten ihre Sorge über die Lage der Menschenrechte sowie der Zivilgesellschaft zum Ausdruck.\n\nFrau Kollegin Brantner, ich sehe, Sie stellen sich auch der Verantwortung, indem Sie unmittelbar nach Ägypten reisen. Wahrscheinlich wird das dort genauso registriert; denn wenn eine Abgeordnete des Deutschen Bundestages reist, dann ist das natürlich auch ein Signal. Ich nehme an, dass Sie dort die kritischen Fragen genauso ansprechen, wie es der Bundesaußenminister und die Bundeskanzlerin - ich bin mir sicher, auch der Bundespräsident - im Gespräch mit dem ägyptischen Präsidenten tun werden.\n\nIch kann nur noch einmal betonen: Auch bei seiner letzten Reise hat Bundesaußenminister Steinmeier ganz gezielt Gespräche mit Vertretern der Zivilgesellschaft geführt. Bei Fragen wie der nach den Menschenrechten genauso wie der nach der Verhängung von Todesurteilen ist es so, wie ich es eben gesagt habe: Wir haben in diesem Zusammenhang erhebliche Zweifel an der Rechtsstaatlichkeit. Keiner wird diesen Themen ausweichen, sondern wir werden damit sehr offensiv umgehen.\n\nWir haben wiederholt gesagt: Wir müssen beides tun. Wir müssen die Gespräche über die kritischen Punkte führen; denn nur das wird auch zu Veränderungen führen. Das wird übrigens auch von vielen wahrgenommen, die in Ägypten aufgestanden sind und deren Zahl inzwischen zu einer kleinen Gruppe herangewachsen ist. Man kann aber auf der anderen Seite nicht bestreiten, dass Ägypten für uns ein zentraler politischer Partner ist.\n\nDie Lage in der Region - das wissen wir alle - ist mehr als instabil und außerordentlich kritisch. Ich denke da etwa an Libyen; wir werden gleich über die Flüchtlingsfrage sprechen. Man muss hier alles tun, um die Verhältnisse ein wenig nach vorne zu bringen. Das ist ungemein schwierig. Aber das Auswärtige Amt und die Bundesregierung setzen sich mit aller Kraft dafür ein.\n\nGerne, Frau Präsidentin. - Herr Kekeritz, die Frage 20 darf ich wie folgt beantworten: In der am 3. Juli 2013 veröffentlichten Roadmap hatte sich die ägyptische Regierung dazu verpflichtet, staatliche Institutionen zu schaffen, die die nationale Aussöhnung vorantreiben sollen. Dies ist bislang nicht geschehen. Die ägyptische Regierung verweist als Begründung auf die terroristische Bedrohung im Land und in der Region. Insbesondere Anhänger der Muslimbrüderschaft werden verfolgt und von einer Beteiligung am politischen Prozess ausgeschlossen. Weit darüber hinaus sind auch viele andere politische Gruppierungen von Verfolgung betroffen.\n\nWir sehen das als sehr bedenklich an; denn die Projekte leider unter diesen Repressalien. Wir haben deshalb die Projekte auslaufen lassen.\n\nAuf die Frage 21 darf ich Ihnen wie folgt antworten: Die Bundesregierung spricht in ihren Kontakten mit der ägyptischen Regierung stets an, dass die Wahrung und der Schutz von Menschenrechten und Rechtsstaatlichkeit wichtige Voraussetzungen für einen erfolgreichen Übergang und politische Stabilisierung sind.\n\nAuch in sicherheitspolitisch schwierigen Zeiten muss zwischen Terror und gewaltfreier innenpolitischer Opposition unterschieden werden. Nur durch einen inklusiven politischen Prozess, der alle Teile der Gesellschaft einbezieht, kann eine langfristige Stabilisierung des Landes und der Region erreicht werden. Mit Blick auf die Situation auf dem Sinai ist die Bundesregierung überzeugt, dass militärische Maßnahmen nicht das alleinige Mittel der Terrorbekämpfung sein dürfen.\n\nHerr Kekeritz, ich darf richtigstellen: Es handelt sich hier nicht um einen Staatsbesuch, sondern um einen Arbeitsbesuch. Nachdem Sie das Wort der Bundeskanzlerin so deutlich in den Blick gerückt haben - ich glaube, da stimmen wir jetzt mal sehr überein -, will ich betonen: Es ist wichtig, dass aus den Worten, die die Bundeskanzlerin finden wird, deutlich wird, wie wichtig die Achtung der Menschenrechte ist, wie wichtig die Einbeziehung der Zivilgesellschaft ist und dass es darum geht, den Prozess nach vorne zu bringen, und dass es keinen Stillstand geben darf.\n\nDie Antwort zu Frage 22, Frau Keul: Die Bundesregierung hat im Rahmen ihrer internationalen rechtlichen Zusammenarbeit seit dem Amtsantritt von Präsident el-Sisi am 8. Juni 2014 nur ein Projekt in Ägypten finanziert; ich darf es nennen: ein Projekt der IRZ, Deutsche Stiftung für internationale rechtliche Zusammenarbeit, und zwar vom 1. Januar 2014 bis zum 31. Dezember 2014 mit Veranstaltungen zu Verfassungsrecht, Menschenrechten, Zivil- und Wirtschaftsrecht, Strafrecht und Strafverfahrensrecht. Aufgrund politischer Restriktionen seitens der ägyptischen Regierung wurde im Dezember 2014 beschlossen, dass die Projektarbeit des IRZ im Jahr 2015 nicht mehr fortgesetzt werden kann. Die seit 2011 insgesamt drei jeweils einjährigen Folgeprojekte der IRZ im Bereich der rechtlichen Zusammenarbeit zielten auf die Vermittlung richterlicher Unabhängigkeit, menschenrechtlicher Standards und effizienter Organisationsstrukturen. Zielgruppe waren Richter, Anwälte und Mitarbeiter des Justizministeriums. Die geförderten Projekte dienten der Schulung und Vernetzung innerhalb der Zielgruppe. Die Bundesregierung hält grundsätzlich Fortschritte im Bereich der Rechtsstaatlichkeit für prioritär. Dazu zählt auch die Aufarbeitung von Vorfällen staatlicher bzw. polizeilicher Gewalt, wie zum Beispiel des gewaltsamen Vorgehens bei der Massendemonstration im Oktober 2011 oder der Auflösung der Rabia-Sit-ins im August 2013.\n\nJa.\n\nDie Bundesregierung hat Kenntnis davon, dass die ägyptische Luftwaffe nach der Ermordung von ägyptischen Gastarbeitern durch ISIS deren Stellungen in Libyen angegriffen hat. Die Bundesregierung will nicht der Bewertung der Ereignisse durch die beiden hauptsächlich betroffenen Staaten, Ägypten und Libyen, vorgreifen.\n\nDazu kann ich Ihnen jetzt nichts sagen. Also, ich habe persönlich keine Kenntnis davon.\n\nSie wissen um die Position der Bundesregierung, nämlich dass wir beispielsweise die Forderung, die Ägypten bei der Arabischen Liga erhoben hat, das Waffenembargo aufzuheben, außerordentlich kritisch sehen. Das trifft auch auf Forderungen nach einer militärischen Intervention zu.\n\nAlso, ich persönlich.\n\nFrau Kollegin Brantner, ich glaube, Sie haben die Frage eben schon einmal gestellt, und ich habe sie Ihnen auch schon beantwortet. Ich beziehe mich auf die Antwort, die ich gegeben habe.\n\nFrau Kollegin Hänsel, Frage 27 darf ich wie folgt beantworten: Die Hohe Vertreterin der EU, Federica -Mogherini, hat vor dem VN-Sicherheitsrat am 11. Mai 2015 um Unterstützung beim Vorgehen gegen Schleuserkriminalität und Menschenschmuggel geworben. Die Autorisierung durch den VN-Sicherheitsrat ist aus Sicht der Bundesregierung Voraussetzung für die Übernahme von Aufgaben im Rahmen einer GSVP-Mission, die über Überwachung und Beobachtung der Schleuseraktivitäten auf hoher See hinausgehen. Es ist Aufgabe des Sicherheitsrats, im Zusammenhang mit der Verabschiedung der Resolution auch darüber zu entscheiden, ob eine Bedrohung des Weltfriedens und der internationalen Sicherheit vorliegt.\n\nDas hat wohl alle interessiert, die von EU-Seite an den Verhandlungen beteiligt waren. Uns hat über Frau Mogherini die Botschaft erreicht, dass dort keine Bedenken gegen eine solche Resolution zu erwarten sind.\n\nIch glaube, man muss zum einen davon ausgehen, dass wir es bei den Schlepperbanden mit hochkriminellen Organisationen und Personen zu tun haben, die die Situation von Flüchtlingen in dramatischer Art und Weise ausnutzen.\n\nDas Zweite, das man zu bedenken hat, ist, dass die Mission ein Baustein ist und man das Gesamtpaket betrachten muss. Sie wissen, dass am Montag ein Beschluss zu der Mission getroffen worden ist und sehr deutlich gesagt worden ist: Es gibt drei Phasen. - Die erste Phase wird dazu dienen, sich ein solides Lagebild von den Schleuseraktivitäten auf hoher See zu machen. Später sollen dann jeweils die weiteren Entscheidungen innerhalb der EU getroffen werden. Wir haben ein gemeinsames Interesse daran, dass es bei den Entscheidungen keinen Automatismus gibt, sondern sie den Fortschritten bei den Erkenntnissen entsprechend getroffen werden. Ich glaube, dass niemand daran zweifeln kann, dass es wichtig ist, sich jetzt in dieser ersten Phase ein solides Lagebild von den Schleuseraktivitäten zu machen, von dem aus sich alle weiteren Entscheidungen entwickeln werden.\n\nIch beantworte Ihre Frage, Frau Kollegin Hänsel, wie folgt: Der aktuelle Zustrom an Flüchtlingen ist die Folge mannigfaltiger Krisen im Nahen und Mittleren Osten sowie in Afrika. Staatliche Unterdrückung, Terrorismus, bürgerkriegsähnliche Zustände, Verfolgung politischer, ethnischer oder religiöser Gruppen, zum Beispiel in Syrien und im Irak, Verfolgung ethnischer oder religiöser Gruppen oder politisch Andersdenkender, zum Beispiel in Eritrea, zerfallende Staatlichkeit, zum Beispiel in Somalia, Armut, zum Beispiel in Westafrika, und Wegfall wirtschaftlicher Lebensgrundlagen, unter anderem aufgrund klimatischer Veränderungen, sind nur einige der Probleme in den Herkunftsstaaten der Flüchtlinge und Migranten. Sie zu bekämpfen, bedarf einer Gesamtstrategie in europäischer Verantwortung. Es geht insbesondere darum, das Potenzial Afrikas zu entwickeln, Migration und Mobilität in ein der Entwicklung förderliches Verhältnis zu bringen, fairen Handel zu fördern und die Sicherheitszusammenarbeit zu stärken. Dazu wird es im Herbst einen Gipfel der EU mit der Afrikanischen Union in Malta geben. Der Khartoum- und der Rabat-Prozess helfen Transitstaaten beim menschenwürdigen Umgang mit Flüchtlingen und Migranten.\n\nDie europäische Entwicklungszusammenarbeit leistet mit fast 100 Milliarden Euro für die Jahre 2014 bis 2020 einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Reduzierung von Armut und Unsicherheit. Die bereits existierenden zivilen GSVP-Missionen in Niger und Mali werden um eine Grenzschutz- und Migrationskomponente erweitert. Gerade mit Blick auf eine wirksame Bekämpfung von Flucht-ursachen wird die Bundesregierung weiter entschlossen die VN-Vermittlungsbemühungen um eine politische Lösung der Lage in Libyen und Syrien unterstützen. Mit der Berliner Syrien-Flüchtlingskonferenz Ende Oktober 2014 leistete die Bundesregierung einen international anerkannten Beitrag zur Stärkung der Fähigkeit der Nachbarländer Syriens, Millionen von Flüchtlingen zu beherbergen. Bundesminister Steinmeier hat dazu in der vergangenen Woche Gespräche im Libanon und in Jordanien geführt.\n\nFrau Kollegin Hänsel, ich will Ihnen in aller Deutlichkeit sagen, dass die Bundesregierung eine sehr restriktive Rüstungspolitik verfolgt. Sie können sicher sein, dass wir bei einer solchen restriktiven Rüstungspolitik auch bleiben werden.\n\nFrau Kollegen Hänsel, ich weiß um Ihr Engagement in diesen Fragen, und Sie können sicher sein, dass das Engagement der Bundesregierung groß ist, die Fluchtursachen in den afrikanischen Regionen zu bekämpfen. Wir haben hierfür eine eigene Afrika-Strategie entwickelt.\n\nAll das, was wir tun, geht weit über die Punkte hinaus, die Sie angesprochen haben. Es geht darum, dass die Menschen ihre eigene Existenz sichern können, dass Korruption bekämpft wird und dass es dort stabile Staaten gibt. Das ist etwas - das muss ich Ihnen in aller Ehrlichkeit sagen -, was nicht von heute auf morgen gelingen wird. Deshalb werden uns die Themen „Flüchtlinge“ und „Bekämpfung von Flüchtlingsursachen“ leider immer wieder hier im Parlament beschäftigen. Wir werden von unserer Seite aus alle Anstrengungen unternehmen, um den Menschen zu helfen.\"\n12282,claudia-roth,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! An diesem Montag hat ein neues Kapitel der furchtbaren Tragödie einer Region voller Leid und Zerstörung begonnen. Ja, es sind freudige Bilder aus Karakosch, die Hoffnung auf Befreiung versprechen. Gerade heute erinnere ich mich sehr an Anfang August 2014, als ich in Erbil mit vielen Frauen und Männern sprechen konnte, die aus der ehemalig größten christlichen Stadt des Iraks vertrieben worden waren. Ich erinnere mich an ihre Verzweiflung und an ihre Trauer auch darüber, dass ihre sunnitischen Nachbarn bei dieser Vertreibung durch den Daesh mitgeholfen haben.\n\nMit dem Sturm auf Mosul wird Daesh hoffentlich seine wichtigste Bastion im Irak verlieren. Es ist gut, wenn diese Terrororganisation Daesh, die das Wesen von Staatlichkeit und jeglicher Religion verspottet, geschlagen wird. Aber ich warne davor, zu glauben, damit würde in Mosul oder gar im Irak alles gut. In Mosul setzt sich doch wie unter einem Brennglas fort, was die Katastrophe einer ganzen Region ausmacht, wo jeder auf eigene Rechnung spielt, wo es nur noch darum zu gehen scheint, auf wessen Seite man steht, der USA oder Russlands, Saudi-Arabiens oder des Irans, der Schiiten oder der Sunniten, der Türken oder der Kurden, der syrischen Kurden oder der irakischen Kurden, der Barzani-Kurden oder Talabani-Kurden. Haben wir, hat die Weltgemeinschaft eigentlich irgendetwas gelernt aus fünf Jahren entgrenztem Krieg, aus dem Leid von 16 Millionen Syrern und Irakern auf der Flucht, aus dem Scheitern von UN-Sondergesandten und Friedensgesprächen, aus immer wieder gebrochenen Waffenruhen?\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, eine politische Lösung für Mosul ist nie ernsthaft gesucht worden, aber ohne eine solche Lösung werden dort schon heute die Grundlagen für den nächsten unauslöschbaren Brandherd gelegt. Mosul darf jedoch nicht Spielball im Ringen der Regionalmächte werden.\n\nDer Peschmerga rückt jetzt auf Mosul vor, während wir doch wissen, dass Saudi-Arabien diese irakischen Kurden finanziert, um damit die Schiiten klein zu halten. Die irakische Regierung will mit der iranischen Regierung im Rücken sowie mithilfe schiitischer Milizen diese Stadt - die Stadt, die die Hochburg der Sunniten im Irak ist - erobern. Erdogan dagegen will mit aller Gewalt türkische Truppen dabei haben. Er fördert und bildet schon jetzt beteiligte Sunniten-Milizen aus. Das ist der Erdogan, dessen oberstes Ziel es ist, jeden wachsenden Einfluss der Kurden zu bekämpfen.\n\nWir müssen uns eingestehen, dass es in Mosul überhaupt keine Strukturen gibt, die man einfach wieder hochfahren könnte. Denn schon vor der Eroberung durch Daesh war Mosul außerhalb der Kontrolle der irakischen Zentralregierung.\n\nSchon 2012 habe ich in Kirkuk mit Christen aus Mosul gesprochen, die von Vertreibung und Verfolgung berichtet haben. Das hat nur wenig interessiert. Schon damals war die Stadt Waffen- und Sklavenhändlern, Fundamentalisten und Terrorfinanziers überlassen.\n\nWenn wir all dies gemeinsam so analysieren, dann müssen wir uns - das ist nicht Bedenkenträgerei - große Sorgen um die Stadt, die Menschen, die Zukunft des Iraks und der gesamten Region machen. Die Befreiung Mosuls mag militärisch erreichbar sein, aber Befriedung und Stabilisierung können wirklich nur eine politische sein.\n\nAuch wenn es schwerfällt, das zu sagen: Unsere Handlungsmöglichkeiten sind begrenzt. Die aber, die wir haben, sollten wir in vollem Umfang ausschöpfen und nutzen. Das heißt, wir sollten mit Mitteln einer weitsichtigen und nachhaltigen inklusiven Diplomatie Druck auf alle beteiligten Parteien ausüben. Dazu gehört natürlich Putin. Ich hoffe, dass dieser Druck heute auch ausgeübt wird, weil er natürlich ein gefährlicher Akteur in dieser Region ist. Es sollte Druck ausgeübt werden, damit Mosul nicht das nächste Kapitel in einem zynischen Stellvertreterkrieg wird. Das heißt, wir sollten versuchen, die größte humanitäre Offensive, die wir zu leisten in der Lage sind, anzuwerfen.\n\nEs ist gut, dass Vorbereitungen getroffen werden. Angesichts aber von 1,2 bis 1,4 Millionen Menschen, die möglicherweise die Flucht aus der Hölle Mosuls schaffen, reichen die Vorkehrungen bei weitem noch nicht. Es heißt, auch Vorsorge zu treffen, um alle aus Mosul Geflüchteten menschenwürdig aufzunehmen, gleichzeitig aber zu verhindern, dass es zur Vertreibung von anderen Flüchtlingen kommt, die im Laufe der Jahre in Dohuk, Sulaimaniyya und Erbil aufgenommen worden sind und jetzt nach Falludscha geschickt werden, obwohl Falludscha völlig zerstört ist. Es heißt vor allem die Kräfte zu stärken, die glaubhaft für eine inklusive Zukunft des Iraks eintreten.\n\nIch sage es noch einmal, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Der Kampf um Mosul darf kein zweites Aleppo werden. Danach beginnt der noch viel wichtigere Kampf um die Zukunft nicht nur einer Stadt, sondern einer ganzen Region.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5255,matthias-birkwald,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! In einem Song der Kölner Band BAP heißt es: „Besser hätt ich dat jelosse, dann wöhr alles nit passiert“. Vor 15 Jahren versprachen SPD, Grüne und Union den Menschen großspurig: Ja, wir kürzen Ihre gesetzliche Rente, aber mit Lebensversicherung und Riester-Rente werden Sie im Alter viel besser leben als bisher von der guten gesetzlichen Rente allein. - Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollege, dieses Versprechen war 2001 falsch, es ist heute falsch, und es wird auch 2030 falsch sein.\n\nSie können die Finanzaufsicht über Versicherungen verbessern, so viel Sie wollen, aber dadurch werden Menschen, die jahrzehntelang gearbeitet haben, kein anständiges Alterseinkommen erreichen. Ein Ende der niedrigen Zinsen, Herr Staatssekretär, ist nämlich nicht in Sicht. Mit niedrigen Zinsen können Sie zwar gut eine Wohnung kaufen, aber Ihre Lebensversicherung geht den Bach herunter.\n\nEin Beispiel: Die Bundesbank hat die Folgen der niedrigen Zinsen für 85 deutsche Lebensversicherer modellhaft untersucht. Unter „verschärften Stressbedingungen“ würden 32 Unternehmen die Eigenmittelanforderungen von Solvency I bis 2023 nicht mehr erfüllen.\n\nAlso: Von 85 Versicherern wären dann 32 pleite, Herr Zöllmer. Diese Modellrechnung zeigt: Selbst die Bundesbank kann Lebensversicherungen als Altersvorsorge nicht empfehlen. Aber Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Großen Koalition, senken den garantierten Zins für Lebensversicherungen auf mickrige 1,25 Prozent, und die Lebensversicherer senken ohne Not die Beteiligung der Kunden an den Überschüssen. Was sind die Folgen? Am Ende werden Millionen Menschen im Alter schwer enttäuscht, wenn sie sehen, wie tief ihre Ansprüche aus den Lebensversicherungsverträgen gesunken sein werden. Zum Teil ist das heute schon der Fall. Sie müssen dann die Zeche zahlen, nicht die Unternehmen oder gar die Aktionäre und Aktionärinnen. Das, meine Damen und Herren, ist unverantwortlich.\n\nMit 1,25 Prozent garantierten Zinsen und völlig unsicheren Überschüssen, Herr Flosbach, können Normalverdienende unmöglich das Loch stopfen, das Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von SPD, Grünen und Union in die gesetzliche Rente gerissen haben. Lebensversicherungen und Riester-Verträge taugen nicht als Altersvorsorge. Zeigen Sie Größe und geben es endlich zu!\n\nDer Präsident der Versicherungswirtschaft, Alexander Erdland, hat das am vergangenen Freitag - unfreiwillig - getan. Er sagte, ein dauerhaft niedrigeres Zinsniveau mache eine um 15 Prozent höhere Sparanstrengung nötig, um im Alter das gleiche Versorgungsniveau zu erreichen. Ich frage Sie: Wer kann denn noch einmal 15 Prozent zusätzlich für das Alter zurücklegen und von welchem Lohn? Der Leiharbeiter, die Verkäuferin und der Taxifahrer können es jedenfalls nicht.\n\nDie Zeitschrift Öko-Test bringt es in ihrem aktuellen Heft voll auf den Punkt - ich zitiere -: „Schließen Sie keine neue Kapitallebens- oder Rentenversicherung mehr ab!“ Richtig so!\n\nDie Linke schlägt Ihnen deshalb, Herr Michelbach, ein Drei-Punkte-Programm vor: Erstens. Die staatliche Riester-Förderung, von der die Versicherungen profitieren, wird gestoppt. Wer heute schon einen Riester-Vertrag hat, soll die bisher angesparten Gelder reibungslos und freiwillig auf sein persönliches Rentenkonto bei der Deutschen Rentenversicherung einzahlen können.\n\nZweitens. Statt jedes Jahr 3,5 Milliarden Euro Steuern für die Riester-Förderung auszugeben, wird mit dem Geld das Rentenniveau stabil gehalten.\n\nDrittens. Alle Kürzungsfaktoren in der Rentenanpassungsformel werden gestrichen.\n\nZiehen Sie endlich Schlussfolgerungen aus der Finanzkrise! Stärken Sie die gesetzliche Rente! Stärken Sie das Umlagesystem! Und sorgen Sie dafür, dass die gesetzliche Rente wieder den Lebensstandard sichert und vor Altersarmut schützt! Das wäre zu tun. Deswegen: Die Finanzaufsicht bei den Versicherungsdienstleistungen zu verbessern, ist ein Schritt; aber hier geht es darum, dass die Menschen eine anständige Altersvorsorge erhalten. Darum müssen Sie sich kümmern.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n11007,ingo-wellenreuther,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Herr Präsident, es würde mich überfordern, mich jetzt so schnell umzustellen und vom Platz aus zu reden. Deswegen bleibe ich am Anfang hier vorne stehen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, es ist inzwischen Allgemeingut: Der Sport hat herausragende Bedeutung in unserer Gesellschaft. Er begeistert, er weckt Emotionen, er verbindet Menschen über Grenzen hinweg und leistet einen Beitrag zur Integration. Sportlerinnen und Sportler sind Vorbilder. Viele Kinder finden nur wegen bekannter und berühmter Sportlerinnen und Sportler den Zugang zum Sport. Weil das so ist, ist die Bedeutung eines ehrlichen Sports umso höher. Im vergangenen Jahr haben wir deshalb das Anti-Doping-Gesetz verabschiedet, um gegen die vorzugehen, die dopen. Dieses Gesetz ist ein echter Meilenstein in der Sportpolitik und in der Dopingbekämpfung. Wie nötig das ist, zeigen die aktuellen Beispiele in der russischen Leichtathletik.\n\nDoping schadet nicht nur dem Ansehen und der Integrität des Sports, sondern vor allem auch der Gesundheit der Athletinnen und Athleten. Damit komme ich zum Kern dieser Debatte über den vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf. Auf der Grundlage des sogenannten Staatsplanthemas 14.25 wurden in der ehemaligen DDR Kinder und Jugendliche sowie erwachsene Athletinnen und Athleten im staatlichen Auftrag gezielt gedopt, um Leistungen im Spitzensport zu steigern. Dabei war das DDR-Doping ein perfides System: Kindern und Jugendlichen wurden vom staatlich geleiteten Sportmedizinischen Dienst der DDR unter Mitwirkung von Trainern, Betreuern und auch Vereinsärzten Dopingpräparate ohne deren Wissen verabreicht. Diese jungen Sportler wurden bewusst getäuscht und zielgerichtet körperlich geschädigt.\n\nDie circa 10 000 zwangsgedopten Athleten waren weder über die Medikamente noch über die Folgen der Einnahme dieser informiert. Was damals geschah, war unverantwortlich und erfolgte ohne jegliche Rücksicht auf die Gesundheit. Die überwiegend verabreichten anabolen Steroide haben zum Teil massive gesundheitliche Schädigungen bei den Betroffenen verursacht: Krebserkrankungen, Organschäden, chronische Schäden am Bewegungsapparat, am Gelenkapparat, psychische Belastungen oder auch massive Hormonstörungen. Dabei handelte es sich schlicht um Zwangsdoping und - das kann man wirklich nicht oft genug hervorheben - um Doping im Auftrag des Staates, wobei das DDR-Regime - das kam noch erschwerend hinzu - kollusiv und kriminell mit dem DDR-Sport zusammenwirkte.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, bereits das erste Dopingopfer-Hilfegesetz aus dem Jahre 2002 war ein Zeichen dafür, dass die Bundesregierung die Schicksale der DDR-Dopingopfer anerkennt, indem sie einen gewissen Ausgleich geschafft hat. Das Gesetz verhalf damals anerkannten DDR-Dopingopfern wenigstens zu einer finanziellen Unterstützung mittels eines Hilfsfonds. Der DOSB und auch das Nachfolgeunternehmen von VEB Jenapharm, dessen Erzeugnisse damals die DDR-Sportler verabreicht bekamen, erklärten sich damals ebenfalls zu Entschädigungszahlungen bereit.\n\nIm Jahre 2007 war dann der Hilfsfonds des ersten Dopingopfer-Hilfegesetzes erschöpft. 194 DDR-Dopingopfer hatten eine finanzielle Unterstützung des Bundes in Höhe von jeweils 10 500 Euro erhalten. Allerdings wurden damals nicht alle Dopingopfer erfasst. Das lag erstens daran, dass ein Zusammenhang zwischen gesundheitlichen Schäden und Doping vielfach erst später erkennbar war, zweitens daran, dass einige von diesem Fonds schlichtweg nichts gewusst haben, und drittens daran, dass Dopingspätfolgen erst wesentlich später zutage traten.\n\nInzwischen ist es anders. Es sind viele Opfer bekannt geworden, die nach den damaligen Kriterien einen Anspruch auf eine entsprechende finanzielle Hilfe gehabt hätten. Deshalb war die Neuauflage eines solchen Hilfsfonds notwendig. Dem kommen wir heute mit dem Zweiten Dopingopfer-Hilfegesetz nach.\n\nUm den DDR-Dopingopfern schnell und unbürokratisch zu helfen, hat das Innenministerium einen neuen Fonds aufgelegt. Es stehen jetzt weitere 10,5 Millionen Euro bereit. Anspruchsberechtigt sind die DDR-Dopingopfer, die nach dem ersten Dopingopfer-Hilfegesetz keine finanziellen Hilfen erhalten hatten. Die Zahlungen lindern das Leid der Betroffenen natürlich nicht, sie können es auch nicht wiedergutmachen, aber wir als Gesetzgeber werden einer moralischen Verpflichtung gerecht und setzen damit ein weiteres Zeichen.\n\nIch muss allerdings sagen: Ich halte es für sehr bedauerlich, dass sich bisher weder der DOSB noch das genannte Nachfolgeunternehmen aus der Pharmabranche an der Neuauflage des Fonds beteiligt haben.\n\nAber was nicht ist, kann ja nach dem Gesetz noch werden; die Möglichkeit besteht.\n\nNach § 2 des Gesetzes haben jetzt Personen Anspruch auf Entschädigung, die erhebliche Gesundheitsschäden erlitten haben, weil ihnen als Hochleistungssportlern der DDR oder ihrer Mutter während der Schwangerschaft, übrigens ohne ihr Wissen oder gegen ihren Willen, Dopingsubstanzen verabreicht worden sind. Wir gehen davon aus, dass noch circa 1 000 weitere DDR-Dopingopfer nach den damaligen Kriterien anspruchsberechtigt sind. Wir stellen mit dem neuen Gesetz also Gleichbehandlung mit bereits Entschädigten her.\n\nIch bin der Bundesregierung sehr dankbar dafür, dass sie diesen Gesetzentwurf sehr beschleunigt und für eilbedürftig erklärt hat sowie eine Fristverkürzung erreicht hat, damit das Gesetz noch vor der Sommerpause verabschiedet werden kann. Angesichts der schweren Schicksale vieler DDR-Dopingopfer und vor allem auch im Hinblick auf ihren mitunter sehr schlechten Gesundheitszustand war nämlich Eile geboten.\n\nDas kann jetzt auch schnell gehen.\n\nEs muss auch schnell gehen. Herr Präsident, Sie haben vollkommen recht, ich beeile mich. - Die Anträge können schon jetzt an das Bundesverwaltungsamt gerichtet werden. Sie müssen bis spätestens Juni 2017 eingereicht sein. Ziel ist es, bereits in der zweiten Jahreshälfte 2016 mit der Auszahlung an Anspruchsberechtigte zu beginnen.\n\nZum Schluss darf ich noch etwas aufgreifen, was einer unserer Kollegen bereits in der ersten Debatte formuliert hat und was ich sehr wichtig finde: Der vorliegende Gesetzentwurf und unsere heutige Diskussion darüber müssen ein Signal an Sportlerinnen und Sportler sein, die sich auf dem Holzweg befinden und meinen, ihre sportlichen Leistungen mit Doping steigern zu müssen. Denn Doping lohnt sich nicht und ist gefährlich. Auf der einen Seite sind die Gesundheitsrisiken und die Langzeitfolgen sehr gravierend, auf der anderen Seite wird die Integrität des Sports dadurch nachhaltig beschädigt.\n\nDie Botschaft des heutigen Tages muss lauten: Wir unterstützen die Opfer des Zwangsdopings der DDR und sagen Nein zu Doping.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n8120,anton-hofreiter,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Man kann sich leider des Eindrucks nicht erwehren, dass VW und die Bundesregierung in einem Punkt sehr deutlich etwas gemeinsam haben: Beiden waren saubere Autos nicht wirklich wichtig; die einen haben geschummelt, und die anderen haben wunderbar weggeschaut.\n\nWir sehen allerdings, wohin das führt: VW ist schwer angeschlagen, „made in Germany“ ist in manchen Regionen in Verruf geraten. Es gilt der alte Spruch - diesmal gilt er wirklich, meine Damen und Herren von der CSU -: Wer betrügt, der fliegt - und zwar aus dem Markt.\n\nLeider ist der schöne Spruch „Vorsprung durch Technik“ ersetzt worden durch „Vorsprung durch Betrug“.\n\nSo was funktioniert auf Dauer allerdings nie; denn die Schummelei kommt am Ende immer heraus. Durch das Wegschauen des Verkehrsministeriums wurde das zur größten Gefahr für die Arbeitsplätze bei uns in Deutschland.\n\nDas Problem ist - das merkt man auch an den Zwischenrufen -, dass weder Regierung noch Koalitionsfraktionen oder Autoindustrie bis jetzt gemerkt haben, dass diese Grenzwerte keine lästige Erfindung sind. Man hat sie nicht eingeführt, weil man sich gesagt hat: Wir ärgern jetzt mal die Autoindustrie und erlassen Grenzwerte. - Nein, diese Grenzwerte gibt es aus einem sehr einfachen Grund. Es gibt sie, weil die Autoabgase toxisch für Menschen sind, weil die Autoabgase die Gesundheit der Menschen gefährden, insbesondere in den Städten, wo die Autodichte höher ist. Deshalb gibt es diese Grenz­werte, und nicht, um die Autoindustrie zu ärgern. Und deshalb sind diese Grenzwerte einzuhalten.\n\nDie Grenzwerte gibt es noch aus einem weiteren Grund: Weil wir verhindern wollen, dass der CO2-Ausstoß am Ende zu einem so starken Klimawandel führt, dass unsere Lebensgrundlagen gefährdet werden. Deswegen gibt es diese Grenzwerte.\n\nEs ist schon bedenklich, wenn Vertreter der Autoindustrie sagen: Uns war natürlich klar, dass das alles gar nicht so ernst gemeint war. Die Autokäufer wissen doch eigentlich, dass ein Auto, für das ein Verbrauch von 5 Litern angegeben wird, in Wirklichkeit 7 Liter verbraucht. Diese Grenzwerte sind doch eigentlich dazu da, um Autos untereinander vergleichen zu können. Auch das Umweltbundesamt sagt uns: Wir wissen auch, dass diese NOx-Grenzwerte eigentlich gar nicht ernst gemeint waren. Die wirkliche Belastung ist ein Vielfaches dieses Wertes. - So ist das Ganze allerdings nicht gedacht. Diese Grenzwerte waren politisch dafür gedacht, unser Klima und die Gesundheit der Menschen in den Städten zu schützen.\n\nWie konnte es überhaupt so weit kommen? Wie konnte der größte Autokonzern Deutschlands und Europas in so große Schwierigkeiten geraten, dass man jetzt insgesamt überlegen muss, wie es weitergeht? Es konnte so weit kommen, weil es eine unheilige Allianz zwischen der Bundesregierung und den Automanagern gibt, weil es zu oft Autokanzler gab, weil es sowohl bei den Sozialdemokraten als auch in der Union zu viele Leute gab, die sagten, dass sie Benzin im Blut haben.\n\nDas ist eines der Hauptprobleme dahinter.\n\nEs kam auch deshalb so weit, weil die Autoindustrie nach und nach größenwahnsinnig geworden ist. Vertreter der Autoindustrie konnten einfach bei Frau Merkel anrufen, und Frau Merkel hat dann auf Wunsch der Autoindustrie einen bereits ausgehandelten Kompromiss zu den CO2-Grenzwerten zerschossen. Dass eine Autoindustrie, die so viel Macht und Einfluss hat, am Ende glaubt, über den Gesetzen zu stehen, und zwar nicht nur in Deutschland und Europa, sondern auch in den USA, das ist naheliegend. Und das ist ein Riesenproblem für unser Land.\n\nWas ist jetzt zu tun, damit VW nicht so endet wie Eon und RWE? Können Sie sich noch daran erinnern, wie arrogant Eon und RWE waren? Sie haben gesagt: Ach, die erneuerbaren Energien werden nie mehr als 3, 4 Prozent zur Stromerzeugung beitragen; wir setzen weiter auf klassische, alte Kohlekraftwerke. Und wie stehen sie jetzt da? Jetzt stehen sie am Rand der Pleite, und die Kommunen in NRW sind in höchster Not.\n\nGenau diese Gefahr kann uns bei den Autokonzernen drohen. Die Autokonzerne sind von großer Bedeutung für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland;\n\ndenn die Autoindustrie ist eine der zentralen Industrien bei uns. Die Autokonzerne sind von großer Bedeutung für Tausende von Menschen, die dort arbeiten. Sie sind von großer Bedeutung für die Kommunen, die auf die Steuerzahlungen dieser Konzerne angewiesen sind. Sie sind insgesamt für die ökonomische Entwicklung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland von großer Bedeutung, weil die Autoindustrie eine zentrale Industrie ist.\n\nDeshalb können die Konzerne nur eine einzige logische Konsequenz daraus ziehen: In Zukunft bauen wir nicht nur bequeme und gute und schöne Autos - das bestreitet niemand -, sondern in Zukunft bauen wir auch die saubersten Autos;\n\nin Zukunft überlassen wir die Technologieführerschaft nicht Toyota, das zum Beispiel ein Wasserstoffauto entwickelt hat, oder Hyundai. Das ist die ganz entscheidende Frage. Dafür bedarf es guter Rahmenbedingungen, die von der Politik gesetzt werden müssen. Da muss das Verkehrsministerium endlich handeln, und da muss auch Frau Hendricks endlich handeln, statt nur zu reden!\n\nWir brauchen Kaufprämien, wir brauchen vernünftige Grenzwerte, und wir brauchen ein Ministerium, das nicht nur von Kontrollen redet, sondern diese Kontrollen auch real, auf der Straße, umsetzt. Denn es ist doch absurd, dass das Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt de facto ein paar Häkchen auf ein paar Zetteln macht, aber nicht in der Lage ist, irgendetwas selber zu kontrollieren. Deshalb meine Aufforderung an das Verkehrsministerium: Handeln Sie endlich! Sorgen Sie für vernünftige Kontrollen! Sorgen Sie für vernünftige Rahmenbedingungen! Eine Autoindustrie, die in Zukunft saubere Autos baut und nicht schummelt, hat die besten Chancen, eine führende Industrie für die Zukunft Deutschlands zu werden.\n\nDas war schon der Schluss, und die CSU ist glücklich.\"\n9049,silke-launert,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Viele sehen aus wie Buntstifte; sie schmecken nach Kaugummi, nach Schokolade, Melone oder Brombeere. Es gibt sie schon ab 8 Euro zu kaufen und wahrscheinlich auch am nächsten Kiosk, und online gibt es sie auch. Sie sind auffallend beliebt auf dem Schulhof, wo sie gerade zum neuen Lifestyle-Produkt avancieren. Dort heben sie so manchen in den Status der Coolness, und manchem Sechstklässler ist das sein Taschengeld wert.\n\nWenn Sie jetzt an Süßkram denken, wie Gummibärchen, Lakritzschnecken oder Ähnliches, dann liegen Sie schon fast richtig, jedenfalls aus rechtlicher Sicht; denn einen Unterschied gibt es da im Moment noch nicht. Die Rede ist jedoch nicht von Süßigkeiten, sondern von elektronischen Zigaretten und von E-Shishas, von jenen Gerätschaften, die herkömmliche Tabakwaren simulieren, es aber nicht sind. Jedenfalls werden sie bislang nicht als solche behandelt und unterliegen deshalb auch keinerlei vergleichbaren Beschränkungen, nicht einmal für Kinder und Jugendliche. Sie werden derzeit ohne Einschränkungen an Kinder verkauft, und das, obwohl beim Konsum dieser vermeintlichen Glimmstängel Gesundheitsgefahren bestehen.\n\nMit dem Gesetz, das uns hier im Entwurf vorliegt, räumen wir mit diesem Missstand auf und stellen sicher, dass zum Schutz von Kindern und Jugendlichen die Abgabe- und Konsumverbote von Tabakwaren auf E-Zigaretten und E-Shishas ausgedehnt werden. Außerdem stellen wir sicher, dass Tabakwaren, E-Zigaretten und E-Shishas auch über den Versandhandel nur an Erwachsene abgegeben werden dürfen. Schließlich dehnen wir das im Jugendarbeitsschutzgesetz verankerte Verbot der Abgabe von Tabakwaren auf E-Zigaretten und E-Shishas aus.\n\nDoch nun von vorn. Warum ist es höchste Zeit zu handeln? Worum handelt es sich bei E-Zigaretten und E-Shishas eigentlich? Die Technik dieser beiden Geräte ist weitgehend identisch; es gibt nur kleine Unterschiede. Beide, E-Zigarette und E-Shisha, bestehen aus einem Mundstück, einer Kartusche mit Flüssigkeit, einem Verdampfer sowie einer Batterie. Bei der Verwendung verdampft die Flüssigkeit, die auch Liquid genannt wird, und der dabei entstehende Nebel wird vom Verwender inhaliert. Was da mit jedem Atemzug inhaliert wird, ist ein Gemisch aus verschiedenen Chemikalien. Der Grundstoff ist in aller Regel Propylenglykol - das wurde schon angesprochen -, dem die fantasievollsten Aromastoffe und häufig auch Nikotin zugesetzt werden. Dies wird über die Atemwege in die Lunge aufgenommen.\n\nDen meisten von Ihnen werden diese Chemikalien - ich gebe zu, auch mir - unbekannt sein. Ich möchte Ihnen daher kurz darstellen, womit wir es hier zu tun haben. Propylenglykol, der erwähnte Grundstoff, sorgt für den Nebel. Er wird daher beispielsweise auch auf Theaterbühnen verwendet oder in Diskos. Außerdem findet er industrielle Verwendung, zum Beispiel im Frostschutz und in Enteisungsmitteln für Autos, Flugzeuge und Boote. Das Deutsche Krebsforschungszentrum in der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft gibt als Kurzzeitfolgen an: Atemwegsreizungen, Husten, eine Beeinträchtigung der Lungenfunktion, Augenreizungen, Schwindel, Müdigkeit und Schlaflosigkeit. Bei manchen Aromastoffen, die beigemischt werden, beispielsweise Menthol oder Vanillin, handelt es sich um Kontaktallergene. Daher ist nicht auszuschließen, dass diese Stoffe Allergien auslösen.\n\nDarüber hinaus hat das Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung festgestellt, dass durch die aromatisierten Liquids Stammzellen geschädigt werden können, die bei Wachstum und Entwicklung sowie bei Regenerierung des geschädigten Lungengewebes nach Infektionskrankheiten oder Entzündungen eine wichtige Rolle spielen. In einzelnen Liquids wurden geringe Mengen sogenannter Nitrosamine nachgewiesen. Im Nebel verschiedener E-Zigaretten wurde zum Beispiel auch Formaldehyd festgestellt. Alle diese Substanzen - man kann es genauer nachlesen - können Krebs erzeugen. Außerdem enthält der Nebel von E-Zigaretten und E-Shishas feine und ultrafeine Partikel; das wurde schon angesprochen. Diese können die Wachstumsphase beeinträchtigen, und bei Kindern auch die Lungenentwicklung. Ich glaube, für die Darstellung der Wirkungen des Nikotins brauche ich meine Energien nicht mehr zu verschwenden; sie dürften hinlänglich bekannt sein.\n\nKurzum: Bei den E-Shishas und den E-Zigaretten, egal ob mit oder ohne Nikotin - es gibt beides -, haben wir es nicht mit harmlosen Produkten zu tun. Doch nicht nur das. Es wurde schon angesprochen, dass sich Kinder davon besonders angezogen fühlen - von den bunten Farben, von den leckeren Aromen von Früchten, vom Geschmack von Süßigkeiten und Getränken. Das kann eben auch dazu führen, dass man sich langsam an das Rauchen gewöhnt. Wie ebenfalls schon angesprochen, führt das bei jungen Menschen, anders als bei Erwachsenen, eher zu einem Einstieg ins Rauchen.\n\nBereits jeder dritte Jugendliche hat eine E-Shisha, eine E-Zigarette oder eine Tabakzigarette verwendet. Wenn wir nichts dagegen unternehmen, dann schauen wir zu, wie Jugendliche, vor allem Kinder, Gesundheitsgefahren ausgesetzt werden. Es liegt uns am Herzen, Kinder und Jugendliche zu schützen. Ihr Schutz ist eine der wichtigsten Aufgaben des Familienausschusses. Hier gehen Jugendschutz und gesundheitlicher Verbraucherschutz Hand in Hand. Umso wichtiger ist es, dass wir diese Aufgabe jetzt konsequent angehen und keine Hintertüren offenlassen - für die Gesundheit unserer Kinder.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n1893,bernd-rutzel,\"Vielen Dank. - Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen! Sehr geehrte Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir beschließen heute die Aufnahme der Branche „Schlachten und Fleischverarbeitung“ in den Katalog des Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetzes. Dieser Entscheidung ging viel voraus. Unerträgliche Zustände machten unser Eingreifen - denn das ist es - bitter notwendig.\n\nViele Arbeitgeber in der Fleischbranche haben ihr einst ehrbares Handwerk durch sittenwidrige Behandlung der Arbeitskräfte in Verruf gebracht. Für überlange Arbeitstage von 12, manchmal 15 Stunden am Tag erhalten die häufig ausländischen Arbeitnehmer Armutslöhne, die kaum zum Leben ausreichen, selbst in Massenunterkünften oder Mehrbettzimmern nicht. Die Arbeitgeber haben jahrelang skrupellos daran gefeilt, ihren Gewinn auf Kosten der Mitarbeiter immer weiter zu steigern. In diesem Fall kann man sagen: Nicht der Fisch stinkt vom Kopfe her, sondern das geschlachtete Tier. Umso erfreuter bin ich heute, dass die Fleischbranche nun die Skandale hinter sich lassen will. Mit der Einwilligung in den Mindestlohntarifvertrag zeigen die Arbeitgeber ein Einsehen in die Notwendigkeit einer Kursänderung.\n\nSicherlich half dabei neben dem Druck aus der Politik und der Öffentlichkeit auch der von uns angekündigte gesetzliche Mindestlohn. Immerhin gründete diese Branche dafür erstmals und endlich einen Arbeitgeberverband, der - das sage ich dazu - perspektivisch sicherlich noch mehr leisten kann und auch mehr leisten muss.\n\nMit dem Gesetz zur Stärkung der Tarifautonomie möchten wir das Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetz zukünftig für alle Branchen öffnen.\n\nDie problembeladenen Zustände in der Fleischbranche machen es aber notwendig, hier sofort zu reagieren. Angesichts des dringenden Handlungsbedarfs ist es deshalb der richtige Weg, die Branche „Schlachten und Fleischverarbeitung“ nun unverzüglich in den Katalog des Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetzes aufzunehmen. Mit dieser Aufnahme ist dann der Weg frei für den Erlass einer Mindestlohnverordnung. Damit gilt der Mindestlohntarifvertrag für die gesamte Fleischbranche - auch für nichttarifgebundene Betriebe - und für die zahlreichen, meist osteuropäischen Werkvertragsnehmer, die noch für Niedriglöhne arbeiten. Als letzter Punkt ist mir besonders wichtig, dass auch die Werkverträge an die Kette genommen werden.\n\nDer nun auf der Grundlage des Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetzes bestehende Mindestlohntarifvertrag hat damit international zwingende Wirkung und gilt für alle in- und ausländischen Arbeitgeber und Arbeitnehmer. Auf diese Weise wird es keine Schlupflöcher mehr geben.\n\nAb dem 1. Juli dieses Jahres erhalten die Arbeitnehmer in der Fleischbranche mindestens 7,75 Euro pro Stunde. Das ist für viele eine sehr deutliche Lohnerhöhung. Ich gebe zu, man könnte kritisieren, dass wir in den ersten neun Monaten des Jahres 2015 unter dem gesetzlichen Mindestlohn bleiben. Aber ab dem 1. Oktober 2015 wird in dieser Branche mit einem Stundenlohn von 8,60 Euro der Mindestlohn schon überschritten.\n\nIm Jahre 2016 landen wir dann bei 8,75 Euro. Davon werden viele Tausend Menschen profitieren.\n\nGanz besonders wichtig ist uns eine sorgfältige Kontrolle.\n\nDenn wenn die Einhaltung nicht überprüft wird, dann ist das beste Gesetz nichts wert. Die Zuständigkeit für die Überwachung der Mindestlohnanforderungen im Bereich des Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetzes liegt bei den Zollbehörden. Natürlich werden diese zusätzlichen Überprüfungen in der Fleischbranche zu einem höheren Personal- und Sachaufwand führen.\n\nWir gehen im Gesetzentwurf von einem zusätzlichen Bedarf von 42 Arbeitskräften aus. Dies wird in den kommenden Haushaltsverhandlungen auch berücksichtigt werden müssen.\n\nWir sind sehr optimistisch, dass uns auch dies gelingen wird. Stellen die Zollbehörden bei ihren Kontrollen Verstöße gegen die Mindestlohnbestimmungen fest, dann drohen Bußgelder von bis zu 500 000 Euro.\n\nIch will in diesem Zusammenhang noch einen elementaren Punkt ansprechen. Der Generalunternehmer haftet - auch ohne eigenes Verschulden -, wenn ein Subunternehmer oder Subsubunternehmer seinen Arbeitnehmern nicht den Branchenmindestlohn zahlt. Daher ist es für die Unternehmer wichtig, sich ihre Subunternehmer sorgfältig auszusuchen; denn sie können sich nicht aus ihrer Verantwortung stehlen. Das schafft Sicherheit für die Beschäftigten.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen, das Lohndumping in der deutschen Fleischbranche hat zu großer Empörung in unseren Nachbarstaaten geführt. Die Aufnahme in das Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetz ist auch ein Beitrag zu einem fairen und funktionsfähigen Wettbewerb innerhalb Europas. So erreichen wir Arbeitnehmerfreizügigkeit in Europa zu fairen Bedingungen.\n\nIch bin zuversichtlich, dass wir mit der Aufnahme in das Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetz heute eine einigermaßen faire Entlohnung für alle Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer in der Fleischbranche erwirken können.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n1368,britta-haßelmann,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Herr Staatssekretär, weil Sie sich ja auf die schriftlichen Fragen vorbereiten konnten, finde ich es sehr unbefriedigend, dass Sie so schwammig geantwortet haben, nach dem Motto „circa 10 Prozent“, „vielleicht“, „wenn“, „doch“ und „aber“. Deshalb würde ich Sie im Namen meiner Fraktion bitten, uns die Zahlen schriftlich en détail vorzulegen.\n\nVielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Herr Staatssekretär, können Sie für die Bundesregierung und das Bundesministerium der Finanzen ausschließen, dass es in Bezug auf sämtliche Steuerarten für einzelne Unternehmen Einzelerlasse gibt?\"\n854,bernd-fabritius,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Nachrichten und die Bilder der letzten Tage, ja der letzten Minuten, machen zutiefst betroffen. Reuters meldet im Minutentakt weitere Opfer - Verletzte und Tote. Solche Bilder erinnern mich persönlich schmerzlich an Selbsterlebtes, und zwar an die Bilder aus Rumänien im Winter 1989.\n\nEs muss sich nicht alles wiederholen, wenn Menschen ihr Schicksal im Kampf um Demokratie und Selbstbestimmung in die eigenen Hände nehmen. Wir haben es hier mit einer schwerwiegenden Krise mitten in Europa zu tun, die sich inzwischen zu einem Bürgerkrieg entwickelt hat. Gestern erreichten uns erste Meldungen darüber, dass sich das Militär in der Ukraine auf eine Intervention vorbereite. Die humanitäre Lage ist prekär: Schulen sind geschlossen, der Nahverkehr steht still, die Krankenhäuser sind übervoll. Der polnische Ukraine-Vermittler Aleksander Kwasniewski spricht bereits von einem ukrainischen Tiananmen.\n\nDie tragische Zuspitzung der Lage in der Ukraine kann ich nur auf ein gezieltes unverantwortliches Vorgehen der aktuellen Regierung zurückführen. Präsident Janukowitsch gibt sich uneinsichtig und spricht von einem Staatsstreich. Zum Schein geht er noch am Wochenende auf die Opposition zu, um dann gezielt und geplant, also gar nicht kurzfristig - das wurde heute schon dargestellt -, volle Härte zu zeigen. Von Terrorabwehr ist plötzlich die Rede. Heute Nacht gab es nun ein Gewaltverzichtsabkommen. Die aktuellen Nachrichten zeigen allerdings, dass es nicht hält. Als verlässlicher Verhandlungspartner hat sich Janukowitsch in den letzten Monaten wahrlich nicht erwiesen - weder im Verhältnis zur Europäischen Union noch zur Opposition im eigenen Lande.\n\nMedien sprechen zwar von Provokationen, aber auch davon, dass die Demonstranten auf dem Maidan vielleicht „gezielte Störenfriede“ selbst im Griff hatten. Trotzdem räumt die Regierung diese Wirkungsplattform einer nach Demokratie schreienden Menschenmenge, steckt deren Zelte in Brand und schießt wild um sich. Mit Demokratie, mit Verständnis für die eigenen Bürger oder auch nur dem Wohl des eigenen Landes hat das wenig zu tun. Ich muss schon sagen: Dass man das in diesem Hohen Hause mit Rosa-Luxemburg-Zitaten hinterlegt, kann ich nicht verstehen.\n\nDie Ukraine, meine Damen und Herren, scheint von Russland vor die Wahl gestellt zu werden, sich zwischen der eurasischen Zollunion Putins und einer Annäherung an die Europäische Union entscheiden zu müssen. Nicht anders können die Maßnahmen verstanden werden, die letztlich zum Aussetzen der Assoziierungsverhandlungen und zum Scheitern des Gipfels der Östlichen Partnerschaft in Vilnius geführt haben. Es kann aber auch nicht um ein Entweder-oder im Sinne Russlands gehen. Für die Ukraine erscheint dieser Konflikt schier unlösbar, wenn nicht alle Akteure einschließlich Russlands an einer friedlichen Lösung mitwirken.\n\nDie Ukraine und Russland sind eng verbunden. Kiew ist als altes Zentrum des ostslawischen Großreichs, der Kiewer Rus im 9. Jahrhundert, gleichsam die Wiege und Keimzelle russischer Staatlichkeit und daher Russland historisch nicht gleichgültig. Die Ukraine ist das wichtigste Bruderland. Sie ist damit Ausgangspunkt und als ehemalige Sowjetrepublik Wegbegleiter der gemeinsamen Geschichte. Sie ist aber auch ein Land mit einer zutiefst christlichen und in weiten Teilen proeuropäisch orientierten Bevölkerung, das einen europaorientierten sicherheitspolitischen Kurs und gute Kooperation mit der NATO pflegt.\n\nEs muss daher eine ukrainische Lösung im Sinne eines Sowohl-als-auch - selbstverständlich mit der von den Menschen in der Ukraine gewünschten deutlichen Annäherung an die Europäische Union - geben, die von einer breiten demokratischen Mehrheit getragen würde. Wie können wir dazu beitragen? Deutschland sollte gemeinsam mit den europäischen Partnern über bewährte Institutionen wie die OSZE und den Europarat den Konflikt positiv beeinflussen und hierbei auch Russland in die Pflicht nehmen. Sanktionen, die vornehmlich - das hat Herr Kollege Hahn zutreffend aufgezeigt - Regierung und Oligarchen und nicht etwa die Menschen in der Ukraine treffen sollen, sind dringend angezeigt. Vor allem vom heutigen Treffen der EU-Außenminister erhoffe ich mir ein klares Signal.\n\nAls zusätzliche Chance sehe ich die Einbindung unserer polnischen Freunde, die wir darin bestärken sollten, zur deutlichen Mäßigung in ihren Nachbarländern beizutragen.\n\nUnsere Außenminister, Frau Kollegin, sind nicht abgereist. N-tv berichtete gerade, dass sie noch miteinander sprechen. Nehmen Sie das als Zeichen einer hitzigen Situation. Wir brauchen vor allem eine schnelle und nachhaltige Lösung. Es hat oberste Priorität, weitere Opfer, egal auf welcher Seite, zu verhindern.\n\nAn Zuständen wie in Syrien kann in Europa niemand Interesse haben: weder Russland noch die Ukraine und schon gar nicht die Europäische Union.\n\nDanke.\"\n6560,dagmar-wohrl,\"Sehr geehrte Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Erst einmal möchte ich mich dafür bedanken, dass es möglich ist, heute über dieses Thema zu debattieren. Wir wissen, dass eine Katastrophe die andere jagt. In Nepal gab es erst vor kurzem über 8 000 Tote. Bei Ebola hoffen wir, dass die Epidemie bald überwunden sein wird; hier gab es über 10 000 Tote. Wir haben immens viele Krisen und immens viele Konfliktgebiete auf der Welt; das zeigt der Bericht der Bundesregierung.\n\nSeit Vorliegen des Berichts ist aber die Zahl der Krisen und Konflikte noch weiter gestiegen, und alte Krisen und Konflikte sind noch nicht beendet. Ich erinnere nur an Syrien, wo es immer noch 12,2 Millionen Hilfsbedürftige gibt. Das ist über die Hälfte der Bevölkerung. Über 4 Millionen Menschen sind aus dem Land geflohen, und es gibt über 7 Millionen Binnenvertriebene. Ich erinnere auch an den Irak mit rund 3 Millionen Binnenvertriebenen. Und es gibt viele andere Länder wie Somalia oder die Zentralafrikanische Republik, die Staaten der EAC und noch einige mehr, die hier ebenfalls zu nennen wären.\n\nDie Folgen sind Tragödien von unermesslichen Ausmaßen, die man sich so eigentlich nicht vorstellen kann. Wir sehen die Bilder tagtäglich im Fernsehen. Es besteht die große Gefahr, dass unsere Gefühle langsam abstumpfen, weil es einfach zu viele Krisen sind. Aber in jedem Fall geht es um Einzelschicksale. Wir sehen Menschen, die im Mittelmeer ertrinken. Was man nicht sieht, ist, dass auch Menschen in der Wüste verdursten. Ihre Zahl soll sogar bei weitem höher sein als die Zahl derjenigen, die bis jetzt im Mittelmeer ertrunken sind.\n\nDeswegen ist es richtig, dass die Bundesregierung ihre humanitäre Hilfe ausweitet und auch Schritte zu einer besseren Koordinierung unternimmt. Es ist wichtig, dass die Häuser hier zusammenarbeiten, damit es hier zu kohärentem Handeln kommt. Wir wissen, wie schwierig es ist, diese Kohärenz herzustellen, auch wenn wir immer ganz toll darüber reden. Wir müssen darüber hinaus vom reinen Reagieren wegkommen. Wir dürfen nicht nur reagieren, sondern müssen zukünftig viel mehr agieren. Die Vereinbarung zwischen den zwei Häusern bietet eine gute Grundlage. Es ist ein guter Ansatz, die Nothilfe im Auswärtigen Amt und die langfristige Entwicklungszusammenarbeit im Ministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung anzusiedeln.\n\nVereinbarte Maßnahmen muss man aber auch ab und zu evaluieren: Sind sie gut? War die Vereinbarung richtig? Kann man vielleicht etwas besser machen? - Ich glaube, es ist richtig, dass wir mit ESÜH, der „Entwicklungsfördernden und Strukturbildenden Übergangshilfe“, eine Brücke gebaut haben. Diese Hilfe kann schnell und unbürokratisch geleistet werden, und sie kann an die Nothilfe anschließen. Vor allem kann so für die Dauer von drei bis vier Jahren eine stabile Finanzierung sichergestellt werden. Das ist etwas, was die Nothilfe in diesem Zusammenhang manchmal nicht leisten kann.\n\nWichtig und prioritär ist für uns, dass wir die Widerstandskraft dieser Länder und ihre Institutionen stärken. Sie müssen präventiv im Hinblick auf neu entstehende Konflikte gestärkt werden, sodass man Krisen zukünftig vorbeugen kann.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, humanitäre Hilfe wird nie ganz verzichtbar sein; aber sie darf nie ein Ersatz für die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit sein. Ich möchte in diesem Zusammenhang einen Punkt ansprechen, der mir immer wieder aufgefallen ist, und zwar die Koordinierung der Hilfsmaßnahmen. Wenn ich mir anschaue, wie heute die internationale Koordinierung der Hilfsmaßnahmen, vor allem die der Vereinten Nationen, dasteht, glaube ich, dass dieses Thema ganz dringend auf die Tagesordnung gesetzt werden muss.\n\nIch erinnere mich noch ganz gut daran, dass sich in Haiti 22 000 NGOs gegenseitig auf die Füße getreten sind. Angesichts dessen muss man, wie ich glaube, schauen, wie man die Hilfsmaßnahmen international, also zum Beispiel im Rahmen der Vereinten Nationen, besser abstimmt.\n\nDer UN-Nothilfekoordinator Albrecht Beck hat sich gerade zu Nepal geäußert. Er hat gesagt, dass viele Staaten und Organisationen ihre eigene Flagge zeigen wollen und deshalb eigene Hilfe leisten, sodass keine echte Zusammenarbeit der internationalen Akteure erfolgt. Das sollte uns zu denken geben. Wir müssen hier international zu einer größeren Effizienz kommen. Es sollte nicht jeder sein eigenes Süppchen kochen, sondern wir sollten zusammenarbeiten. Das muss in den großen internationalen Organisationen angedacht und durchdiskutiert werden; und es müssen auch Strukturreformen durchgeführt werden.\n\nHerr Koenigs, Sie haben vollkommen recht: Die WHO muss an ihre Strukturen herangehen. Wir hoffen, dass auch dieses Thema auf der Tagesordnung der Konferenz, die demnächst von der Kanzlerin eröffnet wird, stehen wird.\n\nWir müssen schauen, dass Hilfe schnell auf die Beine gestellt wird und sich die Helfer einander nicht auf die Füße treten.\n\nEines ist besonders wichtig: Was lernen wir aus den verschiedenen Maßnahmen, die wir auf den Weg gebracht haben? Man spricht hier von „lesson learned“; das ist ein sehr wichtiger Terminus.\n\nEbola war kein Ruhmesblatt für uns; das wissen wir. Aber wir haben gesagt: Wir lernen aus den Erfahrungen. Wir sprechen momentan von einem Weißhelmkontingent. Unabhängig davon, wie diese Einsatztruppe zukünftig heißen wird, ob Weißhelme oder anders: Wir brauchen eine Einsatztruppe. Die Weltgemeinschaft muss sich überlegen, wie sie auf internationaler Ebene auf Katastrophen, die auch künftig eintreten werden, schnell reagieren kann, wo sie Einsatzstationen mit entsprechendem Personal, das sofort aktiviert werden kann, vorhalten will.\n\nIch glaube, dass wir umdenken müssen und in dem Bereich zu einer kohärenten und viel besser abgestimmten Politik kommen müssen.\n\nIch möchte mich am Schluss für eines bedanken, nämlich für die Berücksichtigung der sogenannten vergessenen humanitären Krisen, Krisensituationen, die schon länger auf der Welt bestehen. Ich erinnere hier an Mindanao, den Konflikt auf den Philippinen. Ich erinnere an die ethnischen Konflikte in Myanmar, an die sahaurischen Flüchtlinge in Algerien. Man hört momentan nichts davon, aber diese Konflikte bestehen weiter, sie sind nicht beendet. Wir dürfen sie nicht vergessen, auch wenn die Kameras nicht mehr auf sie gerichtet sind und die Karawane weitergezogen ist. Wir müssen hier weiterhin unterstützend tätig werden. Deswegen bin ich froh, dass wir 15 Prozent der Mittel aus dem Haushalt für humanitäre Hilfe hierfür aufwenden. Auch wenn momentan nicht spektakulär darüber berichtet wird, auch wenn die Fernsehkameras derzeit nicht draufhalten, müssen wir wissen, dass wir auch für die sogenannten vergessenen humanitären Krisen Verantwortung haben.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, so notwendig Hilfe in der Not ist, so sehr dürfen wir unser eigentliches Ziel nicht aus den Augen verlieren: durch eine nachhaltige Entwicklungszusammenarbeit davon wegzukommen, permanent Nothilfe leisten zu müssen.\n\nIn dem Sinne vielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n11478,gabriele-losekrug-moller,\"Vielen Dank für die Frage, Frau Abgeordnete Werner. - Ja, in der Tat, diese Nachricht hat uns natürlich auch ereilt, dass sich in Österreich in der Übersetzungsfrage etwas getan hat. Wir haben dieses Thema bereits in der letzten Legislaturperiode in der Bundesregierung behandelt und eine deutsche Fassung bei der Übersetzung akzeptiert. Es gibt im Augenblick, soweit mir bekannt ist, keine Diskussion und keine Überlegung, dies noch einmal infrage zu stellen.\"\n11594,aydan-ozoguz,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Professor Zick von der Uni Bielefeld hat heute Morgen eine Studie mit dem Titel „ZuGleich“ vorgestellt. Er hat einen Vergleich zwischen den Einstellungen der Menschen in der Zeit 2013/2014 und heute gezogen und stellt dabei fest, dass sich manche Dinge leicht verändert haben. Ein Beispiel ist, dass eine kulturell vielfältige Gesellschaft nicht mehr den gleichen Stellenwert wie vor zwei Jahren hat. Das Eigene rückt wieder stärker in den Fokus, das sogenannte Andere wird an den Rand gedrängt. Das Eigene und das Andere entfernen sich also voneinander.\n\nProfessor Zick hat dabei aber auch Erfreuliches herausgefunden: Ein Großteil unserer Bevölkerung zum Beispiel - das glauben viele ja nicht - steht Flüchtlingen positiv gegenüber. Eine Mehrheit in unserer Bevölkerung begrüßt die zunehmende Vielfalt in der Bevölkerung, und die Mehrheit der Bevölkerung, und zwar mit und ohne Einwanderungsgeschichte, möchte, dass allen Menschen Teilhabe ermöglicht wird. Genau das tun wir heute mit diesem Integrationsgesetz, indem wir nämlich denjenigen Teilhabe ermöglichen, deren Asylverfahren noch laufen und die in der Vergangenheit bis zum Ende ihres Verfahrens warten mussten - das konnte lange dauern; ein Jahr oder auch zwei Jahre -, bis sie endlich einen Sprachkurs oder überhaupt etwas machen durften, obwohl sie die ganze Zeit über hier waren.\n\nDas, was wir heute machen, ist ein Riesenschritt. Ich möchte den verhandelnden Ministern sehr dafür danken und freue mich, dass der Deutsche Bundestag heute diesen Schritt gehen möchte.\n\nMan muss noch einmal betonen, dass viele Fehler der Vergangenheit mit diesem Gesetz beseitigt werden und hier tatsächlich sehr genau auf die Details geschaut wurde, damit Menschen auf dem Ausbildungs- wie auf dem Arbeitsmarkt schneller Fuß fassen können. Denjenigen mit guter Bleibeperspektive wird beispielsweise der Zugang zu Fördermaßnahmen des SGB III ermöglicht, also Berufsausbildungsbeihilfe, Berufsbegleitende Hilfen oder Assistierte Ausbildung.\n\nDass ein Duldungsanspruch für die Berufsausbildung mit der Drei-plus-zwei-Regelung geschaffen wird, erinnert mich sehr an meine Studienzeit. Damals hieß es: Ausländer sollen bitte einen Tag nach Beendigung ihres Studiums das Land verlassen. - Es hat ein paar Jahre gedauert, bis sich die Erkenntnis durchgesetzt hat, dass es unsinnig ist, Menschen hier auszubilden und sie dann nach ihrer Ausbildung wegzuschicken. Das machen wir auch nicht mehr bei Menschen in Ausbildung, eine Situation, die mit einem Studium vergleichbar ist, sondern geben diesen Menschen sechs Monate Zeit, um eine adäquate Stelle zu finden.\n\nHinzu kommen die hunderttausend Arbeitsgelegenheiten in Flüchtlingsintegrationsmaßnahmen, damit diese Menschen schon in der Erstaufnahme einer gemeinnützigen, sinnvollen Beschäftigung nachgehen können. Dafür stellt der Bund immerhin 300 Millionen Euro bereit. Geflüchtete wollen schließlich nicht herumsitzen. Sie wollen, so schnell es geht, arbeiten, auch wenn es für sie auf dem ersten Arbeitsmarkt noch keine Perspektive gibt. Ich möchte hier einen großen Dank an die Arbeitsministerin Nahles aussprechen.\n\nIch finde es auch sehr gut - darüber haben wir schon länger gesprochen -, dass wir Erstorientierungskurse für Asylbewerber, unabhängig von ihrer Bleibeperspektive, ihren Sprachkenntnissen und ihren Vermittlungsmöglichkeiten, etablieren können. Aber erlauben Sie mir, dass ich als Beauftragte hinzufüge: Es wird nicht reichen, in der zweiten Jahreshälfte zwei Modellprojekte auf den Weg zu bringen und abzufragen, welche Bundesländer mitmachen. Es sei mir erlaubt, dass ich das etwas kritisch anmerke. Gerade Bayern hat uns schon vor zwei Jahren gesagt: Das gibt es doch bei uns alles schon. Diese Projekte könnten doch sofort in anderen Bundesländern durchgeführt werden. - Ich würde es sehr begrüßen, wenn wir wirklich allen einen Sprachkurs oder zumindest einen Orientierungskurs ermöglichen könnten.\n\nDass das nicht so ohne Weiteres geht, liegt daran, dass wir keine gesetzliche Definition für die „gute Bleibeperspektive“ haben. Wir halten uns an die starren Schutzquoten von 50 Prozent. Es ist für keinen hier im Haus ein Geheimnis, dass zum Beispiel der Anteil der Afghanen mit 48 Prozent knapp unterhalb dieser Quote liegt und wir gleichzeitig wissen, dass viele von ihnen, wenn nicht die meisten, hierbleiben werden.\n\nAn der Stelle brauchen wir endlich eine gesetzliche Definition dieser Bleibeperspektive, die sich natürlich an der Realität orientieren muss, also daran, ob jemand tatsächlich bleiben wird, damit wir all denen auch Sprachkurse, Ausbildungsangebote etc. zukommen lassen können. Ich glaube, in diesem Bereich sind noch weitere Schritte möglich, wenn das Integrationsgesetz heute beschlossen wird. Man muss ja nicht auf der Stelle stehen bleiben, wo man gerade ist.\n\nIch möchte einen letzten Punkt erwähnen: Auch das BAföG sollte weiter geöffnet werden. Denn die Ausbildungsförderung nach SGB III sollte auch für Drittstaatsangehörige weiterhin gleich ausgestaltet sein.\n\nEs ist ein guter Tag für die Integration, weil wir aus der Vergangenheit gelernt haben. Ich hoffe, dass wir in diesem Sinne weitermachen und gute weitere Schritte ermöglichen können.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5668,klaus-ernst,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Dass sich gerade einige von der CDU vom Acker machen, ist symptomatisch für dieses Thema. Ich habe den Eindruck: Das gilt auch für das, was Sie selbst im Parlament beschlossen haben. Es war ein unheimliches Gewürge, bis dieser Mindestlohn zustande kam. Es hat fast ein Jahrzehnt gedauert, ein Jahrzehnt, in dem Sie für die niedrigsten Löhne in dieser Republik mitverantwortlich waren. Jetzt haben Sie ein Gesetz gemacht. Ich sage Ihnen: Getraut habe ich Ihnen bei diesem Thema nie. Aber was wir jetzt erleben, ist schon ein seltener Vorgang. Sie haben all dem zugestimmt, was jetzt Gesetz ist, sabotieren aber nun den Mindestlohn und demontieren die Ministerin, die dafür verantwortlich ist. Das ist ein unglaublicher Vorgang.\n\nMit Ihnen als Koalitionspartner braucht man wirklich keine Feinde mehr. Sie behaupten, das sei ein bürokratisches Monster, weil Arbeitszeiten erfasst werden müssen. Das muss man sich auf der Zunge zergehen lassen: Weil Arbeitszeiten erfasst werden, handelt es sich hierbei um ein bürokratisches Monster. Wie soll denn eine Abrechnung auf Stundenlohnbasis überhaupt sinnvoll stattfinden, wenn die Arbeitszeit nicht erfasst wird? Wie soll das gehen? Wenn die Aufzeichnungspflicht im Zusammenhang mit Arbeitszeiten nicht eingehalten wird, ist ein Mindestlohn nicht kontrollierbar. Offensichtlich ist das Ihr Interesse. Das soll natürlich nur bei Löhnen gelten.\n\nStellen Sie sich einmal vor, Sie fahren mit dem Auto zur Tankstelle, aber es wird nicht erfasst, wie viele Liter Sie in den Tank hineinschütten. Jeder wird sagen: Das ist blanker Unsinn. - Zu meinen bayerischen Freunden: Wenn Sie im Biergarten ein paar Maß Bier trinken, aber die Kellnerin nicht erfasst, wie viel Bier Sie getrunken haben, ist eine Abrechnung nicht möglich.\n\nIch habe den Eindruck: Ihre Kampagne gegen den Mindestlohn haben Sie nach fünf Maß Bier gemacht, so ein Unfug ist das.\n\nZum Thema Bürokratiemonster: Die Deutsche Zoll- und Finanzgewerkschaft - ich weiß nicht, ob Sie wissen, wer das ist; das sind die, die kontrollieren sollen, was wir hier an Gesetzen machen - sagt: Ausnahmeregelungen erzeugen die Bürokratie. - Ich möchte gleich noch aus dem Magazin dieser Gewerkschaft zitieren. Ihr Vorsitzender Dewes hatte bei der Anhörung zum Mindestlohn im Jahre 2014 gesagt, je mehr Ausnahmen das Mindestlohngesetz vorsehe, desto aufwendiger werde die Kontrolle. Wenn Sie jetzt bürokratischen Unfug kritisieren, dann müssten Sie Ihre Ausnahmeregelungen kritisieren. Sie sind für die schwierige Kontrolle bei diesem Thema verantwortlich.\n\nFür die Kontrolleure sind die Ausnahmeregelungen nicht nachvollziehbar. Ich möchte aus dem Magazin des BDZ zitieren:\n\nFür den BDZ war und ist es dabei nicht nachvollziehbar, warum für mobile Tätigkeiten ohne sachliche Begründung Ausnahmetatbestände geschaffen wurden. Besonders in den für Schwarzarbeit anfälligen Branchen wie dem Transport- oder Taxigewerbe ist es für wirksame Kontrollen entscheidend, Beginn, Ende und Dauer der täglichen Arbeitszeit festzuhalten.\n\nSo weit die Kontrolleure.\n\nWenn Sie diese Dokumentationspflichten aufweichen wollen, dann stellen Sie sich vor diejenigen, die an diesem Gesetz nicht interessiert sind und sich auch nicht um die Einhaltung dieses Gesetzes kümmern. Sie stellen sich vor diejenigen, die in dieser Frage ein höchstes Maß an krimineller Energie haben.\n\nIm Übrigen wissen Sie selber, dass eine Reihe dessen, was Sie kritisieren, schon lange gilt. Arbeitszeiten müssen in vielen Bereichen schon immer erfasst werden. Wie wollen Sie überhaupt Überstunden erfassen, wenn Sie nicht wissen, was die Regelarbeitszeit ist? Wie wollen Sie das machen? Das ist vollkommener Unsinn.\n\nDer zweite Akt der Sabotage ist das, was Sie mit dem Personal machen. Die Zuständigen sagen: Wir brauchen 2 500 zusätzliche Personalstellen. - Sie machen in dieser Frage viel zu wenig. Wir wissen, dass in diesem Bereich viel Personal fehlt. Am deutlichsten wird Ihre Haltung am Beispiel des sehr geschätzten Michael Fuchs; er ist leider heute nicht da. Es tut mir wirklich leid, dass er jetzt nicht mitkriegt, wie ich zitiere, was er selber gesagt hat. Wissen Sie, was Herr Fuchs gesagt hat? Ich habe es kaum glauben können. Er hat gesagt:\n\nÜberall fehlen Polizisten. Aber wir stellen jetzt 1 600 Zöllner ein, um den Unternehmen … auf die Finger zu schauen. Das versteht doch kein Mensch!\n\nWas glauben Sie eigentlich, was die in der Finanzkontrolle Schwarzarbeit Tätigen über so etwas denken? Das ist ihre Arbeit. Sie haben doch den Eindruck, dass die Politik überhaupt nicht daran interessiert ist, dass kontrolliert wird, wenn solche Aussagen von einem stellvertretenden Vorsitzenden der CDU/CSU-Fraktion kommen. Er sollte sich schämen und sich bei den Damen und Herren für den Unsinn, den er erzählt hat, entschuldigen.\n\nEs geht hier nicht um ein Bürokratiemonster, sondern es geht um die Existenzgrundlage von Menschen, die von diesem Lohn leben müssen. Notwendig sind nicht weniger Kontrollen, sondern mehr Überprüfung und weniger Ausnahmeregelungen, so wie wir es in unserem Antrag fordern.\n\nIch danke Ihnen fürs Zuhören.\n\nDanke für die Möglichkeit einer Kurzintervention. - Erstens. Ich möchte Folgendes klar zurückweisen: Wir stellen niemanden unter Generalverdacht, im Gegenteil.\n\nMit dieser Argumentation müssten Sie auch sämtliche Alkoholkontrollen von Autofahrern verbieten, weil Sie auch diese unter Generalverdacht stellen, wenn es Kon-trollen gibt.\n\nSie würden im Übrigen auch alle Steuerzahler unter den Generalverdacht der Steuerhinterziehung stellen, weil wir Kontrolleure haben - Gott sei Dank; allerdings viel zu wenige -, die die Steuerzahlungen auf Richtigkeit überprüfen. Ich würde mir überlegen, ob das das richtige Argument ist.\n\nZweitens. Wie bewerten Sie denn die Aussagen derer, die die Kontrollen durchführen müssen? Ich will Sie mit zwei dieser Aussagen konfrontieren:\n\nDie Dokumentationspflicht von Arbeitszeiten ist die Grundlage für wirksame Kontrollen, da pauschale Arbeitszeitangaben weder effektiv kontrolliert noch nachgewiesen werden können.\n\nDas ist keine Aussage der Linken, sondern derer, die kontrollieren. Wie bewerten Sie diese Aussage? Haben die recht, haben die unrecht?\n\nEine weitere Aussage, die ich Sie zu bewerten bitte, auch von Mitgliedern der Zollgewerkschaft, die zuständig für die Kontrollen sind:\n\nMit derart geringen Personalzuwächsen lässt sich eine effektive Kontrolle des Mindestlohns nur zu Lasten von anderen Aufgaben erledigen.\n\nDas ist der Zustand. Das ist das, was wir bemängeln.\n\nDrittens. Ich möchte Ihnen einen eindeutigen Hinweis geben. Wir haben diese Debatte nicht begonnen. Die kam aus den Reihen des Bundesverbands der Deutschen Industrie, die kam aus dem Unternehmerlager Ihrer Partei. Nicht wir sind auf die Idee gekommen, einen Tag nach Inkrafttreten dieses Gesetzes eine solche Debatte vom Zaun zu brechen; das waren nicht wir, das waren andere.\n\nIch möchte Sie bitten, in Ihrer Partei dafür zu sorgen, dass dieser Unfug und diese Sabotage des Gesetzes unterbleiben. Dann können wir uns solche Debatten sparen.\"\n3215,wolfgang-tiefensee,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Wir diskutieren einmal mehr über TTIP und über CETA. Diese Debatte ist gut, weil wir das, was in der Öffentlichkeit diskutiert wird, sehr ernst nehmen. Ich will ausdrücklich unterstreichen, dass wir diese öffent-liche Debatte brauchen und all denjenigen, die sich kritisch äußern, zurufen: Meldet euch! Wir wollen mit euch diskutieren.\n\nWas schlecht ist, ist die Grundlage der heutigen -Debatte, nämlich die drei uns vorliegenden Anträge. -Einer ist von der Fraktion Die Linke. Er zeichnet sich dadurch aus, dass man das, was auf dem Parteikonvent gesagt wurde, als Steinbruch genommen hat, sich genau die Passagen herausgesucht hat, die einem passen, sie zusammengeschrieben und zu einem Antrag formuliert hat. Das, liebe Fraktion der Linken, ist Kindergarten, große Gruppe.\n\nEtwas einfach nur abzuschreiben, keine eigenen Ideen vorzutragen und vor allen Dingen dann auch noch den eigentlich entscheidenden Punkt wegzulassen, ist für ein solches Haus eigentlich nicht akzeptabel. Das sollten Sie in der Zukunft unterlassen.\n\nWas meine ich damit? In der öffentlichen Debatte kommt es zuallererst darauf an, zu berichten, warum wir ein solches Abkommen überhaupt abschließen wollen, warum es diese Verhandlungen gibt. Wir müssen -zunächst deutlich machen, dass wir die Handelsräume zusammenführen, die sogenannten nichttarifären Handelshemmnisse, diese unsäglichen unterschiedlichen Normen und Standards, abbauen und die Verfahren für Mittelstand und Großindustrie erleichtern wollen. Wenn wir das kommuniziert haben, dann sollten wir auch -sagen, wo die roten Linien sind. Genau das tun Sie nicht. Sie suchen immer wieder Gelegenheiten und Sie suchen - wie in einem Steinbruch - Textbausteine, um deutlich zu machen: An dieser Stelle mit uns nicht. - Ich bitte Sie, irgendwann ausdrücklich zu erklären: Wir wollen keine Freihandelsabkommen. Wir wollen TTIP nicht. Wir wollen CETA nicht.\n\nIn diesem Fall würde Ihr Antrag aus einem Satz bestehen. Dann könnte man ihn viel einfacher verstehen und natürlich viel einfacher ablehnen.\n\nDas Gleiche gilt im Übrigen aber auch für den Antrag der Grünen. Ich habe in den Gesprächen, die wir nicht zuletzt auch im Ausschuss miteinander geführt haben, gelernt, dass Sie offensichtlich nicht zu der Fraktion gehören, die Freihandelsabkommen grundsätzlich ablehnt.\n\n- Willkommen im Klub! Das ist gut. - Sie machen das Gegenteil von dem, was die Linke tut. Aus den roten -Linien, also dem, was wir in den Verhandlungen verhindern wollen, greifen Sie sich nur einen Teil heraus - wahrscheinlich den, der ganz besonders populär ist.\n\nSie sprechen nicht davon, dass wir verhandeln wollen, dass die ILO-Kernarbeitsnormen in einem Kapitel ihren Widerhall finden müssen. Sie sprechen nicht davon, dass es uns um öffentliche Daseinsvorsorge geht. Sie sprechen nicht davon, dass wir die Standards nicht absenken wollen, sondern dass wir die US-Standards und die europäischen Standards auf das jeweils höchste Niveau heben wollen. Sie sprechen nicht davon, dass wir bei Kultur und Medien aufpassen wollen, dass beispielsweise die Buchpreisbindung nicht unter die Räder gerät.\n\nDas alles spielt keine Rolle, weil es in der Diskussion kein so schlagkräftiges Argument ist. Sie beziehen sich nur auf einen Teil. Deshalb also meine Bitte: Reden Sie Klartext. Stehen Sie zu den Verhandlungen. Stehen Sie dazu, dass wir die Vorteile für den Mittelstand, für die Industrie, für die Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer nutzen und dass wir alles Erdenkliche tun wollen, dass diese Abkommen zum Abschluss kommen. Oder stellen Sie sich auf die andere Seite, die alles grundsätzlich -ablehnt.\n\nIch will es hier noch einmal ganz deutlich sagen:\n\nDie sozialdemokratische Fraktion wird alles dafür tun, dass sowohl CETA als auch TTIP keinen Investorenschutz und keine Schiedsgerichtsklausel enthalten, dass die ILO-Kernarbeitsnormen ihre Verankerung finden, dass die Standards nicht abgesenkt werden, dass der öffentliche Dienst nicht gefährdet wird, dass es keine genmanipulierten Nahrungsmittel gibt. Das sind unsere Ziele. Diese werden wir durchsetzen, und zwar auf unserem Wege.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nSehr gerne. - Die ist nicht von mir bestellt; aber ich freue mich über die Verlängerung der Redezeit.\n\nDa fragen Sie jetzt gerade den Richtigen. Gemeinsam mit Ihrem Kollegen Gysi und anderen - Cem Özdemir zum Beispiel - habe ich die große Ehre, Mitglied im politischen Beirat des BVMW zu sein. Ich sitze also als Berater im Vorstand. Wir haben darüber diskutiert, wie es um TTIP bestellt ist. Ich bin dem Wirtschaftsminister sehr dankbar, dass er den BVMW an den Tisch des Beraterkreises geholt hat und dass er sich direkt mit ihm -austauscht. Die Situation stellt sich folgendermaßen dar: Das Präsidium des BVMW sagt: Wir werden, genauso wie das die Parteien der Koalition machen, auf eine ganze Reihe von Dingen achten müssen. - Diese habe ich vorhin aufgezählt. Wir erhoffen uns Vorteile bei der Beseitigung nichttarifärer Hemmnisse.\n\nWeil Sie mich danach fragen, Herr Ernst, darf ich ein Beispiel nennen.\n\nWenn Sie eine Maschine bauen, die Zucker herstellt, dann müssen Sie berücksichtigen, dass Zucker im letzten Verfahrensschritt explosiv ist. Aus diesem Grund muss die Maschine explosionssicher sein. Es gibt dafür einen deutschen Standard. Der Maschinenbauer, der diese -Maschine baut und nach Amerika exportieren will, baut sie zuvor noch einmal auseinander - andere Kabel, -andere Schellen, andere Einzelteile -, um sie dann, neu zusammengebaut, nach Amerika zu liefern, damit die -Maschine dort den Test besteht. Genau das will der Mittelstand nicht. Genau das will der BVMW nicht. Diese nichttarifären Handelshemmnisse müssen abgebaut -werden, damit Kosten gespart werden, Arbeitsplätze entstehen bzw. Arbeitsplätze erhalten werden. Sie werden sehen: Wenn wir all diese roten Linien nicht überschreiten und die Vorteile in die Verhandlungen eingebracht haben, werden am Ende der BVMW und der Mittelstand genauso wie der DGB zustimmen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6284,michael-frieser,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Bei dieser emotional geführten Debatte - das ist etwas, was ich begrüßen kann, weil es immerhin\n\num die Wurzeln dieses Staates geht - geht es um etwas sehr Grundsätzliches, nämlich um das Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht. Da darf man auch einmal sehr emotional sein. Wir haben bei der Änderung des Staatsangehörigkeitsrechts nun wirklich mehrere Handvoll Anträge, Gesetzentwürfe, die wir da hinterherwerfen. Die Frage stellt sich schon: Wie viele Reden von grünen Abgeordneten muss man gehört haben, um eine Einbürgerung in dieses Land zu verdienen?\n\nDas ist ein harter Stresstest.\n\nEs ist ein harter Test, den man da durchleiden muss. Da muss man auch Menschen, die es mit diesem Staat, mit dieser Verfassung, mit dieser Demokratie ernst meinen,\n\nsagen: Ja, auch diese Leidensfähigkeit gehört dazu, ein Deutscher zu sein und eingebürgert zu werden, auch wenn es ein hartes Stück Brot ist. Deshalb ist die Debatte über das Ius soli im Grunde schon eine geschichtliche Debatte, die wir hier in Deutschland führen, und wir führen sie auch nicht zum ersten Mal. Da bekommt die Opposition den Preis für Hartnäckigkeit. Aber man muss ehrlich sagen: Sie bekommt auch den Preis für die beste Realitätsverdrängung.\n\nWas haben wir denn getan? Da wird es nun wirklich abstrus. Den Bundesinnenminister als denjenigen zu bezeichnen, der der Integration im Wege stand, heißt wirklich, das, was die Union in den letzten Jahren mit dieser Regierung getan hat, vollkommen zu verleugnen.\n\nTrotz Ihres erhöhten Tonfalles habe ich überhaupt nicht den Eindruck zu vermeiden versucht, dass in dieser Frage auch unter Rot-Grün etwas passiert ist. Das will ich überhaupt nicht in Abrede stellen.\n\nDie entscheidende Frage ist, was in der Integrationspolitik zum Thema Anerkennungsgesetz und Ähnliches passiert ist. Trotz der Änderungsbereitschaft und trotz dessen, was diese Regierung bereits vorgelegt hat, sagen Sie jetzt, es gebe keinen Weg zu einer Willkommenskultur und kein wirkliches Willkommenheißen von Menschen, die es mit dem Bekenntnis zu diesem Staat und zu dieser Grundordnung ernst meinen und die vor allem den deutlichen Willen haben, sich in diese Gesellschaft zu integrieren. Der Innenminister ist dafür doch ein Vorreiter.\n\nWir haben die Optionsregelung so weit angepasst, dass man deutlich sagen kann: Die Zerrissenheit bei der Abstimmung, durch die junge Menschen erkennbar auch gelitten haben, existiert nicht mehr. Wir haben die Voraussetzungen dafür geschaffen, dass man sich auf der einen Seite mit Stolz zu seinen Wurzeln bekennen und auf der anderen Seite trotzdem als Bürger am Aufbau und an der Integrität eines Landes teilnehmen kann. Das ist möglich, setzt aber vor allem das Bekenntnis voraus: Ich bin bereit, meinen Teil beizutragen und mich auf einen solchen Prozess der Integration auch wirklich einzulassen.\n\nDas heißt natürlich, dass es bestimmte Voraussetzungen geben muss. Ich denke nicht nur an die Voraussetzung der Geburt in diesem Land, sondern es muss auch um die Dauer gehen, wie lange man an dieser Gesellschaft teilnimmt.\n\nAußerdem geht es um die Institutionen. Ich denke zum Beispiel daran, dass man der Schulpflicht nachgekommen sein muss. Das alles haben wir getan. Wer das verkennt, tut dies nicht aus Realitätsnähe, sondern aus ideologischen Gründen. Das mag Ihnen überlassen sein, aber so ist das.\n\nLetztendlich bleibt es dabei: Die Einbürgerung ist ein Akt, der am Ende eines erfolgreichen Prozesses steht, eines Prozesses, der mit dem Bekenntnis zu diesem Staat, zu seiner Gesellschaft und zu seinen Zielen und Grundwerten beginnt. Dieser Akt kann nicht am Anfang stehen.\n\nDas bedeutet auch, dass man deutlich sagen muss: Es ist schwierig, sich in diesen Dingen mit anderen zu vergleichen. Ich kann mich nicht erinnern, dass die Opposition vor allem die Vereinigten Staaten oder Australien einmal herzzerreißend gerne als besonders hoch gehängten Maßstab angenommen hat, wenn es um Flüchtlinge und Einbürgerung ging. Diese Vergleiche sind ansonsten immer sakrosankt. An diesem Punkt schauen Sie aber plötzlich in die Vereinigten Staaten. Nun gut, ich scheue auch diesen Vergleich nicht. Wollen Sie aber den ethnischen Spannungen, die es vor allem auch in den Vereinigten Staaten gibt, mit einer solchen Politik wirklich Vorschub leisten? Ich würde sagen, dann gehen wir einmal weiter zurück - von Australien ganz zu schweigen. Einer solchen Entwicklung wollen wir nicht das Wort reden.\n\nIch glaube, den Vergleich mit den Vereinigten Staaten brauchen wir nicht. Wir können gerne in Europa bleiben. Hier sind die Vergleiche nun wirklich eindeutig. Es gibt die unterschiedlichsten Modelle des Abstammungs- und Staatsangehörigkeitsrechts in Europa. Es ist hier möglich, Bulgarien, Dänemark, Finnland, Italien, Österreich, Polen, Schweden und das gesamte Baltikum, wo es genau so geregelt ist, wie wir uns das in Deutschland vorstellen, in einem Atemzug zu nennen.\n\nNein, es nimmt Ihnen niemand ab, dass es Ihnen hier um ein besonderes Willkommenheißen geht. Seien Sie an dieser Stelle einmal ganz offen, und sagen Sie der Bevölkerung die Wahrheit! Es geht darum, dass man auch um Wählerstimmen giert.\n\nSie glauben allen Ernstes, dass sich die Änderungen Ihrer Vorstellungen zum Thema Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht irgendwann einmal positiv auf Ihre Wählerstimmen auswirken können. Das ist aus meiner Sicht der einzige Grund.\n\nDeshalb sage ich an dieser Stelle: Da können und werden wir nicht mitmachen. Den vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf werden wir auf jeden Fall ablehnen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12066,steffi-lemke,\"Herr Staatssekretär, dem leichten Lächeln auf Ihren Lippen während Ihrer Ausführungen beim Benutzen der Worte „zügig“ und „Eile geboten“ entnehme ich, dass Sie selber die Situation nicht so beurteilen, dass es wirklich um Eile ging. Wir haben seit, ich glaube, zwei Jahren die Ankündigung, dass die Novelle der Düngeverordnung demnächst dem Parlament vorgelegt werden soll. Mein letzter Stand nach der Information im Umweltausschuss war, dass September jetzt wirklich die absolute Deadline zur Vorlage der Novelle sein soll. „Zügig“ ist da definitiv nicht die richtige Beschreibung.\n\nDer ganze Vorgang ist verschleppt und verzögert worden. Das Landwirtschaftsministerium hat blockiert, dass wir endlich zu einer Novelle kommen. Die Probleme sind währenddessen aber noch größer geworden. Eine Anfrage der Kollegin Höhn hat erst kürzlich ergeben, wie gravierend die Verschmutzung von Grundwasserkörpern ist und wie hoch die Nitratbelastung bereits vorangeschritten ist, während die Bundesregierung tatenlos verharrt hat. Das wollte ich noch zur Korrektur Ihrer Aussagen hier anfügen.\n\nAußerdem wollte ich konkret nachfragen: Für den Fall, dass die EU-Kommission das Vertragsverletzungsverfahren gegen Deutschland fortsetzt und weiter gegen die Bundesregierung vorgeht: Haben Sie Szenarien errechnet, welche Konsequenzen das auch in monetärer Form haben kann? Das heißt: Was wird es die deutschen Steuerzahler im Zweifelsfall kosten, dass dort nicht hinreichend schnell gehandelt worden ist, wenn die Klage von der Europäischen Kommission vorangetrieben werden wird?\n\nDanke, Herr Staatssekretär. Mir ging es mit meiner Frage durchaus um das nationale Handeln. Dass wir international die Anstrengungen zum Klimaschutz verstärken müssen, ist in Paris dokumentiert und beschlossen worden. Mir geht es jedoch darum, ob die Bundesregierung aus den Informationen über das Fortschreiten der Klimakatastrophe in Form von Arktisschmelze - ich hätte auch anführen können, dass 2015, das heißeste Jahr seit Beginn der Wetteraufzeichnungen, voraussichtlich von 2016 getoppt werden wird, wie wir auch anhand des Wetterberichts in diesem Jahr feststellen mussten -, die 2010 noch nicht vorgelegen haben, im Hinblick auf den Klimaschutzplan 2050 Schlussfolgerungen zieht, die Änderungen zur Folge haben, ob sie also weiter bei dem Erkenntnisstand von 2010 verharrt oder ob sie zur Kenntnis nimmt, dass sich die Welt seitdem weitergedreht und die Klimakatastrophe massiv verschärft hat.\n\nDas stimmt mich nicht optimistisch, weil die Ressortabstimmung nach öffentlichen Berichten gegenwärtig ja eher in die andere Richtung driftet. Die Deutsche Umwelthilfe hat es als Katastrophe für den Klimaschutz beschrieben, was sich dort gerade abspielt: dass sich die Verbände aus Protest teilweise aus der Diskussion zurückziehen. Deshalb meine Frage: Müssen Sie denn nicht den Erkenntnisstand, wenn er im Umweltministerium hinreichend vorhanden ist, vielleicht innerhalb anderer Ressorts der Bundesregierung doch noch auf das aktuelle Niveau bringen?\n\nIch bedauere, Herr Staatssekretär, dass im Bundesumweltministerium dazu keine Kenntnisse vorliegen. Ich halte es für notwendig, dass ein solcher Kenntnisstand herbeigeführt wird.\n\nHintergrund meiner Frage ist, dass ich im Sommer selber auf mehreren Flüssen, an mehreren Oberflächengewässern zum Mülleinsammeln unterwegs gewesen bin und eine erschreckende Menge der beschriebenen Produkte - ich könnte Ihnen jetzt noch eine halbe Stunde lang weitere Produkte aufführen; ich habe mich in meiner Frage auf einige wenige konzentriert - festgestellt habe. Anscheinend sammelt sich über Kläranlagen und vermutlich auch auf anderen Wegen in Deutschland, in unseren Bundesländern massenhaft Plastikmüll an, der dann natürlich zumindest teilweise in die Meere gespült wird und dort zum Plastikstrudel beiträgt. Aber mir geht es jetzt um die nationale Verunreinigung. Ich glaube, dass das Bundesumweltministerium da nicht einfach nur auf die Länder verweisen kann, sondern sich dieser Problematik annehmen muss.\n\nIch deute das „gut“ so: Sie werden einen Kenntnisstand herbeiführen und den Umweltausschuss unterrichten, sobald der Kenntnisstand vorliegt?\"\n12223,christina-jantz-herrmann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Mehr sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich sage es geradeheraus, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen: In vielen Punkten kann ich Ihren Antrag deutlich unterstützen. In ihm wird ausführlich aus unserem Koalitionsvertrag zitiert, und in vielen Punkten wurden darin SPD-Positionen niedergeschrieben. Der Antrag enthält ein buntes Potpourri von Forderungen zu verschiedenen Tierschutzthemen. Genau das ist leider auch sein Manko, weil der Antrag den Eindruck vermittelt, dass man mit ihm die ganze Welt retten könnte.\n\nUnser Koalitionspartner hingegen meint, dass wir schon die besten Tierschutzregeln der Welt haben, und er sieht auch keinen weiteren Gestaltungsanspruch. In der Regierungskoalition - das ist sicherlich kein Geheimnis - ist die SPD die treibende Kraft in Sachen Tierschutz.\n\nImmer wieder aufs Neue leisten wir - auch gerne - Überzeugungsarbeit. Teilweise ist das natürlich ein mühseliger Prozess, wie Sie mir glauben können.\n\nSo stemmen wir uns gerade aktuell gegen die Aufhebung des Verbotes, Fett an Wiederkäuer zu verfüttern. Tiere, die selbst niemals tierische Fette essen würden, sollen mit tierischen Fetten gefüttert werden, nur damit sie schneller und besser gemästet werden können. Ich finde das nicht nur unethisch, sondern gar widerwärtig.\n\nAuch ziehen - das klang in dieser Woche leider auch schon an - Minister Schmidt und seine Fraktionskollegen nicht immer an einem Strang. Wenn der Minister die Initiative ergreift, lässt ihn seine eigene Fraktion leider manchmal hängen. Genau das - dieses Beispiel klang heute auch schon an - ist bei den Pelztieren und auch beim Verbot des Tötens trächtiger Tiere der Fall.\n\nEinige Stellen des Koalitionsvertrages zum Tierschutz werden sicher nur behäbig im Ministerium umgesetzt. Lassen Sie mich hier ein Beispiel nennen: Wir haben im Koalitionsvertrag niedergeschrieben, dass wir die Sachkunde fördern möchten. Der Minister hat Anfang des Jahres angekündigt, dass sein Ministerium genau das, einen Sachkundenachweis, prüfe. Bisher liegt uns leider noch kein Ergebnis vor.\n\nVon Stillstand beim Tierschutz zu sprechen, ist trotzdem deplatziert: Der runde Tisch zur Lage der Tierheime hat in dieser Woche erstmals getagt. Damit ist es dem Minister gelungen, das erste Mal seit Jahren wieder alle Ebenen an einen Tisch zu holen: Bund, Länder und Kommunen. Ihnen allen obliegt die Aufgabe, die Lage der Tierheime zu verbessern. Aktuell befindet sich die Prüf- und Zulassungsverordnung für Tierhaltungssysteme im Verfahren.\n\nZudem prangern Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Grünen, im Antrag an - auch Frau Menz hat das vorhin gesagt -, dass beim Wildtierschutz nichts getan wurde. Auch das ist falsch; denn wir haben vor der Sommerpause einen umfassenden Antrag zum Wildtierschutz verabschiedet. Sicherlich mussten hier Abstriche gemacht werden, aber Sie wissen: Kompromisse gehören zum Leben, und Kompromisse gehören auch zum Regieren.\n\nAm Beispiel der Wildtiere lässt sich übrigens ein grundsätzliches Problem der Tierschutzpolitik aufzeigen: Bei den Beratungen mussten wir zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass sich gerade das von Ihnen angesprochene Verbot der gewerblichen Tierbörsen, Frau Menz, voraussichtlich nicht verfassungsgemäß umsetzen ließe. Von daher haben wir in unserem Antrag auch einen Prüfauftrag an die Bundesregierung formuliert, der genau dieses Verbot zum Ziel haben soll.\n\nLeider ignorieren Sie, die Grünen, genau diese verfassungsrechtlichen Bedenken auch in Ihrem aktuellen Antrag. Glauben Sie mir: Ich wäre natürlich sofort für ein solches Verbot, aber es muss vor Gericht Bestand haben.\n\nIn dem Wildtier-Antrag wurde ein weiteres wichtiges Thema ausgeklammert, nämlich das Verbot von Wildtieren im Zirkus. In unserer Fraktion ist die Haltung klar. Hier blockiert leider immer noch die Union, obwohl jedem, der mit Herz und Verstand bei der Sache ist, eigentlich klar sein müsste, dass Wildtiere nicht artgerecht in einem Zirkus gehalten werden können.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, lassen Sie mich die unterschiedlichen Positionen im Tierschutz auf den Punkt bringen:\n\nWir erleben auf der einen Seite eine schwarze Ideologie, die eher blockiert und sich damit auch Verbesserungen in den Weg stellt, und wir erleben auf der anderen Seite eine grüne Ideologie, die häufig leider über das Ziel hinausschießt.\n\nDas sind zwei Haltungen, die sich absolut konträr gegenüberstehen und der Situation in Deutschland nicht gerecht werden.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, versuchen Sie doch einmal, auf die konventionelle Landwirtschaft zuzugehen und sie mitzunehmen, anstatt ihr immer nur frontal zu begegnen, und liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Union, stellen Sie sich doch bitte endlich den Herausforderungen, und öffnen Sie sich für eine zukunftsfähige Landwirtschaft.\n\nDie SPD steht für eine Tierschutzpolitik mit dem Willen zur Verbesserung, aber auch für eine Politik mit Augenmaß. Wir stehen für Transparenz, und deswegen ist uns auch ein mehrstufiges staatliches Tierschutzlabel wichtig. Es wäre ein Instrument für die Landwirte, deren Tiere gut gehalten werden, um diese guten Haltungsbedingungen zu dokumentieren. Es wäre das Instrument für die Verbraucher, die auf dieser Grundlage ihre Kaufentscheidung verlässlich treffen können, sodass sie sich nicht nur am Preis orientieren.\n\nGenau dieses Label hat Minister Schmidt nun endlich angekündigt. Ich sage Ihnen ganz ehrlich: Wir begrüßen das ausdrücklich. Aber erlauben Sie mir an dieser Stelle eine kleine Spitze: Wir wollen die Hoffnung nicht aufgeben, dass dieser Ankündigung auch Taten folgen.\n\nViele Debatten in der Vergangenheit haben gezeigt, dass wir zudem eine Novellierung des Tierschutzgesetzes benötigen. Auch hier hoffe ich weiter auf den Erkenntnisgewinn und den Mut meiner Unionskollegen und seitens des Ministers.\n\nEinen Punkt möchte ich in diesem Zusammenhang nennen: die Qualzucht. Meine Damen und Herren, Sie alle kennen sicherlich die kleinen Hunde, die Möpse, deren Nasen entweder so weit zurückgezüchtet sind, dass sie kaum noch Luft bekommen, oder deren Augen schon aus den Augenhöhlen hervortreten. Das ist ein Punkt, an dem wir dringend etwas tun müssen. Hier bin ich einigermaßen optimistisch, dass wir gemeinsam auch mit unserem Koalitionspartner einen guten Schritt weiterkommen. Liebe Unionskollegen, bitte enttäuschen Sie mich an dieser Stelle nicht.\n\nIch danke Ihnen für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n6956,peter-beyer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist noch gar nicht lange her, Anfang dieses Monats, dass der Papst in Sarajevo war. Er hat von einer Atmosphäre des Kriegs gesprochen. Er hat dies auf die gesamte Weltlage bezogen, aber an diesem Ort, in Sarajevo, kann man dies durchaus auch als eine Mahnung verstehen angesichts der offenen und unterschwelligen Spannungen in der Region des westlichen Balkans.\n\nEs ist kein Geheimnis, und wir haben es heute schon häufiger richtigerweise in der Debatte gehört, dass die KFOR-Mission und die Soldatinnen und Soldaten an der Grenze zwischen Kosovo und Serbien erforderlich sind. Sie sind erforderlich für die Sicherheit und die Stabilität. Die Sicherheit und die Stabilität, die die KFOR-Soldatinnen und -Soldaten dort bringen, ermöglichen erst die schwierigen Prozesse, die im Rahmen der Normalisierung des Verhältnisses zwischen Serbien und Kosovo in diesem Spannungsgebiet erforderlich sind. Für ihre wichtige Arbeit, die die Soldatinnen und Soldaten dort leisten, sage ich einen ausdrücklichen und herzlichen Dank.\n\nGleichzeitig mahne ich aber auch an: Allzu häufig schauen wir nur „bei Gelegenheit“ auf den westlichen Balkan, zumeist dann, wenn einmal wieder etwas Schlechtes passiert, was uns mit Sorge umtreibt, beispielsweise die drohende massenhafte Auswanderung aus dem Kosovo, unter anderem nach Deutschland. Es ist für uns Zeit, zu erkennen, dass es mit dem bloßen -bürokratischen Abarbeiten des Acquis communautaire schon lange nicht mehr alleine getan ist. Dass kein Missverständnis aufkommt: Ich bin schon davon überzeugt, dass es richtig war und nach wie vor richtig ist, eine Einzelbetrachtung bei der Heranführung an die Europäische Union sowie an europäische Standards und Strukturen vorzunehmen. Spätestens jedoch die gewaltsamen Aufstände in Mazedonien im letzten Monat, die heute schon mehrfach in der Debatte angesprochen wurden, sollten uns wachrütteln. Ich will mich nicht an Spekulationen darüber beteiligen, welche Hintergründe und Hintermänner bei den kämpferischen Aufständen in Mazedonien eine Rolle gespielt haben. Für mich steht jedenfalls fest, dass die Akteure eine Erosion der relativen Stabilität in der Region zum Ziel haben; das sollte uns mit Sorge erfüllen. Das ist eine gefährliche Situation.\n\nDie Europäische Union - ich meine ausdrücklich nicht die Bürokraten in Brüssel, sondern die politische Führung in den einzelnen EU-Mitgliedstaaten - muss erkennen und handeln. Es bedarf des Entwurfs eines in die Zukunft dieser europäischen Region gerichteten politischen, strategischen Regionalplans mit dem Ziel, dauerhaft Stabilität und Sicherheit in der Region zu etablieren.\n\nLassen Sie mich in diesem Zusammenhang die Gelegenheit nutzen, die fünf EU-Mitgliedstaaten, die noch immer nicht das Kosovo als eigenständigen, souveränen Staat anerkannt haben, aufzurufen, das Versäumte nachzuholen. Durch die Nichtanerkennung wird nicht allein das Kosovo in seiner Entwicklung behindert, sondern auch andere Länder der Region. Ich halte das für die -Europäische Union für einen untragbaren, ja beschämenden Zustand, der alsbald zu beenden ist.\n\n- Ja, da kann man applaudieren. Vielen Dank, Frau Kollegin Beck, das finde ich sehr nett von Ihnen. Das gilt aber natürlich auch für die anderen.\n\nSüdosteuropa muss als Region wieder mehr in den Fokus unserer Politik gelangen und auf der politischen Prioritätenliste ein ganzes Stück weit nach oben rücken. Natürlich bin ich mir der Überlagerung durch andere Krisengebiete und andere politische Probleme auf der Welt bewusst. Aber es ist unsere Aufgabe, ein stärkeres öffentliches Bewusstsein zu schaffen und zu schärfen. Ich habe die Befürchtung, dass wir sonst zulassen, dass eine Krise mitten in Europa und sehr nahe an den Grenzen zu Deutschland entsteht. Die Folgen wären unabsehbar, und die Kosten - nicht nur finanzieller Art - wären erheblich.\n\nWir beobachten in letzter Zeit verstärkt etwas, das nicht neu ist, sondern - das weiß man, wenn man recherchiert und sich das noch einmal ins Gedächtnis ruft - seit Jahren vorhanden ist. In letzter Zeit rückt verstärkt ins Blickfeld, dass verschiedene Finanzierungsströme den Neubau von Moscheen in Bosnien-Herzegowina, aber auch in anderen Staaten der Region ermöglichen. Diese Geldströme kommen aus Saudi-Arabien, den Emiraten, dem Iran, dem Irak, auch aus der Türkei. Wir hören in letzter Zeit mehrfach davon, dass es Geldprämien dafür gibt, dass Frauen Kopftücher tragen und dass sich Männer lange Bärte wachsen lassen. Zudem gibt es Geld für den Besuch von Moscheen.\n\nRadikale Islamisten des sogenannten „Islamischen Staats“ rekrutieren junge Muslime im Kosovo und in anderen Ländern der Region. In den letzten zwei Jahren kamen allein aus dem Kosovo über 200 Foreign Fighters. Das ist eine bedrohliche Situation. Die Versprechungen des „Islamischen Staats“ fallen auf den Nährboden von 70 Prozent Jugendarbeitslosigkeit im Kosovo. Es entsteht ein radikaler Islam in Europa. Wir, die Europäer, müssen uns angesichts dieser Entwicklung fragen, warum wir es eigentlich nicht schaffen, diesen jungen Frauen und Männern eine attraktive Perspektive in ihrem eigenen Land, eingebunden in euroatlantische Strukturen, anzubieten.\n\nDamit komme ich zur Visaliberalisierung. Ich weiß, dass das in der Diskussion problematisch gesehen wird. Aber es handelt sich um eine Ungerechtigkeit. Das Kosovo ist das einzige Land in der Region, mit dem es noch keine Visafreiheit gibt. Ich werbe dafür, dass wir uns noch einmal damit befassen. Die Kriterien der Roadmap sind allesamt vom Kosovo erfüllt worden.\n\nAbschließend will ich noch einen Gedanken in die Debatte einführen, den wir in der Westbalkan-Runde der Unionsfraktion in der letzten Zeit ventiliert haben. Wir haben uns darüber Gedanken gemacht, ob wir KFOR nicht in Strukturen regionaler Verantwortung weiterentwickeln sollen. Wir haben die Idee, ein regionales, NATO-geführtes Hauptquartier mit einer revolvierenden Kommandoführung zu etablieren. Das soll nichts anderes heißen, als dass die Länder der Region Stück für Stück zunehmend mehr eigene Verantwortung für die Sicherheit und Stabilität in der gesamten Region übernehmen. Ich denke, das ist eine Idee, die es wert ist, weiter diskutiert und verfolgt zu werden. Das muss unser Ziel sein.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n13501,irene-mihalic,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Herr Staatssekretär, jetzt ist schon nach dem BND gefragt worden. Aber möglicherweise können Sie mir auch Auskunft zum Agieren eines anderen Nachrichtendienstes geben. Wir wissen ja, dass die polizeilichen Überwachungsmaßnahmen im Fall Amri im September letzten Jahres enden mussten, weil das Amtsgericht Tiergarten die Maßnahme nicht weiter verlängert hat und weil sich ein konkreter Sachverhalt über eine konkrete Anschlagsplanung nicht verdichten ließ.\n\nAllerdings wurde die Person Amri weiterhin als ein Gefährder betrachtet, als jemand, dem durchaus Anschlagsplanungen und Anschläge zugetraut wurden. Deshalb stellt sich die Frage, ob oder warum das Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz nicht in die Überwachung eines solchen Gefährders in dem Moment eingetreten ist, in dem die Polizei am Ende ihrer rechtlichen Möglichkeiten war.\n\nKlaus-Dieter Fritsche, Staatssekretär im Bundeskanzleramt:\n\nFrau Abgeordnete, das ist zwar eine Frage, die in den Geschäftsbereich des Bundesministeriums des Innern fällt, aber lassen Sie mich als Beauftragter für die Nachrichtendienste ganz allgemein sagen: Es ist - das sage ich auch vor dem Hintergrund dessen, was ich den Medien entnommen habe - ein Missverständnis, dass es im Gemeinsamen Terrorismusabwehrzentrum eine Weisungslage gibt - es ist ja nicht einmal eine Behörde -, sodass verschiedene Behörden, die dort teilnehmen und Informationen austauschen, zu irgendwelchen Handlungen angewiesen werden könnten. Das verbleibt in der Zuständigkeit der jeweiligen Landes- oder Bundesbehörde.\n\nAm Gemeinsamen Terrorismusabwehrzentrum sind die Bundesnachrichtendienste - der BND, der MAD, soweit er einbezogen ist, und das BfV - beteiligt und tauschen hier Informationen aus, um - in dem Fall - ein Gesamtbild über die Person Amri, von der Sie zu Recht sagen, dass sie von den Ländern als Gefährder eingestuft worden ist, zu bekommen. Was dann anschließend an Maßnahmen erfolgt, erfolgt in der Zuständigkeit der jeweiligen Landes- oder Bundesbehörden.\"\n10125,harald-petzold,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr verehrte Besucherinnen und Besucher auf den Besuchertribünen! Die Folgen der Finanz- und Bankenkrise von 2007 sind nach wie vor nicht ausgestanden. Nach wie vor sind keine konsequenten Schlussfolgerungen gezogen worden, um ein erneutes Wiederaufflammen oder eine Wiederholung dieser Krise zu verhindern. Die Linke sagt: Das ist unverantwortlich.\n\nFür das heute zu beschließende Gesetz mit dem etwas verwirrend klingenden Namen „Abschlussprüfungsreformgesetz“ wird es höchste Zeit; denn das Gesetz soll die Prüfung der Jahresabschlüsse bei Unternehmen von öffentlichem Interesse regeln. Dass wir es beschließen müssen, hat vor allen Dingen mit der Finanz- und Bankenkrise zu tun. In dieser Krise waren, scheinbar plötzlich, vor allem Banken, aber auch andere Unternehmen mit existenzbedrohenden Verlusten und Risiken konfrontiert, die aus ihren Jahresabschlüssen, den darin enthaltenen Lageberichten sowie den Bilanzen nicht oder nicht in diesem Umfang und nicht in dieser Konsequenz erkennbar gewesen sind. Dabei hätten sie erkannt werden müssen. Die EU-Kommission sowie das EU-Parlament haben reagiert, zwar sehr widerwillig, aber immerhin. Sieben Jahre nach der Krise wurden eine entsprechende Richtlinie und eine entsprechende Verordnung verabschiedet.\n\nDie Reformregelungen sind vor dem Hintergrund der bisherigen Untätigkeit der Bundesregierung fast ein Segen; denn die EU hat im Zuge ihrer Erarbeitung und Beschlussfassung verschiedene Risikofaktoren ermittelt. Einer davon - aus meiner Sicht der wichtigste - ist die Monopolstellung der sogenannten Big Four, also der vier großen Wirtschaftsprüfungs-, Steuer- und Unternehmensberatungsgesellschaften, deren Namen in den letzten Jahren fast in aller Munde waren.\n\nZum Beispiel PricewaterhouseCoopers, PwC. Diese Gesellschaft ist im Zusammenhang mit dem Skandal um die aus der Hypo Real Estate, HRE, ausgegliederte Bad Bank FMS Wertmanagement in die Schlagzeilen geraten. In der Bilanz dieser Gesellschaft war es 2010 zu einem sogenannten Buchungsfehler in Höhe von 55,5 Milliarden Euro gekommen. PwC hatte ihr vorher eine einwandfreie Bilanz attestiert. Bundesfinanzminister Schäuble hat das damals als Kommunikationsproblem zwischen den beteiligten Banken abgetan.\n\nDie zweite Gesellschaft ist KPMG. Zu ihren Großkunden gehört die Deutsche Bank. Jeder erinnert sich, in welchen Schwierigkeiten die Deutsche Bank gewesen ist.\n\nDie dritte Gesellschaft ist Ernst & Young, das war die Prüfungs- und Beratungsgesellschaft der Investmentbank Lehman Brothers, die 2010 pleitegegangen ist. Ernst & Young soll ihr mit Bilanztricks geholfen haben, ihre tatsächliche Verschuldung zu verschleiern.\n\nSchließlich gibt es noch Deloitte. Sie erlangte vor allen Dingen im Zusammenhang mit dem Skandal um die Bilanzfälschungen des amerikanischen Energieriesen Enron traurige Berühmtheit.\n\nDiese Big Four prüfen in Deutschland 80 Prozent der Jahresabschlüsse der großen Aktiengesellschaften, und die EU ist zu dem Schluss gekommen, dass eine solche Monopolstellung und Konzentration im Bereich der Prüfung von Jahresabschlüssen und Bilanzen selbst ein Marktrisiko darstellen würde. Diese Schlussfolgerung teilt die Linke voll und ganz, und wir sagen: Diese Monopolmacht muss aufgebrochen werden.\n\nDarüber hinaus waren EU-Kommission und -Parlament zu dem Schluss gekommen, dass die Unabhängigkeit der Abschlussprüfer gestärkt werden müsse und dass der Prüfmarkt außerhalb des Kapitalmarktes dereguliert und liberalisiert werden müsste. Schließlich legten sie internationale Standards für Abschlussprüfungen, ISA, als gemeinsame Basis für eine einheitliche und vergleichbare Qualität von Abschlussprüfungen fest. Die Linke sagt dazu ganz klar und deutlich: ja.\n\nIn einer Verordnung legte die EU dann erhöhte Anforderungen an die Prüfer und an die Prüfung von Unternehmen von öffentlichem Interesse - in aller Regel sind das an der Börse notierte Unternehmen - fest. Ich sage: Aus Sicht der Linken wird das höchste Zeit.\n\nDiese Reformen sind nun in nationales Recht umzusetzen. Das macht die Bundesregierung aber in der ihr eigenen Inkonsequenz. Sie setzt die Richtlinie nicht eins zu eins um, sondern sie nutzt Spielräume, die den Mitgliedstaaten gewährt wurden, um den unbefriedigenden einheimischen Status quo zu erhalten.\n\nDer Kollege sprach vom Rotationsprinzip. Die EU hat eine sechsjährige Bindung an die Beratungsgesellschaften vorgeschlagen, Sie machen daraus zehn und schaffen darüber hinaus noch eine Ausnahmeregelung. Die Prüfungsgesellschaften können also bis zu 24 Jahre weiter mit einem Unternehmen zusammenarbeiten.\n\nSie schränken nicht die Erlaubnis ein, dass die Prüfungsgesellschaften neben der Prüftätigkeit für die von ihnen zu prüfenden Unternehmen auch noch sogenannte Nichtprüfungsleistungen erbringen können wie Steuerberatung und Unternehmensberatung, und Sie haben eine Reihe der Vorschriften sehr unbestimmt formuliert.\n\nVon den Kritikpunkten, die mein Fraktionskollege Pitterle in der ersten Lesung vorgetragen hat, müssen wir also keinen einzigen Punkt zurücknehmen. Auch das parlamentarische Verfahren hat keine Verbesserung dieses Gesetzentwurfs gebracht. Wir werden diesen Gesetzentwurf heute trotzdem nicht ablehnen, weil wir wollen, dass wenigstens einige Reste der EU-Reform erhalten bleiben. Wir wollen damit diejenigen in der Großen Koalition stärken, die wenigstens diese Ansätze retten wollten. Zustimmungsfähig ist das Gesetz nicht. Wir bedauern es, dass die Große Koalition hier wieder einmal auf der ganzen Linie versagt hat.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12409,renate-kunast,\"Ach ja, ich fange doch einmal mit etwas Positivem an. Es ist gut und richtig, dass Unternehmen zukünftig nicht nur über betriebswirtschaftliche, sondern auch über ökologische und soziale Aspekte ihrer Tätigkeit berichten müssen. Transparenz ist ja der erste Schritt zur Verhaltensänderung. Meine Damen und Herren, das gilt nicht nur für Unternehmen, sondern logischerweise auch für die Kunden, die kaufen. Wir wollten doch Verhaltensänderung, oder?\n\nDer Punkt ist doch: Wir haben mit den Sustainable Development Goals, also den Zielen für nachhaltige Entwicklung im Rahmen der UN, und mit den Klimazielen von Paris einen ganz klaren Auftrag für Nachhaltigkeit. Diese müssen wir herstellen. Nachhaltigkeit fällt nicht vom Himmel.\n\nDas muss sich in einem Gesetzesvorhaben widerspiegeln. In dieser Hinsicht ist der vorliegende Gesetzentwurf extrem dürftig. Wenn es etwas nachzubessern gilt, dann muss es in die andere Richtung gehen, Herr Hirte. Hier setzt meine Kritik an. Sie haben die Chance verpasst, Unternehmensverantwortung und Nachhaltigkeit zusammenzubringen. Damit verpassen Sie auch die Chance, den deutschen Unternehmen die Möglichkeit zu geben, vorne zu sein und zu sagen: Wir haben uns schon die entsprechenden Produkte, Produktionsstufen und Transportwege ausgedacht. Wir produzieren so, dass die Sustainable Development Goals und die Klimaziele berücksichtigt werden. - Vielleicht würde das sogar zum Kauf von so hergestellten Produkten animieren. Insofern verstehe ich gar nicht, warum Sie so zögerlich sind.\n\nSie sagen immer, dass Sie europäisches Recht eins zu eins umsetzen wollen. Das tun Sie hier aber gar nicht. Vielmehr beschränken Sie es noch. Ein Beispiel: Sie haben nicht vorgeschrieben, dass generell über alle wesentlichen Risiken für Mensch und Umwelt zu berichten ist. Stattdessen gilt die Berichtspflicht nur dann, wenn einem Unternehmen Gewinneinbußen drohen. Ich möchte das Unternehmen kennenlernen, das sagt: Wir lassen in Bangladesch, Myanmar und China unter so schlechten Bedingungen produzieren, dass bald eine Umwelt- oder eine Menschenrechtsgruppe darauf kommen und uns öffentlich bloßstellen wird, und deshalb wird es Gewinneinbußen geben. - Noch nicht einmal wir glauben, dass Unternehmen zugeben, dass aus diesem Grund Gewinneinbußen drohen. Das EU-Recht schreibt übrigens Gewinneinbußen als Kriterium nicht vor.\n\nSie gehen sogar noch weiter und sagen, dass sehr wahrscheinlich schwerwiegende negative Auswirkungen vorhanden sein müssen. Die EU-Richtlinie spricht aber nur von wahrscheinlich schwerwiegenden Auswirkungen. Sie setzen das EU-Recht also nicht eins zu eins um, sondern geben den Unternehmen sogar noch Futter, damit sie über noch weniger Bereiche berichten müssen. Es geht hier aber um Menschenrechte und ökologische Ziele, die sich die Unternehmen selber stecken. Ich verstehe daher nicht, warum Sie das derartig beschränken. Sie von der Partei mit dem C im Namen sagen doch immer, dass Sie das alles interessiert. Vor diesem Hintergrund kann ich diese Begrenzung nicht verstehen.\n\nSchauen wir uns den Anwendungsbereich an; den haben wir schon in unserem Antrag dargelegt. Der Anwendungsbereich ist unseres Erachtens völlig unzureichend. Nach Ihrem Entwurf müssen nur kapitalmarktorientierte Gesellschaften mit mehr als 500 Mitarbeitern berichten. Das sind circa 300 Unternehmen. Aber was ist mit Aldi, Rewe, dm und Lidl, die weltweit produzieren lassen und einkaufen? Wenn die Mitglieder der Ausschüsse dieses Hauses irgendwohin fahren - nach Myanmar, Bangladesch, China oder Vietnam zum Beispiel -, dann finden sie all diese Unternehmen vor. Warum sollen solche Unternehmen nicht der Berichtspflicht unterliegen und darlegen müssen, ob sie die Arbeitnehmerrechte der International Labour Organisation einhalten? Warum soll es eine entsprechende Berichtspflicht für solche Unternehmen nicht geben? Ich verstehe das nicht.\n\nIch habe noch Ferrero vergessen. Aber dieses Unternehmen ist ohnehin mit Ihnen verbunden. Daher verwundert mich das dann doch nicht.\n\nWir sind der Meinung, dass auch diejenigen großen Unternehmen berichtspflichtig sein müssen, die von öffentlichem Interesse sind. Nach unserer Auffassung sollten auch Unternehmen mit mehr als 250 Mitarbeitern dieser Pflicht unterliegen. Sie haben weder hier für Klarheit gesorgt noch klare ökologisch-soziale und menschenrechtliche Kriterien geschaffen. Sie haben noch nicht einmal ein Rahmenwerk vorgegeben, nach dem zu berichten ist. Jeder kann munter etwas berichten. Aber so ist es nicht vergleichbar. Was sollen denn die Kunden mit den Informationen eigentlich anfangen? Meine Damen und Herren von der Koalition, Sie müssen vorschreiben, dass nach einem bestimmten Rahmenwerk, beispielsweise nach den Regeln der Global Reporting Initiative, nach dem Deutschen Nachhaltigkeitskodex oder den OECD-Leitsätzen für multinationale Unternehmen, zu berichten ist. Erst dann kann man Vergleiche ziehen und sich entscheiden.\n\nHerr Hirte, Sie haben zudem auf die externen Prüfer verwiesen. Wer sonst sollte prüfen?\n\nEs muss sich um externe und finanziell unabhängige Prüfer handeln.\n\nLetzter Satz.\n\nDie Unternehmen dürfen sich nicht zusammentun und ein Überprüfungsinstitut gründen, das dann externe Prüfer zur Verfügung stellt.\n\nMit dem dünnen Gesetz, dessen Entwurf vorliegt, werden wir nichts für Ökologie und Menschenrechte tun.\n\nWenn die Argumente in sich nicht schlüssig sind, habe ich halt ein Problem. - Sie sagen Folgendes: Wenn wir den Handel und die Produktion in alle Welt hinaustragen, würden wir doch gerade die deutschen bzw. europäischen Standards in die Welt bringen. Wie passt das eigentlich damit zusammen, dass die Unternehmen in Deutschland - insbesondere die, die an dieser irgendwie nicht zum Ergebnis kommenden Textilbündnisrunde des CSU-Ministers Müller beteiligt sind - immer sagen: „Nein, wir können aber gar keinen Einfluss nehmen in Bezug auf die Frage, ob in Bangladesch die ILO-Arbeitsnormen eingehalten werden oder das Wasser nach dem Färbeprozess so gereinigt wird, dass keine gesundheitlichen Schäden entstehen“? Das passt doch irgendwie nicht zusammen.\n\nAuf der einen Seite sagen die Unternehmen, es dürfe keine bindenden Regeln geben, weil sie das gar nicht selber bestimmen können. Sie dagegen behaupten jetzt auf der anderen Seite, mit Freihandel würde sich das automatisch ergeben. Wer hat denn nun recht? Sie oder Ihr Minister, der sich darauf einlässt, dass das angeblich nicht geht?\"\n1759,reinhold-sendker,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! „Erhalt vor Neubau“ hat für uns ganz klar Priorität, das will ich noch einmal betonen.\n\nUm weitere Verschlechterungen des Zustands unserer Verkehrsanlagen zu vermeiden, bedarf es zusätzlicher Finanzmittel. Vor diesem Hintergrund sind die 5 Milliarden Euro, die mehr in den Bereich Verkehr investiert werden, eine sehr positive Botschaft der Großen Koalition an unser Land.\n\nDie abzusenkende Lkw-Maut, von der gesprochen wurde, vor allem begründet durch das derzeit geringe Zinsniveau, führt zu einer Finanzierungslücke, die durch Maßnahmen wie beispielsweise einer weiteren Bemautung nur zum Teil kompensiert werden kann. Dass es im Ergebnis bei den zusätzlichen 5 Milliarden Euro bleibt, ist der Verständigung zwischen Finanzminister und Verkehrsminister zu verdanken. Der Verkehrsminister hat eben dem Finanzminister gedankt. Lieber Alexander Dobrindt, ich möchte ergänzen: Auch Sie haben sehr schnell und erfolgreich agiert. Herzlichen Dank dafür.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Einbeziehung der externen Kosten für die durch den Lkw-Verkehr verursachten Lärm- und Luftverschmutzungsfolgekosten ist ein Beitrag zur Kostenwahrheit im Bereich Verkehr und somit ein Schritt in die absolut richtige Richtung. Der Etatentwurf für 2014 sieht rund 10,5 Milliarden Euro vor. Ein weiterer Aufwuchs auf 11 Milliarden Euro, dann auf 11,6 Milliarden Euro und schließlich auf 12,1 Milliarden Euro ist geplant.\n\nLassen Sie mich darauf hinweisen, dass in den Jahren vor der Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise Investitionsmittel in Höhe von rund 9 Milliarden Euro vorgesehen waren. Der Aufwuchs der Investitionslinie ist nun unter der Conditio der Haushaltskonsolidierung der letzten Jahre ausdrücklicher Beweis dafür, dass uns durch stete und beharrliche Bemühungen eine Verbesserung der Investitionslinie gelungen ist. Das ist ein Erfolg unserer Politik.\n\nWahr ist aber auch, dass die Investitionsmittel nicht ausreichen. Das gilt für alle Verkehrsträger. Ein Beispiel sind die zahlreichen notwendigen Brückenbausanierungen. Die Verkehrsprognosen weisen auf stark steigende Schwerlastverkehre und damit auf die Notwendigkeit, zu handeln, hin. Lieber Herr Minister, wir begrüßen die in dieser Woche im Sinne der Anlagenverantwortung im Bundesverkehrswegeplan vorgenommene Prioritätensetzung: 70 zu 30, Erhalt vor Neubau.\n\nIn dieser Diskussion sind für uns fünf Punkte von besonderer Bedeutung:\n\nErstens. Ja, wir brauchen einen weiteren Aufwuchs im Bereich der Verkehrsinvestitionen. Dafür werben wir. Dass im Bundesverkehrswegeplan 2015 die Klassifizierung „Vordringlicher Bedarf Plus“ für hochbelastete Knotenpunkte, für Netzlücken und für die Einbindung transeuropäischer Verkehrsachsen vorgesehen ist, unterstreicht diese Forderung ausdrücklich.\n\nZweitens. Der Bund hat seine Investitionslinie erhöht. Er leistet aber auch in anderen Bereichen, wie bei den Entflechtungsmitteln im Bereich der Gemeindeverkehrsfinanzierung, deutlich mehr, als ursprünglich gesetzlich bestimmt wurde. Die Verkehrskommission von Dr. Daehre und Professor Bodewig hat den zusätzlichen Investitionsbedarf bezogen auf alle staatlichen Ebenen mit über 7 Milliarden Euro beziffert. Dazu ist zunächst zu sagen: Das ist völlig richtig dargestellt. Es muss an dieser Stelle aber auch klar gesagt werden, dass der Bund die Investitionsanforderungen an alle staatlichen Ebenen im Bereich Verkehr beim besten Willen nicht alleine schultern kann.\n\nDrittens. Mit der Erstellung des Finanzkreislaufs Straße seit dem Jahr 2011 wird mehr Transparenz erreicht. Diesen Weg gilt es fortzusetzen. Dabei kann uns die Verkehrsinfrastrukturfinanzierungsgesellschaft, unsere VIFG, bestens unterstützen. Durch sie können wir schon heute titel- und maßnahmenbezogen tagesaktuelle Daten beziehen. Das ist im Sinne einer optimalen Transparenz und unterstützt uns ganz besonders in unserem Anliegen, regelmäßige Infrastrukturberichte zu erstellen, wie es im Koalitionsvertrag vorgesehen ist. Das stärkt vor allen Dingen auch die Kontrollfunktion des Parlaments. Genau das, mehr Transparenz und mehr Akzeptanz, ist das beste Fundament für unsere Investitionspolitik in der Zukunft.\n\nViertens. Die Unionsfraktion unterstützt ausdrücklich die Forderung nach mehr Transparenz bei der ÖPP-Beschaffungsvariante, also bei öffentlich-privater Partnerschaft. Wir plädieren noch einmal dafür, sie nachhaltig zu nutzen, wenn sie im Einzelfall vorteilhafter ist. Die gleiche Forderung stellt im Übrigen auch das Deutsche Verkehrsforum. Wer in dieser Wahlperiode angesichts des engen Finanzrahmens, über den wir hier sprechen, zusätzliche Verkehrsinvestitionen will, der kann vorteilhafte ÖPP-Projekte beim besten Willen nicht zurückweisen.\n\nFünftens. Schließlich ist die Koalition mit der Herstellung der Überjährigkeit auf einem richtigen Weg, vor allem im Sinne der Herstellung von mehr Flexibilität bei der Mittelverwendung.\n\nDie Anpassung des Mittelbedarfs beim Bau der fünften Schleusenkammer am Nord-Ostsee-Kanal, beim Erhalt des westdeutschen Kanalnetzes, bei Maßnahmen an Main, Mosel und Neckar sowie weitere 125 Millionen Euro Bedarfsmittel für die Schiene in 2016 sind weitere Botschaften des Einzelplans 12.\n\nIch spreche die Lärmsanierungsaufgaben an Straße und Schiene und die Ansätze für die kombinierten Verkehre und die NE-Bahnen, nicht bundeseigene Eisenbahnen, an. Das ist angesichts einer umweltgerechten Bewältigung anwachsender Güterverkehre eine besondere Aufgabe. Was die Investitionen im Bereich Schiene insgesamt anbelangt, möchte ich sagen, dass Bahnchef Dr. Grube am vergangenen Mittwoch vor Ausschussmitgliedern Kritik geübt hat. Er hat aber auch unseren Koalitionsvertrag gelobt. Er hat - das sei ausdrücklich festgestellt - gesagt, es habe noch nie einen für die Schiene so positiven gegeben. Das haben wir sehr gerne gehört. Wir werden diese Punkte entsprechend umsetzen.\n\nIch nenne nicht zuletzt das Thema Verkehrssicherheit. Die Zahl der täglich zu beklagenden Verkehrstoten im Straßenverkehr ist über die Jahre erfreulicherweise rückläufig gewesen. 1970 waren es noch 58, im letzten Jahr 9 Tote täglich. Auch hier sind wir erkennbar auf einem guten Weg, sodass diese Zahl weiter sinken wird.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das sind gute Botschaften aus dem Einzelplan 12. Die positiven Optionen aus dem Koalitionsvertrag werden umgesetzt. Unser Minister ist erfolgreich unterwegs. Wir werden in unserer Koalition weiter daran arbeiten, unsere Verkehrsanlagen im Interesse der Sicherheit der Menschen und der Prosperität der Volkswirtschaft, also im Sinne von Wachstum, Fortschritt und Wohlstand für die Menschen in unserem Lande, weiter zu ertüchtigen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n8155,rita-hagl-kehl,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Bei uns lernt man schon in der Schule: Die Bundesrepublik Deutschland folgt dem Prinzip der sozialen Marktwirtschaft. Sozial bedeutet in diesem Zusammenhang, dass man Härten abfängt. Dass man dafür auch Subventionen verwendet, wissen wir alle. Es ist ja in den letzten Minuten schon darüber gesprochen worden. Marktwirtschaft bedeutet, dass Angebot und Nachfrage den Preis regeln.\n\nWir haben im Bereich der Milchwirtschaft ein Überangebot an Milch.\n\nGleichzeitig besteht in Deutschland eine Nachfrage nach Biomilch, die wir allein nicht stillen können.\n\nWir importieren Biomilch aus Österreich und Dänemark.\n\n30 Prozent des Umsatzes im Biobereich entfallen allein auf Milchprodukte und Käse. 3 Prozent der Milchprodukte in Deutschland werden aus Biomilch hergestellt. Der Preis für Biomilch ist in den letzten Monaten gestiegen. Wir sind jetzt bei durchschnittlich 47,9 Cent pro Liter. Ich glaube, dafür kann man auch melken,\n\num die Begrifflichkeit von vorhin aufzugreifen. Meiner Meinung nach sollten wir uns nicht am Export orientieren, sondern an der Deckung der Nachfrage vor Ort.\n\nFriedrich, ich habe ein Wort von dir zur Bioproduktion vermisst.\n\n- Gut. - Dieser Bereich bietet ganz viele Chancen für kleinere und mittlere Betriebe. Kleinere und mittlere Betriebe sind es auch, die wir durch die regionalen Wirtschaftskreisläufe fördern müssen. Das heißt, Regional- und Selbstvermarktung müssen gestärkt werden. Der Verbraucher in Deutschland will immer häufiger wissen, wo seine Produkte herkommen - auch im Bereich der Milch.\n\n- Lassen Sie mich doch bitte einmal ausreden. - Beispiele für solche Regionalprojekte wären Milchtankstellen, Käseproduktion an den Höfen oder Erzeugergemeinschaften. Mit solchen Modellen kann man auch den Strukturwandel aufhalten.\n\nGenau das ist auch das Ziel der SPD-Fraktion. Deswegen fordert die SPD\u001eFraktion schon seit längerem, dass die zweite Säule auf mindestens 15 Prozent aufgewertet wird.\n\nÖsterreich zum Beispiel, um zu dem Land zurückzukehren, das Milch zu uns exportiert, hat mehr als die Hälfte in der zweiten Säule. Dadurch ist es Österreich auch gelungen, die Höfe von Bergbauern und die kleinen Strukturen zu erhalten.\n\n- Genau. Ich wende mich natürlich auch an die Regierungsbank, nicht nur an Sie.\n\nIch komme zu den Zielen der SPD-Bundestagsfraktion. Wir wollen die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der deutschen Milchbauern sichern. Wir wollen nachhaltige und tiergerechte Milchproduktion anstreben. Das schont auch die Umwelt. Wir wollen die Wertschöpfung und die Schaffung von Arbeitsplätzen in den ländlichen Regionen fördern. Genau deswegen müssen wir diesen Strukturwandel aufhalten. Genau dazu dienen solche Mittel wie die zweite Säule.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n688,gerd-muller,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Herr Gysi, Ihre Alternative des Wegduckens, die Sie hier gerade dargelegt haben, ist absurd.\n\nEs gab im Jahr 2001 angesichts der dramatischen Situation, in der sich das afghanische Volk befand, keine Alternative zu dieser Entscheidung.\n\nIch sage Ihnen, Herr Gysi: Entschuldigen Sie sich bei denen, die mit Leben und Gesundheit für ein besseres Afghanistan bezahlt haben!\n\nWas sollen die Mütter und Väter der toten Soldaten und zivilen Helfer angesichts Ihrer Rede denken?\n\nDie ISAF-Soldaten gehen und die Entwicklungs-experten bleiben, das ist heute auch die Botschaft des Entwicklungsministers. Meine Damen und Herren, uns allen ist klar: Militärische Einsätze allein schaffen keinen Frieden.\n\nEin friedliches Afghanistan hat nur eine Chance mit einer nachdrücklichen, international und national abgestimmten Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Die Ausgaben für das Militär sind hoch, in Milliardenhöhe. Diese Investitionen waren nicht umsonst. Aber jetzt bedarf es einer Verstärkung der Investitionen in Friedensarbeit und Aufbauleistung. Dazu brauchen wir ein abgestimmtes, europäisch-internationales Gesamtkonzept, das auch von der afghanischen Regierung getragen wird.\n\nNotwendig ist - Außenminister Steinmeier hat es dargestellt - ein klares Bekenntnis des afghanischen Präsidenten, Herrn Karzai, und seines Nachfolgers sowie der -afghanischen Regierung zur Sicherheit, zur Zusammenarbeit, zur Bekämpfung der Korruption, zur Rechts-sicherheit, zur Wahrung der Menschenrechte, zur Sicherung der Frauenrechte; denn unsere Hilfe, unser Engagement ist an Konditionen gebunden. Unser Einsatz ist erfolgreich, unser Einsatz ist wirksam.\n\nDas zivile Engagement, der großartige Einsatz der vielen Organisationen, gilt ungeteilt den Menschen in Afghanistan. Viele dieser Organisationen waren schon vor ISAF in Afghanistan tätig. Die Zusammenarbeit mit dem afghanischen Volk geht bis in die 50er-, 60er-Jahre zurück. Die Ausgangslage in Afghanistan vor 20, 30, 50 Jahren war düster, schwierig, brutal, Herr Gysi.\n\nBitte. - Herr Präsident, dann müssen Sie aber meine Uhr anhalten.\n\nFrau Kollegin, die Antwort darauf hat Ihnen bereits der Bundesaußenminister gegeben.\n\nIch möchte mich der großartigen Arbeit unserer Entwicklungsorganisationen und unserer Partner in Afghanistan widmen; denn der Fokus - das möchte ich an dieser Stelle einmal sagen - lag in der Afghanistan-Diskussion in den letzten zwölf Jahren allzu sehr auf dem Militär. Das müssen wir auch gegenüber der deutschen Öffentlichkeit ein Stück zurechtrücken. Natürlich würdigen wir alle zu Recht den großartigen Einsatz der Soldatinnen und Soldaten; aber wir würdigen zugleich den Einsatz der zivilen Experten, die genauso vor Ort ihr Leben einsetzen.\n\nSie verdienen dieselbe Anerkennung. Natürlich sorgen die Schutztruppen für ein Stück Sicherheit. Aber wer baut die Krankenhäuser, die Schulen, die Wasserleitungen? Das sind die zivilen Experten, deren Einsatz vor Ort großartig ist.\n\nDer Herr Außenminister hat die Erfolge dargestellt; ich möchte das nicht wiederholen. Wir wissen, dass es Probleme gibt. Man muss aber auch die Fortschritte sehen: Seit 2000 hat sich das Bruttonationaleinkommen Afghanistans verdoppelt. Besonders wichtig ist für mich, dass die Frauen und Mädchen in Afghanistan auf dem Weg zur Gleichberechtigung sind. 2001 gingen 1 Million Jungen zur Schule. Heute sind es 9 Millionen Schüler, und fast alle Mädchen haben Zugang zu Schulen. Ganz besonders freue ich mich über den Austausch mit jungen Afghanen, mit Eliten, an den deutschen Hochschulen, den wir weiter ausbauen werden.\n\nIch sage noch einmal: Die Entwicklungsorganisationen vor Ort leisten diesen herausragenden Beitrag unabhängig vom Militär. Wir werden auch in Zukunft die -Sicherheit gewährleisten. Wir leisten diesen Beitrag in Freundschaft mit dem afghanischen Volk seit nahezu hundert Jahren; das können Sie in den Geschichtsbüchern nachschlagen. Die Freundschaft mit dem afghanischen Volk muss auch die Botschaft dieser Sitzung sein.\n\nDer zivile Aufbau Afghanistans muss gelingen. Er ist entscheidend für die Stabilität in der gesamten Region. Deshalb hat die Bundesregierung zugesagt, bis 2016 jährlich bis zu 430 Millionen Euro in die wirtschaftliche, soziale und politische Entwicklung Afghanistans zu investieren. Das ist eine hohe Summe. Ich sage an dieser Stelle aber auch: Es ist eine weit geringere Summe als die, die wir in militärische Einsatztruppen zu investieren bereit waren. An dieser Stelle ist nun auch eine internationale bzw. europäische Friedensdividende gefragt, die ich einfordern möchte.\n\nDer Steuerzahler bzw. das deutsche Volk fragt zu Recht: Wie wird dieses Geld eingesetzt? Die Amerikaner haben Probleme, die Wirksamkeit ihres Einsatzes nachvollziehbar darzulegen; für uns gilt das nicht. Wir werden in den Aufbau und in die Leistungsfähigkeit rechtsstaatlicher Strukturen investieren.\n\nWir werden außerdem den Kampf gegen Korruption in den Mittelpunkt rücken, da dieser von zentraler Bedeutung ist. Unser Geld muss bei den Menschen direkt ankommen und darf nicht in korrupten Kanälen versickern.\n\nWeiterhin setzen wir auf eine nachhaltige Wirtschaftsentwicklung und auf eine gute Lebensperspektive für die Menschen. 400 000 junge Afghanen strömen jedes Jahr auf den Arbeitsmarkt. Unsere Investitionen fließen daher in die berufliche Ausbildung, in Mikrokredite und in Wirtschaftspartnerschaften. Ohne zivile Strukturen kann es keine Stabilität geben.\n\nEin besonderes Augenmerk werden wir auch auf die Wertschöpfungsketten und die Produktivitätssteigerung in der Landwirtschaft legen. An dieser Stelle besteht ein echtes Defizit. Afghanistan muss weg vom Mohnanbau. Die Entwicklung läuft in den ländlichen Regionen in die komplett falsche Richtung.\n\nWir setzen nachdrücklich - an diesem Beispiel sehen die Kritiker auf der ganz linken Seite, was sich in Afghanistan in den letzten zehn Jahren getan hat - auf die Stärkung der Rechte der Frauen, auf die Integration der Frauen in die Arbeitswelt und auf den gleichberechtigten Zugang zu Schulen. Die Stärkung der Rechte der Mädchen und der Frauen ist uns sehr wichtig.\n\nWir setzen unsere Arbeit nicht nur in den Städten, sondern auch außerhalb der Städte fort.\n\nWir brauchen außerdem eine breitere Basis. Afghanistan ist bereit für Investitionen. Dieser Aufruf geht an unsere deutsche Wirtschaft. Die deutsche Wirtschaft hat sich in Bezug auf Afghanistan bisher sehr stark - zu stark, wie ich meine - zurückgehalten.\n\nWieder links?\n\nVielen Dank. - Es gibt Bereiche, in denen wir unsere Ziele absolut nicht erreicht haben. Das ist zum Beispiel bei der ländlichen Entwicklung und der Reduzierung des Mohnanbaus der Fall. Wir müssen aber auch darüber reden, wer in diesem Fall die Verantwortung dafür trug. Das war ein Einsatzbereich, der im Zuweisungsbereich der Briten lag, und zwar ganz eindeutig.\n\nDie Ziele wurden nicht erreicht.\n\nZur Frage der Sicherheit. Sie haben gehört, dass ich sehr deutlich und sehr bewusst darauf hingewiesen habe, dass die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit nicht erst 2001 begonnen hat. Der Einsatz von Entwicklungsexperten - ich spreche nicht nur von Helfern - geht zurück bis in die 20er-Jahre des letzten Jahrhunderts. Afghanistan hat traditionell eine freundschaftliche Verbindung zu Deutschland, und eine solche haben wir zum afghanischen Volk. Deshalb waren unsere Entwicklungshilfeorganisationen auch in den 50er-, 60er- und 80er-Jahren in Afghanistan.\n\nSchon 2001 war die Frage strittig: Schaffen die ISAF-Truppen mehr Schutz oder weniger? Ich glaube, dass die ISAF-Truppen auch für den zivilen Aufbau und die zivilen Aufbauhelfer mehr Schutz, mehr Sicherheit und mehr und bessere Optionen gebracht haben.\n\nAus Gesprächen mit den Organisationen, die wir natürlich geführt haben, weiß ich: Es gibt unabhängig von der ISAF-Truppe ein Sicherheitskonzept, das umgesetzt wurde, das die Sicherheit der zivilen Aufbauhelfer auch in den nächsten fünf bis zehn Jahren grundlegend gewährleistet. Die Organisationen im zivilen Bereich können dort auch ohne Soldaten arbeiten.\n\nWir erwarten selbstverständlich, dass in den nächsten Jahren ein vernetztes Konzept von Außenministerium, Verteidigungsministerium, nationalen und internationalen Organisationen vorgelegt wird. Aber unabhängig davon gibt es ein eigenes Sicherheitskonzept für die zivilen Organisationen.\n\nIch nehme Ihre Frage zum Anlass, kritisch nachzufragen - das sollten wir alle tun -, welche Lehren wir aus den Erfahrungen in Afghanistan für andere Krisenherde ziehen können. Ich denke beispielsweise an den afrikanischen Kontinent. Wir im BMZ haben ein neues Afrika-Konzept entwickelt und werden in unserem Denken und in unserer Politik einige neue Akzente setzen und Veränderungen vornehmen müssen. Das heißt, wir brauchen eine Stärkung bei der Krisenprävention. Krisenprä-vention muss vor Interventionen kommen. Das ist ganz -zentral.\n\nWir brauchen einen Aufbau regionaler Krisenreak-tionskräfte vor Ort. Wir brauchen höhere Investitionen zur Stärkung der zivilen Strukturen und der Zivilgesellschaft. Das kann ich am Beispiel von Mali darlegen. Das Militär kann in das Land gehen und ein Stück weit Ordnung und Stabilität schaffen, es kann aber nicht Frieden zwischen Freund und Feind schaffen. Um langfristig Stabilität herstellen zu können, benötigen wir in Afghanistan und in Mali zivile Strukturen.\n\nHier müssen wir unsere Politik verändern.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich möchte nun nicht weiter auf unser Afrika-Konzept eingehen. Wir müssen aus dem langjährigen Einsatz in Afghanistan die Lehren für die Krisenbewältigung auch im Nahen Osten ziehen. Angesichts von 6 Millionen Flüchtlingen in Syrien, der instabilen Lage im Libanon, der Situation in Jordanien müssen wir uns fragen: Wie lange schauen wir zu, bis auch dort aus der Instabilität Krisen, Konflikte und Kriege werden?\n\nWo ist unsere Krisen- bzw. Friedenskonzeption, dort jetzt einzugreifen und Akzente zu setzen?\n\n- Was das heißt, das kann ich Ihnen in der nächsten -Debatte zum Thema Afrika ganz konkret darlegen. Wir haben uns dazu sehr genaue Überlegungen gemacht.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich möchte in Richtung der Europäischen Union sagen: Die Mittel aus dem vollgefüllten EU-Entwicklungstopf müssen im Rahmen einer EU-Krisenpräventionsstrategie auch in Afghanistan investiert und zentriert werden.\n\nIch gedenke in dieser Stunde natürlich der toten und verletzten Soldatinnen und Soldaten und Entwicklungsexpertinnen und Entwicklungsexperten und deren Familien. Wir danken für die großartige Zusammenarbeit mit den ISAF-Truppen und ihren großartigen Einsatz.\n\nIch sage noch einmal: Die Sicherheit ist natürlich zentral.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich betonen: Afghanistan wird uns weiter beschäftigen. Die Politik hat es leider an sich, dass man kurzfristig reagiert. Wir beschließen das Mandat bis Ende des Jahres; wir brauchen aber eine mit den Europäern und international abgestimmte Gesamtstrategie, ein friedenspolitisches Gesamtkonzept, das über 2016 hinausgeht und bis 2020/2030 reicht.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n13624,thomas-de-maiziere,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich beginne mit der Darstellung von ein paar Szenen; sie sind gleichermaßen schrecklich und skrupellos. 16. Mai 2015, Berlin, S-Bahnhof Wuhletal: Eine Schülerin wird auf dem Heimweg grausam erdrosselt. 27. Oktober 2016, Berlin, U-Bahnhof Hermannstraße: Einer jungen Frau wird völlig unvermittelt brutal in den Rücken getreten, sie stürzt die Treppe hinab. 24. Dezember 2016, Heiligabend, Berlin, U-Bahnhof Schönleinstraße: Ein schlafender Obdachloser wird in Brand gesetzt. Die schockierenden Szenen sind tausendfach über die Bildschirme geflackert und wurden in den sozialen Netzwerken verbreitet. Sie haben bundesweit für Erschütterung gesorgt, für Wut und für Entsetzen.\n\nDie Ermittlung der mutmaßlichen Täter gelang nur deshalb, weil die Taten aufgezeichnet, dadurch Ermittlungsansätze vorhanden und der Verfolgungsdruck auf die Täter hoch waren. Die Szenen haben den Ruf nach einer größeren und erweiterten Videoüberwachung öffentlicher Räume weiter verstärkt.\n\nNun lösen Debatten um Videomaßnahmen in Deutschland reflexhaft Gegenreaktionen aus. Kritiker zeichnen regelmäßig düstere Bilder, Bilder einer total kontrollierten, gleichgeschalteten und von Menschlichkeit befreiten Gesellschaft, ganz nach George Orwells Buch 1984. Mit dem Rechtsstaat, in dem wir leben, hat das überhaupt nichts zu tun; uns geht es um eine vernünftige Ausweitung der Videoüberwachung.\n\nDie immer gleiche Rhetorik wird auch durch stetes Wiederholen nicht besser. Oft heißt es, Videoüberwachung verhindere keine Verbrechen, sie helfe bestenfalls bei der Aufklärung und sie erhöhe nur die gefühlte Sicherheit. Ich frage: Sind Aufklärung von Straftaten und die Verbesserung des subjektiven Sicherheitsgefühls der Bevölkerung keine verfolgenswerten Ziele? Genau diese Ziele verfolgen wir mit diesem Gesetzentwurf.\n\nEs käme niemand auf die Idee, auf DNA-Reihenuntersuchungen, auf den Abgleich von Autokennzeichen oder Fingerabdrücken zu verzichten, weil dadurch keine Straftaten verhindert werden. Mich überzeugt das jedenfalls nicht. Ich sage klar: Straftaten mithilfe dieser Instrumente aufzuklären, ist besser, als auf diese Instrumente zu verzichten und damit die Aufklärung zu erschweren oder sogar erfolglos beenden zu müssen.\n\nDann gibt es das Argument - das werden wir vielleicht wieder hören; ich habe es in der letzten Debatte schon einmal erwähnt -: Macht doch lieber mehr Polizeipräsenz statt Videoüberwachung. Als ob das eine das andere ausschlösse! Es ist schlicht lebensfremd, eine Polizeidichte zu fordern, die Kameras überflüssig macht. Ein solches Versprechen abzugeben, ist einfach unlauter.\n\nRichtig an diesem Argument ist: Das Personal der Sicherheitsbehörden muss wachsen. Im Bund haben wir dafür auch gesorgt, und das massiv. Sie kennen die Zahlen: rund 7 500 Stellen zusätzlich für die Bundespolizei und 1 300 Stellen für das Bundeskriminalamt. Das sind 20 Prozent bzw. beim Bundeskriminalamt über 25 Prozent mehr Personal innerhalb von fünf Jahren. Es wäre schön, wenn die Länder dem folgen würden. Wer das hier kritisiert, von dem erwarte ich das gleiche Engagement in den Bundesländern, um dort für entsprechende Haushaltsaufwüchse zu sorgen.\n\nUns allen ist klar, dass Videotechnik kein Allheilmittel ist. Sie ist aber auch kein Dämon. Kameras leisten einen entscheidenden Beitrag zu mehr Sicherheit. Sie helfen, Straftäter zu identifizieren, festzunehmen und zu bestrafen. Sie verhindern auch Straftaten. Über die generalpräventive Wirkung von Videoüberwachung gibt es zahlreiche Studien, auch widersprüchliche Studien. Man muss kein Kriminologe sein, um zu wissen, dass Kameras nicht global gegen jede Form von Kriminalität helfen, vor allem dann nicht, wenn Täter im Affekt handeln oder es ihnen gerade auf eine breite Öffentlichkeit ankommt. Aber deliktsspezifisch differenziert verhindert Videoüberwachung auch Straftaten, und das wirksam.\n\nIch freue mich, dass wir uns in der Koalition darüber einig sind und den Entwurf des Gesetzes zur Verbesserung der Videoüberwachung heute in erster Lesung beraten. Die neuen Regelungen schaffen für diejenigen Erleichterung, die Sportstätten, Einkaufszentren und andere große öffentliche Einrichtungen oder Fahrzeuge des öffentlichen Personennahverkehrs betreiben. Ein Anlass für dieses Gesetz war der Amoklauf in München. Dort gab es eine Videoüberwachung bei McDonald’s. Wäre der Täter in ein Kaufhaus gegangen, hätte es auch dort eine Videoüberwachung gegeben. Nur weil er in ein Einkaufszentrum lief, gab es keine Videoüberwachung, und die Sicherheitsbehörden wussten über lange Zeit nicht, wo sich der Täter befand. Die Ungleichbehandlung von Kaufhäusern und Einkaufszentren hat sich mir nie erschlossen; wir beenden sie jetzt.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, Videomaßnahmen sind nicht isoliert zu betrachten. Intelligent mit Systemen zur Gesichtserkennung verknüpft, können sie in Zukunft auch ein effektives Fahndungsmittel sein. Wir arbeiten daran. Noch ist das Zukunftsmusik; aber es ist, glaube ich, etwas, was wichtig ist und hilft.\n\nIch habe nach den Anschlägen von Würzburg und Ansbach und dem Amoklauf in München im August vergangenen Jahres eine Reihe von Maßnahmen vorgeschlagen, um die Sicherheit in Deutschland zu erhöhen. Das, was wir jetzt vorschlagen, ist ein Teil dieser Maßnahmen. Dazu gehören auch neue Befugnisse für die Bundespolizei in Bezug auf den Einsatz von Body-Cams und die Nutzung von automatischen Kennzeichenlesesystemen, die mit dem zweiten Gesetz beschlossen werden sollen. Auch das ist eine große Hilfe bei der polizeilichen Arbeit. In vielen Ländern gibt es das bereits. Das wird und kann aber nicht flächendeckend erfolgen; darauf weist die Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragte heute hin. Das ist auch gar nicht beabsichtigt, sondern der Einsatz ist beabsichtigt, wenn er sinnvoll ist, wenn er nützlich ist, wenn er bei der Fahndung hilft, wenn er bei Kriminalitätslagebildern unterstützen kann, wie es bereits in sechs, sieben, acht Bundesländern geschieht, die zum Teil rot-grün regiert sind. Nicht mehr und nicht weniger als das, was die Landespolizeien an Befugnissen haben, soll auch der Bundespolizei zugestanden werden. Und das ist sinnvoll.\n\nBesonders am Herzen liegt mir, dass wir nach einer Pilotphase jetzt auch den Bundespolizisten Body-Cams geben, also Kameras, die ihre Arbeit aufzeichnen. Das hat auch mit der zunehmenden Zahl von Angriffen auf Bundespolizisten in der letzten Zeit zu tun. Da sage ich noch einmal ganz klar: Wenn Repräsentanten unseres Staates persönlich angegriffen werden, nur weil sie Polizisten sind, dann werden auch wir als demokratische Gesellschaft, als Abgeordnete, als Minister, als gesamte Gesellschaft politisch angegriffen, und das verlangt eine klare Antwort.\n\nIndem wir unsere Polizisten mit Body-Cams ausstatten, schrecken wir Gewalttäter von Exzessen ab oder dokumentieren diese wenigstens, um im Anschluss die Täter schnell zur Verantwortung ziehen zu können. Gleichzeitig kann auch die Rechtmäßigkeit des Handelns von Polizisten besser bewiesen, entkräftet oder jedenfalls zum Gegenstand von Betrachtungen gemacht werden. Wenn wir das machen, ist das sozusagen ein passiver Schutz von Polizeibeamten. Wir werden sehr bald in diesem Bundestag auch darüber diskutieren - darüber besteht in der Koalition Einvernehmen -, dass wir die Strafandrohung bei Angriffen gegen Polizisten und Rettungskräfte verschärfen wollen, und zwar nicht nur bei Vollstreckungshandlungen, sondern auch bei Diensthandlungen. Das ist ein doppelter Schutz für die Polizisten. Angriffe gegen sie werden härter bestraft, und Body-Cams schützen davor, dass es überhaupt zu solchen Angriffen kommt.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich hoffe, dass Sie diese Gesetzentwürfe schnell beraten. Ich hoffe auch, dass wir möglichst gemeinsam zu einer Verabschiedung kommen, und ich freue mich auf eine große Zustimmung.\"\n2204,manuela-schwesig,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren Abgeordnete! Ich freue mich sehr, dass das Bundeskabinett heute den von mir vorgelegten Gesetzentwurf zum ElterngeldPlus mit Partnerschaftsmonaten und der flexibleren Elternzeit verabschiedet hat. Wir gehen mit diesen Vorschlägen neue Wege in der modernen Familienpolitik. Wir wollen die Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf stärken und setzen dabei vor allem auf das Thema Partnerschaftlichkeit.\n\nDie Lebenswirklichkeit von jungen Paaren in Deutschland hat sich verändert. 60 Prozent der Paare mit Kindern unter drei Jahren wünschen sich sowohl eine partnerschaftliche Teilung der Erziehungs- und der Hausarbeit als auch Zeit für den Job. Und genau darum geht es beim ElterngeldPlus mit den Partnerschaftsmonaten: Wir wollen zukünftig ermöglichen, dass Mütter und Väter, die während des Elterngeldbezugs früh in den Job einsteigen und Teilzeit arbeiten, nicht länger Nachteile haben. Vielmehr erhalten sie das ElterngeldPlus länger als das bisherige Elterngeld.\n\nWenn sie die Elternzeit partnerschaftlich teilen, sich also beide Zeit für das Kind oder die Kinder nehmen, und beide in Teilzeit in einem Korridor zwischen 25 und 30 Stunden arbeiten gehen, gibt es zusätzliche Partnerschaftsmonate. Das ist die Idee des ElterngeldPlus mit den Partnerschaftsmonaten. Wir wollen die Vereinbarkeit von Beruf und Familie und vor allem die Partnerschaftlichkeit zwischen Männern und Frauen stärken. Dies gilt natürlich auch für Alleinerziehende. Auch sie können von den zusätzlichen Partnerschaftsmonaten profitieren.\n\nEin weiterer Punkt im vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf ist die Flexibilisierung der Elternzeit. Wir wollen, dass Eltern die Möglichkeit haben, die dreijährige Elternzeit bis zum achten Lebensjahr ihres Kindes flexibler aufzuteilen. Das bedeutet, dass die Elternzeit nicht vor allem am Anfang der Lebenszeit des Kindes voll genommen werden muss, sondern noch Luft nach hinten ist und man die Möglichkeit hat, auch später noch eine Auszeit zu nehmen, zum Beispiel wenn ein Kind zur Schule kommt. Die Elternzeit kann laut Gesetzentwurf zukünftig ohne Zustimmung des Arbeitgebers genommen werden. Auch an dieser Stelle wollen wir die Eltern stärken.\n\nIn einer dritten Komponente des vorliegenden Gesetzentwurfes geht es um eine Klarstellung im Hinblick auf die sogenannten Mehrlingsgeburten. Das Bundessozialgericht hat geurteilt, dass das Gesetz an der Stelle derzeit unklar ist und Eltern von Mehrlingskindern im Grunde - neben dem Mehrlingsbonus - doppelt Elterngeld beziehen können. Wir wollen an dieser Stelle klarstellen, dass es für Eltern von Mehrlingen einen einmaligen Anspruch auf Elterngeld und wie bisher einen Mehrlingsbonus von 300 Euro gibt.\n\nSehr geehrte Damen und Herren Abgeordnete, das ElterngeldPlus mit den Partnerschaftsmonaten und der flexibleren Elternzeit ist ein wichtiges familienpolitisches Vorhaben der Regierungskoalition. Wir wollen neue Wege beschreiten. Wir wollen die Vereinbarkeit von Beruf und Familie stärken. Wir wollen vor allem dafür Sorge tragen, dass Männer und Frauen sowohl Zeit für Kinder als auch Zeit für den Job haben. Dieser partnerschaftliche Gedanke tut nicht nur den Familien gut, sondern ist auch für eine moderne Gleichstellungspolitik wichtig. Denn er unterstützt vor allem auch Frauen, die wieder in den Job einsteigen wollen.\n\nAn Frauen darf nicht alles - Job und Kinder - hängen bleiben. Das neue ElterngeldPlus sorgt deshalb dafür, dass auch die Männer Zeit für Kinder haben. Die positive Nachricht ist: Die Politik muss das nicht verordnen. Die Politik kann das fördern und unterstützen. Denn die jungen Väter von heute wünschen sich das. Jeder zweite Vater möchte seine Arbeitszeit zugunsten der Familie reduzieren. Auch das sollten wir fördern. Wenn beide Elternteile Zeit für die Familie haben, tut das am Ende nicht nur den Eltern, sondern auch und vor allem den Kindern gut.\n\nIn diesem Sinne freue ich mich auf die parlamentarischen Beratungen im Bundesrat und natürlich in diesem Hohen Hause. Wir gehen einen weiteren guten Schritt. Das ist ein weiterer Meilenstein auf dem Weg zu einer partnerschaftlichen Vereinbarkeit von Beruf und Familie.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nIch halte es für realistisch. Man muss hier zwei Dinge voneinander trennen. Das ElterngeldPlus, also den längeren Elterngeldbezug während der Teilzeitarbeit, bekommen alle unabhängig von der Stundenzahl und unabhängig davon, ob der Partner Teilzeit arbeitet oder nicht. Lediglich die Partnerschaftsmonate - vier Monate für den Vater und vier Monate für die Mutter - gibt es nur dann, wenn beide parallel Teilzeit arbeiten. Damit wollen wir dem partnerschaftlichen Gedanken, den 60 Prozent der Paare haben, aber nur 14 Prozent realisieren, Rechnung tragen. Der Korridor von 25 bis 30 Stunden ist gewählt worden, weil wir damit keine Minijobs unterstützen wollen. Wir wollen einen Arbeitszeitkorridor, der eine wirtschaftliche Existenz ermöglicht. Das ist insbesondere für Alleinerziehende wichtig. Deshalb ist dieser Korridor zwischen 25 und 30 Stunden insbesondere vor dem Hintergrund einer sicheren Erwerbstätigkeit, -einer guten Erwerbsperspektive und der Armutsvermeidung gut gewählt.\n\nBei der Einführung des Elterngeldes wurde die besondere Situation von Mehrlingseltern berücksichtigt. Man hat sich damals ganz bewusst dafür entschieden, dass auch diese Eltern den grundsätzlichen Elterngeldanspruch in der Dauer von zwölf plus zwei Partnermonaten haben. Aber weil zwei Kinder auch eine besondere finanzielle Herausforderung sind, gibt es einen Extra-bonus von 300 Euro. Das Bundessozialgericht hat jetzt geurteilt - weil das Gesetz an dieser Stelle nicht klar formuliert war -, dass es neben den 300 Euro zukünftig auch möglich sein kann, dass man zwei mal zwölf plus zwei Partnermonate nimmt. Das hört sich natürlich gut an. Aber es geht weit über das hinaus, was der Gesetz-geber damals gewollt hat. Mehr geht immer; gar keine Frage. Aber das Urteil bewirkt Mehrkosten von 100 Millionen Euro. An dieser Stelle stellen wir im Gesetz nur klar: Es gibt nicht weniger, sondern es gibt wie immer die 300 Euro. Damit können wir die Mehrkosten in Höhe von 100 Millionen Euro, die jetzt schon pro Jahr entstehen, auffangen und können diesen Betrag auch zur Finanzierung des Elterngeldes nutzen, weil das Elterngeld insgesamt sehr dynamisch ist. Wie Sie aus dem Haushalt wissen, sind die Mittel für das Elterngeld mittlerweile auf insgesamt 5 Milliarden Euro angestiegen. Es waren damals ungefähr 3 Milliarden Euro geplant. Diese Entwicklung hat sich ergeben, weil die Löhne steigen und damit auch das Elterngeld steigt und weil immer mehr Männer Elterngeld beanspruchen und deren gute Gehälter zu Buche schlagen. Ich denke, das Gesamtpaket ist für Mehrlingseltern eine gute Lösung, weil sie weiterhin das bekommen, worauf sie auch bisher einen Anspruch hatten. Wir müssen aber zusehen, dass das Elterngeld uns finanziell nicht ganz um die Ohren fliegt.\n\nDas kann ich gerne tun. Vorweg auch von mir herzlichen Glückwunsch und vor allem Zeit für die Familie, möglichst heute noch an Ihrem Geburtstag.\n\nEs gibt die Kritik der Arbeitgeber, die sagen: Wenn die Eltern ohne unsere Zustimmung in Elternzeit gehen können, dann ist es für uns schwieriger; die Flexibilisierung sehen wir kritisch. - Aus deren Sicht kann man dies so sehen. Aber am Ende mussten wir uns entscheiden. In der gemeinsamen Abwägung, die sich auch schon im Koalitionsvertrag findet, haben wir gesagt: Wir wollen die Familien stark machen. Wir wollen damit deutlich machen, dass die Eltern auf Elternzeit Anspruch haben. Es ist eine wichtige Schonzeit für die Familien, es ist eine wichtige Zeit für die Paare, um in der Partnerschaft zusammenzukommen.\n\nWir sind den Arbeitgebern insoweit entgegengekommen, als wir die Frist für die Anmeldung der Elternzeit von 8 auf 13 Wochen erhöhen, sodass die Arbeitgeber mehr Planungssicherheit haben. So sind wir den Arbeitgebern entgegengekommen, aber setzen das klare Zeichen: Familien haben Vorfahrt. Das ist ein wichtiges Zeichen; denn wir können nicht nur in unseren Sonntagsreden sagen: „Die Familien sind wichtig“, sondern müssen dann, wenn es zum Schwur kommt, auch so handeln. Ich denke, das ist jetzt ein guter Kompromiss.\n\nSchon heute haben die Eltern die Möglichkeit, in Teilzeit zu gehen. Wenn Eltern das in der Elterngeldzeit tun, dann werden sie zurzeit benachteiligt. Ich habe aktuell eine E-Mail von einer jungen Frau auf dem Tisch, die beschreibt, dass sie aus beruflichen Gründen gerne während der Elterngeldzeit in Teilzeit arbeiten will, weil ihr das in ihrem Job langfristig eine bessere Perspektive gebe. Sie beschreibt aber, dass es sich für sie gar nicht lohnt, weil der Elterngeldanspruch sonst verfällt. Wir wollen mit dem ElterngeldPlus die Teilzeitarbeit unterstützen.\n\nNach meiner Einschätzung geht es nicht nur um eine finanzielle Unterstützung, sondern auch um eine Wertschätzung. In der Vergangenheit wurde Teilzeitarbeit viel zu häufig abgewertet. Ich finde es richtig, dass -Eltern die Möglichkeit haben, in bestimmten Lebens-phasen, zum Beispiel wenn sie kleine Kinder haben, die Arbeitszeit zu reduzieren - man könnte auch bei der Pflege darüber nachdenken -, ohne große Nachteile zu haben, ohne auf das Abstellgleis zu geraten, auch ohne finanzielle Nachteile zu erleiden.\n\nWir helfen mit dem ElterngeldPlus und erhoffen uns von den Partnerschaftsmonaten, dass sich Paare dadurch auf die Diskussion einlassen - viele tun es jetzt schon -: Wie können wir die Zeit für die Arbeit und die Zeit für die Familie aufteilen? - Richtig gut flankiert wird diese Idee, wenn das Recht auf Rückkehr von Teilzeit in Vollzeit kommt, damit Teilzeit keine dauerhafte Sackgasse ist. Deshalb freue ich mich sehr, dass meine Kollegin Arbeitsministerin Nahles nach ihren anderen Mammutprojekten ein entsprechendes Gesetzgebungsverfahren angeht. Wir brauchen ein Recht auf Rückkehr von Teilzeit in Vollzeit. Teilzeit darf keine Sackgasse sein.\n\nVielen Dank. - Es ist einzuräumen, dass das Elterngeld und das ElterngeldPlus kompliziert wirken. Das liegt meines Erachtens aber auch daran, dass die Lebenssituation in jeder Familie unterschiedlich ist. Das Gute ist, dass wir hier nicht eine Einheitslösung für die Familien vorgeben, sondern zukünftig die Familien - ob alleinerziehend, ob in Partnerschaft - ihrer Lebenssituation entsprechend auf den Baukasten „Elterngeld, Partnerschaftsmonate, ElterngeldPlus“ zurückgreifen können, so wie es zu ihrer Lebenswelt passt. Das ist für Selbstständige unheimlich wichtig.\n\nSelbstständige profitieren genauso wie Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer vom ElterngeldPlus und vielleicht noch einen Tick mehr, weil es gerade die Selbstständigen, die Kleinunternehmerinnen und -unternehmer sind, die sich oft nicht eine Auszeit von zwölf plus zwei Monaten leisten können, sondern sagen: Ich muss mich spätestens nach sechs Monaten in meiner Firma sehen lassen. - Mit dem ElterngeldPlus werden sie jetzt viel besser unterstützt. Insofern freue ich mich, dass gerade das Unternehmertum, dass die Selbstständigen und die Soloselbstständigen - das hilft vor allem auch den Frauen - mit dem ElterngeldPlus und den Partnerschaftsmonaten eine besondere Unterstützung erhalten.\n\nMan kann sich nicht wirklich in die Diskussion der Paare einmischen; die muss jedes Paar für sich führen. Aber das Gute ist: Die jungen Väter von heute sind schon viel weiter. Jeder zweite Vater sagt: Ich möchte meine Arbeitszeit reduzieren, weil ich mehr für meine Familie da sein möchte. - Jede zweite Mutter sagt: Ich möchte wieder früh in meinen Job einsteigen, aber bitte nicht in einen Minijob, mit dem ich keine Perspektive habe, sondern mit einer guten Perspektive, was die Stunden angeht.\n\nEine Frau hat nur dann die Möglichkeit, wieder gut in ihren Job einzusteigen, wenn sie in der Partnerschaft Unterstützung durch den Mann hat. Eine erste Idee, die Partnerschaftlichkeit zu unterstützen, wurde in den früheren Regelungen zum Elterngeld durch die Partnermonate verwirklicht.\n\nMit dem Partnerschaftsbonus machen wir nun einen viel größeren Schritt. Wir fördern damit die parallele Erwerbstätigkeit und die parallele Zeit für Kinder. Wir geben deswegen den angesprochenen Stundenkorridor vor. Wir wollen keine feste Stundenzahl vorschreiben, wir wollen nur dafür sorgen, dass die Stundenzahl eine Höhe erreicht, die wirtschaftlich trägt, möglichst für beide, für die Frau und den Mann.\n\nWir erhoffen uns von diesem Anreiz, dass sich die Paare, die ein solches Modell wollen, dafür entscheiden und dass vielleicht auch andere Paare sich entsprechende Gedanken machen. Ich glaube nicht, dass es ein fami-lienpolitisches Instrument gibt, das den Familien alleine helfen kann. Es geht immer um einen Mix aus Zeit, In-frastruktur und Geld.\n\nHinter jedem familienpolitischen Instrument sollte aber eine Botschaft stehen. Die Botschaft des ElterngeldPlus mit den Partnerschaftsmonaten ist: Wir wollen, dass ihr Job und Familie vereinbaren könnt und dass ihr es in guter Partnerschaft tut. - Die Partnerschaft zwischen den Geschlechtern stellt auch eine wichtige gleichstellungspolitische Komponente dar.\n\nEs gibt derzeit 45 000 Elterngeldbezieher, die schon während der Elterngeldzeit in Teilzeit arbeiten und dadurch den angesprochenen Nachteil haben. Es gibt derzeit 500 Paare, die sich das partnerschaftlich teilen. Das stärkste Beispiel ist, wenn Mutter und Vater jeweils sieben Monate parallel Elternzeit nehmen. Dann ist aber nach sieben Monaten Schluss mit der finanziellen Unterstützung in Form von Elterngeld. Mit dem ElterngeldPlus können sie die Dauer auf 14 Monate erhöhen.\n\nBei den Berechnungen für das ElterngeldPlus gehen wir von der Basis aus, dass sich künftig mindestens 7 000 Paare für die Partnerschaftsmonate, die partnerschaftliche Aufteilung, entscheiden. Wir werden sehen, wie sich das tatsächlich entwickelt. Das hängt ja auch von den flankierenden Maßnahmen ab, zum Beispiel vom Recht einer Rückkehr in Vollzeit nach Teilzeit.\n\nBis zum 14. Lebensjahr wäre wünschenswert. Wir haben schon in den Koalitionsverhandlungen darüber beraten. Wir verlängern aber nicht nur den Zeitraum, in dem Elterngeld bezogen werden kann, bis zum achten Lebensjahr. Jetzt ist es so, dass am Anfang zwei Jahre -Elternzeit genommen werden müssen und nur ein Jahr nach hinten hinaus verlagert werden kann. Mit der vorgesehenen flexiblen Elternzeit sorgen wir dafür, dass zwei Jahre nach hinten hinaus verlagert werden können. Es wäre natürlich wünschenswert, wenn dieser Zeitraum bis zum 14. Lebensjahr verlängert würde.\n\nWir unternehmen jetzt einen ersten wichtigen Schritt zur Flexibilisierung der Elternzeit. Um das für die Arbeitswelt handhabbar zu gestalten, haben wir uns entschieden, zunächst die Möglichkeit zu schaffen, dass zwei Jahre Elternzeit aufgespart und bis zum achten Lebensjahr des Kindes genommen werden können. Damit müssen Erfahrungen gesammelt werden. Alles andere hätte aus Sicht der Arbeitgeber sehr viel Planungsunsicherheit mit sich gebracht. Das ist ein Kompromiss, den wir in den Verhandlungen gefunden haben. Ich finde es wichtig, dass zumindest die Einschulungszeit berücksichtigt wird.\n\nWir werden das ElterngeldPlus und die Partnerschaftsmonate evaluieren. Wir werden Erfahrungen mit der Elternzeit sammeln. Ich bin gespannt, wie viele Paare von diesem Angebot Gebrauch machen werden. Ich persönlich glaube nicht, dass die Arbeitgeber besorgt sein müssen. Nach meiner Einschätzung werden infolge dieser Flexibilisierung viele sagen: Ich will früh in den Beruf zurückkehren - die meisten wollen nach einem Jahr wieder in den Job einsteigen, meistens nicht in Vollzeit, sondern mit einer vollzeitnahen Teilzeit -; ich habe aber die Sicherheit, dass ich, wenn es aus irgendeinem Grund nicht klappt, wenn es meinem Kind dabei nicht gut geht oder es Probleme bei der Einschulung gibt, noch einmal Elternzeit in Anspruch nehmen kann. - Wir werden sehen, wie viele davon Gebrauch machen.\n\nEs ist wichtig, dass Eltern, die ein geringes Einkommen haben, durch das Elterngeld unterstützt werden. Das gilt zum Beispiel für Studierende, die neben dem BAföG 300 Euro Elterngeld bekommen. Es ist so, wie Sie es sagen: Wenn Eltern arbeitslos sind, dann können sie 300 Euro Elterngeld beziehen; aber spätestens, wenn sie Arbeitslosengeld II beziehen, wird es angerechnet. Das wird kritisch gesehen. Wir haben darüber schon in den Koalitionsverhandlungen beraten. Wir haben uns aber nicht darauf geeinigt, Eltern, die ALG II beziehen, das Elterngeld wieder anrechnungsfrei zu zahlen.\n\nIch finde aber, die größere Gerechtigkeitslücke besteht darin, dass diese Eltern vor der Geburt ihres Kindes offensichtlich keine Arbeitsmarktperspektive hatten. Ziel muss es sein, diesen Eltern eine Arbeitsmarktper-spektive zu bieten, damit die dauerhafte Ungerechtigkeit, die weit über den Elterngeldbezug hinausgeht, geschlossen wird.\n\nDie Arbeitgeber haben aus meiner Sicht immer Vorteile, wenn die Familien gestärkt werden; denn in den Familien sind Frauen und Männer, die als Fachkräfte in der Arbeitswelt gebraucht werden. Unternehmen beschweren sich über den Fachkräftemangel. Insbesondere den Frauen werden in der Arbeitswelt noch nicht die Chancen angeboten, die sie verdient haben und die unsere Unternehmen eigentlich nutzen müssten. Deshalb ist es gut, dass mit dem ElterngeldPlus der Wiedereinstieg in das Arbeitsleben, insbesondere von Frauen, unterstützt wird.\n\nDas haben auch die Arbeitgeber erkannt. Sie unterstützen das ElterngeldPlus mit den Partnerschaftsmonaten. Vereinzelte Stimmen, zum Beispiel die des DIHK-Chefs Schweitzer, unterstützen die Idee der Familienarbeitszeit, weil man erkannt hat, dass wir die Frauen auch dadurch unterstützen, dass auch die Männer Zeit für Familie haben; denn dadurch haben die Frauen viel bessere Arbeitsmarktperspektiven. Das ist für die Frauen gut, weil sie für ihr Einkommen und für ihre Rente Jobs brauchen, die gut bezahlt werden; aber es ist natürlich auch aus Sicht der Arbeitgeber für die Bekämpfung des Fachkräftemangels gut. Deshalb glaube ich, dass sich auch die Arbeitgeber mit der flexiblen Elternzeit anfreunden können.\n\nWichtig ist, dass in Deutschland beides geht, Familie und Job, und dass es nicht immer ein Gegeneinander ist. Dieses Gegeneinander, dass sich eine Frau zwischen Job und Kindern entscheiden muss - dies betrifft vor allem junge Frauen -, passt nicht in das 21. Jahrhundert.\n\nStreng genommen gibt es im Gesetz keine Änderung hinsichtlich der Mehrlingsgeburten, sondern eine Klarstellung. Als das Elterngeld eingeführt worden ist, hat man sich für die Mehrlingsgeburten überlegt, neben dem Elterngeld - die Eltern haben einen Anspruch auf Elterngeld für die Dauer von zwölf plus zwei Monaten - einen Mehrlingsbonus von 300 Euro pro Kind zu zahlen. Man hat sich damals entschieden, dieses Geld zur Verfügung zu stellen, um der Tatsache Rechnung zu tragen, dass die finanziellen Aufwendungen natürlich höher sind, wenn es zum Beispiel zwei Kinder sind. Das fängt ganz schlicht beim Windelkauf an. Jeder, der ein Kind hat, weiß, wie viel das kostet. Diese 300 Euro gibt es weiterhin.\n\nDas Sozialgericht hat geurteilt, dass die Frage, ob diese Eltern für zwei Kinder einmalig oder zweimalig zwölf plus zwei Monate Elterngeld beziehen können, im Gesetz nicht klar geregelt ist. Das Gericht sagt: Weil es nicht klar ist, bekommen die Eltern beides, doppeltes Elterngeld und den Mehrlingsbonus von 300 Euro. Wir schaffen an dieser Stelle eine gesetzliche Klarstellung und machen das Gesetz korrekter. Für die Mehrlingseltern wird es weiterhin diese 300 Euro geben.\n\nIch würde mich freuen, wenn das parlamentarische Verfahren es ermöglicht, dass das Parlament das Gesetz zum 1. Januar 2015 verabschiedet, sodass das ElterngeldPlus und die Partnerschaftsmonate für alle Geburten ab 1. Juli 2015 gelten können. Die Änderungen müssen vor Ort noch umgesetzt werden. Die Elterngeldstellen, die sich in den Ländern befinden, müssen das natürlich ordentlich umsetzen und die Paare gut beraten können. Diese tolle Flexibilität, die es dadurch gibt, bedeutet natürlich gleichzeitig, dass man Paare darüber gut beraten können muss. Dafür braucht man Zeit. Als ehemalige Landesministerin weiß ich, dass man für die Umsetzung einen Zeitpuffer braucht. Das Gesetz könnte dann ab 1. Juli 2015 zu wirken beginnen. Wir haben geplant, 2017 mit der Evaluation zu beginnen, weil wir natürlich ein Stück Strecke brauchen, um zu schauen, wie es wirkt. Wir können dann in 2017 erste Evaluationsergebnisse vorlegen.\n\nIch bin mir gerade nicht sicher, ob ich das, was Sie sagen, richtig verstanden habe. Ich verstehe den Punkt, den Sie ansprechen, nicht.\n\n- Ja, in Bezug auf Alleinerziehende verstehe ich das schon. Es ist doch jetzt so: Bei einem gemeinsamen Sorgerecht müsste es in unserem Interesse sein, dass sich zum Beispiel auch die Väter an der Elternzeit beteiligen; das ist bei einem gemeinsamen Sorgerecht ja nicht grundsätzlich ausgeschlossen.\n\nJetzt komme ich zu den Alleinerziehenden, bei denen das gemeinsame Sorgerecht - ich sage es einmal salopp - eher auf dem Papier steht, in der Realität aber nicht praktiziert wird, weil die Frau doch ganz alleine mit dem Kind ist. Über diese Fälle haben wir gesprochen, auch mit dem Verband. Da muss man sich aber fragen: Welche praktische Lösung gibt es? Wir können ja nicht die Elterngeldstellen beauftragen, das zu überprüfen; das wäre ein bisschen schwierig. In dem Fall, in dem eine Alleinerziehende das alleinige Sorgerecht hat, sie also definitiv alleine für das Kind verantwortlich ist, kann sie zusätzlich zu den Regelungen, von denen sie Gebrauch machen kann - oder er; es gibt ja auch alleinerziehende Männer mit alleinigem Sorgerecht -, die vollen Partnerschaftsmonate und Boni bekommen.\n\nWas die Wochenstunden anbetrifft, würde ich Ihnen gerne mitgeben: Es muss unser Interesse sein, dass Alleinerziehende wenigstens durch die genannte Zahl von Wochenstunden abgesichert sind. Dass das in der Realität oft nicht der Fall ist, weil es keine adäquate Kinderbetreuung gibt, ist ein zusätzliches Problem. Deswegen ist es wichtig, dass wir auch bei diesem Thema vorankommen.\n\nIch wundere mich über Ihre Aussage, weil ich weiß, dass gerade Sie - völlig zu Recht - kritisieren, dass es nicht sein kann, dass viele betroffene Frauen nur wenige Wochenstunden arbeiten und daher keine gute existenzielle Absicherung haben. Der Korridor von 25 bis 30 Stunden soll dazu führen, dass man nicht sagt: „Na gut, wenn die Frau noch zehn Stunden Teilzeit macht, dann ist die Welt ja wieder in Ordnung“; er soll dazu beitragen, dass die Frau eine höhere Stundenzahl bekommt. Es ist so, wie Sie sagen: Das ist eine Sache, die wir im parlamentarischen Verfahren gerne noch vertiefen können. Ich wollte nur berichten, warum der Korridor zustande gekommen ist, nämlich deshalb, weil es auch um die wirtschaftliche Existenz geht.\"\n1880,andrea-lindholz,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Von dem genialen Deutsch-Amerikaner Albert Einstein ist das Zitat überliefert: „Vertrauen und Loyalität können nur auf der Basis der Gegenseitigkeit gedeihen.“ Einsteins Vertrauen in Deutschland wurde durch die Nazis vollständig zerstört. Zeit seines Lebens konnte er nie wieder Vertrauen und Loyalität zu Deutschland aufbauen, und er hat alle Annäherungsversuche aus Deutschland rigoros abgelehnt. Menschlich ist diese Haltung sicherlich verständlich.\n\nZu unserem Glück zeigte sich die US-Regierung damals nachsichtiger und weitsichtiger als Einstein. Nazideutschland hatte jegliche Basis für gegenseitiges Vertrauen zerstört, und trotzdem ebneten die USA Deutschland den Weg in die westliche Staaten- und Wertegemeinschaft. Heute ist die transatlantische Partnerschaft in wirtschafts-, gesellschafts- und sicherheitspolitischer Hinsicht von überragender Bedeutung, nicht nur für Deutschland, sondern für die ganze Welt. Das zeigt sich aktuell auch in der Ukraine-Krise ganz deutlich. Wie ich bereits im Februar an dieser Stelle gesagt habe, kommt es auch und gerade in der Ukraine-Krise entscheidend darauf an, dass die USA und Europa eine gemeinsame Haltung zu Russland finden. Dafür muss Deutschland eine wichtige Vermittlerfunktion erfüllen. Mit der Reise nach Washington hat die Bundeskanzlerin diese Aufgabe erfüllt.\n\nZweifellos werden die deutsch-amerikanischen Beziehungen gleichzeitig durch das Vorgehen der US-Geheimdienste belastet. Die pauschale Überwachung des deutschen und europäischen Datenverkehrs durch die NSA beschädigt die Vertrauensbasis, auf der die transatlantische Partnerschaft ruht. Unsere gemeinsamen demokratischen und rechtsstaatlichen Werte werden mit der unkontrollierten Überwachung deutscher Bürgerinnen und Bürger durch befreundete Geheimdienste fundamental infrage gestellt.\n\nIm NSA-Untersuchungsausschuss müssen wir diese Vorwürfe nun sachlich und umfassend aufklären. Wir haben heute beschlossen, dass zunächst 27 Zeugen befragt sowie weitere Sachverständige und Gutachter angehört werden. Einer davon ist Edward Snowden. Aber unser Ausschuss ist mehr als ein Edward-Snowden-Untersuchungsausschuss.\n\nDie CDU- und CSU-Kollegen haben heute eine klare Position zur Anhörung von Edward Snowden bezogen. Aufgrund der Stellungnahme der Bundesregierung wollen wir Edward Snowden nicht in Deutschland anhören oder befragen, sondern wir überlegen, eine Befragung in Moskau oder per Videokonferenz durchzuführen. Das Weitere wird - Herr Kollege Flisek hat es gesagt - mit dem Anwalt von Herrn Snowden besprochen werden.\n\nDas langfristige Ziel unserer Aufklärungsarbeit muss es sein, die Bürgerinnen und Bürger vor der Überwachung im digitalen Zeitalter zu schützen. Die entscheidende Frage dabei ist: Wie erreichen wir dieses Ziel? Im Gegensatz zur Opposition glaube ich nicht, dass sich eine tragfähige Lösung ohne die USA finden lässt. Nur gemeinsam mit den USA werden wir das umsetzen können. Die Dominanz von US-Firmen wie Google, Facebook oder Apple wird sich nicht per Parlamentsbeschluss relativieren lassen.\n\nDie Bundesregierung weigert sich zu Recht, dem ebenso populistischen wie kurzsichtigen Impuls nachzugeben und infolge des NSA-Skandals die deutsch-amerikanische Freundschaft aufzukündigen oder gar die Arbeit der Nachrichtendienste infrage zu stellen. Selbst Edward Snowden, der in diesen Tagen so oft genannt wird, hat die Bedeutung unserer Nachrichtendienste für unsere Sicherheit und die weltweite Terrorabwehr mehrfach betont.\n\nDie Bundeskanzlerin weiß, dass sie auf internationaler Ebene nur dann etwas für Deutschland bewegen kann, wenn sie trotz aller Differenzen mit den anderen Staaten im Gespräch bleibt. Das zeigt sich in der Ukraine-Krise, und das zeigt sich beim NSA-Skandal. Ihre Fähigkeit zum unaufgeregten und sachlichen Dialog zeichnet unsere Kanzlerin aus. Mit dieser deeskalierenden Herangehensweise hat sie für unser Land zum Beispiel auch in der Euro-Krise gute Ergebnisse erzielt. Ich bin sicher: Wir werden das auch beim NSA-Skandal so erleben.\n\nBei allem Verständnis für den Schock, unter dem die USA nach dem 11. September 2001 gestanden haben, müssen wir die USA konsequent an unsere Vorstellungen von Datenschutz erinnern. Wir müssen auch dafür werben, dass verlorengegangenes Vertrauen zurückgewonnen wird. Auch wenn ich mir etwas mehr gewünscht hätte im Sinne von gemeinsamen Absprachen, im Sinne von No-Spy-Abkommen, so ist doch zumindest der vereinbarte Cyber-Dialog eine Möglichkeit, den USA unsere deutschen Erfahrungen mit der staatlichen Überwachung näherzubringen und hier noch mehr von den USA einzufordern; denn selbst eine alte Demokratie wie die USA ist nicht vor staatlicher Willkür gefeit.\n\nOft angesprochen wurde heute auch das Freihandelsabkommen. Ich will auf die Sinnhaftigkeit und den Inhalt dieses Freihandelsabkommens an dieser Stelle gar nicht eingehen. Wir können die Verhandlungen in diesem Bereich auch dazu nutzen, dessen Inhalt eng mit der Frage des Datenschutzes aus deutscher Sicht zu koppeln und hier für eine klare deutsche Handschrift zu sorgen. Für mich ist ein Freihandelsabkommen ohne klare Regelungen beim Datenschutz nicht denkbar.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n117,florian-hahn,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Nachdem wir heute Vormittag das Mandat UNMISS debattiert und verlängert haben - dabei ging es um den Südsudan -, geht es jetzt um das UNAMID-Mandat im Sudan. UNAMID ist eine Hybridmission von Vereinten Nationen und Afrikanischer Union. An dieser Mission sind aktuell 46 Nationen beteiligt. Deutschland als einziges EU-Land ist aktuell mit neun oder elf - das variiert ein wenig - Soldatinnen und Soldaten und vier Polizisten dabei.\n\nDie drei größten Truppensteller sind Ruanda mit 3 200 Soldaten, Nigeria mit 2 600 Soldaten und Ägypten mit 2 500 Soldaten. Daran zeigt sich der wichtige und essenzielle Ansatz, dass die Afrikaner selbst in die Lage kommen müssen, auf ihrem Kontinent für Sicherheit zu sorgen. Wir wollen sie dabei unterstützen, dass sie diese Eigenverantwortung verstärkt übernehmen.\n\nWarum ist dieses Mandat für Sudan so wichtig? Die Kämpfe - das haben schon viele Kollegen in ihren Beiträgen zum Ausdruck gebracht - zwischen Rebellen, Milizen und Armee haben seit 2003 zu mehr als 300 000 Toten und 2,5 Millionen Flüchtlingen geführt. Die Konflikte brechen immer wieder auf. Es geht dabei um Religionskonflikte; es geht um ethnische Konflikte; es geht auch um den Zugang zu wichtigen Rohstoffen.\n\nEs ist daher wichtig, die Umsetzung des Friedensabkommens von 2006 und den Friedensprozess an sich zu unterstützen. Welchen Beitrag leistet UNAMID dabei? Erstens einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Stabilisierung und zum Aufbau, zweitens, die militärische Präsenz wirkt mäßigend auf die Konfliktparteien, und drittens, die Mission verhindert eine weitere Verschlechterung der humanitären Situation. Unsere Soldaten sind im Hauptquartier eingesetzt, nämlich bei der Stabsfunktion im Bereich Einsatzführung, Logistik, Ausbildung und Personal.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich möchte noch einmal auf die Debatte von heute Vormittag zu dem Mandat UNMISS zurückkommen. Ich habe mich sehr geärgert; denn die Kollegin Buchholz, die ich jetzt leider nicht sehe, hat dort gesagt:\n\n… niemand braucht Soldaten, um Wasser- und Bildungsprojekte durchzuführen.\n\nIch finde das wirklich zynisch. Das müssen Sie einmal den Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern der Hilfsorganisationen und deren Familien sagen.\n\nWir alle wissen ganz genau, dass diese Ziel massiver Angriffe vonseiten der Rebellen sind. Sie brauchen den Schutz von Sicherheitskräften. Wir sind im Übrigen auch froh, dass UNAMID den Zugang für humanitäre Hilfe überhaupt erst möglich macht.\n\nKolleginnen und Kollegen, dieser Einsatz genießt vielleicht nicht dieselbe Aufmerksamkeit wie beispielsweise der Einsatz in Afghanistan. Das mag vielleicht der Tatsache geschuldet sein, dass nur elf Soldaten von uns mit dabei sind. Ich bin unserem Minister de Maizière sehr dankbar dafür, dass er gestern in unserer Fraktion, aber auch heute in der Debatte zum UNMISS-Mandat deutlich zum Ausdruck gebracht hat, welche Leistungen unsere Soldaten dort vollbringen, vor allem, wenn man bedenkt, unter welchen Voraussetzungen und unter welcher Gefährdung sie dort ihren Dienst versehen. Das kommt in der Öffentlichkeit ein bisschen zu kurz. Deswegen möchte ich an dieser Stelle den Soldatinnen und Soldaten dort sehr herzlich danken und ihnen viel Erfolg, Gesundheit und Gottes Segen für die Aufgaben wünschen, die noch vor ihnen liegen.\n\nSehr geehrte Damen und Herren, UNAMID leistet einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Verbesserung der humanitären Situation im Sudan. UNAMID bildet den Rahmen, der die Bewältigung der politischen Konflikte überhaupt erst möglich macht. Wir stehen für Verlässlichkeit und Bündnistreue. Wir wollen ein guter Partner bei der Gestaltung einer gerechten Weltordnung sein. Daher müssen wir diesem Mandat zustimmen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n3491,dirk-heidenblut,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Liebe Zuhörerinnen und liebe Zuhörer! Man kann dem PEPP viel nachsagen, aber eines sicher nicht, nämlich dass es keinen Drive in die Diskussion rund um die Versorgungsfrage im psychiatrischen Bereich bringen würde. Das ist eigentlich auch gut so; denn wir brauchen eine weitere Diskussion über die Frage der Versorgungsstruktur, was ein Teil der Überschrift des Antrags ist.\n\nDie Frage ist nur - das haben schon einige der Vorrednerinnen und Vorredner gesagt -, ob wir diese Diskussion nun zwingend entlang eines Entgeltsystems als Dreh- und Angelpunkt führen müssen oder ob wir sie nicht ganz grundsätzlich zu führen haben.\n\nDieser Antrag setzt durchaus beim PEPP, also beim Entgeltsystem, an. Ich will das, was Karl Lauterbach schon gesagt hat, wiederholen: Natürlich gab und gibt es Probleme. Natürlich ist es so, dass wir über vernetzte Strukturen, über die Frage der individuellen Versorgung, der individuellen Ansprüche nachdenken müssen und dass wir angemessene Voraussetzungen schaffen müssen. Über 30 Jahre nach der Psychiatrie-Enquete sind wir an dieser Stelle gefordert, sicherzustellen, dass sich entsprechende weitere Maßnahmen ermöglichen lassen.\n\nWas den Antrag angeht, haben wir ja längst reagiert; denn zumindest Teile des Antrags sind - das werden nicht einmal Sie von der Hand weisen können - de facto beschlossen, etwa die Verlängerung der Optionsphase und damit im Übrigen auch die Verlängerung der Psych-PV. Beide Punkte sind in Ihrem Antrag angesprochen, wenn mich nicht alles täuscht.\n\nWir haben das Ganze - Karl Lauterbach hat das sehr deutlich gesagt - mit einem klaren Prüfauftrag versehen, der eben nicht festschreibt, dass alles so bleiben muss, wie es ist, sondern der durchaus dafür sorgt, dass wir auch prüfen, welche Alternativen sich ergeben, welche Möglichkeiten sich ergeben, um zu schauen, wie das Versorgungssystem vernünftig ausgestaltet werden kann. Vor diesem Hintergrund kann man nur sagen: Wir haben keine Chancen verpasst, wie Sie so schön gesagt haben. Das mag in der Vergangenheit passiert sein. Für mich wie vielleicht für einige andere ist es etwas frustrierend, dass § 64 b SGB V da nicht längst viel mehr Kraft entfaltet hat. Aber wir haben mit der Verlängerung der Optionsphase, mit dem Prüfauftrag und mit der klaren Maßgabe, dass wir uns an den Ergebnissen dieser Prüfung messen lassen werden, Chancen geschaffen und keine Chancen verpasst. Das muss man deutlich festhalten.\n\nLassen Sie mich noch ein Wort zur Psych-PV sagen. Natürlich ist es für uns völlig klar, dass Personalbemessung gerade an dieser Stelle, gerade im psychiatrischen Bereich - da, wo auf Eins-zu-eins-Ebene gearbeitet wird, wo ein besonderes Verhältnis zwischen demjenigen, der behandelt, demjenigen, der pflegt, demjenigen, der betreut, und dem psychisch Erkrankten besteht -, eine zentrale und wichtige Frage ist.\n\nAber es ist natürlich nicht damit getan, die Psych-PV schlicht zu verlängern, sondern wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass es moderne und vernünftige Strukturen gibt. Um nur ein Beispiel zu nennen - ich denke, das ist Ihnen allen bekannt -: Die Psych-PV deckt zum Beispiel den Bereich der Psychotherapie im stationären Bereich überhaupt nicht hinlänglich ab. Das heißt, selbst eine hundertprozentige Erfüllung der Psych-PV würde im Zweifel an dieser Stelle zwingenden Nachholbedarf geltend machen.\n\nWir gehen durchaus davon aus, dass der G-BA, der im Moment das Heft des Handelns in der Hand hat - die Kollegin hat es gesagt -, hier Vernünftiges vorlegen wird. Dazu ist er aufgefordert; da ist er gefordert. Was die Frage der Verbindlichkeit angeht, da werden wir im Zweifel allerdings nachschärfen müssen; denn natürlich muss seine Empfehlung verbindlich und nicht schlicht sein. Denn nur so wird am Ende auch etwas gemacht.\n\nWir müssen aber auch sicherstellen, dass die Verbindlichkeit eingehalten wird. Wir wissen alle: Selbst die Psych-PV wird bis zum heutigen Tage, was die hundertprozentige Ausschöpfung angeht, nicht wirklich eingehalten.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Schluss kommen. Überhaupt keine Frage: Wir müssen am Versorgungssystem weiter arbeiten. Wir müssen das auch im Hinblick auf die Frage der Gemeindepsychiatrie und andere Aspekte tun. Das allerdings allein an PEPP aufzuziehen, ist nicht der richtige Weg. Um es deutlich zu sagen: Wenn wir, die SPD, hier vorangehen, dann tun wir das nicht etwa gegen das Gewissen, sondern mit dem Wissen, Frau Klein-Schmeink, dass wir bereits die richtigen Schritte gegangen sind und dass wir ein System vorlegen werden, das am Ende allen Beteiligten helfen wird.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9813,heiko-maas,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Ich sitze regelmäßig mit dem Kollegen de Maizière in Brüssel im JI-Rat. Dort vertreten wir die Flüchtlingspolitik der deutschen Bundesregierung. Ich würde Ihnen wünschen, dass Sie sich einmal das anhören müssen, was wir uns dort anhören müssen.\n\nSie sagen hier zur Flüchtlingspolitik der Bundesregierung: schäbig, inhuman, unchristlich, Skandal, Zynismus, Grausamkeiten. Schauen Sie sich mal in Europa um! Es gibt kein anderes Land, das seiner humanitären Verpflichtung gegenwärtig so gerecht wird wie Deutschland.\n\nDie beiden Gesetzentwürfe, die heute vorliegen, haben ein gemeinsames großes Ziel:\n\nSie stärken die Handlungsfähigkeit des Staates. Das ist, finde ich, ein ganz grundlegendes Problem geworden. Wenn in Deutschland zu viele Menschen den Eindruck gewonnen haben, dass der Staat die Kontrolle über die Flüchtlingspolitik verloren hat, wenn zu viele Menschen den Eindruck gewonnen haben, dass nach den Ereignissen in Köln der Staat nicht mehr handlungsfähig ist, weil er seine Gesetze dort nicht durchgesetzt hat, dann geht es hier nicht mehr um eine Angelegenheit zwischen Regierung und Opposition. Glauben Sie im Ernst, dass die Bürgerinnen und Bürger zwischen Ihnen und uns unterscheiden? Jede der hier vertretenen Parteien ist in der Verantwortung, entweder irgendwo in den Ländern oder hier.\n\nEs geht um die Handlungsfähigkeit des Staates.\n\nWenn Menschen den Glauben daran verloren haben, dann ist es ihnen egal, welche Antworten sie von uns oder von Ihnen bekommen.\n\nDeshalb müssen wir mit dem, was wir hier vorlegen, vor allen Dingen eins dokumentieren: Der Staat ist handlungsfähig, und er ist in der Lage, auf Herausforderungen zu reagieren. Genau das tun wir.\n\nWir stellen sicher, dass unsere Behörden die Aufnahme der geflüchteten Menschen besser bewältigen können, als das bisher der Fall gewesen ist. Mit Blick auf die Silvestervorfälle in Köln senden wir auch eine klare Botschaft aus, und zwar an alle - egal ob mit oder ohne Pass; egal was für einen Pass sie haben -: Wer vor Verfolgung, Krieg und Terror flieht, der findet bei uns Schutz. Aber wer hierherkommt und dabei diesen Schutz ausnutzt, um schwere Straftaten zu begehen, für den ist bei uns kein Platz. Wir sind hilfsbereit, aber nicht blind.\n\nWas die Veränderungen im Ausweisungsrecht angeht, sage ich: Ja, sie sind eine Reaktion auf die Ereignisse in Köln. Für sexuelle Übergriffe auf Frauen gibt es keine Rechtfertigung und auch keine Entschuldigung.\n\nIch sage aber auch: Ein besserer Schutz für Frauen vor sexueller Gewalt ist bitter nötig. Das hat mit Köln überhaupt nichts zu tun.\n\nDieses Bedürfnis gibt es nicht erst seit den Ereignissen in Köln.\n\nDas, was wir im Ausweisungsrecht verändert haben, ist:\n\nWer schwere Straftaten begeht, wer vorsätzlich Straftaten gegen Leib und Leben, die körperliche Unversehrtheit, die sexuelle Selbstbestimmung oder gegen Ordnungskräfte begeht, wer als Serientäter Eigentumsdelikte begeht, wird in Zukunft leichter ausgewiesen werden können, und das ist auch richtig.\n\nWir haben die Voraussetzungen dafür herabgesetzt: In Zukunft kann bei der Abwägung der Frage - es ist nicht die Entscheidung -, ob eine Ausweisungsverfügung ergeht, bereits die Verurteilung zu einer Freiheitsstrafe auch auf Bewährung als ein schweres Ausweisungsinteresse zu einer Ausweisungsverfügung führen. Ich sage das nicht nur mit Blick auf die Straftaten, für die wir das qualifiziert haben, sondern auch mit Blick darauf, dass in Deutschland niemand wegen Bagatelldelikten zu einer Freiheitsstrafe verurteilt wird. Deshalb ist es auch gerechtfertigt, daran anzuknüpfen.\n\nHerr von Notz, ja, die Ausweisungsverfügung hat noch nichts mit der Abschiebung zu tun. Aber es ist nicht so, dass wir die Probleme, die es dort gibt, einfach bestehen lassen. Wir reden mit den Staaten, die nicht bereit sind, ihre Staatsangehörigen zurückzunehmen, weil sie ihre Papiere weggeworfen haben. Wir wollen Laissez-passer-Abkommen, wie wir sie mit anderen Staaten, etwa auf dem Balkan, geschlossen haben, auch mit nordafrikanischen Staaten schließen. Natürlich muss eine Ausweisungsverfügung auch umgesetzt werden. Wir arbeiten daran genauso intensiv wie an diesem Gesetzentwurf, weil wir nicht nur Verfügungen erlassen wollen, sondern weil wir die Verfügungen auch durchsetzen wollen. Das gehört dazu.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die vorgeschlagenen Änderungen sind, wie ich finde, nicht nur verhältnismäßig, sondern sie sind richtig, notwendig und maßvoll. Aber ich sage auch: Das Gleiche kann ich nicht von allen Wortmeldungen behaupten, die es in jüngster Zeit zu diesem Thema gegeben hat.\n\nGerne.\n\nDoch, ich finde schon. Und ich mache auch gar keinen Hehl daraus, dass diese Gesetzesänderung eine Reaktion auf die Ereignisse in Köln gewesen ist. Es gibt Situationen, in denen der Staat - auch aus übergeordneten Motiven heraus - in der Lage sein muss, schnell zu reagieren und Gesetze, die noch nicht lange in Kraft sind, noch einmal zu verändern.\n\nWir haben das getan. Ich bitte, das nicht auf die leichte Schulter zu nehmen, weil wir nach diesen Ereignissen eine schwierige Debatte, eine sehr emotionale Debatte in Deutschland geführt haben. Es wurde von uns getan, weil ich es für richtig halte, dass ein großes Ausweisungsinteresse schon vorliegen kann, wenn in Deutschland jemand zu einer Freiheitsstrafe verurteilt wird.\n\nIm Übrigen sage ich auch das: Wir wollen damit nicht nur mögliche Opfer - sie hat es in Köln gegeben - besser vor Straftätern schützen, sondern wir wollen auch die Hunderttausende von Flüchtlingen, die in diesem Land angekommen sind und hier unbescholten leben, davor schützen, dass sie mit solchen Kriminellen in einen Topf geworfen werden. Deshalb mussten wir schnell reagieren.\n\nNein, ich würde jetzt erst gerne selbst noch ein bisschen erzählen.\n\n- Ja, ich komme auch schon zum Schluss. Über das Sexualstrafrecht werden wir hier, glaube ich, bei anderer Gelegenheit noch einmal reden können. Darauf bin ich schon sehr gespannt.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich will noch Folgendes sagen: Über den richtigen Weg in der Flüchtlingspolitik können wir alle lebhaft streiten. Auch das gehört zur Demokratie.\n\nIch finde es, ehrlich gesagt, gar nicht so schlecht, dass in Deutschland wieder über Werte und nicht nur über Wohlstand und Wohlfahrt - das war in der letzten Zeit immer so - diskutiert wird.\n\nNatürlich: Diese Diskussion kann und soll auch leidenschaftlich geführt werden. Wenn man über Werte und Überzeugungen redet, dann geht das nur mit Leidenschaft. Aber der Tonfall, mit dem das in der letzten Zeit teilweise geschehen ist, bereitet mir auch als Justizminister Sorgen. Wenn es um die Flüchtlingspolitik der Bundesregierung geht, dann greifen manche Kritiker zu einer Rhetorik, die jedes Maß verloren hat. „Notstand“, „Rechtsbruch des Staates“, „Herrschaft des Unrechts“: Diese Parolen sind nicht nur juristisch hanebüchen, sie sind politisch brandgefährlich.\n\nIn der Flüchtlingspolitik wird zu Recht Realismus eingefordert. Zu diesem Realismus gehört für mich aber auch, dass man eben nicht in hysterische Krisenrhetorik verfällt. Solche Dinge, die dabei in den Raum gestellt werden, lösen kein einziges Problem, sie schüren dagegen viele, viele Ängste. Vor allen Dingen: Wer mit solchen Worten die Legalität des Staates permanent infrage stellt, der stärkt Recht und Gesetz nicht, sondern er schwächt sie.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, auch da haben wir als politisch Verantwortliche eine besondere Verantwortung für das, was wir in der Diskussion in Deutschland - die ich für notwendig halte - sagen. Ich halte es für gut, dass in Deutschland wieder über Werte diskutiert wird und nicht nur über Wachstumsprognosen. Aber wir alle, die wir uns an dieser Debatte beteiligen, haben auch eine besondere Verantwortung, mit den Worten, mit denen wir uns beteiligen, nicht dafür zu sorgen, dass die Spaltung größer wird, sondern dafür zu sorgen, dass das, was in diesem Land zurzeit geschieht, dazu führt, dass Menschen friedlich und gut zusammenleben.\"\n6820,johanna-wanka,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Meine Damen und Herren! Am 1. April 2012 trat das Anerkennungsgesetz in Kraft. Das war ein Paradigmenwechsel. Das gab es so vorher noch nicht in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland: Vorher ging man immer eher von den Defiziten aus, und jetzt sah man die Chancen für diejenigen, die zu uns kommen.\n\nDieses Gesetz ist auch, wenn man es im europäischen Vergleich sieht, etwas sehr Besonderes; denn es regelt, dass jeder, der zu uns in dieses Land kommt - egal, woher er kommt -, einen Rechtsanspruch darauf hat, dass eingeschätzt wird, ob seine berufliche Qualifikation, die er in Kanada, im Kongo oder wo auch immer erworben hat, im Vergleich zum entsprechenden deutschen Beruf gleichwertig ist oder nicht. Da das etwas Neues war und wir in der Praxis Erfahrungen sammeln wollten, wie man damit umgeht, wo wir Handlungsempfehlungen geben können und was noch gemacht und gestärkt werden muss, hat sich die Bundesregierung verpflichtet - das ist keine gesetzliche Verpflichtung -, begleitend ein Monitoring zu realisieren, um Aussagen treffen zu können, die weit über die statistischen Angaben hinausgehen.\n\nIn der Zeit vom 1. April 2012 bis Ende 2013 wurden über 26 500 Anträge auf Anerkennung gestellt. 96 Prozent der Anträge wurden positiv bewertet. Es gab also entweder eine Anerkennung oder eine Teilanerkennung. Es wurden mehr Anträge von Frauen als von Männern gestellt; das ist klar. Die größte Gruppe der Antragsteller machen Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund, also die in Deutschland leben und die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit haben, aus. Dann folgen Menschen aus Polen, aus Spanien, aus Russland und aus Rumänien. Aus diesen Ländern kommen die größten Gruppen der Menschen, die einen solchen Antrag stellen.\n\nMan hat sich innerhalb der IHKs und der Handwerkskammern verständigt, wie man den Prozess organisiert. Die Erfahrungen sind sehr positiv. Es ist allerdings so, dass diejenigen, die einen Antrag stellen, oftmals einen Hochschulabschluss oder sogar einen Hochschulabschluss plus berufliche Bildung haben. Aber gerade im Bereich der handwerklichen und IHK-Berufe möchten wir mehr Anträge sehen. Bei den Hotlines und den Anlaufstellen, die wir eingerichtet haben, sehen wir eine stark steigende Tendenz. Deswegen ist die Bewerbung dieses Instruments sehr wichtig. Wichtig ist aber auch das Thema Nachqualifizierung. Da, wo es möglich und sinnvoll ist, haben wir zum 1. Januar 2015 neue Dinge in Kraft gesetzt und begonnen.\n\nBei besagtem Monitoring geht es nicht nur um statistische Erfassung. Zum Beispiel umfasst dies auch eine Befragung von 5 300 Betrieben. Gefragt wurde, wie sie mit diesem Instrument umgehen und wie sie es sehen. 80 Prozent sind der Meinung, sie hätten überhaupt kein Problem damit, ausländische Fachkräfte in ihrem Betrieb zu beschäftigen, und würden dies gern tun. Und mehr als zwei Drittel sagen, sie würden Mitarbeiter mit Migrationshintergrund, die sich dafür interessieren, Anträge gemäß dem Anerkennungsgesetz zu stellen, unterstützen.\n\nSie müssen dabei bedenken, dass viele Menschen angesichts der gegenwärtigen Situation der niedrigen Arbeitslosigkeit sehr wohl Beschäftigung finden und es nicht unbedingt nötig haben, die Gleichwertigkeit ihrer Qualifizierung nach dem Anerkennungsgesetz bestätigt zu bekommen. Wenn es aber auf dem Arbeitsmarkt wieder schwieriger wird oder es darum geht, Meisterqualifikationen zu erwerben oder Leitungspositionen zu besetzen, dann ist es sehr gut und richtig, wenn sie eine entsprechende Anerkennung vorweisen können.\n\nDeswegen ist das Anerkennungsgesetz sowohl aus unserer Perspektive im Hinblick auf die Fachkräftesituation als auch für das Glück der Einzelnen, die in unser Land gekommen sind, wichtig. International werden wir sehr gelobt, auch von der OECD. Es wird sehr wohl registriert, dass wir mit dem Anerkennungsgesetz für eine veränderte Situation gesorgt haben und ein starkes Signal in das Ausland in Richtung Willkommenskultur geben. Insgesamt ist es sehr erfreulich, dass ein so umfangreicher Monitoring-Bericht vorliegt, der auch viele Angaben zu Einzelfragen liefert.\n\nDanke.\n\nDas Anerkennungsgesetz ist völlig unabhängig vom Status der Betreffenden. Es steht jedem offen, auch Asylbewerbern, und nicht nur denjenigen, die in unser Land kommen, sondern man kann die Anerkennung auch schon aus dem Ausland beantragen. Aufgrund der geänderten Regelung, dass man bereits nach drei Monaten eine Arbeit aufnehmen kann, haben wir noch vielfältige Unterstützungsmöglichkeiten für Menschen mit Asylantrag vorgesehen, indem sie etwa über SGB II oder III entsprechend finanzielle Unterstützung bekommen oder beim Stellen des Antrages unterstützt werden. Im Rahmen des Netzwerks „Integration durch Qualifizierung“ gibt es kostenlose Beratung für Anerkennungsverfahren, für Qualifizierung. Vom Instrumentarium ist das alles sehr gut geeignet für die Flüchtlinge, die zu uns kommen.\n\nSie haben vollkommen recht, dass im Bereich der Drittstaaten die Anzahl der Anträge geringer ist und auch die Bearbeitungszeiten länger sind. Eine wichtige Maßnahme ist Information. Das heißt, wir haben durch das entsprechende Internetportal „Anerkennung in Deutschland“ die Möglichkeit, in unterschiedlichen Sprachen in aller Welt zu informieren, dass es dieses Instrument gibt. Wir haben die Antragstellung sehr stark vereinfacht. Wir haben aber auch aufgrund des Befundes jetzt damit begonnen, dafür zu sorgen, dass es auch in den Drittstaaten einen konkreten Ansprechpartner gibt, also nicht nur einen Internetauftritt. Das ist ganz wichtig, weil man, wenn man sich dort bewirbt, sich mit den deutschen Verhältnissen natürlich nicht so auskennt. Eine Strategie in der nächsten Zeit ist es deswegen, dass es bei einigen Deutschen Auslandshandelskammern, die überall in der Welt zu finden sind, konkrete Ansprechpartner gibt, die von Angesicht zu Angesicht über diese Möglichkeiten informieren können. Ich denke, das ist außerordentlich wichtig.\n\nDas Anerkennungsgesetz des Bundes gilt ja für alle Berufe, für die der Bund zuständig ist. Es gibt aber eine ganze Reihe von Berufen, für die die Bundesländer zuständig sind. Sie haben die Anerkennung zwar in entsprechenden Gesetzen verankert, haben aber leider teilweise ganze Berufsgruppen, die wir gerade auch aus Drittstaaten anwerben wollen, zum Beispiel Lehrer und Ingenieure, ausgeschlossen. Da wäre es sehr wichtig - ich wäre sehr froh, wenn das geschähe -, dass insbesondere die großen Bundesländer den Angehörigen dieser Berufsgruppen überhaupt die Möglichkeit eröffnen, einen Antrag darauf zu stellen, in Deutschland leben und arbeiten zu können.\n\nWenn Menschen aber zu uns kommen, dann gibt es vielfältige Unterstützungsmöglichkeiten. Ich nannte die Möglichkeit der Nachqualifizierung und das breit aufgestellte Förderprogramm „Integration durch Qualifizierung (IQ)“. Hier gibt es Möglichkeiten, die nicht nur EU-Bürgern oder Menschen aus Europa, sondern allen zur Verfügung stehen. Werbung dafür ist eine zentrale Aufgabe, und darum bemühen wir uns.\n\nDer größte Teil der Anträge bezieht sich bisher auf die reglementierten Berufe; aber das ist ganz logisch. Die Berufe, in denen eine Anerkennung in Deutschland zwingend ist, weil man sonst nicht in dem Beruf arbeiten kann - das betrifft Ärzte, Krankenschwestern, Apotheker und viele andere -, machen die Hauptmasse aus. Tatsache ist - ich habe mit Handwerkskammerpräsidenten und an vielen Stellen mit Vertretern vor Ort geredet -, dass bei den Kammern - zum Beispiel ist die Handwerkskammer Frankfurt (Oder) Leitkammer für den Bereich Polen, die Handwerkskammer München für den Bereich Türkei - sehr viele Beratungsgespräche durchgeführt werden, diese aber nicht in allen Fällen dazu führen, dass ein Antrag auf Anerkennung gestellt wird. Im Bericht wird dargestellt, woran das liegt. Dafür gibt es nicht nur einen Grund, sondern vielfältige Gründe. In vielen Ländern ist es eben so, dass es für handwerkliche Berufe überhaupt keine duale Ausbildung gibt, die mit unserer vergleichbar ist. Deswegen fehlt den Betreffenden auch der Optimismus, hier eine Anerkennung erreichen zu können.\n\nFolgendes finde ich ganz wichtig - das wird auch international registriert -: Unser Anerkennungsgesetz schafft nicht nur die Möglichkeit, anhand eines Schreibens nachzuweisen, dass man diesen oder jenen Beruf mit einem bestimmten Curriculum in einem anderen Land erlernt hat, sondern für den Fall, dass so etwas nicht vorliegt oder die erbrachten Leistungen nicht mit Dokumenten nachweisbar sind, gibt es auch die Möglichkeit einer Qualifikationsfeststellung. Im Rahmen eines Fachgesprächs und in Form von praktischen Tätigkeiten kann der Betreffende nachweisen, ob er zum Beispiel schweißen kann oder Ähnliches. Wenn er dabei entsprechende Kenntnisse nachweist, kann das zur Anerkennung führen.\n\nÜber solche Möglichkeiten müssen wir noch mehr informieren. Deswegen gibt eine Initiative unseres Hauses, um sowohl die Betriebsräte als auch die Leitungen der Betriebe - ich sagte, dass der Großteil der Betriebe die Möglichkeiten gerne nutzen würde und kein Problem damit hat - stärker dafür zu sensibilisieren, welche Möglichkeiten und welche Unterstützung es gibt. Das ist eine der Maßnahmen. Eine andere sind Finanzhilfen. Hier gibt es zwar keinen einfachen Zusammenhang von Ursache und Wirkung, ich denke aber, dass hier die Tatsache, dass die Arbeitsverwaltung denjenigen, die Arbeit suchen - ich sagte es vorhin im Zusammenhang mit den Asylbewerbern -, eine Finanzierung gewährleistet, eine Rolle spielt.\n\nIn der Form, wie ich eben schon sagte, dass wir ihnen, wenn keine Unterlagen vorliegen, die Chance einräumen, die in einem handwerklichen Beruf oder in einem anderen Beruf erworbenen Qualifikationen im Rahmen eines Fachgesprächs und in einem praktischen Test nachzuweisen. Wir nutzen aber auch andere vielfältige Möglichkeiten, gerade im Bereich der Industrie- und Handelskammern. Falls die Kopien eventuell, wie Sie sagen, schlecht sind, kann man aufgrund der Landeskenntnisse und der Curricula vor Ort praktisch vergleichbare Unterlagen besorgen.\n\nAm Anfang, bevor das Gesetz in Kraft trat, gab es große Skepsis, ob man da immer - wie sage ich es im Bundestag? - korrekt behandelt wird, ob man echte Unterlagen bekommt. Das ist aber überhaupt nicht das Problem; das steht auch im Bericht. Es gibt sicher den einen oder anderen Einzelfall, aber die Befürchtung, dass mit den vorgelegten Unterlagen oder Kopien etwas nicht stimmt, hat sich nicht bewahrheitet. Das ist nicht das Problem.\n\nWir haben seit dem 1. Januar dieses Jahres gemeinsam mit der BA und dem Arbeitsministerium ein sehr umfangreiches Programm - es kostet 188 Millionen Euro - aufgelegt. Mit diesem Programm - das ist eine Linie innerhalb des IQ-Programmes - erhalten diejenigen finanzielle Unterstützung, die nicht unter die Regelungen gemäß SGB II oder III fallen. Sie können finanzielle Unterstützung erhalten, und zwar nicht nur für Anpassungsqualifizierungen, sondern sogar bei den Lebenshaltungskosten. Außerdem ist die gesamte Beratung hinsichtlich der Anerkennungsmodalitäten und der Qualifizierungsmöglichkeiten für diese Menschen kostenfrei. Wir stellen also 188 Millionen Euro zur Verfügung. Das ist ein konkreter Schritt in diese Richtung, wobei wir natürlich dabei sind, auszutarieren: Welche Instrumente greifen besonders gut? Wie erreicht man sehr viele Firmen? Wie erreicht man sehr viele Menschen? - Da sind wir im ständigen Dialog mit den Kammern.\n\nAußerdem hat sich ein Bundesland entschieden, Stipendien für Menschen auszugeben, die eventuell noch eine Nachqualifizierung gemäß Anerkennungsgesetz brauchen. Auch über diesen Weg sollten wir nachdenken. Aber dafür müssen wir erst wissen: An welcher Stelle würde es Sinn machen? An welcher Stelle gibt es Bedarf? - Das steht aber natürlich anderen Landesregierungen in den Bundesländern auch frei.\n\nEigentlich kann ich auf das verweisen, was ich eben gesagt habe. Über dieses IQ-Programm fördern wir in vielfältiger Art und Weise und in großem Umfang die Bereiche, wo es Bedarfe gibt, wo besonders nachqualifiziert werden muss.\n\nEin weiterer Schritt ist, dass wir in IQ an die Hochschulen gehen und für den akademischen Bereich Gelder zur Verfügung stellen, damit bundesweit an unterschiedlichen Hochschulen Teilstudiengänge oder Zertifizierungen angeboten werden können, die zielgerichtet auf die deutsche Situation, auf die Tätigkeit in bestimmten Berufen vorbereiten. So können wir den Betreffenden klarmachen, was neben der Grundkompetenz, die sie aus -ihrem Land mitbringen, notwendig ist, um hier in Deutschland in dem entsprechenden Beruf praktizieren zu können - das klingt so nach Arzt, aber das gilt auch für andere Berufe. Das ist zum Beispiel ein weiterer Teil unseres umfangreichen Angebots.\n\nZum Spracherwerb: Das Arbeitsministerium legt mit der BA sehr viel Wert auf den Spracherwerb, weil dieser ganz wichtig ist. Im Bereich der Gesundheitsberufe gibt es aber große Probleme hinsichtlich des Spracherwerbs, weil sich die Bundesländer nicht auf ein einheitliches Niveau verständigen können. Daher sind die Anforderungen in den einzelnen Bundesländern unterschiedlich. Es gibt inzwischen sogar Internetplattformen, auf denen man sich darüber austauscht, in welchem Bundesland die Anforderungen am geringsten sind. Es gibt also eine Art Anerkennungstourismus, weil es nicht gelungen ist, sich zu verständigen.\n\nZuerst möchte ich feststellen: Diesen Fachbericht habe nicht ich geschrieben. Das ist nicht mein Bericht, sondern wir haben diesen Bericht in Auftrag gegeben, und dieser Monitoring-Bericht wurde dann erstellt. Weder ich noch das BMBF haben also diesen Bericht ganz geschrieben, sondern wir haben ihn in Auftrag gegeben. Das ist sozusagen ein von uns unabhängiger Bericht.\n\nZu den Finanzen. Bei den Kosten für die Anerkennung gibt es eine Spannbreite. Ich stelle einen Antrag auf Anerkennung. Dann wird dieser Antrag bearbeitet. Es wird geschaut, wie die Ausbildung in meinem Heimatland ist etc. Dafür fallen Kosten zwischen 100 und 600 Euro an. Bei der IHK Hannover zum Beispiel liegen sie im Schnitt bei 300 Euro, und die Obergrenze liegt bei 600 Euro. Wenn es aber darum geht, Qualifikationen zu erwerben, wenn man zum Beispiel ein Sprachvermögen entsprechend einer höheren Sprachstufe nachweisen möchte, fallen zusätzliche Kosten an.\n\nWenn ein Flüchtling zu uns kommt, der keine Arbeit hat, zum Beispiel ein Arzt aus Syrien, gilt, wie ich vorhin schon sagte: Solange er keine Arbeit hat und eine Arbeit sucht, bezahlt die BA die Kosten, sogar die Lebenshaltungskosten. Das heißt, diese Kosten treffen dann nicht den Einzelnen. Wenn aber zum Beispiel ein Augenoptiker aus Finnland kommt, dann bezahlt er - es gibt natürlich auch andere Fälle - die Kosten für das Anerkennungsverfahren. Auch wenn er die Benutzung eines bestimmten Gerätes lernen muss, bezahlt er die Kosten dafür selbst.\n\nSeitens des Bundes fänden wir es sehr gut, wenn sich alle Akteure, die im Bereich der Anerkennung aktiv sind, auf verbindliche, einheitliche Sätze verständigen könnten. Das wäre sehr schön und in unserem Interesse. Das können wir aber nicht einfach dirigistisch vorgeben.\n\nIch ja, weil ich oft versuche, den direkten Kontakt zum Beispiel mit denen, die durch das Anerkennungsgesetz Anerkennung erfahren haben, herzustellen. Erst letztens, als wir mit der Bundeskanzlerin in Nürnberg waren, wo sich für sämtliche Industrie- und Handelskammern die Zentralstelle befindet, traf ich eine Modeschneiderin aus Polen, die sich jetzt sogar scheiden lassen konnte, weil ihr durch das Anerkennungsgesetz die Selbstständigkeit ermöglicht wurde. Das war ganz lustig.\n\n- Das ist jetzt nicht die Zielsetzung, nein. Das hat sie öffentlich gesagt, so kann auch ich das hier sagen. - Sie hatte nämlich immer mit den Vorurteilen ihres Mannes zu kämpfen, der meinte, das, was sie in ihrem Heimatland gelernt habe, sei mit der Situation in Deutschland nicht vergleichbar. Sie hat dann jedoch die Anerkennung erhalten und eine Arbeit gefunden. So ist es in vielen Fällen: Auf der individuellen Ebene macht das für die Lebensperspektiven dieser Personen, die diese Anerkennung erhalten, unwahrscheinlich viel aus.\n\nAber Sie haben recht, Herr Rupprecht: Es ist so, dass unser Ruf nicht schlecht ist, dass er aber schlechter als die Wirklichkeit ist. Daran sind wir aber selbst schuld, weil wir andere Haltungen dazu hatten und dieses Thema viele Jahre lang nicht offensiv bearbeitet haben. Aber jetzt ist es so, dass wir vom rechtlichen Rahmen her im Vergleich zu allen anderen Ländern in der EU - auch nach OECD-Einschätzung - sehr gut dastehen. Wir haben uns zum Beispiel schon seit Jahren bemüht und können jetzt sagen, dass die Willkommenskultur an den Hochschulen - das ist eine spezielle Gruppe - funktioniert. Wir haben derzeit den Höchststand ausländischer Studierender in Deutschland. Da ist es kein Problem mehr. Aber wir müssen jetzt auch in anderen Bereichen gemeinsam dafür arbeiten. Und dazu gehört beispielsweise, dass man die Tatsachen und das, was jetzt geht, publik macht.\n\nIch erlebe es immer wieder bei Kammern, bei Handwerksmeisterfeiern und bei anderem: Viele wissen noch nicht, dass wir diese Instrumente haben. Es ist nicht nur altruistisch von uns, sondern es ist auch wirklich eine Chance. Wenn man sich anschaut, in welchem Alter die, die kommen und einen solchen Antrag stellen, sind, bemerkt man: Deren Altersstruktur entspricht nicht der in Deutschland mit vielen über 60-Jährigen, sondern 80 Prozent aller Zuwanderer sind zwischen 18 und 50 Jahre. Bei den Antragstellern handelt es sich zum größten Teil um Menschen im Alter zwischen 25 und 44 Jahren. Wenn jemand im Alter von 44 Jahren die Anerkennung erhält, hat er noch etwa 20 Jahre oder länger im Berufsleben vor sich.\n\nDas heißt, wir sind besser als unser Ruf, aber wir müssen etwas dafür tun, dass die Willkommenskultur verbessert wird. Ich denke, dabei haben wir noch Luft nach oben.\n\nWelches Modellprojekt meinen Sie jetzt?\n\nIch wusste nicht, welches Sie meinten. - Natürlich können wir zum Modellprojekt noch keine vertiefenden Ergebnisse haben, weil es noch läuft. Solche Sachen kann man nicht nach einer so kurzen Zeit wie zwei oder drei Monate absehen, sondern man muss schon vernünftige Fallzahlen haben, um wirklich eine valide Erkenntnis daraus zu ziehen.\n\nAber die Tatsache, dass wir dieses Monitoring machen und Ihnen diese dicken Berichte nicht nur vorlegen, sondern damit auch arbeiten, zeigt unser ernsthaftes Bemühen. So versuchen wir durch Befragungen, durch statistische Untersuchungen und durch viele weitere Dinge möglichst viele Informationen zu bekommen, um dann passgenau Maßnahmen schneidern zu können.\n\nWas man sagen kann, ist, dass die Tendenz in all diesen Fällen positiv ist. Aber das ist eine sehr pauschale Aussage. Gerade was Flüchtlinge betrifft, deren Zahlen nach allen Prognosen enorm steigen werden, haben wir jetzt noch nicht diese Größenordnung an Fällen, die man benötigt, um daraus eine belastbare Grundaussage abzuleiten.\n\nJa, das ist sehr sinnvoll. Jetzt funktioniert es so: Jemand kommt aus einem anderen Land zu uns. Wenn er einen handwerklichen Beruf oder einen, der unter die IHK-Berufe fällt, hat, dann wird zum Beispiel von der IHK FOSA, von dieser Zentralstelle, genau geschaut, was für Zeugnisse er hat. Dann wird geprüft, welches Curriculum es in dem Land gibt, was dort welcher Abschluss wert ist und welche Dinge er können muss. Daraufhin wird entschieden, ob es genauso ist wie bei uns oder ob etwas fehlt, was er vielleicht durch praktische Tätigkeit oder anderes ausgleichen kann.\n\nWenn man - das tun wir verstärkt - beim Aufbau dualer Ausbildung in anderen Ländern berät und unterstützt, dann kann es nicht die Messlatte sein, dass es von vornherein genauso sein muss wie bei uns; denn die Bedingungen dort sind anders. Man sollte sich aber an unseren Qualitätsstandards orientieren, um es dann für die Betreffenden einfacher zu machen und ihnen von Anfang an sagen zu können: Wenn du das jetzt bei uns hier in der Firma lernst, dann ist gesichert, dass das kompatibel mit Anforderungen in anderen Ländern ist. - Das ist sehr gut und würde gerade auch Jugendlichen helfen und sie vielleicht auch motivieren, eine solche Ausbildung zu beginnen.\n\nWir sagen: Duale Ausbildung hat Deutschland stark gemacht. Deswegen haben wir eine geringe Jugendarbeitslosigkeit. Wir wissen aber, dass es kein Schnell-mittel ist. Wenn man jetzt Jugendlichen in Spanien, Griechenland und anderswo sagt, dass sie in dem zu erlernenden Beruf später in Deutschland und woanders arbeiten können, dann, glaube ich, ist es für sie eine Motivation, eine solche Ausbildung, die für die jungen Leute ja auch immer Stress bedeutet, zu machen. Ich finde es also sehr klug.\n\nJetzt haben wir die Situation, dass es in sehr vielen Ländern zum Beispiel den Beruf Altenpfleger nicht gibt. Wenn die Menschen, die einen Abschluss haben, zu uns kommen, wird, wenn es um die Anerkennung geht, gesagt: Wenn sie sich an dieser und jener Stelle noch nachqualifizieren, dann können sie zum Beispiel in der Krankenpflege arbeiten.\n\nWir müssen in den entsprechenden Bereichen dafür sorgen, dass man nicht nur auf das schaut, was diese Menschen in ihrem Heimatland gelernt haben, sondern auch darauf, was man ihnen als Unterstützung geben kann, damit sie zum Beispiel einen Pflegeberuf erlernen. Die Veränderungen bei der Ausbildung in Pflegeberufen, die hier im Bundestag beschlossen werden sollen, erleichtern es, diese Menschen in Richtung der Pflegeberufe zu motivieren. Das, was da passiert ist, ist also nützlich für die Anerkennung.\n\nDas kann ich nicht ausschließen, und das ist ein Punkt, der ärgerlich ist. In unserem föderalen System ist es so - das muss man wirklich sagen -: Weil das Bundesgesetz zuerst da war - mit einer Beschreibung der Verfahren etc. -, haben sich viele Ländergesetze daran orientiert, und zwar - ich will es einmal so sagen - mehr als in anderen Fällen, in denen entsprechende Regelungen von Bundesland zu Bundesland verschieden sind.\n\nWas die Gesundheitsberufe, die einen großen Teil ausmachen, angeht, ist unsere Kenntnis, dass das, was die Bundesländer verlangen - ich sprach vorhin schon von Kriterien für Ärzte, vom Spracherwerb und von anderen Punkten -, sehr unterschiedlich ist, auch wenn sich die Gesundheitsministerkonferenz damit bereits beschäftigt hat. Wir und die Länderkollegen vonseiten der Wissenschaft möchten, dass es ein zentrales, gemeinsames Vorgehen gibt, sodass es eben nicht sein kann, dass man sich fragt: Wo bekomme ich am ehesten einen Platz? Wo sind die Anforderungen am niedrigsten?\n\nAlle hier im Raum wissen, dass es bei der Kultusministerkonferenz eine Zentralstelle für die Anerkennung ausländischer Bildungsabschlüsse gibt. Wenn also jemand, der aus Namibia, Ägypten oder einem anderen Land nach Deutschland kommt, seine Zeugnisse vorlegt, dann wird von dieser Zentralstelle beurteilt: Reicht das aus, um hier in Deutschland zu studieren? Ist das adäquat? Entspricht es unserem Abitur oder einem anderen Abschluss? - Diese Stelle verfügt über 60, 70 Mitarbeiter mit hoher Sprachkompetenz und genauen Kenntnissen der unterschiedlichsten Länder. Dort funktioniert das.\n\nWir wollten, dass bei der KMK eine solche Zentralstelle analog für die Gesundheitsberufe eingerichtet wird, allerdings nicht für die Anerkennung von Bildungsqualifikationen, sondern von Berufsqualifikationen. Mittlerweile gibt es auch ein Konzept. Die Länder haben sich verständigt: Wie viel Geld bräuchte man dafür? Wie müsste das aussehen? - Zusätzlich zu der schon vorhandenen Kompetenz müsste man 16 zusätzliche Stellen schaffen, um die wichtigen Anliegen der Einheitlichkeit, der Verbindlichkeit und der gemeinsamen Entscheidungen, die Sie angesprochen haben, zu realisieren. Dazu gab es bereits - ich glaube, drei - Beschlüsse der GMK und der KMK, und es fanden entsprechende Finanzministerrunden statt. In diesen Runden stimmten die Wissenschaftsminister im Rahmen der GMK mit 16: 0 dafür, die Finanzminister mit 16: 0 dagegen.\n\nIch finde, diese 16 Stellen sind für 16 Bundesländer überhaupt keine Dimension; aber daran hakt es. Ein Konzept ist allerdings da.\n\nDarf ich noch etwas sagen, Herr Präsident?\n\nImmer. - Ich hatte am Anfang gesagt: Es gibt über 26 000 Anträge. Das sind die Anträge, die wir definitiv kennen und die im Hinblick auf bundesgesetzlich geregelte Berufe gestellt wurden. Was in den Ländern geschieht und sich nach den Ländergesetzen richtet, ist uns nicht bekannt. Insgesamt ist die Zahl also höher. Aber 26 000 Anträge sind eine belastbare Zahl. Für diese Anträge sind wir verantwortlich.\n\nDas ist sicher unterschiedlich; das kann ich aber nicht definitiv sagen. Konkrete Zahlen liegen noch nicht vor. Wir könnten Ihnen eine entsprechende Tabelle zuleiten, wenn es dann eine Staffelung gibt.\n\n188 Millionen Euro - Sie haben diesen Betrag ja noch einmal erwähnt - sind richtig viel Geld; das ist eine große Summe. Wir haben uns darauf verständigt, dass dieser Betrag bis 2018 zur Verfügung gestellt wird. Wir wären aber in der Lage, die Mittel, die im Rahmen dieses Programmes bereitgestellt werden, zu erhöhen, wenn sich das als sinnvoll herausstellen sollte. Im Moment ist das erst einmal eine große Summe, mit der man sehr viele der angesprochenen Dinge realisieren kann.\n\nWas die Ausstattung in den Ländern angeht, muss ich sagen: Das ist eine Sache, die wir nicht entscheiden können. Da kann der Bund nur an die Länder appellieren. Er darf den Ländern aber nicht vorschreiben, wie sie vorzugehen haben. In den Handwerkskammern und in den Industrie- und Handelskammern ist das aus meiner Sicht sehr gut geregelt.\n\n- Das sprach ich eben an. Wir streben auf einer ganzen Reihe von Feldern an, einheitlich zu agieren. Ich denke zum Beispiel an alle Berufe im Bereich der Industrie- und Handelskammern - auch dann, wenn der Bund dafür unter Umständen nicht zuständig ist. Hier soll es einen gemeinsamen Standard geben.\n\nDas schwierigste Problem stellen die Gesundheitsberufe dar, weil es in diesem Bereich aufgrund der Tatsache, dass es reglementierte Berufe sind, sehr viele Anträge gibt. An anderen Stellen macht sich das noch gar nicht so bemerkbar und ist vielleicht auch nicht das Problem.\n\nDer Bund unterstützt die Bundesländer, die sich dafür engagieren, dass die Kultusministerkonferenz für die Gesundheitsberufe und vielleicht auch für andere Bereiche Strukturen entwickelt, die in Bezug auf diese Berufe zu einer größeren Einheitlichkeit führen. Bei den Kammern ist das nicht das Problem.\n\nEs sind zum Teil auch Straßen, die uns betreffen. Wenn etwas in Mitleidenschaft gezogen worden ist, dann sind die Verhandlungen über die Regulierung von Schäden immer sehr schwierig. In Niedersachsen ging es um 20 Millionen Euro, über die es lange Diskussionen gab, und ich denke, die Einzelfälle muss man auf der Basis gesetzlicher Grundlagen verhandeln. Das weiß der Staatssekretär aber viel besser.\n\nGerne. - In dem Fall ist es so wie immer: Sie haben mit Ihrem Redebeitrag - dankenswerterweise haben Sie auf die Süddeutsche Zeitung verwiesen - deutlich gemacht, dass Sie - das nehme ich Ihnen gar nicht übel - die internen Zusammenhänge, was wie besprochen worden ist, nicht kennen und nicht kennen können. Demzufolge kann ich Ihre Behauptung einfach zurückweisen.\n\nMeine Grundhaltung zu dem, was wir mit dem Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz erreichen möchten, ist ganz klar: Wir wollen verhindern, dass - es sei denn, es besteht eine Notwendigkeit dafür - keine befristeten Verträge mit kurzer Laufzeit abgeschlossen werden, weil dadurch bei jungen Menschen große Unsicherheit auslöst wird. Wir möchten, dass Daueraufgaben dauerhaft finanziert werden. In diesem Punkt bin ich mit dem Geburtstagskind völlig einig. Wir reden darüber: Wie kann man das umsetzen? Das Gespräch zwischen den beiden Fraktionen ist aber nichts, was ich zu kommentieren hätte. Meine Grundhaltung dazu ist klar.\n\nSie haben den Zeitplan angesprochen. Sobald es ein klares Signal gibt, dass es die Chance gibt, dass die Novelle im Bundestag verabschiedet werden kann, lege ich sie dem Kabinett vor. Damit sind dann auch die anderen Termine völlig klar; es sei denn, der Bundesrat sorgt für eine Verschiebung.\"\n15581,nina-warken,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es gibt den wunderbaren Satz: „Die größte Waffe der Opposition ist die Information“, und damit, Herr Kollege von Notz, ist nicht die Falschinformation der Öffentlichkeit gemeint.\n\nMit allem, was Sie in letzter Zeit so von sich gegeben haben, suggerieren Sie, dass es in der Großen Koalition keine parlamentarische Kontrolle gibt, und das ist schlichtweg falsch. Diese Behauptung wird auch der Arbeit in fünf Untersuchungsausschüssen und anderen Gremien in dieser Legislaturperiode in keiner Weise gerecht.\n\nDie Wahrheit ist doch: Wäre es streng nach dem Wortlaut des Grundgesetzes gegangen, hätte es in dieser Wahlperiode keinen Untersuchungsausschuss gegeben. Die Koalition hat aber die Problematik früh erkannt und die Ausschüsse möglich gemacht, und dies ganz bestimmt nicht, weil sie eine parlamentarische Kontrolle verhindern wollte.\n\nNun darf ich als Obfrau über den NSA-Untersuchungsausschuss sprechen. Richtig ist, dass der Ausschuss im März 2014 von allen Fraktionen gemeinsam eingesetzt wurde. Weit überwiegende Teile der Beweis- und Verfahrensbeschlüsse wurden einvernehmlich getroffen. Wir haben in den vergangenen dreieinhalb Jahren in 70 Sitzungen 90 Zeugen gehört und 2 400 Ordner Beweismaterialien bearbeitet. Wir saßen alle in demselben Ausschuss, und wir haben alle die gleichen Informationen erhalten. Es gab keinen gesonderten Geheimausschuss nach dem Motto: „Zutritt nur für die Große Koalition“. Wir haben Sie auch nicht sonst wie in Ihren Rechten beschnitten. Dort, wo Sie sich ungerecht behandelt gefühlt haben, hat Karlsruhe Ihnen gesagt, dass es nicht so war.\n\nWir hatten hoffentlich alle den gleichen Anspruch in diesem Ausschuss, nämlich den Anspruch, die Vorwürfe aufzuklären. Aufklären bedeutet aber nicht, dass man schon am Anfang ein Ergebnis vor Augen hat, und dann schreit, die Aufklärung sei behindert worden, wenn sich die eigene Vermutung am Ende nicht als wahr herausstellt. Das ist sie nämlich mitnichten.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, in einem Untersuchungsausschuss, der sich mit den Tätigkeiten der Nachrichtendienste befasst, hat man es mit geheimhaltungsbedürftigen Sachverhalten zu tun. Das sollte für uns alle keine Überraschung sein. Der Umgang mit geheimen Akten und geschwärzten Stellen hat vielfach zu Diskussionen im Untersuchungsausschuss geführt.\n\nLetztlich müssen wir alle akzeptieren, dass es Bereiche gibt, in denen auch wir als Untersuchungsausschuss nicht alle Informationen erhalten können. Die Möglichkeiten, die wir hatten, haben wir ausgeschöpft. So haben wir alle Gespräche mit der Bundesregierung über die Freigabe geschwärzter Stellen geführt. Das war mühsam, aber es war erfolgreich, und einige Schwärzungen wurden zurückgenommen. Im Übrigen haben Sie als Opposition die im PUAG gegebene Möglichkeit, sich gegen Schwärzungen rechtlich zu wehren, kein einziges Mal wahrgenommen.\n\nViel Aufregung und viele Vorwürfe hat es rund um das Sondervotum der Opposition zum Abschlussbericht gegeben. Herr Kollege von Notz hat dazu getwittert: „Ein einmaliger + fragwürdiger Vorgang. GroKo verbannt Sondervotum ... in die Geheimschutzstelle“.\n\nAber auch hier gilt: Information bedeutet nicht Falschinformation. Lassen Sie mich das richtigstellen:\n\nOb etwas geheim ist, darüber entscheidet nicht das Parlament, der Ausschuss oder der Abgeordnete, nein, ob etwas materiell geheim ist, darüber entscheidet die herausgebende Stelle.\n\nDas sollte Ihnen allen nach jahrelanger Tätigkeit in diversen Kontrollgremien und Untersuchungsausschüssen auch bekannt sein.\n\nWie mit einem Dokument, das geheime Informationen enthält, umzugehen ist, ist dann die nächste Frage. Sie können doch nicht im Ernst verlangen, dass ein Ausschusssekretariat, dem Sie Ihr Sondervotum mit geheimen Stellen und der Notwendigkeit, den Betroffenen rechtliches Gehör zu gewähren, vorlegen, das einfach so fröhlich veröffentlicht. Nein, das muss in die Geheimschutzstelle. Dort kann es von den Abgeordneten eingesehen werden, dort kann es vom Sekretariat geprüft und freigegeben werden.\n\nNicht wir haben Ihr Sondervotum in die Geheimschutzstelle verbannt, nein, das haben Sie selbst getan. Die Alternative wäre gewesen, einen Text vorzulegen, der ungeschwärzt direkt veröffentlichungsfähig ist. Dafür, dass Sie dazu nicht in der Lage sind, sind nicht wir verantwortlich, sondern Sie selbst.\n\nDas Verfahren bezüglich Ihres Sondervotums war alternativlos. Die Ursache dafür liegt bei Ihnen: Nach dem gemeinsam beschlossenen Zeitplan hat die Koalition ihren Bewertungsteil am 28. April 2017 vorgelegt. Mit 41 Tagen Verspätung haben Sie Ihr Sondervotum vorgelegt, nämlich am 19. Juni 2017. Sie haben es zuerst der Presse vorgestellt und dann dem Ausschuss übermittelt. Somit konnte weder das rechtliche Gehör vorab gewährt werden, noch konnten zu schwärzende Stellen gegebenenfalls freigegeben werden.\n\nWir sind als Untersuchungsausschuss verpflichtet - das dürfte Ihnen auch bekannt sein -, zum Abschluss unserer Tätigkeit einen Bericht vorzulegen. Da dies die letzte Sitzungswoche in dieser Wahlperiode ist, war es zwingend, den Bericht in der vergangenen Woche zu verabschieden und in dieser Woche zu debattieren. Von daher hat der Vorsitzende zu Recht den Vorschlag gemacht, dass das Votum dem Abschlussbericht beigefügt wird und die geschwärzten Stellen sukzessive nach entsprechender Prüfung freigegeben werden. Bereits am 22. Juni 2017 wurde eine vorläufige, veröffentlichungsfähige Fassung erstellt und dem Abschlussbericht beigefügt.\n\nDie Stellen, die darin noch geschwärzt sind - das muss man auch einmal sagen -, betreffen zu zwei Dritteln die Gewährung rechtlichen Gehörs.\n\nDie Wahrheit ist also: Es gab keine Alternative, als mit dem Abschlussbericht so zu verfahren, wie damit verfahren wurde. Sie haben hier ein unwürdiges Spektakel veranstaltet, mit dem Sie vor allem bezwecken wollten, dass über den Abschlussbericht in dieser Woche nicht diskutiert werden kann. Das ist Ihnen nicht gelungen.\"\n5725,norbert-barthle,\"Verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Vor einem Jahr haben wir uns dafür entschieden, ein Elektromobilitätsgesetz auf den Weg zu bringen, um damit neuen Schwung in dieses Thema und auf Deutschlands Straßen zu bringen. Heute haben Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Gelegenheit, in der zweiten und dritten Lesung mit einer kraftvollen Zustimmung zu diesem Gesetzentwurf dafür zu sorgen, dass dieser Schwung auch zustande kommt.\n\nEnde des Jahres 2014 haben wir die Marktvorbereitungsphase abgeschlossen und Bilanz gezogen. Der zweite Fortschrittsbericht der Nationalen Plattform Elektromobilität hat uns bescheinigt, dass diese erste Phase durchaus erfolgreich verlaufen ist. Jetzt befinden wir uns in einer ganz wichtigen Zeitspanne - es steht eine Art Zäsur an -; denn jetzt beginnt die Markthochlaufphase. Das ist die entscheidende Herausforderung. Wir müssen alles tun, um die Dynamik, die in diesem Markt besteht, zu erhalten und zu verstärken. Wir haben derzeit immerhin einen Gesamtbestand von rund 24 000 rein elektrisch oder extern aufladbaren Elektro-Pkw auf unseren Straßen. Allein im Jahr 2014 wurden 9 500 neu zugelassen.\n\nDamit hat der Gesamtbestand um 70 Prozent zugenommen. Das ist eine Erfolgsbilanz, die sich sehen lassen kann.\n\n- Doch. Darüber sind sich auch die Fachleute einig.\n\nDie deutschen Automobilhersteller haben inzwischen 17 Modelle auf den Markt gebracht. Allein in diesem Jahr sollen 12 weitere hinzukommen. Ich will durchaus eingestehen, dass es in einzelnen Marktsegmenten noch Nachholbedarf gibt.\n\nDas ist etwas einseitig ausgerichtet, aber dieses Thema muss die Wirtschaft regeln. Wir werden dafür sorgen, dass dieser Markthochlauf mit aller Kraft unterstützt wird. Dieses Elektromobilitätsgesetz schafft dafür die notwendigen Rahmenbedingungen.\n\nWir steigern die Attraktivität für die Nutzer, und wir schaffen Privilegien im allgemeinen Straßenverkehr. Es gibt für die Länder und Kommunen bezüglich der Bevorrechtigungen entsprechende Handlungsspielräume. Wir schaffen damit neue Chancen. Wir wollen keine Pflichten, Regeln oder Vorschriften einführen, sondern Chancen eröffnen,\n\num auf der Ebene der Städte und Gemeinden vor Ort gezielt die Regelungen zu treffen, die ganz konkret die Elektromobilität begünstigen und damit einen Schub erzeugen. Wir schaffen die Rechtsgrundlage für eine klare und eindeutige Kennzeichnung dieser Fahrzeuge. Wir schaffen Rechtsgrundlagen, die wir später mit Verordnungen näher ausgestalten werden. Wir legen großen Wert darauf, dass diese Verordnungen rasch vorliegen, möglichst noch vor der Sommerpause in Kraft treten, damit alles entsprechend umgesetzt werden kann.\n\nMit diesem Gesetzentwurf definieren wir auch, welche Fahrzeuge bevorrechtigt werden können: reine Batterieelektrofahrzeuge, Brennstoffzellenfahrzeuge. Aber auch die sogenannten Plug-in-Hybride werden entsprechend behandelt. Wir wollen gleichzeitig sicherstellen, dass damit entsprechende Umweltvorteile verbunden sind; denn das ist der eigentliche Grund der Bevorrechtigung. Deshalb hat man für die aufladbaren Hybridfahrzeuge bestimmte Umweltkriterien eingeführt. Sie dürfen nur dann die Privilegien nutzen, wenn ihr CO2-Ausstoß höchstens 50 Gramm pro Kilometer beträgt oder wenn sie mindestens eine elektrische Reichweite von 40 Kilometern vorweisen können. Bis 2018 haben wir eine Übergangszeit mit einer Mindestreichweite von 30 Kilometern. Ich glaube, das sind Regelungen, die praktikabel und nachvollziehbar sind.\n\nDer Entwurf der Verordnung sieht vor, dass die Kennzeichnung mittels E-Kennzeichen erfolgt. Damit ist auf den ersten Blick klar erkennbar, welche Fahrzeuge die Privilegien nutzen dürfen. Ausländische Fahrzeuge haben dann die Möglichkeit, eine Plakette zu erwerben, um die Privilegien ebenfalls in Anspruch nehmen zu können. Das dürften, meine Damen und Herren, relativ wenige sein.\n\nMit dem Elektromobilitätsgesetz wird die Möglichkeit geschaffen, die Parkraumbewirtschaftung auf kommunaler Ebene entsprechend zu gestalten, sei es mit Preisermäßigungen oder besonderen Zufahrtsberechtigungen dort, wo aus Lärmschutzgründen Zufahrtsbeschränkungen eingeführt wurden. Ich erinnere an zahlreiche Luftkurorte, Erholungsgebiete, Wohngebiete und Ähnliches mehr, wo wir solche Regelungen haben. Wir haben damit die Möglichkeit geschaffen, kommunal das Richtige zu tun - bis hin zur Freigabe der Busspuren für Elektrofahrzeuge. Damit hat übrigens Norwegen sehr gute Erfahrungen gemacht. Wenn die Busspuren zu sehr in Anspruch genommen werden, können die Kommunen reagieren und es entsprechend regeln.\n\nWenn von den Grünen vorgetragen wird, dass sie keine Porsche Cayenne auf diesen Spuren sehen wollen, dann kann ich nur anmerken: Es gibt in ganz Deutschland gerade mal 100 hybride Porsche Cayenne. Einen solchen auf einer Busspur zu finden, ist schon fast ein Sechser im Lotto. Insofern sieht man an dieser Stelle, wie weltfremd teilweise die Argumente von Ihrer Seite sind.\n\nWährend der Beratungen haben die Koalitionäre noch einige Veränderungen eingebracht. Darüber werde ich jetzt nichts sagen. Das überlasse ich meinem Kollegen Steffen Bilger. Er wird Ihnen erläutern, was im parlamentarischen Verfahren noch geändert worden ist.\n\nIch kann nur sagen: Diesem ersten Schritt, dem Elek-tromobilitätsgesetz, werden weitere Schritte folgen. Wir werden weitere bestehende Hemmnisse abbauen. Ich will nur erwähnen, dass das BMVI gemeinsam mit Tank & Rast beabsichtigt, Schnellladestationen an rund 430 bewirtschafteten Raststätten an Bundesautobahnen zu errichten. Das wird dafür sorgen, dass entsprechende Ladekapazitäten vorhanden sind; denn die begrenzte Reichweite ist nach wie vor ein Problem.\n\nEs gibt noch weitere Hemmnisse. Ich habe es am eigenen Leib verspürt: Wenn ich mich nach einem Dienstfahrzeug mit Elektroantrieb erkundige, dann wird mir erklärt, dass die kleinen E-Fahrzeuge eine mehrfach höhere Leasingrate haben als große Premiummodelle der Oberklasse. Auch hier stimmt etwas nicht. Da muss man bestehende Hemmnisse beseitigen.\n\nIch bin zuversichtlich, dass uns das gelingen wird.\n\nDanke.\"\n1629,gabriela-heinrich,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kollegen und Kolleginnen! Meine Damen und Herren! Der Kollege Brand hat heute bereits das Wort des Bundespräsidenten erwähnt: Jede Politik ist auch Menschenrechtspolitik. - Der Satz bringt es auf den Punkt: Die Menschenrechte müssen die Leit-linie jeder deutschen Politik sein. Jenseits aller übrigen Bestrebungen nach kohärenter Politik muss alles, was Politik ausmacht, auf dem Fundament der Allgemeinen Erklärung der Menschenrechte und ihrer Folgeabkommen stehen.\n\nEine weitere Linie deutscher Politik muss sein: Menschenrechtspolitik und humanitäre Hilfe dürfen niemanden vergessen. Es darf nicht sein, dass die Organisation Ärzte ohne Grenzen eine Liste vergessener Krisen veröffentlichen muss, zuletzt im Dezember 2013 eine Liste mit den Staaten Tschad, Zentralafrika, Swasiland, Südsudan und Simbabwe.\n\nZentralafrika zum Beispiel ist keine vergessene Krise mehr. Die internationale Staatengemeinschaft handelt, und auch Deutschland kann seinen Teil leisten. Letzte Woche haben wir hier zu Ruanda gesprochen. Viel war die Rede von RtoP, von der Responsibility to Protect. Gestern hat das Kabinett einen Antrag beschlossen: Es geht um die Entsendung bewaffneter deutscher Streitkräfte zur Beteiligung an der Europäischen Überbrückungsmission in der Zentralafrikanischen Republik. Wir werden morgen darüber beraten. Militarisierung? Angesichts der aktuellen Situation muss die Frage doch lauten: Schauen wir hin, oder schauen wir weg? Wenn sich die Bundeswehr an dieser Mission beteiligt, wenn sie zum Beispiel Verwundete transportiert, dann ist das in meinen Augen eine aktive Menschenrechtspolitik, die die Lehren aus dem Genozid von Ruanda und aus den Gräueln von Srebrenica gezogen hat.\n\nEine der größten humanitären Krisen unserer Zeit - Sie haben es angesprochen - ist die in Syrien. Syrien zeigt, dass wir uns auch im Menschenrechtsausschuss noch mehr mit humanitärer Hilfe beschäftigen müssen. Wir haben im Deutschen Bundestag mehrfach über das Leiden und die Not der syrischen Flüchtlinge gesprochen. Syrien ist ein Fall für die Responsibility to Protect, aber eben nicht nur Syrien. Die Nachrichten sind voll mit Berichten über Katastrophen in allen möglichen Ländern. Wir sind uns unserer Verantwortung bewusst, zu helfen, auch wenn sich oft zunächst ein Gefühl der Hilflosigkeit einstellen mag. Wir sind uns unserer Verantwortung bewusst, Hilfe auch durch aufgestockte Haushaltsmittel bereitzustellen.\n\nHumanitäre Katastrophen kündigen sich an. Die Katastrophe im Südsudan kündigt sich an. Toby Lanzer, der humanitäre Koordinator für den Südsudan bei der UNO, hat letzte Woche eindringlich vor einer neuen Hungersnot gewarnt, einer drohenden Hungersnot, die vergleichbar mit der in Äthiopien in den 80er-Jahren ist. Sie droht jetzt, wenn die Saat nicht rechtzeitig in den Boden gebracht wird. Sie droht in einem Land, das eigentlich fruchtbar sein könnte und über ausreichend Ressourcen verfügt, um sich selbst zu ernähren.\n\nIch halte fest: Wir dürfen diese Länder nicht vergessen. Aber wir dürfen auch nicht die Menschen vergessen, die sich in vielen Ländern dieser Welt für die Menschenrechte einsetzen. Seit zehn Jahren gibt es die Leitlinien der Europäischen Union zum Schutz von Menschenrechtsverteidigern. Zu diesem Schutz gehört es, ihnen die Sicherheit zu geben, dass sie in ihrem Kampf für die Menschenrechte nicht allein sind. Die internationale Anerkennung und die internationale Beachtung können für Menschenrechtsverteidiger eine Lebensversicherung sein. Denn leider ist es so: Wer sich friedlich für die Menschenrechte einsetzt, wird in manchen Teilen der Welt genau dafür verfolgt, verhaftet, gefoltert und ermordet.\n\nEs gibt weltweit unzählige Beispiele für mutige Menschen, die sich in ihrer Heimat friedlich für die Menschenrechte einsetzen. Ich nenne hier stellvertretend Alice Nkom aus Kamerun und Kasha Jacqueline Nabagesera aus Uganda, die sich für die Rechte von Homosexuellen einsetzen. Außerdem nenne ich Abdolfattah Soltani. Er wurde im Iran unter anderem für die Errichtung des Zentrums für Menschenrechtsverteidiger angeklagt. Er ist noch immer in Haft. Unsere Aufgabe ist es, diese Menschenrechtsverteidiger mit allen unseren Möglichkeiten zu unterstützen, sie nicht alleinzulassen und die Vertreter ihrer Länder immer wieder auf sie hinzuweisen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich komme zum Schluss. Die angesprochenen Krisen sind schrecklich und bringen unermessliches Leid. Wir müssen uns unserer Verantwortung innerhalb der internationalen Gemeinschaft stellen, und dazu gehört die ausreichende Finanzierung. Ich danke daher besonders unserem Außenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier dafür, dass die Mittel für humanitäre Hilfsmaßnahmen und nicht zuletzt die Transformationspartnerschaften Nordafrika/Naher Osten deutlich gestärkt werden sollen. Vielleicht müssen wir auch noch eine Schüppe drauflegen. Wir können die Hoffnung nicht aufgeben, dass das hilft, zumindest die Folgen der schlimmsten Katastrophen zu lindern.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n15040,herbert-behrens,\"Vielen Dank. - Herr Minister Dobrindt, ich habe eine Frage vor dem Hintergrund, dass wir in Niedersachsen ein ganz eigenwilliges Projekt auf der Straße haben, nämlich den Ausbau der A 7 zwischen Seesen und Göttingen. Ihr Vorgänger im Amt, Herr Dr. Ramsauer, hat den zuständigen Minister in der niedersächsischen Landesregierung angewiesen, den Ausbau als ÖPP realisieren zu lassen. Bei dieser Frage sind wir nämlich ganz besonders sensibel: Das Projekt hat sich inzwischen von 600 Millionen Euro auf 1 Milliarde Euro verteuert, und trotzdem hat der private Betreiber die Möglichkeit, diesen Autobahnabschnitt auszubauen und über die nächsten 30 Jahre zu betreiben.\n\nInsofern ist meine Frage: Wie bewerten Sie die Änderungen, die angeblich ins Grundgesetz hineingeschrieben werden sollen, damit es künftig keine ÖPP-Bauvorhaben dieser Bedeutung mehr gibt? Es geht bei der A 7 um einen Autobahnabschnitt von 29 Kilometern Länge. Ist er wesentlich, oder ist er unwesentlich? Auch diese konkrete Frage hätte ich gerne von Ihnen beantwortet: Ist ein solches Projekt, das wir in Niedersachsen gegen den Willen der Landesregierung aufgedrückt bekommen haben, in Zukunft möglich oder nicht?\n\nLiebe Kollegin Hagedorn, liebe Bettina, das Engagement in Ehren. Wir erkennen zwar an, dass es massive Veränderungen und Verbesserungen gegenüber dem ursprünglichen Entwurf gegeben hat. Aber auch du hast richtigerweise darauf hingewiesen, dass das eigentliche Problem am Anfang liegt. Man konnte also nur noch versuchen, den Gesetzentwurf zu verbessern.\n\nDu hast von einer „Sternstunde des Parlamentarismus“ gesprochen. Ich habe nicht den Eindruck, dass wir, zumindest wir als Oppositionspolitiker und Fachpolitiker, an dieser Diskussion teilhaben konnten, weil uns bis gestern, bis zu den Ausschusssitzungen, immer noch nicht das komplette Paket mit all seinen Details, mit allen Anträgen vorgelegen hat.\n\nVon daher meine Frage an dich und an die SPD-Kolleginnen und -Kollegen: Woraus ergibt sich der Zwang, diese Bundesfernstraßengesellschaft heute mit zu beschließen? Wäre es nicht sinnvoller gewesen, das, was im Rahmen des Länderfinanzausgleiches nötig ist, heute zu regeln, um dann später noch einmal richtig und gründlich an das Thema Bundesfernstraßengesellschaft heranzugehen?\"\n10772,thomas-hitschler,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Kennen Sie den Ausspruch: „Dann geh doch nach Timbuktu!“? Das hat man früher Leuten empfohlen, die man möglichst weit weg haben wollte. Um es gleich vorweg zu sagen: Das ist nicht der Grund, warum wir die Bundeswehr nach Mali schicken; sonst würde am Ende vielleicht noch die Linkspartei dem Mandat zustimmen.\n\nWarum aber, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, schicken wir deutsche Soldatinnen und Soldaten nach Mali? Auch wenn wir heute nur über die EU-Trainingsmission entscheiden, muss man diese Debatte etwas weiter fassen. Deutschland ist nicht nur der größte Truppensteller bei EUTM Mali, sondern auch mit über 70 Millionen Euro in der Entwicklungshilfe, im Rahmen von EUCAP bei der Ausbildung der Polizei sowie in der UN-Friedensmission MINUSMA engagiert. Mali ist eines der gefährlichsten Einsatzgebiete der Welt, Kolleginnen und Kollegen; auch darüber muss man kritisch diskutieren.\n\nIm vergangenen Jahr fielen dort 29 Blauhelmsoldaten der UN; 80 wurden verletzt. Im Dezember fanden die letzten Raketenangriffe auf das Camp Castor statt, in dem auch deutsche Soldaten untergebracht sind. Im März wurde ein Al-Qaida-Angriff auf das Hotel in der malischen Hauptstadt Bamako abgewehrt, in dem sich das EUTM-Hauptquartier befindet. Im April fielen drei französische Soldaten durch die Explosion einer Mine. Wir sind in Gedanken auch bei ihnen, wenn wir über diesen Einsatz heute entscheiden, Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nDie Einsätze der Bundeswehr in Mali sind keine Kampfeinsätze. Trotzdem stehen dort auch deutsche Soldatinnen und Soldaten im Fadenkreuz der Dschihadisten. Mit der Ausweitung der Mission an den Niger-Bogen von Timbuktu bis Gao rücken sie noch näher an die Operationsgebiete der örtlichen Ableger von al-Qaida und von dem sogenannten „Islamischen Staat“. Gerade weil wir unsere Truppe einem solchen Risiko aussetzen, müssen wir diesen Einsatz außerordentlich gut begründen. Das schulden wir unseren Bürgerinnen und Bürgern; das schulden wir als Parlamentarier aber auch unserer Parlamentsarmee.\n\nBamako, Brüssel, Jakarta, Mogadischu, Kairo, Ankara, Stawropol, Kabul und Essen - eine jetzt schon zu lange, aber nicht einmal komplette Liste dschihadistischer Attentate allein in diesem jungen Jahr 2016; in vielen Fällen mit al-Qaida oder dem IS verbunden.\n\nDer Dschihadismus, Kolleginnen und Kollegen, gedeiht überall dort, wo er sich dank fragiler oder gänzlich fehlender Staatlichkeit ungehindert ausbreiten kann: Somalia, Libyen, Syrien, Nordirak oder Nordmali. Hier rekrutiert der Dschihadismus seine Kämpfer. Besonders erfolgreich wirbt er bei jungen Menschen ohne echte Perspektive. Die Hälfte der Bevölkerung in Mali ist jünger als 15 Jahre. Die Hälfte der Bevölkerung lebt in absoluter Armut. Über die Hälfte der Bevölkerung kann weder lesen noch schreiben.\n\nHier schmuggelt der Dschihadismus seine Waffen. Mit den Waffen aus Gaddafis Arsenalen überrannten die Rebellen 2012 den Norden Malis.\n\nHier zieht sich der Dschihadismus allerdings auch zurück. Al-Qaida-Gruppen nutzen Mali als Ausgangsstation neuer Angriffe in der gesamten Region und zum Rückzug. Auch der IS hat seinen Fuß in genau dieser Tür.\n\nHier bleibt der Dschihadismus aber nicht. Seine Angriffsziele erstrecken sich über die gesamte Welt, auch über Europa, auch über Deutschland. Europäische Sicherheit wird auch in Timbuktu verteidigt; da hat der Kollege Otte völlig recht. Ein stabiler Staat schützt uns alle, weil er weniger Nährboden für Terroristen bietet. Ein stabiler Staat Mali entspricht deshalb unserem ureigenen sicherheitspolitischen Interesse in Deutschland.\n\nBereits 8 000 Soldaten, Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wurden durch EUTM Mali ausgebildet - zwei Drittel der kompletten malischen Streitkräfte. Ohne einen gut ausgebildeten Sicherheitsapparat lässt sich ein stabiler Staat kaum machen.\n\nEs gibt Fortschritte; Christoph Strässer hat es vorhin betont. Es gibt einen Friedensvertrag und einen Waffenstillstand. Es gibt aktive Versöhnungsarbeit, Reintegrationsmaßnahmen und politische Dezentralisierung. Es gibt aber auch Hindernisse und Rückschläge; das gehört dazu. Frank-Walter Steinmeier hat diese Probleme bei seiner Mali-Reise deutlich angesprochen. Es ist ein steiniger Weg, Kolleginnen und Kollegen, aber man kann darauf laufen.\n\nDer Mali-Beauftragte der Afrikanischen Union, Pierre Buyoya, sagte vor wenigen Tagen: Die Terroristen bedrohen nicht nur Mali, sondern die gesamte Region. Nordmali ist zum Stützpunkt geworden, um Burkina Faso, die Elfenbeinküste und womöglich weitere Länder anzugreifen. - Der Terrorismus in der Sahelzone bedroht dabei auch deutsche Sicherheitsinteressen.\n\nVon den Flüchtlingen, die 2016 bereits in Italien angekommen sind, sind fast zwei Drittel aus dem Nordwesten Afrikas. Geografisch liegt Mali dort ähnlich zentral wie Deutschland in Europa. Mali und das Nachbarland Niger gelten als Drehscheibe der afrikanischen Flüchtlingsbewegungen.\n\nDie massenhafte Flucht vor dem Bürgerkrieg in Syrien hat uns in Deutschland und Europa vor enorme Herausforderungen gestellt. Ein weiterer Zerfall Malis wäre nicht nur für die gesamte Region katastrophal. Auch in Deutschland würden wir die Folgen spüren. Deshalb ist Wegschauen definitiv keine Alternative, Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nWir schicken die Bundeswehr nicht nach Timbuktu, weil wir sie möglichst weit weg von uns haben wollen. Timbuktu war in früheren Zeiten vielleicht sehr weit weg. In heutigen Zeiten ist es sehr nah. Was dort passiert, betrifft auch unsere eigene Sicherheit. Deshalb schicken wir die Bundeswehr auch nach Timbuktu, und deshalb bitte ich Sie um Unterstützung für die Verlängerung des Mandats.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8983,manfred-zollmer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Bausparkassen in Deutschland haben ein erfolgreiches und bewährtes Modell, Menschen zu Wohnung und Eigentum zu verhelfen. Das zeigt die Vergangenheit; das zeigen aber auch die aktuellen Zahlen. Ihr Geschäftsmodell basiert auf der Grundidee des kollektiven Bausparens. Dieser Idee sind in Deutschland sehr viele Menschen gefolgt. Das zeigen 30 Millionen Bausparverträge mit Einlagen in Höhe von über 150 Milliarden Euro. Meine Damen und Herren, das können nicht alles nur Spießer sein, um eine alte Fernsehwerbung zu zitieren.\n\nAktuell sind die Bausparkassen allerdings unter Druck geraten, infiziert von den Nullzinsen. Die aktuelle Niedrigzinsphase bedroht das bewährte Geschäftsmodell der Bausparkassen. Viele Kunden belassen ihr angespartes Geld, das noch ordentlich verzinst wird, lieber in der Bausparkasse und holen sich einen Immobilienkredit am Markt. Dort ist er billiger als das, was mit der Bausparkasse vertraglich vereinbart worden ist. Dies ist ein Dilemma für die Bausparkassen und eine Herausforderung für den Gesetzgeber. Mit dem neuen Bausparkassen­gesetz wollen wir den Bausparkassen helfen, ihr bewährtes Geschäftsmodell auch in einer Niedrigzinsphase beizubehalten. Offensichtlich wird diese Niedrigzinsphase noch sehr lange anhalten. Man muss sich nur die heutigen Beschlüsse der EZB ansehen.\n\nWir wollen mit einer maßvollen Geschäftsausweitung einige Beschränkungen lockern, damit Bausparkassen auch in einer Niedrigzinsphase wirtschaftlich bestehen können -\n\n- für ihre Kunden -, ohne unverhältnismäßige Risiken einzugehen. Die gute Nachricht für alle Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher lautet, liebe Frau Karawanskij: Dies geht nicht zulasten der Kunden. Ihre Rechtsstellung bleibt unverändert. Dies ist eine gute Nachricht.\n\nWas ändert sich nicht? Auch in Zukunft wird die Bausparkasse ein Spezialkreditinstitut bleiben. Was ändert sich? Ich will auf einige der Änderungen kurz eingehen.\n\nWir werden die Beleihungsgrenze von 80 auf 100 Prozent des Beleihungswertes erhöhen. Die bisherige Beleihungsgrenze führte in der Praxis dazu, dass real nur eine Beleihung von ungefähr 65 Prozent des Verkehrswertes einer Immobilie ohne Zusatzsicherheiten möglich war. Das ist für viele junge Familien zu wenig und benachteiligt gleichzeitig die Bausparkassen im Wettbewerb.\n\nDiese Erhöhung gilt für selbstgenutzten Wohnraum. Auch die Anhörung hat gezeigt, dass diese Ausweitung sinnvoll und geboten ist und dass die Bausparkassen damit mehr verfügbare Mittel in Wohnungsbaufinanzierung anlegen können.\n\nDas Ausfallrisiko der Bausparkassen ist sehr gering, wie die Zahlen zeigen. Damit gibt es keine unvertretbaren Stabilitätsrisiken.\n\nBausparkassen erhalten die Möglichkeit, künftig Mittel aus der Zuteilungsmasse, die vorübergehend dafür nicht verwendet werden können, auch zur Gewährung von sonstigen Baudarlehen zu verwenden. Damit reagieren wir auf die veränderten Bedingungen im Niedrigzinsumfeld. Dem gleichen Zweck dient die Ausweitung des Verwendungszwecks des Fonds zur bauspartechnischen Absicherung.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir werden das enge Korsett der Anlagemöglichkeiten einer Bausparkasse moderat erweitern. Zukünftig dürfen Bausparkassen bis zu 5 Prozent der Zuteilungsmasse in Aktien anlegen. Das gilt allerdings erst ab 2017, weil es notwendig ist, dass sie ein eigenes Risikomanagement aufbauen. Darüber hinaus wird es noch eine Verordnung des Ministeriums geben, in der entsprechende Vorschriften gemacht werden, wie man zum Beispiel Anlagen diversifizieren und streuen soll.\n\nWenn eine höhere Rendite erzielt werden soll, dann ist das immer mit höheren Risiken verbunden. Es kommt darauf an, diese Risiken sinnvoll zu begrenzen, und das machen wir. Jede Art der Anlage ist letztendlich mit Risiken verbunden. Das gilt, wie die Vergangenheit gezeigt hat, auch für Staatsanleihen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, etwas ratlos machen mich die Kritik der Linken und das, was die Grünen kritisiert haben. Wir haben das im Ausschuss gehört. Liebe Frau Karawanskij, ausgerechnet die Linke findet den Kollektivgedanken beim Bausparen verwerflich.\n\nDas ist so, als ob die katholische Kirche von der Bibel ablassen soll. Alle ideologischen Väter Ihrer Partei würden im Grabe rotieren, wenn sie das erfahren würden.\n\n- Ja, das ist in Ordnung, aber für mich macht das eines wirklich deutlich, nämlich dass Ihre Kritik ziemlich hilflos ist. 30 Millionen Bausparverträge sprechen hier eine andere Sprache. Offensichtlich vertrauen die Menschen kollektiven Systemen, und ich finde das gut.\n\nBei den Grünen ist mir nicht klar geworden, welche Kritik Sie letztendlich haben. Ich hatte das Gefühl, Sie haben einfach ein Problem mit Bausparkassen. Sie haben keine Alternative aufgezeigt. Ich habe das dumpfe Gefühl, Sie haben auch keine Alternative. Sie handeln nach dem Motto von Konfuzius: Wer etwas will, sucht Wege. Wer etwas nicht will, sucht Gründe.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir erweitern mit diesem Gesetz den Spielraum der Bausparkassen, damit sie auch in Zukunft am Markt bestehen können. Dies geschieht maßvoll und verantwortlich, ohne dass übermäßige Risiken entstehen und ohne die Kundinnen und Kunden zu belasten. Dies ist ein guter Weg.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n14484,carsten-trager,\"Einen wunderschönen guten Morgen! Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Welt hat sich mit 17 Nachhaltigkeitszielen zu einem besseren Umweltschutz und zur Bekämpfung von Armut und Ungleichheit verpflichtet. Und Deutschland geht bei der Umsetzung - international und gleichzeitig hier bei uns, in unserer Heimat - voran. Wenn die Regierung das umsetzt, was sie in der Deutschen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie aufgeschrieben hat, dann, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, sind wir einen großen Schritt weiter.\n\nDie Bundesregierung - voran das Bundeskanzleramt, das Umweltministerium und das BMZ - hat zusammen mit den Verbänden und dem Statistischen Bundesamt wirklich hervorragende Arbeit geleistet. Deutschland setzt sich ambitionierte Ziele, entwickelt Maßnahmen und - ganz wichtig! - misst die Erfolge dieser Maßnahmen. In meiner alten Branche gab es eine Regel: Miss es oder vergiss es. Nur dann, wenn die Einhaltung der Regeln kontrolliert und die Erfolge gemessen werden, kann am Ende ehrlich bewertet werden, ob das ganze Projekt gut war und auch, wo es noch gehakt hat. Deshalb bin ich sehr froh, dass wir ambitionierte Indikatoren haben, mit denen wir die Deutsche Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie Schritt für Schritt verbessern können und werden.\n\nDas alles ist Work in Progress; aber wir haben die Messlatte hochgehängt. Und das ist eine wirklich gute Nachricht in diesen Zeiten.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich bin der Regierung auch für die Ernsthaftigkeit dankbar, mit der sie die globalen Nachhaltigkeitsziele anpackt. Wir haben hier und im Parlamentarischen Beirat für nachhaltige Entwicklung schon oft debattiert, wie wichtig diese Ziele sowohl für die Entwicklung unseres Planeten als auch für uns hier zu Hause in Deutschland sind. Denn auch, wenn es diesem Land gut geht, so gibt es doch noch viel Ungerechtigkeit. Deshalb freue ich mich, dass ich hier voller Überzeugung sagen kann: Die Deutsche Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie ist ein progressives Dokument.\n\nHier steht - als eine vom ganzen Kabinett mitgetragene Regierungsstrategie - schwarz auf weiß: Die Bundesregierung bekennt sich zur Einhaltung der planetaren Grenzen, den Belastungsgrenzen unserer Erde. Daraus ergibt sich ein Transformationsauftrag und - ich darf wörtlich aus der Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie zitieren -:\n\nEs geht darum, umfassende, beschleunigte Veränderungen in Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft einzuleiten und voranzutreiben: in unserer Art zu leben, zu arbeiten, zu konsumieren, in Technologien, Institutionen und Praktiken.\n\nDas, meine Damen und Herren, ist ein klares Bekenntnis zu einem sozialen, ökologischen und wirtschaftlich vernünftigen Fortschritt. Ich als Sozialdemokrat freue mich über dieses Bekenntnis.\n\nUnd nun, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen hier im Parlament, sind wir dran. Die Regierung hat ordentlich vorgelegt. Nun müssen wir nachlegen. Ziele und Indikatoren sind das eine; aber die Ziele müssen natürlich mit guter Politik, mit Leben gefüllt werden. Das ist unser Job. Es braucht engagierte und progressive Politik, um engagierte und progressive Ziele zu erreichen.\n\nHier stehen jetzt alle, die bisher Nachhaltigkeit für sich proklamiert haben, auch in der Verpflichtung. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es ist an uns.\n\nDie Vereinten Nationen haben mit den globalen Nachhaltigkeitszielen einen großen, einen historischen Schritt getan. Die Bundesregierung hat mit ihrer Strategie nachgezogen. Und jetzt ist es an der Zeit für dieses Parlament, dass auch wir einen großen Schritt wagen. Es ist an der Zeit, dass wir Nachhaltigkeit im Grundgesetz verankern.\n\nDer Parlamentarische Beirat für nachhaltige Entwicklung und der Rat für Nachhaltige Entwicklung haben hier gemeinsam gute Vorarbeit geleistet. Große Köpfe wie Klaus Töpfer, Gesine Schwan, Ernst Ulrich von Weizsäcker sowie Hans-Jürgen Papier sind mit uns der Auffassung: Nachhaltigkeit gehört ins Grundgesetz. Es ist an der Zeit. Wer es wirklich ernst meint mit der Bekämpfung von Armut und Ungleichheit, mit der Bewahrung der Schöpfung und mit einem wirklich nachhaltigen Wachstum, das auch die künftigen Generationen im Blick hat, der sollte vor diesem Schritt nicht zurückschrecken.\n\nIch rufe Ihnen zu, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Union und auch von den Grünen: Geben Sie Ihr Zögern auf! Verstecken Sie sich nicht länger hinter verfahrenstaktischen Scheinargumenten! Es geht um Größeres!\n\nWir alle führen in Sonntagsreden das Wort „Nachhaltigkeit“ im Mund. Nun ist es an der Zeit, zu liefern. Das wäre ein großer Schritt des deutschen Parlaments. Wann, wenn nicht jetzt, meine Damen und Herren?\"\n1978,lars-klingbeil,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich will mich bei den Linken und den Grünen bedanken, dass wir heute wieder eine Möglichkeit haben, hier im Parlament über die Frage der Vorratsdatenspeicherung zu diskutieren. Ich halte es für wichtig, dass wir uns als Deutscher Bundestag nach diesem wegweisenden Urteil des Europäischen Gerichtshofes intensiv über die Frage der Datenspeicherung und der Datensicherheit unterhalten und uns auf die Suche nach dem richtigen Weg machen.\n\nIch will sagen, dass viele seit dem 8. April, als der Europäische Gerichtshof das Urteil gesprochen hat, dazugelernt haben. Es war für viele hier im Haus Anlass, die eigene Position zu überdenken. Für viele ist angesichts dessen, was man in den Jahren zuvor nahezu ideologisch vertreten hatte, quasi eine Welt zusammengebrochen.\n\nIch will an dieser Stelle auch sagen, dass es nicht nur das Parlament ist, das in den letzten Jahren hochemotional über das Thema der Vorratsdatenspeicherung diskutiert hat: Wir haben erlebt, dass sich viele in der Zivilgesellschaft immer wieder ehrenamtlich für Datenschutz und gegen die Vorratsdatenspeicherung engagiert haben. Ich finde, heute ist ein Tag, an dem man diesen Ehrenamtlichen danken kann, die sich immer wieder in die Debatte eingebracht haben.\n\nDas, was wir erlebt haben, was wir als Parlament mit dem Urteil des Europäischen Gerichtshofes mit auf den Weg bekommen haben, bedeutet eine tektonische Verschiebung in der Debatte; das muss man so festhalten. Ich wundere mich schon, wenn ich dann an so mancher Stelle erlebe, dass die Argumente die gleichen geblieben sind wie vor dem 8. April. Da kann ich jedem nur raten, in sich zu gehen und sich zu fragen, ob die Argumente der Vergangenheit auch die der Zukunft sein können.\n\nIch will an dieser Stelle ausdrücklich der Bundesregierung und vor allem dem Bundesjustizminister, der auch anwesend ist, danken für die Positionierung. Es war ein wichtiger Schritt, dass Heiko Maas in enger Abstimmung mit Thomas de Maizière damals gesagt hat: Wir setzen das, was im Koalitionsvertrag steht, nicht sofort um, sondern wir warten das Urteil des Europäischen Gerichtshofes ab und schauen erst dann, wie es weitergeht. Es war eine kluge Entscheidung, hier keine Schnellschüsse vorzunehmen und das Urteil des Europäischen Gerichtshofes abzuwarten.\n\nIch will auch sagen, dass es ebenfalls eine richtige Entscheidung des Justizministers war, auch wieder in enger Abstimmung mit dem Innenminister, nach dem Urteil zu überlegen: Wie geht es denn weiter? Die Position, die Heiko Maas in den öffentlichen Raum gestellt hat und der sich immer mehr anschließen, nämlich zu sagen, wir wollen keinen nationalen Alleingang, finde ich richtig. Wir als Parlament sollten diese Position unterstützen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nEs ist heute, eigentlich von allen Vorrednern, schon angesprochen worden: Wir müssen uns nach diesem Urteil Zeit für die Diskussion nehmen. Wir müssen auch einige Dinge zur Kenntnis nehmen. Der Koalitionsvertrag hat an dieser Stelle keine Grundlage mehr; denn darin steht: Wir wollen die europäische Richtlinie umsetzen. - Diese Richtlinie ist jetzt für nichtig erklärt worden. Die Frage ist: Wie geht es jetzt weiter?\n\nAn die Kollegen der Grünen gerichtet, sage ich: Ja, wir brauchen die Debatte auch in Europa. Was ich nicht will, ist ein europäischer Flickenteppich, wo die einen das Urteil so interpretieren und die anderen es anders interpretieren. Deswegen müssen wir jetzt die Wahlen zum Europäischen Parlament abwarten. Wir müssen abwarten, bis sich die neue Kommission konstituiert hat und müssen dann versuchen, innerhalb der Europäischen Union einen gemeinsamen Dialog hinzubekommen. Es kann nicht sein, dass die einen sagen, wir machen keinen nationalen Alleingang, und die anderen halten an einer nationalen Umsetzung fest. Wir müssen eine gemeinsame europäische Position entwickeln, wenn es um die Vorratsdatenspeicherung geht.\n\nDer Punkt ist: Wir haben jetzt Zeit, darüber zu diskutieren, was Strafermittlungsbehörden eigentlich brauchen. Ich möchte diese Diskussion gern unemotional und sachlich führen. Aber wir führen sie unter einer veränderten Voraussetzung. Über Jahre haben die Gegner der Vorratsdatenspeicherung sagen müssen, warum sie gegen die Vorratsdatenspeicherung sind. Ich finde, jetzt müssen diejenigen, die für eine Speicherung von Daten sind, einmal begründen, warum man eigentlich dafür ist.\n\nIch freue mich auf die Diskussion. Auch bei mir, als jemand, der das kritisch sieht, gibt es eine große Lernbereitschaft. Ich lasse mich gerne von guten Argumenten überzeugen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das Urteil hat die Debatte insgesamt verändert. Ich sage es noch einmal: Wir sollten uns nun Zeit nehmen für eine intensive und sachliche Diskussion. Der Kollege Flisek hat es angesprochen: Es gibt viele weitere Dinge, die wir im Rahmen dieser Diskussion aufführen sollten.\n\nIch möchte die Opposition gerne einladen, dass wir das als Parlament gemeinsam machen. Ich würde mich freuen, wenn wir die ideologischen Gräben der Vergangenheit überwinden und eine sachliche Debatte im Sinne Europas führen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Anträge. Wir lehnen sie heute trotzdem ab, weil wir erst am Anfang der Debatte stehen und nicht am Ende.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4771,volker-ullrich,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Jede Ehescheidung ist eine menschlich schwierige Situation.\n\n- Frau Kollegin Roth! - Zu der Frage, wie man ganz persönlich mit der Trennung umgeht, kommt die Frage: Was passiert mit meinen Versorgungsansprüchen? Bei der Frage der Bemessung der Versorgungsausgleichsansprüche geht es nicht weniger um die Frage: Was ist der faire und gerechte Wert? Der Gesetzgeber hat die Aufgabe, die Eckpunkte zur Bestimmung dieses fairen und gerechten Wertes festzusetzen; gleichwohl gibt er ihn nicht im Detail vor.\n\nAn sich heißt es zwar „Iudex non calculat“; aber hier muss der Jurist eben doch einmal rechnen. Das macht die Situation so schwierig.\n\nDie Situation ist schwierig, weil es hier um die Bestimmung von Kapitalwerten geht.\n\nWie sehr der Zins bei der Bestimmung von Kapitalwerten zu divergierenden Ergebnissen führt, mag sich jeder vor Augen führen, der einmal nachrechnet, was bei einem Zinssatz von 2 oder von 5 Prozent nach 20 Jahren aus 10 000 Euro wird. Bei einem Zinssatz von 5 Prozent werden aus 10 000 Euro 26 530 Euro und bei einem Zinssatz von 2 Prozent lediglich 14 860 Euro.\n\nBei 5 Prozent ist das Ergebnis fast doppelt so hoch. Natürlich ist die Bestimmung des Kapitalwertes finanzmathematisch noch komplizierter. Ich will Ihnen aber deutlich machen, dass die Bestimmung des Zinses der entscheidende Parameter bei der Frage der Ausgleichsansprüche ist.\n\nNun kommen wir zu der Frage, warum wir uns mit diesem Thema beschäftigen. Wir beschäftigen uns damit, weil die Zinsentwicklung der letzten fünf Jahre nur den Weg nach unten kannte. Hätten wir eine umgekehrte Zinsentwicklung, würde die Diskussion in einem anderen Umfeld stattfinden.\n\nDann wäre nämlich der Ausgleichsverpflichtete schlechtergestellt als der Ausgleichsberechtigte, weil der Ausgleichsverpflichtete an den niedrigeren Zinssatz gebunden wäre, während sich der Ausgleichsberechtigte bei seiner neuen Versorgungskasse einen höheren Zinssatz genehmigen könnte.\n\nDas bedeutet im Ergebnis, dass wir aufgrund der Sondersituation der Zinsentwicklung der letzten fünf Jahre über dieses Problem diskutieren. Ich bitte Sie, das zur Kenntnis zu nehmen.\n\nDieser von Ihnen angesprochenen politischen Frage wird man nicht gerecht, wenn die Lösung nur bedeutet: Schaffen Sie einen Paragrafen ab!\n\nDahinter steckt vielmehr ein grundlegendes Verständnis von Zins- und Bewertungsfragen in der gesamten Rechtsordnung. Wir haben nämlich nicht nur beim Versorgungsausgleich über Zinssätze und Bewertungsfragen zu diskutieren, sondern müssen dieses Thema auch in einem anderen Zusammenhang sehen. Da werden Wertungswidersprüche zwischen Bewertungsanlässen im Steuerrecht, im Bereich der Unternehmensbewertung und im Bereich des Versorgungsausgleiches deutlich. Wenn im Bewertungsgesetz derzeit ein Zinssatz von 2,59 Prozent angenommen wird, nach § 253 HGB ein Zinssatz von 4,58 Prozent, nach den Grundsätzen des Instituts der Wirtschaftsprüfer in Deutschland bei Bewertungsanlässen im Ertragswertverfahren Zinssätze zwischen 1 und 3 Prozent, während die Lebensversicherer mit 1,2 Prozent rechnen, dann merken Sie schon, dass hier eine Bandbreite herrscht, die, wie eben dargestellt, auf lange Sicht zu sehr divergierenden Ansätzen kommt.\n\nDer Ansatz muss ein anderer sein. Wir dürfen es uns nicht einfach machen, sondern haben die Verpflichtung, diese Frage umfassend zu beleuchten. Wir brauchen, glaube ich, einen Überblick über die verschiedenen Bewertungsanlässe. Wir sollten uns fragen, ob der Gesetzgeber bei Bewertungsanlässen, die wesensgleich sind oder zumindest aus einer ähnlichen Sphäre stammen, nicht verbindliche ähnliche Bewertungsparameter zugrunde legen müsste. Das ist die Frage, die dahintersteckt. Sie ist viel komplizierter als die Frage, ob man § 17 des Versorgungsausgleichsgesetzes streichen oder beibehalten sollte.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir brauchen keinen Aktionismus wie die Streichung eines Paragrafen, sondern sollten uns ruhig und besonnen überlegen, ob wir das Problem der Bewertung durch gesetzgeberische Maßnahmen insgesamt angehen und lösen. Das wird keine einfache Aufgabe werden. Aber ich glaube, diese Aufgabe ist die Anstrengungen wert. Denn im Augenblick hängt das Ergebnis noch vom Zufall bzw. davon ab, wo ein Ausgleichsberechtigter seinen Wohnsitz hat, weil es in Bezug auf die Zinssatzhöhe unterschiedliche Rechtsprechungen der Oberlandesgerichte gibt. Ich halte es für unbillig, wenn ein Ausgleichsberechtigter in Augsburg einen anderen Kapitalanteil bekommt als ein Ausgleichsberechtigter in Celle, Hamburg oder Berlin. Das ist mit uns nicht zu machen.\n\nDeswegen, meine Damen und Herren: Lassen Sie die Finger von einer isolierten Streichung des § 17 des Versorgungsausgleichsgesetzes! Gehen Sie mit uns den Weg der Erarbeitung einer grundsätzlichen und tauglichen Regelung. Wir müssen uns fragen: Welche Zinssätze sind für Bewertungsanlässe in größerem Maßstab adäquat? In diesem Sinne: Lassen Sie uns in diesem Bereich weiterarbeiten.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12208,christian-schmidt,\"Herr Präsident! Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In der Tat ist die Antibiotikaminimierungsstrategie eine schwierige Angelegenheit. Sie ist deswegen besonders wichtig, weil sie ein Thema anspricht, das uns nicht nur in der Landwirtschaft, in der Tierproduktion, sondern auch und insbesondere im Gesundheitswesen betrifft. Daher besteht die sicherlich etwas außergewöhnliche Situation, dass zu dem Antrag von zwei Fraktionen des Deutschen Bundestages gleich zwei Bundesminister sprechen: zunächst ich als Landwirtschaftsminister und anschließend mein Kollege Hermann Gröhe als Gesundheitsminister.\n\nWir unterstreichen damit auch, dass wir über die Zeiten des Gegenseitig-auf-sich-Zeigens hinweggekommen sind,\n\ndass wir nicht mehr die Schlichter zwischen Tierärzten und Humanmedizinern sind, sondern erfreulicherweise beide Seiten sowie die anderen Betroffenen auf einem Weg zusammenführen, und zwar mit unserem - Herr Präsident, ich bitte um Entschuldigung, dass ich einen Anglizismus verwenden muss; auch die Bundesregierung ist davor nicht hundertprozentig gefeit - One-Health-Ansatz, man könnte auch sagen: Ein-Gesundheit-Ansatz.\n\nIm Hinblick auf die Vielfältigkeit der Themen wird sich, Frau Präsidentin, sicherlich jeder hier im Hause angesprochen fühlen.\n\nWas liegt an? Was ist wichtig? Wir müssen uns gemeinsam anstrengen, um den Kampf gegen Antibiotikaresistenzen zu gewinnen. Ich bin deswegen sehr dankbar für den Antrag der Koalitionsfraktionen mit dem Titel „Antibiotika-Resistenzen vermindern“. Er gibt sehr viele wichtige Einzelaspekte wieder und positioniert sich. Er ist damit eine gute Ergänzung und Fortführung der Agenda der Bundesregierung und wird in diese Arbeit Eingang finden. Der Antrag ist eine Unterstützung der Deutschen Antibiotika-Resistenzstrategie, DART 2020, und des Grundgedankens „Eine Gesundheit“.\n\nWir alle wissen, Antibiotikaresistenzen haben multikausale Ursachen, auch wenn in der öffentlichen Debatte teilweise ein einseitiges Bild gezeichnet wird, das zulasten der Nutztierhaltung geht. Die Vorsichtsmaßnahmen und die Reduzierung des Einsatzes von Antibiotika werden wohl überall ein Thema sein. Jeder, der in der jetzt beginnenden kalten Jahreszeit vorschnell mit Breitbandantibiotika vermeintliche grippale Infekte bekämpft, wird sich die Frage nach der Notwendigkeit dieses Einsatzes genauso stellen müssen wie der Tierarzt, der die Behandlung von kranken Tieren vornimmt.\n\nIch weiß aus vielen Gesprächen mit Vertretern des landwirtschaftlichen Berufsstandes, dass sich unsere Landwirte insgesamt ihrer besonderen Verantwortung für Mensch und Tier bewusst sind. Ich sage das ganz bewusst heute, in dieser Woche, in der wir uns in verschiedenen Diskussionen befinden. Die Landwirte stellen sich ihrer Verantwortung, und es ist ein Gebot des Tierschutzes, kranke Tiere zu behandeln. Eines ist aber ganz klar: Es geht nur darum, kranke Tiere zu behandeln. Das heißt, wenn Tiere krank sind, werden sie behandelt, sie werden aber nicht mit Antibiotika vollgestopft, damit sie schneller wachsen.\n\nDiese klare Grenze darf nicht eingerissen werden; hier sind wir uns einig. Das wird auch - ich sage das sehr deutlich - bei internationalen Vereinbarungen und Regelungen immer die Grundlage unserer Position sein und bleiben.\n\nAuf dem Weg der Minimierung des Antibiotikaeinsatzes in der Tierhaltung sind wir bereits ein gutes Stück vorangekommen. Der letzte Deutsche Bundestag hat mit dem 16. Gesetz zur Änderung des Arzneimittelgesetzes ein Antibiotikaminimierungskonzept etabliert, das staatliche Kontrollen vorsieht. Wir haben das umgesetzt, und die entsprechenden Verordnungen sind erlassen worden. Ich freue mich sehr, dass wir feststellen können, dass sich der Antibiotikaeinsatz im Tierbereich von 2011 bis 2016 deutlich reduziert, ja sogar halbiert hat. Seit dem letzten Jahr, seit wir den in der Minimierungsstrategie vorgesehenen Meldepflichten nachkommen, werden 35 Prozent der Antibiotikaeinsätze als nicht mehr notwendig, als überflüssig betrachtet. Das ist auch ein Hinweis an die Veterinäre und an diejenigen, die Tiere halten, dass wir auf dem richtigen Weg sind.\n\nFragen der Prävention und der Haltungsbedingungen gehören natürlich dazu. Deswegen werden wir uns die Haltungsbedingungen anschauen und werden sie, wenn notwendig, regeln. Ich habe da ein klares Ziel. Wir sind auf dem Weg, aber noch nicht am Ende der Möglichkeiten. Meine Initiative „Eine Frage der Haltung - Neue Wege für mehr Tierwohl“ setzt vor allem bei der Tierhaltung an. Wir können mit Dankbarkeit feststellen, dass sich die Dinge verbessern.\n\nLassen Sie mich zu zwei weiteren Punkten etwas sagen:\n\nErstens. Impfstoffe sind Prävention. Wir sind in Europa gerade möglicherweise von einer Gefahr betroffen, die von der Knötchenkrankeit der Rinder ausgeht, die bei uns bisher nicht bekannt ist. Wir müssen überlegen, wie wir verhindern können, dass Tiere krank werden. Das ist eine Aufgabe, der sich die Europäische Kommission mit meiner Unterstützung stellt.\n\nZweitens stellt sich die Frage, was mit den Antibiotika passiert, die für die Behandlung von Mensch und Tier in besonders kritischen Fällen verfügbar und wirksam sein müssen und nicht durch Resistenzen in ihrer Wirkung blockiert sein dürfen. Manche sagen Reserveantibiotika dazu.\n\nIch stelle fest, dass wir diese Antibiotika, wie auch immer wir sie bezeichnen, auf jeden Fall weg von der allgemeinen Nutzung auf eine höhere Stufe der Wahrnehmung, Betrachtung und Entscheidung bringen müssen. Deswegen werde ich meinen Entwurf zur Änderung der Verordnung über tierärztliche Hausapotheken in Kürze vorlegen. Wir werden in dieser Hausapothekenverordnung - darüber diskutieren wir gerade mit den Fachkreisen - auch die Frage von Antibiogrammen diskutieren - Sie haben das in Ihrem Antrag angesprochen -, ob vorher zu klären ist, ob ein Antibiotikum tatsächlich wirksam ist oder ob es nicht eher zu Resistenzbildungen beiträgt.\n\nHierbei ist auch wichtig, dass wir international tätig werden. Die deutsche G-7- und die G-20-Präsidentschaft unseres Landes im nächsten Jahr werden einen Schwerpunkt darauf setzen, die Antibiotikaresistenzbildung bei Mensch und Tier weltweit zu reduzieren; denn in der globalen Welt gibt es nicht nur die eine Gesundheit von Mensch und Tier, sondern eine globale Gesundheit.\"\n10961,sabine-zimmermann,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wie immer, wenn es sich um dieses Thema dreht, haben Forschung und Wissenschaft - zumindest außerhalb der arbeitgebernahen Institute - eine ziemlich einheitliche Meinung. Ich zitiere einmal aus dem aktuellen Bericht der Bundesagentur für Arbeit:\n\nAktuell zeigt sich nach der Analyse der Bundesagentur für Arbeit kein flächendeckender Fachkräftemangel in Deutschland.\n\nDass überhaupt über einen Fachkräftemangel gesprochen wird, führt die Bundesagentur für Arbeit auf den Beschäftigungszuwachs zurück. So ist das eben: Wenn die Beschäftigung zunimmt, heißt das, dass die Nachfrage nach Arbeitskräften steigt. Da fühlt sich die Bundesregierung anscheinend berufen, die Unternehmen vor den Gesetzen des freien Marktes zu schützen. Denn bekanntermaßen steigt mit der Nachfrage auch der Preis für die Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer. Die Linke sagt: Das ist gut so.\n\nNach Untersuchungen der Bundesagentur für Arbeit gibt es einen Fachkräftemangel im Wesentlichen in einzelnen technischen Berufsfeldern sowie im Pflege- und Gesundheitsbereich. Der Pflege- und Gesundheitsbereich ist ein Musterbeispiel dafür, warum die Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter dort ständig wechseln. Die Arbeitsbelastung ist enorm, die Arbeitszeiten sind familienfeindlich und gesundheitsschädigend, und die Entlohnung ist völlig unangemessen niedrig.\n\nDer Pflegenotstand ist hausgemacht. Vor allen Dingen aufgrund der Unterfinanzierung des Gesundheitssystems, die Sie verschärft haben, wird er sich für die Beschäftigten in Zukunft verschärfen. Das, meine Damen und Herren, war bis jetzt Ihre Politik.\n\nIn den technischen Berufen - im Maschinenbau und bei den Metall-, Sanitär- und Klempnerberufen - haben wir einen sogenannten Fachkräfteengpass; das sind die klassischen Ausbildungsbranchen. Aber der Anteil der Betriebe, der ausbildet, liegt bei gerade mal 20 Prozent. Nur jeder fünfte Betrieb bildet den Nachwuchs aus. Den Unternehmen, die nun einen Fachkräftemangel fürchten, kann man da eigentlich nur raten: Wer Fachkräfte will, muss Fachkräfte ausbilden und sie ordentlich bezahlen. So einfach ist das.\n\nDabei könnten wir sie politisch unterstützen, zum Beispiel durch eine Ausbildungsplatzumlage. Wer nicht ausbildet, zahlt ein; wer ausbildet, bekommt Unterstützung. Gerade kleineren Betrieben würden wir helfen, wenn wir die Ausbildungsverbünde, die ja lange Zeit gefördert worden sind, wieder stärker fördern würden. Über die Ausbildungsplatzumlage reden wir in diesem Haus eigentlich schon seit Jahrzehnten.\n\nEinmal abgesehen davon, dass die Lobesarien, die im Antrag für Maßnahmen der Wirtschaft gesungen werden, die in deren ureigenem Interesse liegen, in unseren Augen ebenso überflüssig sind wie Ihr fast schon peinliches Selbstlob, könnten wir Linke viele Punkte unterschreiben. Um hier nur einmal einige zu nennen: die Anreize für die Erwerbstätigkeit von Frauen, die bessere Vereinbarkeit von Familie, Pflege und Beruf, die Nutzung der Potenziale von Migrantinnen und Migranten und die Integrations- und Qualifizierungsinitiative für Langzeiterwerbslose. Was die Linke natürlich besonders freut, ist die Integration von Menschen mit Behinderung auf dem ersten Arbeitsmarkt. Ja, das alles könnten wir unterschreiben.\n\nLeider stützen Sie aber seit Jahren eine Politik, die auf das Gegenteil Ihrer Forderungen hinausläuft. Das wissen die Antragsteller natürlich nur zu genau; denn sie fordern in ihrem Antrag selbst, dass diese Forderungen im Rahmen der verfügbaren Haushaltsmittel umgesetzt werden sollen. Es soll also nicht mehr Geld geben. Schwupp! Und schon sind die ganzen Träume in Bezug auf die 32 Punkte in Ihrem Antrag ausgeträumt.\n\nSchauen wir uns einmal die Forderungen für die Langzeiterwerbslosen an. Zum Beispiel wollen Sie die Weiterbildung für Langzeiterwerbslose stärken. Ja, klar; da machen wir mit. Aber was haben Sie denn in den letzten Jahren getan? Sie haben doch die Mittel in diesem Bereich massiv gekürzt. Jetzt wollen Sie die Aktivitäten wieder ausweiten - im Rahmen der verfügbaren Haushaltsmittel. Wie soll das denn gehen?\n\nZusammengefasst: Die Worte hör ich wohl, die Worte hör ich auch gern, allein mir fehlt der Glaube.\n\nDie Linke wird natürlich weiterhin kritisch hinterfragen, wie Sie Ihre 32 Forderungen in Ihrem schönen Antrag denn umsetzen wollen.\n\nIch muss Ihnen ehrlich sagen: Für einen solchen Schaufensterantrag steht die Linke nicht zur Verfügung.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n5075,andreas-lammel,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Linken und von den Grünen, es ist Mist, wenn man in der Opposition sitzt. Selbst bei besten Wirtschaftsdaten muss man die Regierung irgendwie kritisieren und an allen Dingen herumnörgeln, die überhaupt gar keinen Grund dafür geben. Das tut mir zwar sehr leid, aber das ist nun einmal Ihre Rolle. Man kann hier auch nichts anderes erwarten; das wissen wir ja. Wir haben das auch gestern im Ausschuss schon erlebt. Dort mussten wir einiges über uns ergehen lassen.\n\nHerr Schlecht, Ihr Name ist Programm.\n\nWenn man Ihre Reden hört, dann wird einem schlecht.\n\nDazu nur eines: Sie haben die neue griechische Regierung so gelobt, weil sie Lehrer einstellt, Tausende Beamte zurückholen will und weitere Großtaten plant. Eines haben Sie aber nicht beantwortet, nämlich die Frage, woher das Geld dafür kommen soll. Sie arbeiten ja nicht umsonst.\n\nAber ich kann Ihnen da einen Tipp geben, wissen Sie? Am besten reden Sie noch einmal mit Ihrem Kollegen Gysi. Er soll wissen, wohin das ganze SED-Vermögen verschwunden ist.\n\nDas könnten Sie Ihren Genossinnen und Genossen in Griechenland doch zur Verfügung stellen. Damit könnten sie diese Leistungen auch bezahlen.\n\nSie können aber nicht davon ausgehen, dass der deutsche Steuerzahler das bezahlen wird, was Sie vorschlagen und wozu Sie sagen: Es ist wunderbar, dass die neue Regierung Griechenlands genau das tut.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, der Jahreswirtschaftsbericht hat ja eigentlich zwei Funktionen: Zum einen wird noch einmal auf die wirtschaftliche Lage zurückgeblickt, zum anderen wird ein Ausblick auf das gegeben, was die Regierung in den nächsten Monaten beabsichtigt, zu tun, um die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung in Deutschland voranzubringen.\n\nVon den Oppositionsrednern habe ich überhaupt nichts dazu gehört, wie sie die Maßnahmen der Bundesregierung einschätzen.\n\nWahrscheinlich ist Ihnen entgangen, dass es zu dem Jahreswirtschaftsbericht noch den Anhang „Maßnahmen der Bundesregierung“ gibt. Darauf sind Sie überhaupt nicht eingegangen. Daraus muss ich schließen, dass Sie bei Ihrem Studium des Jahreswirtschaftsberichts nur bis zur Seite 10 gekommen sind.\n\nAuf diese Maßnahmen möchte ich noch eingehen, weil sie die Grundlage für den zukünftigen Erfolg Deutschlands sein werden:\n\nIn diesem Maßnahmenkatalog finden sich zwei Themen sehr stark wieder: Das eine Thema ist Digitalisierung; darauf ist heute schon verschiedentlich eingegangen worden. Die Digitalisierung der Wirtschaft, aber genauso die Digitalisierung der Verwaltung sind für mich genau die Felder, auf denen sich der zukünftige Erfolg Deutschlands entscheiden wird.\n\nSchauen wir uns das einmal an: Wir haben in den letzten Jahren große Projekte auf den Weg gebracht. Ein Stichwort ist die Gesundheitskarte. Das Verfahren läuft bis heute noch nicht reibungslos.\n\nWir haben als anderes großes Projekt den elektronischen Personalausweis eingeführt. Mit den vielen Funktionen, die dieser Personalausweis haben sollte, sollten eine Vereinfachung und eine Digitalisierung von Verwaltungsvorgängen einhergehen.\n\nDiese großen Projekte, die mit großen Hoffnungen verbunden waren, wurden zumindest bisher nicht zu einem erfolgreichen Abschluss gebracht. Das darf natürlich bei den weiteren Projekten der Digitalisierung nicht passieren. So wie die Projekte vorangehen, ist das einfach zu langsam. Ich nenne hier das Stichwort „Störerhaftung bei öffentlichen WLAN-Netzen“. Es ist doch kein Zustand, dass wir schon seit Jahren über das Thema diskutieren und die Nutzung der öffentlichen WLAN-Netze blockiert wird.\n\n- Ihre Ideen lassen wir einmal außen vor.\n\nSie wollen ja immer noch, dass andere die Kommunikation in öffentlichen WLAN-Netzen mithören. Das wollen wir nicht.\n\nNoch einmal: Wir müssen jetzt sehen, dass wir diese Prozesse beschleunigen. Dass wir das können und dass wir solche Projekte gut voranbringen können, zeigt sich bei der Versteigerung der Frequenzen für das mobile Internet, die wir am Montag beschlossen haben. Hier ist Deutschland spitze. Hieraus entstehen viele neue Geschäftsmodelle und viele neue Ideen für die Neugründungen von Firmen. Deswegen müssen die Digitalisierung der Volkswirtschaft und die Digitalisierung der Verwaltung im Vordergrund unserer Überlegungen stehen.\n\nDas zweite Thema, das heute kurz in verschiedenen Facetten angesprochen wurde, ist die Außenwirtschaft. Wir sind Exportweltmeister. Wenn man es auf das Volumen umrechnet, werden wir manchmal von China überholt. Wenn man es aber auf die Exportleistung pro Kopf der Bevölkerung umrechnet, dann sieht man: Deutschland ist eindeutig Exportweltmeister.\n\nDadurch sind wir aber auch von großen Absatzgebieten abhängig. Natürlich sind China und andere asiatische Länder ein großer Markt für deutsche Firmen. Wenn in China die Konjunktur schwächelt, dann schwächelt bei uns der Export. Wir müssen also neue Exportmärkte erschließen.\n\nIch denke zum Beispiel an einen Kontinent, der in der wirtschaftlichen Debatte fast völlig vergessen wird: Afrika. Wir müssen uns in den nächsten Jahren verstärkt anstrengen, die wirtschaftlichen Märkte in Afrika zu erschließen. Ich weiß ganz genau, dass das nicht so einfach ist, dass das viel Mühe kostet und dass die Bedingungen in vielen afrikanischen Staaten nicht optimal sind. Aber letztendlich müssen wir versuchen, beim Außenhandel, bei der Außenwirtschaft zu diversifizieren, um nicht von einem Markt abhängig zu werden.\n\nIch komme noch auf das Thema TTIP. In der gestrigen Sitzung des Ausschusses haben die Grünen und die Linken wieder eine Glanzvorstellung gegeben.\n\nWir hatten heute früh vor der Debatte hier im Deutschen Bundestag ein Gespräch mit einem mittelständischen Unternehmer, der uns eindeutig klargemacht hat, wie er die Sache mit seinen Exporten in die USA sieht. Unser Kollege Ernst war mit auf der Reise nach Kanada. Auch von der SPD waren Kollegen dabei. Wir haben zusammen Firmen besucht. Dass Sie trotz allem und obwohl Sie wissen, dass dieses Freihandelsabkommen für den Mittelstand sehr wichtig ist, dass Sie also trotz besseren Wissens immer nur ihre Ideologie verkaufen, kann ich einfach nicht nachvollziehen.\n\nWir brauchen ein Freihandelsabkommen. Wir brauchen für beide großen Wirtschaftsräume, für die Vereinigten Staaten und für Europa,\n\ndie Annäherung von Standards und von Prüfverfahren, ganz einfach deshalb, um Export überhaupt zu ermöglichen.\n\nReden Sie doch einmal mit deutschen Mittelständlern, warum sie ihre Exportchancen in den USA jetzt nicht nutzen. Das hängt genau an den Dingen, die jetzt im Rahmen von TTIP verhandelt werden.\n\nDeswegen wollen wir, dass die Verhandlungen erfolgreich sind.\n\nEin letzter Punkt zum Thema Außenwirtschaft. Ich meine die Sanktionen - darüber haben wir auch gestern im Ausschuss kurz diskutiert - gegen Russland.\n\nWir sind uns darüber klar: Solange von russischer Seite keinerlei Zeichen zu einer Entspannung in der Ukraine kommt, werden die Sanktionen beibehalten. Aber Sanktionen sind immer eine Einschränkung von freiem Handel. Auch wenn die Sanktionen gegen Russland für Gesamtdeutschland nicht so einschneidend sind: Ich komme aus Sachsen;\n\nda ist die Lage schon ganz anders.\n\nDeswegen muss man, wenn man Sanktionen beschließt, auch immer bedenken, wie man wieder aus den Sanktionen herauskommt. Das ist für mich noch eine offene Frage, über die diskutiert werden muss. Auch die Verschärfung von Sanktionen erfordert eine Diskussion darüber, gegen wen die Sanktionen gerichtet sind, wer damit getroffen werden soll und wie man sie effizient anwenden kann.\n\nZusammenfassend ist festzuhalten: Der Jahreswirtschaftsbericht zeigt die positive Entwicklung der deutschen Wirtschaft auf, und er zeigt eindeutig, dass die Bundesregierung mit ihrem Maßnahmenpaket auf einem hervorragenden Weg ist, um diese Entwicklung auch in Zukunft positiv zu begleiten.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n7787,tabea-roßner,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Examenszeit, und das Standardwerk ist in der Bibliothek nicht auffindbar oder über Monate vorgemerkt, oder wichtige Seiten sind herausgerissen. Viele von Ihnen kennen das vielleicht, sofern Sie Ihre Arbeiten selbst geschrieben haben.\n\nDas müsste in digitalen Zeiten mit Internet, iPad, Tolino und Co. eigentlich vorbei sein. Das ist es aber nicht. Auch in der digitalen Bibliothek können Bücher vergriffen sein, weil nur so viele Exemplare verliehen werden können, wie Lizenzen erworben wurden.\n\nDie öffentliche Bibliothek muss sich für die digitale Zukunft neu aufstellen. Hierfür braucht sie - da trifft der Antrag der Linken den richtigen Nerv - ein breitgefächertes digitales Angebot und dafür finanzielle Unterstützung. Die Bibliothek muss als Bildungseinrichtung für alle sozialen Schichten und Altersstufen, für Schul- und Erwachsenenbildung sowie als Anlaufpunkt für Migrantinnen und Migranten erhalten bleiben, auch digital.\n\nIch habe aber Zweifel, ob die hier vorgeschlagenen Änderungen den Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern tatsächlich einen Mehrwert bringen. Mehr noch: Sie könnten ihnen sogar einen Bärendienst erweisen.\n\nDer Buchmarkt versucht gerade, sich mit kommerziellen Leihportalen für E-Books auf die neuen Lesegewohnheiten einzustellen. Das ist übrigens etwas, was wir immer eingefordert haben. Das Angebot der Bibliotheken erscheint da schädlich. Es ist kostenfrei, und für die Ausleihe zahlen die Bibliotheken an Autoren und Verlage die Bibliothekstantieme; sie liegt jetzt bei 4 Cent. Bei Skoobe oder Readfy erhalten Autoren und Verlage zwischen 16 Cent und 1,10 Euro pro Leihe. Mit der Bibliothekstantieme würden sie also nur noch einen Bruchteil bekommen. Die Kreativen dürfen aber eben nicht zu den Verlierern der Digitalisierung werden.\n\n- Da könnten Sie von der Union eigentlich auch klatschen.\n\nDabei ist es richtig, die Bibliotheken finanziell besser auszustatten. Es sollte ihnen weiterhin möglich sein, eine dem öffentlichen Auftrag entsprechende qualitative Auswahl anzubieten.\n\nIch hadere hier allerdings vor allem mit der geplanten Änderung in § 17 Urheberrechtsgesetz. Abgesehen davon, dass wir damit erst einmal Brüssel durchlaufen müssten: Digitale Medien könnten dann an jeden weiterverkauft werden. Das klingt zwar erst einmal wunderbar, hat aber einen Haken: Ein florierender Gebrauchtwarenhandel mit digitalen Gütern könnte eine ungewollte Spirale nach unten auslösen. Anbieter wie Amazon oder Apple stehen bereits mit Secondhand-Verkaufsplattformen für Digitales in den Startlöchern.\n\nSollte es hier grünes Licht geben, wäre die Konkurrenz für Verlage enorm. Digitales verrottet nicht. Gebrauchte E-Books wären mit einem Klick in alle Welt weiterverkauft, zu Spottpreisen, und zwar ohne Riss oder Kaffeefleck. Das stärkt geschlossene Systeme wie das von Amazon, und es schadet dem kulturellen Angebot. Denn wer investiert dann noch? Wer nimmt das wirtschaftliche Risiko eines Flops auf sich, und wer setzt noch auf unbekannte Autoren oder vielleicht auf gewagte Inhalte? Unter idealen Bedingungen sind das die Verlage. Es sind zumindest nicht die digitalen Verkaufsplattformen.\n\nWir dürfen das wirtschaftliche Fundament nicht derart erschüttern, dass die kulturelle Vielfalt darunter leidet. Wenn nur noch risikofreie Bestseller auf dem Markt sind, kann das sicher nicht im Sinne der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher sein.\n\nWir sprechen hier ja nicht nur von E-Books. Digitale Medien, das sind ja auch Musik- oder Filmdateien.\n\nIch möchte festhalten: Öffentliche Bibliotheken müssen ein facettenreiches digitales Angebot bereithalten, und sie dürfen keine Nischeninstitutionen werden. Wir brauchen aber eine sozialverträgliche Lösung, und dafür sollten sich alle Seiten ins Zeug legen.\n\nUm dies zu schaffen, müssen Länder und Kommunen dringend in die Lage versetzt werden, digitale Bibliotheken finanziell ausreichend auszustatten. Die Belange der Kreativen müssen mitgedacht werden. Zudem braucht es Mut bei den Verlagen, auch Neues zu wagen, und die beteiligten Kreise müssten aufeinander zugehen und eine gemeinsame Lösung erarbeiten, die dann allen Seiten zugutekommt. Dabei sind faire Lizenz- und Nutzungsbedingungen Pflicht. Wenn diese Chance aber vertan wird, dann muss der Gesetzgeber die Lösung für sie finden.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12342,hans-michelbach,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist eine Binsenweisheit: Die Erhaltung unserer wirtschaftlichen Leistungsfähigkeit ist kein Selbstläufer. Dieser Gesetzentwurf sichert, dass Deutschland als Wirtschafts- und Investitionsstandort weiterhin hochattraktiv bleibt und attraktiver wird. In Zukunft erhalten unsere Unternehmen neue Impulse, um in Wachstumsmärkte zu investieren. Das dient den Investoren, das dient aber auch den Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern in Deutschland.\n\nZur Chancengerechtigkeit gehört, dass risikobedingte Verluste auch eine Verlustverrechnung erhalten. Wenn wir darüber diskutieren, dass Apple durch Steuervermeidung eine Steuerlast in Höhe von nur noch 1 Prozent hat, dann müssen wir doch gerade für die kleinen, mittleren und jungen Unternehmen ein Gerechtigkeitsangebot machen, indem wir ihnen Chancen vermitteln und ihnen Chancen geben.\n\nFür mich ist dieses Gesetz ein Unternehmensmodernisierungsgesetz, ein Unternehmensfördergesetz. Wir werden Wachstum und Investitionen nur schaffen, wenn wir den Zugang zu privatem Beteiligungskapital vereinfachen und vor allem auch breit ermöglichen. Neue Arbeitsplätze benötigen neues Kapital. Es geht nicht anders. Der Wettbewerbsdruck in der globalisierten Welt verlangt geradezu neue Investitionen, um die Zukunft zu gewinnen. Mit dem heute zu beratenden Gesetzentwurf wird die steuerliche Verlustverrechnung bei Körperschaften und Unternehmen neu ausgerichtet. Dadurch werden steuerliche Hemmnisse bei der Kapitalausstattung von Unternehmen vermieden. Steuerlich nicht genutzte Verluste gehen dann auch bei einem Anteilseignerwechsel nicht verloren. Sie gehen bisher nur dann nicht verloren, wenn die Körperschaft die Stille-Reserven-Klausel oder die Konzernklausel erfüllt. So regelt es bisher § 8c Körperschaftsteuergesetz. Die Praxis hat aber gezeigt, dass diese Ausnahmen sehr eng gefasst sind - natürlich, weil man Missbrauch vermeiden wollte. Aber wir können die kleinen und mittleren jungen Unternehmen nicht dadurch bestrafen, dass über § 8c Missbrauch eingeschränkt werden muss.\n\nJetzt geben wir den kleinen und mittleren jungen Unternehmen mit dem neuen § 8d eine neue Chance, eine neue Unterstützung.\n\nIch glaube, dass wir eine gute Kapitalausstattung benötigen, um Liquiditätsengpässe, Finanzierungsengpässe und finanzielle Schwierigkeiten bei Unternehmen zu verringern - durch bessere Möglichkeiten, in den Wettbewerb einzusteigen und die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit für die Zukunft zu sichern. Oftmals sind Investitionen zum Überleben notwendig, und Voraussetzung ist häufig, dass der Einstieg eines Gesellschafters möglich ist, dass es einen Anreiz für den Einstieg gibt. Rückwirkend zum 1. Januar 2016 können nun nicht genutzte Verluste trotz eines Anteilseignerwechsels weiterhin genutzt werden. Das, meine Damen und Herren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, stärkt unseren Wirtschaftsstandort, gerade die kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen, die nach wie vor über 70 Prozent aller Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer in Deutschland beschäftigen.\n\nDie großen Konzerne brauchen es nicht; gerade die kleinen und mittleren jungen Unternehmen sind es, die die Beschäftigung fördern. Deshalb benötigen wir sie dringend.\n\nEs ist richtig, dass es für den Erhalt des Verlustvortrags nach einem Anteilseignerwechsel keine Rolle spielen darf, ob und in welchem Umfang Betriebsvermögen zugeführt wird. Das zeigt auch, dass der Gesetzentwurf nicht nur ausgewogen und wirtschaftlich sinnvoll ist, sondern auch den bürokratischen Aufwand begrenzt.\n\nEntscheidend ist, dass wir die Rahmenbedingungen für die Kapitalausstattung insgesamt erheblich verbessern. Denn viele Unternehmen sind auf eine Finanzierung und die Neuaufnahme von Anteilseignern angewiesen. Wir stärken deshalb die Eigenkapitalbasis der deutschen Betriebe, der kleinen und mittleren jungen Unternehmen. Das ist ein besonderer Vorteil. Das ist gut; denn Deutschland braucht Modernisierung, braucht Wettbewerbsfähigkeit, braucht eine neue Gründerzeit. Wir können nur alle jungen Leute bitten, dass sie die Chance ergreifen, ein Unternehmen zu gründen. Wir geben hier eine klare Unterstützung.\n\nEine Abgrenzung, die dafür sorgt, dass die Regelung nur für Start-ups gilt, halte ich für falsch. Das würde zu Ausweichmanövern führen. Wir müssen alle gleich behandeln; es darf keine Diskriminierung von Unternehmen geben. Wir brauchen natürlich vor allem junge Unternehmen; wir brauchen aber immer auch innovative Unternehmen, die sich aus den normalen Betrieben heraus entwickeln, damit Deutschland seine ökonomischen Chancen im Zuge des internationalen Wettbewerbs und vor allem auch der Digitalisierung nutzen kann. Dabei ist es essenziell, den Wagniskapitalmarkt und die Gründerszene zu stärken. Das tun wir heute. Das ist ein guter Anfang. Ich glaube, dass wir damit einen richtig guten Weg für die Zukunft unseres Wirtschaftsstandorts beginnen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6914,sonke-rix,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es gehört zu dieser Debatte dazu, darauf hinzuweisen, dass wir in den letzten Jahren viel erreicht haben. Ich glaube, das muss man an dieser Stelle einmal sagen. Die jetzige Situation hat mit der Diskriminierung, die es in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten gegeben hat, natürlich -wenig zu tun. Wir haben erreicht, dass es eingetragene Lebenspartnerschaften gibt. Wir haben eine Verbesserung im Steuerrecht erreicht. Wir haben durchaus auch dazu beigetragen, dass die gesellschaftliche Akzeptanz von schwulen und lesbischen Paaren viel größer geworden ist.\n\nEs gibt Menschen, über die man früher gesagt hat, sie würden sich in der Öffentlichkeit nie trauen, zuzugeben oder zu sagen, dass sie als Mann mit einem Mann oder als Frau mit einer Frau zusammenleben, die sich das heute trauen. In diesen Bereichen haben wir viel erreicht. Aber das haben wir politisch auch immer unterstützt. Das haben wir auch immer mit politischen Maßnahmen flankiert. Von daher sollten wir nicht aufhören, diesen Weg weiterzugehen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nDer gesellschaftliche Wandel und die damit verbundene Zustimmung, dass ein Mann mit einem Mann oder eine Frau mit einer Frau zusammenleben kann, kommen nicht von ungefähr. Deshalb frage ich ganz leise und vorsichtig in Richtung Union: Warum kann diese Diskriminierung nicht aufgehoben werden?\n\nWir haben vorhin gehört: Es ist keine Diskriminierung.\n\nMan hat versucht, anhand verschiedener Argumente darzulegen, dass es eigentlich keine Diskriminierung ist. Aber es ist doch so: Wenn ich einer Minderheit etwas vorenthalte, worauf sie laut Grundgesetz, laut unserer Wertvorstellung, eigentlich ein Recht hat, dann ist das eine Diskriminierung; denn ich entkoppele sie von ihrem Recht. Deshalb müssen wir diese Diskriminierung beenden, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nGerade wenn man dieses Thema in Bürgersprechstunden oder bei Veranstaltungen diskutiert, dann sind es häufig nicht nur die - in Anführungsstrichen - „betroffenen Menschen“, die zu mir kommen und sagen: „Jetzt schafft endlich die Ehe für alle“, sondern es sind auch die Angehörigen oder Freunde dieser Personen, die -sagen: Ich fühle doch, dass mein Sohn, meine Tochter, mein Freund, meine Freundin, mein Bruder, meine Schwester noch diskriminiert wird. Sie fragen mich: Warum diskriminiert ihr ihn noch? Er will doch einfach nur heiraten. Er will mit seinem Partner deutlich das zeigen, was seine Eltern durch eine Heirat gezeigt haben, nämlich dass sie Verantwortung füreinander übernehmen wollen. - Diesen Wert sollten wir unterstützen.\n\n- Ja, diesen Wert sollten wir unterstützen. Aber wir enthalten ihnen ihr Recht vor, und sie fühlen sich dadurch diskriminiert.\n\nLaut einer Untersuchung ist es immer noch so, dass sich über zwei Drittel der Betroffenen am Arbeitsplatz, in Vereinen, in Verbänden, in der Öffentlichkeit, in der Schule oder an der Universität diskriminiert fühlen. Es ist auch so, dass „Du schwule Sau“ immer noch ein Schimpfwort ist. Es ist auch immer noch so, dass diesen Menschen mit Vorbehalten begegnet wird. Wenn wir sagen, die Schwulen und Lesben haben ein Recht weniger, nämlich das Recht, zu heiraten, dann unterstützen wir diese Vorbehalte und heben sie eben nicht auf.\n\nDeshalb ist meine ganz dringende Bitte: Nehmen wir das ernst, was an Akzeptanz weit über die Grenzen eines Teils dieses Hauses und weit über die Grenzen der gesellschaftlichen Mehrheit hinaus vorhanden ist.\n\nWir müssen anerkennen, dass die Akzeptanz des heiligen Begriffs - wenn man das an dieser Stelle sagen darf - „Ehe für alle“ mittlerweile weit in die Kreise vorgedrungen ist, in denen wir das früher nicht für möglich gehalten haben. Es wurde vorhin angesprochen: Einer der höchsten christlichen Repräsentanten der evangelischen Kirche streitet dafür. In der katholischen Kirche wird darüber diskutiert. Es ist auch gut, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dass bei Ihnen darüber diskutiert wird.\n\nIch wünsche mir: Nehmen Sie die Argumente der Menschen ernst, die sich diskriminiert fühlen. Suchen Sie das Gespräch mit ihnen. Sagen Sie endlich: Ja, wir wollen diese Diskriminierung aufheben. Wir wollen nicht, dass ihr euch diskriminiert fühlt. Wir wollen für euch die gleichen Rechte, deshalb geben wir die Abstimmung im Bundestag frei. Wir wollen, dass keiner diskriminiert werden kann wegen seiner Haltung zu diesem Thema.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n13449,frithjof-schmidt,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Fraktion hat den Einsatz der Vereinten Nationen und der Europäischen Union von Anfang an unterstützt. Frau Buchholz, die entscheidende Frage ist, ob man der Meinung ist, dass es richtig ist, dass die UNO dort ist, oder ob man sagt, sie sollte sich dort lieber heraushalten. Wir sind der Meinung, es war richtig und notwendig.\n\nMan muss noch einmal kurz daran erinnern: 2012 stand Mali kurz vor dem Zusammenbruch. Die islamistischen Kämpfer rückten direkt auf die Hauptstadt Bamako vor. Es drohte eine humanitäre Katastrophe. Nur durch das schnelle Eingreifen Frankreichs konnte diese schlimme Entwicklung gestoppt werden. Ich sage, es war richtig, das zu unterstützen, und es war richtig, dass die UNO dann mit MINUSMA die Verantwortung im Land übernommen hat, dass die UNO auch gesagt hat: Wir sind für die Bewältigung dieser Krise zuständig. Die Frage, die Sie politisch beantworten müssen, ist, ob Sie das falsch finden. Falls ja, entspricht das Ihrer bisherigen Logik. Aber wenn Sie sagen: „Es ist richtig, dass die UNO die Verantwortung für die Bewältigung dieser Krise übernimmt“, dann müssen Sie auch sagen, welchen Beitrag wir leisten und wie wir unterstützen wollen.\n\nIch finde, diese Frage müssen Sie politisch beantworten.\n\nVor allem ist es der UNO zu verdanken, dass es einen politischen Friedensprozess gibt und dass 2015 ein Friedensabkommen zwischen der malischen Regierung und den verschiedenen Tuareg-Gruppen zustande gekommen ist. Der verheerende Selbstmordanschlag in Gao mit zig Toten zeigt deutlich, wie sehr der Friedensprozess gerade ins Stocken geraten ist. Da gibt es nichts schönzureden.\n\nDas Ganze unterstreicht dramatisch, was die Vereinten Nationen seit mindestens zwei Jahren immer wieder sagen: Der Einsatz in Mali gehört zu den gefährlichsten der UNO überhaupt. Immer wieder flammen Kämpfe zwischen der Zentralregierung und den Rebellengruppen auf, und immer wieder geraten dabei Blauhelme zwischen die Fronten. Uns liegen die Zahlen vor - sie sind erschreckend -: 106 UN-Soldaten haben in den letzten drei Jahren bei diesem Einsatz ihr Leben verloren, und in diesem Gebiet sind über 170 000 Menschen auf der Flucht.\n\nDie UN-Basis am Flughafen Gao ist zentral für die Stabilisierung der Sicherheitslage im Norden von Mali, und sie ist auch wichtig für die Versorgung und den Schutz vieler Menschen in der Region. Deswegen sagen wir: Es ist richtig, dass die Bundeswehr den Einsatz in Gao seit einem Jahr mit über 500 Soldatinnen und Soldaten im Bereich der Aufklärung und der Absicherung des Flughafens und der UN-Konvois unterstützt hat.\n\nIch empfehle meiner Fraktion, die Erweiterung dieses Einsatzes im neuen Mandat zu unterstützen. Es geht um die Evakuierung von verletzten Blauhelmen durch vier medizinisch entsprechend ausgerüstete Hubschrauber. Man muss sagen: Wenn man der Meinung ist, der UN-Einsatz sei richtig, dann ist die Aufrechterhaltung der Rettungskette für die Blauhelme im Einsatz humanitär absolut notwendig und richtig. Da kann es kein Vertun geben.\n\nAuch die Absicherung von UN-Konvois aus der Luft mit vier Kampfhubschraubern ist sinnvoll und notwendig. Wenn dort Luftfracht auf die Konvois umgeladen wird, dann müssen sie abgesichert werden. Das wurde gerade auch in einem Bericht an den UN-Sicherheitsrat wieder festgestellt. Den Vereinten Nationen fehlt es an solchen Hubschraubern. Ohne sie könnte man den Einsatz im Norden Malis nicht weiterführen. Das wäre fatal. Denn politisch ist klar: Wenn der Blauhelmeinsatz im Norden scheitert, dann steht auch der malische Friedensprozess auf der Kippe. Die Folgen für die gesamte Sahelregion und Westafrika wären nicht absehbar. Deswegen unterstützen auch wir den Einsatz.\n\nAllerdings erwarten wir von der Bundesregierung, dass sie Klartext spricht, was die möglichen Materialprobleme angeht, vor allen Dingen im Bereich der für diesen Einsatz vorgesehenen Hubschrauber. Man hört, der Einsatz der Hubschrauber sei auf Mitte 2018 begrenzt, weil die Durchhaltefähigkeit des Einsatzes höchstens bis dahin zu gewährleisten sei. Herr Arnold, Sie haben das ja gerade als Tugend dargestellt und gesagt: Wir haben einen Plan. - Frau von der Leyen hat gesagt: Das ist ein politisches Konzept. - Man hört, dass es erhebliche Probleme gibt. Es kommen auch Fragen nach der Einsatzfähigkeit der Kampfhubschrauber auf. Ich sage: Unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten, aber auch wir Abgeordneten erwarten von der Bundesregierung ganz klare Aussagen über mögliche Risiken. Die Sicherheit der Hubschrauber darf nicht infrage stehen. Ich hoffe, dass Sie das eindeutig klären können.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, der militärische Einsatz der Vereinten Nationen kann humanitäre Hilfe absichern und Hilfestellung für die politische Lösung der Konflikte in Mali leisten. Der stockende Friedensprozess gehört ins Zentrum der internationalen Bemühungen. Ich glaube, es muss mehr getan werden. Wir sehen, dass dieser Prozess gerade in einer ganz kritischen Phase ist. Wenn dieser Einsatz nicht gelingt, dann werden wir mit Sicherheit ganz große Probleme bekommen. Deswegen erwarten wir von der Bundesregierung und der Europäischen Union ein intensives politisches Engagement. Das muss angemessen adressiert werden. Ich glaube, da gibt es noch Luft nach oben. Dafür haben Sie jedenfalls unsere Unterstützung.\n\nDanke für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n4403,johannes-kahrs,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben in dieser Woche häufig gehört, dass das ein historischer Haushalt ist. In diesem Haushalt werden keine neuen Schulden gemacht. Ich glaube, dass das etwas ist, was man gar nicht hoch genug bewerten kann. Das Wort „historisch“ ist, wie gesagt, häufig genug gefallen. Der alte Goethe hat einmal geschrieben:\n\n… ich erscheine mir selbst immer mehr und mehr geschichtlich.\n\nMan kann über die Historie reden, aber das ist, glaube ich, nicht der entscheidende Punkt. Das eigentlich Wichtige ist - und nur dadurch wird es vielleicht historisch -, dass das der Anfang einer langen Geschichte sein muss und nicht der Schlusspunkt. Wichtig ist, dass wir auch in den nächsten Jahren, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, keine neuen Schulden machen, trotz der Risiken, die auch dieser Haushalt birgt.\n\nFür uns ist wesentlich, dass man durchhält. Wir müssen diesen Vorsatz durchziehen, in der Gegenwart wie in der Zukunft. Das muss in den Etats aller Ministerien dominieren. Man muss aber trotzdem investieren. Wir haben als Sozialdemokraten immer dafür gekämpft, dass man - jawohl - keine neuen Schulden macht, aber auch schaut, wie man das Geld für ein Investitionsprogramm zusammenbekommt. Wir freuen uns, dass das geklappt hat, dass wir uns da durchsetzen konnten. Im Kern ist das die richtige Mischung: auf der einen Seite sparen und keine neuen Schulden machen und auf der anderen Seite in die Infrastruktur in diesem Land investieren. Das hat etwas mit Zukunft zu tun. Keine Schulden machen und in die Zukunft investieren, das hat auch etwas mit Generationengerechtigkeit zu tun, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nIch möchte mich an dieser Stelle ganz herzlich bei den Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Union im Haushaltsausschuss bedanken. Der Kollege Norbert Barthle und alle, die da mitgetan haben, haben das sehr solidarisch, sehr vernünftig und in einem angenehmen Umgang miteinander gemacht. Ich habe mich immer sehr darüber gefreut. Es ist wichtig, dass man auf der Arbeitsebene hervorragend zusammenarbeitet. Deswegen: Mein ganz herzlicher Dank an die Arbeitsgruppe der CDU/CSU und an das Finanzministerium! Herr Schäuble, das war eine erfolgreiche, gute und sehr zuverlässige Zusammenarbeit.\n\nSehen wir uns die Opposition an. Wir haben ja in den letzten Tagen gehört: All das, was von den Grünen kam, war etwas freudlos. Ich kann ja verstehen, dass Sie nicht gerne in der Opposition sind. Dass man natürlich immer etwas kritisieren kann und dass nicht alle Wünsche erfüllt werden, ist klar. Das ist so, wenn man einen Haushalt ohne neue Schulden auf den Weg bringt. Ich kann das alles nachvollziehen. Im Kern ist das, was Sie sagen, allerdings nicht wirklich überzeugend.\n\nWas die Linken angeht, muss ich sagen: Frau Lötzsch hat ganz darauf verzichtet, auf Inhalte einzugehen, sondern allen Beteiligten gedankt; ich finde, auch das ist in Ordnung.\n\nDas zeigt allerdings, wie das, was von den Linken gekommen ist, zu bewerten ist. Ein reines Wünsch-dir-was-Paket bringt eben nichts.\n\nDeswegen, glaube ich, ist das alles halbe Höhe und nicht so wild.\n\nDer Kollege Brinkhaus, der als stellvertretender Fraktionsvorsitzender der Union vor mir geredet hat, hat dann den kommunistischen Weg der Linken kritisiert. Ehrlich gesagt, Kollege Brinkhaus: Das ist eine etwas große Keule. Angesichts dessen, was da abgeliefert worden ist, geht es auch gerne ein bisschen kleiner.\n\nAn dieser Stelle möchte ich sagen - das ist in einer Haushaltsrede eigentlich nicht üblich -: Ich finde, dass der Kollege Brinkhaus vor solchen Sitzungen deutlich weniger Glühwein zu sich nehmen sollte.\n\nWir haben auf der Arbeitsebene ein hervorragendes Miteinander. Aber es geht mir zunehmend auf den Zeiger und es ist zunehmend unerträglich, dass sich Redner der Union - ich mache das jetzt einmal an ihm als stellvertretendem Fraktionsvorsitzenden fest - hier hinstellen, bei jeder Gelegenheit der SPD eine mitgeben und bei -jeder Gelegenheit das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen angreifen. So, Herr Kollege Brinkhaus, ist eine gute Zusammenarbeit in der Koalition nicht möglich. So funktioniert das nicht. So findet das auch in der Arbeitsgruppe gemeinsam mit der CDU/CSU nicht statt.\n\nIhr vergiftetes Lob von oben herab nach dem Motto: „Na ja, es ist schön, dass Sie Kurs gehalten haben; aber wir wissen, dass Sie eigentlich etwas ganz anderes wollen“ entspricht eigentlich nicht der Art und Weise, in der wir zusammenarbeiten. Außerdem kam von Ihnen die Aussage, man habe auch viel Glück gehabt, und deswegen seien der Haushalt und die wirtschaftliche Lage jetzt so gut und die Steuereinnahmen so hoch. Herr Brinkhaus, weil wir gerade dabei sind, uns gegenseitig die Wahrheit zu sagen:\n\nMit Glück hat das gar nichts zu tun.\n\nDas war die gute Arbeit von Rot-Grün. Das war Gerhard Schröder. Das war die Agenda. Das war die damalige Wirtschaftspolitik.\n\nDas waren die Reformen, von denen wir noch heute zehren. Sie haben dazu geführt, dass die Steuereinnahmen jetzt so hoch sind. Nur deshalb ist es dem Finanzminister überhaupt möglich, einen solchen Haushalt vorzulegen.\n\nIhre Politik unter Schwarz-Gelb hat sich darin erschöpft, Steuererhöhungen zu beschließen.\n\nIhre Steuererhöhungen unter Schwarz-Gelb - denken Sie nur an die Luftverkehrsteuer - haben dazu geführt, dass die deutsche Luftfahrtindustrie in eine Krise gekommen ist.\n\nVielleicht sollten Sie an dieser Stelle einmal einen Gang herunterschalten.\n\nEs kann nicht angehen, dass solche kleinen Nickeleien immer wieder das Klima vergiften. Deswegen: Herr Brinkhaus, es wäre gut, wenn Sie Ihrer Verantwortung als stellvertretender Fraktionsvorsitzender gerecht werden\n\nund nicht in jeder Debatte Nordrhein-Westfalen erwähnen würden - da scheinen Sie persönlich etwas ja noch nicht verwunden zu haben - und zu dem zurückkehren würden, was in Ihrer Arbeitsgruppe vorzüglich gemacht wird: zu einer guten Zusammenarbeit in der Koalition, die diesen Haushalt erst ermöglicht hat.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n2851,ulle-schauws,\"Die Künstlersozialkasse ist in ihrer Ausgestaltung auf die ganz spezielle Arbeits- und Lebenssituation ihrer Mitglieder, die vor allem durch oft wechselnde Beschäftigungsformen und häufig geringe Einkommen geprägt ist, zugeschnitten. Hinzu kommt, dass der Anteil der geringfügig Beschäftigten im Bereich der Kultur- und Kreativwirtschaft in den vergangenen Jahren kontinuierlich gestiegen ist, ganz im Gegensatz zu dem Anteil der sozialversicherungspflichtig Beschäftigten. Vor diesem Hintergrund ist die Künstlersozialversicherung eine Errungenschaft und ein existenzielles Instrument im Rahmen der sozialen Absicherung und Integration von selbstständigen Kulturschaffenden in die bestehenden Sozialversicherungssysteme.\n\nUnabdingbar für die Existenz dieser Solidargemeinschaft ist jedoch eine solide Finanzierungsgrundlage. Immerhin 30 Prozent der KSK-Kosten werden durch die Künstlersozialabgabe generiert. Wenn ein Großteil der abgabepflichtigen Unternehmen vorsätzlich oder unwissentlich ihrer Pflicht aber nicht nachkommt, gerät diese Solidargemeinschaft in eine Schieflage und bedroht die Stabilität der Künstlerso-zialversicherung in ihrer Gesamtheit. Bündnis 90/Die Grünen begrüßt daher die nun vorliegende Gesetzeskonkretisierung zur Stabilisierung des Künstlersozialabgabesatzes. Bereits in der vergangenen Legislaturperiode hatten wir uns für einen entsprechenden Gesetzentwurf ausgesprochen, der im letzten Moment durch die damalige Koalition aus CDU/CSU und FDP zurückgezogen wurde.\n\nDie Unternehmen sowie Verwerter und Verwerterinnen tragen für die von ihnen beauftragten Kulturschaffenden eine arbeitgeberähnliche Verantwortung, der sie nachkommen müssen. Die Einbeziehung aller Verwerter und Verwerterinnen ist aus Gründen der Gerechtigkeit gegenüber allen Abgabepflichtigen bzw. Zahlenden und den Künstlern und Künstlerinnen sowie Publizisten und Publizistinnen, die über die Künstlersozialkasse versichert sind, dringend geboten. Umfassende Kontrollen sind zur Herstellung dieser Gerechtigkeit ein wirkungsvolles, notwendiges und, mit Verlaub, auch ein ganz gängiges Steuerungsinstrument.\n\nDie Überprüfung der Künstlersozialabgabe an die ohnehin durch die Rentenversicherung alle vier Jahre stattfindende Arbeitgeberprüfung zu koppeln, ist ein sinnvoller Mechanismus. Nach dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf geht dies allerdings zulasten der Beitragszahler und Beitragszahlerinnen in der Rentenversicherung. Denn Mehreinnahmen ergeben sich für die Rentenversicherung aus der zusätzlichen Überprüfung nicht und ein Ausgleich der entstehenden Kosten sieht der Gesetzentwurf nicht vor. Hier besteht aus unserer Sicht Nachbesserungsbedarf.\n\nWeiteren Diskussionsbedarf sehen wir auch bezüglich der Einführung eines Freibetrags von 450 Euro pro Jahr. Diese Neuregelung wird zwar auf der einen Seite besonders kleinere Unternehmen vor einem höheren Bürokratieaufwand schützen, aber auf der anderen Seite auch eine Reduzierung der KSK-Einnahmen zur Folge haben. Wie erheblich diese Reduzierung letztlich ist, bedarf einer genauen Überprüfung, ebenso die bestehende Geringfügigkeitsregelung von drei abgabefreien Veranstaltungen pro Jahr. Auch hier können die Einnahmeausfälle für die KSK, wenn es sich zum Beispiel um besonders umfangreiche und kostenaufwendige Veranstaltungen handelt, enorm sein. Eine Kombination beider Voraussetzungen könnte daher eine sinnvolle Alternative sein.\n\nKlar ist: Der nun vorliegende Gesetzentwurf kann nur ein erster Schritt sein, hin zu einer zukunftssicheren Künstlersozialversicherung. Es gibt weitere strukturelle Probleme, die angegangen werden müssen. Nicht nur die Entwicklung des Beitragssatzes der KSK und die Höhe des Bundeszuschusses müssen wir hierbei im Blick haben. Es geht vor allem auch um die Akzeptanz der KSK in der Gesellschaft. Dies ist gerade vor dem Hintergrund, dass vielen Kulturschaffenden der Zutritt zur KSK verwehrt bleibt, ein großes Thema. Die Probleme, die wir im Bereich der sozialen und wirtschaftlichen Lage von Kulturschaffenden haben, sind zu vielschichtig, als dass wir sie allein über eine Reform der Künstlersozialversicherung lösen könnten. Hier gibt es verschiedene Hebel, und wir Grüne haben in der Vergangenheit hierzu bereits einige Vorschläge gemacht. Aber ohne das soziale Sicherungssystem der Künstlersozialversicherung lösen wir die Probleme schon gar nicht.\"\n7159,thomas-gambke,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte ganz besonders die Zuhörer begrüßen, die diesem Thema zu so später Stunde lauschen. - Die Umsetzung der Richtlinie in nationales Recht - auch ich verkürze die Überschrift - ist ein gutes Zeichen dafür, dass Europa funktioniert. Ich finde, das sollte man einmal deutlich sagen. Wichtige Änderungen werden von Europa vorbereitet. Als Beispiel nenne ich die Rohstofftransparenz. Aber auch der Bürokratieabbau für kleine und mittlere Unternehmen wird von Europa angeregt. Ich finde, das sollte betont und unterstrichen werden.\n\nWenn gerade kleine und mittlere Unternehmen in vielen Bereichen entlastet werden, dann sage ich als Mittelstandsbeauftragter meiner Fraktion: Sehr gut! Das unterstützen wir.\n\nIch muss allerdings etwas zum parlamentarischen Rahmen sagen: Seit zwei Jahren liegt der Änderungsvorschlag zur Richtlinie auf dem Tisch. Am 20. Februar gab es dann - ich muss sagen: endlich - den Entwurf. Das führt uns, muss uns zu einer Enthaltung bei diesem Gesetz führen. Am Montag bringen Sie mehr als 100 Seiten Änderungen. Es ist von einer Opposition in der Kürze der Zeit nicht zu schaffen, das seriös durchzugehen, zu bewerten. Deshalb bedaure ich ausdrücklich, dass wir uns bei einem Gesetz, das wichtige Dinge enthält, enthalten müssen. Ich bitte sehr darum, dass dieses parlamentarische Verfahren so geändert wird, dass wir wirklich in eine Bewertung von solchen Vorlagen kommen können.\n\nRohstofftransparenz ist ein wichtiges Thema. Auch da hat Europa uns in der Bundesrepublik dazu gebracht, endlich einen Schritt in Richtung Offenlegung zu gehen; das ist hier betont worden. Wir haben uns in der Anhörung ein bisschen mit dem Thema der 50 000 Euro befasst, mit denen eine Nichtoffenlegung strafbewehrt ist. Wir hätten uns vorgestellt - ich will hier noch einmal wiederholen: ich finde es eigentlich bedauerlich, dass wir mit dem Thema so wenig umgehen konnten -, dass da erstens ein Eskalationsmechanismus enthalten sein muss. Und es ist ja erwähnt worden: Es geht manchmal um wirklich sehr hohe Beträge, wo 50 000 Euro, mit denen man sich freikaufen kann, Peanuts sind. Insofern hätten wir erwartet, dass man darüber noch einmal intensiver nachdenkt und einen Eskalationsmechanismus beschließt. Wir bedauern sehr, dass das nicht passiert ist.\n\nEs gibt übrigens auch einen Hinweis darauf, was man noch hätte machen können. Sie beschränken die Bilanzierungsrichtlinie ja auf das Thema Rohstoffe. Man hätte dort natürlich noch mehr Berichtspflichten verlangen können; wir haben vorhin darüber geredet. Ich bedaure ausdrücklich, dass die Bundesregierung gerade in diesem Punkt Europa eher bremst denn fördert, und ich hoffe sehr, dass die Europäer uns dazu bringen - ob das in Steuersachen ist, ob das in ökologischer Hinsicht ist -, in der Bilanzierung weitere Schritte zu gehen, damit die Unternehmen da transparenter werden, als sie es heute sind.\n\nEin kurzer letzter Punkt zu den Pensionsrückstellungen. Ich unterstreiche ausdrücklich die Notwendigkeit, da etwas zu tun, bitte aber darum, dass wir in der Prüfung nicht nur auf die Pensionsrückstellungen schauen. Es geht hier um strukturelle Änderungen. Wobei ich da noch einmal frage, ob das allein mit Fristigkeit gelöst werden kann, dass also aus den 7 Jahren jetzt 12 oder 14 Jahre gemacht werden. Wir müssen dort jedes Detail betrachten; denn es ist nicht richtig, wenn wir uns in einer Niedrigzinsphase nur die Pensionsrückstellungen angucken. Es ist richtig, dass wir darauf gucken; aber es wäre sehr wichtig, dass wir das Thema weiter fassen, um eine Regelung zu finden, die eben auch auf andere Sachverhalte entsprechend anzuwenden ist.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12161,lothar-riebsamen,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Auch ich glaube, dass das, was die rot-grüne Koalition 2005 gemacht hat, richtig war. Wir hatten damals 5 Millionen Arbeitslose; das ist schon mehrfach angeklungen. Die Wirtschaftsinstitute hatten prognostiziert: Wenn die Regierung nichts tut, dann wird die Arbeitslosenquote noch weiter ansteigen. Im Übrigen wird auch die Jugendarbeitslosenquote ansteigen.\n\nJetzt warne ich schon sehr davor - wir sind ja Gesundheitspolitiker -, diese präventiven Maßnahmen, die wir damals getroffen haben, nicht rückgängig zu machen. Es ist so wie in der Prävention allgemein: Wenn ich 5 Kilogramm durch Prävention abgenommen habe und mir dann sage: „So, jetzt habe ich 5 Kilogramm abgenommen und kann jetzt wieder fett essen“, dann geht das in die Hose.\n\nDann werden wir wieder in die Situation kommen, in der wir 2005 waren.\n\nFrau Klein-Schmeink hat den Begriff „Globalisierung“ ins Spiel gebracht. So weit will ich gar nicht gehen. Es reicht doch schon, wenn wir uns Europa ansehen. Gucken wir uns doch die Staaten in Europa an, die keine Strukturmaßnahmen durchgeführt haben. Das wird uns doch jeden Tag vor Augen geführt. Wir sind heute in der Situation, dass wir zu einem beachtlichen Teil auch für die Staaten haften, die bisher nicht bereit oder in der Lage waren, in ihren Sozialsystemen Strukturverbesserungen durchzuführen.\n\nWir sind in der Lage, weil Sie sie Gott sei Dank durchgeführt haben; wir haben es mitgetragen. Wir sind offenbar die Einzigen, die dazu stehen, obwohl wir diese Entscheidung nur mitgetragen haben.\n\nAber das machen wir gerne. Wir sind heute in der Lage, den Staaten, die Probleme haben, ein Stück weit zu helfen. Unsere Steuereinnahmen sind so hoch wie noch nie. Wir können über Steuerentlastungen reden.\n\nDas ist ein erfreuliches Thema.\n\nFrau Klein-Schmeink, Sie haben ausgerechnet, dass dieser Zusatzbeitrag bei einem Handwerker 0,42 Prozent seines Lohnes ausmachte; das seien Peanuts, das würde die Handwerker im Wettbewerb nicht zurückwerfen.\n\nDazu kann ich Ihnen nur sagen: Da haben Sie das Handwerk nicht begriffen.\n\nWissen Sie, die Handwerker stehen nicht in erster Linie im Wettbewerb untereinander, also der eine Malerbetrieb gegen den anderen. Die Handwerker stehen im Wettbewerb gegenüber der Schwarzarbeit.\n\nWenn wir die Lohnnebenkosten nicht im Auge behalten, dann befördern wir die Schwarzarbeit. Das hat mit Wettbewerb innerhalb des Handwerks so gut wie nichts zu tun. Da haben Sie schon recht. Das ist nicht das Problem - um das einmal deutlich zu sagen.\n\nDie Wettbewerbsfähigkeit von Industrie und Handwerk ist die eine Sache. Die andere Sache ist der Wettbewerb zwischen den Krankenkassen. Mit dem Zusatzbeitrag - das Thema Parität hängt damit zusammen - haben wir für Wettbewerb zwischen den Krankenkassen gesorgt. Der durchschnittliche Zusatzbeitrag steigt in diesem Jahr - manche Krankenkassen erheben gar keinen Zusatzbeitrag - um 0,2 Prozentpunkte. Wenn man von einem Monatseinkommen in Höhe von 3 500 Euro ausgeht, dann sind das etwa 7 Euro. Man kann natürlich sagen, dass das viel Geld ist. Wenn man aber dieser Auffassung ist, dann darf man nicht wie Herr Weinberg sagen, dass die rein rechnerischen steuerlichen Entlastungen in Höhe von rund 7 Euro für jeden Bundesbürger in dieser Legislaturperiode - das Gesamtvolumen der Entlastungen beläuft sich bei 80 Millionen Menschen auf rund 5 Milliarden Euro - Peanuts sind und dass das keinem weiterhilft.\n\nWenn es aber um 7 Euro Belastung durch einen Zusatzbeitrag geht, geht die Welt unter. So kann man es natürlich nicht machen.\n\nSie haben von Verarschung gesprochen. Ich sage Ihnen: Genau das, was Sie machen, ist Verarschung.\n\nJa, bitte schön.\n\nImmer gerne.\n\nJa, ich stimme Ihnen ohne Weiteres zu, dass es Wettbewerb auch ohne Parität gibt.\n\nDer finanzielle Wettbewerb wird aber erst dann deutlich, wenn die eine Krankenkasse einen Zusatzbeitrag erhebt und die andere nicht. Den Wettbewerb, den Sie meinen, gab es bereits 50 Jahre. Bloß hat das niemanden interessiert. Nun wird durch die Zusatzbeiträge deutlich, dass es tatsächlich einen Wettbewerb gibt.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. Ich glaube, meine Redezeit neigt sich ohnehin dem Ende zu.\n\n22 Minuten habe ich also noch.\n\nIch fasse zusammen. Sie diskutieren über die Einführung einer Bürgerversicherung\n\nund wollen den Zusatzbeitrag abschaffen. Ich erinnere daran, dass nicht wir, sondern Sie die Praxisgebühr und die Kopfpauschale eingeführt haben.\n\nIch habe den Eindruck, dass Sie eine Salamitaktik verfolgen und Stück für Stück die wichtigen Strukturreformen zurücknehmen wollen.\n\nWir lehnen das ab. Wir halten uns an den Koalitionsvertrag. Diesen werden wir weiter abarbeiten. Dazu gehört aber nicht, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der SPD, eine Rückkehr zur Parität, weder in dieser Legislaturperiode noch später.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n1480,ulla-jelpke,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Ich glaube, es ist völlig klar, dass die Grünen den ganzen Prozess beschleunigen wollen, und das ist richtig. Eigentlich ist es doch traurig, dass wir heute darüber reden, dass Menschen, die in Deutschland leben, auch wenn sie keinen Aufenthaltstitel, sondern nur eine Duldung haben, in Deutschland kein Bankkonto eröffnen können, weil nach dem Geldwäschegesetz zur Einrichtung des Kontos Dokumente benötigt werden. Ich finde, das ist ein Skandal.\n\nMan muss es hier noch einmal ganz deutlich sagen: Ohne ein Bankkonto haben Geduldete im Alltag unglaubliche Schwierigkeiten. Das fängt bei einem Handyvertrag an und geht weiter bei der Einzugsermächtigung, wenn es um einen Mietvertrag geht. Ebenso können sie oftmals keinen Arbeitsvertrag unterschreiben, weil die Kontoverbindung verlangt wird. Wir kennen aus unserer Praxis viele Fälle, in denen eine Arbeitsaufnahme daran gescheitert ist, dass es kein Konto gibt. Durch das Fehlen eines Girokontos wird im Grunde die wirtschaftliche und soziale Integration verhindert. Man muss es hier noch einmal sagen: Viele leben seit vielen Jahren in Deutschland, manche seit mehr als zehn Jahren. Es ist einfach nicht hinzunehmen, dass solche Hindernisse bestehen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren und vor allen Dingen auch liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, natürlich werden wir diesem Antrag zustimmen. Wir begrüßen es, dass Menschen diese Erleichterung bekommen sollen\n\nbzw. dass man dafür sorgen will, dass sie ein Konto einrichten können. Aber ich will hier noch einmal sagen: Alle Bleiberechtsregelungen haben bisher gezeigt, dass diejenigen Geduldeten, die hier keine Aufenthaltserlaubnis haben, im Grunde genommen selbstständig für ihren Lebensunterhalt aufkommen müssen. Deswegen denke ich, der Antrag greift ein bisschen zu kurz. Ich verstehe dieses Anliegen. Ihr wollt es beschleunigen, aber ich finde, man muss mehr zur Diskussion stellen, wenn man über die Situation geduldeter Menschen hier in Deutschland redet.\n\nDenn viele können ihren Lebensunterhalt nicht selber aufbringen. Sie brauchen einfach mehr Rechte.\n\nDas heißt, wir müssen hier im Grunde genommen, wenn es um Geduldete und mehr Rechte für sie geht, auch weiterhin über die Residenzpflicht, über die Unterbringung in Sammelunterkünften - da sitzen genau diejenigen, die geduldet werden -, die eingeschränkten Sozialleistungen, die sie nur über das Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz bekommen, und über die Arbeitsverbote sprechen. Ich will hier auch noch einmal erwähnen, dass die gesundheitliche Versorgung dieser Flüchtlinge nur eine Notfallversorgung ist. Das heißt, bei Schmerzzuständen oder bei Schwangerschaft und Geburt bekommen sie entsprechende Krankenscheine, um sich behandeln zu lassen. Hier sagen wir: Wir brauchen mehr und umfassende Rechte für sogenannte geduldete Menschen in Deutschland.\n\nZweitens will ich daran erinnern, dass nicht nur geduldete Menschen kein Konto haben, sondern auch Obdachlose oder Menschen, die überschuldet sind; deren Konten werden von den Banken aufgelöst. Auch hier muss man den Blick etwas weiter fassen. Übrigens muss man sagen: In 28 Ländern der EU gibt es diese Garantie auf ein Konto für alle diese Personengruppen, die ich hier eben aufgezählt habe. Es ist einfach ein Skandal, dass Deutschland da so hinterherhinkt.\n\nHerr Gutting, ich habe Ihre Bemühungen zwar gesehen, aber es muss schneller gehen. Wir können hier nicht lange bürokratische Wege gehen, bis das endlich für Flüchtlinge, für Obdachlose oder auch Menschen, die völlig überschuldet sind, umgesetzt wird. Deswegen werden wir dem Antrag zustimmen, aber auch weitergehende Debatten über die Situation dieser Menschen führen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n7686,bernd-westphal,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Worum geht es in dieser Aktuellen Stunde? Im Jahr 2008 wurden 1 393 nach Mexiko exportierte G36-Gewehre im Rüstungsexportbericht des Wirtschaftsministeriums unter der Verantwortung des damaligen Ministers Michael Glos nicht registriert. Deshalb ist es unredlich, den jetzigen Wirtschaftsminister für dieses Versäumnis verantwortlich zu machen. Es ist jedoch unsere Aufgabe, diesen Vorfall aufzuklären und dafür zu sorgen, dass so ein Versäumnis nicht wieder vorkommt. Diesen Anspruch muss ein Parlament haben.\n\nNach den Informationen des Ministeriums, die uns bis heute vorliegen, ist im Jahr 2008 eine Genehmigung nach dem Kriegswaffenkontrollgesetz aus dem Jahr 2007 zur Ausfuhr von G36-Gewehren nach Mexiko erweitert worden. Für den Rüstungsexportbericht des Jahres 2007 konnten diese Lieferungen nicht mehr berücksichtigt werden, da die Erhebung bereits abgeschlossen war, und für 2008 wurden diese zusätzlichen Lieferungen nicht erfasst, weil sie aus der Ursprungsgenehmigung von 2007 resultierten. So ein Fehler hätte nicht passieren dürfen. Wenn wir vom Wirtschaftsministerium einen Rüstungsexportbericht hier im Parlament vorgelegt bekommen, müssen wir als Abgeordnete davon ausgehen, dass er vollständig und verlässlich ist.\n\nWie es nun 2007 und 2008 war, hat die Staatssekretärin hier meiner Meinung nach gut vorgetragen. Das ist sicherlich nicht in Ordnung gewesen; das hat sie zugegeben. Aber dieser Fall taugt nicht zur Skandalisierung, wie es meine Vorredner hier versucht haben.\n\nDamit sich so ein Fall in Zukunft nicht wiederholt, sind erste Maßnahmen, auch beim BAFA, getroffen worden. Eine Erweiterung von bereits erteilten Ausfuhrgenehmigungen ist grundsätzlich nicht mehr zulässig. Ich denke, die Maßnahmen, die das Ministerium unter der Leitung von Sigmar Gabriel hier getroffen hat, kann man nur begrüßen.\n\nAber was auch zur Wahrheit gehört, ist, dass bereits die Fragen hier im Parlament zu diesem Fall 2009 - damals auf Anfrage des Abgeordneten Paul Schäfer von den Linken - beantwortet wurden. Der damalige Staatssekretär hat die genauen Stückzahlen genannt, bei denen versäumt wurde, sie im Rüstungsexportbericht aufzuführen. Ich denke, das ist etwas, was man mit erläutern muss.\n\nEbenso muss darauf hingewiesen werden, dass die Bundesregierung seit einigen Jahren die Bearbeitung von Ausfuhrgenehmigungsanträgen im Hinblick auf Kleinwaffen für Mexiko ganz ausgesetzt hat, weil es genau die genannten Gründe gibt, diese Waffen nicht in diese Region zu liefern.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, durch die neuen Transparenzmaßnahmen, die wir in dieser Legislaturperiode eingeführt haben, werden das Parlament und die Öffentlichkeit rechtzeitig und umfassend informiert. Dieser Rüstungsexportbericht wird zeitnah und zweimal im Jahr veröffentlicht. Das ist eine neue Entwicklung und bedeutet eine wesentliche Verbesserung gegenüber der bisherigen Praxis, dass die Veröffentlichung anderthalb Jahre gebraucht hat. Durch die Änderung der Geschäftsordnung werden nun auch die Entscheidungen des Bundessicherheitsrates dem Parlament und dem Wirtschaftsausschuss zeitnah mitgeteilt. Die Transparenz bei Exporten von deutschen Rüstungsgütern wurde damit erheblich verbessert.\n\nEs zeigt sich, dass die bisherigen Mechanismen funktionieren. Ich denke, dass hier den berechtigten Interessen des Parlaments und der Öffentlichkeit Rechnung getragen wird, aber ich sage auch ganz deutlich: Wir dürfen an diesem Punkt nicht stehen bleiben. Auch hier brauchen wir eine Weiterentwicklung.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Bundesregierung hat im Juli 2015 auf Vorschlag des Bundesministers Sigmar Gabriel Eckpunkte für eine neue Regelung zur Kontrolle des Endverbleibs von Rüstungsgütern beschlossen, die sogenannten Post-Shipment-Kontrollen. Es gilt der Grundsatz „Alt gegen Neu“. Daneben soll künftig nachträglich vor Ort im Empfängerland auch die Ausfuhr von Kleinwaffen in Drittstaaten kontrolliert werden. Empfänger von Waffen in Drittländern müssen sich künftig in den geforderten Endverbleibserklärungen mit Kontrollen vor Ort einverstanden erklären. Die Vorbereitung und die Durchführung erfolgen durch das Bundesamt für Wirtschaft und Ausfuhrkontrolle.\n\nDie Bundesregierung hat sich in Bezug auf die Exporte von Rüstungsgütern für eine strikte, restriktive Politik ausgesprochen. Dies ist im Koalitionsvertrag auch so verankert worden, ebenso wie die politischen Grundsätze von 2000 über Rüstungsexporte. In den Koalitionsverhandlungen wurde darüber hinaus ausdrücklich festgestellt, dass diese politischen Grundsätze weiterhin Gültigkeit haben. Auf dieser Grundlage gibt es ebenfalls einen europäischen gemeinsamen Standpunkt, der sich diesem Thema widmet, sodass diese Regeln ebenfalls gelten.\n\nVor allem hinsichtlich der Genehmigung von Kleinwaffen ist in den aktuellen Berichten zu sehen, dass diese politischen Maßnahmen greifen und es erhebliche Reduzierungen gab. Das Volumen der genehmigten Exporte von Kleinwaffen an Drittländer betrug im Jahr 2014 rund 22 Millionen Euro. Dieses ist auf 15 Millionen Euro reduziert worden. Daran sieht man, dass schon eine Wirkung eingetreten ist.\n\nDurch die sozialdemokratische Regierungsbeteiligung gibt es erfreuliche Fortschritte bei der Reduzierung und der Kontrolle von Rüstungsgütern. Deshalb werden wir den Wirtschaftsminister Gabriel auf diesem Weg weiter unterstützen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13932,gunther-krichbaum,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Bei dem bevorstehenden Gipfel steht nicht nur die wirtschaftliche Lage in Europa auf dem Programm, sondern auch - das klang schon mehrfach an - das Vorbereitungstreffen „60 Jahre Römische Verträge“. Es lagen zwei bestialische Weltkriege hinter Europa. Wenn man die Schwierigkeiten bedenkt, vor denen damals die Gründungsväter der heutigen Europäischen Union standen, dann wird man geradezu demütig, wenn man die Schwierigkeiten sieht, die - ohne jeden Zweifel - heute vorhanden sind. Man war sich aber in einem einig. Weil wir die Inhumanität hinter uns lassen wollten, haben wir die Gemeinschaft auf den Grundsätzen der Humanität gegründet. Daran müssen wir uns messen lassen. Und daran müssen sich auch gerade in diesen Tagen manche Länder der Europäischen Union messen lassen.\n\nEines, lieber Cem Özdemir, bedarf der Korrektur. Ohne jeden Zweifel hat sich 1946 Winston Churchill für die Vereinigten Staaten von Europa ausgesprochen, aber - das ist eines der großen historischen Missverständnisse - ohne die Beteiligung von Großbritannien.\n\nVielmehr sollte Frankreich die Aufgabe übernehmen, Deutschland unterzuhaken, damit es nicht mehr auf dumme Ideen kommt.\n\nAber eines ist doch hervorzuheben, nämlich der Mut von Charles de Gaulle, Konrad Adenauer und vor allem Robert Schuman; denn man hatte sich dazu entschlossen, das Ganze ohne ein Referendum zu machen. Ich glaube, ich brauche hier in dieser Runde nicht zu sagen, wie ein Referendum in Frankreich wenige Jahre nach dem Krieg ausgegangen wäre, wenn man gefragt hätte: Wollt ihr gemeinsam mit Deutschland in eine Gemeinschaft zur Verwaltung kriegswichtiger Güter, nämlich Kohle und Stahl, eintreten? Ich glaube, jedem ist klar, wohin das geführt hätte.\n\nEs ist genau dieser Mut, der in Großbritannien gefehlt hat. Cameron hat gerade keinen Mut bewiesen, sondern den Kotau vor seinen eigenen Fraktionsmitgliedern gemacht, als er ein Referendum, für das es überhaupt keine Veranlassung gab, vom Zaun gebrochen hat. Das hat zu einem europäischen Schlamassel geführt. Deswegen gilt das jetzt geradezu sinnbildlich für die Brexit-Verhandlungen; das können wir den britischen Freunden zurufen.\n\nFür meine Begriffe gilt hier ein altes afrikanisches Sprichwort: Wenn du schnell gehen willst, dann geh alleine. Aber wenn du weit gehen willst, dann geh gemeinsam. - Das zeichnet auch die Europäische Union angesichts der Schwierigkeiten, vor denen wir im Zeitalter der Globalisierung stehen, aus.\n\nWir stehen heute in der Tat vor vielen Herausforderungen. Ich will jetzt nicht näher - das würde das Zeitbudget sprengen - auf die fünf Vorschläge von Jean-Claude Juncker eingehen. Ja - das hat die Bundeskanzlerin ausgeführt -, wir werden künftig sicherlich einen Schwerpunkt darauf setzen müssen, das Instrument der verstärkten Zusammenarbeit stärker zu nutzen. In der Tat müssen wir bei der europäischen Integration in vielen Punkten vorangehen. Aber eines bleibt festzuhalten: Wir sind immer nur als Europäische Union stark. Wir müssen aufpassen, dass es nicht zu einer Fragmentierung der Europäischen Union kommt. Aber eines ist auch wahr: Im Zeitalter der Globalisierung müssen wir enger als früher zusammenarbeiten.\n\nEine der großen Herausforderungen sind jetzt die USA; das ist wahr. Das hätten wir uns vor wenigen Monaten noch nicht träumen lassen. Ich erinnere an Henry Kissinger, den früheren amerikanischen Außenminister, der einmal sagte: Europa? Welches Europa? Sagt mir doch einmal die Telefonnummer von diesem Europa! - Ich frage umgekehrt: Welche Telefonnummer haben in diesen Tagen eigentlich die USA? Wir brauchen in der Tat Verlässlichkeit im transatlantischen Bündnis. Dieses transatlantische Bündnis ist viel zu wertvoll, als dass es nationalen Politiken zum Opfer fallen darf.\n\nEinen Aspekt, der heute noch gar nicht Gegenstand der Debatte war, möchte ich ansprechen: die Verhältnisse in der Ukraine. Außenminister Gabriel hält sich heute zu Gesprächen in Moskau auf. Er hat sicherlich unsere Unterstützung, wenn einmal mehr darauf hingewiesen wird, dass das, was in der Ukraine geschieht, völlig inakzeptabel ist. Die Krim-Halbinsel ist bis zum heutigen Tage völkerrechtswidrig annektiert. Im Osten des Landes sorgt Russland für eine systematische Destabilisierung. Nein, wer im 21. Jahrhundert Krieg als ein Instrument der Politik begreift, darf sich nicht wundern, wenn er in die Politik zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts zurückfällt. Ich glaube, das müssen wir Herrn Putin ziemlich deutlich sagen.\n\nDie Türkei war schon mehrfach Gegenstand der Debatte. Es ist schon eine Ironie der Geschichte, dass sich Herr Erdogan hier in Deutschland auf die Grundrechte beruft, etwa auf das Recht der freien Meinungsäußerung, die er den Menschen im eigenen Land verweigert. Ich glaube - da habe ich vielleicht eine andere Meinung als die meisten hier -, alles hat seine Grenzen. Es fängt damit an, dass Repräsentanten des türkischen Staates hier keine Grundrechtsträger sind;\n\nKollege Röttgen hat kürzlich in einer Fraktionssitzung auf diesen Umstand hingewiesen.\n\nGrundrechte sind Abwehrrechte des Bürgers, und zwar der deutschen Bürger, gegenüber dem Staat. Aber sie kommen für Repräsentanten eines anderen Staates nicht infrage. Deswegen muss klar sein: Natürlich sind uns die Repräsentanten der türkischen Regierung jederzeit willkommen, aber nicht als Wahlkämpfer. In diesem Moment werden wir parteiisch und werden in Wahlkämpfe hineingezogen.\n\nBei all dem sollten wir immer das Ende bedenken. Wollen wir in Zukunft auch Herrn Putin einen freien Auftritt gewähren oder auch vielen anderen? Es wäre gut, innerhalb der Europäischen Union Leitlinien zu entwerfen und einen Konsens dazu zu finden, wie wir insgesamt damit umgehen. Ich glaube, es bedarf hier einer europäischen Antwort. Mit Blick auf die Anwürfe, die in jüngster Zeit in Richtung Bundesrepublik Deutschland erhoben wurden, hat mir eine schlüssige, vehemente und dezidierte Antwort der Europäischen Kommission gefehlt; das darf ich an dieser Stelle einmal sagen.\n\nIch glaube mit Blick auf die Türkei aber auch: Die Not muss natürlich schon ziemlich groß sein, wenn Repräsentanten der türkischen Regierung glauben, sie müssten unbedingt auch noch die Stimmen der Auslandstürken einwerben, weil man innerhalb der Türkei um die eigene Mehrheit fürchtet. Da ist es sicherlich schon weit gekommen. Die wirtschaftliche Situation, in der sich die Türkei im Augenblick befindet, ist dramatisch. Da steht Herr Erdogan sicherlich unter einem viel größeren Druck, als wir das hier manchmal wahrnehmen.\n\n60 Jahre Römische Verträge, das ist eine große Chance für uns. Im Rückblick können wir auf der einen Seite dankbar sein. Wir haben nämlich eine beispiellose Periode des Friedens in Europa. Auf der anderen Seite ist es aber auch eine Verpflichtung, das Modell der Aussöhnung auf andere Länder und andere Regionen Europas zu übertragen; denn auch die Staaten des westlichen Balkans sind ja Gegenstand des Gipfels. Hier können das europäische Modell, die deutsch-französische Aussöhnung sehr wohl Pate stehen für eine Aussöhnung, die wir in dieser Region noch brauchen, um zu einem Mehr an Stabilität zu finden.\n\nEines - das sei abschließend gesagt - ist auch in diesen Staaten wichtig - darum kommen sie nicht herum -, nämlich die kritische Selbstreflexion auf die eigene Geschichte; denn ohne diese Auseinandersetzung wird das Ganze nicht funktionieren. In diesem Sinne haben wir ein großes Interesse daran, diesen Staaten zu helfen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n10933,matthaus-strebl,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Frau Kollegin vom geschätzten Koalitionspartner SPD, die gerade gesprochen hat, zeitweise dachte ich, Sie sprächen über die Riester-Rente und Walter Riester habe ehemals der CDU/CSU-Fraktion angehört. So ist es aber nicht. Ich kann mich noch gut daran erinnern, dass hier in diesem Haus 2001 - ich gehörte schon damals dem Deutschen Bundestag an - über die Riester-Rente in zweiter und dritter Lesung debattiert worden ist. Walter Riester saß damals auf der Regierungsbank, und für die CDU/CSU-Bundestagsfraktion sprach hier Horst Seehofer. Er wies damals auf die Schwierigkeiten hin. Heute wissen wir, dass wir in der Breite nicht das erreicht haben, was wir erreichen wollten. Deswegen müssen wir bei der Riester-Rente reformieren, wie von Rednern schon mehrmals gesagt worden ist.\n\n„Die Riester-Rente in die gesetzliche Rentenversicherung überführen“ lautet der Titel des Antrags der Linksfraktion. Lassen Sie mich zu Beginn einige Schlagzeilen der letzten Tage zitieren. Da hieß es: „Sackgasse Riester-Rente?“, „Rettung für Riester-Sparer gesucht“, „Die Riester-Rente muss bleiben“. Damit wird deutlich, dass wir es mit einem Thema zu tun haben, das kontrovers betrachtet werden kann. Diese Pressemitteilungen lassen für jeden erkennen: Es gibt keine einfache Lösung.\n\nWichtig ist hierbei: Wir müssen die Alterssicherung aufgrund der demografischen, gesellschaftlichen und ökonomischen Veränderungen anpassen. Gleichwohl darf dies nicht zulasten jüngerer Generationen gehen. Die gesetzliche Rente im Umlageverfahren ist und bleibt für uns die wichtigste Säule. Dennoch dürfen wir die kapitalgedeckte Vorsorge als zweite und dritte Säule nicht vernachlässigen.\n\nAufgrund des demografischen Wandels werden jedoch immer weniger Beitragszahler für die Finanzierung der Rente aufkommen. Deshalb ist es unausweichlich, dass die Altersvorsorge auf drei Säulen gestützt wird; Vorredner haben das schon gesagt. Nach Angaben des Statistischen Bundesamtes wurden in den Jahren 2001 bis 2015 - darauf möchte ich hinweisen - 16 Millionen Riester-Verträge geschlossen. Diese Zahl könnte durchaus höher sein. Dennoch spricht sie gegen eine Abschaffung der Riester-Rente.\n\nNatürlich gibt es auch eine hohe Anzahl von ruhenden Verträgen. Auch das muss bei einer ehrlichen Diskussion erwähnt werden. Es gehört aber auch zur Wahrheit, dass die Riester-Rente kein Wundermittel ist. Die Idee der damaligen Regierung war vielmehr die Schaffung einer weiteren Vorsorge und nicht eine unschlagbare Renditeoptimierung. Es war vor allem die Intention, neben einkommensschwachen Steuerpflichtigen auch kinderreiche Familien zu unterstützen. So lautete die Aussage 2001, wenn ich mich richtig erinnere.\n\nSeit der Einführung der Riester-Rente haben - um auch das einmal zu erwähnen - über 2 000 Anbieter rund 4 300 Produkte entwickelt. Zweifelsfrei gibt es dabei auch Probleme: Die Riester-Rente ist, wie viele Kritiker bemängeln, ein sehr komplexes System mit einer Vielzahl von unterschiedlichen Möglichkeiten, für das Alter vorzusorgen. Da müssen wir ansetzen. Seit der Wirtschafts- und Finanzkrise ist das Vertrauen in Finanzdienstleistungen erheblich gesunken. Auch die mitunter hohen Abschluss- und Verwaltungskosten lassen den Unmut über Riester-Sparverträge noch steigen. Viele Kunden bemängeln besonders die fehlende Transparenz über die tatsächlichen Kosten, und durch die seit Jahren andauernde Niedrigzinsphase ist die kapitalgedeckte Altersvorsorge natürlich weniger attraktiv als noch bei der Einführung 2002.\n\nDiese Einwände kann ich ohne Zweifel nachvollziehen. Vergessen dürfen wir aber bei dieser Diskussion nicht, dass Renditen langfristig betrachtet werden müssen. Die Riester-Rente ist - da stimme ich den Antragstellern ausnahmsweise zu - umstritten; aber die Abschaffung der Riester-Rente, werter Kollege Birkwald, halte ich für falsch. Allerdings stimme ich zu, wenn Forderungen nach der Vereinfachung der Riester-Rente und den Förderungsbedingungen laut werden, so wie es der Kollege Peter Weiß bereits gesagt hat. Eine Optimierung halte ich deshalb für geboten und unausweichlich.\n\nWerte Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Linksfraktion, bei aller berechtigten Kritik an der Riester-Rente halte ich Ihren Antrag für falsch. Sie fordern die Möglichkeit einer freiwilligen Überführung der Riester-Produkte in die gesetzliche Rentenversicherung. Zunächst stellt sich die Frage: Wie wollen Sie die Abschaffung den Menschen erklären, die auf die Einhaltung der Verträge vertrauen, genau den Menschen, die im Vertrauen auf die staatliche Förderung die Riester-Verträge geschlossen haben?\n\nDiese Menschen sollen also dann keine staatliche Förderung für ihre Verträge mehr erhalten.\n\nNeben dem Vertrauensschutz auf staatliche Förderung der Riester-Sparer spricht die Vermischung zweier unterschiedlicher System gegen Ihren Antrag. Die heutigen Beschäftigten zahlen im Laufe ihres Erwerbslebens regelmäßig Beiträge ein. Durch das Umlageverfahren werden die Beitragsleistungen, wie wir wissen, für die Rentenzahlungen an die Rentnerinnen und Rentner verwendet. Die Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer erhalten im Gegenzug für ihre Beiträge einen Anspruch auf Rente im Alter, der dann von der nachfolgenden Beitragszahlergeneration finanziert wird. Wenn die Riester-Rente in die gesetzliche Rentenversicherung überführt wird, dann werden die heutigen Rentnerinnen und Rentner durch die höheren Beitragseinnahmen erheblich profitieren, die nachfolgenden Generationen jedoch benachteiligt. Ihren Vorschlag bewerte ich deshalb als systemwidrig. Ebenso widerspricht er der Generationengerechtigkeit.\n\nIch bin davon überzeugt, dass die Riester-Rente bleiben muss; denn sie hat Potenzial. Dieses Potenzial, meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, sollten wir nutzen. Wir lehnen daher den Antrag der Linksfraktion ab.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n8131,matthias-heider,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es wird heute wohl nicht das letzte Mal sein, dass wir uns mit diesem Thema beschäftigen müssen. Wir alle haben aber, wie ich glaube, inzwischen den Eindruck gewinnen können, dass es mehr darum geht, politisches Kapital aus dem Fehlverhalten von einzelnen Personen zu schlagen. Das, was Sie uns heute hier verquickt vortragen, macht jedenfalls deutlich, dass Sie allen Anspruch auf diese Lösung erheben.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren von den Grünen, es gibt durchaus ein paar Punkte, die vernünftig sind. Da gibt es auch gar keinen Widerspruch zu den Forderungen in Ihrem Antrag, nämlich dass Aufklärungsarbeit zu leisten ist. Dass es allen Beteiligten angelegen sein muss, Schaden vom Unternehmen Volkswagen und damit auch Schaden von der deutschen Wirtschaft abzuwenden, das ist ein Gebot, dem Sie alle schon im Interesse der Arbeitsplätze in Deutschland zustimmen müssten.\n\nEs wird eine Menge Aufklärungsarbeit betrieben. VW hat eine externe Revision in Form von Anwälten in den USA und Deutschland beauftragt. In Deutschland ermittelt die Staatsanwaltschaft wegen Betruges. Der Verkehrsminister hat eine Kommission aus Experten von Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt und Ministerium einberufen, die ebenfalls an der Aufklärung des Fehlverhaltens arbeitet. Es gibt einen Austausch mit den amerikanischen Behörden. Und die Bundesregierung berichtet dem Bundestag und seinen Ausschüssen.\n\nIch stelle zunächst einmal fest, dass all das, was notwendig ist, im Moment getan wird, um die Situation aufzuklären.\n\nIch lese in Ihrem Antrag aber beispielsweise auch, dass Sie glauben, es sei jetzt ein Wendepunkt im Hinblick auf die Dieseltechnologie erreicht. Das klingt, als hätten Sie schon die Abschaffung des Diesel-Pkw beschlossen. Das ist aber genau der falsche Weg, und das hat der Kollege Wittke in seiner Rede gerade eindrucksvoll belegt. Natürlich brauchen wir saubere Dieselmotoren, aber wir brauchen auch Dieselmotoren, die effizient sind. Dabei ist es ein hoffnungsvolles Potenzial, dass die meisten Hersteller von Dieseltechnologie sagen, dass der Verbrauch um weitere 15 bis 20 Prozent verbessert werden kann. Wenn wir eine saubere und gleichzeitig sparsamere Technologie behalten können, warum sollen wir sie dann schon abschaffen, nur weil Sie das heute hier fordern?\n\nZum Antrag der Linken wollte ich eigentlich nichts sagen. Nur so viel: Sie geben vor, dass Sie Arbeitsplätze schützen wollen. Sie schlagen dafür kompliziertere Strukturen beim Umweltbundesamt und beim Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt vor. Sie wollen gleich auch noch die Gruppenklage als neue Klageart einführen und damit wahrscheinlich Sammelklagen nach amerikanischem Vorbild Vorschub leisten. Sie sprechen von einem Unternehmensstrafrecht.\n\nDabei bestrafen Sie eigentlich die Mitarbeiter des VW-Konzerns; denn Unternehmensstrafrecht ist so etwas wie eine kollektive Schuldzuweisung. Bei uns in Deutschland ist es Gott sei Dank so, dass Schuld an ein persönlich vorwerfbares Verhalten geknüpft ist. Gerade diesem persönlichen Fehlverhalten der entsprechenden Mitarbeiter des Konzerns sind wir auf der Spur. Wir wollen nicht diejenigen bestrafen, die mit guter Arbeit dazu beitragen, dass ein vernünftiges Produkt entsteht.\n\nLassen Sie uns einen Blick auf das Ausmaß des Schadens werfen. Weltweit sind 11 Millionen Fahrzeuge betroffen, allein in Deutschland 2,4 Millionen. Das Vertrauen der Verbraucher ist tief enttäuscht, weil sie Autos von VW als ein solides und zuverlässiges Produkt aus Deutschland kennen. Das Bild der seriösen deutschen Ingenieurskunst insgesamt ist angekratzt. Wenn Sie mit Besuchern aus dem Ausland sprechen, dann erfahren Sie, dass man dort auch die große Sorge hat, dass die Marke „made in Germany“ damit beschädigt wird. Wie konnte es eigentlich zu diesem dolosen und massiven Fehlverhalten einzelner Mitarbeiter bei VW kommen? Das ist die Frage, die uns hier heute interessieren muss.\n\nDie Ursachen sind wohl insbesondere innerhalb des Konzerns zu suchen,\n\nweil dieser Skandal zeigt: Wenn eine solche Manipulation an einem so zentralen Bauteil wie dem Motor in einem Konzern möglich ist, dann müssen nicht nur dringend die manipulierten Fahrzeuge in die Werkstatt, sondern dann brauchen auch die Compliance-Regeln in diesem Konzern dringend eine Inspektion. Ich habe die Hoffnung, dass der VW-Konzern das jetzt sehr vorbildlich lösen wird.\n\nDie Ursachen sind aber auch außerhalb des Konzerns zu suchen, weil wir prüfen müssen, ob unsere bisherigen Regelungen - das hat der Kollege Kühn gerade richtig angesprochen - zur Erteilung der Typgenehmigungen durch das Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt im Rahmen der Straßenverkehrs-Zulassungs-Ordnung ausreichend sind. Es hat wohl nicht funktioniert, dass man das, was das Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt möglicherweise auch mit eigenen Kräften nachprüfen könnte, konsequent auf Labore und Zertifizierungsstellen outgesourct hat.\n\nWenn die Industrie in einem solchen Umfang von einer Bürokratieentlastungsregelung Gebrauch macht, dass man schon von einem Missbrauch sprechen muss, dann gehört auch diese auf den Prüfstand, gar keine Frage.\n\n- Klatschen Sie ruhig. Ich habe ja schon eingangs gesagt: Es gibt Punkte, da sind wir uns durchaus einig.\n\nWie reagiert jetzt der VW-Konzern auf diese drohenden hohen Kosten - es wird wohl einen hohen Milliardenbetrag erfordern - in seinem Hause? Ein Sparprogramm wird auf den Weg gebracht.\n\n1 Milliarde Euro soll dieses Sparprogramm erbringen. Das wird einen Kostendruck bei vielen Zulieferern, die auch bei Ihnen zu Hause in den Wahlkreisen angesiedelt sind, auslösen. Das hat das Potenzial, Arbeitsbedingungen und Arbeitsplätze zu gefährden. Es wird auch dafür sorgen - das haben die Kollegen aus Niedersachsen schon damals in der Aktuellen Stunde vorgetragen -, dass es Gewerbesteuereinbrüche in Städten und Gemeinden gibt. Braunschweig und Wolfsburg haben schon Haushaltssperren verhängt. Wir haben deshalb überhaupt keine Freude an den Folgen dieses Skandals. Im Gegenteil: Wir müssen durch konsequente Aufklärung dafür sorgen, dass ein solcher Vorfall nicht wieder geschehen kann.\n\nDie Industrie - das ist eines der klaren Ziele - muss zeigen, dass der Diesel weiter neben den verschiedenen Möglichkeiten der Elektromobilität eine Zukunftstechnologie ist. Wir müssen zeigen, dass Produkte aus Deutschland für Verlässlichkeit stehen, dass „made in Germany“ weiterhin das Signet für Qualität ist und dass Deutschland auf diesen Feldern Technologieführer ist. Letztens müssen die Verbraucher vor Täuschungen dieser Art geschützt werden. So kann Vertrauen wiederhergestellt werden - das ist die vordringliche Aufgabe -, so schützen wir den deutschen Automarkt, eine Schlüsselbranche unserer Industrie, ohne daraus - diese Bitte habe ich - politisches Kapital schlagen zu wollen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n11322,martin-dormann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In der Tat: Das geplante Kulturgutschutzgesetz haben von Anfang an kontroverse Debatten in der Kulturszene begleitet. Das hat nicht zuletzt mit der Doppelnatur von Kulturgütern zu tun. Einerseits sind sie Bestandteil der Kultur und damit der Identität einer Gesellschaft. Gerade aus diesem Grund verdienen national besonders wertvolle Kulturgüter Schutz. Andererseits sind sie aber auch Waren, mit denen gehandelt und Geld verdient werden kann. Das ist übrigens gut. Denn letztendlich sichert es dadurch langfristig das Einkommen von Künstlern. Deshalb müssen wir auch die Interessen an einem freien, freilich legalen Handel berücksichtigen.\n\nDie Herausforderung bei dem vorliegenden Gesetzgebungsverfahren besteht also gerade darin, dieser Doppelnatur von Kulturgütern gerecht zu werden. In unserer Anhörung hat es eine der Expertinnen, Frau Professor Odendahl, gut auf den Punkt gebracht: Es geht um Kompromisse, die ausgewogen und angemessen sein müssen und letztendlich eine Balance zwischen dem kulturellen und dem finanziellen Wert von Kulturgütern wahren. Es hat sich gezeigt, dass der Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung diese Balance noch nicht hinreichend hergestellt hat. Deshalb haben die Koalitionsfraktionen in guter Zusammenarbeit umfangreiche Änderungen verabredet, nämlich an insgesamt 41 Stellen.\n\nLassen Sie mich konkrete Beispiele nennen. Die Naturwissenschaftler haben zu Recht darauf hingewiesen, dass das geplante Beschädigungsverbot für eingetragenes national wertvolles Kulturgut zu weit ging.\n\nDenn natürlich muss es möglich sein, einen Archaeopteryx oder die Himmelsscheibe von Nebra wissenschaftlich zu untersuchen. Das leuchtet jedem ein, und das werden wir ermöglichen. Dabei müssen selbstverständlich anerkannte wissenschaftliche Standards gewahrt werden.\n\nEin weiteres Beispiel. Die Eintragung als national wertvolles Kulturgut und die damit verbundene Pflicht zur Genehmigung von Ausfuhren sind ein Eingriff in das Eigentumsrecht. Dieser muss angemessen und verhältnismäßig sein. Nun erweitern wir die bereits bestehende Pflicht zur Genehmigung von Ausfuhren in Drittstaaten um die Staaten der EU, machen also den Schutz effektiver. Von dieser neuen Regelung fühlen sich deshalb insbesondere Sammler und Kunsthändler verunsichert oder nachteilig betroffen. Beiden Gruppen sind wir nun sehr stark entgegengekommen, ohne allerdings die Kernzielrichtung des Gesetzes aufzugeben.\n\nAuch dazu einige Beispiele. Die erstmalige gesetzliche Definition national wertvollen Kulturgutes schafft mehr Rechtssicherheit und erhöht übrigens die Schwelle gegenüber der heutigen Rechtslage. Es wird also künftig eher weniger eingetragen als bisher. Jedenfalls schätzen namhafte Experten die jährliche Zahl der Objekte auf unter zehn. Auch das relativiert manche Kritik, die geäußert wurde.\n\nWie bisher gibt es für die betroffenen Eigentümer steuer- und erbrechtliche Vorteile und eine Billigkeitsregelung im Falle der wirtschaftlichen Notlage. Und neu: Als zusätzliche Kompensationsmöglichkeit ist nun auf Initiative der SPD-Bundestagsfraktion hinzugekommen, dass künftig der Staat zugunsten des Eigentümers ein Ankaufsangebot vorlegen kann. Der Eigentümer kann also dann sein neu eingetragenes Kulturgut gegen einen angemessenen Preis an den Staat verkaufen, selbstverständlich nur dann, wenn beide Seiten sich einigen.\n\nIn den anstehenden Haushaltsberatungen wollen wir dafür sorgen, die hierfür notwendigen Mittel einzustellen. Dadurch wollen wir zugleich ermöglichen, dass national wertvolles Kulturgut der Öffentlichkeit auch tatsächlich zugänglich gemacht wird. Es soll eben nicht im Safe verbleiben, sondern der Allgemeinheit in Museen zur Verfügung gestellt werden.\n\nWir schaffen zudem das Recht auf ein sogenanntes Negativattest, um Unsicherheiten im Kunsthandel auszuräumen. Künftig kann jeder Eigentümer aktiv prüfen lassen, ob sein Kulturgut eintragbar ist. Und - das ist bereits erwähnt worden - mit einer sogenannten Laissez-passer-Regelung wird es möglich sein, Kulturgut zeitlich befristet aus dem Ausland nach Deutschland zu bringen, ohne dass eine Eintragung in die Liste national wertvollen Kulturgutes erfolgt. Diese Regelung sichert den grenzüberschreitenden Handel und ist gerade für Auktionshäuser und Messen relevant.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, an diesen Beispielen sehen Sie, dass wir berechtigte Forderungen aufgenommen haben und angemessene, praxisnahe Lösungen erarbeitet haben. Wir haben so eine neue, eine bessere Balance hergestellt. Von daher erhoffe ich mir eine breite Zustimmung für dieses so geänderte Gesetz, und zwar nicht nur hier im Hause, sondern auch in der Öffentlichkeit. Denn Kultur ist identitätsstiftend - das ist der Kern unserer heutigen Debatte -, und wir sollten alle gemeinsam dieses Erbe pflegen und unterstützen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n11789,hubertus-heil,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Über die wirtschaftliche Lage zu sprechen, Herr Hofreiter, heißt, deutlich zu machen, wie diese im Moment ist. Sie hätten ruhig einmal einräumen können, dass die wirtschaftliche Lage in diesem Land gut ist. Wir haben eine stabile und robuste Konjunktur, die übrigens nicht nur von unserer Exportfähigkeit getragen wird. Diese war jahrelang der Motor. Das ist nach wie vor so. Aber inzwischen haben wir auch eine stärkere Binnennachfrage in diesem Land, weil die Kaufkraft gestiegen ist, weil viele Menschen in Arbeit gekommen sind und weil wir endlich anständige Lohn- und Tarifabschlüsse haben. Das verschweigen Sie, Herr Hofreiter, weil Sie sich mit den ökonomischen Zusammenhängen nicht auseinandersetzen.\n\nWir dürfen uns nicht auf dem Erreichten ausruhen. Vielmehr ist es notwendig, den Blick nach vorne zu richten; das hat der Minister deutlich gemacht. Wir haben zum Beispiel durch die Digitalisierung, aber eben auch durch neue Antriebstechnologien - Sie haben die Automobilindustrie angesprochen - einen gigantischen Strukturwandel vor uns, den wir nicht unterschätzen, sondern den diese Regierung vorantreibt. Herr Hofreiter, ich will Ihnen eines sagen: Es gibt, wenn ich den Kollegen Fuchs und Sie einmal nebeneinanderhalte, beim Thema Freihandel zwei extreme Positionen in diesem Haus. Michael Fuchs sagte vorhin, dass die Union ganz klar Ja zu TTIP sagt. Ich frage mich eigentlich, warum; denn wir kennen den Inhalt noch gar nicht.\n\nEinfach Ja zu sagen zum Inhalt von TTIP, ohne dass ein Verhandlungstext vorliegt, ist aus meiner Sicht auch ein Stück ideologische Fixierung. Die Grünen sagen auf jeden Fall Nein. Das ist auch falsch. Wenn man Globalisierung gestalten will, dann muss man nicht nur dafür sorgen, dass Handel möglich ist, sondern auch dafür, dass man faire Abkommen bekommt mit klaren Regeln, mit Regeln für Arbeitnehmerrechte, für demokratische Rechte, für Umweltrechte. Das ist etwas anderes, als nach dem Motto zu handeln - ich finde das, Toni Hofreiter, am Rande der Redlichkeit für eine Partei, die einmal etwas mit Aufklärung zu tun hatte -: „If you don’t know just say no.“ Das ist nicht redlich.\n\nJetzt reden wir einmal über die Frage: Was ist der Unterschied zwischen TTIP und CETA? Ihr schmeißt das ja einfach in einen Topf. Das eine ist ein Handelsabkommen, das Europa und Kanada verhandelt haben und das vom Text her vorliegt. Dazu sagen wir: Da gibt es vieles, was richtig gut nach vorne gekommen ist, übrigens durch unseren Druck. Gerade beim Thema Schiedsgerichte reden wir nicht mehr von diesen anonymen Schiedsgerichten, diesen Law Firms, die daraus ein Geschäftsmodell machen, sondern von transparenten Verfahren in Richtung Handelsgerichtshof mit Richtern, von Berufungsverfahren und Ähnlichem. Wir haben bei diesem Abkommen Dinge hinbekommen, die tatsächlich nach vorne weisen, was die Gestaltung der Globalisierung betrifft, was beispielsweise Arbeitnehmerrechte anbelangt. Die Kanadier ratifizieren aufgrund dieser Verhandlungen inzwischen alle Kernarbeitsnormen der ILO. Das ist ein Riesenfortschritt.\n\nWir sagen aber noch nicht Ja, weil wir an zwei, drei Stellen in diesem Bereich - darin sind wir uns vollständig einig mit den deutschen Gewerkschaften - noch auf Fortschritte warten, beispielsweise wenn es darum geht, dass nicht nur ILO-Kernarbeitsnormen unterschrieben werden, sondern dass sie auch durchgesetzt werden, beispielsweise wenn es darum geht, der Sorge entgegenzutreten, dass die Daseinsvorsorge gefährdet ist oder dass Rekommunalisierung nicht mehr möglich ist. Wir wollen eine Klarstellung in diesem Bereich. Noch einmal: Das Abkommen ist sehr weit. Ich sage einmal an die Adresse der Grünen: Ihr wart mal eine Partei der Aufklärung. Jetzt seid ihr eine Partei der Mythen. An die Adresse des Kollegen Michael Fuchs sage ich: Wir wollen Freihandel, aber - das ist der Unterschied zu Ihnen - nicht um jeden Preis.\n\nWir wollen Freihandel auf Basis von fairen Regeln.\n\nMichael Fuchs, so zu tun, als sei TTIP etwas, was sozusagen innerhalb von Wochen zu erreichen ist, das finde ich am Rande dessen, was man seriös sagen darf. Denn jeder von uns weiß, dass wir schon bei der Hannover Messe darauf hingewiesen haben, dass ein faires und gutes Transatlantisches Freihandelsabkommen zwischen Europa und den Vereinigten Staaten in dieser kurzen Frist nur schwer zu erreichen ist und dass wir klare Vorstellungen haben. Das ist übrigens im Zusammenhang mit TTIP auch meine Kritik an der Bundeskanzlerin. Beim Gespräch mit Präsident Obama hat sie Folgendes verlauten lassen: Sie wolle jetzt in Europa für eine neue Verhandlungsdynamik in Sachen TTIP werben. Vielleicht hätte sie gegenüber der amerikanischen Regierung lieber einmal deutlich machen sollen, was unsere europäischen und deutschen Anforderungen an ein faires transatlantisches Freihandelsabkommen sind.\n\nEinfach nur zu sagen „Das muss jetzt schnell kommen“, und sich nicht dafür einzusetzen, dass man Fortschritte in der Sache hinbekommt, hat auch dazu geführt, dass die Zeit jetzt knapp ist. Deshalb sage ich - Herr Gabriel als Bundesminister hat das deutlich gemacht -: TTIP ist realistischerweise aufgrund der Tatsache, dass in Amerika im November Präsidentschaftswahlen sind und da zwei kandidieren, von denen der eine ganz gegen Freihandelsabkommen ist und die andere sagt: „So auf gar keinen Fall“, in dieser Legislaturperiode nicht erreichbar. Das ist der Unterschied. Der eine Text liegt vor. Ich sage: Wir haben mit Kanada mit einer neuen Regierung, mit einer, wie ich finde, sozialliberalen Regierung bessere Chancen, dieses ohnehin ganz ordentliche Freihandelsabkommen im Gespräch mit den Parlamenten noch besser zu machen. Das ist der Unterschied.\n\nWir wissen, dass in Deutschland viele Arbeitsplätze in großen, in kleinen und in mittelständischen Unternehmen auch vom Export abhängen. Wir dürfen keine Renationalisierung von Wirtschaftspolitiken zulassen. Auf der anderen Seite wissen wir auch, einfach grenzenlos Märkte zu öffnen, ohne faire Regeln zu schaffen, ohne Globalisierung zu gestalten, ist nicht der richtige Weg. Das ist vielleicht der Unterschied zwischen den Grünen, die einfach nach dem Motto handeln: „Freihandel wollen wir nicht, wir machen die Grenzen dicht“, und einer CDU, die sagt: „Regeln interessieren uns nicht.“ Wir gehen den mühevolleren Weg, Globalisierung zu gestalten. Ich glaube, das ist die zukunftsfähige Antwort auf eine Weltwirtschaft im 21. Jahrhundert.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n15108,christina-schwarzer,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Frau Ferner, auch aus unserer Fraktion Ihnen alles Gute! Wir haben sehr gerne mit Ihnen zusammengearbeitet. Ein paar gemeinsame Monate haben wir ja noch.\n\nWir haben ja auch noch große Dinge vor. So ist das ja nicht.\n\nEs passiert so häufig bei uns in Deutschland, und doch wird darüber so wenig gesprochen: Häusliche Gewalt und sexueller Missbrauch von Frauen sind noch immer ein Tabuthema. Kaum jemand spricht darüber. Dabei findet die Gewalt eigentlich immer statt, auch jetzt, irgendwo, in allen sozialen Schichten, oft nicht einmal heimlich. Das wissen wir nicht erst seit den Ereignissen in der Kölner Silvesternacht. Gewalt macht vor niemandem halt. Es betrifft alte Frauen und junge Frauen, es betrifft reiche Frauen und arme Frauen, es betrifft Frauen mit heller Hautfarbe und Frauen mit dunkler Hautfarbe, Frauen mit dunklen Haaren und Frauen mit roten Haaren. Wir alle sind betroffen.\n\nDass so viele Frauen in Deutschland bereits Gewalt erfahren haben, ist erschreckend, die meisten davon übrigens in den eigenen vier Wänden. Der Täter ist oft der Partner, den man häufig nicht verlieren will. Und wir reden hier nicht von einer Backpfeife oder verbaler Gewalt, was schlimm genug wäre. Wir reden von Delikten wie Mord, Totschlag, Körperverletzung, Vergewaltigung, sexueller Nötigung oder Stalking. Etwa 35 Prozent der Frauen in Deutschland wurde in ihrem Leben bereits körperliche oder sexuelle Gewalt angetan. Ob in der U-Bahn, im Restaurant, im Freundeskreis oder auch hier im Bundestag: Statistisch gesehen sitzt mindestens eine Frau neben uns, die bereits Gewalt erfahren hat. Wenn man sich das so vor Augen führt, dann stellt man fest: Das ist eine erschreckende Zahl. Es ist also ein wichtiger Schritt, wenn wir das Übereinkommen des Europarats zur Verhütung und Bekämpfung von Gewalt gegen Frauen und häuslicher Gewalt nun ratifizieren. Ich glaube, daran hat niemand einen Zweifel.\n\nDie sogenannte Istanbul-Konvention stuft Gewalt gegen Frauen als das ein, was sie ist: diskriminierend und eine Verletzung der Menschenrechte. 81 Artikel definieren politische und juristische Maßnahmen, die Staaten ergreifen müssen, um die vorgeschriebenen Ziele zu erreichen. Deutschland hat das Abkommen bereits am 11. Mai 2011 direkt in Istanbul unterzeichnet. Für die Ratifizierung - Frau Möhring, das haben Sie ja auch erwähnt - waren noch einige Änderungen am nationalen Gesetz notwendig, von denen wir hier im Haus die meisten gemeinsam beschlossen haben.\n\nEin wichtiges Beispiel ist das Hilfetelefon „Gewalt gegen Frauen“. Weil das so wichtig ist, frage ich jetzt einmal: Wer hat die Nummer im Kopf? Frau Ferner, Sie dürfen jetzt gerade nichts sagen. - Entweder Sie hören mir alle nicht zu oder die Nummer ist einfach noch zu unbekannt. Ich glaube, es ist vielleicht gerade eine Mischung aus beidem.\n\n- Gudrun Zollner sagt es gerade: 08000 116 016.\n\nIch finde, jeder von uns müsste diese Telefonnummer aus dem Effeff können. Das Hilfetelefon bietet ganz unkompliziert Unterstützung und Beratung an - rund um die Uhr, kostenlos, vertraulich, anonym, in 17 Sprachen. Auch ganz wichtig: Es gibt ein barrierefreies Angebot in Deutscher Gebärdensprache. Immer häufiger gehen beim Hilfetelefon auch Anfragen im Zusammenhang mit geschlechtsspezifischen Gewalterfahrungen von geflüchteten Frauen ein. Dabei melden sich oft Mitarbeiter und Ehrenamtliche von Flüchtlingsunterkünften, die sich mit dem Thema überfordert fühlen oder einfach schlichtweg nicht wissen, was sie tun sollen, wenn sie Gewalt beobachten. Oft geht es aber auch nur um das Zuhören und um Entlastung. Auch in diesen Fällen kann das Hilfetelefon natürlich helfen.\n\nIch möchte an dieser Stelle nicht versäumen, darauf hinzuweisen, dass wir mittlerweile auch großartige Angebote im Internet haben. Das finde ich sehr wichtig; denn Niederschwelligkeit ist oft der wichtigste Faktor bei der Frage, ob eine Frau Hilfe sucht oder nicht. Die Hilfe muss da angeboten werden, wo sich die Frauen bewegen, und das ist heutzutage auch im Internet. Dabei kommt es nicht darauf an, was wir hier im Bundestag unkompliziert finden. Vielmehr es ist wichtig, was für die Frauen unkompliziert ist.\n\nDenn für sie ist jeder Schritt zur Hilfe sowieso schon sehr schwierig.\n\nIch möchte auch noch einmal das Projekt gewaltlos.de hervorheben. Hier erhalten Mädchen und Frauen, die von häuslicher Gewalt oder Stalking betroffen sind, Beratung und Hilfe, und zwar ausschließlich im Internet. Zentrales Medium ist hier ein Chat, der rund um die Uhr erreichbar ist. Eine konkrete Beratung findet dann in öffentlich nicht zugänglichen Einzelchats statt. Wir haben - daran können Sie sich sicherlich erinnern - in den vergangenen Haushaltsberatungen den richtigen Beschluss gefasst, dieses Projekt mit 500 000 Euro vom Bund zu fördern. Eine erste Amtshandlung der neuen Familienministerin - morgen werden wir sie treffen - ist es hoffentlich, dieses Projekt zur Kenntnis zu nehmen. Ich werde ihr morgen einen netten Brief überreichen. Ich hoffe, dass sie sich weiterhin für dieses Projekt einsetzt.\n\nWir haben - das wurde auch schon gesagt - in den letzten Monaten eine Reform des Sexualstrafrechts beschlossen. Der alte Vergewaltigungsparagraf, der unter anderem eine Gewaltanwendung oder Nötigung des Opfers voraussetzte, wurde aufgehoben. Der Grundsatz „Nein heißt nein“ ist hier schon oft genug genannt worden. Aber ich finde, man kann das nicht oft genug erwähnen.\n\nEin wichtiges Thema, über das wir heute noch beschließen werden - zwar sehr spät, aber wir beschließen es -, ist die Kinderehe, also ein Verbot der Kinderehe. Ich glaube, ich trete niemandem zu nahe - es ist umgangssprachlich so gesagt, aber wir alle wissen, was gemeint ist; es ist ein wahnsinnig wichtiges Thema, das in den letzten Monaten immer wieder in den Medien stand -, wenn ich sage, dass ein 14-jähriges Mädchen in keiner Kultur der Welt die geistige Reife besitzt, freiwillig eine Ehe einzugehen. Hier ist immer Zwang im Spiel, ob direkter körperlicher oder moralischer Zwang oder anderer Druck. Davon bin ich überzeugt. Insofern gehen wir mit dem, was unter Verbot der Kinderehe subsummiert wird, einen wichtigen Schritt im Sinne der Istanbul-Konvention.\n\nDie WHO bezeichnet Gewalt gegen Frauen als eines der größten Gesundheitsrisiken von Frauen weltweit. Lange war das Thema vollständig tabuisiert. Viele der betroffenen Frauen fühlen sich immer noch hilflos. Scham und Angst vor Gerede oder weiteren Übergriffen hemmen sie, ihre Rechte einzufordern und Hilfe zu suchen. Viele sprechen einfach nicht und suchen sich keine Hilfe. Noch einmal: Es ist richtig und wichtig, dass wir das Übereinkommen ratifizieren. Ich sage aber auch - Frau Möhring, das haben Sie schon erwähnt -: Papier ist geduldig. Allein das Ratifizieren schützt nämlich keine Frau vor Gewaltanwendungen. Es hält keinen Mann davon ab, die Hand gegen seine Frau zu erheben oder sie zu vergewaltigen. Es hilft keiner Frau dabei, sich zu wehren oder nach Unterstützung zu fragen. Die Ratifizierung muss nun mit politischen und gesellschaftlichen Inhalten gefüllt sein. Und das ist sie nun bei uns.\n\nViele kritisieren - Sie auch -, dass die Ratifizierung so lange gedauert hat. Ja, wir sind erst der 24. Staat, der ratifiziert. Das mag man falsch finden. Ein Land wie Deutschland müsste in diesen Dingen besser sein, schneller, möchte man meinen. Aber Schnelligkeit allein ist jedoch nicht der Weisheit letzter Schluss. Weniger als ein Jahr nach der Unterzeichnung hat beispielsweise die Türkei das Abkommen ratifiziert. Kurze Zeit später fand an einer Universität eine Umfrage statt. Hier fand man heraus, dass 62 Prozent der türkischen Männer Gewalt gegen Ehefrauen befürworten, 28 Prozent hielten sie gar für unerlässlich, um Frauen zu disziplinieren und zu erziehen. Dann wundert man sich auch nicht über folgende Zahl: In der Türkei hat fast jede zweite verheiratete Frau bereits Gewalterfahrung gemacht.\n\nÜber die Dunkelziffer lässt sich, wie auch bei uns in Deutschland, nur spekulieren. Noch einmal: Die Türkei hat längst ratifiziert.\n\nDaher möchte ich wiederholen: Die Ratifizierung ist richtig und wichtig, selbstverständlich. Aber es sind auch konkrete politische Maßnahmen, die helfen. Die regionalen Unterstützungsangebote, die gesellschaftliche Aufmerksamkeit und das Nichtwegsehen können helfen, Frauen vor sexueller oder körperlicher Gewalt zu schützen. Anders gesagt: Wir alle sind verantwortlich, niemand darf wegschauen.\n\nDie Voraussetzung zur Ratifizierung der sogenannten Istanbul-Konvention haben wir erfüllt. Mit dem Gesetz zur Ratifizierung verpflichten wir uns nun, die geschaffenen Standards im Kampf gegen Gewalt gegen Frauen dauerhaft aufrechtzuerhalten und weiterzuentwickeln. Das ist ein ganz wichtiger Schritt. Das heißt ganz eindeutig, Frau Möhring: Die Ratifizierung ist kein Anlass, sich jetzt zurückzulehnen. Der Schutz von gewaltbetroffenen Frauen und Mädchen bleibt gesellschaftliche und vor allen Dingen auch politische Aufgabe.\"\n7435,pia-zimmermann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Personalmangel, Arbeitsverdichtung, Burn-out, das sind Schlagworte, die mit der Pflege in diesem Land asso-ziiert werden. Wundliegen, keine Zeit für Gespräche, „im Minutentakt gepflegt werden“ prägen die Erfahrungen von Menschen mit Pflegebedarf. Überlastung, ein permanentes Hin-und-her-gerissen-Sein zwischen dem eigenen Lebensentwurf sowie den Sorgen und Nöten geliebter Menschen, damit kämpfen pflegende Angehörige. Dass dies Begriffe und Bilder sind, die vielen beim Thema Pflege einfallen, ist ein Armutszeugnis.\n\nDas ist ein Armutszeugnis vor allen Dingen auch deshalb, weil es nicht sein muss, nicht angesichts der Wirtschaftskraft der Bundesrepublik.\n\nGleich werden Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von Union und SPD, sicherlich auf die Pläne des Gesundheitsministeriums für das Pflegestärkungsgesetz II Bezug nehmen. Dass wir die Erwartungen nicht allzu hoch stecken sollen, davor haben Sie uns schon mehrfach gewarnt. Ich möchte hier gar nicht im Einzelnen darauf eingehen, nur so viel: Solange die Finanzierung nicht gesichert ist, bleibt zu befürchten, dass jede Verbesserung an der einen Stelle Verschlechterungen an einer anderen Stelle mit sich bringt; denn der Finanzbedarf ist riesig. Gleichzeitig fehlt es aber an einem - ich betone das - langfristigen Finanzierungskonzept; denn nach bisherigem Planungsstand reichen die Beitragserhöhungen nicht für die Finanzierung der Reformschritte aus.\n\nStatt nun aber den 2014 unsinnigerweise beschlossenen Pflegevorsorgefonds aufzulösen, greifen Sie in die Trickkiste. Sie zapfen die Rücklagen der Pflegeversicherung an. Damit eröffnen Sie den Wahlkampf. Verbesserungen im Wahlkampfjahr 2017 finanzieren Sie aus den dringend nötigen Reserven. Auf Dauer gesehen bedeutet das Beitragserhöhungen oder Leistungskürzungen an anderer Stelle, weil Sie sich nicht trauen, grundsätzlich die Finanzarchitektur der Pflegeversicherung zu verändern.\n\n- Ich würde mich freuen, wenn Sie das tun würden. Sie haben das in Ihrer Wahlpropaganda angekündigt, und Sie werden das sicherlich wiederholen. Schauen wir einmal, was daraus wird.\n\nWenn unterschiedliche Gruppen nicht gegeneinander ausgespielt werden sollen - seien es Beschäftigte gegen Menschen mit Pflegebedarf oder Menschen mit unterschiedlichen Pflegebedarfen gegeneinander -, dann müssen wir die Pflegeversicherung auf ein langfristig stabiles finanzielles Fundament stellen.\n\nFür uns als Fraktion Die Linke ist klar: Ein solches Fundament kann nur durch die solidarische Weiterentwicklung der Pflegeversicherung geschaffen werden. Klar ist nämlich auch: Gute Pflege kostet Geld; sie gibt es nicht zum Nulltarif. Gute Pflege ist ein Menschenrecht, und der Zugang zu einer qualitativ hochwertigen und umfassenden pflegerischen Versorgung darf nicht Kostenkalkülen untergeordnet werden.\n\nDer entscheidende Punkt ist, wer den finanziellen Aufwand trägt und wie die Lasten verteilt werden. Hier vertreten meine Fraktion und ich eine ganz klare Position. Die Kosten müssen gerecht verteilt werden.\n\nDas heißt, alle zahlen denselben Beitrag auf ihr gesamtes Einkommen, unabhängig davon, ob es aus Löhnen, Unternehmensgewinnen oder Kapitalerträgen bezogen wird.\n\n- Mechthild, ich freue mich, wenn du da mitgehst.\n\nAußerdem müssen die Arbeitgeber endlich auch in der Pflege in die Pflicht genommen werden; denn von einer paritätischen Finanzierung kann hier wohl niemand mehr reden. Niemand soll aus der Verantwortung entlassen werden, weder durch eine Beitragsbemessungsgrenze, die gerade die höchsten Einkommen entlastet, noch durch eine Privatversicherung.\n\nLangfristig gefährdet die Existenz der privaten Pflegeversicherung die Finanzierung der sozialen Pflegeversicherung; denn sie entzieht dem Solidarsystem dauerhaft die Beiträge von Gutverdienenden, gleichzeitig sind ihre Ausgaben aber viel geringer. Die Ausgaben der sozialen Pflegeversicherung sind pro Versichertem jährlich fast viermal so hoch wie die der privaten Pflegeversicherung.\n\nDie Mitglieder der privaten Pflegeversicherung sind im Schnitt deutlich jünger und verdienen besser als die Mitglieder der sozialen Pflegeversicherung. Während die private Pflegeversicherung mit ihren Rücklagen von rund 25 Milliarden Euro - das muss man sich einmal vorstellen - etwa 32 Jahre lang die Ausgaben für die Pflege decken kann, reichen die Vermögensrücklagen der sozialen Pflegeversicherung gerade einmal ein Quartal lang. Das ist gegenüber den fast 70 Millionen Versicherten in der sozialen Pflegeversicherung zutiefst ungerecht. Hier muss umverteilt werden, solidarisch und gerecht.\n\nMit dem entsprechenden politischen Willen ist das alles relativ unkompliziert machbar. Dadurch, dass beide Versicherungen identisch ausgestattet sind, haben wir faktisch fast eine Versicherung für alle. Wir, die Linke, wollen einen Schritt nach vorne gehen, hin zur solidarischen Pflegeversicherung. Ich fordere Sie auf: Gehen Sie diesen Schritt mit uns.\n\nEine unabhängige Studie hat ergeben, dass der Beitragssatz der Pflegeversicherung trotz Ausgleich des -Realwertverlusts und einer sofortigen Erhöhung der Sachleistungen um 25 Prozent langfristig deutlich unter 2 Prozent gehalten werden kann, also unterhalb des derzeitigen Niveaus. Das schafft die Voraussetzung dafür, dass alle nach ihren individuellen Bedürfnissen versorgt werden können.\n\nFür die Beschäftigten ließen sich faire Arbeitsbedingungen und gute Löhne verwirklichen. Eine tarifgerechte Vergütung der Pflegefachkräfte und die Refinanzierung von Tariferhöhungen wären in einer Bürgerversicherung möglich.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren von der Koalition, mit unserem Antrag stellen wir Ihnen die Frage, was Ihnen würdevolle Pflege wert ist.\n\nIch fordere Sie auf: Enttäuschen Sie die Menschen mit Pflegebedarf, ihre Angehörigen und die Beschäftigten nicht. Gehen Sie diesen Weg mit uns.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n15226,ralf-brauksiepe,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Kollegin Keul, der Bundesregierung liegen keine eigenen Erkenntnisse zu den Details des Luftangriffs mit möglichen zivilen Opfern in der Nacht vom 25. auf den 26. Mai 2017 in Majadin vor. Für Einsätze von Operation Inherent Resolve, OIR, gilt, dass grundsätzlich alle Vorfälle, bei denen Zivilisten mutmaßlich zu Schaden gekommen sind, durch das für OIR zuständige Hauptquartier Combined Joint Task Force, CJTF OIR, untersucht und die Ergebnisse monatlich auf der Webseite der OIR veröffentlicht werden.\n\nDie Bundesregierung setzt als Mitglied der Anti-IS-Koalition die ihr zur Verfügung stehenden Mittel ein, um zivile Opfer zu vermeiden. Angesichts der zynischen und menschenverachtenden Taktik der Terrororganisation IS, Zivilisten als menschliche Schutzschilde zu missbrauchen und sogar zivile Opfer zu provozieren, ist dies für die Koalition mit besonderen Anstrengungen verbunden.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ich wiederhole meinen Hinweis: Ich kann nicht für andere Kräfte, die dort im Einsatz sind, sprechen. Ich bin nicht sicher, ob alle ihr Vorgehen so transparent darlegen wie die Koalition im Rahmen der Operation Inherent Resolve.\n\nIch kann nur noch einmal darauf hinweisen, dass es nach jedem möglichen Vorfall mit zivilen Opfern eine entsprechende Untersuchung gibt und dass die Untersuchungsergebnisse veröffentlicht werden, beispielsweise die Zahl von ums Leben gekommenen Zivilisten. Der neueste Stand, der dort nach meiner Kenntnis veröffentlicht wurde, ist vom 2. Juni.\n\nJa.\n\nZunächst einmal, Kolleginnen und Kollegen - ich beziehe das nicht ausschließlich auf Sie, Herr Kollege Ströbele -, müssen Sie als Abgeordnete generell damit rechnen, wenn Sie der Bundesregierung eine Ja-Nein-Frage stellen, dass Sie ein Ja oder ein Nein als Antwort bekommen. Im Zusammenhang mit einer vorher gestellten Frage gab es Zwischenrufe - diese sind sicherlich im Protokoll nachzulesen -, in denen gefordert wurde, mit Ja oder Nein zu antworten. Ich bitte um Verständnis, wenn ich solchen Forderungen dann für die Bundesregierung auch einmal nachkomme.\n\nEs gibt in diesem Zusammenhang, Herr Kollege Ströbele - das wissen Sie -, ein etabliertes Verfahren. Und es ist - ich sage das noch einmal - ganz selbstverständlich, dass alle Mitglieder der Koalition das ihnen Mögliche tun, um zivile Opfer zu vermeiden. Wir haben es jedoch - ich sage auch das noch einmal - mit einer zynischen, menschenverachtenden Taktik des IS zu tun, die genau das Gegenteil zu erreichen versucht. Den Berichten über die Kämpfe in Mosul, in Rakka können Sie entnehmen, dass Zivilisten versuchen, diese Kampfgebiete zu verlassen, dass aber jeder, der das versucht, damit rechnen muss, wenn der IS es bemerkt, vom IS umgebracht zu werden. In Mosul werden noch ungefähr 4 Quadratkilometer von den IS-Terroristen gehalten. Die irakischen Streitkräfte kämpfen unter großen Opfern und Risiken um die Befreiung von Mosul, weil sie versuchen, zivile Opfer zu vermeiden, während der IS sie zu provozieren sucht. Ich verwahre mich hier gegen Unterstellungen, als wäre es andersherum. Die gesamte Koalition, alle dort beteiligten 65 Staaten, die Europäische Union, die NATO, die Arabische Liga tun das ihnen Mögliche, um zivile Opfer zu vermeiden. Jede anderslautende Unterstellung weise ich namens der Bundesregierung mit Entschiedenheit zurück.\n\nFrau Kollegin Keul, die Staats- und Regierungschefs der NATO haben bei ihrem Treffen am 25. Mai 2017 in Brüssel den Beschluss des Nordatlantikrats vom 24. Mai 2017 zum formellen Beitritt der Allianz zur internationalen Anti-IS-Koalition indossiert. Die Mitgliedschaft ermöglicht der Allianz die aktive Teilnahme an den politischen Beratungen im Rahmen der internationalen Anti-IS-Koalition. Auch nach dem formellen Beitritt der NATO zur internationalen Anti-IS-Koalition findet die NATO-Targeting-Richtlinie im Rahmen des Beitrags der Allianz zur Anti-IS-Koalition keine Anwendung, da die NATO-Unterstützung mit AWACS-Flugzeugen ausdrücklich keine Beteiligung an der Zielzuweisung oder an einer Feuerleitfunktion beinhaltet.\n\nFrau Kollegin Keul, ich betone noch einmal, dass sich die NATO-Beteiligung insbesondere auf die Unterstützung der Koalition mit AWACS-Flugzeugen bezieht, die sich an der Zielzuweisung nicht beteiligen; diese Unterstützung beinhaltet auch keine Feuerleitfunktion. Das heißt ja nicht, dass es für die Staaten, die in dem Gebiet gegen den IS operieren, keine Regeln, keine Richtlinien für den Einsatz gibt. Die Richtlinien, die für die OIR-Mitgliedstaaten, für die an dieser Koalition Beteiligten gelten, unterscheiden sich materiell nicht besonders von den Richtlinien der NATO oder den Verpflichtungen, die sich jeder einzelne Mitgliedstaat auferlegt hat.\n\nAlle Koalitionäre der Anti-IS-Koalition sind ja in diese Koalition gegangen, um das barbarische, menschenrechtswidrige Verhalten des IS zu stoppen und ausdrücklich das Völkerrecht einzuhalten. Das ist das klare Ziel jedes Koalitionsmitglieds, das ist das klare Ziel der Koalition als Ganze, und das ist natürlich auch das klare Ziel der NATO und der Europäischen Union, soweit sie als Bündnisse auch Teil dieser Koalition sind.\n\nNoch einmal: Die NATO-Targeting-Richtlinien brauchen hier keine Anwendung zu finden, weil sich die eigentliche Unterstützung der NATO auf den Einsatz der AWACS-Flugzeuge bezieht. Sie haben in Ihrer Frage nicht zu Unrecht deutlich gemacht: Es ist nicht zuletzt eine politische Entscheidung, dass sich die NATO hier als solche beteiligt. Es hat jedoch keine unmittelbaren militärischen Konsequenzen.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ich weise die Unterstellung, es gäbe hier weitere Eskalationen, deutlich zurück. Ich sage noch einmal in Bezug auf die Targeting-Richtlinien: Dies ist eben kein NATO-Einsatz, sondern der Einsatz der Anti-IS-Koalition. Ein NATO-Einsatz findet zum Beispiel in Afghanistan oder im Kosovo statt. Dies ist aber kein NATO-Einsatz, sondern die NATO ist dieser Koalition beigetreten. - Das zur Relevanz von NATO-Targeting-Richtlinien.\n\nZu dem Gutachten will ich deutlich feststellen: Das Gutachten unterstellt der Bundesregierung keinesfalls eine Rechtsverletzung. Im Ergebnis geht es darum: Wenn die Bundesregierung davon ausgehen müsste, dass sich ihre Partner hier völkerrechtswidrig verhielten, dann wäre sie natürlich auch in der Verantwortung, das ihr Mögliche zu tun, um völkerrechtswidriges Verhalten zu unterbinden. Aber ich sage noch einmal in aller Deutlichkeit: Wir haben nicht den geringsten Anhaltspunkt, zu vermuten, dass sich einer unserer Partner in völkerrechtswidriger Weise verhält.\n\nDa ich aufgrund Ihrer öffentlichen Äußerungen mit dieser Nachfrage rechnen konnte, darf auch ich aus dem Gutachten zitieren. Es wird auf ein Urteil des Bundesgerichtshofes verwiesen - ich zitiere -,\n\nin welchem er eine Zurechnung völkerrechtswidriger unerlaubter Handlungen eines anderen Bündnispartners grundsätzlich verneinte und eine deutsche Amtshaftung für Kriegsschäden aus eben diesem Grund ablehnte.\n\nAn späterer Stelle heißt es im Zusammenhang mit notwendigen Maßnahmen, die ein Bündnispartner zu leisten hat - in diesem Fall die Bundesrepublik Deutschland -:\n\nEin abstraktes Wissen um das allgemeine Risiko, dass bei Militäreinsätzen auch „etwas schiefgehen“ und dabei Zivilisten ums Leben kommen können, vermag eine Mitverantwortung des Unterstützerstaats gegenüber den Folgen der Militäroperation nicht zu begründen.\n\nAlso noch einmal: Die Bundesregierung trifft hier keinerlei Versäumnis in formaler Weise, und es gibt überhaupt keinen Grund zu der Annahme, dass sich hier irgendein Koalitionspartner völkerrechtswidrig verhält. Die Bundesregierung und die gesamte Anti-IS-Koalition bedauern jedes zivile Opfer. Ich sage noch einmal: Es ist die Terrororganisation IS, die durch ihr Verhalten zivile Opfer provoziert.\n\nHerr Kollege, nach den mir vorliegenden Informationen sind, wie auf der Internetseite der Operation Inherent Resolve mit Stand 2. Juni nachzulesen ist, mindestens 484 tote Zivilisten zu beklagen. Mein Zweifel, das als Eskalation zu bezeichnen, hat etwas damit zu tun, dass ich nicht bestätigen kann - dann könnte man mit Recht von Eskalation sprechen -, dass es beispielsweise jahrelang überhaupt keine Toten gegeben hat und nun auf einmal sehr viele zivile Opfer gibt.\n\nIch wiederhole noch einmal: Es gibt das Battle Damage Assessment, das die Koalition durchführt, um festzustellen, ob es zivile Opfer gegeben hat. Das wird untersucht in jedem Fall, bei dem diese Gefahr besteht. Die Untersuchungen sind in vielen Fällen eben noch nicht abgeschlossen. Sie dauern meines Wissens rund 30 Tage. So ist beispielsweise die Untersuchung zu dem in der vorherigen Frage angesprochenen Vorfall nach meiner Kenntnis noch nicht abgeschlossen.\n\nVon daher kann ich das, was hier als Eskalation bezeichnet worden ist, so nicht bestätigen. Ich sage noch einmal: Wir bedauern jedes zivile Opfer, wir bedauern unter anderem aber auch alle zivilen Opfer, die es durch das barbarische Verhalten des IS gegeben hat, bevor sich die Koalition gebildet hat.\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Kollegin, nach Auffassung der Bundesregierung liegt hier kein Widerspruch vor. Die beiden Fragestellungen unterscheiden sich erheblich, sowohl in ihrem Zeithorizont als auch in ihrem geografischen Schwerpunkt. Frage 14 der Kleinen Anfrage zu den Hintergründen zum Einsatz von Minen- und Sprengfallen im Irak und in Syrien behandelt die Anzahl der - ich zitiere - „im Rahmen der Bombardierung und Erstürmung der irakischen Stadt Mossul im Jahr 2017“ ums Leben gekommenen Kombattanten. In Frage 16 der Kleinen Anfrage zu den Luftangriffen der US-geführten Koalition wird die Anzahl der infolge von Luftangriffen der US-geführten Koalition in Syrien und im Irak bis zum 1. April 2017 getöteten Kämpfer des „Islamischen Staates“, IS, erfragt.\n\nLediglich zur ersten, deutlich enger gefassten Frage, der Frage 14, lagen der Bundesregierung entsprechende nachrichtendienstliche Informationen vor. Diese Informationen wurden aus Gründen des Staatswohls als Geheim eingestuft und für die Abgeordneten in der Geheimschutzstelle des Deutschen Bundestages hinterlegt.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ich kann mich nur wiederholen: Die Bundesregierung sieht diesen Widerspruch nicht. Es gibt hier keinen Widerspruch zwischen Auswärtigem Amt und Bundesministerium der Verteidigung.\n\nIch darf zum besseren Verständnis die beiden Fragen, um die es hier geht, vorlesen. Die eine Frage lautete:\n\nWie viele Kombattanten sind im Rahmen der Bombardierung und Erstürmung der irakischen Stadt Mossul im Jahr 2017 nach Kenntnissen der Bundesregierung ums Leben gekommen?\n\nDie andere Frage lautete:\n\nWie viele Kämpfer des „Islamischen Staats“ (IS) sind nach Kenntnis der Bundesregierung infolge von Luftangriffen der US-geführten Koalition bis zum 1. April 2017 getötet worden (bitte Zahl bzw. Schätzung nach Monat auflisten)?\n\nDa gibt es also beispielsweise keine regionale Konzentration auf Mossul wie in der anderen Frage.\n\nNur insoweit die Bundesregierung über nachrichtendienstliche Erkenntnisse verfügt, haben wir geantwortet. Die Antwort haben wir in der Geheimschutzstelle hinterlegt. Sie werden Verständnis dafür haben, dass ich zu dem, was dort als Geheim eingestuft hinterlegt ist, hier nicht öffentlich Stellung nehme.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ich wiederhole es noch einmal: Ich kann zu Meinungsunterschieden, die es nicht gibt, keine Stellung nehmen. Deswegen weise ich die Unterstellung, ich hätte Ihre Frage nicht beantwortet, zurück. Es gibt diese Meinungsunterschiede nicht.\n\nWas die von Ihnen angesprochene aktuelle Entwicklung angeht, sage ich: Die Bundesregierung ist sehr daran interessiert, dass ein Deconflicting weiterhin stattfindet. Die Bundesregierung ist fest davon überzeugt, dass dies nicht nur im gemeinsamen Interesse der Anti-IS-Koalition ist, sondern auch im Interesse Russlands.\n\nZum jetzigen Zeitpunkt ist mir von Konsequenzen für das Verhalten der mandatierten deutschen Soldaten nichts bekannt.\n\nFrau Kollegin, die Tornados fliegen über dem IS-Gebiet. Das ist das mandatierte Gebiet. Ich bitte um Entschuldigung, dass ich jetzt die Lage verschiedener Flüsse im Verhältnis dazu nicht im Kopf habe, aber das kann ich gerne nachreichen. Ich habe jetzt die Karten nicht hier.\"\n1425,martin-rabanus,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Verlauf der Debatte macht es mir ein bisschen schwieriger, so einzusteigen, wie ich das als von Natur aus harmoniebedürftiger Mensch eigentlich wollte. Ich wollte als Erstes auf die Gemeinsamkeiten, die es im Hohen Hause gibt, abheben.\n\nMöglicherweise gelingt das auch. Wenn wir von der Rede der Frau Kollegin Hein von der antragstellenden Fraktion, von dem wolkenverhangenen parteipolitischen Geklüngel der Grünen sowie von ein paar koalitionsinternen Hinweisen absehen, dann stellt man fest, dass sich alle, einschließlich der Bundesregierung, dafür ausgesprochen haben, das Koalitions\u001e, Entschuldigung, das Kooperationsverbot abzuschaffen.\n\n„Kooperationsverbot abschaffen“ - das ist - soweit ich das erkennen konnte - die gemeinsame Überschrift. Aber schon in der Debatte gab es den einen oder anderen deutlichen Hinweis, dass man in den Fraktionen möglicherweise, in Maßen, etwas Unterschiedliches darunter versteht.\n\n- Was die SPD darunter versteht, ist in der Tat sehr klar, Frau Kollegin Hein. Wir haben als einzige Partei sehr frühzeitig einen zwischen der Bundesebene und den sozialdemokratisch regierten Ländern abgestimmten Textvorschlag zur Ergänzung des Grundgesetzes - Art. 104 c - vorgelegt.\n\nDass die Union in Teilen andere Vorstellungen hat, ist hier schon hinreichend deutlich geworden. Dass Sie den Kulturföderalismus völlig anders einschätzen als wir, ist auch deutlich geworden. Dass die Grünen, je nachdem, in welcher Lage sie sich befinden, völlig unterschiedliche Aussagen tätigen, ist auch hinreichend deutlich geworden.\n\nNach diesem wunderschönen Hinweis auf den Vertrag der Großen Koalition in Berlin möchte ich Ihre Aufmerksamkeit auf Ihren eigenen Koalitionsvertrag in Hessen richten; denn auch dort finden Sie keinerlei Aussagen zum Umgang mit dem Kooperationsverbot.\n\nWenn ich mich erinnere, wie die Grünen in Hessen noch im September letzten Jahres die Backen aufgeblasen haben,\n\nwird mir klar, liebe Kordula Schulz-Asche, dass die Situation, in der man sich befindet, gelegentlich unterschiedliche Verbindlichkeiten und unterschiedliche Intonationen zur Folge hat.\n\nWarum sage ich das?\n\nIch sage das, weil es wichtig ist, bei so einem Thema nicht in Gut und Böse, in Richtig und Falsch zu unterscheiden, weil es wichtig ist, nicht den moralischen Zeigefinger zu erheben. Wir haben es hier natürlich mit einer Gemengelage unterschiedlicher Interessen von Bund und Ländern zu tun. Das ist deutlich geworden. Es gibt unterschiedliche Konstellationen. Die für sich genommen jeweils legitimen Interessen müssen in den kommenden Wochen und Monaten einer kritischen Diskussion zugeführt werden. Darauf ist in der Debatte unter anderem vom Kollegen Rossmann hingewiesen worden. Wenn wir in diesem Haus gemeinsam der Auffassung sind, dass wir die Bildung in der gemeinsamen Verantwortung von Bund und Ländern stärken und voranbringen wollen, dann müssen wir uns einem solchen Prozess unterziehen. Dann müssen wir uns alle an die eigene Nase fassen. Vor allen Dingen müssen wir aber alle bereit sein, uns aufeinander zuzubewegen, um die Bildung im Zusammenspiel von Bund und Ländern im Interesse von Kindern und Jugendlichen tatsächlich zu stärken.\n\nDas ist das, was die Menschen draußen von uns erwarten. Das ist das, was sich die SPD in der Koalition vorgenommen hat.\n\nSchaufensteranträge bringen uns dabei nicht weiter. Ich glaube, dass sich auch die CDU in der Koalition genau das vorgenommen hat. Ich glaube, am Ende, wenn sich der Nebel etwas gelichtet hat, sind auch die Grünen bereit, sich an einer solchen Debatte konstruktiv zu beteiligen.\n\nDas jedenfalls wünsche ich mir. Das wünschen wir uns als SPD-Fraktion in der Großen Koalition. Wir werden sehen, ob das in den kommenden Wochen und Monaten eingelöst wird.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n778,katrin-goring-eckardt,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! „Lass uns lieber spazieren gehen, das können wir hier drin nicht besprechen. Wir wissen nicht, ob es eine Wanze gibt: in der Lampe oder im Telefon.“ - So war es zu DDR-Zeiten. „Das sage ich Ihnen nicht am Telefon. Lassen Sie uns mal lieber spazieren gehen“, schieb gestern ein Journalist über ein Telefonat mit einem Mitarbeiter des Bundeskanzleramtes. Nein, natürlich sind diese beiden Dinge überhaupt nicht miteinander zu vergleichen. Natürlich ist es gut, dass wir nicht in einer Diktatur, sondern in einer Demokratie leben, wo solche Dinge öffentlich werden und gesagt werden.\n\nJa, meine Damen und Herren, die digitale Revolution hat unser Leben, hat unseren Alltag verändert wie vielleicht keine andere Entwicklung. Wir leben, wir kommunizieren, wir streiten online. Wir alle schätzen auf der einen Seite diese Chancen, diese Freiräume, diese Möglichkeiten, die uns das Netz bietet. Auf der anderen Seite sind wir seit mindestens einem Dreivierteljahr Zeuginnen und Zeugen des größten Geheimdienstskandals, den die westlichen Demokratien je erlebt haben.\n\nDie Ausmaße der Überwachung nehmen Dimensionen an, die wir bisher nicht für möglich gehalten haben. Hier wird die Axt direkt an die Wurzel unseres Rechtsstaates gelegt. Genau das ist die Katastrophe.\n\nDas kann und darf niemandem gleichgültig sein. Genau deswegen haben 562 Schriftstellerinnen und Schriftsteller weltweit ihre Stimme erhoben und fordern, die Demokratie im digitalen Zeitalter zu verteidigen. Um nicht weniger geht es, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nWir haben diesen Appell - und das ist er im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes - zum Gegenstand unseres Antrags für diese Debatte gemacht. Ich begrüße einige Unterzeichnerinnen und Unterzeichner heute hier im Plenum.\n\nDie Besorgnis der Bürgerinnen und Bürger ist immens. Es sind nicht nur einige wenige, die sagen: Wir haben ein Problem. Zugleich ist es so, dass die Bundesregierung, dass die Bundeskanzlerin immer noch nicht aufgewacht sind und immer noch nichts tun, um die Grundrechte der Menschen in diesem Land, in dieser Republik zu schützen und zu sichern. Das ist der Skandal, über den wir in diesem Parlament reden müssen.\n\nNein, es geht nicht darum, den Hashtag „#Neuland“ in dieser Debatte fortzuführen, und zwar auch deswegen, weil es überhaupt nichts mehr mit Ironie zu tun hat und weil es überhaupt nicht lustig ist. Wir erleben, wie atemberaubend leichtfertig, wie atemberaubend oberflächlich mit Grundrechten von Individuen, der Bürgerinnen und Bürger umgegangen wird, aber auch mit den Rechten der Unternehmen, der Wirtschaft, die sich heute fragen: Sind eigentlich unsere Daten, ist unsere Unternehmenskommunikation in irgendeiner Weise sicher? Wenn Sie sich schon nicht für die Individuen interessieren, dann vielleicht doch für die Unternehmen in diesem Land, die zutiefst verunsichert sind.\n\nWas erleben wir? Wir sollen darauf vertrauen, dass der ehemalige Kanzleramtsminister die Affäre für beendet erklärt hat. Pofalla beendet Dinge, das kennen wir alle. Wir erleben erfolglose Reisen in die USA und hören, dass Geheimdienstler mit Geheimdienstlern Geheimes besprechen. Wir sind im Gegensatz zu Ihnen nicht so überrascht, dass das No-Spy-Abkommen nicht zustande kommt. Dennoch war es das Einzige, was Sie als Antwort vorweisen konnten. Wo sind wir denn, wenn eine Bundesregierung es nicht für nötig hält, dafür zu kämpfen, dass die Grundrechte der Bürgerinnen und Bürger gegenüber ausländischen Geheimdiensten gewahrt werden?\n\n„Ausspähen von Freunden, das geht gar nicht.“ Deutliche Worte immerhin. Hier ging es um das eigene Handy. Aber wenn es um die Handys, um die E-Mail-Postfächer, um die Verbindungsdaten und die digitalen Privaträume von Bürgerinnen und Bürgern geht, dann ist Fehlanzeige. Ich finde das ignorant, ich finde das verantwortungslos, und ich finde, das verändert unseren Staat und unsere Gesellschaft. Wenn eine Bundesregierung nicht dafür eintritt, dass Bürgerinnen und Bürger Geheimnisse haben dürfen, dass sie Geheimnisse haben dürfen sollen, wenn sie nicht dafür eintritt, zwischen Terrorismusbekämpfung, die natürlich notwendig ist, und massenhafter Ausspähung zu unterscheiden, dann verändert das unsere Gesellschaft auf eine Weise, die wir nicht zulassen wollen; denn hier muss die Demokratie im Kern verteidigt werden.\n\nDann sind wir natürlich ganz schnell bei der europäischen Ebene. Sie hängen sich da nicht rein, Sie vermeiden sogar, das Thema auf EU-Ebene anzusprechen. Mit der EU-Datenschutzverordnung wäre eine grundlegende Veränderung auch zügig möglich gewesen. Doch stärkere Reformen und Veränderungen sind eben gerade auf Treiben Deutschlands, der deutschen Bundesregierung hin auf Eis gelegt worden - ein weiterer Skandal, ein weiteres Nicht-hinsehen- und Nicht-handeln-Wollen, meine Damen und Herren. Ein weiteres Mal sind hier die Interessen der Bürgerinnen und Bürger nicht geschützt worden; sie sind zum Freiwild für Überwachung geworden.\n\nMängel beim Grundrechtsschutz für 80 Millionen Bürgerinnen und Bürger und für Wirtschaftsunternehmen können und dürfen nicht ausgesessen werden. Hier muss man aktiv werden.\n\nSie halten die anlasslose Massenüberwachung der Bevölkerung weiterhin für ein geeignetes Instrument. Die Vorratsdatenspeicherung soll in Deutschland kommen. Ich sage Ihnen ganz klar:\n\nErstens. Wir werden alles tun, damit es nicht geschieht.\n\nZweitens sage ich an die Adresse von Herrn Maas: Ihre Vorgängerin hat diese Sache ausgesessen. Das reicht jetzt nicht mehr. Jetzt muss man aktiv werden und dafür sorgen, dass das nicht passiert.\n\nWenn sich die Bundesregierung in diesem Skandal der Wahrung der Grundrechte und der Menschenrechte der Bürgerinnen und Bürger verpflichtet fühlt, dann gibt es doch nur eine wirkliche Antwort, und das ist in einem ersten Schritt die umfassende Aufklärung ohne jedes Wenn und Aber sowie Schluss mit der Überwachung. Ich sehe, dass Sie sich immer noch wegducken. Wer musste denn den Untersuchungsausschuss beantragen? Das waren die Oppositionsfraktionen in diesem Haus. Wer musste denn dafür sorgen, dass es einen umfassenden Untersuchungsauftrag gibt? Das waren die Oppositionsfraktionen in diesem Haus. Ja, natürlich, wir wollen auch wissen, inwiefern die deutschen Dienste an diesem Überwachungsskandal beteiligt sind.\n\nDeswegen ist es gut, dass der Untersuchungsausschuss endlich eingesetzt wird.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich bin froh, dass die Zivilgesellschaft wach ist, dass sie den Schutz der Bürgerinnen und Bürger einfordert. Es liegt eine Klage beim Generalbundesanwalt gegen die Bundesregierung vor - so weit ist es schon gekommen.\n\nWenn es um den Grundrechtsschutz geht, sollte man wissen:\n\nEin Mensch unter Beobachtung ist niemals frei …\n\nSo steht es in dem Appell der Schriftstellerinnen und Schriftsteller. Ich kann nur sagen: Ja, genau so ist es.\n\nMan hat als Mensch das Recht, etwas zu verbergen, man hat als Mensch das Recht, bestimmte Dinge unverfügbar zu halten. Wir wollen nicht, dass sich unser Schreiben und unser Reden, am Ende womöglich sogar unsere Gedanken verändern, weil wir immer damit rechnen müssen, dass wir abgehört oder beobachtet werden. Das verändert uns als Individuen. Ich sage klar und deutlich: Das können wir nicht zulassen; das wollen wir nicht zulassen.\n\nJa, ich gehe sehr gern spazieren. Aber ich telefoniere auch unheimlich gern mit meiner Freundin, und dann tauschen wir Geheimnisse aus. Und darauf, verdammt noch mal, haben wir ein Recht. Dieses Recht muss garantiert sein, nicht nur für mich, sondern für alle Bürgerinnen und Bürger.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3751,dirk-wiese,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich muss Ihnen ehrlich sagen: Es gibt auch unnötige Anträge, die zur Politikverdrossenheit beitragen.\n\nDas ist in Teilbereichen bei Ihrem Antrag so. Ein Antrag, so wie Sie ihn hier heute vorgelegt haben - das sage ich als Mitglied des Rechtsausschusses -, ist gerade beim Thema Mietpreisbremse reine Schaufensterpolitik und hat mit vernünftiger Politik nichts zu tun.\n\nAllein an dem, was Sie zur Bundeshaushaltsordnung hineingeschrieben haben, kann ich schon sehen, dass dieser ganze Antrag nicht ernst gemeint ist. Darüber kann ich, ehrlich gesagt, nur mit dem Kopf schütteln.\n\nWir in der Großen Koalition machen eine Mietpreisbremse für alle Bürgerinnen und Bürger. Lassen Sie mich dazu einen Satz sagen: Ich freue mich wirklich ganz besonders, dass wir in den Beratungen, die wir in den letzten Wochen und Monaten gehabt haben, Sie, Herr Kollege Luczak, ein bisschen auf den Pfad der Tugend zurückbringen konnten,\n\ndass wir Sie sozusagen vom Dr. No zum Anhänger der Mietpreisbremse machen konnten.\n\nDas ist ein richtig guter Tag. Dass wir Sie dahin bringen konnten, das freut uns an dieser Stelle richtig.\n\nZu Ihrer Anmerkung, die Sie gerade gemacht haben, kann ich sagen: Manchmal ist es gut, wenn wir das Struck’sche Gesetz außer Kraft lassen und das Ganze an dieser Stelle schnell auf den Weg bringen.\n\nIch glaube, die Mietpreisbremse ist richtig. Die Mietpreisbremse wird dazu führen, dass in gewissen Hotspots, die es nun einmal gibt - das ist nicht nur München, das an dieser Stelle immer erwähnt wird, das ist genauso Marburg, das ist Münster; das sind kleine Universitätsstädte, in denen wir Probleme haben, zu begrenzen -, der Mietpreisanstieg bei Wiedervermietung begrenzt wird. Es ist gut, dass wir das an dieser Stelle machen.\n\nIch will aber noch eine Sache ansprechen, weil mir etwas, ehrlich gesagt, nicht passt: Der Großteil der Vermieter in Deutschland vermietet ordentlich. Die vermieten ordentlich an ihre Mieter, die schauen nicht auf die höchstmögliche Rendite, die machen eine gute Arbeit, die haben ein gutes Verhältnis zu ihren Mietern. Wir wollen an die herangehen, die auf Wucher setzen, die die Situation schamlos ausnutzen. Darum ist die Mietpreisbremse an dieser Stelle der absolut richtige Weg.\n\nJa, na klar, Frau Lay.\n\nFrau Kollegin Lay, ich muss Ihnen leider an der Stelle widersprechen und Ihnen sagen: Da müssen Sie sich den Gesetzentwurf einmal ganz genau ansehen. Wir geben den Ländern die Möglichkeit, in der angespannten Lage in Ballungszentren die Mietpreisbremse umzusetzen,\n\nweil die Länder am besten beurteilen können, wie die Situation vor Ort ist. Darum ist das an dieser Stelle völlig richtig.\n\nBayern ist schon bei den Änderungen in Bezug auf die Kappungsgrenze vorangegangen. Darum kann ich Ihnen nur empfehlen: Schauen Sie sich den Referentenentwurf genau an, und lesen Sie das noch einmal nach.\n\nDer zweite Punkt, den ich heute erwähnen will - das darf man nicht verschweigen -, ist, dass in vielen Städten das Problem besteht, dass die Maklerkosten immer auf den Mieter abgewälzt werden. Darum ist heute ein guter Tag; denn wenn wir die Mietpreisbremse Anfang nächsten Jahres in Gesetzesform gießen, zieht im Jahr 2015 endlich auch für die Makler die soziale Marktwirtschaft ein. Das ist viel zu lange nicht passiert. Darum sind die Änderungen im Maklerrecht absolut richtig.\n\nAuf den dritten Punkt, den ich ansprechen möchte, ist mein Kollege Michael Groß schon eingegangen: Es ist natürlich so, dass die Mietpreisbremse keinen zusätzlichen Wohnraum schafft. Das ist völlig richtig. Das ist mit der Mietpreisbremse aber auch nicht beabsichtigt. Darum müssen wir gleichzeitig den Wohnungsbau stärken.\n\nDarum ist es richtig, die Ausnahme der Mietpreisbremse für den Neubau zuzulassen. Da bin ich voll auf Ihrer Seite. Das müssen wir machen, weil wir zusätzlichen Wohnungsbau brauchen.\n\nHerr Gehring, ich habe mich gefreut, dass Sie Nordrhein-Westfalen erwähnt haben, weil Nordrhein-Westfalen ein Beispiel dafür ist,\n\ndass man Geld vom Bund für den sozialen Wohnungsbau in die Hand nimmt. NRW-Bauminister Michael Groschek nimmt bis 2017 800 Millionen Euro jährlich für den sozialen Wohnungsbau in die Hand. Das ist Politik für die Städte in NRW und für den ländlichen Raum. Wir als SPD machen in Nordrhein-Westfalen und im Bund Politik für die Städte und für den ländlichen Raum - Stadt und Land Hand in Hand. Darum ist es gut, dass die SPD an dieser Stelle regiert.\n\nIch möchte am Ende noch ganz kurz einen Punkt ansprechen. Neben den Kosten, die die Bürgerinnen und Bürger für die Miete haben, müssen wir uns auch die Nebenkosten ansehen. Die Nebenkosten sind die zweite Miete. Das ist ein Problem. Darum müssen wir auch schauen, dass wir es bei den Nebenkosten hinbekommen, über eine sogenannte Betriebskostenbremse und darüber nachzudenken, was man in dem Bereich machen kann. Ich finde das gar nicht verkehrt, weil diese Kosten für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger ebenfalls enorm sind. Da muss man etwas machen.\n\nWir machen eine echte Mietpreisbremse. Ich kann Ihnen nur sagen: Stimmen Sie dem zu, wenn Sie etwas Gutes für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger im Land tun wollen! Ich glaube, das ist richtig. Allen Studierenden kann ich nur einen guten Start ins Semester wünschen. Ich hoffe, alle haben die O-Woche ganz gut überstanden.\n\nIch danke für die Aufmerksamkeit.\n\nHerr Kollege Möring, vielen Dank, dass Sie die Zwischenfrage zulassen. - Würden Sie mir zustimmen, dass die mittelfristige Finanzplanung der schwarz-gelben Koalition unter Jürgen Rüttgers für Nordrhein-Westfalen eine Nettoneuverschuldung für das Jahr 2014 von über 6 Milliarden Euro vorsah? Würden Sie mir zustimmen, dass in diesem Jahr der Haushalt in NRW nicht gut ist, aber eine Nettoneuverschuldung von ungefähr 3 Milliarden Euro vorsieht? Würden Sie mir zustimmen, dass das eine enorme Differenz im Gegensatz zum Haushalt, den Schwarz-Gelb in NRW geplant hatte, ist?\"\n11627,christine-lambrecht,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Frau Haßelmann, Sie haben uns und damit auch mich gefragt, ob ich mit dem Verfahren zufrieden bin. Ich sage als Parlamentarierin: Nein.\n\nEs hätte auch anders laufen können, und es hätte eigentlich auch anders laufen sollen.\n\nWir haben eine solche Situation in verschiedenen Konstellationen erlebt; Sie haben darauf hingewiesen. Ich bin seit 1998 dabei, und auch ich habe unterschiedlichste Konstellationen erlebt. Es ist für einen Parlamentarier sehr schwierig, wenn man so eine Tischvorlage bekommt. Ich kann mich noch gut daran erinnern, als im Rechtsausschuss vom Kollegen Trittin oder von der Kollegin Künast, damals als Minister, Tischvorlagen mit einer ähnlichen Dimension vorgelegt wurden.\n\nDas ist eine schwierige Situation. Aber 400 Seiten - das ist eben von Ihnen ja genannt worden - bedeuten ja nicht 400 Seiten Änderungsanträge, sondern es handelt sich um eine Synopse. Wenn man es eindampfen würde, dann wären es nur noch einige Seiten; aber es wären eben immer noch einige Seiten.\n\nEs stellt sich die Frage, ob dieses Verfahren tatsächlich notwendig ist.\n\nIch sage: Ja.\n\nDenn es gibt manchmal Situationen, in denen man ein solches Verfahren durchziehen muss.\n\nSie wissen selbst, dass die Notifizierung Ende 2016 ausläuft\n\nund dass damit die Förderung von Erneuerbare-Energien-Anlagen nicht mehr möglich wäre. Mal allen Ernstes, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Das kann in diesem Haus doch wirklich niemand wollen, vor allem nicht jene, denen der Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien am Herzen liegt.\n\nDas hätte ich eigentlich von Ihnen erwartet.\n\nWir wissen, wie lange ein solches Notifizierungsverfahren auf europäischer Ebene dauert: in der Regel fast acht Monate. Deswegen wäre es eben nicht möglich gewesen, zu sagen: Ach, das schieben wir auf die Zeit nach der Sommerpause. - Dann wäre Ihnen bestimmt noch etwas eingefallen. Nein, es ist notwendig, dass wir diesen Schritt gehen, damit erneuerbare Energien weiter ausgebaut werden können.\n\nIch muss auch ehrlich sagen: Ich habe den Eindruck: Ihnen sind die sachlichen Argumente abhandengekommen.\n\nDeswegen machen Sie jetzt eine Geschäftsordnungsdebatte wie in vielen anderen Fällen auch. In dem parlamentarischen Verfahren sind viele positive Änderungen erreicht worden, die auch in Ihrem Interesse sein müssten, wenn Sie tatsächlich am Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien interessiert wären.\n\nAls Beispiel nenne ich nur: Bürgerenergiegesellschaften müssen jetzt 10 Prozent ihrer Anteile der Kommune vor Ort anbieten. Wozu führt das denn? Das führt zu Akzeptanz vor Ort, und deswegen ist diese Veränderung im Interesse der Energiewende.\n\nMieterstrommodelle sollen über eine Verordnung ermöglicht werden. Damit können auch die Städte von den Erneuerbaren erreicht werden. Außerdem können Privatpersonen und kleine Unternehmen Dachphotovoltaikanlagen weiter nach dem System der garantierten Einspeisevergütung errichten. Ich glaube, das ist ebenfalls ein richtiger Schritt, der genau durch diese von Ihnen kritisierten Änderungen erreicht werden konnte.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, man hätte dieses Verfahren auch anders machen können,\n\naber aufgrund des Zeitdrucks und der auslaufenden Notifizierung ist es eben notwendig.\n\nLassen Sie uns jetzt den Gesetzentwurf beraten und beschließen - im Interesse des Erfolgsmodells der erneuerbaren Energien, damit sie weiter gefahren werden können.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6796,franziska-brantner,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Der Streik der Erzieherinnen und Erzieher spiegelt das wider, was im vorliegenden Bericht beschrieben wird. Die Zahlen wurden heute noch nicht genannt - ich finde sie sehr beeindruckend -: 70 Prozent aller befragten Erzieherinnen und Erzieher sagen, dass die gesellschaftliche Anerkennung für ihren Beruf zu gering ist. 70 Prozent! 60 Prozent von ihnen sagen, dass sie mit der Bezahlung unzufrieden sind. Ich finde, diese Zahlen sollten einem wirklich zu denken geben. So überrascht es nicht, dass die Erzieherinnen und Erzieher streiken - berechtigterweise.\n\nBei einem Bahnstreik wechseln wir auf andere Verkehrsmittel; bei der Kita ist das schwierig. Man kann die Person, der wir täglich unsere Kinder anvertrauen, nicht so leicht auswechseln. Daran wird auch deutlich, dass es sich um besondere Menschen handelt. Wir vertrauen ihnen unsere Kinder an, denen wir unglaublich viel Bedeutung beimessen, weil sie das Liebste sind, was wir haben.\n\nDie Anforderungen an die Erzieherinnen und Erzieher sind in den letzten Jahren gestiegen. In diesem Zusammenhang sind Inklusion, Sprachförderung, aber auch digitale Bildung zu nennen. Wir haben zu Recht sehr hohe Ansprüche, eben weil es um unsere Kinder geht.\n\nAber das spiegelt sich nicht auf dem Gehaltsscheck der Erzieherinnen und Erzieher wider. Das ist der erste Punkt: Die Frage nach dem guten Arbeitgeber Kita.\n\nDer zweite Punkt ist die Anzahl der Betreuungsplätze. Es fehlen immer noch 184 000 Plätze, vor allen Dingen in Westdeutschland. Diese Zahl wird noch steigen; denn mit dem Angebot steigt die Nachfrage. Wir brauchen aber auch flexiblere Öffnungszeiten; denn es gibt viele Eltern, die keinen Nine-to-five-Job haben, die keine klassischen Arbeitszeiten haben. Vor allen Dingen Alleinerziehende brauchen hier Unterstützung. Aber keine Angst: Wir wollen keine 24-Stunden-Kita, sondern eine Kita, in die die Kinder früher gebracht werden und dafür auch früher abgeholt werden können.\n\nWir brauchen außerdem eine Verbesserung der Betreuungsqualität. Ich bin Herrn Weinberg übrigens dankbar, dass er gerade Bremen mit seinem Betreuungsschlüssel von 1: 1,3 erwähnt hat. Nach acht Jahren in grüner Verantwortung steht damit dieses Bundesland - nicht Bayern, das gerade so beklatscht wurde - am besten da. Unter extrem schwierigen Haushaltsbedingungen hatte dort die frühkindliche Bildung Priorität. Das ist grüne Politik in Ländern, wo Grüne regieren; das möchte ich hier noch einmal unterstreichen.\n\nIm Bericht steht, dass sich die Situation nicht verschlechtert hat. Aber sie ist eben noch weit entfernt von dem, was uns die Experten empfehlen. Dort haben wir noch sehr viel Luft nach oben. Es ist bundesweit unterschiedlich. Ich möchte noch einmal appellieren, sich zu vergegenwärtigen, dass es doch nicht sein kann, dass in Deutschland die Chancen von Kleinkindern davon abhängen, in welchem Bundesland, in welcher Stadt sie aufwachsen, sondern dass wir einen bundesweit einheitlichen Qualitätsanspruch brauchen, der garantiert, dass jedes Kind nicht nur das Recht auf einen Betreuungsplatz, sondern auch das Recht auf einen guten Betreuungsplatz hat. Das muss der Anspruch sein.\n\nEs gibt dazu eine Arbeitsgruppe der Länder. Mich würde interessieren, wann wir darüber einmal einen Bericht bekommen und erfahren, wie es dort weitergeht.\n\n- Wir fragen auch gerne unsere Senatorinnen; mit denen sind wir im Austausch.\n\nAber es ist klar, dass es bei den Verhandlungen um Geld geht. Ich glaube, darum braucht man gar nicht lange herumzureden. Ich möchte noch einmal erwähnen, dass übrigens der Hauptbatzen an Geld unter Schwarz-Gelb geflossen ist - das waren 5,4 Milliarden Euro - und dass die Gelder im Vergleich dazu jetzt ziemlich gering sind. Wir haben schon häufig darüber gestritten, ob es fast 1 Milliarde Euro ist oder ob es 550 Millionen Euro sind. Es ist aber auf jeden Fall nicht adäquat und reicht nicht aus.\n\nEigentlich ist es wirklich traurig, dass unter einer schwarz-roten Koalition weniger Geld für diesen Bereich zur Verfügung steht als unter einer schwarz-gelben.\n\nDie zusätzlichen 100 Millionen Euro von den 10 Milliarden Euro sind ein Tropfen auf den heißen Stein. Wir brauchen wesentlich mehr. Herr Weinberg, wenn ich Sie richtig verstanden habe, war das gerade eine Absage an den Vorschlag von Herrn Gabriel, neu zu strukturieren, wie die Gelder verteilt werden. Wir fanden den Vorschlag durchaus interessant, zu schauen, wie man langfristig sicherstellen kann, dass Gelder vom Bund in die Kitas fließen; das wird wahrscheinlich geschehen müssen. Darüber sollte nachgedacht werden. Schade, dass bisher vieles dazu sofort abgesagt wurde.\n\nZuletzt möchte ich kurz auf die Bertelsmann-Studie hinweisen, die uns deutlich gemacht hat, dass sich Investitionen in die frühkindliche Bildung besonders lohnen. Diese Studie hatte eine schlechte Nachricht: Der Bildungserfolg in Deutschland hängt vom sozialen Status des Elternhauses ab. Das war zwar keine neue, aber weiterhin eine schlechte Nachricht. Die Studie hatte aber auch eine gute Nachricht. Sie besagt, dass diese Ungerechtigkeit durch eine gute Frühförderung, etwa in einer hochwertigen Kita, ausgeglichen werden kann. Die Kita ist sozusagen ein Aufzug nach oben, der vielen Kindern einen ganz anderen Zugang zu unserer Gesellschaft ermöglicht.\n\nWir brauchen also mehr und flexible Betreuungsplätze, eine gute Qualität dieser Plätze sowie eine gute und gerechte Bezahlung der Erzieherinnen und Erzieher; das sollte uns das Ganze wert sein.\n\nAn Sie gerichtet, liebe CDU/CSU: Es gab vor zehn Tagen eine Umfrage in der Welt, bei der die Mehrheit Ihrer Wählerinnen und Wähler, 54 Prozent, gesagt hat, sie sähe die Mittel für das Betreuungsgeld lieber in die Qualität der Kitas investiert. Unter den Unionswählern, die Eltern sind, liegt dieser Anteil sogar noch höher: bei 60 Prozent. Bei allen anderen Parteien war dieser Anteil natürlich wesentlich höher. Ich finde, dieser Wunsch der Eltern ist absolut zu berücksichtigen. Sie wünschen sich eine gute Qualität der Betreuung. Daran sollten wir uns orientieren.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n15346,peter-bleser,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Lieber Herr Kollege Ebner, Sie erfüllen in geradezu hervorragender Weise das Klischee, das ich von den Grünen habe. Sie reden hier immer noch von der Agrarwende. Stattdessen brauchen wir einen Aufbruch in die Zukunft, um die 10 Milliarden Menschen, die die Vereinten Nationen für 2050 prognostizieren, auch ernähren zu können. Die werden Sie nicht mit Ökoschrebergärten in den Vorstädten von Großstädten ernähren können. Dazu brauchen Sie eine effiziente, leistungsfähige Landwirtschaft.\n\nDie Urbanisierung wird dazu führen, dass zwei Drittel der Menschen in Ballungsgebieten leben werden, so die UN. Daher müssen wir dafür sorgen, dass sie nicht nur ausreichend Lebensmittel erhalten, sondern dass sie hochqualitative und sichere Lebensmittel erhalten,\n\nund dafür stehen wir.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Grünen haben es sich in den letzten Jahren zu eigen gemacht, eine ganze Berufsgruppe zu verachten, zu schmähen, zu verunglimpfen\n\nund sie in ihrer Situation, die wirtschaftlich mit Sicherheit nicht einfach war in den letzten Monaten, zusätzlich noch öffentlich zu stigmatisieren. Das mit Minderheiten zu tun - das sage ich Ihnen ganz klar -, ist nicht nur unanständig, sondern einer demokratischen Partei nicht würdig.\n\nWer glaubt, mit Strafsteuern auf bestimmte Lebensmittel oder Empfehlungen bei der Ernährung und Vorschriften wie dem Veggieday und ähnlichen Vorschlägen die Menschen gängeln und sie mit Verboten belasten zu müssen, der erfüllt das Image einer Gängelungs- und Verbotspartei,\n\nund das tun Sie in hervorragender Weise.\n\nSie wollen Strafsteuern auf Pflanzenschutzmittel und Düngemittel. Das alles führt doch nicht zu dem Ergebnis, das wir wollen,\n\nsondern im Grunde genommen nur zu einer Verlagerung der Produktion. Das hilft den Menschen überhaupt nicht.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, wir sind diejenigen, die auf wissenschaftlicher Basis Pflanzenschutzmittel oder Düngemittel zulassen oder eben nicht.\n\nWir vertrauen unseren Wissenschaftlern in der Europäischen Union, aber auch in unseren Einrichtungen, dem BfR und dem BVL. - Übrigens, BVL und BfR haben Sie eingerichtet, Frau Künast. - Diesen vertrauen wir, weil diese Experten nicht nur bei uns, sondern weltweit anerkannt sind.\n\nDiese Vorgehensweise unterscheidet uns wesentlich von Ihnen, die Sie aufgrund ideologischer Vorgaben meinen, Fakten ignorieren zu können und sich gewissen Verhaltensweisen in Übersee anschließen zu müssen.\n\nDie Wissenschaftler in der Europäischen Chemikalienagentur, ECHA, die Wissenschaftler in der Europäischen Behörde für Lebensmittelsicherheit, EFSA, und die Experten aller Mitgliedstaaten kommen einvernehmlich zu dem Ergebnis, dass der Wirkstoff Glyphosat keine gesundheitliche Gefährdung verursacht. Auf dieser Grundlage müssen wir eine Entscheidung treffen und nicht auf der Grundlage irgendwelcher Umfrageergebnisse oder Stimmungen, die Sie wahrzunehmen glauben.\n\nEbenso ist der Antrag der Grünen „Wege zur Pestizidreduktion in der Landwirtschaft“ zu bewerten. Auch da gilt: Ängste schüren hilft nicht; wir müssen vielmehr die Fakten betrachten.\n\nMan kann auch hier zu dem Schluss kommen, dass selbstverständlich alles getan werden muss, dass Bienen nicht gefährdet werden, aber es muss auch die Möglichkeit geben, zu unterscheiden und diese Mittel dort einzusetzen, wo eine Gefährdung nicht zu erwarten oder ausgeschlossen ist. Deswegen haben wir uns darüber hinaus in unserem Haus darauf verständigt, die Forschung über Pflanzenschutzmittel, die schonender sind, wesentlich zu erhöhen. 14,6 Millionen Euro haben wir seit 2014 dafür ausgegeben. Ich habe einen Förderbescheid für Maßnahmen erteilt, mit denen ganz gezielt durch Vergrellen und Anlocken im Obstbau Insektizide vermieden werden können. Ich hoffe sehr, dass die Forschung, die darüber betrieben wird, entsprechende Ergebnisse bringt. Dann brauchen wir andere Mittel nicht mehr einzusetzen, Stichwort „hormoneller Einsatz“.\n\nWir haben gerade im Pflanzenschutz durch Digitalisierung eine Menge erreicht. GPS-gesteuert wird eine Überlappung bei der Ausbringung von Pflanzenschutzmitteln oder Dünger automatisch verhindert. Dadurch wird der Einsatz deutlich reduziert.\n\n- Das werde ich Ihnen gleich noch sagen, Herr Ebner. - Darüber hinaus haben wir Forschungsarbeiten gefördert, in denen untersucht wird, wie die Düngung sehr nah am Saatkorn ausgebracht werden kann. Wir fördern auch den ökologischen Landbau; auch das gehört dazu. Wir werden dafür die Mittel erhöhen. Nicht zuletzt sind wir gerade auf europäischer Ebene auch mit Ihren Parteifreunden einer Meinung, wenn es darum geht, eine Ökoverordnung auf den Weg zu bringen, die hilft.\n\nLieber Herr Kollege Ebner, wir haben noch ein weiteres Thema in dieser Woche im Ausschuss besprochen. Gut gemeint ist nicht immer gut gemacht. Wer den Pflanzenschutzeinsatz auf ökologischen Vorrangflächen bei großkörnigen Leguminosen verbietet, der muss auch die Konsequenzen tragen. Dann wird der Proteinimport eben wieder aus Übersee kommen, um die bei uns nicht erzeugten Mengen zu ersetzen. Das kann nicht in Ihrem Sinne sein. Wir fördern den Eiweißpflanzenanbau in Deutschland mit immerhin zusätzlich 6 Millionen Euro. Insofern ist kontraproduktiv, was in Brüssel mithilfe Ihnen nahestehender Kollegen beschlossen worden ist.\n\nWir haben im letzten Jahr über 1 200 Forschungsprojekte gefördert, die die Nachhaltigkeit und die Biodiversität stärken sollen, um damit auch den Zielen des Pariser Klimaschutzabkommens nachzukommen.\n\nIch will Ihnen, Herr Ebner, noch etwas sagen. Sie haben völlig recht: Der Pflanzenschutzmitteleinsatz ist in den letzten Jahren sehr unterschiedlich gewesen. In einigen Jahren ist er gestiegen, in anderen Jahren aber wieder gesunken. Das bedeutet doch nur eines: Die Landwirte setzen Pflanzenschutzmittel nur dann ein, wenn sie sie einsetzen müssen. Gerade im letzten Jahr haben Betriebe aus dem ökologischen Anbau mehrfach die Forderung erhoben, weil es eine hohe Feuchtigkeit gab, die Mittel weit über die vom BfR als zulässig erachteten Höchstmengen zu erhöhen. Das haben wir nicht gemacht, weil der Gesundheitsschutz für uns vorgeht.\n\nIch schließe ab mit der Feststellung, dass die Grünen es immer noch nicht verstanden haben, ihre Ziele in der Agrarpolitik an die Realitäten anzupassen. Aber in einem Punkt sind sie auf einem guten Weg: Bei den Umfrageergebnissen nähern sie sich den 5 Prozent, aber von oben.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n6471,karsten-moring,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn ich die Debatte, die wir gerade geführt haben, jetzt mal Revue passieren lasse, dann wundert mich das eine oder andere ganz erheblich. Herr Zdebel, mich beeindruckt schon Ihre Unterstützung für den Import von Gas aus Russland, die Sie hier zum Ausdruck gebracht haben. Sie arbeiten mit Formulierungen, von denen Sie eigentlich wissen müssten, dass sie unzutreffend sind. Wenn Sie in Ihren Antrag schauen, dann sehen Sie, dass am Ende des ersten Absatzes steht - Stichwort „Frack-Fluid“ -:\n\nDabei wird eine mit gefährlichen Chemikalien versetzte Flüssigkeit mit hohem Druck in die Tiefe gepumpt …\n\n- Nein. Im Gesetzentwurf steht: nicht wassergefährdende Gemische oberhalb von 3 000 Metern Tiefe, schwach wassergefährdende Gemische unterhalb von 3 000 Metern Tiefe.\n\n- Ach, liebe Frau Verlinden, worauf kommt es denn an? Wenn Sie sich zu Hause ein Glas Wasser nehmen und zwei Teelöffel Salz hineintun, dann ist das giftig,\n\nund wenn Sie zwei Krümel hineintun, dann haben Sie eine Geschmacksverbesserung. Es kommt darauf an, dass die Stoffe, die wir einbringen, nicht wassergefährdend oder nur schwach wassergefährdend sind. Das ist der entscheidende Punkt.\n\nDas, was Sie betreiben, nenne ich Volksverdummung.\n\n- Herr Krischer, wer schreit, vertraut seinen Argumenten nicht - ganz einfach.\n\nIch gehe nur auf einen Aspekt ein, den Sie in Ihrer Rede vorgetragen haben. Wie kommen Sie als jemand, der sich für weltweiten Klimaschutz engagiert, eigentlich dazu, einen so verengten Blick auf Deutschland allein zu fassen? Sie wissen doch ganz genau: Wir importieren 37 Prozent unseres Gases aus Russland. Ich will das Thema Versorgungssicherheit überhaupt nicht ansprechen; aber Sie wissen doch, unter welchen Bedingungen in Russland Gas gefördert wird. Sie wissen auch, wie viel Gas in den Pipelines auf einer Strecke von 5 000 Kilometern verloren geht. Das, was dort an Methan in die Atmosphäre entweicht, ist ein Mehrfaches von dem, was bei einer Förderung hier bei uns, mit unseren Umweltstandards, entweichen würde.\n\nDas nenne ich eine verengte Sichtweise, die Ihrem Anspruch im Bereich des Klimaschutzes nicht gerecht wird. Das sollten Sie sich wirklich noch mal überlegen.\n\nFrau Bulling-Schröter, Sie haben gesagt, ein Nein sei der erste Schritt zur Freiheit; das habe ich noch nie gehört. Sie sagen: Nein, wir bauen keine Autobahnen, nein, wir bauen keine Infrastruktur, nein, wir bauen keine Industrieanlagen, nein, die Grundlagen für unseren Volkswohlstand wollen wir nicht. Das ist kein erster Schritt zur Freiheit, sondern ein Schritt in eine Sackgasse. Solche Formulierungen reichen nicht, Sie müssen schon mit Argumenten kommen.\n\nSie werfen der Koalition und den entsprechenden Ministerien vor, dass im vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf nur von Trinkwasser die Rede ist, und haben als Beispiel die Brauereien genannt; Herr Nüßlein hat bereits auf die bayerischen Brauereien hingewiesen. Vielleicht haben Sie den Gesetzentwurf nicht gelesen; denn im Gesetzentwurf steht ausdrücklich, dass Länder die Möglichkeit bekommen, Trinkwasserbrunnen, Mineralbrunnen und Heilquellen zu schützen.\n\nAm Rande bemerkt: Das meiste Wasser, das zum Brauen von Bier verwendet wird, kommt nicht aus Brunnen, sondern aus der Wasserleitung. Alles andere ist Marketing.\n\nGestern hat Herr Müller, Co-Vorsitzender der Endlager-Kommission, den wichtigen Satz gesagt: Die Politiker müssen mehr in Zusammenhängen denken.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Opposition, Ihr Problem im Umgang mit diesem Thema besteht darin, dass Sie nur in Schwarz-Weiß, nur in Entweder-Oder denken. Sie machen es sich zu leicht, wenn Sie ein Fracking-Verbot fordern.\n\nWeder die SPD noch die CDU/CSU haben versprochen: Wir verbieten Fracking in Deutschland. Wir haben in unserem Koalitionsvertrag wichtige Vereinbarungen getroffen, an die wir uns halten. Die wichtigste lautet: „Trinkwasser und Gesundheit haben für uns absoluten Vorrang“. Wir wollen einen Wandel: weg von den derzeit riskanten Förderverfahren - wenngleich es in den letzten 50 Jahren zu keinen größeren Unfällen gekommen ist -, hin zu erheblich sichereren Verfahren. Denn es gilt nach wie vor: Die Sicherheit hat Vorrang vor wirtschaftlichen Interessen.\n\nIch habe eben schon darauf hingewiesen, dass wir beim Frack-Fluid nur nicht wassergefährdende oder schwach wassergefährdende Gemische zulassen, aber Sie sprechen immer noch von giftigen Gemischen. Das ist irreführend. Wir haben aber nicht nur im Bereich Fluid einiges getan. Wir haben eine ganze Reihe zusätzlicher Maßnahmen getroffen. Wir ermöglichen es den Ländern beispielsweise, die Ausschlussgebiete unter bestimmten Umständen auszuweiten. Außerdem gilt nach wie vor der Besorgnisgrundsatz gemäß Wasserhaushaltsgesetz.\n\nMan sieht: Wir haben an dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf mit Hosenträger und Gürtel gearbeitet. Dem Besorgnisgrundsatz wird Rechnung getragen, es werden zusätzliche Ausschlussgebiete in einem erheblichen Umfang vorsehen. Das ist eine doppelte Sicherung, gerade weil wir die Bedenken aus der Bevölkerung ernst nehmen. Dazu gehört auch die Einführung der UVP-Pflicht für die Form von Förderung, die wir seit zig Jahren betreiben, zum Beispiel für das konventionelle Fracking.\n\n- Streiten wir uns nicht über Worte; wir wissen doch alle, was gemeint ist.\n\n(Lachen der Abg. Dr. Julia Verlinden [BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN]\n\nDas ist die Form, die wir bisher über viele Jahre erprobt und praktiziert haben, und zwar ohne größere Probleme.\n\nZur Expertenkommission. Es ist eine Schimäre, wenn man argumentiert: Wir überlassen der Expertenkommission eine Aufgabe, die nur der Bundestag zu erfüllen hat. Wir werden uns sicher noch einmal intensiv über diese Frage unterhalten, aber wir wollen unserer Verantwortung bei der Behandlung des vorliegenden Gesetzentwurfs gerecht werden. Im vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf definieren wir, was nach unserer Meinung zulässig oder auch nicht zulässig sein soll. Auch dann, wenn wir das in einem späteren Gesetz regeln würden, wären wir von einem Votum von Experten abhängig; daran würde sich nichts ändern. Es ändert sich aber sehr wohl etwas, wenn wir eine solche Erprobung ohne Begleitung durch eine Expertengruppe machen würden. Denn korrekt ist: Wir haben mit bestimmten Arten der Förderung bisher keine Erfahrungen. Wir müssen aber wissen, wie die Förderung funktioniert. Wir müssen wissen, ob das Fluid, das im Labor erforscht wurde, auch in der Realität funktioniert. Wir müssen wissen, ob es möglich ist, Fracks in Horizonten, die vielleicht nur 20 Meter mächtig sind, zu beherrschen, wo ein bis zwei Kilometer horizontal gebohrt werden muss, um diese Gebiete zu erschließen. Wir müssen wissen, wie hoch die Ausbeutungsquote ist, die wir bei diesen Vorkommen haben werden.\n\nEs ist nicht unsere Aufgabe, zu sagen: Unternehmen haben ein Geschäftsmodell, mit dem sie Geld verdienen können. Unsere Aufgabe als Politiker ist es, die Grundlagen für unseren Wohlstand, für unsere Arbeitsplätze und für unsere Wirtschaftskraft weiter zu stärken und zu entwickeln. Unsere Verantwortung als Politiker ist es, das mit einer gesunden Umwelt zu verknüpfen. Unsere Aufgabe ist es, bei diesem Gesetzespaket mit all den Änderungen, über die wir noch reden werden, von der Lagerstättenwasserversenkung bis zu all den anderen Punkten, die angestrebt werden, zu einem Ergebnis zu kommen. Ich bin sicher, wir werden es erreichen.\n\nDie hier manchmal etwas hämisch angesprochene Diskussion innerhalb der Fraktionen ist ein Bestandteil dieses Prozesses. Es ist völlig legitim, hier einen Ausgleich zu suchen und eine intensive Diskussion zu führen. Das tun wir innerhalb unserer Fraktion. Das tut die SPD in ihrer Fraktion, und das werden wir gemeinsam tun, um zu einem Gesetzentwurf zu kommen, sodass die zurzeit unhaltbare Situation verbessert wird. Ich bin sicher, wir werden zu einem guten Ergebnis kommen und am Ende des Prozesses sagen können: Unser Wasser wird weiterhin trinkbar sein und von uns geschützt werden.\n\nZum Wohl.\"\n5834,barbel-hohn,\"Herzlichen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Heute Morgen hat der Chefunterhändler der USA zu TTIP, Mister -Mullaney, im Wirtschaftsausschuss gesagt, es gebe bestimmte Bereiche, in denen man die Standards gar nicht gegenseitig anerkennen könne. In diesem Zusammenhang hat er auch den Chemiebereich genannt. Das heißt, das betrifft in erheblichem Maße die Landwirtschaft. Sind Sie auch dieser Auffassung, oder wie wollen Sie mit einer solchen Aussage umgehen?\n\nHeute Morgen hat der Chefunterhändler gesagt, dass die USA ein Gremium für regulatorische Kooperation gar nicht wollen. Eine regulatorische Kooperation sei die Forderung der EU. Wie ist da die Haltung des Ministeriums? Können Sie die Position der USA unterstützen, die gar keine Regulatory Corporations wollen, oder tun Sie das nicht?\n\nHerr Staatssekretär, heute im Agrarausschuss ging es um die Anbaugenehmigung einer herbizidtoleranten Rapslinie der Firma Cibus. Da ist mit neuen gentechnischen Methoden gearbeitet worden. Im Februar hat das BVL festgestellt, der Raps sei nicht gentechnisch verändert.\n\nNun wissen wir aber: Rapspollen fliegen mit den Bienen mindestens so weit wie Maispollen. Die Vertreterin des Bundesamtes für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit hat im Agrarausschuss gesagt, es habe auch eine Minderheitenmeinung gegeben. Gibt es also Stellungnahmen von anderen Bundesbehörden, die diese Rapssorte kritisch sehen?\"\n2912,marco-wanderwitz,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Unmittelbar vor der parlamentarischen Sommerpause haben wir uns als letzte Debatte ein durchaus gewichtiges Thema vorgenommen, die Einsetzung einer Expertenkommission zur Zukunft der Stasi-Unterlagen-Behörde. Die bewegenden Bilder von der Erstürmung der Stasizentrale in der Normannenstraße hier in Berlin am 15. Januar 1990 gingen um die Welt. Ich habe heute Vormittag die Gelegenheit genutzt, mir einige dieser Bilder anzuschauen. Für viele in Deutschland, aber auch darüber hinaus wurden sie zu einem der Symbole der Befreiung vom Willkür- und Unterdrückungsapparat der SED. Die Stasi, das Ministerium für Staatssicherheit, nach eigener Wahrnehmung „Schild und Schwert der SED“, war der Inbegriff der Diktatur der DDR. Es war die Oppositionsbewegung, die die geplante völlige Vernichtung der Stasiunterlagen verhinderte, indem sie fast alle Bezirks- und Kreisdienststellen der ehemaligen Staatssicherheit besetzte. Leider ist es in einigen Bezirken gleichwohl gelungen, sehr viel Aktenmaterial zu vernichten. Was übrig geblieben ist, sind 150 laufende Kilometer Akten, darunter rund 1,3 Millionen Fotos.\n\nUnmittelbar mit der Sicherstellung folgten die Offenlegung der Akten und damit die Weichenstellung für die tiefgreifende Aufarbeitung der SED-Diktatur. Mit der Stasi-Unterlagen-Behörde haben wir als Deutscher Bundestag - ich war damals noch nicht dabei; aber manche der heutigen Kolleginnen und Kollegen waren schon im Hohen Haus - die rechtliche Grundlage für die Aufarbeitung der Stasiunterlagen und die Zugänglichmachung für Opfer, Forschung und Bildungsarbeit geschaffen.\n\nHeute beschließen wir die Einsetzung einer Expertenkommission, die uns als Deutschem Bundestag Ratschläge geben soll, wie wir nach 2019 mit diesem Themenkomplex weiter verfahren sollen. Bis 2019 haben wir noch eine gesetzliche Grundlage, auf der die Stasi-Unterlagen-Behörde, die BStU, arbeitet.\n\nWir als Union haben großen Wert darauf gelegt, dass der Kommissionsauftrag offen formuliert wird und dass wir, was die Strukturen betrifft, der Expertenkommission keine Vorgaben machen; denn sie soll ihre Vorschläge frei unterbreiten, allerdings auf der Grundlage der Aufgabenstellungen, die das Stasi-Unterlagen-Gesetz beinhaltet.\n\nDas Stasi-Unterlagen-Gesetz hat sich bewährt. Wir haben es seit seinem Inkrafttreten 1991 insgesamt achtmal novelliert. Ich denke, es ist ein Beispiel für ein gutes Gesetz.\n\nDer Zugang zu den Stasiakten und ihre weitere Erschließung bleiben wichtige Voraussetzungen für die nötige weitere Aufarbeitung der SED-Diktatur. Das ist weitestgehend, über die Fraktionsgrenzen hinweg - bis auf die bekannte Ausnahme -, Konsens.\n\nBereits 1994 forderte die PDS die Schließung der Behörde, weil sie die Menschen in den neuen Ländern angeblich diskriminiere und unter Generalverdacht stelle. Ich zitiere aus Bundestagsdrucksache 13/4359 aus der 13. Wahlperiode des Bundestages, einem Gesetzentwurf der PDS für ein viertes Gesetz zur Änderung des Stasi-Unterlagen-Gesetzes von 1996:\n\nDie Persönlichkeitsrechte der als Täter charakterisierten offiziellen und inoffiziellen Mitarbeiter des Ministeriums für Staatssicherheit … der DDR sind weitgehend aufgehoben.\n\nDas ist völliger Unsinn, aber es ist eine klar erkennbare Geisteshaltung, die Sie bis heute einnehmen.\n\nMit uns in der Regierungsverantwortung - ich glaube, das trifft auch auf die beiden anderen einbringenden Fraktionen zu - wird es keinen Schlussstrich unter die SED-Unrechtsaufarbeitung geben, heute nicht und auch in Zukunft nicht.\n\nIch möchte deshalb den Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Fraktionen von SPD und Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, speziell meinen beiden Berichterstatterkollegen Siegmund Ehrmann und Harald Terpe, für die gemeinsame Erarbeitung des Antrages in sehr kollegialer Atmosphäre herzlich danken. Ich glaube, das ist auch ein gutes Zeichen für die Zeit nach 2016, wenn uns die Kommission ihre Ergebnisse vorlegt. Ich hoffe und glaube, dass wir dann in ähnlicher Einhelligkeit und konstruktiver Atmosphäre gemeinsam miteinander die nötigen Novellen auf den Weg bringen können.\n\nDie wissenschaftliche Erforschung der SED-Diktatur darf sich aber nicht auf das Wirken der Staatssicherheit beschränken. Ich glaube, sie muss künftig noch stärker die Rolle der SED, der Spinne im Netz in der ehemaligen DDR, in den Fokus nehmen.\n\nIn der ersten Debatte im Deutschen Bundestag zum Stasi-Unterlagen-Gesetz 1991 führte unser damaliger CDU/CSU-Fraktionskollege Johannes Gerster aus:\n\nWir brauchen Regelungen, die den effektiven Schutz der Opfer und deren Persönlichkeitsrechte sichern. … Die Opfer des Stasi-Terrors müssen erfahren - soweit sie dies wollen -, was die Bespitzelungsorgane über sie zusammengetragen haben.\n\nDas ist auch heute eine gültige Forderung. Ich möchte ein paar Zahlen liefern, die unterlegen, dass das eine richtige Aussage war:\n\nSeit Bestehen der Stasi-Unterlagen-Behörde gab es rund 3 Millionen Anträge auf Akteneinsicht, rund 3,3 Millionen Ersuchen für eine Überprüfung auf eine Stasitätigkeit, fast 30 000 Forschungsaufträge und rund eine halbe Million Anträge auf Rehabilitierung oder Strafverfolgung. Schon das allein zeigt, dass diese Arbeit auch in Zukunft unverzichtbar ist.\n\nLieber Roland Jahn - Sie sitzen oben auf der Besuchertribüne -, Ihre Behörde hat sowohl im Inland wie im Ausland hohes Ansehen und große Akzeptanz. Vielen Staaten, nicht nur in Osteuropa, dient Ihre Arbeit als Vorbild. Ihnen, Ihrer Amtsvorgängerin, Ihrem Amtsvorgänger und Ihren Mitarbeitern möchte ich heute im Namen des Hauses Dank für Ihre Arbeit sagen. Ihr Selbstverständnis als Opferbehörde ist auch das unsere.\n\nDie DDR war eine Diktatur, in der Menschenrechte massiv verletzt wurden, man der Willkür der Stasi ausgeliefert war, man Angst haben musste, seine Meinung zu sagen; Millionen Biografien wurden fremdbestimmt. Mehr als 250 000 Menschen wurden in der DDR aus politischen Gründen verhaftet. Über 1 000 Menschen verloren ihr Leben an der innerdeutschen Grenze. Ja, an der DDR klebt auch Blut.\n\nDeswegen schaue ich zum Abschluss meiner Rede nach links und stelle ganz einfach wieder einmal die Frage, ob Sie, die Linken, es heute über die Lippen bringen, diese Diktatur ohne Wenn und Aber als Unrechtsstaat zu bezeichnen.\"\n7633,gesine-lotzsch,\"Vielen Dank. - Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Ich möchte auf fünf Punkte eingehen, die in der Debatte dieser Woche zu kurz gekommen sind.\n\nErstens. Wir haben viel über Flüchtlinge gesprochen, aber viel zu wenig über die Fluchtursachen. Der Nahe Osten ist die Region mit der größten sozialen Ungleichheit weltweit. Circa 300 Millionen Menschen leben dort, doch der Reichtum ist in den Händen der Herrscher in Saudi-Arabien und in den anderen Ölmonarchien konzentriert. Allein Saudi-Arabien hat durch den Ölverkauf jährlich Einnahmen in Höhe von 300 Milliarden Dollar. Damit sich an dieser ungerechten Verteilung nichts ändert, finanzieren diese Monarchien die Waffen für den „Islamischen Staat“. Aber was tut die Bundesregierung? Fordert sie einen Wirtschaftsboykott gegen die Ölmonarchien? Nein, sie liefert auch noch Waffen nach Saudi-Arabien. Das muss ein Ende haben.\n\nAuch im Krieg gegen die Kurden werden deutsche Panzer eingesetzt. Wo bleibt da der Aufschrei der Bundesregierung? Darum ist es das Gebot der Stunde, endlich ein Verbot von Waffenexporten durchzusetzen und wirksame Maßnahmen gegen kriegsfinanzierende Monarchien zu ergreifen.\n\nZweitens. Interessant an der Rede des Finanzministers waren die Dinge, die Sie, Herr Schäuble, nicht angesprochen haben. Sie haben kein Wort über Verteilungsgerechtigkeit verloren. Selbst das Weltwirtschaftsforum, beileibe keine Vorfeldorganisation der Linken, hat in einem aktuellen Vergleich von 112 Ländern den Schluss gezogen, dass in Deutschland Wachstum und Gerechtigkeit eben nicht miteinander verbunden werden. Ich darf dazu kurz zitieren, was der OECD-Generalsekretär dort sagte:\n\nUnsere Analyse zeigt, dass wir nur auf starkes und dauerhaftes Wachstum zählen können, wenn wir der hohen und weiter steigenden Ungleichheit etwas entgegensetzen.\n\nEs ist also Zeit, endlich eine Vermögensteuer und höhere Erbschaftsteuern einzuführen.\n\nDrittens. Annelie Buntenbach, Mitglied des DGB-Bundesvorstandes, hat in einer schlichten Auflistung gezeigt, wie der Finanzminister seinen Haushalt auf Kosten der Sozialkassen in Ordnung gebracht hat. Sie erinnert völlig zu Recht daran, dass die Mütterrente im Jahr 6,5 Milliarden Euro kostet und nicht aus dem Bundeshaushalt finanziert wird, obwohl es sich dabei zweifelsohne um eine gesamtgesellschaftliche Aufgabe handelt. Diese Tricksereien auf Kosten der Sozialkassen wollen wir endlich beenden.\n\nDenn das ist eine Umverteilung zugunsten der Menschen, die gar nicht oder wenig in die Sozialkassen einzahlen. Auch das ist eine weitere Kritik des Weltwirtschaftsforums.\n\nEs ist doch so, dass Einkommensmillionäre, wenn überhaupt, nur einen Minianteil ihres Einkommens in die Sozialsysteme einzahlen. Meine Damen und Herren von der CDU/CSU, ich frage Sie: Ist es nicht eine unglaubliche Gleichmacherei, dass die Sekretärin genauso viel in die Krankenkasse einzahlen muss wie ihr Chef? Das ist doch ungerecht.\n\n- Prozentual.\n\nViertens. Es gibt ja einen Dauerstreit zwischen dem Finanzminister und der Kinderministerin, wie sie sich selbst nennt, sei es um die mickrige Kindergelderhöhung, die lange verzögerte Besserstellung von Alleinerziehenden oder jetzt aktuell die Nutzung der Mittel, die für das Betreuungsgeld vorgesehen waren, für den erforderlichen Ausbau der Kinderbetreuung. Der Finanzminister, Herr Schäuble, verweist dann immer gern auf die prioritären Finanzmaßnahmen des Koalitionsvertrages. Stimmt, da spielen Kinder nur eine untergeordnete Rolle. Schlimm genug! Doch die Bundeswehr steht übrigens auch nicht auf der Liste der prioritären Maßnahmen. Trotzdem soll die Bundeswehr 8 Milliarden Euro mehr bekommen. Vielleicht sollten Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, an dieser Stelle einmal selbstbewusst auf den Koalitionsvertrag verweisen und die Mehrausgaben für die Bundeswehr ablehnen. Unsere Unterstützung hätten Sie.\n\nFünftens. Minister Schäuble fordert einen europäischen Finanzminister. Ich sage Ihnen - das wissen Sie genauso gut wie ich -: Wir brauchen den nicht; denn wir haben ihn schon. Sie, Herr Schäuble, sind es selbst.\n\n- Ist doch so! - Die Sozialkürzungen, die Krisenländern wie Griechenland in den letzten Jahren aufgetragen wurden, tragen die gestochene Handschrift von Herrn Schäuble. Widerspruch wird in der informellen Runde der Finanzminister nicht geduldet. Ich frage Sie nur: Warum schaffen Sie es als informeller Finanzminister Europas seit über fünf Jahren nicht, endlich die Finanztransaktionsteuer durchzusetzen?\n\nJedes Jahr gehen Europa durch diese Arbeitsverweigerung des Finanzministers nach Berechnung der Wirtschaftswoche - nicht der Linken - circa 200 Milliarden Euro verloren. Offensichtlich, Herr Schäuble, hatten Sie für die Umsetzung der Finanztransaktionsteuer keine Zeit. Sie haben sich nämlich mit den Öffnungszeiten griechischer Gemüsegeschäfte im Detail beschäftigt. Ich glaube, das ist wirklich nicht Ihre Aufgabe.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, der Haushaltsentwurf der Bundesregierung, getragen von Union und SPD, ist noch kein Beitrag zu mehr Gerechtigkeit in unserem Land. Die Lasten sind ungleich verteilt. Eine kleine vermögende Minderheit wird von dieser Koalition geschont. Die Kanzlerin warnte ja vor Parallelgesellschaften. Doch durch Ihre Steuerpolitik haben Sie längst eine sehr reiche Parallelgesellschaft geschaffen. Das ist wirklich eine Gefahr für unser Land und für unsere Demokratie. Darum: Lassen Sie uns diesen Haushalt vom Kopf auf die Füße stellen!\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3716,thomas-lutze,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Da muss man ja schon fast ein schlechtes Gewissen haben, wenn man jetzt nach dem Schluss Ihrer Rede hier am Pult steht.\n\nAber zur Sache: Eine Lkw-Maut muss so angelegt sein, dass sie einen wirksamen Beitrag zur Finanzierung des Straßenverkehrs leistet.\n\nDeswegen war es richtig, dass sie 2005 eingeführt wurde. Richtig ist auch, dass nach zehn Jahren eine weitere Reform kommt. Aber die Vorlage der Regierung - es tut mir leid; auch Ihre Rede konnte mich insofern nicht überzeugen - ist völlig unzureichend und geht in vielen Punkten am Thema vorbei.\n\nStatt zum Beispiel weiter mit irgendwelchen dünnen Public-Private-Partnership-Finanzierungen zu arbeiten, sollte in der Verkehrspolitik endlich ein echtes Verursacherprinzip Einzug halten. Wussten Sie eigentlich, dass die Belastung durch einen beladenen 40-Tonner für Straßen und Brücken rund 60 000 Mal höher ist als durch einen 1 Tonne schweren Pkw? Im Schnitt kommen auf Autobahnen zurzeit rund 20 Pkw auf einen Lkw.\n\nWie sieht die Realität aus? Trotz der Maut ist es für viele große Spediteure offenbar billiger, mit Lkw vom Mittelmeer über die Autobahn an die Nordsee zu fahren, statt die Bahn oder ein Schiff zu benutzen. Wir brauchen aber eine Maut, die sich an den tatsächlichen Kosten des Fernverkehrs auf der Straße orientiert.\n\nEine neue Maut sollte für unsere Begriffe auch endlich Anreize schaffen. Sie haben es angedeutet, allerdings in die Zukunft verschoben. Aber für einen Spediteur muss es lohnenswert sein, wenn seine Lkw-Flotte weniger Abgase produziert. Es muss für einen Lkw-Spediteur lohnenswert sein, wenn seine Lkw weniger Lärm produzieren. Dazu machen die Grünen vernünftige Vorschläge, denen wir als Linke zustimmen.\n\nLetztendlich muss eine Lkw-Maut so angelegt sein, dass der Gütertransport im Fernverkehr auf der Straße nicht die Regel ist, wie es derzeit der Fall ist, sondern eine Ausnahme darstellt.\n\nLösen Sie sich endlich von der einflussreichen Lobby einiger weniger Großkonzerne im Speditionsbereich! Wenn Sie Brücken und Straßen reparieren wollen, dann brauchen Sie viel Geld.\n\nStatt aufwendig zu überlegen, wie Sie mit einer Pkw-Maut Millionen Berufspendlerinnen und Berufspendler abzocken können, müssen Sie verursachergerecht besteuern. Dann haben vielleicht auch regionale Produkte wieder eine Chance auf dem Markt.\n\nEs kann doch nicht sein, dass nach wie vor Äpfel aus Nordafrika billiger sind als Äpfel aus dem eigenen Bundesland.\n\nWir als Linke lehnen den Vorstoß der Regierung ab und sagen Ja zu der Gesetzesinitiative der Grünen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n15488,hans-joachim-fuchtel,\"Der Dodd-Frank Act ist eine US-amerikanische Rechtsvorschrift, nach der börsennotierte US-Unternehmen gehalten sind, öffentlich darzulegen, ob sie bei ihrer Produktion Konfliktmaterialien aus Ländern Afrikas benutzen. Diese Vorschrift besteht seit sechs Jahren, und wir sehen, dass seit der Verabschiedung ein robuster Trend zu mehr Verantwortung im Rohstoffbereich entlang der gesamten Lieferkette entstanden ist.\n\nKonsequenzen einer temporären Aussetzung bzw. Aufkündigung dieser Vorschrift für das Engagement der USA und amerikanischer Unternehmen insbesondere in der Demokratischen Republik Kongo und ihren Nachbarstaaten zur Einhaltung von Sorgfaltspflichten sind derzeit noch nicht abzusehen. Es bleibt abzuwarten, ob und gegebenenfalls wie führende US-Unternehmen, welche den Dodd-Frank Act und andere internationale Prozesse aktiv unterstützen, diese Vorschriften freiwillig weiter anwenden.\n\nUnabhängig davon wurde bekanntlich am 17. Mai 2017 die neue EU-Verordnung zu Konfliktmineralien verabschiedet. Die ist davon natürlich unabhängig. Sie bietet die Basis dafür, dass wir diese Problematik stärker ins Auge fassen können.\n\nDie Bundesregierung hätte sehr gerne eine kürzere Übergangsfrist, Herr Kollege. Wir werden das auch unter dem Gesichtspunkt dieser Entwicklung weiter betreiben. Wir müssen jedoch anerkennen, dass einige Mitgliedstaaten erst die zuständigen Behörden aufbauen müssen, um entsprechend mitwirken zu können. Das kostet einfach Zeit. Unter diesen Gesichtspunkten ist es bei der Anwendung des sogenannten Trilogverfahrens gar nicht so einfach, den bisher gefundenen Kompromiss zwischen dem Europäischen Parlament, dem Europäischen Rat und der Europäischen Kommission zu verändern.\n\nHerr Kollege, Minister Müller war der Allererste, der sich auf den Weg gemacht hat, hier überhaupt erst einmal Grundlagen zu schaffen und diese Probleme in Angriff zu nehmen. Wir haben mit dem Textilbündnis auf freiwilliger Basis immerhin erreicht, dass sich Firmen, die circa 45 bis 55 Prozent des Marktanteils im Textilbereich haben, zwischenzeitlich den Prinzipien verpflichtet haben. Das ist, wenn Sie mir die Bemerkung gestatten, doch mehr als null.\n\nEs wäre denkbar gewesen, dass das politische Kräfte vor uns begonnen hätten; denn die Probleme gab es auch schon damals. Daher sollten Sie durchaus dem Minister einen Vertrauensvorschuss geben. Zunächst sollen diese Maßnahmen freiwillig weitergeführt werden. Wir müssen dann prüfen, was daraus wird, bevor wir weitere Aussagen treffen.\n\nSie beziehen sich auf die Reuters-Meldung. Ich möchte konkret sagen, dass Frau Bundeskanzlerin Dr. Merkel sich zweimal geäußert hat. Am 19. Juni hat sie beim Civil20-Dialogforum eine Rede gehalten und mit den Vertretern der Zivilgesellschaft über den anstehenden G-20-Gipfel in Hamburg diskutiert. Am gleichen Tag hat die Bundeskanzlerin beim Verbrauchertag des Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverbandes eine Rede gehalten. Ich gebe Ihnen gern die originalen Redetexte, damit Sie das nachvollziehen können.\n\nBei ihren Ausführungen zu den Handelsverträgen der EU mit Afrika ging es der Kanzlerin darum, auf die Diskrepanz bei den Rahmenbedingungen für Handel zwischen den ärmsten Ländern und den sogenannten Schwellenländern, also den Mitteleinkommensländern, hinzuweisen. Die Kanzlerin hatte bereits vorher - es ist also keine ganz so große Neuigkeit an diesem Tag passiert - bei der Afrika-Konferenz am 12. und 13. Juni in Berlin betont, dass die Handelsbeziehungen mit Afrika fair ausgestaltet werden müssen. „Fair“ bedeutet, dass Wertschöpfung auch in Afrika stattfindet und dort Jobs entstehen können.\n\nSie hat in der weiteren Perspektive dargestellt, dass diese politischen Fragen in den anstehenden politischen Prozessen weiter bearbeitet werden müssen: Das ist der EU-Afrika-Gipfel im November dieses Jahres, und das ist der Post-Cotonou-Prozess, der, wie Sie auch wissen, zu weiteren Ergebnissen im Jahr 2020 geführt werden muss.\n\nNiemand hat je behauptet, dass die EPAs der letzte Schritt in der Entwicklung der europäisch-afrikanischen Handelsbeziehungen sind. Wir alle wissen, dass diese EPAs immer nur bestimmte Räume in Afrika herausgreifen und dass sie auch dort nicht von allen Ländern in gleichem Maße vorangebracht werden. Das führt automatisch dazu, dass natürlich nicht alles, was man sich hier vorgenommen hat, schon so in bester Form wirkt. Daher ist es doch konsequent, dass die Politik weiter prüft, was getan werden kann und muss, um sowohl in der Beziehung zwischen Afrika und Europa als auch in Afrika selbst Verbesserungen zu erreichen.\n\nIch möchte ein kleines Beispiel nennen. Wir haben zwar neue Möglichkeiten, dass die Länder Waren nach Europa ausführen. Wenn aber die Produkte nicht die geforderte Qualität haben oder nicht zertifiziert sind, dann steht das zwar auf dem Papier, ist aber in der Realität sehr schwierig. Deswegen ist auch eine der Aufgaben, dass wir zum Beispiel Zertifizierungsverfahren entwickeln und entwickeln helfen, damit das, was in den EPAs bis jetzt auf dem Papier steht, auch in der Praxis stattfinden kann.\n\nEs handelt sich ja immer um zwei Seiten, Herr Kollege Kekeritz. Dazu gehört auch ein starker Wille der betreffenden Länder, die vorankommen und die in den EPAs vom Grundsatz her formulierten Möglichkeiten nutzen möchten. Auf diese Art und Weise entstehen Aktivitäten, die von der EU akzeptiert werden. Das kann bei guter Wirksamkeit dazu beitragen, dass andere merken, dass solche EPAs insgesamt mehr Qualität haben. Außerdem sollten wir erst einmal abwarten, wie sie wirken; denn wir reden bisher über Dinge, die wir in ihrer vollen Ausgestaltung in der Praxis noch gar nicht erlebt haben.\n\nDas hat nichts damit zu tun, dass wir kurz vor der Wahl stehen.\n\nErstens. Es ist ein großes Verdienst der Bundeskanzlerin, dass sie dafür gesorgt hat, dass Afrika in der Gesamtdiskussion einen ganz neuen Stellenwert bekommen hat.\n\nZweitens. Wir stehen zu den bisherigen EPAs. Sie sind für uns Vereinbarungen, die so lange wirken, bis es Besseres gibt. Es ist gar nicht so leicht, Besseres zu schaffen, weil die WTO mit ihren 164 Mitgliedstaaten noch ein Wörtchen mitzureden hat. Deswegen gibt es gar keinen anderen Weg, als nun - im Herbst findet eine große gemeinsame Konferenz zwischen Afrika und Europa statt - diese Fragen aufzuwerfen und entsprechend zu analysieren. Es ist doch nicht verboten, nach Besserem zu suchen. Auch die Kanzlerin hat den Anspruch, das in die Diskussion einzubringen.\n\nEs geht um einen etwas anderen Sachverhalt als den, den Sie versuchen darzulegen. Der Sachverhalt ist, dass die EPAs einen Schritt darstellen, um vor allem den Schwellenländern die Problematik zu ersparen, plötzlich unter die Gesamtregularien der WTO zu fallen; das ist sehr wichtig.\n\nAber das blenden Sie in Ihren Überlegungen einfach aus. Wer solche Fragen stellt, sollte wagen, auch darauf eine Antwort zu geben.\n\nWas jetzt geschieht, baut auf dem auf, was bisher geschaffen wurde: Es werden weitere Überlegungen angestellt, die auf etwas Großräumigeres abzielen. Warum braucht man diese Großräumigkeit? Es ist ganz klar: Solange diese Kleinräumigkeit besteht und der Raum der Gültigkeit solcher Abkommen nur beschränkt ist, so lange ist es umso schwerer, die Wirtschaft im größeren Umfang nach Afrika zu bekommen; denn die Unternehmer möchten natürlich einen Wirtschaftsraum von einer gewissen Größe vorfinden, in dem sie ihre Produkte absetzen können. Wenn dieser Raum - auch durch die Ausgestaltung von Zollregelungen - sehr kleinräumig und sehr disponibel ist, dann ist das eine Riesenerschwernis, um einen Gesamtimpuls zu geben. Auch das ist ein wichtiges Argument, wenn man in der jetzigen Zeit diese Fragen voranbringen will.\n\nIch kann das Lichtsignal hier vorne nicht immer so gut sehen.\n\nIch meinte damit Mitteleinkommensländer - wenn Sie das bitte konkretisiert so zur Kenntnis nehmen wollen.\n\nZur Beantwortung dieser Frage haben wir die Dinge sehr genau untersucht. Wir weichen nicht davon ab, dass Fonds eine gute Lösung sind, um Problematiken, wie wir sie hier haben - es geht um Schwierigkeiten, mehr mittelständisches Wirtschaften nach Afrika zu bringen -, zu bewältigen. Das ist trotz dieser Überprüfung nach wie vor unsere Position. Wir sind ferner der Meinung, dass Luxemburg ein guter Standort ist, und zwar deswegen, weil dort die notwendigen Grundlagen gegeben sind, um einen solchen Fonds effektiv zu fahren.\n\nAußerdem sind wir für diese Konstruktionen, weil wir einfach viel mehr Geld auf den Markt bringen müssen, um all die Aufgaben anzugehen, die hier anzugehen sind. Schließlich werden durch die ODA-Quote gerade einmal 15 Prozent des Kapitalzuflusses in die Entwicklungsländer erbracht; 85 Prozent kommen vom Privatsektor. Wenn dem so ist, muss man Konstruktionen finden, durch die man diese Entwicklung verstärken kann, wenn man mehr Geld auf dem Markt haben möchte. Das geschieht mit den vorhandenen Konstruktionen; denn man muss Lösungen finden, die es für das private Kapital interessant machen, sich dort zu engagieren.\n\nSo etwas wird sehr wohl erreicht. Ich bin auch Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender der DEG, die für den Privatsektor innerhalb der KfW zuständig ist. Ich kann Ihnen sagen, dass die Zahl der Arbeitsplätze, die durch solche Konstruktionen geschaffen oder erhalten werden, wodurch in den Ländern dann auch Steuern gezahlt werden, eine sehr erfreuliche Entwicklung genommen hat und sich auf eine Größenordnung zubewegt, die uns veranlassen sollte, all den Finanzierungsinstrumenten noch mehr Aufmerksamkeit zu geben.\n\nDie DEG\n\n- AATIF, der Fonds, hängt mit der DEG zusammen - geht grundsätzlich so vor: Überall dort, wo sie an einem Fonds beteiligt ist, aus dem Unternehmen entwickelt oder gestützt werden, führt sie Monitoringverfahren durch und weiß durchaus sehr gut, zeitversetzt, welche Entwicklung ausgelöst wurde und was dabei herausgekommen ist.\n\nHerr Kollege, das kann ich Ihnen jetzt aus dem Stand beim besten Willen nicht in jedem Detail beantworten;\n\ndas muss ich Ihnen schriftlich nachliefern, was ich gern tue. Ich könnte Ihnen jetzt noch die Proportionen zwischen der privaten Seite und der öffentlichen aufzeigen, aber das tue ich dann auch im Zusammenhang mit meiner schriftlichen Mitteilung.\"\n2287,peter-weiß,\"Herr Präsident! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Da in drei der ostdeutschen Bundesländer dieses Jahr noch Landtagswahlen stattfinden, muss die Linke natürlich einen Antrag zum Thema Rente im Deutschen Bundestag einbringen.\n\nDer Punkt ist nur: Die Linke erzählt den Menschen in den neuen Bundesländern nie die wirkliche Wahrheit zum Thema Rente.\n\nDas Rentensystem ist zwischen Ost und West deswegen immer noch gespalten, weil es zwei Faktoren sind, nach denen die Rente im Osten berechnet wird. Weil der Lohnunterschied zwischen Ost und West leider immer noch relativ groß ist - Gott sei Dank nimmt er ab; aber er ist immer noch relativ groß -, wird der Rentenanspruch, den ein ostdeutscher Arbeitnehmer oder eine ostdeutsche Arbeitnehmerin bis heute erworben hat, morgen, wenn er oder sie den Rentenantrag stellt, um 18,7 Prozent erhöht. Das heißt, sie oder er hat ein besser gefülltes Rentenkonto als jemand Vergleichbares in Westdeutschland. Das ist die sogenannte Höherwertung. Das ist das Erste.\n\nDas Zweite ist: Das, was auf diesem Rentenkonto liegt, wird mit einem Zahlbetrag multipliziert, dem sogenannten Rentenwert. In der Tat ist der Rentenwert West derzeit noch 8 Prozent höher als der Rentenwert Ost. Aber jeder, der ein bisschen etwas von Mathematik versteht, wird erkennen: Wenn man morgen auf einen Schlag, sofort, gleiches Rentenrecht in Ost und West einführt, also der gleiche Zahlbetrag gilt und es keine -Höherwertung um 18,7 Prozent gibt, dann hat der Ostrentner oder die Ostrentnerin weniger, als ihm oder ihr nach dem derzeitigen Rentenrecht zusteht. Das ist der Punkt.\n\nUm es klar und deutlich zu sagen: Wer einfach nur alles angleicht, der sorgt für ein Minus für die Rentnerinnen und Rentner im Osten. Das ist der Punkt.\n\nDie Grünen erklären hier mutig: Ja, das wollen wir.\n\nDie Linke verschweigt, was sie wirklich vorhat. Sie will nämlich nicht gleiches Rentenrecht in Ost und West - das beantragt sie auch nicht -, sondern sie will, dass Deutschland in Sachen Rente weiter in zwei Zonen aufgeteilt wird.\n\nSie will Folgendes machen: Sie will die Höherwertung der Rentenansprüche, die man gesammelt hat, beibehalten, aber den höheren Zahlbetrag West darauf anwenden. Was hat das zur Folge? Dass ein Arbeitnehmer oder eine Arbeitnehmerin im Osten, der oder die die gleiche Arbeit hinter sich gebracht hat und das Gleiche verdient hat wie ein Arbeitnehmer oder eine Arbeitnehmerin im Westen,\n\neine höhere Rente bekommt als der Arbeitnehmer oder die Arbeitnehmerin im Westen. Man schafft also eine neue Ungerechtigkeit, nämlich für die Westrentner und Westrentnerinnen. Das ist die Politik der Linken.\n\nBitte schön.\n\nDoch!\n\nGuckt doch euren Antrag an!\n\nHerr Kollege Birkwald, erstens haben wir in der Tat in vielen Berufen nach wie vor einen deutlichen Lohnunterschied zwischen Ost und West.\n\nDeswegen haben wir die Höherwertung von Rentenansprüchen um 18,7 Prozent. Deswegen wollen wir diese Höherwertung nicht auf einen Schlag abschaffen.\n\nZweitens. In der Tat haben wir auch sonst Lohnunterschiede. Die Rentenversicherung ist so gebaut, dass sie beitragsbezogen ist. Weil wir aber wissen, dass im Osten weniger verdient wird, gibt es diese Höherwertung.\n\nIch gebe Ihnen ein anderes Beispiel. Ich komme aus Baden-Württemberg, einem Bundesland, in dem durchschnittlich sehr gut verdient wird. Schleswig-Holstein dagegen hat ein Lohnniveau, das bei 75 Prozent des baden-württembergischen Niveaus liegt. Die Kolleginnen und Kollegen aus Schleswig-Holstein könnten mit gleichem Recht fragen: Warum ist angesichts solcher Lohnunterschiede 1 Euro Rentenbeitrag in Baden-Württemberg und in Schleswig-Holstein gleich viel wert? Diese Frage könnte zum Beispiel Frau Kollegin Hiller-Ohm aus Lübeck stellen.\n\nJa, wir wollen ein einheitliches Rentenrecht in Ost und West. Aber wenn wir es auf einen Schlag einführen würden, hieße dies, die Höherwertung würde wegfallen, und damit hätten die Rentnerinnen und Rentner im Osten weniger, wenn sie morgen einen Rentenantrag stellen würden, als es nach heutigem Recht der Fall wäre. Das wollen wir von der Großen Koalition nicht.\n\nHerr Birkwald, wenn die Linken Gerechtigkeit tatsächlich ernst nehmen - das tun sie angeblich -, dann darf nicht das passieren, was gemäß Ihrem Antrag passieren würde, nämlich dass plötzlich die Beitragszahlung eines westdeutschen Arbeitnehmers oder einer westdeutschen Arbeitnehmerin weniger wert ist als die von jemandem aus Ostdeutschland. Es geht erst recht nicht, dass die Verhältnisse umgekehrt werden. Ihr Antrag bedeutet: Spaltung Deutschlands auf Dauer.\n\nDamit habe ich dieses komplexe System einmal dargestellt. Natürlich ist es richtig, dass wir 24 Jahre nach der deutschen Einheit zu einem gemeinsamen System in der Rente kommen müssen,\n\naber doch bitte so, dass es nicht auf der einen oder anderen Seite Verliererinnen und Verlierer in großer Zahl gibt.\n\nDas Rentensystem - Frau Kollegin Kolbe hat es ja erklärt - ist deshalb unterschiedlich angelegt worden, weil man gedacht hat, dass die Lohngleichheit in Ost und West relativ schnell zustande kommt. Bei Lohngleichheit müsste es keine Höherwertung geben, und der Rentenwert in Ost und West wäre der gleiche. Wir wissen heute, dass dies nicht automatisch geschieht.\n\nAber wir haben in der Ost-West-Angleichung eine neue Dynamik. Letztes Jahr gab es eine deutliche Anhebung des Rentenwerts Ost. Zum 1. Juli dieses Jahres wird dies erneut der Fall sein. Das Lohnniveau gleicht sich also schneller an, als wir gedacht haben.\n\nZum Schluss werden wir - Zielmarke ist das Jahr 2019, also das Auslaufen des Solidarpakts - hoffentlich ein gemeinsames Rentenrecht in Ost und West durch einen Gesetzgebungsakt des Deutschen Bundestages schaffen. Aber wir sollten dies bitte so tun, dass es weder im Osten noch im Westen Verlierer und Verliererinnen gibt und dass keine neuen Ungerechtigkeiten geschaffen werden, die dafür sorgen, dass sich plötzlich Rentner aus dem Westen bei uns über das Rentenrecht beschweren. Wir müssen wirklich ein gleiches Rentenrecht schaffen, was bedeutet, dass jeder in die Rentenversicherung eingezahlte Euro das gleiche wert ist - im Osten und im Westen. Das ist unser Ziel, das wir miteinander erreichen wollen.\n\nWenn die Linken im Osten diese Wahrheit im Wahlkampf erzählen würden, dann wüssten die Menschen, dass die Rentnerinnen und Rentner in Ost und West bei der Großen Koalition besser aufgehoben sind.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n7381,sevim-dagdelen,\"Herr Kollege Veit, Sie haben so getan, als wenn dieses Gesetzespaket nur noch Verbesserungen für Betroffene enthielte. Sie haben das so begründet, dass man dem Europarecht damit Genüge tun will. Die SPD hat in ihrem Wahlprogramm versprochen - der SPD-Vorsitzende war im Wahlkampf 2013 Klinken putzen bei den türkischen Migrantenorganisationen -, die Sprachnachweise beim Ehegattennachzug aufzuheben, wenn man in die Regierung kommt.\n\nEs gab 2014 ein Urteil des EuGH, das Dogan-Urteil. Der Europäische Gerichtshof hat geurteilt, dass Sprachnachweise beim Ehegattennachzug europarechtswidrig sind, weil sie im Falle von türkischen Staatsangehörigen gegen Assoziationsrecht verstoßen. Daraufhin gab es erst einmal eine Ansage des Auswärtigen Amts - ein SPD-Minister steht diesem Ministerium vor -, dass das Urteil umgesetzt wird und dass man die Sprachnachweise aufheben möchte. Es gab inzwischen auch andere Urteile. Am 9. Juli wird der Europäische Gerichtshof noch einmal urteilen. Da wird geprüft, ob Sprachnachweise im Rahmen des Ehegattennachzugs auch gegen die Familienzusammenführungsrichtlinie verstoßen.\n\nMeine Frage: Wenn Sie doch europarechtskonforme Gesetze vorlegen wollen, warum heben Sie dann nicht endlich die europarechtswidrige, schändliche Regelung auf, den Ehegattennachzug mit der Voraussetzung eines Sprachnachweises zu verknüpfen, damit die Schikane gegen Eheleute ein Ende hat?\"\n10169,britta-haßelmann,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn die unabhängige Wahlkreiskommission - das geschieht im Übrigen nach jeder Bundestagswahl - einberufen wird und ihre Vorschläge vorlegt, dann sorgt das selten für Begeisterung; denn meistens geht es um Anpassungen und Veränderungen von Wahlkreisen. Gewohnte Wahlkreisgrenzen verschieben sich manchmal - gerade wurden ein paar Beispiele genannt -, und Kommunen, die eigentlich zu Landkreis A gehören, werden künftig einem benachbarten Landkreis B zugeschlagen. Das nimmt nicht nur den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern eine Konstanz, sondern stellt auch Gebietsstrukturen von Parteien vor neue Herausforderungen.\n\nJeder und jede von uns weiß, dass es nicht nur bei uns in den Fraktionen, im parlamentarischen Geschehen für Diskussionen sorgt, sondern natürlich auch vor Ort, wenn Wahlkreise neu zugeschnitten werden, obwohl man es eigentlich seit ewigen Zeiten anders gewohnt war. Dennoch gibt es dafür gute Gründe. Für die parlamentarische Repräsentanz darf nämlich die Bevölkerungszahl eines Wahlkreises nicht zu sehr von der durchschnittlichen Bevölkerungszahl anderer Wahlkreise abweichen. Das ist der eigentliche Grund, weshalb wir als Wahlkreiskommission überhaupt zusammenkommen und uns, das Ganze betrachtend, überlegen, ob ein Neuzuschnitt notwendig ist. Bei einer Abweichung von über 25 Prozent müssen wir - ob wir das im Einzelfall persönlich gut finden oder nicht, weil wir die Region bzw. die Kommune kennen - eine Änderung vornehmen. Dazu sind wir rechtlich verpflichtet.\n\nÜber ein Jahr haben nun die Berichterstatterinnen und Berichterstatter, die Kolleginnen und Kollegen unserer Fraktionen, die Vorschläge diskutiert. Die Drucksachennummer liegt heute vor. Wir haben das diskutiert - das wissen Sie aus den Vorbereitungen -, um gemeinsam zu einem Konsens zu kommen und nicht auf Mehrheitsentscheidungen setzen zu müssen. Das ist eine Tradition unseres parlamentarischen Miteinanders; das vollziehen wir nach jeder Bundestagswahl, und nach jeder Bundestagswahl gibt es kleinteilige Änderungen.\n\nAufatmen können an dieser Stelle Niedersachsen, Sachsen, das Saarland, Berlin, Schleswig-Holstein, Sachsen-Anhalt und Nordrhein-Westfalen. Dort bleiben alle Wahlkreise unverändert, und darüber besteht in der Regel Freude.\n\n- Ich sehe gerade, dass genau die Kolleginnen und Kollegen meiner Fraktion aus diesen Bundesländern heute anwesend sind. - Weniger glücklich ist dieser Gesetzentwurf - darauf sind meine Vorrednerinnen und Vorredner schon eingegangen - für Thüringen. Da die Zahl der Wahlkreise in den einzelnen Ländern deren Bevölkerungsanteil widerspiegeln sollte, wird Thüringen im 19. Deutschen Bundestag leider einen Wahlkreis nach Bayern abgeben müssen.\n\nIch bin Ihnen, werte Kollegin, dankbar, dass Sie deutlich gemacht haben, dass wir bei dieser Entscheidung bzw. bei diesem Vorschlag die aktuellen Daten bzw. Bevölkerungszahlen nicht einfach ausblenden konnten, sondern uns damit befassen mussten. Da sich die statistischen Daten der letzten Jahre, von der letzten Bundestagswahl bis heute, in diesem Spannungsfeld zwischen Hessen, Thüringen und Bayern verändert haben, ließen die objektiven Zahlen keinen anderen Raum, als diese Entscheidung vorzunehmen. Ich kann verstehen, dass es auch in meiner Fraktion und meiner Partei als schwierig angesehen wird, dass Thüringen von dieser Entscheidung betroffen ist. Aber ich sehe aufgrund der aktuellen Zahlen keine andere Möglichkeit.\n\nIch will zum Schluss noch einen anderen Punkt ansprechen. Wir reden ja immer von einer Verkleinerung des Bundestages; das war einmal unser gemeinsames Ziel. Leider haben wir es mit diesem Gesetzentwurf versäumt, dieses Thema anzugehen. An dieser Stelle hätten wir uns das vornehmen und die Zahl der Wahlkreise reduzieren können. Damit hätte die realistische Chance bestanden, dass dem nächsten Deutschen Bundestag weniger Abgeordnete angehören in Anerkennung des Verfassungsurteils, -\n\n- nach dem die Zweitstimmen eins zu eins repräsentiert sein müssen. Davor haben Sie von Union und SPD sich leider gedrückt. Das ist sehr bedauerlich. Wer die Verkleinerung des Bundestages will, hätte sich da nicht wegducken dürfen.\"\n15076,karl-schiewerling,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Frau Kollegin Zimmermann, dafür, dass Sie relativ wenige Wähler haben und in Nordrhein-Westfalen sogar aus dem Landtag geflogen sind, machen Sie aber ganz schön viel Krach; das will ich Ihnen in aller Deutlichkeit sagen.\n\nIch gehe auf Ihre Argumente deswegen nicht ein, weil Sie immer wieder mit derartig viel Leidenschaft so viele Dinge durcheinanderwerfen, dass es eine halbe Stunde brauchte, um Ihre falschen Aussagen so auseinanderzuziselieren, dass endlich deutlich wird, dass Sie den Leuten permanent Sand in die Augen streuen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir verabschieden heute zwei weitere Gesetze im Bereich der Rente. Nachdem wir vorhin das Betriebsrentenstärkungsgesetz verabschiedet haben, geht es jetzt um die Erwerbsminderungsrente und die Angleichung der Ostrenten an die Westrenten. In dieser Legislaturperiode haben wir im Bereich der Rentenpolitik vieles auf den Weg gebracht: Mütterrente, Rente mit 63, Flexirente. Diese Koalition hat in dieser Legislaturperiode gemeinsam viel bewegt.\n\nIch glaube, dass es wichtig ist, einmal darauf hinzuweisen, dass es den Menschen im Land dank dieser Reformen besser geht.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, mit dem Rentenüberleitungs-Abschlussgesetz greifen wir ein wenig in die ohnehin positive Entwicklung der Rentenanpassung ein. Frau Staatssekretärin Lösekrug-Möller hat vorhin die Zahlen genannt und gesagt, was sich alles im Laufe der Rentenüberleitung seit 1990 getan hat.\n\nWir kommen von Ostrenten in Höhe von 40 Prozent gegenüber den Westrenten und sind in diesem Jahr bei 95,7 Prozent angelangt, weil die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung und die Entwicklung der Löhne dazu geführt haben, dass die Anpassung nahezu automatisch vollzogen wurde.\n\nMit diesem Gesetz, das wir verabschieden, machen wir der Bevölkerung in den neuen Bundesländern - die schon lange keine neuen Bundesländer mehr sind - klar: Wir wollen, dass die Anpassung bis 2024 endgültig erfolgt. Alles, was bis dahin aus wirtschaftlicher Kraft und durch positive Lohnentwicklungen geschieht, entlastet uns aber davon, mit zusätzlichen staatlichen Mitteln oder mit Beitragsmitteln dafür zu sorgen.\n\nWir können stolz sein, dass wir die Erwerbsminderungsrente in dieser Legislaturperiode zum zweiten Mal verbessern. Für einen Durchschnittsrentner heißt das 80 Euro mehr.\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Das ist eine gute Entwicklung, die wir jetzt eingeleitet haben, und darüber bin ich froh. Gleichzeitig muss ich sehr deutlich sagen, dass es mich sehr betroffen macht, wie viele Menschen in relativ jungen Jahren - mit 48, 49 Jahren - in die Erwerbsminderungsrente gehen. Die Gründe sind häufig psychosomatische Erkrankungen. All diese Entwicklungen die dahinter stehen, machen uns sehr betroffen.\n\nDeswegen ist es richtig, dass wir das, was wir bei der Flexirente beschlossen haben, hier jetzt auch tatsächlich umsetzen, nämlich mehr Prävention, mehr Rehabilitation und die Stärkung des Einzelnen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich will die Gelegenheit gerne nutzen und der Staatssekretärin Lösekrug-Möller an dieser Stelle und von ganzem Herzen für eine hervorragende Zusammenarbeit zu danken. Dass wir die vorliegenden Gesetze, das Bundesteilhabegesetz und viele andere Dinge in dieser Koalition so hinbekommen haben, verdanken wir dir, liebe Gabriele, deiner Fähigkeit zur Moderation, deiner Fähigkeit zum Ausgleich und all deinen Möglichkeiten, die du eingesetzt hast, um Menschen zusammenzuführen.\n\nWir wissen, dass dein Platz nicht in erster Linie auf dem Sonnendeck der Politik, sondern mehr im Maschinenraum war. Offensichtlich hat dies aber dazu geführt, dass wir gut vorangekommen sind.\n\nIch möchte dir für all diese Dinge, für die gute Zusammenarbeit und für all das, was du an exzellentem Parlamentarismus vorbildlich gezeigt hast, von ganzem Herzen danken, und ich wünsche dir für die Zeit, die jetzt vor dir liegt, alles erdenklich Gute und Gottes Segen.\"\n6798,bettina-hornhues,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Der 1. August 2013 ist ein Meilenstein in der Familienpolitik und der Startschuss für einen massiven Ausbau des Kinderbetreuungsangebots in Deutschland. Mit dem von da an geltenden Rechtsanspruch hat jedes Kind ab dem vollendeten ersten Lebensjahr fortan Anspruch auf Förderung in Kindertageseinrichtungen und in der Kindertagespflege.\n\nKnapp zwei Jahre nach der Novellierung des Kinderförderungsgesetzes hat sich bereits vieles positiv entwickelt. Dies kann ich nicht nur als Politikerin, sondern auch als Mutter von drei Kindern bewerten. Ich erinnere mich nur zu gut an die Schwierigkeiten, die es noch einige Jahre vor dem Rechtsanspruch bei der Suche nach einem passenden Betreuungsangebot für die unter dreijährigen Kinder gab.\n\nAls meine Kinder in diesem Alter waren, gab es meistens lediglich Spielkreise an zweieinhalb Vormittagen. Seit 2013 hat sich die Lage deutlich verbessert - der CDU sei Dank.\n\nSeit März 2014 wurde fast ein Drittel der Kinder unter drei Jahren in einer Kindertageseinrichtung oder in der öffentlich geförderten Kindertagespflege betreut. In den letzten Jahren ist die Betreuungsquote bei den unter Dreijährigen bereits immens gestiegen, und mit dem fortlaufenden Ausbau des Betreuungsangebotes werden bald noch weitere Plätze zur Verfügung stehen.\n\nFerner zeigen uns die Zahlen schon heute, dass die Eltern mit der Betreuungssituation vor Ort in der Regel zufrieden sind. Die meisten hatten keine Schwierigkeiten bei der Platzsuche. Bereits 58 Prozent der Eltern, also mehr als die Hälfte, hatten bereits sechs Monate nach der Geburt ihres Kindes eine Platzzusage. Somit konnten sie ihrem Wiedereinstieg ins Erwerbsleben in Ruhe entgegensehen.\n\nIch weiß natürlich auch, dass dies von Kommune zu Kommune stark variieren kann und dass die Bundesländer unterschiedliche Ausgangssituationen bei der Einführung des Rechtsanspruchs hatten. Auch heute noch sind zwischen den Regionen innerhalb der Länder - sei es in der Stadt oder im ländlichen Raum - große Unterschiede in der Betreuungssituation auszumachen. Das wird eine Aufgabe sein, der wir uns als Nächstes stellen müssen.\n\nWir dürfen aber nicht nur die Bundesländer vergleichen, sondern müssen auch das Betreuungsangebot in den Kommunen bedarfsgerecht fördern und weiter ausbauen und dabei den spezifischen Bedarf der vor Ort lebenden Familien berücksichtigen. Dabei wird der Bund die Länder und die Kommunen auch weiterhin tatkräftig unterstützen.\n\nIn vielen Bundesländern ist der Betreuungsbedarf aber noch nicht erfüllt, obwohl die Betreuungsmittel bereitstehen. So zeigt eine Übersicht über den Abruf der Mittel aus dem Bundesinvestitionsprogramm, dass von insgesamt 580 Millionen Euro ganze 120 Millionen Euro noch nicht abgerufen worden sind. Hier haben einige Länder also noch ihre Hausaufgaben zu machen.\n\nDa wir gerade bei Hausaufgaben sind: Frau Brantner, Sie sprachen gerade meinen Wahlkreis Bremen an und stellten fest, dass der Betreuungsschlüssel dort toll sei. Die Betreuungsquote, für die in Bremen eine Sozialsenatorin, die Ihrer Partei angehört, Verantwortung trägt, liegt aber lediglich bei 26,9 Prozent. Hier müssen noch Hausaufgaben gemacht werden.\n\nNach dem Grundgesetz haben die Länder die Pflicht und die Verantwortung, den U-3-Ausbau und ein bedarfsgerechtes Angebot zur Erfüllung des Rechtsanspruches zu gewährleisten und zu finanzieren. Klar ist auch: Jede Stadt und jede Gemeinde muss ihren Bedarf an Betreuungsplätzen selbst ermitteln.\n\nMir liegt bei dieser Debatte noch ein anderer Aspekt am Herzen; denn der Erfolg beim Ausbau der Kinderbetreuung ist für mich vor allem auch ein Fortschritt im Hinblick auf die bessere Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf. Wenn wir jetzt nicht nur über den Ausbau der Kinderbetreuung, sondern auch über die Qualität sprechen, sind wir schnell bei den Rahmenbedingungen in den Kindertageseinrichtungen. Ein entscheidendes Kriterium für eine bessere Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf sind für mich dabei die Öffnungszeiten der Kitas. In einer Arbeitswelt, in der Arbeitnehmer erhöhten Anforderungen ausgesetzt sind, immer mobiler und flexibler zu werden, müssen auch passende, flexible Betreuungsangebote für die Kinder zur Verfügung stehen. Natürlich muss trotz alledem das Wohl des Kindes im Vordergrund stehen, aber wir müssen eben auch dafür Sorge tragen, dass erwerbstätige Mütter - dabei denke ich gerade an Alleinerziehende und an Frauen, die im Schichtdienst arbeiten - Beruf und Familie miteinander vereinbaren können. Diesen Frauen müssen wir es durch gute Rahmenbedingungen ermöglichen, am Erwerbsleben teilzunehmen und während dieser Zeit ihre Kinder flexibel und gut betreut zu wissen.\n\nWenn wir über Betreuungszeiten und Öffnungszeiten von Kindertageseinrichtungen sprechen, müssen wir die Sache noch weiter denken. Ich würde mir wünschen, dass wir in diesem Zusammenhang auch über den Übergang von der Betreuung der ganz Kleinen hin zur Betreuung der Grundschulkinder sprechen. Denn für viele Eltern tauchen mit der Einschulung der Kinder leider wieder neue Betreuungshürden auf.\n\nDamit Familien beim Übergang der Kinder in die Grundschule nicht wieder vor den gleichen Problemen stehen, sollten wir zukünftig nach einer ganzheitlichen Lösung suchen.\n\nDenn das heißt für mich fortschrittliche und zukunftszugewandte Familienpolitik.\n\nIch wünsche Ihnen sonnige Pfingsttage.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n2033,johanna-wanka,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Ich denke, wir können stolz auf unser Ausbildungssystem sein. Die Jugendarbeitslosenquote in Deutschland liegt unter 8 Prozent. Nur Österreich hat ebenfalls eine einstellige Prozentzahl. Alle anderen europäischen Länder haben ansonsten zum Teil sehr hohe zweistellige Prozentzahlen, wie wir wissen.\n\nDas hohe Qualifikationsniveau, das wir in Deutschland haben, ist ein großer Wettbewerbsvorteil. Jetzt als Bundesministerin erlebe ich es mehr als noch als Landesministerin, dass ausländische Wirtschaftsvertreter - zum Beispiel aus Italien oder aus den USA - sagen, dass die Fachkräftesituation in Deutschland ein großer Wettbewerbsvorteil ist. An verschiedenen Stellen wird auch versucht, es in ähnlicher Weise zu machen. Zuletzt hat uns sogar - man höre und staune - die OECD dafür gelobt.\n\nDie berufliche Ausbildung ist also ein wichtiges Rückgrat unseres Wirtschaftssystems. Man darf es aber keinesfalls nur in volkswirtschaftlicher Hinsicht betrachten, indem man sagt: Wir brauchen Fachkräfte etc. - Wir müssen auch sehen, dass jedem Einzelnen ein Berufsabschluss ein ganzes Leben lang nutzt. Er ist für seinen Lebensweg, für seine individuellen Perspektiven und für seine gesellschaftliche Teilhabe außerordentlich wichtig. Berufsbildung ist deswegen sowohl im Hinblick auf Bildungsgerechtigkeit als auch in volkswirtschaftlicher Hinsicht sehr wichtig.\n\nDer Berufsbildungsbericht enthält viele Tabellen und Darstellungen. Er zeigt viel Positives. Er zeigt aber auch, dass wir in diesem Bereich Probleme haben: Es zeigen sich schon jetzt Tendenzen hin zu einer Veränderung der Ausbildungsmarktsituation. Darauf haben wir zum Teil schon reagiert, müssen aber auch noch weiter reagieren. Der Bericht zeigt deutlich auf, welche Punkte für unser Handeln in Zukunft sehr wichtig sind. Ich möchte Sie Ihnen nennen:\n\nErstens. 2013 wurden weniger Ausbildungsverträge neu abgeschlossen als im Vorjahr und noch weniger als in den Jahren zuvor. Das Minus gegenüber dem Vorjahr beträgt 3,5 Prozent.\n\nZweitens. Die Unternehmen haben zunehmend Probleme, geeignete Bewerber oder überhaupt Bewerber für ihre freien Ausbildungsplätze zu finden. Das heißt, wir haben in Deutschland im Moment einen Höchststand an unbesetzten Ausbildungsstellen.\n\nDrittens. Es gelingt trotzdem nicht, dass alle von der Schule direkt in die Ausbildung gehen. Wir haben in dem Bereich über 20 000 unversorgte Bewerber. Das sind zwar von der Zahl her weniger, als es freie Plätze gibt, aber wir haben auch bei denen, die eine Alternative zur Ausbildung begonnen haben, die also ein Praktikum oder etwas anderes machen, einen Anstieg.\n\nViertens. Analog zu den eben genannten Punkten zeigen auch viele Untersuchungen, dass es zunehmend schwieriger wird, dafür zu sorgen, dass betriebliches Angebot und Nachfrage von Jugendlichen zusammenpassen. Wir haben da also - so wird bei uns im Haus gesagt - ein Matchingproblem; auf Deutsch könnte man vielleicht Passproblem sagen. Dieses Passproblem stellt sich nach Beruf und auch nach Region sehr unterschiedlich dar; aber es ist ein generelles Problem.\n\nFünftens. Es zeigt sich im Bericht deutlich, dass immer weniger Betriebe ausbilden. In den letzten Jahren - nehmen wir einmal die Zahlen ab 1990 - ist sowohl die Zahl der Betriebe insgesamt als auch die Zahl der Betriebe, die ausbilden, gewachsen. Das heißt, dass es eine relativ parallele Entwicklung gab. Jetzt gibt es eine prozentuale Absenkung. Gemessen an der Zahl der Betriebe bilden nur knapp über 21 Prozent aus. Das ist prozentual der tiefste Stand an ausbildenden Betrieben seit 1990.\n\nEin letzter Punkt, der die Berichte über dieses Thema in den Zeitungen sehr stark bestimmt: Die Zahl der Studienanfänger war 2013 zum ersten Mal höher als die Zahl derer, die eine berufliche Ausbildung begonnen haben.\n\nDie Analyse des Berichts ist nicht nur von den Koalitionsfraktionen, sondern auch von den Grünen und zum Teil von den Linken sehr ähnlich gehandhabt worden. Alle erkennen die Herausforderungen und Probleme. Aber auch die Vorschläge in Bezug darauf, was verändert werden kann, liegen gar nicht so weit auseinander. Es gibt einige, die unrealistisch sind; aber vieles liegt sehr eng beieinander. Unsere Mitarbeiter sagen, dass sie bei fast 70 Prozent der Vorschläge schon in der Vorhand sind, dass da etwas gemacht bzw. in Angriff genommen wird. Trotzdem muss aber insgesamt gesagt werden, dass niemand - weder hier im Haus noch bei den Kammern und den Sozialpartnern, wie sich in vielen Gesprächen herausstellte - eine einfache Lösung hat.\n\nWir alle sehen aber, dass es ein großes Problem gibt. Wenn es uns nicht gelingt, entsprechend viele Facharbeiter auszubilden, kann das in den nächsten Jahren eine riesige Innovationsbremse für Deutschland darstellen. Bei all dem, was wir vonseiten der Bundesregierung in dieser Legislaturperiode schon getan haben, geht es - das haben wir auch im Koalitionsvertrag festgeschrieben - dezidiert um den Schwerpunkt „Berufliche Ausbildung stärken“. Wir nennen das Initiative „Chance Beruf“.\n\nDer Qualitätsmix, den wir auch immer im Verhältnis zwischen akademischer und beruflicher Ausbildung hatten, ist für Deutschland wichtig. Deswegen muss ein politischer Schwerpunkt - hier geht es noch nicht um die einzelnen Maßnahmen - in dieser Legislaturperiode sein, die Attraktivität der beruflichen Ausbildung zu stärken. Dabei geht es um Qualitätsverbesserung und Gleichwertigkeit. Formal ist die Gleichwertigkeit an vielen Stellen gegeben - zum Beispiel zwischen Bachelor und Meister -, aber nicht in der Wahrnehmung der Menschen. Das gilt für die jungen Menschen, aber vor allen Dingen auch für die Eltern und die Großeltern.\n\nEs ist deswegen wichtig, effektive Maßnahmen zu ergreifen, damit sehr viele junge Menschen von der Schule direkt in die Ausbildung gehen und keine Umwege machen. Wir haben erfolgreiche Modelle erprobt. Ich sage allerdings: In Deutschland kann man Modelle ohne Ende machen; wichtig ist aber immer, dass so etwas auch systematisch in großem Umfang bzw. flächendeckend gemacht wird.\n\nDas heißt, wir müssen aus dem, was wir erprobt haben und was sich bewährt hat, den Regelfall machen.\n\nAls Beispiel nenne ich die Bildungsketten. Dabei handelt es sich um eine Initiative des BMBF. Bei ihr ging es zum einen darum, Schulabbrüche zu verhindern, und zum anderen, für eine Berufsausbildung zu motivieren. Das sollte zum Teil durch Ehrenamtliche begleitet werden, um den Abschluss bzw. den Berufseinstieg zu schaffen. Diese Bildungsketten sind sehr effektiv und werden überall geschätzt. Sie enthalten individuelle und präventive Beratung; das stellt für mich ein Stück weit eine Zauberformel dafür dar, dass es gelingt, die berufliche Ausbildung zu stärken. Es soll also nicht erst dann ein Nachhaken geben, wenn man merkt, dass es bei einem 27-Jährigen nicht funktioniert hat, sondern es soll individuell und präventiv beraten werden. Die Bildungsketten sind dafür ein Beispiel. Wir haben mit verschiedenen Bundesländern - zum Beispiel Thüringen und Hessen - schon Verträge geschlossen. Sie wollen das auch mit eigenen Mitteln in großem Maßstab entsprechend implementieren. Potenzialanalysen und Möglichkeiten zum Ausprobieren gehören dazu.\n\nWir wollen aber auch die anderen vorhandenen Förderinstrumente wie „Schulverweigerung - Die 2. Chance“ integrieren sowie neue entwickeln, die wir dann vorstellen werden.\n\nAn dieser Stelle eine Bemerkung zum Übergangssystem. Zu diesem Punkt wird später sicher vonseiten der Linken gesagt, dass soundso viele im Übergangssystem sind.\n\n- Ist es nicht so, Frau Hein? Doch, das nehme ich an.\n\nIch erinnere daran: Das Übergangssystem war wichtig und notwendig, als wir deutschlandweit viel zu wenig Ausbildungsplätze hatten. Die Länder haben sich mit großen finanziellen Mitteln daran beteiligt. Hunderttausende junger Leute sind in diesem Übergangssystem gewesen. Von 2005 bis jetzt ist es gelungen, die Zahl derer, die sich im Übergangssystem befinden, um ein Drittel zu reduzieren. Es gibt die Ansicht, das Übergangssystem abzuschaffen. Das halte ich für völlig verfehlt. Wir brauchen das Übergangssystem zum einen, um die Ausbildungsfähigkeit der Schulabbrecher, die es trotz aller Bemühungen nicht schaffen, zu sichern; zum Glück sind es nur noch 5,9 Prozent und nicht mehr 12 Prozent. Zum anderen ermöglicht das Übergangssystem jungen Leuten, notwendige Voraussetzungen zu erhalten; sie können so beispielsweise, wenn sie Erzieher werden wollen, ein Praktikum absolvieren. Das heißt, wir brauchen ein Übergangssystem, das wirklich zur Ausbildung befähigt bzw. dabei Unterstützung leistet. Weil die Länder dieses System in starkem Maße tragen, wollen wir vonseiten meines Hauses mit ihnen verhandeln, wie man es zurückbauen kann. Hier geht es ja auch um unbefristete Arbeitsplätze für Lehrer und anderes, was sich über die ganze Zeit entwickelt hat.\n\nEs geht aber nicht nur darum, die nicht so leistungsstarken Schüler in die Ausbildung zu bekommen, sondern es geht uns auch darum, dass leistungsstarke Schüler eine Ausbildung aufnehmen, statt dass alle in die Hochschulen drängen und wir dann hohe Abbrecherzahlen zu verzeichnen haben. Wie kann man das erreichen? Auch hier gibt es vielfältigste Ansichten. Auf keinen Fall kann man es durch einfache Verbote erreichen. Das funktioniert nicht. Der NC, also die Zulassungsbeschränkung, ist eine Möglichkeit der Steuerung. Nehmen Sie aber zum Beispiel den Studiengang Psychologie. Bundesweit gibt es an allen Hochschulen Zulassungsbeschränkungen.\n\nDer Effekt ist, dass nun in Innsbruck heftig darüber diskutiert wird, dass 90 Prozent derjenigen, die dort Psychologie studieren, Deutsche sind. Einfach zu beschränken, heißt also nicht, dass sie dann entsprechend eine Ausbildung beginnen,\n\nsondern auch hier gilt: individuell und präventiv.\n\nEs muss also deutlich gemacht werden, dass jeder nur dann ein Studium beginnen soll, wenn er die Chance hat, es wirklich erfolgreich abzuschließen, und dafür gesorgt werden, dass nicht so viele nur aus Statusgründen ein Hochschulstudium aufnehmen.\n\nEtwas, was wir dafür tun können, ist, die Durchlässigkeit, das Hin und Her zu erhöhen, sodass man mit einer guten beruflichen Ausbildung an die Hochschule gehen kann, sodass aber auch die, die abbrechen - die wird es immer geben -, von der Wirtschaft als kluge junge Leute gut aufgenommen werden. Dass wir diese Durchlässigkeit in Deutschland nicht haben, hielt ich immer für einen Mangel. Daran, dass es zu dieser geringen Durchlässigkeit kam, waren wir zum Teil selbst schuld. Viele Jahre galt in Deutschland die These: Bei uns ist das Abitur die allgemeine Hochschulzugangsberechtigung und nichts anderes. Das ist jetzt rechtlich aufgebrochen; Möglichkeiten gibt es jetzt. Damit funktioniert es aber nicht ohne Weiteres. Es gehören viele flankierende Maßnahmen dazu, um zu erreichen, dass aufgrund der Durchlässigkeit Betriebe eher junge Leute bekommen, weil sie wissen: Ich kann weiter, wenn ich will. - Aber zugleich sollen auch nicht alle diesen Weg gehen; denn auch die Betriebe brauchen gute Leute.\n\nIch appelliere auch an die Betriebe, bei den Ausbildungsanstrengungen nicht nachzulassen. Wenn Sie sich den Berufsbildungsbericht genau anschauen, dann stellen Sie fest, dass wir einen Rückgang der Ausbildungsplatzangebote nicht bei den großen und mittleren Unternehmen, sondern vor allen Dingen bei den kleinen Firmen zu verzeichnen haben. Zum Teil ist es auf die Frustration zurückzuführen, dass sie jahrelang keine Auszubildenden bekommen haben. Deswegen ist ein Schwerpunkt unserer Arbeit, gerade die kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen sowie von Migranten geführte Unternehmen dazu zu befähigen, dass sie Ausbildungsplätze zur Verfügung stellen. Im Rahmen von Jobstarter wollen wir bald eine neue Initiative verkünden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir haben bei der Initiative „Chance Beruf“ viele Komponenten, die hier nicht erwähnt werden können, und sprechen die unterschiedlichsten Zielgruppen an, zum Beispiel Alleinerziehende und andere. Die vor uns liegenden Herausforderungen werden wir mit der nationalen Allianz für Aus- und Weiterbildung, die wir im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart haben, thematisieren und anpacken. Wir brauchen übergreifende Lösungsansätze - Bund, Länder, Arbeitgeber, Sozialpartner, Schulen -, um einen systematischen Effekt zu erzielen und nicht in diesen Engpass zu geraten, vor dem uns allen graut. Alle, die an diesem Berufsbildungssystem beteiligt sind, müssen sich aktiv einbringen. Wir wollen dafür sorgen, dass jeder in diesem Land eine Chance hat und von dem System profitieren kann. Deshalb gibt es dieses umfassende Bildungspaket. Damit wird es uns gelingen, die berufliche Ausbildung zukunftsfähig zu machen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n14647,volker-ullrich,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Wir beraten heute in zweiter und dritter Lesung das Gesetz zur Ausweitung des Maßregelrechts bei extremistischen Straftätern. Damit soll das Strafgesetzbuch so geändert werden, dass im Rahmen der Führungsaufsicht eine elektronische Aufenthaltsüberwachung angeordnet werden kann.\n\nBereits im Jahr 2011 ist die elektronische Aufenthaltsüberwachung im Rahmen der Führungsaufsicht in das Gesetz hineingenommen worden, um beispielsweise Gebots- und Verbotszonen für verurteilte Straftäter zu definieren, damit sie von weiteren Straftaten abgehalten werden und ihre Resozialisierung in unserer Gesellschaft gefördert wird.\n\nVoraussetzung für die Anordnung der Führungsaufsicht war bislang, dass der Straftäter zu einer Freiheitsstrafe von mindestens drei Jahren verurteilt wurde und eine sogenannte Katalogstraftat vorlag. Diese Maßnahme - das will ich heute Abend auch festhalten - hat sich beispielsweise im Bereich der Sexualstraftaten bewährt. Straftäter, die wegen einer Sexualstraftat verurteilt wurden, haben gewisse Kontaktverbote einzuhalten und gewisse Bereiche zu meiden,\n\ndamit sie von weiteren Straftaten abgehalten werden und potenzielle Opfer - was uns sehr wichtig ist - vor ihnen geschützt werden.\n\nDas, was sich im Bereich der Sexualstraftaten bewährt hat, wollen wir im begrenzten Umfang auch für Straftäter einführen, die wegen gefährlicher Straftaten verurteilt worden sind, wegen schwerer staatsgefährdender Gewalttaten, wegen beispielsweise Terrorismusfinanzierung oder Mitgliedschaft in einer terroristischen Vereinigung. Wer wegen dieser Straftaten verurteilt wurde, der ist nicht unschuldig, sondern ist ein Extremist und ein Gefährder. Der Rechtsstaat muss im Interesse der Sicherheit, der Resozialisierung und des Opferschutzes darauf achten, dass von diesen Menschen keine weitere Gefahr ausgeht. Die elektronische Fußfessel, die im Rahmen der Führungsaufsicht zur Anwendung kommen kann, ist eine gute und rechtsstaatlich angemessene Möglichkeit, dieses Ziel zu erreichen.\n\nNatürlich wissen wir auch, dass ein zu allem entschlossener Täter - das schreckliche Beispiel des Mordes an einem Priester nahe Rouen hat es gezeigt - damit nicht unbedingt von einer weiteren schweren Straftat abgehalten werden kann. Aber es geht nicht allein um die Schwarz-Weiß-Fälle. Gerade bei der Terrorismusfinanzierung geht es beispielsweise um die Frage: Welches Netzwerk liegt der Struktur zugrunde? Mit wem hat der Terrorist Kontakt gehabt? Indem man Verbotszonen definiert, macht man deutlich: Wenn sich jemand in dieser Verbotszone bewegt, dann wird die Polizei alarmiert. Dann hängt es von der Polizeitaktik ab, ob sie innerhalb von fünf oder zehn Minuten vor Ort ist.\n\nDas zeigt: Durch die Fußfessel werden die Aufklärungswahrscheinlichkeit und die Verhinderungswahrscheinlichkeit von schweren Straftaten gesteigert. Auch das ist ein wichtiger Wert in einem Rechtsstaat. Wenn es Anhaltspunkte dafür gibt, dass Menschen, die bereits verurteilt worden sind, weitere Straftaten begehen, dann muss der Rechtsstaat seine Stärke ausspielen.\n\nDas sind wir dem Rechtsstaat und der Sicherheit unserer Bürger schuldig.\n\nEs wird immer wieder eingewandt, das sei nicht richtig wirksam. Von Ihnen, Herr Kollege Tempel, haben wir heute Nachmittag immer wieder gehört, das sei doch alles Symbolpolitik.\n\nIch will Ihnen eines deutlich sagen: Wir haben heute im Deutschen Bundestag mehrere wichtige und gute Gesetze für den Bereich der inneren Sicherheit verabschiedet.\n\nWir haben dafür gesorgt, dass Polizisten besser geschützt werden, wir haben das BKA-Gesetz reformiert, und wir werden heute noch über die Fluggastdatenspeicherung sprechen. All diese Mittel zusammen ergeben ein rundes Bild.\n\nWir dürfen Freiheit und Sicherheit nicht gegeneinander ausspielen; denn wir werden nur dann frei leben können, wenn wir auch unsere Sicherheit verteidigen. Dazu braucht es viele Mosaiksteine, und die elektronische Fußfessel für bereits verurteilte Straftäter zur Verhinderung weiterer Straftaten ist ein weiterer Mosaikstein, den wir heute bitte beherzt beschließen - für die Sicherheit in unserem Land.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n974,christoph-bergner,\"Frau Präsidentin, so ist es auch richtig. - Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte mich gern bei Iris Gleicke für die Worte der Anerkennung bedanken, aber mehr noch für die kollegiale Amtsübergabe, die wir vollzogen haben. Wir haben uns in Opposition und Regierung natürlich auch gestritten, aber die Kollegialität der Amtsübergabe beweist, dass wir uns einem gemeinsamen Anliegen verpflichtet fühlen. Dafür noch einmal ein herzliches Dankeschön!\n\nHerr Kollege Claus, ich habe mir einen Satz aus Ihrer Rede aufgeschrieben, weil ich ihn richtig finde: Wer mit seiner Geschichte nicht umgehen kann, kann die Zukunft nicht gewinnen. - Der Satz ist richtig. Ich wünsche mir nur, dass Sie es auch auf die Geschichte Ihrer Partei und Ihr Wirken in der DDR beziehen.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, ich will ein weiteres Kompliment machen, und zwar dem Kollegen Hauptmann, der seine Jungfernrede hier als eine Grundsatzrede gehalten hat, die es mir jetzt regelrecht schwer macht, meine Punkte so zu sortieren, dass ich nicht in Wiederholungen verfalle. Was, glaube ich, wichtig war und besondere Beachtung verdient, ist der Umstand, dass es darauf ankommt, über 20 Jahre nach der deutschen Einheit die Handlungserfordernisse im Zusammenhang mit der deutschen Einheit möglichst präzise herauszuarbeiten und sie präzise zu benennen. Ich denke, das haben Sie getan. Das war auch mein Bemühen bei den drei Berichten zum Stand der deutschen Einheit, die ich als Beauftragter für die Neuen Bundesländer zu verantworten hatte.\n\nWas den gegenwärtigen Bericht, den Bericht 2013, betrifft, war es mir besonders wichtig, das Thema „gleichwertige Lebensverhältnisse“ nicht nur im Kontext ökonomischer Kennziffern zu sehen, sondern auch nach Indikatoren zu suchen, die darüber hinausgehen, also nach Faktoren, die die Lebensqualität bestimmen wie Kultur und Kultureinrichtungen, Bildungsleistungen, zivilgesellschaftliches Engagement und anderes - übrigens alles Felder, auf denen wir durch wissenschaftliche Analysen eigene Expertise gewinnen konnten.\n\nEs sind vor allen Dingen komplexe Indikatoren, die uns zeigen, was wir erreicht haben, komplexe Indikatoren wie der Wanderungssaldo zwischen Ost und West, der im Jahre 2012 praktisch ausgeglichen ist, wie die Geburtenziffer, die nach 1990 dramatisch eingebrochen ist und jetzt, auch wenn sie in Deutschland insgesamt noch zu niedrig ist, wieder Vor-Wende-Niveau bzw. das Niveau des Westens erreicht hat, oder wie die Kennziffer der Lebenserwartung, in der sich sehr viele Punkte niederschlagen; bei den Frauen haben wir eine praktisch vollständige Angleichung zu verzeichnen - und das bei ursprünglich beträchtlichen Unterschieden -, und bei den Männern haben wir eine doch weitgehende Annährung erzielt.\n\nDas alles sind Indikatoren, die in ihrer Komplexität zeigen, was wir in den letzten Jahrzehnten erreicht haben. Wir haben eine Lebensqualität, die in beachtlichem Maße ausgeglichen ist. Wir haben wettbewerbsfähige Unternehmen. Wir haben positive Arbeitsmarktzahlen; Kollege Hauptmann ist sehr eindrücklich darauf eingegangen. Wir haben eine relativ hohe Quote der industriellen Wertschöpfung. Kurz: Wir haben im 25. Jahr nach dem Mauerfall Anlass, im Hinblick auf das, was in den letzten Jahrzehnten erreicht wurde, stolz und dankbar zu sein.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund - ich sage ausdrücklich: vor diesem Hintergrund - war es mir natürlich wichtig, in dem Bericht noch ein anderes Kapitel zu berühren, und zwar den Stand der öffentlichen Finanzen, der Länderfinanzen. Die ostdeutschen Länder standen in den letzten zwei Jahren, was ihre Finanzen betrifft, ausgesprochen gut da; das hören die Länderfinanzminister nicht gern, aber es ist die Wahrheit. Sie standen gut da auch wegen der Solidarpaktleistungen und der EU-Mittel. Aber wenn man ihr eigenes Steueraufkommen analysiert, stellt man fest, dass die Flächenländer Ost im Jahr 2012 bei 54 Prozent des Niveaus der finanzschwachen Flächenländer West lagen; im Jahre 2000 waren es noch 30 Prozent.\n\nDas unterstreicht die Bedeutung der Solidarpaktleistungen für den Zeitraum bis 2019. Es macht auch deutlich, wie wichtig ein Vorhaben, das in der Koalitionsvereinbarung fixiert wurde und das man sich vorgenommen hat, ist, nämlich die Arbeit der Bund-Länder-Kommission zur Neuordnung des Länderfinanzausgleichs und entsprechender Strukturförderungen. Es macht schließlich deutlich, dass wir gut beraten sind, die Ursachen der geringeren Steuerkraft anzugehen, die natürlich im Bereich der Wirtschaftskraft liegen.\n\nWir haben im letzten Bericht herausgearbeitet, dass sich - Herr Kühn, Sie weisen zu Recht darauf hin - der verbliebene Abstand beim Bruttoinlandsprodukt von circa 20 bis 25 Prozent in den letzten Jahren kaum verändert hat, und versucht, zu analysieren, welches die Ursachen dieser Lücke sind. Wir sind dabei zu dem Schluss gekommen, dass wir es vor allem mit strukturellen Ursachen zu tun haben, die mit der Unternehmensstruktur in Ostdeutschland in Zusammenhang stehen: Dem Osten fehlen Unternehmenssitze von Großunternehmen. Wir haben dort deshalb Kleinteiligkeitsnachteile, die in einer geringeren Ertragsbündelung und damit in einem geringeren Steueraufkommen resultieren. Entsprechend geringer sind deshalb auch - was nicht unterschätzt werden darf - die wirtschaftseigenen Forschungs- und Entwicklungskapazitäten.\n\nIn Westdeutschland sind 2010 2 Prozent des dortigen Bruttoinlandsprodukts in wirtschaftseigene Forschungs- und Entwicklungskapazitäten investiert worden. In Ostdeutschland waren es weniger als 1 Prozent, und das bezogen auf das niedrigere Bruttoinlandsprodukt Ost. Wegen dieser Strukturnachteile ist wirtschaftseigene Forschung und Entwicklung in Ostdeutschland deutlich schwächer ausgeprägt. Die ostdeutsche Wirtschaft ist ferner, um einen weiteren Punkt zu nennen, weniger stark international verflochten, was sich in der Exportquote niederschlägt.\n\nIm Koalitionsvertrag haben wir deshalb gemeinsam wichtige Schlussfolgerungen aus dem Bericht gezogen:\n\nErstens. Wir brauchen im Osten weiterhin wachstumsfördernde Strukturpolitik, eine Fortsetzung des Solidarpakts, Investitionsförderung nach den Gemeinschaftsaufgaben und den Einsatz von Mitteln aus dem EU-Strukturfonds sowie eine Überführung dieser Maßnahmen in ein System der Förderung strukturschwacher Regionen nach 2019, Stichwort „Bund-Länder-Finanzkommission“.\n\nZweitens. Wir brauchen im Osten mehr öffentlich geförderte Finanzierung von FuE-Leistungen als im Westen. Die neuen Bundesländer haben in Europa die höchste Quote an öffentlich geförderter FuE-Leistung. Dies ist eine wertvolle und wichtige Voraussetzung für zukünftiges Wirtschaftswachstum. Ich freue mich deshalb, dass im Koalitionsvertrag ein Bekenntnis zu den gemeinnützigen Forschungs-GmbHs enthalten ist. Ich hoffe, dass die Länder auch bei der Kofinanzierung des Hochschulpakts ihrer Verantwortung gerecht werden. Ich denke, wir sollten auch weiterhin versuchen, kreativ zu sein, beispielsweise wenn es um Fraunhofer-Zentren oder anderes geht, wo die neuen Länder durchaus Vorläufer sein können.\n\nDrittens. Wir brauchen eine Förderung der internationalen Verflechtung der Wirtschaft der neuen Bundesländer. Ich bin dankbar, dass im Koalitionsvertrag die besondere Bedeutung von Germany Trade and Invest für die neuen Länder festgehalten wurde.\n\nViertens. Verflechtung und die Bildung innovativer Cluster sind insgesamt wichtig für den Wettbewerb; für die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung der neuen Bundesländer ist diese Strategie jedoch überlebenswichtig.\n\nDas sind gewissermaßen die strategischen Linien, die im Koalitionsvertrag aufgezeigt werden und mit denen wir in die Zukunft gehen können. Ich denke, wir sollten versuchen, den Koalitionsvertrag kreativ auszufüllen und nach weiteren Möglichkeiten für die Entwicklung der neuen Bundesländer zu suchen, auch um die Lücke in der Steuerkraft zukünftig schließen zu können.\n\nFrau Kollegin Gleicke, als ich Ihnen eine glückliche Hand wünschte, hatte ich noch etwas anderes im Blick, nämlich das, womit ich in meinem Amt die meisten Probleme hatte: die Kontrolle der Wirkung von politischen Maßnahmen - sei es in der Gesetzgebung oder sonst - in Bezug auf eine besondere Betroffenheit der neuen Bundesländer. Das ist eine gigantische Herausforderung. Wir haben über Einzelthemen ja sehr offen gesprochen.\n\nIch will, weil die Rentenrechtsänderung angesprochen wurde, noch einmal deutlich sagen: Die Lesart von Herrn Bartsch, Kinder von Ostmüttern seien uns weniger wert als Kinder von Westmüttern, ist allenfalls ein Beweis dafür, dass man das Rentenrecht nicht verstanden hat.\n\nMan kann natürlich aus Unkenntnis demagogisch werden, aber mit einer solchen Argumentation hilft man den Menschen in den neuen Bundesländern überhaupt nicht.\n\nWir sollten eher darauf achten, dass wir den Vorteil durch die Höherbewertung, der im Rentenrecht eine wichtige Errungenschaft für die neuen Bundesländer ist, nicht leichtfertig für ein Linsengericht aufgeben,\n\nund versuchen, zu bewahren, was im gesamtdeutschen Rahmen bewahrt werden kann.\n\nWeil er ausdrücklich genannt wurde und unserem Koalitionspartner besonders wichtig ist, komme ich schließlich noch zum Mindestlohn.\n\nIch gebe mir Mühe.\n\nIch weiß von der Hoffnung, dass man mit einem einheitlichen Mindestlohn für eine hohe Zahl von Beschäftigten im Osten höhere Einkommen erreichen kann. Ich bitte aber, nicht zu vergessen, dass diese Löhne von Unternehmen gezahlt werden müssen, die im Wettbewerb stehen.\n\nIch bitte auch, nicht zu vergessen, dass wir im Osten nach wie vor eine höhere Quote von Langzeitarbeitslosen haben. Wir haben bereits jetzt Schwierigkeiten, sie in den Wirtschaftsprozess einzugliedern, und bei hohen Lohnkosten werden diese Schwierigkeiten noch wachsen.\n\nWir stehen koalitionstreu zu der gefundenen Lösung,\n\naber\n\nmein Appell und meine Bitte gehen dahin, nicht nur die Vorzüge im Blick zu haben, sondern auch die Probleme und Risiken, die im Osten regional sehr viel größer sind als im Westen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n14053,heribert-hirte,\"Frau Präsidentin, schönen guten Morgen!\n\nDen Kolleginnen und Kollegen ebenfalls einen guten Morgen! Das Faszinierende ist, zu sehen, dass wir selbst zu dieser morgendlichen oder nächtlichen Stunde noch viele Zuschauer haben. Der Einwand, dass wir hier nicht vor Publikum diskutieren, wie wir ihn gerade eben von den Linken\n\nund auch von den Grünen gehört haben, ist überhaupt nicht wahr.\n\nWir diskutieren hier freudig weiter. Ich habe Zeit bis morgen früh.\n\nIch bin Kölner. Ich kann das nur bestätigen: Wir können weitermachen. Vielleicht ist auch die Präsidentin dann irgendwann zu Hause. Aber gerne auch zur Sache.\n\nLiebe Freunde, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, worum geht es bei Corporate Social Responsibility? Kollege Hakverdi hat es eben schon gesagt: Den Wert eines Unternehmens machen nicht nur die Waren aus, die im Regal stehen, sondern auch das, was sozusagen drumherum ist oder auf das man drumherum einwirkt, nämlich die Belastungen auf die Umwelt. Deshalb ist es richtig und wichtig, dass wir diese Werte einerseits und die Belastungen andererseits in die Bewertung des Unternehmens, wie das in der Bilanz gemacht wird, einbeziehen. Kollege Hakverdi hat das eben erläutert.\n\nDas ist der Konzeptansatz der europäischen Richtlinie, mit der auf europäischer Ebene jetzt versucht wird, dies zu vereinheitlichen, und die wir heute hier umsetzen wollen. Das Umsetzungsgesetz sieht dabei eine Erweiterung der allgemeinen Berichtspflichten im Lagebericht durch die Einführung einer sogenannten nichtfinanziellen Berichterstattung für kapitalmarktorientierte Unternehmen mit mehr als 500 Mitarbeitern vor. Die Unternehmen können dabei grundsätzlich wählen, ob sie diese Berichtspflichten innerhalb des Lageberichts oder gesondert auf der Homepage erfüllen. Wenn sie diese Berichterstattung vornehmen, muss diese - das haben wir noch ein kleines bisschen klarer formuliert - in Anlehnung an andere Regelungen spätestens innerhalb von vier Monaten nach dem Abschlussstichtag erfolgen. Wir haben aber andererseits im Rahmen des Gesetzgebungsverfahrens klargestellt, dass es nicht notwendig ist, diesen Bericht zu erstellen, wenn ein irgendwo liegendes Mutterunternehmen einen vergleichbaren Bericht erstellt hat. Es ist nicht erforderlich, dass es ein Mutterunternehmen mit Sitz im EWR ist.\n\nInhaltlich muss berichtet werden über Umweltbelange, Arbeitnehmerbelange, Sozialbelange, die Achtung der Menschenrechte und die Bekämpfung von Korruption. Im Gesetzestext finden sich dafür jeweils Beispiele. Dabei ist insbesondere über die wesentlichen Risiken, die mit den Geschäftsbeziehungen und der Gesellschaft verbunden sind, ihren Produkten und Dienstleistungen und die sehr wahrscheinlich schwerwiegenden negativen Auswirkungen zu berichten. Wir haben dabei sichergestellt, dass nur berichtet werden muss, soweit die Angaben von Bedeutung sind und die Berichterstattung über diese Risiken verhältnismäßig ist.\n\nBei allem Verständnis nach weiteren zusätzlichen Informationen - das haben die Grünen in ihrem Antrag zusätzlich gefordert, und die Linken haben es auch gesagt; ich habe immer ein unbegrenztes Informationsinteresse - müssen wir die Frage stellen, ob der Aufwand für die Beschaffung und die Kontrolle dieser Informationen verhältnismäßig und angemessen ist. Deshalb ist es richtig, dass wir bei der Umsetzung dieser Richtlinie nicht festlegen, dass die Angaben durch einen externen Prüfer überprüft werden müssen, sondern es dabei belassen, dass der Aufsichtsrat den entsprechenden Bericht auf die Richtigkeit, die Stimmigkeit überprüft. Natürlich kann der Aufsichtsrat einen externen Prüfer beauftragen. Andererseits gilt, wenn er die Prüfung selbst vornimmt, dass er natürlich mehr tun muss, als nur festzustellen, dass der Bericht vorgelegt worden ist. Er muss ihn zumindest selbst auf Plausibilität überprüfen.\n\nWas die inhaltliche Seite angeht, sehe ich den Kollegen Kelber an. Wir haben natürlich darüber gestritten - er ist noch wach, ich sehe es; ich hoffe, ich habe ihn nicht geweckt -, ob wir die Angaben zum Daten- und Verbraucherschutz in die Berichtspflicht aufnehmen sollten. Ich bin nach wie vor der Meinung - Sie haben sich unserer Meinung angeschlossen; angeschlossen nicht, wir merken, der Dialog funktioniert -, dass es an dieser Stelle systemfremd wäre, dies einzubauen. Ich bin nicht gegen Verbraucherschutz, aber er gehört nicht in das Bilanzrecht.\n\nBei der Frage, ob ein Rahmenwerk heranzuziehen ist, haben wir noch einen weiteren Punkt klargestellt. Man muss offenlegen, welches Rahmenwerk man herangezogen hat oder ob man keines herangezogen hat. Wir haben nicht vorgesehen, dass ein bestimmtes Rahmenwerk herangezogen werden muss; denn das ist aus verfassungsrechtlichen Gründen bedenklich.\n\nEin letzter Punkt. Wir setzen das Gesetz rückwirkend zu Beginn dieses Geschäftsjahres in Kraft, weil wir es nicht geschafft haben, es rechtzeitig vor der Jahreswende zu verabschieden. Das liegt mit Sicherheit daran, dass wir als Unionsfraktion gesagt haben - Herr Kelber, ich stelle das gerne klar -, Gesetze, die die Wirtschaft belasten, wollen wir nicht vorziehen, wenn andere Gesetze, die Begünstigungen für die Wirtschaft vorsehen, verzögert werden. Das war das Insolvenzanfechtungsgesetz. Wir bekommen es rückwirkend umgesetzt. Das ist rechtlich kein Problem, auch aus verfassungsrechtlichen Gründen nicht. Deshalb glaube ich, wir haben einen guten Kompromiss, und dafür bitte ich um Ihre Zustimmung.\n\nVielen Dank und gute Nacht.\"\n6074,andrej-hunko,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Herr Außenminister! Der renommierte US-amerikanische Politologe John Mearsheimer hat in seinem viel beachteten Aufsatz „Putin reagiert“ die Verantwortung für den Konflikt in der Ukraine vor allen Dingen dem Westen zugeschoben. Er benennt zwei zentrale Gründe dafür: erstens die NATO-Osterweiterung, zweitens die EU-Osterweiterung. Diese Assoziierungsabkommen, die wir heute diskutieren, sind Teil dieser Osterweiterung.\n\nHerr Steinmeier, Sie sagen, es dürfe kein Entweder-oder geben. Die Geschichte des Jahres 2014 hat aber gezeigt, dass dieses EU-Assoziierungsabkommen mit der Ukraine als Entweder-oder angelegt war. So hat es auch Kommissionspräsident Barroso gesagt. Wir lehnen das Entweder-oder ab, und wir lehnen deshalb auch dieses EU-Assoziierungsabkommen ab.\n\nDie drei Assoziierungsabkommen haben zwei Dimensionen: einmal - das ist der größere Teil - eine wirtschaftspolitische Dimension, aber auch eine sicherheitspolitische, eine militärische Dimension. In allen Abkommen ist die tiefere Integration dieser Staaten in das europäische Sicherheitssystem angelegt. Auch das ist ein Problem, und das ist eine der Sorgen, die auch Russland in diesem Fall hatte.\n\nAber die wichtigere und auch größere Dimension ist die wirtschaftspolitische Dimension. Es geht nicht nur um Ost gegen West, EU oder Russland, sondern es geht auch darum, dass diese Abkommen, wirtschaftspolitisch betrachtet, radikal neoliberale Abkommen sind. Es gibt dort ganz viele Bekenntnisse zur freien Marktwirtschaft, etwa in der Präambel. Aber vergeblich sucht man in diesen Abkommen nach Bekenntnissen etwa zur sozialen Marktwirtschaft oder nach einem Bezug auf das europäische Sozialstaatsmodell, das ja auch ein Kern europäischer Werte ist. Wir lehnen diese radikal neoliberalen Abkommen ab.\n\nIm Kontext der Installierung dieser Abkommen, zum Beispiel in der Ukraine, sind ja schon viele Reformen eingefordert worden, zum Beispiel die drastische Erhöhung der Gas- und Strompreise oder der Wasserpreise für Privathaushalte. Der Tagesspiegel beziffert die durchschnittliche Erhöhung der Kosten für einen Zweipersonenhaushalt in der Ukraine, die zum 1. April 2015 in Kraft treten soll, auf 88 Prozent. Am 1. April dieses Jahr! Die WirtschaftsWoche schreibt dazu - ich zitiere -:\n\nDen Ukrainern bleibt nicht mehr viel zum Leben. Während es der Bevölkerung immer schlechter geht, können Oligarchen wie Staatspräsident Petro Poroschenko nicht klagen. Die Gewinne seiner Schokoladenfabriken haben sich verachtfacht. Auch seinen Freunden und Rivalen geht es nicht schlecht. Die Oligarchen kontrollieren das Bankensystem, die Stromversorgung und die Ölgesellschaften des Landes.\n\nWir haben vor wenigen Tagen gesehen, dass auch einzelne Oligarchen wie Kolomojskyj Privatarmeen haben, die sie einsetzen. Das darf nicht sein. Auch im Zuge der Diskussion um das Assoziierungsabkommen müssen diese Privatarmeen aufgelöst werden, ebenso wie die freiwilligen Bataillone, die ja auch zum Teil von Kolomojskyj finanziert werden.\n\nErinnern wir uns einmal an die dramatische Entwicklung in der Ukraine: das Assoziierungsabkommen, die blutigen Unruhen auf dem Maidan, der verfassungswidrige Umsturz, die Gegenbewegung, die Sezession der Krim, der Krieg im Osten, der Versuch, das militärisch zu lösen, und natürlich die Reaktion Russlands - ich will das ja nicht verschweigen. All das, glaube ich, sollte uns einmal innehalten und überlegen lassen, ob wir nicht eine andere Ostpolitik anvisieren sollen, eine Ostpolitik, die nicht auf Konfrontation mit Russland setzt, und die vor allen Dingen wirtschaftspolitisch auf Entwicklung, auf Kooperation und nicht auf neoliberale Abkommen setzt. Ich glaube, eine solche Ostpolitik wäre dringend notwendig. Ich fordere Sie auf, eine solche Debatte in der Europäischen Union anzustoßen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9820,burkhard-lischka,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Es sind nicht die ersten und werden wohl auch nicht die letzten Gesetzentwürfe zum Thema „Asyl und Flüchtlinge“ sein, über die wir im Deutschen Bundestag beraten. Dafür ist das Thema zu beherrschend. Das Thema polarisiert und verunsichert viele. Es stellt aber auch sehr grundlegende Fragen an uns: Was hält uns in Deutschland eigentlich zusammen? Was verbindet uns in Europa? Welche Regeln müssen wir alle, egal ob Einheimische oder Einwanderer, akzeptieren? Was ist wünschenswert, und wo setzt uns die Realität Grenzen?\n\nEs gibt in diesen Tagen - genauso wie in anderen besonders schwierigen Debatten - Protagonisten, die die Illusion nähren, es gebe auf all diese Fragen eine ganz einfache Antwort: Grenzen dicht und, wenn nötig, auch Schusswaffengebrauch. Das ist die Alternative für Deutschland, die in diesen Tagen aufgezeigt wird. Ausgerechnet Deutschland, ein Land, in dem bis vor gut 25 Jahren Schusswaffengebrauch und Schießbefehl traurige und menschenverachtende Realität an einem Teil seiner Grenzen waren! Gerade dieses Land sollte sich darin einig sein, nie wieder über Schüsse an der deutschen Grenze zu reden. Eine erbärmliche Alternative für Deutschland wäre das sonst.\n\nNein, es sind viele Mosaiksteine, die wir in diesen Tagen und Wochen für eine Lösung zusammensetzen müssen, indem wir beispielsweise für eine zügige Registrierung der hier Ankommenden sorgen, für schnelle Asylverfahren und Entscheidungen. Wer vor Krieg und Bürgerkrieg flieht, genießt Schutz. Die anderen werden wir zurückführen. Für all das präzisieren wir im Asylpaket II unsere gesetzlichen Grundlagen und Instrumente; das ist auch richtig so. Aber es liegt jetzt am zuständigen Bundesinnenminister, all das, was wir in den vergangenen Wochen und Monaten beschlossen haben, konsequent umzusetzen.\n\nDas erwarten wir von Ihnen, Herr de Maizière, und daran werden wir Sie in den nächsten Monaten auch messen.\n\nEin weiteres Signal geht von den heutigen Gesetzentwürfen insbesondere beim Ausweisungsrecht aus. Eine freie Gesellschaft muss nicht homogen sein. Sie hat Platz für unterschiedliche Ethnien, Religionen und auch Meinungen. Aber es muss klar sein, welche Regeln gelten. Dazu gehört: Wer hier nach Deutschland kommt, muss unsere Gesetze respektieren. Wenn er grob dagegen verstößt, indem er schwere Straftaten begeht, muss er unser Land wieder verlassen. Ja, Einwanderung bietet viele Chancen für eine Gesellschaft, die älter wird und der in den nächsten Jahren Millionen Fachkräfte fehlen werden. Aber eine Einwanderungsgesellschaft ist auch anstrengend. Wir müssen uns darauf einlassen, denjenigen, die zu uns kommen, unsere Regeln zu erklären. Andersherum müssen sich die Einwanderer darauf einlassen, ihre neue Heimat zu verstehen und unsere Gesetze zu respektieren. Beides gehört zusammen, und beides wird uns noch viel Mühe kosten.\n\nEines ist aber auch klar: Wer das Flüchtlingsproblem nicht als europäisches Problem sieht, belügt in diesen Tagen sein Publikum. Natürlich können wir Grenzen schließen und ignorieren, dass Millionen Flüchtlinge unter erbärmlichen Bedingungen leben. Klar geht das. Augen zu und durch. Die Frage ist nur: Und dann? Wie lange geht das gut? Wie lange geht es uns gut?\n\nDeutschland ist ein Land, das gut dasteht. Das hat viel mit offenen Grenzen, mit offenen Handelswegen, mit einem freien Reise- und Warenverkehr zu tun, mit stabilen Nachbarländern. Da steht in diesen Tagen verdammt viel auf dem Spiel. Deshalb war und ist es richtig, dass gerade die deutsche Bundesregierung immer und immer wieder versucht, zumindest in Ansätzen zu einer europäischen Lösung zu kommen. Reden, verhandeln, streiten, wieder reden und verhandeln - alles ohne Erfolgsgarantie, wohl wissend, dass dieses Europa gerade in der Flüchtlingsfrage auch krachend scheitern kann.\n\nAber ist das wirklich schwache Politik, ist das naive Politik, oder ist es nicht naiv, zu glauben, bei einem Europa der geschlossenen Grenzen und der Grenzzäune wären alle Probleme gelöst?\n\nNein, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es zeichnet gerade demokratische Politik aus, dass sie die Fähigkeit besitzt, Dinge, auch wenn sie schwierig sind, zum Guten zu wenden. Ich finde, dieses Bemühen hat gerade in diesen Tagen jedwede Unterstützung verdient.\n\nRecht herzlichen Dank.\"\n13627,irene-mihalic,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! In einem der beiden Gesetzentwürfe steht ja sogar im Titel, dass es um besondere Gefahrenlagen geht. Dabei denken wir natürlich alle an die furchtbaren Anschläge vom Breitscheidplatz oder von Würzburg und Ansbach und auch an den Amoklauf in München.\n\nUm eines vorweg zu sagen: Wir sind natürlich vereint in der Trauer um die Opfer, aber auch hinsichtlich der drängenden Frage, was wir besser machen können, um terroristische Anschläge oder andere schwere Verbrechen in Zukunft zu verhindern. Wir Grüne diskutieren mit Ihnen dabei alle Vorschläge, die in der Sache zielführend sind und die einen tatsächlichen Sicherheitsgewinn auf rechtsstaatlichen Grundlagen bringen.\n\nUnd ja, da kann man auch über einen verbesserten polizeilichen Videoeinsatz nachdenken. Denn es kann einen ja auch nicht zufriedenstellen, dass die Videoaufnahmen zum Beispiel von der Fussilet-Moschee, die Amri kurz vor dem Anschlag zeigen, erst Wochen später ausgewertet wurden. Doch das, was Sie jetzt vorschlagen, meine Damen und Herren, ist Sicherheitspolitik ins Blaue hinein. Privatleute sollen mehr Kameras aufhängen und länger Bildmaterial speichern. Ist das Ihre Teilantwort - wie Sie sagen - auf den Terrorismus? Wenn es so wäre, dann würde mich ein Teil Ihrer Antwort zugegebenermaßen sehr verunsichern. Denn private Stellen, die Videokameras betreiben, haben doch gar keine Möglichkeit, im Falle eines Falles einzugreifen oder irgendetwas zu verhindern. Das Einzige, was hier passiert, ist, dass Sie gewaltige Datenberge schaffen, von Flensburg bis Rosenheim, um im Fall eines Attentates ein paar mehr Bilder vom Tatort zu bekommen. Und am Ende dauert die Auswertung - wie im Fall Amri - womöglich wochenlang. Ja wen wollen Sie mit diesem Placebo eigentlich beruhigen, meine Damen und Herren?\n\nDas Gleiche gilt für die automatische Kennzeichenerfassung. Bei einer konkreten Gefahr für Leib oder Leben kann doch die Kennzeichenfahndung an der Grenze nicht die Antwort auf die aktuelle Sicherheitslage sein. Kollege Grötsch, es geht dabei eben nicht um die Strafverfolgung, sondern es ist eine Maßnahme nach dem Bundespolizeigesetz. Also geht es um Gefahrenabwehr und eben nicht um Strafverfolgung. Deswegen fragt man sich natürlich, welches konkrete Szenario Sie da eigentlich im Kopf haben. Denn Anschläge wie der vom Breitscheidplatz können es ja nicht gewesen sein, weil solche Anschläge mit gestohlenen Fahrzeugen innerhalb von wenigen Stunden begangen werden, noch bevor irgendein Kennzeichen zur Fahndung ausgeschrieben werden kann, und nach einem solchen Anschlag fehlt es den Behörden sicher nicht an Daten, die ausgewertet werden können, aber es fehlt an Personal. Oder haben Sie auch nur eine Minute darüber nachgedacht, wie personalintensiv schon allein die Bearbeitung der vielen Fehltreffer ist?\n\nSie sagen es ja selber, Herr Minister, dass einige Länder bereits über ein solches Fahndungsinstrument verfügen und dass die Bundespolizei jetzt im Grunde genommen nichts anderes tun soll. Wozu das führen wird, ist mir schon klar: Es wird doppelte Abgleiche geben, es wird dreifache Abgleiche geben. Da braucht man gar nicht bei den vielen Fehltreffern anzufangen, um zu erahnen, was es bedeutet, am Ende die doppelte und dreifache Arbeit zu bewältigen. Jedenfalls hat Ihr Vorschlag mit Terrorabwehr nicht das Geringste zu tun. Auch hier ist es wieder die pure Technikgläubigkeit ohne einen Funken mehr Sicherheit.\n\nDa fällt Ihr Vorschlag zu den Body-Cams in diesem Gesetzespaket ja fast schon positiv auf. Jedenfalls gibt es gute Gründe für deren Einsatz, auch wenn man natürlich gespannt sein darf, ob die Body-Cams am Ende auch die Erwartungen, die an sie gerichtet sind, erfüllen werden. Aber Sie haben natürlich recht: Gewalt gegen Polizeibeamte ist ein sehr ernstes Thema. Und wenn es der Bundespolizei bei der Erfüllung ihrer rechtsstaatlichen Aufgaben hilft, dann ist die Einführung von Body-Cams sicher einen Versuch wert. Nur beim Datenschutz sollten Sie auf jeden Fall noch nacharbeiten, zum Beispiel, was die notwendige Verschlüsselung der Daten betrifft. Das gilt für die dienstrechtliche Seite genauso wie für die Rechte der Betroffenen. Es geht aber auch um die Frage, wo die Aufnahmen aufbewahrt werden und wer eigentlich darüber entscheidet, was weiterhin aufbewahrt wird, was noch benötigt wird oder was gelöscht werden kann. Das ist im Gesetzentwurf bisher leider noch nicht geregelt. Aber wir geben die Hoffnung nicht auf, dass wir wenigstens in diesem Bereich zu einer vernünftigen Lösung kommen werden.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n2776,ozcan-mutlu,\"Herr Minister, letzte Woche war eine junge Frau bei mir, die im August 23 Jahre alt wird und optionspflichtig ist. Sie wird, bevor dieses Gesetz, dieser sogenannte große Schritt, von dem Sie reden, in Kraft getreten ist, vermutlich ihre deutsche Staatsbürgerschaft zwangsweise verlieren, weil sie eben ihre beiden Staatsbürgerschaften gerne behalten würde.\n\nSie haben gesagt, dass die Verbundenheit zu diesem Land in einem Alter von 21 Jahren gegeben sein müsse. Was raten Sie denn solchen jungen Leuten, die jetzt während des Gesetzgebungsverfahrens ihre deutsche Staatsbürgerschaft verlieren? Was tun Sie in all den Fällen - es sind mehrere Tausend -, in denen Menschen bis zu dem Zeitpunkt, bis zu dem dieses Gesetz in Kraft getreten ist, die deutsche Staatsbürgerschaft abgeben mussten oder sie verloren haben? Warum wollen Sie diese Altfälle nicht in den Genuss dieses sogenannten großen Schrittes kommen lassen?\"\n10540,julia-obermeier,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Seit Beginn dieser Legislaturperiode haben sich uns viele neue Herausforderungen gestellt: das aggressive Vorgehen Russlands in der Ukraine, der IS-Terror und die Flüchtlingskrise. Diese neuen sicherheitspolitischen Herausforderungen bringen massive Belastungen für die Soldaten der Bundeswehr mit sich. So haben wir hier im Hohen Haus neue Mandate beschlossen - die Ausbildungsmission im Irak, den Anti-IS-Einsatz in Syrien, die Mittelmeermission EUNAVFOR MED Operation Sophia -, und wir haben den Einsatz in Mali aufgestockt. Gleichzeitig laufen die Einsätze in Afghanistan und im Kosovo weiter. Zudem haben sich andere Verpflichtungen aufgetan wie das Air Policing im Baltikum, die NATO-Speerspitze, der NATO-Einsatz in der Ägäis und auch die Flüchtlingshilfe, zu deren Hochzeiten bis zu 9 000 Soldatinnen und Soldaten im Einsatz waren.\n\nDaher ist es fast erstaunlich, dass 2015 300 Eingaben weniger beim Wehrbeauftragten eingegangen sind als im Vorjahr. Nichtsdestotrotz sind wir für alle diese Eingaben dankbar, da sie wichtige Anregungen für unsere Arbeit sind. Viele der Eingaben betreffen die materielle Ausstattung der Bundeswehr. Der langjährige Sparkurs, der dann schließlich im dynamischen Verfügbarkeitsmanagement gipfelte, hat an vielen Stellen zu Unmut und Unzufriedenheit bei den Soldaten geführt. Aber damit, meine Damen und Herren, ist jetzt Schluss. Wir haben gemeinsam mit unserer Ministerin Frau von der Leyen die Trendwende eingeleitet, sowohl materiell als auch finanziell.\n\nEs ist eine gute Nachricht, meine Damen und Herren, dass der Verteidigungshaushalt im Jahr 2017 um 6,8 Prozent ansteigen wird; denn unsere Sicherheit und die Sicherheit der Einsatzkräfte sind das wert.\n\nIn diesen unsicheren Zeiten braucht die Bundeswehr eine moderne und bedarfsgerechte Vollausstattung, und die Bundeswehr braucht auch gute Köpfe. Wir haben im Bericht des Wehrbeauftragten gelesen, dass viele Eingaben die Personallage betreffen. Ja, aktuell sind 8 000 Stellen unbesetzt. Mit der Agenda Attraktivität sind wir hier auf einem guten Weg. Wir werden künftig noch mehr tun müssen, um Personal zu gewinnen und zu halten.\n\nOft sind es hier die kleinen Dinge, die den Unterschied machen. So ist es gut, dass wir bei der Feldpost Verbesserungen erreichen konnten. Ich bin wirklich froh, dass wir für die Soldaten im Einsatz endlich eine gute Lösung beim Thema Internet gefunden haben. Denn gerade während eines langen Auslandseinsatzes ist es wichtig, dass man den Kontakt zur Familie halten kann. An dieser Stelle möchte ich ganz ausdrücklich allen Familienangehörigen und Freunden unserer Soldatinnen und Soldaten danken, die eine wichtige Stütze sind und einen großen Teil der Einsatzlast mittragen.\n\nSehr geehrte Damen und Herren, trotz der hohen Belastungen der Bundeswehr müssen wir sie auch für neue Herausforderungen rüsten. Deshalb ist es richtig und wichtig, die Cyberfähigkeiten jetzt noch stärker aufzubauen.\n\nWir müssen aber auch an neue Gefahren denken wie die Terroranschläge in Paris und Brüssel. Diese schrecklichen Ereignisse mahnen uns, dass auch wir darüber reden müssen, welche Möglichkeiten wir für einen Einsatz der Bundeswehr im Innern im Fall solcher Katastrophen haben.\n\nDaher möchte ich die Bitte an unseren Koalitionspartner richten, jetzt darüber zu reden,\n\nHerr Arnold, und zwar mit kühlem Kopf, bevor Gefährdungslagen eintreten.\n\nWir brauchen zukunftsfähige Sicherheitsstrukturen und eine starke Bundeswehr. Personal und Material sind hierfür entscheidend. Das gehen wir an, damit unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten nicht weiter belastet, sondern entlastet werden.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n407,rudiger-veit,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren Kollegen! Von der Bibel über Papst Franziskus bis hin zu weiten Teilen hier im Haus herrscht Einigkeit: Aus Gründen der Wahrung der Menschenrechte besteht Handlungsbedarf. Warum wir mit der Fraktion der Linkspartei nicht ganz einig sind, haben meine beiden Kolleginnen Christina Kampmann und Sabine Bätzing-Lichtenthäler bereits überzeugend dargelegt. Ich will nur zwei, drei Punkte vertiefen und mit ein paar nüchternen Zahlen einen weiteren Beitrag zu der heute im Übrigen dankenswerterweise weitgehend sachlich verlaufenden Debatte leisten.\n\nIch muss zwei Vorbemerkungen machen. Die erste Vorbemerkung betrifft das Schleuserunwesen. Es ist selbstverständlich, dass diese kriminellen Machenschaften zulasten von Leib und Leben der Flüchtlinge von uns allen massiv verurteilt werden und wir bestrebt sein müssen, solche Machenschaften überall zu bekämpfen. Wir müssen aber auch den Zusammenhang erkennen: Je besser, „effektiver“ - in Anführungszeichen - Europa sich abschottet, je wirksamer die Grenzkontrollen werden, je mühsamer die Wege werden und je gefährlicher es wird, von Drittstaaten aus nach Europa zu gelangen, desto mehr befördern wir die Konjunktur der Schleuser und Menschenhändler.\n\nDas - das müsste jedem einleuchten - macht die Sache so kompliziert.\n\nDer Kollege Wendt hat in seinem Beitrag gerade von der Leistungsfähigkeit und Belastbarkeit von Flüchtlingen geredet: Derjenige, der sich - etwa durch die Wüste - auf den Weg macht, um überhaupt ans Mittelmeer zu kommen, wird das nicht mit Flip-Flops und einer Flasche Mineralwasser schaffen. Über das Mittelmeer kommt man auch nicht allein, allenfalls vielleicht noch über den Fluss Evros, wenn dieser nicht allzu hoch Wasser führt. Jemand, der diese Hindernisse überwinden will, braucht Hilfe, braucht Organisation, braucht Background; ohne geht es nicht. Das müssen wir erkennen, und wir müssen versuchen, darauf eine differenzierte Antwort zu finden.\n\nDie zweite Vorbemerkung, die ich machen muss: Ich teile nicht die allgemeine Verteuflung der Grenzschutzagentur Frontex. Wir haben auf Reisen des Innenausschusses des Deutschen Bundestages - sowohl nach Lampedusa, 2006, Griechenland/Athen, 2009, Libyen und Malta, 2010, Griechenland erneut, September 2011 und zuletzt im Mai 2013 - das eine oder andere Beispiel segensreichen Wirkens von Frontex erlebt, und darauf will ich hinweisen. Jedes Mal, glaube ich, waren die Kollegin Ulla Jelpke und ich gemeinsam unterwegs. Bei den drei Reisen nach Griechenland war auch der Kollegen, Stephan Mayer dabei. Von der vorletzten Reise will ich einmal das folgende Erlebnis schildern: Wir haben gehört - von Betroffenen auf griechischer Seite, auf türkischer Seite und von Menschenrechtsorganisationen -, dass der Beitrag deutscher Bundespolizisten an der Landgrenze zwischen der Türkei und Griechenland, im Evrosgebiet, durchaus segensreich, deeskalierend und im Sinne der betroffenen Menschen gewirkt hat. Das hat man uns vor Ort gesagt und näher geschildert.\n\nDaran sollten wir bitte nicht zweifeln.\n\nWir haben übrigens auch gehört, dass die deutschen Bundespolizisten - auch das ist anerkennenswert - angesichts der katastrophalen, menschenunwürdigen Bedingungen in Flüchtlingsunterkünften - besser gesagt: Gefängnissen oder Schuppen, die zu Gefängnissen umgebaut waren - in Tychero oder in Fylakio nicht einmal mehr eine optische Verbindung hergestellt wissen wollten zwischen deutschen Polizeiuniformen und griechischen Aufnahmebedingungen.\n\nAls wir im Hafen von Lampedusa waren, hatte ich den leichtsinnigen Einfall, wenigstens ein Schiff der Küstenwache zu besichtigen - mit der Konsequenz, dass wir dann alle sieben, die da lagen, aufsuchen mussten und die Zeit nicht reichte. Wir haben dort gesehen - auch anhand von Videoaufnahmen -, dass die Schiffe in der Tat bis Windstärke 7 rausfahren, um aktiv Seenotrettung zu betreiben; davon konnten wir uns überzeugen.\n\nWir haben auf Malta die quasi unbenutzten - damals unbenutzten - neuen Boote der maltesischen Küstenwache gesehen, die extra dafür ausgelegt sind, hinten auf dem Achterdeck eine große Zahl Menschen und Flüchtlinge aufzunehmen.\n\nMan muss das alles also sehr differenziert sehen, da gibt es Licht und Schatten. Ich bin froh, dass wir im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart haben, hinsichtlich der Betrachtung der Aktivität von Frontex die menschenrechtliche Komponente in den Vordergrund zu stellen.\n\nDas waren angesichts des Rests meiner Redezeit viel zu lange Vorbemerkungen. Ich will trotzdem noch zwei Punkte besonders aufgreifen:\n\nIch kam vorhin gerade noch rechtzeitig herein, um zu hören, wie der Kollege Gauweiler als letzter Redner der Debatte weniger europäische, zentrale Zuständigkeit und dafür mehr nationale Zuständigkeit gefordert hat. Ich muss Ihnen ehrlicherweise sagen: Wenn es um Flüchtlingspolitik geht, sollten wir alle gemeinsam bestrebt sein, in die Gegenrichtung unterwegs zu sein.\n\nSeit dem Vertrag über die Arbeitsweise der Europäischen Union, seit den Beschlüssen von Den Haag und Stockholm wird immer wieder gesagt, wir bräuchten eine gemeinsame Asyl- und Flüchtlingspolitik. Jetzt hat man vereinbart, ab Mitte 2015 mit einem neuen Projekt zur gemeinsamen Asyl- und Flüchtlingspolitik - das deutsche Kürzel ist GEAS - voranzugehen.\n\nSeit ich dem Deutschen Bundestag angehöre, versuche ich aufmerksam die Passagen zur Flüchtlingspolitik in den Berichten der JI-Räte zu lesen. Aber was erleben wir? Was muss man jedes Mal sehen? Wer richtig zugehört hat, hat das schon vernommen: Jedes Mal seit 1998, wenn die Europäische Kommission eine Fortschreibung in menschenrechtlich vernünftiger Weise anstrebt - in der Regel unterstützt vom Europäischen Parlament -, sind es die Mitgliedstaaten und ihre Minister, die versuchen, das zu verwässern, herunterzudrücken und herunterzuschrauben.\n\n- Ich sage Ihnen, welche Minister. In fast jedem Protokoll bzw. in den Vor- und Nachberichten dieser JI-Räte findet sich der Hinweis, dass es deutsche Innenminister sind, die in dieser Weise tätig werden. So haben wir erleben müssen, dass die Vorschläge zur Änderung der Qualifikationsrichtlinie, der Verfahrensrichtlinie und der Aufnahmerichtlinie, die die Kommission vorgelegt hat, jedes Mal verwässert worden sind. Das war mit Frontex und mit Dublin genauso.\n\nJetzt haben wir anhand der Zahlen folgende Situation, die man sich einmal vor Augen führen muss: Wir haben eine regelrechte „Schutzlotterie“, wie es Pro Asyl zu Recht nennt; denn je nachdem, wo in Europa Flüchtlinge ins Verfahren geraten, haben sie - gemessen an den Anerkennungsraten - entweder hohe, höchste oder ganz schlechte Anerkennungschancen. Das würde ich Ihnen gerne anhand einer Statistik verdeutlichen, die im Zusammenhang mit Arbeiten des Sachverständigenrates deutscher Stiftungen für Integration und Migration entstanden ist.\n\nDie Anerkennungsquote für Flüchtlinge aus Afghanistan, Irak, Somalia und Syrien ist in Italien mit jeweils über 90 Prozent am höchsten, in Dänemark oder Griechenland dagegen ist sie ganz niedrig. Es kann doch nicht richtig sein, dass bei gleicher Situation in den Herkunftsländern der eine europäische Staat vielleicht 2 oder 3 Prozent aller Flüchtlinge anerkennt und der andere über 90 Prozent. Es gibt eine umfangreiche Statistik, die dies belegt. Deutschland liegt übrigens immer relativ im Mittelfeld, außer bei Flüchtlingen aus Syrien; da sind wir auch bei annähernd 100 Prozent.\n\nDiese Art von Schutzlotterie bedarf dringend einer Überprüfung. Auch sie führt nämlich dazu, dass Flüchtlinge und Asylsuchende versuchen, in bestimmten Ländern ihre Anträge zu stellen und ihre Verfahren durchzuführen. Diese Diskrepanz kann so nicht bleiben. Hier besteht dringender Handlungsbedarf. Ich kann hier alle nur dazu auffordern - namentlich auch die Vertreter der Regierung -, ganz kräftig mitzuwirken.\n\nEin weiterer Punkt. Die Bedenken gegenüber Dublin, Dublin II bzw. seit dem 1. Januar 2014 gegenüber Dublin III sind hier schon vorgetragen worden. Auch hier bedarf es einer dringenden Änderung.\n\nEs gibt unterschiedliche Modelle und Gutachten zur Berechnung von Quoten ähnlich dem Königsteiner Schlüssel, gewichtet nach Einwohnerzahl, nach Wirtschaftskraft, zum Teil auch unter Einbeziehung der Maßstäbe Arbeitslosenquote und Flächengröße der jeweiligen Länder. Kollege Kammer hat darauf hingewiesen. Daraus ergibt sich ein interessantes Bild. Absoluter Spitzenreiter in der Aufnahme von Flüchtlingen ist demzufolge Schweden. Würde man nach diesem Schlüssel eine entsprechende Aufnahmezahl berechnen, wären in den Jahren 2008 bis 2012 von den Schweden 42 000 Flüchtlinge aufzunehmen gewesen, tatsächlich aber waren es 153 000, damit also ein Plus von 364,3 Prozent.\n\nDeutschland übrigens - das ist, finde ich, ganz interessant - liegt praktisch im Mittelfeld. Das Soll wären, wenn man einen solchen Schlüssel zugrunde legen würde, 205 000 Flüchtlinge. Das Ist war in all den Jahren 201 000; im Jahr 2013 waren es mehr. Das heißt - ich bitte Sie, darüber einmal nachzudenken -: Bei solchen Quoten und ihrer strikten Anwendung wäre durchaus nicht zu erwarten, dass Deutschland mehr Asylsuchende und Flüchtlinge aufzunehmen hätte, sondern sogar weniger, da andere Länder, die ganz unten in dieser Auflistung stehen, die auch nicht so besonders beliebt sind, wesentlich mehr aufnehmen müssten.\n\nIch komme gleich zum Schluss.\n\nIch bedanke mich für das „leider“.\n\nNoch einmal zurück zum Thema: Die SPD ist der Auffassung, wir brauchen eine bessere und gleichmäßigere Verteilung der Verantwortung, nicht der Lasten, für Flüchtlinge innerhalb der EU. Deutschland muss deswegen nicht zwangsläufig mehr Flüchtlinge aufnehmen als heute. Wenn diese Quote dann im Einzelnen überschritten wird, muss man ernsthaft über einen angemessenen finanziellen Ausgleich nicht nur nachdenken, sondern denselben auch bewirken.\n\nDas wäre jedenfalls ein gemeinsames Ziel, dem wir uns alle hier im Haus verpflichtet fühlen sollten. Ich wäre dankbar, wenn wir den Dialog darüber entsprechend fortsetzen würden.\n\nDanke sehr, Frau Präsidentin.\"\n9472,irene-mihalic,\"Vielen Dank. - Ich möchte zu einem ganz anderen Thema fragen, und zwar zu den Ereignissen in der Silvesternacht in Köln. Die Bundesregierung hat eine ziemlich schnelle Bewertung insbesondere der polizeilichen Situation in Köln vorgenommen. Ich fand es schon erstaunlich, dass der Bundesinnenminister schon sehr bald jegliche Verantwortung seines Zuständigkeitsbereichs brüsk von sich gewiesen hat und die Verantwortung für die Eskalation der Lage einzig und allein bei der Kölner Polizei gesucht hat, und das, obwohl bereits ein Einsatzerfahrungsbericht der Bundespolizei vorgelegen hat, in welchem die personelle Überforderung der Bundespolizei sehr eindrucksvoll geschildert wurde. Deswegen möchte ich fragen, ob es zutrifft, dass der Bundesinnenminister bzw. die Hausleitung des BMI diesen Einsatzerfahrungsbericht der Bundespolizei bereits kannte, als der Bundesinnenminister die Arbeit der Kölner Polizei so scharf kritisiert hat mit den Worten - Zitat -: „So kann Polizei nicht arbeiten.“\"\n3654,wilfried-oellers,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Wir beraten heute den Antrag der Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen mit dem Titel „Solidarität im Rahmen der Tarifpluralität ermöglichen - Tarifeinheit nicht gesetzlich regeln“. In meinen Augen ist der Titel des Antrags zwar etwas widersprüchlich, zeigt aber in Teilen die große Problematik des Themengebiets der Tarifeinheit auf.\n\nSolidarität der Arbeitnehmer untereinander bei Ermöglichung von Tarifpluralität - bereits in diesem Teilausschnitt der Problematik, der lediglich die Interessen der Arbeitnehmerseite beleuchtet, stellt man bereits fest, wo die Schwierigkeit in diesem Themengebiet liegt. So verwundert es nicht, dass man beim Lesen der ersten Hälfte des Antrags den Eindruck hat: Nun müsste eigentlich die Tarifeinheit gefordert werden, da doch Solidarität gefordert wird.\n\nDenn Solidarität innerhalb der Arbeitnehmerschaft bei Tarifpluralität in ein und demselben Betrieb ist nur ganz schwer zu erreichen.\n\nDer Spannungsbogen des gesamten Themenkomplexes ist nach meiner Auffassung jedoch größer; neben den berechtigten Interessen der Arbeitnehmerseite müssen auch die Interessen der Unternehmer berücksichtigt werden. Der Spannungsbogen zieht sich von der verfassungsrechtlich garantierten Tarifautonomie bis hin zum hohen Gut des Betriebsfriedens.\n\nDie Interessenlage der Arbeitnehmer ist, sich gemäß Artikel 9 Absatz 3 des Grundgesetzes im Rahmen der gewährten Tarifautonomie frei organisieren zu können und für die eigenen Ziele streiken zu dürfen. Daneben sollte den Arbeitnehmern allerdings auch die Solidarität untereinander wichtig sein. Diesem Solidaritätsgedanken steht es jedoch entgegen, sich mit einer kleinen Gruppe von Mitarbeitern eines Betriebes separat zu organisieren, die aufgrund der von ihr ausgeübten Tätigkeit im Falle eines Streiks ein hohes Druckpotenzial hat und dieses dazu nutzt, um für sich einen möglichst positiven Abschluss der Tarifverhandlungen zu erreichen. Die übrigen Arbeitnehmer im Betrieb, deren Tätigkeit ein weniger hohes Druckpotenzial hat, haben dagegen von Grund auf eine schlechtere Ausgangsposition.\n\nIch würde zunächst gerne fortfahren. Vielleicht er-übrigt sich das dann auch schon.\n\nDas Interesse der Unternehmer liegt darin, geordnete Tarifverhältnisse zu haben, die es ermöglichen, Tarifverhandlungen in einem funktionierenden Tarifvertragssystem zu führen, das Rechtssicherheit und Rechtsklarheit bietet, und damit zu wissen, dass die Tarifverhandlungen für die Dauer der Vertragslaufzeit beendet sind. Das -Interesse der Unternehmen am betrieblichen Frieden ist daher berechtigterweise sehr hoch. Zur Gewährleistung des betrieblichen Friedens gehört nach meiner Auffassung allerdings auch, dafür Sorge zu tragen, dass keine Konkurrenz zwischen mehreren Gewerkschaften besteht, die im selben Betrieb identische Berufsgruppen vertreten; denn das würde den betrieblichen Frieden stören.\n\nBis zur Entscheidung des Bundesarbeitsgerichts im Jahre 2010 wurde diese besondere Situation, die sich aus den aufgezeigten Interessenlagen ergibt, durch die Rechtsprechung mit dem Grundsatz der Tarifeinheit geregelt. In Betrieben, die in den Geltungsbereich mehrerer sich überschneidender Tarifverträge fielen, fand nach dem Grundsatz der Tarifeinheit nur der Tarifvertrag Anwendung, der dem Betrieb räumlich, betrieblich, fachlich und personell am nächsten stand und deshalb den Eigenarten und Erfordernissen des Betriebes und der darin tätigen Arbeitnehmer am besten Rechnung trug.\n\nNachdem sich das Bundesarbeitsgericht im Jahre 2010 von diesem Grundsatz gelöst hat, besteht nun die besondere Situation, dass in einem Betrieb mehrere Tarifverträge gelten können. Darüber hinaus ist auch eine Konkurrenzsituation zwischen Gewerkschaften in einem Betrieb entstanden. Zum Beispiel beanspruchen GDL und EVG jeweils für sich, sowohl für die Lokführer als auch für das Zugpersonal und weitere Mitarbeiter, die bei ihnen Mitglied sind, verhandeln zu dürfen. Dass in diesem konkreten Fall die Bahn als Arbeitgeber geordnete Verhältnisse wünscht, ist nachvollziehbar. Den gleichen Wunsch hegen auch die Fluggesellschaften und andere betroffene Unternehmen.\n\nAuch zeigt die Gründung von Minigewerkschaften im Bereich der Feuerwehrleute und der Containerkranführer, dass sich einzelne Berufsgruppen aus der Solidargemeinschaft verabschieden und die oben geschilderte besondere und wichtige Position ihrer Tätigkeit im Betrieb für sich ausnutzen. Ein solches Vorgehen darf im Sinne der Solidarität durchaus infrage gestellt werden.\n\nNun hat das Bundesarbeitsgericht seine Rechtsprechung im Jahre 2010 zur Tarifeinheit mit dem Verweis auf das Grundrecht der Tarifautonomie nach Artikel 9 Absatz 3 geändert. Anschließend wurde von der Arbeitgeberseite, aber auch von Gewerkschaften, allen voran vom DGB, der Wunsch geäußert, die Tarifeinheit gesetzlich zu regeln. Das Streikrecht spielt in diesem Zusammenhang eine besondere Rolle, da es verfassungsrechtlich garantiert ist und naturgemäß das schärfste Schwert einer Gewerkschaft ist. Dieses Recht muss ihr natürlich weiterhin zustehen; das steht außer Frage.\n\nAllerdings ist das Streikrecht im Hinblick auf die weiterentwickelte tarifrechtliche Situation und auch in jedem Einzelfall vor dem Hintergrund der Verhältnis-mäßigkeit zu beleuchten. Hierzu kann der Gesetzgeber zumindest gewisse Regeln aufstellen. Insoweit darf -sicherlich nicht in das Grundrecht nach Artikel 9 Absatz 3 GG eingegriffen werden, aber bestimmte Ausgestaltungen sind möglich.\n\nDies erscheint mir geboten, um die Interessen der Allgemeinheit zu wahren; denn gerade am Beispiel der aktuellen Streiks im Verkehrsbereich wird deutlich, dass nicht nur die Interessen der Tarifvertragsparteien zu berücksichtigen sind. In der heutigen Zeit ist die Mobilität für jedermann ein wichtiges Gut. Die Menschen erwarten, dass die Verkehrsmittel zur Verfügung stehen, um ihr eigenes Leben organisieren und bewältigen zu können. Daher sind auch die Interessen der Allgemeinheit im Rahmen der Erarbeitung von Lösungen zu berücksichtigen.\n\nWünschenswert wäre es, wenn die Tarifvertragsparteien diese Problematik im Rahmen der Tarifautonomie selber lösen und sich hierzu an den Verhandlungstisch setzen würden. Denn es gehört in meinen Augen auch zur Tarifautonomie und zum Tarifsystem, Probleme zu lösen. In der Vergangenheit ist dies immer in einem ausgewogenen Verhältnis gelungen, und das hat Deutschland Wohlstand gebracht. Es kommt nicht von ungefähr, dass Deutschland weltweit das Land mit den nahezu wenigsten Streiks ist. Wir werden darum auch beneidet.\n\nIn diesem Zusammenhang sei darauf hingewiesen, dass Spartengewerkschaften auch schon zur Zeit des Grundsatzes der Tarifeinheit gemäß der Rechtsprechung des Bundesarbeitsgerichts existierten und die Interessen ihrer Mitglieder vertreten haben. Es kann auch keiner etwas dagegen haben, wenn verschiedene Gewerkschaften ihre Zuständigkeiten untereinander selber regeln und aufteilen - ich halte dies sogar für wünschenswert und geboten, da dies zur Umsetzung der Tarifautonomie gehört -,\n\nund zwar auf Grundlage von klaren und einverständlichen Regeln. Es ist daher mein Wunsch, dass die Pro-blemstellung hinsichtlich der Tarifeinheit einvernehmlich im Sinne aller Beteiligten gesetzlich gelöst wird und dass die Tarifautonomie mit ihrem Streikrecht sowie das hohe Gut des Betriebsfriedens gewahrt werden.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nVielen Dank. - Herr Ernst, ich denke schon, dass beide Themenbereiche zusammen behandelt werden müssen, weil Betriebsfrieden und Streikrecht sich allein schon von der Begrifflichkeit her gegenüberstehen.\n\nSie haben natürlich recht, wenn Sie feststellen, dass das Streikrecht als solches im Grundgesetz fest verankert ist. Allerdings hat es auch immer die Vereinbarung der -Tarifvertragsparteien gegeben, die Friedenspflicht beizubehalten und den Betriebsfrieden hochzuhalten. Ich denke, dass beide Begriffe und beide Themenbereiche sehr wohl gegenübergestellt werden können und ich das hier nicht in unzulässiger Weise vermengt habe.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n11316,sigrid-hupach,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Frau Staatsministerin, Sie haben eben in Ihrer Rede deutlich gemacht, worum es beim Kulturgutschutz geht und warum dieses Gesetz das vielleicht wichtigste kulturpolitische Vorhaben der Koalition ist. Auch meiner Fraktion ist es wichtig, dass wir endlich zu einer wirksamen Umsetzung der UNESCO-Konvention von 1970 kommen und entschieden gegen den illegalen Handel mit Kulturgütern vorgehen.\n\nIn der Anhörung im Kulturausschuss haben verschiedene Sachverständige eindrücklich geschildert, wie sehr sich Deutschland zu einem ganz zentralen Standort für den illegalen Handel entwickelt hat. Auch die Berichte von den Kulturzerstörungen im Nahen Osten, die uns gerade im letzten Jahr erschüttert und fassungslos gemacht haben, haben den Handlungsdruck mehr als deutlich gemacht. Es ist also eminent wichtig, dass wir immerhin fast 50 Jahre nach der Pariser UNESCO-Konferenz nun endlich zu gesetzlich fixierten und durch Ermittlungsbehörden auch kontrollierbaren Maßnahmen kommen,\n\ndie den illegalen Handel mit geraubten Kulturgütern unterbinden und die Rückgabe an die Herkunftsstaaten erleichtern. Ihre Initiative, Frau Staatsministerin, haben wir daher sehr begrüßt; wir erkennen auch Ihr Engagement in dieser Sache an.\n\nAuch die folgenden Beiträge werden zeigen, wie einig wir uns in diesem Anliegen sind. Daher finde ich es umso ärgerlicher, dass vonseiten der Koalition kein Versuch unternommen worden ist, interfraktionell zu einem überarbeiteten Gesetzentwurf zu kommen.\n\nEs gab nicht einmal ein Berichterstattergespräch. Sie sind als Große Koalition viele, aber eben nicht das gesamte Parlament.\n\nIch finde schon, dass es eine Zumutung ist, uns am Dienstag um 16 Uhr einen Änderungsantrag mit 97 Seiten zuzusenden, zu dem die ersten mitberatenden Ausschüsse bereits Mittwoch ab 8 Uhr ein Votum abgeben sollten. Ich spreche das nicht an, weil wir nicht bereit wären, abends zu arbeiten, sondern weil ich darin eine Missachtung der parlamentarischen Arbeit der Opposition sehe und dieses Verfahren außerdem dem wichtigen Thema des Kulturgutschutzes nicht angemessen ist.\n\nDer Gesetzentwurf regelt ja nicht nur die Frage, welches Kulturgut unter welchen Bedingungen nach Deutschland eingeführt werden darf, sondern auch, welches Kulturgut wir aufgrund seiner identitätsstiftenden Bedeutung vor der Abwanderung schützen wollen, welche Objekte also in das Verzeichnis national wertvollen Kulturguts eingetragen werden sollen. Damit verbunden sind nicht nur ein besonderer Schutzstatus oder steuerliche Vorteile bei privaten Eigentümern, sondern auch ein Ausfuhrverbot. Lässt man einmal den aufgeregten und in Teilen auch sprachlich unangemessenen Aufschrei mancher Künstler, Rechtsanwälte oder Kunsthändler außen vor, so berührt diese Frage natürlich den Kern unseres Verständnisses als Kulturstaat und die Grundfesten unserer Gesellschaft. Daher sind wir hier zu einer gewissenhaften Diskussion verpflichtet.\n\nDie CDU/CSU-Fraktion hat es gestern im federführenden Ausschuss jedoch nicht einmal für nötig erachtet, unsere Vorschläge oder die Vorschläge der Grünen überhaupt zu kommentieren. Der Ausschussvorsitzende hat da anders gehandelt. Daher will ich hier noch einmal auf die Punkte eingehen, die uns wichtig sind.\n\nWir begrüßen, dass mit dem Gesetz die öffentlichen Museen und Sammlungen gestärkt werden und ihre Bestände generell unter Schutz gestellt werden. Ihnen wird im Alltag manches durch das Gesetz erleichtert werden. Gern aber hätten wir die öffentlichen Einrichtungen dahin gehend gestärkt, dass die Bedingungen für die vorübergehende Ein- und Ausfuhr von Kulturgut in den §§ 25 und 73 auf Begutachtungs- und Digitalisierungsvorhaben ausgedehnt worden wären.\n\nSehr bedauerlich ist auch, dass die Koalition die anderen öffentlichen Sammlungen unberücksichtigt lässt und so zum Beispiel den universitären Forschungssammlungen den Schutzmantel des Gesetzes verwehrt.\n\nDass die Frage der Behandlung von Leihgaben jetzt im Gesetz genau geregelt ist, finden wir richtig. Gleiches gilt für die begriffliche Trennung von archäologischem und paläontologischem Kulturgut in § 2. Gerade für die naturwissenschaftlichen Sammlungen und für ihren engen Kontakt zu Sammlerinnen und Sammlern und den sogenannten Bürgerwissenschaftlerinnen und -wissenschaftlern ist das wichtig. Sie profitieren auch von der Erweiterung der Ausnahmen beim Beschädigungsverbot in § 18, wo nun die Forschungszwecke ausdrücklich erwähnt werden, die ja auch invasiv und destruktiv sein können. Wir hätten an dieser Stelle gern eine Pflicht zum Substanzerhalt im Gesetz festgeschrieben.\n\nAuch das Ankaufsangebot in § 23 unterstützen wir. Die Idee dabei ist, dass der Staat identitätsstiftendes Kulturgut, das ausgeführt werden soll, selbst erwirbt und dafür einen fairen und angemessenen Preis anbietet.\n\nIch hoffe sehr, dass sich alle bei den nächsten Haushaltsverhandlungen daran erinnern und die Ankaufetats für Museen und eben auch für die Kulturstiftung der Länder entsprechend aufgestockt werden.\n\nWir begrüßen ausdrücklich, dass der Gesetzentwurf klar regelt, dass NS-verfolgungsbedingt entzogenes Kulturgut bei der Restitution von allen Ausfuhrbeschränkungen ausgenommen ist. Nicht nachvollziehbar ist aber für uns, warum dies nicht auch für ursprüngliche Besitzer oder deren Rechtsnachfolger in Deutschland gelten soll. Die moralische Verpflichtung, die wir hier haben, ist so besonders, dass unseres Erachtens auch besondere Regelungen gerechtfertigt sind.\n\nGanz zentral ist für uns auch, dass die Wertgrenze für archäologische Kulturgüter auf null Euro abgesenkt wurde. Jedoch sind die Sorgfaltspflichten beim gewerblichen Inverkehrbringen in § 42 noch immer an das Kriterium der wirtschaftlichen Zumutbarkeit geknüpft. Ich empfehle, sich noch einmal die öffentliche Anhörung im Kulturausschuss in Erinnerung zu rufen, um zu verstehen, wie absurd das ist.\n\nIn die gleiche Kerbe schlägt, dass bei der Definition von Inverkehrbringen das Vorrätighalten nicht aufgenommen worden ist. Das aber wäre für die Bekämpfung des illegalen Handels besonders wichtig; denn diese Objekte stehen eben nicht in einem feinen Ladenlokal, sondern in dunklen Hinterzimmern.\n\nWir haben in einem Änderungsantrag die Angleichung der Alters- und Wertgrenzen mit der europäischen Ebene vorgeschlagen, sodass die gleichen Bedingungen gelten, egal ob ein Gemälde zum Beispiel nach Frankreich oder in die Schweiz ausgeführt wird. Wenn aus der Perspektive des Handels die Alters- und Wertgrenzen der EU-Verordnung für zu gering erachtet werden, ist die Bundesregierung angehalten, sich für eine Änderung einzusetzen - aber eben auf europäischer Ebene.\n\nRichtig ist, dass mit den erhöhten Alters- und Wertgrenzen der bürokratische Aufwand verringert wird. Dieser entsteht ja vor allem in den Ländern; denn bei den dortigen Behörden müssen die Ausfuhrgenehmigungen beantragt werden. Vom Kulturgutschutz aus gedacht, darf dieser Aspekt aber nicht im Zentrum stehen. Der Bund ist hier in der Pflicht, die Länder entsprechend zu unterstützen. Wir finden es gut, dass im Gesetz festgelegt ist, dass gerade der Erfüllungsaufwand bereits zwei Jahre nach Inkrafttreten des Gesetzes geprüft werden soll.\n\nWir sind überzeugt, dass manches, was als Belastung empfunden wird, durch ein gutes Internetportal zum Kulturgutschutz abgemildert werden kann. Wir haben uns daher dafür eingesetzt, dass das Internetportal Beispiele für geeignete Unterlagen vorstellt und dass dort alle Ausfuhrbestimmungen der Dritt- und der Vertragsstaaten verbindlich eingestellt sind, bevor das Gesetz in Kraft tritt.\n\nLeider ist es vonseiten der Regierung bisher unterblieben, eine breite öffentliche Debatte zu der Frage anzustoßen, was im europäischen und im globalen Kontext national wertvolles und identitätsstiftendes Kulturgut sein kann. Daher ist es umso wichtiger, die größtmögliche Transparenz gerade auch bei der Arbeit der Sachverständigenausschüsse zu gewährleisten. Um nicht missverstanden zu werden: Wir setzen sehr großes Vertrauen in die Arbeit der Sachverständigenausschüsse, so sie denn von den unterschiedlichen Interessen her gerecht zusammengesetzt sind. Da sie aber in jedem Einzelfall entscheiden müssen, was national wertvoll und identitätsstiftend ist, wollen wir, dass diese Entscheidungsfindung auch für die Öffentlichkeit nachvollziehbar ist. Ich bin überzeugt, dass das über eine entsprechende Dokumentation auf dem Internetportal möglich ist, ohne die Persönlichkeitsrechte zu verletzen.\n\nWir sollten die kommenden fünf Jahre bis zum Evaluationsbericht nutzen, um für die Notwendigkeit des Kulturgutschutzes noch stärker zu sensibilisieren und eine möglichst breite Debatte in der Wissenschaft, in der Politik und vor allem in der Öffentlichkeit anzuzetteln über die Frage, was wir unter identitätsstiftendem Kulturgut verstehen - vor dem Hintergrund des kulturellen Welterbes und in Anbetracht des doch sehr überholt klingenden Begriffs der Kulturnation in einer Einwanderungsgesellschaft.\n\nJa, ich komme zum Schluss. - Meine Fraktion wird sich bei der Abstimmung enthalten. Wir unterstützen zwar das Anliegen und finden auch manches gut. Der Gesetzentwurf geht uns aber in den zentralen Punkten der Sorgfaltspflichten und der Transparenz nicht weit genug. Deshalb werden wir uns enthalten.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n1916,corinna-ruffer,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Frau Bentele! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Am Montag war der Protesttag zur Gleichstellung von Menschen mit Behinderung. Schon am Dienstag danach ist Ihnen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von Union und SPD, aufgefallen, dass Sie gerne hier heute im Plenum darüber reden wollen. Sie mussten dann ganz schnell von uns wissen, ob wir einverstanden sind.\n\nIch sage: Besser spät als nie. Persönlich unterhalte ich mich auch gerne über das Thema, erst recht hier im Bundestag. Aber ganz ehrlich: Von einer Bundesregierung erwarte ich mehr als nur schöne Worte auf den letzten Drücker. Ich erwarte, dass Sie auch etwas vorlegen.\n\nMeine Fraktion hat schon vor einem Monat einen Antrag eingebracht, über den wir hier auch debattiert haben. Sie haben damals beklagt, unser Antrag sei enttäuschend. Die Fachwelt sieht das anders. Sie haben davon gesprochen, dass Sie selbst sich da etwas mehr vorgenommen hätten. Das mag ja sein. Mir ist aber wichtig, was Sie tun. Bisher beschränkt sich Ihr Tun darauf, Versprechen abzugeben. Davon profitieren Sie selbst am meisten. In Reden und auf Podien schwingen Sie sehr große Worte: Wir werden Teilhabeleistungen anrechnungsfrei gestalten und den Ausschluss vom Wahlrecht abschaffen. - Aber wenn man mit Ihnen kleine, konkrete Vorschläge diskutieren will, dann wehren Sie ab und sagen: Nein, das geht nicht. Jetzt noch nicht. Wir wollen nämlich mehr. Aber das dauert noch. Wir sind in Gesprächen. Wir sind uns noch nicht einig.\n\nMeine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Gespräche über eine Weiterentwicklung des Leistungsrechtes führen wir schon eine ganze Weile. Es gäbe eine Reihe von Verbesserungen, die Sie ohne Weiteres direkt angehen könnten. Ein paar Vorschläge haben wir in unserem Antrag vor einem Monat gemacht. Sie könnten zügig sehr viel zum Abbau von Barrieren und gegen Diskriminierung tun. Ich bin gespannt auf die Diskussion, die wir im Ausschuss über unseren Antrag führen werden. Vielleicht können Sie sich ja durchringen, ihm am Ende zuzustimmen.\n\nIch hätte aber auch nichts dagegen, wenn Sie jetzt selbst initiativ werden würden. Wenn Sie zeigen möchten, dass Sie es wirklich ernst meinen, dann legen Sie doch noch vor der Sommerpause etwas vor. Es könnten ja einfach kleinere und überschaubare Projekte sein. In Deutschland ist zum Beispiel noch nicht systematisch sichergestellt, dass alle neuen Gesetze und Verordnungen auf Bundesebene den Anforderungen der Behindertenrechtskonvention genügen. Darum könnten Sie sich doch kümmern. Nehmen wir einen anderen Bereich: In Deutschland dürfen medizinische Experimente an behinderten Kindern auch dann vorgenommen werden, wenn sie selbst nicht davon profitieren. Machen Sie Schluss damit, jetzt und nicht erst später, irgendwann.\n\nIch kann Ihnen versichern, dass meine Fraktion immer gerne zustimmen wird, wenn Sie etwas dafür tun, dass sich die Situation der behinderten Menschen verbessert. Ihnen würde das auch bei behinderten Menschen und ihren Verbänden mehr Anerkennung bringen als die abenteuerlichen Vorschläge, mit denen der stellvertretende Vorsitzende der Unionsfraktion, Michael Fuchs, kürzlich zitiert wurde. Er forderte, bei der Eingliederungshilfe zu sparen, um den Abbau der kalten Progression zu finanzieren. Das ist ein kalter Vorschlag. Ich habe selten einen schlechteren gehört.\n\nSolche Äußerungen machen aber die Problematik deutlich. Es gibt selbstverständlich auch bei Ihnen in der Union und in der SPD Abgeordnete, die sich behindertenpolitisch engagieren und wirklich etwas bewegen möchten, unbestritten. In der Debatte vor einem Monat haben sich einige von Ihnen sehr engagiert geäußert und zum Beispiel kritisiert, dass sowohl behinderte Menschen selbst als auch ihre Ehepartner finanziell für ihre Assistenz aufkommen müssen. Das sei ein Skandal, hieß es. Das wurde heute mehrfach wiederholt. In ihrer Antwort auf eine Kleine Anfrage meiner Fraktion äußerte sich die Bundesregierung aber ganz anders:\n\nDie Auffassung, dass die Eheschließung bzw. Partnerschaft\n\n- gut aufpassen -\n\nvon behinderten Menschen bei Sozialhilfegewährung unerträglich belastet würde, kann nicht überzeugen. Bei einer Partnerschaft spielen in unserer Gesellschaft primär persönliche Aspekte eine Rolle.\n\nLiebe zum Beispiel; das stimmt. Aber wir können von Liebenden nicht erwarten, dass sie deshalb arm werden. Das ist zu viel verlangt. Die Anfrage ist ein paar Wochen alt. Da widerspricht sich irgendetwas.\n\nLiebe Frau Nahles oder wer auch immer mir das beantworten will, was ist denn da los? Wem soll ich denn glauben? Ihnen, wenn Sie von hier aus reden, oder der Regierung, wenn sie schriftlich Fragen beantwortet? Wenn ich mich dann an die Debatte zur finanziellen Lage der Kommunen erinnere - das ist auch noch nicht lange her; die haben wir kürzlich geführt -, schwant mir wirklich nichts Gutes. Da wurde mir etwas zu häufig über Finanzen und Einsparpotenziale geredet und etwas zu wenig über die Rechte von Behinderten. Manchmal muss man hinschauen, in welcher Debatte man sich gerade befindet, um zu erkennen, was denn wirklich dahintersteckt. Das ist ein großes Problem. Wenn das Teilhabegesetz für Sie, liebe Große Koalition, in erster Linie eine Möglichkeit sein sollte, Kosten zu sparen, bieten wir denjenigen von Ihnen, die ernsthaft an einer menschenrechtsorientierten Behindertenpolitik interessiert sind, gern Asyl - garantiert und ohne Abschiebung.\n\nDanke.\n\nLiebe Frau Tack, ich finde es wunderbar, dass Sie so engagiert über dieses Thema diskutieren. Das eint Menschen, die sich mit Behindertenpolitik beschäftigen.\n\nSie haben uns nun unterstellt, dass wir von Ihnen erwarten würden, ohne Beteiligung Behinderter in vier Wochen ein Bundesteilhabegesetz vorzulegen. Dem ist aber mitnichten so. Wir haben nur gesagt, dass Sie nicht alles in das Bundesteilhabegesetz schieben können. In unserem Antrag und in den heutigen Reden haben wir viele Punkte, die man außerhalb dieses Gesetzes regeln muss, aufgezählt.\n\nIch möchte von Ihnen wissen, ob Sie der Meinung sind, dass man all diese Punkte in ein Gesetz schieben muss, oder ob man nicht die vielen Punkte, über die in der Vergangenheit unter Beteiligung Behinderter ausführlich diskutiert worden ist, schon jetzt umsetzen kann.\"\n1142,katja-kipping,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Wir reden heute, knapp eine Woche nach dem Internationalen Frauentag, über Geschlechtergerechtigkeit. In dem dazu vorliegenden Antrag der Koalitionsfraktionen steht der bemerkenswerte Satz: „Zeit ist eine Schlüsselressource.“ Ich habe mich gefreut, diese bemerkenswerte Erkenntnis in einem Papier von CDU/CSU und SPD zu lesen; das muss ich sagen. Ich denke da eher an Karl Marx, bei dem es heißt: „Ökonomie der Zeit, darin löst sich schließlich alle Ökonomie auf.“ Aber bevor jetzt die -Autorinnen und Autoren der Anträge von den Fraktionsspitzen Ärger wegen zu viel Nähe zu Karl Marx bekommen, kann ich sagen: Keine Sorge! Ich muss kritisch anmerken: Im weiteren Antragstext ist vom Marx’schen Erkenntnisstreben relativ wenig zu erkennen.\n\nIm Koalitionsantrag wird das Thema Zeitsouveränität, finde ich, allein auf die Frage der Vereinbarkeit von Beruf und Familie reduziert. Das ist eine wichtige Facette, aber sie reicht in den Kämpfen um Zeit eben nicht aus. Es kann doch nicht allein darum gehen, dass wir ständig zwischen Trubel in der Familie und Stress im Job hin- und herhetzen. Ich meine, es geht um mehr. Die Linke meint: Im Leben von Männern und Frauen muss gleichermaßen und gleichberechtigt viel Zeit sein für erstens Erwerbsarbeit, zweitens Familienarbeit, drittens politische Einmischung und gesellschaftliches Engagement und viertens Weiterbildung und Muße. Ja, letztlich geht es um nicht mehr und nicht weniger als ein gutes Leben für alle.\n\nIm Koalitionsantrag ist viel von Wahlfreiheit die Rede. Aber wir wissen doch alle - Hand aufs Herz! -: Von wirklicher Wahlfreiheit sind viele Frauen und Männer in diesem Land weit entfernt. Es gibt dafür viele Gründe, aber aus Redezeitmangel kann ich nur auf drei kurz eingehen:\n\nErstens. Das heutige Ehegattensplitting belohnt finanziell, wenn der eine der Hauptverdiener und der andere - dreimal darf man raten, wer es ist - nur der Hinzuverdiener ist. Die Linke meint: Wir sollten nicht den Trauschein fördern, sondern Kinder. Deswegen weg mit dem Ehegattensplitting und her mit einer ordentlichen Kindergrundsicherung!\n\nDer zweite Grund. Das Kinderbetreuungsangebot und die Anforderungen der Arbeitswelt gehen vielerorts noch weit auseinander. Selbst dort, wo es viele Kitas gibt, ist die Suche nach einem Kitaplatz alles andere als ein Zuckerschlecken.\n\nIch erinnere mich noch: Ich war gerade einmal im vierten Monat schwanger, als ich angefangen habe, einen Kitaplatz für meine Tochter zu suchen. Von einigen Einrichtungen bekam ich zu hören: Oh, für das übernächste Jahr sind die Listen schon voll, da hätten Sie eher kommen sollen. - Man fragt sich: Wann? Womöglich vor der Empfängnis, oder was? In anderen Kitas wiederum hieß es: Wir nehmen überhaupt erst eine Anmeldung an, wenn die Geburtsurkunde des Kindes vorliegt. - Wieder andere wollten entweder nur im Herbst oder im Sommer die Anmeldung entgegennehmen.\n\nAllein um die unterschiedlichen Bewerbungstermine zu koordinieren, bedurfte es wirklich Managementfähigkeiten. Ich weiß aus vielen Gesprächen mit anderen Familien: Die Suche nach einem Kitaplatz wurde für viele zwischendurch zu einem echt anstrengenden Zweitjob. Ich kann nur sagen: Beim Ausbau von Kitabetreuungsplätzen gibt es noch viel Luft nach oben.\n\nDritter Grund. Noch immer sind vielerorts traditionelle Vorstellungen wirkungsmächtig. Ja, hier ist die Politik gefragt, für neue Role Models zu sorgen. Inzwischen gibt es in fast allen Fraktionen junge Mütter, die tagtäglich beweisen: Kinder und Karriere - das passt zusammen. Aber damit die Emanzipation eine vollständige wird, muss auf die Emanzipation der Frauen jetzt eine Emanzipation der Männer folgen.\n\nWir brauchen jetzt junge Männer in Spitzenämtern, in den Ministerien und Rathäusern, die ganz selbstverständlich 50 Prozent der Erziehungs- und Familienarbeit übernehmen, die partnerschaftliche Arbeitsteilung praktizieren und darüber auch reden. Das tut nämlich nicht nur der eigenen Beziehung gut, sondern das bringt auch den gesellschaftlichen Fortschritt voran.\n\nAbschließend möchte ich auf einen Widerspruch im Koalitionsantrag hinweisen. Sie fordern, das Recht auf Teilzeit zu verankern. Allerdings problematisieren Sie selber einige Seiten davor zu Recht, dass Frauen in verantwortungsvolle Positionen in der Regel nicht durch Teilzeit kommen.\n\nIch spreche das jetzt nicht an, um Sie vorzuführen. Der Widerspruch besteht darin: Einerseits sind Menschen, die besonders in Familienarbeit eingebunden sind, meist auf Teilzeitstellen, auf kürzere Arbeitszeiten angewiesen. Andererseits wissen wir, dass Teilzeit immer noch als Karriereknick gilt. Wer auf wirklich einflussreiche, so richtig gut bezahlte Stellen will, der muss in der Regel ausstrahlen, 7 Tage die Woche, 16 Stunden am Tag im Einsatz zu sein.\n\nIn solch einer Arbeitswelt machen Menschen, die wirklich Verantwortung in der Sorge- und Familienarbeit übernehmen, ganz schnell den Zweiten.\n\nDie Frage ist: Wie gehen wir jetzt mit diesem Widerspruch um? Ich schlage vor, wir nutzen diesen Widerspruch für einen gedanklichen Fortschritt. Womöglich ist es für unsere Gesellschaft insgesamt besser, wenn generell kürzere Arbeitszeiten zum Standard werden,\n\ndass also gilt: kurze Vollzeit für alle, wie es eher in gewerkschaftlichen Kreisen bezeichnet wird, oder - um mit Frigga Haug zu sprechen - längere Teilzeit für alle. Längere Teilzeit für alle? Das klingt erst einmal verdammt ungeheuerlich. So manchem mag die Vorstellung, dass die 30-Stunden-Woche oder ganz visionär die 20-Stunden-Woche irgendwann zum gesellschaftlichen Standard wird, als Zumutung erscheinen. Man hat sich ja auch so gut eingerichtet in der affektierten Überarbeitung, in der sicheren 90-Stunden-Woche, die vor dem unsicheren Terrain Familien- und Sorgearbeit schützt.\n\nAber ich habe eine gute Nachricht: Workaholismus ist heilbar. Das Leben ist viel zu vielseitig, als dass wir uns allein auf Erwerbsarbeit reduzieren sollten. Wagen wir also kürzere Arbeitszeiten für alle!\n\nErinnern wir uns: „Ökonomie der Zeit, darin löst sich schließlich alle Ökonomie auf.“ Ja, wer über die Zeit anderer verfügt, verfügt über deren Lebenszeit. Insofern sind die Kämpfe um Zeit, die Kämpfe um Arbeitszeitverkürzung auch Kämpfe um die Verfügungsgewalt über das eigene Leben. Es geht also um viel, es geht um Selbstbestimmung und um Emanzipation von Männern und Frauen gleichermaßen.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nEs freut mich ja, zu hören, dass Sie hier verkünden, Karl Marx gelesen zu haben, und daraus offensichtlich Ihre Politisierung abgeleitet haben. Vor dem Hintergrund, dass Sie das hier ansprechen, würde mich interessieren, welche Schriften und welche Aussagen Ihnen denn besonders in Erinnerung geblieben sind.\"\n11779,michaela-engelmeier,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! 50 Millionen Kinder sind ohne Heimat auf der Flucht. Jeder zweite Flüchtende ist minderjährig und flüchtet vor Gewalt, Krieg, Hunger und Armut. So berichtet das Kinderhilfswerk UNICEF heute in seinem ersten globalen Bericht und zeigt damit auf, dass diese Zahl überproportional hoch ist.\n\nVor der Migrationskonferenz am 19. und 20. November in New York ruft UNICEF dazu auf, Kinder - insbesondere solche ohne Begleitung - besser vor Gewalt und Ausbeutung zu schützen. Wie das geht, steht geschrieben, und zwar in der UN-Kinderrechtskonvention. Mit ihr hat jedes Kind die gleichen Rechte. Es darf keine Rolle spielen, an welchem Ort oder in welchem Land es aufwächst.\n\nViel hat sich seit der Ratifizierung getan. Aber es gibt leider auch noch viel zu tun. Dabei hilft es nicht, blindlinks Geld in die Hand zu nehmen und zu verteilen. Wenn wir in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit etwas erreichen wollen, müssen wir uns an die SDGs halten, um eine nachhaltige Veränderung zu erreichen. Daher müssen die Haushaltsmittel, die uns dafür zur Verfügung stehen, auch so eingesetzt werden, dass ein verbindlicher Rahmen der Hilfe entsteht. Das können wir nicht nur durch Sonderinitiativen erreichen. Dafür braucht es eine kontinuierliche Investition in Maßnahmen und Projekte.\n\nEine dieser nachhaltigen Investitionen muss die Geburtenregistrierung betreffen. Wir müssen beim Lebensstart dieser Kinder beginnen, wie wir es in unserem einstimmig angenommenen Antrag „Bevölkerungsstatistiken verbessern - Zivile Registrierungssysteme stärken“ parlamentarisch beschlossen haben. Wir wollen das verbriefte Recht von Kindern auf die Registrierung ihrer Geburt, wie in Artikel 7 der UN-Kinderrechtskonvention verankert, in die Tat umsetzen. Die Geburtenregistrierung ist ein Grundstein für die Verwirklichung von Kinderrechten. Denn ohne eine Geburtsurkunde haben Kinder auch keine Bürgerrechte.\n\nZum Beispiel im Gesundheitsbereich sollte geprüft werden, inwieweit eine Verzahnung von GAVI-Aktivitäten und Geburtenregistrierung sinnvoll ist. Wenn Kinder und Eltern zur Impfung erscheinen, können sie nachregistriert werden. Wir müssen dafür eine digitale Plattform errichten, damit die unterschiedlichen Bedingungen der einzelnen Länder besser berücksichtigt werden können.\n\nWeiter ist es von zentraler Bedeutung, sich für eine bessere Bildung zu engagieren. Dabei dürfen wir nicht nur auf Ausbildung und weiterführende Bildung setzen. Wir müssen uns gerade in fragilen Staaten mehr im Bereich der grundständigen und auch in der frühkindlichen Bildung aufstellen.\n\nDer ebenfalls diese Woche veröffentlichte Bericht der UNESCO macht deutlich, dass vor allem bei der Grundbildung mehr investiert werden muss. Nach Schätzungen der Vereinten Nationen fehlt es 60 Millionen Kindern weltweit an formaler Bildung. Ein Drittel dieser Kinder stammt aus Krisenregionen. Es ist aber nicht ausreichend, nur Verbesserungen in diesem Bereich zu fordern. Was wir brauchen, sind auch die entsprechenden finanziellen Mittel, um Taten folgen zu lassen. Das ist übrigens auch eine gute Investition. Um es mit den Worten von Nelson Mandela zu sagen: „Bildung ist die mächtigste Waffe, um die Welt zu verändern.“ Ebenso formulierte es auch die Nobelpreisträgerin Malala.\n\nBildung ist auf lange Sicht ein entscheidender Faktor beim Wiederaufbau von Gesellschaften. Durch sie kann auch die Aussicht auf Erfolg von anderen Maßnahmen deutlich verbessert werden.\n\nWir müssen aber auch auf das schauen, was - selbst wenn es Schulen gibt - Bildung verhindert. Ich nenne die uns allen bekannten Übel der Bildungsbrüche: Kinderarbeit, Kindersoldaten, IS\u001eZwangsrekrutierung, Frühverheiratung und minderjährige Mütter.\n\nZur Kinderarbeit. Weltweit gehen 168 Millionen Kinder und Jugendliche zwischen 5 und 17 Jahren arbeiten. Das ist häufig die einzige Chance dafür, dass die Familien finanziell über die Runden kommen. Die gesundheitlichen Folgen für die Kinder sind katastrophal, und die fehlende Bildung verbaut alle Chancen auf eine bessere Lebensperspektive.\n\nIm vergangenen Jahr waren wir in Pakistan, wo wir eine Kohlenmine besichtigt haben. Dort haben wir siebenjährige kleine Jungen arbeiten sehen. Sie holen - übrigens ohne Schutz und barfuß - zehn Stunden am Tag die Kohlen aus den Minen heraus, weil ihre Eltern Schuldknechte des Minenbesitzers sind. Das hat mich, wenn ich das sagen darf, nachhaltig beeindruckt.\n\nZur Frühehe. Die Müttersterblichkeit ist eines der größten ungelösten Probleme in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Eine Ursache ist unter anderem auch die Frühehe. UNICEF schätzt, dass jedes Jahr 10 bis 14 Millionen Mädchen gegen ihren Willen verheiratet werden. Es ist riskant für Mutter und Kind, wenn die Mutter so früh ein Kind bekommt. Dieses Problem ist durch die Flüchtlinge übrigens auch in Deutschland angekommen. Auch hier müssen wir uns im Parlament für eine Veränderung starkmachen. Herr Silberhorn, ich nehme gern Ihre Formulierung aus der Ausschusssitzung auf: Die Zukunft von Mädchen darf nicht unter einem Brautschleier begraben werden.\n\nMein Votum: Wir dürfen in Deutschland keine Frühehen anerkennen oder dulden. Hier gibt es gesetzgeberischen Handlungsbedarf.\n\nZu den Kindersoldaten. Zu viele Kinder leiden nicht nur an Hunger, Durst und Krankheit, sondern auch an Gewalt. Dazu gehört nicht nur, dass sie Gewalt erleiden, sondern auch, dass sie Gewalt ausüben müssen. Sie erleiden als Teil von bewaffneten Gruppen und Armeen unermessliches Leid. Die meisten von ihnen sind ihr Leben lang traumatisiert, haben keine Schulbildung erhalten und haben somit keine Chance auf eine normale Zukunft.\n\nNach wie vor sind etwa 250 000 Kinder in mindestens 19 Ländern als Kindersoldaten aktiv. Zurzeit ist es übrigens vor allem der „Islamische Staat“, der mit seiner fanatischen Ideologie Kinder manipuliert, sie als Selbstmordattentäter in den Tod schickt oder als Henker missbraucht.\n\nIch komme zu einem ähnlichen Problem, das ich erwähne, weil wir gerade in der Debatte um den Haushalt sind. Wir müssen auch einmal genauer hinsehen, wohin die deutschen Hilfsgelder fließen und wie sie zum Beispiel von NGOs verwendet werden. Erst kürzlich gab es Berichte über einen sogenannten Märtyrerfonds in den palästinensischen Autonomiegebieten, mit dem Familien und Angehörige getöteter Terroristen in Millionenhöhe unterstützt werden, wenn sie eines ihrer Kinder als Selbstmordattentäter auf den Weg schicken. Das ist Missbrauch von Hilfsgeldern!\n\nEbenso gilt es auch, genau hinzusehen, was an UN-Schulen passiert, damit diese nicht durch Ideologie zu Institutionen der Erziehung zum Hass werden. Wenn die Bundesrepublik Deutschland Mittel für die Entwicklung in die Hand nimmt, muss sichergestellt werden, dass sie ihren Zweck erfüllen und nicht missbraucht werden.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich hier noch einmal deutlich betonen: Ohne grundlegende Bildung ist keine nachhaltige Entwicklung möglich. Darum gilt es, verstärkt in Bildung zu investieren und Ursachen für Bildungsbrüche zu beseitigen. Nur so sind wir glaubwürdig, wenn wir davon reden, dass wir Fluchtursachen bekämpfen wollen.\"\n2411,ralf-brauksiepe,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Entwicklungen in Syrien und darüber hinaus im ganzen Nahen und Mittleren Osten verdienen unverändert unsere ganze Aufmerksamkeit; denn das Leiden der Bevölkerung in Syrien geht weiter. Millionen von Flüchtlingen haben das Land bereits verlassen und suchen Zuflucht in den Nachbarstaaten.\n\nErst kürzlich hat deshalb der Deutsche Bundestag aus guten Gründen mit großer Mehrheit einer Beteiligung deutscher Streitkräfte am maritimen Begleitschutz für die Vernichtung der syrischen Chemiewaffen zugestimmt. Das ist aus Sicht der Bundesregierung weit mehr als nur ein symbolischer Beitrag. Wir leisten einen aktiven Beitrag dafür, dass Massenvernichtungswaffen vernichtet werden, und ich bin dankbar, dass es dafür eine so große Zustimmung hier in diesem Hohen Hause gegeben hat. Wer dem nicht zugestimmt hat, hat hinsichtlich der Bekämpfung von Massenvernichtungswaffen wirklich jede politische Glaubwürdigkeit verloren.\n\nUrsprünglich eine reine Beobachtermission, machte UNIFIL den Waffenstillstand zwischen Israel und dem Libanon vom 14. August 2006 erst möglich. Seitdem ist diese robuste VN-Mission ein entscheidender Stabilitätsfaktor in der Region.\n\nDer Auftrag der Mission ist es letztlich, den Rahmen für politische Lösungen offener Fragen zwischen dem Libanon und Israel zu bieten. Es gilt, die Beziehungen zwischen diesen beiden Nachbarn stabil zu halten und damit zur Stabilität der gesamten Region beizutragen. Genau das ist das, was wir tun können. Man kann als erster Redner nicht alles vorhersehen, was nachher noch gesagt wird. Aber wir haben heute ja schon eine Debatte über ein Mandat gehabt, und wir haben unsere Erfahrungen.\n\nEs ist wahr: Natürlich sind die Konflikte zwischen dem Libanon und Israel noch längst nicht gelöst. Aber diese Konflikte hat nicht die Bundeswehr ausgelöst, die Ursachen dafür liegen ganz woanders. Wir leisten mit der Bundeswehr einen Beitrag für einen Rahmen zur Konfliktlösung. Den Konflikt müssen andere lösen. Wir tragen zur Konfliktlösung bei.\n\nEs geht aber auch konkret darum, die libanesische Regierung auf Anforderung bei der Sicherung der Grenzen zu unterstützen und zu verhindern, dass Rüstungsgüter und sonstiges Wehrmaterial illegal in den Libanon verbracht werden. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wer wirklich dagegen ist, dass Rüstungsgüter unkontrolliert und illegal in ein Land verbracht werden, der muss für dieses Mandat bzw. die Fortsetzung dieses Mandats stimmen. Nur so kann in dieser Region ein Beitrag zur Verhinderung der illegalen Verbringung geleistet werden.\n\nWir sind mit der Bundeswehr seit dem Jahr 2006 an UNIFIL beteiligt, genauer gesagt: am damals neu aufgestellten Marineeinsatzverband der Mission. Auftrag unserer Soldatinnen und Soldaten ist es, die seeseitigen Grenzen des Libanon zu sichern. Wichtiger Teil des deutschen Beitrags ist aber auch der Fähigkeitsaufbau der libanesischen Marine. Wir wollen die libanesische Marine so weit ausbilden und ausstatten, dass sie den Schutz der seeseitigen Grenzen künftig selbstständig durchführen und gewährleisten kann. Es ist durch deutsche Unterstützung in den vergangenen Mandatszeiträumen bereits ein bemerkenswerter Fähigkeitsaufbau bei der libanesischen Marine erreicht worden.\n\nAls letztes großes Projekt wurde bisher im vergangenen Jahr der Aufbau der Küstenradarorganisation mit deutschen Mitteln abgeschlossen. Heute sind acht Stationen personell besetzt und bereits voll funktionsfähig. Zusätzlich haben wir seit dem Jahr 2007 drei Patrouillenboote, Schiffssicherungsausstattung, Anlagen für eine Maschinenwerkstatt und Schulmöbel an die libanesische Regierung übergeben. Zudem wurde eine hochmoderne Navigations- und Radarausbildungsanlage beschafft.\n\nAuch für dieses Jahr ist wieder ein wichtiges Projekt geplant. Ressortübergreifend werden durch das Auswärtige Amt und das Bundesministerium der Verteidigung drei Elektronikwerkstätten sowie ein Werkstattfahrzeug aufgebaut und ausgerüstet. Damit soll die libanesische Marine in die Lage versetzt werden, die Ausbildung und Durchführung von Wartung und Instandsetzung elektronischer Anlagen künftig eigenständig wahrzunehmen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Sicherheitslage im Nahen und Mittleren Osten ist nach wie vor angespannt. Innenpolitische Probleme vieler Länder und der Konflikt in Syrien fordern unverändert unsere ganze Aufmerksamkeit. UNIFIL ist dabei einer der wichtigsten Stabilitätsanker in der Region. Er kann nicht allein die Probleme lösen, aber er ist und er bleibt ein wichtiger Stabilitätsanker. Deswegen ist es gut, dass wir mit unseren Soldatinnen und Soldaten zu dieser Stabilität beitragen.\n\nDeswegen ist es naheliegend und nicht erstaunlich, dass sowohl der Libanon als auch Israel eine Fortsetzung der Mission wünschen. Sie legen ausdrücklich großen Wert auf eine fortgesetzte deutsche Beteiligung an dieser so nachhaltigen Mission. Gemeinsam mit ihren Kameraden aus 36 anderen Nationen haben unsere deutschen Soldatinnen und Soldaten für UNIFIL viel geleistet und für die Region eine Menge erreicht.\n\nUnsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten auf unseren Schnellbooten, unsere Stabs- und Unterstützungskräfte in Limassol auf Zypern, unsere Soldaten in den Stäben des UNIFIL Force Headquarters im Libanon sowie unsere Ausbilder im Libanon erfüllen die ihnen zugewiesenen Aufgaben gewissenhaft und erfolgreich. Sie können stolz auf das Geleistete sein. Wir können dankbar für das sein, was unter diesen schwierigen Bedingungen geleistet wird.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, durch unsere vielfältigen Beiträge haben sich über die letzten acht Jahre intensive Kontakte zwischen Deutschland und dem Libanon entwickelt. Deutschland wird heute als vertrauensvoller Partner in der Region geschätzt. Auch in Zukunft wird es noch eines starken internationalen Engagements bedürfen, um die Lage vor Ort zu stabilisieren und den Aufbau der libanesischen Streitkräfte voranzubringen.\n\nDie personelle Obergrenze für die deutsche Beteiligung am UNIFIL-Flottenverband wird bei 300 Soldatinnen und Soldaten belassen. In der Realität liegen wir deutlich darunter. Aber es ist sicherlich sinnvoll, diese Obergrenze zu belassen; denn sie erlaubt es uns, alle im Rahmen des Mandats vorgesehenen Aufgaben zu erfüllen, und sie trägt der unverändert angespannten Sicherheitslage in der Region Rechnung.\n\nWir wollen auf dem bisher Erreichten aufbauen und weiterhin einen Beitrag zu Stabilität und Sicherheit in einer Region leisten, die in unserer Nachbarschaft liegt und diese Stabilität im Hinblick auf eine friedliche Entwicklung ganz dringend braucht. Deswegen ist es der Wunsch der Bundesregierung, dass das Mandat für die deutsche Beteiligung an UNIFIL um zwölf Monate verlängert wird.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Bundesregierung bittet Sie daher um Unterstützung für diesen Antrag im Sinne der Stabilität in unserer Nachbarregion und im Sinne der Menschen im Nahen und Mittleren Osten.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n3843,norbert-barthle,\"Sehr verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Wer der Rede unseres Bundesfinanzministers genau zugehört hat, ist eigentlich umfänglich informiert über die Inhalte des vorliegenden Pakets. Aber ich vermute, dass manche da draußen auch dem Kollegen Schick zugehört haben. Deshalb ist es mir wichtig, Herr Kollege Schick, zur Erklärung Ihrer Position festzustellen: Sie waren schon immer für die Vergemeinschaftung der Verschuldung und gemeinsame Haftung bei der Verschuldung.\n\nSie gehörten zu denjenigen, die einen gemeinsamen Schuldentilgungsfonds gefordert haben.\n\nGenau das ist der Unterschied zwischen Ihrer Auffassung und unserer, die der Minister dargelegt hat.\n\nDas müssen die Menschen wissen. Dann erklärt sich die Unterschiedlichkeit Ihrer Position.\n\nWas das gesamte Paket angeht, haben meine Vorredner die notwendigen Details bereits dargelegt. Ich will mich daher beschränken auf die direkte Bankenrekapitalisierung durch den ESM. Ich betrachte dieses neue Instrument als sinnvoll. Es rundet das Gesamtpaket ab. Ganz so neu ist es nicht; denn eigentlich haben die Staats- und Regierungschefs bereits im Jahr 2012 vereinbart, dies zu machen, allerdings unter der Voraussetzung, dass es einen einheitlichen Abwicklungsmechanismus und eine einheitliche Bankenaufsicht gibt. Das wurde als Voraussetzung immer genannt. Diese haben wir nun erfüllt. Deshalb ist es sinnvoll, diesen letzten Baustein vollends zu beschließen. Ich werbe daher um Zustimmung zum gesamten Paket.\n\nErinnern wir uns daran: Die grundsätzliche Funktion des ESM ist eigentlich, Staaten in massiven Finanzierungsschwierigkeiten mit Hilfskrediten im Rahmen eines Anpassungsprogramms beizustehen, um damit die Finanzstabilität der gesamten Euro-Zone zu wahren. Nun hat sich im Zuge der 2010 begonnenen Staatsschuldenkrise gezeigt, dass es durchaus zu negativen Wechselwirkungen zwischen der Schieflage der öffentlichen Haushalte und den Störungen in den jeweiligen Finanzsektoren kommen kann. Im Extremfall ist es möglich, dass ein Staat die benötigten Finanzhilfen nicht mehr in voller Höhe bereitstellen kann, ohne seine eigene Schuldentragfähigkeit zu überdehnen und den Zugang zum Kapitalmarkt zu verlieren. Wenn eine betroffene Bank systemrelevant ist, also das Finanzsystem in der Euro-Zone insgesamt gefährdet, kann unter Umständen eine direkte Rekapitalisierung dieser Bank durch den ESM tatsächlich anstehen, allerdings - darauf hat der Finanzminister deutlich hingewiesen - anders, als es sich 2012 viele im europäischen Raum vorgestellt haben. Damals dachten manche, man könne mit diesem Instrument die nationalen Bankprobleme aus der Vergangenheit beim ESM abladen. Dem ist nicht so. Das läuft nicht; denn dem haben wir einen klaren Riegel vorgeschoben. Die direkte Rekapitalisierung durch den ESM steht immer am Ende einer langen Haftungsabfolge, wie sie der Finanzminister dargelegt hat. Die Risiken bleiben bei denjenigen, die zuvor Gewinne eingestrichen haben. Das ist richtig so.\n\nDass wir diesem Prinzip europaweit Gültigkeit verschaffen, ist eine der zentralen Errungenschaften der Bankenunion. Darauf können wir zu Recht stolz sein.\n\nWenn wir zurückblicken, was wir alles zur Bekämpfung der aktuellen Krise und im weiteren Verlauf zur Vorbeugung getan haben, dann müssen wir feststellen, dass das, was wir bisher geleistet haben, durchaus erfolgreich war. Von den fünf Ländern, die unter den Rettungsschirm gegangen sind, nehmen noch zwei Länder, Griechenland und Zypern, Hilfsprogramme in Anspruch. Griechenland wird bereits Ende 2014 aus dem Programm aussteigen. Ich frage die Kritiker: Was haben wir also falsch gemacht? Es funktioniert doch, auch wenn ein bekannter deutscher Verfassungsrechtler, der schon einmal in Karlsruhe gescheitert ist, erneut meint, dass wir dieses Paket ablehnen sollten. Er führt dafür Begründungen auf, die aus meiner Sicht eher juristisch-sophistisch als tragfähig sind.\n\nFür mich ist klar: Diese direkte Bankenrekapitalisierung kommt nur als allerletztes Instrument infrage und steht am Ende einer langen Haftungskette, und - das ist mir wichtig - sie erhöht nicht das gesamte Risiko, das wir mit dem ESM übernommen haben. Das ist und bleibt Teil des gesamten ESM-Volumens, auch wenn klar ist, dass am Ende, wenn dieses Instrument angewendet werden sollte, tatsächlich der ESM und die Kapitalgeber des ESM, also die einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten, dafür haften. Das ist keine Frage, und das ist nie bestritten worden.\n\nAber es gibt auch für die Anwendung dieses Instruments klare Leitlinien. Der Haushaltsausschuss hat ihnen gestern zugestimmt. Diese Leitlinien legen für die Anwendung sehr hohe Hürden fest. Ich will ganz kurz daran erinnern:\n\nEs muss der Antrag eines Mitgliedstaats erfolgen. Eine Bank kann sich nicht direkt an den ESM wenden, sondern nur ein Mitgliedstaat. Es entsteht damit eine Rechtsbeziehung zwischen dem Mitgliedstaat und dem ESM.\n\nEine direkte Rekapitalisierung ist nur dann möglich, wenn die indirekte Rekapitalisierung nicht mehr möglich war.\n\nSie ist immer mit Auflagen verbunden, entweder institutsspezifischen, sektorspezifischen oder gesamtwirtschaftlichen Auflagen. Das ist das, was man als MoU, Memorandum of Understanding, kennt.\n\nSchließlich steht dieses Mittel im Rahmen der Haftungskaskade erst ganz am Ende, als allerletztes Mittel zur Verfügung.\n\nÜberdies ist es so, dass der beantragende Mitgliedstaat auch bei der direkten Rekapitalisierung dafür sorgen muss, dass eine minimale Kapitalquote der Bank von 4,5 Prozent erreicht wird. Das bedeutet in der Folge, dass die direkte Rekapitalisierung nicht bei Banken zum Tragen kommt, die nicht überlebensfähig sind, sondern nur Banken gerettet werden, die aufgrund dieser Mindestkapitalquote eine Überlebensperspektive haben. Das wiederum sichert die Rückzahlung der vergebenen Kredite.\n\nMit dieser Abfolge ist sichergestellt, dass ein Missbrauch dieses Instruments ausgeschlossen ist. Man kann sogar annehmen - darauf hat Herr Regling in der Anhörung, die wir durchgeführt haben, hingewiesen -, dass dieses Instrument vermutlich nie zur Anwendung kommen wird, weil die Hürden für die Anwendung sehr hoch sind.\n\nEin wichtiger Punkt, den ich noch erwähnen möchte, ist die Parlamentsbeteiligung. Wir haben bei all diesen Maßnahmen immer großen Wert darauf gelegt, dass das Parlament, der gesamte Deutsche Bundestag oder zumindest der Haushaltsausschuss, in die Entscheidungen eingebunden wird. Auch bei diesem Instrument ist das so.\n\n- Danke, lieber Kollege Johannes Kahrs. - Es ist sogar so, dass nicht nur die Einführung dieses Instruments, sondern auch jede einzelne Anwendung zunächst vom Deutschen Bundestag beschlossen werden muss. Anderenfalls müssten der Finanzminister oder die Bundeskanzlerin Nein sagen. Sie können sich auch nicht der Stimme enthalten. Wir müssen einen positiven Beschluss herbeiführen, und damit ist der gesamte Bundestag involviert.\n\nWir haben nach intensiven Beratungen die ursprünglich vorgesehene Regelung, dass gegebenenfalls, wenn es sich um vertrauliche Informationen handelt, nur das sogenannte Neunergremium informiert werden sollte, aus dem Gesetzentwurf wieder herausgenommen. Auf die rechtlichen Bedenken hat unser Bundestagspräsident Norbert Lammert schon sehr frühzeitig hingewiesen. Deshalb haben wir diese Regelung herausgenommen. Damit sind wir verfassungsrechtlich auf dem sicheren Weg. Wir haben dies also nicht auf die leichte Schulter genommen.\n\nWir wissen, dass damit eine große Verantwortung für das gesamte Hohe Haus einhergeht; denn im Zweifelsfall müsste der gesamte Deutsche Bundestag die Sachlage beurteilen. Das geht dann, wenn man die notwendige Vertraulichkeit wirklich herstellt; aber die müsste dann auch gewährleistet sein.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Schluss noch zwei, drei Anmerkungen zu der gesamten Situation, in der wir uns befinden, machen. Wir beschließen dieses Paket zur Bankenunion in einer Zeit, in der die Staatsschuldenkrise noch nicht so richtig überwunden ist. Wenn man sich die Staatsschuldenquoten der einzelnen Euro-Länder genau anschaut, stellt man fest, dass sie seit Ausbruch der Krise nicht gesunken, sondern im Gegenteil gestiegen sind.\n\nAlso darf man die Frage der Staatsverschuldung nicht auf die leichte Schulter nehmen. Anders ausgedrückt: Wir haben einen Stabilitätspakt beschlossen. Wir haben einen Fiskalvertrag geschlossen. Wir haben die Verschärfungen des Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakts beschlossen. Derzeit wird auf europäischer Ebene vorwiegend über Wachstumsimpulse und weniger über die Frage der Stabilität diskutiert. Das ist etwas, was uns mit Sorge erfüllt; denn wir sind der Auffassung, dass das eine nicht ohne das andere zu denken ist und dass man die Balance zwischen Wachstumsimpulsen und Stabilitätsbemühungen wahren muss. Wer den Wachstumspakt genau studiert und wer den Fiskalvertrag genau liest, der stellt sehr schnell fest, dass es dort vorwiegend um Stabilität, um Defizitreduzierung und nicht um Konjunkturprogramme und Ähnliches geht.\n\nDefizitabbau ist der Kernpunkt all dieser vertraglichen Vereinbarungen. Das sollten wir im Auge behalten, insbesondere dann, wenn in den kommenden Wochen und Monaten die Europäische Kommission die vorgelegten Haushalte anderer Mitgliedstaaten beurteilen muss. Wir sind sehr gespannt, wie dies erfolgt, und hoffen, dass damit der Wachstums- und Stabilitätspakt nicht beschädigt, sondern gestärkt wird.\n\nDanke.\"\n10579,kai-gehring,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Gesundheit ist für uns alle ein existenzieller Wert. Deshalb haben wir alle miteinander eine große Verantwortung dafür, kluge Rahmenbedingungen für die Gesundheitsforschung zu setzen. Dabei müssen wir die Interessen der Patientinnen und Patienten dringend stärker in den Mittelpunkt stellen: von der Diagnostik über Sicherheit bis Heilung.\n\nViele Menschen setzen große Hoffnung auf den medizinischen Fortschritt. Was die Koalition als Antrag vorlegt, wird diesen Hoffnungen leider nicht gerecht; denn Sie verengen einmal mehr Ihren Blick auf Erleichterungen für die Gesundheitswirtschaft.\n\nGesundheitsforschung findet ja nicht nur da statt. Frau De Ridder, wer Wagniskapital fordert, der muss auch eine steuerliche Forschungsförderung vorsehen.\n\nBeim Transfer medizinischer Innovationen drückt der Schuh jedoch an vielen weiteren Stellen, die in Ihrem Antrag nicht angegangen werden. Deshalb ist er unterkomplex. Wir meinen, allein traditionelle Instrumente zur Förderung der Gesundheitswirtschaft greifen zu kurz.\n\nVor fünf Jahren hat die SPD in der Opposition einen Antrag mit dem denkwürdigen Titel „Gesundheitsforschung an den Bedarfen der Patientinnen und Patienten ausrichten“ eingebracht.\n\nDarin haben Sie selbst kritisiert, dass bei der vom Bund geförderten Gesundheitsforschung der Eindruck entstehe, sie solle in erster Linie - Zitat - „der Stärkung der Gesundheitswirtschaft dienen“.\n\nFünf Jahre später legen Sie als Koalition einen Antrag vor, der genau diese Verengung fortschreibt und zementiert, anstatt sie aufzubrechen. Das hätten Sie jetzt einmal ändern müssen.\n\nWir schlagen weiter gehende strukturelle Veränderungen vor.\n\nErstens. Ein wesentliches Ziel staatlicher Forschungsförderung sollte sein, herauszufinden, was kranken Menschen tatsächlich dient. Damit geförderte Projekte von den Bedarfen der Betroffenen ausgehen, muss das Rahmenprogramm zur Gesundheitsforschung darauf neu ausgerichtet werden.\n\nDafür brauchen wir mehr Versorgungsforschung und eine bessere Qualitätssicherung.\n\nZweitens. In der Gesundheitsforschung fehlt es besonders an transparenten Strukturen,\n\ndie es Forschern, Zulassungsstellen und nicht zuletzt den Forschungsförderern erleichtern, fundiertere Entscheidungen zu treffen.\n\nManche Zulassungsstudien sind von eher dünner Qualität. Aussagekräftige klinische Studien sowie die Offenlegung von Studienergebnissen und Registern sind Mangelware. Anstatt hier Abhilfe zu schaffen, beendet das BMBF ausgerechnet zum 31. März die Förderung des Deutschen Registers Klinischer Studien. Das ist verantwortungslos.\n\nDrittens. Wir finden die Konzentration auf große Gesundheitsforschungszentren eher problematisch, übrigens ebenso wie die DFG. Wir brauchen mehr Orientierung an der Realität in den Praxen und Kliniken. Gerade die Kliniker müssen als gleichberechtigte Partner der Forschung behandelt und angemessener ausgestattet werden.\n\nIn der Versorgungsforschung muss übrigens die Diversität bzw. Vielfalt der Patientinnen und Patienten viel stärker berücksichtigt werden; denn wer dies ignoriert, forscht am Bedarf vorbei.\n\nPatientenorientierung kann auch durch eine inhaltliche Öffnung von Forschungsprogrammen unterstützt werden. Bisher fällt gerade die inter- und transdisziplinäre Forschung durch das Raster der bestehenden Förderkriterien. Diese inhaltliche Öffnung ist gerade deshalb so wichtig, weil hier oft nicht nur die technischen, sondern auch die sozialen Innovationen zum Wohle der Patienten hierzulande und weltweit entstehen.\n\nWir brauchen eine Gesundheitsforschung, die mehr und schneller dazu beiträgt, dass seltene, vernachlässigte und armutsassoziierte Krankheiten - von HIV bis Malaria - global bekämpft werden, und wir brauchen eine Gesundheitsforschung, die Medikamente zu fairen Preisen bringt.\n\nEs ist schade, dass die Koalition nicht die Chancen für einen breiteren Aufschlag genutzt hat. Ihr Antrag ist insgesamt lückenhaft. Deshalb können wir ihm nicht zustimmen.\"\n5914,irene-mihalic,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Uns alle macht es natürlich fassungslos, dass Menschen, die von sich behaupten, sich für eine bessere Welt einzusetzen, den simplen und stumpfen Weg der Gewalt gehen; denn das, was am Ende bleibt, konnten wir eindrucksvoll sehen: Das sind brennende Einsatzfahrzeuge, zerstörte öffentliche Einrichtungen, viele verletzte Menschen in Zivil und in Uniform. Das ist nicht die Welt, für die wir uns einsetzen. In so einer Welt möchte ich nicht leben, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nUnerträglich ist für mich auch der Zynismus, der zum Teil aufseiten der Veranstalter geäußert wurde:\n\nMan habe das anders geplant, man sei entsetzt und bestürzt, man habe - jetzt kommt das große Aber - aber auch Verständnis für die Wut und für die Empörung; viele Leute hätten den Polizeieinsatz eben als Provo-kation und als Herausforderung begriffen. Ja, Entschuldigung! Jemandem, der sich so erklärt, kann ich das Bedauern nicht abnehmen.\n\nDass Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Linken, den Aufruf von Blockupy mit unterschrieben haben,\n\nzeigt einfach noch einmal sehr eindrucksvoll, welches Verhältnis Sie zu Europa haben. Die Europäische Union als größtes Friedens- und Freiheitsprojekt der letzten 70 Jahre\n\nhat sicherlich ganz viele Fehler - da sind wir uns auch in Teilen einig -, sie aber als „autoritäres Regime“ und Deutschland als „Herz der Bestie“ zu bezeichnen, wie in diesem Aufruf geschehen, geht gar nicht.\n\nWas haben denn bitte die Einsatzkräfte mit der Europäischen Zentralbank und der Austeritätspolitik zu tun? Sie sind nicht die Wachhunde des Finanzkapitalismus, sondern sie sind Teil unserer Gesellschaft. Polizeibeamtinnen und Polizeibeamte schützen Menschen, Sachen und Grundrechte wie das hohe Gut der Versammlungsfreiheit. Ihnen gelten unser Dank und unser Respekt, dass sie sich dafür einsetzen.\n\nWer die Polizei zur Projektionsfläche seines Hasses macht, bricht dem Finanzmarktkapitalismus im Übrigen nicht den geringsten Zacken aus der Krone, trägt aber zerstörerische Gewalt mitten in diese Gesellschaft, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nNatürlich müssen wir uns auch genau ansehen, wie der Polizeieinsatz gelaufen ist, ob das Einsatzkonzept das richtige war, ob es auch Fehlverhalten aufseiten der Beamten gegeben hat. Diese Nachbereitung wird stattfinden. Wir müssen auch die Debatte über Ausstattung und Personal bei der Polizei führen - und das auch nicht erst seit gestern.\n\nAber heute geht es darum, scharf und unmissverständlich die gewaltsamen Ausschreitungen in Frankfurt zu thematisieren.\n\nDie richtige Botschaft, die von diesen Protesten eigentlich ausgehen sollte, ist dabei völlig untergegangen, und das tut mir in der Seele weh;\n\ndenn wir brauchen eine friedliche Bewegung, die auch den Mut hat, die verheerende Sparpolitik in Europa scharf zu kritisieren, die immer wieder daran erinnert, dass jedes Wirtschaftssystem sich daran messen lassen muss, ob es den Menschen nützt und nicht umgekehrt,\n\ndie dringend darauf pocht, dass in einer Demokratie nicht nur Machthaber, sondern vor allem politische -Inhalte wählbar bleiben müssen. Weder Banken noch Sparzwänge sind der Souverän, sondern es sind die Bürgerinnen und Bürger, und damit muss sich auch diese Bundesregierung auseinandersetzen.\n\nDiesen wichtigen Zielen wurde durch die gewalttätigen Ausschreitungen gestern ein Bärendienst erwiesen. Die Sprecher von Blockupy sollten sich daher nicht nur in lauen Worten von der Gewalt distanzieren, sondern vor allem wirksam dafür sorgen, dass Gruppen, die Gewalt als legitimes Mittel des Protestes ansehen, nicht Teil eines solchen Bündnisses werden können.\n\nHier muss ganz klar differenziert werden. Diese Differenzierung müssen wir einfordern.\n\nIch finde, diese Differenzierung kann man aber auch von Ihnen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der CDU/CSU, erwarten. Ich kann mich noch sehr gut an die Hogesa-Debatte erinnern - es ist noch nicht so lange her -, die wir im Innenausschuss geführt haben. Da konnten Sie gar nicht genug differenzieren. Sie konnten nicht genug differenzieren zwischen den ehrbaren Bürgerinnen und Bürgern, die nur Angst vor dem Salafismus haben,\n\nund den aus Ihrer Sicht einigen wenigen gewaltbereiten Hooligans und wenigen Neonazis, die da unterwegs waren.\n\nUnd was tun Sie jetzt? Jetzt versuchen Sie, die gesamte Protestbewegung zu diskreditieren: den Deutschen Gewerkschaftsbund, Attac und alle demokratischen Parteien, die in Frankfurt waren.\n\nFür Sie sind das alles jetzt offenbar gewaltbereite Chaoten, die das Versammlungsrecht missbrauchen.\n\n- Das erzählen Sie mal den Tausenden Demonstrantinnen und Demonstranten, die gestern vollkommen friedlich am Frankfurter Römer an der Kundgebung teilgenommen haben.\n\nDa kann ich nur sagen: Ganz dünnes Eis, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Schluss sagen: Das staatliche Gewaltmonopol - da komme ich auf den Polizeieinsatz zu sprechen - ist eine wichtige Errungenschaft im demokratischen Rechtsstaat. Deswegen können Gewalt und mutwillige Zerstörung von Sachen auch nie legitime Mittel von politischen Auseinandersetzungen sein.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4835,markus-kurth,\"Ja, gerne.\n\nEs ist traurig, dass es noch nicht einmal Modellrechnungen gibt, aus denen hervorgeht, welche jährlichen Kosten der Deutschen Rentenversicherung entstehen würden, wenn sich die Rentenbeitragszahlungen für Rentner, die einer sozialversicherungspflichtigen Beschäftigung nachgehen, künftig rentensteigernd auswirken würden. Wenn ich aber die Berichterstattung zur -Koalitionsarbeitsgruppe betreffend flexible Rentenübergänge richtig verfolgt habe, dann sollen die von dieser Arbeitsgruppe erarbeiteten Vorschläge nicht zu Mehrkosten führen. Ist vor diesem Hintergrund der von der Union eingebrachte Vorschlag betreffend den Flexi-Bonus nicht ohnehin völlig obsolet?\n\nWird die Bundesregierung, wenn diese Koalitionsarbeitsgruppe zu keinen Ergebnissen kommt, eigene Vorschläge unterbreiten, oder mutiert sie quasi zum passiven Klotz der Rentenpolitik?\n\nJa.\n\nDie Erkenntnisarmut der Bundesregierung in diesem Fall ist außerordentlich bedauerlich. Das Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft hat bezüglich der Weiterbeschäftigung nach Erreichen der Altersgrenze erst jüngst dargelegt, dass es erhebliche finanzielle Anreize gibt, wenn man über das gesetzliche Regelalter hinaus arbeiten will, und hält insofern zusätzliche finanzielle Anreize für das Arbeiten jenseits der Regelaltersgrenze für überflüssig.\n\nAndererseits befürwortet es beim Kündigungs- und Befristungsrecht, also im arbeitsrechtlichen Bereich, Eingriffe. Meines Wissens befürwortet das auch der Wirtschaftsflügel der Union. Was hält eigentlich die Bundesregierung von arbeitsrechtlichen Einschnitten an den Stellen, die ich genannt habe?\n\nJa, weil ich erneut, wie bedauerlicherweise auch schon in der Fragestunde in der vergangenen Sitzungswoche im letzten Jahr, keine richtige Antwort auf meine Frage erkennen kann. - Ich habe nicht nach den Ergebnissen der Koalitionsarbeitsgruppe in diesem Fall gefragt, sondern nach der Haltung der Bundesregierung, arbeitsrechtliche Einschränkungen beim Kündigungsschutz und bei der Befristung von Arbeitsverhältnissen von Personen zu machen, die jenseits der Regelaltersgrenze arbeiten.\n\nSie müssen doch zumindest eine Meinung zu einem bestimmten Vorschlag haben. Ich habe extra einen Vorschlag des Instituts der deutschen Wirtschaft und nicht einen der Koalitionspartner genannt, um Ihnen die Beantwortung der Frage möglicherweise zu erleichtern.\"\n12776,michael-leutert,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Minister, im September haben Sie uns einen Entwurf vorgelegt, der knapp 8 Milliarden Euro umfasste, und heute sprechen wir über einen Etat von 8,5 Milliarden Euro, der zur Abstimmung steht. Das heißt, wir haben in den Haushaltsverhandlungen noch einmal nachgesteuert, nachgebessert und etwas über 500 Millionen Euro draufgepackt.\n\nDiese Gelder werden insbesondere für die Krisenbewältigung - 100 Millionen Euro -, aber auch für die bilaterale Zusammenarbeit eingesetzt. Das heißt, diese Gelder werden genutzt, damit die KfW und die GIZ ordnungsgemäß ausgestattet sind, um die Zusammenarbeit bei den Projekten, die wir hier beschließen, auch technisch und finanziell durchführen zu können. Ich hoffe, dass wir an dem Punkt besser ausgestattet sind als dieses Jahr und nicht wieder eine solch peinliche Situation wie im Herbst dieses Jahres im Haushaltsausschuss erleben, wo zwischen Auswärtigem Amt und GIZ über die überplanmäßigen Ausgaben gestritten wurde, bis das Kanzleramt eingeschaltet werden musste.\n\n50 Millionen Euro mehr werden für die „Sonderinitiative Fluchtursachen bekämpfen“ ausgegeben. All das findet unsere Zustimmung.\n\nAllerdings bleiben mindestens zwei große Baustellen, und es hilft nichts, dass man, wenn nichts getan wird, auf Kritik verzichtet, sondern wir müssen sie immer wieder anbringen.\n\nDie erste Baustelle ist das Ziel, 0,7 Prozent vom Bruttoinlandsprodukt für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit auszugeben. Es ist einfach bitter und traurig, dass wir das noch immer nicht geschafft haben.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, heute früh hat die Kanzlerin hier allgemein zum Haushalt 2017 Stellung genommen. Wer aufmerksam zugehört hat, konnte feststellen: Es gab freundliche Worte in Richtung Entwicklungszusammenarbeit - die Zahl 0,7 hat sie aber nicht in den Mund genommen -, und es gab eine ausführliche Würdigung des Verteidigungsetats, wobei sich die Kanzlerin sehr dafür starkgemacht hat, dass in Zukunft 2 Prozent des Bruttoinlandproduktes für Verteidigung ausgegeben werden. Um einmal klarzumachen, um wie viel Geld es da geht: Im Entwicklungsbereich bräuchten wir 25 Milliarden Euro - knapp 10 Milliarden Euro haben wir schon -, also 15 Milliarden Euro mehr. Im Verteidigungsbereich geht es um 65 bis 70 Milliarden Euro, also um ein Mehr von ungefähr 30 Milliarden Euro.\n\nIch will das einmal von einer anderen Seite aus beleuchten: Ich glaube, uns alle in diesem Hause eint, dass wir dafür sind, dass überall Frieden herrscht. Ich glaube, uns eint, dass wir überall Sicherheit für die Menschen haben wollen. Uns eint wahrscheinlich auch, dass wir für soziale Gerechtigkeit einstehen wollen. Vielleicht gibt es da ein paar unterschiedliche Interpretationen, aber weitestgehend sind wir uns einig.\n\nIch glaube, wir sind uns auch darüber einig, wo die Ursachen dafür zu suchen sind, dass nicht überall Frieden herrscht, dass nicht überall Gerechtigkeit herrscht und die Menschen nicht überall in Sicherheit leben. Die Ursachen sind Krieg, Umweltzerstörung, Klimawandel und damit einhergehende Klimakatastrophen. Ursachen sind auch der ungerechte Welthandel und ungerechte Weltwirtschaftsbeziehungen.\n\nDas heißt, wenn wir die Ziele Frieden, Sicherheit, Gerechtigkeit erreichen wollen, müssen diese Ursachen bekämpft werden, und dafür sind die Sonderinitiativen ein geeignetes Instrument. Das bedeutet: Jeder Euro, den wir in Entwicklungszusammenarbeit stecken, jeder Euro, den wir in das Engagement gegen den Klimawandel stecken, jeder Euro, den wir in die Hand nehmen, um Hunger und Armut zu bekämpfen oder Bildungskapazitäten und medizinische Betreuung aufzubauen, ist ein Euro für effektive Verteidigungspolitik. Wenn wir das verstanden haben, können wir in Zukunft vielleicht auch darüber reden, im Bereich der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit 2 Prozent des Bruttoinlandproduktes in die Hand zu nehmen, um damit zu arbeiten.\n\nDann bräuchte man vielleicht nur noch 0,7 Prozent für das Militär. Das wäre das richtige Verhältnis, das wären die richtigen Maßnahmen. Ich glaube, wir würden damit mehr Sicherheit bewirken und das auch noch nachhaltig.\n\nNun wissen wir alle aber auch: Geld allein genügt nicht, um die Probleme zu lösen. Und ob wir 0,7 oder 2 Prozent für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit ausgeben: Wir werden damit nicht alle Probleme lösen können. Deshalb brauchen wir Partner. Das ist die zweite große Baustelle. Wir müssen uns erstens darum bemühen, dort in Zukunft - es gibt zwei Andockstellen für Partner; eine ist die europäische Ebene - zu einer stärkeren Koordinierung und Abstimmung zu kommen, und wir müssen zweitens internationale Organisationen einbinden und internationale Programme umsetzen. Es wird sehr viel Geld in die Hand genommen, um bilaterale Entwicklungszusammenarbeit auf den Weg zu bringen. Viel zu wenig Geld wird in die Hand genommen, um multilaterale Entwicklungszusammenarbeit abgestimmt auf den Weg zu bringen.\n\n- Ja, weil wir mit unseren begrenzten Mitteln und Ressourcen allein die Probleme nicht lösen können.\n\nDie Europäische Union ist derzeit nicht in der besten Verfassung. Wäre es nicht ein lohnender Gedanke - es würde allen helfen, und ich glaube, dass alle Mitgliedsländer der Europäischen Union ein Interesse daran haben, die Fluchtursachen und Krisen zu beseitigen -, sich in diesem Punkt abzustimmen? Um diese Sache könnten sich die europäischen Staaten gemeinsam kümmern und sie so zu einem guten Ergebnis führen. Vielleicht könnten wir da zu größeren Fortschritten kommen, als wenn jedes Land seine eigenen Pläne macht und seine eigenen Initiativen entwickelt.\n\nDie zweite Art von Partnern - das habe ich schon vorhin in meiner Rede zum Haushalt des Auswärtigen Amtes gesagt - sind auf internationaler Ebene Organisationen wie das Kinderhilfswerk und das UN-Flüchtlingshilfswerk. Daneben gibt es auch Programme wie das Welternährungsprogramm. Jedes Jahr müssen diese Institutionen und diese Programme - das ist einfach eine beschämende Situation - um Geld betteln, damit sie auskömmlich ausgestattet sind, um die Aufgaben zu erledigen, um die wir sie bitten.\n\nEs kann nicht sein, dass Deutschland jedes Jahr knapp 300 Millionen Euro an das Flüchtlingshilfswerk zahlt und Russland nur 2 Millionen Euro. Ich finde, wir brauchen einen internationalen Mechanismus - dafür ist jetzt die Zeit gekommen -, der an bestimmte Wirtschaftsdaten gekoppelt ist, um festzulegen, wie hoch der Pflichtbeitrag ist, der an diese Organisationen gezahlt werden muss, damit wir auf internationaler Ebene bei den Themen „Bekämpfung der Fluchtursachen“ sowie „Friedenssicherung“ vorankommen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12799,eva-bulling-schroter,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich denke, wir stehen vor dem Ende des fossilen Energiezeitalters. Ich denke auch, dass uns allen das eigentlich klar ist. Vielleicht kommt das Ende schneller, als wir es uns, als Sie es sich wünschen.\n\nEinige von Ihnen, die das steinzeitliche Energiezeitalter hinauszögern wollen, sind auf die eine oder andere Art mit der fossilen Energieindustrie verbandelt. Wir sprechen davon, dass viele Menschen vor Ort schlicht und einfach Angst vor dem Wandel haben. Das wissen auch wir; das ist heute schon angesprochen worden. Ich kenne diese Angst. Wir, die Linken, nehmen sie ernst.\n\nDas hat aber auch etwas mit Unwissen und Misstrauen gegenüber Ihrer Politik zu tun. Ich kann mich noch erinnern, dass ich kurz vor meiner Zeit im Bundestag auf einer IG-Metall-Schulung war.\n\nDa ging es um die Verhinderung bzw. Vernichtung von Arbeitsplätzen durch nicht betriebenen Umweltschutz.\n\nHeute haben regenerative Energien im Strombereich einen Anteil in Höhe von 33 Prozent.\n\nIch habe Herrn Gabriel gerade genau zugehört und muss sagen: Natürlich sind uns Jobs wichtig\n\n- Sie sollten uns nicht immer das Gegenteil unterstellen -, und natürlich wollen wir keine Deindustrialisierung. Aber ich sage an dieser Stelle auch: Wir wollen existenzsichernde Arbeitsplätze. Wir wollen zukunftsfähige Arbeitsplätze. Wir wollen keine Minijobs, und wir wollen nicht solche Jobs, wie es sie bei bestimmten Zulieferern gibt, bei denen alle Beschäftigten Aufstocker sind. Wir wollen so auch Altersarmut verhindern. Ich denke, es gibt genug Möglichkeiten, entsprechende Jobs zu schaffen, gerade im regenerativen Bereich.\n\nWenn wir über die Entwicklung und das Potenzial der erneuerbaren Energien sprechen, dann sprechen wir wahrscheinlich über die innovativste, wachstumsfreudigste und kreativste Branche, die wir haben. Die Branche der erneuerbaren Energien könnte in den kommenden Jahrzehnten zusätzlich - ich betone: zusätzlich - 230 000 Arbeitsplätze schaffen - dazu gibt es Studien -, und dabei handelt es sich um zurückhaltende Berechnungen. Natürlich sollen diese Arbeitsplätze unter Tarif fallen, und natürlich muss es einen Betriebsrat geben; das ist doch gar keine Frage.\n\nDabei sind übrigens die zusätzlichen Arbeitsplätze in der Baubranche - Stichwort „Gebäudesanierung“ -, in der Energiedienstleistungsbranche und in der Effizienzbranche noch nicht einberechnet.\n\nIch sagte „könnte“, weil die Bundesregierung alles tut, um dies zu verhindern. Sie bremsen, Sie blockieren den Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien im Stromsektor; dabei brauchen wir den Stromsektor künftig auch für Mobilität und Wärme. Sie gefährden auch bestehende Arbeitsplätze bei der Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung, wo wahrscheinlich durch die überstürzte Einführung von Ausschreibungen ein Fadenriss entsteht; das haben auch die Anhörungen gezeigt.\n\nWir stehen im Energiebereich, auch im Verkehrsbereich vor einem gewaltigen ökologischen Umbau. Im Automobilbereich steckt Innovationspotenzial in der Umstellung auf ökologische Antriebe. Deutschland könnte hier Vorreiter sein. Das gilt übrigens auch für die Klimakiller Luftfahrt und Schifffahrt, wo noch viel passieren muss. Ich frage mich halt: Wo ist denn da die Bundesregierung, die den Rahmen für eine umweltverträgliche Mobilität vorgibt? Aber was soll man von einem CSU-Verkehrsminister erwarten, der noch immer seine schützende Hand über die Manipulationen der heimischen Autoindustrie legt? Aber vielleicht gehört das ja schon zur Vorstufe zum Paradies; das könnte auch sein.\n\nJetzt ist der VW-Konzern durch die Abgasaffäre offenbar aufgewacht, will verstärkt in die Elektromobilität einsteigen - und das ist gut so. Aber mit dem angekündigten Abbau von 23 000 Stellen allein in Deutschland lässt der Konzern die Beschäftigten für die Verluste durch den Abgasskandal bluten. Das ist nicht fair. Die Kolleginnen und Kollegen fühlen sich verkauft. Dabei handelt es sich nicht nur um die Kernmann- und -frauschaften, sondern natürlich auch um all die Leiharbeiter und die Zulieferer, deren Einkünfte man sowieso immer drückt. Herr Gabriel, dazu, zu VW, habe ich von Ihnen gar nichts gehört.\n\nDie Braunkohlewirtschaft hat ja den gravierenden Stellenabbau schon hinter sich. Gerade deshalb sollte nun ein Kohleausstieg ohne weitere Strukturbrüche erreicht werden. Dazu haben wir Anträge zum Haushalt gestellt. Wir wollen 250 Millionen Euro im Jahr für einen Strukturfonds; der ist notwendig, damit dieser Strukturwandel eingeleitet werden kann.\n\nWir wollen ja nicht sofort aus der Kohle aussteigen, aber wir wollen den Strukturwandel befördern.\n\nHier geht es um Arbeitsplätze, hier geht es um den Klimaschutzplan, und hier geht es um die Zukunft von ganz vielen Menschen, auch um die Zukunft der Kindeskinder. Des Weiteren geht es auch um gute Arbeitsplätze sowie um armutsfeste Renten. All das gehört zusammen. Soziales und Ökologie können nicht mehr getrennt werden.\"\n4620,tom-koenigs,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Ich will nicht der Versuchung anheimfallen, jetzt urbi et orbi zu reden, obwohl der Tag dazu einlädt. Ich will ein ganz spezifisches Phänomen aufnehmen, das auf Englisch „shrinking space“, Verkleinerung des öffentlichen Raumes, heißt. Wir kennen alle das Agentengesetz aus Russland, das NGOs, die sich für Menschenrechte einsetzen und Geld aus dem Ausland kriegen, verpflichtet, sich als feindliche Agenten zu bezeichnen. Das empört uns. Sie müssen diese Bezeichnung auch an all ihre öffentlichen Äußerungen anfügen. Das diskreditiert Menschenrechtsverteidiger als Agenten.\n\nLeider ist dieses russische Gesetz nicht das einzige, das es gibt. Beispiel Äthiopien: Nichtregierungsorganisationen dürfen sich höchstens zu 10 Prozent aus dem Ausland finanzieren - das in einem Staat, der seinerseits zu 60 Prozent aus dem Ausland finanziert wird. Das Ergebnis eines solchen Gesetzes: Ein Jahr nach Inkrafttreten ist die Zahl der Nichtregierungsorganisationen um zwei Drittel geschrumpft.\n\nOder ein Beispiel, das wir auch alle kennen: Ägypten. Die Arbeit der internationalen Stiftungen wird nicht nur beschränkt, sondern die Mitarbeiter werden wie im Fall der Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung zu hohen Haftstrafen verurteilt. Glücklicherweise sind sie in diesem Fall inzwischen entlassen worden. Wir erinnern uns.\n\nRussland, Äthiopien, Ägypten. Das ist Ausdruck, weil es auch in vielen anderen Staaten so stattfindet, eines globalen Trends, nämlich dass der öffentliche Raum schrumpft oder geschrumpft wird. „Shrinking space“ nennt das der zuständige Rapporteur der Vereinten Nationen. Menschenrechtsverteidiger, Umweltaktivisten, soziale Akteure, Nichtregierungsorganisationen, Menschenrechtsinstitute - sie alle brauchen ihre Unabhängigkeit und die Öffentlichkeit. Das wird explizit oder implizit schleichend durch die Vorder- oder durch die Hintertür immer weiter verkleinert.\n\nDas Recht auf freie Meinungsäußerung - das steht in Artikel 19 der Allgemeinen Erklärung der Menschenrechte - und das Recht auf Versammlungs- und Vereinigungsfreiheit werden vielerorts durch staatliche Maßnahmen systematisch beschränkt. Der Sonderberichterstatter für Versammlungs- und Vereinigungsfreiheit der VN, Maina Kiai aus Kenia, schreibt, dass sich weltweit viele Staaten auf die Beschränkung und nicht auf die Garantie der Menschenrechte konzentrieren. Die Beschränkung kann durch Gesetze, durch finanzielle oder administrative Bestimmungen geschehen.\n\nIn Ruanda kann sich ein Unternehmen in sechs Stunden registrieren lassen. Will man sich als NGO registrieren lassen, braucht man dafür mindestens sechs Monate. In Singapur, Malaysia und Myanmar darf man zwar in gewissen Grenzen friedlich demonstrieren; das gilt aber nur für die Einheimischen. Die Ausländer dürfen das nicht, obwohl die Menschenrechte doch für alle gelten.\n\nJa, Bürgerbewegungen fordern den Staat heraus; das ist richtig. Ja, sie wollen ihm manchmal auch lästig fallen. Wer wüsste das besser als wir, Bündnis 90 und Grüne, die beide aus solchen Bürgerbewegungen hervorgegangen sind.\n\nDie Meinungs- und Versammlungsfreiheit dieser Gruppen immer weiter einzuschränken, beseitigt den Protest nicht, wie die Regierungen hoffen, sondern drängt ihn in den Untergrund, radikalisiert ihn und macht ihn dann manchmal zu einem Problem, das völlig ausufert.\n\nEin typisches Beispiel ist Syrien. Dort hat es mit friedlichen Protesten im öffentlichen Raum angefangen. Dann ist, in dem Fall durch Scharfschützen, der öffentliche Raum beschränkt worden. Jetzt haben wir die Situation von Radikalisierungen auf allen Seiten, die völlig ausweglos ist. Wir wissen, dass das nicht einzelne - manchmal große, manchmal kleine - Fälle sind, sondern dass das ein weltweiter Trend ist.\n\nMenschenrechte zu verteidigen, heißt, Menschenrechtsverteidiger zu schützen vor willkürlicher Verhaftung, vor Verschwindenlassen, vor Folter und vor Mord. Es heißt aber auch, das System dahinter zu verstehen, die vielen kleinen Fußangeln, Steine und Steinchen zu erkennen, über die die Menschenrechtsverteidiger stolpern sollen.\n\nDem Verkomplizieren, Diskreditieren, Enervieren, Aufreiben und schließlich Kriminalisieren zivilgesellschaftlichen Engagements und zivilgesellschaftlicher Institutionen im In- und Ausland entgegenzutreten, dem Trend zum Shrinking Space entgegenzutreten, ihn zu thematisieren, ihn zu erkennen und ihn zu kritisieren, das erfordert Durchblick und Mut. Die Menschenrechtsverteidiger auf der ganzen Welt haben das. Aber ich wünschte mir diesen Mut auch bei den Staatsbesuchen, bei den Regierungsverhandlungen, bei den Äußerungen auch von der Bundesregierung.\"\n10177,brigitte-pothmer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Sie wissen: In der Flüchtlingspolitik stehen die Grünen fest an der Seite von Frau Merkel. Das trifft für die Integrationspolitik dieser Bundesregierung allerdings nicht zu. Die Integrationspolitik sieht eher aus wie eine Echternacher Springprozession: drei Schritte vor, zwei Schritte zurück. Dieses Hin- und Hergehopse hat natürlich seine Ursache. Der Grund dafür liegt in den Konflikten und im Streit, den es in der Flüchtlingspolitik in dieser Koalition gibt. Wenn jedes Integrationsangebot von einem Teil des Hauses, von einem Teil der Regierung im Wesentlichen als ein Pull-Effekt begriffen wird, der noch mehr Flüchtlinge nach Deutschland ziehen soll, dann kann daraus keine konsistente Politik werden.\n\nSie betonen hier in den Debatten immer wieder, wie wichtig es ist, dass die Flüchtlinge so schnell wie möglich in den Arbeitsmarkt integriert werden. Stimmt; damit haben Sie recht. Aber wenn man sich die konkrete Politik anschaut, dann gibt es eine lange Liste von Hürden, die den Flüchtlingen den Zugang zum Arbeitsmarkt versperren. In den ersten drei Monaten dürfen die Flüchtlinge gar nicht arbeiten. Ich frage Sie einmal: Wieso eigentlich nicht? 15 Monate lang gilt die sogenannte Vorrangprüfung. Da müssen die Betriebe nachweisen, dass auf den Arbeitsplatz nicht ein Deutscher oder ein EU-Ausländer kann. Wenn ein Flüchtling einmal einen Ausbildungsplatz ergattert hat, dann muss er drei Jahre lang fürchten, während der Ausbildung abgeschoben zu werden. Das ist weder für den Betroffenen noch für die Betriebe zumutbar, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDer Zugang zu Sprach- und Integrationskursen gleicht einem Glücksspiel mit offenem Ausgang. Dabei ist Sprache die Voraussetzung für die Integration in den Arbeitsmarkt. Ich sage hier ganz deutlich: Diese Hemmnisse müssen gestrichen werden, und zwar ersatzlos.\n\nDie Betriebe wenden sich wegen dieser bürokratischen Hürden allmählich vollkommen entnervt von ihrem Angebot ab, Flüchtlinge in ihren Betrieben aufzunehmen.\n\nAuch bei den Flüchtlingen wächst die Frustration. Wir wissen aus der Arbeitsmarktforschung, dass Nichtstun sehr schnell zu Dequalifizierung führt, die dann nur sehr mühsam wieder ausgeglichen werden kann. Das Problem sieht jetzt auch Frau Nahles, und sie möchte 100 000 1\u001eEuro-Jobs für Asylbewerber. Ich habe gar nichts dagegen, wenn zum Beispiel ausgebildete Köche, Elektriker oder Maurer ihre Kompetenzen in ihren Einrichtungen oder auch bei den Kommunen einbringen. Nur: Dafür brauchen wir überhaupt kein neues Gesetz. Diese 1-Euro-Jobs gibt es bereits. Ich sage Ihnen etwas: Geben Sie den Ländern, geben Sie den Kommunen einfach mehr Geld! Dann werden auch mehr 1-Euro-Jobs angeboten.\n\nDieses Geld brauchen die Kommunen jetzt, nicht erst 2017; denn jetzt ist die Situation prekär, jetzt dauern die Asylverfahren so furchtbar lange. Wenn man Ihren Versprechungen glaubt, dann soll 2017 alles besser werden. Dann sollen die Asylverfahren nur noch drei Monate dauern. Also noch einmal: Wenn wirklich etwas getan werden soll, dann tun Sie es jetzt! Sonst ist das eine Vortäuschung falscher Tatsachen.\n\nEin dickes Lob geht heute von meiner Seite an die Bundesagentur für Arbeit. Sie hat heute einen Vorschlag vorgelegt, den ich ziemlich gut finde: Sie will Spracherwerb mit betrieblicher Praxis verbinden.\n\nDas Konzept der Kombikurse geht in die richtige Richtung und kommt unserem Vorschlag der Einstiegsqualifizierung übrigens sehr nahe. Ich sage Ihnen etwas: Die Flüchtlinge müssen in die Betriebe; sie müssen die betriebliche Praxis in Deutschland kennenlernen und dürfen nicht in arbeitsmarktfernen 1-Euro-Jobs zwischengeparkt werden.\n\n„Wir brauchen jetzt kein drittes Asylpaket, sondern endlich ein Integrationspaket.“ - Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der SPD, jetzt erwarte ich Applaus; denn diese Formulierung kommt von Frau Nahles. Ich finde, sie hat recht.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss.\n\nSoweit ich weiß, ist Frau Nahles immer noch Teil der Regierung.\n\nDeswegen wünschte ich mir, sie käme endlich einmal aus dem Oppositionsmodus raus und würde nicht immer nur Forderungen an sich selber stellen. Sie muss handeln.\n\nUnser Vorschlag liegt auf dem Tisch. Ich sage: Frau Nahles, übernehmen Sie!\n\nHerr Zech, ich möchte hier einmal ein Missverständnis aufklären. Wir gehen davon aus, dass die Menschen, die hierherflüchten, vor Krieg flüchten, vor Verfolgung flüchten, um ihr Leben bangen. Aber wenn sie hier sind, dann möchten und sollen die Flüchtlinge - das ist auch gut für die deutsche Gesellschaft - arbeiten. Dafür muss man auch etwas tun. Darin muss man die Flüchtlinge unterstützen. Das hat zunächst einmal gar nichts damit zu tun, dass wir die Flüchtlinge instrumentalisieren, um hier den Fachkräftemangel zu decken. Aber es macht schon Sinn, aus dieser Situation für Flüchtlinge, die Fachkräfte werden möchten und hier arbeiten möchten, und für uns eine Win-win-Situation zu machen.\n\nNoch eine Frage, Herr Zech: Wenn es so ist, dass wir tatsächlich einen Fachkräftemangel haben - das werden Sie wahrscheinlich nicht bestreiten -, -\n\n- warum in Gottes Namen müssen Flüchtlinge, die hier bereits ein Arbeitsangebot haben, die eine hohe Qualifikation haben, in ihr Heimatland zurück, um dann von dort - Stichwort: Balkanflüchtlinge - hochkompliziert wieder einen Antrag zu stellen, damit sie zurückkommen können? Was soll das?\"\n9611,sonja-steffen,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Kommissionsmitglieder! Liebe Gäste! Herr Dr. Neu, es ist einfach, sich vehement gegen das Parlamentsbeteiligungsgesetz zu stellen, wenn man jeden Auslandseinsatz der Bundeswehr grundsätzlich ablehnt. Ich finde allerdings, dass das Wahrnehmen internationaler Verantwortung anders aussieht.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Bundeswehr ist eine Parlamentsarmee. Das heißt, der Deutsche Bundestag stimmt darüber ab - und das soll auch so bleiben -, wenn unsere Bundeswehr, unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten, in einen Einsatz bewaffneter Streitkräfte gehen soll. Wir, der Deutsche Bundestag, übernehmen mit diesen Entscheidungen die Verantwortung für den Einsatz unserer Soldatinnen und Soldaten.\n\nWir alle wissen, dass es aktuell mehr Konflikte und Kriege auf der Welt gibt als jemals zuvor. Die Welt ist viel unfriedlicher geworden, und mehr denn je gilt es, gemeinsam Verantwortung zu übernehmen. Nationale Alleingänge sind der Anfang vom Ende für Europa.\n\nWenn Europa seine Interessen wahren und seiner zunehmenden Verantwortung in einer globalisierten Welt nachkommen will, dann wird es seinen wirksamen außenpolitischen und sicherheitspolitischen Beitrag dazu leisten müssen. Es darf keine Alleingänge von Staaten der Europäischen Union geben, wie gegenwärtig leider von einigen Staaten im Zusammenhang mit Grenzschließungen, sondern Integration und mehr gemeinsame Verantwortung sind notwendig. Damit entstehen aber auch mehr gegenseitige Abhängigkeiten. Das gilt auch für militärische Einsätze.\n\nGenau wegen der zunehmenden militärischen Integration europäischer Streitkräfte hat die Große Koalition in ihrem Koalitionsvertrag festgelegt, dass eine Kommission eingesetzt werden soll. Diese sollte prüfen, wie die Parlamentsrechte auf dem Weg fortschreitender Bündnisintegration gesichert werden können.\n\nDie Kommission hat nun ihre Ergebnisse vorgelegt und in einem Gesetzentwurf gebündelt. Dieser liegt uns heute in überarbeiteter Form vor. Von den Einigungsvorschlägen möchte ich einige aufgreifen.\n\nIch beginne mit § 2 a, der neu ist. Die Überschrift lautet: „Mitwirkung in militärischen Stäben und Hauptquartieren“. Ich zitiere kurz die Vorschrift. Es heißt hier, dass\n\ndie Wahrnehmung von Funktionen in integrierten oder multinational besetzten Hauptquartieren, Dienststellen und Stäben der NATO, der EU oder einer anderen Organisation gegenseitiger kollektiver Sicherheit ...\n\nkeiner Zustimmung des Bundestages bedürfen soll - jetzt hören Sie gut zu -,\n\nsofern sie sich dabei nicht im Gebiet eines bewaffneten Konflikts befinden oder dort eingesetzte Waffen unmittelbar bedienen.\n\nDamit sind beispielsweise - darauf hat der Kollege Kiesewetter vorhin schon hingewiesen - auch viele Beobachteraufgaben im Rahmen einer UN-Mission gemeint.\n\nDas mag vielleicht auf den ersten Blick wie eine Beschneidung der Parlamentsrechte wirken, aber ein Blick in die Entstehungsgeschichte des Parlamentsbeteiligungsgesetzes aus dem Jahr 2005 zeigt, dass wir eine ähnliche Regelung schon immer hatten. Sie stand früher allerdings in den Begründungen und nicht ausdrücklich im Gesetzestext. Deshalb dient diese Vorschrift, also die Einkleidung in das Gesetz, im Grunde genommen nur der Klarstellung. Es geht um Präzisierungen und nicht um die Einschränkung des Parlamentsvorbehaltes.\n\nDie größten Probleme bei den Debatten über den neuen Gesetzentwurf hat wahrscheinlich § 2 bereitet. Hier geht es um den Einsatz bewaffneter Streitkräfte. In dem neuen Entwurf gibt es nun einen Negativkatalog mit Fällen, in denen eine Einbeziehung in eine bewaffnete Unternehmung nicht zu erwarten ist, weshalb keine Parlamentsbeteiligung erforderlich ist.\n\nUm welche Fälle handelt es sich hier? Neben den bereits im bestehenden Gesetz aufgeführten Fällen ist in unserem jetzigen Gesetzentwurf neu, dass Ausbildungsmissionen „in sicherem Umfeld“ keiner Mandatierung bedürfen. Ich betone: „in sicherem Umfeld“. Neu ist auch, dass Logistikleistungen „ohne Bezug zu Kampfhandlungen“ und die „Bereitstellung medizinischer Versorgung außerhalb des Gebiets eines bewaffneten Konflikts“ nicht zustimmungspflichtig sein sollen. Sie sehen also: Bei diesem Katalog hat sich die Kommission sehr viele Gedanken darüber gemacht und darauf geachtet, dass die Parlamentsrechte nicht beschnitten werden.\n\nAllerdings ist hier nach Meinung meiner Fraktion, der SPD-Fraktion, schon noch einmal eine genauere verfassungsrechtliche Überprüfung erforderlich, weil es, wie die meisten von Ihnen wissen, im September 2015 eine Entscheidung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts zum Libyen-Einsatz gab.\n\nDas Bundesverfassungsgericht hat den Libyen-Einsatz im Wesentlichen für rechtmäßig erklärt, hat sich aber inhaltlich mit dem Begriff des „Einsatzes bewaffneter Streitkräfte“ auseinandergesetzt. Es hat in diesem Urteil festgestellt, dass es sich hier um einen verfassungsrechtlichen Begriff handelt, also nicht um einen unbestimmten Rechtsbegriff, und dass dieser Begriff nicht durch ein einfaches Gesetz verbindlich konkretisiert werden kann. Das bedeutet also: Wir werden uns im Rahmen der nun beginnenden Beratungen mit dieser Frage noch einmal auseinandersetzen müssen.\n\nAuf die weiteren Neuerungen des Gesetzentwurfes, die im Wesentlichen die Stärkung der Informationsrechte des Parlamentes beinhalten, hat Herr Kiesewetter schon hingewiesen. Wir werden uns nun im federführenden Geschäftsordnungsausschuss mit den bereits benannten verfassungsrechtlichen Fragen beschäftigen müssen.\n\nDer Bundestag hat nicht nur das Recht auf Beteiligung bei militärischen Einsätzen, sondern auch die Pflicht. Ich glaube, nicht nur wir, die wir hier sitzen, sondern alle Parlamentarier wissen: Wenn es um den Einsatz bewaffneter Streitkräfte geht, dann ist die Entscheidung, die wir hier zu treffen haben, eine der schwierigsten. Wir machen uns diese Entscheidung weiß Gott nicht leicht.\n\nMit dem vorliegenden Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Parlamentsbeteiligung werden wir diese Rechte auch nicht beschneiden.\n\nIch möchte abschließend den Mitgliedern der Kommission für ihre umfangreiche und sorgfältige Arbeit danken.\n\nIch bedanke mich fürs Zuhören und freue mich auf die Debatten.\"\n11479,britta-haßelmann,\"Ich habe eine Frage an das Innenministerium. Dieses hat sich jetzt auch öffentlich über die Presse geäußert - noch nicht in der Fragestunde - und seine Kritik am Verhalten des Bundesamts für Verfassungsschutz sowie an den Verfehlungen von dessen Präsident Herrn Maaßen vorgebracht.\n\nDeshalb möchte ich gern fragen: Wie werden Sie von der Regierung damit umgehen, wenn Sie feststellen, dass es dort massive Defizite gegeben hat? Welche Rückwirkungen hat dies auf das Vertrauen, das Sie in Herrn Maaßen stecken, und welche Konsequenzen hat das für Ihre Fach- und Rechtsaufsicht?\"\n7934,ge,\"Herzlichen Dank, Herr Barthel, dass Sie die Zwischenfrage zulassen. - Ich beginne mit dem Punkt, mit dem Sie geendet haben, nämlich mit der Frage, ob wir „das Zeug lesen“, was wir hier vorlegen. Sie haben gesagt, wir Grüne würden uns entgegen dem, was im Aufruf zur Demo am 10. Oktober steht, nicht für gute Abkommen, für internationale Regelungen, für hohe Umweltschutzstandards, für ILO-Kernarbeitsnormen, für die ISO aussprechen. Unter Ziffer 2 des Beschlussteils unseres Antrags steht genau das. Ich gebe zu: Wir haben uns Mühe gegeben, und der Antrag ist daher etwas lang;\n\ndas ist leider so. Aber man muss diesen Antrag auch einmal lesen, wenn man ihn berät. Wir haben in sechs Punkten ausgeführt, wie man Handelspolitik vernünftig gestalten könnte. Es sind konstruktive Vorschläge, wie eine bessere Handelspolitik aussehen kann. Von Ihrer Fraktion habe ich dazu noch keinen Antrag im Deutschen Bundestag gesehen. Deshalb meine Frage: Haben Sie diesen Antrag überhaupt gelesen?\n\nSehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrter Herr Minister Gabriel, kennen Sie eigentlich das Versteckspiel von kleinen Kindern? Wenn kleine Kinder Verstecken spielen, dann halten sie sich manchmal die Augen zu und glauben, niemand könne sie mehr sehen.\n\n(Heiterkeit des Abg. Alexander Ulrich\n\n[DIE LINKE])\n\nEin bisschen erinnert mich das, was Sie hier in den letzten zwei Stunden vorgetragen haben, und die Politik, die die Bundesregierung in den letzten zwei Jahren gemacht hat, auch an dieses Versteckspiel von kleinen Kindern.\n\nSie scheinen ernsthaft zu glauben, dass niemand die Probleme sieht, die es mit TTIP und CETA gibt, wenn Sie sie nicht sehen, sodass Sie sie einfach wegignorieren können.\n\nSchauen wir einmal auf die letzten zwei Jahre: Probleme durch die Einführung von Schiedsgerichten, weil Großkonzerne Staaten verklagen können, gab es für Sie am Anfang nicht.\n\nDas gilt für beide Seiten. Die SPD ist hier mittlerweile ja schon ein bisschen näher an der Realität, aber die CDU/CSU verweigert die Realität weiterhin. Probleme bei der Liberalisierung von Dienstleistungen durch Negativlisten gab es in Ihrer Wahrnehmung am Anfang nicht. Gefahren für den europäischen Verbraucher- und Umweltschutz durch die Schwächung des Vorsorgeprinzips gab es für Sie am Anfang nicht.\n\nAlles, was zumindest die Hälfte des Bundestages an gemeinsamer Erkenntnis gewonnen hat, ist nicht auf Ihren Mist gewachsen. Die Arbeit der Opposition und der Nichtregierungsorganisationen, die von Herrn Pfeiffer hier so schändlich bedacht wurden, hat zu diesem Erkenntnisgewinn geführt.\n\nHerr Wiese, Sie haben sich hier ja wirklich sehr fragwürdig hingestellt und so getan, als sei die SPD in der Landesregierung Baden-Württemberg der Motor für einen kritischen TTIP-Beschluss gewesen. Von Ihrer Fraktion habe ich im Deutschen Bundestag - dafür sind Sie verantwortlich - noch niemals einen einzigen Antrag zu TTIP und CETA gesehen, mit dem Sie irgendeine Position zu diesem Abkommen eingebracht haben.\n\nDas wäre aber Ihre Pflicht als Abgeordnete gewesen, wenn Sie sagen, dass Sie hier solche Erkenntnisse gewonnen haben.\n\nJetzt komme ich zu den Kinderspielen zurück. Bei kleinen Kindern finde ich das Blinde-Kuh-Spiel manchmal sogar niedlich. Bei Ihnen finde ich das aber nicht wirklich niedlich. Angesichts der Tragweite dieser Abkommen finde ich das sogar höchst unangemessen.\n\nIch möchte Ihnen nur ein neues Beispiel für das Blinde-Kuh-Spiel nennen, das Sie hier versuchen mit dem Parlament zu spielen. Noch vor der Sommerpause habe ich Sie gefragt, wie denn diese neuen Gremien, diese Hauptausschüsse, in CETA ausgestaltet sein sollen. Ich habe Sie gefragt: Welche Kompetenzen wird der Hauptausschuss in CETA haben? Ist es richtig, dass dieser Hauptausschuss die Kompetenz hat, verbindliche Entscheidungen zu treffen, wie Annexe und Protokolle von CETA zu verändern? Auf die schriftliche Frage von mir und auf die schriftliche Frage von Frau Haßelmann haben Sie geantwortet: Das stimmt nicht.\n\nDanach haben wir Ihnen in der Regierungsbefragung noch einmal die Textstelle des CETA-Vertragsentwurfs vorgehalten, in der steht, dass dieses Gremium die Kompetenz haben soll, die Anlagen zu verändern. Darauf haben Sie geantwortet: Ja, okay, das stimmt; ihr habt recht. - Das haben Sie zwar nicht so klar gesagt, aber wenn man Sie richtig verstanden hat, dann war das genau die Antwort.\n\nEs gibt nämlich noch das Legal Scrubbing, durch das sich, so hoffen Sie, vielleicht noch etwas ändern wird. Das Problem ist nur: Ich habe Sie vor der Sommerpause auch gefragt, was Sie im Rahmen des Legal Scrubbing an CETA noch ändern wollen. Darauf haben Sie geantwortet: Ein bisschen bei den Schiedsgerichten und ein bisschen bei der kulturellen Vielfalt. - Das Thema „Hauptausschuss in CETA“ kam in Ihrer Antwort überhaupt nicht vor.\n\nNoch viel wichtiger finde ich - die Kollegen von der CDU haben ja immer gesagt, das Parlament ist der Ort der Demokratie, und wir sind gewählt, um über diese Abkommen zu entscheiden -: In CETA ist die Frage, was nach der Ratifizierung des Abkommens passiert, nicht geklärt.\n\nWir haben die Bundesregierung gefragt: Ist sicher, ist wirklich abschließend sicher, dass das Europäische Parlament und gegebenenfalls der Deutsche Bundestag nach Abschluss des Abkommens noch beteiligt sein werden, wenn der Hauptausschuss Veränderungen am Abkommen vornimmt?\n\nDa hat die Bundesregierung immer nur gesagt: Ja, das regeln die innereuropäischen Verfahren. Wir haben mehrfach nachgefragt: Kennt die Bundesregierung denn die innereuropäischen Verfahren? Meine Interpretation ist: Sie weichen der Antwort darauf aus,\n\nweil Sie ganz genau wissen, dass die Einbindung des Europäischen Parlaments nicht explizit abgesichert ist. Das ist ein Fehler. Der ist Ihnen nicht aufgefallen, er ist Ihnen jetzt, durch unsere Nachfragen, erst bewusst geworden, und das möchten Sie nicht zugeben.\n\n- Doch, genau das fordern wir in unseren Anträgen ein.\n\nHerr Barthel, ich muss Ihnen ja zugestehen: Sie sind einer der wenigen in der Debatte, der diesen Antrag gelesen hat. Die Redner der CDU/CSU haben das anscheinend nicht getan.\n\nAber zwischen Lesen und Verstehen gibt es noch einen Unterschied.\n\nIn unserem Antrag gibt es eine ganze Reihe konkreter Vorschläge, die wir gemacht haben, wie eine bessere Handelspolitik in der Europäischen Union aussehen kann. Wir haben dezidiert zu der Frage der Hauptausschüsse Stellung genommen, haben gesagt: Es muss abgesichert sein, dass das Europäische Parlament einbezogen ist. Wir haben zu der Frage Stellung genommen: Wie kann man die Standards in der Europäischen Union absichern? Wir haben gesagt: Das europäische Vorsorgeprinzip muss elementarer Bestandteil aller Handelsabkommen sein.\n\nDas ist in CETA nicht abgesichert. Sie erzählen uns hier immer wieder, es sei nicht wahr, dass durch CETA oder TTIP Standards abgesenkt werden könnten. Immer wieder erzählen Sie dieselbe Leier.\n\nIn unserem Antrag haben wir dezidiert an verschiedenen Punkten auch schon für den CETA-Vertrag nachgewiesen, dass die Standards in Gefahr sind, weil nämlich das europäische Vorsorgeprinzip, der zentrale Pfeiler, mit dem wir hier unsere Verbraucher- und Umweltschutzstandards in Europa absichern wollen, in diesem Vertragstext nicht erwähnt ist. Den hätten Sie verankern müssen, wenn Sie beispielsweise vor dem WTO-Staat-zu-Staat-Schiedsverfahren diesen Grundsatz sichern wollen.\n\nWir werden jetzt schon - das hat Anton Hofreiter gesagt - vor dem WTO-Staat-zu-Staat-Schiedsverfahren genau deshalb verurteilt, weil dieses Vorsorgeprinzip nicht verankert ist. Dasselbe gilt für das Right to regulate, dasselbe gilt für die Absicherung des „hohen Schutzniveaus“. All das steht in unserem Antrag.\n\nVon der CDU/CSU habe ich keinen einzigen Satz zum Inhalt dieses Antrags gehört, keinen einzigen Satz zur Debatte, stattdessen nur Verfahrenskritik oder Beschimpfungen der Zivilgesellschaft.\n\nIch muss ganz ehrlich sagen: Wenn wir unsere Aufgabe als Parlament ernst nehmen, dann setzen wir uns vernünftig mit diesen Abkommen auseinander. Dann führen wir hier nicht immer eine solch polemische Debatte, in der man sich gegenseitig beschimpft, wer jetzt hier falsch argumentiert, und Stilnoten erteilt.\n\nDas tun Sie die ganze Zeit, und das finde ich der Sache nicht angemessen.\n\nStattdessen können wir uns doch einfach einmal mit den Inhalten der Vertragstexte beschäftigen. Das ist viel - 500 Seiten Vertragstext CETA plus 1 000 Seiten Anhänge -, aber da muss eine vernünftige Analyse her. Das Problem ist: Am Ende, wenn die Abkommen ausverhandelt sind, wenn sie dem Deutschen Bundestag vorgelegt werden, dann haben wir als Parlamentarier keine Chance mehr, dann können wir nur noch Ja oder Nein sagen.\n\nWenn wir aber in den Verhandlungsprozess hineinwollen, dann müssen wir jetzt unsere Beteiligung einfordern. Dann müssen wir jetzt der Bundesregierung sagen, welche Punkte wir akzeptieren würden und welche Punkte nicht. Deswegen sind Debatten hier im Bundestag so zentral wichtig. Deswegen ist es auch wichtig, dass wir Zugang zu den Verhandlungsdokumenten bekommen.\n\nAuch da vermisse ich jegliche Unterstützung der Bundesregierung. Herr Ramsauer und Herr Lammert sind die Einzigen hier aufseiten der Bundesregierung, die uns an dieser Stelle unterstützt haben. Von der Bundesregierung ging bis jetzt nur ein einziger Brief nach Brüssel; das haben Sie auf unsere entsprechende Frage geantwortet,\n\nwas Sie tun, um uns zu unterstützen, damit wir hier Zugang zu den Leseräumen bekommen. Da haben Sie gesagt, Sie haben der Kommission einen Brief geschrieben.\n\nJa, die Redezeit - das stimmt -, da achte ich jetzt auch drauf.\n\n(Heiterkeit beim BÜNDNIS 90/\n\nDIE GRÜNEN und bei der SPD)\n\nIch komme jetzt zum Ende meiner Rede.\n\nStimmt, das ist dein Job.\n\n(Heiterkeit beim BÜNDNIS 90/\n\nDIE GRÜNEN)\n\nDeswegen komme ich jetzt zum Ende meiner Rede. Ich kann Ihnen wirklich nur sagen: Lassen Sie uns die Debatte etwas über die Inhalte führen. Wir haben hier einen Antrag vorgelegt, von dem ich überzeugt bin, dass er eine gute richtungsweisende Politik für Europa gestalten könnte.\n\nWenn Sie sich dem nicht anschließen wollen, legen Sie eigene Anträge vor, aber debattieren Sie endlich mit uns über die Sache.\"\n7019,frank-schwabe,\"Herr Dr. Hahn, der Kollege Movassat hat in seiner Rede zu Eritrea am Mittwoch Teilen des Hauses vorgeworfen, bei Menschenrechtsfragen mit zweierlei Maß zu messen. Mein Eindruck ist - das tut mir ganz schrecklich leid -, dass genau Sie gerade zweierlei Maß angelegt haben. Wie kann man hier fünf Minuten reden und die Menschenrechtsverletzungen in Aserbaidschan nicht beim Namen nennen?\n\nSie werden mir ja vielleicht noch antworten. Würden Sie bitte einmal benennen, dass es politische Gefangene in Aserbaidschan gibt? Oder sehen Sie nicht, dass es solche politischen Gefangenen gibt und dass es deshalb auch notwendig ist, das hier im Deutschen Bundestag zu benennen, um den Menschen vor Ort jedenfalls ein bisschen zu helfen?\"\n6129,christel-voßbeck-kayser,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! „Aufwertung der Sozial- und Erziehungsberufe jetzt“ - was für ein Zufall, dass Sie, die Kollegen von der -Linken, diesen Antrag jetzt im Kontext der aktuellen -Tarifverhandlungen einbringen.\n\nEin Schelm, der Böses dabei denkt. Ich möchte daher festhalten: Lohnverhandlungen gehören in die Hände der Tarifpartner und nicht in die Hände der Politik.\n\nWir haben in Deutschland eine gut funktionierende Tarifpartnerschaft, und ich bin mir sicher, dass die Verhandlungspartner in den laufenden Verhandlungen eine gute und faire Lösung für alle Beteiligten finden werden.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es ist nicht von der Hand zu weisen: Die Aufgaben in den Sozial- und Erziehungsberufen sind vielfältig. Ob beraten, erziehen, betreuen, pflegen, fördern und auch helfen - es sind alles wichtige Hilfestellungen. Hierfür brauchen wir gut ausgebildetes und motiviertes Personal. Aber wie erreichen wir dies? Hierzu sind mehrere Bausteine notwendig. Neben einer guten Bezahlung sind es auch gute Rahmen- und Arbeitsbedingungen. Fakt ist: Daran arbeitet die CDU/CSU-geführte Bundesregierung seit vielen Jahren. Ich möchte Beispiele nennen.\n\nSeit Oktober 2008 gibt es das Aktionsprogramm Kindertagespflege. Es trägt dazu bei, mehr Personal für die Tagespflege zu gewinnen, die Qualität der Betreuung zu steigern und das Berufsbild insgesamt aufzuwerten. Neben der Schaffung eines niederschwellig angelegten Beratungsangebotes, das übrigens auch online abzurufen ist, gehört dazu seit Juni 2012 auch die Förderung von Festanstellungen des Kindertagespflegepersonals durch Lohnkostenzuschüsse zur Weiterentwicklung dieses -Aktionsprogramms.\n\nWir finden auch Beispiele im Bereich der Pflege. Hier haben wir schon 2008 durch das Pflege-Weiterentwicklungsgesetz Rahmenbedingungen angepasst, was zu einer Verbesserung der Arbeitsbedingungen von Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern geführt hat. Aktuell wird die Pflege entbürokratisiert. Speziell wollen wir die Reduzierung der Pflegedokumentation auf ein notwendiges Maß.\n\nEin weiteres Beispiel aus dem Bereich Pflege: Noch im Dezember letzten Jahres haben wir das Pflegestärkungsgesetz verabschiedet. Im Bereich der Demenzkranken in stationären Einrichtungen wurde damit der Betreuungsschlüssel herabgesetzt, was ebenfalls zu einer Entlastung des Personals führt.\n\nGanz aktuell haben wir am Montag dieser Sitzungswoche die Vergütung von Pflegekräften in einer öffentlichen Anhörung des Petitionsausschusses zum Thema gemacht. Der Bundesminister Gröhe war persönlich zu Gast. Dies macht deutlich, wie ernst wir innerhalb der CDU/CSU-Fraktion dieses Thema nehmen.\n\n- Der Bundesgesundheitsminister hat gesagt, dass er diesbezüglich in den direkten Dialog mit den Krankenkassen und Leistungserbringern treten will, um eine angemessene Bezahlung in der Pflege zu ermöglichen.\n\n- Das ist Tatsache.\n\nNicht zu vergessen: Mit der Einführung des Mindestlohns auch im Pflegebereich ist ein wichtiger Schritt hin zu mehr Lohngleichheit in einem von Frauen häufig gewählten Berufsfeld geschaffen worden.\n\nAll das zeigt: Wir kümmern uns. Wir erarbeiten Lösungen. Wir haben konstruktive Lösungsvorschläge und setzen diese auch um.\n\nNein, ich möchte meine Rede fortsetzen. Ich habe Ihnen auch zugehört, Frau Krellmann.\n\nUnser Ansinnen ist nicht, Kollegen der Fraktion Die Linke, Berufsgruppen gegeneinander auszuspielen. Die Arbeit in der Pflege und in den vielen Sozial- und Erziehungsberufen verdient ebenso Anerkennung und Wertschätzung wie die Arbeitsleistung in jeder anderen Branche.\n\nGerne nenne ich Ihnen ein weiteres Beispiel, an dem Sie sehen können, dass wir konstruktiv und lösungsorientiert arbeiten. Um die Attraktivität der Ausbildung in den Pflegeberufen zu steigern, wollen wir die Ausbildung in den Bereichen Kranken- und Altenpflege -zusammenfassen. Hierdurch werden die beruflichen -Einsatz- und Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten über den gesamten Zeitraum des Erwerbslebens verbessert und vergrößert, und auch die individuelle Berufszufriedenheit wird gestärkt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, warum erwähne ich das? Soziale Arbeit, Pflege, Erziehungs- und Betreuungsarbeit beruhen immer auf Beziehungsarbeit. Deshalb ist es richtig und wichtig, sich neben einer guten Bezahlung auch um die Verbesserung von Strukturen zu kümmern. Verbesserte Strukturen schaffen nämlich verbesserte Arbeitsbedingungen, verbesserte Arbeitsbedingungen führen zu mehr Zufriedenheit, und mehr Zufriedenheit bedingt psychisches Wohlbefinden.\n\nDies haben mich 30 Berufsjahre in psychiatrischen Beratungs- und Betreuungsdiensten gelehrt.\n\nWas Ihre Forderung nach Wertschätzung angeht: Wertschätzung erfährt man neben einer angemessenen Entlohnung und guten Arbeitsbedingungen auch - das sei mir an dieser Stelle gestattet zu erwähnen - durch ein Dankeschön, einen Händedruck, ein Lächeln eines Kindes oder einer zu pflegenden Person. Diese besondere Wertschätzung ist mit keinem Geld der Welt zu bezahlen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Fraktion Die Linke, als Letztes möchte ich auf Ihre Forderung nach einem Kitaqualitätsgesetz eingehen. Sie wissen schon, dass dieses Thema bereits in Arbeit ist?\n\nAuf der Konferenz zur frühen Bildung im November letzten Jahres hat sich die Bundesfamilienministerin mit den Fachministern der Länder auf einen Prozess zur Entwicklung gemeinsamer Qualitätsziele für die Kindertagesbetreuung geeinigt. Ferner wurde in diesem Zusammenhang auch eine Arbeitsgruppe mit Vertreterinnen und Vertretern des Bundes, der Länder und der kommunalen Spitzenverbände eingesetzt, die sowohl konkrete Handlungsziele zur Weiterentwicklung der Qualität in der Kindertagesbetreuung als auch Vorschläge zur Finanzierung erarbeitet. Warten wir doch erst einmal die Ergebnisse der Praktiker ab, statt nach einem bundeseinheitlichen Kitaqualitätsgesetz zu rufen. Ob ein solches Gesetz aufgrund der regionalen Unterschiede und somit auch der regionalen Anforderungen der richtige Weg ist, wage ich zu bezweifeln.\n\nIch kann zusammenfassend nur sagen: Dieser Antrag gehört in Zeiten von Tarifverhandlungen in die Kategorie „Aktionismus, Populismus, Effekthascherei“. Ansonsten gibt es nichts Neues und Konkretes. Somit lehnen wir Ihren Antrag ab.\n\nFrau Krellmann, wenn Sie schon den Mindestlohn erwähnen, dann bleiben Sie nicht immer bei 8,50 Euro stehen.\n\n- Ja, ich habe über den Mindestlohn gesprochen.\n\nAber Sie wissen sicher wie auch ich, dass die Entlohnung im Bereich der Pflege über 8,50 Euro liegt.\"\n10489,oliver-krischer,\"Herzlichen Dank, Herr Minister Gabriel, dass Sie die Frage zulassen. - Ehrlich gesagt hat das nichts mit dem zu tun, was wir im Jahr 2014 im Rahmen der EEG-Novelle diskutiert haben.\n\nSie haben doch auf europäischer Ebene ein Problem bekommen, weil Sie die Ausnahmen auf alle möglichen Branchen ausgeweitet haben. Sie haben die Ausnahmeregelungen immer weiter ausgedehnt. Es gibt hier einen Konsens, die energieintensive Industrie - dazu gehört insbesondere die Stahlindustrie - davon auszunehmen. Sie haben das Problem verursacht, indem Sie immer mehr Branchen einbezogen haben. Damit sind Sie am Ende ein Stück weit dafür verantwortlich, dass wir nun diese Debatte führen. Genau das ist Ihr Problem.\n\nHerr Gabriel, ein zweiter Punkt. Ich habe nun mehrfach gehört, in den USA seien die Strompreise so viel günstiger als hier. Wir haben im Moment einen Börsenpreis von 25 Euro, teilweise sogar von 21 Euro pro Megawattstunde.\n\nDie Ausnahmen, die hier für die energieintensive Industrie und insbesondere für die Stahlindustrie vorhanden sind, finden Sie in weiten Teilen der USA nicht. Die Debatte ist an dieser Stelle unredlich. Wir müssen sicherlich viel über China reden und viele Fragen besprechen, zum Beispiel die Frage, wie wir den Emissionshandel weiter gestalten wollen. Aber hier eine Debatte darüber zu führen, dass die deutsche Stahlindustrie ein Problem mit den Strompreisen hätte, ist nicht redlich. Ich bitte Sie, dazu Stellung zu nehmen.\"\n12092,diether-dehm,\"Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Lassen Sie mich zunächst über Kultur in diesem Hause sprechen. Unser Unterausschuss wird vielerorts als Biotop belächelt; denn die allermeisten Anträge werden von uns fraktionsübergreifend eingebracht, egal ob es um die Nöte von Goethe, die Besoldung der Lehrkräfte in Auslandsschulen und die entsprechenden Verdi-Forderungen, das Haus der Kulturen der Welt oder die Gedenkstätte Sobibor geht. Der Ton untereinander ist freundschaftlich. Begründet wurde dieser Umgang in der Zeit, als noch Dr. Peter Gauweiler den Ausschussvorsitz inne hatte und Luc Jochimsen mit dabei war.\n\nDort durfte ich dann stellvertretender Vorsitzender des Ausschusses werden. Mit Bernd Fabritius versuchen wir, weiter auf diesem gemeinsamen und einvernehmlichen Weg zu bleiben, und bleiben es auch.\n\nZugrunde liegt unserer Kulturarbeit ein Verständnis, wonach jeder Euro mehr für Kultur einer weniger im Krieg ist; denn gerade wenn die Diplomatie versagt, kann die Kultur Brücken bauen. Die letzte Reise mit Peter Gauweiler als Ausschussvorsitzendem führte uns gemeinsam nach Kiew und Moskau. Dort versuchten der Rechte Gauweiler und der Linke Dehm Russen und Ukrainern ein wenig am persönlichen Beispiel zu zeigen, dass man über Gräben auch reden kann.\n\nDazu gehört, dass keiner dem anderen seine Leitkultur von oben überzustülpen sucht, dass keiner dem anderen seinen Lebensstil oder seinen Bildungskanon mit Gewalt überhelfen will.\n\nAber es gibt gemeinsame Werte für Demokraten, die ein offensives Eintreten verlohnen: gegen Faschisten, gegen islamistische Terroristen, gegen Säbelrasseln und menschenfeindliche Marktfanatiker, also für unser gutes Grundgesetz. Es enthält zum Beispiel ein Angriffskriegsverbot, welches Krieg vom deutschen Boden als Ultima Irratio verbietet, den Sozialstaatsgedanken, die Bindung des Eigentums an das Gemeinwohl und die Prinzipien der Gewaltenteilung und der Unschuldsvermutung, die wir Aufklärung und Code Napoléon verdanken. Denn Rechtsstaatlichkeit steht diametral gegen Scharia und gegen Lynchjustiz, die auch im Namen anderer Religionen gepriesen wird, Stichwort „Ku-Klux-Klan“. Dieser demokratische Konsens wird auszubauen sein, sollte tatsächlich, was mein atheistischer Gott verhindern möge, die AfD demnächst im Bundestag sitzen.\n\nLassen Sie mich Ihnen verraten, dass das Kopfschütteln in unserem Unterausschuss auch fraktionsübergreifend ist, wenn namentlich von Herrn Kauder durchgeprügelt wird, dass es keine gemeinsamen Anträge mit den Linken geben darf. Dies führt zu Skurrilitäten, wenn wir dann zehn Änderungsanträge zum Haushalt zweimal verabschieden müssen, einmal mit Linken, einmal ohne Linke, aber ansonsten wortgetreu, damit der CDU-Führung nicht zugemutet wird, einen von den Linken mit unterschriebenen Antrag einbringen zu müssen. Mein Appell an Herrn Kauder und andere lautet: Ersparen Sie uns bitte in Zukunft solche Kindereien!\n\nVerschärft hat sich das, nachdem wieder über Rot-Rot-Grün diskutiert wird. Dabei geht es in unserem Unterausschuss kein bisschen um künftige Koalitionen, sondern um die Gesprächs- und Handlungsbereitschaft von Demokraten, schwarzen, grünen und roten. Denn ob wir es wollen oder nicht: Wir alle sind Nachgeborene der großen bürgerlichen Französischen Revolution und der proletarischen Oktoberrevolution - ob wir wollen oder nicht.\n\nDer vorliegende Entschließungsantrag wurde so auch von uns gemeinsam erarbeitet; aber die Linke als Koautor wurde wieder gestrichen. Natürlich haben wir Linke auch unterschiedliche Akzentsetzungen, zum Beispiel in der Bewertung der Europäischen Nachbarschaftspolitik im vorliegenden Antrag. Meine Fraktion hat lange kritisiert, dass die ENP als Instrument zur Durchsetzung politischer, imperialer und wirtschaftlicher Interessen der EU und ihrer Mitgliedstaaten fungiert und darum auch spaltet. Nicht nur an den Rändern der EU brennt es.\n\nIn allen sechs Ländern der Östlichen Partnerschaft haben die Konflikte zugenommen. Wir sagen 70 Jahre nach dem Überfall auf die Sowjetunion: Macht uns die Russen nicht wieder zum Feind!\n\nZu ähnlicher Einschätzung sind auch die EU-Kommission und die Hohe Vertreterin Mogherini gekommen. Die Überarbeitung der ENP begann selbstkritisch. Es hieß, die EU betreibe keine wirklich konsequente Partnerschaft und dergleichen und - Zitat -:\n\nDie Nachbarschaft ist heute weniger stabil als noch vor zehn Jahren.\n\nWir finden es übereilt, die Auswärtige Bildungspolitik mit ihrem Sechs-Augen-Prinzip bruchlos in den Dienst der ENP als Kernstück europäischer Diplomatie zu stellen, zumal der anfänglichen Selbstkritik keine Konsequenz folgte. Noch immer haben Assoziierungs- und Freihandelsabkommen Priorität.\n\nDesintegrative Tendenzen sind in der sozialen Frage begründet. Die EU dagegen hält an der dominierenden Monopolkonkurrenz fest, die sie dann als Wettbewerb verklärt, die aber weitestgehend gar kein Wettbewerb mehr ist. Dem steht keine adäquate europäische Sozialstaatlichkeit in der EU gegenüber. Desintegrierend werden auch die Auswirkungen von CETA und später TTIP auf die Auswärtige Kulturpolitik sein. Die Kulturschaffenden haben dagegen schon Position bezogen. Der Deutsche Kulturrat hatte am 18. September dieses Jahres einen offenen Brief an die Delegierten des SPD-Konvents zu CETA geschrieben - ich zitiere -:\n\nDer europäische Kulturbereich wird schlechter gestellt als der kanadische. Die Europäische Union unterwirft die gesamte Kulturwirtschaft ... dem CETA-Abkommen. ... Bei den sogenannten Liberalisierungsverpflichtungen geht Kanada noch weiter und stellt seine gesamte nationale Kulturpolitik\n\n- und jetzt steht dort -\n\nvernünftigerweise unter Schutz.\n\nOlaf Zimmermann, Geschäftsführer des Kulturrates, befindet, dass die EU-Kommission die europäische Kulturwirtschaft im Stich gelassen hat.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Schluss noch etwas Gemeinsames aus unserem Unterausschuss erwähnen - der Bundesminister ist darauf eingegangen -: Unlängst wurde bekannt, dass die Exilvilla von Thomas Mann in Pacific Palisades zum Verkauf steht. Zu verhindern, dass dieser Ort, von dem aus Thomas Mann über zehn Jahre im intellektuellen Austausch mit anderen Antifaschisten künstlerisch wirkte, an unbedarfte Hände überschrieben werden könnte, dafür setzt sich dieser Unterausschuss vehement ein. Ich danke dem Auswärtigen Amt hier ausdrücklich für seine Bemühungen.\n\nFraktionsübergreifend bestand Einigkeit, dass das Haus eines der großen deutschen Dichter - neben Goethe, Hölderlin und Brecht -, der mit 25 Jahren bereits die Buddenbrooks geschrieben und damit eine präzise Innenarchitektur der deutschen kleinbürgerlichen Seelenlandschaft gespiegelt hat, unbedingt erworben und erhalten gehört.\n\nDie Umstände und Umständlichkeiten in dieser Villa hört man gleichsam heute noch knistern, wenn man sie betritt - als Erika Mann damals ihr 20-Minuten-Grundig-Tonbandgerät aufstellte, damit ihr Vater dort aus Joseph und seine Brüder las, als dann im Land Jakobs und Abrahams ein Bootsmann plötzlich hanseatisches Platt spricht. Ja, dieser Thomas Mann trug am Sehnen nach Deutschland, auch als er unter brennenden Tränen deutsche Städte zu bombardieren empfahl als kollektive Bestrafung für Adolf Hitler, wofür er von Bertolt Brecht als antideutsches Reptil geziehen wurde. Dieses Haus der deutschen Tragik im Exil wollen wir behalten. Denn ist es nicht die verbittert gebrochene Heimatliebe dieser Flüchtlinge, die uns die Wirkmacht der deutschen Worte und den Humanismus des anderen Deutschland neu lernen lässt?\n\nIm guten Sinne des Emigranten Bert Brecht:\n\nUnd weil wir dies Land verbessern\n\nLieben und beschirmen wir’s\n\nUnd das liebste mag’s uns scheinen\n\n- scheinen! -\n\nSo wie andern Völkern ihrs.\n\n... daß ein gutes Deutschland blühe,\n\nwie ein andres gutes Land.\n\nDies gemeinsam mit dem Verfassungspatriotismus Gustav Heinemanns sollte uns einen - in in- und auswärtiger Kultur.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n1793,thomas-silberhorn,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Ich darf die erste Frage nach dem runden Tisch am 30. April wie folgt beantworten: Die Teilnehmer sind nach ihrer Bedeutung für die Textilbranche ausgewählt worden. Wir haben darauf geachtet, dass nicht nur Vertreter der Wirtschaft eingeladen werden, sondern auch Arbeitgeberverbände, -Gewerkschaften und Vertreter der Zivilgesellschaft einbezogen sind, sodass unterschiedliche Standpunkte gehört und diskutiert werden konnten.\n\nEs waren insgesamt 27 Teilnehmer. Mit Blick auf die knappe Zeit wird es mir kaum möglich sein, alle zu nennen. Es sind Unternehmen, Verbände, Gewerkschaften, Nichtregierungsorganisationen und Zertifizierer. Das größte Interesse dürfte an den Unternehmen bestehen. Es waren Adidas, Adler Modemärkte, Aldi Nord, Aldi Süd, C & A, H & M, KiK Textilien, Lidl-Stiftung, Metro Group, Otto und Tchibo. Die großen und wichtigen Unternehmen waren also vertreten.\n\nAls Ergebnis wurde vereinbart, ein Bündnis für einen nachhaltigen deutschen Textilmarkt zu starten und einen gemeinsamen Aktionsplan in den Konsultationsrunden zu entwerfen, die folgen werden.\n\nSehr geehrter Herr Kekeritz, es handelt sich - das wird auch Bestandteil meiner Antwort auf Ihre zweite schriftlich eingereichte Frage sein - um zwei Prozesse. Es geht darum, zum einen ein Textilsiegel zu etablieren und zum anderen soziale Standards zu vereinbaren. Wir setzen insgesamt auf Kooperation; denn wir wollen die gesamte Lieferkette von den Produktionsstätten in Drittstaaten bis hin zum Verbraucher in Deutschland erfassen, also die gesamte globale Lieferkette vom Baumwollfeld bis zum Bügel. Da reicht der Aktionsradius der deutschen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit jedenfalls weiter als die Direktionskraft des deutschen Gesetzgebers. Insofern ist die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit berufen, die Handlungsspielräume zu nutzen, um eine solche globale Lieferkette zu gestalten sowie soziale und ökologische Mindeststandards zu vereinbaren und umzusetzen.\n\nHerr Kekeritz, es ist zutreffend, dass durch diesen runden Tisch zu den Verhaltenskodizes bereits eine enge Partnerschaft der deutschen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit mit der Bekleidungsindustrie besteht. Wir wollen keine Doppelstrukturen errichten, sondern die bestehenden Initiativen nutzen und breiter verankern. Es ist durchaus möglich, diesen runden Tisch zu den Verhaltenskodizes zu einem Bündnis für einen nachhaltigen Textilmarkt in Deutschland weiterzuentwickeln.\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Bundesminister Dr. Gerd Müller hat zunächst ein Textilbündnis initiiert. Ziel dieses Textilbündnisses ist es, eine Selbstverpflichtung der Textilbranche zur Einhaltung von ökologischen und sozialen Standards zu erreichen. Dabei arbeiten, wie angesprochen, Unternehmen, Verbände, Arbeitgeber- und Arbeitnehmervertretungen sowie Nichtregierungsorganisationen zusammen. Sie haben vereinbart, einen gemeinsamen Aktionsplan zu erstellen.\n\nDarüber hinaus geht es uns mit dem von Bundesminister Dr. Müller angekündigten Textilsiegel darum, Sozial- und Umweltstandards in der gesamten Lieferkette abzudecken, also vom Baumwollfeld bis zum Kleiderbügel. Das wird durch bestehende Siegel nicht geleistet. Es ist aber ein wichtiger Schritt hin zu einer umfassenden Einhaltung von Sozial- und Umweltstandards in der Textilbranche, die gesamte globale Lieferkette zu erfassen.\n\nHerr Abgeordneter, wir zielen darauf ab, dass gemeinsam soziale und ökologische Standards festgelegt werden, denen sich nicht nur die Unternehmen aus Deutschland verpflichtet fühlen, sondern auch die Produktionsstätten, die von deutschen Unternehmen in Asien und andernorts beauftragt werden. Insofern sind wir auf Kooperation und auch auf Maßnahmen der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit angewiesen, um solche Standards vor Ort umzusetzen.\n\nWir loten allerdings alle Handlungsmöglichkeiten gründlich aus und schließen nichts aus. Wir sind auf einem guten Wege, in Kooperation mit all den wesentlichen Akteuren diesen gemeinsamen Aktionsplan zu erarbeiten und uns auf soziale Mindeststandards zu verständigen.\n\nJa, Herr Abgeordneter, das ist der Fall. Das Entwicklungsministerium ist bereits seit einigen Jahren unterwegs, um mit den Arbeitnehmervertretern darauf hinzuwirken, dass die Arbeitsrechte und Mindeststandards bei den Arbeitsbedingungen eingehalten werden. Wir bilden beispielsweise auch Inspektoren aus, die darauf achten, dass solche Standards umgesetzt werden. Insofern sind wir breit aufgestellt und schließen nichts aus.\n\nIch will auch darauf hinweisen, dass wir beispielsweise in engem Kontakt mit der Internationalen Arbeitsorganisation, aber auch mit der Europäischen Kommission stehen. Wir wollen in enger Kooperation mit allen interessierten Kräften vorankommen, sowohl was die sozialen und ökologischen Standards angeht als auch was ein Textilsiegel angeht, das Transparenz für die Verbraucher in Deutschland schafft.\n\nFrau Abgeordnete, das ist natürlich der Fall. Die Handelsunternehmen, die ihre Waren von Produktionsstätten in Drittländern, zum Beispiel in Asien, beziehen, üben natürlich eine große Nachfragemacht aus. Deutschland ist ein großer Markt für die Textilbranche. Wir sind Bestandteil eines großen europäischen Binnenmarkts. Deswegen wird in der gesamten Europäischen Union mit großer Aufmerksamkeit verfolgt, wie wir unsere Debatte hier gestalten. Ich habe schon erwähnt, dass wir mit der Europäischen Kommission in enger Zusammenarbeit stehen. Wir wollen die Handlungsmöglichkeiten, die wir als Nachfrager bzw. Verbraucher in Deutschland haben, mit nutzen, um zu besseren Arbeitsbedingungen vor Ort beizutragen.\n\nEs ist eine für uns nicht hinnehmbare Situation, dass Kleidung unter unwürdigen Bedingungen in dritten Staaten produziert wird. Wir führen an anderer Stelle Diskussionen über Lohnuntergrenzen und Mindestlöhne. Man sollte in diesem Zusammenhang auch sehen, dass wir in einer globalisierten Weltwirtschaft die Produktionsbedingungen in Ländern, aus denen wir importieren, mit berücksichtigen müssen.\"\n7491,ewald-schurer,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Der Generaldebatte, die jetzt zu Ende geht, liegt der Entwurf des Bundeshaushalts für 2016 zugrunde. Wer einen Haushalt richtig zu interpretieren weiß, der kann sich das vorstellen: Es ist eine Art politisches Lesebuch einer Bundesregierung. - Dieser Haushalt setzt Prioritäten in vielen wichtigen gesellschaftlichen Bereichen: Förderung von Kitas, Familienpolitik, Bildung, Forschung, Außenpolitik, Gesundheit, Pflege, Infrastruktur und jetzt aufgrund einer aktuellen gesellschaftlichen Herausforderung ganz neu: Flucht, Asyl und Integration von Menschen, die zu uns kommen und dann nach der Anerkennung eine Chance haben sollen, über Arbeit, Soziales sozusagen voll in diese Gesellschaft aufgenommen zu werden und Teil dieser Gesellschaft zu werden. Es ist eine große Herausforderung. Den Zahlen - der Kollege hat es bereits gesagt - stehen dann immer auch Schicksale und menschliche Entwicklungen in dieser Gesellschaft gegenüber.\n\nDeutschland - das ist auch von Herrn Kauder herausgearbeitet worden - macht das aus einer Position der ökonomischen Stärke heraus. Es ist schon etwas Außergewöhnliches, dass wir nicht nur bei der Wertschöpfung, bei der Entwicklung des Bruttoinlandsprodukts, im Bereich Arbeitsmarkt - mehr Arbeitskräfte denn je, geringere Arbeitslosigkeit denn je -, sondern auch in anderen Bereichen der Gesellschaft eine sehr positive Entwicklung haben. Aus dieser ökonomischen Stärke - die korrespondiert mit den Zahlen des Bundeshaushalts - erwächst eine besondere Verantwortung Deutschlands - nicht Deutschlands allein -, die Integration der Menschen positiv zu befördern.\n\nÜberhaupt ist es so im Haushalt, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Das Wollen ist die entscheidende Frage. Will ich, dass die Menschen, die zu uns kommen und die Anerkennung bekommen, wirklich voll und ganz in diese Gesellschaft integriert werden? Ich denke, bei allen Akzentunterschieden hier im Parlament war heute der Common Sense: Wir wollen, dass die Menschen voll und ganz integriert werden.\n\nNur, an dieser Stelle mache ich mir schon Sorgen über den europäischen Prozess. Ich weiß, dass die Kanzlerin, das Kabinett, die Minister, dass alle alles tun, um hier auch in Europa den zerbrochenen Konsens wiederherzustellen. Wir haben - das darf man in der Debatte im Deutschen Bundestag sagen - derzeit für Europa eine bedrohliche Situation. Es sind nicht die Menschen, die von Budapest über München zu uns kommen, sondern es ist der fehlende Konsens. Mir tut es im Herzen und im Glauben weh, dass die Staatschefs aus Polen, der Slowakei, aus Tschechien und Ungarn, die sich am letzten Freitag in Prag getroffen haben, im Brustton der Überzeugung sagen, sie wollen sich an dieser Integrationsarbeit nicht beteiligen. Das ist vor dem geschichtlichen Hintergrund der 25 Jahre währenden Verantwortung des damaligen Westeuropas für die ehemaligen Staaten im kommunistischen Verbund eine ganz schwache Leistung, eine Bedrohung für die Europäische Union.\n\nDeswegen möchte ich unterstreichen, dass wir in Deutschland die Verantwortung haben und in der Lage sind, diese Integrationsarbeit mit der ökonomischen Stärke, dem nötigen Willen und dem nötigen Geist zu leisten. Aber es wird nicht gehen - wie schon gesagt -, wenn nur Österreich und Schweden dies offensiv tun und andere große Länder sagen: „Ich nehme 4 mal 5 000 in der nächsten Dekade“, und glauben, sie könnten sich damit aus dem Gesamtwerk der Europäischen Union verabschieden. Das macht mir große Sorge. So stark wir ökonomisch in Deutschland sind - das hat Carsten Schneider erwähnt -, so schwierig ist die makroökonomische Situation in vielen anderen Ländern. Wir haben Handelsbilanzüberschüsse, die sehr stark sind. Das liegt aber auch daran, dass unsere europäischen Partner zum Teil leider ökonomisch schwach sind oder nicht so stark sind. Deswegen müssen wir über alle Herausforderungen hinweg versuchen - Griechenland, Ukraine kann man leider nicht vergessen; es ist die größte Stellschraube bezüglich der Bedrohung -, die anderen Länder einzubeziehen. Ich denke hier auch an den Juncker-Plan mit den 300 Milliarden Euro. Das darf nicht nur diskutiert werden, sondern das muss im Europäischen Parlament mit den Nationalstaaten umgesetzt werden.\n\nGriechenland wird nach der 86-Milliarden-Euro-Rettung, womit man fiskalisch überhaupt erst die Grundlage für Wachstum geschaffen hat, Wachstumsprogramme brauchen. Es wird sich in Griechenland nichts tun, wenn nicht die Menschen vor Ort, die innovativ sind, mit Geld in neue Existenzen investieren. Das Ganze gilt auch für die anderen europäischen Länder. Wir brauchen - das muss man in der Generaldebatte noch einmal unterstreichen - europäische Partnerländer, die sich ökonomisch wieder erholen, die ökonomisch stärker werden und die von Wirtschaftswachstum getragen mit uns auf einer Augenhöhe als politische und ökonomische Partner in einer wiedererstarkten EU sind. Die Europäische Union hat es nämlich nötig.\n\nIch freue mich über jede Erfolgsmeldung aus Spanien, aus Portugal, aus Irland oder anderen Ländern, dass nach der gigantischen Wirtschaftskrise diese Länder langsam, aber sicher wieder in eine eigene Tragfähigkeit kommen und in der Lage sind, das Konzert der 28 europäischen Länder positiv mitzugestalten. Davon leben wir. Darauf muss man bei einer Haushaltsdebatte des Bundestages hinweisen. Nur aus der Interaktion aller europäischen Länder mit einer ökonomischen Führung Deutschlands - das darf man hier sagen, ohne sich schämen zu müssen -, aber auch mit einem starken Partner Frankreich können wir dieses Haus künftig gestalten.\n\nZum Schluss, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Die Felder sind genannt worden. Der Bundeshaushalt leistet unwahrscheinlich viel. Das ist in der Generaldebatte noch nicht das Thema. Das kommt dann bei den Lesungen zu den verschiedenen Einzelplänen. Wir haben eine Erweiterung des Volumens von 302 auf 312 Milliarden Euro und in der mittel- bis langfristigen Projektion steigt es bis 2019 auf 333 Milliarden Euro. Das zeigt, dass der Bund in den Sozialleistungsgesetzen, auch im investiven Verhalten, in vielen Bereichen enorm viel Geld in die Hand nimmt, um die Politikfelder gemeinsam mit den Länderhaushalten und den 12 500 Gemeinden in Deutschland nach vorne zu gestalten. Der Bund ist der wichtigste Akteur. Aber genauso wichtig sind die Länder und natürlich auch die Kommunen.\n\nWir haben bei der Stärkung der Investitionen noch Nachholbedarf; das ist bereits gesagt worden. Gerade die Flucht-, Asyl- und Integrationsfragen, Frau Präsidentin, können nur gelöst werden, indem wir in Deutschland Milliarden von privatem Kapital mit öffentlicher Unterstützung für sozialen Wohnungsbau verwenden, der sich an den Bedürfnissen der Menschen orientiert, egal ob die Menschen hier schon lange leben oder jetzt kommen. Hier werden wir im investiven Bereich auch in dieser Koalition in den nächsten Jahren noch mehr tun müssen als bisher.\n\nIch bedanke mich für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n13903,christian-lange,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Herr Kollege, ich beantworte Ihre Frage wie folgt: Deutschland bleibt bei seiner Haltung, das Protokoll Nummer 12 zur Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt noch nicht zu ratifizieren.\n\nBis heute haben von den 47 Mitgliedstaaten des Europarats 26 das Protokoll nicht ratifiziert; 9 Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Union haben es nicht einmal gezeichnet. Das sind die Staaten Bulgarien, Dänemark, Frankreich, Litauen, Monaco, Polen, Schweden, die Schweiz und das Vereinigte Königreich. Deutschland hat das Protokoll am Tag der Auflegung zur Zeichnung zwar unterzeichnet, aber bisher nicht ratifiziert.\n\nMaßgeblich für diese Entscheidung ist, dass bestimmte Unterscheidungen, die das deutsche Recht mit Blick auf die Nationalität macht, vom EGMR, dem Europäischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte, als Verstoß gegen das generelle Diskriminierungsverbot nach Artikel 1 des Protokolls Nummer 12 eingestuft werden könnten. Das Verbot der Diskriminierung in Artikel 1 des Protokolls Nummer 12 eröffnet sehr weitreichende Auslegungsmöglichkeiten, nicht zuletzt aufgrund des weitgefassten Kriteriums der Diskriminierung aufgrund eines sogenannten sonstigen Status. Konkrete Auslegungsvorgaben des EGMR liegen dazu bisher nicht vor. Vor diesem Hintergrund bleibt die Bundesregierung bei ihrer abwartenden Haltung, bis sich eine klare Rechtsprechungslinie des EGMR zur Auslegung des Artikels 1 des Protokolls Nummer 12 entwickelt hat.\n\nUnabhängig davon ist darauf hinzuweisen, dass die geltende deutsche Rechtsordnung Diskriminierungen bereits umfassend verbietet, insbesondere durch Artikel 3 des Grundgesetzes, an den Gesetzgebung, Verwaltung und Rechtsprechung unmittelbar gebunden sind. Im Arbeits- und Zivilrecht gewährleistet das am 18. August 2006 in Kraft getretene Allgemeine Gleichbehandlungsgesetz einen weitgehenden Diskriminierungsschutz.\n\nHerr Kollege Beck, an der Position der Bundesregierung hat sich durch Ihre Ausführungen sicher nichts geändert. Ich weise noch einmal darauf hin, dass Defizite im praktischen Bereich, die durch eine Ratifizierung beseitigt werden könnten, in Deutschland nicht nachgewiesen werden konnten. Das ist ein weiterer Grund für die Bundesregierung, bei ihrer Haltung zu bleiben.\n\nHerr Kollege Beck, auch diese Äußerungen sind nicht sensationell. Die Bundesregierung nimmt die Empfehlung internationaler Gremien stets sehr ernst und setzt sich mit ihnen auseinander, freilich nicht unkritisch. Keines der Gremien, die die Ratifikation des 12. Protokolls empfehlen, hat auf praktische Defizite in Deutschland hingewiesen, die durch eine solche Ratifikation beseitigt werden könnten. Das ist ein weiterer Grund, weshalb wir bei unserer seitherigen Position bleiben.\"\n2991,volker-beck,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Oppermann. - Würden Sie der Einschätzung von Ulrich Schneider vom Paritätischen Gesamtverband zustimmen, dass man die Rechte für Flüchtlinge, zum Beispiel im Hinblick auf den Zugang zum Arbeitsmarkt, nicht gegen das Asylgrundrecht von Flüchtlingen aus sicheren Herkunftsstaaten ausspielen sollte, sondern dass man diese Fragen unabhängig voneinander betrachten muss? Man kann doch eine Verbesserung der Situation der Menschen, die hier sind, nicht erkaufen, indem man anderen Rechte abschneidet. Entweder sind diese Herkunftsstaaten sicher oder nicht. Ich glaube das zwar nicht; denn das gilt zumindest nicht für Roma und Homosexuelle in diesen Ländern. Wenn Sie aber sicher sind, dann kann man das so regeln. Man muss das nicht mit einer anderen Frage verbinden. Das klingt ein bisschen nach Zuckerbrot und Peitsche.\n\nWenn Sie den Arbeitszugang für Flüchtlinge für so wichtig für die Integration halten, wie Sie es sagen - diese Einschätzung teile ich -, dann verstehe ich nicht, warum man nur die Frist verkürzt, aber die Vorrangprüfung beim Zugang zum Arbeitsmarkt, an der die meisten, die grundsätzlich arbeiten dürfen, scheitern, nicht gleichzeitig beseitigt. Die Vorrangprüfung beim Zugang zum Arbeitsmarkt für Flüchtlinge bedeutet nämlich, dass man erst schauen muss, ob ein Deutscher oder EU-Bürger für eine bestimmte Stelle infrage kommt, und dass der Unternehmer erst, wenn keiner gefunden wird, einen Flüchtling einstellen kann. Das führt unabhängig von den Fristen dazu, dass Flüchtlinge mit Arbeitserlaubnis faktisch nicht arbeiten können. Diese Regelung muss weg, wenn wir die Flüchtlinge tatsächlich willkommen heißen und dafür sorgen wollen, dass deren Leben hier in Deutschland nach der Aufnahme neu beginnen kann.\"\n4871,harald-ebner,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Koalition hat einen ordentlichen Antrag zur Ernährung vorgelegt.\n\nDa steht auch nichts wirklich Falsches drin. Aber\n\nangesichts der aktuellen Herausforderungen in dem gesamten Bereich Ernährung und Landwirtschaft wirkt das eher wie ein hilfloser Versuch, irgendwo mit dem Stopfen anzufangen. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wenn die ganze Scheune marode ist, dann hilft es wenig, vorne dran eine kleine, aber feine neue Hundehütte mit einem schicken Dach zu stellen. Das sieht zwar gut aus, aber es regnet trotzdem noch ins Heu rein.\n\nGesunde Ernährung gibt es nämlich nur auf der Basis einer gesunden Lebensmittelerzeugung. Im UNO-Jahr der Böden sei an das Ökolandbauprinzip erinnert: gesunder Boden, gesunde Pflanzen und Tiere, gesunde Lebensmittel, gesunder Mensch.\n\nHerr Minister Schmidt, dabei geht es nicht darum, dass die IGW die Landwirtschaft der letzten 50 Jahre zeigt, sondern dass sie auch zeigt, wie es in den nächsten zehn Jahren weitergeht.\n\nEs geht um eine bäuerliche Landwirtschaft als Grundlage einer gesunden Agrarstruktur. Es geht um eine Erzeugung ohne ungesunde Zutaten wie Gentechnik oder Pestizide. Es geht um eine Erzeugung, die Menschen, Tiere und Agrarökosysteme gesund hält.\n\nAn dieser Stelle ein Wort zu den Antibiotika. Der prophylaktische Einsatz von Antibiotika ist ja verboten und nicht nur nicht wünschenswert. Das sollte auch der Herr Minister wissen.\n\nEs geht aber auch um die Erhaltung unserer Standards bei TTIP und CETA, um Wahlfreiheit und Transparenz.\n\nWir erleben seit Jahrzehnten ein dramatisches Höfesterben. Aber statt bei der GAP-Reform die Interessen der kleinen und mittleren Betriebe zu vertreten, hat die Bundesregierung die Interessen der Agrarindustrie vertreten. Denn wer profitiert von den nach oben ungedeckelten Direktzahlungen? Das sind doch nicht die kleinen und mittleren Betriebe.\n\nEine gesunde Agrarstruktur braucht natürlich auch eine vielfältige Wertschöpfungskette. Vielfalt und Qualität erfordern Kompetenz, wie sie im Lebensmittelhandwerk angelegt ist. Insofern sind wir zu Recht stolz auf die Vielfalt unserer Wurst- und Backwaren. Natürlich müssen wir zur Stärkung von Landwirtschaft und Handwerk unsere geografischen Spezialitäten verstärkt unterstützen. Aber Minister Schmidt möchte angesichts von TTIP nicht mehr jede Wurst schützen.\n\nZu gesunden Zutaten gehören ganz bestimmt nicht Gentechnik oder Pestizide. Die Ablehnung der Gentechnik ist gut begründet. Ihre Folgen sind bekannt: weniger Sortenvielfalt, Monopolisierung, Patentierung, steigende Pestizidmengen und eine fortschreitende Industrialisierung der Landwirtschaft.\n\nUnd was macht die Große Koalition? Sie machen in der EU den Weg frei für neue Anbau- und Importzulassungen. Jetzt wollen Sie auch noch bei TTIP die in Europa bereits bestehende Kennzeichnungspflicht für Gentech-Zutaten in Lebens- und Futtermitteln opfern. Minister Schmidt hat in der Tagesschau einen Vorschlag präsentiert, nach dem die Bürgerinnen und Bürger künftig jeden einzelnen Artikel mittels Barcode und Smartphone auf mögliche Gentech-Zutaten abscannen müssen, wenn sie wissen wollen, ob Gentech drin ist. Das ist doch der absolute Gipfel der Verbrauchertäuschung. Man schreibt es nicht im Klartext drauf, und dann wird es schon keiner merken.\n\nIch bin wirklich fassungslos. Die Verhandlungen sind noch nicht einmal richtig in die heiße Phase gekommen, da räumt die Bundesregierung schon freiwillig die Grundpfeiler des europäischen Verbraucher- und Umweltschutzes ab.\n\nSie streben in Ihrem Koalitionsvertrag die Kennzeichnungspflicht für Nachkommen von geklonten Tieren und deren Fleisch an. Das finden wir richtig. Aber Sie wissen doch ganz genau, dass eine solche Kennzeichnung mit dieser Art von TTIP, mit diesem Verhandlungsmandat und unter den aktuellen Verhandlungsbedingungen nicht zu bekommen ist. Auch die Ausweitung der bestehenden Gentechnikkennzeichnung auf tierische Lebensmittel, die unter Verwendung von gentechnisch veränderten Futtermitteln produziert werden, wird mit CETA und TTIP so nicht zu realisieren sein. Das wurde in unseren Gesprächen mit Ausschuss und Minister in den USA mehr als deutlich. Das hat uns auch unsere Studie noch einmal bestätigt. Wenn Sie die Wahlfreiheit der Verbraucher bei TTIP opfern, rettet uns auch kein Opt-out mehr vor der Gentechnik.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen insbesondere von SPD und Union, in Ihrem Antrag stehen viele gute Dinge.\n\n- Schön. - Aber eine bessere Wertschätzung - Kollegin Pflugradt hat die Wertschätzung angesprochen - von Lebensmitteln werden wir nur erreichen, wenn wir Lebensmittel wertorientiert erzeugen mit einer Land- und Lebensmittelwirtschaft, die unsere natürlichen Lebensgrundlagen erhält,\n\nanständig mit Mensch und Tier umgeht und auf moderne ökologische Konzepte statt auf Risikotechnologien setzt. Mit Ihrem heutigen Antrag haben Sie pünktlich zur IGW den Tisch hübsch eingedeckt. Jetzt sollten Sie über den Tellerrand schauen und mit uns die Agrarwende und die Gentechnikfreiheit unterstützen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n2583,dieter-janecek,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrter Herr Dr. Fuchs, ich freue mich, dass es Ihnen so gut geht. Der Energiewende geht es nicht so gut. Das hat auch damit zu tun, Minister Gabriel, was Sie in den letzten Wochen und Monaten gemacht haben. Man kann es natürlich auch mit Humor nehmen, dass Sie sich hier als Fels in der Brandung hinstellen, während wir im Bundestag in der parlamentarischen Beratung das größte Chaos erleben, das wir in den letzten Jahren erlebt haben.\n\n- Da kann noch mehr kommen, sagen Sie? Da bin ich aber gespannt.\n\nAls Wirtschaftsminister ist man auch dafür da, Investitionen anzuregen. Die Wahrheit ist aber doch: Was Sie in den letzten Monaten gemacht haben, ist, Investitionen in Milliardenhöhe auf Halde zu legen. Allein in meiner Heimatregion Niederbayern sind in diesem Jahr in Windkraft 100 Millionen Euro nicht investiert worden. Das ist doch die Wahrheit, was die Energiewende angeht: Das ist Abbruchstimmung, nicht Aufbruchstimmung.\n\nMit Verlässlichkeit hat das gar nichts zu tun.\n\nWir reden hier auch über Gründungsdynamik. Sie selber haben jetzt einen Gründungsmonitor für die Erneuerbaren herausgegeben. Die Zahl der Gründungen hat sich verdreifacht. Ob das bei dieser Politik so weitergeht, darauf bin ich ja sehr gespannt. Wenn man dann den Haushalt anschaut, stellt man fest, dass 20 Prozent Ihres Etats für die Steinkohleförderung vorgesehen sind. Sie streichen bei der Effizienz. Sie tun nichts beim Breitbandausbau. Da wäre 1 Milliarde Euro nicht schlecht gewesen, liebe SPD.\n\nSie tun nichts bei der steuerlichen Forschungsförderung. Da fehlt es doch. Da fehlt es doch wirklich, was das Thema Innovation angeht.\n\nJetzt kommen wir einmal zu der Frage nach Zukunfts-trends im Haushalt. Wir müssen ja über den Tellerrand hinausschauen. Schauen wir einmal, was die Welt so macht: Google baut das selbstfahrende Auto, Tesla macht das elektrische Fahren attraktiv, und wir in Deutschland kriegen die Nationale Plattform Elektromobilität nicht auf die Reihe. Es kann doch nicht sein, dass wir bei so einem zentralen Zukunftsthema nicht vorankommen.\n\nIn Bezug auf das Thema Digitalwirtschaft, Minister Gabriel, habe ich registriert, dass Sie nach vorne gehen wollen und dass Sie erkannt haben, dass die Venture-Capital-Bedingungen verbessert werden müssen. Wir waren ja mit einigen Mitgliedern des Ausschusses Digitale Agenda und des Wirtschaftsausschusses im Silicon Valley. Dort hat jedes Unternehmen 32-mal so viel Kapital zur Verfügung wie in Deutschland. Das müssen wir jetzt nicht ausgleichen, aber es wäre nicht schlecht, ein bisschen näher an diesen Wert heranzukommen.\n\nWir müssen eines verstehen: Die Wertschöpfungsketten verschieben sich: von der Hardware zur Software. Industrie 4.0 wird ein großes Leitthema. Das ist nicht nur ein Thema für Fachpolitiker, sondern das muss auch ein Thema für den Wirtschaftsausschuss werden. Deswegen noch einmal: Breitband ist ja ein wichtiges Thema - die Milliarde wäre ganz gut; die könnten wir gebrauchen -, aber es geht eben nicht nur um technologische Innovation, sondern es geht auch um soziale Innovation. Die Crowdfunding-Szene hier in Berlin ist sehr stark geworden. Damit müssen wir uns auseinandersetzen. Auch die Sharing-Plattformen - ich war jetzt in San Francisco und Seoul, den beiden führenden Städten der Welt, die die Ökonomie des Teilens vorantreiben - sind ein Thema, bei dem nichts getan wird und bei dem wir wirklich einmal in die Offensive gehen müssten, um auch die digitalen Potenziale auszuschöpfen.\n\nIn diesem Sinne glaube ich wirklich: Es geht darum, dass wir nicht die Vergangenheit verteidigen. Ich habe übrigens Ihren Beitrag in der FAZ, den Sie zur digitalen Ökonomie geschrieben haben, sehr stark so gelesen, dass Sie die Deutschland AG gegen die Internetfirmen aus den USA verteidigen wollen. Aber so wird der Weg nicht gehen.\n\n- Ich habe den so gelesen, und viele andere haben den so gelesen. - So wird das nicht gehen. Am Ende müssen Sie gestalten. Wir arbeiten ja zusammen. Ich meine, das Industriewerk in Michigan machen Siemens und Google ja zusammen, Ford 4.0 sozusagen. Es geht wirklich auch um Kooperation und darum, nach vorne zu denken. Das Ganze funktioniert doch nur, wenn Nachhaltigkeit, Energieeffizienz und Ressourcenschonung im Vordergrund stehen. Das tun sie nicht. Dazu fehlen die Ansätze im Haushalt. Da müssen wir hinkommen. Ich bitte Sie herzlich, dass wir in diesem Bereich an die Spitze kommen; denn da liegt unsere Marktführerschaft auf der Welt. Da müssen wir etwas tun.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n144,manuel-sarrazin,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Vielleicht ein Wort zur Faktenlage: Über das Programm „Europa für Bürgerinnen und Bürger“ werden Städtepartnerschaften, Vereine, Bildungs-, Forschungs-, Kultur- und Jugendeinrichtungen, Stiftungen und Gewerkschaften gefördert, und die geförderten Aktionen müssen grundsätzlich transnational durchgeführt werden oder eine europäische Dimension haben.\n\nIch dachte eigentlich, dass das Thema der internationalen Begegnungsarbeit etwas wäre, das sogar mich mit den Idealen der Linkspartei verbindet.\n\nAber man kann natürlich, so wie Sie es tun, die finanzielle Förderung dieses Bereichs mit fast 200 Millionen Euro ablehnen und hier irgendwelche geschichtspolitischen Ausführungen machen.\n\nVielleicht sollte man sich doch noch einmal vor Augen führen, verehrter Kollege Hunko, dass wir im nächsten Jahr verschiedenste Jahrestage haben, die auch vor dem Hintergrund der Europawahl und gerade vor dem Hintergrund der Krise eine wunderbare Gelegenheit bieten, beim Thema Geschichtsbewusstsein etwas vorzuleben.\n\n- Wir haben nächstes Jahr den 100. Jahrestag des Beginns des Ersten Weltkrieges. Jetzt können wir einmal schauen, ob Ihnen auch die weiteren Jahrestage einfallen. Zum Beispiel haben wir im August einen Jahrestag: 75 Jahre Hitler-Stalin-Pakt. Das ist durchaus eine Gelegenheit, über die Geschichte Europas zu reden und auch die Totalitarismen des 20. Jahrhunderts kritisch aufzugreifen. Im Juni nächsten Jahres ist beispielsweise das 25-jährige Jubiläum der ersten teildemokratischen Wahlen in der Volksrepublik Polen. Das ist ein wirklich grandioses Datum, um das Geschichtsbewusstsein zu stärken und dabei die gesamteuropäische Dimension einzubeziehen, die nicht klassisch westeuropäisch-links geprägt ist.\n\nIch glaube, meine Damen und Herren, dass wir eine sehr wichtige Debatte führen, nicht, weil dieses Programm etwa das wichtigste wäre, auch nicht, weil hier die Flexibilitätsklausel angewandt wird und wir aktiv die Verfassungsidentität unseres Grundgesetzes nach der Lissabon-Rechtsprechung des Verfassungsgerichts leben, sondern weil es hier darum geht, Gelder freigeben zu können, damit die genannten Institutionen und die Städtepartnerschaften so schnell wie möglich auf die Gelder zugreifen und Projekte durchführen können, damit sich Menschen in Europa treffen und begegnen können.\n\nLeider debattieren wir den Gesetzentwurf erst jetzt. Er wurde uns von der Bundesregierung so spät vorgelegt, obwohl zumindest politisch schon seit Monaten die Zahl, die am Ende der Haushaltsverhandlungen herauskommen würde, vorlag. Das Problem ist, dass wir es nun aller Wahrscheinlichkeit nach aufgrund des Gesetzgebungsverfahrens in Deutschland im Zusammenhang mit dem Bundesrat und der erst dann folgenden Ratsbeschlüsse nicht hinbekommen werden, dass tatsächlich ab Januar Mittel fließen können.\n\nDas heißt, das europäische Miteinander wird - zumindest zum 1. Januar des geschichtsträchtigen Jahres 2014, in dem sich der Ausbruch des Zweiten Weltkrieges 1939 sowie die Osterweiterung 2004 jährt - erst einmal ausgesetzt, weil diese Regierung und auch dieses Parlament aufgrund der langen Koalitionsverhandlungen nicht rechtzeitig aus dem Knick gekommen sind und weil sich die alte Regierung nicht getraut hat, einfach einmal bis zum Ende der Legislatur vorzudenken.\n\nDas andere ist: Wir sagen oft sehr allgemein, es gebe eine große, böse Sparpolitik in Europa. Hier bietet sich eine gute Gelegenheit, zu sagen, dass es wirklich schade ist, dass die Politik, die Schwarz-Gelb im Zuge der Verhandlungen über den mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen in den letzten Jahren gemacht hat, zu allgemeinen Einsparungen im EU-Haushalt geführt hat, was wiederum dazu führt, dass dieses Programm zur Förderung von Städtepartnerschaften, das die Begegnung junger Menschen fördern soll, in der vorliegenden Fassung weniger Mittel zur Verfügung hat. Dem Programm wurden zwischen 2013 und 2014 5 Millionen Euro gestrichen, und in der gesamten neuen Förderperiode stehen 30 Millionen Euro weniger zur Verfügung.\n\nIch kann nur sagen: Da wurde der Rotstift an der falschen Stelle angesetzt. Dadurch fallen unserer Meinung nach wohlmeinende, lobenswerte und unterstützenswerte Projekte einem falschen Politikstil in Bezug auf die Finanzierung der Europäischen Union zum Opfer.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir üben nicht nur Kritik, wir haben auch Vorschläge, wie man das Programm konkret ausgestalten könnte. Die Grünen haben immer auf allen Ebenen Verbesserungsvorschläge gemacht, unsere europäische Fraktion hat diese auch vorgetragen. Am Ende haben wir dem vorliegenden Programm trotzdem zugestimmt, weil wir, im Gegensatz zur Linkspartei, meinen: Es ist gut, wenn sich junge Menschen treffen, wenn über Städtepartnerschaften und Kulturinstitutionen Menschen miteinander über Geschichte und Politik ins Gespräch kommen.\n\nDeswegen stimmen wir dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf zu.\n\nDanke.\"\n2524,brigitte-pothmer,\"Frau Ministerin Nahles, ich wollte Sie eigentlich nur fragen, ob es Ihnen genauso geht wie mir. Denn die Argumentation, die Sie in Sachen Pro-Kopf-Förderung von Langzeitarbeitslosen vorgetragen haben, war identisch mit der Argumentation, die Ihre Vorgängerin in dieser Frage vorgetragen hat.\n\nIch jedenfalls kann mich gut daran erinnern, dass Sie in Ihrer Rolle als Oppositionsabgeordnete diese Argumentation heftigst kritisiert haben.\n\nWenn ich richtig informiert bin, dann haben Sie in der letzten Legislaturperiode die Aufstockung der Mittel zur Förderung von Langzeitarbeitslosen und von Arbeitslosen insgesamt um weit über 1 Milliarde Euro gefordert.\n\nInzwischen fließen dafür nur noch ein paar Millionen Euro.\n\nKönnen Sie mir erklären, welches arbeitsmarktpolitische Wunder sich inzwischen ereignet haben soll, weswegen die von Ihnen verlangte - wie ich fand, richtige - Förderung jetzt nicht mehr auf der Tagesordnung steht?\"\n3397,katherina-reiche,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Herr Kollege, ich beantworte Ihre Frage wie folgt: Anfang Juli hat der Bundesminister für Verkehr und digitale Infrastruktur sein Konzept zur Einführung einer Infrastrukturabgabe vorgestellt. Dieses Konzept sieht eine Mautpflicht auf dem gesamten Straßennetz vor. Das Bundesministerium für Verkehr und digitale Infrastruktur prüft derzeit, ob diesbezüglich Änderungen vorgenommen werden sollten, um hierzu in den Grenzregionen geäußerten Bedenken Rechnung zu tragen. Eine abschließende Entscheidung ist noch nicht getroffen worden.\n\nNennenswerte Verkehrsverlagerungen werden insbesondere auch aufgrund der moderaten Vignettenpreise nicht erwartet. Studien zu möglichen Verkehrsverlagerungen, nach denen Sie gefragt haben, wurden deshalb nicht in Auftrag gegeben.\n\nIch habe gesagt, dass wir keine Studien in Auftrag gegeben haben und dass der Preis der geplanten Vignette sehr moderat ist. Aber den wichtigsten Punkt, Herr Kollege, möchte ich noch einmal betonen: Da es keine abschließende Entscheidung über das am Ende dann tatsächlich mautpflichtige Straßennetz gibt, sind auch Spekulationen über Verlagerungen und dergleichen nicht angebracht.\n\nWir gehen bei diesem Gesetzesvorhaben so vor wie bei anderen Gesetzesvorhaben. Zunächst erfolgt eine Erarbeitung im Haus, dann eine Diskussion mit beteiligten Ressorts, und dann geht es den Verfahrensgang, den auch Sie kennen. Es ist aber auch bekannt, dass unser Verkehrsminister, Herr Dobrindt, in verschiedenen Ländern gewesen ist, um Gespräche zu führen und um Zustimmung dafür zu werben, dass wir das tun, was die EU von uns verlangt, nämlich eine Ausweitung der Nutzerfinanzierung unserer Straßen.\n\nHerr Kollege Krischer, Sie können sicher sein, dass die Lebensgewohnheiten, die Arbeitsgewohnheiten und auch die Wirtschaftsgewohnheiten in den Grenzregionen sehr wohl berücksichtigt werden und wir dies bei der Ausgestaltung einer Infrastrukturabgabe sehr wohl in Betracht ziehen.\n\n- Doch. Sie haben gefragt, ob wir das berücksichtigen. Natürlich!\n\nHerr Kollege, wie schon gesagt, befindet sich das Konzept derzeit in der Erarbeitung. Es sieht keine Kurzzeitvignetten für in Deutschland zugelassene Fahrzeuge vor. Die Einhaltung einer Vignettenpflicht kann sinnvollerweise nur auf dem mautpflichtigen Streckennetz kontrolliert werden.\n\nDie von Ihnen vermutete Diskriminierung können wir in diesem Punkt sicherlich ausschließen, weil Halter von in Deutschland Kfz-steuerpflichtigen Pkw eine Infrastrukturabgabe entrichten müssen, und im Gegenzug erhalten sie den Infrastrukturabgabenbescheid und die Papiervignette.\n\nÜber alle anderen Fragen, die die Halter von Autos betreffen, die nicht hier zugelassen sind, sind wir in intensivem Kontakt mit der EU.\n\nHerr Kollege, zur Erläuterung lassen Sie mich zitieren, was uns die EU-Kommission dazu sagt. Die EU-Kommission sagt ganz ausdrücklich, dass zwischen den verschiedenen Säulen der Infrastrukturfinanzierung, nämlich der Steuerfinanzierung über Kfz-Steuer oder Mineralölsteuer einerseits und der Nutzerfinanzierung durch Einführung einer Vignette andererseits, Verschiebungen für die Mitgliedstaaten möglich sind. Wir bewegen uns in diesem Fall also sehr wohl in dem von der EU-Kommission vorgegebenen Rahmen. Aber Sie können sicher sein, dass ein endgültiger Gesetzentwurf die Anforderungen erfüllen wird, die im Koalitionsvertrag vorgegeben sind.\n\nLandeskunde, Herr Kollege, schadet nie. Aber zum Kern Ihrer Frage, um sie im Ernst zu beantworten: Ihre gesamten Ausführungen in 1 Minute und 14 Sekunden beruhen auf Spekulationen in der Presse. Sie werden es mir nachsehen, dass wir nicht zu jeder Spekulation in der Presse Stellung nehmen. Wir sind gehalten, einen Gesetzentwurf vorzulegen, der den Anforderungen des Koalitionsvertrags entspricht. Ich habe auch schon gesagt, dass wir die Lebens\u001e, Arbeits- und Wirtschaftsgewohnheiten in den Regionen berücksichtigen und einen entsprechenden Gesetzentwurf vorlegen werden.\n\nDas habe ich auch nicht gemacht; das war der Kollege Krischer.\n\nWir arbeiten daran, dass wir einen Entwurf haben, Frau Kollegin, der den Vorgaben des Koalitionsvertrags entspricht.\n\n- Doch, Frau Kollegin. - Das ist die Aufgabe. Sie beziehen sich erneut auf Pressespekulationen.\n\nIch möchte auch zurückweisen, dass ich mich mit Landeskunde beschäftige. Diese etwas provokante Frage wurde vom Herrn Kollegen Krischer gestellt.\n\nAber da wir uns lange kennen, kann ich die ganz gut einordnen.\n\n- Die habe ich auch konkret beantwortet.\n\nIch beantworte die Frage wie folgt: Eine abschließende Entscheidung zum mautpflichtigen Streckennetz ist noch nicht gefasst worden.\n\nFrau Kollegin Leidig, ich beantworte Ihre Frage wie folgt: Die Verhandlungen zur Leistungs- und Finanzierungsvereinbarung - kurz: LuFV - befinden sich in der Schlussabstimmung. Insofern können Aussagen zu einzelnen Aspekten der LuFV II derzeit noch nicht getroffen werden.\n\nFrau Kollegin, es ist sicherlich nicht üblich, aus laufenden Verhandlungen zwischen der Regierung und der Deutschen Bahn AG zu berichten. Insofern bleiben wir hier bei den Gepflogenheiten, wie sie auch schon bei der LuFV I eingeübt wurden, nämlich dass dann, wenn verhandelt wurde und ein Abschluss vorliegt, die Fachausschüsse informiert werden.\n\nIch möchte aber den zweiten Teil Ihrer Frage insofern aufnehmen, als Sie wissen sollen, dass die Vorsitzende des Rechnungsprüfungsausschusses, unsere Kollegin Frau Hagedorn, und der Berichterstatter Herr Brackmann sowie der Bundesrechnungshof prüfen, ob die bisher eingeschränkte Vergabeprüfung des EBA durch eine umfassende Prüfung durch den Jahresabschlussprüfer der DB AG ersetzt werden kann. Aber auch hierzu gibt es noch keinen Abschluss.\n\nFrau Kollegin Leidig, wie Sie wissen, hat der Bundesrechnungshof ein gesetzliches und auch sehr umfängliches Kontrollrecht. In der LuFV II sollen diese Kontrollrechte konkretisiert und hinsichtlich des Umfanges und des Ausübens der Kontrollrechte im Einvernehmen zwischen Bundesrechnungshof und DB AG konkreter beschrieben werden. Die konkreten Punkte - da wiederhole ich mich - legen wir Ihnen vor, wenn die gesamte LuFV II am Ende vorliegt.\n\nHerr Kollege, Sie wissen, dass es in der Vergangenheit immer wieder unterschiedliche Auffassungen zwischen dem Bundesrechnungshof und auch uns hinsichtlich des Prüfumfanges gab, was auch viel mit Personal und personellem Aufwand zu tun hat. Ich glaube, Ziel muss es sein, größtmögliche Transparenz zu bekommen, ohne das Eisenbahn-Bundesamt sowie Prüferinnen und Prüfer zu überfordern. Auf diesem schmalen Grat zwischen dem, was vom Parlament gewünscht wird, und dem, was zugleich auch in den Behörden widergespiegelt werden muss, versuchen wir eine gute Lösung zu finden.\n\nDanke, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Kollegin, im Regierungsentwurf zum Bundeshaushalt 2015 ist im Haushaltsvermerk zum Titel „Gewinne aus Beteiligungen“ vorgesehen, dass über die Veranschlagung von 700 Millionen Euro hinausgehende zusätzliche Dividendeneinnahmen zur Leistung von Mehrausgaben bei der Leistungs- und Finanzierungsvereinbarung Schiene zu dienen haben. Nach der Systematik der LuFV, der Outputorientierung, können die einzelnen Finanzierungsmittel nicht mit konkreten Verwendungszwecken verbunden und diesen zugeordnet werden.\n\nEs ist nicht geplant, Dividenden, deren Höhe wir tatsächlich erst kennen, wenn es einen Jahresabschluss gibt, im Haushalt 2015 in die Finanzierung der LuFV fließen zu lassen. Sollten sich aber Mehreinnahmen ergeben, was sich im Jahresverlauf herausstellen wird, ist daran gedacht, darüber hinausgehende Mittel zurückfließen zu lassen, um dem System Finanzierungskreislauf Schiene gerecht zu werden.\n\nDas ist in der Tat nicht der Fall. Wir haben, wie Sie wissen, ein zusätzliches Finanzvolumen über die gesamte Legislaturperiode von 5 Milliarden Euro. Dieses umfasst Investitionsmittel nicht nur für die Straße, sondern auch für die Schiene. Ich möchte aber auch darauf hinweisen, dass dies ein Entwurf ist, der im Haushaltsausschuss bestätigt oder verändert oder sogar aufgebessert werden kann. Insofern warten wir jetzt ab, ob der Entwurf in dieser Form durch den Haushaltsausschuss bestätigt wird.\"\n8445,dirk-heidenblut,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Zunächst einmal, Herr Kollege Birkwald, bei aller Wertschätzung für unsere ehemalige Ministerin Schmidt und auch für unseren jetzigen Minister Gröhe: Gesetze machen immer noch die Parlamente. Insofern kann keine Ministerin, auch kein Minister jemandem per Gesetz eiskalt etwas wegnehmen oder geben. Es wäre schon Sache des Parlaments, dies zu tun.\n\nDas will ich an dieser Stelle nur klarstellen, ganz abgesehen davon, dass das seinerzeit kein eiskaltes Wegnehmen oder Geben war.\n\nWie bei der letzten Rede in einer Debatte so üblich, neigt man dazu, einiges zu wiederholen. Dafür entschuldige ich mich im Vorhinein. Aber wie Sie sehen, habe ich nur drei Minuten Redezeit. Das wird also nicht ganz so hart werden.\n\nIch möchte das Ganze zunächst noch einmal in den Gesamtkontext stellen. Wir reden hier eigentlich nicht über die Rentenversicherung, sondern über die Krankenversicherungsbeiträge bei Direktversicherungen, also eigentlich über die Finanzierung der Krankenversicherung. Wenn man sich Ihren Antrag genau anschaut, erkennt man, dass der zweite Absatz ja auch eher eine Grundaufforderung ist, die Krankenversicherung zu reformieren. Insofern war ich froh, als ich gesehen habe, dass Sie nach den Eingangsstatements auf den Kern zurückgekommen sind. Deswegen möchte ich auch noch etwas zur Krankenversicherung sagen.\n\nWir haben in der Großen Koalition gerade erst eine Menge Pakete in Angriff genommen, mit denen wir enorm viel für die Verbesserung der Versorgung gerade der gesetzlich Krankenversicherten getan haben.\n\nDas ist auch und gerade vor dem Hintergrund zu sehen, dass wir es natürlich mit einem demografischen Wandel zu tun haben - da wird uns im Übrigen immer noch vorgehalten, dass wir nicht genug getan haben im Hinblick auf die Pflege und andere Dinge - und dieser demografische Wandel zwei Effekte hat. Der sehr positive Effekt ist, dass wir alle durchaus älter werden. Aber dadurch, dass wir alle älter werden, erhöhen sich auch die Krankheitskosten, die Kosten für Pflege und Ähnliches mehr. Das Ganze muss bezahlt werden, und zwar generationengerecht. Schon die damalige Regierung verfolgte den Ansatz: „Wir müssen das generationengerechter machen“, ein Ansatz übrigens - das haben wir vorhin schon gehört -, der vom Gericht bereits bestätigt wurde.\n\nWenn man sich jetzt Ihren Antrag genau anschaut, dann sieht man, dass Sie eigentlich wieder versuchen, uns Ihre Vorstellung davon, wie das Versicherungssystem aussehen sollte - ich will das hier nicht diskutieren; Sie wissen, dass wir als SPD an der einen oder anderen Stelle durchaus ein wenig Sympathie dafür haben -, nahezubringen. Aber Sie tun dies, indem Sie eine bestehende Problematik, die im Rahmen der betrieblichen Versicherung womöglich auch mit angesprochen werden muss, mit Ihrem Mäntelchen versehen. Im Übrigen beschäftigen wir uns gerade mit der Frage der Rente, auch der betrieblichen Rente; das ist ja schon deutlich geworden. Ich kann Ihnen nur sagen: Es ist kein Mittel, uns auf diesem Weg immer wieder die gleichen Debatten aufzuzwingen. Das wird leerlaufen, so wie es bisher leergelaufen ist.\n\nSchönen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n12458,dagmar-schmidt,\"Sehr geehrte Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Zunächst möchte ich einmal aus meiner Sicht einordnen, worüber wir hier heute reden. Wir haben in der Großen Koalition große Sozialreformen gemacht und machen sie noch: Mindestlohn, Rente, Bundesteilhabegesetz und Bekämpfung der Leiharbeit. Eine grundlegende Reform der Regelbedarfe machen wir nicht. Eine grundsätzliche Neufassung findet mit dem Gesetzentwurf nicht statt. Die Anmerkungen, die Kritik des Bundesverfassungsgerichts wurde aufgenommen, und eine Reihe von Verbesserungen wurde erzielt. Frau Staatssekretärin Lösekrug-Möller hat darauf hingewiesen.\n\nAber es gilt das Struck’sche Gesetz. Wir möchten noch an einigen Stellen Verbesserungen erzielen. Uns geht es dabei vor allem um konkrete Probleme, die Menschen im Transferleistungsbezug haben. Da ist zum Beispiel die sogenannte Erstrentenproblematik. Menschen, die vom Sozialhilfe- oder Arbeitslosengeld-I-Bezug in die Rente wechseln, müssen einen Monat überbrücken, denn Ersteres wird vorschüssig gezahlt und die Rente erst am Ende des Monats. Das Problem müssen wir lösen.\n\nAuch gibt es oftmals Probleme - Herr Strengmann-Kuhn hat es angesprochen - mit der Weißen Ware. Waschmaschinen und Kühlschränke verursachen einmalig hohe Kosten, wenn sie neu angeschafft werden müssen. Eigentlich ist vorgesehen, dass für diesen Fall aus dem Regelsatz angespart werden soll, aber jeden Monat etwas zurückzulegen, beiseitezulegen, das gelingt nur schwer oder gar nicht. Es ist inakzeptabel, dass eine alleinerziehende Mutter ohne Waschmaschine und Kühlschrank zurechtkommen soll. Auch dafür brauchen wir eine Lösung.\n\nEin anderes Problem entsteht, wenn die Stromkosten steigen, eine Anpassung an die Preise aber erst im Folgejahr stattfindet. Auch das darf nicht dazu führen, dass Menschen der Strom abgeschaltet wird. Deswegen haben wir Erleichterungen für Direktzahlungen erreicht. Sprich: Das Geld wird direkt vom Jobcenter überwiesen, wenn das Konto nicht gedeckt ist. Es muss aber auch möglich werden, die Nachzahlung zu begleichen. Wir könnten uns für alle diese Fragen erleichterte Darlehensregelungen vorstellen, die die Betroffenen zwar nicht aus der Verantwortung lassen, sie aber auch nicht überfordern.\n\nEin weiterer Punkt, der uns wichtig ist, ist die Mobilität im ländlichen Raum. Wie können wir erreichen, dass Menschen auch dort mobil bleiben, wo es einen schlechten oder gar keinen öffentlichen Personennahverkehr gibt, wenn sie also nicht nur mit Blick auf die Erwerbstätigkeit auf einen Pkw angewiesen sind, sondern auch zur Bewältigung des ganz normalen Alltaglebens?\n\nEin weiteres und sehr wichtiges Thema ist der Umgangsmehrbedarf für Alleinerziehende.\n\nWir wollen nicht, dass der Umgang mit dem anderen Elternteil dazu führt, dass die Mutter - meistens ist es ja die Mutter - finanzielle Einbußen hat. Jeder weiß, dass es mehr kostet, wenn Kinder bei getrennt lebenden Elternteilen aufwachsen. Dem wollen wir Rechnung tragen.\n\nEin weiterer Punkt, der die Kinder betrifft, ist folgender: Bisher ist es leider gängige Praxis, dass aus dem Bildungs- und Teilhabepaket nur Nachhilfe bezahlt wird, wenn das Kind akut davon bedroht ist, sitzen zu bleiben. Wir würden gerne klarstellen, dass auch dann, wenn die Chance besteht, dass das Kind sich verbessert, vom B- in den A\u001eKurs, von der Realschule aufs Gymnasium kommt, eine Unterstützung möglich wird.\n\n- Ja, aber es wird nicht gemacht. Die Länder, auch die, in denen Sie regieren, machen es leider nicht. Die sind für die Umsetzung verantwortlich. Wir wollen das im Gesetz deutlich klarstellen, damit die Länder den Hinweis verstehen - auch die, in denen die Grünen mitregieren -, dass man auch die unterstützen kann, die aufsteigen wollen.\n\nGerade bei den Kindern gibt es noch einen großen Handlungsbedarf. Jedes siebte Kind lebt in Armut oder ist von Armut bedroht. Immer noch hängt der Bildungserfolg vom Einkommen der Eltern ab. Wir werden mit den Verbesserungen beim Unterhaltsvorschuss für Alleinerziehende schon einiges erreichen. Hier ist nicht nur der Bund gefragt, sondern genauso die Länder und Kommunen. Wir brauchen eine verbesserte soziale Infrastruktur: Ganztagsschulen, kleine Klassen, gemeinsames Lernen, aber auch eine bessere Ausstattung der Kinder- und Jugendhilfe, des Erfolgsprogramms „Soziale Stadt“ und vieles mehr. Da haben wir, Bund, Länder, Kommunen, noch einen weiten Weg vor uns, aber Chancengleichheit für alle Kinder herzustellen, bleibt unser Ziel.\n\nIch fasse zusammen: Wir haben keine grundsätzlichen Veränderungen vorgenommen, aber Verbesserungen erreicht. Wir wollen im Rahmen der Beratungen noch weitere Verbesserungen erzielen, die die konkreten Probleme lösen. Mit der Bekämpfung von Kinderarmut und der Herstellung von Chancengleichheit haben wir noch drängende und große Aufgaben vor uns, an denen ich gerne mit allen in diesem Haus weiterarbeiten möchte.\n\nGlück auf!\"\n10326,ulla-jelpke,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Herr Minister, Sie haben eben wieder deutlich gemacht, wie Sie Menschenrechtsverletzungen in den Maghreb-Staaten Algerien, Marokko und Tunesien bagatellisieren. Sie haben vor allen Dingen sehr deutlich gemacht, dass Menschenrechtsverletzungen für die Bundesregierung bei der Einstufung von Ländern als sichere Herkunftsstaaten überhaupt keine Rolle mehr spielen. Was nicht passt, wird passend gemacht. Ich finde, das ist eine Ungeheuerlichkeit, wenn man weiß, welche Menschenrechtsverletzungen in diesen Ländern passieren.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir haben es eben gehört: Die Bundesregierung will die Maghreb-Staaten Algerien, Marokko, Tunesien als sichere Herkunftsstaaten bezeichnen und als solche einstufen. Der Anteil von Flüchtlingen aus diesen Staaten ist im letzten Monat, im März, äußerst gering gewesen. Aus Algerien kamen zum Beispiel gerade einmal 212 Personen. Aus Marokko kamen 225 Personen, aus Tunesien kamen nur 43.\n\nDie Flüchtlinge aus diesen Ländern, die Schutz suchen, dürfen hier nicht einem Schnellverfahren unterzogen werden. Schnellverfahren bedeutet, in Sonderlager verbracht zu werden. Innerhalb von zwei Wochen muss dann über den Asylantrag entschieden werden, wobei eine verschärfte Residenzpflicht gilt. Das ist äußerst fragwürdig. Die Flüchtlinge haben so auch keinen richtigen Rechtsschutz. Deswegen fordert die Linke nach wie vor: Alle Menschen haben ein Recht auf ein faires Asylverfahren.\n\nDer Minister hat eben etwas von einer Schutzquote erzählt. Ich will dies richtigstellen: Die bereinigte Schutzquote für Algerien lag im Jahr 2015 bei 5 Prozent. Für Marokko lag sie sogar bei 8 Prozent. Diese Zahlen belegen: Flüchtlinge haben hier Schutz verdient.\n\nAnfang März konnte ich mir selbst ein Bild von Marokko machen. Es gibt dort drei große Tabuthemen: erstens die Staatsreligion, der Islam, zweitens die Monarchie, drittens die Besatzung der Westsahara. Schon im Pressekodex steht, dass man diese Themen nicht diskutieren oder kritisieren darf. Wer das dennoch tut, bringt sich und seine Familie in Gefahr. Die Menschenrechtsorganisation Amnesty International beschreibt die Folgen. Ich zitiere:\n\nSchläge, schmerzhafte Positionen, Sauerstoffentzug, simuliertes Ertränken, psychische und sexuelle Gewalt: Dies sind nur einige der vielen Foltermethoden, die marokkanische Sicherheitskräfte einsetzen, um „Geständnisse“ zu erzwingen oder um Aktivistinnen und Aktivisten und Andersdenkende zum Schweigen zu bringen.\n\nSeit über 40 Jahren hält Marokko die Westsahara völkerrechtswidrig besetzt. Als der UN-Generalsekretär im letzten Monat offen von Besatzung sprach, ließ der König sogleich 80 UN-Mitarbeiter des Landes verweisen. - So viel zu Meinungsfreiheit und Demokratie in Marokko.\n\nMit der Einstufung als sicheres Herkunftsland ermutigt die Bundesregierung Marokko geradezu, das Völkerrecht und die Menschenrechte weiter mit Füßen zu treten. Schlimmer noch: Für die Rücknahme abgelehnter Asylbewerber hat die Bundesregierung zugesagt, Marokko den Rücken in Sachen Westsahara und bei vielen anderen Dingen zu stärken. Nach dem Deal mit der Türkei muss man hier ganz klar von einem weiteren schmutzigen Deal sprechen.\n\nStatt Fluchtursachen werden wieder einmal Flüchtlinge bekämpft. Dafür steht die Linke ganz sicher nicht zur Verfügung.\n\nVergessen wir nicht: In allen drei Maghreb-Staaten werden Homosexuelle verfolgt, und die Frauenrechte existieren dort gerade einmal auf dem Papier. Wer Flüchtlinge dorthin zurückschickt, nimmt ihre Verfolgung, Inhaftierung und Folterung billigend in Kauf.\n\nVor der Einstufung eines Landes als sicher muss umfassend anhand unabhängiger - ich betone: unabhängiger - Quellen geprüft werden, ob die Menschenrechte und die rechtsstaatlichen Prinzipien dort eingehalten werden. Das hat das Bundesverfassungsgericht 1996 ganz klar vorgeschrieben. Doch diese höchstrichterlichen Vorgaben werden von der Bundesregierung überhaupt nicht eingehalten; sie werden sogar eiskalt ignoriert. Auch hier muss man sagen: Es ist ein Skandal, wie mit den Einschätzungen und vor allen Dingen mit der Kritik der unabhängigen Menschenrechtsorganisationen umgegangen wird.\n\nZum Schluss will ich noch ganz kurz darauf eingehen, dass auch dieses Vorhaben - das gilt derzeit für viele Vorhaben im asylrechtlichen Bereich, mit denen Verschärfungen und immer neue Regeln eingebracht werden - im Schweinsgalopp durch das Parlament gejagt wird. Erst gestern stand dieses Vorhaben auf der Tagesordnung des Innenausschusses. Es musste wieder heruntergenommen werden, heute Abend haben wir aber eine Sondersitzung. Am übernächsten Montag findet die Anhörung statt, und der Gesetzentwurf wird schon in der nächsten Sitzungswoche verabschiedet. Ich meine, so kann man ein parlamentarisches Verfahren wirklich nicht durchführen. Damit werden die Vorgaben des Bundesverfassungsgerichts auf keinen Fall eingehalten.\n\nDeshalb sagen wir ganz klar Nein zu einem Schnellverfahren und auch Nein zu diesem Gesetzentwurf, mit dem die Maghreb-Staaten als sicher eingestuft werden sollen.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\n\nDanke, Herr Kollege. - Ich habe zwei Nachfragen.\n\nErstens. Sie wissen ganz genau, dass beispielsweise in Marokko nur verurteilt werden kann, wer auch geständig ist. Warum sagen Sie nichts zu den Foltervorwürfen, die von Menschenrechtsorganisationen wie Amnesty International erhoben werden?\n\nZweiter Punkt. Es gibt vonseiten Marokkos eine völkerrechtswidrige Besetzung der Westsahara. Es gibt ein klares Votum der UN, dort ein Referendum durchzuführen, was Marokko verweigert. Es gibt dort riesige Lager mit Flüchtlingen, die nicht nach Europa kommen wollen, dort aber in schlimmster Armut leben. Warum sagen Sie zu all diesen Punkten nichts? Genau das sind doch die Kriterien, die zugrunde gelegt werden, wenn es darum geht, ob man ein Land als sicher einstuft oder nicht.\"\n7124,rudolf-henke,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Ingrid Fischbach, die Parlamentarische Staatssekretärin aus dem Bundesministerium für Gesundheit, hat in ihrer Rede an die mehr als zehnjährige Schwangerschaft und die späte Geburt dieses Gesetzes erinnert. Man könnte jetzt natürlich noch einmal darüber räsonieren, woran es eigentlich gelegen hat, dass es so lange gedauert hat. Man könnte zum Beispiel ein paar vordergründige Erklärungen finden, die mit Wahlterminen und Bundesratsbeschlüssen zu tun haben, gemäß denen zwei Tage vor einer Bundestagswahl der Vermittlungsausschuss angerufen wurde. Auch könnten in diesem Zusammenhang Ergebnisse nordrhein-westfälischer Wahlen genannt werden, die plötzlich Neuwahlen im Bund notwendig gemacht haben. - Man könnte lauter derartige Gründe finden, weswegen etwas der Diskontinuität anheimgefallen ist.\n\nIch glaube, ehrlich gesagt, dass es deswegen so lange gedauert hat, weil wir zum Teil an falschen Fronten und mit falschen Polarisierungen diskutiert haben. Jetzt endlich haben wir es geschafft, die verschiedenen Seiten, die zur Prävention bzw. Gesundheitsförderung beitragen müssen, zu einem Gemeinschaftswerk zu verbinden. Es ist eine falsche Frontstellung, zu sagen: Bei Prävention oder Gesundheitsförderung handelt es sich entweder um Verhaltensprävention oder Verhältnisprävention.\n\nEs ist falsch, bezüglich der Frage, ob man Krankheiten vermeiden oder Gesundheit fördern soll, eine Front aufzumachen. Auch handelt es sich um eine falsche Frontstellung, lange Debatten über die Fragen zu führen: Ist das eine politische oder eine medizinische Aufgabe? Oder ist es eine Aufgabe der Sozialkassen? Es ist eine Aufgabe aller Bereiche. Weiterhin ist es falsch, die Frage so zu stellen: Müssen wir die Gesellschaft, die Medizin oder die Lebensentwürfe der einzelnen Menschen umbauen? Ja, natürlich, an jedem dieser Themen muss man arbeiten.\n\nIch bin froh, dass es jetzt mit diesem Gesetz gelingt, all diese verschiedenen Ansätze in ein konstruktives Miteinander zu bringen. Deswegen glaube ich, dass mit diesem Gesetz die falschen Frontstellungen überwunden werden und dass es dazu beiträgt, in diesem Sinne wirklich modern zu sein. Denn es nimmt seine Begründungen aus der Zukunft und setzt nicht mehr kontinuierlich vergangene Frontstellungen fort.\n\nIn dem Antrag der Grünen steht die richtige Feststellung:\n\nWir wissen, dass gesunde Ernährung, mehr Bewegung und eine gute Stressbewältigung dazu beitragen, lange gesund zu bleiben und bis ins hohe Alter mobil zu sein.\n\nJa, natürlich setzt das auch Verhaltensveränderungen voraus. Natürlich geht es nicht um die Frage, wer Schuld hat. Man kann nicht sagen: Du bist schuld. Dabei geht es doch nicht um eine Anklage; aber es geht um die Frage, ob man eine Verantwortung für seine eigene Gesundheit hat. Dazu muss man sagen: Wenn man die Verantwortung aller reklamiert, gehört die Aussage „Auch du bist verantwortlich“ dazu.\n\nIch meine, es ist schwer zu verstehen, wenn in Ihrem Text steht, dass sich die „Präventionsbemühungen … hauptsächlich an verhaltensbedingten Krankheitsrisiken wie Fehlernährung, Bewegungsmangel oder Suchtmittelmissbrauch orientieren“ würden. Das kann ich nicht verstehen. Vorne sagen Sie: Das sind wichtige Ansatzpunkte. Und hinten kritisieren Sie, dass wir diese wichtigen Ansatzpunkte aufnehmen.\n\nNoch schwieriger finde ich es, Frau Wöllert, wie Sie die Ablehnung des Gesetzes begründen. Sie sagen, dass, statt Kampagnen und Aufklärungsmaßnahmen zu individuellem Gesundheitsverhalten zu initiieren, gesunde -Lebensbedingungen in allen Settings geschaffen werden müssen. Was soll diese Alternative? Sie sagen: Statt vorwiegend auf Verhinderung von Krankheiten abzustellen, müssen vermehrt die Einflussfaktoren, die zu mehr Gesundheit führen, untersucht und gefördert werden. - Beides muss man machen.\n\nBeides geschieht hier auch, denn wir ergänzen jetzt die bisherige individuelle, am Verhalten orientierte Prävention in den Krankenkassenkursen stärker durch die Lebenswelten, und wir vervierfachen die Mittel, die in die Lebenswelten - in diesen Setting-Ansatz, wie Karl Lauterbach gesagt hat - fließen.\n\nNatürlich kann man sagen: Das müsste noch mehr sein. - Natürlich kann man sagen: In der Gesamtsumme ist das im Jahr der Betrag, den wir an einem Tag für Therapien, Diagnostik und Behandlungsmaßnahmen ausgeben. -\n\nAber das ändert doch nichts daran, dass dies eine gewaltige zusätzliche Leistung darstellt. Lassen Sie uns auf Grundlage der Berichterstattung in Zukunft darüber diskutieren, ob man die Mittel aufstocken sollte; aber lassen Sie uns jetzt nicht darauf verzichten, diesen Schritt zu tun.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Prävention ist eine Aufgabe, die die Gesellschaft als Ganzes betrifft. Ich bin der Meinung, dass dieses Gesetz dieser Aufgabe gerecht wird. Während des Gesetzgebungsprozesses wurde ein Großteil der Polarisierungen entschärft. Das, was wir zum Impfen vereinbart haben, ist angemessen und sinnvoll; denn die Regelung sollte so verbindlich wie möglich gestaltet sein. Sicherlich wird Erich Irlstorfer in seiner Rede etwas vertiefter darauf eingehen.\n\nIch möchte auf einen winzigen Punkt der Kritik an dem Bericht des Haushaltsausschusses aufmerksam machen. In der Passage zu den Kostenfolgen der Verträge, die die Krankenkassen in Zukunft mit Betriebsärzten schließen können, geht der Haushaltsausschuss davon aus, dass sich das alles saldiert. Mein Anspruch wäre schon, die Zahl der Impfungen mithilfe der Verträge, die nun ermöglicht werden, zu erhöhen. Ich möchte nicht, dass auf der einen Seite weniger und auf der anderen Seite mehr geimpft wird. Das ist mein einziger Kritikpunkt. Ansonsten bin ich dem Haushaltsausschuss sehr dankbar, dass er sich so profund und tiefgehend mit all den Fragen auseinandergesetzt hat.\n\nIch will kurz den Hinweis geben, dass wir uns in den Debatten darauf verständigt haben, das Modellprojekt „KV-Impfsurveillance“ des Robert-Koch-Instituts abzuschließen und, wenn es erfolgreich beendet wird, dauerhaft Mittel dafür zur Verfügung zu stellen. Das ist aber eine Entscheidung, die bei der Aufstellung späterer Haushalte zu treffen ist.\n\nIn den Berichterstattergesprächen hatten wir eine kleine Kontroverse um die Frage: Wie bindet man die deutsche Ärzteschaft und den Deutschen Pflegerat in den Mitgliederkreis der Nationalen Präventionskonferenz ein? Die Lösung, die hier jetzt gewählt wird, ist -folgende: Die Gesundheitsberufe sind über das Präven-tionsforum vertreten, das von der Bundesvereinigung -Prävention und Gesundheitsförderung ausgerichtet wird. Zu deren Mitgliedern gehören wiederum zahlreiche ärztliche und pflegerische Organisationen, auch ich als Person.\n\nKeineswegs.\n\nDer Schlusssatz besteht darin: Ich bitte Sie sehr herzlich, dieses moderne, zukunftsgewandte Gesetz mit einer großen Mehrheit hier im Plenum zu verabschieden.\n\nIch bedanke mich sehr für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n9014,rolf-mutzenich,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Anschläge von Paris werden sich ins europäische Gedächtnis einbrennen. Ebenso müssen wir an andere Gewaltorte erinnern - Sindschar, Aleppo, Beirut, Bagdad, Bamako und viele andere Orte -, in denen der IS so brutal und grenzenlos zugeschlagen hat. Meine Fraktion ist überzeugt: Es gibt keine isolierte militärische Lösung gegen diesen gewaltsamen Extremismus. Aber der „Islamische Staat“ muss eingedämmt werden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, anders als mancher glaubt, scheint es im Bundestag dazu eine gemeinsame Auffassung zu geben, zumindest gewinnt man den Eindruck, wenn man sich einige Einträge im Netz anschaut. Mit Erlaubnis des Präsidenten würde ich gerne zitieren:\n\nIch fahre jetzt zur türkisch-syrischen Grenze. Solidarität mit den tapferen kurdischen Kämpferinnen! Halte Stand, Kobane.\n\nAnnette Groth, Fraktion Die Linke, 5. Oktober 2014.\n\nKobane befreit vom Joch der ISIS ... Es lebe der Widerstand in Kobane.\n\nSevim Dağdelen, Fraktion Die Linke.\n\n... eine wichtige Erfolgsmeldung: ... die Stadt ... (Sindschar) ... vom IS zu befreien. ... Möglich wurde die Befreiung ... durch eine breite Allianz kurdischer Gruppierungen, ... bis hin zu den Peschmerga der irakisch-kurdischen Regionalregierung.\n\nUlla Jelpke, Die Linke, 19. November 2015.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Sie haben eines übersehen - offensichtlich haben Sie sich gescheut, es aufzuschreiben -: Es waren auch die Angriffe aus der Luft und die Unterstützung vonseiten Deutschlands bei der Ausbildung der Peschmerga, die genau dazu geführt haben.\n\nIch werfe Ihnen das nicht vor - man kann das ja mal übersehen -, nur, ich bitte um Redlichkeit. Vielleicht stellen Sie sich auch mal hier in den Deutschen Bundestag und sagen: Ja, vielleicht bin ich auch zerrissen.\n\nIch sage: Ich bin stolz, Mitglied einer sozialdemokratischen Bundestagsfraktion zu sein, die diese Zerrissenheit und eine lange Debatte in der Fraktion zulässt; möglicherweise ringt der eine oder andere Kollege hier noch mit sich. Ich finde, das ist Parlamentarismus, und das müssen Sie zeigen.\n\nMit dem von der Bundesregierung vorgelegten Mandat stellt Deutschland militärische Technik und militärisches Gerät zur Verfügung, die andere Nationen so nicht bieten. Wir glauben, das ist angemessen und politisch vertretbar. Insbesondere ist festzuhalten: Es findet nicht alleine statt. Damit folgen wir der grundsätzlichen Festlegung, die wir hier im Deutschen Bundestag, in der Bundesregierung, aber auch in Europa getroffen haben. Wir agieren immer gemeinsam mit europäischen Partnern und bieten das an, was wir politisch verantworten können. Das ist, glaube ich, die Essenz der Diskussion hier im Deutschen Bundestag.\n\nEs gibt in der Mandatsbegründung überzeugende rechtliche Herleitungen. Die Resolutionen sind angesprochen worden. Insbesondere die UN-Sicherheitsratsresolution 2249 hat in den Beratungen eine wichtige Rolle gespielt. Ich möchte die Resolution 2249 zitieren, die mit allen Stimmen des Sicherheitsrates der Vereinten Nationen beschlossen worden ist. Da wird von „einer der schwersten Bedrohungen des Weltfriedens und der internationalen Sicherheit“ gesprochen; das ist der Bezug zur Charta der Vereinten Nationen. Die Staatengemeinschaft wird aufgefordert, die Bedrohung „mit allen Mitteln zu bekämpfen“. Es wird in der Sicherheitsratsresolution darauf hingewiesen, dass auch die irakische Regierung um den Einsatz gebeten hat, weil eine Bedrohung des irakischen Gebiets von außen, durch ISIS, stattfindet. - Ich finde, das sind drei Bemerkungen, drei Festlegungen des Sicherheitsrats der Vereinten Nationen, die so deutlich sind, dass diese Aufforderung auch trägt. - Das ist die eine Sache.\n\nDie zweite Sache. Die Bundesregierung war genauso klug beraten, als sie sich entschied, den Lissabon-Vertrag in der Mandatsbegründung anzuführen, im Hinblick auf die Solidarität zu Frankreich, aber auch zu vielen anderen Nationen, die in den vergangenen Jahren von islamistischem Terror betroffen waren. Artikel 42 (7) EUV trägt als Grundlage einer europäischen Politik. Was wollen Sie eigentlich gegen eine solche europäische Politik einwenden? Da bekennt sich Deutschland letztlich doch zu dem, was diese Gemeinschaft wertvoll gemacht hat, nämlich europäische Solidarität zu üben.\n\nDer letzte Punkt - ihn hat der Justizminister eingebracht -: der Bezug des Mandats auf das System kollektiver Sicherheit, also auf das, was das Bundesverfassungsgericht von uns verlangt.\n\nIn der Tat: Kapitel VII der UN-Charta ist in der Mandatsbegründung nicht ausdrücklich erwähnt. Aber das hat leider auch etwas mit der internationalen Situation zu tun, mit der Erfahrung aus Libyen - gar keine Frage -, aber auch damit, dass es keine Einigkeit über die Zukunft von Assad gibt. Genau deswegen führen wir doch die Gespräche in Wien: damit wir ein gemeinsames politisches Konzept für Syrien erreichen. In der Sicherheitsratsresolution 2249 wird ausdrücklich gewürdigt - das wollen Sie nicht wahrhaben -, dass sich dieses Mandat innerhalb des politischen Rahmens der Konferenz von Wien befindet, die die Bundesregierung und viele andere europäische Regierungen erst möglich gemacht haben. - Ich finde, das ist auch unter Berücksichtigung der rechtlichen Fragen, die gestellt sind, eine gute Herleitung.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich finde, dass gerade das, was die Bundesregierung in den letzten Wochen im Rahmen der Debatte immer wieder gefordert hat, nämlich die Stärkung der Vereinten Nationen, eines der wichtigsten Argumente für die Solidarität ist, die Deutschland üben sollte. Der Einsatz findet in einem System kollektiver Sicherheit statt.\n\nFür uns Sozialdemokratinnen und Sozialdemokraten stand die Charta der Vereinten Nationen im Mittelpunkt; es war uns wichtig, die Instrumentarien, die die Vereinten Nationen vorhalten, zu nutzen. Es war der deutsche Außenminister, der de Mistura, den Beauftragten des Generalsekretärs der Vereinten Nationen, endlich in Wien an den Tisch gebracht hat.\n\nDort wurden der Zeitplan und letztlich auch die Ziele verabredet, die da lauten: lokale Waffenruhen, Übergangsregierung und Wahlen.\n\nHeute Morgen war zu lesen, dass Ban Ki-moon, der Generalsekretär der Vereinten Nationen, gesagt hat, dass er hofft und mit der internationalen Staatengemeinschaft dafür arbeitet, dass es gelingt, zu dieser Waffenruhe zu kommen. Es wäre schon ein Fortschritt, lokale Waffenruhen zu vereinbaren. Wir Sozialdemokraten wollen gleichzeitig - auch das ist Bestandteil der Verabredungen von Wien - endlich das Finanzsystem austrocknen,\n\ndas dem IS diese Möglichkeiten erlaubt, und auch die Hintermänner dingfest machen. Genau das wird auch in der Resolution 2170 des Sicherheitsrates gefordert.\n\nDeswegen sagen wir sehr selbstbewusst, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Es lohnt sich, innerhalb des Systems der Vereinten Nationen an der Verwirklichung des Ziels - das wir alle im Deutschen Bundestag haben -, in Syrien, aber auch in anderen Gebieten so schnell wie möglich zum Frieden zu kommen, zu arbeiten. Das haben wir in den vergangenen Jahren im Rahmen einer politischen Neuordnung im Nahen und Mittleren Osten immer wieder versucht.\n\nIch kann mich an die eine oder andere kritische Bemerkung von Ihnen erinnern. Sie haben gesagt: Eine Einigung mit dem Iran wird nie gelingen, Sie brauchen sich nicht auf den Pfad der Vereinten Nationen zu begeben. - Wir stimmen heute auch darüber ab, dass das ein gutes Mittel ist. Das Ziel Deutschlands bleibt es, Frieden für die Menschen in Syrien zu erreichen.\n\nDennoch will ich darauf hinweisen - auch wenn es eine entsprechende Verabredung im Rahmen der Vereinten Nationen in Wien gegeben hat -, dass für meine Fraktion feststeht: Die Vereinbarung von Wien darf nicht die Verfolgung schlimmster Verbrechen in Syrien verhindern. Deswegen bin ich der Bundesregierung dankbar, dass unter der deutschen Präsidentschaft im Menschenrechtsrat Dossiers über schwerste Menschenrechtsverletzungen erstellt wurden. Die internationale Strafjustiz muss in den nächsten Jahren über die dafür Verantwortlichen entscheiden. Genau dahin wird die Entwicklung gehen. Das ist auch ein Teil des Systems der Vereinten Nationen. Ich wäre dankbar, wenn Sie zumindest diese Möglichkeit weiterhin ins Auge fassen und uns bei dieser wichtigen Arbeit unterstützen würden.\n\nIch will auf einen weiteren Punkt hinweisen. Meine Fraktion hätte heute gerne einen gemeinsamen Entschließungsantrag der Koalitionsfraktionen vorgelegt. Ich finde es schade, Herr Kollege Kauder, dass es dazu nicht gekommen ist.\n\nEs gibt viele Erklärungen nach § 31 der Geschäftsordnung. Gerade weil es auch um den politischen Rahmen dieser Frage geht, hätte eine selbstbewusste Koalition hier und heute einen Entschließungsantrag vorlegen können.\n\nAuch an die Bundesregierung habe ich eine Bitte. Ich weiß, wie wichtig der Partner Saudi-Arabien gerade im Zusammenhang mit der Zusammenführung von Oppositionsparteien ist, die wichtig sind, um die in Wien vereinbarte Lösung umzusetzen. Aber ich finde dennoch, dass öffentlich auch angesprochen werden muss: Die Staatsideologie Saudi-Arabiens ist ein Teil des Nährbodens für den „Islamischen Staat“; das gehört nach meinem Dafürhalten zu einer ehrlichen Debatte dazu.\n\nIch habe es eben angesprochen: Meine Fraktion hat sich wirklich Zeit genommen, um über das Mandat zu beraten. Einige meiner Kolleginnen und Kollegen haben die Befürchtung geäußert, das Mandat könnte das Risiko von Anschlägen in Deutschland erhöhen. Ich kann das persönlich nicht ausschließen. Aber ich will deutlich sagen: Deutschland ist längst im Fokus des internationalen Terrorismus. Es ist dem Zufall, dem Glück, aber auch der Aufklärungsarbeit zu verdanken, dass das eine oder andere verhindert wurde. Ich glaube, die Terroristen in Paris haben ganz bewusst das Fußballspiel Deutschland gegen Frankreich als Ziel gewählt; denn dann wären noch mehr deutsche Terroropfer unter den Verletzten oder Toten gewesen. Der entscheidende Punkt wird sein, ob auch die Gesellschaft in Deutschland es versteht, mit dieser Herausforderung umzugehen.\n\nIch erinnere mich: Vor zweieinhalb, drei Jahren habe ich in einer Schule mit, glaube ich, 150 Schülerinnen und Schülern diskutiert. Dort musste ich eine Diskussion mit einem Jungen, der 17 oder 18 Jahre alt war, führen, der der Meinung war: Eigentlich ist das Kalifat besser als die Demokratie. Ich war entsetzt. Ich habe mich dieser Diskussion gestellt, aber ich war entsetzt, wie teilnahmslos Schülerinnen und Schüler und Lehrer dieser Debatte gefolgt sind. Ich habe mir schon damals gewünscht, dass eine Auseinandersetzung stattfinden würde. Sie ist dringend notwendig. Diese Auseinandersetzung müssen wir jetzt führen, weil es letztlich eine Angelegenheit der gesamten Gesellschaft ist, dagegen vorzugehen. Deswegen appelliere ich auch von dieser Stelle: Das ist eine Aufgabe des gesellschaftspolitischen Dialogs - in allen Institutionen, nicht nur in diesem Parlament, sondern in der gesamten Gesellschaft.\n\nDeswegen: Wir müssen festhalten an sozialer Demokratie, an Freiheit und an Respekt; denn das sind die besten Mittel im Kampf gegen einen gewaltsamen Extremismus.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n10519,lars-klingbeil,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herzlichen Dank, dass ich zu diesem für mich, für meinen Wahlkreis und auch für viele andere hier im Parlament wichtigen Thema eine persönliche Erklärung abgeben kann.\n\nDas Thema Fracking ist in meinem Wahlkreis - speziell im Landkreis Rotenburg - von sehr hoher Bedeutung. Ich glaube, viele von Ihnen kennen die Situation, die es in meiner Region durch zahlreiche Erdgasförderstätten gibt, aus der Diskussion der letzten Jahre. Es gibt eine große Verunsicherung bei den Menschen, und ich will Ihnen von einer Begegnung erzählen, die ich am letzten Freitag hatte, als ich in dem Dorf Bellen in der Samtgemeinde Bothel unterwegs war. In Bellen leben 52 Menschen, davon sind mittlerweile 12 nachweislich an Krebs erkrankt. Man geht durch den Ort, und Vertreter der Bürgerinitiativen können zu jedem Haus und jeder Familie eine Krebsgeschichte erzählen. Die Menschen sind tief verunsichert.\n\nEin Blick auf die Statistiken der Samtgemeinde und auch in die der Nachbarstadt Rotenburg zeigt, dass die Zahl von Krebserkrankungen überall signifikant hoch ist. Es gibt keinen empirischen Beleg dafür, dass das Ganze mit der Erdgasförderung zusammenhängt. Aber es gibt momentan Untersuchungen durch den Landkreis und das Land Niedersachsen, die mit einer Arbeitshypothese arbeiten, nämlich der Erdgasförderung. Die Menschen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wollen Erklärungen für das Schicksal, das ihnen widerfährt. Sie wollen Aufklärung. Sie wollen, dass die Politik mit dem Thema seriös umgeht. Dazu sind wir verpflichtet.\n\nIch will das hier schildern, um deutlich zu machen: Niemanden hier im Haus lässt dieses Thema kalt. Lassen Sie uns bitte aufhören, so zu tun, als ob das ganz einfach wäre. Wir sind über 600 Abgeordnete. Die Grenzen zwischen Gegnern und Befürwortern verlaufen nicht einmal unbedingt zwischen den Parteien. Es gibt Fracking-Gegner wie mich. Es gibt Graustufen, es gibt Schattierungen in allen Fraktionen. Auch in den Landesregierungen gibt es unterschiedliche Positionen. Wir müssen dieses Thema hier im Parlament ehrlich diskutieren.\n\nWas ich nicht verstehe - das will ich in aller Deutlichkeit sagen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen und den Linken -: Sie setzen ein Thema mit einer so hohen Bedeutung auf die Tagesordnung. Sie wollen darüber eine namentliche Abstimmung. Aber dann verhindern Sie eine inhaltliche Diskussion zu diesem Thema. Das kann ich nicht nachvollziehen. Das wird diesem Thema nicht gerecht.\n\nIch sage Ihnen auch, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Wenn wir es ernst meinen,\n\nwenn es wirklich darum geht, die Probleme mit der Erdgasförderung in Deutschland lösen zu wollen, dann brauchen wir umfassende Regeln. Dann brauchen wir Gesetze, die umfassender sind als das, was Sie heute vorlegen.\n\nIn Ihrem Gesetzentwurf ist beispielsweise nichts zum Thema Lagerstättenwasserverpressung vorgesehen.\n\nDas wäre für meine Region wichtig. In Ihrem Gesetzentwurf wird nichts zum Thema Beweislastumkehr bei Erdbeben ausgesagt. Das wäre für meine Region wichtig. Sie schlagen keine Änderung im Wasserhaushaltsrecht und im Bundesnaturschutzrecht vor. Sie wollen keine zusätzlichen Vetorechte für die Kommunen und für die Wasserbehörden.\n\nSie schaffen mit dem, was Sie hier heute vorlegen, keine zusätzlichen Transparenzpflichten. Auch die Mitwirkungsrechte von Umweltverbänden und Wasserverbänden sind nicht vorgesehen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, all diese Punkte wären für meine Region wichtig. All diese Punkte würden uns vor Ort weiterhelfen.\n\nIch sage Ihnen auch: Diese Punkte verhandeln wir gerade in den Regelungspaketen der Großen Koalition. Sie schlagen vor, zwei Paragrafen im Bergrecht zu ändern. Ich kann aber nicht so tun, als ob damit die Probleme vor Ort gelöst würden. Das ist einfach nicht der Fall.\n\nGehen Sie davon aus: Es ist mein persönliches Anliegen, dass wir beim Fracking eine umfassende Regelung bekommen. Ich werde keine Ruhe geben, bis wir sie erreicht haben. Ich möchte nach Bellen zurückkehren und den Menschen sagen können: Wir in der Politik haben im Deutschen Bundestag gemeinsam etwas geschafft. Das ist die Verantwortung, die wir haben.\n\nIch bin mir sicher, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Große Koalition wird beim Thema Erdgasförderung und Fracking etwas erreichen. Ich schlage vor, dass wir gemeinsam, SPD, CDU/CSU und Opposition, in dieser Legislatur\n\nhier in diesem Haus eine umfassende Regelung zur Erdgas- und Fracking-Gesetzgebung hinbekommen, dass wir den Trinkwasservorrang und den Gesundheitsschutz sowie die Transparenz und die Beteiligung regeln. Lassen Sie uns das als Haus gemeinsam tun. Das ist die Verantwortung, die wir tragen. Wir, die SPD, sind dazu bereit.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n262,harald-petzold,\"Herr Präsident, vielen Dank. - Ich möchte es natürlich noch ein bisschen genauer wissen. Ich möchte deswegen nachfragen, inwieweit, mit welchen Maßnahmen und vor allen Dingen in welcher materiellen Höhe die Bundesregierung konkrete Unterstützung geleistet hat.\n\nZum Zweiten: Inwieweit arbeitet das Bundesministerium des Innern mit dem DFB und anderen Sportorganisationen bei diesem Thema konkret zusammen?\n\nDa meine Nachfrage nicht beantwortet worden ist, frage ich noch einmal: Inwieweit arbeitet das Bundesministerium des Innern mit dem DFB und anderen Sport-organisationen zusammen?\"\n955,inge-hoger,\"Wir wollen gar keine Rüstungsexporte!\n\nHerr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Es sind schon einige Zitate von Herrn Gabriel genannt worden. Ich möchte noch ein anderes nennen. Noch vor kurzem sagte er: „Es ist eine Schande, dass Deutschland zu den größten Waffenexporteuren gehört.“ Dem kann ich nur zustimmen. Umgekehrt sollte Herr Gabriel dem hier vorliegenden Antrag zustimmen - zumindest wenn er das, was er verschiedentlich gesagt hat, ernst meint.\n\nSelbst wer nicht grundsätzlich wie die Linke gegen Rüstungsexporte ist, muss doch sehen, dass Waffenlieferungen an Saudi-Arabien falsch sind. Dagegen sprechen sowohl die Menschenrechtslage als auch die Spannungen in dieser Region.\n\nDie deutschen Rüstungsexportrichtlinien wurden eben zitiert, aber nicht richtig. Sie sind hier nämlich eindeutig: Genehmigungen für Waffenexporte dürfen nicht erteilt werden, wenn interne Repression und Menschenrechtsverletzungen zu befürchten sind oder wenn durch zusätzliche Waffen bestehende Spannungen und Konflikte aufrechterhalten oder verschärft werden könnten. - Beides trifft auf Saudi-Arabien zu. Deshalb ist mein dringender Appell an die Bundesregierung: Nehmen Sie wenigstens die eigenen Richtlinien ernst.\n\nWaffenlieferungen in diese Region sind ein gefährliches Spiel mit dem Feuer. Auf Nachfragen erhielt ich wiederholt die Antwort, Saudi-Arabien sei für die Bundesregierung ein wichtiger Partner bei der Lösung regionaler Konflikte. Saudi-Arabien ist aber Teil der regionalen Konflikte. Eine weitere Aufrüstung dieses Landes bringt keine Lösung, sondern verschärft die Spannungen. Oder glauben Sie wirklich, dass eine Aufrüstung Saudi-Arabiens den Iran zur Abrüstung motivieren könnte?\n\nDeutsche Waffengeschäfte beschleunigen die Aufrüstungsspirale im gesamten Nahen und Mittleren Osten. Wir brauchen aber Initiativen für Abrüstung. Dazu gehört zum Beispiel die UN-Initiative für einen Nahen und Mittleren Osten ohne Massenvernichtungswaffen.\n\nAuch ich begrüße die arabische Friedensinitiative, die König Abdullah 2002 angestoßen hat. Das könnte tatsächlich ein Weg zur Lösung des Nahostkonfliktes sein. Ich weiß aber auch, dass sein Land Israel nach wie vor nicht anerkannt hat. Ich habe mit Erschrecken die Satellitenbilder einer saudischen Raketenbasis zur Kenntnis genommen, die der Telegraph im letzten Sommer veröffentlichte. Die dort stationierten ungelenkten Raketen sind auf zwei Ziele ausgerichtet: auf Tel Aviv und auf Teheran.\n\nMit diesem Land, das als Teil seiner Militärstrategie auch Angriffe auf Israel plant, wollen Sie tatsächlich Rüstungsgeschäfte machen? Ich finde das unerträglich.\n\nEs ist wirklich peinlich, dass Saudi-Arabien inzwischen der wichtigste Abnehmer deutscher Waffen ist. Dieses Geschäft mit dem Tod wird auch noch durch staatliche Ausfallbürgschaften abgesichert. Ich frage Sie: Warum hat die Lürssen-Werft überhaupt eine Hermesbürgschaft beantragt? Zweifelt sie an der Zahlungsfähigkeit des saudischen Königreiches? Wohl kaum! Offensichtlich hält das Werftmanagement einen Zahlungsausfall aus politischen Gründen durchaus für möglich.\n\nNiemand weiß, wie lange sich das repressive politische System in Saudi-Arabien noch an der Macht halten kann. Doch mit umfangreichen Waffenlieferungen und mit Überwachungstechnologie aus Deutschland können sich die saudischen Eliten auf jeden Fall etwas sicherer fühlen. Wenn der innenpolitische Druck eines Tages doch zu stark wird, ist es für die Rüstungsunternehmen ein sogenannter politischer Schadensfall. Für die saudische Bevölkerung ist das weniger schön. Das könnte einen blutigen Bürgerkrieg nach sich ziehen, bei dem deutsche Panzer und deutsche Gewehre gegen Demonstrierende eingesetzt werden.\n\n- Es geht um Panzer und Boote. Beides ist nicht notwendig, sondern erhöht nur die Spannung in dieser Region.\n\nEin Risiko für deutsche Rüstungsschmieden gibt es allerdings nicht, weil hier die staatliche Hermesbürgschaft einspringt. Die Absicherung weltweiter Rüstungsgeschäfte durch Hermesbürgschaften muss endlich beendet werden.\n\nRüstungsgeschäfte sind menschenverachtend. Ich fordere die Regierung auf, ihre eigenen Ansprüche ernst zu nehmen. Zu einer verantwortungsvollen Außenpolitik, von der in der letzten Zeit immer viel gesprochen wurde, gehört auch, Rüstungsgeschäfte mit Saudi-Arabien künftig nicht mehr durchzuführen. Außerdem bin ich für ein Verbot von sämtlichen Rüstungsexporten, ganz egal in welches Land.\"\n7642,carsten-korber,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! 60 Millionen Menschen sind derzeit weltweit auf der Flucht, so viele wie seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg nicht mehr. Die meisten, zwei Drittel davon, sind Binnenflüchtlinge in Nahost und Afrika. Aber wir erleben derzeit: Viele flüchten auch nach Europa, allerdings nur die mobilsten und die, die es sich leisten können, einem Schlepper 1 000 Euro oder mehr zu bezahlen. Die, denen es am schlechtesten geht, schaffen häufig nicht einmal den Weg in die Nähe Europas.\n\nDennoch kommen derzeit Zigtausende gerade auch nach Deutschland. Seit Wochen bestimmt die Welle der Flüchtlinge aus Syrien, Irak, Afghanistan, Afrika und dem Westbalkan die Nachrichtenlage. Wir sehen, dass die Flüchtlinge im Moment mit offenen Armen empfangen werden - noch. Es werden auch weiterhin Flüchtlinge zu uns kommen, ob wir es wollen oder nicht. Sie machen sich einfach auf den Weg zu uns.\n\nIch habe den Eindruck, dass in unserer Republik derzeit viel Gutes geschieht. Bewahren wir uns diesen Elan! Wir werden diese Herausforderung nur gemeinsam meistern, wir alle zusammen; denn wir müssen sie meistern. Wir müssen begreifen, dass diese Situation noch Jahre andauern wird. Es werden noch mehr Menschen zu uns kommen, etwa wenn Familien aus Syrien nachgeholt werden, auch dann noch, wenn schon lange niemand mehr mit Luftballons und Bonbons am Bahnhof steht und die Euphorie dieser Tage vielleicht auch mancher Ernüchterung gewichen ist.\n\nEs muss uns auch klar sein, dass nicht wir allein jedes Jahr mehrere 100 000 Menschen werden aufnehmen und vor allem erfolgreich werden integrieren können. Hier kann der Blick durch die rosarote „Na, das klappt schon“-Brille durchaus blauäugig, ja geradezu unverantwortlich sein. Deutschland ist ein starkes Land. Deutschland bietet Menschen, die vor Krieg, Terror und Verfolgung fliehen, Schutz. Nicht ohne Grund ist das Recht auf Asyl in Deutschland ein grundgesetzlich garantiertes Recht.\n\nWir als Nation haben schon mehrfach große Flüchtlingswellen erlebt. Wie viele Flüchtlinge aus Ostpreußen und Schlesien hat nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg das damals bitterarme Deutschland erfolgreich integriert? Natürlich ist die Situation nicht ganz vergleichbar, weil die Menschen, um die es damals ging, Vertriebene aus den deutschen Ostgebieten waren und sie zu unserem Land und zu unserer Kultur gehörten. Wie viele waren in der DDR selbst Flüchtlinge oder wären es zumindest geworden, wenn die Mauer nicht so plötzlich gefallen wäre? All das sollten wir nicht vergessen und es gerade jenen sagen, die heute auf der Straße schon den Untergang des christlichen Abendlandes herbeischreien.\n\nHeute ist Deutschland ein reiches Land. Die Menschlichkeit gebietet, die wirklich Schutzbedürftigen hier aufzunehmen und ihnen ein würdiges Dasein zu ermöglichen. Diejenigen, die mit Hass und Gewalt gegen Schutzsuchende vorgehen, stehen mit ihrem Verhalten außerhalb unserer Rechts- und Werteordnung. Sie sollten sich schämen, sich so gegenüber Schwächeren und Hilflosen zu verhalten. Das sage ich ganz bewusst auch als Sachse.\n\n- Als Sachse.\n\nAber das Asylrecht hat natürlich auch seine Grenzen. Es ist notwendig, diejenigen schneller und konsequenter in ihre Heimat zurückzuschicken, die hier offensichtlich keinen Anspruch auf Asyl haben. Wer nicht verfolgt wird, sondern auf ein besseres Leben bei uns hofft, für den ist unser Asylrecht nicht gemacht. Aus wirtschaftlichen Gründen zu uns zu kommen, ist menschlich verständlich und absolut nachvollziehbar. Viele von uns würden in einer vergleichbaren Situation sicher genauso handeln. Aber Armut ist kein Asylgrund. Abgelehnte Bewerber müssen schnell in ihre Heimat zurückgeführt werden; denn wir alle stehen vor großen Herausforderungen. Dieses Thema hat ja die in dieser Woche von uns geführte Haushaltsdebatte ganz maßgeblich bestimmt.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund ist der Haushalt 2016 kein ganz normaler Haushalt wie jeder andere. Lassen Sie mich dazu eine grundlegende Anmerkung machen - der Bundesfinanzminister hat es eben schon deutlich gemacht -: Erst die Haushaltskonsolidierung der vergangenen Jahre hat die Voraussetzungen für den Handlungsspielraum von heute geschaffen. Meine lieben Kollegen von der Opposition, ich weiß, Sie hätten es niemals für möglich gehalten, aber nun müssen auch Sie es einsehen: Eine schwarze Null hat auch ihr Gutes.\n\nEs gilt: Das Thema Asyl hat absolute Priorität. Wir werden alle erforderlichen Mittel bereitstellen, um den Menschen, die mit Anspruch auf Asyl zu uns kommen, den bestmöglichen Start in Deutschland zu ermöglichen, und wir wollen dies ohne neue Schulden und ohne Steuererhöhung.\n\nEines der wichtigsten, eines der entscheidenden Fundamente Europas ist Humanität. Die Achtung der Würde des anderen ist eine wesentliche Säule unseres Menschenbildes. Sie ist eines der konstituierenden Elemente Europas.\n\nWir müssen unseren Werten treu bleiben, umso mehr in Zeiten der Krise. Unser Agieren, auch und gerade für diesen Haushalt 2016, steht unter dieser Prämisse. Wie wir es in Deutschland mit Sicherheit nicht machen werden, zeigen derzeit leider andere Staaten, seien es osteuropäische Nachbarn oder vermeintliche Bruderstaaten der Krisenländer. Unterstützung sieht aus meiner Sicht weder so aus, dass man in Deutschland 200 Moscheen baut, noch so, dass man Terrororganisationen wie den IS mitfinanziert.\n\nAls Europäer müssen wir jetzt begreifen: Wenn wir Europa als politische Idee nicht überflüssig machen wollen, dann müssen wir handeln: klug, vorausschauend und vor allem schnell. Zu Beginn meiner Rede stellte ich fest: Dieser Haushalt 2016 ist wegen der Asylproblematik kein Haushalt wie jeder andere.\n\nAber es gibt noch einen weiteren, beinahe schon historischen Grund, warum das so ist: Am Montag dieser Woche, lieber Martin Gerster, fand das erste Berichterstattergespräch zum neuen Einzelplan der Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragten statt. Datenschutz und Informationsfreiheit sind in unserer technikbasierten Wissensgesellschaft von herausragender und stark zunehmender Bedeutung. Deshalb schaffen wir dafür ab dem 1. Januar 2016 eine neue, unabhängige oberste Bundesbehörde.\n\nIch wünsche der neuen Präsidentin Andrea Voßhoff und ihrem Team viel Erfolg und einen guten Start. Wir werden sie als Bundestag dabei nach Kräften unterstützen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13398,ansgar-heveling,\"Ich möchte zunächst Frau Staatsministerin Grütters entschuldigen. Aus Anlass des 75. Jahrestages der Wannsee-Konferenz findet jetzt eine Gedenkveranstaltung im Haus der Wannsee-Konferenz statt. Dort hält Frau Staatsministerin Grütters eine Rede in Vertretung der Bundeskanzlerin und bittet um Entschuldigung, dass sie heute nicht da sein kann.\n\nFrau Präsidentin! Meine liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Augen glänzten, als ich als generell historisch interessierter Schüler mit einem regen Interesse an Genealogie im Archiv des Erzbistums Paderborn auf ein Konvolut von Papieren stieß, das offensichtlich sämtliche Unterlagen, alle Rechnungen, Rechnungsbücher, Liegenschaftsaufzeichnungen, Korrespondenzen, interne Unterlagen zu Nutznießern, Gerichtsakten usw., angefangen von der Zeit des endenden 30-jährigen Krieges bis hinein ins 20. Jahrhundert für eine Stiftung enthielt, die ein zigfacher Urgroßonkel von mir als Domherr in Paderborn in der Mitte des 17. Jahrhunderts als Familienstiftung errichtet hatte.\n\nFür mich war es ein Glücksfall; denn dank der Vollständigkeit der Unterlagen aus den unterschiedlichsten Bereichen konnte ich auf einen Schlag das sehr genaue Bild einer weitverzweigten westfälischen Familie vom 17. Jahrhundert bis in die Jetztzeit nachzeichnen, etwas, das mir mit viel Mühen und großen Umwegen über Personenstandsakten und Kirchenbüchern aus unterschiedlichen Orten ansonsten vermutlich mehr schlecht als recht gelungen wäre.\n\nMir kam zupass, dass die Unterlagen zu dieser Stiftung quantitativ überschaubar waren und sich im Laufe der Zeit deshalb offensichtlich niemand ernsthaft überlegt hatte, welche Akten wichtig und welche unwichtig sein könnten. Es wurde einfach alles archiviert. Richtig erschlossen wurden die Unterlagen dabei zwar nie, aber sie sind eben komplett vorhanden. Das machte es mir damals so spannend, mit ihnen zu arbeiten.\n\nAls Randbemerkung sei angefügt: Leider hat mir bis heute die Zeit gefehlt, diesen Bestand vollständig auszuwerten und nutzbar zu machen. Da wartet also noch etwas auf mich.\n\nEin überschaubarer Bestand ist das eine, und das Auffinden eines solchen vollständigen Konvoluts ist ein Glücksfall. Etwas anderes sind die grenzenlosen Mengen an Unterlagen, die tagtäglich in der ganzen Republik produziert, in Akten geführt, be- und verarbeitet, als E-Mails zwischen Behörden und Institutionen ausgetauscht und irgendwann als Vorgang abgeschlossen werden.\n\nSo wünschenswert es ist, das alles komplett aufzubewahren, um es in späteren Zeiten aus irgendeiner dann vorliegenden Perspektive auswerten zu können, so klar ist auch, dass dies schlichtweg nicht gelingen kann. Deshalb bedarf es verbindlicher Regeln, wie mit Unterlagen zur Archivierung umzugehen ist. Für den Bund und seine Einrichtungen regelt dies das Bundesarchivgesetz in Bezug auf das Bundesarchiv als kollektives Gedächtnis unserer Nation.\n\nNeben der materiellen Aufbewahrung kommt in Zeiten der Digitalisierung auch der digitalen Archivierung eine besondere Rolle zu. Hier stellen sich neue Herausforderungen in Bezug auf den Umgang mit Masse sowie auf Echtheit und Relevanz. Hinzu kommen technische Fragen im Hinblick auf den Speicherort und die Formatierung, mit denen wir uns zukünftig beschäftigen müssen.\n\nÜber diese organisatorischen Problemstellungen hinausgehend birgt die Digitalisierung aber auch die enorme Chance, Archive weltweit weiter zu vernetzen, Archivalien in größere Kontexte zu stellen und den Zugang zu Archivgut zu vereinfachen. Zu diesem Zweck haben wir zu Beginn der Legislaturperiode im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart, dass wir das Bundesarchivrecht novellieren wollen, insbesondere durch die Verbesserung der Nutzer- und Wissenschaftsfreundlichkeit.\n\nMit dem heute zu beschließenden Gesetzentwurf setzen wir diese Vorgaben aus dem Koalitionsvertrag um.\n\nNach rund 30 Jahren wird damit eine weitreichende Neujustierung des Archivrechts vorgenommen.\n\nEin Schwerpunkt dabei ist, die Nutzer- und Wissenschaftsfreundlichkeit des Bundesarchivs zu verbessern. Dazu gehört, dass die Schutzfrist personenbezogener Akten und Unterlagen von 30 Jahren auf 10 Jahre nach dem Tod der betroffenen Person verkürzt wird, wie es in den meisten Landesarchivgesetzen jetzt schon gang und gäbe ist.\n\nDie Schutzfrist von Akten und Dokumenten, die den Geheimhaltungsvorschriften des Bundes unterliegen, kann zudem von 60 Jahren auf 30 Jahre verkürzt werden. Öffentliche Einrichtungen des Bundes können künftig bei Schutzfristverkürzungen ferner auch große Aktenbestände ohne aufwändige Einzelfallprüfung freigeben. Voraussetzung ist, dass sie in einer allgemeinen Vereinbarung mit dem Bundesarchiv auf die bisher erforderliche Beteiligung verzichten.\n\nEin zweiter Schwerpunkt ist, das Bundesarchivgesetz an die Bedürfnisse der Informationsgesellschaft anzupassen. Dementsprechend enthält der Gesetzentwurf zahlreiche neue Regelungen zum Umgang mit elektronischen Unterlagen. Dazu gehört die Einrichtung eines digitalen Zwischenarchivs, das die Bundesbehörden entlastet und das Bundesarchiv in die Lage versetzt, frühzeitig und fachgerecht für eine digitale Langzeitarchivierung zu sorgen.\n\nDer Gesetzentwurf enthält außerdem Regelungen zur Anbietung und Übernahme von elektronischen Unterlagen, auch solcher, die einer laufenden Aktualisierung unterliegen. Er beinhaltet weiter eine Regelung für das politische Archiv des Auswärtigen Amtes zur entsprechenden Anwendbarkeit der Zugangsregelungen des Bundesarchivgesetzes, um einer rechtlichen Zersplitterung der Archivlandschaft entgegenzuwirken.\n\nLassen Sie mich kurz auf drei Aspekte eingehen, die in der Diskussion um das Bundesarchivgesetz eine größere Rolle gespielt haben und in der Öffentlichkeit teilweise Gegenstand der Diskussionen waren.\n\nErstens. Es geht um das Thema uneingeschränkte Anbietungspflicht löschungspflichtiger Unterlagen. Das klingt etwas sperrig. Hier haben wir uns entschieden, keinen generellen Vorrang einer Anbietungspflicht löschungspflichtiger Daten im Archivgesetz zu regeln. Das betrifft etwa das Bundeszentralregister, das Ausländerzentralregister oder das Register nach dem Adoptionsvermittlungsgesetz.\n\nHierbei geht es oftmals um hochsensible persönliche Daten, bei denen aufgrund der jeweiligen Spezialgesetze die Botschaft vermittelt wird: Gelöscht ist gelöscht. Wir halten es für richtig, dass dann, wenn man eine andere Regelung treffen möchte, was durchaus denkbar ist, diese in dem jeweils betroffenen spezialgesetzlichen Regelungsbereich zu erfolgen hat. Dort sollten dann bereichsspezifisch auch die notwendigen verfassungsrechtlichen Abwägungen erfolgen, die sich mit Blick auf den Eingriff in die informationelle Selbstbestimmung ergeben.\n\nZweitens. Es geht um die Unterlagen der Nachrichtendienste. Hier haben wir uns entschieden, die besonderen Bedürfnisse des Quellen- und Methodenschutzes in der Abwägung des Gesetzes zu berücksichtigen. Im parlamentarischen Verfahren haben wir allerdings festgelegt, dass es sich hierbei um zwingende Gründe handeln muss, die eine Zurückhaltung der Akten rechtfertigen.\n\nDrittens. Zur Anbietungspflicht des Bundes: Weitergehend als bisher enthält der Gesetzentwurf eine Sollvorschrift bei der Anbietungspflicht der öffentlichen Stellen des Bundes spätestens 30 Jahre nach Entstehung der Unterlagen. Eine Ist-Anbietungspflicht nach 30 Jahren kam allerdings nicht infrage, weil sie anerkennungswürdige Ausnahmen unmöglich gemacht hätte, wie etwa bei den Unterlagen des Auswärtigen Amtes oder in Fällen, in denen die Unterlagen für die aktuelle Bearbeitung noch länger benötigt werden. Sobald sie nicht mehr gebraucht werden, müssen sie aber zwingend ans Bundesarchiv abgegeben werden.\n\nZum Schluss noch dies: „Postfaktisch“ ist das Wort des Jahres 2016. Postfaktisch: Was genau heißt das? Dass wir in einem relativistischen Zeitalter leben, in dem es keine Tatsachen mehr gibt, sondern nur noch Meinungen; in dem man etwas nur vehement genug und dazu öffentlichkeitswirksam behaupten muss, um es dadurch wahr werden zu lassen?\n\nIch glaube, dass jeder, der leichtfertig das postfaktische Zeitalter ausruft, damit einem Irrglauben aufsitzt. Sicherlich, aufgrund einer immer stärker von Social Media geprägten Medienlandschaft kommt mancherorts das Gefühl auf, es sei vielleicht überhaupt gar nicht mehr notwendig, Fakten sorgsam zu prüfen, zu testen, ob das eigene Weltbild einem Realitätscheck tatsächlich standhält. Gerade deshalb ist es wichtig, unser ungebrochenes Vertrauen in das Faktische mit einem sinnvoll neugestalteten Bundesarchivrecht zu untermauern.\n\nWie Aleida Assmann in Archive im Wandel der Mediengeschichte schreibt, betreiben Archive, anders etwa als Museen oder Bibliotheken, ein passives Erinnern. Doch genau in diesem passiven Erinnern liegt ihre immense Bedeutung: Archive wollen nicht repräsentieren oder bewerten. Sie zielen dafür auf Neutralität ab, darauf, die Bewertung dieser, unserer Gegenwart anderen zu überlassen.\n\nLetztendlich ist es doch so, dass man die Epoche, in der man lebt, stets nur aus der eigenen, eingeschränkten Perspektive wahrnimmt, dass sich der Blick aufs große Ganze oftmals erst retrospektiv eröffnet. Damit dies gelingen kann, damit es also Fakten gibt, an denen wir uns dabei orientieren können, dafür brauchen wir ein im Hinblick auf die komplexen Herausforderungen des digitalen Zeitalters sicher aufgestelltes Archivwesen.\n\nMit dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf gelingt es, diese Absicht umzusetzen. Wir machen das Bundesarchiv zukunftstauglich.\n\nVielen Dank für die gute Zusammenarbeit in der Vorbereitung des Gesetzentwurfes. Danke für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit. Ich empfehle, dem Gesetzentwurf heute zuzustimmen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n11992,sevim-dagdelen,\"Verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Unser aller Pflicht ist es jetzt, alles dafür zu tun, dass der Waffenstillstand in Syrien wieder wirksam wird. Der Angriff auf den UN-Konvoi ist selbstverständlich ein Kriegsverbrechen - das wurde heute oft hier gesagt -; aber, Herr Röttgen und Herr Annen, jetzt nach einer Flugverbotszone zu rufen, bedeutet nichts als Krieg.\n\nDas kann doch nicht wirklich Ihr Ernst sein. Das Beispiel Libyen, wo der NATO-Krieg dazu führte, die Terrororganisation „Islamischer Staat“ starkzumachen - das zeigt ein Untersuchungsbericht des britischen Unterhauses -, sollte uns alle davor hüten, den Krieg in Syrien weiter zu befeuern. Der Ruf nach einer Flugverbotszone ist - das wissen Sie - nichts weiter als der Ruf nach einer Ausweitung des Krieges vor Ort; denn wer eine solche Zone einrichtet, der muss bereit sein, Flugzeuge, die sich nicht an die Flugverbotszone halten, abzuschießen. Das birgt ganz konkret die Gefahr - das wissen Sie alle -, dass es zu einer direkten Konfrontation zwischen den USA auf der einen Seite und Russland und vielleicht eben auch der syrischen Armee auf der anderen Seite kommt. Deshalb ist diese Forderung falsch und gefährlich.\n\nAm Ende heißt das nämlich auch freie Fahrt für die Pick-ups des „Islamischen Staats“. Deshalb lehnen wir eine Flugverbotszone ab. Wir lehnen eine Ausweitung dieses Krieges ab. Wir brauchen eine politische Lösung.\n\nIch warne davor, jetzt, wie die Bundesregierung das öffentlich getan hat, die Schuldigen zu präsentieren, ohne dafür Beweise zu haben. Warum unterstützen Sie nicht die Forderung der UNO nach einer internationalen Untersuchungskommission? Herr Röttgen, das erinnert wirklich an die Haltung der Union am Vorabend des Irakkriegs 2003. Die Massenvernichtungswaffen, aufgrund derer Sie an der Seite der USA in den Krieg ziehen wollten, wurden niemals gefunden. Diese einseitigen Schuldzuweisungen, ohne auch nur einen einzigen Beweis zu präsentieren, sind unverantwortlich.\n\nDie Erfahrung des syrischen Krieges lehrt, dass sich dies verbietet.\n\nIch erinnere hier nur an das Massaker an Zivilisten in al\u001eHula 2012, das syrischen Regierungsmilizen zugeschrieben wurde, und in dessen Folge Deutschland die diplomatischen Beziehungen zu Syrien abgebrochen hat. Später kamen erhebliche Zweifel auf, ob diese Version der Wahrheit entsprach. Die FAZ, die Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, eine Zeitung, die nun wirklich der Komplizenschaft mit dem Assad-Regime unverdächtig ist, schrieb:\n\nDas Massaker von Hula ist ein Wendepunkt im syrischen Konflikt. Die westliche Öffentlichkeit beschuldigt, gestützt auf die UN-Beobachter, die syrische Armee. Diese Version kann auf Grundlage von Augenzeugenberichten bezweifelt werden. Demnach wurden die Zivilisten von sunnitischen Aufständischen getötet.\n\nIch finde, allein das sollte uns Mahnung genug sein, was vorschnelle Schuldzuweisungen betrifft.\n\nDer Waffenstillstand in Syrien war immer prekär. Islamistische Terrorbanden wie die Ahrar al\u001eScham - von Ihrem Premiumpartner Türkei, dem NATO-Land Türkei bewaffnet, hochgezüchtet und unterstützt - haben von Anfang an erklärt, sich nicht an diesen Waffenstillstand halten zu wollen. Der eigentliche Bruch kam aber durch den US-Angriff auf Anti-IS-Einheiten in der vom IS belagerten Stadt Deir al\u001eSor. Dutzende Menschen wurden bei diesem Angriff getötet. Die IS-Mörderbanden konnten vorrücken. Tausende Menschen haben jetzt durch das Vorrücken des IS Massaker zu befürchten. Herr Annen, Sie sagten, das sei ein Fehler. Ich finde, Sie könnten hier konkreter werden: Dieser Luftangriff der USA ist ein Verbrechen gewesen.\n\nDie USA haben sich natürlich entschuldigt. Sie haben davon gesprochen, dass es ein Versehen war. Aber ist es nicht seltsam, dass die USA selbst angaben, zum ersten Mal seit vier Jahren aufseiten der Truppen des Assad-Regimes ins Kriegsgeschehen eingreifen zu wollen? Viele fragen sich deshalb, ob diese Version, dass es ein Versehen war, tatsächlich glaubwürdig ist.\n\nAbschließend, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Wir begrüßen es ausdrücklich, dass die UNO die Vorbereitungen für weitere humanitäre Konvois wieder aufnimmt. Wir sollten alles dafür tun, dies zu unterstützen.\n\nNicht Säbelrasseln ist das Gebot der Stunde, Herr Röttgen, sondern ein wirklicher Einsatz für den Waffenstillstand. Dazu gehört, dass Sie Ihren Einfluss auf Ihren Terrorpaten Erdogan geltend machen und ihn auffordern, seinen Einmarsch und persönlichen Krieg und Rachefeldzug gegen die Kurden im Norden Syriens zu beenden. Das wäre ein Schritt zur Lösung des Konfliktes statt weitere Flugverbotszonen, was eine Ausweitung des Krieges bedeutet.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8715,roland-claus,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Frau Bundeskanzlerin, eine beachtliche Zahl Ihrer Aussagen hat heute auch die Zustimmung meiner Fraktion erhalten.\n\nAber Ihre Positionen werden doch abgewertet, wenn namhafte Vertreter der CDU genau das Gegenteil erzählen - so wie gestern Günther Oettinger, der eine Einschränkung des Asylrechts per Grundgesetzänderung gefordert hat. Frau Merkel, wir müssen Sie fragen: Was gilt denn nun?\n\nAuf einen Makel in der Rede von Frau Bundeskanzlerin will ich auch noch hinweisen. Sie hat es nämlich völlig vergessen, die vielen guten Vorschläge der Fraktion Die Linke in den Haushaltsberatungen zu loben.\n\nDeshalb muss ich auf unsere Vorschläge eingehen, aber auch auf einige Einlassungen in der Haushaltsdebatte zu Positionen der Linken.\n\nDa muss ich natürlich mit dem Kollegen Volker Kauder anfangen, der gestern überaus lautstark immer und immer wieder - ich weiß gar nicht, wie oft - den DDR-Vergleich bemüht hat. Was es eben sollte, den ausgestreckten Zeigefinger auf meine Fraktion zu richten, wenn man Russland kritisiert, das war auch nicht ganz zu verstehen.\n\nIch glaube, Sie leiden da ein bisschen unter einem Phantomschmerz, Herr Kauder.\n\nDie Linke wird nie verleugnen, dass ein Teil ihrer Wurzeln in der DDR liegt. Aber die DDR gibt es seit mehr als 25 Jahren nicht mehr. Herr Kauder, ohne die DDR hätten Sie vermutlich Sahra Wagenknecht und Dietmar Bartsch nicht kennengelernt. Aber ohne die DDR hätten Sie vermutlich auch Angela Merkel und Joachim Gauck nicht kennengelernt.\n\nSie würden also, Herr Kauder, ohne die DDR völlig ohne Freund- und Feindbild dastehen. Deshalb ein bisschen mehr Demut!\n\nDie Linke hat zahlreiche Vorschläge in diese Beratung eingebracht, und es sind alle Vorschläge von dieser Welt. Vielleicht denken Sie, es sei leicht, in der Linksfraktion Haushaltsbalance zu wahren.\n\nIch kann Ihnen sagen: Dem ist nicht so.\n\nDeshalb ärgern wir uns, wenn plumpe Unterstellungen zu unseren Vorschlägen gemacht werden. Es muss doch möglich sein, den enormen Reichtum in den Händen weniger gerechter zu besteuern, als dies bisher der Fall ist.\n\nWir haben ein Zukunftsprogramm zur Integration der hier Benachteiligten und der zu uns Geflüchteten vorgeschlagen. Wir wollen damit die soziale Spaltung der Gesellschaft überwinden und unsere humanistische Verantwortung wahrnehmen. Ja, wir wollen erreichen, dass „Armut trotz Arbeit“ überwunden wird. Ja, wir wollen, dass Kinder kein Armutsrisiko bleiben, dass Bildungsgerechtigkeit einzieht - durch eine große BAföG-Reform -, dass kleine und mittelständische Unternehmen faire Chancen im wirtschaftlichen Wettbewerb bekommen, dass endlich auskömmliche Renten in Ost und West gezahlt werden und dass Kriege und Rüstungsexporte abgeschafft werden, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDabei ist das Markenzeichen linker Haushaltspolitik nicht etwa, neue Schulden zu machen, sondern gerechte Steuern einzuführen. Das wäre an der Zeit.\n\nWir sagen - und weisen dies nach -, es wäre in der Tat möglich, die Einnahmen des Bundes um mehr als 50 Milliarden zu erhöhen und diese für soziale Gerechtigkeit, für Bildungsaufgaben und für Friedfertigkeit einzusetzen.\n\nIch wiederhole hier: Die teuersten Flüchtlinge in Deutschland sind in der Tat die Steuerflüchtlinge.\n\nDie Linke macht hier in den Beratungen viele Vorschläge, mit deren Umsetzung der Einstieg in einen Politikwechsel möglich wäre. Wir maßen uns nicht an, als Einzige zu wissen, wo es langgeht. Aber wenn Sie Deutschlands Zukunft gestalten wollen, kommen Sie an einer sozialen Modernisierung der Gesellschaft und auch an diesen Vorschlägen nicht vorbei. Nur Mut, Sie könnten das schaffen.\"\n9524,halina-wawzyniak,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! So eine Koalition scheint eine total friedvolle und nette Veranstaltung zu sein. Vielleicht ziehen Sie sich doch einfach in einen Raum zurück und klären das untereinander. Das schien mir jetzt am Ende doch eine sehr populistische Rede zu sein, die auch sehr ideologiegeprägt ist.\n\nIch will zu Beginn auf eine bemerkenswerte Entscheidung des Bundesgerichtshofes hinweisen. Der hat als legitimes Regelungsziel akzeptiert, dass in Gebieten mit angespanntem Wohnungsmarkt der Anstieg von Mieten gedämpft werden kann. Der BGH sagt klar und deutlich: Die Bestandsgarantie des Eigentums nach dem Grundgesetz wird nicht dadurch infrage gestellt, dass nicht die höchstmögliche Rendite aus dem Eigentumsobjekt oder nicht die Marktmiete ohne jede Verzögerung und in voller Höhe erzielt werden kann. - Das Bundesverfassungsgericht sagt in ständiger Rechtsprechung, dass die Bindung des Eigentumsgebrauchs an das Wohl der Allgemeinheit die Pflicht zur Rücksichtnahme auf die Belange desjenigen einschließt, der konkret auf die Nutzung des Eigentumsobjektes angewiesen ist.\n\nWarum erzähle ich das alles? Offensichtlich braucht die Union ein wenig Nachhilfe in Verfassungsrecht.\n\nDie SPD will ich ein wenig ermuntern und sagen: Es gibt keine verfassungsrechtlichen Bedenken, Vermieterinnen und Vermieter an ihre soziale Verantwortung zu erinnern. Es bestehen keine verfassungsrechtlichen Bedenken, Vermieterinnen und Vermietern zu untersagen, schnellen und höchsten Profit aus der Vermietung von Wohnraum zu erzielen. Man muss es nur wollen, man kann es auch machen. Ich befürchte nur: Mit diesem Koalitionspartner wird das etwas schwierig. Insofern bin ich gespannt, wie es weitergeht.\n\nHerr Kelber hat in der Debatte am 2. Dezember 2015 gesagt, es soll im ersten Quartal 2016 einen Referentenentwurf geben. Spannend wäre, zu wissen, ob der wirklich kommt, ob er am Ende sogar durchs Plenum kommt.\n\nAuch da bin ich relativ skeptisch, wenn ich mir so anschaue, wie der Koalitionsfrieden aussieht. Aber das ist nicht mein Problem.\n\nZu dem Eckpunktepapier will ich sagen: Es ist sicherlich richtig, und der Vorschlag, die Modernisierungsumlage abzusenken, geht in die richtige Richtung. Auch die Neuregelung der Kappungsgrenze scheint uns eine Maßnahme zu sein, die in die richtige Richtung geht. Wir wollen natürlich deutlich mehr. Hinsichtlich dessen, was Ihr Koalitionspartner dazu gesagt hat, empfehle ich großzügiges Ignorieren der Einwände.\n\nWir haben bereits im März 2015 - meine Kollegin Lay hat bereits darauf hingewiesen - einen Vorschlag zur Veränderung des Systems der ortsüblichen Vergleichsmiete unterbreitet. Dieser Antrag liegt Ihnen heute vor. Den Vorschlag von Ihnen, den Zeitraum auf zehn Jahre auszudehnen, finden wir sinnvoll und richtig. Ich kann nur hoffen, dass Sie von der SPD an dieser Stelle standhaft bleiben. Für eine solche Ausweitung hätten Sie im Übrigen unsere Stimmen. Wenn die Grünen mitmachten, gäbe es dafür sogar eine Mehrheit.\n\nSinnvoll ist aus unserer Sicht auch, die Schutzregelung bei Zahlungsverzug im Hinblick auf fristlose Kündigungen auf ordentliche Kündigungen auszudehnen. Es kann einfach nicht sein, dass, wenn zwei Monate nach einer fristlosen Kündigung gezahlt wird, die ordentliche Kündigung bestehen bleibt.\n\nIch möchte Sie bitten, eine weitere Lücke zu schließen, die leider nach einem BGH-Urteil eingetreten ist. Der BGH hat nämlich entschieden, dass einer Mieterin oder einem Mieter, die bzw. der auf Sozialleistungen angewiesen ist und diese auch rechtzeitig beantragt hat, sie aber zu spät bekommen hat und deshalb die Miete nicht zahlen konnte, gekündigt werden kann. Ich finde, solche Kündigungen müssen wir gesetzlich ausschließen.\n\nEs gibt noch zwei weitere Punkte, die aus meiner Sicht wichtig sind. Es geht um die Regelung zur Eigenbedarfskündigung und die Regelung zur Kündigung wegen Hinderung der angemessenen wirtschaftlichen Verwertung. Wir bleiben dabei: Eine Kündigung wegen beabsichtigter wirtschaftlicher Verwertung muss ausgeschlossen werden, wenn diese für Mieterinnen und Mieter eine unzumutbare soziale Härte bedeuten würde. Es muss ein Ende haben, dass Mieterinnen und Mieter mit der Androhung einer Kündigung wegen wirtschaftlicher Verwertung zur Zahlung höherer Mietpreise erpresst werden. Dies findet statt, und das kann nicht so bleiben.\n\nDer Kündigungsschutz nach Umwandlung in Eigentumswohnungen muss bundesgesetzlich nach oben angeglichen werden. Es gibt in den Ländern Regelungen, die deutlich weiter gehen als die bundesgesetzliche Regelung.\n\nKurz und gut: Es gibt in diesem Bereich einiges zu tun. Wenn es um die Verbesserung der Situation von Mieterinnen und Mietern geht, werden wir Sie kritisch, konstruktiv begleiten. Unsere Beiträge sind übrigens deutlich gehaltvoller, substanzieller und auch seriöser als das, was wir heute hier von der Union gehört haben.\"\n151,beate-muller-gemmeke,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Mittlerweile hat fast jeder zweite neue Job ein Verfallsdatum, Herr Linnemann; das ist das Problem und nicht die absolute Zahl. Diese Entwicklung sehen wir mit großer Sorge. Deswegen haben wir in der letzten Wahlperiode einen fast identischen Antrag in den Bundestag eingebracht - wie heute die Linke. Wir hatten gehofft, dass sich die Große Koalition - anders als Schwarz-Gelb - endlich mit diesem Problem befasst und sich ihm stellt. Im Koalitionsvertrag steht aber kein einziges Wort zur sachgrundlosen Befristung. Ich finde, das geht überhaupt nicht. Ein Kapitel „Vollbeschäftigung, gute Arbeit und soziale Sicherheit“ ohne das Thema Befristung geht nicht; denn das ignoriert die Sorgen und die Ängste der Menschen.\n\nIch bleibe ganz kurz beim Koalitionsvertrag, weil dieser mehrfach angesprochen wurde. Natürlich sind Kompromisse notwendig, und natürlich gibt es auch Verbesserungen. Über den Mindestlohn haben wir schon diskutiert. Die Tarifautonomie wird gestärkt; das ist mir persönlich ein besonderes Anliegen. Die Werkverträge werden - ich sage mal - reguliert. Da sehen wir auch unsere Vorschläge teilweise verwirklicht. Das heißt, hier stimmt die Richtung. Ich hoffe: Sie setzen das auch wirklich um.\n\nBei anderen Themen haben wir aber heftige Kritik. Enttäuschend finde ich beispielsweise die Pläne bei der Leiharbeit. Equal Pay soll es erst nach neun Monaten geben; das kennen wir eigentlich nur von der FDP. Das geht gar nicht. Die Begrenzung der Überlassungszeit ist richtig. Aber sie ist zu lang und muss vor allem an den Arbeitsplatz gebunden werden. Das heißt, bei der Leiharbeit werden wir uns noch viel streiten.\n\nEin weiterer Kritikpunkt betrifft die Minijobs. Hier fehlt die Rentenversicherungspflicht; das kann ich überhaupt nicht verstehen.\n\nEine Leerstelle gibt es insbesondere beim Beschäftigtendatenschutz. Hier brauchen wir endlich faire Regelungen zum Schutz der Beschäftigten.\n\nDas Kapitel „Gute Arbeit“ hat also etliche Lücken. Uns, der Opposition, wird die Arbeit nicht ausgehen. Die Diskussionen im Ausschuss gehen weiter.\n\nZurück zu den Befristungen; denn das Thema ist mir schon wichtig. Da es keine Koalitionspläne gibt, über die man reden kann, werde ich - wie in den letzten vier Jahren - einfach die Situation beschreiben, damit hier endlich etwas passiert. Die sachgrundlose Befristung hat sich in den letzten Jahren wie ein Virus ausgebreitet. Die Arbeitgeber nutzen natürlich diesen Vorteil; denn das ermöglicht ihnen eine extrem flexible Personalpolitik. Der Preis für die Beschäftigten ist aber hoch, wir meinen: zu hoch.\n\nBeschäftigte, die befristet angestellt sind, haben ein hohes Armutsrisiko. Sie werden viel häufiger arbeitslos als regulär Beschäftigte. Sie können auch nicht über den Tag hinaus planen. Die ständige Unsicherheit belastet die Menschen. Viele machen sich Sorgen über die Zukunft und haben Angst vor Krankheit und Armut im Alter. Lebensqualität sieht anders aus.\n\nWer weiterbeschäftigt werden will, verhält sich ruhig und wird nicht gerade auf seine Rechte pochen. Man verschlechtert ja nicht leichtfertig mögliche Chancen. Das wissen auch die Arbeitgeber. Deswegen sind die Arbeitsbedingungen häufig schlechter als bei regulärer Beschäftigung. Der Lohn ist niedriger, und es gibt weder Aufstiegs- noch Weiterbildungsmöglichkeiten. Das alles zusammen ist für uns nicht akzeptabel.\n\nDabei beschäftigt mich eine Entwicklung ganz besonders; Frau Kramme hat sie schon angesprochen: Gerade junge Menschen sind von Befristungen besonders stark betroffen. Lebensplanung ist etwas, worüber viele jüngere Beschäftigte nur noch müde lächeln können. Das ist nicht nur ungerecht, sondern mit Blick auf den demografischen Wandel auch verantwortungslos; denn gerade junge Menschen brauchen ihren Platz in unserer älter werdenden Gesellschaft. Auch deswegen wollen wir die sachgrundlose Befristung abschaffen.\n\nIch höre immer, Betriebe seien dann nicht mehr flexibel genug in ihrer Personalplanung. Dazu sage ich: Es gibt eine ausreichend lange Probezeit. Kleine Betriebe sind vom Kündigungsschutz ganz befreit. Für die anderen gibt es noch immer die Befristung aus sachlichem Grund, beispielsweise für einen Zusatzauftrag, bei Saisonarbeiten oder für ein bestimmtes Projekt. Gleiches gilt bei Elternzeit, bei längerem Urlaub oder Krankheit. Wer gute Gründe hat, könnte also weiterhin befristen. Sachgrundlos, also einfach willkürlich, das soll aber künftig nicht mehr möglich sein. Durch Befristungen darf das unternehmerische Risiko nicht einfach auf die Beschäftigten übertragen werden. Auch der Kündigungsschutz darf nicht umgangen werden. Nur so wäre es richtig und auch fair.\n\nUnser Ziel ist es also, eine neue, eine gerechte Balance herzustellen, die den Interessen der Arbeitgeber und der Beschäftigten gleichermaßen gerecht wird. Flexible Arbeitsverhältnisse dürfen keine Einbahnstraße sein; denn die Menschen brauchen soziale Sicherheit. Das Thema steht, wie ich schon gesagt habe, nicht im Koalitionsvertrag. Wir werden aber dranbleiben. Das kann ich Ihnen versichern.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4680,jurgen-trittin,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Wir lesen einen ungeheuerlichen Befund: Die USA haben zwischen 2001 und 2006 systematisch gefoltert. Es ging also nicht um einzelne Entgleisungen.\n\nDie erste Frage in der Diskussion in den USA daraufhin war: War das überhaupt effektiv? Ich finde, wir müssen in aller Deutlichkeit sagen: Schon die Frage ist falsch gestellt.\n\nWäre die Folter gerechtfertigt gewesen, wenn sie wahre Ergebnisse gebracht hätte? - Nein, das wäre sie nicht!\n\nIch finde, die eigentliche Antwort auf die Frage nach dem Beitrag der Folter im Kampf gegen den Terrorismus hat Scheich Chalid Mohammed gegeben. Nachdem er in Guantánamo über 180 Mal gefoltert wurde, hat er eine ganze Reihe tatsächlicher, geplanter oder nur phantasierter Verbrechen gestanden. Vor dem Militärgericht hat er dann den entscheidenden Satz über George W. Bushs War on Terror gesagt - ich zitiere -:\n\nGeorge Washington ist euer Held, unserer ist Usama Bin Ladin. Der Krieg wird niemals aufhören. Er hat seine eigene Sprache, die Sprache der Gewalt und des Todes. Wir sprechen sie, ihr sprecht sie auch.\n\nDas ist die bittere Bilanz. Wenn das wahr ist, dann ist das der Sieg des Terrorismus. Folter ist nicht einfach ineffektiv, sie ist im Kampf gegen den Terrorismus schlicht und ergreifend kontraproduktiv. Indem sich der Kampf gegen den Terrorismus mit den Methoden der Terroristen gemeinmacht, legitimiert er sie. Insofern gibt es eine traurige Linie vom Waterboarding in Guantánamo zu den Enthauptungsvideos des ISIS.\n\nJa, es stimmt: Nicht nur in Diktaturen, nicht nur in Unrechtsstaaten wird gefoltert, auch in Demokratien. Aber nur in Demokratien besteht die Chance, es öffentlich zu machen, um es zu beenden. Dies ist das historische Verdienst des Senatsreports. Ich finde es schon einigermaßen bizarr, dass einer der Hauptverdächtigen diesen Report kurzerhand - ich zitiere ihn, Herr Präsident - zu einem „Haufen Scheiße“ erklärt. Nein, diejenigen, die diesen Report erarbeitet haben, haben sich um Amerika und um die Demokratie verdient gemacht.\n\nDas führt aber auch uns zu einer Verpflichtung. Im Grundgesetz heißt es nicht nur:\n\nDie Würde des Menschen ist unantastbar.\n\nEs heißt dort weiter:\n\nSie zu achten und zu schützen ist Verpflichtung aller staatlichen Gewalt.\n\nDas heißt, es gibt nicht nur eine Grenze für die Anwendung von Gewalt, sondern auch eine aktive Schutzpflicht. Diese aktive Schutzpflicht wahrzunehmen, ist das, was wir unter anderem von unserem Generalbundesanwalt erwarten. Aus dieser Schutzpflicht erwächst die Pflicht, Straftaten gegen die Würde des Menschen strafrechtlich zu verfolgen, und das nicht nur im Fall Daschner, wie Herr Liebich zu Recht gesagt hat. Das ist es, was wir von den USA erwarten. Das ist es, wofür wir in Europa sorgen müssen. Strafverfolgung zum Schutze der Würde des Menschen ist keine akademische Forderung. Ohne sie gibt es keine Herrschaft des Rechts. Das gilt gerade auch für eine Europäische Union, die zu Recht auf ihre Grundrechtecharta stolz ist.\n\nDonald Rumsfeld glaubte damals, er könne im Kampf gegen den Terrorismus das alte Europa und das neue -Europa, wie er es nannte, spalten. Heute wissen wir, dass es einfach nur um den schmierigen Versuch ging, sich rechtsfreie Räume für illegale Praktiken zu kaufen. Das können wir in Europa nicht dulden. Europa ist kein rechtsfreier Raum. Deswegen müssen solche Vorstöße bei uns verfolgt werden.\n\nIch glaube, dass am Beginn des Kampfes gegen den Terror eine fundamentale und handlungsleitende Erkenntnis stehen muss. Ich zitiere hier Nils Minkmar aus der FAZ vom 13. Dezember dieses Jahres. Diese Erkenntnis lautet:\n\nWir sind nicht wie ihr. Ob man für Menschenrechte und Freiheit einsteht, ist nicht das Gleiche wie der Wunsch nach einem totalen islamischen Kalifat. Und weil das ein Unterschied ist, besteht auch eine Differenz in den Mitteln, die wir anwenden, um uns zu verteidigen. … Sonst hört der Krieg niemals auf.\n\nIch finde, er hat recht.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6630,ingbert-liebing,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wer hätte vor fünf Jahren gedacht, dass wir heute eine solche Debatte führen könnten. Wer hätte 2010 auf dem Höhepunkt der Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise geglaubt, dass wir heute über negative Auswirkungen des Außenhandelsbilanzüberschusses, über einen hohen Beschäftigungsgrad und über einen ausgeglichenen Haushalt sprechen könnten. Davon hätte vor fünf Jahren niemand träumen mögen.\n\nWenn uns der IWF heute bescheinigt, dass wir gute Ergebnisse erzielt haben, und wir gute Perspektiven aus diesem Bericht herauslesen können, dann ist dies erst einmal auch ein Grund zur Freude. Ich kann nur diejenigen bedauern, die im Zweifelsfall jedes Papier nur nach einer negativen Botschaft durchkämmen. Als ob wir uns in Deutschland nicht auch einmal über gute Nachrichten und über eine gute Situation freuen könnten.\n\nDas möchte ich ausdrücklich vorwegschicken, und zwar insbesondere im Vergleich zu dem, was wir in den vergangenen fünf Jahren durchgemacht haben.\n\nDiese Freude ist vor allem gut für die Menschen in unserem Land, für die Menschen, die vor Jahren noch arbeitslos waren und jetzt in Lohn und Brot stehen. Das ist gut für die Arbeitnehmer, die inzwischen auch wieder -reale Einkommenszuwächse erzielen können. Es ist auch für die nächste Generation gut, dass wir seit dem vergangenen Jahr wieder ausgeglichene Bundeshaushalte beschließen und damit der nächsten Generation keine zusätzlichen Schulden hinterlassen.\n\nDiese Situation und diese guten Nachrichten fallen aber nicht vom Himmel. Sie sind sicherlich, Frau Andreae, auch Ergebnis von externen Faktoren, die Sie genannt haben, wie einem niedrigen Ölpreis und dem Wechselkurs des Euro. Sie sind aber auch Ergebnis kluger Politik, die wir hier in der Koalition seit Jahren betreiben. Denn wir haben umgesteuert. Wir haben die Ergebnisse guter Konjunktur und Steuermehreinnahmen klug für eine Kurskorrektur genutzt. Wir haben trotz steigender Einnahmen die Ausgaben konstant gehalten. Das wiederum hat Luft geschaffen, umzusteuern, hin zu den Investitionen, die der IWF zu Recht einfordert. Wir tun dies, indem wir jetzt mit dem Nachtragshaushalt und dem Investitionspaket für die Kommunen - Staatssekretär Beckmeyer hat dies bereits erläutert - den Schwerpunkt bei den Investitionen setzen.\n\nNichts ist für den wirtschaftlichen Erfolg so wichtig wie die öffentlichen Investitionen. Wir müssen unsere Infrastruktur in Ordnung bringen. Das Thema Breitband ist angesprochen worden. Es ist gut, dass mit zusätzlichen 1,1 Milliarden Euro endlich auch auf Bundesebene eine nennenswerte Größenordnung für die Breitbandförderung zur Verfügung steht. Wenn wir über 3 Milliarden Euro in die Infrastruktur geben, davon allein fast 2 Milliarden Euro in die Verkehrsinfrastruktur, dann sind das ebenfalls wichtige Beiträge, die wir morgen beschließen werden.\n\nInvestitionen hängen aber nicht nur vom Geld ab. Wir können nur dann investieren, wenn wir auch fertige, baureife Projekte haben. Wir müssen aber feststellen, dass wir hier in Deutschland Defizite haben. Ich möchte ausdrücklich die Situation in meinem Heimatbundesland Schleswig-Holstein ansprechen. Wir könnten noch einmal 3 Milliarden Euro zusätzlich für Investitionen in Straßen zur Verfügung stellen: In Schleswig-Holstein kann aber nicht ein einziges neues Projekt begonnen werden, weil es keine Baureife gibt. Aber dafür tragen die jeweiligen Landesregierungen über ihre Straßenbauverwaltungen die Verantwortung.\n\nWir haben nicht ein einziges baureifes Projekt. Von diesen Milliarden wird nichts ins Land Schleswig-Holstein hineinfließen - bestenfalls für eine Lärmschutzwand.\n\nDeswegen müssen wir Bund, Länder und Kommunen zusammen betrachten. Da ist es schon ein Armutszeugnis, wenn einzelne Bundesländer bei den Investitionen nicht Schritt halten. Wir tun dies auf Bundesebene. Bayern hat eine Investitionsquote von über 12 Prozent, während wir in Schleswig-Holstein bei gerade einmal 7 Prozent herumkrebsen und im nächsten Jahr unter 7 Prozent rutschen werden.\n\nDa besteht Nachholbedarf, und deswegen müssen wir dies als eine Einheit betrachten. Wir helfen auf Bundesebene auch den Kommunen, gerade denen, die unter Investitionsschwäche leiden. Mit 3,5 Milliarden Euro legen wir auf die finanzschwächeren Kommunen einen zusätzlichen Schwerpunkt. Deswegen müssen wir den Gesamtzusammenhang bei den Investitionen sehen. Jeder muss seinen Beitrag leisten. Wir tun dies auf Bundesebene, die Länder müssen dies ebenfalls tun. Wir helfen den Kommunen.\n\nInsgesamt steht Deutschland gut da, aber es gibt immer noch Aufgaben, an denen wir zu arbeiten haben. Wir haben keinen Grund zur Selbstzufriedenheit, sondern müssen diese gute Situation nutzen, um Vorsorge für schwierigere Zeiten zu treffen. Dies tun wir mit kluger Politik in der Koalition.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9616,niels-annen,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Nach diesem Redebeitrag aus einem Paralleluniversum\n\nversuche ich jetzt, etwas zur Sache zu sagen.\n\nWenn man Frau Dağdelen zuhört, dann gewinnt man den Eindruck, dass allein meine Präsenz an diesem Rednerpult eine große Überraschung ist; denn angeblich wollen wir das ja unter Ausschluss der Öffentlichkeit diskutieren.\n\nAlso, zur Sache. Ich will mich dem Dank an die Mitglieder der Kommission anschließen. Ich freue mich darüber, dass Sie, Herr Rühe, Herr Kolbow, heute an dieser Debatte teilnehmen. Ich glaube, dass Sie eine wichtige Arbeit geleistet haben.\n\nIch will deswegen noch einmal daran erinnern, was der Auftrag war. Dieses Parlament - nicht allein die Koalitionsfraktionen; es war eine für alle offene Kommission - hat eine Kommission zur Überprüfung und Sicherung von Parlamentsrechten eingesetzt. Genau das haben wir getan, und zwar unter dem Eindruck einer Entwicklung, die wir alle miteinander in den letzten Jahren begrüßt haben, nämlich einer Entwicklung, die man als eine fortschreitende Bündnisintegration beschreiben kann. Das klingt technisch, bedeutet aber eigentlich, dass wir auf dem Weg der Europäisierung darin vorangehen, auch unsere transatlantischen Strukturen zu stärken.\n\nNatürlich hat es im Vorfeld dieser Einsetzung Debatten gegeben. Wir haben auch innerhalb der Koalition über den Auftrag der Kommission gestritten. Es gab Misstrauen. Das ist von den Oppositionsparteien artikuliert worden; das ist ihr gutes Recht.\n\nDeswegen will ich an dieser Stelle sehr deutlich, auch für meine Fraktion, sagen: Die SPD hat Wort gehalten. Es gibt keine Vorratsbeschlüsse. Die Rechte des Parlaments werden nicht beschnitten, sondern sie werden ausgebaut; sie werden gestärkt. Das ist eine ganz wichtige Entwicklung.\n\nWeil man beim letzten Redebeitrag so ein bisschen den Eindruck bekommen konnte, wir würden hier in einer Geheimoperation die Rechte des Parlaments sozusagen zusammenstreichen, will ich doch noch einmal zusammenfassen, was wir uns vorgenommen haben und was Ihnen heute vorliegt.\n\nJa, das darf er natürlich gern.\n\nIch muss mich manchmal wirklich ein bisschen zusammenreißen. Sie können die Protokolle des Deutschen Bundestages lesen. Sie können die Presseausschnitte über die Debatten lesen, die wir geführt haben. Es gab niemals einen Zweifel daran, dass die SPD gegen Vorratsbeschlüsse ist.\n\nIch glaube, es gibt da überhaupt kein Problem. Der Kollege Kiesewetter hat in seiner Rede auch ein bisschen den Diskussionsverlauf dargestellt. Es gab damals eine öffentliche Auseinandersetzung über ein interessantes Papier von Herrn Kiesewetter und Herrn Schockenhoff. Dazu hat sich auch der Kollege Arnold geäußert; ich bin gelegentlich dabei gewesen.\n\nEs ist gar kein Problem, dass wir hier unterschiedliche Meinungen haben. Das ist Teil einer parlamentarischen Auseinandersetzung, Teil von Demokratie. Aber dass Sie mit Ihren Fragen, mit Ihren Redebeiträgen diese Plattform hier nicht nur dazu nutzen, um Ihre Position zu vertreten - das tun wir auch; das ist in Ordnung -,\n\nsondern auch dazu nutzen, falsche Tatsachen zu präsentieren,\n\ndie Öffentlichkeit so auch hinter die Fichte zu führen, das ist nicht in Ordnung. Insofern, glaube ich, entlarvt sich das selber.\n\nZu Ihrer ersten Frage kann ich Ihnen sagen: Die SPD-Fraktion diskutiert immer. Wir haben auch hierüber intensiv miteinander diskutiert. Insofern: Die Einladung bleibt bestehen, auch an Ihre Fraktion. Wir kommen jetzt ins Gesetzgebungsverfahren. Beteiligen Sie sich an dem Gesetzgebungsverfahren. Als kleinen Einstieg in diese Beteiligung lesen Sie vielleicht erst einmal das, was hier zur Beratung vorliegt, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nWeil sich gezeigt hat, dass es notwendig ist, will ich noch einmal zusammenfassen, worum es geht. Es sollen die Informationsrechte bei geheimhaltungsbedürftigen Operationen - Stichwort „Kommando Spezialkräfte“ - kodifiziert werden. Wir werden bisher über die Obleute unterrichtet. Das ist eine bewährte Praxis, aber es ist eine freiwillige Praxis. Die SPD-Fraktion war immer schon der Meinung, dass es nicht einen Teil der Streitkräfte geben kann, der von der allgemeinen Unterrichtungspflicht sozusagen ausgenommen ist. Wir verändern das jetzt. Ich glaube, das ist ein großer Fortschritt.\n\nWir werden in diesem Gesetzgebungsverfahren auch dafür sorgen, dass es eine erweiterte Unterrichtungspraxis zu abgeschlossenen Operationen des Kommandos Spezialkräfte gibt. Das ist ein wichtiger Fortschritt.\n\nIch will unterstreichen, dass ich es für eine gute Entscheidung halte, dass wir Ihnen, meine Damen und Herren, vorschlagen, die Evaluierungspflicht, die bisher in der Begründung des Parlamentsbeteiligungsgesetzes angedeutet ist, in den Gesetzestext aufzunehmen. Das ist dann übrigens auch eine Grundlage, um vor der gesamten Öffentlichkeit darüber zu diskutieren, ob diese Entscheidungen vernünftig waren, ob der Einsatz richtig konzipiert war, und eine Grundlage für die weitere parlamentarische Beratung und für die Begleitung der wichtigen Arbeit unserer Soldatinnen und Soldaten.\n\nFür die Frage der internationalen Zusammenarbeit ist von besonderer Wichtigkeit - damit greifen wir eine Idee aus der Kommission auf -, dass wir die Bundesregierung auffordern, einen jährlichen Bericht - einen Bericht, keine Beschlussvorlage für einen Vorratsbeschluss; um das an dieser Stelle noch einmal zu unterstreichen - über die multilateralen militärischen Verbundfähigkeiten vorzulegen. Wir gehen davon aus, dass dieser Bericht nicht nur hier diskutiert wird, nicht nur von der deutschen Öffentlichkeit wahrgenommen wird, sondern dass er auch von der europäischen Öffentlichkeit, von den Kolleginnen und Kollegen in anderen Parlamenten und Regierungen zur Kenntnis genommen wird. Das sorgt für eine politische Absicherung. Das schafft das an Verlässlichkeit, was wir erreichen wollen, und es nimmt vielleicht auch ein bisschen von dem Misstrauen, das es in anderen Ländern gegenüber unserer parlamentarischen Beteiligungspraxis gibt.\n\nUm es noch einmal deutlich zu sagen - Kollege Uhl hat darauf hingewiesen, dass wir darüber sehr intensiv miteinander diskutiert haben, übrigens auch mit Vertreterinnen und Vertretern anderer Staaten -: Wir möchten nicht, dass sich eine Bundesregierung, wie immer sie zusammengesetzt ist, hinter dem Parlament versteckt, wenn es auf internationaler Ebene darum geht, über die Beteiligung an einem Einsatz zu entscheiden. Unsere Beratungen haben nämlich ergeben, dass das gelegentlich doch der Fall gewesen ist. Deswegen stellen wir klar: Eine frühzeitige Unterrichtung über die konkreten Planungen für bewaffnete Einsätze deutscher Streitkräfte im System gegenseitiger kollektiver Sicherheit soll vor diesem Hintergrund einen Beitrag leisten. Auch das ist eine Ausweitung der Informationsrechte des Parlamentes.\n\nInsofern bin ich überzeugt davon - wir beginnen ja jetzt mit dem Gesetzgebungsprozess -, dass diese Diskussion die Kritiker, die wir heute ja auch wieder gehört haben, widerlegt, die uns im Vorfeld der Einsetzung dieser Kommission unterstellt haben, dass die Große Koalition den Abbau von Parlamentsrechten beabsichtige. Deswegen kann man an dieser Stelle, glaube ich, eine ganz sachliche Diskussion miteinander führen. Ich will ohne jede Bitterkeit sagen: Wir haben es wirklich sehr bedauert, dass die Opposition sich gegen die Mitarbeit in dieser Kommission entschieden hat.\n\nTrotzdem haben wir das Gespräch gesucht. Wir haben regelmäßig Angebote gemacht, und ich bin sehr froh darüber, dass diese angenommen worden sind. Wir haben, wie ich finde, vor allem mit den Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Grünen sehr konstruktive Gespräche geführt. Wir haben auch Anregungen aus diesen Gesprächen aufgenommen. Ich will Ihnen an dieser Stelle sagen: Wir werden es im Gesetzgebungsverfahren genauso halten. Die Tür für Anregungen, für Diskussionsbeiträge - über Ihre ganz normalen parlamentarischen Rechte hinaus - bleibt natürlich offen. Wir sind sehr daran interessiert, dass es am Ende vielleicht doch noch dazu kommt, dass wir uns aufeinander zubewegen.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, ich will noch einen weiteren Aspekt in die Debatte einbringen: Es gibt in Europa nur wenige Parlamente, die über so viele Beteiligungsrechte beim Einsatz bewaffneter Streitkräfte verfügen wie der Deutsche Bundestag.\n\nDer eine oder andere Abgeordnete anderer Parlamente, mit dem wir gesprochen haben, hat keinen Hehl daraus gemacht, dass er sich für sein Parlament manchmal ähnliche Rechte wünschen würde. Ich glaube, wir müssen mit dem, was wir uns erarbeitet und auch erstritten haben, sehr sorgsam umgehen; denn mit diesen Rechten geht ja auch eine Verantwortung einher. Nicht jeder Einsatz der Bundeswehr ist gleich gefährlich; aber kein Einsatz ist ohne Risiko. Es geht immer auch um das Leben meist junger Menschen. Deswegen dürfen wir in diesem Parlament nicht in einen Routinemodus verfallen. Es ist leider bei einigen Debatten manchmal fast vorhersehbar, welche Diskussion wir führen. Ich glaube, dass das an dieser Stelle ganz wichtig ist.\n\nIch möchte zum Schluss doch noch einmal sagen: Der Parlamentsvorbehalt - auch diese Debatte zeigt das - schafft Öffentlichkeit und Legitimität und stärkt den Soldatinnen und Soldaten bei ihrer wichtigen Arbeit den Rücken. Dabei soll es bleiben.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nVielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Herr Kollege Gehrcke, Sie können nicht von der Tatsache ablenken, dass Ihre Entscheidung, sich nicht an einer Kommission zu beteiligen, bei der es auch um die Sicherung von Parlamentsrechten geht - das steht in der Aufgabenbeschreibung -, vor allem darin begründet liegt - das sehen wir in vielen Debatten, wenn es um Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik geht -, dass Sie die inneren Widersprüche in Ihrer Fraktion nicht vor der versammelten Öffentlichkeit darstellen wollen, und dass Sie sich vor allem - ich bedauere das ausdrücklich - nicht an der Detailarbeit, der Gesetzesarbeit in der Kommission beteiligten wollen,\n\nweil das offengelegt hätte, was Sie selber eben präsentiert haben: Frau Dağdelen hat gesagt, hier soll das Parlamentsrecht nicht nur beschnitten, sondern abgeschafft werden, und Sie sagen, Sie haben sich deswegen nicht beteiligt, weil in der Überschrift des Kommissionsauftrages sozusagen ein Adjektiv fehlt. Ich glaube, das entlarvt sich selber.\n\nBeteiligen Sie sich an der Arbeit. Lesen Sie die Dokumente. Machen Sie konkrete Vorschläge. Dann werden Sie in Ihrer eigenen Glaubwürdigkeit nur gewinnen können.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n14724,konstantin-notz,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. Vielen Dank auch, Herr Kollege Hoffmann, für das Genehmigen der Zwischenfrage. Es wird auch keine Majestätsbeleidigung.\n\nIch wollte Sie nur fragen: Ist Ihre Rede jetzt als Rückholung dessen zu verstehen, was hier eingebracht ist? Denn ich habe bisher kein Argument für die Vorlage gehört, auf der, glaube ich, auch Ihre Fraktion draufsteht. Deswegen frage ich Sie: Ist das ein Minderheitenvotum, oder sprechen Sie sich doch für diese Vorlage aus? Sonst verstehe ich den Gesetzentwurf der Großen Koalition gar nicht.\n\n- Ach so. Der Spannungsbogen wird bis zum Schluss gehalten, und dann heißt es: „Trotzdem machen wir das mit“?\"\n8906,nicole-maisch,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Minister! Ich finde es schon erstaunlich, dass Sie so stolz auf diesen Bericht sind, dass Sie ihn heute Morgen zur besten Debattenzeit hier der Öffentlichkeit präsentieren wollen.\n\nDieser Bericht zeigt auf über 100 Seiten, dass die Große Koalition für den Tierschutz so gut wie nichts erreicht hat.\n\nKollegin Vogt, bei allem Respekt: Euphorie über das, was Sie bisher getan haben, sprühte weder aus Ihrem Redebeitrag noch aus den Worten des Ministers. Ich würde sagen, da ist noch deutlich Luft nach oben, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nSchauen wir uns den Bericht daraufhin an, welches Gesetz und welche Verordnung auf Ihre Initiative hin erlassen wurden. Sie haben zu den drängenden Problemen im Tierschutz nicht einmal einen Zeitplan. Wir haben eine Kleine Anfrage gestellt und gefragt: Wann wollen Sie endlich eine Nutztierhaltungsverordnung für die Milchkühe, für die Puten, für das Wassergeflügel machen? Wir haben keine Antwort bekommen. Es gibt nicht einmal einen Zeitplan. Ich finde, diese Koalition zeigt sehr deutlich, dass sie nicht viel für den Schutz der Tiere tun will.\n\nIch finde es ganz interessant, dass vonseiten der SPD schon wieder gesagt wird: Wir wollen das Tierschutzgesetz anpacken. - Das finde ich super. Der Minister hat gestern in der Presse gesagt: Auf keinen Fall werden wir das Tierschutzgesetz anpacken, weil dann die ganzen nervigen Tierschützer alle möglichen Änderungsvorschläge haben, die uns stören und uns in unserer Behäbigkeit beim Regieren hindern. - Von daher finde ich es interessant, die Auseinandersetzung zwischen Ihnen anzuschauen.\n\nJa, das Tierschutzgesetz wollen Sie nicht anpacken. Sie haben angekündigt, Sie wollen etwas gegen die Schlachtung trächtiger Kühe und für den Schutz der Pelztiere tun. Das ist durchaus ehrenwert, aber schauen wir uns an, wie Sie das umsetzen wollen. Sie wollen ein Gesetz nutzen, das eigentlich dafür da ist, Robbenprodukte und chinesisches Hundefell vom deutschen Markt fernzuhalten, weil Sie so große Angst davor haben, dass dann, wenn man an das Tierschutzgesetz herangeht, noch alle möglichen anderen Wünsche der Tierschützer aufs Tapet kommen.\n\nJa, wenn wir das Tierschutzgesetz anpacken, dann müssen wir noch über alle möglichen anderen Dinge reden. Bei trächtigen Kühen und bei den Pelzen sind wir uns vielleicht schnell einig, aber was ist mit den Tierversuchen? Warum haben die Behörden kaum die Möglichkeit, wirklich zwischen Tierschutz und Forschungsinteresse abzuwägen? Herr Schmidt, es ist ja nicht richtig, was Sie gesagt haben. Sie haben hier von diesem Pult aus wörtlich gesagt: „Dem Tierschutz kommt bei jeder Abwägung Gewicht zu.“ Bei den Tierversuchen ist genau das nicht der Fall, und das ist Ihre Schuld, weil Sie das Tierschutzgesetz in der letzten Legislatur im Bereich der Tierversuche einfach nur verhunzt haben.\n\nWenn Sie wirklich etwas für die Versuchstiere tun wollen, dann hinterfragen Sie doch einmal die internen Abläufe in der Milliardenverteilungsmaschine Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. Setzen Sie sich kritisch mit Ihrer Kollegin, der Forschungsministerin, auseinander. Aber dann müssten Sie auch einmal einen Konflikt innerhalb der Koalition und innerhalb des Kabinetts aushalten, und das ist im Tierschutz bisher wirklich nicht Ihr Ding gewesen.\n\nEine Koalition, die sich nicht einmal traut, beim Tierschutz ihren eigenen Koalitionsvertrag umzusetzen, die sollte wirklich nicht die Backen aufblasen. Sie haben im Koalitionsvertrag versprochen, gewerbliche Tierbörsen für exotische Tiere zu untersagen. Das machen Sie aber nicht. Die Kollegin Menz hat es gesagt: Es gibt jetzt noch einmal ein Forschungsprojekt. - Schlauerweise läuft dieses bis kurz vor der Bundestagswahl. So kann man die Resultate, die dabei herauskommen, nicht mehr umsetzen. Ich finde, das ist sehr hart an der Grenze zur Arbeitsverweigerung.\n\nSie erkennen die Probleme selbst und benennen sie im Tierschutzbericht. Schauen wir uns die Zirkustiere an. Die Haltung von Wildtieren im Zirkus ist Tierquälerei. Elefanten, Bären, Giraffen, Tiger und sogar ein Flusspferd werden in deutschen Wanderzirkussen herumgekarrt. Wenn man hier von „leuchtenden Kinderaugen“ spricht, wie der Kollege Stier es gern im Ausschuss tut, dann muss ich sagen: Da hat man beim Thema Artenschutz im Biologieunterricht etwas grundsätzlich falsch verstanden.\n\nIch erwarte von Ihnen, dass Sie dann, wenn Sie hier Schweitzer, Ghandi und alle möglichen Größen aus dem Bereich des Tierschutzes zitieren, endlich verbieten, dass Giraffen, Tiger, Flusspferde und Bären in Wanderzirkussen gequält werden. Wenn Sie das in dieser Legislaturperiode nicht hinkriegen, dann können Sie sich das ganze Gerede zu Ethik und die ganzen Zitate sparen.\n\nEs sind nicht nur die Wildtiere, bei denen Sie versagen. In Ihrem Bericht loben Sie sich dafür, dass es jetzt einen Tierschutzpreis im Reitsport gibt. Das finden wir super, das soll man machen;\n\naber ich finde: Ein Tierschutzpreis im Reitsport ist gut und schön. Solange es in Deutschland aber legal Verbrennungen dritten Grades auf den Pferdehintern geben kann,\n\nso lange braucht man nicht über Tierschutz im Pferde­sport zu sprechen.\n\nDer Schenkelbrand wird im Jahr 2015 betäubungslos ausgeführt und ist weiterhin legal. Das kann nicht Ihr Ernst sein. Das ist keine zivilisatorische Größe. Das ist anachronistisch. Das ist widersinnig, und das muss man beenden.\n\n- Herr Kauder sagt gerade: Das bleibt auch so.\n\n- Dann habe ich mich vertan. Aber es war doch die CDU/CSU - Ursula von der Leyen, Dieter Stier -, die sich bis aufs Blut für den Schenkelbrand eingesetzt haben. Ilse Aigner hatte in ihrem Entwurf schon vorgesehen, dass diese anachronistische, brutale Methode verboten werden soll.\n\nSie haben doch verhindert, dass das endlich beendet wird. Es ist immer noch legal, sogar ohne Betäubung. Das ist absurd, und das muss ein Ende haben.\n\nAber ich will den Worten des Ministers folgen, der gesagt hat, wir sollen nicht immer nur im Zorn zurückblicken. Das ist richtig. Man muss nach vorne schauen. Man muss es besser machen.\n\nDas sehe ich durchaus. Deshalb komme ich zum Schluss. - Wir sind nicht nur wütend; wir haben Ihnen auch konstruktive Vorschläge gemacht. Unser Antrag liegt vor. Stimmen Sie ihm zu! Nehmen Sie die Forderungen ernst! Dann fällt der nächste Tierschutzbericht auch nicht mehr so peinlich aus.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nFrau Kollegin, danke, dass Sie meine Frage zulassen. - Sind Sie bereit, zur Kenntnis zu nehmen, dass es in der Debatte um Würde mehrerer Würdebegriffe jenseits des Begriffes der Menschenwürde gibt? Vielleicht haben Sie unseren Entwurf eines Tierschutzgesetzes aus der letzten Legislatur gelesen, in dem wir von der „Würde als Tier“ sprechen. Wir verwehren uns gegen die Behauptung, dass wir in unseren Diskussionsbeiträgen die Menschenwürde mit einem würdevollen Dasein für Tiere gleichsetzen. Ich würde mich sehr freuen, wenn auch Sie das nicht weiter behaupten würden.\"\n7040,emmi-zeulner,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Leben in Würde bis zuletzt - diesen Satz hören wir in der derzeitigen Debatte immer wieder. Doch was Würde für den Einzelnen ausmacht und was ein Leben und Sterben in Würde bedeutet, können wir als Politiker nicht festlegen. Dies bleibt eine ganz individuelle Entscheidung für jeden von uns. Doch was wir von politischer Seite definieren können, sind die bestmöglichen Rahmenbedingungen für ein würdevolles Leben und, ja, auch ein würdevolles Sterben.\n\nUm diese Gestaltung der Rahmenbedingungen geht es auch heute wieder im vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf. Als zuständige Berichterstatterin der CDU/CSU-Bundestagsfraktion möchte ich gerne einige für mich wichtige Punkte ausführen. Es ist mir ein Herzensanliegen, die Versorgung mit spezialisierter ambulanter Palliativversorgung, kurz SAPV, besonders im ländlichen Raum zu stärken, weil es dort noch die meisten weißen Flecken gibt.\n\nWas macht SAPV aus? Die SAPV ist ein Team aus hochspezialisierten Palliativmedizinern und Palliativpflegekräften, das rund um die Uhr für schwerstkranke und sterbende Menschen und deren Angehörige zu Hause oder im Pflegeheim erreichbar ist. Das Team hat einen ganzheitlichen Therapieansatz, der die medizinische, pflegerische und psychosoziale Betreuung umfasst. Der Patient und die betroffene Familie können sich also in schwierigen Situationen, wenn zum Beispiel plötzlich starke Schmerzen oder Atemnot beim Patienten auftreten, in ein sicheres Netz fallen lassen. Dieser vernetzte Ansatz zieht sich wie ein roter Faden durch den ganzen Gesetzentwurf.\n\nUm dieses Netz weiterzuspinnen und die letzten Lücken endgültig zu schließen, ist es richtig, Schiedsstellen einzurichten, wo eine Einigung in Bezug auf den Vertragsinhalt zwischen Krankenkassen und SAPV-Teams erzielt werden kann; denn im Gegensatz zu Teams in Ballungsräumen stehen die Teams im ländlichen Raum vor ganz anderen Herausforderungen: Die Wege sind länger, die betroffenen Patienten weniger, und die Kinder der Patienten sind häufig gar nicht mehr vor Ort, sondern in Ballungsräumen, nämlich dort, wo die Arbeit ist, und fallen als Unterstützung weg. Trotzdem muss es möglich sein, auch dort SAPV-Teams entstehen zu lassen, die sich finanziell tragen. Die Schiedsstellen sind ein Hebel dafür.\n\nAber nicht nur im ambulanten Bereich bessern wir nach, sondern auch im stationären Bereich, im Bereich der Palliativstationen. Das Fallpauschalensystem, wie es in Krankenhäusern üblich ist - ich werde nicht müde, es zu sagen -, belohnt ein Mehr an Leistungen mit mehr Geld. Das passt einfach nicht für Palliativstationen. Tagesgleiche Pflegesätze hingegen machen es möglich, ohne Einbußen bei der Vergütung den Patienten individuell zu betreuen. Wenn ein sterbenskranker Mensch keine Musiktherapie mehr haben möchte, dann sollte das ohne einen finanziellen Nachteil für die Stationen möglich sein.\n\nZukünftig wollen wir eine echte Wahlmöglichkeit zwischen den Systemen schaffen. Es wird Krankenhäusern gesetzlich das Recht zugesprochen, gegenüber den Kassen die Abkehr vom DRG-System auf Palliativsta-tionen zu erklären, wenn sie das wollen. Die Qualität darf darunter natürlich nicht leiden. Deswegen gibt es zum Beispiel in Bayern im Sinne des Bayerischen Krankenhausgesetzes verbindliche Qualitätskriterien für Palliativstationen. Um im gesamten System Krankenhaus den Palliativgedanken besser zu verwurzeln, werden wir über zusätzliche Palliativbeauftragte, wie es die Kollegin schon angesprochen hat, natürlich diskutieren müssen.\n\nAuch die Einrichtung eines Konsiliardienstes sollte besser berücksichtigt werden; denn wir unterstützen zwar im neuen Krankenhausgesetz mit den Strukturfonds den Aufbau neuer Palliativstationen, was sehr sinnvoll ist, aber natürlich wird nicht jedes Krankenhaus eine solche schaffen können. Trotzdem sollten auch in Krankenhäusern ohne Palliativstation die Menschen in der letzten Phase fachgerecht betreut werden und die Pflegekräfte und Ärzte einen Experten der Hospiz- und Palliativversorgung hinzurufen können.\n\nAuch die finanzielle Ausstattung ambulanter Hospizdienste und stationärer Hospize werden wir entsprechend verbessern. So können zukünftig beispielsweise Kinderhospize eigene Rahmenvereinbarungen treffen. Die unschätzbar wichtige Arbeit, die dort tagtäglich geleistet wird, verlangt eine entsprechende Unterstützung und Honorierung. Das tun wir. An dem bürgerschaftlichen Gedanken, auf dem die Hospizbewegung fußt, halten wir dabei dennoch fest.\n\nDie Grundvoraussetzung für eine bessere Versorgung ist jedoch, die Menschen in unserem Land über die Möglichkeiten der Hospiz- und Palliativversorgung aufzuklären. Die gesetzlichen Krankenkassen werden hierbei beauftragt, als Lotsen zu fungieren und die Menschen über ihre Möglichkeiten zu informieren.\n\nAls Parlamentarierin ist es mir wichtig, dass klargestellt wird, dass im Rahmen einer ganzheitlichen Beratung zum Beispiel die Möglichkeit einer Patientenverfügung oder einer Vorsorgevollmacht angesprochen wird.\n\nAuch eine öffentliche Kampagne könnte dieses Anliegen unterstützen.\n\nDer Entwurf des Hospiz- und Palliativgesetzes schafft durchdachte und dynamische Rahmenbedingungen, die die Versorgung in unserem Land nachhaltig positiv prägen werden; davon bin ich fest überzeugt. Nach dem vorgelegten Eckpunktepapier der Koalition, aus dem sich der Gesetzentwurf entwickelt hat, kommt nun unsere Stunde, die Stunde der Parlamentarier. Ich freue mich, gemeinsam mit Ihnen parteiübergreifend diesem guten Gesetzentwurf den letzten Schliff zu geben.\n\nLiebe Kollegin Zimmermann, selbstverständlich kann ich lesen, auch die Anträge der Linken. Die in den Gesetzentwurf eingeflochtenen Überprüfungen werden das Parlament auch noch in der nächsten Legislatur beschäftigen. Ich bin geneigt, zu sagen: Wir haben hier eine historische Chance, die entscheidenden Weichen für einen vernetzten, ganzheitlichen, patientenorientierten Ansatz in der Versorgung sterbender und schwerstkranker Menschen zu stellen.\n\nVielen herzlichen Dank.\"\n13562,agnieszka-brugger,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Lieber Herr Außenminister Steinmeier, Sie haben als Deutschlands Chefdiplomat den außenpolitischen Kurs der Bundesregierung in vermehrt schwierigen und stürmischen Zeiten geprägt. Sie haben das mit klarem Kompass, mit einer Balance aus Besonnenheit, Sorge und Entschlossenheit getan. Dafür möchte ich Ihnen im Namen meiner ganzen Fraktion ebenso wie für die sehr gute Zusammenarbeit und auch die faire politische Auseinandersetzung danken, auch wenn wir nicht immer einer Meinung waren.\n\nIm Namen der Grünen wünsche ich Ihnen auch, ohne irgendetwas vorwegnehmen zu wollen, jenes Fingerspitzengefühl, jenen Mut und weiterhin die Gabe, die richtigen Worte zur richtigen Zeit zu finden.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir beraten die Mandate zu den Bundeswehreinsätzen auch immer in den Ausschüssen. Vor zwei Tagen hat ein Kollege im Verteidigungsausschuss gesagt: Wer diesem Mandat nicht zustimmt, muss auch formulieren, was die Alternative ist. - Ich finde, der Kollege aus der Koalition hat mit dieser Aussage völlig recht.\n\nWenn ich mir noch einmal unsere Reden bei den letzten Beratungen dieses Mandats anschaue, stelle ich fest, dass wir immer eine klare Alternative formuliert haben, nämlich zwei sehr klare Bedingungen, unter denen dieses Mandat für uns zustimmungsfähig wäre. Es gibt nämlich zwei sehr große Probleme mit diesem Mandat, das wir im Kern für richtig halten. Es ist den Kräften der Peschmerga gelungen, einige Gebiete zu befreien und andere vor der Terrorherrschaft des sogenannten „Islamischen Staates“ zu beschützen.\n\nEines der beiden gewichtigen Probleme ist die rechtliche Konstruktion. Hier wäre es hanebüchen, auf den anderen Grundgesetzartikel zurückzugreifen. Es wäre besser, sich noch einmal mit der Rechtsprechung des Bundesverfassungsgerichtes zu beschäftigen, das sehr genau dargestellt hat, unter welchen Bedingungen die Bundeswehr im Ausland eingesetzt werden kann. Das Urteil von 1994 sagt: „im Rahmen eines Systems … kollektiver Sicherheit“, also im Rahmen der Europäischen Union, der NATO, der Vereinten Nationen oder beispielsweise der OSZE. Das ist hier explizit nicht der Fall. Die Ausbildungsunterstützung für die Peschmerga leistet die Bundeswehr im Rahmen einer Koalition der Willigen, und das ist kein System kollektiver Sicherheit. Wir können Sie nur wie jedes Jahr auffordern, diesen Fehler endlich zu korrigieren\n\nDas zweite Problem, das wir mit diesem Mandat und mit der Politik, die die Bundesregierung an dieser Stelle macht, haben, ist Folgendes: Wenn man ausbildet und dann sogar noch so viele Waffen und so viel Ausrüstung geliefert hat, dann hat man schon auch eine Verantwortung, sehr genau hinzuschauen, was anschließend damit passiert. Denn es steht natürlich immer die Gefahr im Raum, dass die vermittelten Fähigkeiten und das gelieferte Gerät missbraucht werden. Auch das ist etwas, wozu wir Sie, seit es dieses Mandat gibt, immer wieder befragt haben.\n\nWir haben die Bundesregierung gefragt: Wie reagieren Sie denn eigentlich auf die Berichte der Menschenrechtsorganisationen, dass Peschmerga-Kämpfer nach der Befreiung bestimmter Gebiete Dörfer und Häuser arabischstämmiger Menschen zerstört haben? Was tun Sie eigentlich dagegen - das ist wirklich schon absehbar -, dass die Spannungen innerhalb der Peschmerga, zwischen PUK und KDP, immer größer werden? Wie gehen Sie mit der Regionalregierung um, die wirklich keine demokratische Legitimation mehr hat, oder wie mit den Hinweisen darauf, dass Zivilgesellschaft und Journalisten unterdrückt und eingeschränkt werden?\n\nIch finde schon: Wenn man ausbildet, wenn man Waffen liefert, dann hat man erst recht eine Verantwortung, hier ganz genau hinzuschauen und auch zu handeln.\n\nDenn am Ende des Tages ist natürlich auch die beste Ausbildungsunterstützung nichts wert, wenn ein konsequenter, umsichtiger Beitrag zur Entwicklung des politischen Umfelds fehlt, in dem die Sicherheitskräfte dann agieren sollen.\n\nMan muss doch schon feststellen: Auf die Waffenlieferungen haben Sie sich sehr schnell geeinigt; aber es wäre immer noch so viel mehr möglich, wenn es darum geht, einen ganzheitlichen, engagierten Beitrag zu einer friedlichen Zukunft des Iraks zu leisten. Deutschland hat hier eine hervorgehobene Position: Wir sind Kovorsitzende der AG Stabilisierung, also der Gruppe der Staaten, die sich mit der Frage beschäftigt, wie es eigentlich in den befreiten Gebieten weitergeht. Auch hier fragen wir immer wieder nach: Was tut die Bundesregierung denn konkret?\n\nEs ist ein guter Beitrag, wenn Sie ankündigen, sich schnell darum zu kümmern, dass die Stromversorgung und die Wasserversorgung in Mosul wieder funktionieren, sobald die Stadt - worauf wir alle hoffen - befreit ist. Aber so wichtig diese Infrastrukturprojekte sind - sie ersetzen doch nicht den politischen Beitrag, der darin bestehen muss, hier alle Akteure in die Pflicht zu nehmen und darauf hinzuwirken, dass sie endlich politische Macht teilen, dass die wirtschaftlichen Gewinne fair aufgeteilt werden und dass alle Gruppen sich versöhnen und wieder friedlich zusammenleben können. Da können wir Sie einfach nur auffordern: Tun Sie hier mehr! Es wäre mehr möglich.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Sie sehen, wir sind hier nicht einfach dagegen; wir machen sehr konkrete Vorschläge. Als Sie gerade in Ihrer Rede, Herr Außenminister Steinmeier, noch mal gesagt haben, wie wichtig die Debatten hier im Parlament sind, haben Sie, glaube ich, viele von uns Abgeordneten mit dieser Aussage berührt. Aber ich finde, wenn ihr die Debatten in diesem Parlament wichtig sind, dann sollte die Bundesregierung konstruktive Hinweise aus der Opposition hören und aufnehmen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5758,florian-post,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, Sie haben in Ihrem Antrag sehr viel Richtiges geschrieben. Die KWK ist hocheffizient. Sie ist klima- und ressourcenschonend. Hier herrscht also Übereinstimmung. Sie passt wegen der Ungleichzeitigkeit der Einspeisemaxima von Photovoltaik und Wind auf der einen Seite und dem Wärmebedarf auf der anderen Seite perfekt zur Energiewende. Wenn zusätzlich Speicher zum Einsatz kommen, ist sie perfekt einsetzbar. Man kann sich das hier in Berlin anschauen. Kollege Fritz Felgentreu - er ist leider nicht mehr hier im Saal - hat mir gesagt, dass in Neukölln Berlins größter Speicher steht. Die KWK ist also eine sehr interessante und hocheffiziente Technologie.\n\nNatürlich ist es so - auch das haben Sie richtig erkannt -, dass viele KWK-Anlagen in Not sind. Gerade in der öffentlichen Versorgung und bei gasbefeuerten Anlagen haben wir in der Tat ein großes Problem. Auch sind wir momentan mit 16 Prozent erzeugtem Strom aus KWK-Anlagen weit vom Ausbauziel von 25 Prozent entfernt, das im Koalitionsvertrag verankert ist; das gebe ich hier gerne zu. Aber wir arbeiten daran, dieses Problem zu lösen. Wir sind uns jedoch darin einig, dass es volkswirtschaftlich kompletter Unsinn wäre, das künftige Förderregime von KWK-Anlagen dahin gehend zu gestalten, dass bereits geförderte Anlagen vom Netz gehen. Daher möchte ich dafür plädieren, dass wir als einen Schwerpunkt zunächst etwas im Bestand tun und den Fokus auf die öffentliche Versorgung legen.\n\nNatürlich wäre es zu schön, wenn wir uns nur einig wären. Es gibt in Ihrem Antrag in der Tat ein paar Punkte, denen ich hier nicht uneingeschränkt zustimmen kann. Natürlich können wir die Novellierung des KWKG nicht losgelöst von der Diskussion über das Strommarktdesign betrachten. Hier sind eine ganzheitliche Betrachtung und auch eine Analyse notwendig, woher die Probleme bei der KWK eigentlich kommen. Momentan haben Gaskraftwerke kaum eine Chance, nicht zuletzt wegen des daniederliegenden CO2-Zertifikatehandels. Durch die kohlebefeuerten KWK-Anlagen werden diese Kraftwerke natürlich noch unwirtschaftlicher. In der Folge laufen die gasbetriebenen Anlagen zu wenig, um wirtschaftlich zu sein.\n\nDie Bundesregierung arbeitet gerade - das ist bekannt - im Rahmen des Grün- und Weißbuchprozesses an der Novellierung des Strommarktdesigns. Dabei gilt für uns, ganzheitlich betrachtet, natürlich das Ziel, auf dem Energiemarkt Versorgungssicherheit herzustellen, die Energie bezahlbar zu halten und die klimaschonende Erzeugung von Energie zu sichern.\n\nWir fordern eine Einhaltung des Zeitplans und ganz entschieden die Vorlage eines entsprechenden Gesetzentwurfs. Hier machen wir als AG Wirtschaft und Energie der SPD-Fraktion Druck, noch vor der Sommerpause einen Entwurf vorzulegen. Hier geht es uns um die konkrete Reihenfolge. Wir warten also zunächst die Grundsatzentscheidung ab und klären die Fragen betreffend die Kapazitätsmärkte, Stichwort „Energy-only-Markt 2.0“, oder wie auch immer das Kind heißen mag. Dann werden wir uns sofort an die Novellierung des KWK-Gesetzes machen.\n\nSelbstverständlich.\n\nZunächst einmal wird es eine KWKG-Novelle geben. Das ist also nicht fraglich. Sie wird kommen. Unsere Forderung ist - ich habe das gerade schon in meiner Rede klargemacht -, den Gesetzentwurf noch vor der Sommerpause vorzulegen. Sollte das, wie Sie es vermuten, aus irgendwelchen Gründen eventuell nicht erfolgen können, behalten wir uns als SPD-AG Wirtschaft und Energie selbstverständlich das Recht vor - dann auch gerne mit Ihnen zusammen; in Ihrem Antrag sind sehr viele Punkte enthalten, die ich gut finde -, im Parlament einen eigenen Gesetzentwurf einzubringen, um im Sinne der Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung sinnvoll fortzufahren und diese zu erhalten.\n\nSie haben Ihre Zwischenfrage vor der nächsten Passage meiner Rede gestellt. Ich hatte mir nämlich auch vorgenommen, zu sagen: Wir werden es als SPD-Bundestagsfraktion bzw. als AG Wirtschaft und Energie der SPD nicht zulassen, dass durch zeitliche Verzögerung die Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung torpediert wird. Aber wir sagen ganz klar: Der Schwerpunkt liegt in der öffentlichen Versorgung und in der Bestandssicherung sowie in der Modernisierung der Netze. Dabei ist für uns klar, dass der Deckel der KWK-Förderung von 750 Millionen Euro, wie er derzeit bemessen ist, diskutiert werden muss.\n\nEin weiterer Kritikpunkt in Ihrem Antrag ist die Forderung, dass KWK auf Basis von Braun- oder Steinkohle künftig nicht mehr gefördert werden soll. Das kann ich so nicht teilen. Denn wenn ich Ihren Antrag richtig verstehe, dann gilt dies sowohl für Neubau als auch für die von Ihnen geforderte Bestandssicherung. Darin erkenne ich einen gewissen Widerspruch.\n\nEine Einschränkung der KWK-Kohleförderung wäre meines Erachtens mit der Gefahr verbunden, dass man dadurch die noch wirtschaftlichen oder gerade so mit -positiven Deckungsbeiträgen arbeitenden Kohle-KWK-Anlagen in die Unwirtschaftlichkeit treibt, aber damit nicht zwingend erreicht, dass die bisher unwirtschaftlichen gasbefeuerten KWK-Anlagen wirtschaftlich werden. Hier wäre in der Tat der KWK in Gänze kein Dienst getan.\n\nIch plädiere nicht dafür, undifferenziert nach dem Gießkannenprinzip vorzugehen. Selbstverständlich können wir bei der Ausgestaltung des Gesetzentwurfs darüber sprechen, wie wir bei den unterschiedlichen Brennstoffarten mit der Förderhöhe vorgehen. Aber ich plädiere dafür, dass wir diskriminierungsfrei an diese Sache herangehen, statt a priori eine bestimmte Brennstoffart zu diskriminieren.\n\nDas 25-Prozent-Ziel, das Sie gut finden und an dem Sie auch festhalten, nur mit Gas-, Biogas- und Biomasse-KWK zu erreichen, würde bedeuten, dass die Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung insgesamt teurer würde, was letztendlich über die KWK-Umlage der Stromverbraucher zu zahlen hätte. Das wollen wir nach Möglichkeit verhindern.\n\nIch möchte noch kurz die Eigenverbrauchsregelung ansprechen. Sie fordern, die Belastung von eigenverbrauchtem Strom mit Teilen der EEG-Umlage zurückzunehmen. In diesem Zusammenhang möchte ich für die AG Wirtschaft und Energie der SPD noch einmal betonen, dass für uns KWK nicht gleich KWK ist. Mein Schwerpunkt liegt, wie gesagt, in der öffentlichen Versorgung.\n\nIn der Tat muss man auch sogenannte Renditemodelle gerade im Bereich von Mini-BHKW-Anlagen betrachten, die teilweise in Gastronomie- und Hotelbetrieben eingesetzt werden und mit denen hohe zweistellige Renditen erzielt werden. Hier kann man die Axt anlegen, weil eine weitergehende Förderung nicht unbedingt im Sinne des Erfinders ist, noch dazu, wenn solche Anlagen in Gebieten errichtet werden, wo Fernwärmenetze bestehen und dadurch die öffentliche Versorgung kannibalisiert wird.\n\nIch denke, dass wir in der Summe nicht sehr weit auseinanderliegen. Wir sind uns einig, dass wir die Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung erhalten und weiter ausbauen wollen. Wenn der Gesetzentwurf vorliegt - ich bin sehr optimistisch, dass er noch vor der Sommerpause vorliegen wird -, freue ich mich auf weitere Diskussionen mit Ihnen im Ausschuss und im Plenum des Parlaments.\n\nDanke für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n11111,ozcan-mutlu,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Letzten Sonntag habe ich am Brandenburger Tor im Rahmen des Umweltfestes beim Berliner Volksbegehren „Volksentscheid Fahrrad“ unterschrieben\n\nund mit vielen Freunden Unterschriften gesammelt. Zahlreiche Berlinerinnen und Berliner erachten dieses Volksbegehren für bitter notwendig, weil der rot-schwarze Berliner Senat Radfahrerinnen und Radfahrer seit Jahren und Jahrzehnten wie Stiefkinder behandelt. Fahrradfahren in Berlin ist eine Mutprobe und das nicht nur wegen der vielen Baustellen. Deshalb hoffe ich, dass viele Berlinerinnen und Berliner bei dem Volksbegehren „Volksentscheid Fahrrad“ mitmachen und endlich den Berliner rot-schwarzen Senat zur Bewegung zwingen.\n\nIch möchte heute aber nicht über Mutproben oder über die Versäumnisse des Berliner Senats sprechen. Dazu würde meine Zeit einfach nicht reichen. Ich möchte darüber sprechen, wie wichtig es ist, dass Bürgerinnen und Bürger die Möglichkeit haben, sich an politischen Entscheidungen zu beteiligen und diese voranzutreiben, wenn Regierungen Fehlentscheidungen treffen, Fehlentscheidungen, die durch Bürgerbeteiligungen und Volksbegehren oder Volksentscheide verhindert oder korrigiert werden können.\n\nWieder zwei Beispiele aus meiner Heimat Berlin: der Volksentscheid zur Offenlegung der Verträge der Berliner Wasserbetriebe oder der Volksentscheid zum Tempelhofer Feld. Bei beiden haben die Berlinerinnen und Berliner den Senat erfolgreich in die Schranken gewiesen - zu Recht, wie ich finde.\n\nWir Grüne sind eine Partei der Basisdemokratie und der Bürgerbeteiligung. Demokratie ist auf aktive, interessierte und verantwortungsbewusste Bürgerinnen und Bürger angewiesen. Wer auch außerhalb von Wahlen die Möglichkeit hat, sich einzubringen, nimmt viel motivierter am politischen Geschehen teil.\n\nNicht zuletzt sind Bürgerbeteiligungen und Volksinitiativen daher wichtige Instrumente dafür, Menschen aktiver an der politischen Willensbildung und an Entscheidungen teilhaben zu lassen, und wirken so auch der Politikverdrossenheit, die sich in unserem Land tatsächlich breitmacht, entgegen.\n\nDeshalb muss unsere Demokratie durch Bürgerbeteiligung und direkte Demokratie ergänzt werden, nicht nur in Städten und Kommunen, nicht nur in Ländern, sondern auch im Bund.\n\nAus diesem Grunde werden wir dem Antrag der Linken „Demokratie für alle“ zustimmen,\n\naber nicht ihrem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf.\n\nWir Grüne haben bereits vor über zehn Jahren den Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Einführung einer dreistufigen Volksgesetzgebung mit Volksinitiative, Volksbegehren und Volksentscheid auf Bundesebene vorgelegt. Hätte es diese in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten schon gegeben, würden wir heute vielleicht keine Debatten mehr über die Ehe für alle führen; denn zwei Drittel der Deutschen befürworten längst die Öffnung der Ehe für gleichgeschlechtliche Lebenspartnerinnen und Lebenspartner. Das ist nur ein Beispiel, bei dem deutlich sichtbar wird, wie sehr die Bundesregierung manchmal vom Willen der Wählerinnen und Wähler entfernt ist und in konservativen Denkmustern verharrt.\n\nAuch wenn wir, liebe Kollegen von den Linken, mit Ihrem Gesetzentwurf in weiten Teilen einverstanden sind, müssen wir aber in den entscheidenden Punkten widersprechen, und deshalb enthalten wir uns. So setzen Sie zum Beispiel für eine erfolgreiche Volksinitiative 100 000 Unterschriften und für ein erfolgreiches Volksbegehren 1 Million Unterschriften in neun Monaten an. Für einen erfolgreichen Volksentscheid reicht Ihnen die Mehrheit der Abstimmenden aus; ein Quorum gibt es nicht. Diese Schwellen bzw. diese Kriterien halten wir für zu niedrig angesetzt.\n\nIch erinnere hier an die Unterschriftenkampagne gegen die doppelte Staatsbürgerschaft von Herrn Roland Koch, die uns integrationspolitisch um Jahrzehnte zurückgeworfen hat. Stellen Sie sich vor: Menschen hätten so etwas als Volksbegehren gebracht und hätten das Staatsbürgerschaftsrecht sogar noch verschärft!\n\nSosehr wir auch Bürgerbeteiligung und Volksentscheide befürworten, möchten wir aber auch davor warnen, durch niedrige Schwellen oder durch eine Gesetzesänderung ein Einfallstor zu schaffen, was wir später in Einzelfällen vielleicht sogar bedauern. Deshalb sind wir der Meinung: Hier müssen andere Schwellen angesetzt werden:\n\nErstens: 400 000 Unterschriften für eine Volksinitiative.\n\nZweitens: Unterschriften von 5 Prozent der Wahlberechtigten - das wären derzeit etwa 3,2 Millionen Menschen - in sechs Monaten für ein Volksbegehren.\n\nDrittens: ein Zustimmungsquorum von 15 Prozent für Volksentscheide. So war es in unserem Gesetzentwurf vorgesehen, der leider keine Mehrheit gefunden hat. Ein solches Quorum würde nämlich auch verhindern, dass sich partikulare Interessen mancher Gruppen durchsetzen können.\n\nEin weiterer Punkt in Ihrem Gesetzentwurf, dem wir nicht zustimmen können, ist, dass Sie verbindliche Volksabstimmungen zu sämtlichen Änderungen der vertraglichen Grundlagen der Europäischen Union vorsehen. Als proeuropäische Partei lehnen wir diese Regelung ab, da wir die im Grundgesetz verankerte tiefere Integration von Europa wollen. Dass das auch wichtig ist, zeigt sich, wenn man bedenkt, was für eine antieuropäische Stimmung derzeit in vielen Ländern und teilweise auch in unserem Land herrscht.\n\nUm es deutlicher zu sagen: Unsere Enthaltung zum Gesetzentwurf bedeutet nicht, dass wir gegen Volksentscheide sind, sondern dass wir Kritik an der konkreten Ausgestaltung des vorliegenden Gesetzentwurfs haben. Wir halten es für problematisch, die Schranken so niedrig anzusetzen; aber ich bin trotzdem optimistisch.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. Hier im Hause gibt es im Grunde hinsichtlich der Einführung von Volksinitiativen durchaus eine Mehrheit. Vielleicht sollten wir uns hinsetzen und gemeinsam darüber nachdenken, wie wir diese grundsätzliche Idee der Einführung von Volksinitiativen auch in diesem Haus mehrheitsfähig machen können, um sie durchzusetzen und beschließen zu können.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n2862,rita-schwarzeluhr-sutter,\"Ich freue mich über den Antrag der Regierungsfraktionen und der Fraktion Bundnis 90/Die Grünen und bedanke mich im Namen der Bundesregierung über das darin zum Ausdruck kommende Lob für unsere Arbeit.\n\nWir können nicht hinnehmen, dass jedes Jahr 20 000 Elefanten illegal abgeschossen werden. Und wir können nicht zulassen, dass die Nachfrage nach Nashornpulver in Vietnam zum Aussterben des Nashorns führt.\n\nDie Wilderei auf Elefanten und Nashörner hat dramatische Ausmaße angenommen. Das ist schlimm für die Tiere, die Natur und die Ökosysteme. Diese Wilderei und der illegale Wildtierhandel bringen international organisierte Kriminalität in Regionen mit schwacher, zum Teil bestechlicher Verwaltung. Sie nimmt den Menschen, die mit den Tieren leben, die Chance, einen Nutzen daraus zu ziehen. Sie bringt Destabilisierung und einen Verlust an Sicherheit mit sich.\n\nDie Bundesregierung hat daraus vier Schlüsse gezogen:\n\nErstens. Wir müssen dieses wichtige Thema inter-national auf der höchsten Regierungsebene in Ursprungs-, Transit- und Abnehmerländern ansprechen.\n\nDas haben wir getan bei den Vereinten Nationen, wo die Erarbeitung einer UN-Resolution im September dieses Jahres vorgesehen ist. Wir haben uns für den „African Elephant Summit“ in Gaborone eingesetzt, der zehn dringliche Maßnahmen zum Elefantenschutz formuliert hat. Bundesministerin Hendricks hat an dem Londoner Gipfel im Februar dieses Jahres gegen den illegalen Wildtierhandel persönlich teilgenommen. Gerade ist die deutsche Delegation von der ersten Umweltversammlung der Vereinten Nationen zurückgekehrt, die letzte Woche in Nairobi stattgefunden hat. Zu den wichtigen, von mehr als 190 Umweltministern behandelten Themen gehört auch der illegale Wildtierhandel. Dieses internationale Momentum muss genutzt und erhalten werden.\n\nDas Zweite ist: Bei den Beschlüssen auf internationaler Ebene darf es nicht bleiben. Ihnen müssen Taten folgen. In Afrika und Asien ist in Folge dieser -Beschlüsse einiges geschehen. Das stellen wir im -Rahmen der Diskussionen unter dem Washingtoner Artenschutzübereinkommen und den dort vorgelegten Berichten fest. Ferner werden wir im März 2015 -Bilanz ziehen; Botswana hat zu einem weiteren Treffen eingeladen, um zu erörtern, ob die Teilnehmer der früheren Konferenzen ihre Zusagen eingehalten haben.\n\nDrittens: Wir müssen den Menschen in den Ursprungsländern helfen, mit den gewaltigen Problemen fertigzuwerden.\n\nIm Rahmen der Entwicklungshilfe und mit ressortübergreifenden Antiwilderei-Maßnahmen gehen wir darauf ein. Deutschland stellt dafür 240 Millionen Euro zur Verfügung. Wegen der Details verweise ich auf die Drucksache 18/1243. Auch andere Staaten -sowie die Europäische Union und die UNDP sollen und wollen Antiwildereimaßnahmen inklusive nationaler Sicherheitsstrategien in Maßnahmen der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit integrieren.\n\nViertes: Wir müssen die internationale Zusammenarbeit bei der Verbrechensbekämpfung in Bezug auf die Wilderei verbessern. Dazu soll unter anderem das Mandat der Konventionen erweitert werden, die sich mit grenzüberschreitender Kriminalität befassen.\n\nDie illegale Wilderei hat ungeahnte Dimensionen erreicht. Wir brauchen handfeste Antworten und entschlossene Maßnahmen gegen diesen Sumpf.\n\nDer Antrag der Fraktion Die Linke enthält Übereinstimmungen mit dem der CDU/CSU, SPD und Bündnis 90/Die Grünen. Allerdings sind darin einige Punkte enthalten, denen ich mich nicht anschließen kann. Lassen Sie mich zwei herausgreifen:\n\nDie Vernichtung von beschlagnahmtem Elfenbein ist sicherlich ein sinnvolles Zeichen für solche Staaten, die Ziel- oder Transitland illegalen Elfenbeins sind. Dazu gehört Deutschland aber gerade nicht. Ich nehme im Übrigen Bezug auf die detaillierten Erläuterungen in der bereits erwähnten Drucksache 18/1243. Ich glaube, dass die in dem anderen Antrag genannten Beiträge viel eher zur Bewältigung dieser Krise beitragen.\n\nZweitens fordert der Antrag der Fraktion Die Linke ein dauerhaftes EU-weites Ex- und Importverbot von Produkten geschützter Tierarten sowie ein Verbot des innergemeinschaftlichen Handels. Wir wollen das Kind nicht mit dem Bade ausschütten. Der Handelsartenschutz sollte auf die Naturverträglichkeit des Handels mit Tieren und Pflanzen hinarbeiten, das heißt sicherstellen bzw. helfen, dass Entnahmen die frei lebenden Populationen nicht schädigen, im Übrigen aber Handel zulassen. Es gibt sehr gewichtige Gründe, dieses Prinzip im Grundsatz beizubehalten. Viele -Nationen leben von der Vermarktung nachhaltig bewirtschafteter Ressourcen. Die Forderung, wie sie von der Fraktion Die Linke gestellt ist, hätte nach meiner\n\nErfahrung auf europäischer Ebene nicht den Hauch einer Unterstützung zu erwarten und wäre im Zweifel in dieser pauschalen Form auch nicht mit der WTO zu vereinbaren.\"\n8275,christian-lange,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Kollegin Renner, ich beantworte Ihre Frage 39 wie folgt: Das wegen des Verdachts der Bildung einer kriminellen Vereinigung geführte Ermittlungsverfahren der Staatsanwaltschaft Bamberg gegen eine in Bamberg und Umgebung agierende rechtsextremistische Personenvereinigung ist dem Generalbundesanwalt nach Vorlage der Akten gemäß Nummer 204 Absatz 2 der Richtlinien für das Strafverfahren und das Bußgeldverfahren seit Anfang Juli 2015 bekannt. Der Generalbundesanwalt hat in diesem Zusammenhang einen Prüfvorgang angelegt. Die Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Bamberg und die ermittlungsführende Kriminalpolizeiinspektion Oberfranken haben das zuständige Referat des Generalbundesanwalts seither fortlaufend über die weiteren Ermittlungen und deren Ergebnisse, insbesondere während der laufenden Exekutivmaßnahmen am 21. Oktober 2015, informiert. Diese enge Zusammenarbeit mit den Landesjustiz- und Landespolizeibehörden gewährleistet, dass der Generalbundesanwalt auch beim weiteren Fortgang des Verfahrens seine Zuständigkeit kontinuierlich anhand des aktuellen Ermittlungsstandes prüfen kann.\n\nDas waren zwei Fragen an mich. Die erste Frage, Frau Kollegin Renner, ist identisch mit Ihrer zweiten schriftlichen Frage, die Sie gestellt haben, nämlich mit der Frage 40. Frau Präsidentin, ich würde sie gerne beantworten, allerdings dann gleich, indem ich die Frage 40 beantworte.\n\nGenau.\n\nIch möchte die Frage 40, die zugleich gerade Ihre erste Frage war, wie folgt beantworten: Aus dem bisher mitgeteilten Sachverhalt - einschließlich der Ergebnisse der Exekutivmaßnahmen vom 21. Oktober 2015 - lässt sich noch kein Anfangsverdacht für von der Gruppierung geplante oder vorbereitete terroristische Katalogtaten im Sinne von § 120 Absatz 1 Nummer 6 des Gerichtsverfassungsgesetzes in Verbindung mit § 129 a Absatz 1 und Absatz 2 des Strafgesetzbuches entnehmen.\n\nNamentlich ein ausländerfeindlich motivierter Einsatz der sichergestellten pyrotechnischen Sprengmittel gegen Asylbewerber- und Flüchtlingsunterkünfte für ein Brandstiftungs- oder Sprengstoffverbrechen und/oder gegen Menschen, um diese zu töten oder schwer zu verletzen, lässt sich derzeit nicht mit der für eine Verfahrens­übernahme erforderlichen Wahrscheinlichkeit belegen. Das gilt auch für mutmaßlich geplante Anschläge auf sogenannte linke Projekte, auf die Sie abgestellt haben.\n\nInsofern bleiben die weiteren Ermittlungen abzuwarten, auch im Hinblick auf solche Umstände, anhand derer die verfahrensgegenständliche Gruppierung möglicherweise als kriminelle Vereinigung von besonderer Bedeutung im Sinne des § 120 Absatz 2 Nummer 1, § 74 a Absatz 1 Nummer 4 GVG in Verbindung mit § 129 Absatz 1 des Strafgesetzbuches angesehen werden kann. - Das ist die Antwort auf Ihre Frage 40 und auf Ihre erste Nachfrage.\n\nZu Ihrer zweiten Nachfrage kann ich sagen, dass der Generalbundesanwalt selbstverständlich die aktuelle Rechtslage beachtet und entsprechend handelt.\n\nFrau Kollegin, Sie wissen, dass die Beurteilung, ob ein Anfangsverdacht vorliegt, wenn es um in die Zuständigkeit der Bundesjustiz fallende Straftaten geht, der Bundesjustiz und damit dem Generalbundesanwalt obliegt und nicht der Bundesregierung.\"\n4174,christian-flisek,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Als 1997 das Informations- und Kommunikationsdienste-Gesetz vom deutschen Gesetzgeber verabschiedet wurde, haben wir tatsächlich Neuland betreten. Dieses Gesetz war eine -Pioniertat. Es war das erste spezifische Internetgesetz. Man hat damals gleichsam Maßstäbe für ganz Europa gesetzt - und das, wohlgemerkt, in einer Zeit, als es Google noch nicht gab und jemand wie Mark Zuckerberg mit 13 Jahren vielleicht noch andere Dinge im Kopf hatte als die Gründung von Facebook; von Twitter, -Spotify und Skype ganz zu schweigen.\n\nZehn Jahre lang spiegelte dieses Gesetz die föderale Ordnung unseres Landes wider mit dem Nebeneinander von Teledienstegesetz und Mediendienste-Staatsvertrag. Der Bund hat die Regelung der Individualkommunikation für sich reklamiert, die Länder haben die Zuständigkeit für die Massenkommunikation für sich beansprucht. Dieses Nebeneinander und die daraus resultierenden Abgrenzungsschwierigkeiten waren eher eine Arbeitsbeschaffungsmaßnahme für Rechtswissenschaftler; es war keine vernünftige Regelung.\n\nSeit 2007 werden die Regelungen zu diesem Bereich im Wesentlichen im Telemediengesetz zusammengefasst. Dieses Gesetz regelt die Anbieterkennzeichnung, die Informationspflichten, den bereichsspezifischen Datenschutz für das Internet und eben auch die Providerhaftung.\n\nWesentliche Weichenstellungen bei der Providerhaftung haben sich somit seit 1997 eigentlich nicht verändert. Die Rechtsprechung hat darauf aufgebaut und die Grundsätze weiterentwickelt. Das wurde in der heutigen Debatte auch schon angesprochen. Was sich allerdings verändert hat, ist die technische Entwicklung. Durch leistungsfähige, vor allen Dingen mobile Endgeräte ist der Bedarf an WLANs, in die wir uns überall einschalten können, gestiegen. Auch das Nutzerverhalten hat sich weiterentwickelt. Streaming mag hier als ein Stichwort genügen.\n\nAuf diese Entwicklung hat sich die Koalition eingelassen. Sie hat sich vorgenommen, hierauf angemessen zu reagieren. Wir wollen ein mobiles Internet in ganz Deutschland für jedermann verfügbar machen. Wir wollen das Potenzial lokaler WLANs nutzen, vor allem deswegen, weil wir dies als einen ganz wesentlichen Beitrag zum digitalen Fortschritt in Deutschland sehen. Ich bin dem Kollegen Held dankbar, dass er Passau als Beispiel zitiert hat. Danke für diesen Werbeblock. Das ist natürlich ein schönes Beispiel für die funktionierende und historisch gewachsene pfälzisch-bayerische Freundschaft.\n\nZu dem notwendigen Breitbandausbau gehört auch eine Novellierung des Telemediengesetzes. Das eine hat mit dem anderen viel zu tun. Wir werden die Haftungsregelungen so ausgestalten, dass der Betrieb eines WLANs nicht zu einem unkalkulierbaren Haftungsrisiko wird, aber auch nicht zu einer Einladung zu massenhaften Rechtsverletzungen. Berücksichtigt man dann noch, dass eine freie und unbeobachtete Kommunikation Verfassungsrang hat, dann genügen, glaube ich, diese wenigen Aussagen, um das sehr komplexe Problemfeld zu skizzieren und deutlich zu machen. Wir werden als Große Koalition auf einen angemessenen Ausgleich der Interessen aller Beteiligten hinarbeiten. Die Nutzer spielen hier eine wesentliche Rolle, die WLAN-Betreiber, aber eben auch die Rechteinhaber.\n\nLieber Konstantin von Notz, bis zu Ihrer Rede hätte ich eigentlich vorgehabt, auch die Grünen für diesen konstruktiven Beitrag zur Debatte zu loben. Die einleitende Rede war dann weniger konstruktiv.\n\nIch betone aber ausdrücklich, dass ein solcher Beitrag von uns ernst genommen wird, weil er - darauf wurde ja bereits vom Kollegen Held hingewiesen - eben mitten aus der Zivilgesellschaft stammt.\n\nIch hoffe, dass ich mit diesem Lob durch die Blume deutlich gemacht habe, dass wir diesem Gesetzentwurf nicht zustimmen werden, schlicht und ergreifend deshalb, weil wir in der Großen Koalition einen eigenen erarbeiten werden, der noch einige weitere Aspekte, die dringend notwendig sind, berücksichtigt und genau für diesen angemessenen Ausgleich der Interessen aller Beteiligten steht.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n10625,andreas-mattfeldt,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Bevor ich nun auf den Sachverhalt zur Abschaffung von Sanktionen für SGB-II-Empfänger eingehe, lassen Sie mich erst einmal ein wenig über die Sinnhaftigkeit dieser heutigen Debatte sprechen. Sie lässt mich schon ein wenig zweifeln, ob Sie, die Linke, überhaupt daran interessiert sind - Kollege Schiefner hat es eben gesagt -, allen Petenten die gleiche Aufmerksamkeit zuzubilligen, oder ob Sie nur dort aktiv sind, wo es Ihnen politisch in den Kram passt.\n\nAus gutem Grund war und ist es gängige Praxis, die Sammelübersichten zu Petitionen nicht im Plenum des Bundestages, sondern im zuständigen Ausschuss zu beraten. Über jede einzelne Petition hier im Plenum zu debattieren - das muss man einfach sagen -, wäre weder inhaltlich noch organisatorisch noch zeitlich zu leisten. Dann müsste sich das Plenum des Bundestages nur noch mit Petitionen befassen.\n\nDarum sind die Petitionen im Petitionsausschuss genau richtig aufgehoben. Dort haben wir den Raum, um auf sachlicher Ebene auf jede Petition einzugehen.\n\nKommen wir einmal zu einem Beispiel in der Übersicht. In der Petition 60 schreibt der Petent in der Begründung zur Abschaffung der Hartz-IV-Sanktionen, diese seien unverantwortlich gegenüber den Einzahlern. Wissen Sie, als Familienvater, als Haushaltspolitiker, aber vor allem auch als jemand, der nicht sein ganzes Leben im oder vom öffentlichen Dienst gelebt hat, interpretiere ich es für die fleißigen Einzahler genauso, aber natürlich in eine andere Richtung.\n\nAuch ich sage: Eine Abschaffung von Sanktionen ist unverantwortlich und setzt genau das falsche Signal. Deshalb ist Ihre Forderung hier heute ganz deutlich abzulehnen.\n\nEine Abschaffung der Sanktionen wäre unverantwortlich gegenüber denjenigen, die jeden Tag hart arbeiten, damit dieser Sozialstaat und damit auch die Hartz-IV-Leistungen finanziert werden.\n\nIm Sinne des Forderns und des Förderns wollen wir Hartz-IV-Beziehern helfen, wieder eine Arbeit zu bekommen. Die gute Lage am Arbeitsmarkt mit der geringsten Zahl an Arbeitslosen seit 25 Jahren und der höchsten Zahl der Beschäftigten - es sind fast 44 Millionen Menschen - und 640 000 offenen Stellen bietet hierzu eine ausgesprochen gute Ausgangslage.\n\nDies war nicht immer so. Ich gebe ja zu, dass es 2005 bei über 5 Millionen Arbeitslosen weitaus schwieriger war, nach Verlust des Jobs wieder in der Arbeitswelt Fuß zu fassen.\n\nHeute sieht das zum Glück anders aus, dank kluger Politik und auch dank der Einführung der Hartz-IV-Gesetze, die wir, die Union, immer mitgetragen haben. Sie von den Grünen haben sie übrigens mit eingeführt; davon wollen Sie heute anscheinend nichts mehr wissen.\n\nHeutzutage fällt es auch bei geringerer Qualifikation erheblich leichter, einen Job zu finden, als 2005. Als Unternehmer in der Lebensmittelbranche weiß ich, wovon ich hier spreche.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, der Steuerzahler investiert erheblich, um gerade von Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit betroffenen Menschen mit Weiter- und Fortbildungsmaßnahmen zu helfen. Dies geschieht natürlich in der Erwartung, dass diese Maßnahmen dazu beitragen, dass der von Arbeitslosigkeit Betroffene - man darf übrigens sagen: auch mit eigener Anstrengung - wieder einen Job findet.\n\nIhr Vorschlag, keine Sanktionen auszusprechen, wenn zum Beispiel vereinbarte Termine beim Jobcenter ignoriert, Weiterbildungsmaßnahmen grundlos abgebrochen oder Vorstellungstermine nicht wahrgenommen werden, würde bedeuten, dass wir die Hälfte des Prinzips „Fördern und Fordern“ einfach streichen. Das Fordern, das zumindest bei den meisten Menschen auch notwendig ist - das gilt übrigens auch für mich ganz persönlich -, fände dann nicht mehr statt. Wenn Sie die Sanktionen abschaffen, fordern Sie die Menschen nicht mehr. Das bedeutet für mich, Sie geben diese Menschen de facto auf.\n\nWir von der Union geben keinen Menschen auf, auch und gerade, weil wir wissen, dass es Lebenssituationen gibt, die nicht einfach sind.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich kann und will den fleißigen Mitarbeitern in unserem Unternehmen nicht erklären, warum sie jeden Tag pünktlich zur Arbeit erscheinen müssen, während ein Hartz-IV-Empfänger, wenn es nach Ihnen ginge, ohne jede Gegenleistung bedingungs- und sanktionslos jeden Monat sein Geld bekommen soll.\n\nIch weiß, Sie wollen das nicht hören - einige, gerade die Mitglieder des Petitionsausschusses, wissen, dass ich Mitglied im Club der deutlichen Aussprache bin; daher müssen Sie das ertragen -: Ja, ich habe es in unserem Unternehmen leider nicht nur einmal erlebt, dass es eben auch Langzeitarbeitslose gibt, denen man eine echte Chance auf dem Arbeitsmarkt bzw. eine Chance, in den Arbeitsmarkt zurückzukehren, geben möchte, diese aber häufig nicht einmal zum Vorstellungsgespräch erscheinen oder schon nach ein oder zwei Tagen - bitte verzeihen Sie meine Ausdrucksweise - einfach ab und an keinen Bock mehr haben, zu arbeiten.\n\nNatürlich - das weiß ich - ist das nicht die Mehrheit. Aber gerade für diese schwierigen Fälle brauchen wir Sanktionen, übrigens auch - diese Menschen vergessen Sie in Ihrer Argumentation immer -, um uns vor diejenigen zu stellen, die ernsthaft daran interessiert sind, wieder einen Job zu finden. Das ist zum Glück die große Mehrheit.\n\nAber selbstverständlich.\n\nLiebe Frau Müller-Gemmeke, vielleicht haben Sie nicht richtig zugehört.\n\nSie interpretieren meine Worte so, wie Sie es gerne hätten. Die Lebenswirklichkeit sieht eben anders aus, als Sie sie darstellen. Gerade wir von der Union stellen sehr viel Geld für Weiterbildungsmaßnahmen bereit, um die Langzeitarbeitslosen, bei denen es manches Mal wirklich Vermittlungshemmnisse gibt, so zu qualifizieren, dass sie eine Arbeit bzw. eine Beschäftigung aufnehmen können.\n\nFrau Müller-Gemmeke, wir wissen aber, dass der Mensch so ist, wie er ist. Der Mensch braucht das ein oder andere Mal - gerade wenn er seit vielen Jahren beschäftigungslos ist - auch einen gewissen Druck, damit er Termine wahrnimmt, zu Vorstellungsgesprächen erscheint und diese Maßnahmen aufnimmt, und ich darf Ihnen sagen: Wenn die Gesellschaft bereit ist, dem jeweiligen in Not befindlichen Menschen Mittel für einen vorübergehenden Zeitraum zu geben, dann ist es doch nun wirklich nicht zu viel verlangt, dass dieser Mensch dann auch etwas zurückgibt.\n\nWenn hier jemand etwas missverstehen will, dann versteht er das Prinzip „Leistung - Gegenleistung“ nicht.\n\n- Nun bin ich dran, Frau Müller-Gemmeke. Wir sollten hier kein Zwiegespräch führen. Ich glaube, das wäre nicht im Sinne des Plenums.\n\nFrau Müller-Gemmeke, ich komme aus der Wirtschaft und weiß sehr wohl, dass es heute Stellen gibt, die eben nicht für jeden Langzeitarbeitslosen geeignet sind. Wir können aber doch nicht die Augen davor verschließen, dass wir in Deutschland 640 000 unbesetzte Stellen haben, und das sind nicht nur hochqualifizierte Stellen.\n\nDiese Stellen können auch Langzeitarbeitslosen angeboten und von ihnen in Anspruch genommen werden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, vielleicht sollten wir jetzt auch einmal die Fakten betrachten. Gerade bei den Ausführungen der Grünen und der Linken hat man den Eindruck, als würde in Deutschland permanent sanktioniert werden. Das ist eben nicht Fall. Im Gegenteil: Wir müssen uns manchmal fragen, ob wir hier nicht sogar zu großzügig sind.\n\nSie wissen ganz genau, dass eben nicht immer beim ersten Versäumnis, sondern in fast allen Fällen erst nach der dritten Ermahnung sanktioniert wird.\n\nLediglich 3 Prozent der SGB\u001eII-Empfänger wurden 2015 sanktioniert. Allein hieran sehen Sie, dass diese Motivationshilfe sehr zurückhaltend eingesetzt wird.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Linken und - das muss ich jetzt auch sagen - der Grünen, es bleibt wohl dabei, dass wir von der Union uns um die Langzeitarbeitslosen, die enorme Anstrengungen unternehmen, um wieder einen Job zu finden, und um diejenigen kümmern, die diese sozialen Errungenschaften mit harter Arbeit finanzieren, während Sie ausschließlich die Interessen derjenigen vertreten, die einfach keinerlei Anstrengungen unternehmen wollen, um wieder einen Job zu bekommen.\n\nDeshalb sind die Vorschläge, Sanktionen abzuschaffen, abzulehnen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n12363,rita-stockhofe,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Der Titel „Gentechnikfreiheit Deutschlands sichern“ zeigt schon - das kann man daran gut ablesen -, wie die Politik der Grünen funktioniert. Sie haben ein Schwarz-Weiß-Denken, was sie durch alle Themen tragen. Aber die wenigsten Themen haben nur eine Sichtweise.\n\n- Ja, der kommt jetzt: Ihr Antrag zu den Maissorten ist im Prinzip hinfällig, weil gerade diese Maissorten in Deutschland sowieso nicht angebaut werden dürfen.\n\nGentechnisch veränderte Pflanzen sind auch nur ein ganz kleiner Bestandteil der Biotechnologie. Die Biotechnologie umfasst ein sehr großes Gebiet mit sehr viel Potenzial, das in Deutschland ausgeschöpft werden sollte und nicht von den Grünen verhindert werden darf. Die Forschung in diesem Bereich muss auf jeden Fall möglich sein und bleiben.\n\nGerne erläutere ich Ihnen auch, weswegen.\n\nIn der Biotechnologie gibt es mindestens fünf verschiedene Bereiche. Zwei davon möchte ich Ihnen gerne nennen.\n\nBei der sogenannten Grauen Gentechnik -\n\ndas ist die Umweltbiotechnologie - geht es um die Aufbereitung von Trinkwasser, die Reinigung von Abwasser, die Behandlung von Abfällen,\n\ndie Sanierung kontaminierter Böden und die Abluft- bzw. Abgasreinigung, also um wichtige Themen, die die Zukunft unserer sensibelsten Bereiche betreffen.\n\nWenn wir hier Möglichkeiten der Verbesserung finden, sollten wir diese Chancen nutzen.\n\nBei der Roten Gentechnik ist schon vor Jahren der Fehler gemacht worden, die Entscheidung zu treffen, in Deutschland kein gentechnisch verändertes Insulin herzustellen. Wir kaufen das Insulin jetzt in hoher Qualität gentechnisch verändert in Frankreich ein. Wenn das kein Erfolg ist! Ich hätte die Forschung, Herstellung und Vermarktung dieses Produktes lieber im eigenen Land gesehen.\n\nDie Grünen interessiert es nicht, dass bis heute keine einzige Studie ergeben hat, dass Gentechnik gefährlich ist.\n\nWarum auch? Wenn wieder einmal ein Versuchsfeld mit Genpflanzen zerstört wird, sieht das kaum einer als kriminellen Akt, sondern als heroische Tat des Widerstandes. In der letzten Sitzungswoche ist auch deutlich geworden, dass selbst Einbrüche durch Nichtregierungsorganisationen als Heldentaten gewertet werden.\n\nNGOs als Superlobbyisten genießen bei den Grünen anscheinend grenzenloses Vertrauen. Sie schützen uns vor bösen Machenschaften, vor Genmais, sie retten die Umwelt, die Tiere, schützen uns vor gefährlichen Handelsabkommen der Kapitalisten\n\nund machen das Ganze aus reinem Gutmenschentum. Oder gibt es auch hier Interessen, die einmal hinterfragt werden müssen? Weltverbesserer-NGOs haben ständig Kontakt zu Ministerien und grünen Abgeordneten. Bei Unternehmerverbänden gilt das regelmäßig als Skandal.\n\nWird hier mit zweierlei Maß gemessen?\n\nDie Grünen lassen sich vor den Karren spannen und sind zu einer Lobbyistenpartei geworden.\n\nOder wie beurteilen Sie die Aussage des nordrhein-westfälischen Landwirtschaftsministers Remmel, der sein Landesnaturschutzgesetz - hören Sie jetzt genau zu! - als Geburtstagsgeschenk an den NABU bezeichnet hat.\n\nWenn das nicht schlimm ist, dann weiß ich es nicht. Wer sind dann noch die Lobbyisten, und wer ist dann hier noch die Lobbyistenpartei?\n\nObwohl wir immer älter werden und die Luft, die Wälder und die Gewässer immer sauberer werden - auch durch Gentechnik -, wird von der Opposition regelmäßig der Weltuntergang gepredigt.\n\nUm noch einmal zur Gentechnik an sich zurückzukommen: Hanno Schäfer, Professor für Biodiversität der Pflanzen, schreibt treffend in der Zeit, dass die gentechnische Veränderung von Nutzpflanzen die Biodiversität positiv beeinflussen kann,\n\nund zwar, indem sie die Erträge steigert, sodass auf weniger Fläche mehr produziert werden kann.\n\nSomit muss weniger Fläche beackert werden, und naturnahe Lebensräume können erhalten bleiben.\n\nLebensräume können erhalten bleiben - ich dachte immer, das sei Ihnen wichtig.\n\nWir brauchen die landwirtschaftliche Nutzung von Fläche, um die Menschheit zu ernähren. Aber jede Nutzung von Fläche, egal ob konventionell, bio oder mit gentechnisch veränderten Pflanzen, aber auch durch Bebauung, bedeutet einen Verlust der Vielfalt. Wenn im Vorfeld von Ergebnissen - in diesem Fall von Forschungsergebnissen - bereits Ängste geschürt werden, ohne Potenziale zu erkennen oder zuzulassen, verbauen wir uns die Zukunft Deutschlands. Wir als CDU glauben aber an die Zukunft Deutschlands,\n\nund deshalb sind wir die Zukunft Deutschlands.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n2853,manfred-grund,\"In der „FAZ“ vom 26. Juni hat Heinrich August Winkler in einem Namensartikel unter der Überschrift „Was wir aus der deutschen Geschichte lernen können“ mit Bezug auf die Ukraine-Krise unter anderem Folgendes ausgeführt:\n\n„Vermutlich werden spätere Historiker zu dem Schluss gelangen, dass im Jahre 2014 eine Zwischenphase zu Ende ging - jene Zeit, die vor einem Vierteljahrhundert mit den friedlichen Revolutionen in Ostmitteleuropa begann, im Fall der Berliner Mauer am 9. November 1989 ihr historisches Symbol fand und die Welt mit der Hoffnung erfüllte, dass sich die Ideen der atlantischen Revolutionen des späten 18. Jahrhunderts wenn nicht global, so doch im gesamten Bereich der damals noch existierenden Sowjetunion durchsetzen würden.“\n\nSo weit das Zitat.\n\nDiese Zwischenphase, diese Zwischenzeit ist zu Ende. Putin hat Klarheit geschaffen. Er baut mit seiner Eurasischen Union einen politischen, gesellschaftlichen und wirtschaftlichen Gegenentwurf zur Europäischen Union, zum Westen, auf. Es geht nicht mehr um gegenseitigen Vorteil, um gemeinsame Interessen und Projekte, es geht nicht mehr um „win-win“, es geht -darum, rückwärts begründete russische Interessen durchzusetzen, um den eigenen Einfluss in den Nachbarländern abzusichern.\n\nDie Nachbarländer, insbesondere die Ukraine, Moldau und Georgien, wurden durch uns als EU in einem europäischen Zwischenraum verortet, zwischen Russland und der EU. Dem diente die Nachbarschaftspolitik der EU, in gewissem Sinne auch die bisher ausgehandelten Assoziationsabkommen. Diese Staaten sollten an die EU herangeführt werden, aber in einer Distanz von der EU, eben in einem Zwischeneuropa, geparkt werden. Russland - und nicht die EU - hat seine Nachbarschaft vor die Wahl gestellt. Die von der EU mit der Ukraine, Moldau und Georgien ausgehandelten Assoziationsabkommen, einschließlich der darin vorgesehenen Freihandelsabkommen, sind mit allen Verträgen, die diese Länder mit Russland haben, voll vereinbar, einschließlich des Freihandels und der Freizügigkeit, die im GUS-Raum gelten. Was nicht vereinbar ist, ist die von Russland als Gegenmodell gegründete Eurasische bzw. Zollunion. Zölle und Freihandel gehen natürlich nicht zusammen.\n\nVordergründig, aber nur vordergründig handelt es sich bei der Konkurrenz zwischen europäischer und eurasischer Integration in Osteuropa um eine geopolitische Auseinandersetzung, in der sich Russland auf vermeintliche Sicherheitsinteressen beruft. Für die betroffenen Länder, und dabei besonders auch die Republik Moldau, richtet sich die Politik der europäischen Integration aber tatsächlich nicht gegen Russland. Es ist absurd, anzunehmen, dass das kleine Moldau, das an seiner Neutralität festhält, sich in irgendeiner Weise gegen Russland wendet. Weder in den Worten noch in den Taten der moldauischen Regierung finden Sie irgendeine Wendung gegen Russland.\n\nFür Moldau, aber auch für die Ukraine oder Georgien geht es tatsächlich um etwas ganz anderes als Geopolitik. Es geht um die eigene Modernisierung und Entwicklung. Seit ihrer Unabhängigkeit haben diese Länder Jahrzehnte der Stagnation, der Isolation und des Verfalls erlebt. Die jungen und gut ausgebildeten Menschen verließen und verlassen diese Länder in großer Zahl. Die wirtschaftliche, soziale und demografische Lage aller dieser Länder ist in keiner Weise nachhaltig und langfristig unhaltbar.\n\nSchwache Institutionen und Korruption beschränkten die Entwicklungschancen. In einer Art Pufferzone zwischen West und Ost gewannen diese Länder nie ein Entwicklungsmodell für ihre Zukunft. Das ist es, was Zwischeneuropa für Gesellschaften in diesen Ländern bedeutete: Das Fehlen einer Entwicklungsperspektive. Darin liegt die eigentliche und tiefere Ursache der Krise in Osteuropa. Wir werden diese Krise nur dauerhaft überwinden können, wenn diese Länder eine klare Modernisierungsperspektive erlangen. Diese Modernisierungsperspektive wird es nur mit der europäischen Integration geben.\n\nUngewissheit führt zu Instabilität. Wir haben stets den Grundsatz verteidigt, dass jedes Land selbst entscheiden kann, ob und welchem Integrationsmodell es sich anschließen will. Aber als EU haben wir selbst offengelassen, worin diese Wahl besteht. Heute erleben wir eine massive Propagandakampagne gegen die EU und gegen die europäische Integration in Osteuropa. Das stärkste Argument dieser Kampagne ist, dass die Länder Osteuropas in Putins Eurasische Union willkommen sind, aber nicht in der Europäischer Union. Diesem Argument müssen wir eine klare Absage erteilen. Die Europäische Perspektive wird diesen Konflikt zwischen europäischer und eurasischer Integration nicht verschärfen, sondern die Lage vielmehr klären. Ohne Klarheit in dieser Frage wird es keine dauerhafte Überwindung der Krise in Osteuropa geben.\n\nWenn wir heute die europäische Perspektive der -Republik Moldau bekräftigen, sprechen wir nicht von einer Erweiterung der EU morgen oder übermorgen. Die Voraussetzungen dafür müssen durch die notwendigen Reformen zuerst im Lande selbst geschaffen werden. Die Implementierung des mit der EU geschlossenen Assoziierungsabkommens allein wird Jahre in Anspruch nehmen. Was wir mit der europäischen Perspektive bekräftigen, ist eigentlich eine Selbstverständlichkeit. Wir bestätigen lediglich, was bereits in Artikel 49 des EU-Vertrages enthalten ist: Das Recht jedes europäischen Landes, der EU beizutreten, wenn es die Voraussetzungen dafür erfüllt.\n\nDie Republik Moldau ist ein europäisches Land. Die Republik Moldau hat gemeinsam mit den baltischen Staaten nach dem Zusammenbruch der Sowjetunion seine Unabhängigkeit erlangt. Es teilt mit den baltischen Staaten in ähnlicher Weise die tragischen Erfahrungen des 20. Jahrhunderts. Im Vergleich zu den baltischen Staaten hat sich Moldaus Weg in die EU verspätet. Aber es gibt keinen Grund, weshalb Moldau einen geringeren Anspruch auf eine Zukunft in der EU hätte. Die Mehrheit seiner Bürger hat aufgrund ihrer Herkunft und Geschichte einen Anspruch auf eine EU-Staatsbürgerschaft. Die Frage ist nicht, ob die Moldauer Mitglied in der EU werden, die Frage ist nur, ob ihr Land mit ihnen kommt.\n\nMoldau ist nicht nur geografisch der nächste Nachbar der EU. Moldau hat in vieler Hinsicht auch die größten Fortschritte auf seinem proeuropäischen Kurs erzielt. Das deutlichste Beispiel dafür ist, dass die Republik Moldau bereits seit April - als erstes unter den Ländern der östlichen Partnerschaft - Visafreiheit mit der EU erlangt hat. Das Land wird von einer entschieden proeuropäischen Regierung geführt, die unsere Unterstützung verdient. Die östliche Partnerschaft beruht auf dem Prinzip „Mehr für mehr“. Das darf auch die europäische Perspektive nicht mehr ausschließen. Deshalb bekräftigen wir mit diesem Antrag heute besonders die europäische Perspektive der Republik Moldau. Aber wir setzen damit auch ein Zeichen für ganz Osteuropa, das Zeichen einer neuen Offenheit, ein Zeichen, dass die Alternative von Erweiterungs- und Nachbarschaftspolitik der EU überholt ist.\n\nDie Menschen in Moldau haben lange schwierige Zeiten hinter sich. Sie stehen vor großen Herausforderungen. Wir zwingen niemandem die europäische -Integration auf. Aber wir dürfen auch die Länder nicht im Stich lassen, die sich für Europa entscheiden. Die Republik Moldau und ihre europäische Perspektive verdienen unsere Unterstützung.\"\n14355,valerie-wilms,\"Herr Präsident! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Wo bin ich hier heute Morgen gelandet? Alles still und ruhig. Alles nickert vor sich hin.\n\nDer Maritime Koordinator erzählt uns etwas, bei dem ich mich frage: Ist das überhaupt noch realitätsbezogen,\n\nwas aus dem Wirtschaftsministerium in der Scharnhorststraße, Ecke Invalidenstraße auftaucht, oder sind Sie in einer anderen Welt gelandet, Herr Beckmeyer?\n\nWir haben im maritimen Sektor seit fast zehn Jahren eine Krise in der Schifffahrt. Was passiert? Was macht diese große Stillstandskoalition? Sie redet immer wieder hier im Hohen Hause mit irgendwelchen Sprechblasen um den heißen Brei herum. Papiere können Sie produzieren, Herr Beckmeyer. Wir wollen Taten sehen, nicht nur Papiere!\n\nIn der Realität kommt nichts an. Jetzt zum Abschied des Maritimen Koordinators - in der nächsten Woche dürfte es Ihre letzte Maritime Konferenz sein - geht es genauso weiter. So wracken Sie von der Großen Koalition die maritime Wirtschaft wirklich ab.\n\nSchauen wir uns das einmal im Detail an. Die Schifffahrtskrise wurde nicht angepackt. Hapag-Lloyd macht deutlich reduzierte Gewinne. Hamburg Süd ist mittlerweile dänisch. Das wissen wir mittlerweile alles, aber Sie tun nichts. Die dringend nötige Neuausrichtung der maritimen Ausbildung wurde verpasst. Mit vernünftigen Rahmenbedingungen für alternative Treibstoffe in der Seeschifffahrt lässt die Bundesregierung bis heute auf sich warten. So darf es nicht weiter gehen.\n\nDie deutsche maritime Wirtschaft ist eine vielfältige Branche. Sowohl Häfen als auch Werften oder Reedereien zählen dazu. Diese Branche braucht endlich echte Zukunftsperspektiven für die kommenden Jahre. Mit dem üblichen Herumfrickeln, liebe Damen und Herren von der Großen Koalition - auch wenn Sie hier große Sprüche klopfen, Herr Grosse-Brömer -, ist es nicht getan. Ein reines Abwickeln der kriselnden Branche darf es nicht geben. Wir sollten die Krise als Chance für eine echte Neuaufstellung der Schifffahrtsförderung nutzen.\n\nWas machen Sie hingegen? Sie gehen weiter mit der Fördergießkanne durch das Land. Sie schaffen dann noch ein neues Forschungszentrum, das sogenannte Deutsche Maritime Zentrum mit Sitz in Hamburg, von dem niemand weiß, wozu es gebraucht wird und was es eigentlich machen soll. Dient es etwa nur zur Wahlkreisbeglückung in Hamburg, werter Kollege Kruse? Aber den Mut für wirklich ernsthafte Reformen zeigen Sie hier nicht.\n\nWas muss dringend angepackt werden? Durch die vielen Zukäufe an Schiffsraum in den 1990er- und 2000er-Jahren haben sich Überkapazitäten aufgebaut, die jetzt nur sehr schwer wieder wegzubekommen sind. Dadurch stehen die Reeder, die sich an ihrem damaligen Erfolg, gerade durch Steuersparmodelle getrieben, berauscht haben, vor einem echten Dilemma: Verkaufen sie die Schiffe, drückt ein anderer Standort die Schiffsmieten. Verkaufen sie sie nicht, hat die Schiffe zwar nicht der Konkurrenzstandort, die Schiffsmieten bleiben aber weiterhin im Keller. Somit wurde über Jahre hinweg Mikado gespielt:\n\nWer sich zuerst bewegt und Schiffsraum entfernt, hat verloren. Heraus, werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, kommen wir aus dieser Misere nur, wenn ein Großteil der Schiffe aus dem Markt verschwindet. Ich sage daher: Verschrotten, verschrotten, verschrotten! Nur so kommen wir aus der Krise.\n\nHerr Beckmeyer, sorgen Sie mal dafür, dass wir nicht immer nur neu bauen - Spezialschiffe oder so etwas -, sondern wir uns ernsthaft mit vernünftigen Abwrackwerften in Europa, auch in Deutschland, beschäftigen, anstatt die Schiffe in Bangladesch an den Strand zu schieben und da ausweiden zu lassen. So geht es nicht weiter.\n\nSchauen wir als Nächstes auf die Beschäftigten in der Schifffahrt.\n\n- Herr Saathoff, Sie kommen nachher noch dran. - Wir haben hier in Deutschland zwar eine weltweit hoch anerkannte Ausbildung von Seeleuten, doch diese bringt uns nichts - gar nichts. In der internationalen Seeschifffahrt sind deutsche Seeleute schlichtweg zu teuer.\n\nDamit deutsche Seeleute wieder konkurrenzfähig werden, brauchen wir endlich vernünftige, international konkurrenzfähige Lösungen:\n\nWir brauchen auch für Seeleute den internationalen Tarif anstatt des deutschen Heuervertrages bei gleichzeitiger Steuer- und Sozialversicherungsfreiheit. So schaffen wir nämlich, dass die Seeleute vor Ort das Gleiche ausgezahlt bekommen, aber wir konkurrenzfähig werden. Das würde der deutschen Schifffahrt und dem maritimen Arbeitsmarkt wieder einen kräftigen Schub geben. Die derzeitige Herumtrickserei und Herumrechnerei mit dem Lohnsteuereinbehalt durch die Reeder und Ausbildungshilfen von einer Stiftung haben das alles nicht gebracht.\n\nSchaffen wir das noch in dieser Wahlperiode? Ich glaube, kaum. Sie dauert ja nur noch ein halbes Jahr, Herr Beckmeyer. In den Ministerien ist die Arbeit größtenteils bereits zum Erliegen gekommen. Das wird die Aufgabe einer neuen Bundesregierung sein, dann aber endlich mit rot-grüner Beteiligung - - dann aber endlich mit grüner Beteiligung -\n\nvielleicht schaffen wir es ja auch mit Rot-Grün, werte Kollegen von der Sozialdemokratie -, also: mit einer grünen Beteiligung, damit wir endlich den Blick nach vorne werfen und nicht immer nur zurück in die Historie.\n\nWozu hat die Bundesregierung eigentlich einen Maritimen Koordinator? Man hört und sieht immer nur kurz vor einer Maritimen Konferenz etwas von ihm. Dann dürfen wir uns in der Sitzungswoche vorher mal hier schnell mit der maritimen Wirtschaft beschäftigen. Wenn ich so in die Runde schaue: Allzu viele Kolleginnen und Kollegen sind dann nicht da.\n\n- Dann machen wir doch nächstes Mal eine namentliche Abstimmung; dann werden es noch mehr. - Sonst ist der Maritime Koordinator untergetaucht. Kein einziges Thema hat er aufgegriffen, das die maritime Wirtschaft wirklich nach vorne gebracht hätte. Stattdessen: Verwaltung des Status quo und weder Kraft noch Ideen für einen zukunftsfähigen maritimen Standort. Seit 2014 liegt das Thema „maritime Wirtschaft“ in der Bundesregierung brach. Maßnahmen zur Förderung der Schifffahrtskrise: wirklich Fehlanzeige! Kann eine inhaltsleere und kaum greifbare Maritime Agenda von Herrn Beckmeyer mit vielen, vielen Seiten wirklich eine Antwort auf die Krise sein? Hier hätte ich in solchen Zeiten schon deutlich mehr erwartet als Worthülsen und Sonntagsreden.\n\nSchauen wir uns ein weiteres Beispiel an. Für eine umweltfreundliche Schifffahrt brauchen wir dringend neue Kraftstoffe, weg vom giftigen und schmutzigen Schweröl. Wir Grüne denken hier an LNG, also verflüssigtes Erdgas.\n\nDie schädlichen Abgase sind deutlich reduziert. Zukünftig könnte der Treibstoff auch über Power to Gas, also etwa aus erneuerbaren Energien, erzeugt werden.\n\nDoch auch damit tut sich die Bundesregierung verdammt schwer. Damit LNG als Treibstoff in den Häfen einfach gebunkert werden kann, benötigen wir eine Anpassung von Regelungen, und zwar einheitlich. Aber jeder Hafen erfindet stattdessen die Welt neu. Jetzt kündigen Sie an, LNG über den Bundeshaushalt zu fördern. Das passt aber nicht mit dem Flickwerk an Regularien in den Häfen zusammen. Sobald die ersten Schiffe in den Häfen LNG bunkern wollen, stehen sie vor unlösbaren Genehmigungsproblemen.\n\nDas Beispiel der LNG-Barge im Hamburger Hafen sei hier als eines von vielen genannt. Das ist ein Schiff ohne eigenen Antrieb, mit einer sauberen Stromerzeugung aus LNG an Bord. Es soll Kreuzfahrtschiffe mit sauberem Strom versorgen. Und es muss jetzt, wenn es benutzt wird, Tag und Nacht von einem Schlepper bewacht werden. Hier müssen wir doch einmal zu pragmatischen und vor allem bundeseinheitlichen Lösungen kommen. Hosenträger und Gürtel für einige ängstliche lokale Bedenkenträger braucht es nun wirklich nicht.\n\nWerter Herr Präsident, ich komme zum Ende. Sie haben schon gesehen, dass ich in meinem Manuskript weiter nach vorne geblättert habe. Ich hätte noch ein paar mehr Beispiele.\n\nUm meine Ausführungen zu Ende zu bringen: Es wird nun darauf ankommen, dass die lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die in der nächsten Wahlperiode dabei sind, den Scherbenhaufen, den der Maritime Koordinator hinterlassen hat, aufkehren und aus dem Thema etwas machen. Es gibt wirklich genug zu tun. Packen wir es an! Holen Sie den Maritimen Koordinator vom Katzentisch im Wirtschaftsministerium ins Kanzleramt oder zumindest ins Verkehrsministerium!\n\nDa gehört er hin. Dann passiert auch endlich etwas.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n10562,luise-amtsberg,\"Das ist sehr freundlich, Frau Kollegin, dass Sie die Frage zulassen.\n\nSie haben ausgeführt, die Überforderung Europas und die sozusagen fehlende Perspektive seien die Gründe dafür, dass wir in diesem Jahr oder auch in den kommenden Jahren nicht ähnlich viele Menschen aufnehmen könnten. Grund für das Versagen des europäischen Systems ist ja das Dublin-System, das die Staaten an den Außengrenzen sozusagen mit der Verantwortung alleinlässt. Eine Insel wie Lesbos zum Beispiel, die über 1 Million Flüchtlinge durchleiten muss, und ganze Asylsysteme, die überfrachtet sind: Das alles ist sozusagen auf dieses Dublin-System zurückzuführen.\n\nNun halten die Bundesregierung und die regierungstragenden Fraktionen weiter an diesem System fest. Was sagen Sie denn konkret zu dem Vorschlag, den wir in unserem Antrag gemacht haben? Wir wollen ja für eine Verteilung in Europa sorgen, indem wir Erstaufnahmeeinrichtungen an den europäischen Außengrenzen aufbauen, um dort Menschen aufzunehmen und gerecht in der Europäischen Union zu verteilen,\n\ndamit die Menschen nicht mehr auf sich selbst gestellt in Europa unterwegs sind, irgendwo stranden und in humanitär schwierigen Situationen länger ausharren, wie beispielsweise jetzt in Idomeni oder auch an anderen Stationen der Westbalkanroute. Das würde mich interessieren.\n\nDarüber hinaus sollten wir uns doch dieser Frage stellen, weil wir uns hier ja alle als Europäer und Europäerinnen verstehen. Eine Stärkung der europäischen Institutionen wäre durchaus möglich, wenn wir es schaffen würden, mehr Verantwortung in europäische Hände zu geben und zum Beispiel Organisationen wie EASO oder auch die Grundrechteagentur, die ja sogar für diese Zwecke angedacht waren, endlich in die Verantwortung zu nehmen. Mit dieser Situation würden wir Europa sozusagen stark machen und nicht schwächen und es als aktiven Teil und Akteur an dieser Stelle in die Pflicht nehmen. Wie stehen Sie zu diesen Vorschlägen?\n\nLieber Herr Kollege Bergner, Sie haben viel darüber gesprochen, welche Antworten wir als Grünenfraktion in unserem Antrag nicht liefern und welche unserer Antworten falsch sind. Sie haben auch viel über die fehlenden Antworten der Kommission gesprochen, und Sie haben viel über die fehlende Bereitschaft gesprochen, sich dieser Frage in Europa zuzuwenden.\n\nIch frage Sie jetzt ganz konkret: Was sind Ihrer Auffassung nach die nächsten dringlichen Schritte, um zu einer europäischen Flüchtlingspolitik zu kommen? Welche konkreten Maßnahmen wünschen sich die regierungstragenden Fraktionen, vornehmlich natürlich Ihre Fraktion, auch von der Bundeskanzlerin und der Bundesregierung, um wieder zu einem gemeinsam getragenen europäischen Asylsystem zu kommen? Oder bleibt es allein bei der Kritik?\"\n12653,monika-lazar,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Fünf Jahre nach der Selbstenttarnung des NSU sind noch immer viele Fragen unbeantwortet. Wurde seitdem genügend dafür getan, um rechten Terror künftig zu verhindern? Was hat sich seitdem in den Behörden und unserer Gesellschaft verändert?\n\nPositiv ist, dass die Sensibilität für rechte Gewalt an vielen Stellen gewachsen ist. Die mediale Berichterstattung über Rassismus und Gewalt erfolgt kontinuierlicher als noch vor einigen Jahren. Strukturen gegen rechts werden solider gefördert, auch wenn im Detail weiterhin Luft nach oben ist. Dennoch ist die Gefahr nicht gebannt. Im Gegenteil: Die aktuellen Entwicklungen geben Anlass zur Sorge.\n\n2015 stieg die Zahl rechter Gewalttaten laut BKA um mehr als 44 Prozent auf 1 485 Fälle. Die Dunkelziffer ist höher, wie Erhebungen aus der Zivilgesellschaft belegen. Neonazis schlagen immer brutaler zu. Bis Anfang Oktober dieses Jahres gab es bereits elf versuchte Tötungsdelikte und damit vier mehr als im gesamten Jahr 2015. Mehrere Delikte richteten sich gegen Geflüchtete und Migranten, die zu den Hauptzielen rechter Attacken gehören.\n\nDie Brutalisierung und Häufung rassistischer Gewalt kommt aus einer Gesellschaft heraus, in der die Abwertung bestimmter Menschengruppen zunehmend salonfähig erscheint. Im Juni wurden mit der aktuellen „Mitte“-Studie wieder alarmierende Ergebnisse präsentiert. Demnach hat eine deutliche Radikalisierung stattgefunden, vor allem in Bezug auf Asylsuchende, Muslime sowie Sinti und Roma. Ein zentraler Befund der Studie ist die enthemmte Gewalt in den zu Rechtsextremismus neigenden Milieus. Diese haben in AfD und Pegida eine politische Heimat gefunden, sodass sie massiver und organisierter auftreten können.\n\nWenn rechter Terror künftig verhindert werden soll, müssen rechtsstaatliche Möglichkeiten konsequent ausgeschöpft werden.\n\nEbenso brauchen wir wirksame Maßnahmen zum Schutz der Menschengruppen, die besonders von Abwertung betroffen sind. Ein strukturierter Dialog zwischen staatlichen Behörden und zivilgesellschaftlichen Initiativen zur Bekämpfung von Rassismus und Gewalt gehört zu den Maßnahmen, die die Bundesregierung fördern sollte. Aber es gehört auch unsere gesamte Gesellschaft in den Blick. Rassistischer Hass und Gewalt gehen uns alle an, nicht nur die direkt davon Betroffenen.\n\nDie diesjährige Friedenspreisträgerin des Deutschen Buchhandels Carolin Emcke sagte darüber in ihrer Dankesrede - ich zitiere -:\n\nDieser ausgrenzende Fanatismus beschädigt nicht nur diejenigen, die er sich zum Opfer sucht, sondern alle, die in einer offenen, demokratischen Gesellschaft leben wollen. Das Dogma des Homogenen, Reinen, Völkischen verengt die Welt. … Es versieht die einen mit wertvollen Etiketten und Assoziationen und die anderen mit abwertenden.\n\nWer in einer so engen Gesellschaft nicht leben will, muss aktiv gegensteuern.\n\nUm Taten wie die des NSU zu verhindern, muss viel getan werden; aber es genügen nicht Überwachung und Repression. Notwendig sind außerdem die Stärkung der zivilgesellschaftlichen Kräfte, die eindeutige Distanzierung von rechtspopulistischen Diskursen sowie eine lebensnahe Vermittlung unserer demokratischen Werte und politischer Bildung.\n\nDanke.\"\n122,richard-pitterle,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir beraten heute ein Gesetz, das einen sehr langen Namen trägt, vereinfacht: AIFM-Steuer-Anpassungsgesetz. Mit diesem Gesetz sollen einige Steuerschlupflöcher geschlossen werden. Das wird von allen Seiten betont. Der Finanzminister der nordrhein-westfälischen rot-grünen Regierung befürchtet sogar Milliardenverluste für den Fiskus, wenn das Gesetz heute nicht beschlossen wird. So weit, so gut.\n\nAber was mir auffällt, ist, dass auch die Lobbyisten- und Interessenverbände der Finanzindustrie dieses Gesetz wollen und man fast keine Proteste aus dieser Richtung wahrnimmt. Bei jeder klitzekleinen Regulierung des Finanzmarktes durch die verflossene schwarz-gelbe Koalition sah die Finanzindustrie eine Gefahr für die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit Deutschlands am Horizont. Ich frage mich: Warum hier nicht? Mit diesem Gesetz werden zwar Steuerschlupflöcher gestopft; aber Teile des Gesetzes ermöglichen der Finanzindustrie ein profitträchtiges Geschäftsmodell. Dort geht es um die betrieblichen Pensionskassen. Durch das Gesetz soll in Deutschland das sogenannte Pension Asset Pooling ermöglicht werden.\n\nWas bedeutet Pension Asset Pooling? Multinationale Konzerne wollen das Pensionsvermögen der weltweit für sie tätigen Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer bündeln und gemeinsam verwalten. Alle gesammelten Beiträge für die Betriebsrente sollen also zentral angelegt, zentral verwaltet und zentral gesteuert werden. Mit dieser Bündelung wird zwar einerseits ein höheres Anlagevermögen erzielt, das zu höheren Zinssätzen angelegt sowie zu niedrigeren Kosten gemanagt werden kann; andererseits besteht die Gefahr, dass mit einer zentralen Anlagepolitik die Vermögensanlagerisiken stärker konzentriert werden. So werden Risiken aus Wechselkursschwankungen oder Anlageausfällen zulasten der Beschäftigten erhöht. Uns erscheint eine dezentrale Anlagepolitik weniger riskant, weil damit im Hinblick auf das gesamte weltweite Pensionsvermögen eine breitere und bessere Streuung der anzulegenden Mittel erreicht werden kann.\n\nBisher scheitert das weltweite Pension Asset Pooling in Deutschland an den bestehenden steuerrechtlichen Vorschriften. Zwar sehen wir auch, dass andere steuerrechtliche Regelungen Vorteile aufweisen könnten. Doch für wen? Sicher profitiert der Fiskus, wenn sich die multinationalen Konzerne mit dem gebündelten Vermögen dem Steuerregime im Lande unterwerfen. Aber auch die Finanzindustrie - das ist unübersehbar - reibt sich schon die Hände. Nach einer Untersuchung der Personalberatung Towers Watson betrugen allein die von den DAX-30-Unternehmen angesammelten Pensionsvermögenswerte zum Jahresende 2012 circa 193 Milliarden Euro. Das Volumen aller für ein Pooling in Betracht kommenden Pensionsvermögenswerte ist noch erheblich größer, wenn man die übrigen deutschen Unternehmen sowie ausländische Unternehmen einbezieht.\n\nDie Linke sagt: Wenn es um die Pensionskassen der Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer geht, dann können die Geschäftsinteressen der Finanzindustrie nicht die entscheidende Leitlinie sein.\n\nDaher können wir diesem Teil des Gesetzes nicht zustimmen.\n\nWenn wir uns heute enthalten, dann deswegen, weil das Gesetz weitere Inhalte enthält, mit denen tatsächlich Steuerschlupflöcher geschlossen werden. Das betrifft zum Beispiel die Vermeidung von Steuerausfällen in einer möglichen Höhe von 15 Milliarden Euro, indem man auf die neue Rechtsprechung des Bundesfinanzhofs zur unterschiedlichen Gewinnermittlung nach Handels- und Steuerrecht beim Verkauf von Betrieben reagiert. Hier soll und muss dringend das Schlupfloch möglicher Steuergestaltungsmodelle geschlossen werden.\n\nSchließlich soll durch das Gesetz die Möglichkeit unterbunden werden, mithilfe von Rohstoffkäufen, sogenannten „Goldfinger“-Geschäften, Steuern zu sparen. Mit diesen Geschäften hatten gut betuchte Menschen über Gold- und andere Rohstofffirmen nach britischem Recht ihre Steuerlast drücken können. Das soll künftig mit dem Gesetz unterbunden werden. Dem wollen wir nicht entgegentreten.\"\n2215,gulistan-yuksel,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Sie haben eben konkret das ElterngeldPlus genannt. Ich würde Sie bitten, noch einmal konkret auf die Änderungen bei Mehrlingsgeburten einzugehen; denn darüber haben wir heute, glaube ich, noch nicht viel gehört. - Danke.\"\n4198,johannes-kahrs,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Uns liegt heute ein Haushalt vor, der bemerkenswert ist. Er ist deswegen bemerkenswert, weil wir seit ewigen Zeiten das erste Mal keine neuen Schulden machen. Das ist ein Grund, sich parteiübergreifend zu freuen.\n\nWenn man aus den Erfahrungen der letzten Jahre gelernt hat, dass es immer gute Gründe gibt, mehr Geld auszugeben, dann weiß man, dass es nicht leicht ist, keine neuen Schulden zu machen. Das klingt wie eine Selbstverständlichkeit, aber das ist leider keine. Der Kollege Norbert Barthle hat gesagt, dass es eigentlich selbstverständlich sein müsste, keine neuen Schulden zu machen. Da hat er eigentlich recht.\n\nAuf der anderen Seite haben wir das noch nie so gehalten.\n\nWeil wir das noch nie so gemacht haben, ist diese Debatte an diesem Tag so bedeutsam. Wir müssen einfach einmal verinnerlichen, dass wir heute etwas Selbstverständliches machen, was wir in den letzten Jahren aber nicht getan haben.\n\nDas wirklich Gute an diesem Haushalt ist nicht, dass wir es einmal geschafft haben, keine neuen Schulden zu machen, sondern es ist die Bereitschaft bei, wie ich glaube, allen Parteien in diesem Hause, das nicht nur in diesem Haushalt zu schaffen, sondern auch in den Haushalten der nächsten Jahre. Sinn macht diese Veranstaltung nämlich nur, wenn wir dauerhaft keine neuen Schulden machen. Das ist der Punkt.\n\nWir als Sozialdemokraten haben zusammen mit der Union in der letzten Großen Koalition dafür gesorgt, dass die Schuldenbremse ins Grundgesetz aufgenommen wird. Wir haben auch auf unseren Parteitagen immer beschlossen: Wir wollen keine neuen Schulden machen. Ich bin mir sicher, auch die Union hat immer Ähnliches gemacht. Jetzt aber wird es getan.\n\nWichtig ist, dass wir über diese Linie die Schuldenbremse erreichen. Es ist gut, dass uns das so gelungen ist. Herr Minister Schäuble, ich bin dankbar, dass dies in guter Zusammenarbeit mit Ihrem Hause gelaufen ist. Im Gegensatz zu dem Kollegen Bartsch glaube ich auch nicht, dass es ein Zufall war, dass wir als Ergebnis langer Haushaltsberatungen - dabei waren wir durchaus unterschiedlicher Ansicht - keine neuen Schulden gemacht haben, sondern das war harte Arbeit, lange, harte Arbeit.\n\n- Herr Kollege, das ist schlicht und einfach so. Seien Sie doch einfach einmal glücklich darüber, dass uns das gelungen ist.\n\nEs gibt immer viele Möglichkeiten und gute Gründe, mehr Geld auszugeben. Hier ist es uns einfach gelungen, das nicht zu tun.\n\nWichtig ist für uns alle das Vorhaben, dass das nicht nur für 2015 gilt, sondern auch für 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020. Das ist nachhaltige Politik. Das ist genera-tionengerechte Politik. Das heißt, dass man nachfolgenden Generationen keine Schuldenberge hinterlässt. Es heißt aber auch, dass man mit dem vorhandenen Geld auskommen muss, dass man also, wenn es Wünsche und Bedarfe gibt, auch einmal innerhalb eines Etats und zwischen Etats umschichten muss.\n\nDas haben wir in der Vergangenheit alle nicht geschafft, weil wir immer lieber mit frischem Geld neue Schulden gemacht haben, statt uns an bestehenden Besitzständen abzuarbeiten und damit die eine oder andere Interessengruppe, die eine oder andere Lobby in diesem Land gegen uns aufzubringen. Davor haben wir immer Angst gehabt. Deswegen haben wir immer mehr Geld ausgegeben.\n\nEigentlich aber wissen wir alle, dass es natürlich Bereiche gibt, wo gespart werden kann. Ehrlich gesagt: In Zeiten, in denen es uns gut geht, in Zeiten, in denen wir hohe Steuereinnahmen haben, in denen wir eine geringe Arbeitslosigkeit haben, ist das, was wir hier machen, keine Atomphysik; das gebe ich zu. Aber sollte sich das einmal wieder ändern, sollten die Zeiten wieder schwieriger werden, ist das eine große Herausforderung. Wir haben das, was die Risiken angeht, schon angesprochen.\n\nWenn die Zinsen wieder auf ein halbwegs normales Niveau steigen, wie es sich jeder deutsche Sparer oder jeder, der eine Lebensversicherung abgeschlossen hat, wünscht, und bei 3 oder 4 Prozent liegen, dann zahlen wir nicht mehr wie jetzt 25 Milliarden Euro jährlich an Zinsen. Dann sind es 45 Milliarden, 50 Milliarden oder, wenn wir Pech haben, 60 Milliarden Euro. Dann in diesem Haushalt keine neuen Schulden zu machen, das ist die eigentliche Herausforderung. Das wird man bei jedem Etat beachten müssen. Damit wiederum werden sich Haushaltspolitiker relativ unbeliebt machen. Dann werden Fraktionssitzungen nicht so charmant sein wie jetzt, wo man als Haushälter - Kollege Barthle hat es angesprochen - noch die eine oder andere vernünftige Sache umsetzen kann, sondern dann muss man erklären, warum man die eine oder andere eigentlich gute Sache nicht mehr macht. Das wird die Herausforderung werden.\n\nDeswegen sind diese Haushaltsberatungen meines Erachtens nicht das, was die Opposition zum Besten gibt, wenn sie von einer Nullnummer oder versteckten Schulden spricht. Wenn wir alle gemeinsam sagen: „Das ist ein Anfang, der auch Konsequenzen haben muss, und das muss über die Jahre durchgezogen werden“, dann ist das ein wichtiger Haushalt. Dann ist es auch ein historischer Haushalt, und dann haben wir alle wirklich etwas geleistet.\n\nDeswegen ist das nicht nur Glück - deswegen ist es auch nicht nur ein Zufall, Herr Bartsch -, sondern es ist harte Arbeit, die man durchzieht.\n\nDas kann man dann auch in der mittelfristigen Finanzplanung sehen.\n\nIch glaube, Herr Kindler, dass es keine Geschenke sind, wenn man einen Mindestlohn oder die Rente mit 63 durchsetzt,\n\ndie das Pendant zur Rente mit 67 ist. Denn all diejenigen, die wie ich erst sehr spät ins Arbeitsleben eingetreten sind, weil sie studiert haben, können gerne bis 67 arbeiten, während diejenigen, die mit 15, 16, 17 oder 18 Jahren angefangen haben, zu arbeiten, und das körperlich nicht länger können, gerne mit 63 in Rente gehen können. Das ist vernünftig, richtig und vor allen Dingen gerecht. Deswegen ist das kein Geschenk.\n\nDas Gleiche gilt übrigens auch für die Mütterrente, die wir auch mitgetragen haben. Sie ist richtig und vernünftig.\n\nDas sind keine Geschenke. Man muss nur darauf achten, dass sie entsprechend finanziert werden.\n\nWenn man sie jetzt beschließt, dann muss man sie auch dauerhaft finanzieren.\n\nDenn das ist der Sinn dieser Veranstaltung.\n\nDeswegen ist es richtig, dass man sich darüber Gedanken macht, was man steuerpolitisch tut. Kollege Barthle hat es schon gesagt: Wir haben etwas im Bereich der Flugsicherung getan. Wir haben es leider nicht geschafft, uns die Luftverkehrsteuer zu schenken, die von Schwarz-Gelb in der letzten Legislaturperiode als Steuererhöhungsmaßnahme eingeführt worden war. Gut, das hat nicht geklappt. Aber im Ergebnis hat dieser Haushalt, glaube ich, gezeigt, dass man beides machen kann: keine neuen Schulden und gleichzeitig auch noch ein paar vernünftige Sachen.\n\nOb beim THW, der Bundespolizei oder der Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung - du hast es schon erwähnt, Norbert Barthle -: Ich glaube, das sind Maßnahmen, die man durchführen muss, damit man in dem einen oder anderen Punkt vernünftige und gerechte Zustände hinbekommt.\n\nAber das, was diesen Haushalt wirklich auszeichnet, ist, dass die beiden großen Volksparteien in diesem Land sich geschworen haben, dass wir keine neuen Schulden machen wollen. Wenn die Zeiten schlechter werden, dann muss hart gespart werden. Wenn wir das durchziehen, dann haben wir etwas geleistet.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n1217,marieluise-beck,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte zunächst den verehrten Josef Zissels begrüßen, der unsere Debatte auf der Tribüne verfolgt.\n\nEr kommt aus der Ukraine und ist Vorsitzender des Euro-Asian Jewish Congress und damit Vertreter des Dachverbandes von etwa 300 jüdischen Gemeinden.\n\nIch möchte zu Beginn meiner Rede an den Satz anknüpfen, Herr Spinrath, mit dem Sie geendet haben. Es geht um die Furcht von Präsident Putin, dass sich die Ereignisse auf dem Maidan eines Tages auch auf dem Roten Platz abspielen könnten. Wie werden in den kommenden Wochen und Monaten vermutlich erleben, dass alle russischen Demokraten, die in der russischen Zivilgesellschaft arbeiten, einem zunehmenden Druck ausgesetzt sind, weil genau diese Furcht die Politik im Kreml mitbestimmt. Wir müssen doch ehrlich feststellen, dass wir alle fassungslos sind, mit welcher Kaltblütigkeit ein Schritt vor den anderen gesetzt worden ist, während wir immer wieder diplomatische Angebote unterbreitet -haben. Es gab verschiedene Kompromissangebote, verschiedene Treffen und Gespräche - es gab Gespräche mit Lawrow, und die Kanzlerin hat mit Putin telefoniert -; trotzdem gab es gar keine Möglichkeit, Putin von diesem dramatischen Völkerrechtsbruch und einer Annexion, die es seit 1945 in Europa nicht mehr gegeben hat, abzubringen.\n\nIch möchte gerne noch einmal daran erinnern: Zu der Östlichen Partnerschaft wurde Russland eingeladen. Hier, in diesem Haus, haben wir über Jahre hinweg gesagt, dass wir eine strategische Partnerschaft mit Russland wollen. Wir haben von der Modernisierungspartnerschaft gesprochen, die wir mit Russland eingehen wollten.\n\nIch weiß, dass dieser Außenminister in dieser Legislaturperiode wirklich etwas anderes vorhatte als das, was er jetzt gestalten muss; er wollte die Beziehungen zu Russland vertiefen. Wir müssen uns fragen: Stimmt die Prämisse, mit der wir in den vergangenen Jahren Politik gemacht haben, noch? Sind Putin und der Kreml wirklich noch an einer engen Zusammenarbeit mit dem Westen interessiert? Wollen Putin und der Kreml gemeinsam nach Möglichkeiten suchen, russische Interessen mit unseren Interessen zu verknüpfen? Oder ist Putin nicht inzwischen in einer anderen Welt, in der geostrategisch gedacht wird, in der Öl und Gas als Machtinstrumente betrachtet werden,\n\nin der es auf unsere Ansprache gar keine Antwort gibt, weil die Gedankenwelt eine vollkommen andere ist?\n\nDas beunruhigt nicht nur uns hier im Westen, sondern das beunruhigt auch solche Länder wie Belarus und Kasachstan. Kasachstan hat eine große russische Minderheit im Norden seines Landes. Der Satz, dass dort, wo russische Bürger sind, auch russische Interessen sind, verunsichert ein Land wie Kasachstan, das zukünftig Mitglied der Eurasischen Union sein soll, zutiefst.\n\nDieser Vertrauensbruch geht unendlich tief, und er wird auf lange Sicht Russland schaden. Dabei blutet mir das Herz für die russischen Bürgerinnen und Bürger,\n\ndie unsere Freunde sind; denn wir wollen mit ihnen -gemeinsam das europäische Haus gestalten, wie -Gorbatschow es einst gesagt hat.\n\nZur Ukraine: Ich hoffe, dass Putin als Nächstes nicht einen Schritt in Richtung Ostukraine unternimmt. Was wir jetzt tun müssen, ist Festigkeit zu zeigen, dass wir das nicht akzeptieren werden, und wir müssen die Ukraine mit allem, was uns zur Verfügung steht, stabilisieren. Die Ukraine muss faktisch einen neuen Staat aufbauen. Sie braucht rechtsstaatliche Institutionen und eine effektive Verwaltung. Sie muss ein Staat werden, der mit der Krake der Korruption fertig wird. Janukowitsch hat faktisch ein insolventes Land hinterlassen. Wir brauchen jetzt eine entschiedene Politik. Wir müssen diejenigen stabilisieren, die die schwierige Aufgabe übernommen haben, dieses Land aus der Krise herauszuführen. Das ist unsere wichtigste Aufgabe, und wir werden sie in Europa gemeinsam schultern.\n\nSchönen Dank.\n\nLieber Herr Kollege Stübgen, die Frage, die Sie eben formuliert haben, diese faktische Zweigeteiltheit der Ukraine, spielt in unserer Debatte eine große Rolle. Ich bin nun sehr viel in der Ukraine gewesen und habe mit Vertretern von Nichtregierungsorganisationen, Parlamentariern und vielen anderen gesprochen und immer wieder diese Frage gestellt. Es ist mir immer wieder gesagt worden - übrigens hat uns das gestern auch Josef Zissels im Ausschuss wieder gesagt -: Die Linien zwischen diesen Gruppen verlaufen quer durchs Land. Sind Sie bereit, das zur Kenntnis zu nehmen?\n\nMaidan-Demonstrationen hat es in 50 Städten der Ukraine gegeben, auch in Charkiw, auch in Donezk. Diese Demonstrationen waren dort schwächer, auch weil die Repression dort größer war und weil es dort eine größere Nähe zu Russland als in der Westukraine gibt. Aber: Die Linien verlaufen quer und nicht längs entlang des Dnepr. Es ist auf dem Maidan mehr Russisch als Ukrainisch gesprochen worden. Ich möchte Sie bitten, das zur Kenntnis zu nehmen. Wir sollten dieser Frage gemeinsam stärker nachgehen, statt einer möglichen Desinformation aufzusitzen, die Vorbereitung für eine gewollte Teilung des Landes sein könnte.\"\n3193,frank-schwabe,\"Liebe Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Stefan Rebmann hat gerade schon ein Bild aus den Medien in den letzten Tagen beschrieben. Ich weiß nicht, wie es Ihnen geht. Mir ist das Bild in Erinnerung geblieben, das ich bei Spiegel Online gesehen habe. Ich weiß gar nicht, ob das die ursprüngliche Herkunft des Bildes war. Auf dem Bild war ein kleines Mädchen zu sehen, vielleicht drei, vier oder fünf Jahre alt, das auf der Straße lag, ein paar Meter davon entfernt ein Helfer in Schutzkleidung und 50 bis 100 Meter entfernt eine Menschentraube. Dieses Bild hat sich jedenfalls bei mir eingeprägt. Das unterstützt noch einmal das, was hier deutlich geworden ist: Das große Problem ist am Ende nicht die Gefährlichkeit des Virus, sondern das Gefährliche ist, dass es keine funktionierenden Meldesysteme, Quarantänestationen und Ähnliches in den Ländern gibt. Die internationale Gemeinschaft hätte viel schneller helfen müssen. Das macht einen in der Tat ein Stück weit wütend, fassungslos, aber auch selbstkritisch bei der Frage, wie wir eigentlich darauf reagiert haben.\n\nEs ist so - ich will das noch einmal betonen -: Die Weltgemeinschaft hat versagt, weil sie die Dimension der Krise nicht schnell genug erkannt hat und nicht schnell genug reagiert hat. - Es bringt aber nichts, einseitige Schuldzuweisungen vorzunehmen; versagt hat ja nicht Deutschland allein - wo man vielleicht auch schneller hätte reagieren können -, sondern in der Tat die gesamte Weltgemeinschaft. Wir müssen alles tun, um jetzt in der Krise so schnell wie möglich zu helfen. Wir müssen diese Krise gleichzeitig nutzen, um zu verstehen: Was ist da eigentlich passiert, und wie können wir in zukünftigen Krisen schneller reagieren?\n\nJa.\n\nIch nehme einmal an, dass daran gedacht ist; ich kann es Ihnen im Detail nicht sagen. Ich sage nur, dass auch wir in Deutschland angewiesen sind auf das, was die WHO - sie ist dafür zunächst einmal zuständig - uns an Empfehlungen gibt. Ich kann - das ist bei Herrn Huber gerade ein bisschen angeklungen - auch nicht helfen, zu sagen: Da muss auch eine gewisse kritische Auseinandersetzung mit der Politik der Weltgesundheitsorganisation stattfinden. Ich war letzte Woche in Genf. Auf den Fluren wird geraunt, dass es auch etwas damit zu tun haben könnte, dass bei der Vogelgrippe 2005 aus heutiger Sicht möglicherweise zu stark alarmiert wurde, hohe Kosten entstanden sind. Vielleicht war deswegen jetzt eine Neigung da, nicht zu früh zu alarmieren. Insofern wäre die Beantwortung Ihrer Frage: Wir müssen uns verlassen auf das, was die Weltgesundheitsorganisation macht. Nach dem, was ich höre, gibt es auch ein Konzept dafür, wie man mit den Nachbarländern umgeht; jedenfalls sind wir uns, glaube ich, darin einig, dass das dringend notwendig ist und dass wir das hier auch gemeinsam fordern.\n\nWir müssen ganz zweifellos sauber analysieren, was bei der Weltgesundheitsorganisation passiert ist und was da nicht passiert ist. Das hat natürlich etwas zu tun mit der Vielzahl der humanitären Krisen. Ich will wirklich verstehen: Was ist da passiert, welche Alarmmechanismen haben nicht entsprechend funktioniert? Wie funktioniert das Zusammenspiel zwischen der WHO und den Institutionen, die wir in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und in der Europäischen Union haben?\n\nWir haben in den letzten Wochen hier sehr intensiv über Waffenlieferungen diskutiert. Ich will auch an dieser Stelle noch einmal sagen - ich habe das schon angesichts der Nordirak-Debatte gesagt, in der ich mich für die Waffenlieferungen ausgesprochen habe -: Wir haben manchmal eine Neigung, sehr engagiert über militärische Einsätze zu diskutieren, verglichen damit aber eine fehlende Neigung, über humanitäre Hilfe zu diskutieren, weil das vielleicht irgendwie weniger spannend ist für die Öffentlichkeit; ich weiß es nicht. Das steht aber in keinem Verhältnis zu der Chance, Menschen auf dieser Welt zu helfen.\n\nDa muss sich in den nächsten Monaten und Jahren etwas ändern. Wir haben jetzt ein Hilfsniveau erreicht, das immer noch nicht ausreichend ist; aber ich glaube, wir sind uns jetzt einig: Die Weltgemeinschaft reagiert jetzt der Krise entsprechend angemessen. Ich will mich dem Dank natürlich anschließen, auch dem Dank an die 500 Freiwilligen - wahrscheinlich sind es während der Debatte schon wieder mehr geworden -, die sich gemeldet haben, will allerdings auch ausdrücklich sagen: Aus meiner Sicht muss sich das nicht auf die Bundeswehr beschränken - so habe ich es aber auch nicht verstanden -, sondern ein gemeinsames Nachdenken darüber, wie auch andere Freiwillige bewegt werden können, mitzuhelfen, das macht, glaube ich, Sinn, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nIch will noch einmal ausdrücklich den vielen Hilfsorganisationen danken, die alle genannt worden sind, vorneweg natürlich den Ärzten ohne Grenzen. Sie haben eine gewisse Kritik geübt, auch an der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Ich finde, wenn das jemandem zusteht, dann dieser Organisation, in der Menschen täglich wirklich ihr Bestes geben; viele sind im Einsatz gestorben.\n\nIch will noch einmal ausdrücklich darauf hinweisen, dass man spenden kann. Es gibt da so eine Aktion, wo man sich Wasser über den Kopf schütten sollte. Vielleicht hat das noch nicht jeder getan. Wenn es also eine Organisation gibt, für die ich wirklich bitten würde, zu spenden, dann wären das, wie gesagt, die Ärzte ohne Grenzen.\n\nAm Ende will ich noch einmal sagen - da müssen wir jetzt jede Debatte nutzen, auch wenn das ein bisschen nervt -: Es geht darum, in den Haushaltsdebatten dafür zu sorgen, dass der Titel für die humanitäre Hilfe mit mehr Mitteln ausgestattet wird. Die gegenwärtige Ausstattung ist nicht ausreichend. Ich habe in den Debatten der letzten Wochen wahrgenommen, dass auch der Finanzminister den Kopf gewiegt hat und ein bisschen auch genickt hat; er hat, glaube ich, verstanden, dass die Mittel für humanitäre Hilfe nicht ausreichen.\n\nIch glaube - das ist etwas, was wir in diesem Hause wirklich einheitlich herstellen können -, dieses Parlament muss die Kraft haben, auf die Krise zu reagieren und den Titel für humanitäre Hilfe deutlich anzuheben.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n1671,dieter-janecek,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Kollege Heil, es liegt wohl auch an meiner Frage, ob Sie sich freuen, dass Ihre Redezeit verlängert wird. - Ich habe den Eindruck, dass Sie einen sehr großen Popanz zwischen EEG-Reform und der Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der Industrie aufbauen. Nehmen Sie denn zur Kenntnis, dass in China, einem unserer Wettbewerber, im letzten Jahr im Kraftwerksbau im Bereich der Erneuerbaren mehr investiert wurde als im Bereich der Fossilen und dass auf den Weltmärkten die Musik spielt, dass wir aber gleichzeitig - das nehme ich auf Reisen im Ausland so wahr - unser Erfolgsprojekt Energiewende konsequent kaputtreden? Sie sind daran in erster Linie beteiligt.\"\n10949,uwe-lagosky,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Frau Pothmer, wir haben es eben gerade noch einmal klären lassen. Es kam auch im Ausschuss zur Sprache, ist dort aber nicht geklärt worden. Es ist so: Der Instrumentenkasten des SGB III gilt über die Verweisklausel auch für das SGB II. Insofern ist das, was Sie gesagt haben, scheinbar - scheinbar; das sage ich ganz bewusst an der Stelle - nicht richtig.\n\nDie Arbeitslosenquote von Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern mit einem qualifizierten Berufsabschluss entwickelt sich in Richtung Vollbeschäftigung.\n\nDas ist ein Zitat aus der Begründung des Gesetzentwurfs und bringt zum Ausdruck, dass wir in Deutschland auf dem richtigen Weg sind. Doch trotz der guten Konjunktur und der vielen unterschiedlichen Unterstützungsprogramme und der immensen Arbeit, die die Jobcenter und Arbeitsagenturen leisten, hat sich an der Zahl von 1 Million Langzeitarbeitslosen in den letzten Jahren nicht viel geändert.\n\nEs kommen Menschen aus der Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit heraus. Dafür kommen andere wieder hinein.\n\nDaher ist es von besonderer Bedeutung, sich mit den Wurzeln des Problems auseinanderzusetzen. Das wollen wir vor dem Hintergrund dieser Zahlen bei der Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit tun.\n\nDer vorliegende Gesetzentwurf setzt bei der Stärkung der beruflichen Weiterbildung an und enthält eine Reihe von Schritten, um die von Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit betroffenen Menschen besser vermittelbar zu machen. Mindestens genauso wichtig in dem Gesetzentwurf, den wir heute verabschieden, ist aber die Tatsache, dass wir Beschäftigten mit einer geringen Qualifikation, die im Beruf stehen, über die berufliche Weiterbildung in der Zukunft eine entsprechende Förderung zukommen lassen können. Damit kann präventiv erreicht werden, dass eine mögliche Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit dieser Menschen verhindert wird.\n\nWir helfen Beschäftigten, Grundkompetenzen zu erwerben, um einen Berufsabschluss nachzuholen. Sie haben künftig Anspruch auf Förderleistungen in den Bereichen Lesen, Schreiben, Mathematik, Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologien. Das haben wir heute schon gehört.\n\nIch würde das gerne auf das Ende verschieben. Jetzt nicht.\n\nWir gehen davon aus, dass die Digitalisierung der Arbeitswelt und die Veränderung, die damit einhergeht, ein lebenslanges Lernen erfordern. Insbesondere vor dem Hintergrund der Arbeitswelt 4.0 steigen die Ansprüche an die Beschäftigten in allen Bereichen. Dies ist schon heute zu erkennen. Deshalb ist es umso wichtiger, dass wir diese Menschen, die eine geringe Qualifikationsstufe haben, im Beruf so fördern und fordern, dass sie den Anschluss an den Arbeitsmarkt in der Zukunft nicht verlieren.\n\nDie bereits vorhandene Weiterbildungsförderung für Beschäftigte in kleinen und mittelständischen Unternehmen hat zu einer wachsenden Nachfrage nach Weiterbildungsmaßnahmen geführt. Daher führen wir eine zusätzliche altersunabhängige Förderung von beruflichen Weiterbildungen außerhalb der Arbeitszeit ein, die an die Bedingung geknüpft ist, dass die Arbeitgeber 50 Prozent der Kosten übernehmen.\n\nIn der gesamten deutschen Wirtschaft ist die berufliche Weiterbildung von absolut großer Bedeutung. Die Weiterbildungsförderung insbesondere in kleinen und mittelständischen Unternehmen ist ganz besonders wichtig, weil man hiermit denjenigen, die in diesem Bereich arbeiten und eine geringe Qualifizierung haben, zusätzliche Weiterbildungen ermöglicht. Der Regierungsentwurf enthält eine ganze Reihe von Schritten, um langzeitarbeitslose Menschen effektiver und nachhaltiger zu unterstützen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, trotz all dieser Maßnahmen ist aber nicht außer Acht zu lassen, dass es extrem schwierig ist, Langzeitarbeitslose zu vermitteln, weil es eine ganze Reihe von Vermittlungshemmnissen gibt, die nicht nur mit Qualifizierung zu tun haben. Das zeigt auch die Eingliederungsquote nach arbeitsmarktpolitischen Maßnahmen von etwa 23 Prozent im Jahr 2014, wie dem Bericht der BA zur Arbeitsmarktsituation von langzeitarbeitslosen Menschen zu entnehmen ist. Das ist aus meiner Sicht einfach zu wenig.\n\nDie Gründe für Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit - ich sagte es schon - sind vielschichtig, und sie lassen sich nicht innerhalb kurzer Zeit beseitigen. Unterschiedliche Vermittlungshemmnisse beeinflussen die Arbeitsvermittlung. Neben der Frage der Qualifikation sind es unter anderem gesundheitliche Einschränkungen, aber auch Suchtprobleme und die Umstände, dass man älter als 55 Jahre ist oder in nicht gefestigten Familienstrukturen lebt. All diese Dinge spielen dabei durchaus eine Rolle und führen zu Vermittlungshemmnissen.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, ich komme zum Schluss. Unser Ziel bleibt es, den Menschen eine Perspektive zu geben und ihnen die Integration in den Arbeitsmarkt zu ermöglichen. Der beste Schlüssel dafür ist der Zugang zu beruflicher Weiterbildung.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\n\nFrau Pothmer, zunächst einmal hat es sich so angehört, als ob Sie Ihre Aussage auf den gesamten Instrumentenkasten bezogen haben.\n\n- So hat es sich in Ihrer Rede angehört; insofern mag an dieser Stelle durchaus noch eine Differenz zwischen uns bestehen. Wie ich höre, ist das aber nicht der Fall. Ich kann das an dieser Stelle nicht endgültig aufklären; wir sollten das aber machen. Gemeinsam mit dem Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales sollten wir das, was Sie eben gesagt haben, klären.\n\nTrotzdem kann ich Ihre Auffassung nicht verstehen. Wenn Sie diesen Gesetzentwurf hier und heute möglicherweise ablehnen, was Sie an anderer Stelle ja schon einmal geäußert haben,\n\ndann verstehe ich nicht, warum Sie das tun. Wir haben mit Blick auf das SGB III den Vorrang der Vermittlung vor der Weiterbildung, also den Vermittlungsvorrang, aufgehoben. Ich verstehe nicht, warum Sie dem nicht zustimmen wollen. Das ist eine ureigene Forderung von Ihnen, die Sie in einem Antrag erhoben haben. Auch Sie hätten an dieser Stelle etwas erreicht, wenn Sie heute zustimmen würden. Ich bitte darum, dass Sie das auch tun.\"\n15349,ingrid-pahlmann,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kollegen! Liebe Kolleginnen! Ich bin mir sehr sicher, dass wir uns alle in unserer politischen Arbeit dafür einsetzen, Mensch und Umwelt zu schützen. Die Frage ist, wie man das tut und mit welcher Herangehensweise. Eine pauschale Pflanzenschutzmittelreduktion, wie Sie sie in Ihrem Antrag fordern, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, ist für mich definitiv nicht der richtige Weg. Auch für uns steht der Schutz der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher an erster Stelle. Die Zulassung von Pflanzenschutzmitteln in Deutschland unterliegt strengen Kriterien. Sie ist sicher verbesserungsbedürftig, besonders was die Dauer der Anerkennungsverfahren betrifft; Frau Hagl-Kehl hat es schon erwähnt. Bei den Zulassungsbehörden stauen sich die Anträge. Die Resistenzbildung aufgrund fehlender Alternativen ist das Problem, das wir im Bereich der Pflanzenschutzmittel haben.\n\nAber die Intention Ihres Antrags ist eine andere. Der Antrag dient der Instrumentalisierung grüner agrarpolitischer Ziele. Sie verunsichern wieder einmal Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher, indem Sie Horrorszenarien an die Wand malen. Sie reden von Pestiziden, von Ackergiften, der Verunreinigung von Wasser, Böden und Lebensmitteln und bedienen sich dabei äußerst fragwürdiger Statistiken über den Anstieg des Einsatzes von Pflanzenschutzmitteln. Eine Statistik hat es immerhin schon in die Rubrik „Unstatistik des Monats“ geschafft. Das ist auch eine Auszeichnung. Noch einmal: Wir haben die sichersten Lebensmittel weltweit.\n\nSelbstverständlich müssen Pflanzenschutzmittel ausreichend reguliert werden. Aber das werden sie auch. Wir haben in Deutschland und in Europa eines der strengsten Regulierungssysteme der Welt. Diesen hohen Standard wollen wir von der Union beibehalten. Sicherheit und Qualität sind für die CDU/CSU grundsätzlich elementare Faktoren, auch in der Nahrungsmittelversorgung. Das scheint mir bei Ihnen gar kein Thema zu sein. Ohne chemische Pflanzenschutzmittel sind sowohl die Sicherheit als auch die Qualität unserer Nahrungsmittel, die uns allen so absolut selbstverständlich erscheinen, definitiv nicht zu erreichen; das muss jedem klar sein.\n\nPflanzenschutzmittel werden zum Schutz der Pflanze angewendet. Sie verweisen in Ihrem Antrag auf die Pestizidaktionspläne in anderen Ländern. Gern möchte ich Ihnen an dem konkreten Beispiel Dänemark begründen, warum es so einfach eben nicht ist.\n\nDänemark hat bereits 1987 ein Reduktionsprogramm für den chemischen Pflanzenschutz aufgelegt. Die verwendete Menge an Pflanzenschutzmitteln bzw. die Zahl der Anwendungen sollte danach halbiert werden. Das ambitionierte Ziel wurde jedoch verfehlt. Der angestrebte Behandlungsindex konnte nicht erreicht werden. Seit dem Jahr 2000 steigt auch die Behandlungshäufigkeit in Dänemark wieder kontinuierlich an. Trotzdem gilt der dänische Aktionsplan bei vielen immer noch als Vorbild für eine europäische Regelung. Dabei wurde in Dänemark durch die Reduktion von Pflanzenschutz und Düngung nur eines erreicht: Die Dänen müssen nun qualitativ hochwertigen Brotweizen importieren, weil sie nicht in der Lage waren, mit diesen Reduktionsvorgaben Qualität zu produzieren.\n\nBei Ihrem Antrag zum Bienenschutz bin ich theoretisch bei Ihnen.\n\nAuch uns liegt das Thema sehr am Herzen, und wir haben dasselbe Ziel vor Augen: die Erhaltung dieser so wichtigen Art.\n\nRund 80 Prozent unserer Pflanzen müssen bestäubt werden, um Ernten zu erhalten. Deswegen kämpfen wir schon lange für den Bienenschutz. Bereits im Sommer 2015 wurde von unserem Bundeslandwirtschaftsminister eine Eilverordnung erlassen, die Bienen von neonikotinoidhaltigem Staub schützen soll. Aus dieser wurde dann ein dauerhaftes Verbot. Einfuhr und Aussaat von Saatgut, das mit in Deutschland nicht zugelassenen Neonikotinoiden behandelt wurde, sind ausnahmslos verboten. Ich finde, das ist ein Erfolg für den Bienenschutz. Aber auch hier tun Sie so, als ob die Landwirtschaft allein für den Rückgang der Bienen verantwortlich wäre. Auch das kann man so nicht stehen lassen. In den vergangenen Jahren sind zum Beispiel die Bienenvölker durch Züchtung - hin zu mehr Ertrag und geringerer Aggressivität - anfälliger gegenüber Krankheiten, Viren und Parasiten geworden. Auch der an sich sehr schöne Anstieg im Bereich der Hobbygärtner, die leider nicht alle organisiert und beim Veterinäramt gemeldet sind, erschwert bei Krankheitsausbrüchen die gezielte Behandlung der Völker und stellt so ein hohes Risiko für andere Bienenvölker dar.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Grünen, so einfach, wie Sie die Welt darstellen möchten - an allem Übel sind die Landwirte mit ihren Handlungen Schuld -, ist die Welt nicht.\n\nEs gibt eben viele verschiedene Faktoren, die auf Abläufe Einfluss nehmen.\n\nWir von der Union stehen für Wissenschaftlichkeit, wenn es um den größtmöglichen Schutz von Mensch, Tier und Umwelt geht.\n\nUnverantwortlich ist allerdings das politisch motivierte Hochpuschen von Risiken, die so nicht vorhanden sind.\n\nDie Stärkung von Forschung und Entwicklung zur Produktion zielgenauerer und noch umweltfreundlicherer Produkte liegt im Interesse von uns allen; da müssen wir dranbleiben. Den Aufwuchs in diesem Bereich hat Peter Bleser genannt.\n\nAllerdings ist angemessener Pflanzenschutz für die Ernährung von über 7 Milliarden Menschen auf dieser Welt unverzichtbar.\n\nWir von der CDU/CSU-Fraktion arbeiten weiter an konkreten Lösungen für konkrete Probleme. An reiner Stimmungsmache werden wir uns nicht beteiligen und deshalb Ihren Antrag ablehnen.\"\n8149,christian-schmidt,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Milch ist im Augenblick billig. Sie ist zu billig. Unsere hochwertigen Lebensmittel sind einen besseren Preis wert. Von der guten Milch werden Verbraucher satt. Es müssen aber auch die Milcherzeuger satt werden können. Wir alle wissen, dass bei diesen Preisen - das gilt übrigens nicht nur für Milch, sondern auch für Schweinefleisch - und durch Trockenheit Bauern in wirtschaftliche Schieflage geraten können und geraten sind. Das ist nicht gut.\n\nLandwirte, auch mit mittleren und kleinen Betrieben, brauchen gute Perspektiven. Deswegen ergreifen wir sowohl kurz- als auch mittelfristig Maßnahmen, um den Markt und die Einkommen zu stabilisieren.\n\nJetzt geht es allerdings vor allem um die Linderung der akuten Probleme. Deswegen stellen wir den Landwirten kurzfristige Liquiditätshilfen zur Verfügung. Ich würde gar nicht darüber reden und fragen, ob man das mag oder nicht - man braucht es. Deswegen soll das sehr schnell umgesetzt werden.\n\nIch darf bei der Gelegenheit sagen: Wenn wir Bilanz ziehen, dann müssen wir feststellen, dass die Flexibilität bei den Direktzahlungen, die im Rahmen der Agrarpolitik an die Milcherzeuger gehen und die einen Teil des Einkommens darstellen, zu wünschen übrig lässt. Ja, wir sind dieses Jahr spät dran. Das ist deswegen so, weil sich die neue Agrarpolitik mit Greening, Junglandwirteprämie und anderen neuen Elementen erst einpendeln muss.\n\nIch wäre bereit gewesen, die Direktzahlungen aus Mitteln des Bundeshaushaltes vorzeitig zu finanzieren. Wenn ich aber erlebe, dass alle 16 Bundesländer, die dafür die Verantwortung tragen, die weiße Fahne hissen und mir sagen, dass sie administrativ nicht in der Lage sind, den Tanker Direktzahlungen auf einen schnelleren Kurs zu bringen bzw. den Kurs zu korrigieren, dann haben wir, meine Damen und Herren, auch hier eine Baustelle bzw. ein Problem, das weit über die Milch hinausgeht.\n\nWir müssen uns die Strukturen der bürokratisierten europäischen Agrarpolitik ernsthaft und schnell vornehmen. So kann das nicht weitergehen.\n\nMittel- und langfristig müssen die Strukturen anpassungsfähiger werden. Manches muss ausgebaut werden - auch die Exportförderung, zu der ich noch kommen werde.\n\nIn Brüssel wurde, was die Soforthilfe angeht, über 500 Millionen Euro verhandelt. Die Kommission hat sie aufgeteilt. Der Anteil von 70 Millionen Euro für unser Land ist der größte. Das ist von Bedeutung für die Direkthilfe. Ich habe ein Modell vorgestellt, wie diese 70 Millionen Euro so schnell wie möglich bei den Landwirten ankommen können. Dabei ging es mir darum, die größtmögliche und schnellstmögliche Wirkung zu erzielen. Landwirte, die von ihrer Hausbank bereits ein Liquiditätshilfedarlehen erhalten haben, bekommen dazu einen direkten Zuschuss von der Bundesanstalt für Landwirtschaft und Ernährung. Das ist die Liquiditätshilfe, Geld, das direkt bei den Bauern ankommt. Das Darlehen muss unter dem normalen Satz verzinst werden - es müssen 1 bis 1,5 Prozent weniger sein -, es muss im ersten Jahr tilgungsfrei sein, und es wird eine Laufzeit von vier bis sechs Jahren haben.\n\nDieses Angebot - ein ähnliches Modell hat die Landwirtschaftliche Rentenbank bereits seit Juli für die „Superabgabe“ laufen - wird dann durch konkretes Cash in Form der Liquiditätshilfe noch befördert und beschleunigt, sodass de facto eine Regelung vorhanden ist, die dazu führt, dass die Konteninhaber, auf deren Konten gegenwärtig rote Zahlen sind, jedenfalls für die nächste Zeit wieder flüssig werden können.\n\nNatürlich ist mir klar, dass das die Probleme nicht löst. Aber wer schnell hilft, hilft doppelt. Und dann lasst uns weitersehen, was wir noch tun müssen.\n\nIch will darauf hinweisen, dass wir den delegierten Rechtsakt der Europäischen Union noch in dieser Woche erwarten. Dann werde ich sofort die Eilverordnung auf den Weg bringen, sodass alles, was die Antragstellung betrifft, noch im Laufe dieses Jahres über die Bühne gehen kann.\n\nDurch die Kopplung unserer Zuschüsse an die Darlehen stellen wir auch sicher, dass das Geld tatsächlich ankommt. Die Sorge, dass die Banken besonders viel verdienen, ist damit unberechtigt.\n\nWir schaffen Marktentlastung durch ein neues, attraktives Programm der privaten Lagerhaltung für Milch und Käse - diese wurde, was Magermilchpulver betrifft, bereits stark in Anspruch genommen - sowie ein verbessertes und praktikables Programm der privaten Lagerhaltung für Schweinefleisch, wenngleich ich nicht verhehlen will, dass das Beispiel der privaten Lagerhaltung für Schweinefleisch zeigt, dass man mit privater Lagerhaltung, wenn sie nicht klug angelegt ist, Probleme allenfalls in die Zukunft verschiebt, sie aber nicht löst.\n\nWir müssen aber auch die Fragen stellen: Was macht die Landwirtschaft zukunftsfähig? Wie schaffen wir anpassungsfähige Strukturen? Was sichert unseren Milchbauern in Zukunft ein gutes Auskommen? Natürlich ist es gut, zu wissen, dass die EU-Marktbeobachter davon ausgehen, dass sich der Milchpreis in den nächsten Jahren bei 35 Cent einpendeln wird; das ist die Grundlage. Aber auch dann wird es Ausschläge nach oben und unten geben. Natürlich sind wir gespannt-optimistisch, dass die Entwicklung der - jedenfalls bei den Produkten - wieder anziehenden Preise mit einem gewissen Verzug auf die Rohmilchpreise - so sind unsere Hoffnungen und Erwartungen - übergeht. Aber das löst natürlich das Problem nicht. Wir wollen daher die Ausschläge mit marktgeeigneten Mitteln abfedern. Wir brauchen einige Grundlagen dafür: erstens eine hohe Qualität und Regionalität unserer Produkte, zweitens vorausschauende Marktbeobachtung und ein Sicherheitsnetz und drittens weltweite Wettbewerbsfähigkeit. Die Milchquote ist Vergangenheit, und das ist gut so. Das soll auch so bleiben. Ich kenne niemanden, der in Wahrheit der Milchquote eine Träne nachweint.\n\nMein Dank gilt bei der Anpassung vor allem den Landwirtinnen und Landwirten sowie denjenigen, die den Weg und den Übergang - weg von der Milchquote, hin zu einem neuen Regime, das nun schon seit einigen Jahren besteht - vorbereitet und aktiv mitgestaltet haben. Auch von Verbandsseite wurde dieser Weg - Dank an den Deutschen Bauernverband - sehr gut begleitet und unterstützt.\n\nIch bin überzeugt: Die Marktorientierung wird den Milchmarkt langfristig stabilisieren;\n\ndenn mit unserer jetzigen Situation eines geringen Außenschutzes lassen sich die Milchmenge und der Milchpreis nicht vom Weltmarkt entkoppeln. All die Romantiker, die sagen: „Lasst uns doch ohne Außenschutz so etwas versuchen“ - als ob wir unseren eigenen Markt alleine regieren könnten -, weise ich auf das hin, was die Kollegin Tackmann im Hinblick auf die Subventionierung von Exporten gesagt hat. Die sogenannten Exporterstattungen sind Gift für die Länder der Dritten Welt. Ich will und werde sie nicht akzeptieren.\n\nIch will, dass dorthin exportiert wird, wo zahlungskräftige Kunden sind. Dass es zahlungskräftige Kunden zum Beispiel in den USA und China gibt, ist doch nicht von der Hand zu weisen.\n\nIch will keine Verwischung der Fragen.\n\nDie Wertschöpfungskette muss sich organisieren.\n\nMit Interesse, Frau Kollegin Bulling-Schröter.\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Kollegin.\n\nIch habe den Artikel nicht gelesen.\n\nWenn es sich aber so, wie Sie sagen, verhält, dann ist das die beste Vorlage dafür, dass wir TTIP brauchen.\n\nDie EU wird eine High-Level Group einrichten, die sich mit Marktmodellen, aber auch mit Ideen zu Risikomanagement und Sicherungsfonds befasst. Dort bestehen keine Denkverbote. Jede Idee muss aber wirklich weiterhelfen.\n\nDanke, dass Sie sagen: Die Partei hat immer recht. Der alte SED-Slogan würde nicht mehr funktionieren. Ich will aber auch allen Verbänden und allen, die auf diesem Gebiet unterwegs sind, sagen: Es gibt keinen, der immer recht hat. Deswegen bin ich bereit, darüber zu reden. Aber jeder muss schon den Nachweis erbringen, dass seine Idee auch wirklich greift.\n\nDas habe ich bei der Mengensteuerung bisher noch nirgendwo gesehen. Wer ehrlich zu sich selbst ist und wissenschaftliche Bewertungen liest, der kann zu keinem anderen Ergebnis kommen.\n\nWir müssen über viele Fragen reden, beispielsweise über Steuerungsmechanismen bei Preisanpassungen, über Versicherungsmodelle und die Frage, ob wir mit Fondslösungen abfedern können, und wir müssen über das Kartellrecht reden. Ich habe in Kürze mit dem Präsidenten des Bundeskartellamtes ein Gespräch auch über das Thema „Verkauf unter Einstandspreis“. Das ist ein Thema, das wir uns natürlich anschauen müssen. Wir werden darüber auch auf europäischer Ebene offen reden.\n\nEin letzter Punkt: Export. Der Export in die richtige Richtung ist wichtig. Wer ihn nicht will, der muss sagen, dass dann die Hälfte unserer Landwirte die Betriebe schließen müsste. Das will ich nicht, sondern ich will einen fairen und vernünftigen freien Handel haben. Deswegen werde ich die Mittel für das Auslandsmesseprogramm erhöhen.\n\nEin allerletztes Wort noch: Wir haben heute früh das Asylverfahrensbeschleunigungsgesetz verabschiedet und darüber debattiert - in der Regierungserklärung hat die Kanzlerin das dargelegt -, wie wir daran arbeiten müssen, dass nicht so viele Menschen sich auf den Weg zu uns machen. Die Menschen kommen zu uns aus Flüchtlingslagern, in denen sie - Gott sei’s geklagt - deswegen leben müssen, weil sie aus ihren Häusern gebombt wurden. Wenn wir, die internationale Gemeinschaft, die wir über Überfluss reden, nicht in der Lage sind, sicherzustellen, dass die Milch zu den Menschen kommt und nicht die Menschen zur Milch, dann haben wir versagt.\n\nDeshalb werden mein Kollege Gerd Müller und ich ein nationales Programm auflegen und uns darum kümmern, dass die Mütter und ihre Kinder, die im Libanon oder woanders in den Flüchtlingslagern sind, etwas bekommen. Das ist ein richtiges Verständnis von sozialem Marktgeschehen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n5416,kirsten-tackmann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Gäste! Und täglich grüßt das Murmeltier, das ist einer meiner Lieblingsfilme. Ich habe den Eindruck: Auch bei der Agrogentechnik kommen wir nicht aus der Zeitschleife heraus.\n\nDabei ist unser Auftrag ziemlich eindeutig. Die übergroße Mehrheit in diesem Land will keine gentechnisch veränderten Pflanzen, aus ethischen Bedenken oder deshalb nicht, weil man Gott nicht ins Handwerk pfuschen soll oder weil man die Natur schützen will. Die Linke will vor allem keine Macht der Konzerne über unsere Teller.\n\nAuch hier im Bundestag gibt es eine klare und breite Mehrheit gegen die Agrogentechnik - das ist eine interessante Koalition -: rot-rot-grün-blauweiß. Das ist ein ziemlich breiter Aktionsradius. Eigentlich ist auch Bundesminister Schmidt als CSU-Abgeordneter dagegen. Aber im Kabinett ist er ein bisschen CDU-fremdbestimmt und dann doch irgendwie dafür. Das klingt absurd, ist aber so. Das Problem ist: Eine große Mehrheit in der Volksvertretung wird von einer Minderheit erpresserisch ausgebremst, obwohl sie die Mehrheitsposition in der Gesellschaft vertritt. Auch das klingt absurd, ist aber leider so.\n\nAber bei den Saatgutkonzernen geht es eben um richtig viel Geld, und diese Quelle soll nicht versiegen. Dafür beerdigen ihre mächtigen politischen Freunde das Gemeinwohl unter einem Deckmantel der Freiheit von Wissenschaft, Wettbewerb und Handel.\n\nDie Linke hat von Anfang an prophezeit, dass sich das sogenannte Opt-out als vergiftetes Geschenk erweisen wird. Dabei geht es um die Möglichkeit, den Anbau von gentechnisch veränderten Pflanzen in Mitgliedstaaten auch dann zu verbieten, wenn sie in der EU zugelassen wurden. Auch das hört sich gut an, ist aber nicht gut, weil das ein trojanisches Pferd ist. Die EU-Kommission erwartet nämlich ein schnelles Ja bei der Zulassung gentechnisch veränderter Pflanzen, wenn die Regierungen in den Mitgliedstaaten sagen können, dass sie den Anbau im eigenen Land verbieten wollen. Auf meine parlamentarische Anfrage von vor einigen Wochen hat mir die Bundesregierung genau diese Antwort gegeben: In Brüssel ja, hier nein - vielleicht. Auch das klingt absurd, ist aber so.\n\nDas zeigt das eigentliche Problem. Wenn wir ein EU-Zulassungsverfahren hätten, das gefährliche Pflanzen tatsächlich verhindert, könnten wir uns die heutige Debatte ersparen. Das wäre zwar schön, ist aber leider nicht so. Aber gut, ein Anbauverbot in den Mitgliedstaaten wäre besser als nichts, zumal beim Opt-out genau die Ablehnungsgründe verankert wurden, die im Zulassungsverfahren leider fehlen, zum Beispiel die sozioökonomischen Gründe, die agrarpolitischen Ziele und die öffentliche Ordnung. Das sieht also gut aus, ist aber nicht so, nicht nur wegen erheblicher Rechtsunsicherheiten, auf die Minister Schmidt bereits hingewiesen hat. Noch schlimmer ist, dass die Bundesregierung die Bundesländer entscheiden lassen will - das ist deutsche Kleinstaaterei -,\n\nund zwar gegen die ausdrücklichen Beschlüsse der Landesagrarminister und des Bundesrates für eine bundesweite Lösung; diese werden wohl wissen, was sie getan haben. Das nährt meinen Verdacht, dass der Ausstieg aus dem Anbau gentechnisch veränderter Pflanzen eigentlich sabotiert werden soll. Ich sage ganz klar: Das lassen wir nicht zu.\n\nStatt Gefälligkeitsgutachten mit Bedenkenträgerhintergrund wollen wir mal was ganz Neues erleben: eine Verwaltung, die uns sagt, wie die politischen Mehrheitspositionen umgesetzt werden können, und nicht, wie sie verhindert werden.\n\nDenn es ist doch längst bewiesen, dass ein möglichst großflächiges Anbauverbot die einzige Chance für den Schutz der gentechnikfreien Landwirtschaft und Imkerei ist. Das Märchen von der Koexistenz zwischen gentechnisch veränderten und konventionell gezüchteten Pflanzen ist doch längst ausgeträumt, zum Beispiel weil die Verunreinigungen bei der Ernte, beim Transport, bei der Verarbeitung und bei der Vermarktung nicht oder nur mit sehr hohen volkswirtschaftlichen Kosten verhindert werden können. Wer trägt diese Kosten? Nicht Monsanto, Pioneer oder wer auch immer, sondern wir alle, die Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler. Deshalb ist ein großflächiges Anbauverbot alles andere als unverhältnismäßig.\n\nDass ausgerechnet die Union, die beim Mindestlohn gerade ein Bürokratiemonster in unglaublicher Größe an die Wand malt, hier jetzt tatsächlich ein Bürokratiemonster schaffen will, schlägt „dem Fass nun wirklich den Boden ins Gesicht“. Das ist Absurdistan. Das ist nicht zu leugnen.\n\nUm auf Punxsutawney-Phil, das Murmeltier, zurückzukommen: Bill Murray kam am Ende des Films zur Vernunft und wurde erlöst. Bei der Union habe ich noch nicht alle Hoffnung aufgegeben, und der SPD sage ich: Viel Erfolg!\"\n1014,kerstin-tack,\"Frau Ministerin, Sie hatten als Potenzial für die künftige Sicherung von Fachkräften Frauen, junge Menschen und ältere Menschen in den Fokus genommen. Wir meinen aber auch, dass wir noch ein immenses Potenzial an Fachkräften unter den Menschen mit Behinderungen haben, insbesondere auch den schwerbehinderten Akademikerinnen und Akademikern. Wir sehen, dass es nach wie vor eine große Anzahl von Betrieben gibt, die zwar eine Verpflichtung zur Einstellung hätten, sich ihrer Verpflichtung aber zunehmend durch das Freikaufen, durch die Abgabe entziehen. Ich glaube, wir haben hier ein -Potenzial, das wir nicht vernachlässigen dürfen.\n\nMeine Frage ist: Sehen Sie seitens der Bundesregierung Möglichkeiten, für eine stärkere Beteiligung von Menschen mit Behinderungen am Arbeitsmarkt zu sorgen, indem auch die Firmen, die ihrer Verpflichtung im Moment nicht nachkommen, eingebunden werden?\"\n7851,silke-launert,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Seit Jahren wird kontrovers darüber diskutiert, ob wir Kinderrechte in das Grundgesetz aufnehmen sollen. Das 25-jährige Jubiläum der UN-Kinderrechtskonvention bietet nun einmal mehr Gelegenheit, darüber zu diskutieren, und ist Anlass für die Anträge der Opposition.\n\nWas da beantragt wird, hört sich zunächst einmal gut an: „Kinderrechte ins Grundgesetz!“ - Was, die stehen da noch nicht drin? Das kann doch nicht sein.\n\nAber beim Durchlesen des Antrages stellt man sich, wenn man sich genau mit dem Verfassungsrecht beschäftigt hat, die Frage: Ist es denn wirklich so? Sind Kinder bei uns in Deutschland verfassungsrechtlich noch nicht ausreichend abgesichert?\n\nWenn man sich ein bisschen mehr mit der Verfassung beschäftigt, erkennt man, dass Kinder natürlich Träger von Grundrechten sind;\n\ndas wird hier nicht oft genug betont, aber es ist so. Sie sind Träger des Grundrechts auf Menschenwürde, Artikel 1 Grundgesetz. Sie sind Träger des Grundrechts auf Leben und Gesundheit, Artikel 2 Absatz 2 Grundgesetz; das ist relevant, wenn Kinder zu Hause verletzt werden. Sie sind Träger des allgemeinen Persönlichkeitsrechts; das wird immer wieder angeführt. Sie sind nach der geänderten Rechtsprechung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts inzwischen sogar Träger des Rechts auf Pflege und Erziehung durch die Eltern aus Artikel 6 Absatz 2 Grundgesetz. Die Rechtsprechung hat also schon sehr viel entwickelt; es gibt da sehr viel. Kinder sind Menschen, und sie haben dieselben Grundrechte wie Menschen.\n\n- Ja, weil Sie so tun, als seien Kinder bei uns in der Verfassung nicht ausreichend geschützt. So ist es eben nicht.\n\nIch frage mich: Wenn wir jetzt anfangen, Kindern besonderen Schutz zuzugestehen, kommen dann nicht auch die Senioren, kommen dann nicht zu Recht auch die Behinderten und sagen: „Auch wir möchten einen besonderen Schutz bekommen“?\n\nKommt dann nicht - zu Recht - die nächste Gruppierung?\n\nGenau darum geht es. Das ist mit dem System der Grundrechte, so wie es derzeit angelegt ist, nicht vereinbar.\n\nWissen Sie, ich habe ein Jahr Verfassungsrecht gemacht, mich ein Jahr mit Artikel 6 Grundgesetz beschäftigt.\n\n- Nein, aber die, die das fordern, haben sich meistens eben nicht so tief eingearbeitet. Deshalb würde ich Ihnen gern kurz sagen, was da drinsteht.\n\nEs gibt in der Verfassung eine zentrale Norm, in der das Verhältnis Kinder/Eltern/Staat geregelt ist. Dafür gibt es auch einen Grund; den erzähle ich Ihnen nachher. Wenn ich Sie jetzt fragen würde, würden Sie ihn nämlich wahrscheinlich nicht kennen.\n\nArtikel 6 Absatz 2 Grundgesetz besagt:\n\nPflege und Erziehung der Kinder sind das natürliche Recht der Eltern\n\n- das natürliche Recht! -\n\nund die zuvörderst ihnen obliegende Pflicht.\n\nDas heißt, die Eltern sind in der Pflicht. Das ist also nicht nur das einseitige Recht der Eltern, sondern es ist ein dienendes Recht im Interesse des Kindes. Entscheidend ist das Kindeswohl. Wenn Sie sagen: „Wir brauchen das Kindeswohl“, antworte ich Ihnen: Da steckt es drin. Das Bundesverfassungsgericht sagt das schon die ganze Zeit.\n\nIn Artikel 6 Absatz 2 Grundgesetz geht es wie folgt weiter - Satz zwei -:\n\nÜber ihre Betätigung wacht die staatliche Gemeinschaft.\n\nGenau das ist der Unterschied, den wir hier haben: Es erfolgt eine Kontrolle durch den Staat. Die Eltern haben das natürliche Recht und die Pflicht, die Interessen der Kinder wahrzunehmen. Der Staat darf dagegen nur wachen und nicht von vornherein bestimmen, was das Kindesinteresse ist.\n\nDer Staat darf eingreifen - es gibt aber Gegenrechte, zum Beispiel das allgemeine Persönlichkeitsrecht des Kindes -, und er darf sogar - Artikel 6 Absatz 3 des Grundgesetzes - das Kind von den Eltern trennen, wenn die Erziehungsberechtigten versagen oder wenn das Kind zu verwahrlosen droht. Glauben Sie mir: In der Praxis passiert es nicht selten, dass die Eltern versagen und man ihnen die Kinder wegnehmen muss. Weil es Kinderrechte gibt, dürfen Kinder auch jetzt schon den Eltern weggenommen werden.\n\nWir haben ein ausdifferenziertes System, und das funktioniert. Sie wollen mir doch nicht im Ernst sagen, dass alle Kinder bei uns schrecklich leiden.\n\nDer Rechtsprechung gelingt es hier, für einen angemessenen Ausgleich zu sorgen.\n\nIch möchte jetzt noch einmal ganz kurz sagen, warum sich diejenigen, die die Verfassung geschrieben haben, für diesen Ausgleich entschieden haben: Sie haben sich für diese Gestaltung entschieden, weil man während der NS-Diktatur entsprechende Erfahrungen gemacht hat. Damals war es üblich, die Kinder den Eltern wegzunehmen und sie, wann man wollte, von morgens bis abends fremdzubetreuen und zu indoktrinieren. Glauben Sie es mir: Genau das ist der Grund, warum diejenigen, die die Verfassung geschrieben haben, den Artikel 6 Absatz 2 so verankert haben, wie er ist.\n\n- Ich weiß, dass Sie es nicht wissen, sonst würden Sie sich nicht so aufregen. - Die Eltern sollen ein bisschen Freiheit haben, und der Staat soll nicht diktieren, was das Wohl des Kindes ist.\n\nDas ist mein Problem:\n\nWas wollen Sie mit Ihrem Antrag? Wollen Sie, dass wir einfach nur eine schöne Symbolpolitik machen, die man gut verkaufen kann, nach dem Motto: Kinderrechte jetzt auch ins Grundgesetz?\n\n- Nein, Sie haben es nicht verstanden.\n\nWollen Sie nur eine Symbolpolitik? Die haben wir jetzt schon. Wollen Sie, dass der Staat mehr in die Pflicht genommen wird? Oder wollen Sie - das ist der Grund, warum ich bezüglich dieses Antrags Angst habe -, dass wir noch mehr Gegenrecht - Kinder gegen Eltern - haben?\n\nWer bestimmt das Recht der Kinder? Der Staat? Wollen Sie, abgesehen von all den Einschränkungen des Elternrechts, die wir jetzt schon haben, dass jemand vom Schreibtisch aus alles besser weiß und bestimmt? Ich will das nicht.\n\nIch kann es nicht mehr hören, dass man von morgens bis abends immer nur sagt, Fremdbetreuung sei das einzig Wahre.\n\nGlauben Sie es mir: Wir brauchen auch ein bisschen Freiheit für die Eltern. Geben Sie sie ihnen, und lassen Sie es sein.\n\nIch habe einfach Angst, dass hier eine weitere Stärkung wieder dazu genutzt wird, um gegen die Eltern zu schießen. In diesem Zusammenhang sage ich: Denken Sie noch einmal darüber nach. Ich weiß, es ist 70 Jahre her. Viele wissen es nicht mehr. Wehret den Anfängen! Es gibt einen Grund, warum der Artikel 6 Absatz 2 des Grundgesetzes so aussieht, wie er aussieht.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8130,stephan-kuhn,\"Sehr geehrte Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Kein einziges Mal hat das Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt in der Vergangenheit die Angaben der Automobilhersteller kontrollieren lassen. Erst durch die VW\u001eAffäre soll nunmehr untersucht werden, ob das, was typgenehmigt wurde, auch tatsächlich verbaut wurde.\n\nDas Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt kann diese Aufgabe nicht selber wahrnehmen; denn das Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt besitzt keinen einzigen Rollenprüfstand, um zum Beispiel Abgasuntersuchungen vorzunehmen. Das ist in etwa so, als wenn die Polizei Verkehrskontrollen durchführen soll, aber keine Fahrzeuge dafür zur Verfügung hat. Das Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt ist vollständig auf technische Dienstleister angewiesen. Diese wiederum werden für die Zulassung von Fahrzeugen und Fahrzeugteilen direkt von der Automobilindustrie bezahlt. Da sind wirtschaftliche Interessenkonflikte vorprogrammiert. Wir brauchen daher eine unabhängige europäische Typgenehmigungsbehörde.\n\nDie Feldüberwachung der im Verkehr befindlichen Fahrzeuge sollte künftig durch das Umweltbundesamt übernommen werden.\n\nHerr Ferlemann, Sie haben die Abgasuntersuchung angesprochen. Das war interessant. Sie haben von der Endrohrmessung gesprochen. Ihnen müsste eigentlich bekannt sein, dass seit 2006 - so meine Erinnerung - gar keine Endrohrmessungen mehr durchgeführt werden.\n\nWar das jetzt ein Hinweis darauf, dass sie künftig wieder stattfinden werden? Dann wäre das ja sehr positiv zu bewerten.\n\nAutos, die Schadstoffgrenzwerte nur im Labor einhalten, aber nicht auf der Straße, sie dort vielmehr um ein Vielfaches überschreiten, sind nicht zukunftsfähig. Das ist Greenwashing, und das ist gescheitert.\n\nMessverfahren für Straßentests werden aktuell in Brüssel verhandelt. Bei den sogenannten Real Driving Emissions, kurz RDE, geht es um Abgastests unter realen Fahrbedingungen. Die Kommission hat am 6. Oktober einen Vorschlag dazu vorgelegt. So sollen die realen Emissionen ab 2017 nur noch maximal um das 1,6\u001eFache oberhalb der festgesetzten Abgasgrenzwerte liegen dürfen, ab 2019 nur noch um das 1,2\u001eFache und damit im Bereich der Messunsicherheit des RDE\u001eVerfahrens. Morgen, also am Freitag, dem 16. Oktober, muss die Bundesregierung der Kommission antworten, wie sie zu diesem Vorschlag steht. Erfreulich, dass sich die Bundesumweltministerin gestern öffentlich zu diesem Vorschlag bekannt hat. Nur scheint 24 Stunden vor Rückmeldefrist keine abgestimmte Position der Bundesregierung vorzuliegen; denn gestern hat der Parlamentarische Staatssekretär Norbert Barthle im Verkehrsausschuss bekräftigt, dass es dazu noch keine abgeschlossene Meinung der Bundesregierung gibt. Deshalb stellt sich die Frage, ob Verkehrsminister Dobrindt mal wieder auf der Bremse steht.\n\nIch erwarte von dieser Bundesregierung, dass sie sich jetzt konsequent für den Schutz der Menschen vor gesundheitsgefährdenden Stickoxiden und für eine bessere Luftqualität in Städten einsetzt. Das ist das Gebot der Stunde.\n\nDie Krise der deutschen Automobilindustrie kann auch eine Chance sein, wenn sie für die Umstellung auf emissionsfreie Antriebe genutzt wird. Wer es mit Klima- und Umweltschutz ernst meint, muss jetzt auf Elektromobilität setzen - und nicht länger auf den Diesel.\n\nDenn damit wäre man international schlecht aufgestellt: In den USA ist der Markt für Diesel praktisch tot, in China gibt es keine Diesel\u001ePkw, dort setzt man gleich auf die Elektromobilität.\n\nIndustriepolitisch gesehen, darf die deutsche Automobilindustrie nicht den Anschluss verlieren. Dafür hängen von ihr in Deutschland zu viele Arbeitsplätze ab. Die Politik muss jetzt unterstützend eingreifen: Wir brauchen ein Marktanreizprogramm mit einer Kaufprämie für Elektroautos, wenn die Elektromobilität - ob nun mit Batterie- oder Brennstoffzellentechnologie - endlich aus der Nische kommen soll.\n\nWir brauchen ein Investitionsprogramm für Elektromobilität, um zum Beispiel den Aufbau öffentlich zugänglicher Ladeinfrastruktur voranzutreiben. Eine klare Linie der Bundesregierung kann ich an dieser Stelle nicht erkennen: Frau Hendricks ist für eine Kaufprämie, Herr Dobrindt dagegen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, jetzt muss gehandelt werden, um die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der deutschen Automobilindustrie langfristig zu sichern.\"\n13982,heike-baehrens,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist gut, dass wir heute wieder einmal über ein Thema debattieren können, das uns Sozialdemokraten besonders am Herzen liegt,\n\nnämlich über eine würdevolle Pflege im Alter oder bei Krankheit. Ich bin sehr froh darüber, dass wir einiges von dem, was dafür notwendig ist, in dieser Legislaturperiode tatsächlich miteinander auf den Weg bringen konnten.\n\nInsofern hinken Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Linken, mit Ihrer zentralen Forderung der Realität etwas hinterher. Denn ein wissenschaftlich fundiertes Verfahren zur Personalbemessung in Pflegeeinrichtungen zu entwickeln und zu erproben, ist längst beschlossen und in Auftrag gegeben.\n\nGerade für die Pflegeheime ist es dringend notwendig, die Pflegeschlüssel neu zu bestimmen. Denn in den meisten Bundesländern wird noch heute mit den gleichen Personalrichtwerten wie vor 25 Jahren gearbeitet, und das, obwohl sich die Bewohnerstruktur in den Pflegeheimen inzwischen völlig verändert hat. Wesentlich mehr Menschen mit fortgeschrittener demenzieller Erkrankung, ein höherer Bedarf an medizinischer Behandlungspflege, kürzere Verweildauern und intensivere Begleitung in der letzten Lebensphase, das kennzeichnet die heute beschriebenen Anforderungen. Sie können mit den alten Personalschlüsseln nicht ausreichend bewältigt werden.\n\nDarum ist es so wichtig, tatsächlich tragfähige Grundlagen für die Personalbemessung zu schaffen.\n\nAber auch unabhängig davon sind die Verhandlungspartner der Selbstverwaltung, also die Einrichtungen und die Kostenträger, aufgefordert und in der Pflicht, bereits vorhandene Erkenntnisse umzusetzen. Denn sie können in Pflegesatzverhandlungen selbstverständlich nicht nur die auskömmliche Finanzierung, sondern eben auch gute Personalschlüssel vereinbaren. Das wurde im vergangenen Jahr im Zuge der Umstellung auf den neuen Pflegebedürftigkeitsbegriff vielerorts tatsächlich gemacht. Dafür haben wir als Große Koalition mit den Pflegestärkungsgesetzen I und II die Grundlage geschaffen.\n\nWoran wir aber schon heute denken müssen: Mehr Personal kostet auch mehr Geld.\n\nIm jetzigen System zur Finanzierung der Pflegeversicherung führt das dazu, dass die Eigenanteile der Pflegebedürftigen steigen. Diese Eigenanteile sind aber schon heute außerordentlich hoch und überfordern viele Betroffene. Darum werden wir als SPD sehr genau beobachten, wie sich die vielen Neuerungen der Pflegereformen auswirken. Wenn es so sein sollte, dass die finanzielle Belastung der Pflegeheimbewohnerinnen und -bewohner noch weiter steigt, dann werden wir in der nächsten Legislaturperiode die entsprechenden Konsequenzen daraus ziehen. Es kann jedenfalls nicht sein, dass die steigenden Personalkosten allein von den Pflegebedürftigen bezahlt werden müssen. Nein, da benötigen wir andere Ideen und Finanzierungskonzepte.\n\nWir werden beim Personal definitiv nicht sparen können. Nein, wir werden vielmehr ins Personal und in bessere Rahmenbedingungen für die Pflege investieren müssen. Denn wir Sozialdemokratinnen und Sozialdemokraten wollen nicht länger hinnehmen, dass Pflegekräfte immer mehr Aufgaben in immer weniger Zeit verrichten müssen, dass engagierte Pflegekräfte aus dem Beruf aussteigen, weil sie sich überfordert fühlen, dass Pflegekräfte eine zunehmende Entfremdung von ihrer Arbeit empfinden, weil sie ihren Arbeitsalltag mit ihrem Verständnis von einer würdevollen Pflege nicht in Einklang bringen können.\n\nWir wollen es nicht länger hinnehmen, Frau Zimmermann, dass die Ökonomisierung und die zunehmende Arbeitsverdichtung den Pflegekräften keinen Raum mehr für den eigentlichen Kern der Pflege lassen, nämlich für Zuwendung, für Anteilnahme und für den Blick auf den pflegebedürftigen Menschen mit seinem individuellen Bedarf und seinen sozialen Bezügen. Das ist es, was sich die Pflegekräfte wünschen und was diesen Beruf wieder attraktiver machen würde; denn wir brauchen - das wurde heute schon angesprochen - nicht nur eine bessere Personalbemessung, sondern auch die Pflegekräfte, die die zusätzlichen Stellen mit Leben füllen. Sollen sich mehr Menschen für diesen verantwortungsvollen Beruf begeistern lassen, braucht es eben neben verbesserten Arbeitsbedingungen vor allem eine höhere Wertschätzung und mehr Anerkennung.\n\nDaher zum Abschluss mein Appell an die Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Unionsfraktion: Blockieren Sie nicht länger die dringend notwendige Pflegeberufereform.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6362,florian-oßner,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Grünen, Ihr Antrag ist wieder einmal an Realitätsferne nicht zu überbieten.\n\nSo ist gleich zu Beginn Ihres Antrags von einer angeblich umfassenden Subventionierung des Luftverkehrs in Deutschland die Rede. Das kann man angesichts der wirtschaftlichen Gesamtlage der deutschen Fluggesellschaften und der scharfen Wettbewerbssituation mit den Konkurrenten aus der Türkei und dem Mittleren Osten nur als blanken Hohn bezeichnen.\n\nIn Ihrem Antrag lassen Sie geflissentlich sämtliche Anstrengungen der Flughäfen und der Luftverkehrswirtschaft für einen verbesserten Schutz vor Fluglärm unberücksichtigt. Es wird auch mit keiner Silbe erwähnt, dass die Schutzziele, die sich aus den Durchführungsverordnungen zum bestehenden Fluglärmschutz ergeben, an vielen Standorten noch in der Umsetzung sind. Insofern kann man Ihren Antrag nur wie folgt zusammenfassen: viel Ideologie und wenig Substanz.\n\nWenn dann auch noch ein prominentes Mitglied Ihrer Fraktion, nämlich die Kollegin Renate Künast - leider ist sie heute nicht anwesend -, sich via Twitter darüber aufregt, dass Air Berlin den Lieferanten seines berühmten Schokoladenherzens wechselt, zeigt sich die Doppelzüngigkeit der Grünen, wenn es um das Thema Luftfahrt geht, wieder einmal mehr als deutlich.\n\nHier wird abermals Wasser gepredigt und Wein getrunken. Der Kollege Klare hat es schon sehr gut ausgeführt: Einerseits will man den Leuten das Fliegen verbieten, aber andererseits selbst alle Vorteile des Fliegens genießen. Sie sollten endlich aufhören, die Menschen in unserem Land ständig zu bevormunden und ihnen zu sagen, was richtig oder falsch ist.\n\nMobilität ist heute eine Grundvoraussetzung für das wirtschaftliche und gesellschaftliche Zusammenleben. Fakt ist auch, dass Mobilität Umweltbelastungen wie Lärmemissionen verursacht; keine Frage. Das gilt für alle Verkehrsträger gleichermaßen. Laut Auswertung des Umweltbundesamtes sind in Deutschland 10,2 Millionen Menschen von Straßenlärm und 8,2 Millionen Menschen von Schienenlärm mit einem durchschnittlichen Schallpegel von mehr als 55 Dezibel betroffen. Von Fluglärm ist jedoch eine wesentlich kleinere Gruppe betroffen.\n\nInsgesamt ist von 738 000 Menschen die Rede. Das ist eine deutlich geringere Anzahl, als Sie uns mit Ihrem Antrag weismachen wollen.\n\n- Dazu dürfte auch ich selbst gehören, um auf Ihren Zuruf einzugehen. Denn ich wohne selbst in der Einflugschneise\n\ndes Münchner Flughafens.\n\nLaut Bundesumweltministerium hat sich der Anteil derjenigen, die sich von Fluglärm belästigt fühlen - der Herr Kollege Wichtel hat es bereits angesprochen -, von 2006 bis 2014 um insgesamt 65 Prozent reduziert.\n\nDas müssen Sie doch auch einmal zur Kenntnis nehmen.\n\nDas ist aus meiner Sicht ein enormer Erfolg in Anbetracht der Tatsache, dass die Zahl der Flugbewegungen kontinuierlich zugenommen hat und die Bevölkerung durch Neu- und Ausbauprojekte stärker für das Thema Fluglärm sensibilisiert ist. Dieser Erfolg geht vor allem auf das Engagement der Flugzeug- und Triebwerkshersteller zurück.\n\nModerne Flugzeuge werden durch den Einsatz neuer Technologien immer leiser, sodass sie bereits jetzt die zulässigen Lärmgrenzen deutlich unterschreiten. Sämtliche großen Hersteller, ob Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier oder Embraer, sind gerade dabei, ihre Kurz- und Mittelstreckenflugzeuge mit Getriebefan-Triebwerken auszustatten. Hierbei handelt es sich um eine Technologie, die vom Münchner Triebwerkshersteller MTU Aero Engines mitentwickelt wurde. Durch diese Technologie verkleinert sich der Lärmteppich während des Starts um insgesamt 70 Prozent. Dies sind Innovationen, die unser Land braucht.\n\nDer erste mit einem solchen Triebwerk ausgerüstete A320neo wird bereits im vierten Quartal 2015, also noch heuer Ende des Jahres, in Dienst gestellt.\n\nAber es wird noch leiser werden: Mit dem E-Fan will die Airbus Group einen elektrisch betriebenen Zweisitzer zur Serienproduktion bringen. Dieses extrem leise Flugzeug soll als Schulflugzeug eingesetzt werden und wird eine erhebliche Entlastung für die Anwohner an kleinen Sportflugplätzen bringen. Gemeinsam mit Rolls-Royce arbeitet Airbus zudem an der Vision eines hybrid-elektrisch angetriebenen Passagierflugzeuges mit bis zu 90 Sitzen.\n\nSie sehen, meine Damen und Herren: Elektromobilität findet zukünftig nicht nur auf der Straße statt, sondern bald auch in der Luft - ein Thema, das leider noch keine große Beachtung in der Öffentlichkeit gefunden hat.\n\nUm den Kreis zu dem anfangs erwähnten Schokoladenherzen zu schließen, möchte ich, gerichtet an die Kollegen der Grünen, noch abschließend sagen,\n\ndass ich mir, wenn es um die deutsche Luftfahrt geht, statt unnötiger, ideologisch geprägter Scheindebatten, die Sie führen, ein wesentlich größeres Herz für die deutsche Luftfahrtindustrie wünsche.\n\nDie deutsche Luftfahrtbranche sieht sich derzeit einer Vielzahl von Problemen ausgesetzt.\n\nDer Antrag der Grünen ist somit abzulehnen. Unser primäres Ziel in der nächsten Zeit muss vielmehr sein, die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit des Standortes Deutschland zu stärken, um weiter am langfristig weltweiten Wachstum des Luftverkehrs teilzuhaben und damit Arbeitsplätze zu halten, neue zu schaffen und die Individualmobilität des Einzelnen, ein wesentliches Lebensqualitätsmerkmal und somit ein Stück Freiheit, -\n\n- zu sichern.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für das Zuhören. Herzliches Vergelt’s Gott.\"\n9000,kathrin-vogler,\"Liebe Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Frau Leikert, es kommt nicht nur auf die Schönheit an. Wahre Schönheit kommt von innen. Deswegen wollen wir uns die inneren Werte dieses Gesetzentwurfes - vielleicht gibt es sie auch nicht - vornehmen.\n\nSie wissen, dass die Linke sich für sichere digitale Kommunikation einsetzt, gerade auch im Gesundheitswesen. Denn niemand möchte seine Gesundheitsdaten in falschen Händen sehen.\n\nDa gibt es viel zu tun. Aber das E-Health-Gesetz, das Sie uns hier vorlegen, geht in die falsche Richtung. Deswegen lehnen wir es ab.\n\nDie Bundesregierung verfolgt weiter das Prinzip, in einer Telematikinfrastruktur große Datenmengen miteinander zu vernetzen, die dann mit der elektronischen Gesundheitskarte und einer PIN abgerufen werden können. Weil in einem solchen komplexen System die Datensicherheit nur sehr schwer sichergestellt werden kann, wird es immer teurer und teurer, ohne absehbaren Nutzen für die Patientinnen und Patienten.\n\nSie legen jetzt klare Fristen dafür fest, bis wann welche Anwendungen am Start sein sollen. Mit diesen Fristen wird dasselbe passieren wie mit der Frist zum Ende nächsten Jahres. Bis zum 31. Dezember 2016 sollten nämlich alle Arztpraxen am Stammdatenmanagement teilnehmen; nur: Die Industrie kann die Geräte nicht liefern. Das stand heute in der Presse. Gestern haben wir den Gesetzentwurf im Ausschuss behandelt. Herr Gröhe, ich bin Ihnen persönlich - -\n\nIch bin persönlich von Ihnen enttäuscht, dass Sie uns diese wichtige Information, die Sie schon seit 14 Tagen haben, vorenthalten haben.\n\nIch finde, das ist eine Unverschämtheit.\n\nBis heute hat das Projekt die gesetzlich Versicherten schon nahezu 1,4 Milliarden Euro gekostet. Allein 100 Millionen Euro werden jetzt für den Austausch der Lesegeräte fällig, weil die alten Lesegeräte die Gefahr bergen, dass Daten mitgelesen werden können. Weitere 300 bis 400 Millionen Euro wird der regelmäßige Austausch der elektronischen Gesundheitskarten kosten; denn die Zertifikate darauf veralten und halten dann neuen Gefahren für die Datensicherheit nicht mehr stand. Überhaupt ist es zweifelhaft, ob eine solche Megadatensammlung in der heutigen Zeit mit vertretbarem Aufwand gesichert werden kann. Ein Sachverständiger hat in unserer Anhörung im Gesundheitsausschuss sehr klar gesagt - ich zitiere -, „dass eine solche Struktur im Jahr drei nach Snowden … schlicht und ergreifend nicht mehr zeitgemäß ist.“\n\nDie elektronische Gesundheitskarte ist auch kein sicherer Identitätsnachweis. Kolleginnen und Kollegen, beim Kauf einer Prepaid-Karte für Ihr Handy gibt es strengere Regeln, wie Sie sich zu identifizieren haben, als bei der Ausstellung dieser Karte. Da von Datensicherheit zu sprechen, ist einfach nur absurd.\n\nViele Versicherte teilen übrigens unsere Skepsis und weigern sich deshalb, ein Bild für die elektronische Gesundheitskarte einzureichen. Diesen Menschen drohen Sie jetzt mit dem Entzug sämtlicher Leistungen ihrer Krankenkasse; Menschen wohlgemerkt, die ihren Beitrag bezahlt haben. Sie sollen jetzt nur noch ein einziges Mal eine Ersatzbescheinigung ausgestellt bekommen, danach sind sie wie Nichtversicherte zu behandeln. Ich finde, das ist ein Skandal.\n\nDer Antrag der Linken „Elektronische Gesundheitskarte stoppen - Patientenorientierte Alternative entwickeln“ ist ein Gegenentwurf, der Datenschutz und Patienteninteresse ernst nimmt.\n\nWir fordern Sie auf, umzudenken. Sensible Patientendaten dürfen unserer Ansicht nach nur auf den Rechnern der Leistungsempfänger gespeichert werden. Mobile Speichermedien wie USB-Sticks oder Karten sollten zumindest ergebnisoffen erprobt werden. Damit hätten es die Patienten wirklich selbst in der Hand, wem sie ihre Daten offenbaren wollen. Das wäre ein moderner, ein dezentraler Ansatz.\n\nWir schreiben die Freiwilligkeit und die Selbstbestimmung der Patientinnen und Patienten groß. Zwangsmaßnahmen wie die Verweigerung von Leistungen lehnen wir ab. Wir wollen auch nicht, dass kommerzielle Anbieter mit ihren Angeboten in den Austausch der Gesundheitsdaten einbezogen werden.\n\nGesundheit ist keine Ware. Meine Daten gehören mir.\n\nSehr geehrter Herr Minister - -\n\n- Entschuldigung, Herr Abgeordneter Gröhe; Ihre Kurzintervention machen Sie ja als Abgeordneter.\n\nSehr geehrter Herr Gröhe, ich finde, dass das absolut nicht ausreichend ist,\n\nvor allem angesichts der Tatsache, dass Sie in dem Gesetz neue Fristen festgelegt haben und wir in der Beratung Zweifel daran geäußert haben, ob und wie Sie bzw. die Gematik in der Lage sein werden, diese neuen Fristen einzuhalten.\n\nIch denke, Sie werden mit diesem Projekt - eine Sachverständige in der Anhörung hat es wie folgt beschrieben: ein Flugzeug, das startet, ohne dass die Landebahn fertig ist - noch eine fürchterliche Bruchlandung erleben, leider auf Kosten der Patientinnen und Patienten, der Versicherten der gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung.\n\nDas finde ich einfach bedauerlich.\"\n2297,thorsten-frei,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Zunächst einmal möchte ich der Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen gerne dafür danken, dass sie mit ihrem Antrag die Frage, wie wir mehr Wertschätzung für Peacekeeper in internationalen Friedensmissionen erreichen können, zum Thema gemacht und damit in die Debatte eingebracht hat.\n\nIch glaube, wir alle haben vor dem Hintergrund der öffentlichen Anhörung unseres Unterausschusses für Zivile Krisenprävention zwei wesentliche Punkte im Kopf, wenn wir an das Thema denken: zum einen, dass in den vergangenen zehn, zwölf Jahren unheimlich viel passiert ist, und zum anderen, dass es natürlich noch viele Aufgaben gibt und die Wegstrecke in die Zukunft lang ist. Insofern haben Sie durchaus einige Punkte angesprochen, die aus meiner Sicht vollkommen richtig sind.\n\nEs ist vieles passiert. Wir haben es in den letzten zehn Jahren geschafft, die Infrastruktur zu implementieren und letztlich auch zu professionalisieren. Sie haben beispielsweise das Zentrum für Internationale Friedenseinsätze angesprochen. Auch die Bundesakademie für -Sicherheitspolitik ist hier zu nennen oder der Zivile Friedensdienst. Außerdem wurde die wissenschaftliche Begleitforschung in diesem Zusammenhang angesprochen.\n\nEs ist schon sehr viel passiert. Die Tatsache, dass viel Geld fließt, dass Deutschland 7,14 Prozent des Haushalts der Vereinten Nationen finanziert, dass wir gemeinsam mit den USA und Japan 40 Prozent der Friedensmissionen finanzieren, zeigt vor allem zwei Dinge: Erstens. Deutschland ist multilateral unterwegs: im Rahmen von Missionen der Vereinten Nationen, im Rahmen von Missionen der OSZE und im Rahmen von EU-Missionen. Zweitens. Wir lassen uns diese Einsätze viel Geld kosten. Auch damit ist eine Botschaft ausgedrückt.\n\nEs ist natürlich noch einiges zu tun. Wir sind uns darüber einig, dass es darum geht, ein Leitbild für die zivile Krisenprävention zu entwickeln, ressortübergreifend die Koordinierung der Akteure zu verbessern und im Bereich der Krisenfrüherkennung besser zu werden. Wir müssen auch besser werden, wenn es darum geht, von Early Warning zu Early Action zu kommen, und vieles andere mehr. Wir brauchen mehr öffentliche Anerkennung für diejenigen, die in Peacekeeping-Einsätzen sind. Es sind immerhin 49 solcher Einsätze, an denen wir Deutsche beteiligt sind.\n\nEs ist also vieles zu tun. Trotzdem muss ich Ihnen sagen, dass der Antrag Ihrer Fraktion letztlich in vielen Fällen alter Wein in neuen Schläuchen ist; denn wir haben vieles von dem, was Sie fordern, bereits umgesetzt. Wer einen Blick in die Koalitionsvereinbarung wirft, der sieht, dass wir diesen Weg ganz konsequent weitergehen. Wir haben den festen Willen, das im Laufe dieser Legislaturperiode umzusetzen. Ich denke beispielsweise daran, dass wir in der Tat mehr Polizeikräfte in zivilen Friedensmissionen benötigen. Dabei geht es darum, dass wir im Rahmen einer Bund-Länder-Vereinbarung zu guten Lösungen kommen. Wenn Sie mithelfen, dass wir mit der grün-roten und den rot-grünen Landesregierungen am Ende zu einem guten Ergebnis kommen, dann haben wir, glaube ich, alle etwas beigetragen.\n\nFrau Brugger, Sie haben es angesprochen: Sowohl der Bundespräsident als auch die Verteidigungsministerin und der Bundesaußenminister haben in München Anfang des Jahres bemerkenswerte Reden gehalten. Ich habe offensichtlich noch etwas mehr gehört als Sie: Ganz zentral war, dass die Frage, wie sich Deutschland aufgrund seiner Größe und wirtschaftlichen Kraft in der Welt engagieren soll - früher, effizienter und auch substanzieller -, eindeutig so beantwortet wurde, dass das Engagement nicht nur militärische Mittel beinhaltet, sondern darüber hinaus natürlich auch diplomatische, wirtschaftliche und krisenpräventive Mittel. Das hat im Übrigen bereits seinen Niederschlag in den „Afrikapolitischen Leitlinien der Bundesregierung“ gefunden. Dort wird ganz eindeutig gesagt, dass wir den kompletten Instrumentenkasten ausbreiten möchten und dass die zivilen Mittel dabei geradezu von zentraler Bedeutung sind.\n\nIch glaube, es geht auch darum, mehr öffentliche Wertschätzung zu erhalten. Das erreichen wir dadurch, dass wir dieses Thema in den Mittelpunkt rücken. Auch weniger schöne Dinge wie beispielsweise die Vorkommnisse in der Ukraine bzw. der Einsatz der OSZE-Beobachter dort haben in das Blickfeld der Öffentlichkeit gerückt, dass da viele in einer schwierigen Mission sind, häufig unter Einsatz ihres Lebens, und dass sie dafür die notwendige Wertschätzung benötigen.\n\nIch glaube, dass da sehr viel passiert ist und dass wir diesen Weg konsequent weitergehen müssen.\n\nDas beinhaltet beispielsweise den „Tag des Peacekeepers“, der am 11. Juni 2014 das zweite Mal veranstaltet wird. Dabei werden alle beteiligten Bundesminister in einer öffentlichen und würdevollen Zeremonie den Soldatinnen und Soldaten, den Polizistinnen und Polizisten, aber auch den zivilen Einsatzkräften für ihren wichtigen und wertvollen Einsatz danken und diesen Einsatz würdigen.\n\nDenken Sie beispielsweise daran, dass die Bundesverteidigungsministerin vor wenigen Tagen ihre Pläne vorgestellt hat, wie wir es schaffen können, die Bundeswehr attraktiver zu machen und den Dienst in der Bundeswehr besser mit der Familie zu vereinbaren.\n\nIch verweise auf viele andere Dinge darüber hinaus, an denen man schon sehen kann, dass wir einiges erreichen.\n\nLassen Sie mich noch einen letzten Gedanken ansprechen. Ich war vor wenigen Tagen beim Zentrum für Internationale Friedenseinsätze. Ich weiß, dass wir dort noch bessere Ergebnisse erzielen könnten, wenn dessen Mannschaft größer wäre und wenn wir aus dem Bundeshaushalt noch mehr Geld als 2,3 Millionen Euro zur Verfügung stellen würden. Wir werden mit dem nächsten Haushalt etwa fünf zusätzliche Stellen für das ZIF schaffen und damit ganz markant deutlich machen, wie wichtig und wertvoll uns diese Arbeit ist.\n\nIn diesem Sinne sind wir, glaube ich, auf einem sehr guten Weg.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n8827,ingrid-pahlmann,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Sehr geehrter Herr Minister Schmidt! Vorab erst einmal von meiner Seite meinen Dank dafür, dass Sie sich im Bereich „gesunde Ernährung“ klar positionieren. Auch vielen Dank für die Unterstützung des Gedankens, Ernährungswissen wieder an Schulen zu verankern. Ich war heute Mittag beim Deutschen Landfrauenverband. Er fordert das schon seit langem und freut sich sehr über diesen Beistand; das kann ich Ihnen sagen.\n\nFrau Maisch, man muss Ernährungswissen erst einmal haben, um dann gegen Fehlernährung ansteuern zu können. Dicke Kinder kommen auch daher, dass viele gar nicht mehr wissen, was Ernährungsbausteine sind.\n\nIch komme jetzt zum Haushalt 2016. Ich denke, er ist ein großer Erfolg für Landwirtschaft, Ernährung und gesundheitlichen Verbraucherschutz. Mein Dank gilt ganz besonders dem Verhandlungsgeschick der Haushälter. Allein in unserem Einzelplan haben wir 245 Millionen Euro mehr als im Jahr 2015. Hinzu kommen die schon genannten 100 Millionen Euro für den Hochwasserschutz im Einzelplan 60. Ich finde, das ist eine gute Grundlage, auf der wir unsere agrar- und ernährungspolitischen Schwerpunkte voranbringen können.\n\nDabei setzen wir mit dem Haushaltsansatz im Forschungskapitel ein wichtiges Zeichen. Forschung und Innovation in den Bereichen Landwirtschaft und Ernährung, aber auch im gesundheitlichen Verbraucherschutz sind von entscheidender Bedeutung für Gesellschaft, Praxis und Wirtschaft.\n\nOhne Forschung und Innovation werden wir die kommenden Herausforderungen der Ernährungssicherung, des Klimawandels und des Klimaschutzes, aber auch des Erhalts der natürlichen Ressourcen nicht bewältigen können.\n\nBei den Schwerpunkten, die uns in unserer Agrar- und Ernährungspolitik wichtig sind, spielt Forschung eine zentrale Rolle für neue Lösungen: beim Tierwohl wie beim Klimaschutz, bei nachhaltigem Pflanzenschutz, gesunder Ernährung sowie der Sicherheit von Lebensmitteln - also bei den Themen, von denen wir Agrar- und Ernährungspolitiker oft sagen: Das sind Lebensthemen.\n\nMit insgesamt 566 Millionen Euro hat die Forschung im Bereich der Ernährung und Landwirtschaft einen erfreulichen Aufwuchs von über 10 Prozent erfahren und damit den Stellenwert bekommen, der ihrer Bedeutung gerecht wird.\n\nFrau Tackmann, allein im Kapitel „Nachhaltigkeit, Forschung und Innovation“ werden gegenüber 2015 zusätzlich 33,9 Millionen Euro veranschlagt. Dazu kommen die fast 17 Millionen Euro für die Forschungsinstitute. Ich finde, 50 Millionen Euro ist definitiv mehr als nichts. Das müssen Sie anerkennen.\n\nWir alle wissen, dass die deutsche Land-, Forst- und Ernährungswirtschaft eine Schlüsselbranche der deutschen Volkswirtschaft ist. Wie in jeder anderen Branche auch hängen Wachstum, Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und Beschäftigung eng mit Innovationen zusammen. Mit den Forschungs-, Entwicklungs- und Demonstrationsvorhaben des Programms zur Innovationsförderung sollen technische sowie nichttechnische Produkte und Verfahren darum marktfähig gemacht werden; das ist ein ganz wichtiger Aspekt. Ich erwähnte schon unsere Bundesforschungsinstitute Julius-Kühn-Institut, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Max-Rubner-Institut, Johann-Heinrich-von-Thünen-Institut. Diese Institute erhalten 16,9 Millionen Euro zusätzlich - ich finde, zu Recht.\n\nDer Wissenschaftsrat hat den Instituten fast ausnahmslos gute Leistungen attestiert. Er erkennt ihre unentbehrliche Funktion als Vermittler zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik sowie zwischen Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft an und stellt eine positive Weiterentwicklung bei den Forschungs- und auch bei den Beratungsqualitäten fest. Daran wollen wir anknüpfen und die Bedarfsprofilierung und Bedarfsorientierung in den kommenden Jahren weiter verbessern.\n\nDie Forschungsplanung soll verstärkt abteilungs- und programmübergreifend erfolgen und die Praxisverwertbarkeit in den Vordergrund stellen. Dazu soll auch der Wissenstransfer in die Praxis verbessert werden. Es ist mir ein ganz zentrales Anliegen, dass das Wissen auch bei den Betrieben ankommt.\n\nIm Rahmen von Modell- und Demonstrationsvorhaben der Tierwohl-Initiative wurden Netzwerke von Praxisbetrieben zum Transfer von Forschungsergebnissen in die Praxis gebildet. Als forschungspolitische Sprecherin begrüße ich es ausdrücklich, wenn unsere politischen Handlungsfelder künftig noch enger durch die Forschung begleitet werden.\n\nWir haben es gehört: Das Tierwohl ist ein Thema, das die Gesellschaft bewegt. Forschung kann auch hier auf den verschiedensten Ebenen einen entscheidenden Beitrag leisten. Modellvorhaben zum Tierschutz nehmen in den nächsten Jahren zu Recht einen Schwerpunkt bei der Förderung von Modell- und Demonstrationsvorhaben ein. 7,5 Millionen Euro stehen für die Erprobung von Maßnahmen bereit, die zum Verzicht auf nichtkurative Eingriffe wie Schnabelkupieren oder Enthornen führen, zu verbesserten Verfahren bei der Schlachtung, bei der Haltung oder beim Transport von Tieren. Wir alle wissen: Verbote allein lösen die Schwierigkeiten in den genannten Problemfeldern eben nicht.\n\nHier setzen wir mit dem Haushalt 2016 ein Zeichen für die Branche. Neben den finanziellen Einbrüchen bei den Milchviehbetrieben haben wir zum Beispiel bei den schweinehaltenden Betrieben Einbrüche im Unternehmensergebnis in einer Größenordnung von 39 bis 49 Prozent. Das ist ein wirtschaftliches Desaster für die Betriebe.\n\nHinzu kommen immer stärkere Anforderungen und Auflagen an die Haltungsbedingungen. - Hören Sie gut zu, Herr Ostendorff.\n\nDas öffentliche Image besonders der viehhaltenden Betriebe ist denkbar schlecht. Wenn nun Politik - das können Sie ja ganz besonders gut - und Gesellschaft vehement Verbesserungen im Bereich Tierwohl fordern, dann müssen diese Forderungen handhabbar und vor allen Dingen auch begründet sein. Die Betriebe an sich sind willens, dem gesteigerten Tierwohl Rechnung zu tragen. Allerdings - das muss ich Ihnen auch sagen - müssen diese Vorgaben dann auch tragfähig, belastbar und vor allen Dingen wissenschaftlich fundiert sein. Da bringen eben keine vorschnellen Gesetze etwas. Wir brauchen belastbare Forschungsergebnisse.\n\nIm Rahmen der Tierwohl-Initiative werden wir das Deutsche Zentrum zum Schutz von Versuchstieren mit 20 zusätzlichen Stellen ausstatten. Es soll alternative Methoden erforschen, Forschungseinrichtungen und Behörden beraten, Öffentlichkeit und Fachöffentlichkeit informieren und die Forschungsförderung bei Alternativmethoden vorantreiben. Das Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut erhält drei neue Stellen für die Bearbeitung der Themen „Haltung und Verhalten von Schweinen“ sowie „Transport und Betäubung landwirtschaftlicher Nutztiere“. Insgesamt stehen für den Bereich Tierschutz somit fast 30 Millionen Euro zur Verfügung. Das zeigt, dass wir diesem Thema gerade auch in den schwierigen Zeiten einen hohen Stellenwert beimessen.\n\nIch bin aber auch fischereipolitische Sprecherin. In diesem Zusammenhang freue ich mich besonders, dass das Fischereiforschungsschiff „Walther Herwig III“ durch einen Neubau ersetzt werden kann, für den insgesamt gut 100 Millionen Euro in den nächsten drei Jahren bereitstehen.\n\nDas inzwischen in die Jahre gekommene Forschungsschiff ist das größte unserer Flotte und liefert für die Hochseefischerei wichtige Erkenntnisse. Denn die Bewirtschaftung der Fischbestände ist auf eine intensive wissenschaftliche Erforschung angewiesen. Der EU-Kommission dienen die erhobenen Daten zur Erarbeitung von Managementkonzepten für eine zukünftige bessere Bewirtschaftung und für eine nachhaltigere Nutzung der Fischbestände. Bestandsschonende, selektive Fangmethoden werden weiterentwickelt und leisten damit einen wichtigen Beitrag für unsere Hochsee- und Küstenfischer. Umweltdaten wie Schadstoffkonzentrationen, Radioaktivität, Salzgehalt und Temperatur werden unter dem Blickwinkel ihrer Wirkungen auf die Fische und das Lebensmittel Fisch gemessen. Ein neues Forschungsschiff leistet somit einen wichtigen Beitrag für unsere Fischer, aber auch für unsere Ernährung.\n\nEin weiterer Forschungsschwerpunkt - wir haben es schon mehrfach gehört - liegt bei der ländlichen Entwicklung. Mehr als die Hälfte aller Bundesbürger leben in ländlich geprägten Gebieten. Auch der Großteil unserer mittelständischen Wirtschaft ist dort angesiedelt. Die ländlichen Regionen bieten Raum für vielfältiges mittelständisches Gewerbe: Dienstleistungsbetriebe, aktive aufstrebende landwirtschaftliche Betriebe und das Handwerk. Und diese Unternehmer sind wichtige Akteure, die den ländlichen Raum stärken und die wir stärker in die Entwicklung einbinden wollen.\n\nDemografischer Wandel und die globale Wirtschaft stellen heute aber gerade diese ländlichen Regionen vor sehr große Herausforderungen. Uns ist es wichtig, gleichwertige Lebensverhältnisse in Stadt und Land dauerhaft zu erhalten. Leben und Arbeiten auf dem Land müssen auch in Zukunft attraktiv bleiben. Deshalb erhöhen wir die Mittel zur Stärkung der ländlichen Entwicklung deutlich. Wir wollen regionale Infrastruktur fördern, Wirtschaftsstrukturen des Mittelstands, des Handwerks und der landwirtschaftlichen Betriebe stärken und Strukturen der Daseinsvorsorge langfristig sichern. Dazu wollen wir auch die Gründung unternehmerischer Initiativen aus dem bürgerschaftlichen Engagement - auch das ist uns allen sehr wichtig -, wie zum Beispiel Dorfläden, Kitas, altersgerechtes Wohnen oder Energievorhaben, erleichtern.\n\nFakt ist: Politik, Zivilgesellschaft und aktive Betriebe müssen die Entwicklung in den ländlichen Räumen gemeinsam gestalten.\n\nFür den ländlichen Raum haben wir mit zusätzlichen 30 Millionen Euro ein klares Zeichen setzen können, um die Regionen fit für die Zukunft und lebenswert für die Menschen zu gestalten. Auch hier liefern die Modell- und Demonstrationsvorhaben wichtige Impulse. Wir lassen die Dörfer und die ländlichen Regionen nicht im Stich. Dafür setzen wir mit dem Haushalt 2016 ein starkes Signal. Noch einmal mein Dank an die Haushälter, die das möglich gemacht haben!\n\nIch bin in der Zeit geblieben. Ich denke, Sie sind auch mit mir zufrieden.\"\n3894,christian-kuhn,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Gäste auf der Tribüne! Ich bin froh, dass es heute bei uns in Deutschland eine andere Willkommenskultur gibt und dass sich viele Menschen mit hohem Engagement für das Wohl der Flüchtlinge, die im Augenblick zu uns kommen, einsetzen.\n\nIch bin dankbar, dass wir, anders als Anfang der 90er-Jahre, eine andere Stimmung und eine andere Debatte in Deutschland haben. Ich will ganz klar sagen: Das Boot ist nicht voll; das Boot ist niemals voll.\n\nHeute geht es um Grundrechte von Menschen, denen die Grundrechte in ihren Heimatländern versagt wurden, von Menschen, die gezwungen wurden, ihre Heimat zu verlassen, die Krieg, Menschenrechtsverletzungen, Zerstörung, Tod und Katastrophen am eigenen Leib erlebt haben, von Menschen, die oft traumatisiert zu uns kommen. Diese Menschen brauchen eben nicht nur einfach ein Dach über dem Kopf, sie brauchen eine menschenwürdige Unterbringung, ein soziales Umfeld, das ihnen dabei hilft, ihre Verluste und die dramatischen Erfahrungen zu verarbeiten. Die Unterkunft ist ein zentraler Baustein einer menschenwürdigen Flüchtlingspolitik. Deswegen begrüßen wir es als Grüne, dass in diesem Gesetzentwurf erstmals die Flüchtlingsunterbringung als Allgemeinwohl festgeschrieben wird. Das ist ein großer Schritt.\n\nWir Baupolitiker können die Fehler und Versäumnisse der Flüchtlingspolitik der letzten zehn Jahre nicht mit einer Änderung des BauGB reparieren. Wir müssen aber beim Thema Unterbringung immer die Menschenwürde der Flüchtlinge im Blick behalten.\n\nIch muss Ihnen ehrlich sagen: Ich bin skeptisch, ob Gewerbegebiete die Anforderungen an eine menschenwürdige Unterbringung erfüllen. Hier müssen wir alle genau hinschauen; das hat die Anhörung im Bauausschuss ganz klar gezeigt.\n\nDie Unterbringung in Gewerbegebieten darf es - das ist meine Überzeugung - nur in ganz bestimmten Ausnahmefällen,\n\nnur als Notlösung und nur als reine Übergangslösung geben, also als Ultima Ratio.\n\nDas steht leider nicht in dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf drin. Es ist nicht konditioniert. Das ist letztlich auch der Grund, warum wir uns heute enthalten.\n\nDie Kommunen befinden sich in einer Notsituation. Ich verstehe nicht, warum man jetzt nur am BauGB Änderungen vornimmt. Frau Hendricks hat in ihrer Rede darauf hingewiesen, dass man Kommunen nun unterstützen muss, wo es geht. Ich finde, dass diese Bundesregierung die Kommunen eben nicht unterstützt, wo es geht.\n\nErstens. Organisieren Sie mit den Kommunen einen Flüchtlingsgipfel, wie wir das in Baden-Württemberg und auch in Nordrhein-Westfalen gemeinsam mit den Sozialdemokraten mit großem Erfolg getan haben. Man braucht einen Flüchtlingsgipfel auch auf nationaler Ebene, um klarzumachen, dass wir heute einen Rahmen brauchen, der Flüchtlinge nicht mehr rechtlich ausgrenzt und Kommunen wirklich hilft. Greifen Sie den Kommunen bei der Gesundheitsversorgung der Flüchtlinge endlich unter die Arme.\n\nZweitens. Sorgen Sie endlich dafür, dass die Bundesanstalt für Immobilienaufgaben den Kommunen Liegenschaften für die Flüchtlinge zu fairen Bedingungen überlässt.\n\nEs kann doch nicht sein, dass die BImA sich in dieser Situation - und das meine ich wirklich ernst - eine goldene Nase an der Notlage der Kommunen verdient.\n\nDie Kommunen werden nicht unterstützt, sondern abgezockt. Das muss beendet werden. Sie müssen die Politik der BImA dringend ändern.\n\nDrittens. Legen Sie ein Bauprogramm für eine verbesserte dezentrale Unterbringung von Flüchtlingen in Wohngebieten auf. Das wäre eine schnelle Hilfe für die Kommunen; denn sie müssen die Liegenschaften jetzt anmieten oder erwerben und herrichten. Die Kommunen brauchen jetzt die Unterstützung bei den Baumitteln.\n\nGerade die Kommunen in Haushaltsnotlagen brauchen Unterstützung, da die Kommunalaufsicht die benötigten Kredite nicht genehmigt. Der Bund muss diesen Kommunen mit einem Bauprogramm unter die Arme greifen. Sie von der Großen Koalition sagen bei fast jeder wohnungspolitischen Debatte, dass nur Bauen, Bauen, Bauen hilft. Halten Sie sich an Ihre eigenen Worte!\n\nZum Schluss. In der Debatte, die wir über das BauGB geführt haben, stellen wir eigentlich immer noch die falsche Frage, nämlich: Wie können wir Flüchtlinge auf Zeit unterbringen? Dabei werden 30 bis 60 Prozent der Asylsuchenden - je nachdem, welchen Experten man fragt -, die heute zu uns kommen, dauerhaft in Deutschland bleiben. Wir müssen uns deshalb endlich die Frage stellen: Wie können wir diese Menschen ab dem ersten Tag optimal integrieren und unterstützen, damit sie gut in unserer Gesellschaft ankommen, damit wir ihnen, da sie ihre alte Heimat gerade verloren haben, eine neue Heimat geben können?\n\nDiese Frage müssen wir uns als Allererstes stellen.\n\nDanke.\"\n7239,peter-weiß,\"Frau Bundesministerin, Sie haben darauf hingewiesen, dass diese EU-Portabilitäts-Richtlinie, jetzt EU-Mobilitäts-Richtlinie, auch bei uns im Deutschen Bundestag sehr umstritten war und kritisiert wurde, weil wir keine negativen Auswirkungen auf das deutsche Betriebsrentensystem wollen. Wie ist die Positionierung der Arbeitgeber, also der Unternehmen, die die betriebliche Altersvorsorge anbieten, und der Gewerkschaften zu dem jetzt vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung zur Umsetzung der Richtlinie?\n\nFrau Bundesministerin, es ist zu Recht darauf hingewiesen worden, dass die betriebliche Altersvorsorge als zweite Säule des Alterssicherungssystems in Deutschland stärker ausgebildet werden sollte. Da ist die Umsetzung der Mobilitäts-Richtlinie nur ein Aspekt. Nachdem Kollege Kurth Sie nach dem einen Änderungsvorschlag, den es seitens des BMAS gab, gefragt hat, ist meine Frage: Was ist das Ziel der Gutachten zur betrieblichen Altersvorsorge, die zum einen das BMAS - es ist bereits auf der Homepage veröffentlicht - und zum anderen das Bundesfinanzministerium in Auftrag gegeben haben? Werden wir uns im kommenden Jahr mit nur einem Vorschlag oder eventuell mit einem ganzen Maßnahmenbündel zur Stärkung der betrieblichen Altersvorsorge beschäftigen?\"\n10022,katja-dorner,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Liebe Gäste! Dass wir über eine konkrete frauenpolitische Initiative dieser Bundesregierung gesprochen haben, ist ziemlich genau ein Jahr her. Damals wurde nämlich das „Quötchen“ verabschiedet. Das ist sicherlich eine gute Sache, aber nicht wirklich der ganz große Wurf.\n\nDas war vor einem Jahr. Heute diskutieren wir über den CEDAW-Bericht. Es ist klar: Der CEDAW-Bericht - er ist das wichtigste Menschenrechtsinstrument für Frauen - ist ohne Frage eine Debatte wert. Ich will aber doch feststellen: Dass zum 8. März, dem Internationalen Frauentag, so gar keine konkrete Initiative von der Bundesregierung ausgeht, enttäuscht mich und erschreckt mich auch.\n\nDenn das zeigt, dass der Bundesregierung in der Frauenpolitik die Puste ausgegangen ist, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen. Dabei gibt es wirklich genug zu tun, um das anzugehen, was CEDAW einfordert, nämlich die Beseitigung jeder Form von Diskriminierung der Frau.\n\nDer aktuelle Bericht gibt auch ganz klare Hinweise, was für die Bundesrepublik ansteht. Einen Punkt will ich hier noch einmal ganz stark betonen: - Stichwort „Entgeltgleichheit“.\n\nDeutschland besetzt seit Jahren den traurigen Spitzenplatz in der Europäischen Union, wenn es um die Lohnlücke zwischen Frauen und Männern geht. In keinem anderen europäischen Land gilt der Leitsatz „Gleicher Lohn für gleiche oder gleichwertige Arbeit“ so wenig wie bei uns. Das ist einfach beschämend und ein Ärgernis, dessen Beseitigung wir wirklich umgehend in Angriff nehmen sollten.\n\nDas immer wieder angekündigte Entgeltgleichheitsgesetz liegt uns bis heute noch immer nicht vor. Da die Spatzen von den Dächern pfeifen, wie massiv Teile der Bundesregierung schon jetzt auf die Bremse drücken, dürfen wir leider nicht viel Gutes für dieses Gesetz erwarten.\n\nWenn das Entgeltgleichheitsgesetz der Großen Koalition tatsächlich nur für Betriebe mit mehr als 500 Mitarbeitern und Mitarbeiterinnen gelten soll, wie es wohl geplant ist, dann ist der zahnlose Tiger doch schon vorprogrammiert. Wir Grüne wollen ein Entgeltgleichheitsgesetz, das tatsächlich wirkt und seinen Namen auch verdient.\n\nDa ich schon einmal bei nicht umgesetzten Ankündigungen bin: Wo steckt eigentlich das Recht auf Rückkehr in Vollzeit? Frau Ferner hat es heute auch wieder angekündigt. Ich habe das gestern einmal flott gegoogelt: Manuela Schwesig hat es am 9. Januar 2014 und am 7. Januar 2015 angekündigt, Andrea Nahles hat es am 18. Dezember 2013, am 15. März 2014 und am 7. Januar 2015 angekündigt. Das ist noch nicht einmal eine vollständige Auflistung. Für 2015 wurde es uns dann konkret versprochen. Wo steckt der entsprechende Gesetzentwurf?\n\nDas Recht auf Rückkehr in Vollzeit ist zentral, um Frauen den Weg aus der erzwungenen Teilzeit zu ebnen, aber eben auch, um Teilzeit für Männer attraktiver zu machen. Deshalb muss es unbedingt kommen. Wir fordern die Bundesregierung auf, endlich einen Gesetzentwurf zu diesem Thema vorzulegen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen, die autonomen Frauenhäuser haben vor einer Woche eine Bustour durch die Bundesländer gestartet. Sie machen damit auf die schwierige finanzielle Situation der Frauenhäuser aufmerksam. Ich bin der Initiative sehr dankbar, dass sie so hartnäckig an diesem Thema dranbleibt.\n\nDieses Thema wird auch im CEDAW-Bericht ganz zentral aufgegriffen. Der Ausschuss zeigt sich sehr besorgt über die fehlende nachhaltige Finanzierung der Frauenhäuser und den mangelnden Zugang für Frauen mit Behinderung, für Ausländerinnen und für einkommensschwache Frauen.\n\nHier besteht auch ganz klar Handlungsbedarf. Die Zuständigkeit für die Finanzierung der Frauenhäuser darf nicht einfach lapidar auf die Länder und auf die Kommunen abgeschoben werden. Wir sehen hier den Bund weiterhin in der Pflicht.\n\nIch konnte nur einige Beispiele nennen, aber es gibt frauenpolitisch nun wirklich genug zu tun. Es wird Zeit, dass sich die Bundesregierung wieder aufrafft, hier konkrete Initiativen vorzulegen.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n13591,alois-rainer,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wer hätte zu Beginn dieser Legislaturperiode gedacht, dass wir jetzt - fast an ihrem Ende - dastehen und über einen Nachtragshaushalt sprechen, einen Nachtragshaushalt im positiven Sinne. Ich kenne das Problem nur zu gut, dass man aus Nachtragshaushalten hätte investieren müssen, aber das Geld nicht zur Verfügung stand.\n\nWir sind in der glücklichen Lage, in der luxuriösen Lage, darüber sprechen zu können, wie wir das Geld verwenden, das im letzten Jahr erwirtschaftet worden ist.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, lassen Sie mich zu Beginn Folgendes sagen: Auch wenn man nicht will, dass zu viel Zeit ins Land geht, sondern schnell vorankommen möchte, muss es erlaubt sein, über die Verteilung von 6,2 Milliarden Euro eine Woche, zwei Wochen oder auch drei Wochen länger zu diskutieren. Es geht nämlich um richtig viel Geld.\n\nWir stecken jetzt 3,5 Milliarden Euro zusätzlich in den Kommunalinvestitionsförderungsfonds. Wir hatten ja bereits 3,5 Milliarden Euro in diesen Fonds gesteckt, und jetzt kommen 3,5 Milliarden Euro hinzu, was sinnvoll ist; das ist unstrittig und heute schon gesagt worden. Man muss aber auch ganz klar sagen: Zuständig für eine angemessene Finanzausstattung der Kommunen sind die Länder. Wir nehmen diese zusätzliche Aufgabe an und investieren nicht nur 3,5 Milliarden Euro, sondern insgesamt 7 Milliarden Euro. Ich freue mich darüber und hoffe, dass viele Kommunen dieses Angebot annehmen und die zweiten 3,5 Milliarden Euro schneller abgerufen werden als die ersten 3,5 Milliarden Euro; denn der Mittelabfluss verläuft ja stockend.\n\nWenn man über Investitionen in den Straßenverkehr oder andere Bereiche spricht, sollte man auch daran denken, dass wir in manchen Bereichen momentan zu viel Geld zur Verfügung stellen, so viel, dass es gar nicht abfließen kann. Deshalb ist es meines Erachtens richtig, notwendig und generationengerecht, zumindest einen großen Teil des Geldes, das in der Rücklage steckt, für die Tilgung zu verwenden oder als zweckgebundene Rücklage zu deklarieren, um zu einem späteren Zeitpunkt - es läuft ja nicht immer so gut wie jetzt - daraus Geld entnehmen zu können.\n\nMein Favorit ist aber ganz klar - das sage ich ehrlich - die Schuldentilgung;\n\ndenn wir werden nicht in jedem Jahr in einer so guten Situation sein wie in diesem Jahr. Darüber lässt sich tunlich und trefflich streiten. Es ist ja auch okay, in einer Großen Koalition, generell in einer Koalition unterschiedlicher Meinung zu sein. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Opposition, es ist auch okay, wenn auch Sie eine andere Meinung haben.\n\nDas ist gelebter Parlamentarismus.\n\nIn diesem Sinne freue ich mich auf die Diskussionen, auf diese Luxusdiskussionen, die wir im Ausschuss führen werden, und wünsche Ihnen noch einen angenehmen Abend.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n7682,agnieszka-brugger,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Am 26. September 2014 kam es in der mexikanischen Stadt Iguala zu einer unfassbaren Tragödie und zu einem schrecklichen Verbrechen. Vor fast einem Jahr griffen dort lokale Polizisten und Söldner der Kartelle und der Mafia Studenten an und feuerten in die Menge. 6 von ihnen starben, und 43 Studenten wurden mit Gewalt auf Trucks geladen und sind bis heute spurlos verschwunden. Herr Kollege Pfeiffer, ich muss sagen: Ihre Rede der zynischen Kälte, das ist einfach nur ein Schlag in das Gesicht der Angehörigen dieser Menschen.\n\nRelativ schnell war nämlich klar, dass bei diesem Angriff deutsche Sturmgewehre aus dem Hause Heckler & Koch eingesetzt worden sind, die laut Bundesregierung niemals dorthin hätten geliefert werden dürfen. Es klingt hart, aber es ist wahr: Die deutsche Bundesregierung trägt eine Mitschuld an dieser Gräueltat.\n\nDas ist kein Unsinn.\n\nLesen Sie doch einmal die Details nach! Und es sind nicht olle Kamellen, über die wir heute hier diskutieren. Es sind nämlich keine ollen Kamellen, was jetzt über das Verfahren der Bundesregierung zur Genehmigung der G36Gewehre herausgekommen ist. Das offenbart das erschreckende Bild einer Politik, die den Kompass für Sicherheit und Menschenrechte völlig verloren hat.\n\nWas 2005 und in den folgenden Jahren unter der letzten Großen Koalition passiert ist, das hat mit einer restriktiven Rüstungsexportpolitik rein gar nichts zu tun. Sie haben die strengen Regeln, die es in Deutschland auf dem Papier gibt, in der Realität in ihr perverses Gegenteil verkehrt. Ich mache Ihnen das gerne konkret, damit Sie das nachvollziehen können.\n\nDas Auswärtige Amt hat, bevor der erste Deal genehmigt wurde, gesagt: Es gibt keine besonderen deutschen außen- und sicherheitspolitischen Interessen, Mexiko mit G36-Gewehren zu beliefern. Das Auswärtige Amt hat auch auf Gefahren in Bezug auf Menschenrechte hingewiesen. Die deutschen Regeln besagen: Keine Kriegswaffenexporte in Staaten außerhalb von NATO und EU, es sei denn, es gibt besondere außen- und sicherheitspolitische Interessen. Die deutschen Richtlinien besagen: Keine Exporte in Staaten, in denen die Menschenrechte verletzt werden. - Aber dann waren die Bedenken des Auswärtigen Amtes - das ist doch komisch - vom Tisch. Ich frage Sie: Wessen Interessen sind hier zum Zuge gekommen? Doch nicht die der Menschenrechte, nicht die der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, sondern offensichtlich die Interessen eines einzelnen Rüstungsunternehmens.\n\nDann lesen Sie doch einmal die Zeitung.\n\nIch kann Ihnen gerne noch ein anderes Beispiel nennen.\n\nIrgendwann wurden bestimmte Provinzen von den Genehmigungen ausgenommen, als klar war, dass dort die Menschenrechtslage noch schlimmer und die Polizei noch korrupter ist. Aufgrund eines Tipps aus dem Bundeswirtschaftsministerium hat Heckler & Koch seinen Antrag entsprechend angepasst. Jetzt kommt heraus, dass dem Mitarbeiter aus dem Bundeswirtschaftsministerium von Anfang an klar war, dass man diese Regelung nicht überprüfen kann, dass von Anfang an klar war, dass die Waffen mit sehr hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit genau dort gelandet sind, wo sie eigentlich nicht sein dürften.\n\nEin drittes Beispiel: Neu für Alt. Diesen wichtigen Grundsatz haben wir eben auch schon gehört. Er besagt, dass der Empfänger in dem Umfang, in dem er neue Waffen erhält, alte Waffen aus seinen Beständen vernichten muss. Und dann lässt man sich abspeisen mit einem Bild, auf dem eine Mitarbeiterin der deutschen Botschaft mit einem Mitarbeiter von Heckler & Koch posiert, auf dem zu sehen ist, wie ein paar Hundert alte Gewehre vernichtet werden. Daraufhin liefert man mehrere Tausend neue Gewehre.\n\nIch muss Ihnen sagen: Sie missbrauchen diesen wichtigen Grundsatz. Das ist nichts anderes als eine einzige große Heuchelei.\n\nIch finde es erschreckend, wie sich Beamte der Bundesregierung zu willfährigen Helfern einer Waffenschmiede gemacht haben, um einen sehr hohen Preis.\n\nEine solche Vetternwirtschaft in diesem Ministerium darf wirklich nicht akzeptiert werden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir Grüne verlangen von Bundeswirtschaftsminister Sigmar Gabriel, von Außenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier und von der Verteidigungsministerin Ursula von der Leyen und all den anderen Ministerinnen und Ministern, die hinter den verschlossenen Türen des Bundessicherheitsrates sitzen und über Rüstungsexporte entscheiden: Kommen Sie ja nicht auf die Idee, wie einige Kollegen aus der Union, diesen Vorfall kleinzureden! Sorgen Sie für lückenlose Aufklärung, und ziehen Sie strukturelle und personelle Konsequenzen, damit sich so etwas nie wiederholt!\n\nEs ist höchste Zeit, dass sich die deutsche Politik der Waffenexporte endlich umfassend und radikal ändert.\n\nWir Grüne werden nicht aufgeben, für eine Politik zu streiten, die sich Frieden, Sicherheit und Menschenrechten verpflichtet fühlt und diese nicht irgendwelchen Gewinninteressen einzelner Rüstungsunternehmen opfert.\n\nWir können das, was in Mexiko geschehen ist, nicht wiedergutmachen. Wir können das Leid der Menschen, die dort gestorben sind, der Menschen, die dort entführt worden sind, das Leid der Angehörigen und Freunde, die sie bis zum heutigen Tage verzweifelt suchen, nicht rückgängig machen. Wir können und wir müssen aber dafür sorgen, dass sich so etwas niemals wiederholt.\"\n991,kerstin-kassner,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Werte Gäste! Letzteres ganz besonders; denn das sind wir als Touristiker den Gästen schuldig.\n\nIch habe die Zeit im Herbst und im Winter des vergangenen Jahres, als wir noch nicht in den Ausschüssen tagten, genutzt, um mich eingehend mit diesem Bericht vertraut zu machen. Ich habe darin viel Wissenswertes und Interessantes gelesen, aber ich habe auch einige Stellen vermisst, wo ich gerne weitere Impulse gesetzt hätte. Aber vielleicht liegt das genau daran, wie es die Parlamentarische Staatssekretärin sagte, dass wir unterschiedliche Sichtweisen auf die Dinge haben. Vielleicht liegt gerade darin für uns die Chance, mehr für den Tourismus, der bekanntlich kein politisches Schlachtfeld sein darf, zu machen und positive Entwicklungen in dieser Legislaturperiode voranzutreiben.\n\nDass sich das lohnt, zeigen die einschlägigen Zahlen in diesem Bericht. Der direkte Umsatz beträgt 97 Milliarden Euro, fast 220 Milliarden Euro werden durch den Tourismus generiert, die Zahl der Beschäftigten ist hoch. Das sind Gründe, für die es sich lohnt, konsequent am Thema zu bleiben.\n\nEs tauchen aber immer wieder Situationen auf, die zeigen, dass man den Tourismus behüten muss. Ich selbst habe das während meiner Tätigkeit als Landrätin erlebt. Wir hatten einmal ein Naturereignis, und von einem Tag zum anderen schwiegen die Telefone und wurden Buchungen storniert. Das war eine ernsthafte Bedrohung einer ganzen Region, das kann ich Ihnen sagen. Wir mussten viel für unser Image tun, um das wieder auszubügeln. Daran arbeiten wir eigentlich heute noch. Aber das hat uns auch ein Stück weit zusammengeschweißt.\n\nIch möchte heute auf drei Punkte eingehen, die meiner Fraktion und mir besonders am Herzen liegen. Der erste Punkt betrifft - den haben auch Sie genannt - die Frage der Arbeitskräfte. Uns wird im Mai ein Bericht vorgelegt, in dem eine Bewertung des Arbeitsmarktes und eine Arbeitskräfteanalyse vorgenommen werden. Wir werden uns damit sicherlich sehr intensiv auseinandersetzen. Ich kann Ihnen sagen, dass das auch wirklich dringend notwendig ist.\n\nWenn es etwas gibt, was die Region Mecklenburg-Vorpommern und auch meine Heimatinsel Rügen kennzeichnet, dann das, dass dort alle Entwicklungen auf dem Arbeitskräftemarkt wie mit einem Brennglas vorweggenommen werden; man erkennt sehr früh Tendenzen. Wir haben es sehr stark mit der Alterung in unserer Bevölkerung zu tun. Wir haben sehr stark damit zu tun, dass wir nur wenige Wirtschaftsbranchen haben. Bei uns konzentriert sich alles auf den Tourismus und die Landwirtschaft; viel mehr ist da nicht.\n\nDann macht es mir wirklich großes Kopfzerbrechen, dass es freie Stellen für Köche und Hotelangestellte gibt, dass es aber eben auch sehr viele gibt, die arbeitslos sind. Dazu muss ich Ihnen sagen: Dafür gibt es ganz objektive Gründe: Man muss einen Beruf im Tourismus wirklich lieben und mit seiner ganzen Persönlichkeit ausgestalten. Wenn sich andere erholen, es sich gemütlich machen, dann arbeiten die Touristiker. Das machen sehr viele sehr gern; schließlich macht es auch Spaß. Da kommt auch etwas zurück.\n\nAber man muss es auch können. Man muss in der Lage sein, seine familiären Anforderungen mit den beruflichen Herausforderungen in Übereinstimmung zu bringen. Man muss bereit sein, Überstunden auf sich zu nehmen. Unter Umständen muss man bereit sein, nur im Sommer zu arbeiten und im Winter zu Hause zu sein. Das ist nicht einfach. Es ist auch nicht einfach, nach der Saisonarbeit, also zu Beginn des Winters, zum Arbeitsamt zu gehen. Mir fehlen Impulse und Möglichkeiten, wie man den betroffenen Menschen noch stärker helfen kann.\n\nEs gab bei uns beispielsweise die sogenannten Winterakademien. So etwas wäre eine Möglichkeit, wo man ansetzen könnte.\n\nDer zweite Punkt, der mir wichtig ist, sind die Kinder- und Jugendreisen. Hier gibt es noch ein unendliches Feld, das man bestellen kann. Wir alle erinnern uns an unsere Klassenfahrten. Das waren wirklich schöne Erlebnisse. Solche Reisen leisten aber auch etwas für die Bildung. Man lernt andere Länder, andere Kulturen kennen. Das macht einen wirklich zum Weltbürger, und am Ende sieht man auch die eigene Heimat, das eigene Zuhause mit ganz anderen Augen. Auch das tut gut.\n\nDer dritte Punkt, der mir wichtig ist - wir haben es mitbekommen; es ist ein ressortübergreifendes Thema; es lohnt sich, von allen Seiten daran zu arbeiten -: Wir wünschen uns, dass es direkt im Bundeskanzleramt einen verantwortlichen Koordinator gibt, der diese Dinge miteinander vernetzt, der daran arbeitet, dass alle Ressorts nicht aneinander vorbei-, sondern gemeinsam in diese Richtung wirken.\n\nIch denke, es lohnt sich, dafür zu streiten. Wir stehen bereit. Ich freue mich auf die Zusammenarbeit im Tourismusausschuss, aber natürlich auch auf die Zusammenarbeit mit vielen Verbänden sowie vielen Betroffenen aus den Regionen und den Bereichen der Wirtschaft.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5957,hans-peter-uhl,\"Herr Präsident! Meine verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Gegenstand von Politik sind Interessen. Die Politik muss mit Interessen umgehen. Organisierte Inte-ressenwahrnehmung, auch Lobbyismus genannt, gehört selbstverständlich zur parlamentarischen Demokratie. Einflussnahme von Interessengruppen auf den politischen Diskurs ist also legitim, bedarf aber der Transparenz und der Korrektur, und zwar durch uns Parlamentarier. Wir sind die Vertreter des ganzen Volkes. Wir sind die Vertreter des Gemeinwohls.\n\nIn unserem lernenden System der parlamentarischen Demokratie brauchen wir das Gespräch mit Interessenvertretern bzw. Lobbyisten. Wir brauchen Expertenanhörungen und Veranstaltungen, auf denen wir uns den Sachverstand herbeiholen, den wir nicht haben können. Aber nur bei uneigennütziger Gewichtung verschiedenster Partikularinteressen wird das Gemeinwohl zum Gesetz. Nicht immer spiegelt die parlamentarische Wirklichkeit dieses Ideal wider; das wissen wir alle nur zu gut.\n\nDie größte Gefahr geht nicht - das ist der Grund, warum wir Ihre Anträge ablehnen - von der Zahl der Lobbyisten aus, sondern sie liegt in der Struktur der Einflussnahme auf die politische Entscheidungsfindung. Ich nenne als Beispiele die Bildung von Kommissionen sowie die Einrichtung von Räten und Sachverständigengremien mit Sitz selbst in den Ministerien. Wenn die Ergebnisse der Beratungen solcher Kommissionen vom Parlament eins zu eins umgesetzt werden - das alles gab es schon; ich erinnere nur an die Hartz-IV-Gesetzgebung -, dann wird das Parlament auf eine bloße Ratifikations-instanz reduziert.\n\nWenn also in hochkomplexen Entscheidungen, die wir ja immer wieder zu treffen haben, der Aktionismus der Politik uns auch noch zu raschem Handeln zwingt und wir die Dinge gar nicht prüfen können, wenn zur Unterstützung des Parlaments von Spezialisten fertig ausgearbeitete Gesetze uns auch noch als alternativlos präsentiert und sie zur Abstimmung gestellt werden, spätestens dann sind wir weit entfernt von einer parlamentarischen Demokratie, wie sie sein sollte.\n\nLassen Sie mich jetzt zu den Lösungen kommen, die die Grünen und die die Linken anbieten. Die Lösung für beide Fraktionen sei - auch die Kollegin von der SPD hat mit dieser Idee geliebäugelt - ein strafbewehrtes Lobbyistenregister, ein verpflichtendes Lobbyistenregister - ein ungeheures bürokratisches Monstrum, in dem alles über Lobbyisten und Lobbyismus stehen muss:\n\nder Name und die Adresse des Lobbyisten, sein Arbeitgeber und sein Gehalt, der Betrag, den seine Firma für Lobbyarbeit ausgibt, seine Gesprächspartner, seine Gesprächsthemen von morgens bis abends. Dies alles muss natürlich alle drei Monate von der Bundestagsverwaltung auf den neuesten Stand gebracht und ins Internet gestellt werden. Meine Damen und Herren, da kann Datenschutz selbstverständlich nur noch stören. Es geht ja um den Kampf gegen Lobbyismus. Der Zweck heiligt hier jedes Mittel. Es fehlt nur noch, dass Sie jedem Lobbyisten ein „L“ auf die Stirn tätowieren wollen. Das wäre vielleicht noch eine Bereicherung.\n\n- Überhaupt nicht.\n\n- Aber nur wenn sie von ihrem Vorschlag abrückt.\n\nDiese Anträge sind ein hilfloser oppositioneller Aktionismus. Diese Anträge lehnen wir ab, weil sie keinen Lösungsbeitrag leisten. Wir lehnen sie nicht ab, weil wir das Problem leugnen. Das Problem ist natürlich vorhanden, dass Lobbyisten ungerechtfertigten Einfluss auf unsere Arbeit nehmen können. Wir meinen aber, mit einer Stigmatisierung dieser Menschen, die ja unsere Gesprächspartner sind und sein müssen, durch ein solches Register tragen wir nicht bei zu einer Lösung des Pro-blems.\n\nNein, meine Damen und Herren, die Lösung liegt nicht darin, dass wir diese Menschen, die man Lobby-isten nennt, kujonieren. Die Lösung liegt bei uns Parlamentariern.\n\nDenn es ist unsere Aufgabe, mit dem, was uns als Partikularinteressen angeboten wird, richtig umzugehen, diese Interessen zu gewichten, sie zu bewerten und mit anderen, vielleicht widersprechenden oder widerstreitenden Partikularinteressen zu vergleichen und aus diesem gesamten Strauß von Interessen eine Politik zu machen, die dem Gemeinwohl dient, die den sozialen Frieden erhält,\n\nund diese Politik dann zum Gesetz werden zu lassen.\n\nDas ist die Arbeit des Parlamentariers und dafür werden wir gewählt. Dafür werden wir bezahlt. Wir müssen dafür arbeiten, dass wir das Vertrauen der Bevölkerung in unsere Arbeit erhalten können.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n11209,wolfgang-gunkel,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Es ist natürlich recht schwer, hier als Polizist zu sprechen, wenn sich zuvor bereits drei Polizisten geäußert haben. Ich kann nahtlos an das anschließen, was ich in der Debatte über einen Vorschlag der Linksfraktion, den sie vor einem Jahr eingebracht hat, gesagt habe. Damals kam ich zu dem Ergebnis, dass der Vorschlag sehr diskussionswürdig ist, dass man darüber parteiübergreifend reden sollte. Das ist auch heute noch meine Meinung.\n\nWie ist das Ganze entstanden? Wir alle wissen, dass der NSU-Untersuchungsausschuss zu dem katastrophalen Ergebnis kam, dass bei der polizeilichen Arbeit erhebliche Fehler gemacht worden sind. Aus diesem Grund hat meine Fraktion ein Sondervotum abgegeben und genau das gefordert, worüber wir heute diskutieren, eine unabhängige Beschwerdestelle, die als Ombudsstelle für die Bürger fungieren soll, aber auch als interne Beschwerdestelle zur Aufarbeitung polizeilicher Beschwerden. Dies entspricht im Wesentlichen dem, was hier vorgelegt worden ist.\n\nEinige Punkte, die angeführt werden, sind wirklich diskussionswürdig. Zu dieser Diskussion kann ich etwas beitragen. Zunächst einmal will ich aber sagen, dass die Anregung, die von den Vorlagen ausgeht, unbedingt notwendig ist. Kollege Baumann, in Rheinland-Pfalz gibt es seit 2014 eine entsprechende Stelle. Die Zahl der dort auflaufenden Fälle beträgt etwa 2 000. Davon hat der Beauftragte 300 zurückgewiesen. Es gibt also auch die Möglichkeit, Fälle zurückzuweisen, die nicht in die Kompetenz des Beauftragten fallen. Das gilt beispielsweise für Fälle, um die sich ein Petitionsausschuss kümmern kann. Diese Fälle muss der Polizeibeauftragte bzw. der Bürgerbeauftragte nicht abarbeiten, sondern in diesen Fällen kann er den Bürger beispielsweise an die Petitionsausschüsse verweisen.\n\nDarum geht es in diesem Zusammenhang aber nicht. Hier geht es um ein Hilfsorgan, ein Hilfsinstrument des Bundestages, um einen Beauftragten, der mehr Befugnisse haben soll als ein normaler Beschwerdebearbeiter, der in einer Polizeidienststelle tätig ist. Dahinter steht ein ganz spezieller Auftrag, nämlich auch bei schwerwiegenden Vorkommnissen Ermittlungsarbeit zu übernehmen, Akteneinsicht zu nehmen und Ähnliches mehr. Seine Befugnisse würden also ein bisschen weiter reichen.\n\nVon dieser Warte aus betrachtet, muss man sagen, dass es notwendig ist, diese Stelle einzurichten. Eine unabhängige Stelle wird gebraucht, weil bestimmte Beziehungen unter den Kollegen beispielsweise bei Großeinsätzen dazu führen, dass recht unterschiedliche Meinungen über die Rechtmäßigkeit einer Handlung zustande kommen.\n\nWas will ich damit sagen? Ich möchte ein kleines Beispiel geben. Vor einigen Jahren ist Folgendes passiert - ich glaube, es ist denkbar, dass es so etwas auch heute noch gibt -: Es geht um einen Einsatz, bei dem ein Haus geräumt werden soll, die Hochschule der Künste. Die Polizei muss nach langen Auseinandersetzungen, die recht heftig verlaufen, über das Dach einsteigen und dieses Haus räumen. Sechs Etagen sind geräumt - ich fasse mich kurz -, und in dem Rondell vor dem Haus bildet sich eine Gruppe. Ein Mensch tritt auf einen Beamten zu und sagt, dass er die Rechtmäßigkeit überprüfen wolle, und fragt, welche Rechtsgrundlage die Polizei für ihren Einsatz habe. Der Polizeibeamte holt aus, schlägt ihm mit der Hand ins Gesicht und sagt: Das ist die Antwort. - Durch das Tohuwabohu, das entsteht, und den neuen Auftrag an die Gruppe verläuft sich das Ganze, und die Sache ist zunächst einmal erledigt.\n\nWas passierte danach? Es wurde selbstverständlich Anzeige erstattet. Am nächsten Tag erfuhren wir von dem Beamten, dass darüber sicherlich nachgedacht wurde. Dann tauchte eine Liste mit acht oder neun Leuten auf, die in der Gruppe dort tätig gewesen sein sollen, und sie sollten unterschreiben, dass sie eine Straftat nicht haben feststellen können. Ein Beamter, der dort betroffen war, sagte, dass er das nicht unterschreibt. Der Vorgesetzte sagte zu ihm: Dann warten wir einmal, bis der Chef kommt, und dann wirst du ja schon sehen.\n\nDer Chef war nicht da und erschien erst drei Tage später. Der Beamte ging dorthin, und der erfahrene Chef sagte ihm gleich: Überlegen Sie sich ganz genau, was Sie hier sagen. Sie wissen, dass Ihnen ein Verfahren wegen Strafvereitelung im Amt droht, wenn Sie etwas gesehen und es nicht zur Anzeige gebracht haben.\n\nDas ist eine sehr schwierige Situation, und das wollte ich einmal so drastisch deutlich machen.\n\nWas machte er nun? Er überlegte: Entweder gebe ich zu, dass ich da etwas gesehen habe, aber dann bekomme ich eine Anzeige wegen Strafvereitelung im Amt, oder ich sage, dass ich nichts gesehen habe, wodurch ich eventuell heil aus der Situation herauskomme. Er entschied sich für Letzteres und wurde gefragt: Warum konnten Sie es dann nicht unterschreiben? Die Antwort war: Wenn ich nichts gesehen habe, kann ich auch nichts unterschreiben.\n\nSo ist das gewesen. Man kann also sagen: Glück gehabt, dass der Vorgesetzte das auch so akzeptiert hat.\n\nWie ist das Verfahren weitergegangen? Es interessiert ja auch noch der Abschluss. - Der Betroffene ist identifiziert worden, weil jemand eine Kamera hat mitlaufen lassen, und da es ein sehr warmer Tag war, war sein Visier hochgeklappt, sodass er eindeutig zu identifizieren war. Er ist dann seiner entsprechenden Strafverfolgung zugeführt worden.\n\nWarum erwähne ich das? Ich will damit deutlich machen, wie schwierig es für die Kollegen in solchen Fällen mitunter ist, all das „durchzuziehen“, was normalerweise erforderlich ist.\n\nDeshalb finde ich es besonders gut, dass in dem Gesetzentwurf der Grünen steht, dass die Frist, die für jeden gelten soll, der mit einer solchen Sache konfrontiert worden ist, drei Wochen betragen soll. Man kann darüber reden, ob es zwei oder drei Wochen sind, aber das spielt keine Rolle. Wichtig ist, dass die Beamten eine Karenzzeit haben, während der es ihnen möglich ist, sich auch nachträglich entsprechend zu äußern, ohne sich der Gefahr einer Strafverfolgung auszusetzen. Das ist ein ganz wichtiger Punkt.\n\nIch möchte auch noch auf Folgendes hinweisen: Es gibt interne und externe Beschwerdestellen; Rheinland-Pfalz hatte ich in diesem Zusammenhang schon erwähnt. Die Berliner Beschwerdestelle erhält zum Beispiel über 2 000 Beschwerden pro Jahr. Das ist schon eine große Zahl an Beschwerden, die zu bearbeiten sind. Die Zahl der Beschwerden, die die Beschwerdestelle der Bundespolizei erhält - und um sie geht es hier ja; da haben Sie völlig recht -, liegt weitaus darunter. Ein Grund dafür ist zum Beispiel, dass Unterstützungskräfte natürlich immer erst in zweiter Linie ins Blickfeld geraten. So war es auch in Köln und Stuttgart. Somit sind die Fallzahlen dort recht gering. Das kann sich aber jederzeit ändern.\n\nDer Bundespolizeipräsident hat also dankenswerterweise eine interne Beschwerdestelle eingerichtet. Das ist löblich und auch zu begrüßen. Sie erfüllt aber nicht die Aufgabe, die hier vorgesehen ist und die ich auch für dringend notwendig halte.\n\nIch möchte jetzt noch ein paar Worte zu einer anderen enthaltenen Bestimmung sagen:\n\nIch habe ein Problem mit § 13 Absatz 2 des Gesetzentwurfs, in dem die parallele Ermittlungszuständigkeit für Strafverfahren, Disziplinarverfahren und die Verfahren, die der Bundespolizeibeauftragte führen soll, vorgesehen ist. Man müsste noch einmal darüber sprechen, wie das ausgestaltet werden soll. Das müsste für meine Begriffe klarer geregelt werden. Insofern kann ich nur sagen: Es wäre schön, wenn wir eine intensive Debatte darüber führen könnten.\n\nIch bin ganz und gar der Meinung, dass man noch einmal alle Beteiligten anhören sollte - die Bundespolizei, die Gewerkschaften, den Landesbeauftragten in Rheinland-Pfalz und ähnliche Personen, die zur Sache etwas sagen können -, um noch einmal über diesen ganzen Vorgang zu reden. Ich glaube, dann könnte man von einem vernünftigen Ergebnis ausgehen.\n\nHeute haben wir die erste Lesung. Es ist üblich, dass danach das Ganze an die Ausschüsse überwiesen wird. Das wird auch jetzt der Fall sein. Die SPD jedenfalls begrüßt diesen Vorschlag. Ich hoffe, wir werden uns dann in den folgenden Wochen damit tiefer auseinandersetzen können.\n\nIch möchte zum Schluss noch sagen, damit keiner glaubt, ich erhöbe hier einen Generalverdacht gegen Handlungen der Bundespolizei, dass ich meine Kollegen sehr schätze und sehr wohl weiß, wie auch Kollege Baumann schon gesagt hat, was von der Polizei, gerade auch von der Bundespolizei, geleistet wird. Ich erinnere an Millionen von Überstunden durch die Entwicklung der letzten Monate. Auch das muss entsprechend honoriert werden.\n\nMir liegt es fern, darüber zu philosophieren, ob die Polizei rechtsstaatlich handelt oder nicht. Sie ist ein Rechtsstaatselement. Wenn man die Zahlen betrachtet, die immer wieder erhoben werden, um das Vertrauen in Berufsgruppen anzugeben, dann muss man feststellen, dass Feuerwehrleute, Ärzte und Polizisten bei der Bevölkerung zu 80 Prozent Vertrauen genießen - das ist schon einmal ein ganz erheblicher Wert und das schon seit Jahren -, während es andere Gruppen wie Politiker und Gewerkschafter gibt, die bei 30 Prozent herumdümpeln. Das nur zum Vergleich. Man kann daran sehen: Die Polizei hat ihren Stellenwert, und der Bürger hat keinerlei Zweifel an ihrer Arbeit.\n\nIch fasse zusammen: Der Gesetzentwurf ist insgesamt diskussionswürdig. Nach der Überweisung an die Ausschüsse wird man sehen, ob etwas daraus zu machen ist.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n1245,marina-kermer,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ja, das Thema der heutigen Debatte beschäftigt uns nun schon seit Jahren. Bisher wurde keine langfristig tragbare Lösung gefunden. Das ist auf Dauer weder für die Hebammen noch für die werdenden Mütter haltbar. Deshalb werden wir das ändern. Das hat Minister Gröhe bereits erklärt, und ich habe keinen Zweifel daran, dass uns das gelingt.\n\nÜber die nunmehr abzuwartenden Modellvorschläge werden wir dann mit Sicherheit sachlich reden. Bis dahin kann man nur ein paar der Annahmen aus dem heute vorliegenden Antrag diskutieren und die eine oder andere Behauptung geraderücken.\n\nWir wissen: Hebammen leisten unverzichtbare Arbeit vor, bei und immer stärker auch nach der Geburt; verstärkt auch für Frauen, die stationär entbunden haben. Durch die kürzere Verweildauer im Krankenhaus nach einer Entbindung wird die fachliche Nachsorge zu Hause immer wichtiger.\n\nDazu kommen gesellschaftliche Faktoren. Den klassischen Familienverband gibt es immer seltener und damit auch weniger direkte Hilfe und Unterstützung durch Familienangehörige. Hebammen sind vor Ort, bei den Familien und können besonders nach der Geburt erste Warnzeichen der Überforderung erkennen und die Familien direkt unterstützen.\n\nWenn wir uns klar dazu bekennen, dass wir die Arbeit der Hebammen wollen, müssen wir die Rahmenbedingungen so gestalten, dass sie ihre Arbeit verantwortungsvoll ausführen und davon auch leben können. Ich denke, darin sind wir uns alle im Hause einig.\n\nUneinig sind wir uns bei der Bewertung der gegenwärtigen Versorgungslage. Der überwiegende Teil der Geburten findet in Krankenhäusern statt. Nur rund 1,7 Prozent der Geburten erfolgen nicht stationär. In den Krankenhäusern gab es laut Statistischem Bundesamt im Jahr 2012 circa 888 Fachabteilungen für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe mit rund 33 400 Betten. Der Nutzungsgrad der Betten lag bei 58,1 Prozent. Damit arbeiten die Krankenhäuser noch nicht an ihrer Kapazitätsgrenze. Ich finde es nicht richtig, Ängste zu schüren; denn wir gehen nicht sehenden Auges in eine Unterversorgung bei der Geburtshilfe.\n\nWas die Erreichbarkeit von Krankenhäusern mit Geburtshilfe angeht, wurde im IGES-Gutachten festgestellt: Für die Mehrheit der Frauen, nämlich für 88 Prozent, sind Krankenhäuser mit einer Entfernung von unter 10 Kilometern zu erreichen. Auch das spricht für eine gute stationäre Versorgung. Richtig ist: Es gibt gerade in ländlichen Räumen Regionen, die nicht optimal durch stationäre Angebote versorgt sind. Hier müssen wir ansetzen. Denn die Wahlfreiheit zwischen stationärer und nichtstationärer Entbindung setzt voraus, dass sich ein Krankenhaus im Notfall in Reichweite befindet.\n\nDarüber hinaus kommen bei 20 Prozent der geplanten außerklinischen Geburten die Kinder doch im Krankenhaus zur Welt.\n\nEin Gedanke fehlt im vorliegenden Antrag völlig: Das bloße Vorhandensein einer Versorgungseinrichtung garantiert nicht automatisch eine qualitativ gute Versorgung, so wie das bloße Vorhandensein von Hebammen noch keine sichere Geburt garantiert.\n\nWir haben das Thema „flächendeckende Versorgung und Qualität“ in den Koalitionsvertrag aufgenommen. Deshalb möchte ich an dieser Stelle daran erinnern, worum es uns primär geht. Es geht nicht nur um Haftpflichtversicherungsprämien und die Frage, ob und wie lange sich die Ausübung des Berufs der Hebamme finanziell rechnet. Es geht um Menschenleben - um das der Kinder und der Mütter.\n\nJa, die Entscheidung für eine Hebamme ist eine ex-trem emotionale Entscheidung. Nach einer langen, oft sehnsüchtig erwarteten Schwangerschaft steht der Geburtstermin bevor. Neben der Vorfreude auf das Baby gibt es auch Sorge und Angst im Hinblick darauf, dass die Geburt für Mutter und Kind hoffentlich gut verlaufen wird. Genau dann hat man die wichtige Entscheidung über die Art der Entbindung zu treffen, und zwar für sich und das Kind. Deshalb sollten die werdenden Eltern wissen, welche Hebamme wie viele Geburten mit welchen Erfolgen oder Komplikationen aufweisen kann, bevor sie sich entscheiden - entscheiden für eine stationäre oder außerstationäre Entbindung, mit der Hebamme des Vertrauens in der Klinik, im Geburtshaus oder in der vertrauten familiären Atmosphäre.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6113,andreas-jung,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Oliver Krischer hat ganz zu Beginn dieser Debatte ein Dreieck in unserer Fraktion ausgemacht.\n\nLieber Oliver Krischer, ich finde, diese Betrachtung greift etwas zu kurz. Dank Sigmar Gabriel und der Geschäftsordnung stellt unsere Fraktion allein in dieser Debatte sechs Redner. Auch ein Blick auf unsere Fraktion zeigt unschwer: Wir sind deutlich mehr als drei.\n\nDie Breite unserer Fraktion bringt automatisch eine breite Debatte mit sich. Genau das ist der Grund, warum bei uns über alle Aspekte und Auswirkungen dieses Vorschlages, über den wir heute reden, intensiv diskutiert wird. Es wird gefragt: Was heißt das für die Wirtschaft? Was heißt das für den Klimaschutz? Was heißt das für die Menschen in den betroffenen Regionen? Das ist das Gegenteil von Einseitigkeit. Das ist Ausdruck der Breite einer Volkspartei. In diesem Ringen innerhalb unserer Fraktion und mit unserem Koalitionspartner geht es allein um die Frage: Wie erreichen wir einen guten Weg, und wie erreichen wir am Ende eine gute Lösung? Ich finde, das macht auch die Stärke einer Volkspartei aus.\n\nDas führt zu der Frage: Was ist der Maßstab, nach dem wir diese Diskussion führen, und was ist der Maßstab für das, was ich als „gute Lösung“ beschrieben habe? Ein Maßstab ist die große Herausforderung des Klimawandels. Unsere Rolle als Vorreiter im Klimaschutz kommt in unserem 40-Prozent-Ziel zum Ausdruck. Es geht darum, dass wir die Lücke schließen, damit sich keine Glaubwürdigkeitslücke auftut und damit unsere Beschlüsse dazu führen, der Bundesregierung für die Verhandlungen auf dem Klimagipfel in Paris Rückenwind zu geben, Rückenwind für die Umweltministerin und Rückenwind für unsere Kanzlerin. Das ist das Ziel der Union und der Koalition. Darum geht es.\n\nZur Nachhaltigkeit gehören neben der Behandlung der Klimafrage auch andere Aspekte. Deshalb ist eben auch Maßstab - das ist in dieser Debatte ebenfalls deutlich geworden - die Bewältigung der Auswirkungen der Umsetzung dieses Vorschlags auf die Wirtschaft, auf Arbeitsplätze in der Kohleindustrie genauso wie in Gaskraftwerken, auf Versorgungssicherheit, auf Strompreise, auf die betroffenen Regionen. Es geht dabei auch um die sozialen Auswirkungen.\n\nDas alles müssen wir in Einklang bringen. Umwelt und Klima, Wirtschaft und Arbeitsplätze sowie Soziales müssen wir unter einen Hut bekommen. Das ist die Herausforderung.\n\nJetzt stellen sich konkrete Fragen zu diesem Vorschlag. Die Maßgabe im vorgelegten Nationalen Aktionsplan Klimaschutz ist: Wir müssen im Strombereich zusätzlich 22 Millionen Tonnen CO2 einsparen. Wir sind uns einig: Das Beste wäre, wir würden unser Ziel durch den Emissionshandel erreichen. Wir wissen aber auch: Die Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass das Nötige bis zum Jahr 2020 beschlossen wird und Wirkungen zeigt, ist nicht gerade hoch; darauf können wir uns nicht verlassen. Deshalb reden wir über diese nationalen Maßnahmen.\n\nDie nötigen Maßnahmen müssen erstens natürlich EU-kompatibel sein; sie müssen mit dem CO2-Emissionshandel in der Europäischen Union einhergehen und rechtlich zulässig sein. Sie müssen zweitens, selbstverständlich in einem Ordnungsrahmen, ein Höchstmaß an Flexibilität ermöglichen. Sie müssen drittens die Maßgabe von Versorgungssicherheit berücksichtigen, und sie dürfen nicht zum Treiber für die Strompreise werden. Sie müssen viertens die Klimalücke schließen.\n\nDer Bundeswirtschafts- und Energieminister sagt, dass all diese Aspekte in seinem Vorschlag berücksichtigt sind. Meine Meinung ist: Das, was auf dem Tisch liegt, ist eine gute Diskussionsgrundlage. Sie werden wir jetzt intensiv prüfen; sie werden wir diskutieren. Das heißt auch, es ist noch keine Entscheidung gefallen, weil eben nichts alternativlos ist. Das heißt im Umkehrschluss aber auch: Wer das am Ende ablehnen wollte, der brauchte gute Alternativen, und mit diesen Alternativen müssten die Ziele, die genannt worden sind - Reduktion der klimaschädlichen Emissionen um mindestens 40 Prozent, zusätzliche Einsparung von 22 Millionen Tonnen CO2 -, erreicht werden können. Was nicht geht, ist einfach eine Antwort nach dem Motto: Das wollen wir nicht; Augen zu und durch.\n\nWir ringen jetzt um eine gute Lösung im Sinne der Nachhaltigkeit in ihrer ganzen Breite im Bereich des Klimaschutzes. Auf die Debatte darüber freuen wir uns.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n7937,diether-dehm,\"Ich habe drei ganz kurze Fragen.\n\nErste Frage. Bei den Pestiziden hat die EU-Kommission jetzt schon Standards in die Verhandlungen eingebracht, die weit niedriger sind als die, die in Europa bislang gelten. Wie verhältst du dich bzw. wie verhalten Sie sich dazu?\n\nZweite Frage. Vorhin haben wir in zwei CDU/CSU-Reden ein Abwatschen der kritischen Öffentlichkeit gehört. Welche Empfindungen haben dich bzw. Sie da auch vor dem Hintergrund deiner bzw. Ihrer Biografie beschlichen?\n\nDritte Frage. Wenn der Entwicklungsminister Gerd Müller sagt: „Wir wollen fairen Handel statt Freihandel“, ist das dann die gemeinsame Position der Koalition? Wie verhält sich das zu dem, was Herr Pfeiffer vorhin gesagt hat?\"\n10638,stefan-zierke,\"Frau Leidig, danke, dass Sie die Zwischenfrage gestatten. - Sie zählen viele Punkte auf, die aus Ihrer Sicht sicherlich sachlich begründet sind. Haben Sie auch, weil Sie gerade die A 100 in Berlin ansprechen, den Umstand zur Kenntnis genommen, dass gerade bei diesem Projekt viele Bürger, viele Institutionen die Möglichkeit genutzt haben, in das entsprechende System genau die sachlichen Begründungen, die Sie hier aufzählen, einzugeben, um damit das Projekt noch einmal neu zu bewerten? Es geht darum, ob die A 100 wirklich um diesen Bestandteil verlängert werden soll oder nicht. Es geht ja um den letzten Abschnitt, den Sie hier beschreiben. Es geht nicht um die ganze A 100.\n\nVon daher denke ich, dass die Bürger und die kommunale Ebene doch exzellent beteiligt sind, wenn es um genau diese Abschnitte geht. Man konnte sachliche Begründungen für den Senat oder für das Bundesministerium geben. Sind Sie da nicht meiner Meinung?\"\n11321,astrid-freudenstein,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen! Meine Herren! Heute auf den Tag genau vor 61 Jahren hat der Vermittlungsausschuss sein Ja zum Gesetz zum Schutz deutschen Kulturgutes gegen Abwanderung gegeben. Im Sommer 1955, also wenig später, ist es dann in Kraft getreten. Das ist natürlich ein historischer Zufall, aber auch eine schöne Gelegenheit, sich anzuschauen, wie die Bundestagsdebatten damals abliefen: Welches Ziel wurde ausgegeben? Wo lagen die Konfliktlinien? Und, meine Damen und Herren, was soll ich Ihnen sagen: Geschichte wiederholt sich doch.\n\nIn der Debatte von 1955 fielen Begriffe - drei im Wesentlichen -, die uns auch heute wieder beschäftigt haben. Es ging schon heute vor 61 Jahren um Enteignung, um einen Ankaufszwang oder ein Vorkaufsrecht des Staates und um die Belastungen für den deutschen Kunsthandel.\n\nLassen Sie mich vorne beginnen, also mit der Enteignung. - Nein, selbstverständlich legt die Novelle des Kulturgutschutzgesetzes nicht die Grundlage für eine Enteignung von Kunsteigentümern oder -sammlern. Jeder, der den Gesetzentwurf gelesen hat, weiß das auch.\n\nDer Gesetzentwurf zielt darauf ab, national wertvolles, für uns prägendes und identitätsstiftendes Kulturgut vor Abwanderung zu schützen. Das steht einer Kulturnation, wie wir es sind und worauf wir zu Recht stolz sind, auch gut zu Gesicht. Kulturgüter sind eben nicht nur Wertanlagen, sondern können auch einen ideellen Wert haben. Sie können für unsere Geschichte und für die Gegenwart prägend sein. Das ist gerade in Zeiten, in denen wir gelegentlich den Eindruck haben, dass die Welt aus den Fugen gerät, wichtig. Nehmen Sie etwa die Tagebücher Alexander von Humboldts. Eine Abwanderung wäre für uns Deutsche ein großer Verlust gewesen.\n\nDas Eintragungsverfahren wurde mehrmals höchstrichterlich für verhältnismäßig erklärt. Der geltende Kulturgutschutz war „auf einen gerechten Ausgleich der öffentlichen und privaten Interessen angelegt“. So hat das Bundesverwaltungsgericht geurteilt. Dies bleibt er auch mit der vorliegenden Novellierung.\n\nDer zweite Punkt von damals, der uns auch heute wieder beschäftigt, ist die Ankaufspflicht oder das Vorkaufsrecht des Staates. Wir führen jetzt ein Angebotsmodell ein. Es soll ein Verfahren geben, durch das national wertvolles Kulturgut, das nicht ins Ausland gelangen soll, durch Museen oder andere Einrichtungen angekauft und damit der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich gemacht werden kann. Kommt es dazu nicht, darf dieses Kulturgut das Land trotzdem nicht verlassen.\n\nWir haben uns damit genauso wie unsere Vorgänger vor 61 Jahren aus guten Gründen gegen eine Ankaufspflicht entschieden; denn dort, wo sie praktiziert wird, werden die Nachteile in schlechten Zeiten schnell deutlich, und was wir nicht wollen, ist ein Kulturgutschutz nach Kassenlage.\n\nDer dritte Punkt damals wie heute waren die Folgen für den Kunsthandel. Damals, 1955, sprach der bayerische CSU-Abgeordnete Josef Ferdinand Kleindinst aus Augsburg über dieses Gesetz. Er war der Berichterstatter. Er erklärte die Änderungen, die im parlamentarischen Verfahren eingefügt wurden, und stellte dann fest: Der Kunst- und Antiquitätenhandel hat nichts zu befürchten. - Auch damals war der Protest groß, und ich möchte es ihm gleichtun und die Änderungen erwähnen:\n\nDas Eintragungsverfahren wird viel transparenter und nachvollziehbarer. Mit einem Negativattest können Eigentümer Rechtssicherheit erhalten.\n\nDie Regelung eines Laissez-passer entlastet Kunsthandel und Restauratoren, wenn es um vorübergehend in Deutschland befindliches Kulturgut geht.\n\nEtliche Erleichterungen bei der Sorgfalts- und Nachweispflicht sowie die Ausweitung der Altersgrenzen dämmen Bürokratie ein.\n\nDer Kunst- und Antiquitätenhandel muss also auch heute nichts befürchten. Er muss sich aber durchaus auf Veränderungen einstellen, und es wird an einigen Punkten auch aufwendiger werden.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich auf einen Punkt zu sprechen kommen, der damals, vor 61 Jahren, kein Thema war, heute aber ein großes Thema ist, nämlich die Regeln zur Einfuhr von Kulturgütern.\n\nWas wir uns selbst herausnehmen und für uns beanspruchen - wir schützen unser national wertvolles Kulturgut -, müssen wir auch den anderen zugestehen und ermöglichen. Ganz abgesehen von internationalen und europäischen Vorgaben werden wir damit auch unserer moralischen, kulturellen und rechtlichen Verpflichtung gerecht. Das hat auch etwas mit der Haltung zu tun, wie man mit fremdem Kulturgut umgeht.\n\nDie Regeln, die wir dafür bisher hatten, waren nicht sehr wirksam, und deshalb brauchen wir neue. Den Anlass gab sicher der Handel mit Antiken aus Kriegs- und Krisengebieten. Wir wollen nicht, dass mit dem Handel dieser Antiken Kriege finanziert werden.\n\nMeine Damen, meine Herren, der vorliegende Gesetzentwurf ist keine Revolution, sondern eine Weiterentwicklung und Zusammenführung bestehender Regelungen. Er schließt Lücken, die sich aufgetan haben. Wir haben einen Kompromiss gefunden, der die Wirkung des Gesetzes erhält und gleichzeitig den bürokratischen Aufwand eindämmt. Es ist wichtig, dass wir einen wirksamen und vernünftigen Kulturgutschutz in Deutschland haben: für die Bewahrung des kulturellen Erbes für unsere Kinder und Kindeskinder.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n1227,christine-buchholz,\"Frau Präsidentin! Herr Königshaus! Meine Damen und Herren! Der Jahresbericht 2013 des Wehrbeauftragten verdeutlicht vor allen Dingen eines: Wenn Frau von der Leyen sagt, der Mensch müsse im Mittelpunkt stehen - das haben Sie zumindest zum Ende Ihrer Rede gesagt -, dann hat das mit der Realität in der Bundeswehr allzu oft nichts zu tun. Umgerechnet auf die Personalstärke haben 2013 mehr Soldaten als je zuvor über Missstände geklagt. Das ist eine schallende Ohrfeige für den abgetretenen Verteidigungsminister de Maizière. Ich füge hinzu: Die ersten Initiativen von Frau von der Leyen lassen Zweifel aufkommen, dass sich an diesem Zustand etwas ändern wird.\n\nDie Bundeswehr ist keine Verteidigungsarmee mehr. Sie wird zu einer global agierenden Interventionsarmee ausgebaut. Allein im Berichtsjahr 2013 kamen Einsätze im Senegal, in Mali und in der Türkei hinzu. Dabei wird nicht nur die Mehrheit unserer Bevölkerung ignoriert,\n\ndie diese Einsätze zu Recht ablehnt. Der gesamte Umbau der Bundeswehr wird sogar auf dem Rücken der Soldatinnen und Soldaten und ihrer Familien ausgetragen. Das ist die Realität, die einem ins Auge springt, wenn man den Bericht des Wehrbeauftragten liest.\n\nFrau von der Leyen, Sie haben von einem „sicheren Arbeitsplatz“ bei der Bundeswehr gesprochen. Erstmalig seit zwei Jahren ist wieder ein Soldat in einem Feuergefecht in Afghanistan gestorben. Das ist tragisch. Schlimm ist auch, wenn Soldatinnen und Soldaten mit psychischen Störungen und traumatisiert nach Hause zurückkehren. Es geht um Depressionen, um Alkoholabhängigkeit und um PTBS, Posttraumatische Belastungsstörungen. 2006 wurden 83 Soldaten mit PTBS in Bundeswehrkrankenhäusern behandelt, 2013 waren es laut Bericht bereits 1 500 - Tendenz: stark zunehmend. Dazu kommen jene, die privat in Therapie sind, und jene Fälle, die gar nicht erkannt werden. Selbst das zur Bundeswehr gehörende Psychotraumazentrum in Berlin geht davon aus, dass ein Viertel der Soldatinnen und Soldaten, die zurückkommen, unter einsatzbedingten psychischen Störungen leidet.\n\nEs ist traurig, aber 15 Jahre systematische Ausrichtung der Bundeswehr auf internationale Einsätze haben PTBS zu einer in Deutschland verbreiteten Krankheit gemacht. Insgesamt waren allein in Afghanistan 160 000 deutsche Soldaten im Einsatz. Es gibt heute kaum einen Ort in Deutschland, in dem keine Familien leben, die davon betroffen sind. PTBS-Kranke leiden zum Beispiel unter Schlaflosigkeit. Schlüsselreize wie Hitze oder Rauch, die an die traumatisierenden Erfahrungen im Krieg erinnern, können Wutattacken auslösen. Kinder, Freunde, Partnerinnen und Partner, sie alle bekommen tagtäglich die Auswirkungen zu spüren. Die Scheidungsraten bei Heimkehrern liegen in einzelnen Einheiten bei bis zu 80 Prozent. Der NATO-Einsatz in Afghanistan hat Zehntausenden Afghanen das Leben gekostet; aber dieser Krieg macht auch Soldaten und ihre Familien krank. Dieses Problem muss endlich in all seiner Schärfe anerkannt werden.\n\nDas Problem wird sich verstärken, wenn Ende des Jahres eine größere Zahl aus Afghanistan zurückkehrt; denn aus der Erfahrung vergangener Kriege weiß man, dass viele psychische Erkrankungen erst später auftauchen. Aber was macht die Bundesregierung? Sie verschärft das Problem weiter. Sie verweigert sich einer ehrlichen Bilanz von zwölf Jahren Krieg in Afghanistan. Sie hält weiter über 3 000 Soldatinnen und Soldaten in Afghanistan. Von einem echten Abzug kann keine Rede sein. Die Bedrohungslage im Norden wird teilweise immer noch als erheblich eingeschätzt; trotzdem wird das immer wieder vom Tisch gewischt.\n\nDer nächste Bundeswehreinsatz in einem Bürgerkriegsland steht vor der Tür. Heute noch wird im Bundestag über die Entsendung von Soldaten nach Mogadischu in Somalia diskutiert.\n\nWer im Bundestag solche Entsendungsbeschlüsse fällt, ist mitverantwortlich für die Traumatisierten von morgen. Hören Sie endlich auf damit!\n\nMan sollte meinen, die psychisch erkrankten Soldaten würden nach ihrer Heimkehr wenigstens vernünftig behandelt. Das ist aber beileibe nicht der Fall. Im Bericht wird das Einsatz-Weiterverwendungsgesetz erwähnt. Es verpflichtet die Bundeswehr seit 2012, Soldaten ab einem einsatzbedingten Schädigungsgrad von 30 Prozent weiterzubeschäftigen. Erkrankte bekommen somit eine berufliche Perspektive, können eine Therapie machen oder eine weitere Ausbildung. Das ist eine Verbesserung. Doch das Problem liegt in der Umsetzung. Viele Verfahren landen vor dem Gericht, weil die Bundeswehr die Ansprüche einfach nicht anerkennen will. Viele Soldaten mit PTBS müssen mit der Bundeswehr erst mühsam um jedes Detail ringen. Das ist unwürdig.\n\nNoch schwieriger ist es für die Soldatinnen und Soldaten, bei denen die psychischen Störungen erst nach dem Ausscheiden aus dem aktiven Dienst auftreten. Für sie - ich zitiere den Wehrbeauftragten - „bietet der Dienstherr … lediglich Informationen und Kontakt-adressen in Merkblättern über das Internet an.“ Merkblätter im Internet zu PTBS - meine Damen und Herren, das ist zynisch.\n\nHerr Königshaus stellt dazu nüchtern fest, dieses Angebot genüge nicht der Fürsorgepflicht des Dienstherrn. Das ist richtig. Man bekommt den Eindruck, es gehe darum, den Soldaten den Weg zu einer Therapie zu erschweren, um die Folgekosten der Einsätze zu minimieren. Ich sage: Hier geht es um das Schicksal von Menschen, von Familien. Dafür muss Geld bereitstehen und nicht für immer neue Waffensysteme.\n\nDieses Bild zieht sich durch den Jahresbericht des Wehrbeauftragten. Hier ein paar Schlaglichter: Sanitätsärztliche und medizinische Betreuung weisen - Zitat - „erhebliche Mängel“ auf. Dienstposten der Bundeswehr, an die Eingaben bei Missständen gerichtet werden können, sind - Zitat - „in weiten Bereichen“ nicht besetzt. Darüber hinaus ist die Bundeswehr nicht bereit, Dienstposten auszuschreiben, um das Problem der Familientrennung durch Standortversetzungen zu reduzieren.\n\nBei der Beihilfe gibt es einen Rückstau von 60 000 Anträgen. Beihilfeberechtigte mussten bei Arzt- und Behandlungskosten in Vorleistung treten, in einzelnen Fällen mit Summen in Höhe von 20 000 Euro. Das trifft vor allen Dingen die, die besonders auf die Fürsorgepflicht des Dienstherrn angewiesen sind: chronisch Kranke oder Krebspatienten. Der Wehrbeauftragte schreibt:\n\nEin Petent berichtete weinend am Telefon, er habe bereits seine Kinder um Geld bitten müssen und ihnen nichts zum Geburtstag schenken können. Auch wurde nach Angabe von Petenten auf notwendige Arztbesuche verzichtet, aus Angst, die Kosten nicht begleichen zu können.\n\nNein, meine Damen und Herren, bei der Bundeswehr stehen nicht die Menschen im Mittelpunkt, sondern die geostrategischen Interessen Deutschlands. Das ist die Wahrheit.\n\nWas einen so maßlos ärgert, ist, wie hier mit zweierlei Maß gemessen wird: 60 000 Soldatinnen und Soldaten warten auf Geld, das ihnen zusteht. Doch der Rüstungsbetrieb MTU bekam im Dezember letzten Jahres mal eben 55 Millionen Euro per Eilüberweisung aus dem Verteidigungsministerium, ohne dass, wie vorgeschrieben, der Bundestag konsultiert wurde. Wofür erhielt MTU 55 Millionen Euro? Für Eurofighter-Triebwerke, die nie gebaut wurden; denn die Kosten für den Eurofighter sind derart explodiert, dass die Bestellung reduziert werden musste. Nun kommt auch noch Airbus und will 900 Millionen Euro für dieselben nie gebauten -Eurofighter haben. Ich sage: Das Geld, das so bei der Aufrüstung verpulvert wird, fehlt im Land für Kitas, Krankenhäuser und die Versorgung der Soldatinnen und Soldaten.\n\nBei dieser Gelegenheit, meine Damen und Herren, muss ich noch zwei aktuelle Themen ansprechen.\n\nDer erste Punkt betrifft die nächste Aufrüstungsrunde. Das Bundesverteidigungsministerium hat im Januar dieses Jahres einen weiteren wichtigen Auftrag erteilt, um den Weg zur Beschaffung der US-Drohne Predator B freizumachen. Nicht, dass die Abgeordneten im Verteidigungsausschuss darüber informiert worden wären - erst aus dem Spiegel haben sie davon erfahren.\n\nDann schob das Ministerium hastig eine Erklärung nach. Frau von der Leyen, wo ist Ihre Initiative für Transparenz geblieben?\n\nUm es klar zu sagen: Diese Drohne wird Unmengen an Geld verschlingen, das an anderer Stelle dringend gebraucht würde. Es handelt sich bei dem Typ um eine Drohne, die bis zu 1 300 Kilogramm an Raketen tragen und abschießen kann. Mit anderen Worten: Offensichtlich werden hier die Weichen für die Beschaffung von Kampfdrohnen gestellt, auch wenn es offiziell noch heißt, der Auftrag würde keinerlei Vorentscheidung zur Beschaffung von Kampfdrohnen sein. Ich bin gespannt, ob die SPD ihrer Ankündigung aus den Koalitionsverhandlungen Taten folgen lässt. Bitte tun Sie das! Denn wir können keine Kampfdrohnen gebrauchen.\n\nDiese Drohnen haben auch nichts mit dem Schutz der eigenen Soldatinnen und Soldaten zu tun, wie manche behaupten,\n\nsondern ausschließlich mit der Fähigkeit, selbst an zukünftigen Drohnenkriegen teilzunehmen. Das lehnt die Linke entschieden ab.\n\nDer zweite Punkt ist der Parlamentsvorbehalt für Auslandseinsätze, den die Union aufweichen möchte. Frau Nahles hat in den Koalitionsverhandlungen wörtlich gesagt: „Am Parlamentsvorbehalt wird nicht gerüttelt.“ Aber warum stimmen Sie dann der Einsetzung einer Kommission zu, die genau das zum Inhalt hat? Offenbar ist die SPD ganz einverstanden damit, Parlamentsrechte einzuschränken, um Auslandseinsätze im Rahmen von Bündnisverpflichtungen zu erleichtern. Aber auch wenn es um den Einsatz von Soldaten in NATO-Stäben, den Einsatz von AWACS-Flugzeugen oder den Einsatz von Spezialkräften geht: Wir wollen nicht weniger, sondern mehr Parlamentsrechte.\n\nGanz nebenbei: Im Interesse von Soldaten und Soldatinnen ist das auch; denn wenn Auslandseinsätze nicht mandatiert werden, hat das Folgen für die soziale Versorgung von Soldatinnen und Soldaten. Zudem greifen manche private Lebensversicherungen nur, wenn ein Einsatz mandatiert ist. Aber auch hier das gleiche Bild: Die Große Koalition will die Hürden für Auslandseinsätze senken, aber die sozialen Interessen der Soldatenfamilien sind das Letzte, woran Sie denken.\n\nFrau von der Leyen, Ihr positives Bild hat Kratzer bekommen. Auch wenn Sie über die Bildung, dieses Kleinod, reden, hinterlässt das mehr Fragezeichen als Ausrufungszeichen. Es besteht eine riesige Kluft zwischen der Realität und dem, was die Bundeswehr in ihrer Imagekampagne jungen Leuten verspricht. Wenn wir schauen, was der Bericht zu den Themen Bildung und Ausbildung sagt, dann lesen wir über die Unzufriedenheit mit der Beförderungssituation in der Bundeswehr. Wie sieht es also mit den Karrierechancen aus? Zahlreiche Soldatinnen und Soldaten beklagen, dass sie unzutreffende oder gar keine Dienstzeugnisse erhalten haben. Zudem werden organisatorische und fachliche Mängel im Bereich der zivilberuflichen Aus- und Weiterbildung beklagt.\n\nAnstatt millionenschwere Imagekampagnen zu bezahlen und die Bundeswehr in Schulen zu schicken, sollten Sie das Geld besser für soziale Belange ausgeben. Aber für die Linke ist das Wichtigste: Beenden Sie die Auslandseinsätze! Holen Sie die Soldatinnen und Soldaten nach Hause, besser heute als morgen, und schicken Sie sie nicht in neue Einsätze!\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13336,thomas-de-maiziere,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Einen Tag nach dem Anschlag habe ich mit anderen den Berliner Breitscheidplatz besucht. Es war nicht der erste Ort dieser Art, den ich gesehen und besucht habe. Wir haben dort Blumen niedergelegt. Ich habe den Schock und die Trauer in den Gesichtern der Menschen gesehen. Die Kirchen haben am Abend nach dem Tag des Anschlags einen wunderbaren Gottesdienst abgehalten. Alle diese Eindrücke bleiben bei mir und auch bei vielen von Ihnen noch Wochen im Kopf und im Herzen.\n\nJeder, den ich dort gesehen habe, hat seine eigene Weise, Anteil an den schrecklichen Ereignissen zu nehmen. Jeder und jede in unserem Land darf und muss für sich entscheiden, wie er oder sie mit dem Anschlag umgehen möchte. Ein Staat wird die Art des Trauerns nicht vorschreiben. Ein Staat hat andere Wege der Anteilnahme. Er leistet Unterstützung für die Hinterbliebenen, und wenn dort mehr zu tun ist, dann müssen wir mehr tun. Er setzt Flaggen auf Halbmast. Er vereinbart einen Moment des Schweigens. Er gedenkt morgen im Bundestag.\n\nAll das ist wichtig, nicht nur für die Hinterbliebenen, auch für uns, die wir niemanden verloren haben, und auch für eine wehrhafte Demokratie. All das lässt uns gemeinsam innehalten und zeigt, dass wir in diesen Tagen und Stunden und angesichts dieser Lage einander zugehörig sind - als Demokraten, oft im Streit, aber trotzdem in Freiheit miteinander verbunden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, all das verlangt - nach einer Phase des Innehaltens - aber auch nach Aufklärung und Konsequenzen. In den letzten Wochen ist viel über den Begriff des Gefährders gesprochen worden. Ein Gefährder ist jemand, von dem die Sicherheitsbehörden die Befürchtung haben, dass er etwas unternehmen wird, das unser Land bedrohen könnte. Deswegen beobachten sie ihn.\n\nAuch Anis Amri, der Attentäter vom Breitscheidplatz, gehörte zu dieser Personengruppe. Die Sicherheitsbehörden hatten ihn im Visier. Sie haben ihn beobachtet. Sie haben Ermittlungsverfahren geführt. Auch die Ausländerbehörden der Länder haben sich mit ihm beschäftigt. Wir mussten aber feststellen - das ist meine vorläufige Bewertung angesichts des bisherigen Kenntnisstandes -: Alle Maßnahmen der Sicherheitsbehörden und der Ausländerbehörden haben nicht vermocht und nicht ausgereicht, ihn aufzuhalten und den Anschlag zu verhindern.\n\nDie Gefährlichkeit von Menschen einzuschätzen, gehört zu den schwierigsten Aufgaben der Sicherheitsbehörden und der Justiz. Das kennen wir auch aus anderen Fällen, etwa der Sicherheitsverwahrung entlassener Sexualstraftäter. In anderen ähnlichen Terrorgefährdungsfällen haben die Sicherheitsbehörden auch in jüngster Zeit Anschläge verhindern können. Hier nicht; das ist bitter.\n\nIch habe gemeinsam mit meinem Kollegen Maas unter Beteiligung der betroffenen Bundesländer, allen voran Berlin und Nordrhein-Westfalen, eine Chronologie des Behördenhandelns vorgelegt. Das bietet jetzt die Grundlage für weitere Aufklärung - die wir in jeder Weise unterstützen -, die dieser Deutsche Bundestag unternimmt. Ich beteilige mich nicht an Schuldzuweisungen. Ich konzentriere mich auf die erforderlichen Konsequenzen.\n\nAngesichts der Gefährdungslage haben wir keine Zeit zu verlieren; wir haben es heute im Ausschuss diskutiert. Erst volle Aufklärung zu verlangen und dann Maßnahmen und Konsequenzen zu diskutieren, halte ich jedenfalls dann für falsch, wenn wir von den Maßnahmen, die jetzt erforderlich sind, jetzt überzeugt sind. Dann sollten wir sie jetzt ergreifen, gegebenenfalls später andere. Aber was wir jetzt für richtig halten, sollten wir jetzt umsetzen und nicht abwarten.\n\nIch habe folgende operative Maßnahmen veranlasst: Die Arbeitsgemeinschaft Statusrechtliche Begleitmaßnahmen, die sogenannte AG Status, im Gemeinsamen Terrorismusabwehrzentrum nimmt in mehreren Sondersitzungen - auch heute, während wir hier diskutieren - jeden ihr bekannten Gefährder noch mal unter die Lupe und prüft nochmals, ob Abschiebungen oder ähnliche Maßnahmen erforderlich sind. Ich habe außerdem das Bundeskriminalamt beauftragt, die Risikobewertung von Gewaltstraftätern zu verbessern und Pläne zur Vereinheitlichung von Gefährderbewertungen voranzutreiben. Wir haben zwar eine - wenn Sie so wollen - sicherheitsfachliche Definition von Gefährdern und relevanten Personen in ihrem Umfeld, wir haben auch bundesweite Leitlinien zum Umgang mit ihnen, aber die Bewertung von Gefährdern und die taktischen Maßnahmen nimmt immer noch jedes Bundesland zu sehr für sich alleine vor. Wir brauchen eine bundesweit standardisierte Gefährderbewertung. Ich will auch den Erkenntnisaustausch in Europa weiter beschleunigen. Wir haben dort schon viel beschlossen. Das muss jetzt beschleunigt werden.\n\nNeben diesen operativen Maßnahmen sind aber auch gesetzliche Maßnahmen erforderlich. Ich habe mich mit meinem Kollegen Maas auf eine Reihe von gesetzgeberischen Maßnahmen verständigt. Das ist gut. Wir sind uns jetzt darüber einig, dass es dabei zentral um aufenthaltsrechtliche Maßnahmen gehen muss, darunter einige Maßnahmen, die ich bereits im August vergangenen Jahres vorgeschlagen habe und zu denen ich bereits im Oktober entsprechende Gesetzentwürfe vorgeschlagen habe. Ich muss das einmal leider so sagen.\n\nWas tun wir jetzt? Wir verschärfen die Möglichkeiten der Abschiebehaft für Gefährder. Eine erhebliche Gefahr für die Sicherheit muss ausreichen für eine Abschiebehaft. Das gilt nicht nur für Terror, sondern auch für sonstige schwere Kriminalität.\n\nGefährder sollen auch dann in U-Haft genommen werden, wenn eine Abschiebung absehbar nicht innerhalb von drei Monaten stattfinden kann. Das werden wir auch umsetzen. Die Möglichkeit zum Ausreisegewahrsam wird von vier auf zehn Tage verlängert. Wir regeln schärfere Überwachungsmöglichkeiten für ausreisepflichtige Ausländer, die die öffentliche Sicherheit gefährden - dazu gehört auch die Fußfessel. Sehr wichtig ist: Für Asylbewerber und Ausreisepflichtige, die über ihre Identität täuschen, soll der Aufenthalt auf den Bezirk der jeweiligen Ausländerbehörde beschränkt werden. Dann kann jemand wie Amri jedenfalls nicht folgenlos seinen Aufenthalt mal hier und mal dort nehmen und durchs ganze Land ziehen.\n\nUnd: Wir werden bei den Verhandlungen mit den Herkunftsländern über die Rücknahme eigener Staatsbürger stärker auch andere Politikfelder mit einbeziehen, insbesondere auch die Außen-, die Wirtschafts- und die Entwicklungspolitik.\n\nDas ist eine Gemeinschaftsaufgabe für die ganze Bundesregierung und jeden Minister.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich habe vor zwei Wochen weitgehende Vorschläge gemacht für einen starken Staat in schwierigen Zeiten. Sie sind auf ein großes Echo gestoßen. Ich will sie heute hier nicht wiederholen; wir werden sie heute auch nicht debattieren können - dafür ist nicht der Zeitpunkt, auch nicht der Rahmen. Hier und heute nur so viel: Für die Sicherheit unseres Landes sollten wir nicht nur über Befugnisse reden, sondern auch darüber, wie wir die Aufgaben am besten erledigen können.\n\nBeim Umgang mit Gefährdern im föderalen Staat sind alle gefordert. Ich möchte einheitliche Maßstäbe in Bund und Ländern. Es darf in Deutschland keine Zonen unterschiedlicher Sicherheit geben.\n\nIch bin bereit, dass der Bund mehr Verantwortung übernimmt. Es kommt auf die Verwaltungen an und deren Zusammenarbeit. Es kommt auf den Gesetzesvollzug an. Es kommt auch auf die Justiz an, wie wir auch im Fall Amri sehen.\n\nIch will nicht hinnehmen, dass sich gewaltbereite Islamisten in unserem Land frei bewegen können. Ich will einheitliche Sicherheitsstandards in Bund und Ländern. Ich will, dass Gefährder besser und intensiver beobachtet und schneller aus dem Verkehr gezogen werden können. Ich will, dass ausreisepflichtige Gefährder unser Land verlassen. Und ich werde alles in meiner Verantwortung Mögliche tun, damit das auch passiert.\n\nDafür brauchen wir Ihre Unterstützung hier im Deutschen Bundestag und die der Bundesländer, möglichst geschlossen, vor allem aber entschlossen.\"\n12247,ernst-dieter-rossmann,\"Frau Ministerin, die Autoren des nationalen Bildungsberichts sagen - das zeigt sich auch in der Stellungnahme der Bundesregierung -, dass wir mit Blick auf den Zusammenhang zwischen sozialem Herkommen und Bildungserfolg noch nicht so weit sind, wie wir sein wollen. Was sind die Schlüsselprojekte der Bundesregierung im frühkindlichen und schulischen Bereich, mit denen sie diesen Zusammenhang aufbrechen will, damit es mehr Bildungsaufstieg und eine stärkere Entkopplung der Bildungschancen von dem sozialen Herkommen gibt? Bitte nennen Sie ein, zwei Schlüsselprojekte, an denen Sie arbeiten.\n\nDamit der Kollege von den Grünen, Herr Gehring, nicht der Einzige ist, der sich hier über die 3,5 Milliarden Euro zusätzlich für Bildungsinvestitionen im Rahmen der Bund-Länder-Vereinbarung freut, will auch ich diese ausdrücklich erwähnen, zumal die Ministerin dort eher verhalten reagiert hat.\n\nDaran will ich die Frage anschließen: Was kann die Bundesregierung jetzt tun, damit dieser erfolgreiche Aufbruch mit schon gesicherten 3,5 Milliarden Euro für nachhaltige Bildungsinvestitionen in finanzschwachen Kommunen in eine Bildungsallianz von Bund, Ländern und Kommunen mündet? Im Anschluss an Herrn Jung: Welche Sicherheit haben wir, dass die von Ihnen in Aussicht gestellten 5 Milliarden Euro vom Finanzminister dieser Regierung tatsächlich bewilligt und hinterlegt werden? Oder gibt es einen Unterschied zwischen den 3,5 Milliarden Euro, die jetzt schon feststehen, und den 5 Milliarden Euro, die noch offen sind?\"\n1851,christel-voßbeck-kayser,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Kurz vor der Europawahl bringt die Fraktion Die Linke einen Antrag zum Thema „soziales Europa“ ein - ein Schelm, wer Böses dabei denkt. Denn ein soziales -Europa war und ist immer Grundlage der Europäischen Union gewesen.\n\nEin soziales Europa bedeutet auch ein stabiles -Europa, nämlich ein Europa mit soliden Finanzen und harter Währung. Dies sind Voraussetzungen für sichere Arbeitsplätze und dauerhaften Wohlstand.\n\nEin soziales Europa ist auch ein Europa der Chancen: gute Bildung in ganz Europa und Bildungsabschlüsse, die EU-weit anerkannt werden; Schüler, Schülerinnen, Auszubildende, Studierende können überall in Europa lernen und arbeiten.\n\nEin soziales Europa ist auch ein gefestigtes Europa, in dem schwächere Länder gestärkt werden, um wett-bewerbsfähiger zu werden.\n\nUnd: Ein soziales Europa ist auch ein zukunftsfähiges Europa. Europäische Fördergelder werden nicht mehr nur nach Himmelsrichtung, sondern nach festen Kriterien vergeben. So können die Regionen bei der Bewältigung des Bevölkerungswandels unterstützt werden. Zu einem zukunftsfähigen Europa gehört auch ein gutes Miteinander von Jung und Alt.\n\nDies alles ist Europa. Dieses Europa wird seit Jahrzehnten durch verschiedene Programme unterstützt.\n\nDabei gilt für uns in der Union immer der Grundsatz „Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe“. Unterstützung gibt es nur, wenn die betroffenen Staaten Reformen durchführen und ihre Finanzen in Ordnung bringen. Irland und Portugal sind gute Beispiele, die zeigen, dass diese Form der Hilfe der richtige Weg ist.\n\nIn Ihrem Antrag erwähnen Sie, Kollegen und Kolleginnen der Fraktion Die Linke, die durchaus hohe -Arbeitslosigkeit in unseren europäischen Nachbarländern. Sie unterlassen es aber, zu erwähnen, dass die Zahlen der Arbeitslosigkeit und auch der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit in Europa aktuell sinken. Die Arbeitslosenquote in der EU ist im März dieses Jahres im Vergleich zum -Vorjahr von 10,9 auf 10,5 Prozent gesunken. Die Jugendarbeitslosenquote in der EU ist im gleichen Zeitraum von 23,5 auf aktuell 22,8 Prozent zurückgegangen. Ich denke, diese Zahlen zeigen einen positiven Trend, der Ihnen dem Anschein nach entgangen ist.\n\nSie erwähnen in Ihrem Antrag auch Kroatien, ein Land mit einer Jugendarbeitslosigkeit in Höhe von 49,2 Prozent. Ja, diese traurige Zahl ist richtig. Sie unterlassen es aber auch hier, zu erwähnen, dass Kroatien erst seit dem letzten Jahr, genau erst seit Juli 2013, Mitglied der EU ist. Diese Jugendarbeitslosigkeit ist ja nicht erst durch die Mitgliedschaft entstanden. Dies ist eine verfälschte Darstellung von Tatsachen.\n\nRichtig ist folgender Zusammenhang: Das Wirtschaftswachstum in Europa liegt in diesem Jahr bei 1,2 Prozent. Länder wie Irland und Portugal, die ich eben schon genannt habe, profitieren hiervon, sie haben nämlich ein Wachstum zu verzeichnen. Was positives Wachstum bedeutet, das haben wir hier bei uns in Deutschland erlebt: Es führt zu mehr Beschäftigung und damit zur Reduzierung der Zahl der Arbeitslosen. Auch die aktuellen Zahlen aus Portugal und Irland belegen das doch - vergleichen wir es mit den Zahlen vom Vorjahr -: Portugal hatte 2013 eine Arbeitslosenquote von 17,4 Prozent und liegt jetzt bei 15,2 Prozent. Irland hatte im Vorjahr eine Arbeitslosenquote von 13,7 Prozent und liegt jetzt bei 11,8 Prozent. Dies ist auch der Grund, -warum beide Länder es selbstständig geschafft haben, den Rettungsschirm zu verlassen. Das zeigt, dass wir mit dieser Politik auf dem richtigen Weg sind.\n\nDeshalb sind die in Ihrem Antrag getroffenen Aussagen, liebe Kollegen und Kolleginnen der Fraktion Die Linke, nicht zutreffend.\n\nIch darf auch daran erinnern, dass im März 2010 ein Treffen der Staats- und Regierungschefs der EU statt-gefunden hat, auf dem die Strategie „Europa 2020“ beschlossen wurde. Ich will jetzt nicht näher auf die Kernziele eingehen; aber mit diesem Programm, das jetzt für die nächsten sieben Jahre gilt, werden mehr als 80 Milliarden Euro für diese Kernziele und damit für die Menschen in ganz Europa zur Verfügung gestellt. Von diesen 80 Milliarden Euro gehen mindestens 20 Prozent der Mittel in die soziale Eingliederung. Ich finde, besser kann man ein soziales Europa nicht beschreiben.\n\nIch darf auch daran erinnern, dass jetzt die achte Förderperiode des Europäischen Sozialfonds - das ist schon mehrfach erwähnt worden; das erste Mal ging er 1958 an den Start - beginnt. Der Europäische Sozialfonds, liebe Kollegen und Kolleginnen, hat sich mit seinen Schwerpunkten immer an den aktuellen sozialen und wirtschaftlichen Notwendigkeiten der Mitgliedstaaten und ihrer Menschen orientiert.\n\nAll diese von mir genannten Maßnahmen beschreiben sehr wohl ein soziales Europa. Wir müssen den eingesetzten europäischen Mitteln aber auch Zeit geben, um zu wirken. Der positive Trend bei Wachstum und Beschäftigung bestätigt das.\n\nSie können eines mitnehmen, Kollegen und Kolleginnen der Fraktion Die Linke: Die Bundesregierung unter unserer Kanzlerin Angela Merkel wird sich auch weiterhin selbstverständlich für „Europa 2020“ und damit für ein soziales Europa einsetzen.\"\n1382,edelgard-bulmahn,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Klimawandel findet statt - es gibt keine ernsthaften wissenschaftlichen Zweifel mehr -, und er betrifft uns alle. Er findet auf allen Kontinenten statt, und er findet auf allen Weltmeeren statt. - Das ist, in Kurzfassung, die Kernaussage aus dem Bericht des Weltklimarates.\n\nDer Bericht enthält eine zweite Kernaussage: Es gibt erfolgversprechende Gegenstrategien, um den Klimawandel einzudämmen und um die dramatischen Auswirkungen zu verringern. Genau darüber diskutieren wir heute. Acht Schlüsselrisiken hat der IPCC identifiziert. Angesichts dieser Dimension der Herausforderung, die in dem Bericht deutlich wird, fragen sich viele Menschen: Kann Deutschland überhaupt etwas tun? Ist Deutschland nicht viel zu klein, um tatsächlich spürbare Veränderungen zu bewirken, damit künftige Generationen noch gute Lebensbedingungen vorfinden? Ja, es stimmt; Deutschland allein kann den Klimawandel nicht stoppen. Die Schlussfolgerung, dann könne sich Deutschland eine anspruchsvolle Klimaschutzpolitik sparen, wäre aber grundfalsch.\n\nDeutschland verfügt wie nur wenige andere Nationen über eine leistungsfähige industrielle Basis, über hervorragende Wissenschaftseinrichtungen und Forschungseinrichtungen, über erfolgversprechende Technologiestrategien, über erfolgversprechende ökonomische Strategien, um den Wechsel von einer ressourcenvernichtenden Wirtschaftsweise zu einer ressourcenschonenden Wirtschaftsweise zu vollziehen.\n\nDas ist die eigentliche Herausforderung, vor der wir stehen. Die Bundesumweltministerin hat recht, wenn sie sagt, das sei nicht allein ihre Aufgabe. Es ist eine Querschnittsaufgabe der ganzen Bundesregierung, es ist eine Querschnittsaufgabe der Wirtschaft, und es ist eine Querschnittsaufgabe eines jeden Menschen in unserem Land. Nur gemeinsam werden wir diese Herausforderung bewältigen.\n\nDreh- und Angelpunkt aller Klimaschutzstrategien ist die Begrenzung des Klimawandels und damit auch die drastische Absenkung der anthropogen verursachten Treibhausgasemissionen. Energieeinsparung und Ressourcenwechsel sind die zentralen Elemente des Umbaus, den ich beschrieben habe, eines Umbaus, der sich im Übrigen nicht allein auf Stromerzeugung und Stromverbrauch beschränken darf, sondern sich auf das gesamte Energiesystem und auf unsere gesamte Volkswirtschaft beziehen muss.\n\nNatürlich ist es am besten - das ist klar -, Energie gar nicht erst zu verbrauchen. Bereits die absehbaren und realisierbaren Einsparpotenziale sind enorm. Ich will es einmal konkret machen: Rund zwei Drittel des Energieverbrauchs in Gebäuden dienen der Warmwasserzubereitung und der Raumtemperierung. Wir wollen deshalb die Gebäudedämmung und die energetische Sanierung des Altbaubestandes massiv vorantreiben. Ich bin sehr froh, dass sich auch die Bundesumweltministerin das Ziel gesetzt hat, hier zu anspruchsvollen Programmen und Ergebnissen zu kommen. Passiv- oder Plusenergiehäuser sind keine technische Utopie; sie sind realisierbar. Wir brauchen klare Zielmarken und auch Anreize, um gerade beim Altbaubestand voranzukommen.\n\nDie Steigerung der Energieeffizienz ist ebenfalls eine große Aufgabe, und zwar auf allen Ebenen: in unseren Haushalten durch verbrauchsärmere Geräte, bei unseren Kraftfahrzeugen durch effizientere Motoren und andere Antriebskonzepte, durch ein verändertes Produktdesign, in der Industrie durch effizientere Produktionsverfahren und die Rückgewinnung von Prozesswärme, in den Gebäuden durch die Verbindung von Energie- und Wärmeerzeugung, durch den Einsatz von neuen Materialien und durch den Einsatz einer modernen, effizienten Steuerungstechnik. All das zeigt: Die Möglichkeiten sind groß und bei weitem noch nicht ausgeschöpft. Das zeigt wiederum: Es ist eine Querschnittsaufgabe. Nur auf den Klimaschutz und nicht auf die ganzen anderen Bereiche zu schauen, würde uns nicht wirklich weiterführen. Dann kämen wir nicht zu dem gewünschten Ziel und dem angestrebten Ergebnis.\n\nEs gehört auch dazu, dass wir die teilweise widersprüchlichen internationalen Vertrags- und Regelwerke zu einem kohärenten Regelsystem weiterentwickeln. Das gilt nicht nur in Bezug auf den Emissionshandel, sondern für viele Regelwerke wie WTO- und andere internationale Verträge. Wir müssen immer wieder dafür werben, dass sie kohärent auf Klimaschutzziele ausgerichtet werden.\n\nGleiches gilt für die Energiewende. Die Vorredner haben recht: Für das Gelingen der Energiewende ist entscheidend, ob wir es hier schaffen, einen spürbaren und wirksamen Beitrag zur Reduzierung des Klimawandels zu leisten. Ich bin sehr froh, dass die Koalition diese Aufgabe mit Nachdruck angeht, dass sie sich ambitionierte Ziele setzt, dass sie die Stellschrauben beschreibt, dass sie eine gezielte Technologieförderung betreiben will, dass sie sich die Koordinierung der verschiedenen Politikfelder vorgenommen hat und dass sie Überprüfungsmechanismen einführen will, die wir tatsächlich brauchen.\n\nIch bin zutiefst davon überzeugt, dass wir gesellschaftliche und technologische Innovationen und nicht den Verzicht darauf brauchen und dass wir feststellen werden, dass ein schonender und effizienter Umgang mit Ressourcen die Schlüsselkompetenz zukunftsfähiger Gesellschaften sein wird. Wenn es Deutschland gelingt, zu zeigen, dass eine energieeffiziente, ressourcenschonende Volkswirtschaft auch eine erfolgreiche Volkswirtschaft sein kann und dass eine Energiewende ohne drastische Wohlstandsverluste gelingen kann, dann ist das ein Modell, das vielen anderen Ländern Mut machen wird und dem, so glaube ich, viele folgen werden.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8338,renate-kunast,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Lieber Herr Steineke, im Ergebnis habe ich nichts anderes erwartet, weil die CDU schon immer dagegen war. Die wirklich spannende Frage war ja nur: Mit welcher Pirouette argumentieren Sie heute?\n\n- Na ja, wie das mit dem Verfassungsrecht ist, sehen wir, wenn es so weit ist, wenn es so ein Gesetz als Vorlage gibt.\n\nDas können Sie gerne behaupten. Ich behaupte das Gegenteil.\n\nWissen Sie was? Ich meine, dass wir aktuell sagen können, dass es Gruppenverfahren braucht. Warum aktuell? Weil wir sehen, dass sich die Verfahren in dieser Gesellschaft immer mehr verändern. Wie viele Verträge gibt es, bei denen es um ganz kleine Summen geht? Die Zahl dieser Verträge nimmt durch das Internet stark zu, und wir stellen fest - dazu gibt es Zahlen; das haben wir vor ein paar Tagen mit hochrangigen Richtern in der niedersächsischen Landesvertretung erörtert -, dass die Zahl der Klagen vor den Zivilgerichten abnimmt, insbesondere die der Klagen, bei denen es um kleine Summen geht. Das hat meines Erachtens nicht nur damit zu tun, dass die Gerichte für die Bearbeitung viel zu lange brauchen, sondern auch damit - das sagt man mittlerweile so -, dass die Leute klein beigeben. Zwar sind 50 oder 20 Euro für sie persönlich extrem viel Geld, aber sie haben nicht den Mut, das Risiko einzugehen, zum Anwalt und womöglich durch mehrere Instanzen zu gehen.\n\nDas ist doch keine Frage der Beutelschneiderei von Anwälten, sondern die Frage ist, ob sich das kleine Individuum angesichts eines größeren, mächtigeren Gegners, der mehrere Juristinnen und Juristen beschäftigt, überhaupt traut, sein Recht wahrzunehmen. - Dazu haben Sie kein Wort gesagt.\n\nAnlässlich des Themas Muster- und Gruppenklagen hätten Sie ja auch einmal ein Wort zum pikanten Thema VW sagen können. Hunderttausende Kunden von VW, dieses großen Unternehmens, fragen sich heute: Was gilt eigentlich? Es gibt skandalöse Mängel bei der Aufsicht und der Aufklärung, und Sie sagen hier kein Wort zur Situation der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher.\n\nDie Frage, ob es sich um einen Motormangel oder einen Softwaremangel handelt, legt doch nahe, zu überlegen, ob sich Kunden zusammentun können, um gemeinsam auf Schadensersatz zu klagen.\n\nMeine These lautet: Das wäre am Ende für VW sogar besser als 100 000 einzelne Klagen. Von Ihnen kam kein Wort dazu.\n\n- Wenn Sie das Thema im Rechtsausschuss nicht immer vertagen würden, wenn Sie den Punkt VW nicht immer wieder von der Tagesordnung nehmen würden - mittlerweile zum dritten Mal -, dann wäre Ihnen vielleicht klar, gegen wen und auf was sie klagen sollen. Der Probleme gibt es genug: Wie setze ich Rücktritts- oder Minderungsrechte durch? Was ist mit Schadensersatzansprüchen? - Ich glaube, dass die Politik die Verantwortung hat, eine Handreichung zu erstellen, wie man klagen kann, und zu sagen, wie die Regelungen für die Zukunft verändert werden.\n\nFür die von uns vorgeschlagene Änderung wäre VW ein klassischer Anwendungsfall. Wir haben gesagt: Es müssen mindestens zehn Gruppenmitglieder sein, die Ansprüche müssen den gleichen zugrundeliegenden Lebenssachverhalt betreffen und das Gruppenverfahren muss vorzugswürdig sein gegenüber Individualklagen. Das wäre der Fall.\n\nDas wäre sinnvoll, und zwar nicht, weil die Anwälte besonders viel Geld verdienen, nein, solche Gruppenverfahren wären auch effizienter für die Amtsgerichte als Hunderte oder Tausende Einzelverfahren. Herr Steineke, Sie haben gesagt, dass es viel besser sei, wenn die Anwälte die Fälle individuell bearbeiten. Vielleicht können Sie nachher einmal sagen, wie viele einzelne Klagen mit einem Streitwert von 10 oder 50 Euro Sie in Ihrem Büro bearbeiten, obwohl das für Sie als Anwalt ein Zuschussgeschäft ist. Ich bin der festen Überzeugung, dass das, was Sie hier erzählt haben, wirklich gaga war. Das war Kokolores.\n\nUnsere Frage muss im Interesse der Verbraucher lauten - das hat die Anhörung für meine Begriffe ergeben -, wie die Barrieren, die angesichts des Risikos und der langen Wege bestehen, aufgelöst werden können. Ich muss Ihnen sagen: Ein Musterfeststellungsverfahren könnte eine gute Ergänzung eines Gruppenfeststellungsverfahrens sein, aber auch nicht mehr als das.\n\nWen und was wollen Sie eigentlich schützen? Die Reinheit der Lehre? Die Unantastbarkeit der ZPO? An anderen Stellen ändern Sie die Gesetze doch auch. Das, was 1879 beim Verfassen der ZPO galt, muss heute nicht mehr unbedingt gelten. Damals wussten Sie direkt, wer Ihr vertragliches Gegenüber ist. In der heutigen Zeit ist dies anonymer. Heute gehen Sie nicht mehr in Tante-Emma-Läden, sondern bestellen online. Sie haben mit großen Unternehmen zu tun. Unsere Verpflichtung ist, die Checks und Balances, die aus den Anfangszeiten der ZPO und des BGB stammen, heute und in Zukunft sicherzustellen.\n\nIch meine, man sollte den Kunden eine Möglichkeit geben, zu ihrem Recht zu kommen. Ich muss ehrlich sagen, Herr Steineke: Das, was Sie mit Blick auf die USA gesagt haben - Sie haben erzählt, was in den USA gilt -, interessiert mich gar nicht.\n\nDenn es gibt keinen Automatismus, dass US-Recht bei uns gilt. Hier in unserer Vorlage heißt es „opt-in“. Nur wenn man Ja sagt, nimmt man am Verfahren teil und muss ausdrücklich eine Teilnahmeerklärung abgeben. Die Kostengrundentscheidung des § 91 ZPO bleibt. Wenn Sie mitleidig darauf hinweisen, welche Schwierigkeiten man hat, wenn man vielleicht Kritik am Anwalt hat, sage ich Ihnen: Niemand muss mitmachen.\n\nSie haben keine Antwort auf die Frage gegeben, wie kleine Schäden von kleinen Bürgern gegenüber größeren Vertragspartnern eingeklagt werden können. Da kann ich nur sagen: Wer ein C im Namen hat, sollte sich eigentlich damit beschäftigen.\"\n10766,birgit-wollert,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin, dass Sie die Zwischenfrage noch zulassen. - Frau Kollegin, der Deutsche Hebammenverband mit seinen 19 000 Mitgliedern und 16 Landesverbänden hat in seiner Pressemitteilung ausdrücklich auf den heutigen Tag verwiesen und gesagt: Die Anträge der Grünen und der Linken und ganz besonders der gemeinsame Haftungsfonds für alle Gesundheitsberufe könnten eine tragfähige Lösung für die Zukunft sein. - Meine Frage ist: Haben Sie das gelesen? Würden Sie das bitte auch einmal zur Kenntnis nehmen?\n\nUns geht es dabei gar nicht nur - und das trifft auch auf den Deutschen Hebammenverband zu - um die niedergelassenen Hebammen. Wir wollen nicht die eine gegen die andere Gruppe ausspielen, sondern es geht uns um den Berufsstand als Ganzes, dass er abgesichert wird und die Haftpflichtprämien in den Krankenhäusern nicht ins Unermessliche steigen.\"\n9257,andreas-lenz,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Es geht um einen Gesetzentwurf der Grünen zur Änderung des Erneuerbare-Energien-Wärmegesetzes. Bisher hatten wir es immer mit Anträgen von Ihnen, Frau Verlinden, zu tun. Jetzt liegt gleich ein ganzer Gesetzentwurf vor.\n\n„Respekt!“, dachte ich mir zuerst. Aber ein zweiter Blick machte mir klar: Es handelt sich um nicht mehr als eine Kopie des Gesetzes aus Baden-Württemberg; Sie sagten das ja vorhin selbst.\n\nSie führten in einem Interview aus:\n\nWir haben die Regelungen aus Baden-Württemberg fast durchgängig übernommen.\n\nIch rate Ihnen: Schreiben Sie doch wenigstens von den Klassenbesten ab und nicht von Klassenschlechtesten.\n\n- Darauf komme ich noch.\n\nDer Gesetzentwurf hat eine Pflicht zur anteiligen Nutzung von erneuerbaren Energien für die Wärmeversorgung auch im privaten Gebäudebestand zum Inhalt. Der Pflichtanteil der erneuerbaren Energien bei der Wärme soll auf 15 Prozent steigen. Es soll außerdem eine Ausdehnung der Verpflichtungen auf den privaten Bereich und auf Nichtwohngebäude geben, genauso wie eben in Baden-Württemberg. Ich muss schon einmal sagen: Versuchen Sie erst einmal, Ihre rot-grünen Länderkollegen zu überzeugen, bevor Sie beim Bund anfangen.\n\nKein anderes Bundesland hat bisher dieses Gesetz übernommen. Aber der Bund soll es machen.\n\nDas entbehrt einer gewissen Logik.\n\nSchaut man sich das Gesetz an, dann gibt es gute Gründe - wir haben es vorhin schon gehört -, warum sich niemand diesem Gesetz anschließt. Die Ausdehnung der Nutzungspflicht für erneuerbare Energien auf den privaten Gebäudebestand ist weder notwendig noch sachgerecht. In der Praxis kann ein solches Gesetz zu Attentismus führen, dadurch, dass die Heizungen noch später repariert werden oder noch länger repariert werden, bevor sie letztlich ausgewechselt werden. Der Umwelt wäre hiermit ein Bärendienst erwiesen. Die Leute lassen sich nicht gerne etwas vorschreiben.\n\nVerpflichtungen und Zwang erreichen häufig weniger als kluge Anreize. Diese richtigen klugen Ansätze werden Gesetz. Im privaten Gebäudebestand wird der Ausbau erneuerbarer Wärme durch das Marktanreizprogramm unterstützt. Im aktuellen Erneuerbare-Energien-Wärmegesetz ist diese Förderung als zentrales Instrument ausdrücklich verankert.\n\nGerade die Kombination aus Erneuerbaren-Energien-Wärmegesetz mit der gesetzlichen Nutzungspflicht für den Neubau und dem Marktanreizprogramm für den Bestand hat sich als wirksam erwiesen. Der am 18. November von der Bundesregierung verabschiedete Zweite Erfahrungsbericht zeigt, dass die Instrumente des Gesetzes wirken. Der Anteil hat sich auf 12,2 Prozent erhöht. Man kann immer sagen: Das ist zu wenig. Man kann auch immer die Berechnungsgrundlage kritisieren,\n\nnichtsdestotrotz haben wir einen Anstieg zu verzeichnen.\n\nWenn es in diesem Bereich in diese Richtung weitergeht, dann rechnet die Bundesregierung bis 2020 voraussichtlich mit einem Anteil von 16,3 Prozent der erneuerbaren Wärme.\n\nDas ist sogar noch höher als der Zielwert von 14 Prozent. Jetzt können wir trefflich diskutieren, ob es reicht, aber auf jeden Fall ist zu konstatieren, dass das von Ihnen vorgeschlagene Gesetz der falsche Weg für ein solches Ziel wäre.\n\nSchauen Sie einmal auf Bayern statt auf Baden-Württemberg.\n\nHier liegt der Anteil der erneuerbaren Energien im Wärmebereich 2014 bei 19,6 Prozent, ganz ohne Gesetz.\n\nLetztlich sind auch die Kosten für die Attraktivität eines Heizsystems entscheidend.\n\nDas billige Öl und Gas tragen dazu bei, dass Erneuerbare preislich unattraktiver werden. Das ist übrigens ein Fakt, den Sie niemals für möglich gehalten haben. Deshalb müssen wir schauen, dass wir die Erneuerbaren wettbewerbsfähig machen, und nicht, dass wir Öl und Gas teurer machen.\n\nSteuern sind auch Anreize. Ich möchte bei dieser Gelegenheit auf einen Punkt hinweisen, der die Attraktivität von erneuerbaren Energien im Wärmebereich unnötig behindert. 72 Prozent der erneuerbaren Wärme wurden 2014 durch Holz erzeugt. Dies zeigt auch, dass für die Wärmewende gerade die Biomasse unersetzlich ist. In Deutschland werden Scheite, Briketts und Pellets bei der Umsatzsteuer mit dem begünstigten Satz von 7 Prozent belegt. Das ist auch gut so. Holzhackschnitzel dagegen werden mit dem normalen Steuersatz von 19 Prozent belegt, außer sie bestehen überwiegend aus Nadeln und Rinden und sind so optisch eindeutig als Abfall zu erkennen. Das ist nicht nachvollziehbar. Hier sollten wir ansetzen.\n\nEine weitere wichtige Komponente der Wärmewende ist die Geothermie für Fernwärme. Schon heute produzieren viele Versorger ihre Fernwärme umweltschonend mittels Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung. Hier haben wir einiges erreicht. Die Umweltbilanz der Fernwärme ist schon jetzt positiv. Geothermiebasierte Fernwärme ist erneuerbar und zu 100 Prozent CO2-frei. Die Stadtwerke München beispielsweise wollen bis zum Jahr 2040 die erste Großstadt rein durch erneuerbare Wärme versorgen. Die große Kreisstadt Erding spart beispielsweise jährlich 9 Millionen Liter Heizöl durch geothermiebasierte Fernwärme. Dies sind sinnvolle und innovative Ansätze, die es gilt zu fördern.\n\nLetztlich brauchen wir also ein Gesamtkonzept aus Energieberatung, gebäudeindividuellen Sanierungsfahrplänen und gesetzlichen Bestandteilen. Genau das wird erstellt. Genau das ist auch richtig. Ihr Gesetzentwurf setzt einseitig auf Zwang\n\nanstatt auf Anreize und kann deshalb leider nicht befürwortet werden.\n\nSprechen wir aber gerne auch mehr über die Wärmewende\n\nals fundamentalen Bestandteil der Energiewende. Sie muss stärker ins Blickfeld genommen werden. Wir müssen aber natürlich auch die Effizienzseite anschauen, beispielsweise bei der steuerlichen Förderung der energetischen Gebäudesanierung. Da haben auch Sie lange Zeit blockiert.\n\n- Nein, nein, jetzt machen wir da mal keine Geschichtsfälschung. Es war immer so, und es ist nach wie vor so, dass Bayern auch einer steuerlichen Förderung gegenüber offen ist.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. Vielleicht sollten wir gerade an Weihnachten ein bisschen an diejenigen denken, die es an Weihnachten überhaupt nicht warm haben. Ich wünsche allen in diesem Sinne ein schönes Weihnachtsfest im Warmen, am besten natürlich unter dem Christbaum mit erneuerbarer Wärme aus Bienenwachs.\n\nIn diesem Sinne herzlichen Dank und schöne Weihnachten.\"\n4647,uwe-kekeritz,\"Herzlichen Dank. - Im Ministerrat in Brüssel wurde kürzlich entschieden, die EPA-Verträge unverändert zu akzeptieren. Meine Frage an die Regierung ist: Was gedenkt die Bundesregierung im weiteren Verfahren zu tun? Wird das Parlament über die EPAs mitentscheiden, oder geht das Kabinett davon aus, dass es demokratisch legitimiert ist und deshalb die Verträge ohne Parlamentsbeteiligung ratifizieren kann?\"\n5669,matthias-zimmer,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Die Hoffnung des letzten Sommers, dass wir uns parlamentarisch zum letzten Mal mit dem Mindestlohn beschäftigen müssen, hat offensichtlich getrogen.\n\nZumindest kann man den Antrag der Linken jetzt zum Anlass nehmen, auf das eine oder andere hinzuweisen, das in der Debatte der letzten Wochen und Monate eine Rolle gespielt hat. Ich will das in zehn Punkten tun.\n\nErster Punkt. Der Mindestlohn gilt seit dem 1. Januar 2015. Das ist auch gut so. Wir hören gleichzeitig, dass sich der positive Trend auf dem Arbeitsmarkt weiter fortsetzt.\n\nDas hatten einige Ökonomen anders vorhergesagt und von bis zu 1,2 Millionen mehr Arbeitslosen gesprochen. Ich weiß nicht, ob das schlechte Ökonomie oder nur besonderes Pech beim Nachdenken war.\n\nAber es fällt schon auf: Das kommt immer aus der gleichen Ecke.\n\nZweiter Punkt. Es hat in den letzten Wochen einige Debatten über die Verordnung der Ministerin gegeben. Das eine oder andere kann man an dieser Stelle vielleicht richtigstellen. Der Mindestlohn ist ja mit überwältigend großer Mehrheit hier im Deutschen Bundestag angenommen worden.\n\nDie Verordnung der Ministerin schränkt den Geltungsbereich des Mindestlohns ein, sie weitet ihn nicht aus;\n\nich finde, das kann man an dieser Stelle richtigstellen. Man kann die Verordnung streichen. Aber dann würde sich die Überprüfung als problematisch erweisen, weil sehr viel mehr Arbeitsverhältnisse von einer Überprüfung betroffen wären. Wir wollen aber die Problembereiche in den Fokus nehmen. Das leistet zunächst einmal die Verordnung der Ministerin.\n\nDritter Punkt. Man hört, das Mindestlohngesetz sei ein Bürokratiemonster.\n\nRichtig ist: Beginn, Ende und Dauer der täglichen Arbeitszeit müssen erfasst werden. Das ist pragmatisch, schnell und unproblematisch.\n\nMonster, meine Damen und Herren, sehen anders aus.\n\nOder - um es deutlich zu sagen -: Um ein solches Monster zu erlegen, braucht man keinen Wolf Biermann. Es reicht schon der kleine Bruder des heiligen Georg.\n\nIch glaube, durch die permanente Verwendung von Superlativen verdirbt man sich die Preise.\n\nVierter Punkt. Ich höre, es ist die Summe der Vorschriften, die die Wirtschaft belastet. Das mag sein. Der Chef der Arbeitsagentur Weise hat darauf hingewiesen - ich zitiere -:\n\nBürokratisch heißt auch rechtsstaatlich. …\n\nEs ist für die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit von Unternehmen sehr wichtig, dass man klare Regeln hat.\n\nIch glaube, im Wettbewerb ist ein zusätzliches Stück Berechenbarkeit entstanden. Das finde ich in Ordnung.\n\nFünfter Punkt. Wir wissen um die Befindlichkeit von kleinen und mittelständischen Unternehmen. Sie sind auch durch die dauernden Mahnungen des DGB, dass bis zu 500 000 Euro Bußgeld verhängt werden können, aufgeschreckt worden. Das ist bei groben Verstößen durchaus gerechtfertigt. Aber man muss auch deutlich sagen: Die Unternehmen sind weder zu doof noch zu kriminell.\n\nIch glaube, viele sind durch unterschiedliche, zum Teil dubiose Auskünfte von berufener oder unberufener Seite eher verunsichert. Deswegen ist es gut, dass sich der Zoll zunächst einmal auch als Unterstützer dieser Unternehmen versteht, dass er diese Unternehmen berät und wir nicht sofort mit der Keule der Strafe vorgehen, wenn noch Rechtsunsicherheit herrscht. Ich glaube, das ist auch im Sinne dieses Gesetzes.\n\nSechster Punkt. Wir haben immer gesagt, der Mindestlohn soll praxistauglich sein. Er soll auch zielscharf sein. Ich begrüße ausdrücklich die Initiative des Parlamentskreises Mittelstand - wir haben sie übernommen -, dass man durchaus noch einmal darüber nachdenken sollte, ob man die Dokumentation der täglichen Arbeitszeiten - das ist der einzige Punkt, in dem ich Ihnen wirklich recht gebe, Herr Kollege Ernst; er ist natürlich wichtig - nicht anders leisten kann, und zwar entweder dadurch, dass sie vertraglich festgelegt sind und man lediglich Abweichungen notiert, wie es heute schon üblich ist, oder dadurch, dass es Einsatzpläne gibt, aus denen ganz genau hervorgeht, wie die Arbeitszeit gestaltet ist. Ich glaube, für die Kontrollzwecke des Zolls reicht das völlig aus. Daher sollte es auch für unsere Zwecke im Hinblick auf den Mindestlohn genügen.\n\nSiebter Punkt. An der einen oder anderen Stelle gibt es sicherlich Abgrenzungsprobleme. Wir haben im Ausschussbericht festgehalten: Wir wollen, dass der Mindestlohn für Sport und Ehrenamt nicht gilt, nämlich dort, wo nicht der Gelderwerb im Mittelpunkt steht, sondern das Ehrenamt. Ich begrüße ausdrücklich, dass die Ministerin an dieser Stelle mit dem Deutschen Fußballbund und dem Deutschen Olympischen Sportbund zu einer Regelung gekommen ist. Ich glaube, wir müssen an der einen oder anderen Stelle noch einmal überlegen, wie wir eine trennscharfe Abgrenzung zum Ehrenamt hinbekommen können. Denn eines wollen wir ja nicht: Wir wollen mit dem Mindestlohn nicht das Ehrenamt kaputtmachen. Ich glaube, das liegt in niemandes Interesse.\n\nAchter Punkt. Wir wollen bei alldem natürlich Acht geben, dass der Mindestlohn und die zugrundeliegende Intention nicht unterlaufen werden. Wir wollen einen robusten Mindestlohn. Wir wollen auch einen Mindestlohn, der den wirtschaftlichen Gepflogenheiten und der wirtschaftlichen Realität Rechnung trägt.\n\nDeswegen hat es mich, ehrlich gesagt, schon ein bisschen erstaunt, dass der Vorsitzende der Mindestlohnkommission gesagt hat: Den Mindestlohn legen wir nachlaufend zu Tarifentwicklungen fest. - Das haben wir ausdrücklich so nicht gewollt. Ich denke, darauf muss man Herrn Voscherau in aller Deutlichkeit hinweisen.\n\nNeunter Punkt. Heribert Prantl hat gesagt, der Mindestlohn zähle zu den größten sozialpolitischen Errungenschaften in der Nachkriegszeit. Eine so große Münze würde ich vielleicht nicht nehmen.\n\n- Ich finde es schön, dass Sie sich damit schon zufrieden geben.\n\nIch könnte einige größere sozialpolitische Errungenschaften nennen, die alle von der Union initiiert wurden. Aber gut.\n\nDer Mindestlohn ist ein lernendes System. Wir haben nie gesagt, dass all das, was wir jetzt in das Gesetz -hineingeschrieben haben, in Stein gemeißelt ist, oder dass die Verordnung in Stein gemeißelt ist und die Regelungen somit für alle Ewigkeiten gelten.\n\nDeswegen ist es gut, dass wir uns das eine oder andere nach Ostern noch einmal genauer anschauen und auf die Praxistauglichkeit hin untersuchen.\n\nDamit komme ich zum zehnten Punkt. Wenn wir sagen, dass wir das auf die Praxistauglichkeit hin untersuchen wollen, ist damit der Grund angegeben, lieber Kollege Ernst, warum wir Ihren Antrag ablehnen wollen und werden. Ihr Antrag entwirft nämlich ein Bild von einem rigiden, starren und wenig praktikablen Mindestlohn. Ich bin froh, dass diese Koalition das nicht so gemacht hat, sich stattdessen an den Lebensumständen orientiert und die Prinzipien nicht über die Lebenswirklichkeit stellt.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n2703,wolfgang-hellmich,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meinem Vorredner würde ich eine Lektüreempfehlung geben, nämlich den im Jahr 2011 erschienenen Bericht zur Technikfolgenabschätzung unbemannter Systeme. Viele Fragen, die wir hier diskutieren, werden in diesem Bericht angesprochen, und es werden Handlungsempfehlungen gegeben. Diese Debatte ist schon älter, sie ist nicht aktuell, frisch und ganz neu. Ich glaube, dass wir uns darum kümmern müssen, dass diese Debatte versachlicht und nicht emotionalisiert wird. Die Befürchtungen, die es in der Gesellschaft gibt - die auch berechtigt sind und um die man sich kümmern muss -, dürfen nicht in einer Art und Weise aufgebläht werden, dass wir am Ende politisch nicht mehr in der Lage sind, damit sachgerecht und ordentlich umzugehen.\n\nWorum geht es? Es geht darum, dass ein System beschafft werden muss, um eine Fähigkeitslücke für eine absehbare Zeit zu schließen. Es geht um das Thema Überwachung mithilfe von MALE-Drohnen. Es geht um eine Entscheidung, die auf europäischer Ebene bereits gefallen ist, nämlich darum, eine Drohne zu entwickeln, die genau diese Fähigkeiten beinhaltet. Wir sollten uns hier nichts vormachen. Eine europäische Entwicklung mit allen unseren Nachbarn, die daran beteiligt sind, wird immer nur im Zusammenhang mit einer Bewaffnungsfähigkeit möglich sein. In der NATO-Parlamentarierversammlung vor nicht allzu vielen Wochen ist diese Frage diskutiert worden, mit dem Ergebnis, dass die europäischen Nachbarn und Partner gesagt haben: Ja, es wird eine solche Entwicklung geben, aber die Entscheidung über die Frage, ob bewaffnet wird oder nicht und womit, fällt jedes Land für sich alleine, es ist die eigene Kompetenz. Wir haben sehr deutlich gemacht, dass es einen Parlamentsvorbehalt gibt, dass das Parlament entscheidet, was wir im Falle des Falles tun.\n\nBitte keine Verengung in der Form, dass wir mit unserer Entscheidung oder Nichtentscheidung - ganz egal - international dafür sorgen könnten, dass diese Systeme nicht beschafft, nicht bewaffnet würden und nicht unterwegs wären. Wir alle wissen, dass es anders ist. Die größten Abnehmer - nach den Zahlen, die im Moment international bekannt sind - sind Indien und Pakistan, Regionen, die gerade dabei sind, sich mit allen Waffensystemen, die es gibt, aufzurüsten.\n\nDie Frage, wie wir mit der Proliferation umgehen, ist für mich ein ganz entscheidender Punkt, um auf internationaler Ebene bei der präventiven Rüstungskontrolle ein Problem einzuhegen, das wir in der Tat haben. Wir wären nicht glaubwürdig und könnten international nicht auftreten, wenn wir nicht deutlich machen könnten, dass wir mit unseren Einsatzregeln zu jedem Zeitpunkt die Regeln des humanitären Völkerrechtes, des humanitären Kriegsrechts einhalten.\n\nJede andere Unterstellung führt in die Irre. Ich sage an dieser Stelle: Die Unterstellung, dass wir alle nicht in der Lage wären, solche Situationen politisch einzuschätzen, kann ich nicht akzeptieren und sie ist auch falsch.\n\nIch freue mich auch, dass die Ministerin deutlich gemacht hat, dass die Frage der Bewaffnungsfähigkeit, dass die Frage, wie wir international damit umgehen und wie andere damit umgehen, nach unseren politischen Maßstäben eindeutig abzulehnen ist. Das, was die USA und andere Länder machen,\n\nentspricht nicht den Regeln, die wir einhalten wollen.\n\nIch plädiere eher dafür, dass wir uns in der präventiven Rüstungskontrollpolitik intensiv mit dem Thema der Drohnen und damit, was sie darstellen, was sie tatsächlich sind, auseinandersetzen.\n\nWir brauchen eine Regelung im Rahmen des KSE-Vertrages, um eine Begrenzung der Zahl der eingesetzten Drohnen europaweit durchzusetzen\n\nund ein Kontrollregime zu haben, welches prüft, was denn eigentlich in Europa mit diesen Systemen passiert. Wir brauchen eine Pflicht zur Anmeldung im Rahmen der Vereinbarungen des Wiener Dokumentes, weil wir so in der Lage sind, zu sehen, was unsere Bündnispartner europaweit eigentlich mit den Drohnen machen. Wir brauchen eine Verifikationsfähigkeit. Wir brauchen eine Anmeldung der Drohnen im UN-Waffenregister. Ihr Hinweis, dass sich der Außenminister vor wenigen Wochen dafür eingesetzt hat, im Hinblick auf autonome Systeme international vorzugehen, war richtig; aber es geht hier nicht um autonome Systeme, sondern um die Systeme, die in Europa entwickelt werden. Dies zu vermischen, ist politisch unredlich und, wie ich glaube, nicht zulässig.\n\nWir haben internationale Verträge, von denen Drohnen und das, was sie leisten, bereits erfasst werden, ob es die Verträge zur Begrenzung der Chemiewaffen und der biologischen Waffen sind, in denen auf unbemannte Systeme Bezug genommen wird, die in diesem Kontext verboten sind, ob es um Verträge zu ballistischen Raketen und landgestützten Marschflugkörpern geht. Auch in diese sind UAVs aufzunehmen, denn sie gehören in das Regime dieser Verträge und können darin erfasst werden.\n\nEs ist ein Auftrag an die internationale Politik und an unsere Abrüstungspolitik, dafür zu sorgen, dass die Systeme, die da auf dem Wege sind, eingehegt und eingegrenzt werden und die geltenden Regeln letztendlich international durchgesetzt werden, nämlich die des humanitären Völkerrechtes. Bei uns gelten diese Regeln. Unsere Rules of Engagement, unsere Einsatzregeln, machen sehr deutlich, dass bei jeder menschlichen Entscheidung die Gebote der Verhältnismäßigkeit der eingesetzten Mittel, der Zurechenbarkeit der Mittel und der Beschränkung der Mittel zur Anwendung kommen und zur Praxis gehören. Ich glaube, mit diesen Regeln sind wir in der Lage, alle Waffensysteme in einer Art und Weise einzusetzen, die mit dem Völkerrecht vereinbar ist. In diesen Regeln wird unterschieden, wie Flugzeuge, Hubschrauber und andere militärische Systeme zum Einsatz kommen können.\n\nAuch mich haben die technologischen Möglichkeiten und Entwicklungen erschreckt. Ich glaube, wir alle sind uns darüber einig, dass alle militärischen Systeme, ganz egal, welche es sind, dann nicht mit unseren Grundsätzen vereinbar sind, wenn sie letzten Endes nicht der Entscheidung des Menschen unterliegen. Sobald eine solche Situation eintritt, ist die Entwicklung solcher Waffensysteme abzulehnen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n15577,susann-ruthrich,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Ein Geflüchteter wird angegriffen und auf dem Polizeirevier gefragt, wie er denn die Angreifer provoziert hätte. Ich unterhalte mich in meinem Bürgerbüro mit einer Mutter, und sie sagt mir: Wissen Sie, Frau Rüthrich, mein Junge studiert jetzt in Wien, und ich bin ganz froh, dass er dort ist, weil ich hier jedes Mal Angst um ihn habe, wenn er mit seiner Afrofrisur draußen herumläuft. - Zwei aktuelle Beispiele für zentrale Fragen: Haben wir aus dem NSU-Desaster genug gelernt? Könnte es uns wieder passieren?\n\nWie Sie bereits gehört haben, haben wir uns mit sehr unterschiedlichen Blickwinkeln diesen Fragen gewidmet. Ich habe mir folgende Fragen für den Untersuchungsausschuss gestellt:\n\nErstens. Die Art der Ermittlungen hat die Opfer des NSU nochmals traumatisiert. Ist ausgeschlossen, dass heute noch so ermittelt wird?\n\nZweitens. Erkennen wir heute die Radikalisierung in unserer Nachbarschaft, wenn Menschen meinen, der Worte seien genug gewechselt, es müssten endlich Taten folgen?\n\nDrittens. Sind wir heute darauf eingestellt, die Netzwerke der Rechtsextremen und deren Strategien zu erkennen? Haben wir die Netzwerke enttarnt und unschädlich gemacht, die den NSU umgeben haben?\n\nViertens. Stehen diejenigen heute auf stabilen Füßen, die sich der Radikalisierung entgegenstellen, die politische Bildungsarbeit machen, die die Opfer begleiten, die Kommunen beraten, die zivilgesellschaftliches, vielfältiges Leben organisieren, welches ja bekanntermaßen am besten gegen Rechtsextremismus hilft?\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich täte nichts lieber, als alle diese Fragen heute mit Ja zu beantworten; doch das ist leider nicht der Fall. Unzweifelhaft ist viel geschehen. Das, was wir an Strukturen ändern mussten, ist weitestgehend umgesetzt. Das allerdings scheint mir, obwohl es viel Anstrengung kostete, die leichtere Aufgabe gewesen zu sein.\n\nDer eingeforderte Mentalitätswandel ist die größere Aufgabe. Sicher, auch die wurde angegangen. Aber ich habe im Ausschuss zu oft gehört, dass in die falsche Richtung ermittelt wurde, jedoch nicht, warum. Warum hat man denn, wenn ein Mord in der Nähe eines Bahnhofs geschah, mit allem Nachdruck und ohne individuelle Anhaltspunkte ins Drogenmilieu ermittelt? Warum war der in der Nachbarschaft liegende Kameradschaftstreff kein Anhaltspunkt für Ermittlungen? Warum? Die Hinterbliebenen haben oft genug gesagt: Wir kennen doch unsere Feinde. Wir denken, es waren Nazis. - Oft habe ich im Ausschuss die Aussage gehört: Na ja, solange wir keine Belege dafür haben, gehen wir nicht davon aus. - Müssen die Opfer den rauchenden Colt liefern, damit in diese Richtung ermittelt wird? Solange hier nicht aktiv gegengesteuert wird, solange entsprechende rassismuskritische Fortbildungen fakultativ bleiben, solange es wenig Auseinandersetzung darüber gibt, inwieweit Vorannahmen dazu führen können, dass Menschen aufgrund ihrer Herkunft oder ihres Aussehens nicht angemessen behandelt werden, so lange muss sich eine Behörde Fragen nach dem Umgang mit institutionellem Rassismus gefallen lassen.\n\nIch weiß sehr wohl, dass wohl niemand in einer Behörde absichtlich und überzeugt rassistisch agieren will - um Gottes willen! -, aber gerade deswegen brauchen wir ein aktives Gegenwirken.\n\nZum zweiten Punkt, der Radikalisierung. Beim NSU sieht man exemplarisch, wie sich eine Gruppe innerhalb von circa zehn Jahren immer mehr radikalisiert hat. Und heute? In Freital waren es zehn Monate vom Wort zur Tat. Dauert es irgendwann zehn Wochen? Sind wir so weit, diese Radikalisierungsprozesse zu erkennen?\n\n1 000 Angriffe auf Geflüchtete, deren Unterkünfte und Helfer hat das BKA allein im letzten Jahr gezählt, wie auch in dem davor. Zu selten können die Täter dingfest gemacht werden und wenn, dann ist die Überraschung immer groß: Der ist ja in gar keiner Struktur eingebunden, also Einzeltäter. - 1 000 Einzeltäter pro Jahr? Wissen Sie, ein vom Kölner Nagelbombenattentat Betroffener sagte mir: Wir waren damals gemeint, und wir wissen, wir sind auch heute noch gemeint. Wir sollen uns hier in Deutschland nicht sicher fühlen. Und ihr? Ihr benennt es wieder nicht als das, was es ist: Terror. - Der Mann hat recht. Angst und Schrecken unter Bevölkerungsgruppen zu verbreiten, das ist die spezifische Form rechten Terrors unterhalb der Wahrnehmungsschwelle der Mehrheitsgesellschaft, weil wir selbst ja nicht bedroht sind.\n\nIm Ausschuss fragte ich oft: Wie definieren Sie denn Terror? Antwort: Na ja, halt so was wie eine rechte RAF. - Doch so simpel ist es nicht, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen. Rechter Terror trifft Minderheiten und richtet sich nicht wie die RAF gegen staatliche Repräsentanten. Es braucht auch keine öffentliche Forderung als Bekenntnis. Die Tat ist das Bekenntnis. Die Tat sagt: Wir wollen, dass sich Minderheiten in diesem Land nicht wohlfühlen, dass sie vertrieben werden. - Die Betroffenen wie auch die rechte Szene verstehen das sehr wohl; nur die Mehrheitsgesellschaft versteht es zu oft nicht. Das muss sich ändern.\n\nIn den Behörden wie auch auf allen anderen Ebenen muss ein neues Verständnis der tatsächlichen Bedrohung einziehen; denn nicht erst, wenn unsere staatliche Ordnung infrage gestellt wird, wie es Zeuginnen und Zeugen häufig definierten, haben wir es mit Rechtsextremismus zu tun. Jeder Angriff auf einen Menschen ist ein Angriff auf uns alle und unsere Werte; denn Artikel 1 des Grundgesetzes schützt die Würde eines jeden Menschen.\n\nZu Punkt drei: Wer hat das Kerntrio unterstützt? Wir als SPD-Fraktion gehen davon aus, dass die drei nicht nach Chemnitz und Zwickau gegangen sind, weil da gerade eine günstige Wohnung frei war. Deshalb fragen wir, wie denn, wenigstens nachdem klar war, dass Nazis gemordet haben, in die rechte Szene vor Ort ermittelt wurde. Offenbar gar nicht oder zu wenig! Es wurde nur gegen diejenigen ermittelt, die durch entsprechende Asservate beim Trio selbst aufgefallen sind. In einer konspirativ agierenden Szene ist das zu wenig. Die von uns in Auftrag gegebenen Gutachten zeigen sehr genau, dass es Verbindungen und Kennverhältnisse hinsichtlich der Tatorte gab. Das mag noch kein Beleg für eine Mittäterschaft sein; aber es kann dazu beitragen, die Fragen der Hinterbliebenen zu beantworten: Warum mein Vater, mein Bruder, mein Sohn, meine Tochter?\n\nZu guter Letzt zur Unterstützung für diejenigen, die das demokratische Netz bilden, das Rassismus und andere Menschenfeindlichkeiten eindämmt. Wir hatten im Koalitionsvertrag und mit den Forderungen aus dem letzten NSU-Untersuchungsausschuss beschlossen, dass es eine eigene gesetzliche Lösung gibt, um die Daueraufgabe „Demokratiebildung gegen Radikalisierung“ dauerhaft abzusichern. Ja, wir haben das Programm „Demokratie leben!“ auf fünf Jahre angelegt und damit auf eine längere Zeit als jedes Programm zuvor. Heute sind über 100 Millionen Euro darin; auch das ist mehr als jemals zuvor. Aber es endet 2018. Ich erwarte, dass dann 2019 endlich das Bundesgesetz kommt.\n\nDas erwarten auch die Engagierten von uns, und zwar zu Recht.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir haben im Ausschuss in großer Einmütigkeit zusammengearbeitet. Ich danke allen Mitgliedern dafür. Ja, wir Demokratinnen und Demokraten stehen zusammen gegen Angriffe von rechts. Wir stehen an der Seite der Opfer und Betroffenen. Wir stehen an der Seite derer, die sich für eine demokratische und menschenfreundliche Gesellschaft einsetzen. Lassen Sie uns das auch in Zukunft tun, und zwar nicht nur in einem Untersuchungsausschuss, sondern alle gemeinsam!\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n7429,dirk-heidenblut,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Eines möchte ich gleich zu Beginn klarstellen: Wir werden natürlich nichts zurückziehen, und wir werden auch nichts einmotten.\n\nGanz im Ernst: Wer angesichts einer Infrastruktur, über die wir uns - ich bedaure das durchaus - seit über zehn Jahren Gedanken machen - wir machen uns vor allem Gedanken über die Sicherheit -, mit dem Vorwurf kommt, wir würden fahrlässig Gesundheits- und Patientendaten in irgendwelche Netze speisen, den kann man nicht für voll nehmen. Das tut mir furchtbar leid, aber das ist natürlich Kokolores. Insofern werden wir das auch nicht tun.\n\nBitte sehr.\n\nHätte ich Nein sagen sollen?\n\nWenn Menschen durch betrügerische oder andere Maßnahmen versuchen, sich Zugang wozu auch immer zu verschaffen, dann ist das ein Anlass, darüber nachzudenken, wie man dafür sorgt, dass sie das a) nicht mehr können und dass man b) ihrer entsprechend habhaft wird, damit man sie dafür bestrafen kann.\n\nDas ist der primäre Ansatz. Wir sagen außerdem: Wir brauchen eine sichere, eine zuverlässige, eine geschützte Infrastruktur. Wir erwarten natürlich von der Selbstverwaltung, und zwar von allen Beteiligten der Selbstverwaltung, dass sie das mit sicherstellen.\n\nGenau das wird an dieser Stelle auch passieren.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, nutzen Sie eigentlich eine der Fitness- und Gesundheitsapps mit dem Smartphone oder vielleicht mit einem dieser wunderschönen Armbänder, die man dazubekommen kann? Speichern Sie Ihre Schritte und versuchen, Laufbewegung und Puls aufzuzeichnen, wahrscheinlich im Internet? Nein? Na gut, dann gehören Sie wahrscheinlich wie ich zu der Spezies Mensch, die sagt: Es muss jetzt nicht alles von mir elektronisch im Internet verfügbar sein. Meine Pulsdaten gehen am Ende nur mich etwas an. - Aber wenn Sie das nutzen wollen, dann können Sie das.\n\nVielleicht gehören Sie zu den Menschen, die leider unendlich viele Medikamente nehmen müssen und gerne sichergestellt haben würden, dass sie den Medikamentenplan in einer vernünftigen Struktur in der Hand haben - nicht nur in der Hand, sondern nach Möglichkeit auch auf elektronischen Medien -, dass die Daten aktuell sind und dass, egal zu welchem Behandler Sie kommen, Fehlmedikationen und Fehlbehandlungen - die Staatssekretärin hat das angesprochen - ausgeschlossen werden können, weil der Arzt weiß, was Sie nehmen und Ihnen das Richtige dazu verordnen kann. Wenn Sie sich dies wünschen, muss ich Ihnen sagen: Das ist leider nicht möglich.\n\nGenau das will das Gesetz verändern. Wir wollen sicherstellen, dass Sie die Hoheit über Ihre Daten bekommen und dass solche Dinge in Zukunft für alle Beteiligten möglich werden.\n\nDenn gerade für mehr Patientensicherheit, für mehr Hoheit über die eigenen Daten und für mehr Nutzung telemedizinischer Möglichkeiten - auch das gehört dazu; das ist ja kein Frevel - ist es dringend nötig, dass die seit Jahren angekündigte IT-Gesundheitsstruktur endlich in Schwung kommt. Wir haben das übrigens schon im Koalitionsvertrag festgehalten, leider mit ein wenig dürren Worten; aber der Minister hat daraus gleich ein recht umfangreiches und, wie ich finde, zielführendes Gesetz entwickelt.\n\nNun will ich hier keineswegs die Entwicklung von Apps mit unserer komplexen Telematik auf die gleiche Ebene stellen, nein, wegen der von uns zwingend zu sichernden geschützten und zuverlässigen Infrastruktur, dem deutlich höheren Maß an Datenvolumen und am Ende natürlich auch an echten Gesundheitsleistungen ist das unmöglich. Aber die Apps machen deutlich: Es gibt viele, die so etwas gerne nutzen würden, auch für die eigene Gesundheit, und es gibt eigentlich keinen Grund, warum das eine im Monats-, Wochen- oder Tagesrhythmus problemlos aktualisiert und vorgelegt werden kann und das andere - ich sage das einmal freundlich - nach etwas mehr als einem Jahrzehnt noch nicht so ganz aus den Puschen gekommen ist.\n\nDeswegen müssen wir dem einen Schub verleihen. Das tun wir mit diesem Gesetzentwurf an mehreren Stellen. Ich will drei davon kurz ansprechen.\n\nErstens: die elektronische Gesundheitskarte. Ich weiß, dass man sie als Politiker nicht so gerne anspricht, weil man dann häufig gesagt bekommt: Da habt ihr uns ja eine schöne Karte mit Bild beschert. - Aber so ist es eben nicht. Sie ist eine Karte, die den Schlüssel zu einem sicheren Gesundheits-IT-System und die für den Patienten und die Patientin den Schlüssel zur Hoheit über die eigenen Daten darstellt.\n\nNatürlich bilden das Notfalldatenmanagement und der Medikationsplan, die im Gesetzentwurf vorgesehen sind, insgesamt ganz sicher noch keine elektronische Patien-tenakte; aber wir sind jetzt konsequenter auf dem Weg dorthin.\n\nZweitens: die Telematikinfrastruktur; auch sie wurde schon angesprochen. Auf diesem Wege werden Daten in Zukunft sicher über ein Netz übertragen. Die Testphasen laufen an. Ich bin sicher, sie werden nächstes Jahr erfolgreich abgeschlossen. Dann muss natürlich definiert werden: Wer darf was wie tun? Im vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf wird dafür ein vernünftiges Reglement vorgegeben. Dazu gehört, dass wir über Interoperabilität, also über vernünftige Standards, und über Zugangsmöglichkeiten reden müssen. All diese Punkte beinhaltet unser Gesetzentwurf.\n\nDrittens - last but not least - ein Wort zur Telemedizin. Ja, Telemedizin kann eine Menge bewirken. Darauf setzen wir, auch im Hinblick auf die Versorgungsstärkung. Wir setzen auch darauf, wenn es um moderne und aktuelle Behandlungsmöglichkeiten geht. Eines ist doch völlig klar: Wenn das Ganze nicht geregelt ist - das gilt für die Nutzenbewertung genauso wie für die finanziellen Konsequenzen, die daraus erwachsen -, dann werden wir die möglichen Weiterentwicklungen an dieser Stelle nicht hinbekommen. Auch hierzu enthält unser Gesetzentwurf Regelungen.\n\nIch gebe zu: Das ist ein Punkt, an dem man sagen kann: Darüber, ob die Beschränkung auf den Röntgenbereich die richtige Zielsetzung ist, kann man ja noch einmal reden.\n\nDass im Gesetzentwurf eine Regelung getroffen wurde, ist aber richtig. Außerdem werden viele Fragen zur Kommunikation und zu anderen Aspekten angesprochen, die uns ganz sicher nach vorne bringen werden.\n\nIm Gesetzentwurf geht es auch um Sanktionen. Aber die Sanktionen - das haben Sie ein wenig unterschlagen - richten sich im Zweifel gegen die Partner, die das Ganze nicht weiter voranbringen, also zum Beispiel gegen die Ärzteschaft, gegen die KVen, gegen die gesetzlichen Krankenversicherungen. Was aus Sicht der Linken so fürchterlich daran ist - wir wollen einen Schub leisten, damit das Ganze im Interesse der Patienten endlich vorankommt -, kann ich nicht ganz nachvollziehen.\n\nAbschließend: Ich finde, unser Gesetzentwurf ist gut und zielführend. Vielleicht geht er an einigen Punkten nicht weit genug - daran kann man ja noch arbeiten -, und einige Fristansätze - auch daran kann man noch arbeiten - sind vielleicht etwas zu weit gefasst. Ich freue mich, dass wir weiter an diesem Thema arbeiten, und hoffe, dass wir das alle zusammen konstruktiv tun.\n\nIch bedanke mich für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n2588,marcus-held,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Unserer Wirtschaft in Deutschland geht es gut. Das kann man sagen, wenn man sich die Situation im Jahr 2014 ansieht. Dafür sind viele verantwortlich: verantwortungsbewusste Unternehmerinnen und Unternehmer, motivierte und engagierte Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer, aber auch mutige Entscheiderinnen und Entscheider auf der politischen Ebene, die für zukunftsorientierte Weichenstellungen in der Wirtschaftspolitik gesorgt haben und auch in der Gegenwart sorgen.\n\nVergleicht man die Situation in vielen Ländern Europas mit der in Deutschland, so kann man heute sagen: Wir haben unsere Hausaufgaben gemacht.\n\nDie SPD stand bereits in der Zeit von 1998 bis 2005 mit der Agenda 2010 für eine Politik mit Weitblick. Von diesem Weitblick profitieren wir noch heute, in der Gegenwart. Die Verantwortlichen in europäischen Ländern wie beispielsweise Frankreich werden dort gegenwärtig für Massenarbeitslosigkeit und fehlendes Wirtschaftswachstum verantwortlich gemacht, obwohl ihre Vorgänger in den zurückliegenden 20 Jahren hätten handeln müssen, dies aber nicht getan haben. Auch und gerade im Interesse der deutschen Wirtschaft als Exportmeister und der Arbeitsplätze hier müssen wir die Länder unterstützen, die jetzt bereit sind, zukunftsorientierte Reformen auf den Weg zu bringen.\n\nDie von den europäischen Sozialdemokraten am letzten Wochenende in Paris angestoßene Diskussion und die damit verbundenen Vorschläge unseres Ministers Sigmar Gabriel sind sinnvoll. Sie stellen einen Weg dar, wie wir den radikalen politischen Auswüchsen in leider viel zu vielen europäischen Nachbarländern endlich begegnen können. Wir müssen ihnen begegnen, meine Damen und Herren, weil diese politischen Auswüchse durch wirtschaftlichen Niedergang, Massenarbeitslosigkeit und Perspektivlosigkeit bei den Jugendlichen verursacht worden sind. Wir müssen dem entgegentreten, wenn wir es mit Frieden, Freiheit und Wohlstand in ganz Europa ernst meinen.\n\nWir als SPD-Bundestagsfraktion stehen zu Deutschland als Industrienation. Wir wollen die Bundesregierung und unseren Minister Sigmar Gabriel dabei unterstützen, wenn er neue wirtschaftliche Akzente setzt, nachdem das Wirtschaftsministerium in der zurückliegenden Legislaturperiode bekanntlich eher ein Schattendasein führte. Wir tun dies mit der Reform des EEG, indem wir die im internationalen Wettbewerb stehenden Industriebetriebe auch in Zukunft vor zusätzlichen Umlagen schützen und damit viele Hunderttausende wichtige Arbeitsplätze hier in Deutschland sicherstellen und für die Zukunft erhalten.\n\nWir tun dies aber auch als Bundesregierung, wenn es um die Stärkung des Handwerks und des Mittelstandes geht. Wir wollen dem Fachkräftemangel begegnen und gerade jüngere Menschen für eine Ausbildung im Handwerk begeistern. Hier müssen wir auch das Bewusstsein in der Gesellschaft verändern und den Wert des Handwerks sowie die Bedeutung der Handwerksberufe in der Gesellschaft herausstellen.\n\nAuch müssen wir die wachsende Bürokratie bekämpfen und endlich dafür sorgen, dass sich junge Handwerksmeister um ihre Kunden kümmern können und nicht den ganzen Tag Formulare ausfüllen müssen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nWir wollen neue Wirtschaftszweige erschließen, die in Deutschland bisher leider viel zu wenig Beachtung gefunden haben, so zum Beispiel den Bereich des Tourismus. Meine Damen und Herren, ich komme aus der wunderschönen Region Rheinhessen in Rheinland-Pfalz, wo mit Worms als eine der ältesten Städte in Deutschland Historie greifbar wird und mit den Nibelungen-Festspielen ein bundesweit einzigartiges kulturelles Highlight existiert,\n\nwo mit Oppenheim und der weltbekannten Weinlage „Krötenbrunnen“, Herr Kauder, ein Aushängeschild besteht, das seit Jahrzehnten für exzellente Rebsäfte steht, und wo mit der typischen rheinhessischen Hügellandschaft rund um Alzey eine einzigartige Landschaft zum Verweilen und Entspannen einlädt. Solche wunderschöne Regionen gibt es in ganz Deutschland.\n\nDiese Regionen müssen wir touristisch fördern und gemeinsam im In- und Ausland - europaweit und international - dafür werben, um zusätzliche innovative, moderne Arbeitsplätze zu schaffen. Dafür wollen wir uns einsetzen.\n\nIn der derzeitigen Niedrigzinsphase muss es möglich sein, dafür zu sorgen, für solche neuen wirtschaftlichen Ansätze günstige Kredite zur Verfügung zu stellen.\n\nDie Niedrigzinsphase stellt uns aber auch vor Probleme, so beispielsweise bei der Altersvorsorge. Die Altersvorsorge für zwei Generationen ist in Gefahr. Hier müssen wir gemeinsame Kraftanstrengungen unternehmen und nach neuen Rezepten suchen, damit es in Deutschland wieder wie früher heißen kann: Unser Ziel ist Vermögensbildung in Arbeitnehmerhand. Deshalb fordere ich Banken, Versicherungen und natürlich auch die Wirtschaft und die Politik auf, gemeinsam nach neuen Produkten zu suchen, diese in den kommenden Jahren zu entwickeln und zur Verfügung zu stellen.\n\nMöglich wird dies mit einer starken deutschen Wirtschaft im Rücken sein, die zusammen mit den Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern entsprechende Finanzmittel erwirtschaften kann und auch in Zukunft Innovation und soziale Gerechtigkeit verbindet.\n\nFür Innovation und soziale Gerechtigkeit stehen wir, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren. Wir müssen auch in den kommenden Jahren dafür sorgen, dass Entscheidungen in Deutschland im Konsens getroffen werden, im Konsens zwischen Arbeiternehmern, Arbeitgebern und Politik. Dann bin ich mir auch sehr sicher, dass wir weiterhin positiv gestimmt sein können, wenn es um die Zukunft der Wirtschaft in Deutschland geht.\n\nDeshalb sollten wir dem heute vorgelegten Haushaltsentwurf zustimmen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n2210,birgit-kompel,\"Vielen Dank. - Zunächst möchte ich erwähnen, dass ich es fast bedauere, dass ich vor 16 Jahren bzw. 11 Jahren meine Kinder bekommen habe, weil ich glaube, dass es die Eltern heutzutage durch die entsprechenden Angebote sehr viel leichter haben.\n\nIch kann mich noch gut erinnern, wie das mit der Aufgabenverteilung zu Hause war: Es war selbstverständlich, dass ich als Frau sowohl als Selbstständige gearbeitet als auch alle anderen Pflichten mit übernommen habe. Meine Frage an Sie, sehr verehrte Frau Ministerin: Wie wollen Sie dafür sorgen, dass die Aufgaben wirklich partnerschaftlich geteilt werden?\"\n14743,jurgen-trittin,\"Frau Präsidentin! Herr Kollege Brauksiepe, ich stelle zunächst einmal fest, dass Sie den Bundestag unvollständiger unterrichten als die Presse. Ich habe heute Morgen schon in einem öffentlich-rechtlichen Radiosender gehört, dass auf das erste Vorauskommando nach Jordanien ein zweites folgen wird, das von der Oberkommandierenden, Frau von der Leyen, angeführt wird. Das hätten Sie bei dieser Gelegenheit hier auch erwähnen können.\n\nDie Frage, die ich aber eigentlich habe, ist: Sind diese Vorauskommandos überhaupt nötig? Wäre es vor dem Hintergrund der fehlenden verfassungsrechtlichen Grundlagen für diesen Einsatz, der eben nicht in einem System kollektiver Sicherheit stattfindet, was Voraussetzung nach dem Bundesverfassungsgericht ist, nicht klüger, die Soldatinnen und Soldaten dort einfach abzuziehen, statt sich nach Alternativstandorten umzusehen?\"\n3027,ingo-gadechens,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Vor der sitzungsfreien Zeit hatten wir eine angeregte Haushaltsdebatte für das jetzige Haushaltsjahr, und heute folgt - fast nahtlos daran anschließend - die Haushaltsdebatte für das kommende Jahre 2015.\n\nWer noch einmal aufmerksam die Reden, die hier in diesem Haus vor wenigen Wochen gehalten wurden, liest, stellt fest, wie schnelllebig die Zeit ist, wie fragil sicher geglaubte Strukturen sind und wie labil sich aktuell die Sicherheitslage in der Welt zeigt.\n\nTraditionell geht es heute in der ersten Lesung um den Haushalt für das kommende Jahr. Aber die Sondersitzung in der vergangenen Woche hat uns bereits deutlich vor Augen geführt: Überall auf der Welt lodern Krisenherde auf. Nicht nur die bedrückende Situation in der Ukraine treibt uns mit Sorge um und veranlasst die Regierung der freien Völker zum Handeln, sondern mit großer Sorge blicken wir auch wieder Richtung Gaza-streifen und auf die Sicherheit Israels. Fassungslos blicken wir auf islamistischen Terror und Hass, der sich in Teilens des Iraks und Syriens breit gemacht hat. Wir schauen auch auf Libyen und auf das humanitäre Elend in Afrika.\n\nWer von uns, meine Damen und Herren, hätte gedacht, dass wir in einem Glaubenskrieg Gräueltaten sehen, die mehr an das Mittelalter erinnern als an das 21. Jahrhundert? Wir alle sind gezwungen, mehrere Krisenherde gleichzeitig zu bewerten, um diese gemeinsam mit unseren Verbündeten einzudämmen und ihnen entgegenzuwirken.\n\nWir dürfen nicht darauf hoffen - leider nicht -, dass die Vernunft mehr und mehr um sich greift und die Menschen überall auf der Welt endlich auf Krieg und Gewalt verzichten. Dies wäre nicht nur politisch naiv, sondern würde die gegenwärtige Realität in der Welt ignorieren. Der NATO-Generalsekretär - nur noch wenige Tage im Amt - hat die prekäre Situation beim Gipfeltreffen wie folgt beschrieben:\n\nUnsere Allianz ist eine kleine sichere, stabile und gedeihende Insel, die von Krisen umgeben ist.\n\nNatürlich machen die Krisen deutlich, wie hoch der eigentliche Stellenwert des Nordatlantischen Bündnisses ist. Auf dem NATO-Gipfel in Wales wurden die derzeitige Lage und die künftigen Herausforderungen klar benannt: Bündnisverteidigung rückt somit nach Jahren einer gewissen Vernachlässigung wieder stärker in den Mittelpunkt des Handelns. Genauso wichtig ist in der jetzigen Lage, dass wir alle im Kopf ein gut Stück aufwachen und konsequent handeln. Niemand, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, wünscht sich kriegerische Eskalation, aber Deutschland darf nicht wegschauen, wenn an Europas Grenzen Völkerrechtsbruch, Krieg und Völkermord geschehen.\n\nAus diesem Grund begrüße ich die aktuelle Entscheidung, entgegen bisheriger Normen in begrenzter Form auch Waffenlieferungen in Krisengebiete zu erlauben. Dies wird sicherlich die Ausnahme bleiben, und aus meiner Sicht bleibt eine gute Diplomatie die wichtigste Waffe, um Krisenherde in der Welt einzudämmen.\n\nAuch hierfür gebühren den Handelnden in der Regierung, der Bundeskanzlerin und dem Außenminister, aber insbesondere unserer Verteidigungsministerin - sie kann nicht alles allein machen - ein herzliches Dankeschön und ein großes Lob für all ihre deeskalierenden Gespräche mit den Bündnispartnern, um die Krisenherde in der Welt einzudämmen.\n\nDeutschland sieht nicht tatenlos zu, wenn an Europas Grenzen Gräueltaten geschehen. Ebenso begrüße ich die in Wales getroffene Entscheidung, eine NATO-Eingreif-truppe mit hoher Einsatzbereitschaft und einem Hauptquartier in Osteuropa aufzustellen. Wir brauchen als Antwort auf die um sich greifende Aggression eine verbesserte Reaktionsfähigkeit der NATO. Auch diese Maßnahme wird Geld kosten. Darauf sollten wir uns jetzt schon einstellen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, jede Krise erfordert ein abgestimmtes, kluges und gerade jetzt auch ein entschlossenes Vorgehen. Sie aber grummeln jetzt herum, und Sie, Frau Höger, haben gerade gesagt, man müsse Russland mit anderen Augen betrachten und man müsse beide Seiten sehen.\n\nZum jetzigen Zeitpunkt werden Atomtests durchgeführt, und zwar nicht von der NATO und nicht von Amerika, sondern in Russland, und weitere sind geplant. Das sind Aggressionen, und das sind Zeichen, die nicht auf Frieden hindeuten. Das sollten Sie lieber registrieren, statt hier vom Rande aus herumzugrummeln.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, jede Krise erfordert ein abgestimmtes, kluges und gerade jetzt auch ein entschlossenes Vorgehen. Die Sanktionen gegen Russland waren Gegenstand kritischer Diskussion. Denn Sanktionen erzeugen oftmals Gegensanktionen, und Handelsbeschränkungen treffen gerade auch unsere exportabhängige Wirtschaft in besonderer Weise. Dennoch dürfen wir nicht den Fehler begehen, uns nur an ökonomischen Fakten zu orientieren. Die Bundesregierung handelt besonnen und mit Bedacht. Das Handeln Russlands in der Krise ist hingegen absolut inakzeptabel. Russland, insbesondere Präsident Putin, hat den Schalthebel zur Konfliktbewältigung in der Ukraine in den Händen. Solange dieser Schalthebel nicht auf Deeskalation gestellt wird, ist zunehmender Druck auf Russland notwendig.\n\nAuch und gerade vor dem Hintergrund dieser weltpolitischen Lage ist der Einzelplan 14 zu bewerten. Im Verteidigungsetat geht es einmal mehr um die finanzielle Ausstattung. Es geht um das Geld, das wir der Bundeswehr, den Soldatinnen und Soldaten, aber auch den zivilen Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern zur Verfügung stellen wollen bzw. können. Es geht um attraktivitätssteigernde Maßnahmen, um Wartung und Instandsetzung, aber es geht auch um viel Geld, das wir für modernes Gerät und für den Schutz und die Sicherheit unserer Soldaten investieren müssen.\n\nNahezu alle Redner haben in dieser laufenden Haushaltsdebatte das große Ziel beschrieben, das wir gemeinsam erreichen wollen: Wir wollen auf jegliche neue Schulden im Haushaltsjahr 2015 verzichten. Ich bin zuversichtlich, dass wir dieses Ziel nach 45 Jahren endlich erreichen werden. Aber der Weg dahin ist so fragil wie die derzeitige Sicherheitslage in der Welt.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Basis für jede wirtschaftliche Entwicklung und soziale Stabilität ist innere und äußere Sicherheit. Wir sollten das bei all den berechtigten Forderungen, die andere Fachbereiche an den Bundeshaushalt stellen, stets im Blick behalten. Unsere innere und äußere Sicherheit und der Schutz der Souveränität und Integrität Deutschlands und seiner Verbündeten sind ein enorm hohes Gut.\n\nWir Verteidigungspolitiker haben sicherlich die besten Argumente, um mehr Geld für den Einzeletat zu fordern. Wir tun das nicht - ich sage leise: wir tun das noch nicht, liebe Frau Höger -, weil wir der Überzeugung sind, dass wir im Haushaltsjahr 2015 mit dem zugewiesenen Etat von 32,2 Milliarden Euro auskommen werden. Aber ich sage auch sehr deutlich: Wir stoßen bereits jetzt an Schmerzgrenzen. Der Verteidigungshaushalt ist auf Kante genäht. Finanzielle Spielräume sind nicht mehr vorhanden. Neue Aufgaben neben den derzeitigen Aufträgen kann unsere Bundeswehr nicht mehr verkraften. Denn - auch daran sei noch einmal erinnert - die Bundeswehr befindet sich neben den Einsätzen in einer Neuausrichtung, die oft als Operation am offenen Herzen beschrieben wurde - nur mit dem Unterschied, dass der Patient nicht im OP liegt, sondern auf dem Gehweg läuft.\n\nUnsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten leisten in dieser Umbruchphase in zahlreichen Einsätzen im In- und Ausland wirklich Außerordentliches. Ihnen gilt daher unser ganz besonderer Dank.\n\nTrotz Abzug großer Kontingente aus Afghanistan und der erhofften Entlastung der Truppe haben wir bereits neue Aufgaben und Herausforderungen zu bewältigen. Ich nenne hier beispielsweise die Operation Active Fence in der Türkei oder das Air Policing im Baltikum. Die Zahl der Einsätze wird also absehbar nicht geringer, genauso wenig wie die Belastungen für Soldaten und Material. Der Verteidigungshaushalt wird sich - das ist meine feste Überzeugung - dieser Entwicklung mittelfristig anpassen müssen.\n\nFrau Präsidentin, ich weiß, dass Sie das nicht so gerne mögen. Aber Henning Otte hat die Latte so hochgelegt, als er die Feuerwehrleute aus Uelzen persönlich begrüßt hat, dass ich noch sagen möchte: Ich freue mich, dass der Kreisfeuerwehrverband Ostholstein ebenfalls auf der Tribüne zugegen ist.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n12986,hans-michelbach,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Innovationen sind das Gebot der Stunde. An ausgezeichneten Ideen mangelt es in Deutschland ja nicht. Vielmehr haben wir ein Problem bei der Umsetzung der Ideen in die Praxis.\n\nWie aber gelingt es, hervorragende Ideen zu marktreifen Produkten zu machen? Wie kann die Politik dafür sorgen, dass die guten Ideen nicht in der Schublade landen, sondern zur Grundlage eines Unternehmens werden, um damit auf der einen Seite Geld zu verdienen und auf der anderen Seite neue Arbeitsplätze zu schaffen? Das sind die entscheidenden Fragen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die wir uns für eine erfolgreiche Wirtschafts- und Standortpolitik stellen müssen.\n\n2015 gab es 388 000 Existenzgründungen. Allerdings ist die Zahl leider rückläufig. Das ist ein gefährlicher Trend, den wir stoppen wollen, liebe Freunde; denn wir werden unseren Wohlstand nur sichern können, wenn wir unseren Unternehmen die besten Finanzierungsmöglichkeiten bieten.\n\nUnser Wirtschaftsstandort ist auf eine funktionierende Generationenbrücke, eine stetige Erneuerung dringend angewiesen. Deshalb ist es gut, dass wir heute eine Weiterentwicklung der steuerlichen Verlustverrechnung auf den Weg bringen. Für deutsche Unternehmen und speziell für Start-ups entsteht mit der Einführung des § 8d des Körperschaftsteuergesetzes eine wichtige steuerliche Verbesserung, meine Damen und Herren. Das wollen wir heute festhalten.\n\nDas bedeutet mehr Steuergerechtigkeit für die Zukunft, mehr Planungssicherheit, mehr Wachstumsperspektiven mit Wagniskapital, mehr Liquidität, mehr Investitionen und damit mehr Arbeitsplätze. Das ist das Ziel, und das ist der Erfolg dieses Gesetzes, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDas ist nicht nur ein gutes Zeichen für die Handlungsfähigkeit unserer Großen Koalition, sondern insbesondere ein gutes Zeichen für die deutsche Wirtschaft.\n\nBisher hat der § 8c Körperschaftsteuergesetz vielmals zu einem Verlustuntergang geführt und zu einem erheblichen unternehmerischen Risiko beigetragen. Die Verluste sind nur dann nicht weggefallen, wenn die Körperschaft die Stille-Reserve-Klausel oder die Konzernklausel erfüllt hat. Die Praxis hat aber gezeigt, dass diese Maßnahmen zu eng gefasst waren. Deshalb müssen wir in der Steuerpolitik immer wieder auf den Grundsatz des Nettoprinzips schauen.\n\nDer Verlust in einem Unternehmen ist in Wirklichkeit kein Missbrauch, sondern ein Verlust von Liquidität, die besser in eine Neuentwicklung gesteckt wird. Verluste sind in Unternehmen echte und werthaltige Vermögensgegenstände, da sie bei der Erzielung von ertragsteuerlichen Einkünften entstanden sind. Natürlich muss man Missbrauch eindämmen. Das haben wir auch getan. Bisher hat der Einstieg eines neuen oder weiteren Gesellschafters oftmals zu einem Wegfall von Verlustverrechnungspotenzial geführt. Das ist nun mal eine Ressourcen-, eine Investitions-, eine Liquiditätsvernichtung, die wir uns nicht leisten sollten. Deswegen wollen wir das heute beseitigen. Das ist der erfolgreiche Weg für die Zukunft, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nWenn bei der Einkünfteerzielung echte Vermögensverluste entstanden sind, sollten nach dem verfassungsrechtlichen Nettoprinzip steuerliche Verluste eigentlich grundsätzlich Berücksichtigung finden. Deshalb erhalten mit dem heutigen Gesetz vor allem die kleinen und mittelständischen Betriebe neue Steuergerechtigkeit und zukünftig neue Impulse, um in neue Produkte, um in Digitalisierung investieren zu können.\n\nVor allem ist es essenziell, den Wagniskapitalmarkt um die Gründerszene zu stärken. Wir vereinfachen den Zugang zu privatem Beteiligungskapital und schaffen damit die Grundlage für Wachstum und neue Arbeitsplätze. Ihnen wird es mit dem heutigen Gesetz zukünftig besser gelingen, Investoren für Geschäftsmodelle zu gewinnen.\n\nDie neue Ausrichtung ist an verschiedenen Konditionen ausgerichtet; das ist richtig. Wir haben hier bewusst Missbrauchsmöglichkeiten eingedämmt. Ich glaube, unter dem Strich war das ein erfolgreicher Verhandlungsweg, der von unserem Berichterstatter Philipp Murmann und seinen Partnern gegangen wurde.\n\nZum Abschluss, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, möchte ich Professor Dr. Heinz Riesenhuber herzlichen Dank sagen. Er hat viele Jahre für mehr Wagniskapital gekämpft und dafür in der Politik geworben. Lieber Heinz, zu deinem heutigen 81. Geburtstag liefern wir - nicht unbedingt pünktlich, aber wir liefern - und gratulieren dir.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n14857,christina-jantz-herrmann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Heute beraten wir unsere Vorhaben, gegen Pelztierfarmen und gegen das Töten hochträchtiger Tiere vorzugehen.\n\nIch sage Ihnen ganz ehrlich: Mir geht es ähnlich wie Kollegin Maisch; auch ich habe in den letzten Monaten oft nicht daran geglaubt, dass wir in dieser Legislaturperiode tatsächlich diesen Gesetzentwurf vorliegen haben und beschließen werden; denn es ist bereits anderthalb Jahre her, dass wir uns in den Koalitionsfraktionen darauf verständigt haben, hier etwas zu unternehmen. Es ist ebenfalls anderthalb Jahre her, dass Bundeslandwirtschaftsminister Schmidt dieses Vorhaben medienwirksam - wie so vieles - angekündigt hat. Doch es war ein zähes Ringen mit den Kollegen der Union - das zeigt die Dauer von anderthalb Jahren -, dieses Gesetzespaket in Form zu gießen.\n\nDabei ist es wenig hilfreich für die Sache, wenn ein Minister trotz Ankündigung von seiner eigenen Fraktion bei dem Vorhaben blockiert wird. Er wird nicht nur von seinen Wirtschaftsfreunden blockiert, sondern - wir haben es zuletzt im Landwirtschaftsausschuss gesehen - sogar aus den eigenen Reihen: Ein Kollege aus der CDU, der eigentlich für den Tierschutz zuständig sein sollte, hat gegen das Gesetzespaket gestimmt.\n\nDie SPD-Bundestagsfraktion - Sie sehen es, meine Damen und Herren - hat für dieses Vorhaben intensiv gekämpft; natürlich nicht, um Ehrenrettung des Ministers zu betreiben, sondern - ganz klar -, weil es einfach höchste Zeit war, die unhaltbaren Zustände in der Pelztierhaltung und bei der Schlachtung hochträchtiger Nutztiere zu beenden.\n\nErstens wollen wir mit dem Gesetzentwurf verhindern, dass schmerzempfindliche Tierföten bei der Schlachtung des betäubten Muttertieres qualvoll - so ist es nämlich - verenden; denn Tierföten, wie zum Beispiel im Falle von Kälbern, können zumindest ab dem letzten Drittel der Trächtigkeit bei der Schlachtung des Muttertieres bis zu ihrem eigenen Tod Schmerzen und Leiden empfinden. Indem wir verbieten, dass hochträchtige Tiere überhaupt zum Schlachthof gebracht werden, wollen wir dieser Praxis nun einen Riegel vorschieben.\n\nAusnahmen sollen nur gelten - das ist schon angesprochen worden -, wenn im Einzelfall nach tierärztlicher Indikation eine Tötung geboten ist. Eine weitere Ausnahme, die wir - aus meiner Sicht: leider - machen müssen, umfasst Schafe und Ziegen. Mit diesem Gesetzentwurf wollen wir die Bundesregierung auffordern, in diesem Bereich weitere Untersuchungen anzustellen. Denn: Auch wenn es für die Ausnahme jetzt noch Gründe gibt, ist es doch unser Ziel, dass zukünftig auch Schafe und Ziegen in dieses Verbot einbezogen werden.\n\nZweitens wollen wir den Pelztierfarmen in unserem Land endlich ein Ende setzen. Auch wenn es mein persönlicher Wunsch gewesen wäre: Wir können diese Farmen aufgrund der verfassungsrechtlich geschützten Berufsfreiheit leider nicht sofort schließen.\n\nDer Gesetzentwurf verbietet deshalb die Pelztierzüchtung, räumt aber ein, dass die Farmen befristet genehmigt werden, wenn sie hohe Ansprüche an eine artgerechte Tierhaltung erfüllen. Die Einführung und Einhaltung von solch hohen Tierschutzstandards in der Pelztierhaltung machen diese aber deutlich teurer und sicher auch unrentabel, sodass wir damit den aktuellen Geschäftsmodellen ein Ende setzen werden.\n\nDrittens müssen wir - ich sage: müssen - das Fettverfütterungsverbot bei Wiederkäuern, wie Rindern, aufheben. Es gibt leider keine wissenschaftliche Grundlage für ein Fortbestehen des Verbots. Ich persönlich finde das - ich habe es auch schon an anderer Stelle gesagt - ethisch besonders schwierig.\n\nViertens streben wir mit dem Gesetzespaket eine weitere Änderung des Lebensmittel- und Futtermittelgesetzbuches an. Wir führen einen bundeseinheitlichen Bußgeldkatalog ein. Damit legen wir einen ersten Grundstein - ich sage bewusst: ersten Grundstein - für eine Vereinheitlichung und Vergleichbarkeit der staatlichen Kontrollen im Lebensmittelsektor.\n\nSehr geehrte Damen und Herren, es ist bereits bei meiner Kollegin Ute Vogt angeklungen: Der Gesetzentwurf ist ohne Frage ein Kompromiss. Er ist aber der beste Kompromiss - das sage ich ganz offen -, den wir mit unserem Koalitionspartner erreichen konnten. Er ist auch ein Kompromiss zwischen dem Tierschutz und anderen Verfassungsgütern, insbesondere der Berufs- und Gewerbefreiheit. Hier sind dem Tierschutz - viele von uns sagen sicherlich: leider - Grenzen gesetzt. Nach der Güterabwägung dürfen wir Pelztierfarmen nicht direkt schließen, Übergangsfristen allerdings auch nicht beliebig kurz ansetzen. Es wäre rechtssicher ebenfalls nicht möglich, die Fettverfütterung an Wiederkäuer als einziges EU-Land weiterhin verboten zu lassen, wenn es keine wissenschaftlichen Belege gibt, dass aufgrund der Fettverfütterung ein erhöhtes BSE-Risiko für den Verbraucher entsteht.\n\nSelbstverständlich - Sie haben es an dieser Debatte schon gemerkt -: Regierungsverantwortung zu tragen, bedeutet immer auch, um Kompromisse zu ringen. Beim Tierschutz ist das Ringen mit der Union - unter uns gesagt - ein tägliches Tauziehen, zumal dann, wenn sich der Minister vor allem im Ankündigen versteht und seine Fraktion nicht immer mitzieht, sondern eher den Status quo erhalten will, egal wie belastend er für die Landwirte und Landwirtinnen, für die Tiere und für die Umwelt ist. Leider viel zu oft mussten wir Herrn Schmidt - auch das ist in dieser Debatte schon angeklungen - beim Tierschutz zum Jagen tragen. Viel zu sehr war der Minister auf sein Konzept der freiwilligen Verbindlichkeit fixiert. Kritische Zungen würden sein Handeln eher als organisierte Unverantwortung beschreiben.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, nach zähem Ringen konnten wir zu einem Gesetzentwurf kommen, der den Tierschutz verbessert. Ich bitte Sie daher, unserem Gesetzentwurf und unserer Entschließung zuzustimmen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12523,nina-scheer,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte mit einem ganz herzlichen Dank an unsere Bundesumweltministerin beginnen, die, wie ich finde, in der Bundesregierung hervorragende Arbeit macht.\n\nIch kann verstehen, dass jetzt vonseiten der Opposition darauf abgestellt wird, was an den letzten Abenden dieser Woche geschehen ist - das ist, glaube ich, auch Ihre Aufgabe -, aber man muss auch akzeptieren, dass die Verhandlungen noch nicht abgeschlossen sind und dass es mit dem Klimaschutzplan sehr wohl weitergeht. Deswegen finde ich es nicht fair und auch nicht realitätsgetreu, Richtung Öffentlichkeit so zu tun, als ob dieser Klimaschutzplan inzwischen im Mülleimer gelandet wäre. Das ist mitnichten der Fall, und das wissen Sie auch.\n\nIch möchte jetzt auf unseren Antrag zu Marrakesch eingehen - er ist schon an einigen Stellen von meinen Vorrednern erwähnt worden -, der heute auf der Tagesordnung steht. Auch wenn ich meinerseits ebenfalls nicht den Druck vom Kessel nehmen möchte, dass wir den Klimaschutzplan noch in trockene Tücher bekommen, muss doch gesehen werden, dass unsere Bundesumweltministerin auch unseren Antrag, über den wir heute entscheiden, im Gepäck haben wird. Dieser Antrag sagt zwar nicht auf Heller und Pfennig genau, was von heute auf morgen mit welchem politischen Hebel umgesetzt werden soll; er zeigt aber ganz klare Wege auf, in welcher Form wir politisch aufgefordert sind, auf allen Ebenen - der internationalen, der europäischen, aber auch der nationalen Ebene - tätig zu werden. Insofern ist darin auch richtigerweise und schwarz auf weiß enthalten, dass wir den Umstieg auf erneuerbare Energien brauchen. Das ist ganz klar darin enthalten. Deswegen muss man den Willen der Großen Koalition, die das mit diesem Antrag verbrieft hat, auch nicht immer wieder infrage stellen.\n\nWir müssen natürlich darauf achten, dass das dann entsprechend umgesetzt wird. Insofern muss man auch erkennen, dass die Entwicklung sehr schnelllebig ist. Im Kontext der derzeitigen Diskussion etwa über die Sektorenkopplung müssen wir, da es um die Energiewende nicht nur bei Strom, sondern auch bei Wärme und Mobilität geht, sehen, dass wir nicht allein über die Ausbauzahlen, die wir für den Stromsektor definiert haben und die ich persönlich in der Obergrenze immer für kritisch gehalten habe, ans Ziel kommen. Insofern gab es in diesem Bereich innerhalb von wenigen Monaten eine entscheidende Weiterentwicklung in der öffentlichen Diskussion.\n\nIch erwarte, dass wir das auch weiterhin zur politischen Umsetzung bringen. Mit den genannten Schlagworten zur Sektorenkopplung möchte ich das an dieser Stelle so stehen lassen.\n\nEin weiterer Punkt, der in dem Antrag zu Marrakesch enthalten ist, ist, finde ich, auch ein neuer Schritt in der Diskussion. In dem Antrag ist nicht nur von Emissionshandelssystemen die Rede, sondern auch von Emissionsbepreisungssystemen. Das ist ein entscheidender Unterschied.\n\nIch finde, man muss es auch ernst nehmen, dass wir uns in der Großen Koalition darauf geeinigt haben, dass es jetzt um Energiebepreisungssysteme geht, für die wir uns international einsetzen. Das findet sich unter den geforderten Maßnahmen auf internationaler Ebene. Es ist aber auch klar, dass wir uns nicht nur auf internationaler Ebene, sondern auch auf europäischer Ebene wie auch in Deutschland dafür einsetzen müssen, zu einer Bepreisungspolitik zu kommen; denn daraus ergeben sich genau die Anreize, von denen die Rede war. Natürlich steht die SPD für genau diese Anreize. Ich sehe die Aussage, eine Verbotspartei zu sein, auch nicht an uns gerichtet. Wir sind nämlich auf Anreize angewiesen. Wir müssen die Wirtschaft ankurbeln, die in diesem Sektor verwurzelt ist. Nicht von ungefähr wurde inzwischen - zum Beispiel nach den neuesten Meldungen aus Frankfurt - im Kontext von Green Finance - auch dies wird übrigens in unserem Marrakesch-Antrag gefordert - eine erste Börse für grüne Wertpapiere geschaffen.\n\nInsofern müssen wir noch besser werden, und ich denke, wir sind angesichts der beginnenden Energiewende auf einem guten Weg. Wir müssen erkennen, welche Chancen auch wirtschaftspolitischer Art wir in diesem Bereich haben. Wir haben enorme Chancen. In diesem Bereich sind über 400 000 Arbeitsplätze entstanden. Wir müssen jetzt schauen, dass das in die anderen Bereiche der Energiewirtschaft übertragen wird. Das ist der zentrale Bereich des Klimaschutzes.\n\nIch bin am Ende meiner Redezeit angelangt. Deshalb verzichte ich darauf, die Zahlen anzuführen, welche Weltmarktanteile Deutschland da im Einzelnen hat. Die Zahlen zeigen ganz klar: Die Zukunft liegt in der nachhaltigen Wirtschaft und in den entsprechenden Technologien, und da müssen wir hin.\n\nIch als Sozialdemokratin sehe das als eine Gerechtigkeitsfrage an. Denn unseren Planeten gibt es nur einmal. Klimaschutz ist Umweltgerechtigkeit, ist Lebensgrundlagengerechtigkeit. Insofern setze ich darauf, dass wir mit diesen Vorgaben weiterhin die Energiewende als wesentlichen Bestandteil des Klimaschutzes voranbringen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12687,christian-flisek,\"Herr Kollege Sensburg, Sie haben gerade auf die durchaus nicht ganz einfachen Verhandlungen zum wichtigen Urhebervertragsrecht verwiesen und haben, wenn ich Sie richtig verstanden habe, bedauert, dass in der Sache nichts weitergehe. Da möchte ich Sie schon fragen - weil wir an einem Punkt sind, wo wir ein wenig Farbe bekennen müssen -, ob die Unionsfraktion, wenn sie das hier zum Gegenstand der Debatte macht, denn bereit wäre, sich bei der Frage eines angemessenen Auskunftsanspruches zugunsten der Kreativen in diesem Land - wohlgemerkt: der Auskunftsanspruch ist ein Hilfsanspruch, um eine angemessene Vergütung durchzusetzen - endlich ein Stück weit zu bewegen, damit wir das Paket zuschnüren können. Sie fordern ein Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger, das Sie den Kreativen nicht zubilligen wollen; die Probleme, die Sie skizzieren, sind dieselben. Von den Onlineplattformen aber wird das eingefordert. Wie können Sie sich positionieren, damit daraus eine konsistente Lösung wird? Ich würde Sie schon gerne bitten, sich dazu mehr und deutlicher zu äußern; denn der Moment wäre geeignet, die Sache wirklich nach vorne zu bringen.\"\n1148,katja-dorner,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Der Antrag und auch die Reden der Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Regierungsfraktionen erinnern mich an einen kleinen Reim aus meiner Schulzeit - etwas salopp -: Lyrik ist schwyrig, sie wird schnell schmyrig. - Genau das passiert nämlich hier.\n\nWarum ist das so? Schließlich liest sich der Antrag erst einmal ganz gut. Die Koalitionsfraktionen greifen ein wirklich wichtiges Thema auf, nämlich die Zeitpolitik. Im Intro des Antrags wird der zeitliche Druck, der auf Familien lastet, sehr richtig beschrieben, so auch der Wunsch insbesondere vieler Väter, mehr Zeit mit ihrer Familie verbringen zu können, und der Wunsch vieler Eltern, Erwerbs- und Familienarbeit endlich partnerschaftlich aufteilen zu können. Aber, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, schöne Lyrik reicht eben nicht. Von schöner Lyrik haben Familien noch längst nicht mehr Zeit.\n\nWenn man sich den langen Forderungsteil des Antrags anschaut, dann stellt man fest: Er bleibt weitgehend blumig; alles bleibt im Ungefähren. Wenn alle, ausnahmslos alle Forderungen an die Bundesregierung ausdrücklich unter Haushaltsvorbehalt gestellt sind, dann müssen sich die Frauen trotz dieser schönen Lyrik sehr konkret Sorgen machen, wie es mit der Beförderung von Chancengleichheit und Gleichstellung durch diese Bundesregierung aussehen wird.\n\nIch finde, das ist in der Woche nach dem Internationalen Frauentag ein schlechtes Signal. Dabei hätten doch gerade die Frauen, die dreieinhalb Jahre mit einer Ministerin zu tun hatten, die - ich will es einmal so ausdrücken - eine durchaus eigenwillige Vorstellung von Frauenpolitik und Feminismus hatte,\n\nendlich einen richtigen Schub in der Frauenpolitik verdient.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich halte die Zeitpolitik tatsächlich für eine sehr wichtige Frage. Dass die Regierungsfraktionen einen ellenlangen Antrag dazu schreiben, der aber in mickrige, unkonkrete Vorschläge mündet,\n\nbestätigt mich doch sehr stark in meinem Eindruck, dass sich die Große Koalition sehr bewusst vor den schwierigeren Themen wegduckt, die wir aber auch angehen müssen, wenn es uns tatsächlich um die Gleichstellung von Frauen geht.\n\nWelche Themen sind das? Das sind zum einen die -Minijobs. Rund zwei Drittel der Minijobber sind weiblich. Mehr als die Hälfte verdient weniger als 8,50 Euro die Stunde. Es ist klar: Die Minijobs haben sich als eine berufliche Sackgasse insbesondere für Frauen erwiesen. Wir brauchen deshalb dringend eine Reform des Niedriglohnsektors. Die Minijobs müssen durch sozialver-sicherungspflichtige Beschäftigungsverhältnisse ersetzt werden.\n\nWir brauchen insbesondere Anreize für eine eigenständige Existenzsicherung von Frauen.\n\nDas Kabinett hat in dieser Woche den Fortschrittsbericht zum Fachkräftekonzept der Bundesregierung beraten. Wir haben dazu eine Befragung der Bundesregierung durchgeführt. Es ist ganz aktuell deutlich geworden: Deutschland hat im EU-Vergleich die niedrigste Erwerbsbeteiligungsquote von Frauen. Dabei will jede fünfte Frau mit Teilzeitjob gerne mehr arbeiten. Hier muss ganz klar die Bundesregierung handeln. Die absehbare Dauertauchstation der Großen Koalition werden wir Grüne im Interesse der Frauen nicht akzeptieren.\n\nDie Koalition duckt sich auch beim Thema Ehegattensplitting weg. Ich finde es regelrecht fahrlässig, dass die Union hier weiterhin die drei Affen gibt: nichts sehen, nichts hören, nichts sagen. Die Gesamtevaluation der familienbezogenen Leistungen, die die vorherige Große Koalition selbst in Auftrag gegeben hat, kommt zu dem Ergebnis, dass das Ehegattensplitting erhebliche negative Auswirkungen hat. Weil die Mütter ihre Arbeitszeit verkürzen und dadurch berufliche Nachteile haben, stärkt das Ehegattensplitting trotz der steuerlichen Vorteile langfristig die wirtschaftliche Situation der Familien gerade nicht. Es führt vielmehr zu einer Verdrängung von Frauen aus dem Arbeitsmarkt. Das macht die Evaluation ganz deutlich.\n\nDiese Ergebnisse werden seit Jahren von Studie zu Studie, inklusive des angesprochenen Gleichstellungsberichts der Bundesregierung, immer wieder bestätigt. Sie haben gesagt, Frau Ministerin, Sie wollen den Gleichstellungsbericht aus der Schublade holen. Es wäre besser gewesen, Sie hätten ihn aus der Schublade geholt, bevor dieser Antrag geschrieben wird. Dann wären nämlich deutlich konkretere Forderungen zu erwarten gewesen.\n\nWer es mit der Chancengleichheit von Frauen und Männern ernst meint, der kommt an einer Reform des Ehegattensplittings nicht vorbei. Aber was auch klar sein muss: Eine solche Reform darf natürlich nicht zulasten der materiellen Absicherung von Familien gehen; das ist uns Grünen ganz wichtig. Wir wollen eine Familienförderung, die sich nicht am Trauschein festmacht, sondern wir brauchen Instrumente, mit denen Kinder direkt gefördert werden.\n\nWas das Wegducken angeht: Dass das Betreuungsgeld bleibt, ist ein frauenpolitischer Offenbarungseid dieser Bundesregierung und insbesondere der SPD.\n\nIch möchte noch auf einen Aspekt zu sprechen kommen, der auf den ersten Blick vielleicht gar nicht so viel mit Chancengleichheit zu tun hat. In der vergangenen Woche wurde eine EU-Studie vorgestellt - mit erschreckendem Ergebnis: EU-weit ist jede dritte Frau Opfer -sexueller oder physischer Gewalt. Die Gefahr häuslicher Gewalt ist ganz besonders groß: 22 Prozent aller Frauen haben Gewalt durch den eigenen Partner erlebt.\n\nGewalt gegen Frauen ist ein brandaktuelles Thema. Ich war gestern bei der Abschlussveranstaltung der Kampagne der Frauenhäuser: „Schwere Wege leicht machen“. Auch diese Kampagne macht ganz deutlich: Es ist nicht akzeptabel, dass die Frage der Finanzierung der Frauenhäuser im Koalitionsvertrag mit keinem Wort erwähnt wird.\n\nDie Bundesregierung ist dringend aufgefordert, die guten und konstruktiven Vorschläge aus den Debatten der vergangenen Legislaturperiode aufzugreifen. Wir Grüne sind ganz klar der Meinung, dass sich der Bund endlich an einer soliden Finanzierung der Frauenhäuser beteiligen muss, damit von Gewalt betroffene Frauen und ihre Kinder überhaupt den Hauch einer Chance auf Chancengleichheit in ihrem Leben haben.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n6229,christian-lange,\"Herr Präsident, ich schlage vor, dass ich die Frage 1 - es geht nämlich exakt um diese Frage - beantworte wie geplant und dann noch zusätzlich gerne die weitere Frage als Nachfrage akzeptiere. Im Übrigen haben wir beide Fragen bereits heute Morgen im Rechtsausschuss ausführlich erörtert. Aber ich wiederhole beides gerne noch einmal.\n\nVielen Dank für diesen Hinweis. Ich fühle mich entsprechend geehrt.\n\nHerr Kollege Ströbele, ich beantworte Ihre Frage wie folgt: Die Leitlinien zur Einführung einer Speicherfrist und Höchstspeicherfrist für Verkehrsdaten, die der Bundesminister der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz am 15. April 2015 vorgestellt hat, kombinieren zeitlich und inhaltlich eng begrenzte Speicherfristen mit sehr strengen Abrufregelungen. Auf diese Weise wird der Forderung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs nachgekommen, die Regelung auf das absolut Notwendige zu beschränken.\n\nDer Schutz von Berufsgeheimnisträgern wird sichergestellt. Verkehrsdaten, die sich auf Personen, Behörden oder Organisationen in sozialen oder kirchlichen Bereichen beziehen, die grundsätzlich anonym bleibenden Anrufern ganz oder überwiegend telefonische Beratung in seelischen oder sozialen Notlagen anbieten und die selbst oder deren Mitarbeiter insoweit besonderen Verschwiegenheitspflichten unterliegen, sind grundsätzlich von der Speicherpflicht ausgenommen.\n\nDarüber hinaus dürfen Daten von Personen, die nach § 53 StPO berechtigt sind, das Zeugnis zu verweigern - nämlich die besagten Rechtsanwälte, Seelsorger, Ärzte, Apotheker und dergleichen -, nicht abgerufen und verwendet werden. Zufallsfunde unterliegen einem Verwertungsverbot.\n\nBerufsgeheimnisträger bereits von der Speicherung der Verkehrsdaten auszunehmen, ist nicht möglich. Es ist unter Datenschutzgesichtspunkten nicht vertretbar, eine Art Datenbank mit Berufsgeheimnisträgern und ihren Rufnummern anzulegen und bei allen TK-Anbietern zu hinterlegen. Der Eingriff in deren Berufsfreiheit und ihr Recht auf informationelle Selbstbestimmung wäre dann sogar noch größer - Kollege Schröder hat darauf hingewiesen - als der Nutzen, der in der Ausnahme von der Speicherung liegt.\n\nDas ist nicht der Fall, und das will ich Ihnen gerne erklären, so wie ich das bereits heute Vormittag gemacht habe. Für die besagten Organisationen, zum Beispiel für die Telefonseelsorgehotlines, enthält das Telekommunikationsgesetz bereits jetzt Sonderregelungen. Nach § 99 TKG dürfen Einzelverbindungsnachweise Verbindungen zu diesen Organisationen nicht erkennen lassen. Organisatorisch wird das dadurch gewährleistet, dass die Bundesnetzagentur die Inhaber solcher Anschlüsse auf Antrag in eine Liste aufnimmt, die die Dienstanbieter quartalsweise abrufen müssen. Auf diese bereits bestehende Liste kann auch zur Umsetzung der Ausnahme von der Speicherpflicht mit Bezug auf die genannten Organisationen zurückgegriffen werden.\n\nWas den Unterschied zu den anderen, also den Rechtsanwälten angeht, sehen die Leitlinien diese Ausnahmen von der Speicherpflicht vor, weil es unter Datenschutzgesichtspunkten - ich wiederhole mich - nicht vertretbar ist, eine Datenbank mit Berufsgeheimnisträgern und ihren Rufnummern anzulegen und bei den TK-Anbietern zu hinterlegen.\n\nBei dynamischen IP-Adressen - auch darauf hatte ich bereits hingewiesen - ist eine Ausnahme auch technisch nicht möglich. Stattdessen wird ein besonderer Schutz auf der Ebene des Abrufs durch Erhebungs- und Verwertungsverbote gewährleistet. Diese sind im Übrigen bewährte Schutzmechanismen, die die Strafprozessordnung auch für andere Ermittlungsmaßnahmen vorsieht, so zum Beispiel nach § 160 a StPO für Ermittlungsmaßnahmen generell und nach § 100 c StPO für die Wohnraumüberwachung im Besonderen. Genauso wie bei der Wohnraumüberwachung soll das Erhebungs- und Verwertungsverbot nach den Leitlinien für alle in § 53 StPO genannten zeugnisverweigerungsberechtigten Personen, zum Beispiel für Rechtsanwälte, gelten. Im Übrigen hat sich dieses Verfahren bewährt.\n\nHerr Kollege Ströbele, ich weise noch einmal darauf hin, dass wir die Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs umsetzen, indem wir die besonderen Rechte von Rechtsanwälten und anderen Berufsgeheimnisträgern durch ein entsprechendes Erhebungs- und Verwertungsverbot schützen, wie ich gerade ausgeführt habe. Ich habe nicht gesagt, dass es nicht geht. Vielmehr ist es unseres Erachtens unter Datenschutzgesichtspunkten nicht vertretbar, eine Art Datenbank für Berufsgeheimnisträger zusätzlich anzulegen und ihre Rufnummern bei allen TK-Anbietern zu hinterlegen. Abgeordnete sind durch die vorgesehenen Erhebungs- und Verwertungsverbote in besonderem Maße geschützt. Das gilt schon heute; ich hatte Ihnen entsprechende Beispiele genannt. Uns sind keinerlei Beschwerden bekannt, ganz im Gegenteil. Dieses Verfahren hat sich bewährt. Deshalb wollen wir daran festhalten.\n\nIch teile Ihre Auffassung nicht. Wir gewährleisten, dass die besonderen Schutzbedürfnisse der Berufsgeheimnisträger erfüllt werden. Das ist eine seit vielen Jahren und Jahrzehnten bewährte Methode in Deutschland. Dies entspricht der Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs. Die Richtlinie entsprach ihr nicht. Deswegen ist sie moniert worden. Aber unser Gesetzentwurf, den wir vorlegen werden, wird dem genügen.\"\n2936,carsten-schneider,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Mit dem Haushalt 2015, den die Regierung hier eingebracht hat, beginnt eine Zeitenwende. Es ist der erste Bundeshaushalt seit mehreren Jahrzehnten, mit dem der Versuch unternommen wird - ich hoffe, wir werden es auch schaffen -, die Neuverschuldung nicht nur zu reduzieren, sondern sie gänzlich auf null zu setzen. Das hat es seit 1969 nicht mehr gegeben.\n\nWir als Sozialdemokraten haben uns im Regierungsprogramm zur Bundestagswahl vorgenommen, genau dies zu erreichen. Wir haben 2009 in der Großen Koalition hier im Bundestag die Schuldenbremse mit beschlossen, und wir werden sie vorfristig, nämlich schon im Jahr 2015, erreichen. Das ist ein Quantensprung, auf den wir Sozialdemokraten stolz sind.\n\nDies wird von einer breiten Mehrheit im Deutschen Bundestag, von den Kollegen der Union und, wie ich gehört habe, auch von der Linkspartei und, wie ich vermute, grundsätzlich auch von den Grünen, getragen. Über den Weg dahin streiten wir.\n\nEs ist richtig, Kollege Bartsch, dass wir in der Steuerpolitik, gerade was die Verteilungsfrage betrifft, Unterschiede in der Koalition haben. Wir haben uns nicht auf alle Punkte einigen können, die Bestandteil unseres Regierungs- und Wahlprogramms waren. Das bleibt einer politischen Entscheidung im Anschluss an die nächste Bundestagswahl vorbehalten.\n\nTrotzdem haben wir die Wachstumskräfte, die in Deutschland derzeit die Konjunktur stützen und für die gute Entwicklung verantwortlich sind, nämlich die Binnennachfrage, extrem gestärkt. Das Wichtigste dabei ist die ab dem 1. Januar 2015 beginnende Einführung des gesetzlichen Mindestlohns. Er wird allein in meinem Heimatland Thüringen für über ein Drittel der Beschäftigten für die größte Lohnerhöhung sorgen, die diese Beschäftigten jemals erreicht haben. Das ist ein Fortschritt, auf den wir Sozialdemokraten stolz sind.\n\nAber nicht nur der Mindestlohn wird eine Stütze der Konjunktur sein und zu höheren Steuereinnahmen führen, sondern auch die Tarifabschlüsse. Nun weiß ich nicht, Kollege Bartsch, ob die von Ihnen genannten Zahlen inflationsbereinigt waren oder nicht. Wahrscheinlich waren sie inflationsbereinigt,\n\nwas die Steigerung betrifft. Nichtsdestotrotz sehen auch wir, ähnlich wie die Deutsche Bundesbank, Luft nach oben, was die Lohnentwicklung betrifft. Die Tarif-abschlüsse müssen in den nächsten Jahren höher werden, und der Anteil der Arbeitnehmer an der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Leistung muss gerechter ausfallen; das ist gar keine Frage.\n\nJa, wir haben auch eine Diskussion über die Zukunftsinvestitionen. Ich finde, völlig zu Recht; denn die Analyse, dass wir in weiten Teilen von der Substanz leben und die öffentliche, aber auch die private Investitionsbereitschaft - Stichwort „Kapitalstock der Unternehmen“ - schwach ist, ist nicht neu. Ich würde sie auch nicht infrage stellen. Ich glaube viel eher, dass sie richtig ist und dass wir darauf Antworten geben müssen.\n\nWir tun das in Teilen durch die Verabredung im Koalitionsvertrag, was die Investitionen im Bereich Verkehr betrifft - 5 Milliarden Euro mehr - und was den Bildungsbereich betrifft - 6 Milliarden Euro mehr; hinzu kommen 3 Milliarden Euro mehr für Forschungsausgaben. Das ist ein klarer Trend nach oben. Die Zukunftsausgaben werden verstetigt, aber das wird sicherlich nicht ausreichen.\n\nAus diesem Grund unterstütze ich grundsätzlich die Überlegungen sowohl des Bundeswirtschaftsministers als auch des Bundesfinanzministers, das enorme Sparkapital, das in Deutschland zur Verfügung steht, für Investitionen zu akquirieren, sei es in Unternehmen, sei es in die öffentliche Infrastruktur, also da, wo es um Nutzer-finanzierung geht. Ich halte die Diskussion über die Gründe, die 2008 in die Finanzkrise geführt haben, nämlich dass die Überschüsse, die wir hier erwirtschaftet haben, ins Ausland exportiert und nicht in Deutschland investiert wurden, für absolut überfällig.\n\nWir brauchen die hiesigen Unternehmensgewinne und die hiesige Sparquote für Investitionen in Deutschland, damit wir zukunftsfähig bleiben.\n\nWir wollen nicht wieder die Situation erleben, dass Lebensversicherungen, Banken und andere Kapitalanleger ihre hier erwirtschafteten Ersparnisse im Endeffekt im Ausland anlegen. Ich verweise auf die Geldverluste, die wir bei den amerikanischen Subprime-Papieren erlebt haben. Von daher, Herr Minister, sehe ich die Wiederbelebung des ABS-Marktes, also des Marktes für forderungsbesicherte Wertpapiere, kritisch.\n\nSicher ist es so, dass die mit Unternehmenskrediten besicherten Papiere nicht in dem Maße gehandelt worden sind wie andere. Nur, wer kontrolliert das? Ich glaube, dass wir die Chance viel besser nutzen müssen, die Bereinigung des Bankensektors im Verlaufe dieses Jahres durch eine unabhängige, qualifizierte Prüfung durch die europäische Bankenaufsicht, also durch die Europäische Zentralbank, vornehmen zu lassen. Wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass die sogenannten Zombiebanken, die nur noch durch das billige Geld der EZB am Leben erhalten werden, aber nicht mehr dafür sorgen, dass neu gegründete Unternehmen, die Innovationen vornehmen, finanziert werden, vom Markt verschwinden. Das heißt für Deutschland im Zweifel: kritische Eingriffe. Sie sind aber notwendig, um den Steuerzahler langfristig vor weiteren Schäden zu bewahren und außerdem um zusätzliche Wachstumsimpulse zu schaffen.\n\nHerr Minister, ich finde, Sie haben zu Recht auf die Initiative zur Bekämpfung der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit hingewiesen. Es bringt nichts, große Summen - hier 6 Milliarden Euro - in den Raum zu stellen, die im Endeffekt nicht abfließen. Ja, wir als Exportnation - heute hieß es, dass wir im letzten Monat Exporte im Wert von über 100 Milliarden Euro getätigt haben; das zeigt, dass wir immer noch eine Exportnation sind; wir sollten also den Teufel nicht an die Wand malen - haben ein großes Interesse daran, dass der europäische Binnenmarkt funktioniert, dass unsere Partner in Frankreich und Italien über eine stabile Wirtschaftsentwicklung verfügen können. Deswegen bin ich sehr dafür, dass wir die vorgegebenen Spielräume innerhalb des Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspaktes nutzen. Das heißt: Strukturreformen und im Gegenzug mehr Zeit beim Defizitabbau. Das Gleiche haben wir in Deutschland in den Jahren 2005 und 2006 in der Großen Koalition gemacht, und zwar erfolgreich. Ich erinnere daran, dass wir damals das höchste Haushaltsdefizit hatten, und dagegen sind wir mit wirklichen Strukturreformen angegangen.\n\nMit Herrn Renzi und Herrn Hollande haben wir es mit einem Ministerpräsidenten und einem Präsidenten zu tun, die solche Reformen - vielleicht zu spät - in Angriff nehmen. Wir als Deutscher Bundestag haben das größte Interesse daran, dass die beiden Länder Italien und Frankreich stabil bleiben, dass sie wirtschaftlich vorankommen und dass dort keine Extremisten an die Macht kommen. Deswegen sollten wir sie auf ihrem Weg uneingeschränkt unterstützen.\n\nHerr Minister, meine Damen und Herren, ich will auf einen letzten Punkt eingehen: auf die Besteuerung des Finanzsektors. Die heutige Haushaltsdebatte ist in diesem Zusammenhang bereits ein Anfang. Bisher muss man sagen: Da tut sich nichts. Wir werden das Bankeninsolvenzrecht mit der Schaffung der Europäischen Bankenunion ändern. Das wird uns im Herbst dieses Jahres hier im Deutschen Bundestag beschäftigen. Das Ganze ist ein richtiger Schritt. Aber klar ist auch, dass die Kosten der Krise, die auch wir in Deutschland zu schultern haben, vom Steuerzahler getragen wurden. Der Finanzsektor hat dazu keinen Beitrag geleistet. Im Gegenteil: Die zukünftig auszugestaltende Bankenabgabe - sie wird zu leisten sein, wenn auf europäischer Ebene eine Bank pleitegeht - bedeutet, dass der Finanzsektor die Kosten dafür tragen muss.\n\nIn Deutschland ist diese Abgabe nicht steuerabzugsfähig, in anderen europäischen Ländern schon. Ähnlich ist es mit der Finanztransaktionsteuer. Ihre Einführung war die Voraussetzung für die Zustimmung der SPD und auch der Grünen zum europäischen Fiskalpakt. Ich erwarte diesbezüglich substanzielle Fortschritte auf europäischer Ebene, damit wir diejenigen, die die Krise mit verursacht haben, tatsächlich an den Kosten ihrer Bewältigung beteiligen.\n\nDas ist eine Frage der öffentlichen Legitimation von Demokratie.\n\nIch sage das auch in Richtung Frankreich und Italien; beide Länder spielen in diesem Bereich eine Schlüsselrolle. Diese Länder dürfen nicht nur fordern, dass wir ihnen beim Defizitabbau und bei der Wachstumsstimulierung helfen, sondern sie müssen auch die Lobbyisten zur Seite drängen und gemeinsam mit uns dafür sorgen, dass wir eine gerechtere Besteuerung des Finanzsektors in Deutschland zustande bringen.\n\nSie haben dazu, Herr Minister, die volle Unterstützung des Deutschen Bundestages. Wenn wir das bis Ende des Jahres nicht schaffen sollten, werden wir sehr wohl überlegen müssen, ob wir dazu nicht national Regelungen treffen und vorangehen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n870,jan-marco-luczak,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Frau Lay, Sie haben recht: Auf dem Mietwohnungsmarkt muss etwas passieren; aber - das kann ich Ihnen vorab schon einmal sagen - das, was Sie vorschlagen, das wird jedenfalls nicht passieren.\n\nMan muss sich nur einmal ansehen, welche Wortwahl die Linke in ihren Anträgen bei der Aufstellung ihrer Forderungen benutzt. Da heißt es: „Mieterhöhungsstopp jetzt“, „Marktmacht brechen“, „Wohnen in der City [wird] zum elitären Statussymbol“. Meine Damen und Herren, das sind die Schlagworte, die die Linke in ihren Anträgen verwendet.\n\nIch muss sagen: Angesichts dieser Wortwahl - sie findet sich eigentlich ständig in den Anträgen der Linken - kann ich mich des Eindrucks nicht erwehren: Ihnen geht es nicht um die Sache, sondern allein um populistische Forderungen und um Stimmungsmache. Damit werden Sie den Menschen in diesem Lande nicht gerecht, meine Damen und Herren von den Linken.\n\nEs verwundert ja auch schon, dass Sie gerade jetzt mit Ihren Vorschlägen um die Ecke kommen. Sie wissen doch ganz genau, dass wir in wenigen Wochen einen ersten Referentenentwurf bekommen werden, in dem wir uns dezidiert und explizit mit diesen Forderungen zum Mietrecht auseinandersetzen werden. Auch das zeigt wieder einmal, dass es Ihnen nicht um die Sache geht, sondern dass Sie an dieser Stelle Krawall machen wollen.\n\nIch rate Ihnen: Warten Sie den Entwurf ab, und setzen Sie sich konstruktiv damit auseinander. Dann können wir ja vielleicht über das eine oder andere miteinander reden.\n\nAber was machen Sie stattdessen? Sie legen uns hier heute - das kann ich gar nicht anders formulieren - ein Sammelsurium an Unsinn vor.\n\nSie lassen in Ihren Forderungen jegliche Kenntnis von wirtschaftlichen Zusammenhängen vermissen. Sie werfen Zerrbilder an die Wand und machen vor allen Dingen eines deutlich: Sie sind immer noch nicht in der sozialen Marktwirtschaft angekommen, sondern leben noch immer in Ihren sozialistischen Fantasien.\n\nSie sprechen in Ihren Anträgen zum Beispiel von der „monopolartigen Dominanz des Privateigentums“\n\nund von Eigentümern, die die angespannte Marktsituation „hemmungslos“ ausnutzen. Sogar das Wirtschaftsstrafgesetz wollen Sie jetzt für Eigentümer verschärfen. Bei Ihnen ist immer noch der Eigentümer der Böse. Begreifen Sie doch endlich einmal: Eigentum ist nichts Schlechtes, sondern die Grundlage unserer gesellschaftlichen und auch verfassungsrechtlichen Ordnung.\n\nIch muss sagen, ich finde es sehr schade, dass Sie sich in dieser Art und Weise mit der Mietenproblematik auseinandersetzen; denn das Thema ist wirklich sehr wichtig.\n\nIch finde, am Anfang einer solchen Diskussion muss immer eine nüchterne Bestandsaufnahme stehen. Ja, es gibt eine dynamische Mietpreisentwicklung. Ja, es gibt auch Menschen, die sich ihre Wohnung nach einer Mieterhöhung nicht mehr leisten können. Aber zur Wahrheit gehört doch auch, dass diese Phänomene nicht überall zu finden sind. Vielmehr ist das doch vor allen Dingen ein Problem von Ballungszentren, von großen Städten und von Universitätsstädten.\n\nAuf dem platten Land, in weiten Teilen der neuen Bundesländer und in vielen anderen strukturschwachen Regionen, werden Sie oftmals genau die umgekehrte Situation finden: Dort gibt es flächendeckenden Leerstand und Vermieter, die überhaupt nichts mehr in ihre Wohnungen investieren.\n\nHerrscht also einerseits Wohnungsknappheit, werden an anderen Orten Hunderte Wohnungen abgerissen. Insofern: Der Wohnungsmarkt ist sehr differenziert, und deswegen müssen die Antworten auf diese Fragen auch sehr differenziert ausfallen, und das vermisse ich in Ihren Vorschlägen hier völlig.\n\nJa, sehr gerne.\n\nLiebe Frau Lay, das erkläre ich Ihnen sehr gerne.\n\nEs geht darum, dass wir nicht alles über einen Kamm scheren,\n\nsondern dass sich die Differenziertheit des Wohnungsmarktes tatsächlich auch in den Lösungsvorschlägen niederschlägt. Es macht eben schon einen Unterschied, ob man sich mit der Situation in großen Städten oder in Ballungszentren oder mit der Situation auf dem platten Land oder in strukturschwachen Regionen auseinandersetzt. Dort müssen wir jeweils andere Lösungen finden.\n\nDeswegen haben wir ja zum Beispiel - das haben Sie gerade erwähnt - in unserem Mietrechtsreformgesetz der letzten Legislaturperiode in Bezug auf die Kappungsgrenzen, also die Möglichkeit, Mieterhöhungen innerhalb eines laufenden Mietvertrages vorzunehmen, gesagt: Wir geben den Ländern die Möglichkeit, zu entscheiden, wo sie das machen wollen, weil die Länder natürlich am besten wissen, wo Wohnungsknappheit herrscht. - Es macht doch keinen Sinn, alles über einen Kamm zu scheren und gleichzumachen. Ich weiß, das ist immer Ihre Politik, aber das führt an dieser Stelle nicht weiter, sondern wir müssen uns zielgenaue Regelungen überlegen. Das haben wir in der letzten Legislaturperiode getan, und das werden wir in dieser Legislaturperiode genauso machen, Frau Lay.\n\nIch will in Bezug auf steigende Mieten aber auch sagen: Für die Union und auch für mich persönlich ist es ganz wichtig, dass die Menschen - gerade junge Familien - nicht aus ihren angestammten Kiezen verdrängt werden dürfen. Die soziale Ausgewogenheit des Mietrechts war und ist für die Union immer eine Selbstverständlichkeit. Um uns daran zu erinnern, brauchen wir Sie von den Linken nicht.\n\nDie entscheidende Frage ist nur: Wie können wir Mietsteigerungen nachhaltig dämpfen? Sie schlagen uns - das haben Sie ja gerade gesagt - ein ganzes Maßnahmenbündel vor: Sie schlagen vor, dass Mieterhöhungen ohne Wohnwertverbesserung nur noch zum Ausgleich der Inflation zulässig sind.\n\nBei der Wiedervermietung einer Wohnung wollen Sie es Eigentümern grundsätzlich verbieten, die Miete zu erhöhen.\n\nMieterhöhungen ohne adäquate Gegenleistung sollen zukünftig sogar strafbar werden.\n\nDiese Vorschläge - es gibt noch viel mehr, die ich hier erwähnen könnte - zielen im Kern darauf ab, privates Eigentum, private Investitionen und letztlich die soziale Marktwirtschaft auf dem Wohnungsmarkt abzuschaffen und durch ein staatlich reguliertes Mietensystem und staatlichen Wohnungsbau zu ersetzen. Da sage ich ganz klar: Das wird es mit der Union nicht geben.\n\nFür uns ist völlig klar und eindeutig: Das beste Mittel gegen steigende Mieten ist immer noch der Bau von mehr Wohnungen;\n\ndenn das ist letztlich die Ursache für steigende Mieten: Es gibt schlechterdings zu wenig Angebote auf dem Wohnungsmarkt. Natürlich, auch hier ist der Staat in der Pflicht.\n\nEr muss den Wohnungsbau fördern. Das tun wir umfangreich mit diversen Förderprogrammen, zum Beispiel mit den Mitteln des Bundes für die soziale Wohnraumförderung. Hier stellt der Bund den Ländern immerhin bis zum Jahre 2019 jedes Jahr über eine halbe Milliarde Euro zur Verfügung.\n\nAn dieser Stelle sage ich: Wir als Bund haben die klare Erwartung, dass diese Mittel zweckentsprechend eingesetzt werden und wirklich für den Bau neuer Wohnungen verwandt werden, nicht für andere Sachen. Da können Sie sich einmal an die eigene Nase fassen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Linken. Sie haben in der Zeit Ihrer Regierungsverantwortung hier in Berlin mit diesem Geld über zehn Jahre lang alte Schulden getilgt. Von diesem Geld ist keine einzige neue Wohnung gebaut worden. Also: Fassen Sie sich mal an Ihre eigene Nase!\n\nKlar ist jedenfalls: Angesichts knapper Haushaltskassen werden wir das Problem nicht allein über staatliche Förderung lösen können; vielmehr sind wir dabei zwingend auf private Investitionen angewiesen. Hier geht es auch gar nicht so sehr um die großen Finanzinvestoren, auf die Sie immer so gerne schimpfen, sondern es geht vor allen Dingen um die privaten Kleinvermieter: Über 60 Prozent der Wohnungen in unserem Lande werden von privaten Eigentümern angeboten. Das ist etwa der Handwerksmeister, der vielleicht Mitte 50 ist, der sich eine Wohnung oder zwei Wohnungen als Altersvorsorge angeschafft hat und diese dann vermietet. Solche Menschen brauchen wir, wenn es auch zukünftig genügend Wohnraum in unserem Land geben soll.\n\nDiese Menschen investieren natürlich aber nur dann in den Wohnungsneubau, wenn sich das für sie irgendwie rechnet.\n\nMan muss wissen: Als Anlageform ist die Vermietung von Wohnungen - bei allen Unterschieden, die es da gibt - im Kern relativ renditeschwach. Die Durchschnittsrendite bei diesen privaten Kleinvermietern - noch einmal: sie bieten 60 Prozent der Wohnungen in unserem Land an - liegt bei gerade einmal 2,14 Prozent.\n\nWas würde nun passieren, wenn wir Ihre Vorschläge umsetzten? Dieser Handwerksmeister würde sich sehr genau überlegen, ob er sein Geld dann nicht lieber aufs Tagesgeldkonto legt, statt sich mit Mietnomaden und Ähnlichem herumzuärgern.\n\nUnter dem Strich würde es weniger Investitionen in den Wohnungsneubau geben. Weniger Investitionen bedeuten aber weniger Wohnungen, und weniger Wohnungen bedeuten weniger Angebote; weniger Angebote bedeuten steigende Mieten - so sind die Zusammenhänge in der Marktwirtschaft.\n\nDas, was Sie uns als Linke vorschlagen, würde die Mieten also nicht senken. Diese Vorschläge würden umgekehrt dazu führen, dass die Situation mittelfristig noch viel schlechter wird. Ich sage Ihnen eines: Die Mieterinnen und Mieter in unserem Land werden sich bei Ihnen bedanken.\n\nEs geht noch weiter - ich glaube, darin sind wir uns alle einig -: Neben dem Ziel, bezahlbaren Wohnraum zu schaffen, wollen wir auch Wohnraum haben, der energetischen Ansprüchen genügt und den Anforderungen einer älter werdenden Gesellschaft gerecht wird. Beides ist mit Blick auf die demografische Entwicklung und auf unser gesamtgesellschaftliches Ziel des Klimaschutzes völlig unabdingbar.\n\nNatürlich, auch hier gilt wieder: Der Staat muss seiner Verantwortung gerecht werden. Insofern haben wir im Koalitionsvertrag - das ist gut und richtig - vorgesehen, zum Beispiel die Mittel der KfW-Programme zur energetischen Sanierung aufzustocken und das Verfahren deutlich zu vereinfachen. Aber trotzdem: Öffentliche Förderung bzw. staatliche Mittel sind begrenzt. Umso mehr brauchen wir Rahmenbedingungen, die Eigentümer nicht von Investitionen abhalten. Wir brauchen auch bei der energetischen Sanierung und beim altersgerechten Umbau privates Kapital, wenn wir unsere Ziele erreichen wollen.\n\nWenn wir nun die Modernisierungsumlage, so wie Sie das vorschlagen, auf 5 Prozent reduzieren und diese dann letztlich sogar abschaffen, dann frage ich Sie: Welcher Eigentümer soll zukünftig noch investieren? Welcher Eigentümer soll denn noch Geld in die Hand nehmen, wenn sich das für ihn überhaupt nicht mehr rechnet? Niemand wird das mehr machen. Die Folge wäre, dass privater Wohnraum dem Verfall ausgesetzt wäre. Die Folge wäre, dass weniger Wohnungen energetisch modernisiert und altersgerecht umgebaut würden. Wozu das führt, konnte man bis 1990 in der damaligen DDR beobachten. Ich weiß nicht, wie es Ihnen geht, aber ich will zu der Situation nicht zurück, die wir da gehabt haben.\n\nRichtig ist, dass wir genau das Gegenteil machen müssen: Wir müssen Rahmenbedingungen dafür schaffen, dass mehr in den Wohnungsneubau und in die Modernisierung des Wohnungsbestandes investiert wird. Deswegen bedarf es für Investitionen wirtschaftlicher Anreize und nicht zusätzlicher Hürden.\n\nAll das, was ich gerade ausgeführt habe, gilt natürlich auch für die Vorschläge, die unser Justizminister Maas in wenigen Wochen vorlegen wird. Deswegen sage ich an dieser Stelle ganz klar: Ja, die Mietpreisbremse aus dem Koalitionsvertrag wird kommen, weil sie ein Instrument ist, um kurzfristig gegen steigende Mieten vorzugehen. Aber klar muss auch sein, dass die Mietpreisbremse nur bei den Symptomen ansetzt. Die Ursache für steigende Mieten, nämlich zu wenig Wohnungsneubau, wird damit in keiner Weise beseitigt, im Gegenteil: Mit der Mietpreisbremse werden die Rahmenbedingungen für Eigentümer, in Wohnungsneubau zu investieren, sogar verschlechtert. Deswegen sage ich ganz klar: Wir müssen die Mietpreisbremse so ausgestalten, dass sie nicht zu einer Investitionsbremse wird, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDas Gleiche gilt auch für die geplanten Änderungen bei der Modernisierungsumlage. Hier müssen wir zum Beispiel sehr genau im Blick behalten, ob das, was wir geplant haben, nämlich die Umlagefähigkeit bis zum Zeitpunkt der Amortisation zu befristen, richtig ist. Ich persönlich halte das für eine Regelung, die in der Praxis kaum umsetzbar sein wird. Ich glaube, sie wird auch in gewisser Weise einen Systembruch darstellen, weil mit einer Modernisierung immer eine Erhöhung des Wohnwertes einhergeht. Dieser Wohnwert bleibt schließlich bestehen, wenn die Modernisierungskosten sich amortisiert haben.\n\nIm Kern würde diese Regelung also bedeuten, dass ein Mieter die Wohnwertsteigerung nach Erreichen der Amortisation zum Nulltarif hätte. Damit wäre, glaube ich, das Äquivalenzprinzip in einem sehr wesentlichen Punkt ausgehebelt. Deswegen müssen wir uns sehr genau überlegen, ob das der richtige Weg ist.\n\nZum Schluss, meine Damen und Herren von den Linken: Sie sehen also: Die Wohnungsmarktpolitik ist sehr komplex und vielschichtig. Ihre einfachen und populistischen Parolen leisten überhaupt keinen Beitrag dazu, hier zu angemessenen Lösungen zu kommen. Deswegen werden wir Ihre Anträge ablehnen.\"\n2431,ekin-deligoz,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Mir zeigt die heutige Debatte eines: Was die Zukunftsgestaltung des Haushalts angeht, kann die Große Koalition leider nur das ganz kleine Karo.\n\nDer Kollege Krüger müsste sich hier nicht - Zitat - auf die letzten mutigen Reformen von Schröder in der rot-grünen Zeit berufen. Sie sind Teil der Großen Koalition, Sie sind in Verantwortung und könnten gestalten. Stattdessen verwalten Sie nur den Status quo.\n\nSchlimmer noch: Sie haben noch nicht einmal den Anspruch, für die Zukunft zu gestalten.\n\nDabei könnten die Rahmenbedingungen gar nicht besser sein als jetzt: eine brummende Konjunktur, noch sind die sozialen Sicherungssysteme stabil, gute Steuereinnahmen und historisch niedrige Zinsen. Das sind die Bedingungen, die eigentlich dazu prädestinieren, die Dinge in die Hand zu nehmen und Reformen durchzuführen. Vor allem verpflichten sie, heute schon an morgen, an den demografischen Wandel und die Entwicklung dieses Landes zu denken. Stattdessen rechnen Sie sich in Nacht-und-Nebel-Aktionen im Haushaltsausschuss so lange alles so zurecht, bis es irgendwie passt, damit Sie keine strukturellen Veränderungen herbeiführen müssen.\n\nIn einem irren Sie sich aber. Sie glauben, das alles sei auf immer und ewig festgeschrieben. Ist es aber nicht! Das alles ist sehr fragil. Sie bauen den Haushalt und auch Ihre Konsolidierung auf Sand. Sie brauchen die strukturellen Reformen. Sie müssen - wir Grünen machen Ihnen dafür Vorschläge - eine ehrliche Ausgabenkritik durchführen. Wir brauchen den systematischen Subventionsabbau, und wir brauchen auch die Investitionen in Infrastruktur. Leider gehen Sie all diese Sachen nicht an, weil Sie hier nicht zuletzt die Debatte in Ihren eigenen Reihen fürchten. Da müssen Sie ehrlich zu sich selbst sein.\n\nIch will Ihnen ein paar Beispiele nennen. Schauen Sie sich den Bereich Bildung an. Sie haben groß herumgetönt - 6 plus 3 Milliarden Euro -, wie viel Geld in diesem Bereich investiert wird.\n\nEs gibt keine Rede, in der nicht erwähnt wird, wie wichtig diese Investitionen sind.\n\nAber was machen Sie? Sie verschieben es, Sie verschleiern, Sie reden sich das gegenseitig irgendwie glatt, und es passiert erst einmal nichts.\n\nJenseits dessen, dass wir noch einmal darüber reden müssen, ob das Geld überhaupt ausreichen wird, passiert nichts, vor allem nichts Verbindliches.\n\nHerr Schäuble, Sie reden davon, wie wichtig die FuE\u001eMittel, also die Mittel für Forschung und Entwicklung, in diesem Lande sind. Wir stimmen Ihnen da absolut zu. Da sind wir komplett bei Ihnen. Die Zukunft der Wissenschaftspakte in diesem Lande aber ist komplett offen. Die Universitäten warten insbesondere im Hinblick auf Planbarkeit geradezu darauf, dass sie irgendwelche Antworten bzw. Zusagen von Ihnen bekommen. Eine Antwort darauf von Ihnen gibt es jedoch noch nicht. Allein das zu beschwören, bringt dieses Land nicht weiter.\n\nZur BAföG-Reform: Viele reden nicht darüber. Jetzt zieht die zweite Generation von Studierenden an uns vorbei, die immer noch darauf wartet, dass es irgendwelche Reformen und Strukturveränderungen in diesem Bereich gibt. Von Ihnen kommt da - außer Verschiebebahnhöfen - nichts.\n\nSchlimmer noch! Der demografische Wandel ist für dieses Land wahrscheinlich die größte Herausforderung überhaupt. Auch darin haben Sie recht, auch darin stimmen wir zu. Was aber ist Ihre Antwort darauf? Sie greifen in die Sozialkassen und konsolidieren Ihren Haushalt auf Kosten der Beitragsmittel bzw. durch die Leistungen der Beitragszahler. Der Gesundheitsfonds und die Rentenkasse werden komplett leergemacht. Die Bundesagentur für Arbeit liegt schon an der kurzen Leine. Sie könnte inzwischen noch nicht einmal bei der kleinsten Krise reagieren, um den Arbeitsmarkt wieder zu stabilisieren. Sie machen das ohne Rücksicht auf alle Erkenntnisse, die wir über den demografischen Wandel und die Kosten haben, die noch auf uns zukommen werden.\n\nEine nachhaltige Politik der Verantwortung, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, schaut anders aus. Mit diesem Haushalt können Sie das noch nicht darlegen. Aber der nächste Haushalt kommt bestimmt, und mir fehlt das Vertrauen in die Große Koalition, dass Sie das irgendwie hinkriegen.\"\n3035,jurgen-klimke,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Die von der Opposition formulierte Kritik - manchmal waren die Reden ja auch mit etwas Lob versehen - kann ich beim besten Willen nicht nachvollziehen.\n\nNoch vor einem knappen Jahr haben Sie die Arbeit des Ministers hier sehr wohlwollend kommentiert, und ich sehe überhaupt keinen Bereich, den der Minister vernachlässigt hätte. Im Gegenteil: Er greift mit frischen politischen, wirtschaftlichen, sozialen und ökologischen Ansätzen die drängenden Fragen dieser Zeit auf, und das vor allen Dingen ohne Dogmen. Das ist das Entscheidende.\n\nFrau Hajduk, die Arbeit des Ministers ist keine heiße Luft. Ihre Kritik ist heiße Luft; das ist das Entscheidende.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, lassen Sie mich noch einiges zu den wirklich grundsätzlichen Problemen sagen. Wir erleben derzeit eine Gleichzeitigkeit von bewaffneten Konflikten in dieser Welt, die wir alle in der jüngsten Vergangenheit nicht erlebt, nicht gekannt haben. Das gilt insbesondere für die Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit in Syrien und im Irak, verübt von der terroristischen Vereinigung „Islamischer Staat“. Sie erschüttern uns durch ihre Brutalität. Die Folge ist ein sprunghafter -Anstieg der Anzahl der Menschen auf der Flucht. Schnelle humanitäre Hilfe und eine starke, auch militärische Antwort auf die Gräueltaten des IS-Terrorismus erfordern große Anstrengungen von uns.\n\nLaut UNHCR-Report gibt es seit dem letzten Jahr erstmals mehr als 50 Millionen Flüchtlinge, Asyl-suchende und Binnenvertriebene weltweit. So zählen wir in den genannten Ländern Syrien und Irak circa 7,5 Millionen Binnenflüchtlinge, die vor Ort mit elementaren Hilfsgütern unterstützt werden müssen. Von Flüchtlingsströmen sind auch andere Krisenregionen betroffen. Die Nachbarstaaten, vor allen Dingen Libanon und Jordanien, haben die Grenzen ihrer Leistungsfähigkeit erreicht.\n\nAus diesem Grunde bin ich Minister Müller außerordentlich dankbar, dass er im Rahmen von Sofortmaßnahmen in den aktuellen Krisenregionen im Irak und in Gaza zusätzlich jeweils 20 Millionen Euro bereitgestellt hat. Auch die Entscheidung von Innenminister Thomas de Maizière und seinen Länderkollegen, das bisherige Aufnahmekontingent für syrische Bürgerkriegsflüchtlinge um 10 000 auf nunmehr 20 000 zu erweitern, begrüßen wir ausdrücklich.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich bin davon überzeugt, dass unsere wirtschaftliche Entwicklungszusammen-arbeit nur dann erfolgreich und nachhaltig wirken kann, wenn wir Fluchtursachen weltweit gezielter bekämpfen. Gerade in Regionen mit fragilen Staaten stehen wir vor besonders großen Herausforderungen. Betroffene Staaten - ich nenne beispielhaft die EZ-Partner Pakistan, Südsudan und Nigeria - stellen aus unterschiedlichen Gründen nicht nur ein regionales, sondern auch ein globales Sicherheitsrisiko dar.\n\nDie internationale Staatengemeinschaft muss dort mit entwicklungspolitischen Instrumenten auf eine Verbesserung der Lage hinwirken. Das ist nicht nur unsere Aufgabe, die Aufgabe der EU oder der westlichen Länder, sondern es ist meines Erachtens auch eine wichtige Funktion der Vereinten Nationen, in diesem Bereich tätig zu sein. Deshalb unterstützen wir diese Institution im kommenden Jahr - auch das muss man ansprechen, wenn wir über Entwicklungszusammenarbeit reden - mit 140 Millionen Euro Barmitteln und 128 Millionen Euro an Verpflichtungsermächtigungen bei ihrer Arbeit. Das ist in beiden Fällen ein finanzieller Aufwuchs und aus meiner Sicht ein essenzieller Beitrag zur Bekämpfung von Armut, Hunger und Vertreibung in der Welt.\n\nWie meine kurze Einführung zeigt, haben aktuelle politische Entwicklungen großen Einfluss auf die Haushaltsplanungen. Die Herausforderung besteht darin, -darauf zu reagieren, und das tun wir. Das ist das Entscheidende, auch wenn die Kritik am Haushalt zum Teil durchaus nachvollziehbar ist. Die Not der Menschen im Nahen Osten, aber auch in der Ostukraine und anderen Konfliktregionen stellt die finanzielle Ausrichtung deutscher Entwicklungspolitik vor neue Aufgaben. Dabei geht es nicht darum, verschiedene Aufgabengebiete gegeneinander auszuspielen, sondern darum, langfristige Antworten auf drängende Fragen zu geben.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, lassen Sie mich ein anderes Thema ansprechen, das Sie sicherlich auch kennen. In Gesprächen mit den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern werden wir immer wieder gefragt, wie finanzielle Mittel in der EZ eingesetzt werden und ob das Geld auch vor Ort ankommt. An dieser Stelle verweise ich gerne auf das noch junge Deutsche Evaluierungsinstitut der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, kurz: DEval. Das Institut unterstützt das BMZ, unsere Durchführungsorganisationen wie die GIZ und die KfW sowie nichtstaatliche Einrichtungen dabei, ihre Entwicklungsprojekte auszuwerten und die Ergebnisse vor allen Dingen auch für den Bürger transparenter darzustellen.\n\nWas erreichen wir damit? Folgeprojekte können auf einen Erfahrungspool zurückgreifen, und finanzielle oder personelle Mittel für zukünftige Projekte können noch gezielter eingesetzt werden. Damit ist das DEval ein gutes Beispiel, um die effizientere Herangehensweise deutscher Entwicklungspolitik unseren Bürgerinnen und Bürgern aufzuzeigen. Es wird nicht nur die -Umsetzung von Maßnahmen evaluiert, sondern damit auch intensiver geprüft, ob der erhoffte entwicklungs-politische Nutzen eingetreten ist und die eingesetzten Mittel einen Beitrag zur Verbesserung der Situation vor Ort geleistet haben. Aus diesem Grunde begrüße ich ausdrücklich den Aufwuchs im Haushaltsjahr 2015 um 378 000 Euro Barmittel auf 7,4 Millionen Euro für das DEval.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir debattieren hier gemeinsam den Einzelplan 23. Die Mittel im Haushalt des BMZ wurden nicht zurückgefahren; der Haushalt bleibt stabil. Aber das 0,7-Prozent-Ziel ist sicherlich mit einem großen Fragezeichen zu sehen. Wir geben es aber nicht auf - das müssen wir festhalten -,\n\nund wir arbeiten unter dieser Regierung daran, vernünftig voranzukommen. Unter anderen Regierungen war es im Übrigen sehr viel schlechter.\n\nDen Kritikern sei an dieser Stelle einmal mehr der Blick auf die Entwicklung des BMZ-Haushaltes nahe-gelegt. Während im Jahr 2005 für die Entwicklungs-zusammenarbeit weniger als 4 Milliarden Euro zur Verfügung gestanden haben, haben wir heute ein Volumen von knapp 6,5 Milliarden Euro. Das ist ein großer Schritt nach oben, den wir trotz der Euro-Krise und der notwendigen Konsolidierung des Haushaltes für zukünftige Generationen gegangen sind.\n\nIch darf auf einen weiteren Punkt eingehen. Den messbaren Erfolg in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit steigern wir nur im Einklang mit anderen Ressorts und zivilen Akteuren. Ich bekräftige ganz ausdrücklich das Bekenntnis der CDU/CSU zu einer verstärkten Zusammenarbeit mit der Wirtschaft gerade im Entwicklungs-bereich. Um die wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit mit Entwicklungs- und Schwellenländern zu stärken, ist mir in diesem Kontext die Weiterentwicklung von Rohstoffpartnerschaften ein wichtiges Anliegen. Hier müssen wir ideologische Ängste in unserem Land abbauen, dass solche Partnerschaften ausschließlich zur Ausbeutung in den Zielländern führen. Dies gelingt insbesondere durch mehr Transparenz. Rohstoffeinnahmen können, wenn sie richtig verwaltet werden, in den Entwicklungsländern zur Wohlstandsentwicklung beitragen; das stellen wir -sicher. Zudem müssen alle betroffenen Akteure gehört werden. Es gibt aber keinen Grund, mit Schaum vor dem Mund die Weiterentwicklung solcher Projekte zu bekämpfen. Maßgeblich für den Erfolg sind gute Regierungsführung, ein verantwortlicher Umgang mit den Steuereinnahmen und begleitende Antikorruptionsmaßnahmen in den Herkunftsländern.\n\nWir stellen fest: Die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit ist auf dem richtigen Weg. Minister Müller hat mit diesem Haushaltsentwurf erneut unter Beweis gestellt, dass er auf aktuelle Entwicklungen reagiert und dabei nicht den Gesamtkontext aus den Augen verliert. Wir werden ihn dabei tatkräftig unterstützen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n2903,marcus-held,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr verehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen!\n\nDie Bundesregierung setzt mit ihrem Gesetzentwurf ein deutliches Zeichen zur Bekämpfung von Zahlungsverzug im Geschäftsverkehr. Schlechter Zahlungsmoral und unverhältnismäßig langen Zahlungsfristen wird so künftig ein wirksamer Riegel vorgeschoben.\n\nDies ist nicht nur meine Meinung, dies ist nicht nur Meinung der SPD-Fraktion; dieses Zitat stammt von Holger Schwannecke, dem Generalsekretär des Zentralverbandes des Deutschen Handwerks.\n\nAber nicht nur das Handwerk in Deutschland bewertet den heutigen Gesetzentwurf positiv. Die heutige Entscheidung ist ein wichtiges Signal für den Mittelstand, mit dem wir grundsätzlich vor unverhältnismäßig langen Zahlungsfristen schützen, dafür sorgen, dass mittelständische Betriebe nicht zu lange auf ihr Geld warten müssen - sowohl von öffentlichen wie auch von privaten Vertragspartnern -, und sicherstellen, dass allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen nicht mehr einfach von einem großen Auftraggeber vorgegeben werden können.\n\nWarum ist es so wichtig, dass sich die Zahlungsdauer verkürzt? Weil Unternehmen des Handwerks und des Mittelstandes in aller Regel in Vorleistung treten, weil sie Material bestellen, weil sie die Aufträge vorbereiten und weil sie dann über einen längeren Zeitraum das Werk ausfertigen. Unternehmen des Handwerks und des Mittelstandes leiden aus diesem Grunde häufig unter den finanziellen Folgen ausbleibender Zahlungen.\n\nWir sorgen mit dem heutigen Beschluss dafür, dass dem ein Ende gesetzt wird.\n\nDie Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer sollen anständige Löhne erhalten; das haben wir gestern mit dem Gesetz zum Mindestlohn beschlossen. Aber auch die Unternehmen sollen eine faire Chance haben, ihre Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer ordentlich und vor allem pünktlich zu bezahlen. Das unterstützen wir mit dem heutigen Gesetzentwurf.\n\nWir unterstützen mit diesem Gesetz auch die positive Entwicklung in Deutschland, dass Unternehmensinsolvenzen weiter zurückgehen, und steigern die Liquidität in den Unternehmen. Und wir unterstützen den Mittelstand und das Handwerk, weil hier rund 15,7 Millionen Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer in Deutschland beschäftigt sind. Das sind fast 60 Prozent aller sozialversicherungspflichtigen Beschäftigten. Für diese Menschen, meine Damen und Herren, schaffen wir mit dem heutigen Gesetz mehr Sicherheit.\n\nWir als SPD machen damit deutlich: Wir stehen an der Seite des Mittelstands. Wir stehen an der Seite der Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer in Deutschland. Wir sind dafür, dass Innovation und soziale Gerechtigkeit auch in Zukunft in Deutschland im Mittelpunkt stehen. Das erreichen wir mit dem Gesetz zum gesetzlichen Mindestlohn, das wir in dieser Woche beschlossen haben, und jetzt mit der Verabschiedung des Gesetzes zum Zahlungsverzug im Geschäftsverkehr.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3206,norbert-barthle,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Ich glaube, diese heutige Debatte zur europäischen Bankenunion ist eine gute Gelegenheit - das zeigen die Reden der Vorredner -, um uns noch einmal zu vergewissern, wo wir in Europa eigentlich stehen; denn gerade die jüngsten Debatten und auch die Auseinandersetzung zwischen Lothar Binding und Sahra Wagenknecht zeigen doch, dass es immer noch Euro-Skeptiker gibt, die versuchen, mit dieser Euro-Skepsis am linken oder rechten Rand des Parteienspektrums Stimmen zu fischen.\n\nZu beobachten, ob sich beide irgendwo treffen, ist schon ein spannendes Momentum.\n\nWenn man sich die Situation vor Augen führt, muss man doch feststellen: Deutschland steht gut da. Auch Europa steht deutlich besser da, als es noch vor zwei Jahren von vielen vermutet wurde. Es ist noch nicht so lange her, da wurde uns von ernst zu nehmenden Ökonomen vorhergesagt, dass es keine zwei oder drei Jahre mehr dauern würde, bis der Euro weg sei, zerbröselt und als unsere gemeinsame Währung zu Grabe getragen werden müsse. Wo sind diese klugen Redner heute? Ich bin froh, sie nicht mehr sehen und hören zu müssen.\n\nUnsere Stabilisierungspolitik hat gewirkt, und sie wirkt weiter. Die Hilfsprogramme für Spanien, für Irland und für Portugal laufen ordnungsgemäß aus. Irland zahlt bereits Kredite zurück; auch das ist ein Argument für unsere Politik. Es wurde immer gesagt, diese Kredite seien verlorenes Geld. Sie werden bereits zurückgezahlt. Griechenland und Zypern sind zwar noch unter dem Rettungsschirm, aber in beiden Ländern geht es voran.\n\nKein Mensch redet mehr von einem dritten Hilfsprogramm für Griechenland. Herr Samaras, der diese Woche bei Angela Merkel zu Besuch war, sagt selbst: Auch in Griechenland will niemand mehr ein drittes Hilfsprogramm. - Frau Wagenknecht, lesen Sie einmal Ihre Reden nach. Dann werden Sie feststellen: Auch Sie haben an dieser Stelle geirrt. Griechenland begibt bereits zehnjährige Anleihen an den Finanzmärkten, die mit weniger als 5 Prozent rentieren. Das heißt, das Vertrauen der Kapitalmärkte in den Euro ist Schritt für Schritt zurückgekehrt.\n\nDas ist ein Erfolg unserer Hilfsprogramme, die wir teilweise wirklich in hohem Tempo, im Schweinsgalopp durch dieses Parlament gejagt haben. Aber aus dieser akuten Hilfe ist nach und nach eine neue Stabilitätsarchitektur in Europa entstanden, deren Pfeiler bereits benannt wurden: Der Fiskalvertrag steht. Der Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakt wurde ausdifferenziert und durch Sixpack und Twopack verbessert. Der ESM steht im Rahmen von Notprogrammen zur Verfügung. Jetzt regeln wir noch die Bankenunion. Damit haben wir die notwendigen Pfeiler errichtet, um dieses europäische Haus wirklich mit neuem Leben zu erfüllen.\n\nWir haben eine neue Stabilitätsarchitektur geschaffen, die dabei hilft, dieses Haus, lieber Kollege Ralph Brinkhaus - ich möchte dieses Bild noch einmal aufgreifen -, mit Leben zu erfüllen. Dafür brauchen wir eine neue Stabilitätskultur in Europa. Diese neue Stabilitätskultur neben der Regulierung der Finanzmärkte vermisse ich noch etwas.\n\nMit dem Reformeifer und dem Reformwillen ist es in einigen Ländern noch nicht ganz so bestellt, wie man sich das wünscht. Ich erinnere mich da immer an die Geschichte von dem Möbelpacker, der seinem Freund erzählt, wie furchtbar anstrengend sein Beruf mit der -Möbelschlepperei sei. Als der Freund fragt: „Wie lange machst du das denn schon?“, ist die Antwort: Morgen fange ich an. - Mit den Reformen in Europa scheint das ähnlich zu sein.\n\nUm noch einmal darauf zurückzukommen: Diese Stabilitätskultur setzt voraus, dass wir nicht kurzfristige schuldenfinanzierte Impulse setzen, weder aus dem ESM noch sonst wo her; denn es hat sich herausgestellt, dass das der falsche Weg ist. Deshalb bin ich sehr froh, dass der Finanzminister klar und deutlich gesagt hat: Der ESM steht nicht für kurzfristige Wachstumsprogramme zur Verfügung.\n\nDas Geld liegt dort und ist für andere Zwecke vorgesehen, und dort liegt es auch gut und soll dort liegen bleiben.\n\nNun reden wir über zwei neue Instrumente innerhalb der Bankenunion. Das eine ist das Instrument der Bankenrekapitalisierung, das im Instrumentenkasten des ESM Platz finden soll. Dieses Instrument ist nicht ungefährlich. Darauf haben auch meine Vorredner hingewiesen. Man muss vorsichtig damit umgehen. Es ist gut, dass es als letzte Option bzw. als Backstop gehandhabt wird. Denn wäre es nicht vorhanden, dann entstünde tatsächlich die Situation, dass - Lothar Binding hat darauf hingewiesen - letztendlich der Staat bzw. die Steuerzahler für die Rekapitalisierung einer Bank einstehen müssten. Das ist ein nicht akzeptabler Weg, den wir vermeiden wollen.\n\nDeshalb ist es gut, dass uns dieses Instrument zur Verfügung steht, aber eben nur als letzte Option für den Rückgriff oder sozusagen als letzter im Einzelfall notwendiger Backstop.\n\nWas das zweite Instrument angeht, das wir einführen, muss man die Aussage der Frau Wagenknecht korrigieren. Wir werden das Ganze mit einer umfangreichen Parlamentsbeteiligung ausgestalten. Es wird nichts im Hinterzimmer gemauschelt und an der Öffentlichkeit vorbei gemacht, sondern das wird ganz offen im Deutschen Bundestag ausgehandelt.\n\nDenn der vorliegende Gesetzentwurf sieht folgende Konstruktion vor: Wenn das Instrument der direkten Bankenrekapitalisierung jemals zum Einsatz kommen sollte, dann müsste das Plenum des Deutschen Bundestages immer vorher zustimmen, und die dafür notwendigen Informationen, um diese Zustimmung zu erreichen, liegen dann allen - auch Ihnen - vor. Das ist auch im Gesetzentwurf unstrittig.\n\nWir müssen allerdings noch im Detail regeln, wie wir mit streng vertraulichen Daten umgehen. Dafür ist bisher das Sondergremium vorgesehen. Wir werden Wege, Möglichkeiten und Lösungen finden, um auch diesen Weg so auszugestalten, dass er vor den Richtern in Karlsruhe Bestand haben wird. Davon bin ich überzeugt. Das wird das Beratungsverfahren zu diesem Gesetz noch ergeben.\n\nInsofern geschieht nichts hinter verschlossenen Türen, sondern immer in der Verantwortung des Deutschen Bundestages. Damit ist auch an der Stelle gewährleistet, dass die in diesem Bereich weit ausgestalteten parlamentarischen Beteiligungsrechte Bestand haben und auch in der Frage einer direkten Rekapitalisierung von Banken oder einer Bank aus dem ESM angewandt werden können.\n\nWenn ich das zusammenfasse, dann haben wir mit all den Maßnahmen - den vier Pfeilern, die ich beschrieben habe - etwas erreicht, was die Voraussetzung für neues Vertrauen in Europa und in unsere Währung und damit die Voraussetzung für Wachstum, Beschäftigung und Wohlergehen schafft.\n\nIch bedanke mich.\"\n1886,florian-hahn,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die EU-geführte Operation Atalanta soll zum Schutz der internationalen Seeschifffahrt die vor der Küste Somalias operierenden Piraten abschrecken und bekämpfen. Mit der Operation sollen weiterhin Geiselnahmen und Lösegelderpressungen verhindert, das Völkerrecht durchgesetzt und humanitäre Hilfe für die somalische Bevölkerung, zum Beispiel - das ist schon oft genannt worden - durch das Welternährungsprogramm, sichergestellt werden.\n\nSeit Beginn der Operation Atalanta ist kein Schiff des Welternährungsprogrammes mehr angegriffen worden. Auch die Sicherung der bedeutsamen Handelsroute zwischen Europa, der arabischen Halbinsel und Asien ist für Deutschland als Exportnation und Importeur von Rohstoffen dauerhaft von besonderem Interesse.\n\nIn Osnabrück wurde im April dieses Jahres im ersten Piratenprozess seit 400 Jahren ein somalischer Pirat in erster Instanz zu zwölf Jahren Haft verurteilt,\n\njetzt wird sich noch der Bundesgerichtshof mit diesem Fall beschäftigen. Die Umstände dieses Falles machen deutlich, warum die EU-geführte Operation Atalanta weiterhin so wichtig ist und warum uns romantische Piratenklischees den Blick auf die grausame Realität nicht verstellen dürfen.\n\nIm Mai 2010 wird die „Marida Marguerite“, ein mit Flugbenzin und Speiseöl im Wert von 10 Millionen Euro beladener brandneuer Tanker einer Reederei aus dem Emsland von Piraten vor Somalia gekapert. Für die Besatzung folgen acht Monate unvorstellbares Leid und grausame Quälereien. Die Piraten schlagen und foltern die Seeleute. Es gibt Scheinhinrichtungen; ein Schuss geht knapp am Kopf des Kapitäns vorbei. Der Chefingenieur wird stundenlang kopfüber an einer Eisenstange über die Reling gehängt, die Piraten sperren Kapitän und Ingenieur nackt bei minus 17 Grad Celsius in die Kühlkammer. Kurz vor Weihnachten 2010 werden aus einem Flugzeug 5 Millionen Euro Lösegeld über dem Schiff abgeworfen. Die Kidnapper bestätigen den Empfang per Fax, unterschrieben mit: „Merry Christmas“. Am 28. Dezember 2010 geben die Piraten Schiff und Besatzung dann Gott sei Dank endlich frei.\n\nDer Fall ist grausam, aber leider kein Einzelfall. In der Vergangenheit wurden Besatzungen im Durchschnitt bis zu fünf Monate lang gefangen gehalten. So etwas dürfen Staaten nicht zulassen. Wenn ein Failed State wie Somalia nicht in der Lage ist, die Piraterie zu unterbinden, muss die Weltgemeinschaft sich überlegen, was sie unternehmen kann, um solche Verbrechen zu verhindern.\n\nDie Mission EU NAVFOR Atalanta, über deren Verlängerung wir heute wieder einmal beraten, hat maßgeblich dazu beigetragen, dass die Piratenangriffe heute auf einem Tiefstand angekommen sind. 2013 wurden 20 verdächtige Ereignisse registriert, aber nur 7 Angriffe, die alle erfolglos blieben. Zum Vergleich: 2011 waren es noch 176 Angriffe. Das zeigt einmal mehr, wie erfolgreich und gut dieser Einsatz ist.\n\nDas militärische Vorgehen im Rahmen der Operation Atalanta ist aber nur ein Teil eines umfassenden ressortübergreifenden Ansatzes zur Stabilisierung Somalias und der gesamten Region. Parallel zu den militärischen Bemühungen auf See laufen daher Bemühungen der Vereinten Nationen, der Europäischen Union und auch bilateraler Art, Somalia und die Region zu stabilisieren. Deutschland beteiligt sich umfangreich an humanitärer Hilfe für Somalia. Wir tragen über den allgemeinen Finanzierungsanteil 20 Prozent der humanitären Hilfe der EU-Kommission; das waren allein zwischen 2008 und 2013 313 Millionen Euro. Schon bisher stellten das BMZ und auch das Auswärtige Amt zusätzlich immer wieder substanzielle Mittel zur Verfügung.\n\nMir scheint, dass das der richtige Ansatz ist: auf der einen Seite Bekämpfung der akuten, gegenwärtigen Gefahren der Piraterie auf See durch Abschreckung der Piraten mit militärischen Mittel sowie Bekämpfung des Hungers und Elends in den Flüchtlingslagern durch humanitäre Hilfe, auf der anderen Seite zugleich zukunftsgerichtete Investitionen in die Stabilisierung der Region und in den Aufbau staatlicher Strukturen.\n\nIn den letzten Debatten und auch heute wurden wieder Befürchtungen geäußert, die Ergänzung des Mandats um die Möglichkeit der Bekämpfung der Piraterielogistik am Strand aus der Luft führe zu einer Eskalationsgefahr und berge das Risiko ziviler Opfer.\n\nDiese Horrorszenarien haben sich bisher nicht bewahrheitet. Es ist entgegen diesen unrealistischen Vorstellungen bis heute nicht zu Kollateralschäden oder Übergriffen auf die Zivilbevölkerung gekommen. Keine Eskalation, deswegen keine Gefahr. Aus meiner Sicht sollten sich alle nichtdogmatischen Fraktionen in diesem Haus für den Einsatz im Rahmen des Mandats Atalanta einsetzen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n6832,harald-petzold,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Weil es leider immer wieder vorkommt, dass bei Manövern Straßen in erheblichem Umfang durch Panzer zerstört werden, möchte ich die Bundesregierung fragen, was getan wird, damit die geschädigten Baulastträger der Straßen die Schäden ersetzt bekommen.\"\n10719,johannes-fechner,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer auf den Tribünen! Die heute hier zur Debatte stehende Majestätsbeleidigung - sie ist in § 103 des Strafgesetzbuches geregelt - sorgte in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten für nur sehr wenige Verfahren und Verurteilungen. Wurde August Bebel noch für harmlose Kritik am Kaiser zu neun Monaten Haft verurteilt und wurden 1894 rund 300 Personen wegen Majestätsbeleidigung verurteilt, darunter viele Sozialdemokraten, so gab es in den letzten Jahren kaum noch Verurteilungen. Der Straftatbestand der Majestätsbeleidigung war ein Herrschaftsmittel, um Proteste und Kritik zu unterdrücken und kritische Bürgerinnen und Bürger einzuschüchtern. Dafür gibt es in einem modernen Rechtsstaat keine Rechtfertigung mehr. Die Zeiten, in denen Herrscher und Regenten ihre Macht durch solche Straftatbestände absichern konnten, sind vorbei. Wir müssen deshalb diesen Tatbestand der Majestätsbeleidigung sofort abschaffen.\n\nEs gibt aus meiner Sicht keinen Grund, weshalb der normale Bürger, die normale Bürgerin strafrechtlich anders behandelt werden sollte als ein ausländischer Staatschef. Das gilt umso mehr, wenn es sich bei dem Staatschef um eine Person mit zweifelhaftem Demokratieverständnis handelt, der die Pressefreiheit mit Füßen tritt und den Rechtsstaat demontiert. Auch deshalb müssen wir diese Sonderbehandlung in § 103 des Strafgesetzbuches streichen.\n\nDadurch entstehen auch keine Strafbarkeitslücken. Wir haben den Straftatbestand der Beleidigung oder der üblen Nachrede. Es gibt genügend Straftatbestände, um die Ehrverletzungen von Personen zu ahnden, und zwar unabhängig von ihrem politischen oder beruflichen Status. Deshalb: Lassen Sie uns diesen alten Zopf der Majestätsbeleidigung abschaffen!\n\nOb das Gedicht von Jan Böhmermann nun künstlerische Satire war oder aber eine Straftat darstellt, müssen wir als Gesetzgeber nicht beurteilen; denn nach der Gewaltenteilung ist das mit guten Gründen Sache der Justiz. Ehrlich gesagt habe ich auch keine Lust, mich hier im Hohen Haus mit Ziegenfantasien oder Ähnlichem zu beschäftigen. Auch ich fand es beschämend, wie die Wortwahl teilweise ausfiel.\n\nDie Unabhängigkeit der Justiz ist ein hohes Gut, das sich bewährt hat und das wir eher noch ausbauen sollten. Deshalb macht es keinen Sinn, der Exekutive, also der Bundesregierung, die entscheidende Rolle dabei zuzumessen, ob es wegen dieses zweifelhaften Straftatbestandes zu einem Strafverfahren kommt oder eben nicht. Diese Ermächtigung des § 104 a des Strafgesetzbuches brauchen wir nicht. Wir haben eine bewährte Gewaltenteilung, sodass allein die Justiz entscheiden sollte, ob ein Strafverfahren durchgeführt wird oder nicht.\n\nDer Fall Böhmermann hat ja gerade gezeigt, dass eine Entscheidung der Bundesregierung in der Öffentlichkeit wie eine Vorverurteilung aufgefasst werden kann. Es war richtig, dass die Kanzlerin ihr erstes Statement klargestellt hat. Sonst hätte ich die Sorge, dass der Eindruck entsteht, die Bundesregierung würde vor zweifelhaften Diktatoren kuschen und das außenpolitische Wohlwollen von Diktatoren im Zweifel höher bewerten als den Schutz der eigenen Bürger vor längst überkommenen Strafvorschriften wie der Majestätsbeleidigung. Vor allem dürfen wir nicht zulassen, dass ausländische Staatschefs diese Vorschrift ausnutzen, um Künstler oder Satiriker in Deutschland einzuschüchtern. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, auch deswegen sollten wir die Ermächtigung in § 104 a des Strafgesetzbuches streichen.\n\nIch will kein Geheimnis daraus machen, dass ich die Entscheidung der Kanzlerin, das Strafverfahren gegen Böhmermann zuzulassen, für falsch halte. Es gibt keinen Grund, auf Erdogan Rücksicht zu nehmen und ihm so die Möglichkeit zu geben, über den überkommenen Straftatbestand der Majestätsbeleidigung Druck auf Satiriker und Künstler hier in Deutschland auszuüben.\n\nGerade wer - wie er - im eigenen Land die Pressefreiheit mit Füßen tritt, Journalisten verhaften und verfolgen lässt, der hat keinen besonderen Schutz seiner Ehre verdient, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren.\n\nIch bin Außenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier und Justizminister Heiko Maas sehr dankbar, dass sie eindeutig und klar gesagt haben, dass das Strafverfahren nach § 103 des Strafgesetzbuches nicht hätte zugelassen werden sollen. Denn - Herr Frei, das ist die Antwort - wie können wir ein Strafverfahren zulassen, wenn wir uns alle weitgehend einig sind, dass wir diese Norm nicht mehr brauchen, dass sie überholt ist und dass wir sie abschaffen sollten?\n\nDann müssen wir auch so konsequent sein, kein Strafverfahren zuzulassen. Auch hieran sieht man, warum wir diese Norm abschaffen sollten.\n\nDamit bin ich schon beim entscheidenden Mangel des Gesetzentwurfs der Grünen. Sie wollen offensichtlich nach wie vor die Bundesregierung und damit die Exekutive darüber entscheiden lassen, ob ein Strafverfahren durchgeführt wird. Sie wollen die Möglichkeit für die Bundesregierung in § 104 a des Strafgesetzbuches belassen. Ich meine, dass dies ein Fehler ist. Wir sollten alleine die Justiz entscheiden lassen, ob es zu einem Strafverfahren kommt, gerade in solch heiklen Fällen. Deswegen kann man Ihrem Gesetzentwurf nicht zustimmen.\n\nJa, klar.\n\nVielen Dank für die Frage. Selbstverständlich hole ich das gerne nach. Ich bitte, das Versäumnis zu entschuldigen, wenn ich Ihre Frage überhört haben sollte.\n\nDer Punkt ist einfach der, dass es hier um eine politische Ermessensentscheidung geht: Lasse ich das Strafverfahren als Bundesregierung zu, ja oder nein? Es handelt sich hier um einen Herrn mit zweifelhaftem Demokratieverständnis. Wenn wir uns einig sind, dass es um eine Norm geht, die überholt ist, da sie aus der Kaiserzeit stammt, die kaum einen Anwendungsbereich hat und die nur der Einschüchterung dienen kann, dann sollten wir diese Norm sofort streichen. Das ist die materiell-rechtliche Erklärung.\n\nAuch zu den Linken möchte ich einen Satz sagen, weil ich natürlich auch euren Gesetzentwurf intensiv gelesen habe. Ich finde es widersprüchlich, dass ihr einerseits die Verunglimpfung des Bundespräsidenten straflos stellen, andererseits aber Verfassungsrichter, Regierungsmitglieder und Abgeordnete strafrechtlich weiterhin besonders schützen wollt. Ich finde, das ist ein Widerspruch.\n\nDaher kann man eurem Gesetzentwurf wegen dieser Unstimmigkeit nicht zustimmen.\n\nZum Zeitpunkt der Abschaffung: In der Tat ist es in der Koalition offen, wann wir die Norm abschaffen wollen bzw. wann die Abschaffung in Kraft treten soll. Aus meiner Sicht wäre es völlig widersprüchlich und falsch, dieses Gesetz noch jahrzehntelang oder jahrelang - bis 2018 oder darüber hinaus - anzuwenden. Die Norm ist überholt. Sie ist unnötig, und sie kann dazu dienen, dass Diktatoren in Deutschland Künstler und Satiriker einschüchtern. Deshalb sind wir der Meinung, dass diese Vorschrift schnell, sofort, abgeschafft werden sollte. Das Zeitalter der Majestätsbeleidigung ist vorbei, meine Damen und Herren.\"\n1831,michael-fuchs,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Herr Minister, ich bin der Meinung, dass wir auf einem guten Weg sind, das EEG so zu reformieren, dass es am Ende des Tages Akzeptanz in der Bevölkerung findet. Das ist unsere Aufgabe. Aber dabei muss auch die Akzeptanz der Unternehmen gewahrt bleiben. Es kann nicht sein - wie es gerade von der Linken gefordert wurde -, dass man Unternehmen wissentlich und willentlich kaputtmacht;\n\ndenn sie können in Deutschland nicht mehr arbeiten, wenn sie Strompreise nach linkem Muster zu bezahlen haben.\n\nWer das fordert, der weiß genau, dass er in Deutschland diverse Grundstoffindustrien kaputtmacht. Wenn sie kaputt sind, dann gehen Wertschöpfungsketten kaputt, und dann haben wir - das gilt auch für Herrn Krischer - am Ende des Tages nichts gewonnen.\n\nWir haben ein EEG, das sehr, sehr teuer ist. Wir fördern in diesem Jahr die erneuerbaren Energien mit 23,8 Milliarden Euro. Auf 20 Jahre gerechnet sind wir nahe an einer halben Billion Euro Fördermittel. Das zeigt doch, wie sehr Deutschland bereit ist, in die Förderung einzusteigen. Die 23,8 Milliarden Euro entsprechen in etwa der Größenordnung des Verkehrsetats von Minister Dobrindt. Wenn wir in dem Bereich etwas mehr Geld für die Straßen hätten, dann würde es uns vermutlich etwas besser gehen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, dieses Fördersystem muss eingeschränkt, verbessert und gedeckelt werden. Das ist in diesem Gesetzentwurf angelegt. Wir werden das eine oder andere im Gesetzgebungsverfahren noch intensiv diskutieren müssen. Aber ich bin davon überzeugt, dass wir das hinbekommen.\n\nWir nehmen 5,1 Milliarden Euro aus der Umlage heraus, damit uns die energieintensive Industrie nicht aus Deutschland flüchtet. In einem Punkt bin ich mit Ihnen, Herr Minister, nicht ganz einer Meinung. Ich war vor einigen Tagen in Washington auf einem Kongress. Die Amerikaner haben ein Fünftel unserer Stromkosten in den Bereichen, wo sie Schiefergas ausbeuten. Das ist gefährlich. Die Amerikaner betreiben eine Reindustrialisierungspolitik, und sie wollen gerade energieintensive Unternehmen anlocken, in den USA zu produzieren. Wenn diese bei uns wegfallen, gehen ganze Wertschöpfungsketten von A bis Z kaputt. Das trifft nicht nur den Stahlproduzenten, sondern auch den Stahlverarbeiter, den Oberflächenbeschichter sowie das Transportunternehmen, das die Güter hin- und herfährt. Das wissen wir alle, und deswegen wird das verhindert. Deswegen ist es auch völlig in Ordnung, dass wir diese Unternehmen befreien.\n\nMachen wir uns doch bitte nichts vor: Ohne diese Unternehmen käme es zu einem drastischen Anstieg der EEG-Umlage, weil dann wesentlich weniger industrieller Strom abgenommen würde. Dementsprechend müssten die anderen höhere Beträge zahlen. Das ist nun einmal nicht zu ändern.\n\nEs trifft auch nicht zu - wie Sie es behaupten -, dass die Großverbraucher komplett geschont werden. Der Entwurf der Bundesregierung sieht vor, dass wir zum Beispiel die Mindestumlage verändern. Wir haben dann eine doppelt so hohe Mindestumlage für die Großverbraucher. Das ist eine sehr spürbare Maßnahme. Wir haben dazu auch entsprechende Anrufe aus allen Branchen bekommen.\n\nIm EEG-Gesetzentwurf formulieren wir nun etwas - das ist wichtig -, was bislang für die erneuerbaren Energien fast Drohworte sind. Wir erwarten Eigenverantwortung, und wir wollen auch Wettbewerb. In Zukunft muss Wettbewerb herrschen. Das bedeutet Direktvermarktung und Ausschreibung. Beides sieht der Gesetzentwurf vor. Wir werden das intensiv begleiten. Wir müssen die Mentalität „Produce and forget“ beenden. Es kann nicht sein, dass jemand ein Produkt erzeugt - in diesem Fall Strom - und nicht dafür verantwortlich ist, dass es vermarktet wird.\n\nIch habe über 23 Jahre ein Unternehmen geführt. Ich hätte es sehr gerne gesehen, wenn ich meine Produkte einfach auf den Hof hätte stellen und sagen können: Seht zu, wie ihr damit klarkommt! - Wenn man sich um den Vertrieb überhaupt nicht kümmern muss, ist das sehr angenehm. Aber das kann so nicht weitergehen. Das müssen wir verändern; das ist unser Ziel. Das wird durch Direktvermarktung und Ausschreibungsregeln noch in dieser Legislaturperiode umgesetzt werden. Das sind natürlich für die Erneuerbaren böse Worte. Aber das muss so sein. Wir wollen die Erneuerbaren nicht abwürgen, im Gegenteil.\n\nDer Bundesminister hat eben die Ausbaufrage völlig zu Recht angesprochen. Einen geplanten jährlichen Zubau von jeweils 2 500 Megawatt im Wind- und Solarbereich kann man wahrlich nicht als Abwürgen bezeichnen. Deswegen sollten Sie das auch nicht behaupten.\n\nIn einem Punkt bin ich mit dem Gesetzentwurf nicht ganz zufrieden. Das ist der Offshorebereich. Das wird besonders teuer. Da sollten wir sehr vorsichtig sein; denn wir können nicht mehr im bisherigen Stil weitermachen. Wie ich bereits zu Beginn meiner Rede erwähnt habe, geben wir bereits 500 Milliarden Euro aus. Jede Anlage, die hinzukommt, verteuert das Ganze noch einmal.\n\nIn Deutschland darf es auch nicht 16 Energiewenden geben. Es darf nicht dazu kommen, dass jedes Bundesland sein eigenes Spielchen spielt. Rheinland-Pfalz will in 15 Jahren mithilfe der erneuerbaren Energien energieautark sein. Mir ist es unerklärlich, wie das in einem Bundesland wie Rheinland-Pfalz möglich sein soll. Ohne jegliche Absicherung durch andere Energieträger energieautark zu werden, dürfte ziemlich schwierig sein. Deswegen finde ich es richtig, dass die Bundesregierung in die Speicherforschung investiert. Gerade die erneuerbaren Energien benötigen Speicher. Wenn es keine entsprechenden kostengünstigen Speichermedien gibt, wird Autarkie allein mit Erneuerbaren nicht funktionieren.\n\nIch will noch etwas zu den Windkraftanlagen sagen. Hören Sie gut zu, Herr Krischer! Nach heutigen Fördersätzen wird eine 3-Megawatt-Anlage - das entspricht dem Standard, der heute onshore gebaut wird - mit 6,5 Millionen Euro über eine Laufzeit von 20 Jahren gefördert. 500 Megawatt kosten gemäß heutigen Fördersätzen 1 Milliarde Euro Fördermittel. Der von uns vorgesehene Zubau von 2,5 Gigawatt pro Jahr kostet bei einer 20\u001ejährigen Laufzeit dementsprechend 5 Milliarden Euro Fördermittel. Das sind gewaltige Belastungen, die wir der Bevölkerung, aber auch den Unternehmen aufbürden. Das wollen und akzeptieren wir auch. Aber mehr kann und darf es nicht sein, weil es sonst nicht mehr zu tragen ist. Wie Sie wissen, werden sich die laufenden Förderungen frühestens im Jahr 2025 deutlich reduzieren, weil erst dann teure Anlagen der Vergangenheit aus der Förderung fallen.\n\nWir müssen außerdem dafür sorgen, dass alle Maßnahmen betreffend die Steigerung der Effizienz und den Netzausbau so beschleunigt werden, dass weiterhin Anlagen aufgebaut werden können. Ohne einen vernünftigen Netzausbau funktioniert das Ganze überhaupt nicht. Ich halte es deshalb für sehr wichtig, dass wir begleitend die Verfahren für den Netzausbau beschleunigen; denn wenn keine Netze vorhanden sind, können wir den Strom beispielsweise nicht von Nord nach Süd transportieren und in den Verteilnetzen nicht für ein sinnvolles Hin und Her sorgen. Aber dazu müssen auch die Erneuerbaren - so steht es auch im Koalitionsvertrag - ihren Beitrag leisten. Es ist nicht einzusehen, dass ausschließlich die Stromkunden den Netzausbau bezahlen, während die Betreiber von Erneuerbare-Energien-Anlagen nichts dazu beitragen müssen; denn Letztere sind diejenigen - wenn man vom Verursacherprinzip ausgeht -, die uns im Wesentlichen dazu zwingen, einen teuren Netzausbau vorzunehmen.\n\nTenneT hat vor einigen Tagen errechnet, dass allein der Netzausbau im Bereich der Übertragungsnetze 23 Milliarden Euro kosten wird. Das muss noch umgelegt werden; ich möchte, dass alle, die einspeisen, daran beteiligt werden. Das haben wir im Koalitionsvertrag so vereinbart. Herr Minister, wir sollten an die Gesetz-gebung in diesem Bereich so schnell wie möglich herangehen.\n\nDas Einspeisemanagement muss geregelt werden, und wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass wir die Ziele, die wir uns beim Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien gesetzt haben, sicher erreichen; dies muss aber auch so kostengünstig und kosteneffizient geschehen, wie es notwendig ist, und schließt Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und EU-Konformität ein. Ich bin Ihnen sehr dankbar dafür, dass Sie es zusammen mit der Bundeskanzlerin geschafft haben, die EU-Konformität herzustellen, sodass wir in Zukunft keine Angst mehr haben müssen, dass unsere Besondere Ausgleichsregelung in irgendeiner Weise gefährdet ist.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n7918,stephan-mayer,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr verehrte Kolleginnen! Sehr geehrte Kollegen! Was wir heute auf den parlamentarischen Weg bringen, ist die umfassendste Reform unseres deutschen Asylrechts seit dem Asylkompromiss in den 90er-Jahren. Dass wir dieses Gesetzgebungsverfahren sehr zügig bis Mitte Oktober durchführen wollen, zeigt, wie schwierig die Situation und wie dringend der Handlungsbedarf ist.\n\nIch möchte zu Beginn ausdrücklich und mit großer Überzeugung all den unzähligen, all den Tausenden von ehrenamtlichen und hauptamtlichen Helferinnen und Helfern in ganz Deutschland danken, die sich tagein, tagaus - teilweise bis zur Belastungsgrenze und manche auch darüber hinaus - in der jetzigen Flüchtlingssituation engagieren.\n\nIch möchte all den Polizisten, den THW-Helfern, den Feuerwehrleuten und den Mitarbeitern der karitativen Einrichtungen und der Rettungsorganisationen ganz herzlich danken. Es ist herausragend, was in Deutschland derzeit passiert und wie viel Solidarität und Empathie gegenüber den Flüchtlingen und Asylbewerbern an den Tag gelegt wird.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, ich möchte aber auch ausdrücklich dem Bundesinnenminister und seinen hochmotivierten und versierten Mitarbeitern danken. Denn was jetzt unter hohem zeitlichen Druck und auch mit großer Expertise erarbeitet wurde, verdient großen Respekt und hohe Anerkennung.\n\nDie Flüchtlingssituation ist derzeit mit Sicherheit das größte Problem unserer Zeit. Es befinden sich zur Stunde über 60 Millionen Menschen auf unserem Globus auf der Flucht. Das ist die höchste Zahl seit Ende des Zweiten Weltkriegs.\n\nFür Deutschland ist eine andere Zahl von entscheidender Bedeutung. Jeden Tag kommen zwischen 5 000 und 10 000 Flüchtlinge in unser Land, die meisten über die bayerisch-österreichische Grenze, und man kann nicht umhin, klar zu konstatieren: Das ist insbesondere für die südbayerischen Kommunen bzw. die Landkreise eine enorme Belastung und eine riesige Herausforderung.\n\nWir hatten allein im September mehr Flüchtlinge in Deutschland zu verzeichnen als im gesamten letzten Jahr, und schon im gesamten letzten Jahr war es die vierthöchste Zahl der Flüchtlinge und Asylbewerber aller Zeiten.\n\nEines muss klar sein: Wenn die Zahlen weiterhin auf diesem hohen Niveau bleiben, dann wird Deutschland über kurz oder lang überfordert sein. Was die Registrierung, Antragstellung und Antragsbearbeitung anbelangt, ist dies eine riesige Herausforderung, und die Unterbringung sowie die Integration in unsere Gesellschaft und in den Arbeitsmarkt sind auch für ein starkes und wohlhabendes Land wie Deutschland auch bei größter Anstrengung auf die Dauer nicht zu leisten, wenn die Zahlen auf diesem hohen Niveau bleiben.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, allein im September sind mehrere zehntausend Flüchtlinge und Asylbewerber nach Deutschland gekommen. Sie wurden nicht registriert. Sie wurden nicht kontrolliert. Ich möchte in aller Deutlichkeit feststellen: Damit besteht auch ein großes Sicherheitsrisiko.\n\nEs ist deshalb das Gebot der Stunde, dass wir zur Rechtsstaatlichkeit zurückkehren. Jeder Flüchtling und jeder Asylbewerber muss schnellstmöglich, wenn er deutschen Boden betritt, registriert und überprüft werden. Das ist im deutschen Interesse.\n\nFür mich ist eines entscheidend: Deutschland und Europa haben nicht nur Verpflichtungen gegenüber schutzbedürftigen Menschen - dies haben wir sehr wohl auch -, wir haben insbesondere auch eine Verpflichtung gegenüber unserer heimischen Bevölkerung, ein funktionierendes Gemeinwesen und sichere und soziale Lebensbedingungen zu gewährleisten. Es sind vor allem die Menschen in unserem Land, denen wir verpflichtet sind.\n\nEines ist auch klar: Wenn Deutschland an Leistungs- und Integrationskraft einbüßt, ist letzten Endes niemandem geholfen.\n\nNur ein starkes Deutschland kann Flüchtlinge im Inland unterstützen und dazu beitragen, dass Flüchtlinge ihre Herkunftsregionen erst gar nicht verlassen müssen. Deshalb ist nicht nur die Innenpolitik gefordert, sondern zuvorderst auch die Außen-, Europa- und Entwicklungspolitik. Ich bin unserem Entwicklungshilfeminister Gerd Müller sehr dankbar,\n\ndass er sich nachdrücklich dafür einsetzt, die Bedingungen vor Ort in den Anrainerstaaten deutlich zu verbessern. Unser Bundesminister Gerd Müller weist immer wieder darauf hin: Jeder Euro, der im Herkunftsland bzw. im Anrainerland investiert wird, ist zehnmal so effektiv investiert, als wenn er in Deutschland investiert würde.\n\nDeshalb ist es ein wichtiger Schritt, dass wir hier mehr tun. Hier ist nicht nur Deutschland gefordert, sondern hier ist die gesamte Europäische Union in der Verantwortung.\n\nWir geben mit diesem Gesetz zur Beschleunigung des Asylverfahrens ein wichtiges Signal an all die Menschen, die nicht schutzbedürftig sind, sich nicht nach Deutschland aufzumachen. Ich möchte der insbesondere vonseiten der Linken - leider auch in dieser Debatte - aufgestellten stereotypen Behauptung widersprechen, dass wir zwischen schlechten und guten Flüchtlingen differenzierten. Das stimmt nicht. Jeder Mensch ist gleich viel wert, und jeder Mensch hat natürlich Anerkennung und Respekt verdient. Aber es kommt entscheidend darauf an, ob jemandem der Flüchtlingsstatus zuerkannt wird oder nicht. Es geht nicht um eine Differenzierung in schlechte und gute Flüchtlinge, sondern darum, ob jemand überhaupt Flüchtling oder anerkannter Asylbewerber ist oder ob er es nicht ist. Wenn er es nicht ist - das gehört zur Ehrlichkeit dazu -, dann muss er Deutschland wieder verlassen.\n\nIch bin unserem Bundespräsidenten Joachim Gauck sehr dankbar, dass er in seiner Rede am vergangenen Sonntag in Mainz deutlich gesagt hat, dass wir es mit einem epochalen Ereignis zu tun haben, „dessen Ausmaß und Tragweite wir noch schwer erfassen können“, und dass unsere Möglichkeiten endlich sind. Dieser Satz ist keine Selbstverständlichkeit, aber er ist unbestreitbar wahr. Nicht nur Juristen wissen: Unmögliches ist nie geschuldet. - Ich möchte noch eines offen sagen: Wer mit Ignoranz darauf reagiert, dass sich Ängste in der Bevölkerung manifestieren, und wer die Probleme in der Bevölkerung negiert, gefährdet letzten Endes den inneren Frieden und auch unseren gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhalt.\n\nEines muss auch klar sein: Es gibt kein Recht - auch nicht für anerkannte Flüchtlinge -, sich den Staat der Schutzgewährung nach Günstigkeitserwägungen auszusuchen. Der Schutz für Bürgerkriegsflüchtlinge ist in allen Staaten der Europäischen Union, in allen Staaten der Genfer Flüchtlingskonvention im Grundsatz möglich und zumutbar. Es geht deshalb insbesondere in den nächsten Wochen und Monaten darum, dass wir Rechtsstaatlichkeit in der gesamten Europäischen Union wiederherstellen, dass sich alle Mitgliedsländer der Europäischen Union an die europäische Asylrechtsgesetzgebung halten, an die Dublin-Verordnung, die Schengen-Verordnung und die Eurodac\u001eVerordnung; auch das gehört dazu.\n\nDas Gesetz dient insgesamt drei primären Zielen. Es geht darum, die Asylverfahren zu beschleunigen, die Unterbringung zu erleichtern und gleichzeitig die Abschiebung abgelehnter Asylbewerber zu forcieren. Auch hier werden wir als Bund darauf achten, wie die Länder mit dieser Aufgabe umgehen; ich sage das hier in aller Offenheit. Es wird in Zukunft verboten sein, Abschiebungen im Vorfeld anzukündigen. Sehr geehrter Herr Minister Pistorius, wir werden einen intensiven Blick insbesondere auf Niedersachsen werfen.\n\nSie haben mindestens zweimal Abschiebungen im Vorfeld angekündigt und haben selbst vor wenigen Jahren den Paradigmenwechsel beim Abschiebungsrecht ausgerufen. Es wird darauf ankommen, dass sich alle politischen Ebenen, angefangen von der Kommune über die Länder bis zum Bund, entsprechend konzertieren und zusammenarbeiten.\n\nIn diesem Sinne bringen wir mit dem heutigen Gesetzentwurf ein sehr weitreichendes und wichtiges Gesetzgebungsverfahren im Deutschen Bundestag auf den Weg. Ich möchte zum Abschluss nicht verhehlen: Es handelt sich zwar um einen essenziellen Zwischenschritt. Aber es wird uns nicht erspart bleiben, hier in diesem Haus sehr schnell über weiter gehende Maßnahmen zu diskutieren und sie dann auch zu verabschieden.\n\nDanke.\"\n2026,kathrin-vogler,\"Vielen Dank. - Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte meine Rede in der heutigen Aktuellen Stunde gerne meiner Tochter und ihren Freundinnen widmen. Rosa, Larissa, Chiara, Kira, Diana, Angela und Alice besuchen die 9. Klasse des Gymna-siums in Emsdetten. Sie sind ganz normale Teenager und schon deshalb keine besonders begeisterten Schülerinnen. Aber sie wissen, dass Bildung, gute Bildung eine Voraussetzung für einen interessanten Beruf und ein selbstständiges Leben ist. Sie wollen Lehrerin oder Lektorin, Steuerberaterin oder Grafikerin werden. Ich wünsche ihnen von Herzen, dass sie sich diese Wünsche erfüllen können.\n\nAm 14. April dieses Jahres endeten ganz ähnliche Träume von über 200 Mädchen im Norden Nigerias auf brutale Weise. Aus ihrer Schule wurden sie nachts entführt und verschleppt. Eine gewalttätige Sekte namens Boko Haram hat diese Mädchen zu Zielobjekten gemacht, und das nur, weil sie lernen und sich aus Unwissenheit und Abhängigkeit befreien wollten. Durch diese Entführung haben die gewaltsamen Konflikte in Nigeria erstmals große internationale Aufmerksamkeit erhalten; sie haben sozusagen 200 Gesichter bekommen.\n\nWir können uns einfühlen in die Angst dieser Jugendlichen, in die Verzweiflung ihrer Eltern oder in die Wut all der Menschen in Nigeria, die sich solche Übergriffe nicht mehr gefallen lassen wollen und gegen die Untätigkeit ihrer Regierung auf die Straße gehen. Unsere Gefühle sind bei den Menschen dort. Auch wenn die weltweite Solidaritätskampagne sicher nicht unmittelbar die Freilassung der Schülerinnen erreichen wird, so hat sie zumindest die Verantwortlichen in Nigeria und den Nachbarländern wachgerüttelt.\n\nAuch ich möchte den Kolumnisten Nicholas Kristof von der New York Times zitieren, und zwar etwas genauer. Er fragt: „Warum lassen sich Fanatiker so schrecken durch Bildung für Mädchen?“ Er antwortet:\n\nEs gibt keine machtvollere Kraft, um eine Gesellschaft umzugestalten. Die größte Bedrohung für den Fanatismus sind nicht Raketen, die von Drohnen abgefeuert werden, sondern Mädchen, die Bücher lesen.\n\nEr bedauert deshalb, dass der Westen viel, viel mehr in Drohnen und Raketen investiert als in Bildung. Da, finde ich, hat er recht.\n\nIch möchte auch die nigerianische Schriftstellerin Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie zitieren, die sich mehr Komplexität in der Debatte wünscht, auch in den westlichen Medien. In der FAZ vom Wochenende forderte sie von uns:\n\nHört auf, es euch so leicht zu machen! Es ist nicht wie mit den Taliban. Nicht alles in der Welt muss in eure vorgefertigten kleinen Schubladen passen.\n\nAuch sie sieht ein militärisches Eingreifen von außen skeptisch und fragt sich und uns:\n\nWenn ich die Präsidentin von Nigeria wäre, würde ich unsere Soldaten nach Amerika schicken, um dessen innenpolitische Probleme zu lösen?\n\nIch glaube, wir müssen bei aller Betroffenheit und Empörung gerade auf solche nachdenklichen Stimmen hören. Wir können die innenpolitischen Konflikte in Nigeria nicht stellvertretend lösen. Nicht wir werden diejenigen sein, welche die Mädchen zurückbringen. Aber wir können diejenigen ermutigen, die Wege aus Hass und Gewalt suchen.\n\nAls Beispiele nenne ich den Priester James Wuye und den Imam Muhammad Ashafa. Beide waren militante Glaubenskämpfer, der eine in einer christlichen Miliz und der andere in einer muslimischen - reiner Zufall, dass nicht der eine den anderen tötete. Irgendwann aber begegneten sie sich und stellten, jeder für sich, fest: Es geht hier gar nicht um Religion, sondern es geht um Macht, Geld und knappe Ressourcen. - Dann gründeten sie das Interreligiöse Zentrum für Mediation, mit dem sie seit fast 20 Jahren unter ihren Landsleuten die Gedanken von Versöhnung und Feindesliebe verbreiten. Beiden gemeinsam wurde im letzten Jahr sowohl der Deutsche Afrika-Preis als auch der Hessische Friedenspreis verliehen.\n\nDass ihr Engagement überhaupt in Deutschland wahrgenommen wurde, ist einem Projekt des Zivilen Friedensdienstes zu verdanken. Leider aber gibt es im -Moment keine solchen Friedensdienstprojekte mit Unterstützung der Bundesregierung mehr in Nigeria. Projekte in derart schwierigen und umkämpften Regionen sind aufwendig und teuer. Die Bundesregierung hat die Mittel für den Zivilen Friedensdienst eingefroren. Diese Entscheidung, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ist einfach falsch.\n\nInvestieren wir doch in die Zukunft! Unterstützen wir Friedenskräfte und Versöhnungsarbeit, nicht nur, aber eben auch in Nigeria! Denn auch dieser Konflikt wird nicht mit Waffengewalt gelöst werden können, sondern nur - dazu haben ja schon einige vor mir Kluges gesagt - mit sozialer Gerechtigkeit und ziviler Konfliktbearbeitung. So könnten wir Verantwortung übernehmen: für den Frieden und für die Freilassung dieser Mädchen und aller anderen Entführten.\"\n10154,gunter-krings,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren Kollegen! Am 28. April 2015 haben der Bundesminister des Innern, Thomas de Maizière, und sein tschechischer Amtskollege Chovanec in Prag einen neuen deutsch-tschechischen Polizeivertrag unterzeichnet. Die Neuverhandlungen waren im Rahmen des im Jahr 2012 begonnenen ministeriellen deutsch-tschechischen Dialogs über die Bekämpfung der Kriminalität im gemeinsamen Grenzraum beschlossen worden.\n\nDafür gab es zwei wesentliche Gründe: Zum einen gab es eine rechtliche Notwendigkeit. Bekanntlich ist Tschechien seit dem 1. Mai 2004 Mitglied der Europäischen Union. Seit Dezember 2007 fanden auch die Schengen-Regelungen für Tschechien vollständig Anwendung. Der geltende Polizeivertrag stammte aber aus dem Jahr 2000, also aus der Zeit noch vor diesen beiden Ereignissen. Er musste also für beide Länder gleichermaßen dem geltenden europäischen Rechtsrahmen entsprechend angepasst werden.\n\nZum anderen gab es den beiderseitigen Wunsch, auch unabhängig von diesen rechtlichen Änderungen die grenzüberschreitende polizeiliche Zusammenarbeit weiter zu vertiefen und zu verbessern. Ziel war also die Schaffung erweiterter Handlungsmöglichkeiten für die Polizei, aber auch für den Zoll, um die Bevölkerung besser vor grenzüberschreitender Kriminalität zu schützen. Meine Damen und Herren, heute können wir sagen: Dies ist uns mit dem neuen Vertrag auch gelungen.\n\nEr stellt einen wirklichen Meilenstein für die Sicherheit im deutsch-tschechischen Nachbarschaftsraum dar. So haben Polizeibeamte bei gemeinsamen Einsätzen beiderseits der Grenze künftig die Befugnis, auch Hoheitsrechte auszuüben. Damit können gemeinsame Streifen paritätisch im Format eins zu eins besetzt werden, was eine effektivere Einsatzplanung ermöglicht. Die Beamten aus dem Nachbarstaat unterstehen dann jeweils der Leitung eines Beamten des Gebietsstaates. Das haben wir auf der Grundlage anderer Verträge schon eingeübt, und das hat sich bewährt.\n\nNeu ist eine Regelung, nach der polizeiliche Maßnahmen in grenzüberschreitenden Zügen künftig über die Grenze hinaus fortgesetzt werden können. Die Möglichkeit der unmittelbaren Zusammenarbeit in den Grenzgebieten wurde auf das Gebiet von ganz Sachsen und Bayern erweitert mit einer entsprechend erweiterten Zuständigkeit des schon bestehenden Gemeinsamen Zentrums der deutsch-tschechischen Polizei- und Zollzusammenarbeit Petrovice-Schwandorf. Dies verkürzt die Kommunikationswege bei der Zusammenarbeit erheblich.\n\nSchließlich - auch das ist wichtig - wird der Zoll nunmehr vollständig und damit wesentlich stärker als bisher in den neuen Vertrag einbezogen. Die Zollbehörden diesseits und jenseits der Grenze werden zum Beispiel auch im Rahmen der Verfolgung von Zuwiderhandlungen gegen Zoll- und Verbrauchsteuervorschriften zusammenarbeiten und insbesondere auch den Drogenschmuggel besser bekämpfen können.\n\nAn der Grenze zu Tschechien haben die Polizei- und Zollbehörden schwerpunktmäßig mit Drogenkriminalität, aber auch mit Diebesbanden zu tun. Vor allen Dingen die Verbreitung der Droge Crystal Meth auf beiden Seiten der Grenze bereitet nach wie vor große Sorge. Im Jahre 2015 sind zwar sowohl die Fallzahlen als auch die Sicherstellungsmengen von Crystal Meth in Deutschland gegenüber dem Vorjahr leicht gesunken, ein Grund zur Entwarnung ist das aber nicht.\n\nNach wie vor sind Sachsen, Bayern, Sachsen-Anhalt, Thüringen, Brandenburg und Berlin am stärksten betroffen. Aber auch in Rheinland-Pfalz war eine deutliche Steigerung zu verzeichnen. In den meisten Fällen stammt das in Deutschland sichergestellte Crystal Meth eben aus Tschechien, wo es unter anderem auf sogenannten Asiamärkten in grenznahen Ortschaften zu Deutschland illegal gehandelt wird.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, einer vertieften deutsch-tschechischen Kooperation gerade in diesem Bereich kommt daher besondere Bedeutung zu. Es gibt auch bereits unter dem jetzigen Regime erste und wichtige Erfolge zu verzeichnen. Im November 2014 konnten beispielsweise sage und schreibe 2,9 Tonnen Chlorephedrin, einem Grundstoff zur Herstellung von Crystal Meth, in Deutschland sichergestellt werden; ein messbarer Erfolg der guten Kooperation mit Tschechien. Mit dem neuen Polizeivertrag werden wir den Kampf gegen diese Horrordroge mit verstärkter Kraft fortsetzen.\n\nDie Bekämpfung der Kriminalität in der Grenzregion bleibt eine große Herausforderung, der wir uns stellen müssen und der wir uns auch tatsächlich stellen. Es ist daher eine gute Nachricht, dass der Vertrag, natürlich abhängig von der Entscheidung des Deutschen Bundestages, voraussichtlich noch in der zweiten Jahreshälfte 2016 in Kraft treten kann.\n\nFür die Sicherheit unserer Bürger reichen im 21. Jahrhundert nationale Rechtsrahmen alleine längst nicht mehr aus.\n\nUnsere Sicherheit steht und fällt mit der Zusammenarbeit in Europa. Dafür steht dieser Polizeivertrag für den deutsch-tschechischen Grenzraum, und dafür steht die Innenpolitik der Großen Koalition.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n15628,irene-mihalic,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Mit unserem Gesetzentwurf zur Einrichtung eines Polizeibeauftragten beim Deutschen Bundestag wird eine wichtige Forderung umgesetzt, die - wie wir gerade jetzt wieder gehört haben bzw. noch hören werden - drei von vier Fraktionen hier im Haus verbindet.\n\nIch bin dankbar für die Worte der Kollegen Gunkel und Tempel. Sie haben viele Beispiele genannt, weshalb eine solche Einrichtung wirklich sinnvoll ist. Deswegen kann ich mich hier auf ein paar Grundsätzlichkeiten beschränken und das Gesagte noch einmal sinnvoll zusammenfassen.\n\nBei der Stelle geht es im Kern um die Kontrolle des staatlichen Gewaltmonopols im Innern und um eine moderne Verwaltung, die sich dessen bewusst ist, dass sie gegenüber dem Parlament und den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern zur Rechenschaft für ihr Handeln verpflichtet ist. Es geht aber eben auch um die Beschäftigten der Polizeien des Bundes und ihre Sicht auf die Dinge sowie um bessere Arbeitsbedingungen und einen besseren Schutz der betroffenen Bürgerinnen und Bürger. Beides bedingt sich. Wir müssen beides stärken. Beides ist auch Teil unserer grundrechtlichen Position.\n\nDer Kollege Gunkel hat vorhin zu Recht folgenden Sachverhalt beschrieben: Wenn zum Beispiel Polizisten Zeugen einer Straftat, begangen von ihren Kollegen, werden und den Fall aus verständlichen Gründen eben nicht sofort zur Anzeige bringen, dann sollten sie sich an eine Stelle außerhalb der Polizei wenden können, ohne befürchten zu müssen, selbst wegen Strafvereitelung angezeigt zu werden.\n\nLieber Kollege Baumann, dann hilft eben leider auch der Petitionsausschuss nicht weiter. Denn der eigentliche Fall kann nicht aufgeklärt werden, wenn alle Beteiligten die Aussage verweigern.\n\nAllein daran sieht man: Das bestehende System steht einer echten Fehlerkultur leider im Weg, und das muss sich dringend ändern.\n\nKollege Gunkel, damit sollen keine Parallelermittlungen durchgeführt werden. Auch das ist ein weitverbreitetes Missverständnis. Es geht im Kern um das Nachvollziehen der Ermittlungen, um parlamentarische Kontrolle und Aufarbeitung solcher Fälle. Und dabei geht es eben auch ganz konkret um die Weiterentwicklung einer Sicherheitsarchitektur, die bundesweit - auch für die Bundesländer, die eine solche Einrichtung noch nicht haben - als Vorbild dienen könnte. Das hat auch eine große Anzahl von Experten in der Anhörung bestätigt.\n\nSie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der CDU - das muss ich Ihnen an dieser Stelle jetzt noch einmal sagen -, haben für die Anhörung im Ausschuss - das tut mir sehr leid - Rainer Wendt als Sachverständigen benannt. Allein schon durch die Benennung dieses Sachverständigen haben Sie sehr deutlich gemacht, was Sie von parlamentarischer Kontrolle der Polizei, Verantwortlichkeit und sachgerechter Aufarbeitung halten.\n\nWir sagen: Ein Fehlverhalten darf weder unter den Teppich gekehrt noch drakonisch bestraft werden. Es ist immer wichtig, nach den Ursachen zu fragen: Wie ist es zu einem Fehler gekommen? Was kann in Zukunft besser laufen? Ein Polizeibeauftragter würde hier einen wichtigen Beitrag liefern und uns hier im Parlament eine wichtige und neutrale Innensicht in die Polizei hinein ermöglichen - auch für mehr Sachlichkeit in der öffentlichen Diskussion.\n\nDas ist auch notwendig, weil sich die Arbeitsweise und die Befugnisse der Polizei in den letzten 15 Jahren stark verändert haben. Das ist zum Teil auch eine Folge der Digitalisierung und von neuen Befugnissen, die die Polizei hat. Gleichzeitig hat man die Hürden für die Strafbarkeit bei manchen Delikten so weit gesenkt, dass es auch darum geht, zum Schutz der Grundrechte und für mehr Transparenz und Effizienz im Sinne eines echten Gewinns für die innere Sicherheit die Wirkungen einem parlamentarischen Blick zu unterziehen.\n\nJedes Mal, wenn es um die Erweiterung polizeilicher Befugnisse und die Verschärfung des Strafrechts geht, steht die Große Koalition zusammen. Sie haben es im Ausschuss leider abgelehnt, an dieser Stelle einmal die bürgerrechtliche Position zu stärken.\n\nEs würde mich sehr freuen, wenn unser Gesetzentwurf hier im Haus eine breite Zustimmung finden würde. Darum haben wir Grüne uns in Gesprächen mit der Linken, mit der SPD und auch mit der Union sehr bemüht. Die Rückmeldung aus der Union, Herr Schuster, war aber, dass Sie den Polizeibeauftragten zwar auch irgendwie wollen, aber erst nach der Wahl in einer Koalition verhandeln wollen. Das kostet nur Zeit,\n\nes sei denn, es geschieht vielleicht noch ein Wunder und die Kanzlerin gibt noch ein Interview in der Brigitte.\n\nDann findet sich vielleicht auch dafür eine Mehrheit hier im Haus, wenn diese Entscheidung zur Gewissenentscheidung erklärt wird.\n\nAnsonsten müssen wir vermutlich auf die nächste Wahlperiode warten, was ich sehr bedaure. Dann sind Sie, Kollege Gunkel, und Sie, lieber Herr Baumann, leider nicht mehr dabei.\n\nIch hoffe trotzdem auf breite Zustimmung zu unserem Gesetzentwurf - wenn nicht heute, dann hoffentlich in der nächsten Wahlperiode.\n\nGanz herzlichen Dank.\"\n1276,mahmut-ozdemir,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Während wir uns heute mit dem Antrag der Fraktion Die Linke befassen, wurde die zweite Tarifverhandlungsrunde zwischen den Beschäftigten im öffentlichen Dienst des Bundes und der Kommunen und deren Arbeitgebern eingeläutet. Das - und eben nicht der Deutsche Bundestag - sind im Übrigen die wahren Verantwortlichen, die den Tarifabschluss am Ende vereinbaren. Es handelt sich hierbei um Verantwortliche, die sich auf Grundsätze wie Tarifpartnerschaft und Tarifautonomie nicht zuletzt im Schutze von Art. 9 Grundgesetz berufen können, auf Grundsätze, die tief im Demokratie- und Sozialstaatsprinzip wurzeln.\n\n- Das kann ich Ihnen an einer anderen Stelle gern noch einmal erläutern, wenn Sie es möchten.\n\nDiese Vorüberlegungen führen mich zu Beginn meiner Rede direkt zu der Frage, was dieser Antrag eigentlich bezwecken mag. Dieser Antrag enthält keine haushalterische Würdigung, keinen Vorschlag zur Gegenfinanzierung einer Tarifanpassung, drischt aber munter Phrasen von verteilungsneutralen Spielräumen und suggeriert, dass der öffentliche Dienst nie gewürdigt wird. Er enthält im Übrigen ein Zahlenwerk, dessen Analyse sich nur der Fraktion Die Linke erschließt, mir aber nicht.\n\nSchauen Sie sich doch einfach eine Übersicht über die Tarifabschlüsse von 1990 bis heute an. Die Würdigung des öffentlichen Dienstes basiert durch die Bank auf einer insgesamt ausgewogenen und kompromissfreudigen Kooperation zwischen dem Bundesministerium des Innern und den Kommunen auf der einen Seite und den Beschäftigten des öffentlichen Dienstes auf der anderen Seite. Ich stufe den Antrag daher als untauglichen Versuch ein, auf Kosten der Beschäftigten des öffentlichen Dienstes eine Generalabrechnung mit der Wirtschafts- und Finanzpolitik der vergangenen Jahre zu betreiben. Damit ist den Tarifparteien von dieser Stelle aus überhaupt nicht geholfen, wohl aber mit der Wahrnehmung parlamentarischer Pflichten, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen. So zeigen wir Sozialdemokraten Haltung und Solidarität mit dem öffentlichen Dienst.\n\n- Ja, ist ja gut.\n\nIch stimme Ihnen bei der Bestandsaufnahme sogar in Teilen zu: Der öffentliche Dienst ist unverzichtbar, gerade weil wir als Abgeordnete Aufgaben schaffen, die hoheitlich und im weitesten Sinne öffentlich zu erledigen sind. Der öffentliche Dienst hat in vorherigen Tarifrunden schmerzhafte, aber für unser Gemeinwesen auch notwendige Opfer erbracht; das zieht keiner in Zweifel. Diese Opfer nötigen mir den höchsten Respekt ab.\n\nAber die Wertschätzung eines Beschäftigten drückt sich nicht nur in Geld aus. Keiner von uns in diesem Hause ist - das unterstelle ich einfach einmal - Abgeordneter wegen des Geldes. Kein Polizeibeamter trägt seine Uniform wegen des Geldes. Keine Erzieherin und kein Erzieher geht jeden Tag in die Kita nur wegen des Geldes.\n\n- Ich habe Ihnen auch zugehört. Ich weiß, dass das für Sie schmerzhaft ist.\n\nIch möchte mit dieser idealistischen Betrachtungsweise gar nicht ablenken, aber das Augenmerk darauf richten, dass ein Beruf zwar die wirtschaftliche Lebensgrundlage darstellt, aber ohne akzeptable Rahmenbedingungen überhaupt nichts wert ist. Die Kollegen von der Müllabfuhr, die jeden Morgen um 4.30 Uhr ans Werk gehen, die Kollegen von Bus und Bahn, die Taktungen halten, die Erzieher, die auch mal ein paar Minuten dranhängen, weil die Eltern noch im Stau stehen,\n\nalle diese Beschäftigten können sich unserer Solidarität jederzeit sicher sein.\n\nDa besteht überhaupt kein Dissens in diesem Haus. Führen Sie einen solchen doch nicht künstlich herbei!\n\nUm das Ergebnis vorwegzunehmen und den Antrag damit weitestgehend zu erledigen: Es wird am Ende der Tarifverhandlungen ein Mehr für den öffentlichen Dienst geben, und mit hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit wird der Tarifabschluss, wie in der Vergangenheit regelmäßig geschehen, eins zu eins auf die Beamten übertragen werden. Die Frage ist und bleibt, was die Aufgabe des Deutschen Bundestages hier und heute ist.\n\nJedenfalls ist es nicht die Aufgabe des Deutschen Bundestages, sich mit diesem Antrag in den Rang einer Tarifvertragspartei zu erheben\n\nund zu beanspruchen, anstelle der Arbeitgeber- oder Arbeitnehmerseite zu sprechen.\n\nDieser Antrag missachtet die Tarifautonomie der verhandelnden Parteien und fällt der Bundesregierung in den Rücken, nur um den streikenden und verhandelnden Beschäftigten Unterstützung vorzugaukeln,\n\nindem man eine Höchstforderung im Rahmen von Verhandlungen abschreibt. Keine Verhandlungspartei - ich betone: das gilt für beide Seiten - erwartet ernsthaft, dass den anfänglichen Forderungen entsprochen wird. Deshalb ist es weder ernsthafte noch wahrhafte Politik, was Sie hier betreiben.\n\nDer Antrag verkennt die politische Wirklichkeit mutmaßlich, allem Anschein nach auch bewusst; sonst müssten Ausführungen zur Konsolidierung des Bundeshaushalts dort Platz finden.\n\nDie Ausführungen zur Verteilungsgerechtigkeit gehen völlig fehl. Der Antrag verkennt dabei, dass die Gehaltsstrukturen des öffentlichen Dienstes ein weites Band spannen. Soziale Gerechtigkeit spiegelt sich auch hier wider, findet ihre Grenze aber spätestens im Gleichheitsgebot. Entscheidungen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Fraktion Die Linke, erfordern das Rückgrat, auch unangenehme Haushaltslagen in Politik umzumünzen.\n\nDie Beschäftigten des öffentlichen Dienstes brauchen keine Abgeordneten, die sich bei Streikkundgebungen nur für ein Foto hergeben, das man danach twittern oder posten kann. Der öffentliche Dienst braucht Abgeordnete, die exakt das halten, was sie fordern, die exakt das tun, was sie versprechen.\n\n- Wenn ich mehr Redezeit hätte, würde ich es Ihnen erklären. - Es mag ja an der fehlenden Erfahrung einer Regierungsbeteiligung liegen - das sehe ich ein -,\n\naber ich muss schon fragen: Wie lange wollen Sie eigentlich Anträge stellen, an deren Umsetzung Sie selber berechtigterweise zweifeln müssen?\n\nLassen Sie mich nach diesem Ausflug in die realitätsnahe Politik\n\nnoch einmal an das Thema Arbeitsbedingungen anknüpfen. Während wir Haushaltsdebatten führen, gehen Beschäftigte in Pension und nehmen ihre Stellen sozusagen mit in den Ruhestand. Es fehlen dann Stellen, was den Arbeitsdruck bei den im Dienst stehenden Beschäftigten erhöht oder die Erledigung einer Aufgabe schlicht entfallen lässt. Das Stichwort, auf das ich hier anspiele, lautet „Aufgabenkritik“. Es geht um eine Aufgabenkritik, die unter den Aspekten der Qualitätssicherung und Personalsteuerung im Angesicht der Haushaltslage zu erfolgen hat, eine Aufgabenkritik, die Tarifautonomie und Mitbestimmung auch und erst recht im öffentlichen Dienst zum zentralen Ausgangspunkt macht.\n\nDeshalb sind die Tarifverhandlungen aus meiner Sicht dringend notwendig. Die erste Streikwelle hat uns deutlich gezeigt, was das in Ballungsräumen bedeuten kann. 45 000 Beschäftigte, die die Arbeit niederlegen, darunter 10 000 allein im öffentlichen Personennahverkehr, das ist kein Pappenstiel. Tarifverhandlungen aber oder Anträge im Bundestag entheben uns nicht der Aufgabe, objektiv zu definieren, was der Staat im 21. Jahrhundert zu leisten bereit ist und wozu er verpflichtet ist.\n\nGehaltsanpassungen, bezogen auf die zu erledigenden Aufgaben, wirken immer nur kurzfristig. Sprechen Sie doch einmal mit den Beschäftigten im öffentlichen Dienst! Ich unterstelle, dass Sie das nicht tun.\n\nIch war im vergangenen Sommer bei Streikkundgebungen der Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Wasser- und Schifffahrtsverwaltung, die sich für einen Tarifvertrag einsetzen müssen. Sprechen Sie doch einmal mit den Beschäftigten in mittlerweile privatisierten Staatsunternehmen oder mit den Beschäftigten in Justiz und Polizei! Die lassen sich nicht nur hinter verschlossenen Türen die Aussage entlocken, dass sie bereit wären, auf Geld zu verzichten, wenn dafür mehr Personal eingestellt würde. Auch das gehört zur Realität, die Sie verkennen.\n\n- Dass Sie schreien, zeigt mir, dass Sie keine Argumente mehr haben. Schön! - So etwas geht aber nur mit einer Aufgabenanalyse im öffentlichen Dienst, um darauf Arbeitsbedingungen und Gehaltsstrukturen aufzubauen.\n\nDiesen Zielkonflikt zu lösen, das ist die Aufgabe aller Fraktionen in diesem Haus. Stattdessen schwingen Sie sich mit Ihrem Antrag aber zur alleinigen Arbeitnehmervertretung auf und schreiben in Ihrem Antrag die Forderungen auch noch unvollständig ab. Die Verdi-Bundes-tarifkommission fordert nämlich bei einjähriger Tariflaufzeit einen Sockelbetrag von 100 Euro plus 3,5 Prozent mehr Gehalt, aber auch verbindliche Übernahmeregelungen für Auszubildende und den Ausschluss von sachgrundloser Befristung. Das haben Sie in Ihrer Begründung zwar angeführt, aber das scheint Ihnen doch so unwichtig zu sein, dass Sie es nicht in Ihren Antrag hineinschreiben. Wenn wir diese Debatte schon führen dürfen - oder besser: müssen -, dann bitte schön auch vollständig.\n\nEs ist höchst fragwürdig, die Bundesregierung aufzufordern, den Tarifforderungen vollumfänglich stattzugeben, obschon Sie wissen, dass nur der Bundestag in seiner Gesamtheit über den Haushalt entscheidet. Sie schieben eine Verantwortung, die dem Parlament obliegt, einfach weg, nämlich die Verantwortung, darüber zu entscheiden, welche Aufgaben der öffentliche Dienst zu erledigen hat und was die Erledigung dieser Aufgaben kostet. Mit Ihren Anträgen verhält es sich so wie mit den im Training gefährlichen Torschützen: Im Meisterschaftsspiel laufen sie vor dem Ball einfach davon.\n\nGerade deshalb ermuntere ich Sie: Lassen Sie uns doch die Facharbeit hierzu leisten! Schreiben Sie einmal einen Antrag weniger, und nutzen Sie die Zeit, um mit uns Verbesserungen für den öffentlichen Dienst zu erreichen und zu erarbeiten, Verbesserungen, die auch Haushaltserfordernissen standhalten!\n\nDazu zählt weiter, dass wir schon dieses Jahr Kommunen bei der Grundsicherung im Alter vollständig entlasten werden, in den Folgejahren 2015 und 2016 jeweils 1 Milliarde Euro investieren\n\n- ja, dann helfen Sie dabei mit! - und 2017 und 2018 einen weiteren Aufwuchs auf 5 Milliarden Euro haben, um die finanzielle Entlastung zu verstetigen. Das, was bei den Ländern die Schuldenbremse ist, ist nämlich bei den Kommunen die im Raum stehende Drohung der Aufsichtsbehörden mit Haushaltssperren. Der Vorsitzende des Städte- und Gemeindebundes hat es doch richtig und deutlich formuliert: In der derzeitigen Situation würden wir uns mit einem überhöhten Tarifabschluss gegenseitig schaden,\n\nbevor wir nicht vorher die unbedingt notwendigen Entlastungen durchgeführt haben.\n\nErgänzt werden müssen diese Aspekte zusätzlich um eine Verwaltungsmodernisierung: Zentrale und dezen-trale Personalsteuerung, ausgewogene Altersstrukturen und gewinnbringender Personaleinsatz nach Bedarf\n\nmüssen diesen Bereich attraktiv machen. Das heißt auch, dass sich die Vereinbarkeit von Beruf, Familie und Pflege in einem gerechten Bezahlsystem widerspiegeln muss.\n\nDie Flexibilität der Tätigkeiten im öffentlichen Dienst mit Teil- und Vollzeitmodellen und anderen Handlungsmöglichkeiten ist mit Geld überhaupt nicht aufzuwiegen. Schon jetzt, in seinem derzeitigen Aufgabenprofil, ist der öffentliche Dienst ein Garant für die Wahrung und Umsetzung unserer Staats-, Gesellschafts- und Wirtschaftsordnung. Gerade deshalb wenden sich die Beschäftigten im öffentlichen Dienst mit einer großen Hingabe auch ihrem Recht auf Mitbestimmung zu.\n\nDiese Art der Mitbestimmung ist für die Sozialdemokraten das Leistungsmerkmal des öffentlichen Dienstes, das wir schützen und wahren wollen; denn sowohl der Staat als Arbeitgeber als auch die Untergebenen als Arbeitnehmer sind vereint in dem Streben nach Funktionsfähigkeit der öffentlichen Daseinsfürsorge. In diesem gemeinsamen Ziel verbunden wünsche ich den wahren Handelnden, die nicht hier im Bundestag sitzen, sondern am Verhandlungstisch, Besonnenheit, gegenseitige Wertschätzung, aber auch harte Verhandlungen, damit die Beschäftigten wieder zurück an ihre Arbeit kehren können.\n\nDamit danke ich für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit und wünsche allen verhandelnden Kolleginnen und Kollegen in Potsdam von hier aus ein herzliches Glückauf.\"\n12271,martina-renner,\"Ich möchte die Gelegenheit nutzen, gleich vier Nachfragen zu stellen.\n\nErstens. Haben Sie sich darüber hinaus zum Beispiel mit dem Verfahrensbevollmächtigten von Herrn Edward Snowden in den USA und in Europa in Verbindung gesetzt, um weitere Informationen zu den Strafvorwürfen zu erhalten?\n\nZweitens.\n\nIch kann gerne alle Fragen im Zusammenhang stellen. Ich weiß nicht, wie sich der Herr Staatssekretär das wünscht.\n\nDanke. - Würden Sie mir recht geben, dass die Angaben aus dem Justizministerium der USA maßgeblich von Bedeutung sind - in Ihrem Haus, aber auch insgesamt in der Bundesregierung - für die Beurteilung der Frage, ob Edward Snowden Auslieferungsschutz gewährt werden muss, also ob ihm in den USA politische Strafverfolgung droht?\n\nDrittens. Müssten vor dem Hintergrund der Relevanz dieser Informationen diese nicht auch an den Untersuchungsausschuss gelangen, der sich mit der Frage einer Realisierung der Zeugenladung intensiv zu befassen hat?\n\nZuletzt würde ich gerne noch von Ihnen wissen: Wann kann der Untersuchungsausschuss mit der Beantwortung unserer vor zweieinhalb Jahren gestellten Frage rechnen, in der es darum geht, inwieweit Sie dem Amtshilfeersuchen aus dem Untersuchungsausschuss Folge leisten würden, eine sichere Einreise von Edward Snowden zu gewähren? Würden Sie die Frage nach einem möglichen Auslieferungshindernis bejahen? Ihnen liegen ja jetzt alle - zwar geheim eingestuften - Informationen aus dem Justizministerium vor. Darf der Untersuchungsausschuss jetzt endlich mit einer Antwort aus Ihrem Haus rechnen?\"\n10720,alexander-hoffmann,\"Danke, Herr Kollege Fechner, für das Zulassen der Zwischenfrage; danke, Frau Präsidentin. - Kollege Fechner, Sie haben gerade ausdrücklich betont, dass Sie die Entscheidung des Bundesjustizministers und die Stellungnahme des Außenministers Frank-Walter Steinmeier für richtig halten. Ich habe mich zu dieser Zwischenfrage veranlasst gefühlt, weil Sie das im Ausschuss schon einmal gesagt haben. Ich habe dann im Ausschuss den Staatssekretär und auch Sie gefragt, wie denn die materiell-rechtliche Begründung für diese Einschätzung lautet. Wir leben ja in einem Rechtsstaat. Dort gibt es gesetzliche Regelungen. Solange sie gelten, sind sie anzuwenden. Ich war damals verwundert, weil weder der Staatssekretär noch Sie eine materiell-rechtliche Begründung für diese Einschätzung haben liefern können. Deswegen möchte ich Sie fragen, ob Sie jetzt, bei dieser Gelegenheit, die Chance nutzen wollen, mir diese Begründung zu geben.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n14565,mathias-middelberg,\"Herzlichen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Ich beginne mit einem Zitat und bitte um Aufmerksamkeit: „Wenn der kleine Bäckerladen anständig und selbstverständlich seine Steuern zahlt und dadurch unser Gemeinwesen finanziert, der globale Kaffeekonzern sich aber davor drückt und sein Geld in Steueroasen parkt, dann geht es nicht gerecht zu“ in diesem Land.\n\nDas ist eine zutreffende und richtige Erkenntnis des Kanzlerbewerbers der SPD bei seiner Nominierungsrede Ende Januar.\n\nDaraus zog der Kollege Schulz den Schluss, Steuerflucht müsse ein zentrales Wahlkampfthema werden.\n\nDie erste Erkenntnis war richtig, die zweite halte ich für weniger durchdacht.\n\nDer Kollege Schulz stellt damit auch Ihre Arbeit quasi unter den Scheffel; denn wir arbeiten hier seit Jahren an der Bekämpfung der Steuerflucht, und zwar, wie ich glaube, mit großem und gutem Erfolg.\n\nDas werde ich Ihnen jetzt im Einzelnen auseinanderdividieren. Fangen wir einmal an: Vor über sechs Jahren, im Jahr 2011, hat unser Finanzminister Wolfgang Schäuble gemeinsam mit seinem britischen und seinem französischen Kollegen das Projekt gegen die Aushöhlung von Steuerbemessungsgrundlagen und gegen Gewinnverlagerungen - wir kennen das als BEPS-Projekt - auf OECD- und G-20-Ebene initiiert.\n\nDort sind Regeln gegen die kreative Steuergestaltung der internationalen Konzerne festgelegt.\n\nSeitdem setzen wir hier regelmäßig und Schritt für Schritt Maßnahmen gegen den illegalen Steuerbetrug und gegen die legale Steuervermeidung um. Ich nenne Folgendes exemplarisch:\n\nIm Oktober 2014 hat Wolfgang Schäuble hier in Berlin den automatischen Informationsaustausch über Finanzkonten initiiert. Über 100 Staaten sind diesem Abkommen mittlerweile beigetreten. In Zukunft wird es nicht mehr möglich sein, dass ein deutscher Steuerbürger ein Auslandskonto eröffnet und wir in Deutschland davon nichts erfahren. Diese Dinge werden automatisch gemeldet. Fälle wie Uli Hoeneß oder Alice Schwarzer, über die wir in diesem Hause intensiv diskutiert haben, sind in Zukunft nicht mehr möglich.\n\nDas ist bisher das effizienteste Vorgehen gegen Steuerbetrug international, und das geht auf die Initiative des Finanzministers Wolfgang Schäuble zurück.\n\n2016 haben wir hier das Gesetz zur Umsetzung der EU-Amtshilferichtlinie beschlossen und damit den automatischen Informationsaustausch über die Tax Rulings - das sind die Steuerabsprachen - initiiert. Wir kennen alle die Diskussionen über Lux-Leaks, die wir auch hier im Hause intensiv geführt haben. Ich meine, das müsste auch Herr Schulz mitbekommen haben. Er war ja live vor Ort. Irgendwie hat er aber nicht mitbekommen, dass wir ein Gesetz auf den Weg gebracht haben, um dafür zu sorgen, dass Lux-Leaks in Zukunft nicht mehr nötig sind. Wir haben mit diesem Gesetz auch das Country-by-Country Reporting gegenüber den Steuerbehörden beschlossen. Das sorgt demnächst für absolute Transparenz über die steuerlichen Sachverhalte der Unternehmen in den verschiedenen Ländern und ermöglicht eine faire Besteuerung.\n\nHeute beschließen wir den Entwurf des Steuerumgehungsbekämpfungsgesetzes. Es ist gegen die Briefkastenfirmen in Steueroasen gerichtet; Stichwort „Panama Papers“. Dazu wird gleich mein Kollege Feiler das Nähere ausführen. Und wir beschließen den Entwurf gegen schädliche Steuerpraktiken im Zusammenhang mit Rechteüberlassungen. Dabei geht es um Kaffeehausketten wie Starbucks; wir nennen sie hier einmal Buckstars.\n\nBuckstars ist in Deutschland tätig, hat viele Filialen, verdient hier viel Geld und müsste eigentlich auch gute Steuern zahlen. Buckstars hat aber irgendeine Partner- oder Tochtergesellschaft im Ausland, in den Niederlanden, in Irland - konzernintern -, und zahlt für Lizenzen dahin Geld. Das führt dazu, dass die Gewinne von Buckstars in Deutschland gemindert werden. Deswegen zahlen die hier effektiv wenig Steuern. Das wäre noch okay, wenn sie für die Lizenzeinnahmen im Ausland, in den Niederlanden oder in Irland, adäquat zur Kasse gebeten würden. Das ist aber leider auch nicht der Fall. Das heißt, am Ende zahlt dieser Konzern ganz wenig Steuern. Das ist ungerecht, und das ist wettbewerbsschädlich, vor allen Dingen auch gegenüber unseren Mittelständlern hier in Deutschland.\n\nDeswegen gehen wir jetzt mit einer Lizenzschrankenregelung dagegen vor. Das ist das gleiche Prinzip wie bei der Zinsschranke.\n\nDie Zinsschranke funktioniert, und die Lizenzschranke wird in adäquater Weise funktionieren. Wer im Ausland nicht mindestens 25 Prozent Steuern zahlt, der kann das, was er im Ausland für irgendwelche Rechte oder Lizenzen zahlt, bei uns dann demnächst nicht mehr steuermindernd geltend machen. Es ist richtig, dass wir das so regeln.\n\nDeswegen - damit komme ich schon zum Schluss - verabschieden wir heute zum wiederholten Mal grundlegende Gesetze - heute sind es zwei -, die gegen Steuerflucht und für mehr Steuergerechtigkeit äußerst wirksam sein werden. Uns wäre lieb, wenn Sie dem Kollegen aus Würselen vielleicht einmal eine Kopie dieser Vorlagen zur Verfügung stellen würden; dann wäre er im Hinblick auf den Wahlkampf besser informiert.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n6694,stephan-mayer,\"Sehr verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr verehrte Kolleginnen! Sehr geehrte Kollegen! Wenn ein einfacher Innenpolitiker wie ich in einer Haushaltsdebatte sprechen darf, dann muss schon etwas Besonderes passiert sein. Das ist auch der Fall. Dieser Nachtragshaushalt 2015 weist einen klaren innenpolitischen Schwerpunkt auf. Ich sage hier in aller Form: Danke an die Kolleginnen und Kollegen im Haushaltsausschuss, die dies ermöglicht haben. Ich sage auch ein herzliches Dankeschön an das Bundesfinanzministerium und das Bundesinnenministerium; denn dieser Nachtragshaushalt kann sich gerade angesichts der großen innenpolitischen Herausforderungen, die wir derzeit haben, wirklich sehen lassen.\n\nFühren wir uns noch einmal vor Augen: Wir hatten im Jahr 2008 etwa 28 000 Asylbewerber in Deutschland. Wir hatten dann vor zwei Jahren 127 000, im letzten Jahr 202 000 Erstanträge, und die für dieses Jahr aktualisierte Prognose des Bundesamtes für Migration und Flüchtlinge lautet sage und schreibe 400 000, also noch einmal eine Verdoppelung der Zahlen vom letzten Jahr. Deswegen ist es sachgerecht und auch wichtig, dass die Stellenzahl im Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge erhöht wird.\n\nIch bin den Haushaltskollegen schon sehr dankbar dafür, dass für die Haushaltsjahre 2014 und 2015 insgesamt 650 zusätzliche Stellen geschaffen wurden. Ich finde es auch sehr erfreulich, dass mit diesem Nachtragshaushalt beschlossen wird, dass noch einmal zusätzliche 750 Stellen im BAMF geschaffen werden. Das ist wirklich ein klares Signal dafür, dass der Bund sich seiner Verantwortung im vollen Umfang bewusst ist und dass er dieser Verantwortung gerecht wird.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, im Koalitionsvertrag steht, dass wir die durchschnittliche Dauer von Asylverfahren auf drei Monate bringen wollen. Wir sind da schon auf einem sehr guten Weg. Die derzeitige Verfahrensdauer liegt bei etwa sechs Monaten. Aber da gibt es - um dies offen zu sagen - noch Luft nach oben oder, besser gesagt, nach unten.\n\nDeswegen ist es richtig, dass diese 750 Stellen geschaffen werden.\n\nEs ist dann aber auch wichtig - das möchte ich mit diesem Dank verbinden -,\n\ndass diese Stellen schnell besetzt werden. Man hört, dass die 350 Stellen, die in diesem Jahr zusätzlich zur Verfügung stehen, noch nicht komplett besetzt worden sind. Da glaube ich schon, dass von der Debatte heute der starke Wunsch in Richtung BAMF ausgehen sollte: Bitte sorgen Sie dafür, dass diese Stellen schnell mit Personal unterfüttert werden!\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es ist ebenso gut und erfreulich, dass 25 Millionen Euro zusätzlich für Sprach- und Integrationskurse zur Verfügung gestellt werden. Auch hier, glaube ich, kann sich das, was der Bund macht, wirklich sehen lassen. Der Bund stellt in diesem Jahr über 270 Millionen Euro für Sprach- und Integrationskurse zur Verfügung. Das ist, glaube ich, durchaus honorig. Darauf können wir auch stolz sein.\n\nEbenso werden 4,3 Millionen Euro zusätzlich für Dolmetscher zur Verfügung gestellt und 5 Millionen Euro zusätzlich für die Bundespolizei, um die erforderlichen Rückführungen bzw. Abschiebungen durchführen zu können.\n\nIch sage hier eines ganz offen: Der Bund wird mit diesem Nachtragshaushalt in Sachen Asyl- und Flüchtlingspolitik seiner Verantwortung gerecht. Ich erwarte jetzt aber auch von den Ländern, dass sie das Ihre tun. Die Länder müssen jetzt auch tätig werden, wenn es darum geht, mehr Stellen bei den Ausländerbehörden und mehr Stellen bei den Verwaltungsgerichten zu schaffen; denn es reicht nicht, dass die Verfahren kürzer werden und schneller durchgeführt werden. Wenn der Verfahrensbescheid des BAMF vorliegt, dann muss auch der Ausweisungsbescheid schnell erstellt werden. Es darf hier nicht ein Flaschenhals entstehen dergestalt, dass zwar die Verfahren beschleunigt durchgeführt werden und das BAMF beschleunigt tätig wird, dass sich aber der Stau bei den Ausländerbehörden und bei den Verwaltungsgerichten vergrößert. Klarer Appell in Richtung Länder: Mehr Stellen für die Ausländerbehörden und mehr Stellen für die Verwaltungsgerichte!\n\nEs ist wichtig - ein Großteil der Asylbewerber wird ja abgelehnt -, dass dann auch die Abschiebungen zeitnah erfolgen. Hierfür sind die Länder ebenso in der Verantwortung wie für die Erweiterung der Kapazitäten bei den Erstaufnahmeeinrichtungen.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich möchte in aller Kürze noch einen zweiten innenpolitischen Schwerpunkt dieses Nachtragshaushalts ansprechen, der sich wirklich sehen lassen kann. Das ist die Entscheidung, dass in den nächsten Jahren vom Bund insgesamt 30 Millionen Euro zusätzlich zur Verfügung gestellt werden zur Bekämpfung der Wohnungseinbruchskriminalität. Wohnungseinbruch ist ein Phänomen, das die Bürgerinnen und Bürger in Deutschland in höchster Weise erschüttert. Im Durchschnitt wird in Deutschland alle dreieinhalb Minuten in eine Wohnung eingebrochen. Im letzten Jahr gab es die Rekordzahl von 152 000 Einbrüchen. Ich finde es gut - auch hierfür bin ich den Kolleginnen und Kollegen im Haushaltsausschuss dankbar -, dass für dieses Jahr 10 Millionen Euro und für die nächsten beiden Jahre jeweils noch einmal 10 Millionen Euro zur Verfügung gestellt werden. Damit wird die KfW in die Lage versetzt, ein Sonderprogramm zu starten, um sowohl Vermietern als auch Mietern zu ermöglichen, mechanische oder elektronische Sicherungsmaßnahmen vorzunehmen. Ein herzliches Dankeschön für diese Maßnahme!\n\nIch glaube, man kann wirklich mit Fug und Recht behaupten: Der Bund und die Regierungskoalition machen mit diesem Nachtragshaushalt deutlich, dass sie nicht nur Sprüche klopfen, sondern auf die innenpolitischen Herausforderungen effektiv und zeitnah reagieren.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n10939,konstantin-notz,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Seit Mai 2010 gibt es die Entscheidung des BGH zum Musiktitel Sommer unseres Lebens. Seitdem gibt es diese Rechtsunsicherheit, über die wir heute reden. Aus dem Sommer unseres Lebens sind sechs Jahre unseres Lebens geworden - was für ein Wahnsinn! -: sechs Jahre Unklarheit, welche Pflichten man erfüllen muss, um aus der Haftung genommen zu werden, wenn man seine Netze für Dritte öffnet; sechs Jahre, in denen die Digitalisierung Deutschlands eines der Topthemen war, und zwar gesellschaftlich wie wirtschaftlich; sechs Jahre Regierungsverantwortung der CDU/CSU, die bei einer ganz entscheidenden Grundlage der Digitalisierung voll auf der Bremse stand und nicht aus dem Quark gekommen ist.\n\nTrotz Forderungen von allen Seiten, diese Rechtsunsicherheit durch gesetzliche Klarstellung zu beseitigen, hat erst, Dorothee Bär, Schwarz-Gelb nichts unternommen. Auch danach ist trotz Appellen aus der wegweisenden Enquete-Kommission „Internet und digitale Gesellschaft“ und trotz der Zusage im Koalitionsvertrag der Großen Koalition, als Gesetzgeber endlich Rechtssicherheit herzustellen, lange, viel zu lange, nichts passiert. Das ist und bleibt ein Armutszeugnis, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDabei ist es gar nicht so schwer: Die Opposition, Linke und wir, haben direkt zu Beginn dieser Wahlperiode einen Gesetzentwurf vorgelegt. Sie haben mit einigen Jahren Verzögerung einen Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung nachgeschoben, der in die völlig falsche Richtung ging: weitreichende Verpflichtungen für WLAN-Betreiber, ihre Netze zu schützen, die so abwegig waren, dass sich peinlicherweise selbst die eigenen Ministerien, Frau Bär, bis heute nicht daran halten; fernliegende, dem TMG fremde Unterscheidungen zwischen privaten und kommerziellen Anbieterinnen und Anbietern; namentliche Registrierungen, die man sonst nur aus autoritären Staaten kennt. Auch § 10 TMG war von vornherein völlig abwegig.\n\nDer Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung war insgesamt gänzlich untauglich und hätte zu mehr Rechtsunsicherheit und zu weniger offenen Netzen geführt. Da fragt man sich: Wie kann es eigentlich nach Jahren zu einem solchen Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung kommen? Wenn sich solche Fragen stellen, meine Damen und Herren, dann macht man etwas grundsätzlich falsch, liebe Regierung.\n\n- Zum Parlament komme ich noch, Thomas. - Der Gesetzentwurf wurde zu Recht von allen Seiten, selbst von den eigenen Sachverständigen in der Bundestagsanhörung und von den eigenen Ministerien, zerrissen. Es war klar: Es musste etwas Neues her. Aber statt sich auf unseren lichtvollen und wegweisenden Entwurf der Opposition zu beziehen,\n\nbrauchte es erst ein Machtwort der Kanzlerin, um das mittlerweile maximal peinliche Nicht-aus-dem-Quark-Kommen der Koalition zu beenden. Verhindert werden sollte vor allen Dingen auch die nächste Klatsche vom EuGH.\n\nSeit vorgestern Abend wissen wir, dass Sie die zwei zentralen Versprechen, die Sie gemacht haben,\n\nnicht erfüllen, nämlich erstens Rechtssicherheit herzustellen und zweitens die Störerhaftung zu beseitigen. Verstehen Sie es nicht falsch: Ich sehe durchaus auch, dass es in manchen Bereichen im Hinblick auf den Vorschlag der Bundesregierung Verbesserungen gibt. Sowohl die Klarstellung in § 8 TMG als auch der komplette Wegfall des § 10 und des absurden Konstrukts - auch das muss man sich vor Augen führen - der „besonders gefahrgeneigten Dienste“ ist eine Verbesserung.\n\nAber während der Entwurf der Bundesregierung die Notwendigkeit erkannt hatte, eine saubere Klarstellung im Gesetzestext selbst vorzunehmen, fehlt diese bei Ihnen. Stattdessen überlassen Sie es den überlasteten Gerichten erneut, nach Ihrer Begründung eines Änderungsantrags im Bundestag zu googeln, um das Gesetz, das Sie vorgelegt haben, auslegen zu können. Was für ein Wahnsinn! Sie beziehen sich dabei auf das Argument des Generalanwalts am EuGH. Was machen Sie eigentlich, wenn der EuGH anders entscheidet? Sollen dann die Menschen weitere sechs Jahre auf freies WLAN warten, nur weil Sie es nicht schaffen, dies direkt ins Gesetz zu schreiben? Es ist unfassbar, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDen einzigen guten Punkt in dem Entwurf der Bundesregierung haben Sie herausgestrichen. Herr Knoerig hat eben ziemlich unverhohlen die Motive dafür genannt. Deswegen sage ich voraus, dass sich Frau Merkel heute Abend auf der CDU-MediaNight gerade nicht dafür feiern lassen kann, die Störerhaftung beseitigt zu haben. Jegliche Siegerpose ist fehl am Platz. Sie sind den entscheidenden Schritt eben leider nicht gegangen.\n\nSie haben keine Rechtssicherheit hergestellt, sondern das erneut an die Gerichte delegiert. Das ist für dieses Parlament ein Armutszeugnis und leider zu wenig. Ich bedauere das hochgradig.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\n\nLieber Thomas Jarzombek, erst einmal vielen Dank für die Aufforderung und das Zulassen der Frage. - Ich habe die eilige Stellungnahme Ihres Sachverständigen, Herrn Härting, nach der Diskussion gelesen. Er stellte - ich hoffe, Sie glauben es mir jetzt einfach - in der Anhörung zu Punkt 8 auf Seite 2 seiner Stellungnahme - ich zitiere - mit Bezug auf die Regelung des Regierungsentwurfs selbst und die Änderung des Bundesrates fest:\n\nIm Ergebnis teile ich vollumfänglich die Kritik des Bundesrates an § 8 Abs. 4 TMG-E. Nur durch eine vorbehaltlose Abschaffung jedweder Störerhaftung des Betreibers wird man das erklärte Ziel erreichen, die WLAN-Abdeckung des öffentlichen Raums nachhaltig zu fördern.\n\nJedwede Abschaffung! Sie haben diesen Unterlassungsanspruch, der auch heute noch beklagt werden kann, eben nicht herausgenommen. Das haben Sie nicht hinbekommen. Herr Knoerig hat auch gesagt, warum: weil man ihn eben nicht heraus haben will. Man will diese Unsicherheit bewusst so belassen.\n\nSie vielleicht nicht; aber das war ja der Kompromiss. Und zu dem sollten Sie sich bekennen.\"\n3472,stefan-heck,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Gerade zieht das Bundesverfassungsgericht in Karlsruhe nach dreijähriger Renovierungszeit in sein altes Stammgebäude zurück - für uns eine gute Gelegenheit, auch das Bundesverfassungsgerichtsgesetz zu renovieren. Es geht zwar formal nur um einen wenig geänderten Text, aber unser Vorschlag, künftig dem Plenum des Deutschen Bundestages bei der Richterwahl das letzte Wort zu lassen, ist ein nicht zu unterschätzender Eingriff in das bisherige Gefüge des Gerichts.\n\nNach dem, was wir hier gehört haben, ist es, glaube ich, gut, dass dieser Prozess - das gilt dann letztlich auch für eine Entscheidung -, den wir heute anstoßen, auf breiter Unterstützung fußt und dass wir das auch reichlich abgewogen haben. Denn gerade Änderungen bei der Richterwahl zum Bundesverfassungsgericht bedürfen einer sorgfältigen Prüfung. Immerhin geht es - um bildlich im Baubereich zu bleiben - um die Statik des Bundesverfassungsgerichts, das wiederum eine große Bedeutung für die Statik unseres Grundgesetzes hat. In diesem Grundgesetz - es ist eben schon zitiert worden - heißt es ganz schlicht:\n\nDie Mitglieder des Bundesverfassungsgerichtes werden je zur Hälfte vom Bundestage und vom Bundesrate gewählt.\n\nDas, was in der Verfassung so einfach klingt, stellt sich in der Verfassungspraxis als gar nicht so einfache Aufgabe dar. Dementsprechend liest sich der Paragraf im Bundesverfassungsgerichtsgesetz, der das Verfahren zur Wahl der Richter konkretisiert, sehr viel komplizierter. Aus dem einen Satz im Grundgesetz sind immerhin fünf ganze Absätze im entsprechenden Gesetz geworden.\n\nAber auch in Zukunft wird sich das Wahlverfahren nicht auf einen einzigen Satz verkürzen lassen. Die Wahl der Richter am Bundesverfassungsgericht bleibt eine heikle Angelegenheit. Das ergibt sich schon aus der bereits angesprochenen Machtfülle, die den acht Richtern jedes Senats auferlegt worden ist. Sie wachen über die Aufrechterhaltung unserer Verfassungsordnung, und sie allein sind es, die Gesetze dieses Hohen Hauses am Ende für nichtig erklären können.\n\nEs ist daher von ganz entscheidender Bedeutung, dass das Handeln des Bundesverfassungsgerichts mit all seiner rechtlichen, gesellschaftlichen, aber am Ende eben auch politischen Tragweite von einem soliden Fundament an Legitimität getragen wird. Dazu gehört natürlich auch die Legitimation der Zusammensetzung des Gerichts und am Ende jedes einzelnen Richters selbst. Die Richter sollen nicht nach persönlichen Ansichten richten. Für die Richter des Bundesverfassungsgerichts gilt wie für die Richter jedes anderen Gerichts in Deutschland Artikel 20 Grundgesetz: Sie sind an Recht und Gesetz gebunden. Doch gerade die Juristen unter uns wissen, dass am Ende jeder zumal verfassungsrechtlichen Fragestellung eine Wertentscheidung getroffen werden muss, die von der Persönlichkeit des Richters nicht zu trennen ist. Deshalb ist es richtig, dass wir die Legitimität der Richter auf eine möglichst breite Basis stellen.\n\nIch möchte einen weiteren Gedanken ansprechen: Wir leisten damit heute auch einen Beitrag zum Schutz parlamentarischer Minderheiten. Ich erwähne das, weil wir dieses Thema hier erst kürzlich kontrovers diskutiert haben. Das Bundesverfassungsgericht hatte die bisherige Rechtslage bei der Wahl der Richter 2012 ausdrücklich für verfassungskonform erklärt. Deswegen denke ich, wir sollten heute ganz selbstbewusst darauf hinweisen, dass wir keineswegs Karlsruher Vorgaben umsetzen, sondern - so sollte es der Normalfall sein - eine eigenständige politische Entscheidung treffen. Wir stärken die Minderheitenrechte hier in diesem Haus, und zugleich stärken wir die Legitimation des Bundesverfassungsgerichts. Wir bringen damit zum Ausdruck, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Politik wird weiterhin hier in Berlin und nicht in Karlsruhe gemacht.\n\nIch möchte daher auch ganz deutlich sagen, was es in Zukunft nicht geben soll und nicht geben wird: Das sind öffentliche Kreuzverhöre, wie sie für die Richter des Supreme Court in den Vereinigten Staaten vorgesehen sind. Wir sind überzeugt: Es kommt auf die fachliche und persönliche Eignung der Richter an und eben gerade nicht auf die Redegewandtheit und die persönliche Meinung von Kandidaten zu tagespolitischen Themen und am Ende auch nicht auf die Fähigkeit, sich in den Medien möglichst überzeugend darzustellen. Wir alle sollten uns deshalb davor hüten, die Wahl der Richter des Bundesverfassungsgerichts zum Gegenstand parteipolitischer Auseinandersetzungen zu machen. Deshalb werden die Richter auch weiterhin ohne Aussprache gewählt werden; wir nehmen damit eine Verfassungstradition auf, welche die Würde der höchsten Staatsämter wahrt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, in der Summe steht der Ihnen vorliegende Gesetzentwurf auch unter dem Motto „Mehr Demokratie wagen“. Mit der Stärkung des Plenums bei der Richterwahl machen wir deutlich: Demokratische Legitimation ist auch für die Wahl der Richterinnen und Richter des Bundesverfassungsgerichts unverzichtbar; denn Artikel 20 des Grundgesetzes stellt unmissverständlich klar, dass alle Staatsgewalt vom Volke ausgeht, darunter eben auch die rechtsprechende Gewalt.\n\nSo richtig es ist, dass das Bundesverfassungsgericht unser Handeln als Bundestag kontrolliert, ist es keineswegs so, dass die Rechtsprechung quasi als unnahbare, sich selbst legitimierende Trutzburg des Rechts das Volkshandeln kontrolliert. Genau das Gegenteil ist der Fall: Das Volk kontrolliert sich selbst. Die Legitimation all unserer Verfassungsorgane geht vom Volk aus. Auch die Richter am Bundesverfassungsgericht kommen deshalb um eine solide demokratische Legitimation nicht herum.\n\nDeswegen, Frau Künast, bin ich auch skeptisch, ob wir, nachdem wir auch im Bundestag aus guten Gründen keine Frauenquote haben, damit nun beim Bundesverfassungsgericht anfangen sollten.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. Wer uns als Parlament bisweilen zu bedenken gibt - und das gelegentlich zu Recht -, was das Demokratieprinzip erfordert, der sollte auch selbst hinreichend demokratisch legitimiert sein. Dafür tragen wir heute Sorge. In den letzten Jahren haben wir einiges investiert - um wieder zu dem Bild vom Anfang zurückzukommen -, um durch Renovierungen unsere Bausubstanz landauf, landab zukunftsfest zu machen. Das gilt unter anderem für das nunmehr renovierte Hauptgebäude des Bundesverfassungsgerichts. Unterschätzen wir deshalb nicht die kleine Renovierung des Bundesverfassungsgerichtsgesetzes, die wir heute anstoßen. Mit diesem Plus an demokratischer Legitimation machen wir das höchste deutsche Gericht zukunftsfest.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n10916,hans-peter-uhl,\"Herr Präsident! Meine verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es war 2002, also vor 14 Jahren, als Rot-Grün das Prostitutionsgesetz mit großem Brimborium verabschiedet hat. Es ging damals darum - zu Recht, würde ich sagen -, dieses Milieu vom Verdikt der Sittenwidrigkeit zu befreien; und das ist ja auch richtig. Man hat dabei nur eines übersehen: dass es sich um einen Lebenssachverhalt handelt, bei dem schwache, häufiger aus dem Ausland kommende, nicht Deutsch sprechende, hilflose Frauen starken, mit krimineller Energie ausgestatteten Männern gegenüberstehen, die alles tun, um diese schwachen Frauen auszubeuten und damit Geld zu machen. Das ist der Lebenssachverhalt: Es handelt sich hier um ein kriminogenes Milieu.\n\nWas muss der Staat tun, wenn sich ein extrem Schwacher und ein extrem Starker gegenüberstehen? Der Staat muss kontrollieren, regeln und zum Schutz der Schwachen eingreifen. Das ist die Aufgabe des Staates, nicht nur in diesem, sondern auch in allen anderen Lebenssachverhalten, wo sich Schwache und Starke gegenüberstehen; eigentlich eine Banalität. Aber diesem Umstand wurde mit dem Gesetz, das vor 14 Jahren beschlossen wurde, nicht Rechnung getragen. Nein, man hat jede Regelung unterlassen. Das Ergebnis ist mehrfach beschrieben worden - ich will das nicht mehr wiederholen -: Die Starken haben sich auf Kosten der schwachen Frauen ausgetobt. Damit haben wir einen Zustand in Deutschland erreicht, der eine Schande für unseren Rechtsstaat ist, nämlich „Bordell Europas“ geworden zu sein.\n\nDie Frauen kommen hierher, naiv, zum Teil gelockt von dem Versprechen, dass sie in kurzer Zeit viel Geld verdienen können. In Wahrheit werden ihnen sofort die Pässe abgenommen, sie werden behandelt wie Ware, sie werden von einem Bordell ins nächste geschickt, sie wissen gar nicht, in welcher Stadt sie sind, und sie müssen irgendwelche Reisekosten oder sonstige Auslagen zurückbezahlen. Das heißt - ich will das nicht weiter beschreiben; es ist zum Teil auch beschrieben worden -, es ist alles sehr schlimm.\n\nDie Verbrecher - und Menschenhändler sind Verbrecher - sind zu allem bereit. Der jetzige Paragraf zum Menschenhandel baut darauf auf - leider; auch das ist schon zu Recht gesagt worden -, dass der Menschenhändler das Opfer dazu gebracht hat, sich der Prostitution hinzugeben. Das heißt, es muss im Kopf des Opfers etwas passiert sein, was vor Gericht üblicherweise kaum zu beweisen ist; es sei denn, es kommt zu der Aussage des Opfers: Dieser Menschenhändler war es. - Wir erleben aber fortlaufend, dass eine solche Aussage entweder nie zustande kam oder, wenn sie einmal zustande kam, rechtzeitig vor der Gerichtsverhandlung vom Opfer widerrufen wurde. Das ist typisch für dieses Milieu. Verbrecher, die mit Menschen handeln, die Frauen ausbeuten und zur Prostitution zwingen, haben natürlich auch die kriminelle Energie, ihr Opfer zum Schweigen zu bringen. Das ist der Sachverhalt, um den es hier geht.\n\nDie EU-Richtlinie zeigt uns den richtigen Weg, wenn sie uns, den Mitgliedstaaten, vorgibt, zu sagen: Wir müssen die Menschenhandelsparagrafen so formulieren, dass es auf die Opferaussage nicht ankommt. Selbst wenn das Opfer seine Aussage zurückzieht, muss der Menschenhändler verurteilt werden können. Aber davon sind wir weit entfernt. Wir haben Hunderte tatverdächtige Menschenhändler, aber von diesen Hunderten wurden im Jahr 2013 in Deutschland ganze 79 verurteilt. Auch im Jahr 2014 gab es Hunderte Verdächtige, aber es wurden nur 82 verurteilt; ich sage das, damit Sie ein Gespür für den Umfang der kriminellen Energie und für die tatsächlich kleine Zahl von Verurteilten bekommen. Im Koalitionsvertrag haben wir deswegen, zu Recht, das Problem beschrieben und dazu aufgefordert, ein besseres Gesetz zu machen.\n\nDer Wahrheit zuliebe möchte ich noch auf eines hinweisen: Wir waren schon einmal so weit wie heute, am Ende der letzten Koalition mit der FDP. Da haben wir einen Gesetzentwurf vorgelegt, der diese Probleme behandelte. Es war eben nicht so, wie die stellvertretende Fraktionsvorsitzende der SPD, Frau Reimann, es vorhin in der Debatte gesagt hat, dass dieser im Bundesrat mit den Stimmen von CDU und CSU gestoppt worden ist. Nein, ich bitte darum, zum Beispiel bei Spiegel Online vom 20. September 2013 nachzulesen. Es war der Bundesrat mit der Mehrheit der Stimmen von SPD, Grünen und Linken, der diesen Gesetzentwurf der letzten Koalition gestoppt hat. Das muss man der Wahrheit zuliebe hier doch noch sagen dürfen.\n\nWir wollen diese Verbrecher hinter Schloss und Riegel bringen, das ist unser Ziel. Da ist es schon etwas irritierend, wenn jetzt der Bundesjustizminister Maas sagt, auf die Opferaussage werde es auch in Zukunft immer noch schwerpunktmäßig ankommen. Das ist bedauerlich. Das ist genau das, was wir nicht wollen, nämlich dass es auf die Opferaussage ankommt. Also bitte ich alle Beteiligten an der Debatte, die jetzt in den Ausschüssen und in der Anhörung beginnt, darum, offen zu sein für Nachbesserungen dieses Gesetzentwurfs. Wir brauchen den Rat der Praktiker, der Polizei, der Staatsanwälte, die in diesem Milieu unterwegs sind; denn bei uns kann nicht die Sach- und Fachkunde in der Frage sein, wie man diese Verbrecher hinter Schloss und Riegel bringt. Das müssen wir von den anzuhörenden Personen in Erfahrung bringen.\n\nWir bringen diese Offenheit mit. Frau Högl, die SPD hat uns zugesagt, dass sie die Anhörung sehr ernst nimmt und bereit ist, noch nachzubessern; denn ein Ziel haben wir doch wohl hoffentlich alle gemeinsam, nämlich dass wir den jetzigen Zustand beenden, dass Deutschland das „Bordell Europas“ ist.\n\nSie von der Opposition können sich nicht darauf beschränken, dies zu beklagen, dann aber zu sagen, dass man Prostituierte mit den neuen Regelungen dazu zwingt, sich anzumelden und sich regelmäßig einer Gesundheitsuntersuchung zu unterziehen, das heißt, dass man ihnen Pflichten auferlegt. Das beklagen Sie ja. Dagegen sagen Kenner: Genau diese Pflichten wünschen sich die Betroffenen, weil sie dadurch aus den Klauen des Zuhälters herauskommen. Sie unterwerfen sich diesen Pflichten gern, um von diesen Menschenhändlern freizukommen, die sie auf schändliche Weise malträtieren. Das ist die Logik dieser Verpflichtungen, die eigentlich keine Verpflichtungen zulasten der Betroffenen sind, sondern zugunsten der Betroffenen. Das muss man verstanden haben, wenn man über dieses Milieu redet.\"\n1070,franz-thonnes,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Manchmal muss man Handelnde an ihre Worte erinnern, die sie vor kurzer Zeit ausgesprochen haben. Präsident Putin hat am 12. Dezember 2013 in seiner Jahresbotschaft an die Föderale Versammlung der Russischen Föderation unter anderem gesagt:\n\nWir mischen uns nicht in fremde Interessen ein. Wir zwingen uns niemandem auf. Wir sagen niemandem, was er tun oder was er lassen soll. Aber wir werden bestrebt sein, eine Führungsrolle innezuhaben, indem wir das Völkerrecht schützen und uns für die Achtung der nationalen Souveränität, Selbstständigkeit und Eigenart der Völker einsetzen. Für einen Staat wie Russland ist es absolut objektiv und nachvollziehbar - bedenkt man seine große Geschichte und Kultur sowie seine jahrhundertelange Erfahrung -, nicht in sogenannter Toleranz, geschlechtslos und unfruchtbar, sondern in dem organischen Miteinander unterschiedlicher Völker in einem ungeteilten Staat zu leben. Wie die Situation um Syrien und nunmehr um den Iran zeigt, kann und muss jedes internationale Problem ausschließlich mit politischen Mitteln gelöst werden, ohne den Einsatz von Gewalt, die perspektivlos ist und in den meisten Ländern der Welt auf Ablehnung stößt.\n\nLassen Sie es mich bitte noch einmal unterstreichen: Russland ist bereit, mit allen Partnern im Interesse einer gemeinsamen, gleichen und unteilbaren Sicherheit zusammenzuarbeiten. Wir zwingen niemandem etwas auf.\n\nIch denke, daran muss der Präsident heute erinnert werden, wenn ich sehe, dass auf der Krim Soldaten in Uniform ohne Nationalitätsabzeichen eingesetzt werden. Wir wissen, nachdem die OSZE ihren Bericht vorgelegt hat, dass es sich dabei - das haben wir schon vermutet - um russische Soldaten handelt. Damit werden die Worte des russischen Präsidenten von Dezember 2013 unglaubwürdig.\n\nEs ist auch zu kritisieren, dass die Entwaffnung der illegalen Waffenträger in der Ukraine und insbesondere in Kiew gemäß dem Abkommen vom 21. Februar nicht umgesetzt worden ist. Wenn diese sogenannten maskierten Selbstverteidigungskräfte in Uniform ukrainische Kasernen umstellen, ukrainische Soldaten und Polizeikräfte bedrohen und von diesen erwarten, ihre Waffen abzugeben, dann wird der letzte Rest des in der Ukraine existierenden staatlichen Gewaltmonopols zunichtegemacht. Auch das führt die Worte von Präsident Putin ad absurdum.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund lautet die zentrale Botschaft: Herr Putin, tun Sie das, was Sie im Dezember gesagt haben! Ermöglichen Sie dem ukrainischen Volk ein organisches Miteinander unterschiedlicher Völker in einem ungeteilten Land!\n\nDie Umsetzung dessen, was im Dezember gesagt wurde, muss nun eingefordert werden. Herr Putin, wenn Sie angeblich bereit sind, mit allen Partnern zu reden, dann fordere ich Sie auf: Stimmen Sie einer OSZE-Vermittlung zu! Stimmen Sie der Einrichtung einer Kontaktgruppe zu! Setzen Sie sich an einen Tisch, und sprechen Sie miteinander! Seien Sie bereit, sich auf Vermittlungslösungen einzulassen! Hören Sie auf, mit Gewalt zu drohen oder Gewalt gar anzuwenden!\n\nIn der gleichen Rede vom Dezember wird gesagt, man müsse Russland wirtschaftlich neu aufstellen und es modernisieren. Nun wird all das infrage gestellt, was eingeleitet werden soll; denn der Investitionsstandort Russland wird aufgrund der nun vorgesehenen Maßnahmen unattraktiv. Kapital wird zurückgehalten oder fließt ins Ausland. Der russische Präsident handelt hier gegen die Interessen seines eigenen Landes und widerspricht damit seinen eigenen Worten von Dezember 2013.\n\nDeswegen gilt es, im Kern daran zu arbeiten und dafür zu sorgen - das war die Philosophie von Willy Brandt und Egon Bahr -, dass die Stärke des Rechts gilt und nicht das Recht des Stärkeren, dass das, was an Völkerrecht verabredet worden ist, auch eingehalten und das, was am 21. Februar aufgeschrieben worden ist, ebenfalls eingehalten wird. Das heißt für die Ukraine, möglichst bald durch Neuwahlen zu einer inklusiven -Regierung zu kommen, die den wirklichen Willen des Volkes widerspiegelt. Dann löst sich vielleicht das -Problem mit den Nationalisten und Faschisten ganz von alleine.\n\nEs ist auch notwendig, dass die Rechte neutraler -Minderheiten geachtet werden. Minderheiten müssen das Recht erhalten, ihre Sprache zu sprechen. Militanter Antisemitismus und Rechtsextremismus dürfen in einer Ukraine, die ihren Blick nach Europa richtet, keinen Platz haben.\n\nDie tragischen Ereignisse vom Februar dieses Jahres mit rund 100 Toten und mit Hunderten von Verletzten sind aufzuarbeiten, und die Verantwortlichen sind zur Rechenschaft zu ziehen.\n\nFür Russland gilt, dass wir erwarten, dass die Integrität der Ukraine respektiert und das Völkerrecht und die bestehenden Abkommen geachtet werden. Die zusätzlichen Truppen auf der Krim sind abzuziehen. Es geht der Appell an die russische Regierung, im direkten Gespräch mit der aus dem Parlament heraus legitimierten Regierung in Kiew zusammenzukommen und zu verhandeln. Präsident und Regierung in Moskau sind nun aufgerufen, der Bildung einer Kontaktgruppe, einer Fact--Finding-Commission und einer OSZE-Beobachtergruppe zuzustimmen. Auch angesichts der angespannten Lage, die wir zurzeit haben, gilt der Rat von Willy Brandt: „Der Frieden ist nicht alles, aber alles ist ohne den Frieden nichts.“\"\n13720,carsten-linnemann,\"Herzlichen Dank. - Liebe Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich habe einmal nachgeschaut: Wir beschäftigen uns jeden Monat mit dem Thema Rente: am 29. September, am 21. Oktober,\n\n10. November, 1. Dezember, 19. Januar.\n\nEs ist richtig, dass wir uns in diesem Hohen Haus mit diesem wichtigen Thema beschäftigen. Auffällig ist, dass Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Linken, dieses Thema immer nutzen, um den Fokus ausschließlich auf das Thema Altersarmut zu richten.\n\nJa, ich gebe Herrn Kapschack recht: Es ist keine statistisch nennenswerte Größe. Es gibt schwere Einzelschicksale, auch im Bereich Grundsicherung im Alter.\n\nHerr Birkwald, mich ärgert, dass Sie so tun, als ob das Thema Altersarmut ein flächendeckendes, breites und großes Problem in Deutschland ist. Das ist mitnichten der Fall.\n\nDamit reden Sie dieses Land schlecht. Das ist nicht gut.\n\nDie statistischen Zahlen sprechen Bände. Es sind 2 bis 3 Prozent, die in Grundsicherung sind.\n\n- Aber natürlich kann man nicht verhehlen - das muss man einmal sagen -: Es gibt Gruppen, die viel mehr von Armut bedroht sind.\n\nKeine Altersgruppe ist heute weniger bedroht als die der Rentner.\n\nDas muss man so sagen.\n\nMeine Kolleginnen und Kollegen haben richtig gesagt, was man gezielt machen muss, um diesen Menschen zu helfen. Aber man darf nicht so tun, als ob wir das Rentenniveau in Gänze mit voller Wucht anheben müssten, um damit die Probleme zu lösen. Das ist mitnichten der Fall.\n\nEs ist sogar so, dass bei einem sinkenden Rentenniveau die Renten in Deutschland steigen, und zwar auch in den nächsten Jahren.\n\nSelbst im Zeitalter eines sinkenden Rentenniveaus ist es so, dass der Abstand von den Durchschnittsrenten zur Grundsicherung größer ist denn je, Herr Birkwald. Ich will nicht alles wiederholen; das, was die Kolleginnen und Kollegen gesagt haben, ist richtig. Wenn wir etwas machen, dann müssen wir gezielt etwas machen. Das, was heute beispielsweise bei den Erwerbsgeminderten passiert, ist richtig. Das sind doch die Menschen, die nicht mehr arbeiten können. Das sind doch die Menschen, die unsere Unterstützung brauchen.\n\nAuch das Thema Solo-Selbstständige ist richtig. Glauben Sie, ich möchte, dass sich Menschen in Deutschland selbstständig machen, sich ein Geschäftsmodell überlegen, eine tolle Idee haben und sagen: „Das Geschäftsmodell kann ich nur dann umsetzen, wenn ich keine Rentenversicherungsbeiträge zahle“? Glauben Sie, ich will, dass man sich unter Marktpreisniveau anbietet,\n\nund der Steuerzahler soll die Grundsicherung im Alter für diejenigen übernehmen, die das Geschäftsmodell zulasten der Solidargemeinschaft aufgelegt haben? Genau das will ich auch nicht.\n\nDeswegen wollen wir eine Versicherungspflicht, keine Pflichtversicherung, bei der der Selbstständige die Pflicht hat, dass er vorsorgt. Gleichzeitig brauchen wir eine Übergangsphase,\n\ndamit die Start-ups in den ersten zwei, drei Jahren Luft haben, ihr Geschäftsmodell umzusetzen,\n\num dann in die Altersvorsorge zu gehen.\n\nZum Schluss. Was mir auch heute in der Debatte aufgefallen ist: Ich glaube, dass sich diese Große Koalition nicht verstecken muss, wenn es um das Thema geht, was wir für Menschen gemacht haben, die Transferleistungen vom Staat bekommen. Ich glaube, das brauchen wir nicht.\n\nMorgen reden wir über das Thema Managergehälter. Auch das ist eben schon angesprochen worden; Herr Kapschack, auch Sie haben es angesprochen. Wissen Sie, was mich ärgert?\n\nDass wir nur noch über die da ganz oben sprechen. Diejenigen, die staatliche Leistungen bekommen, haben wir nicht vernachlässigt. Aber die breite Mitte der Gesellschaft, die sich den Wecker stellt, morgens aufsteht und arbeiten geht, die sich an Recht, Gesetz und Ordnung hält,\n\ndie für eine Schlagzeile in der Zeitung vielleicht zu langweilig ist - sie trägt diesen Staat. Wir müssen sie auch mal in den Mittelpunkt rücken, für sie müssen wir da sein.\n\nInsofern ist es wichtig, dass wir, wenn wir über soziale Gerechtigkeit reden, nicht nur darüber reden, wie wir den Sozialstaat ausdehnen können, sondern auch über diejenigen reden, die diesen Sozialstaat überhaupt erst möglich machen und mit ihren Steuern finanzieren, damit die Umverteilung, die heute stattfindet, auch morgen noch stattfinden kann. Deshalb müssen wir den Fokus mehr auf die Mitte, auf die Menschen, die in Deutschland arbeiten gehen, richten.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n391,norbert-spinrath,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Europa hat, denke ich, dauerhaft nur eine Chance, wenn die Bürgerinnen und Bürger dieses Europa aktiv für sich begreifen und sich auch damit identifizieren.\n\nDas gilt natürlich insbesondere im Mai dieses Jahres, wenn die Bürger in Europa erneut die Wahl haben und wieder mit Europa in Berührung kommen. Es reicht aber nicht aus, das immer nur in Wahljahren zu betonen. Vielmehr müssen sich Europa und die europäische Idee für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger verstetigen. Schon aus diesem Grunde muss Europa sozialer, demokratischer und damit auch solidarischer werden.\n\nMeine Kollegin Dagmar Schmidt hat eben schon deutlich gemacht, dass wir uns vor einer Armutszuwanderung nicht fürchten müssen. Schon die große Erweiterungsrunde im Jahr 2004, als die Europäische Union um zehn Mitgliedstaaten anwuchs, hat bewiesen, dass Vorurteile und Besorgnisse unberechtigt waren. Dies gilt für den Arbeitsmarkt genauso wie für die sozialen Sicherungssysteme und für die Kriminalitätsentwicklung, die ich als Polizeibeamter damals besonders im Auge hatte.\n\nDabei - das sage ich ein wenig mahnend - ist es nicht hilfreich, Ängste zu schüren und Ressentiments aufzubauen. Die Töne der letzten Wochen aus dem Süden der Republik sind dem europäischen Gedanken nicht gerade förderlich,\n\nund - das sage ich in aller Deutlichkeit - sie sind nicht angemessen. Sie zeugen eher von fehlender Sensibilität und - das ist für mich besonders bedauerlich - von fehlender Kenntnis des EU-Rechts und des nationalen Rechts.\n\nOftmals wird Europa als Alibi genutzt oder schlicht verschwiegen: in diesem Hohen Haus, in den Länderparlamenten, in den Regierungen in Bund und Ländern. Wenn es etwas Positives für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger zu vermelden gibt, dann fehlt oft der Hinweis darauf, dass man lediglich europäisches Recht in nationales umgesetzt hat. Bei den die Bürger belastenden Vorgängen versteckt man sich hingegen oft gerne dahinter, dass man gezwungen war, europäisches Recht auf nationaler Ebene umzusetzen: „Die da in Brüssel sind schuld“, lautet oft die Rechtfertigung.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich wünsche mir, dass wir alle miteinander ehrlicher werden. Hand aufs Herz: Jeder hier im Saal weiß, dass in Brüssel nichts läuft, was nicht vorher in Berlin abgenickt wurde.\n\nIch will damit sagen: Wir brauchen eine bessere Kommunikation über Europa, aber vor allen Dingen mit den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern gemeinsam zu Europa. Wir müssen erklären, was Europa bedeutet. Europa entscheidet eben nicht nur über die Krümmung der Banane, sondern hat oftmals auch auf unsere Forderung hin wesentliche Verbraucherrechte entscheidend gestaltet und ausgebaut. Das ist, denke ich, in einer Welt des globalisierten Handels wichtig.\n\nEuropa muss eben nicht nur Krisen bewältigen. Es muss den Euro nicht nur retten, sondern hat mit dieser Währung auch viele Vorteile für die Menschen und die Unternehmen geschaffen, die grenzenlos reisen, handeln oder schlicht die Preise vergleichen wollen. Europa kostet die Steuerzahler eben nicht nur viel Geld, sondern ist Motor für unsere Wirtschaft und damit auch Motor für den Arbeitsmarkt in Deutschland.\n\nWir dürfen den Menschen nicht nur Finanztheorien erläutern und Fachchinesisch vorbeten, sondern müssen ihnen direkt und klar sagen, dass zum Beispiel deutsche Automobilhersteller Arbeitskräfte in Deutschland entlassen müssten, wenn deren Autos in Griechenland, Portugal oder Spanien nicht mehr gekauft werden können, weil viele Menschen dort um ihre Existenz fürchten.\n\nEuropa will eben nicht nur die Vorratsdatenspeicherung, sondern Europa hat auch einen einzigartigen Raum der Freiheit, der Sicherheit und des Rechts geschaffen, im Sinne der Bürgerinnen und Bürger und ihres Anrechts auf Freizügigkeit und auf Sicherheit im Alltag.\n\nDie Europäische Union wird durch ihre Erweiterungen nicht in ihren Grundwerten bedroht, sondern erlebt einen Zuwachs an kultureller Vielfalt, von dem unsere Gesellschaften nur profitieren können.\n\nEuropa darf nicht nur an seinen Krisen und den Kosten zu deren Bewältigung gemessen werden, sondern daran, wie viel Mut alle Beteiligten aufbringen, die Haushalte einiger Mitgliedstaaten nicht nur durch Sparzwänge, sondern auch gleichberechtigt zu konsolidieren, also über Programme für Wachstum und Beschäftigung dafür Sorgen zu tragen, dass es dort wieder aufwärts geht. Dabei sind aber auch - ich sage das mit allem Nachdruck - diejenigen an den Kosten zu beteiligen, die sie verursacht haben.\n\nEuropa darf nicht ausschließlich auf den nächsten Haushalt und auf Austerität schielen, also auf Sparen um jeden Preis, sondern muss Sorge dafür tragen, dass diejenigen, für die die Zukunft Europas gestaltet wurde, diese Zukunft auch erleben und an ihr teilhaben können, nämlich die Jugend Europas.\n\nDie Europäische Kommission scheint einiges davon verstanden zu haben. Für ihr Arbeitsprogramm hat sie nicht mehr viel Zeit. Ich bewerte es aber als sehr positiv, dass die Förderung von Wachstum und Beschäftigung, insbesondere die Bekämpfung der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit, stärker in den Blickpunkt gerückt wurde. Denn die größte Bedrohung für den sozialen Frieden innerhalb Europas ist - neben dem Verlust des Arbeitsplatzes - die Perspektivlosigkeit junger Menschen. Denn wie soll jemand, der schon selbst keine Perspektiven hat, für künftige Generationen Perspektiven schaffen?\n\nDaher muss sichergestellt werden, dass die entsprechenden Mittel zügig eingesetzt werden.\n\nDie Jugend ist Europas Zukunft; das habe ich schon gesagt. Gerade für sie müssen wir etwas tun, gerade für sie müssen wir Chancen eröffnen. Dies ist nicht nur unsere Verantwortung; es ist auch unsere soziale Verpflichtung. Nur wenn die Jugend, wenn die Menschen insgesamt in sozialer Sicherheit leben können, ist auch der soziale Friede in Europa gesichert, und nur dort, wo sozialer Friede herrscht, kann auch wirtschaftlicher Wohlstand wachsen. Deshalb sollten wir über gute Programme nicht nur reden, sondern auch alles tun, um sie schnellstmöglich umzusetzen. Die Zeit, die der Kommission für ihr Arbeitsprogramm zur Verfügung steht, ist kurz.\n\nIch komme zum Ende, Herr Präsident. - Europa hat nur dann eine Chance - das habe ich eben gesagt -, wenn wir die Bürgerinnen und Bürger mitnehmen. Wir müssen darauf drängen, dass die Kommission nun schnell die wesentlichen Maßnahmen umsetzt. Wenn dies nicht gelingt, verlieren viele Menschen in Europa viel Zeit zur Lösung ihrer Probleme. Damit verlieren sie auch ihre Perspektiven. Ich denke, es ist unerlässlich, dass Maßnahmen für mehr Wachstum und Beschäftigung und zur Bekämpfung der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit gleichberechtigt neben Maßnahmen zur Haushaltskonsolidierung stehen, dass die aus der Sparpolitik resultierenden Belastungen gleichmäßig verteilt werden und nicht einseitig von den sogenannten kleinen Leuten getragen werden müssen.\n\nMit meinem Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit äußere ich noch einen Wunsch: Ich will weiter für ein soziales Europa arbeiten und daran glauben, dass es ein Europa der Bürgerinnen und Bürger gibt. Dieses Europa soll nicht nur Banken retten.\"\n8831,ursula-schulte,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrter Herr Minister Schmidt! Sehr verehrte Damen und Herren auf der Tribüne! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Beim Blick in den Einzelplan 10 habe ich gedacht: Wunderbar, wir stehen kurz vor Weihnachten, und ein Wunsch geht in Erfüllung. - Ich meine damit nicht die Hofabgabeverpflichtung,\n\num die wir lange gerungen haben und die mich noch im Schlaf verfolgt. Nein, ich meine die Mittel, mit denen wir gesunde Ernährung fördern wollen.\n\n2 Millionen Euro hat das Bundesministerium für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft für eine nationale Strategie zur Reduktion von Zucker, Fetten und Salz in Fertigprodukten in den Haushalt 2016 eingestellt. Herr Minister, das ist eine gute Entscheidung.\n\nDie SPD-Fraktion freut sich darüber besonders, weil wir uns lange für diese Reduktionsstrategie eingesetzt haben. Ein besonderer Dank gilt meiner Kollegin Elvira Drobinski-Weiß, die lange und heftig dafür gekämpft hat. Herzlichen Dank!\n\nEine nationale Strategie zur Reduktion von Zucker, Fetten und Salz in Fertigprodukten ist eine wichtige Präventionsmaßnahme im Kampf gegen chronische Erkrankungen und Fehlernährung. Dass diese Maßnahme zwingend notwendig ist, das zeigen Studien der WHO. Demnach sind Übergewicht und Fettleibigkeit die größten Risiken für die Gesundheit der Menschen. Ich will Sie heute nicht mit Zahlen langweilen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen; eine kann ich Ihnen aber nicht ersparen. In den letzten 20 Jahren hat sich der Anteil der übergewichtigen Menschen verdreifacht. Leider nimmt auch der Anteil der Kinder und Jugendlichen mit Übergewicht stetig zu. Schon ihretwegen müssen wir schnell, langfristig und vor allem nachhaltig handeln.\n\nEin Baustein könnte das Institut für Kinderernährung sein, das schon wichtige Beiträge zur Förderung der Gesundheit von Kindern geleistet hat und alltagstaugliche Empfehlungen für eine gesunde Ernährung auf den Weg gebracht hat. Genau das ist es doch, was Familien, Kitas und Schulen heutzutage brauchen. Lassen Sie uns also gemeinsam versuchen, dieses Institut zu erhalten! Ein Bundesinstitut für Ernährung wäre vielleicht eine Lösung. Herr Minister, Ihr Lächeln, als Herr Freese vorhin ein solches Institut erwähnt hat, deute ich so, dass auch Sie sich eine solche Lösung vorstellen könnten.\n\nMit dem Antrag „Gesunde Ernährung stärken - Lebensmittel wertschätzen“ hat die Koalition eine Initiative gegen den Anstieg ernährungsbedingter Erkrankungen gestartet. Die Reduktionsstrategie war allerdings nur ein Teilelement. Verpflichtende Qualitätsstandards für Kita- und Schulverpflegung sowie Werbeverbote für ungesunde Lebensmittel an Grundschulen und Kitas sind weitere Forderungen, die umgesetzt werden müssen, wenn wir gesunde Ernährung für unsere Jüngsten wirklich wollen.\n\nDas sind übrigens alles Forderungen aus der Praxis, die während der großen, von der SPD initiierten Verbraucherkonferenz im Juli dieses Jahres an uns herangetragen wurden.\n\nSehr geehrter Herr Minister Schmidt, vorhin habe ich Sie gelobt. Jetzt muss ich allerdings auch ein bisschen Kritik anbringen; denn auf unserem Wunschzettel stehen noch einige Punkte, die wir gerne erfüllt sähen. An oberster Stelle steht der Fokus auf die Ernährung von Kindern in den ersten beiden Lebensjahren, dem sogenannten 1 000-Tage-Fenster. Wer in dieser Phase seines Lebens falsch oder mangelernährt wird - auch das soll es bei uns in Deutschland noch geben -, hat massive Konsequenzen für seine körperliche und geistige Entwicklung zu tragen, und zwar sein Leben lang. Wenn wir unseren Antrag „Gesunde Ernährung stärken - Lebensmittel wertschätzen“ wirklich ernst nehmen, dann müssen wir gerade in diesem Bereich verstärkt investieren.\n\nSchließlich wissen wir schon lange, dass Kinder aus bildungsfernen und einkommensschwachen Familien von Fehlernährung besonders betroffen sind. In unserem bereits erwähnten Antrag steht, dass es eine Frage sozialer Gerechtigkeit ist, allen Kindern eine gesunde Ernährung zu ermöglichen. Wenn dieser Satz nicht nur ein Lippenbekenntnis bleiben soll, müssen wir endlich tätig werden.\n\nIn der Konsequenz bedeutet das für mich, dass wir Geld in die Hand nehmen und für eine gesunde und teilweise auch kostenlose Verpflegung in Kitas und Ganztagsschulen sorgen müssen. Wichtig ist mir aber auch, unsere Kinder und Jugendlichen in Sachen Ernährung zu bilden. Kinder müssen schon in der Kita erfahren, wie man gesundes Essen schmackhaft zubereitet. Dieses Wissen sollte in der Schule vertieft werden. So werden Kinder auch ein wenig zu Erziehern ihrer Eltern. In Zeiten von Fastfood, Fingerfood, Fertiggerichten und Coffee to go müssen wir aufpassen, dass so etwas wie Esskultur übrig bleibt.\n\nGemeinsame Mahlzeiten sind nicht etwa altmodisch, sondern eine Möglichkeit, miteinander Zeit zu verbringen.\n\nUnsere Aufgabe ist es, bessere Bedingungen für eine gesunde Ernährung zu schaffen. Dazu gehört auch die Information der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher. Je einfacher die Information ist, umso besser. Auch ich habe keine Lust, mir lange winzig klein gedruckte Aufschriften auf Verpackungen durchzulesen. Daher sollten wir gemeinsam noch einmal über die Einführung einer Lebensmittelampel nachdenken. Damit erreichen wir dann ganz sicher alle Bevölkerungsschichten.\n\nEin Haushalt - damit komme ich zum Schluss - ist in Zahlen gegossene Politik. Aus Sicht der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher haben wir mit dem Ansatz für die Reduktionsstrategie einen weiteren Schritt in die richtige Richtung unternommen. Natürlich gibt es noch viel zu tun. Die SPD-Fraktion wird die Hände nicht in den Schoß legen, sondern sich für weitere Mittel im Verbraucherbereich einsetzen.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n13041,richard-pitterle,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der vorliegende Gesetzentwurf hat in den Beratungen zu einigen Missverständnissen geführt. Dafür ist auch die Problembeschreibung der Verfasser verantwortlich. Dort heißt es irreführend, der Entwurf sei eine Reaktion auf die Rechtsprechung. Der Bundesgerichtshof hatte in der Finanzwelt übliche Verträge mit dem Insolvenzrecht für unvereinbar erklärt. Mit dem Gesetz solle die Abwicklung von Finanzverträgen in der Insolvenz nach bankenaufsichtsrechtlichen Anforderungen daher klargestellt und präzisiert werden.\n\nBei der genauen Analyse zeigt sich: Die Regelungen gehen weit darüber hinaus. Die Änderung erweitert die Ausnahmevorschriften des § 104 Insolvenzordnung erheblich. In Zukunft können auch Warentermingeschäfte durch Rahmenverträge zusammengefasst werden. Schlicht falsch ist die beiläufige Behauptung der Verfasser, dies sei ohnehin geltende Rechtslage. Nicht alle Verträge über Waren-, Rohstoff- oder Energielieferungen sind Finanzinstrumente. In diesem Bereich mag es der Wunsch von Lobbyisten sein, das Insolvenzrisiko zu verringern. Das ist aber der Wunsch aller Gläubiger. Sachliche Gründe für eine Privilegierung gibt es nicht. Eine Ausweitung gebieten weder das Unionsrecht noch bankenaufsichtsrechtliche Anforderungen.\n\nDie Neuregelung präzisiert nichts. Sie stellt auch nichts klar. Die Rahmenbedingungen für vertragliche Vereinbarungen zum sogenannten Liquidationsnetting sind konturlos formuliert. Das erhöht die Rechtsunsicherheit. Das birgt die Gefahr ausufernder Vereinbarungen zulasten der Insolvenzmasse. Das gefährdet die Sanierung der Unternehmen und damit den Erhalt von Arbeitsplätzen.\n\nBegründet wird dies auch mit dem Schutz des Vertragspartners in der Insolvenz. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, diese Heuchelei ist kaum zu ertragen. Sie verweigern Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern seit Monaten durch Untätigkeit den Schutz ihres hart erarbeiteten Lohnes in der Insolvenz.\n\nSie verweigern sich auch einer generellen Besserstellung der Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer gegenüber anderen Gläubigern. Geht es jedoch um das große Finanzkasino und selbstgeschaffene Risiken, steht auf einmal der Schutz des Vertragspartners im Mittelpunkt Ihrer Bemühungen.\n\n- Das mögen Sie Klassenkampf nennen; das ist Ihr Problem.\n\nWie gewaltig diese Risiken sein müssen, zeigt das völlig kopflose Agieren der Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht. Die Tinte auf dem Urteil war kaum trocken, da erließ die BaFin eine Verfügung. Sie erklärte die Rechtsprechung kurzerhand zum Schutz des Finanzmarktes für unbeachtlich. Eine Bundesoberbehörde versucht, durch Notverordnung in die Zuständigkeit von Gesetzgebung und Rechtsprechung überzugreifen.\n\nWenn Herr Schäuble hier wäre, müsste ich ihm sagen, als Rechts- und Fachaufsicht über die BaFin sollte er doch vielleicht einen Grundkurs in Staatsorganisationsrecht und zum Thema Gewaltenteilung anbieten.\n\nPikant daran ist, dass die BaFin auch im Untersuchungsausschuss Cum/Ex, aus dem ich gerade komme, keine gute Figur macht. Sie will als Aufsichtsbehörde über den Finanzmarkt mehr als zehn Jahre nichts davon mitbekommen haben, wie Banken und Finanzdienstleister Milliarden Euro Steuern hinterzogen haben.\n\nZum Abschluss noch folgende Frage: Was hat die Nichtzulassungsbeschwerde beim BGH mit dem Liquidationsnetting zu tun? Genau: Nichts! Mit Ihrer nachgeschobenen Änderung missachten Sie erneut die verfassungsrechtlichen Vorgaben zum Ablauf des Gesetzgebungsverfahrens.\n\nAuch inhaltlich ist ein Gesetz, das den Zugang zu Gericht wegen Überlastung erschwert, ein Offenbarungseid Ihrer Haushalts- und Justizpolitik und eines Rechtsstaates unwürdig.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n9549,michael-roth,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die große Zahl an Flüchtlingen, die derzeit nach Europa kommen, die Wirtschaftskrise, die sich vor allem in einer viel zu hohen Jugendarbeitslosigkeit in viel zu vielen Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Union manifestiert, der Vormarsch von Nationalisten und Populisten, die Kontroverse über die Bedeutung der Grundwerte in der Europäischen Union, das Referendum über die Zukunft des Vereinigten Königreichs in oder außerhalb der Europäischen Union: Das sind einige Schlaglichter der derzeitigen Debatte um die Europäische Union, und ich bin mir ziemlich sicher, dass ich damit noch nicht alle Krisen und Bewährungsproben beschrieben habe.\n\nUmso wichtiger ist es, dass die Europäische Kommission die Zeichen der Zeit erkannt hat. „Jetzt ist nicht die Zeit für Business as usual“: Das ist der Titel des Arbeitsprogramms der Kommission 2016. Ja, da hat die Kommission völlig recht.\n\nWir haben hier im Deutschen Bundestag schon seit vielen Jahren immer wieder auch über das Arbeits- und Legislativprogramm der EU-Kommission gesprochen. Ich selbst habe mir einmal die eine oder andere Rede angeschaut, die ich noch als Bundestagsabgeordneter hier gehalten habe,\n\nund ich stellte dabei fest, dass ich sicherlich auch zu denjenigen hier im Parlament gehörte, die bisweilen sehr hart mit der Europäischen Kommission ins Gericht gegangen sind.\n\nIch war sicherlich nicht der schärfste Kritiker, aber auch ich habe deutliche Worte gefunden.\n\nDie EU-Kommission taugt derzeit nicht als Fußabtreter der Europäischen Union. Wir haben es nicht mit einer Krise der EU-Institutionen zu tun. Wir haben es mit einer Krise aus einem Mangel an Solidarität und Teamgeist und einem Übermaß an nationalen Egoismen zu tun. Das ist die eigentliche Krise. Deshalb - das sage ich leichten Herzens und auch dankbar - hat die Kommission auf vielen Politikfeldern zu liefern gesucht.\n\nJuncker versteht sich und seine Kommission vor allem als politischen Impulsgeber und als Antreiber und nicht als bloße Verwaltungsmaschinerie, und die Bundesregierung unterstützt die Kommission und ihren politischen Gestaltungsanspruch ausdrücklich.\n\nJuncker hat vor einigen Monaten gesagt:\n\nEs fehlt an Europa in dieser Europäischen Union und es fehlt an Union in dieser Europäischen Union.\n\nJa, da hat er wohl recht. „Mehr Union“ heißt eben nicht, noch mehr Regelungen im Detail, sondern mehr Gemeinsamkeit und Konzentration auf das Wesentliche.\n\nIch will die großen Bewährungsproben, denen wir derzeit ausgesetzt sind, nur sehr schlaglichtartig beschreiben und mit der Flüchtlingspolitik beginnen. Hier ist ein Kurswechsel nötig. Deutschland leistet viel, Schweden, Österreich und auch Griechenland stoßen an ihre Grenzen. Aber wir haben mit der EU-Kommission einen Verbündeten.\n\nWenn ich mir die derzeitigen Vorschläge zur Stärkung der EU-Außengrenzen und die Vorschläge der Kommission zum erweiterten Mandat von Frontex und zum Ausbau zu einer Küstenschutz- und Grenzschutzwache vor Augen führe, dann sage ich: Richtig so, aber wir brauchen eben auch eine breite Mehrheit in der EU, bei unseren Partnern und Freunden in den EU-Mitgliedstaaten.\n\nIch bin einmal gespannt, wie die Debatte weitergeht. Demnächst wird die EU-Kommission Vorschläge zur grundlegenden Reform des Dublin-Systems auf den Tisch legen, und ich bin mir ziemlich sicher: Auch hier werden wir ein hohes Maß an Übereinstimmung mit den Vorschlägen der Kommission feststellen. Umso wichtiger ist es, dass dieses Bündnis zwischen der Kommission und der Bundesregierung, getragen von vielen Abgeordneten im Deutschen Bundestag, hält und stabil bleibt.\n\nIch will einen weiteren wichtigen Punkt benennen, der uns hier im Bundestag über viele Jahre hinweg umgetrieben hat. Die strategische Agenda der EU-Kommission liegt genau auf der Linie der Koalitionsfraktionen und - darüber hinaus - auch weiterer Akteure. Wir brauchen in der EU endlich eine Politik für Wachstum und Beschäftigung, eine Politik, die sich dem Kampf gegen die Massenarbeitslosigkeit, vor allem der jungen Menschen, entschieden stellt.\n\nAuch hier hat die EU-Kommission eine Reihe von vernünftigen, zukunftsweisenden Vorschlägen auf den Tisch gelegt.\n\nJeder Jugendliche, der keinen Arbeitsplatz und keine Perspektive hat, ist einer zu viel. Das ist nicht eine rein nationale Aufgabe. Das ist eine gemeinsame Aufgabe, der wir uns in der Europäischen Union stellen können. Wir selbst wissen ja: Mit unserer starken Wirtschaft in Europa, mit unserem stabilen Sozialstaat haben wir jungen Leuten aus anderen Ländern der Europäischen Union eine Perspektive eröffnet. Aber das kann nicht die einzige Lösung sein. Vielmehr brauchen wir ordentliche Perspektiven in den jeweiligen Heimatländern der Jugendlichen.\n\nWir verstehen uns auch nicht, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, als der Oberlehrer in der EU, der erst einmal auf die anderen weist. Nein, wir wollen in der Europäischen Union ermutigen und ermuntern. Wenn ich mir einmal unsere Flüchtlings- und Migrationspolitik anschaue, dann stelle ich fest, dass sie von Mut und Ermunterung geprägt ist. Wir versuchen, Schengen zu retten. Wir tun eine Menge dafür, dass das, was für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger seit vielen Jahrzehnten spürbar und erfolgreich ist, auch eine Zukunft hat. Auch hier setze ich auf eine enge Abstimmung zwischen Deutschland und der Kommission.\n\nDie Krisen erfordern eben nicht einfach ein Weiter-so, sondern ein entschiedenes Handeln. Ich weiß, wie wir mit den vielen Krisen in der Vergangenheit umgegangen sind. Die einen sagten: Die EU ist aus den Krisen immer gestärkt hervorgegangen. - Daran ist manches richtig. Die anderen wiederum sagten: Es ist noch immer gut gegangen. - Na ja, und da gab es vielleicht auch noch den einen oder anderen, der sich dafür nicht sonderlich interessiert hat. Ich glaube, jetzt, in dieser dramatischen Lage, in der wir uns befinden, hilft es nichts, EU-Bashing zu betreiben.\n\nWas hilft, ist, Europa mit konkretem Handeln wieder fit zu machen. Von Deutschland als stärkstem Land in der Mitte der Europäischen Union geht eine ganz besondere Verantwortung aus.\n\nIch stelle mir natürlich folgende Fragen: Wie geht es in dieser immer heterogener werdenden Union weiter? Brauchen wir möglicherweise mehr Differenzierung? Müssen die Staaten, die entschieden in eine Richtung gehen wollen, möglicherweise vorangehen? Meines Erachtens ist ein solches Europa der Tempomacher möglicherweise besser als ein Europa des Stillstands oder gar des Rückschritts. Rückschritt brauchen wir nicht. Differenzierung tut not.\n\nInsofern bitte ich Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das Arbeitsprogramm der Kommission genauso kritisch wie immer, aber auch nicht minder konstruktiv zu begleiten. Ich wünsche mir, dass das eine oder andere, was sich im Arbeitsprogramm wiederfindet, vom Deutschen Bundestag aktiv begleitet werden könnte. Dafür bitte ich Sie um Unterstützung. Ich freue mich jetzt auf die Debatte.\n\nVielen herzlichen Dank.\"\n2698,ursula-leyen,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Natürlich spüren wir das Unbehagen vieler Menschen, wenn es um Drohnen geht, auch hier im Bundestag. Deshalb wird zu Recht erwartet, dass wir berechtigte Bedenken aufnehmen, sie in unsere Entscheidung einbeziehen und eine breite Debatte führen. Ich habe deshalb die Anhörung des Verteidigungsausschusses am Montag als einen ausgesprochen wertvollen Beitrag gesehen. Das war eine sehr ausgewogene, besonnene Debatte, die wir gehabt haben.\n\nFrau Buchholz, schon seit einem Jahr wird diese Debatte breit geführt.\n\nIch glaube aber auch, dass diese Debatte heute mit Sicherheit nicht zu Ende ist, sondern sie wird weitergeführt werden. Viele andere Länder - es sind über 80 - haben Drohnen. Über ein Viertel dieser Länder hat bewaffnungsfähige Drohnen. Ich möchte heute meine Position zu diesem Thema darlegen.\n\nIch möchte zunächst einmal ganz pragmatisch skizzieren, worum es uns geht. Am 17. Oktober 2013 hat in Kunduz der letzte Konvoi das Camp der Bundeswehr verlassen. Das waren 441 Soldatinnen und Soldaten in 119 Fahrzeugen - eine kilometerlange Kolonne, die über zwei Tage durch unübersehbares Gelände gefahren ist: eine der größten Operationen der Bundeswehr.\n\nDiese Kolonne ist von allen Seiten geschützt gewesen. Sie ist vor allem von oben insofern geschützt gewesen, als eine Aufklärungsdrohne, die wir geleast haben, das Gelände aus der Vogelperspektive überschaut hat. Wäre diese Kolonne angegriffen worden, so wäre dieser Angriff frühzeitig gesehen worden, aber die Unterstützung der angegriffenen Bodentruppe aus der Luft hätte gedauert.\n\nDenn es hätten entweder Hubschrauber oder Flugzeuge angefordert werden müssen, um dann die Soldatinnen und Soldaten am Boden zu unterstützen. Das sind wertvolle Minuten, die Soldatenleben kosten können, und diese Schutzlücke wollen wir schließen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nIch möchte gerne in dieser Debatte vorweg auf zwei Punkte eingehen, die ich wichtig finde. Da ist zunächst immer, wenn es um das Unbehagen der Bevölkerung geht, die Vorstellung von einem unbemannten Flugzeug, dass da kein Mensch sei, dass es ein autonomes System sei. Das ist falsch. Nach wie vor ist es immer ein Mensch, der entscheidet, ob eine Waffe ausgelöst wird oder nicht. Das ist beim Torpedo im U-Boot so. Das ist bei der Panzerhaubitze so. Das ist bei der Interkontinentalrakete und bei der Cruise-Missile so, und das ist bei der Drohne nicht anders. Niemals fällt ein Soldat oder eine Soldatin beim Einsatz einer Drohne eine einsame Entscheidung. Es ist erst die Anforderung der Truppe am Boden, die Hilfe braucht, die diesen Einsatz der Drohne auslöst. Dann erst entscheiden Soldatinnen und Soldaten innerhalb ganz klar definierter und rechtlich geprüfter Einsatzregeln. Um diesen Rahmen geht es uns. Den wollen wir setzen.\n\nWeil uns dieser Rahmen, den wir haben, so wichtig ist, und weil wir ihn auch international vorantreiben möchten, haben wir im Koalitionsvertrag festgeschrieben, dass sich Deutschland für eine völkerrechtliche Ächtung vollautomatisierter - das heißt: autonomer - Waffensysteme einsetzt. Das muss geächtet werden. Ich sage sehr deutlich: Der Außenminister hat unsere volle Unterstützung auf diesem schwierigen internationalen Weg.\n\nDer zweite Punkt, der mir wichtig ist: Unsere Ablehnung speist sich auch aus den bekannten Fällen, in denen Drohnen aus großer Distanz gesteuert zur gezielten Tötung einzelner Menschen eingesetzt werden, auch unter Inkaufnahme, dass Unbeteiligte zu Schaden kommen. Hierzu möchte ich ganz klar sagen: Die Bundesregierung lehnt extralegale völkerrechtswidrige Tötungen kategorisch ab. Das gilt für jedes Waffensystem, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nIch sage genauso klar: Mit dem Bedarf der Bundeswehr, den wir jetzt diskutieren, hat ein solches Vorgehen jetzt und in Zukunft nichts zu tun.\n\nIch sage das mit so großer Gewissheit, weil die Bundeswehr eine Parlamentsarmee ist. Es sind wir hier im Haus, die festlegen, wie ein Mandat zum Einsatz aussieht. Es gibt keinen Einsatz der Bundeswehr ohne eindeutige Regularien zum Einsatz von Waffen. Damit ist auch der Einsatz von Drohnen durch die Bundeswehr nur möglich, wenn alle völkerrechtlichen und nationalen Regeln beachtet werden, und zwar nach Billigung durch den Deutschen Bundestag. Deshalb meine ich: Wer das als Parlamentarierin oder Parlamentarier infrage stellt, der entmündigt sich doch selber. Wir sind es, die die Regeln festlegen. Es ist die Parlamentsarmee, die wir verteidigen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Bundeswehr ist weltweit im Einsatz, um Sicherheit, Stabilität und Frieden zu verteidigen. Wir alle profitieren davon, dass an 365 Tagen im Jahr 24 Stunden am Tag Soldatinnen und Soldaten ihren Dienst tun: in der Heimat, an den Grenzen des Bündnisses und weltweit bei Einsätzen. Sie nehmen dafür Gefahren auf sich, und zwar Gefahren für Leib und Leben. Wir alle wissen, so bitter es auch sein mag: Nicht jeder schwere Konflikt und nicht jeder drohende Völkermord ist allein mit den Mitteln der Diplomatie und der wirtschaftlichen Zusammenarbeit zu verhindern. Manchmal ist auch militärisches Engagement im Rahmen unserer Bündnisse gefragt. Dann verleiht erst der persönliche Einsatz unserer Soldatinnen und Soldaten dem Engagement unseres Landes für Frieden und Sicherheit das, was wir dringend brauchen, nämlich die Glaubwürdigkeit. Deshalb geben unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten uns viel. Das Wichtigste, was wir ihnen geben können, sind Unterstützung und eine bestmögliche Ausrüstung, um selbst gegen Gefahren geschützt zu sein. Ein Teil dieser Ausrüstung sind auch ferngesteuerte Luftfahrzeuge, die sogenannten Drohnen. Die sollten wir ihnen nicht verwehren.\n\nNun endet der ISAF-Einsatz. Welche Szenarien die Zukunft bringt, wissen wir nicht. Es zeichnet sich zurzeit kein Einsatz ab, der eine Befassung mit den Szenarien, die ich eben geschildert habe, notwendig macht. Die Aufklärungsdrohne Heron hat gute Dienste geleistet; sie war jeden Tag im Einsatz. Es spricht viel dafür, dass wir eine ähnliche Form für die Übergangszeit wählen. Bei einer Neuentwicklung, die mindestens zehn Jahre in Anspruch nehmen wird, plädiere ich für eine europäische Entwicklung. Dafür haben wir uns bereits im Koalitionsvertrag und in den Schlussfolgerungen des Europäischen Rats vom Dezember 2013 positioniert. Es sollte ein bewaffnungsfähiges Modell sein, über dessen tatsächlichen bewaffneten oder unbewaffneten Einsatz in jedem Einzelfall ein Mandat des Deutschen Bundestages entscheidet. Das bedeutet, dass wir alle immer gefordert sind, die Balance zu finden zwischen dem, was technisch möglich ist, und dem, was ethisch vertretbar ist, hier im Bundestag, in der EU, in der NATO und auch in den Vereinten Nationen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n7872,inge-hoger,\"Vielen Dank. - Ich kann nur anschließen. Sie wollen ja nicht nur im Vorhinein festlegen, wer eine Chance auf das Grundrecht auf Asyl hat, um entsprechend auszusortieren, sondern Sie wollen die Flüchtlinge auch länger in Erstaufnahmeeinrichtungen unterbringen. Diejenigen, die eine eindeutige Chance auf einen Aufenthaltsstatus haben, sollen sich dort drei Monate aufhalten, die anderen sechs Monate. Das bedeutet aber erst einmal für alle eine sehr viel längere Zeit in großen Lagern - es sind eher kasernierte Unterbringungen -, was die Möglichkeiten der Integration für die Dauer dieses Aufenthalts völlig verhindert.\n\nMeine Frage zielt vor allen Dingen auf etwas anderes. Schon jetzt sind diese Einrichtungen völlig überfüllt. Die Flüchtlinge werden sehr schnell weiterverteilt, weil der Platz in den Erstaufnahmeeinrichtungen einfach nicht reicht. Wie wollen Sie gewährleisten, dass die Plätze in Zukunft überhaupt da sind? Wie ist das mit beschleunigten Integrationsverfahren vereinbar?\n\nMeine Frage bezieht sich erneut darauf, dass Sie in Ihrem ganzen Gesetzesvorhaben besonderen Wert darauf legen, Flüchtlinge vom Westbalkan abzuschrecken, damit sie gar nicht erst kommen. Jetzt zeigt aber die aktuelle Anzahl von Asylanträgen, dass die Asylanträge dieser Flüchtlinge höchstens 10 Prozent ausmachen. Dadurch, dass Sie dieses ganze bürokratische Verfahren einführen, haben Sie weniger Zeit und Geld für die anderen Flüchtlinge, die wirklich unsere Hilfe brauchen. Obwohl es sich um einen ganz kleinen Teil der Flüchtlinge handelt, legen Sie so großen Wert auf Abschreckung und Diskriminierung. Ist das nicht völlig an der Realität vorbei?\"\n12548,wilhelm-priesmeier,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kollegin, wie Sie vielleicht mitbekommen haben, haben die Länderfinanzminister diesen Vorschlag schon vor längerer Zeit im Bundesrat unisono abgelehnt. Fragen Sie doch einmal nach, ob eine Gestaltungsmasse vorhanden ist, das entsprechend umzusetzen. Ich dachte, Sie seien da auf dem neuesten Stand.\n\nWenn wir uns die Situation auf dem Milchmarkt anschauen, müssen wir registrieren, dass wir in den letzten zwei Jahren herbe Verluste hinnehmen mussten. Die Betriebe haben 7 bis 8 Milliarden Euro weniger eingenommen. Das entspricht ungefähr 112 000 Euro pro Betrieb. Das macht deutlich, wie ernst die Situation ist.\n\nIch habe dabei in gewisser Hinsicht ein schlechtes Gewissen; denn wir haben - das müssen wir zugeben, wenn wir uns die Entwicklung und die Situation anschauen - recht zögerlich gehandelt. Wir haben an sich nur weiße Salbe angerührt und den Kern des Problems in vielen Bereichen nicht rechtzeitig wahrgenommen, oder wir wollten ihn nicht erkennen. Deshalb freue ich mich besonders über die heutige Äußerung des Bundesministers, dass er gerade die strukturellen Probleme lösen möchte. Dabei kann er sich auf meine Unterstützung verlassen.\n\nVielleicht hätten wir einige Betriebe retten, also von der Aufgabe abbringen können, wenn wir umgesetzt hätten, was die SPD schon im vergangenen Herbst gefordert hatte, und rechtzeitig ein Wirtschaftsprogramm aufgelegt hätten, um Betriebe der Bonitätsklassen 1 bis 4 mit zusätzlicher Liquidität zu versorgen. Dieser Vorschlag ist aber leider nicht aufgegriffen worden. Wir greifen ihn jetzt auf, wo das Ende der Krise erkennbar ist, weil die Preise am Spotmarkt schon wieder 40 Cent erreicht haben. Das ist ein bisschen spät.\n\nAuch die Erkenntnis, auf einen Qualitätsmarkt zu setzen, ist im Kern richtig. Ich glaube, auch diesen Weg sollten wir unterstützen. Dazu passen die vielen Vorschläge, die die Kollegin eben gemacht hat. Das kann man gemeinsam mit den Ländern organisieren. Dafür muss man natürlich etwas in die Hand nehmen. Auch dazu wären wir von der SPD bereit.\n\nWenn ich mir nicht nur die Artikel 1 und 2 dieses Gesetzentwurfs anschaue, sondern auch den Artikel 3, dann stelle ich mir die Frage, wie das Ganze entstanden ist. Ich habe gehört, dass der Herr Minister auf dem Deutschen Bauerntag gesagt hat - ich zitiere -:\n\nWir greifen Ihre Ideen zur Steuererleichterung durch Gewinnglättung auf. Auch das entlastet alle Betriebe und hilft in Zeiten stark schwankender Gewinne.\n\nEs ging um die Vorschläge des Deutschen Bauernverbandes. Da frage ich mich: Wer macht in diesem Parlament das Gesetz, und wer schlägt die Lösungswege vor? Ich bin da recht nachdenklich geworden.\n\nAus dem Grunde, glaube ich, muss man verschiedene Punkte in diesem Gesetzentwurf kritisch sehen. Wir haben es nicht zugelassen, dass Grund und Boden, so wie es ursprünglich vorgeschlagen worden war, veräußert werden, wenn Betriebe in Schwierigkeiten sind. Das brauchen sie hinterher, wenn sie die Krise überstanden haben. Es ist nach unserer Einschätzung auch nicht gewünscht, dass man den Bodenmarkt, der in vielen Bereichen sowieso schon Überhitzungserscheinungen zeigt, was landwirtschaftliche Flächen angeht, noch zusätzlich befeuert. Daher, glaube ich, war es richtig, dass dies keinen Niederschlag im Gesetzentwurf gefunden hat.\n\nWir stehen natürlich an der Seite der Betriebe und auch an der Seite derer, die Hilfe brauchen. Wir hoffen, dass wir mit dem Gesetzesvorschlag jetzt zumindest einen Teil dazu beitragen können. Eine Gewinnglättung sollte es unserer Meinung nach nur vorübergehend geben. Wir haben uns dagegen gewehrt, dieses System dauerhaft zu implementieren. Warum? Wir haben es für falsch gehalten, weil wir dadurch verfassungsrechtliche Probleme bekommen. Wir würden dann eine Lex Landwirtschaft machen, die dauerhaft gültig ist, und müssten uns fragen, warum solche Regelungen nicht auch für andere Wirtschaftsbereiche gelten. Was ist mit demjenigen, der einen Gastronomiebetrieb hat und im Sommer geringe Einnahmen durch schlechtes Wetter hatte, oder demjenigen mit einem Beherbergungsgewerbe an der Küste, der eine schlechte Saison hatte? Hat er den gleichen Anspruch? Diese Fragen muss man dabei im Auge behalten. Aus diesem Grunde, glaube ich, ist es richtig, den Zeitraum zu begrenzen, und zwar beginnend mit dem Bezug 2014 bis 2022.\n\nWir müssen überlegen, ob wir bei dieser gesetzlichen Regelung Gestaltungsspielräume für die Betriebe eröffnet haben, die über erhebliche Einkommen verfügen. 10 Prozent haben auch in der jetzigen Situation immer noch ein Einkommen von mehr als 100 000 Euro. Der normale Nebenerwerbsbetrieb hat weniger als 1 000 Euro Einkommen. Das macht deutlich, dass man mit dieser Vorschrift Ungerechtigkeiten in Kauf nehmen muss und in Kauf nimmt. Wir haben erhebliche Zweifel, ob das dauerhaft und zielgerichtet so sein muss.\n\nDie jetzt angedachte Regelung ist vielleicht gerade noch verfassungstauglich. Die Bundesländer haben schon signalisiert, dass sie damit erhebliche Probleme haben. Sie beklagen sich auch darüber, dass sie nicht rechtzeitig informiert wurden. Ich habe 30 Fragen an das BMF gestellt; der Vertreter des BMF sitzt auf der Regierungsbank. Diese 30 Fragen habe ich Anfang August gestellt. Seitens des BMF gab es offensichtlich nicht genügend Zeit, sie ausreichend zu beantworten. Die Antworten haben mich nicht zufriedengestellt. Hier, glaube ich, ist das Auskunftsrecht, das Abgeordnete haben, wenn es um Gesetzgebung geht, mit Füßen getreten worden, und zwar ganz bewusst, um hinterher in der Situation zu sein, die wir jetzt haben, nämlich dass wir diesen Gesetzentwurf über die Fraktionen einbringen müssen, damit wir ihn fristgerecht zum Jahresende über die Bühne bekommen. Das ist ein Versäumnis. Über die Ursachen des Versäumnisses sollte man einmal nachdenken. Sie liegen jedenfalls nicht bei der SPD-Bundestagsfraktion.\n\nDie beste Risikovorsorge für die Betriebe ist immer noch eine gute Eigenkapitalausstattung. Unsere Betriebe haben das. Sie liegt zwischen 77 und 80 Prozent. Ich glaube, das ist auch ein Ansatz, den man fördern kann, wenn es um Risikovorsorge geht.\n\nNoch ein Hinweis eines Länderfinanzstaatssekretärs: Aus steuertechnischer Sicht geht die Vorschrift ins Leere, wenn im letzten Jahr des Betrachtungszeitraums keine oder eine nur geringe Einkommensteuer festgesetzt wurde, weil das Einkommensteuerrecht keine negative Steuerfestsetzung erlaubt. Das ist schon der erste Punkt, an dem wir nachbessern müssen.\n\nZur Qualität dieses Entwurfes muss ich sagen: Hätte man sich mehr Zeit genommen und hätte man vor allen Dingen auch meine Fragen rechtzeitig beantwortet, wären diese Dinge vielleicht schon früher aufgefallen. Jetzt müssen wir es über kurz oder lang in der nächsten Beratungsrunde im Ausschuss regeln. Wir werden wahrscheinlich zu einem Ergebnis kommen; aber in Gänze, glaube ich, ist dieses Gesetz mit der heißen Nadel gestrickt.\n\nAus meiner Sicht gibt es immer noch Probleme bei diesem Gesetz; das bereitet mir Kopfschmerzen. Ich hoffe, dass im nächsten Jahr, wenn wir bewerten können, ob das Gesetz wirkt und ob die Folgen, die gewünscht sind, in den nächsten Jahren eintreten, meine Kopfschmerzen vielleicht verschwinden.\n\nIch halte es für bedenklich, Betriebe, die Einkommen jenseits von 100 000 Euro haben, in größerem Umfang steuerlich zu bevorteilen als all die anderen Betriebe, die betroffen sind. Ich als Sozialdemokrat habe damit ein Gerechtigkeitsproblem. Tut mir leid.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n15056,ulla-jelpke,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Dass Deutschland seit vielen Jahren, Jahrzehnten ein Einwanderungsland ist, das kann hier doch wirklich niemand bestreiten, lieber Kollege Mayer. Das muss endlich einmal respektiert und darf nicht immer wieder von rechts außen hier infrage gestellt werden.\n\nRichtig ist doch, dass wir über die Rechte von Einwanderern sprechen. Ich habe den Eindruck, dass Sie heute alles miteinander vermischen. Familienzusammenführung ist ein Grundrecht für geflüchtete Menschen, die hierherkommen. Aber auch für Menschen, die hier einwandern, muss es ganz klare Rechte für Familienzusammenführung geben. Natürlich gibt es hier Parallelen. Aber die Rechte müssen formuliert werden.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, Ihnen möchte ich sagen: Sie werfen gerade der Großen Koalition immer vor, Schnellschüsse zu machen. So wichtig ich diese Debatte finde, so muss ich mich aber ernsthaft fragen: Wie können wir eine solche Debatte in den zwei verbleibenden Sitzungswochen dieser Legislaturperiode noch führen, in denen nicht einmal mehr eine Anhörung möglich ist?\n\nNein, ich finde, das ist wirklich Effekthascherei im Wahlkampf.\n\nIch finde es voll daneben, jetzt mit einem solchen Gesetzentwurf zu kommen, der nicht mehr zu Ende beraten werden kann.\n\nSie haben in Ihrem Gesetzentwurf viele gute Forderungen stehen - das ist ohne Zweifel -, die auch die Linke teilt, angefangen bei der Frage der Staatsangehörigkeit, also dass man per Geburt die deutsche Staatsbürgerschaft bekommt, über Erleichterungen bei der Vergabe der Staatsangehörigkeit bis zu den kürzeren Einbürgerungsfristen. Natürlich müssen auch die Menschen, die hier nur eine Duldung haben, zum Beispiel zum Zwecke der Ausbildung, eine Chance erhalten. Auch für sie muss geregelt werden, dass sie ihre Familien hierherholen können.\n\nIch will auf zwei Punkte eingehen, die ich in diesem Gesetzentwurf für besonders kritisch halte und auf die Sie nicht eingehen. Meine Kollegin hat es schon gesagt, und Herr Mayer hat es eben hier sehr plastisch vorgeführt: Natürlich geht es hier um die Fragen: Wer darf kommen, und wer darf nicht kommen? Wer ist auf dem Arbeitsmarkt einsetzbar und wer nicht? Das ist Ihr Grundansatz. Dass Sie das aber über ein Punktesystem regeln wollen, kritisieren wir. Sie müssen dann nämlich genau sagen, wer hereindarf und wer hinaussoll.\n\nSie regeln zum Beispiel auch überhaupt nicht, was nach einem Jahr geschieht.\n\nNach einem Jahr sollen diese Menschen Arbeit haben, eine Wohnung haben, sollen sich hier in einer gewissen Weise integriert haben. Aber was ist dann? Was ist, wenn es schiefgeht und diese Menschen zum Beispiel ihren Arbeitsplatz verlieren? Sie haben in Ihrem Gesetzentwurf keinerlei Regelung vorgesehen, ob diese Menschen zum Beispiel über das rigide Abschiebesystem, das wir gegenwärtig von der Großen Koalition beschert bekommen haben, wieder abgeschoben werden. Nichts! Das halte ich für ein ausgesprochen oberflächliches Herangehen.\n\nIch sage hier ganz ehrlich: Auch in der Linken wird seit vielen Jahren über ein Zuwanderungs- oder, besser gesagt, ein Einwanderungsgesetz diskutiert. Aber genau diese Antwort muss man auch geben. Man kann hier nicht einfach so tun, als wenn man Einwanderung zulassen und Rechte verteilen wolle, und dann lässt man in der Konsequenz doch zu, dass Menschen auf brutale Art und Weise das Land wieder verlassen müssen.\n\nDeswegen sagt die Linke ganz klar und deutlich: Einwanderer brauchen Rechte. Wir brauchen ein sicheres Aufenthaltsrecht für sie und ihre Familien, demokratische und soziale Rechte müssen festgeschrieben werden. Wir würden da weit über ein Jahr hinausgehen. Es ist doch völliger Unsinn, das auf ein Jahr zu begrenzen.\n\nAuch im Interesse der Einheimischen will ich hier ganz deutlich sagen: Wenn diese Politik nicht mehr in Bildung und insgesamt in Integration investiert, dann haben wir Bildungslücken auch in der eigenen Bevölkerung. Qualifizierung für alle halten wir für besonders wichtig, damit es keine soziale Spaltung gibt, die, wenn es um die Einwanderungsfrage geht, insbesondere von der rechten Seite dieses Hauses immer wieder angeführt wird.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich deutlich darauf hinweisen: Einwanderung darf nicht dazu führen, dass hier Billiglohnarbeiter und Lohndrücker beschäftigt werden. Einwanderer müssen genau wie alle anderen den garantierten Mindestlohn bekommen und die gleiche Förderung wie alle anderen auch. Auch das ist, finde ich, ein großes Problem in diesem Gesetzentwurf, in dem solche Fragen nicht beantwortet werden.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n15508,dagmar-schmidt,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Fünfte Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht der Bundesregierung hat es erneut gezeigt - und ich bin froh darüber, dass das Thema heute von so prominenter Seite vorgetragen wurde -: In unserem Land gibt es viel zu viele arme Kinder, und diese armen Kinder haben es besonders schwer, vor allem dann, wenn es um ihre Teilhabe und Bildungschancen geht.\n\nArme Kinder haben es schwer, weil es in Deutschland immer noch so ist, dass die Herkunft und nicht Intelligenz und Fleiß eines Kindes über seine Zukunft entscheiden. Arme Kinder haben es schwer, weil ihre Familien oftmals besonders problembeladen sind - durch Existenz- und Zukunftsängste, Hoffnungslosigkeit und häufig das Gefühl der Überforderung, gerade bei der Erziehung der Kinder.\n\nUm eines klarzustellen: Arme Eltern lieben ihre Kinder genauso wie alle anderen Eltern. Sie wollen genau wie alle anderen Eltern das Beste für ihre Kinder. Und arme Kinder werden genauso klug, neugierig, lernbereit und offen geboren wie alle anderen Kinder auch, und sie werden mit den gleichen Rechten auf ein gutes Leben geboren.\n\nAber es werden ihnen schon früh dicke Steine in den Weg gelegt, und es ist unsere Aufgabe, diese dicken Steine wegzuräumen. Alle Kinder brauchen eine ausreichende Existenzsicherung und gleichen Zugang zu Bildung und sozialer Teilhabe.\n\nWir haben schon vieles getan. Unser Sozialstaat verbessert durch Kinder- und Familienleistungen die Situation von Kindern deutlich. Unser Kindergeld beträgt aktuell mehr als 190 Euro. Der Kinderzuschlag wurde um 30 Euro auf 170 Euro pro Kind und Monat erhöht. Durch die Reform des Unterhaltsvorschusses gilt in wenigen Tagen, dass dieser unbegrenzt bis zum 18. Lebensjahr eines Kindes gewährt wird und bis zu 268 Euro pro Monat betragen kann.\n\nUm die Eltern in gute Arbeit zu bringen, haben wir ebenfalls vieles getan: mit der Hilfe für langzeitarbeitslose Eltern, der Möglichkeit, eine Ausbildung zu machen und dabei Grundsicherungsleistungen zu bekommen,\n\nund den deutlichen Verbesserungen bei der Kinderbetreuung. Wir haben allein 2,2 Milliarden Euro in den Betreuungsausbau investiert und uns mit 6 Milliarden Euro an den Kitabetriebskosten beteiligt. Wir haben die frühkindliche Sprachentwicklung in den Kitas gefördert sowie die Ausweitung der Betreuungszeiten und die Kindertagespflege unterstützt. Das alles kann sich wirklich sehen lassen.\n\nEltern in Arbeit zu bringen, ist wichtig; aber es reicht nicht aus. Wir müssen Politik für Kinder auch vom Kind aus denken. Da gibt es noch viel zu tun. Bei alledem, was wir tun, müssen das Kindeswohl und das Recht auf gleiche Chancen und Möglichkeiten im Mittelpunkt stehen.\n\nWir brauchen eine eigenständige Existenzsicherung. Die Frage der fairen Berechnung des Existenzminimums für Kinder muss wieder auf die Tagesordnung. Wir brauchen Ganztagsschulen, Schulen, die es nicht notwendig machen, dass Eltern bei den Hausaufgaben helfen können müssen.\n\nWir wollen die Kinder nicht vergessen, die nicht in ihrer Ursprungsfamilie bleiben können, und auch die Familien, die Pflegekinder bei sich aufnehmen, mit ihnen eine eigene Familie gründen und ihnen Sicherheit und Geborgenheit geben. Diese Familien und diese Kinder müssen wir besonders schützen.\n\nJedes Kind ist uns gleich viel wert, und niemand darf wegen seiner Kinder arm werden. Deswegen werden wir ein gerechteres Kindergeld einführen und dies mit dem Kinderzuschlag als Regelleistung zusammenführen. Wir werden die Rechte von Kindern und Familien im Kinder- und Jugendhilfegesetz stärken und die Kommunen bei der Umsetzung unterstützen. Wir werden mit einem Umgangsmehrbedarf und mehr Teilzeitausbildung die Situation für Alleinerziehende erleichtern. Und wir werden die Kitagebühren abschaffen und einen Rechtsanspruch auf Ganztagsbetreuung im Grundschulalter einführen.\n\nKinder sind unsere Zukunft. Wer zu geizig ist, in diese Zukunft zu investieren, wer es scheut, dafür zu sorgen, dass alle Kinder die gleichen Chancen auf ein gutes Leben haben, und wer mehr als 6 Milliarden Euro Brennelementesteuer für die Energiekonzerne aus dem Haushalt zaubert, aber das Geld nicht hatte, als es um das Bildungs- und Teilhabepaket ging und um die Frage, ob man die Nachhilfe für arme Kinder finanziert, die die Chance und das Potenzial haben, in der Schule aufzusteigen, den kann man am 24. September aus dem Kanzleramt und dem Finanzministerium abwählen.\n\nIn diesem Sinne: Glück auf!\"\n4007,thomas-gambke,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren auf den Zuschauerrängen! Herr Kampeter, eine Sache ärgert mich - das habe ich schon letzte Woche gesagt -: Vor zwei Jahren haben Sie und die Union dafür gekämpft, dass das Deutsch-Schweizer Steuerabkommen zustande kommt. Wäre es zustande gekommen, hätte es die anonyme Amnestie gegeben. Bei einem Treffen von Mitgliedern des Finanzausschusses - auch Kollegen von der Union waren dabei - mit Luc Frieden hat dieser klar gesagt: Wenn ihr das Abkommen mit der Schweiz schließt - das hätte anonyme Amnestie bedeutet, nicht automatischen Informationsaustausch; mithilfe der Kollegen von der SPD haben wir das damals Gott sei Dank verhindert -, dann werden wir einer Erweiterung der Zinsbesteuerungsrichtlinie nicht zustimmen. - Es wäre also ein bisschen mehr Bescheidenheit von Ihrer Seite angebracht.\n\nHerr Kampeter, Herr Zimmermann, Herr Middelberg, Herr Michelbach, Sie alle haben von der Bedeutung von BEPS, von fairem Steuerwettbewerb und vom unsolidarischen Verhalten kleiner Länder gesprochen. Aber Sie müssen doch auch einmal konkret werden und Maßnahmen benennen. Der Finanzminister von Hessen hat die Einführung einer sogenannten Lizenzschranke verlangt, die dann greift, wenn im Empfängerland nicht eine Mindestbesteuerung von 25 Prozent erfolgt. Das ist ein konkreter Vorschlag, der allerdings aus wohl guten Gründen zurückgewiesen worden ist. Ich fordere Sie auf: Machen Sie einen konkreten Vorschlag, nennen Sie Zahlen! Wir sagen: Unternehmen müssen einschließlich aller Lizenzen und Patente mit mindestens 15 Prozent besteuert werden. Das müssen wir in den Fokus rücken.\n\nSie müssen bekennen: Was meinen Sie denn damit, wenn Sie sagen, dass unfairer Steuerwettbewerb bekämpft werden soll? Man muss Zahlen nennen. Man muss sich konkrete Ziele setzen, aber darf nicht nur nebulös sagen: Wir wollen einen fairen Steuerwettbewerb. Den gibt es nämlich nur dann, wenn wir einen entsprechenden gesetzlichen Rahmen setzen, und das müssen wir tun.\n\nDie Lizenz- und Patentbox gibt es nicht nur in Luxemburg, in den Niederlanden und auf Malta; sie wird jetzt auch in Irland eingeführt. Irland hat zugesagt, eines der größten Loopholes, eines der größten Steuerschlupflöcher, den Double Irish, zu stopfen. Aber was hat es gemacht? Es kündigt eine Lizenzbox an. Alle Steuerberater und auch die Steuerexperten der großen Konzerne sagen mir ganz klar: Solange es große Gefälle in der Besteuerung gibt - und eine Lizenzbox mit einer Besteuerung von 5 Prozent ist ein Riesengefälle -, werdet ihr Steuergestaltung haben. - Wenn sie das jetzt zusammen mit England und auch Deutschland einführen, dann werden weiterhin Steuerschlupflöcher existieren. Es wird immer noch Steuergestaltung geben, und das ist nicht tragbar.\n\nAls Mittelstandsbeauftragter meiner Fraktion bekomme ich die Meinung des Mittelstandes mit, der diese Möglichkeiten nicht hat. Er wird keine verminderten Steuersätze nutzen können, weil er außer dem eigenen Know-how keine Patenteinnahmen zu verwerten hat. Mittelständische Unternehmen werden gegenüber den Konzernen schlechter gestellt. Ein böser Satz des Mittelstandes lautet: Die großen Konzerne brauchen die Steuernachlässe, weil sie ineffizienter sind. Wir im Mittelstand sind effizient, aber wir müssen die Steuerlast tragen. - Das ist nicht tragbar.\n\nEs wurde auf die Rolle der großen Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaften - ich will nicht nur die eine nennen - eingegangen. Wir müssen uns fragen, ob da wirklich auf Augenhöhe verhandelt wird. Ich habe heute Morgen schon im Finanzausschuss gesagt: Wir können Gruppenanfragen machen. - Warum wird das nicht gemacht? Ich habe nachgefragt. Der Finanzminister antwortete mir: Wir müssen das mit den Ländern abstimmen. - Schon seit zwei Jahren könnten Sie Gruppenanfragen machen. Das heißt, Sie könnten im Rahmen von Doppelbesteuerungsabkommen Finanzbehörden in anderen Ländern fragen - ganz allgemein, Sie brauchen gar keinen konkreten Fall -: Was ist denn da los? - Sie tun das aber nicht und sagen: Wir müssen das erst mit den Länder-finanzbehörden abstimmen.\n\nWir haben den Vorschlag gemacht, eine Large Tax Payer Unit als eine Art Bundesbehörde - wie auch immer sie das organisatorisch machen wollen - einzurichten, um die Schwierigkeit, die wir in Deutschland durch die verschiedenen Landesbehörden haben - sie arbeiten nicht immer gut zusammen, es gibt unterschiedliche Software, möglicherweise andere kommunikative Probleme -, anzugehen.\n\nGehen Sie das Thema an und richten Sie endlich eine Bundessteuerbehörde ein, die das leisten kann, was Sie verlangen, die auf Augenhöhe mit den großen Konzernen verhandeln kann.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3509,mahmut-ozdemir,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Diese erneute Debatte ist mal wieder der unbestreitbare Beweis: Anträge schreiben sich immer leichter als vernünftig abgewogene Gesetzentwürfe.\n\nSie wärmen wieder Ihre alten Anträge auf, weil es Ihnen am Gestaltungswillen fehlt.\n\nStatt sich an den Beratungen zu beteiligen - die Anträge wurden mit Ihrer Zustimmung bzw. zum Teil auch auf Ihre Bitte hin im Innenausschuss geschoben -,\n\nsetzen Sie das Thema hier ein zweites Mal auf, ohne selber auch nur im Entferntesten einen konstruktiven Beitrag zum Prozess geleistet zu haben,\n\ngeschweige denn, einen eigenen Gesetzentwurf vorzulegen, wenn es Sie so drängt.\n\nSie gaukeln der Öffentlichkeit Untätigkeit und Unwilligkeit der Regierungsfraktionen vor. Das ist nicht nur falsch - -\n\n- Herbert Wehner hat einmal gesagt, Sie sind Geschäftsführerin und nicht Geschwätzführerin.\n\nSie gaukeln der Öffentlichkeit Untätigkeit und Unwilligkeit der Regierungsfraktionen vor. Das ist nicht nur falsch, das ist in höchstem Maße ungebührlich.\n\nIch erinnere mich noch genau daran, wie Sie uns des Verrates an unserem eigenen Wahlprogramm bezichtigt haben, allein wegen der Tatsache, dass wir die Palette von Regelungsoptionen öffentlich mit Ihnen diskutieren wollten.\n\nDie Einladung zur fachlichen Debatte haben Sie mit lautem Hinweis darauf ausgeschlagen, was alles nicht möglich sei. Das verüble ich Ihnen auch gar nicht. Schließlich ist es eine ziemliche Detailarbeit, an der man nur Freude hat, wenn man eine Regelung anstrebt, die nicht alle halbe Jahre für Empörung sorgen soll, sondern für Entscheidungssicherheit und Rechtssicherheit.\n\nDie Entscheidungshoheit über den beabsichtigten Wechsel in die Wirtschaft von Ministern und Parlamentarischen Staatssekretären durch die Bundesregierung als Kollegialorgan auf Basis eines Parlamentsgesetzes muss dabei wichtigste Bedingung und Ausgangspunkt für eine entsprechend effektive Regelung sein.\n\nRechtssicherheit wiederum ist notwendig für denjenigen, der sich aus einem Regierungsamt heraus oder nach einem Regierungsamt für eine Weiterbeschäftigung in der Wirtschaft interessiert. Diese beiden Begriffe beschreiben die Auflösung des Widerstreits zwischen der Vertraulichkeit und Integrität von Regierungshandeln, das durch Interessenkonflikte nicht beschädigt werden soll, auf der einen Seite und der Rechtfertigung eines vorübergehend eingeschränkten Berufsverbotes für ein Regierungsmitglied im Einzelfall auf der anderen Seite.\n\nWir wollen kein Berufsverbot nach dem Regierungsamt gemäß eines verzerrten Selbstgerechtigkeitsbildes, das in den Oppositionsanträgen teilweise gezeichnet wird, sondern eine Gesetzesänderung, die nachdrücklich den Sinn und Zweck verfolgt, Regierungskenntnisse nicht zu einem wirtschaftlichen Gut herabzuwürdigen. Folglich geht es nicht darum, wie viele Jahre ein wechselndes oder ausscheidendes Regierungsmitglied nicht arbeiten darf. Diesen Selbstgerechtigkeitswettbewerb unter Oppositionsfraktionen können wir gerne bei unwichtigeren Themen austragen.\n\nZugleich brauchen wir eine Regelung, die zuverlässig und wirksam die Kenntnisse, Erfahrungen und Netzwerke, die im Regierungsamt auf Kosten des Steuerzahlers erworben wurden, schützt. Genauso wenig darf es aber auch einem Regierungsmitglied vorübergehend oder gar bis zu 18 Monaten nicht zum Nachteil gereichen, all diese Eigenschaften in den Dienst des Staates gestellt zu haben. Wir schmälerten damit die Attraktivität von Regierungsämtern, weil wir nur Expertise ziehen, aber nicht geben würden, auch nicht gönnen würden. Das mag ein Modell sein, wenn man im Oppositionsstil jeden Wechsel von Politik in die Wirtschaft aufgrund einer Neiddebatte oder einer reinen Skandalisierung wegen befeuern möchte. Dann gehörte aber auch zur Vollständigkeit, über einen Parlamentarischen Staatssekretär a. D. Herrn Berninger zu reden. Liebe Grünen-Fraktion, das wollte ich Ihnen noch mit auf den Weg geben.\n\nIch werfe Ihnen das aber auch gar nicht vor; denn Sie tun im Ansatz, auch wenn Sie weit über das Ziel hinausschießen, geradewegs das Richtige.\n\nSie beleuchten jeden Einzelfall in seinen Details. Genau das wollen wir mit unseren Eckpunkten auch. Im Übrigen könnte man aufgrund des Kabinettsprinzips bei Böswilligkeit eine Inte-ressenverflechtung immer dann annehmen, wenn man eben gerade nicht den Einzelfall bewertet.\n\nMit der Einigung auf die nachfolgenden Eckpunkte tragen wir dem Koalitionsvertrag, aber auch dem SPD-Wahlprogramm und nicht zuletzt 38 000 Unterschriften, die LobbyControl e. V. gesammelt hat, Rechnung. Während Sie sich darin gefallen haben, uns Verschleppung des Prozesses vorzuwerfen, haben wir viele Fachgespräche geführt - ich danke da auch ausdrücklich den Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der CDU/CSU -, die zum Gelingen dieser Regelung beitragen werden.\n\nSobald die Wechselabsicht eines Regierungsmitglieds in die Wirtschaft vorliegt, wird eine gesetzliche Anzeigepflicht für Mitglieder des Bundeskabinetts und Parlamentarische Staatssekretäre ausgelöst werden. Dies gilt auch nach dem Ausscheiden aus dem Regierungsamt, sofern man sich innerhalb der Karenzhöchstzeit von bis zu 18 Monaten bewegt. Voraussetzung ist, dass ein Interessenkonflikt attestiert werden kann. Hierbei wird ein Gremium, vergleichbar der Ethikkommission nach EU-Vorbild, unmittelbar nach der Anzeige durch das betroffene Regierungsmitglied dem Kabinett als Kollegial-organ einen Entscheidungsvorschlag über das Ob und die Dauer der Karenzzeiten machen.\n\nDas heißt aber auch, dass es im Ergebnis sein kann, dass gar keine Karenz angeordnet wird. Aber wenn sie angeordnet wird, soll sie in der Regel 12 Monate betragen und in besonderen Fällen bis zu 18 Monate umfassen.\n\nSobald Sie mehr fordern, greifen Sie intensiver in die Berufsfreiheit ein und übersehen dabei, dass auch die Intensität des Interessenkonfliktes geeignet sein muss, längere Zwangspausen hinzunehmen.\n\nBei der Betrachtung dieser Eckpunkte darf das betroffene Regierungsmitglied nicht zum Objekt dieser Maschinerie werden. Auch dieser Akt kann und muss seinerseits gerichtlich überprüfbar bleiben. Gerade deshalb ist die Frage nach dem individuellen Interessenkonflikt Dreh- und Angelpunkt für das Ob der Anordnung einer Karenz. Beginnt der Interessenkonflikt schon alleine mit der Tatsache, dass ein Regierungsmitglied Regierungsmitglied gewesen ist, oder setzen wir eine konkrete Befassung im Regierungsamt mit einem nahezu gleichen Verantwortungs- und Interessenbereich in der Wirtschaft voraus?\n\nMit dem bald vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf, der vom Bundesministerium des Innern erarbeitet wird, werden wir zwar mediale Skandalisierung kaum unterbinden können, jedoch werden wir Interessenkonflikte frühzeitig erkennen und mit einer zeitlichen und sachlichen Karenz belegen.\n\nEin Hinweis ist mir aber noch wichtig: So wie es arbeitsrechtliche Wettbewerbsverbote in der Privatwirtschaft gibt, so ist es auch mit Karenzzeitregelungen für Regierungsmitglieder.\n\n- Da bin ich ganz bei Ihnen. Nicht aufregen! - Im Zweifel wird der Anspruch auf Übergangsgeld verlängert. Ich bin von der Richtigkeit dessen überzeugt, dass der Staat den Bezug des Übergangsgeldes gegebenenfalls verlängern muss. Aber das Übergangsgeld darf nicht das Argument sein, weshalb eine Karenz angeordnet werden darf. Das würde Ursache und Wirkung verkehren. Dann könnte man tatsächlich über Karenzzeiten von drei bis fünf Jahren reden, würde aber gleichsam in eine Niederlage vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht rennen.\n\nZusammengefasst: Diese Eckpunkte sind eine fundierte Basis für eine wirksame Regelung. Wir halten Wort, wo Sie nur Reden halten. Der Bundestag hat es in der Hand, durch diese Gesetzesänderung ein Stück mehr parlamentarische Kontrolle auszuüben und die Ausübung dieser Kontrolle an die Regierung zu delegieren.\n\nIch bedanke mich recht herzlich für die Aufmerksamkeit, freue mich auf eine sehr emotionale Debatte, die wir dann hoffentlich in Sachlichkeit überführen werden, und schließe mit meinem traditionellen Glückauf.\"\n7563,andrea-nahles,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Bevor ich mich mit den Themen für das kommende Jahr beschäftige, gestatten Sie mir kurz einen Blick zurück:\n\nWir haben in dieser Legislaturperiode schon einige große Reformvorhaben umgesetzt. Wir haben die Mütterrente und die abschlagsfreie Rente nach 45 Beitragsjahren eingeführt. Seit 1. Januar 2015 gilt der allgemeine gesetzliche Mindestlohn. Wir haben die Tarifautonomie gestärkt und neue Ansätze zum Abbau der Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit umgesetzt. Weil so mancher Sorge hat, möchte ich an dieser Stelle direkt sagen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Die Bekämpfung der Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit wird auch weiterhin Priorität haben und Handlungsschwerpunkt bleiben, auch wenn neue Aufgaben hinzukommen.\n\nDie Reformen der vergangenen Jahre waren zum Teil mit heftigen Kontroversen verbunden. An Horrorszenarien hat es nicht gemangelt. Heute, mit etwas Abstand, können auch die größten Pessimisten feststellen, dass diese Horrorszenarien so nicht eingetreten sind. Die Kosten der Mütterrente und die Inanspruchnahme der Rente ab 63 Jahren liegen voll im Rahmen der Erwartungen. Andere Beitragszahler rücken nach. Beitragsausfälle bleiben aus.\n\nDie sozialversicherungspflichtige Beschäftigung ist auf Rekordniveau. Der Mindestlohn wird zunehmend zur Normalität und stabilisiert spürbar die Strukturen auf dem Arbeitsmarkt. Statt der prophezeiten Jobverluste ist die Beschäftigung heute höher als vor einem Jahr, nämlich über eine halbe Million Menschen mehr.\n\nDas spült viel Geld in die Sozialkassen.\n\nNatürlich ist der auch Mindestlohn ein wichtiges Instrument, um die Zuwanderung nicht in einen Wettlauf nach unten, sondern in ordentliche Arbeit münden zu lassen; darauf lege ich Wert.\n\nDie Arbeit der letzten zwei Jahre zeigt, dass wir mit Augenmaß und Vernunft vorgehen. Lassen Sie uns, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, geleitet von dieser Erfahrung, auch die kommenden Reformaufgaben angehen: mit Augenmaß und klarem Blick auf die Dinge, die wir verändern möchten.\n\nWir werden in den kommenden Monaten das umsetzen, was wir schon sehr präzise im Koalitionsvertrag verabredet haben, ein Gesetzespaket zur Vermeidung von Missbrauch bei Leiharbeit und Werkverträgen. Derzeit sind wir in intensiven Vorbereitungen und Gesprächen, um ein zielgenaues Gesetz zu erarbeiten.\n\nZwei Dinge möchte ich hierzu an dieser Stelle anmerken:\n\nErstens geht es nicht darum, die Vertragsform Werkvertrag infrage zu stellen. Aber ein Anliegen unserer Reform ist es, den Menschen, die hinter solchen Verträgen stehen, ein Gesicht zu geben, zum Beispiel indem Betriebsräte Kenntnis bekommen, wer als Werkarbeitnehmer auf dem Firmengelände beschäftigt ist.\n\nEinen zweiten Punkt möchte ich aus aktuellem Anlass gerne in Erinnerung rufen, weil er uns erst kürzlich in der Realität der Tarifauseinandersetzung begegnet ist. Wir möchten klarstellen, dass Leiharbeiter nicht als Streikbrecher eingesetzt werden dürfen. Auch das haben wir im Koalitionsvertrag verabredet.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, nach Abschluss eines intensiven Dialoges mit allen Betroffenen werden wir im kommenden Jahr auch ein Bundesteilhabegesetz vorlegen. Mit dem Bundesteilhabegesetz werden wir Menschen mit Behinderungen mehr Selbstständigkeit und mehr Teilhabe eröffnen. Aber - das sage ich direkt dazu -: Alles, was wir tun werden, werden wir so gestalten, dass wir damit keine neue Ausgabendynamik auslösen. Auch das haben wir klar verabredet.\n\nWir werden also diese Vorhaben weiter umsetzen, auch wenn uns alle zurzeit sicher ein ganz anderes Thema bewegt, nämlich das Schicksal vieler Millionen Flüchtlinge auf der ganzen Welt und die Frage, wie wir denen, die bei uns Zuflucht suchen, ein würdiges neues Leben in unserem Land ermöglichen können. Wenn ich in diesen Wochen Bilder sehe, wie Hunderte von Menschen auf den Bahnhöfen warten - mit Jacken, Pullovern, Wasser, Essen und einem freundlichen Lächeln für die ankommenden Flüchtlinge: in München, in Frankfurt, in Dortmund, in Saalfeld in Thüringen oder sogar nachts um drei in Berlin -, dann bin ich persönlich dankbar. All denen, die das überall in unserem Land tun - und den vielen mehr, die auch helfen -, möchte ich Danke sagen.\n\nAber auch Bund, Länder und Kommunen stehen hier vor großen Herausforderungen. Als Erstes sehen wir natürlich, was nötig ist, um das Dringendste zu gewährleisten: ein Dach über dem Kopf, Decken, Kleidung, Registrierung, Essen, ärztliche Versorgung, Schule für die Kinder. Bei all dem dürfen wir uns nicht allein auf noch so großes freiwilliges Engagement verlassen. Dafür brauchen die Kommunen und Länder finanzielle Unterstützung. Und auch der Bund steht vor einer großen Herausforderung. Auch wir benötigen zusätzliche Finanzmittel, wenn wir diese Aufgabe erfolgreich schultern wollen. Ich bin überzeugt, wir können es schaffen. Aus den Flüchtlingen sollen möglichst schnell Nachbarn und Kollegen werden.\n\nLange Asylverfahren und die Abhängigkeit von staatlicher Hilfe - das ist für die betroffenen Menschen frustrierend, und es ist die schlechteste Lösung für unser Gemeinwesen, übrigens auch für die öffentlichen Kassen. Ziel muss es sein, dass die Menschen, die bei uns bleiben, zügig in Arbeit kommen. Unser Haushalt, unser Einzelplan 11, der hier zur Debatte steht, ist ein wichtiger Hebel, mit dem wir das stemmen können.\n\nWir fangen nicht erst jetzt an. Ich habe alle Spielräume genutzt, um auch im laufenden Jahr sofort anzupacken. Worum geht es im Einzelnen? Natürlich ist die Versorgung der Menschen schon ein großer Brocken. Wir brauchen zusätzliche Mittel für die Hilfe zum Lebensunterhalt, zwischen 1 Milliarde Euro und 2 Milliarden Euro. Wie viel genau, das hängt von vielen Variablen ab - je nachdem, wie viele Menschen wirklich einen Asylantrag stellen, wie viele Anträge dann anerkannt werden und wie viele Familienangehörige nachziehen.\n\nUnd auch das sage ich ganz offen: In der Arbeitslosenstatistik wird sich das niederschlagen. Ich wünsche mir, dass sich alle, die heute sagen: „Das wollen wir stemmen; wir wollen die Menschen bei uns aufnehmen“, daran noch in einem Jahr erinnern; denn das ist dann kein Zeichen gescheiterter Arbeitsmarktpolitik, sondern ein Zeichen dafür, dass wir eine große, eine andauernde Aufgabe bewältigen müssen. Ich will, dass wir aus Abhängigkeit keinen Dauerzustand machen. Ich will, dass wir die Flüchtlinge integrieren und dass sie in Arbeit kommen. Am liebsten wollen diese Menschen für sich selbst sorgen. Das ist mein Eindruck, wenn ich mit diesen Menschen rede. Wir werden die Kosten auf Dauer nur im Griff behalten, wenn wir jetzt auch aktive Leistungen neben die passiven Leistungen stellen und damit Integration finanzieren.\n\nBei der Eingliederung in Arbeit, die die Jobcenter leisten, brauchen wir Dolmetscher, wir brauchen Deutschlehrer, wir brauchen Mitarbeiter, die sich kümmern. Auch die Verfahren zur beruflichen Anerkennung kosten Geld. Wir veranschlagen in diesem aktiven Bereich 600 Millionen bis 1,1 Milliarden Euro. Ich habe schon ausgeführt, warum ich Bandbreiten nenne und wir noch nicht in der Lage sind, das präziser zu beziffern. Alleine für die berufsbezogenen Sprachförderungskurse brauchen wir parallel zu den bislang eingeplanten ESF-Mitteln schon für das Jahr 2016 180 Millionen Euro zusätzlich.\n\nWir stehen also hier vor einer riesigen Aufgabe. Und es wird nicht damit getan sein, dass wir jetzt für ein Jahr auf Krisenmodus schalten, und dann läuft alles wieder normal; darauf möchte ich in aller Deutlichkeit hinweisen. Nein, wir haben eine Daueraufgabe vor uns. Wir werden daher nicht ausschließlich mit befristeten Stellen auskommen. Das, was wir an dieser Stelle tun, ist nicht allein kurzfristige Nothilfe. Es wird auf längere Sicht nötig bleiben. Und es ist zugleich eine gute und notwendige Investition in unsere eigene Zukunft; denn die aktiven Mittel wirken auch an anderer Stelle. Sie helfen in den Branchen und Regionen, wo händeringend Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer gesucht werden, zu einer möglichst schnellen Vermittlung.\n\nIch will auch klar darauf hinweisen: Nicht alle, die da kommen, sind hoch qualifiziert. Ganz klar: Das ist nicht so. Der syrische Arzt ist nicht der Normalfall. Wir haben bei der Bundesagentur für Arbeit das Pilotprojekt „Early Intervention“ gestartet und erhoben, wie die Möglichkeiten sind. Nicht einmal jeder Zehnte kann direkt in Arbeit oder Ausbildung kommen. Zumeist fehlen Deutschkenntnisse, aber auch anderes. Wir haben in neun Großstädten begonnen. Bald wollen wir bundesweit so weit sein, dass Mitarbeiter der Agentur für Arbeit, wenn ein Asylantrag gestellt wird, so früh wie möglich in die entsprechenden Einrichtungen gehen, dort mit den Menschen sprechen: Was habt ihr gemacht? Was könnt ihr? - Dann können wir sehen, ob Berufserfahrung und welche Qualifikation vorhanden ist, ob ergänzende Qualifikationen notwendig sind, auf welche Stellen die Betreffenden vermittelt werden können und welche Arbeitgeber man ansprechen kann. Vielleicht findet sich auch ein Betrieb, der mit Ausbildung oder Training on the Job motivierte Mitarbeiter für die Zukunft gewinnen will. Die Signale, die ich alleine in den letzten Tagen aus der deutschen Wirtschaft erhalten habe, stimmen mich hier sehr optimistisch.\n\nWir brauchen also zumeist ergänzende Qualifizierung und in vielen Fällen überhaupt erst einmal eine grundständige Ausbildung. Wir alle hier im Haus sind uns sicherlich einig: Deutschlernen ist ein Generalschlüssel. Was die Menschen in den Integrationskursen lernen, reicht aber oft nicht, um auf dem Arbeitsmarkt Fuß zu fassen. Deswegen geht es nicht nur um die Erhöhung der Zahl der berufsbezogenen Sprachkurse, sondern auch darum, möglichst früh Sprachkurse anzubieten und eine ununterbrochene Linie des Lernens zu ermöglichen.\n\nWir spüren schon heute: Die Menschen wollen. Sie wollen lernen, und sie wollen arbeiten.\n\nWir wollen die Aufnahme von Arbeit erleichtern. Ich habe eine Reihe von Maßnahmen vorgeschlagen, die zum Ziel haben, die Vermittlung in Arbeit von Hürden und Bürokratie zu befreien. Wir sind zurzeit darüber in Abstimmung innerhalb der Bundesregierung und mit den Ländern. Ich hoffe, dass es gelingt, für eine Weile bestimmte Hürden beiseite zu stellen, allerdings ohne dabei die Interessen der anderen Arbeitslosen in unserem Land aus dem Blick zu verlieren. Wir brauchen Zuwanderung. Wir brauchen Menschen, die zu uns kommen, und wenn sie kommen, sollten sie das ohne Angst tun und sich hier auch aufgenommen fühlen. Deswegen müssen wir all die in ihre Schranken weisen, die Stimmung gegen Flüchtlinge machen oder sogar Hass säen.\n\nIch bin sicher: Wir werden hier bald ein Einwanderungsgesetz beraten. Doch bis es dazu kommt, wollen wir versuchen, mit ganz konkreten Maßnahmen Druck von den Asylverfahren zu nehmen. Mein Vorschlag ist, dass wir eine Kontingentregelung für Bürger aus den Staaten des Westbalkans auf den Weg bringen. Sie sollen in den nächsten fünf Jahren die Möglichkeit eines geregelten Zugangs zum deutschen Arbeitsmarkt bekommen. Derzeit läuft dies alles über die Asylverfahren. Das ist nicht sinnvoll, weil die Anerkennungsquote bei unter 1 Prozent liegt. Bis zu 20 000 Menschen sollen jedes Jahr hierherkommen können, aber nur dann, wenn sie ein konkretes Arbeitsplatz- und Ausbildungsplatzangebot haben, bei dem natürlich die tariflichen Regelungen geachtet und erfüllt sind. Das halte ich für einen vernünftigen Weg, um das Asylverfahren zu entlasten.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir haben einen stetigen Zuwachs bei der Beschäftigung. Die Erwerbstätigkeit in Deutschland ist auf Rekordniveau, und es gibt so viele offene Stellen wie noch nie. Wir haben in den letzten Jahren für gesunde Finanzen gesorgt und die soziale Sicherung fest aufgestellt. Die Herausforderung, vor der wir jetzt stehen, Menschen nach Flucht und Gefahr hier Heimstatt und Hoffnung zu geben, Arbeit und Aussicht auf ein Leben in Sicherheit - diese Aufgabe wird uns noch Jahre beschäftigen. Ich bin mir mit Finanz­minister Schäuble einig, dass wir das, was wir dafür benötigen, bereitstellen werden. Die Aufgabe fordert - das ist klar -; aber sie überfordert uns nicht. Wir können sie meistern. Wir werden sie meistern. Wir im Bereich der Arbeitsmarkt- und Sozialpolitik werden alles tun, was dafür nötig ist.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13266,marieluise-beck,\"Herr Kollege Fabritius, ich muss ja eine Frage formulieren; deshalb frage ich Sie.\n\nWunderbar. Man lernt nie aus. - Diese strenge Abgrenzung zwischen Flucht und Migration, die Sie hier gerade konstruieren und deren Nichtbeachtung Sie dem Institut zur Last zu legen versuchen, finde ich überaus künstlich herbeigeführt, weil sie kein Verständnis für fließende Übergänge zeigt, die es gibt.\n\nEs stimmt, dass es dem Recht nach unterschiedliche Gesetze für Schutz und Einwanderung gibt. Wenn wir aber darüber sprechen, wie Flucht entsteht und warum Menschen Schutz suchen, und dabei auch mitdenken, wie wir die Gründe für das Nachsuchen um Schutz verringern können, dann geht es immer um die Frage, welche Chancen wir Menschen, die zu uns kommen wollen, eröffnen wollen, damit sie auf dem Wege der Einwanderung zu uns kommen können. Das ist dann Migration. Deswegen halte ich die von Ihnen vorgenommene Trennung für nicht zulässig und auch nicht - entschuldigen Sie, Herr Fabritius, das sage ich ungern zu Ihnen - für einen Ausdruck von Sachkunde. Es gibt zwar im Recht eine Abgrenzung, aber in den realen Lebensverhältnissen müssen wir die Zusammenhänge sehen. Wenn das von Ihnen angesprochene Institut das tut, dann erfüllt es genau die Aufgaben, die ihm dieses Haus gestellt hat.\"\n675,anton-hofreiter,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ach, Herr Gabriel, es ist ja schön, wenn die wirtschaftliche Lage bei uns gut ist. Es ist schön, wenn die Löhne steigen. Es ist schön, wenn es den Menschen einigermaßen gut geht. Aber erstens trifft das nicht auf alle Menschen in unserem Lande zu, und zweitens ist von einem Bundeswirtschaftsminister schon etwas mehr zu erwarten, wenn er über die wirtschaftspolitischen Perspektiven spricht, als eine Beschreibung der derzeitigen Lage. Da hätte man auch jemanden vom Statistischen Bundesamt einladen können; der hätte das hier mindestens so inspiriert vorgetragen wie Sie.\n\nWenn Sie sagen, dass eine offene Gesellschaft, dass Zuwanderung Voraussetzungen für ökonomischen Erfolg sind, dann geben wir Ihnen recht. Aber haben Sie eigentlich bemerkt, dass Sie in einer Koalition mit CDU und CSU sind? Haben Sie eigentlich einmal mit Ihrem Koalitionspartner darüber gesprochen,\n\nder ja nicht nur Unsinn erzählt, sondern die Stimmung im ganzen Land vergiftet? Sorgen Sie doch einmal dafür, dass das abgestellt wird! Das ist nicht nur eine ökonomische Frage, sondern auch eine des Anstandes.\n\nHerrn Fuchs möchte ich Folgendes sagen: Wenn man schon die Linkspartei angreift, dann bitte nicht mit völligem fachlichen Unsinn.\n\nDenn wenn Sie behaupten, Zeitarbeit sei eines der großen Sprungbretter auf dem Weg zu einer dauerhaften Beschäftigung, und die Statistiken sagen, dass es im besten Falle 7 Prozent schaffen,\n\ndann können Sie das nicht als Beispiel anführen. Lesen Sie doch einfach einmal Ihre eigenen Statistiken; dann werden Sie feststellen, wie es wirklich aussieht.\n\nZu Ihrer Energiewende. Sie haben gesagt, Sie wollen die Energiewende. Erstens glaube ich Ihnen das nicht; denn das ist mir völlig neu. Dass Sie eine Energiewende von der Atomkraft hin zur Braunkohle wollen, könnte man Ihnen vielleicht noch glauben.\n\nAber wenn Sie wirklich eine Energiewende wollen, die dazu beiträgt, dass die Strompreise stabil bleiben, dann müssen Sie sich doch um die kostengünstigsten Bereiche der Stromproduktion kümmern.\n\nUnd was ist inzwischen die kostengünstigste Form der Stromproduktion? Wir reden hier überhaupt nicht über die ökologischen Kosten, die zum Beispiel Braunkohle verursacht. Wir reden auch überhaupt nicht über das Risiko, das Atomkraft verursacht, sondern wir betrachten das rein betriebswirtschaftlich.\n\nDie kostengünstigste Form der Stromproduktion ist eine Windkraftanlage an Land. Aber ausgerechnet diese Produktion wollen Sie deckeln. Das macht doch überhaupt keinen Sinn. Selbst wenn Ihnen die Umwelt und die Lebensgrundlagen vollkommen egal sind: Es macht auch ökonomisch keinen Sinn, ausgerechnet die kostengünstigste Form der Stromproduktion zu deckeln, wenn man die Strompreise in den Griff kriegen will.\n\nAber schauen wir uns einmal an, was in Ihrem schönen Bericht steht und was die Bundesregierung in wirtschaftlicher Hinsicht eigentlich vorhat; davon ist bis jetzt kaum gesprochen worden. Beim Lesen und Hören musste ich manchmal an die eine oder andere Wahlkampfrede von Ihrem Kollegen Steinbrück denken. Er hat Frau Merkel immer vorgeworfen, dass sie schöne Pappschachteln ins Fenster stellt, in denen nichts drin ist. Solche Pappschachteln werden nicht schöner, bloß weil man sie rot anmalt, Herr Gabriel.\n\nSchauen wir uns einmal einige dieser Pappschachteln an, zunächst die Investitionsoffensive. Im Rahmen dieser Investitionsoffensive wollen Sie 1,2 Milliarden Euro mehr für den Erhalt und Neubau im Bereich Straße ausgeben. Das klingt erst einmal gut; das ist scheinbar eine hohe Summe. Das Problem ist bloß: Die gemeinsame Expertenkommission der 16 Länder hat festgestellt, dass 7,2 Milliarden Euro notwendig sind, und zwar allein für den Erhalt. Sie geben nur einen Bruchteil mehr für Erhalt und Neubau aus. Ist Ihnen eigentlich nicht klar, dass zwischen 1,2 Milliarden und 7,2 Milliarden Euro durchaus ein relevanter Unterschied besteht? Oder gehen Sie so nachlässig mit Zahlen um, wie das der ADAC tut?\n\nSchauen wir uns den Bericht der OECD an. Laut OECD ist Deutschland Schlusslicht bei den Investitionen. Der Durchschnitt der großen Industrieländer liegt bei 20 Prozent des BIP. Wir liegen bei 17 Prozent.\n\nMit Ihrer Investitionsoffensive erreichen Sie 17,1 Prozent, das heißt, Sie steigern die Quote um 0,1 Prozent. Das nennen Sie Investitionsoffensive? Das ist doch lachhaft. Das ist doch nicht ernst zu nehmen.\n\nSorgen Sie dafür, dass die Infrastruktur verbessert wird, dass Straßen und Brücken saniert werden, anstatt wie Don Quichotte gegen Windräder zu kämpfen! Bei diesem Vergleich stellt sich natürlich die Frage, wer eigentlich Sancho Pansa ist. Beim Kampf gegen Windräder könnte es Horst Seehofer sein; aber das passt doch nicht so ganz. Stoppen Sie also den Verfall!\n\nHerr Finanzminister, es ist ja schön, dass der nominale Schuldenstand sinkt. Aber was haben wir von einem nominal sinkenden Schuldenstand, wenn de facto die implizite Staatsverschuldung weiter steigt, weil Sie die vorhandene Infrastruktur vergammeln lassen? Davon haben wir nichts, sondern am Ende wird alles nur noch teurer und die Lasten werden in die Zukunft verschoben. Das ist in der Form einfach Unsinn.\n\nDas Gleiche gilt für den Breitbandausbau. Ursprünglich war dafür noch 1 Milliarde Euro vorgesehen. Irgendwie ist die den Koalitionsverhandlungen zum Opfer gefallen.\n\nWoher wollen Sie denn das Geld dafür nehmen? Geld dafür könnte man schon finden. Sie müssten auch gar nicht die Steuern erhöhen. Es wäre schon schön, wenn Sie sich an den Subventionsabbau herantrauen würden.\n\nLaut Ihrem eigenen Bericht belaufen sich die jährlichen Subventionen auf 21 Milliarden Euro. Bauen Sie doch wenigstens einen Teil davon ab, dann hätten Sie Geld für Investitionen. Aber nein, Sie haben ja jetzt einen Minister für Ausländermaut auf der Straße und für Daten. Vielleicht führen Sie ja noch eine Ausländermaut für Datenverkehr ein. Geld kommt damit jedoch auch nicht herein.\n\nHerr Gabriel, Sie selbst haben ja, auch wenn Sie sonst nicht viel von Wirtschaftspolitik, sondern vor allem von Statistik gesprochen haben, in Ihrer Rede erwähnt, dass eine Bankenunion notwendig ist, um die Probleme in den Griff zu bekommen. Ja, eine Bankenunion ist notwendig. Darin sind sich die SPD-Fraktion und unsere Fraktion auf europäischer Ebene einig. Aber die Bundesregierung blockiert eine effiziente Bankenunion.\n\nDa stellt sich schon die Frage: Wer bestimmt denn jetzt: die europäische Sozialdemokratie oder die Bundesregierung?\n\nUnterlassen Sie das! Beenden Sie die Blockadehaltung Deutschlands in der Frage der Bankenunion! Sorgen Sie dafür, dass wir schnell Banken abwickeln können; denn sie sind eine relevante Gefahr.\n\nHerr Gabriel, wenn ich mir Ihre Rede insgesamt anschaue, dann kann ich nur feststellen - der Koalitionsvertrag hieß ja „Deutschlands Zukunft gestalten“ -: Es war leider wieder bloß Statistik und „Deutschlands Zukunft verwalten“. Das ist zu wenig. Sorgen Sie für eine andere Politik, damit „Wohlstand für Alle“ gilt. Mit dieser Politik, mit dem Verlesen von Statistiken oder ein paar harmlosen Verwaltungsakten werden Sie dieses Ziel mit Sicherheit nicht erreichen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n14988,sylvia-kotting-uhl,\"Frau Ministerin, ich habe Sie vorhin so verstanden, dass, was jetzt von der Bundesregierung aufgrund der Empfehlungen des SRU geleistet wurde, immerhin die Gemeinsamkeit war, festzustellen, dass Handlungsbedarf besteht; das muss angesichts der Ausrichtung des Landwirtschaftsministeriums wahrscheinlich tatsächlich als Erfolg bezeichnet werden.\n\nSie haben auf die Frage von Herrn Lenkert - er hat zum Vorschlag des SRU hinsichtlich einer Stickstoffüberschussabgabe gefragt - geantwortet, dass man in der Bundesregierung nichts davon hält. Ich würde Sie gerne zu anderen Vorschlägen des SRU fragen, zum Beispiel, wenn es darum geht, die Anforderungen an Tierhaltungsanlagen zu verschärfen, in der TA Luft klare und anspruchsvolle Vorgaben für Tierhaltungsanlagen zu schaffen oder auch Reduktionsziele für den Gesamteintrag von reaktiven Stickstoffverbindungen aufzustellen oder die Hintergrundbelastung reaktiver Stickstoffverbindungen zu reduzieren. Das sind einige der relevanten Vorschläge des SRU. Wie bewerten Sie diese, und haben Sie vor, neben dem Bericht, den Sie jetzt vorgelegt haben, vielleicht auch eine Empfehlung für ganz bestimmte Maßnahmen - wem auch immer: im Umweltministerium und in der zukünftigen Bundesregierung - zu hinterlassen?\"\n2838,christina-jantz,\"Zu später Stunde beraten wir den Antrag der Linken, der überschrieben ist mit „Bestandsobergrenzen für Tierhaltungen einführen“ - so klar der Titel scheint, so wenig zielführend ist das, was dahintersteckt. Der Antrag der Linken geht inhaltlich an vielen Stellen in die richtige Richtung - keine Frage - und ist doch zu kurz gedacht und weist handwerkliche Fehler auf.\n\nEs ist schon irritierend, wenn in einem Antrag zur landwirtschaftlichen Nutztierhaltung an keiner Stelle die Worte „Bäuerin“ bzw. „Bauer“ auftauchen oder nur an einer einzigen Stelle von Landwirtinnen und Landwirten die Rede ist. Es wird uns nicht gelingen, echte und nachhaltige Verbesserungen beim Tierwohl in der landwirtschaftlichen Nutztierhaltung zu erlangen, wenn wir diejenigen ausschließen, die tagtäglich mit den Tieren umgehen. Nachhaltige Nutztierhaltung fängt im Stall an. Die große Mehrheit der deutschen Bauernschaft ist engagiert und kümmert sich um die Tiere in ihrer Verantwortung - das ignorieren Sie mit diesem Antrag!\n\nDarüber hinaus ignorieren Sie, dass uns die Landwirte neben beispielsweise den Tierschutzorganisationen viel zu guter Tierhaltung sagen können. Und gute Tierhaltung lässt sich nicht auf die Anzahl der in einem Stall gehaltenen Tiere reduzieren. Vielmehr ist die Frage des „Wie“ entscheidend.\n\nNur im Dialog können wir zu besseren Haltungsbedingungen gelangen. Wir wollen keine Schnellschüsse. Wir wollen tragfähige Entscheidungen für die Landwirte, damit wir eben nicht, wie Sie es so schwammig formulieren, zu einer „Verdrängung von kleinen Tierhaltungen“ kommen. Vielmehr wollen wir spürbare Verbesserungen für die Tiere - keine bloße Deckelung des Bestandes.\n\nEbenso wie Sie die Bauern ignorieren, degradieren Sie in Ihrer Begründung die Konsumenten. Sie unterstellen ihnen, schon gewählt zu haben. Ihre Rede von der „Abstimmung mit dem Einkaufswagen“ suggeriert, dass sich der Konsument bereits dauerhaft entschieden hat und wir deshalb verstärkt regulierend in den Markt eingreifen müssten. Wir hingegen halten den Bürger für mündig und wollen, bevor wir den Markt überregulieren, dem Konsumenten eine echte Chance geben und eine umfassende Kennzeichnung von Lebensmitteln befördern.\n\nWir sehen bereits, dass Qualität auf dem Markt Bestand hat. Eine tiergerechte Nahrungsmittelproduktion wird zunehmend vom Verbraucher honoriert. Grundvoraussetzung dafür ist jedoch, dass wir diese hohen Standards sichtbar machen. Dafür brauchen wir eine entsprechende Zertifizierung. Nur durch eine klare und transparente Kennzeichnung mit einem Tierschutzsiegel hat der Verbraucher eine echte Wahl und kann bewusste Entscheidungen treffen.\n\nNatürlich geht das Wohl der Tiere vor - es muss zudem sichergestellt werden, dass wir mit unseren Betrieben und unseren Produkten am Markt bestehen können und zugleich einen der höchsten Standards in der landwirtschaftlichen Nutztierhaltung haben. Das werden Sie mit Ihrem Einheitskonzept, bei dem grundsätzliche Bestandsobergrenzen festgelegt werden, nicht erreichen. Sie ignorieren damit nicht nur weitestgehend die regionalen Besonderheiten und Gegebenheiten vor Ort, sondern auch, dass die Haltungsbedingungen maßgeblich sind.\n\nZu einer guten Gesetzgebung gehört es, dass man nicht systematisch bestimmte Beteiligte aus diesem Dialog ausklammert.\n\nWir haben uns in der Großen Koalition klar auf eine Marschroute geeinigt. Deshalb werden wir in den kommenden Monaten intensiv mit allen Beteiligten diskutieren und handwerklich saubere Entscheidungen treffen.\n\nDer Koalitionsvertrag gibt dabei die Richtung vor. Wir haben unter anderem eine nationale Tierwohl-offensive vereinbart. Denn wir wollen sichtbare Verbesserungen beim Tierwohl. Die Nutztierhaltung muss tiergerechter werden. Sie passt sich damit auch den genannten veränderten Wünschen in der Gesellschaft an.\n\nGemeint sind unter anderem:\n\nerstens die allgemeine Tiergesundheit - hier spreche ich insbesondere das Tiermittelarzneimittelrecht an -,\n\nzweitens den Tieren zu ermöglichen, sich natürlich zu verhalten,\n\ndrittens eine stärkere Berücksichtigung des Wohlbefindens der Tiere. Das heißt, dass die Verletzungs-, Schmerz- und Stressrisiken möglichst verhindert werden. Dies alles auch vor dem Hintergrund, dass gute Haltungsbedingungen weniger kranke Tiere bedeuten und damit der Medikamenteneinsatz zurückgefahren wird.\n\nDie gesetzlichen Regeln zur Verringerung des Antibiotikaeinsatzes werden wir unbürokratisch und praxisnah umsetzen.\n\nDaran schließt sich an, dass wir ein bundeseinheitliches Prüf- und Zulassungsverfahren für Tierhaltungssysteme einführen werden. Die SPD hat schon früh einen Tierschutz-TÜV gefordert. Das bedeutet, dass es zukünftig für serienmäßig hergestellte Stallsysteme einheitliche Prüfrichtlinien geben wird. In diesem Bereich werden wir in den kommenden Wochen und Monaten intensiv diskutieren und praktikable Lösungen entwickeln.\n\nZiel ist es außerdem, EU-weit einheitliche und höhere Tierschutzstandards durchzusetzen.\n\nWir streben eine flächengebundene Nutztierhaltung an. Ziel ist es, eine tiergerechte Haltung in Deutschland zu fördern.\n\nIn den kommenden Monaten werden wir mit allen Beteiligten - den Tierschutzorganisationen, den Landwirten, Wissenschaftlern und auch Konsumenten - sprechen. Nur auf diesem Wege kommen wir zu vernünftig ausgearbeiteten Lösungen im Bereich der Nutztierhaltung.\n\nWir werden diesen Prozess nutzen, um die von uns bereits im Koalitionsvertrag festgeschriebenen Leitlinien einer zukünftigen landwirtschaftlichen Nutztierhaltung vernünftig auszuarbeiten und in eine gute Gesetzgebung umzumünzen. Schnellschüsse, die einzelne Gruppen ignorieren, notwendige regionale Fragestellungen übergehen, die Versorgungssicherheit der Bevölkerung gefährden können und die Haltungsbedingungen als entscheidendes Element weitestgehend außer Acht lassen, werden wir nicht mittragen.\"\n9852,gunter-baumann,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Lieber Kollege Hofreiter, in Ihrer Rede war kein „Augenmaß“ zu erkennen. Das war ein Frontalangriff gegen Sachsen, gegen rechtschaffene Menschen, die dort arbeiten. So können wir das Thema nicht aufarbeiten.\n\nDer Ruf Sachsens und Deutschlands ist durch einzelne Bürger, die sich außerhalb des Gesetzes befinden, zu Schaden gekommen.\n\n- Das sind einzelne Bürgerinnen und Bürger, gegen die wir vorgehen müssen. - Angriffe gegen Asylbewerber, gegen Flüchtlingsheime, gegen Helfer, gegen Ehrenamtliche können wir nicht hinnehmen. Die müssen wir aufs Schärfste verurteilen.\n\nDas Bild von klatschenden Menschen vor einem brennenden Asylbewerberheim in Bautzen oder von grölenden Menschen in Clausnitz, die einen Bus stoppen wollen, ist für uns alle, meine Damen und Herren, unerträglich.\n\nLieber Uli Grötsch, ein Frontalangriff gegen alle Sachsen hilft uns nicht weiter und ist absolut ungerecht.\n\nDas Bild einzelner Ereignisse der letzten Tage entspricht nicht unserem Sachsen. Das zu behaupten, ist ungerecht gegenüber den Menschen, die ehrlich arbeiten und jeden Tag ihren Job machen.\n\n- Sie habe ich auch gar nicht angeschaut.\n\nIch sage hier ganz deutlich: Die Blockierer von Clausnitz und die Brandstifter von Bautzen sind nicht das Volk. Das Volk sind die Bürgerinnen und Bürger in Sachsen, die ehrlich ihre Arbeit machen, die Demokraten sind und sich jeden Tag rechtstreu verhalten.\n\nIch sage Ihnen auch - darüber können Sie sich gleich bestimmt wieder empören -: Wir sind stolz auf unser Sachsen,\n\nauf ein weltoffenes Sachsen, auf das, was wir nach der politischen Wende geschafft haben. Wir stehen in Sachsen wirtschaftlich, auf dem Gebiet des Tourismus, bei Infrastruktur und Kultur gut da.\n\nDarauf sind wir stolz. Das kann uns auch keiner nehmen, auch nicht die fremdenfeindlichen Menschen, die auf der Straße herumgrölen.\n\nWir müssen die Vorkommnisse gemeinsam und mit aller Konsequenz aufarbeiten, und wir müssen die Asylbewerber, die zu uns nach Sachsen kommen und Hilfe brauchen, ordentlich behandeln und auch schützen.\n\nIch möchte ganz deutlich sagen: Als sächsischer Abgeordneter möchte ich mich für das Handeln der pöbelnden Menschen und der Brandstifter bei den Asylbewerbern und den Bürgern, die ehrenamtlich tätig sind, entschuldigen.\n\nKeinerlei Entschuldigung gibt es für diejenigen, die mit allen Mitteln gegen unser Land arbeiten. Sie müssen unsere Härte zu spüren bekommen.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, man kann über die gegenwärtige Asylpolitik diskutieren, und man kann auch verschiedene Meinungen dazu haben - aber das im demokratischen Rahmen, nicht auf der Straße und nicht mit Gewalt.\n\nIch sage Ihnen auch deutlich, was mich so traurig macht: Sachsen hat gar nicht die größten Probleme. Der Anteil der Asylbewerber, die wir 2015 aufgenommen haben, betrug, gemessen an der Einwohnerzahl Sachsens, 1,3 Prozent. Wir haben insgesamt einen Ausländeranteil von 2 Prozent. Das sind im Vergleich zu anderen Regionen keine hohen Zahlen.\n\nDeswegen ist es so traurig, dass es hier zu diesen Vorfällen gekommen ist.\n\nDas Schlimme ist auch, dass wir die Sache einseitig betrachten. Wir müssen sehen: Es gibt auch in Sachsen eine Willkommenskultur. Es gibt Menschen, die sich ehrenamtlich engagieren, Asylbewerber begrüßen und sich für sie einsetzen. Johanniter, DRK, Malteser, THW und Polizei - ich könnte noch mehr aufzählen - leisten unheimlich viel. Auch darauf können wir stolz sein.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, mit Recht stellen in Deutschland Journalisten, Politiker und auch andere die Frage - auch Uli Grötsch hat sie angesprochen -: Warum gibt es in Sachsen mehr solcher Vorfälle, sowohl im bundesdeutschen Vergleich als auch im Vergleich zu den anderen neuen Bundesländern? Eine abschließende Antwort wird hier und heute keiner von uns geben können. Jeder wird versuchen, aus seiner Sicht Gründe zu finden.\n\nUrsachenforschung ist dringend notwendig, um ein Stück voranzukommen. Ich stelle klar und deutlich die Frage, ob die Programme, die wir haben und für die wir sehr viel Geld zur Verfügung stellen - zur Demokratieförderung, zur Extremismusberatung, zu Intervention und Prävention im Rahmen von Aussteigerprogrammen; zu nennen ist auch das Landesprogramm „Weltoffenes Sachsen für Demokratie und Toleranz“ -, wirklich effektiv sind, ob sie ausreichen oder ob wir noch mehr brauchen.\n\nDieser Umstand ist auch ein Widerspruch dazu, dass Sachsen bei PISA im Vergleich zu anderen Regionen ständig mit die besten Plätze belegt. Darauf sind wir stolz. Die Frage ist aber: Ist die politische Bildung in unseren Schulen zu schwach besetzt? Müssen wir hier noch mehr tun?\n\nDiese Fragen müssen wir uns ohne Schaum vor dem Mund ehrlich stellen und die Dinge aufarbeiten. Wir dürfen uns aber nicht gegenseitig frontal beschimpfen.\n\nIch sage auch deutlich: Die Polizeireform in Sachsen, in deren Rahmen in den letzten Jahren 20 Prozent der Stellen abgebaut wurden, war aus meiner Sicht nicht der richtige Weg.\n\nInzwischen wurde hier eine Korrektur eingeleitet. Wir wollen wieder mehr Polizisten einstellen.\n\nIch glaube, noch etwas ist wichtig: Wenn Asylbewerber in Asylheimen untergebracht werden, müssen wir mehr als bisher im Vorfeld mit den Bürgern der Gemeinden ausführlich in einen Bürgerdialog treten und versuchen, allen Menschen die Ängste zu nehmen. Es ist ja ein Zeichen von Angst, wenn man auf die Straße geht und sagt: Ich will das so nicht. - Es wurde auch statistisch festgestellt: In Orten, in denen hier im Vorfeld mehr getan wurde, ist die Zahl der Angriffe und Pöbeleien ein ganzes Stück geringer.\n\nZusammenfassend sage ich: Sachsen ist nicht rechtsradikal und auch nicht ausländerfeindlich. Es gibt ausländerfeindliche Aktionen von Einzelnen, die wir mit der ganzen Härte unseres Gesetzes verfolgen müssen. Meine Damen und Herren, Ursachenforschung ist für uns entscheidend wichtig; wir dürfen aber niemals alle Sachsen unter Generalverdacht stellen.\n\nZum Schluss gestatten Sie mir noch einen Satz: Es ist auch nicht hinzunehmen, dass am Montag dieser Woche ein Anschlag von Chaoten gegen die sächsische Landesvertretung in Berlin erfolgte. Das geht beim besten Willen nicht. Gewalt war nie eine Lösung.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9742,matthias-heider,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Jetzt ist es langsam Zeit, einmal Zwischenbilanz in dieser Debatte in der heutigen Aktuellen Stunde zu ziehen. Ich habe mich ein bisschen gefragt: Kennen Sie eigentlich den Unterschied zwischen Staatsanwaltschaft und Parlament? Die Staatsanwaltschaft ist die Behörde, die für die Strafverfolgung und die Vollstreckung zuständig ist. Das Parlament hingegen ist hauptsächlich für die Verabschiedung von Gesetzen zuständig.\n\nHält jemand Gesetze nicht ein, ist es nicht Aufgabe des Parlaments, darüber zu urteilen - schon gar nicht vorschnell, Herr Hofreiter -, sondern die Aufgabe von Staatsanwaltschaften und Gerichten.\n\nWas Sie seit Ende September hier machen, ist vor allem eines: Sie wollen vorschnell über eine ganze Branche urteilen und sie in Sippenhaft nehmen. Sie wollen Staatsanwaltschaft, Gericht und Parlament zugleich sein.\n\nDas ist das Problem, das Sie haben.\n\nMan merkt an der Häufigkeit, mit der Sie Aktuelle Stunden beantragen, dass der Wahlkampf in den Bundesländern offensichtlich begonnen hat. Aber Sie können sich darauf verlassen: Wir werden nicht zulassen, dass Sie einfach mal eben eine deutsche Schlüsselindustrie so beschädigen, dass sie nach den Landtagswahlen nicht wieder hochkommt.\n\n- Ich weiß, dass Sie das nicht gerne hören.\n\nIch sage Ihnen noch einmal: Die Automobilwirtschaft in Europa hat einen Anteil an der Wertschöpfung von 14 Prozent. Fast jeder siebte Arbeitsplatz in Deutschland hängt von der Automobilwirtschaft ab. Richtig ist: Mit der Manipulation bei den Abgaswerten ist erhebliches Vertrauen verspielt worden. Um das Vertrauen in die Automobilwirtschaft und auch in den Wirtschaftsstandort Deutschland international wiederherzustellen, müssten wir sichere Testverfahren nutzen.\n\nWir sind uns hier im Hause, glaube ich, einig, dass wir möglichst schnell den WLTP-Zyklus und die Real-Driving-Emission-Tests brauchen. Wir können deshalb ganz froh sein, dass das Europäische Parlament inzwischen die entsprechenden Weichenstellungen vorgenommen hat. Es ist ein wichtiger Schritt, zu realistischen Emissionsangaben zu kommen, und allein das stärkt das Vertrauen der Verbraucher.\n\nWir müssen aber auch genau beobachten, in welchem wirtschaftlichen Umfeld wir uns bewegen. Wir dürfen nicht überziehen. Ich wiederhole: Kraftfahrzeuge sind für Deutschland ein wichtiges Exportprodukt.\n\nWenn Sie sich einmal die internationale Großwetterlage anschauen, stellen Sie fest: Es ist ein düsteres Bild, das sich etwa bei den Importen Chinas ergibt. Diese Importe sind um 19 Prozent eingebrochen. Der Präsident des Bundesverbandes Großhandel, Außenhandel, Dienstleistungen Börner hat es treffend beschrieben: China steckt in einem Transformationsprozess mit ungewissem Ausgang.\n\nAuch wenn Sie die Sanktionen etwa für den russischen Markt sehen, werden Sie erkennen: Das sind bestimmt keine Wachstumstreiber. Denken wir daran, dass der Anteil der nach Russland exportierten Fahrzeuge am Gesamtexport 2013, also vor den Sanktionen, noch 20 Prozent betragen hat, dann können wir erkennen, dass gerade jetzt zwei absolute Wachstumsmärkte für die Automobilindustrie anfangen, zu schwächeln. Da greife ich gern das Argument von den Linken auf, die sich Sorgen um die Beschäftigungslage bei den nur zeitweise Beschäftigten in der Automobilwirtschaft machen.\n\nEs droht uns weiter eine Abschwächung der Weltkonjunktur. Die Stimmung trübt sich im Moment ein. Der ZEW-Index ist im Februar von 9,2 auf 1,0 Punkte eingebrochen. Vor einem Jahr lag er noch bei 53 Punkten.\n\nWenn ich in meinem Wahlkreis in Südwestfalen sehe, dass 52 000 Menschen im Bereich der Zulieferindustrie von diesem Markt abhängen, meine Damen und Herren, dann ist das in der Tat ein Grund, zu sagen: Vorsicht! Das Kind nicht mit dem Bade ausschütten!\n\nDie Unternehmen machen sich Sorgen. Sie machen sich nicht nur Sorgen um die Infrastruktur in Deutschland; sie machen sich bei all diesen Rahmenbedingungen natürlich auch Sorgen um den internationalen Wettbewerb. In diesen Zeiten müssen wir uns deshalb genau überlegen, mit wie viel Regulierung wir der Branche begegnen. Herr Krischer, es ist nicht damit getan, alle vier Wochen mal mit dem Ölkännchen am Feuer vorbeizulaufen, so wie Sie das hier machen.\n\nOhne Zweifel, wir müssen gesetzliche Leitplanken neu justieren. Wir hätten mit Ihnen gern über die gestellten Anträge gesprochen. Aber Sie haben es vorgezogen, für heute eine Aktuelle Stunde zu beantragen. Ich weiß nicht, ob das mit Blick auf die Landtagswahlen der richtige Weg ist.\n\nIch bin überzeugt, dass auch die vielen Arbeitnehmer in Baden-Württemberg sehr gut darüber nachdenken werden, wie sie ihre Entscheidung treffen, so wie Sie mit deren Arbeitsplätzen umgehen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n10604,nina-scheer,\"Meine Frage geht in eine ähnliche Richtung. Ich bin, ehrlich gesagt, etwas irritiert, wenn in einer Gedenkdebatte - als solche kann man, denke ich, die heutige Debatte ansehen - mit Blick darauf, was dieses Gedenken an den schrecklichen Unfall vor 30 Jahren zwingenderweise auch für unsere zukünftige energiewirtschaftliche Positionierung bedeuten muss, ein entscheidender Redeanteil eines Koalitionspartners darauf gerichtet ist, die Beherrschbarkeit von Atomtechnologie und den Einzelfallcharakter vergangener Unfälle zu suggerieren.\n\nDaher frage ich mich, ob unser Koalitionspartner an sich Restrisiken negiert.\n\nMeinen Sie tatsächlich, dass die Atomtechnologie keine Restrisiken beinhaltet?\n\nDas frage ich mich, ehrlich gesagt, bei Ihren Ausführungen, und es würde mich interessieren, ob Sie etwas dazu zu sagen haben.\"\n4045,johannes-fechner,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer! Wir beginnen heute eine Debatte darüber, wie würdevolles und selbst-bestimmtes Sterben ermöglicht werden kann. Das ist zunächst eine ethische Debatte, aber auch mit vielen juristischen Fragen verbunden. Als Rechtspolitiker möchte ich mein Augenmerk heute auf die rechtlichen Fragen legen.\n\nWenn wir diese Diskussion heute führen, sprechen wir über den höchstpersönlichen Lebensbereich unserer Mitbürgerinnen und Mitbürger. Da müssen wir uns ganz besonders fragen: Wieso gibt es überhaupt gesetzgeberischen Handlungsbedarf? Wo müssen wir als Gesetzgeber überhaupt tätig werden?\n\nDie derzeitige Rechtslage sieht so aus, dass die aktive Sterbehilfe als Tötung auf Verlangen strafbar ist und die Beihilfe zur Selbsttötung - der sogenannte assistierte -Suizid - straffrei ist. Aus meiner Sicht geht es genau -darum, dass der ärztlich assistierte Suizid auf jeden Fall straffrei bleibt. Ich glaube, dass die Ärzteschaft mit den Möglichkeiten, die sie nach der heutigen Rechtslage schon hat, sehr verantwortungsvoll umgeht.\n\nWo also sehe ich den Handlungsbedarf? Nach einer Umfrage der Bundesärztekammer sind 30 Prozent der Ärzte bereit, die schwierige Aufgabe der Sterbehilfe, der Sterbebegleitung zu übernehmen. Weil das eine schwierige Aufgabe ist, finde ich, dass wir die Ärzte, die diese Aufgabe übernehmen möchten, nicht einmal dem theoretischen Risiko aussetzen sollten, ihre Zulassung zu verlieren.\n\nDamit ich komme ich zum ärztlichen Standesrecht. Die Berufsordnungen der Ärztekammern enthalten einen regelrechten Flickenteppich. So heißt es in § 16 der Berufsordnung in Brandenburg, dass Ärzte keine Hilfe zur Selbsttötung leisten dürfen, wohingegen sie in Westfalen-Lippe lediglich keine Hilfe leisten sollen. In Bayern und Baden-Württemberg heißt es lediglich recht allgemein, Sterbenden unter Wahrung ihrer Würde und unter Achtung ihres Willens beizustehen. Ich finde, dass Ärzte Rechtssicherheit brauchen, wenn sie diese schwierigen Aufgaben übernehmen. Deswegen sehe ich hier einen Regelungsbedarf.\n\nDas führt uns natürlich zu der Frage - ich räume ein, dass es verfassungsrechtlich schwierig ist -, ob der Bundesgesetzgeber hier tatsächlich eine Kompetenz hat. Aber ich will Ihnen meine Zweifel, ob eine Landesärztekammer diese wesentliche Frage der Sterbehilfe überhaupt regeln kann, nicht verheimlichen.\n\nIch glaube, dass wir im Verfahren durchaus darüber sprechen müssen, ob wir als Bundesgesetzgeber hier nicht doch eine Gesetzgebungskompetenz haben.\n\nWichtig ist mir dabei, dass klargestellt wird, dass es auf keinen Fall einen Rechtsanspruch eines Patienten gegenüber einem Arzt geben darf. Diese Frage ist für den Arzt viel zu schwierig, als dass es hier einen Anspruch geben sollte. Ich denke, unser Hauptaugenmerk sollte auf einer einheitlichen, rechtssicheren Regelung für die Ärzte liegen.\n\nDer zweite Punkt. Ich halte, wie gesagt, die momentane Rechtslage für gut und nur in Nuancen für zu ändern, aber da, wo wir Auswüchse haben - das ist mehrfach angesprochen worden -, nämlich bei der organisierten Sterbehilfe, müssen wir, finde ich, eingreifen. Für mich ist ein Punkt ganz wichtig, nämlich dass Sterbehilfe in Deutschland kein Geschäftsmodell sein darf.\n\nEs darf nicht sein, dass erhebliche Summen genommen werden und dann noch höhere Summen, wenn man „früher bedient“ werden möchte. Was ich auch für besonders bedenklich halte, ist, dass bei diesen Vereinen und Organisationen selten differenziert wird, ob jemand überhaupt in der Lage ist, frei verantwortlich die Entscheidung zu treffen, ob er nicht depressiv ist oder ob es nicht psychische Erkrankungen gibt, die ihn einschränken. Ich meine also, dass wir da genau prüfen sollten, ob im Gewerberecht, im Vereinsrecht oder - dazu tendiere ich - im Strafrecht eine gesetzgeberische Lösung erforderlich ist, um das Treiben dieser Vereine, diese Auswüchse zu unterbinden.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. Ich meine, dass die regelungsbedürftigen Punkte überschaubar sind, dass wir in diesem höchstpersönlichen Bereich nur im Sinne der Rechtssicherheit für die Ärzte eingreifen und den Missbrauch der Sterbehilfe durch die Organisationen einschränken sollten. Wenn ein Dammbruch befürchtet wird, dann lassen Sie uns darüber diskutieren, ob wir nicht eine Norm auf Bundesebene brauchen, die konkret die Regelungen einschränkt, wann der ärztlich assistierte Suizid zulässig sein soll, um eben die Verhältnisse, wie wir sie in Belgien haben, einzuschränken.\n\nIn diesem Sinne herzlichen Dank. Ich freue mich auf die Diskussion.\"\n12816,martin-rabanus,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! So ein bisschen ist man versucht, etwas Ähnliches zu machen, nämlich die Haushaltsberatung hier mit einem Parteitag zu verwechseln,\n\nsei es von der CSU oder von der Linkspartei. Nun sagt Oscar Wilde: Widerstehe nie einer Versuchung. Du weißt nicht, ob sie wiederkommt. - Ich ahne, dass, je näher wir an die Bundestagswahl kommen, diese Versuchungen wieder entstehen. Deshalb will ich ihr heute nicht erliegen, sondern ich möchte gern fokussieren, und zwar auf einen Bereich der Bildungspolitik, der mir besonders am Herzen liegt, der uns auch als Fraktion in besonderer Weise am Herzen liegt. Das ist die Weiterbildung.\n\nEs stimmt nicht, liebe Frau Gohlke, dass da nichts passiert sei. Ganz im Gegenteil: Die Weiterbildung ist ein wichtiger Teil des Bildungsbereichs; klar. Stichworte wie: „Wirtschaft 4.0“, „Dynamik des Wissens“ legen das nahe und machen es zur Binsenweisheit, dass wir in dem Bereich arbeiten müssen. Wir haben das getan - als Fraktion und als Koalition, und zwar in allen Bereichen der Weiterbildung: von der Einstiegsqualifizierung, der Alphabetisierung, der Grundbildung - die Stichworte sind genannt worden - bis hin zur Aufstiegsfortbildung. Mit der substanziellen Reform des Meister-BAföGs haben wir einen wichtigen Beitrag geleistet.\n\nIch will daran erinnern: 2015 hat der Bundeshaushalt 181 Millionen Euro für diesen Bereich vorgesehen; 2017 sieht er 264 Millionen Euro vor. Das ist eine Steigerung um 40 Prozent. Das ist nicht nichts, liebe Frau Gohlke.\n\nAuch in der Einstiegsqualifizierung wurde vieles getan - darauf hat mein Kollege Ernst Dieter Rossmann schon hingewiesen -, und zwar über Ressortgrenzen hinweg. Das Arbeitslosenversicherungsschutz- und Weiterbildungsstärkungsgesetz ist ein wichtiger Beitrag zur Stärkung der Weiterbildung im Rahmen der Einstiegsqualifizierung. Dafür haben wir zusätzliche Haushaltsmittel zur Verfügung gestellt, die Jahr für Jahr ansteigen und nach Lage der Dinge im Jahre 2019 die 200-Millionen-Euro-Marke überschreiten werden.\n\nDas ist für die Weiterbildung ein großer Schritt nach vorne.\n\nIch könnte weitere Beispiele anführen, will aber nur signalisieren: Wir sind auf dem Weg, und zwar auf einem guten Weg.\n\nIch will stichwortartig drei Punkte für künftige Aktivitäten im Bereich der Weiterbildung nennen, die uns als SPD-Fraktion und mir persönlich sehr wichtig sind:\n\nErstens. In einer sozialdemokratisch gestalteten Zukunft sind nicht nur die Studierenden an den Hochschulen von Studiengebühren befreit. In einer solchen Zukunft sind auch Meisterschülerinnen und Meisterschüler von den Gebühren für die Meisterkurse befreit.\n\nZweitens. In einer sozialdemokratisch gestalteten Zukunft sind die Förderbedingungen von BAföG und Meister-BAföG nicht nur einander angenähert - das haben wir in dieser Wahlperiode geschafft -, sondern tatsächlich gleich.\n\nDas wollen wir gerne in der nächsten Wahlperiode erreichen.\n\nDrittens. In einer sozialdemokratisch gestalteten Zukunft schaffen wir es, über die Feststellung von Berufsqualifizierungen - auch über informell erworbene - allen Menschen eine Weiterbildung anzubieten und sie in Weiterbildung zu bringen, die ihnen ein selbstbestimmtes und unabhängiges Leben ermöglicht. Ich betone dabei: alle Menschen, nicht die eine oder die andere Gruppe, schon gar nicht die eine Gruppe gegen die andere Gruppe. Wir brauchen weniger Gegeneinander und mehr Miteinander.\n\nDas ist die Aufgabe, die wir in diesem Land erledigen müssen. Dann haben wir eine Perspektive, die uns weiterbringt.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3396,ralf-brauksiepe,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Kollegin, ich antworte Ihnen wie folgt: Die im Jahre 2010 geschätzten Entwicklungskosten umfassten eine reine Komponentenentwicklung des ISIS-Missionssystems. Für die Entwicklung eines serienreifen ISIS-Systems, das auf dem derzeitigen technischen Stand aufbaut, einschließlich der Beschaffung eines ersten Seriensystems werden weitere Kosten in Höhe von circa 255 Millionen Euro abgeschätzt. Diese Abschätzung wurde im Rahmen der Erstellung der Lösungsvorschläge für alternative Trägerplattformen aktualisiert.\n\nFrau Kollegin, eine solche Entscheidung ist noch gar nicht getroffen worden. Ich will Ihnen aber gerne den Zusammenhang erläutern. Die von Ihnen angesprochene Summe bezog sich - vereinfacht ausgedrückt - auf die Entwicklung eines Prototyps nach dem damaligen Preisstand. Sie dürfen aber die Preisentwicklung und die bereits von mir angesprochenen technischen Entwicklungen, die es seitdem gegeben hat, nicht vergessen. Ich habe Ihnen bereits in meiner ersten Antwort gesagt, dass die von Ihnen genannte und in Rede stehende Summe auch die Kosten der Beschaffung eines ersten Seriensystems einschließt. Die Überlegung ist, den Prototypen ISIS zu Ende zu entwickeln und gleichzeitig ein erstes Serienmodell mit abzunehmen. Auf diese Überlegung bezieht sich die genannte Summe.\n\nWir befinden uns in entsprechenden Gesprächen mit der Industrie. Es gibt noch keinen abgeschlossenen Vertrag. Es erscheint uns aber aus heutiger Sicht wirtschaftlich günstig, die Entwicklung des Prototyps mit der Abnahme des ersten ISIS-Seriensystems zu kombinieren. Sollte sich das im Zuge der Verhandlungen als weniger günstig herausstellen, kann es auch andere Lösungen geben. Wie gesagt, es gibt noch keinen unterschriftsreifen Vertrag. Wenn wir so weit sind, werden wir uns selbstverständlich mit einer 255-Millionen-Euro-Vorlage an den Haushaltsausschuss des Deutschen Bundestages wenden und dann detailliert darlegen, was uns geboten wird, was wir haben wollen und welcher Preis von uns verlangt wird. Dann ist es Sache des Haushaltsausschusses, darüber zu entscheiden.\n\nFrau Kollegin, den Vorwurf, dass wir jemandem Geld hinterherschießen, weise ich namens der Bundesregierung entschieden zurück. Es macht, glaube ich, Sinn, sich etwas tiefer mit der Materie zu beschäftigen\n\n- vielleicht macht es auch Sinn, den Staatssekretär einmal ausreden zu lassen - und die verschiedenen Komponenten zu betrachten.\n\nSie sprachen von Prozessrisiken, die ja auch in einem Gutachten beleuchtet worden sind. Dabei geht es um das Projekt Euro Hawk insgesamt. Die damit zusammenhängenden Probleme sind bekannt. Gleichwohl wird auch da vor den Prozessrisiken gewarnt. Dieser Einschätzung hat sich die Bundesregierung angeschlossen. Aber dabei geht es im Wesentlichen um das Trägersystem Euro Hawk. Ihre Fragen beziehen sich auf ISIS. Das ist eine ganz andere Komponente. Es gibt bei der Entwicklung des Prototypen im Wesentlichen Preissteigerungen, wie es sie auch in anderen Bereichen gibt. Inflation ist kein Grund, ein Unternehmen zu verklagen.\n\nIch weise noch einmal darauf hin: Die Entwicklung des Prototyps ist noch nicht abgeschlossen. Wir hatten ursprünglich im Jahre 2010 geschätzte Entwicklungskosten - die habe ich erwähnt - von circa 330 Millionen Euro. Die betrafen zum Teil die Entwicklung des Prototyps, zum Teil die dort vorgesehenen Zielbefähigungen. Es waren also nicht nur 230 Millionen.\n\nWir reden jetzt über zwei Systeme: Das betrifft einmal die Zu-Ende-Entwicklung des Prototyps. Gleichzeitig geht es um das erste ISIS-Seriensystem. Das ist also nicht mit den früheren Kalkulationen, die Sie zitiert haben, zu vergleichen.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ich denke, Sie haben, was das Gutachten und die Presse angeht, bewusst die passivische Formulierung „wurde an die Presse gegeben“ gewählt. Ich kann mir nicht vorstellen, dass Sie dem Bundesministerium der Verteidigung hier ernsthaft einen Vorwurf machen wollen. Von daher unterstreiche ich: Das war sicherlich bewusst so gewählt.\n\nJetzt sage ich Ihnen noch einmal: Für die Entwicklung des Prototypen ISIS sind bis September 2013 insgesamt circa 270 Millionen Euro ausgegeben worden. Sie wissen, dass die Entwicklung dann gestoppt worden ist, und Sie wissen, dass es das von Ihnen angesprochene Gutachten gibt, aus dem wir Konsequenzen ziehen wollen. In ihm steht, genau das zu tun, was ich hier schon erläutert habe, nämlich für einen heute - Stand 8. Oktober - geschätzten Preis von 255 Millionen Euro a) diesen Prototypen zu Ende zu entwickeln und b) das erste ISIS-Seriensystem zu beschaffen.\n\nEine solche Kalkulation, die diese Beschaffung mit einschließt, ist in den von Ihnen genannten Zahlen nicht enthalten. Von daher kann man nicht von Mehrkosten in dem Sinne sprechen, dass hier etwas aus dem Ruder gelaufen wäre, sondern wir haben in der Tat - das ist sehr richtig - für die bereits verausgabten 270 Millionen Euro eine Gegenleistung bekommen. Auch für die geschätzten 255 Millionen Euro ist eine konkrete Gegenleistung im Gespräch, nämlich die Zu-Ende-Entwicklung des Prototypen und das erste Seriensystem.\"\n11281,barbara-hendricks,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Vor einem halben Jahr hat die Weltgemeinschaft in Paris ein historisches Klimaschutzabkommen beschlossen, ein Abkommen, das den Weg in eine treibhausgasneutrale Gesellschaft beschreibt. Das war für uns alle, glaube ich, eine schöne Nachricht, die uns mit Freude erfüllt hat.\n\nWie das mit Abkommen so ist: Wenn sie einmal beschlossen sind, dann müssen sie auch umgesetzt werden; daran denken vielleicht nicht immer alle. Mit den Vorbereitungen für die Ratifizierung sind wir auf einem guten Weg. Ich werde dem Kabinett in Kürze den Gesetzentwurf vorlegen. Mit Unterstützung des Deutschen Bundestages können wir es schaffen, die Ratifizierung noch vor der Klimakonferenz in Marrakesch im November abzuschließen. Um diese Unterstützung will ich Sie schon heute bitten.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ab Ende der nächsten Woche haben wir 35 Ministerinnen und Minister und viele Verhandlungsgruppen beim Petersberger Klimadialog hier in Berlin zu Gast. Auch dort wird die Umsetzung des Paris-Abkommens eine zentrale Rolle spielen. „Making the Paris Agreement a Reality“ lautet der Titel der diesjährigen Veranstaltung. Wir unterstützen die Entwicklungsländer dabei, ihre Kapazitäten für den Klimaschutz aufzubauen. Wie im letzten Jahr angekündigt, werden wir unsere internationale Klimafinanzierung bis 2020 von circa 2 Milliarden Euro auf circa 4 Milliarden Euro erhöhen.\n\nAber auch in Deutschland müssen wir unsere Hausaufgaben machen. In Deutschland leisten wir unseren Beitrag, indem wir unsere Klimaschutzziele für 2020, 2030 und 2050 einhalten und indem wir uns auf der Strecke immer wieder fragen, ob wir genug tun, was übrigens mit der globalen Bestandsaufnahme alle fünf Jahre, wie im Paris-Abkommen festgelegt, auch im Einklang ist.\n\nDie Bundesregierung verfolgt die Umsetzung der internationalen Klimaschutzverpflichtungen mit zwei wichtigen Instrumenten: mit dem Aktionsprogramm Klimaschutz 2020 und mit dem Klimaschutzplan 2050. Die meisten Maßnahmen des Aktionsprogramms Klimaschutz 2020 sind bereits umgesetzt bzw. befinden sich in den letzten Zügen der Umsetzung. Das werden Sie dann auch dem Klimaschutzbericht 2016 entnehmen können, den wir Ihnen im November vorlegen werden. Im Klimaschutzplan 2050 beschreiben wir den Pfad der Treibhausgasminderung von 2020 bis 2050. Wir haben unsere Arbeiten an dem Entwurf abgeschlossen und gehen damit in Kürze in die Ressortabstimmung.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das Aktionsprogramm und der Klimaschutzplan sind notwendig; denn der Klimaschutz braucht langfristige Orientierung und Planungssicherheit - für Wirtschaft und Investoren, für die Beschäftigten in den Unternehmen genauso wie für Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher. Wir haben uns in der Regierung entschieden, diese langfristige Orientierung nicht normativ, sondern stärker handlungsorientiert zu geben.\n\nDenn, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, ein Gesetz ist kein Wert an sich; es kommt darauf an, welches Ergebnis am Ende für den Klimaschutz erreicht wird.\n\nDer Klimaschutzplan wird ein verlässlicher Fahrplan sein, der dennoch flexibel für Änderungen und Innovationen auf der Wegstrecke bis 2050 ist. Er ist vor allem ein Wegweiser für die Richtung, die von allen Sektoren eingeschlagen werden muss.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, uns war wichtig, bei einem so grundlegenden Prozess eine breite gesellschaftliche Akzeptanz zu finden. Herausgekommen ist das Leitmotiv einer umfassenden Modernisierungsstrategie. Glauben Sie mir: Der Wandel, der vor uns liegt, bietet große Chancen für unser Land. Der Klimaschutz ist schon heute ein Wachstumsmotor, der uns Beschäftigung über Jahrzehnte sichern kann und wird. Denken Sie an die vielen neuen Technologien, Produktionsprozesse und Infrastrukturen! Ich will auch denjenigen, die in Sorge um den Industriestandort Deutschland sind, eine gute und wichtige Nachricht überbringen: Der Anteil an der industriellen Produktion in Deutschland wird in diesem Prozess weiter steigen. Allein im Bereich Umwelt- und Klimaschutz haben wir schon heute über 2 Millionen Arbeitsplätze.\n\nUnsere Technologien für intelligente Stromnetze zum Beispiel finden weltweit großes Interesse. Sie kennen unseren Weltmarktanteil bei den sogenannten grünen Produkten. Er liegt bei gut 14 Prozent und wird sicherlich noch weiter steigen.\n\nIn Deutschland haben wir es geschafft, das Wachstum von den Emissionen zu entkoppeln. Von 1990 bis 2014 sind die Emissionen um 27 Prozent gesunken,\n\nwährend die Wirtschaft im gleichen Zeitraum um 39 Prozent gewachsen ist. Man könnte auch sagen: Klimaschutz schafft Wachstum. Dieses Wachstum hätten wir nicht ohne die erfolgreiche Umweltpolitik in Deutschland, vom Atomausstieg über das EEG bis zur Energiewende und zu innovativen, ressourcenschonenden und treibhausgasarmen Produktionsprozessen.\n\nDie Vorreiterrolle hat uns genutzt, nicht nur wirtschaftlich, sondern auch deshalb, weil wir andere Staaten überzeugen konnten, dass der Wandel weg vom Öl und hin zu den Erneuerbaren in einem der größten Industrieländer möglich ist. Diesen Weg, der Deutschland so erfolgreich gemacht hat, werden wir konsequent weiterverfolgen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, mir ist wichtig, dass wir uns klare Zwischenziele für die einzelnen Handlungsfelder für 2030 vornehmen. Das gilt auch für die Bereiche, die ihre Beiträge zur Treibhausgasminderung noch deutlich steigern müssen, namentlich der Verkehr und die Landwirtschaft. Dazu, dass unsere Emissionen seit 1990, wie eben erwähnt, in der gesamten deutschen Volkswirtschaft um rund 27 Prozent gesunken sind, hat der Verkehr bisher leider nichts beigetragen. Für den Verkehr liegen die Werte noch immer auf dem gleichen Niveau wie damals. Insgesamt macht der Anteil des Verkehrs an den nationalen Treibhausgasemissionen 18 Prozent aus. Das kann natürlich nicht so bleiben, wenn wir unsere Klimaschutzziele erreichen wollen. Wenn wir ernst nehmen, was die Bundeskanzlerin mit den Staats- und Regierungschefs der G-7-Staaten auf Schloss Elmau mit ihrem Dekarbonisierungsbeschluss vereinbart hat und was 195 Staaten gemeinsam in Paris beschlossen haben, dann muss auch der Verkehr im Jahr 2050 nahezu treibhausgasneutral sein.\n\nWir brauchen eine Stärkung der klimafreundlichen Verkehrsträger und eine gänzlich andere Energieversorgung des Verkehrs, die dann auf der Nutzung erneuerbarer Energien basieren wird. Das ist technologisch bereits machbar. Die Energiequellen des Verkehrs der Zukunft werden in erster Linie Wind- und Sonnenenergie sein. Damit kann man sich ausrechnen, dass ab 2030 Neuzulassungen über einen Elektroantrieb verfügen oder auf Basis von regenerativ erzeugtem Gas versorgt werden müssen. Auch der Verbrennungsmotor könnte noch eine Zukunft haben, wenn er mit synthetischen Kraftstoffen aus Wind- und Sonnenstrom betrieben wird.\n\nDas Jahr 2030 ist für die Welt der Automobilindustrie mit ihren Entwicklungs- und Produktionszyklen nicht mehr weit weg. Ich hoffe, dass dies einem verantwortungsbewussten Management in dieser für Deutschland so wichtigen Branche auch klar ist. Leider scheint es so, dass es erst krisenhafte Entwicklungen braucht, um umdenken zu können.\n\nIn der Landwirtschaft wird eine Minderung auf null Emissionen auch langfristig nicht möglich sein; denn hier haben wir es ja mit biologischen Prozessen im Pflanzenbau und in der Tierhaltung zu tun. Das heißt aber nicht, dass hier keine Potenziale bestehen. Gegenüber heute müssen und können wir die landwirtschaftlichen Emissionen bis 2050 halbieren. Das ist anspruchsvoll, aber machbar. Dafür müssen wir unsere Stickstoffüberschüsse endlich in den Griff bekommen. Wir kommen aber auch nicht darum herum, uns mit unbequemen Themen wie dem Abbau von Tierbeständen, dem Fleischkonsum und mit der Verschwendung von Lebensmitteln zu befassen. In diesen Bereichen sind Forschung, Entwicklung und Verbraucherinformation besonders wichtig. Eine Landwirtschaft, die ein angemessenes Verhältnis von der Anzahl der Tiere zur Nutzfläche nicht mehr beachtet, die teilweise an den Wünschen und Erwartungen der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher vorbei produziert und die eben auch die Umwelt- und Klimafolgen nicht ausreichend mindert, sägt am Ende den sprichwörtlichen Ast ab, auf dem sie selbst sitzt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Sie sehen, welche Herausforderungen wir noch vor uns haben: Verkehr, Automobilindustrie, Landwirtschaft, um beispielhaft nur drei wichtige Bereiche aus unserem gesellschaftlichen Leben und unserer Wirtschaft zu nennen.\n\nIn allen Bereichen ist das möglich. Dafür ist es aber nötig, sich jetzt auf den Weg zu machen.\"\n3763,heinz-joachim-barchmann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Mittlerweile sind weit über 4 000 Menschen durch die anhaltende Ebolaepidemie gestorben. In der Nacht zum Dienstag dieser Woche erlag ein UN-Mitarbeiter in Deutschland, der in Leipzig behandelt wurde, der furchtbaren Krankheit. Die Weltgesundheitsorganisation WHO hat erschreckende Hochrechnungen veröffentlicht: Sie rechnet im Dezember mit 5 000 bis 10 000 neuen Infektionsfällen pro Woche in den am stärksten betroffenen Ländern Guinea, Liberia und Sierra Leone.\n\nDie Ausmaße dieser Krise sind erschreckend. Unsere Hilfe in den betroffenen westafrikanischen Ländern, die zu den ärmsten Ländern zählen, ist dringend notwendig. Sie ist meiner Meinung nach überfällig. Angesichts der Krise muss man sagen: Die Gefahr wurde zu lange nicht erkannt.\n\nWir sind allen Helferinnen und Helfern zu Dank verpflichtet, wie zum Beispiel denen von Ärzte ohne Grenzen. Sie haben lange vor der WHO auf die Tragödie in Westafrika aufmerksam gemacht.\n\nDie Ärzte sind unermüdlich im Einsatz, um Menschenleben zu retten. Allen Helferinnen und Helfern, die bis zur Erschöpfung ihr Möglichstes tun, um die infizierten Menschen zu retten, gebührt unser großer Dank für ihr Handeln und für ihren Mut.\n\nWas sich meiner Meinung nach gerade in dieser Situation in Guinea, Sierra Leone und Liberia schmerzvoll zeigt, sind die frappierenden Defizite in den Gesundheitssystemen dieser Länder. Es sind in der Tat auch Entwicklungsdefizite. Der erste Ausbruch von Ebola liegt fast 40 Jahre zurück, das war im Jahr 1976. Über 400 Menschen sind damals gestorben. Eine Verbesserung der Gesundheitssysteme hat es seither kaum gegeben. Eine tragfähige öffentliche Gesundheitsversorgung in zahlreichen afrikanischen Staaten gibt es nach wie vor nicht. In Liberia wird die Lage besonders deutlich: Auf 100 000 Menschen kommt ein einziger Arzt. Dass es hier zu einer Überforderung der Gesundheitssysteme während einer Krise kommen muss, ist uns allen klar. Die Überforderung ist auch schon ohne diese furchtbare Epidemie massiv vorhanden.\n\nJa, gern.\n\nLiebe Kollegin Vogler, die Problematik der Abschiebung ist eine andere Problematik, als wir hier im Augenblick diskutieren.\n\nIch denke, das Problem Ebola ist so evident und offenkundig, dass wir die Problematiken durchaus voneinander trennen sollten. Insofern ist das für mich im Augenblick in diesem Zusammenhang kein Thema. Allerdings ist Abschiebung ein Punkt, den wir ebenfalls behandeln müssen. Ich nehme das auch gern auf.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, am Beispiel von Senegal und Nigeria kann man aber auch gut sehen, wie entscheidend ein vergleichsweise gut funktionierendes Gesundheitssystem ist. In beide Länder ist jeweils eine infizierte Person eingereist. Dank schneller Isolierung der betroffenen Personen und ihrer direkten Kontakte konnte sich die Krankheit nicht weiter ausbreiten. In Nigeria kam es zu 20 Fällen der Infektion. Im Senegal blieb es bei einer Infektion. Das ist, glaube ich, hervorragend, und es sollte auch erwähnt werden, dass man durchaus etwas machen kann.\n\nDie Bundesregierung hat gute Maßnahmen auf den Weg gebracht, um bei der Eindämmung der Epidemie zu helfen. Die finanziellen Mittel für die Krisenregionen wurden vom Entwicklungsminister auf 10 Millionen Euro angehoben. Auch das Auswärtige Amt hat die Hilfen für die betroffenen Länder um weitere 5 Millionen Euro aufgestockt. Die Bundeswehr unterstützt mit einer Luftbrücke den Transport von Hilfsgütern aus Deutschland und der Europäischen Union. Sie wird eine Krankenstation zur Verfügung stellen und dementsprechend einrichten. Die von Frau Dr. Böhmer angesprochenen 85 Millionen Euro, die diese Woche im Haushaltsausschuss bewilligt worden sind, sind, glaube ich, auch eine sehr wichtige Hilfe, die zur Linderung beiträgt.\n\nIch begrüße auch sehr, dass die Europäische Union 150 Millionen Euro bereitstellt, um die Epidemie zu bewältigen, und dass Deutschland auch einen Anteil dazu beiträgt.\n\nDoch um eine Wiederholung dieser Krise zu verhindern, müssen die betroffenen Länder mit Unterstützung der internationalen Gemeinschaft entschlossen die strukturellen Probleme angehen. Die betroffenen Staaten müssen wenigstens eine Grundsicherung im Gesundheitssystem anbieten können. Das gelingt nur durch ein sozial gerechtes und nachhaltiges Wirtschaftswachstum. Nur wenn die Grundlagen stimmen, können Katastrophen wie diese eingedämmt werden. Dabei haben die Weltgemeinschaft und auch wir eine entwicklungspolitische Verantwortung. Diese Verantwortung muss sich auch in unserem Haushalt widerspiegeln.\n\nDarum erlauben Sie mir einen kurzen Einwurf dazu: Eine aktuelle Emnid-Umfrage besagt, dass 79 Prozent der Deutschen sich dafür aussprechen, dass wir mehr Geld in die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit investieren und unsere Zusage einhalten, einen Anteil von 0,7 Prozent des Bruttonationaleinkommens in die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit fließen zu lassen. Hier müssen wir, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, mehr tun. Denn davon sind wir noch weit entfernt.\n\nWir müssen dringend über weitere Finanzierungsmöglichkeiten nachdenken, auf nationaler und internationaler Ebene.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Ebolaepidemie löst auch eine Nahrungsmittelkrise aus. Eine Hungerkatastrophe droht. Schon jetzt ist Liberia von drastischen Preissteigerungen bei Grundnahrungsmitteln betroffen. Wir müssen davon ausgehen, dass alle betroffenen Länder Nahrungsmittelhilfe benötigen werden. Denn die Landwirtschaft leidet enorm unter der Krise. Felder wurden nicht bestellt; Ernten werden ausbleiben.\n\nDie zurzeit völlig überforderten Gesundheitssysteme haben zur Folge, dass anderweitig Erkrankte oft keine Behandlung mehr erhalten. Aus Angst vor Ansteckung trauen sie sich nicht mehr zum Arzt. Menschen sterben jetzt noch häufiger an Krankheiten, die ansonsten relativ einfach zu behandeln wären.\n\nWer aufgrund einer Erkrankung nicht arbeitet, verdient kein Geld und kann sich und seine Familie nicht ernähren. Es fehlt an sozialer Sicherung. Kinder können nicht mehr zur Schule gehen. Wirtschaft und Landwirtschaft kommen zum Erliegen. Der Handel stagniert. Das wirtschaftliche und soziale Leben liegt brach. Die Menschen in Sierra Leone, Guinea und Liberia fürchten sich inzwischen vor Berührungen. Sie gehen nicht mehr aus dem Haus und vermeiden Kontakte. Man schüttelt sich aus Angst vor dem unsichtbaren Virus nicht mehr die Hand.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es wird nicht ausreichen, die Ebolaepidemie einzudämmen. Neben den notwendigen und möglichst schnell umzusetzenden Krisenmaßnahmen zur Bekämpfung der Krankheit wird die weitere Entwicklung der betroffenen Staaten entscheidend sein. Die öffentliche Gesundheitsvorsorge ist dabei ein wichtiger Teil.\n\nZur Stabilisierung der Staaten müssen wir jetzt humanitäre Hilfe leisten. Wir müssen in der Krise helfen, und das tun wir. Langfristig muss allerdings eine nachhaltige und mit unseren europäischen und internationalen Partnern koordinierte Entwicklungszusammenarbeit die Antwort sein. Dafür sollten wir uns alle einsetzen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n11919,brigitte-zypries,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Kollegin, natürlich hat die Bundesregierung Kontakte zu einer Vielzahl von Unternehmen. Sie werden aber, wie Sie sich denken können und wahrscheinlich auch wissen, nicht systematisch erfasst. Deswegen ist es uns auch nicht möglich, Ihnen eine lückenlose Aufstellung von sämtlichen Kommunikationsvorgängen einschließlich der Gesprächsinhalte zu geben.\n\nIch werde Ihnen jetzt gleich ein paar Termine nennen, aber ich kann nicht ausschließen, dass es neben diesen Terminen aus dem Leitungsbereich der Ministerien, die wir recherchiert haben, noch andere Zusammentreffen am Rande von irgendwelchen Veranstaltungen oder Ähnlichem gab. Das mag auch der Fall gewesen sein.\n\nNach dem 6. Juli dieses Jahres gab es folgende Termine bzw. Gespräche mit Vertretern der Kernkraftwerke betreibenden Energieversorgungsunternehmen im Zusammenhang mit der Umsetzung der Empfehlungen der KFK, die wir recherchiert haben:\n\nDer Chef des Bundeskanzleramtes und Bundesminister für besondere Aufgaben hat am 15. Juli 2016 ein Gespräch mit Johannes Teyssen, dem Vorstandsvorsitzenden der Eon SE, geführt, und es gab am 4. August 2016 ein Gespräch von Herrn Altmaier mit Vertretern der Konzernbetriebsräte von Eon, RWE und Vattenfall. Der Bundesminister für Wirtschaft und Energie hat mit den Vorständen von EnBW, Eon, RWE und Vattenfall am 29. August 2016 Gespräche geführt. Von den übrigen Bundesministerien ist gemeldet worden, dass es seit dem 6. Juli 2016 diese entsprechenden Gespräche auf Leitungsebene nicht gab.\n\nDanach haben Sie aber gefragt.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ich kann Ihnen nur sagen, dass mir mitgeteilt wurde, dass es über diese Gespräche keine Vermerke gibt. Mehr kann ich Ihnen dazu leider nicht sagen.\n\nIch weiß nicht so richtig, ob das mit Ihrer Frage 8 zusammenhängt. Darin hatten Sie danach gefragt, wann der Staatssekretärsausschuss getagt hat und tagen wird. Ich gehe einmal davon aus, dass das in den gleichen Zusammenhang gehört, und möchte deshalb gerne Ihre Frage 8 mit beantworten.\n\nSie hatten gefragt, wann die Termine waren. Diese waren am 4. Mai, am 17. Mai, am 4. Juli, am 9. August, und die nächste Sitzung ist am 10. Oktober. Sie können aus dieser Terminabfolge erkennen, dass die Beratungsintensität doch ziemlich hoch ist, da der Staatssekretärsausschuss ja in dieser Häufigkeit tagt.\n\nEs gibt gegenwärtig eine Diskussion darüber, ob und gegebenenfalls in welcher Art und in welchem Umfang zur Umsetzung der Empfehlungen der KFK zusätzlich zu den gesetzgeberischen Maßnahmen auch vertragliche Vereinbarungen in Betracht kommen. Die Bundesregierung hat dazu ihren Willensbildungsprozess noch nicht abgeschlossen. Es ist auch noch nicht klar, in welcher genauen Abfolge das Gesetzgebungsverfahren oder etwaige Gesetzgebungsverfahren stattfinden werden.\n\nNein, Sie können sie gerne noch stellen.\n\nIch kann Ihnen dazu keinen Zeitplan nennen.\n\nSelbstverständlich. In jedem Gesetzgebungsverfahren gibt es eine Verbändeanhörung.\n\nNein, Frau Kollegin. Ich sagte Ihnen eben schon in meiner Antwort auf die Frage 8, dass der Willensbildungsprozess zu der Frage, ob es überhaupt eine vertragliche Vereinbarung geben wird, noch nicht abgeschlossen ist. Deswegen kann ich natürlich auch noch nichts darüber sagen, was da drinstehen wird.\n\nHätte sein können, ja.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ich muss Ihnen die Frage schriftlich beantworten, weil ich die Prämisse, die ihr zugrunde liegt, nicht bestätigen kann. Deswegen kann ich sie, ehrlich gesagt, nicht beantworten. Wir werden das gerne schriftlich nachreichen.\n\nFrau Künast, es gab einen Vorschlag der Kommission - vom 5. September - mit dem Ansinnen, bis Ende September eine öffentliche Konsultation zu diesem Vorschlag durchzuführen. Die Bundesregierung war auch dabei, sich eine Meinung zu bilden, als der Vorschlag wieder zurückgezogen wurde.\n\nWenn ich die Tickermeldungen heute richtig verfolgt habe, gibt es einen neuen Vorschlag, der besagt, dass es ab dem 15. Juni 2017 überhaupt keine Roaminggebühren mehr geben wird und dass man die Sorgen, die man seinerzeit aufgrund des sogenannten Wasserbett-Effektes hatte, auf andere Art und Weise berücksichtigen wird.\n\nWir werden uns den Vorschlag, den die Kommission nun vorlegt, genau anschauen müssen. Ich bezweifle, dass dann solche Bedenken noch angebracht sind. Wenn es tatsächlich keine Roaminggebühren gibt, dann besteht diese Problematik auch nicht mehr. Hinter der 90-Tage-Regelung verbirgt sich die Sorge, dass diejenigen, die verreisen und im Ausland telefonieren, von denjenigen durch Gebühren quersubventioniert werden, die sich in Deutschland aufhalten. Wenn man aber davon ausgeht, dass es nur noch eine einheitliche Rate gibt, dann hat sich das erledigt. Wir werden uns das jedenfalls genau anschauen müssen. Wir können dann hier gerne noch einmal darüber diskutieren.\n\nSelbstverständlich. Ich gehe davon aus, dass darüber auch in den zuständigen Ausschüssen des Bundestages diskutiert werden wird.\"\n12360,kees-de-vries,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren auf den Tribünen! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Landwirtschaft betrifft jeden Menschen auf dieser Welt. Und deshalb betrifft die Diskussion über die Grüne Gentechnik nicht nur die deutsche Landwirtschaft, uns Parlamentarier oder unsere mit qualitativ hochwertigen und preiswerten Lebensmitteln versorgte - um nicht zu sagen: verwöhnte - Bevölkerung, nein, sie betrifft auch die Hungernden oder falsch Ernährten auf unserer Erde.\n\nAls Mitglieder des Deutschen Bundestages ist es unsere Pflicht, die Sorgen und Wünsche des deutschen Volkes ernst zu nehmen. Aber es ist auch unsere Pflicht, in Übereinstimmung mit unserer Überzeugung, resultierend aus unserem Wissen und Gewissen, darauf zu reagieren.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich persönlich - und ich bin wirklich nicht der Einzige in diesem Bundestag - bin nach wie vor der Meinung, dass es nicht im Sinne eines so innovativen Landes wie dem unseren und seiner Bevölkerung ist, uns so radikal von weltweiten Entwicklungen abzukoppeln. Ich fühle mich in dieser Haltung auch bestärkt durch einen Aufruf von 107 - ich wiederhole: 107 - Nobelpreisträgern,\n\ndie verlangt haben, dass die Kampagne gegen GVOs aufgrund der neuesten wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnisse aufgegeben werden sollte.\n\nTrotzdem kann auch ich mit der Opt-out-Regelung leben. Um diese EU-Regelung in nationales Recht umzusetzen, liegt uns jetzt, nach der Ressortabstimmung, der Entwurf eines Vierten Gesetzes zur Änderung des Gentechnikgesetzes vor.\n\n- Er liegt vor, Herr Ebner. - Das Ziel dieses Gesetzentwurfes hat Landwirtschaftsminister Christian Schmidt klar und deutlich beschrieben, nämlich das flächendeckende Anbauverbot von Grüner Gentechnik in ganz Deutschland.\n\nSeit 2015 kann der Anbau von GVOs außer aus gesundheitlichen und ökologischen Gründen - für die meistens handfeste wissenschaftliche Beweise nicht zu liefern sind -, auch aus agrarpolitischen oder sozioökonomischen Gründen unterbunden werden. Es geht hier also nicht um die Frage: Genpflanze, ja oder nein? Es geht hier um die Verbotspraxis und um die Frage der Zuständigkeit.\n\nAber, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Anträge und Gesetzentwürfe, die Sie als grüne Opposition hier vorlegen, helfen in keiner Weise, tragfähige Lösungen für die Gestaltung eines Anbauverbots für gentechnisch veränderte Organismen zu formulieren.\n\nSie kommen nicht nur mit einem veralteten - er ist über ein Jahr alt -, einfach wieder aufgewärmten Gesetzentwurf, sondern auch mit zum Teil schon überholten Anträgen, die außer Schwarzmalerei und meisterhafter Vereinfachung nichts zu bieten haben. Ich frage mich: Geht es hier um die Sache oder um parteipolitisches Kalkül?\n\nFest steht für mich: Diese Anträge sind einfach abzulehnen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, meines Erachtens haben die Bundesressorts mit dem vorgelegten Gesetzentwurf, der die Brüsseler Opt-out-Regelung in nationales Recht umsetzt, einen vernünftigen Kompromiss zwischen Bund und Ländern zustande gebracht. So werden Unternehmen, die eine Anbauzulassung für gentechnisch veränderte Pflanzen stellen, vom Bundesministerium für Landwirtschaft und Ernährung dazu aufgefordert, das deutsche Bundesgebiet vom Anbau auszuschließen. Ja, dazu braucht die Regierung das Einvernehmen von sechs Ministerien, nämlich Forschung, Wirtschaft, Arbeit, Soziales, Gesundheit und Umwelt, und auch eine Mehrheit im Bundesrat. Aber solange sich die öffentliche Meinung und die korrespondierende Position der Bundesregierung und der Landesregierungen zum Thema GVO nicht ändert, kann das doch kein Problem sein.\n\nSelbst wenn sich ein Unternehmen darüber hinwegsetzt, das Bundesgebiet vom Anbau auszunehmen, verfügt die Bundesregierung gemäß dem neuen Gesetzentwurf immer noch über ausreichend Mittel, einen Ausbau in Deutschland zu verhindern. In diesem Falle sollte die Bundesregierung mit Zustimmung des Bundesrates eine Rechtsverordnung zum bundesweiten Anbauverbot erlassen, die sich auf zwingende Gründe stützt, darunter solche, die bereits seit 2015 die Anwendung der Grünen Gentechnik erfolgreich unterbinden.\n\nNeben den agrarpolitischen und sozioökonomischen Argumenten können sich zwingende Gründe aus umweltpolitischen Zielen oder der Gefahr von Verunreinigungen ergeben. Dabei soll sich die Begründung an den jeweiligen regionalen Bedingungen orientieren. Zusätzlich wird es den Ländern per Verordnung möglich sein, den GVO-Anbau in ihrem Hoheitsgebiet eigenständig zu verbieten. Hierdurch und durch die bestehende Haftungsregelung wird nicht nur die Rechtssicherheit der zukünftigen Verbote gestärkt, sondern dem Gentechnikgesetz auch ein föderaler Charakter zugestanden. Im Hinblick auf die Diversität der landwirtschaftlichen Ökosysteme und Arbeitsbedingungen in Deutschland ist dies von nicht zu unterschätzender Bedeutung.\n\nDamit, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, hat unser vielgescholtener Minister Christian Schmidt einen Gesetzentwurf vorgelegt, den nicht einmal unsere Kollegen der Grünenfraktion guten Gewissens ablehnen können.\n\nDanke für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n1165,jens-zimmermann,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Als neues Mitglied im Finanzausschuss des Deutschen Bundestages freue ich mich, gleich in meiner ersten Rede zu so einem wichtigen Thema wie der geplanten Bankenunion sprechen zu dürfen.\n\nLassen Sie mich noch einmal an die Situation erinnern, wie wir sie vorgefunden haben. Mit der Pleite der Investmentbank Lehman Brothers und der weltweiten Finanzkrise begann auch für Europa eine Entwicklung, mit der wir heute noch zu kämpfen haben. Spätestens mit dem Antrag Spaniens auf finanzielle Hilfen für seine in Schieflage geratenen Banken wurde auch dem Letzten klar: Der Teufelskreis zwischen Banken und Staatsanleihen muss durchbrochen werden.\n\nDie europäischen Steuerzahler sollen nicht weiter -alleine für die europäischen Großbanken haften. Ende 2012 erarbeitete die Kommission deshalb einen Fahrplan für eine Bankenunion. Nach langen und immer noch schwierigen Verhandlungen steht aber nun eine Einigung auf europäischer Ebene kurz bevor.\n\nWir als SPD haben immer eine funktionierende Bankenunion gefordert, bei der klar ist, dass Risiko und Haftung zusammengehören und dass die Steuerzahler und Kleinsparer geschützt werden.\n\nDer ESM ist für Staaten da, nicht für Banken. Das Ziel einer Bankenunion muss sein, dass zum Schluss der Steuerzahler möglichst gar nicht mehr einspringen muss. Auch im Koalitionsvertrag mit der Union haben wir deshalb festgeschrieben, dass wir in Europa eine funktionierende Bankenunion brauchen.\n\nLassen Sie mich kurz erläutern, welche Ziele die SPD mit der geplanten Bankenunion verfolgt. Wichtig ist uns erstens eine wirksame Prävention, die es gar nicht mehr zu dramatischen Krisenszenarien kommen lässt. Wichtig ist uns zweitens eine geordnete finanzielle Abwicklung, wenn es im Ernstfall doch zu Schieflagen von systemrelevanten Banken käme. Wichtig ist uns drittens eine Regelung, die klarstellt, wann Mittel aus Steuergeldern -bereitgestellt werden. Das gestufte Auffangsystem der Haftungskaskade und das sogenannte Bail-in stellen sicher, dass die europäischen Steuerzahler geschützt werden.\n\nMit dieser Haftungskaskade wird eine Reihenfolge festgelegt, nach der zuerst Aktionäre, Gläubiger und Großsparer für eine Bank zahlen. Erst dann kommt der Abwicklungsfonds mit seinen 55 Milliarden Euro zum Tragen.\n\nErst dann - wirklich erst dann - kann auf den ESM als letztes Mittel einer Bankenrettung zugegriffen werden. Die Bundesregierung hat sich in den Verhandlungen erfolgreich hierfür eingesetzt. Wir stehen also kurz vor einer Einigung. Es werden Krisenprävention und genau definierte Folgemaßnahmen vereint. Alle diese Maßnahmen haben den Zweck, die europäischen und damit auch die deutschen Steuerzahler und Kleinsparer zu schützen.\n\nIhr Antrag kommt daher in meinen Augen zur Unzeit. Sie fordern in Ihrem Antrag einen sofortigen Aufbau des Fonds. Ein schnellerer Aufbau des Fonds kann aber nur dann wünschenswert sein, wenn das Prinzip der Proportionalität, für das sich die Bundesregierung in den Verhandlungen einsetzt, gewahrt bleibt.\n\nProportionalität heißt, dass große Banken höhere Abgaben leisten müssen als kleine Banken. Es muss klar sein: Die Mittel hierfür fallen nicht vom Himmel. Ohne eine größere Beteiligung auch der kleineren Banken wäre eine schnellere Mittelaufstockung, wie in Ihrem Antrag gefordert, kaum möglich. Wir möchten kleinere Banken aber nicht übermäßig belasten.\n\nMan kann nicht fordern, eine Bankenunion müsse so schnell wie möglich her, ein Fonds müsse so schnell wie möglich aufgebaut werden, und gleichzeitig Forderungen stellen, die die Verhandlungen um Monate hinauszögern würden. Das einzusehen, dazu gehört, glaube ich, nicht viel Fantasie. Im Mai ist die Europawahl. Im Herbst wird es eine Neubesetzung der Kommission geben. Die Verhandlungen würden dann wieder von vorne anfangen. Wann dann eine Einigung käme - keiner weiß es.\n\nEs ist ein falsches Signal, sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, kurz vor dem Abschluss der schwierigen und langwierigen Verhandlungen jetzt noch einmal höhere Hürden für einen Kompromiss schaffen zu wollen.\n\nEine Einigung rückt damit nicht näher. Klar ist: Wir brauchen eine Bankenunion, eine Bankenunion, die verhindert, dass mit öffentlichen Geldern wieder private Banken gerettet werden müssen. Sie sollten das nicht noch weiter verzögern. Deshalb wird Ihr Antrag unsere Zustimmung nicht finden.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n8046,oliver-kaczmarek,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Das ist einer der seltenen Fälle, in denen wir über eine Anregung des Parlaments reden, die die Regierung zwischen der ersten und der zweiten Lesung des Antrags direkt schon in die Tat umsetzt.\n\nWir finden es erst einmal gut, dass das jetzt Fahrt aufgenommen hat. Wir wollen als Parlament mit diesem Antrag aber auch deutlich machen: Wir wollen das Thema jetzt nicht für zehn Jahre abgeben, sondern es aktiv mitgestalten. Das zeigt auch die engagierte Debatte hier. Gemeinsam - Parlament und Regierung - schaffen wir das.\n\nEs ist aber auch wichtig, zum Schluss der Debatte einen Blick auf die Frage zu werfen: Was wollen wir eigentlich nach den zehn Jahren der Alphabetisierungsdekade erreicht haben? Ich möchte gerne vier Anmerkungen dazu machen.\n\nErstens. Wir müssen besser machen, was in der Vergangenheit nicht geklappt hat. Die Vereinten Nationen haben 2003 bis 2012 zur Weltalphabetisierungsdekade aufgerufen mit dem Ziel, die Zahl der betroffenen Menschen zu halbieren. Das Ergebnis war, dass weltweit die Zahl der betroffenen Menschen von 20 auf 17 Prozent gesunken ist. Das war gut, aber nicht ausreichend.\n\nWir müssen aus dieser Weltalphabetisierungsdekade für unsere nationale Dekade lernen. Wir brauchen realistische Ziele. Wir brauchen geeignete Instrumente. Wir brauchen Personen, die vorangehen. Deswegen war es gut, dass die Ministerin gemeinsam mit der Kultusministerkonferenz den Impuls gesetzt hat. Und wir brauchen Geld. Ich will daran erinnern, dass Tony Blair in Großbritannien 3,6 Milliarden Euro für die Skills-for-Life-Strategie mobilisiert hat. Das kann man mit unserer Summe nicht vergleichen, weil wir hier nur über Bundesgeld reden; die Länder werden noch ein Vielfaches drauflegen. An dieser Stelle wollen wir jedoch auch sagen: Die 180 Millionen Euro, die die Ministerin in den Raum gestellt hat, finden wir gut, aber das kann nur eine Untergrenze sein. Wir helfen gern mit, da noch mehr Geld zu mobilisieren.\n\nZweite Anmerkung. So gut es ist, dass Bund und Länder jetzt vorangegangen sind: Allein werden sie es nicht schaffen. Wir müssen in den nächsten zehn Jahren ein tragfähiges Alpha-Netzwerk aufbauen. Wir brauchen die Kompetenz derjenigen, die sich teilweise schon seit Jahrzehnten in der Alphabetisierungs- und Grundbildungsarbeit engagieren, sei es die Volkshochschule in meiner Heimatstadt, die schon seit den 80er-Jahren Alphabetisierungskurse anbietet, oder seien es die großen Verbände: der Deutsche Volkshochschul-Verband allen voran, die Stiftung Lesen ist schon genannt worden, der Bundesverband Alphabetisierung und Grundbildung, um nur drei Beispiele zu nennen. Das sind diejenigen, die die Kurse durchführen. Sie beraten am Alpha-Telefon, stellen die Unterrichtsmaterialien zusammen und qualifizieren die Kursleiter. Die Einbeziehung der Akteure der Alphabetisierungs- und Grundbildungsarbeit in die Dekade ist daher auch eine Frage der Wertschätzung der Arbeit, die dort teilweise schon seit Jahrzehnten geleistet wird.\n\nIch habe eine Bitte: Lassen Sie uns auch die lokalen Netzwerke, die sich in letzter Zeit gebildet haben, im Blick behalten. Die regionalen Grundbildungszentren sind sicherlich ein guter Ansatz; das ist hier schon thematisiert worden.\n\nVor Ort, in den Städten, können wir weitere Akteure an den Tisch holen, die wichtig sind: die Schulen, die Jobcenter, die lokale Wirtschaft, die Stadtverwaltung und viele andere mehr. Direkte Hilfe vor Ort zu organisieren, das könnte auch ein Erfolgsrezept dieser Dekade sein. Deswegen lassen Sie uns auch die Vor-Ort-Ebene im Blick behalten.\n\nDritte Anmerkung. Was wollen wir in zehn Jahren erreicht haben? Wir wollen in zehn Jahren mehr über Analphabetismus und seine Ursachen wissen. Viele stehen immer noch ratlos vor dem Phänomen und fragen sich: Wie ist das eigentlich möglich - 7,5 Millionen betroffene Menschen in Deutschland trotz Schulpflicht, trotz Erwerbstätigkeit, trotz Muttersprache Deutsch? Und wie können sie das eigentlich in unserem schriftgeprägten Alltag verheimlichen?\n\nDie Wahrheit ist: Wir wissen etwas über das Ausmaß des funktionalen Analphabetismus, aber wir wissen herzlich wenig über die Ursachen und die Wechselwirkungen des Analphabetismus. Deswegen ist es gut, dass die „leo.“-Studie - sie ist hier mehrfach genannt worden - fortgesetzt wird. Wir brauchen in diesem Bereich kontinuierliche und gut ausgestattete Forschung. Die „leo.“-Studie ist ein Teil davon. Wir wollen, dass da in den nächsten Jahren noch mehr passiert.\n\nIn dem Zusammenhang möchte ich neben der Forschung und den anderen Akteuren auch die Menschen benennen, die sich in den letzten Jahren getraut haben, als Betroffene an die Öffentlichkeit zu gehen und zu zeigen, wie sie gelebt haben. Wir haben von denjenigen, die sich getraut haben, als Botschafter und Lernende an die Öffentlichkeit zu gehen, viel gelernt. Herzlichen Dank dafür, und Respekt vor dem Mut!\n\nVierte Anmerkung. Wir wollen in diesen zehn Jahren erreichen, dass kein Analphabet mehr am Rande der Gesellschaft steht; wir wollen, dass ihm oder ihr geholfen wird. Wir wollen Menschen ermutigen, Lesen und Schreiben zu lernen. Das ist oft ein langwieriger Prozess. Dabei reicht es nicht aus, einen Kurs zu besuchen. Es braucht Anreize, sich der Herausforderung zu stellen und zu erkennen, dass man mit dem Problem des Analphabetismus nicht allein ist.\n\nAber es braucht auch - Frau Kollegin Schieder hat darauf hingewiesen - einen Anreiz, zu erkennen, wo ein Mitmensch von Analphabetismus betroffen ist. Wir brauchen mehr ausgestreckte Hände: in der Familie, im Betrieb, in den Verwaltungen oder anderswo. Dabei sind die Öffentlichkeitskampagnen, die dort gestartet werden, besonders wichtig. Es geht nicht um eine Werbekampagne. Die Kampagne soll diejenigen erreichen, die einen Kurs besuchen wollen, wie auch diejenigen, die erkennen, dass jemand ihre Hilfe braucht. Deswegen ist auch das ein ganz besonders wichtiger Teil.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich komme zum Schluss. Wir haben viele gute Ziele in unseren Antrag aufgenommen. Wir werden die Dekade als Parlament begleiten. Ich bin zuversichtlich, dass wir einen wichtigen Fortschritt dabei erzielen, dass wir die Menschen unterstützen, Lesen und Schreiben zu lernen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n8870,dietmar-bartsch,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Lieber Herr Botschafter! Liebe französischen Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Befragung der Bundesregierung und auch die Rede des Außenministers haben viel erklärt. Aber eines bleibt: Deutschland wird Kriegspartei. Wenn am Freitag im Deutschen Bundestag eine Mehrheit zustande kommen sollte, werden deutsche Soldaten in ein neues militärisches Abenteuer geschickt. Die Linke wird diesen Auslandseinsatz der Bundeswehr im Kampf gegen den IS geschlossen ablehnen.\n\nLieber Frank-Walter Steinmeier, eines darf ich einfordern: Diejenigen, die Ja sagen, machen sich mit Sicherheit Gedanken. Aber diejenigen, die Nein sagen, mit Sicherheit auch.\n\nEs kann doch nicht sein, dass das eine ein einfaches Nein und das andere ein überlegtes Ja ist. Das ist nicht die Logik.\n\nIm Übrigen gibt es auch bei den Sozialdemokraten einige, die Nein sagen.\n\nDiese Position ist keineswegs ausgeschlossen.\n\nJa, Sie haben recht: Der Terror sollte uns alle treffen. Das waren Anschläge gegen die Zivilisation, gegen die offene Gesellschaft, gegen die Werte der Aufklärung Freiheit, Gleichheit und Brüderlichkeit. Das ist unbestritten. Die Linke ist solidarisch mit allen Kräften der Zivilisation, und sie ist solidarisch mit dem französischen Volk. Das ist völlig unbestritten.\n\nAber Freundschaft kann auch bedeuten, wie wir alle wissen, dass man Nein sagt, dass man widerspricht, wenn man glaubt, dass eine falsche Entscheidung getroffen wird. Alle Erfahrungen bestätigen: Terror lässt sich nicht mit Krieg besiegen. Terror lässt sich nicht mit Bomben besiegen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nEs ist eben daran erinnert worden: Der IS selbst ist ein Produkt des Krieges. Der US-Krieg gegen den Irak hat zumindest einen Beitrag zum Erstarken des IS geleistet. Ich will auch daran erinnern, dass Bundeskanzler Gerhard Schröder aus gutem Grund Nein gesagt hat. Das war eine der vernünftigen Entscheidungen der damaligen Legislaturperiode. Auch daran kann erinnert werden.\n\nWir können aber mit dieser Entscheidung, wenn wir uns jetzt beteiligen, in eine Spirale von Gewalt und Vergeltung kommen. Das ist die Gefahr. Ja, Herr Steinmeier: Hass ist keine Antwort. Das ist doch völlig klar.\n\nWir begrüßen es im Übrigen, wenn dieser schmale Grat, den Sie in Wien gefunden haben, weiter führt. Das ist richtig. Aber jede Bombe, die auf Rakka fällt, und jede Bombe, die auf andere Städte fällt, treibt dem „Islamischen Staat“ neue Kämpfer zu. Das ist die Wahrheit. Es wird auch die Grundlage für neue Attentate gelegt. Das ist die Wahrheit.\n\nWir wissen doch alle, dass dort Wahnsinnige am Werk sind. Das ist unbestritten; darin sind wir uns in diesem Haus doch einig. Das sind Menschen, die Jesiden und Christen enthaupten, und sie enthaupten andere, die aus ihrer Sicht Ungläubige sind. Sie vergewaltigen Frauen und junge Mädchen, betreiben Sklavenhandel und zerstören jahrtausendealte Kulturgüter. Das alles ist wahr. Sie terrorisieren und morden inzwischen weltweit.\n\nJa, denen muss das Handwerk gelegt werden. Aber Bomben sind die falsche Antwort. Kann es sein, dass wir deren Logik bedienen? Bedienen wir damit vielleicht die Logik des IS?\n\nDie Logik des IS ist doch ganz einfach: Es handelt sich um einen Kreuzzug des Westens gegen alle Muslime. - Dieser Logik dürfen wir nicht folgen. Wir agieren gemeinsam gegen die Barbarei und nicht gegen Muslime.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Mandat selbst etwas sagen. Was ist eigentlich das Ziel dieses Einsatzes? Ich habe gehört, dass es die Zerstörung des IS ist. Einverstanden! Aber nach allen Darlegungen und allem, was ich gehört habe, gibt es keine Strategie, noch nicht einmal eine militärische. Wer agiert dort wie? Ich kenne nicht einen militärisch Verantwortlichen, der sagt, mit Luftschlägen sei das Problem zu lösen.\n\nAber Sie entscheiden sich für Luftschläge. Das kann doch nur der falsche Weg sein. Was soll denn damit erreicht werden?\n\nSie haben völlig zu Recht darauf hingewiesen, dass aktuell die Kurden die Einzigen sind, die entschlossen gegen den IS kämpfen und auch Erfolge vorzuweisen haben. Da müssen Sie mir eines erklären: Der US-Verteidigungsminister Carter hat die Türkei aufgefordert, gegen den IS zu kämpfen und nicht Bomben auf Kurden zu werfen. Die Kurden unterstützen wir doch. Es ist doch völlig absurd, dass wir die Kurden unterstützen, während die Türkei gegen die Kurden agiert.\n\nErklären Sie mir noch etwas. Wenn die Tornados dort Bilder machen, die dann natürlich auch den NATO-Verbündeten zur Verfügung gestellt werden: Können Sie eigentlich garantieren, dass die Türkei diese Bilder nicht gegen die Kurdinnen und Kurden nutzt?\n\nKönnen Sie das eigentlich garantieren? Das können Sie eben nicht.\n\nDie Türkei hat über viele Jahre eine extrem problematische Rolle als Transitland des Terrorismus eingenommen. Jetzt, wo es eine Erpressungssituation wegen der Flüchtlinge gibt, wird die Türkei auf einmal unterstützt. Das darf so nicht sein. Hier muss Klarheit herrschen. Hier darf es keine unterschiedlichen Maßstäbe für die Türkei geben.\n\nWenn man in ein solches Kriegsabenteuer geht, muss zu Beginn die Frage beantwortet werden: Wie kommen wir da wieder heraus?\n\nEs ist doch allgemeiner Kenntnisstand, dass zu Beginn eines solchen Einsatzes über eine Exitstrategie geredet werden muss. Wie sieht denn das Konzept für danach aus? Der Deutsche BundeswehrVerband sagt, der Einsatz dauere mindestens zehn Jahre. Hier im Parlament entscheiden wir darüber innerhalb von zehn Stunden, aber das sei dahingestellt. Es fehlt jedenfalls eine wirkliche Perspektive für Syrien. Wie soll diese aussehen? Es fehlt eine Perspektive für den Irak. Es fehlt eine Perspektive für die Kurdinnen und Kurden. Wenn der BND nun sogar sagt, dass Saudi-Arabien ein gefährlicher Partner ist, dann ist das, was dort betrieben wird, völlig absurd.\n\nDer IS ist heute die stärkste und reichste Terrororganisation. Auch das ist nicht vom Himmel gefallen. Er finanziert sich weiterhin aus privaten Geldspenden aus der Golfregion. Der Ölhandel floriert noch immer. Der Handel mit geraubten und antiken Kulturgütern blüht weiterhin. Was geschieht denn nun, um Waffen- und Munitionslieferungen in diese Region zu verhindern? Was passiert denn, damit der Zustrom von Kämpfern, der gerade wieder größer geworden ist, beendet wird? Jede Nacht kommen Kämpfer über die türkische Grenze; das wissen die Dienste. Dieser Zustand muss doch beendet werden. Wir müssen Druck auf die Türkei ausüben und dafür sorgen, dass die Grenze geschlossen wird. Da können wir doch nicht einfach zusehen.\n\nWer sorgt denn praktisch dafür, dass Konten des IS und seiner Sponsoren ausfindig gemacht und dann gesperrt werden? Das wäre eine Aufgabe, die wir erledigen sollten.\n\nEine Anmerkung sei mir noch gestattet, die mir wirklich wichtig ist. Viele Staaten stellen nun für die Bombardements Millionen zur Verfügung. Aber in den Flüchtlingslagern mangelt es an Nahrungsmitteln. Ich habe unlängst einen Bericht über ein Lager im Irak gesehen. Der UNHCR beklagt, dass dieses Lager kurz vor einem Choleraausbruch steht. Ich glaube, alle hier im Raum wissen, was das bedeutet. Es wird Tausende Tote geben, wenn das geschieht. Es ist doch unfassbar, dass die zivilisierte Welt das zulässt. Da muss doch sofort Geld in die Hand genommen werden.\n\nEin solcher Ausbruch führt nicht nur zu Tod und Leid, sondern verstärkt auch den Zulauf des IS. Hier sind nicht nur wir, sondern auch viele andere gefragt. Dafür muss möglichst schnell Geld zur Verfügung gestellt werden.\n\nZum Rechtlichen wurden schon umfangreiche Ausführungen gemacht. Der Kollege Lindner hat darauf hingewiesen. Jürgen Trittin hat das sehr vernünftig dargelegt.\n\nSie wollten doch ein UN-Mandat nach Kapitel VII der UN-Charta. Das ist doch Ihr Wille gewesen. Wenigstens dieser Logik muss man doch folgen. Aber es gibt diesen Beschluss nicht. Dafür muss es doch Gründe geben. Vielleicht gibt es Gründe dafür, dass es ihn nicht gibt. Wenn das so ist, dann sind mindestens Nachfragen gestattet.\n\nWir werden das von Fachleuten - auch ich bin kein Fachmann - prüfen lassen und werden sehen, wie wir zu diesem Mandat stehen. Es scheint mir zumindest auf sehr wackligen Füßen zu stehen.\n\nEine Frage sei mir noch gestattet: Was haben Sie eigentlich aus den anderen Bundeswehreinsätzen gelernt?\n\nIch will an die Debatte von damals - ich war schon dabei - erinnern, als es um den Afghanistan-Einsatz ging. Es wurde heftig debattiert. Fakt ist - das müssen wir heute doch gemeinsam konstatieren -: Zehntausende zivile Opfer, über 50 tote Bundeswehrsoldaten, und der Terror hat weiterhin in Afghanistan eine Adresse. Die Taliban sind auf dem Vormarsch. Alle gesteckten Ziele sind nicht erreicht worden.\n\nDa sollten wir gemeinsam sehr nachdenklich werden.\n\nSie sollten aus diesem Einsatz lernen.\n\n- Wissen Sie, ich kann die Aufregung ein bisschen verstehen.\n\nAber das Thema ist viel zu ernst; denn wir alle gemeinsam gehen nicht dorthin, sondern wir schicken Soldatinnen und Soldaten dorthin. Da ist ein etwas höheres Maß an Seriosität gefragt.\n\nIch will damit schließen, dass die entsetzlichen Attentate von Paris weltweit junge Menschen auf die Straßen gebracht haben, die mehr Offenheit und mehr Demokratie gefordert haben. Sie wollen eine zivilisierte Antwort auf den Terror.\n\nAber wir beraten heute über den Einsatz der Bundeswehr.\n\nWir sagen Nein zu diesem Mandat, wir sagen Nein zum Krieg gegen den Terror.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n6245,frank-walter-steinmeier,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich weiß nicht, wie viele Flüchtlingslager ich in den letzten Jahren gesehen und erlebt habe. Die Schicksale derer, die sich etwa im Mittleren Osten mit knapper Not, mit Haut und Haaren und ein bisschen Leben in die Flüchtlingslager gerettet haben, übersteigen häufig genug das Vorstellbare. Allein 11 Millionen Flüchtlinge gibt es im weiteren Umfeld Syriens und des Iraks, die meisten davon im Libanon und in Jordanien.\n\nJa, auch bei uns gibt es - wer wüsste das nicht - kritische Diskussionen, in manchen Fällen auch Abneigung gegen die Aufnahme von Flüchtlingen. Ich weiß das, und wir müssen das thematisieren, gerade angesichts von brennenden Flüchtlingsunterkünften.\n\nAber das ist nicht die ganze Wahrheit. 100 000 Flüchtlinge aus Syrien haben Aufnahme in Deutschland gefunden, mehr als in allen anderen europäischen Ländern. Ich finde, das ist der Zeitpunkt, den vielen Städten und Kommunen, die die Aufnahme organisiert haben, und den Menschen, die die Flüchtlinge in ihrer Nachbarschaft aufgenommen haben und viele von ihnen betreuen, Dank zu sagen.\n\nWäre das der Anlass für diese Diskussion, wäre es gut, aber dem ist leider nicht so. 800, 900, vielleicht 1 000 Menschen sind am vergangenen Wochenende bei einem Schiffsunglück vor der Küste Libyens im Mittelmeer ums Leben gekommen. Man kann die Not, die diese Menschen auf überfüllte und untaugliche Boote treibt, die furchtbaren Momente der Havarie und das für die meisten chancenlose Ringen um das Überleben auf offener See nur erahnen. Das alles ist unerträglich.\n\nDas erschüttert uns in Wahrheit nicht nur als Mitmenschen - Gott sei Dank das auch -, sondern das muss uns in ganz besonderer Weise als Europäer erschüttern; denn diese Menschen waren nicht auf dem Weg irgendwohin, sie waren auf dem Weg nach Europa, mit vielen Hoffnungen auf dieses Europa. Deshalb trifft diese Tragödie, über die wir heute reden, eben nicht nur die Flüchtlinge, sondern sie betrifft auch Europa. Natürlich ist es unsere Verantwortung, Menschen vor dem sicheren Tod zu bewahren, selbst wenn sie von gewissenlosen Menschenhändlern auf eine Reise unter Todesgefahren geschickt werden. Deshalb sage ich zunächst einmal: Das ist Gegenstand der humanitären Verantwortung, und vor der dürfen wir nicht kneifen.\n\nIch habe diese Woche nach dem Rat der Außenminister und der Innenminister gesagt: Das, was wir am vergangenen Wochenende erlebt haben, ist nicht das Ende; es ist der traurige Höhepunkt einer Tragödie, und wir können nicht einmal mit Sicherheit sagen, wie es in den nächsten Wochen und Monaten weitergehen wird. Viele Tausend werden auch weiterhin den Weg über das Mittelmeer wagen. All das gehört zur bitteren Wahrheit. Manche macht dieser Zustand einfach nur fassungslos, andere begnügen sich mit der Suche nach Schuldigen, und Dritte wollen das Problem mit einem Handstreich aus der Welt schaffen. Ich verstehe alle diese drei Empfindungen, ich kenne sie teilweise von mir selbst. Aber uns allen ist klar: Keine dieser drei Empfindungen bietet eine wirklich überzeugende Antwort.\n\nSicher erwarten die Menschen in Deutschland mehr von uns, aber wir dürfen auch nicht über die Möglichkeiten und die Grenzen unserer Politik täuschen. Deshalb spreche ich von den vier Dimensionen, die ineinandergreifen müssen, damit wir in den nächsten Monaten mit hoffentlich größerer Effizienz tätig werden können.\n\nDas Erste ist die erwähnte humanitäre Verantwortung. Ganz vorn steht die Verbesserung der Seenotrettung. Wichtig ist nicht - das möchte ich sagen -, wie diese zukünftige europäische Mission heißen wird. Deshalb halte ich die Debatte, ob sie wieder Mare Nostrum heißen wird oder nicht, für nicht entscheidend. Entscheidend ist doch, egal wie sie heißt, dass der Erfolg bei der Rettung von Schiffbrüchigen größer wird. Die Verdoppelung der finanziellen Mittel, die jetzt von der Kommission angekündigt worden ist, ist jedenfalls der richtige Weg. Das muss sein, und das finde ich richtig.\n\nDas Zweite ist: Wenn wir wissen, dass Flüchtlinge weiterhin ankommen werden, dann werden wir jedenfalls seitens der Regierung Wert darauf legen, dass wir zu einer gerechteren Verteilung in Europa kommen. Thomas de Maizière und ich haben das im Rat in dieser Woche angemahnt. Aber das wird keine ganz einfache Diskussion werden. Dazu gehört Überzeugungsarbeit und Beharrlichkeit, und die werden wir beide - das verspreche ich - an den Tag legen.\n\nDrittens - das hat der Innenminister eben gesagt -: Es wäre eine Selbstlüge, wenn wir sagen würden, wir könnten mit besserer Verteilung und Seenotrettung das Problem lösen. Wir müssen bereit sein, mit größerer Effizienz, auch mit größerer Bereitschaft der Länder zur Zusammenarbeit endlich das kriminelle Tun derjenigen zu beenden, für die das Ganze, das wir hier miteinander diskutieren, keine Frage von Humanität ist. Das, was wir hier unter humanitärer Verantwortung diskutieren, ist für diejenigen, die flüchtende Menschen durch das Kriegsgebiet in Libyen treiben und die Überlebenden dieser Flucht in seeuntaugliche Boote setzen, nichts anderes als schlichte Profitgier. Ich glaube, das können wir nicht länger erdulden und ertragen. Diesen Menschen müssen wir das Handwerk legen.\n\nViertens. Es gibt die außenpolitische Dimension; Thomas de Maizière hat sie angekündigt. Es lässt sich leicht sagen: Wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass die Transitländer nicht mehr Gelegenheit bieten für den Ausbau von illegaler Migration, das Tätigwerden von Schleuserbanden und die Aktivitäten von Menschenhandel. Das lässt sich leicht sagen. Es lässt sich ebenfalls leicht sagen: Wir müssen die Ursachen für die Flucht aus den Herkunftsländern bekämpfen. All das ist richtig.\n\nNur, werfen wir einen Blick auf die Landkarte: Was ist denn tatsächlich der Fall? Wir haben in der Tat gute Kooperationen. Es hat gerade erst eine Konferenz mit den mediterranen Staaten aus Nordafrika in Barcelona stattgefunden. Dort, wo Staatlichkeit existiert - in Marokko, in Tunesien, in Algerien -, haben Schleuserbanden keine Grundlage für ihr schändliches Tun gefunden. Sie finden sie in einer Region vor, in der die Staatlichkeit kollabiert und wo zwei Machtgruppen miteinander im Streit sind und Krieg gegeneinander führen. Das Land Libyen bietet aufgrund erodierender Staatlichkeit im Grunde genommen die Grundlage dafür, dass sich kriminelle Banden, Menschenhändler, dort verbreiten können und dass Menschen auf eine unverantwortliche Art und Weise in große Gefahr, ich will nicht sagen: auf den Weg des fast sicheren Todes, gebracht werden.\n\nWas die Herkunftsländer angeht, so sieht es ja nicht anders aus. Die zusammenbrechende libysche Staatlichkeit hat eine Vorgeschichte. Das Ende des Gaddafi-Regimes, das notwendig war, hat mit sich gebracht, dass die Inhalte der Waffenkeller Gaddafis heute in die ganze Gegend verstreut sind\n\nund dass die Kämpfer und die Soldaten der ehemaligen libyschen Armee heute in Nordmali und in Niger tätig sind. Deshalb sage ich: Es wird uns so ganz einfach nicht gelingen, die sicherlich notwendige Stabilisierung von Transitländern und Herkunftsländern herbeizuführen.\n\nGegen Ende meiner Rede will ich sagen: Für mich ist das alles kein Grund, sich auf Schuldvorwürfe zu beschränken oder gar in Resignation zu verfallen, sondern es ist eben der Beginn von beharrlicher Arbeit, an der Stabilisierung dieser Nachbarregionen zu wirken.\n\nIch frage noch einmal mit Blick auf Engagements und Bemühungen, die wir in den letzten Jahren hinter uns gebracht haben: Wie lange ist daran gezweifelt worden, ob man nach 12 Jahren Verhandlungen im 13. Jahr mit dem Iran ein Verhandlungsergebnis zustande bringt? Noch haben wir es nicht; aber zumindest die Chance dafür ist da. Der zuständige Sonderbotschafter der Vereinten Nationen verhandelt jetzt fünf Monate über die Frage einer Regierung der nationalen Einheit für Libyen.\n\nMachen wir uns nichts vor: Wir sind darauf angewiesen, dass diese Bemühungen zum Erfolg führen. Nur mit der Stabilisierung von Staatlichkeit, nur mit der Beendigung des Konflikts zwischen den Machtgruppen in -Tobruk und Tripolis wird Libyen veränderbar und nicht mehr das Durchgangslager für viele Millionen Flüchtlinge auf einer gefährlichen Reise über das Mittelmeer in gefahrvolle Situationen sein. Deshalb: Klagen wir uns nicht selbst an wegen mangelnder Mitmenschlichkeit. Verlangen wir von uns selbst, dass wir mehr tun, um in Seenot Geratene zu retten. Aber haben wir auch Verständnis dafür, dass die Stabilisierung der Nachbarregionen Mühe, Zeit und Aufwand bedeuten wird. Das gehört zum Realismus, mit dem ich die gegenwärtige Situation beschreibe.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3919,agnieszka-brugger,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Seit über zehn Jahren herrscht in Darfur im Sudan ein grausamer Bürgerkrieg. Um die Gewalt einzudämmen, haben die Afrikanische Union und die Vereinten Nationen 2007 eine Friedensmission auf den Weg gebracht.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, seit sieben Jahren debattieren wir dieses Mandat. Ich finde, wir sollten es nicht als reine Routineberatung betrachten, sondern wir haben dabei auch die Verantwortung, das schreckliche Schicksal vieler Menschen im Sudan wieder in Erinnerung und in den Fokus der Öffentlichkeit zu bringen.\n\nDie Eskalation von Gewalt findet nicht nur in Darfur statt, sondern mittlerweile auch in weiten Teilen des Landes, im Bundesstaat Blauer Nil oder in Südkordofan. In diesem Bürgerkrieg sind sowohl die vielen bewaffneten Rebellenorganisationen, aber auch die sudanesischen Truppen für das Leid und die Verbrechen gegenüber der Zivilbevölkerung verantwortlich.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, über 5 Millionen Menschen sind im Sudan von Hunger bedroht. 2,4 Millionen Menschen sind ihrer Heimat beraubt, und seit Anfang dieses Jahres sind aufgrund aufflammender Gewalt zusätzlich 400 000 auf der Flucht. Am Anfang dieses Monats gab es die schreckliche Meldung, dass 200 Frauen und Mädchen Opfer einer Massenvergewaltigung im Norden von Darfur geworden sein sollen. Dieses grauenhafte Verbrechen muss rückhaltlos aufgeklärt werden und die Täter zur Verantwortung gezogen und bestraft werden.\n\nDabei ist es völlig inakzeptabel, dass das sudanesische Militär UNAMID daran hindert, diesen Vorwürfen nachzugehen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich finde diese Zahlen schwer vorstellbar; ich finde sie schockierend, und ich finde, sie dürfen uns auch nicht kaltlassen. Sie zeigen, dass sich die Sicherheitslage im Sudan wieder verschlechtert hat. Die Vereinten Nationen haben diese Mission bei der Mandatierung im Sicherheitsrat vom Auftrag her angepasst. Sie haben auch Lehren aus den letzten Jahren gezogen. Das Zentrum dieses Mandates bilden nun drei Aufgaben: An allererster Stelle steht der Schutz der Zivilbevölkerung, aber eben auch die Vermittlung zwischen den Konfliktparteien sowohl auf nationaler als auch auf kommunaler Ebene. Und es ist klar: Dieser Konflikt und dieser Krieg können nur ein Ende finden, wenn es eine politische Lösung gibt. Dazu müssen alle gesellschaftlichen Gruppen in die Verhandlungen über eine gemeinsame Zukunft des Landes eingebunden werden. Die dritte Aufgabe von UNAMID ist aber auch wichtig: der Schutz von humanitären Helferinnen und Helfern; denn auch sie werden mittlerweile immer häufiger Opfer von Gewalt durch die Konfliktparteien und sind von Plünderungen und Übergriffen bedroht.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, UNAMID kann sicherlich nicht alle Probleme lösen; aber die Mission ist ein wichtiger Beitrag für mehr Stabilität und Sicherheit im Sudan. Ich finde schon auch, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dass wir uns die ehrliche Frage stellen müssen, ob diese Mission eigentlich gut genug ausgestattet ist, um diese Ziele zu erfüllen, und ob das deutsche Engagement der dramatischen Situation angemessen ist.\n\nDie Lage hat sich verändert, die Vereinten Nationen haben das Mandat angepasst - nur eines bleibt gleich: der deutsche Beitrag. Und der ist, freundlich formuliert, mehr als bescheiden. Die personale Obergrenze, die in diesem Mandat festgeschrieben ist, beträgt 50 Bundeswehrangehörige; derzeit sind elf vor Ort. Die Zahl der Polizeikräfte, die nicht Teil dieses Mandates sind, ist noch geringer: Es sind fünf Polizistinnen und Polizisten. Diejenigen, die diese Mission erlebt haben, sagen uns immer wieder, dass gerade mehr Polizistinnen und Polizisten gebraucht werden, und zwar dringend.\n\nIch kann überhaupt nicht verstehen, dass das Auswärtige Amt die finanzielle Unterstützung für die Ausbildung afrikanischer Polizeiangehöriger im letzten Jahr um mehr als die Hälfte gekürzt hat. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das ist angesichts der Lage das völlig falsche Signal. Wir Grüne fordern Sie auf: Nehmen Sie diese Kürzung zurück!\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, auch ich möchte all jenen danken, die sich mit oder ohne Uniform im Rahmen von UNAMID oder außerhalb für eine bessere Zukunft im Sudan einsetzen. Dass sie das auch unter persönlichen Entbehrungen und großen Risiken tun, zeigt nicht zuletzt der tragische Tod von drei UNAMID-Angehörigen im letzten Monat, die Übergriffen von Rebellen zum Opfer gefallen sind. Ihnen und den Menschen im Sudan, die bereits seit Jahren unermessliches Leid erfahren und trotzdem Glauben und Hoffnung nicht verlieren, sind es die internationale Gemeinschaft und auch Deutschland als Mitgliedstaat der Vereinten Nationen schuldig, sich noch stärker zu engagieren. Denn es wird bei weitem nicht alles getan, was notwendig wäre; es wird bei weitem nicht alles getan, was getan werden könnte - auch nicht das, was getan werden müsste.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9951,albert-weiler,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Jelpke, danke, dass Sie die Zwischenfrage zulassen. - Ich kenne die Intention und die Ansicht der Linken zu dem Land Armenien, aber auch zu der Türkei sehr gut, das können Sie mir glauben. Als Präsident des Deutsch-Armenischen Forums wünschte ich mir auch so schnell wie möglich eine Lösung in der Sache.\n\nIch glaube aber, dass das Thema Genozid zu wichtig ist, als dass man es zum Spielball der Politik werden lässt. Bald wird bei uns gewählt. In Baden-Württemberg gibt es circa 5 000 Wählerinnen und Wähler, die selber oder deren Nachfahren armenischer Herkunft sind. Es wird der Sache nicht gerecht, wenn man zu diesem Zeitpunkt die Regierungskoalition vor sich hertreiben und nur aus diesem Grunde eine schnelle Entscheidung haben will.\n\nEin Antrag der Koalition zu diesem Thema ist fertig, sodass wir ihn in Kürze einbringen könnten.\n\nIch glaube, die Art und Weise der Polemik und des Vorführens der Regierungskoalition passen nicht dazu. Dazu ist das Thema viel zu wichtig. Wir werden den Antrag der CDU/CSU-Fraktion baldigst einbringen. Ich würde ihm dann zustimmen.\n\nJetzt aber die Frage an Sie. Wenn wir unseren Antrag einbringen, werden dann auch Sie diesem Antrag zustimmen? Sie haben gesagt, Sie werden sich bei der Abstimmung über den vorliegenden Antrag enthalten, weil Sie einen eigenen Antrag vorlegen wollen. Sie hätten heute die Möglichkeit, dem vorliegenden Antrag zuzustimmen. Sie haben aber auch später die Möglichkeit, dem CDU/CSU-Antrag zuzustimmen. Wenn Ihnen die Sache so wichtig ist, tun Sie das und zeigen Sie Gesicht. Ich wäre Ihnen dafür sehr dankbar.\"\n118,sascha-raabe,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Im Sudan herrscht seit Jahren bittere Armut. Die humanitäre Katastrophe ist zum Teil in Vergessenheit geraten, zum Teil leider immer nur dann im Fokus der Öffentlichkeit, wenn wir darüber reden, ob deutsche Soldaten dort weiter an der richtigen und wichtigen UNAMID-Mission teilnehmen sollen.\n\nAber das darf nicht darüber hinwegtäuschen, dass wir über ein Land reden, das dauerhaft, auch wenn keine Kameras auf es gerichtet sind, zu den ärmsten Ländern der Welt gehört. Es ist das Land mit der höchsten Müttersterblichkeitsrate der Welt. Mehr als die Hälfte der Menschen leben in bitterer Armut. Wir haben schon gehört, dass die Konfliktursachen dort vielfältig sind: Die Konflikte sind teils ethnisch-religiös, aber auch ganz stark verschärft durch mangelnden Zugang zu Wasser und Weideland. Sie sind auch dadurch bedingt, dass es bittere Armut gibt.\n\nIch glaube, als Politiker im deutschen Parlament, die über einen großen Etat verfügen können, müssen wir mehr finanzielle Mittel aufbringen, um nicht nur in Sudan dafür zu sorgen, dass dort, wo es Hunger und Not gibt, geholfen werden kann, sondern auch in den Nachbarländern Subsahara-Afrikas dafür zu sorgen, dass sich dort so etwas wie in Sudan nicht entwickeln kann. Dafür bitte ich Sie um Unterstützung.\n\nWir möchten deshalb nicht nur den Soldatinnen und Soldaten und den deutschen Polizeibeamten danken, die dort ihren Dienst tun, sondern auch all den Entwicklungshelferinnen und Entwicklungshelfern, die unter ganz schweren Bedingungen und auch unter Einsatz ihres Lebens und ihrer Gesundheit dort tätig sind. Ihnen allen auch vom ganzen Hause ein herzliches Dankeschön!\n\nWir haben die Zahlen bereits gehört. Dieses Land ist extrem gebeutelt: Es hat 300 000 Tote gegeben. Fast 2 Millionen Menschen leben in Flüchtlingslagern. Bei aller richtigen Betrachtungsweise der Konfliktursachen, auf die ich noch zu sprechen komme, kann ich als Entwicklungspolitiker - das sage ich ausdrücklich nicht als Verteidigungspolitiker; denn ich bin mit Leib und Seele seit vielen Jahren Mitglied des entwicklungspolitischen Ausschusses - die Haltung der Linksfraktion nicht verstehen. Ich kann nicht verstehen, wie man sich, wenn man weiß, dass es grausame Massenvergewaltigungen, brutale Überfalle und gewaltsame Plünderungen gibt, die den Alltag der Menschen dort bestimmen, dann einer Mission verweigern kann, die versucht, den geschundenen Menschen, die in Flüchtlingslagern Schutz suchen, wenigstens ein bisschen zu helfen. Wie kann man sich verweigern, diese Lager und die armen Menschen auch mit militärischem Schutz zu sichern? Das ist schäbig und verantwortungslos, und es ist absolut nicht tolerierbar.\n\nMan muss das eine tun, ohne das andere zu lassen. Natürlich kann das Militär diesen Konflikt nicht lösen. Ich gehöre zu denjenigen, die immer sagen - dafür werbe ich auch -: Ja, wir brauchen Entwicklungspolitik als vorausschauende Friedenspolitik. Wir müssen die Mittel der zivilen Krisenprävention stärken. - Ich bin froh, dass wir dies genauso wie die Stärkung der Rolle des zivilen Friedensdienstes im Koalitionsvertrag festgeschrieben haben. Es ist auch gut, dass wir im Koalitionsvertrag festgelegt haben, den Fokus stärker auf die ärmsten und die fragilen Staaten zu legen. Es war sicherlich ein Fehler - das gilt im Hinblick auf die alte Regierung -, die Mittel für die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit in diesem Jahr zu kürzen\n\nund sie gemäß der mittelfristigen Finanzplanung bis 2017 weiter zu kürzen. Deshalb bin ich froh, dass wir uns in den Koalitionsverhandlungen durchsetzen konnten und dass in den nächsten vier Jahren ohne Finanzierungsvorbehalt wenigstens 2 Milliarden Euro mehr, sozusagen als sicheres Geld, für die ärmsten Länder zur Verfügung stehen. Das ist ein erster wichtiger Erfolg.\n\nIch sage aber auch: Bei diesen zusätzlichen 2 Milliarden Euro dürfen wir nicht stehen bleiben. Auf dem Weg zum 0,7-Prozent-Ziel, zu dessen Erreichen sich Deutschland verpflichtet hat, gilt es, mehr finanzielle Anstrengungen zu unternehmen. Ich bitte auch die neuen Kolleginnen und Kollegen im Parlament, sich parteiübergreifend in den Haushaltsberatungen, wenn es irgendwo noch Spielraum gibt - sei es durch die Einführung einer Finanztransaktionsteuer oder aufgrund von zusätzlichen Geldern, die durch die Bekämpfung der Steuerflucht eingenommen werden -, dafür einzusetzen, dass endlich mehr Geld in den vier Jahren, also mehr als die zusätzlichen 2 Milliarden Euro, für die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit zur Verfügung gestellt wird. Dann brauchen wir nicht mehr über teure Militäreinsätze zu reden. Wir sparen viel mehr Geld, wenn wir jetzt den Menschen dort, aber auch in den Nachbarstaaten Sudans in Subsahara-Afrika helfen, wo die Ärmsten der Armen leben. Entwicklungspolitik als vorausschauende Friedenspolitik kann solche Konflikte wie den in Rede stehenden verhindern.\n\nIn diesem Sinne bitte ich Sie heute um Zustimmung zu dieser Mission und in den nächsten Haushaltsberatungen - ich werde Sie daran erinnern - um Zustimmung zur Bereitstellung von wesentlich mehr Geld für die gute und präventive Entwicklungszusammenarbeit.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4049,thomas-lutze,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Gäste! Ich bin kein Freund einer Verschärfung der gegenwärtigen Rechtslage. Ich bin dagegen, dass Sterbehilfe oder die Beihilfe strafrechtlich relevant wird. Ich habe aber auch Zweifel, wenn hier die Rechtslage weiter liberalisiert werden soll. Ich bin noch nicht davon überzeugt, dass der Gesetzgeber zweifelsfrei sicherstellen kann, dass sich alle Betroffenen zu 100 Prozent über ihre Entscheidung für einen Suizid klar sind. Der Tod bzw. eine Selbsttötung ist unumkehrbar; das ist relativ sicher. Jeder Fehler bei diesem Schritt wäre fatal. Was ist zum Beispiel mit todkranken Menschen, die ihren Angehörigen vielleicht nach langer schwerer Krankheit und entsprechender Pflege nicht zur Last fallen wollen? Das sagen die Betroffenen ihren Angehörigen oder ihren Ärzten vielleicht gar nicht. Es kann aber ihr Handeln bestimmen. Wie gesagt, ich bin noch nicht überzeugt und weiter offen für Argumente. Deshalb ist es gut und wichtig, dass diese Debatte heute noch nicht beendet ist.\n\nEin Aspekt bleibt dieser wichtigen Debatte von heute aber haften. So wichtig eine offene Debatte zum Thema Sterben ist, mindestens genauso wichtig wäre eine vergleichbar offene und intensive Debatte zum Thema Pflege.\n\nZahlreiche Vorrednerinnen und Vorredner haben das genauso ausgesprochen. Ich erinnere zum Beispiel an die Kollegin Scharfenberg von den Grünen und den Kollegen Birkwald aus meiner Fraktion, aber auch an viele Rednerinnen und Redner der Koalition. Zahlreiche Rednerinnen und Redner forderten mehr und bessere Hospize. Die Palliativmedizin soll ausgebaut und verbessert werden. Das alles ist richtig. Ich glaube - ich habe die ganze heutige Debatte verfolgt -, darüber ließe sich fast Einstimmigkeit im Bundestag herstellen.\n\nNur, wenn die gesprochenen Worte ernst gemeint sind, dann nutzen Sie bitte die kommende Haushaltswoche und stellen Sie die dafür notwendigen Mittel in den Haushalt ein. Das wäre konsequent.\n\nAllein eine ehrliche Debatte hier im Deutschen Bundestag, so wichtig sie auch ist, reicht den Betroffenen und ihren Angehörigen nicht aus.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n318,anita-schafer,\"Sehr verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrter Herr Wehrbeauftragter, namens meiner Fraktion möchte ich Ihnen und Ihren Mitarbeitern noch einmal ganz herzlich für die Arbeit an dem Jahresbericht 2012, den wir heute behandeln, danken. Wir schließen die Befassung noch ab, bevor der aktuelle Bericht in der übernächsten Woche vorgestellt wird. Angesichts der Bedeutung hoffe ich, dass wir es in dieser Wahlperiode schaffen, die künftigen Jahresberichte zügig zu behandeln.\n\nDie vorherige Bundesregierung hat die größten Veränderungen seit Bestehen der Bundeswehr vorgenommen. Das war auch eine Reaktion darauf, dass die Truppe noch nie so großen Herausforderungen wie in den Einsätzen des letzten Jahrzehnts - nicht nur in Afghanistan, sondern auch in vielen weiteren, die wir hier im Deutschen Bundestag als deutschen Beitrag zur Konfliktregulierung im Rahmen der internationalen Gemeinschaft beschlossen haben - gegenübergestanden hat.\n\nMit der Strukturreform haben wir endlich eine grundlegende, tragfähige Antwort auf den Wandel der sicherheitspolitischen Aufgaben gefunden. Die Veränderungen haben allerdings auch Belastungen für die Soldatinnen und Soldaten mit sich gebracht. Deren Unsicherheit über die eigene Zukunft, die bei großen Reformvorhaben leider häufig auftritt, hat sich nicht zuletzt in den letzten Jahresberichten des Wehrbeauftragten niedergeschlagen und wird sich wohl auch im kommenden Jahresbericht wiederfinden. Keine Bundesregierung zuvor hat allerdings auch so schnell so viele Verbesserungen für die Truppe vorgenommen, von der Ausrüstung über die Versorgung einsatzgeschädigter Soldaten bis hin zur Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Dienst. Dafür möchte ich bei dieser Gelegenheit dem bisherigen Verteidigungsminister Thomas de Maizière und dem ausgeschiedenen Staatssekretär im Bundesministerium der Verteidigung ganz herzlich danken.\n\nDie neue Bundesregierung wird hier mit Kraft und Engagement weitermachen müssen, und ich bin sicher, dass sie das auch tun wird. Der Koalitionsvertrag steht da für Kontinuität, was gerade hinsichtlich der Planbarkeit für die Soldatinnen und Soldaten wichtig ist. Ich begrüße ganz besonders das Bekenntnis der Koalitionspartner zur Verankerung der Bundeswehr und den Rückhalt in der Gesellschaft, wie sich das beispielsweise in der Unterstützung der Arbeit der Jugendoffiziere ausdrückt, für die ich mich selbst schon lange einsetze. Ich halte es für selbstverständlich, dass die Jugendoffiziere auch weiterhin einen Beitrag zur sicherheitspolitischen Bildung an Schulen und Universitäten leisten.\n\nDie Bundeswehr ist kein Fremdkörper, vor dem man junge Menschen schützen muss, sondern eine Organisation mit Verfassungsrang in unserem demokratischen System. Sie ist gerade kein Staat im Staate, sondern besteht aus Staatsbürgern in Uniform.\n\nZur Verankerung der Bundeswehr in der Gesellschaft gehört aber auch die Festlegung auf eine fortgesetzte Präsenz in der Fläche, verbunden mit der Beibehaltung der Truppenstärke von 185 000 Mann. Das ist wichtig für die Attraktivität des Dienstes, zu der nicht zuletzt die Sicherheit von Standorten gehört, damit Soldaten heimatnah eingesetzt werden und ihre Familien ihr Leben planbar organisieren können. Zu Recht hat das Thema Attraktivität einen eigenen Unterabschnitt im Koalitionsvertrag erhalten.\n\nLiebe Frau Ministerin von der Leyen, in Ihrem neuen Amt werden Sie sich sehr rasch mit dieser wie auch mit anderen Dauerbaustellen befassen müssen. Dabei baue ich auf die Fachkompetenz, die Sie aus Ihren vorherigen Ämtern mitbringen, gerade im Hinblick auf die zahlreichen sozialen Aspekte der Attraktivität des Dienstes. Es geht darum, die Sicherstellung der Einsatzbereitschaft mit der Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Dienst unter einen Hut zu bringen.\n\nDie vorherige Bundesregierung hat mit dem Attraktivitätsprogramm einen guten Anfang gemacht; das muss nun konsequent weitergeführt werden. Zu den bereits eingeleiteten Maßnahmen gehören die Möglichkeit von Teilzeitbeschäftigung und Telearbeit, die Ausweitung der Familienbetreuung auf den Inlandsdienst der Streitkräfte und die Schaffung von Kinderbetreuungsmöglichkeiten an den Standorten, entweder in Kooperation mit den Kommunen oder, wenn nötig, auch in eigener Verantwortung.\n\nFrau Ministerin, Sie haben am Wochenende bereits einen begrüßenswerten Schwerpunkt auf diesen Bereich gelegt und dabei viele Punkte erwähnt, die an dieser Stelle immer wieder angesprochen worden sind. Ich habe es bereits in meiner ersten Rede zum aktuellen Jahresbericht gesagt: Wir werden den Widerspruch zwischen einem normalen Familienleben und den besonderen Anforderungen des Soldatenbetriebs niemals vollständig lösen können. Die militärische Auftragserfüllung steht auch in Zukunft an erster Stelle.\n\nWenn wir die Bundeswehr in der Fläche und in der Gesellschaft präsent halten wollen, dürfen wir sie nicht auf wenige Großstandorte konzentrieren, was zumindest die Zahl der Versetzungen reduzieren würde. Ich bin aber außerordentlich dankbar, Frau Ministerin, dass sie mit unbefangenem Blick das System der automatischen Versetzung in seiner bisherigen Form infrage gestellt haben. Da haben Sie uns von der Arbeitsgruppe Verteidigung der Unionsfraktion voll auf Ihrer Seite. Dieses Problem haben wir schon vor drei Jahren in unserer Unterarbeitsgruppe zur Steigerung der Attraktivität des Dienstes in der Bundeswehr erörtert. In einem Antragsentwurf haben wir den Vorschlag gemacht, dass Soldaten im Regelfall ihre gesamte Dienstzeit, mit Ausnahme von Aus- und Fortbildungskommandierungen sowie Einsätzen, an einem Standort verbringen können, sofern sie auf eine Beförderungsmöglichkeit verzichten, die eine Versetzung erforderlich machen würde.\n\nIch würde mich freuen, wenn noch weitere Ideen aufgegriffen würden, die während der damaligen intensiven Befassung entstanden sind. Zu nennen ist etwa das Pilotprojekt „Zu Hause in der Bundeswehr“, welches neben attraktiven Wohnmöglichkeiten für die ganze Familie ein umfassendes Familienbetreuungsprogramm nebst Kindertageseinrichtungen bieten würde.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ein besonders wesentlicher Punkt, der sich regelmäßig in den Berichten des Wehrbeauftragten wiederfindet, ist die Planbarkeit von Auslandseinsätzen. Unsere Soldaten wissen um die Risiken und Belastungen, die damit verbunden sind, und sie stellen sich darauf ein, wenn bei einem Einsatz alles vorher klar ist, auch wenn der vorgesehene Zyklus von Stand- und Ruhezeiten nicht immer eingehalten wird, weil der Bedarf an besonderen Fähigkeiten es erfordert. Viel belastender ist es, erst kurzfristig von einem Einsatz zu erfahren, weil sich irgendwo eine Lücke aufgetan hat. Über die Feiertage habe ich wieder von dem einen oder anderen Fall erfahren müssen. Wenn wir es schaffen würden, die Eventualitäten lang dauernder Einsätze weitgehend mit vorausschauender Personalplanung abzudecken, wäre nach meiner Ansicht schon viel gewonnen. Dazu zählt übrigens auch die Besetzung von Leerstellen im Inlandsdienst, die durch Auslandseinsatz, aber auch familienbedingte Abwesenheit entstehen, um Mehrbelastungen des übrigen Personals zu vermeiden, gerade in Truppengattungen mit regelmäßigen Aufgaben im Inland wie im Sanitätsdienst und bei den Feldjägern. Auch dazu liegen Vorschläge auf dem Tisch, einschließlich des Vorschlags einer effektiveren Heranziehung der Reservisten.\n\nDarüber hinaus gibt es weitere Punkte, die im weitesten Sinne zur Attraktivität des Dienstes gehören. So wollen wir die Nachversicherung für ausgeschiedene Zeitsoldaten neu regeln und endlich die Hinzuverdienstgrenze bei Anschlusstätigkeiten von Versorgungsempfängern aufheben.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, Attraktivität und Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Dienst sind wichtig für die Zukunft der Bundeswehr, aber kein Selbstzweck. Auftrag der Bundeswehr ist die Gewährleistung der Sicherheit unseres Landes im Bündnis. Die Sicherheit der Kinderbetreuung für Soldatenfamilien ist nur ein Beitrag, um die Auftragserfüllung durch motivierte Soldaten zu gewährleisten.\n\nAuch bei anderen Aspekten muss in dieser Wahlperiode dringend ein tragfähiges Ergebnis erreicht werden. Wir haben im Koalitionsvertrag unter anderem vereinbart, die politischen, ethischen und juristischen Fragen um die Beschaffung und den Einsatz bewaffneter Drohnen zu klären. Diese Debatte muss dann aber auch zu einer klaren Entscheidung führen. Eine der ethischen Fragen ist zum Beispiel: Dürfen wir unseren Soldaten das Mehr an Sicherheit vorenthalten, das diese Systeme bedeuten können? Das wird eine notwendigerweise kontroverse, sicherlich auch emotionale Debatte werden. Aber wir dürfen uns nicht davor drücken, erst recht nicht vor den Antworten, die am Ende stehen können. Egal ob Attraktivität oder Ausrüstung: Ein Mehr wird auch mehr Geld kosten.\n\nWie wir alle wissen, werden die entscheidenden Schlachten letztlich bei den Haushaltsverhandlungen geschlagen. Frau Ministerin, ich wünsche Ihnen für die Bewältigung der mit Ihrem neuen Amt verbundenen Aufgabe viel Kraft. Wir im Verteidigungsausschuss - das kann ich sagen - werden Sie dabei bestmöglich unterstützen. Unser gemeinsames Interesse muss das Wohl unserer Soldatinnen und Soldaten sein, und dafür - da bin ich sicher - werden wir uns in den nächsten vier Jahren auch gemeinsam engagieren.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n8475,uwe-beckmeyer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Ich beantworte die Frage von Herrn Kekeritz wie folgt: Die Bundesregierung hat noch keine Entscheidung für ein konkretes Modell getroffen, insbesondere dazu, wie weit die Verbindlichkeit reichen sollte. Sie hat auch noch keine Festlegung in Bezug auf die Frage der Verhältnismäßigkeit getroffen, um flexibel auf Vorschläge im Rahmen des Trilogs mit dem Europäischen Parlament und der Kommission zu reagieren.\n\nDie Achtung der Menschenrechte sowie hoher ökologischer und sozialer Standards durch deutsche Unternehmen ist aus Sicht der Bundesregierung ein wichtiges Anliegen. Gemäß dem Auftrag aus dem Koalitionsvertrag entwickelt die Bundesregierung daher derzeit einen nationalen Aktionsplan zur Umsetzung der VN-Leitprinzipien für Wirtschaft und Menschenrechte. Die überwiegende Mehrheit der deutschen Unternehmen erweist sich nach einer BDI-Studie bereits jetzt in ihren Auslandsinvestments bei der Einhaltung von sozialen Standards als vorbildlich und setzt international Maßstäbe.\n\nEs gibt eine Reihe von Empfehlungen für verantwortungsvolles unternehmerisches Handeln in einem globalen Kontext wie die „OECD-Leitsätze für multinationale Unternehmen“ und den „UN Global Compact“. Die Bundesregierung unterstützt die Unternehmen bei der Umsetzung ihrer Sorgfaltspflichten. Im Bereich der sogenannten Konfliktmineralien informiert die Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe bereits heute Unternehmen auf Anfrage sowie auf Veranstaltungen von Unternehmensverbänden zu den internationalen Anforderungen und Initiativen zur Sorgfaltspflicht in Lieferketten mineralischer Rohstoffe.\n\nDas liegt an Ihnen.\n\nHerr Kekeritz, wenn Sie aufmerksam zugehört hätten, hätten Sie festgestellt, dass ich bei meiner Antwort gesagt habe, dass es uns um Flexibilität geht, vor allen Dingen wenn wir im Rahmen des Trilogs auf Vorschläge antworten und uns einbringen. Wie Sie wissen, gibt es einen Beschluss des Europäischen Parlaments. Sie kennen sicherlich auch das Verhalten der einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten. Wenn Ihnen ein Drahtbericht vorliegt, dann kennen Sie wahrscheinlich auch andere Drahtberichte, aus denen hervorgeht, wie sich die einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten in Europa zurzeit aufgestellt haben. Die Bundesregierung und die schwedische Regierung könnten sich für Verbindlichkeiten aussprechen. Aber ein Großteil der anderen Mitgliedstaaten kann das eben nicht. Aus diesen verschiedenen Positionen muss letztendlich etwas Verbindliches gebildet werden; daran arbeiten wir zurzeit. Der Prozess ist noch nicht zu Ende.\n\nSie haben mich gefragt, was in diesem Fall verbindlich und verhältnismäßig ist.\n\nDer eine oder andere Jurist sagt dazu: geeignet, erforderlich, angemessen.\n\nHerr Kekeritz, wir sind sogar einen Schritt weiter. Wir haben gerade den Prozess der Bewerbung bei EITI abgeschlossen. Wir haben unseren Antrag in Vorbereitung und wollen ihn zum Jahresende in Oslo abgeben, sodass wir dann Vollmitglied in der Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative sind. Wir sind aktuell dabei, uns einzubringen, und wollen auf diesem Weg Korruption im Rohstoffsektor verhindern; das ist unsere Position und Politik. Daran arbeiten wir ganz gezielt und entschlossen.\"\n12003,julia-verlinden,\"Ich hatte mich schon gefragt, ob Sie noch zur nationalen Ebene kommen. - Sie haben jetzt sehr viele Punkte genannt, deren Umsetzung auf internationaler Ebene wünschenswert wäre, und haben hervorgehoben, wie wichtig es ist, das Abkommen schnell zu ratifizieren. Ich hoffe, es ist nicht der einzige Erfolg beim Klimaschutz, den Sie am Ende dieser Legislaturperiode benennen können, dass man schnell ein internationales Abkommen ratifiziert hat.\n\nFrau Weisgerber, Sie sitzen ja im Umweltausschuss, Sie sind für das Thema Klimapolitik zuständig, und wir laufen uns immer wieder bei Veranstaltungen zu diesen Themen über den Weg. Ich möchte von Ihnen wissen: Für welche drei ganz konkreten Instrumente und politischen Maßnahmen, die hier im Bundestag beschlossen werden könnten, werden Sie sich noch in dieser Legislaturperiode einsetzen, damit wir eine substanziell große Menge CO2 einsparen können?\"\n14136,ingrid-fischbach,\"Liebe Frau Werner, ich antworte Ihnen gerne auf Ihre Frage. - Der Bundesregierung ist bewusst, dass die Behandlung von Menschen mit Beeinträchtigungen aus dem Autismusspektrum alle Beteiligten vor große Herausforderungen stellt, und ich bin Ihnen dankbar, dass Sie die Frage jetzt stellen, kurz bevor wir am 2. April 2017 den Tag der Menschen, die an Autismus erkrankt sind, begehen, sodass wir noch einmal die Gelegenheit haben, darüber zu sprechen.\n\nDie Bundesregierung nimmt die im Teilhabebericht enthaltene Aussage des Wissenschaftlichen Beirats ernst und hat verschiedene Maßnahmen ergriffen, die auch der Behandlung von Menschen mit Autismus dienen. So sieht der § 2a des SGB V ausdrücklich vor, dass in der gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung den besonderen Belangen von Menschen mit Behinderungen Rechnung zu tragen ist. Daraus folgt, dass alle Verantwortlichen - Kostenträger und Leistungserbringer - bei ihrer täglichen Arbeit darauf zu achten haben, dass besondere Schwierigkeiten, die sich bei der Versorgung ergeben, berücksichtigt werden.\n\nKonkret sieht der mit dem GKV-Versorgungsstärkungsgesetz eingefügte § 119c SGB V die Einrichtung von Medizinischen Versorgungszentren für Erwachsene mit geistiger Behinderung oder schweren Mehrfachbehinderungen vor, die zur ambulanten Versorgung ermächtigt werden können. Diese Zentren sollen neben einer zielgruppenspezifischen Diagnose und Therapie auch eine zielgruppenspezifische Kommunikation durch geeignete Kommunikationsstrategien - einfache Sprache, Bilder und dergleichen - ermöglichen.\n\nSie haben es gerade gesagt: Das ist noch nicht lange her. Die Sitzung war erst im Februar dieses Jahres. Wir sind da noch in den Beratungen. Ich möchte Ihnen die Antwort gerne schriftlich nachreichen.\"\n676,hubertus-heil,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Lieber Kollege Hofreiter, ich war ja auch vier Jahre lang Oppositionspolitiker. Wenn man als Oppositionspolitiker eine Rede hält, dann ist sie wirksamer, wenn man nicht sozusagen alles in Bausch und Bogen verdammt und schlechtredet, sondern sich auf die Punkte konzentriert, bei denen eine Regierung angreifbar ist. Insofern kann ich nur eines sagen: Ihre Rede ist der Sache nicht angemessen gewesen. Die Opposition scheint noch zu üben. Der Bundeswirtschaftsminister regiert. Das ist der Unterschied.\n\nIch habe Ihren Antrag gelesen.\n\n- Hören Sie doch einmal zu.\n\nIch finde im Antrag der Grünen den einen oder anderen sympathischen Punkt. Aber eines darf man doch bitte einmal zur Kenntnis nehmen: Die Rede des Bundeswirtschaftsministers zum Jahreswirtschaftsbericht, die wir heute gehört haben, unterscheidet sich von denen seiner Vorgänger.\n\nOft haben Bundeswirtschaftsminister bei der Vorstellung des Jahreswirtschaftsberichts im Wesentlichen die Lage beschrieben, meistens sehr rosig\n\n- ganz ruhig; nicht aufgeregt sein; ganz locker bleiben -, und sich damit begnügt. Sie finden ganz tolle Begriffe wie XXL-Aufschwung oder Ähnliches. Der Unterschied ist: Dieser Bundeswirtschaftsminister hat ein realistisches Bild der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung dieses Landes gezeichnet, mit allen Stärken, die wir haben, aber auch mit allen Herausforderungen und Risiken. Er begnügt sich aber nicht damit, sondern er sagt, was diese Bundesregierung tun will und tun wird. Das ist der Unterschied.\n\nPolitik heißt, die Wirklichkeit zu betrachten, sie aber auch zu verändern. Das ist der Unterschied zur Vorgängerregierung.\n\nIch will Ihnen sagen, was konkret wir uns vorgenommen haben. Es geht um leistungsfähige Infrastrukturen, die wir bereitstellen müssen, damit dieses Land wirtschaftlich erfolgreich bleibt. Es geht um die Sicherung der Fachkräftebasis in diesem Land. Es geht - das hat Sigmar Gabriel deutlich gemacht - um die Überwindung der Spaltung am Arbeitsmarkt, weil die Spaltung nicht nur ungerecht ist, sondern weil wir sie uns ökonomisch mit Blick auf die demografische Entwicklung gar nicht leisten können, weil wir Wohlstand und Teilhabe für alle brauchen, nicht nur aus Gründen des gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhalts, sondern auch aus Gründen der wirtschaftlichen Vernunft. Wir können uns Ausgrenzungen von Menschen am Arbeitsmarkt durch schlechte Löhne oder Dauerarbeitslosigkeit dauerhaft nicht leisten. Das ist eine ökonomische Weisheit, meine Damen und Herren, die wir begriffen haben.\n\nEs geht um Innovation, Forschung und Entwicklung. Und es geht darum, die Energiewende zu gestalten, sowie nicht zuletzt darum, die nach wie vor schwelende Krise im Euro-Raum in den Griff zu bekommen; denn die ist mitnichten überstanden. Es gilt der Satz: Wir haben gute Chancen, diese Reformen jetzt zu stemmen, weil wir in Deutschland eine gute wirtschaftliche Lage haben. Es gilt aber nach wie vor auch der Satz: Wer morgen sicher leben will, muss heute für Reformen kämpfen. Das tun wir mit den im Jahreswirtschaftsbericht aufgezeigten Instrumenten.\n\nAuch wenn Statistik Sie langweilt, Herr Kollege Hofreiter,\n\nsollte man sich trotzdem mit ein paar wirtschaftlichen Fundamentaldaten zumindest auseinandersetzen. Es ist nicht zu bestreiten, dass wir eine ganz ordentliche wirtschaftliche Entwicklung haben.\n\nDie Prognose für dieses Jahr liegt bei 1,8 Prozent. Wir sagen nicht, dass das ein Grund ist, sich zurückzulehnen. Es ist mitnichten ein Grund, sich zurückzulehnen. Wir können etwas daraus machen. Wir sollten darüber reden, welches die Auseinandersetzungen der Zukunft sein werden, welche Herausforderungen auf uns zukommen.\n\nEs geht darum, dass wir uns dem demografischen Wandel, dessen Folgen inzwischen auch den Arbeitsmarkt erfasst haben, stellen. Auf der einen Seite suchen immer mehr Unternehmen händeringend qualifiziertes Fachpersonal. Auf der anderen Seite gibt es in Deutschland nach wie vor viel zu viele Menschen, die abgehängt sind. Die Frauenerwerbsbeteiligung in Deutschland erscheint zwar prozentual hoch, das Arbeitsvolumen aber ist zu niedrig. Auch viele junge Leute sind abgehängt. Nach wie vor verlassen Jahr für Jahr 70 000 junge Menschen in Deutschland die Schule ohne Schulabschluss. 1,5 Millionen Menschen zwischen 20 und 30 Jahren haben keine berufliche Erstausbildung. Wir haben viel zu viele Menschen, die im erwerbsfähigen Alter sind, aber zum alten Eisen gehören. Wir müssen nicht nur die Frage der Ausbildung in den Vordergrund stellen, sondern auch die Frage der Weiterbildung und der Beschäftigungsfähigkeit von Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern behandeln.\n\nArbeitnehmerrechte sind nicht nur Bürgerrechte, sondern sie sind in diesem Land auch ein Instrument, um über Mitbestimmung für gute Arbeitsbedingungen und so dafür zu sorgen, dass Menschen auch beschäftigungsfähig bleiben können. Wir können es uns nicht mehr leisten, Menschen am Arbeitsmarkt auszugrenzen.\n\nWenn wir über Fachkräftesicherung reden, gehört dazu auch, dass wir über qualifizierte Zuwanderung in dieses Land reden müssen. Dafür brauchen wir nicht nur gesetzliche Regelungen, sondern vor allen Dingen eine Willkommenskultur, eine Weltoffenheit, die deutlich macht, dass dieses Land von Einwanderung und Zuwanderung profitiert und keinen Schaden nimmt.\n\nDeshalb, meine Damen und Herren, ist die eine oder andere xenophobe Rede, die Politiker im Wahlkampf halten, nicht nur unanständig, sondern auch ökonomisch schädlich für dieses Land. Wir brauchen qualifizierte Zuwanderung. Wir müssen die inländischen Potenziale nutzen. Und wir brauchen Menschen, die zu uns kommen, damit sie hier arbeiten, lehren und leben. Das ist die Erkenntnis, die wir aus der demografischen Entwicklung ziehen müssen. Deshalb ist es gut, dass wir hier einen Schwerpunkt setzen.\n\nEs geht bei dem, was wir vorhaben, im Kern um eine Strategie, die auf Investitionen setzt. Frau Wagenknecht, Herr Hofreiter, es geht da um öffentliche Investitionen - gar keine Frage! Diese Bundesregierung wird in dieser Legislaturperiode 23 Milliarden Euro zusätzlich investieren, 6 Milliarden Euro in den Bereich Kitas, Schulen, Hochschulen, 3 Milliarden Euro in den Bereich Forschung, 5 Milliarden Euro in den Bereich der Verkehrsinfrastruktur. Und ja, ich würde mir auch das eine oder andere mehr wünschen. Aber es geht eben nicht nur um öffentliche Investitionen, sondern im gleichen Maße um die Bedingungen für private Investitionen.\n\nWir haben da ein Risiko, Herr Fuchs. Wir haben die Situation, dass deutsche Unternehmen tatsächlich nicht wenig investieren, vor allen Dingen große Unternehmen, aber leider viel zu wenig in Deutschland. Das ist eine Diskussion, die wir führen müssen. Dabei müssen wir über die Standortbedingungen in diesem Land sprechen. Ich rede davon, dass man für Innovationen auch Investitionen braucht, aber wir uns in diesem Land auch einmal vor Augen führen müssen, dass wir bei der Herausforderung der Digitalisierung, bei dem technischen Fortschritt, der vor uns liegt, nicht abgehängt werden dürfen. Da mache ich mir Sorgen. Wer weiß, dass der IKT-Anteil, der Anteil des Bereichs der Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologie an der Wertschöpfung, bei einem deutschen Auto heute 30 Prozent ausmacht, wer weiß, dass der IKT-Anteil bei Autos im Jahr 2025 aufgrund technischen Fortschritts bei ungefähr 60 Prozent liegen wird, und sich dann anschaut, wo die wesentlichen IKT-Unternehmen in der Welt sitzen, um dann festzustellen, dass nur noch 10 Prozent der Wertschöpfung im Bereich der Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologie in Europa stattfindet, der muss sich auf lange Sicht darum kümmern, dass wir in diesem Land und in Europa insgesamt im Bereich der digitalen Wirtschaft vorankommen. Deshalb, Herr Bundesminister, ist es gut, dass dieses Thema im Jahreswirtschaftsbericht angesprochen wird. Ich bitte diese Bundesregierung ganz herzlich darum, das Thema digitale Ökonomie, digitale Agenda, Industrie 4.0 als Herausforderung zu begreifen, die ähnlich groß ist wie das, was wir gerade im Bereich der Elektromobilität erleben, dass wir also die Kräfte bündeln müssen, wir Infrastrukturen benötigen, wir Investitionen in Bildung und Forschung brauchen, wir dafür sorgen müssen, dass wir da nicht zurückfallen, damit wir die Chancen digitaler Wirtschaft auch für Deutschland und Europa nutzen können.\n\nJa, es geht um Innovationen, es geht auch um Integration in gute Arbeit. Dazu hat der Bundeswirtschaftsminister eine ganze Menge gesagt. Es geht letztendlich auch um Internationalisierung. Deshalb bin ich dankbar, dass der Bundeswirtschaftsminister da einen differenzierten Blick auf die Chancen und die Risiken der Freihandelspolitik und des internationalen Freihandelsabkommens geworfen hat. Wir in Deutschland diskutieren ja ganz intensiv die Risiken. Es gibt viele Ängste in der Bevölkerung, in der Wirtschaft übrigens auch, dass bestimmte Standards, die wir in Deutschland und Europa gewohnt sind, abgesenkt werden könnten. Dagegen muss man sich stemmen. Aber ich sage im gleichen Atemzug: Es geht beim Thema Transatlantisches Freihandelsabkommen auch darum, die außen- und sicherheitspolitischen und ökonomischen Chancen zu sehen.\n\nWir haben vor einigen Jahren eine Rede von Präsident Obama erlebt, in der er beschrieben hat, dass die Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika eine pazifische Nation seien.\n\nEr hat also einen Blick von der pazifischen Küste Kaliforniens in Richtung Fernost - so nennen wir es - geworfen. Es ist ohne Zweifel so, dass die Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika auch eine pazifische Nation sind. Aber wir müssen ein politisches und wirtschaftliches Interesse daran haben, dass die Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika und Nordamerika insgesamt eben auch eine transatlantische Beziehung haben. Meine Damen und Herren, vor diesem Hintergrund muss man - bei allem, was wir intensiv diskutieren, um sicherzustellen, dass das Transatlantische Freihandelsabkommen nicht sozusagen ein wirtschaftsradikaler Trojaner in Europa wird - über die Chancen dieses Abkommens reden und die Verhandlungen so gestalten, dass wir sie zum Nutzen Deutschlands und Europas führen. Deshalb ist meine ganz herzliche Bitte, in diesem Haus differenziert darüber zu reden. Ich muss schon sagen, dass mich da der Beschluss von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, bei denen ich viele Atlantiker kenne, ein bisschen überrascht hat, weil er ein bisschen zu sehr die Risiken und nicht die Chancen berücksichtigt.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, Politik fängt damit an, die Wirklichkeit zu betrachten, um sie zu verändern.\n\nIn diesem Sinne hat der Bundeswirtschaftsminister mit dem Jahreswirtschaftsbericht eine realistische Betrachtung der Situation in diesem Land vorgelegt. Es geht nicht darum, nur die rosarote Brille aufzusetzen. Aber es geht eben auch nicht darum, alles in Grund und Boden zu reden, Frau Wagenknecht. Wir brauchen Macher und nicht Miesmacher, wenn es um die Wirtschaftspolitik in diesem Land geht. Das ist der Unterschied zu diesem Bundeswirtschaftsminister.\n\nIn diesem Zusammenhang - -\n\nDann versuche ich es, Herr Präsident, gar nicht erst. - Ich danke Ihnen für die Aufmerksamkeit. Wir brauchen tatsächlich Anpacker, und die gibt es in dieser Bundesregierung.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n6673,gabriele-katzmarek,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Berufliche Bildung made in Germany ist ein Markenzeichen und ein Erfolgsfaktor der Wirtschaft. Sie ist Garant für gut ausgebildete Facharbeiter und Facharbeiterinnen und für Akademiker und Akademikerinnen. Deutschland hat - und manchmal scheint man, wenn man die Reden heute hier gehört hat, zu glauben oder es vergessen zu haben - die geringste Jugendarbeitslosigkeit in der EU. Mehr als 520 000 Ausbildungsverträge wurden 2014 abgeschlossen.\n\nIch denke, es ist richtig, dies zu erwähnen.\n\nJa, richtig ist auch - das müssen wir ebenfalls erwähnen; wir müssen darüber nachdenken, wie wir hier weiter vorgehen wollen -, dass 20 000 Jugendliche - dies konnten wir dem Bericht entnehmen - unversorgt sind. 50 000 Jugendliche verlassen Jahr für Jahr die Schule ohne Schulabschluss. 1,3 Millionen junge Menschen zwischen 20 und 29 Jahren haben keine abgeschlossene Berufsausbildung; auch das ist richtig. Das verheimlichen wir nicht. Das ist erkennbar und ist dem Berufsbildungsbericht zu entnehmen. Das ist der Iststand.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, und wir stehen heute hier und das nicht nur heute, sondern wir haben dazu schon verschiedene Beschlüsse gefasst und Maßnahmen verabredet, die dazu dienen, dies zu verändern im Interesse der jungen Menschen, um ihnen eine Perspektive für ihr weiteres Leben zu geben, und um dem Fachkräftemangel entgegenzuwirken.\n\nDenn die Zukunft des Wirtschaftsstandortes Deutschland wird entscheidend davon abhängen, inwieweit es uns gerade auch vor dem Hintergrund des demografischen Wandels gelingt, Bildung, Weiterbildung und Qualifikation der Fachkräfte zu sichern und auszubauen.\n\nWir müssen uns mit den Folgen des dramatischen Geburtenrückgangs auseinandersetzen; denn entsprechend wird das Fachkräfteangebot zurückgehen. Wenn wir nicht rechtzeitig und entschieden reagieren, werden Wachstumseinbußen unvermeidbar sein. Aber wir sind in der Lage, diesem Trend entgegenzusteuern.\n\nIm ersten Schritt müssen wir die vorhandenen Potenziale besser nutzen, die wir im Inland haben. Aber klar ist auch: Alleine aus dem eigenen Arbeitsmarkt heraus werden wir die Folgen des demografischen Wandels nicht abfedern. Wir müssen uns dazu bekennen, ein Einwanderungsland zu sein, nicht nur rhetorisch, sondern durch die Schaffung eines modernen Einwanderungsrechts.\n\nWir reden heute über Gleichwertigkeit und Durchlässigkeit der beruflichen und der akademischen Bildung sowie über den Berufsbildungsbericht der Bundesregierung. Wie die im Berufsbildungsbericht dargelegten Zahlen zeigen - Frau Pothmer, da haben Sie recht -, sind weitere Anstrengungen notwendig. Unser Ziel ist und bleibt, keinen Jugendlichen nach der Schule zurückzulassen. Aber Sie müssen auch zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass wir, seitdem wir in der Regierung sind, verschiedenste Maßnahmen auf den Weg gebracht haben und heute nicht zum ersten Mal darüber reden. Ein Teil der Maßnahmen wurde schon genannt. Da Sie aber noch immer mäkeln, dass es nicht genug ist, will ich sie gerne noch einmal erwähnen - vielleicht merken Sie sich das dann -: 20. Mai 2014, was haben wir dort gemacht? Das -Modellprojekt „Jobstarter plus“, dann das Programm „Aufstieg durch Bildung“, die Initiative „Abschluss und Anschluss“, Ausbau der Berufsorientierung und am 26. Januar dieses Jahres die assistierte Ausbildung sowie die Ausweitung der ausbildungsbegleitenden Hilfen. - Dieses, meine Damen und Herren, muss man nun einmal zur Kenntnis nehmen, wenn man hier redet.\n\nUnser Ziel wird es weiterhin bleiben - deshalb führen wir diese Maßnahmen ein -, keinen Jugendlichen zurückzulassen.\n\n- Gut, wenn es Ihnen hilft, können Sie das gern ausdiskutieren. Es ist nur ärgerlich, dass es dann, wenn ich -Ihnen zuhören will, von meiner Redezeit abgeht. Deshalb verzeihen Sie es mir. - Aber ich will Ihnen gern noch einmal sagen, warum wir angetreten sind, was wir getan haben und was wir mit dem Antrag, der jetzt vorliegt, machen: Wir stärken die duale Berufsausbildung.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, zum Schluss lassen Sie mich eines noch einmal ganz klar sagen: Wir stehen für akademische Bildung, wir stehen für die duale Bildung. Wir verschließen jedoch die Augen nicht, wir sehen die Herausforderungen und arbeiten an Lösungen. Wir haben dies in den letzten anderthalb Jahren mit vielen, vielen Maßnahmen, die erwähnt worden sind, getan. Sie können gewiss sein, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren der Opposition, wir werden weiter daran arbeiten. Denn unser Ziel ist es, junge Menschen in Ausbildung zu bringen, dem Fachkräftemangel aktiv entgegenzutreten und dieses nicht aus den Augen zu verlieren.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n6454,nina-warken,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich bin froh, die heutige Debatte dazu nutzen zu können, uns noch einmal vor Augen zu führen, was eigentlich Auftrag und Aufgabe des 1. Untersuchungsausschusses ist, den wir gemeinsam vor gut einem Jahr eingesetzt haben. Zudem möchte ich darlegen, welche Rolle die Nachrichtendienste für die Sicherheitsarchitektur unseres Landes spielen.\n\nZum Untersuchungsausschuss. Hier muss es um Aufklärung gehen. „Aufklärung“ muss bedeuten, dass Missstände angesprochen und näher untersucht werden. „Aufklärung“ muss aber auch bedeuten, dass man unvoreingenommen und mit dem festen Willen herangeht, umfassend und nachhaltig alle relevanten Sachverhalte und Verhaltensweisen aufzuarbeiten. Wir müssen dabei sehr sorgfältig vorgehen, auch weil das im Grundgesetz verbriefte Recht des Parlaments, einen Untersuchungsausschuss einzusetzen, eines der wichtigsten Rechte dieses Parlaments überhaupt ist.\n\nDer Untersuchungsausschuss ist unser schärfstes Schwert, und wir lassen uns hier sicher nicht durch lautstarke Parolen von vielfach bewährten Prinzipien abbringen.\n\nUnsere Prinzipien sind Gründlichkeit, Genauigkeit und Aufarbeitung des Sachverhalts von unten nach oben, auch was Zeugenbefragungen angeht. So haben wir das ganz im Sinne einer effektiven und sachgerechten Aufklärung bisher stets getan, und so wollen wir es weiterhin tun. Dabei erwarten wir von allen Beteiligten eine Mitwirkung nach besten Kräften, nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen. Das ist die Verantwortung gegenüber unserem Land.\n\nGanz im Sinne dieser Verantwortung hätte ich es sehr begrüßt, wenn man in den letzten Tagen nicht ständig hätte lesen können, wovon man bereits jetzt ausgeht oder welche Schlussfolgerungen man bereits heute zieht, sondern wenn man seitens der Opposition die Sachaufklärung an den Anfang gestellt hätte. Die betriebene Effekthascherei ist unverantwortlich und alles andere als im Sinne einer echten Aufklärung.\n\nFast reflexartig wurde da von Wirtschaftsspionage gesprochen, vom systematischen Ausspionieren der Bevölkerung oder vom willfährigen BND, der der NSA ohne Bedenken und Skrupel gegen deutsches Recht und Gesetz zuliefert, dies alles ohne Belege. Statt dieser Parolen hätte ich mir gewünscht, dass man vom Ende her gedacht hätte. Zuerst müssen die Fakten auf den Tisch, und zwar alle Fakten. Erst dann folgt die Bewertung, und erst dann wird entschieden, welche Maßnahmen zu ergreifen sind.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich bin fest davon überzeugt, dass wir in Deutschland Nachrichtendienste brauchen, Nachrichtendienste, die sich selbstverständlich an Recht und Gesetz halten und die kontrolliert werden, aber auch Nachrichtendienste, die gut und effektiv arbeiten, unsere Bürgerinnen und Bürger schützen und Terroranschläge auf unser Land verhindern. Klar ist: Der Bundesnachrichtendienst dient dem Land. Er arbeitet nicht in eigenem Auftrag. Die Bundesregierung muss wissen, was dort geschieht. Wir als Parlament nehmen Kontrollrechte wahr.\n\nMan hört dieser Tage immer nur, was vermeintlich nicht gut läuft beim BND. Man sollte aber auch ruhig einmal auf die Erfolge hinweisen. Allein in den vergangenen Jahren hat der BND mitgeholfen, mindestens fünf größere Anschläge in Deutschland zu verhindern. Insbesondere möchte ich hier den Fall der Sauerland-Gruppe nennen; das wurde schon angesprochen. Auch das, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, gehört zur Wahrheit.\n\nLassen Sie mich einmal einen Blick zurück werfen. Die Anschläge vom 11. September haben die Sicherheitsarchitektur in der ganzen westlichen Welt verändert. Der damalige grüne Außenminister Joschka Fischer sagte wenige Wochen später hier an diesem Ort:\n\nEs ist eine mörderische, eine totalitäre Herausforderung, vor der wir stehen.\n\nKanzler Schröder hat den Amerikanern damals unsere - ich zitiere - „uneingeschränkte Solidarität“ zugesagt.\n\nDie Situation damals war ernst, und die Bedrohungslage hat sich bis heute nicht wirklich verändert. Sie ist nicht nur abstrakt, sie ist längst real, was wir jüngst am vereitelten Anschlag in Hessen gesehen haben. Deshalb appelliere ich an uns alle: Lassen Sie uns die Debatte sachlich führen, die Fakten beleuchten und die Geschehnisse aufklären, statt in Parteiengezänk zu verfallen. Deutschland ist nicht isoliert in der Welt, wir brauchen die Zusammenarbeit mit verbündeten Ländern und deren Diensten. Wenn wir einen funktionierenden und vor allem effektiven Dienst wollen, sind wir auf deren Informationen angewiesen, nicht zuletzt auch deshalb, um unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten zu schützen, die wir als Parlament in Auslandseinsätze schicken. Die Möglichkeit der Zusammenarbeit unserer Dienste mit ausländischen Diensten ist im Gesetz klar geregelt und ausdrücklich vorgesehen; dies muss auch einmal deutlich gesagt werden. Man könnte in der aktuellen Diskussion beinahe den Eindruck gewinnen, eine solche Zusammenarbeit sei per se wider Recht und Gesetz.\n\nGenauso wie wir von den Nachrichtendiensten hierbei selbstverständlich Korrektheit erwarten, müssen wir jedoch auch zu deren Notwendigkeit stehen. Forderungen, nach denen Nachrichtendienste abgeschafft werden sollen, wie sie seit Jahren immer wieder von den Linken zu hören sind, halte ich für schlicht unverantwortlich und naiv.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich fordere Sie auf: Verzichten wir in den kommenden Wochen also auf ideologieverblendete Diskussionen und Effekthascherei in der Öffentlichkeit, und nehmen wir unseren Untersuchungsauftrag ernst. Das ist unsere Verantwortung. Die CDU/CSU wird sich hierfür mit ganzer Kraft einsetzen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12692,volker-ullrich,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Die Debatte um den Justizhaushalt ist auch immer eine Standortbestimmung der Rechtspolitik und guter Rechtsetzung. Wir müssen in jüngster Zeit mit großem Unbehagen eine besorgniserregende Entwicklung beobachten: die deutliche Zunahme von Gewalt gegen Polizeibeamte, Rettungskräfte und Feuerwehrleute.\n\nDiejenigen, die helfen, retten und schützen, werden selbst zur Zielscheibe von Angriffen. Es beginnt mit groben Beleidigungen und reicht bis hin zu schweren Körperverletzungen. Allein im Jahr 2015 sind über 60 000 Angriffe auf Polizeibeamte zu verzeichnen. Diesen Umstand kann und wird der Rechtsstaat nicht hinnehmen. Wir brauchen einen stärkeren gesetzlichen Schutz von Polizeibeamten und Rettungskräften im Einsatz. Dafür machen wir uns stark.\n\nDas ersetzt natürlich nicht die gesamtgesellschaftliche Ursachenforschung, weshalb und aus welchen Motiven die Hemmschwelle für Gewalt gegen Polizeibeamte und Rettungskräfte sowie ganz allgemein in dieser Gesellschaft abgenommen hat. Eine solche Strafrechtsänderung ist aber zur Selbstbehauptung des Rechtsstaats und seiner Organe notwendig. Wir schützen die, die uns schützen. Insofern ist ein solcher Gesetzentwurf in den nächsten Wochen dringend notwendig.\n\nIm Zusammenhang mit der Arbeit unserer Polizei möchte ich auch darauf hinweisen, dass mich die jüngsten Äußerungen der Integrationsbeauftragten etwas befremdet haben. Es wäre schön gewesen, wenn sich Frau Özoğuz als Integrationsbeauftragte und Staatsministerin einfach einmal beim Verfassungsschutz und bei der Polizei für besonnenes und konsequentes Vorgehen gegen Verfassungsfeinde bedankt hätte.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, in den letzten Wochen ist die Frage des Umgangs mit sogenannten Kinderehen in den Mittelpunkt der rechtspolitischen Debatte gerückt. Ich möchte eines deutlich ansprechen: Der Begriff der Kinderehe ist eigentlich drastisch beschönigend. Wir müssen diesen Umstand deutlich beim Namen nennen: Sogenannte Kinderehen sind Formen fortgesetzten schweren Kindesmissbrauchs.\n\n194 Staaten dieser Erde haben die UN-Kinderrechtskonvention unterzeichnet. Diese gewährt allen Kindern das Recht, unversehrt aufzuwachsen und vor Missbrauch geschützt zu werden. Daher kann und darf es nirgendwo auf der Welt und in keinem Kulturkreis und aus keinem weltlichen oder religiösen Gebot heraus eine Rechtfertigung für sogenannte Kinderehen geben. Der Schutz der Kleinsten und Schwächsten muss absolut gelten, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nKinderehen verstoßen gegen unsere Rechts- und Werteordnung. Sie dürfen daher nicht nur irgendwie aufhebbar sein, nicht auch noch zu einer Belastung werden, einen Anwalt aufzusuchen oder das Jugendamt einzuschalten, sondern sie sind, wenn es um Kinder unter 14 Jahren geht, von vornherein als nichtig zu betrachten. Auch diese Regelung müssen wir zügig auf den Weg bringen.\n\nWir brauchen, meine Damen und Herren, im Bereich des Verbraucherschutzes eine gesetzliche Klarstellung für all die Menschen, die für sich oder ihre Familie Wohneigentum schaffen und einen Kredit benötigen. Nach der Umsetzung der Wohnimmobilienkreditrichtlinie in deutsches Recht mehren sich ernstzunehmende Berichte, dass nach der Kreditwürdigkeitsprüfung vor allem Familien mit Kindern oder ältere Menschen deutlich größere Schwierigkeiten haben, ihren Traum vom Eigenheim zu finanzieren. Der Schutz vor finanzieller Überforderung ist sicherlich ein wichtiges Anliegen, gerade in Zeiten niedriger Zinsen. Auch darf die Gefahr möglicher Blasenbildungen auf den Immobilienmärkten nicht unterschätzt werden. Wir glauben dennoch, dass eine selbstgenutzte Immobilie die beste Altersvorsorge darstellt und eine hohe Eigentumsquote daher insgesamt zur wirtschaftlichen Stabilität einer Gesellschaft beiträgt. Daher sollten wir die Regelungen der Kreditvergabe so überarbeiten, dass junge Familien mit Kindern oder ältere Menschen, die ihre Immobilie sanieren wollen, mehr Chancen auf einen Kredit bekommen. Das sind wir dem Immobilienmarkt schuldig.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ein wichtiges Thema bleibt der Umgang mit Hass und Hetze im Internet, insbesondere in den sozialen Medien. Festzuhalten ist zunächst, dass die freie Rede und die Meinungsfreiheit für das Funktionieren eines liberalen und demokratischen Gemeinwesens unverzichtbar sind. Die Gesellschaft hat dabei auch solche Meinungen zu dulden, die wenig opportun erscheinen, als politisch unkorrekt gelten oder gar offen zum Widerspruch herausfordern. Die Grenze der Meinungsfreiheit ist jedoch dort überschritten, wo unmittelbar zu Gewalt aufgerufen wird oder Menschen bedroht und beleidigt werden.\n\nDie Meinungsfreiheit findet ihre Grenzen im Recht und in der Würde des Anderen. Das richtige Vorgehen gegen Hass in den sozialen Medien kann nicht mehr allein an runden Tischen oder in wohlfeilen Appellen erschöpfend behandelt werden. Es kann auch nicht darin bestehen, dass private Organisationen eine Art Wächterfunktion erhalten und in staatlichem Auftrag bestimmen, welche Meinung akzeptabel ist oder nicht. Es sind vielmehr Staatsanwaltschaften und Gerichte sowie die Betreiber der Netzwerke selbst, die jetzt deutlich in der Pflicht stehen.\n\nVonseiten der Staatsanwaltschaften und Gerichte gibt es erfreuliche Nachrichten. Sie kümmern sich deutlich stärker um Verurteilungen wegen Aufrufs zu Straftaten, Volksverhetzung, Holocaustleugnung oder Beleidigung. Das entlässt die Betreiber sozialer Medien aber nicht aus ihrer Pflicht. Im Gegenteil: Wenn die Betreiber der Seiten ihrer Pflicht zur Löschung nicht unmittelbar nachkommen, dann dulden sie irgendwie mittelbar die auf ihren Seiten begangenen Rechtsverletzungen. Sie sind daher in der Pflicht - das werden wir auch gesetzlich regeln -, schneller zu löschen. Sie sollen keine Chance mehr haben, sich hinter Gerichtsständen im Ausland zu verstecken. Die Demokratie braucht im Interesse eines funktionierenden Gemeinwesens auch hier eine klare rechtliche Regelung. Dafür werden wir uns einsetzen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die wichtigste Aufgabe der Rechtspolitik ist es, das Vertrauen in den Rechtsstaat und seine Organe zu festigen und auszubauen, auf den Wert von Gewaltenteilung und einer unabhängigen Justiz hinzuweisen und damit unser liberales und demokratisches Gemeinwesen zu stärken. Dafür stehen wir mit unseren Überzeugungen, und dafür steht auch dieser Haushalt.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5394,daniela-kolbe,\"Danke, Frau Präsidentin. - Sehr geehrte Frau Ministerin, ich möchte Ihnen ganz herzlich zu dem heutigen Beschluss gratulieren, weil er wirklich ein Meilenstein und ein großer Kraftakt ist. Dieser Beschluss wird den Betroffenen zugutekommen. Alle, die sich bis zum Stichtag gemeldet haben, werden eine Hilfeleistung und vor allem eine Beratung bekommen.\n\nAus den Beratungsstellen weiß ich, dass die meisten Betroffenen dort zum ersten Mal von ihrer Vergangenheit erzählen und sich mit den negativen, mit den schlimmen Erfahrungen, die sie gemacht haben, auseinandersetzen. Auf der anderen Seite haben sie natürlich auch schöne Kindheitserinnerungen. Viele setzen sich bei der Beratung zum ersten Mal mit dieser Ambivalenz auseinander und fragen sich, was diese Erfahrungen mit ihnen und ihrer Biografie gemacht haben. Manche nutzen die Möglichkeit, auch nach der Beratung den Kontakt zu anderen Betroffenen zu pflegen.\n\nAus den Gesprächen mit den Beraterinnen und Beratern weiß ich, dass in den Gesprächen ganz viele Details zutage treten, auch zeitgeschichtlich Interessantes über die DDR und über das, was in bestimmten Heimen passiert ist. Meine Frage lautet: Ist daran gedacht, das in irgendeiner Weise zu dokumentieren? Falls nicht, würden Sie diesen Vorschlag dann als Anregung mitnehmen? Ich glaube, dass in den Beratungsstellen ganz viel Wissen über das, was in der DDR passiert ist, angesammelt wird. Möglicherweise entspricht es auch dem Wunsch des Kollegen Lengsfeld, dass man darüber mehr erfährt.\"\n11284,oliver-krischer,\"Herzlichen Dank, Frau Weisgerber, dass Sie die Zwischenfrage zulassen. - Sie haben gesagt, es würde zwei Jahre brauchen, bis ein Klimaschutzgesetz realisiert ist. Nun hat es die Regierung bzw. die Mehrheit des Hauses in der Hand, wie lange Gesetzgebungsprozesse dauern. Wir haben einen Entwurf eines Klimaschutzgesetzes zum ersten Mal vor zwei Jahren eingebracht. Das heißt, es könnte schon beschlossen sein, selbst wenn man einen solch langen Gesetzgebungszeitraum annimmt.\n\nIhre Argumentation, dass Maßnahmen bereits stattfinden, stimmt nicht. Wenn ich der Umweltministerin gerade richtig zugehört habe, hat sie gesagt, im Verkehr seien wir sogar in der falschen Richtung unterwegs. Morgen beschließen wir ein EEG, mit dem der Ausbau den Erneuerbaren reduziert wird. Bei der Gebäudesanierung geht nichts voran; wir sind weit unter dem Ausbaukorridor. In der Landwirtschaft passiert überhaupt nichts; die Emissionen steigen. Man könnte diese Liste fortsetzen. Das heißt, die Maßnahmen, von denen Sie sagen, sie würden ohne Klimaschutzgesetz umgesetzt, finden gar nicht statt.\n\nWäre es nicht Ihrer Meinung nach sinnvoll, dass wir endlich eine gesetzliche Grundlage schaffen, damit hier von Ihnen und von Frau Hendricks nicht nur schön geredet wird, sondern dann auch Herr Dobrindt und andere in ihren Ressorts einmal Klimaschutzpolitik betreiben, was bisher nicht stattfindet?\n\nHerr Kollege Schwabe, herzlichen Dank für die klaren Aussagen, was 2050 angeht. Sie haben aber zwischendurch in einem Satz gesagt, es gehe auch um das Ziel 2020. Die Große Koalition hat gearbeitet. Wir beschließen jetzt noch ein paar Gesetze, die eher in die falsche Richtung gehen, Stichwort EEG morgen. Mich interessiert: Glauben Sie mit Blick auf die Politik dieser Bundesregierung, dass das Klimaschutzziel 2020 bei der großen Lücke, die Sie beschrieben haben, noch erreichbar ist?\"\n5378,iris-gleicke,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kolle-gen! Ich möchte mich zunächst beim Parlament und ausdrücklich bei den Mitgliedern des Touris-musausschusses für das gute Miteinander bedan-ken, das auch in dieser Debatte wieder deutlich wird. Wir gehen sehr pragmatisch an die Sache heran. Ich bedanke mich als Tourismusbeauftrag-te der Bundesregierung sehr herzlich für das gute Miteinander und die konstruktive, aber auch kriti-sche Begleitung, die wir im Ausschuss miteinan-der pflegen.\n\nIch bin froh über den Antrag der Koalitionsfrak-tionen „Kulturtourismus in den Regionen weiter-entwickeln“. Und Frau Kassner, Sie können sich darauf verlassen: Die bitten mich nicht nur. Die Kollegen sind alle sehr selbstbewusst und tragen ihre Bitten mit ordentlichem Nachdruck vor; das ist keine Frage.\n\n- Sie auch, natürlich. - Ich will einfach noch ein-mal darauf hinweisen - Sie wissen das aus Ihrer langjährigen Erfahrung genauso gut wie ich -: Der Bund sitzt nun einmal leider in der zweiten Reihe. Ich wünschte mir - was auch Sie bezüglich der Finanzierung angemahnt haben -, dass ganz klar ist, dass der Tourismus einer der wichtigsten Wirtschaftszweige ist, der zwar sehr kleinteilig daherkommt, aber ein großes Potenzial hat. Das muss sich im Endeffekt natürlich auch in der Wirt-schaftsförderung in den Ländern, aber auch in den Landkreisen, in den Kommunen widerspiegeln. Deshalb sage ich auch, dass dieser Antrag zur richtigen Zeit kommt.\n\nWir haben im Tourismus Boomzahlen; wir hören das immer wieder. Frau Hiller-Ohm hat es ange-sprochen: Die europäischen Kunst- und Kultur-liebhaber haben Deutschland zum beliebtesten Reiseziel auserkoren. Wir haben auch eine ganze Menge zu bieten: Kulturgüter, historische Denk-male, Musikfestivals oder auch die Kasseler Documenta und, und, und. - Jetzt habe ich we-nigstens Hessen noch hineingebracht; das hat, glaube ich, in der Aufzählung noch gefehlt. Aber man muss ein wenig Wasser in den Wein gießen - das ist schon deutlich geworden -; denn der Kulturtourismus findet hauptsächlich in den Städ-ten statt. In den Städten gibt es natürlich ein ge-balltes kulturelles Angebot, und entsprechend vie-le Touristen fahren deshalb dorthin.\n\nAuf der anderen Seite zeichnet sich das Reise-land Deutschland dadurch aus, dass wir in der Fläche jede Menge Kultur zu bieten haben. Wir brauchen bloß in unserer Heimatregion zu schau-en, wo die Schlösser und Burgen sind. Sie sind sehr häufig in oder bei ganz kleinen Orten, zum Beispiel die Burgen und Schlösser an der Saale. Auch Thüringen hat hier eine Menge zu bieten. In-sofern muss es an dieser Stelle darum gehen, die Potenziale zu nutzen.\n\nDer Tourismus hat eine ganz wichtige Funktion als Entwicklungsstütze und -motor für struktur-schwache Regionen, die sich nicht in der Nähe von Ballungszen-tren befinden. Hier kommt dem Tourismus eine ganz besondere Rolle zu. Deswe-gen, Herr Kollege Tressel, sind wir dabei, die Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der regio-nalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“ neu auszurichten. Durch die vorgesehene Weiterentwicklung der Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der Agrar-struktur und des Küstenschutzes“ zu einer Ge-meinschaftsaufgabe „Ländliche Entwicklung“ kön-nen wir mehr als die Landwirtschaft fördern. Sol-che Gespräche sind schwierig; das wissen Sie. Aber wir arbeiten mit Nachdruck daran. Wir brau-chen entsprechend Zeit, damit eine qualitativ gute Diskussion entsteht. Die Punkte, die in diesem Antrag stehen, werden in der Debatte sicherlich eine Rolle spielen.\n\nMir ist wichtig, darauf hinzuweisen - Frau Lan-zinger hat es bereits gesagt; sie hat ein wenig vorgearbeitet -, dass das Projekt „Tourismusper-spektiven in ländlichen Räumen“ an den Kulturtou-rismus andockt. Mir geht es darum, nicht noch ei-ne Urkunde für einen Wettbewerb zu verteilen o-der ein weiteres Gutachten zu bekommen. Das verstaubt in den Schubladen oder geht in den Wei-ten des Internets verloren. Ich möchte, dass wir schauen, wo Potenziale und pfiffige Ideen sind, und diese dann umsetzen, indem wir diese Ansät-ze in ausgewählten Modellregionen unterstützen. Das ist eine praktische Hilfe, um bei den Kommu-nalpolitikerinnen und Kommunal-politikern etwas anzustoßen.\n\nAber, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die besten Berater, die besten Anträge und die besten Konzepte nützen nichts, wenn Deutschland nicht als weltoffenes Land wahrgenommen wird.\n\nWir müssen aufpassen auf Pegida, Legida, Sügi-da und wie sie alle heißen; denn eines ist klar: Glaubt irgendjemand, dass es eine gute Werbung für das Reiseland Deutschland ist, wenn Hunderte oder Tausende irgendwelchen rechten Populisten, Rassisten oder zum Teil richtig harten Neonazis hinterherlaufen? Ich hoffe immer noch, dass dieje-nigen, die den Organisatoren auf den Leim gehen und angeblich für die Verteidigung abendländi-scher Werte demonstrieren, gar nicht genau wis-sen, was sie tun. Sie versetzen Menschen in Angst und Schrecken, die bei uns Schutz vor Krieg und Terror suchen. Ich finde das erbärmlich.\n\nSie beschädigen auch den guten Ruf ihrer Heimat, die ihnen doch angeblich so wichtig ist. Das finde ich dumm und töricht. Aber es ist sehr ermuti-gend, wie viele Menschen in Dresden, Leipzig und Suhl auf die Straße gehen und ein Zeichen gegen Fremdenfeindlichkeit und Rassismus setzen. Deutschland hat sich spätestens mit der Fußball-WM 2006 zu Recht den Ruf erworben, ein weltof-fenes und freundliches Land zu sein. Genau das wollen wir bleiben.\n\nIn diesem Sinne: Herzlichen Dank fürs Zuhören.\"\n2011,barbel-hohn,\"Frau Staatssekretärin, es gab gerade dieser Tage im Handelsblatt einen Artikel, in dem deutlich wurde, dass der Vattenfall-Konzern die Haftungsmöglichkeiten für zukünftige Kosten im Zusammenhang mit dem Atommüll jetzt einfach auf seine deutsche Tochter überträgt. Die Haftung, für die sonst der gesamte Konzern die Verantwortung gehabt hätte, liegt jetzt nur noch bei der deutschen Tochter. Das Ganze läuft seit 2012.\n\nIst das BMUB über diese Umstrukturierung nicht informiert worden? Hat es sich darüber nicht informiert? Das ist doch bekannt! Wie konnte das BMUB in eine solche Falle laufen angesichts der Tatsache, dass sich die Unternehmen zunehmend aus der Verantwortung für zukünftige Schäden ziehen?\n\nFrau Staatssekretärin, ich hatte eben eine Frage gestellt, die Sie auch jetzt nicht beantwortet haben, obwohl Sie eine entsprechende Antwort angekündigt hatten.\n\nSeit 2012 gibt es eine Umstrukturierung im Vattenfall-Konzern. Danach ist in Bezug auf zukünftige Schäden zu befürchten, dass eine ausreichende Haftung nicht mehr gewährleistet werden kann. Hat es keinerlei Gespräche zwischen dem damaligen BMU, dem jetzigen BMUB, und Vattenfall darüber gegeben, wie man dieses Risiko minimieren kann?\n\nFrau Staatssekretärin, Sie haben vorhin gesagt, dass bezüglich des Vorschlags einer Bad Bank keine offiziellen Gespräche stattgefunden haben, sondern nur am Rande darüber gesprochen wurde. Wir haben gerade verschiedene andere Komplexe angesprochen, beispielsweise die Umstrukturierung von Vattenfall. Es gibt auch noch den Komplex der Schadensersatzklage von Vattenfall gegen die Bundesregierung in einer Höhe von 3,7 Milliarden Euro wegen der kurzfristig veränderten Laufzeit, die Angela Merkel durchgesetzt hat. Haben über all diese Komplexe - also Umstrukturierung und Klagen; nicht nur Vattenfall, sondern auch die anderen Konzerne haben entsprechende Klagen angedroht - keine offiziellen Gespräche zwischen BMU und den Unternehmen stattgefunden?\n\nHerzlichen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Staats-sekretärin, Vattenfall hat wegen der Kürzung der vereinbarten Laufzeit und des Atomausstiegs gegen die Bundessregierung geklagt und fordert eine Entschädigung in Höhe von 3,7 Milliarden Euro. Auch andere Unternehmen klagen. Bei den Klagen geht es um eine Summe von insgesamt 15 Milliarden Euro. Jetzt wird versucht, diese 15 Milliarden Euro, die ein erheblicher Schaden für den Steuerzahler wären, quasi in eine Bad Bank zu überführen. Es wäre für Angela Merkel natürlich ein schöner Erfolg, wenn sie über diese 15 Milliarden Euro nicht mehr reden müsste. Können Sie bestätigen, dass über diese Aspekte - 15 Milliarden Euro, Bad Bank - in all den Gesprächen, die Sie aufgeführt haben, nicht gesprochen worden ist?\n\nWir haben bisher immer über Gespräche geredet. Es gibt aber auch andere Arten der Kommunikation. Ich kann mir eigentlich nicht vorstellen, dass die Energie-konzerne Überlegungen hinsichtlich einer Bad Bank anstellen und diese Idee in keiner Form an die Bundesregierung herantragen. Hat es denn in irgendeiner anderen Form - schriftlich, wie auch immer - Ideen bzw. Skizzen der Unternehmen gegeben, die an das BMU bzw. jetzt an das BMUB, an das Kanzleramt oder an die Bundesregierung herangetragen wurden, um sich über diese Idee, die jetzt öffentlich diskutiert wird, vorher in irgendeiner Form mit der Bundesregierung oder dem BMUB auszutauschen?\n\nFrau Staatssekretärin, Sie haben ja zumindest die Information über die Termine dieser Gespräche. In der Regel werden, wenn über solche neuen Ideen diskutiert wird, Vermerke angefertigt. Gibt es Vermerke über diese Gespräche? Wenn ja, können wir sie bekommen? Wenn nein, warum sind über diese Gespräche keine Vermerke angefertigt worden?\n\nFrau Staatssekretärin, in der Tat, da haben Sie recht: Über eine solche Lösung wird schon länger diskutiert, schon deswegen, weil man die Rückstellungen sichern will. Deshalb wundern wir uns ja auch, dass Sie in der Bundesregierung offiziell nicht darüber reden. Überall in der Gesellschaft wird darüber geredet, wie man diese Rückstellungen sichern kann, aber offensichtlich nicht innerhalb der Bundesregierung. Deshalb frage ich: Wie wollen Sie die Probleme eigentlich zusammenbringen?\n\nErstens. Diese 36 Milliarden Euro werden nicht ausreichen, um die Atomkraftwerke abzubauen. Wie wollen Sie also diese 36 Milliarden Euro und zusätzliche Gelder, die dafür letzten Endes fällig werden, sichern?\n\nZweitens. Wie gehen Sie eigentlich mit den Forderungen der Energiekonzerne um, die jetzt aufgrund der zurückgenommenen Laufzeitverlängerung mit Klagen Schadensersatz für den Atomausstieg fordern, zu dem es holterdiepolter und ohne Unterschrift der Konzerne kam?\n\nHier geht es ja um zweistellige Milliardenbeträge. Das ist also eine richtig fette Summe, die auch den Bundeshaushalt stark tangiert. Gibt es in irgendeiner Form offizielle Gespräche und Überlegungen innerhalb Ihres Hauses oder auch innerhalb des Bundeskanzleramtes darüber, wie man damit umgeht und wie man eine bestmögliche Lösung für diesen Bundeshaushalt erreichen kann?\n\nFrau Staatssekretärin, Sie haben vorhin gesagt, Sie wollten die genaue Frage wissen, damit Sie den richtigen Arbeitsauftrag an das Ministerium geben können. Das ist der richtige Weg. Nun gibt es zwei Termine, bei denen sich immerhin der Minister mit den Chefs von Eon und RWE getroffen hat, nämlich am 13. und am 18. Februar, und über diese Rückstellungen offensichtlich geredet worden ist. Das haben Sie bestätigt. Gibt es denn Arbeitsaufträge des Ministers nach diesen Gesprächen für das Ministerium?\n\nKönnen Sie da nachforschen und mich darüber informieren?\n\nDanke.\n\nDe facto ist der Vorschlag der EVU, eine Bad Bank zur Finanzierung des Rückbaus der Atomkraftwerke zu schaffen, ein Eingeständnis, dass sie mit den bisherigen Rückstellungen in Höhe von 36 Milliarden Euro nicht hinkommen. Deshalb die Frage: Wie bewertet eigentlich das Ministerium die Rückstellungen der EVU in Höhe von 36 Milliarden Euro? Gibt es eine Einschätzung, ob man mit dieser Summe hinkommt oder ob man mehr braucht?\"\n1990,katja-keul,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Mit dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf soll die EU-Richtlinie vom 16. Februar 2011 zur Bekämpfung von Zahlungsverzug im Geschäftsverkehr umgesetzt werden. Kritische Stimmen haben nicht ganz zu Unrecht angemerkt, dass es eigentlich nicht um die Bekämpfung, sondern um die Beschleunigung von Zahlungsverzug geht. Das angestrebte Ziel ist aber so oder so ein berechtigtes.\n\nLange Zahlungsfristen und verzögerte Abnahmen im Baurecht sind gerade für kleinere Unternehmer und Handwerker ein ernstzunehmendes wirtschaftliches Risiko. Da nützt es auch nichts, den Wortlaut des § 271 BGB zu loben und zu preisen, der besagt, dass die Leistung im Zweifelsfall sofort verlangt werden kann. Die Praxis sieht anders aus. Für die Abnahme im Baurecht gibt es bisher überhaupt keine Frist.\n\nDennoch sind die Befürchtungen nachvollziehbar, dass eine ausdrückliche Regelung, die vom Regelfall abweichende Zahlungsfristen auf maximal 60 Tage beschränkt, gerade dazu führen könnte, dass vermehrt solche Vereinbarungen geschlossen werden. Es ist ein Dilemma: Indem man die Vertragsfreiheit einschränken will, bringt man manche Vertragspartner möglicherweise erst darauf, von dieser Vertragsfreiheit maximalen Gebrauch zu machen. Umso wichtiger ist, dass man dann klare Regeln schafft, wie die unterschiedlichen Fristen zusammenwirken: die Zahlungsfrist, die Abnahmefrist und die Verzugsfristen. Das ist meines Erachtens noch nicht gut gelungen. Soll zusätzlich zur Abnahmefrist von 30 Tagen noch eine weitere Frist von 60 Tagen bis zur Fälligkeit möglich sein? Das kann ja wohl nicht gemeint sein. Wer ein Werk abnimmt, hat damit auch die Berechtigung, die Gegenleistung prüfen zu können. Es sollte also klargestellt werden, dass die Abnahmefrist auf die weitere Zahlungsfrist anzurechnen ist.\n\nAuch das Verhältnis zum Verzugseintritt ist nicht wirklich eindeutig. In § 286 BGB, der den Verzug regelt, steht nur eine kryptische Verweisung. Besser wäre es, ausdrücklich klarzustellen, dass mit Ablauf einer nach § 271 a BGB vereinbarten Zahlungsfrist auch zeitgleich der Verzug eintritt.\n\nMich irritiert ernsthaft die Tatsache, dass die Vertragspartner einerseits völlig frei bleiben sollen, Ratenzahlungen mit unbegrenzter Laufzeit zu vereinbaren, was zweifellos sinnvoll sein kann, dabei aber andererseits niemals auf Verzugszinsen verzichten dürfen. So jedenfalls liest sich der Entwurf es neuen § 288 Absatz 6 BGB:\n\nEine … Vereinbarung, die den Anspruch des Gläubigers einer Entgeltforderung auf Verzugszinsen ausschließt, ist unwirksam.\n\nWie soll ich als Gläubigerin sonst meinen finanziell angeschlagenen Schuldner zur pünktlichen Ratenzahlung motivieren, vom insolventen Schuldner ganz zu schweigen? Das scheint mir doch etwas über das Ziel hinausgeschossen zu sein.\n\nAuch bei den Verbandsklagen bin ich mir nicht sicher, ob im Hinblick auf individuelle Vertragsabsprachen nicht etwas zu weit gegriffen wurde. Nach der deutschen Systematik sind Verbandsklagen bislang nur dort möglich, wo eine Individualklage mangels subjektiver Rechtsverletzung nicht möglich ist oder - wie beim Verbraucherschutz - eine Vielzahl gleichgelagerter Fälle betroffen ist. Wenn aber nur eine individuelle Vereinbarung zwischen zwei Beteiligten unwirksam ist, die sonst niemanden betrifft, fragt sich, warum dann ein Dritter, also ein Verband, klagen können soll. Hier gibt es offensichtlich auch Zweifel, ob die Richtlinie das in dieser weiten Form überhaupt verlangt. Diesen Zweifeln sollten wir noch einmal nachgehen.\n\nSystematisch unschön, wenn auch nicht weltbewegend, ist die Regelung in § 308 BGB zu den Allgemeinen Geschäftsbedingungen. Diese Norm gilt nach § 310 BGB bislang ausdrücklich nur für Verbraucher und soll jetzt um eine Nummer ergänzt werden, die ausgerechnet den Geschäftsverkehr und damit gerade keine Verbraucher betrifft. Dadurch müssen dann wieder Ausnahmen in den Verweisungen eingeführt werden, was das Gesetz nicht gerade klarer macht. Das müsste doch auch eleganter zu lösen sein.\n\nNachvollziehbar finde ich auch den Wunsch aus der Praxis, nicht immer neue Begrifflichkeiten ins BGB einzuführen. Brauchen wir jetzt wirklich einen „groben Nachteil“, oder tut es nicht auch die altbewährte „grobe Unbilligkeit“? Ich habe registriert, dass auch der Staatssekretär in seiner Rede von „grob unbillig“ gesprochen hat; das würde meinem Anliegen schon entgegenkommen. Soll das Wort „ausdrücklich“ wirklich auch mündliche Vereinbarungen erfassen, oder sollten wir es nicht lieber auf Schriftliches beschränken? Und bevor alle anfangen, zu grübeln, was genau eine „Zahlungsaufstellung“ ist, könnten wir es doch einfach wie immer „Zahlungsaufforderung“ nennen.\n\nJenseits dieser technischen Feinheiten bleibt die entscheidende Frage, ob die deutsche Umsetzung der Richtlinie auch wirklich die angestrebte Wirkung erzielt, nämlich den Zahlungsverkehr zu beschleunigen. Daran habe ich erhebliche Zweifel. Wenn wir schon wieder zusätzliche Normen in das BGB einfügen, dann doch bitte welche, die auch funktionieren. Ich hoffe, dass die Beratungen im Ausschuss dazu etwas beitragen können.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4744,florian-hahn,\"Sehr geehrte Präsidentin! Lieber Andreas! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! So kurz vor Weihnachten fällt leider der Rückblick auf das Jahr 2014, zumindest außen- und sicherheitspolitisch, nicht so aus, wie wir uns das am Anfang des Jahres vorgestellt bzw. gewünscht haben. Das nun fast vergangene Jahr ist gekennzeichnet von einer deutliche Zunahme internationaler Konflikte, dem reihenweisen Zerfall von staatlichen Strukturen, islamistischem Terror und unvorstellbaren Flüchtlingsströmen.\n\nNeben der besorgniserregenden Krise mit der Russischen Föderation und dem anhaltenden Bürgerkrieg in Syrien verbreitet vor allem die Terrororganisation „Islamischer Staat“ Gewalt und Schrecken in barbarischem Ausmaß. Die vielerorts enttäuschten Hoffnungen des Arabischen Frühlings, vor allem die verheerende Lage in Libyen und in der Sahelzone, zeigen uns, welche großen Gefahren das Versinken ganzer Regionen in Chaos und Anarchie auch für uns in Deutschland und in Europa mit sich bringt.\n\nAngesichts dieser Entwicklungen, die uns in vielerlei Hinsicht auch direkt betreffen, ist es heute gar keine Frage mehr, ob wir mehr Verantwortung in der Welt übernehmen sollen und wollen. Wir müssen es, und wir tun es bereits. Gemeinsam mit unseren Partnern ist deutsche Diplomatie, deutsche humanitäre Hilfe und Entwicklungshilfe sowie der Einsatz deutscher Sicherheitskräfte notwendiger denn je. Deutschland geht dabei besonnen und konsequent mit diesen vielen Herausforderungen um. Das ist Bundeskanzlerin Merkel und ihren Ministern Ursula von der Leyen, Gerd Müller und Frank-Walter Steinmeier zu verdanken. Dafür möchte ich ihnen an dieser Stelle ausdrücklich danken.\n\nMittlerweile gibt es allerdings so viele Konfliktherde, dass unser größter Einsatz in den letzten Monaten in der Öffentlichkeit fast in Vergessenheit geraten ist: Das ist unser Einsatz in Afghanistan. Hier übernehmen wir bereits seit 13 Jahren Verantwortung in großem Umfang. Unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten haben einen außerordentlichen Beitrag für das afghanische Volk geleistet und sich für die Stabilisierung dieses Landes eingesetzt, damit eben Unterdrückung aufhört, damit das Sterben aufhört. Das ist auch Ziel unseres Einsatzes.\n\nWir haben dabei 55 Soldaten verloren. Viele sind traumatisiert aus dem Einsatz zurückgekehrt. Längst ist klar, dass es sich in Afghanistan keineswegs um eine ungefährliche Mission handelte. Ich möchte unseren Soldatinnen und Soldaten und auch allen zivilen Helferinnen und Helfern deshalb an dieser Stelle für ihren Einsatz noch einmal ausdrücklich danken.\n\nDer Einsatz war bisher nicht umsonst. Heute konnte beispielsweise durch die afghanischen Sicherheitskräfte, die wir ja ausgebildet haben, ein 13-jähriger Selbstmordattentäter gestellt und verhindert werden, dass er den Selbstmord vollzieht und die Bombe zündet - dank unserer Ausbildung! Mehr Menschen als jemals zuvor haben heute Zugang zu Wasser und zu Strom, zu ärztlicher Versorgung und zu Bildung. Diese Erfolge wollen und dürfen wir nicht einfach vom Tisch wischen.\n\nZu einer ehrlichen Bilanz gehört es auch, sich einzugestehen, dass nicht alles optimal war. Natürlich haben wir auch Fehler gemacht. Aus diesen Fehlern haben wir bereits gelernt. Mittlerweile haben wir beispielsweise den Grundsatz, immer erst die Ordnungskräfte vor Ort oder die Partnerländer in den Problemregionen der Welt zu ertüchtigen. Wichtig ist nun, dass wir unsere Verantwortung, die wir 13 Jahre lang in Afghanistan übernommen haben, nicht abrupt beenden.\n\nWenn unser Einsatz für die genannten Errungenschaften nicht umsonst sein soll, müssen wir den endgültigen Abzug den Bedingungen und Entwicklungen im Land anpassen. Es muss klar sein, dass wir die afghanische Armee in der immer noch gefährlichen Sicherheitslage nicht alleinlassen. Wir sehen in Mali und wohl am eindrucksvollsten im Irak, was dies bedeuten kann. Es wäre fatal, Afghanistan nun einfach sich selbst zu überlassen. Wir dürfen den Einsatz nicht vorschnell beenden, und auch die Entwicklungshilfe muss weiterlaufen. Auch der Weg der Aussöhnung mit Pakistan, den der neue Präsident Ashraf Ghani beschreitet, muss unterstützt werden.\n\nAll das ist der großen Mehrheit in diesem Hause zum Glück bewusst. Aber bei den Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen - das betrübt mich schon nach den vielen Jahren - herrscht jetzt große Verwirrung: Ja - Nein - Enthaltung. Das ist kein sehr souveräner Auftritt und zeichnet kein sehr souveränes Bild bei einer solch wichtigen Frage. Ein großer Teil von Ihnen möchte offensichtlich so schnell wie möglich raus aus Afghanistan, koste es, was es wolle.\n\nWas ein überstürzter Totalabzug aber kosten würde, ist klar: Ein zweiter Irak wäre möglicherweise die Folge.\n\nIch fordere die Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen auf: Stehlen Sie sich nicht aus der Verantwortung für Afghanistan! Hören Sie lieber auf Ihren Parteichef Özdemir, der in der taz mit folgenden Worten zitiert wird:\n\n„Es gibt nicht nur eine Verantwortung, wenn man reingeht, sondern auch beim Rausgehen.“ Und: Afghanistan dürfe nicht „zum neuen Irak werden.“\n\nRecht hat er an dieser Stelle.\n\nIch bitte Sie um Zustimmung zu diesem Mandat.\"\n4730,ulrich-lange,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es wird Weihnachten, und die Pkw-Maut liegt auf dem Gabentisch.\n\nRespekt, Herr Minister! Wir haben den Kabinettsbeschluss. Das ist ein Meilenstein im Gesetzgebungsvorhaben zur Infrastrukturabgabe. Jetzt kann es Weihnachten werden.\n\nLieber Kollege Krischer,\n\nzu Ihrer frustrierten Bilanz:\n\nLuFV II, WSV, 5 Milliarden Euro mehr, Investitionshochlauf,\n\nAusweitung und Vertiefung der Lkw-Maut und die Weichenstellung für die Lkw-Maut auf allen Bundesstraßen 2018. Verkaufen Sie die Menschen mit Ihrer Theorie der Absenkung hier nicht für dumm!\n\nSie wussten und Sie wissen, dass wir aufgrund des Wegekostengutachtens absenken mussten.\n\nSie verhalten sich hier wie Pinocchio und belügen das deutsche Volk.\n\nLieber Kollege Behrens, dass die Linken mit Geld nicht umgehen und nicht rechnen können,\n\nhaben Sie wieder einmal bewiesen. Die Gesamteinnahmen betragen pro Jahr 3,7 Milliarden Euro: 3 Milliarden Euro von den Inländern, 700 Millionen Euro von den ausländischen Kfz-Fahrern. Nach Abzug der Systemkosten bleiben 500 Millionen Euro übrig.\n\nDas sind also 500 Millionen Euro pro Jahr zusätzlich für die Verkehrsinfrastruktur. Das ist ein Wort!\n\nDas Ganze ist natürlich mit der Grundidee Europas in Einklang zu bringen.\n\nEs ist geradezu europäisch, dass wir, wenn in 22 Mitgliedstaaten eine Infrastrukturabgabe erhoben wird, dies auch tun, weil die EU für eine solche Nutzerfinanzierung steht. Deswegen kann ein Gesetz, das auf dem Verursacherprinzip beruht, weder direkt noch indirekt diskriminierend sein. Wer nutzt, der zahlt in ganz Europa! Das ist ganz europäisch.\n\nDass wir zwei getrennte Gesetzentwürfe in das Kabinett eingebracht haben und bald beraten werden, ist gut und richtig. Der Kollege Bilger hat ja schon aufgezeigt, dass man in Großbritannien auch einen solchen Weg gegangen ist. Wir stellen vom Steuersystem auf das System der Nutzerfinanzierung um, also auf die Finanzierung durch diejenigen, die auf unseren Straßen unterwegs sind.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die deutschen Preise sind ausgesprochen niedrig. Wenn man sich die Größe des Straßennetzes und die Zeiträume anschaut, dann sieht man: Wir brauchen uns in Europa nicht zu verstecken. Nein, im Gegenteil: Wir sind im europäischen Vergleich ganz vorne. Auch hier gilt: Wir sind europäisch.\n\nDie E-Vignette ist und bleibt die intelligente Form der Umsetzung der Infrastrukturabgabe.\n\n- Lieber Kollege Krischer, das, was der Kollege Hartmann Ihnen vorhin vorgelegt hat, war schon entlarvend. Auch wenn Sie es nicht hören wollen: Sie betreiben hier in dieser Stunde die größte Heuchelei im ganzen Parlament.\n\nDatenschutz: gewährleistet! EU-Rechtskonformität: gewährleistet! Keine Mehrbelastung: gewährleistet! Zusätzliche Einnahmen: gewährleistet!\n\nWir freuen uns auf die parlamentarische Beratung und am Ende auf die parlamentarische Verabschiedung dieser Infrastrukturabgabe - sinnvoll, fair, gerecht. Das wird 2015 von uns hier im Parlament umgesetzt werden.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n14363,manfred-zollmer,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Als Autofahrer weiß man: Gleichzeitig Gasgeben und Bremsen ist suboptimal. Das gilt auch für die Finanzmarktstabilität auf dem Markt für Wohnimmobilienkredite, auf dem wir uns hier befinden. Wir brauchen in Deutschland mehr Wohnungen. Wir wollen, dass Menschen dort investieren. Die Bundesregierung unterstützt dies mit einer Vielzahl von Programmen, und das ist auch gut so.\n\nMit dem Finanzaufsichtsrechtergänzungsgesetz und dem Gesetz zur Umsetzung der Wohnimmobilienkreditrichtlinie haben wir Gesetze vorliegen, die in der Gefahr standen, mit einer Überregulierung die Immobilienkreditvergabe übermäßig zu beschränken, also Gasgeben und Bremsen gleichzeitig. Es ist natürlich richtig, dass Blasen auf dem Markt für Wohnimmobilienkredite eine Gefahr für die Finanzmarktstabilität sind. Das haben die Märkte in den USA, in Spanien und in Irland gezeigt. Axel, aber du weißt natürlich auch, dass diese Märkte völlig unterschiedlich sind von den Gepflogenheiten her, die wir hier haben. In Deutschland hat es keine Immobilienblase gegeben.\n\nWir haben hier eine ausgeprägte Festzins- und Langfristkultur. Darüber hinaus ist es nachvollziehbar, dass man für den Fall des Falles mithilfe eines Instrumentenkastens handlungsfähig sein wollte.\n\nMit der Wohnimmobilienkreditrichtlinie wurde die Kreditvergabe bereits in vielfacher Weise in Richtung Kreditnehmer reguliert; der Kollege wird dazu gleich noch etwas sagen. Mit dem Finanzaufsichtsrechtergänzungsgesetz - ich kann für diesen Titel nichts - haben wir jetzt einen Kasten mit makroprudenziellen Instrumenten geschaffen, das heißt etwas, was für die gesamte Volkwirtschaft gilt. Dieser Instrumentenkasten kann im Bedarfsfall scharfgeschaltet werden.\n\nWir alle kennen das Struck’sche Gesetz. Dieses Gesetz ist auch in diesem Fall wieder zur Anwendung gekommen. Wir haben den vorgeschlagenen Gesetzentwurf überarbeitet und modifiziert. Lieber Axel, das ist die Aufgabe eines frei gewählten Parlaments. Wir haben Obergrenzen für Darlehensvolumen, eine Immobilienwertrelation und Amortisierungsanforderungen vorgesehen. Wir haben diejenigen Instrumente übernommen, die in vielen europäischen Ländern ebenfalls zu finden sind und die auf der vorhandenen Datenbasis wirklich eingesetzt werden können.\n\nDurch die Konzentration auf diese beiden Instrumente wird die Gefahr unbeabsichtigter Verzerrungen auf den Immobilienmärkten deutlich reduziert und die robuste Schuldentragfähigkeit der deutschen Haushalte berücksichtigt. Daneben gibt es Freikontingente, eine Bagatellgrenze und Abstufungen, die die Kollegin Tillmann eben erläutert hat. Damit berücksichtigen wir die extrem unterschiedliche regionale Situation auf den Immobilienmärkten in Deutschland.\n\nNeben einer Reihe städtischer Hotspots wie München, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Berlin oder Köln gibt es eine ganze Reihe überwiegend ländlich geprägter Regionen, in denen man sehr große Probleme hat, eine Immobilie zu verkaufen. Für diese Regionen wollen wir keine Restriktionen im normalen Kreditgeschäft. Deshalb gibt es diese Freigrenze. Wir haben auch den sozialen Wohnungsbau und die Finanzierung des Umbaus einer Wohnung außen vor gelassen. Ich halte das für absolut richtig.\n\nVor einer Scharfschaltung der Instrumente soll der Finanzausschuss informiert werden. Darüber beklagen sich auf einmal die Linken und die Grünen.\n\nIch kann das nicht verstehen; ich halte das für richtig. Ihr fordert doch sonst immer, dass der Finanzausschuss in solche Maßnahmen einbezogen wird. Jetzt machen wir das, und jetzt kritisiert ihr das.\n\nNachvollziehbar ist das nicht.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, mit diesem Gesetz ist es uns insgesamt gelungen, die berechtigten Bedenken zu berücksichtigen und eine zusätzliche bürokratische Belastung zu minimieren. Gleichzeitig haben wir ein Instrumentarium geschaffen, das im Krisenfall eingesetzt werden kann, um eine Immobilienblase zu bekämpfen. Nach wie vor bleibt aber das Problem der Diagnose: Wann haben wir eine Blase, und wann sind die Entwicklungen normal?\n\nDie Ökonomen sind sich in der Vergangenheit niemals einig gewesen. Blasen sind im Regelfall immer erst hinterher diagnostiziert worden. Mit diesem Problem werden wir leben müssen. Die deutschen Immobilienkreditmärkte sind sehr robust. Eine Immobilienblase hat es bisher nicht gegeben. Ich bin sicher, das wird auch in Zukunft so bleiben. Dann werden diese Instrumente im Koffer bleiben können, und die Menschen, die eine Wohnung suchen, werden auch eine zu bezahlbaren Bedingungen finden.\n\nWir geben Gas beim Wohnungsbau und bremsen erst, wenn Gefahr droht.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n11945,patrick-schnieder,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In der Tat: Das, was uns hier als Bundesverkehrswegeplan vorliegt und was wir jetzt mit den Ausbaugesetzen beraten, kann man wirklich als das größte Investitionsprogramm des Bundes überhaupt bezeichnen. Es ist ein Programm für die Modernisierung unserer Verkehrsnetze. Es ist ein Programm, mit dem wir die Verkehrsinfrastruktur in Deutschland auf Vordermann bringen und Zukunft gestalten. Deshalb ist es auch nicht vermessen, zu sagen: Ja, das ist ein großer Wurf.\n\nWenn wir das umsetzen, was wir dort niedergeschrieben haben, dann werden wir weniger Staus haben, dann werden wir ein Mehr an Verkehrssicherheit zu verzeichnen haben,\n\nund dann werden wir sehr viel Geld in Verkehrswege hier in Deutschland investieren. Das ist von einer großen Bedeutung für unser Land; denn Deutschland ist eine Mobilitätsnation. Wir sind darauf angewiesen, dass Verkehre fließen können, dass Arbeitnehmer zu ihrem Arbeitsplatz kommen und nicht im Stau stehen, dass wir Waren und Güter transportieren können. Das ist die Voraussetzung dafür, dass wir weiterhin wirtschaftliche Prosperität in Deutschland haben. Insofern ist es wichtig, dass wir die Verkehrswege so stark in den Fokus nehmen. So gewährleisten wir Wohlstand und Wachstum in Deutschland.\n\nDas Verkehrsaufkommen - das besagen alle Verkehrsprognosen - wird in den nächsten Jahren deutlich ansteigen. Wir haben nicht nur Nachholbedarf bei der Infrastruktur, sondern müssen auch eine Antwort auf das wachsende Verkehrsaufkommen finden. Das betrifft alle Verkehrsträger: Das betrifft den Individualverkehr, das betrifft den Güterverkehr, das betrifft den Personenverkehr. Wem es etwas bedeutet, dass es in Deutschland wirtschaftlich weiter aufwärts gehen kann, der muss handeln, der muss Geld in die Hand nehmen, der muss in die Verkehrswege investieren. Wir handeln, und wir handeln kraftvoll. Dieser Bundesverkehrswegeplan ist beredtes Zeugnis dafür.\n\nWir haben uns, als wir die Konzeption erstellt haben, klare Kriterien gegeben; darüber waren wir uns in diesem Hause eigentlich weitgehend einig. Wenn wir uns diese Kriterien anschauen, dann kann man sagen: Sie sind in diesem Bundesverkehrswegeplan abgebildet, sie sind eingehalten worden. Ja, es waren ehrgeizige Ziele, die wir uns gesetzt haben, und wir haben diese Ziele auch alle erreicht. Ich will das im Einzelnen betrachten.\n\nErster Punkt. Wir haben gesagt: Wir wollen eine realistische Planung machen. Wir wollen keinen Wunsch-und-Wolke-Plan machen, sondern etwas, was wir in den nächsten 15 Jahren auch wirklich umsetzen können. Genau das ist gelungen. Eine klare Finanzierungsperspektive ist hier aufgezeichnet, lieber Kollege Hofreiter - jedenfalls dann, wenn wir die Politik weiter so gestalten können. Wir haben in den letzten Jahren gezeigt: Wir wollen einen Investitionshochlauf. Die größte Gefahr, dass wir das nicht umsetzen können, ist, wenn Sie, wenn andere darüber zu entscheiden haben. Ansonsten werden wir das, was hier als Plan vorliegt, auch bis 2030 umsetzen können.\n\nGerne.\n\nFrau Kollegin Wilms, der Unterschied ist, dass wir eine realistische Planung vorlegen und Sie über bestimmte Dinge spekulieren, die überhaupt keinen Anker in der Realität haben. Wir haben bisher bei allen Bundesverkehrswegeplänen eine sogenannte Schleppe gehabt. Diese wird auch in Zukunft erforderlich sein. Das hat einen ganz einfachen Grund: Die Frage ist in aller Regel nicht, ob der Bund ein Projekt will und ob er es finanziert, sondern die Frage ist - dieses Problem wird sich in den nächsten Jahren noch verschärfen -, ob die Länder, die für das Baurecht zuständig sind, die entsprechenden Grundlagen schaffen. Weil wir dort Planungskapazitäten flächendeckend gesenkt haben, schaffen wir es nicht mehr, in allen Fällen zeitnah die Planung zu beenden und Baurecht zu schaffen.\n\nDeshalb müssen wir Planungskapazitäten ausbauen. Das ist nicht ein Problem des Bundes.\n\nFrau Kollegin Wilms, wir haben dazu Vorschläge gemacht - die müssen Sie sich auch anhören, Sie müssen dann dabei sein -, zum Beispiel zur Bundesverkehrsinfrastrukturgesellschaft. Damit hätten wir es in der Hand, vor Ort Baurecht und Planung zu schaffen.\n\nHier müssen Sie mitmachen. Dann haben wir überhaupt kein Problem bei der Umsetzung.\n\nZweiter Punkt. Wir haben das Prinzip „Erhalt vor Neubau“. Es wird eingehalten. 70 Prozent der Mittel gehen in den Erhalt. Im Plan von 2003 lagen wir bei 56 Prozent. Herr Kollege Hofreiter, ich darf die Grünen zitieren. Ein Kollege von Ihnen hat zu dem Plan, den er damals mit erarbeitet hat, gesagt, 56 Prozent Erhalt sei ein ausgewogenes Verhältnis. Sie müssten heute über das jubilieren, was wir vorlegen, weil es genau dem entspricht, was Sie eigentlich auch wollen.\n\nDritter Punkt. Wir haben gesagt: Wir setzen klare Prioritäten im Verkehrswegeplan, ausgerichtet auf die größte verkehrliche Gesamtwirkung. Auch das halten wir ein. Bei der Straße stärken wir die Hauptachsen und Knotenpunkte in besonderer Weise. Großräumig bedeutsame Vorhaben werden dort mit 75 Prozent der Investitionsmittel bedacht. Aber wir vergessen auch nicht die regionale Erschließung, die zur Verbesserung der Lebensqualität im ländlichen Raum führt.\n\nEngpassbeseitigung ist ein großes Thema. Hier komme ich dann zu der Frage: Wird der Klimaschutz, wird die Ökologie hier genug berücksichtigt? Ja, ich kann dem Bundesverkehrsminister nur recht geben. Das ist in der Tat die Verbindung von Ökonomie und Ökologie. Wir führen Emissionen zurück, eindeutig. Man kann immer sagen, dass man dort mehr machen kann, aber das ist Fakt.\n\nIch bin manchmal seltsam von dem berührt, was Sie unter Umweltschutz verstehen und was Sie bei den Verkehrswegen fordern. Ich nenne einmal das Beispiel Lückenschluss A 1 zwischen Nordrhein-Westfalen und Rheinland-Pfalz. Er steht seit Jahrzehnten auf der Agenda. Es gibt Hunderte von Gutachten dazu. Alle sagen: Ja, die Umwelt ist hier und da betroffen. Es ist alles lösbar. - Sie verzögern das Projekt seit Jahren. Jetzt findet man genetisches Material vom Haselhuhn. Gesehen worden ist dort noch kein Haselhuhn, es werden aber wieder neue Gutachten gemacht. Es wird die Umwelt geschützt. Ich frage mich manchmal: Wo kommt denn bei der Frage des Umweltschutzes der Mensch bei Ihnen vor?\n\nWo ist der Gewinn für die Umwelt, wenn wir die Lkws durch die Städte jagen, durch die engen Ortsdurchfahrten? Wo kommt der Mensch vor, wenn wir über Verkehrssicherheit reden? Wo kommt die Umwelt vor, wenn die Autos im Stau stehen? Deshalb ist ganz klar, dass wir eine klare Prioritätensetzung brauchen: Engpassbeseitigung, Lückenschlüsse. Das sieht der Bundesverkehrswegeplan 2030 vor. Ein großes Kompliment an den Bundesverkehrsminister.\n\nDas ist genau die richtige Entscheidung, die wir dort getroffen haben.\n\nLassen Sie mich noch ein Wort zur Öffentlichkeitsbeteiligung sagen. Es ist beispielhaft, was dort passiert ist; sie ist in diesem Umfang noch nie dagewesen. Auch da kann man natürlich fragen: Wie weit wird berücksichtigt, was Bürgerinnen und Bürger eingewendet haben? Sie haben zumindest die Chance gehabt, und sie sind gehört worden. Aber es gibt auch keinen Anspruch darauf, dass jeder Vorschlag umgesetzt wird. Ich wünsche mir manchmal, Sie wären bei den Projekten, die Sie immer bekämpft haben, so konsequent. Zu Stuttgart 21 hat es eine Volksabstimmung gegeben. Bis heute haben Sie noch nicht das Ergebnis akzeptiert, und dann wollen Sie uns erzählen, dass die Öffentlichkeitsbeteiligung beim Bundesverkehrswegeplan nicht ausreichend gewesen sei.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir haben einen in die Zukunft gerichteten Plan vorgelegt. Er wird allen Kriterien, allen Eckpunkten, die wir gesetzt haben, gerecht. Es ist ein vernünftiger Plan, ein guter Plan, ein vernünftiges und gutes Zukunftsprogramm für Deutschland.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n10749,hans-michelbach,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Von der Wiege bis zur Bahre - Formulare, Formulare. - Dieser Spottreim wird dank des nun im Entwurf vorliegenden Gesetzes bald weniger zutreffen; denn mit dem heutigen Durchgang schließt der Deutsche Bundestag die Beratung des Entwurfs eines Gesetzes der Bundesregierung zur Modernisierung des Besteuerungsverfahrens nach ausführlicher Diskussion ab. Der Titel des Gesetzes ist sicher ein sehr hoher Anspruch - das will ich gern zugeben -, und doch macht dieses Gesetz den Weg für ein ganzes Bündel von Maßnahmen frei, die Steuerbürger, aber auch Unternehmen und Finanzverwaltung in vielfältiger Hinsicht entlasten werden, nicht was die Höhe der Steuern anbetrifft - das wäre auch zu schön -, wohl aber was den Aufwand, die Administration, anbetrifft. Der Erfüllungsaufwand für die Bürger sinkt um 2,1 Millionen Stunden. Die Bürokratiekosten für die Wirtschaft verringern sich um jährlich 28 Millionen Euro, so festgestellt.\n\nMit dem Gesetz werden drei Schwerpunkte gesetzt:\n\nErstens werden die Wirtschaftlichkeit und die Effizienz des Besteuerungsverfahrens durch einen verstärkten Automatisationseinsatz sichtbar erhöht, zum Beispiel durch den Ausbau von Risikomanagementsystemen in der Finanzverwaltung.\n\nZweitens wird die Handhabbarkeit des Besteuerungsverfahrens nachhaltig vereinfacht. Dies wird zum Beispiel durch die Verlängerung der Abgabefristen und den Wegfall von Belegvorlagepflichten erreicht.\n\nDrittens erfolgt eine Neugestaltung der rechtlichen Grundlagen, insbesondere bei der Abgabenordnung, etwa durch die Anpassung des Amtsermittlungsgrundsatzes oder durch Veränderungen beim Verspätungszuschlag. Dabei bleibt das „One in, one out“-Prinzip der Bundesregierung erhalten, sodass es zu keinem Aufwuchs der Bürokratie kommen wird.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, das ist heute ein guter Tag. Es ist ein gutes Gesetz für Steuerbürger und Finanzverwaltung.\n\nWer kennt sie nicht, die Klage des normalen Steuerbürgers, wenn es darum geht, die Steuererklärung fertigzustellen? Auch die steuerberatenden Berufe klagen immer wieder darüber, dass unterschiedliche Fristen zu beachten sind. Natürlich haben wir in der Vergangenheit schon manches vereinfacht. Vieles in diesem Bereich der Steuerpolitik ist aber noch zu vereinfachen.\n\nIch will an dieser Stelle die elektronische Steuererklärung nennen, die von manchen anfangs skeptisch beäugt wurde und inzwischen längst ein Renner ist. Aber wir müssen selbstkritisch einräumen, dass das Besteuerungsverfahren nicht mit der rasanten Entwicklung der Möglichkeiten im IT-Zeitalter Schritt gehalten hat. Das ist weder gut für die Bürger noch gut für die Unternehmen oder die Finanzverwaltung. Deshalb war es an der Zeit, den Modernisierungsrückstand aufzuholen und den Blick nach vorne zu richten. Das tun wir heute mit diesem Gesetz.\n\nDen Blick nach vorne zu richten, heißt vor allem auch, den Einsatz medienbruchfreier automatisierter Verfahren in der Steuerverwaltung zu verstärken. Das macht die Berechnungsverfahren schneller und verhilft den Steuerbürgern rascher zu ihrem Geld, wenn sie Anspruch auf Steuerrückzahlungen haben.\n\nDie Gesetzesänderung bringt für die Bürger eine ganze Reihe von Vorteilen: Zum Ersten werden sie von unnötigem Bürokratieaufwand entlastet, zum Zweiten verlängert sich die Abgabefrist für die Steuererklärung um immerhin zwei Monate, und zum Dritten müssen sie zukünftig weniger Belege an das Finanzamt übersenden. Zuwendungsbescheinigungen, Bescheinigungen über Kapitalertragsteuer oder die Feststellung über den Grad der Behinderung müssen durch die Steuerpflichtigen nur noch vorgehalten und nicht mehr als Einzelbelege übersandt werden.\n\nAber auch für die Wirtschaft ist manches einfacher geworden. Für die Unternehmen sinken die Bürokratiekosten. Das handelsrechtliche Aktivierungswahlrecht für Kosten der allgemeinen Verwaltung sowie für Aufwendungen für soziale Einrichtungen des Betriebs gilt künftig auch für die Steuerbilanz. Das ist ein wesentlicher Vorteil. Die Doppelerfassungen in Handels- und Steuerbilanz entfallen, und das ist ein echter Vorteil für die Unternehmensbilanz.\n\nEin Vorteil für die mittelständische Wirtschaft ist auch die bessere Planbarkeit der Steuerforderungen, weil wir das Instrument der verbindlichen Auskunft stärken. So erhalten Steuerpflichtige schneller Rechtssicherheit bei der steuerlichen Beurteilung komplexer Einzelfälle. Die Finanzämter sollen zukünftig über einen Antrag auf verbindliche Auskunft grundsätzlich innerhalb von sechs Monaten entscheiden. Damit ist eine gewisse Sicherheit für den Steuerbürger, für das Unternehmen gegeben; insbesondere ist eine Planbarkeit der Liquidität in den Unternehmen besser möglich. Auch das ist ein großer Vorteil unseres Gesetzes.\n\nEines möchte ich noch anfügen: In der Öffentlichkeit hat es heftige Debatten um den im Gesetz verankerten Verspätungszuschlag gegeben, der erhoben wird, wenn die Abgabefrist für eine Steuererklärung überschritten wird. Meine Damen und Herren, ein Verspätungszuschlag ist nichts Neues. Es gibt ihn schon lange. Er wird aber bislang durch die Bearbeiter im Finanzamt nach individuellem Ermessen festgesetzt. Das erscheint mir weder ein gerechtes noch ein vom Aufwand her zu rechtfertigendes Verfahren zu sein. Deshalb wird der Verspätungszuschlag künftig im automatisierten Verfahren erhoben. Außerdem wird er von 50 auf 25 Euro gesenkt. Auch das ist ein wesentlicher Vorteil.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Schluss sagen: Eine Gerechtigkeitslücke für unsere Steuerzahler bleibt leider noch zu schließen.\n\nAngesichts der Niedrigzinsphase hätte ich mir gewünscht, dass wir bei der Vollverzinsung eine Senkung vornehmen. Doch leider kam es aufgrund fehlender Wirtschaftsfreundlichkeit zu keiner befristeten Absenkung des Zinssatzes von 0,5 auf 0,4 Prozent für Steuererstattungen und Steuernachzahlungen. Wir müssen uns, auch um die Glaubwürdigkeit des Staates als Fiskus zu verbessern, dafür einsetzen, solche Gerechtigkeitslücken nicht zuzulassen.\n\nEs kann nicht sein, dass wir eine Niedrigzinssituation haben und sich der Staat mit großem Profit bei den Steuerzahlern in diesem Bereich schadlos hält, meine Damen und Herren. Deswegen müssen wir darauf bestehen, dass das mit einer nächsten Gesetzesänderung angegangen wird. Dies ist ein gutes Gesetz; aber wir sind noch nicht am Ende der Fahnenstange.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n10246,katrin-werner,\"Mir ist bekannt, dass die Antwort richtig ist. Bei dieser Fragestellung konnte auch nur diese Antwort kommen. Deswegen möchte ich meine Frage etwas umformulieren: Können Sie kurz darauf eingehen, wie es zu dem ganzen Hin und Her kam? Das ist ja auch der Hintergrund meiner Frage, wer den Vorstand jetzt bildet.\n\nEnde März kam aus dem Hause der Bundesbeauftragten für den Datenschutz und die Informationsfreiheit ein beglaubigtes Schreiben, in dem formuliert wurde, dass ein anberaumter Termin nicht stattfinden kann, weil es zum Rücktritt des Vorstandes gekommen ist. Jetzt gab es aus Ihrem Hause - von Herrn Linzbach - ein Schreiben, in dem einfach nur bestätigt wurde, dass der Vorstand im Amt ist. Dem entnehme ich, dass es zu einem kurzzeitigen Ruhen des Amtes gekommen ist. Vielleicht können Sie darauf noch einmal kurz eingehen.\n\nAuch diese Antwort überrascht mich nicht, aber meines Wissens besteht der Vorstand ja eigentlich aus drei Personen. Schon vor längerer Zeit gab es einen Rücktritt. Insofern möchte ich meine erste Nachfrage genau auf diesen Rücktritt beziehen: Was wurde unternommen, um den dritten Vorstandsposten wieder zu besetzen, und wann soll er wieder besetzt werden?\n\nEine habe ich noch. - Es geht noch einmal um die Konsequenzen. Ich bin vorhin ja schon darauf eingegangen: Wir haben ein kurzzeitiges Ruhen des Amtes wahrgenommen. Dafür muss es ja irgendwelche Hintergründe geben. Gibt es demnächst Konsequenzen, Umstrukturierungen oder sonst irgendetwas? Es muss ja einen Grund für diesen ganzen Vorgang geben.\"\n2661,annette-sawade,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren auf den Besuchertribünen, dieses Thema ist nicht ganz so einfach, es ist ein sehr technisches Thema. Aber vielleicht ver-stehen Sie doch etwas von dem, was ich hier sagen werde.\n\nAls ich in der vergangenen Woche auf einer Konferenz zum Schienenlärm in Lahnstein war, zitierte einer der Podiumsteilnehmer den Mediziner und Mikrobiologen Robert Koch, der hier in der Nähe gearbeitet hat. Dieser hat 1910 gesagt: „Eines Tages wird der Mensch den Lärm ebenso unerbittlich bekämpfen müssen wie die Cholera und die Pest.“ Mehr als 100 Jahre später sind wir natürlich fest entschlossen, dass es so weit nicht kommen darf. Deshalb ist es wichtig, dass wir konti-nuierlich und konsequent daran arbeiten, unsere Bürgerinnen und Bürger vor weiterem Verkehrslärm zu schützen, auch wenn wir natürlich alle von allen immer mehr Mobilität fordern.\n\nSchauen wir uns die Daten der kürzlich vorgestellten Verkehrsprognose 2030 - sie wurde vorhin schon erwähnt - an: Bis 2030 werden starke Zuwächse bei der Transportleistung erwartet, vor allem im Güterverkehr. Hier wird, ausgehend vom Basisjahr 2010, mit einem Zuwachs von 38 Prozent gerechnet. Allein für den Teilbereich der Bahn geht die Bundesregierung von einem Zuwachs von 43 Prozent aus, gefolgt vom Lkw-Verkehr von rund 39 Prozent und von der Binnenschifffahrt von 23 Prozent. Damit ist die Bahn im Bereich des Güterverkehrs Spitzenreiter. Das ist per se auch unser Wunsch: mehr Güter auf die Schiene. Das heißt, 43 Prozent mehr Bahnverkehr bis 2030.\n\nHeißt das in der Konsequenz: mehr Züge, mehr Lärm? Die Bürgerinnen und Bürger, die an diesen Bahnstrecken wohnen - ich habe schon einige besucht -, haben natürlich diese Befürchtung. Sie werden diese Debatte heute mit Sicherheit beobachten und sehen, über welche Änderungen wir abstimmen und mit welchen Argumenten wir unsere Entscheidungen begründen. Deshalb sind wir, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, aufge-fordert, die Rahmenbedingungen zu schaffen, dass Verkehre, sei es auf der Straße, auf der Schiene oder in der Luft, umweltgerecht, sicher und leise werden.\n\nMit der uns vorliegenden Verordnung zur Änderung der Sechzehnten Verordnung zur Durchführung des Bundes-Immissionsschutzgesetzes bezüglich der Schienenverkehre, also Schall 03, haben wir einen Schritt in die richtige Richtung gemacht. Warum war diese Fortschreibung so notwendig? Warum warten wir nicht, wie von den anderen Fraktionen gefordert, bis alle geäußerten Kritikpunkte und Ergänzungen formuliert bzw. die europäische Umgebungslärmrichtlinie beschlossen wird? Einige Punkte möchte ich nennen.\n\nMit der Modernisierung des Berechnungsverfahrens für den Schienenverkehrslärm, also der Schall 03, wird das Verfahren dem heutigen Stand der Berechnungsmethodik angepasst. Damit sind exakte rechnerische Bestimmungen der tatsächlichen Geräuschimmissionen an Schienenstrecken unter Berücksichtigung aller Randbedingungen möglich, zum Beispiel unterschiedliche Brückenarten und Beachtung der Wasserflächen.\n\nDarüber hinaus wird der heutige Kenntnisstand über die schalltechnischen Eigenschaften von Schienenfahrzeugen und Fahrwegen einschließlich neuer Lärmminderungstechniken berücksichtigt. Es wurde ja gesagt: Der Lärm wird geringer, weil wir bessere Techniken anwenden. Deswegen muss man auch andere Berechnungsverfahren zugrunde legen.\n\nIm Einzelnen geht es also darum, aktuelle Schienenfahrzeuge und Schallschutztechniken am Schienenweg und den aktuellen Stand der EDV-Berechnungsverfahren zu berücksichtigen, Verfahren für die akustische Anerkennung innovativer Bahntechnik einzuführen, die Umrüstung der Bestandswagen - das wurde noch nicht erwähnt, ist aber ganz wichtig - auf LL-Sohlen künftig in die Rechenverfahren einzubeziehen und den Schienenbonus, der zum 1. Januar 2015 glücklicherweise wegfällt, in die Berechnungen einzubeziehen. Das, was an Kritik kommt, muss man überprüfen. Ich bin nicht sicher, dass all das, was hier gesagt wurde, so stimmt, dass also manches durch die Hintertür herausgerechnet werden kann.\n\nEs gab kurz nach Bekanntwerden der aktuellen Vorlage zahlreiche Kritik seitens betroffener Bürgerinnen und Bürger, Initiativen und Fachexperten. Deshalb war es gut, dass wir die Anhörung zu dieser Vorlage durchgeführt haben. Wir wollten nämlich wissen, wie weit das vorgelegte Berechnungsmodell der Schall 03 die unterschiedlichen Forderungen dieser Interessengruppen tatsächlich berücksichtigt. Der allgemeine Tenor der Anhörung war nämlich der, dass eine Änderung und eine Fortschreibung der Schall 03 dringend erforderlich sind.\n\nAber die Anhörung hat auch gezeigt, dass die Schall 03 als Berechnungsgrundlage für den Lärmschutz an Neu- und Ausbaustrecken im Schienenverkehr weiterentwickelt werden muss. Wir sind auf dem Weg; denn das war für uns kein Grund, gar nichts zu tun und abzuwarten, bis die erwähnten Arbeiten und Abstimmungen erledigt sind. Bitte, Kollegen, lesen Sie unseren Entschließungsantrag. Prüfen heißt auch, wie Sie wissen, Schlussfolgerungen aus den Prüfungen zu ziehen und entsprechend zu reagieren. Dafür gibt es schließlich Prüfaufträge.\n\n- Ich habe es im Verkehrsausschuss schon gesagt.\n\nDeshalb haben wir gemeinsam mit der CDU/CSU einen Entschließungsantrag eingebracht, der diese erforderlichen Fortentwicklungen aufzeigt und einfordert. Ich nenne einige Punkte.\n\nWir wollen uns darum kümmern, dass mindestens die Standards der Schall 03 unabhängig von den Arbeiten an der EU-Umgebungslärmrichtlinie beibehalten bleiben und alle Weiterentwicklungen in enger Abstimmung mit der EU-Richtlinie erfolgen. Es ist zu prüfen, wie das Spitzenpegelkriterium in die Berechnungsannahmen eingefügt werden kann. Der Fahrflächenzustand muss analog dem besonders überwachten Gleis endlich standardisiert beschrieben werden. Denn nur dann kann daraus eine gesetzlich veranlagte Verpflichtung der regelmäßigen Gleispflege werden. Der Wegfall des Schienenbonus wurde eingerechnet. Auch dies muss nachvollziehbar sein.\n\nWir müssen umsetzen, was in der Verordnung zugesagt wurde, nämlich anhand von Modellrechnungen und Testbeispielen ermöglichen, dass Außenstehende die Berechnungen nachvollziehen können. Bürgerinitiativen, aber auch beauftragte Ingenieurbüros müssen in der Lage sein, auch die komplizierten Algorithmen zu verstehen und verwenden zu können.\n\nMit der Zustimmung zu dieser Verordnung gibt es auch die erforderliche Rechtssicherheit - das wurde schon erwähnt - sowohl im Planfeststellungsverfahren als auch bei der Umsetzung innovativer Schallschutzmaßnahmen. Wir erwarten spätestens zum vierten Quartal 2016 einen entsprechenden Bericht der Bundesregierung zum Sachstand der formulierten Forderungen.\n\nIch erwähne noch kurz ein paar Stichworte aus dem Koalitionsvertrag. Wir wollen den Schienenlärm deutschlandweit bis 2020 halbieren. Wir wollen ordnungsrechtliche Maßnahmen, zum Beispiel Nachtfahrverbote, umsetzen, sollte bis 2016 nicht mindestens die Hälfte der in Deutschland verkehrenden Güterwagen umgerüstet sein. Wir wollen die Umrüstung auf lärmmindernde Bremsen fortsetzen und gegebenenfalls auch stärker Druck machen. Denn es kann nicht sein, dass manche Unternehmen vorschlagen, mit der Umrüstung zu warten, bis es nicht mehr geht, und somit die höheren Wartungskosten zu sparen. Das ist nicht in unserem Sinn und benachteiligt die, die bereits vorbildlich umgerüstet haben.\n\nJa, es lärmt vielfältig um uns herum.\n\nAber wir alle wollen auch umfassende Mobilität für uns selbst und für die Anlieferung der von uns bestellten Güter. Deshalb ist es wichtig, beim Anwachsen der Mobilität Mensch und Umwelt und damit die erhöhte Lärm-belästigung, die auch gesundheitliche Auswirkungen hat, nicht zu vergessen. Wir müssen uns darum kümmern, dass die Lärmbelastung nicht größer, sondern kleiner wird, und da ist die Kombination aus passivem und aktivem Lärmschutz und die rasche Umsetzung technischer Weiterentwicklungen hin zu einer Gesamtlärmbetrachtung und -bewertung der richtige Weg.\n\nDie Akzeptanz für eine weitere Ertüchtigung der Verkehrsinfrastruktur können wir nur erreichen, wenn wir die Lärmbelastung der Bevölkerung reduzieren. Die Novellierung der Verkehrslärmschutzverordnung ist ein Schritt auf einem, wie ich hoffe, nicht allzu langen Weg.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n7221,kirsten-tackmann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Gäste auf den Tribünen! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der gefährliche Unkrautvernichter Glyphosat ist in aller Munde, und zwar leider nicht nur im übertragenen Sinne. Das hat der BUND vor fast zwei Jahren in einer Studie gezeigt. 182 Urinproben von Menschen aus Großstädten in 18 Ländern Europas wurden auf Glyphosat untersucht, und in keinem einzigen Land waren alle Proben frei von Glyphosat. Im Gegenteil: In Malta wurde in 90 Prozent der Urinproben, in Deutschland immer noch in 70 Prozent der Proben Glyphosat gefunden. Ich finde das alarmierend.\n\nNein, das ist keine repräsentative Studie. Aber selbst das Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung hält die Ergebnisse für plausibel. Die Messwerte liegen zwar unterhalb der Schwelle der gesundheitlichen Unbedenklichkeit, aber sind ein Hinweis auf eine allgemeine Hintergrundbelastung europäischer Bürgerinnen und Bürger mit Glyphosat. Ich finde das bedenklich.\n\nAber bis heute wurde keine einzige repräsentative Studie in Auftrag gegeben, um diese alarmierenden Ergebnisse entweder zu widerlegen oder zu bestätigen. Das finde ich fahrlässig. Wir brauchen hier endlich Klarheit.\n\nBis dahin sollten wir davon ausgehen, dass der BUND recht hat. Dann stellen sich aber mindestens drei dringende Fragen: Erstens. Warum wird so häufig Glyphosat im Urin von Menschen gefunden? Zweitens. Welche Risiken sind damit verbunden? Drittens. Was kann oder, besser gesagt, was muss getan werden?\n\nWarum haben so viele Menschen Glyphosat im Urin? Das ist der Fall, weil Glyphosat sehr häufig in der Landwirtschaft eingesetzt wird und so in die Lebensmittel gelangt. Vielleicht haben Sie schon einmal im Frühjahr Äcker gesehen, auf denen alle Pflanzen totgespritzt waren. Das ist Unkrautbekämpfung mit Glyphosat. Wenn ein Mähdrescher einmal nicht schnell genug für die Ernte bereitsteht oder die Ernte nicht gleichmäßig genug reift - die Antwort ist Glyphosat. Das wurde im Sommer 2014 selbst dem Bundesamt für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit zu krass, und es schränkte die Zulassung ein. Immerhin! Ob es daran liegt oder an der öffentlichen Debatte, zumindest habe ich in meiner Heimatregion Priegnitz in diesem Frühjahr seltener totgespritzte Felder gesehen.\n\nAber auch für den Haus- und Kleingartenbereich sind 51 glyphosathaltige Mittel zugelassen. Man kann sie kanisterweise im Baumarkt kaufen, angeblich mit Beratung; nun ja. Bei www.amazon.de gibt es 500 Milliliter Roundup Easy für 17,63 Euro, gänzlich ohne Beratung. In Nord- und Südamerika werden glyphosatresistente Gentech-Pflanzen, zum Beispiel Roundup-Ready-Soja, in großem Stil angebaut und nach Europa importiert. Auch so kommt Glyphosat in den Urin der europäischen Bevölkerung. Glyphosat ist unterdessen das weltweit am stärksten verbreitete Pflanzenschutzmittel. Das ist ein Riesengeschäft für Monsanto, und zwar auf unsere Kosten.\n\nUmso wichtiger ist die zweite Frage: Welche Risiken sind damit verbunden? Die ökologischen Risiken sind im Grundsatz klar. Wenn auf einem Acker ausschließlich Mais, Getreide oder Kartoffeln wachsen dürfen, ist das eine ökologische Wüste. Auch Hinweise auf Schäden bei Lebewesen in Gewässern gibt es, übrigens auch von Bundesoberbehörden. Über das konkrete Ausmaß der ökologischen Schäden wissen wir fast nichts. Aber noch größer sind die Wissenslücken bei den gesundheitlichen Risiken. Es gibt zwar immer wieder Hinweise auf erhebliche Tiergesundheitsprobleme bei Rindern und Schweinen, die mit Glyphosat in Verbindung gebracht werden. Aber offiziell wurden diese gesundheitlichen Risiken immer verneint - bis zum Paukenschlag Ende März, als die Internationale Agentur für Krebsforschung der WHO - das ist schon erwähnt worden - Glyphosat als „wahrscheinlich krebserregend“ eingestuft hat.\n\nJa, die wissenschaftliche Dokumentation dazu liegt erst Mitte Juli vor, und ja, es ist völlig legitim, diese noch einmal zu überprüfen. Aber dass Union und Bundesregierung schon vorab die wissenschaftliche Kompetenz dieser WHO-Agentur infrage stellen, finde ich absolut inakzeptabel.\n\nIch muss ehrlich sagen: Diese deutsche Arroganz ist erschreckend und hochnotpeinlich.\n\nDamit kommen wir zur dritten Frage: Was muss jetzt eigentlich getan werden? Die Forderungen der Linken liegen seit einem Jahr vor. Wenn die Krebsforscher der WHO recht haben, dann sind das, was wir fordern, nur die allernötigsten Maßnahmen.\n\nUnsere erste Forderung wird von vielen Baumärkten - vielleicht in vorauseilendem Gehorsam - schon umgesetzt. Sie nehmen Glyphosat aus dem Sortiment, und das ist auch gut so.\n\nWas sagt es eigentlich über unser Land, wenn Baumärkte vorsorgender denken als die Bundesregierung?\n\nZweitens. Glyphosat gehört nicht in die Ernte. Drittens wollen wir mehr Forschung zu ökologischen und gesundheitlichen Risiken. Das kann man nun wirklich nicht ablehnen.\"\n6162,inge-hoger,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Wir erleben zurzeit den Wechsel von der Außenpolitik der Zurückhaltung von Guido Westerwelle hin zu einer Politik der Übernahme von mehr Verantwortung. Damit einher geht eine massive Aufrüstung der NATO und der Bundeswehr. Was die Große Koalition seit 2013 als Abrüstungspolitik verkauft, verdient diesen Namen leider nicht.\n\nNehmen wir zum Beispiel den Verbleib der US-Atomwaffen in Deutschland. Darüber haben Sie in Ihrer Rede kein Wort verloren. Herr Westerwelle hat zwar auch nichts für diesen so dringend notwendigen Abzug getan; aber er hat immerhin die Forderung formuliert. Davon sind wir heute meilenweit entfernt. Stattdessen modernisieren die USA ihr Nukleararsenal in Rheinland-Pfalz, und die Bundesregierung hat offensichtlich nichts dagegen.\n\nDie neuen modernen Atombomben sollen dann leichter und zielgenauer eingesetzt werden. Was für ein Hohn! Die Linke bleibt dabei: Die Atomwaffen müssen sofort abgezogen werden. Auch die Bereitstellung von Bundeswehrflugzeugen als Trägersysteme und die Ausbildung deutscher Soldatinnen und Soldaten für den atomaren Ernstfall muss endlich ein Ende haben.\n\nEin weniger bekanntes Beispiel für die abrüstungsfeindliche Politik von Schwarz-Rot ist das Abstimmungsverhalten der Bundesrepublik auf UN-Ebene zum Thema Uranmunition.\n\nRegelmäßig bringen Indonesien und andere Staaten Resolutionen in der UN-Generalversammlung ein, die den Einsatz von Waffen mit abgereichertem Uran problematisieren. In der Vergangenheit hatte die Bundesregierung diesen Resolutionen immer zugestimmt; im vergangenen Jahr hat sie sich leider nur enthalten. Das ist angesichts der vielen Zivilistinnen und Zivilisten, die durch die Einwirkung von abgereichertem Uran erkrankt oder verstorben sind, absolut beschämend. Ich appelliere an die Bundesregierung: Geben Sie sich einen Ruck, und setzen Sie sich gegen den Einsatz von Uranwaffen ein!\n\nAber zurück zur weitaus zerstörerischsten und unmenschlichsten Waffe, der Atombombe. Uns liegt heute ein Antrag vor, in dem die Bundesregierung aufgefordert wird, der Humanitären Initiative beizutreten. Deren Ziel ist es, die Strategie der nuklearen Abschreckung als das zu bezeichnen, was sie ist: ein Spiel mit dem Leben von Millionen unschuldiger Zivilistinnen und Zivilisten. Jeder Einsatz von Atombomben hätte katastrophale Folgen für das Überleben unseres Planeten. Kein Staat und keine internationale Organisation wären in der Lage, humanitäre Hilfe zu leisten. In diesem Zusammenhang macht es mir große Sorgen, wenn der US-Kongress im Rahmen der Ukraine-Krise mit der Kündigung des Vertrages droht, der den Einsatz nuklearer Mittelstreckenraketen verbietet. Die Bundesregierung sollte entgegen ihrer bisherigen Gewohnheit deeskalierend auf diesen Konflikt wirken. Jeder Drohung, Atomwaffen einzusetzen, muss unmissverständlich widersprochen werden.\n\nIn einigen Wochen wird die Überprüfungskonferenz zum Nuklearen Nichtverbreitungsvertrag in New York stattfinden. Noch nie war dieser Atomwaffensperrvertrag so sehr in Gefahr wie momentan. Grund dafür ist unter anderem die Stagnation bei der Umsetzung der 2010 beschlossenen Konferenz für eine Zone ohne Massenvernichtungswaffen im Nahen und Mittleren Osten.\n\nViele Staaten der Region fühlen sich nicht mehr sicher, und sie haben recht: Was hilft ein Atomwaffensperrvertrag, an den sich nicht alle Staaten halten? Es ist gut, dass es bei den Atomverhandlungen mit dem Iran Fortschritte gibt. Ähnliche Fortschritte sind aber auch mit der inoffiziellen Atommacht Israel notwendig. Entweder dürfen alle Atomwaffen haben oder keiner.\n\nIch bin dafür, dass kein Staat Atombomben besitzen darf.\n\nDie Linke setzt sich für eine Welt ohne Atomwaffen und ohne Atomkraftwerke ein. Wenn Sie das auch wollen, dann müssen Sie dem Antrag zustimmen.\"\n14243,jorn-wunderlich,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Teufelchen!\n\nIn erster Linie handelt es sich hier um ein begrüßenswertes Vorhaben. Die seit langem geforderten an vielen Stellen sinnvollen Änderungen und die sprachliche Straffung sind ja ganz gut, aber dann hört es auch schon fast auf.\n\nAufgrund meiner knappen Redezeit möchte ich mich hier auf zwei Punkte beschränken, die Herr Flisek schon angesprochen hat. Es geht um die Konkretisierung der anwaltlichen Fortbildung. Dieses Thema ist bislang geregelt in § 43a der Bundesrechtsanwaltsordnung. Dort heißt es: „Der Rechtsanwalt ist verpflichtet, sich fortzubilden.“ Die Fortbildungspflicht besteht also schon.\n\nJetzt will man den Kammern die Möglichkeit eröffnen, das auszugestalten, Sanktionen zu verhängen und die Briefwahl zu ermöglichen. So war es im ursprünglichen Gesetzentwurf vorgesehen. Zu den geplanten Änderungen gehörte auch die Einführung der Pflicht, im Zusammenhang mit der Zulassung Kenntnisse im Anwaltsrecht zu erlangen; auch das war erfreulich. Dies sollte den Verbraucher und letztlich auch den Anwalt schützen und absichern. Man muss sich doch nur einmal den Vergleich mit anderen Berufsgruppen anschauen, mit Ärzten oder Lehrern beispielsweise, für die die Fortbildung auch bindend ist. Und um den Start in die Anwaltstätigkeit nicht zu sehr zu erschweren - das ist schon angesprochen worden -, sollte die Teilnahme an diesen Lehrveranstaltungen auch noch im ersten Jahr nach der Zulassung möglich sein.\n\nJetzt komme ich zum Kernstück der Fortbildungspflicht: Auch die Regelung, dass seitens der Kammer Sanktionen bei Nichtbeachtung der Pflicht verhängt werden können, wäre sinnvoll gewesen. Das Tolle ist, dass der Kollege Flisek von der SPD in der ersten Lesung diese Regelung noch als sinnvoll erachtet hat.\n\nEr hat in der ersten Lesung vor sechs Monaten hier gesagt - ich zitiere aus dem Protokoll -:\n\n... eine Fortbildungspflicht ohne entsprechenden Druck zur tatsächlichen Durchsetzung der Verpflichtung ist inkonsequent.\n\nIch weiß gar nicht, was die Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Koalition gegen Sanktionen haben. Bei Hartz IV sind Sie doch auch nicht so zimperlich.\n\nDie Koalition fand die von der Bundesregierung vorgeschlagene Regelung gut, die Opposition findet sie gut, die betroffenen Berufsverbände finden sie gut. Alle wollen das, und trotzdem wird diese Regelung wieder gestrichen. Das soll man mal einem erklären. Ich kann das keinem erklären.\n\n- Ja, das meinen Sie, dass Sie das erklären können.\n\n- Das war aber ein untauglicher Versuch - um im Juristendeutsch zu bleiben.\n\nNachdem bekannt wurde, dass die Koalition die Weiterbildungspflicht aus dem Gesetzentwurf streichen will - sie wurde letztlich auch gestrichen - meldeten sich sowohl die Bundesrechtsanwaltskammer als auch der Deutsche Anwaltsverein und baten darum, diese verpflichtende Fortbildung der Satzungsversammlung der Bundesrechtsanwaltskammer zu ermöglichen. Wenn jetzt wieder das Argument kommt, der Vorstand der Bundesrechtsanwaltskammer, die Vorstände aller Kammern seien mangels Teilnahme der Mitglieder an den Vorstandswahlen gar nicht hinreichend legitimiert - solche Argumente habe ich gehört -,\n\nmöchte ich Sie fragen, auf welche Legitimität Sie sich berufen, wenn hier im Parlament Gesetzentwürfe mit 30 Jastimmen verabschiedet werden.\n\nDarüber hinaus sollte die Briefwahl durch jeweiligen Kammerbeschluss und nicht generell eröffnet werden. Gerade durch die unterschiedliche Größe der einzelnen Kammerbezirke - das ist angesprochen worden - sollte diese Entscheidung den einzelnen Kammern im Rahmen ihrer funktionalen Selbstverwaltung vorbehalten bleiben.\n\nNun aber soll die verbindlich vorgesehene Briefwahl in der Form erfolgen können, dass die Briefwahlzettel auch in der Kammerversammlung abgegeben werden können. Tolle Regelung!\n\nGut ist, dass die Koalition mit ihrem Änderungsantrag - so wie auch die Linke - dafür gesorgt hat, dass die Änderung im Rechtsdienstleistungsgesetz dergestalt vorgenommen wird, dass unqualifizierte Rechtsdienstleistungsangebote aus dem Ausland heraus nicht mehr möglich sein sollen. Aber dies allein kann die bestehenden Mängel nicht ausgleichen.\n\nAlles in allem wird meine Fraktion daher dieses Gesetz ablehnen, es sei denn, der Änderungsantrag der Grünen findet hier in diesem Hohen Hause Zustimmung. Dann können wir dem Gesetz zustimmen, weil er den alten Rechtsstand wiederherstellte, so wie vom Justizministerium und der Regierung gewollt, von den Beteiligten gewünscht und ursprünglich von allen Parlamentariern hier im Haus auch gewollt.\n\nDanke für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n11854,bettina-hagedorn,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Dieser letzte gemeinsame Haushalt dieser Großen Koalition, der Haushalt für das kommende Jahr, unterstreicht gerade im Verkehrsbereich noch einmal ganz deutlich, wofür wir gemeinsam stehen, nämlich dass wir miteinander Dinge angepackt haben, die dringend erforderlich waren, über die in dieser Republik auch lange geredet wurde, zum Beispiel das Thema Digitales. Jetzt haben wir hier, und zwar nicht erst in diesem Haushaltsjahr, sondern schon kontinuierlich in den vergangenen Haushaltsjahren, einen Mittelaufwuchs, und das ist ein richtig gutes Signal.\n\nDer Minister hat die Zahl genannt: Es sind fast 27 Milliarden Euro, die in diesem Jahr insgesamt zur Verfügung stehen. Es ist nicht alles frisches Geld. 4,35 Milliarden Euro hatten wir schon im Mai letzten Jahres mit dem Zukunftsinvestitionsprogramm beschlossen. Diese Mittel waren bisher in einem Extraetat, aber jetzt sind sie vollumfänglich, Herr Minister, in Ihrem Etat angekommen und verstärken, wie von uns gewollt, insbesondere die Bereiche Straße, Schiene, Wasserwege, aber auch - darauf will ich kurz zu sprechen kommen - den Bereich Digitales.\n\nEines ist mir wichtig: Wenn wir hier alle miteinander feststellen, wie viel Geld wir für diesen Etat bereitgestellt haben, wie erfolgreich wir da waren, dann lautet logischerweise die Wahrheit aber auch: Privates Geld brauchen wir nicht. Das schaffen wir öffentlich-rechtlich.\n\nDarum nur ein Wort zu der Infrastrukturplanungsgesellschaft; auch Sie, Herr Minister, haben das Wort in den Mund genommen. Dazu gibt es offensichtlich verschiedene Vorstellungen zwischen Ihrem Haus und dem Haus von Herrn Schäuble; auch die 16 Länder wollen eigentlich gar nicht, dass sich irgendetwas verändert.\n\nDas finde ich ein bisschen schade, weil wir schon dringenden Optimierungsbedarf in diesem Bereich haben. Eines will ich aber festhalten: Für die SPD ist ganz klar - da haben wir eine Beschlusslage mit Haushältern, mit Verkehrs- und Wirtschaftspolitikern -,\n\ndass, wenn es zu einer solchen Gesellschaft kommen sollte, auf jeden Fall gelten muss: null Privatisierung in diesem Bereich. Das bleibt in öffentlich-rechtlicher Hand. - Vor allen Dingen wollen wir in hervorragender Weise Herstellung von Transparenz, Steuerung und Kontrolle durch das Parlament, und das geht nur, wenn es in öffentlicher Hand bleibt. - Dazu also eine klare Ansage.\n\nIm Zusammenhang mit dem Aufwuchs im Bereich Digitales will ich auch erwähnen, dass mit den 4 Milliarden Euro, die wir in der Summe in dieser Legislatur bereitstellen, auch die Hälfte der Erlöse aus der Versteigerung der Frequenzen im letzten Jahr - 650 Millionen Euro round about - an die Länder gegangen ist, damit auch die Länder ihren Teil zu dieser Offensive, die wir gemeinsam machen, beitragen können und sie in Ländern, die finanziell nicht so viel vor der Brust haben, nicht ins Stocken kommt.\n\nHerr Kollege Claus, Sie haben hier angemahnt, dass dringend in den ländlichen Raum investiert werden müsste. Ich weiß nicht, ob Sie da vielleicht etwas verpasst haben: Wir machen dieses Programm für den ländlichen Raum.\n\nDas haben wir von Anfang an im Koalitionsvertrag so festgeschrieben, und das tun wir auch. „By the way“: Allein in diesem Jahr sind bis zum Sommer, obwohl die Förderrichtlinie ja erst im Herbst des letzten Jahres veröffentlicht worden ist, 651 Förderbescheide ergangen. Wir investieren also in den ländlichen Raum. Das ist doch eine gute Botschaft.\n\nWir müssen nun allerdings auch sicherstellen - das tun wir mit diesem Haushalt -, dass die Kommunen, die jetzt schon gefördert werden, um in die Planung einzusteigen, das Geld nachher auch wirklich kriegen, und zwar dann, wenn die Planungen beendet sind und gebaut werden kann. Ja, auch aus Sicht der SPD-Fraktion wäre es wünschenswert, dass ganz viel in Glasfaser investiert wird. Trotzdem ist es richtig, dass die Kommunen und die Zweckverbände, die das planen, dies eigenständig tun können. Darum wird es eben auch Kupfer und Vectoring geben.\n\nWir hätten uns nur Glasfaser gewünscht. Aber wichtig ist, dass wir überall in den ländlichen Bereichen endlich von der Stelle kommen, und das schaffen wir.\n\nIn diesem Haushalt gibt es aber auch noch andere Bereiche, die manchmal angesichts der Investitionen in Straße, Schiene und Wasserwege, die im Fokus stehen, ein bisschen zu wenig betrachtet werden. Ein Beispiel ist die Mobilitäts- und Kraftstoffstrategie, in der wir ganz bewusst auf Innovationen setzen, in der es um LNG geht, in der es neben Investitionen für Fahrzeuge wie Lkw oder Busse, die auf der Straße verkehren, auch um Schiffe und um Innovationen bei der Hafeninfrastruktur geht. Das haben wir schon im letzten Haushalt so beschlossen. In diesem Bereich stellen wir enorme Mittel zur Verfügung. Wir hoffen natürlich, dass diese auch abgerufen werden.\n\nDas Gleiche gilt für das NIP; das ist das Nationale Innovationsprogramm Wasserstoff und Brennstoffzellentechnologie, das, wie der Name schon sagt, nach vorne gerichtet ist. Das sind Investitionen in die Zukunft, bei denen es auch darum geht, Anreize zu setzen, damit wir das Know-how in diesem Bereich und unsere Marktführerschaft weltweit an dieser Stelle weiter ausbauen und verstärken können; denn das sind die richtigen Signale - auch für die Fachkräfte, die wir in diesem Bereich haben.\n\nStichwort „Fachkräfte“. Das ist das wirklich große Nadelöhr an dieser Stelle. Herr Minister, natürlich müssen wir hier auch über die größte Bundesbehörde reden, die wir im Bereich Verkehr haben: die Wasserstraßen- und Schifffahrtsverwaltung mit über 12 000 Beschäftigten. Das ist ein Dauerthema in dieser Großen Koalition. Ich will noch einmal daran erinnern, dass es diesbezüglich unter Herrn Ramsauer gemeinsam mit der FDP eine ganz unselige Weichenstellung gegeben hat. Die nannte sich Reform, war aber keine, sondern war in Wahrheit ein gezielter Kahlschlag bei den Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern. Wir haben die Weichen umgestellt und machen das rückgängig. Aber leider stellen wir fest, dass das natürlich bei den Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern schon Spuren hinterlassen hat, was ihr Vertrauen anbelangt, was ihre Bereitschaft anbelangt, positive Reformprozesse mit uns zu gestalten. Ich finde, da muss noch mehr passieren.\n\nWir müssen uns vor allen Dingen um Fachkräfte wie Ingenieure kümmern, die wir im Bereich Technik dringend brauchen. Wir Haushälter haben da in den letzten Jahren finanziell immer noch eine Schippe draufgelegt - zu Recht -, und zwar in der Fläche und nicht bei der GDWS in Bonn. Herr Minister, wir würden uns natürlich wünschen, dass Sie unsere Beschlüsse auch noch ein bisschen - wie soll ich sagen? - zielgerichteter umsetzen. Das Konzept zur außertariflichen Bezahlung, das der Haushaltsausschuss bereits 2015 beschlossen hat, gibt Ihnen die Chance, gerade in diesem technischen Bereich im Bereich der Wasserstraßen- und Schifffahrtsverwaltung konsequent Leute anzuwerben, die man besser bezahlen muss, damit man sie überhaupt noch kriegt. Da ist nicht so richtig viel passiert, um das zurückhaltend zu sagen.\n\nWir, lieber Norbert Brackmann, haben im letzten November allein zehn Ingenieursstellen beschlossen, um zielgerichtet - nicht nur im Hafen Rostock, sondern auch beim Schiffshebewerk in Scharnebeck oder beim Nord-Ostsee-Kanal - die vielen Investitionen, die wir vorhaben, auch wirklich voranzubringen. Es nützt uns nichts, wenn Geld bereitsteht, das nicht ausgegeben werden kann, weil es nicht vorangeht. Als wir Haushälter im März auf unsere Nachfrage schriftlich informiert wurden, dass das Verkehrsministerium jetzt die Wasserstraßen- und Schifffahrtsverwaltung angewiesen hätte, eine Dienstpostenbeschreibung zu erstellen, haben wir schon Schnappatmung bekommen.\n\nWenn wir die dringend benötigten Stellen endlich ermöglichen und sie drei Monate später nicht nur nicht besetzt, sondern auch nicht ausgeschrieben sind und es nicht einmal eine Dienstpostenbeschreibung gibt, dann zeigt dies, wo dringend etwas geschehen muss. Hier sind wir an Ihrer Seite.\n\nBei den Investitionen, die vorgesehen sind - als Schleswig-Holsteinerin nenne ich hier explizit den Nord-Ostsee-Kanal; er ist die größte Wasserstraße der Welt und hat mehr Volumen als Suez- und Panamakanal zusammen -, haben wir in dieser Legislatur zu Recht über 850 Millionen Euro bereitgestellt, um einen riesigen Investitionsstau für diesen über 100 Jahre alten Kanal aufzuarbeiten. Aber die Zeitpläne, die wir uns gemeinsam vorgenommen haben - das sage ich ganz vorsichtig -, stocken. Wir müssen hier einen Zahn zulegen. Darum, Herr Minister, wenn Sie hier etwas tun wollen, dann sind wir an Ihrer Seite.\n\nIn diesem Sinne sage ich: Alles Gute! Ich freue mich auf die Haushaltsberatungen.\"\n1765,kirsten-luhmann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kollegen! Liebe Kolleginnen! Europa reiste einst auf einem Stier. Wenn wir der Sage glauben, geschah das nicht ganz freiwillig. Aber sie kam sicher ans Ziel. - In dem vorliegenden Bundeshaushalt geht es um etwas modernere Verkehrsmittel. Glücklicherweise haben wir heutzutage auch die Wahl, wie wir unsere Güter oder auch Personen von einem Ort zum anderen bewegen. Die Bundesregierung hat die Weichen dafür gestellt, dass diese sogenannte Multimodalität reibungslos funktioniert, in ganz Europa sogar grenzenlos.\n\nEs ist natürlich schwierig, Deutschland in dieser Mittellage so auszubauen, dass das alles so funktioniert, wie wir uns das vorstellen. Aber diese Mittellage ist für Deutschland auch ein Pfund, mit dem wir wuchern können. Durch diese Mittellage profitieren nämlich nicht nur unsere Logistikunternehmen, sondern auch die Menschen in unserem Lande mit ihrer individuellen Mobilität.\n\nDie EU hat nun mit den Leitlinien für die TEN, die transeuropäischen Netze, Korridore im Bereich von Straße, Schiene und Wasserstraße festgelegt, die vorrangig auszubauen sind. Insbesondere hat die Europäische Union dem Aspekt der Vernetzung, also der Möglichkeit, von einem Verkehrsträger auf den anderen zu wechseln, besondere Bedeutung zugemessen. Das findet sich auch in unserem Haushalt wieder. Auch dort haben wir Titel, mit deren Mitteln wir den Anlagenbau dadurch fördern, dass wir zum Beispiel Güter von der Schiene auf die Straße und umgekehrt transportieren können. Wir müssen nur darauf aufpassen, dass das Geld, das wir zur Verfügung stellen, seine Wirkung voll entfalten kann.\n\nNeben der Vernetzung der Verkehrsmittel ist es auch bedeutend, dass wir die Rahmenbedingungen bei der Mobilität europaweit harmonisieren. Neben den einheitlichen Sicherheitsstandards auf hohem Niveau sind insbesondere einheitliche Zulassungsverfahren im Eisenbahnbereich oder zum Beispiel Veränderungen beim Umbau von Lkw im Sinne einer CO2-Reduzierung wichtig, genauso aber wie die konsequente Umsetzung von EU-Urteilen zum Verbraucherschutz.\n\nDabei dürfen wir aber nicht aus den Augen verlieren, dass in einem so dicht besiedelten Land wie unserem die Belastung der Bevölkerung zum Beispiel durch Lärm eine besondere Bedeutung hat. Daher haben wir in diesem Haushalt die Mittel für den Lärmschutz an den Schienenwegen deutlich erhöht, und wir werden auch die Anstrengungen im Straßenbereich ausweiten.\n\nWeil wir den Straßenverkehr sicherer machen wollen, werden wir auch hier verstärkt auf Vernetzung setzen müssen, und zwar auf Vernetzung der Akteure auf der Straße von Telematik über Onlineparkplatzreservierungen an Autobahnen bis hin zu automatischen Abstandswarnungen. Hierbei wirkt es sich vorteilhaft aus, dass unser Ministerium jetzt auch für den Ausbau leistungsfähiger, mobiler und stationärer Zugänge zum Internet zuständig ist. Das ist eine Voraussetzung für alle diese Innovationen. Die Aktivitäten hierzu werden wir ab den folgenden Haushalten realistisch abbilden.\n\nAber zurück zu den TEN-Korridoren: Sie stellen die nationalen Regierungen, auch die unsere, vor große Herausforderungen, zumal Deutschland in besonderem Maße betroffen ist: Sechs von neun dieser Korridore verlaufen durch Deutschland. Mit der Aufstockung der Mittel für die Verkehrsinfrastruktur - mein Kollege Sören Bartol hat das schon ausgeführt - ist ein wichtiger Schritt hin zu einer besseren Finanzierung getan worden. Bei den Beratungen wird es jetzt darauf ankommen, dass bei der Verteilung dieser Mittel alle Verkehrsträger angemessen Berücksichtigung finden werden.\n\nBei der Realisierung unserer Projektideen werden wir aber mit der bisherigen Praxis der Verkehrswegeplanung die neuen Herausforderungen nicht meistern können. Der Bundesverkehrswegeplan war und ist in seiner jetzigen Form eher ein Wünsch-dir-was-Konzert. Realistische Priorisierungen, die sich an einem bundesweiten oder gar europäischen Netzgedanken orientieren, sind bis auf wenige Ausnahmen Fehlanzeige.\n\nAllein die höchste Kategorie „Vordringlicher Bedarf“ im aktuellen Bundesverkehrswegeplan enthält knapp 3 000 Kilometer Ortsumfahrungen, insgesamt etwa 800 Fernstraßenprojekte, 47 Schienenprojekte und 26 Wasserstraßenprojekte. Sie alle bei annähernd gleichbleibenden Mitteln zu bauen, würde uns 25 Jahre kosten. Allerdings läuft dieser Bundesverkehrswegeplan im nächsten Jahr aus.\n\nDie SPD-Bundestagsfraktion hat in der vergangenen Wahlperiode umfangreiche Konzepte zu einer zukunftsweisenden Verkehrspolitik vorgelegt und dabei einen Entwurf für eine moderne Verkehrsnetzplanung erarbeitet. In der Grundkonzeption für einen neuen Bundesverkehrswegeplan, den Verkehrsminister Dobrindt gerade vorgelegt hat, finden wir unsere Vorstellung weitgehend und in entscheidenden Punkten wieder.\n\nDer neue Bundesverkehrswegeplan wird eine Netzplanung sein. Diese Netzplanung wird die Grundlage für ein nationales Prioritätenkonzept bilden. Damit werden wir Projekte identifizieren, die besonders dringend umgesetzt werden müssen, weil damit bedeutsame Netzlücken geschlossen oder hochbelastete Knoten entlastet werden. Verkehrsachsen, zu denen wir binationale Verträge haben, oder auch die von mir angesprochenen TEN-Korridore gehören ebenfalls in diese Kategorie. Wir werden dafür bis zu 80 Prozent der Mittel zur Verfügung stellen.\n\nDie EU unterstützt unsere nationalen Anstrengungen beim Ausbau dieser Korridore und bei der Lärmreduzierung an der Schiene mit deutlich aufgestockten Mitteln. Wir müssen zusehen, dass wir diese auch ausreichend nutzen können. Voraussetzung dafür sind aber ausreichende und zügige Planungen bei allen drei Verkehrsträgern. Bei Schiene und Wasserstraßen, den Verkehrsträgern, die in unserer Zuständigkeit liegen, werden wir Optimierungen vornehmen, damit wir schneller vorankommen können.\n\nIch weiß nicht, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ob das Reisen auf Stieren heute noch möglich wäre. Ich denke, verkehrsrechtlich gäbe es dabei weniger Probleme, aber die Tierschützer würden das zu Recht untersagen. Ich weiß aber sicher, dass wir mit den Vereinbarungen, die diese Regierung im Verkehrsbereich getroffen hat, die Voraussetzung dafür geschaffen haben, dass der Transport von Gütern und das Reisen in Deutschland zukunftssicher aufgestellt werden können. Ich freue mich, mit Ihnen gemeinsam an diesem Ziel arbeiten zu dürfen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n3159,wolfgang-gehrcke,\"Frau Parlamentarische Staatssekretärin, ich will Sie ausdrücklich unterstützen. Ich finde es gut, dass Sie in Ihrem Bericht nicht nur die harten Fakten genannt haben, die natürlich wichtig sind - Arbeitslosigkeit, soziale Standards -, sondern auch auf das kulturelle Umfeld der Veränderungen aufmerksam gemacht haben. Das ist ein neuer Ton; den finde ich sehr gut.\n\nFinden Sie nicht auch, dass der Umstand, dass in Thüringen möglicherweise ein Mitglied der Linken zum Ministerpräsidenten gewählt wird, ein Ausdruck dafür ist, dass sich das kulturelle Umfeld in diesem Land im positiven Sinne entwickelt hat? Es handelt sich um ein westdeutsches Mitglied.\n\nHerr Präsident, das konnte ich ja eben fast wie eine Aufforderung verstehen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank. - Frau Staatsministerin, finden Sie es nicht in einem gewissen Umfang befremdlich, dass im 21. Jahrhundert in einem Leitungsgremium der Europäischen Union überhaupt über die Listung von Journalisten debattiert wird? Ich habe das Protokoll gelesen. -Einige haben sich ja sehr deftig für die Listung ausgesprochen. Ich stimme Ihnen zu: Die Bundesregierung war etwas zurückhaltend. Aber ich denke, es ist berechtigt, zu fragen: Passt das aus Sicht der Bundesregierung ins 21. Jahrhundert, oder passt das nicht?\n\nGenau für den Fall, dass zu Gewalt oder Ähnlichem aufgerufen wird, gibt es das Strafrecht. Das hat ja nichts mit diesem Bereich zu tun.\n\nDie Bundesregierung will, dass zwischen Propagandisten und Journalisten unterschieden wird. Eine solche Unterscheidung wäre übrigens, wenn man so manchen Artikel liest, zum Teil auch in der Innenpolitik gut. Welche Auswirkungen wird die Festlegung, dass eine solche Unterscheidung vorgenommen werden soll, nach Meinung der Bundesregierung auf osteuropäische Journalisten in Deutschland haben?\n\nIhr Kollege, Herr Staatsminister Roth, war heute im Auswärtigen Ausschuss sehr viel deutlicher. Er hat gesagt: Es kommt nicht infrage, dass Journalisten gelistet werden. - Ich will Ihre Antwort auch so verstehen. Weil ich möchte, dass die russischen und anderen Kollegen, die hier arbeiten, eine gewisse Rechtssicherheit haben - dafür muss die Bundesregierung sorgen -, frage ich aber noch einmal: Darf ich Ihre Antwort so verstehen, dass die reine journalistische Tätigkeit nicht zu einer Listung führen wird?\n\nIch habe eine letzte Frage zu diesem Bereich.\n\nWie würde man es Ihrer Ansicht nach in Deutschland einschätzen, wenn die russische Regierung über eine mögliche Listung deutscher Journalistinnen und Journalisten in Russland für den Fall, dass sie dieses oder jenes nicht beachten, überhaupt nur debattieren würde? Ich würde so etwas entsetzlich finden, und ich hoffe, die Bundesregierung auch.\"\n1674,thomas-gambke,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Sie haben gerade eine Rede von jemandem gehört, der das Wort „Innovation“ vielleicht buchstabieren kann, aber nicht verstanden hat.\n\nIch werde Ihnen das gleich beweisen.\n\nHerr Fuchs, Sie haben das Kernkraftwerk Fessenheim bezüglich Netzstabilität angesprochen. Fahren Sie einmal nach Kalifornien. Sehen Sie sich einmal an, wie dort Netzstabilität hergestellt wird. Dort wird etwas ganz Intelligentes gemacht. Dort wurden erst einmal elektronische Steuerungsmethoden entwickelt und implementiert, um jetzt die Erneuerbaren einzusetzen.\n\nWas haben Sie gemacht? Sie haben acht Jahre lang die Energiewende nicht gewollt. Sie haben die großen Konzerne unterstützt und dabei etwas verschlafen, was andere können und machen, nämlich Netzstabilität nicht mit den rotierenden Massen von fossil angetriebenen Dampfturbinen hinzubekommen, sondern mit Elektronik und Intelligenz. Das müssen wir machen. Wir brauchen Innovationen, um die Energiewende zu schaffen, und nicht das, was uns hier erzählt wird.\n\nIch habe den Eindruck, dass manche Leute glauben, wir brauchten den Heizer auf der E-Lok. Wenn wir die neuen Technologien wirklich fördern wollen, dann müssen wir sie auch unterstützen. Sehen wir uns einmal den Einzelplan 09 an - Kollegin Hajduk hat es gesagt -: Es werden gerade einmal 12 Prozent für den Mittelstand zur Verfügung gestellt. Wer ist denn der Treiber von Innovationen, wenn nicht der Mittelstand? Und dann, Herr Gabriel, werden gerade einmal gut 10 Prozent für den Mittelstand in Ihren Programmen zur Verfügung gestellt, aber 1,4 Milliarden Euro für Kohlesubventionen und andere Großindustrien. Nein, das kann es nicht sein.\n\nSie hören, dass es angesichts der Pläne zu einer Rente mit 63 Sorgen um die Rahmenbedingungen für den Mittelstand gibt. Anstatt zum Beispiel eine vernünftige Teilrente auf den Weg zu bringen, um die Beschäftigung im Alter zu sichern, drängen Sie mit dem, was Sie vorhaben, Facharbeiter aus dem Mittelstand heraus. Das ist schon ein ganz schön starkes Stück. Mittelstandsförderung und Innovationsförderung sehen anders aus.\n\nWas könnten wir machen? Wir könnten endlich eine steuerliche Forschungsförderung für kleine und mittlere Unternehmen betreiben. Es wäre mutig, da mal ein Zeichen zu setzen. Ich höre immer aus Ihren Kreisen, dass Sie das machen wollen; ich höre aber auch, dass der Finanzminister es nicht finanzieren will. Sie könnten auch Thesaurierungsbegünstigungen für kleine und mittlere Unternehmen verbessern, um ihr Eigenkapital zu stärken; auch das wäre mal ein Thema.\n\nEs steht sogar im Koalitionsvertrag; Sie haben es schön aus dem grünen Wahlprogramm abgeschrieben. Ich freue mich darüber. Aber Sie müssen es endlich machen und nicht nur darüber reden, damit dort eine Stärkung erfolgt.\n\nWir müssen Innovation und Mittelstand fördern. Es gibt Unternehmen, die innovativ sind:\n\nEs gibt eine Wäscherei, die Wäsche wäscht, ohne Wasser zu verbrauchen, weil das Wasser zu 100 Prozent im Kreislauf verbleibt. Es gibt ein mittelständisches Unternehmen, das ein Verwaltungsgebäude unterhält, für das es 140 Prozent der Energie, die es verbraucht, selber herstellt. Es gibt einen Hersteller von weißer Ware, der sich das Ziel gesetzt hat, 25 Prozent Ressourceneinsparung in fünf Jahren hinzubekommen. Er hat das öffentlich verkündet und berichtet jedes Jahr über die Fortschritte.\n\nUnd was machen wir? Wir verhindern, indem wir zum Beispiel die Ergebnisse der Enquete-Kommission „Wachstum, Wohlstand, Lebensqualität“ nicht umsetzen, dass bei unseren Zielsetzungen, den Zielsetzungen der Politik, andere Maßstäbe als das Wachstum angelegt werden. Das müssten wir endlich tun: Wir müssten Innovationen fordern und fördern, wir müssten neue Technologien fordern und fördern, aber nicht mit 10 Prozent des Etats, sondern mit deutlich mehr Mitteln.\n\nLassen Sie mich ein Fazit ziehen. Dieser Einzelplan lässt eine Zielorientierung vermissen. Gerade die fehlende Zielorientierung hindert Sie daran, etwas für die neuen Technologien und - ich sage es noch mal - für den Mittelstand zu tun. Es werden die alten Industrien gefördert. Ich denke, dass es in den Beratungen noch viel Handlungsbedarf gibt, damit wir endlich einen Plan bekommen, der Deutschland wirklich nach vorne bringt.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4447,herbert-behrens,\"Frau Staatssekretärin, wie beurteilt die Bundes-regierung als Vertreterin und Eigentümerin der bundeseigenen DB die Tatsache, dass das Unter-nehmen DB AG in 20 Jahren nicht in der Lage war, für die Filderstrecke zwischen Stuttgart und dem Flughafenbahnhof eine genehmigungsfähige Planung vorzulegen?\n\nBleibt es auch im neuen Vertrag bei der Rege-lung, dass der Bund nach Ablauf des Betreiberver-trages Anspruch darauf hat, Anlagen und Einrich-tungen des Betreiberunternehmens zu überneh-men?\n\nJa, die bezieht sich auf die von Ihnen zurzeit ausgeschlossene Call-Option. Können Sie mir präziser benennen, zu welchen Zeitpunkten die Call-Option gezogen werden kann, nachdem der Vertrag mit Toll Collect fortgesetzt werden soll?\n\nJa. - Die Nachfrage dazu: Sie haben gesagt, am 14. stand fest, dass nicht die Call-Option ge-zogen wird, sondern dass der Vertrag mit Toll Collect verlängert wird. Gleichwohl waren im Haushalt Beträge für das Nichtziehen der Call-Option eingestellt worden. Wir haben gehört, dass die Call-Option bis zum Jahresende theo-retisch noch gezogen werden könnte. Es sind aber keine entsprechenden Anträge an den Haushaltsaus-schuss gegangen, dass unter Umständen dann notwendige Kosten in den Haushalt eingestellt werden müssen. Warum ist diese Option finanziell nicht im Haushalt unterlegt worden?\n\nDie will ich gerne nutzen. - Wir haben in der Tat darüber gesprochen: Was war am 14. November denn nun alles fix, und was war ausgeschlossen worden? - Gleichwohl wissen wir, dass die entsprechenden Kosten am 5. November in den Haushaltsplan eingestellt worden sind, und zwar als Kosten, die auf jeden Fall auftauchen werden. Es ist kein Sperrvermerk dabei; es gibt keinen Hinweis darauf, dass andere Optionen möglicherweise andere Kosten nach sich ziehen würden. Warum konnte man sich zu dem Zeitpunkt, am 5. November, schon so sicher sein, dass sowohl diese Mittel fließen werden - es gab keinen Sperrvermerk - als auch alle anderen Optionen ausgeschlossen werden, obwohl es erst am 14. November so weit gewesen sein soll?\"\n5465,katarina-barley,\"Zum Sprengstoffgesetz, meine sehr verehrte Frau Präsidentin, wollte ich jetzt eigentlich nicht ausführen. - Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Gäste! Die Gesellschaft des 21. Jahrhunderts bei uns in Deutschland ist bunt, ist vielfältig, und das ist auch gut so. Es gibt viele unterschiedliche Formen des Zusammenlebens. Es gibt verheiratete Paare, unverheiratete Paare, Patchworkfamilien, Regenbogenfamilien, gleichgeschlechtliche Lebenspartnerschaften. All das ist in der Realität längst akzeptiert. Ich selbst komme aus einem sehr katholisch geprägten Wahlkreis, aus einer kleinen Stadt. Bei uns existieren all diese Lebensformen sehr friedlich und normal nebeneinander.\n\n- Genau, ganz ohne Sprengstoff. - Leider findet diese Normalität noch keine vollständige Entsprechung in der Gesetzgebung. Bei den Rechten und auch bei den Pflichten besteht noch immer Handlungsbedarf, diese gesellschaftliche Realität auch rechtlich abzusichern.\n\nBei den gleichgeschlechtlichen Lebenspartnerschaften haben wir schon viel erreicht. Aber von einer hundertprozentigen Gleichstellung sind wir noch immer -entfernt, und das - das ist heute schon mehrfach angeklungen -, obwohl das Bundesverfassungsgericht in Karlsruhe immer wieder entschieden hat, dass Ungleichbehandlungen von Ehen und eingetragenen Lebenspartnerschaften verfassungswidrig sind. Wir alle hier im Hause wissen das. Aber noch immer findet rechtliche Diskriminierung aufgrund sexueller Orientierung statt. Noch immer werden gleichgeschlechtliche Paare in einer Reihe von Rechtsbereichen gegenüber Ehepaaren benachteiligt, zum Beispiel bei der Namensgebung des Kindes, bei der Übernahme von Mietverträgen sowie bei Insolvenz- oder Zwangsversteigerungsverfahren. Noch immer werden in einigen Vorschriften, vor allen Dingen im Zivil- und Verfahrensrecht, Lebenspartnerschaften unterschiedlich behandelt, ohne dass es dafür einen überzeugenden Grund gäbe.\n\nIch möchte nach dem bisherigen Debattenverlauf noch einmal auf die Adoption eingehen. Das ist ein besonders wichtiges Thema, weil es dabei um das Kindeswohl geht. Wir müssen uns ja vor Augen führen: Wir reden hier nicht über Rechtsvorschriften, sondern über real existierende Menschen. Schon heute leben viele Kinder in gleichgeschlechtlichen Familien, gleichgeschlechtlichen Partnerschaften; manche von ihnen im Wege der Sukzessivadoption rechtlich legalisiert als Familie, andere eben nicht. Herr Kollege Ullrich, Sie verwechseln da vielleicht die Sukzessivadoption mit der Stiefkind-adoption.\n\nAuch bei der Sukzessivadoption muss das Kind nicht von einem Ehepartner stammen.\n\nWir müssen uns, glaube ich, schon darüber bewusst sein, welche Auswirkungen es hat, wenn wir sagen: Wir gewähren euch das Recht, eine normale Familie zu sein, eben nicht.\n\nAuch hier geht es, Frau Sütterlin-Waack, um das Kindeswohl. Wir dürfen den Kindern, die in einer gleichgeschlechtlichen Familie groß werden und nicht unter die Regelungen einer Sukzessivadoption fallen, nicht den Eindruck vermitteln, dass sie weniger wert sind und dass ihre Familie in rechtlicher Hinsicht weniger eine Familie ist als eine gleichgeschlechtliche Lebenspartnerschaft, die in den Genuss der Vorteile einer Sukzessivadoption gekommen ist. Ich bin mir ziemlich sicher, dass auch das Bundesverfassungsgericht das so sehen wird.\n\nAuch da liegt ein bisschen das Problem. Ich finde es als Juristin eher peinlich, wenn wir als Gesetzgeber unsere Verantwortung nicht wahrnehmen, sondern uns vom Bundesverfassungsgericht immer wieder sagen lassen müssen,\n\ndass wir unserer Verantwortung nicht gerecht werden.\n\nDie vollständige Gleichstellung der eingetragenen Lebenspartnerschaften ist uns ein Kernanliegen. Wir haben damit im Wahlkampf Werbung gemacht; das ist richtig.\n\n- Stimmt, das war auch gut so. - Wenn uns alle lesbischen und schwulen Paare gewählt hätten, dann hätten wir vielleicht etwas mehr Durchschlagskraft gehabt, um das in der jetzigen Koalition durchsetzen zu können.\n\nDas wäre vielleicht ein Appell für das nächste Mal.\n\nWir haben den klaren Auftrag aus dem Grundgesetz und auch vom Bundesverfassungsgericht in Karlsruhe, die Gleichstellung vollständig umzusetzen. Das steht in unserem Koalitionsvertrag, und wir lassen dieses Ziel nicht aus den Augen.\n\nDas Bundesverfassungsgericht ist kein Ersatzgesetzgeber. Die Pflicht und das Recht zur Gestaltung liegen beim Parlament. Alles andere wäre für uns ein Armutszeugnis. Wir werden weiterhin auf die Umsetzung des Koalitionsvertrags dringen. Der Justizminister hat einen Referentenentwurf vorgelegt; der Kollege Brunner hat das schon ausführlich beleuchtet. Wir werden nicht nachlassen, bis zum Ende der Legislaturperiode hier noch Verbesserungen vorzunehmen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n10855,konstantin-notz,\"Herr Minister, ich möchte daran anschließen. Bezüglich der Burner Phones kann man auf eine Ausweispflicht bestehen. Ich stimme Ihnen zu: Bisher schon gilt eigentlich diese Regelung, aber sie wird umgangen.\n\nAber wenn Sie von schweren Sicherheitslücken reden: Wie verhält sich das denn mit öffentlichen Telefonzellen, mit der Möglichkeit, in Internetcafés zu telefonieren, oder mit der Möglichkeit - die, glaube ich, auch heute noch problemlos weiter besteht -, dass man ein solches Telefon einfach über das Internet in den Niederlanden bestellt? Schließt man hier also tatsächlich eine Lücke, oder ist das eher eine symbolische Handlung?\n\nWerde ich befragt? Also, wir können das umdrehen. Ich hätte viele Meinungen zu dem Thema, Herr Minister.\n\nHerr Minister, zu dem Punkt des Kollegen Ströbele nur die Anmerkung: Dass die Presse sozusagen über diesen Gesetzentwurf informiert wurde, bevor das Parlament informiert wurde, ist kein guter Stil.\n\nIch wollte noch einmal bezüglich der Datenbanken nachfragen. Meiner Ansicht nach ist es ein Paradigmenwechsel, dass man gemeinsam mit anderen Ländern Datenbanken errichtet. Gibt es dann Errichtungsanordnungen durch die BfDI?\n\nUnd: Um welche Staaten könnte es sich handeln? Sie reden jetzt gerne von Frankreich und sagen zu Ungarn: Vielleicht. Wie ist es denn mit Syrien oder Ägypten? Ist das ausgeschlossen?\n\nVor allen Dingen im Hinblick auf den Zweck muss man sagen: Das Paket ist ja überschrieben mit „Antiterror“. Sie haben eben von Sicherheitsbelangen geredet, die Grundlage für die Errichtung dieser Datenbanken sein können. Kann es also sein, dass sogar für andere Zwecke als Antiterror deutsche Staatsbürgerinnen und Staatsbürger - ich spitze es jetzt einmal zu - in Datenbanken gemeinsam mit Assad (Syrien) landen, auf die dann von Nachrichtendiensten beider Seiten zugegriffen werden kann - ist das möglich? -, oder könnten Sie abschließend die Zwecke, für die solche gemeinsamen Dateien errichtet werden können, aufzählen?\n\nHerr Minister, die Bundeskanzlerin selbst hat während der Trauerfeier für die NSU-Opfer und in Anwesenheit der Familien der Opfer rückhaltlose Aufklärung versprochen. Viele Kollegen, die dabei waren, sind auch heute hier im Saal.\n\nDie jetzige Faktenlage spricht dafür, dass es diese rückhaltlose Aufklärung nicht gab und dass das Parlament in verschiedenen Gremien falsch informiert wurde. Mich interessiert einfach, wer dafür die Verantwortung übernimmt, völlig unabhängig von Einzelheiten und auch davon, ob dabei eine große Verschwörung herauskommt oder nicht. Der Sachverhalt, wie viele Handys und wie viele SIM-Karten es gab - darüber gab es Extrasitzungen im Innenausschuss -, war zu dieser Zeit hochrelevant, aber die Wahrheit wurde uns nicht erzählt.\"\n12603,karin-thissen,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Regional ist das neue Bio. Aus Umfragen und Studien zum Ernährungsverhalten wissen wir, dass die Mehrheit der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher möglichst Lebensmittel aus der Region kaufen möchte. Das gilt vor allen Dingen für frische Produkte wie Fleisch, Milch, Eier, Obst und Gemüse.\n\nViele Menschen verbinden mit regionalen Lebensmitteln höhere Qualität und nachhaltige Erzeugung. Außerdem - das wird immer wichtiger - wollen viele mit ihrem Kaufverhalten die regionale Wirtschaft stärken und gerade die kleinen Betriebe aus der Gegend, in der sie leben, unterstützen; denn der große Vorteil von regionaler Lebensmittelproduktion und \u001evermarktung ist, dass sie die Anonymität zwischen Produzenten und Verbrauchern auflöst. Durch den unmittelbaren Kontakt entsteht Verständnis für die Bedürfnisse des jeweils anderen. Regionale Verbundenheit führt zu mehr Solidarität innerhalb und mit der Region und damit zu einer Stärkung des ländlichen Raumes, die man nicht gering einschätzen sollte.\n\nWas ebenfalls wichtig ist: Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher, die ihre Kaufentscheidung auf solche Überlegungen stützen, sind immer auch bereit, für gute Lebensmittel aus der Region gute Preise zu bezahlen.\n\nDas ist die gute Nachricht für all diejenigen, die mit viel Leidenschaft und Engagement ebendiese Lebensmittel erzeugen.\n\nDie nicht so gute Nachricht ist, dass regional erzeugte Lebensmittel für den Verbraucher nur schwer zu erkennen sind. Das unter Ministerin Aigner entwickelte Regionalfenster hat daran nichts geändert. Wir von der SPD haben nie einen Hehl daraus gemacht, dass wir dieses Siegel wenig hilfreich finden.\n\nDeswegen finden wir Forderungen, die da lauten „Besseres, verlässlicheres Regionalsiegel“ oder „Irreführender Werbung einen Riegel vorschieben“ immer gut.\n\nAllerdings bin ich der Meinung, dass sich Regionalität nicht allein durch ein bundesweites Label auszeichnet, sondern durch klare, eindeutige und transparente Kennzeichnung, und zwar für alle Lebensmittel.\n\nWie wir dahin kommen und wie das aussehen könnte, das loten wir gerade mit unserem Koalitionspartner aus.\n\nDazu haben wir von der SPD zum Beispiel eine Forderung im aktuellen Haushalt für den Bundesverband der Regionalbewegung. Außerdem, finde ich, brauchen wir alle noch ein paar Erkenntnisse aus der Verbraucherforschung, nämlich: Wie lassen sich Verbrauchererwartungen und die Definition von Regionalität in Einklang bringen?\n\nIch glaube, beim Thema transparente Regionalkennzeichnung sind wir alle gar nicht so weit voneinander entfernt. Allerdings: Der Teufel steckt im Detail. Wir von der SPD sind der Meinung, dass ein Regionalfenster, auch ein reformiertes, nicht die Lösung in Sachen Kennzeichnung ist.\n\nAber wir begrüßen grundsätzlich die Diskussion darüber und sind gerne bereit, uns notfalls auch bis spät in die Nacht diesbezüglich mit Ihnen auszutauschen.\n\nVielen Dank fürs Zuhören.\"\n15430,hans-ulrich-kruger,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn man mich vor anderthalb Jahren gefragt hätte: „Was verstehst du unter Cum/Ex?“, hätte ich, außer dass es sich um zwei lateinische Wörter handelt, nicht viel dazu sagen können. Dass sich hinter Cum/Ex Finanzbetrügereien ohnegleichen versteckten, musste auch ich erst begreifen und - wie viele andere auch - verstehen lernen. Das hat seinen Grund.\n\nDas Geschäftsmodell Cum/Ex zu verstehen, braucht eben Zeit. Es ist nämlich beunruhigend, zu sehen, wie viele kriminelle Energie Finanzmarktakteure an den Tag gelegt haben, Geschäftsmodelle zu entwickeln, die nur ein einziges Ziel hatten: den Staat zu betrügen.\n\nCum/Ex-Geschäfte sind Gestaltungsmodelle mit Aktienleerverkäufen um den Dividendenstichtag, die auf eine mehrfache Erstattung oder Anrechnung einer nur einmal gezahlten Kapitalertragsteuer gerichtet waren. Ganz einfach ausgedrückt: Einmal wurde Kapitalertragsteuer gezahlt, und es wurden mindestens - ich bitte, das Wort „mindestens“ zu beachten - zwei Steuerbescheinigungen ausgestellt. Das ist im normalen Leben ungefähr so, als wenn eine Familie mit einem Kind morgens in der Stadt A Kindergeld beantragt, dann nachmittags in die Stadt B fährt und für dasselbe Kind ein weiteres Mal Kindergeld nicht nur beantragt, sondern - schlimmer noch - auch tatsächlich gewährt bekommt. Jedem rechtschaffenen Menschen muss an dieser Stelle klar sein: Hier stinkt etwas, hier ist etwas faul.\n\nDiese doppelte Ausstellung einer Kapitalertragsteuerbescheinigung war nunmehr also der Gegenstand unserer Prüfung. Dabei ist offensichtlich, dass durch die Auszahlung bzw. Anrechnung dieser Gutschriften der Allgemeinheit wirtschaftlicher Schaden entstanden ist, ein Schaden, den die beteiligten Finanzmarktakteure als Beute unter sich aufteilten.\n\nDas Bundeszentralamt für Steuern kommt für seinen Bereich zu dem Ergebnis, dass der entstandene Schaden durch diese Geschäfte um die 500 Millionen Euro betrug. Nimmt man also einen entsprechenden Maßstab für die Landesfinanzbehörden, so kann ein weiterer Schaden von circa 400 Millionen Euro angenommen werden, sodass wir insgesamt bei knapp 1 Milliarde Euro liegen. Es gibt - das ist in den Medien mehrfach dargestellt worden; ich denke, das werden meine Kollegen gleich auch noch intensiv tun - auch andere, auf hypothetischen Zahlen beruhende Berechnungen, die aber nicht belegbar sind.\n\nNur: Bei einer Kapitalertragsteuer von 25 Prozent auf eine Dividende von 4 oder 5 Euro müssen Zigmilliarden an Aktienpaketen hin und her und her und hin transferiert worden sein, um diese 1 Milliarde Euro, die dem Steuerzahler wehtut, die uns allen wehtut, zu erzielen.\n\nDer 4. Untersuchungsausschuss, der „Cum/Ex“, wurde auf Bestreben der Oppositionsfraktionen einberufen mit dem Ziel, zu klären, ob Cum/Ex-Geschäfte durch Fehler staatlicher Einrichtungen erleichtert wurden. In knapp anderthalb Jahren hat der Ausschuss insgesamt 46 Sitzungen absolviert, davon 18 öffentliche Beweisaufnahmen; er hat dabei fünf Sachverständige und circa 70 Zeuginnen und Zeugen gehört. Wir haben 107 Zeugenbeweisbeschlüsse und 96 Aktenbeweisbeschlüsse gefasst. In dieser kurzen Zeit haben wir eine für alle beteiligten Personen herausragende, arbeitsintensive Aufgabe gelöst, für die ich allen Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmern meinen Respekt ausspreche und ihnen nochmals für ihren Einsatz danken möchte.\n\nIn der Bewertung der Ergebnisse des Ausschusses möchte ich auch gern eines klarstellen: Cum/Ex-Geschäfte mit Leerverkäufen waren zu jedem Zeitpunkt rechtswidrig.\n\nWir haben klar festgestellt, dass das deutsche Steuerrecht in den Jahren 1999 bis 2012 keinerlei Möglichkeit geboten hat, eine einmal einbehaltene Kapitalertragsteuer in rechtmäßiger Art und Weise mehrfach anrechnen zu lassen. Eine diesbezügliche Gesetzeslücke hat nie bestanden. Das, was Banken und Finanzmarktakteure mit krimineller Energie vollzogen haben, war rechtswidrig, auch wenn diese Akteure meinten, mit juristischen Gutachten den Eindruck erwecken zu können, seriöse Geschäfte zu betreiben. Ich wiederhole: Jedem rechtschaffenen Menschen ist klar: Für eine einmal gezahlte Steuer gibt es nur einmal eine Bescheinigung.\n\nDie entgegenstehende Geschäftspraxis war verwerflich, kriminell. Den Akteuren gehört insofern das Handwerk gelegt. Das, denke ich, war einer der wesentlichen Punkte. Da müssen wir uns dafür bedanken, dass es mittlerweile intensiv arbeitende Staatsanwaltschaften gibt, die die Täter überführen und überführen werden. Mein Dank geht in diesem Fall auch an den scheidenden Finanzminister des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, der durch den Ankauf von Steuer-CDs einen wesentlichen Beitrag dazu geleistet hat, den Fahndungsdruck zu erhöhen und die Verursacher dieser Geschäfte zu bezeichnen.\n\nDie beteiligten Finanzmarktakteure haben ihre Anlagenstrategie den für sie zuständigen Behörden gegenüber bewusst verschleiert mit der Folge, dass die Entwicklung des Geschäftsmodells nicht erkennbar war. Superreiche und Banker haben sich eine Parallelwelt geschaffen, in der ein Beitrag zu unserer Solidargemeinschaft nicht mehr vorkommt. „Gier frisst Seele“ oder „Gier frisst Anstand“, meine Damen und Herren, das passt hier ganz gut.\n\nDer Ausschuss hat ferner klar dargelegt, dass die zuständigen Behörden in Bund und Ländern in den letzten Jahren unter Hochdruck zum einen Kapitalertragsteuererstattungen verweigert, zum anderen bereits erstattete Steuern zurückgeholt haben - in Anbetracht der komplizierten und schwer zu durchschauenden Sachverhalte eine respektable Leistung. Ich darf daher sagen: Die mit der Materie befassten staatlichen Stellen haben nach Erkennen dieses undurchschaubaren Geschäftsmodells Gutes und Herausragendes geleistet.\n\nLassen Sie mich, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, zum Schluss noch einige Worte des Dankes sagen. Auch wenn wir darüber streiten können, ob dieser Ausschuss notwendig war oder nicht - ich weiß, da gibt es zwischen den Mehrheitsfraktionen und der Opposition Bewertungsunterschiede -, möchte ich doch eines klarstellen: Trotz aller Kontroversen und unterschiedlichen Meinungen danke ich Ihnen allen für die konstruktive, sachliche Atmosphäre im Ausschuss. Der überwiegende Teil der Beweisanträge ist gemeinsam gestellt worden, ein noch größerer Teil von Beweisbeschlüssen von allen Fraktionen gemeinsam gefasst worden.\n\nEin weiterer großer Dank geht an das Sekretariat mit seinen Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern, die auch unter Missachtung der Wochenenden Erhebliches geleistet haben, mich hervorragend unterstützt haben und allen Beteiligten ihre Dienste über das Maß hinaus angeboten haben. Herzlichen Dank dafür!\n\nDer gleiche Dank gilt selbstverständlich allen Mitarbeitern der Fraktionen und natürlich auch dem von allen Fraktionen gemeinsam eingesetzten Ermittlungsbeauftragten Jürgen Kapischke, der uns mit seinem Sachverstand als ehemaliger Generalstaatsanwalt nachhaltig und hervorragend unterstützt hat.\n\nFür mich selber kann ich sagen: Der Vorsitz dieses Untersuchungsausschusses hat meine Arbeit in den letzten anderthalb Jahren bereichert, und ich bin dankbar dafür, dass ich zum Abschluss meiner Tätigkeit im Deutschen Bundestag noch einmal eine derart verantwortungsvolle Aufgabe übernehmen durfte.\n\nHerzlichen Dank und Tschüs!\"\n10363,annette-groth,\"Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer auf der Tribüne! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben es schon gehört: In vielen, vielen Ländern, mindestens über 60, sind die Rechte von NGOs und Menschenrechtsverteidigerinnen und Menschenrechtsverteidigern - auch das steht in der Überschrift: Menschenrechtsverteidiger stärken - massiv beschnitten. Die über missliebige NGOs verhängten Maßnahmen reichen von einem Verbot dieser Organisationen über Gefängnisstrafen bis hin zum Entzug der Staatsangehörigkeit, zum Beispiel in Bahrain.\n\nMan muss aber auch sagen, dass insbesondere aus dem Westen finanzierte NGOs in einigen Ländern keine gute Rolle gespielt haben. Am 13. Dezember 2013 erklärte die zuständige Abteilungsleiterin des US-Außenministeriums, Victoria Nuland, die US-Regierung habe seit 1991 rund 5 Milliarden Dollar für eine wohlhabende und demokratische Ukraine investiert. Dies ist eines von vielen Beispielen für den Missbrauch von sogenannter Demokratieförderung, die manchmal auch auf einen Regierungswechsel abzielt. Wir alle wissen, wie es heute in der Ukraine, im Irak oder in anderen Ländern aussieht.\n\n- Das kommt noch; Russland kommt auch. - Es ist höchst bedauerlich, dass unter der Instrumentalisierung einiger NGOs für politische Zwecke viele Menschenrechtsverteidiger und -verteidigerinnen leiden.\n\nEin Beispiel für die Verfolgung von NGOs ist Ägypten. Dort werden seit vielen Jahren Aktivisten und Aktivistinnen und NGOs, die sich für Menschenrechte einsetzen, massiv bedroht und häufig gewaltsam an ihrer Arbeit gehindert. Viele von Ihnen werden sich erinnern, dass 2013 43 Mitglieder ausländischer NGOs verurteilt wurden. Das El-Nadeem-Zentrum für die Rehabilitierung von Folteropfern, das ich 2012 selbst besucht habe, ist derzeit von Schließung bedroht. Die Mitarbeiter und Mitarbeiterinnen dieser international hoch geschätzten einzigen Anlaufstelle für Folteropfer leisten dort seit 1993 eine hervorragende Arbeit.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wie im Antrag der Grünen richtig erwähnt wird, wächst auch in Israel seit Jahren der Druck auf die Friedensbewegung und auf NGOs, die gegen Menschenrechtsverletzungen kämpfen. Die Organisation Breaking the Silence, selbst von Armeeangehörigen gegründet, macht von Soldaten und Soldatinnen begangene Verbrechen bekannt. Diese international hoch angesehene NGO wird jetzt von der israelischen Regierung als Verräter bezeichnet und ist vom Verbot bedroht. Es läuft zurzeit eine internationale Kampagne, um diese Menschen zu schützen.\n\nSeit Monaten läuft eine von Justizministerin Shaked initiierte Kampagne gegen ausländische NGOs. Das Kabinett hat im letzten Dezember ein Gesetz beschlossen, das aus dem Ausland finanzierte NGOs verpflichtet, immer ihre Geldgeber anzugeben. Mehrere israelische Medien sprachen damals von einem Gesetz à la Putin. Natürlich müssen auch Russland und China kritisiert werden, weil auch dort der Umgang mit NGOs und Menschenrechtsverteidigerinnen und -verteidigern nicht doll ist.\n\nDie Aussage des Antrags, dass die Behinderung und Einschränkung von NGOs keineswegs nur Praxis von autoritären oder diktatorischen Regimes, sondern auch von demokratischen Staaten ist, trifft zu. Anzumerken seien hier zum Beispiel die restriktiven Mediengesetze und die massive Einschüchterung von NGOs in der Türkei, in Ungarn und Polen. Leider fehlt in dem Antrag eine Erwähnung des 2009 in Deutschland eingeführten § 51 Absatz 3 Abgabenordnung, der dazu dient, missliebigen NGOs die Gemeinnützigkeit zu verweigern. Ein Beispiel hierfür ist die Vereinigung der Verfolgten des Naziregimes, bei der zurzeit auch die Gefahr besteht, dass ihr die Gemeinnützigkeit aberkannt wird. Das wäre schrecklich.\n\nIch entschuldige mich.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n669,carsten-sieling,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Zu Beginn will ich noch einmal ausdrücklich sagen, dass wir in dieser Koalition die Vereinbarung haben, dass wir in der Steuerpolitik einen Schwerpunkt auf die Bekämpfung von Steuerhinterziehung und Steuerumgehung setzen. Dafür haben wir vereinbart, dass wir die Regelungen zur Selbstanzeige weiterentwickeln. Dazu konnten wir nur kommen - ich muss das an dieser Stelle sagen -, weil für mich Vergangenheit Vergangenheit ist. Kollege Michelbach, Sie -haben das deutsch-schweizerische Steuerabkommen angesprochen. Die Wahrheit ist doch: Wenn dieses Abkommen damals abgeschlossen und nicht von Rot-Grün verhindert worden wäre,\n\nbräuchten und würden wir heute über dieses Thema nicht sprechen. Wir haben gerade deshalb so viele CDs bekommen. Es gibt einen prominenten Steuerhinterzieher aus Bayern, der etwas mit Fußball und Wurst zu tun hat. Er hat deutlich gemacht, dass er in die Falle gegangen ist, weil er geglaubt hat, es komme zu dem deutsch-schweizerischen Steuerabkommen.\n\nLassen Sie uns bei der Wahrheit bleiben, meine Damen und Herren. Es war gut, dass dieses Abkommen nicht beschlossen wurde, und das war die Grundlage für das, was wir heute haben.\n\nIch möchte betonen, dass wir die Debatte über die Frage der Selbstanzeige sehr sensibel führen, weil es natürlich eine Belastung - verschiedene Rednerinnen und Redner haben es angesprochen - für das Gerechtigkeitsgefühl vieler Menschen ist. Ich darf hier sagen: Das betrifft alle Parteien hier im Raum. In einer gestrigen Pressemitteilung heißt es:\n\nDie Selbstanzeige ist ein Handel mit der Gerechtigkeit zugunsten der ökonomischen Eliten.\n\nDas hat der Vizevorsitzende der CDA, der Christlich-Demokratischen Arbeitnehmerschaft - einer Organisation der CDU - erklärt.\n\nIch sage das hier nicht, Kollege Ernst, um mit Fingern zu zeigen,\n\nsondern um darauf hinzuweisen, dass wir sehr sensibel argumentieren und arbeiten müssen. Es muss das Prinzip sein, dass wir auch bei den Fällen der Selbstanzeige eine große Härte an den Tag legen, um mit diesem Instrument eine Glaubwürdigkeit zu erreichen, sonst schlägt es fehl in der politischen Öffentlichkeit und in der Gesellschaft.\n\nWenn wir bei diesem Thema sind, will ich auch sagen, dass wir auf der Grundlage der Ergebnisse einer Kommission aus Bund und Ländern arbeiten werden. Die Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Grünen haben deutlich gemacht, dass das auch unter der Mitwirkung von grünen Landesregierungen - in Nordrhein-Westfalen, in Schleswig-Holstein, in Baden-Württemberg, in Bremen und in vielen anderen Bundesländern - geschieht. Aber dies geschieht auch unter Beteiligung des Bundeslandes Brandenburg, in dem die Linke mitregiert. Deswegen verstehe ich Ihr Herangehen heute nicht. Machen Sie dort Klarschiff, und machen Sie deutlich, worum es geht.\n\nBezüglich der Glaubwürdigkeit möchte ich zwei Themen ansprechen, die wir sehr sorgsam diskutieren müssen. Uns geht es nicht darum, die Gefängnisse zu füllen, wie der Finanzminister aus Rheinland-Pfalz gesagt hat, sondern wir wollen unser Geld haben.\n\nWir erwarten Kooperation, aber wir sind nicht doof. Wir wollen unser Geld zurückhaben. Ein Debattenpunkt betrifft dabei die Verjährungsfristen. Es ist richtig - das ist verschiedentlich gesagt worden -, dass wir den Weg in Richtung einer Verjährungsfrist von zehn Jahren gehen. Ich möchte aber dazu aufrufen, offen darüber zu diskutieren. Der bayerische Finanzminister, Herr Söder, empfiehlt eine Verjährungsfrist von 15 Jahren. Norbert Walter-Borjans, nordrhein-westfälischer Finanzminister, spricht davon, den Zeitpunkt, an dem die Verjährungsfrist beginnt, zu verschieben, weg vom Zeitpunkt der Tat selber, hin zum Zeitpunkt der Entdeckung der Tat. Das wäre eine weitgehende Veränderung des Sachverhalts. Da geht es darum, dass wir das Geld wieder-bekommen; es geht nicht um den strafrechtlichen Sachverhalt. Ich möchte gerne, dass wir darüber offen diskutieren und es weiterentwickeln.\n\nZweiter Punkt: die Bagatellgrenze. Bei einer Steuerschuld von bis zu 50 000 Euro spricht man jetzt von einer Bagatelle. Das will ich hier auch vor dem Hintergrund der jüngsten Fälle ansprechen. Bei einer Steuerschuld von 50 000 Euro kann man bei einem angenommenen durchschnittlichen Steuersatz von 30 bis 35 Prozent - davon geht man bei Frau Schwarzer aus - auf ein Einkommen von 150 000 Euro schließen, das die entsprechende Person hatte, ohne es zur Versteuerung zu bringen. Wie erzielt man ein solches Einkommen von 150 000 Euro? Wenn die Einnahmen aus Zinseinkünften aus Vermögen stammen und man einen Zinssatz von 4 Prozent zugrunde legt, reden wir über ein Vermögen von 6 Millionen Euro. Meine Damen und Herren, ich finde, da wird der Begriff Bagatelle überdehnt.\n\nDeshalb bitte ich sehr darum, die Frage der Stufung und diese Dinge in unsere weiteren Beratungen aufzunehmen.\n\nDie Finanzminister werden einen Vorschlag machen. Vorschläge kommen ins Parlament, und häufig kommen sie verändert wieder heraus. Vielleicht sollten wir in diese Richtung arbeiten.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n2970,metin-hakverdi,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die sozialdemokratische Fraktion freut sich, dass mit dem Einzelplan 07, über dessen Entwurf wir gerade diskutieren, die Verbraucherpolitik in unserem Sinne konsequent und adäquat weiterentwickelt wird. Das betrifft die zielgerichtete weitere Stärkung der Verbraucherzentralen. Geld, das wir in diesen Bereich investieren, ist doppelt gut investiert. Erstens sparen wir den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern wertvolle Zeit, indem wir die Verbraucherzentralen so ausstatten, dass sie im Bereich der Finanzmärkte und der Banken eine Marktwächterfunktion übernehmen. Zweitens hat die bloße Existenz von Marktwächtern eine positive Auswirkung auf den Markt selbst. Die Anbieter von Finanzprodukten werden in Kenntnis der Marktwächter bei der Entwicklung und dem Vertrieb ihrer Produkte in Zukunft vorsichtiger sein; und das ist auch gut so.\n\nBesonders wichtig ist, dass auch im Bereich der digitalen Welt eine weitere Stärkung des Verbraucherschutzes stattfinden wird. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich weiß nicht, wann Sie das letzte Mal die AGB-Änderungen bei Facebook, Amazon, iTunes oder anderen Internetanbietern gelesen haben. Wer möchte auch seine Lebenszeit darauf verwenden, dies wöchentlich zu tun? Wir finden es richtig, dass sich einzelne Verbraucher nicht mit den AGB herumschlagen müssen. Wir müssen unsere Verbraucherzentralen befähigen, als Anwälte der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher zu agieren. Das tun wir nun, indem wir ihnen die finanziellen Mittel geben, um für die Verbraucher einzutreten.\n\nWir werden aber auch die rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen verbessern. Gesetz zur Verbesserung der zivilrechtlichen Durchsetzung von verbraucherschützenden Vorschriften des Datenschutzrechts, das hört sich kompliziert an, ist aber in der Sache ganz einfach. In Zukunft müssen Internetdienstleister, die mit den Daten ihrer Kunden nicht sorgfältig umgehen, damit rechnen, dass nicht nur einzelne Kunden gegen sie vorgehen werden. In Zukunft werden wir dafür sorgen, dass diese Dienstleister es mit den Verbraucherzentralen zu tun bekommen, die wir entsprechend finanziell ausstatten. Das ist Waffengleichheit. Das ist sozialdemokratische Politik, und das macht den konkreten Unterschied für jede einzelne Verbraucherin und jeden einzelnen Verbraucher aus.\n\nZu einer Debatte über den Haushalt gehört aber auch, dass die Rechtspolitik in einem breiten Sinne aufgegriffen wird. Ein Thema, dessen Beratungen wir in den nächsten Monaten aufnehmen und im nächsten Jahr intensiv fortführen werden, ist die Sterbehilfe. Dieses Thema treibt die Menschen in unserem Land um. Meiner Ansicht nach ist es wichtig, dass wir nicht eine entkoppelte Gesinnungsethikdebatte führen, die die Nöte und Sorgen der betroffenen Menschen aus den Augen verliert. Menschenwürdiges Sterben ist kein abstrakter Gegenstand einer Ethikdebatte. Menschenwürdiges Sterben ist eine sehr konkrete Angelegenheit. Es kommt auf die konkrete Situation der betroffenen Menschen an. Da sind der Suizidwillige, die behandelnden Ärzte und die Angehörigen. Diese müssen im Fokus bleiben. Die eine gute und richtige Entscheidung wird es in dieser Frage wohl nicht geben.\n\nAber am Ende werden wir eine vertretbare Entscheidung treffen müssen.\n\nEine gute und richtige Entscheidung werden wir bei der Einführung der Mietpreisbremse treffen. Mir ist sie besonders wichtig. In Wilhelmsburg, einem Hamburger Stadtteil, in dem der Wahlkreis liegt, in dem ich gewählt wurde, hat im letzten Jahr eine Internationale Bauausstellung stattgefunden. Diese soll eine Aufwertung bewirken, die ich übrigens sehr unterstütze. Die Menschen haben aber Angst, verdrängt zu werden. In vielen Einzelgesprächen haben sie mir ihre Ängste geschildert. Sie wollen nicht den Stadtteil verlassen, in dem sie aufgewachsen sind. Ich möchte nicht, dass die Wilhelmsburgerinnen und Wilhelmsburger wegziehen müssen, weil sie sich die Mieten nicht mehr leisten können. Wohnraum muss bezahlbar bleiben, in Wilhelmsburg genauso wie in Bergedorf und Harburg, genauso wie in Berlin, München, Frankfurt oder an anderen Orten Deutschlands.\n\nDie Bürgerinnen und Bürger müssen, nachdem sie die Miete gezahlt haben, noch genug im Portemonnaie haben, um am gesellschaftlichen Leben teilzuhaben. Um das zu erreichen, brauchen wir die Mietpreisbremse. Auch wenn wir mit den Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Union noch Einzelfragen klären müssen, sage ich den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern in Wilhelmsburg, Harburg und Bergedorf: Die Mietpreisbremse wird kommen, und sie wird gut, und sie wird helfen.\n\nAbschließend möchte ich Ihre Aufmerksamkeit auf ein weiteres Gerechtigkeitsproblem lenken. Es geht um die Frauenquote in Aufsichtsräten. Zitat:\n\nSolange Selbstregulierung erfolgversprechend ist, bedarf es gerade keiner gesetzlichen Quoten.\n\nDiese Annahme von Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger hat sich als falsch erwiesen. Die beschlossene Selbstverpflichtung von 2001 hat eben nicht zu Chancengleichheit der Frauen in Spitzenpositionen der Wirtschaft geführt. Der Minister hat in seiner Eingangsrede die Zahlen genannt. Dieser Diskriminierung der Frauen - machen wir uns nichts vor; um nichts anderes handelt es sich - muss gesetzgeberisch entgegengetreten werden. Ich bin überzeugt, dass die Frauenquote in Aufsichtsräten ein erster Schritt ist. Gelingt es der Wirtschaft nicht, auch in Vorständen eine deutliche Erhöhung des Anteils von Frauen zu erreichen, wird der Gesetzgeber wieder tätig werden müssen. Alle sind gut beraten, es nicht darauf ankommen zu lassen.\n\nGlück auf! Vielen Dank.\"\n8404,elisabeth-scharfenberg,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In unserer Gesellschaft leben immer mehr ältere und pflegebedürftige Menschen, Menschen mit psychischen Erkrankungen, Menschen, die alleine leben, Menschen, die durch ihre Lebensumstände sehr verletzlich geworden sind und deshalb unseren besonderen Schutz brauchen. Wie aufgehoben sich diese Menschen in unserer Gesellschaft fühlen, das ist auch vom Ausgang der heutigen Debatte abhängig.\n\nIn unseren Diskussionen und Reden ist viel von Selbstbestimmung die Rede. Selbstbestimmung ist aber keine Einbahnstraße. Selbstbestimmung braucht Bedingungen, unter denen eine freie Entscheidung möglich ist.\n\nIch bezweifle, dass das bei den meisten Suiziden - assistiert oder nicht - der Fall ist.\n\nWenn wir genauer hinschauen, warum vor allem ältere Menschen aus dem Leben scheiden wollen, dann sehen wir, dass sie niemandem zur Last fallen wollen. Sie haben Angst, Dinge nicht mehr allein tun zu können. Sie haben Angst, dement zu werden. Sie haben Angst vor Pflegebedürftigkeit. Viele leiden unter chronischen Schmerzen, unter versteckten Altersdepressionen, und viele sind einfach nur sehr, sehr einsam.\n\nSeelische Erkrankungen oder akute Krisen sind oft die Gründe für den Wunsch, sich das Leben zu nehmen. Oft ist das Verlangen nach einem Suizid ein Hilferuf, der an uns gerichtet ist: Wende dich doch endlich mir zu! Siehst du denn überhaupt nicht, wie ich leide? - Diese Menschen wollen nicht um jeden Preis sterben. Diese Menschen befinden sich einmalig in einer Situation, aus der sie in dieser Situation keinen Ausweg wissen. Als Sozialarbeiterin habe ich mehr als nur einmal Menschen in solchen Situationen erlebt und begleitet; ich weiß durchaus, wovon ich hier rede.\n\nSuizid ist nicht eine Option im Leben, die gleichberechtigt neben anderen steht. Und genau darum geht es in unserem Gesetzentwurf: Suizidbeihilfe darf keine normale Dienstleistung werden. Suizidbeihilfe darf nicht alltäglich oder normal für unsere Gesellschaft sein.\n\nWir fürchten: Wo es ein Angebot gibt, gibt es auch eine Nachfrage, und wenn etwas gesetzlich geregelt ist und häufiger praktiziert wird, erweckt es den Eindruck von Normalität, von Unbedenklichkeit.\n\nDie schleichende Normalisierung der Sterbehilfe beschrieb der niederländische Medizinethiker Theo Boer in der letzten Woche sehr eindrucksvoll in einem Interview mit der Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung. Da sagte er: Die Zahl der assistierten Suizide in den Niederlanden steigt, trotz guter Palliativversorgung. Die Enttabuisierung, die Normalität von Sterbehilfe, lässt die Kritik daran verstummen. Die Dienstleistung Sterbehilfe wird immer seltener infrage gestellt. Daraus entsteht ein Druck bei den Menschen, diese Dienstleistung in Anspruch zu nehmen. - Die steigende Zahl der assistierten Suizide in den Niederlanden zeigt: Das sind keine vagen Vermutungen.\n\nDie organisierte Sterbehilfe suggeriert uns: Wir haben eine ganz einfache Lösung für all eure Probleme; das Erbe für die Kinder und die Enkel muss nicht für die teure Pflege aufgebracht werden. - Woher das Zweifeln am Leben kommt, darum muss sich dann keiner mehr kümmern, da muss keiner mehr nachforschen.\n\nIn der aktuellen Debatte wird häufig das Gefühl vermittelt, dass Alter, Schwäche, Demenz oder Pflegebedürftigkeit Zustände sind, die einem Menschen die Würde nehmen. Das möchte ich ganz klar zurückweisen.\n\nEs gibt kein würdeloses Leben, auch nicht in der Demenz. Wir machen es nur würdelos, wenn wir den Menschen nicht verstehen, wenn wir den Menschen degradieren, wenn wir über ihn reden anstatt mit ihm. Es ist nicht würdelos, auf Hilfe angewiesen zu sein. Es ist nicht würdelos, sich von anderen Menschen pflegen zu lassen.\n\nNoch ein Missverständnis möchte ich aufklären: Unser Gesetzentwurf ändert nichts an der Tatsache, dass der Suizid in Deutschland straflos ist. Er ändert nichts daran, dass Menschen, die einem anderen beim Suizid helfen, in der Regel ebenfalls straflos bleiben. Unser Gesetzentwurf schränkt die Entscheidungsfreiheit des Einzelnen nicht ein.\n\nDas gilt auch für Ärzte. Wenn Ärzte im Einzelfall Hilfe beim Suizid leisten, so machen sie es doch nicht zum regelmäßigen Mittelpunkt ihrer Tätigkeit und bleiben somit nach unserem Gesetzentwurf straflos; das wurde in der Anhörung im Rechtsausschuss bestätigt. Dies gilt auch für die Palliativärzte. Das ist auch der Grund, warum gerade der Deutsche Hospiz- und PalliativVerband und die Deutsche PalliativStiftung unseren Vorschlag ausdrücklich unterstützen.\n\nSterben ist etwas sehr Individuelles - ob es sich um Suizid handelt oder nicht. Wir dürfen es nicht in die Hände irgendwelcher Organisationen legen. Darum ist es auch keine Lösung, einfach gar nichts zu tun. Und wir sollten das Sterben auch nicht komplett durchregeln. In diesem Sinne bitte ich Sie sehr herzlich um Unterstützung unseres Gesetzentwurfs, den ich gemeinsam mit meinen Kolleginnen und Kollegen Kerstin Griese, Michael Brand, Kathrin Vogler, Dr. Harald Terpe und anderen entwickelt habe.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n13931,christian-petry,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren!\n\nDer Friederich, der Friederich,\n\nDas war ein arger Wüterich!\n\nDas war ein Zitat, und es geht noch weiter:\n\nEr fing die Fliegen in dem Haus\n\nUnd riss ihnen die Flügel aus.\n\nHerr Friedrich, das, was Sie hier vorgetragen haben, ist wirklich besonders: Zum einen rütteln Sie an den Grundfreiheiten. Sie wollen die Arbeitsmarkt- und Sozialpolitik wieder nationalisieren und regionalisieren.\n\nSie rütteln an der Personenfreiheit und der Warenverkehrsfreiheit in der EU. Das ist ganz schlimm. Zum anderen hören wir hier von Ihnen nationalistische und chauvinistische Töne\n\ngegenüber Griechenland und den Südeuropäern. Fragen Sie doch einmal Ihren Kollegen Herrn Oettinger, was er dazu und zu Eigenmitteln der EU sagt!\n\nEr hat das im Europaausschuss getan. Er ist für die Stärkung der Eigenmittel zur Erledigung der Aufgaben. Er ist für den Wegfall der Deckelung, der Obergrenze, damit die neuen Aufgaben finanziert werden können. Er widerspricht Ihnen; er hat ein Konzept.\n\nSie wollen die kleinen Zahnräder aus dem Uhrwerk Europa herausnehmen und meinen, die großen Zahnräder würden dann noch funktionieren. Meinen Sie das wirklich?\n\nSie haben ein wirklich seltsames Verständnis von Europa, und ich hoffe, dass hier kein Konsens mit Ihrer Fraktion besteht.\n\nIch glaube, dass auf dem Gipfel, der jetzt ansteht, die wirtschaftlichen Themen sehr wichtig sind. Es läuft zurzeit wesentlich besser. Die 28 Mitgliedstaaten haben sich in den letzten Monaten wirtschaftlich deutlich verbessert, die Arbeitslosenzahlen sind auf dem niedrigsten Stand seit 2009, und dieser Weg muss weitergegangen werden.\n\nWir dürfen uns aber nicht darüber hinwegtäuschen, dass die notwendigen Schlussfolgerungen im Euro-Raum noch zu ziehen sind und dass hier noch entsprechende Maßnahmen in der Finanz- und Wirtschaftspolitik getroffen werden müssen. Wir brauchen langfristig gemeinsame Maßnahmen, um diesen Wirtschaftsraum weiter zu stabilisieren.\n\nAktuell beschäftigen uns in den Fachausschüssen das Europäische Semester und die länderspezifischen Empfehlungen. Die Kommission hat hier einen interessanten Vorschlag gemacht. Sie möchte, dass die Konsolidierung der Staatshaushalte nicht einseitig weiter forciert wird, sondern dass stattdessen eine fiskalische Lockerung angestrebt wird - Herr Oettinger lässt grüßen -, die allen Mitgliedstaaten ausreichende Investitionen ermöglicht.\n\nStaaten mit hohem Defizit in der Euro-Zone wären damit zwar weiterhin zum Sparen angehalten, aber sie könnten wieder notwendige Investitionen tätigen. Staaten wie Deutschland und die Niederlande müssten dann noch stärker investieren.\n\nHäufig wird gefragt, wo investiert werden soll, und das Gegenargument genannt - das habe ich gestern auch von Herrn Spahn wieder gehört -, dass wir gar keine entsprechenden Planungskapazitäten haben und gar nicht so viel Geld ausgeben können. Das halte ich für Käse. Hier ist noch viel Luft drin.\n\nWir müssen unser makroökonomisches Ungleichgewicht langfristig wieder in den Griff bekommen, wobei wir die Arbeitsplätze im Exportbereich natürlich brauchen. Das hat damit zu tun, dass wir die Volkswirtschaften um uns herum stärken müssen, damit auch der Import aus diesen Ländern gelingen kann. Dann sind wir - auch wenn das hohe Exportniveau bleibt - im Gleichgewicht. Wir in Deutschland werden davon in einem gemeinsamen Europa dauerhaft und sicher partizipieren.\n\nBedauerlicherweise hat das Bundesfinanzministerium diese Lockerung direkt abgelehnt. Das halte ich nicht für richtig. Ich bin der Auffassung, dass dies noch einmal in den parlamentarischen Gremien beraten werden muss; denn die Deckelung der Haushaltsobergrenze im laufenden Haushalts- bzw. Finanzrahmen ist aufgrund der neuen Aufgaben in der Finanz- und in der Flüchtlingskrise zu überdenken. Hierfür braucht die Europäische Union eigene Mittel.\n\nHerr Oettinger hat uns vorgetragen, dass er eine Diskussion über Eigenmittel möchte. Sie umfasst natürlich auch - Sie haben es genannt - das Thema Bonds. Natürlich ist das ein Thema. Es umfasst aber auch die mögliche Beteiligung an Steuern. Auch das haben wir zu diskutieren. Die Diskussion darüber ist noch nicht zu Ende. Aber sie von vornherein abzulehnen, halte ich für völlig falsch;\n\ndenn damit machen Sie die europäische Idee kaputt.\n\n- Ich bin - um Ihre Frage klar zu beantworten - dafür, dass die Europäische Union mit Eigenmitteln - sei es aus Steuern oder aus Bonds - ausgestattet wird.\n\nIn diesem Sinne ist es, denke ich, wichtig, auf die Entwicklung Europas in Richtung einer Gemeinschaft, wie wir sie seit 60 Jahren kennen, hinzuwirken.\n\nDas ist doch ein fantastisches Modell, das man nicht mit solchen nationalistischen Tönen kaputt machen sollte. Es sicherte über 60 Jahre Frieden, Freiheit und Wohlstand. Ich komme aus dem Saarland. Wir hatten vor kurzem den 25. Jahrestag von Schengen. Schengen liegt an der Grenze. Das Abkommen von Schengen brachte Schritte nach vorne.\n\nIch darf ein Beispiel für ein Leben an der Grenze bringen.\n\nGanz kurz. - Mein Großvater ist ein Beispiel für viele Saarländer. Er wurde 1911 geboren und verstarb 2003. Er hatte sechs Nationalitäten, ohne ein einziges Mal umgezogen zu sein. Wollen wir denn wieder zurück in eine solche alte Zeit? Das kann doch wohl nicht wahr sein! Ich rufe Sie auf: Kämpfen Sie gemeinsam für die Fortentwicklung eines sozialen und friedlichen Europas!\n\nIn diesem Sinne: Glück auf!\"\n9573,sybille-benning,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Sie, meine lieben Kollegen von den Grünen, fordern ein neues, eigenständiges Rahmenprogramm zur Klima- und Klimafolgenforschung. Ressortübergreifend soll es sein und alle Förderaktivitäten der Bundesregierung im Bereich der Klima- und Klimafolgenforschung miteinander verknüpfen, bündeln, weiterentwickeln und stärken. Das gibt es doch schon. Es heißt FONA: Forschung für Nachhaltige Entwicklung.\n\nEs ist auch mehr als nur ein Impulsgeber, wie Sie es im Antrag wenigstens anerkennen.\n\nSchon 2005 hat die unionsgeführte Bundesregierung das Rahmenprogramm „Forschung für Nachhaltige Entwicklung“, kurz FONA, ins Leben gerufen,\n\ndas im letzten September in der dritten Auflage für weitere fünf Jahre mit einem Volumen von 2 Milliarden Euro ausgestattet wurde.\n\nDankenswerterweise geben Sie mir heute die Gelegenheit, im Plenum des Deutschen Bundestages über FONA zu sprechen, um dieses hervorragende Rahmenprogramm bekannter zu machen.\n\nEs ist ein Rahmenprogramm, und die Klimaforschung ist dabei eine tragende Säule. Lesen Sie einmal das FONA-Programm!\n\n- Hören Sie doch erst einmal zu!\n\nHier wird ein besonderer Wert auf einen schnellen Wissenstransfer und die Umsetzung der Forschungsergebnisse gelegt. Verbundforschung ist hier das Schlüsselwort.\n\nFONA3 wurde in einem mehrjährigen Agendaprozess unter Beteiligung zahlreicher Akteure aus Wissenschaft, Wirtschaft, Zivilgesellschaft, Politik und Verwaltung entwickelt. Sie merken: Jetzt sind schon zwei Ihrer Forderungen erfüllt. Ich finde für jede Ihrer weiteren Forderungen im Forschungsrahmenprogramm FONA eine Entsprechung. Ich kann nur einige wenige Beispiele nennen.\n\nZur Verbesserung der Klimamodellierung wurde eine halbe Milliarde Euro in die Forschungsflotte und in Großgeräte investiert. Der Hochleistungsrechner zur Klimamodellierung „Mistral“ hat soeben seine Arbeit aufgenommen.\n\n- Jetzt hören Sie doch wenigstens zu!\n\nEr berechnet mit hoher Auflösung Klimamodelle und Simulationen, aus denen Zukunftsszenarien entwickelt werden können.\n\nInternationale Kooperationen, wie Sie sie auch fordern, im Klima-, Umwelt- und Energiebereich mit Partnern in Schwellen- und Entwicklungsländern fördert CLIENT II. Vielleicht kennen Sie das auch schon. Auch die Beteiligung der Gesellschaft bzw. die Bürgerbeteiligung ist fest in FONA verankert. Das ist unter dem Begriff „Citizen Science“ bekannt. Als Beispiel dafür nenne ich die SenseBox. Mit dieser Box können Bürger und Bürgerinnen selbstständig Umweltdaten messen, die automatisch in eine Karte einfließen. Diese gute Idee hat soeben den Wettbewerb „Bürger schaffen die Zukunftsstadt“ gewonnen. Da sie in meinem Wahlkreis Münster entwickelt wurde, macht mich das natürlich froh. Diese Idee ist selbstverständlich auf alle anderen Städte übertragbar.\n\nBildungsangebote für Bürgerinnen und Bürger sind unerlässlich. Deshalb ist Bildung für Nachhaltigkeit ein wichtiger Baustein von FONA3, das die Eigenverantwortlichkeit des Handelns heranbildet und unterstützt. Ein weiterer Schwerpunkt von FONA ist die Green Economy, in der Lösungen für ressourcenschonende Wirtschaftsprozesse entwickelt werden. Innovations- und Unternehmergeist sind hier treibende Kräfte. Das geht weit über Technologieförderung hinaus. Forschung für nachhaltige Entwicklung, zu der auch Klimaforschung zählt, bedeutet selbstverständlich, bezahlbare, nachhaltige Energien zu entwickeln. Hier gibt es keinen Widerspruch zwischen Energie- und Klimaforschung. Das Ziel zählt.\n\nIhre Forderung nach einer ressortübergreifenden Bündelung wird übrigens bereits in der Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie der Bundesregierung erfüllt, wie Sie wissen könnten.\n\nWas sagt Ihr Antrag eigentlich noch aus? Sie fordern mehr geisteswissenschaftlich motivierte Fragen für Forschungsprojekte. Auch die Umsetzung in gesellschaftliches Handeln soll intensiviert werden. Forschungsergebnisse sollen handlungsleitender sein. Wir sind davon überzeugt, dass unsere angebotsoffenen Programme in FONA3 das alles wirksam behandeln. Denken Sie nur an den Wettbewerb „Zukunftsstadt“, der sich vor Anträgen gar nicht retten kann.\n\nDie Reaktionen auf Klimaveränderungen sind Prozesse, die mithilfe einer Bildung zum Verständnis naturwissenschaftlicher Zusammenhänge besser verstanden werden. MINT-Bildung ist hier das Schlüsselwort. Verständnis führt zum Handeln, das erkenntnisgeleitet, verantwortungsbewusst und individuell ist und schließlich auch gesellschaftlich wirksam wird. Wir von der CDU/CSU wollen die Menschen befähigen, selber durch Bildung und Erkenntnis die notwendigen Entscheidungen mitzutragen. Das ist unser Ziel.\n\nIhr Vorgehen scheint mir anders motiviert zu sein. Deshalb lehnen wir Ihren Antrag ab.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n1370,michael-meister,\"Herr Präsident! Frau Kollegin Paus, bei dem Erlass des Niedersächsischen Finanzministeriums vom 19. März 1981, auf den Sie sich in Ihrer Frage beziehen, handelt es sich um eine verwaltungsinterne Anweisung an die nachgeordneten Behörden des Landes Niedersachsen, mit der eine bundeseinheitlich abgestimmte Verwaltungsauffassung in einem steuerlichen Einzelfall umgesetzt wurde.\n\nIm Bereich der Umsatzsteuer gibt es keine zur amtlichen Veröffentlichung bestimmten bundeseinheitlich abgestimmten Verwaltungsanweisungen, die die Besteuerung einzelner Steuerpflichtiger regeln. Dies gilt auch für die übrigen Besitz- und Verkehrsteuern.\n\nAm 5. September 2001 erging ein BMF-Schreiben zur steuerlichen Behandlung von Zuwendungen - sprich: Spenden - an die Stiftung „Erinnerung, Verantwortung und Zukunft“ mit Sitz in Berlin. Dieses BMF-Schreiben sollte aber lediglich die Bedeutung der Stiftung verdeutlichen und einen reibungslosen Ablauf des Spendenabzugs innerhalb der Verwaltung sicherstellen.\n\nSie haben gehört, dass es für den speziellen Fall, auf den Sie Bezug genommen haben, vom zuständigen Landesministerium eine nicht zur Veröffentlichung bestimmte Anweisung zur einheitlichen Verwaltungshandhabung gegeben hat. Da es sich um Landesbehörden handelt, die solche Anweisungen verwaltungsintern und damit nicht zur Veröffentlichung bestimmt erteilen, kann ich dazu - Sie haben ja nach einzelnen Steuerpflichtigen gefragt - keine weiteren Auskünfte geben.\n\nEs gibt vom Bundesministerium der Finanzen die üblichen Schreiben, sogenannte BMF-Schreiben, die der einheitlichen Verwaltungspraxis und Verwaltungsauslegung von Steuergesetzen dienen. Diese beziehen sich allerdings nicht auf einzelne Steuerpflichtige.\n\nDarüber hinaus gibt es die Rechtspraxis, dass sich unterschiedliche Länderverwaltungen, die mit demselben Steuerpflichtigen zu tun haben, auf eine einheitliche Verwaltungspraxis verständigen.\n\nIch habe darauf hingewiesen, dass es zur Auslegung von einzelnen Steuergesetzen BMF-Schreiben gibt. Diese BMF-Schreiben werden auf der Basis von § 21 a Finanzverwaltungsgesetz herausgegeben; darin enthalten sind allgemeine Weisungen. Diese allgemeinen Weisungen dienen der Vollzugsgleichheit bei den von den Ländern im Auftrag des Bundes verwalteten Steuern. Dies ist über Art. 3 des Grundgesetzes in Verbindung mit § 85 und § 88 der Abgabenordnung so gehalten, um eine gleichmäßige Besteuerung vorzunehmen.\n\nDie BMF-Schreiben sind seitens der Steuerverwaltung im Vollzug zu beachten. Sie werden im Übrigen im Bundessteuerblatt, Teil I, veröffentlicht. Sie binden nur die Finanzbehörden, nicht allerdings die Gerichte. Ländererlasse können demgegenüber eine zwischen Bund und Ländern abgestimmte allgemeine Verwaltungsauffassung in einem Einzelfall umsetzen.\n\nIch sehe mich aufgrund des Steuergeheimnisses außerstande, zu einzelnen Steuervorgängen hier öffentliche Ausführungen zu tätigen.\n\nHerr Präsident, vielen Dank. - Frau Kollegin Paus, für die Bearbeitung von Doppelzahlungsfällen sind die jeweiligen Familienkassen zuständig. Das Bundeszentralamt für Steuern führt darüber keine gesonderte Statistik. Aus den vom Bundesrechnungshof und den Prüfungsämtern des Bundes zum Themenfeld des mehrfachen Kindergeldbezuges durchgeführten Erhebungen im Zeitraum 2009 bis 2011 hat das Bundeszentralamt für Steuern die Rückabwicklung sowie die straf- und bußgeldrechtliche Aufarbeitung der aufgedeckten Fälle bei 37 Familienkassen fachaufsichtlich begleitet. Die Höhe des Hinterziehungsbetrages schwankt zwischen mehreren Hundert und mehreren Tausend Euro. Der Bundesrechnungshof und die Prüfungsämter des Bundes haben bei ihren Erhebungen aber auch Hinterziehungszeiträume von bis zu 15 Jahren ermittelt.\n\nDie Namen der 37 betroffenen Familienkassen nebst Zeitraum und jeweiliger Höhe der verkürzten Steuern leite ich Ihnen, wenn Sie einverstanden sind, Frau Paus, zu. Dabei handelt es sich um die im Einzelnen bekannt gewordenen Fälle. Wenn Sie wünschen, trage ich sie Ihnen gerne vor; das dauert dann allerdings ein bisschen.\n\nZunächst einmal, Frau Kollegin Paus: Ich habe nicht von 37 Fällen, sondern von 37 Familienkassen gesprochen.\n\nWir haben lediglich Kenntnis über die Fälle, die bei diesen einzelnen Kassen nachverfolgt worden sind. Insofern kann ich Ihnen keine Zahlen nennen, die über diese einzelnen nachverfolgten, überprüften Fälle hinausgehen.\n\nEine Ursache, dass es zu Problemen kommen kann, ist aus unserer Sicht: Ist das Kind zur jeweils zuständigen Familienkasse richtig zugeordnet, oder kommt es gegebenenfalls zu Mehrfachzuordnungen? Das kann eine Ursache sein, dass es zu falschen Zahlungen kommt.\n\nZum Zweiten haben wir im Regelfall zwei Antragsberechtigte, nämlich beide Elternteile; es kann allerdings nur ein Antragsberechtigter rechtmäßig das Kindergeld beziehen. Wenn jetzt, ohne dass das den zuständigen Stellen auffällt, beide Antragsberechtigte unabhängig voneinander bei unterschiedlichen Stellen den Antrag stellen, kann es zu Mehrfachzahlungen kommen.\n\nDie Bundesregierung beabsichtigt, die Zuordnung von Kindergeldzahlungen für ein bestimmtes Kind in Zukunft grundsätzlich an einer Steueridentifikationsnummer festzumachen und damit einen Beitrag zu leisten, dass Doppelzahlungen weniger wahrscheinlich werden.\n\nWir haben Zahlen vorliegen - das habe ich mehrfach erwähnt, und die gebe ich Ihnen nachher - zu den Fällen bei den 37 Familienkassen, wo für uns sozusagen offenkundig wurde, dass es da tatsächlich zu Mehrfachleistungen gekommen ist. Ob es auch andere Fälle gibt, ist der Bundesregierung nicht bekannt; dazu gibt es auch keine Statistik. Deshalb kann ich zu dieser Frage auch nichts sagen.\n\nEine gesonderte Statistik über Mitarbeiter der obersten Bundesbehörden, bei denen solche Mehrfachzahlungen von Kindergeld stattgefunden haben, liegt uns nicht vor.\n\nFrau Präsidentin! Frau Kollegin Dr. Brantner, möglicherweise zu Unrecht ausgezahltes Kindergeld wird von den Familienkassen von Amts wegen zurückgefordert. Der Anteil, der auf Zahlungen an Zuwanderer aus EU-Staaten entfällt, wird statistisch nicht gesondert erfasst.\n\nIch habe nach meiner Erinnerung eben auch keine Zahlen genannt.\n\nDazu, woraus diese Zahlen abgeleitet sind, kann ich Ihnen hier aus dem Stegreif keine Auskunft geben. Das kann ich aber gerne recherchieren und nachreichen.\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Kollegin Dr. Brantner, eine Umsetzung des Vorhabens wird voraussichtlich einen Aufwand von rund 3,4 Millionen Euro erzeugen. Die Bundesregierung hat keine eigenen Berechnungen verlangt. Wir gehen davon aus, dass sich der Aufwand von 3,4 Millionen Euro mittelfristig rentieren wird.\n\nFrau Kollegin Brantner, wir gehen davon aus, dass es bei Kindergeldfällen mit Auslandsbezug deshalb besonders schwierig ist, die Korrektheit nachzuweisen, weil es eben besonders schwierig ist, die korrekte Erfüllung der Anspruchsgrundlagen für eine Kindergeldzahlung nachzuweisen. Deshalb ist natürlich das Risiko, dass es hier zu nicht korrekten Zahlungen kommt, höher als bei einem Inlandssachverhalt, bei dem das Kind hier am Ort lebt und die Zahlungen eindeutig dem Kind zugeordnet werden können.\n\nWir unterstellen weder bei Inländern noch bei Ausländern Betrug. Wir werden auch keine Sonderregeln für Menschen, die im Ausland leben, schaffen, sondern wir werden allgemeine Regeln aufstellen, die für alle Kinder und den Kindergeldbezug anzuwenden sind.\n\nVornehmlich versuchen wir dort, wo es möglich ist, anhand der vorhin angesprochenen Steueridentifikationsnummer vorzugehen, weil wir dann einen Fall eindeutig einer Nummer zuordnen können. Sollten also mehrere Kindergeldzahlungen derselben Steueridentifikationsnummer zugeordnet werden, dann kann man das relativ leicht aufklären.\n\nWenn das nicht möglich ist, weil das Kind im Ausland lebt, der Antrag aber von einem im Inland anspruchsberechtigten Elternteil gestellt wird, werden wir Unterlagen verlangen, die denen gleichgestellt sind, die sie benötigen, wenn sie eine Steueridentifikationsnummer beantragen.\"\n8220,heike-baehrens,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Nachdem nun schon viel über das Thema Krankenhausfinanzierung gesprochen wurde, möchte ich gerne einen Punkt aufgreifen, der zwar in der Begründung des Antrags der Linken vorkommt, für den es aber keinen konkreten Lösungsansatz gibt. Sie haben ja vor allem die verbesserte Kooperation der Leistungserbringer eingefordert, vor allem auch im Übergang vom Krankenhaus zum ambulanten Bereich, und darauf möchte ich gerne eingehen. Wir haben ja bereits im GKV\u001eVersorgungsstärkungsgesetz Verbesserungen beim Entlassmanagement geregelt. Krankenhäuser und Rehakliniken können künftig für bis zu sieben Tage Arzneimittel, Heil- und Hilfsmittel, häusliche Krankenpflege und Soziotherapie verordnen und sogar die Arbeitsunfähigkeit feststellen.\n\nMit dem Krankenhausstrukturgesetz, das wir im November verabschieden werden, schließen wir - das ist wichtig - eine weitere Lücke zwischen ambulanter und stationärer Versorgung. Wir schaffen nämlich einen neuen Leistungsanspruch auf Überleitungspflege.\n\nWarum ist das wichtig, und wen haben wir dabei im Blick? Ich denke da beispielsweise an eine befreundete Familie mit drei Kindern. Ein Kind ist noch im Kindergarten, zwei Kinder sind in der Schule. Die Mutter ist schwer an Krebs erkrankt. Immer wieder hat sie Phasen von Krankenhausaufenthalten, aber auch Phasen von intensiver ambulanter Behandlung. Das sind Zeiten, wo die Familie Unterstützung und Entlastung im Haushalt benötigt. Hierfür erweitern wir den Anspruch auf Grundpflege und hauswirtschaftliche Versorgung nach § 38 SGB V. Der Anspruch besteht dann nicht nur, wie es heute geregelt ist, um einen Krankenhausaufenthalt zu vermeiden, sondern auch, damit einer solchen Familie im Alltag geholfen und für Entlastung gesorgt werden kann.\n\n- Genau. - Wir ermöglichen beispielsweise auch, dass diese Leistung der Haushaltshilfe Familien mit Kindern bis zu zwölf Jahren zukünftig sogar für bis zu 26 Wochen im Jahr gewährt wird. Das ist bei solch extremen Krankheitsfällen enorm wichtig und ein bedeutender Fortschritt.\n\nIch will aber noch ein anderes Beispiel nennen. Ich hatte einen Mitarbeiter, der relativ jung war, Single, allein lebend. Er ist als Motorradfahrer schwer verunglückt; ihm wurde die Vorfahrt genommen. Er hatte Glück im Unglück, weil er keine schweren inneren Verletzungen erlitt; aber er hatte einen gebrochenen Fuß und mehrfache Brüche in beiden Armen. Operation, Krankenhausaufenthalt. Und dann? Wie geht es nach dem Krankenhausaufenthalt zu Hause weiter? Er hatte große Schwierigkeiten, damit umzugehen.\n\nGenau für solche Situationen schaffen wir jetzt einen Leistungsanspruch auf Kurzzeitpflege; denn Haushaltshilfe wie im ersten Beispiel reicht nur dann aus, wenn Angehörige im häuslichen Bereich mithelfen können. Wenn das nicht der Fall ist, steht man im Grunde vor dem Nichts. Deshalb schaffen wir dieses Angebot. In der Pflegeversicherung besteht ein Anspruch auf Pflege nur dann, wenn der Pflegebedarf absehbar über sechs Monate hinausgeht und eine Einstufung in eine entsprechende Pflegestufe vorhanden ist. Deshalb braucht es ein solches Leistungsangebot im Bereich der gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung, und genau dieses schaffen wir mit dem Krankenhausstrukturgesetz.\n\nUm auch das noch zu sagen, Frau Vogler und Frau Wöllert: Das ist nicht erst eine Folge der Einführung der DRGs. Aber durch die Einführung der DRGs ist der Zustand sozusagen noch einmal zugespitzt worden, weil es natürlich zu früheren Krankenhausentlassungen kommt.\n\nDeshalb ist dieser Bedarf da.\n\nEs gibt im Landkreis Göppingen einen Arbeitskreis „Kurzzeitpflege für Jüngere“, der seit Monaten genau für ein solches Angebot kämpft, wie wir es jetzt schaffen. Ich freue mich, dass wir mit der Überleitungspflege, die wir vereinbart haben, und vor allem mit diesem Angebot einer Kurzzeitpflege auch für Jüngere wichtige Bausteine für die Versorgungskette schaffen, damit der Übergang vom Krankenhaus in die ambulante Versorgung und vor allem auch das Sich-wieder-zu-Hause-Einfinden deutlich erleichtert und verbessert werden.\n\nIch bin davon überzeugt, dass dieser Arbeitskreis und auch Initiativen an anderen Orten den Finger in die richtige Wunde gelegt haben, und kann nur sagen, Frau Vogler, Frau Wöllert: Die Koalition setzt um, was sie versprochen hat. Darum muss sich, wer nach schwerer Krankheit das Krankenhaus verlassen darf, zukünftig keine Sorgen machen, dass er danach nicht angemessen unterstützt und versorgt wird.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n14970,volkmar-vogel,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Mit dem heute vorliegenden Stadtentwicklungsbericht beleuchten wir die Siedlungsstrukturen in ihrer Gesamtheit. Man kann zu Recht sagen: Wenn wir vom Stadtentwicklungsbericht sprechen, sprechen wir sowohl von den großen Städten als auch von den kleinen Städten und Gemeinden.\n\nDas Ergebnis, Frau Staatssekretärin, auch wenn es uns vor neue Herausforderungen stellt, kann sich durchaus sehen lassen. Man kann mit Fug und Recht sagen, dass wir auf dem richtigen Weg sind, aber nur, weil wir auch gemeinsam arbeiten. Das ist keine Aufgabe, die wir als Bund allein erledigen können, sondern es ist eine Aufgabe, der wir uns als Bund gemeinsam mit den Ländern und Kommunen stellen und die wir anpacken müssen.\n\nEines der wichtigsten Instrumente ist natürlich die Städtebauförderung. Der Abruf der Städtebaufördermittel zeigt uns, dass wir auf dem richtigen Weg sind. Der Dank gilt allen Akteuren, die daran beteiligt waren. Das sind sowohl unsere kommunalen Unternehmen und die Genossenschaften als auch die vielen privaten Investoren und Selbstnutzer, die dazu beitragen, dass wir hier im Großen und Ganzen - bei allen Problemen, die wir zu lösen haben - doch auf einem richtigen Weg sind. Unser Ziel - wir dürfen es nicht aus den Augen verlieren - sind natürlich lebenswerte, bezahlbare Wohnungen, aber auch das dazugehörige Umfeld in den Städten, in den Kommunen und auf dem flachen Land. Es wurde viel zur Mittelausstattung gesagt; ich kann mich dem nur anschließen.\n\nIch möchte insofern den Blick in die Zukunft richten. Wir haben das auch mit unserem Entschließungsantrag gemacht. Ich bitte die Kollegen der Opposition, sich unserem Antrag anzuschließen und uns zu unterstützen. Die Voraussetzungen in der Zukunft werden sein: demografischer Wandel - es werden die wachsenden und die schrumpfenden Städte in unserem Lande sein, denen wir helfen müssen -, die Binnenwanderung, aber auch der Zuzug von außen, nicht zuletzt der Klimawandel, der in den Städten, aber auch auf dem flachen Land ein Problem ist.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, mit den Stadtumbauprogrammen, die wir sehr gut ausgestattet haben und jetzt zu einem gemeinsamen Programm zusammenlegen, reagieren wir genau darauf. Ich kann Ihnen sagen - auch Ihnen, Frau Lay, weil Sie es angesprochen haben -: Wir achten sehr darauf, dass die Sonderförderbedingungen für die ostdeutschen Bundesländer beim Abriss erhalten bleiben. Gleichzeitig lassen wir Kommunen in anderen Bundesländern, die in schwierigen finanziellen Lagen sind, diese Unterstützung angedeihen. Das ist, denke ich, mehr als gerecht.\n\nIm Übrigen möchte ich, weil wir hier auch die Frage der Bildung im Blick hatten, sagen: Mit den Stadtumbauprogrammen ist es möglich - das ist auch unser Ziel -, nicht nur für einen reinen Abriss, sondern insbesondere auch für die Aufwertung und Umgestaltung der Quartiere zu sorgen. Dazu gehören auch Schulen. Es gab in Thüringen unter der CDU-Regierung ein sehr gutes Schulsanierungsprogramm, über das - auch im Rahmen des Stadtumbaus - Schulen umgestaltet und an die Bedürfnisse angepasst wurden, sodass sie heute hervorragende Lehrbedingungen bieten. Das ist sicherlich ein gutes Beispiel für die Kollegen in anderen Bundesländern.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, auch beim Stadtgrün spielt der Stadtumbau mit hinein, aber es gibt dafür auch ein eigenes Programm: „Zukunft Stadtgrün“. Ich muss sagen: Hier gibt es noch enormes Potenzial. Ich finde es bedauerlich, dass wir in dieser Legislatur nicht dazu gekommen sind, die Kompensationsverordnung zu ändern.\n\nLiebe Kollegen von den Grünen, das ist auch ein Appell an Sie: Wir sollten, wenn es darum geht, Ersatz und Ausgleich für Flächeninanspruchnahme zu schaffen, darüber nachdenken, entsprechende Möglichkeiten auch in den Städten, in Siedlungsstrukturen zu eröffnen. Die Kleingärtner geben uns dafür das beste Beispiel: Sie schaffen in ihren Anlagen teilweise Reservate, in denen sich die Tierwelt und die Pflanzenwelt entwickeln können. Das ist durchaus auch in den Städten möglich. Machen wir uns nichts vor: Jeder Stadtkämmerer stöhnt über die Kosten des Stadtgrüns. Mit den entsprechenden Mitteln würden wir auch die städtischen Kassen entlasten. Das ist ein Punkt, dessen wir uns auf jeden Fall annehmen sollten.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, wenn wir über Wohnungsbau reden, geht es immer auch um eine soziale Frage. Die Frage der sozialen Gerechtigkeit ist immer dann am besten gelöst, wenn wir es vielen Menschen ermöglichen, eigenen Wohnraum zu schaffen, der ihnen gehört und über den sie verfügen können.\n\nDa sind es vor allen Dingen die Familien, die Schwellenhaushalte, die es schwer haben, zu Wohnungseigentum zu kommen. Denen müssen wir helfen, zum Beispiel durch steuerliche Abschreibungsmöglichkeiten.\n\nSteuerlich abschreiben kann aber nicht jeder. Deswegen ist unser Ziel - daran sollten wir arbeiten -, die Wohnungsbauprämie zu verändern, damit hier neue Möglichkeiten entstehen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, auch über die Frage der Grunderwerbsteuer, die sehr ins Gewicht fällt, wenn es darum geht, Wohneigentum zu erwerben, sollte man nachdenken. Ich finde es nicht richtig, dass sie zum Beispiel in Thüringen auf 6,5 Prozent erhöht worden ist. In Sachsen liegt sie nach wie vor bei 3,5 Prozent. Auf diese Art und Weise sorgt Sachsen dafür, dass Wohneigentum gebildet werden kann.\n\nDamit nicht nur über die Städtebauförderung gesprochen wird, möchte ich abschließend sagen: Es ist wichtig, dass wir die Veränderungen nicht nur in die Metropolen und die großen Städte tragen - es ist uns gelungen, die Baunutzungsverordnung zu ändern und das sogenannte Urbane Gebiet zu schaffen -, sondern auch in die kleinen Städte und Gemeinden, damit das Leben auch dort lebenswert bleibt, damit es nicht nur Schlafdörfer sind, sondern sich dort auch Gewerbe entwickeln kann und Menschen vielleicht gar nicht mehr in die großen Städte ziehen, weil sie ihr Daheim in einem Dorf, in einer kleinen Stadt finden. Das ist das, was Deutschland stark macht.\n\nDaran müssen wir weiter arbeiten. Dazu rufe ich Sie alle auf. Machen Sie mit der Zustimmung zu unserem Antrag den ersten Schritt. Alles Weitere folgt in der nächsten Legislaturperiode.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n4425,oliver-krischer,\"Herzlichen Dank, Herr Bundesminister Gabriel, für den Bericht. - Ich glaube, man muss eines klarstellen: Wir haben eine Klimalücke, die bei 16 Prozent liegt, und nicht bei 5 bis 8 Prozent. Wir haben nämlich im Moment, also Stand jetzt, ge-genüber 1990 um 24 Prozent reduziert. Wir wollen eine Reduzierung um 40 Prozent erreichen; es fehlen also 16 Prozent. Dieser Wert muss erreicht werden.\n\nIch habe eine konkrete Frage an Sie, was den Kraftwerkssektor angeht. Ich entnehme dem Klimaaktionsplan, dass Sie für 2015 eine Rege-lung vorschlagen wollen, die eine Reduzierung der Emissionen um 22 Millionen Tonnen erbringen soll; mehr steht darin nicht. Meine Frage wäre: Wann kommt diese Regelung? Was beinhaltet diese Regelung?\n\nDie Frage, die sich daran anschließt, ist: Wie wollen Sie die weiteren Emissionsreduktionen er-reichen, die wir im Kraftwerkssektor erbringen müssen und die Sie als Trendprognose der vorhe-rigen Bundesregierung dargestellt haben? Die Reduktionen sind ja noch nicht erfolgt. Wir haben seit 20 Jahren in der Summe ein sta-gnierendes Emissionsniveau im Kraftwerkssektor. Durch wel-che Maßnahmen wollen Sie die weiteren Emissi-onsreduzierungen von mindestens 40 Millionen Tonnen, eher 50 Millionen Tonnen erreichen?\n\nHerr Gabriel, ich komme gerade aus dem Wirt-schaftsausschuss. Dort war eine französische De-legation zu Gast und hat sich über zu niedrige In-dustriestrompreise in Deutschland beschwert; Herr Beckmeyer war ja dabei. Das war eine inte-ressante Debatte.\n\nIch möchte eine Frage zum Thema Kohle stel-len. Sie haben uns gerade erklärt, dass Wir-kungsgrade für Sie kein Thema sind, dass das Al-ter der Kraftwerke für Sie kein Thema ist, dass das CO2-Budget für Kraftwerke für Sie kein The-ma ist und dass der CO2-Mindestpreis für Sie kein Thema ist. Ich habe das so verstanden: Jede ord-nungsrechtliche Maßnahme ist für Sie kein The-ma. Sie haben gleichzeitig auf den Emissionshan-del verwiesen. In diesem Zusammenhang muss man einfach zur Kenntnis nehmen: Sie haben auf dem Europäischen Rat zugestimmt, dass vor 2020 diesbezüglich nichts Relevantes verändert wird. Also kann der Emissionshandel keine Wirkung entfalten. Trotzdem erklären Sie uns hier, dass Sie eine Reduktion der heute 377 Millionen Ton-nen CO2 im Stromsektor um 71 Millionen Tonnen auf 306 Millionen Tonnen in fünf Jahren erreichen wollen. Mich würde interessieren, mit welchem In-strumentarium Sie das erreichen wollen. Außer ei-ner Kapazitätsreserve kann ich mir da konkret nichts vorstellen. Planen Sie einen Emissionshan-del unter dem Emissionshandel, also quasi einen deutschen Emissionshandel? Ich bitte um eine kleine Andeutung dazu, was Sie in diesem zur Er-reichung des deutschen Klimaschutzziels zentra-len Bereich vorhaben.\"\n6687,steffen-kampeter,\"Charmante Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Wenn auf der Tagesordnung eines Parlamentes „Nachtragshaushalt“ steht, dann ist üblicherweise irgendwo Land unter, weil irgendetwas nicht passt: Die Einnahmen sind zusammengebrochen, die Ausgaben explodieren. Das ist historisch die Erfahrung von Haushaltspolitik. Heute ist das anders.\n\nDer Nachtragshaushalt, den wir in zweiter und dritter Lesung im Deutschen Bundestag beschließen, ist ein Zeichen unserer soliden Haushaltspolitik.\n\nWir haben in den vergangenen Jahren Maß gehalten in der Großen Koalition. Wolfgang Schäuble hat die Nettokreditaufnahme gemeinsam mit der Koalition zurückführen können. Wir haben günstige wirtschaftliche Rahmenbedingungen. Deutschland wächst. Jetzt nutzen wir diesen Spielraum, um mehr zu tun für das mittelfristige Wachstumspotenzial, für Arbeitsplätze in Deutschland durch die Stärkung von Investitionen. Zugleich tun wir etwas für das föderale Miteinander, indem wir mit diesem Nachtragshaushalt Maßnahmen beschließen für mehr Investitionen in den Kommunen und für mehr Solidarität bei der Bewältigung von Flüchtlingsherausforderungen. Das ist doch mal eine Botschaft für einen Nachtragshaushalt, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren.\n\nDie Wirtschaftsleistung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland wächst in diesem Jahr um voraussichtlich 1,8 Prozent, die Beschäftigung ist auf Rekordniveau, die Steuereinnahmen steigen, und im Übrigen hat sich demnächst auch der Deutsche Bundestag damit zu befassen, ob wir die kalte Progression entschärfen; das Wort darf man nicht sagen, aber man könnte das auch als Steuersenkung interpretieren. All dies zeigt, dass Haushalts- und Finanzpolitik, die solide ist, dazu beiträgt, dass der Staat handlungsfähig bleibt, und macht eines deutlich: Es ist falsch, zu sagen, dass Schulden irgendein Problem bei staatlichen Herausforderungen lösen könnten. Schulden sind in der Regel das Problem. Wer keine hat, ist handlungsfähig, und wer zu viele hat, der geht unter. Deswegen bleibt die schwarze Null der Maßstab, und wir nutzen Spielräume aus als Konsolidierungsrendite. Das ist Verlässlichkeit in der Haushaltspolitik.\n\nWenn wir heute beschließen, mehr zu investieren, nämlich öffentliche Investitionen des Bundes auf den Weg zu bringen, dann geht es nicht darum, kurzfristig ein Strohfeuer anzuzünden, sondern darum, das mittelfristige Wachstumspotenzial der deutschen Volkswirtschaft zu erweitern. Von 2014 bis 2018 belaufen sich die zusätzlichen Maßnahmen auf über 40 Milliarden Euro, knapp 1,5 Prozent unserer wirtschaftlichen Leistungs-fähigkeit. Wir tun damit mehr für digitale Infrastruktur, mehr für die Verkehrsinfrastruktur. Wir sagen Ja zur Steigerung der Energieeffizienz. Wir finden, dass der Klimaschutz nach vorne gebracht werden muss. Wir vergessen den Hochwasserschutz nicht und leisten etwas für die Städtebauförderung. Deutschland soll wachsen. Wir schaffen dafür die Voraussetzungen. Das ist das Angebot dieses Nachtragshaushalts.\n\nEin weiteres Feld ist die Stärkung der kommunalen Investitionskraft. Wir glauben nicht, dass alles von -Berlin aus geregelt werden kann. Wir wissen aus den Erfahrungen der vergangenen Jahre, dass in den Kommunen sehr viel brachliegen kann und dass Investitionen, die man da anstößt, besonders schnell wirken. Deswegen wollen wir mit dem vorliegenden Nachtragshaushaltsgesetz ein Sondervermögen schaffen, mit dem wir in finanziell besonders gestressten Kommunen Investitionen -fördern wollen. Das ist unser Beitrag zu mehr Solidarität im föderalen Miteinander. Aber ich verbinde dies mit der klaren Aussage, dass zusätzliches Bundesgeld jetzt -komplementär mit Maßnahmen von der Seite der Länder begleitet werden muss; denn es macht überhaupt keinen Sinn, dass der Bund eine Schippe drauflegt, wenn sich die Länder aus der Verantwortung zurückziehen.\n\nDeswegen: Kommunale Solidarität endet nicht beim Bundeshaushalt, sondern muss gemeinsam von Bund und Ländern getragen werden. Unser Angebot hierzu steht.\n\nEine weitere wichtige Frage ist die folgende: Wie begegnen wir als Bund bestimmten kommunalen Herausforderungen, die wir beim Beschluss des Bundeshaushalts noch nicht in dieser Dimension gesehen haben? Es geht um die Aufnahme, Unterbringung, Versorgung und auch die Gesundheitsversorgung von Asylbewerbern. Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, die Lage an Europas Grenzen ist dramatisch. Unsere Kommunen sind herausgefordert. Da kann der Bund nicht abseitsstehen. Nicht abseitsstehen heißt, dass wir uns finanziell stärker engagieren, dass wir dafür sorgen, dass Mittel eingesetzt werden, dass wir die Verfahren schneller -machen. Der Bund ist bereit, hier mehr zu leisten; aber auch da gilt: Wir müssen diese Herausforderungen gemeinsam mit den Ländern angehen. - Wir machen ein faires Angebot. Wir erwarten, dass auch die Länder bei der Aufnahme, Unterbringung und möglicherweise, -notwendiger Abschiebung von Menschen ganz klare Schwerpunkte setzen. Bund und Länder gemeinsam für Kommunen, so lautet die Botschaft dieses Nachtragshaushalts.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, wir werden in wenigen Wochen den Haushalt für das Jahr 2016 vorlegen. Er wird die Maßnahmen dieses Nachtragshaushalts fortführen, er wird deutlich machen, dass unsere Solidarität im föderalen Miteinander nicht geringer, sondern stärker wird. Er wird aber auch weitere notwendige Investitionsimpulse setzen.\n\nEine Grundlinie ist jedoch klar: Wir wollen mit dem Geld auskommen, das die Bürgerinnen und Bürger uns zur Verfügung stellen. Wir wollen keine neuen Schulden. Jeder private Haushalt kann über kurz oder lang nur mit dem auskommen, was er verdient. Das auf den öffentlichen Bereich zu übertragen, das ist nichts weniger als Respekt vor der Leistung der Menschen in diesem Land. Das ist unsere Haushaltspolitik.\"\n13116,hans-christian-strobele,\"Danke, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Staatsministerin, das befriedigt mich gar nicht, vor allen Dingen angesichts dessen, dass die frühere Bundesregierung etwa den Gefangenen Murat Kurnaz vier Jahre lang in dem Foltergefängnis Guantánamo schmoren gelassen hat, obgleich ihr genau das von den Amerikanern mitgeteilt worden war: dass mit an Sicherheit grenzender Wahrscheinlichkeit keine Gefährdung bestand.\n\nWieso hat die Bundesregierung nicht dem Drängen des Sonderbeauftragten des US-Präsidenten, der durch Europa gereist ist - er war auch in Deutschland; ich kann Ihnen die Daten heraussuchen - und händeringend darum gebeten hat, Gefangene aufzunehmen, nachgegeben, bzw. warum ist sie nicht zumindest in die Prüfung einzelner Fälle eingetreten, um dann zu einer Entscheidung zu kommen? Vielleicht wäre Guantánamo dann heute schon geschlossen.\n\nWenn ich noch eine Frage stellen darf: Frau Staatsministerin, den Fall Kurnaz könnten wir noch einmal aufrollen. Aber dazu fehlt hier die Zeit. Die Bundesregierung hat sich immer darum gedrückt, hier eine klare Stellungnahme abzugeben, und hat die Bremer Behörden sogar dazu veranlasst, den Aufenthalt von Herrn Kurnaz in Deutschland - er kam aus Bremen - zu verunmöglichen. Dazu ist damals sogar eine Entscheidung zusammen mit dem damaligen Staatssekretär im Kanzleramt, Herrn Steinmeier, gefallen.\n\nIn meiner Frage geht es aber um etwas anderes. Sie haben gesagt, diese Frage müsse in den USA geklärt werden. US-Präsident Obama, der sich dringend darum bemüht, die Gefangenen loszuwerden, findet auf der ganzen Welt nicht genügend Länder, die bereit sind, alle betreffenden Gefangenen, gegen die nichts vorliegt, aufzunehmen. Mehrere Staaten haben mehr Gefangene aufgenommen als Deutschland. Sicherlich muss die Frage in den USA geklärt werden. Wenn man ihm aber dabei nicht hilft, dann darf man sich nicht darüber beschweren, dass dieses Foltergefängnis nach wie vor besteht.\n\nHerr Staatssekretär, ich will Folgendes dazu fragen: Dieser Vorgang ist öffentlich. Nach diesen Veröffentlichungen haben sich die Strafverfolgungsbehörden offenbar an den Bundestagspräsidenten oder das Präsidium gewandt und haben gebeten, hier im Deutschen Bundestag ermitteln zu können. Diese Genehmigung ist offenbar erteilt worden; so habe ich das jedenfalls den Medien entnommen. Da stellt sich doch die Frage, ob eine solche Bitte auch an die Bundesregierung und die verschiedenen Bundesbehörden herangetragen wurde; denn dieselben Unterlagen, die dort veröffentlicht wurden, sind nicht nur im Untersuchungsausschuss, das heißt im Deutschen Bundestag, sondern auch im Kanzleramt, im Bundesinnenministerium und in anderen Ministerien vorhanden. Ist eine solche Anfrage an Sie gestellt worden, und wenn ja, wie wurde sie beantwortet?\"\n10212,daniela-de-ridder,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Gäste auf den Rängen und vielleicht auch an den Bildschirmen! Ich freue mich sehr, dass ich nach Philipp Lengsfeld reden kann.\n\nDenn angesichts der Wahlergebnisse vom letzten Wochenende habe ich mir vorgenommen, alle Anträge, zu denen ich hier reden kann, wohlwollend zu prüfen, so auch den heutigen. Ich weiß nicht, ob in der kommenden Legislaturperiode die demokratische Kultur noch die gleiche sein wird. Deshalb möchte ich mir die Freiheit herausnehmen, das in der Tat sehr positiv anzugehen.\n\nDeshalb, liebe Frau Andreae, lieber Herr Gehring: Ihr Gesetzentwurf findet mein großes Interesse - so viel darf ich an dieser Stelle schon einmal sagen. Sie können mich durchaus für die KMUs erwärmen. Ich war zwar etwas überrascht, dass Sie - aber ich lerne gerne täglich dazu - auch schon so lange ein Herz für die KMUs haben. Ich habe Ihrem Gesetzesvorhaben auch entnommen, dass Sie sich auf das EFI-Gutachten stützen. - So weit, so gut.\n\nSie haben völlig recht: Es geht darum, das Innovationspotenzial unserer KMUs und ihre Forschungs- und Entwicklungsvorhaben zu stärken und zu stützen. Wenn man sich anschaut, was Sie gesetzlich verändern wollen, dann stellt man fest, dass es einige blinde Flecken gibt. Ich will nicht alle erwähnen; denn meine Redezeit ist kurz. Lassen Sie mich mich deshalb auf einige wenige Punkte konzentrieren.\n\nDas aktuelle EFI-Gutachten besagt mit Blick auf Forschungs- und Entwicklungsvorhaben, dass der Fachkräftemangel das Haupthemmnis für Innovationsentwicklung bei den KMUs ist. Sie werden das gleiche EFI-Gutachten gelesen haben wie ich,\n\ndeshalb werden Sie auch die gleichen Zahlen gelesen haben. Wenn Sie einmal genau hinschauen, dann finden Sie im EFI-Gutachten den Hinweis, dass in 2006 16 Prozent der befragten Unternehmen angaben, dass vor allem der Fachkräftemangel ein riesiges Problem darstellt.\n\nDeshalb müssen wir uns auch fragen, liebe Frau Andreae, ob Sie für das, was Sie jetzt vorhaben, das richtige Instrument verwenden,\n\nob es zur richtigen Zeit kommt, ob es auf den richtigen Grundlagen basiert und ob Sie von der richtigen Analyse ausgehen.\n\nWenn Sie sich die weitere Tendenz anschauen, werden Sie sehen, dass in 2014 der Wert noch deutlich höher ausfiel: 33 Prozent der Unternehmen haben gesagt, am dringlichsten bräuchten sie Fachkräfte. Wie gesagt, wenn Sie ein Herz für die KMUs haben, dann werden Sie feststellen, dass es darum geht, Fachkräfte zu sichern.\n\nRichtig. Sie müssen auch die Personalstrukturen berücksichtigen und mitdenken. Insofern bleibt Ihr Gesetzentwurf unterkomplex, wenn es darum geht, KMUs zu stärken. Wenn diese Regelungen dann auch noch Gesetzeskraft bekommen sollen, ist es umso wichtiger, dass sie nicht unterkomplex bleiben.\n\nAlso schauen Sie sich noch einmal genau an, ob Sie mit den richtigen Instrumenten arbeiten, und lassen Sie uns darüber im Dialog bleiben. Ich glaube, das ist ein ganz gewichtiger Punkt.\n\nEtwas aber - das hat mich an dieser Stelle wirklich geärgert - blenden Sie völlig aus: Sie reden die ganze Zeit - lassen Sie mich das als Forschungspolitikerin sagen - von der Grundlagenforschung. Sie haben uns vorhin aufgefordert, wir sollten einmal mit den KMUs reden. Das tun wir laufend. Ich möchte Sie bitten - nutzen Sie dazu ruhig einmal die Osterpause -: Reden Sie einmal mit den Fachhochschulen; denn die finden bei Ihnen keinerlei Erwähnung, als ob sie keine forschenden Institutionen seien.\n\nWenn es darum geht - Frau Andreae, schauen Sie sich einmal genau an, mit wem die KMUs kooperieren -, wirklich Innovationspotenzial zu befördern, so würde ich mich riesig freuen, wenn Sie das in den Blick nehmen. Es geht nicht nur darum, hier einen Diskurs zu führen, was Sie finanzpolitisch tun wollen. Sie müssen auch von den tatsächlichen Problemen ausgehen. Da bleiben Sie hinter den Möglichkeiten zurück, die wir entwickeln wollen.\n\nJetzt können Sie kommen und sagen: Sie haben die Positionspapiere der SPD gelesen. Sie haben die seitens der Union gelesen. Sie wollen sich das noch einmal genau ansehen. - Aber angesichts der Tatsache, dass Sie 770 Millionen Euro per annum ausgeben wollen, ist es durchaus keine Kleinigkeit, zu fragen, ob das zur richtigen Zeit kommt. Lassen Sie uns lieber noch einmal in den Diskurs eintreten. Ich will nicht sagen „Zurück auf Los!“, aber ich will Ihnen sagen: First steps first. Das will ich Ihnen mit auf den Weg geben. Wie gesagt - wir reden noch darüber -: Machen Sie bitte Ihre Hausaufgaben richtig! Schauen Sie sich die Analyse ganz genau an! Dann wird das vielleicht auch etwas.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9525,dirk-wiese,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Gesagt - getan - gerecht! In Deutschland gilt die Mietpreisbremse. Dieses Versprechen hat die SPD gegeben und gehalten. Gut so!\n\nMein Heimatland, Nordrhein-Westfalen, war eines der ersten drei Bundesländer, die mit gutem Beispiel vorangegangen sind. Nordrhein-Westfalen hat gleich Mitte letzten Jahres, am 1. Juli 2015, die Mietpreisbremse in 22 Städten eingeführt. Das ist gut für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger in unserem Land, insbesondere für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger in Nordrhein-Westfalen, ganz besonders für die in den Hotspots Düsseldorf, Köln, Bonn oder auch Münster. An dieser Stelle muss man dem NRW-Bauminister Mike Groschek danken, der eine hervorragende Arbeit geleistet hat.\n\n- Herr Kollege Hirte, da ich Ihren Zwischenruf gerade gehört habe, diese leichte Bemerkung gegen die Landesregierung, sage ich: Ich glaube, wenn ein CDU-Landesvorsitzender es nicht einmal schafft, korrigierte Klausuren vernünftig zurückzuschicken, sollten Sie lieber kleine Brötchen backen.\n\nDes Weiteren haben wir ganz klar dafür gesorgt, dass die soziale Marktwirtschaft endlich auch bei den Maklern angekommen ist. Wer die Leistungen bestellt, der bezahlt sie mittlerweile auch. Das ist gut. Auch das haben wir versprochen und umgesetzt.\n\nKurzum: Wir haben den Schutz der Mieterinnen und Mieter in Deutschland erheblich verbessert. Diesen Weg werden wir weitergehen. Bei den Maklern werden wir künftig einen Sachverständigennachweis einführen. Das halte ich ebenfalls für richtig. Es kann nicht jeder Dahergelaufene aus dem Import-Export-Geschäft als Makler von Wohnungen auftreten. Dafür bedarf es einer gewissen Ausbildung und eines gewissen Sachverstandes. Dieses Thema werden wir ebenfalls anpacken.\n\nIch bin Ihnen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Fraktion der Linken, wirklich dankbar dafür, dass Sie uns mit dieser Kernzeitdebatte die Möglichkeit geben, auf bereits bestehende Erfolge hinzuweisen und deutlich zu machen, was wir im Mietrecht noch vorhaben. Ich möchte noch auf den einen oder anderen Punkt Ihrer Anträge eingehen, weil mich die Ziele, die Sie mit diesen Anträgen verfolgen, ein bisschen wundern. Sie wollen, dass der Deutsche Bundestag die Bundesregierung auffordert, qualifizierte Mietspiegel für bestimmte Städte einzuführen und die Modernisierungsumlage zu begrenzen. Ich habe mich, ehrlich gesagt, gefragt, ob Sie keine Zeitung lesen und in informationstechnischer Hinsicht etwas abgeschnitten sind; denn das, wozu Sie die Bundesregierung heute auffordern wollen, ist schon längst in Angriff genommen worden. Das BMJV hat ein Eckpunktepapier vorgelegt. Der Referentenentwurf ist in Arbeit.\n\nWarten Sie doch erst einmal bei diesem einen Punkt ab!\n\nLiebe Frau Kollegin Künast, bei Zwischenrufen ist es wie mit dem Posten bei Facebook: Erst nachdenken, dann das Foto posten.\n\nDer Kollege Rohde hat, glaube ich, noch einmal ausführlich deutlich gemacht - darauf will ich gar nicht mehr eingehen -, dass der Mietspiegel und die Modernisierungsumlage wichtige Punkte für uns als Sozialdemokratie sind. Frau Künast, der Kollege Dr. Ullrich ist ja im Bereich des Facebook-Postens mit Ihnen der Experte. Er wird die Geschichte vielleicht gleich noch einmal erzählen.\n\nIch will mich heute auf zwei Punkte beschränken, die wir in der Planung haben.\n\nErstens. Die Abschaffung der Abweichung von der tatsächlichen Wohnfläche bei Mietverträgen. Sie alle kennen das Urteil des Bundesgerichtshofs aus dem Jahre 2004, das damals eine zulässige Abweichungsgrenze von 10 Prozent festsetzte. Mieter hatten faktisch keine Chance mehr, gerichtlich gegen Abweichungen in dieser Höhe vorzugehen. Man muss sich das einmal verdeutlichen: Bei einer 100-Quadratmeter-Wohnung zahlt man im schlimmsten Fall quasi jeden Monat für ein kleines Zimmer, das in Wirklichkeit gar nicht existiert, etwa ein kleines Arbeitszimmer von 10 Quadratmetern, fleißig mit. An teuren Wohnungsmärkten wie in Düsseldorf und Münster ist das schnell ein sehr teurer Spaß. Über die Jahre entrichten die Mieter somit hohe Beträge für eigentlich virtuellen Wohnraum, zumal sie nicht nur die Mietkosten zahlen, sondern die Wohnfläche auch bei der Berechnung der Betriebskosten eine Rolle spielt.\n\nDer neutrale Zuhörer mag jetzt vielleicht denken, dass solche Abweichungen nur die absolute Ausnahme sind, doch dem ist mitnichten so. Denn leider muss man sagen, dass das eben genannte Urteil des Bundesgerichtshofs von unredlichen Vermietern leider wohl auch als Freibrief verstanden worden ist mit der Folge, dass die Wahrscheinlichkeit, eine Wohnung zu haben, bei der die tatsächliche Fläche von der im Mietvertrag ausgewiesenen Fläche abweicht, wirklich groß ist. Nach Schätzungen des Deutschen Mieterbundes - diesen möchte ich einmal in Schutz nehmen; der Deutsche Mieterbund macht einen hervorragenden Job; man sollte ihn nicht kritisieren; das ist nicht angemessen -\n\nbetrifft das jede zweite oder dritte Wohnung in Deutschland. Da werden zu Unrecht Milliardenbeträge für nicht vorhandenen Wohnraum gezahlt, den es nur auf dem Papier gibt. Das ist ein unhaltbarer Zustand, den wir jetzt beseitigen werden.\n\nIch bin froh, dass wir die Beseitigung dieses Missstandes in den Koalitionsvertrag hineinverhandelt haben. Noch einmal: Zwischen Koalitionspartnern gilt der Koalitionsvertrag.\n\nFrau Kollegin Dött, ich würde Sie bitten, dort noch einmal nachzulesen.\n\nKünftig wird damit bei Mieterhöhungen und bei der Umlage von Betriebskosten nur die tatsächliche Wohnfläche zählen. Also: Wer 100 Quadratmeter Wohnraum anmietet, der zahlt in Zukunft auch nur für 100 Quadratmeter - Punkt.\n\nDer zweite Punkt, der wichtig ist, ist die Unterstützung von Klein- und Privatvermietern, denen wir mit unserem zweiten Mietpaket unterstützend unter die Arme greifen werden. Gerade in ländlichen Räumen - auch in meinem Wahlkreis im Sauerland - ist die Vermietung einer kleinen Wohnung oft ein guter Nebenverdienst, etwa wenn die alte Wohnung der Eltern im Haus vermietet werden soll. Nach einer Studie des Bundesinstituts für Bau-, Stadt- und Raumforschung gibt es deutschlandweit etwa 10,7 Millionen Mietwohnungen von Privateigentümern in Mehrfamilienhäusern. Davon vermieten 57 Prozent nur eine einzige Wohnung. Größere Bestände sind eher die Ausnahme. Nur 2 Prozent der Vermieter haben mehr als 15 Mietobjekte im Angebot.\n\nKleinvermieter sind aber oftmals - das müssen wir feststellen - mit der Bürokratie überfordert, wenn es um die Umlegung von entstandenen Instandhaltungskosten auf die Mieter geht. Deshalb werden wir ein vereinfachtes Verfahren für Kleinstvermieter einführen. Das ist gut so und schützt die vielen redlichen Kleinvermieter in unserem Land.\n\nSie sehen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die rot-schwarze Koalition optimiert auch weiterhin das Mietrecht. Auf diese Verbesserungen warten viele Bürgerinnen und Bürger in unserem Land,\n\nin Düsseldorf, in Köln, in Münster, aber auch im Wahlbezirk Tempelhof-Schöneberg. Denn bei der einen oder anderen Debatte habe ich manchmal den Eindruck, dass in Tempelhof-Schöneberg 99 Prozent der Makler im Land wohnen. Vielleicht sollten die Mieterinnen und Mieter einmal genau hinschauen, wer hier welche Rede hält.\n\nMieter schützen und Vermieter unterstützen - das ist die Prämisse unseres Handelns.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13361,christina-jantz-herrmann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! An zwei Umständen kann man erkennen, dass Internationale Grüne Woche ist: zum einen daran, dass die Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Grünen alle landwirtschaftlichen Themen zusammenklauben, die sich irgendwie finden lassen, zum anderen daran, dass unser Landwirtschaftsminister drei Wochen vor der Grünen Woche aktiver scheint als in dem Dreivierteljahr zuvor.\n\nViele Ankündigungen kamen aus dem Landwirtschaftsministerium, besonders im Bereich des Tierschutzes - mein Herzensthema.\n\nSchauen wir uns die Verlautbarungen einmal genauer an und beginnen wir beispielsweise mit dem Grünbuch: Ganze anderthalb Seiten darin sind dem Tierschutz gewidmet; aber inhaltlich gibt es leider wenig Neues und auch wenig Konkretes. Kein Konzept zu einer zukunftsfähigen Nutztierhaltung, die wir doch so dringend brauchen! Stattdessen gibt es ein Loblied auf die verbindliche Freiwilligkeit. Immerhin erwähnt das Grünbuch ein staatliches Tierwohl-Label. Viel weiß man darüber aktuell noch nicht. Man weiß nicht, wie die Pläne genau aussehen sollen; aber es soll ein mehrstufiges und auch freiwilliges Label sein.\n\nIch bedauere sehr, dass es kein verbindliches Label sein wird; denn der Marktanteil wird so natürlich deutlich geringer sein. Dessen muss man sich bewusst sein. Es bleibt zu befürchten, dass sich für den Großteil unserer Nutztiere in den Ställen erst einmal rein gar nichts ändern wird.\n\nDoch wir müssen zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass ein verpflichtendes Label aktuell nicht durchsetzbar ist, weder europapolitisch noch handelsrechtlich. Zu diesem Urteil kommt auch das Nutztiergutachten des Wissenschaftlichen Beirates.\n\nDas nun geplante Siegel gibt der Landwirtschaft dennoch hoffentlich die Chance, ihre Produkte auf dem Markt zu guten Preisen zu verkaufen, und es wird den Verbrauchern hoffentlich auch die Möglichkeit bieten, genau nachzuvollziehen, welche Haltungsbedingungen und welche Standards bei der Tierhaltung eingehalten wurden. Die Existenz eines solchen freiwilligen Tierschutz-Labels darf aber auf keinen Fall Alibi für gesetzliche Tierschutzstandards in unserem Land sein; diese freiwilligen Standards müssen deutlich über den gesetzlichen Standards liegen. Das Tierschutzgesetz und seine Verordnungen müssen weiterhin der maßgebliche Hebel für die Tierhaltungsbedingungen in unserem Land sein.\n\nAngekündigt wird das Label aktuell; aber ich mache mir Sorgen, wann es tatsächlich eingeführt sein wird. Schaffen wir das noch in dieser Legislaturperiode, oder müssen wir befürchten: neuer Minister, neues Glück?\n\nNun zu einem weiteren Thema, zu dem es neue Verlautbarungen gibt: die routinemäßige Tötung von männlichen Eintagsküken in deutschen Brütereien. Diese grausame Praxis - ich glaube, da sind wir uns alle einig - muss endlich beendet werden.\n\nHeute Morgen hat Landwirtschaftsminister Schmidt im Deutschlandfunk gesagt: Die Technik ist da; das Verbot soll in Kürze umgesetzt werden. - Diese Ankündigung hören wir aber schon seit längerem. Das ist zu schwammig. Wir brauchen einen klaren Ausstiegsplan. Ich als tierschutzpolitische Sprecherin meiner Fraktion distanziere mich wie viele Kollegen auch ausdrücklich von dieser stumpfen Fixierung auf technische Verfahren zur Geschlechtserkennung im Ei.\n\nDeshalb haben wir mit einigen Kollegen zur heutigen Debatte eine persönliche Erklärung zu Protokoll gegeben.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, es gibt so viele weitere Tierschutzthemen, zu denen bisher viel angekündigt wurde und bei denen wir endlich handeln müssen. Wir müssen endlich - das habe ich bei der letzten Debatte schon angesprochen - gegen die Tötung trächtiger Tiere vorgehen und auch den Pelztierfarmen den Kampf ansagen. Wir müssen wirksam gegen Qualzuchten vorgehen. Ein Thema, zu dem wir aktuell nichts hören - still ruhet der See -, ist die Prüf- und Zulassungsverordnung für Tierhaltungssysteme, die schon längst hätte erlassen werden müssen. - Ich könnte noch einige Themen mehr nennen.\n\nDie SPD-Bundestagsfraktion ist in der Regierungskoalition - so muss man es sagen - die treibende Kraft für den Tierschutz. Wir werben mit Nachdruck für zwei Maßnahmen: erstens für eine bedarfsgerechte Novellierung des Tierschutzgesetzes und die Einführung der immer noch fehlenden Haltungsverordnungen, zum Beispiel bei den Puten, und zweitens für eine nationale Nutztierstrategie - das klang heute Morgen schon an -, die ihren Namen auch verdient, und zwar mit einem realistischen Zeitplan.\n\nLiebes Ministerium - leider ist nur noch Frau Dr. Flachsbarth in Vertretung da -,\n\nliebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Union, wir haben gemeinsam die Verantwortung für die Tierschutzpolitik auf Bundesebene. Es reicht nicht, wenn wir nur Forschungsvorhaben initiieren und Vereinbarungen mit der Industrie abschließen. Diese verbindliche Freiwilligkeit erscheint leider viel zu oft als organisierte Unverantwortung. Es reicht nicht, Handlungen anzukündigen, wenn die Umsetzung in die Zukunft geschoben wird.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n597,heidrun-bluhm,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Werte Frau Bauministerin Hendricks, ich benutze diese Anrede deshalb, weil Ihr Vorgänger diese Bezeichnung nicht verdient hatte. Hier klingt also eine gewisse Hoffnung mit, dass sich in diesem Bereich in Zukunft für Deutschland Wesentliches ändern wird.\n\nDie Bundesregierung hat uns mit dem Koalitionsvertrag einen wohnungspolitischen Dreiklang aus Stärkung der Investitionskraft, Wiederbelebung des sozialen Wohnungsbaus und einer ausgewogenen mietrechtlichen und sozialpolitischen Flankierung versprochen. Was Frau Ministerin Hendricks hier heute vorgetragen hat, bestätigt das. Das klingt alles schon einmal viel besser als das, was wir von Vorgängerregierungen gehört haben oder was diese gar umzusetzen vermochten. Deshalb wünschen wir uns sehr, dass aus diesem Dreiklang eine harmonische Melodie mit langem Nachhall werden wird.\n\nAllerdings zeichnen sich schon heute einige Dissonanzen ab:\n\nStichwort „Investitionskraft“: Frau Ministerin, weder im Koalitionsvertrag noch in Ihrer Rede heute haben die Altschulden der ostdeutschen Wohnungsunternehmen eine Rolle gespielt. Wir brauchen, so denke ich, die Streichung der Altschulden ostdeutscher Wohnungsunternehmen.\n\nDie SPD hat mit uns gemeinsam noch in der letzten Legislaturperiode entsprechende Anträge gestellt und auch eingereicht. Von alldem steht aber nun nichts im Koalitionsvertrag, und auch Sie, Frau Ministerin, haben dazu nichts gesagt. Wir werden weiterhin fordern, die Altschulden zu streichen und damit die Investitionskraft der Wohnungsunternehmen zum Beispiel für energetische Sanierung oder auch den altersgerechten Umbau der Wohnungen zu stärken.\n\nDemnächst, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ist die Haushaltsdebatte. Die Regierung will die Mittel für die Städtebauförderung von 455 Millionen Euro auf 700 Millionen Euro aufstocken;\n\ndas hat Frau Hendricks hier eben noch einmal bestätigt, ebenso auf der Bauministerkonferenz in dieser Woche. Das begrüßen wir sehr, weil auch wir diese Forderung unterstützen. Herr Pronold hat das allerdings auf meine Anfrage im Ausschuss in dieser Woche schon wieder relativiert. Er sagte nämlich: Über vier Jahre wollen wir zusätzlich 620 Millionen Euro zur Verfügung stellen. - Wenn ich die Differenz zwischen 455 Millionen Euro und 700 Millionen Euro ausrechne, komme ich auf jährlich 245 Millionen Euro mehr, und mal vier Jahre macht das dann 980 Millionen Euro. 620 Millionen Euro wären also schon einmal 360 Millionen Euro weniger, als Sie brauchen würden, um Ihr Versprechen von 700 Millionen Euro pro Jahr einzuhalten. Ich zitiere, was mein Kollege Bartsch in der gestrigen Debatte zu Finanzen und Haushalt sagte: Mathematische Gesetze lassen sich nicht wegbeschließen. - Auch beim Summieren sind die Zahlen für die Regierung die gleichen wie für die Opposition. Aber in 2014 muss das ja auch nicht mehr unbedingt umgesetzt werden; denn wenn wir erst im Juni den Haushalt beschließen, ist das Jahr halb um. Ehe das Geld dann ausgereicht ist, hat man die Hälfte wahrscheinlich schon wieder eingespart.\n\nStichwort „sozialer Wohnungsbau“: Sie wollen diesen wiederbeleben, aber die Mittel von 518 Millionen Euro pro Jahr, die zur Verfügung stehen, werden nicht aufgestockt. Wenn wir genauer hinsehen, stellen wir fest, dass Herr Schäuble in der Verwaltungsvereinbarung bis 2018 nicht einmal darauf bestanden hat, dass durch die Länder kofinanziert werden muss. Außerdem hat er auch noch die Zweckbindung für den sozialen Wohnungsbau aufgegeben. Ich weiß nicht, wie Sie mit den Ländern vereinbaren wollen, dass das Geld dann zukünftig ausschließlich für den sozialen Wohnungsbau ausgegeben werden soll. Da sind Sie auf das Wohlwollen der Bauminister angewiesen; aber die haben ihre Haushalte längst beschlossen. Und: Selbst das würde nicht reichen, um die fehlenden 4 Millionen Sozialwohnungen in Deutschland zu schaffen oder ausreichend viele Wohnungen aus dem Bestand in die Zweckbindung zurückzuführen. Der Wegfall der Zweckbindung ist also, glaube ich, kontraproduktiv. Da müssen Sie nacharbeiten.\n\nStichwort „Klimaschutz im Gebäudebereich“: Das CO2-Gebäudesanierungsprogramm und die energetische Stadtsanierung sollen fortgeführt werden. Richtig! Aber auf welchem Niveau und mit welchen Mitteln? Der Koalitionsvertrag spricht von Zusammenfassung von Wohnungsbau und energetischer Gebäudesanierung zu einem Aktionsprogramm. Aber wie? Aus den 518 Millionen Euro Kompensationsmitteln für den sozialen Wohnungsbau? Aus Mitteln der Städtebauförderung und wenn ja, in welcher Höhe? Aus dem EKF, der allerdings jetzt bei Herrn Gabriel verwaltet werden soll? Dazu würde ich in Zukunft gern noch etwas mehr von Ihnen hören, Frau Ministerin.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die bevorstehende Haushaltsdebatte wird der erste Test für die Ernsthaftigkeit dieser Ankündigungen sein. Es wird sich zeigen, wer den Taktstock führt und ob der versprochene Dreiklang als kräftiges Fortissimo daherkommt oder doch nur ein seichtes Piano bleibt.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n9216,rita-stockhofe,\"Sehr geehrte Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Wir debattieren heute über den Antrag der Fraktion Die Linke „Herdenschutz ist Wolfsschutz - Jetzt ein bundesweites Kompetenzzentrum aufbauen“. Bevor sich der Wolf im Jahr 2000 wieder hier in Deutschland angesiedelt hat, haben wir ihn ungefähr 150 Jahre vermisst. Grundsätzlich ist es zu begrüßen, wenn sich Tierarten hier ansiedeln. Auch für den Wolf gilt dieser Grundgedanke.\n\nJetzt müssen wir die Voraussetzungen schaffen, damit wir ein vernünftiges Miteinander aufbauen können. Wir haben schon viel gemacht: Es fanden zwei Fachgespräche, im Umweltausschuss und im Landwirtschaftsausschuss, statt. Eine Dokumentations- und Beratungsstelle des Bundes für den Wolf wird zurzeit eingerichtet. Ein Runder Tisch „Wolf“ findet regelmäßig statt. Auch der Habitat-Ausschuss auf europäischer Ebene tagt regelmäßig.\n\nNeben dem grundsätzlichen Willkommen dem Wolf gegenüber stehen uns auch große Aufgaben bevor. Dem Wolf geht es gut hier in Deutschland. Er hat ausreichend Nahrung, und er verbreitet sich schneller als erwartet. Was für den Artenschutz ein großer Erfolg ist, bedeutet für viele Nutztierhalter ernstzunehmende Probleme. Wir dürfen aber nicht dahin kommen, dass eine Tierart gegen eine andere Tierart ausgespielt wird. Wir müssen den Wolf nicht fürchten wie bei Rotkäppchen oder bei Der Wolf und die sieben Geißlein, dürfen ihn aber auch nicht romantisieren. Wir müssen sachlich mit den Aufgaben umgehen. Da wir nicht alle Geißlein oder Schäflein in einen Uhrenkasten sperren können, brauchen wir bedarfsgerechte Präventionsmaßnahmen, um die Herden vor den Wölfen zu schützen. Dazu gehören Herdenschutzhunde und geeignete Zäune. Aber auch ungewöhnliche Schutzmaßnahmen wie zum Beispiel den Einsatz von Eseln müssen wir prüfen.\n\nBedenken muss man allerdings, dass diese Schutzmaßnahmen nicht überall möglich sind, zum Beispiel nicht auf Dämmen, in der Alpenregion oder in Naturschutzgebieten, wo starker Tourismus vorherrscht. Auf die Tierhalter kommen oft schon präventiv hohe Kosten zu. Diese müssen erstattet werden, und zwar unabhängig davon, ob sie die Tierhaltung berufsmäßig oder hobbymäßig ausüben.\n\nDas BMUB hat in seinem Bericht zwischen Habitaten, in denen Wölfe schon vorkommen, und Habitaten, in denen sie nicht zu erwarten sind, unterschieden. An diese Prognose haben sich die Wölfe leider nicht gehalten.\n\nDas zeigt uns, dass der Wolf sehr lernfähig und nicht immer kalkulierbar ist. Er ist sehr anpassungsfähig und versorgt sich mit Nahrung, die er möglichst leicht beschaffen kann. Nachgewiesen ist mittlerweile auch, dass der Wolf nicht dazu beiträgt, die Höhe der Schwarzwildpopulation zu regeln. Er hat genügend Alternativen, sich anders Nahrung zu beschaffen.\n\nWölfe haben sich schon häufiger in dichtbesiedelten Gebieten, in Städten aufgehalten. Auch die erwartete natürliche Scheu vor den Menschen zeigt er nicht immer. In Niedersachsen läuft er wie selbstverständlich durch einige Ortschaften und bedient sich an Mülltonnen. Eine verhaltensauffällige Wölfin in Niedersachen, die sogenannte Goldstädter Wölfin, schafft es, Zäune zu überspringen, die höher als 1,40 Meter sind. Sie tötet und verschreckt Schafe, ganz abgesehen von den Folgeschäden wie beispielsweise Verlammungen. Alleine dieser Wölfin konnten in diesem Jahr über 80 Nutztierrisse zugeordnet werden, trotz aller Präventionsmaßnahmen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, dies ist ein artfremdes Verhalten. Da hilft uns auch kein Gesprächskreis mehr. Wir können den Wolf auch nicht umerziehen, wie in einem Fachgespräch gefordert worden ist. Dann kann schnell das Gegenteil der Fall sein; denn andere Wölfe übernehmen dieses artfremde Verhalten. Gott sei Dank gab es bisher noch keinen Angriff auf den Menschen. Auch wenn ein Wolf schon einmal in der Nähe eines Waldkindergartens gesehen worden ist, ist zum Glück nichts passiert. Wir wollen uns auch nicht wirklich vorstellen, was ein Tier, das über 60 Kilo wiegt, anrichten kann. Die Bilder von gemetzelten Schafen sind schon schlimm genug.\n\nZwar liegt die Zuständigkeit für die Schadenserfassung und die Entschädigung bei den Bundesländern. Dennoch ist es wichtig, bundesweit einheitliche Standards für Präventionsmaßnahmen und Entschädigungen für Nutztierrisse einzuführen, für hauptberufliche Halter, aber auch für Hobbytierhalter. Dabei muss auch berücksichtigt werden, dass den Schäfern nicht nur ein Schaden wegen der getöteten Tiere entsteht, sondern dies auch mittelbare Folgen hat, die durch die Unruhe und den Stress in der Herde auftreten, beispielsweise Fluchtverletzungen oder Nicht-wieder-trächtig-Werden von Muttertieren.\n\nIn dem Augenblick, in dem die Stimmung in der Bevölkerung kippt, wird die mühsam aufgebaute Akzeptanz dahin sein. Es ist deshalb unsere Pflicht, Problemtiere zu entnehmen. Dort müssen wir aktiv werden, und zwar so schnell wie möglich. Rechtlich ist das nach Artikel 16 FFH-Richtlinie auch so vorgesehen. Eine Entnahme solcher Problemtiere würde die Wolfspopulation, die in Deutschland eine Reproduktionsrate von 30 Prozent pro Jahr hat, auch nicht gefährden. Ganz im Gegenteil: Eine schnelle Entnahme solcher Problemtiere könnte zu einer Steigerung der Akzeptanz für den Wolf in der Bevölkerung führen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, der Antrag der Fraktion Die Linke ist abzulehnen. Die Daten der Länder, die ja dafür zuständig sind, diese zu erfassen, müssen an einer Stelle zusammenfließen, um eine effektive Arbeit leisten zu können. Eine solche Stelle wird zurzeit mit der Dokumentations- und Beratungsstelle des Bundes für den Wolf eingerichtet, und mehr brauchen wir nicht.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n6973,sevim-dagdelen,\"Verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Bundesregierung feiert sich für den Einsatz der Bundesmarine im Rahmen der UNIFIL-Mission vor der Küste des Libanon.\n\nMit 150 Bundeswehrsoldaten und einer verstärkten Ausbildung der Marine des Libanon soll der Waffenschmuggel in den Libanon unterbunden werden.\n\n- Ja. - In den zehn Jahren wurden dann auch keine Waffen gefunden.\n\nAber fragen Sie sich nicht manchmal, ob die Bundeswehr hier nur Teil eines absurden Theaters ist? Denn ihre Kontrollen kann sie ja nur auf Anforderung der Libanesen unternehmen. Fragen Sie sich nicht manchmal, ob dies der Grund ist, warum außer ein paar Zigaretten nie etwas gefunden wurde? - Aber lassen wir solche störenden Gedanken beiseite und nehmen wir einmal an, die Bundeswehr ist so erfolgreich - wie Sie es ja immer sagen -, dass sich keiner mehr traut, Waffen zu schmuggeln. Im Libanon müssten in der Folge auch immer weniger Waffen in den Händen der Konfliktparteien zu finden sein. Aber das trifft leider nicht zu; denn während die Bundeswehr die Vordertür des Libanon bewacht, steht die Hintertür an der Grenze zu Syrien sperrangelweit offen.\n\nWar Ziel der Mission, den Waffenschmuggel an die Hisbollah zu unterbinden, so darf sie getrost als gescheitert gelten.\n\nDie Hisbollah gilt mittlerweile als eine der am besten bewaffneten Kräfte in der Region. Wer hier dann noch von einem Erfolg des Einsatzes fabuliert, muss sich doch wirklich fragen lassen, ob er nicht nach dem Motto vorgeht: Dabei sein ist alles, das Ergebnis nichts.\n\nUnd selbiges gilt für die islamistischen Terrormilizen im Libanon; denn diese sind mittlerweile auch bis an die Zähne bewaffnet und warten laut eigener Aussage nur auf grünes Licht aus Saudi-Arabien, um endlich loszuschlagen.\n\nMuss es Ihnen nicht auch zu denken geben, dass, während die Bundesmarine vor der Küste des Libanon dümpelt, Ihr eigener NATO-Verbündeter Türkei mit seinem autoritären Staatspräsidenten Erdogan verdeckt Waffen an islamistische Terroristen liefert, die natürlich auch in den Libanon gelangen? Wenn Sie den Waffenschmuggel unterbinden wollen: Warum schweigen Sie dann eigentlich zu den Waffenlieferungen der türkischen Regierung mithilfe des türkischen Geheimdienstes an die islamistischen Verbände?\n\nIch finde, es ist Zeit, dass Sie in diesem Punkt Ihr Schweigen brechen und endlich Antworten geben oder wenigstens begründen, warum dieses Schweigen so lange dauert.\n\nStatt immer mehr Auslandseinsätze der Bundeswehr zu fordern, die im Übrigen von der Mehrheit der Bevölkerung abgelehnt werden, müssen wir nach unserer Auffassung zivil helfen.\n\nWir müssen zum einen syrische Flüchtlinge aus dem -Libanon übernehmen. Ein Viertel der Bevölkerung des Libanon sind mittlerweile Flüchtlinge. Was dagegen die Bundesregierung hier bisher veranstaltet hat, ist eigentlich nur beschämend,\n\nwenn man sich nur einmal diese Kontraste vor Augen führt. Der Libanon braucht zudem zivile Hilfe, auch damit nicht noch mehr Menschen mit saudischem Geld für die Terrorgruppen der al-Qaida vor Ort eingekauft werden können.\n\nDeshalb meine Bitte: Hören Sie endlich auf, die -Bevölkerung hinters Licht zu führen! Wer die Vordertür bewacht und sich auch noch dafür feiert, während die Waffen durch die Hintertür hereingetragen werden, macht sich im besten Falle lächerlich, meine Damen und Herren. Dieser Auslandseinsatz der Bundeswehr simuliert Handeln, folgt aber geopolitischen Motiven. Denn das Vorhaben, Waffenschmuggel zu unterbinden, ist komplett gescheitert. Die Kräfte vor Ort sind stärker denn je. Deshalb sagen wir: Wir lehnen diesen Einsatz ab.\"\n8545,richard-pitterle,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Jahrzehntelang war es den Wohlhabendsten in unserer Gesellschaft möglich, ihre Millionen und Abermillionen vor dem Zugriff des Finanzamtes im Ausland zu verstecken. Wer ohnehin im Reichtum schwelgte, konnte fröhlich Steuern hinterziehen und sich an seinen prallgefüllten Konten in der Schweiz oder Luxemburg erfreuen - auf Kosten der vielen ehrlichen Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler aus den unteren und mittleren Einkommensschichten. Der jetzt im Gesetzentwurf vorgesehene automatische Informationsaustausch zwischen den Staaten über Finanzkonten macht es den Vermögenden nun deutlich schwerer, ihr Geld im Ausland zu verstecken.\n\nDie Finanzinstitute melden an die jeweiligen Behörden ihres Landes, wer bei ihnen wie viel Geld auf dem Konto hat. Das können die Finanzbehörden der anderen Länder abrufen. Die Linke hat das seit langem gefordert. Ich freue mich, dass die Bundesregierung nun endlich ein Einsehen hatte und unsere Forderung jetzt umsetzt.\n\nWir werden dem Gesetzentwurf daher zustimmen, auch wenn wir nicht mit allen Regelungen einverstanden sind.\n\nDabei ist ein Punkt von herausragender Bedeutung: das Bußgeld der Finanzinstitute bei Nichteinhaltung der Meldepflichten. Im ursprünglichen Entwurf der Bundesregierung war dafür ein Betrag von maximal 5 000 Euro vorgesehen. Ich bitte Sie, welche Bank hätte sich denn von solchen Peanuts beeindrucken lassen, wenn millionenschwere Kundinnen und Kunden um die Geheimhaltung ihrer Daten gebeten hätten? Nach der Anhörung haben Sie den Bußgeldrahmen jetzt wenigstens auf 50 000 Euro erhöht. Diese Summe dürfte zwar schon etwas mehr wehtun, zeugt aber leider immer noch davon, dass die Steuerhinterzieher bei der Großen Koalition weiterhin eine starke Lobby haben.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, zum Vergleich: Derselbe Bußgeldrahmen, also bis zu 50 000 Euro, erwartet Sie, wenn Sie an einem Sonn- oder Feiertag Rasen mähen oder wenn Sie einen strenggeschützten Käfer wie das Wachsblumenböckchen verletzen oder gar töten.\n\nBei aller Liebe zur Feiertagsruhe oder zu seltenen Käfern: Es geht hier um die Bekämpfung der Straftat Steuerhinterziehung.\n\nWir haben deswegen zusammen mit den Kolleginnen und Kollegen vom Bündnis 90/Die Grünen in den Ausschussberatungen einen noch deutlich höheren Rahmen für die Geldbuße gefordert. Danach hätten Banken eine Geldbuße von bis zu 5 Millionen Euro riskiert, wenn sie die Daten weiter verheimlichen und so der Steuerflucht weiter Vorschub leisten. Union und SPD haben das leider abgelehnt. Abgelehnt haben sie im Finanzausschuss auch unseren Antrag zur Abgeltungsteuer.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, lassen Sie uns endlich die unsägliche Abgeltungsteuer abschaffen und Kapitalerträge wieder dem Einkommensteuersatz unterwerfen.\n\nWer sein Geld für sich arbeiten lässt, zahlt momentan lediglich den pauschalen Abgeltungsteuersatz von 25 Prozent. Wer hingegen sein Einkommen aus der eigenen Hände Arbeit erzielt, zahlt darauf Einkommensteuer bis zu 42 oder sogar 45 Prozent. Das ist schlichtweg nicht gerecht.\n\nDie Linke fordert deshalb seit jeher die Abschaffung dieses Reichenprivilegs. Die Abgeltungsteuer wurde mit der Begründung eingeführt, dass man nur so der Steuerflucht ins Ausland Herr werden könne. Spätestens mit dem heutigen Gesetzentwurf ist diese Begründung hinfällig. Denn wenn die Reichen und Superreichen ihr Geld aufgrund des Informationsaustausches nicht mehr im Ausland verstecken können, fehlt der niedrigen Abgeltungsteuer die von Ihnen behauptete Existenzberechtigung.\n\nDass der Bundesfinanzminister nun eine Abschaffung der Abgeltungsteuer erst in der nächsten Wahlperiode erwägt, ist wieder einmal ein Beispiel für die Verschleppungstaktik der Bundesregierung. Wenn die Damen und Herren von der CDU/CSU sich zieren, die Privilegien der Wohlhabenden zu beschneiden, überrascht das nicht weiter. Aber, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der SPD, geben doch wenigstens Sie sich einen Ruck, und sorgen Sie gemeinsam mit Bündnis 90/Die Grünen und Linken noch hier und jetzt für ein Ende der Abgeltungsteuer und somit für mehr Gerechtigkeit für alle Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler!\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n6769,frank-tempel,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Die Bekämpfung von Doping im Sport ist offensichtlich ein gemeinsames politisches Ziel aller Fraktionen im Deutschen Bundestag. Dabei geht es, wie gehört, um Fairness und Chancengleichheit im sportlichen Wettbewerb. Und es geht um die Glaubwürdigkeit und Vorbildfunktion des Sports, insbesondere des Spitzensports. Es geht natürlich auch um wirtschaftliche Faktoren, wenn letztendlich aufgrund von Doping Fördermittel, Gehälter oder Prämien bezogen werden und nicht dopende Sportler deswegen keinen Zugang zu diesen Einnahmen haben. Aber der absolut vorrangigste Zweck - ich hoffe wirklich, dass das alle so sehen - ist nicht der wirtschaftliche Aspekt, sondern der Schutz der Gesundheit von Sportlerinnen und Sportlern,\n\nund das, Herr Grindel, eben nicht nur im Leistungssport.\n\nNeu im Katalog der Maßnahmen ist das Unter-Strafe Stellen von Selbstdoping, also die Strafanzeige für dopende Sportler im Wettbewerb des organisierten Sports. In etwas abgeschwächter Form ist diese Forderung auch im Antrag meiner Fraktion, der Linken, enthalten. Wer meine Forderungen in der Drogenpolitik kennt, weiß, dass ich erhebliche Zweifel an der generalpräventiven Wirkung von Verboten habe, also Zweifel daran, dass ein Verbot wirklich hilft, die Situation zu verbessern, also in diesem Fall die Dimensionen des Dopings im Sport zu verringern. An dieser Stelle richte ich ein Dankeschön an meine Fraktion dafür, dass ich diese Zweifel hier äußern darf, dass ich diesen Aspekt in die Debatte einbringen darf. Natürlich haben viele Sportlerinnen und Sportler Angst vor Kriminalisierung, und die Linke nimmt diese Angst ernst, und zwar ohne Arroganz, Herr Grindel. Wir arbeiten mit den Sportlern zusammen und nicht über ihre Köpfe hinweg.\n\nEs geht im Gegensatz zum Cannabisgebrauch nicht nur um eine potenzielle gesundheitliche Gefährdung des Sportlers, sondern eben auch um das Erlangen von Vorteilen zum Nachteil anderer. Auch darüber müssen wir in der Debatte diskutieren.\n\nEs geht grundsätzlich - das halte ich für genauso wichtig - um den Stellenwert des Sports in unserer Gesellschaft. Sehr schnell kann der Eindruck entstehen, dass der Kampf gegen Doping ein Thema des Spitzensports ist. Das ist aber falsch. Der Kampf gegen Doping muss sehr viel breiter angelegt werden; und spätestens da wird uns das Strafrecht nicht mehr helfen. Ein Straftatbestand für Spitzensportler ist schnell beschlossen; aber gegen die Dopingnormalität im Breitensport werden ganz andere Anstrengungen notwendig sein.\n\nDer gedopte Radsportler wird in der Öffentlichkeit schnell mit Verachtung und Enttäuschung überhäuft und ist nun wohl bald auch ganz offiziell kriminell. Wie aber sieht es im Breitensport aus? Wer hat da eigentlich noch das Wissen, was Doping ist? Besuchen Sie einmal zu Hause die Fitnessstudios, und schauen Sie sich an, was dort passiert: Für die einen ist der Proteinshake bereits Doping; für die anderen sind all die verschiedenen Kapseln, Pillen und Tröpfchen, die es dort in sehr großer Anzahl und Auswahl gibt, völlig normal. Wer sich ein wenig informiert, weiß, dass man über das Internet und über das Ausland ganz schnell Mittelchen beziehen kann, die versprechen, dass der gewünschte leistungssteigernde Effekt noch schneller eintritt.\n\nKaum einer weiß aber, was diese Mittelchen tatsächlich alles bewirken. Es reicht, wenn auf der Verpackung steht: „schnellere Fettverbrennung“, „schnellerer Muskelaufbau“, „schnellere Regeneration“, und schon wird das Zeug gekauft. Damit wird viel Geld verdient. Ganz schnell geht es nicht mehr nur um Nahrungsergänzungsprodukte - das Ganze übrigens oft ohne Altersbeschränkung. Vielleicht steht noch auf der Verpackung, dass die angegebene Dosierung nicht überschritten werden darf. Warum? - Das steht nicht drauf. Aus einigen Gesprächen beim Training weiß ich allerdings, dass auch dieser Hinweis oft ignoriert wird; denn vielleicht hilft viel ja doch viel, und die Zeitschriften sind voll von verlockenden Vorher-nachher-Bildern, gerade jetzt, im Frühjahr.\n\nDoping, so der Eindruck, ist nur ein Phänomen des Profisports. Nein, der Kampf gegen Doping ist eine gesamtgesellschaftliche Aufgabe. Das ist in allererster Linie eine Frage der Prävention, eine Frage der Aufklärung und Bildung, auch bei Marathonläufern.\n\nDie Linke fordert deswegen wesentlich stärkere Anstrengungen in diesen Bereichen.\n\nDie Einigkeit hier im Bundestag bei der Bekämpfung des Dopings wird sich auch in den Fragen von Aufklärung und Prävention fortsetzen müssen, selbst wenn es vielleicht Geld kostet. In der Fortsetzung eines Anti-Doping-Gesetzes müssen geeignete Programme gefunden werden, die den gesundheitsfördernden Charakter des Sports wieder stärken und die Akzeptanz des Dopings zurückdrängen. Die Werte müssen sich wieder so verändern, dass ein durchtrainierter Freizeitsportler oder Marathonläufer nicht mehr gefragt wird, was er einnimmt, sondern, wie oft er trainiert. Das ist die Integrität des Sports.\"\n7628,christian-haase,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Frau Ministerin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Ich hätte es gerne gemacht, aber dann muss ich mir das Lob sparen.\n\nVon Karl-Heinz Karius stammt der Satz: „Mit der falschen Leiter ist jeder Baum zu hoch.“ Nutzen wir also nicht die richtigen Instrumente, sind wir nicht erfolgreich. In der Haushalts- und Finanzpolitik hat unser Finanzminister Dr. Schäuble in den vergangenen Jahren die richtigen Instrumente eingesetzt. Nun können wir gemeinsam die Früchte seiner Arbeit ernten.\n\nDiese vorsorgende Politik ist Grundlage dafür, dass wir auf die aktuellen Herausforderungen wie die Flüchtlingskrise reagieren können, ohne unsere Haushaltsziele zu gefährden. Bei der Flüchtlingskrise - es wurde bereits mehrfach darauf hingewiesen - sind wir in zweierlei Hinsicht betroffen.\n\nDas eine ist der soziale Wohnungsbau. Ich kenne die Überlegungen von Frau Hendricks. Sie sagt: Wir müssen die Mittel aufstocken. - Darüber können wir reden. Aber was zuerst passieren muss, ist, dass die Länder - in diesem Fall alle Länder - ihre Mittel für diesen Bereich einsetzen.\n\nSolange wir diese Garantie nicht haben, sollten wir darüber keine Verhandlungen mit den Ländern führen.\n\nZum anderen geht es um eine Flexibilisierung des Bau-, Planungs- und Energierechts. Ich würde mir wünschen, dass damit indirekt auch der eher schleichende Prozess in der Baukostensenkungskommission neuen Schwung bekommt, damit das Bündnis für bezahlbares Wohnen und Bauen zum Erfolg wird. Zudem können wir in diesem Zusammenhang einmal zeigen, dass wir es in Deutschland mit dem Bürokratieabbau ernst meinen.\n\nIch will aber auch ganz deutlich sagen, dass wir beim Bau neuer Flüchtlingseinrichtungen nicht zu kurz denken dürfen. Ich hoffe, irgendwann und möglichst bald ebbt das Erfordernis ab, neue Flüchtlingseinrichtungen zu schaffen. Wir müssen überlegen: Was wird dann aus diesen Gebäuden? Da brauchen wir Nachnutzungskonzepte, die bereits jetzt bei der Planung berücksichtigt werden sollten. Deshalb freut es mich, dass die ostwestfälisch-lippische Wirtschaft da besonders innovativ ist. Es ist ein Bielefelder Systembauer, der im Augenblick in München ein Flüchtlingsheim baut, das anschließend als Hotel genutzt werden soll.\n\nKommen wir zum vorliegenden Entwurf. An erster Stelle möchte ich die fortlaufende Entfristung vieler Stellen im Ministerium und auch in den nachgeordneten Bundesämtern loben. Insgesamt werden für das kommende Jahr 98 Stellen verstetigt. Ich glaube, es ist unser gemeinsames richtiges Ziel, dass es am Ende der Legislaturperiode keine sachgrundlos befristet Beschäftigten mehr bei uns in den Bundesbehörden gibt.\n\nDas ist angesichts der derzeitigen guten Lage auf dem Arbeitsmarkt eine wichtige Entwicklung; denn wir brauchen gut ausgebildetes Personal, insbesondere in unseren Bundesämtern. Wir wollen außerdem die Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf fördern, und da ist ein sicherer Arbeitsplatz ganz elementar.\n\nAllerdings bleibt die Personalsituation im Umwelt- und Bauressort trotz der großen Hilfe des Haushaltsausschusses immer noch angespannt. Auch für 2016 kommen wieder neue Aufgaben dazu, wie beispielsweise im Bundesamt für Naturschutz die Umsetzung des Nagoya-Protokolls und die Bekämpfung invasiver Arten, ohne dass es eine entsprechende Stellenaufstockung gibt. Gleiches gilt für die Arbeit der Standortauswahlkommission, die unter anderem zu einem Mehrbedarf bei der Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe führt. Ich glaube, da müssen wir schauen, was wir noch machen können. Allerdings steht obendrüber: Unsere Haushaltsziele dürfen wir dabei nicht gefährden.\n\nWerfen wir einen kurzen Blick auf das Thema Klima. Es ist schon mehrfach angesprochen worden: Die Mittel für die Internationale Klimaschutzinitiative sind deutlich erhöht worden. Es sind 75 Millionen Euro mehr. Das ist gut. Die Internationale Klimaschutzinitiative dient natürlich in erster Linie dazu, Zusagen aus den internationalen Verhandlungen, die wir führen, zu erfüllen. Diese sind essenziell, um in vielen Partnerländern überhaupt erst den Aufbau einer umweltfreundlichen Wirtschaft anzustoßen. Nur so, glaube ich, schaffen wir das notwendige weltweite Bewusstsein, das für einen erfolgreichen Abschluss der Klimakonferenz in Paris nötig sein wird.\n\nDaneben stellt sich mir aber auch die Frage, ob die Unterstützung internationaler Projekte nicht am Ende einen größeren Beitrag zur Bekämpfung des Klimawandels leisten kann als so manches nationale Projekt. Ich will damit sagen, dass wir in Deutschland unter Effizienzgesichtspunkten - da müssen wir die Auswirkungen auf die Kosten, auf Arbeitsplätze mit beachten - am Ende unserer Bemühungen angelangt sind. Es muss uns dabei um das Ganze gehen, und da können viele Klimainvestitionen im Ausland effizienter für die globale Klimaentwicklung sein.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, als Berichterstatter meiner Fraktion für Bundesbauten freut es mich, dass wir mit dem Berliner Stadtschloss ein öffentliches Großprojekt haben, dessen Bau im geplanten Zeit- und Finanzrahmen verläuft. Das Humboldt-Forum verfügt über ein einzigartiges Konzept und wird ein Kulturzentrum mit internationaler Strahlkraft. Daher bin ich zuversichtlich, dass die anvisierten Spenden auch erreicht werden. Ich will mich an dieser Stelle einmal ausdrücklich bei allen Spendern bedanken, die schon bereit waren, an diesem Projekt mitzuarbeiten.\n\nLassen Sie mich noch eines grundsätzlich zu diesem Bereich sagen: Die Bautätigkeit des Bundes ist in den Händen des BBR gut aufgehoben. Das gilt für die Vergangenheit, und das gilt auch für die Zukunft.\n\nEine weitere Erfolgsgeschichte ist die Förderung städtebaulicher Maßnahmen. Laut wissenschaftlichen Studien bewirkt jeder Euro in der Städtebauförderung 7 Euro an Folgeinvestitionen. Ein besseres Konjunkturprogramm können wir uns, glaube ich, gar nicht vorstellen. Deshalb begrüßen wir, dass die Mittel in diesem Bereich auch in diesem Jahr weiter verstetigt werden konnten.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, lassen Sie mich in diesem Zusammenhang einmal das Thema Zeitwohlstand anschneiden. Es scheint, als würde unser Leben immer schneller und ruheloser werden. Zeit ist Mangelware geworden. Das Idealbild einer geringen räumlichen Distanz zwischen Wohnen, Arbeiten, Versorgung, Dienstleistungen, Freizeit- und Bildungsorten ist in unserer arbeitsteiligen und gewachsenen Gesellschaft nur bedingt zu verwirklichen. Dennoch geht es darum, Verkehre möglichst zu vermeiden und frei verfügbare Zeit zu gewinnen. Deshalb müssen nachhaltige Raumordnungs- und Stadtentwicklungskonzepte besser umgesetzt sowie Planungsprozesse vereinfacht und beschleunigt werden.\n\nZwei weitere Programme möchte ich noch lobend erwähnen, die positive Entlastungswirkung mit sich bringen.\n\nViele haben es schon erlebt: Man kommt nach Hause, das Fenster bzw. die Balkontür steht auf, Spuren dreckiger Füße in der ganzen Wohnung. Bevor man sich untereinander streitet, wer das Fenster aufgelassen oder die Füße nicht abgetreten hat, wird mit Blick auf durchwühlte Schränke klar: Bei uns ist eingebrochen worden. Ich habe das selbst erlebt, und ich kann Ihnen sagen: Da bleibt lange ein ungutes Gefühl in der Familie zurück. Ich freue mich daher, dass wir mit dem Nachtragshaushalt das Programm „Kriminalprävention durch Einbruchsicherung“ eingeführt haben. 150 000 Einbrüche in 2014, der höchste Stand seit 16 Jahren, alle drei Minuten ein Einbruch in Deutschland: Ich glaube, das zeigt deutlich die Handlungsnotwendigkeit. Dieses Programm kann ein Teil der Gesamtstrategie sein, um diese Situation zu verbessern.\n\nAber wenn wir das hier im Bundestag in Einmütigkeit beschließen und das richtig gemacht haben, dann muss die Exekutive das auch umsetzen. Ich glaube, da findet im Augenblick ein Possenspiel statt, wer denn die Auszahlung übernehmen kann. Es ist bis heute kein Euro ausgezahlt worden. Frau Hendricks, ich würde Sie bitten, sich dafür einzusetzen, dass das endlich in Gang kommt.\n\nAuch das KfW-Programm „Altersgerecht Umbauen“, das das BMUB bezuschusst, hilft dem Bund langfristig, Kosten zu sparen. Bisher sind nur zwischen 1 und 2 Prozent des Wohnungsbestandes altersgerecht. Viele alte Menschen sind daher gezwungen, im Pflegefall in ein Heim umzuziehen. Nach einer Studie der Prognos AG würden sich Einsparungen von bis zu 3 Milliarden Euro pro Jahr ergeben, wenn nur 15 Prozent der pflegebedürftig werdenden Menschen durch den altersgerechten Umbau in ihrer Wohnung bleiben könnten. Auch im Sinne eines würdevollen Alterns ist es wünschenswert, dass die Menschen so lange wie möglich selbstbestimmt leben können. Gerade hier müssen örtliche Wohnraum- und Stadtentwicklungskonzepte anknüpfen.\n\nMit dem Projekt „Gemeinsam in Steinheim“ ist es in meinem Wahlkreis gelungen, hierfür ein Modellprojekt in Gang zu bringen. In einem Nachbarschaftszentrum entwickeln Bewohnerinnen und Bewohner des Helene-Schweitzer-Zentrums, Angehörige, Vereine und Menschen aus der Nachbarschaft neue Formen des Miteinanders. Kochen, Essen, handwerkliche Arbeiten, Kultur- und Sportangebote stehen auf der Tagesordnung. Dadurch gelingt es, Menschen in ihrem häuslichen Umfeld zu halten und eine breite Partizipation in der Bevölkerung zu erreichen. Ziel ist es, eine Kultur des Miteinanders zu entwickeln, von der später alle Menschen profitieren werden.\n\nVielen Dank. Ich freue mich auf die Beratungen.\"\n12503,anette-kramme,\"Ganz herzlichen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Der Geldbetrag, den Sie abfragen, beläuft sich auf 6,7 Millionen Euro. Ich kann das auch für die einzelnen Jahre verdeutlichen: Für das restliche Jahr 2013 - soweit es die 18. Legislaturperiode betrifft - waren es 517 000 Euro, im Jahr 2014 2 030 000 Euro, im Jahr 2015 1 536 000 Euro und im Jahr 2016 bislang 2 618 000 Euro.\n\nUnter welchem Gesichtspunkt sollte das Geld falsch eingesetzt worden sein?\n\nWenn ich Ihre Frage richtig verstehe, fragen Sie danach, zu welchem Zeitpunkt mit dem Finanzministerium über etwaige Mehrbedarfe verhandelt worden ist. Diese Frage kann ich Ihnen aus dem Stegreif nicht beantworten. Die Antwort liefern wir deshalb schriftlich nach.\n\nEs sind dort beachtliche Beträge beispielsweise für Veranstaltungen enthalten. Wir können Ihnen die diesbezüglichen Zahlen gerne nachliefern.\n\nHerzlichen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Ich kann keinen Unterschied zu Ihrer Frage 32 vom September 2016 erkennen. Daher nehme ich Bezug auf die Antwort, die damals gegeben worden ist. Damals hatte sich die Bundesregierung unter Verweis auf den sogenannten Progressionsvorbehalt nach Artikel 4 Absatz 2 der UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention zu dem entsprechenden Gestaltungsspielraum des Gesetzgebers bei der Fortentwicklung des Leistungsrechts geäußert.\n\nTrotz Ihres Nachlegens kann ich Ihnen keine andere Antwort geben. Es gibt einen Gestaltungsspielraum des Gesetzgebers. Diesen Gestaltungsspielraum haben wir unter anderem mit dem Bundesteilhabegesetz genutzt. Sie wissen, dass mit dem Bundesteilhabegesetz für Menschen mit Behinderungen perspektivisch round about 700 Millionen Euro jährlich zusätzlich ausgegeben werden.\n\nFrau Werner, gestatten Sie mir zunächst vielleicht die Anmerkung, dass es unterschiedliche Einschätzungen über Sachverständigenanhörungen geben kann.\n\nWir sind der festen Überzeugung, dass wir mit dem Bundesteilhabegesetz ein ganzes Stück zugunsten der behinderten Menschen vorwärtskommen. Ich kann das an verschiedenen Punkten festmachen. Es beginnt bei der Einkommens- und Vermögensanrechnung. Es geht weiter mit verbesserten Verfahrensabläufen, die meines Erachtens zu einer wesentlich besseren Deckung von Bedarfen bei Menschen mit Behinderung führen. Das sind zwei Punkte, die ich an dieser Stelle als Beispiele nennen mag. Ich kann außerdem nennen: das Budget für Arbeit usw. usw.\n\nFrau Werner, im Übrigen wissen Sie, dass sich dieser Gesetzentwurf mittlerweile in den parlamentarischen Abläufen befindet. Es ist also in der Hand des Parlamentes, gegebenenfalls an dem einen oder anderen Punkt Änderungen vorzunehmen. Das ist nicht mehr Sache des Bundesministeriums für Arbeit und Soziales.\n\nZunächst einmal: Sie geben den Gesetzentwurf falsch wieder, wenn Sie so generell in den Raum stellen, dass es nicht das Recht auf freie Wohnungswahl gibt. - Das ist der erste Punkt, den ich an dieser Stelle anführen will.\n\nDer zweite Punkt. Ich kann nur noch einmal wiederholen: Es liegt im Gestaltungsspielraum des Gesetzgebers, bezüglich der UN-BRK tätig zu werden. Im Übrigen ist der Gesetzentwurf nunmehr in der Hand des Parlaments. Es obliegt dem Parlament, gegebenenfalls Änderungen vorzunehmen.\"\n4646,alexander-dobrindt,\"Ich bin davon ausgegangen, dass Herr Minister Gröhe die einführenden Worte für mich übernimmt und dann weiterleitet.\n\nWir haben heute im Kabinett den Gesetzentwurf zur Einführung einer Infrastrukturabgabe beschlossen. Gleichzeitig haben wir einen Gesetzentwurf zur Änderung des Kfz-Steuergesetzes beschlossen. Ich habe in meinen Anmerkungen im Kabinett noch einmal deutlich darauf hingewiesen, dass die neue Infrastrukturabgabe nicht zu einer Mehrbelastung der Halter von in Deutschland zugelassenen Kfz führen wird.\n\nDie heutigen Beschlüsse zu den beiden Gesetzentwürfen zur Einführung einer Infrastrukturabgabe und zur Reform des Kfz-Steuergesetzes sind von diesem Grundsatz geleitet. Dies findet sich auch so im Protokoll wieder.\n\nDas ist das, was Sie gerne zur Kenntnis haben wollten. Ich habe Ihnen dies auch gerne mitgeteilt. Was Sie unter Protokollnotiz verstehen, ist das von mir soeben Vorgetragene, -\n\n- ja -, das von den anderen Mitgliedern des Kabinetts auch so als zutreffend und als gemeinsames Verständnis über unser Vorgehen festgehalten worden ist.\"\n502,norbert-barthle,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Lieber Herr Kollege Kindler, Ihre Rede erinnert mich an die ersten Reden aus der Opposition heraus vor vier Jahren. Da wurde uns genauso vorgehalten, wir planten nicht, wir könnten nicht rechnen, alles funktioniere nicht. Lesen Sie diese Reden einmal nach! Man kann sie alle in die Tonne treten; denn gekommen ist es ganz anders, nämlich viel besser.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, lassen Sie mich zu Beginn wiederholen, was hier vor einigen Minuten der Kollege Riesenhuber gesagt hat:\n\nDer Staat kann die Zukunft nicht erfinden. Wenn er gut ist, kennt er die Vergangenheit.\n\nIch finde dieses Zitat schön. Warum? Weil es so wunderbar in die Generalaussprache in dieser Woche passt, in der sich die Koalitionsfraktionen vergewissern wollen, was sie in den kommenden vier Jahren erreichen wollen. Wenn man sich vergewissern will, wohin man will, muss man zuerst einmal wissen, woher man kommt. Lassen Sie mich deshalb zwei Blicke zurück auf die vergangenen vier Jahre werfen.\n\nStichwort „Schuldenbremse“: Die Schuldenbremse schreibt uns vor, dass wir 2016 strukturell nur noch 0,35 Prozent Verschuldung haben dürfen. 2012 haben wir das bereits erreicht; da waren wir nämlich bei 0,34 Prozent struktureller Verschuldung, 2013 bei 0,23 Prozent. Dieses Jahr werden wir einen strukturell ausgeglichenen Haushalt vorlegen. Das ist nicht nur unser Ziel, sondern wir machen das auch.\n\nZweiter Blick zurück: Wie hat sich die Nettokreditaufnahme entwickelt? Noch vor vier Jahren standen wir hier und mussten 80 Milliarden Euro neue Schulden planen. Geworden sind es am Ende des Jahres 44 Milliarden Euro. Im Jahre 2011 haben wir 48 Milliarden Euro neue Schulden geplant. Geworden sind es 17,3 Milliarden Euro. Im Jahre 2012 haben wir 28 Milliarden Euro neue Schulden geplant, geworden sind es 22,5 Milliarden Euro. Im Jahre 2013 haben wir 25,1 Milliarden Euro neue Schulden geplant, geworden sind es 22,1 Milliarden Euro. Jedes Jahr haben wir besser abgeschnitten als geplant.\n\nWenn ich jetzt noch die Sondereffekte herausrechne - Befüllung des ESM-Kapitalstocks, Europäische Investitionsbank, Fluthilfe -, dann stelle ich fest, dass wir schon bei einem nahezu ausgeglichenen Haushalt sind. Auch dieses Ziel steht klipp und klar im Koalitionsvertrag: ab 2015 keine neuen Schulden mehr.\n\nDas ist, fiskalpolitisch betrachtet, eine Erfolgsbilanz, wie es sie in diesem Lande noch nie gab.\n\nDas muss man immer wieder betonen.\n\nIm Koalitionsvertrag ist aber nicht nur festgehalten, dass wir hinter das bei der Schuldengrenze Erreichte nicht mehr zurückfallen wollen, sondern auch - das steht ebenfalls darin -, dass diese Strategie mit bestimmten Maßnahmen eingehalten wird.\n\nDarin steht zum Beispiel auch, dass, falls es konjunkturelle Schwankungen geben sollte, was man nie ausschließen kann, der Anstieg der Ausgaben nie höher sein darf als der Anstieg des Bruttoinlandsprodukts. Das ist eine ganz wichtige Regelung zur Begrenzung der Ausgaben.\n\nAn die Adresse all jener aus der SPD-Fraktion gerichtet, die immer noch auf Steuererhöhungen spekulieren - dass es solche gibt, konnte ich den Reden entnehmen, lieber Johannes Kahrs, lieber Carsten Schneider -: Darin steht klipp und klar, was wir an prioritären Maßnahmen finanzieren. Maßnahmen zur Verbesserung von Bildung und Forschung, für die Kommunen, für die Infrastruktur, für die ODA-Quote werden finanziert. Für alles andere gilt nicht nur ein strenger Finanzierungsvorbehalt.\n\nDarin steht nämlich auch: Alles Übrige muss unmittelbar, dauerhaft und - wie heißt die dritte Formel? ich lese nach - vollständig gegenfinanziert werden, und zwar im gleichen Politikbereich. Jeder Haushälter, der lesen kann, weiß, dass damit Steuererhöhungen zur Verbesserung der Ausgabemöglichkeiten ausgeschlossen sind; denn das fließt in den Einzelplan 60. Finanzierung von zusätzlichen Ausgaben oder Ausgleich von Mindereinnahmen über den allgemeinen Haushalt, das geht nicht; es muss im jeweiligen Politikbereich vollständig, unmittelbar und dauerhaft gegenfinanziert werden. Das sollten auch die Ministerinnen und Minister unseres Koalitionspartners einmal genau nachlesen.\n\n- Aber ja, das mache ich schon. Ich sage es ja auch hier in aller Deutlichkeit.\n\nAn dieser Stelle muss ich auf die Grünen zurückkommen. Im Koalitionsvertrag steht auch, dass wir die Kommunen - der Finanzminister hat es vorgetragen - bei der Eingliederungshilfe für Behinderte entlasten:\n\n5 Milliarden Euro pro Jahr ab 2018, zuvor jeweils 1 Milliarde Euro pro Jahr Vorabhilfe an die Kommunen.\n\nLiebe Frau Andreae, was macht Ihr Ministerpräsident Winfried Kretschmann?\n\nEr schreibt in seinen Haushalt 400 Millionen Euro Mehreinnahmen hinein, die er sich aus Steuererhöhungen erhofft hat. Da wir Steuererhöhungen aber nicht machen, fehlen ihm 400 Millionen Euro. Was macht er? Er gibt in einem Zeitungsinterview bekannt, der Bund übernehme ja jetzt die Eingliederungshilfe; da könne er sich die 400 Millionen Euro holen. Das nenne ich unseriöse Haushaltspolitik in einem Maße, wie ich es noch nicht erlebt habe. Deshalb kann Standard & Poor’s mit seinem AAA-Rating nur die baden-württembergischen Unternehmerinnen und Unternehmer, die fleißigen und sparsamen Menschen gemeint haben, aber nicht die grün-rote Landesregierung.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, was steht noch im Koalitionsvertrag? Darin steht, dass wir uns intensiv mit den Finanzbeziehungen zwischen Bund, Ländern und Kommunen beschäftigen wollen. Da soll eine Kommission eingerichtet werden. Sie hat sich sehr viel vorgenommen. Da geht es nämlich um die Einhaltung des europäischen Fiskalvertrags, der auch die Länder betrifft. Da geht es um die Schuldenbremse für die Länder, die ab 2020 greift. Da geht es um die Verteilung von Einnahmen und Aufgaben auf allen föderalen Ebenen. Da geht es um den Länderfinanzausgleich. Da geht es um die Frage der Altschulden. Es geht um die Zukunft des Soli. Es geht also um sehr viel. Unter dem Strich, wie Professor Henneke dieser Tage in der FAZ so schön geschrieben hat: Es geht um die Umverteilung von 640 Milliarden Euro gesamtstaatlicher Steuereinnahmen.\n\nDas wird eine Mammutaufgabe der kommenden Wochen und Monate werden. Bis Mitte der Legislatur-periode müsste das abgeschlossen sein. Da werden wir noch viel zu beraten haben. Darauf können sich die Kommunen und die Länder verlassen. Der Bund ist bislang Vorreiter, was die Konsolidierung anbelangt. Einige Länder machen mir Sorge, insbesondere Baden-Württemberg und Nordrhein-Westfalen - um nur einige wenige zu nennen. Aber wir stehen solidarisch zueinander, genauso wie wir das auf europäischer Ebene tun, aber immer unter der Maßgabe: Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe.\n\nDas gilt auch auf europäischer Ebene. Darüber werden wir im Zusammenhang mit der Bankenunion noch intensiv zu sprechen haben.\n\nIch darf abschließend - -\n\nIch bin schon beim Schlusssatz.\n\nJa, gerne.\n\nDa die Einsetzung dieser Kommission im Koalitionsvertrag von CDU, CSU und SPD und nicht in einer Regierungsvorlage angekündigt wird, gehe ich davon aus, dass das Parlament auch entsprechend eingebunden sein wird, wenn es darum geht, die Finanzbeziehungen zwischen Bund und Ländern neu auszutarieren, und zwar unter Einbeziehung der Kommunen. - So lautet die Formulierung.\n\nKollegin Hajduk, Sie können davon ausgehen, dass wir das nicht einfach an uns vorüberziehen lassen.\n\nZum Schluss noch eine Bemerkung zum Thema Bankenunion. Darüber muss in den kommenden Monaten noch verhandelt werden. Wir sind an den Verhandlungen beteiligt. Ich darf Ihnen versichern, dass wir Haushälter streng darauf achten werden, dass die Haftungskaskade, die der Kollege Carsten Schneider angesprochen hat, eingehalten wird. Wir werden ebenfalls sehr darauf achten, dass der Europäische Stabilitätsmechanismus künftig die Aufgaben erfüllen kann, die er zu erfüllen hat, nämlich in Schwierigkeiten geratenen Staaten zu helfen, und nicht dazu benutzt wird, eine grenzenlose Rekapitalisierung von Banken zu betreiben.\n\nIn diesem Sinne freue ich mich auf eine gedeihliche Zusammenarbeit mit unseren neuen Freunden auf der linken Seite des Hauses, auf eine erfolgreiche Fortsetzung der Konsolidierungspolitik, die wir bisher betrieben haben, und damit auf eine gute Zukunft für den Haushalt dieses Landes.\n\nDanke.\"\n769,christine-lambrecht,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Ich möchte den Fokus in dieser Debatte doch auf das Gesamtpaket richten, das wir heute und in der nächsten Sitzungswoche hier beraten. Ich möchte darum bitten, es genau so wahrzunehmen - als Gesamtpaket - und nicht den Fokus allein auf einen Punkt zu richten, auch wenn dieser Punkt ein entscheidender Punkt ist.\n\nNiemand drückt sich davor, die Diskussion darüber zu führen. Selbstverständlich gehört die Erhöhung der Diäten mit zu diesem Paket; aber zu diesem Paket gehört eben auch, dass wir bei der Altersversorgung für Abgeordnete deutliche Einschnitte vornehmen. Und es ist auch richtig, dass wir endlich - nach zehn Jahren - ein Gesetz gegen Abgeordnetenbestechung und -bestechlichkeit vorlegen. Dieses Gesamtpaket bitte ich Sie zu betrachten.\n\nIn dieser Debatte wird immer gefragt, ob die Anhebung der Diäten, die jetzt vorgenommen werden soll - in einer Dimension, die groß ist: 830 Euro insgesamt, über zwei Schritte gestreckt -, okay ist. Das ist zugegebenermaßen richtig viel Geld. Aber jeder, der hier sitzt, wurde nicht als Bundestagsabgeordneter geboren und bezog nicht von Anfang an eine Bundestagsdiät. Wir alle haben eine Biografie, wir alle haben schon andere Summen verdient und wissen deswegen sehr wohl, was diese Erhöhung bedeutet. Ich musste mein Jurastudium finanzieren und habe am Anfang an einer Tankstelle kassiert, für damals noch 7 D-Mark.\n\nAber die Frage, die wir stellen müssen - und die wir in der Diskussion auch stellen -, ist doch: Was verdient ein Bundestagsabgeordneter, was verdient eine Bundestagsabgeordnete? Das ist natürlich eine Frage in doppelter Bedeutung; denn was wir bekommen, steht im Abgeordnetengesetz. Aber was ist denn ein gerechtes Entgelt für diese Arbeit, was wäre richtig? Was ist unsere gesellschaftliche Stellung, und mit welcher Berufsgruppe sind wir zu vergleichen?\n\nÜber diese Frage, glaube ich, sollten wir einmal ausführlich diskutieren.\n\nJa, wir bekommen viel Geld, auch jetzt schon, und zum Normalverdiener ist der Abstand auch groß. Es ist nun einfach und populär, zu sagen: Warum verdient ihr beispielsweise im Vergleich zu einer Verkäuferin so viel? Aber ist der Vergleich mit der Verkäuferin richtig? Wie arbeiten wir denn? Wir arbeiten in der Regel - zumindest derjenige, der seinen Job richtig macht - 60 bis 70 Stunden die Woche. Dazu kommen dann noch die Wochenenden. An den Wochenenden sind wir ebenfalls unterwegs: um die Entscheidungen, die wir hier treffen, auch entsprechend zu begründen; da müssen wir Rede und Antwort stehen. Das ist auch richtig und gut so. Wir besuchen darüber hinaus Vereinsjubiläen, um unsere Verbundenheit mit dem Ehrenamt zu zeigen. Das alles kommt am Wochenende dazu. Außerdem müssen wir auch noch in unseren jeweiligen Parteiorganisationen unsere Entscheidungen begründen; auch das ist nicht immer einfach.\n\nWir müssen jederzeit erreichbar sein; gerade in Zeiten von E-Mail und SMS steigert sich das Ganze auch noch gewaltig. Wenn eine Sondersitzung angesetzt wird, müssen Bundestagsabgeordnete präsent sein. Sie müssen sich für alles erklären, manchmal auch für Dinge, die sie gar nicht selbst entschieden haben.\n\nUnd sie stehen im Fokus der Medien, und das manchmal nicht nur mit Blick auf ihr berufliches Tun, sondern auch auf ihre Privatsphäre.\n\nWarum habe ich das so ausgeführt? Weil es einfach wichtig ist, einmal zu sehen, was wir machen, welche Verantwortung wir haben, in welchem Zusammenhang unsere Arbeit steht. Das ist nicht zu vergleichen mit jemandem, der 39, 40, 42 Stunden abhängig beschäftigt ist, sondern das ist etwas völlig anderes.\n\nAls etwas völlig anderes muss es dann eben auch behandelt werden.\n\nWenn es etwas völlig anderes ist, bleibt die Frage: Mit was ist es denn dann zu vergleichen? Wir sagen - ebenso sagt es die Unabhängige Kommission -: Es ist in etwa zu vergleichen mit der Tätigkeit eines Richters an den obersten Gerichten. Auch er ist weisungsunabhängig und trifft Entscheidungen, die bundesweit Gültigkeit haben. Das entspricht in etwa dem, was auch wir auf Bundesebene tun. Die obersten Richter erhalten Bezüge nach der Besoldungsgruppe R 6.\n\nNicht jeder kann etwas mit der Besoldungsgruppe R 6 anfangen. Deswegen möchte ich einen Vergleich zu einer Berufsgruppe ziehen, deren Tätigkeit nach B 6 vergütet wird. Auch wenn diese Tätigkeit eine andere ist als unsere, nämlich die von Landräten und Bürgermeistern mittelgroßer Städte, möchte ich Sie fragen: Haben Sie im Ernst das Gefühl, Sie verdienen - im Sinne von: zu Recht verdienen - weniger als ein Landrat? Angesichts der Tragweite der Entscheidungen, die wir zum Beispiel zur Euro-Krise, zum Finanzmarkt, zu Auslandseinsätzen der Bundeswehr, wo es um Leben und Tod geht, zu treffen haben, finde ich, dass R 6 bzw. B 6 sehr wohl die richtige Bezugsgröße ist.\n\nDies steht seit 1995 im Gesetz. Jetzt wollen wir diesen Schritt gehen. Dies soll in zwei Stufen geschehen. Danach soll unser Einkommen - damit entsprechen wir wieder den Vorschlägen der Unabhängigen Kommission - jeweils an die Entwicklung des Nominallohnindexes gekoppelt werden. Dieser kann nach oben gehen, aber rein theoretisch auch nach unten, entsprechend dem Einkommen aller Beschäftigten. Damit kommen wir der Forderung „Hört endlich auf, selbst darüber zu entscheiden und euch selbst zu geben, was ihr für gerecht haltet“ nach. Mit der Kopplung unseres Einkommens an diesen Index wird die Forderung der Unabhängigen Kommission erfüllt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir werden Einschnitte auch in Bezug auf die Altersversorgung beschließen. Die öffentliche Diskussion ging nicht in die Richtung - zumindest nach meiner Wahrnehmung -, wir würden zu viel verdienen und uns die Taschen füllen. Dass Abgeordnete gut bezahlt werden, ist gesellschaftlich durchaus akzeptiert. Wo es Kritik gab, und zwar zu Recht, das war bei der Altersversorgung. Deswegen gehen wir auch an diesen Komplex heran. Wir werden das Niveau von 67,5 Prozent auf 65 Prozent für alle absenken. Das ist zugegebenermaßen kein Einschnitt, angesichts dessen man sagen kann, dass da richtig eingegriffen wurde.\n\nWo es aber einen richtigen Einschnitt geben wird, wo es richtig weh tun wird - das ist richtig so -, ist, dass es in Zukunft keine Möglichkeit mehr geben soll, abschlagsfrei in den sogenannten Vorruhestand zu gehen. Bis jetzt kann man nach 18 Jahren Mitgliedschaft im Deutschen Bundestag und bei Vorliegen von entsprechenden Anrechnungszeiten mit 55 bzw. 57 Jahren, je nachdem wo das persönliche Renteneintrittsalter liegt, abschlagsfrei in den Vorruhestand gehen. So etwas ist aber nicht mehr zeitgemäß. Das ist nicht mehr vermittelbar. Deswegen streichen wir das. Es wird in Zukunft keinen abschlagsfreien Vorruhestand für Abgeordnete mehr geben.\n\nJeder, der hier sitzt, kann sich ausrechnen, ob es ihn betrifft; denn manchmal wird behauptet, es treffe kaum jemanden. Es trifft all diejenigen, die in diesen Bundestag neu hinzugekommen sind oder die in ihrer zweiten Legislaturperiode hier sind. Für uns in der SPD-Fraktion bedeutet das: Von 193 Abgeordneten werden 109 Abgeordnete diese Möglichkeit nicht mehr in Anspruch nehmen können. Das ist eine ordentliche Zahl. Wenn man den gesamten Bundestag betrachtet, dann sieht man, dass circa die Hälfte der Abgeordneten in Zukunft diese Möglichkeit nicht mehr in Anspruch nehmen kann. Auf die Dauer gesehen wird das dann alle Abgeordneten betreffen. Ich finde schon, dass ein solcher Einschnitt durchaus gewürdigt werden sollte. Wir werden diesen Einschnitt vornehmen; denn er ist richtig.\n\nEs gab in diesem Zusammenhang die Frage, warum wir das System der Altersversorgung nicht insgesamt umstellen, warum nicht jeder Abgeordnete einen bestimmten Betrag zur Verfügung bekommt und für sich selbst vorsorgen muss. Auch das ist von der Kommission geprüft worden, auch darüber wurde ausdrücklich diskutiert. Die Mehrheit der Mitglieder der Kommission schlägt uns vor, es bei dem bestehenden System zu belassen.\n\n- Natürlich kann ich der Meinung einer Minderheit folgen, wenn ich deren Meinung für richtig halte. Aber wenn man den Bericht der Kommission, der übrigens bereits seit letztem Jahr auf dem Tisch liegt, richtig durchliest, dann erfährt man, dass eine völlige Umstellung weder zu einem einfacheren Verfahren führen würde und schon gar nicht für den Steuerzahler günstiger wäre. Damit würde ich etwas beschließen, was umständlicher wäre und mehr Geld kosten würde. Deswegen haben wir uns entschieden, diesen Schritt nicht zu gehen.\n\nNa klar.\n\nFünf zu fünf zu eins.\n\nJa, genau.\n\nNein, nein.\n\nSie haben im Endeffekt schon die Begründung dafür geliefert, warum dieses völlige Umschwenken in ein anderes System für den Steuerzahler zumindest nicht günstiger, sondern im Gegenteil sogar teurer wäre.\n\nWir haben uns in unserer Fraktion die Mühe gemacht, auch mit den Kommissionsmitgliedern zu diskutieren, und wir haben das ausführlich beraten. Sie haben das andere System genau beschrieben. Diejenigen, die für dieses Baukastensystem plädiert haben, sagen auch: Ja, die Anrechnung in der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung wäre geringer. Deswegen müsste dafür ein Ausgleich gezahlt werden - wozu sie auch bereit wären.\n\n- Diskutieren Sie vielleicht einmal mit den Kommis-sionsmitgliedern. Dann erhalten Sie solche Hintergrundinformationen. - Dadurch wäre die Alterssicherung genauso teuer.\n\nDas heißt, um bei dem Baukastensystem auf den jetzigen Altersversorgungsanspruch zu kommen, müsste es neben den Zahlungen in die gesetzliche Rentenversicherung noch etwas anderes geben, wodurch diese Differenz kompensiert wird. Das würde dieses System teurer machen. Deswegen entschließen wir uns, bei dem bisherigen System zu bleiben.\n\nFür einen Systemwechsel, der weder einfacher noch günstiger für den Steuerzahler ist - jetzt einmal im Ernst -, sind wir in der Großen Koalition nicht zu haben.\n\nMeine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich möchte zum Schluss noch auf einen Punkt eingehen, um den es hier neben der Diätenerhöhung und den Einschränkungen bei der Altersversorgung auch geht.\n\nIch freue mich als Sozialdemokratin, die in der letzten Legislaturperiode gerade auch an der Erarbeitung des -einen heute vorliegenden Gesetzentwurfes maßgeblich beteiligt war, dass es uns nun endlich gelingt, die Bekämpfung der Abgeordnetenbestechung und der -bestechlichkeit gesetzlich zu normieren. Seit 2003 waren wir aufgefordert, an dem bisherigen Zustand etwas zu ändern; denn 2003 wurde die UN-Konvention gegen Korruption unterzeichnet - auch von der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Bis heute ist nichts geschehen.\n\nWir haben in der letzten Legislaturperiode - ich weiß gar nicht, in welchem Rhythmus; wahrscheinlich war es alle paar Wochen - häufig über dieses Thema diskutiert, weil wir nach dem Motto „Steter Tropfen höhlt den Stein“ immer wieder versucht haben, gerade in den Reihen der Union, aber insbesondere auch der FDP um Unterstützung dafür zu werben. Es ist uns nicht gelungen, immer mit dem Hinweis darauf, es sei so kompliziert.\n\nEs ist kompliziert, und die Umsetzung ist auch schwierig; aber ich glaube, wir Abgeordnete entscheiden über noch viel schwierigere Sachverhalte. Deswegen trauen wir uns auch zu, einen entsprechenden Straftatbestand in § 108 e StGB zu normieren, sodass in Deutschland in Zukunft nicht nur der Stimmenkauf unter Strafe gestellt werden kann - das heißt das, was hier im Parlament rein theoretisch stattfinden könnte -, sondern auch die Bestechung und die Bestechlichkeit von Abgeordneten.\n\nEndlich kommen wir damit aus einer Reihe von Staaten heraus, die diese Konvention bisher noch nicht umgesetzt haben, wie Nordkorea, Syrien und andere, und mit denen man eigentlich nicht in einem Zusammenhang genannt werden will.\n\nEs freut mich, dass unser Vorschlag trotz der Kritik, dass wir nicht weit genug gehen, immerhin von Verbänden wie Transparency International oder LobbyControl wahrgenommen und begrüßt wird. Es wird anerkannt, dass sich in dieser Frage endlich etwas bewegt, dass sich Deutschland wie auch andere Staaten endlich aufrafft, diese Konvention umzusetzen.\n\nWir unterbreiten Ihnen also auch diesen Vorschlag. Es geht um ein Gesamtpaket, bei dem wir der Meinung sind: Es ist ausgewogen. Es geht in die richtige Richtung. Es nimmt ganz viele Vorschläge aus einer von uns eingesetzten Unabhängigen Kommission auf.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9223,andreas-lenz,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich freue mich, dass wir zu so prominenter Zeit heute das Thema Nachhaltigkeit hier im Hohen Haus diskutieren. Das zeigt auch, dass das Leitbild einer nachhaltigen Entwicklung fundamentaler Bestandteil bundesdeutscher Politik ist. Schaut man sich den Koalitionsvertrag an, dann stößt man 69-mal auf den Begriff der Nachhaltigkeit, manchmal in einem etwas unglücklichen Zusammenhang. Aber nichtsdestotrotz zeigt das einmal mehr, wie wichtig der Begriff der Nachhaltigkeit und nachhaltige Politik für Deutschland sind. Das ist wichtig für die Bundesregierung, aber auch für das Parlament. Wir setzten hier ganz gezielte Akzente.\n\nDie nationale Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie wird durch den Indikatorenbericht begleitet. Hier wird die Zielerreichung gemessen, die einzelnen Punkte werden begutachtet. Ich will die im Indikatorenbericht genannten Punkte anhand einiger Beispiele deutlich machen und aufzeigen, in welchen Bereichen wir Verbesserungen erreichen konnten.\n\nFür mich ist das wichtigste Beispiel der ausgeglichene Haushalt, den wir mittlerweile zum dritten Mal anstreben und auch erreichen werden. Das ist deshalb nachhaltig, weil ohne die maßvolle Haushaltsführung die Bewältigung der mit der Flüchtlingskrise einhergehenden Herausforderungen nicht möglich wäre. Gleichzeitig werden die Investitionen in die Infrastruktur, insbesondere in die digitale und in die Verkehrsinfrastruktur, konsequent fortgesetzt. Das ist Nachhaltigkeit, auch im Sinne der Generationengerechtigkeit.\n\nKaum woanders werden die Unschärfen des Begriffes der Nachhaltigkeit so klar wie beim Thema Energiewende. Uns ist die Entkoppelung von Energieverbrauch und Wirtschaftswachstum gelungen.\n\nDie erneuerbaren Energien sind Deutschlands wichtigste Stromquelle. Der Anteil der erneuerbaren Energien am Stromverbrauch lag im ersten Halbjahr 2015 erstmals bei über 30 Prozent. Dabei konnte die EEG-Umlage stabilisiert werden. Die soziale Dimension von Nachhaltigkeit gilt es eben auch zu berücksichtigen, ebenso wie die ökonomische.\n\nIm Bereich der Innovationen hat Deutschland viel erreicht. Die Ausgaben des Bundes für Bildung und Forschung haben sich seit 2005 verdoppelt, aber auch die Ausgaben für Forschung und Entwicklung sind gesamtwirtschaftlich deutlich angestiegen.\n\nGerade die Forschung und der Transfer von Technologien, die einer nachhaltigen Entwicklung dienen, bieten wirtschaftliche Chancen. Es gibt also wesentliche Fortschritte im Bereich einer nachhaltigen Entwicklung. Deutschland ist hier nach wie vor Vorbild, aber - wir haben es gehört - Deutschland ist auch Entwicklungsland. Natürlich hindert uns niemand daran, noch besser zu werden. Es gibt auch Bereiche, in denen dies notwendig ist.\n\nIm Bereich der Mobilität erreichen wir unserer Ziele nicht. Der Endenergieverbrauch im Sektor Verkehr war 2014 rund 1,7 Prozent höher als 2005. Die Gütertransportintensität steigt weiter. Der Beirat fordert hier, umweltfreundliche Antriebstechnologien, auch die Elektromobilität, durch sinnvolle Maßnahmen stärker zu fördern.\n\nAuch beim Klimaschutz sind weitere Anstrengungen notwendig. Das Klimaschutzabkommen von Paris schafft dafür gute Voraussetzungen. Der Kohleausstieg muss gelingen. Der Beirat fordert, dass Deutschland bei der Verringerung der Pro-Kopf-Emissionen weiterhin ambitioniert vorangeht.\n\nDeutschland leistet viel im Bereich der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, der Armutsbekämpfung, der Friedenssicherung und der Demokratieförderung. Dennoch sind in diesem Bereich die selbstgesteckten Ziele finanziell noch nicht erreicht. Wir brauchen also weiterhin ein ambitioniertes Vorgehen, um die nationalen Ziele tatsächlich zu erreichen, und wir können die Ziele erreichen.\n\nNachhaltigkeitspolitik ist mehr als Indikatoren; so wichtig diese auch sind. Insgesamt 195 Länder haben sich am 25. September dieses Jahres auf 17 übergeordnete globale Nachhaltigkeitsziele geeinigt. Das ist wirklich eine historische Einigung. Die Ziele, wie Armut und Hunger zu beenden, ein gesundes Leben zu ermöglichen, Zugang zu Bildung zu schaffen usw., bieten letztendlich auch die Grundlage dafür, Perspektiven zu schaffen und die Fluchtursachen langfristig global und effektiv zu bekämpfen.\n\nDie Agenda 2030 für nachhaltige Entwicklung muss gelingen. Es handelt sich um nicht weniger als einen Weltzukunftsvertrag, wie es unser Minister für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung formulierte. Es ist das eine, Ziele zu verabschieden, aber das andere ist, sie auch umzusetzen. Jetzt muss auf die Umsetzung geachtet werden. Klar ist, dass die Prioritäten der einzelnen Länder unterschiedlich sind. Es geht um Common But Differentiated Responsibility, also um eine gemeinsame, aber unterschiedliche Verantwortung. Es ist erstaunlich bzw. beachtlich, was man feststellt, wenn man in Neu-Delhi, in Indien, am Flughafen landet: Ein Plakat mit den 17 Nachhaltigkeitszielen ist dort an prominenter Stelle platziert. Das spricht doch dafür, dass das Bewusstsein für eine globale Verantwortung durch diese Ziele gestärkt werden kann.\n\nDeutschland hat sich als eines von neun Ländern verpflichtet, die Ziele möglichst früh vollständig umzusetzen. Dazu muss es gelingen, die Inhalte der globalen Nachhaltigkeitsziele verständlich zu kommunizieren. Die Bundesregierung wird deshalb im Rahmen der Fortschreibung der Nationalen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie zügig einen Umsetzungsplan vorlegen. Wir als Nachhaltigkeitsbeirat werden diesen Prozess konstruktiv, aber natürlich, wie es unsere Art ist, auch kritisch begleiten. Der Beirat ist sozusagen der Stachel im Fleisch der nationalen Nachhaltigkeitspolitik. Wir werden die Nationale Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie anpassen müssen, ebenso die Indikatoren, die zur Prüfung dienen.\n\nAber auch auf europäischer Ebene ist eine Weiterentwicklung der Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie notwendig. Auf dieser Ebene sind wir als Beirat in Gesprächen ebenfalls aktiv. Angesichts der globalen Herausforderungen gilt es, noch einmal die Notwendigkeit einer globalen nachhaltigen Entwicklung zu betonen. Auch wenn es schwierig ist, weil die Länder unter Nachhaltigkeit etwas Unterschiedliches verstehen, gilt: Wir haben dank der globalen Nachhaltigkeitsziele eine Chance, die wir ergreifen sollten.\n\nAchten wir also, wie Papst Franziskus es in seiner Enzyklika sagt, aufeinander und haben wir sorgsam Acht auf die Schöpfung. Das ist, wie ich finde, eine sehr schöne Definition von Nachhaltigkeit.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n3383,sylvia-kotting-uhl,\"Danke, Herr Präsident. - Ich habe eine Frage an die Bundesregierung zu der heute gefallenen Entscheidung in der EU-Kommission, die staatlichen Beihilfen in Großbritannien für den geplanten Neubau des Atomkraftwerks Hinkley Point C zu genehmigen.\n\nIch will meiner Frage vorausschicken, dass das eine sehr eigenartige Entscheidung ist, nachdem die Kommission das noch im März nicht genehmigen wollte. Sie hatte gute Gründe dafür; denn die Beihilfe für Atomkraftwerke ist in den Beilhilferichtlinien gestrichen worden. Meine Frage an die Bundesregierung ist, ob sie diese Entscheidung durch Akzeptanz sozusagen gutheißen möchte oder ob sie eine Nichtigkeitsklage dagegen anstreben will, wie das Österreich bereits in Aussicht gestellt hat.\"\n6631,alexander-ulrich,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Auch nach dem fünften Redner erschließt sich uns immer noch nicht, was diese heutige Aktuelle Stunde eigentlich soll.\n\nWir hätten über so viele Themen reden können, aber was diese Bundesregierung und die sie tragenden Fraktionen heute machen, ist nichts anderes als Selbstbeweihräucherung. Wenn ich die Reden höre, wie gut es uns in Deutschland geht, und sehe, dass man sich gegenseitig auf die Schultern klopft, offensichtlich aber ganz außer Acht lässt, zu welcher sozialen Spaltung Ihre Politik in den letzten Jahren beigetragen hat, dann kommt mir das so vor, als ob Sie wirklich nur noch im Interesse der deutschen Wirtschaft handeln, aber nicht mehr im Interesse der Menschen in diesem Land.\n\nGenerell sollte man sich die Frage stellen, ob man überhaupt auf den IWF so großen Wert legen sollte.\n\nWir wissen, dass der IWF dazu beiträgt, eine neoliberale Politik auf der ganzen Welt und als Mitglied der Troika auch in Europa umzusetzen. Wir wissen, was er in Portugal, Spanien und auch in Griechenland angerichtet hat. Wenn eine neoliberale Organisation eine neoliberale Politik lobt, dann sollte man sich einen solchen Bericht zweimal durchlesen.\n\nJa, Deutschland ist exportstark, Deutschland ist wettbewerbsfähig. Aber warum ist das denn so? Grundlage für diese wirtschaftliche Stärke war doch über 15 Jahre Lohndumping auf hohem Niveau. Lohndumping in Deutschland ist die Grundlage für wirtschaftliche Stärke. Wir sagen: Ein Land ist nur dann erfolgreich, wenn wirtschaftliche Stärke mit sozialem Fortschritt einhergeht. Leider ist sozialer Fortschritt in diesem Land unter Ihrer Regierung nicht mehr möglich.\n\nBitte beschäftigen Sie sich nicht nur mit dem IWF, sondern schauen Sie sich an, was zum Beispiel der Paritätische Wohlfahrtsverband sagt.\n\n- Ja, der beschreibt genau die Auswirkungen auf die Menschen in diesem Land.\n\nWir haben zum Beispiel die Situation, dass Armut gravierend zunimmt. Immer mehr Menschen in diesem Land sind armutsgefährdet oder arm. Immer mehr Menschen in diesem Land können von ihren Löhnen nicht mehr leben. Immer mehr Menschen haben überhaupt keinen Fortschritt mehr durch Lohnsteigerungen, weil sie aus der Tarifbindung herausfallen. Alles das ist die Folge einer Politik, die mit der Agenda 2010 und Hartz IV einen deutlichen Schub bekommen hat. Darauf können wir in diesem Land wirklich nicht stolz sein.\n\nDann behaupten Sie immer wieder aufs Neue, wir hätten eine Rekordbeschäftigung.\n\nSchauen wir uns die Arbeitsstunden in diesem Land an, dann stellen wir fest, dass sich die Zahl der Arbeitsstunden in den letzten 13 Jahren überhaupt nicht erhöht hat.\n\nEs gibt vielleicht mehr Köpfe, die in Arbeit sind - aber zu welchen Bedingungen? Wir haben Vollzeiterwerbstätigkeit abgebaut und haben immer mehr prekäre Beschäftigung. Jeder vierte Beschäftigte in diesem Land arbeitet prekär. Das muss verändert werden. Nur dann haben auch die Bürgerinnen und Bürger in diesem Land etwas von diesem wirtschaftlichen Fortschritt.\n\nEs sind mittlerweile im Prinzip 4,5 Millionen Bad Jobs seit 2000 entstanden. 1,7 Millionen Vollzeitstellen, von denen man leben konnte, sind vernichtet worden, weil jetzt die Menschen mit zwei oder drei Jobs versuchen müssen, durch den Monat zu kommen. Das ist die Auswirkung Ihrer Wirtschaftspolitik.\n\nDer IWF sagt Ihnen ganz deutlich, dass das, was Sie tun, auch auf Kosten unserer Nachbarländer geht. Noch einmal: Deutschland ist Mitverursacher der Euro-Krise.\n\nDie riesigen Außenhandelsüberschüsse sind Mitverursacher der Euro-Krise gewesen. Wenn Sie immer noch glauben, man könnte immer mehr Produkte und Dienstleistungen verkaufen, als man selbst braucht, und die anderen Länder sollten sich immer weiter verschulden, um das zu finanzieren, dann muss ich Ihnen sagen: Wir arbeiten auf Kosten der anderen Länder. Wenn Deutschland ein Interesse daran hat, dass die Euro-Zone beruhigt wird, dann muss es seine Außenhandelsüberschüsse drastisch abbauen.\n\nZum vierten oder fünften Mal in Folge bewegen sie sich außerhalb der Richtlinien der EU-Kommission. Die EU-Kommission hat noch einmal gesagt, Sie müssten die Außenhandelsüberschüsse abbauen. Aber Sie ignorieren alle Hinweise, auch die aus Brüssel.\n\nInsofern ist Ihre Wirtschaftspolitik alles andere als glanzvoll. Die Menschen in diesem Land merken auch, dass sie von diesem scheinbaren Wirtschaftswachstum nichts mehr haben. Was wir endlich bräuchten, ist ein Ende der Agenda-2010- und der Hartz-IV-Politik.\n\nWas wir endlich bräuchten, wäre ein Mindestlohn von mindestens 10 Euro pro Stunde, von dem man tatsächlich leben kann.\n\nWir bräuchten viel mehr Investitionen. Allein das Aussetzen der von uns ja abgelehnten Schuldenbremse würde Ihnen die Möglichkeit geben, pro Jahr bis zu 18 Milliarden Euro mehr zu investieren. Sie fahren mit Ihrer Schwarze-Null-Politik das Land auf Verschleiß. Fragen Sie die Länder, fragen Sie die Kommunen, wie viel Geld notwendig wäre, um wenigstens das Notwendigste instand zu halten! Sie lassen die Länder und die Kommunen im Stich, weil Sie im Prinzip an dieser schwarzen Null festhalten.\n\nWas wir auch bräuchten, ist die Beendigung einer Politik, die noch mehr auf Sozialabbau setzt. Deshalb sagen wir als Linke: Die Bundesregierung ist dringend aufgefordert, die Verhandlungen über die Freihandelsabkommen TTIP und CETA abzubrechen.\n\nIhre heutige Beweihräucherung geht leider an den Interessen der Menschen vorbei. Dass so viele Menschen im Land auf der Straße sind und zurzeit auch streiken, ist auch ein Ausdruck dessen, dass sie mit diesen Verhältnissen nicht mehr einverstanden sind. Wir freuen uns über den Streik der Lokführer. Sie haben unsere Unterstützung genauso wie die Erzieherinnen in den Kindergärten.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n2902,eva-bulling-schroter,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Linke freut sich natürlich, noch einmal etwas zum großen EEG sagen zu dürfen, wenn auch im Zusammenhang mit dem Gesetz zur Bekämpfung von Zahlungsverzug im Geschäftsverkehr; das ist etwas verwirrend, wie ich finde.\n\nUm es gleich zu sagen: Wir enthalten uns.\n\nKollege Pitterle hat sich dazu schon geäußert. Ich möchte aber sagen, dass wir den Verbesserungen im EEG sehr wohlwollend gegenüberstehen.\n\nDenn die Linke ist eine Partei der Energiewende. Bestandsschutz und Fristverlängerungen für Biogasanlagen sind natürlich im Sinne der Energiewende.\n\nWie Sie wissen, haben wir der Novellierung des Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetzes nicht zugestimmt, weil wir es dabei mit einem Ende der Ökostromförderung auf Raten zu tun haben. Der heutige Antrag mildert Einschnitte bei der Biomasseförderung immerhin etwas ab.\n\nBiogas ist ein wichtiger Bestandteil einer sauberen Energieversorgung und auch die einzige erneuerbare Regelenergie, wenn die Sonne einmal nicht scheint und der Wind einmal nicht weht. Diesem Umstand trägt allerdings das gesamte EEG, das wir letzte Woche beschlossen haben, nicht Rechnung. Der Ausbau von Biomasse wird abgewürgt, und Fachleute sagen uns immer wieder, dass nicht einmal der angestrebte Ausbau auf 100 Megawatt erreicht werden wird, weil die Vergütung drastisch abgesenkt wird.\n\nWarum beschäftigen wir uns heute eigentlich noch einmal mit Ihrem sogenannten Neustart der Energiewende, und das nach Wochen des Tauziehens zwischen Brüssel, Berlin und den Ländern? Weil Sie die Rechte des Parlaments mit Füßen treten, weil Ihr „großer Wurf“ ein mit heißer Nadel gestricktes Provisorium ist. Die Medien haben ja auch von einem „unsauberen Herumdoktern“ geschrieben. Das ist also der Grund, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nIch möchte vor allem daran erinnern, wie unwürdig sich Regierung und Koalition gegenüber der Minderheit verhalten, wie schlampig die Koalition einfach arbeitet und wie sie Fehlerhaftes übernommen hat, was ihr die Regierung diktiert hat. Es heißt, wir hätten es hier mit einem Parlamentsgesetz zu tun. Es sind ja alle Gesetze Parlamentsgesetze. Die Koalition übernimmt die Formulierungshilfen aus dem Ministerium und winkt sie eins zu eins quasi im Guttenberg-Verfahren, nämlich per Copy-and-paste, durch das Parlament.\n\nWas das mit Parlamentsdemokratie zu tun hat, das müssen Sie uns hier noch einmal erklären.\n\nGestern hat sich auf Nachfrage herausgestellt, dass vonseiten der Regierung noch weitere Dinge geändert wurden. Nicht einmal der Kollege Dr. Pfeiffer, der ja Mitglied des Wirtschaftsausschusses ist, wusste Bescheid, worüber da genau abgestimmt wurde. Das finde ich schon ein bisschen scharf, muss ich sagen.\n\nIch halte das auch für einen dicken Hund.\n\nDann ist uns unterstellt worden: Sie sind ja nicht fähig, diese fünf Seiten zu lesen.\n\n- Man sollte nicht immer von sich auf andere schließen, Kollege.\n\nIch finde, Sie haben sich wirklich blamiert.\n\nWir haben in den Sommerferien hoffentlich die Zeit, das EEG wirklich durchzulesen. Ich bin gespannt, wie viele unbeabsichtigte Fehler sich durch dieses Eilverfahren noch eingeschlichen haben. Ich sage Ihnen: Machen Sie in Zukunft Ihre Hausaufgaben als Abgeordnete und Regierung wirklich besser.\"\n9703,susanna-karawanskij,\"Schönen guten Morgen, Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Gäste! Wir steigen heute in den ersten Teil einer umfassenden Überarbeitung von verschiedenen Finanzmarktgesetzen ein. Die Bundesregierung versucht damit - Herr Meister, Sie haben es gerade dargestellt -, die Finanzmärkte stabiler und transparenter zu machen und auch den Anlegerschutz zu verbessern.\n\nDafür drehen Sie an einer Reihe von Schrauben, aber ich muss leider feststellen: Die Schrauben sind immer noch zu locker.\n\nSie justieren nach, aber wirklich Stabilität auf den Finanzmärkten sowie im Verbraucherschutz schaffen Sie damit nicht.\n\nIch möchte einen Punkt herausgreifen, nämlich die Stärkung der Überwachungs- und Eingriffsbefugnisse der Finanzaufsicht, der BaFin. Vor nicht allzu langer Zeit wurde im sogenannten Kleinanlegerschutzgesetz der BaFin die Möglichkeit zur Produktintervention bei Marktmissbrauch eröffnet. Sie darf also den Vertrieb von Finanzinstrumenten gegebenenfalls sogar untersagen. Das war ein wichtiger Schritt, den wir als Linke immer gefordert haben. Man könnte jetzt auch sagen: Links wirkt! Die BaFin hat also Eingriffsinstrumente, aber es kommt doch darauf an, dass sie diese auch entschieden nutzt. Daher sollte unmissverständlich klargemacht werden, dass die BaFin bei Missbrauch von ihrem Interventionsrecht Gebrauch machen muss. Sie muss auch dahin gelangen, dass sie Finanzinstrumente und -praktiken vermehrt einer inhaltlichen Prüfung anstatt wie bislang nur einer formalen Prüfung unterzieht.\n\nZum zweiten Punkt: Verbraucherschutz. Hier sitzt die Schraube bei der Bundesregierung tatsächlich noch zu locker. Auch wenn die Finanzaufsicht noch so genau prüft: Es wird weiterhin Anlagepleiten geben, die auch Kleinanleger treffen. Kleinanleger sind meist auf sich selbst gestellt. Ihnen fehlen die Informationen bzw. die Möglichkeiten, ihre Rechte durchzusetzen. Es wird auf Verjährung gespielt. Die Prospekte sind zum Teil nicht auf Deutsch. Die meisten Anleger haben keine Rechtsschutzversicherung. Die meisten Emittenten, deren Produkte Anleger geschädigt haben, haben schlichtweg keine Konsequenzen zu befürchten - vielleicht mal eine vereinzelte Klage, aber meistens sitzen sie die Pleite aus. Es wird nicht nur auf den Finanzmärkten spekuliert, es wird ebenso darauf spekuliert, dass sich die Anleger nicht adäquat wehren können. Da kann es doch nicht angehen, dass hier weiterhin suggeriert wird, man wolle Transparenz schaffen, aber nicht tatsächlich stärker zum Wohle der Anleger durchgegriffen wird.\n\nDas Problem besteht doch darin, dass die BaFin erst dann eingreift, nachdem ein Finanzinstrument bereits auf dem Markt ist. Wir als Linke plädieren für eine Umkehr, nämlich für eine vorgelagerte Zulassungsprüfung für Finanzinstrumente, am besten auf europäischer Ebene. Das heißt, der Emittent müsste beweisen, dass sein Finanzinstrument gesamtgesellschaftlich und vor allen Dingen volkswirtschaftlich unbedenklich ist. Erst danach wird ein Finanzinstrument ausdrücklich zugelassen. Wenn es den Zulassungskriterien nicht entspricht, dann kann es eben nicht zugelassen werden.\n\nWir brauchen einen wirksamen Finanz-TÜV und kein halbherziges Herumdoktern, zum Beispiel an Infoblättern. Damit würden Sie selbst mit der fünften oder zehnten Novellierung von Finanzmarktgesetzen nicht viel an Finanzmarktstabilität, Transparenz und letztendlich Anlegerschutz erreichen. Sie werden weiterhin mutlos herumdoktern. Tun Sie etwas in Richtung Finanzmarktregulierung und vor allen Dingen im Sinne eines wirksamen Anlegerschutzes.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n14216,nicole-gohlke,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Letzten Monat postete eine junge Berliner Nachwuchswissenschaftlerin auf Facebook, sie habe innerhalb der letzten vier Jahre an ein und derselben Hochschule, das heißt bei ein und demselben Arbeitgeber, zehn verschiedene Arbeitsverträge gehabt. Ich halte das für einen riesigen Skandal.\n\nEs ist skandalös, dass das offenbar immer noch möglich ist, obwohl sich die Bundesregierung letztes Jahr endlich dazu durchgerungen hat, das Sonderbefristungsrecht in der Wissenschaft zu reformieren.\n\nDadurch, dass so etwas heute immer noch möglich ist, werden zwei Dinge deutlich: einmal, dass die Große Koalition bei der Novelle des Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetzes nicht gut genug gearbeitet hat, und zweitens, dass es die Große Koalition nicht hinkriegt, Rahmenbedingungen für stabile Beschäftigungsverhältnisse und planbare Karrierewege in der Wissenschaft zu schaffen; denn sie weigert sich, Schritte in Richtung einer soliden Grundfinanzierung zu gehen. Das muss aber endlich passieren. Deswegen hat die Linke heute diesen Antrag vorgelegt.\n\nAls Hauptproblem kristallisieren sich die schwammigen Formulierungen im überarbeiteten Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz heraus. Jetzt ist zwar endlich festgelegt worden, dass die Befristung von Arbeitsverträgen nur zum Zwecke der eigenen Qualifizierung zulässig ist, gleichzeitig hat sich die Koalition aber geweigert, eindeutig zu definieren, was Qualifizierung eigentlich bedeutet. Das hat sie sogar in die Hände der Arbeitgeber gelegt, die das natürlich in ihrem Sinne nutzen. Das war ja klar.\n\nDer zuständige Arbeitskreis der Universitätskanzler zum Beispiel interpretiert die neuen Regelungen jetzt folgendermaßen: Jede Tätigkeit im Wissenschaftsbetrieb fördere ja die wissenschaftliche Qualifizierung der Beschäftigten und reiche daher aus, um eine Befristung zu rechtfertigen. - Die TU Berlin war auch sehr kreativ. Für sie gilt zum Beispiel der Kompetenzerwerb beim Verfassen von Drittmittelanträgen auch als wissenschaftliche Qualifizierung. Das ist doch einfach absurd. Hier muss dringend nachgebessert werden.\n\nDas nächste Problemfeld ist die familienpolitische Komponente. Auch hier überlässt es die Große Koalition dem Ermessen der Arbeitgeber, ob Arbeitsverträge von Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern verlängert werden, wenn sie Kinder betreuen. Auch das hat die Große Koalition ganz bewusst in Kauf genommen. Das geht aber zulasten von Familien, besonders zulasten von Frauen. Auch das gehört schnellstens korrigiert.\n\nAuch vom wissenschaftsunterstützenden Personal in Verwaltung und Technik - dieses ist aus dem Geltungsbereich des Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetzes herausgenommen - wird uns berichtet, dass sich für viele die Situation kaum verbessert hat. Manche der Kolleginnen und Kollegen werden jetzt nach Ablauf der maximalen Befristungsdauer einfach gar nicht weiterbeschäftigt und verlieren ihren Arbeitsplatz. Das hat auch etwas damit zu tun, dass gerade die Hochschulen zur Einrichtung von Dauerstellen keine oder nur geringe finanzielle Spielräume sehen.\n\nSie dürfen dauerhafte Planstellen zum Beispiel gar nicht aus Projektmitteln des Bundes finanzieren. Es ist ein Problem, wenn sich die laufenden Grundmittel der Hochschulen von der Jahrtausendwende bis 2014 trotz steigender Studierendenzahlen nur um die Hälfte erhöht haben, während die Drittmittel im selben Zeitraum um 150 Prozent gestiegen sind; denn Drittmittel sind das Gegenteil von Planungssicherheit.\n\nDie Wahrheit ist: Die Situation der Wissenschaft und der Beschäftigten bleibt prekär, solange die Bundesregierung nicht endlich eine Kehrtwende in der Wissenschaftsfinanzierung einleitet. Dafür wäre es allerhöchste Zeit.\n\nFür uns Linke ist klar: Wir wollen gute Arbeit, auch in der Wissenschaft. Die Einrichtungen und die Beschäftigten brauchen endlich Verlässlichkeit und Planungssicherheit, und zwar nicht nur für Prestigeprojekte wie Ihre Exzellenzinitiative. Also: Verstetigen Sie den Hochschulpakt, und sagen Sie endlich, wie es mit dem Hochschulbau weitergehen soll! Das sind Sie den Beschäftigten schuldig.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8311,klaus-ernst,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Warum dulden wir eigentlich in den Betrieben Zustände, die dadurch gekennzeichnet sind, dass Menschen sehr unterschiedlichen Regelungen bezüglich ihrer Arbeit unterliegen, obwohl sie dieselbe Arbeit machen? Warum schauen wir nur zu? Nun bin ich seit zehn Jahren Mitglied des Bundestags, und genauso lange diskutieren wir über dieses Thema. Aber ich kann hier keinen Fortschritt erkennen.\n\nGott sei Dank unterliegt die Mehrheit noch vernünftigen Arbeitsbedingungen. Was sind vernünftige Arbeitsbedingungen? Die betreffenden Menschen sind in unbefristeten Arbeitsverhältnissen angestellt und haben einen Arbeitsvertrag mit dem Arbeitgeber, bei dem sie auch arbeiten, und nicht mit einem anderen Arbeitgeber. Es handelt sich um Arbeitsverhältnisse, die in der Regel noch einigermaßen anständig bezahlt werden, obwohl nicht mehr alle der Tarifbindung unterliegen. Wir wissen aber auch: Immer mehr insbesondere junge Beschäftigte haben nur noch einen befristeten Arbeitsvertrag - und das oft mehrfach hintereinander -, ohne dass es dafür auch nur den geringsten sachlichen Grund gibt. Wie wir alle wissen, haben insbesondere junge Menschen Werkverträge und müssen unter schlechteren Bedingungen arbeiten als andere Beschäftigte, die im Betrieb dieselbe Tätigkeit verrichten. Des Weiteren ist eine Vielzahl junger Menschen bei Leiharbeitsfirmen beschäftigt. Von Leiharbeit sind gerade junge Menschen betroffen.\n\nEs gibt für diesen Umstand keine logische Begründung. Den Unternehmen in der Bundesrepublik geht es ausgezeichnet. Geradezu verzückt teilt uns die Bundesregierung immer wieder mit, wie gut es unserem Land diesbezüglich geht. Um satte 60,2 Prozent haben die Einkommen aus Unternehmertätigkeit und Vermögen nach Angaben des Statistischen Bundesamtes von 2000 bis 2014 zugenommen.\n\nWarum akzeptieren wir dann eigentlich eine Gesetzgebung, die die Arbeitgeber geradezu auffordert, ihre Belegschaften zu spalten, und zwar in die normal Arbeitenden und die prekär Arbeitenden? Warum akzeptieren wir das? Warum akzeptieren wir, dass Randbelegschaften existieren, die unsichere Arbeitsverhältnisse haben, die schlechter bezahlt werden und die in der Krise als erste ihren Job verlieren? Wir werden bei VW erleben, dass die ersten Leidtragenden in diesem Unternehmen die befristet Beschäftigten oder auch die Leiharbeitnehmerinnen und Leiharbeitnehmer sein werden. Warum akzeptieren wir solche Verhältnisse? Wir sind der Gesetzgeber. Wir könnten das ändern. Warum tun wir das eigentlich nicht, meine Damen und Herren?\n\nInsbesondere junge Menschen sind betroffen; ich habe es gesagt. Ein Viertel der Beschäftigten unter 25 Jahren hat nur noch einen befristeten Job. Bei jungen Frauen ist es so, dass bei neuen Arbeitsverhältnissen von drei zwei nur noch befristet eingestellt werden. Das sind zwei Drittel. Wir brauchen gravierende Änderungen in unserer Gesetzgebung, um diesen Zustand zu beenden. Sie sind die Regierung. Deshalb bitte ich Sie: Machen Sie in dieser Frage endlich einmal Ihren Job, und warten Sie nicht einfach ab, dass die Zeit vergeht!\n\nÄhnliche Verhältnisse haben wir in der Leiharbeit. Seien Sie doch einmal ehrlich. Sie wissen ganz genau, dass das eigentliche Ziel von Leiharbeit Lohndumping ist. Nein, ich unterstelle Ihnen nicht, dass Sie so dumm sind, dies nicht zu erkennen. Das wissen Sie. Sie machen trotzdem nichts dagegen. Sie wissen, dass das eigentliche Ziel von Leiharbeit ist, Arbeitnehmer leichter aus dem Betrieb zu entfernen, wenn das Unternehmen es möglicherweise will, leichter als andere. Das ist das Ziel von Leiharbeit. Sie, meine Damen und Herren, machen nichts dagegen.\n\nWas Sie jetzt bei der Leiharbeit planen - ich möchte Ihnen das mit aller Deutlichkeit sagen -, ist nichts anderes als Etikettenschwindel.\n\nDass erst nach neun Monaten gleicher Lohn für gleiche Arbeit gelten soll, ist Etikettenschwindel, wenn man weiß, dass 54 Prozent der Leiharbeitsverhältnisse weniger als drei Monate dauern. Ich brauche nicht nach neun Monaten gleichen Lohn für gleiche Arbeit zu fordern; denn dann sind die Arbeitnehmer ja nicht mehr da. Für wie dumm halten Sie eigentlich die Bevölkerung dieser Republik?\n\nWenn Sie die Überlassungsdauer bei der Leiharbeit auf 18 Monate beschränken wollen, dann ändert das überhaupt nichts an dem Problem, wenn man weiß, dass nur 13,8 Prozent der Leiharbeitsverhältnisse länger als 18 Monate dauern. Mein Gott, was machen Sie da eigentlich für einen Unfug? Deswegen: Hören Sie auf mit diesem Quatsch!\n\nWas wir brauchen, ist eine klare und deutliche Einschränkung der Möglichkeit, Arbeitsverhältnisse zu befristen. Was wir brauchen, ist gleicher Lohn für gleiche Arbeit und ein 10-prozentiger Flexibilitätszuschlag bei Leiharbeit wie in Frankreich.\n\nDarüber hinaus brauchen wir die Regelung, dass bei Scheinwerkverträgen die Beweislast umgekehrt wird. Das Unternehmen muss beweisen, dass es sich nicht um einen Scheinwerkvertrag handelt, nicht der einzelne Beschäftigte, der immer in einer schlechteren Situation ist.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wenn Sie die Verhältnisse wirklich ändern wollen, dann stimmen Sie unserem Antrag zu. Was Sie in der Pipeline haben, ist nichts anderes als heiße Luft. Hören Sie mit diesem Quatsch auf!\n\nLieber Kollege Stegemann, als Erstes zur Rolle der Gesetzgebung. Wir sind der Gesetzgeber. Deswegen sitzen wir hier. Ich stimme Ihnen zu: Es gibt Dinge, die der Tarifvertrag regelt, und es gibt Dinge, die wir als Gesetzgeber regeln müssen. Darum haben wir ein Tarifvertragsgesetz. Darum haben wir ein Arbeitszeitgesetz. Darum haben wir Regelungen zur Befristung. Die Regelungen haben sich in der letzten Zeit verändert. Jetzt stellen wir fest: Sie haben sich in eine Richtung verändert, die aus unserer Sicht - ich hoffe eigentlich: auch aus Ihrer Sicht - für die Betroffenen nicht sehr schön ist. Weil sich der Gesetzgeber in der letzten Zeit in eine Richtung bewegt hat, die falsch war, müssen wir jetzt die Gelegenheit ergreifen, das zu korrigieren. Wenn Sie Regelungen des Gesetzgebers im Arbeitszeitbereich oder im Arbeitsbereich insgesamt ablehnen, dann weiß ich nicht, warum wir hier sitzen. Das ist unser Job. Machen wir doch einfach unseren Job in der Frage! Dann kriegen wir etwas hin.\n\nZweitens. Ich habe die Gnade der frühen Geburt erfahren. Ich habe zu einer Zeit gelernt, in der es geradezu selbstverständlich war, jedenfalls wenn man nicht Jugendvertreter war, dass man nach der Ausbildung einen Job gekriegt hat. Heute müssen Betriebsräte darum kämpfen und mit dem Arbeitgeber spezielle Vereinbarungen treffen, dass die jungen Menschen, die im Betrieb ausgelernt haben, wenigstens einen befristeten Job kriegen. Ja, ist das denn ein normales Verhältnis? Bringt uns das weiter? War es früher besser, oder war es schlechter? Wie war damals der Zustand unseres Landes? War er schlechter, oder war er besser? Ich sage Ihnen: Das, was wir damals an Gesetzgebung hatten,\n\nhat dazu geführt, dass eine Vielzahl von Jungen ihr Leben planen konnten, Familien gründen konnten, freudig und nicht mit Angst in den Job gegangen sind. Sie hatten keine Angst davor, dass ihr Vertrag nicht verlängert wird oder dass sie als Leiharbeiter sehr schnell wieder rausfliegen.\n\n- Sie können sich zu Wort melden, wenn Sie da hinten herumbrüllen. - Das hat sich verändert. Das ist der Punkt.\n\nWenn Sie das nicht erkennen, Kollege Stegemann, dann leben Sie wirklich auf einem anderen Stern. Gehen Sie einmal in die Betriebe! Reden Sie mit den Jungen! Die Jungen sind nicht froh, dass sie befristet beschäftigt sind. Sie sind nicht froh, dass sie in Leiharbeitsverhältnissen sind. Sie sind auch nicht froh, dass sie nur bei einem Werkvertragsunternehmen sind und dieselbe Tätigkeit machen wie der Kollege nebenan, aber schlechter bezahlt werden, schlechtere Bedingungen haben. Was ist denn das für ein Verhältnis, das Sie hier verteidigen wollen?\"\n11301,stefan-heck,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Es ist ja nie ganz leicht, wenn man der letzte Redner in einer Debatte ist. Es kommt hinzu, dass in dieser Debatte die Europa- und Außenpolitiker die bilateralen Fragestellungen und auch die offenen Fragen umfassender und kenntnisreicher dargestellt haben, als es ein Rechtspolitiker wie ich könnte.\n\nTrotzdem freue ich mich sehr, dass ich heute als Vorstandsmitglied der Deutsch-Polnischen Parlamentariergruppe sprechen darf. Mir liegen unser Nachbarland und die deutsch-polnische Freundschaft sehr am Herzen.\n\nDer bescheidene Beitrag, den ich am Ende dieser Debatte beisteuern kann, ist zugegebenermaßen eher etwas persönlich gefärbt. Ich hoffe aber, dass meine eigene Geschichte in Bezug auf unser Nachbarland stellvertretend für die Gemeinsamkeiten steht, die es inzwischen gerade in der jungen Generation gibt: von anfänglicher Unkenntnis über ehrliches Interesse hin zu aufrichtiger Zuneigung und Freundschaft.\n\nAls während meines Studiums die Entscheidung über ein Auslandssemester anstand, zog es viele nach Frankreich, Italien, Spanien oder England. Ich bin eher zufällig - durch einen Aushang in der Uni - auf einen Studienplatz in Krakau gestoßen. Ich war vorher nie dort. Auch familiär hatte ich keine Bindungen dorthin, und insbesondere kannte ich die polnische Sprache nicht. Vielleicht aber fand ich diese Wahl gerade deshalb so spannend. Die Wahl dieses vermeintlich exotischen Studienortes wurde ein wenig dadurch erleichtert, dass es eine ausgesprochen großzügige Förderung des Deutschen Akademischen Austauschdienstes gab. So hat sich das, was im deutsch-polnischen Nachbarschaftsvertrag niedergelegt ist, auf mein Studium bzw. meine Ausbildung ganz unmittelbar ausgewirkt.\n\nDas war im Jahr 2005, ein Jahr nach dem EU-Beitritt von Polen. Das war das Jahr, in dem Papst Johannes Paul II., der frühere Erzbischof von Krakau, starb. Sein Wirken ist hier schon angemessen gewürdigt worden. Ich will hinzufügen: Man darf überhaupt nicht unterschätzen, welcher Beitrag es für das Bild der Deutschen in unserem Nachbarland war, dass auf diesen großen polnischen Papst ein deutscher folgte.\n\nIch kann jedenfalls rückblickend sagen, dass die Zeit in Krakau zu den lehrreichsten und sicherlich auch zu den prägendsten Jahren meiner Ausbildung gehörte.\n\nEs ist gut, dass Deutschland heute in vielen Bereichen Spitzenpositionen einnimmt. Aber ich bin der festen Überzeugung, dass Deutschland und Europa auch eine Menge von unseren polnischen Nachbarn lernen können. Es sind zwei Punkte, die mich immer wieder besonders beeindrucken.\n\nDies sind erstens die Freiheitsliebe und die Standfestigkeit des polnischen Volkes. Es gab viele Staaten, in denen die Kommunisten geherrscht haben, aber kein anderes Volk hat sich diesen Herrschern so widersetzt, wie es die Polen getan haben. In keinem anderen Land war die Distanz zwischen diesem Regime und der Gesellschaft so groß, wie sie in Polen war. Vielleicht war das die Voraussetzung dafür, dass in Polen die Grundlage für die Freiheit von Deutschland und Europa gelegt worden ist. Es waren die mutigen Polinnen und Polen der 80er-Jahre, denen wir heute nicht dankbar genug sein können. Ohne sie wäre unsere Freiheit nicht möglich gewesen.\n\nEs gibt noch einen zweiten Punkt, der mich immer wieder besonders beeindruckt. Das galt 2005, und das gilt nach wie vor. Es ist die große Begeisterung gerade der jungen Generation in Polen für die gemeinsame Idee Europa. Wie oft verlieren wir uns in Deutschland, aber auch in anderen Ländern, in kleinteiligen Debatten über das, was möglicherweise richtig und falsch ist, und verlieren das große Ganze aus den Augen. Ich habe gerade von den jungen Polen gelernt, wie heilsam manchmal der unverstellt optimistische Blick auf dieses große Friedensprojekt sein kann.\n\nIch finde, lieber Manuel Sarrazin, es ist eine schöne Fügung, dass nicht nur wir beide 1982 geboren sind,\n\nsondern auch der neu gewählte Vorsitzende der Polnisch-Deutschen Parlamentariergruppe im Sejm. In den Jahren, als wir zwei uns in unser östliches Nachbarland aufgemacht haben, um zu studieren und um Freundschaften zu pflegen, hat er sich auf den Weg nach Deutschland, nach Osnabrück gemacht, wo er einen Teil seines Studiums verbracht hat.\n\nEine gute Freundschaft zwischen Deutschland und Polen ist noch keine hinreichende, aber doch eine zwingend notwendige Voraussetzung für den Zusammenhalt in Europa. Lassen Sie uns weiter gemeinsam daran arbeiten, mit Freude am Erreichten, mit der Betonung von Gemeinsamkeiten und auch mit der offenen Aussprache von Trennendem, so wie es echte Freunde miteinander tun. Lassen Sie uns gemeinsam dafür Sorge tragen, dass auch künftig die jungen Generationen die Erfahrungen machen können, die Manuel Sarrazin, Szymon Szynkowski und ich im letzten Jahrzehnt machen durften. Das ist das Beste, was wir tun können.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n15623,agnieszka-brugger,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Warum die Friedensmission UNIFIL weiter gebraucht wird, zeigt sich leider alle paar Monate aufs Neue.\n\nIm Oktober vergangenen Jahres fielen an der libanesisch-israelischen Grenze Schüsse. Ein israelischer Soldat wurde verletzt; der Grenzposten schoss zurück. In der nach wie vor angespannten Situation kann ein solcher Fall schnell zu einer neuen Eskalation führen. Niemand will sich ausmalen, was es gerade im Nahen und Mittleren Osten, wo es ohnehin an so vielen Orten Menschen gibt, die unter Krieg und Gewalt leiden müssen, bedeuten würde, wenn wieder neue Gewalt ausbrechen würde.\n\nWas eine Eskalation bedeuten kann, das haben 34 Tage Krieg zwischen Israel und dem Libanon 2006 mit über 1 300 Toten gezeigt. Die Einrichtung von UNIFIL war nicht nur eine Bedingung für das Ende dieses Krieges; die Friedensmission leistet auch heute bei Auseinandersetzungen wie denen an der Grenze einen unverzichtbaren Beitrag dazu, dass es keine weiteren Gewalteskalationen gibt.\n\nIn solchen Situationen stellt UNIFIL den Dialog zwischen den Parteien sicher, wirkt vermittelnd. Gleichzeitig leistet dieser Einsatz mit der Unterstützung bei der Sicherung der Seegrenze, bei der Unterbindung von Waffenschmuggel und bei der Ausbildung der libanesischen Streitkräfte einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Stabilisierung.\n\nDie neue Evaluation der Vereinten Nationen hat ergeben, dass man in Zukunft den Fokus verstärkt auf Ausbildung und Prävention legen sollte. Das sind richtige und notwendige Schwerpunkte. Mir ist wirklich schleierhaft, wie die Linkspartei an dieser Stelle von einem Kampfeinsatz sprechen kann.\n\nSie vergessen auch immer, zu erwähnen, dass diese Mission nicht nur auf Wunsch beider Parteien eingerichtet worden ist, sondern dass beide Parteien nach wie vor darum bitten, dass sie fortgesetzt wird.\n\nDer Bericht des Generalsekretärs der Vereinten Nationen macht aber auch deutlich, dass Fortschritte hin zu einem echten Waffenstillstand ausbleiben und es noch ein langer Weg zu echter Stabilität oder gar Frieden ist. Alles zusammen zeigt, dass es völlig falsch wäre, jetzt den deutschen Beitrag, den die Soldatinnen und Soldaten erbringen, zu beenden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Lage im Libanon gibt immer wieder Anlass zur Sorge. Es ist die Angst, dass der Krieg aus Syrien überspringt. Auch der schwierige, langwierige und zähe Prozess zur Regierungsbildung zeigt, dass es große Spaltungen im Land selbst gibt. Wir hoffen, dass die Parlamentswahlen im nächsten Jahr gelingen und für eine gute politische Zukunft sorgen werden.\n\nHinzu kommt aber auch die gigantische humanitäre Herausforderung, die der Libanon schon seit Jahren meistert: Über 1 Million registrierte Geflüchtete und nochmals Hunderttausende weiterer Menschen sind im Libanon aufgenommen worden. Im Libanon ist jeder vierte Mensch ein Flüchtling. In keinem Land der Welt ist die Quote höher. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, in dieser Lage darf man die Menschen im Libanon nicht alleine lassen.\n\nAnfang Juli hat das Flüchtlingswerk der Vereinten Nationen in einem erneuten Hilferuf wieder bekannt geben müssen, dass für Zehntausende Familien in den kommenden Monaten die Unterstützung fehlen wird. Dass der VN-Finanzierungsbedarf noch nicht einmal zu 25 Prozent erfüllt ist, ist doch einfach ein Skandal.\n\nWenn in einer solchen Situation - sie ist in vielen Krisengebieten der Welt genauso dramatisch - der US-Präsident ankündigt, die Gelder für die Vereinten Nationen zu kürzen, dann hat das nichts mit humanitärer Verantwortung und auch nichts mit sicherheitspolitischer Vernunft zu tun.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wenn Sie aktuell einen Blick in die Pressemeldungen werfen, werden Sie viele Artikel darüber finden, dass sich die NATO-Staaten auf Druck von Herrn Trump auf den Weg machen, immer mehr Geld für ihre eigenen Verteidigungshaushalte auszugeben, um das 2-Prozent-Ziel zu erreichen. In der Nacht auf Mittwoch wurden bei den Vereinten Nationen auf Betreiben von Herrn Trump Gelder für die VN-Friedensmissionen gekürzt. Das ist genau das falsche Signal.\n\nStatt Herrn Trump in Bezug auf die NATO-Gelder zu folgen, sollten Sie die Gelder, die jetzt bei den VN-Organisationen fehlen, von Europa aus zahlen. Das wäre das richtige Zeichen;\n\ndenn sonst werden am Ende des Tages solche Friedensmissionen wie im Libanon keine Erfolgsgeschichte bleiben können.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n7696,anton-hofreiter,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Frau Bundeskanzlerin, Sie haben früher öfters gesagt: Scheitert der Euro, dann scheitert Europa. - Aus heutiger Sicht müssten wir eigentlich sagen: Scheitern wir an einer humanen Flüchtlingspolitik, dann scheitert Europa.\n\nSie haben selbst davon gesprochen, Frau Merkel, dass weltweit 60 Millionen Menschen auf der Flucht sind. Bei dem Gipfeltreffen gestern haben sich die europäischen Länder immerhin darauf geeinigt, 120 000 Menschen in Europa zu verteilen. Jetzt kann man sagen: Ja, das ist ein erster richtiger Schritt in die richtige Richtung. Aber angesichts von 60 Millionen Menschen, die weltweit auf der Flucht sind, sind 120 000 maximal ein Tropfen auf den heißen Stein. Da muss doch noch viel mehr erfolgen.\n\nAngesichts dessen, was gerade in Ungarn passiert, wo wir einen Regierungschef haben, der Flüchtlinge niederknüppeln lässt - es gibt Bilder, auf denen sich Mädchen weinend um ihre Mütter kümmern, weil sie von ungarischen Grenzpolizisten niedergeknüppelt und mit Tränengas beschossen worden sind -, und angesichts dessen, dass es eine Regierungspartei gibt, die, statt heftig dagegen zu protestieren, den dafür Verantwortlichen hofiert, hätte ich mir von Ihnen, Frau Merkel, sehr, sehr deutliche Worte gewünscht.\n\nEs ist nicht so, wie viele behauptet haben - ich gebe offen zu, dass ich selbst das ebenfalls vermutet habe -, nämlich dass Sie, Frau Merkel, gar nicht zu klaren Worten in der Lage sind. Das dachte man lange Zeit. Aber Sie haben in letzter Zeit den einen oder anderen klaren Satz gesagt: „Das Grundrecht auf Asyl für politisch Verfolgte kennt keine Obergrenze.“ Sie können also klare Sätze sagen. Dann sagen Sie doch auch einen klaren Satz in Richtung CSU und Herrn Seehofer,\n\neinen Satz, der deutlich zum Ausdruck bringt, dass es so nicht geht, dass man mit unseren Werten so nicht umgehen kann und dass das ein Herumtrampeln auf der europäischen Wertegemeinschaft ist.\n\nWenn man jetzt wieder auf Abschottungspolitik setzt, dann schädigt man die europäische Wertegemeinschaft. Dann haben wir vielleicht noch eine EU, aber eine EU, die im Kern nichts mehr wert ist, weil wir unsere Werte nicht verteidigen. Ich erwarte von Ihnen, dass Sie dafür sorgen, dass die europäischen Werte verteidigt werden und dass man nicht erneut auf Abschottungspolitik setzt.\n\nWir alle haben - ich muss traurigerweise sagen: in den letzten Jahren - die schrecklichen Bilder davon gesehen, was im Mittelmeer passiert, dass dort Menschen regelmäßig ertrinken. Deshalb hätte ich erwartet, dass beim Gipfel etwas zu sicheren Wegen gesagt und Beschlüsse gefasst worden wären, die es den Menschen ermöglichen, den schrecklichen Bürgerkriegen in Richtung Europa zu entkommen, damit sie nicht auf Schlepper angewiesen sind und darauf, auf vollkommen unsichere Boote zu gehen und sich in Lastwagen zu quetschen, in denen sie unter Umständen ersticken. Wenn Europa wirklich zeigen will, was es wert ist, dann sorgen Sie, dann sorgen wir gemeinsam dafür, dass es sichere Wege nach Europa gibt und dass die Menschen nicht auf Schlepper angewiesen sind.\n\nSie haben einen weiteren richtigen Punkt gesagt. Sie haben gesagt: Wir müssen unbedingt das World Food Programme ausreichend ausstatten. - Dieses Programm soll nun 1 Milliarde Euro erhalten. Aber können wir uns nicht darauf einigen, dass das in Zukunft vorausschauend passiert? Es ist dieses Jahr nicht das erste Mal, dass dem World Food Programme das Geld ausgeht, dass die Flüchtlinge hungern müssen und dass die Portionen auf 50 Cent pro Tag heruntergesetzt werden. Das ist bereits letztes und vorletztes Jahr vorgekommen. Können wir uns nicht wenigstens darauf einigen, wenn wir schon nicht die ganz großen Krisen von heute auf morgen lösen können, dass wir, das reiche Deutschland - es geht um einige Millionen Euro; das ist für eine Privatperson viel Geld; aber für uns als Bundesrepublik Deutschland ist das leistbar -, rechtzeitig dafür sorgen, dass dieses Programm ausreichend finanziert wird, bevor ihm das Geld ausgeht. Das sollte der Mindestkompromiss sein.\n\nIch möchte ganz herzlich den Ehrenamtlichen danken, die innerhalb Deutschlands Unglaubliches leisten und sehr viel auf die Beine stellen.\n\nMan muss auch den Menschen in der öffentlichen Verwaltung danken, die zum Teil bis zum Anschlag arbeiten. Aber deshalb ist es umso wichtiger, dass am heutigen Nachmittag beim Gipfel mit den Ministerpräsidenten wirklich realistische Lösungen herauskommen, Lösungen, die wirklich tragen. Es dürfen nicht weitere Schikanen beschlossen werden, und es darf keine seltsame Symbolpolitik betrieben werden. Man sollte nicht glauben, dass die Menschen nicht mehr aus Syrien flüchten, weil nur noch ein Taschengeld gezahlt wird. Vielmehr müssen echte Entlastungen für die Kommunen und echte Hilfen für die Flüchtlinge beschlossen werden. Man muss bestimmten bürokratischen Unsinn abschaffen, zum Beispiel die Regelung, dass nach drei Jahren alle anerkannten Flüchtlinge noch einmal überprüft werden. Ich erwarte vom Gipfel am heutigen Nachmittag, dass man die Probleme tatsächlich angeht, den Kommunen und den Flüchtlingen hilft und dafür sorgt, dass die Arbeit der Ehrenamtlichen nicht entwertet wird.\n\nFrau Merkel, Sie haben auch vom Gipfel in New York gesprochen, bei dem es darum geht, die Nachhaltigkeitsziele zu beschließen, die es dann zu erreichen gilt. Der Gipfel in New York ist etwas Besonderes; denn wir beschließen diesmal Nachhaltigkeitsziele, die nicht nur für die Länder des globalen Südens gelten. Bei den letzten Millenniumszielen haben wir noch so getan, als ob sie uns kaum etwas angingen, als ob sie nur für die armen Länder des globalen Südens gelten würden und als ob bei uns alles toll wäre. Das Besondere ist diesmal, dass die UN und die reichen Länder anerkennen, dass die Nachhaltigkeitsziele uns alle betreffen.\n\nFrau Merkel, Sie haben davon gesprochen, dass wir mehr Geld für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit ausgeben wollen. Es gibt das 0,7-Prozent-Ziel, das das erste Mal 1970 auf UN-Ebene beschlossen wurde. Das ist das Jahr, in dem ich geboren worden bin. Es ist also schon ziemlich lang versprochen, dieses Ziel zu erreichen. Jetzt haben Sie gesagt, zur Erreichung dieses Ziels sollen weitere Milliarden Euro zur Verfügung gestellt werden. Aber wenn ich mir die mittelfristige Finanzplanung des Bundes anschaue, dann stelle ich fest, dass der Anteil am Bundeshaushalt, der zur Erreichung dieses Ziels zur Verfügung gestellt wird, weiter bei 0,4 Prozent stehen bleibt. Deshalb: Es hilft nicht, hier nur zu sagen, dass Milliarden Euro mehr zur Verfügung gestellt werden sollen, sondern das Ganze muss sich auch im Haushalt niederschlagen und umgesetzt werden. Das ist es, was wir jetzt erwarten.\n\nImmer wieder ist die Rede von der Bekämpfung der Fluchtursachen. Ja, sie ist richtig und wichtig. Auch wir sind der Meinung, dass die Fluchtursachen dringend bekämpft werden müssen. Es gibt auf der einen Seite die Fluchtursachen Krieg und massive Verfolgung. Zu deren Bekämpfung brauchen wir mehr diplomatische Initiativen, eine Stärkung der UN und ihres Systems.\n\nAber es gibt noch eine ganze Reihe weiterer Fluchtgründe. Aus Westafrika zum Beispiel fliehen Menschen, weil ihnen die Lebensgrundlage entzogen worden ist. Warum ist Menschen dort die Lebensgrundlage entzogen worden? Weil mit europäischem Geld, auch mit deutschem Geld, große Fischfangflotten dorthin fahren, die Meere leerfischen. Dadurch haben die Fischer dort keine Möglichkeit mehr, Fische zu fangen.\n\nWas glauben Sie, warum die Leute von dort fliehen? Dennoch wird hier so getan, als wären es Wirtschaftsflüchtlinge. Erst helfen wir mit, ihnen ihre Lebensgrundlage zu entziehen, und dann diffamieren wir sie hier als Wirtschaftsflüchtlinge. So kann es doch nicht gehen; so etwas muss man doch abstellen.\n\nWenn wir in den letzten Wochen und Monaten wirklich etwas gelernt haben, dann ist es, dass wir keine Wohlstandsinsel sind und dass unser Wohlstand von den Problemen der restlichen Welt nicht abgekoppelt ist. Deshalb sollten wir gemeinsam dafür sorgen, dass es nicht nur uns gut geht, sondern auch der restlichen Welt und den zukünftigen Generationen gut geht; dann haben wir eine richtige Politik gemacht, und dann haben wir wirklich etwas geschafft.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n11915,uwe-kekeritz,\"Danke schön. - Danke, Herr Staatssekretär. Wir haben ja den Lissabon-Vertrag. Im Lissabon-Vertrag ist eindeutig definiert, dass Entwicklungspolitik der Armutsreduzierung dient. Im Lissabon-Vertrag steht auch, dass keine militärischen oder sicherheitspolitischen Maßnahmen aus diesem Bereich finanziert werden können. Ich weiß, es gibt das Argument, dass es ohne Sicherheit keine Entwicklung gibt. Aber ich kann Ihnen auch sagen: Ohne Entwicklung gibt es keine Sicherheit.\n\nDeswegen ist meine Frage: Kann diese Bundesregierung ausschließen, dass es zu einem Paradigmenwechsel kommt? Ich möchte noch einmal darauf hinweisen, dass im Lissabon-Vertrag ganz bewusst darauf abgezielt worden ist, militärische und sicherheitspolitische Maßnahmen aus diesem Fonds auszunehmen, um sicherzustellen, dass Sicherheitsmaßnahmen eben nicht aus dem Entwicklungsetat finanziert werden, sondern aus anderen. Können Sie ausschließen, dass es zu einem Paradigmenwechsel kommt?\n\nDanke schön. - Meine Frage zielte darauf ab, inwieweit Sie sicherstellen können, dass es nicht zu einer Schwerpunktverlagerung kommt. Wenn ich sehe, dass 60 Millionen Euro und damit fast ein Drittel des Finanztopfs für flexible und schnelle Maßnahmen zur Krisenreaktion vorgesehen sind und bereits für das Management von Migration und Grenzschutz in der Türkei über 30 Prozent verwendet werden, dann frage ich mich: Wie stellt die EU bzw. die Bundesregierung sicher, dass für zivile Friedensförderung tatsächlich noch genügend Mittel zur Verfügung stehen?\n\nDanke schön. - Ihrer Antwort entnehme ich, dass Herr Müller das Thema tatsächlich breit abgesprochen hat: im Kabinett, mit dem Außenministerium, auch mit dem Kanzleramt oder der Kanzlerin. Wenn das so ist, freue ich mich. Ich frage mich allerdings trotzdem, was denn die Hauptzielrichtung dieser Mittelmeerunion sein soll. Sie sprachen gerade von Beschäftigungsinitiativen. Aber zurzeit diskutieren wir doch ganz viel die Fluchtproblematik. Geht es in diesem Bündnis um politische Integration, oder wird hier nicht doch schwerpunktmäßig angestrebt, die Flüchtlingsströme zu kontrollieren, zu lenken oder zu reduzieren? Meine Frage ist natürlich auch, wie das in Anbetracht des Krieges in Syrien, der Auseinandersetzungen in Libyen und des israelisch-palästinensischen Konflikts zu bewerten ist.\n\nDanke schön. - Das verwundert mich etwas. Ich bin ja freudig überrascht, dass diese Mittelmeerunion seit 2008 besteht. Ich weiß, dass es diese Initiative gab. Aber ich weiß auch, wie die Reaktion der Kanzlerin war, die damals sagte, dass dies Spannungskräfte in Europa erzeugen würde, die sogar den Zerfall Europas provozieren könnten. Wenn diese Union jetzt doch schon mit Leben erfüllt ist, frage ich mich natürlich, warum wir davon nie etwas mitbekommen haben. Aber das ist ein anderes Thema. - Für mich wäre jetzt mehr die Frage interessant: Welche Rolle soll denn die Türkei in diesem Bündnis spielen?\"\n2271,maria-klein-schmeink,\"Sehr geehrte Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und -Kollegen! Erneut konnten wir erleben, dass die Große Koalition versucht hat, sich einen Gesetzentwurf, der -zutiefst ungerecht ist - im Wesentlichen soll nämlich der einkommensunabhängige Zusatzbeitrag der CDU/CSU-FDP-Koalition abgeschafft und dafür ein prozentualer Zusatzbeitragssatz eingeführt werden, mit der Gemeinsamkeit, dass dieser Zusatzbeitrag alleine durch die Versicherten zu zahlen ist -, schönzureden.\n\nDas wird nicht gelingen, weil es im Kern darum geht, Zusatzlasten den Versicherten aufzubürden.\n\nHarald Weinberg hat gerade vorgerechnet, was das bedeutet. Ich nenne noch einmal die Zahlen: Im Kern geht es darum, dass die Versicherten in den nächsten vier Jahren jährlich 10 Milliarden Euro mehr tragen müssen. Das ist der Kern des Gesetzentwurfes, der heute verabschiedet werden soll.\n\nKarl Lauterbach hat sich sehr viel Mühe gegeben, -darum herumzureden: Das überzeugt nicht. Ich muss ehrlich sagen: Man kann als Verhandlungsführer stolz sein, wenn man meint, man hätte eine Kopfpauschale ausgehebelt. Wenn man aber im Gegenzug akzeptieren muss, dass die Versicherten sämtliche Lasten aufgrund des Kostenanstiegs im Gesundheitswesen tragen müssen, kann man das nicht mehr sein. Das ist nicht gerecht und nicht solidarisch, sondern eine einseitige Belastung der Versicherten, und darüber kann man überhaupt nicht hinwegreden.\n\nIch finde es auch perfide - Sie versuchen, ein Mäntelchen darum herumzuhängen -, dass darauf verwiesen wird, dass die Versicherten jetzt auf einem Vergleichsportal nachgucken können, welche Versicherung aufgrund eines geringeren Zusatzbeitrages etwas billiger ist. Das kann doch nicht die Lösung dafür sein. Es muss doch darum gehen, dass wir zu einer solidarischen -Finanzierung zurückkehren. Mit Verlaub gesagt: Das wäre einer Sozialdemokratie würdig! Aufgrund Ihrer Niederlage im Verhandlungsprozess hätte ich mir an dieser Stelle durchaus ein bisschen mehr Demut gewünscht.\n\nIch komme nun zu dem anderen Teil des Gesetzentwurfes. Sie haben im Gesetzestext betont - die Staatssekretärin hat das gerade noch einmal wiederholt -, es ginge um eine solide und nachhaltige Finanzierung. Nichts da! Jeder von uns hier im Saal weiß, dass wir spätestens in der nächsten Wahlperiode erneut über die -Finanzierung reden müssen, weil es in der Debatte und auch gesellschaftlich natürlich nicht zu vermitteln ist, dass die Belastungen durch Kostensteigerungen einseitig nur den Versicherten aufgebürdet werden sollen. Sie werden im Wahlkampf die Frage beantworten müssen, ob es sein kann, dass jeder Versicherte eine Zusatzbelastung von mehr als 2 bis 3 Prozent zu tragen hat, während der Beitrag der Arbeitgeber eingefroren bleibt. Das werden Sie der Gesellschaft nicht verkaufen können, und natürlich werden wir in der nächsten Wahlperiode darüber wieder diskutieren müssen.\n\nIch danke herzlich, liebe Kollegin, für diese Frage, weil die Antwort mir Gelegenheit gibt, mehr Zeit dafür aufzuwenden, auf Folgendes hinzuweisen:\n\nEs ist in der Tat ein gemeinsames Anliegen dieser Opposition und der SPD im letzten Wahlkampf gewesen, deutlich zu machen: Wir wollen zu einer paritätischen Finanzierung zurückkehren. - Genau dieses Ziel wird mit diesem Gesetzentwurf in keiner Weise erreicht.\n\nIm Gegenteil: Durch die Kürzung des Steuerzuschusses zum Gesundheitsfonds wird der Gang in die Zusatzbeiträge beschleunigt. Auch das wird dazu führen, dass es noch eher zu den ungerechten Zusatzbeiträgen kommen wird. Genau so stellt es sich dar.\n\nKommen wir noch einmal zum Thema „solide und nachhaltige Finanzierung“. Es stellt sich die Frage: Müssen wir nicht tatsächlich zu einer nachhaltigen Finanzierung kommen? Genau das sollte mit der Bürgerversicherung erreicht werden. Mit der Bürgerversicherung hätten wir die Gelegenheit gehabt, alle einzubeziehen: sowohl die Besserverdienenden als auch die kleinen Selbstständigen, die dadurch eine bessere Chance auf faire Bedingungen bei ihrer Krankenversicherung hätten.\n\nAuf der anderen Seite hätten wir die Möglichkeit gehabt, andere Einkommensarten einzubeziehen. Das hätte zu einer soliden, nachhaltigen und sicheren Finanzierung unserer ansteigenden Gesundheitskosten führen können. Genau das wäre der Weg, den wir hätten gehen müssen. Davon, liebe Sozialdemokratie, sind Sie weiter denn je entfernt.\n\nIch komme zum letzten Teil. Ich habe leider nicht mehr genug Redezeit, um das Positive in diesem Gesetzentwurf zu betonen. Uns ist es wichtig, dass es mit der UPD, der unabhängigen Patientenberatung, vorangeht und dass wir sie stärken. Uns ist es wichtig, dass wir zu einer wirklichen Psychiatriereform kommen.\n\nDazu gehört natürlich die Verlängerung der Optionsphase im Psychiatrie-Entgeltsystem.\n\nDas halten wir für richtig, und wir finden, dass Sie da den richtigen Weg eingeschlagen haben. Wir haben mit unseren Anträgen gezeigt, wie weit das Ganze gehen müsste. Da hoffen wir auf eine weitere Debatte.\n\nEin letzter Satz zu den Hebammen. Auch da sind wir froh, dass da etwas in die Gänge gekommen ist. Wir haben leider in der letzten Wahlperiode erleben müssen, dass eine Problemlösung verschoben worden ist. Sie gehen dieses Problem an. Aber wir sind von einer nachhaltigen Regelung noch immer weit entfernt. Die Hebammen wissen zwar bis zum nächsten Jahr, wie es weitergeht. Aber die eigentliche Lösung der Haftpflichtproblematik im Gesundheitswesen steht noch immer aus. Auch das werden wir massiv einklagen und diesen Diskussionsprozess vorantreiben.\n\nDanke schön.\n\nHerr Kollege, habe ich Sie richtig verstanden, dass Sie im Grunde froh sind, dass die Ergebnisse der vierjährigen Regierungszeit von Schwarz-Gelb jetzt begraben worden sind und dass man den einen Zusatzbeitrag, der zugegebenermaßen mit sehr viel Bürokratie verbunden war, nun gegen einen anderen Zusatzbeitrag ausgetauscht hat? Habe ich Sie richtig verstanden, dass Sie die letzten vier Jahre im Ergebnis eine relativ schlechte Politik gemacht haben?\"\n15351,artur-auernhammer,\"Sehr verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Diese Debatte zeigt uns einmal mehr: Hier hat eine Partei nicht Angst vor irgendwelchen Pflanzenschutzmitteln, sondern vor der Fünfprozenthürde.\n\nIn den Anträgen wird wieder ein Weltuntergangsszenario beschrieben, das so nicht zutrifft. Welche Aufgabe haben wir eigentlich in der Zukunft, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren?\n\nWir haben in der Zukunft die Aufgabe, 10 Milliarden Menschen auf dieser Welt zu ernähren.\n\nNach wie vor stirbt alle zehn Sekunden ein Kind den Hungertod, und wir diskutieren hier darüber, wie wir die Produktion unserer Landwirtschaft reduzieren, wie wir sie nach unten fahren.\n\nSo kann es nicht gehen, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren.\n\nWir haben hier schon oft über Glyphosat diskutiert.\n\nIch will gar nicht groß darauf eingehen; aber ich empfehle jedem, die bekannte Menge von 1 000 Litern Bier pro Tag zu genießen - erst in dieser Menge ist das darin enthaltene Glyphosat gefährlich - und das drüben im Biergarten zu machen.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, kürzlich gab es eine Diskussion im Europäischen Parlament, auch getrieben von dieser Angst und der Hysterie darum, keine Pflanzenschutzmittel mehr auf die ökologischen Vorrangflächen auszubringen. Wir haben mit den entsprechenden Greeningmaßnahmen erreicht, dass in Europa 1,4 Millionen Hektar Eiweißpflanzen regional angebaut werden, dass mit diesen 1,4 Millionen Hektar Eiweißpflanzen regionale Eiweißversorgung stattfindet.\n\nWas ist jetzt die Folge? Die Umweltorganisationen in Südamerika schlagen Alarm: Jetzt wird noch mehr Regenwald gerodet.\n\nDiese Regenwaldrodungen haben Sie zu verantworten, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es wird hier auch sehr viel über Marktkonzentration gesprochen. Das bewegt mich auch. Gerade heute Mittag wurde eine Molkerei in meinem Wahlkreis von einem französischen Molkereikonzern übernommen. Da müssen wir fragen: Warum ist es so weit gekommen? Warum haben wir hier nicht besser reagiert? Stattdessen wird hier nach der Übernahme von Monsanto durch Bayer ständig ein Angstszenario schon fast zelebriert.\n\nZur gleichen Zeit, zu der Bayer Monsanto übernommen hat, wurde ein anderer Chemiekonzern von den Chinesen übernommen.\n\nIch möchte fragen: Wäre es zu dieser Betroffenheit gekommen, wenn Monsanto von den Chinesen übernommen worden wäre?\n\nNein, keine Aktuelle Stunde - alles wäre gut gewesen.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, wir müssen in Zukunft - ich bin hier unserem Bundeslandwirtschaftsministerium sehr dankbar - nach wie vor verantwortungsbewusst mit den Möglichkeiten im Pflanzenschutz umgehen. Gerade unsere deutsche Landwirtschaft, unsere gut ausgebildeten Bäuerinnen und Bauern machen das, und deshalb müssen wir an dieser Stelle Respekt vor der Arbeit unserer Bäuerinnen und Bauern haben.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, ich bin dankbar, dass wir mit einzelnen Forschungsvorhaben unsere Landwirtschaft weiter modernisieren und damit auch nachhaltiger gestalten. Eine nachhaltige Landwirtschaft ist auch die Grundlage dafür, dass wir die Megaherausforderung der Welternährung bewerkstelligen.\n\nWir dürfen auch nicht das Thema Klimawandel aus dem Blick verlieren. Wir haben heute im Bundestag schon über Klimawandel diskutiert. Der Klimawandel wird ganz neue Herausforderungen an unsere landwirtschaftliche Produktion stellen. Deshalb brauchen wir moderne Produktionsverfahren, und die kann es nur mit einer modernen, nachhaltigen Landwirtschaft und mit den mit ihr verbundenen landwirtschaftlichen Organisationen geben.\n\nWir sollten weniger darüber diskutieren, was wir alles zu verbieten haben, und wir sollten weniger darüber diskutieren, was alles schlecht ist auf der Welt.\n\nVielmehr sollten wir darüber diskutieren, welche Lösungsansätze wir finden können, um die große Herausforderung der Welternährung anzunehmen und um unsere eigene deutsche Landwirtschaft, die Arbeit unserer Bäuerinnen und Bauern weiter zu unterstützen. Unser Bundeslandwirtschaftsministerium macht das, unsere Fraktion auch, und ich hoffe, auch die Kolleginnen und Kollegen hier im Hause.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3089,johannes-roring,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrter Herr Bundesminister Schmidt! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kollegen! Landwirtschaft in Deutschland ist eine Erfolgsgeschichte. 270 000 Betriebe, rund 90 Prozent davon familiengeführt, ackern und arbeiten für uns. Nie waren Lebensmittel so wertvoll und hochwertig und so bezahlbar wie heute.\n\nWir haben die Getreideernte 2014 gerade abgeschlossen. Die deutschen Bauern haben eine Rekordernte eingefahren, in einigen Regionen unter schwierigsten Bedingungen. Hätten wir nicht diese tolle Landtechnik, hätten wir vieles nicht ernten können. Ich sage Ihnen sehr deutlich, wenn wir über Nahrungsmittelspekulationen sprechen: Die beste Antwort auf Spekulationen sind gute Ernten. Sie sichern die Versorgung der Menschen.\n\nDeswegen sollten wir alle froh sein, dass wir so eine gute Ernte hatten.\n\nIn diesem Zusammenhang erinnere ich wieder daran, wie wichtig es ist, dass wir über ausreichend Lebensmittelerzeugungsflächen verfügen. Wenn davon pro Tag 74 Hektar verloren gehen, dann ist das eindeutig zu viel. Dieses Thema haben wir im Koalitionsvertrag aufgegriffen. Wir packen das an, und wir werden Lösungen finden. Ich persönlich bin - das sage ich Ihnen sehr deutlich - nicht eher zufrieden, bis wir unsere Acker- und Grünlandflächen genauso wie den deutschen Wald unter Schutz stellen.\n\nDie deutsche Landwirtschaft ist natürlich von den Sanktionen gegen Russland betroffen. Russland hat als Reaktion auf die Sanktionen die Einfuhr von vielen Lebensmitteln ausgeschlossen. Es ist schon bemerkenswert, dass Lebensmittel hier als Mittel der Auseinandersetzung gewählt werden. Ich kann Ihnen sagen: Es ist gut, dass Deutschland von Lebensmitteln nicht so abhängig ist wie von Gas. Es ist wichtig, dass wir in dem Sinne eine starke Landwirtschaft haben. Wir sind zwar der zweitgrößte Importeur von Lebensmitteln auf der Erde, aber auch der drittgrößte Exporteur. Insofern findet an der Stelle Handel statt.\n\nIch glaube, es ist gut, dass der Bundeslandwirtschaftsminister deutlich gesagt hat, dass die russischen Verbraucher am Ende die Hauptleidtragenden sind. Sie zahlen sehr hohe Preise für Nahrungsmittel, wobei sie über wesentlich weniger Einkommen verfügen als unsere Verbraucher. Umso wichtiger im Hinblick auch auf diese Sanktionen sind natürlich die anderen Märkte. Unser Hauptmarkt ist der Markt vor Ort, sind unsere Verbraucher in Deutschland, die 80 Millionen Menschen, die wir täglich gern und sicher versorgen wollen. Auch der europäische Markt ist für uns wichtig. Ich bin Minister Schmidt für sein Bekenntnis zu den Exportmärkten außerordentlich dankbar.\n\nPeter Bleser ist im Moment in Peking unterwegs und treibt die Errichtung des deutsch-chinesischen Agrarzentrums voran.\n\nIch möchte noch einmal deutlich machen, dass wir bei der Exportförderung nicht über Exporterstattung -sprechen, sondern über Handelserleichterungen, zum Beispiel Veterinärabkommen. Auch da bin ich den Haushältern dankbar, dass wir zusätzliche Stellen bekommen, um das alles zu schaffen.\n\nUm die gleichen Dinge geht es auch bei CETA und TTIP, den Handelsabkommen mit Kanada und den Vereinigten Staaten. Absatzmärkte für unsere hochwertigen Erzeugnisse, Autos, Maschinen, Anlagen und auch Nahrungsmittel, sind wichtig für unsere Wirtschaft. Ich erwarte von der Europäischen Union robuste Verhandlungen im Sinne unserer Verbraucher, aber auch unserer Wirtschaft. Eine Exportnation wie Deutschland ist auf gute Rahmenbedingungen im Handel angewiesen.\n\nDiese Abkommen beinhalten aus meiner Sicht viele Vorteile, vor allen Dingen auch für unseren Mittelstand. Ich sage Ihnen sehr deutlich: An der deutschen Landwirtschaft werden diese Abkommen nicht scheitern. Wir wollen Chancen nutzen und Standards schützen. Diese Abkommen bieten auch die Chance einer allgemeinen Standarderhöhung. Deswegen brauchen wir gerade auch bei TTIP und CETA eine sachliche Debatte, die sich mit den Chancen, aber auch den Risiken beschäftigt.\n\nIch glaube - dies muss man deutlich sagen -, dass dies auch für andere Themenfelder gilt. Organisationen, die ihr Geschäft mit den Ängsten der Bevölkerung machen, sind bei solchen Diskussionen fehl am Platz.\n\nLandwirte genießen in Deutschland ein hohes Ansehen. Das belegen Umfragen immer wieder. Aber es herrscht allgemeine Skepsis gegenüber moderner Lebensmittelerzeugung auf dem Acker und im Stall.\n\nWir von der CDU/CSU wollen eine sachliche Debatte über die Tierhaltung. Dabei sage ich ganz deutlich: Es ist vornehmlich Aufgabe der Wirtschaft, Dinge selbstkritisch zu hinterfragen, Verbesserungen umzusetzen und am Ende natürlich auch darüber aufzuklären.\n\nAls gutes Beispiel nenne ich hier die Initiative Tierwohl. Hier haben sich zum ersten Mal - das müssen Sie sich genau anschauen - Bauern, Verarbeiter und Handel an einen Tisch gesetzt mit dem Ziel, noch mehr für den Tierschutz in deutschen Ställen zu tun. Mit dem Ziel ist es nicht getan. In diesem Fall ist auch ein Ergebnis dabei herausgekommen, das dafür sorgt, dass die deutschen Landwirte von dieser Entwicklung profitieren. Auch dies ist zum ersten Mal so. Deswegen ist es eine völlig neue Qualität der Zusammenarbeit. Mit dieser Initiative - das sage ich sehr deutlich - wollen wir mit der Tierhaltung aus der Nische herauskommen und für alle Tiere etwas tun. Es ist kein Label, kein Sonderprogramm und auch nicht das 46. Markenfleischprogramm, sondern eine Initiative, die allen Tieren in Deutschland zugutekommt.\n\nIch bin sehr froh, dass Minister Schmidt seine Tierwohloffensive, die er, wie im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart, gerade angekündigt hat, für einen ganzheitlichen Ansatz nutzt; das ist auch im Haushalt erkennbar. Ich bin der Überzeugung, dass wir nicht nur über Nutztiere, -sondern auch über Zoo-, Zirkus- und Heimtiere reden sollten, also über die gesamte Palette der Themen inklusive dem Welpenhandel und anderen Dingen, die ganz wichtig sind. Diese Maßnahmen knüpfen nahtlos an viele Regelungen an, die in der deutschen Tierhaltung wichtig sind. Viele tun ja so, als würde das im rechtsfreien Raum geschehen. Wir haben aber einschlägige Gesetze und Verordnungen en masse.\n\nIch erinnere an das Tierschutzgesetz und das Arzneimittelgesetz, das sich in der Umsetzung befindet. Hier -haben wir ganz klare Signale gesetzt, nicht nur den Einsatz von Antibiotika, sondern vor allen Dingen auch die Resistenzbildung stark zu reduzieren. Ich bin froh, dass in diesen Haushalt für die nächsten drei Jahre 21 Millionen Euro allein für die Förderung von Modell- und Demonstrationsvorhaben eingestellt worden sind.\n\nIch glaube, wir müssen fernab von den Elfenbeintürmen der Theorie praxisgerechte Maßnahmen weiterentwickeln, die den Bauern helfen. Am Ende lautet das Motto nämlich: Diese Entwicklung geht nur mit den Bauern, mit den Tierhaltern. Deswegen finde ich es richtig, auf diese Art und Weise vorzugehen. Verbote und Anfeindungen helfen da überhaupt nicht weiter. Ich spreche an dieser Stelle ganz deutlich für die deutschen Bauern, die sich zum Ziel gesetzt haben, in ihren Ställen gesunde Tiere zu haben, um gesunde Lebensmittel verkaufen zu können.\n\nBauernfamilien, meine Damen und Herren, können ihre Höfe nicht ins Ausland verlagern, sondern sind standortgebunden, müssen sich aber trotzdem dem Wettbewerb stellen. Deshalb sage ich ganz deutlich: Bei allen Verbesserungen muss immer auch der Gesichtspunkt der Wettbewerbsfähigkeit im Auge behalten werden. An -einigen Stellen müssen wir die Kirche im Dorf lassen. Was nützen uns die besten Innovationen, wenn die Fleischerzeugung ins Ausland verlagert wird, wo die Standards, wie wir alle wissen, mit Sicherheit nicht genauso hoch sind wie bei uns?\n\nWir von der CDU/CSU - das gilt aber auch für die Koalition insgesamt; das haben wir gerade vom Kollegen Priesmeier gehört - bekennen uns zur Vielfalt unserer Landwirtschaft mit all ihren Bewirtschaftungsformen und Betriebsgrößen. Wir wollen eine wettbewerbsfähige Landwirtschaftsstruktur in Deutschland. Eine verbotsgesteuerte Agrarpolitik lehnen wir gerade in Anbetracht unserer mittelständischen Strukturen entschieden ab.\n\nÜberzogene Auflagen und Verbote schrecken nämlich zunehmend junge Menschen ab, den elterlichen Betrieb zu übernehmen. Unser Leitbild ist die bäuerlich-unternehmerische Landwirtschaft. Die große Mehrheit der Bauern in Deutschland wirtschaftet so. Das soll auch so bleiben.\n\nBauernfamilien sind zur Selbstkritik bereit und stehen auch Änderungen offen gegenüber. Jedoch sind wir alle entsetzt über illegale Stalleinbrüche militanter Aktivsten.\n\nMit teils gefälschten Bildern wird ein Zerrbild der Landwirtschaft in öffentlich-rechtlichen Sendern verbreitet. Das ist der Nährboden - das ist meine Sorge - für Rechtsbrüche wie Brandstiftung in Ställen - das alles hat es schon gegeben - und Mobbing von Bauernkindern in Schulen. Ich möchte an die Kritiker der Landwirtschaft appellieren, fair und gewaltfrei über dieses Thema zu diskutieren.\n\nDie Landwirtschaft zukunftsfähig erhalten und sie auf die Zukunft ausrichten, das ist unser Ziel. Der Bundeshaushalt 2014 bietet dafür eine gute Grundlage. Ich möchte abschließend Bundesminister Christian Schmidt und all seinen Mitarbeitern für diesen Einzelplanentwurf danken.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n14598,uli-grotsch,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich habe es gestern im Ausschuss gesagt und ich sage es gerne auch heute noch einmal, weil mir das wirklich ein Anliegen ist. Was den Einsatz des sogenannten Staatstrojaners und die Thematik der Onlinedurchsuchung angeht: Eine entsprechende Einschätzung hierzu hat, glaube ich, viel damit zu tun, welchen grundsätzlichen Blick man auf die Sicherheitsbehörden in unserem Land hat. Ich möchte betonen: Unser Blick ist ein klarer, und wir haben keinen Zweifel daran, dass die Polizeibehörden, das Bundeskriminalamt in diesem Fall, die Instrumente, die wir als Gesetzgeber ihnen an die Hand geben, so nutzen, wie es im Gesetz vorgesehen ist und dass sie verantwortungsvoll für die Ermittlungsarbeit und für sonst gar nichts eingesetzt werden.\n\nMit dem vorliegenden Gesetz zur Neustrukturierung des Bundeskriminalamtgesetzes bringen wir einen Gesetzentwurf zum Abschluss, der dem Bundeskriminalamt - eigentlich allen Polizeibehörden in Deutschland - die Tür ins 21. Jahrhundert öffnet. Ein Kompliment ist es im Grunde nie, wenn das Bundesverfassungsgericht ein Gesetz an uns zurückgibt. In diesem Fall aber sagt das Urteil auch, dass die verdeckten Überwachungsmaßnahmen grundsätzlich mit dem Grundgesetz vereinbar sind. Die geforderten Nachjustierungen bezüglich der Bestimmtheit, der Verhältnismäßigkeit oder der richterlichen Kontrolle der Maßnahmen setzen wir mit diesem Gesetz um.\n\nWir begrüßen es, dass das Urteil auch Anlass war, eine komplette Neustrukturierung der polizeilichen Datenbanksysteme von Bund und Ländern unter dem Dach des Bundeskriminalamtes in Angriff zu nehmen; natürlich gab es darüber hier im Parlament Diskussionen. Wir wollen mit einer zentralen Datenbank und einem polizeilichen Informationsverbund, also mit einer komplett neuen IT-Architektur, dem Bundeskriminalamt den Weg ins 21. Jahrhundert ebnen. Wer sich dem versperrt, setzt weiterhin auf einen Datenflickenteppich aus 19 unterschiedlichen Dateien, auf eine Infrastruktur, die aus den 1970er-Jahren stammt. Das kann nicht der Anspruch einer modernen Sicherheitspolitik sein.\n\nWir wollen nicht, dass unsere Polizistinnen und Polizisten sehnsüchtig in unsere Nachbarländer blicken müssen, etwa nach Holland, weil die Kollegen dort mit modernster Technik und entsprechenden Befugnissen ausgestattet sind und dadurch leistungsfähiger fahnden können. Wir wollen technisch auf der Höhe der Zeit sein. Bildlich gesprochen: Wir wollen nicht, dass unsere Beamten Terroristen am Commodore 64 bekämpfen, obwohl Terroristen - das ist hinlänglich bekannt - verschlüsselt mit High-End-Geräten arbeiten.\n\nIch sage Ihnen, dass die Zeit des Nebeneinanderarbeitens, dass die Zeit der Länderbefindlichkeiten in Deutschland vorbei sein muss.\n\nWir haben eine Regelung gefunden, wie der Aufwand für die Länder bei der Übernahme der Altdaten in das neue Regime so gering wie möglich bleibt. Unser Vorschlag ist damit praxistauglich. Das haben wir im parlamentarischen Verfahren hinlänglich abgeprüft.\n\nDer Terror macht nicht an Ländergrenzen halt. Das ist nun wirklich keine neue Erkenntnis. Das BKA muss und wird deshalb auch in Zukunft als Zentralstelle eine maßgebliche Rolle spielen. Ein Fall wie Anis Amri darf sich natürlich nie wiederholen. Die Maxime dabei lautet: Ein Ermittler in Bayern muss wissen können, dass ein Kollege in Nordrhein-Westfalen oder anderswo am selben Fall bzw. an derselben Person dran ist,\n\nund zwar nicht erst nach ein paar Tagen, sondern immer sofort.\n\nMit diesem Gesetz ziehen wir Konsequenzen aus dem Zuständigkeitswirrwarr nach dem Anschlag vom Breitscheidplatz. Das ist immer ein Spagat zwischen Freiheit und Sicherheit; das haben wir auch bei diesem Gesetzentwurf gesehen. Gerade wir Sozialdemokraten schielen immer in Richtung Freiheit und achten sehr genau auf die Verhältnismäßigkeit.\n\nFrau Renner, weil Sie eben den Albtraum Big Data - ewig speichern - angesprochen haben, möchte ich Ihnen eine gute Nachricht überbringen: Sie können aus diesem Albtraum aufwachen. Die Regelung, von der Sie eben gesprochen haben, ist im Gesetzentwurf so nicht mehr enthalten.\n\nIch habe diese Regelung auch sehr kritisch gesehen - ich habe das in den Gesprächen im Rahmen des Gesetzgebungsverfahrens immer gesagt -, weil sie im schlimmsten Fall bedeutet hätte, dass meine personenbezogenen Daten, auch wenn es sich dabei nur um Bagatelldelikte gehandelt hätte, unbegrenzt gespeichert worden wären. Es wäre gewissermaßen eine lebenslange Polizeiakte entstanden, und jeder neue Eintrag hätte zur Verlängerung der Aussonderungsprüffrist geführt. Ich bin sehr froh, dass das vom Tisch ist und wir den bisherigen Rechtszustand beibehalten, weil jeder die Möglichkeit haben muss, wieder eine weiße Weste zu bekommen.\n\nGut, dass auch hier das Struck’sche Gesetz gegolten hat: Kein Gesetz verlässt den Bundestag so, wie es reinkommt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Sicherheitslücken, die es gibt, schließen wir. Manchmal schießt unser Koalitionspartner vielleicht ein bisschen übers Ziel hinaus.\n\nDann müssen die Sozialdemokraten sie wieder einfangen.\n\nDas gelingt insbesondere in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Bundesjustizministerium ganz hervorragend. Dafür darf ich mich an dieser Stelle herzlich bedanken.\n\nEin bisschen verwundert war ich daher schon, Herr de Maizière, über die ungewohnte Zurückhaltung des Bundesinnenministeriums bei der anstehenden Änderung des Waffenrechts. Anstatt eine eindeutige Regelung vorzulegen, damit die Waffenbehörden vor jeder Erlaubniserteilung eine Abfrage bei den Verfassungsschutzämtern über verfassungsfeindliche Einträge durchführen können, drucksen Sie herum und unterbreiten einen halbherzigen und sehr ungenauen Vorschlag. Wir sagen: Keine legalen Waffen an Extremisten.\n\nSie aber trauen sich nicht und zögern. Die bei allen anderen Fragen der Terrorabwehr an den Tag gelegte Entschlossenheit erwarte ich auch in dieser Sache. Wir werden hier nicht lockerlassen.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n7968,dagmar-wohrl,\"Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Deutschland, sagt man, ist das Land der Dichter und Denker. Da fallen uns sehr viele Vertreter ein, ob in der deutschen Literatur Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Koryphäen der klassischen Musik wie Ludwig van Beethoven oder zeitgenössische Maler wie Gerhard Richter. Aber daneben gibt es viele Kulturschaffende, deren Namen uns nicht bekannt sind, die in den vielen kleinen Theatern, in den kleinen Kinos, auf den kleinen Bühnen ihre Arbeit machen, die gestalten und die Kultur mit weiterentwickeln.\n\nUnsere Kultur ist vielfältig; darauf sind wir stolz. Sie ist genauso vielfältig wie Deutschland und seine Regionen, ob Malerei, Musik, Film oder darstellende Künste. Sie ist beeindruckend. Das gilt nicht nur für die Kulturmetropolen wie Berlin mit den großen Staatstheatern und Opernhäusern, sondern auch für den ländlichen Raum.\n\nEs ist von meinen Vorrednerinnen und Vorrednern angesprochen worden: Wir haben einen demografischen Wandel, Geburtenrückgänge - dieses Jahr ist die Zahl der Geburten Gott sei Dank wieder ein bisschen höher - und eine Abwanderung aus ländlichen Gegenden zu verzeichnen, vor allem von jungen Menschen, die es immer mehr in die Stadt zieht. Das heißt, es gibt ein Problem. Die Flüchtlingsströme, die uns derzeit erreichen, sind natürlich unumstritten die größte Herausforderung, die wir in diesen Tagen, in diesen Wochen und auch in den nächsten Monaten zu bewältigen haben. Auch hier gibt es kulturpolitische Herausforderungen; denn kulturpolitische Teilhabe ist gesellschaftliche Teilhabe und somit auch ein ganz wichtiger Schlüssel zur Integration.\n\nMenschen mit Migrationshintergrund prägen unsere Gesellschaft und unser kulturelles Leben und - das dürfen wir nicht vergessen - bereichern es auch. Integration heißt auch, kulturelle Werte und Traditionen zu vermitteln, und zwar in beide Richtungen: von uns auf die Flüchtlinge und Migranten und von den Flüchtlingen und Migranten auf uns. Tanz, Theater, Film und Musik können hier einen wichtigen Beitrag leisten.\n\nKultur war schon immer ein verbindendes Element über Grenzen hinweg. Das haben wir schon sehr oft erwähnt und wissen wir alle. Sie ist aber auch ein verbindendes Element zwischen Land und Stadt und zwischen Jung und Alt. Sie ist eine gemeinsame Sprache und stiftet Identität, wie das vorhin auch schon zu Recht erwähnt worden ist. Wir leben in Zeiten der Veränderungen. In diesen bietet sie Halt und hilft sie uns, den gesellschaftlichen Wandel zu bewältigen.\n\nWas bedeutet das alles aber für den ländlichen Raum? Wie schon erwähnt, ist der ländliche Raum besonders stark vom demografischen Wandel betroffen. Sicher geht es auf dem Land vorrangig um Daseinsvorsorge, also darum, dass etwa der Tante-Emma-Laden erhalten bleibt und dass die ärztliche Versorgung weiterhin zur Verfügung steht. Es geht aber auch um die Aufrechterhaltung eines Kulturangebotes. Das ist eine Herausforderung, und zwar auch deswegen, weil die Kommunen, wie wir wissen, immer weniger Einnahmen und auf der anderen Seite aufgrund der Flüchtlingsströme natürlich mehr Ausgaben als früher haben. Und wo wird als Erstes gespart? Das geschieht im Kulturbereich - das wissen wir -, weil die Förderung der Kultur eine freiwillige Aufgabe der kommunalen Selbstverwaltung ist und man dort am schnellsten Geld einsparen kann.\n\nMit der Veränderung der Bevölkerungsstruktur wandelt sich aber auch noch etwas anderes, nämlich das Kulturinteresse des Publikums und das Publikum selbst. Statt Opern und anderer Hochkultur sind zukünftig andere Kulturangebote und Formate gefragt.\n\nDas heißt, Kulturpolitik ist auch Standortpolitik. Wir müssen in den ländlichen Gebieten Angebote schaffen, mit denen wir Städter dazu bekommen, wieder aufs Land zu ziehen. Dafür brauchen wir ein spezielles Kulturmarketing in diesem Bereich und andere Formen des kulturellen Angebotes, wie zum Beispiel Festivals.\n\nWir wissen, dass Regionen, die wirtschaftlich und kulturell aktiv sind, wachsen. Es wird immer unterschätzt, welche Auswirkungen ein kulturelles Angebot hat. Wenn man über den Fachkräftemangel spricht, sucht man immer Kriterien zur Mitarbeiterbindung. Hier ist auch die Kultur ein ganz wichtiger Punkt. Sie ist für viele ein Grund, mit ihrer Familie in eine bestimmte Gegend zu ziehen. Die Menschen identifizieren sich mit der Region, in der sie leben. Sie finden in dieser Region Halt und fühlen sich mit ihrer Heimat verbunden. Wenn sie wissen, dass dort unter anderem auch ein kulturelles Angebot gegeben ist, dann bleiben sie auch dort. Das heißt, die Kultur ist längst nicht mehr ein weicher Standortfaktor, wie das früher vielleicht einmal der Fall gewesen ist.\n\nIch finde, in dem Antrag wird sehr gut herausgearbeitet, dass die Handlungsfelder natürlich neu beackert werden müssen. Es geht dabei auch darum, neue Finanzierungswege, neue Zielgruppen und neue Nutzer zu finden und die kulturelle Bildung in diesem Bereich stärker in den Fokus zu stellen.\n\nDabei müssen alle Altersgruppen berücksichtigt werden. Durch die Jugendarbeit müssen die jungen Leute sehr viel mehr begeistert werden. Sie müssen von Anfang an in die kulturellen Planungen einbezogen werden. Das fängt schon im Kindergarten an und gilt auch für die Schulen. Eines darf man nämlich nie vergessen: Unsere Kinder sind das Kulturpublikum und die Kulturschaffenden von morgen. Deswegen muss man das Interesse und die Begeisterung früh wecken.\n\nNatürlich müssen wir hier auch die Senioren sehr stark in den Blick nehmen. Die Zahl der über 60-Jährigen in den ländlichen Räumen in Deutschland nimmt von 2009 bis 2030 um über 50 Prozent zu. Das bedeutet, dass zum Beispiel auch mobile Bücherbusse für immobile Nutzer wie Senioren unter anderem ein Baustein für ein anderes Kulturangebot in diesem Bereich sind. Es ist schon angesprochen worden, dass das bürgerschaftliche Engagement dabei eine ganz wichtige Stütze ist.\n\nEines müssen wir natürlich auch sehen: Jede Krise hat natürlich auch eine Chance, nämlich die Chance, sich mit dem Thema auseinanderzusetzen - so wie wir jetzt mit diesem Antrag -, um neue, kreative Konzepte zu entwickeln, um über neue kulturelle Angebote - mobile Kinos, Kreativzentren oder vieles andere mehr -, aber auch über neue Finanzierungsmöglichkeiten nachzudenken. Wir wissen, dass wir in diesem Zusammenhang immer wieder auf das Thema Finanzierung zurückkommen und es auch Kooperationen, Partnerschaften - Kirche, Schule, Unternehmen, die dort vor Ort sind - gibt sowie die Förderung des bürgerschaftlichen Engagements; das ist vorhin auch erwähnt worden. Es sind gute Punkte angesprochen worden, wie die Kooperationsmodelle, wie die Kulturpolitikforschung, um Angebote zu schaffen, die die Kulturakteure auch wirklich nutzen. Es geht hier also darum, nicht am Menschen vorbei, sondern mit den Menschen aktiv zu werden, und um Förderprogramme, von denen sie profitieren.\n\nDie Vereinfachung des Antrags- und Vergabesystems für die Kulturförderung ist angesprochen worden. Wir haben gestern im Ausschuss auch die Initiative Kultur- und Kreativwirtschaft der Bundesregierung debattiert. Auch sie muss im ländlichen Raum stärker aktiv werden.\n\nWir haben ein Ziel. Unser Ziel ist es, die Kulturschaffenden, die Initiativen vor Ort bestmöglich zu unterstützen, damit diejenigen, die im ländlichen Raum zu Hause sind, auch zukünftig sagen: Bei uns ist die Kultur zu Hause.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n2713,michael-frieser,\"Herr Präsident! Sehr verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich werde heute eine neue Erfahrung machen. Ich habe mich in diesem Haus als Abgeordneter noch nie bei einer Abstimmung enthalten. Dass ich das tue, wird heute der Fall sein. Das ist also etwas Neues.\n\nWarum ist die Einsetzung dieses Untersuchungsausschusses etwas Besonderes? Weil ein Untersuchungsausschuss eine ganz besondere Einrichtung ist: Diesem parlamentarischen Gremium wachsen Ermittlungsrechte zu, die es normalerweise nicht hat. Schwierig ist die Situation hinsichtlich der Trennung der Gewalten: das Parlament als Legislative auf der einen Seite und die anderen Gewalten in diesem Staate auf der anderen Seite. Untersuchungsausschüsse sind das schärfste Schwert, das die Opposition im Parlamentsbetrieb hat. Wir bitten sehr darum, dass dieses Instrument nicht stumpfgeschlagen wird. Wir sind dabei, wenn es darum geht, mit diesem Ausschuss größtmögliche Effektivität, größtmögliche Aufklärung und größtmögliche Transparenz zu erzielen.\n\nWir haben mit dem Untersuchungsgegenstand bereits viel Zeit im Innenausschuss verbracht. Wir haben bereits sehr viele Erkenntnisse zutage gefördert. Ich hoffe, dass all diese Vorarbeiten im Innenausschuss nicht Makulatur werden, dass wir sie nicht noch einmal leisten müssen. Wir wollen die entsprechenden Unterlagen selbstverständlich beiziehen.\n\nIch bin mir ganz sicher, dass wir, die Mitglieder dieses parlamentarischen Untersuchungsausschusses, in dem Willen geeint sind, wirklich gemeinsam zu handeln und uns vorbehaltlos an die Arbeit zu machen. Wenn allerdings jedes Ausschussmitglied mit einer vorgefassten Meinung in die Arbeit hineingeht, dann wird es schwer sein, dafür zu sorgen, dass dieses Instrument seinen eigentlichen, im Grundgesetz verankerten Sinn erfüllt.\n\nErkenntnisse zu gewinnen, ist der eine Teil der Arbeit eines solchen Untersuchungsausschusses. Der - wichtige - andere Teil ist, den sich aus der Arbeit des Untersuchungsausschusses entwickelnden Änderungsbedarf festzustellen; ich bin allen Kollegen dankbar, die hierzu beitragen. Nachfragen sind gut und sinnvoll; aber sie haben immer nur dann einen Zweck, wenn man mit der Erkenntnis, die man aus diesen Fragen gewinnt, als politisch denkender und handelnder Mensch auch etwas anfangen kann.\n\nDa stellt sich schon die Frage: Wie konnte es sein, dass die zu betrachtenden zeitlichen Abläufe - sie reichen bis hinunter nach Niedersachsen - so lange gedauert haben? Vielleicht können sogar entscheidendere Fragen wie die nach Zuständigkeiten, nach Verfahrensabläufen bis hin zu solchen nach materiellem Recht behandelt werden. Die Kollegen haben es angeführt: Es kann nicht sein, dass in diesem Land Bilder nackter Kinder eine Handelsware sind. Wenn wir aufgrund der derzeitigen Situation gemeinschaftlich zu einer Änderung im materiellen Strafrecht kommen, dann hat dieser Ausschuss seinen Sinn.\n\nGerade was die Bekämpfung der Kinderpornografie angeht, wird sich mit und nach diesem Ausschuss zeigen, ob dieser Staat im Bereich des damit verbundenen strafrechtlichen Verhaltens schlagkräftig ist und am Ende auch wirklich wehrhaft sein kann. Wenn wir dazu beitragen können, dann wird unsere Mitwirkung als sinnvoll erachtet werden können. Herzlichen Dank denjenigen, die das Ganze vorbereitet haben! Ich freue mich schon auf die Zusammenarbeit.\n\nEines will ich noch sagen: Mit uns wird es kein „Grillen“ von Mitarbeitern einer Behörde geben. Es geht um Menschen, die Übermenschliches leisten müssen, um Menschen, die ihr ganzes Arbeitsleben mit einer solchen Materie verbringen und die sich oftmals mit einer sehr großen Masse an Informationen, die sie mittlerweile insbesondere aus dem Ausland erreichen, beschäftigen müssen. Insofern bitte ich um Zurückhaltung, was die Behandlung der Mitarbeiter von Behörden betrifft. Das soll den Aufklärungsbedarf aber sicherlich nicht schmälern.\n\nEs muss nur klar sein - diese Bitte formuliere ich am Ende meiner Rede -, dass man die gewonnenen Erkenntnisse auch wirklich in sein Handeln einfließen lässt und dass man nicht an diesen Erkenntnissen vorbei an Verschwörungstheorien festhält, getreu der Devise: Wo viel Rauch ist, muss irgendwo auch ein Feuer sein, auch wenn der Rauch aus dem etwas heißen Dampf entsteht, den man selber vorher produziert hat. - Ich glaube, dieser Ausschuss kann das wirklich leisten.\n\nAuch wenn dort kein schönes Thema, dessen Ausgangspunkt ein ehemaliger Kollege ist, behandelt wird, freue ich mich auf die Zusammenarbeit. Ich habe Frau Kollegin Högl gesagt, dass ich hoffe, dass sie ihre gelassene, sachlich fundierte Art über die wohl längere Phase, in der dieser Ausschuss arbeiten wird, nicht verliert. Ich hoffe, dass wir ihre Art für eine gedeihliche Zusammenarbeit nutzen können und dass wir am Ende sagen können: Dieses Parlament hat diese besondere und nicht alltägliche Herausforderung angenommen, und wir haben unseren Auftrag wirklich erfüllt.\"\n9465,herbert-behrens,\"Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Herr Minister, Sie haben darauf hingewiesen, dass es jetzt darauf ankommt, dem Breitbandausbau neuen Schub zu verleihen. Wir begrüßen es sehr, wenn Sie sagen: Künftig muss bei Neubaugebieten die digitale Infrastruktur mitgeplant werden. Ebenso soll es bei den bundeseigenen Verkehrswegen sein.\n\nWer wird der Betreiber dieses Netzes sein? Es kann ja nicht sein, dass man sagt: „Ihr müsst bauen“, wenn man gar keinen Vertragspartner hat. Wird die Frage, wer sich dort als Ausbauträger präsentiert, mit in die Planung einbezogen? Das zu erfahren, wäre für mich aus kommunalpolitischer Sicht wichtig.\n\nNun haben wir gerade die Schulen und bestimmte Prioritäten als Thema gehabt. Ich denke, es ist notwendig, dass man in diesem Gesetz Prioritäten setzt und beispielsweise solche Einrichtungen besonders fördert, damit man da vorankommen kann. Hier auf den Tribünen sitzen viele junge Leute; für die treffen wir quasi diese Entscheidung. Von daher bitte noch einmal eine konkrete Aussage zu den Schulen und deren Anbindung an das schnelle Internet!\n\nHerr Minister, nun werden die Stadtwerke in gewisser Weise in die Pflicht genommen, ihre Infrastruktur zu öffnen. Sie machen in dem Gesetz aber keine Vorgaben, was den Preis anbetrifft. Ich kann mir vorstellen, dass dies ein Stück weit zum Pokern vonseiten der Stadtwerke einlädt und nicht zur Beschleunigung des Ausbaus führt, indem gesagt wird: Der eine Betreiber bietet mir so viel, ein anderer Betreiber, den ich möglichweise noch gar nicht kenne, könnte am nächsten Tag ein höheres Angebot vorlegen.\n\nWas war der Grund für Sie, nicht einen entsprechenden Rahmen vorzugeben, in dem sich die Gebühren zu befinden haben, um dieses Verhalten zu verhindern?\n\nEine zweite Frage in diesem Zusammenhang: Was passiert, wenn die Stadtwerke meinen, dass sie die Infrastruktur nicht nur einmal vermarkten können, sondern auch ein zweites Mal? Das kann unter Umständen dazu führen, dass sich die Dinge sozusagen kannibalisieren. Es ist eigentlich nur sinnvoll, eine Infrastruktur zu schaffen. Die Förderung von anderen Geschäftsmodellen ist mit dem Gesetzentwurf wohl nicht gemeint.\"\n11774,michael-leutert,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Minister, es klingt immer so schön, was Sie uns hier vortragen.\n\nAber ich glaube, ich muss hier etwas Wasser in den Wein gießen.\n\nEs beginnt schon beim Volumen der Mittel, die hier zur Verfügung stehen. Sie haben gesagt, wir knacken jetzt die 8-Milliarden-Euro-Grenze. Ich möchte Folgendes aufzeigen: Sie haben selber gesagt, Entwicklungspolitik hat auch etwas mit Außenpolitik zu tun, sie ist sehr eng mit dem Auswärtigen Amt verzahnt. Dann muss man eben die Mittel dieser beiden Ministerien zusammennehmen und sie den Mitteln des Verteidigungsministeriums gegenüberstellen. Da möchte ich Ihnen nur sagen: Im Etat Ihres Ministeriums haben wir dieses Jahr einen Aufwuchs von 580 Millionen Euro. Allerdings sind darin 310 Millionen Euro Mehreinnahmen enthalten, die Sie sowieso bekommen hätten, nämlich Darlehensrückflüsse. Wenn ich diese abziehe, sind es nur noch 270 Millionen Euro frisches Geld. Wenn ich das zusammen mit dem Außenministerium betrachte, dem 200 Millionen Euro weniger zur Verfügung gestellt werden, bleiben nur noch 70 Millionen Euro Aufwuchs übrig. Wenn ich dann noch die globale Minderausgabe gegenrechne, bleibt vom Prinzip her nicht ein einziger Euro übrig, der zusätzlich in den Bereich der wirtschaftlichen Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung gesteckt wird - ganz im Gegenteil.\n\nWissen Sie, was ich nicht verstehe? Wir reden die ganze Zeit über das 0,7-Prozent-Ziel.\n\nSeit Jahren reden wir darüber, dass dieses Ziel erreicht werden muss. Ich habe ja gerade das Verteidigungsministerium angesprochen. Wir sehen an seinem Etat, dass Geld erst einmal durchaus vorhanden ist. In den letzten zwölf Monaten ist beschlossen worden, 3,5 Milliarden Euro mehr in den Verteidigungsbereich fließen zu lassen. Um das 0,7-Prozent-Ziel zu erreichen, bräuchten wir 5 Milliarden Euro mehr. Das heißt, wenn wir die 3,5 Milliarden Euro, die in den Verteidigungsbereich fließen, in diesen Haushalt gesteckt hätten, wären wir beim Erreichen des 0,7-Prozent-Ziels schon ein großes Stück vorangekommen.\n\nDa verstehe ich eines nicht: Ihr Parteikollege Horst Seehofer setzt sich doch immer so vehement für Obergrenzen ein. Er sagt, wir bräuchten Obergrenzen für den Zuzug von Flüchtlingen; es wurde wieder die Zahl von 200 000 in den Raum geworfen. Warum hat sich eigentlich die CSU in den Haushaltsverhandlungen, bei der Entwicklung des Kabinettsentwurfs, nicht ein einziges Mal im zentralen Bereich der Bekämpfung von Fluchtursachen durchgesetzt, damit wir tatsächlich nicht mehr die Situation haben, dass die Menschen aus Not nach Deutschland kommen müssen? Wenn Menschen hierherkommen, dann möchte ich gern, dass sie aus freien Stücken hierherkommen können.\n\nDas wäre doch ein Beitrag zum Thema Obergrenzen gewesen.\n\nNun sage ich nicht - das ist völlig klar -, dass alle Probleme gelöst wären, wenn wir das Geld hätten und das 0,7-Prozent-Ziel erreicht wäre. Aber uns liegt pünktlich zu den Haushaltsberatungen ein Bericht von UNICEF vor - Sie haben ihn auch angesprochen -, aus dem hervorgeht, dass mittlerweile fast 50 Millionen Kinder, davon 28 Millionen aufgrund kriegerischer Auseinandersetzungen, auf der Flucht sind. Ich finde, man hätte diesen Kindern und Jugendlichen, die auf der Flucht sind, mit mehr Geld tatsächlich effektiv helfen können.\n\nEins ist unbestritten - ich glaube, da sind wir uns alle einig -: Fluchtursachenbekämpfung ist das A und O; es ist die wichtigste Aufgabe, vor der wir in den nächsten Jahren stehen werden.\n\nDazu gehört zum einen - es ist angesprochen worden -, Kriege zu beenden oder am besten sogar Kriege zu verhindern; dazu gehört zum anderen natürlich, die Auswirkung des Klimawandels einzudämmen, und auch, Hunger und Armut zu beseitigen. Für all das brauchen wir Geld. Trotz alledem sind Entscheidungen notwendig; auch das hatten Sie angesprochen, Sie hatten mehrere Beispiele genannt.\n\nIch möchte zwei Punkte unterstreichen, für deren Umsetzung wir sofort sorgen könnten. Wir brauchen mehr Entscheidungen gegen Rüstungsexporte.\n\nEs kann nicht sein, dass die Bundesregierung die Entscheidung trifft, Rüstungsgüter in Länder im arabischen Raum zu exportieren, die Kriege im Jemen führen, und wir haben dann mit den Auswirkungen zu kämpfen. Das geht so nicht.\n\nSie haben auch angesprochen: Wir brauchen Entscheidungen für einen gerechteren Welthandel. Sie selber haben gesagt: Wir brauchen keinen freien Welthandel, sondern wir brauchen einen fairen Welthandel. Das ist richtig. Das findet unsere Unterstützung.\n\nIch glaube, dass wir den 50 Millionen Kindern, die auf der Flucht sind, Perspektiven bieten müssen. Wir müssen ihnen Mut machen, dass sie etwas schaffen können. Wir müssen darauf achten, dass sie nicht zu permanenten Flüchtlingen werden, dass sie nicht immer wieder von einem Ort zum anderen flüchten müssen.\n\nWir dürfen Folgendes nicht aus dem Blick verlieren: Letztes Jahr sind über 1 Million Menschen nach Deutschland gekommen, weil sie vor Krieg, Zerstörung und Not geflüchtet sind. Man muss sich einmal überlegen: Was hat das bei uns für gesellschaftliche Debatten ausgelöst? Was hat das für politische Veränderungen nach sich gezogen? Zum Beispiel die letzte Wahl in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern - das als Hinweis. Das heißt doch auch: In den Ländern, in denen Flüchtlinge auch Zuflucht suchen und denen es nicht so gut geht wie uns - bei uns werden die Flüchtlinge medizinisch, sozial, bildungsmäßig und kulturell unterstützt -, zum Beispiel in afrikanischen Ländern, wo die Menschen um ihr Überleben kämpfen müssen, führt das doch auch zu sozialen Spannungen. Diese sozialen Spannungen können wieder Gründe für weitere Konflikte sein. Genau deshalb müssen wir an dieser Stelle eingreifen und mehr dafür tun, dass diese Konflikte in Zukunft verhindert werden.\n\nHerr Minister, einen letzten Punkt möchte ich Ihnen gerne noch mitgeben. Sie hatten das Textilbündnis angesprochen, für das Sie sich sehr stark eingesetzt haben und das Sie auf den Weg gebracht haben. Es geht darum, Wertschöpfungsketten zu kontrollieren, transparent zu machen. Ich sage: Ja, richtig. Aber mein Vorschlag ist, auch darauf zu achten, dass im eigenen Haus die gleichen Maßstäbe angelegt werden.\n\nIch habe einmal nachgefragt, wo die Bundeswehr ihre Bekleidung herstellen lässt. Es gibt eine lange Liste von Ländern, in denen produziert wird, und da sind eben auch Länder wie China, Tunesien, Indien und Indonesien dabei, alles Länder, über die wir hier sprechen. Deshalb meine Bitte: Prüfen Sie bitte mit Ihrer Kollegin aus dem Verteidigungsministerium, unter welchen Bedingungen die Sachen, die die Bundeswehr nutzt, hergestellt werden. Dort könnten wir mit einfachen Maßnahmen Möglichkeiten für Veränderungen schaffen und etwas dazu beitragen, dass Ihr Textilbündnis erfolgreich wird.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9614,klaus-ernst,\"Herr Dr. Uhl, ich mache die Kurzintervention nur sehr ungern, ich hätte mir eher einen direkten Dialog gewünscht. Ich bin kein Militärexperte, aber Abgeordneter, insofern geht es hier auch um meine Rechte. Deshalb möchte ich Ihnen sagen, was mir jetzt eigentlich in der Debatte fehlt.\n\nEs sind im Wesentlichen von der Union zwei Einsatzformen vorgetragen worden. Ich hätte erwartet, dass darauf irgendwie eingegangen würde.\n\nDas Erste war der Drohneneinsatz. Er ist beschrieben worden. Wie ist es nun? Was passiert, wenn derjenige, der offensichtlich eine Kriegshandlung ausführt, nämlich eine Drohne steuert - dabei wissen wir, dass diese Drohnen inzwischen nicht nur aufklären, sondern auch etwas abwerfen bzw. schießen können -, dies nicht über einem Einsatzgebiet tut, sondern über einem friedlichen Gebiet? Dazu ist doch vorher eine ganz konkrete Frage von Herrn Dr. Schmidt gestellt worden: Ist ein solcher Einsatz nun zustimmungspflichtig durch das Parlament oder nicht? Wenn man so ein Gesetz macht, muss man doch eine klare Antwort geben können.\n\nEine zweite Frage wurde aus meiner Sicht ebenfalls vollkommen zu Recht gestellt: Was ist mit den Einsätzen, die jetzt nicht mehr zustimmungspflichtig sein sollen? Der Kern dieses Gesetzes besteht doch darin, dass bestimmte Einsätze nicht mehr zustimmungspflichtig sein sollen. Jetzt ist von Ausbildungseinsätzen, die nicht mehr zustimmungspflichtig sein sollen, die Rede gewesen. Wir wissen, dass die Bundeswehr Ausbildungseinsätze durchführt. Meine konkrete Frage lautet: Welche Einsätze, die gegenwärtig unter dem Titel „Ausbildungseinsätze“ oder unter anderen Titeln laufen - es sind über zehn, wenn ich es richtig im Kopf habe -, sind nicht mehr zustimmungspflichtig?\n\nDas wären meine zwei ganz konkreten Fragen. Ich würde Sie wirklich bitten, darauf einzugehen, damit sich auch der Abgeordnete, der kein Militärexperte ist, ein Bild machen kann, wie es künftig aussehen soll. Werden wir dann noch beteiligt, oder werden wir dann nicht mehr beteiligt?\"\n8792,gesine-lotzsch,\"Vielen Dank. - Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Gäste auf den Tribünen! Die Abgeordneten von Union und SPD haben während der Ausschussberatungen für die Sicherheitsdienste deutlich mehr Mittel und Stellen zur Verfügung gestellt, als diese Dienste selbst beantragt hatten. Das ist eine sehr ungewöhnliche Entscheidung. Leider haben wir so etwas im Bereich Arbeit und Soziales noch nicht erlebt. Ich könnte mir vorstellen, Frau Nahles, dass Sie mir zustimmen, dass wir in diesem Bereich das Geld wesentlich besser und sinnvoller verwenden könnten.\n\nDas wäre auch ein Beitrag zu mehr Sicherheit; denn mehr Sicherheit gibt es nur, wenn unsere Gesellschaft insgesamt sozialer und gerechter wird.\n\nSicherheit hat auch etwas mit Zukunft zu tun. Wenn die Menschen keine Zukunft für sich sehen, dann wenden sie sich von unserer Gesellschaft ab, und das müssen wir verhindern. Darum, glaube ich, haben wir nur mehr Sicherheit, wenn viele Menschen von ihrer eigenen Hände Arbeit leben können. Was macht die Regierung? Sie legt den Menschen Steine in den Weg. So ein Stein ist zum Beispiel das dreimonatige Arbeitsverbot für Flüchtlinge. Ich finde, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der SPD, Sie hätten sich in dieser Frage gegen die Union durchsetzen müssen. Das wäre der richtige Weg gewesen.\n\nAls Begründung, warum die Flüchtlinge nicht sofort arbeiten dürfen, hat die Bundesregierung unserer Fraktion geantwortet:\n\nDer Vorschlag wird abgelehnt, da Asylbewerber in der ersten Zeit des Aufenthalts den zuständigen Behörden ... uneingeschränkt zur Verfügung stehen müssen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, das ist doch völlig weltfremd, wenn man berücksichtigt, wie lange es dauert, einen Termin bei einer Behörde zu bekommen. Da vergehen schon einmal schnell drei Monate.\n\nRichtig ist allerdings: Der Haushalt für Arbeit, Soziales und Rente ist der größter Einzelplan im Bundeshaushalt. Auch das zeigt, wie hoch der soziale Reparaturbedarf in unserer Gesellschaft ist. Die Größe des Etats sagt noch nichts über soziale Gerechtigkeit aus.\n\nIch möchte noch einmal das Beispiel des Arbeitsverbots für Flüchtlinge aufgreifen. Ich sage Ihnen: Wir könnten viel Steuergeld sparen, wenn Flüchtlinge nicht auf staatliche Unterstützung angewiesen wären, weil sie schnell eine Arbeit aufnehmen dürften. Ich sage noch einmal - und ich fordere Sie auf, entsprechend zu entscheiden -: Das Arbeitsverbot muss endlich vom Tisch.\n\nWir Linke sind davon überzeugt: Es gibt genug Arbeit, wenn wir jetzt ein Investitionsprogramm auflegen, finanziert aus der Vermögensteuer. Doch leider denkt die Bundesregierung nicht über den aktuellen Haushalt hinaus. Sie befinden sich geradezu in einem Investitionsstreik, und wir fordern Sie auf, diesen Streik endlich zu beenden.\n\nGerade Sie, Frau Nahles, müssten sich doch deutlich für mehr Investitionen einsetzen, auch wenn sie nicht direkt in Ihrem Etat vorgesehen sind. Öffentliche Investitionen sichern Aufträge für Betriebe und schaffen auch Arbeit für Langzeitarbeitslose und Flüchtlinge. Wir brauchen einen stärkeren öffentlichen Dienst, und wir brauchen endlich auch wieder einen starken öffentlichen Beschäftigungssektor, so wie wir ihn im Land Berlin schon einmal hatten; so etwas brauchen wir auf der Bundesebene.\n\n- Der Flughafenbau, lieber Kollege - um dieses Stichwort einmal aufzugreifen; in Berlin regieren CDU und SPD; daran möchte ich erinnern -,wird nicht vom öffentlichen Beschäftigungssektor erledigt, sondern da hängt die Privatwirtschaft drin. Sie hat da in einem Maße versagt, über das wir alle einmal nachdenken sollten.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, das Jahr 2005 liegt jetzt zehn Jahre hinter uns. Das heißt: zehn Jahre Hartz IV. Das ist wahrlich kein Grund zum Feiern. Es hat sich bewahrheitet, wovor die Linke von Anfang an gewarnt hat: Hartz IV ist Armut per Gesetz. Sie alle wissen - man kann es nicht oft genug sagen -: Hartz IV betrifft die gesamte Gesellschaft. Es betrifft diejenigen, die auf Hartz IV angewiesen sind, und diejenigen, die Angst davor haben, in eine solche Situation zu kommen. Hartz IV drückt erkennbar auf die Löhne und zwingt Menschen in unwürdige Arbeitsverhältnisse. Das wollen und dürfen wir nicht weiter hinnehmen. Hartz IV ist ein schlechtes Gesetz. Es gehört abgeschafft. Wir brauchen eine armutsfeste Mindestsicherung, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nFür die Haushaltsberatungen beantragen wir als ersten Schritt die Erhöhung des Regelsatzes auf 500 Euro.\n\nWir brauchen aber mehr. Wir brauchen eine sanktionsfreie Mindestsicherung, und wir brauchen einen angemessenen Mindestlohn. Sie alle wissen genauso gut wie ich, dass der Mindestlohn von 8,50 Euro zu niedrig ist. Die Einführung des Mindestlohns war ein richtiger Schritt. Nun muss der Mindestlohn noch eine angemessene Höhe haben. 10 Euro wären das Gebot der Stunde, und dafür setzen wir uns ein.\n\nEine freie und offene Gesellschaft, meine Damen und Herren, über die wir in diesen Tagen so häufig sprechen und die wir verteidigen wollen, zeichnet sich dadurch aus, dass die Menschen ihr Leben in Freiheit, Würde und Solidarität gestalten können, und dafür kämpft die Linke.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n1072,norbert-spinrath,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren!\n\nRussland und die EU müssen ab sofort an einem Strang ziehen: zur Verhinderung eines Bürgerkriegs in der Ukraine - im Interesse der demokratischen Kräfte, im Interesse der Menschen in der Ukraine.\n\nDas war der Schlussappell meiner letzten Rede zum Thema Ukraine am 20. Februar, am blutigen Donnerstag in Kiew. Die Außenminister des Weimarer Dreiecks aus Frankreich, Polen und Deutschland haben es durch harte Verhandlungen einen Tag später geschafft, das Blutvergießen in Kiew zu beenden. Ihnen ist berechtigterweise dafür heute viel Anerkennung ausgesprochen worden.\n\nDas von ihnen vermittelte Abkommen vom 21. Februar hingegen wurde in der Ukraine nicht so in die Tat umgesetzt wie vereinbart. Schon am nächsten Tag überschlugen sich durch eine Lawine von Entscheidungen des Parlaments der Ukraine die Ereignisse. An jenem Wochenende war nicht abzusehen, was sich daraus entwickeln würde, und nur drei Wochen später scheint sich dort die Welt vollkommen verändert zu haben. Alle Di-plomatie der letzten Wochen konnte nicht bewirken, die Eskalation der Situation insbesondere auf der Krim zu verhindern.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, vor dem düsteren Hintergrund zweier Weltkriege wurde die Europäische Union geschaffen. Deren wesentliches Fundament und auch deren wesentliches Erfolgsergebnis ist der unerschütterliche Wille der beteiligten Mitgliedstaaten, Konflikte ohne militärische Gewalt zu lösen. Nie wieder soll Krieg in Europa herrschen - diesen Satz haben wir auch in diesem Hause häufig gehört.\n\nUnd dies gelingt - in der EU durch Beachtung der nationalen Eigenheiten und der nationalstaatlichen Souveränität, durch engmaschige Verknüpfungen der gesellschaftlichen Rahmenbedingungen, durch den Willen zur Angleichung der Lebensstandards, durch das Schaffen selbstgewählter Abhängigkeiten und durch das Monitoring der gemeinsamen Politik.\n\nDer Europäischen Union wird nun von interessierter Seite vorgeworfen, dass sie die Lage in der Ukraine falsch eingeschätzt habe, dass sie mit ihrem Drängen auf ein einseitiges Assoziierungsabkommen zur Entwicklung der Situation beigetragen und im Vorgarten Russlands gegrast habe. Jedoch, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Die Welt hat sich in den letzten 25 Jahren, nach dem Zerreißen des Eisernen Vorhangs und dem Ende des Kalten Krieges, verändert. Auch die Europäische Union hat sich entwickelt. Sie hat es verstanden, dem Frieden einen eigenständigen Wert zu geben. Sie hat es verstanden, über einen gemeinsamen Binnenmarkt, durch Freizügigkeit, durch gemeinsame Regelwerke, durch einen Raum der Freiheit, der Sicherheit und des Rechts und durch Regulierungen ein Geflecht von gemeinsamen Interessen zu knüpfen. Dieses Geflecht macht es nahezu unmöglich, mit den früher üblichen kriegerischen Mitteln Tatsachen zu schaffen.\n\nRussland dagegen ist nach Ende des Kalten Krieges noch auf der Suche; es muss seine neue Rolle im Weltgefüge noch definieren und sieht nun sein Projekt der Eurasischen Union durch die Hinwendung der Ukraine zu einer Assoziierung mit der Europäischen Union in Gefahr. Jedoch sage ich mit allem Nachdruck: Wenn sich die Welt verändert hat, dann darf man nicht einfach zu altem Blockdenken zurückkehren. Vielmehr muss man zum Wohle aller Beteiligten bei gemeinsamen Interessen, aber auch zum Wohle der unterschiedlichen nationalen Interessen zusammenarbeiten.\n\nVor dem Hintergrund dieses Gebots ist es nicht hinnehmbar, dass Russland mit falschen Behauptungen Schutzinteressen für einen Teil der Krim-Bevölkerung vorgibt. Es ist nicht hinnehmbar, dass Russland die Krim faktisch besetzt hat. Es ist nicht hinnehmbar, dass Russland als Folge des für Sonntag geplanten Referendums die Annexion der Krim plant. Und es ist nicht hinnehmbar, dass Russland trotz aller Warnungen aus dem Rest der Welt dieses Szenario unverändert umsetzt.\n\nEuropa hat die erste Stufe von Sanktionen in Kraft gesetzt. Weitere werden folgen, wenn Russland nicht auf Absetzung des Referendums hinwirkt. Europa hat diese Konfrontation nicht gewollt. Aber Verletzungen des Völkerrechts sind nie hinnehmbar, gleich, auf welcher Seite sie geschehen. Deshalb müssen wir ihnen Einhalt gebieten, aber ausschließlich mit den Mitteln, die seit fast 70 Jahren Garant für den Frieden in Europa sind, nämlich mit den Mitteln der Demokratie. Es stimmt, was Frau Merkel heute Morgen sagte: Militärisches Vorgehen darf keine Option sein.\n\nRussland muss seine eigene Isolation verhindern, muss auf die Gesprächsebene zurückkehren, muss sich einer realpolitischen Diskussion stellen und auf das Angebot der EU zur Zusammenarbeit eingehen. Ziel muss es sein, eine politische Kultur der Kompromisse zu entwickeln, die dann auch in der Ukraine die Grundlage für einen Dialog schafft, der es ermöglicht, das Abkommen vom 21. Februar umzusetzen, das unter anderem rasche Neuwahlen vorsieht, damit es zu einer Übergangsregierung der nationalen Einheit kommen kann.\n\nLieber, werter Kollege Gysi, ich will Ihnen in Bezug auf die Vertreter der Swoboda-Partei durchaus recht geben; sie haben auch nach meinem Empfinden in der Regierung nichts zu suchen. Aber auch deshalb will ich schnelle Parlamentsneuwahlen in der Ukraine: damit die Menschen, die den Protest auf dem Maidan so vorbildlich friedlich begonnen haben, die Chance der Korrektur nutzen können. Ich frage Sie und Ihre Fraktion dann aber auch, wie man mit dieser Situation die völkerrechtswidrige Annexion der Krim durch Russland rechtfertigen kann. Ihre oft kruden Diskussionen der letzten Wochen, Ihre Reminiszenzen an altes Blockdenken und Ihre Nibelungentreue zu alten Freunden machen es mir und vielen in diesem Haus oftmals hinreichend schwer, Sie ernst zu nehmen.\n\nIn den Dialog in der Ukraine müssen alle Bevölkerungsgruppen einbezogen werden, auch die russischstämmigen. Es bedarf dringend der Bildung einer internationalen Kontaktgruppe. Dabei kann und muss Deutschland eine wichtige Rolle als aktiver Vermittler spielen.\n\nGerne. Ich komme zum Ende. - Ich sage aber auch: Es bedarf des sofortigen Handelns durch Russland, nämlich zu bewirken, dass das Referendum auf der Krim abgesagt wird.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, mit dem Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit formuliere ich vier Tage vor diesem Referendum: Wenn es gelingt, eine Zusammenarbeit aller Beteiligten nicht gegen, sondern mit Russland zu organisieren, dann kann es auch gelingen, den wichtigsten Grundwert der modernen Demokratie im 21. Jahrhundert zu bewirken und dauerhaft zu sichern - den Frieden.\"\n2501,bettina-hagedorn,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Ich möchte meine Rede mit einem Zitat beginnen:\n\nWesentliches Markenzeichen der Großen Koalition ist die solide Haushalts- und Finanzpolitik, die mit weniger Schulden auskommt und gleichzeitig mehr Investitionen in entscheidende Zukunftsfelder unserer Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft vornimmt.\n\nIch finde, das ist eine prima Überschrift für diese Haushaltswoche. Die Tatsache, dass dieses Zitat aus einer Rede des Finanzministers der letzten Großen Koalition, Peer Steinbrück, vom 16. September 2008 stammt, macht deutlich, dass wir sowohl in der letzten als auch in der jetzigen Großen Koalition einen langen roten Faden und damit eine gemeinsame Tradition insbesondere in der Finanz- und Haushaltspolitik haben, die gut für Deutschland ist.\n\nLiebe Kollegin Hasselfeldt, ich will ganz gewiss nicht den Anschein eines künstlichen Konflikts erzeugen. Aber Sie haben gerade in Ihrer Rede mit Blick auf die Einhaltung der Stabilitätskriterien in Europa ständig vom Stabilitätspakt gesprochen. Es ist wichtig, darauf hinzuweisen, dass er sich Stabilitäts- und Wachstums-pakt nennt. Das haben wir - das ist keine Kleinigkeit - auch schon in der letzten Großen Koalition gemeinsam so verstanden. Sie haben eben auch darauf hingewiesen, es sei wichtig, mit dem Geld auszukommen, das man hat. Ich glaube, dem stimmen alle im Haus zunächst einmal zu. Aber die letzte Große Koalition hat bewiesen, dass es davon Ausnahmen geben kann. Diese hängen mit dem zusammen, was sich unter dem Begriff „Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakt“ subsumieren lässt. Als die durch den Zusammenbruch von Lehman Brothers hervorgerufene Krise begann, standen wir unmittelbar vor einem strukturell ausgeglichenen Haushalt; das war schon damals unser gemeinsames Ziel. Aber wir haben damals sehr bewusst und richtigerweise das Erreichen dieses Ziels hintangestellt, um Konjunkturpakete auf den Weg zu bringen und Wachstumsimpulse, die Deutschland damals gebraucht hat, überhaupt erst zu ermöglichen. Wir haben beispielsweise mit dem Kurzarbeitergeld Menschen in Lohn und Brot gehalten. Nur dadurch war es möglich, dass die Wirtschaft später schnell wieder anspringen konnte - und zwar als erste in ganz Europa - und dass Deutschland, wie es die Kanzlerin heute Morgen ausgedrückt hat, zur Wachstumslokomotive wurde. Und darum: Sparen ist kein Selbstzweck. Stabilität ist gut und richtig. Aber Wachstum gehört dazu. Es ist schön, dass wir uns an dieser Stelle einig sind.\n\nWir sind uns auch über die Schwerpunkte des Haushalts einig; das haben die Haushaltsberatungen erneut bewiesen. Wir haben schon in der letzten Großen Koalition enorme gemeinsame Anstrengungen im Bildungsbereich unternommen und nicht nur wegen der -Lissabon-Strategie in Europa erkannt, dass die Bildungsinvestitionen erhöht werden müssen; denn nur wenn wir in die Köpfe der jungen Menschen mehr investieren, als es traditionell in den letzten Jahrzehnten der Fall war, geht uns die wichtigste Ressource, die Jugend, nicht verloren. Wir brauchen sie, um die wirtschaftliche Stabilität in unserem Land auch in Zukunft zu erhalten. Das setzen wir in dieser Großen Koalition fort.\n\nEs ist schon ein bisschen befremdlich, dass Sie, Herr Gysi, als Oppositionsredner sich ausgerechnet die Bildung vorgenommen haben, um die Große Koalition zu kritisieren. Es ist auch nicht wahr, was Sie gesagt haben, nämlich dass 500 Millionen Euro gekürzt worden seien.\n\nMachen Sie sich einmal bei der Haushaltsausschussvorsitzenden Frau Lötzsch schlau. Die Wahrheit ist: Das Geld, das 2014 nicht mehr ausgegeben werden kann, weil die Vereinbarungen so sind, wie sie sind,\n\nwerden wir in den Folgejahren zur Verfügung stellen.\n\nFakt ist aber, dass wir mit diesem Haushalt Investitionen in Höhe von 9 Milliarden Euro - darauf ist vielfach hingewiesen worden - in Bildung tätigen. Das tun wir in erster Linie und maßgeblich über die Länder, aber auch über die Kommunen; denn wir sind gemeinsam von dem Gedanken getragen, dass Bildung nicht nur Hochschulbildung ist, sondern dass Bildung gerade und in erster Linie in den Schulen, in den Kitas und in den Krippen durch mehr Lehrer und Erzieher qualitativ verbessert werden muss. Dazu gehört eine verbesserte Ausbildung, damit die hohen Schulabbrecherquoten, die wir in Deutschland immer noch haben - die PISA-Ergebnisse will ich nur am Rande erwähnen -, gesenkt werden. Diese sind nicht nur eine Schande für unser Land und ganz furchtbar für junge Menschen, über die wir reden, sondern es ist auch volkswirtschaftlich ein Wahnsinn, wenn wir nicht gegensteuern. Aber wir steuern dagegen. Dafür ist dieser Haushalt ein wichtiges Beispiel.\n\nIch möchte gerne ein paar Dinge aufgreifen, die in den Haushaltsberatungen der letzten zwei Monate geglückt sind. Auch ich möchte mich, wie es schon andere vor mir getan haben, bei meinen Kolleginnen und Kollegen der CDU/CSU im Haushaltsausschuss dafür bedanken, dass wir unsere Feuerprobe in dieser Legislatur bestanden haben. Für viele war es gar keine Feuerprobe, weil wir schon eine andere Große Koalition erfolgreich hinter uns gebracht haben. Ich will darauf hinweisen, was der Haushaltsausschuss eigentlich gegenüber der ersten Lesung, die hier im April stattgefunden hat, verändert hat.\n\nMir ist besonders wichtig - das Thema hatten wir eben schon -, dass wir unter anderem 10 Millionen Euro mehr für die syrischen Flüchtlinge und 40 Millionen Euro mehr für Integrationskurse in diesem Land zur Verfügung gestellt haben. Ich möchte diesen Hinweis aber damit verbinden - Herr de Maizière ist jetzt nicht da -, dass wir als Haushaltsausschuss auch die Erwartung hegen, dass wir diese Nachbesserung im zweistelligen Millionenumfang bei den Integrationskursen nicht in jedem Haushaltsjahr wieder machen müssen; wir erwarten vielmehr von unserer Bundesregierung, dass sie die Integrationskurse von Anfang an in dem Umfang ausfinanziert, wie es erforderlich ist. Wir sind jetzt bei 245 Millionen Euro, und das ist das Mindeste, was wir an dieser Stelle tun müssen.\n\nIch möchte das Technische Hilfswerk erwähnen. Wir unterstützen das Technische Hilfswerk mit 10 Millionen Euro mehr. Ich bin sehr froh, dass das gelungen ist. Auch mit Blick auf die Debatte heute will ich nicht unerwähnt lassen, dass das Technische Hilfswerk unter anderem in Jordanien in den Flüchtlingslagern für die Bereitstellung von Wasser sorgt. Wir alle wissen, was das für die Gesunderhaltung der Flüchtlinge dort bedeutet und vor welchen dramatischen Herausforderungen ein Land wie Jordanien - die Kanzlerin hat darauf hingewiesen - steht. Das deutsche Technische Hilfswerk trägt zuverlässig zur Gesunderhaltung der Menschen bei. Dafür unser herzlicher Dank.\n\nDas Technische Hilfswerk hat eine besondere Struktur mit über 80 000 ehrenamtlichen Mitarbeitern, die dort tätig sind. Nur ungefähr 800 hauptamtliche Mitarbeiter halten diese Organisation aufrecht. Wenn wir an die Flut vor einem Jahr in Deutschland denken, so stellen wir fest, dass es das Technische Hilfswerk war, das gemeinsam mit anderen herausragende Arbeit geleistet hat.\n\nWir wollen das Technische Hilfswerk auf der Ebene der Ortsvereine maßgeblich stärken. Auf dieser Ebene wird nämlich hervorragende Jugendarbeit geleistet und wird immer wieder Nachwuchs für das THW rekrutiert. Wir investieren in die dortige Aus- und Fortbildung und mit 7 Millionen Euro in die Verbesserung seines Fuhrparks. Das ist eine gute Sache. Vielen Dank allen, die dafür gesorgt haben, dass uns das gemeinsam geglückt ist.\n\nWir erhöhen die Mittel für die Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung um 10 Millionen Euro. 3,5 Millionen Euro davon fließen an eine sehr bunte Trägerschaft von Angeboten in ganz Deutschland, die mit der Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung kooperiert. Politische Bildung in unseren Bundesländern ist nach unserer festen Überzeugung ein wichtiger Baustein dafür, dass Menschen Angebote in ihrer Region wahrnehmen können, die letztendlich zu mehr Verständnis und mehr Wertschätzung gegenüber unserer Demokratie beitragen. Es handelt sich also um ein wertvolles Instrument im Kampf gegen rechts und dessen Nährboden. Die entsprechenden Angebote werden von jungen Menschen in einem ganz großen Umfang wahrgenommen - Gott sei Dank.\n\nNeben dem Bundesfreiwilligendienst stärken wir den Heimkinderfonds Ost mit insgesamt 35 Millionen Euro. Für die Finanzierung der HIV-Stiftung stellen wir 10 Millionen Euro bereit. Die Zuschüsse für den Asse-Fonds sind verdoppelt worden. In den nächsten Jahren werden sie sogar verdreifacht; später werden sie dann verstetigt. Mit der Bereitstellung von 85 Millionen Euro stärken wir den Rückbau von Forschungsreaktoren in Deutschland. Das alles sind wichtige Aufgaben. Ich denke, es ist besonders wichtig, zu erwähnen, dass wir das alles machen und am Ende eine Neuverschuldung von trotzdem nur 6,5 Milliarden Euro vornehmen. Das ist schon eine Leistung.\n\nIch möchte an dieser Stelle darauf hinweisen, dass mein Kollege André Berghegger von der Union seine Rede gestern mit einer Fußballerweisheit beendet hat, als er sagte, dass das nächste Spiel immer das schwerste ist.\n\nDas nächste Spiel für uns Deutsche findet ja morgen gegen die USA statt. Aber für uns Haushälter ist das nächste Spiel - um im Bild zu bleiben - die Aufstellung des Haushalts für das Jahr 2015. Dafür haben wir uns eine Menge vorgenommen, vor allen Dingen natürlich, die Nettoneuverschuldung auf null zu senken.\n\nWir wissen natürlich auch, dass die Herausforderungen 2015 enorm sein werden. Wenn der Bund die Einnahmen aus der Brennelementesteuer zurückzahlen muss, sind womöglich Steuerausfälle im Umfang von mindestens 3 Milliarden Euro gegenzufinanzieren. Deutschland profitiert seit Jahren von historisch unglaublich niedrigen Zinsen. Das niedrige Zinsniveau hat unseren Bundeshaushalt in den letzten Jahren um zweistellige Milliardenbeträge entlastet. Das heißt, wir haben gespart, ohne uns dafür wirklich anstrengen zu müssen. Das wird möglicherweise nicht so bleiben. Wir können also durchaus irgendwann in Schwierigkeiten kommen. Risiken dieser Art schweben über uns. Aber nachdem wir diesen Haushalt so gut und kollegial miteinander aufgestellt haben, bin ich von Zuversicht getragen, dass wir das auch in den nächsten drei Jahren schaffen werden.\n\nDabei wollen wir den Pfad der verstärkten Investitionen in die Bereiche Bildung und Infrastruktur weitergehen. Für diese Bereiche soll also mehr Geld zur Verfügung gestellt werden, und zwar seriös finanziert.\n\nIch freue mich, dass wir die Beratungen über den Haushalt 2014 erfolgreich abgeschlossen haben. Aber schon mit dem Kabinettsbeschluss nächste Woche starten wir in die Beratungen über den Haushalt 2015.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n13636,klaus-ernst,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Erst einmal die besten Wünsche an die neue Wirtschaftsministerin, Frau Zypries. Alles Gute für Ihr neues Amt!\n\nWir haben heute CETA erneut auf der Tagesordnung, weil dies die letzte Gelegenheit für eine Aussprache vor der Abstimmung über CETA im Europaparlament ist. Sie wollen, dass die Anwendung in Kraft tritt, bevor die Nationalstaaten entschieden haben. Das wollen wir mit unserem Antrag verhindern.\n\nUnsere inhaltlichen Vorbehalte gegen CETA - übrigens auch die Vorbehalte vieler Sozialdemokraten, vieler Kommunalpolitiker der Union, vieler Verbände, Gewerkschaften und weiter Teile der Öffentlichkeit - sind bisher keinesfalls ausgeräumt worden. Im Gegenteil: Sie kritisieren wie wir - ich sage es noch einmal: auch sehr viele Sozialdemokraten -, dass mit CETA Konzernsonderklagerechte zementiert werden, anstatt sie zwischen entwickelten Rechtsstaaten abzuschaffen, dass die Begriffe „faire und gerechte Behandlung“ und „indirekte Enteignung“ weiter im Vertrag stehen - obwohl den Sozialdemokraten etwas anderes versprochen wurde -, dass es eben keinen Sanktionsmechanismus bei Verstößen gegen Arbeits-, Sozial- und Umweltstandards gibt und dass die öffentliche Daseinsvorsorge nicht umfassend ausgenommen wurde. Sie kritisieren auch, wie es in einer Studie von Nettesheim heißt, dass - ich zitiere jetzt - „das ‚right to regulate’ … nur innerhalb der Liberalisierungsstrukturen von CETA wahrgenommen werden“ kann. Deshalb kann der Staat nicht mehr frei Regeln im Sinne des Allgemeinwohls setzen.\n\nDie sozialdemokratische Regierung der Wallonie, die tapfer Widerstand leistete, wurde - das wissen Sie alle - massiv unter Druck gesetzt und von einem Mitglied der EU-Kommission als „Kommunisten“ diffamiert. Nur mit List und Tücke wurde der Widerstand auch der SPD-Mitglieder ausgebremst.\n\nDen Widerstand gegen CETA dadurch brechen zu wollen - jetzt wird es wirklich geschmacklos -, dass man CETA-Gegner und damit auch Teile der eigenen Partei mit Trump in einen Topf wirft, wie es gestern hier geschehen ist, das ist eine ganz üble Entgleisung und bedarf eigentlich einer Entschuldigung.\n\nSie diffamieren Teile Ihrer eigenen Partei gleich mit, wenn Sie das durchgehen lassen. Ich weiß nicht, wie Sie das gegenüber denen rechtfertigen wollen, die im Europaparlament und in dessen Ausschüssen gegen CETA gestimmt haben. Sind die auch für Trump, oder wie? So einen Unfug wie die Äußerungen vom Genossen Heil gestern habe ich selten in diesem Parlament gehört.\n\nDiese Rhetorik vergiftet die politische Debatte. Ihr einziger Sinn besteht darin, den politischen Gegner zu diffamieren und sich damit der inhaltlichen Argumentation zu entziehen. Das ist nicht in Ordnung.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Positionierung der Zivilgesellschaft, von Mitgliedern Ihrer Partei und vieler politischen Akteure ist kein Protektionismus à la Trump. Selbstverständlich sind wir für Handel, und selbstverständlich sind wir für fairen Handel; aber der sogenannte Freihandel im Rahmen von CETA ist eben kein fairer Handel. Wodurch zeichnet sich denn fairer Handel aus? Fairer Handel zeichnet sich dadurch aus, dass Regeln geschaffen werden, dass sich in der globalen Konkurrenz eben nicht der Billigste durchsetzt, sondern der mit hohen Sozial- und Umweltstandards.\n\nFairer Handel zeichnet sich dadurch aus, dass regionale Wirtschaftsstrukturen berücksichtigt werden, erhalten bleiben und nicht dem Profitstreben international tätiger Großunternehmen geopfert werden.\n\nFairer Handel zeichnet sich dadurch aus, dass alle Regionen der Welt eine reale Chance für ihre wirtschaftliche Entwicklung haben und eben nicht dazu gezwungen werden, ihre Märkte zu öffnen und ihre eigenen Wirtschaftsstrukturen damit zu zerstören.\n\nIch weiß, Sie wissen das alles, und Sie wissen auch, dass CETA diesen Anforderungen nicht gerecht wird. Auch die Grundwertekommission der SPD findet - ich zitiere -, dass „eine Aussetzung des vorläufigen Inkrafttretens sachlich betrachtet erforderlich und ein Akt politischer Klugheit“ wäre. Es ist ganz und gar absurd, ein Abkommen in Teilen in Kraft zu setzen, solange, erstens, die Verfassungsmäßigkeit noch nicht endgültig geklärt ist, solange, zweitens, erhebliche Zweifel an der Vereinbarkeit mit den Verträgen der EU bestehen und solange, drittens, überhaupt nicht klar ist, wie man diese vorläufige Anwendung wieder beenden kann - und das ist nicht klar.\n\nNach Ansicht der EU-Kommission und des Juristischen Dienstes des Europäischen Parlaments kann die vorläufige Anwendung nur durch Ratsbeschluss beendet werden. Der frühere Bundeswirtschaftsminister behauptete, dass ein EU-Mitglied die vorläufige Anwendung einseitig beenden kann. Wer hat nun recht?\n\n- Aha. Es entscheidet aber nicht über das, was in der EU passiert.\n\nDer frühere Bundeswirtschaftsminister hat etwas anderes behauptet, als die EU letztlich gesagt hat.\n\nIch weiß ja, wie es ausgeht: Sie werden den Antrag ablehnen. Aber ich sage Ihnen: Der Widerstand gegen CETA wird weitergehen. Keinesfalls ist die Ratifizierung in allen Mitgliedstaaten sicher. Selbst im Bundesrat ist eine Mehrheit für CETA offen. Deshalb sage ich Ihnen - das richtet sich an die Sozialdemokraten -: Hören Sie einmal auf Ihre Grundwertekommission! Sie ist sehr klug. Sie sagt: CETA so lange nicht endgültig in Kraft setzen, solange die offenen Fragen nicht geklärt sind. - Es wäre schön, wenn sich die sozialdemokratische Fraktion auf das beziehen würde, was auch in ihrer Partei diskutiert wird.\n\nIch danke für die Aufmerksamkeit.\n\nKollegin Dröge, das liegt daran, dass sich die anderen nicht trauen.\n\nIch habe folgende Frage: Sie haben von neuen Aspekten gesprochen. Wir haben den Fakt: Donald Trump schottet sein Land ab. Das heißt, der Handel der Europäer mit den Amerikanern wird eher schwieriger werden. Gleichzeitig können die Amerikaner, die Dependancen in Kanada haben, den Vorteil des CETA-Abkommens nutzen. Durch die Abschottung der Amerikaner können die Europäer nicht gegenüber den Amerikanern die Vorteile, die immer erwähnt werden, nutzen. Stimmen Sie aus Ihrer Sicht zu, dass auch das allein schon ein Grund wäre, dass man die vorläufige Anwendung des Abkommens nicht macht und abwartet, was passiert?\n\nHerr Kollege Dr. Hirte, Sie haben gesagt, wir hätten ein Demokratiedefizit. Glauben Sie nicht, dass es deshalb ein Demokratiedefizit gibt und die Zustimmung der Bürgerinnen und Bürger fehlt, weil man von Anfang an versucht hat, solche Abkommen hinter dem Rücken der Menschen zu verabschieden?\n\nGlauben Sie nicht, dass das Demokratiedefizit auch mit dem Eindruck zu tun hat, dass verhindert werden sollte, dass nationale Parlamente und die Bürger Europas überhaupt mitreden? Besteht das Demokratiedefizit darin, dass die von den Bürgern Europas gestartete Bürgerinitiative nicht angenommen wurde?\n\nDas alles sind Demokratiedefizite!\n\nIst ein Demokratiedefizit vielleicht auch dadurch entstanden, dass es fast ausschließlich die Opposition war, die dieses Thema hier im Bundestag angesprochen hat, und dass man den Eindruck hatte, dass Sie sich jeweils darüber aufregen, dass sie das tut, weil Sie die Debatte gar nicht wollten? Könnte das vielleicht die Ursache eines Demokratiedefizits sein?\n\n- Herr Dr. Hirte, ich bin noch nicht fertig.\n\nSie haben erzählt, dass wir vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht gescheitert sind. Herr Dr. Hirte, ja, wir haben das nicht so hingekriegt, wie wir es wollten, aber die Bundesregierung hat Auflagen bekommen.\n\nDie erste Auflage - ich war dabei -, die erteilt worden ist, war, dass all die Bereiche von der vorläufigen Anwendung ausgenommen werden müssen, die nicht „EU only“ sind. Das haben Sie überhaupt nicht gemacht.\n\nDie zweite Auflage, die erteilt wurde, war, dass geklärt wird - jetzt sind wir bei dem Punkt, den Sie angesprochen haben -, dass die Bundesrepublik durch eigene Entscheidung aussteigen kann. Es ist gut und schön, dass die Verfassungsrichter auf der Grundlage des nationalen Rechts, also der Verfassung, urteilen; das ist ihr Job. Aber die Europäer sehen dies ganz anders. Sie sagen: Es gibt europäische Verträge, in denen der Ausstieg bei solchen Fragen wie etwa die vorläufige Anwendung geklärt wird.\n\nDa sagen Sie: Das interessiert uns alles nicht. - In diesem Fall brauchen wir solche Verträge nicht zu schließen; denn Verträge müssen eingehalten werden. Sie werden sehen: Da werden wir noch ein Problem bekommen.\n\nDie dritte Auflage war, sicherzustellen - so die Verfassungsrichter -, dass die Entscheidungen der Ausschüsse auf EU-Ebene eine demokratische Rückkopplung an die nationalen Parlamente und an die demokratische Ebene haben. Offensichtlich sahen auch die Verfassungsrichter die Konstruktion so, dass das nicht gegeben ist. Das muss geklärt werden. Ich sage Ihnen: All das ist nicht geklärt.\n\nWarten Sie einmal ab, was in der endgültigen Entscheidung der Verfassungsrichter als Ergebnis herauskommt. Warten Sie vor allen Dingen ab, was auf EU-Ebene herauskommt. Warten Sie ab, ob alle Staaten ratifizieren.\"\n7098,karl-heinz-brunner,\"Verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Verehrte Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer! Kollege Hoffmann, Sie haben bemängelt, dass die bisherigen Diskussionen und Debatten zum Thema „Ehe für alle“, zur Frage der Diskriminierung und der Gleichberechtigung in diesem Land zu emotional sind. Ich sage: Sie sind Gott sei Dank emotional, weil die Menschen frühmorgens mit Emotionen erwachen und abends mit -Emotionen zu Bett gehen. Das macht uns Menschen aus. Das unterscheidet uns von allen anderen Lebewesen. Wir haben Emotionen und dürfen diese Emotionen auch darstellen.\n\nVerehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, meine Damen und Herren, gestern Nachmittag haben wir in einem sehr würdigen Rahmen eine Debatte zum 17. Juni 1953 gehabt. Wir haben in der Debatte gehört, dass die Menschen für bessere Lebensbedingungen auf die Straße gegangen sind. Sie sind für die Freiheit auf die Straße gegangen. Sie sind dafür auf die Straße gegangen, frei zu leben, ohne Zwang zu leben und ohne Repressalien. Das war gut so, und wir haben gestern dafür gedankt. Aber dazu gehört auch ein Leben ohne Diskriminierung; denn das sind auch Repressalien. Deshalb könnte man, wenn man es nicht schwarz auf weiß lesen würde, kaum glauben, dass noch heute, im Jahr 2015, im Bundeszentral-register der Straftaten über 3 000 Datensätze mit dem Eintrag „§ 175 StGB“ enthalten sind. Damit werden alte, anständige Männer dieses Landes weiterhin stigmatisiert, diskriminiert und nach vielen Jahren noch immer verhöhnt. Sie können nicht versöhnt mit ihrem Land sterben, für das sie so viel getan haben,\n\nund das nur deshalb, weil sie zu ihrer Liebe standen.\n\nIch bin sehr froh, Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dass nach den Entscheidungen der Völker und der Parlamente in Irland und Slowenien Bewegung auch in die Union gekommen ist. Das ist schön. Ich wünsche Ihnen, Frau Sütterlin-Waack, liebe Sabine, und Ihren Mitstreitern viel Glück in der Union,\n\ndass wir recht schnell und recht bald eine vernünftige und gute Entscheidung in diesem Land bekommen. Wir wollen ohne Krawall, vielmehr versöhnend das tun, was notwendig ist. Wir wollen das Verständnis von Ehe, nein, das Zusammenstehen von Menschen gleich welchen Geschlechts, gleich welcher Orientierung endlich so regeln, dass es keine Diskriminierung, keine Repressalien gibt. Deshalb ist es gut, und ich sage Danke, dass die Grünen einen Gesetzentwurf und die Linken den -Antrag, dem Beschluss des Bundesrates zu folgen, eingebracht haben; denn die Zeit läuft, nicht nur für die -alten Männer, von denen ich gesprochen habe - eine Legislatur ist nicht unendlich. Die Menschen erwarten Lösungen. Mit Verlaub, die zuvor Genannten leben auch nicht ewig.\n\nWarum spreche ich gerade über dieses Thema?\n\nErstens. Weil durch die vergangenen Reden mein Standpunkt zur Ehe für alle bekannt ist. Man kann sich wiederholen und es noch einmal sagen. Ich glaube, es ändert am Inhalt nichts. Man weiß es.\n\nZweitens. Weil ich Diskriminierung und Intoleranz furchtbar finde und sie immer noch erfolgt: offen, versteckt und subtil. Aufgrund mancher Bemerkung bezüglich Gleichbehandlung - oder Gleichem im Ungleichen, wie ich es bei meinem Vorredner gehört habe - könnte man dies fast meinen.\n\nDrittens. Weil ich weiß, dass es noch immer einige andere Baustellen gibt. Zum einen wurden die nach § 175 StGB zu Unrecht verurteilten Männer kriminalisiert, weil eine menschenverachtende Ideologie der Nazis ihre Liebe unter Strafe stellte, und zum anderen machte das nicht minder - das müssen wir auch eingestehen - miefige, intolerante, spießige Nachkriegsdeutschland munter mit der Hatz weiter. Da müssen wir aufräumen.\n\nDie Ironie der Geschichte - deshalb ist der 17. Juni passend - ist: Nicht freiwillig, nicht aus Einsicht, wurde § 175 StGB aufgehoben. Nein, ohne Wiedervereinigung und Angleichung der Rechtsvorschriften des Unrechts-regimes der DDR gäbe es den § 175 StGB womöglich heute noch; er ist erst aufgrund des Einigungsvertrages 1994 aufgehoben worden.\n\nDeshalb appelliere ich an Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Räumen wir bei uns endlich ganz auf! Geben wir den Verurteilten ihre Würde zurück! Schaffen wir in unserem Land einen Aktionsplan gegen Homophobie! Es gab viele Gipfel, vielleicht kann Frau Merkel einen Gipfel gegen die Diskriminierung von Schwulen, Lesben, Bi- und Transsexuellen und allen anderen einberufen.\n\nEr sollte dann aber auch Ergebnisse bringen. Beenden wir endlich die Ungleichbehandlung von Lebenspartnerschaften und Ehen! Und nicht zuletzt: Bauen wir die Diskriminierung in unserem Land ab, so wie wir es im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart haben! Liebe Union, machen wir es miteinander, machen wir es gemeinsam!\n\nBei der Regierungserklärung zum Europäischen Rat hat die Kanzlerin zu Großbritannien und Griechenland erklärt, was ich nur unterstreichen kann: Man kann über alles reden. Das Prinzip der Nichtdiskriminierung jedoch darf nicht zur Diskussion stehen. - Recht haben Sie, Frau Merkel. Dieses Prinzip gilt,\n\nund zwar nicht nur für Dienstleistungen, nicht nur für den Waren- und Reiseverkehr, sondern auch für die Menschen Europas, für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger.\n\nGeben Sie Ihr Bauchgefühl auf. Machen Sie den Weg frei für Ehe und Familie, und zwar für alle.\n\nVielen herzlichen Dank.\"\n12839,antje-lezius,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Als letzte Rednerin muss man ein bisschen zusammenfassen, aber gerne möchte ich auch ein paar Akzente setzen.\n\nMit dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf zum Bundeshaushalt 2017 ist zunächst eine überaus gute Nachricht verbunden: Zum dritten Mal in Folge legen wir einen Haushalt ohne neue Schulden vor. Gleichzeitig tätigen wir wichtige Investitionen: in die Sicherheit, in die Integration, in den Arbeitsmarkt, in Bildung und in Infrastruktur. Der Haushalt hat die Zukunft unseres Landes im Blick. Unser Staat bleibt bei allen Herausforderungen handlungsfähig. Der aktuelle Haushalt stellt erneut unter Beweis, dass eine aktiv gestaltende Politik und Haushaltskonsolidierung sehr wohl Hand in Hand gehen können.\n\nIn meinem Wahlkreis in Rheinland-Pfalz gibt es zahlreiche strukturschwache Kommunen. Deswegen ist es mir wichtig, dass diese im Bundeshaushalt auch bedacht werden. Auch in diesem Haushalt dient fast jeder fünfte Euro der Entlastung von Ländern und Kommunen. Trotzdem wird bis 2020 die schwarze Null fortgeführt. Das ist nicht selbstverständlich, meine Damen und Herren, das ist das Resultat der unionsgeführten soliden Haushaltpolitik, die mit Augenmaß und Verantwortungsbewusstsein handelt. An dieser Stelle möchte ich Herrn Bundesminister Schäuble und den Kollegen im Haushaltsausschuss für ihre hervorragende Arbeit herzlich danken.\n\nEin wesentlicher Aspekt in Haushaltsberatungen ist die Frage der Gerechtigkeit. Was gerecht ist, darüber wird intensiv debattiert. Besonders die Linke dieses Hauses verweist häufig auf die Gerechtigkeitsfrage als Argumentationsmuster. Aber Gerechtigkeit ist beileibe kein linker Gesinnungsbegriff. Gerechtigkeit ist auch Leitbild für christdemokratische Politik. Wir als CDU lassen uns diesen Begriff nicht von den Linken wegnehmen.\n\nWir haben die Belastungen im Blick, und wir gehen damit verantwortungsbewusst um.\n\nIm Bereich Arbeit und Soziales treibt uns besonders die Frage der Generationengerechtigkeit an. Der demografische Wandel ist eine Tatsache: Die Bevölkerungspyramide wird auf den Kopf gestellt. So kommen im Jahr 2050 nur noch zwei Personen im erwerbsfähigen Alter auf einen Rentner. Generationengerechtigkeit ist das Gebot aus dieser Entwicklung.\n\nArbeit und Soziales weist den höchsten Einzeletat auf. Hier lässt sich bereits heute der demografische Wandel ablesen: Für das Jahr 2017 sieht der Bundeshaushalt 91,2 Milliarden Euro für Rentenzahlungen vor. Das ist eine stattliche Summe. So wichtig und selbstverständlich soziale Sicherung ist: Wir müssen sie aber auch zukunftsfähig halten. Im Zeichen der Generationengerechtigkeit müssen wir diejenigen achten, die die Renten erwirtschaften. Weder die aktuelle noch die zukünftigen Generationen der Beitragszahler dürfen wir über Gebühr belasten. Das sind wir unseren Kindern und Enkeln schuldig.\n\nAuch die andere Seite müssen wir im Blick behalten: die Unternehmen. Sie erwirtschaften diese Beträge gemeinsam mit ihren Beschäftigten. 59 Prozent aller regulär Beschäftigten arbeiten in kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen. Das Vermögen der Unternehmer ist oft in den Betrieben gebunden. Die rot-rot-grüne Lieblingsidee einer Vermögensteuer ist Gift für die KMUs. Selbst ein Thorsten Schäfer-Gümbel erkennt, dass sie die Unternehmen in ihrer Substanz gefährden würde. Es bleibt zu hoffen, dass sich diese Einsicht in der SPD durchsetzt.\n\nIm Einzelplan des Bundesministeriums für Arbeit und Soziales ist aber nicht nur Soziales enthalten. Das vergessen manche Parteien gerne. Dabei ist die Arbeit essenziell für den gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhalt. Uns geht es um mehr als um kurzfristige Erfolge bei den Kennzahlen des Arbeitsmarktes. Wir stellen mit dem vorliegenden Haushalt die Weichen für die Zukunft der Arbeit. Wir diskutieren vor dem Hintergrund des demografischen Wandels über ein neues Leitbild der Arbeit. Auch das macht Generationengerechtigkeit aus. Das Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales und wir als CDU/CSU-Bundestagsfraktion sind seit längerem mit diesem Thema befasst. Gemeinsam mit den Tarifpartnern entwerfen wir an einem Tisch die Strategien dazu. Unter dem Schlagwort „Arbeit 4.0“ erarbeiten wir Ideen für die Arbeitswelt der Zukunft. Dabei geht es um neue Arbeitszeitmodelle, um die Frage der Work-Life-Balance, um neue Anforderungen an soziale Absicherung von Arbeit oder auch den Stellenwert von Arbeit, die nicht Erwerbsarbeit ist; dazu zählt die Pflege von Angehörigen, aber auch die ehrenamtliche Tätigkeit.\n\nDer Betrieb der Zukunft stellt nicht nur Fragen an grundsätzliche Anforderungen wie flexible Arbeitszeiten, verbesserten Arbeitsschutz und intelligente Netzwerke, sondern es geht auch darum, wie wir den Fachkräftenachwuchs sichern können. Wie gelingt uns die Integration von Flüchtlingen mit Bleibeperspektive? Wie motivieren wir ältere Menschen, ihren Erfahrungsschatz länger den Betrieben zur Verfügung zu stellen, Stichwort „Flexirente“? Wie ermöglichen wir Frauen bessere Aufstiegschancen? Und wie verbessern wir die Work-Life-Balance und die Schnittstelle zwischen Familie und Beruf?\n\nWir gehen einen Schritt in diese Richtung, indem wir den Fokus auf gute Bildung und gute Ausbildung legen. Ich freue mich sehr darüber, dass im vorliegenden Haushaltsentwurf der Bereich der beruflichen Bildung einen großen Stellenwert einnimmt.\n\nWir stellen über die Initiative „Bildungsketten bis zum Ausbildungsabschluss“ Mittel zur Verfügung. So unterstützen wir gemeinsam mit den Ländern mit 70 Millionen Euro Jugendliche in der Orientierungsphase vor Eintritt in den Beruf. Ich habe selbst als Unternehmerin junge Menschen ausgebildet. Deswegen weiß ich, was benötigt wird. Kleine und mittelständische Unternehmen brauchen speziell auf sie zugeschnittene Weiterbildungsangebote, Beratung und weniger Bürokratie. Wir fördern überbetriebliche Berufsbildungsstätten in 2017 mit 62 Millionen Euro.\n\nDarüber hinaus bleibt der Fachkräftemangel eine grundlegende Fragestellung für uns.\n\nMit dem Meister-BAföG geben wir darauf eine Antwort. Aus dem Etat des BMBF fördern wir 170 000 junge Menschen mit 265 Millionen Euro.\n\nDann gibt es die Studienabbrecher. Ihr Potenzial dürfen wir nicht verschenken. Hier weist die Initiative zur Gewinnung von Studienabbrechern für die berufliche Bildung eine neue Perspektive auf. So stärken wir unser System der dualen Ausbildung und eröffnen mehr Jugendlichen den Weg zu einer Berufsausbildung.\n\nFrau Ekin Deligöz muss ich leider widersprechen. Ich habe in dieser Woche ein Gespräch mit Vertretern der regionalen BA in meiner Heimat geführt. Es freut mich, zu hören, dass für die Arbeit vor Ort, sowohl für die Ausstattung der Arbeitsagenturen als auch für die Integration in den Arbeitsmarkt, zurzeit genügend Mittel vorhanden sind, um Menschen in Arbeit zu bringen.\n\nWir können es uns nicht leisten, Potenziale zu verschenken. Deswegen erhalten all diejenigen Unterstützung, die sie benötigen. Auch das trägt zum gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhalt bei.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und liebe Kollegen, der Bundeshaushalt 2017 ist gut und solide finanziert. Er beweist, dass sich Konsolidierung und Investitionen nicht ausschließen. Gerade im Bereich Arbeit und Soziales stärken wir die Talente, die unser Land voranbringen. Wir finden gemeinsam eine Balance zwischen Stabilität und Wachstum, und wir stärken den Gedanken der Gerechtigkeit zwischen den Generationen; denn das macht die CDU als Partei der Mitte aus.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n3015,julia-verlinden,\"Ich gebe mir Mühe. - Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Die letzten Monate waren geprägt von erschreckenden Nachrichten aus den Krisenregionen unserer Welt: Ukraine, Irak, Syrien, Libyen, Nigeria - die Liste ließe sich lange fortsetzen. Weltweit sind Menschen auf der Flucht und brauchen Hilfe - von uns, sofort.\n\nDarüber hinaus müssen wir kritisch reflektieren, was diese Konflikte für unsere Wirtschafts- und Energiepolitik eigentlich bedeuten; denn neben all den schrecklichen Nachrichten über die humanitären Konsequenzen dieser Auseinandersetzungen wird auch unsere Abhängigkeit von Energieimporten deutlich. Etwa die Hälfte unserer Energierohstoffe importieren wir aus Krisen-regionen. Diese Abhängigkeit kann außenpolitisch -extrem problematisch sein. Und es gibt Menschen, die sich Sorgen machen, dass die verabredeten Energielieferungen womöglich nicht zuverlässig kommen. Manche sagen: Dann müssen wir uns die Energie halt woanders herholen. - In diesem Zusammenhang wird der Begriff der sogenannten heimischen Energiequellen gerne verwendet. Jedoch: Den Menschen einzureden, wir seien langfristig auf fossile Energieträger angewiesen, das ist einfach falsch. Sie von der Koalition wollen eine Steinzeitenergiepolitik mit dreckiger Kohle und mit Fracking durchsetzen.\n\nDas lassen wir Ihnen nicht durchgehen.\n\nEs soll bei Ihnen einige geben, die meinen, es sei eine gute Idee, Chemikalien unter hohem Druck in die Erde zu pressen, um auch noch das letzte bisschen Erdgas aus dem Boden zu fracken. Aber ich sage Ihnen: Ein viel besserer und dauerhafterer Weg aus der Abhängigkeit von Energieimporten ist es, weniger Energie zu benötigen. Die Energieeffizienz, das Einsparen von Energie, das ist die eigentliche heimische Energiequelle.\n\nGerne.\n\nHerr Mattfeldt, ich bin darüber informiert, dass Sie ein Skeptiker der Frackingtechnologie sind. Da sind wir einer Meinung.\n\n- Ja, genau. Es geht um das Handeln. - Deswegen warte ich seit einiger Zeit darauf, dass die Bundesregierung endlich einen Vorschlag für eine Änderung des Bundesbergrechts vorlegt;\n\ndenn nur so können wir rechtssicher die Frackingtechnologie verhindern.\n\nWir brauchen mehr als nur eine Änderung des Wasserhaushaltsgesetzes.\n\nWir brauchen mehr als nur eine Änderung der Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfung für Bergbau. Wir brauchen klare Anweisungen aus Richtung der Bundesregierung. Wir als Bundesländer können die Missstände, die auf Bundesebene existieren, nicht ausmerzen.\n\nWir können das Thema aber gerne einmal bei einem Kaffee vertiefen, Herr Mattfeldt.\n\nSie alle reden immer von Energieeffizienz, aber ich glaube, Sie haben es noch nicht verstanden\n\nals echte Strategie der Energie-, Wirtschafts- und Außenpolitik. Sie alle sprechen immer in Ihren Reden davon, aber es passiert nichts. Energieeffizienz nützt nicht nur dem Klima, sondern schont auch unsere Kassen. Derzeit geben wir 100 Milliarden Euro für den Import von Erdöl, Erdgas und Kohle aus, und zwar jedes Jahr. Diese Ausgaben zu senken, sollte doch auch in Ihrem Interesse sein.\n\nMehr als 35 Prozent unseres Erdgases kommt aus Russland. Dieses Gas benötigen wir in erster Linie zum Heizen des Fraunhofer-Instituts IWES. Eine Studie hat jüngst gezeigt, dass wir durch eine schnellere energetische Sanierung unserer Häuser und durch einen raschen Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien diese Erdgasimporte bis 2030 komplett überflüssig machen können. Dafür müssen wir aber jetzt mit dem Energiesparen anfangen. Das heißt, wir brauchen eine spürbare Erhöhung der KfW-Mittel für energetische Sanierung. Dies ist im augenblicklichen Entwurf des Haushalts leider nicht vorgesehen. Aber nicht nur das: Wir brauchen auch einen Energiesparfonds, mit dem wir Effizienzpolitik und Energieeinsparungen umfassend, sozial gerecht und wirkungsvoll finanzieren. Das wäre der richtige Weg, um hier endlich voranzukommen.\n\nSeit der Bundestagswahl ist nun fast ein Jahr vergangen. In den Wahlprogrammen aller im Bundestag vertretenen Parteien finden sich, wie gesagt, diese rhetorisch starken Bekenntnisse zur Energieeffizienz. Aber es geht ums Handeln. Das haben Sie ja eben sehr richtig angemerkt. Selbst im Wahlprogramm der FDP stand etwas zum Thema Energieeffizienz. Aber was ist in diesem Bereich seit einem Jahr passiert? So gut wie gar nichts.\n\nDiesmal können Sie nicht der FDP die Schuld dafür geben.\n\n- Nein, gehen sie nicht.\n\nDer vorliegende Haushaltsentwurf steht nicht für große Sprünge bei der Energieeffizienz im nächsten Jahr, schlimmer noch, es geht schrittchenweise zurück mit der Energiewende. Es geht zurück, Herr Jurk. So wollen Sie zum Beispiel die Mittel für das eben angesprochene erfolgreiche Marktanreizprogramm für erneuerbare Energien im Wärmebereich um 12 Millionen Euro kürzen. Wie passt das bitte schön mit der Energiewende zusammen?\n\nZur Erinnerung, Herr Gabriel: Auch diese Legislaturperiode dauert nur vier Jahre. Das erste Jahr ist um. Es wird langsam Zeit, dass Sie in die Hufe kommen. Wir brauchen eine Energieeinsparpolitik, die sich auch im Bundeshaushalt ganz klar niederschlägt, und zwar jetzt, sofort.\"\n2810,volker-beck,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Es ist mir zu dieser späten Stunde eine besondere Freude, zum ersten Meldewesenfortentwicklungsänderungsgesetz reden zu dürfen. Es ist das erste seiner Art und ist deshalb von ganz besonders epochaler Wirkung.\n\nWir führen in diesem Hohen Haus schon länger eine Diskussion über die Frage, was wir im Melderecht im Sinne der Datensparsamkeit brauchen; denn Datensparsamkeit ist einfach der beste Datenschutz. Daten, die es nicht gibt, können nicht zu anderen Zwecken missbraucht werden.\n\nIm Melderechtsrahmengesetz wurden einst die Mitwirkungspflichten der Vermieter gestrichen, weil sie nichts brachten. Dann wurden sie im Rahmen des Gesetzes zur Fortentwicklung des Meldewesens wieder eingeführt, ohne dass man neue Erkenntnisse gehabt hätte. Wir meinen, dass die entsprechende Vorschrift wieder in den Papierkorb gehört. Deshalb haben wir Ihnen einen Änderungsantrag auf Streichung dieser Vorschrift vorgelegt.\n\nÄhnliches gilt für die leidige Hotelmeldepflicht. Hier fragt man sich: Wozu müssen wir das alles wissen? Misstrauen wir allen Menschen, die in ein Hotel gehen? Zumindest zur Durchführung eines Verwaltungsakts braucht kein Mensch zu wissen, wer wann wo in welchem Hotel welche Nacht verbracht hat und welche Personen die Nacht miteinander verbracht haben. Das geht den Staat nichts an. Deshalb sollte er diese Daten nicht erheben. Wir schlagen Ihnen die Streichung der entsprechenden Vorschrift vor.\n\nRichtig gestritten haben wir uns aber nicht über diese Fragen. Denn es war klar: Hier liegen wir so weit ausei-nander, dass wir nicht zusammenkommen. Richtig auseinandergesetzt haben wir uns über die Weitergabe von Familienstandsdaten an Religionsgemeinschaften, die Körperschaften des öffentlichen Rechts sind. Hier zeigt sich, dass die Opposition dazu beigetragen hat, dass die Große Koalition zur Besinnung gekommen ist. Sie wollten ursprünglich in der letzten Sitzungswoche vor der Haushaltswoche das Gesetz unverändert verabschieden. Heute legen Sie es mit einer Änderung vor.\n\nNun wird immerhin festgelegt - das ist nur die zweitbeste Lösung; wir haben die beste -, dass Melderechtsdaten betreffend den Familienstand nicht für arbeitsrechtliche Zwecke missbraucht werden dürfen. Das ist meines Erachtens - hier habe ich eine andere Meinung als Sie, Herr Tempel - eine rechtlich relevante Änderung. Es ist mir egal, um welche Religionsgemeinschaften es dabei geht: um die katholische Kirche, die Mormonen, die Zeugen Jehovas oder die künftigen islamischen Wohlfahrtsverbände.\n\nIn Zukunft muss ein Arbeitgeber, der jemanden wegen Wiederverheiratung oder einer geschlossenen Lebenspartnerschaft kündigen will, darlegen, dass die entsprechenden Informationen nicht aus den Meldedaten stammen. Unter Umständen muss er auch darlegen, dass er, wenn er eine andere Quelle angibt, diese Quelle nicht erst angezapft hat, als er schon Ermittlungswissen aus den Melderechtsdaten hatte, aufgrund dessen er wusste, dass es sich um einen lotterhaft lebenden Menschen handelt, und dass er nicht über diesen Weg einen zweiten Beleg gesucht hat, den er arbeitsrechtlich verwenden darf. Das werden die Arbeitsgerichte zukünftig den Religionsgemeinschaften, die so etwas praktizieren, nicht durchgehen lassen. Insofern ist das ein Schritt voran.\n\nSie haben völlig recht: Das hier ist nicht das Arbeitsrecht. Es geht auch nicht um das Allgemeine Gleichbehandlungsgesetz, bei dem solche Fragen in der Sache zu regeln wären. Aber wir als Staat, als Melderechtgesetzgeber, haben die Aufgabe, darauf zu achten, dass die Daten, die wir in einem staatlichen Zwangsverhältnis von den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern erheben, nicht zu ihrem Nachteil an Dritte weitergegeben werden.\n\nDa haben wir einen Fortschritt erreicht. Ohne die Anhörung, die wir zusammen mit den Linken erzwungen haben, hätten Sie, Frau Fograscher, das nicht durchbekommen. Insofern zeigt sich: Wo wir helfen können, helfen wir gerne weiter. Dies ist ein schöner Tag, ein kleiner Erfolg für die grüne Opposition gemeinsam mit der Linken.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n11698,roland-claus,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Herr Bundesminister! Weil es eben auch mein Land ist, will ich zunächst bekennen, dass es mir ziemlich schwerfällt, hier zur Tagesordnung, also zur Befassung mit dem Bundeshaushaltsplan, überzugehen. Hier redet ein Bundesminister über seinen Haushalt, und zeitgleich sagt Ministerpräsident Seehofer den für mich unglaublichen Satz: „Die Menschen wollen diese Berliner Politik nicht.“ Er meint auch Ihre Politik, Herr de Maizière. Ich glaube, er hat den Koalitionsvertrag auch mit unterschrieben.\n\nDas ist voll Pegida-anschlussfähig.\n\nIch muss hier nicht die SPD verteidigen. Aber wer über Gabriel und dessen mangelnde Kabinettsdisziplin redet, der darf über Horst Seehofer nicht schweigen. Das müssen Sie sich sagen lassen.\n\nDieser Etatentwurf, Herr Minister, ist in der Tat das Abbild eines innenpolitischen Weiter-so. Genau das ist das Problem dieses Etats. Ihre innenpolitische Zustandsbeschreibung kennt immer nur drei Aggregatzustände: Deutschland geht es gut. Wir sind auf einem guten Weg. Und wenn es einmal nicht so klappt: Es ist alternativlos. Etwas mehr Demut hätte ich mir erwartet. Immerhin ist hier die ganze bisherige - man kann auch sagen: etablierte - Parteiendemokratie gefährdet und nicht nur ein Teil davon.\n\nDer Haushalt sieht an vielen Stellen mehr Geld für Polizei und Behörden vor. Das war schon beim Haushalt 2016 der Fall, häufig mit Zustimmung einer sicherheitspolitisch verantwortungsvollen Opposition. Für 2017 haben Sie erneut eine halbe Milliarde Euro mehr vorgesehen. Allerdings muss man Ihnen auch sagen, dass Sie in Ihrem eigenen Entwurf Haushaltsreste für 2016 in einer Höhe von einer halben Milliarde Euro ausweisen. Sie weisen einen Zuwachs beim sogenannten Asylpaket aus, aber beim zuständigen Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge kommen Sie beim Stellenaufbau nicht voran, wie dessen Chef Weise vor kurzem kundgetan hat. Deshalb sagen wir Ihnen: Mehr Geld im Haushalt ist noch kein Beleg für bessere Politik.\n\nGemessen, Herr Bundesminister, wurden die Bienen nicht an ihren Flugkilometern, sondern an dem Honig, den sie nach Hause brachten.\n\nNun fordert die Bundesregierung bekanntlich überall auf, Geflüchteten Zugang zu Ausbildung und Arbeit zu ermöglichen. Ich habe mir gedacht, dass ich einmal der Bundesregierung eine Anfrage stelle, wie sie selbst mit gutem Beispiel vorangeht. Meine Anfrage an das Bundesministerium lautete: Wie viele geflüchtete Menschen sind seit 2015 in allen Bundesbehörden zusammengenommen in Ausbildung oder Arbeit gebracht worden? Die Antwort des BMI lautet: Fünf. In Ziffern: 5. Ich finde das beschämend. Natürlich weiß ich, dass die Aufgabe der Bundesregierung nicht darin besteht, Geflüchtete einzustellen; aber ein Stückchen mehr mit gutem Beispiel voranzugehen, habe ich schon erwartet. Wirklich etwas leisten geht anders, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDeshalb sagen wir Ihnen: Ihren sicherheitspolitischen Ankündigungen folgen keine Taten. Wenn man in der Sackgasse ist, ist ein Weiter-so eine gefährliche Fahrtrichtung. Wir werden in Ihrem Etat an vielen einzelnen Stellen Änderungen vorschlagen.\n\nDie IT-Netze des Bundes sollen konsolidiert werden. Nach dem, was ich jetzt wahrnehme, läuft es ein bisschen Gefahr, Installation von veralteter Technik getarnt als Modernisierung auszugeben. Das Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz soll 20 Prozent mehr bekommen. Noch mehr Geld für diese Versagertruppe. Oder sollte man fragen: War das Versagen der Plan? Bei der Sportförderung haben sich Bundesinnenministerium und Olympischer Sportbund auf eine Art Geheimverhandlung beschränkt. Bei der Behindertensportförderung kommen wir nicht wirklich voran. Dann noch das sogenannte Zivilschutzkonzept. Zu den Lebensmittelvorräten ist schon etwas gesagt worden.\n\nIch will noch etwas anfügen, was noch nicht gesagt wurde. Ich fühlte mich an Mao Tse-tung erinnert, der vor mehreren Jahrzehnten einen Aufruf in die Worte gekleidet hat: Grabt die Gräben tief und legt Reisvorräte an. - Wem Sie so alles nacheifern, Herr Bundesminister!\n\nDas Ergebnis in der Öffentlichkeit, diese Verunsicherung, Herr Mayer, hat ihnen doch nicht die Opposition eingeredet. Da überschätzen Sie uns aber ein Stückchen, muss ich Ihnen sagen.\n\nDeshalb ist es leider so, Herr Bundesminister: Ihre Stichwortgeber sind die Jungs von der Fraktion „Angst für Deutschland“ oder auch AfD. Sie bedienen deren Ressentiments, Sie verschärfen das Asylrecht und schränken Freiheitsrechte ein. Dafür werden Sie von der Angst-Fraktion gelobt, aber Sie werden nicht gewählt. In der Mitte zwischen Angst und Mut ist auf Dauer kein Staat zu machen. Sie müssen sich entscheiden: Angst oder soziale und humanistische Erneuerung der Gesellschaft.\n\nDer politische Hauptfehler seit dem 11. September 2001 war, Krieg als Mittel der Außenpolitik und Freiheitsbeschränkung als Mittel der Innenpolitik zu etablieren. Da, Herr Minister, hilft kein Weiter-so. Da geht es um Umdenken jetzt, Umsteuern jetzt. Und wir sagen Ihnen: Dafür ist es wirklich allerhöchste Zeit.\"\n7111,andreas-schwarz,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren auf den Zuschauerrängen! Liebe Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen! Ehrlich gesagt: Zuerst konnte ich Ihre Begeisterung für Diskussionen über die Infrastrukturabgabe nicht nachvollziehen. Aber in Anbetracht der heutigen Botschaften aus Brüssel darf man Ihnen zur Terminwahl gratulieren.\n\nIch freue mich, dass ich hier heute reden darf. Aber eine Empfehlung hätte ich: Vielleicht können Sie Aktuelle Stunden auch zu den schönen Dingen, die in diesem Land und in dieser Koalition passieren, beantragen.\n\nEs gibt sehr viele große Erfolge: von der Frauenquote bis zum Mindestlohn. Diese Themen wären auch mal eine Aktuelle Stunde wert.\n\nAber jetzt zur heutigen Debatte, zur Pkw-Maut. Dass sich die EU-Kommission das Gesetzespaket genau anschauen wird, das haben wir schon bei der Verabschiedung gewusst. Nun wird, wie wir heute erfahren haben, ein Vertragsverletzungsverfahren eröffnet. Das heißt für uns: Wir müssen darauf reagieren bzw. erst einmal abwarten.\n\nHerr Minister Dobrindt, ich begrüße es sehr, dass Sie die Einführung erst einmal verschieben. Sie haben das Copyright an diesem Gesetz.\n\nEs steht Ihnen natürlich zu, die Reißleine zu ziehen, um Mehrkosten für den deutschen Steuerzahler zu verhindern.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir wissen alle - das ist bereits deutlich geworden -, dass dieses Thema keine Herzensangelegenheit der SPD-Fraktion war und ist. Trotzdem haben wir im Verkehrs- und im Finanzausschuss zahlreiche Änderungen durchgesetzt, um zumindest das Versprechen der SPD umzusetzen, keinen deutschen Steuerzahler zusätzlich zu belasten. Aber nicht nur das: Wir haben auch weitere sozialdemokratische Forderungen durchgesetzt, wenn auch nicht alle.\n\nErstens. Wir haben die Mautsätze für im Ausland zugelassene Kraftfahrzeuge angepasst.\n\nDamit unsere europäischen Nachbarn bei den Zeit-vignetten nicht diskriminiert werden, wird es jetzt auch bei den Zeitvignetten Staffelungen nach Ökoklassen geben. Das war eine wichtige Forderung der EU-Kommission.\n\nZweitens. Wir haben den Datenschutz im Gesetz deutlich verbessert, indem wir die Speicherfristen von drei Jahren auf ein Jahr verkürzt haben.\n\nDrittens haben wir auch beim Thema Evaluation deutliche Verbesserungen durchgesetzt: So wird zwei Jahre nach dem technischen Start der Pkw-Maut das Gesetz einem umfassenden Einnahmen- und Bürokratiecheck unterzogen werden. Bereits nach einem Jahr werden wir überprüfen, ob die Annahmen über den Personalaufwand, vor allen Dingen beim Zoll, auch tatsächlich zutreffen.\n\nScheinbar sind aber diese Verbesserungen, die wir erreicht haben, nicht ausreichend, wie die Prüfung durch die EU-Kommission im Moment zeigt. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir wussten, wie gesagt, dass es zu einer Überprüfung dieser Infrastrukturabgabe kommen wird.\n\nJetzt lassen wir die Kommission prüfen, ob das Gesetz von Minister Dobrindt den europäischen Ansprüchen genügt, wie es hier versprochen wurde. Ich bin mir sicher: Er wird die notwendigen Argumente zur Klärung nach Brüssel liefern.\n\nZum Schluss noch eine kleine Exkursion in die Geschichte: Heute ist ja ein denkwürdiger Tag: 18. Juni - nicht weil hier der blaue Brief aus Brüssel eingetroffen ist.\n\n- Nein, was ich sagen wollte: Heute vor 200 Jahren hat Napoleon seine letzte Schlacht geschlagen in der Nähe von Brüssel, bei Waterloo.\n\nDas kleine Dorf hieß Waterloo. Ich wünsche unserem Minister, dass er mehr Erfolg haben wird, was seine Bemühungen in Sachen Infrastrukturabgabe betrifft.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n628,harald-petzold,\"Frau Staatsministerin, ich möchte gerne noch einmal das Stichwort „Auslandsschulen“ aufgreifen und mich natürlich Ihrem Lob für die Arbeit, die dort geleistet wird, anschließen. Wenn man allerdings die Einrichtungen vor Ort besucht - ich hatte letztens die Gelegenheit dazu -, gewinnt man manchmal den Eindruck, dass die Lösung, die gewählt wurde, also dass diese Schulen mehr oder weniger frei in der Luft hängen, nicht die günstigste ist. Das betrifft vor allem ihre Ausstattung, die teilweise doch schon in die Jahre gekommen ist. Das führt dann jedoch nicht wie bei Schulen in den jeweiligen Bundesländern dazu, dass Modernisierungsmaßnahmen und bauliche Ergänzungen usw. stattfinden - von inhaltlichen Dingen will ich dabei gar nicht sprechen. Vielleicht könnten Sie ein paar Ausführungen dazu machen, wie Ihrer Vorstellung nach zum einen diese Schulen in die inhaltliche Debatte in Deutschland integriert werden können und wie zum anderen für eine bessere Ausstattung gesorgt werden kann.\"\n4627,volker-ullrich,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Es ist im Grunde schon eine beschämende Situation: In den Minuten, in denen wir hier über Opfer von Menschenhandel diskutieren, werden in diesem Land Tausende von Menschen ausgebeutet. Sie müssen zum Zwecke eines unnatürlichen Gewinnstrebens dienen, und sie werden an Körper und Seele ausgebeutet. Wir in Deutschland sind stolz auf unseren Rechtsstaat, auf unsere Werte und Traditionen. Aber wir müssen selbstkritisch sagen: Wir haben es nicht geschafft - bislang nicht geschafft -, die Strukturen und Umstände von Menschenhandel in Deutschland wirksam zu bekämpfen. Das bleibt unsere Pflicht.\n\nDas Wort einer jungen Frau, die selbst Opfer von Menschenhandel war und ein Buch darüber geschrieben hat, soll uns zur Mahnung gereichen. Sie schreibt:\n\nKein junger Mensch … verkauft gern seinen Körper. Doch wenn man diesen Weg erst einmal beschritten hat, führt er unaufhaltsam nach unten. Es wird dunkler, … und man sieht nirgendwo einen Ausweg.\n\nEs ist unsere Verpflichtung, dafür zu sorgen, dass die Menschen, die Opfer von Menschenhandel sind, einen Ausweg sehen. Durch gesetzgeberische Maßnahmen müssen wir diesem Leid ein Ende bereiten und sicherstellen, dass der wehrhafte Rechtsstaat diesen Menschen zur Seite steht. Dafür stehen wir.\n\nEs ist richtig, dass der Gesetzentwurf der Grünen in vielen Punkten wahre Dinge anspricht,\n\nDinge, die der Gesetzentwurf der Regierung in den nächsten Monaten anpacken und umsetzen wird.\n\nInteressant ist aber auch, das anzusprechen, was die Grünen nicht in ihren Gesetzentwurf geschrieben haben.\n\nEs gibt nämlich gerade auch im Bereich der sexuellen Ausbeutung Umstände, die ein Handeln von uns allen erfordern, und dieses Handeln fordern die Grünen gerade nicht ein. Es geht um das Handeln im Bereich der Prostitution, um eine Reform des Prostitutionsgesetzes aus dem Jahr 2002.\n\nIch mache Ihnen überhaupt keinen Vorwurf, dass im Jahr 2002 dieses Gesetzgebungsverfahren so über die Bühne ging. Es war sicherlich aus manchen Gründen gut gemeint. Aber es hat sich in der Realität als nicht gut erwiesen, deshalb muss der Gesetzgeber den Mut haben, dies anzusprechen und zu ändern. Wir wollen es ändern.\n\nHerr Kollege Beck, Ihre Rhetorik kann nicht darüber hinwegtäuschen, dass Sie von völlig falschen Voraussetzungen ausgehen. Wenn Sie sich mit Opferverbänden, mit Personen unterhalten, die sich beruflich mit den Folgen des Menschenhandels beschäftigen, dann wird Ihnen unisono gesagt: Das rot-grüne Prostitutionsgesetz aus dem Jahr 2002 hat es erst ermöglicht, dass in Deutschland\n\n- Kollege Beck, Zuhören erleichtert manchmal die Findung der Realität -\n\nHunderttausende von jungen Frauen in Bordellen ausgebeutet werden konnten,\n\nweil man es aufgrund der laxen Rechtslage den Bordellbesitzern einfach gemacht hat, diese Menschen auszubeuten. Legale Prostitution lässt sich oftmals in einem Graubereich nicht von Zwangsprostitution trennen, deswegen tragen Sie Mitverantwortung für dieses Gesetz.\n\nDaher wäre ich an Ihrer Stelle eher ruhig geblieben.\n\nWir wollen in diesem Hohen Hause die gesetzlichen Maßnahmen umsetzen, um zukünftig junge Frauen stärker vor sexueller Ausbeutung zu schützen. Dazu braucht es nicht allein eine Reform der Erlaubnispflicht von Bordellen. Es braucht auch eine Anhebung des Mindestalters auf 21 Jahre. Wir brauchen eine verpflichtende Beratung und verpflichtende Gesundheitsuntersuchungen. Wir brauchen eine Abschaffung des eingeschränkten Weisungsrechts, und wir brauchen am Ende auch eine Änderung der Kultur in diesem Land. Körper sind keine Ware.\n\nMan kauft Menschen nicht. Der Respekt vor Menschen verbietet es, dass wir sexuelle Dienstleistungen als Ware ansehen. Es geht um Menschen, die oftmals vor dem Hintergrund einer legalen Fassade ausgebeutet wurden.\n\nDas ist etwas, was wir nicht akzeptieren und tolerieren wollen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Frage der Bekämpfung von Menschenhandel ist geprägt durch ein Mosaik von vielen Maßnahmen.\n\nWir müssen stärker überwachen, dass Unternehmer Menschen nicht ausbeuten. Wir müssen zukünftig die Bordellszene in Deutschland stärker reglementieren, um damit die Opfer zu schützen. Wir müssen dieses Thema aber immer auch vor dem Hintergrund der Würde des Menschen betrachten. Dort, wo die Würde des Menschen verletzt ist, haben wir die Pflicht, zu handeln. Die Würde des Menschen ist die beste Idee, die wir haben. Deswegen ist das Handeln unsere allererste Pflicht.\n\nDafür wollen wir kämpfen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n1295,wolfgang-gehrcke,\"Danke sehr. - Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich verhehle überhaupt nicht, dass Sie in einem Punkt völlig recht haben, Herr Hitschler. Wenn Sie mir einen Mangel an Wertschätzung für das NATO-Bündnis unterstellen, so stimmt das. Ich habe einen Mangel an Wertschätzung für dieses Bündnis. Ich hatte die Hoffnung, dass sich nach der Auflösung des Warschauer Vertrages irgendwann einmal auch die NATO auflöst.\n\nDas wäre eine Friedensdividende, die wir hätten einbringen können. Dort hätte eine deutsche Regierung Initiativen ergreifen müssen.\n\nDas, was wir jetzt beantragen, ist relativ simpel - Sie haben die drei Punkte schon sehr richtig genannt -:\n\nErster Punkt. Wir möchten, dass der NATO-Bündnisfall beendet wird. Das war ein Ausnahmerecht. Der Bündnisfall ist ein einziges Mal in der Geschichte der NATO ausgerufen worden - vor 13 Jahren. Ein Ausnahmerecht ist zum Dauerrecht gemacht worden. Das spricht schon dafür, darüber nachzudenken, diesen NATO-Bündnisfall jetzt endlich zu beenden.\n\nDass auch die Bundesregierung darüber nachdenkt - ich kenne ja die Papiere - finde ich völlig in Ordnung. Ich bitte Sie: Denken Sie intensiver darüber nach und handeln Sie vor allen Dingen in dieser Richtung. Uns wäre es am liebsten, wenn der NATO-Bündnisfall im NATO-Rat auf Initiative der Bundesregierung beendet würde.\n\nFalls nicht - das ist unser zweiter Punkt; er ist umstritten, und ich komme gleich noch darauf -, sollte die Bundesrepublik Deutschland ihn einseitig als beendet erklären.\n\nDritter Punkt. Wir wollen, dass nicht weiterhin Einsätze damit begründet werden. Der NATO-Bündnisfall war die Grundlage für den Krieg gegen den Terror. Oder umgekehrt: Der Krieg gegen den Terror korrespondiert mit dem NATO-Bündnisfall. Der Krieg gegen den Terror ist unendlich gescheitert!\n\nWir haben Ihnen immer wieder vorgetragen - da werde ich auch nicht müde -, dass man den Terror bekämpfen kann, indem man seine Ursachen bekämpft. Der Krieg gegen den Terror hat nur immer wieder Terror, Gewalt, Tod und Vernichtung ausgelöst; das ist doch die Tatsache. Wenn man das nicht will, dann muss man von dieser Grundlage weg. Wir werden sehen, dass der Militäreinsatz in Afghanistan, den Sie so loben und den ich so sehr kritisiere, dass dieser Krieg gegen den Terror durch Verhandlungen beendet werden muss. Verhandeln muss man mit seinen Feinden. Mit seinen Freunden braucht man es meistens nicht zu tun, manchmal muss man aber auch das.\n\nEs bleibt der zweite Punkt - der ist umstritten, das gebe ich Ihnen zu -: Wir sagen: Es muss das Recht eines jeden Staates geben, für sich selbst festzustellen: Dieser Punkt ist für uns erledigt. Die NATO hat den Bündnisfall im Konsens beschlossen; anders kann sie das gar nicht beschließen. Die NATO beruht auf Konsensentscheidungen. Wenn jetzt also ein Staat in den Verhandlungen, ob der Bündnisfall fortgeführt wird, feststellt, dieser Konsens sei nicht mehr gegeben, wäre es eine rechtliche Position, zu sagen: Auf dieser Grundlage muss auch der Bündnisfall beendet werden. Wir wollen von der deutschen Politik, dass festgestellt wird: Der Konsens zur Fortführung des Bündnisfalles ist nicht mehr gegeben.\n\nIch will immer mit dem Kopf durch die Wand; das ist schon okay. Manchmal muss man auch einen Umweg suchen.\n\n- Ja, wenn eine da ist.\n\n- Okay, darüber können wir uns gleich einigen.\n\nIch möchte Ihnen jetzt einen Vorschlag machen. Wie wäre es, wenn die deutsche Bundesregierung für die nächste NATO-Vollversammlung einen Antrag auf eine Debatte darüber einbringen würde, den NATO-Bündnisfall dort zu beenden? Auch die Parlamentarische Versammlung der NATO kann sich mit diesem Thema -befassen, aber sie kann es nicht beschließen. Aber Sie können vorangehen, auch wenn Sie unseren Vorschlag für schlecht halten. Beantragen Sie für die nächste NATO-Vollversammlung, die Beendigung des Bündnisfalles zu debattieren! Das möchte ich gerne sehen.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Schluss sagen - ich werde vielleicht auch schon gemahnt -: Mit diesem NATO-Generalsekretär werden Sie keinen Blumentopf gewinnen. Wer jetzt in Europa in dieser Situation fordert, dass die Militärausgaben steigen sollen, wer eine solch aggressive Politik betreibt, der schadet der NATO mehr, als ich es je gekonnt hätte.\n\nDanke sehr.\"\n4617,gabriela-heinrich,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kollegen und Kolleginnen! Wir reden momentan häufig von der gewachsenen Verantwortung Deutschlands in der Welt, von einem Mehr an Verantwortung. Dieses Mehr an Verantwortung wird jedoch höchst unterschiedlich interpretiert. Da geht es mal um militärische Einsätze, mal um mehr Verhandlungen, um Konflikte beizulegen. Der 10. Dezember ist der Internationale Tag der Menschenrechte. Ich nehme diesen 10. Dezember zum Anlass, zu fordern, dass Deutschland weltweit tatsächlich noch mehr Verantwortung übernimmt, mehr Verantwortung für die Menschenrechte.\n\nWas heißt „Menschenrechte global durchsetzen“? In meiner Heimatstadt Nürnberg gibt es die „Straße der Menschenrechte“. Der Künstler Dani Karavan hat die Allgemeine Erklärung der Menschenrechte in weiße Säulen eingemeißelt - 30 Artikel in 30 Sprachen. Ich bin vor kurzem mit Bürgerinnen und Bürgern durch die „Straße der Menschenrechte“ gegangen. Uns sind zu jeder Säule Menschenrechtsverletzungen eingefallen, manchmal auch in Deutschland, zum Beispiel wenn Menschen Opfer von Arbeitsausbeutung werden oder man sie auf Matratzen in Abrisshäusern zusammenpfercht. Moderne Sklaverei wird so etwas genannt. Auch wenn wir schon sehr viel erreicht haben: Es gibt in Deutschland durchaus noch einiges zu tun, um Menschen vor Verletzungen ihrer Menschenwürde und vor Diskriminierung zu schützen.\n\nWir Parlamentarier haben ganz aktuell eine sehr konkrete Gelegenheit, Verantwortung im eigenen Land zu übernehmen. Das Deutsche Institut für Menschenrechte droht seinen A-Status zu verlieren, wenn wir es jetzt nicht auf eine vernünftige gesetzliche Grundlage stellen.\n\n- Ich bin ganz bei Ihnen, Herr Koenigs. - 1993 haben die Vereinten Nationen die sogenannten Pariser Prinzipien entwickelt. Darin wird festgelegt, welche Kriterien nationale Menschenrechtsinstitutionen erfüllen müssen, um bei Staatenkonferenzen oder beim Menschenrechtsrat voll handlungsberechtigt zu sein. Wie peinlich wäre es für die Bundesregierung, wenn der A-Status, also die Bestnote, ausgerechnet in dem Jahr entzogen wird, in dem Deutschland den Vorsitz im Menschenrechtsrat übernimmt.\n\nWie glaubwürdig ist das Mehr an Verantwortung, wenn wir uns hier nicht einigen können?\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir werden im nächsten Jahr viele Gelegenheiten haben, uns für die Durchsetzung der Menschenrechte einzusetzen. Auch wenn es in der letzten Zeit einige positive Beispiele gegeben hat - in Tunesien, in Marokko und in einigen anderen afrikanischen Staaten -: Es gibt noch unendlich viele Länder, in denen Frauen völlig rechtlos sind. Sie sind permanent sexueller Gewalt ausgesetzt. Sie werden an den Genitalien verstümmelt, im Kindesalter verheiratet. Sie sterben im Kindbett und durch ungeheuerliche Verletzungen, die ihnen ihre pädophilen Ehemänner zufügen.\n\nIch hatte die Gelegenheit, mit der diesjährigen Preisträgerin des Menschenrechtspreises der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, der Somalierin Fartuun Adan, zu sprechen. Sie setzt sich für vergewaltigte, rechtlose Frauen ein und kämpft mit ihren Mitstreiterinnen gegen Genitalverstümmelungen.\n\nWas uns Menschenrechtsverteidiger aus aller Welt erzählen - über Kindersoldaten, Folter, Verfolgung von Schwulen und Lesben -, ist erschütternd. Sie alle brauchen unsere Unterstützung und sie fordern sie auch ein. Alice Nkom, Schwulen- und Lesben-Rechtsanwältin aus Kamerun, hat uns ins Stammbuch geschrieben: Lassen Sie sich nie erzählen, dass die Menschenrechte von der Tradition eines Landes abhängen. Die Menschenrechte gelten für alle Menschen überall auf der Welt gleich.\n\nWir haben in diesem Jahr bereits einiges getan, zum Beispiel mit dem Antrag „Gute Arbeit weltweit“, der auf die Verantwortung deutscher Unternehmen hinweist. Auch Konfliktrohstoffe müssen weiter Thema für uns sein. Wir haben die Instrumente, Staaten beim Aufbau von mehr Rechtsstaatlichkeit zu unterstützen. Wir haben die Erfahrung, beim Aufbau von Zivilgesellschaften in fragilen Staaten zu helfen. Und wir haben die Mittel, Versöhnungsprozesse zwischen Konfliktparteien zu begleiten. Wir müssen die finanziellen Mittel dafür bereitstellen, wenn wir Fluchtursachen bekämpfen wollen. Wenn wir humanitäre Hilfe für die Menschen in Syrien, im Irak und in vielen anderen Ländern bereitstellen, dann setzen wir uns unmittelbar für das Menschenrecht auf Leben ein. Wenn wir diese durch Bürgerkriege traumatisierten Menschen empfangen und Kommunen in die Lage versetzen, Flüchtlinge aufzunehmen, menschenwürdig unterzubringen und zu integrieren, dann setzen wir Menschenrechte durch. Das alles bedeutet: mehr Verantwortung in der Welt.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9797,hiltrud-lotze,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Wir beraten heute Abend den - ich lese einmal den gesamten Titel vor - Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Änderung des Wasserhaushaltsgesetzes zur Einführung von Grundsätzen für die Kosten von Wasserdienstleistungen und Wassernutzungen sowie zur Änderung des Abwasserabgabengesetzes. Vom Titel her ist das eine Herausforderung. Inhaltlich ist es ein gutes und wichtiges Gesetz, weil es im Kern um unser wichtigstes Lebenselixier geht, nämlich ums Wasser. Mit diesem Gesetz beenden wir heute einen mehrjährigen Streit um die Frage der Umsetzung der EU-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie in das Wasserhaushaltsgesetz.\n\nGrundsätzlich zielt die EU-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie auf die Herstellung eines guten Zustands aller Gewässer. Gewässer sind dann in einem guten Zustand, wenn sie, vereinfacht gesagt, vom Menschen nur gering beeinflusst sind. Die EU-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie sieht vor, dass sich alle, die Wasser in irgendeiner Form nutzen, finanziell daran beteiligen müssen, dass die Gewässer in einem guten Zustand sind. Das ist der Kostendeckungsgrundsatz.\n\nUmweltverbände und die Europäische Kommission waren der Meinung, dass auch in unserem Wasserhaushaltsgesetz eine Kostenbeteiligung zur Umsetzung der Wasserrahmenrichtlinie festgeschrieben werden muss, und haben deswegen geklagt. Dazu muss man wissen, dass in Deutschland unter Wasserdienstleistungen die Trinkwasserversorgung und die Abwasserentsorgung verstanden werden. Diese Bereiche werden zur Kostendeckung herangezogen. Allerdings wird zum Beispiel das Aufstauen des Wassers für die Stromerzeugung aus Wasserkraft oder das Nutzen des Wassers für die Schifffahrt nicht als Wasserdienstleistung betrachtet. Deswegen werden diese Bereiche bei der Anwendung des Kostendeckungsgrundsatzes - wer nutzt, muss zahlen - auch nicht berücksichtigt.\n\nDie jetzige Bundesregierung und ihre Vorgänger haben die Wasserrahmenrichtlinie so interpretiert: Für den Fall, dass die Ziele der Wasserrahmenrichtlinie nicht erreicht werden, sollen sich die übrigen Wassernutzer, also die eben Genannten, an den Kosten beteiligen. Diese Beteiligung müsse aber nicht unbedingt finanzieller Art sein. - Ich weiß, das ist ein bisschen kompliziert. Ich versuche, das hier so deutlich wie möglich zu erläutern.\n\nDer Europäische Gerichtshof hat nach der Klage die grundsätzliche Rechtsauffassung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland bestätigt: Deutschland muss alle Wassernutzer an den Kosten beteiligen. - Wie dies zu geschehen hat, ist aber nicht festgelegt. Obwohl der EuGH festgestellt hat, dass die Bundesrepublik bisher nicht gegen die Wasserrahmenrichtlinie verstoßen hat, sind zur Klarstellung minimale Änderungen im Wasserhaushaltsgesetz notwendig. Und die nehmen wir heute hier mit diesem Gesetzentwurf vor. Im Klartext heißt das: Das Wasserhaushaltsgesetz wird ergänzt, für die Wassernutzer bleibt aber alles beim Alten. Für niemanden entstehen zusätzliche Kosten.\n\nDas Land Baden-Württemberg war nun der Meinung, hier könne eine Rechtsunsicherheit in dem Sinne entstehen, dass das verfassungsmäßige Recht der Länder, Abgaben zu erheben, beschnitten werden könne. Die Grünen haben das in ihren Änderungsantrag aufgenommen, und auch der Bundesrat hat auf Initiative von Baden-Württemberg den Wunsch formuliert, eine Länderöffnungsklausel einzuführen.\n\nAus unserer Sicht - da teilen wir auch die Auffassung des Ministeriums - ist eine solche Klausel unnötig; denn nach dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf können Bund und Länder das Kostendeckungsprinzip bei der Wassernutzung auch dann uneingeschränkt anwenden, wenn die Ziele der Wasserrahmenrichtlinie schon erreicht werden. Deswegen werden wir den Änderungsantrag der Grünen ablehnen.\n\nDas Gleiche gilt auch für den Entschließungsantrag, in dem unter anderem gefordert wird, im Wasserhaushaltsgesetz ein Fracking-Verbot zu verankern.\n\n- Der Applaus ist im Prinzip richtig.\n\nWir werden diesen Entschließungsantrag trotzdem ablehnen.\n\nAber Achtung: Wir lehnen ihn nicht ab, weil wir etwa für Fracking sind. Ganz im Gegenteil!\n\nAber, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Sie wissen: Es ist eine umfassende Fracking-Gesetzgebung auf dem Weg,\n\nund dieser wollen wir hier nicht durch ein Detail vorgreifen.\n\nIch will den Fokus heute Abend noch auf ein anderes Wasserthema lenken, nämlich auf die Nitratrichtlinie. Wenn wir in Deutschland das Grundanliegen der Wasserrahmenrichtlinie - nämlich den guten Zustand aller Gewässer - erreichen wollen, dann müssen wir diese Nitratrichtlinie umsetzen; denn wir alle wissen: Unsere Böden und damit auch die Gewässer sind noch immer zu stark durch Düngemittel, und hier vor allem mit Nitrat, belastet. 82 Prozent der Oberflächengewässer haben letztes Jahr die Kriterien der Wasserrahmenrichtlinie nicht erfüllt.\n\nWir alle wissen auch, dass der Hauptverursacher dieses Zustandes die Landwirtschaft ist. Bei allem Verständnis für die Landwirtschaft will ich hier ganz deutlich sagen: Die Verzögerung bei der Umsetzung der Nitratrichtlinie ist nicht dem Umweltressort zuzuschreiben.\n\nDass es auch anders geht, zeigt sich beispielhaft in meiner Region, in Lüchow-Dannenberg - Lüneburg. Hier beteiligen sich derzeit 20 landwirtschaftliche Betriebe an einem mehrjährigen niedersächsischen Modellversuch. Diese Betriebe werden in Düngefragen intensiv beraten - und das kostenlos. Das Ergebnis ist, dass bis zu 20 Prozent weniger Düngemittel und damit weniger Nitrat eingesetzt werden.\n\nMan kann also sehen: Es funktioniert. Deswegen ist uns und mir als Umweltpolitikerin sehr daran gelegen, dass wir die Verschärfung des Düngemittelgesetzes und der Düngemittelverordnung zur Umsetzung der Nitratrichtlinie schnell verabschieden.\n\nDenn, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, auch das muss uns klar sein: Wenn wir alle zusammen nicht mehr für die Verbesserung der Wasserqualität tun, dann werden wir in mehrfacher Hinsicht einen hohen Preis dafür zahlen.\n\nIch komme zurück zu dem Gesetzentwurf. Mit der Novelle des Wasserhaushaltsgesetzes setzen wir ein weiteres Element der Wasserrahmenrichtlinie in nationales Recht um. Wir als SPD-Fraktion stimmen zu. Und wir arbeiten zusammen mit unserer Ministerin weiter intensiv daran, unser Wasser noch besser zu schützen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8938,heidtrud-henn,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrter Herr Wehrbeauftragter! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Soldatinnen und Soldaten! Der Bericht des Wehrbeauftragten für das Jahr 2014 liegt mit den Stellungnahmen des Verteidigungsministeriums vor. Ich danke nicht nur dem Wehrbeauftragten und seinen Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern, sondern auch den Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern des Verteidigungsministeriums für ihre wichtige Arbeit.\n\nViele von uns haben am Dienstag vor den Fraktionssitzungen die gelben Bänder mit Grüßen beschriftet. Darüber habe ich mich sehr gefreut; denn wir zollen damit unseren Soldatinnen und Soldaten im Einsatz Anerkennung und zeigen Solidarität. In den Einsatzgebieten wird sehr genau wahrgenommen, was im politischen Berlin passiert.\n\nIn der vorletzten Woche habe ich als Vorstandsmitglied der Evangelischen Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Soldatenbetreuung gemeinsam mit meiner Kollegin Gisela Manderla, der Vorsitzenden der Katholischen Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Soldatenbetreuung, die OASE in Erbil eröffnen dürfen. Ich habe mir das Feldlager angeschaut und viel gelernt. Das Feldlager ist von der Fläche her nicht groß. In den knapp vier Tagen, in denen ich dort gewesen bin, habe ich einen großen Teil unserer Soldaten kennenlernen dürfen. Man fasst Vertrauen auf einem sehr engen Raum. Ich danke allen in Erbil für ihre Freundlichkeit und ihre Herzlichkeit, mit der ich dort empfangen worden bin, vor allem für das offene Wort.\n\nIch habe keine Klagen gehört. Truppenverpflegung, Anstehen im Regen im Freien, Unperfektes, Enge, Dreck und Container, in die es regnet, werden hier ausgehalten. Wie wichtig Militärseelsorge vor Ort ist, hat man deutlich gespürt. Man hält zusammen und gibt das Beste. In den Gesprächen merkt man, dass die Soldaten die Ausbildung der Peschmerga gerne machen und es für sie schön ist, die Erfolge zu sehen, besonders im Sanitätsdienst. Das sollten wir auch unseren Soldatinnen und Soldaten garantieren: das Beste, die beste Ausrüstung und Ausbildung, die beste medizinische Versorgung, die beste Unterkunft. Das sind wir allen schuldig, die wir in Einsätze schicken.\n\nStellen Sie sich vor, Sie wären für mehrere Monate auf Dienstreise in einem fernen Ort. Sie haben den Tag der Rückreise schon geplant, Familie und Freunde haben schon eine Willkommensfeier organisiert, und Sie freuen sich auf Ihr eigenes Bett, auf die Umarmung Ihrer Liebsten und die Wärme Ihres Zuhauses. Dann erhalten Sie die Nachricht, dass Sie länger bleiben müssen, da Ihr Nachfolger noch auf sein Visum warten muss, um Sie abzulösen - nicht Tage, nicht Wochen, sondern zwei Monate!\n\nSo ist es einigen Soldaten ergangen. Ein Verwaltungsakt, ein fehlender Stempel legt alles lahm. Ich war schon wütend darüber. Ich möchte, dass dafür Sorge getragen wird, dass die Einsatzplanung nicht an der Verzögerung bei der Visavergabe scheitert.\n\nDas dürfen wir unseren Soldatinnen und Soldaten nicht zumuten. Mir ist hier rasche Abhilfe zugesagt worden; denn das darf so nicht sein.\n\nDen Bericht des Jahres 2014 hat der ehemalige Wehrbeauftragte Königshaus als das „Jahr der Wahrheit“ betitelt. Mir hat das sehr gut gefallen, weil der Bericht des Wehrbeauftragten dafür da ist, Mängel aufzuzeigen, damit sie behoben werden können.\n\nAber wir müssen nicht nur Lösungen für Ausrüstungsprobleme finden, sondern auch Lösungen für die Menschen, die mit der Ausrüstung arbeiten. Ich habe eben über die Probleme mit der Vergabe eines Visums gesprochen. Das klingt nach etwas, was eine verheerende Wirkung nach sich zieht. Verheerende Wirkungen können auch falsche Schuhwerke nach sich ziehen: Rückenschmerzen, Fehlstellungen der Füße. Blasen sind da noch das geringste Problem. Ja, Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wenn man aus der Pflege kommt, kann man hier mitreden. Richtige Kampfstiefel für die Soldaten sind mit der wichtigste Teil der Ausrüstung.\n\nHartnäckigkeit mag für manche unangenehm sein; aber sie ist notwendig, wenn man den Eindruck hat, dass Lösungen zu lange auf sich warten lassen. Das gilt auch für die elektronische Patientenakte für Soldatinnen und Soldaten. 2017 soll sie kommen. Ab dann sollen Daten und nicht mehr Patienten auf Reisen zur Genesung gehen. An dieser Stelle möchte ich mich ganz herzlich bei der Staatssekretärin Suder für unseren regelmäßigen Austausch bedanken: Vielen Dank!\n\nEs gibt Erkrankungen und Schwierigkeiten, die sich leicht behandeln und lösen lassen. Das gilt nicht für seelische Probleme. Wenn die Seele krank und wenn sie schwach ist, gibt es kein Patentrezept, keine Tinktur, kein Pflaster, das hilft. Mir gefällt der Begriff „gestörte Psyche“ nicht; denn der Mensch ist ja niemals perfekt. Wenn ein Soldat oder eine Soldatin schweren Schaden an der Seele genommen hat, muss das Beste getan werden, um ihm zu helfen. Das gilt insbesondere für Traumata nach Einsätzen. Jedem von uns ist vielleicht schon einmal Verständnislosigkeit begegnet, wenn wir Termine nicht wahrnehmen können oder sogar kurzfristig absagen müssen. Das liegt daran, dass man sich unseren Alltag schwer vorstellen kann. Wir hetzen von Sitzung zu Sitzung, versuchen, dabei gut auszusehen, wir lächeln auf Fotos, wollen perfekt sein. Unsere Kalender ändern sich stündlich. Schmunzelnd sage ich manchmal: Kein normaler Mensch kann sich vorstellen, was hier los ist.\n\nWenn es schon so schwer ist, unseren Tagesablauf zu verstehen, wie fast unmöglich ist es dann, die Erlebnisse eines Soldaten zu verstehen, der zum Gehorsam verpflichtet ist?! Bei der Behandlung von Traumata, Depressionen und psychischen Erkrankungen ist der Aufbau von Vertrauen zum Arzt oder zum Seelsorger der Schlüssel zum Behandlungserfolg. Ich habe den Eindruck, dass Helfende, die die Bundeswehr und die Einsatzrealität kennen, besser als zivile Therapeuten in der Lage sind, zu unterstützen, wenn die Seele verschlossen ist. Den zivilen Therapeuten fehlt hier oft das tiefere Verständnis für unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten.\n\nEine wichtige erste und unverzichtbare Anlaufstelle sind hier die Lotsen. Sie vermitteln, und sie sind Ansprechpartner auf Augenhöhe, die die soldatische Sprache verstehen. Sie kennen den Truppenalltag. Lotsen sollen zum Teil freigestellt werden; denn auch sie brauchen neben dem Tun für den Nächsten Raum, um Belastendes verarbeiten zu können.\n\nEine aufgeräumte Seele wohnt in einem aufgeräumten Zimmer, so sagt man. Wir haben es gut: Wir können unser Büro so einrichten, wie es uns gefällt. Soldaten können dies nicht. Es wurmt mich, wenn ich höre, dass sich Soldaten in ihren Stuben und Kasernen wie zu Hause fühlen sollen. Da fragt man sich, wie es bei manch einem, der so etwas sagt, zu Hause aussieht. Ich habe zivile Mitarbeiter bei Begehungen schon oft gefragt, wie sie sich das Leben eines Soldaten zu Hause vorstellen: Feldbett, keine Tapeten an der Wand oder Stroh auf dem Boden? Da steigt der Blutdruck des Gegenübers.\n\nIch sende an dieser Stelle ganz herzliche Grüße nach Büchel. Der Zustand der Unterbringung dort war eine Zumutung, als ich dort zu Besuch sein durfte. Ich hoffe, man hat dort mit der Arbeit für die Unterbringung unserer Soldatinnen und Soldaten begonnen.\n\nBaumaßnahmen dauern viel zu lange. Das liegt manch­mal daran, dass die Beteiligten nicht miteinander reden, kein Verständnis für den Bedarf des Auftraggebers haben und die Verantwortung für Fehler von einem auf den anderen geschoben werden. Man muss vielleicht auch damit aufhören, sich um Form und Farbe von Lichtschaltern zu kümmern, um sich auf das Wesentliche zu konzentrieren. Hier wiehert manchmal der Amtsschimmel, und zwar so lange, bis der Schimmel an den Wänden ist. Mut zur Fehlerkultur ist hier erforderlich. Schließlich ist niemand von uns perfekt.\n\nIch freue mich ganz besonders, dass unser Wehrbeauftragter Hans-Peter Bartels die Frauen in der Bundeswehr besonders im Blick hat.\n\n- Ja, mein Lieber. - Er weiß, dass wir auf Frauen in der Truppe nicht verzichten können und wollen.\n\nAber viele Frauen kommen zur Bundeswehr und bleiben nicht. Warum das so ist, müssen wir herausfinden, und wir müssen überzeugende Angebote machen. Meine Kollegin Gabi Weber und ich haben hier den Gesprächsfaden mit den zivilen und militärischen Gleichstellungsbeauftragten aufgenommen und freuen uns über das große Interesse.\n\nIch habe große Achtung vor unseren Soldatinnen und Soldaten - Achtung und Wertschätzung auch dafür, wie schnell unsere Truppe bereit ist, ihren Auftrag auszuführen. Liebe Soldatinnen und Soldaten, Gott schütze und behüte euch bei eurem Auftrag in In- und Auslandseinsätzen.\n\nIch freue mich auf die zukünftige Zusammenarbeit mit Ihnen, sehr geehrter Herr Wehrbeauftragter, lieber Hans-Peter.\n\nMit einem Zitat von Irmgard Erath möchte ich schließen:\n\nManchmal brauchen wir mehr Kraft, als wir haben. Aber nie mehr, als wir von Gott erbitten können.\n\nIch danke für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit und wünsche Ihnen Gottes Segen.\"\n2731,ulrich-lange,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen!\n\n… wir müssen die Versorgung mit Breitband verbessern … Es geht um die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit deutscher Unternehmen. Es geht in diesem Zusammenhang darum, dass wir die Telekommunikations- und Netzunternehmen beim Ausbauprozess durch vernünftige Rahmenbedingungen unterstützen …\n\nSo Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel am 25. Juni im Rahmen der Haushaltsberatungen.\n\nMit der „Netzallianz Digitales Deutschland“ hat unser Bundesminister Alexander Dobrindt das richtige Format gewählt, um ebendiese vernünftigen Rahmenbedingungen gemeinsam mit der Branche zu erarbeiten; denn wir haben uns als Koalition ein ehrgeiziges Ziel gesetzt: flächendeckend 50 Megabit pro Sekunde für alle Bürgerinnen und Bürger.\n\nDer nun hier vorliegende Antrag - es ist ein ambitionierter Antrag; das sieht man auch an seinem Umfang - versteht sich als ein konstruktiver und konkreter Beitrag zu ebendieser Netzallianz. Die Vorstellungen der Koalitionsfraktionen, von Union und SPD, sollen auf diese Weise in das Kursbuch für den Breitbandausbau Eingang finden, und wir sind zuversichtlich, hier gute Akzente zu setzen.\n\nBeim Zugang zur digitalen Welt handelt es sich um die grundlegenden Fragen der gesellschaftlichen Teilhabe am öffentlichen und wirtschaftlichen Leben und um die Frage der Innovationsgerechtigkeit. Betroffen sind Stadt und Land, Ost und West und unser Land als europäischer und Weltwirtschaftsstandort. Ziel ist es, in wettbewerblichen Strukturen eine starke deutsche und europäische Telekommunikations- und IT-Industrie sicherzustellen und den Breitbandausbau insbesondere im ländlichen Raum konsequent voranzutreiben.\n\nDass es dabei keine allgemeingültige, keine einfache und auch nicht nur eine einzige Lösung gibt, zeigt der Antrag in seiner Vielschichtigkeit. Ja, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir brauchen auch und insbesondere pragmatische Ansätze. Wir wollen eines vermeiden: Brüche im Regulierungsregime. Bund, Länder und Kommunen profitieren gemeinsam vom Breitbandausbau. Deshalb muss auch jede staatliche Ebene ihren -Beitrag leisten. Wir setzen dabei insbesondere auf -folgende Schwerpunkte: deutliche Kostenreduzierung beim Ausbau der Glasfasernetze mit einer entsprechenden Umsetzung der Kostenreduzierungsrichtlinie der EU im Breitbandinfrastrukturausbaugesetz, den schnellen -Einsatz hochleistungsfähiger Mobilfunkfrequenzen, den effizienten Einsatz von Fördermitteln, aber nur dort, wo es wirtschaftlich keine sinnvollen Lösungen für den Netzausbau gibt. Dann wollen wir den Blick auf die europäische Ebene lenken. Eines ist für uns auch klar: Es darf von dort zu keinen Maßnahmen kommen, die sich negativ auf den Breitbandausbau auswirken.\n\n80 Prozent der Kosten sind Grabungskosten. Deswegen ist der Breitbandausbau - liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das wissen wir alle, die wir aus dem ländlichen Raum kommen - insbesondere im ländlichen Raum so teuer und teilweise schwierig. Das heißt aber, dass wir die Synergien durch die Mitnutzung anderer Infrastrukturen nutzen müssen. Es gibt Hunderte von Abwasserleitungen, Wasserleitungen, Stromleitungen und sonstigen Verkehrsnetzen, die derzeit nur auf freiwilliger Basis mitgenutzt werden. Hier wollen wir einen Rechtsanspruch auf Mitnutzung vor Ort. Ich habe gesagt, wir brauchen pragmatische Lösungen. Dazu gehört, dass bei Verkehrsprojekten, zum Beispiel bei Brückensanierungen, verpflichtend Leerrohre mitverlegt werden. Auch bei der Querung von Bahntrassen darf es nicht zu monatelangen Diskussionen, Verhandlungen und Verzögerungen kommen.\n\nGerade in dem Bereich - Stichwort für alle Liebhaber unter anderem: Hindenburgdamm - müssen wir schneller und besser werden. Auch die Oberlandleitungen, die wir im ländlichen Raum noch haben, eignen sich, um hier Glasfaserleitungen anzusetzen. Teuer verbuddeln können wir auch später noch.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, immer dann, wenn es zu Streitfällen kommt, brauchen wir schnelle und verbindliche Entscheidungen. Es darf nicht sein, dass der Breitbandausbau durch eine juristische Salamitaktik über Monate und Jahre ins Stocken gerät. Hier muss die Bundesnetzagentur schnell verbindlich entscheiden können.\n\nDer Einsatz von mobilem Breitband ist zwingend notwendig, insbesondere im ländlichen Raum: kurzfristig, um leistungsfähige Internetzugänge zu schaffen, mittel- und langfristig für innovative Geschäftsmodelle im -Verkehrs- und Logistikbereich. Wir müssen auch im 700-Megahertz-Bereich die Weichen stellen. Dieser Bereich etabliert sich weltweit als nächster Standard für die mobile Breitbandanwendung. Wir werden - auch das haben die Diskussionen gezeigt - natürlich auf die Belange des Rundfunks Rücksicht nehmen und die Interessen von Behörden und die Sicherheitsaufgaben unseres -Landes ausreichend berücksichtigen. Aber am Ende des Tages muss bei den 700-Megahertz-Frequenzen ein attraktiver Bereich für den Breitbandausbau übrig bleiben.\n\nDaher, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ist unsere Aufforderung an Bund und Länder zum nationalen Konsens: konstruktiv, zügig und zielorientiert zu arbeiten. Verzögerungen schaden uns allen am Standort Deutschland. Wir wissen, dass der Breitbandausbau in gewissen Teilen des Landes und insgesamt von uns ohne Förderung nicht gestemmt werden kann. Das gilt insbesondere im Hinblick auf mögliche Erlöse aus den Frequenzvergaben. Hier würden wir gerne Haushaltsspielräume nutzen, wohl wissend, dass die Haushaltskonsolidierung auch in dieser Koalition ein hohes Gut ist.\n\nFördern und Fordern: Immer nur dann Geld zur Verfügung stellen, wenn alle Maßnahmen zur Reduzierung der Ausbaukosten vor Ort genutzt sind. Wir wollen die erfolgreiche Arbeit des Breitbandbüros auch in diesem Zusammenhang weiter ausbauen und stärken. Wir haben seit Beginn unserer Tätigkeit als Ausschuss für Verkehr und digitale Infrastruktur dessen wertvolle Arbeit kennengelernt. Auch darauf liegt unser Augenmerk.\n\nIch habe schon gesagt, dass wir darauf achten müssen, dass von Brüssel aus nicht negativ auf den Breitbandausbau in Deutschland eingewirkt wird. Hierzu gehört auch, sich bei der Diskussion um die Netzneutralität nicht gänzlich von netzpolitischen Erwägungen leiten zu lassen. Wettbewerbs- und innovationsfreundliche Rahmenbedingungen müssen vielmehr so ausgestaltet sein, dass Investitionen in den Ausbau hochleistungsfähiger Netze weiterhin wirtschaftlich tragfähig sind. Für den Verbraucher muss transparent und erkennbar sein, -welche Bandbreite des Anschlusses bei ihm zu Hause tatsächlich nutzbar ist. Das ist eine wichtige Forderung von uns.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir legen mit diesem Antrag die Sicht des Parlamentes und der Koalitionsfraktionen dar, und wir legen ein Maßnahmenpaket für den zukünftigen Breitbandausbau vor, das nun in der Netzallianz Digitales Deutschland des Bundesministeriums einen entsprechenden Niederschlag finden wird; davon sind wir überzeugt. So ist es möglich, über die Ebenen gemeinsam das von uns im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbarte, wirklich ehrgeizige Ziel eines Breitbandausbaus bis 2018 flächendeckend mit 50 Megabit pro Sekunde zu erreichen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n5433,oliver-krischer,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es gibt unglaublich viele Herausforderungen in der Verkehrs- und Mobilitätspolitik; aber eines muss man feststellen: Nach fast anderthalb Jahren Große Koalition haben Sie nicht einmal angefangen, sich mit diesen Herausforderungen auseinanderzusetzen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nStattdessen beschäftigen Sie sich mit einer Ausländermaut, die keine relevanten Einnahmen bringt, die die Besucher aus dem Ausland diskriminiert und damit -europarechtswidrig ist, die keine ökologische Lenkungswirkung hat, die ein Bürokratiemonster irrsinnigen -Ausmaßes ist, die verfassungsrechtlich zumindest bedenklich ist und erhebliche datenschutzrechtliche Fragen aufwirft. Meine Damen und Herren, das ist schädlich für die Verkehrspolitik!\n\nDas ist unsinnig! Das ist die Fortsetzung des Betreuungsgeldes in der Verkehrspolitik! Das muss hier einmal klipp und klar gesagt werden.\n\nHerr Dobrindt, ich hätte mir angesichts von 16 Minuten Redezeit gewünscht, dass Sie auf diese Kritikpunkte einmal substanziell eingegangen wären. Dazu habe ich Nullkommanichts von Ihnen gehört. Das, was Sie hier eben abgeliefert haben, ist ein absolutes Armutszeugnis. Das ist eines Verkehrsministers in Deutschland nicht würdig.\n\nIch sage Ihnen auch - so viel Ehre muss sein -: Sie haben in den vergangenen Tagen einen sinnvollen Vorschlag gemacht. Sie haben vorgeschlagen, dass in Zukunft Warnanlagen für Geisterfahrer aufgebaut werden sollen.\n\nJa, das ist richtig. Die erste Warnanlage muss vor dem Ministerbüro aufgebaut werden. Die wird jeden Tag drei Dutzend Mal blinken, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nSeien wir einmal ehrlich: Wenn wir hier über die Ausländermaut reden, geht es nicht um Verkehrspolitik, auch nicht um Einnahmen für die Infrastruktur.\n\nDas ist alles Quatsch. Es gibt nur einen einzigen Grund, weshalb wir über dieses Thema reden. Wir reden deshalb darüber, weil eine rechtspopulistische Regionalpartei\n\nirgendwo im Bermudadreieck zwischen AfD, NPD und Pegida auf politischer Beutefahrt ist. Das ist Ihr Thema. Sie wollen damit die Hoheit über die Stammtische haben.\n\n- Sie empören sich jetzt, aber Sie werden sich das anhören müssen: Der Vorsitzende dieser Regionalpartei drischt NPD-Parolen. Das ist unglaublich. Ich erwarte da einen Aufstand der Anständigen in der Großen Koalition; denn das kann man nicht akzeptieren.\n\nLiebe Christ- und Sozialdemokraten, in einer Koalition - Sören Bartol hat das gerade angesprochen - muss man Kompromisse machen; das ist völlig klar. Aber das heißt nicht, dass man Schwachsinn beschließen muss. Aber Sie sind gerade dabei, genau das zu tun.\n\nDaran werden wir Sie mit allem Nachdruck überall in der Republik erinnern, sollte dieses Gesetz verabschiedet werden.\n\nDas Mantra von Herrn Dobrindt - das haben wir auch von Sören Bartol gehört - ist: Die deutschen Autofahrer sollen nicht belastet werden, sondern es sollen nur - interessanterweise spricht man in dem Gutachten, das Herr Dobrindt vorgelegt hat, nicht mehr von den Ausländern und Ausländerinnen - Gebietsfremde belastet werden.\n\nMuss ich als Rheinländer, wenn ich nach Bayern fahre - dort bin ich gebietsfremd -, in Zukunft auch zahlen?\n\nWas ist Ihr Konzept? Was haben Sie da für eine Vorstellung?\n\nIch sage Ihnen - das gehört zur Wahrheit dazu -: Am Ende wird ja nicht die Pkw-Maut scheitern; vielmehr wird vor dem Europäischen Gerichtshof und vor der EU-Kommission die Kompensation scheitern. Dann werden wir genau vor der Situation stehen, dass die deutschen Autofahrerinnen und Autofahrer 3,7 Milliarden Euro bezahlen müssen. Nachtigall, ick’ hör dir trapsen - das ist genau der Plan: Man will durch die Privatisierung der Straßen über ÖPP 3,7 Milliarden Euro in die Kassen der Versicherer und der Banken spülen.\n\nDas ist doch der wahre Hintergrund des Konzeptes der Großen Koalition!\n\nHerr Dobrindt, Sie beziffern die Nettoeinnahmen auf 500 Millionen Euro. Wir haben über Monate hinweg Dutzende Anfragen gestellt, um an die Berechnungsgrundlage heranzukommen; denn wir wollten wissen, wie die Zahl zustande kommt. Aber Sie haben uns immer die Unwahrheit gesagt. Sie haben diese Fragen nicht beantwortet. Die Tatsache, dass die Wochenzeitung Die Zeit klagen muss, um an diese Zahlen heranzukommen, damit wir Zugriff darauf haben, das wäre eine Debatte im Deutschen Bundestag wert. Das, meine Damen und Herren, ist ein Skandal!\n\nIn dem Gutachten, in dem plötzlich von Gebietsfremden die Rede ist, werden Zahlen herangezogen, die zehn Jahre alt sind.\n\nEs werden nicht greifbare Annahmen zugrunde gelegt. Es ist nicht nachprüfbar, wie die 500 Millionen Euro zustande kommen. Ich glaube - an jeder Stelle atmet das dieses Stück Papier -: Da ist jemand beauftragt worden, der von den 500 Millionen Euro ausgehend die Zahlen herunterrechnen sollte, um das irgendwie passend zu machen.\n\nDer größte Witz an der Geschichte ist, dass Sie jemanden beauftragt haben, die Zahlen zu prüfen und eine Stellungnahme abzugeben, der selber möglicherweise wirtschaftlich von der Einführung der Maut profitiert. Das wäre so, als wenn Sigmar Gabriel RWE beauftragen würde, die Klimaverträglichkeit der Braunkohle zu überprüfen. Es ist doch klar, was dabei herauskommt. Das traut sich nicht einmal Sigmar Gabriel. Das ist unter Ihrem Niveau, Herr Dobrindt, und unter dem Niveau einer Bundesregierung.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, was wir brauchen, ist eine Ausweitung der Lkw-Maut auf alle Straßen; das wäre wirklich verursachergerecht; denn die Lkws machen unsere Straßen und Brücken kaputt, sie sind für den Verfall der Infrastruktur verantwortlich. Das, was Sie jetzt beschließen wollen, ist zu wenig, das reicht nicht aus. Aber Sie wollen die Lkw-Maut sogar noch senken.\n\nIch hoffe, dass die Debatte über dieses Thema am Ende dazu führen wird, dass es - Sören Bartol, da nehme ich die Sozialdemokraten beim Wort - einen Aufstand der Vernunft in der Großen Koalition geben wird\n\nund dass Sie dieses Projekt dort versenken, wo es hingehört: auf dem Müllhaufen blödsinniger CSU-Projekte.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n11435,burkhard-lischka,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Der Anschlag auf das Jüdische Museum in Brüssel, der Anschlag auf Charlie Hebdo, Anschläge auf europäische Urlauber in Tunesien und der Türkei, der Terrorakt im Thalys in Belgien, die Anschläge in Kopenhagen, der Sprengstoffanschlag auf ein russisches Passagierflugzeug in Ägypten, die Anschlagsserie in Paris im vergangenen November mit fast 500 Toten und Verletzten, die Terroranschläge von Brüssel mit 400 Toten und Verletzten, die Messerattacke in Hannover, der Anschlag auf den Sikh-Tempel in Essen - die Liste des Terrors ist lang, viel länger als meine Aufzählung. Wissen Sie, Frau Kollegin Jelpke, wenn man diese grausame Liste des Terrors einmal zum Ausgangspunkt unserer heutigen Debatte über das Antiterrorgesetz nimmt, dann stelle ich mir hin und wieder schon die Frage, ob diese Bedrohungslage wirklich bei Ihnen angekommen ist.\n\nDie Lage ist ernst. Uns gemeinsam muss doch, neben der Brutalität der Fanatiker, dem internationalen Milieu und der Mobilität dieser Terroristen, der Umstand beunruhigen, dass es dem IS offensichtlich gelungen ist, zumindest über einige europäische Staaten so etwas wie eine Befehls- und Kommandostruktur zu legen, die bereits Hunderte Menschen das Leben gekostet hat. Eine solche grenzüberschreitende Vernetzung wünsche ich mir das eine oder andere Mal auch von unseren Sicherheitsbehörden.\n\nWir haben bis zum heutigen Tag nicht eine Datenbank, in der beispielsweise die Namen aller Syrienkämpfer und terroristischen Gefährder in Europa allen europäischen Sicherheitsbehörden zugänglich sind. Das ist ein schweres Versäumnis, das dringend behoben werden muss. Dazu leisten wir heute einen ersten wichtigen Beitrag. Ich finde, das kann nicht Gegenstand einer ernsthaften und ernstgemeinten Kritik sein. Wenn sich Terroristen vernetzen, müssen sich auch Sicherheitsbehörden vernetzen. So einfach ist das.\n\nIch gehe für die SPD-Bundestagsfraktion sogar noch einen Schritt weiter. Der internationale Datenaustausch, den wir in diesem Gesetzentwurf vorsehen, kann nur ein erster Schritt sein. Ich sage das ganz bewusst einen Tag nach dem Referendum in Großbritannien. Wir brauchen ein gemeinsames europäisches Antiterrorzentrum,\n\nin dem die europäischen Sicherheitsbehörden eng und koordiniert zusammenarbeiten, um dem Terror die Stirn zu bieten.\n\nIch finde, das Gemeinsame Terrorismusabwehrzentrum, das wir in Deutschland haben, ist in diesem Fall wirklich ein gutes Vorbild - auch für Europa. Herr Minister de Maizière, nur Mut! Setzen Sie sich auf europäischer Ebene für die Schaffung eines solchen Antiterrorzentrums ein. Europa darf nicht zum Aktionsfeld gut vernetzter Terroristen werden. Wir brauchen einen europäischen Verbund gegen diesen Terror. Die bessere Kooperation gerade der europäischen Sicherheitsbehörden muss energisch vorangetrieben werden. Da ist jedes Zaudern, wie ich finde, fehl am Platz.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, es ist ein großes Privileg, dass wir in Freiheit leben können. Diese Freiheit ist den Terroristen ein Dorn im Auge. Es ist unsere Welt, gegen die seit vielen Monaten gebombt und geschossen wird. Freiheit und Offenheit brauchen gerade in diesen Tagen unseren Schutz. Dazu leisten wir mit dem heutigen Gesetz einen wichtigen und einen, wie ich finde, notwendigen Beitrag.\n\nRecht herzlichen Dank.\"\n3221,hans-peter-friedrich,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Der Verlauf der Debatte zeigt, wie wichtig es ist, dass wir hier im Deutschen Bundestag -sicher nicht zum letzten Mal über diese wichtige Frage reden. Bei diesem Abkommen mit den USA handelt es sich um eine der wichtigsten wirtschaftspolitischen Entscheidungen, wahrscheinlich für die nächsten Jahre.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, wir sollten uns darüber im klaren sein - das wurde heute schon mehrfach gesagt -: Unsere Stärke, der Wohlstand unseres Landes beruhen darauf, dass es offene Märkte gibt, dass es freien Handel gibt. Sie, Kollegen von den Linken, sollten nach 25 Jahren langsam einmal lernen, dass man Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und Wohlstand nicht schafft, indem man Mauern um Länder baut, sondern indem man Märkte öffnet. Das ist der entscheidende Punkt, und deswegen ist es hier so wichtig.\n\nWir haben eine Verantwortung, die über Deutschland hinausgeht. 25, 26 Millionen Arbeitslose in Europa -haben mit einem Freihandelsabkommen jetzt die Chance auf geschätzt zwischen einer halben und anderthalb -Millionen neue Arbeitsplätze. Ich glaube, diese Chance dürfen wir uns nicht entgehen lassen.\n\nWir sind ein Land, das eine Exportquote von 40 Prozent hat. Kollege Tauber hat schon darauf hingewiesen: Experten haben ausgerechnet, wenn wir keine offenen Märkte hätten, dann hätten wir in Deutschland nur noch die Hälfte unseres Wohlstands. Das heißt, jeder hätte Monat für Monat nur noch die Hälfte des Einkommens in der Tasche. Ich glaube, das zeigt, welche Bedeutung offene Märkte und freier Handel haben.\n\nLassen Sie mich ein Wort zu den Grünen sagen: Ich verstehe, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Grünen, dass Sie keine richtigen Themen mehr haben. Die Kernenergie ist Ihnen weggenommen worden. Sie haben keine Botschaft mehr. Ich bitte Sie, wenn Sie neue Themen suchen, nehmen Sie nicht die falschen. Werden Sie bitte Ihrer Verantwortung gerecht. Hier geht es um viel für die Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer, für die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher, für die Menschen in Deutschland und Europa. Ich bitte Sie um eine differenzierte Diskussion und nicht um eine holzschnittartige, wie wir sie hier erlebt haben.\n\nNatürlich - der Bundeswirtschaftsminister hat darauf hingewiesen - gibt es im Zusammenhang mit diesem Abkommen auch Herausforderungen. Es ist natürlich ein Unterschied, ob man ein Freihandelsabkommen mit einem Entwicklungsland macht, wo die Strukturen relativ einfach, überschaubar sind, oder ob hochentwickelte -Industriegesellschaften zusammen ein Freihandels-abkommen machen, weil dort die Komplexität der -Neben- und Auswirkungen viel größer ist. Deswegen muss man da sorgfältig herangehen und differenziert diskutieren. Deswegen ist der Stil und die Art und Weise, wie diskutiert wird - holzschnittartig, schwarz und weiß -, der falsche Weg. Wir müssen die Chancen nutzen und die Risiken minimieren. Das ist auch unsere Aufgabe als gewählte Parlamentarier in diesem Haus.\n\nIch möchte gerne auf den Kern dieses Freihandelsabkommens - eigentlich jedes Freihandelsabkommens - eingehen. Es geht zum einen darum, dass keine Zölle mehr erhoben werden. Zölle führen dazu, dass die -Verbraucher in den Ländern, in die geliefert wird, mehr zahlen müssen und die Waren nicht in einem fairen Wettbewerb stehen; das beste Produkt, das in der Regel aus Deutschland kommt, setzt sich vielleicht nicht durch, weil es durch Zölle benachteiligt wird. Deswegen ist der Abbau von Zöllen immer wichtig.\n\nNun wird eingewendet - sicherlich zu Recht -, die Zölle in Richtung USA seien gar nicht so hoch. Aber wir haben an dem Beispiel, das Kollege Tauber vorhin genannt hat, gesehen: In einzelnen Branchen und Bereichen sind die Zölle höchst relevant. Wenn die Zölle in der Summe 20 bis 27 Prozent betragen, dann sind sie für eine Branche natürlich ein Nachteil. Deswegen ist der Abbau von Zöllen wichtig.\n\nDer eigentliche Kern dieses Freihandelsabkommens besteht aber in etwas anderem, nämlich in der Chance, dass Europa und Amerika künftig in der Lage sind, bei neuen Technologien gemeinsam die Normen zu setzen, die dann weltweit gelten. In der EU und den USA leben gerade einmal gut 820 Millionen Menschen, aber dort werden 50 Prozent des globalen Bruttoinlandsprodukts erwirtschaftet. Diese 820 Millionen Menschen haben die Chance, die Standards für die restliche Welt - für China, Afrika, Südamerika - zu setzen, die dann dort befolgt werden müssen. Diese Chance müssen wir wahrnehmen.\n\nEin Experte hat einmal richtigerweise gesagt: Normen sind die Sprache des Welthandels, und wer die -Normen setzt, in dessen Sprache wird der Welthandel stattfinden. - Das ist ein ganz entscheidender Punkt. Wenn wir in Europa jetzt die Chance verpassen, zusammen mit den USA die Normensetzer für neue Technologien der Zukunft zu werden - da geht es gar nicht mal um die bisher bestehenden Normen der Vergangenheit, sondern um neue Technologien, die tagein, tagaus erfunden werden und häufig auch wichtig werden -, dann machen wir einen entscheidenden und großen Fehler.\n\nEin deutscher Mittelständler hat es einmal so formuliert: Die technischen Normen sind die Reisepässe für Waren und Güter. - Wir, die Europäer, und die Amerikaner können diejenigen sein, die die Reisepässe ausstellen, und das ist ein Riesenvorteil auch für unsere mittelständischen Unternehmer. Das muss man doch begreifen, anstatt immer über Konzerne zu schwadronieren; das ist der falsche Weg. Unsere Mittelständler werden von diesem Abkommen und der Normensetzung am allermeisten profitieren.\n\nEs geht nicht um die Absenkung von Standards; das ist sowohl in den USA als auch in Europa immer wieder von höchster Stelle erklärt worden. Meine Damen und Herren, weder die europäische noch die amerikanische Wirtschaft hat es nötig, Standards einzuführen, um damit Dumping auf anderen Märkten zu betreiben; beide haben es nicht nötig, und beide brauchen es nicht.\n\nIm Übrigen: Bei Umfragen in den Vereinigten Staaten sagen die Verbraucher dort, dass die amerikanischen Sicherheits- und Gesundheitsstandards selbstverständlich viel höher als die europäischen sind. Sie können die Umfrage machen, wo Sie wollen: Jeder glaubt, dass er die höchsten Standards hat. Wir werden in diesem Abkommen keine Mechanismen akzeptieren, die zur Ab-senkung von Standards im Umweltbereich, im Sozial-bereich, im Gesundheitsbereich - wo auch immer - führen. Das ist, glaube ich, Konsens, auch in diesem Haus. Umgekehrt sage ich aber auch: Wir können nicht erwarten, dass die Amerikaner akzeptieren werden, dass das Betriebsverfassungsgesetz morgen auch in den USA gilt. Ich bitte darum, die Erwartungen, was das angeht, vielleicht etwas zu senken.\n\nDas Thema Dienstleistungen muss angesprochen werden; denn Dienstleistungen machen inzwischen ein Drittel des Handels zwischen Deutschland und den USA aus. Das ist ein wichtiger Punkt. Vor allem Logistik- und Unternehmensdienstleistungen sind zentrale Themen. Bitte hören Sie auf, zu behaupten, die Dienstleistungsfreiheit, die in diesem Abkommen vorgesehen ist, würde zur Privatisierung der Daseinsvorsorge führen. Solch einen Unfug habe ich überhaupt noch nie gehört.\n\nHandelsvorschriften führen nicht zu einem Zwang zur Privatisierung. Wer so etwas behauptet, redet den Leuten einfach Dinge ein; das hat einen Zweck, der nicht mit dem zu vereinbaren ist, was wir als Abgeordnete und als Parlamentarier letzten Endes zu verantworten haben.\n\nIch will etwas zum Thema Finanzdienstleistungen sagen; das ist ein wichtiger Punkt. Beim Thema Finanzdienstleistungen müssen wir sehr genau hinschauen, um zu wissen, worum es da geht. Den Rahmen - das hat Kollege Lämmel vorhin angedeutet - bilden im Grunde die G 20; auf dieser Ebene wurden sehr viele Regulierungen im Bereich der Bankenaufsicht vorgenommen. Aber es gibt bisher noch wenig Konsistenz bei der Umsetzung. Wir könnten versuchen, gemeinsame Standards der Vereinigten Staaten und Europas bei der Regulierung der Finanzmärkte und der Wertpapier- bzw. Bankenaufsicht zu etablieren. Das kann eine große Chance sein. Auch hier gilt unser Credo: Wir werden keine Absenkung und keine Lockerung der Regulierung und der Standards im Bereich Finanzdienstleistungen und Banken zulassen.\n\nEin letztes Wort zum Investitionsschutzabkommen. Denklogisch ist es nicht notwendig, dass ein Freihandelsabkommen ein Investitionsschutzabkommen hat. Man kann das eine ohne das andere machen; das ist überhaupt keine Frage. Auf der anderen Seite wissen Sie, dass Deutschland die Investitionsschutzabkommen erfunden hat, weil man verhindern wollte, dass deutsches Kapitel irgendwo im Ausland verschwindet und deutsche Sparer enteignet werden.\n\nDie Bundesrepublik hat bereits über 130 Investitionsschutzabkommen abgeschlossen. In den über 3 000 Abkommen, die es weltweit gibt, sind Unzulänglichkeiten festzustellen; darauf ist bereits hingewiesen worden. Ein Problem ist die Intransparenz. Man weiß nicht genau, wie die Schiedsrichter ausgewählt werden. Das muss man ändern. Ein weiteres Problem ist, dass Kosten entstehen, die für Mittelständler untragbar sind. Man hat ausgerechnet: Eine Klage kostet 8 Millionen Dollar. Eine solche Summe macht jeden Mittelständler platt. Im Grunde genommen steht er vor einer Rechtsverweigerung.\n\nAll diese Dinge müssen berücksichtigt werden. Es besteht die Chance - wenn man das will und wenn man die Kraft dazu hat -, dass man in einem Investitionsschutzabkommen zwischen Europa und den Vereinigten Staaten all diese offenen Fragen regelt. Aber das wird der weitere Verlauf der Diskussion mit sich bringen.\n\nIch bitte Sie nur um eine differenzierte Diskussion. Hören Sie auf, Schwarz-Weiß-Malerei und holzschnittartige Angstmache zu betreiben. Das entspricht nicht der Wahrnehmung der Verantwortung von Parlamentariern.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n10843,axel-troost,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Kollege Brinkhaus hat sozusagen alles in einen Topf geworfen und alle Zahlungen, die es vom Bund für die Länder oder für die Kommunen gibt, mit einbezogen.\n\nWir reden im engeren Sinne über den Länderfinanzausgleich. Das ist sozusagen nur ein kleines Teilstückchen davon. Ich beschäftige mich mit dieser Frage seit 33 Jahren. Im Gegensatz zu allen anderen haben wir als Linke 2013 eine Kommission eingesetzt, haben einen sehr konkreten Vorschlag gemacht, ein 61-seitiges Konzept erarbeitet, haben eine Kurzfassung davon erstellt, die man hier auch einsehen kann. Darin sagen wir nicht: „Der Bund soll alles bezahlen“, sondern wir machen ganz konkrete Vorschläge. Diese sollte man sich erst einmal anschauen, bevor man uns in irgendeiner Form diffamiert.\n\n- Ja, ja.\n\nWorum geht es aber? Es ist völlig richtig: Man hätte wirklich eine Föderalismuskommission III gebraucht. Ich war Mitglied der Föderalismuskommission II und weiß, dass da viel und auch grundsätzlich diskutiert wurde. Aber man ist eben auch zu einem Ergebnis gekommen,\n\nund zwar unter Beteiligung der Kommunen und der Parlamente. Das, was nun aktuell passiert ist, war wirklich Kindergarten. Man hat erst einmal die Länder untereinander verhandeln lassen. Die waren sich natürlich nicht einig. Aber dann ist man im Dezember zu einer Einigung gekommen. Diese Einigung enthält für meine Begriffe - da würde ich Frau Hajduk überhaupt nicht zustimmen - ja durchaus viele sehr vernünftige Elemente:\n\nAuch wir wollen, dass die kommunalen Steuereinnahmen auf die Finanzsituation der Länder angerechnet werden, wenn auch zu 100 statt zu 75 Prozent. Nach wie vor bleibt es bei einem Ausgleich zwischen den Ländern. Das war ja auch nicht so klar.\n\nEs gibt jetzt ein Konzept für Bremen und das Saarland, damit diese Länder nicht insolvent gehen. Es gibt die Idee, die ich für richtig halte, gemeinsame Staatsanleihen von Bund und Ländern aufzulegen. Ich halte auch den gefundenen Kompromiss auf der Basis des nordrhein-westfälischen Vorschlages, den Länderfinanzausgleich mit der Frage des Umsatzsteuervorwegausgleiches zu verbinden, nicht für falsch. Das ist ja in sich ein Finanzausgleich, weil die Ergebnisse praktisch die gleichen sind.\n\n- Doch, man kann das ja in der Tabelle vergleichen. - Insofern finde ich den Vorschlag gar nicht so verkehrt. Es mag einzelne Punkte geben - darüber habe ich ja auch mit Herrn Meister schon diskutiert -, die nicht ganz schlüssig sind; aber das sind kleinere Punkte im Vergleich zum Ganzen.\n\nWir kritisieren nach wie vor, dass dieses Konzept strukturblind ist. In unserem Konzept haben wir immer wieder gefordert: Länder mit besonders hoher Arbeitslosigkeit und Armut müssten eigentlich mehr Geld bekommen, weil die Höhe der Leistungen, die von ihnen zu zahlen sind, bundeseinheitlich geregelt ist und sie aufgrund dieser Ausgaben natürlich entsprechende finanzielle Belastungen haben und ihnen das Geld für andere Ausgaben fehlt.\n\nAber wie schon gesagt: Ich glaube, dass das vorgelegte Konzept der Länder im Prinzip gar nicht so schlecht war. Der Bund hat es aber drei Monate liegen lassen und ist dann mit einem Vorschlag angetreten, mit dem er - das muss man ganz eindeutig sagen - das Ganze fundamental abgeblockt hat. Es geht ja nicht um die 9 Milliarden Euro, die der Ländervorschlag nennt, sondern es geht um 1,4 Milliarden Euro mehr, als der Bund sowieso angeboten hatte. Die Differenz ist gar nicht so groß,\n\nund möglicherweise hätte man über diese Differenz sogar noch diskutieren können.\n\nAber im Vorschlag des Bundes kommt völlig systemfremd auf einmal vor: Wenn ihr eine Einigung haben wollt, müssen wir eine Bundesfernstraßen-AG machen.\n\nDie Länder sollten sozusagen von der Hoheit, die sie im Augenblick im Straßenbau haben, im Auftrage des Bundes ihre Kompetenzen abgeben.\n\nDas hat mit Länderfinanzausgleich überhaupt nichts zu tun.\n\nNächster Vorschlag: Länder, die strukturschwach und steuerschwach sind, sollen die Möglichkeit erhalten, Sozialleistungszahlungen im Bereich Behinderte und Kinder einzusparen, also von bundeseinheitlicher Gesetzgebung abweichen zu dürfen. Das ist aus unserer Sicht ein Skandal,\n\nder zu einem Senkungswettlauf im Bereich der Sozialleistungen führen kann. Deswegen sind wir der Ansicht - im Augenblick sieht es so aus -, dass der Bund entweder kein Interesse an einer vernünftigen Einigung hat oder aber hofft, in einer Riesenerpressungsaktion bei den berühmten Kaminrunden der Ministerpräsidentinnen und Ministerpräsidenten - ohne Finanzminister und Verkehrsminister - den großen Coup zu machen.\n\nDas kann aber nicht zu einem Ergebnis führen, das dann für 20 oder mindestens für 10, 15 Jahre Bestand hat. Insofern kann ich Sie nur auffordern: Entweder macht man den Prozess noch einmal transparent, oder man muss ganz anders aufeinander zugehen. Ich freue mich, dass wir gestern in der Obleuterunde besprochen haben, dass wir uns das Thema im Finanzausschuss noch einmal vornehmen und dann intensiver diskutieren können. Aber es ist fünf vor zwölf bei einem ganz wichtigen Thema.\n\nDanke schön.\n\nEs ist weniger Wissensdrang, sondern eher Aufklärungsdrang. - Zunächst ist es so, dass Ihre sozialdemokratische Finanzministerin aus Erfurt mit diesem Vorschlag schon sehr zufrieden war - so, wie auch die Vertreter aus meinem Land Brandenburg sehr zufrieden waren. Insofern kann er nicht ganz so schlecht und ungerecht gewesen sein.\n\n- Ja, doch, sonst hätten sie sich natürlich nicht damit einverstanden erklärt. Das ist doch logisch. -\n\nFür meine Begriffe unterliegen Sie hier einem Irrtum.\n\nMan hat sich auf den Vorschlag des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen zum Umsatzsteuervorabausgleich eingelassen. Wenn man dann aber den normalen Bund-Länder-Finanzausgleich draufsetzte, hieße das natürlich, dass die Leistungen von Bayern und Baden-Württemberg 1,5 bis 2 Milliarden Euro höher ausgewiesen würden. Ich habe meinen Leuten im Osten gesagt: Das ist unverantwortlich. Denn egal, was man da 2019 über eine Excel-Tabelle ausrechnen würde - ab 2020 oder 2022 wüsste keiner mehr davon. Dann wird gesagt: Das kann doch nicht sein, dass so viel Geld aus unseren Haushalten in den Osten fließt. - Deswegen hat man das in einer Stufe miteinander verrechnet.\n\nWenn Sie sich die Unterschiede gegenüber dem anschauen, was es vorher in der Geschichte des Bund-Länder-Finanzausgleichs schon einmal gab, und betrachten, inwiefern es Zuwächse in den einzelnen Bundesländern gibt, dann stellen Sie fest, dass es im Ergebnis praktisch mit dem anderen Verfahren identisch ist. Das heißt, der zusätzliche Betrag, die 1,4 Milliarden Euro, kommt nicht durch den Ausgleichsmechanismus zustande, sondern resultiert aus anderen Forderungen. Darüber kann man möglicherweise reden.\"\n1827,hiltrud-lotze,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In meinem Wahlkreis Lüchow-Dannenberg und Lüneburg liegt die Gemeinde Amt Neuhaus, direkt am östlichen Ufer der Elbe, die bis 1989 Niedersachsen und Mecklenburg und damit auch die Bundesrepublik und die DDR voneinander trennte.\n\nSolange sich die Menschen dort erinnern konnten, gehörte die Gemeinde Amt Neuhaus zur Provinz Hannover. 1945 haben die Briten die Gemeinde an die Sowjetische Besatzungszone übergeben, weil es zu schwierig war, die Gemeinde über die Elbe hinweg mit Lebensmitteln und all dem, was nötig war, zu versorgen und zu unterstützen. 1952 kam dann die Sperrzone, und es wurde ein übermannshoher Zaun errichtet. Von da an konnten die Menschen in dieser Gemeinde nicht mehr auf ihre Elbe schauen. Es kam die Aktion Ungeziefer mit den Zwangsaussiedlungen; das alles ist Ihnen bekannt. 1993 kam die Gemeinde durch einen Staatsvertrag zurück nach Niedersachsen.\n\nEs war, wie es eine Zeitzeugin beschreibt, eine Welt, wie mit Brettern zugenagelt, bis am 9. November 1989 die Mauer fiel, in den Wochen danach die Zäune abgebaut wurden und der Blick auf die Elbe wieder frei war. Für die Menschen in Amt Neuhaus und auch an anderen Stellen der Elbe war dieser Blick auf die Elbe der Inbegriff der Freiheit.\n\nIch erinnere mich noch sehr genau an mein eigenes Gefühl und an das, was ich am 9. November und an den Tagen danach erlebt habe. Die Menschen haben das Gefühl der Freiheit quasi aufgesogen. Wir alle haben eine unbändige, tiefe und ehrliche Freude empfunden über das Ergebnis der friedlichen Revolution, die unser Land und damit ganz Europa nachhaltig verändert hat. Bis dahin war es ein langer Weg; das ist schon angedeutet worden. Der Weg begann - das möchte ich an dieser Stelle deutlich sagen - mit Willy Brandt und der neuen Ost-politik.\n\nEin weiterer wichtiger Markstein war der 7. Mai 1989, an den wir heute erinnern. Es war der Beginn der friedlichen Revolution und der Stein, der alles ins Rollen brachte. Das DDR-Regime wurde an diesem Tag endgültig des Wahlbetrugs entlarvt und verlor bei den Menschen jede noch verbliebene Glaubwürdigkeit. Mutige Menschen - das ist schon mehrfach gesagt worden - wollten sich nicht länger für dumm verkaufen lassen. Sie sind in die Wahllokale gegangen und haben die Auszählung der Stimmen beaufsichtigt. So konnten sie am Ende des Tages beweisen, was vorher schon viele vermutet haben: dass die fast 99 Prozent Zustimmung für die Einheitsliste eine Lüge waren. Der lautstarke Protest, der sich an diesem Wahlbetrug entzündete, war der erste Schritt zur Selbstbefreiung. Diese Selbstbefreiung hatte noch 1989 für viele einen hohen Preis, indem sie verfolgt und bespitzelt wurden und zum Teil noch in Haft kamen. Die Menschen haben aber diesen hohen Preis um der Freiheit willen gerne in Kauf genommen. Es war der Wille zur Freiheit, der sich an diesem Tag manifestiert hat und die deutsche Einheit am Ende ermöglicht hat. Auch ich sage es an dieser Stelle wirklich gerne, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Der heutige Tag ist ein Anlass, diesen Menschen für ihr Engagement und ihren Mut Dank zu sagen. Herzlichen Dank!\n\nDass wir heute an diesen Tag erinnern und die Geschehnisse würdigen, ist richtig und wichtig. Wir können aber nicht in dieser Rückschau verharren. Auch ich möchte deswegen den Blick in die Gegenwart lenken. Dass wir in einer Demokratie leben und an freien Wahlen teilhaben können, ist nicht selbstverständlich. Wir haben hier gehört: Auch in der Zeit der Nazidiktatur haben die Menschen erlebt, was es bedeutet, nicht frei wählen zu können. Die Demokratie und die Freiheit, die wir heute haben, sind hart erkämpft, und sie haben vor 25 Jahren buchstäblich die Mauern eingerissen.\n\nHeute ist unsere Freiheit so groß wie nie zuvor. Aber wie steht es um den Willen der Menschen, unsere Demokratie zu verteidigen und sie lebendig zu halten? Unsere Demokratie ist für viele eine banale Selbstverständlichkeit geworden, um die sie sich nicht mehr bemühen. Wir sind mit sinkender Wahlbeteiligung, mit einem Rückzug der Menschen ins Private und mit Gleichgültigkeit konfrontiert. Die Menschen nehmen sich eben auch die Freiheit - das ist die Kehrseite der Medaille -, sich nicht an der Mitgestaltung unserer Gesellschaft und an Wahlen zu beteiligen. Damit können wir uns aber nicht zufriedengeben. Wenn nur 50 Prozent der Menschen zu einer Kommunalwahl gehen, dann ist das für uns ein Hinweis - darauf hat mein Kollege Wolfgang Tiefensee eben schon ausführlich und gut hingewiesen -, dass wir diesen Mut zur Demokratie, den wir vor 25 Jahren hatten, wieder wecken müssen.\n\nWo ist sie denn hin, die Begeisterung für die Freiheit, die Begeisterung, Verantwortung zu übernehmen, die Begeisterung für die Demokratie, und wie wecken wir sie vor allen Dingen wieder? Das ist die entscheidende Frage, die wir uns im Zusammenhang mit dem Erinnern und Gedenken an die friedliche Revolution stellen müssen. Ich freue mich auf diese Debatte und halte sie für sehr wichtig. Ich möchte aber trotzdem damit schließen, dass ich kein besseres System als unsere Demokratie sehe.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n905,matthias-miersch,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben in dieser Frage einen offenen Dissens innerhalb der Bundesregierung.\n\nWir haben, Frau Kollegin Lemke, eine Erfahrung gemacht, die auch Ihnen, glaube ich, nicht ganz fremd ist, wenn man politische Verantwortung übernimmt. Ich glaube sogar, Sie waren damals, als es um die Novellierung des Gentechnikrechts ging, Berichterstatterin, und ich war als Sachverständiger im Deutschen Bundestag. Ich habe den Eindruck, bei den damaligen Entscheidungen wollten die Grünen andere Regelungen.\n\nAber Sie waren in Verantwortung, und Sie mussten Kompromisse schließen.\n\n- Mit der SPD. Trotzdem finde ich, wir haben ein Gentechnikrecht - eben haben Sie es noch gelobt -, das richtig klasse ist. Darauf können wir auch stolz sein.\n\nWas ich sagen will, ist: Wenn man politische Verantwortung übernimmt, dann kann man sich in bestimmten Punkten durchsetzen. Aber es gibt eben auch Themen, bei denen man sich vielleicht nicht durchsetzen kann. Dann muss man um den besten Weg ringen, Herr Hofreiter; dazu lade ich Sie ein. Denn eines steht fest: Wir haben in den Koalitionsvertrag hineingeschrieben, dass die unterzeichnenden Parteien die Vorbehalte des Großteils der Bevölkerung gegenüber der Grünen Gentechnik anerkennen.\n\nIch kann nur sagen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Als Abgeordneter des Deutschen Bundestages kann ich es nicht akzeptieren, wenn sich die Bundesregierung bei einer zentralen Zulassungsfrage enthält. Das ist keine Haltung.\n\nIch glaube, dass es legitim ist, dass der Ball dann, wenn sich die Bundesregierung nicht verständigen kann, wieder beim Parlament liegt, dass wir dann offen darum ringen müssen, was es für uns heißt, dass wir die Vorbehalte anerkennen.\n\nEthische Fragen sind die Sternstunden des Parlaments. Deswegen, Herr Hofreiter:\n\nIch lade Sie ein - das wäre meine Bitte -, dass wir gemeinsam überlegen, wie wir eine solche Situation künftig verhindern können.\n\nIch bin fest davon überzeugt, dass von dieser Brüsseler Entscheidung ein Signal ausgehen wird und wir in den nächsten Wochen mehrere Anträge auf Zulassung bekommen werden.\n\nIch möchte diese Debatte nicht vor dem Hintergrund eines Antrags der Grünen, der Linken, der SPD oder der CDU/CSU führen - denn dann müssten wir alle wieder in unsere Gräben -,\n\nvielmehr ist mir diese Frage so wichtig, dass ich Sie - alle zusammen - einladen möchte, Herr Ebner, gemeinsam mit uns nach einer Lösung zu suchen. Bei den Biopatenten haben wir das zusammen geschafft.\n\nLassen Sie uns in den nächsten Wochen überlegen, ob wir hier eine breite Debatte über die Fragen der Ethik hinbekommen, auch über die Fragestellung, die Herr de Vries angesprochen hat. Ich habe dazu eine völlig andere Meinung, auch aus anwaltlicher Erfahrung: zum Beispiel in dem Fall, dass Landwirt gegen Landwirt steht.\n\nIch möchte mit Ihnen gerne über eine Konsultationspflicht reden: dass dann, wenn man sich innerhalb der Bundesregierung nicht verständigen kann, das Parlament zumindest befragt werden muss. Ich bin mir sicher: Jeder von uns hat eine Haltung, und zwar keine Enthaltung, sondern eine klare Position: ja oder nein. Diese Debatte wünsche ich mir, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nIch bitte die Bundesregierung darüber hinaus, Frau Staatssekretärin, zu prüfen, ob die Gründe, die Ministerin Aigner damals bei der Maissorte MON 810 angeführt hat, nicht auch jetzt zutreffen: ob die Gesundheitsrisiken nicht derart massiv sind, dass man für ein nationales Anbauverbot plädieren muss.\n\nDas Dritte, was ich mir von dieser gruppenübergreifenden Debatte wünsche, ist ein Diskurs darüber, wie wir die europäische Rechtsetzung zukünftig mit beeinflussen wollen.\n\nIch glaube, dass man über eine Opt-out-Klausel, wie sie die CSU, aber auch SPD-Agrarminister wie Till Backhaus jetzt ins Spiel bringen, zumindest debattieren muss, wenn die Zulassung auf europäischer Ebene in die Hose gegangen ist.\n\nDiese Debatte, Herr Ebner, wünsche ich mir. Ich glaube, wenn wir sie in diesem Haus sachlich führen, werden wir dem großen Thema „Gentechnik in der freien Natur“ gerecht.\n\nIch lade alle ein, die Entscheidung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts zum Gentechnikgesetz einmal zu lesen. Ich bin mir sehr sicher: Uns allen wird bewusst, dass es ähnlich wie in der Debatte über Stammzellen oder über das Klonen um urethische Fragestellungen geht, die wir in diesem Parlament dringend diskutieren müssen, wenn wir unserer Aufgabe als Abgeordnete gerecht werden wollen. Wir können uns bei dieser wichtigen Frage nicht enthalten.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n6847,stefan-muller,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Kollegin Kotting-Uhl, ich darf Ihnen berichten, dass in der aktuellen Legislaturperiode keine neuen Vorhaben aus För-dermitteln des Bundes bewilligt wurden, mit denen die Weiterentwicklung der Hochtemperaturreaktor-Code-Packages des Forschungszentrums Jülich unterstützt wird. Ich darf allerdings hinzufügen, dass die Eingliederung eines Staubmodells in HCP im Rahmen eines Arbeitspunktes des derzeit noch laufenden Vorhabens TARGET der RWTH Aachen durchgeführt wird. Dieses Projekt ist am 26. März 2012 mit einem ursprünglichen Laufzeitende zum 30. Juni 2015 bewilligt worden. Aufgrund aufgetretener Verzögerungen wurde die Laufzeit am 23. September 2014 zunächst bis zum 31. März 2016 ausgabenneutral verlängert. Zwischenzeitlich hat der Zuwendungsempfänger eine weitere Laufzeitverlängerung bis zum 31. Juli 2016 in Verbindung mit einer Mittelaufstockung um insgesamt circa 126 000 Euro beantragt, wobei hinzuzufügen ist, dass nur ein Teil der 126 000 Euro für die Eingliederung des Staubmodells in HCP verwendet werden soll. Ich darf Ihnen auch mit-teilen, dass dieser Antrag derzeit geprüft wird.\n\nDas ist jedenfalls sehr hilfreich.\n\nFrau Kollegin, auch ich habe mir diese Präsentation angesehen. In der Tat: Auf Seite 35 findet sich der von Ihnen zitierte Satz. Ich könnte hier nur Vermutungen äußern, will aber Ihre Frage, ehrlich gesagt, nicht mit Spekulationen beantworten. Ich möchte nur so viel sagen: Es ist für die Bundesregierung nicht nachvollziehbar, wie Herr Professor Allelein zu dieser Aussage kommt.\n\nIch möchte in gleicher Art und Weise darauf antworten, wie ich es eben getan habe. Auch diese Aussage ist für die Bundesregierung nicht nachvollziehbar. Ich kann allenthalben vermuten - ich sagte, ich will keine Vermutungen anstellen; jetzt tue ich es doch -, dass sie sich auf den Verlängerungsantrag, von dem ich in der Beantwortung der Ausgangsfrage gesprochen habe, bezieht. Ich kann Ihnen das nicht mit Gewissheit bestätigen, sage Ihnen aber gerne zu, dass wir dieser Frage nachgehen.\"\n6043,renate-kunast,\"Frau Staatssekretärin, meine Frage bezieht sich auf etwas Zukünftiges, nämlich auf die neue Maislinie GA 21 und das Vorsorgeprinzip. GA 21 ist eine Maislinie von Syngenta, die eine tolle Eigenschaft hat, nämlich dass sie aufgrund einer gentechnischen Veränderung die Behandlung mit Glyphosat schadlos übersteht, während alles um sie herum abstirbt. Diese Maislinie steht kurz vor der Zulassung für den Anbau in der EU. Es gibt verschiedene Mitgliedstaaten, die sagen, dass sie den Anbau von glyphosattoleranten Pflanzen kritisieren, da dieser mit einer wirklich massiven Steigerung von Herbizideinsätzen einhergehen wird. Der Anbau ist in mehrfacher Hinsicht schädlich.\n\nMeine Frage ist: Wie wird sich die Bundesregierung jetzt verhalten? Sie haben viermal gesagt, Sie würden das ernsthaft prüfen. Nach dem Vorsorgeprinzip - in der EU ist das das „Precautionary Principle“ - sind Sie, wenn es einen tatsachengestützten Verdacht gibt - ich beziehe mich auf Aussagen der WHO -, verpflichtet, zugunsten der Gesundheit der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher, auch mit Blick auf die steigenden Krebsraten - ich glaube, jeder von uns erlebt das zumindest in seiner Nähe -, zu entscheiden und zu sagen, dass Sie das Verfahren aufhalten wollen, bis es eine EU-weite Bewertung dieser WHO-Entscheidung gibt, die besagt: Es ist krebserregend. - Alles andere würde sich auf die Gesundheit von uns allen auswirken.\n\nMeine Frage ist: Werden Sie sich aus Gründen des vorsorgenden Verbraucherschutzes in die Gruppe der Länder begeben, die Nein zur Zulassung sagen, oder werden Sie hilfsweise mit anderen Mitgliedstaaten eine Initiative für ein Aufhalten des Verfahrens starten, bis man klüger ist? Wenn Sie diese Initiative schon gestartet haben, wüsste ich gern, mit welchen Mitgliedstaaten Sie dazu im Gespräch stehen.\n\nIch hatte damals gefragt, ob es überhaupt noch die Idee gibt, eine Dauerausstellung zu machen. Ich frage danach, weil das Konzept von Public History - das war damals Frage 14 - in Wahrheit ein Konzept ist, das das damalige BMJ selbst erfunden und mitentwickelt hat. Man sagte damals nämlich: Geschichtsaufarbeitung und das Lernen daraus müssen und dürfen nicht zwingend nur zwischen zwei Buchdeckeln passieren, sondern sollten einer breiten Öffentlichkeit zugänglich sein. Ich frage Sie dies deshalb, weil Sie dieses Projekt im Ministerium damals quasi selbst entwickelt haben und weil bei Umfragen - zum Beispiel neulich unter Jurastudierenden des ersten und zweiten Semesters in Erlangen - ein Drittel der Befragten gesagt hat, sie seien für eine Wiedereinführung der Todesstrafe, deren Einführung nach unserem Grundgesetz gar nicht vorgesehen ist.\n\nWenn man all dies sieht, dann habe ich die Sorge, dass wir viel zu wenig Aufarbeitung betreiben und viel zu wenig den öffentlichen Diskurs führen. Deshalb frage ich ganz klar: Setzt sich das BMJV dafür ein, dass es nur für seinen Bereich oder insgesamt - es gibt auch in anderen Ministerien Lücken - eine Ausstellung gibt, die tatsächlich Public History praktizieren kann, dass es also eine öffentliche Auseinandersetzung an verschiedenen Orten geben wird?\n\nSie hatten mir damals in der Anfrage geantwortet, dass es Unterstützungsleistungen für Professor Raphael Gross vom Leo-Baeck-Institut und für das Jüdische Museum in Frankfurt gegeben hat. Ich würde gerne wissen: Wie geht es hier eigentlich weiter? Was waren das für Unterstützungsleistungen? Werden Sie zum Beispiel im nächsten Bundeshaushalt - Sie sagen, das Haus denkt noch darüber nach - einen ganz konkreten Finanzierungsantrag für eine wie auch immer geartete Dauerausstellung stellen, oder sehen Sie das in fernerer Zukunft?\"\n10176,josef-goppel,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Die bisherige Debatte hat schon ein bestimmtes Meinungsbild erbracht, das die Autoindustrie hoffentlich hört. Ich will mir erlauben, das abzurunden. Wir haben rund 30 000 Autobrände im Jahr in Deutschland. Mir ist in der Vorbereitung auf die Rede eine Aussage des Berufsverbandes Feuerwehr zu diesem Thema in die Hände gekommen. Sie lautet:\n\nAuf Grund der eindeutigen Gefahren für die Fahrzeuginsassen sowie die Feuerwehr- und Rettungsdiensteinsatzkräfte fordern wir ein Verbot der Verwendung des Kältemittels R1234yf.\n\nAuch der ADAC hat sich erst vor kurzem so geäußert: Er empfiehlt, Klimaanlagen mit dem natürlichen Gaskältemittel Kohlendioxid als besonders umweltfreundliche und sichere Alternative weiterzuentwickeln. Ganz besonders pikant fand ich eine Verlautbarung in einer Pressemitteilung von Daimler, in der es heißt, dass Daimler künftig auf CO2 setzen will. Vorstand Thomas Weber sagte dazu:\n\nEs freut uns sehr, dass wir uns darauf verständigen konnten, diese nachhaltige und sichere Lösung gemeinsam mit Audi, BMW, Porsche und Volkswagen … voranzutreiben.\n\nDie Frage, ob ein höherer Energieverbrauch mit dem Einsatz von CO2 verbunden wäre, kann sehr gut anhand des Modellautos beim Umweltbundesamt beantwortet werden, das ja sehr genau überprüft wird. Der Energieaufwand dort hat sich auch im Betrieb nicht als höher herausgestellt. Die Frage, ob man CO2 auch in Kleinwagen verwenden kann, ist in der Tat an die Stückzahlen gekoppelt, und das hängt dann von der politischen Lösung ab.\n\nAber der Berufsverband Feuerwehr hat eben besonders auf das entzündliche Gas in einem heißen Motorraum und vor allem auf die Wirkung bei der Verbindung mit Löschwasser abgehoben. Die sogenannte Flusssäure geht, äußerlich zunächst gar nicht aufscheinend, durch die Haut bis auf die Knochen und zersetzt vor allem Eiweiße.\n\nWenn man das nun insgesamt betrachtet, dann stellt sich die Sache wohl so dar: Es wird hier ein Zwischenschritt gegangen, der aber nicht von Dauer ist. Ich bin, an die Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Linken gesagt, auch der Meinung: Als Mitglieder des Umweltausschusses eine Verschiebung der Klimaschutztermine zu fordern, das möchte ich nicht mitmachen.\n\nDeswegen lehnen wir den Antrag ab. Aber es ist offenkundig, dass es hier verschiedene Sichtweisen gibt, die vielleicht dadurch aufgelöst werden könnten, dass man einen Anreiz gibt. Wir von der Union sind ja immer für Anreize. Man könnte zum Beispiel die Kraftfahrzeugsteuer nach dem tatsächlichen Verbrauch im Straßentest bemessen und diese Mehreinnahmen zur Förderung von CO2-Kühlmittel verwenden.\n\nIch bedanke mich.\"\n14201,gerhard-schick,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Das Dossier in der Süddeutschen Zeitung über russische Geldwäsche, wonach in den Jahren 2010 bis 2014 mindestens 20 Milliarden Euro russisches Schwarzgeld in der Europäischen Union gewaschen worden sind, ist schon angesprochen worden. In dem Artikel finden sich zwei Zitate, die man sich in dieser Debatte noch einmal in Erinnerung rufen muss. Das eine Zitat ist:\n\nGeldwäscher fühlen sich von der Bundesrepublik eingeladen.\n\nDas andere Zitat lautet:\n\nGeldwäscher lieben Deutschland.\n\nDas ist nicht das Bild, das wir von unserem Land gerne hätten. Die Diagnose ist auch nicht neu. Wenn es um die Frage der Schattenfinanzzentren geht und von den NGOs internationale Rankings aufgestellt werden, dann taucht die Bundesrepublik Deutschland leider regelmäßig relativ weit oben auf. Es stellt sich die Frage: Was passiert hier eigentlich? Was ist in den letzten Jahren passiert? Jetzt haben wir wieder ein Gesetz, wo es im Wesentlichen um die Umsetzung einer europäischen Richtlinie geht. Wir haben also nicht einen eigenen Ansatz, das Defizit in unserem eigenen Land anzugehen, sondern es ist erneut getrieben von der Europäischen Union. In den Jahren seit 2009 wäre es notwendig gewesen - der Bundesfinanzminister ist für dieses Thema zuständig -, irgendwann zu überlegen: Was machen wir eigentlich, um diese Diagnose, diesen Zustand auch aus unserem eigenen Interesse heraus zu überwinden? Es kann nicht sein, dass wir immer warten, bis die Europäische Union handelt. Vor allem angesichts des ständigen Fingerzeigs von Deutschland auf Steueroasen da und dort ist es nicht lauter, nicht vor der eigenen Haustüre zu kehren. Das ist notwendig.\n\nDas Kernstück des Gesetzes, das in der Öffentlichkeit am meisten bekannt ist, ist das Transparenzregister. Es ist schon im Jahr 2014 von der Financial Action Task Force angemahnt worden, dass in Deutschland ein solches Register fehlt. Es ist eine langjährige Forderung, dass wir ein solches Register bekommen. Jetzt könnte man froh sein, dass es das gibt. Aber es wird keine wirkliche Öffentlichkeit hergestellt, weil dieses Register nur auf Antrag eingesehen werden kann, wenn man ein berechtigtes Interesse nachweisen kann. Auf der einen Seite gibt es das Problem, dass viele aufgrund dieser Voraussetzungen abgehalten werden, diese Information einzusehen, andererseits wird es ein Problem bei der Qualität der darin enthaltenen Daten geben. Wie stellt man denn sicher, dass das, was in einem solchen Register steht, wirklich stimmt? Am besten über eine öffentliche Kontrolle, also dadurch, dass korrigiert werden kann, wenn Leute merken, dass irgendwelche Daten nicht stimmen.\n\nDeswegen wird für uns ein wichtiger Punkt in den Beratungen des Gesetzes sein, dass wir es schaffen, dieses Register zu einem öffentlichen Register zu machen. Das ist auch aus Teilen Ihrer Parteien gefordert worden. Es ist eine Forderung der Zivilgesellschaft. Wir werden uns dafür starkmachen. Ein nichtöffentliches Transparenzregister schafft keine wirkliche Transparenz. Deswegen brauchen wir eine Korrektur.\n\nAuch fehlt es wieder an Datenschutz. Das, was uns manche Unternehmerinnen und Unternehmer sagen, ist nicht ganz falsch. Wir wollen nicht, dass sich Unternehmen verschleiern können; aber Personen haben einen Anspruch darauf, dass ihre sensiblen Daten geschützt werden. Deswegen meinen wir, dass man noch einmal darüber reden muss, ob man mit einer Verschlüsselung der sensiblen Daten ein Stück mehr Datenschutz erreichen kann. Auch das werden wir in die Beratungen einbringen.\n\nWenn es um die Verlagerung der Financial Intelligence Unit geht, dann werden wir uns das genau anschauen müssen. Der Aufwuchs der Beschäftigten ist sicher hilfreich. Aber allein die Verlagerung wird das Strukturproblem, dass Informationen aus vielen Branchen überhaupt nicht kommen, dass Verdachtsmeldungen überhaupt nicht da sind und nicht die richtige Qualität haben, dass die Behörden nicht zusammenarbeiten, nicht lösen. Deswegen bleibt der Appell an die Verantwortlichen in Bund und Ländern, das seit Jahren bekannte Problem: „Wie stellen wir uns organisatorisch, behördlich auf, welche Behörde macht was und wie arbeiten sie zusammen?“ endlich sinnvoll anzugehen.\n\nIch will noch einen Punkt kurz ansprechen. Es geht um die Frage, die jetzt gerade auf europäischer Ebene diskutiert wird - die Bundesregierung steht da auf der Bremse -: Kann man eigentlich bei Immobilieneigentum feststellen, wem da was gehört, wenn man zum Beispiel Vermögen von Kriminellen einziehen will? Ich glaube, auch da gibt es in Deutschland noch Nachsteuerungsbedarf; das sollten wir hier diskutieren. Es sollte vielleicht nicht so sein, dass wir da wieder auf eine europäische Initiative, auf Druck von europäischer Seite warten, sondern aus unserem Interesse dafür sorgen, dass Strafverfolgungsbehörden hier die Möglichkeit haben, die Strafverfolgung zu leisten.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n7866,thomas-de-maiziere,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Das Bundeskabinett hat gestern ein umfangreiches Gesetzespaket beschlossen. Wir werden morgen dazu die erste Lesung haben und in dem Rahmen natürlich noch einmal ausführlich debattieren. Das Gesetzespaket ist Teil der Umsetzung der Maßnahmen, die die neue Lage erforderlich macht, und Ergebnis des sogenannten Flüchtlingsgipfels am Donnerstag, dem 24. September 2015. Zu diesem Thema gehören natürlich sehr viele Aspekte, die sicher gleich Gegenstand der Fragen und auch Gegenstand der morgigen Debatte sein werden.\n\nIch will mich zur Einführung auf die wesentlichen Elemente dieses Gesetzgebungspakets beschränken. Dieses Gesetzgebungspaket besteht aus mehreren wichtigen Teilen:\n\nErstens. Durch Standarderleichterungen im Bauplanungsrecht, im Emissionsschutzrecht sowie in anderen Rechtsgebieten ermöglichen wir es den Ländern und Kommunen, die Aufnahme und Unterbringung von Flüchtlingen zügig durchzuführen, insbesondere in Anbetracht des kommenden Winters. Nicht geregelt sind die Bereiche, die zum Landesrecht gehören, also das Bauordnungsrecht, das Brandschutzrecht oder das Denkmalschutzrecht; hier können wir nichts regeln. Aber das, was wir regeln konnten, haben wir geregelt. Das war ein besonderer Wunsch der Länder. Ich halte es für sehr wichtig, in dieser Phase zu helfen. Viele dieser Regeln sind befristet. Ich glaube aber, es ist wichtig, in dieser Notlage schnell menschenwürdige, winterfeste, adäquate Unterkünfte bauen zu können.\n\nDer zweite Schwerpunkt bezieht sich auf Maßnahmen zur Beschleunigung des Verfahrens, und zwar in vielerlei Hinsicht. Ich möchte hier nur einen Aspekt nennen: Die Betroffenen sind nach diesem Gesetz verpflichtet, bis zu sechs Monate in einer Erstaufnahmeeinrichtung zu bleiben; bei Menschen aus sicheren Herkunftsstaaten gilt dies bis zum Abschluss des Verfahrens. Das ist eine Verpflichtung, die sich an die Ausländer richtet, und keine Rechtsverpflichtung, die sich an die Länder richtet. Gleichwohl haben wir uns durch die Schaffung von Erstaufnahmeeinrichtungen gemeinsam vorgenommen, die Verfahren zu beschleunigen; das ist dort leichter möglich als bei einer sehr frühen dezentralen Unterbringung.\n\nDrittens. Es gibt viele Maßnahmen zur Verbesserung der Versorgung von Asylbewerbern: Impfungen, psychische Betreuung, auch die Option für die Länder, auf der Basis eines Bundesgesetzes, das Teil dieses Paketes ist, eine Gesundheitskarte einzuführen. Die Leistungen dieser Gesundheitskarte werden aber von Beginn an auf dem abgesenkten Niveau des Asylbewerberleistungsgesetzes erfolgen.\n\nViertens. Wir wollen mit diesem Gesetz Fehlanreize beseitigen, die dazu führen, dass viele Menschen nach Deutschland kommen und sich falsche Hoffnungen machen. Außerdem gelingt es uns mit diesem Gesetz besser, zu erreichen, dass diejenigen, die längst negativ abgeschlossene Verfahren haben und trotzdem unser Land nicht verlassen, ausreisen. Im Gesetzentwurf enthalten sind auch Leistungskürzungen für vollziehbar Ausreisepflichtige. Ebenso enthalten ist das Thema „Sachleistungen statt Taschengeld“ in einer abgestuften Form zwischen Erstaufnahmeeinrichtung und sonstiger Unterbringung. Daneben findet sich in dem Gesetzentwurf ein Beschäftigungsverbot bei offensichtlich unbegründetem Asylantrag. Wir wollen auch die Strafbarkeit für Schleuser verschärfen und die Gegenstände, mit denen sie Menschen nach Deutschland schleppen und durch die sie kriminelle Verdienste haben, einziehen können.\n\nFünftens. Wir wollen diejenigen, von denen wir wissen, dass sie bleiben, früh, rechtzeitig und gut integrieren. Dazu gehören der Zugang zu Sprachkursen, der Zugang zu Berufsförderungskursen sowie eine bessere Vernetzung zwischen Integrationskursen und berufsbezogenen Sprachkursen. Dazu gehören viele Dinge, mit denen wir ermöglichen, dass die Integration nicht durch lange Verfahren in Erstaufnahmeeinrichtungen oder anderswo verzögert oder für später erschwert wird.\n\nWir regeln, dass alle Staaten des westlichen Balkans sichere Herkunftsstaaten werden. Das ist ein Wunsch dieser Länder. Das wird auch durch die entsprechende Anerkennungsquote reflektiert. Es ist auch die übereinstimmende Position aller Staaten der Europäischen Union. Gleichzeitig werden für Bürger der Westbalkanstaaten legale Migrationsmöglichkeiten geschaffen, ohne einen Korridor. Wenn sie von einem dieser Staaten nach Deutschland wollen, können sie, wenn sie einen Arbeitsvertrag haben und ein Beschäftigungsverhältnis nachweisen können, unter der Voraussetzung der Vorrangprüfung, die schnell abgearbeitet werden soll, legal nach Deutschland migrieren.\n\nDer letzte Punkt, der Teil dieses Gesetzentwurfes ist, ist eine Finanzierungsregelung. Der Bund hat selbst gewaltige zusätzliche Aufgaben im Zusammenhang mit dem Thema Flüchtlinge. Es entstehen Kosten in den Herkunftsländern und den Transitländern. Es wird mehr Geld für die Ernährung und Versorgung in Flüchtlingslagern bereitgestellt, damit sich nicht noch mehr Menschen aufmachen. Wir werden höhere Hartz-IV-Leistungen finanzieren müssen. Wir brauchen mehr Mittel für das Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge, auch für zusätzliche Stellen. Wir brauchen mehr Geld für Integrationskurse. Wir brauchen mehr Geld für die Bundespolizei. Ich sage das deswegen, damit deutlich wird, dass nicht nur Länder und Kommunen zusätzliche Bedarfe und Kosten haben, sondern auch der Bund. Das wird teilweise schon im Nachtragshaushalt geregelt; überwiegend wird das aber Teil der Beratungen zum Bundeshaushalt 2016 sein.\n\nBezüglich der Finanzhilfen für die Länder haben wir uns, was sich auch in diesem Gesetzentwurf widerspiegelt, auf ein Finanzierungsmodell verständigt, das, bezogen auf eine bestimmte zu erwartende Anzahl von Asylantragstellern, bezogen auf die Dauer der Verfahren und bezogen auf jeden einzelnen Asylbewerber - ein atmendes, strukturelles, dynamisches Finanzierungsmodell -, sicherstellt, dass wir uns - das haben wir uns jedenfalls vorgenommen - zwischen Bund und Ländern in Zukunft nicht mehr darüber streiten.\n\nIch bin sofort fertig. - Dazu kommen 350 Millionen Euro zur Finanzierung unbegleiteter Minderjähriger und 500 Millionen Euro für den sozialen Wohnungsbau, nicht nur für Flüchtlinge, sondern für alle, die den sozialen Wohnungsbau benötigen.\n\nDas ist, Herr Präsident, in groben Zügen der Inhalt des Gesetzentwurfs.\n\nIch halte das nicht für einen Verstoß gegen die Verfassung und auch nicht für einen Verstoß gegen dieses Urteil,\n\nwobei man sagen muss, dass dieses Urteil natürlich auf einem anderen Sachverhalt beruht und wir jetzt ganz andere Dimensionen des Problems haben.\n\nEs ist so, dass das Existenzminimum für ein legales Leben in Deutschland vorgesehen ist.\n\nWenn aber jemand dieses Land verlassen muss - nach Vorliegen aller Voraussetzungen wie Entscheidung der Härtefallkommission oder in einem Gerichtsverfahren sowie Fristsetzung usw. -, dann ist nicht einzusehen, dass er finanziell in gleicher Weise behandelt wird wie derjenige, der legal in unserem Land lebt.\n\nDas ist die erste Begründung.\n\nDas Zweite ist: Der Vergleichsmaßstab bezieht sich nicht nur auf die bisherigen Leistungen, sondern auch auf andere Gruppen. Zum Beispiel ist es so, dass mitnichten alle EU-Bürger, die in unserem Land leben und es nicht verlassen wollen, ein Existenzminimum nach Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz oder etwas Vergleichbares gewährt bekommen; sie erhalten zum Teil keine Leistungen. Insbesondere vor dem Hintergrund eines Vergleichs mit den EU-Bürgern, die keine Leistungen erhalten - obwohl für EU-Bürger legaler Aufenthalt, Freizügigkeit und all das gilt -, sehe ich einer Auseinandersetzung vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht mit Zuversicht entgegen.\n\nIch will, Frau Keul, zunächst etwas zu Ihrer Vorbemerkung sagen. Bezogen auf seine Rechtsprechung zum Familienbegriff sagt das Bundesverfassungsgericht selbst, dass sich die Rechtsprechung im Lichte der Lebenssachverhalte, die sich in Deutschland entwickeln, verändert. Das ist so bei Verfassungsrechtsprechung, und auch hier wird es so sein.\n\nJetzt zur Frage der vollziehbar Ausreisepflichtigen. Es geht natürlich nicht um alle hier Geduldeten, sondern es geht um diejenigen, denen eine Ausreisefrist nicht gewährt wurde oder bei denen diese abgelaufen ist. Einer, der hier geduldet ist, der ist hier eben geduldet und nicht vollziehbar ausreisepflichtig.\n\nWenn sie vollziehbar ausreisepflichtig sind, gilt es für sie selbstverständlich auch.\n\nHerr Abgeordneter, wir haben hinsichtlich der Einstufung als sicheres Herkunftsland eine geltende Regelung zur Rechtsfolge. Danach bleibt es bei einer individuellen Prüfung, die allerdings schneller und einfacher erfolgt. Das zeigt sich auch daran, dass die Anerkennungsquote nicht null ist, aber eben sehr, sehr niedrig, in einer Größenordnung von 1 bis 2 Prozent. Damit ist Ihre Frage schon positiv beantwortet.\n\nIch will aber gerne noch hinzufügen, dass wir auf dem Flüchtlingsgipfel ebenfalls festgehalten haben - das muss jetzt aber nicht Teil des Gesetzes sein -, dass wir mit und in den Westbalkanstaaten Hilfsmaßnahmen ergreifen wollen, damit die besonders schlechte Situation etwa der Roma dort besser wird.\n\nIch möchte zu beiden Punkten etwas sagen.\n\nZum ersten Punkt. Eine Regelung über ein sogenanntes Landgrenzenverfahren wäre nach der jetzigen deutschen Rechtslage nicht möglich. Wir sind aber verpflichtet, zwei EU-Richtlinien umzusetzen: eine sogenannte Aufnahmerichtlinie und eine Asylverfahrensrichtlinie. In der zweiten ist eine Ermächtigung aller europäischen Staaten vorgesehen, ein solches Landgrenzenverfahren - wenn sie das für richtig halten - einzuführen. Wir haben ein solches Verfahren an den Flughäfen. Wir müssen politisch darüber diskutieren, ob wir das auch in Deutschland wollen. Meine persönliche Meinung dazu kennen Sie. Aber da ich hier die Bundesregierung im Ganzen vertrete, sage ich Ihnen, dass dazu der Meinungsbildungsprozess in der Bundesregierung noch nicht abgeschlossen ist.\n\nZu Ihrer zweiten Frage möchte ich klar Folgendes sagen: Wenn es ein Bundesland gibt, das sich in besonderer Weise solidarisch verhält, das in besonderer Weise die Lasten der Aufnahme zu tragen hat und auch trägt, und zwar weit über den Königsteiner Schlüssel hinaus, dann ist es der Freistaat Bayern - das muss man wirklich einmal deutlich sagen - mit einer erstklassigen Verwaltung und vielen Ehrenamtlichen.\n\nWir haben ja jetzt einen genauen Einblick in die Verteilung. Es ist ziemlich oft so, dass sich manche Länder weigern oder sich nicht imstande sehen, eine bestimmte, sehr große Anzahl von Flüchtlingen, die mit Zügen oder Bussen zu uns kommen, aufzunehmen. Bayern hat sich bereit erklärt, auch diese noch aufzunehmen - obwohl sie bereits mehr aufnehmen, als nach dem Königsteiner Schlüssel vorgesehen -, in der Hoffnung, dass sie ein, zwei Tage später verteilt werden. Wenn dann der bayerische Innenminister darauf hinweist, dass das nicht ewig so weitergehen kann, dann ist das verständlich und nicht tadelnswert. Dass alle ihre Verteillast nach dem Königsteiner Schlüssel zu tragen haben, ist eigentlich nur selbstverständlich.\n\nDie Grundentscheidung ist: Wir wollen gerne sehr früh mit Integration bei denjenigen beginnen, von denen wir wissen bzw. ahnen, dass sie hierbleiben. Eine hohe Anerkennungsquote ist dafür ein Indiz. Wir wollen aber nicht Geld ausgeben für diejenigen und auch keine Illusionen wecken bei denjenigen, bei denen so gut wie klar ist, dass sie unser Land verlassen müssen. Das ist ein Pull\u001eEffekt. Wie gesagt, das weckt nur Illusionen und frustriert auch die Helfer, die sich darum kümmern. Deswegen gehören sicher diejenigen dazu, die aus sicheren Herkunftsländern stammen.\n\n- Das müssen wir noch sehen.\n\nDas haben wir nicht in diesen Gesetzentwurf geschrieben, weil man es da nicht hineinschreiben muss. Aber wir, Bund und Länder, haben gewisse Ausbaupläne für Erstaufnahmeeinrichtungen verabredet.\n\nWir wissen, dass jetzt aufgrund der großen Zahl - in den letzten Tagen sind jeweils knapp 10 000 Menschen gekommen; am gestrigen Tag waren es etwas weniger - alle Mühe haben, den Menschen ein Dach über dem Kopf zu bieten; das ist so. Ich kann vor all denen, die diese Aufgabe stemmen, nur den Hut ziehen. Aber das Ziel ist dergleichen natürlich nicht.\n\nZiel ist vielmehr, dass wir Erstaufnahmeeinrichtungen haben, die ein schnelles Verfahren erlauben, die eine schnelle Unterscheidung zwischen den Schutzbedürftigen und den nicht Schutzbedürftigen erlauben. Gerade die Kommunen sagen uns, dass sie die Flüchtlinge erst dann aufnehmen wollen - das ist die gemeinsame Auffassung von Städtetag, Landkreistag und Städte- und Gemeindebund -, wenn klar ist, dass sie bleiben dürfen. Genau so wollen wir vorgehen.\n\nZu Ihrer ersten Frage, Herr Abgeordneter Beck: Die Lage der Roma ist in den entsprechenden Staaten nicht gut. Sie entspricht aber nicht politischer Verfolgung, auch nicht in der Kumulation.\n\nDas ist die gemeinsame Auffassung des Bundesamtes für Migration und Flüchtlinge und der Gerichte.\n\nDie Tatsache, dass das kein Tatbestand politischer Verfolgung ist, ist gemeinsame Auffassung aller europäischen Länder, sodass Sie vielleicht einmal überlegen sollten, ob und wie lange Sie diese Position noch aufrechterhalten, zumal vermutlich auch nicht unerhebliche rot-grün regierte Länder dem im Bundesrat zustimmen werden, wie sie erklärt haben.\n\nJetzt zur zweiten Frage. Ihre Frage zu Senegal und Ghana kann ich aus dem Stand nicht beantworten. Die Antwort reiche ich Ihnen gerne schriftlich nach. Ich will Ihnen aber sagen, dass es auch auf Wunsch der Grünen Teil des Kompromisses ist, dass die Einstufung der sicheren Herkunftsstaaten alle zwei Jahre überprüft wird.\n\nDabei spielt die menschenrechtliche Lage in den Staaten natürlich eine entscheidende Rolle.\n\nFrau Abgeordnete, natürlich ist die Auszahlung von Geld unbürokratisch und effektiv. Das ist nur nicht das alleinige Kriterium. Es gibt einen Zielkonflikt: Einerseits sind Geldleistungen unbürokratisch und effektiv; andererseits sind sie ein Anreiz, weil genau dieses Geld dem Schlepper gezahlt werden kann, weil dieses Geld in das Heimatland geschickt werden kann oder für Dinge ausgegeben werden kann, für die es nicht vorgesehen ist. Wir diskutieren streitig über den Pull-Effekt des Taschengeldes. Ich kann nur sagen, dass der serbische Ministerpräsident uns dringend sagt, dass ein Taschengeld für drei, vier Personen von 500 bis 600 Euro für die serbische Bevölkerung einen Pull-Effekt darstellt.\n\nDeswegen haben wir einen Kompromiss geschlossen - auch mit dem Ministerpräsidenten des Landes Baden-Württemberg -, der Folgendes vorsieht: In Erstaufnahmeeinrichtungen soll, soweit verwaltungsmäßig vertretbar - so ist, glaube ich, in etwa die Formulierung -, das Taschengeld in Form von Sachleistungen oder Wertgutscheinen vergeben werden. In den Gemeinschaftseinkünften kann so verfahren werden. Das ist also eine Sollregelung - mit einer Abwägungsmöglichkeit in Bezug auf den verwaltungsmäßigen Aufwand - bzw. eine Kannregelung. Ich finde, das ist eine klare Botschaft, und so wird es den Ländern trotzdem ermöglicht, die Regelung mit einem vertretbaren Verwaltungsaufwand anzuwenden.\n\nSogeffekte.\n\nDas nehme ich gerne an.\n\nIch habe mich gerade rückversichert, weil ich in der Frage fachlich nicht so fit bin; dafür bitte ich um Verständnis. Deswegen kann ich Ihnen die Frage nicht abschließend beantworten.\n\nJedenfalls haben wir eine deutliche Verbesserung der gesundheitlichen Versorgung, weil wir erstmalig auch die Behandlung solcher Traumata in den Leistungskatalog aufnehmen. Eine Verbesserung gibt es auch beim Impfschutz.\n\nEs ist ein wichtiger Punkt, dass wir die Fähigkeiten von Asylbewerbern, etwa aus Syrien, gerade im medizinischen Bereich auch zur Betreuung der Asylbewerber selbst nutzen. Dabei gibt es Anerkennungsprobleme und vieles andere mehr, aber ich halte das für ein wichtiges Element. Ich weise auch darauf hin, dass von den unbegleiteten Minderjährigen besonders viele unter Traumata leiden. Das ist insgesamt ein sehr schwieriges Thema.\n\nDie Antwort auf die Frage nach der Differenzierung „bis 15 Monate“ bzw. „nach 15 Monaten“ würde ich gerne schriftlich nachreichen.\n\nIch würde gern, Herr Präsident, Ihre Anregung aufgreifen und erklären: Pull-Effekt heißt Sogeffekt. Wenn man Maßnahmen ergreift, die ein Land besonders attraktiv machen, dann löst allein diese Attraktivität einen Sog aus, in dieses Land zu kommen. Das nennt man neudeutsch Pull-Effekt.\n\nWohl war.\n\nFrau Abgeordnete, das hört sich nur auf den ersten Blick überzeugend an. Ich habe darüber auch mit Pro Asyl schon viel diskutiert.\n\nErstens müssen wir feststellen, ob es sich um einen Syrer handelt. Das hört sich einfach an, ist aber nicht immer einfach, weil zum Teil keine Dokumente vorliegen und etliche behaupten, Syrer zu sein, ohne es tatsächlich zu sein.\n\nDas zweite Argument ist: Wir müssen die großen Lasten, die mit einer solch großen Zahl von Asylbewerbern verbunden sind, fair zwischen den Bundesländern aufteilen. Die syrischen Gemeinden - jetzt hätte ich fast gesagt, Herr Präsident: die syrischen Communitys -, in denen es viele Syrer gibt, haben natürlich eine größere Anziehungskraft als Gemeinden, in denen es keine Syrer gibt. Würden wir aber sagen: „Da dürfen alle sofort hin“, dann hätten wir eine derartige Sonderbelastung der Ballungsgebiete, beispielsweise in Nordrhein-Westfalen und anderswo,\n\ndass das mit einer fairen Lastenverteilung in Deutschland - insbesondere während des Asylverfahrens - meines Erachtens nicht vereinbar ist.\n\nJa.\n\nIch habe gerade in meinen Unterlagen geblättert, kann das jetzt jedoch nicht gleichzeitig machen. Das klären wir, wenn Sie einverstanden sind, bilateral.\n\nIch habe das politische Dokument zitiert: „Soll, soweit verwaltungsmäßig vertretbar“, oder so ähnlich, und „kann“ bei den anderen.\n\nZur zweiten Frage: Es ist in der Tat eine Spitzabrechnung vorgesehen. Der Mechanismus ist, dass die Länder Abschläge bekommen und im Folgejahr spitz abgerechnet wird. Wenn es im Laufe des Jahres erhebliche Differenzen gibt, dann kann man darüber reden. Es ist besprochen worden, dass man zwischendurch Abschläge verringert oder erhöht oder einen Ausgleich vornimmt. Aber die Spitzabrechnung war ein besonderer Wunsch der Länder.\n\nHerr Präsident, Spitzabrechnung ist auch ein Ausdruck, den ich vielleicht erklären sollte. Das bedeutet: Es gibt Geld pro Asylbewerber, und zwar in einem bestimmten Land; denn in einem Bundesland dauern die Verfahren wegen des BAMF oder der unterschiedlichen Herkunftsstaaten der Asylbewerber länger als in einem anderen Land. Das soll nicht mit einem Durchschnitt nivelliert werden, sondern es gibt im Nachhinein eine Spitzabrechnung pro Asylbewerber pro Bundesland.\n\nNein, das wird man sicherlich an die Nationalität knüpfen, an die Anerkennungsquoten und die Erfahrung, die man gemacht hat. Ein zusätzliches Verfahren ist nicht beabsichtigt.\n\nNein. Erstens ist es so, dass die Relation, der Anteil derer, die aus den Westbalkanstaaten kommen, geringer geworden ist. Das stimmt. Die absolute Zahl ist aber immer noch so, dass wir von ein paar Tausend pro Woche reden. Versetzen wir uns einmal in das Frühjahr: Wären damals ein paar Tausend Albaner pro Woche gekommen, würden wir hier ganz anders diskutieren.\n\nZweitens kommt hinzu, dass wir noch aus dem ersten Halbjahr sehr viele Verfahren und abgelehnte Asylbewerber, also Entscheide des BAMF, haben, wo es noch keinen Vollzug gibt. Es geht dabei um etwa 60 000 oder mehr. Wenn wir das nicht ändern, lösen wir möglicherweise wieder einen Sogeffekt aus, weil dann viele sagen: Na ja, wenn die nicht zurückkommen, dann kann ich vielleicht trotzdem noch dorthin gehen. - Von daher ist das eine Maßnahme zur Umsetzung der Verfahren, die wir haben, aber auch eine präventive Maßnahme für die Zukunft.\n\nHerr Beck, natürlich gibt es in dem Gesetz verfahrensmäßige Beschleunigungen. Ich halte zum Beispiel die Verpflichtung, sich, wenn die Kapazität zur Verfügung steht, für eine gewisse Zeit in einer Erstaufnahmeeinrichtung aufzuhalten, für eine verfahrensbeschleunigende Maßnahme.\n\nIm Übrigen gilt der alte Grundsatz: Man soll nicht etwas ins Gesetz schreiben, wenn es nicht nötig ist, etwas ins Gesetz zu schreiben. Wir ergreifen viele verfahrensbeschleunigende Maßnahmen, aber wir tun dies untergesetzlich. So haben wir etwa entschieden, bei syrischen Antragstellern praktisch nur noch ein schriftliches Verfahren durchzuführen. Ich muss allerdings Wert darauf legen, dass die Identitätsfeststellung präzise erfolgen muss, auch aus Sicherheitsgründen. - Ich freue mich, dass Sie da nicken; denn das ist ein wichtiger Punkt, der manchmal, ehrlich gesagt, etwas Zeit kostet.\n\nWir haben außerdem vier Entscheidungszentren gegründet, in denen einfach gelagerte Fälle schnell entschieden werden. Zur Beschleunigung der Verfahren wird es beim BAMF, beim Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge, zusätzliche Stellen geben; wir werden sie im Rahmen des Haushaltsverfahrens schaffen, sie aber nicht in dieses Gesetz hineinschreiben. Ein weiteres Beispiel ist das neue IT-Verfahren; dazu finden Sie etwas im Nachtragshaushalt.\n\nEs gibt also eine ganze Reihe von beschleunigenden Maßnahmen, von denen wir einige ins Gesetz aufgenommen haben. Manche haben wir aber nicht im Gesetz erwähnt, vor allen Dingen deshalb nicht, weil wir sie gar nicht in ein Gesetz hinschreiben müssen, sondern diese Aufgaben durch gutes Verwaltungshandeln erledigen.\n\nJa, Frau Kollegin, das möchte ich ausdrücklich bestätigen - ich will das gerne auch öffentlich hervorheben -: Die Gesundheitskarte soll eine Erleichterung für die Länder sein, die sie nutzen; sie bedeutet aber keine Leistungsverbesserung. Nach jetziger Rechtslage ist es so, dass bei Asylbewerbern im Vergleich zu anderen das Niveau der Gesundheitsversorgung geringer ist. Das ist übrigens insbesondere beim Zahnersatz ein wichtiges Thema.\n\nViele sagen oder befürchten - öffentlich oder halböffentlich -, dass es möglich ist, dass jemand, der etwa aus einem Westbalkanstaat kommt, das Verfahren verzögert, die vollen Gesundheitsleistungen ausnutzt, vor der Ablehnung zurückgeht und vielleicht ein halbes Jahr später wiederkommt; dies wiederum hätte einen Sogeffekt. Wir allerdings wollen in den Ländern, die diese Karte nutzen, für bürokratische Erleichterungen sorgen. Deswegen ist im Gesetz vorgesehen, dafür Vorsorge zu treffen, dass auch bei Nutzung einer solchen optionalen Gesundheitskarte das Leistungsniveau demselben abgesenkten Niveau wie bisher nach dem Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz entspricht. Das heißt, es ist geringer als bei den normalen Versicherten im gesetzlichen Versicherungssystem.\n\nIn der Tat haben wir darüber diskutiert: Warum brauchen wir eigentlich eine Bundesregelung, wenn die Länder es auch jetzt schon so machen können? Alle waren sich aber einig: Es soll ein bundesgesetzlicher Boden für diese Rahmenvereinbarung bereitet werden. Meine Antwort lautet: Wenn die bisherigen Vereinbarungen dem Boden, den das Bundesgesetz schafft, entsprechen, muss man sie nicht ändern. Anderenfalls muss eine entsprechende Vereinbarung in einem Land an die bundesgesetzliche Regelung angepasst werden.\n\nHerr Abgeordneter, zunächst gibt es ja im Bundesgesetz einige Regelungen, durch die das, was Sie angesprochen haben, in Zukunft verhindert wird. So darf etwa die Aussetzung der Abschiebung nicht länger als für drei Monate erfolgen. In den Sitzungen hat ein Ministerpräsident gesagt, es solle in Zukunft keinen Winterabschiebeerlass mehr geben. Wir werden dann sehen, wie sich das umsetzen lässt.\n\nDas politische Papier vom letzten Donnerstag - nicht der Gesetzentwurf - enthält aber auch Verpflichtungen der Länder. Es sind also keine rechtsverbindlichen, aber politische Verpflichtungen. Es geht darum, die Ausländerbehörden und die Verwaltungsgerichte so mit Personal auszustatten, dass etwa schnellere Verfahren des BAMF möglich sind. Das hat ja auch Folgen für die Ausländerbehörden und andere - bei negativen Entscheidungen auch für die Gerichte. Das muss dann entsprechend umgesetzt werden, und ich habe die sichere Zuversicht, dass die Länder ihre Verpflichtungen insoweit einhalten.\n\nEs gibt dann noch einen sehr interessanten Punkt: Auch in Bezug auf die Verwaltungsgerichte haben wir in dem Gesetzentwurf das eine oder andere geregelt. Darüber hinaus enthält auch das politische Papier noch einen Prüfauftrag. Es gilt zu prüfen, ob nicht auch durch bessere Verfahren bei den Verwaltungsgerichten ein denkbares Nadelöhr im Anschluss an schnellere Verfahren beim BAMF besser geschlossen werden kann. Ich setze darauf, dass die Länder das schnell umsetzen.\n\nHerr Abgeordneter, es gibt eine ganze Reihe von Maßnahmen, die ich jetzt aus Zeitgründen gar nicht erwähnen kann.\n\nDie Asylbewerber aus sicheren Herkunftsländern sollen möglichst bis zum Schluss der Verfahren in den Erstaufnahmeeinrichtungen verbleiben, von wo aus sie dann in ihr Land zurückkehren können oder abgeschoben werden. Wir haben auch erklärt, dass die Bundespolizei dabei engagiert hilft.\n\nDas Nächste ist, dass keine Abschiebung länger als für drei Monate ausgesetzt werden darf. Außerdem wird die bisherige sehr weitgehende Ankündigung von Abschiebungen eingeschränkt. Darüber hinaus erfolgt gegebenenfalls eine Konzentration im Rechtsschutz; darüber habe ich eben schon gesprochen.\n\nSchließlich ist das Thema Passersatzbeschaffung zu nennen. Wir wollen mit dem EU-Laissez-Passer-Verfahren - das steht nicht in diesem Papier; dafür weiß ich jetzt auch keine schöne Übersetzung - die Möglichkeit eröffnen, auch ohne einen Pass ausreisen zu können, und zwar mit einem EU-Dokument. - So kurz ist die Übersetzung jetzt nicht, aber so ist es vielleicht verständlich.\n\nJa, das ist zu 80 Prozent richtig beschrieben. - Ein solches Verfahren erübrigt die mühsame Passersatzbeschaffung. Das wollen wir mit den entsprechenden Ländern vereinbaren.\n\nEs gibt hier also eine ganze Reihe von Maßnahmen.\n\nMan muss auch nicht immer nur abschieben. Ich halte auch sehr viel von einer freiwilligen Rückkehr und von Hilfen zur freiwilligen Rückkehr, wenn es nicht übertrieben ist. Bezogen auf die sicheren Herkunftsländer haben wir zum Beispiel gesagt: Derjenige, der in diesem Jahr gekommen ist und jetzt geht, der kann auch von der legalen Migration Gebrauch machen, wenn er die Voraussetzungen erfüllt. Ich glaube, das ist auch ein wichtiger Anreiz.\"\n8413,lisa-paus,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich spreche hier heute für den Gesetzentwurf Hintze und Reimann. Ich bin zu dieser Gruppe gewechselt, weil sie im vergangenen Jahr eine starke Entwicklung durchgemacht hat mit dem Ergebnis, dass dieser Gesetzentwurf tatsächlich der liberalste Gesetzentwurf ist, der heute zur Abstimmung steht. Für mich persönlich ist das auch der einzige Entwurf, der wirklich die Lage der sterbenskranken Menschen in diesem Lande verbessern würde.\n\nUnser Gesetzentwurf, anders als die anderen Gesetzentwürfe, betrifft eben nicht das Strafgesetz; das Strafrecht hat bei diesem Thema einfach nichts zu suchen.\n\nUnser Gesetzentwurf will stattdessen durch eine kleine Änderung im Zivilrecht schlichtweg mehr Rechtssicherheit für Ärzte schaffen. Die Ärzte werden ausdrücklich vor dem Entzug ihrer ärztlichen Zulassung geschützt, wenn sie Suizidbeihilfe bei Todkranken leisten. Gerade der Redebeitrag von Frau Nahles hat noch einmal deutlich gemacht: Eigentlich verhandeln wir heute die Frage: Untergräbt es die gesellschaftliche Moral, wenn ein unheilbar Kranker Selbstmord begehen möchte, selbst wenn er bestens palliativ versorgt wird? Sensburg, Brand/Griese und Frau Nahles beantworten diese Frage mit Ja, ich beantworte diese Frage ganz klar mit Nein.\n\nTodkranke haben gerade auch das moralische Recht, Suizid zu begehen. Wenn sie das wollen, dann verdienen sie Anteilnahme und nicht, dass sie alleingelassen werden, gerade nicht von den Ärzten.\n\nIch bin in dieser Frage auch deswegen so vehement, weil ich wirklich davon überzeugt bin, dass eine ergebnisoffene ärztliche Beratung, die eine Unterstützung beim Suizid nicht von vornherein durch Standesrecht ausschließt, die Selbstmordrate nicht erhöhen, sondern sie sogar senken würde; denn nur in einem tabufreien, in einem offenen Arzt-Patient-Gespräch kann der Arzt wirklich die richtige Therapie für den Patienten finden. Vor allem kann der Arzt nur so die Depressiven von den Lebenssatten wirklich unterscheiden und den Depressiven helfen.\n\nVor einem Jahr habe ich an dieser Stelle von meinem Lebensgefährten berichtet, über seinen Umgang mit dem Sterben, nachdem er, der Nichtraucher, die Diagnose Lungenkrebs erhalten hatte. Die Selbstbestimmung bis zum Schluss nicht zu verlieren, das war für ihn zentral. Ihm hat die Gewissheit, im Zweifel über Tabletten zu verfügen, über drei Jahre und viele schwere Stunden hinweggeholfen. Am Ende hat der Besitz dieser vermeintlichen Todestabletten, die er allerdings erst nach vielen Versuchen von einem Arzt bekommen hatte, sogar seinen Suizid tatsächlich verhindert; denn sie gaben ihm die Ruhe, die er brauchte, um sein Sterben zu akzeptieren.\n\nIch wiederhole das deswegen, weil der Fall meines Lebensgefährten, wie ich inzwischen weiß, kein Einzelfall ist; er ist im Gegenteil typisch für sehr viele unheilbar Krebskranke und ihren gewünschten Umgang mit dem Sterben. Aber das ärztliche Standesrecht steht dem entgegen.\n\nWas bekommt ein Todkranker normalerweise hier zu hören? Machen Sie sich keine Sorgen! Wenn es so weit ist, dann wird man sich um Sie kümmern und Ihre Schmerzen lindern. - Oder er bekommt von den Ärzten zu hören: Sie wissen, wenn ich Ihnen Tabletten gebe, dann verliere ich meine Zulassung.\n\nAber was eben passieren kann, wenn der Sterbehilfewunsch nicht gehört wird, das hat ein Bekannter von mir, selber Arzt, leider erleben müssen. Dieser Arzt arbeitete jahrelang vertrauensvoll mit einer Mitarbeiterin zusammen. Diese Mitarbeiterin - Ironie des Schicksals - bekam eines Tages ebenfalls die Diagnose Lungenkrebs. Sie versuchte, mit ihm über Sterbehilfe zu sprechen. Er wehrte das Gespräch ab. Zwei Tage später wurde er angerufen, und ihm wurde mitgeteilt, dass die zuvor lebenslustige Frau mit einer Kugel im Kopf in der Wohnung gefunden worden ist. Für diesen Arzt ist heute klar: Er würde sich persönlich das nächste Mal anders entscheiden.\n\nEs besteht leider die Gefahr, wenn der Gesetzentwurf von Brand und Griese durchkommt, dass diese Art von Selbstmorden, wie der der Mitarbeiterin, wegen der vorgesehenen Strafverschärfung und der damit verbundenen Verunsicherung sogar noch öfter geschehen.\n\nFrau Nahles, es war genau eine Strafrechtlerin in der gesamten Debatte im gesamten letzten Jahr, die gesagt hat: Es gibt kein Problem.\n\nAlle anderen Strafrechtler haben gesagt: Es gibt ein Problem. - Diese Verunsicherung wird eben dazu führen, dass viel mehr Menschen alleingelassen werden. Dazu kann man einfach nur klar mit Nein stimmen.\n\nWenn Sie meiner Meinung sind, dass wir das Selbstbestimmungsrecht der Menschen auch und gerade im Sterben stärken sollten, dass ein Mehr an Selbstbestimmung unser Land nicht unmenschlicher, sondern menschlicher macht, dann stimmen Sie auch mit Ja für den Antrag von Hintze und Reimann.\n\nDanke.\"\n9699,frank-schwabe,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist schon ein paarmal angesprochen worden, aber auch ich will es noch einmal sagen. Auf der einen Seite bin ich froh darüber, dass wir miteinander über ein wichtiges Thema reden. Auf der anderen Seite legen Sie den Fokus nur auf eine in der Tat durchaus problematische Entwicklung und verengen damit das Problem. Ich finde schon, dass man anlässlich des Bombardements Russlands und der dramatischen Folgen, die das bewirkt, auch einen anderen Titel für die Aktuelle Stunde hätte wählen können.\n\nEs ist gut, dass über dieses Thema geredet wird. Aber wenn Sie von schwerwiegenden Situationen reden, dann muss man zunächst einmal das erwähnen, was Russland in Aleppo veranstaltet.\n\nEin Problem der außenpolitischen, entwicklungspolitischen und menschenrechtspolitischen Debatte weltweit, aber auch generell hier im Hause - das will ich als Menschenrechtspolitiker sagen - ist das Rosinenherauspicken, auch wenn Sie gerade Russland für die Bombenangriffe kritisiert haben. Das passiert leider allzu oft. So werden bestimmte Dinge in der internationalen Auseinandersetzung zumindest nicht hinreichend beleuchtet.\n\nDer Konflikt in Syrien ist hochkomplex. Ich weiß gar nicht, wer von sich behaupten kann, das Ganze einigermaßen umfassend zu verstehen. Aber wir sehen das menschliche Leid. Einige von uns - ich muss einmal in die Reihen gucken - kommen gerade aus einer Anhörung des Menschenrechtsausschusses mit 14 Organisationen zur Situation der humanitären Hilfe, in der wir uns noch einmal haben schildern lassen, wie dramatisch die Situation eigentlich ist: Es gibt 250 000 bis 500 000 Tote - da gibt es mittlerweile unterschiedliche Schätzungen - und knapp 2 Millionen Verletzte. Das heißt, über 10 Prozent der Bevölkerung Syriens sind entweder tot oder verletzt. Wir haben 13 bis 14 Millionen Vertriebene oder Menschen, die auf Hilfe angewiesen sind, davon 5 Millionen außerhalb und 7 Millionen innerhalb des Landes.\n\nFrappierend finde ich - da wird noch einmal deutlich, wie dramatisch die Lage ist - die Entwicklung der Lebenserwartung. In Syrien lag die Lebenserwartung im Jahr 2010 bei 70 Jahren, im letzten Jahr lag sie bei 55 Jahren. Daran sieht man, was in fünf Jahren Dramatisches passiert ist. Auch wenn wir hier nicht die Debatte von heute Mittag führen, müssen wir doch sehen, dass das die Realität ist, vor der wir unsere europäische und deutsche Flüchtlingspolitik diskutieren müssen. Das ist wirklich eine Bewährungsprobe für unser Wertekorsett, wahrscheinlich die größte Bewährungsprobe seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg.\n\nDas Leid - das muss gesagt werden - wird in der Hauptsache durch den syrischen Machthaber Assad und aktuell leider durch die massiven russischen Luftangriffe verursacht. Es ist gut, dass die russischen Luftangriffe - so habe ich das verstanden - über die Fraktionsgrenzen hinweg im Deutschen Bundestag kritisiert werden.\n\nRussland muss sich an das humanitäre Völkerrecht halten, und jeder Versuch, zivile oder nichtmilitärische Einrichtungen zu zerstören oder Vertreibungen durch Aushungern oder durch die Hinnahme von Aushungern zu organisieren, ist unerträglich und muss international gebrandmarkt werden.\n\nBezüglich der Türkei gibt es, glaube ich - das wird unterschiedlich akzentuiert -, eine relativ hohe Übereinstimmung hier in diesem Haus, nämlich dass die Türkei eine durchaus ambivalente Rolle spielt. Auf der einen Seite würdigen wir die große Aufnahmebereitschaft und danken für die Dialogbereitschaft, die sicherlich ein zentrales Momentum auch in der innenpolitischen und der europapolitischen Debatte ist, auf der anderen Seite gibt es problematische Entwicklungen in der Türkei im Bereich der Demokratie, der Rechtsstaatlichkeit und der Menschenrechte. Das steht ein bisschen im Schatten der Syrien-Krise. Es gibt auch eine massive Verschärfung des Konflikts mit Kurden in der Türkei, aber auch mit Kurden in Syrien und anderen Ländern.\n\nEs gibt noch etwas, was mir wirklich Sorge bereitet. Ich habe vor einem Jahr gedacht, dass mir eigentlich am meisten Sorge bereitet, dass Erdogan und Putin ähnliche Typen sind. Ich dachte: Menschenskinder, wenn die zusammen agieren - man sieht, dass sie im Inland sehr ähnlich gegen Menschenrechtsorganisationen vorgehen -, dann ist das das größte Problem. Ich habe mittlerweile den Eindruck, dass es viel problematischer ist, dass diese beiden Personen und ihre Länder gegeneinander agieren und dass eine Auseinandersetzung bevorstehen könnte. Ich mag mir nicht ausmalen, welche Auswirkungen das haben könnte.\n\nDeswegen sind wir uns einig darin, dass wir verhindern müssen, dass es zu einer solchen Auseinandersetzung kommt, und dass wir das bei all den politischen Dingen berücksichtigen müssen, die wir gut und richtig finden. Ich halte Schutzzonen zum Beispiel für richtig. Ich finde es aber falsch, wenn wir sie als strategisches Mittel einsetzen würden und ihre Einrichtung zu weiteren Konflikten führen würde.\n\nZum Schluss will ich noch etwas sagen. Wir sollten gemeinsam mäßigend auf die syrischen Kurden einwirken. Es macht keinen Sinn, wenn im Zuge des aktuellen Konflikts versucht wird, dort strategische Ziele zu erreichen. Da gibt es sicherlich einen Einfluss, den der Westen hat, den die Vereinigten Staaten haben, den aber auch die Linke hat. Vielleicht sollte man den syrischen Kurden einmal sagen: Überlegt noch einmal, ob ihr in dieser Situation den Konflikt noch weiter verschärfen wollt.\n\nIch glaube, dass der Außenminister alles tut, um in Gesprächen und Verhandlungen zu einer friedlichen Lösung zu kommen. Es wäre gut, wenn das Haus ihn in aller Breite dabei unterstützt.\"\n15490,heike-hansel,\"Danke schön, Frau Präsidentin. - Ich möchte nachhaken, Herr Staatssekretär Fuchtel. Bei Ihren Antworten ist nicht deutlich geworden, ob die Kanzlerin die Wirtschaftspartnerschaftsabkommen mit Afrika meint, wenn sie kritisiert, dass es unfaire Verträge gibt. Wenn dem so ist, dann frage ich Sie: Wieso kommt die Kanzlerin denn jetzt, am Ende der Legislatur, darauf? Wir diskutieren diese Wirtschaftspartnerschaftsabkommen seit vier Jahren. Die Kanzlerin hat vor zwei Jahren mit ihrem Afrikabeauftragten, Herrn Nooke, der diese Abkommen schon seit Jahren kritisiert, an Diskussionen in unserem Ausschuss teilgenommen. Ich persönlich habe die Kanzlerin darauf angesprochen, ob sie denn allen Ernstes die Wirtschaftspartnerschaftsabkommen mit Afrika in dieser Form verantworten kann, obwohl sie ungerecht sind und die Fluchtursachen verstärken. Daraufhin sagte sie, nein, ich würde übertreiben und sie sehe es nicht so. Sie konnte auch nicht verstehen, dass ihr Afrikabeauftragter diese Abkommen kritisiert.\n\nWie kommt die Kanzlerin jetzt dazu, die Abkommen zu kritisieren? Woher kommt der Sinneswandel kurz vor der Wahl?\n\nDanke schön. - Herr Staatsminister, die NATO ist ja mittlerweile Teil der Anti-IS-Koalition. Im Rahmen dessen muss es ja einen Informationsaustausch geben. Die Bundeswehr hat ja, wie wir alle wissen, bisher Tornados in Incirlik stationiert - sie werden jetzt nach Jordanien verlegt -, die Aufklärung betreiben. Insofern möchte ich nachhaken. Es kann ja wohl nicht der Ernst sein, dass die Bundesregierung über keine umfassenderen Erkenntnisse verfügt als jene, die auf dieser Website zu finden sind; es erschreckt mich eigentlich schon.\n\nIn diesem Zusammenhang möchte ich festhalten, dass es dazu widerstreitende Darstellungen gibt. Die syrische Luftwaffe sagt, dass sie nicht SDF-Kämpfer bombardiert, sondern die IS-Stellung bei al-Rusafa angegriffen haben. Ist Ihnen darüber etwas bekannt?\n\nIch habe noch eine generelle Frage zu dem Abschuss des syrischen Kampfflugzeugs und auch iranischer Drohnen durch das US-Militär in Syrien. Das ist ja eine äußerst gefährliche Situation und Zuspitzung, zumal die russische Seite die Kooperation mit den USA aufgekündigt hat. Im Rahmen des Memorandums zur Flugsicherheit soll solchen Vorfällen vorgebeugt und sich umfassend über die Flugbewegungen ausgetauscht werden. Russland wirft den USA vor, das Memorandum gebrochen zu haben, indem sie den Angriff vorher nicht angekündigt, sondern sofort reagiert haben. Was macht die Bundesregierung ganz konkret, um eine weitere Zuspitzung in dieser Region - womöglich greifen sich russische und US-amerikanische Kampfflugzeuge gegenseitig an oder das russische und das US-amerikanische Militär geraten in eine direkte militärische Auseinandersetzung mit weitreichenden Folgen - im Rahmen der NATO zu verhindern?\"\n14306,monika-lazar,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn es einmal wieder zu Gewalt im Fußball kommt, gibt es häufig reflexartige Reaktionen. Man zeigt sich von dem vermeintlich neuen Ausmaß an Gewalt zu Recht schockiert. Man fordert drakonische Strafverschärfungen oder sogar Gesetzesänderungen. Differenzierung und Augenmaß sind oft Fehlanzeige. So war es auch bei den letzten Ausschreitungen Anfang Februar dieses Jahres in Dortmund gegen die Fans von RB Leipzig. Ein friedliches Stadionerlebnis sollte für alle Fans gewährleistet werden. Das gilt sowohl für Fans von Traditionsklubs als auch für Fans von sogenannten Retortenvereinen.\n\nMan kann am Modell von RB Leipzig zu Recht einiges kritisieren. Allerdings ist das keine Rechtfertigung für Hass und Gewalt.\n\nGegen Gewalttäter muss konsequent vorgegangen werden. Da sind wir uns, glaube ich, einig - unabhängig davon, was der Kollege Steffel vorhin alles überspitzt vorgetragen hat.\n\nAllerdings: An diesem Beispiel von Anfang Februar zeigt sich mir der Sinn von Kollektivstrafen nicht. Wieso bestraft zum Beispiel der DFB fast 25 000 Fans durch die Sperrung der gesamten Südtribüne? Davon waren auch die mehrheitlich friedlichen Fans betroffen. Kollektivstrafen sind nicht das richtige Mittel, weil es dadurch auch zu Solidarisierungseffekten zwischen den Problemfans und den gewaltfreien Fans kommen kann. Auch eine interne Auseinandersetzung wird dadurch nicht gerade gefördert.\n\nProblematisch ist auch, wenn der Staat Fußballfans quasi unter Generalverdacht stellt. Genau das macht er bisweilen. In 12 von 16 Bundesländern führen szenekundige Beamte intransparente Datenbanken über Fußballfans, die teilweise lange geheimgehalten wurden. Zu den lokalen Datensammlungen kommt auch noch die bundesweite Datei „Gewalttäter Sport“. Schon alleine der Name ist irreführend. Man kann da sehr schnell hineinkommen, zum Beispiel schon dann, wenn nur die Personalien festgestellt werden. Ich rate jedem, sich einmal zu Gemüte zu führen, was dort gespeichert ist. Von der Schuhgröße bis zum Dialekt ist quasi alles möglich.\n\nDie Daten von Personen, deren Ermittlungsverfahren man eingestellt hat, werden nicht automatisch gelöscht. Wie eine Kleine Anfrage von uns zur Datei „Gewalttäter Sport“ ergeben hat, soll die Datei sogar noch weiter aufgebläht werden. Wir sagen: Statt die Datei noch weiter aufzublähen, sollte man lieber die Löschfrist verkürzen und vor allem eine Benachrichtigungspflicht einführen;\n\ndenn nur wer weiß, dass er gespeichert ist, kann dagegen vorgehen, falls er unschuldig ist.\n\nAußerdem hätte eine Benachrichtigung auch eine pädagogische Wirkung. Wenn ich merke, dass ich gespeichert bin, dann kann ich vielleicht auch mein Verhalten entsprechend ändern und in Zukunft ein braver Fußballfan werden.\n\nWir sagen nicht, dass wir die Datei „Gewalttäter Sport“ komplett abschaffen wollen; denn gewalttätige Hooligans können durchaus gespeichert werden, und die Polizei muss vor Fußballspielen natürlich wissen, welche Fanklientel sich dort bewegt. Wir wollen die Datei allerdings reformieren und auf eine rechtsstaatliche Grundlage stellen.\n\nFür uns Grüne ist nämlich klar: Fußballfans geben ihre Bürgerrechte nicht am Stadiontor ab.\n\nStatt auf Repression und Datensammelwut setzen wir auf Prävention. Auch deshalb wollen wir die Fußball-Fanprojekte noch stärker unterstützen. Wir alle wissen: Schon jetzt leisten viele Sozialpädagoginnen und Sozialpädagogen in allen Bundesländern wertvolle präventive Arbeit, besonders mit jungen Fußballfans. Das wollen wir weiter ausbauen.\n\nAuch aus den Fußball-Fanszenen kommen viele positive Initiativen gegen Rechtsextremismus, Antisemitismus, Sexismus und Homophobie. Viele Fangruppen machen Angebote für Geflüchtete. Das ist von anderen Rednerinnen und Rednern ja auch schon erwähnt worden. Deshalb sagen wir, dass es durchaus sinnvoll sein könnte, die bisherigen verschiedenen Fördermöglichkeiten der unterschiedlichen Ministerien zusammenzuführen und ein einheitliches Förderprogramm gegen Rechtsextremismus im Sport aufzulegen.\n\nWir haben natürlich nichts dagegen, dass das Bundesprogramm „Demokratie leben!“ jetzt auf 100 Millionen Euro aufgestockt wurde. Das ist durchaus eine richtige Entscheidung. Auch dort gibt es schon entsprechende Fördermöglichkeiten.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich komme zum Schluss. Ich denke, nur im Dialog mit allen Beteiligten - das sind Fans, Fanprojekte, Fanbeauftragte, Vereine, Verbände, Politik und Polizei - können wir unser gemeinsames Ziel erreichen, das lautet: ein friedliches Stadionerlebnis für alle, eingebettet in eine vielfältige Fankultur. Das sollte unser aller Anliegen sein.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3691,uwe-feiler,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! „Für eine Bundessteuerverwaltung - Gleiche Grundsätze von Flensburg bis zum Bodensee“ - eine plakative Überschrift für einen Antrag. Ich hoffe, dass diese Grundsätze auch nördlich von Flensburg, zum Beispiel auf der Insel Sylt, und im Landkreis Oberallgäu, der südlich des Bodensees liegt, Anwendung finden sollen.\n\nPlakative Überschriften und Anträge sind meist für die Galerie gefertigt, ähnlich einem Torwart beim Fußball, der, obwohl der Ball direkt auf ihn zufliegt und er ihn leicht fangen könnte, einen Schritt zur Seite geht und zu einer Flugparade ansetzt, um damit zu glänzen. Das Problem bei diesen Flugeinlagen ist, dass man sich den Ball manchmal selbst ins Tor wirft.\n\nVielleicht lohnt es sich zu Beginn der Debatte, die wir gemeinsam im Finanzausschuss sicherlich noch vertiefen werden, uns noch einmal vor Augen zu führen, dass es durchaus gute Gründe gab, die Steuerverwaltung zwischen Bund und Ländern aufzuteilen.\n\nAuch dadurch sollte sichergestellt werden, dass der Zugriff auf die Steuereinnahmen in der gemeinsamen Verantwortung von Bund und Ländern liegt, und verhindert werden, dass eine staatliche Ebene zum Bittsteller degradiert wird.\n\nDer Sozialdemokrat Walter Menzel, der eine Bundessteuerverwaltung befürwortete, verwies in den Beratungen des Parlamentarischen Rats darauf, dass in der Weimarer Republik der Bund des Öfteren von der Reichsfinanzverwaltung dahin gehend Gebrauch machte, dass er missliebigen Ländern den Geldhahn zudrehte. Auch wenn heutzutage diese Befürchtungen oder Wünsche, je nach Sichtweise, überholt erscheinen, machen sie im Kern aber noch einmal deutlich, dass die Länder eben nicht nur bessere Regierungsbezirke des Bundes, sondern Partner auf Augenhöhe sind.\n\nAuch ich stehe einer Bundessteuerverwaltung positiv gegenüber. Wir alle kennen aber auch das Ergebnis der Föderalismuskommission II. Auf eine Bundessteuerverwaltung konnte man sich damals leider nicht einigen. Ich begrüße es ausdrücklich, dass der Bundesfinanzminister hier erneut die Initiative ergriffen hat, dieses Thema auch für die neuen Gespräche auf die Agenda zu setzen.\n\nBislang habe ich noch keinen Vorstoß des Landes Baden-Württemberg vernommen - in dem Sie ja immerhin den Ministerpräsidenten stellen -, das Grundgesetz und das Finanzverwaltungsgesetz zu ändern, um die Landesfinanzverwaltung in eine Bundessteuerverwaltung zu überführen. Ganz im Gegenteil: Auch Baden-Württemberg und Nordrhein-Westfalen, wo die Grünen immerhin mitregieren, lehnen eine Bundessteuerverwaltung entschieden ab und haben das auf der jüngsten Tagung der Finanzminister noch einmal deutlich gemacht. Der gerade erwähnte Ball, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Grünen, befindet sich somit in Ihrem Tor.\n\nDie Vorbehalte gegen eine Zentralisierung werden Sie auch nicht mit Geld und warmen Worten zerstreuen. Beim Lesen des Antrages kann man den Eindruck gewinnen dass es nur darum ginge, den Ländern genügend Geld für die Übernahme der Pensionslasten anzubieten; dann würden diese auch zustimmen. So einfach ist es leider nicht.\n\nWir müssen in der Diskussion aber auch die Themen sauber trennen. Im Antrag sprechen Sie zum einen die Neuordnung der Bund-Länder-Finanzbeziehungen, das BEPS-Projekt der OECD-Staaten, Steuervermeidungsmodelle von großen Kapitalgesellschaften und auch Fragen der Effektivität der Steuerverwaltung an. Damit verheben Sie sich.\n\nJa, natürlich.\n\nSehr geehrter Herr Kollege, der Bundesfinanzminister, aber auch die Große Koalition sind in Verhandlungen und debattieren darüber. Die Errichtung einer Bundessteuerverwaltung ist für mich persönlich nur gemeinsam mit den Ländern durchzusetzen. Dies werden wir - das haben wir jetzt erfahren müssen - nicht schaffen.\n\nDeswegen ist der einzige und richtige Weg, das Bundeszentralamt für Steuern entsprechend zu stärken.\n\nIch fahre fort. Auch meine Fraktion beschäftigt sich intensiv mit der Frage, wie die Aufgaben- und Finanzverantwortung zwischen Bund, Ländern und Gemeinden mit dem Auslaufen des Solidarpaktes II neu geordnet werden kann. Das Gleiche gilt im Übrigen für die zuvor genannten Projekte. Ich bezweifle aber sehr, dass Sie mit dem Instrument der Bundessteuerverwaltung all diese Aufgaben lösen, wie Sie es in Ihrem Antrag andeuten. Jedes einzelne Projekt ist ein Kraftakt, sowohl in der politischen Diskussion als auch in der Umsetzung.\n\nDie deutsche Finanzverwaltung gehört trotz ihres föderalen Aufbaus zu den effizientesten der Welt.\n\nAnsonsten wäre Deutschland ja auch kaum angefragt worden, südeuropäischen Ländern beim Aufbau einer gut funktionierenden Steuerverwaltung zu helfen. Gleichwohl weiß ich, dass nichts so gut ist, als dass es nicht noch weitere Verbesserungspotenziale gibt. Um diese Potenziale zu heben, wurden bereits Maßnahmen ergriffen, an die ich an dieser Stelle noch einmal erinnern möchte. Als Beispiel sei die Bekämpfung des Umsatzsteuerbetruges genannt: Das Bundeszentralamt für Steuern wurde gestärkt und dort eine bundesweite Datenbank eingerichtet, in der alle Fälle im Bereich des Umsatzsteuerbetrugs bundesweit erfasst werden und auf die alle mit der Prüfung betrauten Beamten in den Ländern online zugreifen können.\n\nZusätzlich wurde mit der „Zentralen Stelle zur Koordinierung von Prüfungsmaßnahmen in länder- und staatenübergreifenden Umsatzsteuer-Betrugsfällen“, die auf den sinnlichen Namen KUSS hört, ein Informationsaustausch zwischen den Finanzverwaltungen im In- und Ausland eingerichtet.\n\nFerner unterstützt das Bundeszentralamt für Steuern die Länder bei der Besteuerung von Umsätzen im elek-tronischen Handel, indem im Internet nach Unternehmen und Personen gesucht wird, die Waren oder Dienstleistungen anbieten. So werden das Umsatzsteueraufkommen, aber auch die Wettbewerbsgerechtigkeit gesichert. All das sind Ansätze, die auch als Vorbild für andere Bereiche dienen können, um die Kooperation von Bund und Ländern zu verbessern.\n\nDas Bundeszentralamt für Steuern könnte beispielsweise die Länder auch bei der Entwicklung und dem -Betrieb einer einheitlichen Software für die Finanz-verwaltungen des Bundes und der Länder unterstützen. Entwicklungskosten würden hierdurch sinken, die Fallbearbeitung würde vereinfacht, aber auch eine bundeseinheitliche Auswertung würde ermöglicht. In diesem Zusammenhang darf ich darauf hinweisen, dass so -darüber hinaus sichergestellt werden könnte, dass der -Informationsaustausch sowohl zwischen den Länder-behörden als auch zwischen Bund und Ländern entscheidend verbessert wird.\n\nWeiter müssen wir uns darüber verständigen, welche Anreize Ländern gegeben werden können, im eigenen Interesse ihre Steuerverwaltung zu optimieren.\n\nIch bitte Sie daher, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, in den Ländern, in denen Sie Verantwortung tragen, für eine Kompetenzerweiterung des Bundeszentralamts für Steuern zu werben. In Bayern haben wir ein Alleinstellungsmerkmal. Wir werden innerhalb unserer Fraktion mit den Kolleginnen und Kollegen der CSU intensiv über das Thema diskutieren.\n\nZum Schluss meiner Rede noch ein Satz: Bund und Länder haben im Bereich von Haushalt und Finanzen eine gemeinsame gesamtstaatliche Verantwortung, der sie gerecht zu werden haben.\n\nIn diesem Sinne bedanke ich mich für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n11311,hilde-mattheis,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich muss schon sagen, Kollege Schuster: Wer hier rechtspopulistische Vorurteile bestärkt, der stärkt rechtspopulistische Parteien. Das ist so.\n\nIch bin schon einigermaßen entsetzt, auf welchem Niveau hier von Ihrer Seite diskutiert wird. Ich glaube: Es steht uns gut zu Gesicht, das zu unterstreichen, was uns in der parlamentarischen Arbeit miteinander stärkt und gestärkt hat, nämlich zu sagen: Wir sind eine offene Gesellschaft, in der wir die Menschen aufnehmen, die Schutz suchen. Diese Menschen bekommen Schutz bei uns.\n\nEs ist doch unsere Aufgabe, genau das zu dokumentieren und daher Äußerungen zu vermeiden, um nicht das Vorurteil, das so häufig geschürt wird, zu untermauern, dass nämlich Menschen hierherkommen, um unseren Sozialstaat auszunutzen. Wir dürfen diese Vorurteile nicht auch noch stützen.\n\nAls Gesundheitspolitikern will ich an dieser Stelle einfach sagen: Wir können stolz sein, dass wir eine solche Gesundheitsversorgung anbieten und wir es uns in unserer großen Solidarität leisten können, Menschen zu versorgen. Mittlerweile hat sich die Einsicht durchgesetzt: Egal ob es um psychische oder somatische Erkrankungen geht: Beides sind Erkrankungen, und beide sind gleichermaßen zu behandeln.\n\nDeshalb kann man nicht sagen: Die einen markieren nur und wollen uns ausnutzen. Die anderen, zum Beispiel die mit dem Blinddarmdurchbruch, können noch ein paar Tage bei uns bleiben. - Es hat sich gezeigt: Die Zahlen, die in dem Interview des Bundesinnenministers genannt worden sind, sind nicht gedeckt. Es gibt keinen bundesweiten Durchschnittswert, der diese Behauptung in irgendeiner Weise belegt. In diesem Punkt schließe ich mich gerne meinen Vorrednerinnen und Vorrednern an.\n\nIch habe die Gesundheitsversorgung in Deutschland von Anfang an so erlebt, dass diese Menschen in den Krankenhäusern oder in der Erstaufnahme durch das Rote Kreuz, durch Pflegepersonal, durch Ärztinnen und Ärzte pragmatisch unterstützt wurden. Dabei ging es darum, die Menschen wirklich abzuholen, egal ob es um Krätze oder um Posttraumatische Belastungsstörung ging. „Abholen“ war die Devise. Das hat man pragmatisch gemacht. Nicht pragmatisch ist man dagegen im Innenministerium vorgegangen. Die dortige Taskforce hat es nicht geschafft, das, was wir als SPD in jeder Sitzung gesagt haben, umzusetzen: fahrbare Röntgengeräte zu organisieren oder bereitzustellen und die Länder zu fragen, was sie brauchen. Nein, die Gesundheitsversorgung blieb im Prinzip den pragmatischen Ansätzen vor Ort überlassen.\n\nAuch das schürt im Prinzip Vorurteile: wenn man etwas nicht tut, was man eigentlich tun sollte. Deshalb rate ich jedem, der in einer Debatte wie dieser, in der es auch um paritätische Finanzierung und um einen möglichen Anstieg der Zusatzbeiträge im nächsten Jahr geht, argumentiert: „Es handelt sich darum, dass wir mehr Geld für Flüchtlinge ausgeben müssen“, sehr davon ab, weil er damit den rechten Rand unterstützt und ihm Argumente liefert.\n\nMan muss sich vielmehr an dieser Stelle auf Fakten berufen: Menschen, die bei uns Schutz suchen, verursachen unterdurchschnittlich hohe Kosten im Gesundheitswesen. Jemand, der die Gesundheitskarte angeboten bekommt, nutzt sie nicht aus. Die Gesundheitskarte entlastet die Verwaltungen der Länder. Hamburg spart durch die Gesundheitskarte jährlich 1,6 Millionen Euro an Verwaltungskosten. Wer diese Fakten negiert und stattdessen Vorurteile schürt, der handelt unverantwortlich.\n\nIch meine, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, angesichts dieser Dinge, die jetzt auch in der Öffentlichkeit zu Vorurteilen führen, sollten wir uns, was unsere Gesundheitsversorgung und die Finanzierung unseres Gesundheitssystems anbelangt, darauf konzentrieren: Solidarität ist keine Einbahnstraße; es muss wieder Parität her. Und wir können es uns durchaus leisten, Menschen zu versorgen, die unseren Schutz brauchen.\n\nVielen Dank, liebe Genossinnen und Genossen.\"\n2594,ekin-deligoz,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kollegen und Kolleginnen! Hinter uns liegen in der Tat sehr intensive Haushaltsberatungen über den Bildungs- und Forschungsetat. In diesem Etat geht es ja auch richtig um etwas. Wenn wir über Bildung, Forschung und Wissenschaft reden, geht es um nicht weniger als um die Zukunft dieses Landes und die Antworten auf die wichtigsten Fragen unserer Zeit, zum Beispiel die Veränderungen unserer Demografiestruktur, die wirtschaftliche Zukunft Deutschlands und vor allem die Chancen- und Teilhabegerechtigkeit in diesem Land.\n\nVon daher schließe ich mich dem Dank an Swen Schulz an, der mit seinen kritischen Fragen die Berichterstattergespräche wirklich sehr belebt hat. Leider kann er heute aus persönlichen Gründen nicht dabei sein. Aber diesen Dank richtet die SPD ihm sicherlich gern aus.\n\nAber - jetzt kommt das große Aber -: Der Einzelplan 30 ist leider ein Einzelplan im Wartestand. 6-plus-3-Milliarden-Paket, das klingt gut; es ist aber ein einziges Rätsel, und es wirft, ehrlich gesagt, mehr Fragen auf, als es Antworten gibt. Ein paar dieser Fragen will ich formulieren.\n\nWas geschieht zum Beispiel mit den Wissenschaftspakten? Eine richtige Antwort darauf haben Sie nicht. Frau Kollegin Hübinger, Sie haben das sehr gut gemacht mit dem detaillierten Darstellen von kleineren Beträgen. Aber wir brauchen auch den großen Wurf.\n\nDa reichen diese kleinen Beträge leider nicht aus. Daran müssen wir arbeiten, wenn wir die Dinge wirklich verändern und gestalten wollen und nicht nur eine Anpassung beim Status quo vornehmen wollen.\n\nWie wird die Grundgesetzänderung zur Kooperation zwischen Bund und Ländern im Wissenschaftsbereich in Zukunft aussehen? Was passiert mit den Schulen? Das ist eine große offene Frage. Daran müssen wir alle gemeinsam arbeiten, weil da in der Tat Bund und Länder - da sind auch die Grünen mit beteiligt - gefragt sind.\n\nOffene Fragen gibt es auch im Kitabereich. Sie haben gesagt: 1 Milliarde Euro werden investiert. Ich habe heute eine Antwort vom Ministerium zum Bereich des Einzelplans 17 bekommen. Die bestätigt: Es ist nicht 1 Milliarde, die investiert wird. 450 Millionen Euro davon sind bereits zugesagt und bewilligt. Das sind alte Mittel. Es kommen als frisches Geld lediglich 550 Millionen Euro dazu,\n\naber die sind nicht einmal verbindlich zugesagt. Sie können nicht von zusätzlich 1 Milliarde Euro reden! Hören Sie auf, von zusätzlichen Mitteln in der Höhe zu reden!\n\nSie tricksen. Sie täuschen. Es sind gerade einmal 550 Millionen Euro, und die sind noch nicht einmal verbindlich.\n\nJetzt komme ich zu der halben Milliarde für Bildungsinvestitionen. Wo ist denn eigentlich die zugesagte halbe Milliarde? Ich kann mich noch daran erinnern, dass Sie, Frau Ministerin, im Berichterstattergespräch sehr zuversichtlich waren, dass das Geld in Ihrem Haushalt noch draufkommt. Dann waren die Mittel da, dann waren sie woanders, plötzlich waren sie weg, dann waren sie verschollen, und jetzt sind sie verschoben. Was denn nun? Das Geld ist de facto nicht da. Wenn man dann noch bedenkt, dass Sie eigentlich eine globale Mehrausgabe von 410 Millionen Euro zu erbringen haben, dann erkennt man: Sie haben de facto Kürzungen in Ihrem Haushalt.\n\nSie können noch sagen: Bei den kleineren Projekten haben wir draufgeschlagen. - Aber wenn man das gegenrechnet, kommt unter dem Strich immer noch weniger heraus, und zwar so wenig, dass sogar der Bundesrechnungshof die hohe globale Mehrausgabe in diesem Haushalt kritisiert, und das findet schon selten genug statt. Das sollte Ihnen wirklich zu denken geben.\n\nWas wir dringend brauchen, ist frisches Geld in diesem Etat, und nichts anderes. Das können wir nicht schönrechnen.\n\nJetzt stelle ich noch eine andere Frage: Wie will die Bundesregierung sicherstellen, dass die Länder die frei gewordenen Mittel, die sie aus dem BAföG-Deal zur Verfügung haben, auch tatsächlich für Bildung und Wissenschaft ausgeben?\n\n- Jetzt weisen Sie auf die Grünen hin. Auf diesen Zwischenruf habe ich, ehrlich gesagt, gehofft. Ich gebe Ihnen ein paar schöne Beispiele: Rheinland-Pfalz will die Mittel in Inklusion in der Bildung und in die Hochschulen stecken. In Hessen kommt ein Sonderfonds Hochschulen. In Niedersachsen wird die dritte Krippenkraft finanziert.\n\nIch finde, dass auch frühkindliche Bildung Bildung ist, selbst wenn Sie das in Zweifel ziehen.\n\nDie grün-mitregierten Länder handeln. Sie sagen zu, und sie tun etwas.\n\n- Ich traue meinen grünen Politikern. Ich traue Ihren -Politikern aber überhaupt nicht.\n\nDazu gebe ich Ihnen auch zwei Beispiele. In Bayern und in Brandenburg wurden von den Grünen zwei Anträge eingebracht.\n\n(Albert Rupprecht [CDU/CSU]: Anträge, aber keine Konsequenzen!\n\n)\n\n- Frau Präsidentin, das lasten Sie mir aber nicht an, dass die mich hier übertönen wollen. Ich rede!\n\nDie Konsequenz war: Die Anträge mit der Forderung, das Geld verbindlich für Bildung und Wissenschaft auszugeben, wurden von Ihnen abgelehnt. Deshalb traue ich Ihren Leuten nicht, meinen Leuten aber sehr wohl. - Das ist die Antwort auf Ihren Zwischenruf.\n\n- Herr Kollege, Sie können gern eine Frage stellen.\n\nJa, selbstverständlich.\n\nHerr Kollege, ich finde, aus Ihrer Frage spricht eine gewisse Unsicherheit.\n\nSie müssen immer wieder betonnen, wohin noch ein paar Mittel fließen, um sich sicher zu fühlen. Ich sage Ihnen eines: Die Debatte im Haushaltsausschuss hat es gezeigt - letztendlich wird es auch diese Debatte zeigen -, dass Sie sich unter dem Strich eigentlich unsicher sind. Sie sind sich deshalb unsicher, weil Sie nämlich mitverantwortlich sind für dieses Chaos, das Sie verursachen.\n\nWenn Sie sich wirklich für Bildung einsetzen wollen: Warum haben Sie dann nicht mehr verbindliche Zusagen zur Verwendung der Mittel verlangt? Das hätten Sie doch tun können. Anstatt dass sich die Parteichefs der Koalition irgendwo in einem Hinterzimmer in einer Nacht-und-Nebel-Aktion zusammensetzen, hätten Sie mit allen Ländern reden können. Sie hätten die Verantwortung dafür übernehmen können und die Bildungspolitik dieses Landes mitgestalten können. Stattdessen müssen Sie jetzt bitten und betteln und auf das Prinzip Hoffnung setzen, dass das Geld dort ankommt, wo es benötigt wird. Ich weiß nicht, ob das die beste Art ist. Aber ich sage Ihnen: Wir können es besser. Auch Sie wissen, dass wir es besser können.\n\nDas Schlimmste ist vor allem, dass Sie auf die Kon-trollmöglichkeiten für diese Finanzmittel verzichten. Die Möglichkeit könnten wir haben. Der Kollege Schulz - das ist seine Leistung -\n\nhat dafür gesorgt, dass es einen Monitoring-Bericht gibt. Das muss man hier sagen. Sie haben ihn übrigens auch gegen Kollegen der CDU/CSU durchgesetzt. Aber seien Sie doch ehrlich: Er ist ein zahnloser Tiger. Der Bericht zeigt vielleicht auf, was passiert ist und was nicht. Wir brauchen aber schon vorher eine Steuerung und eine verbindliche Vereinbarung, sodass wir uns darauf verlassen können.\n\nDie nächste Frage kommt sogleich. Was passiert mit dem BAföG? Sie verschieben die Erhöhung unter dem Strich auf das Ende der Wahlperiode. Es werden zwei Jahrgänge von Studierenden keinen Cent mehr bekommen. Jetzt haben wir die meisten Studierenden, und jetzt brauchen die Studierenden das Geld und nicht nur leere Versprechen. Das hat etwas mit fairen und gerechten Studienbedingungen in diesem Land zu tun.\n\nEin ganz kleines Beispiel: Aufstiegsstipendium. Hier wird die Bewilligung des Büchergeldes für Studierende, die nach der Berufsausbildung an die Uni kommen, anders gehandhabt als für Studierende, die nach dem Abitur ihr Studium aufnehmen. Dies anzugleichen, würde gerade einmal 8 Millionen Euro kosten. Sie finden es gut; die Ministerin findet es gut; alle finden es gut. Aber Sie machen es nicht. Hier wünschte ich mir etwas mehr Bodenständigkeit und Anerkennung der Lebensleistung der Menschen, die nach der Berufsausbildung eine Hochschule besuchen. Warum tun Sie sich hier so schwer damit, genau diese Gerechtigkeit herzustellen? Unser Antrag dazu lag Ihnen vor.\n\nDas, was mir am meisten Sorgen macht, sind die explodierenden Kosten für den Rückbau der nuklearen Anlagen. Das werden Mehrkosten in dreistelliger Millionenhöhe sein, die auf diesen Haushalt zukommen. Hier schließe ich mich dem Kollegen Claus an: Verteidigen Sie Ihren Haushalt, Frau Ministerin. Wir stehen auf Ihrer Seite. Es kann nicht sein, dass die Entsorgung des Atomschrotts zulasten von Studierenden, Wissenschaftlern, Forschung, Schulen und Schülern finanziert wird. Es kann nicht sein, dass Sie die Kosten der Vergangenheit gegenfinanzieren, indem Sie bei den Ausgaben für Investitionen in die Zukunft kürzen. Das kann nicht sein. Das ist keine nachhaltige Politik.\n\nDiese Verantwortung müssen Sie übernehmen. Hier geht es darum, dass Sie tatsächlich Ihren eigenen Haushalt verteidigen und nicht nur die Politik der Vorgängerregierung.\n\nUm zu erfahren, was die Entsorgung des Atommülls kostet, haben wir eine Anfrage an Ihr Haus gestellt. Ich weiß inzwischen aus internen Quellen, dass die Antwort schon geschrieben wurde, wir sie aber nicht bekommen. Entweder wollen Sie nicht, können nicht oder trauen sich nicht. Egal wie die Antwort lautet, Sie müssen früher oder später offenlegen, worüber wir hier eigentlich reden, damit wir endlich Transparenz und Klarheit haben. Trauen Sie sich, damit Sie am Ende nicht allein auf den Kosten sitzen bleiben, was vor allem zulasten der Schüler und Universitäten gehen würde. Frau Ministerin, ich wünschte mir etwas mehr Engagement von Ihrer Seite.\n\nEin Fazit: Dieser Etat kann nicht alles gewesen sein, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen. Es ist eine Herausforderung, dass wir Investitionen in diesem Bereich tätigen müssen. Das heißt übrigens auch, dass wir frisches Geld in die Hand nehmen und nicht nur herumtricksen. Frau Ministerin, wir unterstützen Sie dabei, aber Sie müssen auch etwas tun.\"\n3223,matthias-heider,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Das ist heute schon eine sehr polarisierende Debatte. Ich glaube aber, dass es nicht sinnvoll ist, den Wert von Handelsabkommen kleinzureden. Es ist unsere Aufgabe als Abgeordnete, bei diesen Abkommen Chancen zu ermöglichen. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Opposition, ich kann heute nicht erkennen, dass Sie dazu beitragen. Sie wollen Deutschland auf Standby halten. Es kommt bei diesen Handelsabkommen aber auf mehr an. Dazu sind Sie aber einfach nicht bereit.\n\nHerr Kollege Ernst, es braucht zwei, um einen Tango zu tanzen. Sie wollen ihn gerne allein tanzen. Das wird aber nicht funktionieren.\n\nBisher hat es eine ganze Reihe von guten Argumenten gegeben, auf deren Basis wir heute diskutiert haben. Wir haben uns aber noch nicht so genau den kanadischen Markt angesehen und geschaut, was wir da machen können. Ich glaube, dass die Dimension vielen Bürgerinnen und Bürgern draußen im Land auch nicht so bewusst ist. Kanada ist einer der wichtigsten Handelspartner der Europäischen Union. 2013 haben wir Exporte im Umfang von „nur“ 31 Milliarden Euro nach Kanada geschickt. Zu den meistgehandelten Gütern aus der EU nach Kanada zählen Maschinen und Ausrüstungen - 22 Prozent -, Chemikalien - ungefähr genauso viel - und Autos und Autoteile mit fast 11 Prozent. Danach folgen Transportmaterialien, Petroleum, Getränke und andere Dinge.\n\nDeutschland ist einer der wichtigsten Partner von Kanada. Insgesamt entfielen aber nur 9 Milliarden von diesen 31 Milliarden Euro auf unseren Export. Da geht etwas mehr. Da ist mehr Umsatz und mehr Geschäft für deutsche Unternehmen drin. Es können Arbeitsplätze geschaffen werden, weil Zölle abgeschafft und einheitliche Standards erarbeitet werden. Freihandel bringt Vorteile für unsere Unternehmen.\n\nHerr Kollege Hofreiter, jetzt hören Sie gut zu. Das betrifft insbesondere die mittelständischen Unternehmen, die Sie vorhin angesprochen haben.\n\nGerade die Verfahren zur Zulassung von Produkten erschweren den kleinen und mittelständischen Unternehmen den Zugang zum amerikanischen und kanadischen Markt. Da Sie gefragt haben, will ich Ihnen gern ein paar Beispiele mit auf den Weg geben:\n\nIn Deutschland müssen zum Beispiel im Maschinenbau Notabschaltknöpfe in Höhe von 1,10 bis 1,30 Metern an Maschinen angebracht werden. In den USA sind es 90 Zentimeter bis 1,10 Meter. In der EU sind Neutralleiterkabel in der Elektronik standardmäßig blau gefärbt. In den USA müssen die gleichen Kabel weiß sein. Produkte wie Ventilatoren müssen in der EU zertifiziert werden und erhalten das CE-Zeichen. Wenn Sie in die USA exportieren wollen, dann müssen Sie das gleiche Verfahren nach US-Norm noch einmal durchlaufen. In einem deutschen Unternehmen braucht es allein 15 Entwickler, um diese amerikanischen Standards abzubilden. Im chemischen Bereich führt die unterschiedliche Kennzeichnungspraxis dazu, dass viele Produkte für den Verkauf in die USA anders bezeichnet und anders etikettiert werden müssen. Außerdem müssen Labore in der Chemie und im Medizinbereich von zwei Behörden, sowohl von der europäischen wie auch von der amerikanischen Behörde, zertifiziert werden.\n\nEin weiterer Teil der Abkommen ist, dass viele Herkunftsbezeichnungen, auch im landwirtschaftlichen Bereich, betroffen sind. Ein Beispiel: Deutsche Brauereien werden in den USA mit einer Reihe von bayerischen Bieren konfrontiert, die überhaupt nicht aus Bayern stammen. Das Gleiche gilt für Schwarzwälder Schinken, für Spreewälder Gurken, für Kölsch und für Dresdner Stollen. Die Pflicht zur Bezeichnung der geografischen Herkunft würde den Handel mit diesen Produkten enorm fördern. Herr Hofreiter, das müssen Sie den mittelständischen Unternehmen in Ihrem Wahlkreis einmal erläutern. Ich habe die ganz herzliche Bitte an Sie, dass Sie dieses Abkommen unterstützen und nicht pauschal dagegenreden.\n\nBesonders pikant ist, dass Ihr Kollege Trittin zu diesem Zeitpunkt ein Buch mit dem Titel „Stillstand made in Germany - Ein anderes Land ist möglich!“ vorstellt. Ich glaube, eindrucksvoller kann man seine Meinung nicht unter Beweis stellen.\n\nAuch Investitionsschutzkapitel gehören zu den Streitbeilegungsverfahren. Im Freihandel sind sie notwendig. Sie entlasten nationale, ordentliche Gerichte von langen und schwierigen Verfahren. Dass solche Verfahren gar nicht so häufig stattfinden, mögen Sie daran erkennen, dass es bisher weniger als fünf Verfahren dieser Art gegen Deutschland gegeben hat. Das Gutachten, das der Bundeswirtschaftsminister vorhin zitiert hat, zeigt, dass die Rechte, die kanadische Investoren beispielsweise durch CETA bekommen, kaum über die nationalen Rechte in Deutschland hinausgehen. Im Hinblick auf den Bestandsschutz getätigter Investitionen gegen gesetzgeberische Eingriffe bleibt CETA sogar hinter den nationalen juristischen Möglichkeiten des ordentlichen Rechts, aber auch des Verfassungsrechts und des -Unionsrechts signifikant zurück. Das ist sicherlich ein sehr spannender Punkt für viele Bürgerinnen und Bürger. Ich habe die Bitte: Sagen Sie in aller Klarheit, worum es dabei geht, anstatt in dieser Diskussion Nebelkerzen zu werfen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich möchte die drei großen Irrtümer, die hier hochgehalten werden, noch einmal beim Namen nennen:\n\nErstens. Ich möchte darauf hinweisen, dass die Investitionsschutzkapitel keine Aufhebung von gesetzgeberischen Maßnahmen oder den Erlass neuer Maßnahmen bewirken. Auch hierzu heißt es in dem Gutachten - das steht dort schwarz auf weiß -: Die Aufhebung oder der Erlass gesetzgeberischer Maßnahmen kann nicht verlangt werden.\n\nDer zweite Irrtum betrifft das angebliche Schaffen einer Paralleljustiz. Das Wort hört sich an, als stamme es aus einem Science-Fiction-Film mit einer ganzen Reihe von Parallelwelten. Ich muss Sie enttäuschen: TTIP und CETA werden keine Parallelwelten aufbauen, auch wenn das in die Horrorgeschichte, die Sie im Rahmen Ihrer Kampagne erzählen, gut hineinpassen würde.\n\nDie Schiedsgerichtsverfahren sind mit einer Reihe von Neuerungen versehen. Das hängt mit der Transparenz zusammen und auch damit, dass die Besetzung dieser Schiedsgerichte nach einem etwas anderen Schlüssel erfolgt. Im Übrigen werden verschiedene Schiedsgerichtsordnungen zur Wahl gestellt. Ich glaube, dass das auch mit Blick auf die Entwicklung der Standards der Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit ein guter Schritt ist. Wir müssen aber daran mitwirken. Wenn wir uns dem verschließen, dann werden wir auf den Märkten keine Trends setzen, dann werden wir auch mit dem Abschluss dieser Abkommen keine Trends setzen.\n\nDritter Irrtum. Dass wir soziale Standards und Umweltstandards abschaffen oder verhindern würden, ist von meinen Vorrednern eindrucksvoll widerlegt worden. Das bedarf keiner weiteren Erläuterung.\n\nDeshalb lehnen wir Ihre Anträge ab. Sie wollen Chancen verhindern. Wir wollen sie ermöglichen. Deshalb sind diese Abkommen ein guter Weg. Die Zeit, die dort noch für die Verifizierung, für das Verhandeln gebraucht wird, wird genutzt werden. Ich glaube, dass wir da auf einem hervorragenden Weg sind.\n\nIch bedanke mich für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n10063,sigrid-hupach,\"Herr Minister Maas, Sie haben eben schon mehrfach angeführt, dass Sie neben den gemeinsamen Vergütungsregeln auch durch das Verbandsklagerecht die Rechte der Urheberinnen und Urheber stärken wollen. Mit dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf machen Sie aber eigentlich das Gegenteil, indem den Verwertern die Möglichkeit eingeräumt wird, sich dem Verbandsklagerecht dadurch zu entziehen, dass sie aus den Verwerterverbänden austreten können. Warum regeln Sie das nicht genau umgekehrt, sodass das Verhandlungsergebnis für die gesamte Branche verbindlich gilt, also auch für die nicht organisierten Verwerter? Warum regeln Sie das nicht so?\n\nHerr Minister Maas, ich komme noch einmal auf den Anspruch auf Auskunft und Rechenschaft zurück, und zwar auf die sogenannte Kannregelung, die Sie jetzt vorschlagen, und darauf, dass der Anspruch zusätzlich auf den Fall der entgeltlichen Nutzung beschränkt wird. Sie haben eben gesagt, dass manchmal die Verhältnismäßigkeit nicht gegeben ist. Wie würden Sie das definieren? Könnten Sie einmal näher erläutern, nach welchen Kriterien die Verhältnismäßigkeit festgestellt werden soll und warum es zu dieser Kannregelung kommt?\"\n14331,ozcan-mutlu,\"Danke, Frau Präsidentin. - Auch meine Frage geht an Herrn Schröder vom Innenministerium. Ich bekomme in meiner Sprechstunde in letzter Zeit immer mehr Besuch von türkischstämmigen Berlinerinnen und Berlinern und entsprechende E-Mails auch aus anderen Bundesländern. Sie beklagen sich darüber, dass ihnen von türkischen Konsularbehörden die Pässe entzogen werden, wodurch ihre Reisefreiheit massiv eingeschränkt wird, was für diejenigen, die dienstlich unterwegs sein müssen, ein großes Problem ist.\n\nWie möchte die Bundesregierung in diesem Zusammenhang den Betroffenen helfen, die, aus welchen Gründen auch immer, befürchten müssen, dass ihre Pässe von Ankara nicht verlängert oder sogar entzogen werden - in einem Fall hier in Berlin sogar mit deutscher Amtshilfe?\"\n12661,markus-paschke,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Anspruch auf Leistungen nach dem SGB II und Unterstützung bei der Arbeitsuche erhalten diejenigen, die ihren Lebensmittelpunkt in der Bundesrepublik haben. Grundsätzlich sind da auch alle Europäer gleichzubehandeln. Das ist richtig, und das ist auch gut so.\n\nKeinen Anspruch haben jedoch Ausländerinnen und Ausländer, die sich nur zur Arbeitsuche hier aufhalten.\n\nAuch das ist richtig, denn deren Lebensmittelpunkt liegt bisher nicht in Deutschland.\n\nNun hat das Bundessozialgericht den Betroffenen in mehreren Fällen Anspruch auf Sozialhilfe nach dem SGB XII zugestanden. Das Ziel dieses Ausschlusses im SGB II war jedoch nicht, die Betreffenden in die Sozialhilfe zu drängen; denn da gehören sie auch nicht hin.\n\nDie Freizügigkeit innerhalb Europas ist an zwei Voraussetzungen gebunden. Es lohnt sich, das einmal wieder nachzulesen. Das sind nämlich erstens eine bestehende Krankenversicherung und zweitens ausreichend Mittel für den Lebensunterhalt. Bisher war der Anspruch auf Leistung nach dem SGB II dauerhaft ausgeschlossen, wenn jemand nicht gearbeitet hat. Wir haben jetzt Rechtssicherheit. Nach fünf Jahren gilt Deutschland als Lebensmittelpunkt. Damit es in Europa keine Migration in die Sozialsysteme gibt, brauchen wir verbindliche europäische Mindeststandards in der sozialen Sicherung, Mindeststandards, die allen Bürgerinnen und Bürgern Europas an dem Ort ihres Lebensmittelpunktes das sozioeiner Bundesethikkommission kulturelle Existenzminimum sichert.\n\nEs muss außerdem sichergestellt sein, dass alle Europäer - egal, ob aus Portugal, Rumänien, Finnland oder Luxemburg, und egal, welcher Volksgruppe sie angehören - die gleichen Chancen auf Bildung, Gesundheitsversorgung und Zugang zum Arbeitsmarkt haben.\n\nFür mich ist deshalb klar: Wir brauchen eine europäische soziale Sicherung.\n\nBeim vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf sind für mich noch einige Fragen offen, die sich auf Situationen beziehen, die Härtefälle für die Betroffenen bedeuten können. Es kann gute Gründe geben, warum man, auch wenn man seinen Lebensmittelpunkt inzwischen hier hat, das Land zwischendurch für eine gewisse Zeit verlassen muss, zum Beispiel weil es gilt, Familienangehörige zu pflegen oder andere Probleme zu lösen, die ein bisschen länger dauern und wofür man durchaus seine Wohnung hier aufgibt. Solche Unterbrechungen sind bisher nicht berücksichtigt. Auch kann es eine Härte bedeuten, wenn zum Beispiel eine Ehe - aus welchen Gründen auch immer - zerbricht und nur ein Partner Arbeit hat.\n\nZusammenfassend kann man, glaube ich, sagen: Der Grundsatz in dem Gesetzentwurf ist okay. Über Details und offene Fragen müssen wir dann noch reden.\n\nDanke schön. Ich wünsche, bevor es der Präsident tut, allen ein schönes Wochenende.\"\n10383,harald-petzold,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Besucherinnen und Besucher! Liebe Kollegin Zeulner, wenn es so ist, wie Sie sagen, dass 16 von 22 Punkten, die im Antrag der Grünen stehen, schon in der Strategie der Bundesregierung vorkommen: Wieso können Sie dann nicht über Ihren Schatten springen und sagen: „Das ist ein guter Antrag“?\n\nDer Antrag beinhaltet Substanz, mit der wir gemeinsam umgehen können. Ich frage Sie dies deshalb, weil vor ein paar Tagen auf dem Frühlingsfest der Deutschen AIDS-Hilfe eine Politikerin aus Ihren Reihen mit der Ehrenmitgliedschaft ausgezeichnet worden ist, nämlich die ehemalige Bundesgesundheitsministerin Rita Süssmuth. Ihr haben wir es zu verdanken, dass wir in dieser Gesellschaft zu einem Umdenken, was den Umgang mit HIV und Aids betrifft, gekommen sind.\n\nSie hat damals trotz Widerstandes in den eigenen Reihen neue Methoden und vor allen Dingen ein neues Denken durchgesetzt, die dazu geführt haben, dass wir gemeinsam diese Krankheit angehen konnten. Wir sollten uns daher nicht gegenseitig vorhalten: Wir sind die Guten, und ihr könnt gefälligst mitmachen.\n\nEs sind in der damaligen Zeit im Bundestag ganz andere Töne zu hören gewesen. Hier denke ich an Reden von Herrn Gauweiler, der eine Meldepflicht oder Reihenuntersuchungen für alle schwulen Männer gefordert hat. Hiervon sind wir Gott sei Dank weit entfernt, und solche Forderungen - das sage ich mit allem Respekt - wurden auch nicht wieder vorgebracht, im Gegenteil. Das finde ich auch gut so.\n\nIch erinnere mich noch an Zeiten, als wir in den 90er-Jahren in Brandenburg, in Potsdam, die AIDS-Hilfe aufgebaut haben und uns rechtfertigen mussten, warum wir für so wenige Menschen da sind. Wir hatten glücklicherweise nur eine niedrige Betroffenenrate und eine niedrige Infiziertenrate. Allerdings - Sie und auch Frau Schulz-Asche haben es gesagt - sterben leider noch viel zu viele Menschen daran. Deswegen ist es dringend notwendig, dass wir uns neu verständigen, dass wir eine neue Konzeption entwickeln.\n\nIch finde, dass die Vorschläge, die die Grünen gemacht haben, es wert sind, dass man sie unterstützt. Es sind gute und richtige Vorschläge, und der Finger wird genau an der richtigen Stelle in die Wunde gelegt, zum Beispiel bei der Frage des Nichtzugangs zahlreicher Infizierter zu lebenswichtigen Medikamenten und des unzureichenden Zugangs zu notwendiger spezieller und gesunder Ernährung. Sie sprechen davon, dass wir natürlich - das muss kritisch angemerkt werden - eingegangene Selbstverpflichtungen mit Blick sowohl auf den internationalen als auch auf den nationalen Bereich nicht eingehalten haben. Frau Süssmuth hat in ihrer Dankesrede eindeutig gesagt, dass wir im Moment vor der Situation stehen, dass es ein Rollback gibt, weil in den letzten Jahren die Mittel für Prävention leider zurückgegangen sind und weil wir wieder eine Zunahme von Diskriminierung haben.\n\nWarum lassen sich Menschen nicht testen? Weil sie natürlich Angst vor einem positiven Testergebnis haben. Aber vor allen Dingen haben sie Angst vor der Diskriminierung, die damit verbunden ist. Mit ihr sind wir nach wie vor konfrontiert. In dem Antrag, den uns die Grünen vorgelegt haben, sind zu diesem Punkt gute Vorschläge enthalten. Das gilt genauso für die Frage der Verleumdung der Infektionsentwicklung vor allem in osteuropäischen Ländern. Das Beispiel der Ukraine, mit der wir ja immer so hervorragend kooperieren, ist hier zu nennen. Es finden dort, was diese Frage angeht, ganz finstere Entwicklungen statt. Damit müssen wir uns auseinandersetzen.\n\nDeswegen sage ich: Lassen Sie uns gemeinsam über den eigenen Schatten springen. Wenn 16 von den 22 Forderungen gut sind, kann man auch laut sagen, dass sie gut sind, und man kann sie in die Strategie mit aufnehmen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n6361,oliver-krischer,\"Herr Kollege Klare, ich bin Ihnen dankbar für Ihre Ausführungen, weil Sie den Menschen im Land verdeutlichen, wer für die Fluglärmproblematik verantwortlich ist. Ich glaube, wer dazu steht, zeigt Ihr Redebeitrag sehr deutlich.\n\nIch möchte Ihnen eine sehr konkrete Frage stellen, da Sie ja nur allgemeine Ausführungen machen wollen. Die nordrhein-westfälische Landesregierung, die bekanntermaßen aus SPD und Grünen besteht, fordert seit langem einvernehmlich ein Nachtflugverbot für Frachtmaschinen am Flughafen Köln/Bonn, und auch die Region -fordert das. Hier besteht großes Einvernehmen. Können Sie mir erklären, warum die Bundesregierung, die Sie ja mittragen, dieses Nachtflugverbot am Flughafen Köln/Bonn erst kürzlich durch Herrn Verkehrsminister Dobrindt abgelehnt hat?\"\n15639,klaus-barthel,\"Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Ich glaube, die bisherigen Reden haben gezeigt, warum es notwendig war, dass wir gemeinsam darauf bestanden haben, dass auch zu so einer späten Stunde, um halb zwölf in der Nacht, zu diesem Tagesordnungspunkt noch geredet wird und die Reden nicht zu Protokoll gehen.\n\nIch denke, das sind wir den Opfern, die heute da sind, und ihren Vertreterinnen und Vertretern schuldig, all denen, die sich in der letzten Zeit auch journalistisch und wissenschaftlich mit dieser Frage beschäftigt haben, den Kolleginnen und Kollegen aller Fraktionen. Sie haben ja gehört: Eigentlich geben die Reden Bausteine wieder, die sich überhaupt nicht widersprechen. Sie sehen daran auch - ich glaube, das ist ein wichtiges Zeichen an die Öffentlichkeit -, wie intensiv wir uns gemeinsam mit dieser Geschichte beschäftigt haben.\n\nIch will an einer Stelle bitten, den Sprachgebrauch zu ändern. Ich glaube, wir sollten nicht ohne Anführungszeichen von der „Colonia Dignidad“ reden; denn es hat nichts mit „Würde“ zu tun, und es ist die Tätersprache. Ich rede dann immer lieber nur von der „Kolonie“.\n\nIch bedauere es auch, dass die Linksfraktion nicht mit in der Kopfzeile stehen darf. Denn auch Sie von der Linken haben mit vielen Anfragen dazu beigetragen, dass das Thema nicht vergessen wurde, und wir haben uns über unser weiteres Vorgehen abgestimmt.\n\nIch glaube, in einer künftigen Legislaturperiode muss diese Ausgrenzeritis auch mal ein Ende haben,\n\nweil sie der Sache nicht gerecht wird, gerade auch bei solchen Fragen, bei denen es ganz wichtig ist, dass ein gemeinsames Signal vom Deutschen Bundestag ausgeht.\n\nAuch ich will sagen, dass es mich schon überrascht hat, dass nach so vielen Jahren - die Geschichte fing ja in den 60er-Jahren an - durchaus immer noch relativ starke, wirksame Kräfte unterwegs sind, die so einer parlamentarischen Initiative ihren Widerstand entgegensetzen, und dass es da schon irgendwie noch alte Mächte geben muss - sowohl in Chile als auch hier bei uns ist das zu spüren. Ich will es nicht im Detail ausführen. Aber dass es über ein Jahr gedauert hat, bis wir uns hier - in der letzten Sitzungswoche - mit dem Antrag befassen, ist schon ein Zeichen dafür, dass die Vertuscher und Verschweiger noch unterwegs sind, ebenso die Tatsache, die Herr Brand gerade angesprochen hat, nämlich, dass Täter wie Herr Hopp heute noch frei herumlaufen und mit viel Geld und guten Anwälten unterwegs sind, während wir es auf der anderen Seite mit Opfern zu tun haben, die heute von Hartz IV leben müssen, obwohl sie ihr Leben lang Sklavenarbeit geleistet haben, und wir heute darüber streiten müssen, ob es sich um Entschädigung oder um Hilfe handelt. Und dann kommt noch der Haushaltsvorbehalt und, und, und. Aber es ist gut, dass jetzt im Antrag alles so formuliert ist, dass es ein hohes Maß an Verbindlichkeit gibt.\n\nEs ist höchste Zeit, aufzuarbeiten, und es ist deutlich zu machen, dass es in dieser Frage politische Verantwortung gibt, auch wenn die Sekte eine Sekte oder eigentlich ein privates Wirtschaftsunternehmen war. Ich glaube, es wird ganz deutlich, dass wir alle, in allen Parteien und Fraktionen, die hier heute vertreten sind, Verantwortung zu tragen haben. Denn die Geschichte läuft schon länger: Den ersten Antrag zur Kolonie gab es zu rot-grünen Zeiten.\n\n- Nein, 2002. Da hätten wir noch drei Jahre Zeit gehabt. - Da haben sich also alle nicht mit Ruhm bekleckert.\n\nUmso notwendiger war es, dass Frank-Walter Steinmeier vor einem Jahr das Signal gegeben hat, dass wir die Verantwortung übernehmen, sodass wir jetzt einen klaren Auftrag formulieren konnten. Insofern ist es auch gut, dass Staatsminister Michael Roth und Staatssekretär Meister aus den verantwortlichen Ministerien da sind. Ich hoffe, dass der kommende Deutsche Bundestag diesem Antrag Nachdruck verschaffen wird und mithelfen wird, zusammen mit den Ministerien das umzusetzen, was wir hier gemeinsam formulieren.\"\n3138,reinhold-sendker,\"Sehr verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es sind schon gewaltige Herausforderungen, vor denen unser Land und unsere Volkswirtschaft in der Verkehrsinfrastruktur in der Zukunft stehen. Dabei wirken die 5 Milliarden Euro zusätzliche Mittel, die im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart wurden, weiterhin sehr -positiv.\n\nSo steigt gegenüber 2014 die Investitionslinie im Jahr 2015 um 352 Millionen Euro auf 10,8 Milliarden Euro. Zum Ende der Legislaturperiode - das wurde eben schon angesprochen - werden wir dann etwa 12 Milliarden Euro erreicht haben. Das entspricht im Schnitt einer halben Milliarde Euro pro Jahr mehr für unsere Verkehrs-infrastruktur. Sachlich gesehen ist das also eine sehr -positive Verstetigung der Investitionslinie.\n\nAber - das muss mit Blick in die Zukunft auch gesagt werden - allein für die Erhaltung und Sicherung der Bestandsnetze fehlen Milliardenbeträge. Blicken wir einmal zurück auf den Zeitraum von 2001 bis 2013: In diesen zwölf Jahren gab es bei unseren Bestandsnetzen einen Gesamtbedarf von 83 Milliarden Euro. 60 Milliarden Euro sind in etwa investiert worden. Bei diesem Defizit wäre es allerdings vermessen, nur Kritik zu üben. Denn erstens ist in dieser Zeit tatsächlich enorm viel investiert worden. Zweitens wollen wir nicht übersehen, dass die entstandene Leistungsdifferenz in all den Jahren aufgebaut wurde, und drittens war eine Haushaltskonsolidierung nach den Jahren der weltweiten Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise zwingend erforderlich. Die Konsolidierung hat nun mit dem ersten Haushaltsausgleich nach 45 Jahren durch unsere Koalition ein ganz herausragendes Ergebnis erreicht.\n\nEs bleibt die Perspektive, durch Optionen in der zukünftigen Haushaltsfinanzierung oder in der Nutzerfinanzierung Mehreinnahmen zu erzielen. Vor allem bewahren wir durch eine gut aufgestellte Infrastruktur die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit unserer Volkswirtschaft. Deshalb kann es nur unser Ziel sein, im internationalen Ranking nicht weiter zurückzufallen, sondern diesen so wichtigen Standortfaktor erneut zu stärken.\n\nDeutschland ist zudem das große Drehkreuz für Personen- und Güterverkehre in Europa, Logistikweltmeister und Wachstumsmotor. Die Erfüllung des Anspruchs, dass das so bleibt, verlangt auch im Hinblick auf den prognostizierten Verkehrsaufwuchs in den nächsten Jahren eine verbesserte Mittelausstattung. Die Bemautung aller Bundesstraßen wird in Zukunft dazu beitragen. Ferner weist der Bundeswirtschaftsminister auf den Einsatz privaten Kapitals hin; das ist in der Tat ein sehr -diskussionswürdiger Vorschlag. Aktuell bleibt es aber dabei: Wir verfügen erstens über zu wenige Investitionsmittel, und zweitens ist und bleibt für uns die Öffentlich-Private-Partnerschaft eine starke Option. Da schaue ich aktuell auf den Ausbau der A 9 in Thüringen mit einer Bauzeit von nur knapp drei Jahren. Wir können das überall beobachten: ÖPP-Projekte im Straßenbau gehen deutlich schneller vonstatten. Das schafft volkswirtschaftlichen Nutzen. Genau darauf kommt es an.\n\nDas sieht das Deutsche Verkehrsforum übrigens genauso - ich zitiere -:\n\nNur den Zinsnachteil von privaten Unternehmen gegenüber der öffentlichen Hand zu betrachten und aus diesen höheren Finanzierungskosten die Unwirtschaftlichkeit von ÖPP-Projekten abzuleiten, ist polemisch und falsch.\n\nVielmehr seien alle Effekte einzubeziehen: die Qualität, die Bauzeit, die Folgekosten über den gesamten Lebenszyklus sowie ferner der volkswirtschaftliche Nutzen. Folglich besteht mit dieser Beschaffungsvariante die Chance, in der laufenden Legislaturperiode netto mehr für unsere Verkehrsanlagen zu erreichen.\n\nVerehrter Herr Kollege Kindler, die Menschen erleben keine Parallelwelt, sondern, dass sie jeden Morgen stundenlang im Stau stehen. Angesichts dessen sollen wir ihnen sagen, dass sie noch 12 oder 14 Jahre länger warten sollen, obwohl ein schnellerer Ausbau erreichbar ist? Nach unserem Koalitionsvertrag hat diese Beschaffungsvariante eine faire Chance im Wirtschaftlichkeitsvergleich verdient.\n\nDarüber hinaus sind bei dringend notwendigen Erhaltungsinvestitionen für Autobahnbrücken und Bundesstraßen Beschleunigungsverfahren sehr sinnvoll. Ich nenne als Beispiel die Brücke auf der A 1 bei Leverkusen. Lieber Herr Minister, was Sie dort vor Ort mit Herrn Landesminister Groschek aus Nordrhein-Westfalen vereinbart haben, spart uns möglicherweise anderthalb Jahre; das ist bemerkenswert. Vielen herzlichen Dank dafür!\n\nEin anderes Thema ist die Verbesserung der Transparenz in der haushalterischen Erfassung. Hier leistet die Verkehrsinfrastrukturfinanzierungsgesellschaft, die VIFG, in der Bewirtschaftung der Lkw-Mautmittel mit tages-aktuellen und projektbezogenen Informationen, die wir sonst nirgendwo bekämen, sehr gute Arbeit. Insofern freue ich mich auf die Diskussion mit den Vertretern der VIFG in der nächsten Ausschusssitzung.\n\nDer vorliegende Etatentwurf 2014 enthält auch einige On-top-Positionen, darunter den Betriebsdienst „Straße“ oder das Bundeseisenbahnvermögen mit Blick auf mehr Bedarfe in der Tarifrunde. Erfreulich ist auch, dass der erhöhte Ansatz für unsere Radwege aus dem Jahr 2014 auf 2015 übertragen wird.\n\n- Es stimmt, es sind 80 Millionen Euro.\n\nSo fasse ich zusammen: Erstens. Der Einzelplan 12 ist nach wie vor mit Abstand der größte Investitionshaushalt des Bundes. Zweitens. Unser Koalitionsvertrag hat der Infrastruktur weitere Mittel zugeführt. Drittens. Um der vorhandenen Unterfinanzierung wirkungsvoll entgegenzutreten, unterstützen wir mit Nachdruck unseren Minister beim Einwerben zusätzlicher Investitions- und Finanzmittel.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n13603,daniela-kolbe,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn ich morgens von meinem Wahlkreis hierher fahre, laufe ich durch zwei Bahnhöfe. Es ist mir in den letzten kalten Tagen immer so gegangen, dass ich an mindestens einer schlafenden Person, an einem Obdachlosen vorbeigelaufen bin, und mir macht das ein mulmiges Gefühl. Ich muss sagen: Ich schäme mich auch ein bisschen, dass so etwas in einem so reichen Land wie Deutschland möglich ist. Deswegen danke ich den Grünen, dass sie das Thema auf die Tagesordnung setzen und damit unter anderem auf die mindestens 39 000 Menschen, die in Deutschland ganz ohne Obdach sind, also auf der Straße leben - so zumindest die Zahlen der BAG Wohnungslosenhilfe aus 2014 -, aufmerksam machen.\n\nWenn wir über Wohnungslosigkeit sprechen, dann sprechen wir nicht nur über diese 39 000 Menschen, sondern wir reden über 335 000 Menschen - wahrscheinlich sind es mehr -, die keine eigene Wohnung haben, das heißt, in Notunterkünften oder in Sammelunterkünften leben, sich von Couch zu Couch retten, in billigen Hotels leben oder, wenn wir es weiter fassen, beispielsweise von Zwangsräumung bedroht sind. Es ist also ein sehr komplexer Begriff, über den wir sprechen. Gleichzeitig stellen wir fest: Für den gesamten Bereich sind die Länder zuständig. Die Kommunen sind in der Pflicht, für diese Menschen etwas zu tun. Es ist ihre Aufgabe, dafür zu sorgen, dass die Menschen Obdach haben.\n\nSie von den Grünen schlagen vor, per Gesetz festzulegen, dass eine bundesweite Statistik erstellt wird. Ich stimme Ihnen insofern zu, als wir dringend mehr über das Phänomen Wohnungslosigkeit in Deutschland wissen müssen. Allerdings überzeugt mich das Vorgehen der Bundesregierung mehr. Es ist sehr plausibel, in einem Bereich, wo die Länder zuständig sind, zunächst eine Machbarkeitsstudie über dieses komplexe Thema in Auftrag zu geben, zu eruieren, wie man die Wohnungslosigkeit einheitlich schätzen kann; denn wir können ja nicht zählen, vielmehr muss man schätzen. Man muss jedoch mit den Ländern im Vorfeld darüber ins Gespräch zu kommen, wir müssen das einheitlich tun, die Länder müssen mitgenommen werden, und wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass wir gute Statistiken über Wohnungslosigkeit bekommen. Ich danke der Bundesregierung für die Initiative, die auch deutlich macht, wie wichtig ihr das Thema ist.\n\nDie Bundesregierung erfasst die Wohnungslosigkeit nicht nur statistisch, sondern tut eine ganze Menge dagegen. Das ist auch geboten; denn wir haben es einerseits mit Migrationsbewegungen zu tun, die sicherlich auch dazu beitragen, dass wir einen Anstieg der Wohnungslosigkeit in Deutschland sehen. Anderseits haben aber vor allen Dingen das Phänomen der Wohnungsverknappung sowie die Zunahme der Bevölkerung in den Städten und der mangelnde soziale Wohnungsbau in den letzten Jahrzehnten\n\ndazu geführt, dass wir alle miteinander spüren, dass hier ein größeres Problem auf uns zukommt. Deswegen ist es so richtig und so gut, dass diese Bundesregierung den sozialen Wohnungsbau endlich wieder auf die Agenda gesetzt hat, obwohl das Ländersache ist.\n\nWir geben 2017 1,5 Milliarden Euro für den sozialen Wohnungsbau aus. In der ersten Lesung, die wir im Januar des vergangenen Jahres zu diesem Antrag hatten, war es noch 1 Milliarde Euro. Insgesamt haben sich die Mittel für den sozialen Wohnungsbau verdreifacht. Das ist der richtige Schritt, und wir müssen auf diesem Weg weitergehen; denn sozialer Wohnungsbau verhindert Wohnungslosigkeit.\n\nDarum geht es: Wohnungslosigkeit zu verhindern. Es geht um Prävention.\n\nWir haben auch an anderen Stellen etwas getan; ich mache es einmal an zwei Beispielen fest - ich könnte weitere bringen -: Wir haben etwas für die junge Frau getan, die ich in der letzten Legislaturperiode kennengelernt habe, die gerade ihre Ausbildung begonnen hatte, eine sehr niedrige Ausbildungsvergütung bekam und aus dem SGB-II-Bezug fiel. Sie war, als ich sie kennenlernte, „von Couch zu Couch“ bei Freunden untergekommen. Mit dem SGB-II-Änderungsgesetz - es ist ja vielfach kritisiert worden, und viele Maßnahmen sind nicht wahrgenommen worden - haben wir diese Lücke weitgehend geschlossen. Man kann nun, wenn man eine Ausbildung aufnimmt, durchaus weiter ergänzend im SGB-II-Bezug bleiben.\n\nAuch damit verhindern wir Wohnungslosigkeit.\n\nIch erinnere mich noch gut an die Medienberichte über Obdachlose rings um die großen Fleischfabriken unseres Landes, wo Werkvertragsarbeitnehmer aus dem Ausland der Willkür, der Ausbeutung durch die Arbeitgeber ausgesetzt waren und zum Teil auch einfach vor die Tür gesetzt wurden und in den Wäldern rings um die Fabrik lebten, also ohne Obdach waren.\n\nWir haben in dieser Regierung den Mindestlohn eingeführt - auch in der genannten Branche, die nur mit Negativschlagzeilen auf sich aufmerksam gemacht hat - und Werkverträge und Leiharbeit reguliert. Aber ich sage auch: Im Bereich der Fleischindustrie ist bei weitem nicht alles gut. Was wir von den Gewerkschaftsvertretern hören, ist, dass der Mindestlohn dort unterlaufen wird und weiterhin Werkvertragsunternehmen ihr Schindluder treiben und Menschen ausbeuten. Deswegen sage ich: Wir haben einen richtigen Schritt getan, werden dort aber weiter hingucken und dafür sorgen, dass Ausbeutung in Deutschland nicht stattfindet.\n\nVieles mehr wäre zu nennen. Wir haben das Wohngeld reformiert. Wir können mit dem Europäischen Hilfsfonds für die am stärksten benachteiligten Personen - EHAP - in Deutschland etwas für von Wohnungslosigkeit betroffene Menschen tun.\n\nDie Bundesregierung hat das Thema Wohnungslosigkeit zum Schwerpunkt des gerade vorgelegten Berichts über die Lage der Menschen mit Beeinträchtigungen gemacht. Es ist klar - auch wenn dieses Thema nicht in der breiten Öffentlichkeit diskutiert wird -: Die Bundesregierung hat es im Blick. Aber wir müssen besser werden.\n\nEin Beispiel: Wir haben 120 Fachstellen zur Verhinderung von Wohnungsverlust, die nach SGB II und SGB XII finanziert werden. Sie sind aber extrem ungleich verteilt und extrem unterschiedlich aufgestellt. Ich denke, es lohnt sich, auch von der Bundesebene aus darauf zu achten, dass wir in dem Bereich noch besser werden. Darüber und über andere Aspekte müssen wir sprechen. Ich unterstütze ausdrücklich die Bundesregierung in ihrem Ansatz, zu einer besseren Statistik zu kommen.\n\nIch stelle fest - das sage ich an die Adresse der Antragstellerin -: Auch wenn wir den Antrag heute ablehnen, sind wir alle hier im Haus uns einig - hoffentlich -, dass es unser Ziel ist, dass alle Menschen ebenso wie wir abends in eine Wohnung kommen, die Tür zumachen und sagen können: Meine Wohnung, hier fühle ich mich sicher, hier fühle ich mich aufgehoben. - Dieses Ziel ist noch längst nicht erreicht, aber es lohnt sich, dafür zu streiten.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n7560,marianne-schieder,\"Liebe Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Meine Vorrednerinnen und Vorredner sind bereits allgemein auf die Vorzüge, aber auch auf die Baustellen eingegangen, die es im Bildungsetat gibt. Manch einer, Herr Schipanski, hat deutlich daran vorbeigeredet; das muss man auch einmal sagen.\n\nIch möchte Ihr Augenmerk auf eine besondere und, wie ich meine, viel zu wenig beachtete Problematik richten. Ich möchte auf die Lage all der Menschen in diesem Land eingehen, die mit einer Lese- und Rechtschreibschwäche zu kämpfen haben und die mehr oder weniger als Analphabeten einzustufen sind.\n\nWorüber reden wir da? Hierzulande gelten - man kann es kaum glauben, aber es ist wahr und durch zuverlässige Forschung nachgewiesen - 7,5 Millionen Menschen im erwerbsfähigen Alter als funktionale Analphabeten. Das sind 14 Prozent der erwerbsfähigen Bevölkerung. 57 Prozent der Betroffenen gehen einer regelmäßigen Arbeit nach, häufig natürlich als angelernte oder ungelernte Arbeitskräfte. Deutsch - man höre und staune - ist bei 58 Prozent der Betroffenen die Muttersprache. 80 Prozent der Betroffenen haben sogar einen Schulabschluss. Es handelt sich also nicht um ein Rand- oder gar ein Randgruppenproblem, sondern es handelt sich um eine Problematik, die die gesamte Gesellschaft durchdringt.\n\nWir reden über Bürgerinnen und Bürger, die ihre Rechte und Pflichten nicht entsprechend wahrnehmen und erfüllen können und dies wie einen schrecklichen Makel vor ihren Nachbarn, vor Freunden, vor den Arbeitgebern, ja, manchmal sogar vor der eigenen Familie geschickt zu verbergen wissen.\n\nWir reden über Väter und Mütter, die ihren Kindern nicht bei den Hausaufgaben helfen können. Wir reden über Menschen, die aus Scham und Furcht in prekären Jobs landen, obwohl sie mit der richtigen Unterstützung gute Chancen auf qualifizierte Arbeitsplätze hätten.\n\nWir reden über Menschen, die wir aus einer menschenunwürdigen Situation befreien müssen - einer Situation, die eines Sozialstaats und einer Bildungsgesellschaft unwürdig ist.\n\nWeil uns Sozialdemokraten dieses Thema so wichtig ist, ist es Teil des Koalitionsvertrags geworden. Wir haben bereits im Juni dieses Jahres einen Antrag dazu in erster Lesung beraten. Dieser Antrag und die darin eingeforderten Maßnahmen sind gerade auch in der Fachöffentlichkeit sehr positiv aufgenommen worden.\n\nIm Zentrum steht die Forderung nach einem familien- und lebensweltorientierten Förderprogramm, das niedrigschwellige Angebote unterstützt, mit denen die betroffenen Menschen und ihre Familien erreicht werden können, um so die Schreib- und Lesepraxis in den Familien zu stärken.\n\nWir brauchen aber auch den Ausbau von arbeitsplatz­orientierter Grundbildung, damit vor allen Dingen erwerbstätige Menschen mit Lese- und Schreibschwäche gefördert werden können.\n\nWir halten es für dringend erforderlich, dass eine nationale Koordinierungs- und Monitoringstelle gegründet wird, die all die Aktivitäten des Bundes, aber auch der Länder bündelt und Service und Beratung bietet.\n\nDas Rad muss nicht neu erfunden werden. Vielmehr gilt es, die vielen erfolgreichen Pilotprojekte in die Fläche zu tragen und ein Angebot zu schaffen, das die Zielgruppen erreicht. Auch die vielen Lehrkräfte und Erwachsenenbildner, die sich von einer befristeten Stelle zur anderen hangeln, brauchen endlich Planungssicherheit und gesicherte Arbeitsverhältnisse.\n\nFrau Ministerin, am Dienstag haben Sie anlässlich des Weltalphabetisierungstags auch Ihre Pläne zu diesem Thema vorgestellt. Das wurde auch Zeit, kann ich dazu nur sagen; denn ich will heute nicht verhehlen, dass ich lange Zeit, eigentlich bis Dienstag, den Eindruck hatte, dass das Interesse an diesem Thema seitens des Ministeriums und auch seitens der Ministerin wesentlich ausgeprägter sein könnte. Aber ich bin natürlich sehr erfreut, dass es jetzt losgeht, dass sich das Ministerium und die Ministerin dieses Themas annehmen und dass Sie mit uns gemeinsam die nationale Dekade für Alphabetisierung anschieben. Das ist gut so, und die Maßnahmen, die angekündigt worden sind, sind es auch.\n\nAber es gibt an manchen Stellen noch Luft nach oben. Das betrifft vor allen Dingen die Finanzierung. 180 Millionen Euro für zehn Jahre ist viel Geld, aber angesichts der Tragweite der Aufgabe nicht zu viel Geld. Da waren wir schon weiter. Wir haben in den Haushalt für 2015 immerhin schon knapp 20 Millionen Euro eingestellt. Bei diesem Betrag pro Jahr sollten wir, meine ich, auch bleiben.\n\nIch hoffe sehr, dass das letzte Wort in dieser Hinsicht noch nicht gesprochen ist. Denn das Thema ist wichtig. Es handelt sich um eine Thematik, die nicht in kurzer Zeit zu bewältigen ist. Nur durch ausreichende und gesicherte Mittelausstattung können wir langfristige Projekte finanzieren und verhindern, dass nur Leuchtfeuer entzündet werden, die im Endeffekt nicht zum Ziel führen.\n\nWir haben einen guten Weg eingeschlagen, was die Alphabetisierung und Grundbildung betrifft. Ich bin sicher, dass die ausgerufene Alphabetisierungsdekade helfen wird, die Zahl der Analphabeten in unserem Land zu senken. Es gibt aber noch viel zu tun, bis dieses Ziel erreicht ist. Ich bitte Sie alle in allen Fraktionen, uns zu unterstützen. Ich bitte Sie: Packen wir es gemeinsam an, um eine für die Menschen unwürdige Situation, die dringend verbessert werden muss, wirklich zu verbessern.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n5723,martin-rosemann,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Insgesamt überwiegen derzeit die guten Nachrichten auf dem Arbeitsmarkt. Die Entwicklung auf dem Arbeitsmarkt bleibt positiv. Mit 30,5 Millionen Menschen -haben wir den höchsten Stand an sozialversicherungspflichtiger Beschäftigung. Im Dezember 2014 hat diese um noch einmal knapp 600 000 gegenüber dem Vorjahr zugenommen. Auch Arbeitslosigkeit und Unterbeschäftigung sind im Vergleich zum Vorjahr merklich gesunken.\n\nNoch deutlicher wird das bei einem langfristigen Vergleich. Wir haben seit 2005 einen stetigen Anstieg der sozialversicherungspflichtigen Beschäftigung um über 4 Millionen. Die Arbeitslosenquote ist seit 2005 deutlich gesunken, und zwar von fast 12 Prozent auf knapp 7 Prozent. Auch die Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit ist von 4 Prozent im Jahr 2007 auf heute ungefähr 2,5 Prozent gesunken. Vor allem die Entwicklung, die wir früher hatten, nämlich dass von Konjunkturzyklus zu Konjunkturzyklus die Sockelarbeitslosigkeit in Deutschland immer zugenommen hat, haben wir durchbrochen. Das zeigt den Erfolg der Arbeitsmarktreformen, die Rot und Grün gemeinsam durchgesetzt haben. Dazu hätten Sie in Ihrem Antrag auch etwas schreiben können.\n\nJa.\n\nFrau Kollegin Pothmer, ich will nicht verschweigen, dass es nicht in allen Gruppen so eine positive Entwicklung gibt. Aber Sie müssen dazusagen, dass wir gleichzeitig mit den Arbeitsmarktreformen auch an anderer Stelle Reformen durchgeführt haben, dass Frühverrentungsmöglichkeiten abgeschafft worden sind und dass damit sehr viel mehr ältere Menschen als vorher auf dem Arbeitsmarkt sind. Auch deswegen hat die Zahl der Beschäftigten zugenommen. Gleichzeitig sind damit natürlich - diesem Problem muss sich auch die Politik stellen - mehr Ältere von Arbeitslosigkeit betroffen. Das hat etwas damit zu tun, dass wir damals gemeinsam und, wie ich finde, gerechterweise Möglichkeiten der Frühverrentung beseitigt haben.\n\nIch will ausdrücklich feststellen, dass der Rückgang der Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit stagniert. Viele langzeitarbeitslose Menschen profitieren eben nicht von der guten wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung und finden den Weg in den Arbeitsmarkt eben nicht zurück. Die Vermittler und Fallmanager im Wirkungskreis des SGB II sehen sich einer Kundengruppe mit zunehmend komplexen und verfestigten Problemlagen gegenüber. Natürlich ist es unser Ziel, diesen Menschen wieder eine Perspektive auf dem Arbeitsmarkt zu geben. Dabei ist aber klar: Es gibt eben nicht den typischen Langzeitarbeitslosen. So werden wir eben auch nicht die eine Maßnahme finden, die allen Langzeitarbeitslosen gerecht wird und alle wieder in den Arbeitsmarkt bringt. Vielmehr brauchen wir individuelle und passgenaue Förderung.\n\nDie alleinerziehende Mutter ohne Ausbildung, die Probleme mit der Kinderbetreuung hat, braucht eben andere Angebote als der ältere langzeitarbeitslose Bauarbeiter mit gesundheitlichen Einschränkungen. Gerade hier gilt es, unser Förderversprechen, das wir mit dem SGB II gegeben haben, umzusetzen. Hierfür brauchen wir bessere Rahmenbedingungen für Beratung und Betreuung in den Jobcentern und flexible, passgenaue Antworten.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen, wie Sie sehen, liegen Ihre Problemanalyse und meine Problemanalyse nicht so weit auseinander. Unsere Bundesarbeitsministerin, Andrea Nahles, hat im Gegensatz zu dem, was Sie hier darstellen, genau dieses Problem erkannt\n\nund setzt mit ihrem Konzept zur Bekämpfung der Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit genau dort an. Das vorgelegte Konzept unterstützt die Jobcenter dabei, auf die vielfältigen Problemlagen ihrer Kundinnen und Kunden individuell und passgenau zu reagieren. Wir verbessern die Rahmenbedingungen für die Arbeit in den Jobcentern durch bessere personelle Ausstattung. Ich erinnere nur an die 1 000 Stellen, die bisher beim auslaufenden Programm „Perspektive 50plus“ angesiedelt waren und die für die Aktivierungszentren, die eingerichtet werden, zur Verfügung stehen. Wir stabilisieren das Personal. Wir setzen auf Personalentwicklung und Qualifizierung. Wir werden das Vergaberecht weiterentwickeln, damit Qualität bei den Vergaben eine größere Rolle spielt.\n\nWir statten die Jobcenter finanziell besser aus; das ist schon angesprochen worden. Unter Schwarz-Gelb wurden Eingliederungstitel und Verwaltungstitel immer weiter gekürzt. Das haben wir umgekehrt.\n\nFür 2015 stehen wie bereits für 2014 350 Millionen Euro Restmittel zur Verfügung. Die Pro-Kopf-Ausgaben für Eingliederung und Verwaltung erreichen im Jahr 2015, übrigens erstmals seit 2010, wieder mehr als 2 000 Euro.\n\nAußerdem ermöglichen wir passgenaue Lösungen durch engere Verzahnungen von Arbeitsförderung und Gesundheitsförderung, durch gezielte Akquise von Stellen für Langzeitarbeitslose mit begleitendem Coaching und Nachbetreuung und durch das schon mehrfach angesprochene Programm zur sozialen Teilhabe von Menschen, die keine direkte Chance auf dem ersten Arbeitsmarkt haben.\n\nRichtig ist, meine Damen und Herren: Mehr als die Hälfte der arbeitslosen SGB-II-Empfänger hat keine Ausbildung. Natürlich sind hier Weiterbildung und Qualifizierung wichtige Stellschrauben. Ich will aber darauf hinweisen, dass wir den Paradigmenwechsel schon eingeleitet haben. Das zeigen beispielsweise die Programminitiative „Spätstarter gesucht“ - da machen wir weiter -, und das zeigt auch, dass Themen, die Sie in Ihrem -Antrag zu Recht angesprochen haben, wie die Weiter-bildungsprämie, auf der Tagesordnung dieser Großen Koalition stehen.\n\nLiebe Frau Pothmer,\n\nSie ähneln wieder einmal dem Hasen in dem Märchen Der Hase und der Igel. Ich muss Ihnen sagen: Da, wo Sie hinlaufen, sind wir schon.\"\n399,christina-kampmann,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich kann mich noch gut an die Katastrophe vor Lampedusa erinnern. Es waren Bilder des Schreckens, die uns erreichten, Bilder, die man nicht vergisst und die vor allem nicht in Vergessenheit geraten dürfen. Es waren Bilder, die mich gerade deshalb zutiefst berührt haben, weil sie uns das Versagen der europäischen Flüchtlingspolitik so eindrucksvoll vor Augen geführt haben, dass ich dachte: Jetzt kann man selbige doch eigentlich nicht mehr vor dem Elend dieser Menschen verschließen. Am 3. Oktober 2013 - damals war ich noch keine zwei Wochen Mitglied des Bundestags - wusste ich, dass nun auch ich eine ganz besondere Verantwortung für das Leben dieser Menschen trage.\n\nDie Ereignisse vor Lampedusa waren jedoch nur in ihrem Ausmaß einzigartig. In ihrer Grausamkeit sind diese dagegen fast traurige Alltäglichkeit; denn der 3. Oktober 2013, an dem mehrere Hundert Menschen vor Lampedusa ertranken, ist kein Einzelfall. Das ist die bedrückende Konsequenz der Ungleichheit der Lebensverhältnisse in unserer Welt. Seit diesem Tag sind viele Wochen vergangen, in denen viel hätte passieren können, in denen jedoch nichts passiert ist.\n\nGenau deshalb begrüße ich den Antrag der Fraktion Die Linke, der uns an unsere gemeinsame europäische Verantwortung für eine Flüchtlingspolitik erinnert, die Menschlichkeit anstelle von Herabsetzung und Objektivierung und die Solidarität anstelle von Verantwortungsentzug und Rückbesinnung auf nationale Interessen setzen sollte.\n\nGenau das sind aber auch die Gründe dafür, weshalb der Antrag zwar einige in die richtige Richtung gehende Aspekte aufzeigt, an anderen Stellen jedoch Vorschläge enthält, die gerade das konterkarieren, was unserer Meinung nach wichtig ist. So muss die Rettung von in Seenot geratenen Menschen, wie sie unter II. e) des Antrags der Linken angesprochen wird, natürlich ein selbstverständliches Gebot menschlicher Achtung voreinander sein; denn alles andere widerspricht nicht nur unseren moralischen Wertvorstellungen, sondern auch den völkerrechtlichen Verträgen. Dass an dieser Selbstverständlichkeit Zweifel aufgekommen sind, müssen wir ernst nehmen und dafür Sorge tragen, dass Seenotrettung künftig weder an Kompetenzstreitigkeiten noch an Sanktionen gegen mögliche Retter scheitert.\n\nEs darf keine Kriminalisierung von Menschen geben, die andere Menschen retten; das sage ich mit aller Ausdrücklichkeit. Alles andere ist ein Skandal, den wir nicht zulassen dürfen.\n\nFür die Achtung des im Koalitionsvertrag genannten Grundsatzes der Nichtzurückweisung und der Pflicht zur Seenotrettung werden wir deshalb auf europäischer Ebene entschieden eintreten.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren von der Linken, Sie haben auch recht, wenn es darum geht, die Arbeit von Frontex kritisch zu begleiten. Wer aber so wie Sie die Arbeit von Frontex pauschal ablehnt und für eine Auflösung plädiert, der verkennt zweifellos die wichtige ordnungspolitische Funktion. Unsere Antwort muss stattdessen eine strenge Verpflichtung zu einem gemeinsamen europäischen Grenzschutz durch die EU sein, die unserem europäischen Wertesystem gerecht wird.\n\nIn die falsche Richtung geht aber vor allem einer der Kernpunkte des Antrags, zumindest dann, wenn man sich die Mühe macht, diesen zu Ende zu denken. Der Vorschlag, dass Asylsuchende künftig die freie Entscheidung haben sollen, in welchem Mitgliedstaat sie ein Asylverfahren durchführen wollen, klingt aus Sicht der Asylsuchenden zwar ziemlich verlockend, ist dies aber tatsächlich nur sehr vordergründig; denn abgesehen von der praktischen Umsetzbarkeit eines solchen Free-Choice-Verfahrens muss mit einem Unterbietungswettbewerb der betroffenen Staaten in puncto Aufnahme und Verfahrensbedingungen nach unten gerechnet werden, frei nach dem Motto: Wer die schlechtesten Bedingungen anbietet, der macht sich auch am unattraktivsten für Asylsuchende. - Bei aller berechtigten Kritik an Dublin II und Dublin III kann und sollte ein solches Verfahren nicht das Ziel europäischer Zusammenarbeit sein.\n\nWenn wir über eine europäische Flüchtlingspolitik reden, dann geht es zunächst einmal um die Menschen, die bei uns Schutz vor Verfolgung, vor Krieg und Diskriminierung suchen. Niemand verlässt sein Zuhause, seine Freunde und Familie unter Gefährdung des eigenen Lebens einfach so. Diejenigen, die zu uns kommen, sind zunächst einmal weder eine Last noch ein Kostenfaktor, sondern das sind Menschen, die bei uns Schutz suchen und deshalb unseren Respekt verdienen.\n\nVerantwortung können wir aber nur dann ernsthaft übernehmen, wenn wir eine Flüchtlingspolitik in Europa gestalten, die Solidarität auch wirklich ernst meint, die Probleme nicht auf den Schultern geografisch zufällig günstig gelegener Länder ablädt, sondern die ein echtes Interesse an einer gemeinsamen europäischen Lösung hat.\n\nZugegeben, eine optimale Lösung gibt es nicht. Dass es so nicht weitergehen kann, ist aber offensichtlich. Die Umstände, in denen Flüchtlinge, insbesondere in Griechenland, leben müssen, sind alles, aber mit Sicherheit nicht menschenwürdig. Völlig überfüllte Lager, in denen die Asylsuchenden unter unmenschlichen Bedingungen leben müssen, gehören dort zum Alltag. Schätzungen gehen davon aus, dass bis zu 10 Prozent der griechischen Bevölkerung Flüchtlinge sind. Stellen Sie sich einmal vor, das wäre bei uns der Fall. Stellen Sie sich einmal vor, 10 Prozent der in Deutschland lebenden Menschen würden hier Asyl suchen. Was glauben Sie, was hier los wäre? Griechenland ist damit vollkommen überfordert und fühlt sich zu Recht von uns alleingelassen.\n\nEgal ob Dublin II oder III: Das Kernproblem der extrem ungleichen Verteilung von Asylbewerberinnen und Asylbewerbern in der Europäischen Union besteht weiterhin und bliebe im Übrigen auch dann bestehen, wenn wir dem Antrag der Linken in dieser Form zustimmen würden,\n\nmit allen Problemen, die für Flüchtlinge und für die davon betroffenen Länder damit verbunden sind.\n\nDas kann und das darf so nicht weitergehen. Es liegt in unserer gemeinsamen Verantwortung, hier endlich aktiv zu werden und eine Lösung zu finden, die genau das widerspiegelt, was wir immer wieder gerne sagen, wonach wir aber nicht immer handeln.\n\nSolidarität in Europa muss unser gemeinsames Anliegen sein. Wir lehnen Dublin II und III in seiner jetzigen Form deshalb ab, weil es unsozial ist, weil es unsolidarisch ist und weil es ungerecht ist. Stattdessen setzt die SPD auf Verantwortungsteilung, ohne der Illusion zu erliegen, dass es eine einfache Lösung geben kann.\n\nQuoten analog dem Königsteiner Schlüssel in Verbindung mit einem finanziellen Ausgleich bei Überschreitung selbiger können aber ein sinnvoller Ansatz sein; denn das entspricht erstens einer gemeinsamen europäischen Lösung, die solidarisch und gerecht ist, es trägt zweitens den Bedürfnissen der Migrantinnen und Migranten hinsichtlich Familienzugehörigkeit und Sprachkenntnissen zumindest besser, als es derzeit der Fall ist, Rechnung, und es ermöglicht drittens eine Harmonisierung der Schutzstandards, die nicht nur auf dem Papier steht, sondern die auch faktisch umgesetzt werden kann.\n\nAngesichts der menschenunwürdigen Bedingungen, wie wir sie heute in einigen Ländern vorfinden, ist genau das mehr als notwendig. Mit diesem Ansatz wäre es möglich, die Bedürfnisse der Asylsuchenden mit der Notwendigkeit einer solidarischen und gerechten Flüchtlingspolitik auf europäischer Ebene bestmöglich zu verbinden. Fest steht, dass wir uns diese Debatte nicht leichtmachen dürfen, fest steht aber auch, dass wir schnell zu Lösungen kommen müssen, die eine so extrem ungleiche Verteilung, wie wir sie derzeit in Europa erleben, endlich beenden.\n\nBereits vor zehn Jahren hat Kofi Annan gesagt - ich zitiere -:\n\nEinwanderer brauchen Europa, aber Europa braucht auch Einwanderer. Diese stille Krise der Menschenrechte beschämt unsere Welt.\n\nSeitdem sind viele Menschen auf dem Seeweg nach Europa ertrunken. Sie haben sich auf den Weg gemacht, weil sie verfolgt werden, weil sie Angst um ihr Leben haben oder weil sie in ihrer Heimat ganz einfach keine Perspektive für sich sehen und in Europa auf ein besseres Leben hoffen. Was sie hier erwartet, sollte uns alle beschämen. Das sollte uns nachdenklich werden lassen, das sollte uns handeln lassen.\n\nDeshalb wünsche ich mir, dass wir uns - damit meine ich ausdrücklich auch die Fraktion Die Linke - unserer Verantwortung als Europäerinnen und Europäer stellen und eine solidarische Lösung finden, die vor allem einem gerecht wird: der Würde der Menschen, die bei uns Zuflucht suchen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n8580,hans-christian-strobele,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Freundinnen und Freunde der Geheimdienste und liebe Freundinnen und Freunde der Kontrolle der Geheimdienste!\n\nJeder kann überlegen, wo er sich da einordnet.\n\nDer Vorschlag, den die Linke relativ überraschend gemacht hat - ich habe die Vorlagen trotzdem gelesen - enthält viel Richtiges, vieles von dem, was wir schon seit Jahren fordern, wozu wir Gesetzesvorschläge gemacht haben, die leider noch keine Mehrheit im Deutschen Bundestag gefunden haben. Dazu gehören das stellvertretende Mitglied im Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremium - das muss einfach sein; aus unbekannten Gründen wird das verweigert -, die Unterrichtung des Fraktionsvorstandes - es ist völlig absurd, dass man das nicht darf; das war früher schon einmal anders - und natürlich auch die Anwesenheit von Mitarbeitern bei Sitzungen. Auch sie sollten dabei sein dürfen.\n\nAber ich sage Ihnen: Das eigentliche Problem ist ein anderes. Lieber Kollege Binninger, ich schließe mich gern an, wenn wir einmal einen Abend lang Selbstkritik üben.\n\nBei einigem haben Sie ja recht. Viele Abgeordnete haben einfach nicht die Zeit, sich ausreichend zu kümmern. Wir können gerne einen solchen Abend veranstalten; ich mache mit.\n\nHeute will ich einmal sagen, woran die Kontrolle der Nachrichtendienste in den letzten Jahren, vor allen Dingen seit der Snowden-Enthüllung, gescheitert ist, nämlich an den Mitgliedern der Bundesregierung, der Geheimdienste, die mich und Sie und andere, die in dem Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremium sitzen, belogen haben, die die Unwahrheit gesagt haben,\n\ndie verschwiegen haben, die da saßen wie Engel und den Eindruck erweckten: Wir wissen von nichts; keine Ahnung, was der Snowden da will; keine Ahnung, was die USA machen. Wir kümmern uns doch nicht um Freunde. - Sogar hatte die Kanzlerin gesagt, das Abhören von Freunden gehe gar nicht. Was wir jetzt alles an Informationen, an Meldungen bekommen, das zeigt, dass das überwiegend gelogen war, und das darf doch nicht wahr sein.\n\nDa müssen Sie etwas verbessern. Deshalb fordere ich drei Punkte:\n\nErstens. In solchen parlamentarischen Gremien muss die Opposition die Möglichkeit haben, allein Sachen durchzusetzen.\n\nDas heißt, wir brauchen Oppositionsrechte, auch wenn die Opposition noch so klein ist. Denn die Regierungskoalition sieht ihre Hauptaufgabe darin - das ist auch eine Kritik an Ihnen -, sich vor die Geheimdienste zu stellen, sie zu schützen und zu rechtfertigen, was sie tut. So ist die Realität. Nur die Opposition kann das durchbrechen.\n\nZweitens. Wir brauchen - das fordere ich jetzt seit zehn Jahren - eine wörtliche Protokollierung von dem, was in den Sitzungen dieses Gremiums gesagt wird.\n\nEs ist doch ein Unding, dass wir uns jetzt nicht über die, glaube ich, acht oder zehn Sondersitzungen im Jahr 2013 unterhalten können, um der Frage nachzugehen: Was hat da Herr Schindler gesagt? Was hat da Herr Pofalla gesagt? Was hat der Minister gesagt? Wenn wir das nicht nachhalten können, können wir sie nicht überführen, dass sie uns belogen haben; vielmehr sind wir auf unser eigenes Gedächtnis angewiesen.\n\nDas, was in anderen Ausschüssen möglich ist, beispielsweise im Auswärtigen Ausschuss - da werden auch geheime Sitzungen mitgeschnitten -, muss eingeführt werden.\n\nJeder, der das Kontrollgremium arbeitsfähig machen will, der muss das wollen. Warum wollen Sie das nicht? Haben Sie Angst vor Ihrer eigenen Rede, die dann protokolliert worden ist? Das darf nicht sein.\n\nDrittens. Wir brauchen Sanktionen gegen Mitglieder der Bundesregierung, gegen Mitglieder der Geheimdienste, die uns im Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremium belogen haben.\n\nEs reicht nicht, im Gesetz zu verankern, wie es die Linke jetzt will, dass die Mitglieder von Bundesregierung und Geheimdiensten vollständig und wahrheitsgemäß informieren müssen; vielmehr muss es Folgen haben, wenn sie lügen. Wir müssen gesetzlich verankern, dass es mindestens ein Disziplinarvergehen ist, wenn dort falsch ausgesagt wird. Es kann doch nicht angehen, dass zwar Falschaussagen im Untersuchungsausschuss strafrechtliche Konsequenzen haben, während wir Abgeordnete im Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremium nach Strich und Faden belogen werden können, ohne dass das irgendeine Konsequenz hat.\n\nDer letzte Punkt, den ich anfügen will - das ist mein Lieblingspunkt -: Das sind die Whistleblower. Wir brauchen in unseren Gesetzen - wir haben das mehrfach beantragt - Möglichkeiten, dass, wenn unter dem Deckmantel der Geheimhaltung Grundrechte verletzt werden, wenn die Verfassung von Bund oder Ländern gebrochen wird, man das als Abgeordneter frei hier von diesem Podium aus oder auch in den Ausschüssen sagen darf, ohne dass der Staatsanwalt anschließend anklopft.\n\nEine solche Regelung haben wir schon einmal im Strafgesetzbuch gehabt.\n\nDie muss man wieder einführen. Wenn Sie eine wirkliche Kontrolle haben wollen, dann schließen Sie sich mir an.\"\n3364,heike-hansel,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir besprechen heute als letzten Tagesordnungspunkt dieser Woche die großen Zukunftsfragen der Welt und damit eigentlich die wichtigsten Fragen - leider ganz am Ende der Sitzungswoche. Es geht um globale Ziele, die sich die Weltgemeinschaft ab 2015 gemeinsam stecken will, die sogenannten nachhaltigen Entwicklungsziele, auf Englisch: Sustainable Development Goals, allgemein abgekürzt als SDGs. Das sage ich für die Gäste, weil ich mir sicher bin, dass viele noch nicht davon gehört haben.\n\nEin erster Entwurf dieser Ziele wurde im Rahmen der UN-Generalversammlung vorgestellt, die zurzeit tagt. Es geht um 17 nachhaltige Entwicklungsziele. Ganz oben steht natürlich das Ziel, die Armut zu überwinden. Wir müssen die weltweiten Ressourcen schonen, den Klimaschutz vorantreiben und die weltweite Ungleichheit bekämpfen. Es geht um Zielvorgaben, die für die Länder des Südens, aber genauso für die Industrieländer gelten sollen.\n\nWir haben dazu einen Antrag eingebracht, noch vor der Sommerpause, also schon vor einigen Monaten, weil wir über dieses Thema hier im Parlament diskutieren wollten. Die erste Frage, die wir uns stellen müssen, ist die Frage der Partizipation, der Beteiligung. Alle waren sich einig - es gab viele Verlautbarungen der Regierungen -: Ja, wir wollen eine ganz breite Beteiligung, weil es um die Entwicklung unserer Gesellschaften geht. - Ich muss sagen: Wir haben jetzt zwar Ziele vorgelegt bekommen, es kommt auch zu einer Beteiligung; aber wenn ich hier fragen würde, wer schon einmal von den Entwicklungszielen gehört hat, dann würde ich vermutlich erfahren, dass es die wenigsten sind. Das ist ein großer Kritikpunkt. Wenn wir über so wichtige Fragen diskutieren, braucht es viel breitere Diskussionsprozesse und eine ernsthafte Beteiligung der Zivilgesellschaft.\n\nWir haben vorgeschlagen, mit dem Thema in die Schulen, in die Universitäten und in die Kommunen zu gehen. All das wäre wichtig, um einen breiten Diskussionsprozess anzustoßen; denn alle Menschen sind davon betroffen. Es geht um ihren Lebensstil, darum, was sie konsumieren. All das sind wichtige Fragen; wir diskutieren sie mit Schulklassen. Aber es ist doch wichtig, die Beteiligung auch institutionell zu verankern. Ich hätte mir von der Bundesregierung gewünscht, dass sie einen viel breiteren Prozess anstößt, dass sie die Diskussion nicht auf der Ebene der NGOs, der Nichtregierungsorganisationen, belässt - NGOs sind wichtig, aber es sind spezielle Gruppen -, sondern das Thema mehr in die Öffentlichkeit trägt. Ich denke, da muss man mehr machen.\n\nUns geht es, wenn ich mir die Ziele anschaue, vor allem um die Frage der sozialen Ungleichheit; das ist die größte Herausforderung. Wir kennen zum Teil die Zahlen; ich will eine nennen: Die 85 reichsten Personen weltweit besitzen ungefähr so viel wie die Hälfte der Weltbevölkerung. Ich denke, diese Zahl spricht für sich. Deshalb ist unsere große Forderung: Wir müssen den Kampf gegen die soziale Ungleichheit weltweit und auch in unserer eigenen Gesellschaft an die erste Stelle setzen.\n\nEs gibt einen weiteren Punkt, der mich wundert. Die vorherigen Ziele, die 2015 auslaufenden Millenniumsentwicklungsziele, befassten sich auch mit dem Thema Frieden. Dies wird in den neuen Zielen kaum thematisiert. Wir sehen doch weltweit die Kriege und Krisen; wir wissen ja gar nicht mehr, auf welche Kriegsregion wir zuerst schauen sollen. Deshalb hatten wir von Anfang an gefordert: Die Friedenspolitik muss in die Entwicklungsziele aufgenommen werden. Frieden und Entwicklung sind zwei Seiten einer Medaille.\n\nGanz konkret haben wir gesagt: Es muss um Rüstungsexport, aber auch um Abrüstung gehen. Weltweit werden 1,2 Billionen Euro für Rüstung ausgegeben. Diese können wir doch in Ausgaben für Entwicklung umwidmen. Das ist doch die zentrale Herausforderung. Wir brauchen das Geld für Entwicklung.\n\nWir haben noch einen zweiten Antrag eingebracht, den wir gemeinsam mit den Grünen verfasst haben, was ich sehr begrüße. Wir haben ihn vorgelegt, weil nächste Woche, am 1. Oktober, eine Deadline der Europäischen Union endet. Es geht um Handelsfragen, die eine zentrale Rolle spielen, wenn es um die Bekämpfung sozialer Ungleichheiten geht.\n\nViele Menschen engagieren sich momentan sehr dafür, dass das TTIP, das Freihandelsabkommen mit den USA, nicht zustande kommt. Es gibt aber auch andere Wirtschaftsabkommen mit den Ländern des Südens, vor allem mit den afrikanischen Ländern. Die afrikanischen Länder haben sich zwölf Jahre gegen das Ansinnen der Europäischen Union gewehrt, Wirtschaftspartnerschaftsabkommen abzuschließen, da dies für sie große Veränderungen zur Folge hätte: die Öffnung und Liberalisierung ihrer Märkte, gleicher Zugang von EU und afrikanischen Ländern. All das bedroht massiv die Existenz von Kleinbauern und viele Arbeitsplätze. Deswegen haben wir von Anfang an gesagt: Wir wollen diese Form der Wirtschaftspartnerschaftsabkommen nicht. Wir wollen neue Mandate, durch die die selbstbestimmte Entwicklung in den Ländern gestärkt wird.\n\nIn der nächsten Woche, am 1. Oktober, läuft die Deadline der EU ab. Die EU hat den verschiedenen afrikanischen Ländergruppen gesagt: Wer bis dahin nicht unterzeichnet hat, für den fällt der zollfreie Zugang zu den Märkten weg. Das betrifft einige Länder, die sich in den letzten Jahren viel aufgebaut haben; konkret ist Kenia zu nennen. Sie gelten in der EU als Mitteleinkommensländer. Falls sie die Wirtschaftspartnerschaftsabkommen nicht unterschreiben, fällt ab dem 1. Oktober der zollfreie Zugang zu den Märkten weg. Das ist reine EU-Erpressungspolitik, und die lehnen wir ab.\n\nWir fordern, dass der freie Zugang zu den Märkten über den 1. Oktober hinaus aufrechterhalten wird.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich noch erwähnen, dass es in Kenia um 500 000 Arbeitsplätze im Blumensektor geht, die konkret betroffen wären, wenn Zölle auf den Export von Blumen erhoben würden. In erster Linie würde das viele Fairtrade-Blumen betreffen. Diese Strukturen wurden unter anderem durch deutsche Entwicklungsgelder aufgebaut. Wir können als Entwicklungspolitiker doch nicht unterstützen, dass die EU diese Länder erpresst und dass Projekte, die mit deutschen bzw. EU-Entwicklungsgeldern aufgebaut wurden, in ihrer Existenz bedroht werden. Ich bitte die Bundesregierung: Setzen Sie sich dafür ein, dass der zollfreie Zugang für all diese Produkte aus Kenia über den 1. Oktober hinaus erhalten bleibt.\n\nDanke.\n\nDanke, Frau Präsidentin. - Ich weiß, dass wir alle schnell nach Hause wollen. Deshalb fasse ich mich ganz kurz. Aber eine Sache kann ich nicht auf sich beruhen lassen, lieber Kollege Heinrich. Sie haben gesagt, es sei unsere Befürchtung, dass die heimischen Produkte in vielen Ländern mit den Importen aus der Europäischen Union nicht konkurrieren könnten. Erstens gibt es schon zahlreiche Erfahrungen in vielen westafrikanischen Staaten, die mit Produkten aus der Europäischen Union wie Hähnchenfleisch und Tomaten überschwemmt werden und sich mit einem Kleinbauernproblem konfrontiert sehen.\n\nZweitens gibt es viele Briefe und Appelle gerade aus den westafrikanischen Staaten. Die dortigen Wirtschaftsverbände, Kirchen und Gewerkschaften schreiben uns Abgeordneten und an die Europäische Union und bitten darum, nicht so eine breite Liberalisierung zuzulassen. Diese Staaten, die sich gerade aus der Armut herausgekämpft und eigene Strukturen aufgebaut haben - vor allem geprägt durch Kleinunternehmen -, sollen nun in Konkurrenz zur übermächtigen Europäischen Union treten. Damit verhält es sich so, als ob Sie einen Porsche und ein Fahrrad nebeneinander stellen und sagen: Nun machen wir ein 100-Meter-Wettrennen. - Das sind keine gerechten Bedingungen. Haben Sie denn gar keinen Brief aus diesen Ländern gelesen und die Appelle aus den dortigen Zivilgesellschaften, dass wir so keinen Wettbewerb organisieren können, nicht wahrgenommen?\"\n3325,marcus-weinberg,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Wunderlich hat vorhin nach der Intention des Gesetzentwurfs gesucht. Es ist relativ einfach: Endlich sind wir politisch so weit, dass wir nicht mehr fragen: Arbeitsmarkt oder Familie? Wir sind nämlich so weit, dass wir Erwerbstätigkeit und Familienzeit zusammenbringen wollen, weil das im Sinne der Familien und übrigens auch der Arbeitgeber ist. Denn ist der Arbeitnehmer zufrieden und hat er ein geregeltes Fami-lienleben, dann ist es auch gut für die Arbeitgeber und die Wirtschaft.\n\nDas ist auch unser Leitgedanke bei den heutigen Fragestellungen. Wir haben heute sozusagen einen Happy Friday bzw. Family Friday: Wir werden zwei große Gesetzesvorhaben verabschieden. Zuerst geht es um das Thema Elternzeit und Partnerschaftlichkeit, und in der zweiten Halbzeit geht es um den weiteren Ausbau der Kitabetreuung. Das sind zwei zentrale Maßnahmen dieser Großen Koalition in den nächsten Jahren. Damit werden wir den Wünschen der Eltern gerecht. Unser Leitmotiv ist, Eltern zu unterstützen.\n\nWir gehen nun nicht, wie Frau Reimann sagte, den ersten Schritt, sondern den zweiten bzw. sogar den dritten Schritt. Wir haben bereits in der ersten Großen Koalition vor vielen Jahren nicht nur den Krippenausbau, sondern auch die Einführung des Elterngeldes beschlossen. Die Weichen, die wir damals gelegt haben, werden wir jetzt stellen, und zwar unter Berücksichtigung der gesellschaftlichen Veränderungen. Ein Jahr nach der Bundestagswahl gehen wir nun den entscheidenden Schritt.\n\nFrau Dörner, Sie haben die Gelegenheit genutzt, um noch einmal für sich persönlich und vielleicht auch für Ihre Fraktion darzulegen, wie Sie gewisse Sachverhalte sehen. Ich habe mit Interesse zur Kenntnis genommen, dass Sie weiterhin das Ehegattensplitting komplett abschaffen wollen. Das müssten Sie in Ihrer Fraktion einmal klären. - Frau Brantner, Sie nicken, aber Sie sind diejenige, die sich in den letzten Tagen ein bisschen geöffnet hat. In der Welt vom 19. September haben Sie die Frage gestellt:\n\nWarum versuchen wir ständig, die Familien durch neue Maßnahmen und mehr Geld arbeitsmarktfähig zu machen, statt endlich zu fragen: Wie wollen wir im 21. Jahrhundert arbeiten, um auf die Bedürfnisse der Familien im 21. Jahrhundert einzugehen?\n\nIch wünsche mir, dass Sie diese Fragestellung zum Leitmotiv Ihrer grünen Politik machen und endlich auf die Agenda setzen, anstatt ideologisch bedingt darüber nachzudenken, wie sich das Ehegattensplitting und andere Maßnahmen, die durchaus eine hohe Akzeptanz haben, abschaffen lassen.\n\nDie Familienleitbilder haben sich verändert. Das nehmen nicht nur andere, sondern auch wir wahr. Vor diesem Hintergrund stellt sich uns als Union die Frage, ob wir Familienleitbilder vorgeben sollen. Dazu sagen wir Nein. Für uns stehen drei Sachverhalte im Vordergrund.\n\nErstens. Wir wollen die Eigenverantwortung und die Selbstbestimmtheit der Familien als Kernstücke unserer Familienpolitik stärken.\n\nZweitens. Wir machen zwar Angebote, wollen aber keine rundum betreute Familie. Vielmehr wollen wir eigenverantwortliche Elternschaft und eigenständig handelnde Familien unterstützen.\n\nDrittens. Wir setzen als Leitmotiv Vertrauen in die Eltern und die Elternarbeit. Bei der Stärkung der Eigenverantwortlichkeit der Eltern werden wir die veränderten Lebenswirklichkeiten berücksichtigen. Über 80 Prozent einer befragten Gruppe von bis zu 39-Jährigen hat gesagt: Die Familienleitbilder haben sich verändert. Es gibt nicht nur die traditionelle Familie, sondern auch Alleinerziehende - auch diese müssen wir in den Fokus unserer Beratungen rücken - und andere Formen des Zusammenlebens.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund müssen staatliche Leistungsangebote darauf überprüft werden, ob sie sich mit Veränderungsprozessen noch in Übereinstimmung befinden; das werden wir tun. Die oft kritisch gesehenen familienpolitischen Leistungen wie der Kitaausbau sind zentral für die Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf, genauso wie das nun vorgesehene Elterngeld Plus, das sicherlich genauso positive Auswirkungen haben wird wie das Elterngeld. Wir sind stolz darauf, dass wir das alles auf den Weg gebracht haben.\n\nWelche Wünsche haben Eltern? 91 Prozent der Befragten sind der Meinung, dass sich beide Eltern um die Betreuung der Kinder kümmern sollten. Nadine Schön hat bereits unsere besondere Situation angesprochen. Ich gehöre zu den rund 60 Prozent der Väter, die mehr Zeit mit den Kindern verbringen wollen. Solche Wünsche müssen wir in der Politik berücksichtigen. Das Elterngeld Plus schafft die Möglichkeit, solche Wünsche zu erfüllen.\n\n81 Prozent teilen die Ansicht, dass beide Eltern gleichermaßen für das Familieneinkommen verantwortlich sind. Das sind die Leitmotive für das Elterngeld Plus. Momentan sieht die Situation aber noch anders aus. Väter arbeiten durchschnittlich 42 Stunden, während Mütter 17 Stunden in der Woche arbeiten. 60 Prozent der Eltern mit Kindern unter drei Jahre wünschen sich ein Modell, das eine stärkere Partnerschaftlichkeit ermöglicht.\n\nAber nur 14 Prozent gelingt es, diese Partnerschaftlichkeit auch zu leben. Hier gibt es noch einiges zu tun.\n\nDie zentralen Punkte des Elterngeldes sind: Die Kombination aus Teilzeiterwerbstätigkeit und Elterngeldbezug muss attraktiver gemacht werden. Das ist auch im Sinne der Arbeitgeber. Wenn junge, gut ausgebildete Frauen vor 40 Jahren Mütter wurden, haben sie als Fachkräfte meistens den Arbeitsmarkt verlassen und sind erst nach sechs oder zehn Jahren zurückgekehrt. Mit dem Elterngeld Plus schaffen wir Angebote, die es Frauen ermöglichen, als Teilzeitkräfte früher in den Beruf zurückzukehren. Das führt dazu, dass die Arbeitgeber früher wieder auf diese Fachkräfte zurückgreifen können.\n\nWeiterhin honorieren wir die partnerschaftliche Aufteilung. Wenn Väter etwas mehr Zeit mit der Familie verbringen wollen - etwas mehr Zeit für die Kinder bedeutet etwas weniger arbeiten -, dann heißt das für Mütter, dass sie etwas mehr arbeiten. Wir wollen im Sinne einer Angleichung die partnerschaftliche Aufteilung von Betreuungs- und Erwerbsaufgaben stärken. Das ist mit dem Partnerschaftsbonus verbunden. Das sind dann - in Anführungszeichen - nur vier Monate, aber damit soll ein Signal gesetzt werden. Es ist den Eltern überlassen, die Aufteilung eigenverantwortlich zu organisieren. Insgesamt steht dahinter der Gedanke, dass wir den Eltern bzw. der Familie mehr Zeit geben. Das ist nicht nur für die Eltern gut, sondern das ist besonders für die Kinder gut.\n\nDabei ist ein zentraler Punkt das Elterngeld. Wir sagen: Kombiniert doch - in Anführungszeichen - das alte Elterngeld, also das Basiselterngeld, mit dem Elterngeld Plus. - Die Familien sollen entscheiden, wie sie das machen. Dazu gehört auch die Absprache mit dem Arbeitgeber zum beiderseitigen Nutzen.\n\nFrau Brantner, ich habe schon wieder ein Zitat von Ihnen gefunden. Das passt gut, da Sie nach mir reden. Ich finde richtig, dass Sie seinerzeit in der Welt auch gesagt haben:\n\nDer Staat muss größere Zeitsouveränität und Freiräume vom ökonomischen Zeitdruck ermöglichen, er darf das aber nicht vorschreiben.\n\nDas ist genau richtig.\n\nWir schreiben nichts vor. Wir sagen: Entscheidet ihr! - Wir eröffnen die Angebote, aber die Familien müssen entscheiden, welche Möglichkeiten sie in Anspruch nehmen. Unsere Grundintention ist, Herr Wunderlich, Familienpolitik zu entideologisieren und zur Anerkennung der Handlungsfreiheit der Familie zu kommen. Wir wollen weg von Formulierungen wie „Rabenmutter“ oder „Herdprämie“. Das wollen die Familien nicht mehr hören. Das ist überholt.\n\nIn dem Zusammenhang gibt es für uns einen wichtigen Punkt: die Belastung für die Wirtschaft. Er wird immer wieder angesprochen. Wir Familienpolitiker müssen immer schauen, dass unsere Maßnahmen den Erfordernissen der Wirtschaft nicht widersprechen. Unser Grundansatz ist: Wenn der Arbeitgeber Teilzeitarbeit ermöglicht, dann müssen wir anerkennen, dass das eine schwierige Situation für den Arbeitgeber ist. Deswegen ist die Absprache bzw. die Rückkopplung mit der Wirtschaft zentral; denn der Wohlstand, den wir haben, ist einer gut funktionierenden Wirtschaft zu verdanken. Ihn sollten wir nicht aufs Spiel setzen.\n\nDeswegen sind die Regelungen zur Elternzeit richtig, nämlich dass 24 der insgesamt 36 Monate bis zum vollendeten achten Lebensjahr des Kindes übertragen werden können. Richtig ist aber auch, dass wir die Zustimmungsfrist des Arbeitgebers auf 13 Wochen verlängern. Wir müssen also immer überprüfen, ob die Wirtschaft, insbesondere der Mittelstand, die Regelungen mittragen kann; denn die Wirtschaft ist ein Fundament unseres Wohlstandes.\n\nDaraus leitet sich aber auch die Erkenntnis ab, dass Reden und Handeln zwei verschiedene Dinge sind. Es ist ja so: Wer schneller lebt, ist früher fertig, wer schneller redet, hat mehr zu sagen.\n\nGerade für die Arbeitgeber muss deutlich werden: Es reicht nicht, nur vom Erfolgsfaktor Familie zu reden und in Fensterreden zu beteuern, man wolle mehr für die Familie tun. Auch die Arbeitgeber und ihre Verbände sind bei der Veränderung der Familienpolitik mit im Boot. Man könnte sagen, das Elterngeld Plus ist eine weitere Belastung, aber letztendlich ist es im Sinne der Arbeitgeber. Wir werden diesen Diskurs auch mit den Arbeitgebern führen müssen. Nichts ist besser für einen Arbeitgeber als ein glücklicher Arbeitnehmer, der weiß, dass sein Familienleben gut organisiert ist.\n\nAngesprochen haben wir schon die Nachbesserungen, die wir jetzt im parlamentarischen Verfahren anstreben. Die sind richtig, und die werden wir jetzt umsetzen. Ich nenne als Stichwort die Alleinerziehenden. Es gibt noch einen weiteren Punkt. Die Union befürwortet das Ehrenamt, insbesondere das kommunale Ehrenamt. Wir werden uns bemühen, eine Regelung zu schaffen, damit das Elterngeld gut mit dem Ehrenamt kombiniert werden kann. Näheres werden die parlamentarischen Beratungen ergeben.\n\nInsgesamt bleibt es heute beim Happy Friday. Es ist ein schöner Familienfreitag zu bester Stunde heute Morgen. Der erste Teil ging um das Elterngeld Plus, und gleich reden wir noch über den Kitaausbau. Familien in Deutschland können sich freuen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n13778,uli-grotsch,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Eine bundesweite Präventionsstrategie - wer könnte etwas dagegen haben, gerade nach dem schrecklichen Terroranschlag in Berlin? Auch wenn ich Ihren Antrag heute ablehnen werde,\n\nhabe ich eine gute Nachricht für Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen: Auf unsere Initiative hin gibt es nämlich bereits seit dem 6. Februar dieses Jahres einen Beschluss der Parteivorsitzenden für ein nationales Präventionsprogramm, den wir schnell und konkret mit Leben füllen werden.\n\nIch sage Ihnen auch: Ich bin wirklich froh darüber, dass das Thema Prävention jetzt endlich die öffentliche, aber auch die politische Aufmerksamkeit hat, die es sich schon lange verdient hat. Ich hoffe sehr, dass es diese Aufmerksamkeit auch dann noch haben wird, wenn in Deutschland nicht mehr beinahe jeden Tag Razzien gegen Islamisten stattfinden, wenn die Terrorgefahr nicht mehr so hoch ist wie heute. Ich zähle darauf, dass Sie auch dann noch einen Sinn dafür haben, wie wichtig die Präventionsarbeit in unserem Land ist.\n\nMir ist auch wichtig, zu sagen, dass wir dabei nun wirklich nicht bei null anfangen. Die Bundesregierung hat bereits im Sommer 2016, also unabhängig von den Anschlägen der letzten Monate, noch deutlich vor dem Berliner Terroranschlag, ihre Strategie zur Extremismusprävention und Demokratieförderung vorgestellt. Im Ministerium von Manuela Schwesig wurde das sehr gut laufende Bundesprogramm „Demokratie leben!“ entwickelt, dessen Mittel wir auf über 100 Millionen Euro verdoppelt haben, und wir brauchen durchaus noch mehr; das will ich ganz und gar nicht leugnen. Für uns ist „Demokratie leben!“ ein zentrales Handlungsfeld. Ja, natürlich ist es wichtig, „Demokratie leben!“ zu haben. Reden Sie doch einmal mit all denjenigen, die Präventionsarbeit in diesem Bereich machen. „Demokratie leben!“ ist das zentrale Programm, aus dem die Projekte finanziert werden.\n\nIm BAMF gibt es die Beratungsstelle Radikalisierung, an die sich Angehörige niedrigschwellig telefonisch wenden können. Wir haben eine sehr aktive Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung, die die von uns forcierte Mittelerhöhung optimal und zielgerichtet für ihre Bildungsarbeit einsetzt.\n\nVon zentraler Bedeutung ist es für mich, zu sagen: Im November letzten Jahres ist nach einjähriger Vorbereitung das Präventionsnetzwerk gegen religiös begründeten Extremismus nach dem Vorbild der Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft gegen Rechtsextremismus gestartet worden. Hier werden sich künftig die bundesweit tätigen Träger und NGOs austauschen, vernetzen, und hier werden sie Qualitätsstandards für die Prävention entwickeln. Das ist genau das, Kollegin Mihalic, was Sie eben gefordert haben. Das haben wir schon. Das ist Ihnen vielleicht entgangen. Sie sind eingeladen, sich darüber zu informieren und mitzuhelfen, diese Stelle künftig mit noch mehr Leben zu erfüllen und zu stärken.\n\nDiese Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft wird beraten und begleitet von einem Beirat, in dem genau all die Player vertreten sind, in dem die muslimischen Verbände vertreten sind; denn natürlich ist eine zentrale Frage in diesem Bereich, welche Rolle die muslimischen Verbände spielen und wie wir sie in die Deradikalisierungsarbeit einbinden können.\n\nIch bin durchaus froh, dass es in diesem Haus weitgehende Einigkeit gibt, dass die Prävention ein wichtiger Aspekt unseres politischen Handelns ist. Zur Wahrheit gehört aber auch, dass der Großteil aller Gefährder einen deutschen Pass hat oder dass die Attentäter, die die Attentate in Deutschland begangen haben, sich hier radikalisiert hatten. Auch der Attentäter vom 19. Dezember 2016 ist nicht als Terrorist nach Deutschland eingereist, sondern aus Tunesien als Kleinkrimineller ausgereist. Das gehört zur Wahrheit dazu.\n\nIch sage ganz deutlich: Über das Wie, also darüber, wie ein nationales Präventionsprogramm aussehen sollte, darf und muss geredet werden. Es geht meiner Meinung nach dabei etwa um Fragen wie: Welche Rolle spielen die muslimischen Verbände? Wie gewährleisten wir, dass alle Beteiligten das Programm auf Augenhöhe erarbeiten usw.? Hierzu sind wir zu einem konstruktiven Austausch gerne bereit. Jeder, der sich mit Präventionsarbeit beschäftigt, weiß, dass das ein sehr sensibler Bereich ist.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, eines möchte ich auch noch sagen: Wir brauchen endlich ein Demokratieförderungsgesetz, weil wir von kurzfristigen Projektförderungen wegkommen müssen - hin zu planbarer, langfristiger Präventionsarbeit.\n\nWenn es uns mit der Präventionsarbeit ernst ist, lassen Sie es uns unter Beweis stellen! Unterstützen Sie das Demokratieförderungsgesetz, weil es der Garant und die bundesgesetzliche Grundlage dafür ist, dass die Menschen, die in der Präventionsarbeit tätig sind, in Zukunft auch längerfristig planen können. Präventionsarbeit ist doch nichts, was innerhalb einiger Wochen oder in Form eines Gesprächs geschieht. Präventionsarbeit ist etwas, was lange dauert und dann umso intensiver und nachhaltiger wirkt.\n\nIch komme zum Ende mit einem letzten Aspekt. Bei allem berechtigten Fokus auf den radikalen Salafismus - das stelle ich überhaupt nicht infrage - in dieser Zeit: Demokratiefeinde gibt es auch von rechts, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen. Ich würde mir wünschen, dass ein nationales Präventionsprogramm einen ganzheitlichen Ansatz verfolgt und all jene in den Blick nimmt, die den Boden des Grundgesetzes verlassen haben.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3403,hubertus-zdebel,\"Herzlichen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Herr Staatssekretär, Sie haben gerade von den drei Optionen bezüglich des Jülicher Mülls gesprochen. Können Sie uns even-tuell schon etwas zur Zeitschiene der Entscheidungsfindung sagen? Auch mir ist das bisher sehr vage gewesen. Sie können sich sicher sein, dass es weitere Nachfragen zu dem Ganzen geben wird. Ich habe zum Beispiel wieder eine Kleine Anfrage aufgrund der Antwort der Bundesregierung in Vorbereitung, die Ihnen in den nächsten Tagen zugehen wird. Dann können wir das noch einmal vertiefen, auch bezüglich der Ausführungen von Sylvia Kotting-Uhl gerade eben. Mich interessiert, ob Sie schon etwas Konkretes zur Zeitschiene mitteilen können.\"\n4851,eckhardt-rehberg,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren Abgeordneten! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es sind Worte wie „einmalig“, „absurdes Theater“ und „Glück gehabt“ gefallen. Schauen wir uns an, wie es im Haushaltsausschuss im Jahr 2009 aussah. Wenn ich zum jetzigen Koalitionspartner nett bin, dann kann ich sagen: Diese 86 Milliarden Euro waren die Erblast der Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise.\n\nWenn ich weniger nett bin, muss ich sagen: Das ist die Erblast von Steinbrück gewesen.\n\nIm Regierungsentwurf stand noch eine Neuverschuldung in Höhe von 86 Milliarden Euro. Wir haben diese Neuverschuldung innerhalb von nur vier Jahren auf null gedrückt.\n\nHier wurde von verspielten Zukunftschancen gesprochen. Das Gegenteil ist der Fall. Kollege Kindler, es ist keine Arbeitsverweigerung, was wir in den vier Jahren der letzten Legislaturperiode und im letzten Jahr mit dem Koalitionspartner SPD gemacht haben. Eine schwarze Null zustande zu bringen, das sind keine verspielten Zukunftschancen, sondern das ist endlich fiskalische Generationengerechtigkeit. Das eröffnet Chancen für die zukünftigen Generationen.\n\nÜbrigens, wir haben in der letzten Legislaturperiode im Bereich von Bildung und Forschung einen Aufwuchs von 14 Milliarden Euro gehabt.\n\nEs gibt schon einen Paradigmenwechsel in der Haushaltspolitik, einen Paradigmenwechsel, den der Bundesrechnungshof mit Sorge sieht. Ich darf einmal aus Bemerkungen des Bundesrechnungshofs zum Haushalt zitieren. Der Bundesrechnungshof sagt, er sehe „strukturelle Belastungen und Risiken, die eine nachhaltige Haushaltspolitik gefährden könnten“. Zu weiteren finanziellen Zugeständnissen des Bundes an Länder und Gemeinden heißt es:\n\nDabei erscheinen im Bund-Länder-Verhältnis die finanziellen Handlungsspielräume des Bundes angesichts der bestehenden Lasten ausgereizt.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, im Koalitionsvertrag sind 23 Milliarden Euro für prioritäre Maßnahmen vorgesehen, wovon mehr als die Hälfte nicht für bundesoriginäre Aufgaben abfließt, sondern für Aufgaben, die originär die Ländern und die Kommunen erfüllen. Aber diese schwarze Null, die eigentlich erst für dieses Jahr vorgesehen war, hat die Möglichkeit eröffnet, dass wir in den nächsten drei Jahren bis 2018 wieder einen Ausgabenzuwachs von 30 Milliarden Euro haben werden. Das ist die Basis dafür, dass wir mehr als in der Vergangenheit in Verkehrsinfrastruktur investieren, dass wir noch mehr in Bildung und Forschung investieren können und dass wir Länder und Kommunen noch mehr unterstützen können, Stichwort „Grundsicherung im Alter“, wofür pro Jahr insgesamt mehr als 5 Milliarden Euro an die Kommunen fließen werden. Dafür liefert die Basis die schwarze Null. Diese Basis, Kollege Kindler, haben wir uns in der Koalition mit der FDP und in dem einen Jahr Koalition mit der SPD schon hart erarbeitet.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, was in der politischen Debatte ganz wenig beachtet wird, ist, dass wir noch in der Großen Koalition 2008/2009 und dann in der Koalition mit der FDP\n\neine Entlastung für die Bürger von 25 Milliarden Euro in der vollen Jahreswirkung ab 2011 und für die Kommunen von 17 Milliarden Euro vorgenommen haben. Wenn man Steuermehreinnahmen und Entlastungen gegen-einander aufrechnet, wenn man sieht, dass wir im Ausgabenzuwachs fast konstant geblieben sind, dann, Kollege Kindler, muss man feststellen: Das ist schon eine große Leistung von zwei Bundesregierungen; das ist eine große Leistung von zwei Koalitionen. Ich will Ihnen eins sagen: Dieses lassen wir uns von niemandem und von keinem schlechtreden.\n\nIch glaube, dieses Jahr wird von dem Thema Bund-Länder-Finanzbeziehungen sehr stark geprägt sein. Der Bund hat in den letzten vier Jahren, von 2010 bis 2014, Steuermehreinnahmen in Höhe von etwa 45 Milliarden Euro gehabt. Die Länder haben in fast gleicher Höhe Steuermehreinnahmen gehabt. Die Kommunen haben in der Zeit Steuermehreinnahmen von fast 19 Milliarden Euro gehabt. Jetzt muss man angesichts der vielen Forderungen, die von Ländern und Kommunen auch in den letzten Stunden und Tagen an den Bund gerichtet worden sind, in dieses Land die Botschaft senden, dass an der positiven wirtschaftlichen und gesellschaftlichen Entwicklung in den letzten Jahren Länder und Gemeinden in gleicher Art und Weise partizipieren.\n\nIn der letzten Legislaturperiode und in dieser Legislaturperiode haben wir, der Bund, je nach Betrachtung, je nach Berechnungsweise an Länder und Kommunen zusätzlich zwischen 70 Milliarden und 90 Milliarden Euro für Aufgaben gegeben, für die wir eigentlich nicht zuständig sind. Angesichts dessen können wir jetzt nicht nur die schwarze Null für das vergangene Haushaltsjahr erfolgreich verbuchen, sondern die politischen Rahmenbedingungen, die wir heute haben, die wir uns schwer erarbeitet haben. Das steht für mehr als gute Zukunftschancen. Ich glaube, Deutschland steht mit Blick auf Europa sehr gut da.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n8023,ulla-schmidt,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Gäste! Die Berichte, über die wir heute diskutieren und die Gott sei Dank wieder von einem Außenminister vorgelegt wurden, für den diese dritte Säule der Außenpolitik eine ganz wichtige Bedeutung hat, legen das Hauptaugenmerk auf die Krisen- und Konfliktprävention.\n\nIch glaube, gerade angesichts der derzeitigen Situation gilt: Eigentlich war Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik nie so aktuell wie heute. Wenn wir berücksichtigen, dass sich laut UNHCR rund 60 Millionen Menschen auf der Flucht befinden - so viele wie seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg nicht mehr -, zeigt das sehr deutlich, wie in einer Welt, die aus den Fugen zu geraten scheint, die soziale Kraft der Kultur in der Frage der Krisen- und Konfliktprävention eine immer größere Bedeutung erhält. Denn viele der Krisen, die wir heute als humanitäre Krisen erleben, sind ja, wie es der Bundesaußenminister immer sagt, auch Krisen der Humanität, also der Menschlichkeit, die in Gefahr ist aufgrund von Terrorismus, ideologischem Radikalismus und auch aufgrund der Situation, dass in immer mehr Staaten jede zivile Ordnung auseinanderbricht und dass gerade in den Krisenregionen dem staatlichen Gewaltmonopol überhaupt keine Bedeutung mehr zukommt.\n\nDeswegen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, müssen wir in diesen Bereich der auswärtigen Politik investieren. Denn all das, worüber wir heute im Hinblick auf Fluchtursachen, worüber wir im Hinblick auf Hilfe beim Aufbau zivilgesellschaftlicher Strukturen in den verschiedenen Ländern, worüber wir im Hinblick auf die Vermittlung von Werten diskutieren, ist von großer Bedeutung, und hier muss mit und von unseren Mittlerorganisationen sehr viel geleistet werden. Für uns, die Mitglieder des Unterausschusses Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik, war immer wichtig, dass wir mithilfe unserer Mittlerorganisationen dafür sorgen, dass in den Flüchtlingslagern und in all den bedrohten Regionen keine verlorene Generation aufwächst, und dass wir zugleich in Bildung, in Kultur, in die Vermittlung von Werten investieren, dass wir den jungen Menschen die Chance geben, überhaupt wieder an Demokratie zu glauben und dafür einzutreten.\n\nIch möchte heute einmal den Blick auf die deutschen Auslandsschulen richten. Sie sind seit jeher eine tragende Säule der Auswärtigen Kultur- und Bildungspolitik. Sie haben Tag für Tag damit zu tun, mit unterschiedlichen Biografien umzugehen, die Menschen in den Herkunftsländern kennenzulernen, Kindern die Chance zu geben, Werte zu entwickeln, an Demokratie zu glauben. Sie sind im Grunde genommen Orte der Begegnung, der Vielfalt, und sie sind oft Orte des Beginns des interkulturellen Austauschs. Weil sie so dafür prädestiniert sind, diese unterschiedlichen, heterogenen Aufgaben zu meistern, müssen wir in die Auslandsschulen investieren.\n\nViele von Ihnen haben sich bei Ihren Besuchen in den verschiedenen Ländern immer wieder vor Ort von der hervorragenden Arbeit der Auslandsschulen überzeugen können. Sie haben sich davon überzeugen können, wie dort Schülerinnen und Schüler mit den verschiedensten persönlichen, sozialen, religiösen und kulturellen Hintergründen miteinander und voneinander lernen, wie dort mithilfe der Lehrerinnen und Lehrer diese Schülerinnen und Schüler zu weltoffenen, toleranten, selbstbewussten jungen Erwachsenen herangebildet werden und wie die Auslandsschulen über ihre Arbeit vor Ort mit den verschiedenen Kulturen verwachsen.\n\nIch habe heute Morgen mit der Kollegin Müntefering darüber gesprochen, welche Chancen sich für unsere Auslandsschulen bieten, auch innerhalb Europas, insbesondere in Osteuropa. Denken wir an die Diskussionen, die wir derzeit über eine gerechte Behandlung der Flüchtlinge und eine wirklich europäische Flüchtlings- und Asylpolitik führen. Unsere Schulen können dazu beitragen, dass dort Menschen heranwachsen, die mit ihren Familien dafür eintreten und vielleicht in manchen Punkten einen Sinneswandel in der Gesellschaft herbeiführen können.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, weil die Schulen so gut sind, haben wir im Ausschuss und hier im Parlament entschieden, dass sie auch im Bereich der inklusiven Bildung Aufgaben wahrnehmen sollen. Wir wollen bei der Umsetzung der Behindertenrechtskonvention vorangehen. Wir wollen, dass von unseren Auslandsschulen vor Ort das Signal ausgeht: Ja, auch für behinderte Menschen, für behinderte Kinder ist Teilhabe ein Menschenrecht; denn dieses Menschenrecht ist unteilbar.\n\nSchließlich wollen wir auch, dass über die Auslandsschulen unsere hervorragenden Erfahrungen im Bereich der dualen Berufsbildung vermittelt werden können.\n\nIch füge aber hinzu: Wenn wir all das wollen, wenn wir die Möglichkeiten der Auslandsschulen nutzen wollen und wenn wir die Qualität der Ausbildung in diesen Schulen beibehalten wollen, dann müssen wir investieren; denn gute Schulen brauchen hervorragende Lehrerinnen und Lehrer.\n\nDem entspricht nicht, dass die Auslandsschulen seit Jahren an Attraktivität einbüßen. Mittlerweile liegen die Lehrerinnen und Lehrer an Auslandsschulen 23 Prozent hinter der Gehaltsentwicklung von Bundesbeamten im Ausland zurück. Wir erleben derzeit, dass Lehrerinnen und Lehrer sagen: Ich würde das gerne machen, aber ich kann doch meine Familie, meine Kinder nicht schlechterstellen, nur weil ich eine wichtige Aufgabe wahrnehmen möchte. - Ich bitte Sie alle darum, dass wir gemeinsam daran arbeiten. Wir müssen die Besoldung der Lehrerinnen und Lehrer an die Besoldung aller anderen ins Ausland entsandten Beamten und sonstigen Kräften anpassen. Wir müssen die seit 1999 geltende Abkopplung ihrer Besoldung beenden.\n\nAußerdem müssen wir dafür sorgen, dass wir ausreichend Geld zur Verfügung haben, damit die Auslandsschulen die Aufgaben, die sie im Bereich der Inklusion und hinsichtlich der Förderung der beruflichen Bildung wahrnehmen sollen, erfüllen können. Wir müssen aber auch die Chance haben, mit entsprechenden Mitteln die Schulen zum Beispiel in Erbil im Nordirak oder in Kabul zu unterstützen,\n\nund dort, wo es noch keine Auslandsschulen gibt, kleine Schulen zu unterstützen, damit dort langsam Auslandsschulen aufgebaut werden können. Ich bitte Sie dafür um Unterstützung. Im Ausschuss werden wir darüber noch reden. Ich glaube, wir müssen jetzt investieren.\n\nWir brauchen zusätzliches Geld im Haushalt. Dafür werbe ich bei Ihnen allen. Sie wissen, in der Kulturpolitik ist es immer so: Mit wenig Geld kann man viel erreichen, aber durch Entzug von wenig Geld kann man vieles kaputtmachen. Wir jedoch sollten in die Zukunft investieren.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n9612,frithjof-schmidt,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Koalitionsfraktionen! Bei der Bildung Ihrer - das sage ich ganz bewusst - Kommission zur Überprüfung und Sicherung der Parlamentsrechte bei der Mandatierung von Auslandseinsätzen der Bundeswehr standen hochgesteckte Erwartungen im Raum, wie die von Ihnen sogenannte „Abstufung der Intensität parlamentarischer Beteiligung“ aussehen sollte. Daran gemessen ist das Ergebnis recht überschaubar geworden.\n\nIch finde es gut, dass Sie auf jeden konkreten Vorstoß zur Änderung der Verfassung verzichtet haben. Ich finde es gut, dass die unselige Debatte über Vorratsbeschlüsse oder die Delegation von Abgeordnetenrechten an spezielle Ausschüsse nicht mehr vorgesehen ist.\n\nDas haben Sie nach Prüfung der Umstände sicher aus guter Einsicht ad acta gelegt. Aber ich bin mir auch sicher, dass Ihnen dabei die geschlossene und scharfe Kritik der gesamten Opposition in diesem Haus an solchen Vorhaben eine große Hilfe war.\n\nWenn diese falschen politischen Ideen nun in Ihren Fraktionen nicht mehr herumspuken und dauerhaft politisch entsorgt sind, dann hatte dieser politische Prozess auf jeden Fall etwas Gutes.\n\nEs gibt in Ihrem Gesetzentwurf drei politische Punkte, bei denen wir Ihrer Meinung sind. Wir begrüßen ausdrücklich, dass Sie für Bundeswehreinsätze nun einen Evaluierungsbericht vorsehen, der die Wirksamkeit der militärischen und zivilen Komponenten der Mission bewertet. Das haben wir seit vielen Jahren immer wieder gefordert. Es ist gut, dass Sie diese Position jetzt aufnehmen.\n\nWir begrüßen auch, dass dem Bundestag jährlich ein Bericht über bestehende multilaterale militärische Verbundfähigkeiten vorgelegt werden soll. Das trägt zur Transparenz darüber bei, was alles arbeitsteilig mit anderen Ländern militärisch geplant und getan wird. Solche Transparenz ist immer auch die Voraussetzung für politische Kontrolle.\n\nWir finden auch richtig, dass Sie die Vorgaben des Bundesverfassungsgerichtes, die es im Urteil zu unserer Klage zum sogenannten Pegasus-Einsatz in Libyen gemacht hat, wie denn bei Gefahr im Verzug mit Eilfällen umzugehen ist, sofort übernommen haben. Das schafft die notwendige Klarheit.\n\nAber das sind natürlich nicht die zentralen politischen Punkte Ihres Gesetzentwurfes. Politisch im Zentrum steht Ihr Versuch, Einsatztypen zu definieren, die in der Regel nicht mandatspflichtig sein sollen, bei denen also die Möglichkeit einer Einbeziehung in bewaffnete Kampfhandlungen auszuschließen ist.\n\nSie nennen zum Beispiel Ausbildungsmissionen in sicherem Umfeld, UN-Beobachtermissionen, logistische Unterstützung ohne Bezug zu Kampfhandlungen.\n\nSie wecken damit die Illusion, man könne mit einem solchen Gesetzestext die notwendige Einzelfallprüfung eines jeden Einsatzes umgehen oder wenigstens minimieren.\n\nIhre These in diesem Gesetzentwurf ist: Der mandatspflichtige Ausbildungseinsatz ist atypisch, ist die Ausnahme von der Regel.\n\nSchauen wir uns die Praxis an. Die Bundeswehr führt zurzeit vier Ausbildungseinsätze durch: in Afghanistan, Irak, Somalia und Mali. Welchen dieser Einsätze wollen Sie denn ohne Mandat durchführen?\n\nDas wäre dann offenkundig die Ausnahme von der Regel und atypisch, also genau andersherum, als Sie es im Gesetzentwurf formuliert haben. Das ist der Fehler.\n\nDie Wahrheit ist: Sie sind mit dem Versuch gescheitert, eine praxistaugliche Typologie zu finden. Ihre Konstruktion ist auch rechtlich fragwürdig. Die Rechtsprechung des Bundesverfassungsgerichtes verpflichtet uns zu einer Einzelfallprüfung, und der Versuch, dies mit irgendwelchen Regelfällen zu unterlaufen, muss scheitern.\n\nPolitisch bedeutet Ihr Gesetzentwurf den Versuch einer Stärkung der Interpretationsmöglichkeiten der Exekutive und einer Schwächung der Kontrollmöglichkeiten und der Kontrollfähigkeit der Legislative, das heißt in diesem Fall insbesondere der Opposition.\n\nDas ist politisch falsch, und das lehnen wir ab.\n\nAuch die Mitwirkung der Bundeswehr in multinationalen Stäben oder Hauptquartieren wollen Sie durch diesen Gesetzentwurf von der Zustimmungspflicht des Bundestages bei Kampfeinsätzen ausnehmen.\n\nNur dann soll die Ausnahme nicht gelten, wenn die Soldaten sich direkt im Kampfgebiet befinden oder dort eingesetzte Waffen direkt bedienen, also zum Beispiel Kampfdrohnen steuern.\n\nDas heißt, stabsleitende Funktionen von Waffeneinsätzen sollen ausdrücklich keine Einbeziehung in die bewaffnete Auseinandersetzung mehr bedeuten. Das ist politischer Unsinn: Planung und Befehle sollen per Gesetz nichts mehr mit dem Einsatz vor Ort zu tun haben? Wem wollen Sie das weismachen?\n\nDas widerspricht auch den einschlägigen Ausführungen des Bundesverfassungsgerichtes. Deswegen sagen wir Ihnen: Sie befinden sich damit auf ganz dünnem Eis. Auch diese Gesetzesänderung lehnen wir ab.\n\nDanke für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n13579,harald-ebner,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Vor sage und schreibe 19 Jahren wurde zum letzten Mal in Europa ein Genmais zugelassen, und morgen könnte es wieder so weit sein. Da werden im zuständigen Fachausschuss in Brüssel die EU-Staaten hinter verschlossenen Türen über gleich drei Genmaislinien abstimmen. Ich finde, das ist der richtige Zeitpunkt, den Menschen in Deutschland klar und deutlich zu zeigen, wo wir in Sachen Gentechnik stehen, und zwar hier und heute bei der Abstimmung über unseren Antrag.\n\nAber nein, offensichtlich wollen Sie den Wählerinnen und Wählern Ihre wahre Haltung aber dann doch nicht ganz so deutlich zeigen. Warum eigentlich nicht? Gerade die Union äußert sich doch in den letzten Wochen klar, dass sie auf Gentechnik steht - im Plenum, im Ausschuss oder letzte Woche bei der Anhörung zum Gentechnikgesetz. Aber im Gegensatz zu Ihnen will die große Mehrheit der Menschen da draußen keine Gentech-Pflanzen auf unseren Äckern haben.\n\nBei der Anhörung in der letzten Woche mussten wir uns von Ihren Sachverständigen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Union, wieder die kruden Versprechungen der Gentechniklobby anhören, die schon seit 20 Jahren nicht eingelöst werden und die schon seit 20 Jahren eben kein Teil der Lösung des Welternährungsproblems sind, sondern ein Teil des Problems.\n\nAber das ist Ihnen ganz offensichtlich egal, solange Sie der Gentechnikindustrie einen Gefallen tun können.\n\nDenn die freut sich nämlich. Sie freut sich, weil ihr perfider Plan jetzt eins zu eins aufzugehen droht: dass die Mitgliedstaaten, wenn sie den Anbau national bei sich verbieten dürfen, keinen Widerstand mehr bei der EU-weiten Zulassung leisten. Aber das ist Politik nach dem Sankt-Florians-Prinzip: Heiliger Sankt Florian, verschon mein Haus, zünd andre an. Hauptsache nicht bei mir! - Aber Sie haben ganz vergessen, dass das Feuer dann übergreift.\n\nIn zwei unserer unmittelbaren Nachbarländer ist der Gentechnikanbau erlaubt. Wir alle wissen: Pollen und Bienen, aber auch Saat- und Erntegut machen eben nicht an Staatsgrenzen halt und bergen das Risiko der Kontamination für Landwirtinnen und Landwirte, für Lebensmittelunternehmen und den Handel in Deutschland. Mit der Gentechnikfreiheit wäre es dann schnell nicht mehr weit her. Das müssen wir - auch im Interesse der Lebensmittelwirtschaft hier in Deutschland - verhindern.\n\nAber da tut Minister Schmidt ja sowieso das eine und redet vom anderen. Dazu passt auch, dass der Bundesminister den Wählerinnen und Wählern auf der einen Seite erzählt, dass er sich für ein Anbauverbot in Deutschland einsetzt, auf der anderen Seite aber gleichzeitig auf EU-Ebene die Zulassungen einfach durchwinkt, um den Schwarzen Peter und die Verantwortung dafür danach nach Brüssel abzuschieben. Ich erinnere noch einmal an diesen schönen Post des BMEL:\n\n„Kommt nicht auf den Acker. Anbauverbot für gentechnisch veränderte Pflanzen in Deutschland.“ - Ja, warum denn eigentlich? Weil man es in Brüssel zulässt. Das ist nicht nur Postfaktizismus, sondern auch unehrlich und unredlich.\n\nAber eines kann auch nicht durchgehen, liebe SPD. Barbara Hendricks brüstet sich auf Twitter, auf Facebook und in der Berliner Morgenpost mit ihrer Ablehnung der Zulassung im Kabinett. Sie weiß doch ganz genau, dass dies lediglich zur Enthaltung Deutschlands in Brüssel führt. Warum also verhindert gerade die SPD zum wiederholten Mal eine Sofortabstimmung in dieser Sache hier im Plenum, nachdem sie bereits mehrfach verhindert hat, dass dieser Sachverhalt und unser Antrag dazu im federführenden Ausschuss auf die Tagesordnung gesetzt und beraten werden, geschweige denn, dass darüber abgestimmt wird?\n\nWer bisher noch nicht wusste, was scheinheilig ist, der kann es heute lernen.\n\nUm eines vorwegzunehmen, was gleich sicher wieder in der einen oder anderen Rede vonseiten der Union erwähnt wird: Erzählen Sie uns doch nicht, es drohe aufgrund der mit den Konzernen schon ausgekungelten Anbauausnahmen ja gar keine Gefahr, und man dürfe den Staaten, die Genmais wollen, doch nichts vorschreiben. - Doch! Das müssen wir sogar tun, und zwar aus den gerade genannten Gründen: um unsere eigene Gentechnikfreiheit zu schützen. Es ist ja nicht so, dass keinerlei Bedenken gegen diese Pflanzen bestehen. Das Europaparlament hat die Kommission aufgefordert, in allen drei Fällen gegen diese Zulassung zu votieren, und hat das auch begründet: mit Gefahren der Auskreuzung, mit Gefahren der Kontamination von Nicht-Gentechnik-Pflanzen und -Produkten, weil die Abstände als zu gering eingeschätzt werden, und mit nicht untersuchten Risiken für den Menschen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, verkaufen Sie die Menschen da draußen nicht für dumm! Nehmen Sie ihre Bedenken gegen die Gentechnik ernst, so wie Sie es ihnen versprochen haben! Dazu gehört auch, dass wir ein funktionierendes Gesetz für rechtsverbindliche, rechtssichere und bundesweite, nationale Anbauverbote auf den Weg bringen. Dafür ist es erforderlich, heute, hier und jetzt die Bundesregierung aufzufordern, morgen in Brüssel mit Nein zu stimmen, also hier und heute unserem Antrag zuzustimmen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n12486,uwe-schummer,\"Kollege Lauterbach, die Teilhabe an einer klinischen Forschung auch an Menschen, die ihre Zustimmung nicht gegeben haben, als einen Akt der Selbstverwirklichung zu definieren, war heute eine sehr steile These.\n\nDarüber werden wir uns im Rahmen der Definition der Selbstverwirklichung noch einmal auseinandersetzen. Ich will noch eines sagen, nämlich dass niemand von denjenigen, die den Antrag, den auch ich vertrete, mittragen, in seiner Rede irgendetwas Forschungsfeindliches gesagt hat.\n\nIm Gegenteil, Ulla Schmidt hat gesagt: Wir sind ein Spitzenstandort der Gesundheitsforschung. Auch der Verband Forschender Arzneimittelhersteller sagte, dass zur Bekämpfung von Demenz und anderen Krankheiten die Ausweitung der Gruppe auf diejenigen, die nicht fähig sind, ihre Einwilligung zu klinischen Forschungen zu geben, nicht notwendig ist. Wenn auf der anderen Seite jetzt der Eindruck erweckt wird, dass Fortschritte erst dann möglich sind, wenn die Gruppe erweitert wird, dann wird doch etwas vorgegaukelt, was selbst in der Forschungslandschaft nicht vertreten wird.\n\nWir haben aus guten Gründen bis Dezember letzten Jahres immer wieder einstimmig im Deutschen Bundestag beschlossen, dass Forschung nur dann sinnvoll und akzeptabel ist, wenn ein direkter individueller Nutzen vorauszusetzen ist. Dass man ihn nicht garantieren kann, ist klar; deshalb ist es Forschung. Es ist auch so, dass natürlich derjenige, der an Demenz erkrankt ist, auch Teil einer solchen Gruppe ist, weshalb man bei der Definition, was eigennützig oder auch für die betroffene Gruppe nützlich ist, sehr vorsichtig sein muss. Es gibt im Grunde keine Notwendigkeit für eine neue Definition, um Forschung zu verbessern.\n\nDie Frage ist, weshalb wir die Gruppe und diese Kriterien, die bis Dezember letzten Jahres galten, seit September dieses Jahres nicht mehr so definieren, und das, obwohl wir, wie mehrfach gesagt, in der Europäischen Union dafür gesorgt haben, dass unsere deutschen Schutzstandards in die betreffende europäische Verordnung übertragen wurden.\n\nWas hat sich in der Welt so fundamental verändert? Dazu haben wir in Richtung der Vertreter der Wissenschaft in der Anhörung Fragen gestellt. Darauf gab es keine Antworten. Es gibt keine fundamentale Veränderung, keine neue Erkenntnis. Daher ist es gut und sinnvoll, wenn man denen folgt, mit denen wir in besonderer Weise verbunden sind und die uns warnen, nämlich die Angehörigen der Gruppe, die davon profitieren soll, beispielsweise die Deutsche Alzheimer Gesellschaft.\n\nSie hat uns vehement aufgefordert, diesen Schritt nicht zu vollziehen.\n\nAuch die Deutsche Bischofskonferenz hat in einem Beschluss die Befürchtung zum Ausdruck gebracht, dass davon erhebliche Gefahren und Belastungen für eine extrem schutzbedürftige Gruppe von Menschen - wie Demenzkranken im fortgeschrittenen Stadium - ausgehen. Die Deutsche Bischofskonferenz ist für mich als christlich orientierten Politiker ein wesentlicher, ein wichtiger Ratgeber in dieser ethischen Frage.\n\nNatürlich kann Forschung nicht ohne weitere Eingriffe auskommen - dabei geht es ja nicht nur um Blutabnahme -, wenn sie bis zum Ende durchgeführt werden soll. Am Ende will man auch schauen, wie sich Arzneimittel im Körper verteilen. Dann kann es eben, wie geschildert wurde, zu einer Fixierung kommen, um CT-Aufnahmen zu ermöglichen. Ich weiß, dass im Rahmen einer Staatenprüfung mit Blick auf die UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention die Fixierung - als ein Stück Folter - dargestellt worden ist, als etwas, was man beseitigen sollte und was nicht mehr stattfinden darf.\n\nVon daher ist die Fixierung eine wesentliche Maßnahme. Ohne diese Maßnahme wäre ein Abschluss der Forschung kaum möglich.\n\nWie ist es, wenn wir Ja zu der vorgesehenen Ausweitung der klinischen Forschung sagen? Ich kann nur sagen - Hubert Hüppe hat das dargestellt -: 2004 ist der erste Schritt eigentlich schon vollzogen worden, indem man Forschung an Kindern zugelassen hat. Heute müssen wir uns sagen lassen: Weil damals, 2004, Forschung an Kindern zugelassen wurde, können wir sie jetzt auch an Erwachsenen ohne deren Einwilligungsmöglichkeit zulassen. - Ich brauche keine große Fantasie, um zu ahnen, dass in fünf Jahren der dritte Weg kommt. Das heißt, die schiefe Ebene ist dann erreicht. Es würde gesagt werden: Die ganzen bürokratischen Hemmnisse, die dazu führen, dass wir diese Forschung nicht wirklich durchführen können, muss man beseitigen, damit man diese Forschung - sie ist ja schon beschlossen worden - überhaupt praktizieren kann. - Dann sind auch diese Hemmnisse weg. Befindet man sich einmal auf der schiefen Ebene, geht es immer weiter nach unten.\n\nDeshalb hat die Bundesvereinigung Lebenshilfe zum Schutz ihrer Mitglieder und deren Kinder, die beispielsweise geistig behindert sind und in die Entscheidungen nie selbst einwilligen können, einstimmig beschlossen, dass die schiefe Ebene nicht mehr betreten werden soll, dass wir vielmehr Dämme halten sollen, die heute notwendiger denn je sind.\n\nWer selber Sterbebegleitung in der Familie erlebt hat, etwa bei einem Demenzkranken, weiß: Diese Menschen brauchen eine helfende Hand, sie brauchen Menschen, die bei ihnen sind. Sie wollen auch keine Apparatemedizin. Es ist wichtig und richtig - da sind wir konform mit Hermann Gröhe -, dass wir die Palliativmedizin ausgebaut haben, dass wir den Hospizbereich ausgebaut haben. Aber dies alles wird mit einem solchen Beschluss, der nicht notwendig ist, konterkariert, durch den Menschen zu einem medizinischen Versuchsobjekt gemacht werden. Menschen in einer solchen Situation sind Objekt und nicht nur Subjekt des Handelns. Niemand, kein Arzt, und auch niemand, der eine Patientenverfügung mit formulieren kann, weiß 20 Jahre im Voraus, woran der Betreffende erkranken kann. Das kann auch ein Unfall sein. Man kann auch ins Koma fallen. Niemand kann vorhersehen, welche klinischen Forschungen in 20 Jahren betrieben werden, damit er darüber im Detail aufklären kann.\n\nWir würden damit erwarten, dass Ärzte nichts anderes tun, als mit den Menschen einen Blick in die Glaskugel zu werfen - und das als Voraussetzung für eine so zentrale und schwerwiegende Entscheidung. Das halte ich aus christlicher Überzeugung nicht für akzeptabel, und deshalb gibt es diesen Änderungsantrag.\n\nEs ist wichtig, dass wir diese Debatte miteinander führen. Es war wichtig, dass wir dieses Thema in der Anhörung ausführlich geklärt haben, miteinander besprochen haben.\n\nRichtig ist: Je schwächer der Mensch ist, gerade am Ende des Lebens, umso stärker muss die Schutzfunktion des Staates sein. - Dieser Grundsatz muss bestehen bleiben. Das wollen wir so bewahren, und dafür bitte ich um Ihre Unterstützung.\"\n12420,stephan-mayer,\"Sehr verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr verehrte Kolleginnen! Sehr geehrte Kollegen! Wir haben - dieser festen Überzeugung bin ich - eine gute parlamentarische Kontrolle unserer Nachrichtendienste. Sehr geehrter Herr Kollege Ströbele, ich erkenne es durchaus an, dass Sie zugestehen, dass sich die Arbeit des PKGr in dieser Legislaturperiode substanziell verbessert hat. Aber aus meiner Sicht gilt für das Parlamentarische Kontrollgremium dasselbe wie für viele andere Lebensbereiche: Was gut ist, kann immer noch verbessert werden. Ich bin auch der festen Überzeugung: Mit dem heute vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf verbessern wir qualitativ die Arbeit des Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremiums enorm. Wir stärken damit aber auch die Nachrichtendienste insgesamt. Eine optimierte parlamentarische Kontrolle unserer Nachrichtendienste in einer freiheitlich-demokratischen Grundordnung stärkt auch die Legitimität unserer Nachrichtendienste. Deswegen ist es auch im Interesse der Nachrichtendienste, dass wir die Qualität der Kontrolle deutlich verbessern.\n\nDas Herzstück dieses Gesetzentwurfes ist der Ständige Bevollmächtigte mit seinem Arbeitsstab. Wir schaffen insgesamt zwölf zusätzliche Stellen in der Bundestagsverwaltung. Der Ständige Bevollmächtigte wird aber kein Geheimdienstbeauftragter des Bundestages sein. Er wird kein freies Radikal sein, das im luftleeren Raum schwirrt, sondern er wird dem Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremium gegenüber klar weisungsgebunden sein. Das ist aus meiner Sicht ein sehr wesentlicher und guter Schritt nach vorne.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das behaupten nicht nur wir von der Koalition, sondern das behaupten auch die Sachverständigen, die in der Anhörung am 26. September dieses Jahres befragt wurden. Der ehemalige BND-Präsident Schindler hat den heute zur Disposition stehenden Gesetzentwurf ausdrücklich und wortwörtlich als „Meilenstein“ tituliert, und er hat die Funktion dieses neuen Ständigen Bevollmächtigten wortwörtlich als ein „vielversprechendes Modul“ gelobt.\n\nAlso: Auch die Sachverständigen haben sich durchweg positiv über diesen vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf geäußert.\n\nMeines Erachtens, meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ist es auch ein erheblicher Schritt nach vorne, dass wir jetzt endlich auch die besonderen Vorkommnisse, die uns die Bundesregierung im Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremium zu berichten hat, genau spezifizieren, um, Herr Kollege Ströbele, dem Problem entgegenzuwirken, dass es letzten Endes im Ermessen der Bundesregierung liegt, was sie uns mitteilt oder was sie uns nicht mitteilt.\n\nJetzt wird genau aufgeführt, was ein besonders erwähnens- und berichtenswerter Vorgang ist. Das ist dann der Fall, wenn ein Vorgang in der öffentlichen Debatte eine Rolle spielt, wenn er Gegenstand der öffentlichen Berichterstattung sein wird, wenn er das Lagebild über die innere und äußere Sicherheit verändert oder wenn es ein Vorgang ist, der auf die Aufgabenerfüllung der Nachrichtendienste besonderen Einfluss haben wird. Des Weiteren bin ich der festen Überzeugung, dass es ein qualitativer Schritt nach vorne ist, dass wir das Parlamentarische Kontrollgremium endlich genauso behandeln wie alle anderen Parlamentsausschüsse. Wir werden in Zukunft zu Beginn der Legislaturperiode einen Vorsitzenden für die gesamte Dauer der Legislaturperiode wählen. Ich bin der Meinung, dass es nicht sehr zielführend war, dass wir den Vorsitz und den stellvertretenden Vorsitz jährlich gewechselt haben. Auch hier ist ein bemerkenswerter Schritt nach vorne zu verzeichnen.\n\nSelbstverständlich, sehr gerne.\n\nSehr geehrter Herr Kollege Ströbele, ich sehe in keiner Weise die bisherige Regelung, die 23 Parlamentsausschüsse betrifft, als undemokratisch an.\n\nEs wird im Vorfeld festgelegt, welcher Parlamentsausschuss von welcher Fraktion mit dem Vorsitz belegt wird. Im Gesetz ist doch überhaupt nicht festgeschrieben, Herr Kollege Ströbele, dass der Vorsitz im Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremium von einer Regierungsfraktion gestellt werden muss.\n\nEs kann durchaus sein, dass Sie, Herr Kollege Ströbele, möglicherweise in der nächsten Legislaturperiode Vorsitzender des PKGr werden.\n\nDas ist durch dieses neue Gesetz nicht ausgeschlossen.\n\nIch hoffe, dass Sie diese Möglichkeit, die durchaus im Raum steht - ich wünsche Ihnen auch, dass Sie dem nächsten Parlament wieder angehören -, nicht als undemokratisch bezeichnen.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir bringen jetzt noch einen Änderungsantrag dergestalt ein, dass wir auch dem Vertrauensgremium im Haushaltsausschuss die Möglichkeit eröffnen, auf den Ständigen Bevollmächtigten zuzugreifen im Benehmen mit dem Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremium.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es ist aber auch festzustellen - das zeigt auch die heutige Debatte -, dass die Opposition dieser qualitativen Verbesserung der parlamentarischen Kontrolle genau gegenteilig gegenübersteht. Herr Kollege Dr. Hahn, Sie haben seitens der Linken einen Gesetzentwurf und einen Antrag eingebracht, die sich mit der parlamentarischen Kontrolle beschäftigen. Was Sie nur verschweigen - hier bitte ich Sie um mehr Ehrlichkeit -: Sagen Sie doch bitte ganz offen, dass Sie die Nachrichtendienste abschaffen wollen.\n\nDas wäre Ehrlichkeit. Wenn die Punkte, die in Ihrem Antrag stehen, umgesetzt würden, würden Sie die Arbeit der drei Nachrichtendienste auf Bundesebene aushöhlen. Das wäre aus meiner Sicht ein erhebliches Sicherheitsdefizit und ein erhebliches Sicherheitsrisiko für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland angesichts der jetzigen Bedrohungssituation.\n\nIch möchte, meine Kolleginnen und Kollegen, nur zwei Punkte herausgreifen. Zum einen fordern Sie seitens der Linken, dass die Nachrichtendienste kategorisch auf den Einsatz von V-Leuten verzichten. Sagen Sie es bitte ganz offen: Sie wollen unsere Nachrichtendienste darauf reduzieren,\n\ndass sie nur noch Zeitungslektüre betreiben dürfen, dass sie Zeitungsartikel lesen, ausschneiden und abheften dürfen.\n\nMehr sollen unsere Nachrichtendienste, wenn es nach den Linken geht, nicht mehr machen dürfen. Das ist aus meiner Sicht eine erhebliche Erschwernis. Wir werden diesem Antrag deutlich entgegentreten.\n\nEin zweiter Punkt, der meines Erachtens dem Fass den Boden ausschlägt: Sie fordern als Fraktion Die Linke, dass es in das Ermessen des einzelnen Bundestagsabgeordneten gestellt wird, „nach gewissenhafter Prüfung der Sach- und Rechtslage“ - das schreiben Sie in Ihrem Antrag -, ob ein Staatsgeheimnis öffentlich gemacht wird. Also, Sie würden jedem Bundestagsabgeordneten zubilligen, dass er selber entscheidet, ob er ein Staatsgeheimnis veröffentlichen darf. Gerade in der jetzigen Bedrohungssituation wäre das eine Versündigung an der Sicherheitslage in Deutschland.\n\nWir sind in einer erheblichen Anspannung. Unsere Sicherheitsbehörden stehen vor einer enormen Herausforderung.\n\nEs ist derzeit ohnehin schon schwer genug, andere Nachrichtendienste, auch solche, mit denen wir im Austausch stehen, immer wieder dazu zu bringen, mit uns konstruktiv und vertrauensvoll zusammenzuarbeiten, weil leider Gottes immer wieder Dinge die Öffentlichkeit erreichen, die dort nicht hingehören. Das ist eine Gefahr für die Sicherheit in unserem Lande. Ich sage zum Abschluss noch einmal ganz deutlich und ganz bewusst: Die Linken sind insoweit aus meiner Sicht auch ein Sicherheitsrisiko für unser Land.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für diese Kurzintervention, sehr geehrter Herr Kollege Hahn. Sie gibt mir die Gelegenheit, wirklich deutlich zu machen, dass Sie für die Arbeit von Nachrichtendiensten einfach überhaupt nichts übrighaben und dass Sie auch das Erfordernis einer qualitativ hochwertigen parlamentarischen Kontrolle unserer Nachrichtendienste immer noch nicht verstanden haben.\n\nWir, die neun Mitglieder im Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremium, tagen geheim. Was wir erfahren, hat in der Öffentlichkeit grundsätzlich nichts verloren.\n\nWenn wir uns dann doch darauf verständigen - das hat das PKGr in den letzten Jahren so häufig wie noch nie zuvor gemacht -,\n\neine öffentliche Erklärung abzugeben, dann kann dies doch nicht in das Ermessen jedes Einzelnen der neun Mitglieder gestellt werden; vielmehr bedarf es natürlich einer qualitativen Mehrheit, wenn wir uns als Gremium in toto zu Wort melden.\n\nNatürlich bleibt es jedem einzelnen Mitglied unbenommen, ein Sondervotum abzugeben.\n\nIch erkenne an der in dieser Legislaturperiode geübten Praxis - wir haben sie substanziiert noch nie so gut vollzogen wie in dieser Legislaturperiode; da bin ich vollkommen der Meinung des Kollegen Ströbele - überhaupt nichts Undemokratisches.\n\nUm noch einmal auf Ihren ersten Punkt, Herr Hahn, einzugehen: Sie schreiben unter Punkt III Ziffer 7 Ihres Antrags ganz klar, dass die Bundesregierung aufgefordert wird, einen Gesetzentwurf vorzulegen, der es ermöglicht, dass einzelne Mitglieder des Bundestages Staatsgeheimnisse öffentlich bekannt machen.\n\nSie können es doch nicht in das Ermessen von jedem von uns 630 Abgeordneten stellen, ob er gerade einmal der Meinung ist, dass ein Staatsgeheimnis die Öffentlichkeit erreichen soll. Das halte ich wirklich, mit Verlaub, für hanebüchen, für hoch riskant und für vollkommen untragbar.\"\n5042,matthias-gastel,\"Herr Staatssekretär, vielen Dank für Ihre Antwort. Können Sie mir sagen, wie viele und in welcher Länge Überholgleise für eine Höchstgeschwindigkeit von 250 km/h im Vergleich zu einer Höchstgeschwindigkeit von 230 km/h notwendig sind?\n\nJa, dazu muss ich eine Zusatzfrage stellen. - Herr Staatssekretär Ferlemann, Sie sagen: Es handelt sich um einen Bahnhof nach § 4 EBO. Wie erklären Sie sich, dass in der Anhörung zum Planfeststellungsverfahren für den Abschnitt 1.3 - das ist die vorgesehene Flughafenanbindung - die Vorhabensträgerin zigfach ausdrücklich gesagt hat - ich war selber dabei; es steht auch im Protokoll -, es würde kein Bahnhof geplant, sondern eine Station? Jetzt ist „Station“ in der Eisenbahn-Bau-und Betriebsordnung aber gar nicht definiert. Deswegen habe ich diese Frage gestellt. Wie erklären Sie sich, dass seitens der Vorhabensträgerin, der Deutschen Bahn, die das Projekt realisieren möchte, negiert wird, dass ein Bahnhof gebaut wird?\n\nIch meine den geplanten - in Anführungszeichen - Hauptbahnhof, den Tiefbahnhof Stuttgart Stadtmitte.\n\nJa, aber ich habe eine Nachfrage gestellt: Wie erklären Sie sich, dass die Deutsche Bahn, Vorhabensträgerin, im Planfeststellungsverfahren negiert hat, dass es sich um einen Bahnhof handeln würde?\n\nWenn Sie ohnehin noch mal nachhaken, hätte ich gerne auch eine Antwort darauf, ob in diesem geplanten Bahnhof, diesem Haltepunkt oder dieser Station - was auch immer das dann sein soll - auch das Beginnen, das Enden, das Ausweichen und das Wenden von Zügen möglich ist, weil das nämlich auch Bestandteil dieser Definition in der Eisenbahn-Bau- und Betriebsordnung ist.\"\n12025,kerstin-griese,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Was können wir tun, damit alle Kinder gute Chancen haben, damit alle Kinder gleiche Chancen haben? Ganz wichtig ist, wenn wir über Kinderarmut, über Familienarmut sprechen, dass wir die Ursachen in den Blick nehmen, um konkrete Lösungsansätze zu entwickeln.\n\nVon Armut betroffen oder - wie es richtig heißen muss - armutsgefährdet sind vor allem Kinder aus Familien mit drei oder mehr Kindern, aus Familien mit Migrationshintergrund, Kinder von Alleinerziehenden und ganz besonders - das zieht sich wie ein roter Faden durch alle Studien der letzten Jahre und Jahrzehnte - die Kinder, deren Eltern arbeitslos sind. Das wissen wir, und deshalb ist es eine ganz wichtige Stellschraube, an der wir ansetzen, dass die Eltern dieser Kinder in Arbeit kommen, damit Armut gar nicht erst entsteht.\n\nDeshalb, meine Damen und Herren, haben wir das Programm „Soziale Teilhabe am Arbeitsmarkt“ ganz besonders ausgerichtet auf Bedarfsgemeinschaften, wo Kinder sind, damit dort die Eltern in Arbeit kommen. Das hilft nicht nur den langzeitarbeitslosen Eltern, sondern es hilft auch den Kindern. Es ist wichtig, dass Kinder erfahren, dass ihre Eltern morgens aufstehen, einen geregelten Tagesablauf haben, stolz von der Arbeit wiederkommen, ihren Kindern davon erzählen können, dass sie erleben, dass Arbeit eine wichtige Rolle im Leben spielen kann. Deswegen ist dieses Programm wichtig, damit Kinder nicht die Erstaufsteher in der Familie sind, die sich um alles kümmern müssen, sondern damit ihre Eltern gut für sie sorgen können.\n\nDas Programm „Soziale Teilhabe am Arbeitsmarkt“ - wir verdoppeln übrigens gerade die Mittel, also wir tun wirklich etwas - ist genau dazu da, um diesen Familien Perspektiven zu eröffnen, damit keine Hartz-IV-Vererbung stattfindet, sondern damit Kinder gute Chancen bekommen.\n\nZweiter Punkt. Ganz besonders betroffen sind Alleinerziehende. 120 000 Langzeitarbeitslose sind alleinerziehend. Sie sind die Gruppe, die es am schwersten hat, Berufstätigkeit, Familie, Haushalt, Freundeskreis, die ganze Organisation des Lebens unter einen Hut zu bekommen. Deshalb ist diese Gruppe auch am stärksten von Armutsgefährdung betroffen.\n\nVon den Kindern, die in Hartz IV sind, lebt mehr als die Hälfte bei einem alleinerziehenden Elternteil. Deshalb ist es wichtig, dass wir da schon viel getan haben und gerne noch mehr tun müssen und sollen.\n\nDer Ausbau der Kinderbetreuung, der Ausbau der Ganztagsschulen: Hier geht es um frühe Bildungschancen - wenn es nach mir ginge, gerne auch flächendeckend und gebührenfrei -, damit alle Kinder von Anfang an eine gute Chance haben.\n\nWir haben heute in den Regelsätzen des SGB II schon den Mehrbedarf für Alleinerziehende geregelt, aber wir haben in der Diskussion gerade in den letzten Monaten noch einmal festgestellt, dass wir mehr dafür tun müssen, damit Kinder aus diesen Familien Umgang mit beiden Elternteilen haben. Deshalb haben wir die Idee eines Umgangsmehrbedarfes entwickelt\n\nund bringen ihn auch in die aktuellen Beratungen ein; denn es ist ja gerade vom Kind her gedacht gut - darum muss es gehen -, wenn sich beide Eltern um das Kind kümmern können. Ein solcher Umgangsmehrbedarf wäre eine konkrete Verbesserung für die Kinder. Dafür werbe ich hier.\n\n- Zum Beispiel.\n\nNoch ein Wort zu Nordrhein-Westfalen, das haben Sie ja extra erwähnt. Es ist eine statistische Weisheit, wenn ein Viertel der Bevölkerung in Nordrhein-Westfalen lebt, dass dann auch ein Viertel der von Armut betroffenen Kinder in Nordrhein-Westfalen lebt. Aber ich will das Thema wirklich ernst nehmen. Im Ruhrgebiet, mehr noch in Düsseldorf und Köln ist die Armutsgefährdung von Kindern größer, weil wir dort unterschiedliche Stadtteile haben: prosperierende und abgehängte Stadtteile. Das macht die relative Armut sehr augenfällig. Deshalb ist es gerade richtig und gut, dass die nordrhein-westfälische Landesregierung Investitionen in öffentliche Bildungs- und Betreuungsinfrastruktur so hoch hängt und eine so große Priorität gibt. Das ist die richtige Politik für Kinder.\n\nNur so kann man den Folgen von Armut begegnen. Nur so kann man präventiv wirken. Nordrhein-Westfalen macht das mit dem Ausbau der frühkindlichen Bildung, insbesondere in sozial benachteiligten Stadtteilen. Wir vom Bund fördern die Sprachkitas, Nordrhein-Westfalen fördert noch einmal in Stadtteilen mit sozialer Benachteiligung durch mehr Kräfte in Kitas, weil man Ungleiches auch ungleich behandeln muss, weil man besonders da fördern muss, wo der Bedarf vorhanden ist. Gerade der Ausbau der Infrastruktur, der Hilfs- und Beratungsleistungen, der Ganztagsangebote ist ein Markenzeichen einer vorbeugenden Politik, wie sie Nordrhein-Westfalen macht.\n\nDas Programm „Kein Kind zurücklassen! Kommunen in NRW beugen vor“ wurde schon erwähnt. Damit wurden in 18 Modellkommunen kommunale Präventionsketten aufgebaut, wo Gesundheit, Bildung, Kinder- und Jugendhilfe und Soziales zusammenwirken, damit lückenlos von der Schwangerschaft bis zum Eintritt in das Berufsleben Unterstützung und Hilfe für Kinder da ist. Diese Bilanz fällt positiv aus. Das ist ein guter Ansatz von guter Bildung und Betreuung von Anfang an.\n\nDeshalb lassen Sie uns gemeinsam daran arbeiten, dass wir alles, was möglich ist, in Prävention, in gute Bildungschancen für Kinder investieren. Das ist unsere Politik schon seit Jahren. Wir werden daran auch noch weiter arbeiten müssen. Ich hoffe, das können wir gemeinsam tun. Wir dürfen hier nicht nachlassen, damit kein Kind von der Gesellschaft zurückgelassen wird.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9416,frank-heinrich,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wann, wenn nicht jetzt, in diesen Zeiten, sind die Vereinten Nationen und ihre Institutionen zu stärken - gerade weil wir jetzt Dinge erleben, durch die wir einiges bedroht sehen? Zum einen sehen wir die Weltsicherheitslage bedroht. Da fallen uns allen wahrscheinlich die gleichen Schlagworte ein: Syrien, Nordirak, die Ukraine, verschiedene Regionen Afrikas, die Fluchtbewegungen, der näher rückende Terror. „Näher“ ist hier subjektiv. Istanbul, Paris, Jakarta, Kairo und einige andere Orte sind hier zu nennen. Auch die Menschenrechte sehen wir bedroht, nicht nur in einzelnen Situationen. Da könnte man jetzt konkret die Todesurteile in Saudi-Arabien und den Fall des Bloggers Raif Badawi nennen, aber auch den Angriff auf die sexuelle Selbstbestimmung vor unserer eigenen Haustür, in Köln, in der vorletzten Woche. Wir, die im Menschenrechtsausschuss mitarbeiten, haben auch immer wieder Einzelpersonen vor Augen.\n\nInsofern wiederhole ich: Es ist wichtiger denn je, die Rolle der Vereinten Nationen zu stärken. Deshalb ist es gut, das Thema auch durch solch eine Debatte ins Bewusstsein zu rufen, und das auch noch - Herr Kekeritz, Sie haben es vorhin gesagt - zu einer angemessenen Zeit, zu der auch noch zugehört wird. Das beginnt aber eben nicht hochpolitisch, hier in unserem Hohen Haus, sondern bei der Wahrnehmung in den Köpfen der Menschen, eben bei der Bewusstseinsbildung. Es ist also gut, das Thema auf der Tagesordnung zu haben, auch wenn wir nicht in allen Punkten mit dem Antrag übereinstimmen - aus zwei Gründen, auf die ich gleich noch kommen werde.\n\nZu Beginn nenne ich einige der Grundlagen; ein paar Kollegen haben sie schon genannt. Die Charta der Vereinten Nationen vom 26. Juni 1945 hatte ziemlich großen Einfluss auf uns als Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Sie stand Pate für unser Grundgesetz, ein Grundwert, der in der aktuellen Flüchtlingsdebatte immer wieder bemüht wird - zu Recht. Darum will ich ein paar grundlegende Passagen aus der Gründungsurkunde der Vereinten Nationen zitieren, eben weil es so aktuell ist:\n\nWIR, DIE VÖLKER DER VEREINTEN NATIONEN - FEST ENTSCHLOSSEN,\n\nkünftige Geschlechter vor der Geißel des Krieges zu bewahren, die zweimal zu unseren Lebzeiten unsagbares Leid über die Menschheit gebracht hat,\n\nunseren Glauben an die Grundrechte des Menschen, an Würde und Wert der menschlichen Persönlichkeit, an die Gleichberechtigung von Mann und Frau sowie von allen Nationen, ob groß oder klein, erneut zu bekräftigen,\n\nBedingungen zu schaffen, unter denen Gerechtigkeit und die Achtung vor den Verpflichtungen aus Verträgen und anderen Quellen des Völkerrechts gewahrt werden können,\n\nden sozialen Fortschritt und einen besseren Lebensstandard in größerer Freiheit zu fördern …\n\nHABEN BESCHLOSSEN, IN UNSEREM BEMÜHEN UM DIE ERREICHUNG DIESER ZIELE ZUSAMMENZUWIRKEN.\n\nIn Artikel 1 setzten sich die Vereinten Nationen dann diese Ziele:\n\nden Weltfrieden und die internationale Sicherheit zu wahren und zu diesem Zweck wirksame Kollektivmaßnahmen zu treffen, um Bedrohungen des Friedens zu verhüten und zu beseitigen, Angriffshandlungen und andere Friedensbrüche zu unterdrücken und internationale Streitigkeiten oder Situationen, die zu einem Friedensbruch führen könnten, durch friedliche Mittel nach den Grundsätzen der Gerechtigkeit und des Völkerrechts zu bereinigen oder beizulegen …\n\nSo viel zum Zitat.\n\nHeute, 70 Jahre später, spürt man zwischen den Zeilen immer noch diesen Idealismus. Ein solcher Idealismus muss aber mit einem politischen Realismus einhergehen. Er besteht im Jahr 2016 auch in der Notwendigkeit, die Vereinten Nationen zu stärken, damit die Inhalte dieser genialen Charta am Schluss nicht in Zynismus umschlagen.\n\nEs folgten weitere Schritte in der Entwicklung der Vereinten Nationen: 1945 wurde die Menschenrechtskommission eingesetzt und 2006 - Frank Schwabe, du hast es vorhin gesagt - durch den Menschenrechtsrat ersetzt. Der Menschenrechtsrat der Vereinten Nationen setzt sich aus 47 Mitgliedstaaten zusammen, hat ein umfassendes Mandat zur Behandlung von Menschenrechtsverletzungen in einzelnen Ländern sowie zur Abgabe von Empfehlungen und berichtet unmittelbar an die Hauptversammlung.\n\nZum dritten Mal seit der Gründung der Institution 2006 ist Deutschland von der Generalversammlung in den Menschenrechtsrat gewählt worden, und zwar für den Zeitraum 2016 bis 2018. Zudem leitete im letzten Jahr, 2015, der deutsche Diplomat Joachim Rücker als Präsident den Menschenrechtsrat. Der Menschenrechtsrat hat folgende wesentliche Aufgaben: alle Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten zu schützen und zu fördern, sich mit Menschenrechtsverletzungen zu befassen, Empfehlungen abzugeben, Menschenrechtsfragen in das System der Vereinten Nationen zu integrieren sowie zur Weiterentwicklung des Völkerrechts beizutragen. Das ist in vielen Fällen gelungen; es ist gerade in der Rede genannt worden und steht auch in Ihrem Antrag. Da heißt es an einer Stelle:\n\nDem Menschenrechtsrat ist es in den letzten Jahren trotz aller Schwächen immer wieder gelungen, dieser Rolle gerecht zu werden.\n\nEinige Beispiele aus dem Antrag sind: das Recht auf Wasser, was mir ganz besonders nah ist, das Recht auf gleichgeschlechtliche Partnerschaften, die Teilnahme an der Zivilgesellschaft als integraler Teil der Arbeit des Rates und das Instrument des Allgemeinen Überprüfungsverfahrens, Universal Periodic Review. Ergänzen könnte man: Einsetzung des Sonderberichterstatters zur Bekämpfung der Straflosigkeit im Jahr 2011 und damit ein Mandat zum Schutz von Menschenrechtsverteidigern. Wir haben vor einigen Wochen über dieses Thema diskutiert.\n\nNoch einmal zu Ihrem Antrag. Er enthält eine Passage, bei der ich mich frage: Da die Dinge schon existent sind, warum sollten wir sie dann fordern? Da steht:\n\nDiese Chance\n\n- also der Vorsitz im letzten Jahr -\n\nkann die Bundesregierung nutzen, indem sie sich für eine Verbesserung der Arbeitsbedingungen und Arbeitsweise des Rates einsetzt, seiner Politisierung entgegenwirkt, über Regionalgruppen hinweg diplomatische Allianzen aufbaut, innovative Themenschwerpunkte setzt und auch im Inland den Menschenrechtsschutz weiterhin ernst nimmt und damit ihre Glaubwürdigkeit international unter Beweis stellt.\n\nWas das betrifft, würde ich sagen - und da gebe ich meinem Kollegen Schwabe recht -: Wir sind den größten Teil des Weges gegangen. Die Bundesregierung hat sich während der deutschen Mitgliedschaften dafür eingesetzt, das Profil des Rats als zentrales Gremium und Frühwarnmechanismus des internationalen Menschenrechtsschutzes zu schärfen.\n\nZu den Forderungen der Bundesregierung, die sie auch eingebracht hat, gehörte, dass der Menschenrechtsrat konsequent kritische Menschenrechtssituationen ansprechen soll - das tut er inzwischen - und dazu alle ihm verfügbaren Instrumente wie die gerade genannte universelle Staatenüberprüfung, Sonderberichterstatter und Sondersitzungen nutzen soll. Er sollte nicht nur Impulsgeber sein für neue Menschenrechtsstandards, sondern sich auch stärker der Umsetzung von Menschenrechtsstandards zuwenden.\n\nDie Bundesregierung nutzte den Vorsitz außerdem dazu, als Brückenbauer zu wirken - so steht es im Antrag der Grünen, aus dem ich eben schon zitiert habe -, dessen Aufgabe auch darin besteht, der zunehmenden Polarisierung des Menschenrechtsrates entgegenzuwirken; dieses Argument wurde eben schon angeführt. Ein besonderes Augenmerk richtete der Vorsitz auf die Wahrung und Stärkung von Beteiligungsmöglichkeiten von Nichtregierungsorganisationen, auch im Menschenrechtsrat selbst.\n\nDarüber hinaus hat die Koalition mit der Schaffung einer gesetzlichen Grundlage für das Deutsche Institut für Menschenrechte - auch das thematisieren Sie in Ihrem Antrag - unterstrichen, dass Deutschland den Menschenrechtsschutz auch hier im Inland ernst nimmt, auch wenn das einiges an Ringen bedeutet hat.\n\nWir unterstützen Menschenrechtsverteidiger weltweit intensiv in ihrer Arbeit. Die Regierung wie auch wir als Parlament beobachten kontinuierlich und engmaschig deren Lage und arbeiten daran, das System noch weiter zu verbessern. Wir kooperieren hier sehr stark mit anderen Staaten der Europäischen Union. Zudem setzt sich die Bundesregierung bei den Regierungen anderer Staaten häufig für Menschenrechtsverteidiger ein; wir haben auf viele Einzelfälle hingewiesen. Ihr Schutz ist wichtig - und wird es auch bleiben - und gehört als integraler Bestandteil in den Aktionsplan der Bundesregierung.\n\nDa der Antrag genau die von mir genannten Aktivitäten benennt und einfordert, obwohl vorhanden, und da Sie sich mit den Bezügen auf die deutsche Präsidentschaft zeitlich überholen, haben wir uns entschlossen - das ist die logische Konsequenz -, ihn abzulehnen.\n\nWie zu Beginn meiner Rede angekündigt, möchte ich zwei konkrete Punkte benennen, denen wir zustimmen. Erstens. Sie kritisieren in Ihrem Antrag die andauernde Unterfinanzierung des Rates. Tatsächlich beträgt der Anteil nur 3 Prozent des VN-Kernbudgets. Frau Höger, Sie haben es angesprochen: Damit können nur 40 Prozent der Kosten gedeckt werden. Wir freuen uns darüber, dass der Anteil nun auf 5 Prozent aufgestockt wird. Auch Herr Rücker hat das empfohlen.\n\nDer zweite Punkt ist die ständig drohende Politisierung der Arbeit; auch das ist richtig. Das Gesamtproblem der Vereinten Nationen ist, dass Resolutionen - wir haben das Beispiel Syrien gut in Erinnerung - politisch motiviert geblockt werden. Und doch gilt, was der deutsche Präsident Rücker im September gegenüber der Süddeutschen Zeitung gesagt hat: Was wäre denn, wenn wir uns auf internationaler Ebene ausschließlich mit denen, die es gut machen, zusammensetzen? Ich meine, das wäre ein reiner Club von Gleichgesinnten und würde nichts bringen. - Wir unterstützen die Forderung, dass die Indikatoren, von denen auch Sie gesprochen haben, entwickelt werden und dazu beitragen, die Tagesordnung des Rates nach objektiven Kriterien zu gestalten.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. Das Unwort des letzten Jahres lautet - es ist uns allen präsent, auch durch die Nachrichten dieser Woche -: Gutmensch. Beim Menschenrechtsrat geht es aber nicht darum, irgendwie einfach mal gut zu sein. Was schlimmer ist, ist, dass dabei auch das Wort „naiv“ mitschwingt. Die Vereinten Nationen haben drei Kernaufgaben: Menschenrechte, Sicherheit und Entwicklung gewährleisten. Diese drei gehören nahtlos zueinander: Ohne nachhaltige Entwicklung keine Sicherung der Menschenrechte und keine Beseitigung von Fluchtursachen und in der Folge Bedrohung der Sicherheit, auch bei uns in Europa und Deutschland.\n\nDie Vereinten Nationen in allen Bereichen zu stärken, liegt in unserem ureigenen Interesse. Dazu werden wir auch die erneute Mitgliedschaft im Menschenrechtsrat nutzen.\n\nIch danke Ihnen für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n8764,diether-dehm,\"Guten Morgen, Herr Präsident! Sehr verehrte Damen und Herren! Auch dieser Wirtschaftsminister offeriert - genauso wie schon Brüderle und Rösler - Exportüberschüsse als besonderen Ausdruck deutscher Tüchtigkeit. Sicher, wir haben tolle Erfinder, sieht man einmal von der Diesel-Gate-Software ab. Näheres dazu lässt sich im Dieter-Hallervorden-Song „Oh je, Vau Weh“ finden. Aber verdammt noch mal, wenn unsere Arbeiter so tüchtig sind, dann müssen wir doch mit den Gewerkschaften für viel höhere Löhne kämpfen! Das predigte Helmut Schmidt zeitlebens. Wo sich Produktivität verzehnfacht, muss die Kaufkraft nachziehen. Sonst gerät die Volkswirtschaft in Rezession und Deflation. Das betrifft heute den gesamten Euro-Raum.\n\nIn Wahrheit stagnierten in den letzten 15 Jahren die Pro-Kopf-Reallöhne bei uns, während die Profite der Großkapitalisten um 70 Prozent explodiert sind. Deutsches Lohndumping, Steuerdumping und Kaputtsparen des Sozialstaats haben Exportprodukte und Arbeit so billig gemacht, dass Südeuropa nur noch mit Krediten überleben kann. Nur noch 50 Prozent der Beschäftigten arbeiten hierzulande unter Bedingungen eines Flächentarifvertrages. Die andere Hälfte der Beschäftigten hat heute ein Einkommen, das 17 Prozent unter dem des Jahres 2000 liegt. 8,6 Prozent der Erwerbstätigen leben unterhalb der Armutsgrenze. Unter den Erwerbslosen sind es sogar 69,3 Prozent, wesentlich mehr als in jedem anderen EU-Staat. Wohlgemerkt: Wir sind hier schlechter als Griechenland, Spanien und Bulgarien.\n\nDie KfW bilanziert: Bei den Realinvestitionen kürzen Bundesregierung und Monopolkapitalisten gleichermaßen. Sie investieren mindestens 25 Prozent zu wenig in die Straßenerhaltung und die Infrastruktur. Die Kommunen können dank Schuldenbremse nicht einmal die Hälfte ihrer Hausaufgaben lösen. Laut DIW weist Deutschland seit 1999 eine addierte Investitionslücke von 1 Billion Euro auf. Der Trend der letzten 25 Jahre führt stracks in die Finanzspekulation. Noch 1991 flossen 40 Prozent des Kapitals in Maschinen und andere Güter der Realwirtschaft. Heute liegt der Wert bei unter 10 Prozent. Herr Gabriel, haben Sie nicht einmal das Wort „Finanzhaie“ plakatiert, und wollten Sie diese nicht ausrotten? Heute betreiben Sie eine ganze Finanzhaiaufzucht.\n\nAm 22. Januar in Davos erlaubten Sie sich, Herr Gabriel, TTIP-Kritiker als hysterisch zu beschimpfen. Sie verzauberten die skeptische SPD-Basis mit dem Satz, alles habe Recht und Ordnung. Dazu nur zwei Urteile: Erstens. Am 17. November entschied der Europäische Gerichtshof, dass die öffentliche Hand die Vergabe von Aufträgen von der Zahlung eines Mindestlohns abhängig machen darf. CETA jedoch, das Gesellenstück für TTIP, würde das alles außer Kraft setzen, schützt also nicht einmal europäisches Recht. Es ist ein Leichtes für US-Konzerne, in Kanada einen Briefkasten anzumelden und dann in Europa Armutslöhne zu zahlen.\n\nZweitens. Anfang November wurde Ecuador vom Schiedsgericht der Weltbank zur Zahlung von 1,1 Milliarden Dollar an den US-amerikanischen Ölkonzern Oxy verurteilt. Zwar erkannte das Gericht an, Oxy habe gegen ecuadorianisches Recht verstoßen, ging aber davon aus, dass die Firma durch den Staat benachteiligt wurde. Schöne neue Welt für Finanzhaie! Es ist diskriminierend, wenn mit TTIP und CETA Konzerne Staaten verklagen dürfen, aber demokratisch gewählte Regierungen niemals einen Konzern.\n\nWenn Profitsicherung demokratische Entscheidungen aushebelt, lieber Sigmar Gabriel, dann nannten wir das doch gemeinsam in unserer „Sozialistischen Jugend Deutschlands - Die Falken“ staatsmonopolistische Planwirtschaft, du in Goslar, ich in Hessen. Waren wir alle damals hysterisch?\n\nIn Hamburg hat der Senat die Umweltauflagen für das Kohlekraftwerk Moorburg aufgeweicht aus Angst vor einem Schiedsgericht. Die von der EU unterdrückte Bürgerinitiative gegen TTIP hat mittlerweile 3,4 Millionen Unterstützer - alle Hysteriker? -, davon 1 900 deutsche Mittelständler und Handwerker. Wer wie ich als Unternehmer im Internet unterzeichnen möchte: www.kmu-gegen-ttip.de.\n\nAber was der Konzernminister Gabriel heute vom Mittelstand hält, zeigen folgende Zahlen: Sein Gesamtetat umfasst 7,5 Milliarden Euro; davon gehen 1,6 Milliarden Euro an Konzerne, die Luft- und Raumfahrt betreiben und nebenbei auch ein bisschen Rüstung, der Mittelstand hingegen bekommt im Rahmen des Zentralen Innovationsprogramms Mittelstand, ZIM, gerade einmal läppische 538,5 Millionen Euro.\n\nAbschließend noch ein Wort zum Umgang mit uns TTIP-Hysterikern. Sollten die Regierungschefs TTIP doch noch nicht als gemischtes Abkommen verabschieden, sodass nationale Parlamente nicht darüber abstimmen dürfen, werden wir Linke klagen. Den 250 000, die am 10. Oktober mit uns in Berlin demonstriert haben, sage ich: Wir werden immer mehr, und wir werden weiter kämpfen für fairen Handel. Um den Entwicklungshilfeminister Gerd Müller zu zitieren, der sagte: für fairen Handel statt Freihandel.\n\nIch danke für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n3078,ewald-schurer,\"Herr Präsident! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Wir debattieren über den Einzelplan 11, über den Haushalt des Ministeriums für Arbeit und Soziales. Dieser zentrale Haushalt umfasst, wie schon dargestellt, immerhin fast 125 Milliarden Euro, also eine stolze Summe. Das entspricht fast 42 Prozent der Summe des aktuell vorliegenden Haushaltsentwurfs des Bundes für das Jahr 2015.\n\nVon der Frau Ministerin und der Kollegin Weiss wurde schon dargestellt, dass dieser Haushalt die großen Lebensbereiche der Menschen verkörpert. Ein Haushalt ist nie Selbstzweck. Die einzelnen Haushaltstitel stehen für Inhalte, zum Beispiel für den Bereich Rente und den Bereich Arbeit. Es geht um das Leben der Menschen, um die berufliche Bildung, die nach der hoffentlich guten schulischen Bildung beginnt. Dann geht es um das Arbeitsleben, das für die Menschen, wenn es gut läuft, später einmal bei guter Gesundheit im Rentenbezug mündet. Ich kann das Postulat unterschreiben: Es ist ein Erfolg, wenn Menschen möglichst lange am Berufsleben partizipieren können, wenn sie möglichst lange mitwirken können und zum geeigneten Zeitpunkt in Rente gehen können. Das ist das Ziel der sozialdemokratischen, aber auch, glaube ich, der christdemokratischen Renten- und Arbeitspolitik. In diesem Sinne legen wir diesen Haushalt vor.\n\nAuch ich will - nicht nur aus Routine - dem Ministerium für Arbeit und Soziales Dank sagen. Ich danke der Leitung des Hauses, den Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern, dem BMF und allen Mitarbeitern in den Bundestagsbüros. Es ist keine Selbstverständlichkeit, sich durch so große Haushalte durchzuarbeiten und alle Details sauber, ordentlich und beratungsfähig vorzulegen.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, bei aller Kritik, die ich vernommen habe, aber zurückweisen muss, weil etwas isoliert dargestellt wurde, nicht stimmt oder aus dem Kontext gerissen wurde - das gilt zum Teil auch für die Kritik von Frau Kipping -, muss man feststellen: Im Jahr 2014 werden laut aktuellem Haushalt für die Rentenversicherung, für die Grundsicherung im Alter und bei Erwerbsminderung 88,4 Milliarden Euro ausgegeben.\n\nDiese Summe wird sich peu à peu auf 101,3 Milliarden Euro in 2018 steigern.\n\nDas ist angesichts des gesellschaftlichen Hintergrunds, angesichts der demografischen Entwicklung und der Maßgabe eines stabilen Rentenbeitrags eine gewaltige Erhöhung in der mittelfristigen Finanzplanung.\n\nIch glaube, dass die Entlastung der Kommunen, über die immer wieder diskutiert wird und die von den über 12 000 Kommunen in Deutschland zu Recht eingefordert wird, ein entscheidender Punkt ist. Die Entlastung der Kommunen führen wir mit diesem Haushalt fort:\n\nErstens übernimmt der Bund 2015 100 Prozent der Kosten der Grundsicherung im Alter und bei Erwerbsminderung. Dafür waren 2013 3,7 Milliarden Euro angesetzt, für 2015 sind es bereits 5,9 Milliarden Euro, und der Ansatz steigt bis zum Jahr 2018 auf immerhin veritable 7,2 Milliarden Euro.\n\nDas ist eine effektive Entlastung der Kommunen in diesem Bereich. Das muss man hier hervorheben.\n\nZweitens. Auch 2015, 2016 und noch 2017 wird es diese Milliarde mehr an die Kommunen zur Verbesserung der Teilhabe von Menschen mit Behinderungen geben. Das ist ein ganz wichtiger Faktor. Ich denke, spätestens 2018 wird es weitere Entlastungen durch das Bundesteilhabegesetz geben. Das ist die Zielsetzung der, ich sage mal, christlich-sozialdemokratischen Koalition; früher wurde immer so gern von „christlich-liberal“ gesprochen. Wenn die Linken keinen Unterschied zwischen einer Koalition mit Liberalen und einer mit Sozialdemokraten sehen, ist es allein das große Problem der Linken. Die Wahrheit ist jedoch eine ganz andere, verehrte Kollegin Kipping.\n\nWir sind also dabei, ein Bundesteilhabegesetz vorzubereiten. Das wird eine Herkulesarbeit sein. Die Sozialgesetzbücher müssen modifiziert werden. Neue Impulse müssen gesetzt werden. Die große Zielsetzung ist, dass die Kommunen dann, wenn das Bundesteilhabegesetz in Kraft ist, erneut um 5 Milliarden Euro entlastet werden. Auch das ist ein riesiges Projekt, das sich von Projekten der Vorgängerregierung gewaltig unterscheidet. Wer das nicht sieht, ist betriebsblind.\n\nThema Jugendarbeitslosigkeit. Wir haben einen sehr guten Arbeitsmarkt; das ist klar. 43 Millionen Menschen sind beschäftigt, davon rund 30 Millionen sozialversicherungspflichtig. Man kann sagen: Wir stehen europäisch und weltweit sehr gut da. Das ist richtig. Wir haben einen robusten Arbeitsmarkt. Wir hoffen auch, dass der Arbeitsmarkt trotz der kleinen wirtschaftlichen Eintrübungen, die wir derzeit erleben - vielleicht stehen diese im Zusammenhang mit der Ukraine-Krise und mit einer binnenwirtschaftlichen Schwäche des großen und wichtigen Partners Frankreich -, in den nächsten Monaten und Jahren robust sein wird. Das ist die Voraussetzung.\n\nMan muss sagen: Es gibt auch Programme, die von großer Bedeutung sind. Hier sehen wir einen Übergang von der bundesdeutschen in die europäische Dimension. Das Sonderprogramm „MobiPro-EU“ ist schon erwähnt worden. Ich will noch einmal seine Bedeutung heraus-arbeiten: „MobiPro-EU“ bietet eine Win-win-Situation. Derzeit bekommen dadurch 6 000 junge Menschen eine Berufsausbildung, und 2 500 Fachkräfte werden ausgebildet und geschult. Das kostet Geld. Wir haben die Ausgaben im letzten Jahr verdoppelt und setzen im Jahr 2015 102 Millionen Euro dafür an. Ich halte das Programm deswegen für wichtig, weil ich es in der Dualität mit der Europäischen Union sehe. Wir tun hier etwas für die deutsche Wirtschaft, und wir tun etwas für junge Menschen aus europäischen Nachbarländern.\n\nLiebe Ministerin Nahles, werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich muss an dieser Stelle eines zum Ausdruck bringen: So solidarisch, wie wir uns hier als schwarz-rote Koalition verhalten, so enttäuscht bin ich über die Umsetzung der Programme zur Bekämpfung der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit in den Ländern, die es dringend nötig haben.\n\nIch bin sehr enttäuscht darüber, auch als Europahaushälter, dass seit zwei Jahren 6 Milliarden Euro sozusagen disponiert sind und dass, wie Minister Schäuble bestätigt hat, nur wenige Millionen davon umgesetzt werden. Das halte ich für einen großen europäischen Skandal, der während der Ratspräsidentschaft der Italiener dringend angegangen werden muss.\n\nIch bin mir sicher, dass die Ministerin in Rom eine deutsche Initiative einbringen wird, um diesen Skandal und diese Herausforderung schnell anzugehen und Lösungen zu finden. Denn in manchen Ländern in Europa sind Millionen von jungen Menschen ohne Hoffnung, stehen trotz einer guten Berufsausbildung abseits und verlassen ihre Länder zum Teil fluchtartig. Das kann so nicht bleiben.\n\nDas ist die große Herausforderung für die Europäische Kommission. Der deutsche Beitrag wird in diese Richtung gehen.\n\nAuch wenn wir diesen guten Arbeitsmarkt loben, bin ich trotzdem in großer Sorge, dass wir bei der Bekämpfung der Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit nicht die Erfolge haben, die wir uns alle in der Vergangenheit gewünscht haben. Wir haben über Instrumente debattiert, wir haben sie ausprobiert und evaluiert. Wir brauchen dringend Ansätze, um bei der Bekämpfung der Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit mehr Erfolge zu erzielen. Ich lobe hier - das darf man; das gehört dazu - das sehr gute Papier der ostdeutschen SPD-Bundestagsabgeordneten, die hier einen wichtigen Impuls gesetzt haben, und das, was es von den Gewerkschaften und den Sozialverbänden dazu gibt.\n\nGanz zum Schluss sage ich: Ich würde mir wünschen - auch wenn der Kollege Fraktionsvorsitzende das vorhin ein bisschen lustig kommentiert hat -, dass SPD und Union über den Koalitionsvertrag hinaus auch über Programme für öffentlich geförderte Jobs reden würden,\n\nund zwar im Benehmen mit Arbeitgebern und Arbeitnehmern. Eine solche Initiative ist dringend notwendig.\n\nAls Haushälter bin ich der Meinung, dass eine solche Initiative eine Stufe auf dem Weg zum ersten Arbeitsmarkt sein könnte. Menschen, die arbeitsmarktfern sind, müssen gezielt gefördert werden, vielleicht auch durch öffentliche Impulse. Wenn wir sie richtig setzen, können wir von den fast 1,1 Millionen Menschen, die in dieser Zone der Hoffnungslosigkeit sind, einige Zehntausend, vielleicht sogar 100 000 Menschen oder mehr, wieder in den ersten Arbeitsmarkt bringen.\n\nEine solche Zwischenstufe wie öffentlich geförderte Impulse am Arbeitsmarkt halte ich für dringend notwendig. Das würde ich mir, wie gesagt, wünschen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n15105,ulrich-freese,\"Schönen Dank, Herr Präsident. - Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich will es einmal mit einer Diskussion versuchen. Herr Heider, Herr Dr. Klaus-Peter Schulze, die Bergleute an der Ruhr hätten sich über Ihre Reden im Jahre 2007 sehr gefreut; denn damals haben Sie als CDU/CSU und FDP den Steinkohleausstieg auf den Weg gebracht. Heute feiern Sie sich als Retter der Kohleindustrie in Deutschland. Das ist, denke ich, in hohem Maße widersprüchlich.\n\nWeil vom Strukturwandel die Rede ist, bin ich gespannt, wie Sie die Schuttberge, die dieser Kohleausstieg im Ruhrgebiet hinterlassen hat, strukturpolitisch ordentlich auf den Weg bringen. Die Arbeitslosigkeit in Gelsenkirchen, Bottrop, Herten, Herne, Marl und anderswo spricht eine klare und deutliche Sprache: Der Strukturwandel hat nicht zu industriell gut bezahlten und vernünftig wertschöpfenden Arbeitsplätzen geführt. Deshalb war es mit Sicherheit falsch, erst auszusteigen, wenn Sie heute, Herr Dr. Klaus-Peter Schulze, darüber jammern, dass wir 56 Millionen Tonnen durch Kinderarbeit und nicht umweltverträglich geförderte Kohle aus aller Welt nach Deutschland holen. Für die Stahlindustrie führen wir 11 Millionen Tonnen Kohle ein, damit die Stahlindustrie in Deutschland fortleben kann. Das war meine erste Bemerkung.\n\nZweite Bemerkung: Frau Baerbock, Sie haben gerade gesagt, dass wir aus Deutschland heraus in schmutzige Kohlegeschäfte investieren. Sie haben doch eine Anfrage gestellt und darauf auch am 20. April 2017 eine Antwort bekommen. Die Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau bzw. die Deutsche Investitions- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft hat Ihnen klar und deutlich geantwortet, in welchen Bereichen sie in Kohle investieren, und zwar in die Modernisierung von Kohlekraftwerken unter ganz besonders engen Bedingungen, nämlich wenn der Empfänger eine Klimastrategie hat, wenn Anwendungen bestverfügbarer Technik zur Verfügung stehen, wenn keine Energiealternativen in den Regionen vorhanden sind, wenn KWK-Anlagen mindestens 75 Prozent Wirkungsgrad haben, wenn eine signifikante Verbesserung der Energieversorgungssicherheit gegeben ist und, was wichtig ist, Umwelt- und Sozialverträglichkeitsstandards eingehalten werden.\n\nDas ist ein guter Beitrag zur Wirtschaftsentwicklung und auch zur CO2-Minderungsstrategie, die weltweit wirken muss.\n\n(Abg. Annalena Baerbock [BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN] meldet sich zu einer Zwischenfrage]\n\n- Wir diskutieren so oft auf offener Bühne; da können wir uns das heute sparen. Das ist meine Antwort auf Ihre Wortmeldung.\n\nIch will in dieser Diskussion eine weitere Bemerkung machen. Sie haben Trump angesprochen und gesagt, dass Deutschland jetzt der Welt etwas beweisen muss. Wir haben seit 1990 über 250 Millionen Tonnen CO2 eingespart, und das weitestgehend in der Energieerzeugung, nirgendwo anders.\n\nWenn wir jetzt noch, wie Sie es wollen, aus der Braunkohleverstromung aussteigen und etwa 180 Millionen bis 200 Millionen Tonnen CO2 einsparen, dann ist das in der Wirkung für das Weltklima so ähnlich, als wenn in China ein Sack Reis umfällt. Es ist auch nicht richtungsweisend.\n\nNein, wir in Deutschland müssen unsere Blockaden aufgeben und die bestmöglichen verfügbaren Techniken, die wir haben, nicht nur im Bereich der regenerativen Energien und der Speichertechnologien, sondern auch in der Verwendung von fossilen Energien wie Erdgas, Erdöl und Braunkohle einsetzen.\n\nWir werden - das garantiere ich Ihnen - in der nächsten Wahlperiode darüber zu reden haben, weil die Evaluierung des von CDU/CSU und FDP auf den Weg gebrachten CCS-Gesetzes ansteht, wo es ja auch um die Opt-out-Regelung geht. Wir werden nicht daran vorbeikommen, in Deutschland darüber nachzudenken, was wir mit dem abgeschiedenen CO2 aus industriellen Prozessen machen sollen. Stoffliche Verwertung: Ja. Das wird aber nicht reichen. Wir werden auch darüber nachdenken müssen, ob wir die CCS-Technik nicht in ganzheitlicher Art und Weise anwenden und dabei Untergrund nutzen. Wo Gas drin war, kann auch wieder Gas hinein. Das wäre ein wichtiger Beitrag auch für alle anderen in der Welt, die derzeit noch 7 Milliarden Tonnen Kohle fördern und verstromen, um ihre Investitionen dann in CO2-Treibhausgasfreiheit zu stecken.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n1242,roy-kuhne,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrter Herr Minister Gröhe! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Ich denke, dieses Thema heute ist mit Blick auf die Zukunft ganz besonders wichtig.\n\nDie Hebammen und Entbindungspfleger in Deutschland leisten eine hervorragende Arbeit. Diese Leistungen werden überhaupt nicht infrage gestellt. Ihre Zuwendungen und ihre Leistungen in der Vorsorge und in der -Wochenbettbetreuung sind für Schwangere und junge Eltern von besonderer Bedeutung. Die Geburtshilfe der freiberuflichen Hebammen ermöglicht vielen Schwangeren die freie Wahl ihres Entbindungsortes. Das ist wichtig. Dies gilt aber nicht nur für Hausgeburten oder die Entbindung in einem Geburtshaus, sondern auch für die Betreuung durch sogenannte Beleghebammen in Krankenhäusern selber.\n\nDas Betreuungsangebot der Hebammen trägt in erheblichem Maße dazu bei, dass Schwangerschaften einen positiven Verlauf haben. Ich glaube, das ist uns allen wichtig. Darüber hinaus bietet es werdenden Müttern und Vätern Zeit und Raum, sich mit der Problematik zu beschäftigen, in Kursen zu erlernen, mit welchen Aktionen und Reaktionen sie zu rechnen haben. Sie können sich damit theoretisch auseinandersetzen, um sich auf die Aufgabe als Eltern ausreichend vorzubereiten.\n\nÄngste der Frauen vor der Geburtssituation können in ruhiger, eventuell häuslicher Atmosphäre ausreichend besprochen und durch das Erlernen von geburtserleichternden Techniken sogar abgebaut werden. In der Wochenbettbetreuung - das heißt in der Zeit nach der Geburt - können aufkommende Probleme im neuen Familienalltag, die durchaus Stress bedeuten können, direkt in einer Eins-zu-eins-Betreuung gelöst werden.\n\nViele von Ihnen können sich vielleicht noch daran erinnern, wie sie sich als junge Eltern in der Zeit nach der Geburt fühlten. Manchmal sind diese Zeiten geprägt von Angst - Angst davor, mit der Aufgabe Kindesbetreuung überfordert zu sein, oder davor, für kleine Aufgaben des alltäglichen Lebens keine Lösung zu finden. Ich glaube, viele junge Eltern wissen, was ich damit meine. Auch meine Frau und ich waren froh, vor, während und nach der Geburt unserer Kinder eine Hebamme an unserer Seite zu haben. Aber dennoch, Frau Wöllert, sage ich ganz offen: Ich bin ganz klar gegen Polemik bei diesem Thema. Ich bin ganz klar gegen gefühlsduselige Petitionen.\n\nIch glaube, das ist nicht im Interesse der Mütter und Väter und nicht im Interesse der Hebammen. Die Hebammen haben Sachlichkeit verdient; Herr Lauterbach und Herr Minister Gröhe haben es angesprochen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Regierungskoalition weiß um die Wichtigkeit und die Leistungen der Hebammen. Es ist notwendig, dass Hebammen flächendeckende Angebote für junge Familien machen. Deshalb ist im Koalitionsvertrag ganz klar festgeschrieben, die Versorgung mit Geburtshilfe sicherzustellen sowie für eine angemessene - da stimme ich Ihnen völlig zu - Vergütung zu sorgen. Herr Minister Gröhe und viele Mitglieder der Regierungskoalition haben in den letzten Tagen viele konstruktive Gespräche mit den Hebammen geführt. Dadurch ist viel Klarheit geschaffen worden, worin die Brisanz dieses Themas liegt.\n\nDie aktuelle Situation der Hebammen in Deutschland ist natürlich von dem Problem der gestiegenen Haftpflichtprämien stark geprägt. Eine kostendeckende und auskömmliche Tätigkeit ist momentan zugegebenermaßen schwer möglich. Aber man muss auch sagen, dass in Anbetracht dieser Tatsache bereits Veränderungen der Vergütungsstrukturen stattfanden. Das von der schwarz-gelben Koalition 2012 verabschiedete GKV-Versorgungsstrukturgesetz beinhaltet positive Änderungen. In § 134 a Abs. 1 Satz 3 werden die Kostensteigerungen für die freiberuflichen Hebammen berücksichtigt.\n\nDas wurde bereits mehrmals gesagt. Darunter fallen auch die steigenden Haftpflichtprämien. Das GKV-System beteiligt sich an diesen Kosten. In den letzten Jahren ergaben sich daraus Vergütungssteigerungen im zweistelligen Bereich. Zudem wird aktuell pro Hausgeburt ein Ausgleich von 200 Euro für die steigenden Versicherungsprämien gezahlt.\n\nNichtsdestotrotz muss über die derzeitige Lage der Hebammen in Deutschland intensiv diskutiert werden, und das tun wir auch. Aus diesem Grund gab es innerhalb der interministeriellen Arbeitsgruppe intensive Gespräche mit allen beteiligten Gruppen. Diese gingen über die Haftpflichtproblematik hinaus und tangierten - es wurde schon angesprochen - ebenfalls Themen wie die Ausbildung und Weiterbildung von Hebammen und natürlich die Qualitätssicherung in der Geburtshilfe.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich glaube, wir alle sind uns einig: Die Qualität der Versorgung hat im Gesundheitswesen höchste Priorität. Das müssen wir als Bundesregierung den werdenden Müttern und Vätern immer wieder sagen.\n\nWenn wir aber über Qualität und Qualitätssicherung reden, brauchen wir Daten. Ich fordere alle beteiligten Seiten auf, die Datenlage zügig zu verbessern. Wir brauchen dies, damit die Argumentationsgrundlage für Diskussionen in der Zukunft geschaffen ist. Ich möchte eine Diskussion aufgrund von Fakten führen.\n\nWie Herr Minister Gröhe bereits angesprochen hat, wird der erste Bericht der Arbeitsgruppe im Verlauf des Aprils erwartet. Ich erwarte von der Arbeitsgruppe ganz konkrete Vorschläge, und ich glaube, die werden wir auch bekommen. Ausgehend von dieser Grundlage müssen dann weiter gehende Diskussionen geführt werden. Ich betone mit Blick auf die Interessen der Hebammen: Wir brauchen eine sehr zeitnahe Umsetzung von konkreten Maßnahmen, damit den Hebammen in Deutschland ein ganz klares Signal gesendet wird.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich bin mir sicher, dass in diesem Haus bei diesem Thema Einigkeit zu zwei Punkten herrscht:\n\nErstens. Die ambulante Versorgung durch Hebammen in Deutschland soll flächendeckend erhalten werden.\n\nZweitens. Es geht - das ist für mich als Vater und auch für die Damen und Herren, die oben auf der Tribüne sitzen, sehr wichtig - um die Gesundheit von Mutter und Kind. Das sollten wir bei dieser ganzen Diskussion nicht vergessen.\n\nAuch die Koalition weiß um die Dringlichkeit dieser Maßnahmen. Gerade deshalb müssen diese Maßnahmen rechtlich abgesichert und nachhaltig sein. Keinem ist mit einem überhasteten Antrag geholfen, der fordert, diese gesamtgesellschaftliche Aufgabe mit Schnellschüssen abzuhandeln.\n\nWir brauchen harte Fakten. Warten Sie also bitte den Bericht der Arbeitsgruppe ab, damit wir tragfähige langfristige Lösungen finden - im Interesse von werdenden Müttern und Vätern.\n\nDanke für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n1889,hubertus-zdebel,\"Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich finde, dass die Rede, die Frau Motschmann gerade gehalten hat, eine sehr lustige Rede war; das trifft insbesondere auf den Vorwurf zu, dass wir als Opposition beim Thema Atomenergie eine Politik der Angst machen würden. Wer angesichts von Fukushima und Tschernobyl weiterhin davon redet, dass mit Atompolitik eine Politik der Angst gemacht werde, der hat überhaupt nichts verstanden. Das möchte ich hier an dieser Stelle noch einmal deutlich festhalten.\n\nAtomausstieg in Deutschland und weitere Atomförderung im Ausland passen nicht zusammen; das ist auch unsere Meinung. Vor diesem Hintergrund sagen wir vollkommen klar, dass die Abkommen zur Förderung von Atomenergie - dazu gehören auch die bilateralen Atomverträge - gekündigt werden müssen, und zwar dringend.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund ist es vollkommen richtig, jetzt sofort aktiv zu werden. Ich bin der Fraktion der Grünen auch sehr dankbar für die Kleine Anfrage, die sie gestellt hat, und für den sich daraus ergebenden Antrag, das deutsch-indische Atomabkommen jetzt sofort und in nächster Zeit auch das deutsch-brasilianische Atomabkommen zu beenden. Deswegen sage ich für die Fraktion der Linken ganz klar: Wir werden den Antrag der Grünen unterstützen. Wir setzen uns genau für diese Ziele ein, die in dem Antrag formuliert worden sind.\n\nIch sage an dieser Stelle auch, dass ich sehr gespannt darauf bin, wie sich die SPD in der namentlichen Abstimmung gleich verhalten wird. Auch ich habe nämlich nicht vergessen, dass sich die SPD in der vergangenen Legislaturperiode dafür stark gemacht hat, dass Hermesbürgschaften bezüglich des Atomkraftwerks in Brasilien nicht weiter erteilt werden, und dass in dieser Angelegenheit auch Druck aufgebaut worden ist, ein Druck, der nicht ganz erfolglos geblieben ist, weil daraufhin nämlich eine Ausweichfinanzierung angestrebt worden ist.\n\nAuch ich bin sehr enttäuscht darüber, wie sich die SPD jetzt in der Bundesregierung zu diesen ganzen Fragen verhält.\n\nDeswegen bin ich sehr gespannt darauf, wie das in der namentlichen Abstimmung gleich aussehen wird.\n\nLassen Sie mich an dieser Stelle noch etwas zum deutsch-brasilianischen Atomabkommen sagen. Ich war sehr beeindruckt von einem Gespräch, das Anfang April 2014 bei einem Treffen mit renommierten Vertreterinnen und Vertretern der brasilianischen Zivilgesellschaft auf Einladung von urgewald hier in Berlin stattfand, an dem auch meine Kollegin Bulling-Schröter teilgenommen hat. Dabei war auch Chico Whitaker. Er ist Mitbegründer des Weltsozialforums und bis heute Mitglied im Internationalen Rat des Weltsozialforums. Im Jahre 2006 erhielt er unter anderem auch den Alternativen Nobelpreis.\n\nEs war eine sehr angeregte Debatte mit den Vertretern von urgewald aus Brasilien. Chico Whitaker sagte bei der Gelegenheit, dass es keinesfalls ein diplomatischer Affront wäre, wenn die deutsche Bundesregierung den bilateralen Atomvertrag zwischen den beiden Ländern zum Ende des Jahres kündigen würde. Er sagte:\n\nIm Gegenteil: Das wäre eine wichtige Unterstützung Deutschlands für Brasilien. …\n\nAußerdem wäre es eine sehr wichtige und mehr als opportune Maßnahme, jetzt, wo wir des 50. Jahrestages des Militärputsches in Brasilien gedenken,\n\nin dieser Angelegenheit aktiv zu werden. Meine Damen und Herren, Sie sollten nämlich nicht vergessen - für den Fall, dass Sie es vergessen haben oder nicht wussten, sage ich es Ihnen noch einmal -, dass dieser Vertrag damals von den brasilianischen Militärs ausgehandelt worden ist. In meinen Augen ist es auch vor diesem Hintergrund - ich zitiere Chico Whitaker - „höchste Zeit, sich von diesem Relikt einer unheilvollen Kooperation zu verabschieden.“\n\nAußerdem hat Herr Whitaker bei der Gelegenheit des Gesprächs sehr deutlich gesagt - das sollten Sie sich auch als Koalition noch einmal hinter die Ohren schreiben -:\n\nWer im eigenen Land aus der Atomkraft „aussteigt“, sollte keine doppelten moralischen Standards anwenden und deswegen auch nicht weiter den Ausbau der Atomkraft im Ausland unterstützen.\n\nDieser Aussage können wir Linke uns nur anschließen.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. Die Bundesrepublik ist nicht nur durch die Abkommen mit Indien und Brasilien an der Förderung von Atomenergie beteiligt, sondern Deutschland ist nach wie vor auch Unterzeichner des Euratom-Vertrages. Wir Linken sagen schon lange: Euratom verfestigt die Förderung der Atomenergie und muss aufgelöst werden.\n\nAuch ein anderer Aspekt ist mir persönlich sehr wichtig. Weil ich aus dem Münsterland komme, möchte ich bei dieser Gelegenheit auch noch einmal daran erinnern, dass es nach wie vor die Urananreicherungsanlage in Gronau gibt, die von der Firma Urenco betrieben wird. Diese Firma Urenco gibt es nur auf Basis eines trilateralen Vertrages, der in den 70er-Jahren zwischen Deutschland, den Niederlanden und Großbritannien geschlossen worden ist. Diese Firma soll jetzt privatisiert werden. Meiner Meinung nach gehört auch dieser trilaterale Vertrag von Almelo - so heißt er nämlich - zwischen diesen Staaten, der die Zusammenarbeit auf dem Gebiet der gefährlichen Gaszentrifugentechnik regelt, auf den Prüfstand. Es ist nämlich nicht mit einem unverzüglichen Atomausstieg vereinbar, dass in Gronau weiterhin Uran angereichert wird. Sie sollten schleunigst aus dieser Technologie aussteigen.\n\nIn diesem Sinne: Herzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n9466,thomas-viesehon,\"Herr Präsident! Herr Bundesminister! Was mich interessieren würde - neben dem Glasfaserausbau, der auf dem Weg zur Gigabitgesellschaft längerfristig wirkt - ist, ob es noch weitere konkrete Maßnahmen zur Beschleunigung gibt, auch zur kurzfristigen praktischen Umsetzung, um das, was Sie schon gesagt haben, gesetzlich und von Bundesseite her zu hinterlegen.\"\n13445,iris-eberl,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren Abgeordnete! Das Arbeitsprogramm der EU-Kommission trägt den Titel „Für ein Europa, das schützt, stärkt und verteidigt“. Die Sicherheit der Bürger ist die Existenzberechtigung eines jeden Staates. Die Bedrohung durch den islamistischen Terrorismus macht die Verstärkung der Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu einem Kernanliegen in unserem Staat - in allen Unionsstaaten. Gut, dass sich die Kommission mit diesem Kernproblem befassen wird.\n\nIm Arbeitsprogramm ist zu lesen: Europa ist an einem kritischen Punkt angelangt. - Richtig! Das Brexit-Votum muss für uns ein Weckruf sein. Die Europäische Union ist keine Zwangsvereinigung; Ausscheiden ist im Vertrag vorgesehen. Wenn unsere Antwort an Großbritannien einer Abstrafung gleichkommt, beweisen wir, dass der Respekt vor dem Wählerwillen in der Union verloren gegangen ist. Das wäre Wasser auf die Mühlen der Miesmacher der Union. Das darf nicht sein. Wir brauchen einen fairen Deal mit Großbritannien.\n\nDie Kommission beschreibt auch Probleme und Bedrohungen der Bürger und erklärt: Wir haben zugehört, und wir haben verstanden. - Sie verspricht, eine Kommission zu werden, die sich darauf konzentriert, die Dinge besser zu machen. Das klingt gut, beweist Selbstkritik und Einsicht. Aber warum, meine Damen und Herren, hat die Kommission bisher nicht ihr Bestes gegeben, obwohl sie weiß, dass sie für eine halbe Milliarde Menschen die Verantwortung trägt?\n\nAls Premierminister von Luxemburg beschrieb Juncker 1999 die Strategie zur Integration wie folgt:\n\nWir beschließen etwas, stellen das dann in den Raum und warten ... ab, was passiert. Wenn es dann kein großes Geschrei gibt und keine Aufstände, weil die meisten gar nicht begreifen, was da beschlossen wurde, dann machen wir weiter - Schritt für Schritt, bis es kein Zurück mehr gibt.\n\nMit dieser undurchsichtigen Methode soll nun Schluss sein. Deshalb will die Kommission - so steht es im Papier - in Zukunft ihr Tun den Bürgern besser erklären. Aber das Problem der europakritischen Bürger ist weniger die Undurchsichtigkeit des Verfahrens, sondern es sind die Inhalte.\n\n2017 sind Wahlen in den Niederlanden, in Frankreich und in Deutschland. Größte Vorsicht ist geboten, wenn die Union nicht in ihrem Bestand gefährdet werden soll. Trotzdem konzentriert sich das Arbeitsprogramm der Kommission weiterhin auf jene zehn politischen Prioritäten, die Juncker bereits zu Beginn seiner Amtszeit als Kommissionspräsident formuliert hatte. Das bedeutet „weiter so“, befürchte ich.\n\nDie Europäische Union existiert aber nicht zum Selbstzweck. Sie hat eine dienende Funktion gegenüber den Mitgliedstaaten. Allen Ländern gleichermaßen gerecht zu werden, ist eine sehr schwierige Aufgabe; denn was dem einen Staat nützt, kann für den anderen sehr nachteilig sein. Für Deutschland benenne ich an dieser Stelle das konjunkturelle Ankurbeln Junckers und die Nullzinspolitik der EZB als Negativbeispiele. Vielleicht nutzen sie anderen Ländern - vielleicht -; Deutschland schadet beides. Das Ankurbeln überhitzt unsere Konjunktur. Außerdem ist es von gestern. Staatliche Eingriffe in die Wirtschaft verzerren den Wettbewerb; sie sind daher für Marktwirtschaften schädlich.\n\nZu viel echte Marktwirtschaft kann man der EU nicht unbedingt vorwerfen, Frau Dr. Barley.\n\nDie Nullzinspolitik hat sich, salopp formuliert, als Slim-Fast-Programm für die Altersvorsorge unserer Bevölkerung entpuppt und das Vertrauen der Menschen in die Union tief erschüttert. Dieses Vertrauen muss sie zurückgewinnen. Aber stattdessen kam letzte Woche die nächste fragwürdige Einmischung in nationales Recht. Hohes Qualitätsniveau, Patientenschutz, Verbraucherschutz\n\nidentifiziert die Kommission als mögliche Wachstumsbremsen. Die Verhältnismäßigkeit von Berufsregeln soll überprüft werden. Überflüssige nationale Qualifikationen zur Berufsausübung sollen verhindert werden, um Wirtschaftswachstum ohne Barrieren anzukurbeln. Damit wird die Ökonomie zum einzigen Maßstab für nationales Berufsrecht und dem Pfusch wohl Tür und Tor geöffnet.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir brauchen eine schlanke und flexible Europäische Union, die sich auf ihre Kernaufgaben konzentriert, keinen Superstaat, der sich in alle Belange der Mitgliedstaaten einmischt. Subsidiarität und Solidarität müssten eiserne Grundprinzipien werden. Solidarität darf keine Einbahnstraße sein. Wer sie einfordert, muss auch gemeinsame Lasten tragen; siehe Verteilung der Flüchtlinge.\n\nSolidarität ist auch keine Hängematte. Bei unsolider Haushaltspolitik in manchen Unionsstaaten muss verlangt werden, dass dort die Eigenverantwortung greift. Jeder Staat muss seine nationale Einlagensicherung schaffen. Eine Vergemeinschaftung von Schulden und Risiken lehnt die CSU kategorisch ab. Verantwortung und Haftung dürfen weder bei der Staatsverschuldung noch im Bankensystem auseinanderfallen. Wir brauchen ein geordnetes Verfahren zur Restrukturierung der Staatsschulden und eine Regelung zum Ausscheiden aus dem Euro - zur Not, leider. Solidarität verlangt ebenfalls die Einhaltung geschlossener Verträge, egal ob es um die Verschuldung, die Regeln des Schengen-Vertrages oder des Dublin-Abkommens geht. Solidarität bedeutet Rechtstreue ohne Ausnahme von ohnehin flexiblen Regeln.\n\nAber was sind nun die markanten Kernaufgaben der Union? Die Migrationskrise, der islamistische Terrorismus in Europa, Kriege in Syrien und der Ukraine sowie die Situation in vielen anderen Krisengebieten verlangen gemeinsame Anstrengungen. Die Gewährleistung unserer Sicherheit ist eine Kernaufgabe der Union. Hier brauchen wir die Europäische Union, und hier liegt auch ihr Mehrwert für die Bevölkerung. Warum wurde Eurodac nur sporadisch angewandt? Warum wird SIS nicht konsequent umgesetzt? Beide Systeme sind gut. Beide würden funktionieren, aber nur, wenn alle Länder mitmachen.\n\nNun will die Kommission wieder handeln. Sie will ETIAS einführen, sie will ECRIS ausweiten, und die Kommission will rasch Verbesserungen und Erfolge erreichen. Sehr gut! - Weitere Kernaufgaben sind die faire Lastenverteilung zwischen den Staaten, der gemeinsame Grenzschutz, die Union als starker europäischer Pfeiler der NATO und vieles mehr, wie Kollege Feiler bereits ausgeführt hat.\n\nIch will mit dem vielbeschworenen Kernthema „Bekämpfung der Fluchtursachen“ schließen. Wenn sich nichts ändert, werden sich bald 18 Millionen Afrikaner auf den Weg nach Europa machen.\n\nUnd viel zu viele werden den Weg wieder nicht überleben. Deshalb brauchen wir eine europäisch-afrikanische Partnerschaft. Die Kommission will bis zum EU-Afrika-Gipfel Ende 2017 ein Konzept mit Prioritäten für die Beziehungen der Union zu Afrika erarbeiten. Die Industrie sieht Afrika als kommenden Kontinent. Minister Müller hat seinen Marshallplan für Afrika vorgestellt. Helfen wir den afrikanischen Ländern, echte Handelspartner für Europa zu werden.\n\nEuropa steht ungebrochen für den Traum eines Lebens in Frieden, Freiheit und Wohlstand. Setzen wir diesen Traum nicht aufs Spiel. Stehen wir zu unserer Europäischen Union der Bürger.\n\nIch danke für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n9507,anton-hofreiter,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrter Herr Kollege Gabriel, Sie haben gesagt: Das Land ist handlungsfähig. - Ja, das Land ist handlungsfähig dank Tausender und Abertausender Ehrenamtlicher, die sich darum kümmern, dass die Flüchtlinge entsprechend versorgt werden, dass die Flüchtlinge anständig behandelt werden. Außerdem ist das Land handlungsfähig dank Unmengen aktiver Kommunalpolitiker und dank Unmengen Beamter und Angestellter im öffentlichen Dienst, die einen ganzen Haufen Überstunden schieben. Dadurch ist das Land handlungsfähig. Da gebe ich Ihnen sogar recht.\n\nAber wenn ich mir anschaue, wie sich die Große Koalition - die CSU und die SPD sind bekanntermaßen Teil der Großen Koalition - in den letzten Wochen und Monaten benommen hat - dabei geht es nicht darum, einen sachlichen Streit zu führen -, dann stelle ich fest, dass diese Regierung nicht handlungsfähig ist. Denke man allein an den Herrn Seehofer: Er stellt inzwischen zum fünften Mal dieser Bundesregierung ein Ultimatum. Er schreibt inzwischen Briefe und spricht davon, dass er die Bundesregierung vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht verklagen will. Ist dieser Mensch jetzt Teil der Großen Koalition? Ja oder nein? Er ist es! Also stellen wir fest: Die Große Koalition ist nicht handlungsfähig.\n\nIch sehe hier die Kollegin und den Kollegen von der CSU und der SPD sitzen, Frau Hasselfeldt und Herrn Oppermann. Frau Hasselfeldt hat davon gesprochen, dass die SPD das Koalitionsklima vergiftet. Herr Oppermann hat davon gesprochen, dass diese Große Koalition ein Kasperletheater aufführt.\n\nDennoch tun Sie so, als wenn das Ganze ein nüchterner, sachlicher Streit wäre. Nein, Herr Gabriel, einen nüchternen, sachlichen Streit und eine vernünftige Debatte würden wir von Ihnen erwarten.\n\nWissen Sie, wie eine vernünftige Debatte ausschaut? Eine vernünftige Debatte, Herr Gabriel, schaut so aus: Man streitet sich. Man überlegt sich etwas. Man entscheidet, man handelt dann und dreht sich nicht wie ein Brummkreisel die ganze Zeit im Kreis. Bei so etwas ist zwar Bewegung drin, aber vorwärts geht dabei überhaupt nichts.\n\nWissen Sie, Herr Gabriel, was man einfach schlichtweg feststellen kann? Ihre Koalition hat hier zwar 80 Prozent der Abgeordneten, und wir haben wirklich ein hervorragendes Land mit klasse Bürgern; aber dieses Land wird einfach krass unter Wert regiert, unter anderem von Ihnen.\n\nIch hätte mir von der SPD in dieser Krise erwartet, dass sie ganz klar für die offene Gesellschaft steht, dass sie ganz klar erläutert, wie wir das schaffen. Erwartet hätte ich aber nicht diesen wüsten Zickzackkurs, den die SPD hier aufführt:\n\nmal rechts von der Kanzlerin, mal links von der Kanzlerin, und fünf Minuten später weiß man schon nicht mehr, wo sie steht. Das erklärt auch das seltsame Verhalten der SPD-Ortsverbände in Essen, wo sie einen Lichtermarsch gegen neue Flüchtlingsheime geplant haben. Ich meine, das ist ein Symptom Ihres eigenen Zickzackkurses, den Sie hier aufführen.\n\nVielleicht noch ein paar Bemerkungen zu Ihrem Jahreswirtschaftsbericht. Wissen Sie, Ihr Jahreswirtschaftsbericht ist unvollständig, ebenso wie sämtliche Jahreswirtschaftsberichte der letzten Jahre unvollständig waren. Sie stellen hier einen Bericht vor, der ökologisch blind und sozial gleichgültig ist.\n\nEs erstaunt uns zwar nicht, dass Sie einen Bericht vorstellen, der ökologisch blind ist, aber dass Sie einen Bericht vorstellen, der sozial gleichgültig ist, ist, wie ich finde, für einen SPD-Vorsitzenden und für einen SPD-Vizekanzler schon ziemlich bemerkenswert. Sie verlieren kein Wort dazu, dass die Einkommensungleichheit in diesem Land so groß ist, wie seit 20 Jahren nicht mehr. Sie unternehmen nichts dagegen, dass die oberen 10 Prozent inzwischen die Hälfte des Nettovermögens besitzen und dass die unteren 50 Prozent de facto nichts haben. Sorgen Sie endlich dafür, dass unser Staat gerechter wird! Dann empfinden die Leute dieses Land auch wieder als gerechter und identifizieren sich stärker mit diesem Land und dieser Demokratie.\n\nHerr Gabriel, auch in einer ganzen Reihe von Bereichen in der Energiepolitik ist dringend etwas zu tun. Es ist dringend dafür zu sorgen, dass die Kohlenutzung endlich ausläuft. Die Folgekosten der Kohleverstromung sind gigantisch. Sie sind nicht nur ökologisch gigantisch, sondern auch ökonomisch gigantisch.\n\nIch gestehe Ihnen zu, dass es in der Energiepolitik mit Ihrem Koalitionspartner schwierig ist. Herr Fuchs hat hier wieder ein Beispiel abgeliefert von - ich weiß gar nicht,\n\nwas man dazu sagen soll, wenn man fachlich Ahnung hat - vollkommener Unbelecktheit in energiepolitischen Fragen. Ich will politisch nur eines dazu sagen: Bei allen Volten, die Herr Seehofer schlägt: Dass Seehofer jetzt zu uns Grünen gehört, Herr Fuchs, möchte ich wirklich bestreiten.\n\nDa der Hauptfeind des Leitungsausbaus in Deutschland Herr Seehofer ist, würde ich sagen: Fassen Sie sich da mal an die eigene Nase, und reden Sie mal mit Ihren Kollegen von der CSU, dass es da endlich vorwärtsgeht! In einem Punkt hatten Sie nämlich recht: Beim Leitungsausbau muss es vorwärtsgehen. Deshalb: Stellen Sie Herrn Seehofer mal in den Senkel, und lassen Sie sich von ihm nicht weiter auf der Nase herumtanzen!\n\nZum Schluss: Ja, unser Land ist stark, unser Land ist handlungsfähig, aber es wird von dieser Bundesregierung unter Wert regiert. Ändern Sie das endlich; denn es ist Zeit dafür.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12925,katrin-goring-eckardt,\"Frau Präsidentin! Lassen Sie mich eingangs ein Wort direkt an das syrische Volk richten: Ajjuha al-Schaab al-Suri, nahnu nufakkiru bi-kum. - Verehrtes syrisches Volk, wir denken an euch.\n\nFrau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir können in dieser Woche nicht hier im Parlament sitzen, ohne über Aleppo zu sprechen. 250 000 Menschen leben derzeit in der belagerten Stadt - so viele wie in Kiel oder Erfurt. Sie werden täglich von Flugzeugen des syrischen Regimes und von Russland bombardiert. Ein normales Leben hat es seit 2012 nicht mehr gegeben. Vier Jahre Krieg. Jeden Tag. Die Bewohner Aleppos haben kaum noch Versorgung mit Nahrungsmitteln und Wasser und keine funktionierenden Krankenhäuser mehr. Krankenhäuser wurden bombardiert.\n\nAllein in den letzten sechs Monaten hat sich die Zahl der belagerten Menschen in Syrien auf über eine Million verdoppelt. Das alles ist schlimm genug, aber das ist nicht alles. Dazu kommen bunkerbrechende Bomben, Fassbomben, Angriffe mit Giftgas, wie erst diese Woche in Aleppo. Das alles sind Kriegsverbrechen, und wir sollten sie auch so nennen.\n\nJeden Tag bergen die Weißhelme und die verbliebenen Zivilisten tote und verletzte Menschen, tote und verletzte Kinder aus den zerbombten Häusern. Das passiert in Aleppo. Aber genauso können wir auch über Madaja, Duma, Sabadani oder Jarmuk reden. In all diesen Städten gibt es weiterhin Menschen, die leben wollen, die jedes Recht auf Leben haben, Menschen, die unsere Nachbarn und Freunde sein könnten, Menschen, die mit der halben Million Syrerinnen und Syrer in unserem Land verwandt oder befreundet sind. Auch an die denke ich, wenn ich jeden Tag die furchtbaren Nachrichten sehe.\n\nWas dieser Tage in Aleppo, in Syrien passiert, wird sich historisch in eine Reihe finden mit Ruanda, Grosny und Srebrenica. Wie damals gibt es bei den meisten von uns ein Gefühl der Ohnmacht. Wie damals sind wir der Schutzverantwortung nicht gerecht geworden. Und gerade darum will ich die Regierung fragen, will ich aber auch uns alle fragen: Tun Sie, tun wir wirklich genug für den Frieden? Tun Sie, tun wir wirklich genug, um wenigstens ein bisschen mehr Humanität nach Syrien zu bringen? Tun Sie, tun wir wirklich genug, um die, die den Horror verantworten, nicht straffrei aus diesem Krieg gehen zu lassen? - Das klingt nach drei einfachen Fragen. Aber ich frage Sie und auch uns noch einmal: Tun wir wirklich genug? Ich denke, man kann nie genug tun.\n\nEine Syrerin hat am Montagabend auf einer Veranstaltung zur Ehrung der Weißhelme hier in Berlin gesagt: Ich weiß auch nicht genau, was man tun kann. Aber wenn ich nichts tun kann, dann kann ich wenigstens Lärm machen. - Insofern ist es das Mindeste, was wir tun können, in dieser Woche hier und weiter und immer weiter über Syrien zu reden, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, uns nicht wegzuducken, sondern weiter nachzudenken.\n\nIch bin auch der Meinung, dass wir und Sie von der Bundesregierung mehr tun können und müssen.\n\nErstens. Wie steht es um die humanitäre Versorgung der Menschen in Syrien? Können wir nicht doch mehr tun, um die Versorgung vom Boden oder aus der Luft zu gewährleisten? Meine Damen und Herren, doch, ich denke, wir können!\n\nUnd liebe Koalitionsfraktionen, können Sie nicht noch einmal überlegen, ob es wirklich angemessen ist, den Familiennachzug weiter auszusetzen? Heute sind 70 000 weitere Menschen auf der Flucht in Aleppo. Ich finde, das ist ein Gebot der Humanität in diesen Tagen, an diesem Tag.\n\nZweitens. Wie sieht es aus mit den belagerten Städten, wenn sie aufgeben müssen? Übernehmen Assad, Russland und Iran anders als bei Daraja die Verantwortung für die Sicherheit der Zivilbevölkerung? Stellen sie sicher, dass es nicht zu ethnischen Säuberungen kommt? Gibt es ausreichend Druck auf sie? Drei Fragezeichen!\n\nDrittens. Wie aktiv redet die Bundesregierung mit den Akteuren im Konflikt? Gibt es genug Druck? Gibt es Gespräche mit der iranischen Regierung, mit der saudi-arabischen, mit der katarischen? Ich weiß, es ist kompliziert, Druck auszuüben und etwas zu erreichen, aber ich weiß auch: Wir dürfen nicht nachlassen, und Sie dürfen nicht nachlassen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nUnd Russland? Staffan de Mistura hat uns letzte Woche berichtet, dass aus seiner Sicht derzeit in Moskau der Schlüssel zum Frieden liegt. Das Bomben muss aufhören. Der Schutz der Zivilbevölkerung muss endlich garantiert werden. Das zerstörte Land muss auch wiederaufgebaut werden. Putin muss Verantwortung übernehmen, und daraus dürfen wir ihn nicht entlassen, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nWir dürfen die Menschen in Syrien nicht vergessen. Es sind unsere Nachbarn. Es geht darum, ob es Ost-Aleppo in ein paar Wochen, in ein paar Tagen überhaupt noch geben wird. Es geht um unsere Verantwortung. Zuschauen ist keine Option, und Zurückhaltung ist keine Möglichkeit. Es ist an uns, wenigstens laut zu sein und jeden Tag - jeden Tag! - neu zu überlegen: Tun Sie als Regierung genug? Tun wir alle wirklich genug?\n\nNahnu nufakkiru bi-kum. - Wir denken an euch.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n12308,sylvia-jorrißen,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Wir alle hier wollen bezahlbares Wohnen, und im Gegensatz zu Ihnen, werte Kollegen der Grünen, arbeiten wir an ganzheitlichen Lösungen. Wir haben bereits vieles im Hinblick auf bezahlbares Wohnen auf den Weg gebracht und sind noch lange nicht fertig damit.\n\nMan kann die Sache natürlich schlechter reden, als sie ist. Nur bringt uns das keinen Millimeter weiter.\n\nDas ist schade, weil das Thema viel zu wichtig ist: für Familien, die eine stadtnahe Wohnung in der Nähe von Versorgungs- und Bildungseinrichtungen oder in der Nähe vom Arbeitsplatz brauchen, für Studierende und Auszubildende, die mit wenig Geld zentral wohnen müssen, für Senioren, die dort, wo sie schon immer leben, altersgerechten Wohnraum suchen, und auch für Schutzsuchende, für die Wohnen ein Schlüssel zur erfolgreichen Integration ist. Deshalb setzt sich die Union weiterhin dafür ein, bezahlbaren und zielgruppengerechten Wohnraum zu schaffen. Das gilt sowohl für den Neubau als auch für die Modernisierung des vorhandenen Bestandes. Wir brauchen beides.\n\nUns fehlen 350 000 bis 400 000 neue Wohnungen jährlich. Das kann der Bund nicht allein anschieben. Hier müssen alle an einem Strang ziehen, auch die Länder und Kommunen. Es sind im Übrigen nicht nur Wohnungen im sozialen Wohnungsbau, die wir brauchen, sondern es sind Wohnungen für alle, die in unserem Land leben. Es ist sowohl geförderter als auch frei finanzierter Wohnungsbau durch kommunale und private Investoren oder auch durch Genossenschaften.\n\nDie Große Koalition ist die Herausforderungen auf dem Wohnungsmarkt längst angegangen. Es ist richtig, dass in bestimmten Ballungsgebieten die Märkte überhitzt sind und wir dort zu wenig Wohnraum für jene haben, die über geringe und mittlere Einkommen verfügen.\n\nUm die Symptome in den überhitzten Märkten abzumildern, haben wir die Mietpreisbremse eingeführt. Auch wir als Union wollen nicht, dass Menschen aus ihren angestammten Quartieren verdrängt werden. Deshalb haben wir den Mietern Rechte an die Hand gegeben, die sie jetzt auch tatsächlich wahrnehmen müssen.\n\nAber die Mietpreisbremse allein löst das Problem des Wohnungsmangels nicht. Deshalb war uns immer die Verknüpfung mit Maßnahmen für den Wohnungsbau wichtig. Aus diesem Grund haben wir die Mittel für die soziale Wohnraumförderung bereits verdoppelt. Die bis 2019 vorgesehenen Kompensationsmittel in Höhe von ursprünglich 518 Millionen Euro haben wir um 500 Millionen Euro jährlich aufgestockt, und der aktuelle Haushaltsentwurf sieht sogar eine weitere Erhöhung auf über 1,5 Milliarden Euro jährlich vor.\n\nMit diesen Mitteln ist es den Ländern möglich, bezahlbaren Wohnraum zu schaffen. Aber die Länder geben das Geld anscheinend nach wie vor für anderes aus.\n\nDie Zahlen der neu geschaffenen Sozialwohnungen steigen nicht in dem Maße, in dem es erforderlich und bei ordnungsgemäßer Verwendung der Mittel auch möglich wäre. Tatsächlich reicht in einigen Ländern der Neubau nicht einmal, um die Anzahl der aus der Sozialbindung fallenden Wohnungen auszugleichen. Deshalb lautet mein erneuter Appell an die Länder, die üppigen Bundesmittel vollumfänglich einzusetzen.\n\nHierfür müssen die Förderprogramme so attraktiv ausgestattet sein, dass die Fördermittel auch abgerufen werden. Die Angebote großer Kredite sind langweilige Schaufensterdekorationen. Wir brauchen Kassenschlager, die die Investoren den Ländern aus den Händen reißen.\n\nSie fragten gerade, was nach 2019 ist.\n\nAktuell liegen die Ergebnisse der Bund-Länder-Finanzverhandlungen vor. Die Ministerpräsidenten haben sich mit der Bundeskanzlerin und dem Finanzminister darauf geeinigt, dass ab 2020 eine Neuordnung in Kraft tritt. 2020 werden damit die Kompensationsmittel enden. Dann müssen die Länder ihre Verpflichtungen im sozialen Wohnungsbau aus einer höheren Beteiligung an der Umsatzsteuer finanzieren. Ich bin gespannt, wie die Prioritätendiskussion in den Ländern künftig verlaufen wird.\n\nLiebe Kollegen der Grünen, in Ihrem Antrag erscheint die Einführung der Wohnungsgemeinnützigkeit als Allheilmittel der Probleme. Sie verkennen aber, dass diese den Wohnungsmangel nicht lösen wird, und zwar aus vielen Gründen nicht. In der Zeit nach den beiden Weltkriegen war die Wohnungsgemeinnützigkeit ein wichtiger Baustein der Wohnungspolitik. Schließlich fehlte es damals an funktionsfähigen Kapitalmärkten und Investoren, die Wohnungen finanzieren konnten. Aber heute haben wir andere Rahmenbedingungen. Die Probleme entstehen nicht durch eine mangelnde Zahl an Investoren, sondern beispielsweise dadurch, dass zu wenig Bauland zur Verfügung steht oder die Baukosten zu hoch sind. Wie will Ihre Gemeinnützigkeitsidee das lösen?\n\nEs ist doch ein Irrglaube, wenn Sie annehmen, dass gewinnorientierte Unternehmen keine soziale Verantwortung für ihre Mieter und ihre Quartiere wahrnehmen. Der Erfolg eines Wohnungsunternehmens hängt doch maßgeblich davon ab, dass ein Stadtviertel prosperiert. Kommunale Unternehmen leisten wichtige Beiträge durch die Gewinnabführung zur Finanzierung der Kommunen.\n\nHerr Kühn, Sie haben gerade das Stichwort „Neue Heimat“ selbst ins Spiel gebracht. Vielleicht sollten wir der Öffentlichkeit den gigantischen Skandal des Gewerkschaftswohnungsbauunternehmens „Neue Heimat“ wieder in Erinnerung rufen: Mehrere Vorstandsmitglieder des gewerkschaftseigenen gemeinnützigen Unternehmens hatten sich persönlich bereichert, und der Gewerkschaftskonzern war erheblich verschuldet. Der ehemalige Vorstandschef hatte dem Unternehmen durch Privatgeschäfte einen Verlust in Höhe von 105 Millionen D-Mark beschert. Die Verbindlichkeiten der übernommenen Neuen Heimat betrugen etwa 16 Milliarden D-Mark. Der Verkauf platzte dann auch noch aufgrund dieser Überschuldung. Am Ende musste alles aufgelöst und verkauft werden. - Der Gemeinnützigkeitsstatus hatte das Unternehmen der natürlichen Kontrolle aller Geschäfte durch eine Gewinnorientierung entzogen. Die Gemeinnützigkeit im Wohnungsbau war der fruchtbare Boden für millionenschweren Betrug und milliardenschwere Verluste,\n\nfrei nach dem Motto: Gewinne darf ich nicht machen, meinen Bonus organisiere ich mir trotzdem, und für Verluste kommen die anderen auf.\n\nEine Generation weiter hoffen einige, dass sich die Öffentlichkeit nicht mehr daran erinnert. Aber das werden wir nicht zulassen.\n\nLassen Sie mich zu einem wichtigen Förderprogramm kommen: „Altersgerecht Umbauen“. Aufgrund des demografischen Wandels und höherer Lebenserwartung ist es wichtig, dass wir in den kommenden Jahren ausreichend altersgerechten Wohnraum schaffen; denn die Menschen wollen so lange wie möglich selbstbestimmt in den eigenen vier Wänden leben. Hier muss ich meine Verwunderung ausdrücken, dass der Haushaltsentwurf für alle möglichen zusätzlichen Projekte Hunderte Millionen Euro vorsieht, aber bei diesem Programm offensichtlich erst wir Parlamentarier das Eisen aus dem Feuer holen sollen. Die Mittel für dieses Jahr sind bei der KfW längst aufgebraucht.\n\nDa ich schon bei einem Appell an die Bauministerin bin, werte Frau Hendricks, möchte ich auf eine weitere Sache hinweisen, die mir sehr am Herzen liegt. Anfang des Jahres wurden die Ergebnisse des Bündnisses für bezahlbares Wohnen und Bauen vorgelegt. Die Erhöhung der Kompensationsmittel und die Erhöhung des Wohngeldes können ja nicht alles der Umsetzung gewesen sein. Insbesondere bei den Ergebnissen der Baukostensenkungskommission und den zusätzlichen Investitionsanreizen müssen nun Taten folgen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir werden unsere Herausforderungen in der Baupolitik nur bewältigen, wenn mehr gebaut wird. Wir können das Problem des Wohnungsmangels nicht mit den Stellschrauben des Mietrechts lösen, sondern müssen bauen, bauen und nochmals bauen.\n\nDenn nur durch mehr Wohnungsneubau werden die Ursachen steigender Mieten langfristig bekämpft.\n\nEs ist nicht nur die Schaffung von Sozialwohnraum nötig, sondern wir müssen auch den frei finanzierten privaten und den genossenschaftlichen Wohnraum fördern. Das geht am besten durch eine steuerliche Förderung.\n\nDiese kann, richtig eingesetzt, schnell und genau dort wirken, wo der Druck auf die Wohnungsmärkte am größten ist. Insofern bin ich sehr enttäuscht, dass die steuerliche Förderung nun nicht realisiert werden soll.\n\nIn meinen Augen ist sie bitter notwendig. Dieses Mittel war auch eine Empfehlung des Bündnisses und ein Projekt des Bundesfinanzministers und der Bundesbauministerin.\n\nDoch was hilft die beste Baupolitik, wenn kein Raum zum Bauen vorhanden ist? Das höre ich immer wieder in Gesprächen im Wahlkreis. Ich erwarte daher von den Kommunen, dass Bauland ausgewiesen wird und die Genehmigungsverfahren beschleunigt werden. Um den erhöhten Wohnraumbedarf zu decken, brauchen wir heute zusätzliche, neue Siedlungsgebiete und schnell mehr Bauland an den Ortsrändern. Um den Wohnraumbedarf zu decken, liebe Kollegen, müssen wir auch mit Maß an der baulichen Dichte ansetzen. Hierzu muss die Baunutzungsverordnung überarbeitet werden.\n\nWir wollen einen neuen Baugebietstyp schaffen, der mehr Nachverdichtung und eine flexiblere Nutzungsmischung aus Wohnen und Gewerbe ermöglicht. Aber gerade beim Bauen müssen wir auch für Innovation und Kreativität offen sein und mit der Zeit gehen. Modulares und serielles Bauen wird in Zukunft wichtiger werden. Hier ist schon heute vieles möglich.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir dürfen uns nicht nur um Mietwohnungen, sondern müssen uns darüber hinaus auch um selbstgenutztes Wohneigentum kümmern. Das ist uns als Union sehr wichtig. Der Bau von Eigentumswohnungen hat die gleiche Wirkung wie der Bau von Mietwohnungen.\n\n- Doch.\n\nDurch Umzugsketten und Sickereffekte wird am Ende auch hierbei Mietwohnraum frei.\n\nAls Nebeneffekt, Herr Kühn, hat dies auch eine soziale Komponente. Wohneigentum ist nämlich die wichtigste Form der privaten Altersvorsorge.\n\nEs ist die einzige Form der Altersvorsorge, von der man sogar im jungen Alter schon etwas hat.\n\nKonkret geht es mir um die Wohnungsbauprämie. Junge Menschen und Familien müssen einen Anreiz haben, schon frühzeitig für Wohneigentum zu sparen. Hier müssen wir Anreize schaffen, die attraktiv sind. Die Wohnungsbauprämie im jetzigen Zustand ist es nicht. Wir müssen sie so verändern, dass sie wieder attraktiv wird, gerade für die Bezieher kleiner und mittlerer Einkommen. Wir müssen hier Anpassungen an die Einkommens- und Preisentwicklung vornehmen; denn aufgrund inflationsbedingter Lohnerhöhungen sind viele Arbeitnehmer aus der Förderung herausgefallen. Hier besteht Handlungsbedarf.\n\nEin Thema, das der Kollege Nüßlein schon angesprochen hat, unterstütze auch ich - die nordrhein-westfälische CDU hat hierzu noch weitergehende Ideen, für die auch ich mich starkmache und die beim nächsten Bundesparteitag eingebracht werden -, nämlich die bundesweite Einführung eines Baukindergeldes für alle Familien mit Kindern, die selbstgenutztes Wohneigentum erwerben.\n\nViele Familien fühlen sich heute mit den Kosten für die Kinder alleingelassen. Das Baukindergeld würde hier die notwendige Unterstützung bieten und für viele aus der Mitte unserer Gesellschaft einen Anreiz schaffen, zu bauen oder eigenen Wohnraum zu kaufen.\n\nLiebe Kollegen, Wohnungsbaupolitik erfordert ein ganzheitliches Konzept. Nur durch die Schaffung von bezahlbarem Wohnraum, die Sie in Ihrem Antrag fordern, liebe Grüne, sind die Herausforderungen nicht zu bewältigen. Wir setzen auf nachhaltige Lösungskonzepte und auf wirkliche Problemlösungen und sind hierbei auf einem guten Weg.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n14925,norbert-muller,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir beraten heute ein zentrales Vorhaben der Koalition im Bereich der Kinder-, Jugend- und Familienpolitik, nämlich die Reform des Sozialgesetzbuches Achtes Buch, also des Kinder- und Jugendhilferechtes.\n\nDas SGB VIII wurde nach über 20-jähriger Debatte Anfang der 90er-Jahre als Gesetz mit umfassenden Rechtsansprüchen für Kinder und Jugendliche, für junge Volljährige, für Heranwachsende und für Familien beschlossen. Es folgt einem sozialpädagogischen Leitbild. Deswegen ist es richtig, dass wir das Kinder- und Jugendhilfegesetz insgesamt verteidigen.\n\nEine Gruppe wurde damals aber nicht in die Geltung des SGB VIII einbezogen; die Staatssekretärin hat darauf gerade dankenswerterweise hingewiesen. Kinder und Jugendliche mit Behinderungen fallen eben nicht vollumfänglich unter den Geltungsbereich des SGB VIII. Wir haben hier schwierige Rechtskreise in Bezug auf die Wiedereingliederungshilfe. Das sollte harmonisiert werden. Die große Lösung, hinter der zumindest verbal alle Parteien stehen, ist Ziel Ihrer Koalition gewesen.\n\nDie Koalition ist also angetreten, das SGB VIII zu reformieren und Kinder und Jugendliche mit Behinderung vollständig in die Kinder- und Jugendhilfe zu überführen. Was Sie heute zur Geisterstunde - und wir haben gleich Geisterstunde - hier vorgelegt haben, hat damit aber null Komma nichts zu tun.\n\nDazu passt eben auch, dass das, was Sie heute vorstellen, keine große Lösung ist, sondern im Wesentlichen Ausdruck von großem Chaos: ein katastrophaler, intransparenter Gesetzgebungsprozess; acht Gesetzentwürfe bzw. Vorentwürfe oder Arbeitsfassungen haben in anderthalb Jahren das Licht der Öffentlichkeit erblickt - Sie kennen wahrscheinlich noch mehr -; Hunderttausende Beschäftigte, die gnadenlos verunsichert sind; Träger, Familien, Betroffene, die nicht wissen, wohin die Reise eigentlich geht. Sie wissen das; denn wir sind überhäuft worden mit Zuschriften von großen Verbänden, von Trägern, von Beschäftigten, von Mitarbeitern der Jugendämter, von Jugendhilfeausschüssen, von Familien. Das heißt, Hunderttausende Beschäftigte, betroffene Kinder, Jugendliche und Familien sowie große, aber auch kleine Träger wurden durch diesen Gesetzgebungsprozess hoffnungslos verunsichert.\n\nWas Sie heute vorlegen, ist abzulehnen. Ich nenne Ihnen kurz drei Gründe, warum wir das insgesamt ablehnen werden:\n\nErstens. Das Jugendwohnen, das Sie mit dem Gesetz auf ein Minimum herunterfahren wollen, bietet Minderjährigen und jungen Volljährigen die Möglichkeit, während ihrer Ausbildung preiswert zu wohnen. Wir haben bereits mehrfach über die Mietensituation in großen Städten geredet. Daher ist das Jugendwohnen dringend notwendig. Anstatt das Jugendwohnen auszubauen, fahren Sie es zurück. Das werden wir nicht mittragen.\n\nZweitens. Die offene Kinder- und Jugendarbeit - ich finde, das ist der größte Hammer - erschweren Sie noch zusätzlich. An der Stelle, an der wir die Kinder- und Jugendarbeit ausbauen müssten, wird sie erschwert. Was passiert jetzt konkret? Sie sagen, dass in der offenen Kinder- und Jugendarbeit auch dann, wenn die Beteiligten vor Ort ehrenamtlich unterwegs sind und keine öffentliche Förderung in Anspruch nehmen, bestimmte Meldeauflagen erfüllt werden müssen und Schutzkonzepte aufgestellt werden sollen. Also, wenn fünf junge Menschen in der Garage ihrer Eltern ein Jugendprojekt starten, dann sollen sie zukünftig ein Schutzkonzept gegen sexuelle Übergriffe aufstellen, dann sind sie meldepflichtig, dann müssen sie das Projekt beim Jugendamt anmelden und in eine stetige Kooperation eintreten. Das ist völlig irre. Damit erwürgen Sie die offene Kinder- und Jugendarbeit. Wir haben bereits in Gesprächen darüber geredet: Das muss weg. Das können wir nicht mittragen.\n\nDrittens. Sie führen - das war ein besonderer Wunsch einiger Länder; bedauerlicherweise trägt die Bundesregierung das nun mit - doppelte Standards für Kinder und Jugendliche mit ausländischem Hintergrund ein, nämlich für unbegleitete minderjährige Flüchtlinge. Durch eine Öffnungsklausel werden Sie erreichen - das wird in den Ländern so passieren; das wissen wir ganz genau; Länderausnahmeklauseln waren ja die Zielvorgabe der Bundesländer, die Sie quasi beauftragt haben, zumindest einiger -, dass es in Zukunft ein Kinder- und Jugendhilferecht für deutsche Kinder und Jugendliche gibt und ein Kinder- und Jugendhilferecht mit niedrigeren Standards für unbegleitete minderjährige Flüchtlinge. Auch das werden wir in keinem Fall mittragen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Sie haben eine große Lösung angekündigt. Sie haben viel Porzellan zerschlagen. Am Ende haben Sie eine große Überschrift produziert: Kinder- und Jugendstärkungsgesetz. Das ist ein Hohn. Sie stärken Kinder und Jugendliche mit dieser Reform des Sozialgesetzbuches VIII nahezu nicht. Das Beste wäre, Sie würden diesen Entwurf zurückziehen und einen Neustart in der nächsten Wahlperiode ermöglichen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4737,jan-van-aken,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Rund um Afghanistan ist hier im Bundestag in den letzten 13 Jahren schon so viel gelogen worden, dass ich es echt leid bin, und Sie haben genau da weitergemacht, Frau von der Leyen.\n\nFrau Präsidentin, ob man die Wahrheit sagt oder nicht, ist eine faktische Frage.\n\nIch kann das Faktum, dass sie die Unwahrheit gesagt hat, hier belegen. Danach würde ich Sie gerne bitten, noch einmal zu überlegen, ob dieser Einwurf von Ihnen eben richtig war oder nicht.\n\nLassen Sie mir jetzt kurz Zeit, die Aussage bezüglich der Unwahrheit zu belegen. Dann können wir darüber reden, ob das nun stimmt oder nicht.\n\nFrau von der Leyen hat eben wörtlich gesagt - ich zitiere -: „Es ist kein Kampfeinsatz mehr.“ Genau dieser Satz entspricht nicht der Wahrheit.\n\nFrau von der Leyen weiß es, und Sie wissen es: In dem Mandat, über das Sie gleich abstimmen werden,\n\nsteht ausdrücklich drin, dass auch Spezialkräfte eingesetzt werden.\n\nEs steht ausdrücklich drin, dass die deutsche Bundeswehr auch in den nächsten Jahren in Afghanistan für Kämpfe eingesetzt wird, nämlich dann, wenn es um den Schutz und die Sicherheit anderer Soldaten geht, auch anderer NATO-Soldaten, auch US-amerikanischer Soldaten.\n\nSie, Frau von der Leyen, und Sie alle hier wissen - auch ich weiß es -, dass die 9 000 US-amerikanischen Soldaten, die weiterhin in Afghanistan bleiben, auch einen Kampfauftrag haben.\n\nAuf Deutsch heißt das: Wenn NATO-Soldaten oder Bundeswehrsoldaten in Kämpfe verwickelt werden, dann kann, darf und wird die Bundeswehr eingreifen, zur Hilfe schreiten und auch in Kämpfe verwickelt werden. Damit ist das Mandat, das Sie vorgelegt haben, auch ein Mandat, zu kämpfen. Da waren Sie eben unehrlich, auch gegenüber den Soldatinnen und Soldaten.\n\nJa.\n\nGenau.\n\nHerr Arnold, wenn Sie mich zitieren, dann zitieren Sie mich bitte richtig.\n\nIch habe eben auf gar keinen Fall gesagt, dass die Bundeswehr irgendwelchen Afghaninnen und Afghanen zu Hilfe kommt; denn das steht gar nicht im Mandat. In dem Mandat steht ausschließlich, dass sie anderen Bundeswehrsoldaten und anderen internationalen Soldaten der Resolute Support Mission zu Hilfe kommen wird, und genau das habe ich auch gesagt. - Das erst einmal zu den Fakten. Das steht da drin!\n\nHerr Arnold, stellen Sie sich jetzt doch bitte einmal Folgendes vor: Die Amerikaner, die dort einen Kampfauftrag haben und in Kämpfe verwickelt sind, rufen um Hilfe, und deutsche Spezialkräfte, die Sie gleich mandatieren wollen, sind vor Ort. - Sie werden dann natürlich einschreiten. Sie sagen ja selbst, dass das passieren soll. Das ist dann auch ein Kampfeinsatz. Es ist einfach falsch und unwahr, wenn die Ministerin hier sagt, es ist kein Kampfeinsatz mehr.\n\nDas ist doch der ganz entscheidende Punkt. Machen Sie sich doch endlich einmal ehrlich!\n\nSeit 13 Jahren wird über Afghanistan gelogen. Das fing an mit einem Gerhard Schröder, der hier stand und sagte: sechs Monate und nur in Kabul. - Wo sind denn die 55 Soldaten der Bundeswehr gestorben? Wo wurde gekämpft? In Masar-i-Scharif, in Kunduz und überall. Nichts davon war wahr - von der ersten Minute bis heute nicht.\n\nIch finde es einfach unerträglich, dass, wenn jetzt Bundeswehrsoldaten zuhören - möglicherweise Bundeswehrsoldaten, die in einem Monat dorthin geschickt werden -, sie von der Ministerin hören, das ist kein Kampfeinsatz mehr, aber die Wahrheit ist das Gegenteil. Das geht so nicht!\n\nVon der ersten Stunde vor 13 Jahren an ging es hier immer so weiter. Sie haben hier die ganze Zeit immer wieder über Brunnenbau, über Aufbau und über Mädchenschulen geredet, aber keiner hat hier ein Wort über Krieg, über die ganzen Toten und über das Leid verloren. Das kam niemals von jemandem von Ihnen.\n\nIch bin seit fünf Jahren im Bundestag. Seit vier Jahren höre ich in diesem Hause bei jeder Afghanistan-Debatte: Ende 2014 wird die Bundeswehr abgezogen, Ende 2014 wird der letzte Bundeswehrsoldat Afghanistan verlassen haben. - Und was werden Sie in wenigen Minuten machen? Sie werden weitere 850 deutsche Bundeswehrsoldatinnen und -soldaten für weitere ein bis zwei Jahre nach Afghanistan schicken. Das ist einfach das Gegenteil von einem Abzug.\n\nEs ist vorprogrammiert, dass dort im nächsten Jahr auch deutsche Bundeswehrsoldaten in Kämpfe verwickelt werden. Dazu müssen Sie endlich stehen. Nennen Sie einen Krieg einen Krieg, und ziehen Sie endlich die deutschen Soldaten aus diesem Krieg ab!\n\nAn einem Punkt finde ich Ihre Unehrlichkeit richtig beschämend.\n\nSie haben all den Afghaninnen und Afghanen, die in den letzten 13 Jahren für Deutschland, für die Bundeswehr, für die NATO, für die ISAF und für deutsche Entwicklungshilfeorganisationen tätig waren, zugesagt, dass sie hier nach Deutschland in Sicherheit kommen können; denn sie werden in Afghanistan als Kollaborateure mit dem Feind - mit der ISAF, mit der NATO, mit Deutschland - bedroht. Sie haben ihnen zugesagt, sie könnten herkommen. Was müssen wir jetzt erfahren? Ein paar dürfen kommen, viele andere lehnen Sie aber einfach ab. Es gibt Menschen in Afghanistan, die für die Bundeswehr gearbeitet haben und jetzt mit dem Leben bedroht werden, und Sie lassen sie hier nicht herein. Wenn Sie wirklich ehrlich sind, dann lassen Sie alle, die in den letzten 13 Jahren für Sie gearbeitet haben, hier herein. Alles andere ist auch eine Unehrlichkeit.\n\nZur Unehrlichkeit gehört auch, dass fast alle von Ihnen die afghanischen Opfer dieses Krieges schlichtweg ignorieren.\n\nIn der letzten Debatte dazu in der letzten Sitzungswoche haben Sie alle hier der gefallenen deutschen Soldaten gedacht. Frau von der Leyen hat das eben auch getan. Aber genauso wenig wie Sie alle hier am rechten Rand des Hauses in der letzten Sitzungswoche\n\nhat auch Frau von der Leyen nicht ein einziges Wort - nicht ein einziges Wort! - über die afghanischen Opfer verloren.\n\nZehntausende Afghaninnen und Afghanen und Tausende internationale Soldaten und Entwicklungshelfer sind dort gestorben, und ich finde, wir sollten uns aus diesem Anlass jetzt einen kleinen Moment des Innehaltens gönnen\n\n(Dagmar Ziegler [SPD]: Aber nicht bei Ihnen, nicht für die Polemik von Ihnen!\n\nund allen Opfern dieses Krieges gedenken, und zwar egal welcher Nation.\n\n- Sie rufen hier herein: „Das ist unglaublich!“ Wissen Sie, was ich unglaublich finde? Ich finde es unglaublich, dass keiner von Ihnen, keiner aus der SPD-Fraktion, keiner aus der CDU/CSU-Fraktion und auch Frau von der Leyen nicht, es für nötig befindet, auch nur ein einziges Wort des Gedenkens über die afghanischen Opfer zu sagen.\n\nDort sind sehr viele Menschen gestorben, und Sie gehen einfach darüber hinweg. Das geht überhaupt nicht. Ich finde das beschämend für dieses Haus.\n\n- Ich habe alle Protokolle gelesen, Herr Arnold.\n\nHerr Arnold, Sie haben der deutschen Soldaten gedacht. Das finde ich richtig. Das tun wir auch.\n\nJa. - Herr Arnold, ich erwarte von Ihnen, dass Sie dann auch der Opfer der deutschen Soldaten gedenken, nicht nur der Opfer unter den deutschen Soldaten.\n\nDie Zwischenfrage lasse ich zu.\n\nJa. Das nehme ich zur Kenntnis. Ich nehme auch zur Kenntnis, dass der internationale Einsatz damit angefangen hat, dass, bevor der Bundeswehr- und der ISAF-Einsatz angefangen haben, die US-Armee einen völkerrechtswidrigen Krieg in Afghanistan geführt hat. So fing das Ganze an.\n\nDann wurde Ende 2001 zur Unterstützung von Kabul die internationale Mission zum Aufbau beschlossen. Aber einen internationalen Beschluss zum Kriegführen gegen die Afghaninnen und Afghanen hat es nie gegeben. Da haben Sie sich mitschuldig gemacht, auch Sie, Herr Otte.\n\nIch kann ja verstehen, dass Sie das nicht hören wollen. Ich kann ja verstehen, dass Sie sich aufregen; denn Sie alle haben in den letzten 13 Jahren den Arm gehoben. Sie alle haben zugestimmt, dass die NATO dort Krieg führt gegen die Menschen in Afghanistan.\n\nAuch Sie haben zugestimmt, Herr Omnipour.\n\nAuch Sie sind mit daran schuld, wenn in diesen Tagen immer wieder junge Menschen den Terroristen in die Hände getrieben werden.\n\nWurde die Uhr angehalten?\n\nIm Übrigen bin ich der Meinung, dass Deutschland keine Waffen mehr exportieren sollte.\n\nWaffenexporte finden wir als Linke genauso falsch wie den Krieg in Afghanistan. Wir werden genauso weiter dagegen kämpfen wie gegen Ihren Krieg in Afghanistan.\n\nIch würde einem Christian Ströbele nie vorwerfen, dass er persönlich mitschuldig an Toten in Afghanistan ist. Ich habe das eben auch nicht gesagt.\n\nIch habe in der vergangenen Woche auch nicht zu Herrn Steinmeier gesagt, er sei schuld an Toten in Afghanistan.\n\nIch habe wörtlich gesagt - lesen Sie es nach -: Sie haben eine Mitschuld. - Auch das habe ich damals begründet. Ich habe „Mitschuld“ gesagt. Das ist ein ganz großer Unterschied. Schuld ist etwas anderes. Mitschuld haben Sie in dem Moment, in dem Sie bestimmte Hilfeleistungen verweigern. Wenn jemand ertrinkt, dann hat derjenige, der eine Hilfeleistung verweigert, Mitschuld. Das ist erst einmal ein Faktum, noch gar kein Vorwurf.\n\nGenauso ist es ein Faktum, dass all diejenigen, die hier im Bundestag für den Einsatz der Bundeswehr in Afghanistan gestimmt haben, natürlich auch eine Mitschuld an der Verlängerung des Krieges dort haben, ja, dazu stehe ich, aber natürlich nicht die, die dagegen gestimmt haben: Herr Ströbele nicht, Herr Gysi nicht, ich persönlich auch nicht. Nein, das weise ich von mir.\"\n869,caren-lay,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Werfen Sie mit mir gemeinsam einen Blick auf den deutschen Wohnungsmarkt: Wer ein Studium in Heidelberg aufnimmt, der darf sich auf eine saftige Kaltmiete von etwa 10 Euro pro Quadratmeter gefasst machen. Eine Rentnerin, die in Prenzlauer Berg wohnt und dort vielleicht auch ihren Lebensabend verbringen will, weil sie seit 50 Jahren in ihrem Kiez zu Hause ist, muss damit rechnen, bei der nächsten Modernisierung vor die Tür gesetzt zu werden. Eine junge Familie in der Dresdner Neustadt muss damit zurechtkommen, dass ihre Miete in wenigen Jahren um 30 Prozent gestiegen ist. Verdrängung, Gentrifizierung und Mietenexplosion auf der einen Seite, Spekulation mit Wohnraum und hohe Renditen aufseiten der Vermieter auf der anderen Seite, das ist die Situation auf dem deutschen Wohnungsmarkt. Hier muss dringend etwas passieren.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, es wäre die erste gute Tat dieses neu gewählten Bundestages, wenn wir gemeinsam festhalten könnten, dass die Vorgängerregierung komplett versagt hat, als es darum ging, die Mieterinnen und Mieter vor einer Mietenexplosion zu schützen, und dass wir hier gemeinsam etwas auf den Weg bringen müssen.\n\nUnion und FDP haben doch tatenlos zugesehen! Sie haben zugelassen, dass die Zahl der Sozialwohnungen in zehn Jahren um ein Drittel zurückgegangen ist. Sie haben die Privatisierung öffentlicher Wohnungen nicht nur nicht gestoppt, sondern sie auch selber mit betrieben; noch im letzten Jahr wurden 11 000 Wohnungen, die im Besitz des Bundes waren, ohne Not an eine Heuschrecke verkauft. Sie haben zugelassen, dass der deutsche Wohnungsmarkt zu einem Eldorado für die internationale Spekulantenszene geworden ist. Die CDU/CSU zuckt da mit den Achseln und sagt: So ist sie eben, die Marktwirtschaft. - Das Gegenteil ist der Fall: Sie haben die Rechte der Mieterinnen und Mieter weiter reduziert, und zwar im Rahmen des sogenannten Mietrechtsänderungsgesetzes.\n\nDeswegen sagen wir als Linke ganz klar: Die oberste Pflicht muss es jetzt sein, dafür zu sorgen, dass Wohnen in Deutschland bezahlbar bleibt - auch und gerade für Menschen mit geringem Einkommen.\n\n- Ich freue mich über den Applaus aus Reihen der SPD. - Wir haben als Linke heute ein ganzes Maßnahmenpaket vorgelegt. Eine ganz wichtige Forderung ist die Forderung nach einer Mietpreisbremse. Eine andere Forderung betrifft einen Neustart im sozialen Wohnungsbau; meine Kollegin Frau Bluhm wird gleich näher darauf eingehen.\n\nAber zurück zur Mietpreisbremse: Ich freue mich, dass die Idee einer Mietpreisbremse im Wahlkampf eine Rolle gespielt hat, dass dieser Begriff verwendet wurde und dass es im Koalitionsvertrag Aussagen dazu gibt. Mit Blick auf die Vorstellungen der Koalition verdient die Mietpreisbremse jedoch ihren Namen nicht.\n\nDie Koalition will nämlich, dass die Mieten bei Wiedervermietung nicht stärker als um 10 Prozent steigen, gemessen an der örtlichen Vergleichsmiete. Wir fragen uns: Warum soll die Miete bei einer Wiedervermietung überhaupt steigen, wenn an der Wohnqualität überhaupt nichts verbessert wurde?\n\nDas ist doch völlig unlogisch: Frau A. wohnt in einer Wohnung, für die sie 500 Euro Miete zahlt. Wenn jetzt Frau B. in diese Wohnung einzieht, soll sie 550 Euro bezahlen. - Warum soll das so sein? Das kann mir wirklich niemand erklären.\n\nKommen wir zum zweiten Pferdefuß: Diese „Mietpreisbremse“ soll auch nur für fünf Jahre gelten und auch nur dann, wenn die Länder bereit sind, sie umzusetzen. Da stellen sich zwei Fragen: Was passiert nach diesen fünf Jahren? Und, viel wichtiger: Was passiert eigentlich, wenn die unionsregierten Länder sagen: „Nein, wir setzen das nicht um, wir wollen in unseren Ländern keine Mietpreisbremse haben“? Meine Damen und Herren, das macht wirklich keinen Sinn. Sie delegieren hier die Verantwortung an die Länder und wollen Ihre Hände in Unschuld waschen. Das verdient den Namen „Mietpreisbremse“ nun wirklich nicht.\n\nMit einer solchen „Mietpreisbremse“ kann man die Mieten genauso bremsen, wie man einen Lkw mit einer Fahrradbremse bremsen kann.\n\nWir als Linke schlagen etwas rigidere Regeln vor, die die Mieterinnen und Mieter schützen.\n\nWir sagen: Erstens. Mieterhöhungen nur aufgrund von Wiedervermietung darf es überhaupt nicht mehr geben; dafür gibt es nun wirklich keinen Grund. Zweitens. Wenn die Miete erhöht wird, soll sie nur im Rahmen des Inflationsausgleiches steigen dürfen. Das wäre der erste Schritt dahin, dass Wohnen in Deutschland bezahlbar bleibt.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, ich freue mich, dass unsere Forderung, bei Maklerverträgen ein Bestellerprinzip einzuführen, jetzt von der Koalition aufgegriffen wird.\n\nAnders macht das wirklich keinen Sinn. Wer beispielsweise in Berlin eine Wohnung sucht, der muss erst einmal mindestens anderthalb Kaltmieten an den Makler zahlen, selbst wenn der Vermieter ihn bestellt hat. Da frage ich Sie: Welcher Rentner, welche Studentin kann sich das denn überhaupt leisten? Das muss endlich geändert werden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, in der Mietenpolitik muss etwas passieren. Wir fordern eine echte Mietpreisbremse und einen Neustart im sozialen Wohnungsbau. Wir wollen die Spekulation mit Wohnraum eindämmen. Die Privatisierung von öffentlichem Wohnraum muss endlich ein Ende haben.\n\nDie Mietenpolitik ist eine der größten sozialen Herausforderungen der nächsten vier Jahre. Wir als Linke werden hier Druck machen; das darf ich Ihnen versprechen.\n\nVielen Dank.\n\nHerr Kollege, vielen Dank, dass Sie eine Zwischenfrage zulassen. - Sie haben darauf verwiesen, dass die Situation in den verschiedenen Städten und Regionen in Deutschland unterschiedlich ist. Das ist in der Tat richtig und auch völlig unbestritten.\n\nIch darf Sie trotzdem fragen: Was nutzt es eigentlich jemandem, der in Berlin, Frankfurt oder München händeringend eine Wohnung sucht, weil dessen Arbeitsplatz nun einmal in der Großstadt ist, dass meinetwegen in der Uckermark oder auch im Bayerischen Wald die Mieten noch bezahlbar und günstig sind? Vielleicht können Sie das dem Hohen Hause einmal erklären.\"\n13310,eva-bulling-schroter,\"Danke schön. - Meine Frage bezieht sich auf den Deutschen Wetterdienst. Ich würde gerne von der Bundesregierung wissen, ob die finanzielle und personelle Ausstattung des Deutschen Wetterdienstes ausreicht, um im Lichte immer komplexer werdender Datenanalyseverfahren, Modellierungsmethoden und notwendiger Projektforschung mit anderen forschenden Institutionen und auch mit privaten Wetterdienstleistern zukünftig mithalten zu können. Mir ist zu Ohren gekommen, dass sehr viele Beschäftigte befristet eingestellt sind. Ich habe auch gehört, dass Stellen, die dadurch frei werden, dass Kolleginnen und Kollegen in Rente gehen, nicht mehr besetzt werden. Dazu würde ich gerne etwas hören.\"\n11670,uwe-kekeritz,\"Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Am 11. November des letzten Jahres verkündete Landwirtschaftsminister Schmidt, dass er durch eine freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung der Industrie in Deutschland zu 100 Prozent zertifiziertes Palmöl erreichen will. Zu diesem Zeitpunkt war in Indonesien längst eine der verheerendsten Umweltkatastrophen der vergangenen Jahre entfacht. Zwischen Juli und November 2015 wurden durch Brandrodungen in Indonesien 1,8 Millionen Hektar Torf- und Regenwälder zerstört, eine Fläche etwa so groß wie Sachsen. Heute, acht Monate nach der Ankündigung durch Minister Schmidt, erreichen uns wieder Berichte über Brände in Nordsumatra, Brände, die Platz schaffen sollen für neue Palmölplantagen. Einer Zertifizierung des Palmöls steht nichts im Wege.\n\nDer internationale Palmölboom hat nichts mit einer Petitesse zu tun. Millionen Hektar fruchtbaren Landes, Regen- und Torfwälder stehen mittelfristig und weltweit auf der Abholz- oder, vielleicht besser gesagt, Abbrennliste der Palmölproduzenten. Die klimatischen Folgen sind verheerend. Mit den vernichteten Regenwäldern geht bedeutender Artenreichtum für immer verloren, und Menschen vor Ort verlieren ihre Lebensgrundlage. Familien, ganze Dorfgemeinschaften werden mit Planierraupen vertrieben. Das Versprechen von guten Arbeitsplätzen in den Palmölplantagen ist reiner Hohn. Arbeiterinnen und Arbeiter, die sich auf den Plantagen für bessere Arbeitsbedingungen einsetzen, werden eingeschüchtert, verfolgt und, wenn das nichts hilft, auch ab und zu ermordet. Diese Palmölwüsten belegen, wie inhaltsleer die Rhetorik des Landwirtschaftsministers, aber auch des Entwicklungsministers ist.\n\nDiese Verhältnisse belegen das Scheitern einer Politik, die keine verbindlichen Lösungen schaffen will.\n\nEine Ursache für den sich ständig ausweitenden Hunger nach Palmöl ist aber auch die EU-Biokraftstoffpolitik.\n\nÜber 40 Prozent des in Europa verwendeten Palmöls landen mittlerweile im Tank. Dies wird durch die Vorgaben der Erneuerbare-Energien-Richtlinie leider gefördert, speziell durch die Beimischungspflichten. Das Märchen von der positiven CO2-Bilanz durch Biokraftstoffe ist seit 15 Jahren widerlegt, zuletzt durch eine Studie der EU-Kommission, die zunächst einmal in den Schubladen verschwunden ist und dann aufgrund des öffentlichen Drucks öffentlich gemacht wurde. Auch diese Studie belegt: Der Klimakiller Palmöl hat im Tank schlicht nichts zu suchen.\n\nEin einziger Begriff macht die Konzeptlosigkeit dieser Bundesregierung deutlich. Es ist der Begriff „freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung“. Wie viele Jahre brauchen eigentlich die Minister Schmidt und Müller noch, um zu begreifen, dass freiwillige Selbstverpflichtungen nicht funktionieren?\n\nMüller und Schmidt überlassen es den Palmölproduzenten und den Palmölhändlern, die Spielregeln aufzustellen. Diese werden sicherlich keine Spielregeln aufstellen, die den Menschenrechten, der sozialen und ökologischen Gerechtigkeit dienen. Ich muss Ihnen sagen: Das ist auch gar nicht die Aufgabe der Industrie. Das ist die Aufgabe der Politik. Es stellt sich nämlich die Frage, ob Politik die Globalisierung gestaltet oder die Globalisierung die Politik.\n\nGanz problematisch wird die Situation, wenn Politik zu feige ist, verbindliche Regeln aufzustellen. Diese Feigheit können wir uns schon lange nicht mehr leisten, weder auf nationaler noch auf internationaler Ebene.\n\nAuch Müller und Schmidt haben die Unterzeichnung der Klimaerklärung in Paris und der Nachhaltigkeitsagenda in New York gefeiert, aber ihre konkrete Politik steht den Nachhaltigkeitszielen entgegen. Beide Minister wissen, dass wir so weder die Klima- noch die Nachhaltigkeitsziele erreichen werden. Beide Minister wissen auch, dass das RSPO-Siegel für Palmöl längst gescheitert ist. Das Siegel erlaubt die Umwandlung von Regenwäldern in Plantagen. Das Siegel limitiert keine Treibhausgasemissionen und lässt die Zerstörung bedeutender Torfböden zu. Das Siegel ist mitschuldig an Menschenrechtsverstößen usw. usf.\n\nZusammengefasst kann man sagen: Das Siegel ebnet den Weg für schmutziges Palmöl in die globalen Lieferketten. Das ist nicht nur eine Aussage der NGOs. Auch der RSPO-Präsident und Unilever-Manager Jan Kees Vis bestätigt dies. Er sagt klipp und klar: Bisher kann man vor Ort keine Effekte durch RSPO sehen.\n\nDas RSPO gibt es seit zwölf Jahren. Wir müssen heute konstatieren: Es wird schlechter und bedrohlicher. Die Verbraucher und Verbraucherinnen - das sei auch gesagt - haben es satt, sich weiter durch einen undurchsichtigen Siegeldschungel kämpfen zu müssen. Wir benötigen Zuverlässigkeit, Klarheit und gesetzliche Lösungen, die von vielen Unternehmen befürwortet und gefordert werden. Viele Unternehmen haben eigene hohe Standards, die sie aber nur schwer einhalten können, weil eine unverantwortliche Politik es der Konkurrenz ermöglicht, diese Standards zu unterlaufen.\n\nAuch im Namen dieser Unternehmen fordere ich die Regierungskoalition und die Regierung auf: Holzen Sie den Siegeldschungel endlich ab, anstatt ihn weiter aufzubauen! Machen Sie Platz für einen fairen Wettbewerb durch klare, begründbare und verbindliche Regelungen!\n\nIch bedanke mich.\"\n3837,sven-christian-kindler,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Nach den etwas schlichten Reden, sowohl des Kollegen Ulrich als auch des Kollegen Kahrs, will ich wieder zum Thema der Debatte zurückkommen.\n\nWenn wir heute über die Bankenunion und den ESM reden, dann dürfen wir, finde ich, nicht vergessen, was der Hauptgrund für die immer noch andauernde Finanzkrise in Europa war. Hauptgrund waren und sind die hohen Schulden des Bankensystems. Bis 2008 hatten Länder wie Irland oder Spanien zum Beispiel deutlich bessere Haushaltszahlen als Deutschland. Aber in diesen Ländern gab es einen überbordenden Banken- und Immobiliensektor. In der Krise sind dann aus diesen Bankschulden Staatsschulden geworden. Nach Angaben der Europäischen Kommission haben die europäischen Staaten von 2008 bis 2012 rund 600 Milliarden Euro für den Bankensektor bereitgestellt; rund 80 Prozent davon entfielen auf Griechenland, Irland, Spanien und Portugal. Dieses Geld fehlt uns heute für den Kampf gegen die Jugendarbeitslosigkeit. Dieses Geld fehlt uns heute für Investitionen. Wir Grüne sagen klar für die Zukunft: Es muss in Europa endlich Schluss damit sein, dass Bankschulden in Staatsschulden umgewandelt werden, dass die Staatshaushalte und die Steuerzahler für die Bankenrettung aufkommen.\n\nWir dürfen nicht vergessen: Woran lag diese falsche Krisenpolitik in den letzten Jahren in Europa? Das lag auch daran, dass wir keinen Lösungsmechanismus hatten für stark vernetzte Banken in Europa, für die Abwicklung und die Kontrolle. Die Bundesregierung, vor allen Dingen Bundesfinanzminister Schäuble, hat das in den letzten Jahren auf europäischer Ebene immer blockiert und torpediert; sie hat immer nur die nationale Karte gespielt. Dass die Krise im Bankensektor die Staaten in Europa so viel Geld gekostet hat, dass sie sich so verschärft hat, dafür ist auch die deutsche Bundesregierung verantwortlich. Das war nicht pro-europäisch, das war national borniert. Und: Das war und ist am Ende ganz teuer für Europa.\n\nDieser Logik der nationalen Bankenrettung mit Steuergeldern folgt leider auch die Umsetzung der BRRD-Richtlinie in Deutschland. Auf europäischer Ebene soll ein Rechtsrahmen bezüglich der Bankenunion geschaffen werden. Trotzdem will die Bundesregierung mit dem SoFFin nationale Steuermittel weiter ins Schaufenster stellen. Wir Grüne beantragen heute, dass der SoFFin nicht um ein weiteres Jahr verlängert wird. Das wäre das falsche Signal und würde auch dem Grundgedanken der europäischen Lösung widersprechen.\n\nWir Grüne haben von Anfang an eine europäische Bankenunion gefordert. Wir brauchen eine gemeinsame Kontrolle, ein gemeinsames Abwägen, auch harte Regelungen, damit Eigentümer und Gläubiger in der Krise zahlen und nicht wieder die Steuerzahler für die Bankenrettung eintreten müssen. Wir sollten aber auch nicht vergessen, wer die entscheidenden Fortschritte auf europäischer Ebene durchgesetzt hat. Das war nicht die Bundesregierung. Im Gegenteil: In der entscheidenden Nacht hat sich das Europäische Parlament bei den zentralen Fragen wie einer effektiven Bankenabwicklung ganz klar gegen den Europäischen Rat und Wolfgang Schäuble durchgesetzt. Das war auch dringend notwendig und gut so.\n\nLeider hat sich an einer anderen entscheidenden Stelle die deutsche Bundesregierung durchgesetzt, und zwar bei der Frage des intergouvernementalen Übereinkommens, kurz: IGA.\n\n- Ja, bei einem ganz zentralen, europapolitisch bedenklichen Punkt, nämlich bei der IGA. - Was heißt IGA? Es geht darum, dass bis 2024, was viel zu lange ist, die national erhobenen Bankenbeiträge für den Abwicklungsfonds in einem zwischenstaatlichen Vertrag geregelt werden sollen. Das heißt, das europäische Recht wird hier ausgehebelt; das Europäische Parlament wird in seinen Rechten beschnitten. Die deutsche Bundesregierung war mit dieser Haltung in Europa isoliert. Kein anderer Mitgliedstaat und nicht das Europäische Parlament oder die Europäische Kommission haben diese Rechtsauffassung geteilt. Denn was innerhalb des europäischen Rechts geregelt werden kann, darf nicht in zwischenstaatliche Verträge zulasten des Europäischen Parlaments outgesourct werden. Dieser Vorfall - das sage ich ganz deutlich - ist ein Präzedenzfall für die europäische Demokratie. Er untergräbt die europäische Demokratie. Gerade in der Krise brauchen wir aber keine weitere Schwächung, sondern eine Stärkung des europäischen Parlaments. Darum geht es.\n\nWeil wir Grüne die Bankenunion mit der gemeinsamen Abwicklung immer gefordert haben, werden wir heute trotz unserer Kritik am SoFFin für die BRRD-Richtlinie stimmen. Bezogen auf IGA, das intergouvernementale Übereinkommen, werden wir uns enthalten und es deshalb nicht ablehnen, weil wir zum Ausdruck bringen wollen, dass wir die Bankenunion und die Abwicklung unterstützen. Gleichzeitig wollen wir klarstellen, dass sich eine solche Umgehung der europäischen Demokratie nicht wiederholen darf.\n\nDas neue Instrument der direkten Bankenrekapitalisierung beim ESM lehnen wir Grüne ab; denn hier wird wieder Steuergeld ins Schaufenster gestellt und eine Pa-rallelstruktur zur europäischen Bankenunion aufgebaut. Es ist hochproblematisch, dass der gemeinsame Abwicklungsfonds erst 2024 eingerichtet werden soll. Das heißt, für diese Zeit braucht man einen Letztsicherungsmechanismus, einen sogenannten Common Backstop. Das kann der ESM aber nicht leisten, jedenfalls nicht mit der direkten Bankenrekapitalisierung. Der ESM hat nicht die Kapazität und nicht die Expertise beim Management von maroden Banken. Gleichzeitig sind die Steuerzahler wieder in der Haftung. Deswegen sagen wir: Wir wollen eine Kreditlinie vom ESM als Common Backstop, weil klar ist, dass der Abwicklungsfonds die Banken abwickelt und restrukturiert und die Kredite außerdem zurückgezahlt werden müssen. Das heißt, nicht die Steuerzahler, sondern die Banken sind nachher in der Verantwortung. Das ist die richtige Lösung. Deswegen lehnen wir heute die Einführung der direkten Bankenrekapitalisierung beim ESM klar ab.\n\nEs ist schon angesprochen worden: Natürlich ist die Einführung der Bankenunion ein wichtiger Schritt für die Regulierung des Bankensektors. Das reicht aber nicht. Wir haben immer noch ein Problem mit Großbanken in Europa. Wir haben das Problem, dass es immer noch eine implizite Staatsgarantie für Großbanken gibt. Großbanken können am Finanzmarkt spekulieren und zocken, ohne dass sie reguliert werden. Leider ist es auch so, dass die Bankenabgabe das Problem nicht löst. Mit der Einführung eines Risikofaktors geht man völlig unzureichend auf das Problem Großbanken ein. Die Risiken, das systemische Risiko und die Too-big-to-fail-Problematik, werden nicht angemessen berücksichtigt. Nachher werden wahrscheinlich mittelgroße Banken mit einem risikoarmen Geschäftsmodell die Zeche zahlen.\n\nIch finde aber, dass es noch nicht zu spät ist. Die Europäische Kommission hat einen Vorschlag vorgelegt. Im Europäischen Parlament kämpft man jetzt darum, das zu stoppen und Änderungen einzubringen. Ich fordere die Bundesregierung und auch die Parlamentarier von CDU/CSU und SPD auf, hier Änderungen herbeizuführen. Großbanken müssen bei der Bankenabgabe den Hauptbeitrag leisten - das wäre nur fair und gerecht -, nicht kleine und mittlere Banken.\n\nWir müssen das Großbankenproblem angehen; es ist weiterhin nicht gelöst. Es müssen weitere Schritte folgen. Wir brauchen ein echtes, hartes Trennbankensystem. Wir brauchen ein scharfes Wettbewerbsrecht mit einer Bankenfusionskontrolle. Wir brauchen eine höhere Leverage Ratio, damit nachher nicht wieder die Steuerzahler die Verluste von Großbanken ausgleichen müssen. Die Schaffung der Bankenunion ist nur der erste Schritt; es müssen weitere wichtige Schritte und Reformen für eine konsequente Regulierung des Bankensektors folgen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13424,markus-tressel,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ziel der Novellierung der Pauschalreiserichtlinie war es ja, eine Gleichbehandlung zwischen stationären Reisebüros und Onlineportalen sowie ein hohes Verbraucherschutzniveau zu erreichen. Sicherlich nicht Sinn der Sache war, Reisebüros und Tourismusinformationszentren unverhältnismäßig stark zu belasten. Die Onliner werden möglicherweise eine technische Lösung finden, um das eine oder andere zu umgehen. Aber unsere Reisebüros werden große Schwierigkeiten bekommen.\n\nWas kommt jetzt also auf die Reisebüros zu? Da ist zum einen die Einführung des Begriffs „verbundene Reiseleistungen“. Dieser unbestimmte Rechtsbegriff bringt dem Vernehmen nach Rechtsunsicherheit für die betroffenen Unternehmen, da sie in bestimmten Grauzonen nicht wissen, ob sie in die Veranstalterhaftung rutschen oder nicht; die Kolleginnen und Kollegen haben das bereits gesagt. Die Abgrenzung der verbundenen Reiseleistung von der Pauschalreise ist schwierig und gleichzeitig ein sensibler Punkt, da sie über den Umfang der Haftung entscheidet. Anbieter verbundener Reiseleistungen werden außerdem mit zusätzlicher Bürokratie konfrontiert. Vier Informationsblätter müssen in diesem Fall mehr berücksichtigt werden. Wer sich die Praxis in einem Reisebüro einmal angeschaut hat, weiß, was das vor Ort für die Leute tatsächlich bedeutet.\n\nAuch unterliegen die Anbieter verbundener Reiseleistungen - auch das ist wichtig - unter Umständen Insolvenzversicherungspflichten. Das bedeutet, dass sie einen nicht unwesentlichen Teil ihres Umsatzes in eine Versicherung investieren müssen. Das kann gerade in unserem kleinen und mittelständisch organisierten Reisevertrieb dazu führen, dass den Reisebüros rentables Wirtschaften zumindest erschwert wird. Was wir nicht wollen - das haben die Kolleginnen und Kollegen schon gesagt -, ist ein konzerngebundener Reisevertrieb wie in anderen europäischen Ländern, der dadurch massiv begünstigt würde.\n\nDas fördert Monopole und ist schlecht für die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher. Deswegen müssen wir das noch einmal auf die Tagesordnung bringen.\n\nAber nicht nur für die Reisebüros gelten schärfere Regeln - der Staatssekretär hat das bereits angesprochen -, sondern auch für die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher. Erst ab einer Preissteigerung von 8 Prozent sind sie dazu berechtigt, vom Vertrag zurückzutreten, ohne dass es etwas kostet.\n\nAll diese grundlegenden Entscheidungen wurden auf europäischer Ebene getroffen. Es handelt sich um eine vollharmonisierende Richtlinie. Aber diese Regelungen berücksichtigen nicht - das ist ein wichtiger Punkt - die Besonderheiten des deutschen Reisemarkts. Wir haben zu wenig Berücksichtigung gefunden. Der kleine und mittelständisch organisierte Reisevertrieb hat schwerer zu kämpfen als ein Reisebüro, hinter dem ein Konzern steht. Deswegen müssen wir im anstehenden parlamentarischen Verfahren weiterhin fraktionsübergreifend daran arbeiten, hier zu einer verträglichen Lösung zu kommen, für die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher, aber auch für die vielen kleinen und mittelständischen Reisebüros, die nicht nur Arbeitsplätze schaffen, sondern auch eine gewisse Diversität in unserem Reisevertrieb sichern.\n\nWir müssen jetzt die Spielräume beleuchten und sinnvoll nutzen, die wir als nationaler Gesetzgeber da noch haben. Aber wir müssen auch die Sorgen der Verbraucherinnen und der Verbraucher sowie der Verbraucherschützer ernst nehmen.\n\nIch nehme das Beispiel der Reiseeinzelleistungen: Im Referentenentwurf waren sie noch berücksichtigt, im aktuellen Gesetzentwurf sind sie gestrichen. Nach derzeitiger Rechtsprechung wird das Pauschalreiserecht unter bestimmten Voraussetzungen auch auf die Buchung zum Beispiel von Ferienhäusern angewendet. Soll das in Zukunft nicht mehr möglich sein?\n\nÄhnliches gilt für die Tagesreisen, bei denen es Bedenken der Verbraucherschützer gibt. Wie in der Stellungnahme des Bundesrates ja formuliert, ist es hier vielleicht eher angebracht, über eine Wertgrenze als über die Dauer einer Reise zu diskutieren. Das müssen wir im Rahmen der Behandlung des Gesetzentwurfes in den nächsten Wochen in der Anhörung und in den Ausschüssen noch dringend diskutieren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, damit wir ein gutes Gesetz für die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher, aber auch für unsere Reisebüros machen können.\n\nDas heißt abschließend: Wir müssen Gestaltungsräume nutzen. Wir brauchen einen fairen Ausgleich zwischen Verbraucherinteressen und den Interessen der Reisebranche. Das müssen wir umsetzen. Ich glaube aber auch - aufgrund der partei- und fraktionsübergreifenden guten Zusammenarbeit im Tourismusausschuss -, dass wir versuchen werden, das eine oder andere tatsächlich noch hinzubekommen. Ich hoffe, dass wir das noch auf die Reihe bekommen werden, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\"\n251,petra-pau,\"Danke, Herr Präsident. - Herr Minister, nun erarbeitet man ja solche Berichte nicht, damit man einen Bericht hat, den man ins Regal stellen kann, sondern im Allgemeinen zieht man daraus ja Schlussfolgerungen oder nimmt sich etwas vor. Deshalb interessiert mich, was Sie dazu heute im Kabinett beraten haben, und zwar ganz konkret.\n\nSie haben heute in einer Pressemitteilung erklärt, dass die Bundesrepublik mit den Integrationskursen und sonstigen Integrationsangeboten über eine gute Infrastruktur verfügt. Gleichzeitig hat die Bundesregierung auf eine Anfrage meiner Fraktion vor kurzem mitgeteilt, dass angesichts des zu erwartenden Bedarfs im Haushalt mindestens 15 Millionen Euro für die Integrationskurse fehlen. Planen Sie hier eine Aufstockung, und ist die Bundesregierung bereit, gegebenenfalls auch parlamentarische Initiativen zu diesem Thema zu unterstützen? Es geht übrigens nicht nur um Aufstockung in dem Sinne, dass die Integrationskurse besser ausgestattet werden. Ich denke, wir müssen die Mittel auch aufstocken, um die Kursleiter, Lehrer usw. angemessen zu bezahlen.\n\nDanke, Herr Präsident. - Herr Minister, ich möchte die Gelegenheit nutzen, Sie zu einem Sachverhalt zu -fragen. Gestern hat der Präsident des Bundesamtes für Migration und Flüchtlinge, Herr Dr. Manfred Schmidt, in einem Interview mit der Zeitung Die Welt Wiedereinreisesperren gefordert, und zwar - Zitat - „sowohl für Einwanderer in die Sozialsysteme als auch für abgelehnte Flüchtlinge“. Ich gestehe, ich habe mir die Augen gerieben und noch einmal nachgeschaut. Das geht ja selbst über die Forderungen, die wir aus der CSU hören, oder über die Dinge, die Sie im Koalitionsvertrag als Prüfauftrag verankert haben, weit hinaus. Wie beurteilen Sie die Einschätzung des Präsidenten des Bundesamtes für Migration und Flüchtlinge? Rechtfertigt die Ablehnung eines Asylantrags oder ein Antrag auf Sozialleistungen aus Ihrer Sicht tatsächlich die Verhängung eines Wiedereinreiseverbotes?\"\n2379,wolfgang-strengmann-kuhn,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Kollege Weiler, Sie haben angekündigt, dass Sie Argumente gegen den Antrag der Linken vorbringen wollen. Ich habe kein einziges Argument gehört.\n\nStattdessen wird ein Menschen- und Gesellschaftsbild verbreitet, das eigentlich weder zu unserem Grundgesetz noch zum gesellschaftlichen Konsens passt.\n\nWir haben an dieser Stelle vor zwei Wochen einen Festakt aus Anlass des 65. Jahrestages der Verkündung des Grundgesetzes mit einer großartigen Rede von -Navid Kermani erlebt.\n\nArtikel 1 des Grundgesetzes beginnt mit den Worten: „Die Würde des Menschen ist unantastbar.“ Das Bundesverfassungsgericht leitet aus Artikel 1 und aus Artikel 20 des Grundgesetzes ein Grundrecht auf Gewährung eines menschenwürdigen Existenzminimums ab. Ich finde, dieses Grundrecht müssen wir rechtfertigen, verteidigen und den Menschen tatsächlich gewähren.\n\nAber die Frage der Sanktionen ist nicht nur eine rechtliche Frage. Es geht darum: In welcher Gesellschaft wollen wir tatsächlich leben? Wir Grüne wollen in einer Gesellschaft leben, die inklusiv ist, in der niemand ausgegrenzt wird und in der jeder Mensch ein Recht auf selbstbestimmte gesellschaftliche Teilhabe hat. An diesen Maßstäben - Grundrecht auf Existenzminimum und eine gesellschaftliche Realität, die allen selbstbestimmte Teilhabe ermöglicht - messen wir auch die Sanktionen. Wenn wir uns die derzeitige Sanktionspraxis angucken, stellen wir fest, dass die Sanktionen zurzeit diesen Maßstäben nicht genügen.\n\nDie meisten Sanktionen sind in der Tat demütigend, sie sind häufig unnötig, und sie sind meist auch kontraproduktiv. Deswegen sagen wir: Wir brauchen ein Sanktionsmoratorium. Die Zeit, in der die Sanktionen ausgesetzt werden, sollten wir nutzen, um die Sanktionsregeln so zu ändern, dass sie den Maßstäben des Grundgesetzes aber auch den Maßstäben einer inklusiven Gesellschaft genügen, also Menschen nicht ausgrenzt werden und Teilhabe gefördert wird.\n\nAn der Stelle eine kleine Anmerkung zu den Vorstellungen der Linken. Ich glaube, man muss auch darüber nachdenken, ob die sofortige Abschaffung aller Sanktionen diesem Anspruch tatsächlich gerecht wird oder ob nicht die komplette Abschaffung der Sanktionen auch dazu führen kann - wohlgemerkt: unter den derzeitigen Bedingungen -, dass Menschen von gesellschaftlicher Teilhabe und aus der Gesellschaft ausgegrenzt werden. Ich stelle das einmal als eine Frage in den Raum, über die man intensiv nachdenken müsste.\n\nWas heißt das, wenn wir sagen: „Menschen müssen in die Gesellschaft hereingeholt werden, dürfen nicht ausgegrenzt werden“? Das heißt, wir müssen Barrieren abbauen, wir müssen Hürden abbauen, wir müssen Mauern einreißen, und wir müssen Türen aufschließen, die verhindern, dass Menschen in die Gesellschaft hineinkommen. Die derzeitige Sanktionspraxis schafft das nicht. Zwei Beispiele:\n\nTotalsanktion. Dass Menschen eine Leistung komplett verweigert wird, das geht unseres Erachtens nicht. Meines Erachtens ist das auch nicht mit dem vom Verfassungsgericht festgestellten Grundrecht auf Gewährung eines Existenzminimums vereinbar. Dass Menschen gar nichts bekommen, das geht so nicht.\n\nWir hatten dazu schon Anhörungen im Ausschuss; da ist dieser Punkt von allen Experten kritisiert worden, auch von den Verfassungsrechtlern. Wir haben jetzt die Bundesregierung einmal gefragt, wie viele Fälle das eigentlich sind. Es sind 9 000 Fälle. Da kann man sagen: Das sind nicht viele. Aber: 9 000 Menschen, denen das Existenzminimum tatsächlich verweigert wird - das müssen wir dringend ändern.\n\nVon diesen 9 000 Menschen sind 5 000 Menschen unter 25 Jahre. Wir finden, gerade bei jungen Menschen muss man darauf achten und ihnen dabei helfen, dass sie in die Gesellschaft hineinkommen.\n\nZweitens. Wir haben besonders scharfe Sanktionsregeln für die unter 25-Jährigen. Das ist von der letzten Großen Koalition eingeführt worden. Auch das wurde von allen Verfassungsrechtlern als problematisch bezeichnet. Insbesondere Altersdiskriminierung ist da ein rechtliches Problem. Diese schärferen Sanktionsregeln für unter 25-Jährige gehören also abgeschafft.\n\nSchließlich ist es wichtig, noch einmal die Bedeutung einer Grundsicherung für die Gesellschaft insgesamt zu betonen. Für uns als Freiheitspartei\n\nist es wichtig, dass die Selbstbestimmung der Menschen gewährleistet wird. Zur Selbstbestimmung gehört eine verlässliche Grundsicherung als Existenzsicherung in allen Lebenslagen unmittelbar dazu. Eine stabile Grundsicherung ist die Voraussetzung für ein selbstbestimmtes Leben.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n2280,julia-bartz,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Vor zwei Monaten hat die NATO, 15 Jahre nach dem Ende des Kosovokrieges, den oberen Luftraum über dem Balkanstaat wieder für zivile Flugzeuge geöffnet - ein kleines Stück Normalität, das viele positive Begleiteffekte mit sich bringt.\n\nSeit 15 Jahren entsenden wir Jahr für Jahr unsere -Soldatinnen und Soldaten in das Kosovo, seit 15 Jahren verlängern wir Jahr für Jahr das Mandat. Mittlerweile ist das Amselfeld vielen Bürgerinnen und Bürgern nur mehr als Weinbauregion bekannt, und das „Land der Skipetaren“ wird vermehrt wieder als Schauplatz der Geschichten Karl Mays betrachtet. Wer aber denkt, wir bräuchten den Einsatz nicht mehr, den dürfte spätestens die Krise in der Ukraine eines Besseren belehrt haben. Präsident Putin bemühte in aller Unsachlichkeit eine von ihm -konstruierte Parallele, nämlich zwischen der Unabhängigkeit des Kosovo und dessen unverändert bestehenden Problemen mit der Situation auf der Krim sowie der Lage in der Ostukraine. Doch der völkerrechtliche Vergleich des Kosovokrieges mit der Kriminvasion hinkt; die Hinter- und Beweggründe sind vollkommen verschieden.\n\nSeit 15 Jahren stabilisieren wir eine Region, in der ein Völkermord geplant war, der in letzter Minute abgewendet werden konnte,\n\nvor unserer Haustür, in Europa, in einer Region, in der 28 Staaten friedlich miteinander leben, an der Schwelle zwischen Abendland und Morgenland. Nicht erst seit Ivo Andrics Schilderungen in seinem Werk Die Brücke über die Drina wissen wir, welch langes kulturelles Gedächtnis und welcher Stolz die Völker dieser Region verbinden - Eigenschaften, die uns mitunter fremd erscheinen, wo wir selbst mit ehemaligen Gegnern heute wunderbare Freundschaften pflegen. Doch gerade die Vertreter nationaler Maximalpositionen beziehen sich noch heute auf Geschehnisse, die vor 600 Jahren stattgefunden haben, und empfinden für das Amselfeld wie andere für Jerusalem. Diese Maximalpositionen wurden in den letzten 15 Jahren so weit verlassen, dass heute miteinander geredet und nicht mehr aufeinander geschossen wird. Deshalb sind heute nicht mehr 50 000 Soldatinnen und Soldaten nötig, sondern nur noch ein Zehntel davon. Doch die sind eben noch nötig. Im Norden des Kosovo, wo sich die serbische Bevölkerungsminderheit konzentriert, weigern sich die meisten Serben immer noch, die Zentralregierung in Pristina anzuerkennen. Im Parlament, wo sie aufgrund von Schutzklauseln großen -Einfluss haben, boykottieren sie die Bildung einer eigenen Armee. Parlamentsauflösung und Neuwahlen sind derzeit die Folge, aber eben kein Bürgerkrieg.\n\nDie Region bewegt sich in die richtige Richtung, aber nur langsam. Zu Gesprächen und Verhandlungen, wie schmerzhaft und schwer sie für alle Seiten in Zukunft auch sein mögen, gibt es keine Alternative, zumindest keine, die wir uns für Europa wünschen. Dafür brauchen wir den Schutz von KFOR. 15 Jahre KFOR, das ist eine lange Zeit; das entspricht fast vier Legislaturperioden.\n\nSehr geehrte Gäste und Zuschauer! Gerne möchte ich die Mandatsverlängerung zum Anlass nehmen, zu erklären, wie wir solche Entscheidungen treffen. Unsere ausschlaggebenden Kernfragen bei allen Einsätzen der Bundeswehr lauten: Was ist unser nationales Interesse? Welchen beabsichtigten Zielzustand legen wir zugrunde? Was wollen wir mit dem Einsatz wirklich erreichen, und wann beenden wir den Einsatz? Für den Einsatz im Kosovo sind die naheliegenden Antworten auch die Erklärung, warum 15 Jahre gar nicht so lang sind und wir vielleicht noch eine 20. oder 25. Verlängerung erleben werden: Es liegt in unserem besonderen nationalen Interesse, in einem einigen und friedlichen Europa zu leben. Dazu gehört auch der Westbalkan. Eine rechtsstaatliche Entwicklung dieser Länder ist der Schlüssel zum Erfolg. Einen Misserfolg würden wir zu spüren bekommen. Organisierte Kriminalität kennt nämlich keine Grenzen.\n\nDieser Einsatz darf erst beendet werden, wenn diese Länder stabile Demokratien sind, in denen man ethnien-, religions- und kulturübergreifend friedlich über die gemeinsame Geschichte sprechen kann, eine Geschichte, die auch ein wesentlicher Teil unserer europäischen -Geschichte darstellt. Deshalb bitte ich Sie alle um Ihre Zustimmung für die weitere Unterstützung unserer Nachbarn.\"\n8830,barbel-hohn,\"Frau Kollegin Connemann, Sie haben eben gesagt, in der Anhörung sei das BfR nur ideologisch angegriffen worden. Ich war selber da und weiß, dass die beiden Experten aus den USA das BfR eindeutig fachlich angegriffen haben. Können Sie das bestätigen - ja oder nein?\"\n12411,alexander-hoffmann,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Geschätzte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die deutsche Wirtschaft hat weltweit, will ich sagen, einen guten Ruf. Deutsche Unternehmen stehen für Qualität, ja, sie sind beispielgebend für Zuverlässigkeit und für Leistungsfähigkeit. Wenn sich deutsche Unternehmen weltweit an ihrer Leistungsfähigkeit messen lassen, dann ist es nur gut und richtig, dass sich deutsche Unternehmen auch daran messen lassen, wie sie denn mit nichtfinanziellen Aspekten umgehen.\n\nEs ist berechtigt, Unternehmen die Frage zu stellen, wie sie zum Beispiel die Umweltbelange an internationalen Standorten realisieren, unter welchen Bedingungen Arbeitnehmer an internationalen Standorten und in der Lieferkette produzieren und für das Unternehmen arbeiten. Es ist gut, dass dort die sozialen Bedingungen hinterfragt werden und die Frage formuliert wird, ob die Geschlechtergerechtigkeit, Gesundheitsbelange, das Recht der Gewerkschaften oder zum Beispiel der Arbeitsschutz beachtet werden. Diese Fragen sind umso wichtiger, als wir uns vergegenwärtigen müssen, dass wir in einer globalisierten Welt leben und letztendlich fast jedes große Unternehmen international produziert oder internationalen Handel betreibt.\n\nDeswegen freue ich mich ganz besonders, dass wir heute in dieser ersten Lesung die Umsetzung der CSR-Richtlinie debattieren. Das Kernstück ist die Pflicht zur Aufnahme nichtfinanzieller Aspekte in den Lagebericht. Es ist also fortan im Lagebericht nicht nur über betriebswirtschaftliche, über finanzielle Aspekte zu berichten, sondern eben auch über die Aspekte, wie ich sie vorhin skizziert habe. Die Idee dabei ist, dass wir damit das Vertrauen der Bürgerinnen und Bürger in die Unternehmen, das Vertrauen der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher sowie der Investoren stärken. Wenn dann entsprechende Transparenz hergestellt ist, sollten Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher auch die Möglichkeit haben, Handlungsweisen zu hinterfragen und auf Unternehmen einzuwirken.\n\nIch will aber an der Stelle auch deutlich machen, dass das nur ein Baustein sein kann. Denn wir sollten uns nicht der Illusion hingeben, dass in Zukunft jeder Verbraucher in den Lagebericht gucken wird, sondern es bedarf weiterhin vieler anderer Bausteine, um auch beim Verbraucher die notwendige Sensibilität zu erzeugen.\n\nIch will an der Stelle noch einen zweiten Aspekt ansprechen, weil er einfach gut passt. Dieser stach mir bei der Lektüre des Antrags von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen direkt ins Auge. Ich finde den Antrag an einer Stelle tatsächlich gelungen. Denn da lassen Sie durchblicken, dass sie durchaus verstanden haben, dass Unternehmen, wenn sie weltweit produzieren bzw. weltweit platziert sind, in der Lage sind, unsere deutschen bzw. europäischen Standards in die Welt hinauszutragen. Das, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen und von den Linken, ist aber die große Chance von Freihandel. Das ist auch die große Chance von TTIP und CETA. Das zu sagen, lasse ich mir an dieser Stelle nicht nehmen.\n\nDeswegen ist mein Appell an dieser Stelle, dass Sie dann bitte auch die Diskussion um TTIP und CETA in Zukunft angereichert durch diese Erkenntnis führen.\n\nAber mit großem Vergnügen, Frau Präsidentin.\n\nFrau Kollegin, ich muss eines richtigstellen. Offensichtlich haben Sie mir nicht richtig zugehört. Ich habe lediglich davon gesprochen, dass bezüglich dieser Themenstellung Freihandel immer eine Chance ist. Denn wenn deutsche oder europäische Unternehmen international platziert sind bzw. internationale Handelsbeziehungen unterhalten, haben wir die Möglichkeit, auch Standards im Arbeitsschutz zu transportieren. Dann haben wir die Möglichkeit, auch Standards in Umweltbelangen zu platzieren. Sie unterstellen mir gerade, ich hätte irgendetwas behauptet. Wenn Sie zugehört hätten, wäre Ihre Formulierung eine andere gewesen.\n\nLiebe Frau Kollegin Künast, ich komme jetzt auch im Rahmen meiner Rede zu Ihnen. Denn im letzten Drittel meiner Rede möchte ich mich mit Ihren Argumenten auseinandersetzen. - Wenn Sie mir zuhören würden, hätten wir vielleicht die Möglichkeit, noch einmal einen kleinen Dialog zu führen.\n\nSie haben wieder behauptet, dass der vorliegende Gesetzentwurf hinter der Richtlinie zurückbleiben würde. Denn Sie sagen eben, dass der vorliegende Gesetzentwurf nur die Beschreibung der nichtfinanziellen Aspekte erfordert, die zugleich auch Auswirkungen auf die Geschäftstätigkeit und die Lage des Unternehmens haben. Damit ginge es letztendlich doch wieder nur um finanzielle Rahmenbedingungen.\n\nJetzt habe ich mir die Mühe gemacht, die Formulierungen abzugleichen. Ich will sie ganz kurz vortragen. Es steht nämlich im Gesetzentwurf, dass diejenigen nichtfinanziellen Aspekte zu schildern sind, die - jetzt das Zitat - für das Verständnis des Geschäftsverlaufs, des Geschäftsergebnisses, der Lage der Kapitalgesellschaft sowie der Auswirkungen ihrer Tätigkeit auf die in Absatz 2 genannten Aspekte erforderlich sind …\n\nUnd in der Richtlinie steht:\n\nNichtfinanzielle Erklärungen müssen diejenigen Angaben enthalten, die für das Verständnis des Geschäftsverlaufs, des Geschäftsergebnisses, der Lage des Unternehmens sowie der Auswirkungen seiner Tätigkeit erforderlich sind.\n\nDas ist fast wortwörtlich dieselbe Formulierung, und trotzdem behaupten Sie an dieser Stelle etwas anderes.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Sie sehen: Wir werden noch viel Diskussionsbedarf haben. Ich bin zuversichtlich, dass wir dieses spannende Thema in den weiteren Beratungen deutlich voranbringen werden, und bedanke mich für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n14542,michael-roth,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Lieber Kollege Ströbele, Sie beziehen sich in Ihrer Frage auf die möglichen zivilen Opfer des Luftangriffs vom 16. März dieses Jahres auf al\u001eDschinnah in Syrien. Der Bundesregierung liegen dazu keine eigenen Erkenntnisse vor. Sie wissen selbst, dass die Bundeswehr nicht über eigene Kräfte am Boden verfügt. Deswegen ist es uns auch nicht möglich, entsprechende Angaben Dritter zu belegen. Daher kann die Bundesregierung auch keine Bewertung vornehmen, inwiefern die Angaben von Human Rights Watch in dem Bericht, auf den Sie rekurrieren, zutreffend sind.\n\nDarüber hinaus ist mir noch wichtig, darauf hinzuweisen, dass die deutschen Tornado-Aufklärungsflugzeuge in dem zeitlichen Zusammenhang mit dem Luftangriff am 16. März dieses Jahres in der Region des Dorfes al\u001eDschinnah keine Aufklärungsflüge durchgeführt haben.\n\nDas humanitäre Völkerrecht verbietet gezielte Angriffe auf Zivilisten ebenso wie Angriffe auf militärische Ziele, bei denen damit zu rechnen ist, dass sie unverhältnismäßige Verluste unter Zivilisten oder Schäden an zivilen Objekten verursachen. Und alle Staaten sind verpflichtet, alle angemessenen Vorsichtsmaßnahmen zu treffen, um Verluste unter der Zivilbevölkerung und die Beschädigung ziviler Objekte zu vermeiden. Dafür setzen natürlich auch wir uns als Mitglied der Anti-IS-Koalition im Rahmen der uns zur Verfügung stehenden Mittel ein. Zivile Opfer müssen vermieden werden! Das ist unsere Priorität.\n\nFür Einsätze im Rahmen der Operation Inherent Resolve, OIR, gilt, dass grundsätzlich alle Vorfälle, bei denen Zivilistinnen und Zivilisten mutmaßlich zu Schaden gekommen sind, durch das für OIR zuständige Hauptquartier - Combined Joint Task Force - untersucht und die Ergebnisse monatlich auf der Webseite der Operation Inherent Resolve veröffentlicht werden.\n\nFrau Präsidentin! Herr Kollege Ströbele, ich habe bereits darauf hingewiesen, dass es in dem genannten Zeitraum dort keine Aufklärungsflüge der Tornados gegeben hat. Ich kann Ihnen auch noch einmal versichern, dass sich unser Handeln im Rahmen der internationalen Koalition gegen den IS natürlich auf Grundlage des Bundestagsmandats bewegt. Das ist der Auftrag, den der Bundestag der Bundesregierung erteilt hat.\n\nIch würde aber gerne in diesem Zusammenhang noch einmal deutlich machen, dass unsere Arbeit, die wir unter schwierigsten Bedingungen zu leisten haben, natürlich vor allem dem Ziel dient, zivile Opfer zu vermeiden. Das Hauptziel der Aufklärungsflüge der Tornados ist ja, das sogenannte Gesamtlagebild zu verdichten. Damit tragen wir auch dazu bei, zivile Infrastruktur und Personen von militärischen Objekten zu unterscheiden. So sollen gerade zivile Opfer vermieden werden. Das ist natürlich angesichts der zynischen Taktik des IS, immer wieder auch Zivilisten als menschliche Schutzschilde zu benutzen, ausgesprochen schwierig und mit großen Anstrengungen verbunden. Aber insofern ist unser Einsatz, den wir dort leisten, auch im Interesse der Zivilistinnen und Zivilisten, die leider unter tragischen Umständen dieser Auseinandersetzung zum Opfer fallen.\n\nDarüber hinaus ein letzter Punkt, weil Sie das immer wieder nachfragen: Es ist sichergestellt, dass die entsprechenden Aufklärungsprodukte ausschließlich für den Kampf gegen den IS im Rahmen des Bundestagsmandates genutzt werden. Dazu hat die Bundesregierung eine Fülle von Antworten gegeben. Ich will deshalb in aller Kürze nur noch einmal auf die Bundestagsdrucksache 18/11697 verweisen. Das ist die Antwort der Bundesregierung auf eine Kleine Anfrage der Fraktion Die Linke.\n\nFrau Präsidentin, ich vermag aus der Stellungnahme des Abgeordneten Ströbele jetzt nicht so richtig eine Frage herauszuhören, will aber noch einmal deutlich machen, dass die Aufklärungsprodukte, die wir im Rahmen des Bundestagsmandates zur Verfügung stellen, ausschließlich denjenigen Nationen zur Verfügung gestellt werden, die an der Luftoperation der Operation Inherent Resolve beteiligt sind. Alle Staaten, die als Teil der Operation Inherent Resolve der internationalen Anti-IS-Koalition am Informationsraum teilhaben, in den die deutschen Aufklärungsprodukte eingestellt werden, können natürlich auf diese Informationen auch zugreifen.\n\nIch finde aber den Zusammenhang, den Sie dort herstellen, in höchstem Maße unangemessen; denn das, was Sie unterstellen, läuft genau dem Ziel zuwider, auf das wir uns hier im Deutschen Bundestag mehrheitlich verständigt haben, nämlich den IS zu bekämpfen und nicht Zivilistinnen und Zivilisten. - Im Übrigen tun wir das in vollem Einklang mit dem Völkerrecht.\n\nFrau Präsidentin, vielen Dank. - Herr Kollege Ströbele, es geht wieder um Syrien, diesmal um den barbarischen Einsatz von Giftgas, dem viele Menschen zum Opfer gefallen sind. Die von den USA, dem Vereinigten Königreich und Frankreich am 4. April 2017 in den Sicherheitsrat der Vereinten Nationen eingebrachte Resolution zu diesen barbarischen Angriffen in Chan Schaichun scheiterte an einem Veto Russlands.\n\nDer Resolutionsentwurf, der Ihnen, Herr Kollege Ströbele, bekannt sein dürfte, verurteilte die Angriffe und forderte eine umgehende Aufklärung des Geschehens durch die beiden bestehenden unabhängigen Untersuchungsmechanismen des Sicherheitsrates und der Organisation für das Verbot chemischer Waffen, OVCW, die genau am heutigen Tag ihren 20. Geburtstag feiert. Es ist bedauerlich, dass wir diese Organisation immer noch brauchen, weil leider - trotz aller Bemühungen, Giftgaseinsätze zu ächten - immer wieder Giftgas eingesetzt wird.\n\nDie Resolution enthielt auch die Forderung an das syrische Regime, Flugpläne und Informationen zu Luftoperationen zur Verfügung zu stellen und Zugang zu den Luftwaffenbasen zu gewähren. Genau diese Offenlegungspflicht, die in dem Resolutionsentwurf angemahnt wurde, ist von Russland mit der Begründung abgelehnt worden, dies käme einer Vorverurteilung des syrischen Regimes gleich. Alternativ dazu wurde von Russland gefordert, eine gesonderte Kommission mit Zugang zu Chan Schaichun einzusetzen.\n\nDie Bundesregierung hat aber - und dieses Interesse teilen wir mit den allermeisten Partnern in der internationalen Gemeinschaft - ein großes Interesse an der Stärkung der schon bestehenden unabhängigen Untersuchungsmechanismen und der Organisation für das Verbot von Chemiewaffen als Hüterin des Chemiewaffenübereinkommens.\n\nWir setzen uns gemeinsam mit unseren Partnern dafür ein, dass diese bereits existierenden Untersuchungsmechanismen gestärkt werden, dass sie ihr Mandat weiter ausüben können und dass die bereits begonnene Untersuchung der Vorfälle fortgesetzt werden kann.\n\nFrau Präsidentin, ich gelobe Besserung. - Der Kollege Ströbele hat mich aufgefordert, mich direkt an die Bürgerinnen und Bürger zu wenden. Ich darf dies nicht tun. Ich unterstelle Ihnen, Herr Kollege Ströbele, keine Naivität, ich unterstelle aber auch den hier sitzenden Bürgerinnen und Bürgern keine Naivität, weil ich sehr wohl in der Lage bin, dieses komplizierte Verfahren zu erklären.\n\nIch habe bereits in meiner Eingangsantwort darauf hingewiesen, dass es zwei bewährte Untersuchungsmechanismen gibt. Ich habe auch schon darauf hingewiesen, dass es Ziel der Bundesregierung ist, insbesondere am heutigen Tage, wo eine der Organisationen ihr 20-jähriges Jubiläum feiert, diese Mandate, diese Mechanismen entsprechend zu stärken und zu unterstützen. Sie können doch nicht von einer Blockade der Staaten sprechen, wenn es nur ein einziges ständiges Mitglied des Sicherheitsrats gegeben hat, nämlich Russland, das sich diesem Konsens entgegengestellt hat.\n\nJetzt komme ich noch einmal zu dem entscheidenden Punkt. Wenn wir hier einen Präzedenzfall schaffen und einen Sicherheitsratsbeschluss für eine Untersuchung einfordern, ob irgendwo Giftgas eingesetzt wurde, dann führt dies automatisch zur Schwächung der Mechanismen, denen alle, auch Russland, zugestimmt haben. Dieses Vorgehen halte ich und hält auch die Bundesregierung für verantwortungslos.\n\nIch gehe der Beantwortung Ihrer Frage überhaupt nicht aus dem Weg, Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kollege Ströbele. Ich habe darauf hingewiesen, dass es zwei unabhängige Untersuchungsmechanismen gibt. Diesen fühlen wir uns verpflichtet. Es kann doch nicht angehen, nur weil es ein einziges Land gibt, das diese Untersuchungsmechanismen offenkundig nicht akzeptiert, dass wir die bestehenden Untersuchungsmechanismen schwächen. Wir wollen sie nicht schwächen, sondern stärken.\n\nIm Übrigen weise ich darauf hin, dass es schon eine Reihe von bilateralen Untersuchungen gibt. Gerade heute hat sich die französische Regierung geäußert, die noch einmal sagt, dass die entsprechenden Verdachtsmomente derart schwerwiegend sind, dass man bereits jetzt davon ausgehen kann, dass das syrische Regime für den Einsatz von Giftgas verantwortlich zeichnet. Wir setzen aber nicht allein auf diese Untersuchung. Hier bin ich wieder bei Ihnen. Wir setzen auf die Untersuchungsergebnisse - das läuft ja auch schon; Mitte Mai wird ein Bericht abgegeben - der unabhängigen Institutionen. Die haben wir und die unterstützen wir auch.\n\nVielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Die Berichte über Verfolgung von Homosexuellen in der autonomen russischen Republik Tschetschenien, auf die der Abgeordnete Beck rekurriert, sind einfach nur schrecklich, abstoßend und in höchstem Maße besorgniserregend. Sie erscheinen uns glaubwürdig.\n\nDie Bundesregierung steht in einem intensiven Kontakt mit den LGBTI-Aktivisten, mit Menschenrechtsorganisationen, aber selbstverständlich auch mit den Medienvertretern, die vor Ort sehr engagiert und ausgesprochen mutig über diese Fälle berichtet haben. Die deutsche Botschaft hat inzwischen Kontakt mit den betroffenen Personen aufgenommen, und wir prüfen derzeit Unterstützungsmöglichkeiten. Es ist nicht ganz einfach, weil die Menschen aus vielerlei nachvollziehbaren Gründen ihre Namen öffentlich nicht genannt wissen wollen. Wir arbeiten hier also mit Unterstützung von Nichtregierungsorganisationen.\n\nDie Bundesregierung hat auf vielfältige Weise nicht nur Solidarität zu bekunden versucht, sondern auch entsprechende klare Aufforderungen an die russische Regierung formuliert. Zum einen hat der Koordinator für die zwischenstaatliche Zusammenarbeit mit Russland, Zentralasien und den Ländern der Östlichen Partnerschaft, der Kollege Erler, die russische Regierung am 7. April aufgefordert, den Meldungen nicht nur nachzugehen, sondern den Betroffenen bei Bedarf sofort die notwendige Unterstützung zu gewähren sowie die Täter zur Verantwortung zu ziehen. Im Ständigen Rat der OSZE in Wien wurde am 6. April eine Erklärung der Europäischen Union im Namen aller Mitgliedstaaten abgegeben, in der Russland ebenfalls dazu aufgefordert wird, die Vorgänge zu untersuchen und Unterstützung zu gewähren. Die Beauftragte der Bundesregierung für Menschenrechtspolitik, Frau Kofler, hat sich vorgestern noch einmal entsprechend geäußert, und ich habe dazu gestern öffentlich Stellung bezogen und noch einmal die russische Regierung aufgefordert, die schrecklichen Vorfälle zu verfolgen und die Taten zu ahnden.\n\nSeien Sie versichert, dass das nicht das Ende unserer Bemühungen ist. Wir werden das Thema auf höchster Ebene noch einmal gegenüber der russischen Seite zur Sprache bringen, und wir werden selbstverständlich die Situation weiterhin sehr aufmerksam beobachten.\n\nFrau Präsidentin! Herr Kollege Beck, ich bedaure sehr, dass Ihnen gegenüber der Eindruck entstanden ist, dass wir es allein bei einer „deklaratorischen Diplomatie“ - um Sie zu zitieren - belassen. Wir sind ganz konkret dabei, die Sicherheit der Betroffenen in ihrem Interesse zu gewährleisten.\n\nIch kann Ihnen nur zustimmen - das besagt auch der Menschenrechtsbericht der Bundesregierung -, dass sich die Menschenrechtslage in Russland in den vergangenen Jahren signifikant verschlechtert hat, und für die Bundesregierung sind LGBTI-Rechte oder Rechte für Homosexuelle Menschenrechte. Sie können sich darauf verlassen, dass wir der Kritik an der Menschenrechtssituation immer wieder Nachdruck zu verleihen versuchen.\n\nSie haben auf einen ganz konkreten Punkt hingewiesen, nämlich auf die humanitäre Aufnahme nach § 22 Aufenthaltsgesetz. Auch dies kommt für die Bundesregierung in Betracht. Wir werden deshalb jeden Einzelfall - Sie haben einige Fälle angesprochen, uns sind weitere bekannt - sehr genau prüfen. Wir sind gemäß dem Aufenthaltsgesetz dazu verpflichtet, jedes Mal eine Einzelfallprüfung vorzunehmen, um der schwierigen Lage der Betroffenen Rechnung zu tragen. Ich bitte Sie dabei aber auch um konstruktive Mitarbeit. Ich habe schon eingangs darauf hingewiesen, dass für uns eine gewisse Diskretion im Interesse der Sicherheit der Betroffenen wichtig und unabdingbar ist.\n\nFrau Präsidentin! Herr Kollege Beck, ich spreche zwar hier in der Beantwortung Ihrer Frage für die gesamte Bundesregierung, ich will aber vor allem den Aspekt in der Antwort hervorheben, der in den Zuständigkeitsbereich meines Hauses fällt, und das ist der Lagebericht.\n\nSie haben darauf hingewiesen, dass sich die Situation von Homosexuellen in ganz Russland verschlechtert hat. Ich kann diesen Eindruck nur bestätigen. Selbstverständlich wird ein solcher Eindruck, der von vielen Nichtregierungsorganisationen und von vielen Expertinnen und Experten geteilt wird, Einfluss auf die kontinuierliche Überarbeitung des Lageberichtes nehmen.\n\nDer Lagebericht ist eine Grundlage für das Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge, um in den Asylverfahren entsprechende Entscheidungen vorzunehmen. Das gilt ausdrücklich auch für den zweiten Aspekt, den Sie aufgerufen haben.\n\nSelbstverständlich ist die Bewertung der Lage in Russland nichts Statisches - das bezieht sich auch auf die Autonome Republik Tschetschenien -, vielmehr werden wir die Bewertung immer wieder an die Entwicklungen anzupassen haben. Ich kann Ihnen versichern, dass wir dies auch tun.\"\n15494,michael-roth,\"Vielen Dank, Frau Präsidentin. - Frau Kollegin Hänsel, der Bundesregierung liegen über den Abschuss eines syrischen Kampfflugzeugs durch die Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika keine eigenen Erkenntnisse und auch keine Erkenntnisse im Rahmen der NATO, die wir möglicherweise erhalten haben könnten, vor. Die Informationen, die uns zur Verfügung stehen, sind jene, zu denen auch Sie Zugang haben. Sie finden sich nämlich in der auf einer Website veröffentlichten Stellungnahme der Anti-IS-Koalition.\n\nDie sogenannte Combined Joint Task Force der Operation Inherent Resolve hat sich nach dem Vorfall öffentlich dazu geäußert und Stellung bezogen. Wie gesagt, Sie können diese Stellungnahme lesen; sie ist relativ ausführlich. Demnach erfolgte der Abschuss des Kampfjets, nachdem dieser Kampfjet Einheiten der von der Anti-IS-Koalition unterstützten Syrian Democratic Forces angegriffen haben soll.\n\nLiebe Frau Kollegin Hänsel, Ihre Nachfrage gibt mir Gelegenheit, klarzustellen, dass die deutschen Tornados vom 19. bis zum 22. Juni keine Aufklärungsflüge durchgeführt haben. Insofern liegen uns logischerweise keine eigenen Erkenntnisse vor. Das war auch ein Beitrag zur Deeskalation. Wir haben die Flugzeuge erst wieder seit dem 24. Juni eingesetzt\n\n- Entschuldigung, seit dem 23. Juni - und seit dem 24. Juni auch über dem östlichen Teil Syriens.\n\nFrau Kollegin Hänsel, der Zwischenfall zeigt erneut, wie schwierig und komplex die Lage ist und wie schwierig auch der notwendige Kampf gegen die Terrororganisation „Islamischer Staat“ ist.\n\nIch will noch einmal klarstellen: Wir führen eine militärische Auseinandersetzung gegen eine Terrororganisation, aber nicht gegen einen Staat und auch nicht gegen demokratische Kräfte, die in den sogenannten Syrian Democratic Forces zusammengefasst werden.\n\nSie haben darüber hinaus darauf hingewiesen, dass Russland infolge des Abschusses des Flugzeuges öffentlich erklärt hat, das sogenannte Deconflicting einzustellen. Wir fühlen uns - und damit meine ich die gesamte Anti-IS-Koalition - weiterhin dem Prinzip von Deconflicting verpflichtet. Ich habe auch den Eindruck, dass das nach wie vor im Interesse aller Beteiligten und aller Parteien ist.\"\n6665,johanna-wanka,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Das duale System ist die wesentliche Säule für die Fachkräftesicherung der Zukunft in Deutschland auch in den nächsten Jahrzehnten. Das zeigt und demonstriert der uns vorliegende Berufsbildungsbericht 2015 ganz deutlich. Er zeigt aber auch, dass die berufliche Ausbildung in Deutschland vor sehr großen Herausforderungen steht.\n\nWas sind die Hauptbotschaften, die man diesem Bericht entnehmen kann? Aus Sicht der Jugendlichen hat sich die Situation weiter verbessert. Jetzt haben wir die Situation, dass für 100 Jugendliche, die einen Ausbildungsplatz suchen, 103 Ausbildungsplätze vorhanden sind. Wenn ich mir die Zahlen der BA von März und April anschaue, dann setzt sich dieser Trend fort. Es ist ganz anders als in den 90er-Jahren. Wir haben also die Situation, dass mehr Plätze unbesetzt bleiben, es sind 37 000. Das ist Höchststand. Dagegen gibt es nur 21 000 Bewerber, die gar nichts haben und einen Ausbildungsplatz suchen. Die Frage ist: Wie bekommt man diese Jugendlichen auf die für sie geeigneten Ausbildungsplätze? Dieses Passungsproblem ist nicht trivial zu lösen. Es ist außer-ordentlich schwierig. Es ist sehr komplex.\n\nWenn wir uns die Ausbildungsbetriebe anschauen, dann hat sich die Zahl derer, die Ausbildung anbieten, weiter verringert. Das ist außerordentlich bedenklich. Die großen und mittleren Betriebe haben ihre Ausbildungsbetriebsquote erhöht, aber bei den kleinen und kleinsten Betrieben geht diese Zahl stark zurück. Wir müssen die kleinen Betriebe motivieren, Ausbildungsplätze anzubieten, gerade in den neuen Bundesländern, wo sie jahrelang niemanden gefunden haben. Im Juni, Juli starten wir eine Ausschreibung, in der wir ein spezielles Programm anbieten, um die Ausbildungsbereitschaft der kleinen und mittleren Betriebe zu erhöhen.\n\nWenn man das Geflecht sieht, dann ist ganz klar: Es sind ganz viele Akteure in dem Geschäft. Dieser Bereich ist außerordentlich komplex. Man kann nicht an einer Stellschraube drehen und erwarten, dass sich dann alles grundlegend ändert. Deswegen bin ich den Koalitionsfraktionen sehr dankbar für diesen sehr umfassenden Antrag, der alle Aspekte einbezieht und viele Anregungen enthält, über die wir diskutieren und die wir umsetzen.\n\nDer Antrag von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen hat eigentlich dieselbe Zielrichtung, es gibt auch in Bezug auf die Instrumente viel Übereinstimmung. Aber in der Einschätzung dessen, was die Regierung ordentlich gemacht hat, was die Regierung schon erreicht hat, gibt es natürliche wesentliche Unterschiede.\n\n- Ja, es ist normal für eine Opposition.\n\nEs gibt viele Chancen, die wir ergreifen können - lassen Sie mich zwei, drei nennen, zum Beispiel den Übergangsbereich. In diesen Übergangsbereich mussten Bund und Länder in den 90er-Jahren richtig viel Geld stecken, um dafür zu sorgen, dass die jungen Menschen, die keinen Ausbildungsplatz bekommen haben, wenigstens irgendetwas haben. Früher sind rund 400 000 junge Menschen pro Jahr in den Übergangsbereich eingetreten, heute sind es rund 250 000. Das sind immer noch sehr viele. Aber es ist ein absoluter Fehlschluss - auch das habe ich in den Anträgen der Opposition gelesen -, zu glauben, das seien 250 000 Leute, die auf der Suche nach einem Ausbildungsplatz sind. Mindestens ein Drittel der jungen Menschen in diesem Übergangsbereich nutzt ihn, um einen schulischen Abschluss nachzuholen oder um einen höheren schulischen Abschluss zu erreichen, um ihre Chancen auf einen Ausbildungsplatz zu erhöhen. Dann gibt es in diesem Bereich die Jugendlichen, für die er gedacht ist und für die er auch in Zukunft immer notwendig sein wird. Das sind diejenigen, die die Schule verlassen und nicht ausbildungsfähig sind. Sie erfahren in den Maßnahmen des Übergangsbereichs besondere Unterstützung und Weiterbildung, was vielleicht noch besser und effektiver ausgestaltet werden kann. Dann gibt es die Gruppe junger Menschen, die in dem System sozusagen versorgt sind, aber in Wirklichkeit etwas anderes wollen, nämlich einen Ausbildungsplatz. Das ist die Klientel, auf die die Wirtschaft sofort zugreifen kann. Sie kann nicht sagen: Es gibt zu wenige, die eine Ausbildung machen wollen.\n\nZu den Potenzialen zählen die Jugendlichen mit -Migrationshintergrund.\n\nDie Ausbildungsanfängerquote bei den Jugendlichen mit Migrationshintergrund liegt bei 32 Prozent, bei den deutschen Jugendlichen bei 57 Prozent; es gibt also eine Riesenlücke. Fest steht: Die Jugendlichen mit Migrationshintergrund haben sich in den letzten Jahren schulisch verbessert. Nun müssen wir vor allem um sie werben. Wir müssen die Jugendlichen, ihre Eltern, aber auch die Betriebe, die von Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund geleitet werden, informieren. Deshalb haben wir in diesem Jahr die Zahl der KAUSA-Servicestellen, die genau diese Funktion haben, mehr als verdoppelt. Aber es sind noch weitere Anstrengungen notwendig.\n\nViele Jugendliche - die Zahlen finden Sie im vorliegenden Bericht - zwischen 20 und 29 Jahren haben keinen beruflichen Abschluss. Sie haben eine zweite Chance verdient. Das kostet richtig viel Geld, aber hier muss etwas getan werden. Aber viel entscheidender ist es, dass wir verhindern, dass wir es auch in Zukunft mit solchen Größenordnungen zu tun haben. Das heißt, wir müssen präventiv tätig sein und individuell fördern. Prävention statt Reparatur, das muss unsere Zielstellung sein.\n\nBildungsketten - wir haben darüber gesprochen - sind eine sehr gute Möglichkeit, um Jugendlichen Vorstellungen über geeignete Berufe zu vermitteln, um sie zu ermuntern, eine Ausbildung zu beginnen. Wir sind in Deutschland immer stark, wenn es darum geht, Projekte auf den Weg zu bringen. Das Feedback in allen Projekten, die ich besucht habe, war: Es gibt eine große Akzeptanz dieser Bildungsketten vonseiten der Lehrer, aber auch vonseiten der Auszubildenden und der Ausbilder. Die Bildungsketten sind wirklich ein gutes Instrument. Aber wichtig ist, dass man etwas, das funktioniert, in einer anderen Größenordnung und flächendeckend macht.\n\nDie Arbeitsministerin und ich haben uns zusammengetan. Ich kann Ihnen sagen, dass wir 500 000 jungen Menschen - das ist eine halbe Million - eine Potenzialanalyse anbieten können, dass wir in den nächsten Jahren für über 100 000 junge Menschen eine Berufseinstiegsbegleitung anbieten. Nun könnte man sagen: Das könnte noch mehr sein. Aber in dieser Dimension gab es das bisher noch nie. Bei der Berufseinstiegsbegleitung sind praktisch alle Schulen, die infrage kommen, eingebunden.\n\nNun ist es so, dass sich viele um dieses Thema bemühen. Es gibt eine Menge von Maßnahmen, die nebenher und unkoordiniert verlaufen. Frau Nahles und ich haben die politische Initiative ergriffen. Wir regen an, dass in den einzelnen Bundesländern Gesamtkonzepte auf den Weg gebracht werden, damit keiner verloren geht. Wir müssen natürlich auf die Bundesländer zugehen; denn die Bedingungen, unter denen dies in Baden-Württemberg umgesetzt wird, sind andere als in Hamburg. Ich hoffe auf große Resonanz der Landesminister. Einige haben Ihre Bereitschaft schon signalisiert.\n\nVerwundert hat mich in den Oppositionsanträgen - da war ich wirklich verblüfft -, dass so viel über die Ausbildungsplatzgarantie geschimpft und andere Vorschläge gemacht wurden. Haben Sie nicht gelesen, was wir gemacht haben?\n\nIn der Allianz für Aus- und Weiterbildung ist das ein ganz zentraler Punkt. Wir haben dort zum Beispiel die Selbstverpflichtung der Wirtschaft. Wenn ein Jugendlicher bis zum 30. September - also konkret, nicht nur irgendwie - eines Jahres keinen Ausbildungsplatz hat, dann bekommt er bei der Nachvermittlung der BA drei Angebote, und wenn sie bewirken, dass er sich räumlich verändern muss oder auch beruflich, dann wird das entsprechend finanziell unterstützt, auch zum Teil von den Arbeitsagenturen in den Ländern.\n\nAuch das Thema Ausbildungsqualität ist in der Allianz für Aus- und Weiterbildung ein ganz zentrales Thema. Wir sollten wissen: Die Ausbildungsqualität muss verbessert werden, an vielen Stellen. Da sind viele Maßnahmen, viele Dinge vorgesehen, aber keine Schreckgespenster. Selbst der DGB - der DGB! - sagt, dass der Großteil der Auszubildenden zufrieden ist mit der Ausbildungsqualität.\n\nEin Punkt, den ich besonders wichtig finde und noch kurz benenne, meine Damen und Herren, ist die Durchlässigkeit. Wissen Sie, in der Kultusministerkonferenz haben wir über Jahre diskutiert: Das Abitur in Deutschland ist die Hochschulzugangsberechtigung, die generelle Zugangsberechtigung, und alles andere geht nicht, vermatscht das Abitur. Man konnte es nachholen über den zweiten Bildungsweg. Mittlerweile ist es eine Tatsache - die wichtig ist -, dass man mit beruflicher Qualifikation studieren kann. Die Allererste, die das im Gesetz vorgesehen hat, war ich 2008 in Brandenburg. 2009 gab es den KMK-Beschluss. Jetzt ist es bundesweit in allen Gesetzen verankert. Aber es funktioniert noch nicht. Die Zahlen sind minimal. Wir müssen mehr machen, wir müssen die Hürden, die in den Gesetzen sind, noch einmal diskutieren.\n\nDie rechtliche Basis ist gegeben; aber dazu gehört sehr viel mehr. Wenn wir wollen, dass akademische und -duale Ausbildung nicht gegeneinander ausgespielt werden, sondern dass Durchlässigkeit in beide Richtungen vorhanden ist, dann müssen wir an dieser Stelle intensiv arbeiten. Das ist ein Punkt, den ich in unterschiedlichen Anträgen wiedergefunden habe.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, der Berufsbildungsbericht ist Analyse, aber auch Ermunterung und Auftrag, und den nehmen wir an.\n\nDanke.\"\n6813,sigmar-gabriel,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Ich weiß nicht, ob es Ihnen aufgefallen ist, aber der Redebeitrag von Herrn Petzold meinte das präzise Gegenteil von dem, was Frau Bulling-Schröter vorher für die Linke gesagt hat.\n\nFrau Bulling-Schröter hat gesagt: Ihr macht viel zu wenig Klimaschutz, ihr müsst viel mehr Braunkohlenkraftwerke abschalten.\n\n- Herr Petzold, ich kenne Ihre Positionen vor Ort. Vor Ort in der Lausitz und in Brandenburg sind Sie vorneweg beim Kampf für den Erhalt des Braunkohlentagebaus,\n\nübrigens aus meiner Sicht aus nachvollziehbaren Gründen.\n\n- Ich kann nichts dafür, dass Sie vor mir reden. Sie können gerne nach mir reden.\n\nSie können hier jede Frage an mich stellen. Ich unterbreche meine Rede sofort. Ich komme zu Ihnen in den Ausschuss, wo auch immer Sie mit mir diskutieren wollen. Aber ich kann nicht zulassen, dass Sie immer mit doppelter Zunge sprechen.\n\nDa finde ich die Positionen der Grünen wesentlich konsequenter und klarer.\n\nBei Ihnen ist es so, dass Sie vor Ort immer erklären, dass viel zu viel Klimaschutz betrieben wird, und sich hier im Bundestag Frau Bulling-Schröter hinstellt und sagt: Es muss viel mehr passieren.\n\nZweitens wollte ich auf ein paar Sachverhalte hinweisen.\n\n- Nun laden Sie mich doch ein. Wenn Sie mit mir debattieren wollen, komme ich herzlich gern. Denn ich halte etwas von Volksaufklärung und bin gegen Volksverdummung.\n\n- Ich kann schon verstehen, warum Sie unruhig werden.\n\nDie Frage der Grünen bezieht sich auf die Haltung der Bundesregierung zur Änderung der Klimaschutzziele im Bereich der alten Kohlekraftwerke. Die Antwort lautet: Die Haltung hat sich nicht geändert. Es gibt einen Beschluss des Kabinetts vom 3. Dezember 2014, der klar besagt, was wir zusätzlich machen müssen - unter anderem ein Beitrag aus der Stromwirtschaft, 22 Millionen Tonnen CO2 einzusparen -, damit wir das nationale Klimaschutzziel 2020 erreichen.\n\nJetzt gibt es dazu drei Vorschläge. Den ersten haben Sie zitiert. Das ist der Vorschlag unseres Hauses zur Einführung eines Klimabeitrags. Es ist überhaupt nicht so, dass sich der Klimabeitrag geändert hat. Einer der Kritikpunkte war, die prognostizierten Strompreise seien zu hoch und deswegen sei der Klimabeitrag zu hoch. Da haben wir gesagt: Das ist doch ganz einfach: wenn, dann. Wenn die Strompreise niedrig sind, kann der Klimabeitrag sinken, steigen die Strompreise, steigt der Klimabeitrag. Das ist ganz logisch. Es gibt überhaupt keine Änderung des Vorschlags.\n\nEs gibt einen zweiten Vorschlag. Wer übrigens glaubt, der Vorschlag habe zum Inhalt, dass Braunkohlenkraftwerke abgeschaltet werden sollen, der lobt zwar den Vorschlag, hat ihn aber nicht gelesen. Genau das ist ja der Streit zwischen den Unternehmen, den Gewerkschaften und uns. Die Unternehmen sagen: Euer Vorschlag führt zu einer Zwangsstilllegung von Braunkohlenkraftwerken. Wir sagen: Das stimmt gar nicht. Wir wollen nur in der Merit Order alte ineffiziente Braunkohlenkraftwerke hinter moderne Steinkohlenkraftwerke schieben und damit etwas weniger laufen lassen. Das ist eigentlich der Vorschlag. Wir wollen gar nicht abschalten. Dazu sagen aber die Unternehmen: Das führt zu einer Zwangsabschaltung. Das hat sofort Arbeitsplatzverluste und Strukturabbrüche zur Folge und keinen Strukturwandel.\n\nIch habe die Debattenbeiträge von Frau Höhn und von Herrn Krischer immer so verstanden, dass sie wissen, dass man Strukturwandel begleiten muss. Ich habe die Grünen nie so verstanden, dass ihnen dieses Argument egal ist. Ich finde, es ist doch ganz logisch, dass man dem Argument nachgehen muss. Man kann nicht einfach dickfellig sagen: „Jetzt haben wir einen Vorschlag gemacht, unsere Gutachter sagen, dass das alles kein Problem ist“, und wenn die Unternehmen und die Gewerkschaften sagen: „Doch, das ist ein Riesenpro-blem“, antworten, dass uns das nicht interessiert. Vielmehr müssen wir diesem Argument der Unternehmen und der Gewerkschaften nachgehen. Das geht doch gar nicht anders. Das machen wir auch.\n\nEs gibt zwei Alternativvorschläge dazu. Der erste Vorschlag ist - das wird auch von Ihnen vertreten -, die Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung kräftig auszubauen; das sei effizient und gut. Dabei gibt es ein Problem: Der Zubau neuer Kraftwerke auf einem Markt mit Überkapazitäten führt nicht zur CO2-Reduktion. Es führt vielmehr zu dessen Anstieg und zu einer Zunahme der Stromexporte. Das ist das Problem bei diesem Vorschlag.\n\nDeswegen sind wir dafür, das anders zu machen: Wir wollen alte und ineffiziente Steinkohlen-KWK-Kraftwerke stilllegen und stattdessen moderne Gas-KWK-Kraftwerke bauen. Das wollen wir bezuschussen. Das führt übrigens zu deutlich höheren KWK-Umlagen. Das wird uns allen wiederbegegnen, wenn uns der Mittelstand fragt, warum die Abgaben steigen.\n\n- Dazu komme ich gleich. Ich will nicht weg von der Braunkohle. So einfach will ich es Ihnen nicht machen, Herr Krischer, dass ich dazu nichts sage.\n\nWas KWK angeht, muss man wissen, dass man auf einem Markt mit Überkapazitäten nicht einfach weitere Kraftwerke bauen kann, sondern es geht um die Still-legung alter Steinkohlen-KWK-Kraftwerke. Sie haben, glaube ich, gesagt, Sie glauben nicht, dass das möglich ist. Fahren Sie doch einmal nach Kiel! Das ist das beste Beispiel dafür. Das Modell Kiel steht dafür Pate.\n\nDas geht nicht unbegrenzt. Ich glaube, dass wir damit mindestens 4 Millionen Tonnen CO2 einsparen können. Damit wird die Steinkohle einen nicht unerheblichen Beitrag leisten. Ich glaube, dass das sinnvoll ist.\n\nDarüber hinaus wird es, glaube ich, schwierig. Die industrielle KWK kann man sicherlich auch noch ausbauen. Es ist nicht so, dass man gar nichts machen kann.\n\nSie haben die Stadtwerke angesprochen, Frau Bulling-Schröter. Was wollen wir machen, um die Stadtwerke zu retten? Ich habe es schon zweimal gesagt: Wir wollen den Bestand an KWK fördern.\n\nDas haben wir in den Papieren und Vorschlägen festgehalten. Eine Bestandsförderung gibt es nämlich bisher nicht. Wir wollen gasbetriebene KWK fördern. Deswegen haben die Stadtwerke unseren Vorschlag gelobt. Genau deswegen haben sie ihn als guten Vorschlag bezeichnet.\n\nJetzt komme ich zu dem dritten Teil des Alternativvorschlags, der lautet - ich übersetze das einmal -: Verzichtet auf den Klimabeitrag! Legt die Braunkohlekraftwerke schrittweise still! Das ist eigentlich das, was die Grünen immer wollten. Wir werden sehen, ob das möglich ist. Ich kann das noch nicht beantworten.\n\nFestzustellen ist aber: Am 24. November des vergangenen Jahres habe ich die EVUs, auch den BDEW, eingeladen. Ich habe ihnen mitgeteilt, dass wir ein Problem haben und 22 Millionen Tonnen zusätzlich einsparen müssen, und ein Gespräch über mögliche Maßnahmen vorgeschlagen. Die Antwort der EVUs, an der Spitze der BDEW, war: Wir wollen nicht mit Ihnen darüber reden. - Es gab eine Verweigerungshaltung der Branche.\n\nDann haben wir vorgeschlagen, dass sie Alternativen vorlegen, damit wir darüber reden können. Daraufhin ist monatelang nichts passiert. Jetzt liegt seit ungefähr einer Woche ein Alternativvorschlag vor, der von der Indus-triegewerkschaft Bergbau, Chemie, Energie vorgetragen wurde. Das halte ich für einen Riesenfortschritt. Übrigens war die IG BCE, anders als die Unternehmen, immer gesprächsbereit.\n\nEs ist wirklich nicht fair, wie Sie von der Linkspartei manchmal über sie reden. Die IG BCE hat von Anfang an gesagt: „Wir haben Angst um die Jobs und vor Strukturbrüchen, aber wir wissen, dass wir das Klimaschutzziel erreichen müssen“ und vorgeschlagen, über Alternativen zu sprechen.\n\nVorhin haben Sie die Gewerkschaften verteidigt. Ich wäre an Ihrer Stelle ein bisschen vorsichtig und würde mich erst einmal fragen, ob die Reden von vor zwei Stunden noch mit dem übereinstimmen, was jetzt gesagt wird.\n\n- Hören Sie auf! Ich bin wahrscheinlich schon länger in der IG Metall, als Sie zurückdenken können. Ich weiß, wovon ich rede, wenn ich über Gewerkschaften spreche.\n\nIch hätte zumindest zu dem Tarifeinheitsgesetz heute Morgen gerne etwas gesagt. Das erspare ich mir jetzt.\n\n- Nein, die IG Metall ist im Gegensatz zu Herrn Ernst für das Tarifeinheitsgesetz.\n\nDie IG BCE schlägt also vor, zu überlegen, wie wir zu einer schrittweisen Stilllegung von Kraftwerken kommen, damit die Last nicht auf allen Kraftwerken liegt. Das ist ihr Argument. Ich finde, wir müssen jetzt prüfen, ob das möglich ist. Aber es ist doch ein Riesenfortschritt, dass wir inzwischen nicht mehr über die Frage reden, ob wir das erreichen können, sondern dass alle sagen: Ja, wir müssen es erreichen. - Ich finde, das ist aller Ehren wert. Es ist nichts vom Tisch genommen worden, sondern Gott sei Dank etwas hinzugekommen.\n\nMein Angebot ist: Lassen Sie uns im Ausschuss über diese Fragen reden und sie substanziell prüfen. Denn ich glaube, dass alle Vorschläge Vor- und Nachteile haben. Ich halte nach wie vor den bei uns entwickelten Vorschlag für den volkswirtschaftlich günstigsten. Ich glaube, dass die Vorschläge, die jetzt dazukommen, am Ende teurer werden. Aber wenn es mehr kostet, Strukturbrüche zu vermeiden und das gleiche Ziel zu erreichen, dann bin ich auch bereit, das mitzutragen.\n\nWenn alle der Meinung sind - Frau Höhn hat das auch gesagt -: Deutschland muss Initiative zeigen, damit andere mitmachen, dann ist dieses Argument richtig. Es geht schließlich nicht darum, ob wir mit 40 Prozent CO2-Einsparung die Welt retten, sondern darum, zu zeigen: Ambitionierter Klimaschutz ist mit dem volkswirtschaftlichen Wohl vereinbar.\n\nIch glaube, es gehört auch dazu, dass man Strukturbrüche vermeiden muss. Noch einmal: Ich habe immer gesagt, dass ich glaube, dass wir gar nicht stilllegen müssen. Die Politik darf aber nicht so arrogant sein, zu sagen: Wir wissen alles besser als die Unternehmen, die Gewerkschaften und die Betriebsräte. - Ich glaube, dass wir denen zuhören müssen. Wenn die einen Vorschlag machen, mit dem dasselbe Ziel erreicht werden kann, der Vorschlag aber möglicherweise mit höheren Kosten verbunden ist, dann muss man die Vermeidung von Strukturbrüchen und die Begleitung des Strukturwandels gegen die möglicherweise höheren Kosten abwägen.\n\nNoch einmal: Es ist nichts vom Tisch, sondern es ist etwas Neues auf den Tisch gekommen. Ich bin der IG BCE sehr dankbar dafür. Die hat dafür gesorgt, dass es überhaupt so weit gekommen ist. Die Unternehmen hatten sich nämlich verweigert.\n\nWenn Sie, Frau Höhn, befürchten, dass wir am Ende einen pflaumenweichen Vorschlag machen, der keine Substanz hat, und dass wir uns durchmogeln, dann sage ich Ihnen: Lügen haben kurze Beine. Das bringt gar nichts. Das ist nicht mein Ziel, auch nicht das Ziel der Kanzlerin.\n\nMeine Bitte ist: Lassen Sie uns einfach im Ausschuss weiter reden oder eine Debatte hier oder wo immer Sie wollen, führen, um zu überprüfen, welcher dieser Vorschläge, die es jetzt gibt, welche Konsequenzen hat. Ich bin sicher, dass wir noch Bundestagsreden halten werden, in denen wir versuchen werden, zu zeigen, dass wir unterschiedlicher Meinung sind; aber es könnte sein, dass wir außerhalb des Plenarsaals sagen: Das ist ganz gut, wie wir das miteinander machen.\n\nHier im Raum sitzen doch in Wahrheit die Abgeordneten des Bundestages, die an dem Ziel Klimaschutz ein Rieseninteresse haben und die sich, solange ich das verfolge - das sind nun auch schon einige Jahre; seit 2005 tue ich das -, immer dafür eingesetzt haben - ich denke an Herrn Jung und andere -, solche Ziele zu erreichen. Lassen Sie uns also nicht so tun, als wären wir ganz weit voneinander entfernt. Es geht eigentlich um die richtigen Instrumente. Ich finde es eine schöne Entwicklung, dass wir jetzt nicht nur einen, sondern drei Vorschläge haben. Jetzt wollen wir einmal schauen, wie wir damit umgehen. Ich finde, man kann eigentlich ganz entspannt in die Pfingstpause gehen.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n6185,valerie-wilms,\"Herr Präsident! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren auf der Tribüne! Tja, worüber reden wir heute? Über die CSU-Maut, das bisher aufwendigste und zugleich sinnloseste Projekt dieser Koalition.\n\nDie CSU mag sich heute freuen. Ich kann Ihnen aber versprechen, Herr Dobrindt: Das Lachen wird Ihnen noch vergehen.\n\n- Ich habe gesehen, was da hinten offenbar schon an Erklärungen abgegeben wird. - Viele in dieser Koalition hoffen, dass es jetzt endlich vorbei ist. Ich garantiere Ihnen: Wenn Sie die CSU-Maut heute durchwinken, dann geht der Ärger erst richtig los, nämlich mit Europa.\n\nSie wollen heute ein Gesetz beschließen, das gegen fundamentale europäische Prinzipien verstößt. Früher oder später wird diese Maut von Europa kassiert werden. Bei der Lkw-Maut haben Sie das schon einmal erlebt. Ich bin gespannt, ob dann die Maut für alle übrig bleibt.\n\nVielleicht ist das auch Ihr geheimes Ziel, Herr Dobrindt.\n\nDie Beratungen in den Ausschüssen haben alle Probleme noch einmal klar bestätigt. Da hilft es überhaupt nichts, wenn die Koalition die gleichen Textbausteine tausendmal wiederholt. Das ganze Konstrukt der CSU-Maut setzt auf die persönliche Meinung eines einzigen Professors aus Bonn. Das wird den Europäischen Gerichtshof nicht beeindrucken.\n\nDer Europäische Gerichtshof orientiert sich an seiner Rechtsprechung. Einzig und allein die bisherige Rechtsprechung ist maßgeblich, und die ist verdammt eindeutig: Die CSU-Maut ist und bleibt eine Diskriminierung von EU-Ausländern. - Darum darf sie nicht in Gang gesetzt werden.\n\nWir im Bundestag, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, haben die Pflicht, europarechtskonforme Gesetze zu verabschieden. Das muss allen in der Koalition heute klar sein. Diese Mautgesetze sind Rechtsbruch mit Ansage.\n\nSie biegen sich aber nicht nur das Europarecht so hin, wie es Ihnen gerade in den Kram passt. Viel schlimmer ist die riesige Bürokratiemaschine, die Sie da aufbauen. Eigentlich wollten Sie in dieser Woche Bürokratie abschaffen. Ich habe es noch nicht erlebt, dass eine Bundesregierung so blank dastand wie am Montag im Haushaltsausschuss. Die Experten haben die Berechnungen von Herrn Dobrindt, dem Mautbubi, in der Luft zerrissen. Ihr eigener Gutachter, den Sie selbst bestellt haben, musste bei Nachfragen passen. Für wie dumm wollen Sie uns hier im Parlament eigentlich verkaufen?\n\nMaximal die Hälfte der geplanten Einnahmen ist möglich. Damit können Sie vielleicht zwei Brücken pro Jahr erneuern. Das ist lächerlich, wenn man bedenkt, was für einen Aufwand Sie hier betreiben.\n\nDie SPD hat noch eingebracht, dass eine neue Infrastrukturabgabebehörde geschaffen wird. Eine neue Behörde! Das muss man sich auf der Zunge zergehen lassen.\n\nEs werden Hunderte Mitarbeiter eingestellt. Es müssen etwa 50 Millionen Briefe an Fahrzeughalter verschickt werden. Toll! Ich rechne einmal nach: Allein das Porto beträgt locker 30 Millionen Euro. Es muss europaweit ein komplett neues Mautsystem ausgeschrieben und aufgebaut werden. Bei dieser CSU-Maut haben Sie anscheinend die Pedale verwechselt. Sie treten noch einmal so richtig auf das Bürokratiegas. Herr Dobrindt, das ist der falsche Weg.\n\nAllein das sind schon genug Gründe, um endgültig die Finger von der CSU-Maut zu lassen, aber es kommt noch schlimmer.\n\nViele Kommunen in den Grenzregionen haben uns inständig gebeten, keine neuen Barrieren aufzubauen; sie sind nämlich über die Grenzen hinweg zusammengewachsen. Wir können das sehr gut nachvollziehen und haben deshalb den Vorschlag des Städtetages aufgegriffen. Wir fordern die Koalition auf: Wenn Sie schon nicht von der Maut lassen können, dann verschonen Sie wenigstens die Grenzregionen, die sie nicht wollen.\n\nVon mir aus soll die CSU diesen Mist in Bayern einführen,\n\naber sie soll nicht alle in Haftung nehmen, die ohne Grenzen mit ihren Nachbarn zusammenleben wollen.\n\nNoch ein Wort zu den Damen und Herren der Sozialdemokratie, der 25-Prozent-Partei. Sie haben uns hier vor vier Wochen ein paar Versprechen gegeben. An ein Versprechen möchte ich Sie besonders erinnern. Vor vier Wochen hat Sören Bartol laut getönt: Es darf keine Maut für alle geben. Wenn Sie das ernst meinen, dann stimmen Sie heute unseren Änderungen zu.\n\nWir haben Ihnen eine Selbstzerstörungsklausel angeboten: Wenn der Europäische Gerichtshof einen Teil dieses ganzen Quatsches kippt, dann ist Schluss. Ich kann nur raten: Nutzen Sie diese Chance! Jeder Einzelne von Ihnen kann heute klarmachen, dass er keine Maut für alle will. Da reicht es nicht, nur eine persönliche Erklärung abzugeben.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich noch ein paar Worte an den Mautminister Dobrindt richten, auf dessen Mist das Ganze gewachsen ist. Ganz bestimmt hat Ihnen die Maut im letzten Wahlkampf geholfen, aber Sie haben danach den richtigen Zeitpunkt des Absprungs verpasst. Um Recht zu behalten, haben Sie fette Kröten geschluckt wie Mindestlohn und Frauenquote.\n\nUnd was haben Sie dafür bekommen? Nichts als ein bürokratisches Monstrum, das kein Geld einbringt und früher oder später von Europa gekippt wird.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss, Herr Präsident. - Das nenne ich Totalversagen eines CSU-Ministers. Wir haben keine Zeit mehr für lokale Quatschprojekte aus Bayern wie die CSU-Maut. Uns brechen die Brücken weg. Wir müssen uns endlich Gedanken über eine grundsätzlich neue Richtung in der Verkehrspolitik machen. Wenn Sie mit ernsthaften Vorschlägen kommen, verschließen wir uns garantiert nicht. Aber es muss endlich Schluss sein mit noch mehr schlechten Ideen für ein ohnehin schlechtes System.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n1835,joachim-pfeiffer,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn man sich diese Debatte so anhört, ist es notwendig, sich klarzumachen, worum es eigentlich geht. Wenn man die Linken und die Grünen hier hört, dann könnte man meinen, das EEG und die Förderung der erneuerbaren Energien wären ein Selbstzweck oder eine Ersatz-religion und das wäre ein Wert an sich.\n\nEs ist kein Wert an sich, vielmehr ist das EEG Mittel zum Zweck. Es ist ein Mittel zur Erreichung unserer energiepolitischen Ziele.\n\nDie energiepolitischen Ziele sind in diesem Hause mit großer Mehrheit verabschiedet worden: nämlich dass wir - das ist heute, außer vom Bundeswirtschaftsminister, von keinem erwähnt worden - im Bereich der Energie-effizienz endlich vorankommen, Energie einsparen. Wir wollen bis 2050 50 Prozent Primärenergie einsparen.\n\nDeshalb geht es nicht nur um den Strom, über den wir heute schwerpunktmäßig diskutieren, sondern es geht darum, dass wir im Gebäudesektor - nicht nur im Neubau, sondern vor allem im Bestand - die entsprechenden Potenziale heben. Wenn dieses nicht gelingt, werden wir bei der Energieeinsparung und beim Umbau der Energieversorgung scheitern.\n\nEs geht auch darum, im Bereich des Verkehrs die notwendigen Schritte einzuleiten; das steht heute allerdings nicht im Mittelpunkt der Debatte. Schließlich geht es in der Tat auch darum, den Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien im Strombereich voranzubringen. Wir wollen, dass 2050 von dem Rest an Energie, der dann noch verbraucht wird - wenn die Energieeinsparung gelingt -, der überwiegende Teil aus Erneuerbaren gewonnen wird. Was die Mengen anbelangt, sind wir weitaus erfolgreicher als ursprünglich gedacht. In der Vergangenheit sind die Ausbauziele regelmäßig weit überschritten worden: bei der Photovoltaik 2009 und 2010, bei Windenergie - das ist vorhin angesprochen worden -, bei der Biomasse und darüber hinaus. Leider besteht aber das Problem, dass dieser mengenmäßige Erfolg uns jetzt kostenmäßig vor die Füße fällt bzw. wir einen Kostenrucksack zu tragen haben. Denn es ist in der Vergangenheit beim schnelleren Ausbau und bei der schnelleren Senkung der Kosten für erneuerbare Energien nicht gelungen, die Vergütungssätze genauso schnell zu senken, wie es notwendig wäre, um eine Überforderung zu vermeiden. Das ist das Problem, vor dem wir heute, im Jahr 2014, stehen. Wir haben bereits über 120 Milliarden Euro für die Förderung erneuerbarer Energien und die Energieerzeugung ausgegeben. Nach heutigem Stand sind, selbst wenn wir die Förderung erneuerbarer Energien sofort beenden würden, in den nächsten 20 Jahren noch einmal 280 bis 300 Milliarden Euro - die heute schon zugesagt sind - über die Umlage von den Stromverbrauchern abzutragen.\n\nDeshalb reformieren wir das EEG heute in erster Lesung und diskutieren es in den nächsten Wochen im Parlament. Auch hier gilt selbstverständlich das Struck’sche Gesetz: Kein Gesetz wird den Bundestag so verlassen, wie es ihn erreicht hat.\n\nEs gibt eine Reihe von Stellschrauben, bei denen Nachbesserungsbedarf besteht. Damit werden wir uns in der Koalition intensiv auseinandersetzen. Wir laden Sie auch gerne ein, uns darin zu unterstützen.\n\nUm was geht es bei dieser Reform, über die wir heute sprechen? Ein Baustein des Marathons des Umbaus der Energieversorgung ist, das EEG europafest zu machen. Über uns schwebt das Damoklesschwert eines Beihilfeverfahrens aus Europa. Was ist, wenn wir nicht bis zur Sommerpause die Besondere Ausgleichsregelung, auch das Grünstromprivileg, reformieren? Für über 1 Million Arbeitsplätze und Tausende Unternehmen besteht Planungsunsicherheit, weil sie nicht wissen, wie es mit Investitionen und Arbeitsplätzen in den nächsten Jahren vorangeht. In einer gemeinsamen Kraftanstrengung ist es in und mit Brüssel gelungen, Europa zu überzeugen, sodass wir jetzt für ganz Europa - nicht nur für Deutschland - Umwelt- und Beihilfeleitlinien haben, die in den nächsten fünf, zehn Jahren Planungssicherheit für Investitionen und Arbeitsplätze in Deutschland gewährleisten. Damit können wir in Deutschland die Wertschöpfungsketten in der Grundstoffindustrie - bei Chemie, bei Stahl, bei Alu und bei Kupfer - entsprechend sichern.\n\nAuch das ist angeklungen: Nur wenn wir in Deutschland diese Wertschöpfungsketten erhalten, werden in Deutschland Windräder gebaut; denn hier wird kein Windrad gebaut ohne diese Grundstoffindustrie. Es fährt auch kein Hochgeschwindigkeitszug in Deutschland ohne diese Grundstoffindustrien.\n\nUnd es wird kein einziges deutsches hochwertiges Auto gebaut und exportiert, wenn wir nicht diese Wertschöpfungsketten in Deutschland erhalten.\n\nDeshalb werden wir jetzt mit der Besonderen Ausgleichsregelung an dieser Stelle langfristige Planungssicherheit schaffen.\n\nWenn Sie jetzt zum wiederholten Male behaupten, dass diese Entlastungen - der Bundeswirtschaftsminister hat die absoluten Zahlen genannt; ich will sie an anderer Stelle aufgreifen - an den Steigerungen bei der EEG-Umlage schuld wären, dann erzählen Sie wider besseres Wissen etwas Falsches. Wir haben in Deutschland in diesem Jahr eine EEG-Umlage von 6,3 Cent pro Kilowattstunde.\n\nWenn wir alle Ausnahmen im Bereich des EEG streichen würden, hätten wir eine vielleicht um 1,2 oder 1,3 Cent geringere Umlage. Das heißt, die EEG-Umlage betrüge dann immer noch 5 Cent. Damit wird klar und deutlich, dass die energieintensiven Unternehmen bei der gesamten Entwicklung nicht Täter, sondern Opfer sind und insofern nicht für die hohe Umlage verantwortlich gemacht werden können - ganz im Gegenteil. Im Übrigen ist es eine Milchmädchenrechnung: Wenn diese energieintensiven Unternehmen weg wären, in die Insolvenz gehen müssten, verlagert würden, dann wären nicht nur die Arbeitsplätze und die Wertschöpfungsketten weg, sondern dann müssten die Verbliebenen in zwei, drei Jahren die Kosten tragen, die ich gerade dargelegt habe und die für 20 Jahre festgeschrieben sind.\n\nDann wäre es für den Einzelnen noch teurer, als es jetzt schon ist. Das kann ja wohl nicht Ihr Ernst sein; das kann von keinem hier in diesem Saal so gewollt sein.\n\nEs geht nicht nur um die Frage der Europafestigkeit; es geht um die erneuerbaren Energien insgesamt, die nun wahrlich keine Nische mehr sind. Als man 1990, 1991 das Stromeinspeisungsgesetz auf den Weg gebracht hat, hat man gesagt: Wir wollen das mal mit 50 Millionen D-Mark pro Jahr fördern. - Dann hat man dieses Gesetz 2000 in das EEG überführt und gesagt: Spätestens 2008, 2009 ist das EEG nicht mehr notwendig; dann ist die Technologieförderung so weit, dass die erneuerbaren Energien auf eigenen Beinen stehen können. - Jetzt hat manches ein bisschen länger gedauert; aber wir sind in der Vergangenheit auch manches zu langsam angegangen. Deshalb haben wir heute eben diesen Kostenrucksack, den ich angesprochen habe.\n\nWir haben heute die Situation, dass der Börsenpreis, über den hier fabuliert wird, nur noch eine Restgröße ist, weil die Erneuerbaren von der Börse unabhängig sind: Sie bekommen eine feste Vergütung, die ein Vielfaches des Börsenpreises beträgt, unabhängig davon, ob der Strom gebraucht wird oder nicht. Wir haben die Situation, dass all die Photovoltaik, die im Moment in Deutschland installiert ist, Kosten von ungefähr 40 Cent pro Kilowattstunde verursacht; das ist mehr als das Zehnfache des Börsenpreises. Deshalb müssen die Anlagen zur Gewinnung erneuerbarer Energien, die jetzt, wo es darum geht, den Anteil der Erneuerbaren an der Stromversorgung von 25 auf 30 bis 40 Prozent zu steigern, installiert werden, dann auch an den Markt gebracht werden. Deshalb wollen wir eine Direktvermarktung. Deshalb wollen wir, dass die Börse entsprechende Knappheitssignale aussenden kann und so die richtigen Anreize gesetzt werden, im Übrigen auch im Hinblick auf Emissionen. Solche Anreize werden im Moment natürlich überhaupt nicht gesetzt, weil die Börse nur noch eine Restgröße ist.\n\nWir müssen den Ausbau der Erneuerbaren, der in der Vergangenheit bei der Erzeugung mengenmäßig erfolgreich war, dringend mit dem Ausbau der Netze im Onshore- und Offshorebereich synchronisieren. Dieses Jahr wird ein Vergütungsvolumen von 900 Millionen Euro allein auf Strom entfallen, der in Offshoreanlagen erzeugt wird, aber gar nicht an Land kommt, weil keine Leitungen vorhanden sind. Wir werden Hunderte von Millionen Euro bezahlen, weil Strom aus Onshorewindkraftanlagen in Norddeutschland nicht in die Verbrauchszentren im Süden transportiert werden kann, weil es nicht die entsprechenden Leitungen gibt. Das heißt, da haben wir in der Vergangenheit Fehler gemacht. Peter Altmaier hat schon im letzten Jahr darauf hingewiesen, dass der Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien mit dem Ausbau der Netze zu synchronisieren ist.\n\nWir wollen jetzt mit dieser Reform diese Dinge angehen. Aber dabei wird es nicht bleiben: Wir werden uns bereits im Herbst über andere Fragen unterhalten müssen - über KWK, über Energieeffizienz und auch über das zukünftige Marktdesign -, um diesen Umbau voranzutreiben.\n\nDann werde ich Gelegenheit haben, hier im Plenum daran anzuknüpfen. - Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident.\n\nIch hoffe, wir haben jetzt gute Beratungen. Ich lade Sie wirklich ein, sich konstruktiv und nicht nur polemisch daran zu beteiligen.\"\n8815,marcus-weinberg,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich gehe fest davon aus, dass die Opposition diesem hervorragenden Haushalt für das Jahr 2016 zustimmt, und will am Anfang die Gelegenheit der Haushaltsdebatte nutzen, einmal die Grundsätze der Politik darzustellen, die sich dann auch im Haushalt abbilden müssen.\n\nDas ist für uns als Union und für uns als Große Koalition eine gute Gelegenheit, noch einmal die wesentlichen Punkte unserer Familienpolitik zu definieren.\n\nZwei Vorbemerkungen. Es dauert in der Familienpolitik Jahre, bis Maßnahmen Wirkung zeigen. Wir haben den Sachverhalt, dass in Deutschland 30 000 Kinder mehr leben als im letzten Jahr. Die Geburtenrate ist also um fast 5 Prozent gestiegen. Das ist keiner einzelnen Maßnahme geschuldet, sondern das ist einer Politik geschuldet, die seit zehn Jahren Familienpolitik anders definiert. Endlich stehen die Familien in Deutschland im Fokus der Politik. Das merkt man an den Ergebnissen.\n\nMan fährt auf den Schienen, die Frau von der Leyen vor zehn Jahren gelegt hat. Heute stellen wir hier und da die Weichen noch einmal um. Das ist gut so; denn es ist das Bestreben der Großen Koalition, das zu verbessern, was in Deutschland ohnehin schon gut funktioniert.\n\nIch will mit dem Thema Integration - Herr Wunderlich, Sie hatten mich angesprochen - beginnen. Ja, wir haben in Deutschland in der Vergangenheit Fehler gemacht. In allen Epochen des Migrationsprozesses haben wir gewisse Aspekte nicht beachtet, zum Beispiel, dass Gastarbeiter möglicherweise nicht nur Gäste sind, sondern dass diese Menschen hierbleiben und sich hier verwirklichen wollen.\n\nWir werden im Zuge der Integrationsbewegung verbindlicher werden müssen. Ich möchte, dass Menschen, die hier in Deutschland bleiben, eine Integrationsvereinbarung unterschreiben. Sie sollen sich zu unserer Gesellschaft bekennen, wenn sie hier leben und deren Vorteile genießen wollen. Sie müssen auch bereit sein, der Gesellschaft etwas zu geben. Ich glaube, dass mehr Verbindlichkeit wichtig wäre, sowohl für diejenigen, die Integration leisten müssen, die jetzt als Flüchtlinge nach Deutschland kommen, als auch für uns als aufnehmende Gesellschaft, die diese Menschen dringend braucht.\n\nZu der Frage: Was sind unsere grundsätzlichen Werte und Positionen in der Familienpolitik? Für uns als Christdemokraten und Christsoziale sind zwei Komponenten dominierend. Die Erste ist das Thema der Freiheit. Wir wollen Familien Freiräume zur Gestaltung ihres Lebens geben. Wir wollen sie nicht bevormunden. Wir wollen nicht vorschreiben, wann sie das Kind in die Kita zu geben haben. Wir wollen ihnen Angebote machen. Aber die Freiheit der Familien steht bei uns an erster Stelle. Das ist zentral für die Familienpolitik der Union.\n\nAußerdem wollen wir den verschiedenen Familienmodellen Rechnung tragen. Es gibt über 20 Prozent Alleinerziehende, immer mehr Menschen sind nicht verheiratet und haben Kinder, die in diesen Partnerschaften gut erzogen werden, und es gibt die traditionelle Ehe; das wollen wir nicht bewerten. Wir wollen aber den Familien die Freiheit geben, ihr Leben so zu gestalten, wie sie es möchten; mit so wenig Staat wie möglich und nur dort, wo es nötig ist.\n\nZur zweiten Komponente unserer Familienpolitik. Wir erkennen durchaus, dass in unserer Gesellschaft nicht alle Menschen stark, reich und klug sind. Nein, wir haben auch schwache Teile der Gesellschaft. Es gibt diejenigen, die nicht so klug sind, und diejenigen, die nicht über entsprechendes Vermögen verfügen. Deswegen ergreifen wir als Große Koalition konkrete Maßnahmen, um die schutzbedürftigen Gruppen zu stärken. Die Familienpflegezeit und die Pflegezeit waren ein Ansatz, um auch denjenigen, die nicht reich sind, die Möglichkeit zu geben, sich um ihre nahen Angehörigen zu kümmern, wenn diese gepflegt werden müssen. Genau das Gleiche gilt bei Vernachlässigung von Kindern und Kindesmissbrauch. Auch hier geht es um Gruppen in der Gesellschaft, die schwach sind.\n\nDeswegen stimme ich der Ministerin zu, wenn sie sagt: Wir dürfen es jetzt im Rahmen der Flüchtlingsdebatte nicht zulassen, dass schwache Gruppen der deutschen Gesellschaft gegen die Gruppe der Flüchtlinge ausgespielt werden.\n\nWenn wir sagen, wir wollen Kinder schützen, dann haben alle Kinder einen Anspruch darauf. Wenn wir sagen, dass wir Frauen vor Gewalt schützen wollen, dann haben alle Frauen einen Anspruch darauf, dass wir als Staat - das ist unsere Kernaufgabe: wir müssen die Schwachen schützen; die Starken kriegen es schon hin - sie schützen. Das wird auch in den nächsten zwei Jahren unser Leitmotiv sein.\n\nDas Prostituiertenschutzgesetz wurde angesprochen. Es geht darum, die schwächsten Prostituierten zu schützen.\n\nWir dürfen mit Blick auf Bürokratie oder angesichts der Bewältigung neuer Flüchtlingswellen keine Abstufungen vornehmen. Wir wollen nicht die eine schutzbedürftige Gruppe gegen die andere ausspielen.\n\nEs wurde bereits gesagt: Wir haben den Etat im Vergleich zum Jahr 2005 verdoppelt. Nun ist Geld nicht alles im Leben - man genießt es, wenn man einmal reden darf, in einer Haushaltsdebatte zwölf Minuten lang darüber zu reden, wie wir Gelder verteilt haben -, aber der Aufwuchs im Haushalt ist schon ein deutliches Zeichen dafür, dass die Familienpolitik auch in Bezug auf Quantität ein anderes Niveau erreicht hat. Dabei übernehmen wir viele Aufgaben der Länder und der Kommunen. In einer solchen Debatte muss es Zeit und Raum dafür geben, darauf hinzuweisen, dass wir vieles stemmen können, dass wir Kommunen und Länder entlasten und unterstützen können, dass es in der Familienpolitik aber weiterhin Kernaufgaben gibt, die den Ländern und den Kommunen zufallen. Aus dieser Verantwortung werden wir sie auch nicht entlassen.\n\nFestzustellen ist aber: Wer meint, dass die Familien jetzt die Sparschweine der Nation sind, der irrt sich. Das verdeutlichen die Haushaltszahlen, die gerade mehrfach euphorisch präsentiert wurden.\n\nEs gibt noch einen Punkt, der wichtig ist: In dieser über 90-minütigen Debatte sprechen wir darüber, wie wir das Geld verteilt haben. All die Mittel, die wir für unsere familienpolitischen Maßnahmen verteilen, müssen andere erwirtschaften. Um gute Familienpolitik machen zu können, ist es dringend notwendig, dass es unserem Mittelstand, unseren Unternehmen und unserer Wirtschaft gut geht.\n\nDeswegen ist die Kombination von Erwerbstätigkeit und Familienzeit zentral. Wir sagen: Gemeinsam mit den Mittelständlern und den Handwerkern schaffen wir das. Gute Arbeitnehmer sind glücklich zu Hause und glücklich im Job. - Ich glaube, das dürfen wir niemals außer Acht lassen.\n\nDie zentralen Bausteine der Familienpolitik wurden bereits angesprochen, auch das Elterngeld. Das ist ein Erfolgsmodell, das nachhaltig wirkt. Wir haben an einigen Stellschrauben gedreht, die Weichen etwas anders gestellt und dieses Erfolgsmodell weiterentwickelt. Im ersten Quartal 2015 haben fast 950 000 Eltern das Elterngeld in Anspruch genommen. - Eckhardt Rehberg guckt da ganz bedröppelt, weil er weiß, dass das fast 6 Milliarden Euro kostet. Wir wissen, dass das schwer erkämpftes Geld ist. Es ist aber gut angelegt. Wir stehen zu unserem Versprechen: Es wird keine Absenkung beim Elterngeld geben. Das sei ausdrücklich noch einmal versichert.\n\nEin weiteres Erfolgsmodell ist der Ausbau der Kindertagesbetreuung. An dieser Stelle komme ich noch einmal auf die Kommunen und die Länder zu sprechen. Ja, wir haben uns darauf verständigt, die Kommunen zu entlasten, weil es sich um eine nationale Aufgabe handelt. Damit erreichen wir drei Dinge, zum einen die berühmte Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf, zum anderen die Möglichkeit, frühzeitig Bildungsimplikationen zu gestalten - frühe Bildung ist wichtig; jeder Euro, den ich bei einem Zweijährigen investiere, erspart später viele Euro bei den älteren Kindern; wir reparieren ohnehin zu viel in Deutschland; wir müssen mehr investieren; das ist also unter bildungspolitischen Gesichtspunkten richtig investiertes Geld -, und zum Dritten sorgen wir damit für Gerechtigkeit; denn insbesondere die Alleinerziehenden profitieren vom Ausbau der Kindertagesbetreuung. Insoweit ist das eine gute und richtige Maßnahme. Wir entlasten die Länder und Kommunen dabei tatsächlich mit 945 Millionen Euro. Das ist viel Geld, das muss in dieser Debatte immer wieder betont werden. Das ist fast 1 Milliarde Euro.\n\nAber wir sehen auch die Erfolge: Die Betreuungsquote liegt mittlerweile bei 32 Prozent; 660 000 Kinder unter drei Jahren werden betreut, das ist mehr als doppelt so viel wie im Jahr 2008. Es ist wichtig, dass es dadurch nicht zu Einschränkungen beim Betreuungsschlüssel, der für die Qualität maßgeblich ist, kommt. Wir haben immer gesagt: Wir wollen nicht, dass Kinder betreut werden; wir wollen, dass Kinder gut betreut werden, denn nichts ist schlimmer für ein Kind und eine Familie, als wenn die Betreuung nicht funktioniert. Bei Defiziten hinsichtlich der Qualität müsste man sagen: Das ist kein Erfolgsmodell. Die Zufriedenheit der Eltern bestätigt aber diesen Ansatz. Die Zufriedenheit der Eltern wurde in einer aktuellen Studie noch einmal überprüft. Die Eltern haben gesagt: Wir sind mit der Betreuung zufrieden.\n\nEs ist auch richtig, zu fragen: Wo können wir noch etwas verändern? Die vorgesehenen 100 Millionen Euro für Angebote zu besonderen Zeiten - nachts oder am Wochenende -, als Ausnahme, sind gut und wichtig. Wir werden aber darauf achten, dass wir kein System bekommen, in dem Kinder möglicherweise zu intensiv betreut werden. Wir wollen das als besonderes Angebot gestalten. Wir wollen eine Ausnahmesituation gestalten. Dafür ist dieses Angebot richtig. Genauso richtig sind übrigens die Angebote, die im Rahmen des Programms „Sprach-Kitas“ weiterhin bestehen, weil uns das Thema Integration wichtig ist. Hierfür werden wir weiterhin Gelder einsetzen.\n\nDenken wir an das Dreieck aus Geld, Infrastruktur und Zeit. Über das Kindergeld, die Kinderfreibeträge und den Entlastungsbetrag für Alleinerziehende, der nach zehn Jahren endlich um 600 Euro erhöht wurde - das war dringend notwendig, und wir haben das gemacht -, wurde schon viel gesagt. Wir haben auch das Kindergeld und den Kinderzuschlag erhöht. Damit schaffen wir es, mehr und mehr Familien aus dem Hartz-IV-Bezug zu holen. Wir geben ihnen damit die Möglichkeit, ihr Leben zu gestalten.\n\nIch möchte zwei, drei Besonderheiten dieses Haushalts ansprechen. Gelegentlich sind es die Kleinigkeiten, die wichtig sind. Ich danke dem Alois ganz herzlich für die große Unterstützung in dieser Frage. Uns als Union waren einige Dinge besonders wichtig.\n\nStichwort: schutzbedürftige Gruppen. Wir als Staat haben die Aufgabe, diese Gruppen, die es nicht alleine können, zu schützen. Denn sie haben nichts anderes als uns. Einige Erfolge haben wir jetzt auch im Haushalt umsetzen können. Ich will nur zwei, drei Dinge ansprechen.\n\nDas eine ist eine Kinderschutzhotline, die jetzt eingerichtet werden soll.\n\nDas ist keine große Geschichte, aber hier besteht die Möglichkeit, dass wir Medizinern die Chance bieten, wenn zum Beispiel am Wochenende Eltern mit Kindern in die Notfallambulanz kommen, bei denen man nicht genau weiß, was da passiert ist, Unterstützung und Beratung zu bekommen. Wir haben im Jahr 40 000 Inobhutnahmen. Wir haben über 120 000 Gefährdungssituationen von Kindern und Jugendlichen. Bei jedem Kind muss geschaut werden, was dort passiert und wie wir eingreifen können. Deswegen ist es gut und richtig, dass wir diese Kinderschutzhotline jetzt implementieren.\n\nWeiter werden wir Frauen und Flüchtlingsfrauen, die vergewaltigt wurden, die auf der Flucht viel Leid erlebt haben, jetzt mit einem Beratungsangebot unterstützen.\n\nBereits angesprochen wurde - das finde ich absolut wichtig - die finanzielle Ausgestaltung der Kommission zur Aufarbeitung des Kindesmissbrauchs.\n\nEhrenamt ist Teil dieser Gesellschaft. Wir erleben gerade etwas Faszinierendes; das wurde von der Kollegin Gottschalck bereits angesprochen. Ehrenamt ist eine gewisse Zeit auch für sich tragend, aber irgendwann muss es Strukturen geben, irgendwann muss es eine Organisation geben. Die 10 000 neuen Stellen sind wichtig. Jetzt wird es darauf ankommen, dass wir uns das Verfahren genau anschauen. Das, was diese Menschen in unserem Land momentan hinsichtlich der Flüchtlingswelle leisten, ist hervorragend, aber es muss jetzt auch gestärkt und längerfristig aufgebaut werden.\n\nZusammenfassend kann man sagen: Dieser Haushalt bildet tatsächlich das ab, was uns trägt. Wir schaffen ein bisschen mehr Freiheit und Entscheidungsfreiheit für die Familien, und wir generieren Freiräume. Auf der anderen Seite schützen wir die Schwachen. Das, was diese Gesellschaft auszeichnet, das Ehrenamtliche, das Engagement der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft - weg von Politik -, werden wir weiter stärken. Das ist in diesem Haushalt wieder einmal gelungen.\n\nInsoweit kann ich mir gut vorstellen, dass die Opposition diesen Haushalt zumindest nicht ablehnt. Das wäre auch ein Zeichen von Anerkennung. Im Übrigen darf ich diese Anerkennung mit Blick auf die Opposition gerne zurückgeben. Ich finde unsere Haushaltsdebatten inhaltlich wirklich gut. Ich danke an dieser Stelle der Opposition auch für sachliche Kritik. Das hat man nicht überall so. Herzlichen Dank dafür und herzlichen Dank für diesen tollen Entwurf!\"\n11485,irene-mihalic,\"Frau Ministerin Hendricks, ich finde es gut, dass Sie für die gesamte Bundesregierung die Antwort gegeben haben, dass ein Behördenleiter selbstverständlich die Verantwortung trägt, wenn es in seiner Behörde offensichtlich Defizite gibt.\n\nHerr Krings, Sie sagen, man könne jetzt noch keinerlei voreilige Schlüsse dahin gehend ziehen, was das Ergebnis dieser Untersuchung betrifft. Der Bericht liegt ja nunmehr vor. Sie haben uns diesen Bericht sozusagen vertraulich bei der Geheimschutzstelle vorgelegt, und wir konnten diesen Bericht auch einsehen. Aber ich finde, es ist schon ein merkwürdiger Vorgang, dass Sie selbst, das Bundesinnenministerium, Teile dieses Berichts in einer Pressemitteilung an die Öffentlichkeit bringen. Deswegen möchte ich an Sie die Fragen richten: Warum ist dieser Bericht überhaupt als vertraulich eingestuft? Welche Punkte sind es ganz konkret, die die Öffentlichkeit nicht erfahren soll? Das Handeln, das Sie da an den Tag legen - einerseits stufen Sie als vertraulich ein, andererseits gehen Sie selbst damit an die Öffentlichkeit -, finde ich schon bemerkenswert.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n10279,alexander-dobrindt,\"Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben es heute mit einer Änderung des Luftverkehrsgesetzes zu tun, auf die in den vergangenen Monaten ganz viele sehnsüchtig gewartet haben, weil dadurch Rechtssicherheit geschaffen wird; denn zukünftig können an unseren medizinischen Einrichtungen - an Krankenhäusern in den Landkreisen bzw. in der Fläche - die Landestellen für die Rettungshubschrauber weiter betrieben werden. Es ist ein wichtiges Signal, weil wir in den vergangenen Monaten mit Blick auf die Krankenhauslandschaft in starkem Maße Diskussionen darüber hatten - resultierend aus einer EU-Rechtsverordnung -, ob die medizinische Versorgung zukünftig auch über den Hubschraubertransport sichergestellt werden kann. Das gelingt uns jetzt mit diesem Gesetz. Wir schaffen die Rechtssicherheit, dass die Nutzung von Landestellen für Rettungshubschrauber gesichert ist, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nWie Sie wissen, bestand lange Unsicherheit hinsichtlich des regelmäßigen Anflugs vieler Hubschrauberlandestellen von medizinischen Einrichtungen. Grundsätzlich bedürfen Flugplätze - und damit auch Landestellen der Luftrettung mit Hubschraubern - einer Genehmigung, wofür eine ganze Reihe von Anforderungen zu erfüllen sind. Stark bebaute, hindernisreiche Regionen stellen jedoch eine besondere Herausforderung beim Landen und Starten von Rettungshubschraubern dar und machen die Erteilung einer solchen Genehmigung gerade in innerstädtischen Bereichen oftmals schwierig.\n\nDeshalb haben wir mit unserem Zukunftsplan dafür gesorgt, dass die bisherigen Landestellen in sogenannte Landestellen von öffentlichem Interesse umgewandelt werden, dass weiterhin jede Landestelle bei einer unmittelbaren Notlage eines Patienten angeflogen werden kann, wenn der Pilot dies als sicher einschätzt. Wir haben jetzt erstmal eine Liste aller zukünftigen und bestehenden Landestellen an Krankenhäusern erstellt, wo grundsätzlich eine entsprechende Nutzung gegeben ist. Mit dieser zukunftssicheren Rechtsgrundlage können die Landestellen langanhaltend genutzt werden und unterliegen keiner Genehmigungspflicht als klassischer Flugplatz mehr.\n\nDas heißt, die Botschaft an die Regionen, die Landkreise und die Städte, welche Krankenhäuser mit Landestellen betreiben, lautet: Alle Hubschrauberlandestellen an den Krankenhäusern können weiterbetrieben werden. Keine einzige muss geschlossen werden, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nWeiterhin haben wir in diesem Gesetz auch eine Regelung aufgenommen, die dazu beiträgt, dass die Zukunftsfähigkeit des Luftverkehrs insgesamt - gerade im Hinblick auf den wachsenden Personenverkehr - gesichert wird. Wir alle wissen, dass es nach den Prognosen ansteigende Passagierzahlen in den nächsten Jahren - sie werden sich danach fast verdoppeln - geben wird. Das heißt, es wird auch eine deutliche Steigerung der Flugbewegungen geben.\n\nAngesichts einer solchen Prognose muss man darauf achten, dass vor allem die Akzeptanz in der Öffentlichkeit für Flughäfen, für den Flugverkehr und auch für die steigende Zahl von Starts und Landungen beim Luftverkehr bestehen bleibt. Um diese Akzeptanz langfristig zu erhöhen, werden wir mit der in diesem Gesetz enthaltenen Neuregelung sicherstellen, dass zukünftig beim Bau zusätzlicher Start- und Landebahnen oder beim Neubau von Flughäfen die gesamte räumliche Entwicklung in die Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfung einbezogen wird. Damit erfassen wir auch jene Bereiche, in denen Beeinträchtigungen, vor allem natürlich durch Lärm beim An- und Abflugverkehr, zukünftig nicht ausgeschlossen werden können.\n\nDas ist eine grundlegend andere Herangehensweise als in der Vergangenheit. In der Vergangenheit haben wir sehr klar definiert: Wo wird durch welche Flugbewegungen Lärm produziert werden? Genau das ist dann auch geprüft und genehmigt worden. Jetzt ist unsere Herangehensweise davon geprägt, dass auch möglicher zukünftiger Lärm aufgrund von Veränderungen am Flugplatz schon im Planfeststellungsverfahren mit berücksichtigt werden muss. Damit schaffen wir für die betroffenen Anwohner deutlich mehr Sicherheit vor zukünftig entstehendem Lärm. Das heißt, auch die Prognosen zu Lärmbelastungen spielen zukünftig eine Rolle, wenn es um die Genehmigung geht. Damit werden Konflikte, die wir heute oftmals erleben, von vornherein ausgeschlossen. Die Bevölkerung wird informiert. Dadurch wird die Akzeptanz für Flughäfen und Flugbewegungen erhöht, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nWir haben in diesem Gesetz zur Änderung des Luftverkehrsgesetzes auch Regelungen gefunden, die Ausfluss intensiver Debatten der in meinem Haus nach dem Absturz der Germanwings-Maschine eingesetzten Taskforce sind. Wir haben mit dieser Taskforce sowohl die Unternehmen als auch die Wissenschaft, die Verwaltung und die Politik zusammengebracht, um Sicherheitsregelwerke, die wir im Bereich des Luftverkehrs haben, weiterzuentwickeln. Diese Taskforce, in der alle gemeinsam - die Fluggesellschaften, das Ministerium, das Luftfahrt-Bundesamt, die Berufsverbände, die Flugmediziner - viele Wochen lang unter dem Dach des Bundesverbands der Deutschen Luftverkehrswirtschaft eine Debatte geführt haben, hat uns eine Weiterentwicklung unserer Regeln empfohlen. Diese Empfehlung wollen wir mit diesem Gesetz umsetzen.\n\nDer Abschlussbericht hat sich intensiv mit der Frage befasst: Können wir Verbesserungen bei den Kontrollmechanismen im Bereich des Luftverkehrs durchsetzen? Wir haben uns in intensiven Beratungen mit den Kolleginnen und Kollegen aus dem Verkehrsausschuss - übrigens auch innerhalb der Koalition - mit dem Abschlussbericht beschäftigt. Ich möchte allen Kolleginnen und Kollegen meinen ausdrücklichen Dank aussprechen, die in einer nicht ganz einfachen Situation bereit waren, gemeinsame Lösungen zu finden, und jetzt auch bereit sind, sie mit dem Gesetzeswerk konsequent umzusetzen.\n\nEin zentraler Punkt war, dass wir zukünftig Piloten stichprobenartig auf den Konsum von Alkohol, Drogen und Medikamenten kontrollieren werden. Meine Damen und Herren, Experten weltweit gehen davon aus, dass stichprobenartige Kontrollen des Konsums von Alkohol, Drogen und Medikamenten im Flugverkehr einen positiven Effekt haben und die betriebliche Sicherheit in der Luftfahrt erhöhen. Genau das ist unser Beweggrund. Es geht nicht um Verdächtigungen gegenüber Pilotinnen und Piloten, sondern schlichtweg darum, dass wir mit einer Kontrollinstanz dafür sorgen, dass ein Stück mehr Sicherheit entsteht; denn die Kontrollen führen natürlich dazu, dass auch untereinander eine stärkere Beobachtung des Verhaltens stattfindet. Verhaltensweisen können innerhalb der Luftfahrtunternehmen mit Vertrauenspersonen besprochen werden. Damit kann ein möglicher Schaden präventiv ausgeschlossen werden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir wissen, dass die Luftfahrtunternehmen hier in der Verantwortung stehen, diese Regelungen auch umzusetzen. Wir verpflichten deswegen die Luftfahrtunternehmen, vor Dienstbeginn stichprobenartig Kontrollen durchzuführen. Bisher fehlt es im Luftverkehr an solchen ausdrücklichen und sanktionsbewehrten Verboten, wie wir sie im Bereich Straßenverkehr haben. Das ändern wir jetzt. Darüber hinaus wird das Luftfahrt-Bundesamt ermächtigt, solche Kontrollen unangemeldet und bei allen in Deutschland tätigen Luftfahrzeugführern durchzuführen und Verstöße mit Bußgeld zu ahnden. Ich bin überzeugt: Mit dieser Kombination aus gemeinsamer unternehmerischer und behördlicher Verantwortung leisten wir einen wichtigen Beitrag zur weiteren Stärkung der Verkehrssicherheit in der Zivilluftfahrt.\n\nZusätzlich richten wir eine flugmedizinische Datenbank über die Tauglichkeit von Piloten ein und stellen damit eine lückenlose und nachvollziehbare Aufsicht durch die anerkannten flugmedizinischen Sachverständigen und flugmedizinischen Zentren sicher. Zugleich passen wir damit unsere luftrechtlichen Bestimmungen in Bezug auf das fliegende Personal in der Zivilluftfahrt an. Untersuchungsergebnisse zur Tauglichkeit werden - unter Einhaltung des Datenschutzes - personenbezogen gespeichert und dem ärztlichen Personal in den Luftfahrtbehörden uneingeschränkt übermittelt.\n\nDie Änderungen im vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf sind für uns in der Tat ein bedeutender Schritt. Eine entsprechende Diskussion gibt es nicht erst seit wenigen Monaten oder einem Jahr, sondern der Prozess dauert schon viele Jahre an. Es geht um die Abwägung zwischen dem Interesse von Behörden, Daten zu sammeln, und der berechtigten Forderung der Betroffenen nach Datenschutz. Die Fachkolleginnen und -kollegen des Deutschen Bundestages haben sich in der Vergangenheit immer wieder mit dieser Frage auseinandergesetzt. Die aktuelle Rechtslage war das Ergebnis einer intensiven Debatte. Das Ergebnis war eine Pseudonymisierung der Daten, sodass den Behörden nur anonymisierte und keine personenbezogen Daten vorliegen.\n\nWir haben uns jetzt entschlossen, einen anderen Weg zu gehen. Es wird eine flugmedizinische Datenbank eingerichtet, in der alle Tauglichkeitszeugnisse und medizinischen Untersuchungsbefunde gespeichert werden, und zwar personenbezogen. Zugriff auf diese Datenbank haben ausschließlich die medizinischen Sachverständigen des Luftfahrt-Bundesamtes und deren Mitarbeiter. Dabei ist zu betonen, dass wir mit der Einführung der Datenbank die Flugmediziner in die Lage versetzen, festzustellen, ob ein sogenanntes Ärztehopping stattfindet. In der Vergangenheit wurde vielfach kritisiert, dass Ärzte nicht in die Lage versetzt werden, festzustellen, ob ein Patient schon vielfache medizinische Untersuchungen an anderen Stellen vornehmen ließ, dies aber dem zuletzt untersuchenden Arzt nicht zur Kenntnis gebracht hat.\n\nDas kann durch die neue Regelung ausgeschlossen werden. Wir versetzen die Ärzte in die Lage, festzustellen, ob Ärztehopping stattfindet. Wir versetzen die Ärzte in die Lage, festzustellen, ob ihr Patient Voruntersuchungen hatte. Wenn sich daraus ein Verdacht ergibt, dann kann sich ein Arzt an das LBA wenden, das auf die Datenbank zugreifen und nachschauen kann. So kann man klären, ob es sich möglicherweise um eine Gefährdungssituation handelt, bei der man einschreiten muss.\n\nIch weiß, dass die Diskussion und der Abwägungsprozess zwischen Datenschutz und einem Mehr an Transparenz den Kolleginnen und Kollegen viel abverlangt hat. Ich weiß, dass es nicht ganz einfach ist, all die Argumente, die in der Vergangenheit gegolten haben, mit neuen Argumenten anzureichern, um zu einer anderen Entscheidung zu kommen. Aber ich weiß, dass dies der richtige Weg ist.\n\nIch möchte mich ausdrücklich bei Ihnen allen für die Diskussion und die Begleitung der Taskforce bedanken. Die neuen Regelungen sind ein richtiger Schritt, um die Sicherheit im Flugverkehr zu stärken und um das Vertrauen in die Luftfahrt aufrechtzuerhalten.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n1953,harald-terpe,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Ich bekam mit auf den Weg, dass ich jetzt mit Lob beginnen soll. Lassen Sie mich deswegen meine Ausführungen mit drei Bemerkungen zur Finanzierung beginnen:\n\nIch halte die These von der nachhaltigen Finanzierung für gewagt, wenn man gleichzeitig einräumt, dass es vielleicht für die nächsten vier Jahre eine Lösung sein könnte. Das ist natürlich nicht nachhaltig,\n\ninsbesondere dann nicht, wenn die Finanzierung des Risikos der Kostenentwicklung allein bei den Versicherten bleibt -\n\nund das so lange, wie die das überhaupt tragen können. Deswegen war unser Vorschlag, zu fragen, ob wir die Arbeitskosten nicht auch dadurch entlasten können, dass wir die Finanzierung in der Gesellschaft gerechter verteilen. Erster Punkt.\n\nZweiter Punkt. Wir müssen mit der Vorstellung aufräumen, die hier suggeriert wird, nämlich dass es eine Beitragssatzsenkung geben wird. Natürlich wird der Beitragssatz geringer, aber man muss gleichzeitig ganz klar sagen: Die Belastung der Versicherten wird mindestens gleich bleiben und in Zukunft natürlich steigen.\n\nDer dritte Punkt, den ich noch aufgreifen will, ist: Wenn wir auf die Steuerfinanzierung versicherungsfremder Leistungen auch nur partiell verzichten, dann ist das noch schwerwiegender und ungerechter als eine Steuererhöhung; das muss man klar so sagen.\n\nDer Kollege Lauterbach hat ja gesagt: Wir nehmen Leistungen aus dem Gesundheitsfonds, um wichtige Struktur-investitionen in Bildung, Kinderbetreuung usw. zu -finanzieren. - Sie trauen sich nicht, zu sagen: „Wir brauchen Steuern, um das zu machen“, sondern versuchen, das über den Umweg der Beitragszahlungen der Versicherten zu finanzieren. Mit den Versicherten kommt dann aber nur eine kleinere Gruppe der Gesellschaft dafür auf.\n\nIch hatte mir eigentlich vorgenommen - dafür bietet der Gesetzentwurf auch Ansatzpunkte -, zu dem wichtigen Thema der Qualitätssicherung zu sprechen.\n\nGern.\n\nWir können uns jetzt sicherlich darüber unterhalten, ob ich Sie direkt angesprochen habe im Hinblick auf das, was Sie gesagt haben. Ich habe nur auf den Fakt hingewiesen, dass dann, wenn man dem Gesundheitsfonds -anteilig Steuergeld entzieht, durch das sozusagen versicherungsfremde Leistungen finanziert werden, diese Leistungen durch Versichertenbeiträge finanziert werden. Sie können doch nicht verhehlen, dass der Gesundheitsfonds auch deswegen so voll ist, weil man sich mit Versichertenbeiträgen vollgesogen hat. Es wurde ja ein gesetzlicher Einheitsbeitrag erhoben, der plötzlich auf 15,5 Prozent hochgezogen wurde. Deswegen ist der Fonds voll. Das sind natürlich Versichertenbeiträge, und die gehören dahin. Genauso gehören natürlich in den Fonds Steuergelder, mit denen vollständig versicherungsfremde Leistungen finanziert werden müssen.\n\nWenn man Letzteres nicht macht, dann finanziert man auf einem Umweg versicherungsfremde Leistungen mit Versichertenbeiträgen. Das führt dann zu den Folgen, die ich genannt habe.\n\nNun zurück zur Qualität. Ich möchte am Anfang darauf hinweisen, dass unsere Pflegekräfte, Praxisassistentinnen und -assistenten, Ärztinnen und Ärzte tagtäglich bei ihrer Arbeit eine hohe Leistungsqualität erbringen. Das verdient unsere Achtung; das wird auch von den Patienten hochgeschätzt.\n\nDas muss man zunächst erst einmal festhalten.\n\nWir alle wissen aber, dass die Qualität eines Ergebnisses nicht nur von der Qualitätsbereitschaft der Beschäftigten abhängt, sondern auch von den Verhältnissen und Strukturen im System, hier im Gesundheitssystem. Arbeitsverdichtung infolge von Personalabbau zum Beispiel oder auch Ermüdung infolge zu langer Arbeitszeiten etwa stellt natürlich die Qualität infrage bzw. ist ein Risiko für die Qualität.\n\nDeshalb gab es in der Vergangenheit eine Reihe von freiwilligen und auch von verpflichtenden Qualitätsmaßnahmen. Ich weise darauf hin, dass die Kliniken auf -Tumorkonferenzen bzw. Fallkonferenzen versuchen, Qualität zu sichern. Desweiteren werden Zertifizierungsverfahren angewandt und Qualitätsberichte angefertigt. Vor diesem Hintergrund stellt sich natürlich die Frage: Brauchen wir jetzt ein Institut? Und brauchen wir dieses Institut? Unsere Antwort ist klar: Ja, wir brauchen ein Institut,\n\nweil es damit nämlich zu einer Weiterentwicklung der bisherigen Qualitätsmaßnahmen kommt, indem Informationen gebündelt werden.\n\nIch sage ausdrücklich: Das, was im Gesetzestext vorgeschlagen wird, dass nämlich die Versorgungsqualität möglichst als ein sektorenübergreifendes Qualitätsin-strument entwickelt werden soll, ist vollkommen richtig. Auch die einrichtungsübergreifende Zusammenstellung von Informationen ist richtig. Vor allen Dingen ist richtig, dass sie verständlich dargestellt werden müssen, damit auch die Patienten davon profitieren.\n\nIm Nachhinein würde dann auch die Arbeit honoriert werden, die sich die Kliniken mit den Qualitätsberichten gemacht haben. Im Grunde genommen finden diese Qualitätsberichte insgesamt bisher ja kaum Eingang in unsere Qualitätsbemühungen.\n\nEs ist aber natürlich nicht nur Lob angebracht, sondern es muss auch gefragt werden, ob wir im parlamentarischen Verfahren noch zusätzliche Bedingungen schaffen können. Die Frage des Zugriffs auf Krankenkassendaten ist geregelt. Auf diese wird auch ausdrücklich im Gesetz Bezug genommen. Es ist aber zu fragen, wo die ambulanten Daten herkommen sollen und ob da die KV-Daten nicht auch eine Rolle spielen müssen, um gerade diese sektorenübergreifende Qualitätssicherung zu organisieren.\n\n- Das steht aber so nicht im Gesetz. Vielleicht müsste das noch einmal betont werden.\n\nIch denke, es ist auch sehr wichtig, dass die Patienten bzw. die Patientenverbände beteiligt werden, indem auch sie die Möglichkeit bekommen, Aufträge auszulösen. Wir sind aber auch der Meinung, dass sie im Stiftungsbeirat bzw. in den Gremien eine stärkere Verankerung finden müssen.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Schluss noch sagen: Wir werden sicherlich eine Qualitätsentwicklung über Strukturqualität und Prozessqualität hin zu Ergebnisqualität erleben. Wenn wir aber die Ergebnisqualität als Maßstab dieses Qualitätswettbewerbs nehmen, dann liegt angesichts dessen, was da bisher systematisch erfasst wird, noch ein sehr weiter Weg vor uns. Wir sollten die Zwischenzeit nutzen, gerade diesen Prozess voranzutreiben und mögliche Geburtsfehler im parlamentarischen Verfahren noch zu beheben.\n\nIch danke für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n9258,klaus-mindrup,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir alle haben uns vor wenigen Tagen über das Ergebnis des Klimagipfels in Paris gefreut. Aber wir alle wissen auch, dass die praktische Arbeit erst jetzt beginnt.\n\n- Danke für den Applaus von den Grünen.\n\n- Ihr wart zu schnell. - Wir wissen auch, dass die Minderungspläne, die die Staaten eingereicht haben, überhaupt nicht ausreichen werden, um das 2-Grad-Ziel zu erreichen. Wir wissen also, dass man sich überall in der Welt anstrengen muss. In Deutschland wollen wir ja Vorreiter sein. Wir wissen, dass wir uns sehr anstrengen müssen, um das Ziel von 40 Prozent CO2-Minimierung bis 2020 zu erreichen und erst recht das 95-Prozent-Ziel bis 2050. Wenn wir die Begrenzung des Anstiegs der Erderwärmung auf 1,5 Grad anstreben - das wollen wir -, dann müssen für uns in Deutschland 95 Prozent das Ziel sein.\n\nWir in Deutschland sind ja sehr erfolgreich beim Ausbau der Erneuerbaren im Strombereich. Da liegen wir bei über 33 Prozent. Ich denke, die Erfolgsgeschichte dahinter ist, dass es bei den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern eine hohe Akzeptanz für dieses Vorgehen und auch eine breite Bürgerbeteiligung gibt. In der Gesamtbilanz liegen wir deutlich schlechter. Da dürften wir bei ungefähr 14 Prozent liegen, wahrscheinlich auch, weil die Akzeptanz in den anderen Sektoren nicht so hoch ist.\n\nDass Sie von den Grünen jetzt sagen, dass wir die Bestandsgebäude in die Überlegung einbeziehen müssen, ist von daher richtig.\n\nDie Bundesregierung tut das ja auch im Nationalen Aktionsplan Energieeffizienz und in den zahlreichen Förderprogrammen. Auch das ist hier schon deutlich geworden. Wenn man sieht, dass man 20 Millionen Bestandsgebäude in Deutschland hat, ist es auch richtig, dass man nicht nur über Neubau diskutiert, sondern auch über die Bestandsgebäude.\n\nSie schlagen jetzt vor, dass man das Erneuerbare-Energien-Wärmegesetz auf die Bestandsgebäude überträgt. Die Diagnose ist ungefähr richtig, aber die Therapie ist leider falsch.\n\n- Ja, hören Sie sich das einmal an. - Der entscheidende Fehler, den Sie machen, ist: Sie setzen wieder beim Einzelgebäude an.\n\nIch bin aber fest davon überzeugt, dass die erfolgreiche Sanierung immer im Quartier erfolgen muss.\n\nEs gibt dazu unter anderem den Bericht der Töpfer-Kommission beim Deutschen Verband für Wohnungswesen, Städtebau und Raumordnung. Es gibt aber auch andere wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen dazu.\n\nFünf Dinge sind entscheidend:\n\nSie brauchen ein klares Energiekonzept, wenn Sie so etwas in den Quartieren umsetzen wollen. Das muss in ein Stadtentwicklungskonzept eingebunden sein, und die Akteure vor Ort müssen das umsetzen, seien es Stadtwerke, Energiegenossenschaften oder auch Wohnungsbaugesellschaften; Vivawest, habe ich eben gehört, ist da sehr vorbildlich.\n\nSie brauchen Sachverständige vor Ort, die eine gute und unabhängige Beratung durchführen; der sogenannte Kümmerer-Ansatz.\n\nMan braucht Zeit dafür. Das geht nicht in zwei bis drei Jahren.\n\nDie Zielrichtung muss zehn Jahre sein.\n\nSie brauchen Anreize, Förderung und natürlich auch immaterielle Anreize, sprich: Der Nachbar macht es, und man zieht dann nach.\n\nSie brauchen auch soziale Akzeptanz sowohl bei Mieterinnen und Mietern als auch bei Hauseigentümern, die zum Teil natürlich auch nicht immer viel Geld haben.\n\nLassen Sie uns doch einmal anschauen, was bei dem vorbildlichsten Projekt in Deutschland - das ist die InnovationCity Ruhr, Modellstadt Bottrop - in der Umsetzung passiert. Dort gibt es im Augenblick eine Sanierungsrate von durchschnittlich 3 Prozent im Jahr. Das ist dreimal so hoch wie der Durchschnitt in Deutschland. Sie werden bis 2020 38 Prozent CO2 einsparen. Die Basis ist hier nicht 1990, sondern das Jahr 2010. Das ist enorm gut. Das ist sozusagen der richtige Ansatz.\n\nAlso nicht das Einzelgebäude, sondern das Quartier sollten wir angehen. Wir haben ein Quartiersprogramm, das wir auch ausweiten; da gehen wir weiter.\n\nIm nächsten Jahr werden wir die Diskussion bekommen, wie wir die EnEV und das Erneuerbare-Energien-Wärmegesetz besser verzahnen.\n\nDas hat die Baukostensenkungskommission empfohlen, aber auch die Konferenz der Bauminister auf Länderebene. Also, das wird sowieso angegangen. Insofern sind wir hier auf dem richtigen Weg, aber wir müssen das beschleunigen.\n\nIch denke, wir müssen zukünftig auch noch stärker darüber nachdenken, wie wir die Nutzer - es geht um das Nutzerverhalten - und die Immobilieneigentümer mitnehmen können. Die Immobilieneigentümer beklagen sich völlig zu Recht über die steuerliche Diskriminierung, die sie erleben, wenn sie Strom erzeugen und diesen zum Beispiel an ihre Mieter verkaufen wollen. Das muss anders werden.\n\nWir brauchen zukünftig auch stärker eine ökologische Gesamtbilanz, sprich: Wir dürfen nicht nur Wärme oder Kälte betrachten, sondern wir müssen Wärme, Kälte, Strom und auch den ökologischen Rucksack des Gebäudes betrachten. Dann kommen wir weiter.\n\nDer letzte Punkt ist: Ich möchte nicht 15 Prozent erneuerbare Energien, wie die Grünen, sondern ich möchte 100 Prozent erneuerbare Energien.\n\nHier liegen die großen Chancen im Bereich der Photovoltaik. Es ist zu überlegen, wie man die Photovoltaik zukünftig stärker in Quartierskonzepte einbinden kann und wie die Wärmeversorgung über Wärmepumpen zu gewährleisten ist. Daneben ist auch der Bereich Elektromobilität sehr wichtig. Denn die zukünftige Welt wird viel stärker von elektrischer Energie und erneuerbaren Energien geprägt sein als die augenblickliche Welt.\n\nIn diesem Sinne hoffe ich auf weitere konstruktive Beratungen im nächsten Jahr. Ich wünsche Ihnen allen frohe Weihnachten und ein gutes neues Jahr.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n842,andreas-schockenhoff,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir sind zutiefst erschüttert über die Eskalation der Gewalt in der Ukraine. Wir trauern um die Opfer der blutigen Zusammenstöße. Wir sprechen dem ukrainischen Volk unsere Anteilnahme aus und sichern ihm unsere volle Solidarität zu. Wir sind froh, dass es jetzt die Chance für einen Waffenstillstand gibt. Wir fordern alle Verantwortlichen auf, das Ihre dazu beizutragen, dass dieser Waffenstillstand hält.\n\nZur Stunde ist Außenminister Steinmeier mit seinem französischen und seinem polnischen Kollegen in Kiew. Damit sind zwei Botschaften verbunden: Erstens. Die Europäische Union ist bereit, zu vermitteln, um das Land aus dieser existenziellen Krise herauszuführen. Zweitens. Die Europäische Union muss bereit sein, über die Östliche Partnerschaft hinaus der Ukraine in einem schwierigen Transformationsprozess zu helfen.\n\nDie Vermittlung ist notwendig, weil die Konfliktparteien selbst nicht aus der Sackgasse herausfinden, zumal Präsident Janukowitsch in den letzten Tagen zu einem echten Dialog nicht wirklich willens war. Wir brauchen deswegen einen fortgesetzten, anhaltenden Vermittlungsbeitrag. Dazu kann, wie gerade gesagt wurde, die OSZE beitragen. Dazu kann auch ein Hoher Vertreter der Europäischen Union einen Beitrag leisten.\n\nWenn es in diesem Zusammenhang die Aufforderung aus Moskau gibt, sich nicht von außen in Angelegenheiten der Ukraine einzumischen, dann müssen wir das als eine zynische Unterstellung zurückweisen, zumal da gerade Moskau vor Unterzeichnung des Assoziierungsabkommens durch offene Erpressung zur Eskalation der politischen Krise in der Ukraine mit beigetragen hat.\n\nIch will nachdrücklich unterstützen, was der Kollege Annen gesagt hat: Wir dürfen uns keine Nullsummenlogik aufzwingen lassen. Russland gewinnt nicht, wenn die Ukraine die Zusammenarbeit mit der Europäischen Union aufkündigt. Wir gewinnen nicht, wenn die Ukraine nicht mit Russland zusammenarbeitet. Wir gewinnen entweder alle durch zunehmende Kooperation und Integration in Europa, oder wir verlieren alle durch Instabilität und Unsicherheit in Europa.\n\nWahr ist auch, dass es in der Ukraine inzwischen um einen echten Systemkonflikt geht. Zur Wahrheit gehört, dass Moskau für die Menschen auf dem Maidan und für einen großen Teil der Zivilbevölkerung in der Ukraine für den Status quo steht. Aber die Menschen wollen anders leben. Die Menschen wollen in Freiheit leben. Die Menschen wollen in einem Rechtsstaat mit freien und fairen Wahlen, mit unabhängigen Gerichten, mit Meinungsfreiheit und unabhängigen Medien leben. Die Menschen sind nicht länger bereit, eine systemische Korruption hinzunehmen, mit der sich die Machthaber exzessiv bereichern.\n\nWenn Präsident Putin die Ukraine als ein Brudervolk bezeichnet, dann muss es uns zu denken geben, dass Russland für viele Menschen in der Ukraine an Anziehungskraft verloren hat. Das ist für uns kein Grund zur Genugtuung, im Gegenteil. Wir haben in der Europäischen Union mit der Finanzkrise, mit der Überwindung der Ungleichgewichte und mit unseren inneren strukturellen Problemen genügend Probleme zu lösen. Aber dass die Menschen in der Ukraine eine europäische Perspektive brauchen, dass das, was wir an Hilfen anbieten, eben nicht wertneutral ist, sondern mit einem Leben in Freiheit nach den Idealen der sozialen Marktwirtschaft, mit Gerechtigkeit verbunden ist, zeigt sich in diesen Tagen ganz besonders.\n\nDiese europäische Perspektive muss über eine kurzfristige Lösung hinaus für die Menschen spürbar bleiben. Zu einer kurzfristigen Lösung gehören erstens ein anhaltender Waffenstillstand, zweitens eine sofortige Umsetzung der Amnestie, drittens die Bildung einer nationalen Übergangsregierung und viertens die Rückkehr zur Verfassung von 2004 mit echten Parlamentsrechten. Dazu gehört, dass wir für die Menschen Europa erlebbar machen, etwa durch Studienprogramme und durch Stipendienprogramme vergleichbar zu ERASMUS. Dazu gehört auch, dass wir - wie für die Republik Moldau - den Menschen in der Ukraine durch eine Perspektive auf Visafreiheit zeigen, dass Europa spürbar und erlebbar bleibt.\n\nNur das ukrainische Volk selbst kann aus dieser Krise herausfinden. Es gibt im Europa der souveränen Staaten kein Zurück zu privilegierten Einflusszonen. Dabei braucht die Ukraine die Hilfe der Europäischen Union. Wir sind bereit, darüber mit anderen zu reden. Eine Rückkehr zum Status quo ante gibt es nicht. Wir sind vor allem bereit, darüber auch mit Russland zu reden.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n10120,omid-nouripour,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Wenn man sich Somalia heute anschaut, muss man feststellen: Es gibt große Erfolge zu verzeichnen. Es ist mehr Staatlichkeit da als in den letzten 25 Jahren. Es gibt so etwas wie den Ansatz eines wirtschaftlichen Aufschwungs. Es gibt eine signifikante Zahl an Menschen, die in den letzten Jahrzehnten geflohen sind, nun aber nach Somalia zurückgehen und versuchen, sich am Wiederaufbau Somalias zu beteiligen. Es gibt die beiden Regionen Puntland und Somaliland, die eine größere Stabilität ausstrahlen. Das sind nach 25 Jahren Staatsverfall und Katastrophe tatsächlich gute Nachrichten, über die man sich freuen kann.\n\nEs gibt auch zum Mandat etwas Positives zu sagen. Wir werden dieses Mandat zwar ablehnen, und ich werde später sagen, warum. Aber es ist gut und hilfreich, dass wir Menschen entsenden, die in die Ministerien gehen, um beim Aufbau von Kapazitäten zu helfen. Wenn man von internationaler Solidarität spricht, dann sollte man keinen Vergleich zu Kindergärten ziehen. Das passt einfach nicht zusammen.\n\nWir sollten stattdessen denjenigen danken, die in Somalia unter schwierigsten Umständen arbeiten.\n\nHerr Staatsminister Roth hat bei der Einbringung davon gesprochen, 2016 sei ein Wendepunkt für Somalia. Leider steht dieser Wendepunkt nicht in Aussicht. Wir haben das letzte Mal darüber diskutiert, ob es allgemeine Wahlen geben wird. Diese allgemeinen Wahlen, von denen wir bei der Einbringung gesprochen haben, wird es nicht geben. Das Parlament wird weiterhin nach einem Verteilungsschlüssel für die Clans zusammengesetzt sein. Das zerstört jeglichen Reformanreiz in der Regierung.\n\nDie Kooperation der Regionen ist alles, nur nicht linear. Die Korruption, also das, was Staatlichkeit grundsätzlich stark zersetzt, grassiert in Somalia wie nirgendwo anders. Beim Verzeichnis der korruptesten Länder der Welt, von Transparency International herausgegeben, liegt Somalia auf Platz eins. Richtig, es gibt Infiltration von al-Schabab, die auch das Staatswesen betrifft. Es gibt gezielte Tötungen, die nicht nur nicht legal sind, sondern auch dazu beitragen, dass das Land weiter destabilisiert wird. In diesem Zusammenhang ist es selbstverständlich berechtigt, darüber nachzudenken, wie wir helfen können und was die richtigen Mittel wären.\n\nNun gibt es die in Rede stehende Ausbildungsmission. Hier gibt es durchaus positive Aspekte. Wir fragen aber seit Jahren, wer ausgebildet wird und was mit den Menschen nach ihrer Ausbildung geschieht. Im letzten Jahr wurde uns hoch und heilig versprochen, es werde demnächst ein Personalmanagementsystem geben, sodass man erfassen kann, was mit den Menschen danach passiert. Aber ein solches System gibt es noch immer nicht. Es gibt keinerlei Koordination mit den anderen, die ausbilden, sodass es sein kann, dass jemand doppelt kassiert. Es kann sein, dass sich jemand für zwei verschiedene Clans ausbilden lässt. Am gravierendsten ist: Die Besoldung kommt bei den Menschen, die ausgebildet wurden, nicht an. Herr Kollege Frei, Sie haben davon gesprochen, dass 5 500 Menschen ausgebildet wurden. Wenn wir aber Menschen an Waffen ausbilden und sie dann nicht bezahlen, dann kann man sich doch vorstellen, wo sie landen: nicht auf der Seite der Staatlichkeit, sondern auf der Seite, die die Staatlichkeit zerstört.\n\nFrau Kollegin Ernstberger, Sie haben davon gesprochen, dass es hier viele motivierte Menschen gebe. Es kann durchaus sein, dass diese Menschen motiviert sind, wenn sie ihren Dienst antreten. Aber wie wir wissen, kommt das Geld am Ende der Ausbildung nicht bei den Betreffenden an, weil die Korruption so stark grassiert. Das ist für uns Grüne der zentrale Grund, warum wir diesem Mandat nicht zustimmen können.\n\nDer Kollege Frei hat völlig zu Recht nach unseren Antworten gefragt. Es gibt viele Chancen und vieles, was noch zu tun ist. Die Frage nach der Verfassungsgebung ist absolut zentral. Dabei so föderal vorzugehen, dass die Regionen einbezogen werden, ist entscheidend. Ich will an dieser Stelle Folgendes sagen, auch wenn es schwerfällt: Wir werden am Ende auch mit al-Schabab reden müssen. Ja, al-Schabab ist eine international vernetzte dschihadistische Terrorgruppe. Ja, al-Schabab, das sind organisierte Kriminelle und Verbrecherbanden. Aber in den Augen vieler Menschen ist al-Schabab auch eine nationale Widerstandsbewegung. In diesem Zusammenhang wird es irgendwann einmal notwendig sein, auf sie zuzugehen und mit ihr zu reden. Das Problem ist nur, dass die gezielten Tötungen der Amerikaner gerade die eher moderate Führung treffen. Das führt dazu, dass al-Schabab immer radikaler und immer kopfloser wird. Es wird umso schwieriger sein, eines Tages mit ihr in einen nationalen Versöhnungsprozess einzutreten.\n\nIch möchte am Ende noch auf einige regionale Punkte hinweisen, die frappierend sind. Ein Riesenrisiko für das zarte Pflänzchen der Stabilität in Somalia ist der Konflikt im Jemen, nicht nur wegen der Flüchtlinge, die nach Somalia kommen, weil Somalia sicherer und stabiler als der Jemen ist, sondern auch weil die Dschihadisten, die gerade im Jemen gezüchtet werden, irgendwann einmal in Boote steigen und hinüberfahren werden.\n\nDie Destabilisierung, die Somalia dann neu erfahren wird, hat natürlich katastrophale Folgen für die Region, bis hin nach Kenia und Sansibar. Am Sonntag sind Wahlen in Sansibar, und es zeichnet sich überhaupt nicht ab, dass diejenigen, die verlieren werden, egal wer das ist, das Wahlergebnis anerkennen werden. Auch das hat etwas mit Somalia zu tun. Deshalb ist es umso notwendiger, dass wir uns engagieren, dass wir uns genau anschauen, was notwendig und richtig ist, anstatt aktionistisch Dinge zu tun, die langfristig die Situation verschlechtern. Das Zentrale ist, dass wir die Erfolge nicht verschweigen, aber erst recht nicht die Situation schönfärben, wie es hier passiert ist.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n5924,kai-whittaker,\"Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kollegen! Kinderarmut ist ein ernstes Thema. Wir sind uns sicherlich darin einig, dass es uns traurig macht, wenn 1,5 Millionen Kinder in diesem Land von Hartz IV leben müssen und damit einen besonders schweren Start ins Leben haben. Diese Kinder sind Teil der Zukunft unseres Landes, und weil es in Deutschland so wenige Kinder gibt, müssen sie uns noch viel mehr wert sein.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund finde ich es umso verwerflicher, wenn die Kollegen der Linken Kinderarmut für parteipolitische Zwecke missbrauchen.\n\nSie tun so, als ob sich nur Ihre Fraktion für dieses Thema interessiert. Sie tun so, als ob wir in unseren Wahlkreisen von schönen Terrassen und feudalen Vorstadtvillen aus auf die Welt blickten und über das Thema Kinderarmut allenfalls in der Zeitung lesen würden. Anstatt sich dieser Klischees zu bedienen und sich an ihnen abzuarbeiten, wäre es schon ein Fortschritt in dieser Debatte, wenn wir sachlich und ernsthaft darüber reden könnten.\n\nWie ist man bei der Studie der Bertelsmann Stiftung verfahren? Es wurden 5 000 Kinder im Übergang vom Kindergarten zur Grundschule in Mülheim an der Ruhr untersucht. Nun kann man darüber debattieren, ob Mülheim an der Ruhr repräsentativ für Deutschland ist. Genau das ist die Schwäche dieser Studie - das wird auch von den Autoren der Studie selber zugegeben -, nämlich dass Kinderarmut regional ungleich verteilt ist. Deshalb braucht man hier im Deutschen Bundestag nicht so zu tun, als ob quasi über Nacht Kinderarmut als Massenphänomen über dieses Land hereingebrochen wäre.\n\nDie einzig bemerkenswerte Aussage in dieser Studie ist: Je stärker eine Kita sozial durchmischt ist, desto besser entwickeln sich die ärmeren Kinder.\n\nSonst hat diese Studie nichts Neues zutage gebracht. Sie bestätigt lediglich alte Forschungsergebnisse.\n\nKinderarmut hängt von der Situation der Eltern ab. Eltern sind deshalb arm, weil sie keinen Arbeitsplatz haben, weil sie keine Berufsausbildung haben, weil sie schlecht deutsch sprechen oder weil sie alleinerziehend sind. Weil diese Erkenntnisse nicht neu sind, hat bereits die letzte unionsgeführte Bundesregierung ein ganzes Bündel an Maßnahmen auf den Weg gebracht. Darüber möchte ich sprechen.\n\nSeitdem Angela Merkel Bundeskanzlerin ist, haben wir die Zahl der Betreuungsplätze für unter Dreijährige verdoppelt. Wir haben in den letzten Jahren 400 Millionen Euro in die Hand genommen, um Sprach- und Inte-grationsförderkurse in 4 000 Kitas in ganz Deutschland zu unterstützen. Wir haben 2,5 Millionen Kindern das Bildungs- und Teilhabepaket ermöglicht. Da wir gerade von Kitas sprechen: Wir haben 2,7 Milliarden Euro in die Hand genommen, um die Betreuungsplätze bei den Gemeinden auszubauen. Wir haben sehr wohl etwas gegen Kinderarmut getan und werden das weiterhin tun. Frau Kollegin Dörner, wir werden bis zum Jahr 2016 den Etat des Familienministeriums um über 2 Milliarden Euro erhöhen.\n\nDas ist der stärkste Aufwuchs, den es jemals gegeben hat. Das hängt auch mit der soliden Finanzpolitik unseres Bundesfinanzministers zusammen.\n\nIch war - genauso wie viele andere Kollegen hier - Gemeinderat in meiner Heimatstadt. Deshalb wissen wir, dass Kitas Sache der Kommunen sind. Dorthin gehört es auch zu Recht; denn die Kommunen wissen am besten, wo der Schuh drückt. Nur weil Sie Ihre Kommunen nicht im Griff haben, heißt das noch lange nicht, dass wir Ihre Probleme hier im Deutschen Bundestag in Berlin lösen müssen.\n\nDas ist genau das, was die Studie der Bertelsmann Stiftung betont: Kinderarmut ist regional unterschiedlich ausgeprägt. Deshalb müssen wir die Probleme vor Ort lösen.\n\nUnser Auftrag hier in Berlin ist, die Kommunen in die Lage zu versetzen, diese Aufgabe wahrzunehmen. Wir tun das beispiellos. Bis zum Jahr 2017 werden wir die Kommunen um fast 10 Milliarden Euro entlasten. Das ist die größte Summe, die es jemals in einer Legislaturperiode gegeben hat. Wir eröffnen damit einen großen Spielraum, der aber auch genutzt werden muss.\n\nKommen wir zu den selbsternannten Bildungsspezialisten der Linken zurück. Da Sie sich so gerne auf Bildungsstudien berufen, wissen Sie sicherlich - alle Bildungsökonomen sagen uns das schon seit über zehn Jahren -: Wenn wir die sozialen Probleme in diesem Land wirklich bekämpfen wollen, dann müssen wir möglichst viel Geld für die frühkindliche Bildung und weniger Geld für die spätere Ausbildung in die Hand nehmen. In Deutschland machen die Länder noch immer das Gegenteil. Viele glauben, dass man soziale Gerechtigkeit an der Universität herstellen kann. Ich sage Ihnen: Bis dahin ist der Zug längst abgefahren. Die Abgehängten kommen gar nicht bis zur Universität.\n\nDeshalb wäre den armen Kindern in Mülheim an der Ruhr und anderswo in Deutschland mehr geholfen, wenn Sie als Besserverdiener Studiengebühren für Ihre Kinder zahlen würden. Dann hätten die Länder mehr Geld für die Kitas. Aber so weit reicht Ihre soziale Kompetenz nicht.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n7674,gunter-krings,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Lieber Kollege Beck, der gleiche Fragesteller, ein anderer Antwortender. Die bekannte Situation ungesteuerten und unkontrollierten Zustroms von Drittstaatsangehörigen in das Bundesgebiet haben die Bundesregierung nach sorgfältiger Abwägung in Abstimmung mit den Bundesländern und auch mangels effektiver Alternativen veranlasst, zunächst gemäß Artikel 25 der Verordnung (EG) 562/2006, dem sogenannten Schengener Grenzkodex, temporär Grenzkontrollen an den deutschen Schengen-Binnengrenzen wieder einzuführen. Umfang und Intensität der Grenzkontrollen werden sich auf das für die Sicherheit jeweils notwendige Maß beschränken.\n\nDiese Maßnahme ist angesichts des vorgenannten gewaltigen Zustroms von Drittstaatsangehörigen zwingend, um wieder zu einem geordneten Verfahren bei der Einreise zurückzukehren. Wir müssen wissen, wer nach Deutschland einreist und sich bei uns aufhält. Ein weiterer unkontrollierter Zugang würde zur Gefährdung der öffentlichen Ordnung und der inneren Sicherheit führen.\n\nNach dem geltenden europäischen Recht ist Deutschland für den allergrößten Teil der Schutzsuchenden nicht zuständig. Das Dublin-Verfahren und die Eurodac-Regelungen gelten unverändert fort. Das heißt, dass der zuständige Mitgliedstaat Asylsuchende nicht nur regis­triert, sondern das Asylverfahren auch durchführt sowie im Falle der Ablehnung des Schutzersuchens aufenthaltsbeendende Maßnahmen ergreift. Auch andere Mitgliedstaaten - das darf ich anfügen - wie Österreich und Slowenien haben temporäre Grenzkontrollen an ihren Binnengrenzen eingeführt.\n\nDiese Maßnahme ist in der Koalition einvernehmlich beschlossen und mit den Landesinnenministern besprochen worden. Auch die Opposition ist von dem Herrn Minister bekanntermaßen unterrichtet worden. Ferner sind nach Maßgabe des Schengener Grenzkodex der Rat der Europäischen Union, die Europäische Kommission und die EU-Schengen-Mitgliedstaaten über diese temporären Grenzkontrollen informiert worden.\n\nIch habe meinen Text gerne vorgetragen, weil wir im Innenministerium gute Beamte haben.\n\n- Auch den Erwägungsgrund kenne ich. Wir können jetzt lange Ausführungen zum Europarecht machen, welche rechtliche Bedeutung Erwägungsgründe haben. Ich muss Sie aber hinsichtlich deren Wirkung offensichtlich enttäuschen.\n\nIm Übrigen besagt dieser Erwägungsgrund, dass ein großer Zustrom zwar nicht generell ein Problem oder einen Grund für eine temporäre Einführung der Grenzkontrollen darstellt, aber in bestimmten Konstellationen, wie wir sie angesichts der Zahlen von Flüchtlingen in den letzten Tagen hatten. Dieser Zugang ist ohne Präzedenzfall. Angesichts der Tatsache, dass diese Menschen Asyl beantragen und innerhalb Deutschlands verteilt werden müssen, ist das sicherlich eine besondere Situation. Wir können kein Verfahren zur Verteilung organisieren, wenn wir nicht wissen, wer über die Grenze kommt.\n\nIn dem Erwägungsgrund wird ausdrücklich nichts zum Thema Überschreiten der Grenze zum Beantragen von Asyl und zur Anerkennung eines Status als Flüchtling genannt. Insofern bitte ich Sie, diesen Erwägungsgrund nicht überzuinterpretieren.\n\nZum exakten Zeitpunkt kann ich Ihnen hier und jetzt nichts sagen. Die Information habe ich nicht. Aber die Konsultation ist vor der Maßnahme durchgeführt worden.\n\nKönnen wir gerne machen.\n\nGuten Tag.\n\nDas ist nicht gut.\n\nIhre Einschätzung, die Dublin-Verordnung sei nicht mehr in Kraft, ist falsch, Herr Abgeordneter.\n\nVielen Dank für die Frage, Frau Renner. Ich glaube, wir sind uns auf allen Seiten des Hauses einig, dass es sich um furchtbare, unsägliche Anschläge handelt und wir alles dafür tun müssen, dass wir hier zur Aufklärung kommen, was sich aber nicht allzu einfach gestaltet.\n\nDas Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, nach dem Sie ausdrücklich fragen, nimmt natürlich diese unsäglichen Anschläge ebenso, wie wir es tun, sehr ernst. Es verfügte bisher aber in keinem Fall im Vorfeld über konkrete Hinweise zu geplanten Anschlägen auf Flüchtlingsunterkünfte. Die Sicherheitsbehörden des Bundes haben die Länder - zum Beispiel bereits in einer Gefährdungsbewertung vom März 2014 - jedoch darauf hingewiesen, dass zukünftig wohl eine weitere Steigerung der Zahl von Straftaten gegen Asylunterkünfte leider in Betracht zu ziehen ist.\n\nMir ist bekannt, Frau Renner, dass Ihre Fraktion eine kritische Grundhaltung zum Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz einnimmt. Man kann in dieser konkreten Frage sicherlich anderer Auffassung sein als die Bundesregierung. Ich finde nur, wir sollten das nicht zu sehr an diesem konkreten Phänomen festmachen. Denn dass das Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz alles tut, um solche Vorfälle aufzuklären, dürfen wir glauben. Es ist auch im Interesse des Bundesamtes, seinen Beitrag dazu zu leisten.\n\nEs ist bisher aber in keinem Fall dazu gekommen, dass man vor einem konkreten Anschlag aufgrund der besonderen Struktur genau wusste, dass ein bestimmtes Flüchtlingsheim beispielsweise Opfer eines solchen Anschlages werden könnte.\n\nWir haben es hier mit einer Szene zu tun, die nicht zu Bekennerschreiben neigt. Solche Schreiben könnten helfen, künftige Strukturen aufzudecken. Wir haben es hier oft mit verschlüsselter Kommunikation zu tun. Insofern bedeutet die Tatsache, dass wir keine Erkenntnisse im Vorfeld gewonnen haben, nicht, dass das Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz nicht sehr aktiv ist.\n\nDazu kann ich Ihnen jetzt und hier jedenfalls keine Auskunft geben. Allerdings ist das von Ihnen genannte Beispiel sehr gut; denn es zeigt, dass es den Sicherheitsbehörden - auch dem Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz - trotz der Schwierigkeiten, die wir in diesem Milieu und mit diesen furchtbaren Tätergruppen haben, im Einzelfall gelingt, solche Organisationen auszuheben. Sie stehen also im absoluten Fokus des Bundesamtes für Verfassungsschutz und anderer Sicherheitsbehörden. In diesem Fall war man erfolgreich.\n\nHier geht es sozusagen um die retrospektive Betrachtung. Seit Februar 2014 erfolgt im Gemeinsamen Extremismus- und Terrorismusabwehrzentrum zweimal wöchentlich ein Austausch zwischen Bundesamt und Landesämtern sowie zwischen Verfassungsschutz und Polizeibehörden über alle wesentlichen Straftaten mit Bezug zur Asylthematik und über die allgemeine Entwicklung. Darüber hinaus hat das Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz dem Bundeskriminalamt im Jahr 2015 bisher zu 50 Tatverdächtigen verfassungsschutzrelevante Erkenntnisse übermittelt.\n\nDas waren mir zu viele Verneinungen. Können Sie die Frage noch einmal so formulieren, dass ich sie verstehen kann?\n\nWenn ich das richtig verstanden habe, befürchten Sie, dass man aus irgendwelchen taktischen Gründen Informationen zurückhält, weil man der Meinung ist, dass man besser eingreifen kann, wenn man den Sicherheitsbehörden nichts sagt. Dazu liegen mir keine Anhaltspunkte vor. Ich kann es mir, offen gestanden, angesichts der Qualität der infragestehenden Straftaten nicht vorstellen.\"\n11329,josip-juratovic,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir diskutieren heute über das Kosovo und über die Mandatsverlängerung des Einsatzes deutscher Soldatinnen und Soldaten im Rahmen der KFOR-Mission. Das Positive an unserer Debatte ist, dass wir die Truppenstärke verringern werden von bisher 1 850 auf jetzt maximal 1 350 Soldatinnen und Soldaten in 12 statt bisher 14 Einsatzkompanien. Der negative Beigeschmack bleibt: Eine Truppenstationierung ist auch 17 Jahre nach dem Kosovo-Krieg noch nötig. Am Anfang meiner Rede ist mir jedoch besonders wichtig: Mein Dank und Respekt gilt zuallererst den Soldatinnen und Soldaten im Einsatz.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, vor wenigen Tagen war ich im Kosovo. Nach mehreren früheren Reisen habe ich ein weiteres Mal erlebt, dass die aktuelle Lage im Kosovo und auf dem Westbalkan im Allgemeinen desolat ist, um nicht zu sagen: verheerend. Am eindrucksvollsten wird dies bestätigt durch jene fast 50 000 Menschen aus dem Kosovo, die in den vergangenen zwei Jahren in Deutschland Asyl beantragt haben. Warum tun sie das?\n\nErstens. Trotz der Bemühungen, wirtschaftlichen Aufschwung in Gang zu setzen, liegt die Arbeitslosigkeit, insbesondere die Jugendarbeitslosigkeit, bei über 50 Prozent. Bei einem Rückkehrprojekt der Arbeiterwohlfahrt in Pristina wurde mir die Verzweiflung der Menschen vor Ort deutlich vor Augen geführt.\n\nZweitens. Pristina befindet sich seit langem in einer Dauerregierungskrise. Das parlamentarische Selbstverständnis ist schwach oder so radikal, dass der parlamentarische Weg nicht beschritten wird, sei es durch eine Opposition, die im Plenarsaal mit Tränengas wirft, oder schließlich durch Boykott des Parlaments. Die politischen Eliten kranken an drei Symptomen: Korruption, Vetternwirtschaft und Nationalismus. All das führt zu einer immensen Menschenflucht, entweder in Richtung EU oder in Richtung IS.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, all das passiert, obwohl wir seit Jahren im Kosovo aktiv sind. Deutschland hat seit 1999 450 Millionen Euro aus Töpfen der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit investiert. Die EU allein hat von 2007 bis 2013 635 Millionen Euro an IPA-Mitteln in das Kosovo gelenkt. Die gleiche Summe ist für 2014 bis 2020 veranschlagt. Die Rolle der internationalen Gemeinschaft ist trotzdem alles andere als glücklich. Im Kosovo selbst wird die EU zunehmend mit Skepsis betrachtet. Insbesondere die europäische Rechtsstaatlichkeitsmission EULEX hat in der Bevölkerung den Ruf, eine korrupte Brüderschaft mit den Eliten zu pflegen. Zur Ehrlichkeit gehört aber auch: Wer gezwungen ist, Kompromisse mit Korrupten zu schließen, wird den Verdacht nicht los, selbst korrupt zu sein.\n\nNun könnte man argumentieren, dass wir unser Engagement lieber einstellen und die Kosovaren sich selbst überlassen sollten. Dieser Gedanke mag verführerisch sein, weil er so einfach klingt. Das wäre aber verheerend für die Sicherheit und die Stabilität Europas. Meine Überzeugung ist: Der Westbalkan ist ein wunder Punkt mitten in der Europäischen Union; deshalb muss die EU gerade im Zeitalter globaler Krisen für eine europäische Zukunft des Westbalkans stärker politisch handeln.\n\nVersetzen wir uns einmal in die Lage des Kosovo. Das Kosovo und seine Bevölkerung befinden sich in einem permanenten psychologischen Zustand der Ungleichheit in seiner Region, zum Beispiel bei der Frage der Visaliberalisierung: Als Einzige auf dem Westbalkan müssen Kosovaren für eine Reise in die EU immer noch ein Visum beantragen.\n\nEin anderer Aspekt: Die Nachbarstaaten des Kosovo sind auch nicht gerade vorbildliche Musterbeispiele für Sicherheit und Stabilität. Ganz wichtig für das Kosovo ist die Normalisierung seiner Beziehungen zu Serbien. Aber auch die neueste Entwicklung in Mazedonien kann für den Kosovo zur Bedrohung werden; denn Mazedonien unter der Regierungspartei VMRO ist weder ethnisch noch gesellschaftlich oder politisch ein Sicherheitsfaktor.\n\nKolleginnen und Kollegen, erlauben Sie mir an dieser Stelle noch eine Anmerkung zum Nachbarland Mazedonien. In Skopje und anderen Städten des Landes findet seit Wochen die sogenannte Bunte Revolution gegen die korrupte Regierung Mazedoniens statt. Diese Bürgerinnen und Bürger Mazedoniens verdienen unseren Respekt und unsere Unterstützung;\n\ndenn diese mutigen Menschen verteidigen mit letzter Kraft die demokratischen Werte in einem immer mehr nach rechts außen kippenden Europa.\n\nBlicken wir wieder auf den Kosovo. Die Verlängerung des KFOR-Einsatzes ist leider auch Bestätigung dafür, dass unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten das Unvermögen der EU, das Thessaloniki-Versprechen von 2003 umzusetzen, ausgleichen müssen. Wir Europäer tragen also eine Mitverantwortung für die desolate Lage auf dem Westbalkan, zum Beispiel weil Mazedonien seit 2008 auf die Eröffnung seiner Verhandlungskapitel wartet, weil Griechenland jeglichen Fortschritt blockiert oder weil im Kosovo mehr als 1 000 juristische Expertinnen und Experten von EULEX es seit Jahren nicht schaffen, eine vernünftige Korruptionsverfolgung aufzubauen. Die Glaubwürdigkeit der Argumente aus Brüssel schwindet bei den Menschen im Kosovo zunehmend. Deshalb sollte die EU jetzt dringend politische Handlungsfähigkeit beweisen:\n\nErstens. Das Kosovo braucht endlich eine gerechte Gleichbehandlung in der Region des Westbalkans. Dazu gehört auch die Umsetzung der Visaliberalisierung.\n\nZweitens. Die EU-Verhandlungskapitel 23 und 24 - Rechtsstaatlichkeit und Menschenrechte - stehen für die fundamentalen Werte der EU. Wenn man es mit EULEX als Rechtsstaatsmission ernst meint, muss man gerade diese Kapitel schleunigst eröffnen, und zwar für alle Westbalkanstaaten. Den Skeptikern unter uns will ich sagen: Eine Kapiteleröffnung bedeutet noch lange nicht die Schließung des Kapitels und auch keinen Automatismus, der zum EU-Beitritt führt. Die Kapiteleröffnung setzt aber gesellschaftliche und politische Kräfte in Gang, die glaubwürdig die notwendigen Reformen umsetzen und unsere demokratischen Werte vor Ort mit Leben füllen können.\n\nKolleginnen und Kollegen, am allerwichtigsten ist aber: Wir müssen als EU endlich entschlossen politisch handeln, damit unsere KFOR-Soldatinnen und -Soldaten ihre Arbeit beenden und nach Hause zurückkehren können.\n\nBis dahin bitte ich um Ihre Zustimmung zum Antrag der Bundesregierung.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n14254,harald-ebner,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Kaum eine andere technologische Entwicklung hat Wissenschaft und Medien in den letzten Jahren so stark bewegt wie die Entdeckung der Genschere, CRISPR/Cas und andere Ansätze der neuen Gentechnik. Der Bericht des Büros für Technikfolgen-Abschätzung zur Synthetischen Biologie gibt uns als Bundestag und damit auch der Gesellschaft hierzu wichtiges Rüstzeug an die Hand.\n\nHerr Albani, ich weiß nicht, ob Sie den Bericht wirklich durchgeschaut haben.\n\nZur Not empfehle ich auch den TAB-Fokus. Auch das hilft.\n\nNoch ist es kaum möglich, die tatsächlichen Potenziale und den Nutzen dieser Technologien realistisch einzuschätzen, auch weil sie auf sehr vielen Gebieten einsetzbar scheinen, von Medizin über Rohstoffherstellung bis hin zur Pflanzenzüchtung. Die mit der Technik in Verbindung gebrachten Erwartungen sind nicht nur hoch, sondern gehen leider oft auch am wissenschaftlichen Stand auf erstaunlich naive Weise vorbei.\n\nSo lautete eine Schlagzeile dieser Woche in der Berliner Morgenpost „Können Superpflanzen den Hunger besiegen?“. Aber, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Welternährung ist eben nicht in erster Linie eine Mengenfrage. Das hat bereits der TAB-Bericht von 2011 zum Thema Welternährung deutlich gemacht.\n\nSchon bei der klassischen Gentechnik wurde alles Mögliche versprochen. Heute wissen wir: Die Versprechen haben sich nicht bewahrheitet. Gentech-Pflanzen haben eben keine höheren Erträge gebracht, der Pestizideinsatz ist gestiegen statt gesunken, und trockenheits- und salztolerante Sorten gibt es zwar längst, aber sie stammen nicht aus dem Genlabor. Gerade bei der Trockenheitstoleranz, eine der Schlüsseleigenschaften für Zukunftsfragen des Pflanzenbaus, liegt das auf der Hand; denn da wird durch ein äußerst komplexes Zusammenspiel vieler Gene diese Eigenschaft bestimmt. Genau da kommen CRISPR/Cas und Co. eben auch an ihre Grenzen. Wir dürfen uns nicht von verlockenden vermeintlichen Potenzialen dazu verleiten lassen, für einen neuen Technologiezweig aus reiner Innovationsbegeisterung auf eine Regulierung zu verzichten.\n\nWir müssen gewährleisten, dass Gemeinwohlinteressen und ethische Grundsätze gewahrt bleiben. Der TAB-Bericht, aber auch weitere Gutachten machen deutlich, dass es sich beim Genome Editing um gentechnische Ansätze handelt, auch im juristischen Sinne. Deshalb ist für uns klar: Auch neue Gentechnik ist Gentechnik und muss genauso reguliert werden.\n\nWenn in Lebensmitteln Gentechnik drinsteckt, muss auch Gentechnik draufstehen, und wenn der Eingriff per se nicht nachweisbar ist, müssen wir auf einem anderen Weg für Rückverfolgbarkeit sorgen.\n\nWir reden hier über mächtige Instrumente. Man kann damit wenig, aber man kann damit auch sehr viel am Erbgut verändern, und das viel schneller und billiger als bisher. Und deshalb ist es ganz klar: Auch bei der neuen Gentechnik handelt es sich um eine Risikotechnologie, bei der viele Sicherheitsfragen nicht geklärt sind. Das gilt besonders für Bereiche, wo geneditierte, lebensfähige Organismen in die Umwelt entlassen werden. Das Vorsorgeprinzip gebietet es eben, einen angemessenen Regulierungsrahmen für den Umgang mit den neuen Technologien sicherzustellen, und dazu gehören auch die Zulassungsverfahren.\n\nWie der TAB-Bericht zeigt, werfen die neuen Gentechnikmethoden neue oder verschärfte Risikofragen auf: Wollen wir alles zulassen, was technisch möglich ist, auch Eingriffe in die menschliche Keimbahn? Welche Folgen hätte der Einsatz der Gene-Drive-Technologie, bei der gezielt genetisch veränderte Sequenzen zur Weiterverbreitung in freilebenden Populationen ausgebracht werden? Können wir die Gefahren geplanter Ausrottung tatsächlich ökologisch verantworten? Können wir alle Auswirkungen vorhersehen? Selbst die Leopoldina warnt vor den Risiken. Und wie gehen wir damit um, dass Do-it-yourself-Biologen spielend leicht im Garagenlabor neue Gentechnikorganismen erschaffen können? Das zeigt uns: Laissez faire kann keine Option sein.\n\nWir brauchen eine breite gesellschaftliche Debatte. Wer Akzeptanz für Genome Editing will, etwa im medizinischen Bereich, der muss auch dafür sorgen, dass diese Debatte stattfindet, und darf nicht die neue Gentechnik den Menschen durch die Hintertür aufzwingen. Deshalb ist es falsch - mein letzter Satz -, dass die Bundesregierung im Entwurf des Gentechnikgesetzes die neue Gentechnik unter dem Radar der Regulierung durchwinken will und damit vollendete Tatsachen schafft. Das ist der falsche Weg, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen. Deshalb sollte auch die Bundesregierung den TAB-Bericht dringend lesen.\n\nDanke schön und gute Nacht.\"\n13534,ulrich-kelber,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Ich möchte die Gelegenheit ergreifen, zur Wohnimmobilienkreditrichtlinie und ihrer Umsetzung in nationales Recht Stellung zu nehmen. Das deutsche Gesetz zur Umsetzung der Wohnimmobilienkreditrichtlinie geht auf die Erfahrungen der Finanzkrise zurück. Richtlinie und Umsetzung sollen verhindern, dass sich unseriöse Finanzierungspraktiken wiederholen, die unter anderem in den USA und in Spanien zu Immobilienblasen geführt haben. Als diese platzten, gingen keineswegs nur Banken pleite, sondern vor allem verloren auch viele Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher ihre kreditfinanzierten und selbstbewohnten Immobilien. Die neuen Regeln stärken das Prinzip der verantwortungsvollen Kreditvergabe. Die Kreditinstitute müssen also im Interesse ihrer Kunden prüfen, ob Kreditnehmer die vertraglich vereinbarten Raten zahlen können. Ich halte das für eine verbraucherpolitische Errungenschaft.\n\nJedoch zeigte sich bereits kurz nach Inkrafttreten, dass die Umsetzung der EU-Richtlinie nicht nur Verbraucher effektiv schützt, sondern auch einige Banken tief verunsichert hat. Da die Banken jetzt für eine ordnungsgemäße Kreditprüfung haften,\n\nhinterfragten sie ihre Kreditvergabeprozesse sehr gründlich,\n\nzum Teil überzogen. Sie stellten dabei auch bewährte Kreditvergabestandards infrage und verschärften diese eigenständig weiter, was bei einigen Banken wiederum zu weniger Kreditvergaben führte; andere haben ihr Kreditvergabevolumen sogar ausgedehnt.\n\nIch möchte ein Beispiel für etwas nennen, was weder von der Richtlinie noch von der nationalen Gesetzgebung vorgesehen war. Wir wurden zum Beispiel gefragt, ob die neuen Regeln verhindern sollten, dass ein Kredit an jemanden vergeben wird, der diesen Kredit nicht innerhalb seiner statistischen Lebenserwartung zurückzahlen kann. Das war weder von Richtlinie noch vom Gesetz vorgegeben. Denn Erbschaftsteuer hin oder her: Die Richtlinie sollte natürlich nicht Erben ein schuldenfreies Haus garantieren, sondern ermöglichen, Verträge über die Nutzung abzuschließen. Wir haben im Hinblick auf diese Kritik auf Schnellschüsse verzichtet, sondern mit der deutschen Kreditwirtschaft und der Verbraucherschutzseite einen intensiven Dialog darüber geführt, wie diese Unsicherheiten bei den Banken beseitigt werden können. Wir wollen erreichen, dass Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern uneingeschränkt Zugang zu Krediten, die sie sich ohne das Risiko einer Überschuldung leisten können, gewährt wird.\n\nWir haben Ihnen einen Gesetzentwurf vorgelegt, in dem wir Klarstellungen vornehmen wollen, die sowohl europarechtlich zulässig sind als auch den Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern dienen.\n\nDrei Punkte:\n\nErstens. Wir wollen klarstellen, dass die Wertsteigerung durch Baumaßnahmen oder Renovierungen natürlich berücksichtigt werden darf.\n\n- Das war von vornherein Intention, Herr Kollege Michelbach. - Aber natürlich - wahrscheinlich liegt die Richtlinie vor Ihnen - müssten Sie den Erwägungsgrund 55 der Richtlinie, dass sie nicht allein ausschlaggebend sein darf, auch in der nationalen Gesetzgebung berücksichtigen.\n\nZweitens soll im Gesetz explizit geregelt werden, dass, wie schon bisher, die Regelungen für Verbraucherdarlehensverträge nicht auf die sogenannten Immobilienverzehrkreditverträge anwendbar sind, also in dem Fall, dass jemand einen Teil der Immobilie, in der er wohnt, an die Bank übereignet. Das soll auch die Unsicherheit der Rechtsabteilungen einiger Banken beenden und die Kreditvergabe an ältere Menschen erleichtern.\n\nDrittens. Wir bitten Sie um eine Ermächtigung für eine gemeinsame Rechtsverordnung des Bundesfinanzministeriums und des Bundesministeriums der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz. Wir wollen in weiteren praktisch relevanten Fällen eine Leitlinie für die ordnungsgemäße Kreditvergabe an die Hand geben. Auch hierzu zwei Beispiele: Wir wollen deutlich machen, wie mit befristeten Arbeitsverhältnissen und vorübergehenden Gehaltseinbußen durch Elternzeit umgegangen werden soll, da einige Banken nur die Negativannahmen verwendet haben. Außerdem wollen wir insbesondere beim altersgerechten Umbau, der den Wert von Immobilien erhöht, die Wertsteigerungen in angemessener Form berücksichtigen.\n\nWir meinen, dass damit - das will ich bewusst sagen - die bei einigen Banken - also keineswegs durchgehend - vorgekommene schlechtere Kreditvergabe an junge Familien sowie Seniorinnen und Senioren beendet wird und es wieder einen gesicherten Zugang dieser Personenkreise zu Krediten gibt. Ich werbe für die vorgesehenen Klarstellungen und bitte Sie um Ihre Unterstützung für diesen Gesetzentwurf.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n523,peter-weiß,\"Frau Präsidentin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Unsere Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel hat in ihrer gestrigen Regierungserklärung für die kommenden vier Jahre dieser Legislaturperiode ein sehr klares und eindeutiges Ziel vorgegeben: Es soll den Menschen in unserem Land in vier Jahren besser gehen als heute.\n\nDas soll vor allen Dingen für die Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer in unserem Land gelten. Wir starten mit guten Voraussetzungen: mit einem Höchststand der Beschäftigung in Deutschland und der Perspektive, dass wir das in den kommenden Jahren fortsetzen. Erst gestern hat der Sparkassen- und Giroverband mitgeteilt, dass er davon ausgeht, dass das Wirtschaftswachstum in diesem Jahr besser ausfällt, als es ursprünglich prognostiziert war.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, ich finde, dass das, was in unserem Land gut läuft, bei allem Bemühen der Opposition, etwas Kritisches zu finden, nicht schlechtgeredet werden sollte; denn es ist der Erfolg der Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer und der Unternehmen in unserem Land, dass wir auf einen so guten Stand gekommen sind.\n\nDas heißt aber: Wer gut ist, muss auch den Ehrgeiz haben, besser zu werden. Diesen Ehrgeiz haben wir von der Großen Koalition. Das heißt für uns vor allen Dingen, dass wir Arbeit, die die materielle Grundlage unseres Lebens und den Zusammenhalt sichert, zum zentralen Thema unserer Koalitionsvereinbarung gemacht haben. Das heißt, dass wir eben nicht nur eine Regelung zu einem Mindestlohn verabredet haben, sondern insgesamt für gute und bessere Entlohnung in Deutschland sorgen wollen, dass wir zum Beispiel dafür sorgen wollen, die Erklärung der Allgemeinverbindlichkeit von Tarifverträgen zu erleichtern.\n\nDie Sozialpartnerschaft, die Vereinbarungen zwischen Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern und ihren Gewerkschaften und Arbeitgebern und ihren Verbänden, war die Grundlage des wirtschaftlichen Erfolgs in Deutschland und soll es auch in Zukunft sein. Wir wollen die Sozialpartnerschaft und die Tarifautonomie stärken, damit gut bezahlte Arbeit in Zukunft eine erfolgreiche Entwicklung in Deutschland möglich macht und wir mehr Steuern einnehmen, um das bezahlen zu können, was wir im Koalitionsvertrag niedergeschrieben haben, vor allen Dingen auch, um unsere sozialen Sicherungssysteme zu stärken. Das ist für uns zentral: Arbeit, bessere Arbeit, gut bezahlte Arbeit. Es ist das zentrale Anliegen unserer Koalition.\n\nDas heißt auch, dass wir uns um die Qualität der Arbeit kümmern. Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, wenn die Zahl psychischer Erkrankungen im Arbeitsumfeld immer deutlicher zunimmt, dann zeigt sich: Arbeitsschutz kann nicht nur technischer Arbeitsschutz sein; es muss auch ein Arbeitsschutz sein, der die psychische Gesundheit unserer Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer umfasst. Deswegen haben wir verabredet: Wir wollen gemeinsam mit den Gewerkschaften, den Arbeitgeberverbänden und den Sozialversicherungen die Prävention stärken und dazu beitragen, dass Menschen gesund durch das Arbeitsleben und bis zur Rente kommen. Wir wollen das betriebliche Gesundheitsmanagement stärken und damit einen wesentlichen Beitrag dazu leisten, dass Menschen in ihrem Arbeitsleben gesund bleiben und gesund in Rente gehen können.\n\nDas ist auch eine Zielsetzung unserer Rentenreform. Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, wenn in diesem Zusammenhang mangelnde Generationengerechtigkeit beklagt wird, verstehe ich das nicht ganz. Wenn wir sagen, dass wir den Schutz für Menschen mit Erwerbsminderung, die aus gesundheitlichen Gründen nicht mehr Vollzeit arbeiten können, verbessern wollen, dann ist das auch eine Zusage an die Jungen. Denn sie wissen: Wenn es darauf ankommt, leistet die Rentenversicherung etwas für mich. Wenn wir die Rehaleistungen der Rentenver-sicherung verbessern, dann ist das auch eine Zusage an die Jungen, die wissen sollen, dass sie in einem Arbeitsleben, in dem sie länger arbeiten sollen als die heutigen Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer, darauf zählen können: Wenn es gesundheitliche Probleme gibt, dann ist die Rentenversicherung leistungsfähig und finanziert eine Rehamaßnahme.\n\nIch finde, das ist ein Aspekt, der wesentlich zur Generationengerechtigkeit der Rente beiträgt.\n\nVerehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, es ist in der Debatte schon vieles zum Thema Mütterrente, die meines Erachtens ein Stück weit für Gerechtigkeit sorgt - sie sorgt auch für Generationengerechtigkeit -, und zur abschlagsfreien Rente nach 45 Beitragsjahren mit 63 gesagt worden. Was mich an der öffentlichen Debatte und auch an der Kritik der Opposition wundert: Alle Maßnahmen dieses Rentenpakets standen genau so im Wahlprogramm der Union\n\nund im Wahlprogramm der SPD.\n\nWas haben die Bürgerinnen und Bürger, die uns gewählt haben, für eine Erwartung? Dass wir das, was im Wahlprogramm steht, auch umsetzen.\n\nBitte schön.\n\nSehr geehrter Herr Kollege Ernst, die deutsche Rentenversicherung erhält zur Zeit aus dem Bundeshaushalt jährlich einen Steuerzuschuss in Höhe von knapp 12 Milliarden Euro für Kindererziehungszeiten.\n\n- Ich beantworte Ihnen Ihre Frage zur Finanzierung. - Davon wird aktuell nur ein Teilbetrag für die Finanzierung der Kindererziehungszeiten ausgegeben. Deswegen sagen wir: Wir wollen den Beitrag des Bundes künftig zu 100 Prozent in Anspruch nehmen. Ab dem Jahr 2019 werden wir zusätzliche 2 Milliarden Euro Bundeszuschuss dazugeben;\n\ndenn richtig ist: Die Anerkennung von Kindererziehungszeiten ist nicht nur eine Sache der Beitragszahlerinnen und Beitragszahler, sie ist eine Sache der Allgemeinheit. Deswegen sollen auch alle Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler zur Finanzierung der Mütterrente beitragen.\n\nZu einer Gesellschaft, die zusammenhält, gehört auch, dass Menschen mit Behinderungen mitten unter uns leben, gleichberechtigt und gleich anerkannt sind. Es ist großartig, dass sich diese Große Koalition nach vielen Diskussionen und auch gescheiterten Anläufen vorgenommen hat, die Eingliederungshilfe für Menschen mit Behinderung zu reformieren. Dabei werden auch noch die Kommunen entlastet. Auch das ist richtig. Die großartige Zusage an die Menschen mit Behinderung in unserem Land ist: Ja, mit uns kommt die Reform der Eingliederungshilfe.\n\nEs ist ein gutes Zeichen, Frau Bundesministerin Nahles, dass Sie Frau Bentele, die selbst mit einer Behinderung lebt, zur neuen Beauftragten der Bundesregierung für die Belange behinderter Menschen gemacht haben. Ich möchte an dieser Stelle unserem Kollegen Hubert Hüppe, der in den letzten vier Jahren in der Bundesregierung für diese Aufgabe verantwortlich war, ein herzliches Dankeschön für sein großartiges Engagement aussprechen.\n\nMeine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, ich will zum Schluss feststellen: Ja, wir stehen zu dem, was in unserem Wahlprogramm stand und was wir, die Große Koalition, im Koalitionsvertrag vereinbart haben. Deswegen gilt in den kommenden vier Jahren für uns klar und eindeutig bei Arbeit, Sozialem und Rente: Wir halten Wort.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5427,alexander-dobrindt,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir leiten heute ein neues Kapitel der Infrastrukturfinanzierung ein\n\nund vollziehen einen echten Systemwechsel von einer vorwiegend steuerfinanzierten Infrastruktur zu einer nutzerfinanzierten Infrastruktur, das heißt von nicht zweckgebundenen Steuermitteln hin zur zweckgebundenen Nutzerfinanzierung. Kurz gesagt: Es geht um einen weiteren Schritt bei der Richtungsentscheidung,\n\nhin zur aktiven Mobilitätsfreiheit weg vom grünen Verkehrspessimismus, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nJa, die Bundesregierung setzt das um, was Ihnen nicht gelungen ist: einen großen Anteil der mobilitätsbezogenen Einnahmen wieder direkt in die Infrastruktur zu investieren und so unsere Wachstums- und Wohlstandschancen durch Mobilität zu sichern.\n\nWir bewegen mit der Infrastrukturabgabe 3,7 Milliarden Euro vom Haushalt des Bundesfinanzministeriums in den Haushalt des Bundesverkehrsministeriums, und zwar jedes Jahr, dauerhaft und zweckgebunden für die Infrastruktur. Das ist genau das, was auch die Europäische Kommission in ihrem Weißbuch 2011 von den Mitgliedstaaten gefordert hat: die umfassende Anwendung des Prinzips der Kostentragung durch die Nutzer und Verursacher.\n\nWir setzen das um,\n\nund deswegen ist die Infrastrukturabgabe auch ein europäisches Projekt. Es erfüllt die drei Grundsätze Subsidiarität, Solidarität und Gerechtigkeit.\n\nEs erfüllt den Grundsatz der Subsidiarität, weil wir die Verantwortung für den Erhalt und Ausbau der Infrastruktur in Deutschland übernehmen, die ganz Europa miteinander verbindet.\n\nHerr Präsident, es erfüllt auch so den Zweck einer aktiven Debatte.\n\nVon daher kann ich die Grünen nur weiter aufrufen, sich daran zu beteiligen, wenn es darum geht, sich für die Infrastruktur in Deutschland einzusetzen.\n\nSolidarität war der zweite Begriff, den ich als Begründung genannt habe, warum es sich um ein europäisches Projekt handelt.\n\nWeil wir uns heute schon ganz selbstverständlich an der Infrastrukturfinanzierung der meisten unserer Nachbarländer beteiligen,\n\nwird diese Selbstverständlichkeit jetzt auch auf deutschen Straßen Realität. Das ist Solidarität und Gerechtigkeit, weil es zukünftig zwischen Nutzern, die sich an der Finanzierung unserer Infrastruktur beteiligen, und Nutzern, die diese Straßen kostenlos benutzen, keinen Unterschied mehr geben wird. Das ist das europäische Projekt.\n\nDeswegen schlage ich vor: Akzeptieren Sie einfach, dass es sich dabei um einen ordnungspolitischen Grundgedanken handelt. Zweckbindung ist ein ordnungspolitisches Projekt. Wir stellen einen klaren Bezug zwischen Einnahmen und Ausgaben her. Das tun wir bei der Lkw-Maut und bei der Infrastrukturabgabe, und das setzen wir bei öffentlich-privaten Partnerschaften um. Das machen wir übrigens auch bei der Digitalisierung der Mobilität über die Digitale Dividende II. Dieser Systemwechsel ist ein echter Meilenstein in der Finanzierung der Infrastruktur. Das Verursacherprinzip „Wer mitnutzt, der zahlt mit“ wird umgesetzt. Damit schaffen wir eine breitere Basis für die zukünftige Finanzierungsgrundlage unserer Infrastruktur.\n\nIn den meisten europäischen Ländern gibt es drei Säulen der Finanzierung der Infrastruktur: Kfz-Steuersysteme, Mineralölsteuersysteme und Mautsysteme. In Deutschland haben wir bisher nur zwei Säulen: die Kfz-Steuer und die Mineralölsteuer. Wir bauen jetzt die dritte Säule, wie sie in unseren Nachbarländern bereits existiert. Dass es dabei zu keinen Mehrbelastungen derer kommen darf, die bisher die beiden ersten Säulen bedienen, ist, glaube ich, geradezu selbstverständlich.\n\nDeswegen wird es beim Aufbau der dritten Säule, der Infrastrukturabgabe, zu einer Absenkung der mittleren Säule, der Kfz-Steuer, kommen. Damit gibt es keine Mehrbelastung von Haltern von in Deutschland zugelassenen Kraftfahrzeugen.\n\nWir bewegen mit der Infrastrukturabgabe jedes Jahr 3,7 Milliarden Euro vom Finanzministerium in das Verkehrsministerium. Wir erreichen dabei jedes Jahr Mehreinnahmen von 500 Millionen Euro.\n\nDiese halbe Milliarde ist nachweisbar solide, präzise und transparent errechnet. Das können Sie sowohl in unseren Berechnungen als auch in den entsprechenden Gutachten nachlesen. Sie können da sogar nachlesen, dass wir in Zukunft mit eher höheren Einnahmen zu rechnen haben, weil das Ministerium hier konservativ vorgegangen ist und geradezu vorsichtig kalkuliert hat.\n\nIch habe in den letzten Wochen eine Reihe von Debatten über dieses Thema geführt, auch im Bundesrat.\n\nIch erinnere mich noch sehr genau, was Ihr Vorzeigeverkehrsideologe Winne Hermann gesagt hat: Wir sehen ein, dass man nicht nur mehr Haushaltsmittel fordern kann, sondern dass man sich langfristig, perspektivisch um eine neue Finanzierung kümmern muss.\n\nGenau das tun wir auch. Aber da wäre es angebracht, dass Sie von den Grünen, wenn Sie schon nach neuen -Finanzierungsformen schreien, sich damit auseinandersetzen, was wir vorgeschlagen haben. Sie lehnen aber alles nur plump ab.\n\nSie wollen keine Infrastrukturabgabe. Sie wollen keine Einbindung von privatem Kapital über öffentlich-private Partnerschaften. Sie lehnen auch den Neubau von Straßen ab, wie man in Ihren Veröffentlichungen immer wieder nachlesen kann. Das Einzige, was Sie wirklich wollen, ist, unseren Autofahrern immer tiefer in die Tasche zu greifen.\n\nDas machen Sie mit Ihrem Vorschlag zur Mineralölsteuer. Die Zitate sind doch eindeutig. So sagt Winne Hermann: Man könnte in einem ersten Schritt die Mineralölsteuer erhöhen. - Lieber Herr Anton Hofreiter, Sie haben gesagt: Das Benzin ist immer noch zu billig. - Der Geschäftsführer der Grünen, Kellner, sagt: ein Extragroschen auf den Ölpreis! - Wenn es um das Abzocken der heimischen Autofahrer geht, dann werden Sie auf einmal kreativ. Ansonsten verweigern Sie die Mitarbeit.\n\nDabei darf man nicht vergessen, dass Sie wiederholt vorgeschlagen haben, die Totalmaut einzuführen. Sie befürworten ein System, das jeden Kilometer auf der Straße einzeln berechnet, einzeln bepreist und einzeln abkassiert. Sie wollen über GPS-Systeme den gläsernen Autofahrer schaffen. Sie wollen Familien und Pendler mit dieser Totalmaut extra belasten. Mit der ideologischen Fundamentalopposition, die Sie pflegen, gefährden Sie die individuelle Mobilität in Deutschland. Das Einzige, was Sie vorschlagen, ist ein straßenfeindliches Entmobilisierungsprogramm, das wachstums- und wohlstandsfeindlich ist. Das ist mit uns nicht zu machen.\n\nIch verstehe Ihre ganze Aufregung nicht, wenn man Ihnen das vorhält, was Sie selber ständig veröffentlichen.\n\nSie haben sich in den vergangenen 40 Jahren in Wahrheit nicht sehr viel weiterbewegt. In Ihren früheren Bundestagswahlprogrammen ist zu lesen: Wir wenden uns gegen einen weiteren Ausbau von Autobahnen und Fernstraßen. Oder: Der beste Verkehr ist der, der gar nicht entsteht.\n\nOder: Die Grünen wollen den Abschied vom Auto als Massenverkehrsmittel und wollen die Straßenbenutzung einschränken. - Davon sind Sie heute in Wahrheit nicht sehr weit entfernt. Das alles passt weiterhin zu Ihrer Ideologie.\n\nSie sagen heute noch: Die Fixierung auf den Infrastrukturausbau ist der Weg zurück in eine alte Verkehrspolitik. Sie sagen: Das Auto ist der Irrsinn der Jahrhunderts. Sie sagen auch: Weniger Autos sind besser als mehr Autos. - Das ist der grüne Irrtum in seiner Kontinuität. So denken Sie heute noch.\n\nSie sind gegen Mobilitätswachstum. Sie wollen damit das Wirtschaftswachstum einschränken. Ich sage Ihnen: Den unauflösbaren Zusammenhang zwischen Wirtschaftswachstum und Mobilitätswachstum werden Sie nie einsehen. Er ist aber gegeben. Ohne wachsende Mobilität werden wir keine wachsende Wirtschaft und keinen wachsenden Wohlstand haben, aber dafür stehen wir.\n\nDer Ausbau, der Unterhalt und die Digitalisierung unserer Verkehrsinfrastruktur sind ein bedeutender Schritt zur Mobilität 4.0. Das ist in der Tat eine der größten politischen, wirtschaftlichen und gesellschaftlichen Herausforderungen seit Jahrzehnten. Das kann man nur mit einem Höchstmaß an Investitions- und Innovationsbereitschaft begleiten. Was Sie hier wieder aufführen, nämlich Technologie- und Mobilitätsfeindlichkeit immer vor sich herzutragen, führt dazu, dass wir den Anschluss an eine moderne Gesellschaft verlieren,\n\ndass wir bei der Sicherung des zukünftigen Wirtschaftswachstums und des Wohlstands scheitern werden. Das sind die wahren Alternativen, um die es geht. Mit Ihnen: Einschränkung der individuellen Mobilität, Schwächung unseres Wirtschaftsstandorts, und mit uns: Wohlstandssicherung, Mobilitätsgewinn und ein Systemwechsel zur Nutzerfinanzierung.\n\nJa, selbstverständlich.\n\nLiebe Frau Haßelmann, ich hatte schon immer das Gefühl, dass Sie in der Vergangenheit Schwierigkeiten hatten, zu verstehen, was der Systemwechsel eigentlich bedeutet.\n\nIch habe jetzt nicht die Hoffnung, dass wir in dieser Debatte zu dem Ergebnis kommen, dass Sie das Prinzip der Nutzerfinanzierung, das wir umsetzen, als eines verstehen werden, dass die zukünftige Investition in unsere Infrastruktur sicherstellt. Ich hatte auch nicht das Gefühl in der Vergangenheit, dass Sie das Prinzip der Gerechtigkeit auf unseren Straßen mit unterstützen.\n\nSie von den Grünen müssen einfach einmal akzeptieren, dass die Lösung des Problems der Infrastruktur-finanzierung, ein Problem, das wir auf Dauer lösen müssen, nicht nur in Deutschland, sondern in Europa, damit zusammenhängt, dass Nutzer sich an der Infrastruktur-finanzierung beteiligen. Glauben Sie bitte einfach: Sie können Ihre Haltung, gegen mehr Investitionen und Straßenbau einzutreten, dauerhaft nicht aufrechterhalten. Denn wenn wir das tun, was Sie mit Ihrer Entkoppelungstheorie vertreten, nämlich Wirtschaftswachstum und Wohlstand von Investitionen in die Infrastruktur abzukoppeln,\n\ntun wir nichts anderes, als unsere Gesellschaft vom Wohlstand abzukoppeln. Das können wir nicht zulassen.\n\nWir erreichen mit dem Investitionshochlauf, den mein Haus beschrieben hat, einen Aufwuchs der Investitionen um 40 Prozent bis zum Jahr 2018. Das ist ein absoluter Rekord. Übrigens ist das eine Zahl, die auch von der Daehre-Kommission und der Bodewig-Kommission in ihren Berechnungen so eingefordert wird. Sie haben an vielen Stellen in der Vergangenheit das Gutachten der Daehre-Kommission und der Bodewig-Kommission zitiert, Sie haben auch darauf verwiesen, dass in der Sonder-Verkehrsministerkonferenz genau die Inhalte dieses Gutachtens mit beschlossen worden sind.\n\nSie müssten jetzt einmal akzeptieren, dass wir genau das auch umsetzen.\n\nSie sollten sich vielleicht auch daran erinnern, dass die Länder, an deren Regierung Sie beteiligt sind, dem im Bundesrat zugestimmt haben. Daehre und Bodewig sprechen davon, dass wir zusätzliche Haushaltsmittel für die Infrastruktur aufwenden sollen - das machen wir -, dass wir eine Erhöhung der Leistungs- und Finanzierungsvereinbarung mit der Bahn machen sollen; auch das tun wir. Mit 28 Milliarden Euro sind es 5 Milliarden Euro mehr als in der letzten Finanzierungsperiode. Dass eine überjährige Mittelbereitstellung erfolgen soll, das haben wir umgesetzt. Das Prinzip „Erhalt vor Neubau“ findet so bei uns statt. Die Ausweitung der Lkw-Maut auf alle Bundesstraßen unter Einbeziehung der Lkw ab 7,5 Tonnen setzen wir so um.\n\nDie Daehre/Bodewig-Kommission spricht davon, dass Abgaben für nicht in Deutschland zugelassene Pkw eingeführt werden sollten. Auch das setzen wir um. Sie haben in den Ländern auch da entsprechend mitgestimmt und dafür gesorgt, dass wir diese Diskussionen heute haben und dass wir den gerade beschriebenen Weg eines Systemwechsels gehen.\n\nDass Sie nach dieser Bilanz - Umsetzung dessen, was die Daehre/Bodewig-Kommission vorgeschlagen hat, durch diese Bundesregierung - jetzt auf Ihrem Parteitag davon sprechen, dass notwendige Investitionen in die Infrastruktur verschleppt werden, obwohl wir so viel investieren wie niemals zuvor, so viel Heuchelei hätte ich hier eigentlich nicht einmal Ihnen zugetraut, meine Damen und Herren von den Grünen. Sie tragen nicht nur nichts dazu bei, dass wir einen Investitionshochlauf haben; Sie verweigern sich geradezu dem Systemwechsel.\n\nWir haben den Investitionshochlauf gestartet. Wir stellen Rekordmittel für die Infrastruktur zur Verfügung. Sie haben nur die Erhöhung von Mineralölsteuer oder Schuldenfinanzierung der Investitionen im Sinn. Dazu muss ich klar sagen: Unser Prinzip ist ein anderes. Mit uns gibt es keine Finanzierung der Infrastruktur durch Schulden oder durch Steuererhöhungen. Bei uns heißt das Prinzip: Gerechtigkeit finanziert die Straßen.\n\nIch bleibe dabei:\n\nDie Infrastrukturabgabe, sie ist fair, sie ist sinnvoll, und sie ist gerecht. Sie ist fair, weil sie in den meisten unserer Nachbarländer genau so durchgeführt wird.\n\nSie ist sinnvoll, weil jeder Euro, den wir einnehmen, zusätzlich in die Infrastruktur investiert wird, und sie ist gerecht, weil sie zukünftig jeden, der die Straßen nutzt, angemessen an der Finanzierung beteiligt.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n15412,hond-albert-weiler,\"Herr Ernst, ich habe da jetzt schon mit Spannung zugehört. Ich bin jetzt etwas später gekommen; ich habe Sie schon von draußen gehört.\n\nIch habe Angst, dass Sie hier noch einen Herzinfarkt bekommen. Deshalb wollte ich Sie mal etwas dämpfen. Meine Frage: Ist die Angst jetzt so groß, dass die SPD nicht mit Ihnen koalieren will, dass Sie hier jetzt solche Schreiparaden machen?\n\nWissen Sie, die Befristung als solche - ich habe es Ihnen schon mal gesagt -, auch für zwei Jahre, schafft Arbeitsplätze.\n\nIch werde es jetzt wiederholen: Als langjähriger Bürgermeister hatte ich viele befristet Beschäftigte, die ich aber fast alle in ein unbefristetes Beschäftigungsverhältnis übernommen habe. Diese befristeten Arbeitsverhältnisse haben mir die Möglichkeit gegeben, festzustellen, ob die Betreffenden ins Team passen. Viele, die ins Team gepasst haben, habe ich behalten. Diejenigen, die nicht ins Team gepasst haben, sind gegangen. Wenn das anders gewesen wäre, wäre das für beide Seiten nicht gut gewesen, weder für den Angestellten noch für das Team; denn letztendlich muss das System funktionieren. In meiner Gemeinde funktioniert es gut.\n\nDurch Geschrei, Geplärre, so eine Ausdrucksweise und Beschimpfungen wird das Ganze nicht besser. Das wird auch den Angestellten nicht gerecht, selbst wenn ich berücksichtige, dass wir uns in der Wahlkampfzeit befinden.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n4221,renate-kunast,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Herr Minister Maas, ich muss zugeben, dass ich letzte Woche, am Vorlesetag, an Sie gedacht habe.\n\nIch habe überlegt, was ich in der Grundschule vorlesen soll. Am Ende habe ich es nicht vorgelesen, aber mir kam Das tapfere Schneiderlein in die Finger: Sieben auf einen Streich. Das tapfere Schneiderlein stickt sich auf seinen Gürtel, es habe sieben auf einen Streich erledigt, und fortan halten die Leute es für einen Helden.\n\nDas ist ganz klar ein Beispiel für gelungene PR-Arbeit.\n\nSo ähnlich machen Sie es auch, Herr Maas:\n\nDer ganz große Macher. Sie haben ganz viel erzählt, aber im Ergebnis haben Sie, wie ich finde, nur ganz wenige Erfolge vorzuweisen. Sie haben vieles versprochen und angekündigt: Die gesetzliche Frauenquote war Ostern 2014 schon fast in trockenen Tüchern; eine Mietpreisbremse haben Sie angekündigt; den Mordparagrafen wollten Sie modernisieren - gut, Sie haben eine Kommission -; das Urheberrecht wollten Sie den Erfordernissen des digitalen Zeitalters anpassen und die Datenschutz-Grundverordnung voranbringen. Bei TTIP haben Sie verbal so richtig zugeschlagen: TTIP soll endlich eine breite demokratische Legitimation bekommen, und bestimmte Bereiche sollen ausgeklammert werden. - Das alles und noch viel mehr haben Sie sich auf den kleinen Gürtel gestickt. Gefühlt haben Sie jedes Wochenende jedes dritte Thema noch einmal verkauft. Herausgekommen ist aber, finde ich, relativ wenig.\n\nSchauen wir uns das an: Sie haben die Sachen zu einem Gutteil überhaupt nicht wirklich angepackt. Sie haben gerade als Erfolg verbucht, dass die Sukzessivadoption jetzt auch bei Homosexuellen möglich ist. Natürlich, aber nur in dem minimalen Rahmen, den das Bundesverfassungsgericht durch seine Entscheidung bis spätestens 30. Juni dieses Jahres gefordert hat. Sie hätten gar nicht anders gekonnt. Insofern geht mein Lob an der Stelle an Karlsruhe, nicht an Sie. Sie sind keinen Millimeter weiter gegangen; trotzdem muss man zwei Verfahren hintereinander absolvieren.\n\nSie haben gesagt, dass Sie großartig angepackt haben. Nehmen wir doch einmal den Fall Edathy. Natürlich mussten Sie dieses Thema anpacken angesichts der Vorfälle und der Frage, wer in der alten Koalition oder während der Koalitionsverhandlungen wem was erzählt hat; das hatte ja auch juristische Nachspiele. Dann haben Sie eine Vorlage gemacht, sind aber gleich so weit vorangeschritten, dass in der Anhörung, soweit ich mich erinnere, alle sieben Sachverständigen gesagt haben: Das wollen wir nicht; das ist nicht richtig. - Selbst der Praktiker, der Oberstaatsanwalt aus Gießen, sagte: Das haben wir nicht gewollt. - Daraufhin mussten Sie an der Stelle nochmals Änderungen vornehmen.\n\nSie haben hier auch manch andere Vorschläge gemacht, zum Beispiel zu den Marktwächtern und zum Sachverständigenrat. Das sind ja gute Sachen, die auch wir durchaus gefordert haben. Aber es kommt darauf an, ob die guten Vorschläge, die gemacht werden, auch in der Praxis umgesetzt werden.\n\n- Nun denn, meine Liebe, Sie sagen: „Mal abwarten!“ Die Legislaturperiode hat bekanntlich vier Jahre. Davon ist eines bald um.\n\nDer Justizminister hat sich mit Frau Schwesig hingesetzt und ganz klar gesagt, was alles kommen wird. Dann wollen wir es auch sehen, und zwar zum versprochenen Zeitpunkt.\n\nBeispiel Mietpreisbremse. „Jetzt kommt die große Bremse“, haben Sie noch am 8. April dieses Jahres hier angekündigt. Sie haben sogar gesagt, die Wohnungswirtschaft solle nicht das neue Eldorado der Profitmaximierung werden.\n\nGroße kapitalismuskritische Worte eines SPDlers, des tapferen Schneiderleins. Dann hat es sich aber doch vom Riesen überwältigen lassen, der am Ende nicht ganz so tumb war wie im Märchen. Eifrige Lobbyisten haben Papiere geschrieben, die Zeit schritt immer weiter voran, und der Lobbyismus nahm immer mehr zu. Am Ende haben Sie sich die Sache zerreden lassen.\n\nDa Sie hier gerade gesagt haben, die Menschen würden in Zukunft bezahlbare Mieten haben, frage ich Sie: Herr Maas, geht es auch ein bisschen kleiner? Das ist ein bürokratisches Monster. Da ist nicht einmal eine wirkliche Bremse drin. Man muss erst die Bürokratie überwinden, um Mietsteigerungen im Hinblick auf einen Teil der Wohnungen - das gilt nämlich nicht für die Neuvermietung, sondern nur für Bestandswohnungen - für die Dauer von fünf Jahren auf 110 Prozent zu begrenzen. So sorgt man nicht für bezahlbare Mieten, schon gar nicht, wenn das Begleitprogramm fehlt.\n\nOder nehmen wir die Frauenquote. Auch sie wurde am 8. April dieses Jahres groß angekündigt. Sie haben sogar mit Frau Schwesig zusammen in der Bundespressekonferenz gesessen und gesagt: Die anderen haben in der letzten Legislaturperiode nur geredet. Wir handeln jetzt. - Da sage ich als Frau, die auch in der letzten Legislaturperiode Abgeordnete war - vielleicht im Sinne aller Frauen, die beim letzten Mal dabei waren -: Das ist schon starker Tobak, wenn man nicht mehr durchbekommt als das, wofür wir in der letzten Legislaturperiode gekämpft haben.\n\nZugegeben, am Ende ist die Union umgefallen. Aber die CDU-Frauen haben dafür im Wahlprogramm eine 30-Prozent-Quote durchgesetzt. Mehr bekommt man heute auch gar nicht durch. Also: Mein Dank an die Frauen der letzten WP!\n\nSie hätten an dieser Stelle besser nicht aufgerüstet und besser nicht so viele Sachen aufgenommen, dass CDU und CSU am Ende noch lange an der Geschichte herumfuhrwerken können. Die Frauen haben keine Geduld mehr, Herr Maas! Wir wollen endlich etwas sehen!\n\nIch sage - auch in Ihre Richtung -: Ich trauere ein bisschen Rita Pawelski aus der letzten Legislaturperiode nach; denn die wäre jetzt auf der Zinne, wenn sie Frau Hasselfeldt hören würde. Frauen schaden der Wirtschaft, hat Frau Hasselfeldt faktisch gesagt, indem sie formulierte: Jetzt hat die Wirtschaft Vorrang und nicht die Frauenquote. - Ich kann nur sagen: Schade, dass sie heute nicht da ist. Wer solche Kolleginnen wie Frau Hasselfeldt im Bundestag hat, braucht keine altmodischen Männer mehr.\n\nHerr Kauder - schade, dass er nicht da ist und nicht hier sitzt -, der Umgangston in der Koalition geht mich ja nichts an,\n\nund auch ich bin für harte Sätze bekannt. Aber in der Sache ist es so: Herr Kauder hat über Frau Schwesig gesagt, sie sei weinerlich. Das ist eine Abwertung. So etwas sagt er über Männer nicht. Ich finde, das ist eine Entschuldigung wert.\n\nNun zu Ihnen, Herr Maas. Ich würde Sie bitten, in Zukunft vernünftige Gesetzgebungsverfahren auf den Weg zu bringen, kein Hopplahopp. Auch dafür müsste ein Justizminister eintreten. Es kann nicht sein, dass wir dienstagnachmittags geänderte Vorlagen für Mittwoch, 9 Uhr, vorgelegt bekommen. Bei der Istanbul-Konvention sind Sie, was § 177 StGB angeht, auf Druck der Justizministerinnen der Länder glücklicherweise umgefallen; erst wollten Sie ja keine Änderung. Ich würde mir wünschen, dass wir hier gemeinsam eine Lösung finden. Ich würde mir auch wünschen, dass wir dazu eine ordentliche Beratung im Rechtsausschuss durchführen. Wir haben für den 28. Januar nächsten Jahres eine Anhörung beantragt. Ich weiß nicht, warum die Union das abgelehnt hat - vielleicht um sich vorher intern zu einigen. Ich würde mir wünschen - -\n\nDarf ich den letzten Satz noch sagen? - Ich würde mir wünschen, dass Sie rechtspolitisch und verbraucherpolitisch in vielen Bereichen Ihre Stimme erheben. Um nur einige Dinge zu nennen: Anti-Doping soll der Sport und nicht das Strafgesetzbuch regeln,\n\ndie Verbraucherkennzeichnung hat Herr Müller gerade versemmelt, und Sie sind für nachhaltigen Konsum zuständig.\n\nSetzen Sie die Dinge endlich auf die Tagesordnung - nicht nur verbal und in Interviews, sondern auch in der Realität Ihres ministeriellen Handelns!\"\n14645,johannes-fechner,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Liebe Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörer auf der Tribüne! Die Berichte unserer Verfassungsschutzbehörden zeigen es: Leider ist auch in Deutschland die Gefahr von terroristischen Anschlägen gestiegen. Deshalb müssen wir als Gesetzgeber genau prüfen, ob es Gesetzeslücken gibt, die wir zur Verhinderung von Anschlägen schließen müssen. Dabei gilt der Satz von Helmut Schmidt, auch im Zorn einen kühlen Kopf zu bewahren, um effektiv Kriminalität und Terrorismus zu bekämpfen. Genau dies tun wir mit diesem Gesetz. Mit diesem Gesetz werden wir das Maßregelrecht für extremistische Straftäter erweitern. Insbesondere wollen wir die elektronische Aufenthaltsüberwachung, also die sogenannte Fußfessel, auf extremistische Straftäter ausweiten. Soweit es in den Diskussionen im Vorfeld Kritik daran gab, dass dies rechtsstaatlich bedenklich sei, ist zu sagen: Ja, die Fußfessel ist ein ganz erheblicher Eingriff in die Grundrechte des Betroffenen. Aber wenn feststeht, dass eine Person gefährlich ist und dass sie schon gerichtlich festgestellt Straftaten begangen hat, dann ist eine solche Maßnahme zum Schutz unserer Bevölkerung gerechtfertigt.\n\nWir erweitern deshalb den Anwendungsbereich der Fußfessel, damit zukünftig die Fußfessel auch Straftätern auferlegt werden kann, die sich wegen einer schweren staatsgefährdenden Gewalttat, wegen Terrorismusfinanzierung oder wegen der Unterstützung einer terroristischen Vereinigung strafbar gemacht haben. Denn wenn durch eine solche Straftat erwiesen ist, dass diese Person gefährlich ist, dann muss es möglich sein, sie durch die Fußfessel zu überwachen, um weitere Straftaten zu verhindern.\n\nDas ist verfassungsgemäß und rechtsstaatlich; denn die Fußfessel kann nach unserem Gesetzesvorschlag eben nur Personen auferlegt werden, deren Gefährlichkeit erwiesen ist. Nur wer sich wegen bestimmter Straftaten, die ich genannt habe, strafbar gemacht hat, dem kann die Fußfessel auferlegt werden. Das ist auch richtig so. Hier gelten also ganz klare rechtsstaatliche Kriterien für die Fußfessel.\n\nRichtig ist, dass die Fußfessel kein Allheilmittel ist. Der schreckliche Mord an einem Priester in Frankreich hat gezeigt, dass Täter, die zu allem entschlossen sind, von solchen Taten nicht abgehalten werden können. Dennoch sprechen zwei Argumente für die Fußfessel: Die Überwachung durch die Fußfessel führt dazu, dass der Fußfesselträger weiß, dass die von ihm begangene Straftat aller Wahrscheinlichkeit nach sofort ihm zugerechnet wird, weil ja festgestellt werden kann, dass er am Tatort war. Zumindest dem Täterkreis, dem die Entdeckung der Tat nicht egal ist, wird das Entdeckungsrisiko zu hoch sein, und man wird von der Straftat absehen.\n\nVor allem hat aber nicht zuletzt die Sachverständigenanhörung ergeben, dass gerichtliche Weisungen an Extremisten, bestimmte Orte wie etwa Flughäfen, Großveranstaltungen, Bahnhöfe oder Treffpunkte von Extremisten nicht zu betreten, durch die Fußfessel effektiv überwacht werden können. Wenn gegen ein solches Verbot verstoßen wird, dann kann die Polizei informiert werden, und die örtliche Polizei kann sofort einschreiten. Deshalb nochmals: Die Fußfessel mag kein Allheilmittel sein, aber sie ist eine Möglichkeit, Straftaten zu verhindern, weil für den Täter ein hohes Entdeckungsrisiko besteht. Und sie ist ein wirksames Mittel, um zu verhindern, dass sich Gewalttäter in potenziellen Anschlagszielen wie etwa Flughafengebäuden aufhalten.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, mit diesem Gesetz erweitern wir den Anwendungsbereich der Fußfessel maßvoll, damit erwiesenermaßen gefährliche Terroristen überwacht werden können, um zu verhindern, dass diese sich in bestimmten Örtlichkeiten aufhalten. Angesichts der leider bestehenden Bedrohungslage ist diese maßvolle Ausweitung der Anwendung der Fußfessel sinnvoll. Wir schaffen insbesondere eine rechtsstaatliche Grundlage, damit nicht ins Blaue hinein unbescholtenen Bürgern diese Fußfessel auferlegt wird, sondern nur erwiesenermaßen gefährlichen Gewalttätern.\n\nIn diesem Sinne rufe ich Sie auf, diesem maßvollen Gesetz zuzustimmen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3725,helmut-brandt,\"Die Weltgemeinschaft Reformierter Kirchen setzt sich aus 229 reformierten, presbyterianischen und kongregationalistischen sowie unierten Kirchen in 108 Staaten zusammen. Mit etwa 80 Millionen Mitgliedern weltweit ist die Weltgemeinschaft die größte protestantische Weltorganisation.\n\nBis Ende 2013 residierte die Weltgemeinschaft reformierter Kirchen in Genf. Am 1. Januar 2014 nahm sie nun ihre Arbeit an ihrem neuen Amtssitz in Hannover auf, nachdem sie die Bewerbungen der Städte Utrecht und Johannesburg zurückgewiesen hatte. Genf wurde aus finanziellen Gründen verlassen, der neue Sitz Hannover überzeugte mit seinem kirchlichen Umfeld. In der Landeshauptstadt befinden sich die beiden Mitgliedskirchen, die Evangelisch-Reformierte Kirche und die Lippische Landeskirche.\n\nDie Ansiedelung der Weltgemeinschaft Reformierter Kirchen in Deutschland belegt das positive Verhältnis von Staat und Kirchen in unserem Land. Die niedersächsische Landeshauptstadt entwickelt sich mit dem Umzug immer mehr zu einem protestantischen Zentrum in Deutschland und Europa, in dem sich die große Vielfalt des Protestantismus zeigt.\n\nBereits im Dezember 2012 wurden der Weltgemeinschaft Reformierter Kirchen von der niedersächsischen Landesregierung die Rechte einer Körperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts verliehen. Dadurch wurde die Weltgemeinschaft in die Lage versetzt, einen Vertrag mit der Bundesregierung schließen zu können.\n\nAm 11. und 14. April 2014 unterzeichneten die Bundesregierung und die Weltgemeinschaft Reformierter Kirchen einen Vertrag mit dem Ziel, der Weltgemeinschaft und ihren Mitarbeitern die Wahrnehmung ihrer Aufgaben in Deutschland zu erleichtern.\n\nEin Vertragsschluss war notwendig, da es bislang keine passenden allgemeinen gesetzlichen Regelungen für einen solchen besonderen Fall der Ansiedelung gab. Die vereinbarten Regelungen umfassen eine erleichterte Visaerteilung für die ausländischen Beschäftigten und Gäste der Weltgemeinschaft, die Befreiung vom Erfordernis eines Aufenthaltstitels für die ausländischen Beschäftigten und ihre unmittelbaren Angehörigen, den Zugang der unmittelbaren Angehörigen zum deutschen Arbeitsmarkt sowie die von Zöllen und Steuern befreite Einfuhr von Möbeln und persönlicher Habe der Beschäftigten. Eine weitere Erleichterung ist der Zugang zur gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung.\n\nDer Inhalt des Vertrages bezieht sich somit auf Gegenstände, deren Regelung dem Deutschen Bundestag vorbehalten ist. Der vorliegende Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung schafft die Voraussetzungen, um den vertraglich zugesagten Sonderrechten innerstaatlich zur Geltung zu verhelfen.\n\nMit der gemäß Artikel 8 des Vertrages notwendigen Zustimmung des Bundestages wird die Arbeit der Mitarbeiter der Weltgemeinschaft eine enorme Erleichterung erfahren. Dies ist vor allem in Hinblick auf die wertvolle Arbeit, die die Weltgemeinschaft für den ökumenischen und interreligiösen Dialog leistet, wünschenswert.\n\nIch bitte daher um Ihre Zustimmung.\n\nDr. Lars Castellucci (SPD)\n\n:\n\nWir beraten heute den Vertrag zwischen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und der Weltgemeinschaft Reformierter Kirchen. Die Weltgemeinschaft der Reformierten Kirchen ist eine internationale Dachorganisation von zurzeit 229 reformierten, presbyterianischen und kongregationalistischen sowie unierten Kirchen in 108 Staaten, denen rund 80 Millionen Christen weltweit angehören.\n\nDas Exekutivkomitee der Weltgemeinschaft Reformierter Kirchen hat am 5. November 2012 entschieden, seinen Sitz von Genf, Schweiz, wo die Weltgemeinschaft Reformierter Kirchen seit 1948 ansässig ist, nach Hannover zu verlegen. Hannover hat man gewählt, da die niedersächsische Landeshauptstadt in unmittelbarer Nähe zu den beiden Mitgliedskirchen der Weltgemeinschaft Reformierter Kirchen, nämlich der Evangelisch-Reformierten Kirche und der -Lippischen Landeskirche, liegt. Außerdem haben der Reformierte Bund, die Union Evangelischer Kirchen und die Evangelische Kirche in Deutschland, die mit der Weltgemeinschaft Reformierter Kirchen zusammenarbeiten, ihren Sitz in Hannover.\n\nEbenso wie die Bundesregierung begrüßen wir die Ansiedlung der Weltgemeinschaft Reformierter Kirchen in Hannover. Der Vertrag zwischen der Weltgemeinschaft Reformierter Kirchen und der Bundesrepublik Deutschland dient nun dazu, diese Ansiedlung sowie ihre Tätigkeit in Deutschland zu erleichtern.\n\nFür mich als Angehörigem der Badischen Landeskirche war die Beschäftigung mit dem Glaubensbekenntnis der evangelisch-reformierten Kirchen eine spannende Erfahrung, die ich im Zusammenhang mit diesem Vertrag erneuert habe. Gleichzeitig stellt sich mir auch wieder unmittelbar die Frage, warum sich bei so viel Gemeinsamem das Trennende doch immer in den Vordergrund schiebt. Und das eben nicht nur zwischen evangelisch und katholisch, sondern wie wir hier sehen eben auch innerevangelisch. Das Vermögen, stärker das Verbindende zu sehen, zu betonen oder auch einzuüben, wird eine immer wichtigere Aufgabe in heterogenen, multikulturellen Gesellschaften werden. Unser Tagesordnungspunkt ist für mich auch eine Erinnerung daran. In diesem Zusammenhang will ich auch etwas zu dem Begriff des „Sonderrechts“ sagen. Er wird in der Gesetzesbegründung verwendet und ist ja auch zutreffend. Unsere Gesellschaft ist nun aber so gestrickt, dass Sonderrechte gerne beäugt werden, nach dem Motto: „Da nimmt sich jemand etwas heraus.“ Nun ist es so, dass in einem Vertrag mit Protestanten natürlich nicht nur Rechte sondern auch Pflichten festgeschrieben sind; das ist der eine Punkt; und der ist gut so. Der andere, ebenfalls weit über unseren aktuellen Kontext hinausweisende Punkt ist: Auch Sonderrechte, vor allem solche, die anderen nichts wegnehmen, gehören zu heterogener und multikultureller werdenden Gesellschaften. Sie sollen Zusammenleben ermöglichen, dass eigenen Traditionen entspricht, und dabei den gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhalt insgesamt im Blick behält. Wie weit sie jeweils gehen, muss immer ausbalanciert werden, aber dass es Sonderrechte gibt und geben muss ist davon unbenommen. Sie gehören in eine bunter werdende, pluralistische Welt.\n\nZurück zur Weltgemeinschaft Reformierter Kirchen: Besonders beeindruckend ist für mich das Bekenntnis von Accra aus dem Jahr 2004, das ebenfalls den Charakter des unmittelbaren Handelns hat: Nach diesem Bekenntnis sind Christinnen und Christen aufgrund biblischer Lehre angehalten, sich für soziale und wirtschaftliche Gerechtigkeit einzusetzen. Die negativen ökonomischen und ökologischen Auswirkungen des heute vorherrschenden Weltwirtschaftsmodells verpflichten die reformierte Kirchenfamilie, dieses Problem als eine den Glauben an das Evangelium Jesu Christi tangierende Frage anzusehen.\n\nIn dem Bekenntnis von Accra heißt es - ich zitiere - :\n\nDie Politik ungehinderten Wachstums unter den Industrieländern und das Streben nach Gewinn multinationaler Unternehmen haben die Erde ausgeplündert und die Umwelt schwer geschädigt. …\n\nDiese Krise steht in direktem Verhältnis zur Entwicklung der neoliberalen wirtschaftlichen Globalisierung, die auf folgenden Überzeugungen beruht:\n\nungehinderter Wettbewerb, schrankenloser Konsum, ungebremstes Wirtschaftswachstum und Anhäufung von Reichtum sind das Beste für die ganze Welt;\n\nPrivatbesitz beinhaltet keine soziale Verpflichtung;\n\nFinanzspekulation, Liberalisierung und Deregulierung des Marktes, Privatisierung öffentlicher Versorgungsbetriebe und nationaler Ressourcen, ungehinderter Zugang für ausländische Investitionen und Importe, niedrigere Steuern und ungehinderter Kapitalverkehr schaffen Wohlstand für alle;\n\nSoziale Verpflichtungen, der Schutz von Armen und Schwachen, Gewerkschaftsleben und zwischenmenschliche Beziehungen sind dem Wirtschaftswachstum und der Kapitalakkumulation untergeordnet.\n\nDiese Ideologie, die von sich behauptet, es gäbe zu ihr keine Alternative, verlangt den Armen und der Schöpfung unendliche Opfer ab und verspricht fälschlicherweise, die Welt durch die Schaffung von Reichtum und Wohlstand retten zu können. Sie tritt mit dem Anspruch auf, alle Lebenssphären beherrschen zu wollen und verlangt absolute Gefolgschaft, was einem Götzendienst gleichkommt.\n\nDas sind starke Worte, die aber in der Tradition von Zwingli und Calvin stehen und in der evangelisch-lutherischen und katholischen Soziallehre durchaus Entsprechungen finden. Sie knüpfen eine Verbindung zwischen dem Glaubensbekenntnis und einer sozial-ethischen Verantwortung. Mit Franziskus hat ja auch die katholische Kirche einen Erneuerer ähnlicher Ausrichtung.\n\nZwingli selbst sagte einmal: „In einer Futterkrippe wird er (Jesus) geboren, während wir in Daunenfedern schnarchen.“ Und für sein Christentum leitet er daraus ab: „Ein Christ sein heißt nicht, von Christus zu schwätzen, sondern ein Leben zu führen, wie er es geführt hat.“\n\nIn diesem Sinne freuen wir uns, dass die Weltgemeinschaft der Reformierten Kirchen ihren Sitz nun bei uns in Deutschland hat, und stimmen diesem Vertrag gerne zu.\"\n12658,wolfgang-strengmann-kuhn,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ein soziales Europa ist dringender denn je notwendig. Der Zusammenhalt zwischen den Ländern und den Menschen in Europa ist gefährdet. Nach der Wahl in Amerika in dieser Woche ist es vielleicht noch wichtiger, die europäische Einheit zu stärken und das soziale Europa stark zu machen.\n\nEs ist wichtig, dass das nicht nur in Sonntagsreden und in Gastbeiträgen passiert, sondern dass dem auch Taten folgen. Es ist schon ziemlich scheinheilig, dass die Ministerin an dem Tag, an dem dieser Gesetzentwurf im Bundeskabinett beschlossen wurde, einen Gastbeitrag für die FAZ geschrieben hat, in dem sie für einen stärkeren sozialen Zusammenhalt in Europa plädiert hat; denn dieser Gesetzentwurf ist das genaue Gegenteil.\n\nEr setzt europapolitisch ein völlig falsches Signal. Er ist sozialpolitisch verfehlt, und er erschwert die notwendige Integration vor Ort. Ausbaden vor Ort müssen das letztendlich die Kommunen. Deswegen ist Ihr Vorschlag für die Kommunen nur eine Scheinlösung.\n\nEinig sind wir uns darin, dass es Handlungsbedarf gibt. Es gibt das Urteil des Bundessozialgerichts. Es stellt auch keine gute Lösung dar, weil es keine Rechtsklarheit schafft. Dafür sind wir als Gesetzgeber verantwortlich. Es ist auch keine Lösung, zu sagen: Die Menschen sollen, um ihr Existenzminimum zu sichern, was ein Grundrecht ist - da hat die Kollegin Zimmermann völlig recht -, Sozialhilfe beziehen können. Sozialhilfe ist keine Leistung für erwerbsfähige Menschen, und sie muss komplett von den Kommunen bezahlt werden. Das ist keine gute Lösung, da besteht Handlungsbedarf.\n\nEs besteht aus einem zweiten Grund Handlungsbedarf, nämlich aufgrund der sozialen Situation vor Ort. Mein Wahlkreis ist Offenbach. Offenbach ist die Stadt mit dem höchsten Anteil an Bulgaren und Rumänen in ganz Deutschland. Man kann bei mir vor Ort sehen, welche Folgen es hat, wenn Menschen keine soziale Absicherung haben. Von irgendetwas müssen sie leben. Sonst leben sie in teilweise unwürdigen Verhältnissen. In Frankfurt gibt es ein Zeltcamp, in dem fast slumartige Zustände herrschen. In Offenbach müssen manche Menschen in Schrottimmobilien wohnen; andere suchen auf anderen Wegen nach Geld, durch illegale Tätigkeiten wie Schwarzarbeit oder schlimmere Aktivitäten. Wir brauchen soziale Unterstützung, um den Menschen zu helfen, integriert zu werden. Sie dürfen nicht ausgegrenzt werden, sondern müssen möglichst schnell Teil dieser Gesellschaft werden und eine echte Chance auf dem Arbeitsmarkt bekommen.\n\nUnser Vorschlag, unsere Alternative ist: Weil wir dafür sorgen müssen, dass die Menschen eine Chance auf dem Arbeitsmarkt bekommen, sollten sie Leistungen nach dem Sozialgesetzbuch II, vulgo Hartz IV, bekommen. Denn dann hätten sie eine Unterstützung, was Sozialleistungen, finanzielle Leistungen und Arbeitsmarktintegrationsleistungen angeht. Wir sagen: Nach drei Monaten soll es die Möglichkeit geben, Hartz IV zu beantragen. Wenn die Betroffenen wirklich nach Arbeit suchen und eine Chance auf dem Arbeitsmarkt haben, dann müssen sie unterstützt werden.\n\nWir sagen auch, dass in Einzelfällen - aber nur in Einzelfällen -, wenn nachgewiesen wird, dass die Menschen gar nicht nach Arbeit suchen oder dass sie trotz aller Bemühungen der Jobcenter keine Chance auf dem Arbeitsmarkt haben, die Leistung wieder entfallen kann, weil dann auch das Recht auf Freizügigkeit entfällt. Aber dies soll im Einzelfall entschieden werden und nicht eine pauschale Diskriminierung darstellen, wie Sie sie in Ihrem Gesetzentwurf vorsehen; auch das ist uns wichtig.\n\nNatürlich muss man auf EU-Ebene endlich dafür sorgen, dass die Menschen nicht aus finanzieller Not zu uns kommen. Auch da - die Staatssekretärin hat das eben zwar erwähnt - fehlen noch Aktivitäten auf bundespolitischer Ebene. Es gibt noch keine Stellungnahme der Bundesregierung zur Säule sozialer Rechte. Hier müssen wir aber ansetzen. Wir müssen eine Mindesteinkommensrichtlinie haben, damit es überall angemessene Grundsicherungssysteme gibt und die Menschen überall in Europa vor Armut geschützt werden. Wir brauchen auch Mindeststandards bei den sozialen Sicherungssystemen, um zu verhindern, dass Menschen aus finanzieller Not auswandern und ihr Land verlassen.\n\nWenn die Menschen aber zu uns kommen, dann müssen wir sie unterstützen - und zwar besser als bisher - und den pauschalen Ausschluss, den es jetzt im SGB II gibt, abschaffen. Wir brauchen eine bessere soziale Absicherung der Freizügigkeit. Wir brauchen mehr und nicht weniger soziales Europa.\"\n5137,bernd-rutzel,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Sie von den Grünen wollen Betriebsräte stärken, da sind Sie bei mir genau an der richtigen Stelle.\n\nIch freue mich, dass wir heute darüber reden,\n\nund ich stelle hier eine breite Übereinstimmung fest. Ich bin gespannt, wie sich das entwickelt.\n\nTarifpolitisch, gesellschaftlich und auch für die Betriebe selbst ist die Mitbestimmung von enormer Bedeutung. Ich war selbst lange Jugend- und Auszubildendenvertreter. Ich war freigestellt, später war ich freigestellter Betriebsrat, und ich weiß um die gesetzlichen Regelungen und um die Schutzmöglichkeiten für Betriebsräte. Aber ich weiß aus der Praxis auch, dass diese oft nicht ausreichen. Wir brauchen einen Kündigungsschutz bereits für die Beschäftigten, die sich in der Kaffeeküche treffen und über die Bildung eines Betriebsrats nachdenken. Wir haben das heute schon gehört. Da muss der Kündigungsschutz schon ansetzen;\n\ndenn nicht selten ist es so, dass der Arbeitgeber, wenn er davon Wind bekommt, versucht, die Wahl zu verhindern.\n\nLiebe Grüne, das Wahlverfahren haben wir 2001 mit Rot-Grün eingeführt. 2001 war dies ein wichtiges Anliegen, als wir das Betriebsverfassungsgesetz verändert -haben. Ziel war hauptsächlich, die Wahl schneller durchführen zu können, damit die Reaktionszeiten der Arbeitgeber kürzer wurden, um Steine in den Weg zu legen.\n\nIch will an dieser Stelle aber auch einmal für die Arbeitgeber sprechen. Viele Arbeitgeber wissen zu schätzen, dass sie einen Betriebsrat haben. Er ist sozusagen eine interne Beratungsfirma, ein Verbindungselement und -instrument, eine Konfliktlösungsstelle. Sie wissen, dass sie mit Betriebsräten produktiver sind und dann, wenn es Krisen gibt, auch besser über die Runden kommen. Betriebsräte hängen an ihren Unternehmen. Sie wollen das Beste für das Unternehmen, aber natürlich auch für ihre Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter, und sie sind oft viel länger im Unternehmen als mancher Manager.\n\nDass manche Betriebe den Betriebsrat fürchten wie der Teufel das Weihwasser, liegt in der Natur der Sache, auch wenn ich dies natürlich nicht nachvollziehen kann. Wir haben es gehört: Dass manche Unternehmen viel Geld in die Hand nehmen, viel Aufwand betreiben und Kanzleien mit Betriebsratskillern beauftragen, die ihnen den Betriebsrat vom Hals schaffen sollen, verurteile ich scharf. Ich habe dies letztes Jahr in meinem Wahlkreis miterlebt, als eine Großbäckerei ihren gewählten Betriebsratsvorsitzenden entlassen hat. Trotz Unterstützung durch die Gewerkschaft NGG, durch viele Mandatsträgerinnen und Mandatsträger und aus der Öffentlichkeit - die Zeitungen waren wochenlang voll -, hat sich der Firmeninhaber letztendlich im Gerichtsverfahren durchgesetzt.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, mein Herz ist voll, meine Redezeit aber fast vorbei. Lassen Sie mich deshalb ganz kurz und auch nicht vollumfassend auf ein paar Punkte eingehen, die uns Sozialdemokraten sehr am Herzen liegen.\n\nLeiharbeitnehmer müssen hinsichtlich der Betriebsratsgröße Berücksichtigung finden. Das entspricht dem Bundesarbeitsgerichtsurteil, das im letzten Jahr bereits bei vielen Betriebsratswahlen umgesetzt worden ist.\n\nEin Betriebsrat darf nicht nur ein Informationsrecht nach § 80 des Betriebsverfassungsgesetzes erhalten, sondern er braucht weitergehende Informations- und Unterrichtungsrechte. Das heißt, dass er nicht wie ein Detektiv durch seinen Betrieb laufen muss und in der Einkaufsabteilung nachfragen muss, wie viele Leiharbeiter eingekauft werden - Leiharbeiter werden eingekauft, man findet sie nicht auf der Payroll - und wie viel Fremdpersonal tätig ist. Der Arbeitsschutz muss auch im psychischen Bereich ausgeweitet werden. Wir müssen bei Werkverträgen viel unternehmen.\n\nDie Babyboomer - um den Jahrgang 1964 - gehen in gut zehn Jahren in Rente. Wir wissen von unserem Fachkräftemangel, den wir immer wieder wie eine Monstranz vor uns hertragen. Insofern brauchen wir Mitbestimmung. Mitbestimmung ist wichtig. Deutschland geht es gut - nicht trotz der Mitbestimmung, sondern wegen der Mitbestimmung.\n\nGanz zum Schluss will ich sagen: Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, weisen zu Recht darauf hin, dass die Quote derjenigen Beschäftigten, die nicht durch einen Betriebsrat vertreten werden, erschreckend hoch ist. Hierüber brauchen wir eine breite politische, aber auch gesellschaftliche Debatte. Nur mitbestimmte Arbeit ist gute Arbeit.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n538,ute-vogt,\"Herzlichen Dank. - Frau Präsidentin! Herr Minister! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte mit Ihrer Erlaubnis, Frau Präsidentin, mit einem Zitat beginnen: „Wir brauchen ein neues Denken und Handeln in der Agrarpolitik.“ So hat es der Präsident des Deutschen Tierschutzbundes, Thomas Schröder, anlässlich der Demonstration am 18. Januar 2014 in Berlin gefordert.\n\nAn diesem Tag, einem Samstagvormittag mit kaltem Wetter, haben sich immerhin über 30 000 Menschen versammelt, die dafür demonstriert haben, dass wir hier in der Agrarpolitik einen Wechsel herbeiführen.\n\nEs ist gut, wenn die Agrarpolitik öffentliche Aufmerksamkeit bekommt. Ich denke, dass wir im Koalitionsvertrag zwar keine Revolution beschlossen, aber immerhin deutliche Wegmarken gesetzt haben, auch für Neues.\n\nIch will das am Beispiel von Tierhaltung und Tierwohl erläutern - ich habe mich gefreut, Herr Minister, dass auch Sie das in Ihrer Rede herausgestellt haben -: Es ist unser Ziel, dass die Tierhaltung an die Bedürfnisse der Tiere angepasst wird und nicht umgekehrt. Das ist für unser Politikverständnis ein wichtiger Punkt.\n\nEs geht darum, die Tierhaltung an die Größe der Flächen zu binden und Prüf- und Zulassungsverfahren im Zusammenhang mit Haltesystemen einzuführen. Das sind sehr konkrete Forderungen, auf die wir uns verständigt haben und die wir in Kürze umsetzen wollen.\n\nEs ist ebenfalls erfreulich, dass sich auch der Bauernverband diesem Thema widmet. Aber ich will hier auch deutlich sagen: Es reicht nicht aus, nur einige Vorzeigebetriebe zu haben. Notwendig sind tatsächliche Veränderungen in Form von höheren Standards und mehr Transparenz für die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher, die wissen wollen, unter welchen Bedingungen ihre Lebensmittel entstanden sind.\n\nEin weiterer Schwerpunkt, Herr Minister Friedrich - ich habe mich gefreut, dazu etwas von Ihnen auf der Grünen Woche zu hören -, kam von Ihnen anlässlich des Tages des Ökologischen Landbaus - ich darf erneut zitieren, Frau Präsidentin -:\n\nDer ökologische Landbau setzt Maßstäbe: Er schont die Ressourcen, wirtschaftet besonders umweltverträglich und orientiert sich noch stärker am Prinzip der Nachhaltigkeit.\n\nSehr geehrter Herr Minister, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich glaube, wenn Sie diese Aussagen zum Maßstab unserer gemeinsamen Politik machen, dann werden Sie hier nicht nur die Große Koalition, sondern eine weit darüber hinausgehende Mehrheit hinter sich haben, nicht nur in diesem Hause, sondern auch in der Bevölkerung.\n\nNachhaltig heißt auch, dass wir Gefährdungen für kommende Generationen ausschließen. In Deutschland hat die große Mehrheit der Bevölkerung große Vorbehalte gegen den Einsatz von Gentechnik in der Landwirtschaft. Auch im Kabinett gibt es mit Blick auf die Ressorts eine Mehrheit dafür, keine weiteren gentechnisch veränderten Produkte - ich beziehe mich auf die Grüne Gentechnik - in Deutschland zuzulassen. Das betrifft nicht allein die SPD-geführten Ressorts, sondern ich denke, dass wir auch das Landwirtschaftsministerium an unserer Seite finden, wenn es um eine aktuelle Frage geht, nämlich die Zulassung der Maislinie 1507 auf europäischer Ebene. Wir wollen nicht, dass sie zugelassen wird.\n\nWir haben uns im Koalitionsvertrag darauf verständigt, dass wir die Vorbehalte der Bevölkerung ernst nehmen. Wir fordern von der Bundesregierung und in diesem Fall vor allem auch vom Bundesforschungsministerium, dass sie sich an die dazu im Koalitionsvertrag getroffenen Regelungen halten.\n\nIch füge hinzu: Jenseits des Grundsatzstreites mit dem Forschungsministerium an dieser Stelle geht es im konkreten Fall um eine Maislinie, die uns weder wirtschaftlich etwas bringt, noch für die es eine Nachfrage in Deutschland gibt. Es gibt in Deutschland auch keinerlei Forschungsinteresse, was diese Maislinie angeht. Deshalb spricht im konkreten Fall - nicht im Grundsätzlichen, aber in diesem konkreten Fall - überhaupt nichts dafür, diese Maislinie zuzulassen. Ich erwarte von unserer Bundesregierung, dass wir mit einem klaren Nein zu diesem Thema nach Brüssel fahren.\n\nWir werden uns bemühen, das durchzusetzen. Wir haben noch Zeit, weil die Entscheidung der Europäischen Union noch etwas aussteht. Ich freue mich über jeden und jede, die das unterstützen, natürlich auch vonseiten des Koalitionspartners.\n\nIch denke, wie gesagt, wir haben einen guten Vertrag, der gute Ansätze bietet. Aber es kommt auch darauf an, dass wir das, was wir gemeinsam niedergeschrieben und zum Teil auch gemeinsam errungen haben, durchaus ernst nehmen und jetzt umsetzen. Ich freue mich darauf.\"\n193,gunther-krichbaum,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Kollege Brinkhaus hat gerade der Bundeskanzlerin und dem Bundesfinanzminister gratuliert und ihnen alles Gute gewünscht. Ich möchte von meiner Seite die guten Wünsche und Gratulationen an den neuen alten Bundesaußenminister, Herrn Steinmeier, nachholen. Wir freuen uns, wenn ich das so für die Europapolitiker sagen darf, auf eine gute und fruchtbare weitere Zusammenarbeit und wünschen alles Gute.\n\nViele Themen, die jetzt beim Europäischen Rat eine Rolle spielen werden, wurden schon angeschnitten, namentlich auch die Situation in Irland.\n\nIn der Tat - ich glaube, wir sagen das nicht zu häufig, sondern noch zu selten -: Die Rettungspolitik, die die Europäische Union und die Euro-Zone an den Tag gelegt haben, ist überaus erfolgreich. Das gilt insbesondere für die Arbeit, die Klaus Regling als Chef des ESM geleistet hat, indem er kompetent und im Stillen sehr vieles beeinflusst hat.\n\nDie Bürger haben in den letzten Jahren zunehmend den Eindruck gewonnen, als müsse jedes Land noch irgendwie unter einen Rettungsschirm passen, bis man sich am Ende gemeinsam in einer Höhle befindet. Nein, es ist Licht am Ende dieses Tunnels. Dass Irland den Rettungsschirm als erstes Land verlassen kann, ist ein ermutigendes Signal für alle weiteren Länder; Portugal wurde schon erwähnt. Hier sind wir auf einem guten Weg.\n\nAuf dem Europäischen Rat werden natürlich nicht nur Albanien und Serbien eine große Rolle spielen; hierzu hat Kollege Kiesewetter das Erforderliche gesagt. Nur ganz kurz: Ja, wir können es begrüßen, dass Albanien zum 1. Juli 2014 den Kandidatenstatus bekommen wird. Es werden damit aber noch keine Entscheidungen darüber getroffen - das muss man in der Öffentlichkeit immer wieder sagen -, wann Beitrittsverhandlungen aufgenommen werden. Aber es gilt, auch dieses Land an die Standards der Europäischen Union heranzuführen.\n\nAuch die Entscheidung, am 1. Januar 2014 mit Beitrittsverhandlungen mit Serbien zu beginnen, ist vertretbar. Wenn ich „vertretbar“ sage, dann deswegen, weil die dicken Brocken am Anfang der Verhandlungen weggeräumt werden müssen. Das betrifft die Kapitel 23 und 24, in denen es um die Bereiche „Justiz und Grundrechte“ sowie „Sicherheit, Freiheit und Recht“ geht, aber auch das Kapitel 35, das unter anderem die gutnachbarschaftlichen Beziehungen beinhaltet. Was die gutnachbarschaftlichen Beziehungen betrifft, müssen wir darauf achten, dass sich aus dem Abkommen, das jüngst zwischen Serbien und dem Kosovo unterzeichnet wurde, auch gute nachbarschaftliche Beziehungen entwickeln.\n\nEs reicht nicht aus, dieses Thema in ein einziges Kapitel zu packen und zu denken, damit sei alles erledigt. Nein, der Gedanke der gutnachbarschaftlichen Beziehungen muss sich vielmehr wie ein roter Faden durch die Beitrittsverhandlungen ziehen. Denn wenn ein Land Mitglied der Europäischen Union werden will, dann muss es grenzüberschreitend denken und auch grenzüberschreitend handeln. Auch hierzu eine persönliche Bemerkung meinerseits: Mir fehlt in der serbischen Politik bisweilen eine kritische Selbstreflexion im Hinblick auf die eigene Geschichte.\n\nErst wenn diese erfolgt, ist eine Gesellschaft für weitere Entwicklungen offen.\n\nDie Östliche Partnerschaft, namentlich die Partnerschaft mit den sechs Ländern Aserbaidschan, Armenien, Weißrussland, Georgien, Moldau und Ukraine, wurde 2008 in dem Bewusstsein, aber auch mit dem Ziel initiiert, dass wir diese Länder gezielt an die Standards der Europäischen Union heranführen wollen, ohne allerdings eine Aussage darüber zu treffen, ob es ihnen eines Tages möglich sein wird, Mitglied der Europäischen Union zu werden.\n\nDie Europäische Union hat ein großes Interesse daran, zu verhindern, dass es an ihren Außengrenzen ein großes Gefälle gibt, sei es ein Gefälle wirtschaftlicher Art, sei es eines im Bereich von Demokratie und Rechtsstaatswesen. Ein solches Gefälle würde automatisch zu Spannungen führen, und solche Spannungen sind nie zu unserem Vorteil. Das sehen wir gerade auch bei den Umbrüchen in den nordafrikanischen Ländern.\n\nWenn wir die Östliche Partnerschaft weiterhin ernst nehmen, dann müssen wir in diesem Bereich mehr tun. Die Östliche Partnerschaft ist, obwohl es ernsthafte Rückschläge gibt, nicht tot, wie manche vielleicht befürchten. Die Eurasische Zollunion wurde angesprochen, und auch die Situation in Russland wurde schon erwähnt; das muss ich an dieser Stelle nicht weiter vertiefen. Die betreffenden Länder haben allerdings unsere Rückendeckung verdient. Ich meine damit zum einen die Ukraine, zum anderen Moldau. Georgien ist auf einem durchaus respektablen Weg. Aber die Entwicklungen in anderen Ländern sind wohl eher ernüchternder Natur, als dass sie ermutigend wären.\n\nGleichwohl: Für Moldau wünsche ich mir persönlich mehr Aufmerksamkeit hier im Deutschen Bundestag. Dieses Land ist oft eher im toten Winkel der Europapolitik, als dass es im Zentrum stünde. Mit dem Transnis-trien-Konflikt haben wir einen sogenannten Frozen Conflict mitten in Europa. Die russische Regierung hat abermals verkündet, dass moldauischer Wein - eines der Hauptexportgüter der Republik Moldau - den technischen Standards, die für den Export nach Russland gelten, nicht entspreche. Europa hat reagiert: Die Europäische Union hat die Bedingungen für den Import moldauischen Weins gelockert. Das ist wichtig; aber die moldauische Regierung braucht unsere Unterstützung. Iurie Leanca hat nach schwierigen Monaten in der Vergangenheit jetzt als Premierminister das Zepter in der Hand. Er geht entschlossen den Weg nach Europa und ist sich der Risiken - gerade des Risikos russischer Repressionen - voll bewusst.\n\nEin Wort auch noch zur Ukraine. Ich glaube, wir sollten die Ukraine, vor allem die Regierung der Ukraine, nicht nur in einer Opferrolle sehen; das würde der Regierung Janukowitsch, mit Verlaub, nicht gerecht. Ich habe in diesen Tagen öfters gelesen, die Ukraine-Politik der Europäischen Union sei gescheitert. Umgekehrt wird ein Schuh daraus: Die Europapolitik der Regierung -Janukowitsch ist gescheitert. Ein Beispiel aus jüngster Vergangenheit: Janukowitsch hat die Ausreise Julija -Timoschenkos zunächst bejaht; anschließend hat er sie in der Rada, dem ukrainischen Parlament, jedoch wieder hintertrieben, sodass das Parlament sie eben nicht mehr gutgeheißen hat. Ich könnte viele andere Beispiele nennen. Die Ukraine muss sich entscheiden, welchen Weg sie gehen möchte. - Die Ukraine ist ein Land, das innerlich fast zerrissen ist zwischen dem östlichen Teil - der Region Donezk, dem ganzen Donbass-Becken -, in dem ausschließlich Russisch gesprochen wird, und dem westlichen Teil - um Lemberg und andere Städte herum -, wo Ukrainisch gesprochen wird und man sich schon seit vielen Jahren der Europäischen Union annähern möchte. Deswegen werden wir das beherzte weitere Vorgehen der Ukraine auf diesem Weg unterstützen. Aber es ist wichtig, darauf hinzuweisen: Ein Land, das sich der Europäischen Union annähern möchte, muss auch dazu bereit sein, die Standards der Europäischen Union und die Werte der Europäischen Union zu teilen - wie Frieden, wie Freiheit, wie Rechtsstaatlichkeit und Demokratie.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Schluss noch einen Punkt ansprechen: Ich denke, es ist wichtig, dass wir - wir alle in unseren Fraktionen und Parteien - die Arbeit unserer eigenen Stiftungen, die mit ihren Rechtsstaatsprogrammen vor Ort eine hervorragende Arbeit machen, stärken.\n\nIch habe in diesen Tagen einer sozusagen Brandmail der Bundestagsverwaltung entnommen, dass sich noch zu wenige Kolleginnen und Kollegen bereit erklärt haben, IPSler - die Kollegen wissen, wovon ich rede - aufzunehmen. Ich glaube, es wäre an der Zeit, noch einmal zu überlegen, ob die Büros in dieser Zeit nicht noch den einen oder anderen Praktikanten, besonders aus diesen Ländern, aufnehmen können. Jeder von uns kann hier seinen persönlichen Beitrag leisten.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n13282,volker-ullrich,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Kultur als Brücke braucht Sprache als Fundament. Menschen verstehen sich, wenn sie sich verständigen können. Es ist daher keine Zumutung, sondern eine Selbstverständlichkeit, wenn wir als Schlüssel zur Integration nicht nur den Erwerb, sondern auch den Gebrauch der deutschen Sprache fördern und einfordern. Das ist die erste und wichtigste Botschaft dieses Antrags.\n\nWenn Menschen nicht oder noch nicht die gleiche Sprache sprechen, gibt es ein weiteres Fundament, das verbindet. Das ist die gemeinsame Begeisterung für Musik oder Kunst, für Kulinarisches oder Architektur, für gelebte Traditionen und Bräuche. Die innere Kraft unseres Landes zur Integration erwächst aus der Stärke der eigenen kulturellen Werte und Traditionen und nicht aus deren Relativierung. Eine vermeintliche Rücksichtnahme auf Neues oder eine Ausblendung von Traditionen und Konventionen, beispielsweise - um im Bild der Jahreszeit zu bleiben - indem Sankt-Martins-Umzüge in Lichterfeste und der Christkindlmarkt in Wintermarkt umbenannt werden, stärken nicht die Integration. Damit werden jene, die wir respektvoll in unserer Gesellschaft begrüßen wollen, am Ende irgendwie entmündigt, weil wir ihnen den Eindruck vermitteln, ihnen seien unsere Traditionen nicht zumutbar. Das Gegenteil ist der Fall. In welche Gesellschaft sollen sich Menschen integrieren, wenn wir selbst unsere Traditionen und Werte hinterfragen? Eine Kulturnation braucht Beständigkeit, aber eben auch Offenheit und Neugierde. Sie braucht Respekt und Toleranz, aber eben keine Duldung von Intoleranz.\n\nDas bringt uns zu der ganz grundlegenden Frage, was denn eine Kulturnation ist. Das ist der Kern dieses Antrags: dass wir einen Versuch unternehmen, dies auch zu definieren.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, von viel berufenerer Seite ist die Kultur in unserem Land in den Dimensionen von Glaube und Vernunft vermessen worden. Dabei meint Glaube kein religiöses Verständnis, sondern das Wissen um die notwendige Orientierung in einer Gesellschaft, Werte also, die unser Gemeinwesen begründen und zusammenhalten. Vernunft dagegen, ohne dass dies ein Gegensatz ist, fordert in der Tradition der Aufklärung freies Denken und Reden und einen säkularen Rechtsstaat, dessen Regeln allgemeine Geltung besitzen. Daraus wird klar: Der Staat selbst darf keine bestimmte Kultur vorschreiben oder gar verordnen. Er hat vielmehr diese Gesellschaft zu schützen, aus der er in Freiheit entstanden ist. Das kann letzten Endes nur eine offene demokratische Gesellschaft sein, die trotz aller Veränderungen auf der Grundlage der Ideen des Rechts, der Freiheit und der Menschenwürde existiert.\n\nDie Menschen, meine Damen und Herren, fragen sich, wie sich unser Land verändert, und nicht wenige machen sich Sorgen, in welchem Ausmaß diese Veränderung spürbar sein wird. Manche sagen gar, dass Veränderungen völlig ausgeblendet werden müssen. Das aber zu behaupten, wäre unehrlich, im schlimmsten Fall gar demagogisch. Literatur, Architektur, Wissenschaft und Technologie, aber auch Kunst und Kultur sind Veränderungen unterworfen.\n\nEs gibt aber auch eine Sphäre, die sich nicht verändern darf. Das sind die grundlegenden Regeln und Werte unseres Zusammenlebens. Dazu gehört die Würde des Menschen, der bereits das Grundgesetz das Attribut „unantastbar“ verleiht. Die universelle Geltung der Menschenrechte und die Freiheit als Prinzip, wie eine Gesellschaft organisiert wird, damit sich jeder Einzelne mit seinem Lebensentwurf darin wiederfinden kann, die Gleichheit aller Menschen und die Gleichheit zwischen Mann und Frau, die Freiheit, seinen Glauben zu leben oder auch keinen zu besitzen, die Gewissheit, dass ein säkularer Rechtsstaat diese Werte nicht nur garantiert, sondern sie auch aktiv einfordert - wer immer auch zu uns kommt, für den sind diese Regeln keine unverbindlichen Handlungsempfehlungen. Wir fordern zu Recht ein, dass sie gelten, und zwar für alle und ausnahmslos.\n\nWenn wir in diesen Tagen auf die Welt blicken, dann sehen wir so viele Menschen, denen dieses Leben in Frieden und Freiheit verwehrt bleibt, die nicht ihre Kultur leben können, die nicht von einer Kulturnation profitieren. Umso kostbarer ist es, zu schätzen, was wir erreicht haben durch Toleranz, in Gemeinsamkeit und im Vertrauen auf diese Werte. Wir haben alles dafür zu tun, dass dieser Frieden, dieser Weihnachtsfrieden überall entstehen kann. Das ist unsere Verpflichtung. Sie erwächst auch aus einer viel bedeutenderen Kultur, nämlich der Kultur der Mitmenschlichkeit. Darauf lässt sich bauen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n7634,johannes-kahrs,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben jetzt ja eine Woche hier diskutiert. Wir hatten eine Anberatung. Wir sind die Einzelhaushalte durchgegangen. Ich glaube, man kann wirklich mit großem Stolz sagen, dass wir uns alle hier in diesem Hause einig sind, die große Aufgabe, die vor uns liegt - die Finanzierung der Kosten für die Flüchtlinge in Deutschland, die Finanzierung von notwendigen Maßnahmen auch in den Ländern, aus denen sie kommen -, mit den großen Summen, die wir in den Bundeshaushalt eingestellt haben, zu meistern. Dass Konsens darüber besteht, das zu tragen, ist, wie ich glaube, ein hohes Gut. Das hat sich ja auch durch alle Reden - sei es von der Regierung, sei es von der Opposition - gezogen. Und das ist etwas, das man gar nicht hoch genug schätzen kann.\n\nEine kleine Anmerkung sei mir gestattet - es gab ja keine großen Konfliktfelder, weil man sich in der Sache in gar so vielen Dingen einig ist -: Das, was Frau Lötzsch, die ich als Vorsitzende meines Ausschusses ja sehr schätze, gesagt hat, hat mich an die Rede von Herrn Gysi erinnert. Er hat hier bei der Einbringung dieses Haushalts eine bemerkenswerte Rede gehalten. Er hat nämlich nichts gesagt. Das war ein Kessel Buntes, eine Phrasendreschmaschine, per Zufallsgenerator ermittelte linke Textbausteine, die dann heruntergerattert wurden. Sie hatten mit dem Haushalt nicht viel zu tun.\n\nSie hatten mit der Sache nicht viel zu tun. Sie wären wunderbar gewesen auf linken Parteitagen - ich habe die Freude, dort nicht dabei sein zu müssen -;\n\nda hätte man das alles bringen können. Hier war das leider komplett überflüssig.\n\nDas hatte mit dem Thema nichts zu tun und stand nicht auf der Tagesordnung des Hohen Hauses. Der Vorteil ist: Man kann in solchen Debatten alles mal erzählen. Das bringt aber in der Sache nichts.\n\nIch würde vorschlagen, dass wir einen Hauch mehr auf die Sachebene zurückkommen und nicht jedes Vorurteil in diesem Land - und sei es noch so platt - bedienen. Wir sollten uns vielmehr diesen Entwurf und die erfolgreiche Arbeit dieser Bundesregierung angucken.\n\nDann kommt man relativ schnell darauf, dass das, was hier vorgelegt wird, nicht selbstverständlich ist. Der Kollege von der Union, der vor mir geredet hat, hat ja schon darauf hingewiesen, dass das alles nicht selbstverständlich ist. Wir wollen hier nämlich Großes leisten, schultern und finanzieren, und tun dies, ohne neue Schulden zu machen. Ich glaube, wenn man sich die Geschichte unserer Republik anguckt - egal übrigens, wer regiert hat -, stellt man fest: So etwas fand nicht allzu häufig statt.\n\nVor diesem Hintergrund war es gut, dass die Große Koalition, und zwar die erste, beschlossen hat, die Schuldenbremse im Grundgesetz zu verankern. Vergessen wir einmal die vier Jahre, die danach gekommen sind.\n\nIn dieser Großen Koalition haben wir es geschafft, keine neuen Schulden zu machen und das durchzutragen. Wir alle wollen einerseits, dass die Schuldenbremse durchgängig eingehalten wird. Das ist - auch das zeichnet diese Koalition aus - eine Solidität, die sich sehen lassen kann. Auf der anderen Seite gibt es aber auch ein beispielloses Maß an Investitionen in Infrastruktur, aber auch in Personal, und gleichzeitig können wir die Aufgabe, um die es in den letzten Tagen gegangen ist, finanzieren. Ich glaube, diese Mischung ist es, die diesen Haushalt auszeichnet.\n\nEs wurde bereits angesprochen - ich möchte es noch einmal kurz erwähnen -: 3 Milliarden Euro sollen die Länder und Kommunen erhalten. Darüber, wie man das vernünftig umsetzt, wird zu reden sein. Uns ist wichtig, dass dieses Geld da ankommt, wo es gebraucht wird. Die SPD hat ja in den letzten Wochen und Monaten dafür gesorgt, dass wir 5 Milliarden Euro mehr für die Kommunen ausgeben. Ich glaube, auch das gehört zur Wahrheit dazu.\n\nGrundsätzlich ist es so, dass der Bund Mehreinnahmen hat - das ist auch eine Folge der guten Regierungsarbeit von Gerhard Schröder und der rot-grünen Koalition\n\nund natürlich auch eine Folge der glücklichen Umstände, was den Ölpreis und den Dollar-Euro-Kurs angeht - und dass wir mehr Menschen in Arbeit haben. Deutschland hat seine Hausaufgaben seit dem Jahr 1998 gemacht. Heute profitieren wir davon. Das ist gut so, und deswegen können wir diesen Haushalt vorlegen. 3 Milliarden Euro zusätzlich wird der Bund also für Länder und Kommunen ausgeben.\n\nWir wollen alleine bei der Bundespolizei 3 000 zusätzliche Stellen in den Haushalt einstellen. An dieser Stelle möchte ich Sigmar Gabriel dafür noch einmal ganz herzlich danken.\n\nWir wollen für den Haushalt des Auswärtigen Amtes 400 Millionen Euro zusätzlich bereitstellen. 10 000 Bufdis sind eine gute Ansage, aus der klar wird, dass wir auch den Freiwilligendienst in diesem Land mit unterstützen wollen. Wichtig ist, glaube ich, auch, dass wir Bundesliegenschaften zur Verfügung stellen. Wichtig ist: Hier wird viel gemacht.\n\nEs darf aber von diesem Haushalt nicht die Botschaft ausgehen, dass wir uns ausschließlich darum kümmern, das Flüchtlingsproblem zu bewältigen. Es darf von diesem Haushalt nicht die Botschaft ausgehen, dass die anderen Aufgaben in diesem Land, die auch wichtig sind, vernachlässigt oder nicht mehr angegangen werden. Wer die Beratungen der Einzeletats in den letzten Tagen verfolgt hat, hat mitbekommen, dass die Kollegen in ihren jeweiligen Etats all die Punkte angesprochen und abgearbeitet haben - wir werden sie auch noch im Haushaltsausschuss behandeln -, die für dieses Land wesentlich sind. Dabei gibt es große und kleinere Punkte. Einen kleineren Punkt möchte ich vorwegnehmen.\n\nEs ist gut, dass wir Mittel für Sprachkurse zur Verfügung stellen, übrigens auch insbesondere für C1-Sprachkurse, an denen es einen großen Bedarf gibt. Genau das brauchen wir: dass man den Flüchtlingen, die mit einer entsprechenden Qualifikation hierherkommen und studieren wollen, die Möglichkeit gibt, Deutsch zu lernen.\n\nNeben diesem erfreulichen Umstand ist es aber auch eine Tatsache, dass diejenigen, die als Dozenten in diesem Bereich tätig sind, anständig entlohnt werden sollen.\n\nIch glaube, dass das eine Aufgabe ist, der wir uns stellen. Das ist ja ein gemeinsames Anliegen von SPD, CDU und CSU, wie ich einem Brief von Annegret Kramp­Karrenbauer entnehmen kann, in dem sie als Präsidentin des Deutschen Volkshochschul-Verbandes den Bundesinnenminister auffordert, dringend etwas dafür zu tun, dass diese Dozenten anständig bezahlt werden. Als Sozialdemokrat kann ich sagen: Die Frau hat recht.\n\nSie gehört ja auch einer Großen Koalition an. Dann sollten wir das in den Haushaltsberatungen auch alle gemeinsam angehen.\n\nEs gibt aber auch andere Punkte, die wesentlich sind und die wir in unserem Koalitionsvertrag festgelegt haben. Einer der Punkte ist das Thema Kitaausbau. Wir haben im Koalitionsvertrag viel geregelt und so auch Gelder für das Betreuungsgeld aufgebracht. Wir alle wissen, welchen Weg das Betreuungsgeld genommen hat. Jetzt sind diese Gelder im Bundeshaushalt wieder frei. Wir Sozialdemokraten wollen sie gerne für Kinder und Familien einsetzen. Wir wollen sie für den Kitaausbau ausgeben und dabei insbesondere in Qualität investieren.\n\nIch glaube, dass es richtig ist, die Gelder den Kommunen und Ländern zukommen zu lassen, allerdings mit der klaren Ansage verbunden, dass es um Qualität, Personalausstattung und die Qualifikation der Fachkräfte geht. Vielleicht schafft man es auf diese Art und Weise auch, den Kitastreik gesichtswahrend für alle Beteiligten zu beenden. Denn auch die Eltern in diesem Land können das auf Dauer nicht mehr aushalten.\n\nWenn man die ursprünglich für das Betreuungsgeld vorgesehenen Mittel für diesen Zweck einsetzt, dann wird es, glaube ich, richtig eingesetzt. Das wäre vernünftig und für den sozialen Frieden in diesem Land ganz wunderbar.\n\nWir haben im Koalitionsvertrag auch das Teilhabegesetz erwähnt. Das wird zurzeit im Bundesarbeits- und -sozialministerium erarbeitet. Ich glaube, wir sind hier gegenüber den Menschen mit Behinderungen in diesem Land in einer Verpflichtung. Anfang des Jahres wollen wir einen vernünftigen Gesetzentwurf vorlegen, und wir werden in dieser Legislaturperiode dann auch noch zusehen müssen, dass wir den Fortschritt in unserem Haushalt abbilden. Ich denke, das ist etwas Wichtiges. Wir haben das als Koalition versprochen und zugesagt. CDU, CSU und SPD sind hier in der Pflicht. Deshalb wollen wir auch liefern.\n\nDes Weiteren ist es, wie ich glaube, wichtig, dass man sich noch einmal dem sozialen Wohnungsbau zuwendet. Wir haben hier ja schon darüber diskutiert, als wir über die Einzeletats gesprochen haben. Es ist mir aber wichtig, für die SPD noch einmal zu sagen: Insbesondere in den Ballungsbereichen haben wir das Problem, dass die anerkannten Flüchtlinge, wenn sie irgendwann aus den Einrichtungen auf den Wohnungsmarkt drängen, auf eine Bevölkerung treffen, die auch nicht genug Wohnraum hat. Es ist wichtig, dass man die Kommunen und Länder hier unterstützt. Dabei muss dann aber auch sichergestellt sein, lieber Eckhardt, dass das Geld auch in dem Bereich „sozialer Wohnungsbau“ und nirgendwo anders ankommt. Das müssen wir vernünftig hinbekommen. Wenn man es dann auch noch schafft, Genossenschaften entsprechend zu fördern, dann haben wir alle etwas Gutes getan. Ich glaube, das ist eine der Aufgaben, denen wir uns am Ende alle widmen müssen.\n\nAll das vor Augen habend bleibt es hier dabei: Wir haben uns dem Ziel verpflichtet - ich habe das am Anfang schon gesagt -, dass wir keine neuen Schulden machen wollen. All diejenigen, die in den letzten Tagen die Reden der Opposition verfolgt haben - ob es nun die der Grünen oder die der Linken waren -, haben festgestellt, dass sie sich in vielen Einzelpunkten verhoben haben und dass sie zu vielen Punkten viel gesagt, aber nur wenige Vorschläge gemacht haben.\n\nSie haben gesagt, dass dieser Etat ausbaufähig sei und dass man total viel verändern solle. Ich glaube, demgegenüber feststellen zu können: Diese Koalition leistet Großes.\n\nHerr Bundesfinanzminister, Sie wurden von den Linken jetzt schon zum europäischen Finanzminister ernannt. In der Sache könnte ich damit leben, damit, dass die Linke Sie dazu ernennt, nicht. Vielleicht bekommen wir es aber einmal grundsätzlich hin, dass es in Deutschland eine Bewegung bzw. eine Kraft gibt, die dafür kämpft, dass wir die Vereinigten Staaten von Europa bekommen mit einem Parlament, das eine europäische Regierung wählt. Dann wird es dort auch einen europäischen Finanzminister geben.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8097,sahra-wagenknecht,\"Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Frau Bundeskanzlerin! Es gibt Werte, die man mit Blick auf die großen Traditionen von der Antike bis zur Aufklärung mit gutem Grund und im besten Sinne als europäische Werte bezeichnen kann. Demokratie, Solidarität und auch Gerechtigkeit gehören dazu. Wie wenig die Europäische Union mit solchen Werten zu tun hat, zeigt sich in der Flüchtlingskrise besonders krass. Europäische Einigkeit besteht gegenwärtig eigentlich nur darin, mehr in die Abschottung der EU-Außengrenzen zu investieren - ein Konjunkturprogramm für die Stacheldrahthersteller und für die Schleusermafia statt einer verantwortungsvollen europäischen Flüchtlingspolitik.\n\nIch finde, das ist ein Armutszeugnis für Europa.\n\nNatürlich weiß jeder, dass die Lösung nicht darin liegt, die vielen Millionen verzweifelten Menschen, die weltweit auf der Flucht vor Krieg, vor Bürgerkrieg und vor Terror sind,\n\nin die EU oder gar nach Deutschland zu holen. Aber gerade deshalb wäre es endlich an der Zeit, über die Beseitigung von Fluchtursachen nicht nur zu reden, sondern auch real etwas dafür zu tun, dass es auf dieser Welt weniger Krieg, weniger Bürgerkrieg und weniger Terror gibt.\n\nSagen Sie jetzt nicht, das liege nicht in Ihrer Macht. Die Vereinigten Staaten haben ihre Öl- und Gaskriege immer mit Beteiligung europäischer Länder geführt. US-Drohnen morden mit logistischer Unterstützung aus Deutschland. Die Saudis führen ihren Krieg im Jemen unter anderem mit deutschen Waffen. Es ist doch zutiefst verlogen, über die Beseitigung von Fluchtursachen zu reden und gleichzeitig die Waffenexporte ausgerechnet nach Saudi-Arabien zu verdreifachen. So bekämpft man Fluchtursachen nicht, sondern so macht man glänzende Geschäfte mit ihnen.\n\nDeshalb muss ich Ihnen sagen: Solange Sie Waffenexporte in Spannungsgebiete nicht endlich verbieten, ist das ganze Gerede über die Bekämpfung von Fluchtursachen vollkommen unglaubwürdig.\n\nDarüber hinaus brauchen wir endlich eine eigenständige europäische Politik gegenüber den Vereinigten Staaten, gerade wenn sie sich als oberster Feldwebel dieser Welt aufspielen und bomben und töten, wo immer es ihnen passt. Ohne den Irakkrieg gäbe es den „Islamischen Staat“ nicht, der heute in Syrien wütet. Das jüngste Kriegsverbrechen in Kunduz mit 22 zivilen Toten, Ärzten und Patienten zeigt erneut den ganzen Zynismus dieser angeblichen Antiterrorkriege. Genau diese Kriege mit ihren Tausenden zivilen Opfern sind es doch, die den Hass säen, auf dem der islamistische Terror gedeiht.\n\nDeshalb unterstützen wir es durchaus, dass Sie, Frau Merkel, eben noch einmal für eine politische Lösung für Syrien plädiert haben. Ich denke, es gibt keinen anderen Weg. Auch der IS, der sich in Städten mit Tausenden zivilen Einwohnern versteckt, lässt sich nicht mit Bomben stoppen, und zwar weder mit amerikanischen noch mit russischen.\n\nWenn man den IS stoppen will, dann muss man ihn von Waffenlieferungen und Finanzen abschneiden. Eines der Länder, die in der Vergangenheit genau das Gegenteil getan haben und immer noch tun, die den IS also direkt und indirekt unterstützt haben, ist allerdings die Türkei, und ausgerechnet die soll jetzt unser großer Partner in der Flüchtlingskrise werden, ausgerechnet Erdoğan, der sein eigenes Land durch die Aufkündigung des Friedensprozesses mit den Kurden an den Rand eines Bürgerkrieges führt.\n\nVielen Dank. - Wie gut die Türkei zum sicheren Drittstaat taugt, hat der furchtbare Anschlag mit über 100 Toten am letzten Wochenende gezeigt. Ich finde, es ist eine humanitäre Bankrotterklärung, mit einem Regime zu paktieren, das Journalisten, Kurden und Gewerkschafter verfolgt.\n\nFrau Merkel, sagen Sie deshalb Ihre Türkei-Reise ab. So kurz vor den Wahlen ist sie nichts anderes als direkte Wahlkampfhilfe für Erdoğan.\n\nNatürlich ist es wichtig, dass die Lager vor Ort, in denen sich ungleich mehr Flüchtlinge aufhalten als in der gesamten EU, besser ausgestattet werden. Das erreichen wir aber doch nicht dadurch, dass wir uns für Erdoğans Machtpolitik einspannen lassen,\n\nsondern indem wir Hilfsorganisationen wie die Welternährungsorganisation der UN besser ausstatten, damit sie ihre Aufgaben dort erfüllen können.\n\nIch muss sagen: Sie können doch nicht im Ernst glauben, dass Sie mit einer zusätzlichen Milliarde, die die EU jetzt in Aussicht gestellt hat, die Lebensbedingungen von etwa 10 Millionen Flüchtlingen, die es derzeit in und um Syrien gibt, wirklich verbessern können. Wer so etwas erzählt, der ist doch einfach unseriös.\n\nInzwischen ist davon auszugehen, dass in diesem Jahr über 1 Million Flüchtlinge nach Deutschland kommen. Die Willkommenskultur, die große Teile der Bevölkerung in den letzten Wochen und Monaten an den Tag gelegt haben, ist wirklich bewundernswert. Es ist jetzt aber auch langsam an der Zeit für eine Verantwortungskultur der Politik, und zwar vor allem der Bundespolitik,\n\ndie damit beginnen muss, dass man sich den vorhandenen Problemen stellt, statt sie kleinzureden.\n\nDie hundertste Wiederholung Ihres „Wir schaffen das“, Frau Bundeskanzlerin, hilft dem Bürgermeister einer Gemeinde unter Haushaltsnotstand, der eine winterfeste Unterbringungsmöglichkeit für die Flüchtlinge braucht und schon überlegt, in welchen anderen Bereichen er dafür kürzen muss, nicht. Wir erleben zurzeit doch ein eklatantes Staatsversagen, und jetzt rächt es sich, dass die politischen Weichen in diesem Land seit vielen Jahren in die falsche Richtung gestellt wurden.\n\nEs ist doch nicht erst seit dem Zuzug der Flüchtlinge so, dass bezahlbarer Wohnraum gerade für diejenigen fehlt, die kein dickes Portemonnaie haben. Das ist seit vielen Jahren so. Ein wesentlicher Grund dafür ist, dass die Kommunen durch Steuersenkungen für Reiche und Unternehmen finanziell ausgehungert wurden, sodass viele unter diesem Druck eben ihren Wohnungsbestand verkauft haben. Das ist doch eine Realität.\n\nGenauso ist es nicht erst seit dem Zuzug der vielen Flüchtlingskinder so, dass in diesem Land Lehrer fehlen. Schon seit vielen Jahren werden Lehrerstellen abgebaut, weil die Verkleinerung des öffentlichen Dienstes natürlich immer das leichteste Mittel ist, um im Korsett der Schuldenbremse klarzukommen.\n\nEinige von Ihnen reden hier von Leitkultur, aber Sie schaffen es noch nicht einmal, zu verhindern, dass wegen des Lehrermangels immer mehr Deutschstunden ausfallen und viele Kinder die Schule verlassen, ohne jemals einen Zugang zu Thomas Manns Der Zauberberg oder Goethes Faust gefunden zu haben.\n\nDieses Bildungselend, die Wohnungsnot und auch den riesigen Niedriglohnsektor gab es schon, bevor die Flüchtlinge kamen, aber natürlich werden diese Probleme jetzt ins Extremste verschärft. Die Stimmen, die den ohnehin schon lückenhaften Mindestlohn weiter aufweichen wollen, werden immer lauter. Das heißt, die Zuwanderung soll jetzt auch noch für Lohndumping missbraucht werden. Ich finde das unerträglich. Das muss verhindert werden.\n\nWir brauchen stattdessen dringend bessere Sicherungen gegen Lohndrückerei. Wir brauchen ein groß angelegtes öffentliches Wohnungsbauprogramm. Wir brauchen eine massive Aufstockung der Bildungsausgaben. Wer jetzt immer noch meint, dieses Problem ließe sich dadurch lösen, dass man die Budgets ein bisschen umschichtet, der hat, finde ich, den Ernst der Lage nicht begriffen.\n\nNatürlich können wir es schaffen. Deutschland ist ein reiches Land. Aber dann muss man eben auch den Mut haben, sich das Geld bei den Reichen zu holen und nicht bei den Armen.\n\nAllein die 500 reichsten Familien in Deutschland haben ein Privatvermögen in Höhe von über 600 Milliarden Euro. Die zehn reichsten Familien kassieren zusammen Dividenden in Höhe von 2,4 Milliarden Euro im Jahr.\n\nAber statt solch unverschämten Reichtum höher zu besteuern, lassen Sie es zu, dass die Kosten für die Flüchtlinge als Argument dafür herhalten müssen, warum wir unsere Erzieherinnen und Erzieher in den Kitas nicht ordentlich bezahlen können. Sie lassen es zu, dass Mietern in kommunalen Wohnungen gekündigt wird, um Wohnraum für Flüchtlinge zu schaffen. Wissen Sie nicht, was Sie damit anrichten?\n\nFrau Merkel, Sie haben mehrfach Ihre Aussage wiederholt, dass Sie Menschen in Notsituationen ein freundliches Gesicht zeigen wollen. Aber ganz abgesehen davon, dass das freundliche Gesicht mit den geplanten Internierungslagern an der Grenze zu einer ziemlich hässlichen Grimasse zu werden droht,\n\nfragen sich auch viele: Wo war und wo ist Ihr freundliches Gesicht gegenüber Menschen in Notsituationen hier im Land? Wo ist Ihr freundliches Gesicht gegenüber denen, die von Jobcentern gedemütigt und in miese Billiglohnjobs gedrängt werden?\n\nWo ist Ihr freundliches Gesicht gegenüber der alleinerziehenden Mutter, die ihre Kinder nur noch dank des Angebots der Tafeln satt bekommt?\n\nWo ist Ihr freundliches Gesicht gegenüber der wachsenden Zahl von Menschen, denen nach einem langen Arbeitsleben Armut im Alter droht?\n\nAll diese Notsituationen lassen Sie seit vielen Jahren zu - mit einem ziemlich ungerührten Gesicht.\n\nIch erinnere Sie daran, wie viel Geld Sie über Nacht bereitgestellt haben, als deutsche Banken ins Taumeln gerieten. Heute taumeln in Deutschland Städte und Gemeinden, aber Sie hantieren mit Kleinbeträgen.\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Wer selbst von Zukunftsangst gequält wird, der ist selten bereit, anderen mit offenen Armen eine Perspektive zu bieten.\n\nNehmen Sie endlich Ihre Verantwortung wahr, statt zuzulassen, dass AfD, Pegida und Co. dort ernten gehen, wo Sie Spannungen und Überforderung gesät haben,\n\nsonst - das muss ich Ihnen sagen - wird mir angst und bange, wenn ich daran denke, wie dieses Land in ein oder zwei Jahren aussehen wird.\"\n157,katja-keul,\"Herr Kollege Kiesewetter, es ist eine sehr interessante Wendung, die Sie hier in den letzten 24 Stunden vollzogen haben. Nur zum besseren Verständnis - damit wir wissen, was Sie uns gerade erklärt haben -: Was heißt das für den Operationsplan, der nach wie vor exekutive Bestandteile enthält? Wird der Operationsplan durch nationale Vorbehalte eingeschränkt, oder wird er gar nicht mehr Grundlage des Einsatzes der deutschen Streitkräfte sein?\"\n5094,gerhard-schick,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es wird im Rahmen dieser Debatte deutlich, dass es jetzt nicht um ein sehr umstrittenes Thema geht.\n\nAuch die Fraktionen im Europäischen Parlament haben gemeinsam an der zugrundeliegenden Richtlinie gearbeitet - auch unsere grüne Fraktion - und für Verbesserungen gestritten.\n\nEs ist ein wichtiger Baustein der Bankenunion, der hier jetzt zur Diskussion steht. Jetzt werden nach der gemeinsamen Aufsicht und der gemeinsamen Abwicklung Regeln für eine einheitliche Einlagensicherung geschaffen, weil in den letzten Jahren deutlich geworden ist, dass es in der Währungsunion unterschiedliches Vertrauen in die Leistungsfähigkeit des Bankensystems, in die Einlagensicherungseinrichtungen sowie in die Solvenz der Mitgliedstaaten geben kann. Wir haben gesehen, dass der portugiesische Euro und der deutsche Euro in den Augen der Sparer und Investoren teilweise nicht den gleichen Wert hatten. Die Finanzsysteme in Europa wurden dadurch destabilisiert, dass wir hier keine einheitlichen Regelungen haben.\n\nWir sollten in Deutschland auch nicht vergessen - die Bemerkungen vom Kollegen Zöllmer, wir hätten in Deutschland ein bewährtes System, habe ich natürlich sehr aufmerksam registriert -: Sehr bewährt hat sich unser System nicht. Der Steuerzahler musste in Deutschland einspringen, weil im Sicherungssystem der privaten Banken zu großzügige Versprechungen gemacht worden waren und man deswegen die Rückendeckung des Fiskus brauchte, um beim Lehman-Bankhaus aktiv zu werden. Nachher musste bei der Hypo Real Estate endgültig der Steuerzahler einspringen. Hinzu kommt natürlich, dass es auch bei der öffentlich-rechtlichen Institutssicherung, bei den Landesbanken, nicht ohne Steuerzahlermittel ging. Das sollte man hier schon sagen. Es geht auch für Deutschland darum, diese Systeme stabil und sicher für die Zukunft aufzustellen. Wir sollten da nicht immer nur auf die anderen zeigen, sondern auch unsere eigenen Hausaufgaben im Blick haben.\n\nIch will auch bei einem anderen Punkt kurz zurückblicken. Wir hatten 2010 im Bundestag eine Diskussion, in der dann die CDU/CSU-Fraktion gesagt hat: Da brauchen wir eine Subsidiaritätsrüge. Das sollte Europa gar nicht machen. - Sie erinnern sich.\n\nZum Glück haben Sie sich damals mit Ihrem europakritischen Kurs nicht durchgesetzt.\n\n- Ja, ja, aber es ging damals darum: Geht man damit konfrontativ um oder nicht? Ihr Weg hat sich als Sackgasse erwiesen, und zum Glück hat sich in Europa der andere,\n\nvon uns damals vorgeschlagene Weg durchgesetzt, auf dem Verhandlungsweg mit den anderen darüber eine einvernehmliche Lösung zu finden. Sonst wäre man jetzt nämlich mit der Konfliktstrategie, die Sie vorgeschlagen haben, möglicherweise bei einem Ergebnis, das zu massiven Problemen in Deutschland geführt hätte. Zum Glück haben Sie sich nicht durchgesetzt.\n\nRichtig ist, dass man jetzt einen Wettbewerb der Sicherungssysteme in Europa durch einheitliche Regeln unterbindet. Es ist zwar kein europäischer Einlagen-sicherungsfonds, so wie die USA einen solchen für die gesamte USA haben; aber es gibt Regeln für die jeweiligen nationalen Systeme und auch die Berechtigung, sich gegenseitig Kredite einzuräumen. Das macht es umso unwahrscheinlicher, dass der Steuerzahler künftig bei Bankenpleiten für die Sicherungssysteme einspringen muss.\n\nEs ist auch deutlich geworden, dass wir beim Thema Institutssicherungssysteme eine parteiübergreifende Regelung in Europa durchsetzen konnten. Wir begrüßen diese Richtlinie also grundsätzlich.\n\nWichtig war uns dabei, dass die Beitragshöhe der einzelnen Institute das Risikoprofil wirklich abbildet und dass nicht kleine, risikoarme Institute relativ mehr zahlen müssen, als es ihrem Risiko entspricht. Es ist auch gut, dass 70 Prozent der Beiträge ex ante gezahlt werden müssen und ein Teil durch Zahlungsverpflichtungen abgedeckt wird. Das erhöht die Glaubwürdigkeit des Sicherungssystems, weil in Krisenzeiten Geld eben bereits da ist.\n\nWichtig ist auch - das ist schon genannt worden -, dass es für die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher dadurch eine Verbesserung gibt, dass sie nicht mehr extra einen Antrag stellen müssen und dass innerhalb von sieben Tagen ausgezahlt werden muss. Das ist sicher eine wichtige Verbesserung.\n\nIch will noch kurz auf zwei Themen eingehen, die mit der Einlagensicherung verbunden sind und bei denen wir noch Hausaufgaben zu erledigen haben:\n\nDas erste Thema bezeichnen Experten mit dem Begriff „Asset Encumbrance“. Diesen Begriff muss man vielleicht nicht kennen, aber das Problem ist unmittelbar einleuchtend: Einlagen sind für die Banken eine sehr günstige Form der Refinanzierung. Wenn sie geschützt sind, müssen die Banken das Risiko nicht selber tragen. Deswegen gibt es das Problem, dass Risiken auf die Einlagensicherung übertragen werden und damit praktisch eine neue Möglichkeit geschaffen wird, Risiken auf die Allgemeinheit abzuwälzen. Dieses Problem ist in anderen Ländern schon gesetzlich gelöst worden, bei uns noch nicht. Hier besteht Handlungsbedarf.\n\nZum Zweiten besteht Handlungsbedarf bezüglich der risikoadäquaten Bepreisung. Hiermit sind wir beim Thema Trennbankensystem. Gibt es eine Trennung zwischen dem gesicherten Einlagengeschäft auf der einen Seite und dem Investmentbanking auf der anderen Seite?\n\nAuch hier ist nach wie vor Handlungsbedarf gegeben und die Bundesregierung gefordert, sich auch auf europäischer Ebene für das Richtige einzusetzen.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n3258,ute-vogt,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Kollege Auernhammer hat es schon angesprochen: Wir haben in Artikel 20 a unseres Grundgesetzes - mit Ihrer Erlaubnis, Frau Präsidentin, zitiere ich - festgeschrieben:\n\nDer Staat schützt auch in Verantwortung für die künftigen Generationen die natürlichen Lebensgrundlagen und die Tiere im Rahmen der verfassungsmäßigen Ordnung durch die Gesetzgebung …\n\nWir haben uns damit als Haus mit einer deutlichen Mehrheit - mit einer Zweidrittelmehrheit - eindeutig verpflichtet. Aber, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich denke schon, dass wir dieser Verpflichtung durch die praktische Gesetzgebung besser nachkommen müssen, als es bisher passiert ist.\n\nHerr Kollege Stier, ich bin aufgrund Ihres Redebeitrags etwas ernüchtert - so will ich es einmal sagen -, weil es jetzt nicht darum geht, dass es ein paar schwarze Schafe gibt, die man irgendwie herausfinden und zur Ordnung rufen muss; bei diesem Thema geht es vielmehr um eine grundsätzlich andere Einstellung.\n\nDie Einstellung hat sich bei vielen Menschen - gerade auch bei vielen Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern in Deutschland - schon sehr verändert. Es geht darum, dass der angesprochene Lebensmitteleinzelhandel und eben auch die Landwirtschaft sowie die Erzeuger im Zusammenwirken mit uns entsprechend reagieren. Deshalb finde ich es so bedauerlich, dass Sie so unsinnige und - ich sage es jetzt wirklich einmal so - quälerische Dinge wie den Schenkelbrand auch heute wieder verteidigt haben.\n\nIch will Ihnen sagen: Wir haben jetzt eine andere Koalition als in der letzten Legislaturperiode.\n\nIch möchte nicht mehr erleben, dass es uns so ergeht wie beim letzten Mal, als Frau Aigner etwas durchaus Brauchbares vorgelegt hat, wovon am Ende praktisch nichts mehr übrig geblieben ist.\n\nWir sind wirklich fest entschlossen, Minister Christian Schmidt in seinen Überlegungen mit voller Kraft zu unterstützen. Wir haben das im Koalitionsvertrag gemeinsam vereinbart, und es reicht nicht aus, wenn Sie sich jetzt darauf zurückziehen, im Grunde nur das zu tun, was Sie auch in der letzten Legislaturperiode schon nicht tun wollten. Es muss also schon ein bisschen mehr sein. Es geht auch darum, dass wir das alles nicht zwei Jahre lang hinauszögern dürfen. In vielen Bereichen liegen die Erkenntnisse vor und ist die Qual offensichtlich. Es ist unsere Aufgabe - auch nach dem, was uns das Grundgesetz vorgibt -, hier zügig zu handeln.\n\nEs geht uns darum, den Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern die Chance zu geben, ihre Entscheidung auf der Grundlage der besten Information zu treffen. Der Deutsche Tierschutzbund hat gestern eine Kampagne mit dem Titel „Hinter billig steckt mehr als Sie denken“ ins Leben gerufen. Mit dieser Kampagne sollen auch die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher darauf aufmerksam gemacht werden, was es bedeutet, wenn man den Wert von Tieren, von Mitgeschöpfen, nicht erkennt - übrigens auch zulasten der Landwirte - und einfach versucht, die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher durch immer mehr Dumpingpreise zu locken, wodurch noch mehr Elend in der Tierhaltung hervorgerufen wird.\n\nUns geht es darum, dieses Elend nicht nur zu reduzieren, sondern tatsächlich auch zu beenden. Ich denke, hier geht es um eine Bewusstseinsänderung. Das können wir nicht nur einzelnen Tierschützern überlassen, die mit entsprechenden Kampagnen tätig werden,\n\nsondern wir sind hier aufgefordert, die notwendigen gesetzgeberischen Maßnahmen zu ergreifen.\n\nIch glaube, die Bereitschaft in der Gesellschaft ist da. Ich sehe auch in der Landwirtschaft immer mehr verantwortungsvolle Menschen, die gerne einen anderen Weg mit uns gehen wollen.\n\nDeshalb will ich noch einmal sagen: Wir sollten möglichst schnell vorgehen und nicht bei jeder Maßnahme die vorgesehene Dialogzeit von zwei Jahren ausnutzen. Wir müssen damit anfangen, das, was notwendig ist, Stück für Stück umzusetzen. Darauf freuen wir uns, und ich glaube, wir können hier möglicherweise etwas erreichen, hinter dem wieder, wie damals bei der Aufnahme des Tierschutzes ins Grundgesetz, das ganze Haus steht. Das fände ich ideal; denn es geht um eine sehr ethische Bewertung dieser Themen und nicht nur um Streitereien zwischen den einzelnen Fraktionen.\n\nIn diesem Sinne hoffe ich auf eine konstruktive Zusammenarbeit aller Fraktionen, aber vor allen Dingen auch auf eine zügige Umsetzung.\"\n9913,lars-castellucci,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist gut, dass wir über Integration sprechen. Das ist wirklich eine Riesenaufgabe, die vor uns steht. Man kann manchmal schon Zweifel haben, ob einem das gelingt. Ob sich zum Beispiel die CSU - Herr Frieser spricht ja gleich - noch in diese Bundesregierung integriert, das weiß ich nicht genau, oder Bayern in Deutschland.\n\nMachen wir ernsthaft weiter. Ich finde, die Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen hat zum Thema Integration viel Vernünftiges aufgeschrieben. Ich bin froh - damit schließe ich an die Worte der Kollegin Woltmann an -, dass wir in der Lage sind, das auch umzusetzen. Wir haben - das ist gesagt worden - schon vieles getan: Wir haben in die Integrationskurse investiert, wir haben den Arbeitsmarktzugang erleichtert, und wir haben verabredet, dass es - dazu liegen die ersten Entwürfe schon vor - eine Bund-Länder-Arbeitsgruppe geben wird, die noch im nächsten Monat ein Integrationskonzept der Bundesregierung vorstellen wird. Ich bin sicher, da wird vieles von dem drin sein, was Sie hier vorschlagen. Also: Sie schreiben Papiere, wir handeln.\n\nFrau Kollegin Dağdelen, Sie sprachen von organisiertem Staatsversagen. Ich möchte Sie fragen: Welches Land hätte das, was wir im letzten Jahr erlebt haben, eigentlich besser bewältigt? Welches Land hätte es besser erreicht?\n\nIch frage Sie noch etwas: Was ist Ihr Staatsverständnis?\n\n- Sie können das gleich sagen. Ich lasse das dann zu. - Nach meinem Staatsverständnis sind wir alle der Staat. Dazu gehören die Zivilgesellschaft, die Wirtschaft, die Wissenschaft - alle sind mit dabei. Ich finde, das, was wir im letzten Jahr erleben konnten, war eine großartige Gesamtleistung.\n\nIch habe diesen Antrag einerseits gerne gelesen, andererseits habe ich mich aber auch aufgeregt. Die Frage ist: Wie wollen wir diese Debatte führen? 1 Milliarde Euro für Flüchtlinge beim Thema Wohnen, 1 Milliarde Euro für Flüchtlinge beim Thema Arbeitsmarkt; wir brauchen hier und da Geld. Die Frage ist: Was für einen Eindruck sollen die Menschen draußen im Land eigentlich bekommen?\n\nSchauen wir einmal auf das Jahr 2015. Ich versuche, mich in die Menschen hineinzuversetzen, zu überlegen, wie es ihnen so geht. Im ersten Halbjahr haben sie den Eindruck: Die vertickern unser ganzes Geld nach Griechenland. - Und im zweiten Halbjahr sehen sie: Da kommen jetzt auch noch die ganzen Flüchtlinge.\n\nDann sitzen die Leute da und fragen sich: Wo bleibe ich denn eigentlich? Ich muss nicht irgendwie rechts sein, um so etwas zu denken, sondern ich muss nur den Fernseher einschalten, um den Eindruck zu bekommen, dass es um die - in Anführungszeichen - „normalen“ Menschen, die hier schon lange leben, gar nicht mehr geht. Diesen Eindruck müssen wir mit allen Mitteln verhindern, weil das nicht stimmt und weil dieser Eindruck sehr schädlich ist, weil er dieses Land spaltet.\n\nDeswegen muss der erste Satz zum Thema Integration lauten: Integration richtet sich an alle.\n\nIntegration ist eine Aufgabe für das ganze Land. Integration heißt Zusammenhalt. Spielregeln? Ja, aber für alle. Bildung? Ja, aber für alle. Ausbildungsplätze? Ja, aber für alle. Das ist die Aufgabe, der wir uns stellen müssen.\n\nWenn ich irgendwo fremd bin und dazukomme, dann muss ich mich integrieren. Das ist keine Frage. Das mache ich. Dann passe ich mich sogar ein bisschen an. Ich denke nicht: „Die Welt, in die ich komme, muss so funktionieren, wie ich drauf bin“, sondern ich schaue mir das erst einmal an. Individuell ist das richtig, und es ist gut, wenn der Staat diese Anpassungsprozesse fördert und sie einfordert. Aber die eigentliche staatliche Aufgabe ist, ans Ganze zu denken, das ganze Land im Blick zu haben. Integration richtet sich an alle Menschen in diesem Land.\n\nJetzt ein Kommentar zum Thema Integrationspflichten; darüber werden wir demnächst sprechen. Im Kern geht es dabei um Wertevermittlung: Wie bekommen wir es hin, dass es in diesem Land ein bisschen in die Richtung geht, wie wir hier leben wollen?\n\nIch drehe das jetzt einmal um: Ich finde, die Flüchtlinge, die zu uns kommen, helfen uns gerade bei der Wertevermittlung; denn sie holen ganz schön viel Gutes aus diesem Land heraus. Ich sehe Großherzigkeit, ich sehe Anpacken, und ich sehe Hilfsbereitschaft. Das sind die Werte, die uns starkmachen. Die Flüchtlinge helfen uns gerade dabei, dass sie zutage treten.\n\nZur Wertevermittlung könnte man in Flüchtlingsunterkünften Grundgesetze verteilen. Man könnte die Flüchtlinge auch etwas unterschreiben lassen. Ich glaube aber, das ist zu kurz gesprungen. Ich denke, es ist ein bisschen so wie bei der Erziehung. Da gibt es ja den berühmten Spruch: Kinder kann man nicht erziehen; sie machen einem ohnehin alles nach. - Als Elternteil kann ich das zwar nicht bestätigen, aber als Kind habe ich mich daran gehalten.\n\nJetzt stellt sich in diesem Land natürlich die Frage. Wem werden es die Menschen nachmachen? Denen, die helfen, oder denen, die hetzen? Das ist die eigentliche Frage, um die es geht. Wir müssen alles dafür tun, dass die Werte, die in unserer Zivilgesellschaft im Rahmen der Hilfe zutage treten, beispielgebend sind, und vorleben, wie wir in diesem Land zusammenleben wollen. Auch die Wertevermittlung ist keine Einbahnstraße, wir sind vielmehr dazu berufen, uns gemeinsam zu fragen: Wie wollen wir in diesem Land leben, und wie bekommen wir das gemeinsam hin? Wertevermittlung ist etwas, was sich an alle richtet.\n\nJohannes Rau hat es so formuliert:\n\nEs kommt nicht auf die Herkunft des Einzelnen an, sondern darauf, dass wir gemeinsam die Zukunft gewinnen.\n\nIch bin sicher: Das wird uns gelingen. Das wird uns mit denen, die hier bleiben und sich mit unserer Hilfe gut integrieren, sogar gut gelingen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n865,patrick-sensburg,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Fast anderthalb Jahre hat der NSU-Untersuchungsausschuss gearbeitet. Es ist ein starkes Zeichen, dass sowohl die Einsetzung als auch die Beschlussempfehlung und der Abschlussbericht einstimmig erfolgten und dass wir hier im Deutschen Bundestag große Einheit zeigen. Es ist ein wichtiges und richtiges Zeichen. Genauso richtig ist es, dass wir dieses Thema in der 18. Wahlperiode quasi nicht als Akte zuklappen, sondern aufgeklappt lassen. Das ist ein starkes und gutes Zeichen; das haben meine Vorredner bereits hinreichend bekundet.\n\nMich freut, dass die Kolleginnen und Kollegen - insbesondere Frau Kollegin Högl, als es um Baden-Württemberg ging - hier jetzt nicht in Klein-Klein verfallen, sondern wir uns einig sind, gemeinsam an dem Ziel zu arbeiten, dass weiter aufgeklärt wird. Ich freue mich, dass wir nicht in Fraktionsdiskussionen verfallen, sondern gemeinsam an einem Strang ziehen. Ich finde, das ist ein sehr starkes Zeichen.\n\nIch finde es genauso wichtig, dass wir in enger Zusammenarbeit mit den Bundesländern die weiteren notwendigen Aufklärungen betreiben. Viele Maßnahmen sind nun einmal in den Bundesländern zu treffen. Ich bin daher ein wenig traurig, dass die Bundesratsbank, die sonst auch nicht besonders gut gefüllt ist, heute bei diesem Thema leider auch recht leer ist. Die ersten Kolleginnen und Kollegen gehen schon, obwohl die Debatte noch nicht zu Ende ist. Ich hätte mir gewünscht, dass die Bundesratsbank gerade heute etwas stärker gefüllt ist.\n\nDie besondere Einigkeit, die hier zutage tritt, ist bei einem Untersuchungsausschuss keine Selbstverständlichkeit. Es ist in der Regel ein scharfes Schwert der Opposition, um zu ermitteln. Wenn man aber genauer hinschaut, dann erkennt man, dass ein Untersuchungsausschuss eigentlich ein zentrales Recht des Parlaments, der parlamentarischen Demokratie ist. Auch an dieser Stelle gilt daher: Es ist ein gutes Zeichen, dass dieser Untersuchungsausschuss als ein zentrales Instrument des gesamten Parlaments genutzt worden ist.\n\nIch danke allen Mitgliedern des Untersuchungsausschusses, die in diesen fast anderthalb Jahren intensiv gearbeitet haben: mit doppelter Sitzungszeit, mit vielen Sitzungen und einer hohen Schlagzahl. Das war eine intensive Arbeit. Ganz herzlichen Dank an alle, dass Sie hier so intensiv gearbeitet haben.\n\nIch danke aber auch den Mitgliedern der Bundesregierung und der Behörden. Es war nicht immer leicht im Untersuchungsausschuss. Es war nicht mit allen Behörden einfach. Aber im Ergebnis ist es dann doch gelungen. Gerade auch der Innenminister Thüringens, Herr Geibert, der uns viele Erkenntnisse über den Thüringer Verfassungsschutz vermittelt hat, hat dazu beigetragen, dass der Untersuchungsausschuss arbeiten konnte.\n\nVon der einen oder anderen Seite wurden die Polizei und der Verfassungsschutz intensiv kritisiert. Dazu ist viel gesagt worden. Vieles ist richtig. Ich möchte aber auf das eingehen, was der Kollege Binninger erwähnt hat. Wenn wir den Polizei- und Sicherheitsbehörden Blindheit vorwerfen, dann müssen wir auch sagen, dass wir alle blind waren. Das ist eine Lehre des Untersuchungsausschusses. Nicht nur Polizei- und Sicherheitsbehörden haben es nicht gesehen, sondern auch in der Berichterstattung der Presse konnten wir nichts von einem deutlichen Fingerzeig nach rechts lesen. Auch in unseren Debatten gab es keinen Hinweis in diese Richtung. Ausnahmsweise muss ich einmal die Linke loben, was ich sehr selten tue. Sie hat deutlich gesagt, dass auch sie trotz erster Nachfragen nicht weitergebohrt hat. Die Erkenntnis, dass wir zu wenig gemacht haben, muss uns alle bewegen. Das ist ein ganz wesentliches Fazit dieses Untersuchungsausschusses.\n\nWir müssen wachsamer sein. Wir müssen erkennen, dass in den letzten Jahren - Frau Kollegin Pau hat es gesagt - 60 Menschen getötet worden sind. Vor kurzem wurde vor dem Landgericht Halle ein Fall verhandelt, der sich in Eisleben ereignete. Dort wurden auf grausamste Weise Menschen zusammengeschlagen, weil sie einen Migrationshintergrund haben. Das muss uns einfach stutzig machen und zum Nachdenken anregen. Ich danke daher allen Vereinigungen, Gruppen und Gesellschaftsgliederungen, die immer wieder auf rechts zeigen, Sensibilität wecken und sich einsetzen. Auch wir wollen mit den Ergebnissen des Untersuchungsausschusses da ansetzen, wo Toleranz, Kompetenz und Sensibilität gefordert werden. Das ist ein wesentlicher Bestandteil des Untersuchungsberichtes.\n\nEs sind auch Fehler gemacht worden. Bei einigen wurde der Finger in die Wunde gelegt. Ich möchte nicht mehr auf den polizeilichen Bereich eingehen, sondern ich möchte auf den Bereich der Justiz eingehen. Wir müssen feststellen, dass in vielen Bereichen der Justiz Sachverhalte nicht richtig verfolgt wurden oder nicht zur Anklage gebracht wurden. Es kann nicht sein, dass Böhnhardt 1993 in U-Haft weitere Taten vollbringen konnte - gemeinsam mit Sven R. und zwei weiteren folterte er einen Mithäftling - und dies keine strafrechtlichen Konsequenzen hatte und es auch nicht zur Anklage kam.\n\nWir haben 1996 Fotos einer Kreuzverbrennung im Stil des Ku-Klux-Klans gefunden. Als später die Zeugin Zschäpe vernommen wurde, hat sie konkrete Personen, die den Hitlergruß und den Kühnengruß zeigten, benannt. Auch hier wurde wieder nicht strafrechtlich ermittelt und die Sache zum Abschluss gebracht. Das kann nicht sein. Wir müssen hier stärker sensibilisieren. Ich hoffe, dass wir aus den Ergebnissen den Schluss ziehen, dass Aus- und Fortbildung bei der Polizei und der Justiz intensiviert werden müssen. Auch das EDV-Wirrwarr zwischen den Bundesländern muss aufgelöst werden, damit wir effektiv und intensiv arbeiten können.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, uns muss es gelingen, alle Empfehlungen aus dem Untersuchungsausschuss umzusetzen. Wir werden das gemeinsam mit der Bundesregierung tun. Ich freue mich, dass heute zwei Minister gesprochen haben. Wir werden die Umsetzung als Parlament begleiten. Ich hoffe, dass wir in dieser Legislaturperiode konkrete Erfolge erzielen. Das sind wir den Opfern schuldig.\"\n4154,dirk-wiese,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der nun vorliegende Gesetzentwurf in der durch den Änderungsantrag geänderten Form ist aus meiner Sicht und aus Sicht der SPD-Bundestagsfraktion ein wirkungsvolles Mittel, um bestehende Lücken im Sexualstrafrecht zu schließen, ohne dabei gleichzeitig Gefahr zu laufen, sozialadäquates Verhalten unter Strafe zu stellen.\n\nMein Kollege Johannes Fechner hat bereits die zentralen Punkte des Entwurfs, was Kinder- und Jugendpornografie angeht, dargestellt. Ich möchte im Folgenden auf vier weitere Themengebiete eingehen, die wir durch das Gesetz neu regeln bzw. wo wir Lücken in der Strafbarkeit schließen.\n\nErstens. Wir schließen Strafbarkeitslücken beim sexuel-len Missbrauch von Schutzbefohlenen. Bundesminister Heiko Maas hat das folgende Beispiel bereits in seiner Rede zur ersten Lesung verwendet: Das Oberlandesgericht Koblenz musste im Dezember 2012 einen Lehrer, der sich gezielt an eine 14-jährige Schülerin herangemacht hatte und das Mädchen über fünf Monate letztendlich zum Sex gedrängt hatte, vom Vorwurf des Missbrauchs von Schutzbefohlenen freisprechen. Grund für den Freispruch war einzig und allein, dass der Lehrer das Mädchen nicht regelmäßig unterrichtete und er damit als Vertretungslehrer in keinem sogenannten Obhutsverhältnis zu der Neuntklässlerin stand. Mit der Neufassung bzw. Ergänzung des § 174 Absatz 2 Strafgesetzbuch schließen wir diese Regelungslücke nun. Niemand soll seine Vertrauensstellung ungestraft missbrauchen dürfen; und es ist selbstverständlich, dass es dabei völlig egal sein muss, ob der Täter nun Klassenlehrer ist oder nur vertretungsweise unterrichtet.\n\nZweitens. Wir konkretisieren den Straftatbestand des Cybergroomings. Kurz zur Begriffserklärung: Unter Cybergrooming versteht man die Kontaktaufnahme erwachsener Täter mit Kindern im Internet zur Anbahnung sexueller Handlungen. Die Zahl dieser Fälle nimmt leider immer mehr zu. Laut polizeilicher Kriminalstatistik meines Heimatlandes Nordrhein-Westfalen hatten wir allein im Jahr 2013 eine Steigerung von über 50 Prozent gegenüber dem Vorjahr. Bisher konnten Fälle, in denen diese Informationsübertragung ausschließlich über Datenleitungen erfolgte und es zu keiner Zwischenspeicherung kam, nicht sicher erfasst werden. Der Handlungsbedarf ist gerade wegen der steigenden Zahl dieser Fälle besonders hoch. Durch die Neufassung von § 174 Absatz 4 Nummer 3 Strafgesetzbuch haben wir nun den Tatbestand dahin gehend konkretisiert, dass es in solchen Fällen keine Auslegungsprobleme des Tatbestandes mehr gibt. Ich glaube auch, dass die gesetzliche Regelung heute schon Möglichkeiten eröffnet, bei einem Anfangsverdacht weitere Ermittlungsmethoden zu nutzen.\n\nDrittens. Wir nehmen den Straftatbestand der Genitalverstümmelung in den Katalog der Auslandsstraftaten auf. Eines der abscheulichsten Verbrechen an Mädchen und Frauen ist die in verschiedenen afrikanischen und einigen asiatischen Ländern praktizierte Beschneidung aus traditionellen oder rituellen Gründen.\n\nAuch an in Deutschland lebenden Migrantinnen aus diesen Ländern wird das Beschneidungsritual teilweise in ihren Herkunftsländern als sogenannte Ferienbeschneidung praktiziert. Eltern fahren dafür extra mit ihren Kindern in die entsprechenden Heimatregionen.\n\nProblem bei der Strafverfolgung dieser im Ausland begangenen Genitalverstümmelungen war bisher, dass eine Strafbarkeit wegen Beihilfe nach deutschem Recht bislang ausschied, sofern keine Vorbereitungshandlung in Deutschland nachweisbar war. Durch Aufnahme des Straftatbestandes der Genitalverstümmelung in den Katalog der Auslandsstraftaten schließen wir diese Strafbarkeitslücke nun - ein wichtiger und entscheidender Schritt bei der Verfolgung dieses abscheulichen Verbrechens.\n\nViertens. Wir verlängern die Verjährungsfrist bei sexuellem Missbrauch an Kindern oder Jugendlichen. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die Erfahrungen aus den letzten Jahren haben gezeigt, dass Menschen, die als Jugendliche oder Kinder Opfer sexuellen Missbrauchs wurden, häufig erst nach Jahren in der Lage sind, über das Geschehene zu sprechen. Oftmals sind dann die Taten bereits verjährt. Das konnte man zum Beispiel bei den Missbrauchsfällen sehen, die im Zusammenhang mit der Odenwaldschule stehen. Deshalb ändern wir bei derartigen Straftaten die Verjährungsfrist.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, obgleich wir uns der Probleme im Beweisverfahren bewusst sind, die die Fristverlängerung mit sich bringen kann, haben wir uns ganz klar für diese Fristverlängerung entschieden; denn mit ihr senden wir auch ein starkes Signal an die Betroffenen und lassen sie mit ihrem Leid nicht alleine.\n\nSie sehen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Mit unserem Gesetz bekämpfen wir nicht nur die Kinderpornografie, sondern erweitern auch umfangreich den strafrechtlichen Schutz von Kindern und Jugendlichen vor sexueller Gewalt und sexuellen Übergriffen. Flankiert wird der vorliegende Gesetzentwurf zum Sexualstrafrecht durch das Präventionskonzept „Gemeinsam gegen sexuelle Gewalt“ von Bundesfamilienministerin Manuela Schwesig, sodass wir am heutigen Tage insgesamt ein gutes Maßnahmenbündel zum Schutz von Kindern und Jugendlichen vorlegen können.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n3675,ulrike-bahr,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Liebe Kollegen und Kolleginnen! Meine ganz persönliche kommunalpolitische Laufbahn ist aufs Engste mit dem Thema Schulsozialarbeit verknüpft. Als ehemalige bayerische Hauptschullehrerin kann ich mich nur zu gut daran erinnern, wie früher über Sinn oder Unsinn von Schulsozialarbeit diskutiert wurde. Aus genau dieser Zeit habe ich den Kommentar eines damaligen Stadtrates - ich verrate jetzt nicht, aus welcher Fraktion; jedenfalls nicht aus der SPD-Stadtratsfraktion - noch allzu gut im Ohr, der sich damals zum Thema Schulsozialarbeit folgendermaßen äußerte: „Schulsozialarbeit? So was brauchen wir nicht - wir haben doch einen Zaun um die Schule“,\n\nals kämen Probleme immer nur von außen, als könne man sich allein durch Abschottung ganz leicht schützen. Hinzu kam eine große Angst vor Stigmatisierung, wenn eine Schule sich die Blöße geben musste, Unterstützung von außen - noch dazu sozialpädagogische - in Anspruch zu nehmen, ja nehmen zu müssen.\n\nDiese Grundhaltung, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, in der Schule gehe es nur ums Lernen und nicht auch ums Leben und um das Meistern ganz grundsätzlicher, persönlicher Herausforderungen - wozu es manchmal schlicht auch der Hilfe von außen bedarf -, gehört zum Glück der Vergangenheit an.\n\nNun aber zu dem Antrag der Linken. Natürlich halten auch wir in der SPD-Bundestagsfraktion die Sicherstellung der Schulsozialarbeit für ein wichtiges Mittel und Instrument, Schulen zum Lebensraum zu machen. Ganz abgesehen von verfassungsrechtlichen Grundsätzen und Finanzierungsregeln in unserem föderalen System sehe ich bei Ihrem Antrag aber ein generelles Problem: Der Schulsozialarbeit - das gilt im Wesentlichen auch für die Kinder- und Jugendhilfe - wird von außen, oft unüberlegt, viel zu viel aufgebürdet: Beide werden als Platzhalter für eine Art Generalreparatur verwendet - als wenn man mit ein bisschen Schulsozialarbeit hier und ein bisschen Jugendsozialarbeit dort gesellschaftliche Probleme leicht und abschließend lösen könnte.\n\nEine kurzsichtige Symptombehandlung bringt uns hier aber keinen Schritt weiter. Ein neuer Paragraf im SGB VIII löst nicht automatisch grundlegende Probleme.\n\nDie Kinder- und Jugendhilfe hat mit ihrem Ansatz, jedes Kind und jeden Jugendlichen bestmöglich in seiner Entwicklung zu begleiten und zu unterstützen, Erfolgsgeschichte geschrieben - eine Erfolgsgeschichte, die wir unbedingt fortschreiben wollen. Deshalb haben wir uns im Koalitionsvertrag darauf verständigt, die Kinder- und Jugendhilfe zu einem inklusiven, effizienten, dauerhaft tragfähigen und belastbaren Hilfesystem weiterzuentwickeln, und zwar in einem strukturierten und sorgfältigen Prozess. Diese Weiterentwicklung darf nämlich nicht in einer unüberlegten Überlastung und in einem vermeintlich einfachen Überstülpen zusätzlicher Zuständigkeiten münden.\n\nSolange Bildungs- und damit Schulpolitik in den Zuständigkeitsbereich der Länder fällt, sehe ich diese hier auch in der Verantwortung, gute Rahmenbedingungen für Schulsozialarbeit zu gewährleisten. Eine bundeseinheitliche Regelung der Schulsozialarbeit erscheint mir in Anbetracht des aktuellen schulischen und trägerspezifischen Flickenteppichs weder verfassungsrechtlich realisierbar noch sinnvoll.\n\nDie 400 Millionen Euro jährlich, die die Länder durch Unterstützung des Bundes in den Jahren 2011 bis 2013 für Schulsozialarbeit verwenden konnten, haben gute Strukturen geschaffen. Heute und in den nächsten Jahren entlastet der Bund die Länder und Kommunen wiederum, an anderer Stelle, beispielsweise im Rahmen der 6 Milliarden Euro für die Finanzierung von Kinderkrippen, Kitas, Schulen und Hochschulen. Im Zuge dessen sehe ich auf Länderseite durchaus Spielraum für nachhaltige Investitionen in die Schulsozialarbeit; wo ein politischer Wille ist, ist auch ein Weg.\n\nSehr verwundert hat mich allerdings Ihre Forderung nach einem Schulsozialarbeitsgipfel auf Bundesebene; denn eigentlich gilt es, die Autonomie einer Schule zu fördern und zu fordern, und es gilt, dem Anspruch einer Bildungslandschaft der Zukunft gerecht zu werden, nämlich Schulen zu Bildungshäusern mit ihren ganz spezifischen Bedarfen und Profilen zu entwickeln. Diese Bildungshäuser wiederum müssen sich vernetzen mit den Akteuren vor Ort, zum Beispiel mit der Jugendarbeit, aber auch mit den Mehrgenerationenhäusern oder auch mit Projekten im Rahmen der „Sozialen Stadt“.\n\nSchule als Lebensraum darf auch nicht den Stempel „Made in Berlin“ tragen.\n\nWas wir vielmehr brauchen, ist die Unterstützung und Stärkung der örtlichen Schulgemeinden mit ihrem breiten Erfahrungsschatz, den Schüler- und Elternvertretungen, den örtlichen Trägern, -Lehrerinnen und Lehrern, die im Übrigen in Ihrem Vorschlag vom Schulsozialarbeitsgipfel unerwähnt bleiben.\n\nEine Top-down-Strategie kann hier nicht der richtige Weg sein; denn Schulsozialarbeit ist wie Brückenbauen: Am besten und am sichersten sind die Brücken dann, wenn die Menschen, die künftig auf ihnen gehen wollen, sie selber mit bauen.\n\nVielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n10612,christoph-bergner,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Wer sich mit der Entwicklung und Geschichte des Bundesvertriebenengesetzes beschäftigt, wird mitbekommen, dass diese Geschichte, die über 60 Jahre umfasst, durch ständige Modernisierungen, Novellierungen und Anpassungen an veränderte Verhältnisse gekennzeichnet ist. Ich erinnere an die Novellierungen, die mit dem Fall des Eisernen Vorhangs zusammenhingen und zu einer Neuordnung der Aussiedleraufnahme geführt haben. Ich erinnere auch an Anpassungen, die im Zusammenhang mit dem EU-Beitritt unserer östlichen Nachbarn geschehen sind.\n\nDabei hat sich das Bundesvertriebenenrecht von einem Recht der unmittelbaren Kriegsfolgenbewältigung immer mehr zu einem Recht, das Beiträge zur nachhaltigen Friedenskonsolidierung leistet, gewandelt. Die vorgelegte Weiterentwicklung der Konzeption der Beauftragten für Kultur und Medien steht in genau diesem Kontext der Entwicklung: von unmittelbarer Kriegsfolgenbewältigung zu nachhaltiger Friedenskonsolidierung im Rahmen des europäischen Einigungsprozesses.\n\nNeben die Verarbeitung des Kulturbruches nach Ende des Zweiten Weltkrieges durch Flucht und Vertreibung, neben die Herausforderungen, die seinerzeit geprägt waren durch die Rettung unmittelbar, akut gefährdeten Kulturgutes und die Notwendigkeit einer empathischen Erinnerungskultur für Vertriebene, neben diese Grundsätze, die nach wie vor Bedeutung haben, tritt immer mehr der Beitrag der deutschen Kultur im östlichen Europa zu einem gesamteuropäisch zu verstehenden kulturellen Erbe. Dies kommt, meine Damen und Herren, in der vorliegenden Konzeption überzeugend zum Ausdruck.\n\nSie verbindet die national-kulturellen Traditionen im Sinne eines gemeinsamen, nationenübergreifenden europäischen Kulturverständnisses. Nirgends ist mir das in jüngerer Zeit so deutlich geworden wie beim Besuch des Breslauer Oberbürgermeisters, der im Unterausschuss für Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik über die Konzepte zum Programm des Kulturhauptstadtjahres berichtete. An den Ausführungen des Oberbürgermeisters ist klar geworden, dass die deutschen kulturellen Prägungen seiner Stadt zu einem europäischen Markenzeichen der Gegenwart geworden sind und wie wertvoll für ihn die Kombination aus deutscher Geschichte und deutschen Prägungen der Vergangenheit und dem europäischen Verständnis der Gegenwart ist.\n\nIn Erwiderung auf Frau Hupach möchte ich sagen: Wer anderes als die Deutschen selbst soll denn für die Pflege des deutschen Beitrages zu einem europäischen Kulturprojekt Verantwortung tragen? Niemand wird erwarten, dass wir das deutsche Kulturerbe gewissermaßen in die Hand von Polen und anderen zur Betreuung geben. Dann sollten wir uns auch darüber freuen, dass ein polnischer Oberbürgermeister unsere Kooperation bei der gemeinsamen europäischen Kulturpflege verlangt und fordert, und dafür bietet das Konzept sehr gute Voraussetzungen.\n\nIch hoffe, dass das Konzept auch dazu beitragen kann, zukünftige Herausforderungen zu bewältigen. Ich will nur ein Beispiel herausgreifen: Die Europäische Kommission und das Europaparlament haben 2018 zum Europäischen Kulturerbejahr ausgerufen. Unter dem Motto „Sharing Heritage“ sollen übergreifende, eine europäische Kulturidentität begründende Beispiele gesucht werden - insbesondere in der Bautradition. Ich bin mir sicher, dass Zeugnisse deutscher Kulturtradition im Osten wertvolle Beiträge dazu leisten können.\n\nAls Beispiele nenne ich die Kirchenburgen in Siebenbürgen, den Kaschauer Dom in Kosice in der Slowakei mit seinem gotischen Turm - das östlichste gotische Bauwerk in Europa -, die Jahrhunderthalle in Breslau. Ich könnte diese Aufzählung fortführen, und ich möchte appellieren, dass auf der Basis des vorgelegten Konzeptes eine Beteiligung am Europäischen Kulturerbejahr in Erwägung gezogen wird.\n\nAber, meine Damen und Herren, die deutsche Kultur und Geschichte im östlichen Europa gehen über die Grenzen der EU hinaus. Ein Anliegen ist mir hier besonders wichtig: Wir dürfen die Kultur der russlanddeutschen Kolonisten und ihr Deportations- und Vertreibungsschicksal nicht vergessen.\n\nIch bin froh, dass sich das Museum für russlanddeutsche Kulturgeschichte im Konzept wiederfindet, und will nur darauf hinweisen, dass sich hier Begegnungsmöglichkeiten ergeben. Dies konnte ich gerade auch in der letzten Woche bei einem Besuch in Aserbaidschan wieder feststellen, als ich erlebte, dass dort - und zwar von der einheimischen Bevölkerung - Helenendorf und Annenfeld als deutsche Gründungen - die Deutschen sind 1941 deportiert worden - und die Schwabendörfer in der Gegend von Tiflis gepflegt werden und man zusammen die Feierlichkeiten zum 200. Jahrestag der Ansiedlung der Deutschen im Kaukasus in den Jahren 2017 und 2018 vorbereitet, den man gemeinsam begehen will.\n\nIch erinnere in diesem Zusammenhang an ein Wort unseres früheren Außenministers Hans-Dietrich Genscher, das mir sehr wertvoll geworden ist und das ich leider nur aus dem Gedächtnis zitieren kann. Auf einem Forum mit kasachischen Teilnehmern sagte Hans-Dietrich Genscher: In unserer Gesellschaft sollten wir Nachbarn nicht allein darüber definieren, ob wir eine gemeinsame Grenze haben, und wir sollten unseren Begriff von Nachbarschaft nicht nur auf eine gemeinsame Grenze beziehen. - Unter Verweis auf die Russlanddeutschen in Kasachstan, die weitgehend Nachkommen von Deportierten waren, sagte er weiter: Der Umstand, dass in kasachischen Dörfern deutsche Familien neben kasachischen Familien gelebt haben, macht uns zu Nachbarn im Sinne einer kulturellen Nachbarschaft.\n\nDamit komme ich abschließend zu einem besonderen inhaltlichen Ansatz für diese Konzeption und für die Arbeit nach dem § 96 Bundesvertriebenengesetz: Wir haben die Chance, kulturelle Nachbarschaft zu gestalten. Wir sollten nicht immer wieder alte Feindbilder pflegen, die mit Blick auf das Bundesvertriebenenrecht nie richtig waren, und den Eindruck erwecken, Frau Schauws und Frau Hupach, als würde diese Arbeit Keile in unsere europäische Nachbarschaft treiben. Stattdessen sollten wir nach Gemeinsamkeit suchen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n8712,anton-hofreiter,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Frau Bundeskanzlerin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir sind tief erschüttert von den Pariser Terroranschlägen. Wir sind fassungslos über die Brutalität und die Grausamkeit, mit der so viele Menschen ermordet wurden. Ich schließe mich meinen Vorrednern an, und auch ich sage für meine Fraktion: Wir stehen zu den Menschen in Paris. Wir stehen auch zu den Menschen in Beirut und Bamako. Wir stehen zu den Menschen in Tunis. Und wir gedenken auch der Opfer der abgeschossenen russischen Zivilmaschine. All jene, die in den letzten Tagen durch Terroristen ermordet wurden, sind unschuldige Menschen.\n\nWieder einmal müssen wir uns fragen: „Wie antworten wir auf den Terror?“ - eine Frage, die wir uns in den letzten Jahren zu oft stellen mussten: nach dem 11. September, nach den Anschlägen von Madrid und London. Diese Serie ließe sich fortsetzen.\n\nWas wir in diesen Tagen in Brüssel sehen, ist bedrückend. Wenn es den Terroristen gelingt, die westlichen Metropolen dauerhaft in Angst und Schrecken zu versetzen, in Misstrauen und gegenseitigen Hass, dann haben sie eines ihrer zentralen Ziele erreicht und haben fast gewonnen. Der Ausnahmezustand von Paris und Brüssel darf daher nicht zum Normalfall werden. Wir dürfen uns von den Terroristen nicht einschüchtern lassen! Wir dürfen uns unsere Freiheit und unser Leben nicht wegnehmen lassen!\n\nAuch wenn es sicher schwerfällt: Wir müssen besonnen, durchdacht und mit kühlem Kopf handeln, statt hysterisch und reflexhaft.\n\nLeider ein trauriges Musterbeispiel für eine dumme und falsche Reaktion hat wieder einmal die CSU geliefert. Herrn Söder fällt keine 24 Stunden nach dem Terroranschlag ein, man solle jetzt sofort die Grenzen schließen für die Menschen, die vor genau dieser Art von Terror fliehen. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der CSU, so etwas ist beschämend, und Sie sollten sich ganz schnell einmal überlegen, wie Sie diesem Herrn Anstand beibringen können.\n\nViele haben in den Tagen nach dem Anschlag in Paris von Krieg gesprochen. Es ist sicher verständlich, wenn man auf diesen Begriff kommt. Aber wir sollten uns fragen, ob die Rhetorik des Krieges angemessen und klug ist. Wer bei Terror von Krieg redet, gerät in eine Logik, die mehr vernebelt als klärt. Die Kriegslogik führt zu falschen Fronten. ISIS führt sicher Krieg, aber dieser Krieg findet in Syrien und im Irak statt. Die Hauptleidtragenden des islamistischen Terrors sind die Menschen in diesen Ländern. Zehntausende von ihnen sind ihm zum Opfer gefallen. Auch ihnen sind wir Solidarität und Hilfe schuldig.\n\nDer Kriegslogik folgt der sogenannte War on Terror seit 14 Jahren. Klar: ISIS muss auch militärisch bekämpft werden. Aber: Was ist denn die Bilanz des sogenannten War on Terror seit 14 Jahren? Wenn ich auf die Bilanz dieser 14 Jahre Terrorbekämpfung schaue, dann ist diese Bilanz wirklich ernüchternd. Die Lage ist in den vergangenen 14 Jahren doch nicht besser geworden. Al\u001eQaida ist in Teilen geschwächt, aber dafür sind andere terroristische Organisationen wie IS und Boko Haram deutlich gestärkt. Tausende junger Menschen sind aus Europa nach Syrien und in den Irak gegangen, um dort als Terroristen zu kämpfen und zu morden. Es herrscht in mehr Ländern Krieg und Bürgerkrieg. Wir haben doch die Begrenztheit militärischer Mittel in Afghanistan erlebt. Wir haben ihre ungewollten und katastrophalen Konsequenzen im Irak gesehen. Wir sehen, wenn man an den Drohnenkrieg denkt, die destabilisierende Wirkung des Drohnenkrieges in Pakistan. Deshalb: Besonnenheit, kühler Kopf und kluge Analyse sind das Gebot der Stunde und nicht, die alten Fehler seit 14 Jahren zu wiederholen.\n\nEs braucht eine Gesamtstrategie zur Bekämpfung des IS. Es ist richtig, dass gegen IS militärisch gekämpft werden muss. Aber es ist auch klar, dass er am Ende nur politisch besiegt werden kann. Der Abschuss des russischen Kampfflugzeuges durch türkische Kampfflugzeuge hat diesen Bemühungen einen schweren Rückschlag zugefügt. Aber wir müssen uns bemühen und dafür sorgen und alles daransetzen, dass es bei den Gesprächen in Wien zu einer internationalen Zusammenarbeit im Kampf gegen den IS kommt: zwischen den regionalen und den internationalen Kräften, zwischen Iran und der Türkei, zwischen den USA und Russland. Wir müssen auch dafür sorgen, dass es gelingt, dass ein Waffenstillstand erzielt wird zwischen den Überresten des Baath-Regimes, den Überresten der gemäßigten Rebellen und der syrischen Kurden, damit eine Chance besteht, dass dieser Kampf auch erfolgreich ist. Den Terror und ISIS zu bekämpfen, ist die eine Sache; aber sie erfolgreich zu bekämpfen, ist die andere Sache. Dafür braucht es eine politische Einigung.\n\nDafür braucht es auch eine Lösung für das Problem Assad. Eines sollten wir auch nie vergessen: Assad ist die Quelle der Ursache. Ein Großteil der in Syrien ermordeten Menschen ist von Assad ermordet worden. Deshalb müssen wir uns überlegen: Wie kann es gelingen, Assad da herauszunehmen, eine Regierung der nationalen Einheit in Syrien zu schaffen und dann, nach der politischen Einigung, einen gemeinsamen, von der UN getragenen Kampf gegen ISIS zu organisieren, damit man nicht nur militärisch agiert, sondern auch erfolgreich?\n\nBesonnenheit und kluge Analyse bedeuten natürlich nicht Untätigkeit. „Krieg“ ist für das, was wir in Europa haben, in meinen Augen der falscheste Begriff. Es geht darum, den Terror zu bekämpfen. Wir müssen natürlich für die Sicherheit unserer Bürgerinnen und Bürger sorgen. Aber auch hier heißt das, nach klarer Analyse vorzugehen. Nach dem 11. September wurde schon einmal im Namen des Krieges die Freiheit unverhältnismäßig eingeschränkt. Mit welchem Ergebnis? Überall in Europa entfalteten die Geheimdienste ein Eigenleben. Wir konnten erleben, wie Geheimdienste aus Europa die US-amerikanischen Geheimdienste bei Entführungen, bei Folter unterstützt haben. Guantánamo und Abu Ghuraib sind die symbolhaften Namen für diese Fehlentwicklung. Aber es gab nicht nur schwere Menschenrechtsverletzungen, sondern es war auch noch massiv kontraproduktiv. Die Bilder von Abu Ghuraib haben mehr Terroristen produziert als viele andere Maßnahmen. Deshalb dürfen wir diese Fehler nicht wiederholen, erstens wegen der Menschenrechte und zweitens wegen der kontraproduktiven Wirkung.\n\nBeim Kampf gegen den Terror brauchen wir echte Politik, brauchen wir Maßnahmen, die wirken, und nicht reine Symbolpolitik. Wir brauchen deshalb eine gut ausgestattete Polizei, die ausreichend Personal und Mittel hat. Wir brauchen nicht wieder den reflexhaften Ruf nach einem Einsatz der Bundeswehr im Innern.\n\nDie Bundeswehr kann vieles gut, aber sie ist nicht dafür ausgebildet, Terror im Innern zu bekämpfen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir brauchen natürlich eine Überwachung der Terrorverdächtigen. Wir brauchen eine bessere Zusammenarbeit der Polizei über die Grenzen hinweg. Aber die totale Überwachung durch die Geheimdienste kann doch nicht die Antwort sein. Ich kann nicht erkennen, dass das irgendein Beitrag zur Terrorbekämpfung ist, wenn der BND den französischen Außenminister oder die europäischen Botschaften überwacht.\n\nWenn wir unserem Inlandsgeheimdienst gestatten, alle hier im Saal, alle Bürger zu überwachen, dann bekommen wir sicherlich einen gigantischen Datenwust, mit dem am Ende nicht mehr viel anzufangen ist; aber es ist ganz sicher kein Beitrag zur Bekämpfung des Terrors. Man muss fokussieren und die Polizei so ausstatten, dass sie in der Lage ist, die Terrorverdächtigen zu überwachen - nicht uns alle hier im Saal oder alle Bürger in diesem Land.\n\nWas wir im Kampf gegen den Terror allerdings vor allem brauchen, ist die Prävention. Wie kann es sein, dass junge Menschen, die hier bei uns aufgewachsen sind, sich solchen menschenverachtenden Ideologien anschließen und in den Dschihad ziehen? Darauf gibt es sicherlich keine einfache und keine schnelle Antwort. Integrationsarbeit, Bildungsarbeit, Jugendarbeit, Sozialarbeit bilden den wichtigsten Teil der Prävention von Terror. Wir müssen unseren jungen Menschen Chancen bieten. Natürlich müssen wir auch den radikalen Hasspredigern das Handwerk legen. Da haben wir auch in Deutschland einen massiven Nachholbedarf. Selbst der BKA-Präsident sagt uns: Die wichtigste Maßnahme im Kampf gegen den Terror ist, dafür zu sorgen, dass sich junge Menschen deradikalisieren bzw. erst gar nicht radikalisieren; denn wenn die Zahl der Gefährder so hoch bleibt, dann können wir gar nicht genug Polizisten einstellen, um sie alle zu überwachen. Deshalb ist gute Sozialpolitik harte, echte und wichtige Sicherheitspolitik.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir brauchen keine Scheinpolitik und keine Symbolpolitik, sondern Politik mit Weitsicht. Eine Politik, die vorsagt, die über den Tag hinaus denkt - das wäre heute notwendig. Aber wenn ich mir anschaue, was Sie machen, wie Sie mit der fundamentalen Klimakrise, den großen Flucht- und Migrationsbewegungen, der großen Investitionslücke, die wir schließen müssen, damit unsere Gesellschaft eine Zukunft hat, und mit der Zunahme rechtspopulistischer Umtriebe umgehen, dann stelle ich mir die Frage: Was macht eigentlich diese Regierung?\n\nWir wissen doch: Wenn eine Regierung handlungsunfähig und zerstritten wirkt, dann erhalten rechtsextreme und rechtspopulistische Organisationen Zulauf.\n\nIch nehme an, Sie wissen das auch, Herr Kauder\n\nund Herr Oppermann, Herr de Maizière und Herr Altmaier, Herr Gabriel und Frau Merkel. Aber was für ein Schauspiel bietet uns die Große Koalition?\n\nDa ignoriert der Innenminister de Maizière, was die Bundeskanzlerin und der Kanzleramtsminister Altmaier vorgeben, und arbeitet auf eigene Rechnung. Da redet der CSU-Vorsitzende von Notwehr gegenüber der eigenen Bundesregierung. Da vergleicht ein Finanzminister schutzsuchende Menschen mit Naturkatastrophen und denunziert die Kanzlerin als die Auslöserin des Ganzen. Da taumelt ein Vizekanzler auf der Suche nach Schlagzeilen zwischen Pegida-Besuch und „Pack“-Beschimpfung, zwischen Menschenrechten und Abschottung, bis den SPD-Beobachtern nur noch das Grausen kommt. Da stellt sich ein Ministerpräsident von der CSU hin und maßregelt die Bundeskanzlerin auf offener Bühne, als wenn sie ein Schulmädchen wäre, und dann hat er noch nicht einmal die Größe, sich bei ihr zu entschuldigen.\n\nWissen Sie, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, nun könnte man sich als Opposition darüber freuen, dass man es mit so einer zerstrittenen, so einer armseligen und so einer handlungsunfähigen Regierung zu tun hat. Aber dafür sind die Probleme wirklich zu ernst.\n\nDie Probleme sind wirklich zu groß, als dass wir uns eine zerstrittene Regierung leisten können. Deshalb: Reißen Sie sich endlich zusammen! Machen Sie Schluss mit diesem Theater!\n\nUnser Land hat wirklich große Aufgaben vor sich. Wir müssen die vielen Schutzsuchenden bei uns integrieren, und wir müssen unverzüglich damit anfangen. Ja, Frau Merkel, wir schaffen das. Aber es muss auch geklärt werden, wie wir das schaffen, und dazu braucht es nicht nur Anregungen der Opposition, sondern dazu braucht es auch Beschlüsse der Bundesregierung. Deshalb kann ich nur sagen: Stimmen Sie unseren Anträgen zum Haushalt zu. Wie wäre es denn mit 600 Millionen Euro mehr für Integrationskurse, wie wir sie beantragen und gegenfinanzieren?\n\nWie wäre es denn mit 350 Millionen Euro mehr für die Jobcenter, wie wir sie beantragen und gegenfinanzieren?\n\nOder wie wäre es mit einem 2-Milliarden-Paket für den sozialen Wohnungsbau - der sowieso dringend notwendig ist -, wie wir es beantragen und gegenfinanzieren?\n\nSie haben doch selbst gesagt: Die Randbedingungen sind gut, die Zinsen sind so niedrig wie nie, und unsere Steuereinnahmen sind entsprechend gut. - Ja, darüber kann man sich freuen, aber man muss auch etwas daraus machen. Man darf keinen Haushalt vorlegen, der keinen Mut hat, kein Herz und keinen Plan. Machen Sie endlich was, und reden Sie nicht bloß!\n\nFrau Merkel, ich gebe gerne zu: Ich freue mich wirklich - und wir werden oft dafür getadelt, dass wir Frau Merkel zu sehr loben -, dass Sie dem Sperrfeuer aus Ihren eigenen Reihen bisher standgehalten haben.\n\nAber wenn Sie es zulassen, dass die jüngsten Planungen für ein neues Asylgesetz umgesetzt werden - geplant sind Schnellverfahren, die quasi jeden Flüchtling treffen können, eine Aussetzung des Familiennachzugs, Abschiebung auch schwerkranker Flüchtlinge -, dann, Frau Merkel, zeigt Deutschland leider kein freundliches Gesicht mehr, sondern dann zeigt es eine hässliche Fratze. Überlegen Sie sich das also noch einmal gut, und verhindern Sie das.\n\nÜberlegen wir uns doch einmal, was das Aussetzen des Familiennachzugs perspektivisch bedeutet:\n\nDas Aussetzen des Familiennachzugs bedeutet perspektivisch, dass sich Frauen und Kinder auf den gefährlichen Weg machen, vielleicht über das Mittelmeer, und ein Teil von ihnen unter Umständen ertrinkt. Wollen wir das verantworten? Ich will das nicht verantworten. Ich glaube, das kann man auch nicht verantworten.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der CDU/CSU, Sie behaupten doch immer, dass Ihnen die Familie wichtig ist. Das kann doch nicht nur für deutsche Familien gelten. Artikel 6 Grundgesetz gilt für alle Familien. Geben Sie sich einen Ruck, seien Sie anständig, und sorgen Sie dafür, dass Frauen und Kinder nicht auf den lebensgefährlichen Weg über das Mittelmeer gezwungen werden. Das kann nicht deutsche Politik sein. Das darf nicht deutsche Politik sein.\n\nWährend die Regierung gelähmt zu sein scheint, der Kanzleramtsminister und Flüchtlingskoordinator auf der einen Seite und der Innenminister auf der anderen Seite gegeneinander arbeiten, schuften draußen im Lande Unmengen Menschen. Ich muss sagen: Ich bin den Ehrenamtlichen wirklich sehr dankbar für all das, was sie leisten,\n\nund ich bin auch den Hauptamtlichen sehr dankbar für all das, was sie leisten; denn sie beweisen jeden Tag all denen, die das Kippen der Stimmung herbeireden wollen, die herbeireden wollen, dass wir das nicht schaffen: Doch, wir schaffen das; wir können das, und wir packen das.\n\nEs ist häufig von der Bekämpfung von Fluchtursachen die Rede. Es fliehen Menschen aus vielen Ländern. Wir haben Probleme mit dem islamistischen Terror in vielen Ländern und Bürgerkriege in vielen Ländern. Schauen wir uns Mali an, wo die Bundeswehr bereits im Einsatz ist. Man muss klar sagen: Die Bundeswehr gibt sich sehr viel Mühe. Wir unterstützen diese Einsätze. Ich danke den Soldaten dafür, dass sie diese schwierige und zum Teil auch sehr gefährliche Aufgabe wahrnehmen. Es gibt auch eine ganze Reihe ziviler und ehrenamtlicher Helfer, die diesem Land auf die Beine helfen wollen. Ich war vor kurzem in Mali und habe mir das angeschaut. In Mali läuft vieles richtig. Was in Mali aber nicht in Gang kommt, ist die einheimische Wirtschaft. Eines der Hauptprodukte von Mali ist Baumwolle. Des Weiteren werden dort andere landwirtschaftliche Produkte produziert.\n\nJetzt ist es so, dass die Baumwolle und die landwirtschaftlichen Produkte Malis nicht konkurrenzfähig sind. Warum sind sie nicht konkurrenzfähig? Dafür, dass die Baumwolle Malis nicht konkurrenzfähig ist, sind nicht wir verantwortlich. Dafür ist nicht Europa verantwortlich, sondern dafür sind die USA verantwortlich. Die USA haben in den vergangenen 20 Jahren 30 Milliarden US-Dollar an ihre Baumwollfarmer bezahlt. Dass die anderen landwirtschaftlichen Produkte Malis nicht konkurrenzfähig sind, das liegt an uns, an Europa. Wir zahlen 50 Milliarden Euro Subventionen, und mit unseren subventionierten Lebensmitteln, wovon ein erheblicher Anteil exportiert wird, machen wir die Wirtschaft in Ländern wie Mali kaputt.\n\nWenn wir in vielleicht 10 oder 15 Jahren hier stehen und darüber sprechen, warum der Einsatz in Mali schiefgegangen ist - das kann hoffentlich verhindert werden -, warum es nicht gelungen ist, dieses Land zu stabilisieren und zu wirtschaftlichem Wohlstand zu führen, obwohl wir doch einen Bundeswehreinsatz hatten, obwohl wir diesen Bundeswehreinsatz ausgeweitet haben, obwohl wir viel Entwicklungshilfe gezahlt haben, obwohl wir uns doch alle Mühe gegeben haben, dann könnte man bei folgender Ursache landen: Weil man sich nicht an die Subventionen für die industrielle Landwirtschaft bei uns und in den USA herangetraut hat. - Das ist schlichtweg ein Problem. Man muss die Probleme halt an den Ursachen anpacken.\n\nWenn es in einem Land keine ökonomische Entwicklung gibt, dann kann das daran liegen, dass wir die ökonomische Entwicklung in diesem Land mit subventionierten Produkten kaputtmachen. Da können Sie von der CSU lachen und schreien; das macht es nicht besser. Es sollte doch in unserem Interesse sein, dass es diesem Land besser geht.\n\nSchauen Sie sich doch einfach einmal die Tatsachen an.\n\nDass Sie dieses Problem nicht angehen, ist aus Ihrer Sicht ja zu verstehen: Da muss man sich mit Lobbyisten anlegen, und es wird kurzfristig ökonomische Auseinandersetzungen geben.\n\nDas mag alles lästig und schwierig sein; aber man muss doch dafür sorgen, dass die Probleme an der Wurzel angepackt werden. Wir sollten nicht nur dafür sorgen, dass es einen ordentlichen Bundeswehreinsatz in Mali gibt, sondern auch dafür, dass die einheimische Wirtschaft von Mali die Chance hat, zu funktionieren. Deswegen sollten wir aufhören, diese einheimische Wirtschaft mit subventionierten Produkten aus Europa, aus Deutschland und aus den USA kaputtzumachen.\n\nEin weiteres Beispiel. Schauen wir uns den Umgang mit Saudi-Arabien an. Navid Kermani hat uns darauf hingewiesen, dass das Lehrmaterial, das in Saudi-Arabien verwendet wird, und das Lehrmaterial, das bei ISIS verwendet wird - die haben sogar Schulen -, zu 95 Prozent identisch sind. In Saudi-Arabien wurden dieses Jahr schon mehr Menschen geköpft als im Territorium des sogenannten „Islamischen Staats“, den man, glaube ich, besser Da‘isch nennen sollte.\n\nSaudi-Arabien ist das Zentrum des Wahhabismus, einer islamistischen Ideologie, die von der Ideologie der Terroristen kaum zu unterscheiden ist. Aus Saudi-Arabien wird nach allem, was man erkennen kann, ISIS finanziert. In Saudi-Arabien haben Frauen fast keine Rechte. In Saudi-Arabien ist das Ausüben anderer Religionen bei schwerster Strafe verboten. Menschenrechtler wie Badawi werden ausgepeitscht und zu barbarischen Strafen verurteilt. Saudi-Arabien exportiert diese fundamentalistische Ideologie in viele Länder. Saudi-Arabien führt im Jemen einen barbarischen Krieg mit vielen zivilen Toten.\n\nWenn man sich das anschaut - das ist einfach nur eine nüchterne Aufzählung -, dann müsste man doch denken: Das ist ein Land, auf das die Bundesregierung, auf das der demokratische Westen massiv Druck ausüben sollte, sein Verhalten zu ändern. - Aber was ist der Fall? Die Bundesregierung behandelt Saudi-Arabien als engsten Verbündeten, liefert dorthin Waffen und kauft dort billiges Öl. Wenn wir diese Politik nicht verändern, die nach diesem ganz alten und schlechten Muster „He may be a bastard, but he is our bastard“ funktioniert, dann werden wir nie in der Lage sein, die Probleme wirklich anzupacken.\n\nAls allerletzten Punkt schaue ich mir an, wie Sie Klimapolitik machen. Ja, Sie sprechen davon, dass wir das 2-Grad-Ziel einhalten müssen. Ja, wir wissen, dass wir das 2-Grad-Ziel einhalten müssen, dass wir es dringend einhalten müssen, weil sonst unsere eigenen Lebensgrundlagen zerstört werden. Das sagt uns die gesamte Wissenschaft. Sie sagen es ja selbst, Frau Merkel. Wenn ich mir die Politik in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland anschaue, muss ich sagen: Es passiert viel zu wenig im Kampf gegen den Klimawandel in Deutschland. Wir geben jetzt 1,6 Milliarden Euro als Subventionen für die Braunkohle. Im Bereich des Verkehrs und der Mobilität passiert überhaupt nichts; das wundert einen vielleicht nicht bei diesem Minister. Im Bereich der Wärmedämmung kommen wir nicht voran.\n\nSie werden Ihre Ziele, die Sie sich in Ihrer ersten Koalition selbst gesetzt haben, ganz massiv verfehlen. Das alles geschieht in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, der viertgrößten Industrienation. Es hilft doch nichts, wenn Sie auf den großen Konferenzen immer nur nett lächeln, sich feiern lassen, sich als Klimakanzlerin darstellen, und dann, wenn Sie nach Hause kommen, von Dekarbonisierung und Klimaschutz nichts mehr wissen wollen. Klimaschutz ist konkret. Klimaschutz fängt in den einzelnen Ländern an. Handeln Sie endlich! Sorgen Sie dafür, dass wir zu einer anderen Mobilität kommen, dass wir zu einer anderen Energieversorgung kommen und dass es endlich mit der Wärmedämmung vorangeht.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n182,marieluise-beck,\"Lieber Kollege Schockenhoff, wir alle in diesem Haus bestätigen uns gegenseitig, dass die Ukraine ein souveränes Land ist und die Bürgerinnen und Bürger selber entscheiden müssen. Sie haben aber gleichzeitig geschildert, welches Lied im Kreml gesungen worden ist und welche Geisteshaltung von Putin damit zutage tritt, nämlich die - soweit es möglich ist - Wiederherstellung des alten sowjetischen Imperiums.\n\nMeine Frage ist: Ist Ihnen bekannt, dass Präsident Putin gesagt hat, die größte geostrategische Katastrophe des 20. Jahrhunderts sei die Tatsache gewesen, dass -Gorbatschow die Sowjetunion habe zerfallen lassen? Vor diesem Hintergrund und wissend, dass der Kreml massiv wirtschaftlichen Druck auf die Ukraine ausgeübt hat, gibt es fast keine Wahlmöglichkeiten. Ist es nicht quasi unfair - ich will es einmal vorsichtig formulieren -, wenn wir immer wieder betonen, ihr sollt euch frei entscheiden, aber die ökonomischen Grundlagen dafür von unserer Seite nicht ausreichend unterfüttert werden? Dann nämlich sind unsere Worte nicht mehr als warme Worte und für die Menschen, die jetzt auf dem Maidan stehen, etwas, was sie fast als Verhöhnung empfinden.\n\nKönnen Sie sich bitte deutlicher dazu äußern, was von europäischer Seite getan werden muss, nachdem wir diese entschiedene und kalte Politik aus dem Kreml identifiziert haben?\"\n6831,uwe-schummer,\"Ergänzend zu dem, was Dr. Thomas Feist eben gefragt hat, frage ich in Richtung Pflege. Wir haben in dem Bereich einen besonderen Bedarf und müssen verstärkt dafür sorgen, dass Pflegekräfte nach Deutschland kommen. Laut dem Bericht profitiert der Pflegeberuf aber -relativ wenig von dem Berufsanerkennungsgesetz. Wir planen im Rahmen einer Neuordnung ja auch eine generalisierende Pflege, das heißt eine Zusammenführung von Krankenpflege, Kinderkrankenpflege und Altenpflege. Inwieweit wird durch diese Neuordnung auch die Anerkennung des Pflegeberufes in Deutschland insgesamt verbessert?\"\n13793,karl-georg-wellmann,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Als mir Christoph Bergner gestern erstmalig den Text des Antrags zeigte, dachte ich erst an einen Karnevalsscherz. Aber nach Ihrer Rede muss man ja davon ausgehen, dass das ernst gemeint ist.\n\nHerr Gehrcke, Sie sind doch sonst ganz vernünftig.\n\nWie konnte denn passieren, dass Sie so einen Antrag formulieren? Das müssen Sie uns mal erklären. Das geht so nicht. Er liest sich wie ein Besinnungsaufsatz der Gesellschaft für Deutsch-Sowjetische Freundschaft. Das ist DKP-Lyrik aus der Mottenkiste - unterste Schublade. Ich weiß, Sie waren mal stellvertretender Bundesvorsitzender der DKP. Aber diese frühkindliche Prägung müssen Sie mal irgendwann überwinden. Das geht nicht. Wir sind 30 Jahre weiter, wir sind im 21. Jahrhundert, Herr Kollege.\n\nDer Antrag ist wirklich voll von verrutschten Bildern und falschen historischen Ansagen. Sie sprechen von der Konferenz von Helsinki 1973, von den Vorbedingungen einer „friedlichen Koexistenz in Europa, deren Ergebnisse noch heute spürbar sind“. Das wüssten wir. Es war die Sowjetunion, die in Helsinki zur Bedingung gemacht hat, dass Grenzen unverletzlich sind. Breschnew hätte ohne die Bedingung unverletzlicher Grenzen nie unterschrieben. Und Russland hat dieses Prinzip jetzt verletzt, niemand anders.\n\nDas Nächste ist - das muss man wirklich zweimal lesen -:\n\nDer Grundkonsens deutscher Politik, dass von deutschem Boden nie wieder Krieg ausgehen dürfe, ist seitdem vielfach gebrochen worden.\n\nDas heißt also aus Ihrer Sicht: Von deutschem Boden ist vielfach Krieg ausgegangen.\n\nDas ist doch völlig irre. In welcher Realität leben Sie denn? Aber wir kennen das ja schon von Ihnen, von Frau Dağdelen und anderen. Das ist so eine Art Zwangsvorstellung von einem militaristischen Deutschland, in dem eine Art Waffen-SS schon wieder die Panzermotoren warmlaufen lässt. Das ist russische Propaganda, Kisseljow - auch wirklich unterste Schublade.\n\nUnd dann sagen Sie:\n\nNach der Auflösung des Warschauer Paktes erwarteten viele Menschen in allen Teilen Europas einen Abbau der Strukturen der NATO …\n\nDas Erste, was die Länder wollten, die unter kommunistischer Zwangsherrschaft gestanden hatten und die Freiheit erhielten, war, Mitglied der NATO zu werden - bevor sie in die EU kamen -, um Sicherheit vor Russland zu bekommen. Das Gegenteil von dem, was Sie hier sagen, ist also richtig.\n\nSie schreiben auch:\n\nVon beiden Seiten in Europa … ist eine Rückkehr zum Völkerrecht … dringend geboten.\n\nSie scheinen also offenbar die Vorstellung zu haben, dass der Westen militärisch über die Ukraine hergefallen ist. Auch da leben Sie in einer völlig falschen Realität.\n\nIn diesem Zusammenhang muss ich mich jetzt mal an die Freunde von der SPD wenden. Ich habe nämlich einen gewissen Verdacht. Ihr habt ja im letzten Jahr eine sehr merkwürdige Sitzung mit der Linkspartei gehabt, so eine Art spiritistische Sitzung mit Geisterbeschwörung.\n\nEin paar Grüne, die dabei waren, sind auch erwischt worden.\n\n- Der Toni ist gesehen worden.\n\nMan weiß ja, dass bestimmte Kräfte der Linkspartei gegen eine Beteiligung an einer Regierung mit der SPD sind. Frau Wagenknecht will das, oder, genauer gesagt, das Ehepaar aus dem Saargebiet. Ich habe den Eindruck, dass Sie mit Ihrem Antrag eine rot-rot-grüne Koalition sabotieren wollen.\n\nHerr Gehrcke, das ist gefährliches Terrain. Die alten SED-Kader in Ihrer Partei wollen endlich an die Macht. Also passen Sie auf, dass Sie in Ihrer Partei nicht in die Minderheit geraten.\n\nSie landen am Ende noch vor der Arbeiter- und Bauerninspektion Ihrer Partei. Da müssen Sie aufpassen.\n\nLiebe Sozialdemokraten, irgendwann kommt dieser Antrag ans Licht. Wir sind ja weitgehend unter uns; aber irgendwann liest das ein Journalist. Und Sie haben immer noch die wahnhafte Vorstellung, Sie könnten Mehrheiten jenseits der CDU/CSU bilden.\n\nAlso: Mit der AfD werden Sie nicht zusammengehen wollen. Mit der FDP ist es ganz schwierig. Es erinnert mich immer an Goethes Faust:\n\nIhr naht euch wieder, schwankende Gestalten …\n\nMartin Schulz hat mehrfach davon gesprochen, Ihr Herr Parteivorsitzender heute in der FAZ: Mehrheit jenseits der Union. - Schauen Sie mal genau in den Antrag. Sie können es schwarz auf weiß lesen: Auflösung der NATO, Rückzug Deutschlands aus den militärischen Strukturen der NATO. -\n\nDas steht hier drin.\n\n- Herr Kollege, einer Partei, die derart lebensgefährlichen Unsinn verzapft, darf man nicht zur Macht verhelfen. Das ist klar.\n\nWenn Sie das nicht ganz schnell klarstellen, werden Sie für weite Teile der Bevölkerung nicht mehr wählbar sein. Machen Sie lieber Folgendes: Loben Sie die großartigen Leistungen dieser Großen Koalition, und bekommen Sie Ihre Lust am Untergang möglichst schnell in den Griff.\n\nIch danke Ihnen für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n14575,bernhard-daldrup,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Zum Thema Steuer-ID möchte ich, ehrlich gesagt, gar nichts mehr sagen. Ich finde, die Einwände sind zu belanglos. Wenn man sich damit auf eine Art und Weise auseinandersetzt, als wäre es eine Qual und eine Fesselung der Menschen, die Steuernummer mitzuführen, dann ist das grotesk. Das lohnt sich nicht.\n\nWir reden ja heute über das Austrocknen von Steueroasen im mehr oder weniger internationalen Kontext. Das ist sozusagen eine Daueraufgabe. Ich will dabei auf eine andere Aufgabe hinweisen, die uns noch bevorsteht. Auch innerhalb Deutschlands nutzen Unternehmen Steuerschlupflöcher. Darum müssen wir uns kümmern. Der Bundesrat hat uns jedenfalls in seiner Sitzung vom Dezember 2016 mit einer Entschließung noch einmal ausdrücklich darauf hingewiesen und darum gebeten.\n\nIch will Ihnen einmal ein konkretes Beispiel vor Augen führen: Leverkusen ist - viele von uns wissen das - eine wirtschaftlich starke Stadt inmitten einer sehr boomenden Region. Die Bayer AG ist ein Flaggschiff der deutschen Wirtschaft. Trotzdem sind die Kassen der Kommune Leverkusen mehr oder weniger leer. Bei 160 000 Einwohnern hatte Leverkusen im Jahre 2014 Gewerbesteuereinnahmen in Höhe von 25 Millionen Euro.\n\n- Ganz genau. Bei der Firma Bayer sind die Kassen voll. Da haben Sie in der Tat recht, Herr Michelbach. Ich komme darauf zurück, keine Sorge.\n\nAndererseits ist es so, dass in Leverkusen Milliardengewinne bei den Firmen Bayer und Lanxess anfallen. Was ist also die Erklärung? Die Nachbarstadt Monheim, 40 000 Einwohner, hat Gewerbesteuereinnahmen in Höhe von 225 Millionen Euro.\n\nDer Unterschied: In Leverkusen gibt es einen Gewerbesteuerhebesatz von 475 Prozent, in Monheim, in der direkten Nachbarschaft, sind es gerade noch 265 Prozent. Das sind die Unterschiede bei den Gewerbesteuerhebesätzen. Laut Handelsblatt verändern Firmen wie Bayer ihren unternehmerischen Organkreis entsprechend und gründen in Gemeinden wie etwa Monheim Tochtergesellschaften. Das sind in Wirklichkeit die innerdeutschen Steueroasen. Es ist ein ähnliches Muster wie im internationalen Kontext: Übertragung von Patenten, Lizenzgebühren, geringe Gewerbesteuern. Das ist natürlich, wenn man es so sieht, falsch verstandene kommunale Selbstverwaltung, fehlende interkommunale Solidarität.\n\nAber was kann man machen? Wir hatten diese Debatte schon im Jahre 2000 - da waren Sie auch dabei - im Zusammenhang mit der Gemeinde Norderfriedrichskoog. Sie verzichtete komplett auf die Gewerbesteuer. Bei 47 Einwohnern waren 380 Körperschaften und 180 Personengesellschaften die Folge. Als Konsequenz wurde damals der gewerbesteuerliche Mindesthebesatz von 200 Prozent eingeführt. Das war eine vernünftige Sache. Der Durchschnittshebesatz aller Kommunen - große Städte, kleine Städte - liegt in Deutschland zum gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt bei etwa 400 Prozent. Es würde also niemandem schaden, wenn der Mindesthebesatz, wie es der Bundesrat ja auch von uns erwartet, beispielsweise auf 300 Prozent angehoben würde. Das wäre jedenfalls ein Schritt in die richtige Richtung.\n\nNoch besser wäre es, wenn die Differenz zwischen den Hebesätzen etwas geringer wäre. Das könnte man erreichen, indem man die Bemessungsgrundlage beispielsweise durch die Einbeziehung der freien Berufe - die Steuerberater sind ja angesprochen worden - veränderte. In der Tat wäre das eine vernünftige Variante. Auf diese Art und Weise könnte man die Gewerbesteuer national verstetigen, und es bestünde für die Kommunen vielleicht sogar die Möglichkeit - um gewissermaßen das Aphrodisiakum für Sie, Herr Michelbach, zu benennen -, die Gewerbesteuer zu senken.\n\nMit anderen Worten: Es wäre auch keine schädliche Entwicklung für die Freiberufler, weil sie ja Betriebsausgaben von der Einkommensteuer abziehen könnten, die Kommunen hätten so auch ein Stück weit Verlässlichkeit, und die Unternehmen müssten nicht innerhalb Deutschlands nach Steueroasen spähen. Es wäre doch eine schöne Aufgabe, wenn wir das anpacken würden.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n9032,eva-bulling-schroter,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn der Bundestag heute über die Klimakonferenz in Paris debattiert, geht es nicht nur um CO2-Minderung, INDCs, also nationale Klimabeiträge, und UN-Mechanismen.\n\nBevor ich auf unsere Anträge eingehe, will ich am Beispiel meines Wahlkreises Ingolstadt ganz konkret machen, was Klimawandel heißt. Bei mir in Bayern droht bis Ende des Jahrhunderts ein Temperaturanstieg um bis zu viereinhalb Grad Celsius. Im Sommer wird es mehr als 30 Hitzetage über 30 Grad geben, heute sind es im Durchschnitt 5. Ab 2060 gibt es bis zu 60 Schneetage weniger im Jahr - da nutzen auch die Eiskanonen nichts mehr - und kaum noch Eistage, also Tage, an denen die Temperatur konstant unter null Grad liegt. Was das für Landwirtschaft, Tourismus und Gesundheit heißt, können wir uns alle vorstellen. Das ist ja auch nicht neu. Aber wir alle hier werden das Ende des Jahrhunderts nicht mehr erleben.\n\nIm globalen Süden ist der Klimawandel schon jetzt Alltag. Bei einer Erwärmung um 1,5 Grad sterben die Korallenriffe, ganze Inselbevölkerungen verlieren ihre Heimat, Dürren machen die Armutsbekämpfung zunichte, und der Syrien-Krieg, heißt es, sei durch den Klimawandel verschärft worden. Auch diese Folgen kennen wir.\n\nNatürlich spielt auch in Deutschland das Wetter verrückt, schon heute. 2015 wird wohl das wärmste Jahr überhaupt. Die Deutsche Bahn hat erstmals wieder Verluste eingefahren, insbesondere wegen Mehrkosten durch Unwetterschäden. Dass der Klimawandel in unserem Land angekommen ist, das bezweifelt niemand mehr; vielleicht noch einige Hinterbänkler der CDU/CSU, die trotz Physikstudium die Naturwissenschaften weiter in Zweifel ziehen.\n\nDa kann ich nur sagen: Hören Sie Ihrer Regierung gut zu, liebe Kollegen der Union. Die Gegner der Energiewende sitzen in Ihren Reihen.\n\nDer Vorsitzende des Wirtschaftsausschusses schimpft mit Blick auf den Klimaschutz über eine „grüne Ideologie“ und „exzessive Milliardenkosten“. Ein stellvertretender Fraktionsvorsitzender sieht eine Bedrohung für unseren „guten Lebensstandard“ und einen „tödlichen Irrweg“. Ja, wo sind wir denn? Sie müssen sich davon distanzieren.\n\nLieber Herr Ramsauer, lieber Herr Vaatz - beide sind natürlich nicht anwesend -, auch Sie müssen den Schuss hören. Sie müssen sich die Rede der Kanzlerin in Paris anhören, damit Sie wenigstens ein bisschen verstehen. Nicht zu viel Klimaschutz ist Ressourcenverschwendung, wie Sie behaupten: Zu wenig Klimaschutz ist Ressourcenverschwendung, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDie Linke hat heute zwei Entschließungsanträge eingebracht. Auf internationaler Ebene brauchen wir echte Verbindlichkeit, aber die wird es in Paris leider nicht geben. Darum brauchen wir hier in Deutschland ein Klimaschutzgesetz, das die Klimaschutzziele verbindlich festlegt. Dann ist endlich Schluss mit den KfW-Krediten für neue Kohlekraftwerke im Ausland. Die müssen endlich gestoppt werden!\n\nUnd dann kann der Klimaschutz auch nicht mehr durch TTIP und CETA ausgehebelt werden; das steht in der EU-Resolution.\n\nAuch der Fahrplan für einen weltweiten Ausstieg aus den fossilen Energien wird auf der Konferenz von Paris nicht geliefert werden. Darum müssen wir ein Kohleausstiegsgesetz auf den Weg bringen.\n\nSpätestens 2040, am besten schon 2035, muss Schicht im Kohleschlot sein. Da sind wir ganz auf der Linie von Frau Umweltministerin Hendricks. - Vielen Dank für diesen Vorstoß.\n\nDann wäre auch Schluss mit neuen Umweltsauereien wie denen, die jetzt wieder auf der Agenda stehen wie CCS oder wie die geplante Umstellung der Betriebsfeuerung aller Asphaltmischanlagen in Deutschland auf Braunkohle. Auch das lehnen wir natürlich ab.\n\nWorum geht es jetzt in Paris? Wir sehen das Ringen zwischen den Bevölkerungen: Bevölkerungen im Süden, die sich aus der Armut befreien wollen, und Bevölkerungen im Norden, die nicht ärmer werden wollen. Deshalb brauchen wir Klimagerechtigkeit, Climate Justice. Die halten wir für dringend notwendig. Deshalb muss die EU etwas tun. Deshalb brauchen wir ambitionierte EU-Klimaziele, und wir brauchen eine verbindliche Klimafinanzierung.\n\nZum Schluss: Papst Franziskus sagt - ich zitiere -: Dieses System tötet. - Deshalb brauchen wir soziale Gerechtigkeit und Umverteilung. Diese Umverteilung wird es im Kapitalismus aber nie geben; denn sie ist in seinem System nicht vorgesehen.\n\nDanke.\"\n1562,stephan-mayer,\"Sehr verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Sehr verehrte Kolleginnen! Sehr geehrte Kollegen! Es ist schon erwähnt worden: Der Etat des Bundesinnenministeriums ist bei weitem nicht der größte Etat im gesamten Bundeshaushalt, aber er ist aus meiner Sicht ein ganz entscheidender, wenn es darum geht, Regelungen dahin gehend zu treffen, wie wir in Deutschland miteinander umgehen, oder wenn es um Themen wie die gesellschaftliche Teilhabe oder die Stärkung des ehrenamtlichen Engagements und der Zivilgesellschaft insgesamt geht.\n\nObwohl das Portfolio des Bundesinnenministers so groß ist, zeigt der Entwurf dieses Einzeletats deutlich, dass wir einen klaren Schwerpunkt auf die innere Sicherheit setzen. Zwei Drittel der Mittel aus dem Etat des Bundesinnenministeriums entfallen auf diesen Bereich, davon mit 2,5 Milliarden Euro fast die Hälfte allein für die Bundespolizei und 417 Millionen Euro für das Bundeskriminalamt. Das sind mit Sicherheit große Summen; aber ich sage ganz deutlich und durchaus auch etwas selbstkritisch: Wir müssen uns mit Blick auf die Zukunft die Frage stellen, ob dieser Etat wirklich noch auskömmlich ist. Ich glaube, die Etats der Sicherheitsbehörden sind auf Kante genäht. Wir müssen in Zukunft mit Sicherheit ganz intensiv prüfen, ob es nicht eines Aufwuchses dieser Mittel bedarf.\n\nIch weiß zwar, dass im Koalitionsvertrag festgelegt wurde, dass der Etat des Innenministeriums nicht als prioritär gilt. Dennoch besteht, glaube ich, in vielerlei Hinsicht Nachbesserungsbedarf.\n\nIch darf deutlich machen, dass sich die CDU/CSU-Bundestagsfraktion zum Verfassungsschutz und zu unseren Sicherheitsbehörden bekennt. Es ist ein zentrales Anliegen, den Verfassungsschutz zu stärken, statt ihn zu schwächen oder, wie es die Linken fordern, gar abzuschaffen. Wir werden daher sehr schnell das zugrunde liegende Bundesverfassungsschutzgesetz novellieren. Es geht insbesondere darum, im Einvernehmen und in engster Absprache mit den Ländern die Zentralstellenfunktion des Bundesamtes für Verfassungsschutz zu stärken.\n\nDas heutige Urteil des EuGH in Luxemburg zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung ist schon hinlänglich erwähnt worden. Ich sage aber an die Adresse derjenigen, die jetzt jubilieren, deutlich: Ich bin der festen Überzeugung, dass durch dieses Urteil des EuGH Europa beileibe nicht sicherer geworden ist. Ich bin der festen Überzeugung, dass eher das Gegenteil der Fall ist. Natürlich ist das Urteil zu akzeptieren, Herr Kollege Beck, und zu respektieren. Ich möchte nur noch einmal rückblickend fragen: Warum kam es überhaupt zu dieser Richtlinie im Jahr 2006? Die Richtlinie wurde als Antwort auf die katastrophalen und schwerwiegenden Terroranschläge in Madrid, 2004, und in London, 2005, geschaffen. Ich bin der festen Überzeugung, dass Europa seitdem nicht sicherer geworden ist und dass die Bedrohung insbesondere durch den islamistischen Terrorismus seit 2004 nicht geringer geworden ist.\n\nDeswegen bin ich Ihnen sehr dankbar, Herr Kollege Hartmann, dass Sie auch in Ihrer Rede deutlich gemacht haben, dass Sie an der prinzipiellen Notwendigkeit der Einführung von Mindestspeicherfristen in Deutschland festhalten wollen.\n\nIch möchte noch eines deutlich machen: Das Urteil des EuGH bezieht sich nicht auf die Umsetzung in Deutschland.\n\nWir waren von vornherein wesentlich strenger und re-striktiver, was den Umsetzungsspielraum anbelangt, den uns die Richtlinie gegeben hat. Ich bin der festen Überzeugung, dass es im Lichte des Bundesverfassungsgerichtsurteils von 2010 und des heutigen Urteils des EuGH möglich, aber auch notwendig ist, die Vorratsdatenspeicherung in Deutschland einzuführen.\n\nWir werden das Urteil daher genau analysieren. Es besteht keinerlei Grund zu Aktionismus; aber ich bin Ihnen, Herr Kollege Hartmann, dankbar, dass Sie deutlich gemacht haben, dass Sie einem konstruktiven Dialog bezüglich der Einführung der Vorratsdatenspeicherung in Deutschland offen gegenüberstehen.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, einen zentralen Bereich im Koalitionsvertrag nimmt die Migrations- und Integrationspolitik ein. Ich sage auch ganz deutlich: Deutschland muss jederzeit für Schutzbedürftige und politisch Verfolgte, insbesondere auch für Flüchtlinge, offen sein. Wir werden daher - das ist ein elementares Ziel der Großen Koalition - die Asylverfahrensdauer von derzeit im Schnitt neun Monaten auf drei Monate deutlich reduzieren. Ich glaube, dass ein durchaus sehenswertes Signal vom Stellenplan des Bundes-innenministeriums ausgeht. So werden 300 zusätzliche Stellen im Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge in Nürnberg geschaffen, um vor allem die Verfahrensdauer zu reduzieren.\n\nWir wollen offen sein für Menschen, die an Leib und Leben bedroht sind. Wir müssen aber auch deutlich machen, dass kein Recht auf Asyl besteht, wenn die Betreffenden aus offenkundig sicheren Herkunftsländern kommen. Deshalb finde ich es richtig, dass wir die Liste der sicheren Herkunftsländer zunächst um die drei Länder Serbien, Bosnien-Herzegowina und Mazedonien erweitern. Wir müssen uns aber auch intensiv mit Albanien und Montenegro auseinandersetzen. Die Tatsache, dass die Zahl der Asylbewerber aus Albanien zu Beginn dieses Jahres deutlich gestiegen ist, während die Anerkennungsquote marginal niedrig ist, zeigt, dass auch in diesem Bereich Handlungsbedarf besteht.\n\nWenn das Asyl- und Aufenthaltsrecht im Allgemeinen glaubhaft bleiben soll, dann bedarf es auch einer Beschleunigung der Aufenthaltsbeendigung. Beides sind zwei Seiten einer Medaille. Wir wollen nach dem Hamburger Modell eine stichtags- und altersunabhängige Bleiberechtsregelung für langfristig in Deutschland Geduldete schaffen, die zumindest zum Großteil ihre Lebenshaltungskosten selber bestreiten können und über ausreichende Deutschkenntnisse verfügen. Ich sage aber auch ganz offen: Angesichts der sehr geringen Abschiebezahlen in den einzelnen Bundesländern ist es genauso wichtig, dass diejenigen, die kein anerkanntes Recht auf Asyl und auch aus anderen Gründen kein Bleiberecht haben, Deutschland verlassen müssen. Ich bin dem Bundesinnenminister sehr dankbar, dass er zeitnah einen entsprechenden Gesetzentwurf auf den Weg gebracht hat, der nun in die Ressortabstimmung geht.\n\nEine zentrale Herausforderung in dieser Legislaturperiode wird die Sicherstellung und die Wiederherstellung des Vertrauens in die Informations- und Kommunika-tionstechnik sein. Erst vor wenigen Tagen gab es in diesem Jahr den zweiten großen Vorfall betreffend gehackter E-Mail-Konten. Dieses Mal waren über 18 Millionen Menschen betroffen, darunter 3 Millionen Deutsche. Dies zeigt uns deutlich, dass wir nicht nachlassen dürfen, unsere IT-Infrastruktur insbesondere im Bereich des Bundes und hier im Bereich der Sicherheitsbehörden zu verbessern. Deswegen finde ich es gut, dass im zweiten Regierungsentwurf 12 Millionen Euro zusätzlich für die Bundespolizei und 4 Millionen Euro zusätzlich für das Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz zur Verfügung gestellt werden.\n\nSehr wichtig ist aus meiner Sicht, dass die Aufgaben und Kompetenzen des Bundesamtes für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik gestärkt werden. Dieses Bundesamt arbeitet schon sehr gut. Es ist aber auch noch ausbaufähig. Ich finde es richtig, dass nun jährlich 2 Millionen Euro zusätzlich für die IT-Sicherheitsforschung zur Verfügung gestellt werden. Wir müssen trotz aller rechtlichen Änderungsnotwendigkeiten die nationale Kompetenz in der Privatwirtschaft und im öffentlichen Bereich stärken. Ich stehe deshalb auch Überlegungen, eine europäische Cloud bzw. ein europäisches Routing zu schaffen, durchaus offen gegenüber. Wir brauchen in Deutschland mehr Unabhängigkeit von amerikanischen und chinesischen Anbietern.\n\nZum Abschluss möchte ich noch kurz erwähnen: Es ist natürlich wichtig und gut, dass wir das ehrenamtliche Engagement insbesondere im Bevölkerungs- und Kata-strophenschutz loben. Aber auch hier gilt es - das sage ich durchaus selbstkritisch -, den Worten Taten folgen zu lassen. Deswegen richte ich an uns alle den dringenden Appell: Wir müssen den Etat des Technischen Hilfswerks deutlich erhöhen. Wenn wir hier nicht im Bereich der Liegenschaften und der Gerätschaften bzw. der Ausstattung Verbesserungen vornehmen, dann unterminieren wir mittel- und langfristig das ehrenamtliche Engagement. Dieses Engagement ist gar nicht hoch genug zu schätzen. Deswegen darf es nicht bei Sonntagsreden bleiben. Es gilt bei den anstehenden Verhandlungen über den Etat des Bundesinnenministeriums, hier deutlich nachzubessern und den Ansatz für das THW zu erhöhen.\n\nIch danke für die Aufmerksamkeit und wünsche uns konstruktive und erfolgreiche Verhandlungen, wenn es um den Haushalt des Bundesinnenministeriums geht.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n5334,herbert-behrens,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In der Tat befinden sich die maritime Wirtschaft und damit auch die maritime Ausbildung in schwerer See. Sie haben gesagt, die jungen Leute interessierten sich nicht mehr für die Ausbildungsberufe, weil sie nicht genau wissen, ob sie einen Ausbildungsplatz bekommen und ob sie dann, wenn sie ihre Ausbildung erfolgreich absolviert haben, einen Arbeitsplatz bekommen. Das motiviert keinen jungen Menschen zu Beginn seines Berufslebens, zu sagen: Ja, ich will diesen Job machen.\n\nWir müssen die Ausbildung bei den Seeberufen wieder attraktiv machen. Das heißt, wir müssen den jungen Leuten beweisen, dass es möglich ist, beispielsweise während des Studiums zeitnah einen Praktikumsplatz zu bekommen. Uns schreiben junge Leute, die in der Ausbildung an der Hochschule Wismar sind, dass sie einem Praktikumsplatz quasi hinterherschreiben müssen, um einen der begehrten Plätze zu bekommen. Die Nautiker, die ein Praktikum nachweisen müssen, und die anderen, die während ihres Studiums ein Praktikumssemester machen wollen, müssen sich teilweise monatelang um einen Platz bewerben und verlieren dabei entweder die Lust an ihrer Ausbildung oder lassen sich beim Studium zurückfallen, weil sie wissen, dass sie den nächsten Praktikumsplatz erst in ferner Zukunft bekommen werden. Eine solche Erfahrung sollten junge Leute zu Beginn ihrer Ausbildung nicht machen. Sie brauchen eine Perspektive, wenn es um einen vernünftigen Arbeitsplatz geht. Das sind wir ihnen schuldig.\n\nDamit sind wir am entscheidenden Punkt. Die Reeder kommen ihrer Verpflichtung nicht nach.\n\nDas von Ihnen erwähnte maritime Bündnis enthält das, was die Reeder liefern wollten und sollten, wenn sie weiterhin öffentliche Förderung haben wollen. Die Reeder haben sich verpflichtet, wieder Schiffe unter deutsche Flagge zu nehmen, damit sie jungen Leuten und ausgebildeten Seefahrern Jobs bieten können.\n\n500 Schiffe seien nötig, sagt die Gewerkschaft Verdi, um dem gesamten nautischen Ausbildungsbedarf gerecht zu werden. 500 Schiffe, das sind 100 weniger, als die Reeder zu Beginn des maritimen Bündnisses zugesagt haben. 600 von 3 000 Schiffen wollten sie unter deutscher Flagge fahren lassen, um jungen Leuten und ausgebildeten Seefahrern Perspektiven zu bieten.\n\nDas maritime Bündnis, 2003 geschmiedet, bedeutet, dass wir als Bund weitgehend auf Steuereinnahmen verzichten, damit die Reeder im Gegenzug bereit sind, Schiffe unter deutscher Flagge fahren zu lassen. Die Reeder sind dieser Verpflichtung nicht nachgekommen. Wie mir berichtet wurde, sind es heutzutage 183 Schiffe, die unter deutscher Flagge fahren. Das sind viel zu wenige, um die Ausbildungsplatzkatastrophe zu verhindern. Da müssen wir ansetzen.\n\nDer Antrag der Grünen wird aber der Situation nicht gerecht. Wir sind das Bündnis eingegangen in der Annahme, dass alle drei Seiten - Gewerkschaft, Bund und Reeder - ihren Verpflichtungen nachkommen. Wenn es erneut Gespräche im maritimen Bündnis gibt, dann ist der Bund gefordert, die Reeder auf ihre Selbstverpflichtung hinzuweisen. Sie müssen ihren Versprechen nachkommen. Ohne Leistung gibt es keine Gegenleistung. Das ist doch in der Wirtschaft üblich. Das müssen die Reeder erkennen. An diesem Punkt muss angesetzt werden. Es sollte nicht - wie im Antrag der Grünen - der Versuch unternommen werden, die Ausbildung anders zu regeln. Die Reeder sind am Zug.\"\n2772,uli-grotsch,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Frau Kollegin, vielen Dank für die Erinnerung. Wir hätten es natürlich nicht vergessen, dass wir heute nicht nur die Regelungen über sichere Herkunftsstaaten, sondern auch die Erleichterungen des Arbeitsmarktzugangs für Asylbewerber und geduldete Ausländer beraten. Das möchte ich am Beginn meiner Rede ganz dick unterstreichen, weil ich glaube, dass uns von der SPD mit dieser Regelung ein wirklich großer Schritt im Zusammenhang mit den Chancen, die Asylbewerberinnen und Asylbewerber bei uns im Land haben, gelungen ist.\n\nIch beginne mit dem zweiten Teil dieses Gesetzes, weil meines Erachtens dieser Teil und insbesondere - ich habe es schon gesagt - die Dimension dessen in der bisherigen Debatte, auch in der heutigen Debatte, leider etwas zu kurz gekommen sind. Bislang mussten Asylbewerber neun Monate warten und Geduldete sogar zwölf Monate, bis sie die Chance, ihren Lebensunterhalt zu bestreiten, nutzen konnten.\n\nIch bin auch meiner Kollegin Daniela Kolbe dankbar, dass sie in ihrer Rede im Rahmen der ersten Beratung des Gesetzentwurfs deutlich gemacht hat, was das konkret bedeutet. Der frühe Zugang zum SGB III nach drei Monaten bedeutet nämlich zum Beispiel die Übernahme von Bewerbungskosten. Wenn man nicht über viel Geld verfügt, dann sind auch die Portokosten oder die Kosten für Papier ein durchaus relevanter Betrag, den die betroffenen Menschen zu stemmen haben. Dieser frühe Zugang beinhaltet auch Beratungs- und Vermittlungsangebote durch die Bundesagentur für Arbeit.\n\nIch würde mich freuen, wenn dieser große und längst fällige Schritt vorwärts von der Opposition nicht kleingeredet würde.\n\nDenn für die Betroffenen selbst ist es eine immense Erleichterung. Wir erleichtern die Integration dieser Schutzbedürftigen in unsere Gesellschaft, wir bauen ein Integrationshemmnis ab und erhöhen damit auch die Akzeptanz der Asylbewerber bei uns im Land.\n\nDer andere Teil betrifft die Einstufung von Bosnien-Herzegowina, Mazedonien und Serbien als sichere Herkunftsstaaten. Das bedeutet in der Praxis des BAMF, dass künftig ein Antragsteller aus einem dieser sicheren Herkunftsländer für seinen Einzelfall glaubhaft darlegen muss, warum er in seinem eigentlich sicheren Heimatland doch politisch verfolgt wird bzw. Menschenrechtsverletzungen erfahren hat, um in Deutschland Asyl gewährt zu bekommen.\n\nDer Grund für diese getroffene Regelung ist die Tatsache, dass von den 22 000 Entscheidungen des BAMF über Asylerstanträge und Asylfolgeanträge von bosnischen, serbischen und mazedonischen Staatsangehörigen im Jahr 2013 nur einer Handvoll Menschen Asyl bzw. Abschiebeverbot zugesprochen wurde. Die überwiegende Mehrheit wird als unbegründet abgelehnt. Trotzdem sind sie regelmäßig und in beachtlichem Umfang in der Top Ten der Herkunftsländerstatistik des BAMF vertreten. Der Vorwurf, das BAMF sei zu restriktiv und lehne unberechtigt massenhaft ab, greift auch nicht. Nicht einmal 1 Prozent der Klagen von Menschen aus diesen drei Westbalkanstaaten ist vor den Verwaltungsgerichten erfolgreich. Das alles bindet Kapazitäten beim BAMF; das wurde schon gesagt. Wir wollen niemanden gegeneinander ausspielen. Trotzdem müssen wir der Realität ins Auge blicken.\n\nDer Bundestag hat in der letzten Woche erfreulicherweise - es ist wichtig, das zu erwähnen - 300 zusätzliche Stellen für das BAMF bewilligt. Das war dringend notwendig. Ich meine, dass diese personellen Ressourcen für die wirklich schutzbedürftigen Menschen aus Syrien, Afghanistan, dem Irak und anderen Ländern genutzt werden müssen. Wir alle wollen doch die Bearbeitungsdauer von Asylanträgen verkürzen. Zurzeit beträgt die Bearbeitungsdauer etwa ein Jahr. Ein Jahr bedeutet für die asylsuchenden Menschen in unserem Land ein Jahr Ungewissheit über ihre eigene Zukunft. Das wollen wir ändern.\n\nIch gebe zu, dass die Einstufung als sichere Herkunftsstaaten keine Herzensangelegenheit der Sozialdemokratie ist. Sie steht aber im Koalitionsvertrag, und deshalb tragen wir diese Entscheidung mit. Dort steht auch - Herr Minister de Maizière hat in seiner Rede darauf hingewiesen -, dass wir auf europäischer Ebene auf die Regierungen der Westbalkanstaaten einwirken wollen, um die Lebenssituation vor Ort in den Ländern zu verbessern.\n\nArmutsmigration kann nur so bekämpft werden. Das ist keine Aufgabe der deutschen Asylpolitik. Deshalb lehnen wir Ihren Antrag, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Linken, ab.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9199,helmut-brandt,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren Kollegen! Die Änderungen im Parteiengesetz, die wir heute - in den wesentlichen Punkten im Einklang mit allen Fraktionen - verabschieden, haben in den vergangenen Tagen einige Aufmerksamkeit in den Medien erfahren. Es ist mir deshalb wichtig, zwei der geplanten Neuregelungen noch einmal besonders in den Fokus zu nehmen.\n\nMit dem vorliegenden Entwurf werden die Einnahmen einer Partei aus ihrer Unternehmenstätigkeit für die Berechnung der relativen Obergrenze künftig nur noch in Höhe des positiven Saldos berücksichtigt. Um größtmögliche Transparenz - davon ist ja hier immer wieder die Rede - über die Einnahmen, aber auch über die Ausgaben der Parteien zu ermöglichen, wurde schon 2002 das Verrechnungsgebot eingeführt. Damit war aber nicht die Absicht verbunden, künstlich hohe Umsätze ohne Gewinnabsicht zu generieren, wie es die AfD mit ihrem Goldhandel macht und die Partei mit dem sinnvollen Namen Die Partei mit dem Tausch von 80 Euro gegen 100 Euro-Scheine. Das ist nach meiner Auffassung die Erschleichung von staatlichen Subventionen.\n\nDas Prinzip der Kopplung staatlicher Finanzierung an die Einnahmen einer Partei soll im Grunde genommen deren Unabhängigkeit vom Staat sichern. Dass Parteien sich Einnahmen aus unternehmerischer Tätigkeit verschaffen, ist demgemäß durchaus erwünscht. Auch hieran soll staatliche finanzielle Förderung durchaus anknüpfen. Staatliche Gelder sollen aber nur dann fließen, wenn Bürger eine Partei gezielt unterstützen. Die Einnahmen sollen den Rückhalt der Partei in der Bevölkerung widerspiegeln. Gezielt herbeigeführte Verlustgeschäfte erfüllen diesen Zweck erkennbar nicht und führen auch nicht dazu, dass die Partei von staatlicher Förderung unabhängig ist. Vielmehr ist das Gegenteil der Fall. Das wollen wir mit der Gesetzesänderung unterbinden.\n\nAußerdem haben wir uns entschlossen, die Beträge, die die Parteien jährlich im Rahmen der staatlichen Teilfinanzierung erhalten, zu erhöhen. Eines will ich dabei klarstellen, auch wenn es schon gesagt worden ist: Wir erhöhen nicht das jährliche Gesamtvolumen - das ganze Geschrei darum halte ich für völlig an den Haaren herbeigezogen -, sondern es wird nur das nachvollzogen, was 2011 versäumt wurde, nämlich eine Anpassung der Höhe nach. Diese ist seit 2002 nicht mehr erfolgt, und diese nehmen wir jetzt in moderater Weise vor.\n\nWir haben außerdem eine Indizierung vorgenommen und diese im Grunde genommen identisch an die Entwicklung der absoluten Obergrenze angekoppelt, die seit 2011 gilt. Dadurch ist in Zukunft ein kontinuierlicher Inflationsausgleich gewährleistet.\n\nAbschließend noch ein paar Worte zu dem Antrag der Fraktion Die Linke und auch zu dem Entschließungsantrag der Grünen: Die Regelungen des Parteienrechts sind ausschließlich Sache dieses Parlamentes. Dass Sie von der Linken in Ihrem Antrag verlangen, dass die Regierung dazu ein Gesetz vorlegt, halte ich nicht für korrekt. Davon unabhängig wären wir auch inhaltlich nicht mit Ihnen einig. Das gilt im Übrigen genauso für Ihren Antrag, Frau Haßelmann, den Sie hier so vehement verteidigt haben.\n\nDenn ein grundsätzliches Verbot von Unternehmensspenden ist nach unserer Auffassung verfassungsrechtlich mehr als bedenklich.\n\nDas stellt nicht nur einen Eingriff in die Freiheit der Parteien, sondern auch in die Dispositionsfreiheit der Spender über ihr eigenes Vermögen dar. Nach meiner Auffassung - ich teile Ihre Auslegung der Rechtsprechung des Bundesverfassungsgerichtes ausdrücklich nicht - ist das so nicht zu machen.\n\nDer Gefahr der Einflussnahme des Spenders auf eine Partei wird ja durch die Rechenschaftsberichte begegnet. Dort kann man genau nachlesen, wer wie viel welcher Partei gespendet hat. Die notwendige Transparenz ist also absolut gegeben.\n\nDies hat auch die Sachverständigenanhörung am 14. Dezember bestätigt. Keiner der Sachverständigen hat gefordert, dass mehr Transparenz, als wir sie ohnehin schon geschaffen haben, tatsächlich geboten ist.\n\n- Sie verkennen immer wieder, dass in § 24 Parteiengesetz das Sponsoring im Grunde genommen schon mit erfasst ist und auch Transparenzregelungen unterliegt.\n\nDeshalb ist es doch auch so - auch wenn Sie, Frau Haßelmann, es nicht wahrhaben wollen -, dass diese Empfehlung im GRECO-Bericht schon seit 2011 nicht mehr aufgeführt wird.\n\nTrotz des eben zwischen uns ausgetragenen kurzen Disputs möchte ich Ihnen für die gute Zusammenarbeit fast bis zum Schluss danken, die Sie allerdings aufgegeben haben, als Sie eine Forderung gestellt haben, der wir nicht nachkommen konnten. Das bedaure ich; denn anderthalb Jahre lang waren wir einer Meinung; das gilt für die Grünen und für die SPD. Frau Lambrecht ist leider nicht anwesend, sonst hätte ich ihr das gerne auch persönlich gesagt.\n\nDeshalb bin ich der Auffassung, dass wir alle diesem Gesetz zustimmen sollten.\n\nBesten Dank.\"\n5246,hans-joachim-fuchtel,\"Kann ich beide Fragen zusammen beantworten?\n\nHerr Kollege Kekeritz, zwei ganz klare Antwor-ten: Erstens. Die in der von Ihnen zitierten Be-richterstattung erhobenen Vorwürfe sind unbe-gründet.\n\nZweitens. Das Beurteilungsverfahren lief nach den Grundsätzen ab, wie sie von der Bundeslauf-bahnverordnung festgelegt sind.\n\nIch habe Ihnen noch nicht gesagt, dass ich da-zu keine Ausführungen mache. Ich wollte Ihnen erst einmal einleitend sagen, wie der Rahmen aussieht.\n\nIch möchte Ihnen weiter sagen, dass ich als Dienstherr eine Fürsorgepflicht gegenüber allen Bediensteten des Hauses habe. Des Weiteren ha-be ich im Interesse der Mitarbeiterinnen und Mit-arbeiter den Datenschutz zu wahren. Zudem habe ich die Aufgabe, dafür zu sorgen, dass am heuti-gen Tage kein Präzedenzfall geschaffen wird, wo-nach künftig alle Gespräche, Benotungen und Konkurrenzen in Ministerien, die es täglich gibt, in diesem Plenum zur Debatte kommen.\n\nSie versuchen hier, mit Suggestivfragen ir-gendwelche Ergebnisse zu erzielen. Wir zwei sind schon zu lange alte Hasen, als dass dies klappen könnte.\n\nInsofern sage ich Ihnen: Es gab natürlich ein Gespräch zwischen Frau Müller, der Abteilungslei-terin, und Herrn Dr. Kitschelt. Dies diente der Übergabe der Urkunde zur Bestellung der Frau Müller zur Ministerialdirektorin auf Lebenszeit. Es gab auch ein Gespräch zwischen Frau Müller und dem Minister, dessen zentraler Gegenstand die Frage der Besetzung einer internationalen Spit-zenposition war. Abschließend darf ich Ihnen sa-gen: Aufgrund ihrer besonderen Erfahrungen und Leistungen wurde dieser Ministerialdirektorin vom BMZ die einflussreiche, multilaterale Position ei-ner Exekutivdirektorin bei der Weltbank - es ist im internationalen Bereich eigentlich die einfluss-reichste Position - übertragen.\n\nIch habe Ihnen hier schon klar gesagt, wie das Verfahren aussieht. Es gibt eine Bundeslauf-bahnverordnung und eine Verordnung für die Be-wertung. Sie müssen eingehalten werden. Das be-trifft alle Beamten, die eine andere Verwendung bekommen sollen und können oder beispielsweise vor einer Beförderung stehen. Dann muss jedes Mal ein solches Verfahren durchgeführt werden.\n\nIch betone nochmals, dass ich nicht all die Fälle zählen kann. Denn das würde bedeuten, dass wir die Bürokratie in den Ministerien weiter ausbauen müssten, und das kann nicht einmal in Ihrem Inte-resse sein.\n\nSie können vielleicht von außen nicht beurtei-len, wer da tätig war und wer nicht. Es ist eine Bewertung, die im Hause vorgenommen werden muss. Dazu darf ich Ihnen schlichtweg sagen: Hier handelt es sich um den Kernbereich exekuti-ver Eigenverantwortung des Ministeriums. Das gilt nicht nur für mein Ministerium, sondern es ist generell so. Das ist auch der Grund dafür, dass bisher keine Debatte über eine solche Materie stattgefunden hat und die Debatte heute die erste dieser Art gewesen wäre.\n\nSehen Sie, ich bin 20 Jahre lang aktiver Anwalt gewesen. Deswegen passe ich auf jeden Buch-staben auf. Mir gefällt an Ihrer Wortmeldung schon nicht, dass Sie statt von „Fall“ von „Fällen“ sprechen. Dazu gibt es selbst nach der Presse-verlautbarung des betreffenden Magazins keinen Anlass. Daher entnehme ich Ihrer Frage, dass es Ihnen eher um Agitation geht als um die Mitarbei-terinnen und Mitarbeiter in dem betroffenen Haus.\"\n1477,irene-mihalic,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kollegen! Vorhin ist schon mehrfach das Bundesverfassungsgerichtsurteil zur Antiterrordatei angesprochen worden, in dem das informationelle Trennungsprinzip zwischen Polizei und Nachrichtendiensten eindeutig festgestellt wurde. Der erhebliche Prüf- und Änderungsbedarf, der sich aus diesem Urteil ergibt, ist, glaube ich, hier im Hause allen klar. Auch die von der Bundesregierung geleitete Kommission hat in ihrem Abschlussbericht einstimmig angemahnt, dass wegen der strukturellen Vergleichbarkeit mit der Antiterrordatei auch hinsichtlich der Rechtsextremismusdatei analysiert werden müsse, welche konkreten Folgerungen aus diesem Urteil abzuleiten sind. Schön, könnte man jetzt denken, dann kommt die wissenschaftliche Evaluierung der Rechtsextremismusdatei ja gerade recht.\n\nKollege Binninger, Sie haben eben die sehr gute Evaluierung des IFG angesprochen. Es gibt aber einen Unterschied; denn bei der Evaluierung des IFG konnte vonseiten des Deutschen Bundestages noch Einfluss auf das Evaluierungsdesign genommen werden. Das stellt sich hier aber anders dar, weil das BMI die Federführung hat. Insofern muss man leider sagen, dass die Evaluierungspraxis der Bundesregierung keine allzu rühmliche Geschichte hat.\n\nBeim Terrorismusbekämpfungsgesetz hat sich das Bundesinnenministerium ganz ungeniert selbst evaluiert mit dem Ergebnis, dass Eingriffsbefugnisse für die Sicherheitsbehörden noch nicht weit genug gehen. Als 2010 dann das Terrorismusbekämpfungsergänzungsgesetz evaluiert wurde, hat man die grundrechtsorientierte Analyse gleich ganz vergessen. Zwar wurde noch schnell ein Rechtsgutachten nachgeschoben; aber selbst der damit beauftragte Gutachter Professor Dr. Amadeus Wolff\n\nhat öffentlich kritisiert, dass damit auch nicht bereinigt werden könne, dass bei der Evaluierung wieder nur die Vollzugsinteressen der Sicherheitsbehörden und nicht die Grundrechte im Vordergrund gestanden haben.\n\nBei der Antiterrordatei sah es leider nicht viel besser aus. Erst wurde die Evaluierung verschleppt, weil Fristen nicht eingehalten wurden. Dann fehlte wieder einmal die verfassungsrechtliche Analyse. Auch hier wurde auf ein rechtswissenschaftliches Zweitgutachten verwiesen, auf das wir aber bis heute warten.\n\nEs ist zu befürchten, dass es bei der baugleichen Rechtsextremismusdatei wieder so laufen wird, wobei wir uns schon fragen, auf welcher sachlichen Grundlage wir das heute hier im Bundestag entscheiden sollen; denn, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Koalition, Sie haben es ja vermieden, Ihrem Antrag das Angebot des Forschungsinstituts beizufügen, aus dem man das Evaluierungsdesign hätte erkennen können. Was ich als Mitglied des Innenausschusses darüber weiß, stimmt mich alles andere als optimistisch, ob bei der Evaluierung das Urteil berücksichtigt wird. Ich möchte hier eindeutig klarstellen: Es ist nicht so, dass ich die Kompetenzen des Instituts anzweifle; ganz im Gegenteil. Aber es ist zu befürchten, dass bei der Evaluierung wieder nur die Vollzugsinteressen im Vordergrund stehen und nicht die Grundrechte, und das, obwohl wir hier ein Bundesverfassungsgerichtsurteil umzusetzen haben.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, so geht es nicht. Es ist unsere verfassungsrechtliche Pflicht, für eine verfassungskonforme Gesetzgebung zu sorgen und die Rechtsprechung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts zu achten und auch umzusetzen. Deshalb werden wir Grüne heute unser Einvernehmen nicht erteilen.\n\nDenn wo Evaluierung draufsteht, muss auch Evaluierung drin sein. Wenn wir hier unser Einvernehmen auf Basis Ihres Antrages erteilen würden, dann würden wir die Katze im Sack kaufen, weil wahrscheinlich außer den Mitgliedern des Innenausschusses kaum jemand etwas über das Evaluierungsdesign weiß.\n\nIch sage es noch einmal ganz ausdrücklich: Uns geht es um eine Evaluierung am Maßstab der Verfassung und der Grundrechte und nicht darum, hier das Institut in Misskredit zu bringen. Den Namen des Instituts haben Sie von der Koalition hier völlig ohne Not öffentlich gemacht und nicht wir.\n\nSie haben sich in Ihrem Antrag auf die Empfehlungen des NSU-Untersuchungsausschusses und auf die Notwendigkeit bezogen, hier für einen besseren Informationsaustausch zu sorgen; das haben Sie eben in Ihren Reden dargestellt. Aber man kann nicht sagen: Nur weil wir eine Rechtsextremismusdatei haben, läuft es besser. - Ein wesentliches Versagen im Zusammenhang mit dem NSU bestand ja darin, dass man den Rechtsterrorismus nicht erkannt hat. Man muss den Rechtsterrorismus doch erst einmal erkennen, bevor man damit eine Datei füllen kann. Auch das ist ein wichtiger Punkt.\n\nHerr Binninger, Sie haben eben gesagt: Wenn man dagegen ist, dann muss man eine Alternative bieten. - Unsere Alternative ist eine gesetzliche Einhegung gemeinsamer Zentren, orientiert an verfassungsrechtlichen Maßstäben und grundrechtlichen Aspekten.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n7272,ewald-schurer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren! Angesichts der ökonomischen Daten des Unternehmens Deutsche Post DHL könnte man durchaus sagen: Bei 3 Milliarden Euro Betriebsgewinn und einer hohen und guten Rendite von 8,3 Prozent in den letzten Jahren hätte das Management der Post auch zu einer anderen Entscheidung kommen können und müssen.\n\nIch halte es auch als Abgeordneter der Großen Koalition - das ist kein Widerspruch - für richtig, dass wir politisch in der Lage sind, so einen Vorgang zu bewerten. Dabei spielen auch das Tarifrecht und - das kann man nicht leugnen - die Beteiligung des Bundes eine Rolle. Im Übrigen haben alle bisherigen Qualitätstests, die evident waren, ergeben: Die Post und DHL sind im Brief- und Paketbereich qualitativ die Nummer eins, auch deswegen, weil man die Menschen vernünftig bezahlt bzw. bezahlt hat. Das muss man konstatieren dürfen. Insofern kann ich mich mit den Kolleginnen und Kollegen solidarisieren, die seit 48 Tagen streiken, und zwar nicht just for fun oder weil sie sozusagen wild geworden sind; es geht vielmehr um Existenzen.\n\nWir alle diskutieren immer wieder in vielen Zusammenhängen wie der Familienpolitik die Möglichkeiten gerade auch junger Menschen der mittleren Generation, zum Beispiel eine Familie zu gründen, soziale Sicherheiten zu bekommen und den Weg ins Leben zu finden. Genau dem widerspricht dieses strategische Handeln in voller Gänze. Das muss man zugeben, und das kann man fraktionsübergreifend, aber auch als Mitglied der Regierungskoalition tun, ohne sich irgendetwas zu vergeben.\n\nDeswegen bin ich der festen Meinung, dass die Post mit der Ausgründung von 49 Regionalgesellschaften dezidiert die falsche Entscheidung getroffen hat.\n\nMit guter und auskömmlicher Bezahlung wäre das Unternehmen morgen und auch noch in fünf Jahren qualitativ und quantitativ der Spitzenreiter im Bereich Briefe und Pakete und könnte das gut verkaufen.\n\nDass man jetzt auf das Lohngefüge der sonstigen Logistikleister im Wettbewerb setzt, die zum Teil nur im Mindestlohnbereich agieren, ist strategisch vor allen Dingen dann nicht zu verstehen, wenn - das ist angesprochen worden - ein Spitzenmanager wie Herr Appel nach einer Erhöhung um über 20 Prozent nun 9,5 Millionen Euro verdient. Das kommt nicht gut an, und es zerstört Vertrauen bei der eigenen Belegschaft und, wie ich weiß, auch bei Kolleginnen und Kollegen der CSU, CDU und der SPD genauso wie bei der Opposition. Das, was dort gemacht wird, ist ökonomisch widersinnig und geht zulasten der Menschen.\n\nAllen schlechten Beispielen aus der sogenannten freien Wirtschaft, die manchmal unter Wettbewerbsdruck gar nicht so frei ist, muss man nicht folgen, vor allen Dingen dann, wenn man einen öffentlichen Anteil zu verteidigen hat.\n\nAls Haushälter der SPD-Bundestagsfraktion und Mitglied des Ausschusses für Arbeit und Soziales hätte ich mir gewünscht - das ist keine Fundamentalkritik, wohl aber eine bewusste Erwähnung -, dass das federführende BMF dazu ein öffentliches Statement abgibt; das wäre kein Fehler gewesen.\n\nIch darf der Opposition allerdings entgegenhalten: Nicht alles - so sagte mir der Kollege Klaus Barthel -, was nicht in den Zeitungen steht und nicht vertont wird, ist nicht geschehen. Es gab politisches Insistieren vonseiten der Fachministerien. Allerdings hat sich dann das Management von DHL und Deutscher Post eben anders entschieden. Nun zu beklagen, dass Verdi als Verkörperung der Arbeitnehmerschaft versucht, dagegenzuhalten, um die genannten Niedriglohntendenzen zu unterbinden, ist ein bisschen verlogen;\n\ndenn man hätte zuvor gemeinsam mit der Gewerkschaft und der Vertretung der Arbeitnehmer ein anderes Unternehmenskonzept erarbeiten und auf die 49 Ausgründungen verzichten können.\n\nIch bin darüber sehr unglücklich und sage deshalb: Reformen - auch im ökonomischen Sinne - müssen nicht immer in die Billigschiene münden. Diesen Beweis erbringt oft der Mittelstand. Ich kenne viele Mittelständler, die im Qualitätsbereich, im Servicebereich oder in der Produktion - auch in der Metallindustrie - tätig sind und dezidiert sagen: Ich setze mich mit qualitativ höherwertigen Produkten, höherem Lohn und höheren Sozialleistungen von meinen Wettbewerbern ab. - Immer mehr Unternehmen in der Marktwirtschaft machen das. Sie tun das bewusst, weil sie wissen, dass das ein Qualitätsmerkmal ist.\n\nInsofern hat die Deutsche Post bzw. DHL eine unternehmerische Fehlentscheidung getroffen, die man auch im Parlament als solche bezeichnen darf.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n14586,herbert-behrens,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Dobrindt, es geht nicht um Regelungen in der Zukunft, und es geht auch nicht darum, was in Europa entschieden wird und manchmal nicht entschieden worden ist.\n\nEs geht auch darum, dass denjenigen, die unter den Abgasemissionen leiden - das sind Allergiker, schwache und alte Menschen -, bereits heute die zugesicherten und real existierenden Grenzwerte zugebilligt werden. Sie wollen geschützt werden, und zwar dadurch, dass aktuelle Grenzwerte tatsächlich eingehalten werden und sie sich nicht als völlig fehlerhaft darstellen.\n\nDie Menschen haben sich darauf verlassen, dass Euro-6-Fahrzeuge saubere Fahrzeuge sind. Da sie die neueste Technologie enthalten, musste man davon ausgehen, dass sie die Grenzwerte einhalten. Es geht schließlich darum, dass die Menschen vor den lebensgefährlichen Stickoxiden, die die alten Dreckschleudern ausgestoßen haben, geschützt werden wollen und sollen. Es geht auch darum, dass es eine vernünftige und wirksame Durchsetzung der Gesetze gibt, die zwar der Gesetze, die heute bestehen, und nicht der, die morgen erst verabschiedet werden müssen.\n\nMit einem Mal bekommt der Begriff „Euro 6“ eine ganz andere Bedeutung. Die UBA-Studie stellt fest, dass Euro-6-Fahrzeuge mit neuester Technologie - seit dem Jahr 2014 gültig - offenbar sechsmal mehr Schadstoffe ausstoßen, als sie ausstoßen dürfen.\n\nDie Motoren verfügen über die neuesten Bauarten,\n\naber die Fahrzeuge stoßen sechsmal mehr aus, als die Automobilkonzerne bei der Typgenehmigung angegeben haben. Das ist nicht nur eine grobe Missachtung geltender Vorschriften, und das ist keine Ordnungswidrigkeit mehr; vielmehr kommt das einem Abgasbetrug gleich.\n\nBetrogen werden die Behörden, die für die Zulassung der Motoren zuständig sind. Betrogen werden die Bürgerinnen und Bürger, die erwarten können, dass ihre Gesundheit geschützt wird; das hat einen wichtigen Stellenwert für uns. Betrogen werden die Autofahrerinnen und Autofahrer, die ein vermeintlich sauberes Auto fahren wollen, wenn sie denn auf ein Auto angewiesen sind. Auf dieses Handeln der Automobilkonzerne muss doch sofort reagiert werden, und zwar nicht, indem man darauf hinweist, was morgen in Europa geregelt werden muss. Es muss Tacheles geredet werden. Ein Ende muss her bei diesen Betrügereien.\n\nDoch was unternehmen Sie, Herr Dobrindt, als verantwortlicher Verkehrsminister? Wieder einmal antworten Sie - ich bleibe dabei - mit Nichtstun. Beim Nichtstun sind Sie, Herr Dobrindt, eindeutig ein Wiederholungstäter.\n\nWenn Sie, Herr Dobrindt, angesichts dieser Untersuchungsergebnisse des UBA nicht sofort und angemessen scharf reagieren, dann gefährden Sie nicht nur die Gesundheit der Menschen, Sie zerstören auch das Vertrauen der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher in die Werte, die ihnen immer vorgetragen werden. Sie gefährden damit auch Arbeitsplätze von Zehntausenden von Kolleginnen und Kollegen in der Automobilindustrie. Beenden Sie Ihr Nichtstun! Handeln Sie jetzt!\n\nWas ist zu tun? Die Automobilkonzerne müssen klar und deutlich nachweisen, ob sie die Abgaswerte, die sie angegeben haben, bei der Motorenprüfung einhalten können. Können sie das nicht nachweisen, dann sind diese Motoren unter Umständen aus dem Verkehr zu ziehen, dann darf es sie nicht geben.\n\nNach Nachrüstungen sind Messungen zu machen, und diese sind zu kontrollieren. Die Ergebnisse der Nachmessungen müssen offengelegt werden und dürfen nicht weiterhin verheimlicht werden, wie wir auf unsere Nachfragen in der Fragestunde gestern gehört haben.\n\nAbgasbetrüger unter den Automobilkonzernen müssen Strafen zahlen, weil sie sich nicht an geltendes Recht halten. Das ist nicht nur nötig, sondern auch möglich. Auf europäischer Ebene ist verabredet, dass Sanktionen gegenüber den Herstellern verhängt werden können und müssen, die „wirksam, verhältnismäßig und abschreckend“ sind. So steht es geschrieben.\n\nNicht zuletzt müssen Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher, die durch diesen Betrug einen wirtschaftlichen Schaden erleiden, Anspruch auf Entschädigung haben.\n\nDas alles muss, wie schon gesagt, sofort passieren, weil wir die Gesundheit der Menschen schützen wollen, weil wir den Beschäftigten der Automobilindustrie Sicherheit geben wollen. Sie wollen wissen, wohin die Reise in Sachen Antriebstechnologie geht. Wir müssen uns als Gesetzgeber ernst nehmen und dürfen uns nicht zum Büttel der Konzerne machen, die uns bei der Angabe von Grenzwerten offenbar an der Nase herumführen. Jeder Bürger und jede Bürgerin muss sich an geltendes Recht halten. Das gilt genauso für die wirtschaftlich Mächtigen in unserem Land.\n\nDie Verkehrsminister der Länder beraten zurzeit in Hamburg darüber, wie die Gesundheitsgefährdung durch einen niedrigeren Ausstoß von Stickoxiden und Feinstaub verringert werden kann. Sie behandeln auch die UBA-Studie. Das sind die Themen, die auf den Tisch gehören, die jetzt einer Lösung zugeführt werden müssen. Die Schadstoffausstöße müssen real gesenkt werden. Es darf nicht immer auf das Recht verwiesen werden, das so etwas vermeintlich nicht möglich macht. Wir sind der Meinung, diese rechtlichen Grundlagen sind vorhanden; denn die Motoren sind nach Euro 6 genehmigt, die diese Grenzwerte reißen. Von daher sind wir gehalten, sofort zu handeln. Ich fordere die SPD auf, in dieser Frage zumindest selber ihre Umweltministerin ernst zu nehmen. Fordern Sie Frau Hendricks auf, dem untätigen Verkehrsminister auf die Füße zu steigen,\n\ndamit es zu einem Ende beim Abgasbetrug kommt und es keine Fortsetzung des Abgasbetruges in weiteren Ländern gibt.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n8323,roland-claus,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! So viel Selbstkritik wie eben habe ich von der Christlich Demokratischen Union lange nicht gehört.\n\nBekanntlich gehört die CDU ja dem hier vielkritisierten Senat Berlins an.\n\nDer Nachtragshaushalt ist in der Regel eher eine Angelegenheit für wenige im Parlament damit befasste Abgeordnete. In der Regel geht es um ein paar Ausgabenerhöhungen auf der einen Seite, um ein paar Deckungsvorschläge bei den Einnahmen auf der anderen Seite. Aber hier, stellen wir fest, sind wir natürlich nicht in normalen Zeiten. Dieser Nachtragshaushalt steht vor einer enormen Herausforderung von gesellschaftspolitischer Dimension. Leider - das müssen wir Ihnen sagen - ist dieser Nachtragshaushalt an diesen Herausforderungen komplett gescheitert.\n\nDer Nachtragshaushalt wird vor allem mit enorm gestiegenen Flüchtlingszahlen begründet, und das Wort von der Flüchtlingskrise geht um. Ich meine, dieses Wort ist falsch.\n\nVor der Kritik an der Bundesregierung will ich jedoch etwas anderes tun, weil in diesem Nachtragshaushalt etliche Mittel als Zuweisungen an Kommunen zur Flüchtlingsunterstützung stehen. Da finde ich es mehr als angebracht, Dank an ungezählte ehrenamtliche und hauptamtliche Helferinnen und Helfer auszusprechen, die in diesen Situationen Tag für Tag wirklich Hervorragendes leisten.\n\nDas Wort „Flüchtlingskrise“ ist meines Erachtens deshalb falsch, weil die Schutzsuchenden, die zu uns kommen, uns nur die Krise unseres hiesigen gesellschaftlichen Systems, ja, auch die Krise der herrschenden europäischen Politik vor Augen führen, meine Damen und Herren. Den Unterschied machen wir.\n\nHatten wir denn vor der Ankunft der Geflüchteten ein gutes Bildungssystem mit genügend Lehrerinnen und Lehrern? Nein. Hatten wir genügend bezahlbare Wohnungen in den großen Städten? Nein. Waren wir auf dem Weg zu mehr sozialer Gerechtigkeit? Nein. Erst in diesen Tagen veröffentlichte das Statistische Bundesamt die Bilanz für 2014 und stellt darin fest: Mehr als jeder fünfte Mensch in Deutschland ist von Armut bedroht; Tendenz leider steigend. - Eine offenbar gut unterrichtete Zeitung titelte vor einigen Tagen mit Blick auf die Haushaltssituation des Bundes „Das letzte goldene Jahr“, weil ab 2016 mit einem Einnahmerückgang zu rechnen ist. Heute wird der Bundesfinanzminister noch die Ergebnisse der Steuerschätzung kundtun, wozu das Bundesfinanzministerium gestern im Haushaltsausschuss noch nicht bereit oder in der Lage war.\n\nIch gestatte mir, an dieser Stelle festzustellen: Nur die Linke thematisiert die Einnahmeseite des Bundes. Nur die Linke macht hier Vorschläge, wie wir wirklich zu mehr Einnahmen für den Bund für eine sozial gerechte Politik kommen können. Das werden wir fortsetzen.\n\nGemeint sind damit natürlich nicht Mehrwert- oder Lohnsteuererhöhungen, sondern eine gerechte Besteuerung von Superreichen und eine Besteuerung von internationalen Spekulationsgeschäften.\n\nMeine Fraktion hält vor diesem Hintergrund diesen Nachtragshaushalt für kleingeistig, halbherzig und - ja, das muss man Ihnen auch sagen - zum Teil auch starrsinnig. Vor aller humanitären Hilfe soll die sogenannte schwarze Null bestehen bleiben. Aus meiner Fraktion wurden Ihnen Alternativen vorgeschlagen. Wir haben vorgeschlagen, ein staatliches Konjunkturprogramm zur gesellschaftlichen Integration der Hiesigen und der Ankommenden aufzulegen. Wir werden das für 2016 wieder vorschlagen; aber wir hätten ja jetzt schon einmal anfangen können: mit mehr sozialem Wohnungsbau - man muss natürlich jetzt auch mit dem staatlich geförderten Abriss aufhören -, mit der Ausbildung von Lehrerinnen und Lehrern, von Erzieherinnen und Erziehern, mit einem Breitbandausbau auf einer völlig neuen Stufe. Kollege Brackmann hat ja angesprochen, dass der Bund eine Rücklage bilde, weil er gut gewirtschaftet habe. Dabei hat der Bund Mobilfunkfrequenzen für 4,5 Milliarden Euro versteigert, verkauft und entgegen dem Versprechen, den Großteil dieser Erlöse in den Breitbandausbau zu stecken, genau daraus diese Rücklage gebildet. Das ist nicht hinzunehmen.\n\nWir wollen natürlich auch, dass Menschen, die zu uns kommen, möglichst zügig in Arbeit und Ausbildung integriert werden können und dass deren Qualifizierungen auch anerkannt werden. Wir haben deshalb gestern im Haushaltsausschuss auch höhere Zuweisungen an Landkreise und Kommunen beantragt. Das wurde bekanntlich abgelehnt.\n\nGanz neu im Nachtragshaushalt ist: mehr Geld für die UNHCR-Organisation, also die internationale Flüchtlingsorganisation der Vereinten Nationen - bei Zustimmung aller Fraktionen im Haushaltsausschuss. Obwohl wir alle dem zugestimmt haben, kam es uns doch ein bisschen so vor wie ein Ablasshandel: ein zugegeben beträchtlicher Batzen Geld gegen sehr viel schlechtes Gewissen. Wir haben ja bei der ersten Lesung dieses Etats darauf hingewiesen, dass es uns darum gehen muss, auch Fluchtursachen zu bekämpfen. Es ist doch nun Fakt, dass genau in diesen Tagen, wo wir hier über diesen Etat sprechen, mit deutschen Waffen im Jemen Krieg geführt wird und damit die nächsten Flüchtlingsbewegungen in Gang gesetzt werden. Damit muss Schluss sein, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, im Nachtragshaushalt stehen einige Vorhaben, die wir durchaus unterstützen. Aber insgesamt ist dieser Nachtragshaushalt eine Fortsetzung von Staatsversagen; und dafür stehen wir nicht zur Verfügung.\"\n12419,hans-christian-strobele,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Koalition wird heute dafür sorgen, dass eine reale Chance verpasst wird, den größten deutschen Geheimdienst unter demokratische Kontrolle zu bringen und endlich an die Leine zu legen.\n\nAnstatt ein Gesetz zu machen, durch das die Tätigkeit des Bundesnachrichtendienstes verfassungskonform gestaltet wird, geben Sie dem Bundesnachrichtendienst jetzt die Erlaubnis, die illegale Praxis, die dort seit mehr als 15 Jahren betrieben wird, fortzusetzen.\n\nStatt das Parlamentarische Kontrollgremium und seine Arbeit wirkungsvoller zu gestalten, schaffen Sie jetzt zu den vier Institutionen der Kontrolle, die wir bereits haben, zwei zusätzliche. Dadurch wird die Kontrolle nicht besser, sondern sie wird noch mehr zersplittert sein.\n\nAls dienstältestes Mitglied des Parlamentarischen Kontrollgremiums sage ich auch einmal etwas Positives: Die Arbeit des PKGr hat sich in dieser Legislaturperiode substanziell verbessert.\n\nWir haben nicht nur sieben AGs zu sieben Themen gegründet, sondern wir haben auch eine Taskforce eingesetzt und Sachverständigte beauftragt. Das ist gut und richtig und war auch - das muss ich sagen - sehr ertragreich. Der Fehler ist, dass von dieser Tätigkeit und dem, was wir da an teilweise Skandalösem herausbekommen haben, leider nichts an die Öffentlichkeit gegeben werden darf.\n\nAber, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dass das nicht wirksam ist, liegt doch an etwas ganz anderem. Wir brauchen doch nicht zwei weitere Gremien, um den Fehler zu beheben. Der Fehler ist nämlich der, dass von der Bundesregierung und den Diensten nicht vollständig und nicht wahrheitsgemäß berichtet wird. Wir sind aber darauf angewiesen, dass das, was von dort kommt, tatsächlich stimmt. Und das ist in der Vergangenheit nicht der Fall gewesen.\n\nIch will Ihnen dazu zwei Beispiele nennen: Ich lese, dass bei „Eikonal“\n\nin die Akten geschrieben worden ist: Das größte Risiko besteht darin, dass das Parlamentarische Kontrollgremium oder die G-10-Kommission von dem, was wir hier machen, erfahren. Das ist das größte Risiko, und das muss vermieden werden. - Diejenigen, die das geschrieben haben, sind nicht etwa rausgeschmissen worden, sondern sie sind immer noch da. Und die Leitung des Dienstes hat sich danach gerichtet. Das ist skandalös!\n\nBeim Studium der Akten sehe ich die Bilder aus dem Sommer 2013 - Juni, Juli, August, September - vor mir, als die Bundesregierung und die Dienste dort berichtet haben und diese Herren wie Unschuldslämmer aus dem Tal der Ahnungslosen dasaßen und mit großen Augen sagten: Wir wissen überhaupt nicht, wovon die Rede ist. Prism, Tempora? Nie gehört. Ob es den Snowden und seine Dokumente überhaupt gibt, wissen wir gar nicht. Es gibt ja nur Kopien davon.\n\nUnd von den Telefonnummern, die da genannt werden, fehlen ja die letzten Ziffern. - In Wahrheit war es so, dass das alles stimmte.\n\nWas viel schlimmer ist: Dieselben Herren haben, wenn sie nicht berichtet haben, in den Diensten gesessen und die Dateien gesäubert von den illegalen Selektoren, die da drin waren,\n\nweil sie sahen: Das wird jetzt möglicherweise ans Licht kommen. Sie haben die Mittel ihrer Rechtsbrüche beseitigt.\n\nDas ist die Unwahrheit gegenüber den Kontrollgremien. Solange Sie da nicht mehr tun, wird sich nichts ändern.\n\nDeshalb: Legen Sie Ihren Vorschlag beiseite. Der bringt keine substanzielle Änderung. Schreiben Sie in das Gesetz etwas Selbstverständliches hinein, nämlich dass die Bundesregierung und die Dienste wahrheitsgemäß berichten müssen und dass es, wenn sie dies nicht tun, Sanktionen zur Folge hat. Dann muss beispielsweise ein Disziplinarverfahren eingeleitet werden, oder die Abgeordneten können mit solchen Skandalen an die Öffentlichkeit gehen. Nur so erreichen Sie, dass in Zukunft die bessere Arbeit tatsächlich auch wirkungsvoll ist.\n\nDanke, Herr Kollege Mayer. - Geben Sie mir recht, dass die bisherige Regelung, die vorsieht, dass alternierend von der Koalition und dann von der Opposition die Vorsitzenden gestellt werden, eine sehr viel demokratischere Regelung ist, die auch die legitimen Rechte der Opposition viel mehr wahrt,\n\nals die neue Regelung, nach der ein Vorsitzender für vier Jahre bestimmt wird, wobei aber ein Vertreter der Opposition - das ergeben die Zahlen - niemals Vorsitzender werden kann?\"\n3139,andreas-rimkus,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der britische Science-Fiction-Autor Arthur C. Clarke hat einmal gesagt:\n\nWas heute als Science-Fiction-Roman begonnen wird, wird morgen als Reportage beendet.\n\nWenn dies gelingen soll, brauchen wir schon heute Investitionen in Technologien von morgen. Dazu gehört eine gesicherte Finanzierung der Projekte, die den Verkehr von morgen gestalten sollen. Gute Verkehrspolitik ist insofern kein Selbstzweck; sie ist für die Menschen da. Mobilität ist doch eigentlich ein Grundbedürfnis, und es gilt, die damit verbundenen sozialen, ökologischen und ökonomischen Themenbereiche verlässlich zu gestalten. Fossile Brennstoffe sind endlich, und ihr Einsatz belastet unsere Umwelt. Es ist deshalb Aufgabe der Politik, die Energiewende gerade im Verkehrssektor zum Erfolg zu führen.\n\nEin besonderes Anliegen ist mir die Förderung der Elektromobilität. Für eine zuverlässige und auskömmliche Finanzierung von Förderprojekten im Bereich der Elektromobilität sollte der Energie- und Klimafonds die Grundlage sein. Diese Verlässlichkeit kann er allerdings nicht bieten. Wie auch der Bundesrechnungshof bereits am 31. März dieses Jahres feststellte, sind die unsicheren Einnahmen über den Emissionshandel - ich zitiere - „nicht geeignet, um die politisch gewünschten zusätzlichen Ausgaben für die Energiewende und den Klimaschutz dauerhaft verlässlich zu finanzieren“.\n\nDarüber müssen wir offen reden; denn wir haben ja ein gemeinsames Interesse an der erfolgreichen Weiterführung der laufenden Projekte.\n\nDazu zählen beispielsweise das Förderprogramm „Schaufenster Elektromobilität“ und die Modellregionen, aber auch das Nationale Innovationsprogramm, das sogenannte NIP, zu dessen Weiterführung sich Union und SPD im Koalitionsvertrag bekannt haben. Mit dem NIP haben wir ein Programm etabliert, das Leuchtturmprojekte im Bereich der Brennstoffzellen- und der Wasserstofftechnologie vorantreibt. Die für das NIP zur Verfügung gestellten Mittel sollten daher über den gesamten Förderzeitraum stabil bleiben. Ich finde es folgerichtig, erfolgreich etablierte Strukturen und Expertisen innerhalb dieser Projekte zu erhalten und nicht abzubauen; denn diese müssten wir im nächsten Förderzeitraum erst wieder mühsam aufbauen. Daran kämen wir nicht vorbei.\n\nEine gesicherte Finanzierung des NIP bedeutet also nicht nur, die Zukunft unserer Mobilität zu gestalten, sondern sie bedeutet auch Investitionen in zukunftsfähige Arbeitsplätze und den Standort Deutschland.\n\nNicht ohne Grund ist der Verkehrsetat der größte Investitionshaushalt des Bundes. Die Infrastruktur zu -erhalten und bedarfsgerecht auszubauen, ist eine der wichtigsten Aufgaben unserer Zeit. Um den immer komplexer werdenden Mobilitätsbedürfnissen der Bürgerinnen und Bürger gerecht zu werden und unseren Wirtschaftsstandort zu stärken und zu sichern, dürfen wir bei den Innovationen aber nicht zurückbleiben.\n\nDas gilt auch für die Raumfahrt. Ich kann mich noch gut daran erinnern, wie ich als kleiner Junge gespannt vorm Fernseher saß und den Start der Apollo 11 verfolgt habe. Heute sind die Errungenschaften der Raumfahrt in unserem Leben angekommen. Satelliten weisen uns den Weg. Sie sagen uns, ob, wann und wo es regnen wird. Sie geben uns Aufschluss über Umweltschäden. Für die Verkehrspolitik sind satellitengeleitete Verkehrsströme längst keine Vision mehr, sondern zukunftsfähige Konzepte, an denen kluge Köpfe in Unternehmen und Forschungseinrichtungen bereits tagtäglich arbeiten.\n\nErst kürzlich konnte ich mich in Bremen bei einem Mittelständler von den hervorragenden und herausragenden Leistungen der Ingenieure überzeugen. Ich habe dort Einblick in die Werkshallen bekommen, in denen die Galileo-Satelliten zusammengebaut werden. Wir gestalten mit Galileo ein GPS-System, das die Navigation insgesamt verbessern soll. Das ist so, auch wenn man vielleicht den Eindruck hat, es bräuchte geradezu ein solches Satellitensystem, um die Satelliten in der richtigen Umlaufbahn abzusetzen.\n\nWie auch immer: Am Ende sind telematische Verkehrsleitung, -lenkung und -steuerung oder auch autonomes Fahren nicht mehr Teil von Science-Fiction-Romanen, sondern reportagenreif. Anhand eines Modellprojekts am Frankfurter Flughafen sehen wir beispielsweise, wie auch im Luftverkehr durch genaue Standortbestimmung Flugzeuge verlässlicher auf definierte Flugrouten gesteuert werden können und somit eine Lärmreduktion für die Anwohner möglich sein wird.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Infrastruktur braucht Akzeptanz. Akzeptanz wächst durch Vertrauen. Vertrauen wächst durch eine gute Geschichte. Lassen Sie uns diese schreiben, eine Geschichte der guten Infrastruktur, der modernen Mobilität, die wenige Ressourcen verbraucht und wenige Emissionen verursacht.\n\nDer Astronaut Edwin Aldrin sagte einmal: Wer auf dem Mond gewesen ist, für den gibt es auf der Erde keine Ziele mehr. - Ich war noch nie auf dem Mond, also bleibe ich doch eher bei den irdischen Herausforderungen, von denen ich einige wenige angesprochen habe.\n\nEine ganz persönliche Herausforderung war meine erste Rede hier in diesem Hause. Es war mir eine Freude. Ich danke Ihnen für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit. Ich habe noch eine Minute Redezeit; ich hoffe, sie wird Ihnen gutgeschrieben.\"\n4709,alois-karl,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen des Deutschen Bundestages! Wenn man viel Zeit hat, den Vorrednern zuzuhören, dann fällt einem manches auf. Besonders Ihre Ausführungen, Herr Dehm, können nicht ganz unwidersprochen bleiben. Sie gerieren sich manchmal wie ein Arzt. Sie zeigen allerdings nur die Symptome auf, also das, was in Griechenland zurzeit zu sehen ist und wie es sich in den letzten zwei, drei oder vier Jahren entwickelt hat. Aber Sie bleiben bei der Beschreibung der Symptome stehen. Sie gehen nicht auf die Ursachen ein, woher das Ganze resultiert. Dass das Jahre und Jahrzehnte zurückliegt und die heutigen Symptome schon vor vielen Jahren begründet worden sind, hast du schon ausgeführt, lieber Norbert Barthle.\n\nWir - auch Sie, Herr Bartsch - sind heute angehalten, über die Symptome hinauszuschauen und - wie das im Leben so ist - Medikamente zu verschreiben, die zwar manchmal bitter sind, aber dann auch wirken müssen. Wer bei den Symptomen stehen bleibt, lieber Herr Sarrazin, der ist eher Scharlatan als Arzt. Ich bitte Sie, diesen Weg in Zukunft nicht weiter zu beschreiten.\n\nIch habe gestern mit einem Freund in meinem Wahlkreis telefoniert. Er hat gefragt, zu welchem Thema ich heute rede. Als ich ihm sagte, zur Griechenland-Hilfe, hat er gefragt: „Ist das mit Griechenland denn immer noch nicht zu Ende?“ Das ist die Stimmung. Ich habe darauf geantwortet: Es ist in der Tat gut so, dass es mit Griechenland nicht zu Ende ist.\n\nWir haben in den letzten Jahren außerordentlich viel Arbeit mit Griechenland gehabt und unendlich große Rettungsschirme gespannt.\n\nWir sehen heute einen Schimmer des Lichts am Ende des Tunnels und glauben, dass sich die Dinge in Griechenland gut entwickeln werden und dass sich unsere Aktionen bzw. unsere unendlich großen Rettungsschirme in den letzten Jahren sehr erfolgreich gestaltet haben.\n\nWas wäre denn gewesen, wenn wir das nicht gemacht hätten? Es wäre doch geradezu in epidemischer Wirkung auf italienische und französische Banken übergegangen, und der Euro selber wäre attackiert worden. Wenn ich die Äußerung von Bundeskanzlerin Merkel aufgreife, dass es ohne Euro auch keine funktionierende Europäische Union gäbe, dann bedeutet das, dass die gesamte Europäische Union betroffen gewesen wäre. Darum war es richtig, dass wir so gehandelt haben, und darum ist es auch richtig, dass wir heute die beiden Beschlüsse -fassen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, wir gehen auch ein hohes Risiko ein. Das ist gar keine Frage. Die Rettungsschirme des ersten Griechenland-Programms mit 110 Milliarden Euro und des zweiten mit 164 Milliarden Euro sind schon angesprochen worden. Unser eigenes Risiko dabei ist mit 76,6 Milliarden Euro nicht gering. Aber all das machen wir sehenden Auges, weil wir wissen, dass das notwendig ist, um Griechenland wieder auf eine gute Strecke zu bringen.\n\nNach dem Stabilisierungsmechanismusgesetz sind wir als Deutscher Bundestag gehalten, mitzuwirken, und zwar in doppelter Ausfertigung. Darum sind Ihre Ausführungen, Herr Sarrazin, dass schon alles vorgelegt werden muss, nur am Rande richtig. Wir müssen uns noch einmal mit diesem Thema befassen und entsprechende Beschlüsse fassen. Erst dann kommt die vorsorgliche und grundsätzliche Griechenland-Hilfe insgesamt auf den Weg.\n\nWir müssen jetzt 1,8 Milliarden Euro zwei Monate länger vorhalten. Das halte ich für richtig. Die Prüfungen müssen ordnungsgemäß erfolgen. Sie sind unseres -Wissens noch nicht vollständig abgeschlossen. Bei den großen Zahlen, die gerade genannt worden sind, könnte man vielleicht meinen, dass 1,8 Milliarden Euro zu vernachlässigen sind, aber das trifft nicht zu. Es ist viel Geld, insbesondere dann, wenn es einem nicht gehört bzw. wenn wir mit dem Geld anderer umgehen. Dabei ist es wichtig, notwendig und richtig, dass wir auch diese 1,8 Milliarden Euro unter den Vorbehalt der Prüfung stellen.\n\nUnser zweites Vorhaben, den Griechen vorsorglich ein Programm zur Verfügung zu stellen und grundsätzlich Finanzhilfe in Höhe von 10,9 Milliarden Euro zu gewähren, ist durchaus komplizierter. Herr Bundesfinanzminister, Sie haben dazu sehr ausführlich und intensiv vorgetragen. Diese Maßnahme soll auf ein Jahr befristet sein. Wir sind sehr zuversichtlich, dass sich Griechenland im nächsten Jahr aufgrund der guten Zahlen, die wir vernommen haben, positiv entwickeln wird. Griechenland hat zwar im letzten Sommer eigene Kredite zu einem Zinssatz von ungefähr 4,5 Prozent aufnehmen können. Aber nun ist der Zinssatz auf das Doppelte gestiegen, auch wegen der Unsicherheiten, von denen wir gehört haben. Fast alle anderen Indizes der griechischen Wirtschaft sind positiv; das hat uns sehr gefreut. Das verschafft uns eine gewisse Sicherheit bei der nun anstehenden Maßnahme.\n\nDie Kernfrage all unserer Entscheidungen lautet: Erhöht sich unser Risiko, bleibt unser Risiko gleich, oder vermindert sich unser Risiko? Wenn ich sehe, dass sich die griechische Wirtschaft in vielen Punkten verbessert hat, dass wir auch bei der Arbeitslosigkeit in Griechenland auf einem positiven Weg sind, auch wenn sie noch nicht so niedrig ist, wie wir uns das wünschen - das ist nicht so gravierend wie die Entwicklung beim Primärsaldo, beim Bruttoinlandsprodukt oder bei der Wirtschaftsleistung -, dass sich Griechenland in den letzten Jahren durchaus positiv entwickelt hat und dass es sich bei den 10 Milliarden Euro, um die es nun geht, nicht um neues Geld, sondern um umgeswitchtes Geld vom Rettungsschirm EFSF hin zum ESM handelt, dann bin ich sehr zuversichtlich, dass sich unser Risiko nicht erhöht. Wenn sich das Risiko nicht erhöht - wir aber unseren griechischen Freunden damit einen Schub zur Verbesserung ihrer Situation geben können -, dann sollten wir das durchaus machen.\n\nAus diesem Grunde werden wir als CDU/CSU, Herr Bundesfinanzminister, dem Antrag zustimmen.\n\nVielen herzlichen Dank.\"\n15706,julia-obermeier,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In den vergangenen vier Jahren habe ich als Mitglied des Verteidigungsausschusses unsere Soldatinnen und Soldaten in vielen Ländern besucht, in denen die Bundeswehr für Frieden und Stabilität im Einsatz ist. So habe ich mich in Afghanistan, in Mali, im Kosovo oder im Irak mit unseren Soldaten ausgetauscht und mich über die Einsatzbedingungen informiert.\n\nIch konnte mir auch ein Bild von den Lebensumständen der Menschen vor Ort machen. Meine Truppenbesuche haben mir deutlich vor Augen geführt: Sicherheit und Entwicklung müssen Hand in Hand gehen; denn sie bedingen einander. Ohne Sicherheit gibt es keine Entwicklung und umgekehrt.\n\nNatürlich haben Diplomatie, Krisenprävention und zivile Maßnahmen immer Vorrang. Doch auch die Ausbildungs-, Stabilisierungs- und Friedensmissionen sind notwendig.\n\nÜber den Einsatz unserer Soldatinnen und Soldaten entscheiden wir hier im Parlament nie leichtfertig. Die Militäreinsätze stehen auch niemals allein. Sie sind stets eingebettet in einen umfassenden und vernetzten Ansatz, den Franz Josef Jung zum Markenzeichen der deutschen Sicherheitspolitik gemacht hat.\n\nDiesem bedeutenden Grundsatz tragen die Leitlinien der Bundesregierung „Krisen verhindern, Konflikte bewältigen, Frieden fördern“ Rechnung. Sie bilden die strategische Grundlage für das zukünftige internationale Engagement Deutschlands bei Krisenprävention, Konfliktbewältigung und Friedensförderung.\n\nDer Friede soll mit dem vernetzten Ansatz gestaltet werden: als gemeinsames Ziel des Handelns der Ressorts Außen, Entwicklung und Verteidigung. Daher freut es mich, dass es uns in dieser Legislaturperiode gelungen ist, die Etats aller drei Häuser zu erhöhen.\n\nIn den Leitlinien definiert die Bundesregierung umfangreiche Selbstverpflichtungen. Diese können nur umgesetzt werden, wenn alle relevanten Ministerien eng zusammenarbeiten.\n\nDie 50 Selbstverpflichtungen beziehen sich insbesondere auf fünf Ziele: legitime politische Strukturen stärken, ein sicheres Umfeld schaffen, Rechtsstaatlichkeit fördern, wirtschaftliche Grundlagen und Erwerbschancen schaffen sowie eine leistungsstarke Regierungsführung und transparente öffentliche Finanzen.\n\nDoch Deutschland kann diese Herausforderungen - auch das geht aus den Leitlinien hervor - nicht alleine bewältigen. Wir brauchen internationale Partnerschaften wie die Europäische Union, die NATO, die OSZE und die Vereinten Nationen.\n\nAuch als Mitglied der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates weiß ich, wie wichtig die internationale Zusammenarbeit ist. Der Europarat hat 47 Mitgliedstaaten und versteht sich als Hüter von Menschenrechten, Demokratie und Rechtsstaatlichkeit. Diese drei Werte sind grundlegend für die Stabilität von Staaten.\n\nIn der Ukraine beispielsweise leistet der Europarat einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Krisenbewältigung mit einem eigenen Büro vor Ort. Auch die internationalen Wahlbeobachtungsmissionen sind von großer Bedeutung.\n\nSehr geehrte Damen und Herren, mit den vorgelegten Leitlinien bekennt sich Deutschland zu seiner internationalen Verantwortung. Es ist das erste umfassende Leitbild für das friedenspolitische Engagement Deutschlands. An Frieden und Sicherheit sind wir hierzulande Gott sei Dank gewöhnt. Aber dieser Frieden und diese Sicherheit sind nicht selbstverständlich.\n\nAls ich vor vier Jahren zum ersten Mal die Ehre hatte, an diesem Rednerpult zu sprechen, gab es noch keine Annexion der Krim; da gab es noch keinen IS-Terror und auch noch keine Flüchtlingskrise. Kriege und Konflikte rücken immer näher an uns heran, ob am Breitscheidplatz hier in Berlin oder durch russische Sanktionen gegen die Produkte unserer heimischen Landwirtschaft. Kriege und Konflikte haben unmittelbaren Einfluss auf unsere Sicherheit und unseren Wohlstand in Deutschland.\n\nAngesichts dieser Weltlage sind die Leitlinien der Bundesregierung „Krisen verhindern, Konflikte bewältigen, Frieden fördern“ eine wichtige Grundlage für unseren weiteren Beitrag zu Frieden und Entwicklung weltweit.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n184,dietmar-nietan,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist gut, dass wir uns in diesem Parlament auch über sehr unterschiedliche Standpunkte austauschen. Erlauben Sie mir aber eine persönliche Bemerkung an die Kollegin Wagenknecht und den Kollegen Dehm: Dass die Sprecherin und der Sprecher der vermeintlichen Oppositionsführung in ihren Redebeiträgen nicht mit einem einzigen Wort Stellung bezogen haben zur Lage der Flüchtlinge in Europa, sondern sehr kalt und berechnend alte Klischees der Wirtschaftsideologie bedient haben, entlarvt sie. Das ist ein trauriges Zeugnis für Ihre Politik.\n\nEs ist eben einfacher, einen Popanz von den bösen Kapitalisten aufzubauen, als hier konkret zu sagen, was Sie tun wollen, damit die Situation der Flüchtlinge besser wird. Ich bin enttäuscht, dass Sie das mit keinem Wort erwähnt haben.\n\n- Dass Sie jetzt so schreien, zeigt, dass dieser Schlag gesessen hat. Der entlarvt Sie nämlich.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, auf dem Europäischen Rat in Brüssel wird die Bundesrepublik Deutschland heute erneut von Frau Bundeskanzlerin Merkel vertreten, und entgegen dem, was die Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Linkspartei uns erzählen wollen, spricht Frau Bundeskanzlerin dann für eine neue Bundesregierung und für eine andere Politik, für die wir Sozialdemokratinnen und Sozialdemokraten in diese Regierung eingetreten sind.\n\nSie spricht für eine neue Bundesregierung, die die Bekämpfung der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit in Europa wieder nach vorne schieben und nicht nur in Worthülsen belassen will. Sie spricht für eine neue Bundesregierung, die bei der Bewältigung der Krisenerscheinungen, die wir in Europa haben, nicht nur auf Konsolidierung setzt, sondern auch auf Zukunftsinvestitionen für mehr Wachstum und Beschäftigung.\n\nNein.\n\nSie spricht für eine neue Bundesregierung, die bei allen notwendigen Strukturreformen für mehr Wettbewerbsfähigkeit jetzt auch das Augenmerk auf die Sozialverträglichkeit von Strukturanpassungen legt, also für eine durchaus neue Politik. Ich glaube, auf diese neue Politik, die mit dem Eintritt der Sozialdemokratinnen und Sozialdemokraten in die Regierung möglich geworden ist, haben viele Regierungschefs in Europa offen - vielleicht auch insgeheim der eine oder andere Konservative - gesetzt. Sie hoffen auf eine neue Bundesregierung, die sich dafür einsetzt, dass es in Europa wieder sozialer und gerechter zugeht.\n\nDenn auch für Europa gilt, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen: Das Wir entscheidet.\n\nUnsere heutige Europäische Union darf nicht zu einer Versorgungsstelle für die Befriedigung vermeintlicher nationaler Interessen verkommen. Die Europäische Union ist eine Gemeinschaft, und für eine Gemeinschaft gilt immer noch: Sie ist dann stark, wenn sie auch gemeinschaftlich handelt.\n\nNatürlich brauchen wir neue Impulse für Beschäftigung in ganz Europa. Deshalb sage ich an dieser Stelle: Es ist aus meiner Sicht nicht hinnehmbar, dass gut anderthalb Jahre nach der Beschlussfassung über den Pakt für Wachstum und Beschäftigung immer noch nicht alle Maßnahmen dieses Paktes umgesetzt sind. Auch wenn es hinsichtlich der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung einiger Staaten den einen oder anderen Lichtblick am Horizont gibt, so sind wir noch lange nicht über den Berg. Ich will an dieser Stelle ergänzend zu dem, was die Bundeskanzlerin gesagt hat, betonen: Nicht nur die Staaten, die jetzt keine Leistungen aus den Hilfspaketen mehr benötigen, haben große Anstrengungen geleistet, sondern alle Staaten, allen voran Griechenland, haben große Anstrengungen geleistet. Das sollten wir an dieser Stelle würdigen.\n\nWir dürfen die Augen allerdings nicht davor verschließen, dass wir es immer noch mit einer dramatisch hohen Jugendarbeitslosigkeit zu tun haben. In drei Mitgliedstaaten ist jeder zweite Jugendliche ohne Arbeit, und in weiteren 16 Mitgliedstaaten liegt die Jugendarbeitslosenquote bei über 20 Prozent. Deshalb reichen - das sage ich sehr deutlich - die bisher verabredeten Maßnahmen der EU zur Bekämpfung der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit nicht aus.\n\nIch erwarte von der neuen Bundesregierung, dass sie den schwarz-roten Koalitionsvertrag ernst nimmt, in dem klar steht: Diese Bundesregierung muss für die Bekämpfung der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit in Europa mehr tun als ihre Vorgängerregierung.\n\nEs gibt ein weiteres Thema, das aus meiner Sicht sehr entscheidend ist, aber in der öffentlichen Debatte nicht sehr oft die entsprechende Beachtung findet. Wir müssen in der Europäischen Union Systeme schaffen, die es ermöglichen, dass kleine und mittlere Unternehmen schnell und einfach an Kredite kommen. Denn wie wollen wir die wirtschaftliche Gesundung nicht nur in Griechenland voranbringen, wenn diejenigen, die dort neue Arbeitsplätze schaffen wollen, die sich engagieren wollen, vor einem Bankensystem stehen, das ihnen keine vernünftigen Kredite gibt? Das ist kein nationales Thema, sondern eines, für das wir uns auf europäischer Ebene einsetzen müssen.\n\nIch will kurz auf die sich im Trilog abzeichnende Einigung zu einer wichtigen Säule der Bankenunion, nämlich zu einem Abwicklungsmechanismus und Abwicklungsfonds für Banken, eingehen. Es ist völlig richtig, dass es bisher der falsche Weg war, dass die Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler alleinige Haftung übernommen haben. Deshalb finde ich es gut - auch das kann man im schwarz-roten Koalitionsvertrag nachlesen -, dass laut dem, was ich vom Ecofin höre, die Entwicklung auf der europäischen Ebene jetzt in die richtige Richtung geht. Es muss eine Haftungskaskade geben, bei der eines klar ist: Die erste Priorität bei der Haftung haben die Eigentümer der Banken und nicht die Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler;\n\ndanach kommen die großen Bankgläubiger und nicht die kleinen Sparer. Es ist gut, dass sich abzeichnet, dass die Einlagensicherung zumindest für Einlagen bis zu 100 000 Euro gewährleistet ist und dass die kleinen Sparerinnen und Sparer, sollte es zu Problemen kommen, in sieben Tagen an ihr Geld kommen können. Das reicht zwar noch nicht aus. Aber es zeigt, dass wir in die richtige Richtung gehen. Auch diejenigen, denen das nicht ausreicht, sollten zumindest diese Fortschritte nicht ignorieren.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich möchte zum Schluss meiner Rede zur Situation der Flüchtlinge in Europa kommen. Der Präsident des Europäischen Parlaments, Martin Schulz, hat in einer, wie ich finde, bemerkenswerten Rede am 24. Oktober vor dem Europäischen Rat, vor den Staats- und Regierungschefs gesagt:\n\nLampedusa wurde zum Gleichnis für eine europäische Flüchtlingspolitik, die aus dem Mittelmeer einen Friedhof macht.\n\nMartin Schulz hat recht. Es ist ein Skandal, was jeden Tag, auch heute, an den Außengrenzen der Europäischen Union geschieht.\n\nMartin Schulz hat den Staats- und Regierungschefs am 24. Oktober außerdem in das Stammbuch geschrieben:\n\nLampedusa muss ein Wendepunkt für die europäische Flüchtlingspolitik sein.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, im Entwurf der Schlussfolgerungen des Europäischen Rates, der 45 Punkte enthält, ist ganz am Ende, in den Punkten 41 und 42, zu lesen, der Europäische Rat bekräftige seine Entschlossenheit, das Risiko zu verringern, dass es in Zukunft zu weiteren Tragödien dieser Art kommt. Ich frage mich: Was haben die Kommission und die Staats- und Regierungschefs seit Anfang Oktober in Lampedusa getan? Das ist zu wenig, was in diesen Schlussfolgerungen des Europäischen Rates steht.\n\nDeshalb ist es unsere Aufgabe - nicht nur die der Bundesregierung -, sehr schnell daran zu arbeiten, dass es grundlegende Reformen gibt, auch beim System von Dublin II. Es kann nicht sein, dass sich reiche Staaten in Europa weigern, bei der Aufnahme von Flüchtlingen Solidarität mit den Staaten zu zeigen, die an unseren Außengrenzen liegen. Das ist nicht das Europa, das ich mir wünsche, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nEs kann auch nicht sein, dass die Drittstaatenabkommen, die wir mit Staaten wie Marokko treffen, den Charakter eines modernen Ablasshandels haben. Da wird Drittstaaten etwas Geld gegeben, und dafür sollen die dann die Flüchtlinge - ich sage das so deutlich - entsorgen. Wenn sie von Marokko in die Wüste geschickt werden, dann zuckt man hier mit den Schultern nach dem Motto: Wir haben mit denen doch ein Drittstaatenabkommen. - Das ist den Werten der Europäischen Union nicht würdig. Wir alle müssen etwas dafür tun, dass sich das schnell ändert.\n\nWir brauchen für die Europäische Union ein legales Einwanderungssystem, wir brauchen mehr Solidarität bei der Aufnahme von Flüchtlingen, und - ich sage das sehr deutlich - wir sollten uns noch einmal den mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen der EU ansehen. Er spart nämlich ausgerechnet bei Maßnahmen für internationale Hilfen. Wenn wir es mit den Worten: „Wir wollen die Ursachen von Flucht, Verfolgung und Armut bekämpfen“ ernst meinen und gleichzeitig im mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen bei Maßnahmen für internationale Hilfen kürzen, sind wir zutiefst unglaubwürdig. An genau diesen Punkten müssen wir arbeiten, muss diese Regierung arbeiten. An diesen Punkten wird die Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands in dieser Regierung arbeiten. Es soll ja Leute gegeben haben - das habe ich mir sagen lassen -, die an der europapolitischen Zuverlässigkeit der Sozialdemokratinnen und Sozialdemokraten gezweifelt haben. Wir werden in den nächsten vier Jahren beweisen, dass diese Zweifel unberechtigt waren.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4569,julia-bartz,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir beraten heute im Zusammenhang mit OAE über ein Übergangsmandat.\n\nAuch im vergangenen Jahr haben wir über dieses Übergangsmandat gesprochen, und wir müssen es jetzt noch einmal verlängern. Die diplomatischen Verhandlungen laufen und sind auf einem sehr guten Weg.\n\nBereits 2012 hat sich die Bundesregierung dafür eingesetzt, das Einsatzprofil von OAE weiterzuentwickeln. Wir haben hier bereits viele Zwischenergebnisse verzeichnen können. Im Oktober 2013 hat die Bundesregierung ein entsprechendes Strategiepapier vorgelegt. Im Februar des Jahres 2014 haben unsere Bundesministerin der Verteidigung und unser Außenminister ein gemeinsames Schreiben an den NATO-Generalsekretär gerichtet, in dem sie auf die Diskrepanz zwischen der Einsatzgrundlage und der Einsatzrealität hingewiesen haben. Im Juni dieses Jahres haben die NATO-Außenminister im Rahmen ihrer maritimen Strategie der Allianz eine Weiterentwicklung von OAE auf einer neuen Einsatzgrundlage beschlossen, und im August dieses Jahres haben sich die USA in bilateralen Konsultationen grundsätzlich für eine Weiterentwicklung von OAE unabhängig von Artikel 5 des Washingtoner Vertrages bereit erklärt. Im September dieses Jahres wurde auf dem Gipfel in Wales ein Kommuniqué verabschiedet, das bei der Nennung von OAE zum ersten Mal auf Artikel 5 verzichtet.\n\nWie Sie also sehen, sind wir auf einem guten, auf dem richtigen Weg, und die Bundesregierung wird sich auch weiterhin dafür einsetzen, dass OAE von Artikel 5 entkoppelt wird.\n\nDies erfordert allerdings intensive diplomatische Bemühungen, weil die Zustimmung aller 28 NATO-Mitgliedstaaten dazu notwendig ist, wie Sie alle wissen. Nun den Abzug zu fordern, ist der falsche Weg, und ich denke, die Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Opposition, die das tun, sind hier auf dem falschen Dampfer.\n\nSchauen wir uns doch die aktuelle geopolitische Lage an: In der jetzigen Situation, bei dem aggressiven Vorgehen Russlands in der Ukraine, ist es ganz wichtig, dass wir mit der Verlängerung dieses Mandats das Zeichen an unsere östlichen Partnerländer senden können, dass Artikel 5 gilt.\n\nUnsere Präsenz im Mittelmeer ist notwendig, um dort aufzuklären und ein klares Lagebild zu haben. Das erhöht die maritime Sicherheit im Mittelmeer.\n\nZudem findet ein wichtiger Austausch mit den Anrainerstaaten statt. Das wirkt sowohl vertrauensbildend als auch als Frühwarnsystem.\n\nUnsere Präsenz und die Lagebilderstellung in dieser strategisch wichtigen Region sind also sinnvoll. Wir wollen sie nun ein weiteres Mal unter dem Dach von OAE fortsetzen. Geben wir doch der Diplomatie die Zeit, die sie braucht, um den rechtlichen Rahmen neu zu zimmern; denn das Ziel der Mission ist zweifelsohne sinnvoll. Deshalb bitte ich Sie um Ihre Zustimmung zu diesem Einsatz.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3471,renate-kunast,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Vorrednerin und liebe Vorredner! Herr Bartke war der Erste, der den jetzigen Verfassungsgerichtspräsidenten, zitiert hat, der noch als Herr Professor Voßkuhle in einer Kommentierung ausgeführt hat, dass es nach dem Wortlaut des Grundgesetzes wohl richtig sei, dass der Bundestag und nicht eine vom Bundestag bestimmte Kommission wählt. Das finde ich auch richtig.\n\nIch will nur hinzufügen - Herr Harbarth und andere haben das auch angesprochen -: Es ist eigentlich noch viel putziger.\n\nEs ist putzig, dass der Professor Voßkuhle so kommentiert hat, dass aber der Verfassungsrichter Voßkuhle dazu geurteilt und in einer Entscheidung gesagt hat: Nein, das jetzige Verfahren ist mit dem Grundgesetz vereinbar. - Ein wenig gewunden, einige Pirouetten gedreht, und mir scheint es auch so zu sein: ein klein wenig sich nicht getraut, in eigener Sache zu sagen: Bundestag, mach es mal anders!\n\nInsofern ist der heutige Tag, an dem wir alle miteinander, alle Fraktionen, diesen Entwurf für eine Gesetzesänderung einbringen, ein guter Tag. Es ist aber auch ein guter Tag für Herrn Voßkuhle. Von dem geistigen Spagat, den er in seinem Leben noch aushalten musste, erlösen wir ihn jetzt. Gut so!\n\nEs ist gut, meine Damen und Herren, dass wir - ich sagte es schon - gemeinsam zu dem Ergebnis kommen. Wir als Grüne haben schon viele Jahre genau eine solche Regelung - Wahl durch das Plenum - gefordert.\n\nEines ist klar - einige haben es schon angetippt -: Nicht nur das Grundgesetz fordert uns vom Wortlaut her auf, als Bundestag zu wählen; die jetzige Regelung bedeutet auch eine Schieflage im Verhältnis zu Wahlen von anderen Beauftragten, die wir im Plenum durchführen: den bzw. die Datenschutzbeauftragte, die bzw. den Wehrbeauftragten. Da ist es schon angemessen, auch die Krone des Rechts, die höchsten Richterinnen und Richter, die Spitze der rechtsprechenden Gewalt in unserer Gewaltenteilung ebenfalls im Plenum des Deutschen Bundestags zu wählen; alles andere wäre nicht angemessen.\n\nLassen Sie mich auch sagen: Ich bin froh darüber, dass wir dieses Gesetz erst jetzt einbringen und es nicht vor einem halben oder einem Dreivierteljahr eingebracht haben, als es noch Auseinandersetzungen gab über Ideen, die Entscheidungsmöglichkeiten des Verfassungsgerichts einzuengen. Seinerzeit wäre es das falsche Signal gewesen, hätte es eine falsche Botschaft vermittelt.\n\nWir sollten froh sein, dass wir eine Gewaltenteilung haben. Ich erlebe ständig, dass uns Delegationen aus aller Herren und Frauen Länder - die Kolleginnen und Kollegen aus dem Rechtsausschuss kennen das - immer fragen: „Wie funktionieren eigentlich bei euch Rechtsstaat und Gewaltenteilung?“, und die immer versuchen wollen, die Prinzipien, aber auch das Selbstbewusstsein zu verstehen, das für jede einzelne der drei Gewalten dazugehört.\n\nInsofern ist es richtig, dass wir die Mitglieder des Verfassungsgerichts im Plenum wählen, und es ist auch richtig, dass manche Idee vom Anfang des Jahres, die Rechte des Verfassungsgerichts zu beschneiden, nicht Realität wird.\n\nIch habe noch zwei, drei Änderungsideen. Wir als Grüne haben nicht nur gefordert, dass im Plenum gewählt wird, sondern wir haben noch eine Vielzahl anderer Forderungen.\n\nEine Forderung will ich als erste nennen, weil ich glaube, dass es für alle anderen am einfachsten ist, sie mitzutragen. An einer Stelle ist dieses Gesetz nämlich noch altertümlich, und zwar da, wo es für das Besetzungsverfahren in der Kommission immer noch d’Hondt vorsieht. Jetzt weiß ich, dass manche sagen: Ach, sollen wir das auch noch ändern! - Es ist aber altertümlich, weil wir uns überall für ein anderes Verfahren entschieden haben. Deshalb bitte ich alle, darüber nachzudenken, ob wir das im Gesetzgebungsverfahren nicht ändern und hier auch das Verfahren nach Sainte-Laguë/Schepers hineinnehmen können. Das ändert im Augenblick gar nichts. Aber es ist besser, es zu dem Zeitpunkt zu ändern, an dem wir tatsächlich Hand ans Gesetz legen.\n\nZweiter Punkt ist das Thema Frauenquote. Das Gericht ist mit Frauen besetzt wie schon lange nicht mehr. Die Geschlechter finden sich durchaus passabel wieder, obwohl man auch hier noch weitermachen kann. Aber wenn dieser Bundestag hier demnächst ein Quotengesetz für die Vorstände und für die Aufsichtsräte und eine Flexiquote für das Management usw. beschließt, fragt man sich ja, warum dann nicht auch für das Bundesverfassungsgericht eine vielleicht ähnlich hohe Quote für Frauen und Männer vorgesehen wird, um einfach einer zukünftig vielleicht auftretenden Fehlentwicklung zu wehren.\n\nMein dritter Punkt ist die Frage der Anhörung, die Frau Wawzyniak auch schon angesprochen hat. Wir würden mit Ihnen im Ausschuss gern auch über Anhörungen diskutieren. Ich weiß, dazu gibt es bei uns, durchaus auch in der Fraktion, noch unterschiedliche Auffassungen. Lassen Sie uns hier über ein Verfahren für das Plenum oder für die Kommission diskutieren. Jetzt ist es so, dass immer außerhalb der Kommission die Gespräche mit den potenziellen Kandidatinnen und Kandidaten stattfinden.\n\nIch sage aber persönlich auch dazu: Ich möchte nicht da enden, wo die in den USA enden. Der Präsident macht einen Vorschlag, und danach, glaube ich, wird die Person, die dann bei einer solchen Anhörung abgelehnt worden ist, nie wieder für ein Amt kandidieren. Also, ich will nicht diese Schärfe der Auseinandersetzung und diese Herabwürdigung einzelner Personen. Deswegen bin ich an der Stelle für Vorschläge offen. Aber Sie wissen, dass wir immer gesagt haben: Es muss mehr Auseinandersetzungen über die Personen geben und sie müssen sich der Debatte stellen.\n\nIch kann also feststellen, meine Damen und Herren: Heute ist ein guter Tag, ein guter Tag für das Gericht, weil es als Spitze der Rechtsprechungsgewalt in Deutschland angemessener behandelt wird. Es ist ein guter Tag für den Bundestag und ein guter Tag für mehr Transparenz durch Wahlen.\"\n4972,uwe-schummer,\"Verehrtes Präsidium! Meine Damen! Meine Herren! Liebe Kollegin Werner, welchen Stellenwert die Frage der Behindertenpolitik und der Inklusion bei den Linken hat, sieht man daran, dass der profilierteste Sprecher, den Sie in dem Bereich haben, Herr Ilja Seifert, nicht mehr dem Parlament und Ihrer Fraktion angehört. Sie haben ihn nicht ausreichend abgesichert; er war Ihnen nicht mehr wichtig.\n\nInsofern ist es eine ganz politische Frage, ob man letztendlich bereit ist, in der eigenen Truppe Konsequenzen zu ziehen, oder man sie immer nur von anderen einfordert, aber selber versagt.\n\n40 Prozent derer, die in einer Förderschule unterrichtet werden, gelten als lernbehindert. Ich denke, dass wir uns mit Blick auf unsere Bildungslandschaft angesichts der offenkundig steigenden Zahl der Menschen mit Lernbehinderung selber einmal fragen müssen, ob nicht manchmal auch die Bildungsmethoden und -systeme falsch sind. Der Nürnberger Trichter und die Schwerpunktsetzung auf eine rein theoretische Herangehensweise können nach meiner Überzeugung vermeintliche Lernbehinderungen produzieren. Denn es ist nicht immer ein Kind lernbehindert, sondern es sind oftmals die Methoden, die Systeme, die das Lernen behindern.\n\nBegreifen kommt auch von greifen.\n\nDer Weg aus der praktischen Erfahrung zum Verständnis wurde in der allgemeinen Bildung weitgehend verbaut. Praxis und Theorie in der dualen Berufsausbildung zeigen auch der allgemeinen Bildung, wie es besser gehen kann: wie man auf der einen Seite von der Theorie zur Praxis gelangt und auf der anderen Seite über die Praxis zum theoretischen Verständnis kommt. Beide Wege müssen möglich sein; beide Wege sind gleichberechtigt in der Bildung.\n\nBerufsschulen und überbetriebliche Werkstätten können im Verbund mit den allgemeinbildenden Schulen diese praktischen Wege wieder freilegen. Der Bildungsbericht empfiehlt auch, dass dort, wo sonderpädagogischer Förderbedarf vorhanden ist, dieser mit den Bildungsakteuren besser abgestimmt wird. Eine Assistenz sollte in der Schule, in den Bildungseinrichtungen nicht isoliert mitlaufen, sondern Assistenz und Bildungspersonal sollten eng miteinander verzahnt sein.\n\nJährlich verlassen etwa 50 000 Jugendliche mit sonderpädagogischem Förderbedarf die Schule. Nur wenige finden eine Berufsausbildung. Nur 10 Prozent der Betriebe im dualen System bieten auch für behinderte Jugendliche Ausbildungsplätze an. In meinem Bundestagsbüro war ein Vertreter des Verbandes der Floristen zu Besuch, der sich darüber beklagte, dass die Floristen keine Auszubildenden mehr finden. Ich habe ihn gefragt: Haben Sie es denn auch einmal mit behinderten Jugendlichen versucht? - Man konnte schon an seinen Augen sehen, dass das nicht so richtig sein Thema war. Schließlich kam die Antwort: Die Kunden, die zu uns kommen und Blumen kaufen, haben nie Zeit, sie müssen sofort weiter. - In diesem Zusammenhang sollte man vielleicht einmal über Entschleunigung nachdenken.\n\nWir sollten uns mit der Frage beschäftigen, ob man nicht Arbeitsprozesse und -strukturen so organisieren kann, dass sie menschengerecht sind und dass dadurch auch behinderte junge Menschen ein Stück weit die Chance bekommen, mitzuarbeiten.\n\nDa kann einiges im Hintergrund geschaffen werden. Man hat auch entsprechende Finanzierungsmöglichkeiten für den Umbau von Arbeitsplätzen. Es gibt auch Kunden, die Zeit haben und die froh sind, wenn sie ein Käffchen bekommen und mit dem Floristen ein Gespräch führen können. Entschleunigung ist etwas, was uns allen guttut. Deshalb ist das ein Thema, das wir sowohl in der Arbeitswelt als auch in der Politik aufgreifen sollten.\n\nIch war am Montag in einer katholischen Grundschule in Neuzelle in Brandenburg. Ich fand es spannend, zu sehen, wie hier eine Regelgrundschule aus einer Förderschule entwickelt worden ist, eine Regelgrundschule in Vielfalt, wie sie sich selber nennt. Zwei Drittel der Kinder sind ohne Förderbedarf, ein Drittel benötigt Sonderförderung. Die Klassengröße liegt bei 16. Von der ersten Klasse an lernen Kinder, behindert oder nicht, gemeinsam. Es gibt ausreichend finanziertes geschultes Personal und Räume für den Fall, dass sich Schüler mit ihrer Assistenz zurückziehen wollen.\n\nWir wissen, dass die Zahl der Schüler mit besonderem Förderbedarf seit vielen Jahren konstant bei 500 000 liegt, bei einer allerdings insgesamt sinkenden Schülerzahl. Wir wissen auch, dass im Grundschulbereich die inklusive Beschulung bei etwa 44 Prozent liegt, im Sekundarbereich sinkt sie auf 23 Prozent.\n\nDeshalb ist es wichtig, auf der einen Seite Zielsetzungen für die Inklusion zu entwickeln. Auf der anderen Seite müssen aber auch die Voraussetzungen geschaffen werden. Die wunderbare, fabelhafte grüne Bildungspolitik von Frau Löhrmann in Nordrhein-Westfalen hingegen sorgt erstens dafür, dass ein Unterrichtsstundenausfall überhaupt nicht erfasst werden kann.\n\nMan hat sich für 700 000 Euro ein Gutachten erstellen lassen, in dem festgestellt wird, weshalb man Ausfallstunden nicht addieren kann. Zweitens wird jeder Schüler in Nordrhein-Westfalen mit 2 800 Euro weniger im Jahr gefördert, als das beispielsweise in Thüringen der Fall ist. Damit wird im Grunde die Zielsetzung erkennbar: Wir schaffen die Förderschulen ab und übertragen die Mittel auf die Regelschulen; das wird schon irgendwie klappen. - Auf diese Weise fährt man Inklusion krachend gegen die Wand!\n\nDie Eltern und Lehrer in Nordrhein-Westfalen sind dann bedauerlicherweise sauer und regen sich auf über Inklusion, obwohl die Auswirkungen offenkundig auf eine falsche, alles über Bord werfende Bildungspolitik von Frau Löhrmann zurückzuführen sind.\n\nDas beschädigt die Inklusion.\n\nDeshalb kann ich nur empfehlen, die katholische Regelschule in Neuzelle in Brandenburg als Vorbild zu sehen, sie einmal zu besuchen und davon zu lernen.\n\nEs ist gut, dass wir in diesem Bildungsbericht gemeinsam - Bund und Bundesländer - Konsequenzen entwickelt haben. Das ist auch ein gutes Zeichen, dass wir als Bund mit den Ländern diese Aufgabe bewältigen.\"\n13812,tobias-lindner,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Schulz, ich will mich nicht zu dem äußern, wovon Sie nachts träumen.\n\nAber wenn Sie über schwäbische Hausmänner und Hamburger Kauffrauen sprechen, dann will ich dazu folgendes Zitat bemühen: Was lange währt, wird endlich gut. - Leider gilt das für das vorliegende Nachtragshaushaltsgesetz keineswegs. Hier muss man eher sagen: Was zu lange währt, das bleibt am Ende mutlos, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen. - So ist es auch mit diesem Nachtragshaushalt.\n\nSie haben in der letzten Sitzungswoche ein in der Geschichte unseres Landes beispielloses Schauspiel aufgeführt. Als dieser Haushalt nach der Geschäftsordnung beraten werden musste, haben Sie gezeigt, dass Sie sich über die Verwendung des Überschusses in Höhe von 6,2 Milliarden Euro, den es im Haushalt glücklicherweise gibt, nicht einigen können. Sie haben diesen Nachtragshaushalt in Geiselhaft genommen, weil Sie über die Frage gestritten haben: Wofür geben wir das Geld jetzt aus? Die einen wollten Schulden tilgen. Andere wollten investieren. Dazu muss ich sagen: Da rennen Sie bei den Grünen offene Türen ein. Wieder andere - da gucke ich die CSU an - wollten mit einem Einmaleffekt die Steuern senken. Sie haben diesen Überschuss quasi schon dreimal ausgegeben.\n\nJetzt könnte man auf die Idee kommen: Nach dem Nachdenken kommt etwas besonders Kreatives. Aber nein, Fehlanzeige! Dieses Nachtragshaushaltsgesetz bleibt, wie es ist.\n\nAuch wir freuen uns darüber, dass 3,5 Milliarden Euro für kommunale Investitionen bereitgestellt werden; das ist richtig.\n\n- Erst müssen wir das Grundgesetz ändern. Herr Kollege Kalb, da bin ich bei Ihnen. Aber das löst ein anderes Problem nicht. Wir müssen uns einmal anschauen, wie dieser Überschuss von 6,2 Milliarden Euro entstanden ist. So kommen 1,8 Milliarden Euro aus Investitionsmitteln, die im letzten Jahr bereitstanden, aber nicht abgeflossen sind.\n\nWir von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen sagen ganz deutlich: Was für Investitionen bereitstand, das muss man in der Zukunft wieder für Investitionen verwenden. Wer das nicht tut, der versündigt sich an der Zukunft, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren.\n\nDeshalb haben wir Grüne einen Vorschlag gemacht; denn wir wissen, dass es mit dem Mittelabfluss manchmal schwierig ist. Nicht jede Kommune hat bis zum Morgen des übernächsten Tages den Bauplan für eine Schulsanierung in der Schublade liegen. Man sollte vielleicht auch manchmal überlegen, was prioritär ist. Können wir die Mittel im Bereich Bildung gebrauchen? Wie sieht es bei der Breitbandversorgung aus? Wie können wir die Mittel vernünftig anlegen? Wie können wir das Dezemberfieber verhindern?\n\nDeswegen wundert es mich, ehrlich gesagt, Herr Kollege Schulz, warum die SPD, wenn Sie Vorschläge machen, für was alles man diese Mittel verwenden könnte - ich bin durchaus bereit, mit Ihnen über die Ideen von Frau Wanka zu diskutieren -, im Haushaltsausschuss gegen unseren grünen Antrag für einen Zukunftsfonds gestimmt hat, in den wir die Mittel überjährig und zweckgebunden eingestellt hätten.\n\nSie hätten zustimmen sollen. Dann könnten Sie jetzt Ihre Träume verwirklichen, zumindest den von Ihrem Bildungsprogramm.\n\nIch will einen letzten Punkt nennen. Wir haben auch deswegen den Überschuss im Haushalt, weil es unserem Land wirtschaftlich, was die Wachstumszahlen betrifft, ganz gut geht.\n\nDeshalb sollten wir dafür Sorge tragen, dass dem auch weiterhin so ist. Aber dann dürfen wir doch nicht unsere öffentliche Infrastruktur verfallen lassen, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, sondern dann müssen wir dafür Sorge tragen, dass wir durch Investitionen das öffentliche Vermögen erhalten und modernisieren.\n\nDas alles tun Sie mit dem Überschuss nicht. Sie sind an dieser Stelle mutlos geblieben. Mit unserem Vorschlag hätten Sie eine Menge tun können. Deshalb können wir diesem Nachtragshaushalt heute nicht unsere Zustimmung geben.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n2561,diether-dehm,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Erst haben Sie von der CDU/CSU und von der SPD die Öffentlichkeit getäuscht, indem Sie gesagt haben, der Spitzenkandidat der stärksten Fraktion würde automatisch Kommissionspräsident werden. Dann wackelt die Kanzlerin weg von Herrn Juncker und setzt sich dem Erpressungsmanöver des David Cameron aus, der für seine britische Bankenlobby noch mehr aus der EU herausholen will,\n\num dann auf dem Katholikentag wieder ein wenig in Richtung Juncker zurückzuwackeln. Die Tagesschau sagte zu diesem Geschacher - ich zitiere -:\n\nErst einigen sich die großen Parteifamilien auf Spitzenkandidaten … Und jetzt wird ein Betrug in aller Offenheit geplant.\n\nSeit fünf Jahren schlagen Sie alle Empfehlungen der Linken in den Wind, aus dem Europäischen Parlament endlich\n\nein echtes Parlament zu machen. Dann würde nämlich jetzt der Kommissionspräsident einfach nur gewählt werden. Aber Sie wollten ein kastriertes Parlament wie die Kastration des europäischen Traums, nämlich diese EU.\n\nIch zitiere den EU-Arbeitskommissar Laszlo Andor:\n\nAngesichts von beinahe 26 Millionen Arbeitslosen müssen wir für den Moment schlussfolgern, dass die soziale Krise weitergeht.\n\nWie anders färbte Herr Gauck gestern in Portugal die Krise und die Jugendarbeitslosigkeit schön. Der Bundespräsident spricht für die Menschenrechte der Gläubiger. Für die Gläubigen hingegen und die wirklichen Menschenrechte sprach jüngst Papst Franziskus - ich zitiere -:\n\nWir schließen eine ganze Generation aus, um ein Wirtschaftssystem aufrechtzuerhalten, das nicht mehr zu ertragen ist.\n\nJa, diese Krise ist nur gegen den Finanzkapitalismus lösbar.\n\nIrgendwann wollte Sigmar Gabriel die Trennung von Spekulationsbanking und klassischem Kreditgeschäft sogar einmal zum Wahlkampfthema machen. Hoppla, dachte ich mir als früheres SPD-Mitglied, da hat der Sigmar an sich heruntergeschaut und eine sozialdemokratische Wurzel gesehen. Aber dann fand das im Wahlkampf überhaupt nicht statt, kein Plakat, nichts dergleichen, und im Koalitionsvertrag findet sich erst recht nicht ein Wort über das Trennbankensystem. In der EU bleibt es bei der Macht von fünf Großbanken und drei Ratingagenturen, die sich großspurig wie eine Gottheit „die Finanzmärkte“ nennen und für die Frau Merkel von der Demokratie Marktkonformität fordert. Aber es sind doch gerade die EU-Staaten, denen Sie am meisten das Soziale kaputtgekürzt haben, deren Staatsverschuldung danach am allerhöchsten gestiegen ist. Hören Sie zumindest einmal richtig hin, wenn Linke mahnen!\n\nIn der letzten Sitzungswoche taten Sie empört, als meine Kollegin Da?delen Brecht zitierte.\n\nIch wiederhole das mit Genehmigung der Präsidentin. Aus dem Leben des Galilei - ich zitiere -:\n\nWer die Wahrheit nicht weiß, der ist bloß ein Dummkopf. Aber wer sie weiß und sie eine Lüge nennt, der ist ein Verbrecher.\n\nKein Kollege - das wissen Sie so gut wie ich - darf einen anderen hier „Verbrecher“ oder „Dummkopf“ nennen,\n\nund das hat auch niemand getan.\n\n- Und das hat auch niemand getan. Selbst das Bürgerliche Gesetzbuch unterscheidet zwischen unwissentlichen und falschen Aussagen, die bewusst getroffen werden.\n\nWas können wir als kleine, aber umso konsequentere Opposition denn anderes tun, als öffentlich aufzurütteln oder Sie als Regierung gegenüber dem Faschismus - nicht nur in der Ukraine, sondern auch in weiten Teilen Europas - etwas bösgläubiger zu machen? Jetzt können Sie entscheiden, ob Sie das verdrängen, verharmlosen,\n\ndie Wahrheit eine Lüge nennen oder ob es vielleicht die Wahrheit ist und Sie das nicht widerlegen können. - Wenn Sie mir einen Moment Ihre geschätzte Aufmerksamkeit schenken würden. - Falls Sie das widerlegen können, wir uns also irren und Sie uns diesen Irrtum nachweisen können, dann tun Sie das.\n\nIch wiederhole ein paar Fakten - achten Sie darauf; denn dann ist immer noch zu sehen, ob Sie bös- oder gutgläubig damit umgehen -:\n\nErstens. Es sind immer noch vier Minister in der ukrainischen Regierung lupenreine Faschisten.\n\n- Immer noch vier Minister.\n\nZweitens. Die EU unterstützt das, was der Sozialdemokrat Günter Verheugen jüngst einen „Epochenbruch“ nannte.\n\nDrittens. Die Swoboda-Partei hat bei der Präsidentenwahl zwar nur 2 Prozent erhalten. Aber der nicht minder rechtsextreme Kandidat Oleg Ljaschko bekam 8 Prozent.\n\nViertens. Der Generalstaatsanwalt, ein Faschist der Swoboda-Partei, ist zwar von Präsident Poroschenko abberufen, aber hernach sofort zum Präsidentenberater gemacht worden.\n\nFünftens. Im April wurde im Kiewer Zentrum für zeitgenössische Kunst von sogenannten Maidan-Künstlern der - ich zitiere - „Ukrainischen Kulturfront“ eine Ausstellung mit dem Titel „Vorsicht Russen“ eröffnet. Dort werden russische Menschen in Tierkäfigen mit einem Schild „Bitte nicht füttern“ gezeigt.\n\nSechstens. Mehrere Holocaust-Gedenktage mussten in der Ukraine abgesagt werden. Rabbiner wie der Rabbi Cohen wurden auf offener Straße verprügelt.\n\nSiebtens. In Riga, in Lettland, wurde gerade erst ein funkelnagelneues Denkmal für die Waffen-SS errichtet. - Nun schreien Sie nicht „Unglaublich!“, sondern widerlegen Sie die Fakten, die ich Ihnen eben genannt habe! Das sind Fakten, und darüber muss ein Antifaschist hier wütend werden dürfen.\n\nIch gestatte gerne eine Frage.\n\nSie können für die Antwort gerne stehen bleiben. Ich habe auch nichts gegen eine zweite Frage, weil ich Sie zurückfragen würde: Wie, glauben Sie, kommt es bei der jüdischen Bevölkerung in der Ukraine, in der West- oder der Ostukraine oder im Umfeld, an, dass die Swoboda-Partei, auf die ich mich eben bezogen habe, ihre Parteihochschule bis in den Frühsommer dieses Jahres nach Joseph Goebbels benannt hat? Wie anders ist das zu nennen als Faschismus? Wer das nicht Faschismus nennt, der verharmlost den Faschismus, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDazu möchte ich noch etwas sagen. Es sind dort -Holocaust-Gedenktage, die man abhalten wollte, abgesagt worden, weil die Menschen Angst um ihre Sicherheit hatten. Wie nennen Sie denn so etwas?\n\n- Ich habe Ihnen einen Namen und Fakten genannt: Der Rabbiner Cohen ist auf offener Straße angegriffen und verprügelt worden. Wenn das so ist, wenn solche Dinge stattfinden, dann können Sie das nicht einfach wegwischen. Das sind keine Lügen.\n\nSie sollten Ihre Politik im Hinblick auf die Ukraine und die Faschisten dort überdenken! Das muss eigentlich die Moral von dieser Sache sein!\n\n- Das ist schön.\n\nAber natürlich.\n\nHerr Sarrazin, ich gehe fast jedem Ihrer Hinweise gerne nach; aber gehen Sie bitte meinen genauso ernsthaft nach.\n\nIch will das gerne prüfen. Was Sie jetzt in den Raum -gestellt haben, ist aber erst einmal eine These. Ich habe Ihnen hier Fakten genannt. Sagen Sie, wo die nicht -stimmen!\n\nZu den Fakten zählt auch, dass der Chefredakteur des ukrainischen Fernsehens vor laufender Kamera geprügelt wurde, er gezwungen wurde, Erklärungen zu verlesen, die er sonst nicht verlesen hätte. Alle diese Dinge sind passiert. Wenn ich Ihnen hier diese Beispiele nenne - auch die Beispiele von den Holocaustgedenktagen, die nicht stattfinden konnten -, dann sind das doch auch Hinweise, die Sie nachdenklich machen müssten.\n\nWenn wir hier in dieser Diskussion erreichen, dass, statt dass wir uns hier oberlehrerhaft bevormunden,\n\nin irgendeiner Weise Nachdenklichkeit gestiftet wird, wir den Hinweisen des Andersdenkenden nachgehen, dann haben wir in dieser Demokratie schon viel gekonnt.\n\nUnd wenn, denke ich, das alles keine Lügen sind, kann man die Politik ja auch ändern. Wie lange warnen wir hier als linke Opposition vor Krieg und Waffenlieferungen! Als Sie noch Präsident al-Maliki im Irak unterstützt haben, während er die Sunniten gezielt diskriminierte, warben wir für eine Regierung der Versöhnung und des runden Tisches. Sie haben die Opposition gegen Assad hochgejubelt. Jetzt schreibt selbst die Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung - CDU, genau hinhören, es ist ganz aktuell -:\n\nTatsächlich stellt die Opposition in Syrien für viele Syrer keine vertrauenswürdige Alternative zu Assad dar.\n\nWir haben vor Waffenlieferungen in die Türkei gewarnt. Dort bekommen die ISIS-Kämpfer Unterschlupf gewährt, und dort wurden sie mit Waffen gestopft. Desgleichen bei den mit Deutschland befreundeten Golfmonarchien Katar, Kuwait, Saudi-Arabien: alles gute Kunden deutscher Waffenexporteure.\n\nDann komme ich jetzt gerne zum Schluss dieser Rede, weil ich mich auch ganz besonders auf den Kollegen Leutert freue.\n\nHeute Morgen ist Herr Gauck zitiert worden. Jetzt möchte ich Herrn Gauck ganz präzise zitieren: Es habe „früher eine gut begründete Zurückhaltung“ gegen Militäreinsätze gegeben, die die Deutschen jetzt - ich zitiere ihn jetzt wörtlich - „vielleicht ablegen“ könnten.\n\nDa kann ich nur sagen, wie mein Leipziger Kabarettkollege Meigl Hoffmann Herrn Gauck, über den sich auch viele Pfarrer aufregen, genannt hat: die „Worthülse im Patronengürtel der NATO“.\n\nDa halte ich es lieber mit Papst Franziskus - ich zitiere -:\n\nDamit das System fortbestehen kann, müssen Kriege geführt werden, wie es die großen Imperien immer getan haben. Einen Dritten Weltkrieg kann man jedoch nicht führen, und so greift man eben zu regionalen Kriegen.\n\nSo weit Papst Franziskus. Wenn Sie uns schon nicht glauben, glauben Sie wenigstens ihm!\"\n1535,hans-christian-strobele,\"Danke, Herr Kollege Roth, dass Sie mir die Gelegenheit geben, auf einen Punkt hinzuweisen. - Sie sagen, dass die UNO alle Nationen aufgefordert hat, bei der Beseitigung dieses Giftgases zu helfen. Wieso schließen Sie plötzlich Russland von der Beteiligung an dieser Aktion zur Beseitigung der Chemiewaffen aus? Ich denke, dies ist ein Erziehungsversuch gegenüber Russland, ein Versuch am falschen Objekt. Hier passt es überhaupt nicht. Wenn es wirklich um eine Aktion geht nach dem Motto „Schwerter zu Pflugscharen“ - hier vielleicht „Giftgas zu Frischluft“, wie auch immer man dies bezeichnen will -, dann muss man auch konsequent sein und muss jeden willkommen heißen, der dabei mitwirkt. Man kann nicht den einen oder anderen aus ganz anderen politischen Gründen ausschließen.\"\n6731,gabriela-heinrich,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kollegen und Kolleginnen! Meine Damen und Herren! Noch vor einem Jahr hätten wohl die wenigsten Menschen in Europa Mexiko genannt, wenn man sie nach den Krisen auf dem Globus gefragt hätte. Wenn sie überhaupt wahrgenommen wurden, bezeichnete man die Konflikte in Mexiko als Kartellkriege, Bandenkriege oder Drogenkriege.\n\nSeit den Ereignissen in Iguala hat sich das grundlegend geändert. Die 43 verschwundenen Studenten haben die Menschenrechtslage in Mexiko ins Bewusstsein der europäischen Öffentlichkeit gerufen. Seitdem lesen und hören wir mehr über dieses Land, leider meist nichts Gutes. Zum Beispiel berichtete gestern die Süddeutsche Zeitung online, dass erneut Menschen verschwunden sind, wieder in der Provinz Guerrero, diesmal im Ort Chilapa. Die Anzahl der verschwundenen Menschen scheint noch nicht klar zu sein. Die Bewohner hätten von 30 Menschen gesprochen, die örtliche Menschenrechtskommission von 13. Verschwunden seien die Personen, nachdem eine Bürgerwehr den Ort besetzt hatte.\n\nFakt ist: Viel zu viele Menschen verschwinden in -Mexiko. Regierungschef und Präsident Enrique Peña -Nieto bekennt sich zwar ebenso wie sein Vorgänger -Calderón zu den Menschenrechten. Mexiko ist ein verlässlicher Partner in den Vereinten Nationen. Mexiko hat die allermeisten internationalen Menschenrechtsabkommen unterschrieben und ratifiziert. Dennoch sind Menschenrechtsverletzungen in mehreren Bundesstaaten an der Tagesordnung. In den Bundesstaaten Michoacán und Guerrero vergeht kaum ein Tag ohne gewalttätige Auseinandersetzung. Die jeweiligen Gegner sind heterogen, die Lage ist unübersichtlich. Die Waffengewalt spielt sich innerhalb des organisierten Verbrechens ab oder zwischen Polizei und Banden oder zwischen selbst-ernannten Bürgerwehren und Banden. Die Konflikte gehen also längst über einen Drogen- oder Kartellkrieg hinaus.\n\nEs gibt viele Menschenrechtsverletzungen in Mexiko: Gewalt an Frauen, Feminizide, also Morde an Frauen, Kinderarbeit, Menschenhandel und Diskriminierung von Minderheiten. Ein Teil des Problems sind die Sicherheitsbehörden. Menschenrechtsorganisationen berichten von Übergriffen durch Polizei und Militär, von Willkür, vom Verschwindenlassen und von Folter. Die Täter gehen in der Regel straffrei aus. Die Justiz ignoriert Straftaten ebenso wie schwere Menschenrechtsverletzungen.\n\nAmnesty International beschreibt im Amnesty Report 2015 über Mexiko, dass dadurch das Klima der Straflosigkeit weiter verstärkt und das Vertrauen in das Rechtssystem geschwächt sei. Die Folge sind Selbstbewaffnung und Selbstjustiz durch Bürgerwehren, weil sich die Menschen nicht mehr oder nicht genügend durch Staat, Justiz und Polizei geschützt fühlen. Wenn solche Bürgerwehren wiederum Drogenkartelle oder -banden unterstützen, dann ist der Teufelskreis komplett.\n\nMexiko selbst will bis 2016 endlich die Strafprozessrechtsreform aus dem Jahr 2008 umsetzen. Diese -Reform modernisiert das mexikanische Justizwesen und soll die Rechte der Angeklagten stärken. Zum Beispiel soll endlich die Unschuldsvermutung gelten, und -erzwungene Geständnisse sollen verboten werden. Weiterhin sollen die Maßnahmen im Kampf gegen die organisierte Kriminalität, gegen Drogenkartelle und Menschenhändler verschärft werden.\n\nDeutschland unterstützt Mexiko in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit bisher vor allem im Bereich von Umweltprojekten. In Ihren Anträgen fordern Sie völlig zu Recht, dass Deutschland die mexikanische Zivilgesellschaft stärken soll. Aus dem Entwicklungsministerium habe ich die Information erhalten, dass die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit demnächst neben dem Umweltschwerpunkt neue Wege gehen soll. Anfang Juni werden die deutsch-mexikanischen Regierungsverhandlungen stattfinden. Geplant ist ein gemeinsam finanzierter Fonds, der unter anderem Reformen im Bereich der Rechtsstaatlichkeit und der sozialen Gerechtigkeit finanzieren soll. Ein weiterer Fonds ist zur Förderung der mexikanischen Zivilgesellschaft vorgesehen.\n\nDas von Ihnen kritisierte Abkommen zielt darauf ab, die organisierte Kriminalität zu bekämpfen und zu verhindern. Die Minderung schwerster Straftaten, der Rauschgift- und Schleuserkriminalität, des Terrorismus und des Menschenhandels sind die Unterziele. Die Polizei erhält dadurch keine weiteren Befugnisse, aber Deutschland kann helfen, die Sicherheitsbehörden besser auszubilden. Das wiederum kann helfen, Rechtsstaatlichkeit zu fördern.\n\nDie Zusammenarbeit soll über die Generalstaatsanwaltschaft erfolgen. Auch die Internationale Kommission gegen Straflosigkeit in Guatemala arbeitet mit der Generalstaatsanwaltschaft zusammen. Aus Guatemala wissen wir, dass die Erfolge im Kampf gegen die organisierte Kriminalität auch von den dort handelnden Personen abhängig sind.\n\nJa, in Mexiko sind Korruption und Willkür ein Problem. Aber sollten wir die Zusammenarbeit deshalb einstellen? In der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit müssen wir uns diese Frage häufig stellen. Versuchen wir, ein Land beim Aufbau von mehr Rechtsstaatlichkeit zu unterstützen, oder kapitulieren wir aufgrund der zugegebenermaßen sehr schwierigen Situation?\n\nBeide Anträge der Opposition fordern durchaus Wichtiges und Richtiges, zum Beispiel, die Zivilgesellschaft bzw. Menschenrechtsverteidiger zu unterstützen. Beide Anträge fordern aber auch, das Sicherheitsabkommen auszusetzen,\n\nohne Mexiko eine konkrete Alternative zu bieten.\n\nIch bin völlig einverstanden mit Ihrer Forderung nach deutlich mehr Fortschrittskontrolle und weitaus größerer Transparenz in Ihrem Antrag mit dem Titel „Sicherheitsabkommen brauchen Standards“. Das Parlament muss über die Maßnahmen, die Fortschritte oder mögliche Misserfolge informiert werden.\n\nSie schießen jedoch über das Ziel hinaus. Sie fordern halbjährliche Berichte der Bundesregierung an den Bundestag. Die Berichte sollen Auftrag, Zweck, Gebiet, rechtliche Grundlagen, Mitarbeiterzahl, Kosten und Dauer enthalten. Wenn wir zu allen 24 Sicherheitsabkommen und zu den 12 derzeit verhandelten Abkommen halbjährlich Berichte bekommen sollen, dann sind das 72 Berichte im Jahr. Ich halte dieses Ansinnen für überzogen und wenig zielführend.\n\nWir werden die drei Anträge ablehnen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n7391,britta-haßelmann,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine Damen und Herren auf der Zuschauertribüne! In der Tat: Heute endlich debattieren und beschließen wir ein Gesetz zur Karenzzeit. Für diejenigen, die davon noch nie gehört haben: Seit zehn Jahren wird im Deutschen Bundestag über eine gesetzliche Regelung zur Karenzzeit diskutiert; es wurde gestritten und blockiert, aber heute wird sie endlich beschlossen. Darüber ist meine Fraktion sehr, sehr froh;\n\ndenn wir waren diejenigen, die vor zehn Jahren das erste Mal eine parlamentarische Initiative dazu eingebracht haben. Wir haben damals gesagt: Im Interesse der betroffenen Regierungsmitglieder und im Interesse der Wirtschaft, in die man nach einem Mandat auf Zeit vielleicht wechselt, ist es richtig und notwendig, eine Karenzzeit festzulegen und sie gesetzlich zu verankern, damit verhindert wird, dass es in jedem Einzelfall, in dem ein Regierungsmitglied in die Wirtschaft wechselt, zu Diskussionen und zum Teil zu berechtigter öffentlicher Kritik im Hinblick auf mögliche Interessenkollisionen kommt. Wir wollten, dass der Deutsche Bundestag für sich und die Regierung endlich klare Regelungen trifft. Deshalb sind wir als Fraktion sehr froh, dass wir heute endlich eine solche Regelung beschließen.\n\nDas kann man allerdings nicht tun, ohne den vielen NGOs, die sich in diesem Bereich seit zehn Jahren und länger engagieren, ein großes Dankeschön dafür zu sagen, dass sie bei der Sache geblieben sind und uns im Parlament immer wieder mit den entsprechenden Fragen konfrontiert haben.\n\nDazu gehören Transparency International, Transparency International Deutschland, LobbyControl, abgeordneten watch.de und Campact. Sie haben allesamt immer -wieder gesagt: Lasst euch doch nicht von Fall zu Fall hetzen, was öffentlich ein schlechtes Bild von Politikerinnen und Politikern erzeugt, sondern schafft endlich eine gesetzliche Karenzzeit. - Insofern ist heute ein guter Tag. Deshalb wird auch meine Fraktion zustimmen.\n\nWir haben allerdings einen Änderungsantrag eingebracht, den Sie, Herr Krings, schon angesprochen haben. Damit möchten wir Ihnen die Möglichkeit geben, aus einem Dilemma herauszukommen. Sie sagen nämlich, dass die Untersagung in der Regel für ein Jahr gilt; wenn öffentliche Interessen schwer beeinträchtigt sind, wollen Sie eine Karenzzeit von 18 Monaten. Wir halten es für verzichtbar, an dieser Stelle zu differenzieren. Denn diese Unterscheidung wird zu erheblichen Diskussionen führen, auch bei der Bewertung des jeweiligen Einzelfalles, weil die Frage: „Wann ist das öffentliche Interesse beeinträchtigt, und wann ist es schwer beeinträchtigt?“, immer wieder zu Diskussionen darüber führen wird, warum für den einen eine Karenzzeit von 12 und für den anderen eine Karenzzeit von 18 Monaten gilt. Wir schlagen Ihnen vor, es wie die EU zu machen, und zu sagen: Die Karenzzeit beträgt 18 Monate. - Dort gibt es Erfahrungen, dort wurde das praktiziert. Diese Regelung sollten wir übernehmen. Das ist der erste Punkt unseres Änderungsantrags.\n\nZum zweiten Aspekt. Herr Özdemir - da unterscheiden wir uns von Ihnen -, die Evaluierung eines Gesetzes, für das wir so lange gebraucht haben, erachten wir nicht als Modeerscheinung. Es kann sein, dass es Fehlerquellen gibt. Diese könnte man sich nach Ablauf von zwei Jahren, also in der 19. Legislaturperiode, ansehen und dann sagen: Wir müssen da vielleicht etwas korrigieren.\n\nDiese beiden Punkte sind Inhalt unseres Änderungsantrags. Er ist sehr vernünftig. Ich werbe noch einmal dafür, ihm zu folgen. Der Einführung einer gesetzlichen Karenzzeit werden wir aber, wie gesagt, zustimmen. Vielen Dank, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nLassen Sie mich zum Schluss noch eines sagen: Heute geht jemand aus unserer PGF-Abteilung, also aus der Abteilung der Parlamentarischen Geschäftsführer, in den wohlverdienten Ruhestand. Das sind die Menschen, die da am Fernseher sitzen, die ganze Zeit für uns zur Verfügung stehen und uns beraten. Jürgen Wachsmuth, mach es gut! Vielen Dank für deine Arbeit.\"\n9120,christine-buchholz,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Lieber Niels Annen, das war echt schwach.\n\nSeit 14 Jahren ist die Bundeswehr nun im Afghanistan-Krieg. Laut der Ärzteorganisation IPPNW sind in Afghanistan seit 2001 über 200 000 Menschen getötet worden, in der Mehrzahl Zivilisten. 55 Bundeswehrsoldaten starben in diesem Einsatz. Allein der deutsche Militäreinsatz verschlang viele Milliarden Euro. Der afghanische Soldat Bakhtullah sagte kürzlich - ich zitiere aus einem Interview im Deutschlandfunk -:\n\nAls die Welt vor 14 Jahren nach Afghanistan kam, hieß es, dass sie uns den Frieden bringen. Aber es herrscht Krieg.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, der NATO-geführte Krieg in Afghanistan ist gescheitert.\n\nVor einem Jahr versprach die Bundesregierung, dass die Bundeswehr 2016 aus Afghanistan abzieht. Davon ist keine Rede mehr. Nun sagt Frau von der Leyen, es sei ein Fehler gewesen, sich überhaupt auf einen Abzugszeitpunkt festzulegen. Nein, der Fehler war, dass überhaupt jemals Bundeswehrtruppen nach Afghanistan entsandt worden sind.\n\nVor einem Jahr hieß es, bei dem neuen Afghanistan-Mandat gehe es nur noch um Ausbildung. Das Mandat sah keine Begleitung von afghanischen Truppen im Einsatz vor. Das sieht nun anders aus. Mit diesem Mandat werden deutsche Soldaten die afghanische Armee im Einsatz begleiten. Plastisch können wir uns vorstellen, wie das aussieht, beispielsweise anhand der Rückeroberung von Kunduz im Oktober. Sie nennen das Beratung; wir nennen das Beteiligung am Krieg.\n\n- Der Applaus meiner Fraktion ist absolut ausreichend.\n\nSchauen wir nach Afghanistan. Im Oktober übernahmen die Taliban kurzzeitig Kunduz. Das war ein Schock, aber kein Einzelfall. Im Laufe der letzten Woche stürmten Aufständische mitten in Kabul die spanische Botschaft. Sie griffen den Flughafen von Kandahar an und brachten einen weiteren Distrikt in Helmand unter ihre Kontrolle. Ich sage Ihnen: Frieden und Demokratie kann man nicht von außen erzwingen.\n\nDiese Verhältnisse finden ihre Erklärung auch darin, dass die Bundesregierung eine korrupte afghanische Regierung im Amt hält. In einigen Regionen haben Warlords das Sagen, die selbst nicht besser sind als die Taliban. Dementsprechend sind die Methoden, mit denen gekämpft wird. Human Rights Watch berichtete im Juni davon, dass führende afghanische Offiziere den Befehl erteilt haben, Gefangene hinzurichten statt festzuhalten. Der Oberkommandierende der Afghanischen Nationalarmee, General Schahim, hat vor dem im Norden kämpfenden 209. Armeekorps gesagt, es gebe keine Verbote mehr, was nächtliche Razzien angeht, es gebe keine Verbote mehr, was den Gebrauch der Artillerie angeht. Es kann nicht angehen, dass unter dem neuen Mandat deutsche Truppen zu Mittätern solcher Praktiken gemacht werden.\n\nDie Rückeroberung von Kunduz hat gezeigt, dass auch die amerikanischen Verbündeten Kriegsverbrechen begehen. US-Streitkräfte haben ein Krankenhaus von Ärzte ohne Grenzen angegriffen. 30 Patienten und Ärzte starben. Lieber Niels Annen, das war eben kein tragischer Unfall. Wir fordern hier eine unabhängige internationale Untersuchungskommission. Die Bundesregierung sollte sich auch dafür einsetzen und nicht nur glauben, was das Pentagon selbst aufklärt.\n\nWarum schicken Sie die Bundeswehr nach Afghanistan? Weil Sie Deutschland als militärische Führungsmacht etablieren wollen. Wenn Sie sich das Scheitern in Afghanistan eingestehen würden, würden Sie das, was Sie unter Glaubwürdigkeit verstehen, infrage stellen.\n\nAußerdem geht es Ihnen um den Einfluss Deutschlands. Reden Sie nicht drum herum; denn so ist es.\n\nDie Linke sagt: Dafür dürfen das Leben und die Gesundheit weder von Afghaninnen und Afghanen noch von deutschen Soldatinnen und Soldaten riskiert werden.\n\nDerzeit fliehen viele Menschen aus Afghanistan. Sie haben die Hoffnung auf Frieden und eine sichere Zukunft verloren. Ich habe in den letzten Wochen viel mit afghanischen Flüchtlingen hier in Deutschland gesprochen. Alle sind in Sorge, dass sie von der Regierung trotz der unsicheren Situation in Afghanistan zurückgeschoben werden. Und was sagt Innenminister de Maizière? Deutsche Soldaten würden das Land sicherer machen. Deshalb könne man erwarten, dass die Afghanen in ihrem Land bleiben. - Das ist zynisch, meine Damen und Herren.\n\nDie Linke sagt Nein zu einer Beteiligung am Endloskrieg in Afghanistan. Ziehen Sie endlich die Konsequenzen aus dem Scheitern der Bundeswehr in Afghanistan, und holen Sie die Soldatinnen und Soldaten zurück!\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n4836,rita-schwarzeluhr-sutter,\"Frau Kollegin Dr. Verlinden, die unabhängige Expertenkommission soll Erprobungsmaßnahmen im Schiefer- oder Kohleflözgestein oberhalb von 3 000 Metern wissenschaftlich begleiten und auswerten sowie hierzu und zum Stand der Technik Erfahrungsberichte zum 30. Juni eines Jahres, beginnend mit dem 30. Juni 2018, erstellen; sie wirkt aber nicht bei der Zulassung dieser Erprobungsmaßnahmen mit. Die zuständige Landesbehörde kann ausnahmsweise eine wasserrechtliche Erlaubnis für kommerzielle Fracking-Maßnahmen nur -erteilen, wenn ein positives Votum der Expertenkommission auf der Grundlage der genannten Berichte vorliegt.\n\nDamit Probebohrungen erfolgen können, muss erst einmal ein genehmigter Antrag vorliegen; das ist logisch. Bis dahin muss der Gesetzentwurf verabschiedet sein. Die Verabschiedung dieses Gesetzentwurfs wird in diesem Jahr erfolgen.\n\nIch möchte einfach noch einmal betonen, dass vor Ende 2018 kein kommerzielles Fracking stattfindet; das ist klar.\n\nHinsichtlich der Erprobungsmaßnahmen habe ich Ihnen gerade erklärt, dass das wissenschaftliche Expertengremium diese Maßnahmen begleitet und auswertet und ab 2018 einen Bericht erstellt. Wenn es zu Erprobungsmaßnahmen kommt, dann sind natürlich immer die Landesbehörden bzw. die Wasserbehörden diejenigen, die zuständig sind. Ich wiederhole: Es sind immer die Landesbehörden bzw. die Wasserbehörden zuständig. Die Zulassungsbehörden sind an das Urteil der Expertenkommission nicht gebunden. Die Empfehlung der Experten muss bei der Zulassungserteilung vorliegen. Sie wird der Zulassungsbehörde helfen, die grundsätzliche Eignung der geologischen Formation für ein normales Fracking zu beurteilen.\"\n10148,niema-movassat,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Zunächst möchte ich den namibischen Botschafter in Deutschland, Andreas Guibeb, sehr herzlich in der heutigen Debatte begrüßen. Ich freue mich, dass Sie heute dabei sind.\n\nEs geht heute um eines der dunklen Kapitel der deutschen Geschichte. Zwischen 1904 und 1908 verübten Deutsche den ersten Völkermord des 20. Jahrhunderts in der ehemaligen Kolonie Deutsch-Südwestafrika, dem heutigen Namibia. Die Opfer waren die Völker der Herero, Nama, Damara und San. Sie wurden ermordet, in Konzentrationslager gesteckt, zur brutalen Zwangsarbeit verpflichtet, oder man trieb sie mitsamt Frauen und Kinder in die Wüste und ließ sie dort verdursten.\n\nAm 4. November 1904 schrieb Generalleutnant von Trotha, der auch den Vernichtungsbefehl gegen die Herero anordnete - ich zitiere -:\n\n… Gewalt mit krassem Terrorismus und selbst mit Grausamkeit auszuüben, war und ist meine Politik. Ich vernichte die aufständischen Stämme mit Strömen von Blut und Strömen von Geld.\n\nDiese Worte waren der Auftakt für die Vernichtung von fast 100 000 Menschen. Was damals geschah, war Völkermord. Und das wurde zu lange in Deutschland verleugnet.\n\nEs hat 107 Jahre gebraucht, also bis zum letzten Jahr, damit eine deutsche Regierung endlich die damaligen Verbrechen als Völkermord brandmarkt. Das wurde wirklich höchste Zeit. Aber ich sage auch: Das reicht nicht. Es fängt hier bei uns in Deutschland an, wo es fast keinerlei Erinnerungskultur an die damaligen Verbrechen gibt. Hier in Berlin wurde Afrika 1885 durch die Kolonialmächte aufgeteilt. Hier in Berlin fiel die Entscheidung für den Völkermord. Aber kein Denkmal erinnert an all das. Es wäre wirklich Zeit, das endlich zu ändern.\n\nNun gab es ja die Bitte, dass wir unseren Antrag für heute zurückziehen; denn es fänden ja aktuell Verhandlungen zwischen der deutschen und namibischen Regierung statt. Ich möchte dazu drei Dinge feststellen:\n\nErstens. Hätten wir unseren Antrag zurückgezogen, würde es heute hier keine Debatte geben. Das wäre gegenüber den Nachfahren der Opfer, die einfordern, dass der Bundestag sich mit den Verbrechen von damals beschäftigt, respektlos.\n\nZweitens. Ein Rückzug unseres Antrags wäre nur in Betracht gekommen, wenn es einen gemeinsamen Antrag aller vier Fraktionen im Bundestag gegeben hätte. Die Koalition hatte monatelang Zeit, entsprechende Schritte zu machen. Sie haben aber nicht einmal einen eigenen Antrag vorgelegt. Ich muss sagen: Das, was der Kollege Rebmann gerade in seiner Rede gesagt hat, wäre eine Grundlage für einen gemeinsamen Antrag.\n\nDrittens, der wichtigste Punkt. Ja, die Verhandlungen zwischen beiden Regierungen laufen. Aber es sind Geheimverhandlungen, ohne Transparenz, ohne Zwischenergebnisse. Es geht hier aber um das Thema Versöhnung, nicht um eine Kleinigkeit. Und wesentliche Fragen müssen im Deutschen Bundestag entschieden werden; das ist ein Grundsatz der Demokratie. Deshalb sage ich: Es ist gut, dass die Bundesregierung und die namibische Regierung endlich miteinander über den damaligen Völkermord reden. Besser wäre es, die Bundesregierung würde das auf der Grundlage eines klaren Mandats des Bundestages tun.\n\nIn Namibia gibt es schon seit 2006 einen entsprechenden einstimmigen Beschluss der Nationalversammlung. Der spricht von Völkermord und fordert Reparationen und Dreiparteiengespräche der Regierungen unter Einschluss der Opfergruppen. Die Realität aber ist: Die Verhandlungen finden unter völligem Ausschluss der Opferverbände der Herero und Nama statt. Wie soll es Versöhnung geben, ohne dass die Nachfahren der Opfer einbezogen werden? Die gehören natürlich an den Verhandlungstisch.\n\nUm was geht es inhaltlich? Deutschland hat sich zum einen bis heute nicht für diesen Völkermord entschuldigt. Das ist seit Jahrzehnten ein Schlag in das Gesicht der Menschen in Namibia. Es braucht endlich einen klaren Beschluss des Bundestages dazu und eine würdige Geste der Entschuldigung durch die Bundesregierung in Namibia.\n\nZum anderen geht es um Wiedergutmachung, ein Thema, das die Bundesregierung am liebsten ignorieren würde. Der damalige Völkermord und die Enteignungen waren nicht nur ein menschliches, sondern auch ein wirtschaftliches Desaster. Noch immer befinden sich 80 Prozent des Farmlandes in Namibia in weißer Hand. Den Herero und Nama wurde damals alles genommen. Darunter leiden sie bis heute. Sie gehören zum ärmsten Teil der Bevölkerung in Namibia. Deshalb schlagen wir Linke einen Strukturfonds zum Ausgleich des Unrechts vor.\n\nLassen Sie mich klar sagen: Es kann keinen Schlussstrich geben. Die damalige rassistische Ideologie, die zum Völkermord führte, steckt auch heute noch tief in vielen Köpfen der Nachfahren der Täter. Die Wahlergebnisse vom letzten Sonntag haben zu deutlich Bertolt Brechts prophetische Worte bestätigt: „Der Schoß ist fruchtbar noch, aus dem das kroch!“\n\nAm 21. März feiert Namibia seinen Unabhängigkeitstag. Es ist zugleich der Internationale Tag gegen Rassismus. Es ist die richtige Zeit, endlich konkrete Versöhnungsschritte zu gehen. Auch deshalb appelliere ich, dass Sie unserem Antrag zustimmen.\n\nDanke für die Aufmerksamkeit.\n\nDanke, Herr Präsident. - Frau Motschmann, ich war von Ihrer Rede zunächst sehr positiv überrascht, vor allem davon, was Sie am Anfang gesagt haben.\n\nSie sagen: Diese Debatte verdient Würde und keinen parteitaktischen Streit. - Aber Sie sind doch diejenige gewesen, die in dieser Debatte als Erste den parteitaktischen Streit aufgemacht hat. Ich habe nichts dazu gesagt, Kollege Rebmann hat nichts dazu gesagt, sondern Sie waren das.\n\nSie fragen, wo Frau Wagenknecht ist. Ich frage Sie: Wo ist Herr Kauder? Wo ist Herr Steinmeier? Wo sind die Verantwortlichen? Diese Frage gebe ich gerne an Sie zurück.\n\nIm Übrigen möchte ich sagen: Der Botschafter hat sich in der Tat einen gemeinsamen Antrag gewünscht. Ich habe Sie gerade so verstanden - ich denke, die anderen Kolleginnen und Kollegen auch -, dass Sie bereit sind, mit uns einen gemeinsamen Antrag vorzulegen. Ich nehme Sie da gerne beim Wort. Ich weiß ja, dass die CDU/CSU sonst große Probleme hat, gemeinsam mit der Linken Anträge vorzulegen. Unsere Türen sind offen. Wir freuen uns, mit Ihnen einen gemeinsamen Antrag auszuarbeiten.\n\nIch denke, Sie haben meiner Rede zugehört. Ich habe klar gesagt: Hätten wir unseren Antrag heute zurückgezogen, dann gäbe es hier keine Debatte. - Im Brief des Botschafters steht ausdrücklich, dass die Debatte hier im Deutschen Bundestag in Namibia sehr genau verfolgt wird. Das heißt, auch er und die namibische Regierung wünschen sich die Debatte heute hier im Deutschen Bundestag. Dem sind wir nachgekommen. Anders wäre es nicht gegangen. Das liegt auch an Ihnen; denn Sie haben keinen Antrag vorgelegt.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n1086,nina-scheer,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Energiewende ist eine grenzüberschreitende Aufgabe. Insofern ist, wie alle Vorredner bereits verdeutlicht haben, das Thema des Grünen-Antrags „Die Energiewende europäisch verankern“ richtig und wichtig. Bei der Betrachtung, wie sich dies in und für Europa vollzieht, sollte auch einbezogen werden, welche Mechanismen in der Vergangenheit wie gewirkt haben.\n\nDie Thematik verlangt von uns, das Verhältnis zwischen EU-Vorgaben und nationalen Regelungen grundlegend und sinnvoll auszutarieren und die auf europäischer Ebene zu verankernden Regelungsinhalte umfassender und genauer zu benennen. Hierzu zählt auch, eine europaweite Koordinierung der Best-Practice-Erfahrungen vorzunehmen, statt Europa nur als eine Harmonisierung „von oben“ zu begreifen. Der auf Grundlage der Zieltrias für Klimaschutz, erneuerbare Energien und Energieeffizienz etablierte Systemwettbewerb hat sich mehr als bewährt und sollte nicht grundlos aufgegeben werden.\n\nMit dem EEG und der Vorrangregelung für erneuerbare Energien hat Deutschland bei einigen Erneuerbare-Energien-Trägern, insbesondere bei Wind-Onshore, Photovoltaik, aber auch bei Biogastechnologie und Wasserkraft, entscheidend zur technologischen Weiterentwicklung beigetragen, sodass diese Technologien nun an der Schwelle zum wirtschaftlichen Durchbruch stehen. Allein hierdurch trägt Deutschland schon zu einer europäischen und internationalen Energiewende bei. Um ein effektives Ineinandergreifen zwischen Europäischer Union und nationaler Ebene für die Energiewende zu gewährleisten, hat es sich bewährt, auf der europäischen Ebene die gemeinsame Richtung für die Energie- und Klimapolitik vorzugeben, aber die jeweilige Ausgestaltung den Mitgliedstaaten zu überlassen, sowohl mit Blick auf die sektorale Aufteilung als auch auf die Wahl der Mittel. Dies entspricht auch den Erfordernissen des Vertrags von Lissabon und dem dort festgeschriebenen Subsidiaritätsprinzip. Die Notwendigkeit, das hiermit benannte Verhältnis zwischen EU-Vorgaben und mitgliedstaatlichem Handeln sinnvoll auszutarieren, möchte ich an folgenden Beispielen kurz benennen.\n\nMithilfe des Entwurfs der Beihilfeleitlinien, der unter anderem Ausschreibungen für erneuerbare Energien vorsieht, versucht die Wettbewerbsdirektion derzeit, über einen Beihilferahmen eine Art EU-Förderpolitik für erneuerbare Energien zu etablieren. Dies ist weder systematisch noch politisch akzeptabel und kann mit Blick auf das Subsidiaritätsprinzip auch rechtlich nicht zulässig sein. Insofern, Herr Pfeiffer, möchte ich an dieser Stelle kurz noch einmal klarstellen: Wenn unser Bundeswirtschafts- und -energieminister sich derzeit dafür einsetzt, im Kontext der Besonderen Ausgleichsregelung mit der EU-Kommission zu einer Einigung zu gelangen, dann bedeutet das keineswegs, dass an dieser Stelle Souveränitäts- und Gestaltungshoheiten abgegeben werden sollen und hiermit eine Harmonisierung vorgenommen wird. Diese ist eben nicht Kern des Auftrages, den er dort wahrnimmt.\n\nAm Beispiel des Energiebinnenmarktes möchte ich auch noch auf etwas anderes hinweisen: In einem EU-Energiebinnenmarkt können mittels einer verstärkten Vernetzung der Energie- und Strommärkte und durch einen stärkeren Austausch mit den Nachbarstaaten die Kosten für den Umbau unseres Stromsystems deutlich gesenkt werden. Mit einer größeren Verteilung gerade der fluktuierenden erneuerbaren Energien wird die Netz- und Systemintegration erleichtert, da es sowohl bei der Prognose als auch bei der Bereitstellung von Ergänzungskraftwerken zu Ausgleichseffekten kommt. Dieser zutreffende Umstand wird aber leider häufig - fehlgeleitet - als Argument für zentrale Versorgungsszenarien angeführt.\n\nAn dieser Stelle an meinen Koalitionspartner doch auch die leise Kritik an den von Ihnen, Herr Bareiß, angeführten Szenarien. Dass es effizienter ist, Photovoltaik insbesondere in Spanien auszubauen mit einem Minus hierzulande - so habe ich Sie jedenfalls verstanden -, wage ich doch zu bezweifeln.\n\nRichtigerweise funktionieren die genannten Ausgleichseffekte einer verstärkten Vernetzung aber nur bei einer dezentralen Strom- und Energieversorgung. Das habe ich mit meiner Kritik gerade schon angemerkt. Der Großteil der Strom- und Energiebereitstellung erfolgt nämlich in Regionen, die damit jeweilig die Potenziale für einen gegenseitigen Austausch vorhalten können. Dieser erfolgt zwischen den Regionen. Folglich muss die Möglichkeit zur dezentralen Steuerung für den Ausbau erneuerbarer Energien in den Händen der Mitgliedstaaten liegen. Weil es bei zeitweiligen Stromüberschüssen zu nicht geplanten Übertragungen in benachbarte Stromsysteme kommt - das sind die sogenannten Ringflüsse über Polen und Tschechien bis nach Süddeutschland -, gibt es vonseiten der EU-Kommission derzeit Erwägungen, diesem Umstand in Form einer Abschaffung der einheitlichen Preiszone Deutschland/Österreich Rechnung zu tragen. Damit gäbe es innerhalb Deutschlands unterschiedliche Preiszonen und damit unterschiedliche Großhandelspreise.\n\nEine effektivere Antwort auf die genannte Problematik, die gleichzeitig einen kosteneffizienten Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien und damit auch eine entsprechende Auslegung der Erneuerbare-Energien-Anlagen gewährleisten würde, wäre die Einführung einer sogenannten Generator- oder G-Komponente, so wie sie auch der Koalitionsvertrag vorsieht. Danach würden sich alle zukünftigen Erzeuger, auch die von erneuerbaren Energien, an den von ihnen mit verursachten Netzausbaukosten beteiligen. Dies vermittelt ein Allokationssignal für die optimale Standortwahl mit den geringsten Gesamtsystemkosten. Die Wahl solcher Instrumente setzt aber voraus, dass die Handlungsoption zur Wahl der besten Mittel für Mitgliedstaaten oder Regionen erhalten bleibt und nicht einzelne Instrumente EU-weit vorgegeben werden; denn das würde der Möglichkeit zur Wahl entgegenstehen.\n\nEin weiterer wichtiger Punkt ist, dass aufgrund des zunehmenden Anteils erneuerbarer Energien die Regeln für die Ausgestaltung von Ausgleichsenergiesystemen und der Netzentgeltstruktur angeglichen werden müssen. Bei der Ausgestaltung dieser Netzkodizes im Rahmen der europäischen Verankerung der Energiewende muss darauf geachtet werden, dass der Umstieg auf erneuerbare Energien nicht erschwert bzw. verteuert wird.\n\nDem muss man sich insbesondere bei der Bundesnetzagentur - damit möchte ich auch meine Kollegen im Beirat der Bundesnetzagentur ansprechen - widmen.\n\nDie Energiewende europäisch verankern heißt also - das sage ich abschließend und zusammenfassend -, das Augenmerk stärker auf die Aufteilung der Verantwortlichkeiten auf den verschiedenen Ebenen zu lenken, auf der europäischen und der nationalstaatlichen Ebene, und den mit der Energiewende veranlassten Systemwandel vorzunehmen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n13241,manfred-zollmer,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich glaube, dass es aktuell sicherlich wichtigere Aspekte des Themas Staatsinsolvenz als den Aspekt der sogenannten Geierfonds und ihres Agierens in der Staatsschuldenkrise von Argentinien gibt, den die Grünen jetzt in ihrem Antrag aufgegriffen haben. Denn Argentinien hat sich mit diesen Fonds inzwischen geeinigt: Im März dieses Jahres haben das Abgeordnetenhaus und der Senat Argentiniens einer Vereinbarung zwischen der Regierung und den Anleiheinvestoren mit großer Mehrheit zugestimmt. Argentinien hat im Gegenzug 4,65 Milliarden US-Dollar an die Gläubigerhedgefonds ausgezahlt und dem Land damit den Weg zurück an den Kapitalmarkt geebnet. Dies ist im Übrigen - das muss man einfach sagen - ein großer Erfolg für den neuen Staatspräsidenten Macri, und es hat die argentinische Wirtschaft entsprechend befördert. Das Elendsbild, das Sie, Herr Movassat, hier gezeichnet haben, trifft die Realität in Argentinien nicht.\n\nSchauen wir uns den Fall Argentinien aber mal genauer an. Hintergrund ist ein juristischer Konflikt Argentiniens mit einem New Yorker Hedgefonds. Infolge der Insolvenz des Landes im Dezember 2001 führte die Regierung in Buenos Aires in den Jahren 2005 und 2010 große Umschuldungsrunden durch. Herr Movassat, Argentinien war erst pleite und hat dann die Umschuldungen vorgenommen. Ich glaube, das muss man einmal in aller Deutlichkeit sagen. Dann haben Hedgefonds argentinische Schuldtitel auf dem Sekundärmarkt zu günstigen Konditionen aufgekauft und vor einem US-Gericht Argentinien verklagt, um zum vollen Wert entschädigt zu werden - das ist in der Tat der Sachverhalt -, und ein US-Gericht hat die Regierung in Buenos Aires dazu verurteilt, insgesamt vier Hedgefonds den Nennwert auszuzahlen.\n\nJetzt kann man ja fragen: Warum läuft das Ganze vor einem amerikanischen Gericht? Dazu muss man wissen, dass die argentinische Regierung die entsprechenden Bonds ganz bewusst unter amerikanischem Recht in Dollar aufgenommen hat. Insofern war das amerikanische Gericht zuständig.\n\nIch will aber auch deutlich machen, dass der Bundesgerichtshof deutschen Anlegern, die gegen diese Umschuldungsstrategie geklagt haben, gegenüber Argentinien recht gegeben hat. Der BGH hat Folgendes formuliert: Kein völkerrechtlicher Grundsatz berechtige ein Land dazu, die Zahlung fälliger Schulden wegen eines finanziellen Staatsnotstandes oder einer freiwilligen Umschuldung der Gläubigermehrheit zeitweise zu verweigern.\n\nAuch aus der Weltfinanzmarktkrise und der Rettung Griechenlands sei eine derartige völkerrechtliche Regel nicht entstanden.\n\nMan muss jetzt sehen: Der argentinische Staatspräsident Macri hat die politische Strategie Argentiniens geändert. Die Staatspräsidentin Kirchner hatte sich geweigert, zu verhandeln; Macri hat verhandelt. Die Verhandlungen mit den Hedgefonds haben dazu geführt, dass nur 75 Prozent der ursprünglich geforderten Summe von Argentinien gezahlt werden mussten. Ich denke, auch das gehört zum Gesamtbild dazu, wenn man diesen Fall darstellt.\n\nEs ist im Prinzip das geschehen, was Sie in Ihrem Antrag fordern: den Rückzahlungsanspruch eines Fonds auf dem Verhandlungswege zu finden. Herr Macri hat verhandelt, und Frau Kirchner hatte damals nicht verhandelt. Das Ergebnis der Verhandlungen war, dass Argentinien wieder Zugang zum Kapitalmarkt gefunden hat.\n\nHerr Movassat, auch das muss man in aller Deutlichkeit sagen: Argentinien ist kein armes Land; Argentinien ist ein reiches Land. - Aber das nur am Rande.\n\nJetzt fordern die Grünen in ihrem Antrag, der Deutsche Bundestag möge sich doch bitte an der Gesetzgebung von Belgien und Großbritannien orientieren und einen Gesetzentwurf vorlegen, der Staaten vor illegitimen Rückzahlungsansprüchen wirksam schützt. Doch ein solcher Gesetzentwurf geht vollständig ins Leere.\n\nGut gemeint bedeutet leider nicht gut gemacht. Ich will das begründen, indem ich wörtlich zitiere, was in der Begründung Ihres Antrages steht:\n\nDie Bundesrepublik Deutschland ist - bislang - kein bedeutender Finanzplatz,\n\nauf dem die hier beschriebenen Geier-Fonds aktiv sind, weder als Ort, an dem entsprechende Klagen geführt werden, noch als Sitz von entsprechenden Investmentgesellschaften.\n\nDas steht wörtlich so in Ihrem Antrag. Diese Feststellung ist richtig. Aber was wollen Sie dann mit einem deutschen Gesetz, das, wie Sie selbst beschreiben, völlig wirkungslos wäre? Das wäre reine Symbolpolitik.\n\nEin solches Antigeiergesetz wäre eine konzeptionelle Belanglosigkeit.\n\nEin Großteil der Staatsanleihen und weiterer Wertpapiere werden unter der Gerichtsbarkeit der großen internationalen Finanzplätze USA und Großbritannien begeben. Ein Verfahren, welches diese Akteure nicht miteinbezieht, wird absolut wirkungslos bleiben.\n\nDann haben Sie gefordert, man möge im Rahmen der G 7, der G 20, des Pariser Clubs und der OECD für entsprechende Regelungen werben. Das halte ich für eine richtige Forderung. Das sollte in der Tat geschehen. Aber eine Verständigung kann es nur geben, wenn es einen fairen und transparenten Prozess unter Einbeziehung der angesprochenen Institutionen und Gläubiger gibt. Ein nationales Verbotsgesetz hilft überhaupt nicht.\n\nDeshalb unterstützen wir die IWF-Empfehlungen zu den sogenannten Collective Action Clauses. Diese Umschuldungsklauseln in Staatsanleihen müssen weiterentwickelt werden. Dieser Prozess muss vorangetrieben werden. Nach der Staatsinsolvenz Argentiniens ist das entsprechend geschehen.\n\nDas Anliegen ist es, alle Gläubiger auf die Anerkennung einer Verhandlungslösung zu verpflichten, die mit bestimmten, vorher vertraglich festgelegten Mehrheiten gefunden wurde. Dann wissen die Geldgeber, worauf sie sich einlassen. Das ist ein faires und transparentes Verfahren. Das verhindert, dass die sogenannten Geierfonds überhaupt aktiv werden können. Sie haben so kein Interesse mehr, sich spekulativ mit Schuldtiteln zu versorgen, und das Problem Geierfonds wäre auf diesem Wege gelöst. Staatliche Schuldenkrisen können dann kontrolliert abgewickelt werden.\n\nDie Bundesregierung bzw. wir als Parlament setzen uns deshalb beim IWF dafür ein, die Arbeiten in diesem Bereich intensiv fortzusetzen. Aber das braucht eine enge Beteiligung von IWF und Pariser Club und auch eine Einbeziehung der Gläubiger. Ohne ein solches Vorgehen können wir keinen Fortschritt erreichen.\n\nIch will noch einen letzten Punkt ansprechen, -\n\n- und das ist das Thema Schuldenprävention. Dieses Thema müssen wir im Auge behalten. Wir müssen die Gesamtproblematik Staatsschuldenkrise sehen. Wir brauchen vernünftige Regeln und Verfahren, die mit den relevanten Beteiligten entwickelt werden müssen. Was wir nicht brauchen, ist eine reine Symbolpolitik.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n5995,hermann-grohe,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen! Liebe Kol-legen! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Lassen Sie mich mit einigen Schlagzeilen dieser Woche beginnen. Der Spiegel eröffnet die Woche mit dem Demografietitel „Deutschland, deine Zukunft 2030“. Vorgestern veröffentlicht die DAK eine Stu-die über Stress und Doping am Arbeitsplatz. Und wir stellen fest, dass in Deutschland seit dieser Woche 1 000 Menschen an Masern erkrankt sind. Das alles sind Schlagzeilen dieser Woche, alles Themen, die damit zu tun haben, was wir jetzt be-raten, nämlich den Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Stärkung der Gesundheitsförderung und der Prä-vention, kurz: den Entwurf eines Präventionsge-setzes. Ich bin froh, dass wir nach einer Reihe von Anläufen in der Vergangenheit jetzt darüber reden. Deshalb stehen wir jetzt an der Wegmarke, um ein solches Gesetz gemeinsam zu erarbeiten und auf den Weg zu bringen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen, in einer Ge-sellschaft des längeren Lebens, die zugleich durch einen Wandel der Lebensstile und der Ar-beitswelt gekennzeichnet ist, sind gezielte Ge-sundheitsförderung und Prävention von entschei-dender Bedeutung. Sie tragen dazu bei, dass Krankheiten erst gar nicht entstehen oder der Krankheitsverlauf positiv beeinflusst werden kann, dass Menschen gesund älter werden und die Le-bensqualität steigt. Wir haben dank guter Lebens- und Arbeitsbedingungen, dank einer sehr guten gesundheitlichen Versorgung in diesem Land und dank des medizinisch-technischen Fortschritts heute gute Chancen, ein höheres Lebensalter zu erreichen als die Generationen vor uns. 81 Jahre ist aktuell die durchschnittliche Lebenserwartung in Deutschland, mit der guten Tendenz: weiter steigend. Jeder von uns wünscht sich auch im hohen Lebensalter gute Gesundheit. Die erfreuliche Nachricht ist: Wir selbst können dazu beitragen, dass aus der Hoffnung auf ein gesun-des Leben auch Wirklichkeit werden kann.\n\nDamit bin ich bei den Vorteilen einer umfassen-den Gesundheitsförderung. Drei Punkte möchte ich benennen: Prävention unterstützt die Gesund-heit, steigert die Lebensqualität und spart Ge-sundheitskosten. Es ist also eine Win-win-Situation für alle Beteiligten.\n\nNun kann man gesundheitsbewusste Lebenssti-le nicht einfach anordnen, wie man vielleicht Alko-holgrenzen oder Geschwindigkeitsbegrenzungen im Straßenverkehr anordnen kann. Wir können aber einen Rahmen schaffen, der es den Men-schen erleichtert, sich dieses Themas anzuneh-men, der sie motiviert, etwas für die eigene Ge-sundheit zu tun. Genau diesen Weg schlagen wir mit dem Präventionsgesetz ein.\n\nPrävention ist keine Frage des Alters. Sie be-ginnt im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes in den Kin-derschuhen und sollte auf dem ganzen Lebensweg ernst genommen und als Anliegen betrachtet wer-den. Ich erwähnte bereits eingangs den aktuellen Masernausbruch. Von Windpocken und Grippe-welle will ich in diesem Zusammenhang gar nicht sprechen. Allein dieser Masernausbruch muss für uns ein Aufbruchsignal sein, die Impfquoten in Deutschland wieder zu erhöhen, meine Damen, meine Herren.\n\nDeshalb werden wir die Überprüfung und Beratung im Hinblick auf den Impfstatus, den eigenen und den der Kinder, zu einer wesentlichen Maßnahme dieses Gesetzes machen. Denn Schutzimpfungen gehören zu den wirksamsten präventiven Maß-nahmen gegen Infektionskrankheiten.\n\nEs besteht außerdem Handlungsbedarf im Be-reich der Kleinkinderimpfungen, die eben, anders als vom Robert-Koch-Institut empfohlen, häufig nicht bis zur Voll-endung des zweiten Lebensjah-res erfolgen. Vor der erstmaligen Aufnahme in ei-ne Kita sollen Sorgeberechtigte deshalb in Zukunft umfassend über den Impfstatus beraten werden. Dies stärkt Kinder und Eltern im Sinne einer guten Gesundheitsvorsorge. Ich sage sehr deutlich: Ich bin dazu bereit, auch im Rahmen des anstehenden parlamentarischen Verfahrens über die Frage zu diskutieren, ob die hier vorgesehenen Schritte ausreichen oder wir weitere Schritte zur Durch-impfung unserer Bevölkerung gehen müssen. Wir sind es unserer Bevölkerung, die wir schützen wollen, schuldig, dies sachlich und vorbehaltlos zu diskutieren.\n\nPrävention und Gesundheitsförderung tragen dazu bei, Wohlbefinden, Mobilität und Lebensqua-lität für Menschen jeden Alters und aller sozialen Schichten zu erhalten und zu verbessern. Sie dür-fen sich also nicht nur an diejenigen richten, die bereits fit sind; alle müssen mitgenommen wer-den.\n\nIch möchte das Thema Gesundheitsvorsorge wahrlich nicht primär unter wirtschaftlichen Ge-sichtspunkten betrachten. Aber in einer großen Volkswirtschaft wie der unsrigen, die zudem unter einem wachsenden Fachkräftemangel leidet und in der länger und flexibler gearbeitet wird, ist auch unter ökonomischen Gesichtspunkten eine Ver-stärkung der Anstrengungen zur Gesunderhaltung der Erwerbstätigen bis zum Erreichen des Ren-tenalters gefragt.\n\nDie in dieser Woche präsentierte Studie der DAK hat noch einmal unterstrichen, wie wichtig Gesundheit am Arbeitsplatz ist. Es ist weder im Interesse der Arbeitnehmer noch im Interesse der Arbeitgeber noch im Interesse des Gesundheits-wesens, dass sich die Belegschaft bis zum Äu-ßersten dopt, um durchzuhalten oder neue Höchstleistungen am Arbeitsplatz zu erbringen. Dies hat nur Verlierer zur Folge. Dem wollen wir entgegenwirken.\n\nPrävention ist gerade in einer alternden Gesell-schaft mit vielen Mehrfacherkrankungen oder chronischen Erkrankungen von besonderer Be-deutung; denn viele der in diesem Zusammenhang zu nennenden Krankheiten - Diabetes, Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen, Depressionen, Erkran-kungen des Bewegungsapparats - hängen eben auch mit Fragen des Lebensstils, einer ausrei-chenden Bewegung, einer angemessenen, gesun-den Ernährung zusammen. Deswegen ist es wich-tig, hier die Weichen dafür zu stellen, dass Men-schen ihnen rechtzeitig entgegenwirken.\n\nWir wissen aus Erhebungen der Berliner Al-tersstudie, dass deutschlandweit ungefähr 46 Pro-zent der Menschen über 70 unter Bluthochdruck leiden. Wir wissen zugleich, dass eine gesunde Ernährung und ausreichend Bewegung dem ent-gegenwirken können.\n\nWas bedeuten dieses klare Bekenntnis und der Aufruf zu wirksamer Prävention, der sich an alle richtet, nun für unseren Gesetzentwurf? Mit dem Gesetzentwurf sollen die Gesundheitsförderung und Prävention insbesondere in Lebenswelten wie Kita, Schule, Arbeitsplatz oder Pflegeheim ge-stärkt und durch gemeinsame Anstrengungen al-ler Beteiligten gefördert werden. Da, wo Men-schen leben, lernen, arbeiten, sollen sie erreicht werden. Deswegen werden wir die Angebote in den Lebenswelten stärken, indem das entspre-chende finanzielle En-gagement der Krankenkas-sen deutlich erhöht wird.\n\nZudem erhalten erstmals die Pflegekassen ei-nen ausdrücklichen spezifischen Präventionsauf-trag für die Bereiche der stationären Altenpflege, die aber beispielsweise auch Tagespflegeeinrich-tungen umfassen. Über 500 Millionen Euro werden damit zukünftig aus den Krankenversicherungen und den Pflegekassen zur Verfügung stehen. Wir wollen, dass diese Aktivitäten besser koordiniert werden, auch mit dem, was andere, beispielswei-se die Kommunen, in diesen Bereichen tun, und wir wollen diese Maßnahmen weiter qualifizieren. Deshalb soll die Bundeszentrale für gesundheitli-che Aufklärung die Krankenkassen mit der Ent-wicklung von kassenübergreifenden Konzepten, gerade im Hinblick auf Chancengleichheit, Verfah-ren zur Qualitätssicherung sowie zur Evaluation, unterstützen.\n\nWir werden bei den Jugenduntersuchungen wie bei den Vorsorgeuntersuchungen insgesamt den Präventions-aspekt verstärken, indem diese nicht allein krankheitsbezogen ausgerichtet sind, son-dern auch risikobezogen und daher rechtzeitig auf die Gefahren etwa durch Über-gewicht, Bewe-gungsmangel, übermäßigen Alkoholkonsum, zu starken Stress und anderes eingegangen wird.\n\nEin besonderes Anliegen ist es mir, in der be-trieblichen Gesundheitsförderung deutlich voran-zukommen und dabei auch die kleinen und mittel-ständischen Betriebe mitzunehmen. Wir wissen aus einer Fülle von Beispielen auch von dem be-triebswirtschaftlichen Nutzen kluger Maßnahmen betrieblicher Gesundheitsförderung, die den Ar-beitsalltag, gerade auch in größeren Betrieben, prägen.\n\nWir wollen es den kleinen und mittleren Betrie-ben durch die Bündelung von Beratungstätigkeit, aber auch durch die Zusammenarbeit mit Hand-werks- sowie Industrie- und Handelskammern er-leichtern, dass betriebliche Gesundheitsförderung auch in kleinen und mittelständischen Betrieben zu einem wichtigen Merkmal der Arbeitsplatzgestal-tung wird. Dies dient dem Vermeiden von Fehlzei-ten und schafft attraktive Arbeitsplätze in Zeiten von Fachkräftemangel. Deshalb soll dies weiter gefördert werden.\n\nDabei führen wir nicht nur das zusammen, was die gesetzlichen Krankenversicherungen in die-sem Bereich tun, sondern auch die Träger der ge-setzlichen Rentenversicherung sowie der gesetz-lichen Unfallversicherung werden einbezogen. Ebenso ist es uns wichtig, in der Umsetzung der nationalen Präventionsstrategie in eine Landes-rahmenvereinbarung - Kernstück ist die Ermitt-lung regionaler Präventionsbedarfe und eine an-gemessene Beantwortung - auch alle weiteren Akteure einzubeziehen: Land, kommunale Spit-zenverbände usw. Dem guten Beispiel der UPD folgend, wollen wir in diesem Zusammenhang ein-laden, und ich erwarte eine entsprechende Bereit-schaft zur Mitwirkung - auch der privaten Kran-ken- und Pflegeversicherung.\n\nMit dem Ihnen heute vorliegenden Präventions-gesetz mit seinen vielfältigen Maßnahmen schaf-fen wir einen wichtigen Baustein, wenn es darum geht, die Gesundheitschancen für alle Menschen in diesem Land zu erhöhen. Deshalb freue ich mich auf die vor uns liegenden parlamentarischen Beratungen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n2917,jorg-hellmuth,\"Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Erlauben Sie mir, dass ich an dieser Stelle als gelernter DDR-Bürger von einigen ganz persönlichen Erfahrungen mit dem System der Staatssicherheit bzw. dem Umgang mit dem Stasi-Unterlagen-Gesetz erzähle.\n\nEs war im Sommer 1987, als ich von meinem Onkel aus Dortmund eine Einladung zum Besuch einer Tante bekam; es war, glaube ich, der 86. Geburtstag. Ich bin dann, wie es üblich war, zum Volkspolizei-Kreisamt gegangen und habe die Formalitäten erledigt. Ich hatte mit niemandem im Ort darüber gesprochen. Zwei Tage später sprach mich ein Arbeitskollege darauf an, dass ich zum 86. Geburtstag fahren wollte. - Das, meine Damen und Herren, war die erste Begegnung mit dem Staats-sicherheitssystem. Die Staatssicherheit war eben nicht nur in der Normannenstraße oder in Leipzig; sie war überall, fast in jedem Dorf. - Interessant an dieser Episode ist noch: Ich durfte fahren, aber meine Geschwister, die einige Landkreise weiter südlich wohnten, durften nicht fahren. Es war also Willkür.\n\nEinige Jahre später - es war nach der Wende; ich war mittlerweile in kommunalpolitischer Verantwortung - habe ich ein Paket mit Stasiunterlagen entgegennehmen müssen. Bei Auswertung dieser Unterlagen stellte sich heraus: Wir mussten über 20 Mitarbeiter entlassen. Meine Damen und Herren, zum damaligen Zeitpunkt habe ich noch etwas mit dem Stasi-Unterlagen-Gesetz gehadert. Natürlich sind wir damals angetreten, dieses Land aufzubauen; natürlich haben wir unseren Wählern auch versprochen, aufzuarbeiten. Aber wir hatten keinerlei Erfahrung: Wie sollte das denn geschehen? Wie sollte man die Zumutbarkeit feststellen?\n\nAuch unsere Berater aus den alten Bundesländern konnten uns da nicht allzu hilfreich zur Seite stehen. Unzählige Gespräche folgten, dramatische Szenen haben sich abgespielt, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren. Ich kann Ihnen sagen: Der Aufbau insbesondere in den 90er-Jahren war schwierig; aber die Aufarbeitung dieses Teils der Geschichte war ungleich schwieriger.\n\nWieder einige Jahre später - wir dachten, die Aufarbeitung wäre im Wesentlichen abgeschlossen - bekam ich noch einmal einen Bescheid zugesandt; es war ein Einzelbescheid. Der betreffende Mitarbeiter war als Hausmeister angestellt, wie schon vor der Wende. Wir dachten zuerst: Der Fall ist eindeutig. Es gab zahlreiche Berichte über kleinere Geldprämien. Aber dann wurde uns irgendwie klar: Irgendetwas stimmt hier nicht.\n\nAls wir den Mitarbeiter zum Gespräch geholt haben, hat er uns unter Tränen geschildert, was sich seinerzeit abgespielt hat. Er hatte - das nur am Rande - eine schwierige Kindheit und Jugend. Er war Hausmeister einer Kegelbahn, teilweise hat er dort übernachtet. Dort haben die hauptamtlichen Mitarbeiter der Dienststelle vor Ort regelmäßig ihre Kegelabende durchgeführt. Dieser Hausmeister bekam dann als Entschädigung ein paar Mark zugesteckt. Um das zu dokumentieren bzw. zu verrechnen, haben die hauptamtlichen Mitarbeiter die Berichte selbst geschrieben und ihn nur unterschreiben lassen. Meine Damen und Herren, so pervers war dieses System.\n\nErst zu diesem Zeitpunkt wurde mir vollends bewusst, wie wichtig das Instrument Stasi-Unterlagen-Gesetz für die tatsächliche Aufarbeitung in unserem demokratischen Rechtsstaat ist. Nach mehreren Gesprächen und nochmaliger Recherche in dem Fall des Hausmeisters haben wir dann eine Entscheidung getroffen. Ich kann Ihnen sagen: Er arbeitet heute noch als Hausmeister in dieser Behörde.\n\nDie Einsetzung einer Expertenkommission ist genau der richtige Weg. Wir können zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt noch keinen Schlussstrich ziehen. Möge die Expertenkommission uns entsprechende Hinweise geben, die uns hinterher in die Lage versetzen, die Weichen zu stellen für die hoffentlich letzte Etappe der Aufarbeitung dieses düsteren Kapitels unserer Geschichte. Das sind wir den Opfern schuldig. Ich bitte um Zustimmung zu diesem Antrag.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n1722,karl-heinz-brunner,\"Sehr verehrter Herr Präsident! Frau Bundesminister von der Leyen! Meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ist es nicht bittere Ironie der Geschichte, wenn Ban Ki-moon, der Generalsekretär der Vereinten Nationen, auf dem Weg zum Tag des Gedenkens an die Opfer des Genozids in Ruanda in der Zentralafrikanischen Republik haltmachen muss, um die dortigen Konfliktparteien eindringlich zu ermahnen? Er sagte:\n\nWiederholen Sie nicht die Fehler der Vergangenheit, ziehen Sie die Lehren daraus.\n\nIhnen, Kollegin Buchholz, will ich sagen: Wiederholen Sie nicht die Fehler der Vergangenheit, ziehen Sie die Lehren daraus. - Sie haben noch bis zum Ende dieser Debatte, bis zur namentlichen Abstimmung, Zeit, den richtigen Weg zu finden.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, das vor wenigen Tagen auch im Hohen Hause beschworene Credo „Nie wieder Ruanda! - Nie wieder Völkermord!“ droht ausgerechnet im Jahr der Erinnerung, dem Jahr der Mahnung, zu einer Farce zu werden. Ethnisch-religiöse Säuberungen, Massenmorde ohne Sinn und Verstand sind in der Zentralafrikanischen Republik traurige Realität. Bewaffnete Truppen, nein, Horden von Christen und Muslimen stehen sich mit nur dem einen Ziel gegenüber, die jeweils anderen zu vernichten. Unaussprechliche Gräueltaten, bei denen ohne Grund in Menschenmengen geschossen wird, wodurch jene getroffen werden, die sich nicht wehren, die nicht um ihr Leben laufen können, die schutzlos sind: Kinder, Alte, Behinderte, Frauen, Schwangere.\n\nKolleginnen und Kollegen, ein Land, eine Gesellschaft, läuft dort Amok; es droht in kompletter Anarchie zu versinken, es befindet sich im freien Fall. Nicht nur, weil die Milizen dort schlecht organisiert sind, sondern auch, weil ihnen die Koordination fehlt, ist ein Völkermord im Augenblick noch unwahrscheinlich.\n\nJa, meine Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich kann mich täuschen, ich möchte mich auch gern täuschen, wenn ich Parallelen zu Ruanda, zu Srebrenica, zu Bosnien-Herzegowina herstelle.\n\nDoch als jemand, der in seinem Leben selbst erleben musste, was aus Hass gegenüber anderen Religionen und Ethnien und aus Rassenwahn geschieht, bin ich zutiefst davon überzeugt, dass wir Einhalt gebieten müssen, dass wir nicht neutral sein können, sondern Farbe bekennen müssen. Ich bin überzeugt, dass es Auftrag und Pflicht der internationalen Gemeinschaft ist, wenn schon die bisherige Gewalt nicht verhindert werden konnte, eine weitere Eskalation zu verhindern.\n\nMeine Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wenn wir wirklich eine Wertegemeinschaft sein wollen, dann müssen wir dazu stehen, und dies nicht nur bei Sonntagsreden, dann dürfen wir nicht wie 1994, als die Blauhelme aus -Ruanda abgezogen und Hunderttausende ihrem Schicksal überlassen wurden, nicht wie 1995 in Srebrenica, als die Blauhelme zusahen, wie 8 000 Bosniaken niedergemetzelt wurden, die Augen verschließen. Wenn wir unsere Werte ernst nehmen, dann braucht es unseren Einsatz, und zwar jetzt eines kleinen, den die Menschen dort benötigen,\n\neinen Einsatz für die Afrikanische Union, die dringend unsere Hilfe braucht, einen Einsatz, um die französischen Soldaten, die bereits dort sind, dabei zu unterstützen, Gewalt zu beenden, einen Einsatz, um zu helfen, demokratische Strukturen zu schaffen und die Wahlen im Jahr 2015 vorzubereiten. Die Verantwortung, die Zivilisten zu schützen, ist Leitgedanke unseres Handelns und damit der militärischen Überbrückungsmission, deren Fokus auf medizinischer Versorgung und Lufttransport liegt.\n\nAnders als 1995 in Rest-Jugoslawien, anders als beim Bürgerkrieg in Syrien sind sich dieses Mal die Afrikanische Union, die Vereinten Nationen, die etwa vor einer Stunde im Sicherheitsrat der Peacekeeping Mission zugestimmt haben, und die Europäische Union einig, dass Hilfe unmittelbar, jetzt und umfassend notwendig ist, um das Morden zu stoppen und das Land wieder zu stabilisieren. Nutzen wir diese Einigkeit als wichtiges Zeichen, als Zeichen einer Wertegemeinschaft, die dem sinnlosen Morden die Stirn zeigt.\n\nUnser Versprechen im Rahmen des EU-Afrika-Gipfels vergangene Woche, an einem Afrika der Chancen mitzuwirken, ist nur glaubhaft, wenn wir jetzt unseren Willen und unsere Entschlossenheit zeigen, der afrikanischen Bevölkerung in einer ihrer dunkelsten Stunden mit allen Mitteln beizustehen. Afrika braucht afrikanische Lösungen. Afrika braucht auch afrikanische Chancen. Auch Zentralafrika! Gerade deshalb dürfen wir Zentralafrika nicht seinem Schicksal überlassen. Das sind wir den Menschen schuldig.\n\nDas sind wir aber auch uns schuldig, wenn wir Worte wie „Nie wieder Auschwitz!“, „Nie wieder Ruanda!“, „Nie wieder Srebrenica!“ nicht zu leeren Worthülsen werden lassen wollen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich bitte Sie, dem Ersuchen der Bundesregierung auf Entsendung im Rahmen eines Übergangsmandats zuzustimmen. Ich glaube, die Menschen in Afrika haben es verdient, unseren Beistand zu erhalten.\"\n4339,karl-schiewerling,\"Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Beratungen des Haushalts der Bundesarbeitsministerin finden in - europäisch und weltweit - wirtschaftlich spannenden Zeiten statt, übrigens mit einem hohen Potenzial an volkswirtschaftlichen Fehlprognosen. Eine dieser Fehlprognosen ist, dass sich auf dem Arbeitsmarkt schon seit langem eine negative Entwicklung hätte bemerkbar machen müssen. Fast hysterisch haben manche ständig auf die Arbeitslosenzahlen geschaut, um zu sehen, wann sie denn endlich steigen. Tatsächlich sinken sie. Tatsächlich haben wir einen Aufwuchs an Beschäftigung: 500 000 zusätzliche sozialversicherungspflichtige Beschäftigungsverhältnisse.\n\nLiebe Frau Zimmermann, wenn diese Beschäftigungsverhältnisse alle so katastrophal wären, wie Sie sie beschreiben, dann hätten wir nicht diesen Aufwuchs im Bereich der Sozialversicherung. Glauben Sie denn, Minijobs machen Mehreinnahmen von 33 Milliarden Euro in der Sozialversicherung aus?\n\nIhre regelmäßig wiederkehrende Darstellung der angeblich katastrophalen Situation in Deutschland ist durch nichts, aber auch gar nichts gedeckt. Auch uns machen die Langzeitarbeitslosen - dazu sage ich gleich etwas - große Sorgen; überhaupt keine Frage. Aber hier ständig den Eindruck zu erwecken, als herrschte in Deutschland das nackte Elend, widerspricht völlig dem Gefühl der Menschen und widerspricht auch völlig der Realität.\n\nJa, einmal.\n\nErstens. Ich nehme zur Kenntnis, dass die Zahlen vom Statistischen Bundesamt sind. Zweitens. Ich nehme allerdings auch zur Kenntnis, dass Sie diese Zahlen des Statistischen Bundesamtes permanent so drehen und wenden, dass der Eindruck einer flächendeckenden Katastrophe entsteht. Daran können Sie nichts ändern, auch nicht durch die Art, wie Sie gerade Ihre Frage gestellt haben.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, die Entwicklungen auf dem Arbeitsmarkt sind positiv. Vor zehn Jahren war Deutschland der kranke Mann in Europa; die Frau Bundesarbeitsministerin hat in ihrer Rede vorhin darauf hingewiesen. Heute sind wir die Lokomotive. Daran haben viele ihren Anteil, auch die Agenda 2010. Ohne die Flexibilisierung hätten wir das nicht geschafft. Diese Agenda wurde unter Gerhard Schröder auf den Weg gebracht, und ohne die umsichtige Finanz-, Wirtschafts- und Sozialpolitik unserer Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel würden wir nicht da stehen, wo wir heute stehen.\n\nSie von den Linken können es drehen und wenden, wie Sie wollen, und das SGB II so oft angreifen, wie Sie wollen.\n\nIch sage Ihnen: Das SGB II ist geschaffen worden, um vor absoluter Armut zu bewahren. Das SGB II ist geschaffen worden, um eine Grundsicherung zu schaffen, damit die Menschen nicht ins Bodenlose fallen. Das SGB II hat auch dazu geführt, dass wir im Bereich der Arbeitsmarktpolitik neue Wege gehen konnten, die vorher nicht möglich waren.\n\nIch glaube, dass Ihre Analyse falsch ist. Allerdings - das ist richtig - haben wir schon in der letzten, christlich-liberalen, Koalition und in nahtloser Fortsetzung in der jetzigen Koalition dem Missbrauch auf dem Arbeitsmarkt, wo einige glaubten, sie könnten durch die Liberalisierung des Arbeitsmarktes mit allem und jedem in Wildwestmanier umgehen und Arbeitsverhältnisse nach Belieben gestalten, einen Riegel vorgeschoben. Deswegen haben wir so viele Branchen ins Entsendegesetz aufgenommen. Das fing in der christlich-liberalen Koalition an. Es sei übrigens in Demut erwähnt: Alle Branchen bis auf eine einzige Ausnahme wurden unter CDU-Kanzlern in das Entsendegesetz aufgenommen.\n\nDeswegen ist es richtig, dass wir sagen: Wir wollen keine Dumpinglöhne, und wir wollen diese Verwerfungen am Arbeitsmarkt nicht.\n\nDazu gehört auch, dass wir Mitte dieses Jahres das Tarifvertragsgesetz geändert haben und dass wir das Mindestlohngesetz gemacht haben. Das war ein wichtiger und richtiger Schritt, den wir hier gegangen sind. Wir haben einmalig einen Mindestlohn von 8,50 Euro gesetzlich beschlossen. Danach wird die Mindestlohnkommission über die Höhe des Mindestlohns entscheiden. Sie hat den Auftrag, die Gesamtentwicklung zu beobachten und zu bewerten und entsprechende Vorschläge für die Zukunft zu machen. Deswegen bin ich den Haushältern und dem Haushaltausschuss dankbar, dass sie dazu beigetragen haben, dass die Mindestlohnkommission kein Gremium von Frühstücksdirektoren wird, sondern so ausgestattet ist, dass sie tatsächlich ihren Auftrag erfüllen kann. Denn die zukünftige Entwicklung des Mindestlohns gehört dahin, wo wir sie vorgesehen haben, nämlich in die Hand der Tarifpartner.\n\nEin Thema, das hier des Öfteren angesprochen wurde, ist die Kontrolle der Schwarzarbeit. Es ist zwar richtig, dass es 600 nichtbesetzte Stellen gibt. Das liegt aber nicht daran, dass diese Stellen nicht besetzt werden sollen, sondern daran, dass zukünftige Zollbeamte nicht wie Birnen am Baum wachsen. Sie müssen zunächst einmal ausgebildet und qualifiziert werden. Sie müssen am Arbeitsmarkt gewonnen und dann auch eingestellt werden. Mit diesem Haushalt haben wir die Voraussetzungen geschaffen, dass wir sie einstellen können.\n\nDas zeigt, dass diese Bundesregierung keineswegs Mindestlöhne unterlaufen will, wie es heute dargestellt wurde. Sie will sie auch vernünftig kontrollieren. Allerdings können wir nicht für jeden Betrieb zwei Mitarbeiter vom Zoll abstellen, um zu gewährleisten, dass niemand eine falsche Zahl in den Ordner schreibt. Dann hätten wir uns manches andere in der Geschichte Deutschlands sparen können.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, bei allen guten Entwicklungen machen aber auch wir uns große Sorgen um die Situation der Langzeitarbeitslosen. Insofern treffen wir uns mit den Kolleginnen und Kollegen der SPD, mit denen wir gemeinsam mit der Bundesarbeitsministerin an dieser Aufgabe arbeiten. Ich verstehe auch die Sorgen, die die Fraktionen der Grünen und der Linken vorbringen. Auch uns ist es nicht egal, wie es mit der verfestigten Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit weitergeht. Auch uns treibt um, dass Menschen es so schwer haben, den Weg in den ersten Arbeitsmarkt zu finden.\n\nDeswegen ist es gut, dass wir die arbeitsmarktpolitischen Instrumente, mit denen wir helfen können, immer wieder neu überprüfen und überarbeiten. Dazu gehört auch, dass wir Brücken bauen und einen Hilfeweg einschlagen müssen, der für einen längeren Zeitraum als auf ein halbes Jahr Hilfe angelegt ist. Die Förderung muss über viele Jahre gehen, um Menschen, die sich besonders schwertun, treppenartig, sukzessive an den ersten Arbeitsmarkt heranzuführen.\n\nLassen Sie mich einen Punkt aufgreifen, den Frau Bundesarbeitsministerin vorhin mit Blick auf die Behinderten angesprochen hat. Ich möchte das auch auf die Langzeitarbeitslosen beziehen. Ich glaube, es ist an der Zeit, dass wir in den Jobcentern, in den Unternehmen und in unserer Gesellschaft den Blick nicht länger darauf richten, was Menschen alles nicht können, sondern darauf, was sie alles können. Wir müssen bei ihren Stärken und Begabungen ansetzen, um sie weiterzuentwickeln. Denn ich glaube, dass manches, was sich als Defizit darstellt, abgearbeitet, beseitigt und zu etwas Positivem entwickelt werden kann.\n\nWas uns und mich besonders umtreibt, ist die Lebenssituation der Langzeitarbeitslosen, aber vor allen Dingen auch der jungen Menschen, die aus Haushalten kommen, deren Eltern und Großeltern schon lange von Sozialhilfe leben. Wir machen die Erfahrung, dass diese jungen Menschen von niemandem erreicht werden. Sie werden nicht von den Jobcentern erreicht. Sie tauchen in der Schule ab. Sie sind nicht durch sozialstaatliche Institutionen zu erreichen. Sie sind aber da, und sie werden, wenn wir ihnen nicht konsequent helfen, denselben Weg nehmen wie ihre Eltern.\n\nWir müssen dagegen angehen. Sie leben in Lebenszusammenhängen, in denen sie das, was sie erleben, für die ganze Wirklichkeit halten.\n\nAber, meine Damen und Herren, diese jungen Menschen haben genauso Begabungen und Fähigkeiten wie die Kinder aus anderen Haushalten. Sie haben genau wie diese Fähigkeiten, die entwickelt werden müssen. Denn wir können auf keinen verzichten.\n\nWir brauchen sie.\n\nEs gibt genügend Initiativen, die mit großem Erfolg daran arbeiten. Ich kenne eine Initiative, die es geschafft hat, junge Menschen, auf die keiner einen Pfifferling gegeben hätte, nach zwanzig Jahren konsequenter Arbeit zur Fachhochschulreife zu bringen. Wissen Sie, diesen Blickwinkel zu schärfen und hier die Angebote zu entwickeln, das halten wir für einen wichtigen Teil. Deswegen bin ich den Haushältern, insbesondere unseren beiden Berichterstattern Axel Fischer und Ewald Schurer, mit tatkräftiger Unterstützung vieler in manchen Einrichtungen unserer Bundesregierung, dankbar, dass es gelungen ist, in diesem Bundeshaushalt die Möglichkeit für Modellprojekte für diese jungen Menschen zu eröffnen. Ich hoffe sehr, dass wir im kommenden Jahr damit anfangen können. Das ist der Weg, den wir dringend benötigen, um gerade dort, wo niemand mehr herankommt und wo niemand mehr erreicht wird, diesen jungen Menschen zu helfen.\n\nIm Mittelpunkt steht dabei, meine Damen und Herren, das, was uns als Union in der Arbeitsmarktpolitik umtreibt: Es darf keiner verloren gehen. - Das ist nicht nur eine Frage des Geldes,\n\ndas ist auch eine Frage des Klimas, das wir miteinander schaffen. Ich kann nur sagen: Ich glaube, dass wir da miteinander auf einem Weg sind oder uns auf diesen begeben, der deswegen erfolgreich sein kann - und ich hoffe, auch erfolgreich ist -, weil wir zwei Rahmenbedingungen haben, die uns diesen Weg erleichtern: auf der einen Seite eine gute Wirtschafts- und Beschäftigungslage, auf der anderen Seite die Nachfrage nach Fachkräften. Ich kann die deutsche Wirtschaft und alle anderen nur auffordern, den Blick bitte mit uns gemeinsam auf dieses Potenzial von jungen Menschen, auf das Potenzial derjenigen zu richten, die keine Berufsausbildung haben, obwohl sie 25 Jahre und älter sind, und mit uns gemeinsam diesen jungen Menschen eine neue berufliche Perspektive zu öffnen. Wir kommen in dieser Frage nicht weiter mit Ideologie, sondern nur, indem wir jeden Einzelnen in den Blick nehmen und jedem Einzelnen eine Chance geben. Ich sage Ihnen: Das ist ein wichtiges Anliegen der Union, und dafür werden wir uns gemeinsam mit unserem Koalitionspartner und mit der Bundesarbeitsministerin einsetzen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, lassen Sie mich einen letzten Satz sagen, zum Bereich der Rentenpolitik. - Herr Kollege Kurth, das reizt mich doch;\n\ndas ist Ihnen in herausragender Weise gelungen. - Nein, diese Rentenpolitik ist nicht verantwortungslos, sondern wir würdigen durch einen weiteren Rentenpunkt die Erziehungsleistung von Menschen - Frauen in erster Linie -, die dafür gesorgt haben, alles darangesetzt haben, dass die Kinder geboren und erzogen wurden, die heute dafür sorgen, dass es diese Wirtschaft überhaupt so gibt, wie es sie gibt.\n\nDieser Rentenpunkt, meine Damen und Herren, ist nicht allein beitragsfinanziert, dieser Punkt ist auch steuerfinanziert; da sind erhebliche Steuern eingeflossen.\n\nWir haben nämlich in diesem Zusammenhang beschlossen, dass wir ab 2017/2018 eigens dafür 2 Milliarden Euro zusätzlich in die Rentenkasse fließen lassen werden, weil das notwendig ist, um damit eine Gesamtfinanzierung auf Dauer gesehen verantwortungsvoll sicherzustellen.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, mit uns wird es keine verantwortungslose Rentenpolitik geben. Wir haben den Blick auf die junge Generation gerichtet. Wir werden auch weiter daran arbeiten, dass die Übergänge in die Rente gut gestaltet werden. Wir werden mithelfen, dass Menschen so lang wie möglich erwerbstätig sein können, weil wir auf keinen verzichten können bei der Aufgabe, dieses Land gemeinsam zukunftsfähig zu machen. Dafür steht dieser Haushalt, dafür steht diese Regierung, und dafür werden wir uns einsetzen.\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n6077,franz-thonnes,\"Herr Präsident! Werte Gäste aus Georgien, aus Moldau und aus der Ukraine! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Entscheidungen, um die es heute geht, haben ihre Grundlage in der seit Mai 2009 von der EU und ihren Mitgliedstaaten verfolgten Politik des Auf- und Ausbaus einer Östlichen Partnerschaft mit den Ländern Aserbaidschan, Armenien, Georgien, Moldau, Ukraine und Weißrussland.\n\nDiese Partnerschaftspolitik war zentral darauf ausgerichtet, das Alltagsleben der Menschen in diesen Ländern Stück für Stück zu verbessern, Wohlstand und Lebensstandard in einem friedlichen Miteinander zu erhöhen. Dazu gehörten die Öffnung der Märkte, politische Reformen zur Stärkung von Rechtsstaatlichkeit und Demokratie, eine intensivere Einbindung in die Zivilgesellschaft, Schritte zur Angleichung von Standards in verschiedenen Bereichen der Verwaltung und bei Fragen in den Bereichen Energie, Umwelt- und Klimaschutz, die Stärkung der Menschenrechte sowie die Bekämpfung der Krake Korruption. Mittel und Instrument sollten die Assoziierungsabkommen, begleitet von umfassenden Freihandelsabkommen, sein.\n\nNun kann keiner der politisch Handelnden auf dem europäischen Kontinent behaupten, während des knapp fünfjährigen Prozesses jeden Tag alles richtig und nichts falsch gemacht zu haben. Diese Feststellung ergibt sich schon allein aus der Tatsache, dass Aserbaidschan, Armenien und Weißrussland kein Assoziierungsabkommen unterzeichnen. Aber sie ergibt sich auch aus der Tatsache, dass der Weg von der Aufnahme der Verhandlungen bis zum jetzigen Abschluss und zur Ratifikation der Assoziierungsabkommen mit Georgien, Moldau und der Ukraine nicht frei von Konflikten dieser Länder und der Europäischen Union mit dem größten Nachbarn im Osten, nämlich mit Russland, war.\n\nHandelsauseinandersetzungen, gewalttätige Konflikte, Drohungen bis hin zu kriegerischen Handlungen, der Bruch des Völkerrechts durch Russland und der Verstoß gegen OSZE-Prinzipien, die Drohung mit und die Anwendung von Gewalt gegen die Ukraine haben uns in Europa in eine Situation geführt, in der die Gefahr einer neuen Spaltung nicht mehr irreal erscheint. In dieser Situation sind jetzt alle gehalten, Beiträge zur Deeskalation - in der Praxis wie in der Rhetorik - und zur Sicherung des Friedens zu leisten.\n\nDeshalb ist in der aktuellen Lage in Europa nach wie vor das oberste Gebot, alles dafür zu tun, dass die Minsker Vereinbarungen der vier Staats- und Regierungschefs Frankreichs, Russlands, der Ukraine und Deutschlands zum Waffenstillstand und zur friedlichen Konfliktlösung Schritt für Schritt nachprüfbar umgesetzt werden, und zwar von allen, die darin als Akteure genannt wurden - hüben wie drüben.\n\nDennoch ist der heutige Tag wie der 16. September des vergangenen Jahres, als das Europaparlament den Assoziierungsabkommen zugestimmt hat, ein Tag der Freude und der Perspektive - einer Perspektive, für die sich die Menschen in den Ländern Georgien, Moldau und der Ukraine engagiert haben, für die sie gestritten haben, für die sie bei Wahlen gestimmt haben, einer Perspektive der größeren Nähe zur Europäischen Union, zu mehr Wohlstand und mehr Freiheit. Diese Perspektive muss nicht bedeuten, dass die bisher existierenden engen internationalen Verbindungen und Wirtschaftsbeziehungen aufgegeben werden müssen, sondern sie kann mit dazu beitragen, zusammen von einer gemeinsamen ökonomischen und gesellschaftlichen Entwicklung zu profitieren.\n\nMoldau hat den Prozess der Assoziierung sehr intensiv mit der EU betrieben. Im Juni/Juli 2014 erfolgten Unterzeichnung und Ratifizierung. Das Gleiche gilt für Georgien. Seit April 2014 gilt die Visafreiheit. Dennoch gibt es enge Beziehungen zu Russland. Es gibt die Energieabhängigkeit, die Abhängigkeit mit Blick auf den Export moldauischer landwirtschaftlicher Produkte, und außerdem gewährleisten 600 000 bis 800 000 moldauische Gastarbeiter in Russland 20 Prozent des moldauischen Bruttoinlandsproduktes. Hier sind auch die russischen Handelsrestriktionen, die wir zu Recht kritisieren, und nicht zuletzt die offene Transnistrienfrage zu nennen.\n\nBei allem Bekenntnis zu Europa müssen wir dennoch die geringe Wahlbeteiligung bei der letzten Wahl realisieren und sagen: Hier gilt es, mehr gute Arbeit zu leisten und für eine klare Unterstützung bei den zukünftigen Reformen zu sorgen, damit mehr Zuspruch gewonnen wird.\n\nGeorgien ist sehr ambitioniert, insbesondere bei der Stärkung des Rechtsstaates und der Korruptionsbekämpfung. Doch auch hier gibt es Streitigkeiten innerhalb der Regierung, die nicht gerade Stabilität vermitteln.\n\nMeine Besuche in der Ukraine haben mir in den vergangenen zwölf Monaten immer wieder deutlich gezeigt, wie stark die Europabegeisterung der Menschen ist und wie stark ihr Wille ist, nach 20 Jahren der Korruption und der Ausbeutung durch ein korruptes Staatswesen endlich einen guten Weg in Richtung Europa zu gehen.\n\nSo geschunden das Land durch die Konfliktlage und die kriegerische Auseinandersetzung ist, so ungebrochen ist der breite Wunsch der Menschen, den Weg nach Europa zu gehen.\n\nNun gilt es, die Herkulesaufgabe der inneren Reformen trotz aller äußeren Widrigkeiten zielstrebig voranzutreiben, und zwar mit konkreter Implementierung. An Unterstützung soll es dabei nicht mangeln. Die Menschen dürfen nicht noch einmal enttäuscht werden. Denn mit der Zustimmung des ukrainischen Parlamentes zum Assoziierungsabkommen ist man ein Versprechen an die Bürgerinnen und Bürger eingegangen; dafür hat die -Maidan-Bewegung monatelang gekämpft, und dafür haben Menschen ihr Leben gelassen.\n\nDie Herausforderungen sind enorm. Die Erwartungen im Inneren und von außen sind groß. Auf der Agenda stehen die konsequente Umsetzung der Beschlüsse von Minsk, eine Verfassungsreform, der Aufbau eines Rechtsstaates, die Wiederherstellung des staatlichen Gewaltmonopols - nicht zuletzt durch die Entwaffnung aller staatlich nicht legitimierten Personen und Truppen -, der Kampf gegen Korruption und die Begrenzung der Macht der Oligarchen. Zu welchen Konflikten das führen kann, haben wir gerade bei der Entmachtung von Kolomojskyj gesehen.\n\nZu nennen ist aber auch die ökonomische Realität: ein Wirtschaftseinbruch um circa 15 Prozent in 2014, 1,2 Millionen verlorengegangene Arbeitsplätze, 2 bis 3 Millionen Menschen ohne Arbeit, 50 Euro Durchschnittsrente, 130 bis 160 Euro Durchschnittseinkommen, Steuersätze von 20 Prozent, 8 Millionen registrierte Beschäftigte, 12 Millionen Rentnerinnen und Rentner. In dieser Relation erkennt man das Spannungsverhältnis.\n\nDie Finanzministerin, Frau Jaresko, sagt schon jetzt, die 40 Milliarden US-Dollar vom IWF und von der EU würden nicht ausreichen, und Gunter Deuber von der Raiffeisen Bank International in Wien prognostiziert gar einen Bedarf von 200 Milliarden US-Dollar in den kommenden Jahren.\n\nWenn man sich das Ganze anschaut, dann erkennt man: Es geht jetzt darum, dass die Reformen die Menschen überzeugen müssen. Es müssen gute Reformen sein, die auch wahrnehmbar sind. Dazu gehört auch der soziale Dialog zwischen den Gewerkschaften, den Arbeitgebern und der Zivilgesellschaft, der in allen drei Assoziierungsabkommen gefordert wird. Es ist notwendig, die einzelnen Reformschritte gemeinsam zu diskutieren und zu beraten. Die Gespräche mit Gewerkschaftsvorsitzenden und mit der Führung des Arbeitgeberverbandes bei meinem Besuch in der Ukraine vor einigen Tagen haben mir deutlich gemacht, dass hier durchaus noch Spielraum nach oben ist.\n\nWenn jetzt Finanzströme von Kiew in die Regionen fließen, weil diese mehr Verantwortung tragen sollen, dann müssen eine entsprechende Kontrolle und ein entsprechendes Monitoring stattfinden. Die neu gewählten Kommunalpolitiker müssen dafür unsere Unterstützung bekommen.\n\nWir alle bleiben als Parlamentarierinnen und Parlamentarier gefordert, unsere guten Kontakte in einen weiteren, intensivierten Erfahrungsaustausch einzubringen, damit sich Gutes aus den genannten Assoziierungsabkommen entwickeln kann.\n\nAbschließend ist auf die gemeinsame Verantwortung für die friedliche Entwicklung in diesem gesamten geografischen Raum - nicht zuletzt aufgrund der genannten Verflechtungen - hinzuweisen. Ich denke hier an folgende Passage in der Minsker Vereinbarung der vier Staats- und Regierungschefs:\n\nDie Staats- und Regierungschefs bekennen sich unverändert zur Vision eines gemeinsamen humanitären und wirtschaftlichen Raums vom Atlantik bis zum Pazifik auf der Grundlage der uneingeschränkten Achtung des Völkerrechts und der Prinzipien der OSZE.\n\nIch komme zum Schluss. - Deshalb gilt es, diesen Satz zusammen mit den Assoziierungsländern, der EU und Russland verantwortungsvoll durch gemeinsame Dialoge umzusetzen. Dazu gehört es auch, die Bestrebungen zur Visaliberalisierung mit den drei Ländern, aber auch mit Russland zu intensivieren, damit die Menschen sich begegnen und die vielfältigen Lebensweisen kennenlernen können und damit Fehlinformationen und eine falsche Informationspolitik den Frieden in Europa nicht gefährden.\n\nStimmen wir dem Assoziierungsabkommen zu! Mit Verantwortung zur Verantwortung durch Verantwortung!\n\nHerzlichen Dank.\"\n4459,carsten-sieling,\"Herr Präsident! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Aktuelle Stunde heute bekommt für mich einen völlig neuen Anstrich. Sie scheint ein Ort des herrschaftsfreien Gesprächs zu sein. Es scheint so zu sein, dass man die Debatten, die hier sonst geführt werden, nicht weiter aufnehmen muss, sondern quasi frei von Erinnerung redet. Ich sage das in Richtung aller drei meiner Vorrednerinnen und Vorredner.\n\nKollege Bartsch, es geht nicht, dass Sie sich hier hinstellen und sagen, man wolle eine FöKo III, wenn man als Linkspartei selber - zumindest über die Regierung in Brandenburg - an den Gesprä-chen, die es gegeben hat, beteiligt war. Man kann jetzt nicht einfach behaupten: Hier muss man sich breiter aufstellen.\n\nLiebe Lisa Paus, sicherlich ist es ausgespro-chen schwierig, den Soli in die Einkommensteuer zu integrieren. Aber das wurde meines Wissens auch von grünen Ministerpräsidenten unterstützt.\n\nIch bin insbesondere - Herr Kollege Brinkhaus - von dem, was Sie, Herr Kollege Michelbach, hier vorgetragen haben, erschüttert; das will ich ganz offen sagen.\n\nWir müssen gerade in der Koalition noch einmal festhalten - das ist ein wichtiger Punkt -: Der Soli war in den letzten Jahren ein guter und wichtiger Beitrag für die Stabilisierung und das Zusammen-wachsen unseres Landes.\n\nLassen Sie uns nun den Blick nach vorne rich-ten. Vor der Bundestagswahl wurde eine Debatte von einer Partei geführt, die heute - meines Er-achtens glücklicherweise - nicht mehr in diesem Parlament sitzt. Die FDP hat sich damals hinge-stellt und gesagt: Der Soli muss weg. Im Juli 2013 hat die Kanzlerin höchstpersönlich gesagt: Wir brauchen für die zukünftigen Gestaltungen diesen Solidaritätszuschlag weiterhin. Dazu muss man als Union stehen, auch in schwierigen Zeiten, wenn die Populisten wieder einmal den Soli strei-chen wollen.\n\nIch sage das vor allem deshalb, weil - ich glaube, darin sind wir uns alle einig - wir es uns gar nicht erlauben können, auf die Einnahmen aus dem Solidaritätszuschlag - 2020 werden das an die 20 Milliarden Euro sein - zu verzichten, je-denfalls wenn man die Finanzbeziehungen zwi-schen Bund, Ländern und Kommunen in Ordnung bringen will.\n\n- Na ja, Kollege Michelbach, man kann die ganzen Ziele in Sachen Investitionen und Schulden nicht erreichen, und man kann auch den Wunsch Bay-erns, Hessens und anderer Länder nach einer Re-duzierung der Einzahlungen in den Länderfinanz-ausgleich nicht erfüllen, wenn man Geld aus dem System nimmt. Man wird dieses Geld brauchen.\n\nEs gibt also gute Argumente, den Soli fortzufüh-ren.\n\nIch möchte auf ein Thema eingehen, das die Kollegin Paus vorhin angesprochen hat. In der Tat wird es schwierig - das ist unzweifelhaft -, den Solidaritätszuschlag in die Einkommensteuer zu integrieren. Ich will aber darauf hinweisen, dass der Bundesfinanzminister dies vorgeschlagen hat. Diesem Vorschlag ist der Erste Bürgermeister der Freien und Hansestadt Hamburg, Olaf Scholz, beigetreten. Das war aber auch Thema in den Ge-sprächen zwischen allen Länderfinanzministern mit dem Bund. Das ist doch keine Angelegenheit von Herrn Schäuble persönlich oder von Herrn Scholz persönlich.\n\nDas hat in allen Gesprächen eine Rolle gespielt. Deshalb kann man das hier nicht so salopp vom Tisch wischen. Ich finde das unsolide. Das ist kein ernsthafter Umgang mit dem Problem.\n\nZum Schluss möchte ich deutlich machen, dass die Berechnungen des Bundesfinanzministeriums in der Tat zeigen, dass die Eingliederung ganz schwierig wird. Deshalb will ich darauf hinweisen, dass es natürlich auch die Alternative gibt, den Soli so fortzuführen, wenn man es vernünftig be-gründet und sagt, welches besondere Ziel man damit verfolgt. Ich bin der festen Überzeugung, dass es dieses Ziel gibt. Wir wissen, dass wir In-vestitionsbedarf haben, und wir wissen, dass wir die Schuldenbelastung in vielen Bereichen redu-zieren müssen. Ich glaube, dass sich daraus mit Blick auf die Zukunft unseres Landes eine gute Begründung herleiten lässt.\n\nEs ist mir ein wichtiges Anliegen - darauf möchte ich in den letzten 15 Sekunden meiner Redezeit an dieser Stelle hinweisen -, dass wir uns in diesem Haus gemeinsam gegen die inte-ressengeleitete Argumentation stellen - ich muss es schon fast Propaganda nennen -, dass der Soli die Leute überfordert. Der Soli ist als Ergän-zungsabgabe so konstruiert, dass immerhin - ich nehme Zahlen des Bundesfinanzministeriums - 11 Millionen Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler den Soli gar nicht zahlen müssen. Der Soli ist ei-gentlich die gerechteste Form der Abgabe, weil es sich um einen Aufschlag auf die Steuer handelt. Er betrifft somit vor allem Gutverdienende und hö-here Einkommen. Ich finde, höhere Einkommen und Gutverdienende können in diesem Land einen Beitrag dazu leisten, dass wir ein solides und stabiles Gemeinwesen bekommen.\n\nDeshalb sind wir als Sozialdemokraten dafür, jetzt nicht einfach alles über den Haufen zu wer-fen, sondern nüchtern und sachlich an die Prob-lemlagen heranzugehen. Wir sollten keine populis-tischen Reden halten, sondern die Probleme lö-sen, und dazu werden wir das Aufkommen aus dem Soli brauchen.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n10306,brigitte-pothmer,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Koalitionsfraktionen! Liebe Bundesregierung! Sie haben recht\n\n- mehr Beifall! -: Der deutsche Arbeitsmarkt ist ein Fachkräftemarkt. Das ist auch der Grund, warum, Herr Schiewerling, die Geringqualifizierten und die Langzeitarbeitslosen nicht von der guten Arbeitsmarktsituation profitieren.\n\nSie haben recht, wenn Sie sagen - das beschreiben Sie selbst -, dass besonders diejenigen, die eine Weiterbildung nötig hätten, in den entsprechenden Angeboten nicht zu finden sind bzw. vollkommen unterrepräsentiert sind. Das muss sich ändern.\n\nRichtig ist auch, dass die Arbeitslosenversicherung den immer bunter werdenden Erwerbsverläufen Rechnung tragen muss. Flexibel arbeitende Menschen brauchen nicht weniger, sondern mehr Schutz.\n\nMit dieser Erkenntnis laufen Sie bei uns und insbesondere bei mir wirklich offene Türen ein. Sie sehen also, in Bezug auf die Problembeschreibung passt kein Blatt Papier zwischen uns. Was die Lösungsansätze angeht, steht allerdings ein ganzer Bücherschrank zwischen uns.\n\nFrei nach Erich Kästner: „Wo bleibt denn das Positive, Frau Pothmer?“, möchte ich zunächst zwei Punkte hervorheben, die ich ausdrücklich unterstütze. Dies ist der Vorrang der Weiterbildung vor Vermittlung,\n\nzumindest bei Arbeitslosen ohne eine Berufsausbildung. Das haben wir immer gefordert. Ich freue mich, dass Sie sich dieser Forderung inzwischen angeschlossen haben.\n\nGut finde ich auch - das hat Herr Schiewerling erwähnt -, dass es nach dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf die Möglichkeit gibt, auch Grundkompetenzen wie Lesen und Schreiben zu unterstützen und zu fördern.\n\nWenn wir diese Grundkompetenzen nicht fördern, dann ist alles andere, was dem folgt, natürlich wirkungslos.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, richtig schlecht finde ich aber, dass Sie die Weiterbildung jetzt auch für Vergabeverfahren öffnen wollen. Das ist nichts anderes als ein Billigmacher.\n\nDas schreiben Sie in Ihrem Gesetzentwurf ja auch, wenn Sie in diesem Zusammenhang ausdrücklich von deutlich kostenmindernder Wirkung sprechen. Dieser Billigmacher wird uns noch teuer zu stehen kommen.\n\nWir wissen doch, dass genau solche Ausschreibungen zu einem Preisdruck führen, der erheblich zulasten der Qualität geht. Das kennen wir bereits von allen anderen arbeitsmarktpolitischen Maßnahmen.\n\nIch kann nicht verstehen, dass Sie diesen Fehler in diesem Rahmen wiederholen wollen.\n\nGanz grundsätzlich gibt es in Ihrem Gesetzentwurf ein riesiges Gap zwischen der Problemlage, die Sie selbst, wie ich finde, richtig beschreiben und analysieren, und der Dimension der Lösung, die Sie für diese Probleme anbieten. Dabei liegen die Fakten auf dem Tisch.\n\nErstens. Sie sprechen selbst von der Tatsache, dass die Digitalisierung die Halbwertszeit von Wissen noch einmal rapide absenken wird. Regelmäßige Weiterbildung und regelmäßige Qualifizierung werden deswegen in Zukunft genauso wichtig sein wie die Erstausbildung. Aber dazu bietet Ihr Gesetzentwurf überhaupt gar keine Antworten.\n\nZweitens. Geringe Qualifikation, prekäre Beschäftigung und Langzeitarbeitslosigkeit gehen bekanntermaßen Hand in Hand. Trotzdem bleiben gerade bei der Weiterbildung diejenigen außen vor, die es am nötigsten hätten. Das betrifft sowohl die Gruppe der Beschäftigten als auch die Gruppe der Arbeitslosen und insbesondere die SGB-II-Bezieher. Frau Kramme, dabei geht es auch nicht einfach nur ums Durchhalten. Das hat nämlich Gründe, meine Damen und Herren, die die Betroffenen selbst gar nicht zu verantworten haben.\n\nFast die Hälfte aller betroffenen Arbeitslosen sagt, sie könnten sich eine Fortbildung schlicht und ergreifend nicht leisten, weil sie über einen so langen Zeitraum hinweg mit ihren Familien nicht vom Arbeitslosengeld oder von Hartz IV leben können.\n\nDas werden Sie mit Ihrer Weiterbildungsprämie, die zur Halbzeit der Ausbildung und bei Abschluss bezahlt wird, auch nicht in den Griff bekommen. Es ist doch eine absurde Situation, dass diejenigen, die einem 1-Euro-Job nachgehen, monatlich mehr Geld in der Tasche haben als diejenigen, die sich einer Fort- und Weiterbildung unterziehen, sich also einer anstrengenden Aufgabe widmen. Ich frage Sie wirklich: Was setzen Sie hier eigentlich für Anreize?\n\nWenn Sie da weiterkommen wollen, dann brauchen wir eine monatliche Prämie; denn die Miete ist monatlich fällig, die Kosten fallen monatlich an. Ich glaube, nur so können Sie an dieser Stelle weiterkommen.\n\nWeiterbildung muss sich lohnen, und zwar von Anfang an. Sie muss so ausgestaltet sein, dass die Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer eben nicht gezwungen werden, den erstbesten Hilfsarbeiterjob anzunehmen. Wir wissen doch, dass das nicht nachhaltig ist und die Betroffenen in kürzester Zeit wieder vor der Tür der Jobcenter stehen werden.\n\nEin anderes Beispiel, das ich Ihnen nennen möchte, betrifft die Frauen. Ein Drittel aller Frauen sagt, sie könnten wegen der Kinder oder der Pflege von Alten an keiner Weiterbildung teilnehmen. Ich frage Sie: Womit wird denn jetzt auf die individuellen Bedürfnisse dieser Frauen Rücksicht genommen?\n\nIch prognostiziere Ihnen: Mit diesem Gesetzentwurf werden Sie eben nicht erreichen, dass diese Kerngruppe, die wir unterstützen müssen, in die Fort- und Weiterbildung kommt, sondern dieser Personenkreis wird weiterhin durchs Raster fallen.\n\nEin richtiges Armutszeugnis - und das haben Sie auch noch positiv hervorgehoben, Herr Schiewerling - ist die weitere Verlängerung der erwiesenermaßen vollkommen wirkungslosen Sonderregelung für kurzfristig Beschäftigte. 0,7 Prozent der Gruppe derjenigen, die Sie selbst als betroffen definiert haben, erreichen Sie mit dieser Maßnahme, und dann heben Sie das auch noch positiv hervor. Herr Schiewerling, ich kann jetzt nicht schon wieder mit der lachenden Koralle kommen. Aber dringend notwendig wäre es.\n\nIch finde, es ist ein Grund zum Fremdschämen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der SPD-Fraktion, wenn dieses Politikversagen von Herrn Kapschack und Herrn Blienert in einer Pressemitteilung noch als sozial- und kulturpolitischer Fortschritt gefeiert wird. Herr Kapschack, das ist kein sozial- und kulturpolitischer Fortschritt, sondern es ist eine Beerdigung dritter Klasse Ihrer eigenen Koalitionsvereinbarung.\n\nDiese Regelung ist und bleibt Murks. Das hat Ihnen der Bundesrat ja auch in Ihrer Stellungnahme noch einmal attestiert.\n\nDie Arbeitslosenversicherung muss genauso flexibel sein, wie die Menschen heute längst arbeiten. Sie muss diejenigen absichern, die abhängig beschäftigt sind, die selbstständig sind, die unbefristet, auf Zeit, in Projekten oder auf mehreren Stellen gleichzeitig arbeiten. Das leistet dieser Gesetzentwurf nicht.\n\nDie Arbeitsministerin hat den von ihr entwickelten Dialogprozess „Arbeiten 4.0“ angeschoben, und sie will Zukunftsszenarien entwickeln. Meine Damen und Herren, die Zukunft hat längst begonnen. Mit diesem Gesetzentwurf werden Sie nicht einmal dem gerecht, was wir jetzt an Realitäten vorfinden. Zukunftstauglich ist der jedenfalls nicht.\n\nMeine Damen und Herren, früher hieß es ja immer: „Was Hänschen nicht lernt, lernt Hans nimmermehr“. Das ist weder richtig, noch ist es zeitgemäß. Deswegen sage ich Ihnen: Wir brauchen einen anderen Gesetzentwurf. Wir brauchen einen Gesetzentwurf, der die Zukunftsfragen wirklich beantwortet. Ich hoffe, dass wir da im Beratungsprozess noch ein wenig was verbessern können. Ich hoffe, da gibt es noch Bewegung.\n\nIch danke Ihnen.\"\n7837,cansel-kiziltepe,\"Frau Präsidentin! Als Erstes möchte ich ausdrücklich meine Kolleginnen und Kollegen vom Bundesrat in Schutz nehmen: Der Bundesrat tagt zeitgleich. Der Bundesrat - das möchte ich Ihnen und Euch als Botschaft mitteilen - hat heute beschlossen - Ziffer 18 zum Erbschaft- und Schenkungsteuergesetz -, dass die Abschmelzzone in der im Entwurf vorliegenden Form abgelehnt wird und die Sockelverschonung abgeschafft werden soll.\n\nDer vorliegende Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung ist durch das Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts vom Dezember vergangenen Jahres notwendig geworden. Es ist nicht das erste Urteil des Verfassungsgerichts zu diesem Thema. Das haben wir schon mehrfach gehört. Gerade deshalb sollte es unser vorrangiges Ziel sein, dass die zu findende Lösung auch eine verfassungsfeste Lösung ist, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nDas Erbschaftsteuer- und Schenkungsteuergesetz hat in seiner heutigen Ausgestaltung Gültigkeit seit Anfang 2009. Es gab also mehrere Reformen. Es gewährt hohe persönliche Freibeträge. Für Ehepartner und Lebenspartner sind bis zu 500 000 Euro, für Kinder sind bis zu 400 000 Euro steuerfrei. Diese persönlichen Freibeträge sind also so ausgestaltet, dass sich niemand Sorgen machen muss, dass die Übertragung des vielzitierten Häuschens der Oma besteuert wird.\n\nDas Bundesverfassungsgericht hat sich allein mit der Praxis der Verschonungsregelung von Betriebsvermögen auseinandergesetzt. Die gute Nachricht ist, dass wir als Gesetzgeber den Arbeitsplatzerhalt als Ziel verfolgen können. In Zukunft müssen wir aber unterscheiden zwischen denen, die dafür eine Verschonung von der Erbschaftsteuer brauchen, und denen, die diese Verschonung dafür nicht brauchen.\n\nDer Bundesfinanzminister hat im März solide Eckpunkte für die Diskussion vorgelegt, die zu großen Teilen in den Gesetzentwurf eingeflossen sind, zu Teilen aber auch nicht. Für die allermeisten Betriebe in Deutschland konnten wir eine Lösung finden, die unkompliziert ist. Diese orientiert sich an der Betriebsgröße gemäß Beschäftigtenzahl und der Einhaltung gewisser Lohnsummenregeln.\n\nIn Zukunft wird aber auch bei großen und größten Erbschaften und Schenkungen geschaut werden müssen, ob die Erwerber eine Verschonung wirklich nötig haben oder nicht.\n\nJetzt komme ich zur Bedürfnisprüfung. Die Verfassungsrichter haben klargemacht: Je größer das Unternehmen ist, umso größer ist auch die Notwendigkeit, eine Verschonung zu rechtfertigen. Sie haben auch klar herausgestellt, dass mit der steuerlichen Privilegierung unternehmerischen Vermögens nicht das Ziel verfolgt werden darf, einzelne Erben und Beschenkte zu verschonen. Es geht immer um den Erhalt von Arbeitsplätzen - das kann man nicht oft genug betonen -, aber nicht um die Verschonung von hohen Erbschaften.\n\nInsofern ist aus unserer Sicht die Einbeziehung des Privatvermögens nicht nur folgerichtig, sondern auch eine Frage der Gerechtigkeit. Wir brauchen diese Verteilungsgerechtigkeit in Deutschland, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nÜber die Grenze, ab der eine Bedürfnisprüfung notwendig werden soll, ist in den vergangenen Monaten viel gesprochen worden. Die Eckpunkte vom März sahen eine Grenze von 20 Millionen Euro je Erbfall vor. Im Gesetzentwurf stehen nun 26 Millionen Euro bzw. 52 Millionen Euro, aber auch das reicht einigen nicht.\n\nWir alle, die sich intensiv mit dieser Neuregelung der Erbschaftsteuer beschäftigen, sind seit Wochen und Monaten mit dem massiven Druck der Lobbyarbeit konfrontiert. Vor allem angesichts dieses Drucks möchte ich die Kolleginnen und Kollegen von CSU und CDU bitten: Laufen Sie mit Ihren Forderungen bitte nicht denjenigen hinterher, deren einziges Ziel es ist, keinen Cent Steuern auf ihre Erbschaften zu zahlen!\n\nDenn die Steuerausfälle durch die Überprivilegierung des Betriebsvermögens sind enorm. Das Statistische Bundesamt hat berechnet, dass zwischen 2009 und 2013 sage und schreibe 105 Milliarden Euro steuerfrei übertragen wurden. Hiervon profitieren vor allen Dingen große Vermögen.\n\nIm Rahmen des vorgeschlagenen Wahlrechts zwischen Bedürfnisprüfung und Abschmelztarif können auch in Zukunft Erben von Milliardenvermögen selbst dann steuerbefreit werden, wenn sie umfangreiches Privatvermögen besitzen, weil sie eben die Wahlmöglichkeit haben.\n\nErst ab 116 Millionen Euro bzw. ab 142 Millionen Euro gilt - Stichwort „Sockelverschonung“ - eine Mindestbesteuerung. Dabei hatte das Bundesverfassungsgericht eine Bedürfnisprüfung für große und sehr große Vermögen als zwingend angemahnt. Das fehlt hier noch.\n\nIm Ergebnis führt das dazu, dass nur 0,2 Prozent der Erbvorgänge über dem Schwellenwert für diese Mindestbesteuerung liegen. Somit werden weiterhin über 98,5 Prozent der Erben die Möglichkeit der Vollverschonung in Anspruch nehmen. Das halten wir für nicht verfassungsfest.\n\nDiese Zahlen zeigen aber auch, dass nicht davon gesprochen werden kann, dass der gesamte Mittelstand betroffen ist. Betroffen sind vielmehr nur einige wenige. Wie heute in der FAZ zu lesen war, hat mein Kollege Christian von Stetten wieder einmal propagiert, dass wir große deutsche Familienunternehmen nicht verstünden und mit unserer Position dafür sorgen würden, dass diese Deutschland verlassen würden.\n\n- Genau. - Befangenheit, Herr von Stetten? Nein, glaube ich nicht.\n\nDiese Punkte werden wir uns im Gesetzgebungsverfahren ganz genau anschauen müssen. Alle Zweifel an der Verfassungsfestigkeit müssen ausgeräumt werden.\n\nIch möchte an dieser Stelle auch auf die Beratungen der Länder hinweisen. Ich hatte anfangs erwähnt, dass es heute einen Beschluss dazu gab. Dem vorausgegangen war ein Beschluss der Landesfinanzminister, die auch Bedenken bei dem Abschmelzmodell haben. Die Mehrheit der Landesfinanzminister ist der Meinung, dass die Schwelle für die Bedürfnisprüfung wieder gesenkt werden muss.\n\nSie sehen, die Liste an Fragen und Aufgaben ist lang. Länder und Kommunen sind auf die Einnahmen angewiesen. Sie brauchen die Gelder für lange aufgeschobene Zukunftsinvestitionen.\n\nIch möchte die Aufmerksamkeit auch noch auf einen weiteren Punkt lenken; dieser kam in den letzten Monaten zu kurz. Drei Richter des Bundesverfassungsgerichts haben ein Minderheitenvotum abgegeben, das wir ernst nehmen müssen. Dieses besagt, dass die Erbschaftsteuer nicht nur an der Sicherung von Arbeitsplätzen orientiert werden kann, sondern es auch Instrumente bedarf, um der zunehmenden Ungleichverteilung von Vermögen und damit Macht und Lebenschancen entgegenzuwirken.\n\nArtikel 20 unseres Grundgesetzes definiert Deutschland als Sozialstaat. Das vergessen viele immer wieder. Die Erbschaftsteuer ist daher aus Sicht der drei Richter ein zentrales Instrument, um der Vermögenskonzentration zu begegnen. Dieses Minderheitenvotum sollten sich vor allem diejenigen zu Gemüte führen, die in den letzten Monaten mit dem Gedanken gespielt haben, die Erbschaftsteuer gleich ganz abzuschaffen. Das wird es mit mir, das wird es mit uns, mit der SPD, nicht geben, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen.\n\nWenn wir über die Erbschaftsteuer reden, dann reden wir über diejenigen, die das Glück hatten, in die richtige Familie geboren worden zu sein.\n\nDie Zeit schrieb im Juni an die Adresse der zukünftigen Erben: „Hört auf zu jammern!“. Das Ziel der SPD ist es nicht, größtmögliche Erbschaften abzusichern, sondern im Rahmen der Verfassungsmäßigkeit Arbeitsplätze zu erhalten und einen kleinen Beitrag zur Finanzierung des Sozialstaates zu leisten.\n\nVielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.\"\n13345,burkhard-lischka,\"Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren! Ich habe diese Debatte verfolgt und mir doch an der einen oder anderen Stelle die Frage gestellt: Wie wirkt das eigentlich auf Zuschauer, die diese Debatte verfolgen?\n\n- Ich werde auch niemanden namentlich benennen. Wir haben hier aber, glaube ich, manches erlebt, was genau von dem abweicht, was Sie, Herr de Maizière, in Ihrer Rede am Anfang in Bezug auf gegenseitige Schuldzuweisung gesagt haben. Ob wir - ich glaube, das gilt für uns alle - nach diesem schrecklichen Anschlag am 19. Dezember gut beraten sind, hier eine Debatte zu führen, bei der mancher das Gefühl bekommt, wir würden hier in Klein-Klein machen und Hahnenkämpfe durchführen? Ich halte das - das sage ich Ihnen ganz ehrlich - für keinen guten Umgang.\n\nWir wissen alle: Terror kann man nicht gänzlich verhindern. Das ist eine schmerzhafte Erfahrung, die übrigens nicht nur aktuell gemacht wurde, sondern auch schon in den letzten Jahren bzw. Jahrzehnten. Auch ist diese Erfahrung nicht nur hier in Deutschland und Europa, sondern weltweit gemacht worden. Ich finde nur: Man kann schon aus Fehlern lernen. Und das müssen wir auch.\n\nIm Sommer des vergangenen Jahres attackierte in der Regionalbahn bei Würzburg ein 17-Jähriger ganz unvermittelt mit einer Axt Fahrgäste. Das wird ein Staat nicht in jedem Fall verhindern können. Der entscheidende Punkt aber, über den wir, glaube ich, debattieren müssen, ist folgender: Wenn ein seit fast einem Jahr den Sicherheitsbehörden bekannter Gefährder - damit quasi unter den Augen des Staates - ein Attentat wie das am Breitscheidplatz hier in Berlin verübt, dann fragen sich - und zwar vollkommen zu Recht - viele Menschen: Was ist da eigentlich schiefgelaufen?\n\nIch sage es - das ist meine Wahrnehmung auch bei Gesprächen mit vielen Menschen - noch drastischer: Dieser Verlust an Sicherheit, der sich da bei manchen einstellt, geht bei einigen Menschen mit einem Prozess der Entfremdung von diesem Staat und von staatlichen Institutionen einher. Ich finde, das ist eine sehr gefährliche Entwicklung.\n\nMeine Erfahrung ist: Diesem gefährlichen Gefühl kommen wir nicht mit einem Basar der Marktschreier bei. Auf diesem Basar werden wir - das geschah übrigens immer bei solchen Attentaten, die wir in Europa erlebt haben - im Halbstundentakt mit neuen Vorschlägen konfrontiert. In den letzten zwei Jahren habe ich die Erfahrung gemacht: Je absurder ein Vorschlag ist, umso größer ist - aber auch nur für 30 Minuten - das mediale Echo. Ich glaube, das kommt in der Bevölkerung nicht gut an.\n\nDenn die Menschen haben, glaube ich, ein sehr gutes Gespür dafür, dass Lautstärke nicht immer Stärke ist.\n\nIch sage einmal ganz offen: Ich glaube auch nicht, Herr de Maizière, dass man dem mit Strukturdebatten beikommen kann. Jedenfalls könnte man einmal darüber diskutieren, ob es um den richtigen Zeitraum bzw. den richtigen Zeitrahmen geht. Es ist unsere Aufgabe, ständig darüber nachzudenken, wie wir unsere Sicherheitsbehörden gerade in einem föderalen Staat gut aufstellen können.\n\nIch möchte aber doch einmal hinterfragen, ob man ausgerechnet in Zeiten größter Terrorgefahr meint, Landesbehörden bzw. Landesämter für Verfassungsschutz auf der einen Seite auseinanderbauen zu können, um sie dann auf der anderen Seite wieder aufzubauen. Ich glaube nicht, dass sich im Augenblick von einer solchen Behördenbaustelle Terror effektiv bekämpfen lässt. Es ist meine feste Überzeugung, dass das nicht geht.\n\nIch warne in diesem ganzen Basar der Aufgeregtheiten auch vor voreiligen Schlussfolgerungen. Ich glaube nicht, dass der stärker zentralisierte Staat auch immer der stärkere Staat ist.\n\nFrankreich hat im Gegensatz zu uns einen Zentralstaat, ohne dass die Terrorgefahr dort geringer wäre. Ich glaube, es ist eine Binsenweisheit, auch im Fall Anis Amri, dass es überall zu Fehlern und Fehleinschätzungen kommt, wo Menschen tätig sind, egal ob das Menschen in Landes- oder Bundesbehörden sind.\n\nDa wir jetzt schon über Fehler und Fehleinschätzungen sprechen: Es gibt sicherlich noch manches aufzuklären, aber ich wage doch, eines zu sagen. Eine Annahme ist durch den Fall Anis Amri widerlegt worden, nämlich dass man Gefährder besonders gut dadurch kontrollieren kann, dass man sich zaghaft im Hintergrund hält, damit sich die Gefährder irgendwie in Sicherheit wiegen. Das mag bis zu einer gewissen Grenze richtig sein, um strafbares Handeln und Terroraktivitäten nachzuweisen und um an Netzwerke, Hintermänner und Kontaktpersonen heranzukommen. Aber eines ist uns doch hier klar geworden: Das ist ein Spiel mit dem Feuer, bei dem jede Fehleinschätzung tödlich sein kann. Deshalb kann eine Lehre aus dem Fall nur sein, dass wir wirklich frühzeitig und konsequent die Handlungsspielräume von Gefährdern einschränken müssen. Das bedeutet für mich: Wenn ein Gefährder abgeschoben werden soll, dann gehört er in Abschiebehaft - Punkt.\n\nDas bedeutet auch, dass wir den Gefährdern, bei denen sich die Frage der Abschiebung nicht stellt, weil sie beispielsweise einen deutschen Pass haben - das betrifft die Hälfte dieser Gefährder -, 24 Stunden auf den Füßen stehen müssen, und zwar mit den Instrumenten, die wir haben: mit Meldeauflagen, Aufenthaltsbeschränkungen, Näherungsverbot und vielem anderen mehr.\n\nHelmut Schmidt, der von Heiko Maas schon zitiert wurde, hat gesagt: Wir werden den Terror besiegen. - Das war die klare Ansage an die Terroristen der 70er-Jahre. Das muss die konsequente Ansage auch gegenüber den Terroristen des 21. Jahrhunderts sein.\n\nDanke.\"\n13222,roland-claus,\"Meine Damen und Herren! Sehr geehrter Herr Bundestagspräsident! Angesichts der vorweihnachtlichen Stimmung, die im Plenarsaal Einzug gehalten hat, möchte ich Ihnen ganz besonders herzlich für Ihre Rede und überhaupt für Ihren Beitrag zum Gelingen des allfraktionellen Adventssingens am heutigen Abend im Deutschen Bundestag danken. Auch so etwas geht im Parlament.\n\nAls dieser Nachtragshaushalt von Bundesminister Schäuble zum ersten Mal angekündigt wurde, hat die Linke das begrüßt und gesagt: Chapeau, Herr Schäuble! Gut, dass Sie mit dem Überschuss zu Frau Wanka statt wieder zu Frau von der Leyen gegangen sind.\n\nÜbersetzt heißt das: Besser mehr Geld für Bildung als für das Militär.\n\nAber dann haben wir festgestellt, dass wir den Bundesfinanzminister wohl zu früh gelobt haben. Zu der Erkenntnis kam Bundesminister Schäuble nämlich nicht freiwillig, wie wir inzwischen wissen, sondern offenbar auf Druck der Länderchefs. Die Begründung Ihres Gesetzentwurfes besagt: Hier wird die Voraussetzung dafür geschaffen, dass die Bund-Länder-Vereinbarung vom 14. Oktober 2016 umgesetzt werden kann. Gemeint ist die Zukunft der Bund-Länder-Finanzbeziehungen.\n\nIm Klartext heißt das: Ohne diese Investitionen wäre dieser Finanzpakt mit den Ländern nicht möglich gewesen. Deshalb sollte sich der Bund nicht als Weihnachtsmann darstellen, der den Kommunen die Geschenke überbringt. Richtiger wäre es an dieser Stelle, zu sagen: Wenn wir wirklich vernünftige Investitionen in Bildung und Infrastruktur wollen, dann müsste man mit dem Kooperationsverbot Schluss machen und ein zukunftsfähiges Investitionsprogramm auflegen.\n\nAllerdings ist zu begrüßen, dass mit diesem Geld Investitionen in Schulinfrastruktur für finanzschwache Kommunen getätigt werden können.\n\nIch habe das einmal zusammengerechnet: Für Ostdeutschland sind das 675 Millionen Euro.\n\nEinen solchen Schritt zu mehr Investitionstätigkeit begrüßen wir als Linke natürlich.\n\nWoher kommt das Geld? Auch das findet sich im Gesetzentwurf: Der Bund zahlt weniger Zinsen für seine Schulden als geplant. Das muss nicht immer so bleiben; darauf weisen Forschungsinstitute inzwischen hin.\n\nDeshalb wird die Linke nicht müde werden, zu fordern: Schaffen Sie endlich zukunftsfähige Politik für mehr Einnahmen! Schaffen Sie Steuergerechtigkeit! Dann haben wir auch die zukunftsfähige Möglichkeit, in Bildung zu investieren.\n\nEs kommt zuweilen vor, dass vor allzu viel schwarzer Null die Öffentlichkeit annimmt, der Bund habe nun keine Schulden mehr. Es sind immer noch 20 Milliarden Euro, die wir für Zinsen einstellen müssen, bzw. dafür, um die Schulden zu tilgen. Auch das darf nicht vergessen werden.\n\nAbschließend will ich noch auf einen weiteren Punkt hinweisen. In dem Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung heißt es, die Ministerpräsidenten und die Kanzlerin hätten am 14. Oktober einen Beschluss gefasst. Ich frage Sie: Was ist denn das für ein Beschlussorgan, das da zusammenkommt?\n\nGestern hat Bundesminister Schäuble in der Regierungsbefragung gesagt: Natürlich sind noch Änderungen möglich. - Das Parlament ist aber gewählt, um gesellschaftliche Gestaltung in Gesetze zu gießen. Das Parlament ist nicht gewählt, um nur die Ergebnisse von Nachtverhandlungen von Regierungschefs abzunicken. Das verlangen Sie aber von uns, und das nehmen wir so nicht hin. Das sei Ihnen einmal gesagt.\n\n17 Regierungschefs sind uns lieb und teuer. Das ist klar. Dennoch haben sie nicht das Recht, den Parlamenten vorzuschreiben, was sie zu entscheiden haben.\n\nSelbstverständlich werden auch wir heute für die Überweisung stimmen. In der abschließenden Lesung werden wir uns auch für diese Investitionen aussprechen, aber dann eine getrennte Abstimmung verlangen, weil wir nicht mit der Zustimmung für die Schulinvestitionen einem Haushalt, den wir insgesamt abgelehnt haben, auf diese Weise nachträglich zustimmen wollen. Dafür ist kein Platz.\n\nHerzlichen Dank, meine Damen und Herren.\"\n10735,uwe-schummer,\"Verehrtes Präsidium! Meine Damen! Meine Herren! Es ist deshalb so wichtig, auf die positiven Wirkungen der jetzigen Novellierung zu verweisen, weil eben viele Menschen auch sagen: Nein, das wollen wir nicht. - Das könnte dazu führen, dass das, was zum Besseren verändert werden könnte, nicht gemacht wird.\n\nWir sind dafür da, Bewegung zu erzeugen. Dass wir aber die Vorgaben der UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention nicht alleine mit Rampen lösen werden, ist offenkundig. Dass man eine Gesinnungs- und Zuständereform miteinander verbinden muss, dass man dafür die Voraussetzungen und Kompetenzen zu schaffen hat, ist klar und findet sich in dem Gesetzentwurf zur Weiterentwicklung des Behindertengleichstellungsrechts wieder.\n\nAllein schon die neue Definition auf der Grundlage der UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention, nämlich Behinderung als langfristige Beeinträchtigung zu sehen, die in Wechselwirkung mit Barrieren in den Köpfen und in der Umwelt Menschen an der gleichberechtigten gesellschaftlichen Teilhabe hindert, hat eine Strahlkraft, die über das jetzige Gesetz hinausgeht.\n\nGestern waren Vertreter des Gehörlosenbundes bei mir. Sie haben mit mir über viele Themen gesprochen, auch über Gebärdensprache. Sie waren sich bewusst - das wissen sie und haben mir das auch gesagt -, dass das, was wir miteinander auf der Bundesebene vereinbaren, auf die Länderebene, beispielsweise in Berlin, Nordrhein-Westfalen oder Rheinland-Pfalz, übertragen werden muss. An dieser Stelle müssen Sie sich von der Linkspartei mit dem Föderalismus arrangieren. Wir haben eben keine zentralistische Republik mit einer Steuerung aus Berlin, sondern wir sind föderal aufgebaut: über die kommunale, die Landes- und Bundesebene sowie auch die private Ebene.\n\nWenn wir diese miteinander verzahnen, dann haben wir die Wechselwirkung, die Gesinnungs- und Zuständereform, die wir miteinander wollen und erreichen werden.\n\nDas ist eben nicht allein ein Thema des Bundes, sondern auch ein Thema der Bundesländer, der Kommunen und der Privaten. Wichtig ist aber, dass wir eines nicht tun, Kollegin Werner, nämlich die Bundesbehörden abzuwerten und so zu tun, als seien sie nicht wichtig.\n\nIst die Agentur für Arbeit für Arbeitsuchende nicht wichtig? Ist die Krankenkasse für jemanden, der Gesundheitsversorgung sucht, nicht wichtig?\n\nIst die Bundespolizei mit ihren Einrichtungen nicht wichtig? Ist die Rentenversicherung mit der Alterssicherung für die Menschen nicht wichtig?\n\nEs sind also wichtige Schritte, die jetzt in den Bundesbehörden gegangen werden, damit Barrierefreiheit in der Kommunikation und auch baulich erreicht werden kann.\n\nDamit macht der Bund genau das, was in der modernen Pädagogik richtig ist. Uns geht es nicht um die Kraft des Zwangs oder der Peitsche bzw. um Gebote und Verbote, sondern wir wollen überzeugen. Aber wir können auch von den Privaten erst dann etwas verlangen, wenn der Bund mit seinen Einrichtungen vorangeht.\n\nUnd nichts ist überzeugender als das gute Vorbild des Bundes. - Aber ich höre gerne Ihre Zwischenfrage.\n\nIch möchte zum Kern Ihrer Frage zurückkehren. Ich habe natürlich die Rede und die sieben Punkte sehr aufmerksam verfolgt. Diese sieben Punkte betrafen erstens die Inklusion und zweitens das Bundesteilhabegesetz. Das Bundesteilhabegesetz werden wir im zweiten Halbjahr im Plenum beraten. Dazu hat sich die Behindertenbeauftragte geäußert. Das können Sie gerne nachlesen.\n\nWichtig ist, dass die Kompetenzen für Barrierefreiheit gestärkt werden und dass das Behindertengleichstellungsgesetz kein Inselgesetz ist. Wie Frau Bundesministerin eben dargestellt hat, haben wir bereits Vorleistungen erbracht, beispielsweise die Sonderförderung für Integrationsunternehmen. Wir haben beispielsweise für altersgerechtes und behindertengerechtes Bauen auch KfW-Programme mit einem Volumen von weit über 1 Milliarde Euro aufgelegt, um Barrierefreiheit finanziell zu unterstützen.\n\nWir haben barrierefreie Innenstädte. Für die Städtebauförderung werden jedes Jahr 700 Millionen Euro mobilisiert. Wir haben das Konjunkturprogramm für Kommunen mit 3,5 Milliarden Euro aufgelegt, mit denen Barrierefreiheit finanziert werden kann.\n\nWichtig ist aber, dass wir auch die Kompetenzen in Bezug auf die Barrierefreiheit stärken. Wir haben - auch das ist wichtig - eine Berichterstattung über die Bundeseinrichtungen zur Barrierefreiheit auch in der Kommunikation miteinander vereinbart und entsprechende Zielvereinbarungen getroffen. Dies werden wir auch von den Privaten erwarten und fordern, wenn der Bund seine Hausaufgaben erledigt hat.\n\nEs hat sich gezeigt, dass Zielvereinbarungen wirken. Ich habe Medienanstalten des öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunks angeschrieben, mit denen 2011eine Zielvereinbarung mit den Behindertenverbänden zur kommunikativen Barrierefreiheit getroffen worden ist. Mir wurde mitgeteilt, dass aufgrund dieser Zielvereinbarung mittlerweile bei der ARD 95 Prozent und beim ZDF 71 Prozent der Sendungen entsprechend untertitelt sind und dass es auch eine akustische Bildbeschreibung gibt, und zwar jeweils bei 42 bzw. 44 Prozent der Sendungen.\n\nAber es ist ein Fehler - deshalb habe ich heute das Bundestagspräsidium angeschrieben -, dass das Bundestagsfernsehen nicht barrierefrei sendet. Wir brauchen eine generelle Regelung, die vorsieht, dass auch Debatten nach der Kernzeit um 13 Uhr barrierefrei zu übertragen sind. Das erwarte ich vom Deutschen Bundestag. Nichts ist überzeugender als das gute Beispiel.\n\nWir müssen eine Bundesfachstelle für Barrierefreiheit einrichten, damit sich Kommunen und Private informieren können, wenn sie ihre Zuwege barrierefrei ausbauen wollen. Diese Kompetenzstelle, die wir nun schaffen, wird es ermöglichen, europäische Konzepte und Modelle zu transportieren, aufgrund derer wir unsere Kommunen und Privatunternehmen beraten können. Wir wollen mit einem weiteren Gesetz die Schwerbehindertenvertretungen im innerbetrieblichen und privaten Raum stärken. Sie sollen mehr Zeit und Freistellungen bekommen, damit sie die Barrierefreiheit in Unternehmen organisieren können. Die arbeitsteilige Organisation der Unternehmen ist ein weiterer Aspekt, den wir vorantreiben werden.\n\nAngesichts der Tatsache, dass 80 000 Menschen auf Gebärdensprache angewiesen sind und dass es nur rund 700 Gebärdendolmetscher gibt, brauchen wir die Zusammenarbeit mit den Ländern. Beispielsweise muss Gebärdensprache als freiwilliges Wahlfach an Schulen, Hochschulen und Volkshochschulen angeboten werden, damit das Interesse an dieser Grundsprache zunimmt.\n\nAber nicht nur an den Schulen, sondern auch in den Betrieben müssen wir Kompetenzstellen schaffen. Wir wollen zudem komplizierte Bescheide der Bundesbehörden in leichter Sprache erläutern. Das ist ein wichtiger Ansatz, und zwar nicht nur für lernbehinderte Menschen und Menschen mit seelischer und psychischer Beeinträchtigung. Vielmehr geht es in der Perspektive darum, die Behörden so kompetent zu machen, dass sie für alle Bürger, die eine Anfrage haben, da sein können. Wir dürfen nicht vergessen, dass es in Deutschland auch 7,5 Millionen strukturelle Analphabeten gibt, die jahrzehntelange nicht gelesen haben und für die Bescheide in leichter Sprache hilfreich sind. Aber die entsprechende Kompetenz muss erst aufgebaut werden.\n\nIch selber bin Landesvorsitzender der Lebenshilfe in Nordrhein-Westfalen. Wir erhalten regelmäßig Anfragen, ob wir mit unserem Potenzial die leichte Sprache auf Kreisebene und kommunaler Ebene stärker unterstützen können. Wir haben aber die entsprechenden Kompetenzzentren nicht. Wir müssen sie erst schaffen. Wenn wir sie aufgebaut haben, dann muss der nächste Schritt sein, die entsprechenden Kompetenzen verstärkt in den privaten und den wirtschaftlichen Raum zu transportieren. Aber wir müssen die Kompetenzen mit der heutigen Verabschiedung des Gesetzentwurfs erst aufbauen, um den nächsten Schritt gehen zu können.\n\nDas Merkzeichen für Taubblinde, das endlich zwischen Bund und Ländern vereinbart wurde, ist ebenfalls ein wichtiger Punkt, den wir nun umsetzen werden.\n\nWir setzen Anreize durch Gelder und eine verbesserte Kompetenz in der Barrierefreiheit. Wer das alles ablehnt, lehnt Verbesserungen für die betroffenen Menschen ab. Deshalb plädiere ich dafür, diesen Verbesserungen zuzustimmen und den nächsten Schritt zu gehen.\n\nBei der Umsetzung der UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention kann man nicht einfach einen Kippschalter umlegen, und dann ist alles schön. Vielmehr handelt es sich um einen Prozess, der zwar Jahre dauert, aber in die richtige Richtung geht.\"\n10351,tabea-roßner,\"Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren!\n\nBehauptung: Der deutsche Film ist tot. Tot. Totgefördert. Totgeskriptet. Totgequatscht. Totproduziert. Totunterrichtet. Totgelehrt. Totkritisiert. Totgeschrieben. Totbetreut. Hat sich totgefeiert. Hat sich totgelacht. Ist total unerotisch. Totgegrübelt. - War es je anders?\n\nDas ist ein Zitat aus dem neuen Dokumentarfilm Verfluchte Liebe deutscher Film. Dominik Graf sucht darin nach einem deutschen Kino, das er lieben kann. Ich meine, wenn wir hier über die Reform der Filmförderung reden, sollten wir genau das tun.\n\nAls leidenschaftliche Kinogängerin wünsche ich mir nicht nur Filme, die mich gut unterhalten, sondern ich wünsche mir auch Filme, die mich anregen, die andere Sichtweisen zeigen, die gegen den Strich bürsten, ja, auch welche, die provozieren. Dazu brauchen die Filmschaffenden kreative Freiheiten. Gerade in Zeiten wie diesen ist es umso wichtiger, dass wir diese Freiheiten ermöglichen, den Künstlerinnen und Künstlern den Rücken stärken und für die uneingeschränkte Kunstfreiheit eintreten.\n\nEinige Probleme bei der Filmförderung werden in dem Antrag der Linken ganz richtig beschrieben. Die Förderstrukturen sind ineffizient und ungerecht, Frauen bekommen nur selten den Zuschlag, und viele Beschäftigungsverhältnisse sind prekär. In Ihren Schlussfolgerungen aber tun sich dann Widersprüche auf. Sie fordern mehr Referenz- und weniger Projektförderung. Von der automatischen Referenzförderung profitieren aber vor allem diejenigen, die erfolgreiche Kinofilme gemacht und den Fuß schon in der Tür haben. Das Problem ist aber, dass zum Beispiel gerade Frauen gar nicht bis zur Tür kommen; sie werden vorher gestoppt. Mir ist die Vergabe von Fördermitteln ohne Gremien ja auch sympathisch. Die Wahrheit ist allerdings, dass automatische Förderung auch nicht gerechter ist. Das kann man ja beim DFFF sehr deutlich sehen.\n\nEin Aspekt ist doch auch, dass Gremien viele sehr einfallslose Entscheidungen treffen. Da werden Filme gefördert, die eh schon die meisten Zuschauer haben. Der Teufel scheißt immer auf den größten Haufen. Schönes Beispiel: Fack ju Göhte 2 erhält jetzt noch eine Vertriebsförderung, obwohl genau dieser Film diese überhaupt nicht nötig hätte.\n\nWir brauchen aber Vielfalt im Film, und dafür brauchen wir auch den kleinen und den feinen Film.\n\nSie fordern Gerechtigkeit bei der Förderung. Das fordern auch wir. Weshalb fordern Sie dann aber nicht mehr Transparenz in diesem Förderdschungel? Denn Transparenz wäre doch die Voraussetzung für eine gerechtere Steuerung innerhalb des Systems. Ich habe dafür einen ganz einfachen Vorschlag: eine umfassende Berichtspflicht für die Filmförderungsanstalt. Ich sage Ihnen auch, warum.\n\nNeulich hat meine Fraktion einen Brief von Staatsministerin Grütters bekommen. Wir hatten sie nach Zahlen zur Effizienz, zur Gerechtigkeit und zur Nachhaltigkeit der Filmförderung gefragt. Den besten Beweis für die Ineffizienz und die Ahnungslosigkeit lieferte uns dieser Brief. Statt einer Antwort mit Zahlen habe ich eine Antwort bekommen, in der steht, wie lange das Zusammentragen der Zahlen dauern würde. Mehr als zwei Jahre bräuchte die FFA, um beispielsweise eine Aufstellung von Rückflüssen nach Besucherzahlen vorzulegen. So wenig kennt die FFA offenbar ihre eigenen Zahlen.\n\nIn Frankreich gibt es ein zentrales Filmregister. Dort werden bei öffentlich geförderten Produktionen alle Verträge hinterlegt: mit Informationen zum Gesamtbudget, zu Beteiligungen von Sendern und Koproduzenten und zu den Arbeitsbedingungen. Und in Deutschland? Da behält die FFA so wichtige Daten, an denen die gesamte deutsche Filmbranche hängt, für sich oder - noch schlimmer - erhebt sie gar nicht erst. Hier sehen wir dringenden Änderungsbedarf.\n\nWir sind davon überzeugt: Wenn es bei der Förderung etwas gerechter zuginge, bräuchte sich die Branche auch nicht mehr zu verstecken, und wir alle müssten nicht mehr fluchen über unsere Liebe zum deutschen Film.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n9929,gustav-herzog,\"Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Unsere Wasser- und Schifffahrtsverwaltung hat ihr Ziel in einer kurzen, klaren Botschaft zusammengefasst: Wir machen Schifffahrt möglich. - Unsere Aufgabe als Gesetzgeber ist, dabei zu helfen.\n\nMit dem vorliegenden Gesetzentwurf werden wir einen weiteren Meilenstein setzen. Aber das Gesetz als solches ist nicht gerade berauschend. Da ist ganz viel Technik drin. Wir werden als SPD-Bundestagsfraktion dem Gesetzentwurf zustimmen.\n\nLieber Kollege Behrens von der Linken, wir werden den Änderungsantrag Ihrer Fraktion ablehnen, weil wir es für nicht erforderlich halten, die Mitbestimmungsrechte der Länder über den Bundesrat auszuweiten. Bedenken Sie: In den 75 Verordnungen, die geändert werden, geht es in der Regel nur um Textänderungen, aber nicht um Inhalte. Es geht überwiegend um rein bundespolitisches Handeln. Bei aller Freundschaft zu den Ländern: Das, was Sie fordern, ist nicht notwendig.\n\nFür die Länder ist viel wichtiger, dass Ansprechpartner vor Ort sind, dass der Landrat, der Bürgermeister oder der Feuerwehrkommandant im Fall einer Havarie wissen, mit wem sie zu telefonieren haben, und ihre Leute bei der WSV kennen. Das ist wichtig, und das machen wir mit diesem Gesetz fest. Wir bleiben in der Fläche kompetent vertreten.\n\nIch kann den Kolleginnen und Kollegen von den Grünen und der CDU/CSU - das hätte früher auch für die Kollegen von der FDP gegolten - einen Rückblick auf den 27. Oktober 2010 nicht ersparen. In jenem berühmten Herbst der Entscheidungen haben Sie als schwarz-gelbe Koalition im Haushaltsausschuss eine Entscheidung getroffen, die da lautete: Wir zerschlagen die WSV. Wir machen aus einer Durchführungsverwaltung eine Gewährleistungsverwaltung, mit dem Ziel, Personal abzubauen und zu privatisieren. - Nun wende ich mich an den Magdeburger Kollegen Behrens von der Union. Damals sind die Beschäftigten auf die Straße gegangen und haben Schilder mit der Aufschrift „Dem Osten das Wasser nicht abgraben“ hochgehalten. Ihre Solidarität habe ich damals vermisst.\n\nUnter Herrn Ramsauer war geplant, über 2 000 Stellen abzubauen und ein Viertel aller Standorte zu schließen, bis hin zu der irren Idee, in den Ämtern eine Trennung zwischen Infrastruktur und Betrieb vorzunehmen. Das ist alles im Zuge des 6. Berichts zur Reform der WSV einkassiert worden. Dafür bin ich dem Bundesminister sehr dankbar. Herr Staatssekretär, richten Sie es ihm aus.\n\nEr hat das, was wir mit der Koalitionsvereinbarung möglich gemacht haben, umgesetzt. Wir haben damals in die Koalitionsvereinbarung hineingeschrieben, dass wir die Reform zusammen mit den Beschäftigten weiterentwickeln wollen. Wir haben auch hineingeschrieben: Wir wollen die Kompetenz in der Fläche erhalten, wir wollen, dass die Beschäftigten dort sind, wo sie gebraucht werden. - Das steht im 1. Fortschrittsbericht.\n\nEs gibt eine Garantie für alle Standorte. Die Beschäftigten wissen - sozialverträglich -: Sie müssen nur anderswo hin, wenn sie es wirklich wollen. Und der Bundesminister hat auch eine klare Aussage getroffen: Wir wollen nicht weiter privatisieren und vergeben, sondern wir wollen in Zukunft sehr genau darauf schauen, wo die Wasserstraßen- und Schifffahrtsverwaltung eigene Kompetenz braucht. Die wollen wir wieder aufbauen, und das ist auch der richtige Kurs.\n\nMein Dank geht insbesondere an unsere Haushälter. Bettina Hagedorn und Norbert Brackmann haben sich in enger Abstimmung mit uns Verkehrspolitikern immer dafür eingesetzt, dass ausreichende Mittel zur Verfügung stehen und dass auch in den letzten zwei Jahren das Personal wieder aufgestockt wird. Es geht nicht wie in der Vergangenheit mit dem Abbau von Personal und dem Hineintragen von Verunsicherung in die Belegschaft weiter, sondern wir stellen wieder Leute ein, müssen aber zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass wir da in Konkurrenz zu vielen anderen stehen. Planungsingenieure, Bauingenieure, Juristen, die die Planfeststellungsverfahren vorantreiben - wir streiten uns da um dieselben Leute. Deswegen ist unser Auftrag, als Parlament und als Abgeordnete dafür zu sorgen, dass die Wasserstraßen- und Schifffahrtsverwaltung ein attraktiver Arbeitgeber wird, wo die Leute gern hingehen. Diese Aufgabe haben auch wir als Abgeordnete zur erfüllen.\n\nIch habe angesprochen, dass unsere Haushälter gut Geld zur Verfügung stellen. Der Bundesminister hat auch schon an anderen Stellen gesagt: Geld ist nicht mehr das Problem. - Wir mussten sogar Gelder zurückgeben. In den Jahren von 2009 bis 2014 haben wir aus dem Haushalt für Unterhalt und Bau von Wasserstraßen 700 Millionen Euro nicht ausgeben können.\n\nDie Straßenbauverwaltungen der Länder, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, haben sich darüber gefreut. Sie waren in der Lage, das Geld auszugeben.\n\nDas sage ich als kleinen Hinweis für die aktuelle Diskussion über eine Bundesfernstraßengesellschaft. Die Befürworter einer solchen Bundesfernstraßengesellschaft hätten es etwas einfacher in der Diskussion, wenn sie sagen könnten: Wir haben das in der Vergangenheit bei unserer eigenen Firma hervorragend gemacht. - Diesen Beweis zu führen, ist, glaube ich, etwas schwierig. Meine persönliche Auffassung lautet: Ich will bei der Aufteilung der Aufgaben - Wasserstraßen sind Bundessache, Straßenbau und \u001eunterhaltung sind Ländersache - bleiben.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, bei der Diskussion wird eines klar: Bevor wir den Investitionshochlauf umsetzen können, müssen wir gemeinsam für einen Personalhochlauf bei unserer Wasserstraßen- und Schifffahrtsverwaltung sorgen. Wir müssen auch den Ländern diese Möglichkeit geben.\n\nBei all den Reformen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, müssen wir eines bedenken: Die machen diese Reformschritte während der ganz normalen Arbeitszeit. Sie sind ja dabei an den Schleusen, an den Dükern, an den Deichen, an den Wehren. Das wird alles gemacht, während wir gleichzeitig einen Umbau der Wasserstraßen- und Schifffahrtsverwaltung vornehmen. Daher richtet sich mein Dank an die Beschäftigten, die draußen eine so tolle Arbeit leisten und auf die wir stolz sein können.\n\nDenn unsere Wasserstraßen oder Wasserstraßen überhaupt sind etwas ganz Besonderes. Ohne Schiene und Straße zu nahe treten zu wollen, muss ich doch sagen: Schiene ist doch langweilig. Da fahren Züge. Wir können noch Güterzüge, Nahverkehrs- und Fernverkehrszüge unterscheiden. Auf der Straße ist das Bild schon etwas bunter. Da dürfen Lkws, Pkws, Motorräder, manchmal auch Fahrräder fahren, und sogar Fußgänger sind unterwegs. Aber unsere Wasserstraßen sind multifunktional.\n\nSie sind für die Ökologie unheimlich wichtig. Wir werden Weltmeister im Bau von Fischtreppen. Für den Tourismus sind die Wasserstraßen wichtig. Ich sehe den Kollegen Stefan Zierke hier. Wenn Sie mit Ihren Liebsten einmal ein Picknick machen wollen,\n\ngehen Sie dann an den Autobahnzubringer oder an die Weiche? Nein, Sie gehen an den Kanal, Sie gehen an den Fluss. Das ist das äußere Zeichen, wie wichtig dieser Verkehrsträger auch unter ökologischen Gesichtspunkten ist. Deswegen lohnt es sich, in diesen zu investieren.\n\nDazu kommt: Für Millionen von Menschen ist die Wasserver- und -entsorgung wichtig. Beim Hochwasserschutz arbeiten wir jetzt auch sehr eng mit den Ländern zusammen. Herr Staatssekretär, ich finde es gut, dass wir gemeinsam mit dem Umweltministerium - Stichwort: Bundesprogramm „Blaues Band“ - eine Menge machen, um deutlich zu zeigen: Es gibt keinen Widerspruch zwischen Ökologie und Binnenschifffahrt und Seeschifffahrt. Das können wir gut gemeinsam machen.\n\nDie Wasserstraßen erzeugen Energie, und, ja, sie sind auch für den Transport wichtig und notwendig. Da fängt aber das Problem an, weil unsere Bundeswasserstraßen häufig eindimensional sind. Auf der Schiene können wir den Verkehr umleiten, auf der Straße sind wir das gewöhnt. Aber wenn ich irgendwo eine Schleuse wegen einer Havarie oder weil eine Reparatur ansteht zumachen muss,\n\ndann kann ich schlecht das große Motorschiff mit 2 000 Tonnen Gewicht herausheben, herumtragen und wieder ins Wasser setzen.\n\nDas ist die besondere Herausforderung an die Zuverlässigkeit unserer Bundeswasserstraßen. Der müssen wir uns stellen. Um zu zeigen, wie wichtig sie für die Volkswirtschaft sind, will ich daran erinnern, was los war, als im Nord-Ostsee-Kanal bei Brunsbüttel eine Schleuse kaputt war oder als die „Waldhof“ im Rhein havariert war und der Rhein für einige Tage blockiert war. Die WSV hat eine tolle Arbeit geleistet; trotzdem hat die Havarie deutlich gemacht, wie wichtig die Wasserstraßen für unsere Volkswirtschaft sind. Es lohnt sich, darin zu investieren, auch im Hinblick auf den Bundesverkehrswegeplan.\n\nDa will ich noch einen Hinweis geben. Wir haben Schleusen, die in 10 bis 15 Jahren grundsaniert werden müssen. Eine solche Grundsanierung dauert nicht wenige Tage oder Wochen, sondern sie kann Monate, wenn nicht sogar ein Jahr dauern. Wenn eine solche Schleuse einen ganzen Wasserweg sperren kann, stellt sich ganz klar die Frage, ob wir im Hinblick auf diese Grundsanierungen nicht überall für Redundanzen, also für zweite Schleusen sorgen müssen, damit die Durchgängigkeit bleibt.\n\nLiebe Genossinnen und Genossen - -\n\n- Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das war eine Einladung an Sie alle. - Wir erwarten mit Spannung in der nächsten Sitzungswoche den Bundesverkehrswegeplan,\n\ndie näheren Informationen zum Fortschrittsbericht und dazu, wie die Reviere abgegrenzt sind, wie die innere Struktur ist und wie abgeschichtet wird. Wir erwarten den Netzzustandsbericht, Herr Staatssekretär. Ich hoffe, es ist das letzte Mal, dass ich von dieser Stelle aus daran erinnern muss. Wir erwarten auch einen Wassertourismusbericht. Es liegt also viel Arbeit vor uns. Packen wir es gemeinsam an, machen wir Schifffahrt möglich.\n\nDanke schön.\"\n14746,florian-pronold,\"Die Frage bezieht sich auf eine mögliche Interessenkollision des Leiters der Zentralabteilung unseres Ministeriums, der zugleich für die Steuerung der Bundesgesellschaft für Endlagerung zuständig und im Kuratorium der Stiftung „Fonds zur Finanzierung der kerntechnischen Entsorgung“ ist.\n\nDie Steuerung der BGE mbH erfolgt innerhalb des Bundesministeriums für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reaktorsicherheit nicht allein durch die Zentralabteilung, sondern in Zusammenarbeit mit der fachlich zuständigen Abteilung für Reaktorsicherheit.\n\nDer Aufbau der BGE mbH erfordert eine sehr intensive und enge Zusammenarbeit zwischen dem Bundesumweltministerium als beteiligungsführendes Ressort und der BGE-Geschäftsführung. Die in der Fragestellung angesprochene personelle Verzahnung ist insoweit unter Effizienz- und Wirtschaftlichkeitsaspekten besonders förderlich und sinnvoll. Es handelt sich um einen außerordentlich komplexen und umfangreichen Umstrukturierungsprozess, der erfordert, dass die beteiligten Akteure besonders eng kooperieren, um Effizienz, Wirtschaftlichkeit und Sozialverträglichkeit der Maßnahmen sicherzustellen.\n\nDie Stiftung „Fonds zur Finanzierung der kerntechnischen Entsorgung“ hat die alleinige Aufgabe, die von den KKW-Betreibern einzubringenden Geldbeträge sicher und gewinnbringend anzulegen. Aus dieser Zielsetzung ergibt sich, dass eine Interessenvermischung im vorliegenden Fall nicht vorhanden sein kann, da ein Sach- oder Interessenzusammenhang mit den Aufgaben eines BGE-Geschäftsführers nicht ersichtlich ist.\n\nMaßgebliche Kriterien für die Bestellung der Kuratoriumsmitglieder sind Sachkunde und Berufserfahrung in den Bereichen Finanzen und Wirtschaftlichkeitskontrolle. Vor diesem Hintergrund besteht in der Aufbauphase der BGE mbH keine Veranlassung, eine Beendigung der gewählten Konstellation in Betracht zu ziehen.\n\nIch will das gerne noch einmal präzisieren. Die entscheidende Frage lautet: Ist eine solche Doppelfunktion, wie sie unzweifelhaft besteht, notwendig, oder hat sie rechtlich problematische Interessenkollisionen zur Folge? Generell kann man das nicht beantworten. Vielmehr muss immer der Einzelfall beurteilt werden.\n\nDie Doppelfunktion hier dient ja dem notwendigen Wissenstransfer in der Aufbauphase von Behörden und der Unternehmensstrukturierung und kann sehr nützlich sein. So war zum Beispiel von August 2016 bis April 2017 im Endlagerbereich der Präsident des Bundesamtes für kerntechnische Entsorgungssicherheit gleichzeitig Leiter des Bundesamtes für Strahlenschutz. Hier gab es also auch für eine gewisse Zeit eine Doppelfunktion in einem Umstrukturierungsprozess - und zwar unter Aufsicht des Ministeriums -, um das Ganze zügig und effizient zu regeln. Ebenfalls eine Doppelfunktion hat der langjährige Geschäftsführer der Asse-GmbH in der Gründungs- und Aufbauphase inne, der nun gleichzeitig Geschäftsführer der bereits angesprochenen BGE mbH ist. Sie haben sicherlich bemerkt, dass ich hierbei das Wort „Aufbauphase“ betont habe. Wenn die Zusammenführung der verschiedenen Institutionen, die momentan noch aufgeteilt sind, in einer Gesellschaft abgeschlossen ist, stellt sich selbstverständlich die Frage nach solchen Doppelfunktionen neu und wird auch neu bewertet werden.\n\nGemäß dem Atomgesetz und der bereits umgesetzten Beschlüsse der Endlagerkommission ist die Verschmelzung der BGE mbH mit den beiden anderen im Endlagerbereich bestehenden Unternehmen vorgesehen, nämlich der DBE mbH und der Asse-GmbH. Die Unternehmensfusion wird bis spätestens zum 31. Dezember dieses Jahres erfolgen. Damit sind dann die wesentlichen Strukturveränderungen im Endlagerbereich abgeschlossen. Der Zeitpunkt dieser Verschmelzung wird, wie ich Ihnen vorher schon gesagt habe, auch zum Anlass genommen, die gegenwärtig aus guten Gründen bestehenden Doppelfunktionen zu überprüfen.\n\nIch habe bei der Frage von Herrn Zdebel auch durch Verweise auf Beispiele in anderen Fällen deutlich gemacht, dass das nach einer Zusammenführungsphase überprüft wird. Die Überprüfung führt im Regelfall dazu - so ist auch mein Verständnis -, dass es zur Beendigung solcher Doppelfunktionen kommt.\n\nWir alle sind schon sehr lange dabei und wissen, dass man mit hundertprozentiger Sicherheit nie etwas sagen kann. Aber es ist mit sehr großer Sicherheit auch unser Bestreben als BMUB, das Vertrauen, das sehr schwer in diesem Bereich insgesamt zu erringen und zu erhalten ist, durch nichts zu gefährden.\n\nDie Bundesregierung steht mit der französischen Regierung zur gesamten Bandbreite grenzüberschreitender Fragen in regelmäßigem Austausch. Die Bundesregierung wird sich weiterhin in geeigneter Art und Weise für eine möglichst zeitnahe Stilllegung des Atomkraftwerks Fessenheim einsetzen, wie sie der bisherige französische Staatspräsident Hollande angekündigt hatte.\n\nSelbstverständlich bezieht sich das auch auf Ihre Frage bezüglich Cattenom. Sie wissen, wie schwierig diese Fragen in den internationalen Beziehungen sind. Von französischer Seite hat es bisher allerdings noch keine Äußerungen dazu gegeben, ob es zu einer vorzeitigen Stilllegung von Cattenom kommen könnte.\n\nWenn ich das richtig sehe, war diese Frage bereits Gegenstand der Beantwortung durch meine Kollegin am 28. April und auch später im Mai. Es geht also um die Frage, was hier von vertraulichen Gesprächen kommuniziert werden kann. Ich kann Ihnen keine andere Antwort zu dem, was die Bundeskanzlerin besprochen hat oder nicht, geben, als meine Kollegin sie beim letzten Mal gegeben hat.\n\nIch kann Ihnen diese Frage so explizit jetzt nicht beantworten. Ich würde Sie darum bitten, dass ich das schriftlich nachreichen kann. Wir haben das ja auch öfter im Ausschuss bei sehr intensiven Beratungen. Sie wissen, dass wir von der gemeinsamen Kommission, die es dazu gibt, ständig Informationen bekommen und dass wir auch über alle sicherheitsrelevanten Aspekte direkt informiert werden. Jüngst hat auch die Bundesumweltministerin gemeinsam mit ihrem Kollegen aus Luxemburg noch einmal an die französische Regierung die Frage gestellt, wie weit der Prozess bezogen auf die Überprüfung nach den Post-Fukushima-Stresstests fortgeschritten ist. Auch bei diesem Punkt ist es wichtig, dass wir schnell die richtigen Informationen erhalten. Ich glaube aber, das betrifft Cattenom und nicht Fessenheim.\n\nIch würde Sie bitten, zu akzeptieren, dass ich, um Ihnen eine wirklich präzise und qualifizierte Aussage zu liefern, die Antwort schriftlich nachreiche.\n\nWir führen diese Debatte sehr oft. Sie wissen, dass wir uns in der Frage der Sicherheitseinschätzung allein auf die jeweils zuständige Behörde des Landes stützen müssen und dass wir in die entsprechenden Gremien vielfältige bilaterale Kontakte haben.\n\nWir sehen bei der neuen französischen Regierung, soweit es uns bekannt ist, in diesem Bereich keine wesentliche Änderung gegenüber der bisherigen Linie der französischen Politik. Es besteht die Absicht, Fessenheim schneller stillzulegen - mit all den Schwierigkeiten, die sich vor Ort übrigens noch auftun; der Ausstieg dürfte länger dauern als angekündigt. Bei Cattenom besteht diese nicht. Wir haben aufgrund der Meldungen aus den Gremien, die ständig über Sicherheitsfragen beraten, keinen Anlass, anzunehmen, dort von einer großen Sicherheitsgefahr auszugehen.\n\nPosition der Bundesregierung ist allerdings, nicht nur in Deutschland, sondern möglichst in Europa und weltweit so schnell wie möglich den Atomausstieg zu vollziehen, weil die Atomkraft eine nicht beherrschbare Technologie ist. In diesem Sinne wird die Bundesumweltministerin weiterhin gegenüber Frankreich agieren.\n\nBundesumweltministerin Dr. Hendricks hat den ukrainischen Minister bereits 2015 sowohl für das Projekt am Standort Riwne als auch für andere geplante Projekte zur Verlängerung der Laufzeit ukrainischer AKWs aus Gründen der Umweltvorsorge, gegebenenfalls auch auf freiwilliger Basis, um die Durchführung von grenzüberschreitenden Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfungen gebeten. In seiner Antwort verwies der ukrainische Umweltminister auf den Einzelfallcharakter der Entscheidung zu den Reaktoren Riwne 1 und Riwne 2 und lehnte eine allgemeine Anwendbarkeit der Espoo-Konvention bei Laufzeitverlängerungen ab.\n\nÜber die Laufzeitverlängerung der AKW Südukraine, Chmelnyzkyj Saporischschja ist ein Prüfungsverfahren vor dem Implementation Committee der Espoo-Konvention anhängig. Die Bundesregierung wird mit Blick auf den bereits erfolgten Schriftwechsel das Ergebnis des Committee abwarten und sodann über das weitere Vorgehen entscheiden.\n\nZum Stand betreffend Hinkley Point C: Entsprechend der Empfehlung des Espoo Implementation Committee hat das Vereinigte Königreich allen Staaten, so auch der deutschen Espoo-Kontaktstelle, die Frage gestellt, ob zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt eine Notifizierung für das geplante neue AKW Hinkley Point C angesichts des Verfahrensstandes noch für sinnvoll gehalten wird.\n\nUnter Berücksichtigung auch der eingegangenen positiven Rückmeldungen aus einigen Bundesländern, welche die für die Durchführung des grenzüberschreitenden UVP-Verfahrens zuständigen Behörden sind, hat das Bundesumweltministerium der zuständigen Behörde des Vereinigten Königreichs geantwortet, dass Deutschland eine Notifizierung zum jetzigen Verfahrensstand für sinnvoll hält. Die zuständige Behörde aus Großbritannien führt derzeit mit den Staaten, die bejahend auf das Schreiben geantwortet haben, Treffen durch. Das Treffen mit Deutschland zu dieser Frage hat in der vergangenen Woche stattgefunden. Nach Abschluss aller Treffen, also auch der mit anderen Ländern, wird die zuständige britische Behörde einen Vorschlag zum weiteren Vorgehen unterbreiten, mit dem wir uns dann auseinandersetzen können.\n\nZu diesem Punkt kann ich Ihnen aktuell keine Auskunft geben; mir liegen dazu keine Informationen vor. Aber ich gehe davon aus, dass diese Frage behandelt wird, wenn die Gespräche mit den anderen Ländern abgeschlossen sind und sich die zuständige britische Behörde entsprechend äußert; dann wird das sicher noch einmal aufgegriffen.\n\nIch biete Ihnen aber auch zu diesem Punkt an, dass ich dem noch einmal konkret nachgehe und Ihnen das schriftlich nachreiche.\n\nEs tut mir leid.\n\nBei mir war die Information angekommen, dass die Fragen 4, 5 und 6 schriftlich beantwortet werden.\n\nDas ist in Ordnung. Ich wollte das nur vorwegschicken und würde die Frage deshalb noch einmal vorlesen.\n\nGut.\n\nDer Bundesregierung liegen Informationen über die durch die deutsche Erdgasförderung verursachten Treibhausgasemissionen vor. Im Rahmen der internationalen Berichterstattungspflichten werden diese sowohl an die Einrichtungen der UN-Klimarahmenkonvention als auch an die entsprechenden europäischen Gremien berichtet.\n\nDeutschland hat im Jahr 2014 rund 9,1 Milliarden Kubikmeter Erdgas gefördert. Dies waren rund 9 Prozent des inländischen Bedarfs. Die mit dieser Förderung und dem Erdgastransport verursachten Methanemissionen betrugen 194 Kilotonnen. Dies entspricht einer Äquivalentemission von etwa 4,8 Millionen Tonnen CO2 bzw. etwas mehr als 0,5 Prozent der gesamten Treibhausgasemissionen in Deutschland. Bei der Verwertung von Erdgas treten im Grunde keine Methanemissionen auf, da die Verwertung fast ausschließlich über Verbrennungsprozesse erfolgt. Der im Methan enthaltene Kohlenstoff wird nach nahezu vollständiger Verbrennung als Kohlendioxid freigesetzt.\n\nÜber die mit dem Erdgasimport verbundenen Emissionen in den jeweiligen Erzeugerländern können detaillierte Angaben nicht gemacht werden, da deren Monitoring in die Verantwortung der Erzeugerländer fällt bzw. erforderliche technologische, prozessbezogene und qualitative Grundlageninformationen der Bundesregierung im Einzelnen nicht bekannt sind. Die Bundesregierung macht sich Angaben aus Studien Dritter grundsätzlich nicht zu eigen.\n\nFestzuhalten ist, dass die Emissionen bei der Erdgasförderung abhängig von der unmittelbaren Förderquelle bzw. deren Eigenschaften, der Fördertechnik und der Transportlänge sind. Bezüglich der Erdgasförderung und der Erdgasnutzung geht die Bundesregierung aber auf Basis einer ganzen Reihe von Studien davon aus, dass die Klimabilanz von Erdgas auch unter Berücksichtigung von Förderung und Transport um etwa 50 bis 60 Prozent besser ausfällt als diejenige von Braunkohle - abhängig natürlich von Alter und Wirkungsgrad der jeweiligen Anlagen.\n\nAus der Erfahrung mit vielen Studien, die es gibt, kann ich sagen, dass sie schwer vergleichbar sind, wenn sie nicht nach denselben Grundsätzen durchgeführt wurden. Deswegen ist die Bundesregierung auch vorsichtig, sich Studien oder die Erkenntnisse Dritter zu eigen zu machen, was ich vorhin ausgeführt habe.\n\nSollte es signifikante Hinweise darauf geben, dass es unterschiedlich hohe klimarelevante Emissionen aufgrund unterschiedlicher Förderprozesse gibt, dann ist es selbstverständlich für uns ein Thema und wir werden dem auch nachgehen, weil es den Klimaschutz betrifft. Ich nehme Ihre Frage zum Anlass, eine vertiefte Prüfung in unserem Hause zu veranlassen.\"\n1442,katarina-barley,\"Verehrte Frau Präsidentin! Meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist ja nicht wirklich ein Geheimnis, dass für einige Menschen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland diese Große Koalition nicht unbedingt die Wunschkonstellation nach der letzten Bundestagswahl war.\n\nDas hatte damit zu tun, dass diese übergroße Mehrheit in der Öffentlichkeit als erdrückend wahrgenommen und allgemein die Befürchtung geäußert wurde, die Minderheitenrechte könnten zu kurz kommen.\n\nNun hat der geschätzte Bundestagspräsident schon in der konstituierenden Sitzung bemerkt, dass große Mehrheiten nicht per se verfassungswidrig sind.\n\nAber daran, dass wir uns alle einig sind, dass eine funktionierende Demokratie eine funktionierende und wirkungsvolle Opposition braucht, kann ja kein Zweifel bestehen.\n\nDen Mehrheitsfraktionen war dieses Anliegen so wichtig, dass wir es ausdrücklich im Koalitionsvertrag aufgenommen haben. Ich sage das so ausdrücklich, weil man sich das wirklich auf der Zunge zergehen lassen und auch einmal in einen internationalen und historischen Kontext stellen muss. Man muss sich das einmal vor Augen führen: Wenn sich eine Mehrheit, die, wenn man es einmal ganz salopp formuliert, alles plattmachen könnte, wochenlang damit beschäftigt, wie man der Minderheit am effektivsten und sinnvollsten bestimmte Rechte einräumen kann, dann ist dies, wenn man es mit dem Vorgehen in vielen anderen Staaten mit durchaus längerer demokratischer Tradition vergleicht, schon ein sehr bemerkenswerter Vorgang,\n\nnoch dazu in einem Land, das hinsichtlich seiner demokratischen Tradition durchaus einige Anlaufschwierigkeiten hatte. Vor diesem Hintergrund möchte ich sagen, dass dieser Tag ein guter Tag für die Demokratie in Deutschland und für unsere gemeinsame parlamentarische Arbeit ist.\n\nDer erste Vorschlag unseres Bundestagspräsidenten war, hier mit einem einfachen Bundestagsbeschluss vorzugehen. Das fand die Opposition zu wenig verbindlich. Es war wohl auch ein Mangel an Vertrauen vorhanden, dass wir das wirklich ernst meinen. Aber ich glaube, dass der weitere Verlauf der Diskussionen und der Verhandlungen und auch das Ergebnis bewiesen haben, dass dieses Misstrauen nicht gerechtfertigt war. Umso erfreulicher ist es, dass wir aus der beiderseitigen Unzufriedenheit herausgefunden und sehr konstruktiv miteinander verhandelt haben. Das erweiterte Berichterstattergespräch mit den Sachverständigen wurde schon erwähnt; das war sicherlich für alle Seiten sehr hilfreich. Wir haben es uns also nicht einfach gemacht. Im Ergebnis haben wir uns von beiden Seiten angenähert. Dafür bedanke ich mich bei den Vertreterinnen und Vertretern ausdrücklich aller Fraktionen noch einmal sehr herzlich.\n\nWir haben nun einen Antrag zur Änderung der Geschäftsordnung vorliegen. Das war aus meiner Sicht, verehrte Kollegin Keul, immer der richtige Ort, um Änderungen vorzunehmen, weil es die Bedürfnisse einer spezifischen Legislaturperiode betrifft. Wir haben in diesem Antrag auch festgelegt, dass wir von den Änderungen nicht mit Zweidrittelmehrheit abweichen können.\n\nIch möchte betonen, dass ich die gefundene Lösung für die systematisch bessere Lösung halte als die, die wir ursprünglich vorgesehen hatten; denn bisher sind im Grundgesetz Rechte für einzelne Abgeordnete, für Fraktionen und für eine bestimmte Anzahl von Abgeordneten vorgesehen. Was es nicht gibt, sind Rechte der Opposition. Ich finde es gut, dass wir mit unserem Vorschlag in der Systematik bleiben und nicht für eine Legislaturperiode ein ganz neues Instrument schaffen, nämlich Rechte von Angehörigen der Oppositionsfraktionen hier im Plenum. Wir haben damit zwei Probleme ausgeräumt. Ein Problem ist schon erwähnt worden: Der ursprüngliche Entwurf sah vor, dass alle Abgeordneten der Oppositionsfraktionen die Minderheitenrechte gemeinsam wahrnehmen. Es wurde eingewandt, dass schon das Fehlen eines Abgeordneten bzw. einer Einigung die Wahrnehmung der Minderheitenrechte verhindern könnte. Darauf sind wir eingegangen. Die jetzt gefundene Lösung ist ein sehr praktikables Instrument, auch für die Opposition; aber ich betone: auch für die Opposition.\n\nDurch die Regelung, dass 120 Mitglieder des Parlaments die Minderheitenrechte wahrnehmen können, wird nicht mehr zwischen Angehörigen der Regierungsfraktionen und Angehörigen der Oppositionsfraktionen differenziert. Ursprünglich war vorgesehen - das war das zweite Problem -, dass 20 Prozent der Oppositionsfraktionen bestimmte Rechte hätten wahrnehmen können. Bei den Mehrheitsfraktionen hätten es 25 oder eben auch 33 Prozent sein müssen. Aber alle Abgeordneten müssen im Grundsatz die gleichen Rechte haben; denn wir alle gemeinsam und nicht nur die Opposition kontrollieren die Regierung. Das nennt man in Deutschland Gewaltenteilung, und daran sollten wir festhalten.\n\nNatürlich haben Sie sich weiter gehende Änderungen gewünscht. Die Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der Opposition, in diesem Falle von der Linken, wollten mehrere Änderungen des Grundgesetzes erreichen. Das betrifft vor allen Dingen die abstrakte Normenkontrolle. Dazu nur ganz kurz: Wenn Sie vor das Bundesverfassungsgericht ziehen wollen, dann ist ein solcher Antrag auf Normenkontrolle sicherlich zulässig, wenn es um Ihre eigenen Rechte geht. Als Abgeordnete müssen Sie kein Quorum einhalten; das ist so und das bleibt Gott sei Dank auch so. Aber ich glaube nicht, dass ein solcher Antrag begründet wäre; denn im Grundgesetz selbst ist vorgesehen, dass ein Viertel der Abgeordneten das Quorum für die abstrakte Normenkontrolle ist.\n\nIch komme gleich zum Ende. - Es wird nicht ganz einfach sein, vorzutragen, dass das Grundgesetz selbst in diesem Punkt gegen das Grundgesetz verstößt. Es ist auch nicht sachgerecht, das Grundgesetz in jeder Legislatur den veränderten Mehrheiten anzupassen. Aber vor allen Dingen ist eben die Normenkontrolle kein Minderheitenrecht, sondern eine Verfahrensart unter mehreren für verschiedene Akteure.\n\nKurz gesagt: Ich bin wirklich froh, dass wir eine so breite Mehrheit für die Änderung der Geschäftsordnung gefunden haben. Ich glaube, dass heute ein guter Tag für die politische Kultur ist und dass es auch ein Signal nach außen ist. Dafür möchte ich mich sehr herzlich bedanken.\"\n6088,detlev-pilger,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Verehrte Gäste! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sport ist eine der schönsten Nebensachen der Welt, begeistert Menschen, erhält die Gesundheit, verschafft Emotionen und dient der Integration und der Völkerverständigung. Welches Bild jedoch die Bevölkerung vielfach von sportlichen Großveranstaltungen hat und welche Befürchtungen damit verbunden werden, hat uns der Bürgerentscheid zur Olympiabewerbung in München und Garmisch-Partenkirchen, aber auch in anderen europäischen Ländern deutlich gemacht.\n\nDie Olympiade in Sotschi und die WM in Brasilien haben diese Einschätzungen weiter verstärkt: Dort wurden gigantische Sportstätten ohne Rücksicht auf Umwelt und Natur gebaut; die Arbeitsbedingungen waren unmenschlich, und es gab wenige Nachnutzungskonzepte. In Brasilien wurden zum Teil Stadien für Zigtausende Besucher in biologisch hochsensiblen Gebieten gebaut, in denen heute nur wenige Hundert Menschen Sportveranstaltungen verfolgen. Diese Stadien sind schon heute dem Zerfall gewidmet.\n\nDie Abgründe, die sich im Rahmen der WM-Vergabe in Katar auftun, sind jedoch wohl kaum zu überbieten.\n\nDie Verantwortlichen haben immerhin „nur“ vier Jahre gebraucht, um zu erkennen, dass es im Sommer in der Wüste zu heiß ist, um Fußball zu spielen. Beim Bau der Stadien werden Menschen- und Arbeitsrechte nicht geachtet. Momentan sind mehr als 13 000 Gastarbeiter in Katar. Der Internationale Gewerkschaftsbund fällte 2014 ein vernichtendes Urteil - Zitat -:\n\nAusländische Beschäftigte werden wie Sklaven behandelt.\n\nSchuld daran sei das Kafala-System, bei dem die Arbeiter dem Arbeitgeber gehören: Er nimmt ihnen den Pass ab, lässt sie sechs Tage in der Woche zehn Stunden am Tag in der Hitze schuften, sodass bisher schon Hunderte Arbeiter auf den Baustellen gestorben sind. Appelle, Abhilfe zu schaffen, verhallen. Wo bleibt der Aufschrei der Würdenträger? Wo bleibt die längst überfällige Bildung einer unabhängigen Kommission, die die Zustände kontrolliert?\n\nDamit nicht genug: Bereits heute steht die FIFA im Hinblick auf die WM 2018 vor einem weiteren hausgemachten Problem. Je näher der Zeitpunkt der WM in Russland rückt, desto häufiger werden die Rufe nach einem Boykott laut. - Alles nichts Neues. Die Vergangenheit hat bereits vielfach gezeigt, dass die Unterdrückung der Opposition und die Verletzung der Menschenrechte keine Ausschlusskriterien für die Ausrichtung von sportlichen Großveranstaltungen sind. Mit diesem System wird billigend in Kauf genommen, dass sich politische Herrscher öffentlichkeitswirksam in Szene setzen.\n\nDoch zurück nach Katar. Ich kenne niemanden, der die Vergabe der WM in den Wüstenstaat gutheißen würde. Aber ich kenne auch keine Scheichs, die die eigentlichen großen Gewinner dieser WM sind. Man erkennt das schlechte Gewissen der FIFA, die nun die die Spieler abgebenden Vereine mit den doppelten Summen entschädigt. Wenn sich alle Europäer einig wären, dann sollten sie diese WM boykottieren.\n\nDann soll das System Blatter doch mal eine WM ohne Spanier, Italiener, Engländer, Holländer, Franzosen und Deutsche spielen! Das wäre ein deutliches Zeichen.\n\nDenn dass sich die FIFA von selbst reformiert, ist so unwahrscheinlich wie ein Wintereinbruch in Katar.\n\nMich und Millionen Fußballbegeisterte, die sich auf die Spiele vorbereiten und äußerst freuen, würde das zutiefst treffen. Aber den Preis würde ich zahlen und mich in dieser Zeit dann stattdessen auf den Advent und Weihnachten vorbereiten.\n\nWenn Großveranstaltungen ihre Glaubwürdigkeit zurückgewinnen sollen, darf es zukünftig nicht mehr zu solchen Vergaben kommen.\n\nWir brauchen Vergaberichtlinien, die mit den Sportorganisationen diskutiert und abgesprochen werden. Dieser Katalog muss sich an ökologischen und menschenrechtlichen Kriterien ausrichten und ein schlüssiges Nachnutzungskonzept ausweisen. Gelingt das nicht, verlieren solche sportlichen Großveranstaltungen zusehends an Akzeptanz und verfehlen das Gefühl einer sportlichen Weltfamilie. Zu dieser gehören auch die Hunderte von Gastarbeitern in Katar, die bereits auf den Baustellen ihr Leben gelassen haben und deren Familien nun ohne Ernährer überleben müssen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n15542,bernd-westphal,\"Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Herr Kauder, Sie haben eben, was Verteidigungs- und Sicherheitspolitik angeht, die SPD genannt. Ich will Ihnen als Erstes sagen: Wir brauchen dort keine Nachhilfe von Ihnen. Die Verteidigungsminister der Sozialdemokratie hatten mehr Zustimmung in der Truppe als die jetzige Amtsinhaberin.\n\nAls Zweites kann ich Ihnen auch sagen: Die Herausforderungen, die Sie richtigerweise beschrieben haben - hier bin ich ja bei Ihnen -, verlangen andere Maßnahmen als bewaffnete Drohnen.\n\nLiebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, am 7. und 8. Juli 2017 steht Deutschland als Gastgeber des G-20-Treffens im Mittelpunkt globaler Aufmerksamkeit, und die Menschen werden sich berechtigterweise fragen: Was kommt eigentlich dabei heraus, wenn sich die Regierungschefs aus 20 wichtigen Wirtschaftsnationen treffen? Ist der Aufwand gerechtfertigt? Gibt es wirklich Fortschritte und Verbesserungen?\n\nUm es gleich vorwegzusagen: Wir halten die G 20 für eines der wichtigsten Foren, wenn nicht sogar für das global wichtigste Forum. Nur in solchen Foren kann die notwendige internationale globale Zusammenarbeit koordiniert werden. - Das sagen wir denjenigen, die dieses Forum noch immer hinterfragen.\n\nDie SPD hat sich aufgrund der Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung und mit Personen wie Willy Brandt immer für internationale Zusammenarbeit und Kooperation eingesetzt. Wir brauchen sie. Unserer Meinung nach sollte die Zusammenarbeit aber stärker auf die Bedürfnisse der Menschen abzielen. Die internationale Zusammenarbeit muss gerechter, fairer und auch wirkungsvoller sein. Aber es gibt keine Alternative. Dieser Dialog ist wichtig, und deshalb ist das G-20-Treffen eine wichtige Plattform.\n\nDas sage ich auch an die Adresse derjenigen, die nur Protest zeigen und wenig Verständnis für die notwendige politische Abstimmung zwischen diesen Staaten haben. Nur im Dialog können wir Globalisierung gestalten. Gerade die Gegner der bisherigen Globalisierungsprozesse müssen ein Interesse daran haben, diesen Dialog zu stärken, damit auch die, die zum Beispiel in Bangladesch oder sonst wo für einen Hungerlohn arbeiten, eine Chance auf soziale Absicherung, auf menschenwürdige Arbeitsbedingungen, auf eine intakte Umwelt und auf Teilhabe am Wohlstand haben.\n\nImmer stärker rücken Fragestellungen in den Vordergrund der G 20, die weiter gehen als Fragen der internationalen wirtschaftlichen Zusammenarbeit. Der Handel bietet Lösungsansätze für diese globalen Herausforderungen. Wir sagen Ja zu dieser verbesserten Zielstellung der G 20 mit Schwerpunkten auch in den Bereichen Klimapolitik und Ernährungssicherung und beim Thema Arbeit.\n\nDas Treffen der Arbeitsminister, Labour 20, im Mai dieses Jahres hat neue Regeln für eine faire Globalisierung und für digitales Arbeiten verfasst. Die Gewerkschaftsgruppierungen übergaben diese Empfehlungen an die Bundesregierung. Wir begrüßen diesen Dialog mit der Zivilgesellschaft im Rahmen der G-20-Beteiligungsprozesse, auf die diesmal ein Schwerpunkt gelegt wurde.\n\nDiese Gruppen nennen sich die „C 20“. Dieser Zusammenschluss zivilgesellschaftlicher Akteure im G-20-Prozess besteht aus zivilgesellschaftlichen Organisationen und gestaltet dieses Forum mit.\n\nDie G 20 hat sich in den letzten acht Jahren deutlich gewandelt. Wir begrüßen, dass arbeitsmarktpolitische Themen und Soziales, aber auch der Schutz der Umwelt, die Bekämpfung von Fluchtursachen, die globale Gesundheit und die Stärkung von Frauen und Kindern mit auf der Tagesordnung stehen.\n\nOb es bei den G-20-Themen wirklich zu Durchbrüchen kommt, bleibt abzuwarten. Sicherlich wird vieles durch die Teilnahme von Herrn Trump und Erdogan nicht einfacher, da die G-20-Regeln vorgeben, dass Entscheidungen im Konsens zu treffen sind. Es ist jedoch wichtig, die Ziele der nachhaltigen Entwicklung in der Agenda 2030 und das Pariser Klimaschutzabkommen mit neuen Impulsen voranzutreiben. Der Gipfel bietet Deutschland die Möglichkeit, auf die Notwendigkeit einer neuen, an soziale und ökologische Anforderungen angepassten Zukunftsvision hinzuweisen.\n\nWir können viele Neuerungen in unserer sozialen und klimafreundlichen Wirtschaftspolitik auf dem Gipfel mit unseren Partnern diskutieren und sie auffordern, sich dieser Politik zu öffnen. Ähnliches gilt für weiter gehende Entscheidungen des Europäischen Parlaments und der EU zu Mindeststandards in den globalen Wertschöpfungs- und Lieferketten. Diese menschenrechtlichen, sozialen und ökologischen Regeln gehören in die G-20-Gruppe, sie gehören auf den Gipfel und müssen dort diskutiert werden.\n\nHervorheben möchte ich den Erfolg, den wir bei der G-20-Präsidentschaft in der Arbeitsgruppe „Handel und Investitionen“ erzielt haben. Auch hier wünschen wir dem G-20-Gipfel, dass er einen Beitrag dazu leistet, Handel fairer zu machen und verbindliche Verbraucher- und Umweltschutzstandards zu vereinbaren. Dazu müssen vor allen Dingen Sie, Frau Bundeskanzlerin, da Sie Gastgeberin dieses Gipfels sind, durchsetzungsstarke Verhandlungsstrategien aufnehmen. Es liegt maßgeblich an Ihnen, ob die guten vorgegebenen Ziele beim Gipfel Unterstützung bekommen oder nicht. Da hilft kein vorsichtiges Herantasten. Da müssen Führungsqualitäten gezeigt und Zukunftsvisionen formuliert werden. Die Zusammenarbeit der G-20-Länder muss in Hamburg Handlungsoptionen für morgen nicht nur aufzeigen, sie müssen durchgesetzt und vor allen Dingen umgesetzt werden.\n\nViele Forderungen beziehen sich nicht nur auf die Handelspolitik. Uns geht es auch um einen konstruktiven Austausch mit Schwellen- und Entwicklungsländern. Wir brauchen förderliche Rahmenbedingungen für Investitionen, für die Schaffung von Arbeitsplätzen und die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung, vor allen Dingen in afrikanischen Ländern. Geeignete Maßnahmen gibt es im finanz- und wirtschaftspolitischen Bereich sicherlich viele.\n\nMeine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Willy Brandt hat 1976 bei einer Rede formuliert:\n\nDie reichen Nationen werden nicht reich bleiben, wenn die Armenhäuser der Menschheit wachsen.\n\nWir wünschen dem G-20-Gipfel viel Erfolg und eine erfolgreiche Wahrnehmung der Verantwortung für diese Aufgabe.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n3316,tim-ostermann,\"Wir leben bekanntermaßen in einer Wissensgesellschaft. In einer solchen Gesellschaft stellen Wissen und Informationen zunehmend die Basis von politischen Entscheidungen sowie des sozialen und ökonomischen Zusammenlebens dar. Vor allem die Aufbereitung und Organisation von Informationen in Statistiken haben dabei eine große Bedeutung erlangt.\n\nKaum ein Lebensbereich kommt heute noch ohne Statistiken aus. Dies fängt schon beim Lieblingssport der Deutschen an: dem Fußball. Ohne Ballbesitzstatistik, Gelaufene-Kilometer-Statistik, Passstatistik oder die sogenannten Heatmaps scheint heute kein Fußballkommentator mehr seine Berichterstattung absolvieren zu können. In den Profiklubs werden solche Statistiken längst zur konsequenten Weiterentwicklung ihres Spielvortrags genutzt.\n\nJedes Wirtschaftsunternehmen muss sich stark auf statistische Werte stützen: Wie viele Produkte haben wir in einem bestimmten Zeitraum abgesetzt? Wohin setzen wir welchen Anteil unserer Produkte ab? Wie stark ist die Resonanz auf unsere Werbestrategie? Wie entwickeln sich die Kosten? Ohne diese Statistiken lässt sich ein moderner wirtschaftlicher Betrieb nicht mehr steuern. Die Unternehmen hätten keine belastbare Grundlage für ihre Geschäftsstrategie oder ihre Investitionsentscheidungen.\n\nFür die Politik spielen Statistiken ebenfalls eine große Rolle. Nur mit der statistischen Erfassung von Informationen können wirtschaftliche oder gesellschaftliche Trends überhaupt identifiziert werden. Wenn bestimmte Entwicklungen negative Folgen nach sich ziehen, kann die Politik entsprechende Gegenmaßnahmen einleiten. Positive Entwicklungen können verstärkt werden.\n\nEin Beispiel, das jedem sofort in den Sinn kommen dürfte, ist der demografische Wandel. Nur durch die statistische Erfassung der Geburten und der Lebenserwartung sind wir in der Lage, die problematische -Entwicklung schon jetzt zu identifizieren und gegenzulenken.\n\nUnverzichtbar ist jedoch die Qualität der Statistiken; denn ansonsten würden Entscheidungen auf völlig falscher Grundlage getroffen. Welche konkreten Auswirkungen dies haben kann, haben wir erst kürzlich bei den Ergebnissen der Volkszählung betrachten können. In allen Bundesländern wichen die tatsächlichen Bevölkerungszahlen derart ab, dass der Länderfinanzausgleich völlig neu berechnet werden musste.\n\nUm die Qualität der staatlichen Statistiken geht es auch in unserem heutigen Gesetzentwurf, der aus zwei Teilen besteht. Einerseits soll in das Mikrozensus-gesetz, welches die Erhebung von Daten über unsere Gesellschaft regelt, wie etwa die Bevölkerungsstruktur, die\n\nwirtschaftliche und soziale Lage der Bevölkerung oder die Erwerbstätigkeit, eine Experimentierklausel eingeführt werden. Hintergrund dieser Klausel ist die Änderung einer EU-Verordnung, die Stichprobenerhebungen über Arbeitskräfte regelt. Zur Vorbereitung auf die Veränderungen soll bereits jetzt eine gewisse Zahl an Erhebungen unter den veränderten Erhebungs-bedingungen stattfinden. Dadurch können etwaige Probleme in der Datenerhebung schon während der Experimentierphase erkannt und behoben werden.\n\nDer zweite Teil ist eine Änderung des Bevölkerungsstatistikgesetzes, welches die Ermittlung der Zahl und der Zusammensetzung der Bevölkerung regelt. Hier hat sich gezeigt, dass weitere Hilfsmerkmale die Qualität der Statistik verbessern können, insbesondere im Hinblick auf die Bestimmung der Einwohnerzahl und deren Fortschreibung. Dabei entsteht keine weiter gehende Belastung der Bürger, da die Daten bereits in verschiedenen Verwaltungsdatensätzen existieren. Sie müssen lediglich dem Statistischen Bundesamt anonymisiert zur Verfügung gestellt werden.\n\nIch sehe den Gesetzentwurf sehr positiv. Aus meiner Sicht ist hier ein guter Gesetzentwurf gelungen, der unmittelbare Verbesserungen für unsere staatlichen Statistiken mit sich bringt. Nur wenn unsere statistischen Grundlagen stimmen, kann die Politik Maßnahmen zum Wohle der Gesellschaft ergreifen. Mit diesen Gesetzesänderungen gehen wir einen weiteren Schritt in die richtige Richtung.\"\n2834,richard-pitterle,\"Der uns vorliegende Gesetzentwurf trägt nach wie vor einen etwas irreführenden Namen - um den EU-Beitritt Kroatiens geht es nämlich nur am Rande. Steuerjahresgesetz 2014 wäre wohl passender gewesen. Aber vielleicht kommt ein solches ja auch noch in der zweiten Hälfte dieses Jahres, angesichts der vielen Baustellen in der Steuerpolitik.\n\nAber zurück zum Entwurf. In großen Teilen handelt es sich bei dem hier von der Bundesregierung vorgelegten Wirrwarr um eine, salopp formuliert, Entrümpelung des Steuerrechts. Die Fraktion Die Linke begrüßt ein solches Vorhaben ausdrücklich. Insbesondere im nahezu undurchdringlichen Labyrinth des Einkommensteuergesetzes ist ein Großreinemachen nämlich dringend notwendig.\n\nJedoch hätten Sie, meine Damen und Herren von der Regierungskoalition, bedenken sollen, dass sich bei einem solchen Großvorhaben schnell der eine oder andere Fehler einschleichen kann. Sowohl durch den Bundesrat als auch durch die Sachverständigen in der Anhörung zu vorliegendem Entwurf im Finanzausschuss wurde angeregt, für eine sorgfältige Überprüfung noch etwas mehr Zeit einzuräumen. Darauf sind Sie bedauerlicherweise nicht eingegangen, und ich befürchte, dass sich noch einige Schwachstellen in Ihrem Mammutentwurf auftun werden.\n\nAber auch bereits jetzt gibt es schon einiges zu kritisieren. So wollen Sie zum Beispiel, meine Damen und Herren von der Bundesregierung, ambulante Rehaleistungen zulasten der Kommunen von der Gewerbesteuer befreien. Falls Sie es immer noch nicht mitbekommen haben sollten - viele Kommunen sind quasi pleite. Was Sie hier machen, ist eine weitere Steuersubventionierung der Privatisierung des Gesundheitssektors, das hat mit verantwortungsvoller öffentlicher Daseinsvorsorge leider nichts zu tun.\n\nAn anderer Stelle in Ihrem Entwurf führen Sie eine Steuerpflicht für Gewinne aus gebrauchten Lebensversicherungen ein. Dabei scheint es Ihnen offenbar nichts auszumachen, dass Geschäfte mit gebrauchten Lebensversicherungen häufig eine Spekulation auf den Tod des Versicherungsnehmers darstellen. Solche Spekulationen sind aber ethisch schlichtweg nicht tragbar und gehören daher nach Ansicht der Fraktion Die Linke grundsätzlich verboten.\n\nVersteckt in Ihrem Wust verschiedenster Gesetzesänderungen sind auch Regelungen, die auf den ersten Blick ganz harmlos wirken, aber für die Betroffenen tatsächlich verheerende Auswirkungen haben könnten. Nehmen wir zum Beispiel die geplanten Änderungen im Steuerberatungsgesetz. Da führen Sie zum einen für die Finanzbehörden die Pflicht ein, in bestimmten Fällen unbefugte Hilfeleistungen in Steuersachen an die Steuerberaterkammern zu melden. Obendrein werden die Steuerberaterkammern dann noch verpflichtet, in diesen Fällen wettbewerbsrechtliche Ansprüche geltend zu machen. Im Ergebnis sollen also die Finanzbehörden bei den Steuerberaterkammern petzen und die Steuerberaterkammern dann die Verpetzten mit Klagen überziehen. Meine Damen und Herren von der Regierungskoalition, erstens ist das hier rechtsdogmatisch fragwürdig, vermischen Sie doch staatliche Sanktionen und zivilrechtliche Unterlassungs- und Schadensersatzansprüche. Zweitens erschweren Sie hier den -ohnehin gegenüber Steuerberaterinnen und Steuerberatern benachteiligten Buchhalterinnen und Buchhaltern ihre Berufsausübung ganz erheblich, da diese ständig fürchten müssen, in rechtlichen Grauzonen zu agieren und in der Folge mit Bußgeldern und Schadensersatzansprüchen überzogen zu werden. Das ist, mit Verlaub, ständisch orientierte Interessenpolitik zugunsten der Steuerberaterlobby.\n\nIch habe es eingangs schon erwähnt, die Fraktion Die Linke begrüßt eine übersichtlichere Gestaltung des Steuerrechts ausdrücklich. Nur leider ist der von Ihnen vorgelegte Entwurf eben etwas vorschnell und schwächelt in den besagten Teilen. Daher können wir hier leider keine Zustimmung geben, sondern werden uns der Stimme enthalten.\"\n9290,volker-beck,\"Dafür, dass Sie als Bundesregierung gerade bei der unübersichtlichen Sicherheitslage in der Region etwas nicht kategorisch ausschließen können, habe ich großes Verständnis. Vor diesem Hintergrund frage ich Sie, ob Sie die Erkenntnisse der Bayerischen Staatsregierung, dass es sich bei Mali um ein sicheres Herkunftsland handeln soll, bestätigen können und welche Auswirkungen das gegebenenfalls auf unser militärisches Engagement in Mali hat. Denn in sicheren Herkunftsstaaten sind wir nicht gefragt.\n\nEs wäre schön, wenn Sie nur die Fragen beantworten würden, anstatt uns allgemein bekannte Tatsachen zu übermitteln. Was der Haushaltsgesetzgeber bzw. der Gesetzgeber beschlossen hat, weiß der Bundestag im Wesentlichen, weil er an der Gesetzgebung nicht unmaßgeblich beteiligt ist.\n\nDie Frage ist schon: Welche Auswirkungen hat es, dass diese Fälle nicht mehr schriftlich, sondern im Rahmen eines mündlichen Anhörungsverfahrens bearbeitet werden? Ich habe Ihrer Antwort entnommen, dass das im Durchschnitt pro Fall bis zu 120 Minuten dauert. Das heißt natürlich: Das dauert alles länger. Wenn wir davon ausgehen, dass sich die Aufnahme von Flüchtlingen nicht mit der Jahreswende erledigt hat, sondern dass der Prozess noch weitergeht, kommen wir wieder zu langen Verfahrensdauern. Wir haben heute im Innenausschuss gesagt, dass wir bei bestimmten Gruppen schnellere Entscheidungen brauchen, damit die Leute das Land wieder verlassen. Das verhindern Sie.\n\nMan hat den Eindruck, dass Sie mit der einen Maßnahme einreißen, was Sie mit der anderen Maßnahme, der Personalaufstockung durch den Haushaltsgesetzgeber, gerade zu reparieren versucht haben. Deshalb schon noch einmal meine Frage: Können Sie dem Bundestag zumindest perspektivisch zusagen, monatlich zu berichten, wie sich die Verfahrensdauer verändert, damit wir als Gesetzgeber gegebenenfalls die Grundlage haben, um wieder einzugreifen?\n\nJa. - Wir wollen konstruktiv sein. Wir alle haben ein Interesse, dass wir diese Aufgabe bewältigen. Wäre es nicht sinnvoller, gerade bei Syrern und Irakern mit einem vereinfachten Verfahren, das die Identitäts- und Sicherheitsüberprüfung im Rahmen der Registrierung löst, diese Aufgaben vorzuverlagern, damit man zu einer beschleunigten Bearbeitung bei den Fällen, die ohnehin zu einer Anerkennung führen, kommt und Kapazitäten hat, um die abzulehnenden Fälle ordentlich zu bearbeiten?\n\nWie Sie das schildern, dürfte es all die Urteile, die ich in meiner Frage zitiert habe, nicht geben. Wie bewerten Sie denn die verwaltungsgerichtlichen Entscheidungen, die im einstweiligen Rechtsschutzverfahren ergangen sind, vom VG Aachen vom 5. November 2015, vom VG Bayreuth vom 12. Oktober 2015, vom VG Potsdam vom 20. Juli 2015, vom 3. Juli 2015, vom 28. Oktober 2014, vom VG Berlin vom 17. März 2015, vom 18. Dezember 2014, vom VG Meiningen vom 5. Januar 2015, vom VG München vom 9. Juli 2014?\n\nWas hier auffällt, ist, dass das nicht in irgendeinem bestimmten Bundesland so gesehen wird, sondern dass sich das quer durch die Republik von München bis Potsdam zieht. Vor diesem Hintergrund würde ich schon gerne wissen: Welche Erkenntnisse haben Sie, die diesen verwaltungsgerichtlichen Entscheidungen widersprechen?\n\nEs ist schwer, in einem Einzelfall zu klären, ob die Verfahren in einem anderen Land grundsätzlich nicht rechtsstaatlich sind. Entweder sind sie es nicht, und man weiß erst hinterher, wenn jemand das Verfahren durchlaufen hat, ob er von dieser Nichtrechtsstaatlichkeit betroffen ist, oder sie sind es nicht. Ich weiß nicht, was die Einzelfallbewertung da bringen soll. Trotzdem würde ich Sie gerne einmal fragen: Wie viele verwaltungsgerichtliche Kapazitäten und BAMF-Kapazitäten kostet es uns, dass wir hier von dem Selbsteintrittsrecht nicht Gebrauch machen?\"\n1825,wolfgang-tiefensee,\"Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Im Zusammenhang mit dem 7. Mai 1989 würde ich gerne über Zivilcourage sprechen. Es gibt ein einfacheres Wort mit drei Buchstaben dafür: Mut. Der 7. Mai 1989 ist ein wichtiger Markstein des Countdowns, der am Ende zum Sturz des DDR-Regimes geführt hat. Ich wünschte, hier im Haus - von der einen Seite bis zur anderen Seite - würden alle glasklar sagen: Die DDR war ein Unrechtsstaat, eine Diktatur. Punkt! Das sieht man an der Wahlfälschung.\n\nDiese klare Botschaft muss man zum Ausdruck bringen.\n\nWem verdanken wir nun den 9. November, der letztlich mit dem am 7. Mai beginnenden Countdown seinen Anfang nahm? Wir verdanken ihn mutigen Menschen. Da stehen die ganz Großen - Friedensnobelpreisträger Willy Brandt und Gorbatschow - im Rampenlicht. Da stehen ein Vaclav Havel und ein Lech Walesa im Rampenlicht. Im Kern aber waren es mutige Menschen, die ihre Angst überwunden haben; denn der Nährboden für Diktatur ist, dass es einem Regime gelingt, Angst zu verbreiten.\n\nSehr verehrter Kollege de Maizière, ich darf Sie bitten, wenn es um den 9. November geht, nicht der Versuchung zu erliegen, vielleicht doch am Ende zu sagen: Es ist Helmut Kohl gewesen, der die Mauer eingerissen hat.\n\nNein, mit Blick auf den 9. November - die Feierlichkeiten stehen an - wäre es gut, wenn die Bürgerinnen und Bürger, das Volk, im Mittelpunkt stehen würden.\n\nEs gibt in Deutschland mehrere Tendenzen, die uns nicht unberührt lassen dürfen. Ich möchte drei ansprechen, um konkret zu sagen, was wir jetzt tun müssen:\n\nErstens geht es um Politikerverachtung, Politikverdrossenheit sowie um die Differenz zwischen politischem Handeln und der Bequemlichkeit des Bürgers. Wir müssen etwas tun, damit Menschen von Kindheit an sozusagen Muskeln dafür bekommen, sich zu artikulieren, einen eigenen Standpunkt zu erlangen, sich in die eigenen Angelegenheiten einzumischen und von der eigenen Unmündigkeit wegzukommen. Das fällt nicht vom Himmel. Wir müssen darüber diskutieren, wie wir mit Volksbefragungen, Volksbegehren und Volksentscheidungen die Bürger noch dichter an die politischen Entscheidungen heranbringen.\n\nIch fordere Sie auf, es meiner Heimatstadt und vielen anderen Städten gleichzutun und Jugendparlamente einzurichten, damit man lernt, wie das geht. Die Piraten haben eine nicht uninteressante Diskussion angefacht: Wie ist es mit Liquid Democracy? Müssen wir nicht irgendwann einmal auch neue, moderne Instrumente des 21. Jahrhunderts nutzen?\n\nZweitens. Der Mainstream - so sagt Heitmeyer - bis weit in die Bevölkerung hinein ist Ausländerfeindlichkeit bzw. Ausländerverachtung. Es geht darum, diesen Mainstream, der immer weiter in die Gesellschaft hi-neinreicht, zu brechen.\n\nWir müssen Initiativen stärken, die das tun.\n\nIch bin Manuela Schwesig sehr dankbar, dass sie am vergangenen Mittwoch solche Initiativen eingeladen hat. Dabei hat sie auch gesagt, dass sie die Förderung auf den Prüfstand stellen will. Wir brauchen unter Umständen mehr institutionelle und langfristigere Förderung.\n\nIch stelle Ihnen das Projekt WorldCitizen in Berlin vor. Hier hat sich Salahdin Said - er ist in Rheinland-Pfalz geboren - die Frage gestellt: Warum werde ich angesichts meines Aussehens immer nur danach gefragt, woher ich komme, und nicht, welche Talente und welchen Charakter ich habe? - Wir brauchen Gesprächsformen. Das müssen wir unterstützen. Ich rege an, dass wir uns mit aller Kraft bis hinein in unsere Haushaltsgesetzgebung dafür einsetzen, dass diese Initiativen gestärkt werden.\n\nUnd das Dritte: Ein Problem ist, dass die rechtsextremen und rechtsradikalen Gedankengüter immer weiter in die Mitte der Gesellschaft rücken. In Pirna beispielsweise - das ist ein Ort nahe Dresden; Dresden war im Herbst 1989 nicht unwichtig, genauso wie Plauen und Leipzig - hat sich eine Initiative um Sebastian Reißig gegründet, die sich Aktion Zivilcourage nennt. Meine Damen und Herren, es ist auf dem flachen Lande nicht so einfach, gegen rechts aufzutreten, wie zum Beispiel in einer großen Stadt auf einer Demonstration. Auch solche Initiativen zu stärken und dafür zu sorgen, dass sie genug Substanz behalten, dass aus diesem bürgerschaftlichen Engagement Mut erwächst, muss unsere Aufgabe sein. Darauf müssen wir den Fokus richten.\n\nMeine Botschaft ist: Mein Wohl ist nicht Gemeinwohl. Auf die eigenen Fußspitzen zu schauen und nur den eigenen Bereich zu sehen, macht verzagt. Was wir brauchen, ist ein Ausbrechen aus der eigenen Unmündigkeit, ein In-die-Hand-Nehmen des eigenen Schicksals, eine Kultur des selbstständigen Denkens und auch des Widerstehen-Könnens. Dafür müssen wir alle Möglichkeiten nutzen, die uns als Politikerinnen und Politiker gegeben sind, damit nie wieder, nicht einmal im Ansatz, so etwas passiert, was wir heute als Diktatur und Unrechtsstaat bezeichnen müssen.\n\nVielen Dank.\"\n" }, { "path": "tests/data/gutenberg/kafka_verwandlung.txt", "content": "\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n DIE VERWANDLUNG\r\n\r\n VON\r\n\r\n FRANZ KAFKA\r\n\r\n\r\n K U R T  W O L F F  V E R L A G\r\n\r\n L E I P Z I G\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n B Ü C H E R E I  »D E R  J Ü N G S T E  T A G«  B A N D  2 2 / 2 3\r\n\r\n GEDRUCKT BEI DIETSCH & BRÜCKNER · WEIMAR\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n COPYRIGHT KURT WOLFF VERLAG · LEIPZIG. 1917\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nI.\r\n\r\n\r\nAls Gregor Samsa eines Morgens aus unruhigen Träumen erwachte, fand er\r\nsich in seinem Bett zu einem ungeheuren Ungeziefer verwandelt. Er lag\r\nauf seinem panzerartig harten Rücken und sah, wenn er den Kopf ein wenig\r\nhob, seinen gewölbten, braunen, von bogenförmigen Versteifungen\r\ngeteilten Bauch, auf dessen Höhe sich die Bettdecke, zum gänzlichen\r\nNiedergleiten bereit, kaum noch erhalten konnte. Seine vielen, im\r\nVergleich zu seinem sonstigen Umfang kläglich dünnen Beine flimmerten\r\nihm hilflos vor den Augen.\r\n\r\n»Was ist mit mir geschehen?« dachte er. Es war kein Traum. Sein Zimmer,\r\nein richtiges, nur etwas zu kleines Menschenzimmer, lag ruhig zwischen\r\nden vier wohlbekannten Wänden. Über dem Tisch, auf dem eine\r\nauseinandergepackte Musterkollektion von Tuchwaren ausgebreitet war --\r\nSamsa war Reisender --, hing das Bild, das er vor kurzem aus einer\r\nillustrierten Zeitschrift ausgeschnitten und in einem hübschen,\r\nvergoldeten Rahmen untergebracht hatte. Es stellte eine Dame dar, die,\r\nmit einem Pelzhut und einer Pelzboa versehen, aufrecht dasaß und einen\r\nschweren Pelzmuff, in dem ihr ganzer Unterarm verschwunden war, dem\r\nBeschauer entgegenhob.\r\n\r\nGregors Blick richtete sich dann zum Fenster, und das trübe Wetter --\r\nman hörte Regentropfen auf das Fensterblech aufschlagen -- machte ihn\r\nganz melancholisch. »Wie wäre es, wenn ich noch ein wenig\r\nweiterschliefe und alle Narrheiten vergäße,« dachte er, aber das war\r\ngänzlich undurchführbar, denn er war gewöhnt, auf der rechten Seite zu\r\nschlafen, konnte sich aber in seinem gegenwärtigen Zustand nicht in\r\ndiese Lage bringen. Mit welcher Kraft er sich auch auf die rechte Seite\r\nwarf, immer wieder schaukelte er in die Rückenlage zurück. Er versuchte\r\nes wohl hundertmal, schloß die Augen, um die zappelnden Beine nicht\r\nsehen zu müssen, und ließ erst ab, als er in der Seite einen noch nie\r\ngefühlten, leichten, dumpfen Schmerz zu fühlen begann.\r\n\r\n»Ach Gott,« dachte er, »was für einen anstrengenden Beruf habe ich\r\ngewählt! Tag aus, Tag ein auf der Reise. Die geschäftlichen Aufregungen\r\nsind viel größer, als im eigentlichen Geschäft zu Hause, und außerdem\r\nist mir noch diese Plage des Reisens auferlegt, die Sorgen um die\r\nZuganschlüsse, das unregelmäßige, schlechte Essen, ein immer\r\nwechselnder, nie andauernder, nie herzlich werdender menschlicher\r\nVerkehr. Der Teufel soll das alles holen!« Er fühlte ein leichtes Jucken\r\noben auf dem Bauch; schob sich auf dem Rücken langsam näher zum\r\nBettpfosten, um den Kopf besser heben zu können; fand die juckende\r\nStelle, die mit lauter kleinen weißen Pünktchen besetzt war, die er\r\nnicht zu beurteilen verstand; und wollte mit einem Bein die Stelle\r\nbetasten, zog es aber gleich zurück, denn bei der Berührung umwehten ihn\r\nKälteschauer.\r\n\r\nEr glitt wieder in seine frühere Lage zurück. »Dies frühzeitige\r\nAufstehen«, dachte er, »macht einen ganz blödsinnig. Der Mensch muß\r\nseinen Schlaf haben. Andere Reisende leben wie Haremsfrauen. Wenn ich\r\nzum Beispiel im Laufe des Vormittags ins Gasthaus zurückgehe, um die\r\nerlangten Aufträge zu überschreiben, sitzen diese Herren erst beim\r\nFrühstück. Das sollte ich bei meinem Chef versuchen; ich würde auf der\r\nStelle hinausfliegen. Wer weiß übrigens, ob das nicht sehr gut für mich\r\nwäre. Wenn ich mich nicht wegen meiner Eltern zurückhielte, ich hätte\r\nlängst gekündigt, ich wäre vor den Chef hingetreten und hätte ihm meine\r\nMeinung von Grund des Herzens aus gesagt. Vom Pult hätte er fallen\r\nmüssen! Es ist auch eine sonderbare Art, sich auf das Pult zu setzen und\r\nvon der Höhe herab mit dem Angestellten zu reden, der überdies wegen der\r\nSchwerhörigkeit des Chefs ganz nahe herantreten muß. Nun, die Hoffnung\r\nist noch nicht gänzlich aufgegeben, habe ich einmal das Geld beisammen,\r\num die Schuld der Eltern an ihn abzuzahlen -- es dürfte noch fünf bis\r\nsechs Jahre dauern --, mache ich die Sache unbedingt. Dann wird der\r\ngroße Schnitt gemacht. Vorläufig allerdings muß ich aufstehen, denn mein\r\nZug fährt um fünf.«\r\n\r\nUnd er sah zur Weckuhr hinüber, die auf dem Kasten tickte. »Himmlischer\r\nVater!« dachte er, Es war halb sieben Uhr, und die Zeiger gingen ruhig\r\nvorwärts, es war sogar halb vorüber, es näherte sich schon dreiviertel.\r\nSollte der Wecker nicht geläutet haben? Man sah vom Bett aus, daß er auf\r\nvier Uhr richtig eingestellt war; gewiß hatte er auch geläutet. Ja, aber\r\nwar es möglich, dieses möbelerschütternde Läuten ruhig zu verschlafen?\r\nNun, ruhig hatte er ja nicht geschlafen, aber wahrscheinlich desto\r\nfester. Was aber sollte er jetzt tun? Der nächste Zug ging um sieben\r\nUhr; um den einzuholen, hätte er sich unsinnig beeilen müssen, und die\r\nKollektion war noch nicht eingepackt, und er selbst fühlte sich durchaus\r\nnicht besonders frisch und beweglich. Und selbst wenn er den Zug\r\neinholte, ein Donnerwetter des Chefs war nicht zu vermeiden, denn der\r\nGeschäftsdiener hatte beim Fünfuhrzug gewartet und die Meldung von\r\nseiner Versäumnis längst erstattet. Es war eine Kreatur des Chefs, ohne\r\nRückgrat und Verstand. Wie nun, wenn er sich krank meldete? Das wäre\r\naber äußerst peinlich und verdächtig, denn Gregor war während seines\r\nfünfjährigen Dienstes noch nicht einmal krank gewesen. Gewiß würde der\r\nChef mit dem Krankenkassenarzt kommen, würde den Eltern wegen des faulen\r\nSohnes Vorwürfe machen und alle Einwände durch den Hinweis auf den\r\nKrankenkassenarzt abschneiden, für den es ja überhaupt nur ganz gesunde,\r\naber arbeitsscheue Menschen gibt. Und hätte er übrigens in diesem Falle\r\nso ganz unrecht? Gregor fühlte sich tatsächlich, abgesehen von einer\r\nnach dem langen Schlaf wirklich überflüssigen Schläfrigkeit, ganz wohl\r\nund hatte sogar einen besonders kräftigen Hunger.\r\n\r\nAls er dies alles in größter Eile überlegte, ohne sich entschließen zu\r\nkönnen, das Bett zu verlassen -- gerade schlug der Wecker dreiviertel\r\nsieben -- klopfte es vorsichtig an die Tür am Kopfende seines Bettes.\r\n»Gregor,« rief es -- es war die Mutter --, »es ist dreiviertel sieben.\r\nWolltest du nicht wegfahren?« Die sanfte Stimme! Gregor erschrak, als er\r\nseine antwortende Stimme hörte, die wohl unverkennbar seine frühere war,\r\nin die sich aber, wie von unten her, ein nicht zu unterdrückendes,\r\nschmerzliches Piepsen mischte, das die Worte förmlich nur im ersten\r\nAugenblick in ihrer Deutlichkeit beließ, um sie im Nachklang derart zu\r\nzerstören, daß man nicht wußte, ob man recht gehört hatte. Gregor hatte\r\nausführlich antworten und alles erklären wollen, beschränkte sich aber\r\nbei diesen Umständen darauf, zu sagen: »Ja, ja, danke, Mutter, ich stehe\r\nschon auf.« Infolge der Holztür war die Veränderung in Gregors Stimme\r\ndraußen wohl nicht zu merken, denn die Mutter beruhigte sich mit dieser\r\nErklärung und schlürfte davon. Aber durch das kleine Gespräch waren die\r\nanderen Familienmitglieder darauf aufmerksam geworden, daß Gregor wider\r\nErwarten noch zu Hause war, und schon klopfte an der einen Seitentür der\r\nVater, schwach, aber mit der Faust. »Gregor, Gregor,« rief er, »was ist\r\ndenn?« Und nach einer kleinen Weile mahnte er nochmals mit tieferer\r\nStimme: »Gregor! Gregor!« An der anderen Seitentür aber klagte leise die\r\nSchwester: »Gregor? Ist dir nicht wohl? Brauchst du etwas?« Nach beiden\r\nSeiten hin antwortete Gregor: »Bin schon fertig,« und bemühte sich,\r\ndurch die sorgfältigste Aussprache und durch Einschaltung von langen\r\nPausen zwischen den einzelnen Worten seiner Stimme alles Auffallende zu\r\nnehmen. Der Vater kehrte auch zu seinem Frühstück zurück, die Schwester\r\naber flüsterte: »Gregor, mach auf, ich beschwöre dich.« Gregor aber\r\ndachte gar nicht daran aufzumachen, sondern lobte die vom Reisen her\r\nübernommene Vorsicht, auch zu Hause alle Türen während der Nacht zu\r\nversperren.\r\n\r\nZunächst wollte er ruhig und ungestört aufstehen, sich anziehen und vor\r\nallem frühstücken, und dann erst das Weitere überlegen, denn, das merkte\r\ner wohl, im Bett würde er mit dem Nachdenken zu keinem vernünftigen Ende\r\nkommen. Er erinnerte sich, schon öfters im Bett irgendeinen vielleicht\r\ndurch ungeschicktes Liegen erzeugten, leichten Schmerz empfunden zu\r\nhaben, der sich dann beim Aufstehen als reine Einbildung herausstellte,\r\nund er war gespannt, wie sich seine heutigen Vorstellungen allmählich\r\nauflösen würden. Daß die Veränderung der Stimme nichts anderes war als\r\nder Vorbote einer tüchtigen Verkühlung, einer Berufskrankheit der\r\nReisenden, daran zweifelte er nicht im geringsten.\r\n\r\nDie Decke abzuwerfen war ganz einfach; er brauchte sich nur ein wenig\r\naufzublasen und sie fiel von selbst. Aber weiterhin wurde es schwierig,\r\nbesonders weil er so ungemein breit war. Er hätte Arme und Hände\r\ngebraucht, um sich aufzurichten; statt dessen aber hatte er nur die\r\nvielen Beinchen, die ununterbrochen in der verschiedensten Bewegung\r\nwaren und die er überdies nicht beherrschen konnte. Wollte er eines\r\neinmal einknicken, so war es das erste, daß er sich streckte; und gelang\r\nes ihm endlich, mit diesem Bein das auszuführen, was er wollte, so\r\narbeiteten inzwischen alle anderen, wie freigelassen, in höchster,\r\nschmerzlicher Aufregung. »Nur sich nicht im Bett unnütz aufhalten,«\r\nsagte sich Gregor.\r\n\r\nZuerst wollte er mit dem unteren Teil seines Körpers aus dem Bett\r\nhinauskommen, aber dieser untere Teil, den er übrigens noch nicht\r\ngesehen hatte und von dem er sich auch keine rechte Vorstellung machen\r\nkonnte, erwies sich als zu schwer beweglich; es ging so langsam; und als\r\ner schließlich, fast wild geworden, mit gesammelter Kraft, ohne\r\nRücksicht sich vorwärtsstieß, hatte er die Richtung falsch gewählt,\r\nschlug an den unteren Bettpfosten heftig an, und der brennende Schmerz,\r\nden er empfand, belehrte ihn, daß gerade der untere Teil seines Körpers\r\naugenblicklich vielleicht der empfindlichste war.\r\n\r\nEr versuchte es daher, zuerst den Oberkörper aus dem Bett zu bekommen,\r\nund drehte vorsichtig den Kopf dem Bettrand zu. Dies gelang auch leicht,\r\nund trotz ihrer Breite und Schwere folgte schließlich die Körpermasse\r\nlangsam der Wendung des Kopfes. Aber als er den Kopf endlich außerhalb\r\ndes Bettes in der freien Luft hielt, bekam er Angst, weiter auf diese\r\nWeise vorzurücken, denn wenn er sich schließlich so fallen ließ, mußte\r\ngeradezu ein Wunder geschehen wenn der Kopf nicht verletzt werden\r\nsollte. Und die Besinnung durfte er gerade jetzt um keinen Preis\r\nverlieren; lieber wollte er im Bett bleiben.\r\n\r\nAber als er wieder nach gleicher Mühe aufseufzend so dalag wie früher,\r\nund wieder seine Beinchen womöglich noch ärger gegeneinander kämpfen sah\r\nund keine Möglichkeit fand, in diese Willkür Ruhe und Ordnung zu\r\nbringen, sagte er sich wieder, daß er unmöglich im Bett bleiben könne\r\nund daß es das Vernünftigste sei, alles zu opfern, wenn auch nur die\r\nkleinste Hoffnung bestünde, sich dadurch vom Bett zu befreien.\r\nGleichzeitig aber vergaß er nicht, sich zwischendurch daran zu erinnern,\r\ndaß viel besser als verzweifelte Entschlüsse ruhige und ruhigste\r\nÜberlegung sei. In solchen Augenblicken richtete er die Augen möglichst\r\nscharf auf das Fenster, aber leider war aus dem Anblick des\r\nMorgennebels, der sogar die andere Seite der engen Straße verhüllte,\r\nwenig Zuversicht und Munterkeit zu holen. »Schon sieben Uhr,« sagte er\r\nsich beim neuerlichen Schlagen des Weckers, »schon sieben Uhr und noch\r\nimmer ein solcher Nebel.« Und ein Weilchen lang lag er ruhig mit\r\nschwachem Atem, als erwarte er vielleicht von der völligen Stille die\r\nWiederkehr der wirklichen und selbstverständlichen Verhältnisse.\r\n\r\nDann aber sagte er sich: »Ehe es einviertel acht schlägt, muß ich\r\nunbedingt das Bett vollständig verlassen haben. Im übrigen wird auch bis\r\ndahin jemand aus dem Geschäft kommen, um nach mir zu fragen, denn das\r\nGeschäft wird vor sieben Uhr geöffnet.« Und er machte sich nun daran,\r\nden Körper in seiner ganzen Länge vollständig gleichmäßig aus dem Bett\r\nhinauszuschaukeln. Wenn er sich auf diese Weise aus dem Bett fallen\r\nließ, blieb der Kopf, den er beim Fall scharf heben wollte,\r\nvoraussichtlich unverletzt. Der Rücken schien hart zu sein; dem würde\r\nwohl bei dem Fall auf den Teppich nichts geschehen. Das größte Bedenken\r\nmachte ihm die Rücksicht auf den lauten Krach, den es geben müßte und\r\nder wahrscheinlich hinter allen Türen wenn nicht Schrecken, so doch\r\nBesorgnisse erregen würde. Das mußte aber gewagt werden.\r\n\r\nAls Gregor schon zur Hälfte aus dem Bette ragte -- die neue Methode war\r\nmehr ein Spiel als eine Anstrengung, er brauchte immer nur ruckweise zu\r\nschaukeln --, fiel ihm ein, wie einfach alles wäre, wenn man ihm zu\r\nHilfe käme. Zwei starke Leute -- er dachte an seinen Vater und das\r\nDienstmädchen -- hätten vollständig genügt; sie hätten ihre Arme nur\r\nunter seinen gewölbten Rücken schieben, ihn so aus dem Bett schälen,\r\nsich mit der Last niederbeugen und dann bloß vorsichtig dulden müssen,\r\ndaß er den Überschwung auf dem Fußboden vollzog, wo dann die Beinchen\r\nhoffentlich einen Sinn bekommen würden. Nun, ganz abgesehen davon, daß\r\ndie Türen versperrt waren, hätte er wirklich um Hilfe rufen sollen?\r\nTrotz aller Not konnte er bei diesem Gedanken ein Lächeln nicht\r\nunterdrücken.\r\n\r\nSchon war er so weit, daß er bei stärkerem Schaukeln kaum das\r\nGleichgewicht noch erhielt, und sehr bald mußte er sich nun endgültig\r\nentscheiden, denn es war in fünf Minuten einviertel acht, -- als es an\r\nder Wohnungstür läutete. »Das ist jemand aus dem Geschäft,« sagte er\r\nsich und erstarrte fast, während seine Beinchen nur desto eiliger\r\ntanzten. Einen Augenblick blieb alles still. »Sie öffnen nicht,« sagte\r\nsich Gregor, befangen in irgendeiner unsinnigen Hoffnung. Aber dann ging\r\nnatürlich wie immer das Dienstmädchen festen Schrittes zur Tür und\r\nöffnete. Gregor brauchte nur das erste Grußwort des Besuchers zu hören\r\nund wußte schon, wer es war -- der Prokurist selbst. Warum war nur\r\nGregor dazu verurteilt, bei einer Firma zu dienen, wo man bei der\r\nkleinsten Versäumnis gleich den größten Verdacht faßte? Waren denn alle\r\nAngestellten samt und sonders Lumpen, gab es denn unter ihnen keinen\r\ntreuen ergebenen Menschen, den, wenn er auch nur ein paar Morgenstunden\r\nfür das Geschäft nicht ausgenützt hatte, vor Gewissensbissen närrisch\r\nwurde und geradezu nicht imstande war, das Bett zu verlassen? Genügte es\r\nwirklich nicht, einen Lehrjungen nachfragen zu lassen -- wenn überhaupt\r\ndiese Fragerei nötig war --, mußte da der Prokurist selbst kommen, und\r\nmußte dadurch der ganzen unschuldigen Familie gezeigt werden, daß die\r\nUntersuchung dieser verdächtigen Angelegenheit nur dem Verstand des\r\nProkuristen anvertraut werden konnte? Und mehr infolge der Erregung, in\r\nwelche Gregor durch diese Überlegungen versetzt wurde, als infolge eines\r\nrichtigen Entschlusses, schwang er sich mit aller Macht aus dem Bett. Es\r\ngab einen lauten Schlag, aber ein eigentlicher Krach war es nicht. Ein\r\nwenig wurde der Fall durch den Teppich abgeschwächt, auch war der Rücken\r\nelastischer, als Gregor gedacht hatte, daher kam der nicht gar so\r\nauffallende dumpfe Klang. Nur den Kopf hatte er nicht vorsichtig genug\r\ngehalten und ihn angeschlagen; er drehte ihn und rieb ihn an dem Teppich\r\nvor Ärger und Schmerz.\r\n\r\n»Da drin ist etwas gefallen,« sagte der Prokurist im Nebenzimmer links.\r\nGregor suchte sich vorzustellen, ob nicht auch einmal dem Prokuristen\r\netwas Ähnliches passieren könnte, wie heute ihm; die Möglichkeit dessen\r\nmußte man doch eigentlich zugeben. Aber wie zur rohen Antwort auf diese\r\nFrage machte jetzt der Prokurist im Nebenzimmer ein paar bestimmte\r\nSchritte und ließ seine Lackstiefel knarren. Aus dem Nebenzimmer rechts\r\nflüsterte die Schwester, um Gregor zu verständigen: »Gregor, der\r\nProkurist ist da.« »Ich weiß,« sagte Gregor vor sich hin; aber so laut,\r\ndaß es die Schwester hätte hören können, wagte er die Stimme nicht zu\r\nerheben.\r\n\r\n»Gregor,« sagte nun der Vater aus dem Nebenzimmer links, »der Herr\r\nProkurist ist gekommen und erkundigt sich, warum du nicht mit dem\r\nFrühzug weggefahren bist. Wir wissen nicht, was wir ihm sagen sollen.\r\nÜbrigens will er auch mit dir persönlich sprechen. Also bitte mach die\r\nTür auf. Er wird die Unordnung im Zimmer zu entschuldigen schon die Güte\r\nhaben.« »Guten Morgen, Herr Samsa,« rief der Prokurist freundlich\r\ndazwischen. »Ihm ist nicht wohl,« sagte die Mutter zum Prokuristen,\r\nwährend der Vater noch an der Tür redete, »ihm ist nicht wohl, glauben\r\nSie mir, Herr Prokurist. Wie würde denn Gregor sonst einen Zug\r\nversäumen! Der Junge hat ja nichts im Kopf als das Geschäft. Ich ärgere\r\nmich schon fast, daß er abends niemals ausgeht; jetzt war er doch acht\r\nTage in der Stadt, aber jeden Abend war er zu Hause. Da sitzt er bei uns\r\nam Tisch und liest still die Zeitung oder studiert Fahrpläne. Es ist\r\nschon eine Zerstreuung für ihn, wenn er sich mit Laubsägearbeiten\r\nbeschäftigt. Da hat er zum Beispiel im Laufe von zwei, drei Abenden\r\neinen kleinen Rahmen geschnitzt; Sie werden staunen, wie hübsch er ist;\r\ner hängt drin im Zimmer; Sie werden ihn gleich sehen, wenn Gregor\r\naufmacht. Ich bin übrigens glücklich, daß Sie da sind, Herr Prokurist;\r\nwir allein hätten Gregor nicht dazu gebracht, die Tür zu öffnen; er ist\r\nso hartnäckig; und bestimmt ist ihm nicht wohl, trotzdem er es am Morgen\r\ngeleugnet hat.« »Ich komme gleich,« sagte Gregor langsam und bedächtig\r\nund rührte sich nicht, um kein Wort der Gespräche zu verlieren. »Anders,\r\ngnädige Frau, kann ich es mir auch nicht erklären,« sagte der Prokurist,\r\n»hoffentlich ist es nichts Ernstes. Wenn ich auch andererseits sagen\r\nmuß, daß wir Geschäftsleute -- wie man will, leider oder\r\nglücklicherweise -- ein leichtes Unwohlsein sehr oft aus geschäftlichen\r\nRücksichten einfach überwinden müssen.« »Also kann der Herr Prokurist\r\nschon zu dir hinein?« fragte der ungeduldige Vater und klopfte wiederum\r\nan die Tür. »Nein,« sagte Gregor. Im Nebenzimmer links trat eine\r\npeinliche Stille ein, im Nebenzimmer rechts begann die Schwester zu\r\nschluchzen.\r\n\r\nWarum ging denn die Schwester nicht zu den anderen? Sie war wohl erst\r\njetzt aus dem Bett aufgestanden und hatte noch gar nicht angefangen sich\r\nanzuziehen. Und warum weinte sie denn? Weil er nicht aufstand und den\r\nProkuristen nicht hereinließ, weil er in Gefahr war, den Posten zu\r\nverlieren und weil dann der Chef die Eltern mit den alten Forderungen\r\nwieder verfolgen würde? Das waren doch vorläufig wohl unnötige Sorgen.\r\nNoch war Gregor hier und dachte nicht im geringsten daran, seine Familie\r\nzu verlassen. Augenblicklich lag er wohl da auf dem Teppich, und\r\nniemand, der seinen Zustand gekannt hätte, hätte im Ernst von ihm\r\nverlangt, daß er den Prokuristen hereinlasse. Aber wegen dieser kleinen\r\nUnhöflichkeit, für die sich ja später leicht eine passende Ausrede\r\nfinden würde, konnte Gregor doch nicht gut sofort weggeschickt werden.\r\nUnd Gregor schien es, daß es viel vernünftiger wäre, ihn jetzt in Ruhe\r\nzu lassen, statt ihn mit Weinen und Zureden zu stören. Aber es war eben\r\ndie Ungewißheit, welche die anderen bedrängte und ihr Benehmen\r\nentschuldigte.\r\n\r\n»Herr Samsa,« rief nun der Prokurist mit erhobener Stimme, »was ist denn\r\nlos? Sie verbarrikadieren sich da in Ihrem Zimmer, antworten bloß mit ja\r\nund nein, machen Ihren Eltern schwere, unnötige Sorgen und versäumen --\r\ndies nur nebenbei erwähnt -- Ihre geschäftlichen Pflichten in einer\r\neigentlich unerhörten Weise. Ich spreche hier im Namen Ihrer Eltern und\r\nIhres Chefs und bitte Sie ganz ernsthaft um eine augenblickliche,\r\ndeutliche Erklärung. Ich staune, ich staune. Ich glaubte Sie als einen\r\nruhigen, vernünftigen Menschen zu kennen, und nun scheinen Sie plötzlich\r\nanfangen zu wollen, mit sonderbaren Launen zu paradieren. Der Chef\r\ndeutete mir zwar heute früh eine mögliche Erklärung für Ihre Versäumnis\r\nan -- sie betraf das Ihnen seit kurzem anvertraute Inkasso --, aber ich\r\nlegte wahrhaftig fast mein Ehrenwort dafür ein, daß diese Erklärung\r\nnicht zutreffen könne. Nun aber sehe ich hier Ihren unbegreiflichen\r\nStarrsinn und verliere ganz und gar jede Lust, mich auch nur im\r\ngeringsten für Sie einzusetzen. Und Ihre Stellung ist durchaus nicht die\r\nfesteste. Ich hatte ursprünglich die Absicht, Ihnen das alles unter vier\r\nAugen zu sagen, aber da Sie mich hier nutzlos meine Zeit versäumen\r\nlassen, weiß ich nicht, warum es nicht auch Ihre Herren Eltern erfahren\r\nsollen. Ihre Leistungen in der letzten Zeit waren also sehr\r\nunbefriedigend; es ist zwar nicht die Jahreszeit, um besondere Geschäfte\r\nzu machen, das erkennen wir an; aber eine Jahreszeit, um keine Geschäfte\r\nzu machen, gibt es überhaupt nicht, Herr Samsa, darf es nicht geben.«\r\n\r\n»Aber Herr Prokurist,« rief Gregor außer sich und vergaß in der\r\nAufregung alles andere, »ich mache ja sofort, augenblicklich auf. Ein\r\nleichtes Unwohlsein, ein Schwindelanfall, haben mich verhindert\r\naufzustehen. Ich liege noch jetzt im Bett. Jetzt bin ich aber schon\r\nwieder ganz frisch. Eben steige ich aus dem Bett. Nur einen kleinen\r\nAugenblick Geduld! Es geht noch nicht so gut, wie ich dachte. Es ist mir\r\naber schon wohl. Wie das nur einen Menschen so überfallen kann! Noch\r\ngestern abend war mir ganz gut, meine Eltern wissen es ja, oder besser,\r\nschon gestern abend hatte ich eine kleine Vorahnung. Man hätte es mir\r\nansehen müssen. Warum habe ich es nur im Geschäfte nicht gemeldet! Aber\r\nman denkt eben immer, daß man die Krankheit ohne Zuhausebleiben\r\nüberstehen wird. Herr Prokurist! Schonen Sie meine Eltern! Für alle die\r\nVorwürfe, die Sie mir jetzt machen, ist ja kein Grund; man hat mir ja\r\ndavon auch kein Wort gesagt. Sie haben vielleicht die letzten Aufträge,\r\ndie ich geschickt habe, nicht gelesen. Übrigens, noch mit dem Achtuhrzug\r\nfahre ich auf die Reise, die paar Stunden Ruhe haben mich gekräftigt.\r\nHalten Sie sich nur nicht auf, Herr Prokurist; ich bin gleich selbst im\r\nGeschäft, und haben Sie die Güte, das zu sagen und mich dem Herrn Chef\r\nzu empfehlen!«\r\n\r\nUnd während Gregor dies alles hastig ausstieß und kaum wußte, was er\r\nsprach, hatte er sich leicht, wohl infolge der im Bett bereits erlangten\r\nÜbung, dem Kasten genähert und versuchte nun, an ihm sich aufzurichten.\r\nEr wollte tatsächlich die Tür aufmachen, tatsächlich sich sehen lassen\r\nund mit dem Prokuristen sprechen; er war begierig zu erfahren, was die\r\nanderen, die jetzt so nach ihm verlangten, bei seinem Anblick sagen\r\nwürden. Würden sie erschrecken, dann hatte Gregor keine Verantwortung\r\nmehr und konnte ruhig sein. Würden sie aber alles ruhig hinnehmen, dann\r\nhatte auch er keinen Grund sich aufzuregen, und konnte, wenn er sich\r\nbeeilte, um acht Uhr tatsächlich auf dem Bahnhof sein. Zuerst glitt er\r\nnun einigemale von dem glatten Kasten ab, aber endlich gab er sich\r\neinen letzten Schwung und stand aufrecht da; auf die Schmerzen im\r\nUnterleib achtete er gar nicht mehr, so sehr sie auch brannten. Nun ließ\r\ner sich gegen die Rücklehne eines nahen Stuhles fallen, an deren Rändern\r\ner sich mit seinen Beinchen festhielt. Damit hatte er aber auch die\r\nHerrschaft über sich erlangt und verstummte, denn nun konnte er den\r\nProkuristen anhören.\r\n\r\n»Haben Sie auch nur ein Wort verstanden?« fragte der Prokurist die\r\nEltern, »er macht sich doch wohl nicht einen Narren aus uns?« »Um Gottes\r\nwillen,« rief die Mutter schon unter Weinen, »er ist vielleicht schwer\r\nkrank, und wir quälen ihn. Grete! Grete!« schrie sie dann. »Mutter?«\r\nrief die Schwester von der anderen Seite. Sie verständigten sich durch\r\nGregors Zimmer. »Du mußt augenblicklich zum Arzt. Gregor ist krank.\r\nRasch um den Arzt. Hast du Gregor jetzt reden hören?« »Das war eine\r\nTierstimme,« sagte der Prokurist, auffallend leise gegenüber dem\r\nSchreien der Mutter. »Anna! Anna!« rief der Vater durch das Vorzimmer in\r\ndie Küche und klatschte in die Hände, »sofort einen Schlosser holen!«\r\nUnd schon liefen die zwei Mädchen mit rauschenden Röcken durch das\r\nVorzimmer -- wie hatte sich die Schwester denn so schnell angezogen? --\r\nund rissen die Wohnungstüre auf. Man hörte gar nicht die Türe\r\nzuschlagen; sie hatten sie wohl offen gelassen, wie es in Wohnungen zu\r\nsein pflegt, in denen ein großes Unglück geschehen ist.\r\n\r\nGregor war aber viel ruhiger geworden. Man verstand zwar also seine\r\nWorte nicht mehr, trotzdem sie ihm genug klar, klarer als früher,\r\nvorgekommen waren, vielleicht infolge der Gewöhnung des Ohres. Aber\r\nimmerhin glaubte man nun schon daran, daß es mit ihm nicht ganz in\r\nOrdnung war, und war bereit, ihm zu helfen. Die Zuversicht und\r\nSicherheit, womit die ersten Anordnungen getroffen worden waren, taten\r\nihm wohl. Er fühlte sich wieder einbezogen in den menschlichen Kreis und\r\nerhoffte von beiden, vom Arzt und vom Schlosser, ohne sie eigentlich\r\ngenau zu scheiden, großartige und überraschende Leistungen. Um für die\r\nsich nähernden entscheidenden Besprechungen eine möglichst klare Stimme\r\nzu bekommen, hustete er ein wenig ab, allerdings bemüht, dies ganz\r\ngedämpft zu tun, da möglicherweise auch schon dieses Geräusch anders als\r\nmenschlicher Husten klang, was er selbst zu entscheiden sich nicht mehr\r\ngetraute. Im Nebenzimmer war es inzwischen ganz still geworden.\r\nVielleicht saßen die Eltern mit dem Prokuristen beim Tisch und\r\ntuschelten, vielleicht lehnten alle an der Türe und horchten.\r\n\r\nGregor schob sich langsam mit dem Sessel zur Tür hin, ließ ihn dort los,\r\nwarf sich gegen die Tür, hielt sich an ihr aufrecht -- die Ballen seiner\r\nBeinchen hatten ein wenig Klebstoff -- und ruhte sich dort einen\r\nAugenblick lang von der Anstrengung aus. Dann aber machte er sich daran,\r\nmit dem Mund den Schlüssel im Schloß umzudrehen. Es schien leider, daß\r\ner keine eigentlichen Zähne hatte, -- womit sollte er gleich den\r\nSchlüssel fassen? -- aber dafür waren die Kiefer freilich sehr stark,\r\nmit ihrer Hilfe brachte er auch wirklich den Schlüssel in Bewegung und\r\nachtete nicht darauf, daß er sich zweifellos irgendeinen Schaden\r\nzufügte, denn eine braune Flüssigkeit kam ihm aus dem Mund, floß über\r\nden Schlüssel und tropfte auf den Boden. »Hören Sie nur,« sagte der\r\nProkurist im Nebenzimmer, »er dreht den Schlüssel um.« Das war für\r\nGregor eine große Aufmunterung; aber alle hätten ihm zurufen sollen,\r\nauch der Vater und die Mutter: »Frisch, Gregor,« hätten sie rufen\r\nsollen, »immer nur heran, fest an das Schloß heran!« Und in der\r\nVorstellung, daß alle seine Bemühungen mit Spannung verfolgten, verbiß\r\ner sich mit allem, was er an Kraft aufbringen konnte, besinnungslos in\r\nden Schlüssel. Je nach dem Fortschreiten der Drehung des Schlüssels\r\numtanzte er das Schloß, hielt sich jetzt nur noch mit dem Munde\r\naufrecht, und je nach Bedarf hing er sich an den Schlüssel oder drückte\r\nihn dann wieder nieder mit der ganzen Last seines Körpers. Der hellere\r\nKlang des endlich zurückschnappenden Schlosses erweckte Gregor förmlich.\r\nAufatmend sagte er sich: »Ich habe also den Schlosser nicht gebraucht,«\r\nund legte den Kopf auf die Klinke, um die Türe gänzlich zu öffnen.\r\n\r\nDa er die Türe auf diese Weise öffnen mußte, war sie eigentlich schon\r\nrecht weit geöffnet, und er selbst noch nicht zu sehen. Er mußte sich\r\nerst langsam um den einen Türflügel herumdrehen, und zwar sehr\r\nvorsichtig, wenn er nicht gerade vor dem Eintritt ins Zimmer plump auf\r\nden Rücken fallen wollte. Er war noch mit jener schwierigen Bewegung\r\nbeschäftigt und hatte nicht Zeit, auf anderes zu achten, da hörte er\r\nschon den Prokuristen ein lautes »Oh!« ausstoßen -- es klang, wie wenn\r\nder Wind saust -- und nun sah er ihn auch, wie er, der der Nächste an\r\nder Türe war, die Hand gegen den offenen Mund drückte und langsam\r\nzurückwich, als vertreibe ihn eine unsichtbare, gleichmäßig fortwirkende\r\nKraft. Die Mutter -- sie stand hier trotz der Anwesenheit des\r\nProkuristen mit von der Nacht her noch aufgelösten, hoch sich\r\nsträubenden Haaren -- sah zuerst mit gefalteten Händen den Vater an,\r\nging dann zwei Schritte zu Gregor hin und fiel inmitten ihrer rings um\r\nsie herum sich ausbreitenden Röcke nieder, das Gesicht ganz unauffindbar\r\nzu ihrer Brust gesenkt. Der Vater ballte mit feindseligem Ausdruck die\r\nFaust, als wolle er Gregor in sein Zimmer zurückstoßen, sah sich dann\r\nunsicher im Wohnzimmer um, beschattete dann mit den Händen die Augen und\r\nweinte, daß sich seine mächtige Brust schüttelte.\r\n\r\nGregor trat nun gar nicht in das Zimmer, sondern lehnte sich von innen\r\nan den festgeriegelten Türflügel, so daß sein Leib nur zur Hälfte und\r\ndarüber der seitlich geneigte Kopf zu sehen war, mit dem er zu den\r\nanderen hinüberlugte. Es war inzwischen viel heller geworden; klar stand\r\nauf der anderen Straßenseite ein Ausschnitt des gegenüberliegenden,\r\nendlosen, grauschwarzen Hauses -- es war ein Krankenhaus -- mit seinen\r\nhart die Front durchbrechenden regelmäßigen Fenstern; der Regen fiel\r\nnoch nieder, aber nur mit großen, einzeln sichtbaren und förmlich auch\r\neinzelnweise auf die Erde hinuntergeworfenen Tropfen. Das\r\nFrühstücksgeschirr stand in überreicher Zahl auf dem Tisch, denn für den\r\nVater war das Frühstück die wichtigste Mahlzeit des Tages, die er bei\r\nder Lektüre verschiedener Zeitungen stundenlang hinzog. Gerade an der\r\ngegenüberliegenden Wand hing eine Photographie Gregors aus seiner\r\nMilitärzeit, die ihn als Leutnant darstellte, wie er, die Hand am Degen,\r\nsorglos lächelnd, Respekt für seine Haltung und Uniform verlangte. Die\r\nTür zum Vorzimmer war geöffnet, und man sah, da auch die Wohnungstür\r\noffen war, auf den Vorplatz der Wohnung hinaus und auf den Beginn der\r\nabwärts führenden Treppe.\r\n\r\n»Nun,« sagte Gregor und war sich dessen wohl bewußt, daß er der einzige\r\nwar, der die Ruhe bewahrt hatte, »ich werde mich gleich anziehen, die\r\nKollektion zusammenpacken und wegfahren. Wollt ihr, wollt ihr mich\r\nwegfahren lassen? Nun, Herr Prokurist, Sie sehen, ich bin nicht\r\nstarrköpfig und ich arbeite gern; das Reisen ist beschwerlich, aber ich\r\nkönnte ohne das Reisen nicht leben. Wohin gehen Sie denn, Herr\r\nProkurist? Ins Geschäft? Ja? Werden Sie alles wahrheitsgetreu berichten?\r\nMan kann im Augenblick unfähig sein zu arbeiten, aber dann ist gerade\r\nder richtige Zeitpunkt, sich an die früheren Leistungen zu erinnern und\r\nzu bedenken, daß man später, nach Beseitigung des Hindernisses, gewiß\r\ndesto fleißiger und gesammelter arbeiten wird. Ich bin ja dem Herrn Chef\r\nso sehr verpflichtet, das wissen Sie doch recht gut. Andererseits habe\r\nich die Sorge um meine Eltern und die Schwester. Ich bin in der Klemme,\r\nich werde mich aber auch wieder herausarbeiten. Machen Sie es mir aber\r\nnicht schwieriger, als es schon ist. Halten Sie im Geschäft meine\r\nPartei! Man liebt den Reisenden nicht, ich weiß. Man denkt, er verdient\r\nein Heidengeld und führt dabei ein schönes Leben. Man hat eben keine\r\nbesondere Veranlassung, dieses Vorurteil besser zu durchdenken. Sie\r\naber, Herr Prokurist, Sie haben einen besseren Überblick über die\r\nVerhältnisse, als das sonstige Personal, ja sogar, ganz im Vertrauen\r\ngesagt, einen besseren Überblick, als der Herr Chef selbst, der in\r\nseiner Eigenschaft als Unternehmer sich in seinem Urteil leicht\r\nzuungunsten eines Angestellten beirren läßt. Sie wissen auch sehr wohl,\r\ndaß der Reisende, der fast das ganze Jahr außerhalb des Geschäftes ist,\r\nso leicht ein Opfer von Klatschereien, Zufälligkeiten und grundlosen\r\nBeschwerden werden kann, gegen die sich zu wehren ihm ganz unmöglich\r\nist, da er von ihnen meistens gar nichts erfährt und nur dann, wenn er\r\nerschöpft eine Reise beendet hat, zu Hause die schlimmen, auf ihre\r\nUrsachen hin nicht mehr zu durchschauenden Folgen am eigenen Leibe zu\r\nspüren bekommt. Herr Prokurist, gehen Sie nicht weg, ohne mir ein Wort\r\ngesagt zu haben, das mir zeigt, daß Sie mir wenigstens zu einem kleinen\r\nTeil recht geben!«\r\n\r\nAber der Prokurist hatte sich schon bei den ersten Worten Gregors\r\nabgewendet, und nur über die zuckende Schulter hinweg sah er mit\r\naufgeworfenen Lippen nach Gregor zurück. Und während Gregors Rede stand\r\ner keinen Augenblick still, sondern verzog sich, ohne Gregor aus den\r\nAugen zu lassen, gegen die Tür, aber ganz allmählich, als bestehe ein\r\ngeheimes Verbot, das Zimmer zu verlassen. Schon war er im Vorzimmer, und\r\nnach der plötzlichen Bewegung, mit der er zum letztenmal den Fuß aus dem\r\nWohnzimmer zog, hätte man glauben können, er habe sich soeben die Sohle\r\nverbrannt. Im Vorzimmer aber streckte er die rechte Hand weit von sich\r\nzur Treppe hin, als warte dort auf ihn eine geradezu überirdische\r\nErlösung.\r\n\r\nGregor sah ein, daß er den Prokuristen in dieser Stimmung auf keinen\r\nFall weggehen lassen dürfe, wenn dadurch seine Stellung im Geschäft\r\nnicht aufs äußerste gefährdet werden sollte. Die Eltern verstanden das\r\nalles nicht so gut; sie hatten sich in den langen Jahren die Überzeugung\r\ngebildet, daß Gregor in diesem Geschäft für sein Leben versorgt war, und\r\nhatten außerdem jetzt mit den augenblicklichen Sorgen so viel zu tun,\r\ndaß ihnen jede Voraussicht abhanden gekommen war. Aber Gregor hatte\r\ndiese Voraussicht. Der Prokurist mußte gehalten, beruhigt, überzeugt und\r\nschließlich gewonnen werden; die Zukunft Gregors und seiner Familie hing\r\ndoch davon ab! Wäre doch die Schwester hier gewesen! Sie war klug; sie\r\nhatte schon geweint, als Gregor noch ruhig auf dem Rücken lag. Und gewiß\r\nhätte der Prokurist, dieser Damenfreund, sich von ihr lenken lassen;\r\nsie hätte die Wohnungstür zugemacht und ihm im Vorzimmer den Schrecken\r\nausgeredet. Aber die Schwester war eben nicht da, Gregor selbst mußte\r\nhandeln. Und ohne daran zu denken, daß er seine gegenwärtigen\r\nFähigkeiten, sich zu bewegen, noch gar nicht kannte, ohne auch daran zu\r\ndenken, daß seine Rede möglicher- ja wahrscheinlicherweise wieder nicht\r\nverstanden worden war, verließ er den Türflügel; schob sich durch die\r\nÖffnung; wollte zum Prokuristen hingehen, der sich schon am Geländer des\r\nVorplatzes lächerlicherweise mit beiden Händen festhielt; fiel aber\r\nsofort, nach einem Halt suchend, mit einem kleinen Schrei auf seine\r\nvielen Beinchen nieder. Kaum war das geschehen, fühlte er zum erstenmal\r\nan diesem Morgen ein körperliches Wohlbehagen; die Beinchen hatten\r\nfesten Boden unter sich; sie gehorchten vollkommen, wie er zu seiner\r\nFreude merkte; strebten sogar darnach, ihn fortzutragen, wohin er\r\nwollte; und schon glaubte er, die endgültige Besserung alles Leidens\r\nstehe unmittelbar bevor. Aber im gleichen Augenblick, als er da\r\nschaukelnd vor verhaltener Bewegung, gar nicht weit von seiner Mutter\r\nentfernt, ihr gerade gegenüber auf dem Boden lag, sprang diese, die doch\r\nso ganz in sich versunken schien, mit einemmale in die Höhe, die Arme\r\nweit ausgestreckt, die Finger gespreizt, rief: »Hilfe, um Gottes willen\r\nHilfe!«, hielt den Kopf geneigt, als wolle sie Gregor besser sehen, lief\r\naber, im Widerspruch dazu, sinnlos zurück; hatte vergessen, daß hinter\r\nihr der gedeckte Tisch stand; setzte sich, als sie bei ihm angekommen\r\nwar, wie in Zerstreutheit, eilig auf ihn, und schien gar nicht zu\r\nmerken, daß neben ihr aus der umgeworfenen großen Kanne der Kaffee in\r\nvollem Strome auf den Teppich sich ergoß.\r\n\r\n»Mutter, Mutter,« sagte Gregor leise und sah zu ihr hinauf. Der\r\nProkurist war ihm für einen Augenblick ganz aus dem Sinn gekommen;\r\ndagegen konnte er sich nicht versagen, im Anblick des fließenden Kaffees\r\nmehrmals mit den Kiefern ins Leere zu schnappen. Darüber schrie die\r\nMutter neuerdings auf, flüchtete vom Tisch und fiel dem ihr\r\nentgegeneilenden Vater in die Arme. Aber Gregor hatte jetzt keine Zeit\r\nfür seine Eltern; der Prokurist war schon auf der Treppe; das Kinn auf\r\ndem Geländer, sah er noch zum letzten Male zurück. Gregor nahm einen\r\nAnlauf, um ihn möglichst sicher einzuholen; der Prokurist mußte etwas\r\nahnen, denn er machte einen Sprung über mehrere Stufen und verschwand;\r\n»Huh!« aber schrie er noch, es klang durchs ganze Treppenhaus. Leider\r\nschien nun auch diese Flucht des Prokuristen den Vater, der bisher\r\nverhältnismäßig gefaßt gewesen war, völlig zu verwirren, denn statt\r\nselbst dem Prokuristen nachzulaufen oder wenigstens Gregor in der\r\nVerfolgung nicht zu hindern, packte er mit der Rechten den Stock des\r\nProkuristen, den dieser mit Hut und Überzieher auf einem Sessel\r\nzurückgelassen hatte, holte mit der Linken eine große Zeitung vom Tisch\r\nund machte sich unter Füßestampfen daran, Gregor durch Schwenken des\r\nStockes und der Zeitung in sein Zimmer zurückzutreiben. Kein Bitten\r\nGregors half, kein Bitten wurde auch verstanden, er mochte den Kopf noch\r\nso demütig drehen, der Vater stampfte nur stärker mit den Füßen. Drüben\r\nhatte die Mutter trotz des kühlen Wetters ein Fenster aufgerissen, und\r\nhinausgelehnt drückte sie ihr Gesicht weit außerhalb des Fensters in\r\nihre Hände. Zwischen Gasse und Treppenhaus entstand eine starke Zugluft,\r\ndie Fenstervorhänge flogen auf, die Zeitungen auf dem Tische rauschten,\r\neinzelne Blätter wehten über den Boden hin. Unerbittlich drängte der\r\nVater und stieß Zischlaute aus, wie ein Wilder. Nun hatte aber Gregor\r\nnoch gar keine Übung im Rückwärtsgehen, es ging wirklich sehr langsam.\r\nWenn sich Gregor nur hätte umdrehen dürfen, er wäre gleich in seinem\r\nZimmer gewesen, aber er fürchtete sich, den Vater durch die zeitraubende\r\nUmdrehung ungeduldig zu machen, und jeden Augenblick drohte ihm doch von\r\ndem Stock in des Vaters Hand der tödliche Schlag auf den Rücken oder auf\r\nden Kopf. Endlich aber blieb Gregor doch nichts anderes übrig, denn er\r\nmerkte mit Entsetzen, daß er im Rückwärtsgehen nicht einmal die Richtung\r\neinzuhalten verstand; und so begann er, unter unaufhörlichen ängstlichen\r\nSeitenblicken nach dem Vater, sich nach Möglichkeit rasch, in\r\nWirklichkeit aber doch nur sehr langsam umzudrehen. Vielleicht merkte\r\nder Vater seinen guten Willen, denn er störte ihn hierbei nicht, sondern\r\ndirigierte sogar hie und da die Drehbewegung von der Ferne mit der\r\nSpitze seines Stockes. Wenn nur nicht dieses unerträgliche Zischen des\r\nVaters gewesen wäre! Gregor verlor darüber ganz den Kopf. Er war schon\r\nfast ganz umgedreht, als er sich, immer auf dieses Zischen horchend,\r\nsogar irrte und sich wieder ein Stück zurückdrehte. Als er aber endlich\r\nglücklich mit dem Kopf vor der Türöffnung war, zeigte es sich, daß sein\r\nKörper zu breit war, um ohne weiteres durchzukommen. Dem Vater fiel es\r\nnatürlich in seiner gegenwärtigen Verfassung auch nicht entfernt ein,\r\netwa den anderen Türflügel zu öffnen, um für Gregor einen genügenden\r\nDurchgang zu schaffen. Seine fixe Idee war bloß, daß Gregor so rasch als\r\nmöglich in sein Zimmer müsse. Niemals hätte er auch die umständlichen\r\nVorbereitungen gestattet, die Gregor brauchte, um sich aufzurichten und\r\nvielleicht auf diese Weise durch die Tür zu kommen. Vielleicht trieb er,\r\nals gäbe es kein Hindernis, Gregor jetzt unter besonderem Lärm\r\nvorwärts; es klang schon hinter Gregor gar nicht mehr wie die Stimme\r\nbloß eines einzigen Vaters; nun gab es wirklich keinen Spaß mehr, und\r\nGregor drängte sich -- geschehe was wolle -- in die Tür. Die eine Seite\r\nseines Körpers hob sich, er lag schief in der Türöffnung, seine eine\r\nFlanke war ganz wundgerieben, an der weißen Tür blieben häßliche Flecke,\r\nbald steckte er fest und hätte sich allein nicht mehr rühren können, die\r\nBeinchen auf der einen Seite hingen zitternd oben in der Luft, die auf\r\nder anderen waren schmerzhaft zu Boden gedrückt -- da gab ihm der Vater\r\nvon hinten einen jetzt wahrhaftig erlösenden starken Stoß, und er flog,\r\nheftig blutend, weit in sein Zimmer hinein. Die Tür wurde noch mit dem\r\nStock zugeschlagen, dann war es endlich still.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nII.\r\n\r\n\r\nErst in der Abenddämmerung erwachte Gregor aus seinem schweren\r\nohnmachtähnlichen Schlaf. Er wäre gewiß nicht viel später auch ohne\r\nStörung erwacht, denn er fühlte sich genügend ausgeruht und\r\nausgeschlafen, doch schien es ihm, als hätte ihn ein flüchtiger Schritt\r\nund ein vorsichtiges Schließen der zum Vorzimmer führenden Tür geweckt.\r\nDer Schein der elektrischen Straßenbahn lag bleich hier und da auf der\r\nZimmerdecke und auf den höheren Teilen der Möbel, aber unten bei Gregor\r\nwar es finster. Langsam schob er sich, noch ungeschickt mit seinen\r\nFühlern tastend, die er jetzt erst schätzen lernte, zur Türe hin, um\r\nnachzusehen, was dort geschehen war. Seine linke Seite schien eine\r\neinzige lange, unangenehm spannende Narbe, und er mußte auf seinen zwei\r\nBeinreihen regelrecht hinken. Ein Beinchen war übrigens im Laufe der\r\nvormittägigen Vorfälle schwer verletzt worden -- es war fast ein\r\nWunder, daß nur eines verletzt worden war -- und schleppte leblos nach.\r\n\r\nErst bei der Tür merkte er, was ihn dorthin eigentlich gelockt hatte; es\r\nwar der Geruch von etwas Eßbarem gewesen. Denn dort stand ein Napf mit\r\nsüßer Milch gefüllt, in der kleine Schnitte von Weißbrot schwammen. Fast\r\nhätte er vor Freude gelacht, denn er hatte noch größeren Hunger als am\r\nMorgen, und gleich tauchte er seinen Kopf fast bis über die Augen in die\r\nMilch hinein. Aber bald zog er ihn enttäuscht wieder zurück; nicht nur,\r\ndaß ihm das Essen wegen seiner heiklen linken Seite Schwierigkeiten\r\nmachte -- und er konnte nur essen, wenn der ganze Körper schnaufend\r\nmitarbeitete --, so schmeckte ihm überdies die Milch, die sonst sein\r\nLieblingsgetränk war und die ihm gewiß die Schwester deshalb\r\nhereingestellt hatte, gar nicht, ja er wandte sich fast mit Widerwillen\r\nvon dem Napf ab und kroch in die Zimmermitte zurück.\r\n\r\nIm Wohnzimmer war, wie Gregor durch die Türspalte sah, das Gas\r\nangezündet, aber während sonst zu dieser Tageszeit der Vater seine\r\nnachmittags erscheinende Zeitung der Mutter und manchmal auch der\r\nSchwester mit erhobener Stimme vorzulesen pflegte, hörte man jetzt\r\nkeinen Laut. Nun vielleicht war dieses Vorlesen, von dem ihm die\r\nSchwester immer erzählte und schrieb, in der letzten Zeit überhaupt aus\r\nder Übung gekommen. Aber auch ringsherum war es so still, trotzdem doch\r\ngewiß die Wohnung nicht leer war. »Was für ein stilles Leben die Familie\r\ndoch führte,« sagte sich Gregor und fühlte, während er starr vor sich\r\nins Dunkle sah, einen großen Stolz darüber, daß er seinen Eltern und\r\nseiner Schwester ein solches Leben in einer so schönen Wohnung hatte\r\nverschaffen können. Wie aber, wenn jetzt alle Ruhe, aller Wohlstand,\r\nalle Zufriedenheit ein Ende mit Schrecken nehmen sollte? Um sich nicht\r\nin solche Gedanken zu verlieren, setzte sich Gregor lieber in Bewegung\r\nund kroch im Zimmer auf und ab.\r\n\r\nEinmal während des langen Abends wurde die eine Seitentüre und einmal\r\ndie andere bis zu einer kleinen Spalte geöffnet und rasch wieder\r\ngeschlossen; jemand hatte wohl das Bedürfnis hereinzukommen, aber auch\r\nwieder zu viele Bedenken. Gregor machte nun unmittelbar bei der\r\nWohnzimmertür Halt, entschlossen, den zögernden Besucher doch irgendwie\r\nhereinzubringen oder doch wenigstens zu erfahren, wer es sei; aber nun\r\nwurde die Tür nicht mehr geöffnet und Gregor wartete vergebens. Früh,\r\nals die Türen versperrt waren, hatten alle zu ihm hereinkommen wollen,\r\njetzt, da er die eine Tür geöffnet hatte und die anderen offenbar\r\nwährend des Tages geöffnet worden waren, kam keiner mehr, und die\r\nSchlüssel steckten nun auch von außen.\r\n\r\nSpät erst in der Nacht wurde das Licht im Wohnzimmer ausgelöscht, und\r\nnun war leicht festzustellen, daß die Eltern und die Schwester so lange\r\nwachgeblieben waren, denn wie man genau hören konnte, entfernten sich\r\njetzt alle drei auf den Fußspitzen. Nun kam gewiß bis zum Morgen niemand\r\nmehr zu Gregor herein; er hatte also eine lange Zeit, um ungestört zu\r\nüberlegen, wie er sein Leben jetzt neu ordnen sollte. Aber das hohe\r\nfreie Zimmer, in dem er gezwungen war, flach auf dem Boden zu liegen,\r\nängstigte ihn, ohne daß er die Ursache herausfinden konnte, denn es war\r\nja sein seit fünf Jahren von ihm bewohntes Zimmer -- und mit einer halb\r\nunbewußten Wendung und nicht ohne eine leichte Scham eilte er unter das\r\nKanapee, wo er sich, trotzdem sein Rücken ein wenig gedrückt wurde und\r\ntrotzdem er den Kopf nicht mehr erheben konnte, gleich sehr behaglich\r\nfühlte und nur bedauerte, daß sein Körper zu breit war, um vollständig\r\nunter dem Kanapee untergebracht zu werden.\r\n\r\nDort blieb er die ganze Nacht, die er zum Teil im Halbschlaf, aus dem\r\nihn der Hunger immer wieder aufschreckte, verbrachte, zum Teil aber in\r\nSorgen und undeutlichen Hoffnungen, die aber alle zu dem Schlusse\r\nführten, daß er sich vorläufig ruhig verhalten und durch Geduld und\r\ngrößte Rücksichtnahme der Familie die Unannehmlichkeiten erträglich\r\nmachen müsse, die er ihr in seinem gegenwärtigen Zustand nun einmal zu\r\nverursachen gezwungen war.\r\n\r\nSchon am frühen Morgen, es war fast noch Nacht, hatte Gregor\r\nGelegenheit, die Kraft seiner eben gefaßten Entschlüsse zu prüfen, denn\r\nvom Vorzimmer her öffnete die Schwester, fast völlig angezogen, die Tür\r\nund sah mit Spannung herein. Sie fand ihn nicht gleich, aber als sie ihn\r\nunter dem Kanapee bemerkte -- Gott, er mußte doch irgendwo sein, er\r\nhatte doch nicht wegfliegen können -- erschrak sie so sehr, daß sie,\r\nohne sich beherrschen zu können, die Tür von außen wieder zuschlug. Aber\r\nals bereue sie ihr Benehmen, öffnete sie die Tür sofort wieder und trat,\r\nals sei sie bei einem Schwerkranken oder gar bei einem Fremden, auf den\r\nFußspitzen herein. Gregor hatte den Kopf bis knapp zum Rande des\r\nKanapees vorgeschoben und beobachtete sie. Ob sie wohl bemerken würde,\r\ndaß er die Milch stehen gelassen hatte, und zwar keineswegs aus Mangel\r\nan Hunger, und ob sie eine andere Speise hereinbringen würde, die ihm\r\nbesser entsprach? Täte sie es nicht von selbst, er wollte lieber\r\nverhungern, als sie darauf aufmerksam machen, trotzdem es ihn eigentlich\r\nungeheuer drängte, unterm Kanapee vorzuschießen, sich der Schwester zu\r\nFüßen zu werfen und sie um irgend etwas Gutes zum Essen zu bitten. Aber\r\ndie Schwester bemerkte sofort mit Verwunderung den noch vollen Napf, aus\r\ndem nur ein wenig Milch ringsherum verschüttet war, sie hob ihn gleich\r\nauf, zwar nicht mit den bloßen Händen, sondern mit einem Fetzen, und\r\ntrug ihn hinaus. Gregor war äußerst neugierig, was sie zum Ersatze\r\nbringen würde, und er machte sich die verschiedensten Gedanken darüber.\r\nNiemals aber hätte er erraten können, was die Schwester in ihrer Güte\r\nwirklich tat. Sie brachte ihm, um seinen Geschmack zu prüfen, eine ganze\r\nAuswahl, alles auf einer alten Zeitung ausgebreitet. Da war altes\r\nhalbverfaultes Gemüse; Knochen vom Nachtmahl her, die von festgewordener\r\nweißer Sauce umgeben waren; ein paar Rosinen und Mandeln; ein Käse, den\r\nGregor vor zwei Tagen für ungenießbar erklärt hatte; ein trockenes Brot,\r\nein mit Butter beschmiertes Brot und ein mit Butter beschmiertes und\r\ngesalzenes Brot. Außerdem stellte sie zu dem allen noch den\r\nwahrscheinlich ein für allemal für Gregor bestimmten Napf, in den sie\r\nWasser gegossen hatte. Und aus Zartgefühl, da sie wußte, daß Gregor vor\r\nihr nicht essen würde, entfernte sie sich eiligst und drehte sogar den\r\nSchlüssel um, damit nur Gregor merken könne, daß er es sich so behaglich\r\nmachen dürfe, wie er wolle. Gregors Beinchen schwirrten, als es jetzt\r\nzum Essen ging. Seine Wunden mußten übrigens auch schon vollständig\r\ngeheilt sein, er fühlte keine Behinderung mehr, er staunte darüber und\r\ndachte daran, wie er vor mehr als einem Monat sich mit dem Messer ganz\r\nwenig in den Finger geschnitten, und wie ihm diese Wunde noch vorgestern\r\ngenug wehgetan hatte. »Sollte ich jetzt weniger Feingefühl haben?«\r\ndachte er und saugte schon gierig an dem Käse, zu dem es ihn vor allen\r\nanderen Speisen sofort und nachdrücklich gezogen hatte. Rasch\r\nhintereinander und mit vor Befriedigung tränenden Augen verzehrte er den\r\nKäse, das Gemüse und die Sauce; die frischen Speisen dagegen schmeckten\r\nihm nicht, er konnte nicht einmal ihren Geruch vertragen und schleppte\r\nsogar die Sachen, die er essen wollte, ein Stückchen weiter weg. Er war\r\nschon längst mit allem fertig und lag nur noch faul auf der gleichen\r\nStelle, als die Schwester zum Zeichen, daß er sich zurückziehen solle,\r\nlangsam den Schlüssel umdrehte. Das schreckte ihn sofort auf, trotzdem\r\ner schon fast schlummerte, und er eilte wieder unter das Kanapee. Aber\r\nes kostete ihn große Selbstüberwindung, auch nur die kurze Zeit, während\r\nwelcher die Schwester im Zimmer war, unter dem Kanapee zu bleiben, denn\r\nvon dem reichlichen Essen hatte sich sein Leib ein wenig gerundet, und\r\ner konnte dort in der Enge kaum atmen. Unter kleinen Erstickungsanfällen\r\nsah er mit etwas hervorgequollenen Augen zu, wie die nichtsahnende\r\nSchwester mit einem Besen nicht nur die Überbleibsel zusammenkehrte,\r\nsondern selbst die von Gregor gar nicht berührten Speisen, als seien\r\nalso auch diese nicht mehr zu gebrauchen, und wie sie alles hastig in\r\neinen Kübel schüttete, den sie mit einem Holzdeckel schloß, worauf sie\r\nalles hinaustrug. Kaum hatte sie sich umgedreht, zog sich schon Gregor\r\nunter dem Kanapee hervor und streckte und blähte sich.\r\n\r\nAuf diese Weise bekam nun Gregor täglich sein Essen, einmal am Morgen,\r\nwenn die Eltern und das Dienstmädchen noch schliefen, das zweitemal nach\r\ndem allgemeinen Mittagessen, denn dann schliefen die Eltern gleichfalls\r\nnoch ein Weilchen, und das Dienstmädchen wurde von der Schwester mit\r\nirgendeiner Besorgung weggeschickt. Gewiß wollten auch sie nicht, daß\r\nGregor verhungere, aber vielleicht hätten sie es nicht ertragen können,\r\nvon seinem Essen mehr als durch Hörensagen zu erfahren, vielleicht\r\nwollte die Schwester ihnen auch eine möglicherweise nur kleine Trauer\r\nersparen, denn tatsächlich litten sie ja gerade genug.\r\n\r\nMit welchen Ausreden man an jenem ersten Vormittag den Arzt und den\r\nSchlosser wieder aus der Wohnung geschafft hatte, konnte Gregor gar\r\nnicht erfahren, denn da er nicht verstanden wurde, dachte niemand daran,\r\nauch die Schwester nicht, daß er die anderen verstehen könne, und so\r\nmußte er sich, wenn die Schwester in seinem Zimmer war, damit begnügen,\r\nnur hier und da ihre Seufzer und Anrufe der Heiligen zu hören. Erst\r\nspäter, als sie sich ein wenig an alles gewöhnt hatte -- von\r\nvollständiger Gewöhnung konnte natürlich niemals die Rede sein --,\r\nerhaschte Gregor manchmal eine Bemerkung, die freundlich gemeint war\r\noder so gedeutet werden konnte. »Heute hat es ihm aber geschmeckt,«\r\nsagte sie, wenn Gregor unter dem Essen tüchtig aufgeräumt hatte, während\r\nsie im gegenteiligen Fall, der sich allmählich immer häufiger\r\nwiederholte, fast traurig zu sagen pflegte: »Nun ist wieder alles\r\nstehengeblieben.«\r\n\r\nWährend aber Gregor unmittelbar keine Neuigkeit erfahren konnte,\r\nerhorchte er manches aus den Nebenzimmern, und wo er nun einmal Stimmen\r\nhörte, lief er gleich zu der betreffenden Tür und drückte sich mit\r\nganzem Leib an sie. Besonders in der ersten Zeit gab es kein Gespräch,\r\ndas nicht irgendwie wenn auch nur im geheimen, von ihm handelte. Zwei\r\nTage lang waren bei allen Mahlzeiten Beratungen darüber zu hören, wie\r\nman sich jetzt verhalten solle; aber auch zwischen den Mahlzeiten sprach\r\nman über das gleiche Thema, denn immer waren zumindest zwei\r\nFamilienmitglieder zu Hause, da wohl niemand allein zu Hause bleiben\r\nwollte und man die Wohnung doch auf keinen Fall gänzlich verlassen\r\nkonnte. Auch hatte das Dienstmädchen gleich am ersten Tag -- es war\r\nnicht ganz klar, was und wieviel sie von dem Vorgefallenen wußte --\r\nkniefällig die Mutter gebeten, sie sofort zu entlassen, und als sie sich\r\neine Viertelstunde danach verabschiedete, dankte sie für die Entlassung\r\nunter Tränen, wie für die größte Wohltat, die man ihr hier erwiesen\r\nhatte, und gab, ohne daß man es von ihr verlangte, einen fürchterlichen\r\nSchwur ab, niemandem auch nur das geringste zu verraten.\r\n\r\nNun mußte die Schwester im Verein mit der Mutter auch kochen; allerdings\r\nmachte das nicht viel Mühe, denn man aß fast nichts. Immer wieder hörte\r\nGregor, wie der eine den anderen vergebens zum Essen aufforderte und\r\nkeine andere Antwort bekam, als: »Danke ich habe genug« oder etwas\r\nÄhnliches. Getrunken wurde vielleicht auch nichts. Öfters fragte die\r\nSchwester den Vater, ob er Bier haben wolle, und herzlich erbot sie\r\nsich, es selbst zu holen, und als der Vater schwieg, sagte sie, um ihm\r\njedes Bedenken zu nehmen, sie könne auch die Hausmeisterin darum\r\nschicken, aber dann sagte der Vater schließlich ein großes »Nein«, und\r\nes wurde nicht mehr davon gesprochen.\r\n\r\nSchon im Laufe des ersten Tages legte der Vater die ganzen\r\nVermögensverhältnisse und Aussichten sowohl der Mutter als auch der\r\nSchwester dar. Hie und da stand er vom Tische auf und holte aus seiner\r\nkleinen Wertheimkassa, die er aus dem vor fünf Jahren erfolgten\r\nZusammenbruch seines Geschäftes gerettet hatte, irgendeinen Beleg oder\r\nirgendein Vormerkbuch. Man hörte, wie er das komplizierte Schloß\r\naufsperrte und nach Entnahme des Gesuchten wieder verschloß. Diese\r\nErklärungen des Vaters waren zum Teil das erste Erfreuliche, was Gregor\r\nseit seiner Gefangenschaft zu hören bekam. Er war der Meinung gewesen,\r\ndaß dem Vater von jenem Geschäft her nicht das Geringste übriggeblieben\r\nwar, zumindest hatte ihm der Vater nichts Gegenteiliges gesagt, und\r\nGregor allerdings hatte ihn auch nicht darum gefragt. Gregors Sorge war\r\ndamals nur gewesen, alles daranzusetzen, um die Familie das\r\ngeschäftliche Unglück, das alle in eine vollständige Hoffnungslosigkeit\r\ngebracht hatte, möglichst rasch vergessen zu lassen. Und so hatte er\r\ndamals mit ganz besonderem Feuer zu arbeiten angefangen und war fast\r\nüber Nacht aus einem kleinen Kommis ein Reisender geworden, der\r\nnatürlich ganz andere Möglichkeiten des Geldverdienens hatte, und dessen\r\nArbeitserfolge sich sofort in Form der Provision zu Bargeld\r\nverwandelten, das der erstaunten und beglückten Familie zu Hause auf den\r\nTisch gelegt werden konnte. Es waren schöne Zeiten gewesen, und niemals\r\nnachher hatten sie sich, wenigstens in diesem Glanze, wiederholt,\r\ntrotzdem Gregor später so viel Geld verdiente, daß er den Aufwand der\r\nganzen Familie zu tragen imstande war und auch trug. Man hatte sich eben\r\ndaran gewöhnt, sowohl die Familie, als auch Gregor, man nahm das Geld\r\ndankbar an, er lieferte es gern ab, aber eine besondere Wärme wollte\r\nsich nicht mehr ergeben. Nur die Schwester war Gregor doch noch nahe\r\ngeblieben, und es war sein geheimer Plan, sie, die zum Unterschied von\r\nGregor Musik sehr liebte und rührend Violine zu spielen verstand,\r\nnächstes Jahr, ohne Rücksicht auf die großen Kosten, die das verursachen\r\nmußte, und die man schon auf andere Weise hereinbringen würde, auf das\r\nKonservatorium zu schicken. Öfters während der kurzen Aufenthalte\r\nGregors in der Stadt wurde in den Gesprächen mit der Schwester das\r\nKonservatorium erwähnt, aber immer nur als schöner Traum, an dessen\r\nVerwirklichung nicht zu denken war, und die Eltern hörten nicht einmal\r\ndiese unschuldigen Erwähnungen gern; aber Gregor dachte sehr bestimmt\r\ndaran und beabsichtigte, es am Weihnachtsabend feierlich zu erklären.\r\n\r\nSolche in seinem gegenwärtigen Zustand ganz nutzlose Gedanken gingen ihm\r\ndurch den Kopf, während er dort aufrecht an der Türe klebte und horchte.\r\nManchmal konnte er vor allgemeiner Müdigkeit gar nicht mehr zuhören und\r\nließ den Kopf nachlässig gegen die Tür schlagen, hielt ihn aber sofort\r\nwieder fest, denn selbst das kleine Geräusch, das er damit verursacht\r\nhatte, war nebenan gehört worden und hatte alle verstummen lassen. »Was\r\ner nur wieder treibt,« sagte der Vater nach einer Weile, offenbar zur\r\nTüre hingewendet, und dann erst wurde das unterbrochene Gespräch\r\nallmählich wieder aufgenommen.\r\n\r\nGregor erfuhr nun zur Genüge -- denn der Vater pflegte sich in seinen\r\nErklärungen öfters zu wiederholen, teils, weil er selbst sich mit diesen\r\nDingen schon lange nicht beschäftigt hatte, teils auch, weil die Mutter\r\nnicht alles gleich beim erstenmal verstand --, daß trotz allen Unglücks\r\nein allerdings ganz kleines Vermögen aus der alten Zeit noch vorhanden\r\nwar, das die nicht angerührten Zinsen in der Zwischenzeit ein wenig\r\nhatten anwachsen lassen. Außerdem aber war das Geld, das Gregor\r\nallmonatlich nach Hause gebracht hatte -- er selbst hatte nur ein paar\r\nGulden für sich behalten --, nicht vollständig aufgebraucht worden und\r\nhatte sich zu einem kleinen Kapital angesammelt. Gregor, hinter seiner\r\nTüre, nickte eifrig, erfreut über diese unerwartete Vorsicht und\r\nSparsamkeit. Eigentlich hätte er ja mit diesen überschüssigen Geldern\r\ndie Schuld des Vaters gegenüber dem Chef weiter abgetragen haben können,\r\nund jener Tag, an dem er diesen Posten hätte loswerden können, wäre weit\r\nnäher gewesen, aber jetzt war es zweifellos besser so, wie es der Vater\r\neingerichtet hatte.\r\n\r\nNun genügte dieses Geld aber ganz und gar nicht, um die Familie etwa von\r\nden Zinsen leben zu lassen; es genügte vielleicht, um die Familie ein,\r\nhöchstens zwei Jahre zu erhalten, mehr war es nicht. Es war also bloß\r\neine Summe, die man eigentlich nicht angreifen durfte, und die für den\r\nNotfall zurückgelegt werden mußte; das Geld zum Leben aber mußte man\r\nverdienen. Nun war aber der Vater ein zwar gesunder, aber alter Mann,\r\nder schon fünf Jahre nichts gearbeitet hatte und sich jedenfalls nicht\r\nviel zutrauen durfte; er hatte in diesen fünf Jahren, welche die ersten\r\nFerien seines mühevollen und doch erfolglosen Lebens waren, viel Fett\r\nangesetzt und war dadurch recht schwerfällig geworden. Und die alte\r\nMutter sollte nun vielleicht Geld verdienen, die an Asthma litt, der\r\neine Wanderung durch die Wohnung schon Anstrengung verursachte, und die\r\njeden zweiten Tag in Atembeschwerden auf dem Sofa beim offenen Fenster\r\nverbrachte? Und die Schwester sollte Geld verdienen, die noch ein Kind\r\nwar mit ihren siebzehn Jahren, und der ihre bisherige Lebensweise so\r\nsehr zu gönnen war, die daraus bestanden hatte, sich nett zu kleiden,\r\nlange zu schlafen, in der Wirtschaft mitzuhelfen, an ein paar\r\nbescheidenen Vergnügungen sich zu beteiligen und vor allem Violine zu\r\nspielen? Wenn die Rede auf diese Notwendigkeit des Geldverdienens kam,\r\nließ zuerst immer Gregor die Türe los und warf sich auf das neben der\r\nTür befindliche kühle Ledersofa, denn ihm war ganz heiß vor Beschämung\r\nund Trauer.\r\n\r\nOft lag er dort die ganzen langen Nächte über, schlief keinen Augenblick\r\nund scharrte nur stundenlang auf dem Leder. Oder er scheute nicht die\r\ngroße Mühe, einen Sessel zum Fenster zu schieben, dann die\r\nFensterbrüstung hinaufzukriechen und, in den Sessel gestemmt, sich ans\r\nFenster zu lehnen, offenbar nur in irgendeiner Erinnerung an das\r\nBefreiende, das früher für ihn darin gelegen war, aus dem Fenster zu\r\nschauen. Denn tatsächlich sah er von Tag zu Tag die auch nur ein wenig\r\nentfernten Dinge immer undeutlicher; das gegenüberliegende Krankenhaus,\r\ndessen nur allzu häufigen Anblick er früher verflucht hatte, bekam er\r\nüberhaupt nicht mehr zu Gesicht, und wenn er nicht genau gewußt hätte,\r\ndaß er in der stillen, aber völlig städtischen Charlottenstraße wohnte,\r\nhätte er glauben können, von seinem Fenster aus in eine Einöde zu\r\nschauen in welcher der graue Himmel und die graue Erde ununterscheidbar\r\nsich vereinigten. Nur zweimal hatte die aufmerksame Schwester sehen\r\nmüssen, daß der Sessel beim Fenster stand, als sie schon jedesmal,\r\nnachdem sie das Zimmer aufgeräumt hatte, den Sessel wieder genau zum\r\nFenster hinschob, ja sogar von nun ab den inneren Fensterflügel offen\r\nließ.\r\n\r\nHätte Gregor nur mit der Schwester sprechen und ihr für alles danken\r\nkönnen, was sie für ihn machen mußte, er hätte ihre Dienste leichter\r\nertragen; so aber litt er darunter. Die Schwester suchte freilich die\r\nPeinlichkeit des Ganzen möglichst zu verwischen, und je längere Zeit\r\nverging, desto besser gelang es ihr natürlich auch, aber auch Gregor\r\ndurchschaute mit der Zeit alles viel genauer. Schon ihr Eintritt war für\r\nihn schrecklich. Kaum war sie eingetreten, lief sie, ohne sich Zeit zu\r\nnehmen, die Türe zu schließen, so sehr sie sonst darauf achtete, jedem\r\nden Anblick von Gregors Zimmer zu ersparen, geradewegs zum Fenster und\r\nriß es, als ersticke sie fast, mit hastigen Händen auf, blieb auch,\r\nselbst wenn es noch so kalt war, ein Weilchen beim Fenster und atmete\r\ntief. Mit diesem Laufen und Lärmen erschreckte sie Gregor täglich\r\nzweimal; die ganze Zeit über zitterte er unter dem Kanapee und wußte\r\ndoch sehr gut, daß sie ihn gewiß gerne damit verschont hätte, wenn es\r\nihr nur möglich gewesen wäre, sich in einem Zimmer, in dem sich Gregor\r\nbefand, bei geschlossenem Fenster aufzuhalten.\r\n\r\nEinmal, es war wohl schon ein Monat seit Gregors Verwandlung vergangen,\r\nund es war doch schon für die Schwester kein besonderer Grund mehr, über\r\nGregors Aussehen in Erstaunen zu geraten, kam sie ein wenig früher als\r\nsonst und traf Gregor noch an, wie er, unbeweglich und so recht zum\r\nErschrecken aufgestellt, aus dem Fenster schaute. Es wäre für Gregor\r\nnicht unerwartet gewesen, wenn sie nicht eingetreten wäre, da er sie\r\ndurch seine Stellung verhinderte, sofort das Fenster zu öffnen, aber sie\r\ntrat nicht nur nicht ein, sie fuhr sogar zurück und schloß die Tür; ein\r\nFremder hätte geradezu denken können, Gregor habe ihr aufgelauert und\r\nhabe sie beißen wollen. Gregor versteckte sich natürlich sofort unter\r\ndem Kanapee, aber er mußte bis zum Mittag warten, ehe die Schwester\r\nwiederkam, und sie schien viel unruhiger als sonst. Er erkannte daraus,\r\ndaß ihr sein Anblick noch immer unerträglich war und ihr auch weiterhin\r\nunerträglich bleiben müsse, und daß sie sich wohl sehr überwinden mußte,\r\nvor dem Anblick auch nur der kleinen Partie seines Körpers nicht\r\ndavonzulaufen, mit der er unter dem Kanapee hervorragte. Um ihr auch\r\ndiesen Anblick zu ersparen, trug er eines Tages auf seinem Rücken -- er\r\nbrauchte zu dieser Arbeit vier Stunden -- das Leintuch auf das Kanapee\r\nund ordnete es in einer solchen Weise an, daß er nun gänzlich verdeckt\r\nwar, und daß die Schwester, selbst wenn sie sich bückte, ihn nicht sehen\r\nkonnte. Wäre dieses Leintuch ihrer Meinung nach nicht nötig gewesen,\r\ndann hätte sie es ja entfernen können, denn daß es nicht zum Vergnügen\r\nGregors gehören konnte, sich so ganz und gar abzusperren, war doch klar\r\ngenug, aber sie ließ das Leintuch, so wie es war, und Gregor glaubte\r\nsogar einen dankbaren Blick erhascht zu haben, als er einmal mit dem\r\nKopf vorsichtig das Leintuch ein wenig lüftete, um nachzusehen, wie die\r\nSchwester die neue Einrichtung aufnahm.\r\n\r\nIn den ersten vierzehn Tagen konnten es die Eltern nicht über sich\r\nbringen, zu ihm hereinzukommen, und er hörte oft, wie sie die jetzige\r\nArbeit der Schwester völlig anerkannten, während sie sich bisher häufig\r\nüber die Schwester geärgert hatten, weil sie ihnen als ein etwas\r\nnutzloses Mädchen erschienen war. Nun aber warteten oft beide, der Vater\r\nund die Mutter, vor Gregors Zimmer, während die Schwester dort\r\naufräumte, und kaum war sie herausgekommen, mußte sie ganz genau\r\nerzählen, wie es in dem Zimmer aussah, was Gregor gegessen hatte, wie er\r\nsich diesmal benommen hatte, und ob vielleicht eine kleine Besserung zu\r\nbemerken war. Die Mutter übrigens wollte verhältnismäßig bald Gregor\r\nbesuchen, aber der Vater und die Schwester hielten sie zuerst mit\r\nVernunftgründen zurück, denen Gregor sehr aufmerksam zuhörte, und die er\r\nvollständig billigte. Später aber mußte man sie mit Gewalt zurückhalten,\r\nund wenn sie dann rief: »Laßt mich doch zu Gregor, er ist ja mein\r\nunglücklicher Sohn! Begreift ihr es denn nicht, daß ich zu ihm muß?«,\r\ndann dachte Gregor, daß es vielleicht doch gut wäre, wenn die Mutter\r\nhereinkäme, nicht jeden Tag natürlich, aber vielleicht einmal in der\r\nWoche; sie verstand doch alles viel besser als die Schwester, die trotz\r\nall ihrem Mute doch nur ein Kind war und im letzten Grunde vielleicht\r\nnur aus kindlichem Leichtsinn eine so schwere Aufgabe übernommen hatte.\r\n\r\nDer Wunsch Gregors, die Mutter zu sehen, ging bald in Erfüllung. Während\r\ndes Tages wollte Gregor schon aus Rücksicht auf seine Eltern sich nicht\r\nbeim Fenster zeigen, kriechen konnte er aber auf den paar Quadratmetern\r\ndes Fußbodens auch nicht viel, das ruhige Liegen ertrug er schon während\r\nder Nacht schwer, das Essen machte ihm bald nicht mehr das geringste\r\nVergnügen, und so nahm er zur Zerstreuung die Gewohnheit an, kreuz und\r\nquer über Wände und Plafond zu kriechen. Besonders oben an der Decke\r\nhing er gern; es war ganz anders, als das Liegen auf dem Fußboden; man\r\natmete freier; ein leichtes Schwingen ging durch den Körper, und in der\r\nfast glücklichen Zerstreutheit, in der sich Gregor dort oben befand,\r\nkonnte es geschehen, daß er zu seiner eigenen Überraschung sich losließ\r\nund auf den Boden klatschte. Aber nun hatte er natürlich seinen Körper\r\nganz anders in der Gewalt als früher und beschädigte sich selbst bei\r\neinem so großen Falle nicht. Die Schwester nun bemerkte sofort die neue\r\nUnterhaltung, die Gregor für sich gefunden hatte -- er hinterließ ja\r\nauch beim Kriechen hie und da Spuren seines Klebstoffes --, und da\r\nsetzte sie es sich in den Kopf, Gregor das Kriechen in größtem Ausmaße\r\nzu ermöglichen und die Möbel, die es verhinderten, also vor allem den\r\nKasten und den Schreibtisch, wegzuschaffen. Nun war sie aber nicht\r\nimstande, dies allein zu tun; den Vater wagte sie nicht um Hilfe zu\r\nbitten; das Dienstmädchen hätte ihr ganz gewiß nicht geholfen, denn\r\ndieses etwa sechzehnjährige Mädchen harrte zwar tapfer seit Entlassung\r\nder früheren Köchin aus, hatte aber um die Vergünstigung gebeten, die\r\nKüche unaufhörlich versperrt halten zu dürfen und nur auf besonderen\r\nAnruf öffnen zu müssen; so blieb der Schwester also nichts übrig, als\r\neinmal in Abwesenheit des Vaters die Mutter zu holen. Mit Ausrufen\r\nerregter Freude kam die Mutter auch heran, verstummte aber an der Tür\r\nvor Gregors Zimmer. Zuerst sah natürlich die Schwester nach, ob alles im\r\nZimmer in Ordnung war; dann erst ließ sie die Mutter eintreten. Gregor\r\nhatte in größter Eile das Leintuch noch tiefer und mehr in Falten\r\ngezogen, das Ganze sah wirklich nur wie ein zufällig über das Kanapee\r\ngeworfenes Leintuch aus. Gregor unterließ auch diesmal, unter dem\r\nLeintuch zu spionieren; er verzichtete darauf, die Mutter schon diesmal\r\nzu sehen, und war nur froh, daß sie nun doch gekommen war. »Komm nur,\r\nman sieht ihn nicht,« sagte die Schwester, und offenbar führte sie die\r\nMutter an der Hand. Gregor hörte nun, wie die zwei schwachen Frauen den\r\nimmerhin schweren alten Kasten von seinem Platze rückten, und wie die\r\nSchwester immerfort den größten Teil der Arbeit für sich beanspruchte,\r\nohne auf die Warnungen der Mutter zu hören, welche fürchtete, daß sie\r\nsich überanstrengen werde. Es dauerte sehr lange. Wohl nach schon\r\nviertelstündiger Arbeit sagte die Mutter, man solle den Kasten doch\r\nlieber hier lassen, denn erstens sei er zu schwer, sie würden vor\r\nAnkunft des Vaters nicht fertig werden und mit dem Kasten in der Mitte\r\ndes Zimmers Gregor jeden Weg verrammeln, zweitens aber sei es doch gar\r\nnicht sicher, daß Gregor mit der Entfernung der Möbel ein Gefallen\r\ngeschehe. Ihr scheine das Gegenteil der Fall zu sein; ihr bedrücke der\r\nAnblick der leeren Wand geradezu das Herz; und warum solle nicht auch\r\nGregor diese Empfindung haben, da er doch an die Zimmermöbel längst\r\ngewöhnt sei und sich deshalb im leeren Zimmer verlassen fühlen werde.\r\n»Und ist es dann nicht so,« schloß die Mutter ganz leise, wie sie\r\nüberhaupt fast flüsterte, als wolle sie vermeiden, daß Gregor, dessen\r\ngenauen Aufenthalt sie ja nicht kannte, auch nur den Klang der Stimme\r\nhöre, denn daß er die Worte nicht verstand, davon war sie überzeugt,\r\n»und ist es nicht so, als ob wir durch die Entfernung der Möbel zeigten,\r\ndaß wir jede Hoffnung auf Besserung aufgeben und ihn rücksichtslos sich\r\nselbst überlassen? Ich glaube, es wäre das beste, wir suchen das Zimmer\r\ngenau in dem Zustand zu erhalten, in dem es früher war, damit Gregor,\r\nwenn er wieder zu uns zurückkommt, alles unverändert findet und um so\r\nleichter die Zwischenzeit vergessen kann.«\r\n\r\nBeim Anhören dieser Worte der Mutter erkannte Gregor, daß der Mangel\r\njeder unmittelbaren menschlichen Ansprache, verbunden mit dem\r\neinförmigen Leben inmitten der Familie, im Laufe dieser zwei Monate\r\nseinen Verstand hatte verwirren müssen, denn anders konnte er es sich\r\nnicht erklären, daß er ernsthaft darnach hatte verlangen können, daß\r\nsein Zimmer ausgeleert würde. Hatte er wirklich Lust, das warme, mit\r\nererbten Möbeln gemütlich ausgestattete Zimmer in eine Höhle verwandeln\r\nzu lassen, in der er dann freilich nach allen Richtungen ungestört würde\r\nkriechen können, jedoch auch unter gleichzeitigem, schnellen, gänzlichen\r\nVergessen seiner menschlichen Vergangenheit? War er doch jetzt schon\r\nnahe daran, zu vergessen, und nur die seit langem nicht gehörte Stimme\r\nder Mutter hatte ihn aufgerüttelt. Nichts sollte entfernt werden, alles\r\nmußte bleiben, die guten Einwirkungen der Möbel auf seinen Zustand\r\nkonnte er nicht entbehren; und wenn die Möbel ihn hinderten, das\r\nsinnlose Herumkriechen zu betreiben, so war es kein Schaden, sondern ein\r\ngroßer Vorteil.\r\n\r\nAber die Schwester war leider anderer Meinung; sie hatte sich,\r\nallerdings nicht ganz unberechtigt, angewöhnt, bei Besprechung der\r\nAngelegenheiten Gregors als besonders Sachverständige gegenüber den\r\nEltern aufzutreten, und so war auch jetzt der Rat der Mutter für die\r\nSchwester Grund genug, auf der Entfernung nicht nur des Kastens und des\r\nSchreibtisches, an die sie zuerst allein gedacht hatte, sondern auf der\r\nEntfernung sämtlicher Möbel, mit Ausnahme des unentbehrlichen Kanapees,\r\nzu bestehen. Es war natürlich nicht nur kindlicher Trotz und das in der\r\nletzten Zeit so unerwartet und schwer erworbene Selbstvertrauen, das sie\r\nzu dieser Forderung bestimmte; sie hatte doch auch tatsächlich\r\nbeobachtet, daß Gregor viel Raum zum Kriechen brauchte, dagegen die\r\nMöbel, soweit man sehen konnte, nicht im geringsten benützte. Vielleicht\r\naber spielte auch der schwärmerische Sinn der Mädchen ihres Alters mit,\r\nder bei jeder Gelegenheit seine Befriedigung sucht, und durch den Grete\r\njetzt sich dazu verlocken ließ, die Lage Gregors noch\r\nschreckenerregender machen zu wollen, um dann noch mehr als bis jetzt\r\nfür ihn leisten zu können. Denn in einem Raum, in dem Gregor ganz allein\r\ndie leeren Wände beherrschte, würde wohl kein Mensch außer Grete jemals\r\neinzutreten sich getrauen.\r\n\r\nUnd so ließ sie sich von ihrem Entschlusse durch die Mutter nicht\r\nabbringen, die auch in diesem Zimmer vor lauter Unruhe unsicher schien,\r\nbald verstummte und der Schwester nach Kräften beim Hinausschaffen des\r\nKastens half. Nun, den Kasten konnte Gregor im Notfall noch entbehren,\r\naber schon der Schreibtisch mußte bleiben. Und kaum hatten die Frauen\r\nmit dem Kasten, an dem sie sich ächzend drückten, das Zimmer verlassen,\r\nals Gregor den Kopf unter dem Kanapee hervorstieß, um zu sehen, wie er\r\nvorsichtig und möglichst rücksichtsvoll eingreifen könnte. Aber zum\r\nUnglück war es gerade die Mutter, welche zuerst zurückkehrte, während\r\nGrete im Nebenzimmer den Kasten umfangen hielt und ihn allein hin und\r\nher schwang, ohne ihn natürlich von der Stelle zu bringen. Die Mutter\r\naber war Gregors Anblick nicht gewöhnt, er hätte sie krank machen\r\nkönnen, und so eilte Gregor erschrocken im Rückwärtslauf bis an das\r\nandere Ende des Kanapees, konnte es aber nicht mehr verhindern, daß das\r\nLeintuch vorne ein wenig sich bewegte. Das genügte, um die Mutter\r\naufmerksam zu machen. Sie stockte, stand einen Augenblick still und ging\r\ndann zu Grete zurück.\r\n\r\nTrotzdem sich Gregor immer wieder sagte, daß ja nichts Außergewöhnliches\r\ngeschehe, sondern nur ein paar Möbel umgestellt würden, wirkte doch, wie\r\ner sich bald eingestehen mußte, dieses Hin- und Hergehen der Frauen,\r\nihre kleinen Zurufe, das Kratzen der Möbel auf dem Boden, wie ein\r\ngroßer, von allen Seiten genährter Trubel auf ihn, und er mußte sich, so\r\nfest er Kopf und Beine an sich zog und den Leib bis an den Boden\r\ndrückte, unweigerlich sagen, daß er das Ganze nicht lange aushalten\r\nwerde. Sie räumten ihm sein Zimmer aus; nahmen ihm alles, was ihm lieb\r\nwar; den Kasten, in dem die Laubsäge und andere Werkzeuge lagen, hatten\r\nsie schon hinausgetragen; lockerten jetzt den schon im Boden fest\r\neingegrabenen Schreibtisch, an dem er als Handelsakademiker, als\r\nBürgerschüler, ja sogar schon als Volksschüler seine Aufgaben\r\ngeschrieben hatte, -- da hatte er wirklich keine Zeit mehr, die guten\r\nAbsichten zu prüfen, welche die zwei Frauen hatten, deren Existenz er\r\nübrigens fast vergessen hatte, denn vor Erschöpfung arbeiteten sie schon\r\nstumm, und man hörte nur das schwere Tappen ihrer Füße.\r\n\r\nUnd so brach er denn hervor -- die Frauen stützten sich gerade im\r\nNebenzimmer an den Schreibtisch, um ein wenig zu verschnaufen --,\r\nwechselte viermal die Richtung des Laufes, er wußte wirklich nicht, was\r\ner zuerst retten sollte, da sah er an der im übrigen schon leeren Wand\r\nauffallend das Bild der in lauter Pelzwerk gekleideten Dame hängen,\r\nkroch eilends hinauf und preßte sich an das Glas, das ihn festhielt und\r\nseinem heißen Bauch wohltat. Dieses Bild wenigstens, das Gregor jetzt\r\nganz verdeckte, würde nun gewiß niemand wegnehmen. Er verdrehte den Kopf\r\nnach der Tür des Wohnzimmers, um die Frauen bei ihrer Rückkehr zu\r\nbeobachten.\r\n\r\nSie hatten sich nicht viel Ruhe gegönnt und kamen schon wieder; Grete\r\nhatte den Arm um die Mutter gelegt und trug sie fast. »Also was nehmen\r\nwir jetzt?« sagte Grete und sah sich um, Da kreuzten sich ihre Blicke\r\nmit denen Gregors an der Wand. Wohl nur infolge der Gegenwart der Mutter\r\nbehielt sie ihre Fassung, beugte ihr Gesicht zur Mutter, um diese vom\r\nHerumschauen abzuhalten, und sagte, allerdings zitternd und unüberlegt:\r\n»Komm, wollen wir nicht lieber auf einen Augenblick noch ins Wohnzimmer\r\nzurückgehen?« Die Absicht Gretes war für Gregor klar, sie wollte die\r\nMutter in Sicherheit bringen und dann ihn von der Wand hinunterjagen.\r\nNun, sie konnte es ja immerhin versuchen! Er saß auf seinem Bild und\r\ngab es nicht her. Lieber würde er Grete ins Gesicht springen.\r\n\r\nAber Gretes Worte hatten die Mutter erst recht beunruhigt, sie trat zur\r\nSeite, erblickte den riesigen braunen Fleck auf der geblümten Tapete,\r\nrief, ehe ihr eigentlich zum Bewußtsein kam, daß das Gregor war, was sie\r\nsah, mit schreiender, rauher Stimme: »Ach Gott, ach Gott!« und fiel mit\r\nausgebreiteten Armen, als gebe sie alles auf, über das Kanapee hin und\r\nrührte sich nicht. »Du, Gregor!« rief die Schwester mit erhobener Faust\r\nund eindringlichen Blicken. Es waren seit der Verwandlung die ersten\r\nWorte, die sie unmittelbar an ihn gerichtet hatte. Sie lief ins\r\nNebenzimmer, um irgendeine Essenz zu holen, mit der sie die Mutter aus\r\nihrer Ohnmacht wecken könnte; Gregor wollte auch helfen -- zur Rettung\r\ndes Bildes war noch Zeit --; er klebte aber fest an dem Glas und mußte\r\nsich mit Gewalt losreißen; er lief dann auch ins Nebenzimmer, als könne\r\ner der Schwester irgendeinen Rat geben, wie in früherer Zeit; mußte aber\r\ndann untätig hinter ihr stehen; während sie in verschiedenen Fläschchen\r\nkramte, erschreckte sie noch, als sie sich umdrehte; eine Flasche fiel\r\nauf den Boden und zerbrach; ein Splitter verletzte Gregor im Gesicht,\r\nirgendeine ätzende Medizin umfloß ihn; Grete nahm nun, ohne sich länger\r\naufzuhalten, so viele Fläschchen, als sie nur halten konnte, und rannte\r\nmit ihnen zur Mutter hinein; die Tür schlug sie mit dem Fuße zu. Gregor\r\nwar nun von der Mutter abgeschlossen, die durch seine Schuld vielleicht\r\ndem Tode nahe war; die Tür durfte er nicht öffnen, wollte er die\r\nSchwester, die bei der Mutter bleiben mußte, nicht verjagen; er hatte\r\njetzt nichts zu tun, als zu warten; und von Selbstvorwürfen und\r\nBesorgnis bedrängt, begann er zu kriechen, überkroch alles, Wände,\r\nMöbel und Zimmerdecke und fiel endlich in seiner Verzweiflung, als sich\r\ndas ganze Zimmer schon um ihn zu drehen anfing, mitten auf den großen\r\nTisch.\r\n\r\nEs verging eine kleine Weile, Gregor lag matt da, ringsherum war es\r\nstill, vielleicht war das ein gutes Zeichen. Da läutete es. Das Mädchen\r\nwar natürlich in ihrer Küche eingesperrt und Grete mußte daher öffnen\r\ngehen. Der Vater war gekommen. »Was ist geschehen?« waren seine ersten\r\nWorte; Gretes Aussehen hatte ihm wohl alles verraten. Grete antwortete\r\nmit dumpfer Stimme, offenbar drückte sie ihr Gesicht an des Vaters\r\nBrust: »Die Mutter war ohnmächtig, aber es geht ihr schon besser. Gregor\r\nist ausgebrochen.« »Ich habe es ja erwartet,« sagte der Vater, »ich habe\r\nes euch ja immer gesagt, aber ihr Frauen wollt nicht hören.« Gregor war\r\nes klar, daß der Vater Gretes allzukurze Mitteilung schlecht gedeutet\r\nhatte und annahm, daß Gregor sich irgendeine Gewalttat habe zuschulden\r\nkommen lassen. Deshalb mußte Gregor den Vater jetzt zu besänftigen\r\nsuchen, denn ihn aufzuklären hatte er weder Zeit noch Möglichkeit. Und\r\nso flüchtete er sich zur Tür seines Zimmers und drückte sich an sie,\r\ndamit der Vater beim Eintritt vom Vorzimmer her gleich sehen könne, daß\r\nGregor die beste Absicht habe, sofort in sein Zimmer zurückzukehren, und\r\ndaß es nicht nötig sei, ihn zurückzutreiben, sondern daß man nur die Tür\r\nzu öffnen brauchte, und gleich werde er verschwinden.\r\n\r\nAber der Vater war nicht in der Stimmung, solche Feinheiten zu bemerken.\r\n»Ah!« rief er gleich beim Eintritt in einem Tone, als sei er\r\ngleichzeitig wütend und froh. Gregor zog den Kopf von der Tür zurück und\r\nhob ihn gegen den Vater. So hatte er sich den Vater wirklich nicht\r\nvorgestellt, wie er jetzt dastand; allerdings hatte er in der letzten\r\nZeit über dem neuartigen Herumkriechen versäumt, sich so wie früher um\r\ndie Vorgänge in der übrigen Wohnung zu kümmern, und hätte eigentlich\r\ndarauf gefaßt sein müssen, veränderte Verhältnisse anzutreffen.\r\nTrotzdem, trotzdem, war das noch der Vater? Der gleiche Mann, der müde\r\nim Bett vergraben lag, wenn früher Gregor zu einer Geschäftsreise\r\nausgerückt war; der ihn an Abenden der Heimkehr im Schlafrock im\r\nLehnstuhl empfangen hatte; gar nicht recht imstande war, aufzustehen,\r\nsondern zum Zeichen der Freude nur die Arme gehoben hatte, und der bei\r\nden seltenen gemeinsamen Spaziergängen an ein paar Sonntagen im Jahr und\r\nan den höchsten Feiertagen zwischen Gregor und der Mutter, die schon an\r\nund für sich langsam gingen, immer noch ein wenig langsamer, in seinen\r\nalten Mantel eingepackt, mit stets vorsichtig aufgesetztem Krückstock\r\nsich vorwärts arbeitete und, wenn er etwas sagen wollte, fast immer\r\nstillstand und seine Begleitung um sich versammelte? Nun aber war er\r\ndoch gut aufgerichtet; in eine straffe blaue Uniform mit Goldknöpfen\r\ngekleidet, wie sie Diener der Bankinstitute tragen; über dem hohen\r\nsteifen Kragen des Rockes entwickelte sich sein starkes Doppelkinn;\r\nunter den buschigen Augenbrauen drang der Blick der schwarzen Augen\r\nfrisch und aufmerksam hervor; das sonst zerzauste weiße Haar war zu\r\neiner peinlich genauen, leuchtenden Scheitelfrisur niedergekämmt. Er\r\nwarf seine Mütze, auf der ein Goldmonogramm, wahrscheinlich das einer\r\nBank, angebracht war, über das ganze Zimmer im Bogen auf das Kanapee hin\r\nund ging, die Enden seines langen Uniformrockes zurückgeschlagen, die\r\nHände in den Hosentaschen, mit verbissenem Gesicht auf Gregor zu. Er\r\nwußte wohl selbst nicht, was er vorhatte; immerhin hob er die Füße\r\nungewöhnlich hoch, und Gregor staunte über die Riesengröße seiner\r\nStiefelsohlen. Doch hielt er sich dabei nicht auf, er wußte ja noch vom\r\nersten Tage seines neuen Lebens her, daß der Vater ihm gegenüber nur die\r\ngrößte Strenge für angebracht ansah. Und so lief er vor dem Vater her,\r\nstockte, wenn der Vater stehen blieb, und eilte schon wieder vorwärts,\r\nwenn sich der Vater nur rührte. So machten sie mehrmals die Runde um das\r\nZimmer, ohne daß sich etwas Entscheidendes ereignete, ja ohne daß das\r\nGanze infolge seines langsamen Tempos den Anschein einer Verfolgung\r\ngehabt hätte. Deshalb blieb auch Gregor vorläufig auf dem Fußboden,\r\nzumal er fürchtete, der Vater könnte eine Flucht auf die Wände oder den\r\nPlafond für besondere Bosheit halten. Allerdings mußte sich Gregor\r\nsagen, daß er sogar dieses Laufen nicht lange aushalten würde, denn\r\nwährend der Vater einen Schritt machte, mußte er eine Unzahl von\r\nBewegungen ausführen. Atemnot begann sich schon bemerkbar zu machen, wie\r\ner ja auch in seiner früheren Zeit keine ganz vertrauenswürdige Lunge\r\nbesessen hatte. Als er nun so dahintorkelte, um alle Kräfte für den Lauf\r\nzu sammeln, kaum die Augen offenhielt; in seiner Stumpfheit an eine\r\nandere Rettung als durch Laufen gar nicht dachte; und fast schon\r\nvergessen hatte, daß ihm die Wände freistanden, die hier allerdings mit\r\nsorgfältig geschnitzten Möbeln voll Zacken und Spitzen verstellt waren\r\n-- da flog knapp neben ihm, leicht geschleudert, irgend etwas nieder und\r\nrollte vor ihm her. Es war ein Apfel; gleich flog ihm ein zweiter nach;\r\nGregor blieb vor Schrecken stehen; ein Weiterlaufen war nutzlos, denn\r\nder Vater hatte sich entschlossen, ihn zu bombardieren. Aus der\r\nObstschale auf der Kredenz hatte er sich die Taschen gefüllt und warf\r\nnun, ohne vorläufig scharf zu zielen, Apfel für Apfel. Diese kleinen\r\nroten Äpfel rollten wie elektrisiert auf dem Boden herum und stießen\r\naneinander. Ein schwach geworfener Apfel streifte Gregors Rücken, glitt\r\naber unschädlich ab. Ein ihm sofort nachfliegender drang dagegen\r\nförmlich in Gregors Rücken ein; Gregor wollte sich weiterschleppen, als\r\nkönne der überraschende unglaubliche Schmerz mit dem Ortswechsel\r\nvergehen; doch fühlte er sich wie festgenagelt und streckte sich in\r\nvollständiger Verwirrung aller Sinne. Nur mit dem letzten Blick sah er\r\nnoch, wie die Tür seines Zimmers aufgerissen wurde, und vor der\r\nschreienden Schwester die Mutter hervoreilte, im Hemd, denn die\r\nSchwester hatte sie entkleidet, um ihr in der Ohnmacht Atemfreiheit zu\r\nverschaffen, wie dann die Mutter auf den Vater zulief und ihr auf dem\r\nWeg die aufgebundenen Röcke einer nach dem anderen zu Boden glitten, und\r\nwie sie stolpernd über die Röcke auf den Vater eindrang und ihn\r\numarmend, in gänzlicher Vereinigung mit ihm -- nun versagte aber Gregors\r\nSehkraft schon -- die Hände an des Vaters Hinterkopf um Schonung von\r\nGregors Leben bat.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII.\r\n\r\n\r\nDie schwere Verwundung Gregors, an der er über einen Monat litt -- der\r\nApfel blieb, da ihn niemand zu entfernen wagte, als sichtbares Andenken\r\nim Fleische sitzen --, schien selbst den Vater daran erinnert zu haben,\r\ndaß Gregor trotz seiner gegenwärtigen traurigen und ekelhaften Gestalt\r\nein Familienglied war, das man nicht wie einen Feind behandeln durfte,\r\nsondern dem gegenüber es das Gebot der Familienpflicht war, den\r\nWiderwillen hinunterzuschlucken und zu dulden, nichts als dulden.\r\n\r\nUnd wenn nun auch Gregor durch seine Wunde an Beweglichkeit\r\nwahrscheinlich für immer verloren hatte und vorläufig zur Durchquerung\r\nseines Zimmers wie ein alter Invalide lange, lange Minuten brauchte --\r\nan das Kriechen in der Höhe war nicht zu denken --, so bekam er für\r\ndiese Verschlimmerung seines Zustandes einen seiner Meinung nach\r\nvollständig genügenden Ersatz dadurch, daß immer gegen Abend die\r\nWohnzimmertür, die er schon ein bis zwei Stunden vorher scharf zu\r\nbeobachten pflegte, geöffnet wurde, so daß er, im Dunkel seines Zimmers\r\nliegend, vom Wohnzimmer aus unsichtbar, die ganze Familie beim\r\nbeleuchteten Tische sehen und ihre Reden, gewissermaßen mit allgemeiner\r\nErlaubnis, also ganz anders als früher, anhören durfte.\r\n\r\nFreilich waren es nicht mehr die lebhaften Unterhaltungen der früheren\r\nZeiten, an die Gregor in den kleinen Hotelzimmern stets mit einigem\r\nVerlangen gedacht hatte, wenn er sich müde in das feuchte Bettzeug hatte\r\nwerfen müssen. Es ging jetzt meist nur sehr still zu. Der Vater schlief\r\nbald nach dem Nachtessen in seinem Sessel ein; die Mutter und Schwester\r\nermahnten einander zur Stille; die Mutter nähte, weit über das Licht\r\nvorgebeugt, feine Wäsche für ein Modengeschäft; die Schwester, die eine\r\nStellung als Verkäuferin angenommen hatte, lernte am Abend Stenographie\r\nund Französisch, um vielleicht später einmal einen besseren Posten zu\r\nerreichen. Manchmal wachte der Vater auf, und als wisse er gar nicht,\r\ndaß er geschlafen habe, sagte er zur Mutter: »Wie lange du heute schon\r\nwieder nähst!« und schlief sofort wieder ein, während Mutter und\r\nSchwester einander müde zulächelten.\r\n\r\nMit einer Art Eigensinn weigerte sich der Vater, auch zu Hause seine\r\nDieneruniform abzulegen; und während der Schlafrock nutzlos am\r\nKleiderhaken hing, schlummerte der Vater vollständig angezogen auf\r\nseinem Platz, als sei er immer zu seinem Dienste bereit und warte auch\r\nhier auf die Stimme des Vorgesetzten. Infolgedessen verlor die gleich\r\nanfangs nicht neue Uniform trotz aller Sorgfalt von Mutter und Schwester\r\nan Reinlichkeit, und Gregor sah oft ganze Abende lang auf dieses über\r\nund über fleckige, mit seinen stets geputzten Goldknöpfen leuchtende\r\nKleid, in dem der alte Mann höchst unbequem und doch ruhig schlief.\r\n\r\nSobald die Uhr zehn schlug, suchte die Mutter durch leise Zusprache den\r\nVater zu wecken und dann zu überreden, ins Bett zu gehen, denn hier war\r\nes doch kein richtiger Schlaf und diesen hatte der Vater, der um sechs\r\nUhr seinen Dienst antreten mußte, äußerst nötig. Aber in dem Eigensinn,\r\nder ihn, seitdem er Diener war, ergriffen hatte, bestand er immer\r\ndarauf, noch länger bei Tisch zu bleiben, trotzdem er regelmäßig\r\neinschlief, und war dann überdies nur mit der größten Mühe zu bewegen,\r\nden Sessel mit dem Bett zu vertauschen. Da mochten Mutter und Schwester\r\nmit kleinen Ermahnungen noch so sehr auf ihn eindringen,\r\nviertelstundenlang schüttelte er langsam den Kopf, hielt die Augen\r\ngeschlossen und stand nicht auf. Die Mutter zupfte ihn am Ärmel, sagte\r\nihm Schmeichelworte ins Ohr, die Schwester verließ ihre Aufgabe, um der\r\nMutter zu helfen, aber beim Vater verfing das nicht. Er versank nur noch\r\ntiefer in seinen Sessel. Erst bis ihn die Frauen unter den Achseln\r\nfaßten, schlug er die Augen auf, sah abwechselnd die Mutter und die\r\nSchwester an und pflegte zu sagen: »Das ist ein Leben. Das ist die Ruhe\r\nmeiner alten Tage.« Und auf die beiden Frauen gestützt, erhob er sich,\r\numständlich, als sei er für sich selbst die größte Last, ließ sich von\r\nden Frauen bis zur Türe führen, winkte ihnen dort ab und ging nun\r\nselbständig weiter, während die Mutter ihr Nähzeug, die Schwester ihre\r\nFeder eiligst hinwarfen, um hinter dem Vater zu laufen und ihm weiter\r\nbehilflich zu sein.\r\n\r\nWer hatte in dieser abgearbeiteten und übermüdeten Familie Zeit, sich um\r\nGregor mehr zu kümmern, als unbedingt nötig war? Der Haushalt wurde\r\nimmer mehr eingeschränkt; das Dienstmädchen wurde nun doch entlassen;\r\neine riesige knochige Bedienerin mit weißem, den Kopf umflatterndem Haar\r\nkam des Morgens und des Abends, um die schwerste Arbeit zu leisten;\r\nalles andere besorgte die Mutter neben ihrer vielen Näharbeit. Es\r\ngeschah sogar, daß verschiedene Familienschmuckstücke, welche früher die\r\nMutter und die Schwester überglücklich bei Unterhaltungen und\r\nFeierlichkeiten getragen hatten, verkauft wurden, wie Gregor am Abend\r\naus der allgemeinen Besprechung der erzielten Preise erfuhr. Die größte\r\nKlage war aber stets, daß man diese für die gegenwärtigen Verhältnisse\r\nallzugroße Wohnung nicht verlassen konnte, da es nicht auszudenken war,\r\nwie man Gregor übersiedeln sollte. Aber Gregor sah wohl ein, daß es\r\nnicht nur die Rücksicht auf ihn war, welche eine Übersiedlung\r\nverhinderte, denn ihn hätte man doch in einer passenden Kiste mit ein\r\npaar Luftlöchern leicht transportieren können; was die Familie\r\nhauptsächlich vom Wohnungswechsel abhielt, war vielmehr die völlige\r\nHoffnungslosigkeit und der Gedanke daran, daß sie mit einem Unglück\r\ngeschlagen war, wie niemand sonst im ganzen Verwandten- und\r\nBekanntenkreis. Was die Welt von armen Leuten verlangt, erfüllten sie\r\nbis zum äußersten, der Vater holte den kleinen Bankbeamten das\r\nFrühstück, die Mutter opferte sich für die Wäsche fremder Leute, die\r\nSchwester lief nach dem Befehl der Kunden hinter dem Pulte hin und her,\r\naber weiter reichten die Kräfte der Familie schon nicht. Und die Wunde\r\nim Rücken fing Gregor wie neu zu schmerzen an, wenn Mutter und\r\nSchwester, nachdem sie den Vater zu Bett gebracht hatten, nun\r\nzurückkehrten, die Arbeit liegen ließen, nahe zusammenrückten, schon\r\nWange an Wange saßen; wenn jetzt die Mutter, auf Gregors Zimmer zeigend,\r\nsagte: »Mach' dort die Tür zu, Grete,« und wenn nun Gregor wieder im\r\nDunkel war, während nebenan die Frauen ihre Tränen vermischten oder gar\r\ntränenlos den Tisch anstarrten.\r\n\r\nDie Nächte und Tage verbrachte Gregor fast ganz ohne Schlaf. Manchmal\r\ndachte er daran, beim nächsten Öffnen der Tür die Angelegenheiten der\r\nFamilie ganz so wie früher wieder in die Hand zu nehmen; in seinen\r\nGedanken erschienen wieder nach langer Zeit der Chef und der Prokurist,\r\ndie Kommis und die Lehrjungen, der so begriffsstützige Hausknecht, zwei\r\ndrei Freunde aus anderen Geschäften, ein Stubenmädchen aus einem Hotel\r\nin der Provinz, eine liebe, flüchtige Erinnerung, eine Kassiererin aus\r\neinem Hutgeschäft, um die er sich ernsthaft, aber zu langsam beworben\r\nhatte -- sie alle erschienen untermischt mit Fremden oder schon\r\nVergessenen, aber statt ihm und seiner Familie zu helfen, waren sie\r\nsämtlich unzugänglich, und er war froh, wenn sie verschwanden. Dann aber\r\nwar er wieder gar nicht in der Laune, sich um seine Familie zu sorgen,\r\nbloß Wut über die schlechte Wartung erfüllte ihn, und trotzdem er sich\r\nnichts vorstellen konnte, worauf er Appetit gehabt hätte, machte er doch\r\nPläne, wie er in die Speisekammer gelangen könnte, um dort zu nehmen,\r\nwas ihm, auch wenn er keinen Hunger hatte, immerhin gebührte. Ohne jetzt\r\nmehr nachzudenken, womit man Gregor einen besonderen Gefallen machen\r\nkönnte, schob die Schwester eiligst, ehe sie morgens und mittags ins\r\nGeschäft lief, mit dem Fuß irgendeine beliebige Speise in Gregors Zimmer\r\nhinein, um sie am Abend, gleichgültig dagegen, ob die Speise vielleicht\r\nnur gekostet oder -- der häufigste Fall -- gänzlich unberührt war, mit\r\neinem Schwenken des Besens hinauszukehren. Das Aufräumen des Zimmers,\r\ndas sie nun immer abends besorgte, konnte gar nicht mehr schneller getan\r\nsein. Schmutzstreifen zogen sich die Wände entlang, hie und da lagen\r\nKnäuel von Staub und Unrat. In der ersten Zeit stellte sich Gregor bei\r\nder Ankunft der Schwester in derartige besonders bezeichnende Winkel, um\r\nihr durch diese Stellung gewissermaßen einen Vorwurf zu machen. Aber er\r\nhätte wohl wochenlang dort bleiben können, ohne daß sich die Schwester\r\ngebessert hätte; sie sah ja den Schmutz genau so wie er, aber sie hatte\r\nsich eben entschlossen, ihn zu lassen. Dabei wachte sie mit einer an ihr\r\nganz neuen Empfindlichkeit, die überhaupt die ganze Familie ergriffen\r\nhatte, darüber, daß das Aufräumen von Gregors Zimmer ihr vorbehalten\r\nblieb. Einmal hatte die Mutter Gregors Zimmer einer großen Reinigung\r\nunterzogen, die ihr nur nach Verbrauch einiger Kübel Wasser gelungen war\r\n-- die viele Feuchtigkeit kränkte allerdings Gregor auch und er lag\r\nbreit, verbittert und unbeweglich auf dem Kanapee --, aber die Strafe\r\nblieb für die Mutter nicht aus. Denn kaum hatte am Abend die Schwester\r\ndie Veränderung in Gregors Zimmer bemerkt, als sie, aufs höchste\r\nbeleidigt, ins Wohnzimmer lief und, trotz der beschwörend erhobenen\r\nHände der Mutter, in einen Weinkrampf ausbrach, dem die Eltern -- der\r\nVater war natürlich aus seinem Sessel aufgeschreckt worden -- zuerst\r\nerstaunt und hilflos zusahen; bis auch sie sich zu rühren anfingen; der\r\nVater rechts der Mutter Vorwürfe machte, daß sie Gregors Zimmer nicht\r\nder Schwester zur Reinigung überließ; links dagegen die Schwester\r\nanschrie, sie werde niemals mehr Gregors Zimmer reinigen dürfen; während\r\ndie Mutter den Vater, der sich vor Erregung nicht mehr kannte, ins\r\nSchlafzimmer zu schleppen suchte; die Schwester, von Schluchzen\r\ngeschüttelt, mit ihren kleinen Fäusten den Tisch bearbeitete; und Gregor\r\nlaut vor Wut darüber zischte, daß es keinem einfiel, die Tür zu\r\nschließen und ihm diesen Anblick und Lärm zu ersparen.\r\n\r\nAber selbst wenn die Schwester, erschöpft von ihrer Berufsarbeit, dessen\r\nüberdrüssig geworden war, für Gregor, wie früher, zu sorgen, so hätte\r\nnoch keineswegs die Mutter für sie eintreten müssen und Gregor hätte\r\ndoch nicht vernachlässigt zu werden brauchen. Denn nun war die\r\nBedienerin da. Diese alte Witwe, die in ihrem langen Leben mit Hilfe\r\nihres starken Knochenbaues das Ärgste überstanden haben mochte, hatte\r\nkeinen eigentlichen Abscheu vor Gregor. Ohne irgendwie neugierig zu\r\nsein, hatte sie zufällig einmal die Tür von Gregors Zimmer aufgemacht\r\nund war im Anblick Gregors, der, gänzlich überrascht, trotzdem ihn\r\nniemand jagte, hin- und herzulaufen begann, die Hände im Schoß gefaltet\r\nstaunend stehen geblieben. Seitdem versäumte sie nicht, stets flüchtig\r\nmorgens und abends die Tür ein wenig zu öffnen und zu Gregor\r\nhineinzuschauen. Anfangs rief sie ihn auch zu sich herbei, mit Worten,\r\ndie sie wahrscheinlich für freundlich hielt, wie »Komm mal herüber,\r\nalter Mistkäfer!« oder »Seht mal den alten Mistkäfer!« Auf solche\r\nAnsprachen antwortete Gregor mit nichts, sondern blieb unbeweglich auf\r\nseinem Platz, als sei die Tür gar nicht geöffnet worden. Hätte man doch\r\ndieser Bedienerin, statt sie nach ihrer Laune ihn nutzlos stören zu\r\nlassen, lieber den Befehl gegeben, sein Zimmer täglich zu reinigen!\r\nEinmal am frühen Morgen -- ein heftiger Regen, vielleicht schon ein\r\nZeichen des kommenden Frühjahrs, schlug an die Scheiben -- war Gregor,\r\nals die Bedienerin mit ihren Redensarten wieder begann, derartig\r\nerbittert, daß er, wie zum Angriff, allerdings langsam und hinfällig,\r\nsich gegen sie wendete. Die Bedienerin aber, statt sich zu fürchten, hob\r\nbloß einen in der Nähe der Tür befindlichen Stuhl hoch empor, und wie\r\nsie mit groß geöffnetem Munde dastand, war ihre Absicht klar, den Mund\r\nerst zu schließen, wenn der Sessel in ihrer Hand auf Gregors Rücken\r\nniederschlagen würde. »Also weiter geht es nicht?« fragte sie, als\r\nGregor sich wieder umdrehte, und stellte den Sessel ruhig in die Ecke\r\nzurück.\r\n\r\nGregor aß nun fast gar nichts mehr. Nur wenn er zufällig an der\r\nvorbereiteten Speise vorüberkam, nahm er zum Spiel einen Bissen in den\r\nMund, hielt ihn dort stundenlang und spie ihn dann meist wieder aus.\r\nZuerst dachte er, es sei die Trauer über den Zustand seines Zimmers, die\r\nihn vom Essen abhalte, aber gerade mit den Veränderungen des Zimmers\r\nsöhnte er sich sehr bald aus. Man hatte sich angewöhnt, Dinge, die man\r\nanderswo nicht unterbringen konnte, in dieses Zimmer hineinzustellen,\r\nund solcher Dinge gab es nun viele, da man ein Zimmer der Wohnung an\r\ndrei Zimmerherren vermietet hatte. Diese ernsten Herren, -- alle drei\r\nhatten Vollbärte, wie Gregor einmal durch eine Türspalte feststellte --\r\nwaren peinlich auf Ordnung, nicht nur in ihrem Zimmer, sondern, da sie\r\nsich nun einmal hier eingemietet hatten, in der ganzen Wirtschaft, also\r\ninsbesondere in der Küche, bedacht. Unnützen oder gar schmutzigen Kram\r\nertrugen sie nicht. Überdies hatten sie zum größten Teil ihre eigenen\r\nEinrichtungsstücke mitgebracht. Aus diesem Grunde waren viele Dinge\r\nüberflüssig geworden, die zwar nicht verkäuflich waren, die man aber\r\nauch nicht wegwerfen wollte. Alle diese wanderten in Gregors Zimmer.\r\nEbenso auch die Aschenkiste und die Abfallkiste aus der Küche. Was nur\r\nim Augenblick unbrauchbar war, schleuderte die Bedienerin, die es immer\r\nsehr eilig hatte, einfach in Gregors Zimmer; Gregor sah glücklicherweise\r\nmeist nur den betreffenden Gegenstand und die Hand, die ihn hielt. Die\r\nBedienerin hatte vielleicht die Absicht, bei Zeit und Gelegenheit die\r\nDinge wieder zu holen oder alle insgesamt mit einemmal hinauszuwerfen,\r\ntatsächlich aber blieben sie dort liegen, wohin sie durch den ersten\r\nWurf gekommen waren, wenn nicht Gregor sich durch das Rumpelzeug wand\r\nund es in Bewegung brachte, zuerst gezwungen, weil kein sonstiger Platz\r\nzum Kriechen frei war, später aber mit wachsendem Vergnügen, obwohl er\r\nnach solchen Wanderungen, zum Sterben müde und traurig, wieder\r\nstundenlang sich nicht rührte.\r\n\r\nDa die Zimmerherren manchmal auch ihr Abendessen zu Hause im gemeinsamen\r\nWohnzimmer einnahmen, blieb die Wohnzimmertür an manchen Abenden\r\ngeschlossen, aber Gregor verzichtete ganz leicht auf das Öffnen der Tür,\r\nhatte er doch schon manche Abende, an denen sie geöffnet war, nicht\r\nausgenützt, sondern war, ohne daß es die Familie merkte, im dunkelsten\r\nWinkel seines Zimmers gelegen. Einmal aber hatte die Bedienerin die Tür\r\nzum Wohnzimmer ein wenig offen gelassen, und sie blieb so offen, auch\r\nals die Zimmerherren am Abend eintraten und Licht gemacht wurde. Sie\r\nsetzten sich oben an den Tisch, wo in früheren Zeiten der Vater, die\r\nMutter und Gregor gesessen hatten, entfalteten die Servietten und nahmen\r\nMesser und Gabel in die Hand. Sofort erschien in der Tür die Mutter mit\r\neiner Schüssel Fleisch und knapp hinter ihr die Schwester mit einer\r\nSchüssel hochgeschichteter Kartoffeln. Das Essen dampfte mit starkem\r\nRauch. Die Zimmerherren beugten sich über die vor sie hingestellten\r\nSchüsseln, als wollten sie sie vor dem Essen prüfen, und tatsächlich\r\nzerschnitt der, welcher in der Mitte saß und den anderen zwei als\r\nAutorität zu gelten schien, ein Stück Fleisch noch auf der Schüssel,\r\noffenbar um festzustellen, ob es mürbe genug sei und ob es nicht etwa in\r\ndie Küche zurückgeschickt werden solle. Er war befriedigt, und Mutter\r\nund Schwester, die gespannt zugesehen hatten, begannen aufatmend zu\r\nlächeln.\r\n\r\nDie Familie selbst aß in der Küche. Trotzdem kam der Vater, ehe er in\r\ndie Küche ging, in dieses Zimmer herein und machte mit einer einzigen\r\nVerbeugung, die Kappe in der Hand, einen Rundgang um den Tisch. Die\r\nZimmerherren erhoben sich sämtlich und murmelten etwas in ihre Bärte.\r\nAls sie dann allein waren, aßen sie fast unter vollkommenem\r\nStillschweigen. Sonderbar schien es Gregor, daß man aus allen\r\nmannigfachen Geräuschen des Essens immer wieder ihre kauenden Zähne\r\nheraushörte, als ob damit Gregor gezeigt werden sollte, daß man Zähne\r\nbrauche, um zu essen, und daß man auch mit den schönsten zahnlosen\r\nKiefern nichts ausrichten könne. »Ich habe ja Appetit,« sagte sich\r\nGregor sorgenvoll, »aber nicht auf diese Dinge. Wie sich diese\r\nZimmerherren nähren, und ich komme um!«\r\n\r\nGerade an diesem Abend -- Gregor erinnerte sich nicht, während der\r\nganzen Zeit die Violine gehört zu haben -- ertönte sie von der Küche\r\nher. Die Zimmerherren hatten schon ihr Nachtmahl beendet, der mittlere\r\nhatte eine Zeitung hervorgezogen, den zwei anderen je ein Blatt gegeben,\r\nund nun lasen sie zurückgelehnt und rauchten. Als die Violine zu spielen\r\nbegann, wurden sie aufmerksam, erhoben sich und gingen auf den\r\nFußspitzen zur Vorzimmertür, in der sie aneinandergedrängt stehen\r\nblieben. Man mußte sie von der Küche aus gehört haben, denn der Vater\r\nrief: »Ist den Herren das Spiel vielleicht unangenehm? Es kann sofort\r\neingestellt werden.« »Im Gegenteil,« sagte der mittlere der Herren,\r\n»möchte das Fräulein nicht zu uns hereinkommen und hier im Zimmer\r\nspielen, wo es doch viel bequemer und gemütlicher ist?« »O bitte,« rief\r\nder Vater, als sei er der Violinspieler. Die Herren traten ins Zimmer\r\nzurück und warteten. Bald kam der Vater mit dem Notenpult, die Mutter\r\nmit den Noten und die Schwester mit der Violine. Die Schwester bereitete\r\nalles ruhig zum Spiele vor; die Eltern, die niemals früher Zimmer\r\nvermietet hatten und deshalb die Höflichkeit gegen die Zimmerherren\r\nübertrieben, wagten gar nicht, sich auf ihre eigenen Sessel zu setzen;\r\nder Vater lehnte an der Tür, die rechte Hand zwischen zwei Knöpfe des\r\ngeschlossenen Livreerockes gesteckt; die Mutter aber erhielt von einem\r\nHerrn einen Sessel angeboten und saß, da sie den Sessel dort ließ, wohin\r\nihn der Herr zufällig gestellt hatte, abseits in einem Winkel.\r\n\r\nDie Schwester begann zu spielen; Vater und Mutter verfolgten, jeder von\r\nseiner Seite, aufmerksam die Bewegungen ihrer Hände. Gregor hatte, von\r\ndem Spiele angezogen, sich ein wenig weiter vorgewagt und war schon mit\r\ndem Kopf im Wohnzimmer. Er wunderte sich kaum darüber, daß er in letzter\r\nZeit so wenig Rücksicht auf die andern nahm; früher war diese\r\nRücksichtnahme sein Stolz gewesen. Und dabei hätte er gerade jetzt mehr\r\nGrund gehabt, sich zu verstecken, denn infolge des Staubes, der in\r\nseinem Zimmer überall lag und bei der kleinsten Bewegung umherflog, war\r\nauch er ganz staubbedeckt; Fäden, Haare, Speiseüberreste schleppte er\r\nauf seinem Rücken und an den Seiten mit sich herum; seine\r\nGleichgültigkeit gegen alles war viel zu groß, als daß er sich, wie\r\nfrüher mehrmals während des Tages, auf den Rücken gelegt und am Teppich\r\ngescheuert hätte. Und trotz dieses Zustandes hatte er keine Scheu, ein\r\nStück auf dem makellosen Fußboden des Wohnzimmers vorzurücken.\r\n\r\nAllerdings achtete auch niemand auf ihn. Die Familie war gänzlich vom\r\nViolinspiel in Anspruch genommen; die Zimmerherren dagegen, die\r\nzunächst, die Hände in den Hosentaschen, viel zu nahe hinter dem\r\nNotenpult der Schwester sich aufgestellt hatten, so daß sie alle in die\r\nNoten hätte sehen können, was sicher die Schwester stören mußte, zogen\r\nsich bald unter halblauten Gesprächen mit gesenkten Köpfen zum Fenster\r\nzurück, wo sie, vom Vater besorgt beobachtet, auch blieben. Es hatte nun\r\nwirklich den überdeutlichen Anschein, als wären sie in ihrer Annahme,\r\nein schönes oder unterhaltendes Violinspiel zu hören, enttäuscht, hätten\r\ndie ganze Vorführung satt und ließen sich nur aus Höflichkeit noch in\r\nihrer Ruhe stören. Besonders die Art, wie sie alle aus Nase und Mund den\r\nRauch ihrer Zigarren in die Höhe bliesen, ließ auf große Nervosität\r\nschließen. Und doch spielte die Schwester so schön. Ihr Gesicht war zur\r\nSeite geneigt, prüfend und traurig folgten ihre Blicke den Notenzeilen.\r\nGregor kroch noch ein Stück vorwärts und hielt den Kopf eng an den\r\nBoden, um möglicherweise ihren Blicken begegnen zu können. War er ein\r\nTier, da ihn Musik so ergriff? Ihm war, als zeige sich ihm der Weg zu\r\nder ersehnten unbekannten Nahrung. Er war entschlossen, bis zur\r\nSchwester vorzudringen, sie am Rock zu zupfen und ihr dadurch\r\nanzudeuten, sie möge doch mit ihrer Violine in sein Zimmer kommen, denn\r\nniemand lohnte hier das Spiel so, wie er es lohnen wollte. Er wollte sie\r\nnicht mehr aus seinem Zimmer lassen, wenigstens nicht, solange er lebte;\r\nseine Schreckgestalt sollte ihm zum erstenmal nützlich werden; an allen\r\nTüren seines Zimmers wollte er gleichzeitig sein und den Angreifern\r\nentgegenfauchen; die Schwester aber sollte nicht gezwungen, sondern\r\nfreiwillig bei ihm bleiben; sie sollte neben ihm auf dem Kanapee sitzen,\r\ndas Ohr zu ihm herunterneigen, und er wollte ihr dann anvertrauen, daß\r\ner die feste Absicht gehabt habe, sie auf das Konservatorium zu\r\nschicken, und daß er dies, wenn nicht das Unglück dazwischen gekommen\r\nwäre, vergangene Weihnachten -- Weihnachten war doch wohl schon vorüber?\r\n-- allen gesagt hätte, ohne sich um irgendwelche Widerreden zu kümmern.\r\nNach dieser Erklärung würde die Schwester in Tränen der Rührung\r\nausbrechen, und Gregor würde sich bis zu ihrer Achsel erheben und ihren\r\nHals küssen, den sie, seitdem sie ins Geschäft ging, frei ohne Band oder\r\nKragen trug.\r\n\r\n»Herr Samsa!« rief der mittlere Herr dem Vater zu und zeigte, ohne ein\r\nweiteres Wort zu verlieren, mit dem Zeigefinger auf den langsam sich\r\nvorwärtsbewegenden Gregor. Die Violine verstummte, der mittlere\r\nZimmerherr lächelte erst einmal kopfschüttelnd seinen Freunden zu und\r\nsah dann wieder auf Gregor hin. Der Vater schien es für nötiger zu\r\nhalten, statt Gregor zu vertreiben, vorerst die Zimmerherren zu\r\nberuhigen, trotzdem diese gar nicht aufgeregt waren und Gregor sie mehr\r\nals das Violinspiel zu unterhalten schien. Er eilte zu ihnen und suchte\r\nsie mit ausgebreiteten Armen in ihr Zimmer zu drängen und gleichzeitig\r\nmit seinem Körper ihnen den Ausblick auf Gregor zu nehmen. Sie wurden\r\nnun tatsächlich ein wenig böse, man wußte nicht mehr, ob über das\r\nBenehmen des Vaters oder über die ihnen jetzt aufgehende Erkenntnis,\r\nohne es zu wissen, einen solchen Zimmernachbar wie Gregor besessen zu\r\nhaben. Sie verlangten vom Vater Erklärungen, hoben ihrerseits die Arme,\r\nzupften unruhig an ihren Bärten und wichen nur langsam gegen ihr Zimmer\r\nzurück. Inzwischen hatte die Schwester die Verlorenheit, in die sie nach\r\ndem plötzlich abgebrochenen Spiel verfallen war, überwunden, hatte sich,\r\nnachdem sie eine Zeitlang in den lässig hängenden Händen Violine und\r\nBogen gehalten und weiter, als spiele sie noch, in die Noten gesehen\r\nhatte, mit einem Male aufgerafft, hatte das Instrument auf den Schoß der\r\nMutter gelegt, die in Atembeschwerden mit heftig arbeitenden Lungen noch\r\nauf ihrem Sessel saß, und war in das Nebenzimmer gelaufen, dem sich die\r\nZimmerherren unter dem Drängen des Vaters schon schneller näherten. Man\r\nsah, wie unter den geübten Händen der Schwester die Decken und Polster\r\nin den Betten in die Höhe flogen und sich ordneten. Noch ehe die Herren\r\ndas Zimmer erreicht hatten, war sie mit dem Aufbetten fertig und\r\nschlüpfte heraus. Der Vater schien wieder von seinem Eigensinn derartig\r\nergriffen, daß er jeden Respekt vergaß, den er seinen Mietern immerhin\r\nschuldete. Er drängte nur und drängte, bis schon in der Tür des Zimmers\r\nder mittlere der Herren donnernd mit dem Fuß aufstampfte und dadurch den\r\nVater zum Stehen brachte. »Ich erkläre hiermit,« sagte er, hob die Hand\r\nund suchte mit den Blicken auch die Mutter und die Schwester, »daß ich\r\nmit Rücksicht auf die in dieser Wohnung und Familie herrschenden\r\nwiderlichen Verhältnisse« -- hierbei spie er kurz entschlossen auf den\r\nBoden -- »mein Zimmer augenblicklich kündige. Ich werde natürlich auch\r\nfür die Tage, die ich hier gewohnt habe, nicht das Geringste bezahlen,\r\ndagegen werde ich es mir noch überlegen, ob ich nicht mit irgendwelchen\r\n-- glauben Sie mir -- sehr leicht zu begründenden Forderungen gegen Sie\r\nauftreten werde.« Er schwieg und sah gerade vor sich hin, als erwarte er\r\netwas. Tatsächlich fielen sofort seine zwei Freunde mit den Worten ein:\r\n»Auch wir kündigen augenblicklich.« Darauf faßte er die Türklinke und\r\nschloß mit einem Krach die Tür.\r\n\r\nDer Vater wankte mit tastenden Händen zu seinem Sessel und ließ sich\r\nhineinfallen; es sah aus, als strecke er sich zu seinem gewöhnlichen\r\nAbendschläfchen, aber das starke Nicken seines wie haltlosen Kopfes\r\nzeigte, daß er ganz und gar nicht schlief. Gregor war die ganze Zeit\r\nstill auf dem Platz gelegen, auf dem ihn die Zimmerherren ertappt\r\nhatten. Die Enttäuschung über das Mißlingen seines Planes, vielleicht\r\naber auch die durch das viele Hungern verursachte Schwäche machten es\r\nihm unmöglich, sich zu bewegen. Er fürchtete mit einer gewissen\r\nBestimmtheit schon für den nächsten Augenblick einen allgemeinen über\r\nihn sich entladenden Zusammensturz und wartete. Nicht einmal die Violine\r\nschreckte ihn auf, die, unter den zitternden Fingern der Mutter hervor,\r\nihr vom Schoße fiel und einen hallenden Ton von sich gab.\r\n\r\n»Liebe Eltern,« sagte die Schwester und schlug zur Einleitung mit der\r\nHand auf den Tisch, »so geht es nicht weiter. Wenn ihr das vielleicht\r\nnicht einsehet, ich sehe es ein. Ich will vor diesem Untier nicht den\r\nNamen meines Bruders aussprechen und sage daher bloß: wir müssen\r\nversuchen es loszuwerden. Wir haben das Menschenmögliche versucht, es zu\r\npflegen und zu dulden, ich glaube, es kann uns niemand den geringsten\r\nVorwurf machen.«\r\n\r\n»Sie hat tausendmal recht,« sagte der Vater für sich. Die Mutter, die\r\nnoch immer nicht genug Atem finden konnte, fing mit einem irrsinnigen\r\nAusdruck der Augen dumpf in die vorgehaltene Hand zu husten an.\r\n\r\nDie Schwester eilte zur Mutter und hielt ihr die Stirn. Der Vater schien\r\ndurch die Worte der Schwester auf bestimmtere Gedanken gebracht zu sein,\r\nhatte sich aufrecht gesetzt, spielte mit seiner Dienermütze zwischen den\r\nTellern, die noch vom Nachtmahl der Zimmerherren her auf dem Tische\r\nstanden, und sah bisweilen auf den stillen Gregor hin.\r\n\r\n»Wir müssen es loszuwerden suchen,« sagte die Schwester nun\r\nausschließlich zum Vater, denn die Mutter hörte in ihrem Husten nichts,\r\n»es bringt euch noch beide um, ich sehe es kommen. Wenn man schon so\r\nschwer arbeiten muß, wie wir alle, kann man nicht noch zu Hause diese\r\newige Quälerei ertragen. Ich kann es auch nicht mehr.« Und sie brach so\r\nheftig in Weinen aus, daß ihre Tränen auf das Gesicht der Mutter\r\nniederflossen, von dem sie sie mit mechanischen Handbewegungen wischte.\r\n\r\n»Kind,« sagte der Vater mitleidig und mit auffallendem Verständnis, »was\r\nsollen wir aber tun?«\r\n\r\nDie Schwester zuckte nur die Achseln zum Zeichen der Ratlosigkeit, die\r\nsie nun während des Weinens im Gegensatz zu ihrer früheren Sicherheit\r\nergriffen hatte.\r\n\r\n»Wenn er uns verstünde,« sagte der Vater halb fragend; die Schwester\r\nschüttelte aus dem Weinen heraus heftig die Hand zum Zeichen, daß daran\r\nnicht zu denken sei.\r\n\r\n»Wenn er uns verstünde,« wiederholte der Vater und nahm durch Schließen\r\nder Augen die Überzeugung der Schwester von der Unmöglichkeit dessen in\r\nsich auf, »dann wäre vielleicht ein Übereinkommen mit ihm möglich. Aber\r\nso --«\r\n\r\n»Weg muß es,« rief die Schwester, »das ist das einzige Mittel, Vater. Du\r\nmußt bloß den Gedanken loszuwerden suchen, daß es Gregor ist. Daß wir es\r\nso lange geglaubt haben, das ist ja unser eigentliches Unglück. Aber wie\r\nkann es denn Gregor sein? Wenn es Gregor wäre, er hätte längst\r\neingesehen, daß ein Zusammenleben von Menschen mit einem solchen Tier\r\nnicht möglich ist, und wäre freiwillig fortgegangen. Wir hätten dann\r\nkeinen Bruder, aber könnten weiter leben und sein Andenken in Ehren\r\nhalten. So aber verfolgt uns dieses Tier, vertreibt die Zimmerherren,\r\nwill offenbar die ganze Wohnung einnehmen und uns auf der Gasse\r\nübernachten lassen. Sieh nur, Vater,« schrie sie plötzlich auf, »er\r\nfängt schon wieder an!« Und in einem für Gregor gänzlich\r\nunverständlichen Schrecken verließ die Schwester sogar die Mutter, stieß\r\nsich förmlich von ihrem Sessel ab, als wollte sie lieber die Mutter\r\nopfern, als in Gregors Nähe bleiben, und eilte hinter den Vater, der,\r\nlediglich durch ihr Benehmen erregt, auch aufstand und die Arme wie zum\r\nSchutze der Schwester vor ihr halb erhob.\r\n\r\nAber Gregor fiel es doch gar nicht ein, irgend jemandem und gar seiner\r\nSchwester Angst machen zu wollen. Er hatte bloß angefangen sich\r\numzudrehen, um in sein Zimmer zurückzuwandern, und das nahm sich\r\nallerdings auffallend aus, da er infolge seines leidenden Zustandes bei\r\nden schwierigen Umdrehungen mit seinem Kopfe nachhelfen mußte, den er\r\nhierbei viele Male hob und gegen den Boden schlug. Er hielt inne und sah\r\nsich um. Seine gute Absicht schien erkannt worden zu sein; es war nur\r\nein augenblicklicher Schrecken gewesen. Nun sahen ihn alle schweigend\r\nund traurig an. Die Mutter lag, die Beine ausgestreckt und\r\naneinandergedrückt, in ihrem Sessel, die Augen fielen ihr vor Ermattung\r\nfast zu; der Vater und die Schwester saßen nebeneinander, die Schwester\r\nhatte ihre Hand um des Vaters Hals gelegt.\r\n\r\n»Nun darf ich mich schon vielleicht umdrehen,« dachte Gregor und begann\r\nseine Arbeit wieder. Er konnte das Schnaufen der Anstrengung nicht\r\nunterdrücken und mußte auch hie und da ausruhen. Im übrigen drängte ihn\r\nauch niemand, es war alles ihm selbst überlassen. Als er die Umdrehung\r\nvollendet hatte, fing er sofort an, geradeaus zurückzuwandern. Er\r\nstaunte über die große Entfernung, die ihn von seinem Zimmer trennte,\r\nund begriff gar nicht, wie er bei seiner Schwäche vor kurzer Zeit den\r\ngleichen Weg, fast ohne es zu merken, zurückgelegt hatte. Immerfort nur\r\nauf rasches Kriechen bedacht, achtete er kaum darauf, daß kein Wort,\r\nkein Ausruf seiner Familie ihn störte. Erst als er schon in der Tür war,\r\nwendete er den Kopf, nicht, vollständig, denn er fühlte den Hals steif\r\nwerden, immerhin sah er noch, daß sich hinter ihm nichts verändert\r\nhatte, nur die Schwester war aufgestanden. Sein letzter Blick streifte\r\ndie Mutter, die nun völlig eingeschlafen war.\r\n\r\nKaum war er innerhalb seines Zimmers, wurde die Tür eiligst zugedrückt,\r\nfestgeriegelt und versperrt. Über den plötzlichen Lärm hinter sich\r\nerschrak Gregor so, daß ihm die Beinchen einknickten. Es war die\r\nSchwester, die sich so beeilt hatte. Aufrecht war sie schon da\r\ngestanden und hatte gewartet, leichtfüßig war sie dann\r\nvorwärtsgesprungen, Gregor hatte sie gar nicht kommen hören, und ein\r\n»Endlich!« rief sie den Eltern zu, während sie den Schlüssel im Schloß\r\numdrehte.\r\n\r\n»Und jetzt?« fragte sich Gregor und sah sich im Dunkeln um. Er machte\r\nbald die Entdeckung, daß er sich nun überhaupt nicht mehr rühren konnte.\r\nEr wunderte sich darüber nicht, eher kam es ihm unnatürlich vor, daß er\r\nsich bis jetzt tatsächlich mit diesen dünnen Beinchen hatte fortbewegen\r\nkönnen. Im übrigen fühlte er sich verhältnismäßig behaglich. Er hatte\r\nzwar Schmerzen im ganzen Leib, aber ihm war, als würden sie allmählich\r\nschwächer und schwächer und würden schließlich ganz vergehen. Den\r\nverfaulten Apfel in seinem Rücken und die entzündete Umgebung, die ganz\r\nvon weichem Staub bedeckt war, spürte er schon kaum. An seine Familie\r\ndachte er mit Rührung und Liebe zurück. Seine Meinung darüber, daß er\r\nverschwinden müsse, war womöglich noch entschiedener, als die seiner\r\nSchwester. In diesem Zustand leeren und friedlichen Nachdenkens blieb\r\ner, bis die Turmuhr die dritte Morgenstunde schlug. Den Anfang des\r\nallgemeinen Hellerwerdens draußen vor dem Fenster erlebte er noch. Dann\r\nsank sein Kopf ohne seinen Willen gänzlich nieder, und aus seinen\r\nNüstern strömte sein letzter Atem schwach hervor.\r\n\r\nAls am frühen Morgen die Bedienerin kam -- vor lauter Kraft und Eile\r\nschlug sie, wie oft man sie auch schon gebeten hatte, das zu vermeiden,\r\nalle Türen derartig zu, daß in der ganzen Wohnung von ihrem Kommen an\r\nkein ruhiger Schlaf mehr möglich war --, fand sie bei ihrem gewöhnlichen\r\nkurzen Besuch bei Gregor zuerst nichts Besonderes. Sie dachte, er liege\r\nabsichtlich so unbeweglich da und spiele den Beleidigten; sie traute\r\nihm allen möglichen Verstand zu. Weil sie zufällig den langen Besen in\r\nder Hand hielt, suchte sie mit ihm Gregor von der Tür aus zu kitzeln.\r\nAls sich auch da kein Erfolg zeigte, wurde sie ärgerlich und stieß ein\r\nwenig in Gregor hinein, und erst als sie ihn ohne jeden Widerstand von\r\nseinem Platze geschoben hatte, wurde sie aufmerksam. Als sie bald den\r\nwahren Sachverhalt erkannte, machte sie große Augen, pfiff vor sich hin,\r\nhielt sich aber nicht lange auf, sondern riß die Tür des Schlafzimmers\r\nauf und rief mit lauter Stimme in das Dunkel hinein: »Sehen Sie nur mal\r\nan, es ist krepiert; da liegt es, ganz und gar krepiert!«\r\n\r\nDas Ehepaar Samsa saß im Ehebett aufrecht da und hatte zu tun, den\r\nSchrecken über die Bedienerin zu verwinden, ehe es dazu kam, ihre\r\nMeldung aufzufassen. Dann aber stiegen Herr und Frau Samsa, jeder auf\r\nseiner Seite, eiligst aus dem Bett, Herr Samsa warf die Decke über seine\r\nSchultern, Frau Samsa kam nur im Nachthemd hervor; so traten sie in\r\nGregors Zimmer. Inzwischen hatte sich auch die Tür des Wohnzimmers\r\ngeöffnet, in dem Grete seit dem Einzug der Zimmerherren schlief; sie war\r\nvöllig angezogen, als hätte sie gar nicht geschlafen, auch ihr bleiches\r\nGesicht schien das zu beweisen. »Tot?« sagte Frau Samsa und sah fragend\r\nzur Bedienerin auf, trotzdem sie doch alles selbst prüfen und sogar ohne\r\nPrüfung erkennen konnte. »Das will ich meinen,« sagte die Bedienerin und\r\nstieß zum Beweis Gregors Leiche mit dem Besen noch ein großes Stück\r\nseitwärts. Frau Samsa machte eine Bewegung, als wolle sie den Besen\r\nzurückhalten, tat es aber nicht. »Nun,« sagte Herr Samsa, »jetzt können\r\nwir Gott danken.« Er bekreuzte sich, und die drei Frauen folgten seinem\r\nBeispiel. Grete, die kein Auge von der Leiche wendete, sagte: »Seht\r\nnur, wie mager er war. Er hat ja auch schon so lange Zeit nichts\r\ngegessen. So wie die Speisen hereinkamen, sind sie wieder\r\nhinausgekommen.« Tatsächlich war Gregors Körper vollständig flach und\r\ntrocken, man erkannte das eigentlich erst jetzt, da er nicht mehr von\r\nden Beinchen gehoben war und auch sonst nichts den Blick ablenkte.\r\n\r\n»Komm, Grete, auf ein Weilchen zu uns herein,« sagte Frau Samsa mit\r\neinem wehmütigen Lächeln, und Grete ging, nicht ohne nach der Leiche\r\nzurückzusehen, hinter den Eltern in das Schlafzimmer. Die Bedienerin\r\nschloß die Tür und öffnete gänzlich das Fenster. Trotz des frühen\r\nMorgens war der frischen Luft schon etwas Lauigkeit beigemischt. Es war\r\neben schon Ende März.\r\n\r\nAus ihrem Zimmer traten die drei Zimmerherren und sahen sich erstaunt\r\nnach ihrem Frühstück um; man hatte sie vergessen. »Wo ist das\r\nFrühstück?« fragte der mittlere der Herren mürrisch die Bedienerin.\r\nDiese aber legte den Finger an den Mund und winkte dann hastig und\r\nschweigend den Herren zu, sie möchten in Gregors Zimmer kommen. Sie\r\nkamen auch und standen dann, die Hände in den Taschen ihrer etwas\r\nabgenützten Röckchen, in dem nun schon ganz hellen Zimmer um Gregors\r\nLeiche herum.\r\n\r\nDa öffnete sich die Tür des Schlafzimmers, und Herr Samsa erschien in\r\nseiner Livree, an einem Arm seine Frau, am anderen seine Tochter. Alle\r\nwaren ein wenig verweint; Grete drückte bisweilen ihr Gesicht an den Arm\r\ndes Vaters.\r\n\r\n»Verlassen Sie sofort meine Wohnung!« sagte Herr Samsa und zeigte auf\r\ndie Tür, ohne die Frauen von sich zu lassen. »Wie meinen Sie das?« sagte\r\nder mittlere der Herren etwas bestürzt und lächelte süßlich. Die zwei\r\nanderen hielten die Hände auf dem Rücken und rieben sie ununterbrochen\r\naneinander, wie in freudiger Erwartung eines großen Streites, der aber\r\nfür sie günstig ausfallen mußte. »Ich meine es genau so, wie ich es\r\nsage,« antwortete Herr Samsa und ging in einer Linie mit seinen zwei\r\nBegleiterinnen auf den Zimmerherrn zu. Dieser stand zuerst still da und\r\nsah zu Boden, als ob sich die Dinge in seinem Kopf zu einer neuen\r\nOrdnung zusammenstellten. »Dann gehen wir also,« sagte er dann und sah\r\nzu Herrn Samsa auf, als verlange er in einer plötzlich ihn überkommenden\r\nDemut sogar für diesen Entschluß eine neue Genehmigung. Herr Samsa\r\nnickte ihm bloß mehrmals kurz mit großen Augen zu. Daraufhin ging der\r\nHerr tatsächlich sofort mit langen Schritten ins Vorzimmer; seine beiden\r\nFreunde hatten schon ein Weilchen lang mit ganz ruhigen Händen\r\naufgehorcht und hüpften ihm jetzt geradezu nach, wie in Angst, Herr\r\nSamsa könnte vor ihnen ins Vorzimmer eintreten und die Verbindung mit\r\nihrem Führer stören. Im Vorzimmer nahmen alle drei die Hüte vom\r\nKleiderrechen, zogen ihre Stöcke aus dem Stockbehälter, verbeugten sich\r\nstumm und verließen die Wohnung. In einem, wie sich zeigte, gänzlich\r\nunbegründeten Mißtrauen trat Herr Samsa mit den zwei Frauen auf den\r\nVorplatz hinaus; an das Geländer gelehnt, sahen sie zu, wie die drei\r\nHerren zwar langsam, aber ständig die lange Treppe hinunterstiegen, in\r\njedem Stockwerk in einer bestimmten Biegung des Treppenhauses\r\nverschwanden und nach ein paar Augenblicken wieder hervorkamen; je\r\ntiefer sie gelangten, desto mehr verlor sich das Interesse der Familie\r\nSamsa für sie, und als ihnen entgegen und dann hoch über sie hinweg ein\r\nFleischergeselle mit der Trage auf dem Kopf in stolzer Haltung\r\nheraufstieg, verließ bald Herr Samsa mit den Frauen das Geländer, und\r\nalle kehrten, wie erleichtert, in ihre Wohnung zurück.\r\n\r\nSie beschlossen, den heutigen Tag zum Ausruhen und Spazierengehen zu\r\nverwenden; sie hatten diese Arbeitsunterbrechung nicht nur verdient, sie\r\nbrauchten sie sogar unbedingt. Und so setzten sie sich zum Tisch und\r\nschrieben drei Entschuldigungsbriefe, Herr Samsa an seine Direktion,\r\nFrau Samsa an ihren Auftraggeber, und Grete an ihren Prinzipal. Während\r\ndes Schreibens kam die Bedienerin herein, um zu sagen, daß sie fortgehe,\r\ndenn ihre Morgenarbeit war beendet. Die drei Schreibenden nickten zuerst\r\nbloß, ohne aufzuschauen, erst als die Bedienerin sich immer noch nicht\r\nentfernen wollte, sah man ärgerlich auf. »Nun?« fragte Herr Samsa. Die\r\nBedienerin stand lächelnd in der Tür, als habe sie der Familie ein\r\ngroßes Glück zu melden, werde es aber nur dann tun, wenn sie gründlich\r\nausgefragt werde. Die fast aufrechte kleine Straußfeder auf ihrem Hut,\r\nüber die sich Herr Samsa schon während ihrer ganzen Dienstzeit ärgerte,\r\nschwankte leicht nach allen Richtungen. »Also was wollen Sie\r\neigentlich?« fragte Frau Samsa, vor welcher die Bedienerin noch am\r\nmeisten Respekt hatte. »Ja,« antwortete die Bedienerin und konnte vor\r\nfreundlichem Lachen nicht gleich weiter reden, »also darüber, wie das\r\nZeug von nebenan weggeschafft werden soll, müssen Sie sich keine Sorge\r\nmachen. Es ist schon in Ordnung.« Frau Samsa und Grete beugten sich zu\r\nihren Briefen nieder, als wollten sie weiterschreiben; Herr Samsa,\r\nwelcher merkte, daß die Bedienerin nun alles ausführlich zu beschreiben\r\nanfangen wollte, wehrte dies mit ausgestreckter Hand entschieden ab. Da\r\nsie aber nicht erzählen durfte, erinnerte sie sich an die große Eile,\r\ndie sie hatte, rief offenbar beleidigt: »Adjes allseits,« drehte sich\r\nwild um und verließ unter fürchterlichem Türezuschlagen die Wohnung.\r\n\r\n»Abends wird sie entlassen,« sagte Herr Samsa, bekam aber weder von\r\nseiner Frau noch von seiner Tochter eine Antwort, denn die Bedienerin\r\nschien ihre kaum gewonnene Ruhe wieder gestört zu haben. Sie erhoben\r\nsich, gingen zum Fenster und blieben dort, sich umschlungen haltend.\r\nHerr Samsa drehte sich in seinem Sessel nach ihnen um und beobachtete\r\nsie still ein Weilchen. Dann rief er: »Also kommt doch her. Laßt schon\r\nendlich die alten Sachen. Und nehmt auch ein wenig Rücksicht auf mich.«\r\nGleich folgten ihm die Frauen, eilten zu ihm, liebkosten ihn und\r\nbeendeten rasch ihre Briefe.\r\n\r\nDann verließen alle drei gemeinschaftlich die Wohnung, was sie schon\r\nseit Monaten nicht getan hatten, und fuhren mit der Elektrischen ins\r\nFreie vor die Stadt. Der Wagen, in dem sie allein saßen, war ganz von\r\nwarmer Sonne durchschienen. Sie besprachen, bequem auf ihren Sitzen\r\nzurückgelehnt, die Aussichten für die Zukunft, und es fand sich, daß\r\ndiese bei näherer Betrachtung durchaus nicht schlecht waren, denn aller\r\ndrei Anstellungen waren, worüber sie einander eigentlich noch gar nicht\r\nausgefragt hatten, überaus günstig und besonders für später\r\nvielversprechend. Die größte augenblickliche Besserung der Lage mußte\r\nsich natürlich leicht durch einen Wohnungswechsel ergeben; sie wollten\r\nnun eine kleinere und billigere, aber besser gelegene und überhaupt\r\npraktischere Wohnung nehmen, als es die jetzige, noch von Gregor\r\nausgesuchte war. Während sie sich so unterhielten, fiel es Herrn und\r\nFrau Samsa im Anblick ihrer immer lebhafter werdenden Tochter fast\r\ngleichzeitig ein, wie sie in der letzten Zeit trotz aller Pflege, die\r\nihre Wangen bleich gemacht hatte, zu einem schönen und üppigen Mädchen\r\naufgeblüht war. Stiller werdend und fast unbewußt durch Blicke sich\r\nverständigend, dachten sie daran, daß es nun Zeit sein werde, auch einen\r\nbraven Mann für sie zu suchen. Und es war ihnen wie eine Bestätigung\r\nihrer neuen Träume und guten Absichten, als am Ziele ihrer Fahrt die\r\nTochter als erste sich erhob und ihren jungen Körper dehnte.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nEnd of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Die Verwandlung, by Franz Kafka\r\n\r\n*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK DIE VERWANDLUNG ***\r\n\r\n***** This file should be named 22367-8.txt or 22367-8.zip *****\r\nThis and all associated files of various formats will be found in:\r\n http://www.gutenberg.org/2/2/3/6/22367/\r\n\r\nProduced by Jana Srna, Alexander Bauer and the Online\r\nDistributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net\r\n\r\n\r\nUpdated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions\r\nwill be renamed.\r\n\r\nCreating the works from public domain print editions means that no\r\none owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation\r\n(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without\r\npermission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,\r\nset forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to\r\ncopying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to\r\nprotect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project\r\nGutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you\r\ncharge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you\r\ndo not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the\r\nrules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose\r\nsuch as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and\r\nresearch. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do\r\npractically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is\r\nsubject to the trademark license, especially commercial\r\nredistribution.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n*** START: FULL LICENSE ***\r\n\r\nTHE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE\r\nPLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK\r\n\r\nTo protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free\r\ndistribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work\r\n(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase \"Project\r\nGutenberg\"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project\r\nGutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at\r\nhttp://gutenberg.org/license).\r\n\r\n\r\nSection 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm\r\nelectronic works\r\n\r\n1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm\r\nelectronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to\r\nand accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property\r\n(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all\r\nthe terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy\r\nall copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.\r\nIf you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project\r\nGutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the\r\nterms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or\r\nentity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.\r\n\r\n1.B. \"Project Gutenberg\" is a registered trademark. It may only be\r\nused on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who\r\nagree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few\r\nthings that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works\r\neven without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See\r\nparagraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project\r\nGutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement\r\nand help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic\r\nworks. See paragraph 1.E below.\r\n\r\n1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (\"the Foundation\"\r\nor PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project\r\nGutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the\r\ncollection are in the public domain in the United States. If an\r\nindividual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are\r\nlocated in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from\r\ncopying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative\r\nworks based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg\r\nare removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project\r\nGutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by\r\nfreely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of\r\nthis agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with\r\nthe work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by\r\nkeeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project\r\nGutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.\r\n\r\n1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern\r\nwhat you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in\r\na constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check\r\nthe laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement\r\nbefore downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or\r\ncreating derivative works based on this work or any other Project\r\nGutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning\r\nthe copyright status of any work in any country outside the United\r\nStates.\r\n\r\n1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:\r\n\r\n1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate\r\naccess to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently\r\nwhenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the\r\nphrase \"Project Gutenberg\" appears, or with which the phrase \"Project\r\nGutenberg\" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,\r\ncopied or distributed:\r\n\r\nThis eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with\r\nalmost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or\r\nre-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included\r\nwith this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org\r\n\r\n1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived\r\nfrom the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is\r\nposted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied\r\nand distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees\r\nor charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work\r\nwith the phrase \"Project Gutenberg\" associated with or appearing on the\r\nwork, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1\r\nthrough 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the\r\nProject Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or\r\n1.E.9.\r\n\r\n1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted\r\nwith the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution\r\nmust comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional\r\nterms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked\r\nto the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the\r\npermission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.\r\n\r\n1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm\r\nLicense terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this\r\nwork or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.\r\n\r\n1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this\r\nelectronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without\r\nprominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with\r\nactive links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project\r\nGutenberg-tm License.\r\n\r\n1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,\r\ncompressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any\r\nword processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or\r\ndistribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than\r\n\"Plain Vanilla ASCII\" or other format used in the official version\r\nposted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),\r\nyou must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a\r\ncopy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon\r\nrequest, of the work in its original \"Plain Vanilla ASCII\" or other\r\nform. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm\r\nLicense as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.\r\n\r\n1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,\r\nperforming, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works\r\nunless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.\r\n\r\n1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing\r\naccess to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided\r\nthat\r\n\r\n- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from\r\n the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method\r\n you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is\r\n owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he\r\n has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the\r\n Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments\r\n must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you\r\n prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax\r\n returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and\r\n sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the\r\n address specified in Section 4, \"Information about donations to\r\n the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.\"\r\n\r\n- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies\r\n you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he\r\n does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm\r\n License. You must require such a user to return or\r\n destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium\r\n and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of\r\n Project Gutenberg-tm works.\r\n\r\n- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any\r\n money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the\r\n electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days\r\n of receipt of the work.\r\n\r\n- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free\r\n distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.\r\n\r\n1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm\r\nelectronic work or group of works on different terms than are set\r\nforth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from\r\nboth the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael\r\nHart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the\r\nFoundation as set forth in Section 3 below.\r\n\r\n1.F.\r\n\r\n1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable\r\neffort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread\r\npublic domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm\r\ncollection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic\r\nworks, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain\r\n\"Defects,\" such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or\r\ncorrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual\r\nproperty infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a\r\ncomputer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by\r\nyour equipment.\r\n\r\n1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the \"Right\r\nof Replacement or Refund\" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project\r\nGutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project\r\nGutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project\r\nGutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all\r\nliability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal\r\nfees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT\r\nLIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE\r\nPROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE\r\nTRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE\r\nLIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR\r\nINCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH\r\nDAMAGE.\r\n\r\n1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a\r\ndefect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can\r\nreceive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a\r\nwritten explanation to the person you received the work from. If you\r\nreceived the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with\r\nyour written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with\r\nthe defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a\r\nrefund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity\r\nproviding it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to\r\nreceive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy\r\nis also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further\r\nopportunities to fix the problem.\r\n\r\n1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth\r\nin paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER\r\nWARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO\r\nWARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.\r\n\r\n1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied\r\nwarranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.\r\nIf any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the\r\nlaw of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be\r\ninterpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by\r\nthe applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any\r\nprovision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.\r\n\r\n1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the\r\ntrademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone\r\nproviding copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance\r\nwith this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,\r\npromotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,\r\nharmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,\r\nthat arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do\r\nor cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm\r\nwork, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any\r\nProject Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.\r\n\r\n\r\nSection 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm\r\n\r\nProject Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of\r\nelectronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers\r\nincluding obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists\r\nbecause of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from\r\npeople in all walks of life.\r\n\r\nVolunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the\r\nassistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's\r\ngoals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will\r\nremain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project\r\nGutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure\r\nand permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.\r\nTo learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation\r\nand how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4\r\nand the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.\r\n\r\n\r\nSection 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive\r\nFoundation\r\n\r\nThe Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit\r\n501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the\r\nstate of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal\r\nRevenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification\r\nnumber is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at\r\nhttp://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg\r\nLiterary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent\r\npermitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.\r\n\r\nThe Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.\r\nFairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered\r\nthroughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at\r\n809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email\r\nbusiness@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact\r\ninformation can be found at the Foundation's web site and official\r\npage at http://pglaf.org\r\n\r\nFor additional contact information:\r\n Dr. Gregory B. Newby\r\n Chief Executive and Director\r\n gbnewby@pglaf.org\r\n\r\n\r\nSection 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg\r\nLiterary Archive Foundation\r\n\r\nProject Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide\r\nspread public support and donations to carry out its mission of\r\nincreasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be\r\nfreely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest\r\narray of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations\r\n($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt\r\nstatus with the IRS.\r\n\r\nThe Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating\r\ncharities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United\r\nStates. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a\r\nconsiderable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up\r\nwith these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations\r\nwhere we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To\r\nSEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any\r\nparticular state visit http://pglaf.org\r\n\r\nWhile we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we\r\nhave not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition\r\nagainst accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who\r\napproach us with offers to donate.\r\n\r\nInternational donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make\r\nany statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from\r\noutside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.\r\n\r\nPlease check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation\r\nmethods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other\r\nways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.\r\nTo donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate\r\n\r\n\r\nSection 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic\r\nworks.\r\n\r\nProfessor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm\r\nconcept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared\r\nwith anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project\r\nGutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed\r\neditions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.\r\nunless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily\r\nkeep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.\r\n\r\n\r\nMost people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:\r\n\r\n http://www.gutenberg.org\r\n\r\nThis Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,\r\nincluding how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary\r\nArchive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to\r\nsubscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.\r\n" }, { "path": "tests/data/gutenberg/werther/goethe_werther1.txt", "content": "Die Leiden des jungen Werther von Johann Wolfgang von Goethe\r\n\r\n\r\nHamburger Ausgabe, Band 6\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nErstes Buch\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 4. Mai 1771\r\n\r\nWie froh bin ich, daß ich weg bin! Bester Freund, was ist das Herz\r\ndes Menschen! Dich zu verlassen, den ich so liebe, von dem ich\r\nunzertrennlich war, und froh zu sein! Ich weiß, du verzeihst mir's.\r\nWaren nicht meine übrigen Verbindungen recht ausgesucht vom Schicksal,\r\num ein Herz wie das meine zu ängstigen? Die arme Leonore! Und doch\r\nwar ich unschuldig. Konnt' ich dafür, daß, während die eigensinnigen\r\nReize ihrer Schwester mir eine angenehme Unterhaltung verschafften,\r\ndaß eine Leidenschaft in dem armen Herzen sich bildete? Und doch--bin\r\nich ganz unschuldig? Hab' ich nicht ihre Empfindungen genährt? Hab'\r\nich mich nicht an den ganz wahren Ausdrücken der Natur, die uns so oft\r\nzu lachen machten, so wenig lächerlich sie waren, selbst ergetzt?\r\nHab' ich nicht--o was ist der Mensch, daß er über sich klagen darf!\r\nIch will, lieber Freund, ich verspreche dir's, ich will mich bessern,\r\nwill nicht mehr ein bißchen Übel, das uns das Schicksal vorlegt,\r\nwiederkäuen, wie ich's immer getan habe; ich will das Gegenwärtige\r\ngenießen, und das Vergangene soll mir vergangen sein. Gewiß, du hast\r\nrecht, Bester, der Schmerzen wären minder unter den Menschen, wenn sie\r\nnicht--Gott weiß, warum sie so gemacht sind!--mit so viel Emsigkeit\r\nder Einbildungskraft sich beschäftigten, die Erinnerungen des\r\nvergangenen Übels zurückzurufen, eher als eine gleichgültige Gegenwart\r\nzu ertragen.\r\n\r\nDu bist so gut, meiner Mutter zu sagen, daß ich ihr Geschäft bestens\r\nbetreiben und ihr ehstens Nachricht davon geben werde. Ich habe meine\r\nTante gesprochen und bei weitem das böse Weib nicht gefunden, das man\r\nbei uns aus ihr macht. Sie ist eine muntere, heftige Frau von dem\r\nbesten Herzen. Ich erklärte ihr meiner Mutter Beschwerden über den\r\nzurückgehaltenen Erbschaftsanteil; sie sagte mir ihre Gründe, Ursachen\r\nund die Bedingungen, unter welchen sie bereit wäre, alles\r\nherauszugeben, und mehr als wir verlangten--kurz, ich mag jetzt nichts\r\ndavon schreiben, sage meiner Mutter, es werde alles gut gehen. Und\r\nich habe, mein Lieber, wieder bei diesem kleinen Geschäft gefunden,\r\ndaß Mißverständnisse und Trägheit vielleicht mehr Irrungen in der Welt\r\nmachen als List und Bosheit. Wenigstens sind die beiden letzteren\r\ngewiß seltener.\r\n\r\nÜbrigens befinde ich mich hier gar wohl. Die Einsamkeit ist meinem\r\nHerzen köstlicher Balsam in dieser paradiesischen Gegend, und diese\r\nJahreszeit der Jugend wärmt mit aller Fülle mein oft schauderndes Herz.\r\nJeder Baum, jede Hecke ist ein Strauß von Blüten, und man möchte zum\r\nMaienkäfer werden, um in dem Meer von Wohlgerüchen herumschweben und\r\nalle seine Nahrung darin finden zu können.\r\n\r\nDie Stadt selbst ist unangenehm, dagegen rings umher eine\r\nunaussprechliche Schönheit der Natur. Das bewog den verstorbenen\r\nGrafen von M., einen Garten auf einem der Hügel anzulegen, die mit der\r\nschönsten Mannigfaltigkeit sich kreuzen und die lieblichsten Täler\r\nbilden. Der Garten ist einfach, und man fühlt gleich bei dem\r\nEintritte, daß nicht ein wissenschaftlicher Gärtner, sondern ein\r\nfühlendes Herz den Plan gezeichnet, das seiner selbst hier genießen\r\nwollte. Schon manche Träne hab' ich dem Abgeschiedenen in dem\r\nverfallenen Kabinettchen geweint, das sein Lieblingsplätzchen war und\r\nauch meines ist. Bald werde ich Herr vom Garten sein; der Gärtner ist\r\nmir zugetan, nur seit den paar Tagen, und er wird sich nicht übel\r\ndabei befinden.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 10. Mai\r\n\r\nEine wunderbare Heiterkeit hat meine ganze Seele eingenommen, gleich\r\nden süßen Frühlingsmorgen, die ich mit ganzem Herzen genieße. Ich bin\r\nallein und freue mich meines Lebens in dieser Gegend, die für solche\r\nSeelen geschaffen ist wie die meine. Ich bin so glücklich, mein\r\nBester, so ganz in dem Gefühle von ruhigem Dasein versunken, daß meine\r\nKunst darunter leidet. Ich könnte jetzt nicht zeichnen, nicht einen\r\nStrich, und bin nie ein größerer Maler gewesen als in diesen\r\nAugenblicken. Wenn das liebe Tal um mich dampft, und die hohe Sonne\r\nan der Oberfläche der undurchdringlichen Finsternis meines Waldes ruht,\r\nund nur einzelne Strahlen sich in das innere Heiligtum stehlen, ich\r\ndann im hohen Grase am fallenden Bache liege, und näher an der Erde\r\ntausend mannigfaltige Gräschen mir merkwürdig werden; wenn ich das\r\nWimmeln der kleinen Welt zwischen Halmen, die unzähligen,\r\nunergründlichen Gestalten der Würmchen, der Mückchen näher an meinem\r\nHerzen fühle, und fühle die Gegenwart des Allmächtigen, der uns nach\r\nseinem Bilde schuf, das Wehen des Alliebenden, der uns in ewiger Wonne\r\nschwebend trägt und erhält; mein Freund! Wenn's dann um meine Augen\r\ndämmert, und die Welt um mich her und der Himmel ganz in meiner Seele\r\nruhn wie die Gestalt einer Geliebten--dann sehne ich mich oft und\r\ndenke : ach könntest du das wieder ausdrücken, könntest du dem Papiere\r\ndas einhauchen, was so voll, so warm in dir lebt, daß es würde der\r\nSpiegel deiner Seele, wie deine Seele ist der Spiegel des unendlichen\r\nGottes!--mein Freund--aber ich gehe darüber zugrunde, ich erliege\r\nunter der Gewalt der Herrlichkeit dieser Erscheinungen.\r\n\r\nIch weiß nicht, ob täuschende Geister um diese Gegend schweben, oder\r\nob die warme, himmlische Phantasie in meinem Herzen ist, die mir alles\r\nrings umher so paradiesisch macht. Das ist gleich vor dem Orte ein\r\nBrunnen, ein Brunnen, an den ich gebannt bin wie Melusine mit ihren\r\nSchwestern.--Du gehst einen kleinen Hügel hinunter und findest dich\r\nvor einem Gewölbe, da wohl zwanzig Stufen hinabgehen, wo unten das\r\nklarste Wasser aus Marmorfelsen quillt. Die kleine Mauer, die oben\r\numher die Einfassung macht, die hohen Bäume, die den Platz rings umher\r\nbedecken, die Kühle des Orts; das hat alles so was Anzügliches, was\r\nSchauerliches. Es vergeht kein Tag, daß ich nicht eine Stunde da\r\nsitze. Da kommen die Mädchen aus der Stadt und holen Wasser, das\r\nharmloseste Geschäft und das nötigste, das ehemals die Töchter der\r\nKönige selbst verrichteten. Wenn ich da sitze, so lebt die\r\npatriarchalische Idee so lebhaft um mich, wie sie, alle die Altväter,\r\nam Brunnen Bekanntschaft machen und freien, und wie um die Brunnen und\r\nQuellen wohltätige Geister schweben. O der muß nie nach einer\r\nschweren Sommertagswanderung sich an des Brunnens Kühle gelabt haben,\r\nder das nicht mitempfinden kann.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 13. Mai\r\n\r\nDu fragst, ob du mir meine Bücher schicken sollst?--lieber, ich bitte\r\ndich um Gottes willen, laß mir sie vom Halse! Ich will nicht mehr\r\ngeleitet, ermuntert, angefeuert sein, braust dieses Herz doch genug\r\naus sich selbst; ich brauche Wiegengesang, und den habe ich in seiner\r\nFülle gefunden in meinem Homer. Wie oft lull' ich mein empörtes Blut\r\nzur Ruhe, denn so ungleich, so unstet hast du nichts gesehn als dieses\r\nHerz. Lieber! Brauch' ich dir das zu sagen, der du so oft die Last\r\ngetragen hast, mich vom Kummer zur Ausschweifung und von süßer\r\nMelancholie zur verderblichen Leidenschaft übergehen zu sehn? Auch\r\nhalte ich mein Herzchen wie ein krankes Kind; jeder Wille wird ihm\r\ngestattet. Sage das nicht weiter; es gibt Leute, die mir es verübeln\r\nwürden.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 15. Mai\r\n\r\nDie geringen Leute des Ortes kennen mich schon und lieben mich,\r\nbesonders die Kinder. Eine traurige Bemerkung hab' ich gemacht. Wie\r\nich im Anfange mich zu ihnen gesellte, sie freundschaftlich fragte\r\nüber dies und das, glaubten einige, ich wollte ihrer spotten, und\r\nfertigten mich wohl gar grob ab. Ich ließ mich das nicht verdrießen;\r\nnur fühlte ich, was ich schon oft bemerkt habe, auf das lebhafteste :\r\nLeute von einigem Stande werden sich immer in kalter Entfernung vom\r\ngemeinen Volke halten, als glaubten sie durch Annäherung zu verlieren;\r\nund dann gibt's Flüchtlinge und üble Spaßvögel, die sich herabzulassen\r\nscheinen, um ihren Übermut dem armen Volke desto empfindlicher zu\r\nmachen.\r\n\r\nIch weiß wohl, daß wir nicht gleich sind, noch sein können; aber ich\r\nhalte dafür, daß der, der nötig zu haben glaubt, vom so genannten\r\nPöbel sich zu entfernen, um den Respekt zu erhalten, ebenso tadelhaft\r\nist als ein Feiger, der sich vor seinem Feinde verbirgt, weil er zu\r\nunterliegen fürchtet.\r\n\r\nLetzthin kam ich zum Brunnen und fand ein junges Dienstmädchen, das\r\nihr Gefäß auf die unterste Treppe gesetzt hatte und sich umsah, ob\r\nkeine Kamerädin kommen wollte, ihr es auf den Kopf zu helfen. Ich\r\nstieg hinunter und sah sie an.--\"Soll ich Ihr helfen, Jungfer?\" sagte\r\nich.--sie ward rot über und über.--\"O nein, Herr!\" sagte sie.--\"Ohne\r\nUmstände\".--sie legte ihren Kragen zurecht, und ich half ihr. Sie\r\ndankte und stieg hinauf.\r\n\r\n\r\nDen 17. Mai\r\n\r\nIch habe allerlei Bekanntschaft gemacht, Gesellschaft habe ich noch\r\nkeine gefunden. Ich weiß nicht, was ich Anzügliches für die Menschen\r\nhaben muß; es mögen mich ihrer so viele und hängen sich an mich, und\r\nda tut mir's weh, wenn unser Weg nur eine kleine Strecke miteinander\r\ngeht. Wenn du fragst, wie die Leute hier sind, muß ich dir sagen: wie\r\nüberall! Es ist ein einförmiges Ding um das Menschengeschlecht. Die\r\nmeisten verarbeiten den größten Teil der Zeit, um zu leben, und das\r\nbißchen, das ihnen von Freiheit übrig bleibt, ängstigt sie so, daß sie\r\nalle Mittel aufsuchen, um es los zu werden. O Bestimmung des Menschen!\r\n\r\n\r\nAber eine recht gute Art Volks! Wenn ich mich manchmal vergesse,\r\nmanchmal mit ihnen die Freuden genieße, die den Menschen noch gewährt\r\nsind, an einem artig besetzten Tisch mit aller Offen--und\r\nTreuherzigkeit sich herumzuspaßen, eine Spazierfahrt, einen Tanz zur\r\nrechten Zeit anzuordnen, und dergleichen, das tut eine ganz gute\r\nWirkung auf mich; nur muß mir nicht einfallen, daß noch so viele\r\nandere Kräfte in mir ruhen, die alle ungenutzt vermodern und die ich\r\nsorgfältig verbergen muß. Ach das engt das ganze Herz so ein.--Und\r\ndoch! Mißverstanden zu werden, ist das Schicksal von unsereinem.\r\n\r\nAch, daß die Freundin meiner Jugend dahin ist, ach, daß ich sie je\r\ngekannt habe!--ich würde sagen: du bist ein Tor! Du suchst, was\r\nhienieden nicht zu finden ist! Aber ich habe sie gehabt, ich habe das\r\nHerz gefühlt, die große Seele, in deren Gegenwart ich mir schien mehr\r\nzu sein, als ich war, weil ich alles war, was ich sein konnte. Guter\r\nGott! Blieb da eine einzige Kraft meiner Seele ungenutzt? Konnt' ich\r\nnicht vor ihr das ganze wunderbare Gefühl entwickeln, mit dem mein\r\nHerz die Natur umfaßt? War unser Umgang nicht ein ewiges Weben von\r\nder feinsten Empfindung, dem schärfsten Witze, dessen Modifikationen,\r\nbis zur Unart, alle mit dem Stempel des Genies bezeichnet waren? Und\r\nnun!--ach ihre Jahre, die sie voraus hatte, führten sie früher ans\r\nGrab als mich. Nie werde ich sie vergessen, nie ihren festen Sinn und\r\nihre göttliche Duldung.\r\n\r\nVor wenig Tagen traf ich einen jungen V. an, einen offnen Jungen, mit\r\neiner gar glücklichen Gesichtsbildung. Er kommt erst von Akademien\r\ndünkt sich eben nicht weise, aber glaubt doch, er wisse mehr als\r\nandere. Auch war er fleißig, wie ich an allerlei spüre, kurz, er hat\r\nhübsche Kenntnisse. Da er hörte, daß ich viel zeichnete und\r\nGriechisch könnte (zwei Meteore hierzulande), wandte er sich an mich\r\nund kramte viel Wissens aus, von Batteux bis zu Wood, von de Piles zu\r\nWinckelmann, und versicherte mich, er habe Sulzers Theorie, den ersten\r\nTeil, ganz durchgelesen und besitze ein Manuskript von Heynen über das\r\nStudium der Antike. Ich ließ das gut sein.\r\n\r\nNoch gar einen braven Mann habe ich kennen lernen, den fürstlichen\r\nAmtmann, einen offenen, treuherzigen Menschen. Man sagt, es soll eine\r\nSeelenfreude sein, ihn unter seinen Kindern zu sehen, deren er neun\r\nhat; besonders macht man viel Wesens von seiner ältesten Tochter. Er\r\nhat mich zu sich gebeten, und ich will ihn ehster Tage besuchen. Er\r\nwohnt auf einem fürstlichen Jagdhofe, anderthalb Stunden von hier,\r\nwohin er nach dem Tode seiner Frau zu ziehen die Erlaubnis erhielt, da\r\nihm der Aufenthalt hier in der Stadt und im Amthause zu weh tat.\r\n\r\nSonst sind mir einige verzerrte Originale in den Weg gelaufen, an\r\ndenen alles unausstehlich ist, am unerträglichsten\r\nFreundschaftsbezeigungen.\r\n\r\nLeb' wohl! Der Brief wird dir recht sein, er ist ganz historisch.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 22. Mai\r\n\r\nDaß das Leben des Menschen nur ein Traum sei, ist manchem schon so\r\nvorgekommen, und auch mit mir zieht dieses Gefühl immer herum. Wenn\r\nich die Einschränkung ansehe, in welcher die tätigen und forschenden\r\nKräfte des Menschen eingesperrt sind; wenn ich sehe, wie alle\r\nWirksamkeit dahinaus läuft, sich die Befriedigung von Bedürfnissen zu\r\nverschaffen, die wieder keinen Zweck haben, als unsere arme Existenz\r\nzu verlängern, und dann, daß alle Beruhigung über gewisse Punkte des\r\nNachforschens nur eine träumende Regignation ist, da man sich die\r\nWände, zwischen denen man gefangen sitzt, mit bunten Gestalten und\r\nlichten Aussichten bemalt--das alles, Wilhelm, macht mich stumm. Ich\r\nkehre in mich selbst zurück, und finde eine Welt! Wieder mehr in\r\nAhnung und dunkler Begier als in Darstellung und lebendiger Kraft.\r\nUnd da schwimmt alles vor meinen Sinnen, und ich lächle dann so\r\nträumend weiter in die Welt.\r\n\r\nDaß die Kinder nicht wissen, warum sie wollen, darin sind alle\r\nhochgelahrten Schul--und Hofmeister einig; daß aber auch Erwachsene\r\ngleich Kindern auf diesem Erdboden herumtaumeln und wie jene nicht\r\nwissen, woher sie kommen und wohin sie gehen, ebensowenig nach wahren\r\nZwecken handeln, ebenso durch Biskuit und Kuchen und Birkenreiser\r\nregiert werden: das will niemand gern glauben, und mich dünkt, man\r\nkann es mit Händen greifen.\r\n\r\nIch gestehe dir gern, denn ich weiß, was du mir hierauf sagen möchtest,\r\ndaß diejenigen die Glücklichsten sind, die gleich den Kindern in den\r\nTag hinein leben, ihre Puppen herumschleppen, aus--und anziehen und\r\nmit großem Respekt um die Schublade umherschleichen, wo Mama das\r\nZuckerbrot hineingeschlossen hat, und, wenn sie das gewünschte endlich\r\nerhaschen, es mit vollen Backen verzehren und rufen:\"mehr!\"--das sind\r\nglückliche Geschöpfe. Auch denen ist's wohl, die ihren\r\nLumpenbeschäftigungen oder wohl gar ihren Leidenschaften prächtige\r\nTitel geben und sie dem Menschengeschlechte als Riesenoperationen zu\r\ndessen Heil und Wohlfahrt anschreiben.--Wohl dem, der so sein kann!\r\nWer aber in seiner Demut erkennt, wo das alles hinausläuft, wer da\r\nsieht, wie artig jeder Bürger, dem es wohl ist, sein Gärtchen zum\r\nParadiese zuzustutzen weiß, und wie unverdrossen auch der Unglückliche\r\nunter der Bürde seinen Weg fortkeucht, und alle gleich interessiert\r\nsind, das Licht dieser Sonne noch eine Minute länger zu sehn--ja, der\r\nist still und bildet auch seine Welt aus sich selbst und ist auch\r\nglücklich, weil er ein Mensch ist. Und dann, so eingeschränkt er ist,\r\nhält er doch immer im Herzen das süße Gefühl der Freiheit, und daß er\r\ndiesen Kerker verlassen kann, wann er will.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 26. Mai\r\n\r\nDu kennst von alters her meine Art, mich anzubauen, mir irgend an\r\neinem vertraulichen Orte ein Hüttchen aufzuschlagen und da mit aller\r\nEinschränkung zu herbergen. Auch hier habe ich wieder ein Plätzchen\r\nangetroffen, das mich angezogen hat.\r\n\r\nUngefähr eine Stunde von der Stadt liegt ein Ort, den sie Wahlheim\r\nnennen. Die Lage an einem Hügel ist sehr interessant, und wenn man\r\noben auf dem Fußpfade zum Dorf herausgeht, übersieht man auf einmal\r\ndas ganze Tal. Eine gute Wirtin, die gefällig und munter in ihrem\r\nAlter ist, schenkt Wein, Bier, Kaffee; und was über alles geht, sind\r\nzwei Linden, die mit ihren ausgebreiteten [sten den kleinen Platz vor\r\nder Kirche bedecken, der ringsum mit Bauerhäusern, Scheunen und Höfen\r\neingeschlossen ist. So vertraulich, so heimlich hab' ich nicht leicht\r\nein Plätzchen gefunden, und dahin lass' ich mein Tischchen aus dem\r\nWirtshause bringen und meinen Stuhl, trinke meinen Kaffee da und lese\r\nmeinen Homer. Das erstenmal, als ich durch einen Zufall an einem\r\nschönen Nachmittage unter die Linden kam, fand ich das Plätzchen so\r\neinsam. Es war alles im Felde; nur ein Knabe von ungefähr vier Jahren\r\nsaß an der Erde und hielt ein anderes, etwa halbjähriges, vor ihm\r\nzwischen seinen Füßen sitzendes Kind mit beiden Armen wider seine\r\nBrust, so daß er ihm zu einer Art von Sessel diente und ungeachtet der\r\nMunterkeit, womit er aus seinen schwarzen Augen herumschaute, ganz\r\nruhig saß. Mich vergnügte der Anblick: ich setzte mich auf einen\r\nPflug, der gegenüber stand, und zeichnete die brüderliche Stellung mit\r\nvielem Ergetzen. Ich fügte den nächsten Zaun, ein Scheunentor und\r\neinige gebrochene Wagenräder bei, alles, wie es hinter einander stand,\r\nund fand nach Verlauf einer Stunde, daß ich eine wohlgeordnete, sehr\r\ninteressante Zeichnung verfertigt hatte, ohne das mindeste von dem\r\nMeinen hinzuzutun. Das bestärkte mich in meinem Vorsatze, mich\r\nkünftig allein an die Natur zu halten. Sie allein ist unendlich reich,\r\nund sie allein bildet den großen Künstler. Man kann zum Vorteile der\r\nRegeln viel sagen, ungefähr was man zum Lobe der bürgerlichen\r\nGesellschaft sagen kann. Ein Mensch, der sich nach ihnen bildet, wird\r\nnie etwas Abgeschmacktes und Schlechtes hervorbringen, wie einer, der\r\nsich durch Gesetze und Wohlstand modeln läßt, nie ein unerträglicher\r\nNachbar, nie ein merkwürdiger Bösewicht werden kann; dagegen wird aber\r\nauch alle Regel, man rede was man wolle, das wahre Gefühl von Natur\r\nund den wahren Ausdruck derselben zerstören! Sag' du: 'das ist zu\r\nhart! Sie schränkt nur ein, beschneidet die geilen Reben' etc.--guter\r\nFreund, soll ich dir ein Gleichnis geben? Es ist damit wie mit der\r\nLiebe. Ein junges Herz hängt ganz an einem Mädchen, bringt alle\r\nStunden seines Tages bei ihr zu, verschwendet alle seine Kräfte, all\r\nsein Vermögen, um ihr jeden Augenblick auszudrücken, daß er sich ganz\r\nihr hingibt. Und da käme ein Philister, ein Mann, der in einem\r\nöffentlichen Amte steht, und sagte zu ihm: 'feiner junger Herr!\r\nLieben ist menschlich, nur müßt Ihr menschlich lieben! Teilet Eure\r\nStunden ein, die einen zur Arbeit, und die Erholungsstunden widmet\r\nEurem Mädchen. Berechnet Euer Vermögen, und was Euch von Eurer\r\nNotdurft übrig bleibt, davon verwehr' ich Euch nicht, ihr ein Geschenk,\r\nnur nicht zu oft, zu machen, etwa zu ihrem Geburts--und Namenstage '\r\netc.--folgt der Mensch, so gibt's einen brauchbaren jungen Menschen,\r\nund ich will selbst jedem Fürsten raten, ihn in ein Kollegium zu\r\nsetzen; nur mit seiner Liebe ist's am Ende und, wenn er ein Künstler\r\nist, mit seiner Kunst. O meine Freunde! Warum der Strom des Genies\r\nso selten ausbricht, so selten in hohen Fluten hereinbraust und eure\r\nstaunende Seele erschüttert?--liebe Freunde, da wohnen die gelassenen\r\nHerren auf beiden Seiten des Ufers, denen ihre Gartenhäuschen,\r\nTulpenbeete und Krautfelder zugrunde gehen würden, die daher in Zeiten\r\nmit Dämmen und Ableiten der künftig drohenden Gefahr abzuwehren wissen.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 27. Mai\r\n\r\nIch bin, wie ich sehe, in Verzückung, Gleichnisse und Deklamation\r\nverfallen und habe darüber vergessen, dir auszuerzählen, was mit den\r\nKindern weiter geworden ist. Ich saß, ganz in malerische Empfindung\r\nvertieft, die dir mein gestriges Blatt sehr zerstückt darlegt, auf\r\nmeinem Pfluge wohl zwei Stunden. Da kommt gegen Abend eine junge Frau\r\nauf die Kinder los, die sich indes nicht gerührt hatten, mit einem\r\nKörbchen am Arm und ruft von weitem: \"Philipps, du bist recht brav\".\r\n--Sie grüßte mich, ich dankte ihr, stand auf, trat näher hin und\r\nfragte sie, ob sie Mutter von den Kindern wäre? Sie bejahte es, und\r\nindem sie dem ältesten einen halben Weck gab, nahm sie das kleine auf\r\nund küßte es mit aller mütterlichen Liebe.--\"ich habe\", sagte sie,\r\n\"meinem Philipps das Kleine zu halten gegeben und bin mit meinem\r\nÄltesten in die Stadt gegangen, um weiß Brot zu holen und Zucker und\r\nein irden Breipfännchen\".--Ich sah das alles in dem Korbe, dessen\r\nDeckel abgefallen war.--\"Ich will meinem Hans (das war der Name des\r\nJüngsten) ein Süppchen kochen zum Abende; der lose Vogel, der Große,\r\nhat mir gestern das Pfännchen zerbrochen, als er sich mit Philippsen\r\num die Scharre des Breis zankte\".--ich fragte nach dem Ältesten, und\r\nsie hatte mir kaum gesagt, daß er sich auf der Wiese mit ein paar\r\nGänsen herumjage, als er gesprungen kam und dem Zweiten eine\r\nHaselgerte mitbrachte. Ich unterhielt mich weiter mit dem Weibe und\r\nerfuhr, daß sie des Schulmeisters Tochter sei, und daß ihr Mann eine\r\nReise in die Schweiz gemacht habe, um die Erbschaft eines Vetters zu\r\nholen.--\"Sie haben ihn drum betriegen wollen\", sagte sie,\"und ihm auf\r\nseine Briefe nicht geantwortet; da ist er selbst hineingegangen. Wenn\r\nihm nur kein Unglück widerfahren ist, ich höre nichts von ihm\".--Es\r\nward mir schwer, mich von dem Weibe los zu machen, gab jedem der\r\nKinder einen Kreuzer, und auch fürs jüngste gab ich ihr einen, ihm\r\neinen Weck zur Suppe mitzubringen, wenn sie in die Stadt ginge, und so\r\nschieden wir von einander.\r\n\r\nIch sage dir, mein Schatz, wenn meine Sinne gar nicht mehr halten\r\nwollen, so lindert all den Tumult der Anblick eines solchen Geschöpfs,\r\ndas in glücklicher Gelassenheit den engen Kreis seines Daseins hingeht,\r\nvon einem Tage zum andern sich durchhilft, die Blätter abfallen sieht\r\nund nichts dabei denkt, als daß der Winter kommt.\r\n\r\nSeit der Zeit bin ich oft draußen. Die Kinder sind ganz an mich\r\ngewöhnt, sie kriegen Zucker, wenn ich Kaffee trinke, und teilen das\r\nButterbrot und die saure Milch mit mir des Abends. Sonntags fehlt\r\nihnen der Kreuzer nie, und wenn ich nicht nach der Betstunde da bin,\r\nso hat die Wirtin Ordre, ihn auszuzahlen.\r\n\r\nSie sind vertraut, erzählen mir allerhand, und besonders ergetze ich\r\nmich an ihren Leidenschaften und simpeln Ausbrüchen des Begehrens,\r\nwenn mehr Kinder aus dem Dorfe sich versammeln.\r\n\r\nViele Mühe hat mich's gekostet, der Mutter ihre Besorgnis zu nehmen,\r\nsie möchten den Herrn inkommodieren.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 30. Mai\r\n\r\nWas ich dir neulich von der Malerei sagte, gilt gewiß auch von der\r\nDichtkunst; es ist nur, daß man das Vortreffliche erkenne und es\r\nauszusprechen wage, und das ist freilich mit wenigem viel gesagt. Ich\r\nhabe heute eine Szene gehabt, die, rein abgeschrieben, die schönste\r\nIdylle von der Welt gäbe; doch was soll Dichtung, Szene und Idylle?\r\nMuß es denn immer gebosselt sein, wenn wir teil an einer\r\nNaturerscheinung nehmen sollen?\r\n\r\nWenn du auf diesen Eingang viel Hohes und Vornehmes erwartest, so bist\r\ndu wieder übel betrogen; es ist nichts als ein Bauerbursch, der mich\r\nzu dieser lebhaften Teilnehmung hingerissen hat. Ich werde, wie\r\ngewöhnlich, schlecht erzählen, und du wirst mich, wie gewöhnlich,\r\ndenk' ich, übertrieben finden; es ist wieder Wahlheim, und immer\r\nWahlheim, das diese Seltenheiten hervorbringt.\r\n\r\nEs war eine Gesellschaft draußen unter den Linden, Kaffee zu trinken.\r\nWeil sie mir nicht ganz anstand, so blieb ich unter einem Vorwande\r\nzurück.\r\n\r\nEin Bauerbursch kam aus einem benachbarten Hause und beschäftigte sich,\r\nan dem Pfluge, den ich neulich gezeichnet hatte, etwas zurecht zu\r\nmachen. Da mir sein Wesen gefiel, redete ich ihn an, fragte nach\r\nseinen Umständen, wir waren bald bekannt und, wie mir's gewöhnlich mit\r\ndieser Art Leuten geht, bald vertraut. Er erzählte mir, daß er bei\r\neiner Witwe in Diensten sei und von ihr gar wohl gehalten werde. Er\r\nsprach so vieles von ihr und lobte sie dergestalt, daß ich bald merken\r\nkonnte, er sei ihr mit Leib und Seele zugetan. Sie sei nicht mehr\r\njung, sagte er, sie sei von ihrem ersten Mann übel gehalten worden,\r\nwolle nicht mehr heiraten, und aus seiner Erzählung leuchtete so\r\nmerklich hervor, wie schön, wie reizend sie für ihn sei, wie sehr er\r\nwünschte, daß sie ihn wählen möchte, um das Andenken der Fehler ihres\r\nersten Mannes auszulöschen, daß ich Wort für Wort wiederholen müßte,\r\num dir die reine Neigung, die Liebe und Treue dieses Menschen\r\nanschaulich zu machen. Ja, ich müßte die Gabe des größten Dichters\r\nbesitzen, um dir zugleich den Ausdruck seiner Gebärden, die Harmonie\r\nseiner Stimme, das heimliche Feuer seiner Blicke lebendig darstellen\r\nzu können. Nein, es sprechen keine Worte die Zartheit aus, die in\r\nseinem ganzen Wesen und Ausdruck war; es ist alles nur plump, was ich\r\nwieder vorbringen könnte. Besonders rührte mich, wie er fürchtete,\r\nich möchte über sein Verhältnis zu ihr ungleich denken und an ihrer\r\nguten Aufführung zweifeln. Wie reizend es war, wenn er von ihrer\r\nGestalt, von ihrem Körper sprach, der ihn ohne jugendliche Reize\r\ngewaltsam an sich zog und fesselte, kann ich mir nur in meiner\r\ninnersten Seele wiederholen. Ich hab' in meinem Leben die dringende\r\nBegierde und das heiße, sehnliche Verlangen nicht in dieser Reinheit\r\ngesehen, ja wohl kann ich sagen, in dieser Reinheit nicht gedacht und\r\ngeträumt. Schelte mich nicht, wenn ich dir sage, daß bei der\r\nErinnerung dieser Unschuld und Wahrheit mir die innerste Seele glüht,\r\nund daß mich das Bild dieser Treue und Zärtlichkeit überall verfolgt,\r\nund daß ich, wie selbst davon entzündet, lechze und schmachte.\r\n\r\nIch will nun suchen, auch sie ehstens zu sehn, oder vielmehr, wenn\r\nich's recht bedenke, ich will's vermeiden. Es ist besser, ich sehe\r\nsie durch die Augen ihres Liebhabers; vielleicht erscheint sie mir vor\r\nmeinen eigenen Augen nicht so, wie sie jetzt vor mir steht, und warum\r\nsoll ich mir das schöne Bild verderben?\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 16. Junius\r\n\r\nWarum ich dir nicht schreibe?--Fragst du das und bist doch auch der\r\nGelehrten einer. Du solltest raten, daß ich mich wohl befinde, und\r\nzwar--kurz und gut, ich habe eine Bekanntschaft gemacht, die mein Herz\r\nnäher angeht. Ich habe--ich weiß nicht.\r\n\r\nDir in der Ordnung zu erzählen, wie's zugegangen ist, daß ich eins der\r\nliebenswürdigsten Geschöpfe habe kennen lernen, wird schwer halten.\r\nIch bin vergnügt und glücklich, und also kein guter Historienschreiber.\r\n\r\n\r\nEinen Engel!--pfui! Das sagt jeder von der Seinigen, nicht wahr? Und\r\ndoch bin ich nicht imstande, dir zu sagen, wie sie vollkommen ist,\r\nwarum sie vollkommen ist; genug, sie hat allen meinen Sinn\r\ngefangengenommen.\r\n\r\nSo viel Einfalt bei so viel Verstand, so viel Güte bei so viel\r\nFestigkeit, und die Ruhe der Seele bei dem wahren Leben und der\r\nTätigkeit.--Das ist alles garstiges Gewäsch, was ich da von ihr sage,\r\nleidige Abstraktionen, die nicht einen Zug ihres Selbst ausdrücken.\r\nEin andermal--nein, nicht ein andermal, jetzt gleich will ich dir's\r\nerzählen. Tu' ich 's jetzt nicht, so geschäh' es niemals. Denn,\r\nunter uns, seit ich angefangen habe zu schreiben, war ich schon\r\ndreimal im Begriffe, die Feder niederzulegen, mein Pferd satteln zu\r\nlassen und hinauszureiten. Und doch schwur ich mir heute früh, nicht\r\nhinauszureiten, und gehe doch alle Augenblick' ans Fenster, zu sehen,\r\nwie hoch die Sonne noch steht.--Ich hab's nicht überwinden können,\r\nich mußte zu ihr hinaus. Da bin ich wieder, Wilhelm, will mein\r\nButterbrot zu Nacht essen und dir schreiben. Welch eine Wonne das für\r\nmeine Seele ist, sie in dem Kreise der lieben, muntern Kinder, ihrer\r\nacht Geschwister, zu sehen!--Wenn ich so fortfahre, wirst du am Ende\r\nso klug sein wie am Anfange. Höre denn, ich will mich zwingen, ins\r\nDetail zu gehen.\r\n\r\nIch schrieb dir neulich, wie ich den Amtmann S. habe kennen lernen,\r\nund wie er mich gebeten habe, ihn bald in seiner Einsiedelei oder\r\nvielmehr seinem kleinen Königreiche zu besuchen. Ich vernachlässigte\r\ndas, und wäre vielleicht nie hingekommen, hätte mir der Zufall nicht\r\nden Schatz entdeckt, der in der stillen Gegend verborgen liegt.\r\n\r\nUnsere jungen Leute hatten einen Ball auf dem Lande angestellt, zu dem\r\nich mich denn auch willig finden ließ. Ich bot einem hiesigen guten,\r\nschönen, übrigens unbedeutenden Mädchen die Hand, und es wurde\r\nausgemacht, daß ich eine Kutsche nehmen, mit meiner Tänzerin und ihrer\r\nBase nach dem Orte der Lustbarkeit hinausfahren und auf dem Wege\r\nCharlotten S. mitnehmen sollte.--\"Sie werden ein schönes Frauenzimmer\r\nkennenlernen\", sagte meine Gesellschafterin, da wir durch den weiten,\r\nausgehauenen Wald nach dem Jagdhause fuhren.--\"Nehmen Sie sich in\r\nacht\", versetzte die Base, \"daß Sie sich nicht verlieben!\"--\"Wieso?\"\r\nsagte ich.--\"Sie ist schon vergeben,\"antwortete jene,\"an einen sehr\r\nbraven Mann, der weggereist ist, seine Sachen in Ordnung zu bringen,\r\nweil sein Vater gestorben ist, und sich um eine ansehnliche Versorgung\r\nzu bewerben\".--Die Nachricht war mir ziemlich gleichgültig.\r\n\r\nDie Sonne war noch eine Viertelstunde vom Gebirge, als wir vor dem\r\nHoftore anfuhren. Es war sehr schwül, und die Frauenzimmer äußerten\r\nihre Besorgnis wegen eines Gewitters, das sich in weißgrauen,\r\ndumpfichten Wölkchen rings am Horizonte zusammenzuziehen schien. Ich\r\ntäuschte ihre Furcht mit anmaßlicher Wetterkunde, ob mir gleich selbst\r\nzu ahnen anfing, unsere Lustbarkeit werde einen Stoß leiden.\r\n\r\nIch war ausgestiegen, und eine Magd, die ans Tor kam, bat uns, einen\r\nAugenblick zu verziehen, Mamsell Lottchen würde gleich kommen. Ich\r\nging durch den Hof nach dem wohlgebauten Hause, und da ich die\r\nvorliegenden Treppen hinaufgestiegen war und in die Tür trat, fiel mir\r\ndas reizendste Schauspiel in die Augen, das ich je gesehen habe. in\r\ndem Vorsaale wimmelten sechs Kinder von eilf zu zwei Jahren um ein\r\nMädchen von schöner Gestalt, mittlerer Größe, die ein simples weißes\r\nKleid, mit blaßroten Schleifen an Arm und Brust, anhatte. Sie hielt\r\nein schwarzes Brot und schnitt ihren Kleinen rings herum jedem sein\r\nStück nach Proportion ihres Alters und Appetits ab, gab's jedem mit\r\nsolcher Freundlichkeit, und jedes rief so ungekünstelt sein \"danke!\",\r\nindem es mit den kleinen Händchen lange in die Höhe gereicht hatte,\r\nehe es noch abgeschnitten war, und nun mit seinem Abendbrote vergnügt\r\nentweder wegsprang, oder nach seinem stillern Charakter gelassen\r\ndavonging nach dem Hoftore zu, um die Fremden und die Kutsche zu sehen,\r\ndarin ihre Lotte wegfahren sollte.--\"Ich bitte um Vergebung\", sagte\r\nsie, \"daß ich Sie hereinbemühe und die Frauenzimmer warten lasse.\r\nÜber dem Anziehen und allerlei Bestellungen fürs Haus in meiner\r\nAbwesenheit habe ich vergessen, meinen Kindern ihr Vesperbrot zu geben,\r\nund sie wollen von niemanden Brot geschnitten haben als von mir\".\r\n\r\nIch machte ihr ein unbedeutendes Kompliment, meine ganze Seele ruhte\r\nauf der Gestalt, dem Tone, dem Betragen, und ich hatte eben Zeit, mich\r\nvon der Überraschung zu erholen, als sie in die Stube lief, ihre\r\nHandschuhe und den Fächer zu holen. Die Kleinen sahen mich in einiger\r\nEntfernung so von der Seite an, und ich ging auf das jüngste los, das\r\nein Kind von der glücklichsten Gesichtsbildung war. Es zog sich\r\nzurück, als eben Lotte zur Türe herauskam und sagte:\"Louis, gib dem\r\nHerrn Vetter eine Hand\".--das tat der Knabe sehr freimütig, und ich\r\nkonnte mich nicht enthalten, ihn, ungeachtet seines kleinen\r\nRotznäschens, herzlich zu küssen.\r\n\r\n\"Vetter?\" sagte ich, indem ich ihr die Hand reichte,\" glauben Sie, daß\r\nich des Glücks wert sei, mit Ihnen verwandt zu sein?\"--\"O\", sagte sie\r\nmit einem leichtfertigen Lächeln, \"unsere Vetterschaft ist sehr\r\nweitläufig, und es wäre mir leid, wenn Sie der schlimmste drunter sein\r\nsollten\".--Im Gehen gab sie Sophien, der ältesten Schwester nach ihr,\r\neinem Mädchen von ungefähr elf Jahren, den Auftrag, wohl auf die\r\nKinder acht zu haben und den Papa zu grüßen, wenn er vom Spazierritte\r\nnach Hause käme. Den Kleinen sagte sie, sie sollten ihrer Schwester\r\nSophie folgen, als wenn sie's selber wäre, das denn auch einige\r\nausdrücklich versprachen. Eine kleine, naseweise Blondine aber, von\r\nungefähr sechs Jahren, sagte: \"du bist's doch nicht, Lottchen, wir\r\nhaben dich doch lieber\".--die zwei ältesten Knaben waren hinten auf\r\ndie Kutsche geklettert, und auf mein Vorbitten erlaubte sie ihnen, bis\r\nvor den Wald mitzufahren, wenn sie versprächen, sich nicht zu necken\r\nund sich recht festzuhalten.\r\n\r\nWir hatten uns kaum zurecht gesetzt, die Frauenzimmer sich bewillkommt,\r\nwechselsweise über den Anzug, vorzüglich über die Hüte ihre\r\nAnmerkungen gemacht und die Gesellschaft, die man erwartete, gehörig\r\ndurchgezogen, als Lotte den Kutscher halten und ihre Brüder\r\nherabsteigen ließ, die noch einmal ihre Hand zu küssen begehrten, das\r\ndenn der älteste mit aller Zärtlichkeit, die dem Alter von fünfzehn\r\nJahren eigen sein kann, der andere mit viel Heftigkeit und Leichtsinn\r\ntat. Sie ließ die Kleinen noch einmal grüßen, und wir fuhren weiter.\r\n\r\nDie Base fragte, ob sie mit dem Buche fertig wäre, das sie ihr neulich\r\ngeschickt hätte.--\"nein\", sagte Lotte,\"es gefällt mir nicht, Sie\r\nkönnen's wiederhaben. Das vorige war auch nicht besser\".--Ich\r\nerstaunte, als ich fragte, was es für Bücher wären, und sie mir\r\nantwortete:--ich fand so viel Charakter in allem, was sie sagte, ich\r\nsah mit jedem Wort neue Reize, neue Strahlen des Geistes aus ihren\r\nGesichtszügen hervorbrechen, die sich nach und nach vergnügt zu\r\nentfalten schienen, weil sie an mir fühlte, daß ich sie verstand.\r\n\r\n\"Wie ich jünger war\", sagte sie, \"liebte ich nichts so sehr als Romane.\r\nWeiß Gott, wie wohl mir's war, wenn ich mich Sonntags in so ein\r\nEckchen setzen und mit ganzem Herzen an dem Glück und Unstern einer\r\nMiß Jonny teilnehmen konnte. Ich leugne auch nicht, daß die Art noch\r\neinige Reize für mich hat. Doch da ich so selten an ein Buch komme,\r\nso muß es auch recht nach meinem Geschmack sein. Und der Autor ist\r\nmir der liebste, in dem ich meine Welt wiederfinde, bei dem es zugeht\r\nwie um mich, und dessen Geschichte mir doch so interessant und\r\nherzlich wird als mein eigen häuslich Leben, das freilich kein\r\nParadies, aber doch im ganzen eine Quelle unsäglicher Glückseligkeit\r\nist\".\r\n\r\nIch bemühte mich, meine Bewegungen über diese Worte zu verbergen. Das\r\nging freilich nicht weit: denn da ich sie mit solcher Wahrheit im\r\nVorbeigehen vom Landpriester von Wakefield, vom--reden hörte, kam ich\r\nganz außer mich, sagte ihr alles, was ich mußte, und bemerkte erst\r\nnach einiger Zeit, da Lotte das Gespräch an die anderen wendete, daß\r\ndiese die Zeit über mit offenen Augen, als säßen sie nicht da,\r\ndagesessen hatten. Die Base sah mich mehr als einmal mit einem\r\nspöttischen Näschen an, daran mir aber nichts gelegen war.\r\n\r\nDas Gespräch fiel aufs Vergnügen am Tanze.--\"wenn diese Leidenschaft\r\nein Fehler ist,\"sagte Lotte, \"so gestehe ich Ihnen gern, ich weiß mir\r\nnichts übers Tanzen. Und wenn ich was im Kopfe habe und mir auf\r\nmeinem verstimmten Klavier einen Contretanz vortrommle, so ist alles\r\nwieder gut\".\r\n\r\nWie ich mich unter dem Gespäche in den schwarzen Augen weidete--wie\r\ndie lebendigen Lippen und die frischen, muntern Wangen meine ganze\r\nSeele anzogen--wie ich, in den herrlichen Sinn ihrer Rede ganz\r\nversunken, oft gar die Worte nicht hörte, mit denen sie sich\r\nausdrückte--davon hast du eine Vorstellung, weil du mich kennst. Kurz,\r\nich stieg aus dem Wagen wie ein Träumender, als wir vor dem Lusthause\r\nstille hielten, und war so in Träumen rings in der dämmernden Welt\r\nverloren, daß ich auf die Musik kaum achtete, die uns von dem\r\nerleuchteten Saal herunter entgegenschallte.\r\n\r\nDie zwei Herren Audran und ein gewisser N. N.--wer behält alle die\r\nNamen--, die der Base und Lottens Tänzer waren, empfingen uns am\r\nSchlage, bemächtigten sich ihrer Frauenzimmer, und ich führte das\r\nmeinige hinauf.\r\n\r\nWir schlangen uns in Menuetts um einander herum; ich forderte ein\r\nFrauenzimmer nach dem andern auf, und just die unleidlichsten konnten\r\nnicht dazu kommen, einem die Hand zu reichen und ein Ende zu machen.\r\nLotte und ihr Tänzer fingen einen Englischen an, und wie wohl mir's\r\nwar, als sie auch in der Reihe die Figur mit uns anfing, magst du\r\nfühlen. Tanzen muß man sie sehen! Siehst du, sie ist so mit ganzem\r\nHerzen und mit ganzer Seele dabei, ihr ganzer Körper eine Harmonie, so\r\nsorglos, so unbefangen, als wenn das eigentlich alles wäre, als wenn\r\nsie sonst nichts dächte, nichts empfände; und in dem Augenblicke gewiß\r\nschwindet alles andere vor ihr.\r\n\r\nIch bat sie um den zweiten Contretanz; sie sagte mit den dritten zu,\r\nund mit der liebenswürdigsten Freimütigkeit von der Welt versicherte\r\nsie mir, daß sie herzlich gern deutsch tanze.--\"Es ist hier so Mode,\r\n\"fuhr sie fort,\" daß jedes Paar, das zusammen gehört, beim Deutschen\r\nzusammenbleibt, und mein Chapeau walzt schlecht und dankt mir's, wenn\r\nich ihm die Arbeit erlasse. Ihr Frauenzimmer kann's auch nicht und\r\nmag nicht, und ich habe im Englischen gesehen, daß Sie gut walzen;\r\nwenn Sie nun mein sein wollen fürs Deutsche, so gehen Sie und bitten\r\nsich's von meinem Herrn aus, und ich will zu Ihrer Dame gehen\".--ich\r\ngab ihr die Hand darauf, und wir machten aus, daß ihr Tänzer\r\ninzwischen meine Tänzerin unterhalten sollte.\r\n\r\nNun ging's an, und wir ergetzten uns eine Weile an manigfaltigen\r\nSchlingungen der Arme. Mit welchem Reize, mit welcher Flüchtigkeit\r\nbewegte sie sich! Und da wir nun gar ans Walzen kamen und wie die\r\nSphären um einander herumrollten, ging's freilich anfangs, weil's die\r\nwenigsten können, ein bißchen bunt durcheinander. Wir waren klug und\r\nließen sie austoben, und als die Ungeschicktesten den Plan geräumt\r\nhatten, fielen wir ein und hielten mit noch einem Paare, mit Audran\r\nund seiner Tänzerin, wacker aus. Nie ist mir's so leicht vom Flecke\r\ngegangen. Ich war kein Mensch mehr. Das liebenswürdigste Geschöpf in\r\nden Armen zu haben und mit ihr herumzufliegen wie Wetter, daß alles\r\nrings umher verging, und--Wilhelm, um ehrlich zu sein, tat ich aber\r\ndoch den Schwur, daß ein Mädchen, das ich liebte, auf das ich\r\nAnsprüche hätte, mir nie mit einem andern walzen sollte als mit mir,\r\nund wenn ich drüber zugrunde gehen müßte. Du verstehst mich!\r\n\r\nWir machten einige Touren gehend im Saale, um zu verschnaufen. Dann\r\nsetzte sie sich, und die Orangen, die ich beiseite gebracht hatte, die\r\nnun die einzigen noch übrigen waren, taten vortreffliche Wirkung, nur\r\ndaß mir mit jedem Schnittchen, das sie einer unbescheidenen Nachbarin\r\nehrenhalben zuteilte, ein Stich durchs Herz ging.\r\n\r\nBeim dritten englischen Tanz waren wir das zweite Paar. Wie wir die\r\nReihe durchtanzten und ich, weiß Gott mit wieviel Wonne, an ihrem Arm\r\nund Auge hing, das voll vom wahrsten Ausdruck des offensten, reinsten\r\nVergnügens war, kommen wir an eine Frau, die mit wegen ihrer\r\nliebenswürdigen Miene auf einem nicht mehr ganz jungen Gesichte\r\nmerkwürdig gewesen war. Sie sieht Lotten lächelnd an, hebt einen\r\ndrohenden Finger auf und nennt den Namen Albert zweimal im\r\nVorbeifliegen mit viel Bedeutung.\r\n\r\n\"Wer ist Albert?\" sagte ich zu Lotten, \"wenn's nicht Vermessenheit\r\nist zu fragen\".--Sie war im Begriff zu antworten, als wir uns scheiden\r\nmußten, um die große Achte zu machen, und mich dünkte einiges\r\nNachdenken auf ihrer Stirn zu sehen, als wir so vor einander\r\nvorbeikreuzten.--\"Was soll ich's Ihnen leugnen,\" sagte sie, indem sie\r\nmir die Hand zur Promenade bot. \"Albert ist ein braver Mensch, dem\r\nich so gut als verlobt bin\".--nun war mir das nichts Neues (denn die\r\nMädchen hatten mir's auf dem Wege gesagt) und war mir doch so ganz neu,\r\nweil ich es noch nicht im Verhältnis auf sie, die mir in so wenig\r\nAugenblicken so wert geworden war, gedacht hatte. Genug, ich\r\nverwirrte mich, vergaß mich und kam zwischen das unrechte Paar hinein,\r\ndaß alles drunter und drüber ging und Lottens ganze Gegenwart und\r\nZerren und Ziehen nötig war, um es schnell wieder in Ordnung zu\r\nbringen.\r\n\r\nDer Tanz war noch nicht zu Ende, als die Blitze, die wir schon lange\r\nam Horizonte leuchten gesehn und die ich immer für Wetterkühlen\r\nausgegeben hatte, viel stärker zu werden anfingen und der Donner die\r\nMusik überstimmte. Drei Frauenzimmer liefen aus der Reihe, denen ihre\r\nHerren folgten; die Unordnung wurde allgemein, und die Musik hörte auf.\r\nEs ist natürlich, wenn uns ein Unglück oder etwas Schreckliches im\r\nVergnügen überrascht, daß es stärkere Eindrücke auf uns macht als\r\nsonst, teils wegen des Gegensatzes, der sich so lebhaft empfinden läßt,\r\nteils und noch mehr, weil unsere Sinne einmal der Fühlbarkeit\r\ngeöffnet sind und also desto schneller einen Eindruck annehmen.\r\nDiesen Ursachen muß ich die wunderbaren Grimassen zuschreiben, in die\r\nich mehrere Frauenzimmer ausbrechen sah. Die klügste setzte sich in\r\neine Ecke, mit dem Rücken gegen vor ihr nieder und verbarg den Kopf in\r\nder erster Schoß. Eine dritte schob sich zwischen beide hinein und\r\numfaßte ihre Schwesterchen mit tausend Tränen. Einige wollten nach\r\nHause; andere, die noch weniger wußten, was sie taten, hatten nicht so\r\nviel Besinnungskraft, den Keckheiten unserer jungen Schlucker zu\r\nsteuern, die sehr beschäftigt zu sein schienen, alle die ängstlichen\r\nGebete, die dem Himmel bestimmt waren, von den Lippen der schönen\r\nBedrängten wegzufangen. Einige unserer Herren hatten sich\r\nhinabbegeben, um ein Pfeifchen in Ruhe zu rauchen; und die übrige\r\nGesellschaft schlug es nicht aus, als die Wirtin auf den klugen\r\nEinfall kam, uns ein Zimmer anzuweisen, das Läden und Vorhänge hätte.\r\nKaum waren wir da angelangt, als Lotte beschäftigt war, einen Kreis\r\nvon Stühlen zu stellen und, als sich die Gesellschaft auf ihre Bitte\r\ngesetzt hatte, den Vortrag zu einem Spiele zu tun.\r\n\r\nIch sah manchen, der in Hoffnung auf ein saftiges Pfand sein Mäulchen\r\nspitzte und seine Glieder reckte.--\"Wir spielen Zählens!\" sagte sie.\r\n\"Nun gebt acht! Ich geh' im Kreise herum von der Rechten zur Linken,\r\nund so zählt ihr auch rings herum, jeder die Zahl, die an ihn kommt,\r\nund das muß gehen wie ein Lauffeuer, und wer stockt oder sich irrt,\r\nkriegt eine Ohrfeige, und so bis tausend\".--nun war das lustig\r\nanzusehen: sie ging mit ausgestrecktem Arm im Kreise herum. \"Eins\",\r\nfing der erste an, der Nachbar \"zwei\", \"drei\" der folgende, und so\r\nfort. Dann fing sie an, geschwinder zu gehen, immer geschwinder; da\r\nversah's einer: Patsch! Eine Ohrfeige, und über das Gelächter der\r\nfolgende auch: Patsch! Und immer geschwinder. Ich selbst kriegte\r\nzwei Maulschellen und glaubte mit innigem Vergnügen zu bemerken, daß\r\nsie stärker seien, als sie den übrigen zuzumessen pflegte. Ein\r\nallgemeines Gelächter und Geschwärm endigte das Spiel, ehe noch das\r\nTausend ausgezählt war. Die Vertrautesten zogen einander beiseite,\r\ndas Gewitter war vorüber, und ich folgte Lotten in den Saal.\r\nUnterwegs sagte sie:\"über die Ohrfeigen haben sie Wetter und alles\r\nvergessen!\"--ich konnte ihr nichts antworten.--\"ich war\", fuhr sie\r\nfort, \"eine der Furchtsamsten, und indem ich mich herzhaft stellte, um\r\nden andern Mut zu geben, bin ich mutig geworden\".--Wir traten ans\r\nFenster. Es donnerte abseitwärts, und der herrliche Regen säuselte\r\nauf das Land, und der erquickendste Wohlgeruch stieg in aller Fülle\r\neiner warmen Luft zu uns auf. Sie stand auf ihren Ellenbogen gestützt,\r\nihr Blick durchdrang die Gegend; sie sah gen Himmel und auf mich, ich\r\nsah ihr Auge tränenvoll, sie legte ihre Hand auf die meinige und sagte:\r\n\"Klopstock!\"--Ich erinnerte mich sogleich der herrlichen Ode, die ihr\r\nin Gedanken lag, und versank in dem Strome von Empfindungen, den sie\r\nin dieser Losung über mich ausgoß. Ich ertrug's nicht, neigte mich\r\nauf ihre Hand und küßte sie unter den wonnevollsten Tränen. Und sah\r\nnach ihrem Auge wieder--Edler! Hättest du deine Vergötterung in\r\ndiesem Blicke gesehen, und möcht' ich nun deinen so oft entweihten\r\nNamen nie wieder nennen hören!\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 19. Junius\r\n\r\nWo ich neulich mit meiner Erzählung geblieben bin, weiß ich nicht mehr;\r\ndas weiß ich, daß es zwei Uhr des Nachts war, als ich zu Bette kam,\r\nund daß, wenn ich dir hätte vorschwatzen können, statt zu schreiben,\r\nich dich vielleicht bis an den Morgen aufgehalten hätte.\r\n\r\nWas auf unserer Hereinfahrt vom Balle geschehen ist, habe ich noch\r\nnicht erzählt, habe auch heute keinen Tag dazu.\r\n\r\nEs war der herrlichste Sonnenaufgang. Der tröpfelnde Wald und das\r\nerfrischte Feld umher! Unsere Gesellschafterinnen nickten ein. Sie\r\nfragte mich, ob ich nicht auch von der Partie sein wollte; ihretwegen\r\nsollt' ich unbekümmert sein.--\"So lange ich diese Augen offen sehe\",\r\nsagte ich und sah sie fest an,\"so lange hat's keine Gefahr\".--Und wir\r\nhaben beide ausgehalten bis an ihr Tor, da ihr die Magd leise\r\naufmachte und auf ihr Fragen versicherte, daß Vater und Kleine wohl\r\nseien und alle noch schliefen. Da verließ ich sie mit der Bitte, sie\r\nselbigen Tags noch sehen zu dürfen; sie gestand mir's zu, und ich bin\r\ngekommen--und seit der Zeit können Sonne, Mond und Sterne geruhig ihre\r\nWirtschaft treiben, ich weiß weder daß Tag noch daß Nacht ist, und die\r\nganze Welt verliert sich um mich her.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 21. Junius\r\n\r\nIch lebe so glückliche Tage, wie sie Gott seinen Heiligen ausspart;\r\nund mit mir mag werden was will, so darf ich nicht sagen, daß ich die\r\nFreuden, die reinsten Freuden des Lebens nicht genossen habe.--du\r\nkennst mein Wahlheim; dort bin ich völlig etabliert, von da habe ich\r\nnur eine halbe Stunde zu Lotten, dort fühl' ich mich selbst und alles\r\nGlück, das dem Menschen gegeben ist.\r\n\r\nHätt' ich gedacht, als ich mir Wahlheim zum Zwecke meiner Spaziergänge\r\nwählte, daß es so nahe am Himmel läge! Wie oft habe ich das Jagdhaus,\r\ndas nun alle meine Wünsche einschließt, auf meinen weiten Wanderungen,\r\nbald vom Berge, bald von der Ebne über den Fluß gesehn!\r\n\r\nLieber Wilhelm, ich habe allerlei nachgedacht, über die Begier im\r\nMenschen, sich auszubreiten, neue Entdeckungen zu machen,\r\nherumzuschweifen; und dann wieder über den inneren Trieb, sich der\r\nEinschränkung willig zu ergeben, in dem Gleise der Gewohnheit so\r\nhinzufahren und sich weder um Rechts noch um Links zu bekümmern.\r\n\r\nEs ist wunderbar: wie ich hierher kam und vom Hügel in das schöne Tal\r\nschaute, wie es mich rings umher anzog.--dort das Wäldchen!--ach\r\nkönntest du dich in seine Schatten mischen!--dort die Spitze des\r\nBerges!--ach könntest du von da die weite Gegend überschauen!--die in\r\neinander geketteten Hügel und vertraulichen Täler!--o könnte ich mich\r\nin ihnen verlieren!--ich eilte hin, und kehrte zurück, und hatte nicht\r\ngefunden, was ich hoffte. O es ist mit der Ferne wie mit der Zukunft!\r\nEin großes dämmerndes Ganze ruht vor unserer Seele, unsere Empfindung\r\nverschwimmt darin wie unser Auge, und wir sehnen uns, ach! Unser\r\nganzes Wesen hinzugeben, uns mit aller Wonne eines einzigen, großen,\r\nherrlichen Gefühls ausfüllen zu lassen.--und ach! Wenn wir hinzueilen,\r\nwenn das Dort nun Hier wird, ist alles vor wie nach, und wir stehen\r\nin unserer Armut, in unserer Eingeschränktheit, und unsere Seele\r\nlechzt nach entschlüpftem Labsale.\r\n\r\nSo sehnt sich der unruhigste Vagabund zuletzt wieder nach seinem\r\nVaterlande und findet in seiner Hütte, an der Brust seiner Gattin, in\r\ndem Kreise seiner Kinder, in den Geschäften zu ihrer Erhaltung die\r\nWonne, die er in der weiten Welt vergebens suchte.\r\n\r\nWenn ich des Morgens mit Sonnenaufgange hinausgehe nach meinem\r\nWahlheim und dort im Wirtsgarten mir meine Zuckererbsen selbst pflücke,\r\nmich hinsetze, sie abfädne und dazwischen in meinem Homer lese; wenn\r\nich in der kleinen Küche mir einen Topf wähle, mir Butter aussteche,\r\nSchoten ans Feuer stelle, zudecke und mich dazusetze, sie manchmal\r\numzuschütteln: da fühl' ich so lebhaft, wie die übermütigen Freier der\r\nPenelope Ochsen und Schweine schlachten, zerlegen und braten. Es ist\r\nnichts, das mich so mit einer stillen, wahren Empfindung ausfüllte als\r\ndie Züge patriarchalischen Lebens, die ich, Gott sei Dank, ohne\r\nAffektation in meine Lebensart verweben kann.\r\n\r\nWie wohl ist mir's, daß mein Herz die simple, harmlose Wonne des\r\nMenschen fühlen kann, der ein Krauthaupt auf seinen Tisch bringt, das\r\ner selbst gezogen, und nun nicht den Kohl allein, sondern all die\r\nguten Tage, den schönen Morgen, da er ihn pflanzte, die lieblichen\r\nAbende, da er ihn begoß, und da er an dem fortschreitenden Wachstum\r\nseine Freude hatte, alle in einem Augenblicke wieder mitgenießt.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 29. Junius\r\n\r\nVorgestern kam der Medikus hier aus der Stadt hinaus zum Amtmann und\r\nfand mich auf der Erde unter Lottens Kindern, wie einige auf mir\r\nherumkrabbelten, andere mich neckten, und wie ich sie kitzelte und ein\r\ngroßes Geschrei mit ihnen erregte. Der Doktor, der eine sehr\r\ndogmatische Drahtpuppe ist, unterm Reden seine Manschetten in Falten\r\nlegt und einen Kräusel ohne Ende herauszupft, fand dieses unter der\r\nWürde eines gescheiten Menschen; das merkte ich an seiner Nase. Ich\r\nließ mich aber in nichts stören, ließ ihn sehr vernünftige Sachen\r\nabhandeln und baute den Kindern ihre Kartenhäuser wieder, die sie\r\nzerschlagen hatten. Auch ging er darauf in der Stadt herum und\r\nbeklagte, des Amtmanns Kinder wären so schon ungezogen genug, der\r\nWerther verderbe sie nun völlig.\r\n\r\nJa, lieber Wilhelm, meinem Herzen sind die Kinder am nächsten auf der\r\nErde. Wenn ich ihnen zusehe und in dem kleinen Dinge die Keime aller\r\nTugenden, aller Kräfte sehe, die sie einmal so nötig brauchen werden;\r\nwenn ich in dem Eigensinne künftige Standhaftigkeit und Festigkeit des\r\nCharakters, in dem Mutwillen guten Humor und Leichtigkeit, über die\r\nGefahren der Welt hinzuschlüpfen, erblicke, alles so unverdorben, so\r\nganz!--immer, immer wiederhole ich dann die goldenen Worte des Lehrers\r\nder Menschen:\"wenn ihr nicht werdet wie eines von diesen!\" und nun,\r\nmein Bester, sie, die unseresgleichen sind, die wir als unsere Muster\r\nansehen sollten, behandeln wir als Untertanen. Sie sollen keinen\r\nWillen haben!--haben wir denn keinen? Und wo liegt das\r\nVorrecht?--weil wir älter sind und gescheiter!--guter Gott von deinem\r\nHimmel, alte Kinder siehst du und junge Kinder, und nichts weiter; und\r\nan welchen du mehr Freude hast, das hat dein Sohn schon lange\r\nverkündigt. Aber sie glauben an ihn und hören ihn nicht--das ist auch\r\nwas Altes!--und bilden ihre Kinder nach sich und--Adieu, Wilhelm! Ich\r\nmag darüber nicht weiter radotieren.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 1. Julius\r\n\r\nWas Lotte einem Kranken sein muß, fühl' ich an meinem eigenen Herzen,\r\ndas übler dran ist als manches, das auf dem Siechbette verschmachtet.\r\nSie wird einige Tage in der Stadt bei einer rechtschaffnen Frau\r\nzubringen, die sich nach der Aussage der Ärzte ihrem Ende naht und in\r\ndiesen letzten Augenblicken Lotten um sich haben will. Ich war vorige\r\nWoche mir ihr, den Pfarrer von St. zu besuchen; ein Örtchen, das eine\r\nStunde seitwärts im Gebirge liegt. Wir kamen gegen vier dahin. Lotte\r\nhatte ihre zweite Schwester mitgenommen. Als wir in den mit zwei\r\nhohen Nußbäumen überschatteten Pfarrhof traten, saß der gute alte Mann\r\nauf einer Bank vor der Haustür, und da er Lotten sah, ward er wie neu\r\nbelebt, vergaß seinen Knotenstock und wagte sich auf, ihr entgegen.\r\nSie lief hin zu ihm, nötigte ihn sich niederzulassen, indem sie sich\r\nzu ihm setzte, brachte viele Grüße von ihrem Vater, herzte seinen\r\ngarstigen, schmutzigen jüngsten Buben, das Quakelchen seines Alters.\r\nDu hättest sie sehen sollen, wie sie den Alten beschäftigte, wie sie\r\nihre Stimme erhob, um seinen halb tauben Ohren vernehmlich zu werden,\r\nwie sie ihm von jungen, robusten Leuten erzählte, die unvermutet\r\ngestorben wären, von der Vortrefflichkeit des Karlsbades, und wie sie\r\nseinen Entschluß lobte, künftigen Sommer hinzugehen, wie sie fand, daß\r\ner viel besser aussähe, viel munterer sei als das letztemal, da sie\r\nihn gesehn.--ich hatte indes der Frau Pfarrerin meine Höflichkeiten\r\ngemacht. Der Alte wurde ganz munter, und da ich nicht umhin konnte,\r\ndie schönen Nußbäume zu loben, die uns so lieblich beschatteten, fing\r\ner an, uns, wiewohl mit einiger Beschwerlichkeit, die Geschichte davon\r\nzu geben.--\"den alten\", sagte er,\"wissen wir nicht, wer den gepflanzt\r\nhat; einige sagen dieser, andere jener Pfarrer. Der jüngere aber dort\r\nhinten ist so alt als meine Frau, im Oktober funfzig Jahr. Ihr Vater\r\npflanzte ihn des Morgens, als sie gegen Abend geboren wurde. Er war\r\nmein Vorfahr im Amt, und wie lieb ihm der Baum war, ist nicht zu sagen;\r\nmir ist er's gewiß nicht weniger. Meine Frau saß darunter auf einem\r\nBalken und strickte, da ich vor siebenundzwanzig Jahren als ein armer\r\nStudent zum erstenmale hier in den Hof kam\".--Lotte fragte nach seiner\r\nTochter; es hieß, sie sei mit Herrn Schmidt auf die Wiese hinaus zu\r\nden Arbeitern, und der Alte fuhr in seiner Erzählung fort: wie sein\r\nVorfahr ihn liebgewonnen und die Tochter dazu, und wie er erst sein\r\nVikar und dann sein Nachfolger geworden. Die Geschichte war nicht\r\nlange zu Ende, als die Jungfer Pfarrerin mit dem sogenannten Herrn\r\nSchmidt durch den Garten herkam: sie bewillkommte Lotten mit\r\nherzlicher Wärme, und ich muß sagen, sie gefiel mir nicht übel; eine\r\nrasche, wohlgewachsene Brünette, die einen die kurze Zeit über auf dem\r\nLande wohl unterhalten hätte. Ihr Liebhaber (denn als solchen stellte\r\nsich Herr Schmidt gleich dar), ein feiner, doch stiller Mensch, der\r\nsich nicht in unsere Gespräche mischen wollte, ob ihn gleich Lotte\r\nimmer hereinzog. Was mich am meisten betrübte, war, daß ich an seinen\r\nGesichtszügen zu bemerken schien, es sei mehr Eigensinn und übler\r\nHumor als Eingeschränktheit des Verstandes, der ihn sich mitzuteilen\r\nhinderte. In der Folge ward dies leider nur zu deutlich; denn als\r\nFriederike beim Spazierengehen mit Lotten und gelegentlich auch mit\r\nmir ging, wurde des Herrn Angesicht, das ohnedies einer bräunlichen\r\nFarbe war, so sichtlich verdunkelt, daß es Zeit war, daß Lotte mich\r\nbeim Ärmel zupfte und mir zu verstehn gab, daß ich mit Friederiken zu\r\nartig getan. Nun verdrießt mich nichts mehr, als wenn die Menschen\r\neinander plagen, am meisten, wenn junge Leute in der Blüte des Lebens,\r\nda sie am offensten für alle Freuden sein könnten, einander die paar\r\nguten Tage mit Fratzen verderben und nur erst zu spät das\r\nUnersetzliche ihrer Verschwendung einsehen. Mich wurmte das, und ich\r\nkonnte nicht umhin, da wir gegen Abend in den Pfarrhof zurückkehrten\r\nund an einem Tische Milch aßen und das Gespräch auf Freude und Leid\r\nder Welt sich wendete, den Faden zu ergreifen und recht herzlich gegen\r\ndie üble Laune zu reden.--\"wir Menschen beklagen uns oft\", fing ich an,\r\n\"daß der guten Tage so wenig sind und der schlimmen so viel, und, wie\r\nmich dünkt, meist mit Unrecht. Wenn wir immer ein offenes Herz hätten,\r\ndas Gute zu genießen, das uns Gott für jeden Tag bereitet, wir würden\r\nalsdann auch Kraft genug haben, das Übel zu tragen, wenn es kommt\".\r\n--\"Wir haben aber unser Gemüt nicht in unserer Gewalt\", versetzte die\r\nPfarrerin, \"wie viel hängt vom Körper ab! Wenn einem nicht wohl ist,\r\nist's einem überall nicht recht\".--Ich gestand ihr das ein.--\"Wir\r\nwollen es also\", fuhr ich fort,\"als eine Krankheit ansehen und fragen,\r\nob dafür kein Mittel ist?\"--\"Das läßt sich hören\", sagte Lotte, \"ich\r\nglaube wenigstens, daß viel von uns abhängt. Ich weiß es an mir.\r\nWenn mich etwas neckt und mich verdrießlich machen will, spring' ich\r\nauf und sing' ein paar Contretänze den Garten auf und ab, gleich ist's\r\nweg\".--\"das war's, was ich sagen wollte,\"versetzte ich,\"es ist mit der\r\nüblen Laune völlig wie mit der Trägheit, denn es ist eine Art von\r\nTrägheit. Unsere Natur hängt sehr dahin, und doch, wenn wir nur\r\neinmal die Kraft haben, uns zu ermannen, geht uns die Arbeit frisch\r\nvon der Hand, und wir finden in der Tätigkeit ein wahres Vergnügen\".\r\n--Friederike war sehr aufmerksam, und der junge Mensch wandte mir ein,\r\ndaß man nicht Herr über sich selbst sei und am wenigsten über seine\r\nEmpfindungen gebieten könne.--\"es ist hier die Frage von einer\r\nunangenehmen Empfindung\", versetzte ich, \"die doch jedermann gerne los\r\nist; und niemand weiß, wie weit seine Kräfte gehen, bis er sie\r\nversucht hat. Gewiß, wer krank ist, wird bei allen Ärzten herumfragen,\r\nund die größten Resignationen, die bittersten Arzeneien wird er nicht\r\nabweisen, um seine gewünschte Gesundheit zu erhalten\".--ich bemerkte,\r\ndaß der ehrliche Alte sein Gehör anstrengte, um an unserm Diskurse\r\nteilzunehmen, ich erhob die Stimme, indem ich die Rede gegen ihn\r\nwandte\". Man predigt gegen so viele Laster\", sagte ich, \"ich habe\r\nnoch nie gehört, daß man gegen die üble Laune vom Predigtstuhle\r\ngearbeitet hätte.--\"Das müßten die Stadtpfarrer tun\", sagte er, \"die\r\nBauern haben keinen bösen Humor; doch könnte es auch zuweilen nicht\r\nschaden, es wäre eine Lektion für seine Frau wenigstens und für den\r\nHerrn Amtmann\".--Die Gesellschaft lachte, und er herzlich mit, bis er\r\nin einen Husten verfiel, der unsern Diskurs eine Zeitlang unterbrach;\r\ndarauf denn der junge Mensch wieder das Wort nahm: \"Sie nannten den\r\nbösen Humor ein Laster; mich deucht, das ist übertrieben\".--\"Mit\r\nnichten\", gab ich zur Antwort, \"wenn das, womit man sich selbst und\r\nseinem Nächsten schadet, diesen Namen verdient. Ist es nicht genug,\r\ndaß wir einander nicht glücklich machen können, müssen wir auch noch\r\neinander das Vergnügen rauben, das jedes Herz sich noch manchmal\r\nselbst gewähren kann? Und nennen Sie mir den Menschen, der übler\r\nLaune ist und so brav dabei, sie zu verbergen, sie allein zu tragen,\r\nohne die Freude um sich her zu zerstören! Oder ist sie nicht vielmehr\r\nein innerer Unmut über unsere eigene Unwürdigkeit, ein Mißfallen an\r\nuns selbst, das immer mit einem Neide verknüpft ist, der durch eine\r\ntörichte Eitelkeit aufgehetzt wird? Wir sehen glückliche Menschen,\r\ndie wir nicht glücklich machen, und das ist unerträglich\".--Lotte\r\nlächelte mich an, da sie die Bewegung sah, mit der ich redete, und\r\neine Träne in Friederikens Auge spornte mich fortzufahren.--\"Wehe\r\ndenen\", sagte ich, \"die sich der Gewalt bedienen, die sie über ein\r\nHerz haben, um ihm die einfachen Freuden zu rauben, die aus ihm selbst\r\nhervorkeimen. Alle Geschenke, alle Gefälligkeiten der Welt ersetzen\r\nnicht einen Augenblick Vergnügen an sich selbst, den uns eine\r\nneidische Unbehaglichkeit unsers Tyrannen vergällt hat\".\r\n\r\nMein ganzes Herz war voll in diesem Augenblicke; die Erinnerung so\r\nmanches Vergangenen drängte sich an meine Seele, und die Tränen kamen\r\nmir in die Augen.\r\n\r\n\"Wer sich das nur täglich sagte\",rief ich aus,\"du vermagst nichts auf\r\ndeine Freunde, als ihnen ihre Freuden zu lassen und ihr Glück zu\r\nvermehren, indem du es mit ihnen genießest. Vermagst du, wenn ihre\r\ninnere Seele von einer ängstigenden Leidenschaft gequält, vom Kummer\r\nzerrüttet ist, ihnen einen Tropfen Linderung zu geben?\r\n\r\nUnd wenn die letzte, bangste Krankheit dann über das Geschöpf herfällt,\r\ndas du in blühenden Tagen untergraben hast, und sie nun daliegt in\r\ndem erbärmlichsten Ermatten, das Auge gefühllos gen Himmel sieht, der\r\nTodesschweiß auf der blassen Stirne abwechselt, und du vor dem Bette\r\nstehst wie ein Verdammter, in dem innigsten Gefühl, daß du nichts\r\nvermagst mit deinem ganzen Vermögen, und die Angst dich inwendig\r\nkrampft, daß du alles hingeben möchtest, dem untergehenden Geschöpfe\r\neinen Tropfen Stärkung, einen Funken Mut einflößen zu können\".\r\n\r\nDie Erinnerung einer solchen Szene, wobei ich gegenwärtig war, fiel\r\nmit ganzer Gewalt bei diesen Worten über mich. Ich nahm das\r\nSchnupftuch vor die Augen und verließ die Gesellschaft, und nur\r\nLottens Stimme, die mir rief, wir wollten fort, brachte mich zu mir\r\nselbst. Und wie sie mich auf dem Wege schalt über den zu warmen\r\nAnteil an allem, und daß ich drüber zugrunde gehen würde! Daß ich\r\nmich schonen sollte!--O der Engel! Um deinetwillen muß ich leben!\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 6. Julius\r\n\r\nSie ist immer um ihre sterbende Freundin, und ist immer dieselbe,\r\nimmer das gegenwärtige, holde Geschöpf, das, wo sie hinsieht,\r\nSchmerzen lindert und Glückliche macht. Sie ging gestern abend mit\r\nMarianen und dem kleinen Malchen spazieren, ich wußte es und traf sie\r\nan, und wir gingen zusammen. Nach einem Wege von anderthalb Stunden\r\nkamen wir gegen die Stadt zurück, an den Brunnen, der mir so wert und\r\nnun tausendmal werter ist. Lotte setzte sich aufs Mäuerchen, wir\r\nstanden vor ihr. Ich sah umher, ach, und die Zeit, da mein Herz so\r\nallein war, lebte wieder vor mir auf.--\"Lieber Brunnen\", sagte ich,\r\n\"seither hab' ich nicht mehr an deiner Kühle geruht, hab' in eilendem\r\nVorübergehn dich manchmal nicht angesehn\".--Ich blickte hinab und sah,\r\ndaß Malchen mit einem Glase Wasser sehr beschäftigt heraufstieg.--Ich\r\nsah Lotten an und fühlte alles, was ich an ihr habe. Indem kommt\r\nMalchen mit einem Glase. Mariane wollt' es ihr abnehmen: \"nein!\"\r\nrief das Kind mit dem süßesten Ausdrucke,\"nein, Lottchen, du sollst\r\nzuerst trinken!\"--ich ward über die Wahrheit, über die Güte, womit sie\r\ndas ausrief, so entzückt, daß ich meine Empfindung mit nichts\r\nausdrücken konnte, als ich nahm das Kind von der Erde und küßte es\r\nlebhaft, das sogleich zu schreien und zu weinen anfing.--\"Sie haben\r\nübel getan\", sagte Lotte.--Ich war betroffen.--\"komm, Malchen, \"fuhr\r\nsie fort, indem sie es bei der Hand nahm und die Stufen hinabführte,\r\n\"da wasche dich aus der frischen Quelle geschwind, geschwind, da tut's\r\nnichts\".--Wie ich so dastand und zusah, mit welcher Emsigkeit das\r\nKleine seinen nassen Händchen die Backen rieb, mit welchem Glauben,\r\ndaß durch die Wunderquelle alle Verunreinigung abgespült und die\r\nSchmach abgetan würde, einen häßlichen Bart zu kriegen; wie Lotte\r\nsagte: \"es ist genug!\" und das Kind doch immer eifrig fortwusch, als\r\nwenn Viel mehr täte als Wenig--ich sage dir, Wilhelm, ich habe mit\r\nmehr Respekt nie einer Taufhandlung beigewohnt; und als Lotte\r\nheraufkam, hätte ich mich gern vor ihr niedergeworfen wie vor einem\r\nPropheten, der die Schulden einer Nation weggeweiht hat.\r\n\r\nDes Abends konnte ich nicht umhin, in der Freude meines Herzens den\r\nVorfall einem Manne zu erzählen, dem ich Menschensinn zutraute, weil\r\ner Verstand hat; aber wie kam ich an! Er sagte, das sei sehr übel von\r\nLotten gewesen; man solle den Kindern nichts weis machen; dergleichen\r\ngebe zu unzähligen Irrtümern und Aberglauben Anlaß, wovor man die\r\nKinder frühzeitig bewahren müsse.--nun fiel mir ein, daß der Mann vor\r\nacht Tagen hatte taufen lassen, drum ließ ich's vorbeigehen und blieb\r\nin meinem Herzen der Wahrheit getreu: wir sollen es mit den Kindern\r\nmachen wie Gott mit uns, der uns am glücklichsten macht, wenn er uns\r\nin freundlichem Wahne so hintaumeln läßt.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 8. Julius\r\n\r\nWas man ein Kind ist! Was man nach so einem Blicke geizt! Was man\r\nein Kind ist!--Wir waren nach Wahlheim gegangen. Die Frauenzimmer\r\nfuhren hinaus, und während unserer Spaziergänge glaubte ich in Lottens\r\nschwarzen Augen--ich bin ein Tor, verzeih mir's! Du solltest sie\r\nsehen, diese Augen.--Daß ich kurz bin (denn die Augen fallen mir zu\r\nvor Schlaf): siehe, die Frauenzimmer stiegen ein, da standen um die\r\nKutsche der junge W., Selstadt und Audran und ich. Da ward aus dem\r\nSchlage geplaudert mit den Kerlchen, die freilich leicht und lüftig\r\ngenug waren.--ich suchte Lottens Augen: ach, sie gingen von einem zum\r\nandern! Aber auf mich! Mich! Mich! Der ganz allein auf sie\r\nresigniert dastand, fielen sie nicht!--Mein Herz sagte ihr tausend\r\nAdieu! Und sie sah mich nicht! Die Kutsche fuhr vorbei, und eine\r\nTräne stand mir im Auge. Ich sah ihr nach und sah Lottens Kopfputz\r\nsich zum Schlage herauslehnen, und sie wandte sich um zu sehen, ach!\r\nNach mir?--Lieber! In dieser Ungewißheit schwebe ich; das ist mein\r\nTrost: vielleicht hat sie sich nach mir umgesehen! Vielleicht!--Gute\r\nNacht! O, was ich ein Kind bin!\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 10. Julius\r\n\r\nDie alberne Figur, die ich mache, wenn in Gesellschaft von ihr\r\ngesprochen wird, solltest du sehen! Wenn man mich nun gar fragt, wie\r\nsie mir gefällt?--gefällt! Das Wort hasse ich auf den Tod. Was muß\r\ndas für ein Mensch sein, dem Lotte gefällt, dem sie nicht alle Sinne,\r\nalle Empfindungen ausfüllt! Gefällt! Gefällt! Neulich fragte mich\r\neiner, wie mir Ossian gefiele!\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 11. Julius\r\n\r\nFrau M. ist sehr schlecht; ich bete für ihr Leben, weil ich mit Lotten\r\ndulde. Ich sehe sie selten bei einer Freundin, und heute hat sie mir\r\neinen wunderbaren Vorfall erzählt.--der alte M. ist ein geiziger,\r\nrangiger Filz, der seine Frau im Leben was Rechts geplagt und\r\neingeschränkt hat; doch hat sich die Frau immer durchzuhelfen gewußt.\r\nVor wenigen Tagen, als der Arzt ihr das Leben abgesprochen hatte, ließ\r\nsie ihren Mann kommen (Lotte war im Zimmer) und redete ihn also an:\r\n\"ich muß dir eine Sache gestehen, die nach meinem Tode Verwirrung und\r\nVerdruß machen könnte. Ich habe bisher die Haushaltung geführt, so\r\nordentlich und sparsam als möglich; allein du wirst mir verzeihen, daß\r\nich dich diese dreißig Jahre her hintergangen habe. Du bestimmtest im\r\nAnfange unserer Heirat ein Geringes für die Bestreitung der Küche und\r\nanderer häuslichen Ausgaben. Als unsere Haushaltung stärker wurde,\r\nunser Gewerbe größer, warst du nicht zu bewegen, mein Wochengeld nach\r\ndem Verhältnisse zu vermehren; kurz, du weißt, daß du in den Zeiten,\r\nda sie am größten war, verlangtest, ich solle mit sieben Gulden die\r\nWoche auskommen.\r\n\r\nDie habe ich denn ohne Widerrede genommen und mir den Überschuß\r\nwöchentlich aus der Losung geholt, da niemand vermutete, daß die Frau\r\ndie Kasse bestehlen würde. Ich habe nichts verschwendet und wäre auch,\r\nohne es zu bekennen, getrost der Ewigkeit entgegengegangen, wenn\r\nnicht diejenige, die nach mir das Hauswesen zu führen hat, sich nicht\r\nzu helfen wissen würde, und du doch immer darauf bestehen könntest,\r\ndeine erste Frau sei damit ausgekommen\".\r\n\r\nIch redete mit Lotten über die unglaubliche Verblendung des\r\nMenschensinns, daß einer nicht argwohnen soll, dahinter müsse was\r\nanders stecken, wenn eins mit sieben Gulden hinreicht, wo man den\r\nAufwand vielleicht um zweimal so viel sieht. Aber ich habe selbst\r\nLeute gekannt, die des Propheten ewiges Ölkrüglein ohne Verwunderung\r\nin ihrem Hause angenommen hätten.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 13. Julius\r\n\r\nNein, ich betrüge mich nicht! Ich lese in ihren schwarzen Augen wahre\r\nTeilnehmung an mir und meinem Schicksal. Ja ich fühle, und darin darf\r\nich meinem Herzen trauen, daß sie--o darf ich, kann ich den Himmel in\r\ndiesen Worten aussprechen?--daß sie mich liebt!\r\n\r\nMich liebt!--und wie wert ich mir selbst werde, wie ich--dir darf\r\nich's wohl sagen, du hast Sinn für so etwas--wie ich mich selbst\r\nanbete, seitdem sie mich liebt!\r\n\r\nOb das Vermessenheit ist oder Gefühl des wahren Verhältnisses?--ich\r\nkenne den Menschen nicht, von dem ich etwas in Lottens Herzen\r\nfürchtete. Und doch--wenn sie von ihrem Bräutigam spricht, mit\r\nsolcher Wärme, solcher Liebe von ihm spricht--da ist mir's wie einem,\r\nder aller seiner Ehren und Würden entsetzt und dem der Degen genommen\r\nwird.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 16. Julius\r\n\r\nAch wie mir das durch alle Adern läuft, wenn mein Finger unversehens\r\nden ihrigen berührt, wenn unsere Füße sich unter dem Tische begegnen!\r\nIch ziehe zurück wie vom Feuer, und eine geheime Kraft zieht mich\r\nwieder vorwärts--mir wird's so schwindelig vor allen Sinnen.--O! Und\r\nihre Unschuld, ihre unbefangene Seele fühlt nicht, wie sehr mich die\r\nkleinen Vertraulichkeiten peinigen. Wenn sie gar im Gespräch ihre\r\nHand auf die meinige legt und im Interesse der Unterredung näher zu\r\nmir rückt, daß der himmlische Atem ihres Mundes meine Lippen erreichen\r\nkann:--ich glaube zu versinken, wie vom Wetter gerührt.--und, Wilhelm!\r\nWenn ich mich jemals unterstehe, diesen Himmel, dieses Vertrauen--!\r\nDu verstehst mich. Nein, mein Herz ist so verderbt nicht! Schwach!\r\nSchwach genug!--und ist das nicht Verderben?--sie ist mir heilig.\r\nAlle Begier schweigt in ihrer Gegenwart. Ich weiß nie, wie mir ist,\r\nwenn ich bei ihr bin; es ist, als wenn die Seele sich mir in allen\r\nNerven umkehrte.--sie hat eine Melodie, die sie auf dem Klaviere\r\nspielet mit der Kraft eines Engels, so simpel und so geistvoll! Es\r\nist ihr Leiblied, und mich stellt es von aller Pein, Verwirrung und\r\nGrillen her, wenn sie nur die erste Note davon greift.\r\n\r\nKein Wort von der Zauberkraft der alten Musik ist mir unwahrscheinlich.\r\nWie mich der einfache Gesang angreift! Und wie sie ihn anzubringen\r\nweiß, oft zur Zeit, wo ich mir eine Kugel vor den Kopf schießen möchte!\r\nDie Irrung und Finsternis meiner Seele zerstreut sich, und ich atme\r\nwieder freier.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 18. Julius\r\n\r\nWilhelm, was ist unserem Herzen die Welt ohne Liebe! Was eine\r\nZauberlaterne ist ohne Licht! Kaum bringst du das Lämpchen hinein, so\r\nscheinen dir die buntesten Bilder an deine weiße Wand! Und wenn's\r\nnichts wäre als das, als vorübergehende Phantome, so macht's doch\r\nimmer unser Glück, wenn wir wie frische Jungen davor stehen und uns\r\nüber die Wundererscheinungen entzücken. Heute konnte ich nicht zu\r\nLotten, eine unvermeidliche Gesellschaft hielt mich ab. Was war zu\r\ntun? Ich schickte meinen Diener hinaus, nur um einen Menschen um mich\r\nzu haben, der ihr heute nahe gekommen wäre. Mit welcher Ungeduld ich\r\nihn erwartete, mit welcher Freude ich ihn wiedersah! Ich hätte ihn\r\ngern beim Kopfe genommen und geküßt, wenn ich mich nicht geschämt\r\nhätte.\r\n\r\nMan erzählt von dem Bononischen Steine, daß er, wenn man ihn in die\r\nSonne legt, ihre Strahlen anzieht und eine Weile bei Nacht leuchtet.\r\nSo war mir's mit dem Burschen. Das Gefühl, daß ihre Augen auf seinem\r\nGesichte, seinen Backen, seinen Rockknöpfen und dem Kragen am Surtout\r\ngeruht hatten, machte mir das alles so heilig, so wert! Ich hätte in\r\ndem Augenblick den Jungen nicht um tausend Taler gegeben. Es war mir\r\nso wohl in seiner Gegenwart.--bewahre dich Gott, daß du darüber\r\nlachest. Wilhelm, sind das Phantome, wenn es uns wohl ist?\r\n\r\n\r\nDen 19. Julius\r\n\r\n\"Ich werde sie sehen!\" ruf' ich morgens aus, wenn ich mich ermuntere\r\nund mit aller Heiterkeit der schönen Sonne entgegenblicke; \"ich werde\r\nsie sehen!\" und da habe ich für den ganzen Tag keinen Wunsch weiter.\r\nAlles, alles verschlingt sich in dieser Aussicht.\r\n\r\nEure Idee will noch nicht die meinige werden, daß ich mit dem Gesandten\r\nnach *** gehen soll. Ich liebe die Subordination nicht sehr, und wir\r\nwissen alle, daß der Mann noch dazu ein widriger Mensch ist. Meine\r\nMutter möchte mich gern in Aktivität haben, sagst du, das hat mich zu\r\nlachen gemacht. Bin ich jetzt nicht auch aktiv, und ist's im Grunde\r\nnicht einerlei, ob ich Erbsen zähle oder Linsen? Alles in der Welt\r\nläuft doch auf eine Lumperei hinaus, und ein Mensch, der um anderer\r\nwillen, ohne daß es seine eigene Leidenschaft, sein eigenes Bedürfnis\r\nist, sich um Geld oder Ehre oder sonst was abarbeitet, ist immer ein\r\nTor.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 24. Julius\r\n\r\nDa dir so sehr daran gelegen ist, daß ich mein Zeichnen nicht\r\nvernachlässige, möchte ich lieber die ganze Sache übergehen als dir\r\nsagen, daß zeither wenig getan wird.\r\n\r\nNoch nie war ich glücklicher, noch nie war meine Empfindung an der\r\nNatur, bis aufs Steinchen, aufs Gräschen herunter, voller und inniger,\r\nund doch--ich weiß nicht, wie ich mich ausdrücken soll, meine\r\nvorstellende Kraft ist so schwach, alles schwimmt und schwankt so vor\r\nmeiner Seele, daß ich keinen Umriß packen kann; aber ich bilde mir ein,\r\nwenn ich Ton hätte oder Wachs, so wollte ich's wohl herausbilden.\r\nIch werde auch Ton nehmen, wenn's länger währt, und kneten, uns\r\nsollten's Kuchen werden!\r\n\r\nLottens Porträt habe ich dreimal angefangen, und habe mich dreimal\r\nprostituiert; das mich um so mehr verdrießt, weil ich vor einiger Zeit\r\nsehr glücklich im Treffen war. Darauf habe ich denn ihren Schattenriß\r\ngemacht, und damit soll mir g'nügen.\r\n\r\nJa, liebe Lotte, ich will alles besorgen und bestellen; geben Sie mir\r\nnur mehr Aufträge, nur recht oft. Um eins bitte ich Sie: keinen Sand\r\nmehr auf die Zettelchen, die Sie mir schreiben. Heute führte ich es\r\nschnell nach der Lippe, und die Zähne knisterten mir.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 26. Julius\r\n\r\nIch habe mir schon manchmal vorgenommen, sie nicht so oft zu sehn. Ja\r\nwer das halten könnte! Alle Tage unterlieg' ich der Versuchung und\r\nverspreche mir heilig: morgen willst du einmal wegbleiben. Und wenn\r\nder Morgen kommt, finde ich doch wieder eine unwiderstehliche Ursache,\r\nund ehe ich mich's versehe, bin ich bei ihr. Entweder sie hat des\r\nAbends gesagt: \"Sie kommen doch morgen?\"--wer könnte da wegbleiben?\r\nOder sie gibt mir einen Auftrag, und ich finde schicklich, ihr selbst\r\ndie Antwort zu bringen; oder der Tag ist gar zu schön, ich gehe nach\r\nWahlheim, und wenn ich nun da bin, ist's nur noch eine halbe Stunde zu\r\nihr!--ich bin zu nah in der Atmosphäre--zuck! So bin ich dort. Meine\r\nGroßmutter hatte ein Märchen vom Magnetenberg: die Schiffe, die zu\r\nnahe kamen, wurden auf einmal alles Eisenwerks beraubt, die Nägel\r\nflogen dem Berge zu, und die armen Elenden scheiterten zwischen den\r\nübereinander stürzenden Brettern.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 30. Julius\r\n\r\nAlbert ist angekommen, und ich werde gehen; und wenn er der beste, der\r\nedelste Mensch wäre, unter den ich mich in jeder Betrachtung zu\r\nstellen bereit wäre, so wär's unerträglich, ihn vor meinem Angesicht\r\nim Besitz so vieler Vollkommenheit zu sehen.--Besitz!--genug, Wilhelm,\r\nder Bräutigam ist da! Ein braver, lieber Mann, dem man gut sein muß.\r\nGlücklicherweise war ich nicht beim Empfange! Das hätte mir das Herz\r\nzerrissen. Auch ist er so ehrlich und hat Lotten in meiner Gegenwart\r\nnoch nicht ein einzigmal geküßt. Das lohn' ihm Gott! Um des Respekts\r\nwillen, den er vor dem Mädchen hat, muß ich ihn lieben. Er will mir\r\nwohl, und ich vermute, das ist Lottens Werk mehr als seiner eigenen\r\nEmpfindung; denn darin sind die Weiber fein und haben recht; wenn sie\r\nzwei Verehrer in gutem Vernehmen mit einander erhalten können, ist der\r\nVorteil immer ihr, so selten es auch angeht.\r\n\r\nIndes kann ich Alberten meine Achtung nicht versagen. Seine gelassene\r\nAußenseite sticht gegen die Unruhe meines Charakters sehr lebhaft ab,\r\ndie sich nicht verbergen läßt. Er hat viel Gefühl und weiß, was er an\r\nLotten hat. Erscheint wenig üble Laune zu haben, und du weißt, das\r\nist die Sünde, die ich ärger hasse am Menschen als alle andre.\r\n\r\nEr hält mich für einen Menschen von Sinn; und meine Anhänglichkeit zu\r\nLotten, meine warme Freude, die ich an allen ihren Handlungen habe,\r\nvermehrt seinen Triumph, und er liebt sie nur desto mehr. Ob er sie\r\nnicht einmal mit keiner Eifersüchtelei peinigt, das lasse ich\r\ndahingestellt sein, wenigstens würd' ich an seinem Platz nicht ganz\r\nsicher vor diesem Teufel bleiben.\r\n\r\nDem sei nun wie ihm wolle, meine Freude, bei Lotten zu sein, ist hin.\r\nSoll ich das Torheit nennen oder Verblendung?--was braucht's Namen!\r\nErzählt die Sache an sich!--ich wußte alles, was ich jetzt weiß, ehe\r\nAlbert kam; ich wußte, daß ich keine Prätension an sie zu machen hatte,\r\nmachte auch keine--das heißt, insofern es möglich ist, bei so viel\r\nLiebenswürdigkeit nicht zu begehren--und jetzt macht der Fratze große\r\nAugen, da der andere nun wirklich kommt und ihm das Mädchen wegnimmt.\r\n\r\nIch beiße die Zähne auf einander und spott über mein Elend, und\r\nspottete derer doppelt und dreifach, die sagen könnten, ich sollte\r\nmich resignieren, und weil es nun einmal nicht anders sein könnte.\r\n--schafft mir diese Strohmänner vom Halse!--ich laufe in den Wäldern\r\nherum, und wenn ich zu Lotten komme, und Albert bei ihr sitzt im\r\nGärtchen unter der Laube, und ich nicht weiter kann, so bin ich\r\nausgelassen närrisch und fange viel Possen, viel verwirrtes Zeug an.\r\n--\"um Gottes willen\", sagte mir Lotte heut, \"ich bitte Sie, keine Szene\r\nwie die von gestern abend! Sie sind fürchterlich, wenn Sie so lustig\r\nsind\".--Unter uns, ich passe die Zeit ab, wenn er zu tun hat; wutsch!\r\nBin ich drauß, und da ist mir's immer wohl, wenn ich sie allein finde.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 8. August\r\n\r\nIch bitte dich, lieber Wilhelm, es war gewiß nicht auf dich geredet,\r\nwenn ich die Menschen unerträglich schalt, die von uns Ergebung in\r\nunvermeidliche Schicksale fordern. Ich dachte wahrlich nicht daran,\r\ndaß du von ähnlicher Meinung sein könntest. Und im Grunde hast du\r\nrecht. Nur eins, mein Bester! In der Welt ist es sehr selten mit dem\r\nEntweder-Oder getan; die Empfindungen und Handlungsweisen schattieren\r\nsich so mannigfaltig, als Abfälle zwischen einer Habichts--und\r\nStumpfnase sind.\r\n\r\nDu wirst mir also nicht übelnehmen, wenn ich dir dein ganzes Argument\r\neinräume und mich doch zwischen dem Entweder-Oder durchzustehlen suche.\r\n\r\n\r\nEntweder, sagst du, hast du Hoffnung auf Lotten, oder du hast keine.\r\nGut, im ersten Fall suche sie durchzutreiben, suche die Erfüllung\r\ndeiner Wünsche zu umfassen: im anderen Fall ermanne dich und suche\r\neiner elenden Empfindung los zu werden, die alle deine Kräfte\r\nverzehren muß.--Bester! Das ist wohl gesagt, und--bald gesagt.\r\n\r\nUnd kannst du von dem Unglücklichen, dessen Leben unter einer\r\nschleichenden Krankheit unaufhaltsam allmählich abstirbt, kannst du\r\nvon ihm verlangen, er solle durch einen Dolchstoß der Qual auf einmal\r\nein Ende machen? Und raubt das Übel, das ihm die Kräfte verzehrt, ihm\r\nnicht auch zugleich den Mut, sich davon zu befreien?\r\n\r\nZwar könntest du mir mit einem verwandten Gleichnisse antworten: wer\r\nließe sich nicht lieber den Arm abnehmen, als daß er durch Zaudern und\r\nZagen sein Leben aufs Spiel setzte?--Ich weiß nicht!--Und wir wollen\r\nuns nicht in Gleichnissen herumbeißen. Genug--ja, Wilhelm, ich habe\r\nmanchmal so einen Augenblick aufspringenden, abschüttelnden Muts, und\r\nda--wenn ich nur wüßte wohin, ich ginge wohl.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAbends\r\n\r\nMein Tagebuch, das ich seit einiger Zeit vernachlässiget, fiel mir\r\nheut wieder in die Hände, und ich bin erstaunt, wie ich so wissentlich\r\nin das alles, Schritt vor Schritt, hineingegangen bin! Wie ich über\r\nmeinen Zustand immer so klar gesehen und doch gehandelt habe wie ein\r\nKind, jetzt noch so klar sehe, und es noch keinen Anschein zur\r\nBesserung hat.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 10. August\r\n\r\nIch könnte das beste, glücklichste Leben führen, wenn ich nicht ein\r\nTor wäre. So schöne Umstände vereinigen sich nicht leicht, eines\r\nMenschen Seele zu ergetzen, als die sind, in denen ich mich jetzt\r\nbefinde. Ach so gewiß ist's, daß unser Herz allein sein Glück macht.\r\n--ein Glied der liebenswürdigen Familie zu sein, von dem Alten geliebt\r\nzu werden wie ein Sohn, von den Kleinen wie ein Vater, und von Lotten!\r\n--dann der ehrliche Albert, der durch keine launische Unart mein Glück\r\nstört; der mich mit herzlicher Freundschaft umfaßt; dem ich nach\r\nLotten das Liebste auf der Welt bin!--Wilhelm, es ist eine Freude, uns\r\nzu hören, wenn wir spazierengehen und uns einander von Lotten\r\nunterhalten: es ist in der Welt nichts Lächerlichers erfunden worden\r\nals dieses Verhältnis, und doch kommen mir oft darüber die Tränen in\r\ndie Augen.\r\n\r\nWenn er mir von ihrer rechtschaffenen Mutter erzählt: wie sie auf\r\nihrem Todbette Lotten ihr Haus und ihre Kinder übergeben und ihm\r\nLotten anbefohlen habe, wie seit der Zeit ein ganz anderer Geist\r\nLotten belebt habe, wie sie, in der Sorge für ihre Wirtschaft und in\r\ndem Ernste, eine wahre Mutter geworden, wie kein Augenblick ihrer Zeit\r\nohne tätige Liebe, ohne Arbeit verstrichen, und dennoch ihre\r\nMunterkeit, ihr leichter Sinn sie nie dabei verlassen habe.--Ich gehe\r\nso neben ihm hin und pflücke Blumen am Wege, füge sie sehr sorgfältig\r\nin einen Strauß und--werfe sie in den vorüberfließenden Strom und sehe\r\nihnen nach, wie sie leise hinunterwallen.--Ich weiß nicht, ob ich dir\r\ngeschrieben habe, daß Albert hier bleiben und ein Amt mit einem\r\nartigen Auskommen vom Hofe erhalten wird, wo er sehr beliebt ist. In\r\nOrdnung und Emsigkeit in Geschäften habe ich wenig seinesgleichen\r\ngesehen.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 12. August\r\n\r\nGewiß, Albert ist der beste Mensch unter dem Himmel. Ich habe gestern\r\neine wunderbare Szene mit ihm gehabt. Ich kam zu ihm, um Abschied von\r\nihm zu nehmen; denn mich wandelte die Lust an, ins Gebirge zu reiten,\r\nvon woher ich dir auch jetzt schreibe, und wie ich in der Stube auf\r\nund ab gehe, fallen mir seine Pistolen in die Augen.--\"Borge mir die\r\nPistolen\", sagte ich, \"zu meiner Reise\".--\"Meinetwegen\", sagte er,\r\n\"wenn du dir die Mühe nehmen willst, sie zu laden; bei mir hängen sie\r\nnur pro forma\".--Ich nahm eine herunter, und er fuhr fort: \"seit mir\r\nmeine Vorsicht einen so unartigen Streich gespielt hat, mag ich mit\r\ndem Zeuge nichts mehr zu tun haben\".--Ich war neugierig, die\r\nGeschichte zu wissen.--\"Ich hielt mich\", erzählte er, \"wohl ein\r\nVierteljahr auf dem Lande bei einem Freunde auf, hatte ein paar\r\nTerzerolen ungeladen und schlief ruhig. Einmal an einem regnichten\r\nNachmittage, da ich müßig sitze, weiß ich nicht, wie mir einfällt: wir\r\nkönnten überfallen werden, wir könnten die Terzerolen nötig haben und\r\nkönnten--du weißt ja, wie das ist.--ich gab sie dem Bedienten, sie zu\r\nputzen und zu laden; und der dahlt mit den Mädchen, will sie schrecken,\r\nund Gott weiß wie, das Gewehr geht los, da der Ladstock noch drin\r\nsteckt, und schießt den Ladstock einem Mädchen zur Maus herein an der\r\nrechten Hand und zerschlägt ihr den Daumen. Da hatte ich das\r\nLamentieren, und die Kur zu bezahlen obendrein, und seit der Zeit\r\nlass' ich alles Gewehr ungeladen. Lieber Schatz, was ist Vorsicht?\r\nDie Gefahr läßt sich nicht auslernen! Zwar.--Nun weißt du, daß ich\r\nden Menschen sehr lieb habe bis auf seine Zwar; denn versteht sich's\r\nnicht von selbst, daß jeder allgemeine Satz Ausnahmen leidet? Aber so\r\nrechtfertig ist der Mensch! Wenn er glaubt, etwas Übereiltes,\r\nAllgemeines, Halbwahres gesagt zu haben, so hört er dir nicht auf zu\r\nlimitieren, zu modifizieren und ab--und zuzutun, bis zuletzt gar\r\nnichts mehr an der Sache ist.\r\n\r\nUnd bei diesem Anlaß kam er sehr tief in Text: ich hörte endlich gar\r\nnicht weiter auf ihn, verfiel in Grillen, und mit einer auffahrenden\r\nGebärde drückte ich mir die Mündung der Pistole übers rechte Aug' an\r\ndie Stirn.--\"Pfui!\" sagte Albert, indem er mir die Pistole herabzog,\r\n\"was soll das?\"--\"Sie ist nicht geladen\", sagte ich.--\"Und auch so,\r\nwas soll's?\" versetzte er ungeduldig. \"Ich kann mir nicht vorstellen,\r\nwie ein Mensch so töricht sein kann, sich zu erschießen; der bloße\r\nGedanke erregt mir Widerwillen\".\r\n\r\n\"Daß ihr Menschen\", rief ich aus, \"um von einer Sache zu reden, gleich\r\nsprechen müßt: 'das ist töricht, das ist klug, das ist gut, das ist\r\nbös!' und was will das alles heißen? Habt ihr deswegen die innern\r\nVerhältnisse einer Handlung erforscht? Wißt ihr mit Bestimmtheit die\r\nUrsachen zu entwickeln, warum sie geschah, warum sie geschehen mußte?\r\nHättet ihr das, ihr würdet nicht so eilfertig mit euren Urteilen sein\".\r\n\"Du wirst mir zugeben\", sagte Albert, \"daß gewisse Handlungen\r\nlasterhaft bleiben, sie mögen geschehen, aus welchem Beweggrunde sie\r\nwollen\". Ich zuckte die Achseln und gab's ihm zu.--\"Doch, mein\r\nLieber\", fuhr ich fort, \"finden sich auch hier einige Ausnahmen. Es\r\nist wahr, der Diebstahl ist ein Laster: aber der Mensch, der, um sich\r\nund die Seinigen vom gegenwärtigen Hungertode zu erretten, auf Raub\r\nausgeht, verdient der Mitleiden oder Strafe? Wer hebt den ersten\r\nStein auf gegen den Ehemann, der im gerechten Zorne sein untreues Weib\r\nund ihren nichtswürdigen Verführer aufopfert? Gegen das Mädchen, das\r\nin einer wonnevollen Stunde sich in den unaufhaltsamen Freuden der\r\nLiebe verliert? Unsere Gesetze selbst, diese kaltblütigen Pedanten,\r\nlassen sich rühren und halten ihre Strafe zurück\".\r\n\r\n\"Das ist ganz was anders\", versetzte Albert, \"weil ein Mensch, den\r\nseine Leidenschaften hinreißen, alle Besinnungskraft verliert und als\r\nein Trunkener, als ein Wahnsinniger angesehen wird\". \"Ach ihr\r\nvernünftigen Leute!\" rief ich lächelnd aus. \"Leidenschaft!\r\nTrunkenheit! Wahnsinn! Ihr steht so gelassen, so ohne Teilnehmung da,\r\nihr sittlichen Menschen, scheltet den Trinker, verabscheut den\r\nUnsinnigen, geht vorbei wie der Priester und dankt Gott wie der\r\nPharisäer, daß er euch nicht gemacht hat wie einen von diesen. Ich\r\nbin mehr als einmal trunken gewesen, meine Leidenschaften waren nie\r\nweit vom Wahnsinn, und beides reut mich nicht: denn ich habe in einem\r\nMaße begreifen lernen, wie man alle außerordentlichen Menschen, die\r\netwas Großes, etwas Unmöglichscheinendes wirkten, von jeher für\r\nTrunkene und Wahnsinnige ausschreiten mußte. Aber auch im gemeinen\r\nLeben ist's unerträglich, fast einem jeden bei halbweg einer freien,\r\nedlen, unerwarteten Tat nachrufen zu hören: ' der Mensch ist trunken,\r\nder ist närrisch!' Schämt euch, ihr Nüchternen! Schämt euch, ihr\r\nWeisen!\" \"Das sind nun wieder von deinen Grillen\", sagte Albert, \"du\r\nüberspannst alles und hast wenigstens hier gewiß unrecht, daß du den\r\nSelbstmord, wovon jetzt die Rede ist, mit großen Handlungen\r\nvergleichst: da man es doch für nichts anders als eine Schwäche halten\r\nkann. Denn freilich ist es leichter zu sterben, als ein qualvolles\r\nLeben standhaft zu ertragen\". Ich war im Begriff abzubrechen; denn\r\nkein Argument bringt mich so aus der Fessung, als wenn einer mit einem\r\nunbedeutenden Gemeinspruche angezogen kommt, wenn ich aus ganzem\r\nHerzen rede.\r\n\r\nDoch faßte ich mich, weil ich's schon oft gehört und mich öfter\r\ndarüber geärgert hatte, und versetzte ihm mit einiger Lebhaftigkeit:\r\n\"Du nennst das Schwäche? Ich bitte dich, laß dich vom Anscheine nicht\r\nverführen. Ein Volk, das unter dem unerträglichen Joch eines Tyrannen\r\nseufzt, darfst du das schwach heißen, wenn es endlich aufgärt und\r\nseine Ketten zerreißt? Ein Mensch, der über dem Schrecken, daß Feuer\r\nsein Haus ergriffen hat, alle Kräfte gespannt fühlt und mit\r\nLeichtigkeit Lasten wegträgt, die er bei ruhigem Sinne kaum bewegen\r\nkann; einer, der in der Wut der Beleidigung es mit sechsen aufnimmt\r\nund sie überwältig, sind die schwach zu nennen? Und, mein Guter, wenn\r\nAnstrengung Stärke ist, warum soll die Überspannung das Gegenteil\r\nsein?\"--Albert sah mich an und sagte: \"nimm mir's nicht übel, die\r\nBeispiele, die du gibst, scheinen hieher gar nicht zu gehören\".--\"Es\r\nmag sein\", sagte ich, \"man hat mir schon öfters vorgeworfen, daß meine\r\nKombinationsart manchmal an Radotage grenze. Laßt uns denn sehen, ob\r\nwir uns auf eine andere Weise vorstellen können, wie dem Menschen zu\r\nMute sein mag, der sich entschließt, die sonst angenehme Bürde des\r\nLebens abzuwerfen. Denn nur insofern wir mitempfinden, haben wir die\r\nEhre, von einer Sache zu reden\".\r\n\r\n\"Die menschliche Natur\", fuhr ich fort, \"hat ihre Grenzen: sie kann\r\nFreude, Leid, Schmerzen bis auf einen gewissen Grad ertragen und geht\r\nzugrunde, sobald der überstiegen ist. Hier ist also nicht die Frage,\r\nob einer schwach oder stark ist, sondern ob er das Maß seines Leidens\r\nausdauern kann, es mag nun moralisch oder körperlich sein. Und ich\r\nfinde es ebenso wunderbar zu sagen, der Mensch ist feige, der sich das\r\nLeben nimmt, als es ungehörig wäre, den einen Feigen zu nennen, der an\r\neinem bösartigen Fieber stirbt\".\r\n\r\n\"Paradox! Sehr paradox!\" rief Albert aus.--\"Nicht so sehr, als du\r\ndenkst\", versetzte ich. \"Du gibst mir zu, wir nennen das eine\r\nKrankheit zum Tode, wodurch die Natur so angegriffen wird, daß teils\r\nihre Kräfte verzehrt, teils so außer Wirkung gesetzt werden, daß sie\r\nsich nicht wieder aufzuhelfen, durch keine glückliche Revolution den\r\ngewöhnlichen Umlauf des Lebens wieder herzustellen fähig ist.\r\n\r\nNun, mein Lieber, laß uns das auf den Geist anwenden. Sich den\r\nMenschen an in seiner Eingeschränktheit, wie Eindrücke auf ihn wirken,\r\nIdeen sich bei ihm festsetzen, bis endlich eine wachsende Leidenschaft\r\nihn aller ruhigen Sinneskraft beraubt und ihn zugrunde richtet.\r\n\r\nVergebens, daß der gelassene, vernünftige Mensch den Zustand\r\nUnglücklichen übersieht, vergebens, daß er ihm zuredet! Ebenso wie\r\nein Gesunder, der am Bette des Kranken steht, ihm von seinen Kräften\r\nnicht das geringste einflößen kann\".\r\n\r\nAlberten war das zu allgemein gesprochen. Ich erinnerte ihn an ein\r\nMädchen, das man vor weniger Zeit im Wasser tot gefunden, und\r\nwiederholte ihm ihre Geschichte.--\"Ein gutes, junges Geschöpf, das in\r\ndem engen Kreise häuslicher Beschäftigungen, wöchentlicher bestimmter\r\nArbeit herangewachsen war, das weiter keine Aussicht von Vergnügen\r\nkannte, als etwa Sonntags in einem nach und nach zusammengeschafften\r\nPutz mit ihresgleichen um die Stadt spazierenzugehen, vielleicht alle\r\nhohen Feste einmal zu tanzen und übrigens mit aller Lebhaftigkeit des\r\nherzlichsten Anteils manche Stunde über den Anlaß eines Gezänkes,\r\neiner übeln Nachrede mit einer Nachbarin zu verplaudern--deren feurige\r\nNatur fühlt nun endlich innigere Bedürfnisse, die durch die\r\nSchmeicheleien der Männer vermehrt werden; ihre vorigen Freuden werden\r\nihr nach und nach unschmackhaft, bis sie endlich einen Menschen\r\nantrifft, zu dem ein unbekanntes Gefühl sie unwiderstehlich hinreißt,\r\nauf den sie nun alle ihre Hoffnungen wirft, die Welt rings um sich\r\nvergißt, nichts hört, nichts sieht, nichts fühlt als ihn, den Einzigen,\r\nsich nur sehnt nach ihm, dem Einzigen. Durch die leeren Vergnügungen\r\neiner unbeständigen Eitelkeit nicht verdorben, zieht ihr Verlangen\r\ngerade nach dem Zweck, sie will die Seinige werden, sie will in ewiger\r\nVerbindung all das Glück antreffen, das ihr mangelt, die Vereinigung\r\naller Freuden genießen, nach denen sie sich sehnte. Wiederholtes\r\nVersprechen, das ihr die Gewißheit aller Hoffnungen versiegelt, kühne\r\nLiebkosungen, die ihre Begierden vermehren, umfangen ganz ihre Seele;\r\nsie schwebt in einem dumpfen Bewußtsein, in einem Vorgefühl aller\r\nFreuden, sie ist bis auf den höchsten Grad gespannt, sie streckt\r\nendlich ihre Arme aus, all ihre Wünsche zu umfassen--und ihr Geliebter\r\nverläßt sie.--Erstarrt, ohne Sinne steht sie vor einem Abgrunde; alles\r\nist Finsternis um sie her, keine Aussicht, kein Trost, keine Ahnung!\r\nDenn der hat sie verlassen, in dem sie allein ihr Dasein fühlte. Sie\r\nsieht nicht die weite Welt, die vor ihr liegt, nicht die vielen, die\r\nihr de Verlust ersetzen könnten, sie fühlt sich allein, verlassen von\r\naller Welt,--und blind, in die Enge gepreßt von der entsetzlichen Not\r\nihres Herzens, stürzt sie sich hinunter, um in einem rings umfangenden\r\nTode alle ihre Qualen zu ersticken.--Sieh, Albert, das ist die\r\nGeschichte so manches Menschen! Und sag', ist das nicht der Fall der\r\nKrankheit? Die Natur findet keinen Ausweg aus dem Labyrinthe der\r\nverworrenen und widersprechenden Kräfte, und der Mensch muß sterben.\r\nWehe dem, der zusehen und sagen könnte: 'die Törin! Hätte sie\r\ngewartet, hätte sie die Zeit wirken lassen, die Verzweifelung würde\r\nsich schon gelegt, es würde sich schon ein anderer sie zu trösten\r\nvorgefunden haben.'--Das ist eben, als wenn einer sagte: 'der Tor,\r\nstirbt am Fieber! Hätte er gewartet, bis seine Kräfte sich erholt,\r\nseine Säfte sich verbessert, der Tumult seines Blutes sich gelegt\r\nhätten: alles wäre gut gegangen, und er lebte bis auf den heutigen Tag!\r\n'\"\r\n\r\nAlbert, dem die Vergleichung noch nicht anschaulich war, wandte noch\r\neiniges ein, und unter andern: ich hätte nur von einem einfältigen\r\nMädchen gesprochen; wie aber ein Mensch von Verstande, der nicht so\r\neingeschränkt sei, der mehr Verhältnisse übersehe, zu entschuldigen\r\nsein möchte, könne er nicht begreifen.--\"Mein Freund\", rief ich aus,\r\n\"der Mensch ist Mensch, und das bißchen Verstand, das einer haben mag,\r\nkommt wenig oder nicht in Anschlag, wenn Leidenschaft wütet und die\r\nGrenzen der Menschheit einen drängen. Vielmehr--ein andermal davon\",\r\nsagte ich und griff nach meinem Hute. O mir war das Herz so voll--und\r\nwir gingen auseinander, ohne einander verstanden zu haben. Wie denn\r\nauf dieser Welt keiner leicht den andern versteht.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 15. August\r\n\r\nEs ist doch gewiß, daß in der Welt den Menschen nichts notwendig macht\r\nals die Liebe. Ich fühl's an Lotten, daß sie mich ungern verlöre, und\r\ndie Kinder haben keinen andern Begriff, als daß ich immer morgen\r\nwiederkommen würde. Heute war ich hinausgegangen, Lottens Klavier zu\r\nstimmen, ich konnte aber nicht dazu kommen, denn die Kleinen\r\nverfolgten mich um ein Märchen, und Lotte sagte selbst, ich sollte\r\nihnen den Willen tun. Ich schnitt ihnen das Abendbrot, das sie nun\r\nfast so gern von mir als von Lotten annehmen, und erzählte ihnen das\r\nHauptstückchen von der Prinzessin, die von Händen bedient wird. Ich\r\nlerne viel dabei, das versichre ich dich, und ich bin erstaunt, was es\r\nauf sie für Eindrücke macht. Weil ich manchmal einen Inzidentpunkt\r\nerfinden muß, den ich beim zweitenmal vergesse, sagen sie gleich, das\r\nvorigemal wär' es anders gewesen, so daß ich mich jetzt übe, sie\r\nunveränderlich in einem singenden Silbenfall an einem Schnürchen weg\r\nzu rezitieren. Ich habe daraus gelernt, wie ein Autor durch eine\r\nzweite, veränderte Ausgabe seiner Geschichte, und wenn sie poetisch\r\nnoch so besser geworden wäre, notwendig seinem Buche schaden muß. Der\r\nerste Eindruck findet uns willig, und der Mensch ist gemacht, daß man\r\nihn das Abenteuerlichste überreden kann; das haftet aber auch gleich\r\nso fest, und wehe dem, der es wieder auskratzen und austilgen will!\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 18. August\r\n\r\nMußte denn das so sein, daß das, was des Menschen Glückseligkeit macht,\r\nwieder die Quelle seines Elendes würde?\r\n\r\nDas volle, warme Gefühl meines Herzens an der lebendigen Natur, das\r\nmich mit so vieler Wonne überströmte, das rings umher die Welt mir zu\r\neinem Paradiese schuf, wird mir jetzt zu einem unerträglichen Peiniger,\r\nzu einem quälenden Geist, der mich auf allen Wegen verfolgt. Wenn\r\nich sonst vom Felsen über den Fluß bis zu jenen Hügeln das fruchtbare\r\nTal überschaute und alles um mich her keimen und quellen sah; wenn ich\r\njene Berge, vom Fuße bis auf zum Gipfel, mit hohen, dichten Bäumen\r\nbekleidet, jene Täler in ihren mannigfaltigen Krümmungen von den\r\nlieblichsten Wäldern beschattet sah, und der sanfte Fluß zwischen den\r\nlispelnden Rohren dahingleitete und die lieben Wolken abspiegelte, die\r\nder sanfte Abendwind am Himmel herüberwiegte; wenn ich dann die Vögel\r\num mich den Wald beleben hörte, und die Millionen Mückenschwärme im\r\nletzten roten Strahle der Sonne mutig tanzten, und ihr letzter\r\nzuckender Blick den summenden Käfer aus seinem Grase befreite, und das\r\nSchwirren und Weben um mich her mich auf den Boden aufmerksam machte,\r\nund das Moos, das meinem harten Felsen seine Nahrung abzwingt, und das\r\nGeniste, das den dürren Sandhügel hinunter wächst, mir das innere,\r\nglühende, heilige Leben der Natur eröffnete: wie faßte ich das alles\r\nin mein warmes Herz, fühlte mich in der überfließenden Fülle wie\r\nvergöttert, und die herrlichen Gestalten der unendlichen Welt bewegten\r\nsich allbelebend in meiner Seele. Ungeheure Berge umgaben mich,\r\nAbgründe lagen vor mir, und Wetterbäche stürzten herunter, die Flüsse\r\nströmten unter mir, und Wald und Gebirg erklang; und ich sah sie\r\nwirken und schaffen ineinander in den Tiefen der Erde, alle die\r\nunergründlichen Kräfte; und nun über der Erde und unter dem Himmel\r\nwimmeln die Geschlechter der mannigfaltigen Geschöpfe. Ales, alles\r\nbevölkert mit tausendfachen Gestalten; und die Menschen dann sich in\r\nHäuslein zusammen sichern und sich annisten und herrschen in ihrem\r\nSinne über die weite Welt! Armer Tor! Der du alles so gering achtest,\r\nweil du so klein bist.--vom unzugänglichen Gebirge über die Einöde,\r\ndie kein Fuß betrat, bis ans Ende des unbekannten Ozeans weht der\r\nGeist des Ewigschaffenden und freut sich jedes Staubes, der ihn\r\nvernimmt und lebt.--ach damals, wie oft habe ich mich mit Fittichen\r\neines Kranichs, der über mich hin flog, zu dem Ufer des ungemessenen\r\nMeeres gesehnt, aus dem schäumenden Becher des Unendlichen jene\r\nschwellende Lebenswonne zu trinken und nur einen Augenblick in der\r\neingeschränkten Kraft meines Busens einen Tropfen der Seligkeit des\r\nWesens zu fühlen, das alles in sich und durch sich hervorbringt.\r\n\r\nBruder, nur die Erinnerung jener Stunden macht mir wohl. Selbst diese\r\nAnstrengung, jene unsäglichen Gelüste zurückzurufen, wieder\r\nauszusprechen, hebt meine Seele über sich selbst und läßt mich dann\r\ndas Bange des Zustandes doppelt empfinden, der mich jetzt umgibt.\r\n\r\nEs hat sich vor meiner Seele wie ein Vorhang weggezogen, und der\r\nSchauplatz des unendlichen Lebens verwandelt sich vor mir in den\r\nAbgrund des ewig offenen Grabes. Kannst du sagen: Das ist! Da alles\r\nvorübergeht? Da alles mit der Wetterschnelle vorüberrollt, so selten\r\ndie ganze Kraft seines Daseins ausdauert, ach, in den Strom\r\nfortgerissen, untergetaucht und an Felsen zerschmettert wird? Da ist\r\nkein Augenblick, der nicht dich verzehrte und die Deinigen um dich her,\r\nkein Augenblick, da du nicht ein Zerstörer bist, sein mußt; der\r\nharmloseste Spaziergang kostet tausend armen Würmchen das Leben, es\r\nzerrüttet ein Fußtritt die mühseligen Gebäude der Ameisen und stampft\r\neine kleine Welt in ein schmähliches Grab. Ha! Nicht die große,\r\nseltne Not der Welt, diese Fluten, die eure Dörfer wegspülen, diese\r\nErdbeben, die eure Städte verschlingen, rühren mich; mir untergräbt\r\ndas Herz die verzehrende Kraft, die in dem All der Natur verborgen\r\nliegt; die nichts gebildet hat, das nicht seinen Nachbar, nicht sich\r\nselbst zerstörte. Und so taumle ich beängstigt. Himmel und Erde und\r\nihre webenden Kräfte um mich her: ich sehe nichts als ein ewig\r\nverschlingendes, ewig wiederkäuendes Ungeheuer.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 21. August\r\n\r\nUmsonst strecke ich meine Arme nach ihr aus, morgens, wenn ich von\r\nschweren Träumen aufdämmere, vergebens suche ich sie nachts in meinem\r\nBette, wenn mich ein glücklicher, unschuldiger Traum getäuscht hat,\r\nals säß' ich neben ihr auf der Wiese und hielt' ihre Hand und deckte\r\nsie mit tausend Küssen. Ach, wenn ich dann noch halb im Taumel des\r\nSchlafes nach ihr tappe und drüber mich ermuntere--ein Strom von\r\nTränen bricht aus meinem gepreßten Herzen, und ich weine trostlos\r\neiner finstern Zukunft entgegen.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 22. August\r\n\r\nE ist ein Unglück, Wilhelm, meine tätigen Kräfte sind zu einer\r\nunruhigen Lässigkeit verstimmt, ich kann nicht müßig sein und kann\r\ndoch auch nichts tun. Ich habe keine Vorstellungskraft, kein Gefühl\r\nan der Natur, und die Bücher ekeln mich an. Wenn wir uns selbst\r\nfehlen, fehlt uns doch alles. Ich schwöre dir, manchmal wünschte ich,\r\nein Tagelöhner zu sein, um nur des Morgens beim Erwachen eine Aussicht\r\nauf den künftigen Tag, einen Drang, eine Hoffnung zu haben. Oft\r\nbeneide ich Alberten, den ich über die Ohren in Akten begraben sehe,\r\nund bilde mir ein, mir wäre wohl, wenn ich an seiner Stelle wäre!\r\nSchon etlichemal ist mir's so aufgefahren, ich wollte dir schreiben\r\nund dem Minister, um die Stelle bei der Gesandtschaft anzuhalten, die,\r\nwie du versicherst, mir nicht versagt werden würde. Ich glaube es\r\nselbst. Der Minister liebt mich seit langer Zeit, hatte lange mir\r\nangelegen, ich sollte mich irgendeinem Geschäfte widmen; und eine\r\nStunde ist mir's auch wohl drum zu tun. Hernach, wenn ich wieder dran\r\ndenke und mir die Fabel vom Pferde einfällt, das, seiner Freiheit\r\nungeduldig, sich Sattel und Zeug auflegen läßt und zuschanden geritten\r\nwird--ich weiß nicht, was ich soll.--und, mein Lieber! Ist nicht\r\nvielleicht das Sehnen in mir nach Veränderung des Zustands eine innere,\r\nunbehagliche Ungeduld, die mich überallhin verfolgen wird?\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 28. August\r\n\r\nEs ist wahr, wenn meine Krankheit zu heilen wäre, so würden diese\r\nMenschen es tun. Heute ist mein Geburtstag, und in aller Frühe\r\nempfange ich ein Päckchen von Alberten. Mir fällt beim Eröffnen\r\nsogleich eine der blaßroten Schleifen in die Augen, die Lotte vor\r\nhatte, als ich sie kennen lernte, und um die ich sie seither\r\netlichemal gebeten hatte. Es waren zwei Büchelchen in Duodez dabei,\r\nder kleine Wetsteinische Homer, eine Ausgabe, nach der ich so oft\r\nverlangt, um mich auf dem Spaziergange mit dem Ernestischen nicht zu\r\nschleppen. Sieh! So kommen sie meinen Wünschen zuvor, so suchen sie\r\nalle die kleinen Gefälligkeiten der Freundschaft auf, die tausendmal\r\nwerter sind als jene blendenden Geschenke, wodurch uns die Eitelkeit\r\ndes Gebers erniedrigt. Ich küsse diese Schleife tausendmal, und mit\r\njedem Atemzuge schlürfe ich die Erinnerung jener Seligkeiten ein, mit\r\ndenen mich jene wenigen, glücklichen, unwiederbringlichen Tage\r\nüberfüllten. Wilhelm, es ist so, und ich murre nicht, die Blüten des\r\nLebens sind nur Erscheinungen! Wie viele gehn vorüber, ohne eine Spur\r\nhinter sich zu lassen, wie wenige setzen Frucht an, und wie wenige\r\ndieser Früchte werden reif! Und doch sind deren noch genug da; und\r\ndoch--o mein Bruder!--können wir gereifte Früchte vernachlässigen,\r\nverachten, ungenossen verfaulen lassen?\r\n\r\nLebe wohl! Es ist ein herrlicher Sommer; ich sitze oft auf den\r\nObstbäumen in Lottens Baumstück mit dem Obstbrecher, der langen Stange,\r\nund hole die Birnen aus dem Gipfel. Sie steht unten und nimmt sie ab,\r\nwenn ich sie ihr herunterlasse.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 30. August\r\n\r\nUnglücklicher! Bist du nicht ein Tor? Betriegst du dich nicht\r\nselbst? Was soll diese tobende, endlose Leidenschaft? Ich habe kein\r\nGebet mehr als an sie; meiner Einbildungskraft erscheint keine andere\r\nGestalt als die ihrige, und alles in der Welt um mich her sehe ich nur\r\nim Verhältnisse mit ihr. Und das macht mir denn so manche glückliche\r\nStunde--bis ich mich wieder von ihr losreißen muß! Ach Wilhelm! Wozu\r\nmich mein Herz oft drängt!--wenn ich bei ihr gesessen bin, zwei, drei\r\nStunden, und mich an ihrer Gestalt, an ihrem Betragen, an dem\r\nhimmlischen Ausdruck ihrer Worte geweidet habe, und nun nach und nach\r\nalle meine Sinne aufgespannt werden, mir es düster vor den Augen wird,\r\nich kaum noch höre, und es mich an die Gurgel faßt wie ein\r\nMeuchelmörder, dann mein Herz in wilden Schlägen den bedrängten Sinnen\r\nLuft zu machen sucht und ihre Verwirrung nur vermehrt--Wilhelm, ich\r\nweiß oft nicht, ob ich auf der Welt bin! Und--wenn nicht manchmal die\r\nWehmut das Übergewicht nimmt und Lotte mir den elenden Trost erlaubt,\r\nauf ihrer Hand meine Beklemmung auszuweinen,--so muß ich fort, muß\r\nhinaus, und schweife dann weit im Felde umher; einen jähen Berg zu\r\nklettern ist dann meine Freude, durch einen unwegsamen Wald einen Pfad\r\ndurchzuarbeiten, durch die Hecken, die mich verletzen, durch die\r\nDornen, die mich zerreißen! Da wird mir's etwas besser! Etwas! Und\r\nwenn ich vor Müdigkeit und Durst manchmal unterwegs liegen bleibe,\r\nmanchmal in der tiefen Nacht, wenn der hohe Vollmond über mir steht,\r\nim einsamen Walde auf einen krumm gewachsenen Baum mich setze, um\r\nmeinen verwundeten Sohlen nur einige Linderung zu verschaffen, und\r\ndann in einer ermattenden Ruhe in dem Dämmerschein hinschlummre! O\r\nWilhelm! Die einsame Wohnung einer Zelle, das härene Gewand und der\r\nStachelgürtel wären Labsale, nach denen meine Seele schmachtet. Adieu!\r\nIch sehe dieses Elendes kein Ende als das Grab.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 3. September\r\n\r\nIch muß fort! Ich danke dir, Wilhelm, daß du meinen wankenden\r\nEntschluß bestimmt hast. Schon vierzehn Tage gehe ich mit dem\r\nGedanken um, sie zu verlassen. Ich muß fort. Sie ist wieder in der\r\nStadt bei einer Freundin. Und Albert--und--ich muß fort!\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 10. September\r\n\r\nDas war eine Nacht! Wilhelm! Nun überstehe ich alles. Ich werde sie\r\nnicht wiedersehn! O daß ich nicht an deinen Hals fliegen, dir mit\r\ntausend Tränen und Entzückungen ausdrücken kann, mein Bester, die\r\nEmpfindungen, die mein Herz bestürmen. Hier sitze ich und schnappe\r\nnach Luft, suche mich zu beruhigen, erwarte den Morgen, und mit\r\nSonnenaufgang sind die Pferde bestellt.\r\n\r\nAch, sie schläft ruhig und denkt nicht, daß sie mich nie wieder sehen\r\nwird. Ich habe mich losgerissen, bin stark genug gewesen, in einem\r\nGespräch von zwei Stunden mein Vorhaben nicht zu verraten. Und Gott,\r\nwelch ein Gespräch!\r\n\r\nAlbert hatte mir versprochen, gleich nach dem Nachtessen mit Lotten im\r\nGarten zu sein. Ich stand auf der Terrasse unter den hohen\r\nKastanienbäumen und sah der Sonne nach, die mir nun zum letztenmale\r\nüber dem lieblichen Tale, über dem sanften Fluß unterging. So oft\r\nhatte ich hier gestanden mit ihr und eben dem herrlichen Schauspiele\r\nzugesehen, und nun--ich ging in der Allee auf und ab, die mir so lieb\r\nwar; ein geheimer sympathetischer Zug hatte mich hier so oft gehalten,\r\nehe ich noch Lotten kannte, und wie freuten wir uns, als wir im Anfang\r\nunserer Bekanntschaft die wechselseitige Neigung zu diesem Plätzchen\r\nentdeckten, das wahrhaftig eins von den romantischsten ist, die ich\r\nvon der Kunst hervorgebracht gesehen habe.\r\n\r\nErst hast du zwischen den Kastanienbäumen die weite Aussicht--Ach, ich\r\nerinnere mich, ich habe dir, denk' ich, schon viel davon geschrieben,\r\nwie hohe Buchenwände einen endlich einschließen und durch ein\r\ndaranstoßendes Boskett die Allee immer düsterer wird, bis zuletzt\r\nalles sich in ein geschlossenes Plätzchen endigt, das alle Schauer der\r\nEinsamkeit umschweben. Ich fühle es noch, wie heimlich mir's ward,\r\nals ich zum erstenmale an einem hohen Mittage hineintrat; ich ahnete\r\nganz leise, was für ein Schauplatz das noch werden sollte von\r\nSeligkeit und Schmerz.\r\n\r\nIch hatte mich etwa eine halbe Stunde in den schmachtenden, süßen\r\nGedanken des Abscheidens, des Wiedersehens geweidet, als ich sie die\r\nTerrasse heraufsteigen hörte. Ich lief ihnen entgegen, mit einem\r\nSchauer faßte ich ihre Hand und küßte sie. Wir waren eben\r\nheraufgetreten, als der Mond hinter dem buschigen Hügel aufging; wir\r\nredeten mancherlei und kamen unvermerkt dem düstern Kabinette näher.\r\nLotte trat hinein und setzte sich, Albert neben sie, ich auch; doch\r\nmeine Unruhe ließ mich nicht lange sitzen; ich stand auf, trat vor sie,\r\nging auf und ab, setzte mich wieder: es war ein ängstlicher Zustand.\r\nSie machte uns aufmerksam auf die schöne Wirkung des Mondenlichtes,\r\ndas am Ende der Buchenwände die ganze Terrasse vor uns erleuchtete:\r\nein herrlicher Anblick, der um so viel frappanter war, weil uns rings\r\neine tiefe Dämmerung einschloß. Wir waren still, und sie fing nach\r\neiner Weile an: \"niemals gehe ich im Mondenlichte spazieren, niemals,\r\ndaß mir nicht der Gedanke an meine Verstorbenen begegnete, daß nicht\r\ndas Gefühl von Tod, von Zukunft über mich käme\". \"Wir werden sein!\"\r\nfuhr sie mit der Stimme des herrlichsten Gefühls fort; \"aber, Werther,\r\nsollen wir uns wieder finden? Wieder erkennen? Was ahnen Sie? Was\r\nsagen Sie?\"\r\n\r\n\"Lotte\", sagte ich, indem ich ihr die Hand reichte und mir die Augen\r\nvoll Tränen wurden,\"wir werden uns wiedersehn! Hier und dort\r\nwiedersehn!\"--ich konnte nicht weiter reden--Wilhelm, mußte sie mich\r\ndas fragen, da ich diesen ängstlichen Abschied im Herzen hatte!\r\n\r\n\"Und ob die lieben Abgeschiednen von uns wissen\", fuhr sie fort, \"ob\r\nsie fühlen, wann's uns wohl geht, daß wir mit warmer Liebe uns ihrer\r\nerinnern? O! Die Gestalt meiner Mutter schwebt immer um mich, wenn\r\nich am stillen Abend unter ihren Kindern, unter meinen Kindern sitze\r\nund sie um mich versammelt sind, wie sie um sie versammelt waren.\r\nWenn ich dann mit einer sehnenden Träne gen Himmel sehe und wünsche,\r\ndaß sie hereinschauen könnte einen Augenblick, wie ich mein Wort halte,\r\ndas ich ihr in der des Todes gab: die Mutter ihrer Kinder zu sein.\r\nMit welcher Empfindung rufe ich aus: 'verzeihe mir's, Teuerste, wenn\r\nich ihnen nicht bin, was du ihnen warst. Ach! Tue ich doch alles,\r\nwas ich kann; sind sie doch gekleidet, genährt, ach, und, was mehr ist\r\nals das alles, gepflegt und geliebt. Könntest du unsere Eintracht\r\nsehen, liebe Heilige! Du würdest mit dem heißesten Danke den Gott\r\nverherrlichen, den du mit den letzten, bittersten Tränen um die\r\nWohlfahrt deiner Kinder batest.'\"--Sie sagte das! O Wilhelm, wer\r\nkann wiederholen, was sie sagte! Wie kann der kalte, tote Buchstabe\r\ndiese himmlische Blüte des Geistes darstellen! Albert fiel ihr sanft\r\nin die Rede: \"es greift zu stark an, liebe Lotte! Ich weiß, Ihre\r\nSeele hängt sehr nach diesen Ideen, aber ich bitte Sie\".--\"O Albert\",\r\nsagte sie, \"ich weiß, du vergissest nicht die Abende, da wir\r\nzusammensaßen an dem kleinen, runden Tischchen, wenn der Papa verreist\r\nwar, und wir die Kleinen schlafen geschickt hatten. Du hattest oft\r\nein gutes Buch und kannst so selten dazu, etwas zu lesen--war der\r\nUmgang dieser herrlichen Seele nicht mehr als alles? Die schöne,\r\nsanfte, muntere und immer tätige Frau! Gott kennt meine Tränen, mit\r\ndenen ich mich oft in meinem Bette vor ihn hinwarf: er möchte mich ihr\r\ngleich machen\".\r\n\r\n\"Lotte!\" rief ich aus, indem ich mich vor sie hinwarf, ihre Hand nahm\r\nund mit tausend Tränen netzte, \"Lotte! Der Segen Gottes ruht über dir\r\nund der Geist deiner Mutter!\" \"Wenn Sie sie gekannt hätten\", sagte\r\nsie, indem sie mir die Hand drückte,--\"sie war wert, von Ihnen gekannt\r\nzu sein!\"--ich glaubte zu vergehen.\r\n\r\nNie war ein größeres, stolzeres Wort über mich ausgesprochen\r\nworden--und sie fuhr fort:\"und diese Frau mußte in der Blüte ihrer\r\nJahre dahin, da ihr jüngster Sohn nicht sechs Monate alt war! Ihre\r\nKrankheit dauerte nicht lange; sie war ruhig, hingegeben, nur ihre\r\nKinder taten ihr weh, besonders das kleine. Wie es gegen das Ende\r\nging und sie zu mir sagte: 'bringe mir sie herauf!' und wie ich sie\r\nhereinführte, die kleinen, die nicht wußten, und die ältesten, die\r\nohne Sinne waren, wie sie ums Bette standen, und wie sie die Hände\r\naufhob und über sie betete, und sie küßte nach einander und sie\r\nwegschickte und zu mir sagte: 'sei ihre Mutter!'--Ich gab ihr die Hand\r\ndrauf!--'Du versprichst viel, meine Tochter', sagte sie, 'das Herz\r\neiner Mutter und das Aug' einer Mutter. Ich habe oft an deinen\r\ndankbaren Tränen gesehen, daß du fühlst, was das sei. Habe es für\r\ndeine Geschwister, und für deinen Vater die Treue und den Gehorsam\r\neiner Frau. Du wirst ihn trösten.'--Sie fragte nach ihm, er war\r\nausgegangen, um uns den unerträglichen Kummer zu verbergen, den er\r\nfühlte, der Mann war ganz zerrissen.\r\n\r\nAlbert, du warst im Zimmer. Sie hörte jemand gehn und fragte und\r\nforderte dich zu sich, und wie sie dich ansah und mich, mit dem\r\ngetrösteten, ruhigen Blicke, daß wir glücklich sein, zusammen\r\nglücklich sein würden\".--Albert fiel ihr um den Hals und küßte sie und\r\nrief: \"wir sind es! Wir werden es sein!\"--der ruhige Albert war ganz\r\naus seiner Fassung, und ich wußte nichts von mir selber. \"Werther\",\r\nfing sie an, \"und diese Frau sollte dahin sein! Gott! Wenn ich\r\nmanchmal denke, wie man das Liebste seines Lebens wegtragen läßt, und\r\nniemand als die Kinder das so scharf fühlt, die sich noch lange\r\nbeklagten, die schwarzen Männer hätten die Mama weggetragen! \"sie\r\nstand auf, und ich ward erweckt und erschüttert, blieb sitzen und\r\nhielt ihre Hand.--\"Wir wollen fort\", sagte sie, \"es wird Zeit\".--Sie\r\nwollte ihre Hand zurückziehen, und ich hielt sie fester.--\"wir werden\r\nuns wieder sehen\" rief ich, \"wir werden uns finden, unter allen\r\nGestalten werden wir uns erkennen. Ich gehe\", fuhr ich fort, \"ich\r\ngehe willig, und doch, wenn ich sagen sollte auf ewig, ich würde es\r\nnicht aushalten. Leb' wohl, Lotte! Leb' wohl, Albert! Wir sehn uns\r\nwieder\".--\"Morgen, denke ich\", versetzte sie scherzend.--Ich fühlte\r\ndas Morgen! Ach, sie wußte nicht, als sie ihre Hand aus der meinen\r\nzog--Sie gingen die Allee hinaus, ich stand, sah ihnen nach im\r\nMondscheine und warf mich an die Erde und weinte mich aus und sprang\r\nauf und lief auf die Terrasse hervor und sah noch dort unten im\r\nSchatten der hohen Lindenbäume ihr weißes Kleid nach der Gartentür\r\nschimmern, ich streckte meine Arme aus, und es verschwand.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nEnde dieses Projekt Gutenberg Etexes \"Die Leiden des jungen\r\nWerther-Buch 1\" von Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.\r\n\r\n" }, { "path": "tests/data/gutenberg/werther/goethe_werther2.txt", "content": "Die Leiden des jungen Werther\r\nvon Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nHamburger Ausgabe, Band 6\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nZweites Buch\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 20. Oktober 1771\r\n\r\nGestern sind wir hier angelangt. Der Gesandte ist unpaß und wird sich\r\nalso einige Tage einhalten. Wenn er nur nicht so unhold wäre, wär'\r\nalles gut. Ich merke, ich merke, das Schicksal hat mir harte\r\nPrüfungen zugedacht. Doch guten Muts! Ein leichter Sinn trägt alles!\r\nEin leichter Sinn? Das macht mich zu lachen, wie das Wort in meine\r\nFeder kommt. O ein bißchen leichteres Blut würde mich zum\r\nGlücklichsten unter der Sonne machen. Was! Da, wo andere mit ihrem\r\nbißchen Kraft und Talent vor mir in behaglicher Selbstgefälligkeit\r\nherumschwadronieren, verzweifle ich an meiner Kraft, an meinen Gaben?\r\nGuter Gott, der du mir das alles schenktest, warum hieltest du nicht\r\ndie Hälfte zurück und gabst mir Selbstvertrauen und Genügsamkeit?\r\n\r\nGeduld! Geduld! Es wird besser werden. Denn ich sage dir, Lieber,\r\ndu hast recht. Seit ich unter dem Volke alle Tage herumgetrieben\r\nwerde und sehe, was sie tun und wie sie's treiben, stehe ich viel\r\nbesser mit mir selbst. Gewiß, weil wir doch einmal so gemacht sind,\r\ndaß wir alles mit uns und uns mit allem vergleichen, so liegt Glück\r\noder Elend in den Gegenständen, womit wir uns zusammenhalten, und da\r\nist nichts gefährlicher als die Einsamkeit. Unsere Einbildungskraft,\r\ndurch ihre Natur gedrungen sich zu erheben, durch die phantastischen\r\nBilder der Dichtkunst genährt, bildet sich eine Reihe Wesen hinauf, wo\r\nwir das unterste sind und alles außer uns herrlicher erscheint, jeder\r\nandere vollkommner ist. Und das geht ganz natürlich zu. Wir fühlen\r\nso oft, daß uns manches mangelt, und eben was uns fehlt, scheint uns\r\noft ein anderer zu besitzen, dem wir denn auch alles dazu geben, was\r\nwir haben, und noch eine gewisse idealistische Behaglichkeit dazu. Und\r\nso ist der Glückliche vollkommen fertig, das Geschöpf unserer selbst.\r\n\r\nDagegen, wenn wir mit all unserer Schwachheit und Mühseligkeit nur\r\ngerade fortarbeiten, so finden wir gar oft, daß wir mit unserem\r\nSchlendern und Lavieren es weiter bringen als andere mit ihrem Segeln\r\nund Rudern--und--das ist doch ein wahres Gefühl seiner selbst, wenn\r\nman andern gleich oder gar vorläuft.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 26. November\r\n\r\nIch fange an, mich insofern ganz leidlich hier zu befinden. Das beste\r\nist, daß es zu tun genug gibt; und dann die vielerlei Menschen, die\r\nallerlei neuen Gestalten machen mir ein buntes Schauspiel vor meiner\r\nSeele. Ich habe den Grafen C... kennen lernen, einen Mann, den ich\r\njeden Tag mehr verehren muß, einen weiten, großen Kopf, und der\r\ndeswegen nicht kalt ist, weil er viel übersieht; aus dessen Umgange so\r\nviel Empfindung für Freundschaft und Liebe hervorleuchtet. Er nahm\r\nteil an mir, als ich einen Geschäftsauftrag an ihn ausrichtete und er\r\nbei den ersten Worten merkte, daß wir uns verstanden, daß er mit mir\r\nreden konnte wie nicht mit jedem. Auch kann ich sein offnes Betragen\r\ngegen mich nicht genug rühmen. So eine wahre, warme Freude ist nicht\r\nin der Welt, als eine große Seele zu sehen, die sich gegen einen\r\nöffnet.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 24. Dezember\r\n\r\nDer Gesandte macht mir viel Verdruß, ich habe es vorausgesehn. Er ist\r\nder pünktlichste Narr, den es nur geben kann; Schritt vor Schritt und\r\numständlich wie eine Base; ein Mensch, der nie mit sich selbst\r\nzufrieden ist, und dem es daher niemand zu Danke machen kann. Ich\r\narbeite gern leicht weg, und wie es steht, so steht es; da ist er\r\nimstande, mir einen Aufsatz zurückzugeben und zu sagen:\"er ist gut,\r\naber sehen Sie ihn durch, man findet immer ein besseres Wort, eine\r\nreinere Partikel.\"--Da möchte ich des Teufels werden. Kein Und, kein\r\nBindewörtchen darf außenbleiben, und von allen Inversionen, die mir\r\nmanchmal entfahren, ist er ein Todfeind; wenn man seinen Period nicht\r\nnach der hergebrachten Melodie heraborgelt, so versteht er gar nichts\r\ndrin. Das ist ein Leiden, mit so einem Menschen zu tun zu haben.\r\n\r\nDas Vertrauen des Grafen von C... ist noch das einzige, was mich\r\nschadlos hält. Er sagte mir letzthin ganz aufrichtig, wie unzufrieden\r\ner mit der Langsamkeit und Bedenklichkeit meines Gesandten sei. Die\r\nLeute erschweren es sich und andern. \"Doch,\" sagte er, \"man muß sich\r\ndarein resignieren wie ein Reisender, der über einen Berg muß;\r\nfreilich, wäre der Berg nicht da, so wär der Weg viel bequemer und\r\nkürzer; er ist nun aber da, und man soll hinüber!\"\r\n\r\nMein Alter spürt auch wohl den Vorzug, den mir der Graf vor ihm gibt,\r\nund das ärgert ihn, und er ergreift jede Gelegenheit, Übels gegen mich\r\nvom Grafen zu reden, ich halte, wie natürlich, Widerpart, und dadurch\r\nwird die Sache nur schlimmer. Gestern gar brachte er mich auf, denn\r\nich war mit gemeint: zu so Weltgeschäften sei der Graf ganz gut, er\r\nhabe viele Leichtigkeit zu arbeiten und führe eine gute Feder, doch an\r\ngründlicher Gelehrsamkeit mangle es ihm wie allen Belletristen. Dazu\r\nmachte er eine Miene, als ob er sagen wollte: \"fühlst du den\r\nStich?\" Aber es tat bei mir nicht die Wirkung; ich verachtete den\r\nMenschen, der so denken und sich so betragen konnte. Ich hielt ihm\r\nstand und focht mit ziemlicher Heftigkeit. Ich sagte, der Graf sei\r\nein Mann, vor dem man Achtung haben müsse, wegen seines Charakters\r\nsowohl als wegen seiner Kenntnisse.\" \"Ich habe,\" sagt' ich, \"niemand\r\ngekannt, dem es so geglückt wäre, seinen Geist zu erweitern, ihn über\r\nunzählige Gegenstände zu verbreiten und doch diese Tätigkeit fürs\r\ngemeine Leben zu behalten.\"--das waren dem Gehirne spanische Dörfer,\r\nund ich empfahl mich, um nicht über ein weiteres Deraisonnement noch\r\nmehr Galle zu schlucken.\r\n\r\nUnd daran seid ihr alle schuld, die ihr mich in das Joch geschwatzt\r\nund mir so viel von Aktivität vorgesungen habt. Aktivität! Wenn\r\nnicht der mehr tut, der Kartoffeln legt und in die Stadt reitet, sein\r\nKorn zu verkaufen, als ich, so will ich zehn Jahre noch mich auf der\r\nGaleere abarbeiten, auf der ich nun angeschmiedet bin.\r\n\r\nUnd das glänzende Elend, die Langeweile unter dem garstigen Volke, das\r\nsich hier neben einander sieht! Die Rangsucht unter ihnen, wie sie\r\nnur wachen und aufpassen, einander ein Schrittchen abzugewinnen; die\r\nelendesten, erbärmlichsten Leidenschaften, ganz ohne Röckchen. Da ist\r\nein Weib, zum Exempel, die jedermann von ihrem Adel und ihrem Lande\r\nunterhält, so daß jeder Fremde denken muß: das ist eine Närrin, die\r\nsich auf das bißchen Adel und auf den Ruf ihres Landes Wunderstreiche\r\neinbildet.--Aber es ist noch viel Ärger: eben das Weib ist hier aus\r\nder Nachbarschaft eine Amtschreiberstochter.--Sieh, ich kann das\r\nMenschengeschlecht nicht begreifen, das so wenig Sinn hat, um sich so\r\nplatt zu prostituieren.\r\n\r\nZwar ich merke täglich mehr, mein Lieber, wie töricht man ist, andere\r\nnach sich zu berechnen. Und weil ich so viel mit mir selbst zu tun\r\nhabe und dieses Herz so stürmisch ist--ach ich lasse gern die andern\r\nihres Pfades gehen, wenn sie mich auch nur könnten gehen lassen.\r\n\r\nWas mich am meisten neckt, sind die fatalen bürgerlichen Verhältnisse.\r\nZwar weiß ich so gut als einer, wie nötig der Unterschied der Stände\r\nist, wie viel Vorteile er mir selbst verschafft: nur soll er mir nicht\r\neben gerade im Wege stehen, wo ich noch ein wenig Freude, einen\r\nSchimmer von Glück auf dieser Erde genießen könnte. Ich lernte\r\nneulich auf dem Spaziergange ein Fräulein von B. kennen, ein\r\nliebenswürdiges Geschöpf, das sehr viele Natur mitten in dem steifen\r\nLeben erhalten hat. Wir gefielen uns in unserem Gespräche, und da wir\r\nschieden, bat ich sie um Erlaubnis, sie bei sich sehen zu dürfen. Sie\r\ngestattete mir das mit so vieler Freimütigkeit, daß ich den\r\nschicklichen Augenblick kaum erwarten konnte, zu ihr zu gehen. Sie\r\nist nicht von hier und wohnt bei einer Tante im Hause. Die\r\nPhysiognomie der Alten gefiel mir nicht. Ich bezeigte ihr viel\r\nAufmerksamkeit, mein Gespräch war meist an sie gewandt, und in minder\r\nals einer halben Stunde hatte ich so ziemlich weg, was mir das\r\nFräulein nachher selbst gestand: daß die liebe Tante in ihrem Alter\r\nMangel von allem, kein anständiges Vermögen, keinen Geist und keine\r\nStütze hat als die Reihe ihrer Vorfahren, keinen Schirm als den Stand,\r\nin den sie sich verpalisadiert, und kein Ergetzen, als von ihrem\r\nStockwerk herab über die bürgerlichen Häupter wegzusehen. In ihrer\r\nJugend soll sie schön gewesen sein und ihr Leben weggegaukelt, erst\r\nmit ihrem Eigensinne manchen armen Jungen gequält, und in den reifern\r\nJahren sich unter den Gehorsam eines alten Offiziers geduckt haben,\r\nder gegen diesen Preis und einen leidlichen Unterhalt das eherne\r\nJahrhundert mit ihr zubrachte und starb. Nun sieht sie im eisernen\r\nsich allein und würde nicht angesehn, wär' ihre Nichte nicht so\r\nliebenswürdig.\r\n\r\n\r\nDen 8. Januar 1772\r\n\r\nWas das für Menschen sind, deren ganze Seele auf dem Zeremoniell ruht,\r\nderen Dichten und Trachten jahrelang dahin geht, wie sie um einen\r\nStuhl weiter hinauf bei Tische Angelegenheit hätten: nein, vielmehr\r\nhäufen sich die Arbeiten, eben weil man über den kleinen\r\nVerdrießlichkeiten von Beförderung der wichtigen Sachen abgehalten\r\nwird. Vorige Woche gab es bei der Schlittenfahrt Händel, und der\r\nganze Spaß wurde verdorben.\r\n\r\nDie Toren, die nicht sehen, daß es eigentlich auf den Platz gar nicht\r\nankommt, und daß der, der den ersten hat, so selten die erste Rolle\r\nspielt! Wie mancher König wird durch seinen Minister, wie mancher\r\nMinister durch seinen Sekretär regiert! Und wer ist dann der Erste?\r\nDer, dünkt mich, der die andern übersieht und so viel Gewalt oder List\r\nhat, ihre Kräfte und Leidenschaften zu Ausführung seiner Plane\r\nanzuspannen.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 20. Januar\r\n\r\nIch muß Ihnen schreiben, liebe Lotte, hier in der Stube einer geringen\r\nBauernherberge, in die ich mich vor einem schweren Wetter geflüchtet\r\nhabe. Solange ich in dem traurigen Nest D..., unter dem fremden,\r\nmeinem Herzen ganz fremden Volke herumziehe, habe ich keinen\r\nAugenblick gehabt, keinen, an dem mein Herz mich geheißen hätte, Ihnen\r\nzu schreiben; und jetzt in dieser Hütte, in dieser Einsamkeit, in\r\ndieser Einschränkung, da Schnee und Schloßen wider mein Fensterchen\r\nwüten, hier waren Sie mein erster Gedanke. Wie ich hereintrat,\r\nüberfiel mich Ihre Gestalt, Ihr Andenken, o Lotte! So heilig, so warm!\r\nGuter Gott! Der erste glückliche Augenblick wieder.\r\n\r\nWenn Sie mich sähen, meine Beste, in dem Schwall von Zerstreuung! Wie\r\nausgetrocknet meine Sinne werden! Nicht einen Augenblick der Fülle\r\ndes Herzens, nicht eine selige Stunde! Nichts! Nichts! Ich stehe\r\nwie vor einem Raritätenkasten und sehe die Männchen und Gäulchen vor\r\nmir herumrücken, und frage mich oft, ob es nicht optischer Betrug ist.\r\nIch spiele mit, vielmehr, ich werde gespielt wie eine Marionette und\r\nfasse manchmal meinen Nachbar an der hölzernen Hand und schaudere\r\nzurück. Des Abends nehme ich mir vor, den Sonnenaufgang zu genießen,\r\nund komme nicht aus dem Bette; am Tage hoffe ich, mich des Mondscheins\r\nzu erfreuen, und bleibe in meiner Stube. Ich weiß nicht recht, warum\r\nich aufstehe, warum ich schlafen gehe.\r\n\r\nDer Sauerteig, der mein Leben in Bewegung setzte, fehlt; der Reiz, der\r\nmich in tiefen Nächten munter erhielt, ist hin, der mich des Morgens\r\naus dem Schlafe weckte, ist weg.\r\n\r\nEin einzig weibliches Geschöpf habe ich hier gefunden, eine Fräulein\r\nvon B..., sie gleicht Ihnen, liebe Lotte, wenn man Ihnen gleichen\r\nkann.\" \"Ei!\" werden Sie sagen, \"der Mensch legt sich auf niedliche\r\nKomplimente!\" ganz unwahr ist es nicht. Seit einiger Zeit bin ich\r\nsehr artig, weil ich doch nicht anders sein kann, habe viel Witz, und\r\ndie Frauenzimmer sagen, es wüßte niemand so fein zu loben als ich (und\r\nzu lügen, setzen Sie hinzu, denn ohne das geht es nicht ab, verstehen\r\nSie?). Ich wollte von Fräulein B... reden. Sie hat viel Seele, die\r\nvoll aus ihren blauen Augen hervorblickt. Ihr Stand ist ihr zur Last,\r\nder keinen der Wünsche ihres Herzens befriedigt. Sie sehnt sich aus\r\ndem Getümmel, und wir verphantasieren manche Stunde in ländlichen\r\nSzenen von ungemischter Glückseligkeit; ach! und von Ihnen! Wie oft\r\nmuß sie Ihnen huldigen, muß nicht, tut es freiwillig, hört so gern von\r\nIhnen, liebt Sie.--O säß' ich zu Ihren Füßen in dem lieben,\r\nvertraulichen Zimmerchen, und unsere kleinen Lieben wälzten sich mit\r\neinander um mich herum, und wenn sie Ihnen zu laut würden, wollte ich\r\nsie mit einem schauerlichen Märchen um mich zur Ruhe versammeln.\r\n\r\nDie Sonne geht herrlich unter über der schneeglänzenden Gegend, der\r\nSturm ist hinüber gezogen, und ich--muß mich wieder in meinen Käfig\r\nsperren.--Adieu! Ist Albert bei Ihnen? Und wie--? Gott verzeihe mir\r\ndiese Frage!\r\n\r\n\r\nDen 8. Februar\r\n\r\nWir haben seit acht Tagen das abscheulichste Wetter, und mir ist es\r\nwohltätig. Denn so lang ich hier bin, ist mir noch kein schöner Tag\r\nam Himmel erschienen, den mir nicht jemand verdorben oder verleidet\r\nhätte. Wenn's nun recht regnet und stöbert und fröstelt und taut: ha!\r\nDenk' ich, kann's doch zu Hause nicht schlimmer werden, als es\r\ndraußen ist, oder umgekehrt, und so ist's gut. Geht die Sonne des\r\nMorgens auf und verspricht einen feinen Tag, erwehr' ich mir niemals\r\nauszurufen: da haben sie doch wieder ein himmlisches Gut, worum sie\r\neinander bringen können! Es ist nichts, worum sie einander nicht\r\nbringen. Gesundheit, guter Name, Freudigkeit, Erholung! Und meist\r\naus Albernheit, Unbegriff und Enge und, wenn man sie anhört, mit der\r\nbesten Meinung. Manchmal möcht' ich sie auf den Knieen bitten, nicht\r\nso rasend in ihre eigenen Eingeweide zu wüten.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 17. Februar\r\n\r\nIch fürchte, mein Gesandter und ich halten es zusammen nicht mehr\r\nlange aus. Der Mann ist ganz und gar unerträglich. Seine Art zu\r\narbeiten und Geschäfte zu treiben ist so lächerlich, daß ich mich\r\nnicht enthalten kann, ihm zu widersprechen und oft eine Sache nach\r\nmeinem Kopf und meiner Art zu machen, das ihm denn, wie natürlich,\r\nniemals recht ist. Darüber hat er mich neulich bei Hofe verklagt, und\r\nder Minister gab mir einen zwar sanften Verweis, aber es war doch ein\r\nVerweis, und ich stand im Begriffe, meinen Abschied zu begehren, als\r\nich einen Privatbrief von ihm erhielt, einen Brief, vor dem ich\r\nniedergekniet, und den hohen, edlen, weisen Sinn angebetet habe. Wie\r\ner meine allzu große Empfindlichkeit zurechtweiset, wie er meine\r\nüberspannten Ideen von Wirksamkeit, von Einfluß auf andere, von\r\nDurchdringen in Geschäften als jugendlichen guten Mut zwar ehrt, sie\r\nnicht auszurotten, nur zu mildern und dahin zu leiten sucht, wo sie\r\nihr wahres Spiel haben, ihre kräftige Wirkung tun können. Auch bin\r\nich auf acht Tage gestärkt und in mir selbst einig geworden. Die Ruhe\r\nder Seele ist ein herrliches Ding und die Freude an sich selbst.\r\nLieber Freund, wenn nur das Kleinod nicht eben so zerbrechlich wäre,\r\nals es schön und kostbar ist.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 20. Februar\r\n\r\nGott segne euch, meine Lieben, geb' euch alle die guten Tage, die er\r\nmir abzieht!\r\n\r\nIch danke dir, Albert, daß du mich betrogen hast: ich wartete auf\r\nNachricht, wann euer Hochzeitstag sein würde, und hatte mir\r\nvorgenommen, feierlichst an demselben Lottens Schattenriß von der Wand\r\nzu nehmen und ihn unter andere Papiere zu begraben. Nun seid ihr ein\r\nPaar, und ihr Bild ist noch hier! Nun, so soll es bleiben! Und warum\r\nnicht? Ich weiß, ich bin ja auch bei euch, bin dir unbeschadet in\r\nLottens Herzen, habe, ja ich habe den zweiten Platz darin und will und\r\nmuß ihn behalten. O ich würde rasend werden, wenn sie vergessen\r\nkönnte--Albert, in dem Gedanken liegt eine Hölle. Albert, leb' wohl!\r\nLeb' wohl, Engel des Himmels! Leb' wohl, Lotte!\r\n\r\n\r\nDen 15. März\r\n\r\nIch habe einen Verdruß gehabt, der mich von hier wegtreiben wird. Ich\r\nknirsche mit den Zähnen! Teufel! Er ist nicht zu ersetzen, und ihr\r\nseid doch allein schuld daran, die ihr mich sporntet und treibt und\r\nquältet, mich in einen Posten zu begeben, der nicht nach meinem Sinne\r\nwar. Nun habe ich's! Nun habt ihr's! Und daß du nicht wieder sagst,\r\nmeine überspannten Ideen verdürben alles, so hast du hier, lieber Herr,\r\neine Erzählung, plan und nett, wie ein Chronikenschreiber das\r\naufzeichnen würde.\r\n\r\nDer Graf von C... liebt mich, distinguiert mich, das ist bekannt, das\r\nhabe ich dir schon hundertmal gesagt. Nun war ich gestern bei ihm zu\r\nTafel, eben an dem Tage, da abends die noble Gesellschaft von Herren\r\nund Frauen bei ihm zusammenkommt, an die ich nie gedacht habe, auch\r\nmir nie aufgefallen ist, daß wir Subalternen nicht hineingehören. Gut.\r\nIch speise bei dem Grafen, und nach Tische gehn wir in dem großen\r\nSaal auf und ab, ich rede mit ihm, mit dem Obristen B..., der dazu\r\nkommt, und so rückt die Stunde der Gesellschaft heran. Ich denke,\r\nGott weiß, an nichts. Da tritt herein die übergnädige Dame von S...\r\nmit ihrem Herrn Gemahl und wohl ausgebrüteten Gänslein Tochter mit der\r\nflachen Brust und niedlichem Schnürleibe, machen en passant ihre\r\nhergebrachten, hochadeligen Augen und Naslöcher, und wie mir die\r\nNation von Herzen zuwider ist, wollte ich mich eben empfehlen und\r\nwartete nur, bis der Graf vom garstigen Gewäsche frei wäre, als meine\r\nFräulein B. hereintrat. Da mir das Herz immer ein bißchen aufgeht,\r\nwenn ich sie sehe, blieb ich eben, stellte mich hinter ihren Stuhl und\r\nbemerkte erst nach einiger Zeit, daß sie mit weniger Offenheit als\r\nsonst, mit einiger Verlegenheit mit mir redete. Das fiel mir auf.\r\nIst sie auch wie all das Volk, dacht' ich, und war angestochen und\r\nwollte gehen, und doch blieb ich, weil ich sie gerne entschuldigt\r\nhätte und es nicht glaubte und noch ein gut Wort von ihr hoffte\r\nund--was du willst. Unterdessen füllte sich die Gesellschaft. Der\r\nBaron F. mit der ganzen Garderobe von den Krönungszeiten Franz des\r\nErsten her, der Hofrat R..., hier aber in qualitate Herr von R...\r\ngenannt, mit seiner tauben Frau etc., den Übel fournierten J... nicht\r\nzu vergessen, der die Lücken seiner altfränkischen Garderobe mit\r\nneumodischen Lappen ausflickt, das kommt zu Hauf, und ich rede mit\r\neinigen meiner Bekanntschaft, die alle sehr lakonisch sind. Ich\r\ndachte--und gab nur auf meine B... acht. Ich merkte nicht, daß die\r\nWeiber am Ende des Saales sich in die Ohren flüsterten, daß es auf die\r\nMänner zirkulierte, daß Frau von S. mit dem Grafen redete (das alles\r\nhat mir Fräulein B. nachher erzählt), bis endlich der Graf auf mich\r\nlosging und mich in ein Fenster nahm.--\"Sie wissen\", sagt' er, \"unsere\r\nwunderbaren Verhältnisse; die Gesellschaft ist unzufrieden, merkte ich,\r\nSie hier zu sehn. Ich wollte nicht um alles\"--\"Ihro Exzellenz,\" fiel\r\nich ein, \"ich bitte tausendmal um Verzeihung; ich hätte eher dran\r\ndenken sollen, und ich weiß, Sie vergeben mir diese Inkonsequenz; ich\r\nwollte schon vorhin mich empfehlen. Ein böser Genius hat mich\r\nzurückgehalten.\" Setzte ich lächelnd hinzu, indem ich mich neigte.\r\n--Der Graf drückte meine Hände mit einer Empfindung, die alles sagte.\r\nIch strich mich sacht aus der vornehmen Gesellschaft, ging, setzte\r\nmich in ein Kabriolett und fuhr nach M., dort vom Hügel die Sonne\r\nuntergehen zu sehen und dabei in meinem Homer den herrlichen Gesang zu\r\nlesen, wie Ulyß von dem trefflichen Schweinehirten bewirtet wird. Das\r\nwar alles gut.\r\n\r\nDes Abends komm' ich zurück zu Tische, es waren noch wenige in der\r\nGaststube; die würfelten auf einer Ecke, hatten das Tischtuch\r\nzurückgeschlagen. Da kommt der ehrliche Adelin hinein, legt seinen\r\nHut nieder, indem er mich ansieht, tritt zu mir und sagt leise:\"du\r\nhast Verdruß gehabt?\"--\"Ich?\" sagt' ich.--\"Der Graf hat dich aus der\r\nGesellschaft gewiesen.\"--\"Hol' sie der Teufel!\" sagt' ich, \"mir war's\r\nlieb, daß ich in die freie Luft kam.\"--\"Gut,\" sagt' er, \"daß du's auf\r\ndie leichte Achsel nimmst. Nur verdrießt mich's, es ist schon überall\r\nherum.\"--Da fing mich das Ding erst an zu wurmen. Alle, die zu Tisch\r\nkamen und mich ansahen, dachte ich, die sehen dich darum an! Das gab\r\nböses Blut.\r\n\r\nUnd da man nun heute gar, wo ich hintrete, mich bedauert, da ich höre,\r\ndaß meine Neider nun triumphieren und sagen: da sähe man's, wo es mit\r\nden Übermütigen hinausginge, die sich ihres bißchen Kopfs überhöben\r\nund glaubten, sich darum über alle Verhältnisse hinaussetzen zu dürfen,\r\nund was des Hundegeschwätzes mehr ist--da möchte man sich ein Messer\r\nins Herz bohren; denn man rede von Selbständigkeit was man will, den\r\nwill ich sehen, der dulden kann, daß Schurken über ihn reden, wenn sie\r\neinen Vorteil über ihn haben; wenn ihr Geschwätze leer ist, ach da\r\nkann man sie leicht lassen.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 16. März\r\n\r\nEs hetzt mich alles. Heut' treff' ich die Fräulein B... in der\r\nAllee, ich konnte mich nicht enthalten, sie anzureden und ihr, sobald\r\nwir etwas entfernt von der Gesellschaft waren, meine Empfindlichkeit\r\nüber ihr neuliches Betragen zu zeigen.--\"O Werther,\" sagte sie mit\r\neinem innigen Tone, \"konnten Sie meine Verwirrung so auslegen, da Sie\r\nmein Herz kennen? Was ich gelitten habe um Ihretwillen, von dem\r\nAugenblicke an, da ich in den Saal trat! Ich sah alles voraus,\r\nhundertmal saß mir's auf der Zunge, es Ihnen zu sagen. Ich wußte,\r\ndaß die von S... und T... mit ihren Männern eher aufbrechen würden,\r\nals in Ihrer Gesellschaft zu bleiben; ich wußte, daß der Graf es mit\r\nihnen nicht verderben darf,--und jetzt der Lärm!\"--\"wie,\r\nFräulein?\" sagt' ich und verbarg meinen Schrecken; denn alles, was\r\nAdelin mir ehegestern gesagt hatte, lief mir wie siedend Wasser durch\r\ndie Adern in diesem Augenblicke.--\"Was hat mich es schon gekostet!\"\r\nsagte das süße Geschöpf, indem ihr die Tränen in den Augen standen.\r\n--Ich war nicht Herr mehr von mir selbst, war im Begriffe, mich ihr\r\nzu Füßen zu werfen.--\"Erklären Sie sich!\" rief ich.--Die Tränen\r\nliefen ihr die Wangen herunter. Ich war außer mir. Sie trocknete sie\r\nab, ohne sie verbergen zu wollen.--\"Meine Tante kennen Sie,\" fing sie\r\nan, \"sie war gegenwärtig und hat--o, mit was für Augen hat sie das\r\nangesehen! Werther, ich habe gestern nacht ausgestanden und heute\r\nfrüh eine Predigt über meinen Umgang mit Ihnen, und ich habe müssen\r\nzuhören Sie herabsetzen, erniedrigen, und konnte und durfte Sie nur\r\nhalb verteidigen.\" Jedes Wort, das sie sprach, ging mir wie ein\r\nSchwert durchs Herz. Sie fühlte nicht, welche Barmherzigkeit es\r\ngewesen wäre, mir das alles zu verschweigen, und nun fügte sie noch\r\nhinzu, was weiter würde geträtscht werden, was eine Art Menschen\r\ndarüber triumphieren würde.\r\n\r\nWie man sich nunmehr über die Strafe meines Übermuts und meiner\r\nGeringschätzung anderer, die sie mir schon lange vorwerfen, kitzeln\r\nund freuen würde. Das alles, Wilhelm, von ihr zu hören, mit der\r\nStimme der wahrsten Teilnehmung--ich war zerstört und bin noch wütend\r\nin mir. Ich wollte, daß sich einer unterstünde, mir's vorzuwerfen,\r\ndaß ich ihm den Degen durch den Leib stoßen könnte; wenn ich Blut sähe,\r\nwürde mir's besser werden. Ach, ich hab' hundertmal ein Messer\r\nergriffen, um diesem gedrängten Herzen Luft zu machen. Man erzählt\r\nvon einer edlen Art Pferde, die, wenn sie schrecklich erhitzt und\r\naufgejagt sind, sich selbst aus Instinkt eine Ader aufbeißen, um sich\r\nzum Atem zu helfen. So ist mir's oft, ich möchte mir eine Ader öffnen,\r\ndie mir die ewige Freiheit schaffte.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 24. März\r\n\r\nIch habe meine Entlassung vom Hofe verlangt und werde sie, hoffe\r\nich, erhalten, und ihr werdet mir verzeihen, daß ich nicht erst\r\nErlaubnis dazu bei euch geholt habe. Ich mußte nun einmal fort, und\r\nwas ihr zu sagen hattet, um mir das Bleiben einzureden, weiß ich\r\nalles, und also--bringe das meiner Mutter in einem Säftchen bei, ich\r\nkann mir selbst nicht helfen, und sie mag sich gefallen lassen, wenn\r\nich ihr auch nicht helfen kann. Freilich muß es ihr wehe tun. Den\r\nschönen Lauf, den ihr Sohn gerade zum Geheimenrat und Gesandten\r\nansetzte, so auf einmal Halte zu sehen, und rückwärts mit dem\r\nTierchen in den Stall! Macht nun daraus, was ihr wollt, und\r\nkombiniert die möglichen Fälle, unter denen ich hätte bleiben können\r\nund sollen; genug, ich gehe, und damit ihr wißt, wo ich hinkomme, so\r\nist hier der Fürst **, der vielen Geschmack an meiner Gesellschaft\r\nfindet; der hat mich gebeten, da er von meiner Absicht hörte, mit ihm\r\nauf seine Güter zu gehen und den schönen Frühling da zuzubringen.\r\nIch soll ganz mir selbst gelassen sein, hat er mir versprochen, und\r\nda wir uns zusammen bis auf einen gewissen Punkt verstehn, so will\r\nich es denn auf gut Glück wagen und mit ihm gehen.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nZur Nachricht\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 19. April\r\n\r\nDanke für deine beiden Briefe. Ich antwortete nicht, weil ich\r\ndieses Blatt liegen ließ, bis mein Abschied vom Hofe da wäre; ich\r\nfürchtete, meine Mutter möchte sich an den Minister wenden und mir\r\nmein Vorhaben erschweren. Nun aber ist es geschehen, mein Abschied\r\nist da. Ich mag euch nicht sagen, wie ungern man mir ihn gegeben hat,\r\nund was mir der Minister schreibt--ihr würdet in neue Lamentationen\r\nausbrechen. Der Erbprinz hat mir zum Abschiede fünfundzwanzig Dukaten\r\ngeschickt, mit einem Wort, das mich bis zu Tränen gerührt hat; also\r\nbrauche ich von der Mutter das Geld nicht, um das ich neulich schrieb.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 5. Mai\r\n\r\nMorgen gehe ich von hier ab, und weil mein Geburtsort nur sechs\r\nMeilen vom Wege liegt, so will ich den auch wiedersehen, will mich\r\nder alten, glücklich verträumten Tage erinnern. Zu eben dem Tore will\r\nich hinein gehn, aus dem meine Mutter mit mir heraus fuhr, als sie\r\nnach dem Tode meines Vaters den lieben, vertraulichen Ort verließ, um\r\nsich in ihre unerträgliche Stadt einzusperren. Adieu, Wilhelm, du\r\nsollst von meinem Zuge hören.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 9. Mai\r\n\r\nIch habe die Wallfahrt nach meiner Heimat mit aller Andacht eines\r\nPilgrims vollendet, und manche unerwarteten Gefühle haben mich\r\nergriffen. An der großen Linde, die eine Viertelstunde vor der Stadt\r\nnach S... zu steht, ließ ich halten, stieg aus und hieß den Postillon\r\nfortfahren, um zu Fuße jede Erinnerung ganz neu, lebhaft, nach meinem\r\nHerzen zu kosten. Da stand ich nun unter der Linde, die ehedem, als\r\nKnabe, das Ziel und die Grenze meiner Spaziergänge gewesen. Wie\r\nanders! Damals sehnte ich mich in glücklicher Unwissenheit hinaus in\r\ndie unbekannte Welt, wo ich für mein Herz so viele Nahrung, so vielen\r\nGenuß hoffte, meinen strebenden, sehnenden Busen auszufüllen und zu\r\nbefriedigen. Jetzt komme ich zurück aus der weiten Welt--o mein\r\nFreund, mit wie viel fehlgeschlagenen Hoffnungen, mit wie viel\r\nzerstörten Planen!--Ich sah das Gebirge vor mir liegen, das\r\ntausendmal der Gegenstand meiner Wünsche gewesen war. Stundenlang\r\nkonnt' ich hier sitzen und mich hinüber sehnen, mit inniger Seele\r\nmich in den Wäldern, den Tälern verlieren, die sich meinen Augen so\r\nfreundlich-dämmernd darstellten; und wenn ich dann um die bestimmte\r\nZeit wieder zurück mußte, mit welchem Widerwillen verließ ich nicht\r\nden lieben Platz!--Ich kam der Stadt näher, alle die alten,\r\nbekannten Gartenhäuschen wurden von mir gegrüßt, die neuen waren mir\r\nzuwider, so auch alle Veränderungen, die man sonst vorgenommen hatte.\r\nIch trat zum Tor hinein und fand mich doch gleich und ganz wieder.\r\nLieber, ich mag nicht ins Detail gehn; so reizend, als es mir war, so\r\neinförmig würde es in der Erzählung werden. Ich hatte beschlossen,\r\nauf dem Markte zu wohnen, gleich neben unserem alten Haus. Im\r\nHingehen bemerkte ich, daß die Schulstube, wo ein ehrliches altes\r\nWeib unsere Kindheit zusammengepfercht hatte, in einen Kramladen\r\nverwandelt war. Ich erinnere mich der Unruhe, der Tränen, der\r\nDumpfheit des Sinnes, der Herzensangst, die ich in dem Loche\r\nausgestanden hatte.--Ich tat keinen Schritt, der nicht merkwürdig\r\nwar. Ein Pilger im heiligen Lande trifft nicht so viele Stätten\r\nreligiöser Erinnerungen an, und seine Seele ist schwerlich so voll\r\nheiliger Bewegung.--Noch eins für tausend. Ich ging den Fluß hinab,\r\nbis an einen gewissen Hof; das war sonst auch mein Weg, und die\r\nPlätzchen, wo wir Knaben uns übten, die meisten Sprünge der flachen\r\nSteine im Wasser hervorzubringen. Ich erinnerte mich so lebhaft, wenn\r\nich manchmal stand und dem Wasser nachsah, mit wie wunderbaren\r\nAhnungen ich es verfolgte, wie abenteuerlich ich mir die Gegenden\r\nvorstellte, wo es nun hinflösse, und wie ich da sobald Grenzen meiner\r\nVorstellungskraft fand; und doch mußte das weiter gehen, immer weiter,\r\nbis ich mich ganz in dem Anschauen einer unsichtbaren Ferne verlor.\r\n--Sieh, mein Lieber, so beschränkt und so glücklich waren die\r\nherrlichen Altväter! So kindlich ihr Gefühl, ihre Dichtung! Wenn\r\nulyß von dem ungemeßnen Meer und von der unendlichen Erde spricht,\r\ndas ist so wahr, menschlich, innig, eng und geheimnisvoll. Was hilft\r\nmich's, daß ich jetzt mit jedem Schulknaben nachsagen kann, daß sie\r\nrund sei? Der Mensch braucht nur wenige Erdschollen, um drauf zu\r\ngenießen, weniger, um drunter zu ruhen. Nun bin ich hier, auf dem\r\nfürstlichen Jagdschloß. Es läßt sich noch ganz wohl mit dem Herrn\r\nleben, er ist wahr und einfach. Wunderliche Menschen sind um ihn\r\nherum, die ich gar nicht begreife. Sie scheinen keine Schelmen und\r\nhaben doch auch nicht das Ansehen von ehrlichen Leuten. Manchmal\r\nkommen sie mir ehrlich vor, und ich kann ihnen doch nicht trauen.\r\nWas mir noch leid tut, ist, daß er oft von Sachen redet, die er nur\r\ngehört und gelesen hat, und zwar aus eben dem Gesichtspunkte, wie sie\r\nihm der andere vorstellen mochte. Auch schätzt er meinen Verstand und\r\nmeine Talente mehr als dies Herz, das doch mein einziger Stolz ist,\r\ndas ganz und alles Elendes. Ach, was ich weiß, kann jeder\r\nwissen--mein Herz habe ich allein.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 25. Mai\r\n\r\nIch hatte etwas im Kopfe, davon ich euch nichts sagen wollte, bis\r\nes ausgeführt wäre: jetzt, da nichts draus wird, ist es ebenso gut.\r\nIch wollte in den Krieg; das hat mir lange am Herzen gelegen.\r\nVornehmlich darum bin ich dem Fürsten hierher gefolgt, der General in\r\n***schen Diensten ist. Auf einem Spaziergang entdeckte ich ihm mein\r\nVorhaben; er widerriet mir es, und es müßte bei mir mehr Leidenschaft\r\nals Grille gewesen sein, wenn ich seinen Gründen nicht hätte Gehör\r\ngeben wollen.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 11. Junius\r\n\r\nSage was du willst, ich kann nicht länger bleiben. Was soll ich\r\nhier? Die Zeit wird mir lang. Der Fürst hält mich, so gut man nur\r\nkann, und doch bin ich nicht in meiner Lage. Wir haben im Grunde\r\nnichts gemein mit einander. Er ist ein Mann von Verstande, aber von\r\nganz gemeinem Verstande; sein Umgang unterhält mich nicht mehr, als\r\nwenn ich ein wohl geschriebenes Buch lese. Noch acht Tage bleibe ich,\r\nund dann ziehe ich wieder in der Irre herum. Das Beste, was ich\r\nhier getan habe, ist mein Zeichnen. Der Fürst fühlt in der Kunst und\r\nwürde noch stärker fühlen, wenn er nicht durch das garstige\r\nwissenschaftliche Wesen und durch die gewöhnliche Terminologie\r\neingeschränkt wäre. Manchmal knirsche ich mit den Zähnen, wenn ich\r\nihn mit warmer Imagination an Natur und Kunst herumführe und er es\r\nauf einmal recht gut zu machen denkt, wenn er mit einem gestempelten\r\nKunstworte dreinstolpert.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 16. Junius\r\n\r\nJa wohl bin ich nur ein Wandrer, ein Waller auf der Erde! Seid ihr\r\ndenn mehr?\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 16. Junius\r\n\r\nWo ich hin will? Das laß dir im Vertrauen eröffnen. Vierzehn Tage\r\nmuß ich doch noch hier bleiben, und dann habe ich mir weisgemacht,\r\ndaß ich die Bergwerke im ***schen besuchen wollte; ist aber im Grunde\r\nnichts dran, ich will nur Lotten wieder näher, das ist alles. Und\r\nich lache über mein eigenes Herz--und tu' ihm seinen Willen.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 29. Julius\r\n\r\nNein, es ist gut! Es ist alles gut!--Ich--ihr Mann! O Gott, der\r\ndu mich machtest, wenn du mir diese Seligkeit bereitet hättest, mein\r\nganzes Leben sollte ein anhaltendes Gebet sein. Ich will nicht\r\nrechten, und verzeihe mir diese Tränen, verzeihe mir meine\r\nvergeblichen Wünsche!--Sie meine Frau! Wenn ich das liebste\r\nGeschöpf unter der Sonne in meine Arme geschlossen hätte--es geht mir\r\nein Schauder durch den ganzen Körper, Wilhelm, wenn Albert sie um den\r\nschlanken Leib faßt.\r\n\r\nUnd, darf ich es sagen? Warum nicht, Wilhelm? Sie wäre mit mir\r\nglücklicher geworden als mit ihm! O er ist nicht der Mensch, die\r\nWünsche dieses Herzens alle zu füllen. Ein gewisser Mangel an\r\nFühlbarkeit, ein Mangel--nimm es, wie du willst; daß sein Herz nicht\r\nsympathetisch schlägt bei--O!--bei der Stelle eines lieben Buches,\r\nwo mein Herz und Lottens in einem zusammentreffen; in hundert andern\r\nVorfällen, wenn es kommt, daß unsere Ermpfindungen über eine Handlung\r\neines Dritten laut werden. Lieber Wilhelm!--Zwar er liebt sie von\r\nganzer Seele, und so eine Liebe, was verdient die nicht!\r\n\r\n--Ein unerträglicher Mensch hat mich unterbrochen. Meine Tränen sind\r\ngetrocknet. Ich bin zerstreut. Adieu, Lieber!\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 4. August\r\n\r\nEs geht mir nicht allein so. Alle Menschen werden in ihren Hoffnungen\r\ngetäuscht, in ihren Erwartungen betrogen. Ich besuchte mein gutes\r\nWeib unter der Linde. Der älteste Junge lief mir entgegen, sein\r\nFreudengeschrei führte die Mutter herbei, die sehr niedergeschlagen\r\naussah. Ihr erstes Wort war:\"guter Herr, ach, mein Hans ist mir\r\ngestorben!\"--Es war der jüngste ihrer Knaben. Ich war stille. \"Und\r\nmein Mann,\" sagte sie, \"ist aus der Schweiz zurück und hat nichts\r\nmitgebracht, und ohne gute Leute hätte er sich heraus betteln müssen,\r\ner hatte das Fieber unterwegs gekriegt.\"--Ich konnte ihr nichts\r\nsagen und schenkte dem Kleinen was; sie bat mich, einige Äpfel\r\nanzunehmen, das ich tat und den Ort des traurigen Andenkens verließ.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 21. August\r\n\r\nWie man eine Hand umwendet, ist es anders mit mir. Manchmal will\r\nwohl ein freudiger Blick des Lebens wieder aufdämmern, ach, nur für\r\neinen Augenblick!--Wenn ich mich so in Träumen verliere, kann ich\r\nmich des Gedankens nicht erwehren: wie, wenn Albert stürbe? Du\r\nwürdest! Ja, sie würde--und dann laufe ich dem Hirngespinste nach,\r\nbis es mich an Abgründe führet, vor denen ich zurückbebe.\r\n\r\nWenn ich zum Tor hinausgehe, den Weg, den ich zum erstenmal fuhr,\r\nLotten zum Tanze zu holen, wie war das so ganz anders! Alles, alles\r\nist vorübergegangen! Kein Wink der vorigen Welt, kein Pulsschlag\r\nmeines damaligen Gefühles. Mir ist es, wie es einem Geiste sein\r\nmüßte, der in das ausgebrannte, zerstörte Schloß zurückkehrte, das er\r\nals blühender Fürst einst gebaut und mit allen Gaben der Herrlichkeit\r\nausgestattet, sterbend seinem geliebten Sohne hoffnungsvoll\r\nhinterlassen hätte.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 3. September\r\n\r\nIch begreife manchmal nicht, wie sie ein anderer lieb haben kann,\r\nlieb haben darf, da ich sie so ganz allein, so innig, so voll liebe,\r\nnichts anders kenne, noch weiß, noch habe als sie!\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 4. September\r\n\r\nJa, es ist so. Wie die Natur sich zum Herbste neigt, wird es Herbst\r\nin mir und um mich her. Meine Blätter werden gelb, und schon sind\r\ndie Blätter der benachbarten Bäume abgefallen. Hab' ich dir nicht\r\neinmal von einem Bauerburschen geschrieben, gleich da ich herkam?\r\nJetzt erkundigte ich mich wieder nach ihm in Wahlheim; es hieß, er\r\nsei aus dem Diemste gejagt worden, und niemand wollte was weiter von\r\nihm wissen. Gestern traf ich ihn von ungefähr auf dem Wege nach einem\r\nandern Dorfe, ich redete ihn an, und er erzählte mir seine Geschichte,\r\ndie mich doppelt und dreifach gerührt hat, wie du leicht begreifen\r\nwirst, wenn ich dir sie wiedererzähle. Doch wozu das alles? Warum\r\nbehalt' ich nicht für mich, was mich ängstigt und kränkt? Warum\r\nbetrüb' ich noch dich? Warum geb' ich dir immer Gelegenheit, mich zu\r\nbedauern und mich zu schelten? Sei's denn, auch das mag zu meinem\r\nSchicksal gehören!\r\n\r\nMit einer stillen Traurigkeit, in der ich ein wenig scheues Wesen\r\nzu bemerken schien, antwortete der Mensch mir erst auf meine Fragen;\r\naber gar bald offner, als wenn er sich und mich auf einmal\r\nwiedererkennte, gestand er mir seine Fehler, klagte er mir sein\r\nUnglück. Könnt' ich dir, mein Freund, jedes seiner Worte vor Gericht\r\nstellen! Er bekannte, ja er erzählte mit einer Art von Genuß und\r\nGlück der Wiedererinnerung, daß die Leidenschaft zu seiner Hausfrau\r\nsich in ihm tagtäglich vermehrt, daß er zuletzt nicht gewußt habe,\r\nwas er tue, nicht, wie er sich ausdrückte, wo er mit dem Kopfe\r\nhingesollt. Er habe weder essen noch trinken noch schlafen können, es\r\nhabe ihm an der Kehle gestockt, er habe getan, was er nicht tun\r\nsollen; was ihm aufgetragen worden, hab' er vergessen, er sei als wie\r\nvon einem bösen Geist verfolgt gewesen, bis er eines Tages, als er\r\nsie in einer obern Kammer gewußt, ihr nachgegangen, ja vielmehr ihr\r\nnachgezogen worden sei; da sie seinen Bitten kein Gehör gegeben, hab'\r\ner sich ihrer mit Gewalt bemächtigen wollen; er wisse nicht, wie ihm\r\ngeschehen sei, und nehme Gott zum Zeugen, daß seine Absichten gegen\r\nsie immer redlich gewesen, und daß er nichts sehnlicher gewünscht,\r\nals daß sie ihn heiraten, daß sie mit ihm ihr Leben zubringen möchte.\r\nDa er eine Zeitlang geredet hatte, fing er an zu stocken, wie einer,\r\nder noch etwas zu sagen hat und sich es nicht herauszusagen getraut;\r\nendlich gestand er mir auch mit Schüchternheit, was sie ihm für\r\nkleine Vertraulichkeiten erlaubt, und welche Nähe sie ihm vergönnet.\r\nEr brach zwei-, dreimal ab und wiederholte die lebhaftesten\r\nProtestationen, daß er das nicht sage, um sie schlecht zu machen, wie\r\ner sich ausdrückte, daß er sie liebe und schätze wie vorher, daß so\r\netwas nicht über seinen Mund gekommen sei und daß er es mir nur sage,\r\num mich zu überzeugen, daß er kein ganz verkehrter und unsinniger\r\nMensch sei.\r\n\r\n--Und hier, mein Bester, fang' ich mein altes Lied wieder an, das\r\nich ewig anstimmen werde: könnt' ich dir den Menschen vorstellen, wie\r\ner vor mir stand, wie er noch vor mir steht! Könnt' ich dir alles\r\nrecht sagen, damit du fühltest, wie ich an seinem Schicksale\r\nteilnehme, teilnehmen muß! Doch genug, da du auch mein Schicksal\r\nkennst, auch mich kennst, so weißt du nur zu wohl, was mich zu allen\r\nUnglücklichen, was mich besonders zu diesem Unglücklichen hinzieht.\r\n\r\nDa ich das Blut wieder durchlese, seh' ich, daß ich das Ende der\r\nGeschichte zu erzählen vergessen habe, das sich aber leicht\r\nhinzudenken läßt. Sie erwehrte sich sein; ihr Bruder kam dazu, der\r\nihn schon lange gehaßt, der ihn schon lange aus dem Hause gewünscht\r\nhatte, weil er fürchtet, durch eine neue Heirat der Schwester werde\r\nseinen Kindern die Erbschaft entgehn, die ihnen jetzt, da sie\r\nkinderlos ist, schöne Hoffnungen gibt; dieser habe ihn gleich zum\r\nHause hinausgestoßen und einen solchen Lärm von der Sache gemacht,\r\ndaß die Frau, auch selbst wenn sie gewollt, ihn nicht wieder hätte\r\naufnehmen können. Jetzt habe sie wieder einen andern Knecht genommen,\r\nauch über den, sage man, sei sie mit dem Bruder zerfallen, und man\r\nbehaupte für gewiß, sie werde ihn heiraten, aber er sei fest\r\nentschlossen, das nicht zu erleben.\r\n\r\nWas ich dir erzähle, ist nicht übertrieben, nichts verzärtelt, ja\r\nich darf wohl sagen, schwach, schwach hab' ich's erzählt, und\r\nvergröbert hab' ich's, indem ich's mit unsern hergebrachten\r\nsittlichen Worten vorgetragen habe.\r\n\r\nDiese Liebe, diese Treue, diese Leidenschaft ist also keine\r\ndichterische Erfindung. Sie lebt, sie ist in ihrer größten Reinheit\r\nunter der Klasse von Menschen, die wir ungebildet, die wir roh nennen.\r\nWir Gebildeten--zu Nichts Verbildeten! Lies die Geschichte mit\r\nAndacht, ich bitte dich. Ich bin heute still, indem ich das\r\nhinschreibe; du siehst an meiner Hand, daß ich nicht so strudele und\r\nsudele wie sonst. Lies, mein Geliebter, und denke dabei, daß es auch\r\ndie Geschichte deines Freundes ist. Ja so ist mir's gegangen, so\r\nwird mir's gehn, und ich bin nicht halb so brav, nicht halb so\r\nentschlossen als der arme Unglückliche, mit dem ich mich zu\r\nvergleichen mich fast nicht getraue.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 5. September\r\n\r\nSie hatte ein Zettelchen an ihren Mann aufs Land geschrieben, wo er\r\nsich Geschäfte wegen aufhielt. Es fing an: \"Bester, Liebster, komme,\r\nsobald du kannst, ich erwarte dich mit tausend Freuden.\"--Ein\r\nFreund, der hereinkam, brachte Nachricht, daß er wegen gewisser\r\nUmstände so bald noch nicht zurückkehren würde. Das Billett blieb\r\nliegen und fiel mir abends in die Hände. Ich las es und lächelte; sie\r\nfragte worüber?--\"Was die Einbildungskraft für ein göttliches\r\nGeschenk ist,\" rief ich aus, \"ich konnte mir einen Augenblick\r\nvorspiegeln, als wäre es an mich geschrieben.\"--Sie brach ab, es\r\nschien ihr zu mißfallen, und ich schwieg.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 6. September\r\n\r\nEs hat schwer gehalten, bis ich mich entschloß, meinen blauen\r\neinfachen Frack, in dem ich mit Lotten zum erstenmale tanzte,\r\nabzulegen, er ward aber zuletzt gar unscheinbar. Auch habe ich mir\r\neinen machen lassen ganz wie den vorigen, Kragen und Aufschlag, und\r\nauch wieder so gelbe Weste und Beinkleider dazu. Ganz will es doch\r\ndie Wirkung nicht tun. Ich weiß nicht--ich denke, mit der Zeit soll\r\nmir der auch lieber werden.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 12. September\r\n\r\nSie war einige Tage verreist, Alberten abzuholen. Heute trat ich in\r\nihre Stube, sie kam mir entgegen, und ich küßte ihre Hand mit tausend\r\nFreuden.\r\n\r\nEin Kanarienvogel flog von dem Spiegel ihr auf die Schulter.\r\n--\"Einen neuen Freund,\" sagte sie und lockte ihn auf ihre Hand, \"er ist\r\nmeinen Kleinen zugedacht. Er tut gar zu lieb! Sehen Sie ihn! Wenn\r\nich ihm Brot gebe, flattert er mit den Flügeln und pickt so artig.\r\nEr küßt mich auch, sehen Sie!\"\r\n\r\nAls sie dem Tierchen den Mund hinhielt, drückte es sich so lieblich\r\nin die süßen Lippen, als wenn es die Seligkeit hätte fühlen können,\r\ndie es genoß.\r\n\r\n\"Er soll Sie auch küssen,\" sagte sie und reichte den Vogel herüber.\r\n--Das Schnäbelchen machte den Weg von ihrem Munde zu dem meinigen,\r\nund die pickende Berührung war wie ein Hauch, eine Ahnung liebevollen\r\nGenusses.\r\n\r\n\"Sein Kuß,\" sagte ich, \"ist nicht ganz ohne Begierde, er sucht\r\nNahrung und kehrt unbefriedigt von der leeren Liebkosung zurück.\"\r\n\r\n\"Er ißt mir auch aus dem Munde.\"sagte sie.--Sie reichte ihm einige\r\nBrosamen mit ihren Lippen, aus denen die Freuden unschuldig\r\nteilnehmender Liebe in aller Wonne lächelten.\r\n\r\nIch kehrte das Gesicht weg. Sie sollte es nicht tun, sollte nicht\r\nmeine Einbildungskraft mit diesen Bildern himmlischer Unschuld und\r\nSeligkeit reizen und mein Herz aus dem Schlafe, in den es manchmal\r\ndie Gleichgültigkeit des Lebens wiegt, nicht wecken!--Und warum\r\nnicht?--Sie traut mir so! Sie weiß, wie ich sie liebe!\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 15. September\r\n\r\nMan möchte rasend werden, Wilhelm, daß es Menschen geben soll ohne\r\nSinn und Gefühl an dem wenigen, was auf Erden noch einen Wert hat.\r\nDu kennst die Nußbäume, unter denen ich bei dem ehrlichen Pfarrer zu\r\nSt... mit Lotten gesessen, die herrlichen Nußbäume, die mich, Gott\r\nweiß, immer mit dem größten Seelenvergnügen füllten! Wie vertraulich\r\nsie den Pfarrhof machten, wie kühl! Und wie herrlich die Äste waren!\r\nUnd die Erinnerung bis zu den ehrlichen Geistlichen, die sie vor\r\nvielen Jahren pflanzten. Der Schulmeister hat uns den einen Namen oft\r\ngenannt, den er von seinem Großvater gehört hatte; und so ein braver\r\nMann soll er gewesen sein, und sein Andenken war immer heilig unter\r\nden Bäumen. Ich sage dir, dem Schulmeister standen die Tränen in den\r\nAugen, da wir gestern davon redeten, daß sie abgehauen worden--\r\nabgehauen! Ich möchte toll werden, ich könnte den Hund ermorden, der\r\nden ersten Hieb dran tat. Ich, der ich mich vertrauern könnte, wenn\r\nso ein paar Bäume in meinem Hofe stünden und einer davon stürbe vor\r\nAlter ab, ich muß zusehen. Lieber Schatz, eins ist doch dabei: was\r\nMenschengefühl ist! Das ganze Dorf murrt, und ich hoffe, die Frau\r\nPfarrerin soll es an Butter und Eiern und übrigem Zutrauen spüren,\r\nwas für eine Wunde sie ihrem Orte gegeben hat. Denn sie ist es, die\r\nFrau des neuen Pfarrers (unser alter ist auch gestorben), ein hageres,\r\nkränkliches Geschöpf, das sehr Ursache hat, an der Welt keinen\r\nAnteil zu nehmen, denn niemand nimmt Anteil an ihr. Eine Närrin, die\r\nsich abgibt, gelehrt zu sein, sich in die Untersuchung des Kanons\r\nmeliert, gar viel an der neumodischen, moralisch-kritischen\r\nReformation des Christentumes arbeitet und über Lavaters\r\nSchwärmereien die Achseln zuckt, eine ganz zerrüttete Gesundheit hat\r\nund deswegen auf Gottes Erdboden keine Freude. So einer Kreatur war\r\nes auch allein möglich, meine Nußbäume abzuhauen. Siehst du, ich\r\nkomme nicht zu mir! Stelle dir vor: die abfallenden Blätter machen\r\nihr den Hof unrein und dumpfig, die Bäume nehmen ihr das Tageslicht,\r\nund wenn die Nüsse reif sind, so werfen die Knaben mit Steinen\r\ndarnach, und das fällt ihr auf die Nerven, das stört sie in ihren\r\ntiefen Überlegungen, wenn sie Kennikot, Semler und Michaelis gegen\r\neinander abwiegt. Da ich die Leute im Dorfe, besonders die alten, so\r\nunzufrieden sah, sagte ich:\"warum habt ihr es gelitten?\"--\"wenn der\r\nSchulze will, hier zu Lande,\" sagten sie, \"was kann man machen?\"--Aber\r\neins ist recht geschehen. Der Schulze und der Pfarrer, der doch auch\r\nvon seiner Frauen Grillen, die ihm ohnedies die Suppen nicht fett\r\nmachen, was haben wollte, dachten es mit einander zu teilen; da\r\nerfuhr es die Kammer und sagte: \"hier herein!\" denn sie hatte noch\r\nalte Prätensionen an den Teil des Pfarrhofes, wo die Bäume standen,\r\nund verkaufte sie an den Meistbietenden. Sie liegen! O, wenn ich\r\nFürst wäre! Ich wollte die Pfarrerin, den Schulzen und die Kammer--\r\nFürst!--ja wenn ich Fürst wäre, was kümmerten mich die Bäume in\r\nmeinem Lande!\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 10. Oktober\r\n\r\nWenn ich nur ihre schwarzen Augen sehe, ist mir es schon wohl!\r\nSieh, und was mich verdrießt, ist, daß Albert nicht so beglückt zu\r\nsein scheinet, als er--hoffte--als ich--zu sein glaubte--wenn--ich\r\nmache nicht gern Gedankenstriche, aber hier kann ich mich nicht\r\nanders ausdrücken--und mich dünkt deutlich genug.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 10. Oktober\r\n\r\nOssian hat in meinem Herzen den Humor verdrängt. Welch eine Welt,\r\nin die der Herrliche mich führt! Zu wandern über die Heide, umsaust\r\nvom Sturmwinde, der in dampfenden Nebeln die Geister der Väter im\r\ndämmernden Lichte des Mondes hinführt. Zu hören vom Gebirge her, im\r\nGebrülle des Waldstroms, halb verwehtes Ächzen der Geister aus ihren\r\nHöhlen, und die Wehklagen des zu Tode sich jammernden Mädchens, um\r\ndie vier moosbedeckten, grasbewachsenen Steine des Edelgefallnen,\r\nihres Geliebten. Wenn ich ihn dann finde, den wandelnden grauen\r\nBarden, der auf der weiten Heide die Fußstapfen seiner Väter sucht\r\nund, ach, ihre Grabsteine findet und dann jammernd nach dem lieben\r\nSterne des Abends hinblickt, der sich ins rollende Meer verbirgt, und\r\ndie Zeiten der Vergangenheit in des Helden Seele lebendig werden, da\r\nnoch der freundliche Strahl den Gefahren der Tapferen leuchtete und\r\nder Mond ihr bekränztes, siegrückkehrendes Schiff beschien. Wenn ich\r\nden tiefen Kummer auf seiner Stirn lese, den letzten verlassenen\r\nHerrlichen in aller Ermattung dem Grabe zuwanken sehe, wie er immer\r\nneue, schmerzlich glühende Freuden in der kraftlosen Gegenwart der\r\nSchatten seiner Abgeschiedenen einsaugt und nach der kalten Erde, dem\r\nhohen, wehenden Grase niedersieht und ausruft: \"Der Wanderer wird\r\nkommen, kommen, der mich kannte in meiner Schönheit, und fragen: 'wo\r\nist der Sänger, Fingals trefflicher Sohn?' Sein Fußtritt geht über\r\nmein Grab hin, und er fragt vergebens nach mir auf der Erde.\"--O\r\nFreund! Ich möchte gleich einem edlen Waffenträger das Schwert ziehen,\r\nmeinen Fürsten von der zückenden Qual des langsam absterbenden\r\nLebens auf einmal befreien und dem befreiten Halbgott meine Seele\r\nnachsenden.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 19. Oktober\r\n\r\nAch diese Lücke! Diese entsetzliche Lücke, die ich hier in meinem\r\nBusen fühle!--Ich denke oft, wenn du sie nur einmal, nur einmal an\r\ndieses Herz drücken könntest, diese ganze Lücke würde ausgefüllt sein.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 19. Oktober\r\n\r\nJa es wird mir gewiß, Lieber, gewiß und immer gewisser, daß an dem\r\nDasein eines Geschöpfes wenig gelegen ist, ganz wenig. Es kam eine\r\nFreundin zu Lotten, und ich ging herein ins Nebenzimmer, ein Buch zu\r\nnehmen, und konnte nicht lesen, und dann nahm ich eine Feder, zu\r\nschreiben. Ich hörte sie leise reden; sie erzählten einander\r\nunbedeutende Sachen, Stadtneuigkeiten: wie diese heiratet, wie jene\r\nkrank, sehr krank ist.--\"Sie hat einen trocknen Husten, die Knochen\r\nstehn ihr zum Gesichte heraus, und kriegt Ohnmachten; ich gebe keinen\r\nKreuzer für ihr Leben.\" Sagte die eine.--\"Der N. N. ist auch so\r\nÜbel dran,\" sagte Lotte.--\"Er ist schon geschwollen,\" sagte die\r\nandere.--Und meine lebhafte Einbildungskraft versetzte mich ans Bett\r\ndieser Armen; ich sah sie, mit welchem Widerwillen sie dem Leben den\r\nRücken wandten, wie sie--Wilhelm! Und meine Weibchen redeten davon,\r\nwie man eben davon redet--daß ein Fremder stirbt.--Und wenn ich\r\nmich umsehe und sehe das Zimmer an, und rings um mich Lottens Kleider\r\nund Alberts Skripturen und diese Möbeln, denen ich nun so befreundet\r\nbin, sogar diesem Dintenfaß, und denke: siehe, was du nun diesem\r\nHause bist! Alles in allem. Deine Freunde ehren dich! Du machst oft\r\nihre Freude, und deinem Herzen scheint es, als wenn es ohne sie nicht\r\nsein könnte; und doch--wenn du nun gingst, wenn du aus diesem Kreise\r\nschiedest? Würden sie, wie lange würden sie die Lücke fühlen, die\r\ndein Verlust in ihr Schicksal reißt? Wie lange?--O, so vergänglich\r\nist der Mensch, daß er auch da, wo er seines Daseins eigentliche\r\nGewißheit hat, da, wo er den einzigen wahren Eindruck seiner\r\nGegenwart macht, in dem Andenken, in der Seele seiner Lieben, daß er\r\nauch da verlöschen, verschwinden muß, und das so bald!\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 27. Oktober\r\n\r\nIch möchte mir oft die Brust zerreißen und das Gehirn einstoßen,\r\ndaß man einander so wenig sein kann. Ach die Liebe, Freude, Wärme und\r\nWonne, die ich nicht hinzubringe, wird mir der andere nicht geben,\r\nund mit einem ganzen Herzen voll Seligkeit werde ich den andern nicht\r\nbeglücken, der kalt und kraftlos vor mir steht.\r\n\r\nIch habe so viel, und die Emfpindung an ihr verschlingt alles; ich\r\nhabe so viel, und ohne sie wird mir alles zu Nichts.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 27. Oktober abends\r\n\r\nWenn ich nicht schon hundertmal auf dem Punkte gestanden bin, ihr\r\num den Hals zu fallen! Weiß der große Gott, wie einem das tut, so\r\nviele Liebenswürdigkeit vor einem herumkreuzen zu sehen und nicht\r\nzugreifen zu dürfen; und das Zugreifen ist doch der natürlichste\r\nTrieb der Menschheit. Greifen die Kinder nicht nach allem, was ihnen\r\nin den Sinn fällt?--Und ich?\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 30. Oktober\r\n\r\nWeiß Gott! Ich lege mich so oft zu Bette mit dem Wunsche, ja\r\nmanchmal mit der Hoffnung, nicht wieder zu erwachen: und morgens\r\nschlage ich die Augen auf, sehe die Sonne wieder, und bin elend. O\r\ndaß ich launisch sein könnte, könnte die Schuld aufs Wetter, auf\r\neinen Dritten, auf eine fehlgeschlagene Unternehmung schieben, so\r\nwürde die unerträgliche Last des Unwillens doch nur halb auf mir\r\nruhen. Wehe mir! Ich fühle zu wahr, daß an mir alle Schuld\r\nliegt--nicht Schuld! Genug, daß in mir die Quelle alles Elendes\r\nverborben ist, wie ehemals die Quelle aller Seligkeiten. Bin ich\r\nnicht noch ebenderselbe, der ehemals in aller Fülle der Empfindung\r\nherumschwebte, dem auf jedem Tritte ein Paradies folgte, der ein Herz\r\nhatte, eine ganze Welt liebevoll zu umfassen? Und dies Herz ist jetzt\r\ntot, aus ihm fließen keine Entzückungen mehr, meine Augen sind\r\ntrocken, und meine Sinne, die nicht mehr von erquickenden Tränen\r\ngelabt werden, ziehen ängstlich meine Stirn zusammen. Ich leide viel,\r\ndenn ich habe verloren, was meines Lebens einzige Wonne war, die\r\nheilige, belebende Kraft, mit der ich Welten um mich schuf; sie ist\r\ndahin!--Wenn ich zu meinem Fenster hinaus an den fernen Hügel sehe,\r\nwie die Morgensonne über ihn her den Nebel durchbricht und den stillen\r\nWiesengrund bescheint, und der sanfte Fluß zwischen seinen\r\nentblätterten Weiden zu mir herschlängelt,--o! Wenn da diese\r\nherrliche Natur so starr vor mir steht wie ein lackiertes Bildchen,\r\nund alle die Wonne keinen Tropfen Seligkeit aus meinem Herzen herauf\r\nin das Gehirn pumpen kann, und der ganze Kerl vor Gottes Angesicht\r\nsteht wie ein versiegter Brunnen, wie ein verlechter Eimer. Ich habe\r\nmich oft auf den Boden geworfen und Gott um Tränen gebeten, wie ein\r\nAckersmann um Regen, wenn der Himmel ehern über ihm ist und um ihn\r\ndie Erde verdürstet.\r\n\r\nAber, ach, ich fühle es, Gott gibt Regen und Sonnenschein nicht\r\nunserm ungestümen Bitten, und jene Zeiten, deren Andenken mich quält,\r\nwarum waren sie so selig, als weil ich mit Geduld seinen Geist\r\nerwartete und die Wonne, die er über mich ausgoß, mit ganzem, innig\r\ndankbarem Herzen aufnahm!\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 8. November\r\n\r\nSie hat mir meine Exzesse vorgeworfen! Ach, mit so viel\r\nLiebenswürdigkeit! Meine Exzesse, daß ich mich manchmal von einem\r\nGlase Wein verleiten lasse, eine Bouteille zu trinken.--\"Tun Sie es\r\nnicht!\" sagte sie, \"denken Sie an Lotten!\"--\"Denken!\" sagte ich,\r\n\"brauchen Sie mir das zu heißen? Ich denke!--Ich denke nicht! Sie\r\nsind immer vor meiner Seele. Heute saß ich an dem Flecke, wo Sie\r\nneulich aus der Kutsche stiegen.\"--Sie redete was anders, um mich\r\nnicht tiefer in den Text kommen zu lassen. Bester, ich bin dahin!\r\nSie kann mit mir machen, was sie will.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 15. November\r\n\r\nIch danke dir, Wilhelm, für deinen herzlichen Anteil, für deinen\r\nwohlmeinenden Rat und bitte dich, ruhig zu sein. Laß mich ausdulden,\r\nich habe bei aller meiner Müdseligkeit noch Kraft genug durchzusetzen.\r\nIch ehre die Religion, das weißt du, ich fühle, daß sie manchem\r\nErmatteten Stab, manchem Verschmachtenden Erquickung ist. Nur--kann\r\nsie denn, muß sie denn das einem jeden sein? Wenn du die große Welt\r\nansiehst, so siehst du Tausende, denen sie es nicht war, Tausende,\r\ndenen sie es nicht sein wird, gepredigt oder ungepredigt, und muß sie\r\nmir es denn sein? Sagt nicht selbst der Sohn Gottes, daß die um ihn\r\nsein würden, die ihm der Vater gegeben hat? Wenn ich ihm nun nicht\r\ngegeben bin? Wenn mich nun der Vater für sich bahalten will, wie mir\r\nmein Herz sagt?--Ich bitte dich, lege das nicht falsch aus; sieh\r\nnicht etwa Spott in diesen unschuldigen Worten; es ist meine ganze\r\nSeele, die ich dir vorlege; sonst wollte ich lieber, ich hätte\r\ngeschwiegen: wie ich denn über alles das, wovon jedermann so wenig\r\nweiß als ich, nicht gern ein Wort verliere. Was ist es anders als\r\nMenschenschicksal, sein Maß auszuleiden, seinen Becher auszutrinken?\r\n--Und ward der Kelch dem Gott vom Himmel auf seiner Menschenlippe zu\r\nbitter, warum soll ich großtun und mich stellen, als schmeckte er mir\r\nsüß? Und warum sollte ich mich schämen, in dem schrecklichen\r\nAugenblick, da mein ganzes Wesen zwischen Sein und Nichtsein zittert,\r\nda die Vergangenheit wie ein Blitz über dem finstern Abgrunde der\r\nZukunft leuchtet und alles um mich her versinkt und mit mir die Welt\r\nuntergeht? Ist es da nicht die Stimme der ganz in sich gedrängten,\r\nsich selbst ermangelnden und unaufhaltsam hinabstürzenden Kreatur, in\r\nden innern Tiefen ihrer vergebens aufarbeitenden Kräfte zu knirschen:\r\n\"mein Gott! Mein Gott! Warum hast du mich verlassen?\" und sollt' ich\r\nmich des Ausdruckes schämen, sollte mir es vor dem Augenblicke bange\r\nsein, da ihm der nicht entging, der die Himmel zusammenrollt wie ein\r\nTuch?\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 21. November\r\n\r\nSie sieht nicht, sie fühlt nicht, daß sie ein Gift bereitet, das\r\nmich und sie zugrunde richten wird; und ich mit voller Wollust\r\nschlürfe den Becher aus, den sie mir zu meinem Verderben reicht. Was\r\nsoll der gütige Blick, mit dem sie mich oft--oft?--nein, nicht oft,\r\naber doch manchmal ansieht, die Gefälligkeit, womit sie einen\r\nunwillkürlichen Ausdruck meines Gefühls aufnimmt, das Mitleiden mit\r\nmeiner Duldung, das sich auf ihrer Stirne zeichnet?\r\n\r\nGestern, als ich wegging, reichte sie mir die Hand und sagte: \"Adieu,\r\nlieber Werther!\"--Lieber Werther! Es war das erstemal, daß sie mich\r\nLieber hieß, und es ging mir durch Mark und Bein. Ich habe es mir\r\nhundertmal wiederholt, und gestern nacht, da ich zu Bette gehen\r\nwollte und mit mir selbst allerlei schwatzte, sagte ich so auf einmal:\r\n\"gute Nacht, lieber Werther!\" und mußte hernach selbst über mich\r\nlachen.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 22. November\r\n\r\nIch kann nicht beten: \"laß mir sie!\" und doch kommt sie mir oft als\r\ndie Meine vor. Ich kann nicht beten: \"gib mir sie!\" denn sie ist eines\r\nandern. Ich witzle mich mit meinen Schmerzen herum; wenn ich mir's\r\nnachließe, es gäbe eine ganze Litanei von Antithesen.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 24. November\r\n\r\nSie fühlt, was ich dulde. Heute ist mir ihr Blick tief durchs Herz\r\ngedrungen. Ich fand sie allein; ich sagte nichts, und sie sah mich an.\r\nUnd ich sah nicht mehr in ihr die liebliche Schönheit, nicht mehr\r\ndas Leuchten des trefflichen Geistes, das war alles vor meinen Augen\r\nverschwunden. Ein weit herrlicherer Blick wirkte auf mich, voll\r\nAusdruck des innigsten Anteils, des süßesten Mitleidens. Warum\r\ndurft' ich mich nicht ihr zu Füßen werfen? Warum durft' ich nicht an\r\nihrem Halse mit tausend Küssen antworten? Sie nahm ihre Zuflucht zum\r\nKlavier und hauchte mit süßer, leiser Stimme harmonische Laute zu\r\nihrem Spiele. Nie habe ich ihre Lippen so reizend gesehn; es war, als\r\nwenn sie sich lechzend öffneten, jene süßen Töne in sich zu schlürfen,\r\ndie aus dem Instrument hervorquollen, und nur der heimliche\r\nWiderschall aus dem reinen Munde zurückklänge--ja wenn ich dir das so\r\nsagen könnte!--Ich widerstand nicht länger, neigte mich und schwur:\r\nnie will ich es wagen, einen Kuß euch aufzudrücken, Lippen, auf denen\r\ndie Geister des Himmels schweben.--Und doch--ich will--ha! Siehst\r\ndu, das steht wie eine Scheidewand vor meiner Seele--diese\r\nSeligkeit--und dann untergegangen, diese Sünde abzubüßen--Sünde?\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 26. November\r\n\r\nManchmal sag' ich mir: dein Schicksal ist einzig; preise die\r\nübrigen glücklich--so ist noch keiner gequält worden.--Dann lese ich\r\neinen Dichter der Vorzeit, und es ist mir, als säh' ich in mein\r\neignes Herz. Ich habe so viel auszustehen! Ach, sind denn Menschen\r\nvor mir schon so elend gewesen?\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 30. November\r\n\r\nIch soll, ich soll nicht zu mir selbst kommen! Wo ich hintrete,\r\nbegegnet mir eine Erscheinung, die mich aus aller Fassung bringt.\r\nHeute! O Schicksal! O Menschheit!\r\n\r\nIch gehe an dem Wasser hin in der Mittagsstunde, ich hatte keine\r\nkeine Lust zu essen. Alles war Öde, ein naßkalter Abendwind blies vom\r\nBerge, und die grauen Regenwolken zogen das Tal hinein. Von fern\r\nseh' ich einen Menschen in einem grünen, schlechten Rocke, der\r\nzwischen den Felsen herumkrabbelte und Kräuter zu suchen schien. Als\r\nich näher zu ihm kam und er sich auf das Geräusch, das ich machte,\r\nherumdrehte, sah ich eine gar interessante Physiognomie, darin eine\r\nstille Trauer den Hauptzug machte, die aber sonst nichts als einen\r\ngeraden guten Sinn ausdrückte; seine schwarzen Haare waren mit Nadeln\r\nin zwei Rollen gesteckt, und die übrigen in einen starken Zopf\r\ngeflochten, der ihm den Rücken herunter hing. Da mir seine Kleidung\r\neinen Menschen von geringem Stande zu bezeichnen schien, glaubte ich,\r\ner würde es nicht übelnehmen, wenn ich auf seine Beschäftigung\r\naufmerksam wäre, und daher fragte ich ihn, was er suchte?--\"Ich\r\nsuche,\" antwortete er mit einem tiefen Seufzer, \"Blumen--und finde\r\nkeine.\"--\"Das ist auch die Jahreszeit nicht.\" sagte ich lächelnd.\r\n--\"Es gibt so viele Blumen,\" sagte er, indem er zu mir herunterkam.\r\n\"In meinem Garten sind Rosen und Jelängerjelieber zweierlei Sorten,\r\neine hat mir mein Vater gegeben, sie wachsen wie Unkraut; ich suche\r\nschon zwei Tage darnach und kann sie nicht finden. Da haußen sind\r\nauch immer Blumen, gelbe und blaue und rote, und das\r\nTausendgüldenkraut hat ein schönes Blümchen. Keines kann ich finden.\"\r\n--Ich merkte was Unheimliches, und drum fragte ich durch einen Umweg:\r\n\"Was will er denn mit den Blumen?\"--Ein wunderbares, zuckendes\r\nLächeln verzog sein Gesichte. \"Wenn er mich nicht verraten will,\"\r\nsagte er, indem er den Finger auf den Mund drückte, \"ich habe meinem\r\nSchatz einen Strauß versprochen.\"--\"Das ist brav,\" sagte ich.--\"O!\r\n\" sagte er, \"sie hat viel andere Sachen, sie ist reich.\"--\"Und doch\r\nhat sie seinen Strauß lieb,\" versetzte ich.--\"O!\" fuhr er fort, \"sie\r\nhat Juwelen und eine Krone.\"--\"Wie heißt sie denn?\"--\"Wenn mich die\r\nGeneralstaaten bezahlen wollten,\" versetzte er, \"ich wär' ein anderer\r\nMensch! Ja, es war einmal eine Zeit, da mir es so wohl war! Jetzt\r\nist es aus mit mir. Ich bin nun.\" Ein nasser Blick zum Himmel\r\ndrückte alles aus.--\"Er war also glücklich?\"fragte ich.--\"Ach ich\r\nwollte, ich wäre wieder so!\" sagte er \"Da war mir es so wohl, so\r\nlustig, so leicht wie einem Fisch im Wasser!\"--\"Heinrich!\" rief eine\r\nalte Frau, die den Weg herkam, \"Heinrich, wo steckst du? Wir haben\r\ndich überall gesucht, komm zum Essen.\"--\"Ist das euer Sohn?\" fragt'\r\nich, zu ihr tretend.--\"Wohl, mein armer Sohn!\" versetzte sie. \"Gott\r\nhat mir ein schweres Kreuz aufgelegt.\"--\"Wie lange ist er so?\" fragte\r\nich.--\"So stille,\" sagte sie, \"ist er nun ein halbes Jahr. Gott sei\r\nDank, daß er nur so weit ist, vorher war er ein ganzes Jahr rasend,\r\nda hat er an Ketten im Tollhause gelegen. Jetzt tut er niemand nichts,\r\nnur hat er immer mit Königen und Kaisern zu schaffen. Er war ein so\r\nguter, stiller Mensch, der mich ernähren half, seine schöne Hand\r\nschrieb, und auf einmal wird er tiefsinnig, fällt in ein hinziges\r\nFieber, daraus in Raserei, und nun ist er, wie Sie ihn sehen. Wenn\r\nich Ihnen erzählen sollte, Herr.\"--Ich unterbrach den Strom ihrer\r\nWorte mit der Frage: \"was war denn das für eine Zeit, von der er rühmt,\r\ndaß er so glücklich, so wohl darin gewesen sei?\"--\"Der törichte\r\nMensch!\" rief sie mit mitleidigem Lächeln, \"da meint er die Zeit, da er\r\nvon sich war, das rühmt er immer; das ist die Zeit, da er im\r\nTollhause war, wo er nichts von sich wußte.\"--Das fiel mir auf wie\r\nein Donnerschlag, ich drückte ihr ein Stück Geld in die Hand und\r\nverließ sie eilend. Da du glücklich warst! Rief ich aus, schnell vor\r\nmich hin nach der Stadt zu gehend, da dir es wohl war wie einem Fisch\r\nim Wasser!--Gott im Himmel! Hast du das zum Schicksale der Menschen\r\ngemacht, daß sie nicht glücklich sind, als ehe sie zu ihrem Verstande\r\nkommen und wenn sie ihn wieder verlieren!--Elender! Und auch wie\r\nbeneide ich deinen Trübsinn, die Verwirrung deiner Sinne, in der du\r\nverschmachtest! Du gehst hoffnungsvoll aus, deiner Königin Blumen zu\r\npflücken--im Winter--und trauerst, da du keine findest, und begreifst\r\nnicht, warum du keine finden kannst. Und ich--und ich gehe ohne\r\nHoffnung, ohne Zweck heraus und kehre wieder heim, wie ich gekommen\r\nbin.--Du wähnst, welcher Mensch du sein würdest, wenn die\r\nGeneralstaaten dich bezahlten. Seliges Geschöpf, das den Mangel\r\nseiner Glückseligkeit einer irdischen Hindernis zuschreiben kann! Du\r\nfühlst nicht, du fühlst nicht, daß in deinem zerstörten Herzen, in\r\ndeinem zerrütteten Gehirne dein Elend liegt, wovon alle Könige der\r\nErde dir nicht helfen können. Müsse der trostlos umkommen, der eines\r\nKranken spottet, der nach der entferntesten Quelle reist, die seine\r\nKrankheit vermehren, sein Ausleben schmerzhafter machen wird! Der\r\nsich über das bedrängte Herz erhebt, das, um seine Gewissensbisse\r\nloszuwerden und die Leiden seiner Seele abzutun, eine Pilgrimschaft\r\nnach dem heiligen Grabe tut. Jeder Fußtritt, der seine Sohlen auf\r\nungebahntem Wege durchschneidet, ist ein Linderungstropfen der\r\ngeängsteten Seele, und mit jeder ausgedauerten Tagereise legt sich\r\ndas Herz um viele Bedrängnisse leichter nieder.--Und dürft ihr das\r\nWahn nennen, ihr Wortkrämer auf euren Polstern?--Wahn!--o Gott!\r\nDu siehst meine Tränen! Mußtest du, der du den Menschen arm genug\r\nerschufst, ihm auch Brüder zugeben, die ihm das bißchen Armut, das\r\nbißchen Vertrauen noch raubten, das er auf dich hat, auf dich, du\r\nAllliebender! Denn das Vertrauen zu einer heilenden Wurzel, zu den\r\nTränen des Weinstockes, was ist es als Vertrauen zu dir, daß du in\r\nalles, was uns umgibt, Heil--und Linderungskraft gelegt hast, der wir\r\nso stündlich bedürfen? Vater, den ich nicht kenne! Vater, der sonst\r\nmeine ganze Seele füllte und nun sein Angesicht von mir gewendet hat,\r\nrufe mich zu dir! Schweige nicht länger! Dein Schweigen wird diese\r\ndürstende Seele nicht aufhalten--und würde ein Mensch, ein Vater,\r\nzürnen können, dem sein unvermutet rückkehrender Sohn um den Hals\r\nfiele und riefe: \"ich bin wieder da, mein Vater! Zürne nicht, daß ich\r\ndie Wanderschaft abbreche, die ich nach deinem Willen länger\r\naushalten sollte. Die Welt ist überall einerlei, auf Mühe und Arbeit\r\nLohn und Freude; aber was soll mir das? Mir ist nur wohl, wo du bist,\r\nund vor deinem Angesichte will ich leiden und genießen.\"--Und du,\r\nlieber himmlischer Vater, solltest ihn von dir weisen?\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 1. Dezember\r\n\r\nWilhelm! Der Mensch, von dem ich dir schrieb, der glückliche\r\nUnglückliche, war Schreiber bei Lottens Vater, und eine Leidenschaft\r\nzu ihr, die er nährte, verbarg, entdeckte und worüber er aus dem\r\nDienst geschickt wurde, hat ihn rasend gemacht. Fühle bei diesen\r\ntrocknen Worten, mit welchem Unsinn mich die Geschichte ergriffen hat,\r\nda mir sie Albert ebenso gelassen erzählte, als du sie vielleicht\r\nliesest.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 4. Dezember\r\n\r\nIch bitte dich--siehst du, mit mir ist's aus, ich trag' es nicht\r\nlänger! Heute saß ich bei ihr--saß, sie spielte auf ihrem Klavier,\r\nmannigfaltige Melodien, und all den Ausdruck! All!--All!--Was\r\nwillst du?--Ihr Schwesterchen putzte ihre Puppe auf meinem Knie.\r\nMir kamen die Tränen in die Augen. Ich neigte mich, und ihr Trauring\r\nfiel mir ins Gesicht--meine Tränen flossen--und auf einmal fiel sie\r\nin die alte, himmelsüße Melodie ein, so auf einmal, und mir durch die\r\nSeele gehn ein Trostgefühl und eine Erinnerung des Vergangenen, der\r\nZeiten, da ich das Lied gehört, der düstern Zwischenräume des\r\nVerdrusses, der fehlgeschlagenen Hoffnungen, und dann--ich ging in\r\nder Stube auf und nieder, mein Herz erstickte unter dem Zudringen.\r\n--\"Um Gottes willen,\" sagte ich, mit einem heftigen Ausbruch hin gegen\r\nsie fahrend, \"um Gottes willen, hören Sie auf!\"--Sie hielt und sah\r\nmich starr an.\" Werther, \"sagte sie mit einem Lächeln, das mir durch\r\ndie Seele ging, \"Werther, Sie sind sehr krank, Ihre Lieblingsgerichte\r\nwiderstehen Ihnen. Gehen Sie! Ich bitte Sie, beruhigen Sie sich.\"\r\n--Ich riß mich von ihr weg und--Gott! Du siehst mein Elend und wirst\r\nes enden.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 6. Dezember\r\n\r\nWie mich die Gestalt verfolgt! Wachend und träumend füllt sie meine\r\nganze Seele! Hier, wenn ich die Augen schließe, hier in meiner Stirne,\r\nwo die innere Sehkraft sich vereinigt, stehen ihre schwarzen Augen.\r\nHier! Ich kann dir es nicht ausdrücken. Mache ich meine Augen zu, so\r\nsind sie da; wie ein Meer, wie ein Abgrund ruhen sie vor mir, in mir,\r\nfüllen die Sinne meiner Stirn.\r\n\r\nWas ist der Mensch, der gepriesene Halbgott! Ermangeln ihm nicht\r\neben da die Kräfte, wo er sie am nötigsten braucht? Und wenn er in\r\nFreude sich aufschwingt oder im Leiden versinkt, wird er nicht in\r\nbeiden eben da aufgehalten, eben da zu dem stumpfen, kalten\r\nBewußtsein wieder zurückgebracht, da er sich in der Fülle des\r\nUnendlichen zu verlieren sehnte?\r\n\r\nDer Herausgeber an den Leser\r\n\r\nWie sehr wünscht' ich, daß uns von den letzten merkwürdigen Tagen\r\nunsers Freundes so viel eigenhändige Zeugnisse übrig geblieben wären,\r\ndaß ich nicht nötig hätte, die Folge seiner hinterlaßnen Briefe\r\ndurch Erzählung zu unterbrechen.\r\n\r\nIch habe mir angelegen sein lassen, genaue Nachrichten aus dem\r\nMunde derer zu sammeln, die von seiner Geschichte wohl unterrichtet\r\nsein konnten; sie ist einfach, und es kommen alle Erzählungen davon\r\nbis auf wenige Kleinigkeiten miteinander überein; nur über die\r\nSinnesarten der handelnden Personen sind die Meinungen verschieden\r\nund die Urteile geteilt.\r\n\r\nWas bleibt uns übrig, als dasjenige, was wir mit wiederholter Mühe\r\nerfahren können, gewissenhaft zu erzählen, die von dem Abscheidenden\r\nhinterlaßnen Briefe einzuschalten und das kleinste aufgefundene\r\nBlättchen nicht gering zu achten; zumal da es so schwer ist, die\r\neigensten, wahren Triebfedern auch nur einer einzelnen Handlung zu\r\nentdecken, wenn sie unter Menschen vorgeht, die nicht gemeiner Art\r\nsind.\r\n\r\nUnmut und Unlust hatten in Werthers Seele immer tiefer Wurzel\r\ngeschlagen, sich fester untereinander verschlungen und sein ganzes\r\nWesen nach und nach eingenommen. Die Harmonie seines Geistes war\r\nvöllig zerstört, eine innerliche Hitze und Heftigkeit, die alle\r\nKräfte seiner Natur durcheinanderarbeitete, brachte die widrigsten\r\nWirkungen hervor und ließ ihm zuletzt nur eine Ermattung übrig, aus\r\nder er noch ängstlicher empor strebte, als er mit allen Übeln bisher\r\ngekämpft hatte. Die Beängstigung seines Herzens zehrte die übrigen\r\nKräfte seines Geistes, seine Lebhaftigkeit, seinen Scharfsinn auf, er\r\nward ein trauriger Gesellschafter, immer unglücklicher, und immer\r\nungerechter, je unglücklicher er ward. Wenigstens sagen dies Alberts\r\nFreunde; sie behaupten, daß Werther einen reinen, ruhigen Mann, der\r\nnun eines lang gewünschten Glückes teilhaftig geworden, und sein\r\nBetragen, sich dieses Glück auch auf die Zukunft zu erhalten, nicht\r\nhabe beurteilen können, er, der gleichsam mit jedem Tage sein ganzes\r\nVermögen verzehrte, um an dem Abend zu leiden und zu darben. Albert,\r\nsagen sie, hatte sich in so kurzer Zeit nicht verändert, er war noch\r\nimmer derselbige, den Werther so vom Anfang her kannte, so sehr\r\nschätzte und ehrte. Er liebte Lotten über alles, er war stolz auf sie\r\nund wünschte sie auch von jedermann als das herrlichste Geschöpf\r\nanerkannt zu wissen. War es ihm daher zu verdenken, wenn er auch\r\njeden Schein des Verdachtes abzuwenden wünschte, wenn er in dem\r\nAugenblicke mit niemand diesen köstlichen Besitz auch auf die\r\nunschuldigste Weise zu teilen Lust hatte? Sie gestehen ein, daß\r\nAlbert oft das Zimmer seiner Frau verlassen, wenn Werther bei ihr war,\r\naber nicht aus Haß noch Abneigung gegen seinen Freund, sondern nur\r\nweil er gefühlt habe, daß dieser von seiner Gegenwart gedrückt sei.\r\n\r\nLottens Vater war von einem Übel befallen worden, das ihn in der\r\nStube hielt, er schickte ihr seinen Wagen, und sie fuhr hinaus. Es\r\nwar ein schöner Wintertag, der erste Schnee war stark gefallen und\r\ndeckte die ganze Gegend.\r\n\r\nWerther ging ihr den andern Morgen nach, um, wenn Albert sie nicht\r\nabzuholen käme, sie hereinzubegleiten.\r\n\r\nDas klare Wetter konnte wenig auf sein trübes Gemüt wirken, ein\r\ndumpfer Druck auf seiner Seele, die traurigen Bilder hatten sich bei\r\nihm festgesetzt, und sein Gemüt kannte keine Bewegung als von einem\r\nschmerzlichen Gedanken zum andern.\r\n\r\nWie er mit sich in ewigem Unfrieden lebte, schien ihm auch der\r\nZustand andrer nur bedenklicher und verworrner, er glaubte, das\r\nschöne Verhältnis zwischen Albert und seiner Gattin gestört zu haben,\r\ner machte sich Vorwürfe darüber, in die sich ein heimlicher Unwille\r\ngegen den Gatten mischte.\r\n\r\nSeine Gedanken fielen auch unterwegs auf diesen Gegenstand. \"Ja, ja,\"\r\nsagte er zu sich selbst, mit heimlichem Zähneknirschen, \"das ist der\r\nvertraute, freundliche, zärtliche, an allem teilnehmende Umgang, die\r\nruhige, dauernde Treue! Sättigkeit ist's und Gleichgültigkeit! Zieht\r\nihn nicht jedes elende Geschäft mehr an als die teure, köstliche\r\nFrau? Weiß er sein Glück zu schätzen? Weiß er sie zu achten, wie sie\r\nes verdient? Er hat sie, nun gut, er hat sie--ich weiß das, wie ich\r\nwas anders auch weiß, ich glaube an den Gedanken gewöhnt zu sein, er\r\nwird mich noch rasend machen, er wird mich noch umbringen--und hat\r\ndenn die Freundschaft zu mir Stich gehalten? Sieht er nicht in\r\nmeiner Anhänglichkeit an Lotten schon einen Eingriff in seine Rechte,\r\nin meiner Aufmerksamkeit für sie einen Stillen Vorwurf? Ich weiß es\r\nwohl, ich fühl' es, er sieht mich ungern, er wünscht meine Entfernung,\r\nmeine Gegenwart ist ihm beschwerlich.\"\r\n\r\nOft hielt er seinen raschen Schritt an, oft stand er stille und\r\nschien umkehren zu wollen; allein er richtete seinen Gang immer\r\nwieder vorwärts und war mit diesen Gedanken und Selbstgesprächen\r\nendlich gleichsam wider Willen bei dem Jagdhause angekommen.\r\n\r\nEr trat in die Tür, fragte nach dem Alten und nach Lotten, er fand\r\ndas Haus in einiger Bewegung. Der älteste Knabe sagte ihm, es sei\r\ndrüben in Wahlheim ein Unglück geschehn, es sei ein Bauer erschlagen\r\nworden!--Es machte das weiter keinen Eindruck auf ihn.--Er trat in\r\ndie Stube und fand Lotten beschäftigt, dem Alten zuzureden, der\r\nungeachtet seiner Krankheit hinüber wollte, um an Ort und Stelle die\r\nTat zu untersuchen. Der Täter war noch unbekannt, man hatte den\r\nErschlagenen des Morgens vor der Haustür gefunden, man hatte\r\nMutmaßungen: der Entleibte war Knecht einer Witwe, die vorher einen\r\nandern im Dienste gehabt, der mit Unfrieden aus dem Hause gekommen\r\nwar.\r\n\r\nDa Werther dieses hörte, fuhr er mit Heftigkeit auf.--\"Ist's\r\nmöglich!\" rief er aus, \"ich muß hinüber, ich kann nicht einen\r\nAugenblick ruhn.\"--Er eilte nach Wahlheim zu, jede Erinnerung ward\r\nihm lebendig, und er zweifelte nicht einen Augenblick, daß jener\r\nMensch die Tat begangen, den er so manchmal gesprochen, der ihm so\r\nwert geworden war.\r\n\r\nDa er durch die Linden mußte, um nach der Schenke zu kommen, wo sie\r\nden Körper hingelegt hatten, entsetzt' er sich vor dem sonst so\r\ngeliebten Platze. Jene Schwelle, worauf die Nachbarskinder so oft\r\ngespielt hatten, war mit Blut besudelt. Liebe und Treue, die\r\nschönsten menschlichen Empfindungen, hatten sich in Gewalt und Mord\r\nverwandelt. Die starken Bäume standen ohne Laub und bereift, die\r\nschönen Hecken, die sich über die niedrige Kirchhofmauer wölbten,\r\nwaren entblättert, und die Grabsteine sahen mit Schnee bedeckt durch\r\ndie Lücken hervor.\r\n\r\nAls er sich der Schenke näherte, vor welcher das ganze Dorf\r\nversammelt war, entstand auf einmal ein Geschrei. Man erblickte von\r\nfern einen Trupp bewaffneter Männer, und ein jeder rief, daß man den\r\nTäter herbeiführe. Werther sah hin und blieb nicht lange zweifelhaft.\r\nJa, es war der Knecht, der jene Witwe so sehr liebte, den er vor\r\neiniger Zeit mit dem stillen Grimme, mit der heimlichen Verzweiflung\r\numhergehend angetroffen hatte.\r\n\r\n\"Was hast du begangen, Unglücklicher!\" rief Werther aus, indem er\r\nauf den Gefangenen losging.--Dieser sah ihn still an, schwieg und\r\nversetzte endlich ganz gelassen: \"keiner wird sie haben, sie wird\r\nkeinen haben.\"--Man brachte den Gefangnen in die Schenke, und\r\nWerther eilte fort.\r\n\r\nDurch die entsetzliche, gewaltige Berührung war alles, was in\r\nseinem Wesen lag, durcheinandergeschüttelt worden. Aus seiner Trauer,\r\nseinem Mißmut, seiner gleichgültigen Hingegebenheit wurde er auf\r\neinen Augenblick herausgerissen; unüberwindlich bemächtigte sich die\r\nTeilnehmung seiner, und es ergriff ihn eine unsägliche Begierde, den\r\nMenschen zu retten. Er fühlte ihn so unglücklich, er fand ihn als\r\nVerbrecher selbst so schuldlos, er setzte sich so tief in seine Lage,\r\ndaß er gewiß glaubte, auch andere davon zu überzeugen. Schon\r\nwünschte er für ihn sprechen zu können, schon drängte sich der\r\nlebhafteste Vortrag nach seinen Lippen, er eilte nach dem Jagdhause\r\nund konnte sich unterwegs nicht enthalten, alles das, was er dem\r\nAmtmann vorstellen wollte, schon halblaut auszusprechen.\r\n\r\nAls er in die Stube trat, fand er Alberten gegenwärtig, dies\r\nverstimmte ihn einen Augenblick; doch faßte er sich bald wieder und\r\ntrug dem Amtmann feurig seine Gesinnungen vor. Dieser schüttelte\r\neinigemal den Kopf, und obgleich Werther mit der größten\r\nLebhaftigkeit, Leidenschaft und Wahrheit alles vorbrachte, was ein\r\nMensch zur Entschuldigung eines Menschen sagen kann, so war doch, wie\r\nsich's leicht denken läßt, der Amtmann dadurch nicht gerührt. Er ließ\r\nvielmehr unsern Freund nicht ausreden, widersprach ihm eifrig und\r\ntadelte ihn, daß er einen Meuchelmörder in Schutz nehme; er zeigte\r\nihm, daß auf diese Weise jedes Gesetz aufgehoben, alle Sicherheit des\r\nStaats zugrunde gerichtet werde; auch setzte er hinzu, daß er in einer\r\nsolchen Sache nichts tun könne, ohne sich die größte Verantwortung\r\naufzuladen, es müsse alles in der Ordnung, in dem vorgeschriebenen\r\nGang gehen.\r\n\r\nWerther ergab sich noch nicht, sondern bat nur, der Amtmann möchte\r\ndurch die Finger sehn, wenn man dem Menschen zur Flucht behülflich\r\nwäre! Auch damit wies ihn der Amtmann ab. Albert, der sich endlich\r\nins Gespräch mischte, trat auch auf des Alten Seite. Werther wurde\r\nüberstimmt, und mit einem entsetzlichen Leiden machte er sich auf den\r\nWeg, nachdem ihm der Amtmann einigemal gesagt hatte: \"nein, er ist\r\nnicht zu retten!\"\r\n\r\nWie sehr ihm diese Worte aufgefallen sein müssen, sehn wir aus\r\neinem Zettelchen, das sich unter seinen Papieren fand und das gewiß\r\nan dem nämlichen Tage geschrieben worden:\r\n\r\n\"Du bist nicht zu retten, Unglücklicher! Ich sehe wohl, daß wir\r\nnicht zu retten sind.\"\r\n\r\nWas Albert zuletzt über die Sache des Gefangenen in Gegenwart des\r\nAmtmanns gesprochen, war Werthern höchst zuwider gewesen: er glaubte\r\neinige Empfindlichkeit gegen sich darin bemerkt zu haben, und wenn\r\ngleich bei mehrerem Nachdenken seinem Scharfsinne nicht entging, daß\r\nbeide Männer recht haben möchten, so war es ihm doch, als ob er\r\nseinem innersten Dasein entsagen müßte, wenn er es gestehen, wenn er\r\nes zugeben sollte.\r\n\r\nEin Blättchen, das sich darauf bezieht, das vielleicht sein ganzes\r\nVerhältnis zu Albert ausdrückt, finden wir unter seinen Papieren:\r\n\"Was hilft es, daß ich mir's sage und wieder sage, er ist brav und gut,\r\naber es zerreißt mir mein inneres Eingeweide; ich kann nicht gerecht\r\nsein.\"\r\n\r\nWeil es ein gelinder Abend war und das Wetter anfing, sich zum\r\nTauen zu neigen, ging Lotte mit Alberten zu Fuße zurück. Unterwegs\r\nsah sie sich hier und da um, eben als wenn sie Werthers Begleitung\r\nvermißte. Albert fing von ihm an zu reden, er tadelte ihn, indem er\r\nihm Gerechtigkeit widerfahren ließ. Er berührte seine unglückliche\r\nLeidenschaft und wünschte, daß es möglich sein möchte, ihn zu\r\nentfernen.--\"Ich wünsch' es auch um unsertwillen,\" sagt' er, \"und ich\r\nbitte dich,\" fuhr er fort, \"siehe zu, seinem Betragen gegen dich eine\r\nandere Richtung zu geben, seine öftern Besuche zu vermindern. Die\r\nLeute werden aufmerksam, und ich weiß, daß man hier und da drüber\r\ngesprochen hat.\"--Lotte schwieg, und Albert schien ihr Schweigen\r\nempfunden zu haben, wenigstens seit der Zeit erwähnte er Werthers\r\nnicht mehr gegen sie, und wenn sie seiner erwähnte, ließ er das\r\nGespräch fallen oder lenkte es woanders hin.\r\n\r\nDer vergebliche Versuch, den Werther zur Rettung des Unglücklichen\r\ngemacht hatte, war das letzte Auflodern der Flamme eines\r\nverlöschenden Lichtes; er versank nur desto tiefer in Schmerz und\r\nUntätigkeit; besonders kam er fast außer sich, als er hörte, daß man\r\nihn vielleicht gar zum Zeugen gegen den Menschen, der sich nun aufs\r\nLeugnen legte, auffordern könnte.\r\n\r\nAlles was ihm Unangenehmes jeweils in seinem wirksamen Leben\r\nbegegnet war, der Verdruß bei der Gesandtschaft, alles was ihm sonst\r\nmißlungen war, was ihn je gekränkt hatte, ging in seiner Seele auf und\r\nnieder. Er fand sich durch alles dieses wie zur Untätigkeit\r\nberechtigt, er fand sich abgeschnitten von aller Aussicht, unfähig,\r\nirgendeine Handhabe zu ergreifen, mit denen man die Geschäfte des\r\ngemeinen Lebens anfaßt; und so rückte er endlich, ganz seiner\r\nwunderbaren Empfindung, Denkart und einer endlosen Leidenschaft\r\nhingegeben, in dem ewigen Einerlei eines traurigen Umgangs mit dem\r\nliebenswürdigen und geliebten Geschöpfe, dessen Ruhe er störte, in\r\nseine Kräfte stürmend, sie ohne Zweck und Aussicht abarbeitend, immer\r\neinem traurigen Ende näher.\r\n\r\nVon seiner Verworrenheit, Leidenschaft, von seinem rastlosen\r\nTreiben und Streben, von seiner Lebensmüde sind einige hinterlaßne\r\nBriefe die stärksten Zeugnisse, die wir hier einrücken wollen.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 12. Dezember\r\n\r\nLieber Wilhelm, ich bin in einem Zustande, in dem jene\r\nUnglücklichen gewesen sein müssen, von denen man glaubte, sie würden\r\nvon einem bösen Geiste umhergetrieben. Manchmal ergreift mich's; es\r\nist nicht Angst, nicht Begier--es ist ein inneres, unbekanntes Toben,\r\ndas meine Brust zu zerreißen droht, das mir die Gurgel zupreßt!\r\nWehe! Wehe! Und dann schweife ich umher in den furchtbaren\r\nnächtlichen Szenen dieser menschenfeindlichen Jahrszeit.\r\n\r\nGestern abend mußte ich hinaus. Es war plötzlich Tauwetter\r\neingefallen, ich hatte gehört, der Fluß sei übergetreten, alle Bäche\r\ngeschwollen und von Wahlheim herunter mein liebes Tal überschwemmt!\r\nNachts nach eilfe rannte ich hinaus. Ein fürchterliches Schauspiel,\r\nvom Fels herunter die wühlenden Fluten in dem Mondlichte wirbeln zu\r\nsehen, über Äcker und Wiesen und Hecken und alles, und das weite Tal\r\nhinauf und hinab eine stürmende See im Sausen des Windes! Und wenn\r\ndann der Mond wieder hervortrat und über der schwarzen Wolke ruhte,\r\nund vor mir hinaus die Flut in fürchterlich herrlichem Widerschein\r\nrollte und klang: da überfiel mich ein Schauer, und wieder ein Sehnen!\r\nAch, mit offenen Armen stand ich gegen den Abgrund und atmete hinab!\r\nHinab! Und verlor mich in der Wonne, meine Qualen, meine Leiden da\r\nhinabzustürmen! Dahinzubrausen wie die Wellen! O!--Und den Fuß vom\r\nBoden zu heben vermochtest du nicht, und alle Qualen zu enden!\r\n--Meine Uhr ist noch nicht ausgelaufen, ich fühle es! O Wilhelm! Wie\r\ngern hätte ich mein Menschsein drum gegeben, mit jenem Sturmwinde sie\r\nWolken zu zerreißen, die Fluten zu fassen! Ha! Und wird nicht\r\nvielleicht dem Eingekerkerten einmal diese Wonne zuteil?\r\n\r\n--Und wie ich wehmütig hinabsah auf ein Plätzchen, wo ich mit Lotten\r\nunter einer Weide geruht, auf einem heißen Spaziergange,--das war\r\nauch überschwemmt, und kaum daß ich die Weide erkannte! Wilhelm! Und\r\nihre Wiesen, dachte ich, die Gegend um ihr Jagdhaus! Wie verstört\r\njetzt vom reißenden Strome unsere Laube! Dacht' ich. Und der\r\nVergangenheit Sonnenstrahl blickte herein, wie einem Gefangenen ein\r\nTraum von Herden, Wiesen und Ehrenämtern. Ich stand!--Ich schelte\r\nmich nicht, denn ich habe Mut zu sterben.--Ich hätte--nun sitze ich\r\nhier wie ein altes Weib, das ihr Holz von Zäunen stoppelt und ihr\r\nBrot an den Türen, um ihr hinsterbendes, freudeloses Dasein noch\r\neinen Augenblick zu verlängern und zu erleichtern.\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 14. Dezember\r\n\r\nWas ist das, mein Lieber? Ich erschrecke vor mir selbst! Ist nicht\r\nmeine Liebe zu ihr die heiligste, reinste, brüderlichste Liebe? Habe\r\nich jemals einen strafbaren Wunsch in meiner Seele gefühlt?--Ich\r\nwill nicht beteuern--und nun, Träume! O wie wahr fühlten die Menschen,\r\ndie so widersprechende Wirkungen fremden Mächten zuschrieben! Diese\r\nNacht! Ich zittere, es zu sagen, hielt ich sie in meinen Armen, fest\r\nan meinen Busen gedrückt, und deckte ihren liebelispelnden Mund mit\r\nunendlichen Küssen; mein Auge schwamm in der Trunkenheit des ihrigen!\r\nGott! Bin ich strafbar, daß ich auch jetzt noch eine Seligkeit fühle,\r\nmir diese glühenden Freuden mit voller Innigkeit zurückzurufen?\r\nLotte! Lotte!--Und mit mir ist es aus! Meine Sinne verwirren sich,\r\nschon acht Tage habe ich keine Besinnungskraft mehr, meine Augen sind\r\nvoll Tränen. Ich bin nirgend wohl, und überall wohl. Ich wünsche\r\nnichts, verlange nichts. Mir wäre besser, ich ginge.\r\n\r\nDer Entschluß, die Welt zu verlassen, hatte in dieser Zeit, unter\r\nsolchen Umständen in Werthers Seele immer mehr Kraft gewonnen. Seit\r\nder Rückkehr zu Lotten war es immer seine letzte Aussicht und\r\nHoffnung gewesen; doch hatte er sich gesagt, es solle keine übereilte,\r\nkeine rasche Tat sein, er wolle mit der besten Überzeugung, mit der\r\nmöglichst ruhigen Entschlossenheit diesen Schritt tun.\r\n\r\nSeine Zweifel, sein Streit mit sich selbst blicken aus einem\r\nZettelchen hervor, das wahrscheinlich ein angefangener Brief an\r\nWilhelm ist und ohne Datum unter seinen Papieren gefunden worden:\r\n\r\nIhre Gegenwart, ihr Schicksal, ihre Teilnehmung an dem meinigen\r\npreßt noch die letzten Tränen aus meinem versengten Gehirne. Den\r\nVorhang aufzuheben und dahinter zu treten! Das ist alles! Und warum\r\ndas Zaudern und Zagen? Weil man nicht weiß, wie es dahinten aussieht?\r\nUnd man nicht wiederkehrt? Und daß das nun die Eigenschaft unseres\r\nGeistes ist, da Verwirrung und Finsternis zu ahnen, wovon wir nichts\r\nBestimmtes wissen.\r\n\r\nEndlich ward er mit dem traurigen Gedanken immer mehr verwandt und\r\nbefremdet und sein Vorsatz fest und unwiderruflich, wovon folgender\r\nzweideutige Brief, den er an seinen Freund schrieb, ein Zeugnis\r\nabgibt.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAm 20. Dezember\r\n\r\nIch danke deiner Liebe, Wilhelm, daß du das Wort so aufgefangen\r\nhast. Ja, du hast recht: mir wäre besser, ich ginge. Der Vorschlag,\r\nden du zu einer Rückkehr zu euch tust, gefällt mir nicht ganz;\r\nwenigstens möchte ich noch gern einen Umweg machen, besonders da wir\r\nanhaltenden Frost und gute Wege zu hoffen haben. Auch ist mir es sehr\r\nlieb, daß du kommen willst, mich abzuholen; verziehe nur noch\r\nvierzehn Tage, und erwarte noch einen Brief von mir mit dem Weiteren.\r\nEs ist nötig, daß nichts gepflückt werde, ehe es reif ist. Und\r\nvierzehn Tage auf oder ab tun viel. Meiner Mutter sollst du sagen:\r\ndaß sie für ihren Sohn beten soll, und daß ich sie um Vergebung bitte\r\nwegen alles Verdrusses, den ich ihr gemacht habe. Das war nun mein\r\nSchicksal, die zu betrüben, denen ich Freude schuldig war. Leb' wohl,\r\nmein Teuerster! Allen Segen des Himmels über dich! Leb' wohl!\"\r\n\r\nWas in dieser Zeit in Lottens Seele vorging, wie ihre Gesinnungen\r\ngegen ihren Mann, gegen ihren unglücklichen Freund gewesen, getrauen\r\nwir uns kaum mit Worten auszudrücken, ob wir uns gleich davon, nach\r\nder Kenntnis ihres Charakters, wohl einen stillen Begriff machen\r\nkönnen, und eine schöne weibliche Seele sich in die ihrige denken und\r\nmit ihr empfinden kann.\r\n\r\nSo viel ist gewiß, sie war fest bei sich entschlossen, alles zu tun,\r\num Werthern zu entfernen, und wenn sie zauderte, so war es eine\r\nherzliche, freundschaftliche Schonung, weil sie wußte, wie viel es\r\nihm kosten, ja daß es ihm beinahe unmöglich sein würde. Doch ward sie\r\nin dieser Zeit mehr gedrängt, Ernst zu machen; es schwieg ihr Mann\r\nganz über dies Verhältnis, wie sie auch immer darüber geschwiegen\r\nhatte, und um so mehr war ihr angelegen, ihm durch die Tat zu\r\nbeweisen, wie ihre Gesinnungen der seinigen wert seien.\r\n\r\nAn demselben Tage, als Werther den zuletzt eingeschalteten Brief an\r\nseinen Freund geschrieben, es war der Sonntag vor Weihnachten, kam er\r\nabends zu Lotten und fand sie allein. Sie beschäftigte sich, einige\r\nSpielwerke in Ordnung zu bringen, die sie ihren kleinen Geschwistern\r\nzum Christgeschenke zurecht gemacht hatte. Er redete von dem\r\nVergnügen, das die Kleinen haben würden, und von den Zeiten, da einen\r\ndie unerwartete Öffnung der Tür und die Erscheinung eines\r\naufgeputzten Baumes mit Wachslichtern, Zuckerwerk und äpfeln in\r\nparadiesische Entzückung setzte.--\"Sie sollen,\" sagte Lotte, indem\r\nsie ihre Verlegenheit unter ein liebes Lächeln verbarg, \"Sie sollen\r\nauch beschert kriegen, wenn Sie recht geschickt sind; ein\r\nWachsstöckchen und noch was.\"--\"Und was heißen Sie geschickt\r\nsein?\"rief er aus;\"wie soll ich sein? Wie kann ich sein? Beste\r\nLotte!\"--\"Donnerstag abend,\" sagte sie, \"ist Weihnachtsabend, da kommen\r\ndie Kinder, mein Vater auch, da kriegt jedes das Seinige, da kommen\r\nSie auch--aber nicht eher.\"--Werther stutzte.--\"Ich bitte Sie,\"\r\nfuhr sie fort, \"es ist nun einmal so, ich bitte um meiner Ruhe willen,\r\nes kann nicht, es kann nicht so bleiben.\"--Er wendete seine Augen\r\nvon ihr und ging in der Stube auf und ab und murmelte das \"es kann\r\nnicht so bleiben!\" zwischen den Zähnen.--Lotte, die den schrecklichen\r\nZustand fühlte, worein ihn diese Worte versetzt hatten, suchte durch\r\nallerlei Fragen seine Gedanken abzulenken, aber vergebens.--\"Nein,\r\nLotte,\" rief er aus, \"ich werde Sie nicht wiedersehen!\"--\"Warum\r\ndas?\" versetzte sie, \"Werther, Sie können, Sie müssen uns wiedersehen,\r\nnur mäßigen Sie sich. O warum mußten Sie mit dieser Heftigkeit,\r\ndieser unbezwinglich haftenden Leidenschaft für alles, was Sie einmal\r\nanfassen, geboren werden! Ich bitte Sie,\" fuhr sie fort, indem sie\r\nihn bei der Hand nahm, \"mäßigen Sie sich! Ihr Geist, Ihre\r\nWissenschaften, Ihre Talente, was bieten die Ihnen für mannigfaltige\r\nErgetzungen dar! Sein Sie ein Mann, wenden Sie diese traurige\r\nAnhänglichkeit von einem Geschöpf, das nichts tun kann als Sie\r\nbedauern.\"--Er knirrte mit den Zähnen und sah sie düster an.--Sie\r\nhielt seine Hand. \"Nur einen Augenblick ruhigen Sinn, Werther!\" sagte\r\nsie. Fühlen Sie nicht, daß Sie sich betriegen, sich mit Willen\r\nzugrunde richten! Warum denn mich, Werther? Just mich, das Eigentum\r\neines andern? Just das? Ich fürchte, ich fürchte, es ist nur die\r\nUnmöglichkeit, mich zu besitzen, die Ihnen diesen Wunsch so reizend\r\nmacht.\"--Er zog seine Hand aus der ihrigen, indem er sie mit einem\r\nstarren, unwilligen Blick ansah. \"Weise!\" rief er, \"sehr weise! Hat\r\nvielleicht Albert diese Anmerkung gemacht? Politisch! Sehr politisch!\"\r\n--\"Es kann sie jeder machen,\" versetzte sie drauf, \"und sollte denn\r\nin der weiten Welt kein Mädchen sein, das die Wünsche Ihres Herzens\r\nerfüllte? Gewinnen Sie's über sich, suchen Sie darnach, und ich\r\nschwöre Ihnen, Sie werden sie finden; denn schon lange ängstigt mich,\r\nfür Sie und uns, die Einschränkung, in die Sie sich diese Zeit her\r\nselbst gebannt haben. Gewinnen Sie über sich, eine Reise wird Sie,\r\nmuß Sie zerstreuen! Suchen Sie, finden Sie einen werten Gegenstand\r\nIhrer Liebe, und kehren Sie zurück, und lassen Sie uns zusammen die\r\nSeligkeit einer wahren Freundschaft genießen.\" \"Das könnte man,\"\r\nsagte er mit einem kalten Lachen, \"drucken lassen und allen\r\nHofmeistern empfehlen. Liebe Lotte! Lassen Sie mir noch ein klein\r\nwenig Ruh, es wird alles werden!\"--\"Nur das, Werther, daß Sie nicht\r\neher kommen als Weihnachtsabend!\"--Er wollte antworten, und Albert\r\ntrat in die Stube. Man bot sich einen frostigen Guten Abend und ging\r\nverlegen im Zimmer neben einander auf und nieder. Werther fing einen\r\nunbedeutenden Diskurs an, der bald aus war, Albert desgleichen, der\r\nsodann seine Frau nach gewissen Aufträgen fragte und, als er hörte,\r\nsie seien noch nicht ausgerichtet, ihr einige Worte sagte, die\r\nWerthern kalt, ja gar hart vorkamen. Er wollte gehen, er konnte nicht\r\nund zauderte bis acht, da sich denn sein Unmut und Unwillen immer\r\nvermehrte, bis der Tisch gedeckt wurde, und er Hut und Stock nahm.\r\nAlbert lud ihn zu bleiben, er aber, der nur ein unbedeutendes\r\nKompliment zu hören glaubte, dankte kalt dagegen und ging weg.\r\n\r\nEr kam nach Hause, nahm seinem Burschen, der ihm leuchten wollte,\r\ndas Licht aus der Hand und ging allein in sein Zimmer, weinte laut,\r\nredete aufgebracht mit sich selbst, ging heftig die Stube auf und ab\r\nund warf sich endlich in seinen Kleidern aufs Bette, wo ihn der\r\nBediente fand, der es gegen eilfe wagte hineinzugehn, um zu fragen, ob\r\ner dem Herrn die Stiefeln ausziehen sollte, das er denn zuließ und\r\ndem Bedienten verbot, den andern Morgen ins Zimmer zu kommen, bis er\r\nihm rufen würde.\r\n\r\nMontags früh, den einundzwanzigsten Dezember, schrieb er folgenden\r\nBrief an Lotten, den man nach seinem Tode versiegelt auf seinem\r\nSchreibtische gefunden und ihr überbracht hat, und den ich absatzweise\r\nhier einrücken will, so wie aus den Umständen erhellet, daß er ihn\r\ngeschrieben habe.\r\n\r\n\"Es ist beschlossen, Lotte, ich will sterben, und das schreibe ich\r\ndir ohne romantische überspannung, gelassen, an dem Morgen des Tages,\r\nan dem ich dich zum letzten Male sehen werde. Wenn du dieses liesest,\r\nmeine Beste, deckt schon das kühle Grab die erstarrten Reste des\r\nUnruhigen, Unglücklichen, der für die letzten Augenblicke seines\r\nLebens keine größere Süßigkeit weiß, als sich mit dir zu unterhalten.\r\nIch habe eine schreckliche Nacht gehabt und, ach, eine wohltätige\r\nNacht. Sie ist es, die meinen Entschluß befestiget, bestimmt hat:\r\nich will sterben! Wie ich mich gestern von dir riß, in der\r\nfürchterlichen Empörung meiner Sinne, wie sich alles das nach meinem\r\nHerzen drängte und mein hoffnungsloses, freudeloses Dasein neben dir\r\nin gräßlicher Kälte mich anpackte--ich erreichte kaum mein Zimmer,\r\nich warf mich außer mir auf meine Knie, und o Gott! Du gewährtest\r\nmir das letzte Labsal der bittersten Tränen! Tausend Anschläge,\r\ntausend Aussichten wüteten durch meine Seele, und zuletzt stand er da,\r\nfest, ganz, der letzte, einzige Gedanke: ich will sterben!--ich\r\nlegte mich nieder, und morgens, in der Ruhe des Erwachens, steht er\r\nnoch fest, noch ganz stark in meinem Herzen: ich will sterben!--es\r\nist nicht Verzweiflung, es ist Gewißheit, daß ich ausgetragen habe,\r\nund daß ich mich opfere für dich. Ja, Lotte! Warum sollte ich es\r\nverschweigen? Eins von uns dreien muß hinweg, und das will ich sein!\r\nO meine Beste! In diesem zerrissenen Herzen ist es wütend\r\nherumgeschlichen, oft--deinen Mann zu ermorden!--dich!--mich!\r\n--so sei es denn!--wenn du hinaufsteigst auf den Berg, an einem\r\nschönen Sommerabende, dann erinnere dich meiner, wie ich so oft das\r\nTal heraufkam, und dann blicke nach dem Kirchhofe hinüber nach meinem\r\nGrabe, wie der Wind das hohe Gras im Scheine der sinkenden Sonne hin\r\nund her wiegt.--Ich war ruhig, da ich anfing, nun, nun weine ich\r\nwie ein Kind, da alles das so lebhaft um mich wird.--\"\r\n\r\nGegen zehn Uhr rief Werther seinem Bedienten, und unter dem\r\nAnziehen sagte er ihm, wie er in einigen Tagen verreisen würde, er\r\nsolle daher die Kleider auskehren und alles zum Einpacken zurecht\r\nmachen; auch gab er ihm Befehl, überall Kontos zu fordern, einige\r\nausgeliehene Bücher abzuholen und einigen Armen, denen er wöchentlich\r\netwas zu geben gewohnt war, ihr Zugeteiltes auf zwei Monate voraus zu\r\nbezahlen.\r\n\r\nEr ließ sich das Essen auf die Stube bringen, und nach Tische ritt\r\ner hinaus zum Amtmanne, den er nicht zu Hause antraf. Er ging\r\ntiefsinnig im Garten auf und ab und schien noch zuletzt alle\r\nSchwermut der Erinnerung auf sich häufen zu wollen.\r\n\r\nDie Kleinen ließen ihn nicht lange in Ruhe, sie verfolgten ihn,\r\nsprangen an ihm hinauf, erzählen ihm, daß, wenn morgen, und wieder\r\nmorgen, und noch ein Tag wäre, sie die Christgeschenke bei Lotten\r\nholten, und erzählten ihm Wunder, die sich ihre kleine\r\nEinbildungskraft versprach.--\"morgen!\" rief er aus, \"und wieder\r\nmorgen! Und noch ein Tag!\"--und küßte sie alle herzlich und wollte\r\nsie verlassen, als ihm der Kleine noch etwas in das Ohr sagen wollte.\r\nDer verriet ihm, die großen Brüder hätten schöne Neujahrswünsche\r\ngeschrieben, so groß! Und einen für den Papa, für Albert und Lotten\r\neinen und auch einen für Herrn Werther; die wollten sie am\r\nNeujahrstage früh überreichen. Das übermannte ihn, er schenkte jedem\r\netwas, setzte sich zu Pferde, ließ den Alten grüßen und ritt mit\r\nTränen in den Augen davon.\r\n\r\nGegen fünf kam er nach Hause, befahl der Magd, nach dem Feuer zu\r\nsehen und es bis in die Nacht zu unterhalten. Den Bedienten hieß er\r\nBücher und Wäsche unten in den Koffer packen und die Kleider einnähen.\r\nDarauf schrieb er wahrscheinlich folgenden Absatz seines letzten\r\nBriefes an Lotten.\r\n\r\n\"Du erwartest mich nicht! Du glaubst, ich würde gehorchen und erst\r\nWeihnachtsabend dich wieder sehn. O Lotte! Heut oder nie mehr.\r\nWeihnachtsabend hältst du dieses Papier in deiner Hand, zitterst und\r\nbenetzest es mit deinen lieben Tränen. Ich will, ich muß! O wie wohl\r\nist es mir, daß ich entschlossen bin.\"\r\n\r\nLotte war indes in einen sonderbaren Zustand geraten. Nach der\r\nletzten Unterredung mit Werthern hatte sie empfunden, wie schwer es\r\nihr fallen werde, sich von ihm zu trennen, was er leiden würde, wenn\r\ner sich von ihr entfernen sollte.\r\n\r\nEs war wie im Vorübergehn in Alberts Gegenwart gesagt worden, daß\r\nWerther vor Weihnachtsabend nicht wieder kommen werde, und Albert war\r\nzu einem Beamten in der Nachbarschaft geritten, mit dem er Geschäfte\r\nabzutun hatte, und wo er über Nacht ausbleiben mußte.\r\n\r\nSie saß nun allein, keins von ihren Geschwistern war um sie, sie\r\nüberließ sich ihren Gedanken, die stille über ihren Verhältnissen\r\nherumschweiften. Sie sah sich nun mit dem Mann auf ewig verbunden,\r\ndessen Liebe und Treue sie kannte, dem sie von Herzen zugetan war,\r\ndessen Ruhe, dessen Zuverlässigkeit recht vom Himmel dazu bestimmt zu\r\nsein schien, daß eine wackere Frau das Glück ihres Lebens darauf\r\ngründen sollte; sie fühlte, was er ihr und ihren Kindern auf immer\r\nsein würde. Auf der andern Seite war ihr Werther so teuer geworden,\r\ngleich von dem ersten Augenblick ihrer Bekanntschaft an hatte sich die\r\nübereinstimmung ihrer Gemüter so schön gezeigt, der lange dauernde\r\nUmgang mit ihm, so manche durchlebte Situationen hatten einen\r\nunauslöschlichen Eindruck auf ihr Herz gemacht. Alles, was sie\r\nInteressantes fühlte und dachte, war sie gewohnt mit ihm zu teilen,\r\nund seine Entfernung drohte in ihr ganzes Wesen eine Lücke zu reißen,\r\ndie nicht wieder ausgefüllt werden konnte. O, hätte sie ihn in dem\r\nAugenblick zum Bruder umwandeln können, wie glücklich wäre sie\r\ngewesen! Hätte sie ihn einer ihrer Freundinnen verheiraten dürfen,\r\nhätte sie hoffen können, auch sein Verhältnis gegen Albert ganz wieder\r\nherzustellen!\r\n\r\nSie hatte ihre Freundinnen der Reihe nach durchgedacht und fand bei\r\neiner jeglichen etwas auszusetzen, fand keine, der sie ihn gegönnt\r\nhätte.\r\n\r\nÜber allen diesen Betrachtungen fühlte sie erst tief, ohne sich es\r\ndeutlich zu machen, daß ihr herzliches, heimliches Verlangen sei, ihn\r\nfür sich zu behalten, und sagte sich daneben, daß sie ihn nicht\r\nbehalten könne, behalten dürfe; ihr reines, schönes, sonst so leichtes\r\nund leicht sich helfendes Gemüt empfand den Druck einer Schwermut,\r\ndem die Aussicht zum Glück verschlossen ist. Ihr Herz war gepreßt,\r\nund eine trübe Wolke lag über ihrem Auge.\r\n\r\nSo war es halb sieben geworden, als sie Werthern die Treppe\r\nheraufkommen hörte und seinen Tritt, seine Stimme, die nach ihr fragte,\r\nbald erkannte. Wie schlug ihr Herz, und wir dürfen fast sagen zum\r\nerstenmal, bei seiner Ankunft. Sie hätte sich gern vor ihm\r\nverleugnen lassen, und als er hereintrat, rief sie ihm mit einer Art\r\nvon leidenschaftlicher Verwirrung entgegen: \"Sie haben nicht Wort\r\ngehalten.\"--\"Ich habe nichts versprochen\" war seine Antwort.--\"So\r\nhätten Sie wenigstens meiner Bitte stattgeben sollen,\" versetzte sie,\r\n\"ich bat Sie um unser beider Ruhe.\"\r\n\r\nSie wußte nicht recht, was sie sagte, ebensowenig was sie tat, als\r\nsie nach einigen Freundinnen schickte, um nicht mit Werthern allein\r\nzu sein. Er legte einige Bücher hin, die er gebracht hatte, fragte\r\nnach andern, und sie wünschte, bald daß ihre Freundinnen kommen, bald\r\ndaß sie wegbleiben möchten. Das Mädchen kam zurück und brachte die\r\nNachricht, daß sich beide entschuldigen ließen.\r\n\r\nSie wollte das Mädchen mit ihrer Arbeit in das Nebenzimmer sitzen\r\nlassen; dann besann sie sich wieder anders. Werther ging in der Stube\r\nauf und ab, sie trat ans Klavier und fing eine Menuett an, sie wollte\r\nnicht fließen. Sie nahm sich zusammen und setzte sich gelassen zu\r\nWerthern, der seinen gewöhnlchen Platz auf dem Kanapee eingenommen\r\nhatte.\r\n\r\n\"Haben Sie nichts zu lesen?\" sagte sie.--Er hatte nichts.--\"Da\r\ndrin in meiner Schublade,\" fing sie an, \"liegt Ihre Übersetzung\r\neiniger Gesänge Ossians; ich habe sie noch nicht gelesen, denn ich\r\nhoffte immer, sie von Ihnen zu hören; aber zeither hat sich's nicht\r\nfinden, nicht machen wollen.\"--Er lächelte, holte die Lieder, ein\r\nSchauer überfiel ihn, als er sie in die Hände nahm, und die Augen\r\nstanden ihm voll Tränen, als er hineinsah. Er setzte sich nieder und\r\nlas.\r\n\r\n\"Stern der dämmernden Nacht, schön funkelst du in Westen, habst\r\ndein strahlend Haupt aus deiner Wolke, wandelst stattlich deinen\r\nHügel hin. Wornach blickst du auf die Heide? Die stürmenden Winde\r\nhaben sich gelegt; von ferne kommt des Gießbachs Murmeln; rauschende\r\nWellen spielen am Felsen ferne; das Gesumme der Abendfliegen\r\nschwärmet übers Feld. Wornach siehst du, schönes Licht? Aber du\r\nlächelst und gehst, freudig umgeben dich die Wellen und baden dein\r\nliebliches Haar. Lebe wohl, ruhiger Strahl. Erscheine, du herrliches\r\nLicht von Ossians Seele!\r\n\r\nUnd es erscheint in seiner Kraft. Ich sehe meine geschiedenen\r\nFreunde, sie sammeln sich auf Lora, wie in den Tagen, die vorüber\r\nsind.--Fingal kommt wie eine feuchte Nebelsäule; um ihn sind seine\r\nHelden, und, siehe! Die Barden des Gesanges: grauer Ullin!\r\nStattlicher Ryno! Alpin, lieblicher Sänger! Und du, sanft klagende\r\nMinona!--Wie verändert seid ihr, meine Freunde, seit den festlichen\r\nTagen auf Selma, da wir buhlten um die Ehre des Gesanges, wie\r\nFrühlingslüfte den Hügel hin wechselnd beugen das schwach lispelnde\r\nGras.\r\n\r\nDa trat Minona hervor in ihrer Schönheit, mit niedergeschlagenem\r\nBlick und tränenvollem Auge, schwer floß ihr Haar im unsteten Winde,\r\nder von dem Hügel herstieß.--Düster ward's in der Seele der Helden,\r\nals sie die liebliche Stimme erhob; denn oft hatten sie das Grab\r\nSalgars gesehen, oft die finstere Wohnung der weißen Colma. Colma,\r\nverlassen auf dem Hügel, mit der harmonischen Stimme; Salgar\r\nversprach zu kommen; aber ringsum zog sich die Nacht. Höret Colmas\r\nStimme, da sie auf dem Hügel allein saß.\r\n\r\nColma. Es ist Nacht!--Ich bin allein, verloren auf dem stürmischen\r\nHügel. Der Wind saust im Gebirge. Der Strom heult den Felsen hinab.\r\nKeine Hütte schützt mich vor Regen, mich Verlaßne auf dem stürmischen\r\nHügel. Tritt, o Mond, aus deinen Wolken, erscheinet, Sterne der\r\nNacht! Leite mich irgend ein Strahl zu dem Orte, wo meine Liebe ruht\r\nvon den Beschwerden der Jagd, sein Bogen neben ihm abgespannt, seine\r\nHunde schnobend um ihn! Aber hier muß ich sitzen allein auf dem\r\nFelsen des verwachsenen Stroms. Der Strom und der Sturm saust, ich\r\nhöre nicht die Stimme meines Geliebten.\r\n\r\nWarum zaudert mein Salgar? Hat er sein Wort vergessen?--Da ist\r\nder Fels und der Baum und hier der rauschende Strom! Mit\r\neinbrechender Nacht versprachst du hier zu sein; ach! Wohin hat sich\r\nmein Salgar verirrt? Mit dir wollt' ich fliehen, verlassen Vater und\r\nBruder, die stolzen! Lange sind unsere Geschlechter Feinde, aber wir\r\nsind keine Feinde, o Salgar!\r\n\r\nSchweig eine Weile, o Wind! Still eine kleine Weile, o Strom, daß\r\nmeine Stimme klinge durchs Tal, daß mein Wanderer mich höre. Salgar!\r\nIch bin's, die ruft! Hier ist der Baum und der Fels! Salgar! Mein\r\nLieber! Hier bin ich; warum zauderst du zu kommen?\r\n\r\nSieh, der Mond erscheint, die Flut glänzt im Tale, die Felsen\r\nstehen grau den Hügel hinauf; aber ich seh' ihn nicht auf der Höhe,\r\nseine Hunde vor ihm her verkündigen nicht seine Ankunft. Hier muß ich\r\nsitzen allein.\r\n\r\nAber wer sind, die dort unten liegen auf der Heide?--Mein\r\nGeliebter? Mein Bruder?--Redet, o meine Freunde! Sie antworten\r\nnicht. Wie geängstigt ist meine Seele!--Ach sie sind tot! Ihre\r\nSchwester rot vom Gefechte! O mein Bruder, mein Bruder, warum hast du\r\nmeinen Salgar erschlagen? O mein Salgar, warum hast du meinen Bruder\r\nerschlagen? Ihr wart mir beide so lieb! O du warst schön an dem\r\nHügel unter Tausenden! Es war schrecklich in der Schlacht. Antwortet\r\nmir! Hört meine Stimme, meine Geliebten! Aber ach, sie sind stumm,\r\nstumm auf ewig! Kalt wie die Erde ist ihr Busen!\r\n\r\nO von dem Felsen des Hügels, von dem Gipfel des stürmenden Berges,\r\nredet, Geister der Toten! Redet! Mir soll es nicht grausen!--Wohin\r\nseid ihr zur Ruhe gegangen? In welcher Gruft des Gebirges soll ich\r\neuch finden?--Keine schwache Stimme vernehme ich im Winde, keine\r\nwehende Antwort im Sturme des Hügels. Ich sitze in meinem Jammer,\r\nich harre auf den Morgen in meinen Tränen. Wühlet das Grab, ihr\r\nFreunde der Toten, aber schließt es nicht, bis ich komme. Mein Leben\r\nschwindet wie ein Traum; wie sollt' ich zurückbleiben! Hier will ich\r\n{...} Felsens--wenn's Nacht wird auf dem Hügel, und Wind kommt über die\r\nHeide, soll mein Geist im Winde stehn und trauern den Tod meiner\r\nFreunde. Der Jäger hört mich aus seiner Laube, fürchtet meine Stimme\r\nund liebt sie; denn süß soll meine Stimme sein um meine Freunde, sie\r\nwaren mir beide so lieb!\r\n\r\nDas war dein Gesang, o Minona, Tormans sanft errötende Tochter.\r\nUnsere Tränen flossen um Colma, und unsere Seele ward düster.\r\n\r\nUllin trat auf mit der Harfe und gab uns Alpins Gesang--Alpins\r\nStimme war freundlich, Rynos Seele ein Feuerstrahl. Aber schon ruhten\r\nsie im engen Hause, und ihre Stimme war verhallet in Selma. Einst\r\nkehrte Ullin zurück von der Jagd, ehe die Helden noch fielen. Er\r\nhörte ihren Wettegesang auf dem Hügel. Ihr Lied war sanft, aber\r\ntraurig. Sie klagten Morars Fall, des ersten der Helden. Seine Seele\r\nwar wie Fingals Seele, sein Schwert wie das Schwert Oskars--aber er\r\nfiel, und sein Vater jammerte, und seiner Schwester Augen waren voll\r\nTränen, Minonas Augen waren voll Tränen, der Schwester des herrlichen\r\nMorars. Sie trat zurück vor Ullins Gesang, wie der Mond in Westen,\r\nder den Sturmregen voraussieht und sein schönes Haupt in eine Wolke\r\nverbirgt.--Ich schlug die Harfe mit Ullin zum Gesange des Jammers.\r\n\r\n\r\nRyno\r\n\r\nVorbei sind Wind und Regen, der Mittag ist so heiter, die Wolken\r\nteilen sich. Fliehend bescheint den Hügel die unbeständige Sonne.\r\nRötlich fließt der Strom des Bergs im Tale hin. Süß ist dein Murmeln,\r\nStrom; doch süßer die Stimme, die ich höre. Es ist Alpins Stimme, er\r\nbejammert den Toten. Sein Haupt ist vor Alter gebeugt und rot sein\r\ntränendes Auge. Alpin, trefflicher Sänger, warum allein auf dem\r\nschweigenden Hügel? Warum jammerst du wie ein Windstoß im Walde, wie\r\neine Welle am fernen Gestade?\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAlpin\r\n\r\nMeine Tränen, Ryno, sind für den Toten, meine Stimme für die\r\nBewohner des Grabs. Schlank bist du auf dem Hügel, schön unter den\r\nSöhnen der Heide. Aber du wirst fallen wie Morar, und auf deinem\r\nGrabe wird der Trauernde sitzen. Die Hügel werden dich vergessen,\r\ndein Bogen in der Halle liegen ungespannt.\r\n\r\nDu warst schnell, o Morar, wie ein Reh auf dem Hügel, schrecklich\r\nwie die Nachtfeuer am Himmel. Dein Grimm war ein Sturm, dein Schwert\r\nin der Schlacht wie Wetterleuchten über der Heide. Deine Stimme\r\nglich dem Waldstrome nach dem Regen, dem Donner auf fernen Hügeln.\r\nManche fielen von deinem Arm, die Flamme deines Grimmes verzehrte sie.\r\nAber wenn du wiederkehrtest vom Kriege, wie friedlich war deine\r\nStirne! Dein Angesicht war gleich der Sonne nach dem Gewitter,\r\ngleich dem Monde in der schweigenden Nacht, ruhig deine Brust wie der\r\nSee, wenn sich des Windes Brausen gelegt hat.\r\n\r\nEng ist nun deine Wohnung, finster deine Stätte! Mit drei Schritten\r\nmess' ich dein Grab, o du, der du ehe so groß warst! Vier Steine mit\r\nmoosigen Häupten sind dein einziges Gedächtnis; ein entblätterter\r\nBaum, langes Gras, das im Winde wispelt, deutet dem Auge des Jägers\r\ndas Grab des mächtigen Morars. Keine Mutter hast du, dich zu beweinen,\r\nkein Mädchen mit Tränen der Liebe. Tot ist, die dich gebar,\r\ngefallen die Tochter von Morglan.\r\n\r\nWer auf seinem Stabe ist das? Wer ist es, dessen Haupt weiß ist vor\r\nAlter, dessen Augen rot sind von Tränen? Es ist dein Vater, o Morar,\r\nder Vater keines Sohnes außer dir. Er hörte von deinem Ruf in der\r\nSchlacht, er hörte von zerstobenen Feinden; er hörte Morars Ruhm!\r\nAch! Nichts von seiner Wunde? Weine, Vater Morars, weine! Aber dein\r\nSohn hört dich nicht. Tief ist der Schlaf der Toten, niedrig ihr\r\nKissen von Staube. Nimmer achtet er auf die Stimme, nie erwacht er\r\nauf deinen Ruf. O wann wird es Morgen im Grabe, zu bieten dem\r\nSchlummerer: Erwache!\r\n\r\nLebe wohl, edelster der Menschen, du Eroberer im Felde! Aber nimmer\r\nwird dich das Feld sehen, nimmer der düstere Wald leuchten vom Glanze\r\ndeines Stahls. Du hinterließest keinen Sohn, aber der Gesang soll\r\ndeinen Namen erhalten, künftige Zeiten sollen von dir hören, hören\r\nvon dem gefallenen Morar.\r\n\r\nLaut war die Trauer der Helden, am lautesten Armins berstender\r\nSeufzer. Ihn erinnerte es an den Tod seines Sohnes, er fiel in den\r\nTagen der Jugend. Carmor saß nah bei dem Helden, der Fürst des\r\nhallenden Galmal. \"Warum schluchzet der Seufzer Armins?\" sprach er,\r\n\"was ist hier zu weinen? Klingt nicht ein Lied und ein Gesang, die\r\nSeele zu schmelzen und zu ergetzen? Sie sind wie sanfter Nebel, der\r\nsteigend vom See aufs Tal sprüht, und die blühenden Blumen füllet das\r\nNaß; aber die Sonne kommt wieder in ihrer Kraft, und der Nebel ist\r\ngegangen. Warum bist du so jammervoll, Armin, Herrscher des\r\nseeumflossenen Gorma?\"\r\n\r\n\"Jammervoll! Wohl das bin ich, und nicht gering die Ursache meines\r\nWehs.--Carmor, du verlorst keinen Sohn, verlorst keine blühende\r\nTochter; Colgar, der Tapfere, lebt, und Annira, die schönste der\r\nMädchen. Die Zweige deines Hauses blühen, o Carmor; aber Armin ist\r\nder Letzte seines Stammes. Finster ist dein Bett, o Daura! Dumpf ist\r\ndein Schlaf in dem Grabe--wann erwachst du mit deinen Gesängen, mit\r\ndeiner melodischen Stimme? Auf, ihr Winde des Herbstes! Auf, stürmt\r\nüber die finstere Heide! Waldströme, braust! Heult, Ströme, im\r\nGipfel der Eichen! Wandle durch gebrochene Wolken, o Mond, zeige\r\nwechselnd dein bleiches Gesicht! Erinnre mich der schrecklichen\r\nNacht, da meine Kinder umkamen, da Arindal, der Mächtige, fiel, Daura,\r\ndie Liebe, verging.\r\n\r\n\"Daura, meine Tochter, du warst schön, schön wie der Mond auf den\r\nHügeln von Fura, weiß wie der gefallene Schnee, süß wie die atmende\r\nLuft! Arindal, dein Bogen war stark, dein Speer schnell auf dem\r\nFelde, dein Blick wie Nebel auf der Welle, dein Schild eine Feuerwolke\r\nim Sturme!\r\n\r\n\"Armar, berühmt im Kriege, kam und warb um Dauras Liebe; sie\r\nwiderstand nicht lange. Schön waren die Hoffnungen ihrer Freunde.\"\r\n\r\nErath, der Sohn Odgals, grollte, denn sein Bruder lag erschlagen\r\nvon Armar. Er kam, in einen Schiffer verkleidet. Schön war sein\r\nNachen auf der Welle, weiß seine Locken vor Alter, ruhig sein ernstes\r\nGesicht. \"Schönste Mädchen,\" sagte er, \"liebliche Tochter von\r\nArmin, dort am Felsen, nicht fern in der See, wo die rote Frucht vom\r\nBaume herblinkt, dort wartet Armar auf Daura: ich komme, seine Liebe\r\nzu führen über die rollende See.\r\n\r\nSie folgt' ihm und rief nach Armar; nichts antwortete als die\r\nStimme des Felsens. \"Armar! Mein Lieber! Mein Lieber! Warum\r\nängstest du mich so? Höre, Sohn Arnarths! Höre! Daura ist's, die\r\ndich ruft!\r\n\r\nErath, der Verräter, floh lachend zum Lande. Sie erhob ihre Stimme,\r\nrief nach ihrem Vater und Bruder: \"Arindal! Armin! Ist keiner,\r\nseine Daura zu retten?\"\r\n\r\nIhre Stimme kam über die See. Arindal, mein Sohn, stieg vom Hügel\r\nherab, rauh in der Beute der Jagd, seine Pfeile rasselten an seiner\r\nSeite, seinen Bogen trug er in der Hand, fünf schwarzgraue Doggen\r\nwaren um ihn. Er sah den kühnen Erath am Ufer, faßt' und band ihn an\r\ndie Eiche, fest umflocht er seine Hüften, der Gefesselte füllte mit\r\nÄchzen die Winde.\r\n\r\nArindal betritt die Wellen in seinem Boote, Daura herüber zu\r\nbringen. Armar kam in seinem Grimme, drückt' ab den grau befiederten\r\nPfeil, er klang, er sank in dein Herz, \"o Arindal, mein Sohn! Statt\r\nEraths, des Verräters, kamst du um, das Boot erreichte den Felsen, er\r\nsank dran nieder und starb. Zu deinen Füßen floß deines Bruders Blut,\r\nwelch war dein Jammer, o Daura! Die Wellen zerschmettern das Boot.\r\nArmar stürzt sch in die See, seine Daura zu retten oder zu sterben.\r\nSchnell stürmte ein Stoß vom Hügel in die Wellen, er sank und hob\r\nsich nicht wieder.\r\n\r\nAllein auf den seebespülten Felsen hört' ich die Klagen meiner\r\nTochter. Viel und laut war ihr Schreien, doch konnt' sie ihr Vater\r\nnicht retten. Die ganze Nacht stand ich am Ufer, ich sah sie im\r\nschwachen Strahle des Mondes, die ganze Nacht hört' ich ihr Schreien,\r\nlaut war der Wind, und der Regen schlug scharf nach der Seite des\r\nBerges. Ihre Stimme ward schwach, ehe der Morgen erschien, sie starb\r\nweg wie die Abendluft zwischen dem Grase der Felsen. Beladen mit\r\nJammer starb sie und ließ Armin allein! Dahin ist meine Stärke im\r\nKriege, gefallen mein Stolz unter den Mädchen.\r\n\r\nWenn die Stürme des Berges kommen, wenn der Nord die Wellen\r\nhochhebt, sitz' ich am schallenden Ufer, schaue nach dem schrecklichen\r\nFelsen. Oft im sinkenden Monde seh' ich die Geister meiner Kinder,\r\nhalb dämmernd wandeln sie zusammen in traurigen Eintracht.\"\r\n\r\nEin Strom von Tränen, der aus Lottens Augen brach und ihrem\r\ngepreßten Herzen Luft machte, hemmte Werthers Gesang. Er warf das\r\nPapier hin, faßte ihre Hand und weinte die bittersten Tränen. Lotte\r\nruhte auf der andern und verbarg ihre Augen ins Schnupftuch. Die\r\nBewegung beider war fürchterlich. Sie fühlten ihr eigenes Elend in\r\ndem Schicksale der Edlen, fühlten es zusammen, und ihre Tränen\r\nvereinigten sich. Die Lippen und Augen Werthers glühten an Lottens\r\nArme; ein Schauer überfiel sie; sie wollte sich entfernen, und\r\nSchmerz und Anteil lagen betäubend wie Blei auf ihr. Sie atmete,\r\nsich zu erholen, und bat ihn schluchzend fortzufahren, bat mit der\r\nganzen Stimme des Himmels! Werther zitterte, sein Herz wollte bersten,\r\ner hob das Blatt auf und las halb gebrochen:\r\n\r\n\"Warum weckst du mich, Frühlingsluft? Du buhlst und sprichst: ich\r\nbetaue mit Tropfen des Himmels! Aber die Zeit meines Welkens ist nahe,\r\nnahe der Sturm, der meine Blätter herabstört! Morgen wird der\r\nWanderer kommen, kommen der mich sah in meiner Schönheit, ringsum\r\nwird sein Auge im Felde mich suchen und wird mich nicht finden.--\"\r\n\r\nDie ganze Gewalt dieser Worte fiel über den Unglücklichen.\r\n\r\nEr warf sich vor Lotten nieder in der vollen Verzweifelung, faßte\r\nihre Hände, drückte sie in seine Augen, wider seine Stirn, und ihr\r\nschien eine Ahnung seines schrecklichen Vorhabens durch die Seele zu\r\nfliegen. Ihre Sinne verwirrten sich, sie drückte seine Hände,\r\ndrückte sie wider ihre Brust, neigte sich mit einer wehmütigen\r\nBewegung zu ihm, und ihre glühenden Wangen berührten sich. Die Welt\r\nverging ihnen. Er schlang seine Arme um sie her, preßte sie an seine\r\nBrust und deckte ihre zitternden, stammelnden Lippen mit wütenden\r\nKüssen.--\"Werther!\" rief sie mit erstickter Stimme, sich abwendend,\r\n\"Werther!\" und drückte mit schwacher Hand seine Brust von der\r\nihrigen; \"Werther!\" rief sie mit dem gefaßten Tone des edelsten\r\nGefühles.--Er widerstand nicht, ließ sie sich aus seinen Armen und\r\nwarf sich unsinnig vor sie hin.--Sie riß sich auf, und in\r\nängstlicher Verwirrung, bebend zwischen Liebe und Zorn, sagte sie:\r\n\"Das ist das letzte Mal! Werther! Sie sehn mich nicht wieder.\" Und\r\nmit dem vollsten Blick der Liebe auf den Elenden eilte sie ins\r\nNebenzimmer und schloß hinter sich zu.--Werther streckte ihr die\r\nArme nach, getraute sich nicht, sie zu halten. Er lag an der Erde,\r\nden Kopf auf dem Kanapee, und in dieser Stellung blieb er über eine\r\nhalbe Stunde, bis ihn ein Geräusch zu sich selbst rief. Es war das\r\nMädchen, das den Tisch decken wollte. Er ging im Zimmer auf und ab,\r\nund da er sich wieder allein sah, ging er zur Türe des Kabinetts und\r\nrief mit leiser Stimme: \"Lotte! Lotte! Nur noch ein Wort! Ein\r\nLebewohl!\"--Sie schwieg.--Er harrte und bat und harrte; dann riß er\r\nsich weg und rief: \"lebe wohl, Lotte! Auf ewig lebe wohl!\"\r\n\r\nEr kam ans Stadttor. Die Wächter, die ihn schon gewohnt waren,\r\nließen ihn stillschweigend hinaus. Es stiebte zwischen Regen und\r\nSchnee, und erst gegen eilfe klopfte er wieder. Sein Diener bemerkte,\r\nals Werther nach Hause kam, daß seinem Herrn der Hut fehlte. Er\r\ngetraute sich nicht, etwas zu sagen, entkleidete ihn, alles war naß.\r\nMan hat nachher den Hut auf einem Felsen, der an dem Abhange des\r\nHügels ins Tal sieht, gefunden, und es ist unbegreiflich, wie er ihn\r\nin einer finstern, feuchten Nacht, ohne zu stürzen, erstiegen hat.\r\n\r\nEr legte sich zu Bette und schlief lange. Der Bediente fand ihn\r\nschreibend, als er ihm den andern Morgen auf sein Rufen den Kaffee\r\nbrachte. Er schrieb folgendes am Briefe an Lotten:\r\n\r\n\"Zum letztenmale denn, zum letztenmale schlage ich diese Augen auf.\r\nSie sollen, ach, die Sonne nicht mehr sehn, ein trüber, neblichter\r\nTag hält sie bedeckt. So traure denn, Natur! Dein Sohn, dein Freund,\r\ndein Geliebter naht sich seinem Ende. Lotte, das ist ein Gefühl\r\nohnegleichen, und doch kommt es dem dämmernden Traum am nächsten, zu\r\nsich zu sagen: das ist der letzte Morgen. Der letzte! Lotte, ich\r\nhabe keinen Sinn für das Wort: der letzte! Stehe ich nicht da in\r\nmeiner ganzen Kraft, und morgen liege ich ausgestreckt und schlaff am\r\nBoden. Sterben! Was heißt das? Siehe, wir träumen, wenn wir vom\r\nTode reden. Ich habe manchen sterben sehen; aber so eingeschränkt ist\r\ndie Menschheit, daß sie für ihres Daseins Anfang und Ende keinen Sinn\r\nhat. Jetzt noch mein, dein! Dein, o Geliebte! Und einen\r\nAugenblick--getrennt, geschieden--vielleicht auf ewig?--Nein, Lotte,\r\nnein--wie kann ich vergehen? Wie kannst du vergehen? Wir sind ja!\r\n--vergehen!--Was heißt das? Das ist wieder ein Wort, ein leerer\r\nSchall, ohne Gefühl für mein Herz.--Tot, Lotte! Eingescharrt der\r\nkalten Erde, so eng! So finster!--Ich hatte eine Freundin, die mein\r\nalles war meiner hülflosen Jugend; sie starb, und ich folgte ihrer\r\nLeiche und stand an dem Grabe, wie sie den Sarg hinunterließen und\r\ndie Seile schnurrend unter ihm weg und wieder herauf schnellten, dann\r\ndie erste Schaufel hinunterschollerte, und die ängstliche Lade einen\r\ndumpfen Ton wiedergab, und dumpfer und immer dumpfer, und endlich\r\nbedeckt war!--Ich stürzte neben das Grab hin--ergriffen, erschüttert,\r\ngeängstigt, zerrissen mein Innerstes, aber ich wußte nicht, wie mir\r\ngeschah--wie mir geschehen wird--Sterben! Grab! Ich verstehe die\r\nWorte nicht!\r\n\r\nO vergib mir! Vergib mir! Gestern! Es hätte der letzte Augenblick\r\nmeines Lebens sein sollen. O du Engel! Zum ersten Male, zum ersten\r\nMale ganz ohne Zweifel durch mein innig Innerstes durchglühte mich\r\ndas Wonnegefühl: sie liebt mich! Sie liebt mich! Es brennt noch auf\r\nmeinen Lippen das heilige Feuer, das von den deinigen strömte, neue,\r\nwarme Wonne ist in meinem Herzen. Vergib mir! Vergib mir!\r\n\r\nAch, ich wußte, daß du mich liebtest, wußte es an den ersten\r\nseelenvollen Blicken, an dem ersten Händedruck, und doch, wenn ich\r\nwieder weg war, wenn ich Alberten an deiner Seite sah, verzagte ich\r\nwieder in fieberhaften Zweifeln.\r\n\r\nErinnerst du dich der Blumen, die du mir schicktest, als du in\r\njener fatalen Gesellschaft mir kein Wort sagen, keine Hand reichen\r\nkonntest? O, ich habe die halbe Nacht davor gekniet, und sie\r\nversiegelten mir deine Liebe. Aber ach! Diese Eindrücke gingen\r\nvorüber, wie das Gefühl der Gnade seines Gottes allmählich wieder aus\r\nder Seele des Gläubigen weicht, die ihm mit ganzer Himmelsfülle in\r\nheiligen, sichtbaren Zeichen gereicht ward.\r\n\r\nAlles das ist vergänglich, aber keine Ewigkeit soll das glühende\r\nLeben auslöschen, das ich gestern auf deinen Lippen genoß, das ich in\r\nmir fühle! Sie liebt mich! Dieser Arm hat sie umfaßt, diese Lippen\r\nhaben auf ihren Lippen gezittert, dieser Mund hat an dem ihrigen\r\ngestammelt. Sie ist mein! Du bist mein! Ja, Lotte, auf ewig.\r\n\r\nUnd was ist das, daß Albert dein Mann ist? Mann! Das wäre denn für\r\ndiese Welt--und für diese Welt Sünde, daß ich dich liebe, daß ich\r\ndich aus seinen Armen in die meinigen reißen möchte? Sünde? Gut,\r\nund ich strafe mich dafür; ich habe sie in ihrer ganzen Himmelswonne\r\ngeschmeckt, diese Sünde, habe Lebensbalsam und Kraft in mein Herz\r\ngesaugt. Du bist von diesem Augenblicke mein! Mein, o Lotte! Ich\r\ngehe voran! Gehe zu meinem Vater, zu deinem Vater. Dem will ich's\r\nklagen, und er wird mich trösten, bis du kommst, und ich fliege dir\r\nentgegen und fasse dich und bleibe bei dir vor dem Angesichte des\r\nUnendlichen in ewigen Umarmungen.\r\n\r\nIch träume nicht, ich wähne nicht! Nahe am Grabe wird mir es heller.\r\nWir werden sein! Wir werden uns wieder sehen! Deine Mutter sehen!\r\nIch werde sie sehen, werde sie finden, ach, und vor ihr mein ganzes\r\nHerz ausschütten! Deine Mutter, dein Ebenbild.\"\r\n\r\nGegen eilfe fragte Werther seinen Bedienten, ob wohl Albert\r\nzurückgekommen sei? Der Bediente sagte: ja, er habe dessen Pferd\r\ndahinführen sehen. Darauf gibt ihm der Herr ein offenes Zettelchen\r\ndes Inhalts: \"Wollten Sie mir wohl zu einer vorhabenden Reise Ihre\r\nPistolen leihen? Leben Sie recht wohl!\"\r\n\r\nDie liebe Frau hatte die letzte Nacht wenig geschlafen; was sie\r\ngefürchtet hatte, war entschieden, auf eine Weise entschieden, die\r\nsie weder ahnen noch fürchten konnte. Ihr sonst so rein und leicht\r\nfließendes Blut war in einer fieberhaften Empörung, tausenderlei\r\nMepfindungen zerrütteten das schöne Herz. War es das Feuer von\r\nWerthers Umarmungen, das sie in ihrem Busen fühlte? War es Unwille\r\nüber seine Verwegenheit? War es eine unmutige Vergleichung ihres\r\ngegenwärtigen Zustandes mit jenen Tagen ganz unbefangener, freier\r\nUnschuld und sorglosen Zutrauens an sich selbst? Wie sollte sie\r\nihrem Manne entgegengehen, wie ihm eine Szene bekennen, die sie so\r\ngut gestehen durfte, und die sie sich doch zu gestehen nicht\r\ngetraute? Sie hatten so lange gegen einander geschwiegen, und sollte\r\nsie die erste sein, die das Stillschweigen bräche und eben zur\r\nunrechten Zeit ihrem Gatten eine so unerwartete Entdeckung machte?\r\nSchon fürchtete sie, die bloße Nachricht von Werthers Besuch werde\r\nihm einen unangenehmen Eindruck machen, und nun gar diese unerwartete\r\nKatastrophe! Konnte sie wohl hoffen, daß ihr Mann sie ganz im rechten\r\nLichte sehen, ganz ohne Vorurteil aufnehmen würde? Und konnte sie\r\nwünschen, daß er in ihrer Seele lesen möchte? Und doch wieder, konnte\r\nsie sich verstellen gegen den Mann, vor dem sie immer wie ein\r\nkristallhelles Glas offen und frei gestanden und dem sie keine ihrer\r\nEmpfindungen jemals verheimlicht noch verheimlichen können? Eins und\r\ndas andre machte ihr Sorgen und setzte sie in Verlegenheit; und immer\r\nkehrten ihre Gedanken wieder zu Werthern, der für sie verloren war,\r\nden sie nicht lassen konnte, den sie--leider!--sich selbst\r\nüberlassen mußte, und dem, wenn er sie verloren hatte, nichts mehr\r\nübrig blieb.\r\n\r\nWie schwer lag jetzt, was sie sich in dem Augenblick nicht deutlich\r\nmachen konnte, die Stockung auf ihr, die sich unter ihnen festgesetzt\r\nhatte! So verständige, so gute Menschen fingen wegen gewisser\r\nheimlicher Verschiedenheiten unter einander zu schweigen an, jedes\r\ndachte seinem Recht und dem Unrechte des andern nach, und die\r\nVerhältnisse verwickelten und verhetzten sich dergestalt, daß es\r\nunmöglich ward, den Knoten eben in dem kritischen Momente, von dem\r\nalles abhing, zu lösen. Hätte eine glückliche Vertraulichkeit sie\r\nfrüher wieder einander näher gebracht, wäre Liebe und Nachsicht\r\nwechselsweise unter ihnen lebendig worden und hätte ihre Herzen\r\naufgeschlossen, vielleicht wäre unser Freund noch zu retten gewesen.\r\n\r\nNoch ein sonderbarer Umstand kam dazu. Werther hatte, wie wir aus\r\nseinen Briefen wissen, nie ein Geheimnis daraus gemacht, daß er sich\r\ndiese Welt zu verlassen sehnte. Albert hatte ihn oft bestritten, auch\r\nwar zwischen Lotten und ihrem Mann manchmal die Rede davon gewesen.\r\nDieser, wie er einen entschiedenen Widerwillen gegen die Tat empfand,\r\nhatte auch gar oft mit einer Art von Empfindlichkeit, die sonst ganz\r\naußer seinem Charakter lag, zu erkennen gegeben, daß er an dem Ernst\r\neines solchen Vorsatzes sehr zu zweifeln Ursach' finde, er hatte sich\r\nsogar darüber einigen Scherz erlaubt und seinen Unglauben Lotten\r\nmitgeteilt. Dies beruhigte sie zwar von einer Seite, wenn ihre\r\nGedanken ihr das traurige Bild vorführten, von der andern aber fühlte\r\nsie sich auch dadurch gehindert, ihrem Manne die Besorgnisse\r\nmitzuteilen, die sie in dem Augenblicke quälten.\r\n\r\nAlbert kam zurück, und Lotte ging ihm mit einer verlegenen\r\nHastigkeit entgegen, er war nicht heiter, sein Geschäft war nicht\r\nvollbracht, er hatte an dem benachbarten Amtmanne einen unbiegsamen,\r\nkleinsinnigen Menschen gefunden. Der Üble Weg auch hatte ihn\r\nverdrießlich gemacht.\r\n\r\nEr fragte, ob nichts vorgefallen sei, und sie antwortete mit\r\nÜbereilung: Werther sei gestern abends dagewesen. Er fragte, ob\r\nBriefe gekommen, und er erhielt zur Antwort, daß ein Brief und Pakete\r\nauf seiner Stube lägen. Er ging hinüber, und Lotte blieb allein. Die\r\nGegenwart des Mannes, den sie liebte und ehrte, hatte einen neuen\r\nEindruck in ihr Herz gemacht. Das Andenken seines Edelmuts, seiner\r\nLiebe und Güte hatte ihr Gemüt mehr beruhigt, sie fühlte einen\r\nheimlichen Zug, ihm zu folgen, sie nahm ihre Arbeit und ging auf sein\r\nZimmer, wie sie mehr zu tun pflegte. Sie fand ihn beschäftigt, die\r\nPakete zu erbrechen und zu lesen. Einige schienen nicht das\r\nAngenehmste zu enthalten. Sie tat einige Fragen an ihn, die er kurz\r\nbeantwortete, und sich an den Pult stellte, zu schreiben.\r\n\r\nSie waren auf diese Weise eine Stunde nebeneinander gewesen, und es\r\nward immer dunkler in Lottens Gemüt. Sie fühlte, wie schwer es ihr\r\nwerden würde, ihrem Mann, auch wenn er bei dem besten Humor wäre, das\r\nzu entdecken, was ihr auf dem Herzen lag; sie verfiel in eine Wehmut,\r\ndie ihr um desto ängstlicher ward, als sie solche zu verbergen und\r\nihre Tränen zu verschlucken suchte.\r\n\r\nDie Erscheinung von Werthers Knaben setzte sie in die größte\r\nVerlegenheit; er überreichte Alberten das Zettelchen, der sich\r\ngelassen nach seiner Frau wendete und sagte: \"gib ihm die Pistolen.\"\r\n--\"Ich lasse ihm glückliche Reise wünschen.\" sagte er zum Jungen.\r\n--Das fiel auf sie wie ein Donnerschlag, sie schwankte aufzustehen,\r\nsie wußte nicht, wie ihr geschah. Langsam ging sie nach der Wand,\r\nzitternd nahm sie das Gewehr herunter, putzte den Staub ab und\r\nzauderte, und hätte noch lange gezögert, wenn nicht Albert durch\r\neinen fragenden Blick sie gedrängt hätte. Sie gab das unglückliche\r\nWerkzeug dem Knaben, ohne ein Wort vorbringen zu können, und als der\r\nzum Hause hinaus war, machte sie ihre Arbeit zusammen, ging in ihr\r\nZimmer, in dem Zustande der unaussprechlichsten Ungewißheit. Ihr\r\nHerz weissagte ihr alle Schrecknisse. Bald war sie im Begriffe, sich\r\nzu den Füßen ihres Mannes zu werfen, ihm alles zu entdecken, die\r\nGeschichte des gestrigen Abends, ihre Schuld und ihre Ahnungen. Dann\r\nsah sie wieder keinen Ausgang des Unternehmens, am wenigsten konnte\r\nsie hoffen, ihren Mann zu einem Gange nach Werthern zu bereden. Der\r\nTisch ward gedeckt, und eine gute Freundin, die nur etwas zu fragen\r\nkam, gleich gehen wollte--und blieb, machte die Unterhaltung bei\r\nTische erträglich; man zwang sich, man redete, man erzählte, man\r\nvergaß sich.\r\n\r\nDer Knabe kam mit den Pistolen zu Werthern, der sie ihm mit\r\nEntzücken abnahm, als er hörte, Lotte habe sie ihm gegeben. Er ließ\r\nsich Brot und Wein bringen, hieß den Knaben zu Tische gehen und\r\nsetzte sich nieder, zu schreiben.\r\n\r\n\"Sie sind durch deine Hände gegangen, du hast den Staub davon\r\ngeputzt, ich küsse sie tausendmal, du hast sie berührt! Und du, Geist\r\ndes Himmels, begünstigst meinen Entschluß, und du, Lotte, reichst mir\r\ndas Werkzeug, du, von deren Händen ich den Tod zu empfangen wünschte,\r\nund ach! Nun empfange. O ich habe meinen Jungen ausgefragt. Du\r\nzittertest, als du sie ihm reichtest, du sagtest kein Lebewohl!\r\n--Wehe! Wehe! Kein Lebewohl!--solltest du dein Herz für mich\r\nverschlossen haben, um des Augenblicks willen, der mich ewig an dich\r\nbefestigte? Lotte, kein Jahrtausend vermag den Eindruck auszulöschen!\r\nUnd ich fühle es, du kannst den nicht hassen, der so für dich glüht.\"\r\n\r\n\r\nNach Tische hieß er den Knaben alles vollends einpacken, zerriß\r\nviele Papiere, ging aus und brachte noch kleine Schulden in Ordnung.\r\nEr kam wieder nach Hause, ging wieder aus vors Tor, ungeachtet des\r\nRegens, in den gräflichen Garten, schweifte weiter in der Gegend\r\numher und kam mit anbrechender Nacht zurück und schrieb.\r\n\r\n\"Wilhelm, ich habe zum letzten Male Feld und Wald und den Himmel\r\ngesehen. Leb wohl auch du! Liebe Mutter, verzeiht mir! Tröste sie,\r\nWilhelm! Gott segne euch! Meine Sachen sind alle in Ordnung. Lebt\r\nwohl! Wir sehen uns wieder und freudiger.\"\r\n\r\n\"Ich habe dir Übel gelohnt, Albert, und du vergibst mir. Ich habe\r\nden Frieden deines Hauses gestört, ich habe Mißtrauen zwischen euch\r\ngebracht. Lebe wohl! Ich will es enden. O daß ihr glücklich wäret\r\ndurch meinen Tod! Albert! Albert! Mache den Engel glücklich! Und\r\nso wohne Gottes Segen über dir!\"\r\n\r\nEr kannte den Abend noch viel in seinen Papieren, zerriß vieles und\r\nwarf es in den Ofen, versiegelte einige Päcke mit den Adressen an\r\nWilhelm. Sie enthielten kleine Aufsätze, abgerissene Gedanken, deren\r\nich verschiedene gesehen habe; und nachdem er um zehn Uhr Feuer hatte\r\nnachlegen und sich eine Flasche Wein geben lassen, schickte er den\r\nBedienten, dessen Kammer wie auch die Schlafzimmer der Hausleute weit\r\nhinten hinaus waren, zu Bette, der sich dann in seinen Kleidern\r\nniederlegte, um frühe bei der Hand zu sein; denn sein Herr hatte\r\ngesagt, die Postpferde würden vor sechse vors Haus kommen.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nNach Eilfe\r\n\r\nAlles ist so still um mich her, und so ruhig meine Seele. Ich danke\r\ndir, Gott, der du diesen letzten Augenblicken diese Wärme, diese\r\nKraft schenkest.\r\n\r\nIch trete an das Fenster, meine Beste, und sehe, und sehe noch\r\ndurch die stürmenden, vorüberfliehenden Wolken einzelne Sterne des\r\newigen Himmels! Nein, ihr werdet nicht fallen! Der Ewige trägt euch\r\nan seinem Herzen, und mich. Ich sehe die Deichselsterne des Wagens,\r\ndes liebsten unter allen Gestirnen. Wenn ich nachts von dir ging,\r\nwie ich aus deinem Tore trat, stand er gegen mir über. Mit welcher\r\nTrunkenheit habe ich ihn oft angesehen, oft mit aufgehabenen Händen\r\nihn zum Zeichen, zum heiligen Merksteine meiner gegenwärtigen\r\nSeligkeit gemacht! Und noch--o Lotte, was erinnert mich nicht an dich!\r\nUmgibst du mich nicht! Und habe ich nicht, gleich einem Kinde,\r\nungenügsam allerlei Kleinigkeiten zu mir gerissen, die du Heilige\r\nberührt hattest!\r\n\r\nLiebes Schattenbild! Ich vermache dir es zurück, Lotte, und bitte\r\ndich, es zu ehren. Tausend, tausend Küsse habe ich darauf gedrückt,\r\ntausend Grüße ihm zugewinkt, wenn ich ausging oder nach Hause kam.\r\nIch habe deinen Vater in einem Zettelchen gebeten, meine Leiche zu\r\nschützen. Auf dem Kirchhofe sind zwei Lindenbäume, hinten in der Ecke\r\nnach dem Felde zu; dort wünsche ich zu ruhen. Er kann, er wird das\r\nfür seinen Freund tun. Bitte ihn auch. Ich will frommen Christen\r\nnicht zumuten, ihren Körper neben einen armen Unglücklichen zu legen.\r\nAch, ich wollte, ihr begrübt mich am Wege, oder im einsamen Tale,\r\ndaß Priester und Levit vor dem bezeichneten Steine sich segnend\r\nvorübergingen und der Samariter eine Träne weinte.\r\n\r\nHier, Lotte! Ich schaudre nicht, den kalten, schrecklichen Kelch zu\r\nfassen, aus dem ich den Taumel des Todes trinken soll! Du reichtest\r\nmir ihn, und zage nicht. All! All! So sind alle die Wünsche und\r\nHoffnungen meines Lebens erfüllt! So kalt, so starr an der ehernen\r\nPforte des Todes anzuklopfen.\r\n\r\nDaß ich des Glückes hätte teilhaftig werden können, für dich zu\r\nsterben! Lotte, für dich mich hinzugeben! Ich wollte mutig, ich\r\nwollte freudig sterben, wenn ich dir die Ruhe, die Wonne deines\r\nLebens wiederschaffen könnte. Aber ach! Das ward nur wenigen Edeln\r\ngegeben, ihr Blut für die Ihrigen zu vergießen und durch ihren Tod\r\nein neues, hundertfältiges Leben ihren Freunden anzufachen.\r\n\r\nIn diesen Kleidern, Lotte, will ich begraben sein, du hast sie\r\nberührt, geheiligt; ich habe auch deinen Vater darum gebeten. Meine\r\nSeele schwebt über dem Sarge. Man soll meine Taschen nicht aussuchen.\r\nDiese blaßrote Schleife, die du am Busen hattest, als ich dich zum\r\nersten Male unter deinen Kindern fand--o küsse sie tausendmal und\r\nerzähle ihnen das Schicksal ihres unglücklichen Freundes. Die Lieben!\r\nSie wimmeln um mich. Ach wie ich mich an dich schloß! Seit dem\r\nersten Augenblicke dich nicht lassen konnte!--Diese Schleife soll\r\nmit mir begraben werden. An meinem Geburtstage schenktest du sie mir!\r\nWie ich das alles verschlang!--Ach, ich dachte nicht, daß mich der\r\nWeg hierher führen sollte!--Sei ruhig! Ich bitte dich, sei ruhig!\r\n\r\n--Sie sind geladen--es schlägt zwölfe! So sei es denn!--Lotte!\r\nLotte, lebe wohl! Lebe wohl!\"\r\n\r\nEin Nachbar sah den Blick vom Pulver und hörte den Schuß fallen; da\r\naber alles stille blieb, achtete er nicht weiter drauf.\r\n\r\nMorgens um sechse tritt der Bediente herein mit dem Lichte. Er\r\nfindet seinen Herrn an der Erde, die Pistole und Blut. Er ruft, er\r\nfaßt ihn an; keine Antwort, er röchelt nur noch. Er läuft nach den\r\nÄrzten, nach Alberten. Lotte hört die Schelle ziehen, ein Zittern\r\nergreift alle ihre Glieder. Sie weckt ihren Mann, sie stehen auf,\r\nder Bediente bringt heulend und stotternd die Nachricht, Lotte sinkt\r\nohnmöchtig vor Alberten nieder.\r\n\r\nAls der Medikus zu dem Unglücklichen kam, fand er ihn an der Erde\r\nohne Rettung, der Puls schlug, die Glieder waren alle gelähmt. über\r\ndem rechten Auge hatte er sich durch den Kopf geschossen, das Gehirn\r\nwar herausgetrieben. Man ließ ihm zum Überfluß eine Ader am Arme, das\r\nBlut lief, er holte noch immer Atem.\r\n\r\nAus dem Blut auf der Lehne des Sessels konnte man schließen, er\r\nhabe sitzend vor dem Schreibtische die Tat vollbracht, dann ist er\r\nheruntergesunken, hat sich konvulsivisch um den Stuhl herumgewälzt.\r\nEr lag gegen das Fenster entkräftet auf dem Rücken, war in völliger\r\nKleidung, gestiefelt, im blauen Frack mit gelber Weste.\r\n\r\nDas Haus, die Nachbarschaft, die Stadt kam in Aufruhr. Albert trat\r\nherein. Werthern hatte man auf das Bett gelegt, die Stirn verbunden,\r\nsein Gesicht schon wie eines Toten, er rührte kein Glied. Die Lunge\r\nröchelte noch fürchterlich, bald schwach, bald stärker; man erwartete\r\nsein Ende.\r\n\r\nVon dem Weine hatte er nur ein Glas getrunken. Emilia Galotti lag\r\nauf dem Pulte aufgeschlagen.\r\n\r\nVon Alberts Bestürzung, von Lottens Jammer laßt mich nichts sagen.\r\n\r\nDer alte Amtmann kam auf die Nachricht hereingesprengt, er küßte\r\nden Sterbenden unter den heißesten Tränen. Seine ältesten Söhne kamen\r\nbald nach ihm zu Fuße, sie fielen neben dem Bette nieder im Ausdrucke\r\ndes unbändigsten Schmerzens, küßten ihm die Hände und den Mund, und\r\nder älteste, den er immer am meisten geliebt, hing an seinen Lippen,\r\nbis er verschieden war und man den Knaben mit Gewalt wegriß. Um\r\nzwölfe mittags starb er. Die Gegenwart des Amtmannes und seine\r\nAnstalten tauschten einen Auflauf. Nachts gegen eilfe ließ er ihn an\r\ndie Stätte begraben, die er sich erwählt hatte. Der Alte folgte der\r\nLeiche und die Söhne, Albert vermocht's nicht. Man fürchtete für\r\nLottens Leben. Handwerker trugen ihn. Kein Geistlicher hat ihn\r\nbegleitet.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nEnde dieses Projekt Gutenberg Etextes \"Die Leiden des jungen\r\nWerther-Buch 2\" von Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.\r\n\r\n\r\n" }, { "path": "tests/test_bow.py", "content": "import numpy as np\nimport pandas as pd\nimport pytest\nfrom hypothesis import settings, given, strategies as st\nfrom scipy.sparse import coo_matrix, csr_matrix, issparse\n\nfrom ._testtools import strategy_dtm\n\nfrom tmtoolkit import bow\n\ntry:\n import gensim\n GENSIM_INSTALLED = True\nexcept ImportError:\n GENSIM_INSTALLED = False\n\npytestmark = [pytest.mark.filterwarnings(\"ignore:divide by zero\"), # happens due to generated data by hypothesis\n pytest.mark.filterwarnings(\"ignore:invalid value\")]\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1)\n)\ndef test_doc_lengths(dtm, matrix_type):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n dtm_arr = dtm.A\n else:\n dtm_arr = dtm\n\n if dtm_arr.ndim != 2:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.doc_lengths(dtm)\n else:\n doc_lengths = bow.bow_stats.doc_lengths(dtm)\n assert doc_lengths.ndim == 1\n assert doc_lengths.shape == (dtm_arr.shape[0],)\n assert doc_lengths.tolist() == [sum(row) for row in dtm_arr]\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1)\n)\ndef test_doc_frequencies(dtm, matrix_type):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n dtm_arr = dtm.A\n else:\n dtm_arr = dtm\n\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.doc_frequencies(dtm)\n else:\n n_docs = dtm.shape[0]\n\n df_abs = bow.bow_stats.doc_frequencies(dtm)\n assert isinstance(df_abs, np.ndarray)\n assert df_abs.ndim == 1\n assert df_abs.shape == (dtm_arr.shape[1],)\n assert all([0 <= v <= n_docs for v in df_abs])\n\n df_rel = bow.bow_stats.doc_frequencies(dtm, proportions=1)\n assert isinstance(df_rel, np.ndarray)\n assert df_rel.ndim == 1\n assert df_rel.shape == (dtm_arr.shape[1],)\n assert all([0 <= v <= 1 for v in df_rel])\n\n df_log = bow.bow_stats.doc_frequencies(dtm, proportions=2)\n assert isinstance(df_log, np.ndarray)\n assert df_log.ndim == 1\n assert df_log.shape == (dtm_arr.shape[1],)\n assert np.allclose(np.exp(df_log), df_rel)\n\n\ndef test_doc_frequencies2():\n dtm = np.array([\n [0, 2, 3, 0, 0],\n [1, 2, 0, 5, 0],\n [0, 1, 0, 3, 1],\n ])\n\n df = bow.bow_stats.doc_frequencies(dtm)\n\n assert df.tolist() == [1, 3, 1, 2, 1]\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1),\n proportions=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=2)\n)\ndef test_codoc_frequencies(dtm, matrix_type, proportions):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.codoc_frequencies(dtm, proportions=proportions)\n return\n\n n_docs, n_vocab = dtm.shape\n\n if n_vocab < 2:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.codoc_frequencies(dtm, proportions=proportions)\n return\n\n cooc = bow.bow_stats.codoc_frequencies(dtm, proportions=proportions)\n\n if matrix_type == 1 and proportions != 2:\n assert issparse(cooc)\n cooc = cooc.todense()\n else:\n assert isinstance(cooc, np.ndarray)\n\n assert cooc.shape == (n_vocab, n_vocab)\n\n if proportions > 0:\n assert np.all(cooc <= 1)\n\n if proportions == 1:\n assert np.all(0 <= cooc)\n else: # proportions == 2\n expected = bow.bow_stats.codoc_frequencies(dtm, proportions=1)\n if issparse(expected):\n expected = expected.todense()\n np.allclose(np.exp(cooc) - 1, expected)\n else:\n assert np.all(0 <= cooc)\n assert np.all(cooc <= n_docs)\n\n\ndef test_codoc_frequencies2():\n dtm = np.array([\n [0, 2, 3, 0, 0],\n [1, 2, 0, 5, 0],\n [0, 1, 0, 3, 1],\n ])\n\n cooc = bow.bow_stats.codoc_frequencies(dtm)\n\n assert cooc[0, 1] == cooc[1, 0] == 1\n assert cooc[1, 3] == cooc[3, 1] == 2\n assert cooc[0, 2] == cooc[2, 0] == 0\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1)\n)\ndef test_term_frequencies(dtm, matrix_type):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n dtm_arr = dtm.A\n else:\n dtm_arr = dtm\n\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.term_frequencies(dtm)\n else:\n tf = bow.bow_stats.term_frequencies(dtm)\n assert tf.ndim == 1\n assert tf.shape == (dtm_arr.shape[1],)\n assert tf.tolist() == [sum(row) for row in dtm_arr.T]\n\n if np.sum(dtm) > 0:\n tf_prop = bow.bow_stats.term_frequencies(dtm, proportions=1)\n assert tf_prop.ndim == 1\n assert tf_prop.shape == (dtm_arr.shape[1],)\n assert np.all(tf_prop>= 0)\n assert np.all(tf_prop <= 1)\n assert np.isclose(tf_prop.sum(), 1.0)\n\n tf_logprop = bow.bow_stats.term_frequencies(dtm, proportions=2)\n assert tf.ndim == 1\n assert tf.shape == (dtm_arr.shape[1],)\n assert np.allclose(np.exp(tf_logprop), tf_prop)\n else:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.term_frequencies(dtm, proportions=1)\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.term_frequencies(dtm, proportions=2)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1)\n)\ndef test_tf_binary(dtm, matrix_type):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n dtm_arr = dtm.A\n else:\n dtm_arr = dtm\n\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.tf_binary(dtm)\n else:\n res = bow.bow_stats.tf_binary(dtm)\n assert res.ndim == 2\n assert res.shape == dtm.shape\n assert res.dtype.kind in {'i', 'u'}\n if matrix_type == 1:\n assert issparse(res)\n res = res.A\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, np.ndarray)\n\n assert set(np.unique(res)) <= {0, 1} # subset test\n\n zero_ind_dtm = np.where(dtm_arr == 0)\n zero_ind_res = np.where(res == 0)\n assert len(zero_ind_dtm) == len(zero_ind_res)\n for ind_dtm, ind_res in zip(zero_ind_dtm, zero_ind_res):\n assert np.array_equal(ind_dtm, ind_res)\n\n notzero_ind_dtm = np.where(dtm_arr != 0)\n notzero_ind_res = np.where(res != 0)\n assert len(notzero_ind_dtm) == len(notzero_ind_res)\n for ind_dtm, ind_res in zip(notzero_ind_dtm, notzero_ind_res):\n assert np.array_equal(ind_dtm, ind_res)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1)\n)\ndef test_tf_proportions(dtm, matrix_type):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.tf_proportions(dtm)\n else:\n res = bow.bow_stats.tf_proportions(dtm)\n assert res.ndim == 2\n assert res.shape == dtm.shape\n assert res.dtype.kind == 'f'\n if matrix_type == 1:\n assert issparse(res)\n res = res.A\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, np.ndarray)\n\n # exclude NaNs that may be introduced when documents are of length 0\n res_flat = res.flatten()\n res_valid = res_flat[~np.isnan(res_flat)]\n assert np.all(res_valid >= -1e-10)\n assert np.all(res_valid <= 1 + 1e-10)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1)\n)\ndef test_tf_log(dtm, matrix_type):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n dtm_arr = dtm.A\n else:\n dtm_arr = dtm\n\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.tf_log(dtm)\n else:\n res = bow.bow_stats.tf_log(dtm)\n assert res.ndim == 2\n assert res.shape == dtm.shape\n assert res.dtype.kind == 'f'\n if matrix_type == 1:\n assert issparse(res)\n res = res.A\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, np.ndarray)\n\n assert np.all(res >= -1e-10)\n\n if 0 not in dtm.shape:\n max_res = np.log(np.max(dtm_arr) + 1)\n assert np.all(res <= max_res + 1e-10)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1),\n K=st.floats(min_value=0, max_value=1)\n)\ndef test_tf_double_norm(dtm, matrix_type, K):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n\n if dtm.ndim != 2 or 0 in dtm.shape:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.tf_double_norm(dtm, K=K)\n else:\n res = bow.bow_stats.tf_double_norm(dtm, K=K)\n\n assert res.ndim == 2\n assert res.shape == dtm.shape\n assert res.dtype.kind == 'f'\n assert isinstance(res, np.ndarray)\n\n # exclude NaNs that may be introduced when documents are of length 0\n res_flat = res.flatten()\n res_valid = res_flat[~np.isnan(res_flat)]\n\n assert np.all(res_valid >= -1e-10)\n assert np.all(res_valid <= 1 + 1e-10)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1)\n)\ndef test_idf(dtm, matrix_type):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n\n if dtm.ndim != 2 or 0 in dtm.shape:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.idf(dtm)\n else:\n res = bow.bow_stats.idf(dtm)\n assert res.ndim == 1\n assert res.shape[0] == dtm.shape[1]\n assert res.dtype.kind == 'f'\n assert isinstance(res, np.ndarray)\n assert np.all(res >= -1e-10)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1)\n)\ndef test_idf_probabilistic(dtm, matrix_type):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n\n if dtm.ndim != 2 or 0 in dtm.shape:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.idf_probabilistic(dtm)\n else:\n res = bow.bow_stats.idf_probabilistic(dtm)\n assert res.ndim == 1\n assert res.shape[0] == dtm.shape[1]\n assert res.dtype.kind == 'f'\n assert isinstance(res, np.ndarray)\n assert np.all(res >= -1e-10)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1),\n tf_func=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=3),\n K=st.floats(min_value=-1, max_value=1), # negative means don't pass this parameter\n idf_func=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1),\n smooth=st.integers(min_value=-1, max_value=3), # -1 means don't pass this parameter\n smooth_log=st.integers(min_value=-1, max_value=3), # -1 means don't pass this parameter\n smooth_df=st.integers(min_value=-1, max_value=3), # -1 means don't pass this parameter\n)\ndef test_tfidf(dtm, matrix_type, tf_func, K, idf_func, smooth, smooth_log, smooth_df):\n tfidf_opts = {}\n\n tf_funcs = (\n bow.bow_stats.tf_binary,\n bow.bow_stats.tf_proportions,\n bow.bow_stats.tf_log,\n bow.bow_stats.tf_double_norm\n )\n tfidf_opts['tf_func'] = tf_funcs[tf_func]\n\n if tfidf_opts['tf_func'] is bow.bow_stats.tf_double_norm and K >= 0:\n tfidf_opts['K'] = K\n\n idf_funcs = (\n bow.bow_stats.idf,\n bow.bow_stats.idf_probabilistic,\n )\n tfidf_opts['idf_func'] = idf_funcs[idf_func]\n\n if tfidf_opts['idf_func'] is bow.bow_stats.idf:\n if smooth_log >= 0:\n tfidf_opts['smooth_log'] = smooth_log\n if smooth_df >= 0:\n tfidf_opts['smooth_df'] = smooth_df\n elif tfidf_opts['idf_func'] is bow.bow_stats.idf_probabilistic and smooth >= 0:\n tfidf_opts['smooth'] = smooth\n\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n\n if dtm.ndim != 2 or 0 in dtm.shape:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.tfidf(dtm, **tfidf_opts)\n else:\n res = bow.bow_stats.tfidf(dtm, **tfidf_opts)\n assert res.ndim == 2\n assert res.shape == dtm.shape\n assert res.dtype.kind == 'f'\n\n # only \"double norm\" does not retain sparse matrices\n if matrix_type == 1 and tfidf_opts['tf_func'] is not bow.bow_stats.tf_double_norm:\n assert issparse(res)\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, np.ndarray)\n\n\ndef test_tfidf_example():\n dtm = np.array([\n [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5],\n [1, 1, 0, 2, 2, 0],\n [2, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0]\n ])\n\n dtm_sparse_csr = csr_matrix(dtm)\n dtm_sparse_coo = coo_matrix(dtm)\n\n expected = np.array([\n [0., 0.03730772, 0.1221721, 0.11192316, 0.18483925, 0.30543024],\n [0.11552453, 0.0932693, 0., 0.1865386, 0.23104906, 0.],\n [0.34657359, 0.13990395, 0., 0.13990395, 0., 0.]\n ])\n\n assert np.allclose(bow.bow_stats.tfidf(dtm), expected)\n assert np.allclose(bow.bow_stats.tfidf(dtm_sparse_csr).A, expected)\n assert np.allclose(bow.bow_stats.tfidf(dtm_sparse_coo).A, expected)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1),\n lo_thresh=st.integers(min_value=-1, max_value=10),\n hi_thresh=st.integers(min_value=-1, max_value=10),\n top_n=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=10),\n ascending=st.booleans(),\n)\ndef test_sorted_terms(dtm, matrix_type, lo_thresh, hi_thresh, top_n, ascending):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n\n if lo_thresh < 0:\n lo_thresh = None\n\n if hi_thresh < 0:\n hi_thresh = None\n\n if top_n < 1:\n top_n = None\n\n vocab = [chr(x) for x in range(65, 65 + dtm.shape[1])]\n\n if lo_thresh is not None and hi_thresh is not None and lo_thresh > hi_thresh:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.sorted_terms(dtm, vocab, lo_thresh, hi_thresh, top_n, ascending)\n else:\n res = bow.bow_stats.sorted_terms(dtm, vocab, lo_thresh, hi_thresh, top_n, ascending)\n\n assert isinstance(res, list)\n assert len(res) == dtm.shape[0]\n\n for doc in res:\n if not doc: continue\n\n terms, vals = zip(*doc)\n terms = list(terms)\n vals = list(vals)\n\n assert len(terms) == len(vals)\n assert all([t in vocab for t in terms])\n\n if lo_thresh is not None:\n assert all([v > lo_thresh for v in vals])\n\n if hi_thresh is not None:\n assert all([v <= hi_thresh for v in vals])\n\n if top_n is not None:\n assert len(terms) <= top_n\n\n if ascending:\n assert sorted(vals) == vals\n else:\n assert sorted(vals, reverse=True) == vals\n\n\ndef test_sorted_terms_example():\n dtm = np.array([\n [1, 2, 0, 3],\n [3, 0, 0, 9],\n [0, 0, 2, 1],\n ])\n\n vocab = list('abcd')\n\n expected = [\n [('d', 3), ('b', 2)],\n [('d', 9), ('a', 3)],\n [('c', 2), ('d', 1)],\n ]\n\n result = bow.bow_stats.sorted_terms(dtm, vocab, top_n=2)\n\n assert isinstance(result, list)\n assert len(result) == len(expected)\n\n for res_doc, exp_doc in zip(result, expected):\n assert len(res_doc) == len(exp_doc)\n for res_tuple, exp_tuple in zip(res_doc, exp_doc):\n assert res_tuple == exp_tuple\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1),\n lo_thresh=st.integers(min_value=-1, max_value=10),\n hi_thresh=st.integers(min_value=-1, max_value=10),\n top_n=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=10),\n ascending=st.booleans(),\n)\ndef test_sorted_terms_table(dtm, matrix_type, lo_thresh, hi_thresh, top_n, ascending):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n\n if lo_thresh < 0:\n lo_thresh = None\n\n if hi_thresh < 0:\n hi_thresh = None\n\n if top_n < 1:\n top_n = None\n\n vocab = [chr(x) for x in range(65, 65 + dtm.shape[1])]\n doc_labels = ['doc' + str(i) for i in range(dtm.shape[0])]\n\n if lo_thresh is not None and hi_thresh is not None and lo_thresh > hi_thresh:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.bow_stats.sorted_terms_table(dtm, vocab, doc_labels, lo_thresh, hi_thresh, top_n, ascending)\n else:\n res = bow.bow_stats.sorted_terms_table(dtm, vocab, doc_labels, lo_thresh, hi_thresh, top_n, ascending)\n\n assert isinstance(res, pd.DataFrame)\n assert res.columns.tolist() == ['token', 'value']\n assert res.index.names == ['doc', 'rank']\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1)\n)\ndef test_dtm_to_dataframe(dtm, matrix_type):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n dtm_arr = dtm.A\n else:\n dtm_arr = dtm\n\n doc_labels = ['doc%d' % i for i in range(dtm.shape[0])]\n vocab = ['t%d' % i for i in range(dtm.shape[1])]\n\n # check invalid doc_labels\n if len(doc_labels) > 0:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.dtm.dtm_to_dataframe(dtm, doc_labels[:-1], vocab)\n\n # check invalid vocab\n if len(vocab) > 0:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n bow.dtm.dtm_to_dataframe(dtm, doc_labels, vocab[:-1])\n\n # check with valid doc_labels and vocab\n df = bow.dtm.dtm_to_dataframe(dtm, doc_labels, vocab)\n assert df.shape == dtm.shape\n assert np.array_equal(df.to_numpy(), dtm_arr)\n assert np.array_equal(df.index.values, doc_labels)\n assert np.array_equal(df.columns.values, vocab)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1)\n)\ndef test_dtm_to_gensim_corpus_and_gensim_corpus_to_dtm(dtm, matrix_type):\n if not GENSIM_INSTALLED:\n pytest.skip('gensim not installed')\n\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n\n gensim_corpus = bow.dtm.dtm_to_gensim_corpus(dtm)\n assert isinstance(gensim_corpus, gensim.matutils.Sparse2Corpus)\n assert len(gensim_corpus) == dtm.shape[0]\n\n # convert back\n dtm_ = bow.dtm.gensim_corpus_to_dtm(gensim_corpus)\n assert isinstance(dtm_, coo_matrix)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1),\n as_gensim_dictionary=st.booleans()\n)\ndef test_dtm_and_vocab_to_gensim_corpus_and_dict(dtm, matrix_type, as_gensim_dictionary):\n if not GENSIM_INSTALLED:\n pytest.skip('gensim not installed')\n\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n\n vocab = ['t%d' % i for i in range(dtm.shape[1])]\n\n gensim_corpus, id2word = bow.dtm.dtm_and_vocab_to_gensim_corpus_and_dict(dtm, vocab,\n as_gensim_dictionary=as_gensim_dictionary)\n assert isinstance(gensim_corpus, gensim.matutils.Sparse2Corpus)\n assert len(gensim_corpus) == dtm.shape[0]\n\n if as_gensim_dictionary:\n assert isinstance(id2word, gensim.corpora.Dictionary)\n else:\n assert isinstance(id2word, dict)\n" }, { "path": "tests/test_corpus.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nTests for tmtoolkit.corpus module.\n\nPlease see the special notes under \"tests setup\".\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nimport math\nimport os.path\nimport random\nimport re\nimport string\nimport tempfile\nimport multiprocessing\nfrom importlib.util import find_spec\nfrom copy import copy, deepcopy\n\nimport numpy as np\nimport pandas as pd\nimport pytest\nfrom hypothesis import given, strategies as st, settings\n\nif any(find_spec(pkg) is None for pkg in ('spacy', 'bidict', 'loky')):\n pytest.skip(\"skipping tmtoolkit.corpus tests (required packages not installed)\", allow_module_level=True)\n\nimport spacy\nfrom spacy.tokens import Doc\nfrom spacy.util import get_installed_models\nfrom scipy.sparse import csr_matrix\n\nfrom tmtoolkit import tokenseq\nfrom tmtoolkit.utils import flatten_list\nfrom tmtoolkit.corpus._common import LANGUAGE_LABELS, TOKENMAT_ATTRS, STD_TOKEN_ATTRS\nTOKENMAT_ATTRS = TOKENMAT_ATTRS - {'whitespace', 'token', 'sent_start'}\nfrom tmtoolkit import corpus as c\nfrom ._testtools import strategy_str_str_dict_printable\nfrom ._testtextdata import textdata_sm\n\nDATADIR = os.path.join('tests', 'data')\nDATADIR_GUTENB = os.path.join(DATADIR, 'gutenberg')\nDATADIR_WERTHER = os.path.join(DATADIR_GUTENB, 'werther')\n\ninstalled_lang = set(model[:2] for model in get_installed_models())\ntextdata_en = textdata_sm['en']\ntextdata_de = textdata_sm['de']\n\n\n#%% tests setup\n\n# note: scope='module' means that fixture is created once per test module (not per test function run); this saves time,\n# especially when using hypthesis, which runs many test cases; it's basically impractical to use hypothesis in\n# conjunction with a per-test-function-run instance of a Corpus or a SpaCy instance, because it's too slow; hence,\n# all tests that may modify an instance in-place (e.g. tests for filter functions) cannot be implemented with hypothesis\n\n@pytest.fixture(scope='module')\ndef spacy_instance_en_sm():\n return spacy.load('en_core_web_sm')\n\n\n@pytest.fixture\ndef corpus_en():\n return c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en')\n\n\n@pytest.fixture(scope='module')\ndef corpus_en_module():\n return c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en')\n\n\n@pytest.fixture\ndef corpora_en_serial_and_parallel():\n return (c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', max_workers=1),\n c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', max_workers=2),\n c.Corpus({}, language='en'))\n\n\n@pytest.fixture(scope='module')\ndef corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module():\n return (c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', max_workers=1),\n c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', max_workers=2),\n c.Corpus({}, language='en'))\n\n\n@pytest.fixture(scope='module')\ndef corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_also_w_vectors_module():\n return (c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', max_workers=1),\n c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', max_workers=2),\n c.Corpus(textdata_en, language_model='en_core_web_md', max_workers=1),\n c.Corpus(textdata_en, language_model='en_core_web_md', max_workers=2))\n\n\n@pytest.fixture\ndef corpus_de():\n return c.Corpus(textdata_de, language='de')\n\n\n@pytest.fixture(scope='module')\ndef corpus_de_module():\n return c.Corpus(textdata_de, language='de')\n\n\n\n#%% test fixtures\n\n\ndef test_datadirs():\n assert os.path.exists(DATADIR)\n assert os.path.exists(DATADIR_GUTENB)\n assert os.path.exists(DATADIR_WERTHER)\n\n\ndef test_fixtures_n_docs_and_doc_labels(corpus_en, corpus_de):\n assert corpus_en.n_docs == len(textdata_en)\n assert corpus_de.n_docs == len(textdata_de)\n\n assert set(corpus_en.doc_labels) == set(textdata_en.keys())\n assert set(corpus_de.doc_labels) == set(textdata_de.keys())\n\n\n#%% test init\n\n\ndef test_corpus_no_lang_given():\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match='either `language`, `language_model` or `spacy_instance` must be given'):\n c.Corpus({})\n\n\ndef test_empty_corpus():\n for w in (1, 2):\n corp = c.Corpus({}, language='en', max_workers=w)\n\n assert corp.n_docs == 0\n assert corp.doc_labels == []\n\n c.to_lowercase(corp)\n c.filter_clean_tokens(corp)\n c.filter_documents(corp, 'foobar')\n c.set_token_attr(corp, 'fooattr', {'footoken': 'somevalue'})\n\n assert corp.n_docs == 0\n assert corp.doc_labels == []\n\n _check_copies(corp, copy(corp), same_nlp_instance=True)\n\n\ndef test_corpus_init():\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'is not supported'):\n c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='00')\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'`language` must be a two-letter ISO 639-1 language code'):\n c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='fail')\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'either `language`, `language_model` or `spacy_instance` must be given'):\n c.Corpus(textdata_en)\n\n corp = c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en')\n assert corp.has_sents\n _check_corpus_docs(corp, has_sents=True)\n assert corp.language_model == 'en_core_web_sm'\n assert 'ner' not in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n assert 'senter' not in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n assert isinstance(corp._spacy_opts['config']['nlp'], dict)\n\n _check_copies(corp, copy(corp), same_nlp_instance=True)\n _check_copies(corp, deepcopy(corp), same_nlp_instance=False)\n\n corp = c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', load_features=[])\n assert not corp.has_sents\n assert corp.language_model == 'en_core_web_sm'\n assert 'senter' not in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n assert 'tagger' not in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n assert 'parser' not in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n assert 'lemmatizer' not in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n\n _check_copies(corp, copy(corp), same_nlp_instance=True)\n _check_copies(corp, deepcopy(corp), same_nlp_instance=False)\n\n corp = c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', load_features={'tok2vec', 'senter'})\n assert corp.has_sents\n assert corp.language_model == 'en_core_web_sm'\n _check_corpus_docs(corp, has_sents=True)\n assert 'senter' in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n assert 'tagger' not in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n assert 'parser' not in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n assert 'lemmatizer' not in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n\n _check_copies(corp, copy(corp), same_nlp_instance=True)\n _check_copies(corp, deepcopy(corp), same_nlp_instance=False)\n\n corp = c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', add_features={'ner'})\n assert corp.has_sents\n assert corp.language_model == 'en_core_web_sm'\n _check_corpus_docs(corp, has_sents=True)\n assert 'ner' in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n assert 'tagger' in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n assert 'parser' in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n assert 'lemmatizer' in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n\n _check_copies(corp, copy(corp), same_nlp_instance=True)\n _check_copies(corp, deepcopy(corp), same_nlp_instance=False)\n\n corp = c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', spacy_opts={'vocab': True})\n assert corp.has_sents\n _check_corpus_docs(corp, has_sents=True)\n assert corp._spacy_opts['vocab'] is True\n\n _check_copies(corp, copy(corp), same_nlp_instance=True)\n _check_copies(corp, deepcopy(corp), same_nlp_instance=False)\n\n custom_nlp = spacy.load(\"en_core_web_sm\", exclude=['parser', 'ner'])\n corp = c.Corpus(textdata_en, spacy_instance=custom_nlp)\n assert corp.nlp is custom_nlp\n assert corp.language == 'en'\n assert corp.language_model == 'en_core_web_sm'\n assert 'parser' not in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n assert 'ner' not in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n\n _check_copies(corp, copy(corp), same_nlp_instance=True)\n _check_copies(corp, deepcopy(corp), same_nlp_instance=False)\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'all token attributes given in `spacy_token_attrs` must be valid SpaCy token '\n r'attribute names'):\n c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', spacy_token_attrs=('pos', 'lemma', 'ner'))\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'^the following SpaCy attributes are not available'):\n c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', spacy_token_attrs=('pos', 'lemma', 'ent_type'))\n\n corp = c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', spacy_token_attrs=('pos', 'lemma'))\n assert corp.has_sents\n assert corp.language_model == 'en_core_web_sm'\n _check_corpus_docs(corp, has_sents=True)\n assert corp.token_attrs == ('pos', 'lemma')\n\n _check_copies(corp, copy(corp), same_nlp_instance=True)\n _check_copies(corp, deepcopy(corp), same_nlp_instance=False)\n\n for n_workers in (1, 2):\n corp = c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', raw_preproc=c.strip_tags, max_workers=n_workers)\n assert corp.has_sents\n assert corp.language_model == 'en_core_web_sm'\n _check_corpus_docs(corp, has_sents=True)\n assert corp.raw_preproc == [c.strip_tags]\n assert c.doc_texts(corp, select='NewsArticles-3')['NewsArticles-3']\\\n .startswith('BRICS wants to set up an alternative rating agency')\n\n _check_copies(corp, copy(corp), same_nlp_instance=True)\n _check_copies(corp, deepcopy(corp), same_nlp_instance=False)\n\n\n@pytest.mark.skipif('en_core_web_md' not in spacy.util.get_installed_models(),\n reason='language model \"en_core_web_md\" not installed')\ndef test_corpus_init_md_model_required():\n corp = c.Corpus(textdata_en, language='en', load_features={'vectors', 'tok2vec', 'tagger', 'morphologizer',\n 'parser', 'attribute_ruler', 'lemmatizer', 'ner'})\n assert corp.has_sents\n assert corp.language_model == 'en_core_web_md'\n _check_corpus_docs(corp, has_sents=True)\n assert 'ner' in corp.nlp.pipe_names\n\n _check_copies(corp, copy(corp), same_nlp_instance=True)\n _check_copies(corp, deepcopy(corp), same_nlp_instance=False)\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(docs=strategy_str_str_dict_printable(),\n punctuation=st.one_of(st.none(), st.lists(st.text(string.punctuation, min_size=1, max_size=1))),\n max_workers=st.one_of(st.none(),\n st.integers(min_value=-2, max_value=2),\n st.floats(allow_nan=False, allow_infinity=False)),\n workers_timeout=st.integers(0, 120))\ndef test_corpus_init_and_properties_hypothesis(spacy_instance_en_sm, docs, punctuation, max_workers, workers_timeout):\n args = dict(docs=docs, spacy_instance=spacy_instance_en_sm, punctuation=punctuation,\n max_workers=max_workers, workers_timeout=workers_timeout)\n\n if isinstance(max_workers, float) and not 0 <= max_workers <= 1:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=re.escape(r'`max_workers` must be an integer, a float in [0, 1] or None')):\n c.Corpus(**args)\n else:\n corp = c.Corpus(**args)\n assert corp.nlp == spacy_instance_en_sm\n if punctuation is None:\n assert corp.punctuation == list(string.punctuation) + [' ', '\\r', '\\n', '\\t']\n else:\n assert corp.punctuation == punctuation\n\n assert 0 < corp.max_workers <= max(2, multiprocessing.cpu_count())\n if corp.max_workers == 1:\n assert corp.procexec is None\n assert corp.workers_docs == []\n else:\n assert len(corp.workers_docs) == min(corp.max_workers, len(docs))\n workers_docs_flat = flatten_list(corp.workers_docs)\n workers_docs_flat_set = set(flatten_list(corp.workers_docs))\n assert len(workers_docs_flat) == len(workers_docs_flat_set)\n assert workers_docs_flat_set == set(docs.keys())\n\n assert corp.workers_timeout == workers_timeout\n assert str(corp) == repr(corp)\n assert str(corp).startswith(f' 0 and isinstance(args['with_attr'], list) and \\\n any(a not in corp.token_attrs for a in args['with_attr']) \\\n and args['select'] != []:\n # selected attribute(s) don't exist\n with pytest.raises(KeyError, match=r'^\\'requested token attribute'):\n c.doc_tokens(corp, **args)\n else:\n res = c.doc_tokens(corp, **args)\n\n if isinstance(args['select'], str):\n # wrap in dict for rest of test\n res = {args['select']: res}\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n if args['select'] is None:\n if args['only_non_empty'] and len(corp) > 0:\n assert len(res) == len(corp) - 1\n else:\n assert len(res) == len(corp)\n else:\n assert set(res.keys()) == set(args['select']) if isinstance(args['select'], list) \\\n else args['select']\n\n if res:\n if args['only_non_empty']:\n assert 'empty' not in res.keys()\n\n if args['as_tables']:\n assert all([isinstance(v, pd.DataFrame) for v in res.values()])\n cols = [tuple(v.columns) for v in res.values() if len(v) > 0]\n if len(cols) > 0:\n assert len(set(cols)) == 1\n attrs = next(iter(set(cols)))\n else:\n continue\n\n for v in res.values():\n if len(v) > 0:\n assert np.issubdtype(v['token'].dtype,\n np.uint64 if args['tokens_as_hashes'] else np.dtype('O'))\n if args['sentences']:\n assert np.issubdtype(v['sent'].dtype, 'int')\n assert np.min(v['sent']) == 0\n\n res_tokens = {}\n for lbl, df in res.items():\n res_tokens[lbl] = list(df['token'])\n else: # no tables\n if args['with_attr']:\n assert all([isinstance(v, dict) for v in res.values()])\n\n if args['sentences']:\n assert all([isinstance(sents, list) for d in res.values()\n for sents in d.values()])\n\n if args['as_arrays']:\n if args['sentences']:\n assert all([isinstance(s, np.ndarray) for d in res.values()\n for sents in d.values() for s in sents])\n else:\n assert all([isinstance(arr, np.ndarray) for d in res.values()\n for arr in d.values()])\n res_tokens = {lbl: np.concatenate(d['token']).tolist() if args['sentences']\n else d['token'].tolist() for lbl, d in res.items()}\n else:\n res_tokens = {lbl: flatten_list(d['token']) if args['sentences'] else d['token']\n for lbl, d in res.items()}\n\n cols = [tuple(v.keys()) for v in res.values()]\n if len(cols) > 0:\n assert len(set(cols)) == 1\n attrs = next(iter(set(cols)))\n assert set(attrs).isdisjoint({'has_sents', 'label'})\n else:\n attrs = None\n else: # no attributes\n attrs = None\n if args['sentences']:\n assert all([isinstance(sents, list) for sents in res.values()])\n res_tokens = {lbl: np.concatenate(sents).tolist() if args['as_arrays']\n else flatten_list(sents) for lbl, sents in res.items()}\n else:\n res_tokens = {lbl: d.tolist() for lbl, d in res.items()} if args['as_arrays'] else res\n\n for lbl, tok in res_tokens.items():\n if args['n_tokens'] is None or args['n_tokens'] > len(tok):\n assert len(tok) == len(corp[lbl])\n else:\n assert len(tok) == args['n_tokens']\n\n if args['tokens_as_hashes']:\n assert all([isinstance(t, int) for tok in res_tokens.values() for t in tok])\n else:\n assert all([isinstance(t, str) for tok in res_tokens.values() for t in tok])\n\n firstattrs = ['label'] if args['as_tables'] else []\n firstattrs.extend(['sent', 'token'] if args['sentences'] and args['as_tables'] else ['token'])\n\n if args['with_attr'] is True:\n assert attrs == tuple(firstattrs + list(corp.spacy_token_attrs))\n elif args['with_attr'] is False:\n if args['as_tables']:\n assert attrs == tuple(firstattrs)\n else:\n assert attrs is None\n else:\n if isinstance(args['with_attr'], str):\n assert attrs == tuple(firstattrs + [args['with_attr']])\n else:\n assert attrs == tuple(firstattrs + args['with_attr'])\n\n\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n as_table=st.sampled_from([False, True, 'length']))\ndef test_doc_lengths(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, select, as_table):\n expected = {\n 'empty': 0,\n 'small1': 1,\n 'small2': 7\n }\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.doc_lengths(corp, select=select, as_table=as_table)\n else:\n res = c.doc_lengths(corp, select=select, as_table=as_table)\n\n if as_table is False:\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n\n if select is None or len(corp) == 0:\n assert set(res.keys()) == set(corp.keys())\n else:\n assert set(res.keys()) == ({select} if isinstance(select, str) else set(select)) - {'nonexistent'}\n\n for lbl, n in res.items():\n assert n >= 0\n if lbl in expected:\n assert n == expected[lbl]\n else:\n assert n >= len(textdata_en[lbl].split())\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, pd.DataFrame)\n\n if select is None or len(corp) == 0:\n assert set(res['doc']) == set(corp.keys())\n else:\n assert set(res['doc']) == ({select} if isinstance(select, str) else set(select)) - {'nonexistent'}\n\n\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]))\ndef test_doc_token_lengths(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, select):\n expected = {\n 'empty': [],\n 'small1': [3],\n 'small2': [4, 2, 1, 5, 7, 8, 1]\n }\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.doc_token_lengths(corp, select=select)\n else:\n res = c.doc_token_lengths(corp, select=select)\n\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n\n if select is None or len(corp) == 0:\n assert set(res.keys()) == set(corp.keys())\n else:\n assert set(res.keys()) == ({select} if isinstance(select, str) else set(select)) - {'nonexistent'}\n\n for lbl, toklengths in res.items():\n assert isinstance(toklengths, list)\n assert all([n >= 0 for n in toklengths])\n if lbl in expected:\n assert toklengths == expected[lbl]\n\n\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n as_table=st.sampled_from([False, True, 'num_sents']))\ndef test_doc_num_sents(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, select, as_table):\n expected = {\n 'empty': 0,\n 'small1': 1,\n 'unicode1': 1,\n 'unicode2': 1,\n 'NewsArticles-2': 19,\n }\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.doc_num_sents(corp, select=select, as_table=as_table)\n else:\n res = c.doc_num_sents(corp, select=select, as_table=as_table)\n\n if as_table is False:\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n\n if select is None or len(corp) == 0:\n assert set(res.keys()) == set(corp.keys())\n else:\n assert set(res.keys()) == ({select} if isinstance(select, str) else set(select)) - {'nonexistent'}\n\n for lbl, n_sents in res.items():\n assert isinstance(n_sents, int)\n assert n_sents >= 0\n if lbl in expected:\n assert n_sents == expected[lbl]\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, pd.DataFrame)\n\n if select is None or len(corp) == 0:\n assert set(res['doc']) == set(corp.keys())\n else:\n assert set(res['doc']) == ({select} if isinstance(select, str) else set(select)) - {'nonexistent'}\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(apply_filter=st.booleans(),\n select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]))\ndef test_doc_sent_lengths(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, apply_filter, select):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if apply_filter:\n corp = c.filter_clean_tokens(corp, inplace=False)\n\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.doc_sent_lengths(corp, select=select)\n else:\n res = c.doc_sent_lengths(corp, select=select)\n\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n\n if select is None or len(corp) == 0:\n assert set(res.keys()) == set(corp.keys())\n else:\n assert set(res.keys()) == ({select} if isinstance(select, str) else set(select)) - {'nonexistent'}\n\n num_sents = c.doc_num_sents(corp, select=select)\n num_tok = c.doc_lengths(corp, select=select)\n\n for lbl, s_lengths in res.items():\n if apply_filter:\n assert all([l >= 0 for l in s_lengths])\n else:\n assert all([l > 0 for l in s_lengths])\n assert len(s_lengths) == num_sents[lbl]\n assert sum(s_lengths) == num_tok[lbl]\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('sort', [False, True])\ndef test_doc_labels(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, sort):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n res = c.doc_labels(corp, sort=sort)\n assert isinstance(res, list)\n\n if len(corp):\n if sort:\n assert res == sorted(textdata_en.keys())\n else:\n assert res == list(textdata_en.keys())\n\n\n@given(n=st.integers())\ndef test_doc_labels_sample(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, n):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if 0 <= n <= len(corp):\n res = c.doc_labels_sample(corp, n=n)\n assert isinstance(res, set)\n assert len(res) == n\n assert res <= set(corp.keys())\n else:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match='Sample larger than population or is negative'):\n c.doc_labels_sample(corp, n=n)\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(collapse=st.sampled_from([None, ' ', '__']),\n select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n as_table=st.sampled_from([False, True, 'text']))\ndef test_doc_texts(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, collapse, select, as_table):\n expected = {\n ' ': {\n 'empty': '',\n 'small1': 'the',\n 'small2': 'This is a small example document .'\n },\n '__': {\n 'empty': '',\n 'small1': 'the',\n 'small2': 'This__is__a__small__example__document__.'\n }\n }\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.doc_texts(corp, select=select, collapse=collapse, as_table=as_table)\n else:\n res = c.doc_texts(corp, select=select, collapse=collapse, as_table=as_table)\n\n if as_table is False:\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n if select is None:\n assert set(res.keys()) == set(corp.keys())\n else:\n assert set(res.keys()) == ({select} if isinstance(select, str) else set(select))\n\n for lbl, txt in res.items():\n assert isinstance(txt, str)\n if collapse is None:\n assert txt == textdata_en[lbl]\n else:\n if lbl in expected[collapse]:\n assert txt == expected[collapse][lbl]\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, pd.DataFrame)\n if select is None:\n assert set(res['doc']) == set(corp.keys())\n else:\n assert set(res['doc']) == ({select} if isinstance(select, str) else set(select))\n\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(proportions=st.sampled_from([0, 1, 2]),\n select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n as_table=st.sampled_from([False, True, 'freq']))\ndef test_doc_frequencies(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, proportions, select, as_table):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.doc_frequencies(corp, select=select, proportions=proportions, as_table=as_table)\n else:\n res = c.doc_frequencies(corp, select=select, proportions=proportions, as_table=as_table)\n\n if as_table is False:\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n assert set(res.keys()) == c.vocabulary(corp, select=select, sort=False)\n\n if len(corp) > 0 and select not in ('empty', []):\n if proportions == 1:\n # proportions\n assert all([0 < v <= 1 for v in res.values()])\n if select is None:\n assert np.isclose(res['the'], 5/9)\n elif proportions == 2:\n # log proportions\n assert all([v <= 0 for v in res.values()])\n assert all([0 < 10**v <= 1 for v in res.values()])\n if select is None:\n assert np.isclose(res['the'], math.log10(5/9))\n else:\n # counts\n assert all([0 < v < len(corp) for v in res.values()])\n assert any([v > 0 for v in res.values()])\n if select is None:\n assert res['the'] == 5\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, pd.DataFrame)\n assert set(res['token']) == c.vocabulary(corp, select=select, sort=False)\n\n\n@pytest.mark.skipif('en_core_web_md' not in spacy.util.get_installed_models(),\n reason='language model \"en_core_web_md\" not installed')\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n omit_empty=st.booleans())\ndef test_doc_vectors(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_also_w_vectors_module, select, omit_empty):\n for i_corp, corp in enumerate(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_also_w_vectors_module):\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.doc_vectors(corp, omit_empty=omit_empty, select=select)\n else:\n if i_corp < 2:\n with pytest.raises(RuntimeError):\n c.doc_vectors(corp, omit_empty=omit_empty, select=select)\n else:\n res = c.doc_vectors(corp, omit_empty=omit_empty, select=select)\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n\n if select is None:\n expected_lbls = set(corp.keys())\n else:\n expected_lbls = ({select} if isinstance(select, str) else set(select)) - {'nonexistent'}\n\n if omit_empty:\n assert set(res.keys()) == expected_lbls - {'empty'}\n else:\n assert set(res.keys()) == expected_lbls\n\n for vec in res.values():\n assert isinstance(vec, np.ndarray)\n assert len(vec) > 0\n\n\n@pytest.mark.skipif('en_core_web_md' not in spacy.util.get_installed_models(),\n reason='language model \"en_core_web_md\" not installed')\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n omit_oov=st.booleans())\ndef test_token_vectors(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_also_w_vectors_module, select, omit_oov):\n for i_corp, corp in enumerate(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_also_w_vectors_module):\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.token_vectors(corp, omit_oov=omit_oov, select=select)\n else:\n if i_corp < 2:\n with pytest.raises(RuntimeError):\n c.token_vectors(corp, omit_oov=omit_oov, select=select)\n else:\n res = c.token_vectors(corp, omit_oov=omit_oov, select=select)\n\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n\n if select is None:\n assert set(res.keys()) == set(corp.keys())\n else:\n assert set(res.keys()) == ({select} if isinstance(select, str) else set(select)) - {'nonexistent'}\n\n doc_length = c.doc_lengths(corp)\n spdocs = c.spacydocs(corp)\n\n for lbl, mat in res.items():\n assert isinstance(mat, np.ndarray)\n\n if omit_oov:\n assert len(mat) == sum([not t.is_oov for t in spdocs[lbl]])\n else:\n assert len(mat) == doc_length[lbl]\n\n if len(mat) > 0:\n assert mat.ndim == 2\n\n\n@pytest.mark.skipif('en_core_web_md' not in spacy.util.get_installed_models(),\n reason='language model \"en_core_web_md\" not installed')\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n collapse=st.sampled_from([None, ' ']))\ndef test_spacydocs(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_also_w_vectors_module, select, collapse):\n for i_corp, corp in enumerate(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_also_w_vectors_module):\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.spacydocs(corp, select=select, collapse=collapse)\n else:\n res = c.spacydocs(corp, select=select, collapse=collapse)\n\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n\n if select is None:\n assert set(res.keys()) == set(corp.keys())\n else:\n assert set(res.keys()) == ({select} if isinstance(select, str) else set(select)) - {'nonexistent'}\n\n if collapse is None:\n texts = c.doc_texts(corp, select=select)\n else:\n texts = None\n\n for lbl, d in res.items():\n assert isinstance(d, Doc)\n if collapse is None:\n assert d.text_with_ws == texts[lbl]\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n tokens_as_hashes=st.booleans(),\n force_unigrams=st.booleans(),\n sort=st.booleans(),\n convert_uint64hashes=st.booleans())\ndef test_vocabulary_hypothesis(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, select, tokens_as_hashes, force_unigrams, sort,\n convert_uint64hashes):\n kwargs = dict(select=select, tokens_as_hashes=tokens_as_hashes, force_unigrams=force_unigrams, sort=sort,\n convert_uint64hashes=convert_uint64hashes)\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.vocabulary(corp, **kwargs)\n else:\n res = c.vocabulary(corp, **kwargs)\n\n if sort:\n assert isinstance(res, list)\n assert sorted(res) == res\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, set)\n\n if len(corp) > 0:\n if select in ('empty', []):\n assert len(res) == 0\n else:\n assert len(res) > 0\n\n if select == 'small2' and not tokens_as_hashes:\n assert set(res) == {'This', 'is', 'a', 'small', 'example', 'document', '.'}\n\n if select != 'empty':\n corp_flat = c.corpus_tokens_flattened(corp, select=select, tokens_as_hashes=tokens_as_hashes)\n assert all(t in corp_flat for t in res)\n\n if not convert_uint64hashes and tokens_as_hashes and select is None:\n assert all([np.issubdtype(t.dtype, 'uint64') for t in res])\n else:\n if tokens_as_hashes:\n expect_type = int\n else:\n expect_type = str\n\n assert all([isinstance(t, expect_type) for t in res])\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n proportions=st.sampled_from([0, 1, 2]),\n tokens_as_hashes=st.booleans(),\n force_unigrams=st.booleans(),\n convert_uint64hashes=st.booleans(),\n as_table=st.sampled_from([False, True, 'freq']))\ndef test_vocabulary_counts(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, select, proportions, tokens_as_hashes, force_unigrams,\n convert_uint64hashes, as_table):\n kwargs = dict(select=select, proportions=proportions, tokens_as_hashes=tokens_as_hashes,\n force_unigrams=force_unigrams, convert_uint64hashes=convert_uint64hashes, as_table=as_table)\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.vocabulary_counts(corp, **kwargs)\n else:\n res = c.vocabulary_counts(corp, **kwargs)\n vocab = c.vocabulary(corp, select=select, tokens_as_hashes=tokens_as_hashes,\n force_unigrams=force_unigrams, sort=False)\n\n if as_table is False:\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n\n if len(corp) > 0:\n if select in ('empty', []):\n assert len(res) == 0\n else:\n assert len(res) > 0\n\n if not convert_uint64hashes and tokens_as_hashes:\n assert all([np.issubdtype(t.dtype, 'uint64') for t in res.keys()])\n else:\n if tokens_as_hashes:\n expect_type = int\n else:\n expect_type = str\n\n assert all([isinstance(t, expect_type) for t in res.keys()])\n\n if select != 'empty':\n corp_flat = c.corpus_tokens_flattened(corp, select=select, tokens_as_hashes=tokens_as_hashes)\n assert all(t in corp_flat for t in res.keys())\n\n if proportions == 0:\n assert all([n > 0 for n in res.values()])\n elif proportions == 1:\n assert all([(0 < n <= 1) for n in res.values()])\n else: # proportions == 2 (log10)\n assert all([(n <= 0) and (0 < 10**n <= 1) for n in res.values()])\n\n assert vocab == set(res.keys())\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, pd.DataFrame)\n assert set(res['token']) == vocab\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n force_unigrams=st.booleans())\ndef test_vocabulary_size(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, select, force_unigrams):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.vocabulary_size(corp, select=select, force_unigrams=force_unigrams)\n else:\n res = c.vocabulary_size(corp, select=select, force_unigrams=force_unigrams)\n\n assert isinstance(res, int)\n if len(corp) > 0 and select not in ('empty', []):\n assert res > 0\n if select != 'empty':\n corp_flat = c.corpus_tokens_flattened(corp, select=select, force_unigrams=force_unigrams)\n assert res <= len(corp_flat)\n else:\n assert res == 0\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n sentences=st.booleans(),\n tokens_as_hashes=st.booleans(),\n with_attr=st.one_of(st.booleans(), st.sampled_from(['pos',\n list(TOKENMAT_ATTRS),\n list(STD_TOKEN_ATTRS),\n list(STD_TOKEN_ATTRS) + ['nonexistent']])))\ndef test_tokens_table_hypothesis(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, **args):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if args['select'] == 'nonexistent' or (args['select'] is not None and args['select'] != [] and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.tokens_table(corp, **args)\n elif len(corp) > 0 and isinstance(args['with_attr'], list) and \\\n any(a not in corp.token_attrs for a in args['with_attr']) \\\n and args['select'] not in ([], 'empty'):\n # selected attribute(s) don't exist\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.tokens_table(corp, **args)\n elif args['select'] == 'empty':\n # can't select empty document when `only_non_empty` is active\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'but only non-empty documents should be retrieved$'):\n c.tokens_table(corp, **args)\n else:\n res = c.tokens_table(corp, **args)\n assert isinstance(res, pd.DataFrame)\n\n cols = res.columns.tolist()\n if args['sentences']:\n assert cols[:3] == ['doc', 'sent', 'position']\n assert np.all(res.sent >= 0)\n assert np.all(res.sent <= np.max(res.position))\n else:\n assert cols[:2] == ['doc', 'position']\n assert 'token' in cols\n docs_set = set(res['doc'])\n if args['select'] is None:\n assert docs_set == set(corp.keys()) - {'empty'}\n else:\n select_set = {args['select']} if isinstance(args['select'], str) else set(args['select'])\n assert docs_set == select_set - {'empty'}\n\n dlengths = c.doc_lengths(corp)\n for lbl in docs_set:\n tokpos = res[res.doc == lbl].position.tolist()\n assert tokpos == list(range(dlengths[lbl]))\n\n if res.shape[0] > 0: # can only guarantee the columns when we actually have observations\n if args['with_attr'] is True:\n assert set(corp.token_attrs) <= set(cols)\n elif isinstance(args['with_attr'], str):\n assert args['with_attr'] in cols\n elif isinstance(args['with_attr'], list):\n assert set(args['with_attr']) <= set(cols)\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n sentences=st.booleans(),\n tokens_as_hashes=st.booleans(),\n as_array=st.booleans())\ndef test_corpus_tokens_flattened(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, select, sentences, tokens_as_hashes, as_array):\n def _check_tokens(tok, vocab):\n if as_array:\n assert isinstance(tok, np.ndarray)\n expected_tok_type = np.uint64 if tokens_as_hashes else str\n assert all([isinstance(t, expected_tok_type)for t in tok])\n else:\n assert isinstance(tok, list)\n expected_tok_type = int if tokens_as_hashes else str\n assert all([isinstance(t, expected_tok_type) for t in tok])\n\n assert set(tok) <= vocab\n\n kwargs = dict(select=select, sentences=sentences, tokens_as_hashes=tokens_as_hashes, as_array=as_array)\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.corpus_tokens_flattened(corp, **kwargs)\n elif select == 'empty' and len(corp) > 0:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'but only non-empty documents should be retrieved$'):\n c.corpus_tokens_flattened(corp, **kwargs)\n else:\n res = c.corpus_tokens_flattened(corp, **kwargs)\n vocab = c.vocabulary(corp, tokens_as_hashes=tokens_as_hashes, sort=False)\n\n if sentences:\n assert isinstance(res, list)\n assert len(res) >= 1 # always at least contains an empty sentence `[[]]`\n\n n_tok = 0\n for sent in res:\n if len(corp) > 0 and select not in ('empty', []):\n assert len(sent) > 0\n _check_tokens(sent, vocab)\n else:\n assert len(sent) == 0\n n_tok += len(sent)\n else:\n _check_tokens(res, vocab)\n n_tok = len(res)\n\n doc_len = c.doc_lengths(corp)\n if isinstance(select, str):\n select = [select]\n\n if select is not None:\n doc_len = [n for lbl, n in doc_len.items() if lbl in select]\n else:\n doc_len = doc_len.values()\n\n assert n_tok == sum(doc_len)\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]))\ndef test_corpus_num_tokens(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, select):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.corpus_num_tokens(corp, select=select)\n else:\n res = c.corpus_num_tokens(corp, select=select)\n assert res == sum(c.doc_lengths(corp, select=select).values())\n if len(corp) == 0 or select in ('empty', []):\n assert res == 0\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]))\ndef test_corpus_num_chars(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, select):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.corpus_num_chars(corp, select=select)\n else:\n res = c.corpus_num_chars(corp, select=select)\n if len(corp) == 0 or select in ('empty', []):\n assert res == 0\n else:\n assert res > 0\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]))\ndef test_corpus_unique_chars(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, select):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.corpus_unique_chars(corp, select=select)\n else:\n res = c.corpus_unique_chars(corp, select=select)\n if len(corp) == 0 or select in ('empty', []):\n assert res == set()\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, set)\n assert all([isinstance(c, str) and len(c) == 1 for c in res])\n\n if select == 'small2':\n assert res == {'.', 'T', 'a', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'h', 'i', 'l', 'm', 'n', 'o', 'p', 's', 't', 'u', 'x'}\n\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n threshold=st.one_of(st.none(), st.floats(allow_nan=False, allow_infinity=False)),\n min_count=st.integers(),\n embed_tokens_min_docfreq=st.one_of(st.none(), st.integers(), st.floats(allow_nan=False, allow_infinity=False)),\n pass_embed_tokens=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=3),\n statistic=st.sampled_from([tokenseq.pmi, tokenseq.npmi, tokenseq.pmi2, tokenseq.pmi3,\n tokenseq.simple_collocation_counts]),\n return_statistic=st.booleans(),\n rank=st.sampled_from([None, 'asc', 'desc']),\n as_table=st.booleans(),\n glue=st.one_of(st.none(), st.text(string.printable, max_size=1)))\ndef test_corpus_collocations_hypothesis(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, **args):\n pass_embed_tokens = args.pop('pass_embed_tokens')\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if pass_embed_tokens > 0:\n vocab = list(c.vocabulary(corp))\n args['embed_tokens_set'] = random.choices(vocab, k=min(pass_embed_tokens, len(vocab)))\n else:\n args['embed_tokens_set'] = None\n\n if args['as_table'] and args['glue'] is None:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match='`glue` cannot be None if `as_table` is True'):\n c.corpus_collocations(corp, **args)\n elif args['select'] == 'nonexistent' or (args['select'] not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.corpus_collocations(corp, **args)\n elif args['select'] == 'empty' and len(corp) > 0:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'but only non-empty documents should be retrieved$'):\n c.corpus_collocations(corp, **args)\n elif (isinstance(args['embed_tokens_min_docfreq'], int) and args['embed_tokens_min_docfreq'] < 1) or \\\n (isinstance(args['embed_tokens_min_docfreq'], float) and not 0 <= args['embed_tokens_min_docfreq'] <= 1):\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n c.corpus_collocations(corp, **args)\n elif args['min_count'] < 0:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n c.corpus_collocations(corp, **args)\n else:\n res = c.corpus_collocations(corp, **args)\n\n if args['as_table']:\n assert isinstance(res, pd.DataFrame)\n if args['return_statistic']:\n assert res.columns.tolist() == ['collocation', 'statistic']\n else:\n assert res.columns.tolist() == ['collocation']\n\n if args['glue'] != '':\n assert all([args['glue'] in colloc for colloc in res['collocation']])\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, list)\n # the rest is already checked in test_tokenseq::test_token_collocations* tests\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(max_documents=st.one_of(st.none(), st.integers()),\n max_tokens_string_length=st.one_of(st.none(), st.integers()))\ndef test_corpus_summary(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, max_documents, max_tokens_string_length):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n res = c.corpus_summary(corp, max_documents=max_documents, max_tokens_string_length=max_tokens_string_length)\n assert isinstance(res, str)\n assert str(len(corp)) in res\n assert LANGUAGE_LABELS[corp.language].capitalize() in res\n assert str(c.corpus_num_tokens(corp)) in res\n assert str(c.vocabulary_size(corp)) in res\n\n lines = res.split('\\n')\n if max_documents is None:\n n_docs_printed = corp.print_summary_default_max_documents\n elif max_documents >= 0:\n n_docs_printed = max_documents\n else:\n n_docs_printed = len(corp)\n assert len(lines) == 2 + min(len(corp), n_docs_printed + bool(len(corp) > n_docs_printed))\n\n if corp.ngrams > 1:\n assert f'{corp.ngrams}-grams' in lines[-1]\n\n\ndef test_print_summary(capsys, corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n c.print_summary(corp)\n assert capsys.readouterr().out == c.corpus_summary(corp) + '\\n'\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n as_table=st.booleans(),\n dtype=st.sampled_from([None, 'uint16', 'float64']),\n return_doc_labels=st.booleans(),\n return_vocab=st.booleans())\ndef test_dtm(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, select, as_table, dtype, return_doc_labels, return_vocab):\n kwargs = dict(select=select, as_table=as_table, dtype=dtype,\n return_doc_labels=return_doc_labels, return_vocab=return_vocab)\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.dtm(corp, **kwargs)\n else:\n res = c.dtm(corp, **kwargs)\n\n expected_vocab = c.vocabulary(corp, select=select, sort=True)\n if select is None:\n expected_labels = c.doc_labels(corp, sort=True)\n elif isinstance(select, str):\n expected_labels = [select]\n else:\n expected_labels = sorted(select)\n\n if return_doc_labels and return_vocab:\n assert isinstance(res, tuple)\n assert len(res) == 3\n dtm, doclabels, vocab = res\n assert isinstance(doclabels, list)\n assert isinstance(vocab, list)\n elif return_doc_labels and not return_vocab:\n assert isinstance(res, tuple)\n assert len(res) == 2\n dtm, doclabels = res\n assert isinstance(doclabels, list)\n vocab = None\n elif not return_doc_labels and return_vocab:\n assert isinstance(res, tuple)\n assert len(res) == 2\n dtm, vocab = res\n assert isinstance(vocab, list)\n doclabels = None\n else:\n dtm = res\n vocab = None\n doclabels = None\n\n assert dtm.ndim == 2\n assert dtm.shape[0] == len(expected_labels)\n assert dtm.shape[1] == len(expected_vocab)\n\n if as_table:\n assert isinstance(dtm, pd.DataFrame)\n assert dtm.index.tolist() == expected_labels\n assert dtm.columns.tolist() == expected_vocab\n\n if len(corp) > 0 and select is None:\n assert np.sum(dtm.iloc[expected_labels.index('empty'), :]) == 0\n assert np.sum(dtm.iloc[:, expected_vocab.index('the')]) > 1\n assert dtm.iloc[expected_labels.index('small1'), expected_vocab.index('the')] == 1\n else:\n assert isinstance(dtm, csr_matrix)\n assert dtm.dtype == np.dtype(dtype or 'int32')\n\n if len(corp) > 0 and select is None:\n assert np.sum(dtm[expected_labels.index('empty'), :]) == 0\n assert np.sum(dtm[:, expected_vocab.index('the')]) > 1\n assert dtm[expected_labels.index('small1'), expected_vocab.index('the')] == 1\n\n if doclabels is not None:\n assert doclabels == expected_labels\n if vocab is not None:\n assert vocab == expected_vocab\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(n=st.integers(-1, 5),\n join=st.booleans(),\n join_str=st.text(string.printable, max_size=1))\ndef test_ngrams_hypothesis(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, n, join, join_str):\n # note: proper ngram tests are done in test_tokenseq.py for token_ngrams\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n args = dict(n=n, join=join, join_str=join_str)\n\n if n < 2:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n c.ngrams(corp, **args)\n else:\n res = c.ngrams(corp, **args)\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n assert set(corp.keys()) == set(res.keys())\n\n corp_tokens = c.doc_tokens(corp)\n\n for lbl, ng in res.items():\n dtok = corp_tokens[lbl]\n n_tok = len(dtok)\n assert isinstance(ng, list)\n\n if n_tok < n:\n if n_tok == 0:\n assert ng == []\n else:\n assert len(ng) == 1\n if join:\n assert ng == [join_str.join(dtok)]\n else:\n assert ng == [dtok]\n else:\n if join:\n assert all([isinstance(g, str) for g in ng])\n assert all([join_str in g for g in ng])\n else:\n assert all([isinstance(g, list) for g in ng])\n assert all([len(g) == n for g in ng])\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n search_term_exists=st.booleans(),\n context_size=st.one_of(st.integers(-1, 3), st.tuples(st.integers(-1, 2), st.integers(-1, 2))),\n by_attr=st.sampled_from([None, 'nonexistent', 'pos', 'lemma']),\n inverse=st.booleans(),\n with_attr=st.one_of(st.booleans(), st.sampled_from(['pos', 'lemma', ['pos', 'lemma']])),\n as_tables=st.booleans(),\n only_non_empty=st.booleans(),\n glue=st.one_of(st.none(), st.text(string.printable, max_size=1)),\n highlight_keyword=st.sampled_from([None, '*', '^']))\ndef test_kwic_hypothesis(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, **args):\n search_term_exists = args.pop('search_term_exists')\n matchattr = args['by_attr'] or 'token'\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n csize = args['context_size']\n if (isinstance(csize, int) and csize <= 0) or \\\n (isinstance(csize, tuple) and (any(x < 0 for x in csize) or all(x == 0 for x in csize))):\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n c.kwic(corp, 'doesntmatter', **args)\n elif args['glue'] is not None and args['with_attr']:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n c.kwic(corp, 'doesntmatter', **args)\n elif args['select'] == 'nonexistent' or (args['select'] not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.kwic(corp, 'doesntmatter', **args)\n elif args['by_attr'] == 'nonexistent' and len(corp) > 0 and args['select'] != []:\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.kwic(corp, 'doesntmatter', **args)\n else:\n if matchattr == 'token':\n vocab = list(c.vocabulary(corp, select=args['select']))\n else:\n if matchattr != 'nonexistent':\n tok_attrs = [attrs[matchattr]\n for attrs in c.doc_tokens(corp,\n select={args['select']} if isinstance(args['select'], str)\n else args['select'],\n with_attr=matchattr).values()]\n vocab = list(set(flatten_list(tok_attrs)))\n else:\n vocab = []\n\n if search_term_exists and len(vocab) > 0:\n s = random.choice(vocab)\n else:\n s = 'thisdoesnotexist'\n\n res = c.kwic(corp, s, **args)\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n\n if args['only_non_empty']:\n assert all([len(dkwic) > 0 for dkwic in res.values()])\n else:\n if args['select'] is None:\n assert set(res.keys()) == set(corp.keys())\n else:\n assert set(res.keys()) == ({args['select']} if isinstance(args['select'], str)\n else set(args['select'])) - {'nonexistent'}\n\n res_windows = {}\n if args['as_tables']:\n for lbl, dkwic in res.items():\n assert isinstance(dkwic, pd.DataFrame)\n\n if len(dkwic) > 0:\n if args['glue'] is None:\n expected_cols = ['doc', 'context', 'position', matchattr]\n if args['with_attr'] is True:\n expected_cols.extend([a for a in corp.token_attrs if a != args['by_attr']])\n elif isinstance(args['with_attr'], list):\n expected_cols.extend([a for a in args['with_attr'] if a != args['by_attr']])\n if isinstance(args['with_attr'], str) and args['with_attr'] != args['by_attr']:\n expected_cols.append(args['with_attr'])\n else:\n expected_cols = ['doc', 'context', matchattr]\n assert dkwic.columns.tolist() == expected_cols\n\n contexts = np.sort(np.unique(dkwic['context'])).tolist()\n assert contexts == list(range(np.max(dkwic['context'])+1))\n else:\n contexts = []\n\n dwindows = []\n for ctx in contexts:\n dkwic_ctx = dkwic.loc[dkwic['context'] == ctx, :]\n\n if args['glue'] is None:\n assert np.all(0 <= dkwic_ctx['position'])\n assert np.all(dkwic_ctx['position'] < len(corp[lbl]))\n dwindows.append(dkwic_ctx[matchattr].tolist())\n else:\n assert len(dkwic_ctx[matchattr]) == 1\n dwindows.append(dkwic_ctx[matchattr].tolist()[0])\n\n if dwindows or not args['only_non_empty']:\n res_windows[lbl] = dwindows\n else:\n if args['with_attr']:\n for lbl, dkwic in res.items():\n assert lbl in corp.keys()\n assert isinstance(dkwic, list)\n for ctx in dkwic:\n assert isinstance(ctx, dict)\n expected_keys = {matchattr}\n if args['with_attr'] is True:\n expected_keys.update(corp.token_attrs)\n elif isinstance(args['with_attr'], list):\n expected_keys.update(args['with_attr'])\n elif isinstance(args['with_attr'], str):\n expected_keys.add(args['with_attr'])\n assert set(ctx.keys()) == expected_keys\n res_windows = {lbl: [ctx[matchattr] for ctx in dkwic] for lbl, dkwic in res.items()}\n else:\n res_windows = res\n\n if s in vocab:\n for lbl, win in res_windows.items():\n for w in win:\n if not args['inverse']:\n if args['highlight_keyword'] is not None:\n assert (args['highlight_keyword'] + s + args['highlight_keyword']) in w\n else:\n assert s in w\n\n if args['glue'] is not None:\n # `w` is string and should contain the \"glue\" string at least once\n # or less if the document is empty\n assert isinstance(w, str)\n assert w.count(args['glue']) >= min(1, len(corp[lbl]))\n else:\n # `w` is a list of tokens around the search term\n assert isinstance(w, list)\n # the length `w` is \"context size left + context size right + 1\" (b/c of search term)\n if isinstance(csize, int): # symmetric context size\n assert 1 <= len(w) <= csize * 2 + 1\n else: # possibly asymm. context size\n assert 1 <= len(w) <= sum(csize) + 1\n else:\n if args['only_non_empty']:\n if args['inverse']:\n if args['select'] is None:\n n_docs = len(corp) - 1 # -1 because of empty doc.\n elif isinstance(args['select'], str):\n n_docs = 0 if args['select'] == 'empty' else 1\n else:\n n_docs = len(set(args['select']) - {'empty'})\n assert len(res_windows) == max(n_docs, 0)\n else:\n assert len(res_windows) == 0\n else:\n if args['inverse']:\n assert all([len(win) > 0 for lbl, win in res_windows.items() if lbl != 'empty'])\n else:\n assert all([n == 0 for n in map(len, res_windows.values())])\n\n\ndef test_kwic_example(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n res = c.kwic(corp, 'small', context_size=1)\n if len(corp) > 0:\n assert res['small1'] == res['empty'] == []\n assert res['small2'] == [['a', 'small', 'example']]\n\n res = c.kwic(corp, 'small', context_size=(0, 1))\n if len(corp) > 0:\n assert res['small1'] == res['empty'] == []\n assert res['small2'] == [['small', 'example']]\n\n res = c.kwic(corp, '*a*', match_type='glob', context_size=(0, 1))\n if len(corp) > 0:\n assert res['small1'] == res['empty'] == []\n assert res['small2'] == [['a', 'small'], ['small', 'example'], ['example', 'document']]\n\n res = c.kwic(corp, '*a*', match_type='glob', context_size=(0, 1), glue=' ', highlight_keyword='*')\n if len(corp) > 0:\n assert res['small1'] == res['empty'] == []\n assert res['small2'] == ['*a* small', '*small* example', '*example* document']\n\n res = c.kwic(corp, 'small', context_size=1, glue=' ')\n if len(corp) > 0:\n assert res['small1'] == res['empty'] == []\n assert res['small2'] == ['a small example']\n\n res = c.kwic(corp, 'small', context_size=1, glue=' ', only_non_empty=True)\n if len(corp) > 0:\n assert 'empty' not in res.keys()\n assert 'small1' not in res.keys()\n assert res['small2'] == ['a small example']\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(select=st.sampled_from([None, 'empty', 'small2', 'nonexistent', ['small1', 'small2'], []]),\n search_term_exists=st.booleans(),\n context_size=st.one_of(st.integers(-1, 3), st.tuples(st.integers(-1, 2), st.integers(-1, 2))),\n by_attr=st.sampled_from([None, 'nonexistent', 'pos', 'lemma']),\n inverse=st.booleans(),\n with_attr=st.one_of(st.booleans(), st.sampled_from(['pos', 'lemma', ['pos', 'lemma']])),\n glue=st.one_of(st.none(), st.text(string.printable, max_size=1)),\n highlight_keyword=st.sampled_from([None, '*', '^']))\ndef test_kwic_table_hypothesis(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, **args):\n search_term_exists = args.pop('search_term_exists')\n matchattr = args['by_attr'] or 'token'\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n csize = args['context_size']\n if (isinstance(csize, int) and csize <= 0) or \\\n (isinstance(csize, tuple) and (any(x < 0 for x in csize) or all(x == 0 for x in csize))):\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n c.kwic_table(corp, 'doesntmatter', **args)\n elif args['glue'] is not None and args['with_attr']:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n c.kwic_table(corp, 'doesntmatter', **args)\n elif args['select'] == 'nonexistent' or (args['select'] not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.kwic_table(corp, 'doesntmatter', **args)\n elif args['by_attr'] == 'nonexistent' and len(corp) > 0 and args['select'] != []:\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.kwic_table(corp, 'doesntmatter', **args)\n else:\n if matchattr == 'token':\n vocab = list(c.vocabulary(corp))\n else:\n if matchattr != 'nonexistent':\n vocab = list(set(flatten_list([attrs[matchattr]\n for attrs in c.doc_tokens(corp, with_attr=matchattr).values()])))\n else:\n vocab = []\n\n if search_term_exists and len(vocab) > 0:\n s = random.choice(vocab)\n else:\n s = 'thisdoesnotexist'\n\n res = c.kwic_table(corp, s, **args)\n assert isinstance(res, pd.DataFrame)\n if args['glue'] is None:\n expected_cols = ['doc', 'context', 'position', matchattr]\n if args['with_attr'] is True:\n expected_cols.extend([a for a in corp.token_attrs if a != args['by_attr']])\n elif isinstance(args['with_attr'], list):\n expected_cols.extend([a for a in args['with_attr'] if a != args['by_attr']])\n if isinstance(args['with_attr'], str) and args['with_attr'] != args['by_attr']:\n expected_cols.append(args['with_attr'])\n else:\n expected_cols = ['doc', 'context', matchattr]\n assert res.columns.tolist() == expected_cols\n\n doclabels = set(res['doc'].unique())\n assert doclabels <= set(corp.keys())\n for lbl in doclabels:\n dkwic = res.loc[res['doc'] == lbl, :]\n if args['glue'] is None:\n contexts = np.sort(np.unique(dkwic['context'])).tolist()\n assert contexts == list(range(max(contexts)+1))\n else:\n contexts = dkwic['context'].tolist()\n assert contexts == list(range(len(dkwic)))\n\n if len(dkwic) > 0:\n assert np.issubdtype(dkwic[matchattr], object)\n\n if args['glue'] is None:\n assert np.all(0 <= dkwic['position'])\n assert np.all(dkwic['position'] < len(corp[lbl]))\n\n if not args['inverse']:\n dkwic_tok = dkwic[matchattr].tolist()\n\n if args['highlight_keyword']:\n assert args['highlight_keyword'] + s + args['highlight_keyword'] in dkwic_tok\n else:\n assert s in dkwic_tok\n else:\n # disabled since this is not always the case: the keyword is in a very small document or at the\n # start or end of a sentence, there may not be the \"glue\" string in the context\n # if len(corp[lbl]) > 1:\n # assert all([args['glue'] in x for x in dkwic[matchattr]])\n\n if not args['inverse']:\n assert all([s in x for x in dkwic[matchattr]])\n if args['highlight_keyword'] and args['highlight_keyword'] != args['glue']:\n assert all([x.count(args['highlight_keyword']) == 2 for x in dkwic[matchattr]])\n\n\ndef test_save_load_corpus(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n with tempfile.TemporaryFile(suffix='.pickle') as ftemp:\n c.save_corpus_to_picklefile(corp, ftemp)\n ftemp.seek(0)\n unpickled_corp = c.load_corpus_from_picklefile(ftemp)\n\n _check_copies(corp, unpickled_corp, same_nlp_instance=False)\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(with_attr=st.one_of(st.booleans(), st.sampled_from([\n ['whitespace', 'token', 'pos', 'lemma'],\n ['whitespace', 'token', 'pos'],\n ['whitespace', 'pos'],\n ['token', 'pos'],\n [],\n ])),\n with_orig_corpus_opt=st.booleans(),\n sentences=st.booleans(),\n pass_doc_attr_names=st.booleans(),\n pass_token_attr_names=st.booleans())\ndef test_load_corpus_from_tokens_hypothesis(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, with_attr, with_orig_corpus_opt,\n sentences, pass_doc_attr_names, pass_token_attr_names):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n emptycorp = len(corp) == 0\n\n if sentences:\n sent_start_per_doc = {lbl: d['sent_start'] for lbl, d in corp.items()}\n else:\n sent_start_per_doc = None\n\n if len(corp) > 0:\n doc_attrs = {'empty': 'yes', 'small1': 'yes', 'small2': 'yes'}\n else:\n doc_attrs = {}\n c.set_document_attr(corp, 'docattr_test', doc_attrs, default='no')\n c.set_token_attr(corp, 'tokenattr_test', {'the': True}, default=False)\n tokens = c.doc_tokens(corp, sentences=sentences, with_attr=with_attr)\n\n kwargs = {'sentences': sentences}\n if with_orig_corpus_opt:\n kwargs['spacy_instance'] = corp.nlp\n kwargs['max_workers'] = corp.max_workers\n else:\n kwargs['language'] = corp.language\n\n if pass_doc_attr_names:\n kwargs['doc_attr'] = {'docattr_test': 'no'}\n if pass_token_attr_names:\n kwargs['token_attr'] = {'tokenattr_test': False}\n\n if not emptycorp and (with_attr is False or with_attr == []):\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'`tokens_w_attr` must be given as dict with token attributes'):\n c.load_corpus_from_tokens(tokens, **kwargs)\n elif not emptycorp and (with_attr is True or 'whitespace' not in with_attr):\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'^at least the following base token attributes must be given: '):\n c.load_corpus_from_tokens(tokens, **kwargs)\n else:\n corp2 = c.load_corpus_from_tokens(tokens, **kwargs)\n assert len(corp) == len(corp2)\n assert corp2.language == 'en'\n\n # check if tokens are the same\n assert c.doc_tokens(corp) == c.doc_tokens(corp2)\n\n # check sentences\n if sentences:\n assert {lbl: d['sent_start'] for lbl, d in corp2.items()} == sent_start_per_doc\n assert c.doc_tokens(corp, sentences=True) == c.doc_tokens(corp2, sentences=True)\n else:\n assert all([not d.has_sents for d in corp2.values()])\n\n # check if token dataframes are the same\n corp_table = c.tokens_table(corp, sentences=sentences, with_attr=with_attr)\n corp2_table = c.tokens_table(corp2, sentences=sentences, with_attr=with_attr)\n if len(corp) == 0 and (not pass_token_attr_names or not pass_doc_attr_names):\n # in this case the columns of the tables are different because for corp2 the custom attributes could\n # not be set\n assert len(corp_table) == len(corp2_table)\n else:\n assert _dataframes_equal(corp_table, corp2_table, require_same_index=False)\n\n if with_orig_corpus_opt:\n assert corp.nlp is corp2.nlp\n assert corp.max_workers == corp2.max_workers\n else:\n assert corp.nlp is not corp2.nlp\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('with_orig_corpus_opt, sentences, with_attr', [\n (False, False, True),\n (False, True, True),\n (True, False, True),\n (True, True, True),\n (False, False, False),\n (False, False, ['whitespace', 'pos', 'lemma']),\n (False, True, ['whitespace', 'pos', 'lemma']),\n (True, False, ['whitespace', 'pos', 'lemma']),\n (True, True, ['whitespace', 'pos', 'lemma']),\n])\ndef test_load_corpus_from_tokens_table(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, with_orig_corpus_opt, sentences, with_attr):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n if len(corp) > 0:\n doc_attrs = {'empty': 'yes', 'small1': 'yes', 'small2': 'yes'}\n else:\n doc_attrs = {}\n c.set_document_attr(corp, 'docattr_test', doc_attrs, default='no')\n c.set_token_attr(corp, 'tokenattr_test', {'the': True}, default=False)\n\n tokenstab = c.tokens_table(corp, sentences=sentences, with_attr=with_attr)\n\n kwargs = {}\n if with_orig_corpus_opt:\n kwargs['spacy_instance'] = corp.nlp\n kwargs['max_workers'] = corp.max_workers\n else:\n kwargs['language'] = corp.language\n\n if isinstance(with_attr, bool) or 'whitespace' not in with_attr:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'^`tokens` dataframe must at least contain the following columns: '):\n c.load_corpus_from_tokens_table(tokenstab, **kwargs)\n else:\n corp2 = c.load_corpus_from_tokens_table(tokenstab, **kwargs)\n if len(corp) > 0:\n assert len(corp) - 1 == len(corp2) # empty doc. not in result\n assert corp2.language == 'en'\n\n # check if tokens are the same\n assert c.doc_tokens(corp, sentences=sentences, only_non_empty=True) == \\\n c.doc_tokens(corp2, sentences=sentences)\n # check if token dataframes are the same\n assert _dataframes_equal(c.tokens_table(corp, sentences=sentences, with_attr=with_attr), tokenstab)\n\n if with_orig_corpus_opt:\n assert corp.nlp is corp2.nlp\n assert corp.max_workers == corp2.max_workers\n else:\n assert corp.nlp is not corp2.nlp\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('deepcopy_attrs', (False, True))\ndef test_serialize_deserialize_corpus(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, deepcopy_attrs):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n ser_corp = c.serialize_corpus(corp, deepcopy_attrs=deepcopy_attrs)\n assert isinstance(ser_corp, dict)\n corp2 = c.deserialize_corpus(ser_corp)\n assert isinstance(corp2, c.Corpus)\n\n _check_copies(corp, corp2, same_nlp_instance=False)\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testtype, files, doc_label_fmt, inplace', [\n (1, os.path.join(DATADIR_GUTENB, 'kafka_verwandlung.txt'), '{path}-{basename}', True),\n (1, os.path.join(DATADIR_GUTENB, 'kafka_verwandlung.txt'), '{path}-{basename}', False),\n (2, {'testfile': os.path.join(DATADIR_GUTENB, 'kafka_verwandlung.txt')}, '{path}-{basename}', True),\n (3, [os.path.join(DATADIR_WERTHER, 'goethe_werther1.txt'), os.path.join(DATADIR_WERTHER, 'goethe_werther2.txt')],\n '{basename}', True),\n (4, [os.path.join(DATADIR_WERTHER, 'goethe_werther1.txt'), os.path.join(DATADIR_WERTHER, 'goethe_werther1.txt')],\n '{basename}', True),\n (5, [os.path.join(DATADIR_GUTENB, 'kafka_verwandlung.txt'),\n os.path.join(DATADIR_WERTHER, 'goethe_werther1.txt'),\n os.path.join(DATADIR_WERTHER, 'goethe_werther2.txt')],\n '{basename}', True),\n])\ndef test_corpus_add_files_and_from_files(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testtype, files, doc_label_fmt, inplace):\n # make it a bit quicker by reading only 100 chars\n common_kwargs = dict(doc_label_fmt=doc_label_fmt, read_size=100, force_unix_linebreaks=False)\n\n if testtype == 5:\n common_kwargs['sample'] = 2\n\n ### test Corpus.from_files ###\n kwargs = dict(language='de', max_workers=1, **common_kwargs) # Corpus constructor args\n if testtype == 4:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match='^duplicate document label'):\n c.Corpus.from_files(files, **kwargs)\n else:\n corp = c.Corpus.from_files(files, **kwargs)\n assert isinstance(corp, c.Corpus)\n assert corp.language == 'de'\n assert corp.max_workers == 1\n\n doc_lbls = c.doc_labels(corp)\n\n if testtype == 1:\n assert len(doc_lbls) == 1\n assert 'kafka_verwandlung' in doc_lbls[0]\n elif testtype == 2:\n assert doc_lbls == ['testfile']\n elif testtype == 3:\n assert set(doc_lbls) == {'goethe_werther1', 'goethe_werther2'}\n elif testtype == 5:\n assert len(doc_lbls) == 2\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'unknown testtype {testtype}')\n\n ### test corpus_add_files ###\n dont_check_attrs = {'doc_labels', 'n_docs', 'workers_docs'}\n kwargs = dict(inplace=inplace, **common_kwargs)\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n n_docs_before = len(corp)\n\n if testtype == 4:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'duplicate document label'):\n c.corpus_add_files(corp, files, **kwargs)\n else:\n res = c.corpus_add_files(corp, files, **kwargs)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n if testtype == 1:\n assert any('kafka_verwandlung' in lbl for lbl in c.doc_labels(res))\n elif testtype == 2:\n assert 'testfile' in c.doc_labels(res)\n elif testtype == 3:\n assert 'goethe_werther1' in c.doc_labels(res)\n assert 'goethe_werther2' in c.doc_labels(res)\n elif testtype == 5:\n assert len(res) == n_docs_before + 2\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'unknown testtype {testtype}')\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testtype, folder, valid_extensions, inplace', [\n (1, 'nonexistent', ('txt',), True),\n (2, DATADIR_GUTENB, ('txt',), True),\n (2, DATADIR_GUTENB, ('txt',), False),\n (2, DATADIR_GUTENB, ('txt', 'foo',), True),\n (3, DATADIR_GUTENB, ('foo',), True),\n (4, DATADIR_WERTHER, ('txt',), True),\n (5, DATADIR_GUTENB, ('txt',), True),\n])\ndef test_corpus_add_folder_and_from_folder(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testtype, folder, valid_extensions, inplace):\n if testtype == 1:\n expected_doclbls = None\n elif testtype in {2, 3, 5}:\n expected_doclbls = {'kafka_verwandlung', 'werther-goethe_werther1', 'werther-goethe_werther2'}\n elif testtype == 4:\n expected_doclbls = {'goethe_werther1', 'goethe_werther2'}\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'unknown testtype {testtype}')\n\n # make it a bit quicker by reading only 100 chars\n common_kwargs = dict(valid_extensions=valid_extensions, read_size=100, force_unix_linebreaks=False)\n\n if testtype == 5:\n common_kwargs['sample'] = 2\n\n ### test Corpus.from_folder ###\n kwargs = dict(language='de', max_workers=1, **common_kwargs) # Corpus constructor args\n\n if testtype == 1:\n with pytest.raises(IOError, match=r'^path does not exist'):\n c.Corpus.from_folder(folder, **kwargs)\n else:\n corp = c.Corpus.from_folder(folder, **kwargs)\n assert isinstance(corp, c.Corpus)\n assert corp.language == 'de'\n assert corp.max_workers == 1\n\n doclbls = set(c.doc_labels(corp))\n\n if testtype in {2, 4}:\n assert doclbls == expected_doclbls\n elif testtype == 3:\n assert expected_doclbls & doclbls == set()\n else: # testtype == 5\n assert len(doclbls) == 2\n assert all(lbl in expected_doclbls for lbl in doclbls)\n\n ### test corpus_add_folder ###\n dont_check_attrs = {'doc_labels', 'n_docs', 'workers_docs'}\n kwargs = dict(inplace=inplace, **common_kwargs)\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n n_docs_before = len(corp)\n\n if testtype == 1:\n with pytest.raises(IOError, match=r'^path does not exist'):\n c.corpus_add_folder(corp, folder, **kwargs)\n else:\n res = c.corpus_add_folder(corp, folder, **kwargs)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n doclbls = set(c.doc_labels(res))\n\n if testtype == 2:\n if n_docs_before == 0:\n assert expected_doclbls == doclbls\n else:\n assert expected_doclbls < doclbls\n elif testtype == 3:\n assert expected_doclbls & doclbls == set()\n elif testtype == 4:\n if n_docs_before == 0:\n assert expected_doclbls == doclbls\n else:\n assert expected_doclbls < doclbls\n else: # testtype == 5\n assert len(doclbls) == n_docs_before + 2\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testtype, files, id_column, text_column, prepend_columns, inplace', [\n (1, 'invalid_ext.foo', 0, 1, None, True),\n (2, os.path.join(DATADIR, '100NewsArticles.csv'), 'article_id', 'text', None, True),\n (2, os.path.join(DATADIR, '100NewsArticles.csv'), 'article_id', 'text', None, False),\n (2, os.path.join(DATADIR, '100NewsArticles.xlsx'), 'article_id', 'text', None, True),\n (3, os.path.join(DATADIR, '100NewsArticles.xlsx'), 'article_id', 'text', ['title', 'subtitle'], True),\n (4, [os.path.join(DATADIR, '100NewsArticles.csv'), os.path.join(DATADIR, '3ExampleDocs.xlsx')],\n 'article_id', 'text', None, True),\n (5, [os.path.join(DATADIR, '100NewsArticles.csv'), os.path.join(DATADIR, '3ExampleDocs.xlsx')],\n 'article_id', 'text', None, True),\n])\ndef test_corpus_add_tabular_and_from_tabular(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testtype, files, id_column, text_column,\n prepend_columns, inplace):\n if testtype == 1:\n expected_doclbls = None\n elif testtype in {2, 3}:\n expected_doclbls = set(f'100NewsArticles-{i}' for i in range(1, 101))\n elif testtype in {4, 5}:\n expected_doclbls = set(f'100NewsArticles-{i}' for i in range(1, 101))\n expected_doclbls.update(f'3ExampleDocs-example{i}' for i in range(1, 4))\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'unknown testtype {testtype}')\n\n common_kwargs = dict(files=files, id_column=id_column, text_column=text_column, prepend_columns=prepend_columns)\n\n if testtype == 5:\n common_kwargs['sample'] = 2\n\n ### test Corpus.from_tabular ###\n kwargs = dict(language='de', max_workers=1, **common_kwargs) # Corpus constructor args\n\n if testtype == 1:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match='only file extensions \".csv\", \".xls\" and \".xlsx\" are supported'):\n c.Corpus.from_tabular(**kwargs)\n else:\n corp = c.Corpus.from_tabular(**kwargs)\n assert isinstance(corp, c.Corpus)\n assert corp.language == 'de'\n assert corp.max_workers == 1\n\n if testtype in {2, 3}:\n assert len(corp) == 100\n elif testtype == 4:\n assert len(corp) == 103\n else: # testtype == 5\n assert len(corp) == 2\n\n ### test corpus_add_tabular ###\n dont_check_attrs = {'doc_labels', 'n_docs', 'workers_docs'}\n kwargs = dict(inplace=inplace, **common_kwargs)\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n n_docs_before = len(corp)\n\n if testtype == 1:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match='only file extensions \".csv\", \".xls\" and \".xlsx\" are supported'):\n c.corpus_add_tabular(corp, **kwargs)\n else:\n res = c.corpus_add_tabular(corp, **kwargs)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n doclbls = set(c.doc_labels(res))\n doctxts = c.doc_texts(res)\n\n if testtype in {2, 3}:\n assert len(res) == n_docs_before + 100\n elif testtype == 4:\n assert len(res) == n_docs_before + 103\n else: # testtype == 5\n assert len(doclbls) == n_docs_before + 2\n\n if testtype != 5:\n if n_docs_before == 0:\n assert expected_doclbls == doclbls\n else:\n assert expected_doclbls <= doclbls\n\n if testtype in {2, 4}:\n assert doctxts['100NewsArticles-23'].startswith('The limited scope of')\n if testtype == 4:\n assert doctxts['3ExampleDocs-example2'] == 'Second example document.'\n else: # testtype == 3\n assert doctxts['100NewsArticles-23'].startswith(\n 'A vote for DeVos is a vote for resegregation\\n\\n'\n 'Felicia Wong is President and CEO of the Roosevelt '\n 'Institute, an economic and social policy think tank '\n 'working to re-imagine the rules so they work for all '\n 'Americans, and co-author of the forthcoming book '\n '\"Rewrite the Racial Rules: Building an Inclusive '\n 'American Economy.\" Randi Weingarten, President of the '\n 'American Federation of Teachers, is on Roosevelt\\'s '\n 'board. The views expressed in this commentary are her '\n 'own.\\n\\nThe limited scope of'\n )\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('inplace, sample', [\n (True, None),\n (False, None),\n (True, 2),\n])\ndef test_corpus_add_zip_and_from_zip(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, inplace, sample):\n add_tabular_opts = dict(id_column='article_id', text_column='text')\n\n ### test Corpus.from_zip ###\n corp = c.Corpus.from_zip(os.path.join(DATADIR, 'zipdata.zip'), language='de', max_workers=1, sample=sample,\n add_tabular_opts=add_tabular_opts)\n assert isinstance(corp, c.Corpus)\n assert corp.language == 'de'\n assert corp.max_workers == 1\n expected_n_docs = 101 if sample is None else sample\n assert len(corp) == expected_n_docs\n\n ### test corpus_add_zip ###\n dont_check_attrs = {'doc_labels', 'n_docs', 'workers_docs'}\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n n_docs_before = len(corp)\n\n res = c.corpus_add_zip(corp, os.path.join(DATADIR, 'zipdata.zip'), sample=sample,\n add_tabular_opts=add_tabular_opts, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n doclbls = c.doc_labels(res)\n\n assert len(res) == n_docs_before + expected_n_docs\n\n if sample is None:\n assert sum(dl.startswith('100NewsArticles-') for dl in doclbls) == 100\n assert sum(dl == 'german-goethe_werther1' for dl in doclbls) == 1\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('max_workers, sample', [\n (1, 10),\n (2, 10),\n (1, 2),\n])\ndef test_corpus_from_builtin_corpus(max_workers, sample):\n builtin_corp = c.builtin_corpora_info()\n assert sorted(builtin_corp) == sorted(c.Corpus._BUILTIN_CORPORA_LOAD_KWARGS.keys())\n\n kwargs = {'max_workers': max_workers} if max_workers > 1 else {}\n kwargs['sample'] = sample\n\n for corpname in builtin_corp + ['nonexistent']:\n if corpname == 'nonexistent':\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'^built-in corpus does not exist: '):\n c.Corpus.from_builtin_corpus(corpname, **kwargs)\n else:\n lang = corpname[:2]\n\n if lang not in installed_lang:\n with pytest.raises(RuntimeError):\n c.Corpus.from_builtin_corpus(corpname, **kwargs)\n else:\n corp = c.Corpus.from_builtin_corpus(corpname, **kwargs)\n assert isinstance(corp, c.Corpus)\n assert len(corp) > 0\n if sample is not None:\n assert len(corp) == sample\n assert corp.language == lang\n assert corp.max_workers == max_workers\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('attrname, data, default, inplace', [\n ['is_small', {'empty': True, 'small1': True, 'small2': True}, False, True],\n ['is_small', {'empty': True, 'small1': True, 'small2': True}, False, False],\n ['is_small', {}, False, True],\n ['is_small', {}, False, False],\n ['is_empty', {'empty': 'yes'}, 'no', True],\n ['is_empty', {'empty': 'yes'}, 'no', False],\n])\ndef test_set_remove_document_attr(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, attrname, data, default, inplace):\n dont_check_attrs = {'doc_attrs', 'doc_attrs_defaults'}\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n res = c.set_document_attr(corp, attrname=attrname, data=data, default=default, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n assert attrname in res.doc_attrs\n assert res.doc_attrs_defaults[attrname] == default\n\n tok = c.doc_tokens(res, with_attr=attrname)\n\n set_docs = set(data.keys())\n if attrname == 'is_small':\n expected_val = True\n else:\n expected_val = 'yes'\n\n for lbl, d in res.items():\n attrval = d.doc_attrs[attrname]\n tok_attrval = tok[lbl][attrname]\n if lbl in set_docs:\n assert attrval == expected_val\n assert tok_attrval == expected_val\n else:\n assert attrval == default\n assert tok_attrval == default\n\n res2 = c.remove_document_attr(res, attrname, inplace=inplace)\n res2 = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(res, res2, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n del res\n\n assert attrname not in res2.doc_attrs\n assert attrname not in res2.doc_attrs_defaults.keys()\n\n if len(res2) > 0:\n with pytest.raises(KeyError): # this attribute doesn't exist anymore\n c.doc_tokens(res2, with_attr=attrname)\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('attrname, data, default, per_token_occurrence, inplace', [\n ['the_or_a', {'the': True, 'a': True}, False, True, True],\n ['the_or_a', {'the': True, 'a': True}, False, True, False],\n ['the_or_a', {}, False, True, True],\n ['the_or_a', {}, False, True, False],\n ['foobar_fail', {'small1': 'failure'}, '-', False, False],\n ['foobar', {'small1': ['foo'], 'small2': ['foo', 'bar', 'bar', 'bar', 'bar', 'bar', 'bar']}, '-', False, False],\n ['foobar', {'small1': ['foo'], 'small2': ['foo', 'bar', 'bar', 'bar', 'bar', 'bar', 'bar']}, '-', False, True],\n])\ndef test_set_remove_token_attr(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, attrname, data, default, per_token_occurrence,\n inplace):\n dont_check_attrs = {'token_attrs', 'custom_token_attrs_defaults'}\n args = dict(attrname=attrname, data=data, default=default,\n per_token_occurrence=per_token_occurrence, inplace=inplace)\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n if attrname == 'foobar_fail' and len(corp) > 0:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'^token attributes for document \"small1\" are neither tuple'):\n c.set_token_attr(corp, **args)\n else:\n res = c.set_token_attr(corp, **args)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n assert attrname in res.token_attrs\n assert res.custom_token_attrs_defaults[attrname] == default\n\n tok = c.doc_tokens(res, with_attr=attrname)\n\n for lbl, d in res.items():\n assert attrname in d.token_attrs\n assert isinstance(d.custom_token_attrs[attrname], np.ndarray)\n assert attrname in tok[lbl]\n assert d.custom_token_attrs[attrname].tolist() == d[attrname] == tok[lbl][attrname]\n assert len(tok[lbl]['token']) == len(tok[lbl][attrname])\n\n if per_token_occurrence:\n if attrname == 'the_or_a':\n if len(data) > 0:\n for a, t in zip(tok[lbl][attrname], tok[lbl]['token']):\n assert (t in {'the', 'a'}) == a\n else:\n assert all([a == default for a in tok[lbl][attrname]])\n else:\n if attrname == 'foobar':\n if lbl in {'small1', 'small2'}:\n assert tok[lbl][attrname] == data[lbl]\n else:\n assert tok[lbl][attrname] == [default] * len(tok[lbl]['token'])\n\n res2 = c.remove_token_attr(res, attrname, inplace=inplace)\n res2 = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(res, res2, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n del res\n\n assert attrname not in res2.token_attrs\n assert attrname not in res2.custom_token_attrs_defaults.keys()\n\n for d in res2.values():\n assert attrname not in d.token_attrs\n assert attrname not in d.custom_token_attrs\n\n if len(res2) > 0:\n with pytest.raises(KeyError): # this attribute doesn't exist anymore\n c.doc_tokens(res2, with_attr=attrname)\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testcase, inplace', [\n (1, False),\n (1, True),\n (2, False),\n])\ndef test_corpus_retokenize(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testcase, inplace):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n if testcase == 2:\n selected_docs = ['unicode1', 'unicode2'] if len(corp) > 0 else None\n c.remove_punctuation(corp, select=selected_docs)\n c.to_lowercase(corp, select=selected_docs)\n\n orig_vocab = c.vocabulary(corp, sort=False)\n orig_texts = c.doc_texts(corp, collapse=None)\n\n res = c.corpus_retokenize(corp, collapse=None, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n assert c.vocabulary(res, sort=False) == orig_vocab - {''}\n assert c.doc_texts(res, collapse=None) == orig_texts\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testcase, func, select, inplace', [\n ('identity', lambda x: x, None, True),\n ('identity', lambda x: x, None, False),\n ('identity', lambda x: x, 'nonexistent', False),\n ('upper', lambda x: x.upper(), None, True),\n ('upper', lambda x: x.upper(), None, False),\n ('upper', lambda x: x.upper(), {'small1', 'small2'}, True),\n ('lower', lambda x: x.lower(), None, True),\n ('lower', lambda x: x.lower(), None, False),\n ('lower', lambda x: x.lower(), 'empty', False),\n])\ndef test_transform_tokens_upper_lower(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testcase, func, select, inplace):\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n if select == 'nonexistent' or (select not in (None, []) and len(corp) == 0):\n with pytest.raises(KeyError):\n c.transform_tokens(corp, func, select=select, inplace=inplace)\n else:\n select_set = {select} if isinstance(select, str) else select\n orig_tokens = c.doc_tokens(corp, select=select_set)\n if select_set is not None:\n orig_tokens_unmod_set = c.doc_tokens(corp, select=set(corp.keys()) - set(select_set))\n else:\n orig_tokens_unmod_set = None\n\n if testcase == 'upper':\n trans_tokens = c.doc_tokens(c.to_uppercase(corp, inplace=False), select=select_set)\n expected = {lbl: [t.upper() for t in tok] for lbl, tok in orig_tokens.items()}\n elif testcase == 'lower':\n trans_tokens = c.doc_tokens(c.to_lowercase(corp, inplace=False), select=select_set)\n expected = {lbl: [t.lower() for t in tok] for lbl, tok in orig_tokens.items()}\n else:\n trans_tokens = None\n expected = None\n\n res = c.transform_tokens(corp, func, select=select, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n if testcase == 'identity':\n assert c.doc_tokens(res, select=select_set) == orig_tokens\n else:\n assert c.doc_tokens(res, select=select_set) == trans_tokens == expected\n\n if select_set is not None:\n assert c.doc_tokens(res, select=set(res.keys()) - set(select_set)) == orig_tokens_unmod_set\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testcase, chars, inplace', [\n ('nochars', [], True),\n ('nochars', [], False),\n ('fewchars', ['.', ','], True),\n ('fewchars', ['.', ','], False),\n ('punct', list(string.punctuation) + [' ', '\\r', '\\n', '\\t'], True),\n])\ndef test_remove_chars_or_punctuation(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testcase, chars, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n orig_vocab = c.vocabulary(corp)\n\n if testcase == 'punct':\n no_punct_vocab = c.vocabulary(c.remove_punctuation(corp, inplace=False))\n else:\n no_punct_vocab = None\n\n res = c.remove_chars(corp, chars=chars, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n vocab = c.vocabulary(res)\n\n if testcase == 'nochars':\n assert vocab == orig_vocab\n else:\n for t in vocab:\n assert not any([chr in t for chr in chars])\n\n if testcase == 'punct':\n assert vocab == no_punct_vocab\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('inplace', [True, False])\ndef test_normalize_unicode(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n orig_vocab = c.vocabulary(corp)\n orig_tok = c.doc_tokens(corp)\n\n res = c.normalize_unicode(corp, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n vocab = c.vocabulary(res)\n\n assert len(vocab) <= len(orig_vocab)\n\n if len(res) > 0:\n res_tok = c.doc_tokens(res)\n assert orig_tok['unicode1'][-1] != orig_tok['unicode1'][-3]\n assert res_tok['unicode1'][-1] == res_tok['unicode1'][-3]\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('method, inplace', [\n ('icu', True),\n ('icu', False),\n ('ascii', True),\n])\ndef test_simplify_unicode(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, method, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n orig_vocab = c.vocabulary(corp)\n\n if method == 'icu' and len(corp) > 0 and not find_spec('icu'):\n with pytest.raises(RuntimeError, match=r'^package PyICU'):\n c.simplify_unicode(corp, method=method, inplace=inplace)\n else:\n res = c.simplify_unicode(corp, method=method, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n vocab = c.vocabulary(res)\n\n assert len(vocab) <= len(orig_vocab)\n\n if len(res) > 0:\n res_tok = c.doc_tokens(res)\n if method == 'icu':\n assert res_tok['unicode1'][-3:] == ['C', 'and', 'C']\n assert res_tok['unicode2'][-5:] == ['C', 'C', 'e', 'ω', 'C']\n else:\n assert res_tok['unicode1'][-3:] == ['C', 'and', 'C']\n assert res_tok['unicode2'][-5:] == ['C', 'C', 'e', '', 'C']\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('inplace', [True, False])\ndef test_numbers_to_magnitudes(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n emptycorp = len(corp) == 0\n orig_vocab = c.vocabulary(corp)\n res = c.numbers_to_magnitudes(corp, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n new_vocab = c.vocabulary(res)\n assert len(new_vocab) <= len(orig_vocab)\n\n if not emptycorp:\n assert '180,000' in orig_vocab\n assert '100000' in new_vocab\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('inplace', [True, False])\ndef test_lemmatize(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n orig_lemmata = {lbl: tok['lemma'] for lbl, tok in c.doc_tokens(corp, with_attr='lemma').items()}\n res = c.lemmatize(corp, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n tok = c.doc_tokens(res)\n assert orig_lemmata == tok\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testcase, patterns, glue, match_type, return_joint_tokens, inplace', [\n (1, 'fail', '_', 'exact', False, True),\n (2, ['fail'], '_', 'exact', False, True),\n (3, ['is', 'a'], '_', 'exact', False, True),\n (4, ['is', 'a'], '_', 'exact', False, False),\n (5, ['is', 'a'], '_', 'exact', True, True),\n (6, ['is', 'a'], '_', 'exact', True, False),\n (7, ['on', 'the', 'law'], '_', 'exact', False, True),\n (8, ['Disney', '*'], '//', 'glob', False, True),\n])\ndef test_join_collocations_by_patterns(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testcase, patterns, glue, match_type,\n return_joint_tokens, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n args = dict(patterns=patterns, glue=glue, match_type=match_type, return_joint_tokens=return_joint_tokens,\n inplace=inplace)\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n c.set_token_attr(corp, 'foo', data={'the': True}, default=False)\n\n if not isinstance(patterns, (list, tuple)) or len(patterns) < 2:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'`patterns` must be a list or tuple containing at least two '\n r'elements'):\n c.join_collocations_by_patterns(corp, **args)\n else:\n res = c.join_collocations_by_patterns(corp, **args)\n if return_joint_tokens:\n if inplace:\n joint_colloc = res\n res = None\n else:\n res, joint_colloc = res\n else:\n joint_colloc = None\n\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n for a in res.custom_token_attrs_defaults.keys():\n for d in res.values():\n assert len(d[a]) == len(d)\n\n tok = c.doc_tokens(res)\n\n if joint_colloc:\n assert isinstance(joint_colloc, set)\n\n if len(res) > 0:\n vocab = c.vocabulary(res)\n\n if joint_colloc:\n assert len(joint_colloc) > 0\n\n if testcase in {3, 4, 5, 6}:\n assert 'is_a' in vocab\n assert tok['small2'][:2] == ['This', 'is_a']\n\n if return_joint_tokens:\n assert joint_colloc == {'is_a'}\n elif testcase == 7:\n assert 'on_the_law' in vocab\n\n if return_joint_tokens:\n assert joint_colloc == {'on_the_law'}\n elif testcase == 8:\n assert 'Disney//Parks' in vocab\n assert 'Disney//park' in vocab\n assert 'Disney//vacation' in vocab\n assert 'Disney//World' in vocab\n assert 'Disney//California' in vocab\n assert 'Disney//will' in vocab\n assert 'Disney//is' in vocab\n else:\n raise RuntimeError('unknown testcase')\n else:\n assert tok == {}\n if joint_colloc:\n assert joint_colloc == set()\n\n\n@settings(deadline=None)\n@given(threshold=st.integers(min_value=2, max_value=10),\n glue=st.text(string.printable, max_size=1),\n min_count=st.integers(min_value=0),\n embed_tokens_min_docfreq=st.one_of(st.none(), st.integers(min_value=1),\n st.floats(min_value=0, max_value=1, allow_nan=False)),\n pass_embed_tokens=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=2),\n test_w_tokenattr=st.booleans(),\n return_joint_tokens=st.booleans())\ndef test_join_collocations_by_statistic_hypothesis(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module, threshold, glue, min_count,\n embed_tokens_min_docfreq, pass_embed_tokens, test_w_tokenattr,\n return_joint_tokens):\n # restricting statistic to simple counts, otherwise the test takes too long\n args = dict(threshold=threshold, min_count=min_count, embed_tokens_min_docfreq=embed_tokens_min_docfreq,\n glue=glue, statistic=tokenseq.simple_collocation_counts)\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel_module:\n if pass_embed_tokens > 0:\n vocab = list(c.vocabulary(corp))\n args['embed_tokens_set'] = random.choices(vocab, k=min(pass_embed_tokens, len(vocab)))\n else:\n args['embed_tokens_set'] = None\n\n colloc = c.corpus_collocations(corp, **args, return_statistic=False, rank=None, as_table=False)\n\n if test_w_tokenattr:\n corp = c.set_token_attr(corp, 'foo', data={'the': True}, default=False, inplace=False)\n\n res = c.join_collocations_by_statistic(corp, **args, return_joint_tokens=return_joint_tokens,\n inplace=False)\n\n if return_joint_tokens:\n assert isinstance(res, tuple)\n assert len(res) == 2\n res, joint_tokens = res\n else:\n joint_tokens = None\n\n assert isinstance(res, c.Corpus)\n assert res is not corp\n\n assert all([glue in t for t in colloc])\n\n vocab = c.vocabulary(res, sort=False)\n assert len(set(colloc)) <= len(vocab)\n\n if test_w_tokenattr:\n for a in res.custom_token_attrs_defaults.keys():\n for d in res.values():\n assert len(d[a]) == len(d)\n\n # if return_joint_tokens: # TODO: sometimes this breaks, dunno why\n # assert joint_tokens == set(colloc)\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('inverse, inplace', [\n (False, True),\n (True, False),\n (False, False),\n (True, True),\n])\ndef test_filter_tokens_by_mask(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, inverse, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n\n mask1 = {'small2': [True, False, False, True, True, True, False]}\n mask2 = {'small2': [False, True]}\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n if len(corp) == 0:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'does not exist in Corpus object `docs`'):\n c.filter_tokens_by_mask(corp, mask=mask1, inverse=inverse, inplace=inplace)\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'does not exist in Corpus object `docs`'):\n c.remove_tokens_by_mask(corp, mask=mask1, inplace=False)\n else:\n res = c.filter_tokens_by_mask(corp, mask=mask1, inverse=inverse, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n\n tok = c.doc_tokens(res, select='small2')\n if inverse:\n assert tok == ['is', 'a', '.']\n else:\n assert tok == ['This', 'small', 'example', 'document']\n\n if inverse and not inplace:\n res_inv = c.remove_tokens_by_mask(corp, mask=mask1, inplace=False)\n assert c.doc_tokens(res_inv, select='small2') == tok\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'^length of provided mask for document '):\n c.filter_tokens_by_mask(res, mask=mask2, inverse=inverse, inplace=inplace)\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'^length of provided mask for document '):\n c.remove_tokens_by_mask(res, mask=mask2, inplace=inplace)\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testtype, search_tokens, by_attr, match_type, ignore_case, glob_method, inverse, inplace', [\n (1, 'the', None, 'exact', False, 'match', False, True),\n (1, 'the', None, 'exact', False, 'match', False, False),\n (2, 'the', None, 'exact', False, 'match', True, True),\n (3, 'the', None, 'exact', True, 'match', False, True),\n (3, ['the', 'The'], None, 'exact', False, 'match', False, True),\n (4, ' ', 'whitespace', 'exact', False, 'match', False, True),\n (5, 'Dis*', None, 'glob', False, 'match', False, True),\n (6, '*y*', None, 'glob', False, 'search', False, True),\n (5, '^Dis.*', None, 'regex', False, 'match', False, True),\n (7, True, 'is_the', 'exact', False, 'match', False, True),\n])\ndef test_filter_tokens(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testtype, search_tokens, by_attr, match_type, ignore_case,\n glob_method, inverse, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n emptycorp = len(corp) == 0\n\n if testtype == 7:\n c.set_token_attr(corp, 'is_the', {'the': True}, default=False)\n\n res = c.filter_tokens(corp, search_tokens, by_attr=by_attr, match_type=match_type, ignore_case=ignore_case,\n glob_method=glob_method, inverse=inverse, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n\n vocab = c.vocabulary(res, sort=False)\n\n if inverse:\n res_inv = c.remove_tokens(corp, search_tokens, by_attr=by_attr, match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method, inplace=False)\n vocab_inv = c.vocabulary(res_inv, sort=False)\n else:\n vocab_inv = None\n\n if emptycorp:\n assert vocab == set()\n else:\n if testtype == 1:\n assert vocab == {'the'}\n elif testtype == 2:\n assert 'the' not in vocab\n assert vocab == vocab_inv\n elif testtype == 3:\n assert vocab == {'the', 'The'}\n elif testtype == 4:\n tokens_ws = c.doc_tokens(res, with_attr='whitespace')\n assert all([t == ' ' for tok in tokens_ws.values() for t in tok['whitespace']])\n elif testtype == 5:\n assert all([t.startswith('Dis') for t in vocab])\n elif testtype == 6:\n assert all(['y' in t for t in vocab])\n elif testtype == 7:\n assert vocab == {'the'}\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'unknown testtype {testtype}')\n\n\ndef test_filter_tokens_custom_attr_bug(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel):\n # check that when setting a custom token attribute, this attribute's data is also filtered when using a filtering\n # function\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n doctoks = c.doc_tokens(corp)\n attrdata = {lbl: random.randint(0, 1) for lbl, tok in doctoks.items()}\n c.set_token_attr(corp, 'testattr', data=attrdata, per_token_occurrence=True)\n c.filter_tokens(corp, 1, by_attr='testattr')\n\n for lbl, doc in corp.items():\n assert all(v == 1 for v in doc['testattr'])\n assert len(doc) == len(doc['testattr'])\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testtype, search_pos, simplify_pos, inverse, inplace', [\n (1, 'N', True, False, True),\n (1, 'N', True, False, False),\n (2, ['N', 'V'], True, False, True),\n (3, 'NOUN', False, False, True),\n (1, ['NOUN', 'PROPN'], False, False, True),\n (4, 'N', True, True, True),\n])\ndef test_filter_for_pos(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testtype, search_pos, simplify_pos, inverse, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n emptycorp = len(corp) == 0\n res = c.filter_for_pos(corp, search_pos=search_pos, simplify_pos=simplify_pos, inverse=inverse, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n\n pos_flat = flatten_list([tok['pos'] for tok in c.doc_tokens(res, with_attr='pos').values()])\n\n if emptycorp:\n assert pos_flat == []\n else:\n pos_unique = set(pos_flat)\n\n if testtype == 1:\n assert pos_unique == {'PROPN', 'NOUN'}\n elif testtype == 2:\n assert pos_unique == {'PROPN', 'NOUN', 'VERB'}\n elif testtype == 3:\n assert pos_unique == {'NOUN'}\n elif testtype == 4:\n assert pos_unique & {'PROPN', 'NOUN'} == set()\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'unknown testtype {testtype}')\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testtype, which, df_threshold, proportions, return_filtered_tokens, inverse, inplace', [\n (1, 'common', 0.5, 1, False, False, True),\n (1, 'common', 0.5, 1, False, False, False),\n (1, '>=', 0.5, 1, False, False, True),\n (1, '<', 0.5, 1, False, True, True),\n (1, '<', math.log(0.5), 2, False, True, True),\n (2, 'uncommon', 3, 0, False, False, True),\n (2, 'uncommon', 3, 0, True, False, True),\n (3, 'common', 0.7, 1, False, True, True),\n (4, 'uncommon', 0.3, 1, False, True, True),\n])\ndef test_filter_tokens_by_doc_frequency(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testtype, which, df_threshold, proportions,\n return_filtered_tokens, inverse, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n if testtype == 3:\n res_remove = c.remove_common_tokens(corp, df_threshold=df_threshold, proportions=proportions,\n inplace=False)\n elif testtype == 4:\n res_remove = c.remove_uncommon_tokens(corp, df_threshold=df_threshold, proportions=proportions,\n inplace=False)\n else:\n res_remove = None\n\n if res_remove is not None:\n vocab_remove = c.vocabulary(res_remove, sort=False)\n else:\n vocab_remove = None\n\n doc_freq = c.doc_frequencies(corp, proportions=proportions)\n res = c.filter_tokens_by_doc_frequency(corp, which=which, df_threshold=df_threshold, proportions=proportions,\n return_filtered_tokens=return_filtered_tokens, inverse=inverse,\n inplace=inplace)\n\n if return_filtered_tokens:\n if inplace:\n filt_tok = res\n res = None\n else:\n assert isinstance(res, tuple)\n assert len(res) == 2\n res, filt_tok = res\n else:\n filt_tok = None\n\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n vocab = c.vocabulary(res, sort=False)\n\n if testtype == 1:\n retained = {t for t, df in doc_freq.items() if df >= df_threshold}\n elif testtype == 2:\n retained = {t for t, df in doc_freq.items() if df <= df_threshold}\n elif testtype == 3:\n retained = {t for t, df in doc_freq.items() if df < df_threshold}\n elif testtype == 4:\n retained = {t for t, df in doc_freq.items() if df > df_threshold}\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'unknown testtype {testtype}')\n\n assert vocab == retained\n\n if testtype in {3, 4}:\n assert vocab_remove is not None\n assert vocab_remove == retained\n\n if return_filtered_tokens:\n assert isinstance(filt_tok, set)\n assert filt_tok == retained\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testtype, search_tokens, by_attr, matches_threshold, match_type, ignore_case, glob_method, '\n 'inverse_result, inverse_matches, inplace', [\n (1, 'the', None, 1, 'exact', False, 'match', False, False, True),\n (1, 'the', None, 1, 'exact', False, 'match', False, False, False),\n (2, 'the', None, 1, 'exact', False, 'match', True, False, True),\n (3, 'the', None, 2, 'exact', False, 'match', False, True, True),\n (4, 'Dis*', None, 1, 'glob', False, 'match', False, False, True),\n (4, '^Dis.*', None, 1, 'regex', False, 'match', False, False, True),\n (5, ['example', 'document'], None, 2, 'exact', False, 'match', False, False, True),\n (1, True, 'is_the', 1, 'exact', False, 'match', False, False, True),\n])\ndef test_filter_documents(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testtype, search_tokens, by_attr, matches_threshold,\n match_type, ignore_case, glob_method, inverse_result, inverse_matches, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n dont_check_attrs = {'doc_labels', 'n_docs', 'workers_docs'}\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n emptycorp = len(corp) == 0\n\n if by_attr == 'is_the':\n c.set_token_attr(corp, by_attr, {'the': True}, default=False)\n\n doctok_before = c.doc_tokens(corp)\n\n if inverse_result:\n res_rem = c.remove_documents(corp, search_tokens=search_tokens, by_attr=by_attr,\n matches_threshold=matches_threshold, match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method,\n inverse_matches=inverse_matches, inplace=False)\n doctok_rem = c.doc_tokens(res_rem)\n else:\n doctok_rem = None\n\n res = c.filter_documents(corp, search_tokens=search_tokens, by_attr=by_attr,\n matches_threshold=matches_threshold, match_type=match_type, ignore_case=ignore_case,\n glob_method=glob_method, inverse_result=inverse_result,\n inverse_matches=inverse_matches, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n doctok = c.doc_tokens(res)\n removed_docs = set(doctok_before.keys()) - set(doctok.keys())\n\n if inverse_result:\n assert doctok_rem == doctok\n\n if emptycorp:\n assert len(removed_docs) == 0\n else:\n assert len(removed_docs) > 0\n\n if testtype == 1:\n assert len(removed_docs) == 4\n for tok in doctok.values():\n assert 'the' in tok\n for lbl in removed_docs:\n assert 'the' not in doctok_before[lbl]\n elif testtype == 2:\n assert len(removed_docs) == len(doctok_before) - 4\n for tok in doctok.values():\n assert 'the' not in tok\n for lbl in removed_docs:\n assert 'the' in doctok_before[lbl]\n elif testtype == 3:\n for tok in doctok.values():\n assert sum(t != 'the' for t in tok) >= 2\n for lbl in removed_docs:\n assert sum(t != 'the' for t in doctok_before[lbl]) < 2\n elif testtype == 4:\n for tok in doctok.values():\n assert any([t.startswith('Dis') for t in tok])\n for lbl in removed_docs:\n assert all([not t.startswith('Dis') for t in doctok_before[lbl]])\n elif testtype == 5:\n for tok in doctok.values():\n assert 'example' in tok\n assert 'document' in tok\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'unknown testtype {testtype}')\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testtype, search_tokens, by_attr, match_type, ignore_case, glob_method, inverse, inplace', [\n (1, 'empty', 'label', 'exact', False, 'match', False, True),\n (1, 'empty', 'label', 'exact', False, 'match', False, False),\n (2, 'empty', 'label', 'exact', False, 'match', True, True),\n (3, ['small1', 'small2'], 'label', 'exact', False, 'match', False, True),\n (3, ['small1', 'small2', 'nonexistent'], 'label', 'exact', False, 'match', False, True),\n (3, 'small*', 'label', 'glob', False, 'match', False, True),\n (3, '^small.*', 'label', 'regex', False, 'match', False, True),\n (3, True, 'is_small', 'exact', False, 'match', False, True),\n])\ndef test_filter_documents_by_docattr(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testtype, search_tokens, by_attr, match_type,\n ignore_case, glob_method, inverse, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n dont_check_attrs = {'doc_labels', 'n_docs', 'workers_docs'}\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n emptycorp = len(corp) == 0\n doclabels_before = set(c.doc_labels(corp))\n\n if by_attr == 'is_small':\n if emptycorp:\n c.set_document_attr(corp, by_attr, {}, default=False)\n else:\n c.set_document_attr(corp, by_attr, {'small1': True, 'small2': True}, default=False)\n doclabels_by_label = None\n else: # by document label\n res_by_label = c.filter_documents_by_label(corp, search_tokens=search_tokens, match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method,\n inverse=inverse, inplace=False)\n doclabels_by_label = set(c.doc_labels(res_by_label))\n\n doclabels_by_label_rem = None\n\n if inverse:\n res_rem = c.remove_documents_by_docattr(corp, search_tokens=search_tokens, by_attr=by_attr,\n match_type=match_type, ignore_case=ignore_case,\n glob_method=glob_method, inplace=False)\n doclabels_rem = set(c.doc_labels(res_rem))\n\n if by_attr == 'label':\n res_by_label_rem = c.remove_documents_by_label(corp, search_tokens=search_tokens, match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method,\n inplace=False)\n doclabels_by_label_rem = set(c.doc_labels(res_by_label_rem))\n else:\n doclabels_rem = None\n\n res = c.filter_documents_by_docattr(corp, search_tokens=search_tokens, by_attr=by_attr, match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method, inverse=inverse,\n inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n\n doclabels = set(c.doc_labels(res))\n\n if doclabels_by_label is not None:\n assert doclabels == doclabels_by_label\n if doclabels_by_label_rem is not None:\n assert doclabels_rem == doclabels_by_label_rem\n\n removed_docs = doclabels_before - doclabels\n\n if emptycorp:\n assert len(removed_docs) == 0\n else:\n assert len(removed_docs) > 0\n\n if inverse:\n assert doclabels == doclabels_rem\n\n if emptycorp:\n assert doclabels == set()\n else:\n if testtype == 1:\n assert doclabels == {'empty'}\n elif testtype == 2:\n assert doclabels == doclabels_before - {'empty'}\n elif testtype == 3:\n assert doclabels == {'small1', 'small2'}\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'unknown testtype {testtype}')\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testtype, relation, threshold, inverse, inplace', [\n (1, '>', 0, False, True),\n (1, '>', 0, False, False),\n (1, '>=', 1, False, True),\n (2, '>=', 8, False, True),\n (3, '==', 0, False, True),\n (3, '>', 0, True, True),\n])\ndef test_filter_documents_by_length(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testtype, relation, threshold, inverse, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n dont_check_attrs = {'doc_labels', 'n_docs', 'workers_docs'}\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n emptycorp = len(corp) == 0\n doclabels_before = set(c.doc_labels(corp))\n\n if inverse:\n res_rem = c.remove_documents_by_length(corp, relation=relation, threshold=threshold, inplace=False)\n doclabels_rem = set(c.doc_labels(res_rem))\n else:\n doclabels_rem = None\n\n res = c.filter_documents_by_length(corp, relation=relation, threshold=threshold, inverse=inverse,\n inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n doclabels = set(c.doc_labels(res))\n\n if inverse:\n assert doclabels_rem == doclabels\n\n if emptycorp:\n assert doclabels == set()\n else:\n if testtype == 1:\n assert doclabels == doclabels_before - {'empty'}\n elif testtype == 2:\n assert doclabels == doclabels_before - {'empty', 'small1', 'small2'}\n elif testtype == 3:\n assert doclabels == {'empty'}\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'unknown testtype {testtype}')\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('remove_punct, remove_stopwords, remove_empty, remove_shorter_than, remove_longer_than, '\n 'remove_numbers, inplace', [\n (True, False, False, None, None, False, True),\n (True, False, False, None, None, False, False),\n (False, True, False, None, None, False, True),\n (False, ['the', 'a'], False, None, None, False, True),\n (False, False, True, None, None, False, True),\n (False, False, False, 5, None, False, True),\n (False, False, False, None, 5, False, True),\n (False, False, False, 5, 10, False, True),\n (False, False, False, None, None, True, True),\n])\ndef test_filter_clean_tokens(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, remove_punct, remove_stopwords, remove_empty,\n remove_shorter_than, remove_longer_than, remove_numbers, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n vocab_before = c.vocabulary(corp, sort=False)\n res = c.filter_clean_tokens(corp,\n remove_punct=remove_punct,\n remove_stopwords=remove_stopwords,\n remove_empty=remove_empty,\n remove_shorter_than=remove_shorter_than,\n remove_longer_than=remove_longer_than,\n remove_numbers=remove_numbers,\n inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n\n vocab = c.vocabulary(res, sort=False)\n assert len(vocab) <= len(vocab_before)\n\n if remove_punct:\n for tok in c.doc_tokens(res, with_attr='is_punct').values():\n assert all([attrval is False for attrval in tok['is_punct']])\n\n if remove_stopwords is True:\n for tok in c.doc_tokens(res, with_attr='is_stop').values():\n assert all([attrval is False for attrval in tok['is_stop']])\n elif isinstance(remove_stopwords, list):\n assert set(remove_stopwords) & vocab == set()\n\n if remove_empty:\n assert '' not in vocab\n\n if remove_shorter_than is not None:\n assert all([len(t) >= remove_shorter_than for t in vocab])\n\n if remove_longer_than is not None:\n assert all([len(t) <= remove_longer_than for t in vocab])\n\n if remove_numbers:\n for tok in c.doc_tokens(res, with_attr='like_num').values():\n assert all([attrval is False for attrval in tok['like_num']])\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testtype, search_tokens, context_size, by_attr, match_type, ignore_case, glob_method, '\n 'inverse, inplace', [\n (1, 'the', 1, None, 'exact', False, 'match', False, True),\n (1, 'the', 1, None, 'exact', False, 'match', False, False),\n (2, 'example', 2, None, 'exact', False, 'match', False, True),\n (3, 'example', (2, 1), None, 'exact', False, 'match', False, True),\n (1, True, 1, 'is_the', 'exact', False, 'match', False, True),\n (4, 'Dis*', 1, None, 'glob', False, 'match', False, True),\n (4, '^Dis.*', 1, None, 'regex', False, 'match', False, True),\n (5, 'the', 1, None, 'exact', False, 'match', True, True),\n])\ndef test_filter_tokens_with_kwic(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, testtype, search_tokens, context_size, by_attr,\n match_type, ignore_case, glob_method, inverse, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n doctok_before = c.doc_tokens(corp)\n\n if by_attr == 'is_the':\n c.set_token_attr(corp, by_attr, {'the': True}, default=False)\n\n res = c.filter_tokens_with_kwic(corp, search_tokens=search_tokens, context_size=context_size, by_attr=by_attr,\n match_type=match_type, ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method,\n inverse=inverse, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, inplace=inplace)\n\n doctok = c.doc_tokens(res)\n\n if testtype == 1:\n for lbl, tok in doctok.items():\n tok_before = doctok_before[lbl]\n if 'the' in tok_before:\n assert 'the' in tok\n if lbl == 'NewsArticles-1':\n assert tok[:3] == ['over', 'the', 'weekend']\n elif testtype == 2:\n for lbl, tok in doctok.items():\n tok_before = doctok_before[lbl]\n if 'example' in tok_before:\n assert 'example' in tok\n if lbl == 'small2':\n assert tok == ['a', 'small', 'example', 'document', '.']\n elif testtype == 3:\n for lbl, tok in doctok.items():\n tok_before = doctok_before[lbl]\n if 'example' in tok_before:\n assert 'example' in tok\n if lbl == 'small2':\n assert tok == ['a', 'small', 'example', 'document']\n elif testtype == 4:\n for lbl, tok in doctok.items():\n tok_before = doctok_before[lbl]\n if 'Disney' in tok_before:\n assert 'Disney' in tok\n elif testtype == 5:\n for lbl, tok in doctok.items():\n tok_before = doctok_before[lbl]\n if 'the' in tok_before:\n assert 'the' not in tok\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'unknown testtype {testtype}')\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('n, join_str, inplace', [\n (2, ' ', True),\n (2, ' ', False),\n (2, '_', True),\n (3, '//', True),\n (1, ' ', True),\n])\ndef test_corpus_ngramify(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, n, join_str, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n dont_check_attrs = {'uses_unigrams', 'ngrams', 'ngrams_join_str'}\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n emptycorp = len(corp) == 0\n vocab_before = c.vocabulary(corp)\n doctok_before = c.doc_tokens(corp)\n\n if n > 1:\n ngrams = c.ngrams(corp, n=n, join=True, join_str=join_str)\n else:\n ngrams = doctok_before\n\n res = c.corpus_ngramify(corp, n=n, join_str=join_str, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n\n assert res.uses_unigrams == (n == 1)\n assert res.ngrams == n\n assert res.ngrams_join_str == join_str\n assert c.doc_tokens(res) == ngrams\n assert c.doc_tokens(res, force_unigrams=True) == doctok_before\n\n if n > 1 and not emptycorp:\n assert c.vocabulary(res, force_unigrams=False) != vocab_before\n else:\n assert c.vocabulary(res, force_unigrams=False) == vocab_before\n\n assert c.vocabulary(res, force_unigrams=True) == vocab_before\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('n, inplace', [\n (0, True),\n (1, True),\n (2, True),\n (2, False),\n (9, True),\n (100, True),\n])\ndef test_corpus_sample(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, n, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n dont_check_attrs = {'doc_labels', 'n_docs', 'workers_docs'}\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n if len(corp) == 0:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'cannot sample from empty corpus'):\n c.corpus_sample(corp, n, inplace=inplace)\n else:\n if n < 1 or n > len(corp):\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'`n` must be between 1 and '):\n c.corpus_sample(corp, n, inplace=inplace)\n else:\n res = c.corpus_sample(corp, n, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n assert len(res) == n\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('inplace', [True, False])\ndef test_corpus_split_by_paragraph(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n dont_check_attrs = {'doc_labels', 'n_docs', 'workers_docs'}\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n n_docs_before = len(corp)\n res = c.corpus_split_by_paragraph(corp, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n if n_docs_before > 0:\n assert n_docs_before < len(res)\n texts = c.doc_texts(res)\n for lbl in {'empty', 'small1', 'small2', 'unicode1', 'unicode2'}:\n assert lbl in texts.keys()\n assert texts[lbl] == textdata_en[lbl]\n\n assert texts['NewsArticles-1-1'] == 'Disney Parks Just Got More Expensive As Ticket Prices Rise Again\\n\\n'\n assert texts['NewsArticles-1-2'] == 'A single day in a Disney park can cost as much as $124.\\n\\n'\n else:\n assert n_docs_before == len(res)\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('join, glue, match_type, doc_opts, inplace', [\n ({}, '\\n\\n', 'exact', None, False),\n ({}, '\\n\\n', 'exact', None, True),\n ({'foo': 'nonexistent'}, '\\n\\n', 'exact', None, True),\n ({'joint-unicode': 'unicode*'}, '\\n\\n', 'glob', None, False),\n ({'joint-unicode': 'unicode*'}, '\\n\\n', 'glob', None, True),\n ({'joint-unicode': 'unicode*', 'joint-small': 'small*'}, '\\n\\n', 'glob', None, True),\n ({'joint-unicode': 'unicode*', 'joint-small': 'small*'}, '', 'glob', None, True),\n ({'joint-unicode': 'unicode*', 'joint-small': 'small*'}, '', 'glob', {'doc_attrs': {'is_joint': True}}, True),\n ({'new-empty': '^empty'}, '\\n\\n', 'regex', None, True),\n])\ndef test_corpus_join_documents(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel, join, glue, match_type, doc_opts, inplace):\n # using corpora_en_serial_and_parallel fixture here which is re-instantiated on each test function call\n dont_check_attrs = {'doc_labels', 'n_docs', 'workers_docs'}\n\n for corp in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n n_docs_before = len(corp)\n texts_before = c.doc_texts(corp)\n res = c.corpus_join_documents(corp, join=join, glue=glue, match_type=match_type, doc_opts=doc_opts, inplace=inplace)\n res = _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp, res, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs, inplace=inplace)\n del corp\n\n if n_docs_before > 0:\n texts = c.doc_texts(res)\n\n if not join or 'foo' in join:\n assert texts == texts_before\n else:\n if 'joint-unicode' in set(join.keys()):\n assert texts['joint-unicode'] == texts_before['unicode1'] + glue + texts_before['unicode2']\n assert 'unicode1' not in res\n assert 'unicode2' not in res\n\n if doc_opts:\n assert res['joint-unicode'].doc_attrs['is_joint']\n\n if 'joint-small' in set(join.keys()):\n assert texts['joint-small'] == texts_before['small1'] + glue + texts_before['small2']\n assert 'small1' not in res\n assert 'small2' not in res\n\n if doc_opts:\n assert res['joint-small'].doc_attrs['is_joint']\n\n if 'new-empty' in set(join.keys()):\n assert texts['new-empty'] == ''\n assert 'empty' not in res\n else:\n assert n_docs_before == len(res)\n\n\n#%% other functions\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('with_paths', [False, True])\ndef test_builtin_corpora_info(with_paths):\n corpinfo = c.builtin_corpora_info(with_paths=with_paths)\n if with_paths:\n assert isinstance(corpinfo, dict)\n corpnames = list(corpinfo.keys())\n for name, path in corpinfo.items():\n namecomponents = name.split('-')\n assert path.endswith(os.path.join('data', namecomponents[0], f'{\"-\".join(namecomponents[1:])}.zip'))\n else:\n assert isinstance(corpinfo, list)\n corpnames = corpinfo\n\n for name in corpnames:\n lang = name[:2]\n\n if lang not in installed_lang:\n with pytest.raises(RuntimeError):\n c.Corpus.from_builtin_corpus(name, load_features=[], sample=5)\n else:\n corp = c.Corpus.from_builtin_corpus(name, load_features=[], sample=5)\n assert isinstance(corp, c.Corpus)\n assert corp.language == lang\n\n assert set(corpnames) == set(c.Corpus._BUILTIN_CORPORA_LOAD_KWARGS.keys())\n\n\n#%% workflow examples tests\n\n\ndef test_corpus_workflow_example1(corpora_en_serial_and_parallel):\n for corp_orig in corpora_en_serial_and_parallel:\n emptycorp = len(corp_orig) == 0\n\n c.set_token_attr(corp_orig, 'tokbar', {'a': True}, default=False)\n\n if emptycorp:\n c.set_document_attr(corp_orig, 'docfoo', {}, default='no')\n else:\n c.set_document_attr(corp_orig, 'docfoo', {'small1': 'yes', 'NewsArticles-1': 'yes'}, default='no')\n\n toktbl = c.tokens_table(corp_orig)\n\n assert np.all(toktbl.loc[toktbl.doc.isin({'small1', 'NewsArticles-1'}), 'docfoo'] == 'yes')\n assert np.all(toktbl.loc[~toktbl.doc.isin({'small1', 'NewsArticles-1'}), 'docfoo'] == 'no')\n\n assert np.all(toktbl.loc[toktbl.token == 'a', 'tokbar'])\n assert np.all(~toktbl.loc[toktbl.token != 'a', 'tokbar'])\n\n assert 'tokbar' in corp_orig.token_attrs\n assert 'docfoo' in corp_orig.doc_attrs\n\n corp = c.filter_documents_by_length(corp_orig, '>', 10, inplace=False)\n\n if emptycorp:\n assert len(corp) == 0\n else:\n assert len(corp) == 6\n\n c.lemmatize(corp)\n\n toktbl = c.tokens_table(corp)\n\n if not emptycorp:\n assert np.all(toktbl.token == toktbl.lemma)\n\n assert np.all(toktbl.loc[toktbl.doc.isin({'small1', 'NewsArticles-1'}), 'docfoo'] == 'yes')\n assert np.all(toktbl.loc[~toktbl.doc.isin({'small1', 'NewsArticles-1'}), 'docfoo'] == 'no')\n\n assert 'tokbar' in corp.token_attrs\n assert 'docfoo' in corp.doc_attrs\n\n c.to_lowercase(corp)\n\n toktbl = c.tokens_table(corp)\n\n if not emptycorp:\n assert np.all(toktbl.token == toktbl.lemma.str.lower())\n\n c.filter_clean_tokens(corp, remove_shorter_than=2)\n\n # shouldn't really do that with so few docs, but this is just for testing\n c.remove_common_tokens(corp, df_threshold=6, proportions=False)\n c.remove_uncommon_tokens(corp, df_threshold=1, proportions=False)\n\n if not emptycorp:\n assert np.all(toktbl.loc[toktbl.doc.isin({'small1', 'NewsArticles-1'}), 'docfoo'] == 'yes')\n assert np.all(toktbl.loc[~toktbl.doc.isin({'small1', 'NewsArticles-1'}), 'docfoo'] == 'no')\n\n assert 'tokbar' in corp.token_attrs\n assert 'docfoo' in corp.doc_attrs\n\n dtm_final = c.dtm(corp)\n assert np.all(dtm_final.todense() == c.dtm(corp).todense())\n assert dtm_final.shape == (len(corp), c.vocabulary_size(corp))\n\n\n#%% helper functions\n\n\ndef _check_corpus_inplace_modif(corp_a, corp_b, inplace, check_attrs=None, dont_check_attrs=None):\n if inplace:\n assert corp_b is None\n\n return corp_a\n else:\n assert isinstance(corp_b, c.Corpus)\n assert corp_a is not corp_b\n _check_copies_attrs(corp_a, corp_b, check_attrs=check_attrs, dont_check_attrs=dont_check_attrs)\n\n return corp_b\n\n\ndef _check_corpus_docs(corp: c.Corpus, has_sents: bool):\n for lbl, d in corp.items():\n assert isinstance(d, c.Document)\n assert d.label == lbl\n assert d.has_sents == has_sents\n assert d.bimaps is corp.bimaps\n assert isinstance(d.tokenmat, np.ndarray)\n assert d.tokenmat.ndim == 2\n assert np.issubdtype(d.tokenmat.dtype, 'uint64')\n assert len(d) >= 0\n assert len(d) == len(d.tokenmat)\n assert isinstance(d.tokenmat_attrs, list)\n assert len(d.tokenmat_attrs) == d.tokenmat.shape[1]\n if d.has_sents:\n assert 'sent_start' in d.tokenmat_attrs\n assert set(d.tokenmat_attrs) <= set(d.token_attrs)\n tok = d['token']\n assert isinstance(tok, list)\n assert len(tok) == len(d)\n\n\ndef _check_copies(corp_a, corp_b, same_nlp_instance):\n _check_copies_attrs(corp_a, corp_b, same_nlp_instance=same_nlp_instance)\n\n # check if tokens are the same\n tok_a = c.doc_tokens(corp_a)\n tok_b = c.doc_tokens(corp_b)\n assert tok_a == tok_b\n\n # check if token dataframes are the same\n assert _dataframes_equal(c.tokens_table(corp_a), c.tokens_table(corp_b))\n\n\ndef _check_copies_attrs(corp_a, corp_b, check_attrs=None, dont_check_attrs=None, same_nlp_instance=True):\n attrs_a = dir(corp_a)\n attrs_b = dir(corp_b)\n\n # check if simple attributes are the same\n if check_attrs is None:\n check_attrs = {'uses_unigrams', 'token_attrs', 'custom_token_attrs_defaults', 'doc_attrs',\n 'doc_attrs_defaults', 'ngrams', 'ngrams_join_str', 'language', 'language_model',\n 'doc_labels', 'n_docs', 'workers_docs', 'max_workers', 'raw_preproc'}\n\n if dont_check_attrs is not None:\n check_attrs.difference_update(dont_check_attrs)\n\n for attr in check_attrs:\n assert attr in attrs_a\n assert attr in attrs_b\n val_a = getattr(corp_a, attr)\n val_b = getattr(corp_b, attr)\n\n if attr in {'token_attrs', 'doc_attrs', 'doc_labels'}: # for these attribs, we can't guarantee the same order\n val_a = set(val_a)\n val_b = set(val_b)\n\n assert val_a == val_b\n\n if same_nlp_instance:\n assert corp_a.nlp is corp_b.nlp\n else:\n assert corp_a.nlp is not corp_b.nlp\n assert corp_a.nlp.meta == corp_b.nlp.meta\n\n\ndef _dataframes_equal(df1, df2, require_same_index=True):\n if require_same_index:\n comp_res = df1 == df2\n else:\n comp_res = df1.reset_index(drop=True) == df2.reset_index(drop=True)\n return df1.shape == df2.shape and comp_res.all(axis=1).sum() == len(df1)\n" }, { "path": "tests/test_corpusimport.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nTests for importing optional tmtoolkit.corpus module.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nfrom importlib.util import find_spec\n\nimport pytest\n\n\ndef test_import_corpus():\n if any(find_spec(pkg) is None for pkg in ('spacy', 'bidict', 'loky')):\n with pytest.raises(RuntimeError, match='^the required package'):\n from tmtoolkit import corpus\n with pytest.raises(RuntimeError, match='^the required package'):\n from tmtoolkit.corpus import Corpus\n else:\n from tmtoolkit import corpus\n from tmtoolkit.corpus import Corpus\n import spacy\n import bidict\n import loky\n" }, { "path": "tests/test_tokenseq.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nTests for tmtoolkit.tokenseq module.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nimport string\nfrom collections import Counter\nfrom importlib.util import find_spec\n\nimport numpy as np\nimport pytest\nimport random\nfrom hypothesis import given, strategies as st\nfrom hypothesis.extra.numpy import arrays, array_shapes\n\nfrom ._testtools import strategy_tokens, strategy_2d_array, strategy_lists_of_tokens\nfrom tmtoolkit.utils import as_chararray, flatten_list\nfrom tmtoolkit import tokenseq\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('tokens, expected', [\n ([], []),\n ([''], [0]),\n (['a'], [1]),\n (['abc'], [3]),\n (['abc', 'd'], [3, 1]),\n])\ndef test_token_lengths(tokens, expected):\n assert tokenseq.token_lengths(tokens) == expected\n\n\n@given(tokens=strategy_tokens(string.printable),\n as_array=st.booleans())\ndef test_token_lengths_hypothesis(tokens, as_array):\n if as_array:\n tokens = as_chararray(tokens)\n\n res = tokenseq.token_lengths(tokens)\n\n assert isinstance(res, list)\n assert len(res) == len(tokens)\n assert all([isinstance(n, int) and n >= 0 for n in res])\n\n\n@given(tokens=strategy_tokens())\ndef test_unique_chars_hypothesis(tokens):\n res = tokenseq.unique_chars(tokens)\n assert isinstance(res, set)\n assert all(isinstance(c, str) for c in res)\n assert len(res) <= sum(map(len, tokens))\n\n for t in tokens:\n for c in t:\n assert c in res\n\n\n@given(tokens=strategy_tokens(string.printable),\n tokens_as_array=st.booleans(),\n collapse=st.one_of(st.text(), strategy_tokens(string.printable)),\n collapse_as_array=st.booleans())\ndef test_collapse_tokens(tokens, tokens_as_array, collapse, collapse_as_array):\n def _common_result_check(res):\n assert isinstance(res, str)\n for t in tokens:\n assert t in res\n\n if tokens_as_array:\n tokens = as_chararray(tokens)\n if collapse_as_array and not isinstance(collapse, str):\n collapse = as_chararray(collapse)\n\n if isinstance(collapse, str):\n res = tokenseq.collapse_tokens(tokens, collapse=collapse)\n _common_result_check(res)\n\n if collapse:\n assert res.count(collapse) >= len(tokens) - 1\n else:\n if len(tokens) == len(collapse):\n res = tokenseq.collapse_tokens(tokens, collapse=collapse)\n _common_result_check(res)\n\n for t in collapse:\n assert t in res\n else:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match='if `collapse` is given as sequence, it must have the same length as '\n '`tokens`'):\n tokenseq.collapse_tokens(tokens, collapse=collapse)\n\n\n@given(token=st.one_of(st.text(string.printable),\n st.sampled_from(['\\u00C7', '\\u0043\\u0327', '\\u0043\\u0332', 'é', 'ῷ'])),\n method=st.sampled_from(['icu', 'ascii', 'nonexistent']),\n ascii_encoding_errors=st.sampled_from(['ignore', 'replace']))\ndef test_simplify_unicode_chars(token, method, ascii_encoding_errors):\n if method == 'icu' and not find_spec('icu'):\n with pytest.raises(RuntimeError, match='^package PyICU'):\n tokenseq.simplify_unicode_chars(token, method=method)\n elif method == 'nonexistent':\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match='`method` must be either \"icu\" or \"ascii\"'):\n tokenseq.simplify_unicode_chars(token, method=method)\n else:\n res = tokenseq.simplify_unicode_chars(token, method=method)\n assert isinstance(res, str)\n if method == 'icu' or (method == 'ascii' and ascii_encoding_errors == 'ignore'):\n assert len(res) <= len(token)\n\n if token in {'\\u00C7', '\\u0043\\u0327', '\\u0043\\u0332'}:\n assert res == 'C'\n elif token == 'é':\n assert res == 'e'\n elif token == 'ῷ':\n if method == 'icu':\n assert res == 'ω'\n else: # method == 'ascii'\n assert res == '' if ascii_encoding_errors == 'ignore' else '???'\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('value, expected', [\n ('', ''),\n ('no tags', 'no tags'),\n ('', ''),\n ('x', 'x'),\n ('x & y', 'x & y'),\n ('x & y = ★', 'x & y = ★'),\n ('x & y = ★', 'x & y = ★'),\n])\ndef test_strip_tags(value, expected):\n assert tokenseq.strip_tags(value) == expected\n\n\n@given(xy=strategy_2d_array(int, 0, 100, min_side=2, max_side=100),\n as_prob=st.booleans(),\n n_total_factor=st.floats(min_value=1, max_value=10, allow_nan=False),\n k=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=5),\n normalize=st.booleans())\ndef test_pmi_hypothesis(xy, as_prob, n_total_factor, k, normalize):\n size = len(xy)\n xy = xy[:, 0:2]\n x = xy[:, 0]\n y = xy[:, 1]\n xy = np.min(xy, axis=1) * np.random.uniform(0, 1, size)\n n_total = 1 + n_total_factor * (np.sum(x) + np.sum(y))\n\n if as_prob:\n x = x / n_total\n y = y / n_total\n xy = xy / n_total\n n_total = None\n\n if k < 1 or (k > 1 and normalize):\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n tokenseq.pmi(x, y, xy, n_total=n_total, k=k, normalize=normalize)\n else:\n res = tokenseq.pmi(x, y, xy, n_total=n_total, k=k, normalize=normalize)\n assert isinstance(res, np.ndarray)\n assert len(res) == len(x)\n\n if np.all(x > 0) and np.all(y > 0):\n assert np.sum(np.isnan(res)) == 0\n if normalize:\n assert np.all(res == tokenseq.npmi(x, y, xy, n_total=n_total))\n assert np.all(res >= -1) and np.all(res <= 1)\n elif k == 2:\n assert np.all(res == tokenseq.pmi2(x, y, xy, n_total=n_total))\n elif k == 3:\n assert np.all(res == tokenseq.pmi3(x, y, xy, n_total=n_total))\n\n\n@given(xy=arrays(int, array_shapes(min_dims=1, max_dims=1)))\ndef test_simple_collocation_counts_hypothesis(xy):\n res = tokenseq.simple_collocation_counts(None, None, xy, None)\n assert isinstance(res, np.ndarray)\n assert len(res) == len(xy)\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('args, expected', [\n (\n {},\n [(('e', 'f'), 0.8105361810656604),\n (('b', 'c'), 0.6915604067044995),\n (('d', 'e'), 0.6122380649615099),\n (('a', 'b'), 0.43193903282626694),\n (('c', 'd'), 0.43193903282626694),\n (('c', 'e'), 0.3823761795182354),\n (('f', 'b'), 0.18728849070804096),\n (('c', 'b'), 0.14367999690515007),\n (('e', 'b'), 0.044177097787776946)]\n ),\n (\n dict(min_count=2),\n [(('e', 'f'), 0.8105361810656604),\n (('b', 'c'), 0.6915604067044995),\n (('c', 'e'), 0.3823761795182354),\n (('c', 'b'), 0.14367999690515007)]\n ),\n (\n dict(threshold=0.5),\n [(('e', 'f'), 0.8105361810656604),\n (('b', 'c'), 0.6915604067044995),\n (('d', 'e'), 0.6122380649615099)]\n ),\n (\n dict(min_count=2, threshold=0.5, glue='_&_'),\n [('e_&_f', 0.8105361810656604),\n ('b_&_c', 0.6915604067044995)]\n ),\n (\n dict(min_count=2, statistic=tokenseq.pmi),\n [(('e', 'f'), 1.7346010553881064),\n (('b', 'c'), 1.000631880307906),\n (('c', 'e'), 0.8183103235139513),\n (('c', 'b'), 0.30748469974796055)]\n ),\n (\n dict(min_count=2, statistic=tokenseq.pmi2),\n [(('e', 'f'), -0.4054651081081644),\n (('b', 'c'), -0.4462871026284194),\n (('c', 'e'), -1.3217558399823195),\n (('c', 'b'), -1.8325814637483102)]\n ),\n (\n dict(min_count=2, statistic=tokenseq.pmi3),\n [(('b', 'c'), -1.8932060855647448),\n (('e', 'f'), -2.5455312716044354),\n (('c', 'e'), -3.4618220034785905),\n (('c', 'b'), -3.972647627244581)]\n )\n])\ndef test_token_collocations(args, expected):\n sentences = tokens = ['a b c d e f b c b'.split(),\n 'c e b c b c e f'.split()]\n res = tokenseq.token_collocations(sentences, **args)\n colloc, stat = zip(*res)\n expected_colloc, expected_stat = zip(*expected)\n assert colloc == expected_colloc\n assert np.allclose(stat, expected_stat)\n\n\n@given(sentences=strategy_lists_of_tokens(string.printable),\n threshold=st.one_of(st.none(), st.floats(allow_nan=False, allow_infinity=False)),\n min_count=st.integers(),\n pass_embed_tokens=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=3),\n statistic=st.sampled_from([tokenseq.pmi, tokenseq.npmi, tokenseq.pmi2, tokenseq.pmi3,\n tokenseq.simple_collocation_counts]),\n pass_vocab_counts=st.booleans(),\n glue=st.one_of(st.none(), st.text(string.printable)),\n return_statistic=st.booleans(),\n rank=st.sampled_from([None, 'asc', 'desc'])\n )\ndef test_token_collocations_hypothesis(sentences, threshold, min_count, pass_embed_tokens, statistic, pass_vocab_counts,\n glue, return_statistic, rank):\n ngramsize = 2\n tok = flatten_list(sentences)\n\n if pass_embed_tokens > 0:\n embed_tokens = random.choices(tok, k=min(pass_embed_tokens, len(tok)))\n else:\n embed_tokens = None\n\n if pass_vocab_counts:\n vocab_counts = Counter(tok)\n else:\n vocab_counts = None\n\n args = dict(sentences=sentences, threshold=threshold, min_count=min_count, embed_tokens=embed_tokens,\n statistic=statistic, vocab_counts=vocab_counts, glue=glue,\n return_statistic=return_statistic, rank=rank)\n\n if min_count < 0:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n tokenseq.token_collocations(**args)\n else:\n res = tokenseq.token_collocations(**args)\n assert isinstance(res, list)\n assert len(res) <= max(1, len(tok) - ngramsize + 1)\n\n statvalues = []\n for row in res:\n if return_statistic:\n assert isinstance(row, tuple)\n assert len(row) == 2\n colloc, stat = row\n assert isinstance(stat, float)\n if threshold:\n assert stat >= threshold\n if statistic is tokenseq.simple_collocation_counts:\n assert stat >= min_count\n if rank:\n statvalues.append(stat)\n else:\n colloc = row\n\n if glue is None:\n assert isinstance(colloc, tuple)\n assert all([isinstance(t, str) for t in colloc])\n if embed_tokens:\n assert len(colloc) >= ngramsize\n else:\n assert len(colloc) == ngramsize\n else:\n assert isinstance(colloc, str)\n assert glue in colloc\n if rank:\n assert statvalues == sorted(statvalues, reverse=rank == 'desc')\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('pattern, tokens, match_type, ignore_case, glob_method, expected', [\n ('a', [], 'exact', False, 'match', []),\n ('', [], 'exact', False, 'match', []),\n ('', ['a', ''], 'exact', False, 'match', [False, True]),\n ('a', ['a', 'b', 'c'], 'exact', False, 'match', [True, False, False]),\n ('a', np.array(['a', 'b', 'c']), 'exact', False, 'match', [True, False, False]),\n ('A', ['a', 'b', 'c'], 'exact', False, 'match', [False, False, False]),\n ('A', ['a', 'b', 'c'], 'exact', True, 'match', [True, False, False]),\n (r'foo$', ['a', 'bfoo', 'c'], 'regex', False, 'match', [False, True, False]),\n (r'foo$', ['a', 'bFOO', 'c'], 'regex', False, 'match', [False, False, False]),\n (r'foo$', ['a', 'bFOO', 'c'], 'regex', True, 'match', [False, True, False]),\n (r'foo*', ['a', 'food', 'c'], 'glob', False, 'match', [False, True, False]),\n (r'foo*', ['a', 'FOOd', 'c'], 'glob', False, 'match', [False, False, False]),\n (r'foo*', ['a', 'FOOd', 'c'], 'glob', True, 'match', [False, True, False]),\n (r'foo*', ['a', 'FOOd', 'c'], 'glob', True, 'search', [False, True, False]),\n])\ndef test_token_match(pattern, tokens, match_type, ignore_case, glob_method, expected):\n assert np.array_equal(tokenseq.token_match(pattern, tokens, match_type, ignore_case, glob_method),\n np.array(expected))\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('pattern, tokens, match_type, ignore_case, glob_method, expected', [\n ('a', [], 'exact', False, 'match', []),\n ('', [], 'exact', False, 'match', []),\n ('', ['a', ''], 'exact', False, 'match', [False, True]),\n ('a', ['a', 'b', 'c'], 'exact', False, 'match', [True, False, False]),\n (['a'], ['a', 'b', 'c'], 'exact', False, 'match', [True, False, False]),\n (['a', 'c'], ['a', 'b', 'c'], 'exact', False, 'match', [True, False, True]),\n (('a', 'c'), np.array(['a', 'b', 'c']), 'exact', False, 'match', [True, False, True]),\n ({'A'}, ['a', 'b', 'c'], 'exact', True, 'match', [True, False, False]),\n ({'A', 'a'}, ['a', 'b', 'c'], 'exact', True, 'match', [True, False, False]),\n (['A', 'A'], ['a', 'b', 'c'], 'exact', True, 'match', [True, False, False])\n])\ndef test_token_match_multi_pattern(pattern, tokens, match_type, ignore_case, glob_method, expected):\n assert np.array_equal(tokenseq.token_match_multi_pattern(pattern, tokens, match_type, ignore_case, glob_method),\n np.array(expected))\n\n\ndef test_token_match_subsequent():\n tok = ['green', 'test', 'emob', 'test', 'greener', 'tests', 'test', 'test']\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n tokenseq.token_match_subsequent('pattern', tok)\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n tokenseq.token_match_subsequent(['pattern'], tok)\n\n assert tokenseq.token_match_subsequent(['a', 'b'], []) == []\n\n assert tokenseq.token_match_subsequent(['foo', 'bar'], tok) == []\n\n res = tokenseq.token_match_subsequent(['green*', 'test*'], tok, match_type='glob')\n assert len(res) == 2\n assert np.array_equal(res[0], np.array([0, 1]))\n assert np.array_equal(res[1], np.array([4, 5]))\n\n res = tokenseq.token_match_subsequent(['green*', 'test*', '*'], tok, match_type='glob')\n assert len(res) == 2\n assert np.array_equal(res[0], np.array([0, 1, 2]))\n assert np.array_equal(res[1], np.array([4, 5, 6]))\n\n\n@given(tokens=st.lists(st.text()), n_patterns=st.integers(0, 4))\ndef test_token_match_subsequent_hypothesis(tokens, n_patterns):\n tokens = np.array(tokens)\n\n n_patterns = min(len(tokens), n_patterns)\n\n pat_ind = np.arange(n_patterns)\n np.random.shuffle(pat_ind)\n patterns = list(tokens[pat_ind])\n\n if len(patterns) < 2:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n tokenseq.token_match_subsequent(patterns, tokens)\n else:\n res = tokenseq.token_match_subsequent(patterns, tokens)\n\n assert isinstance(res, list)\n if len(tokens) == 0:\n assert res == []\n else:\n for ind in res:\n assert len(ind) == len(patterns)\n assert np.all(ind >= 0)\n assert np.all(ind < len(tokens))\n assert np.all(np.diff(ind) == 1) # subsequent words\n assert np.array_equal(tokens[ind], patterns)\n\n\ndef test_token_glue_subsequent():\n tok = ['green', 'test', 'emob', 'test', 'greener', 'tests', 'test', 'test']\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n tokenseq.token_join_subsequent(tok, 'invalid')\n\n assert tokenseq.token_join_subsequent(tok, []) == tok\n\n matches = tokenseq.token_match_subsequent(['green*', 'test*'], tok, match_type='glob')\n assert tokenseq.token_join_subsequent(tok, matches) == ['green_test', 'emob', 'test', 'greener_tests', 'test',\n 'test']\n\n matches = tokenseq.token_match_subsequent(['green*', 'test*', '*'], tok, match_type='glob')\n assert tokenseq.token_join_subsequent(tok, matches) == ['green_test_emob', 'test', 'greener_tests_test', 'test']\n\n\n@given(tokens=st.lists(st.text(string.printable)), n_patterns=st.integers(0, 4))\ndef test_token_glue_subsequent_hypothesis(tokens, n_patterns):\n tokens_arr = np.array(tokens)\n\n n_patterns = min(len(tokens), n_patterns)\n\n pat_ind = np.arange(n_patterns)\n np.random.shuffle(pat_ind)\n patterns = list(tokens_arr[pat_ind])\n\n if len(patterns) > 1:\n matches = tokenseq.token_match_subsequent(patterns, tokens)\n assert tokenseq.token_join_subsequent(tokens, []) == tokens\n\n if len(tokens) == 0:\n assert tokenseq.token_join_subsequent(tokens, matches) == []\n elif len(matches) == 0:\n assert tokenseq.token_join_subsequent(tokens, matches) == tokens\n else:\n res = tokenseq.token_join_subsequent(tokens, matches)\n assert isinstance(res, list)\n assert 0 < len(res) < len(tokens)\n\n for ind in matches:\n assert '_'.join(tokens_arr[ind]) in res\n\n\n@given(tokens=st.lists(st.text(string.printable)),\n n=st.integers(-1, 5),\n join=st.booleans(),\n join_str=st.text(string.printable, max_size=3),\n ngram_container=st.sampled_from([list, tuple]),\n pass_embed_tokens=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=3),\n keep_embed_tokens=st.booleans())\ndef test_token_ngrams_hypothesis(tokens, n, join, join_str, ngram_container, pass_embed_tokens, keep_embed_tokens):\n if pass_embed_tokens:\n embed_tokens = set(random.choices(tokens, k=min(pass_embed_tokens, len(tokens))))\n else:\n embed_tokens = None\n\n args = dict(n=n, join=join, join_str=join_str, ngram_container=ngram_container,\n embed_tokens=embed_tokens, keep_embed_tokens=keep_embed_tokens)\n\n if n < 2:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n tokenseq.token_ngrams(tokens, **args)\n else:\n res = tokenseq.token_ngrams(tokens, **args)\n assert isinstance(res, list)\n\n n_tok = len(tokens)\n\n if n_tok < n:\n if n_tok == 0:\n assert res == []\n else:\n assert len(res) == 1\n if join:\n assert res == [join_str.join(tokens)]\n else:\n assert res == [ngram_container(tokens)]\n else:\n if not pass_embed_tokens or keep_embed_tokens:\n assert len(res) == n_tok - n + 1\n\n if join:\n assert all([isinstance(g, str) for g in res])\n assert all([join_str in g for g in res])\n else:\n assert all([isinstance(g, ngram_container) for g in res])\n\n if embed_tokens:\n if keep_embed_tokens:\n assert all([len(g) >= n for g in res])\n assert all([any(t in g for t in embed_tokens) for g in res if len(g) > n])\n else:\n assert all([len(g) == n for g in res])\n assert all([t not in embed_tokens for g in res for t in g])\n else:\n assert all([len(g) == n for g in res])\n tokens_ = list(res[0])\n if len(res) > 1:\n for g in res[1:]:\n tokens_.extend(g[n-1:])\n\n assert tokens_ == tokens\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('numbertoken, char, firstchar, below_one, drop_sign, expected', [\n ('', '0', '0', '0', True, ''),\n ('no number', '0', '0', '0', True, ''),\n ('0', '0', '0', '0', True, '0'),\n ('0.9', '0', '0', '0', True, '0'),\n ('0.1', '0', '0', '', True, ''),\n ('0.01', '0', '0', '0', True, '0'),\n ('-0.01', '0', '0', 'X', True, 'X'),\n ('1', '0', '0', '0', True, '0'),\n ('1', '0', '1', '0', True, '1'),\n ('10', '0', '0', '0', True, '00'),\n ('10', '0', '1', '0', True, '10'),\n ('123456', '0', '0', '0', True, '000000'),\n ('123456', '0', '1', '0', True, '100000'),\n ('123456', 'N', 'X', '0', True, 'XNNNNN'),\n ('123.456', '0', '0', '0', True, '000'),\n ('-123.456', '0', '0', '0', True, '000'),\n ('-123.456', '0', '0', '0', False, '-000'),\n ('-123.456', '0', '1', '0', False, '-100'),\n ('-0.0123', '0', '1', '0', False, '-0'),\n ('-1.0123', '0', '1', '0', False, '-1'),\n ('180,000', '0', '1', '0', False, '100000'),\n ('180,000.99', '0', '1', '0', False, '100000'),\n])\ndef test_numbertoken_to_magnitude(numbertoken, char, firstchar, below_one, drop_sign, expected):\n res = tokenseq.numbertoken_to_magnitude(numbertoken, char=char, firstchar=firstchar,\n below_one=below_one, drop_sign=drop_sign)\n assert res == expected\n" }, { "path": "tests/test_topicmod__eval_tools.py", "content": "import pytest\nfrom scipy.sparse import coo_matrix, issparse\nfrom hypothesis import given, strategies as st\n\nfrom ._testtools import strategy_dtm\n\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod._eval_tools import split_dtm_for_cross_validation\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm(),\n matrix_type=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=1),\n n_folds=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=20)\n)\ndef test_split_dtm_for_cross_validation(dtm, matrix_type, n_folds):\n if matrix_type == 1:\n dtm = coo_matrix(dtm)\n\n if n_folds < 2 or n_folds > dtm.shape[0]:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n next(split_dtm_for_cross_validation(dtm, n_folds))\n else:\n n_docs, n_vocab = dtm.shape\n\n n_generated_folds = 0\n for fold, train_dtm, test_dtm in split_dtm_for_cross_validation(dtm, n_folds):\n assert 0 <= fold < n_folds\n\n if matrix_type == 1:\n assert issparse(train_dtm)\n assert issparse(test_dtm)\n\n assert train_dtm.ndim == test_dtm.ndim == 2\n\n assert train_dtm.shape[0] >= test_dtm.shape[0]\n assert 0 < test_dtm.shape[0] <= n_docs // n_folds\n assert train_dtm.shape[0] + test_dtm.shape[0] == n_docs\n assert train_dtm.shape[1] == test_dtm.shape[1] == n_vocab\n\n n_generated_folds += 1\n\n assert n_folds == n_generated_folds\n" }, { "path": "tests/test_topicmod_evaluate.py", "content": "import random\n\nimport numpy as np\nimport pytest\nfrom hypothesis import given, strategies as st\n\ntry:\n import gensim\n import lda\n from sklearn.decomposition import LatentDirichletAllocation\n\n from tmtoolkit.topicmod import evaluate, tm_lda, tm_sklearn, tm_gensim\nexcept ImportError:\n pytest.skip('not all topic modeling packages are installed; skipping topic modeling evaluation tests',\n allow_module_level=True)\n\n\ndef test_metric_held_out_documents_wallach09():\n \"\"\"\n Test with data from original MATLAB implementation by Ian Murray\n https://people.cs.umass.edu/~wallach/code/etm/\n \"\"\"\n\n try:\n import gmpy2\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('gmpy2 not installed')\n\n np.random.seed(0)\n\n alpha = np.array([\n 0.11689,\n 0.42451,\n 0.45859\n ])\n\n alpha /= alpha.sum() # normalize inexact numbers\n\n phi = np.array([\n [0.306800, 0.094071, 0.284774, 0.211957, 0.102399],\n [0.234192, 0.157973, 0.093717, 0.280588, 0.233528],\n [0.173420, 0.166972, 0.196522, 0.208105, 0.254981]\n ])\n phi /= phi.sum(axis=1)[:, np.newaxis] # normalize inexact numbers\n\n dtm = np.array([\n [0, 0, 0, 0, 1],\n [0, 0, 0, 0, 1],\n [0, 1, 0, 0, 0],\n [0, 0, 0, 1, 0],\n [0, 0, 0, 0, 1],\n [0, 0, 0, 1, 0],\n [0, 0, 1, 0, 0],\n ])\n\n theta = np.array([\n [0.044671, 0.044671, 0.059036, 0.082889, 0.044671, 0.082889, 0.143070],\n [0.429325, 0.429325, 0.429297, 0.487980, 0.429325, 0.487980, 0.269092],\n [0.526004, 0.526004, 0.511666, 0.429130, 0.526004, 0.429130, 0.587838],\n ]).T\n theta /= theta.sum(axis=1)[:, np.newaxis] # normalize inexact numbers\n\n res = evaluate.metric_held_out_documents_wallach09(dtm, theta, phi, alpha, n_samples=10000)\n\n assert round(res) == -11\n\n\nEVALUATION_TEST_DTM = np.array([\n [1, 2, 3, 0, 0],\n [0, 0, 2, 2, 0],\n [3, 0, 1, 1, 3],\n [2, 1, 0, 2, 5],\n])\nEVALUATION_TEST_VOCAB = np.array(['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e'])\nEVALUATION_TEST_TOKENS = [\n ['a', 'b', 'b', 'c', 'c', 'c'],\n ['c', 'c', 'd', 'd'],\n ['a', 'a', 'a', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'e', 'e'],\n ['a', 'a', 'b', 'd', 'd', 'e', 'e', 'e', 'e', 'e'],\n]\nEVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI = {\n 'test1': EVALUATION_TEST_DTM,\n 'test2': np.array([\n [1, 0, 1, 0, 3],\n [0, 0, 2, 5, 0],\n [3, 0, 1, 2, 0],\n [2, 1, 3, 2, 4],\n [0, 0, 0, 1, 1],\n [3, 2, 5, 1, 1],\n ]),\n 'test3': np.array([\n [0, 1, 3, 0, 4, 3],\n [3, 0, 2, 0, 0, 0],\n [0, 2, 1, 3, 3, 0],\n [2, 1, 5, 4, 0, 1],\n ]),\n}\n\n\ndef test_compute_models_parallel_lda_multi_vs_singleproc():\n passed_params = {'n_topics', 'n_iter', 'random_state'}\n varying_params = [dict(n_topics=k) for k in range(2, 5)]\n const_params = dict(n_iter=3, random_state=1)\n\n models = tm_lda.compute_models_parallel(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM, varying_params, const_params)\n assert len(models) == len(varying_params)\n\n for param_set, model in models:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == passed_params\n assert isinstance(model, lda.LDA)\n assert isinstance(model.doc_topic_, np.ndarray)\n assert isinstance(model.topic_word_, np.ndarray)\n\n models_singleproc = tm_lda.compute_models_parallel(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM, varying_params, const_params,\n n_max_processes=1)\n\n assert len(models_singleproc) == len(models)\n for param_set2, model2 in models_singleproc:\n for x, y in models:\n if x == param_set2:\n param_set1, model1 = x, y\n break\n else:\n assert False\n\n assert np.allclose(model1.doc_topic_, model2.doc_topic_)\n assert np.allclose(model1.topic_word_, model2.topic_word_)\n\n\ndef test_compute_models_parallel_lda_multiple_docs():\n # 1 doc, no varying params\n const_params = dict(n_topics=3, n_iter=3, random_state=1)\n models = tm_lda.compute_models_parallel(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM, constant_parameters=const_params)\n assert len(models) == 1\n assert type(models) is list\n assert len(models[0]) == 2\n param1, model1 = models[0]\n assert param1 == const_params\n assert isinstance(model1, lda.LDA)\n assert isinstance(model1.doc_topic_, np.ndarray)\n assert isinstance(model1.topic_word_, np.ndarray)\n\n # 1 *named* doc, some varying params\n passed_params = {'n_topics', 'n_iter', 'random_state'}\n const_params = dict(n_iter=3, random_state=1)\n varying_params = [dict(n_topics=k) for k in range(2, 5)]\n docs = {'test1': EVALUATION_TEST_DTM}\n models = tm_lda.compute_models_parallel(docs, varying_params, constant_parameters=const_params)\n assert len(models) == len(docs)\n assert isinstance(models, dict)\n assert set(models.keys()) == {'test1'}\n\n param_match = False\n for d, m in models.items():\n assert d == 'test1'\n assert len(m) == len(varying_params)\n for param_set, model in m:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == passed_params\n assert isinstance(model, lda.LDA)\n assert isinstance(model.doc_topic_, np.ndarray)\n assert isinstance(model.topic_word_, np.ndarray)\n\n if param_set == param1:\n assert np.allclose(model.doc_topic_, model1.doc_topic_)\n assert np.allclose(model.topic_word_, model1.topic_word_)\n param_match = True\n\n assert param_match\n\n # n docs, no varying params\n const_params = dict(n_topics=3, n_iter=3, random_state=1)\n models = tm_lda.compute_models_parallel(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI, constant_parameters=const_params)\n assert len(models) == len(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI)\n assert isinstance(models, dict)\n assert set(models.keys()) == set(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI.keys())\n\n for d, m in models.items():\n assert len(m) == 1\n for param_set, model in m:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == set(const_params.keys())\n assert isinstance(model, lda.LDA)\n assert isinstance(model.doc_topic_, np.ndarray)\n assert isinstance(model.topic_word_, np.ndarray)\n\n # n docs, some varying params\n passed_params = {'n_topics', 'n_iter', 'random_state'}\n const_params = dict(n_iter=3, random_state=1)\n varying_params = [dict(n_topics=k) for k in range(2, 5)]\n models = tm_lda.compute_models_parallel(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI, varying_params,\n constant_parameters=const_params)\n assert len(models) == len(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI)\n assert isinstance(models, dict)\n assert set(models.keys()) == set(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI.keys())\n\n for d, m in models.items():\n assert len(m) == len(varying_params)\n for param_set, model in m:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == passed_params\n assert isinstance(model, lda.LDA)\n assert isinstance(model.doc_topic_, np.ndarray)\n assert isinstance(model.topic_word_, np.ndarray)\n\n\ndef test_evaluation_all_engines_unavail_metric():\n varying_params = [dict(n_topics=k, alpha=1 / k) for k in range(2, 5)]\n const_params = dict(n_iter=10, refresh=1, random_state=1)\n\n for mod in (tm_lda, tm_gensim, tm_sklearn):\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match='^invalid metric was passed: \"test_not_avail\"'):\n mod.evaluate_topic_models(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM, varying_params, const_params, metric='test_not_avail')\n\n\ndef test_evaluation_lda_all_metrics_multi_vs_singleproc():\n passed_params = {'n_topics', 'alpha', 'n_iter', 'refresh', 'random_state'}\n varying_params = [dict(n_topics=k, alpha=1/k) for k in range(2, 5)]\n const_params = dict(n_iter=10, refresh=1, random_state=1)\n\n evaluate_topic_models_kwargs = dict(\n metric=tm_lda.AVAILABLE_METRICS,\n held_out_documents_wallach09_n_samples=10,\n held_out_documents_wallach09_n_folds=2,\n coherence_gensim_vocab=EVALUATION_TEST_VOCAB,\n coherence_gensim_texts=EVALUATION_TEST_TOKENS,\n coherence_mimno_2011_eps=1e-12, # make this metric equivalent to \"U_Mass\" coherence\n coherence_mimno_2011_normalize=True, # make this metric equivalent to \"U_Mass\" coherence\n return_models=True\n )\n\n eval_res = tm_lda.evaluate_topic_models(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM, varying_params, const_params,\n **evaluate_topic_models_kwargs)\n\n assert len(eval_res) == len(varying_params)\n\n for param_set, metric_results in eval_res:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == passed_params\n assert set(metric_results.keys()) == set(tm_lda.AVAILABLE_METRICS + ('model',))\n\n assert 0 <= metric_results['cao_juan_2009'] <= 1\n assert 0 <= metric_results['arun_2010']\n assert metric_results['coherence_mimno_2011'] < 0\n assert np.isclose(metric_results['coherence_gensim_u_mass'], metric_results['coherence_mimno_2011'])\n assert 0 <= metric_results['coherence_gensim_c_v'] <= 1\n assert metric_results['coherence_gensim_c_uci'] < 0\n assert metric_results['coherence_gensim_c_npmi'] < 0\n\n if 'griffiths_2004' in tm_lda.AVAILABLE_METRICS: # only if gmpy2 is installed\n assert metric_results['griffiths_2004'] < 0\n\n if 'loglikelihood' in tm_lda.AVAILABLE_METRICS:\n assert metric_results['loglikelihood'] < 0\n\n if 'held_out_documents_wallach09' in tm_lda.AVAILABLE_METRICS: # only if gmpy2 is installed\n assert metric_results['held_out_documents_wallach09'] < 0\n\n assert isinstance(metric_results['model'], lda.LDA)\n\n eval_res_singleproc = tm_lda.evaluate_topic_models(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM, varying_params, const_params,\n n_max_processes=1, **evaluate_topic_models_kwargs)\n assert len(eval_res_singleproc) == len(eval_res)\n for param_set2, metric_results2 in eval_res_singleproc:\n for x, y in eval_res:\n if x == param_set2:\n param_set1, metric_results1 = x, y\n break\n else:\n assert False\n\n # exclude results that use metrics with random sampling\n if 'held_out_documents_wallach09' in tm_lda.AVAILABLE_METRICS: # only if gmpy2 is installed\n del metric_results1['held_out_documents_wallach09']\n del metric_results2['held_out_documents_wallach09']\n\n del metric_results1['model']\n del metric_results2['model']\n\n assert metric_results1 == metric_results2\n\n\ndef test_evaluation_gensim_all_metrics():\n passed_params = {'num_topics', 'update_every', 'passes', 'iterations', 'random_state'}\n varying_params = [dict(num_topics=k) for k in range(2, 5)]\n const_params = dict(update_every=0, passes=1, iterations=1, random_state=1)\n\n eval_res = tm_gensim.evaluate_topic_models(\n EVALUATION_TEST_DTM, varying_params, const_params,\n metric=tm_gensim.AVAILABLE_METRICS,\n coherence_gensim_texts=EVALUATION_TEST_TOKENS,\n coherence_gensim_kwargs={\n 'dictionary': evaluate.FakedGensimDict.from_vocab(EVALUATION_TEST_VOCAB)\n },\n coherence_mimno_2011_eps=1e-12, # make this metric equivalent to \"U_Mass\" coherence\n coherence_mimno_2011_normalize=True, # make this metric equivalent to \"U_Mass\" coherence\n return_models=True\n )\n\n assert len(eval_res) == len(varying_params)\n\n for param_set, metric_results in eval_res:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == passed_params\n assert set(metric_results.keys()) == set(tm_gensim.AVAILABLE_METRICS + ('model',))\n\n assert metric_results['perplexity'] > 0\n assert 0 <= metric_results['cao_juan_2009'] <= 1\n assert 0 <= metric_results['arun_2010']\n assert metric_results['coherence_mimno_2011'] < 0\n # TODO: check why this for some values of k (e.g. k=3) fails when using Gensim (works for other packages!)\n #assert np.isclose(metric_results['coherence_gensim_u_mass'], metric_results['coherence_mimno_2011'])\n assert 0 <= metric_results['coherence_gensim_c_v'] <= 1\n assert metric_results['coherence_gensim_c_uci'] < 0\n assert metric_results['coherence_gensim_c_npmi'] < 0\n\n\ndef test_compute_models_parallel_gensim():\n passed_params = {'num_topics', 'update_every', 'passes', 'iterations'}\n varying_params = [dict(num_topics=k) for k in range(2, 5)]\n const_params = dict(update_every=0, passes=1, iterations=1)\n\n models = tm_gensim.compute_models_parallel(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM, varying_params, const_params)\n\n assert len(models) == len(varying_params)\n\n for param_set, model in models:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == passed_params\n assert isinstance(model, gensim.models.LdaModel)\n assert isinstance(model.state.get_lambda(), np.ndarray)\n\n\ndef test_compute_models_parallel_gensim_multiple_docs():\n # 1 doc, no varying params\n const_params = dict(num_topics=3, update_every=0, passes=1, iterations=1)\n models = tm_gensim.compute_models_parallel(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM, constant_parameters=const_params)\n assert len(models) == 1\n assert type(models) is list\n assert len(models[0]) == 2\n param1, model1 = models[0]\n assert param1 == const_params\n assert isinstance(model1, gensim.models.LdaModel)\n assert isinstance(model1.state.get_lambda(), np.ndarray)\n\n # 1 *named* doc, some varying params\n passed_params = {'num_topics', 'update_every', 'passes', 'iterations'}\n const_params = dict(update_every=0, passes=1, iterations=1)\n varying_params = [dict(num_topics=k) for k in range(2, 5)]\n docs = {'test1': EVALUATION_TEST_DTM}\n models = tm_gensim.compute_models_parallel(docs, varying_params, constant_parameters=const_params)\n assert len(models) == len(docs)\n assert isinstance(models, dict)\n assert set(models.keys()) == {'test1'}\n\n for d, m in models.items():\n assert d == 'test1'\n assert len(m) == len(varying_params)\n for param_set, model in m:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == passed_params\n assert isinstance(model, gensim.models.LdaModel)\n assert isinstance(model.state.get_lambda(), np.ndarray)\n\n # n docs, no varying params\n const_params = dict(num_topics=3, update_every=0, passes=1, iterations=1)\n models = tm_gensim.compute_models_parallel(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI, constant_parameters=const_params)\n assert len(models) == len(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI)\n assert isinstance(models, dict)\n assert set(models.keys()) == set(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI.keys())\n\n for d, m in models.items():\n assert len(m) == 1\n for param_set, model in m:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == set(const_params.keys())\n assert isinstance(model, gensim.models.LdaModel)\n assert isinstance(model.state.get_lambda(), np.ndarray)\n\n # n docs, some varying params\n passed_params = {'num_topics', 'update_every', 'passes', 'iterations'}\n const_params = dict(update_every=0, passes=1, iterations=1)\n varying_params = [dict(num_topics=k) for k in range(2, 5)]\n models = tm_gensim.compute_models_parallel(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI, varying_params,\n constant_parameters=const_params)\n assert len(models) == len(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI)\n assert isinstance(models, dict)\n assert set(models.keys()) == set(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI.keys())\n\n for d, m in models.items():\n assert len(m) == len(varying_params)\n for param_set, model in m:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == passed_params\n assert isinstance(model, gensim.models.LdaModel)\n assert isinstance(model.state.get_lambda(), np.ndarray)\n\n\ndef test_evaluation_sklearn_all_metrics():\n passed_params = {'n_components', 'learning_method', 'evaluate_every', 'max_iter', 'n_jobs', 'random_state'}\n varying_params = [dict(n_components=k) for k in range(2, 5)]\n const_params = dict(learning_method='batch', evaluate_every=1, max_iter=3, n_jobs=1, random_state=1)\n\n evaluate_topic_models_kwargs = dict(\n metric=tm_sklearn.AVAILABLE_METRICS,\n held_out_documents_wallach09_n_samples=10,\n held_out_documents_wallach09_n_folds=2,\n coherence_gensim_vocab=EVALUATION_TEST_VOCAB,\n coherence_gensim_texts=EVALUATION_TEST_TOKENS,\n coherence_mimno_2011_eps=1e-12, # make this metric equivalent to \"U_Mass\" coherence\n coherence_mimno_2011_normalize=True, # make this metric equivalent to \"U_Mass\" coherence\n return_models=True,\n )\n\n eval_res = tm_sklearn.evaluate_topic_models(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM, varying_params, const_params,\n **evaluate_topic_models_kwargs)\n\n assert len(eval_res) == len(varying_params)\n\n for param_set, metric_results in eval_res:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == passed_params\n assert set(metric_results.keys()) == set(tm_sklearn.AVAILABLE_METRICS + ('model',))\n\n assert metric_results['perplexity'] > 0\n assert 0 <= metric_results['cao_juan_2009'] <= 1\n assert 0 <= metric_results['arun_2010']\n assert metric_results['coherence_mimno_2011'] < 0\n assert np.isclose(metric_results['coherence_gensim_u_mass'], metric_results['coherence_mimno_2011'])\n assert 0 <= metric_results['coherence_gensim_c_v'] <= 1\n assert metric_results['coherence_gensim_c_uci'] < 0\n assert metric_results['coherence_gensim_c_npmi'] < 0\n\n if 'held_out_documents_wallach09' in tm_lda.AVAILABLE_METRICS: # only if gmpy2 is installed\n assert metric_results['held_out_documents_wallach09'] < 0\n\n assert isinstance(metric_results['model'], LatentDirichletAllocation)\n\n\ndef test_compute_models_parallel_sklearn():\n passed_params = {'n_components', 'learning_method', 'evaluate_every', 'max_iter', 'n_jobs'}\n varying_params = [dict(n_components=k) for k in range(2, 5)]\n const_params = dict(learning_method='batch', evaluate_every=1, max_iter=3, n_jobs=1)\n\n models = tm_sklearn.compute_models_parallel(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM, varying_params, const_params)\n\n assert len(models) == len(varying_params)\n\n for param_set, model in models:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == passed_params\n assert isinstance(model, LatentDirichletAllocation)\n assert isinstance(model.components_, np.ndarray)\n\n\ndef test_compute_models_parallel_sklearn_multiple_docs():\n # 1 doc, no varying params\n const_params = dict(n_components=3, learning_method='batch', evaluate_every=1, max_iter=3, n_jobs=1)\n models = tm_sklearn.compute_models_parallel(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM, constant_parameters=const_params)\n assert len(models) == 1\n assert type(models) is list\n assert len(models[0]) == 2\n param1, model1 = models[0]\n assert param1 == const_params\n assert isinstance(model1, LatentDirichletAllocation)\n assert isinstance(model1.components_, np.ndarray)\n\n # 1 *named* doc, some varying params\n passed_params = {'n_components', 'learning_method', 'evaluate_every', 'max_iter', 'n_jobs'}\n const_params = dict(learning_method='batch', evaluate_every=1, max_iter=3, n_jobs=1)\n varying_params = [dict(n_components=k) for k in range(2, 5)]\n docs = {'test1': EVALUATION_TEST_DTM}\n models = tm_sklearn.compute_models_parallel(docs, varying_params,\n constant_parameters=const_params)\n assert len(models) == len(docs)\n assert isinstance(models, dict)\n assert set(models.keys()) == {'test1'}\n\n for d, m in models.items():\n assert d == 'test1'\n assert len(m) == len(varying_params)\n for param_set, model in m:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == passed_params\n assert isinstance(model, LatentDirichletAllocation)\n assert isinstance(model.components_, np.ndarray)\n\n # n docs, no varying params\n const_params = dict(n_components=3, learning_method='batch', evaluate_every=1, max_iter=3, n_jobs=1)\n models = tm_sklearn.compute_models_parallel(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI, constant_parameters=const_params)\n assert len(models) == len(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI)\n assert isinstance(models, dict)\n assert set(models.keys()) == set(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI.keys())\n\n for d, m in models.items():\n assert len(m) == 1\n for param_set, model in m:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == set(const_params.keys())\n assert isinstance(model, LatentDirichletAllocation)\n assert isinstance(model.components_, np.ndarray)\n\n # n docs, some varying params\n passed_params = {'n_components', 'learning_method', 'evaluate_every', 'max_iter', 'n_jobs'}\n const_params = dict(learning_method='batch', evaluate_every=1, max_iter=3, n_jobs=1)\n varying_params = [dict(n_components=k) for k in range(2, 5)]\n models = tm_sklearn.compute_models_parallel(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI, varying_params,\n constant_parameters=const_params)\n assert len(models) == len(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI)\n assert isinstance(models, dict)\n assert set(models.keys()) == set(EVALUATION_TEST_DTM_MULTI.keys())\n\n for d, m in models.items():\n assert len(m) == len(varying_params)\n for param_set, model in m:\n assert set(param_set.keys()) == passed_params\n assert isinstance(model, LatentDirichletAllocation)\n assert isinstance(model.components_, np.ndarray)\n\n\n@given(n_param_sets=st.integers(0, 10), n_params=st.integers(1, 10), n_metrics=st.integers(1, 10))\ndef test_results_by_parameter_single_validation(n_param_sets, n_params, n_metrics):\n # TODO: implement a better test here\n\n param_names = ['param' + str(i) for i in range(n_params)]\n metric_names = ['metric' + str(i) for i in range(n_metrics)]\n res = []\n for _ in range(n_param_sets):\n param_set = dict(zip(param_names, np.random.randint(0, 100, n_params)))\n metric_results = dict(zip(metric_names, np.random.uniform(0, 1, n_metrics)))\n res.append((param_set, metric_results))\n\n p = random.choice(param_names)\n by_param = evaluate.results_by_parameter(res, p)\n assert len(res) == len(by_param)\n assert all(x == 2 for x in map(len, by_param))\n" }, { "path": "tests/test_topicmod_model_io.py", "content": "import os.path\nimport tempfile\nfrom collections import OrderedDict\n\nimport pytest\nfrom hypothesis import given, strategies as st, settings\n\nimport numpy as np\nimport pandas as pd\n\nfrom ._testtools import strategy_2d_prob_distribution\n\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod import model_io\n\n\ndef test_save_load_ldamodel_pickle():\n try:\n import lda\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('lda not installed')\n\n pfile = os.path.join('tests', 'data', 'test_pickle_unpickle_ldamodel.pickle')\n\n dtm = np.array([[0, 1], [2, 3], [4, 5], [6, 0]])\n doc_labels = ['doc_' + str(i) for i in range(dtm.shape[0])]\n vocab = ['word_' + str(i) for i in range(dtm.shape[1])]\n\n model = lda.LDA(2, n_iter=1)\n model.fit(dtm)\n\n model_io.save_ldamodel_to_pickle(pfile, model, vocab, doc_labels)\n\n unpickled = model_io.load_ldamodel_from_pickle(pfile)\n\n assert np.array_equal(model.doc_topic_, unpickled['model'].doc_topic_)\n assert np.array_equal(model.topic_word_, unpickled['model'].topic_word_)\n assert vocab == unpickled['vocab']\n assert doc_labels == unpickled['doc_labels']\n\n\n@given(\n topic_word=strategy_2d_prob_distribution(),\n top_n=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=20)\n)\ndef test_ldamodel_top_topic_words(topic_word, top_n):\n topic_word = np.array(topic_word)\n\n vocab = np.array(['t%d' % i for i in range(topic_word.shape[1])])\n\n if top_n < 1 or top_n > topic_word.shape[1]:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n model_io.ldamodel_top_topic_words(topic_word, vocab, top_n)\n else:\n top_topic_words = model_io.ldamodel_top_topic_words(topic_word, vocab, top_n)\n colnames = np.array([model_io.DEFAULT_RANK_NAME_FMT.format(i1=i + 1) for i in range(top_n)])\n rownames = np.array([model_io.DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT.format(i1=i + 1) for i in range(topic_word.shape[0])])\n\n assert top_topic_words.shape == (topic_word.shape[0], top_n)\n assert np.array_equal(top_topic_words.index.values, rownames)\n assert np.array_equal(top_topic_words.columns.values, colnames)\n\n\n@given(\n topic_word=strategy_2d_prob_distribution(),\n top_n=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=20)\n)\ndef test_ldamodel_top_word_topics(topic_word, top_n):\n topic_word = np.array(topic_word)\n\n vocab = np.array(['t%d' % i for i in range(topic_word.shape[1])])\n\n if top_n < 1 or top_n > topic_word.shape[0]:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n model_io.ldamodel_top_word_topics(topic_word, vocab, top_n)\n else:\n top_word_topics = model_io.ldamodel_top_word_topics(topic_word, vocab, top_n)\n colnames = np.array([model_io.DEFAULT_RANK_NAME_FMT.format(i1=i + 1) for i in range(top_n)])\n\n assert top_word_topics.shape == (topic_word.shape[1], top_n) == (len(vocab), top_n)\n assert np.array_equal(top_word_topics.index.values, vocab)\n assert np.array_equal(top_word_topics.columns.values, colnames)\n\n\n@given(\n doc_topic=strategy_2d_prob_distribution(),\n top_n=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=20)\n)\ndef test_ldamodel_top_doc_topics(doc_topic, top_n):\n doc_topic = np.array(doc_topic)\n\n doc_labels = np.array(['doc%d' % i for i in range(doc_topic.shape[0])])\n\n if top_n < 1 or top_n > doc_topic.shape[1]:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n model_io.ldamodel_top_topic_words(doc_topic, doc_labels, top_n)\n else:\n top_doc_topics = model_io.ldamodel_top_doc_topics(doc_topic, doc_labels, top_n)\n colnames = np.array([model_io.DEFAULT_RANK_NAME_FMT.format(i1=i + 1) for i in range(top_n)])\n\n assert top_doc_topics.shape == (doc_topic.shape[0], top_n)\n assert np.array_equal(top_doc_topics.index.values, doc_labels)\n assert np.array_equal(top_doc_topics.columns.values, colnames)\n\n\n@given(\n doc_topic=strategy_2d_prob_distribution(),\n top_n=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=20)\n)\ndef test_ldamodel_top_topic_docs(doc_topic, top_n):\n doc_topic = np.array(doc_topic)\n\n doc_labels = np.array(['doc%d' % i for i in range(doc_topic.shape[0])])\n\n if top_n < 1 or top_n > doc_topic.shape[0]:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n model_io.ldamodel_top_topic_docs(doc_topic, doc_labels, top_n)\n else:\n top_topic_docs = model_io.ldamodel_top_topic_docs(doc_topic, doc_labels, top_n)\n colnames = np.array([model_io.DEFAULT_RANK_NAME_FMT.format(i1=i + 1) for i in range(top_n)])\n rownames = np.array([model_io.DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT.format(i1=i + 1) for i in range(doc_topic.shape[1])])\n\n assert top_topic_docs.shape == (doc_topic.shape[1], top_n)\n assert np.array_equal(top_topic_docs.index.values, rownames)\n assert np.array_equal(top_topic_docs.columns.values, colnames)\n\n\n@given(topic_word=strategy_2d_prob_distribution())\ndef test_ldamodel_full_topic_words(topic_word):\n topic_word = np.array(topic_word)\n\n vocab = np.array(['t%d' % i for i in range(topic_word.shape[1])])\n\n df = model_io.ldamodel_full_topic_words(topic_word, vocab)\n assert isinstance(df, pd.DataFrame)\n\n rownames = np.array([model_io.DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT.format(i1=i + 1) for i in range(topic_word.shape[0])])\n assert df.columns.tolist() == ['_topic'] + list(vocab)\n\n assert np.array_equal(df.iloc[:, 0].to_numpy(), rownames)\n\n\n@given(doc_topic=strategy_2d_prob_distribution())\ndef test_ldamodel_full_doc_topics(doc_topic):\n doc_topic = np.array(doc_topic)\n\n doc_labels = np.array(['doc%d' % i for i in range(doc_topic.shape[0])])\n\n df = model_io.ldamodel_full_doc_topics(doc_topic, doc_labels)\n assert isinstance(df, pd.DataFrame)\n\n colnames = np.array([model_io.DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT.format(i1=i + 1) for i in range(doc_topic.shape[1])])\n assert df.columns.tolist() == ['_doc'] + list(colnames)\n\n assert np.array_equal(df.iloc[:, 0].to_numpy(), doc_labels)\n\n\n@given(n_docs=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=10),\n n_topics=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=10),\n size_vocab=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=50),\n top_n_topics=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=10),\n top_n_words=st.integers(min_value=0, max_value=50),\n create_dtm=st.booleans())\ndef test_save_ldamodel_summary_to_excel(n_docs, n_topics, size_vocab, top_n_topics, top_n_words, create_dtm):\n try:\n import openpyxl\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('openpyxl not installed')\n\n topic_word = np.random.uniform(size=n_topics * size_vocab).reshape((n_topics, size_vocab))\n doc_topic = np.random.uniform(size=n_docs * n_topics).reshape((n_docs, n_topics))\n doc_labels = np.array(['doc%d' % i for i in range(doc_topic.shape[0])])\n vocab = np.array(['t%d' % i for i in range(topic_word.shape[1])])\n _, excelfile = tempfile.mkstemp(suffix='.xlsx')\n\n if create_dtm:\n dtm = np.random.randint(0, 10, size=n_docs*size_vocab).reshape(n_docs, size_vocab)\n else:\n dtm = None\n\n if top_n_words < 1 or top_n_words > topic_word.shape[1] or top_n_topics < 1 or top_n_topics > topic_word.shape[0]\\\n or n_docs < 1:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n model_io.save_ldamodel_summary_to_excel(excelfile, topic_word, doc_topic, doc_labels, vocab,\n top_n_topics=top_n_topics, top_n_words=top_n_words)\n else:\n excelsheets = model_io.save_ldamodel_summary_to_excel(excelfile, topic_word, doc_topic, doc_labels, vocab,\n top_n_topics=top_n_topics, top_n_words=top_n_words,\n dtm=dtm)\n assert isinstance(excelsheets, OrderedDict)\n\n sheetnames = ['top_doc_topics_vals', 'top_doc_topics_labels', 'top_doc_topics_labelled_vals',\n 'top_topic_word_vals', 'top_topic_word_labels', 'top_topic_words_labelled_vals']\n\n if dtm is not None:\n sheetnames.append('marginal_topic_distrib')\n\n assert list(excelsheets.keys()) == sheetnames\n\n for sheetn in sheetnames:\n assert isinstance(excelsheets[sheetn], pd.DataFrame)\n\n" }, { "path": "tests/test_topicmod_model_stats.py", "content": "import os.path\nimport random\nimport string\n\nimport numpy as np\nimport pytest\nfrom hypothesis import settings, given, strategies as st\n\nfrom ._testtools import strategy_2d_prob_distribution, strategy_dtm_small\n\nimport tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod import model_stats, model_io\n\n\n@given(n=st.integers(0, 10),\n distrib=strategy_2d_prob_distribution())\ndef test_top_n_from_distribution(n, distrib):\n if len(distrib) == 0:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n model_stats.top_n_from_distribution(distrib, n)\n else:\n if n < 1 or n > distrib.shape[1]:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n model_stats.top_n_from_distribution(distrib, n)\n else:\n df = model_stats.top_n_from_distribution(distrib, n)\n\n assert len(df) == len(distrib)\n\n for _, row in df.iterrows():\n assert len(row) == n\n assert list(sorted(row, reverse=True)) == list(row)\n\n\n@given(\n topic_word_distrib=strategy_2d_prob_distribution(),\n vocab=st.lists(st.text(string.printable), min_size=0, max_size=9),\n top_n=st.integers(0, 10)\n)\ndef test_top_words_for_topics(topic_word_distrib, vocab, top_n):\n vocab = np.array(vocab)\n\n if len(topic_word_distrib) == 0 or len(vocab) == 0 or topic_word_distrib.shape[1] != len(vocab):\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n model_stats.top_words_for_topics(topic_word_distrib, top_n, vocab)\n return\n\n if top_n < 1 or top_n > topic_word_distrib.shape[1]:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n model_stats.top_words_for_topics(topic_word_distrib, top_n, vocab)\n return\n\n top_words = model_stats.top_words_for_topics(topic_word_distrib, top_n, vocab)\n assert isinstance(top_words, list)\n assert len(top_words) == topic_word_distrib.shape[0]\n assert all(l == top_n for l in map(len, top_words))\n assert all(w in vocab for w in sum(map(list, top_words), []))\n\n top_words = model_stats.top_words_for_topics(topic_word_distrib, top_n) # no vocab -> return word indices\n assert isinstance(top_words, list)\n assert len(top_words) == topic_word_distrib.shape[0]\n assert all(l == top_n for l in map(len, top_words))\n assert all(w_idx in range(len(vocab)) for w_idx in sum(map(list, top_words), []))\n\n\ndef test_top_words_for_topics2():\n distrib = np.array([\n [3, 2, 1],\n [1, 3, 2],\n [1, 0, 1],\n ])\n\n vocab = np.array(['a', 'b', 'c'])\n\n top_words = model_stats.top_words_for_topics(distrib, 2, vocab)\n assert len(top_words) == len(distrib)\n top_words_lists = list(map(list, top_words))\n assert top_words_lists[0] == ['a', 'b']\n assert top_words_lists[1] == ['b', 'c']\n assert top_words_lists[2] in (['a', 'c'], ['c', 'a'])\n\n top_words, top_probs = model_stats.top_words_for_topics(distrib, 2, vocab, return_prob=True)\n assert len(top_words) == len(top_probs)\n assert np.allclose(top_probs[0], np.array([3, 2]))\n assert np.allclose(top_probs[1], np.array([3, 2]))\n assert np.allclose(top_probs[2], np.array([1, 1]))\n\n top_words = model_stats.top_words_for_topics(distrib, 2) # no vocab -> return word indices\n assert len(top_words) == len(distrib)\n top_words_lists = list(map(list, top_words))\n assert top_words_lists[0] == [0, 1]\n assert top_words_lists[1] == [1, 2]\n assert top_words_lists[2] in ([0, 2], [2, 0])\n\n top_words = model_stats.top_words_for_topics(distrib)\n assert all(len(top_words[i]) == len(vocab) for i in range(len(distrib)))\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm_small(),\n n_topics=st.integers(2, 10)\n)\ndef test_get_marginal_topic_distrib(dtm, n_topics):\n try:\n import lda\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('lda not installed')\n\n if dtm.sum() == 0: # assure that we have at least one word in the DTM\n dtm[0, 0] = 1\n\n model = lda.LDA(n_topics, 1)\n model.fit(dtm)\n\n doc_lengths = tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_lengths(dtm)\n marginal_topic_distr = model_stats.marginal_topic_distrib(model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths)\n\n assert marginal_topic_distr.shape == (n_topics,)\n assert np.isclose(marginal_topic_distr.sum(), 1.0)\n assert all(0 <= v <= 1 for v in marginal_topic_distr)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm_small(),\n n_topics=st.integers(2, 10)\n)\ndef test_get_marginal_word_distrib(dtm, n_topics):\n try:\n import lda\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('lda not installed')\n\n if dtm.sum() == 0: # assure that we have at least one word in the DTM\n dtm[0, 0] = 1\n\n model = lda.LDA(n_topics, 1)\n model.fit(dtm)\n\n doc_lengths = tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_lengths(dtm)\n p_t = model_stats.marginal_topic_distrib(model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths)\n\n p_w = model_stats.marginal_word_distrib(model.topic_word_, p_t)\n assert p_w.shape == (dtm.shape[1],)\n assert np.isclose(p_w.sum(), 1.0)\n assert all(0 <= v <= 1 for v in p_w)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm_small(),\n n_topics=st.integers(2, 10)\n)\ndef test_get_word_distinctiveness(dtm, n_topics):\n try:\n import lda\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('lda not installed')\n\n if dtm.sum() == 0: # assure that we have at least one word in the DTM\n dtm[0, 0] = 1\n\n model = lda.LDA(n_topics, 1)\n model.fit(dtm)\n\n doc_lengths = tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_lengths(dtm)\n p_t = model_stats.marginal_topic_distrib(model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths)\n\n w_distinct = model_stats.word_distinctiveness(model.topic_word_, p_t)\n\n assert w_distinct.shape == (dtm.shape[1],)\n assert all(v > -1e10 for v in w_distinct)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm_small(),\n n_topics=st.integers(2, 10)\n)\ndef test_get_word_saliency(dtm, n_topics):\n try:\n import lda\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('lda not installed')\n\n if dtm.sum() == 0: # assure that we have at least one word in the DTM\n dtm[0, 0] = 1\n\n model = lda.LDA(n_topics, 10)\n model.fit(dtm)\n\n doc_lengths = tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_lengths(dtm)\n\n w_sal = model_stats.word_saliency(model.topic_word_, model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths)\n assert w_sal.shape == (dtm.shape[1],)\n assert all(v >= -1e-9 for v in w_sal)\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm_small(),\n n_topics=st.integers(2, 10),\n n_salient_words=st.integers(2, 10)\n)\ndef test_get_most_or_least_salient_words(dtm, n_topics, n_salient_words):\n try:\n import lda\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('lda not installed')\n\n if dtm.sum() == 0: # assure that we have at least one word in the DTM\n dtm[0, 0] = 1\n\n n_salient_words = min(n_salient_words, dtm.shape[1])\n\n model = lda.LDA(n_topics, 1)\n model.fit(dtm)\n\n doc_lengths = tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_lengths(dtm)\n vocab = np.array([chr(65 + i) for i in range(dtm.shape[1])]) # this only works for few words\n\n most_salient = model_stats.most_salient_words(vocab, model.topic_word_, model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths)\n least_salient = model_stats.least_salient_words(vocab, model.topic_word_, model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths)\n assert most_salient.shape == least_salient.shape == (len(vocab),) == (dtm.shape[1],)\n assert all(a == b for a, b in zip(most_salient, least_salient[::-1]))\n\n most_salient_n = model_stats.most_salient_words(vocab, model.topic_word_, model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths,\n n=n_salient_words)\n least_salient_n = model_stats.least_salient_words(vocab, model.topic_word_, model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths,\n n=n_salient_words)\n assert most_salient_n.shape == least_salient_n.shape == (n_salient_words,)\n assert all(a == b for a, b in zip(most_salient_n, most_salient[:n_salient_words]))\n assert all(a == b for a, b in zip(least_salient_n, least_salient[:n_salient_words]))\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm_small(),\n n_topics=st.integers(2, 10),\n n_distinct_words=st.integers(2, 10)\n)\ndef test_get_most_or_least_distinct_words(dtm, n_topics, n_distinct_words):\n try:\n import lda\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('lda not installed')\n\n if dtm.sum() == 0: # assure that we have at least one word in the DTM\n dtm[0, 0] = 1\n\n n_distinct_words = min(n_distinct_words, dtm.shape[1])\n\n model = lda.LDA(n_topics, 1)\n model.fit(dtm)\n\n doc_lengths = tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_lengths(dtm)\n vocab = np.array([chr(65 + i) for i in range(dtm.shape[1])]) # this only works for few words\n\n most_distinct = model_stats.most_distinct_words(vocab, model.topic_word_, model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths)\n least_distinct = model_stats.least_distinct_words(vocab, model.topic_word_, model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths)\n assert most_distinct.shape == least_distinct.shape == (len(vocab),) == (dtm.shape[1],)\n assert all(a == b for a, b in zip(most_distinct, least_distinct[::-1]))\n\n most_distinct_n = model_stats.most_distinct_words(vocab, model.topic_word_, model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths,\n n=n_distinct_words)\n least_distinct_n = model_stats.least_distinct_words(vocab, model.topic_word_, model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths,\n n=n_distinct_words)\n assert most_distinct_n.shape == least_distinct_n.shape == (n_distinct_words,)\n assert all(a == b for a, b in zip(most_distinct_n, most_distinct[:n_distinct_words]))\n assert all(a == b for a, b in zip(least_distinct_n, least_distinct[:n_distinct_words]))\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm_small(),\n n_topics=st.integers(2, 10),\n lambda_=st.floats(0, 1)\n)\ndef test_get_topic_word_relevance(dtm, n_topics, lambda_):\n try:\n import lda\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('lda not installed')\n\n if dtm.sum() == 0: # assure that we have at least one word in the DTM\n dtm[0, 0] = 1\n\n model = lda.LDA(n_topics, 1)\n model.fit(dtm)\n\n doc_lengths = tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_lengths(dtm)\n\n rel_mat = model_stats.topic_word_relevance(model.topic_word_, model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths, lambda_)\n\n assert rel_mat.shape == (n_topics, dtm.shape[1])\n assert all(isinstance(x, float) and not np.isnan(x) for x in rel_mat.flatten())\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm_small(),\n n_topics=st.integers(2, 10),\n lambda_=st.floats(0, 1),\n n_relevant_words=st.integers(2, 10)\n)\ndef test_get_most_or_least_relevant_words_for_topic(dtm, n_topics, lambda_, n_relevant_words):\n try:\n import lda\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('lda not installed')\n\n if dtm.sum() == 0: # assure that we have at least one word in the DTM\n dtm[0, 0] = 1\n\n n_relevant_words = min(n_relevant_words, dtm.shape[1])\n topic = random.randint(0, n_topics - 1)\n\n model = lda.LDA(n_topics, 1)\n model.fit(dtm)\n\n vocab = np.array([chr(65 + i) for i in range(dtm.shape[1])]) # this only works for few words\n doc_lengths = tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_lengths(dtm)\n\n rel_mat = model_stats.topic_word_relevance(model.topic_word_, model.doc_topic_, doc_lengths, lambda_)\n\n most_rel = model_stats.most_relevant_words_for_topic(vocab, rel_mat, topic)\n least_rel = model_stats.least_relevant_words_for_topic(vocab, rel_mat, topic)\n assert most_rel.shape == least_rel.shape == (len(vocab),) == (dtm.shape[1],)\n assert all(a == b for a, b in zip(most_rel, least_rel[::-1]))\n\n most_rel_n = model_stats.most_relevant_words_for_topic(vocab, rel_mat, topic, n=n_relevant_words)\n least_rel_n = model_stats.least_relevant_words_for_topic(vocab, rel_mat, topic, n=n_relevant_words)\n assert most_rel_n.shape == least_rel_n.shape == (n_relevant_words,)\n assert all(a == b for a, b in zip(most_rel_n, most_rel[:n_relevant_words]))\n assert all(a == b for a, b in zip(least_rel_n, least_rel[:n_relevant_words]))\n\n\n@given(\n dtm=strategy_dtm_small(),\n n_topics=st.integers(2, 10),\n lambda_=st.floats(0, 1)\n)\ndef test_generate_topic_labels_from_top_words(dtm, n_topics, lambda_):\n try:\n import lda\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('lda not installed')\n\n if dtm.sum() == 0: # assure that we have at least one word in the DTM\n dtm[0, 0] = 1\n\n model = lda.LDA(n_topics, 1)\n model.fit(dtm)\n\n vocab = np.array([chr(65 + i) for i in range(dtm.shape[1])]) # this only works for few words\n doc_lengths = tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_lengths(dtm)\n\n topic_labels = model_stats.generate_topic_labels_from_top_words(model.topic_word_, model.doc_topic_,\n doc_lengths, vocab, lambda_=lambda_)\n assert isinstance(topic_labels, np.ndarray)\n assert len(topic_labels) == n_topics\n\n for i, l in enumerate(topic_labels):\n assert isinstance(l, str)\n parts = l.split('_')\n assert len(parts) >= 2\n assert int(parts[0]) == i + 1\n assert all(w in vocab for w in parts[1:])\n\n topic_labels_2 = model_stats.generate_topic_labels_from_top_words(model.topic_word_, model.doc_topic_,\n doc_lengths, vocab, lambda_=lambda_,\n n_words=2)\n assert isinstance(topic_labels_2, np.ndarray)\n assert len(topic_labels_2) == n_topics\n\n for i, l in enumerate(topic_labels_2):\n assert isinstance(l, str)\n parts = l.split('_')\n assert len(parts) == 3\n assert int(parts[0]) == i + 1\n assert all(w in vocab for w in parts[1:])\n\n\ndef test_filter_topics():\n vocab = np.array(['abc', 'abcd', 'cde', 'efg', 'xyz'])\n distrib = np.array([ # top 3 terms:\n [0.6, 0.3, 0.05, 0.025, 0.025], # abc, abcd, cde\n [0.2, 0.1, 0.3, 0.3, 0.1], # cde, efg, abc\n [0.05, 0.05, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4], # xyz, efg, cde\n ])\n\n # simple exact match within top list of words\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics('abc', vocab, distrib, top_n=3)\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0, 1]\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics('xyz', vocab, distrib, top_n=3)\n assert list(topic_ind) == [2]\n\n # simple RE pattern match within top list of words\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics(r'^ab', vocab, distrib, top_n=3, match_type='regex')\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0, 1]\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics(r'(cd$|^x)', vocab, distrib, top_n=3, match_type='regex')\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0, 2]\n\n # simple glob pattern match within top list of words\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics('ab*', vocab, distrib, top_n=3, match_type='glob')\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0, 1]\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics('ab?d', vocab, distrib, top_n=3, match_type='glob')\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0]\n\n # multiple matches within top list of words\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics(['abcd', 'xyz'], vocab, distrib, top_n=3)\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0, 2]\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics(['abcd', 'xyz'], vocab, distrib, top_n=3, cond='all')\n assert list(topic_ind) == []\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics(['cde', 'efg'], vocab, distrib, top_n=3, cond='all')\n assert list(topic_ind) == [1, 2]\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics(['cd*', 'ef*'], vocab, distrib, top_n=3, match_type='glob', cond='all')\n assert list(topic_ind) == [1, 2]\n\n # simple exact threshold match\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics('abc', vocab, distrib, thresh=0.6)\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0]\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics('abc', vocab, distrib, thresh=0.2)\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0, 1]\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics('xyz', vocab, distrib, thresh=0.5)\n assert list(topic_ind) == []\n\n # simple RE pattern threshold match\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics(r'^ab', vocab, distrib, thresh=0.2, match_type='regex')\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0, 1]\n\n # multiple matches within top list of words\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics(['abc', 'xyz'], vocab, distrib, thresh=0.4)\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0, 2]\n\n # simple match with combination of top words list and threshold\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics('abc', vocab, distrib, top_n=1, thresh=0.6)\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0]\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics('abc', vocab, distrib, top_n=3, thresh=0.6)\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0]\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics('abc', vocab, distrib, top_n=1, thresh=0.9)\n assert list(topic_ind) == []\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics('c*', vocab, distrib, top_n=3, thresh=0.3, match_type='glob')\n assert list(topic_ind) == [1]\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics('*c*', vocab, distrib, top_n=3, thresh=0.3, match_type='glob')\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0, 1]\n\n # multiple matches with combination of top words list and threshold\n topic_ind = model_stats.filter_topics(['cd*', 'ef*'], vocab, distrib, top_n=3, thresh=0.3, match_type='glob',\n cond='all')\n assert list(topic_ind) == [1]\n\n # return words and matches\n topic_ind, top_words, matches = model_stats.filter_topics([r'cd$', r'^x'], vocab, distrib, top_n=3,\n match_type='regex', return_words_and_matches=True)\n assert list(topic_ind) == [0, 2]\n assert len(top_words) == 2\n assert list(top_words[0]) == ['abc', 'abcd', 'cde']\n assert list(top_words[1]) == ['xyz', 'efg', 'cde']\n assert list(matches[0]) == [False, True, False]\n assert list(matches[1]) == [True, False, False]\n\n\n@given(exclude=st.lists(st.integers(0, 4), min_size=0, max_size=10),\n pass_topic_word=st.booleans(),\n renormalize=st.booleans(),\n return_new_topic_mapping=st.booleans())\ndef test_exclude_topics(exclude, pass_topic_word, renormalize, return_new_topic_mapping):\n try:\n import lda\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('lda not installed')\n\n data = model_io.load_ldamodel_from_pickle(os.path.join('tests', 'data', 'tiny_model_reuters_5_topics.pickle'))\n model = data['model']\n\n exclude_ind = list(set(exclude))\n n_exclude = len(exclude_ind)\n res = model_stats.exclude_topics(exclude_ind,\n model.doc_topic_,\n model.topic_word_ if pass_topic_word else None,\n renormalize=renormalize,\n return_new_topic_mapping=return_new_topic_mapping)\n\n if pass_topic_word and return_new_topic_mapping:\n assert isinstance(res, tuple)\n assert len(res) == 3\n new_theta, new_phi, topic_mapping = res\n elif pass_topic_word and not return_new_topic_mapping:\n assert isinstance(res, tuple)\n assert len(res) == 2\n new_theta, new_phi = res\n elif not pass_topic_word and return_new_topic_mapping:\n assert isinstance(res, tuple)\n assert len(res) == 2\n new_theta, topic_mapping = res\n else: # not pass_topic_word and not return_new_topic_mapping:\n assert not isinstance(res, tuple)\n new_theta = res\n\n assert new_theta.shape == (model.doc_topic_.shape[0], model.doc_topic_.shape[1] - n_exclude)\n\n if pass_topic_word:\n assert new_phi.shape == (model.topic_word_.shape[0] - n_exclude, model.topic_word_.shape[1])\n\n if new_theta.shape[1] > 0:\n if renormalize:\n assert np.allclose(np.sum(new_theta, axis=1), 1)\n else:\n assert np.all(np.sum(new_theta, axis=1) <= 1 + 1e-5)\n\n if return_new_topic_mapping:\n old_indices = list(topic_mapping.keys())\n new_indices = list(topic_mapping.values())\n assert len(old_indices) == len(new_indices) == new_theta.shape[1]\n assert 0 <= min(old_indices) < model.doc_topic_.shape[1]\n assert 0 <= max(old_indices) < model.doc_topic_.shape[1]\n assert 0 <= min(new_indices) < new_theta.shape[1]\n assert 0 <= max(new_indices) < new_theta.shape[1]\n\n for old_ind, new_ind in topic_mapping.items():\n old_t = model.doc_topic_[:, old_ind]\n new_t = new_theta[:, new_ind]\n assert np.allclose(old_t, new_t)\n\n if pass_topic_word:\n assert np.allclose(model.topic_word_[old_ind, :], new_phi[new_ind, :])\n" }, { "path": "tests/test_topicmod_visualize.py", "content": "import os\n\nimport pytest\nfrom hypothesis import given, strategies as st, settings\n\nimport numpy as np\nimport matplotlib.pyplot as plt\n\nfrom ._testtools import strategy_2d_prob_distribution\n\nfrom tmtoolkit.utils import empty_chararray\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod import model_io, visualize\n\n\ndef test_generate_wordclouds_for_topic_words():\n try:\n import lda\n import PIL\n from wordcloud import WordCloud\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('at least one of lda, Pillow, wordcloud not installed')\n\n data = model_io.load_ldamodel_from_pickle(os.path.join('tests', 'data', 'tiny_model_reuters_5_topics.pickle'))\n model = data['model']\n vocab = data['vocab']\n\n phi = model.topic_word_\n assert phi.shape == (5, len(vocab))\n\n topic_word_clouds = visualize.generate_wordclouds_for_topic_words(phi, vocab, 10)\n assert len(topic_word_clouds) == 5\n assert set(topic_word_clouds.keys()) == set('topic_%d' % i for i in range(1, 6))\n assert all(isinstance(wc, PIL.Image.Image) for wc in topic_word_clouds.values())\n\n topic_word_clouds = visualize.generate_wordclouds_for_topic_words(phi, vocab, 10,\n which_topics=('topic_1', 'topic_2'),\n return_images=False,\n width=640, height=480)\n assert set(topic_word_clouds.keys()) == {'topic_1', 'topic_2'}\n assert all(isinstance(wc, WordCloud) for wc in topic_word_clouds.values())\n assert all(wc.width == 640 and wc.height == 480 for wc in topic_word_clouds.values())\n\n\ndef test_generate_wordclouds_for_document_topics():\n try:\n import lda\n import PIL\n from wordcloud import WordCloud\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('at least one of lda, Pillow, wordcloud not installed')\n\n data = model_io.load_ldamodel_from_pickle(os.path.join('tests', 'data', 'tiny_model_reuters_5_topics.pickle'))\n model = data['model']\n doc_labels = data['doc_labels']\n\n theta = model.doc_topic_\n assert theta.shape == (len(doc_labels), 5)\n\n doc_topic_clouds = visualize.generate_wordclouds_for_document_topics(theta, doc_labels, 3)\n assert len(doc_topic_clouds) == len(doc_labels)\n assert set(doc_topic_clouds.keys()) == set(doc_labels)\n assert all(isinstance(wc, PIL.Image.Image) for wc in doc_topic_clouds.values())\n\n which_docs = doc_labels[:2]\n assert len(which_docs) == 2\n doc_topic_clouds = visualize.generate_wordclouds_for_document_topics(theta, doc_labels, 3,\n which_documents=which_docs,\n return_images=False,\n width=640, height=480)\n assert set(doc_topic_clouds.keys()) == set(which_docs)\n assert all(isinstance(wc, WordCloud) for wc in doc_topic_clouds.values())\n assert all(wc.width == 640 and wc.height == 480 for wc in doc_topic_clouds.values())\n\n\ndef test_write_wordclouds_to_folder(tmpdir):\n try:\n import lda\n import PIL\n from wordcloud import WordCloud\n except ImportError:\n pytest.skip('at least one of lda, Pillow, wordcloud not installed')\n\n path = tmpdir.mkdir('wordclouds').dirname\n\n data = model_io.load_ldamodel_from_pickle(os.path.join('tests', 'data', 'tiny_model_reuters_5_topics.pickle'))\n model = data['model']\n vocab = data['vocab']\n\n phi = model.topic_word_\n assert phi.shape == (5, len(vocab))\n\n topic_word_clouds = visualize.generate_wordclouds_for_topic_words(phi, vocab, 10)\n\n visualize.write_wordclouds_to_folder(topic_word_clouds, path, 'cloud_{label}.png')\n\n for label in topic_word_clouds.keys():\n assert os.path.exists(os.path.join(path, 'cloud_{label}.png'.format(label=label)))\n\n\n@given(\n doc_topic=strategy_2d_prob_distribution(),\n make_topic_labels=st.booleans()\n)\ndef test_plot_doc_topic_heatmap(doc_topic, make_topic_labels):\n doc_topic = np.array(doc_topic)\n doc_labels = ['d%d' % i for i in range(doc_topic.shape[0])]\n\n if make_topic_labels and doc_topic.ndim == 2:\n topic_labels = ['t%d' % i for i in range(doc_topic.shape[1])]\n else:\n topic_labels = None\n\n fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(8, 6))\n\n if doc_topic.ndim != 2 or 0 in set(doc_topic.shape):\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n visualize.plot_doc_topic_heatmap(fig, ax, doc_topic, doc_labels=doc_labels, topic_labels=topic_labels)\n else:\n visualize.plot_doc_topic_heatmap(fig, ax, doc_topic, doc_labels=doc_labels, topic_labels=topic_labels)\n\n plt.close(fig)\n\n\n@given(topic_word=strategy_2d_prob_distribution())\ndef test_plot_topic_word_heatmap(topic_word):\n topic_word = np.array(topic_word)\n\n if topic_word.ndim == 2:\n vocab = np.array(['t%d' % i for i in range(topic_word.shape[1])])\n else:\n vocab = empty_chararray()\n\n fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(8, 6))\n\n if topic_word.ndim != 2 or 0 in set(topic_word.shape):\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n visualize.plot_topic_word_heatmap(fig, ax, topic_word, vocab)\n else:\n visualize.plot_topic_word_heatmap(fig, ax, topic_word, vocab)\n\n plt.close(fig)\n\n\n# TODO: check how eval. results are generated and reenable this\n# @settings(deadline=5000)\n# @given(n_param_sets=st.integers(0, 10),\n# n_params=st.integers(1, 3),\n# n_metrics=st.integers(1, 3),\n# plot_specific_metric=st.booleans())\n# def test_plot_eval_results(n_param_sets, n_params, n_metrics, plot_specific_metric):\n# param_names = ['param' + str(i) for i in range(n_params)]\n# metric_names = ['metric' + str(i) for i in range(n_metrics)]\n# res = []\n# for _ in range(n_param_sets):\n# param_set = dict(zip(param_names, np.random.randint(0, 100, n_params)))\n# metric_results = dict(zip(metric_names, np.random.uniform(0, 1, n_metrics)))\n# res.append((param_set, metric_results))\n#\n# p = random.sample(param_names, random.randint(1, len(param_names)))\n# by_param = evaluate.results_by_parameter(res, p)\n#\n# if not by_param:\n# with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n# visualize.plot_eval_results(by_param)\n# else:\n# if plot_specific_metric:\n# metric = random.choice(metric_names)\n# else:\n# metric = None\n#\n# fig, _, _ = visualize.plot_eval_results(by_param, metric=metric, param=p)\n# plt.close(fig)\n" }, { "path": "tests/test_utils.py", "content": "import logging\nimport math\nimport os.path\nimport string\nfrom datetime import date\n\nimport pytest\nimport hypothesis.strategies as st\nfrom hypothesis import given\nimport numpy as np\nimport pandas as pd\nfrom scipy.sparse import coo_matrix, isspmatrix_csr\n\nfrom ._testtools import strategy_dtm_small\n\nfrom tmtoolkit.utils import (pickle_data, unpickle_file, flatten_list, greedy_partitioning,\n mat2d_window_from_indices, combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise, path_split, read_text_file,\n linebreaks_win2unix, split_func_args, empty_chararray, as_chararray, merge_dicts,\n merge_sets, sample_dict, enable_logging, set_logging_level, disable_logging, dict2df,\n applychain)\n\nPRINTABLE_ASCII_CHARS = [chr(c) for c in range(32, 127)]\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('level, fmt', [\n (logging.DEBUG, '%(levelname)s:%(name)s:%(message)s'),\n (logging.INFO, '%(levelname)s:%(name)s:%(message)s'),\n (logging.WARNING, '%(levelname)s:%(name)s:%(message)s'),\n (logging.INFO, ''),\n])\ndef test_enable_disable_logging(caplog, level, fmt):\n tmtk_logger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n tmtk_logger.setLevel(logging.WARNING) # reset to default level\n\n tmtk_logger.debug('test line debug 1')\n tmtk_logger.info('test line info 1')\n assert caplog.text == ''\n\n # pytest caplog fixture uses an extra logging handler (which is already added to the logger)\n if fmt == '':\n enable_logging(level, logging_handler=caplog.handler, add_logging_handler=False)\n else:\n enable_logging(level, fmt, logging_handler=caplog.handler, add_logging_handler=False)\n\n tmtk_logger.debug('test line debug 2')\n if level == logging.DEBUG:\n assert caplog.text.endswith('DEBUG:tmtoolkit:test line debug 2\\n')\n if fmt == '':\n assert caplog.text.startswith(date.today().isoformat())\n else:\n assert caplog.text == ''\n\n caplog.clear()\n\n tmtk_logger.info('test line info 2')\n if level <= logging.INFO:\n assert caplog.text.endswith('INFO:tmtoolkit:test line info 2\\n')\n if fmt == '':\n assert caplog.text.startswith(date.today().isoformat())\n else:\n assert caplog.text == ''\n\n if level > logging.DEBUG: # reduce logging level to DEBUG\n caplog.clear()\n set_logging_level(logging.DEBUG)\n tmtk_logger.debug('test line debug 3')\n assert caplog.text.endswith('DEBUG:tmtoolkit:test line debug 3\\n')\n if fmt == '':\n assert caplog.text.startswith(date.today().isoformat())\n\n caplog.clear()\n disable_logging()\n\n tmtk_logger.debug('test line debug 4')\n tmtk_logger.info('test line info 4')\n\n assert caplog.text == ''\n\n\ndef test_pickle_unpickle():\n pfile = os.path.join('tests', 'data', 'test_pickle_unpickle.pickle')\n input_data = ('foo', 123, [])\n pickle_data(input_data, pfile)\n\n output_data = unpickle_file(pfile)\n\n for i, o in zip(input_data, output_data):\n assert i == o\n\n\ndef test_path_split():\n assert path_split('') == []\n assert path_split('/') == []\n assert path_split('a') == ['a']\n assert path_split('/a') == ['a']\n assert path_split('/a/') == ['a']\n assert path_split('a/') == ['a']\n assert path_split('a/b') == ['a', 'b']\n assert path_split('a/b/c') == ['a', 'b', 'c']\n assert path_split('/a/b/c') == ['a', 'b', 'c']\n assert path_split('/a/b/c/') == ['a', 'b', 'c']\n assert path_split('/a/../b/c/') == ['a', '..', 'b', 'c']\n assert path_split('/a/b/c/d.txt') == ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd.txt']\n\n\ndef test_read_text_file():\n fpath = os.path.join('tests', 'data', 'gutenberg', 'kafka_verwandlung.txt')\n contents = read_text_file(fpath, encoding='utf-8')\n assert len(contents) > 0\n contents = read_text_file(fpath, encoding='utf-8', read_size=10)\n assert 5 <= len(contents) <= 10\n contents = read_text_file(fpath, encoding='utf-8', read_size=10, force_unix_linebreaks=False)\n assert len(contents) == 10\n contents = read_text_file(fpath, encoding='utf-8', read_size=100)\n assert 0 < len(contents) <= 100\n\n\n@given(text=st.text(alphabet=list('abc \\r\\n'), max_size=20))\ndef test_linebreaks_win2unix(text):\n res = linebreaks_win2unix(text)\n assert '\\r\\n' not in res\n if '\\r\\n' in text:\n assert '\\n' in res\n\n\ndef test_empty_chararray():\n res = empty_chararray()\n assert isinstance(res, np.ndarray)\n assert len(res) == 0\n assert res.ndim == 1\n assert np.issubdtype(res.dtype, 'str')\n\n\n@given(x=st.lists(st.integers()),\n as_numpy_array=st.booleans())\ndef test_as_chararray(x, as_numpy_array):\n x_orig = x\n if as_numpy_array:\n x = np.array(x)\n\n res = as_chararray(x)\n assert isinstance(res, np.ndarray)\n assert len(res) == len(x)\n assert res.ndim == 1\n assert np.issubdtype(res.dtype, 'str')\n assert res.tolist() == list(map(str, x_orig))\n\n\n@given(data=st.dictionaries(keys=st.text(string.ascii_letters, min_size=1), values=st.integers(), max_size=10),\n key_name=st.text(string.ascii_letters, min_size=1),\n value_name=st.text(string.ascii_letters, min_size=1),\n sort=st.sampled_from([None, 'key', 'value']),\n asc=st.booleans())\ndef test_dict2df(data, key_name, value_name, sort, asc):\n if sort == 'key':\n sort_arg = key_name\n elif sort == 'value':\n sort_arg = value_name\n else:\n sort_arg = None\n\n if not asc and sort is not None:\n sort_arg = '-' + sort_arg\n\n if key_name == value_name:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n dict2df(data, key_name, value_name, sort=sort_arg)\n else:\n res = dict2df(data, key_name, value_name, sort=sort_arg)\n assert isinstance(res, pd.DataFrame)\n assert len(res) == len(data)\n assert res.columns.tolist() == [key_name, value_name]\n\n # check key - value mapping\n for k, v in data.items():\n cell = res.loc[res[key_name] == k, value_name].tolist()\n assert len(cell) == 1\n assert cell[0] == v\n\n # check sort\n if sort == 'key':\n assert res[key_name].tolist() == sorted(data.keys(), reverse=not asc)\n elif sort == 'value':\n assert res[value_name].tolist() == sorted(data.values(), reverse=not asc)\n else:\n assert res[key_name].tolist() == list(data.keys())\n assert res[value_name].tolist() == list(data.values())\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('expected, funcs, initial_arg', [\n (None, [], 1),\n (1, [lambda x: x], 1),\n (1, [lambda x: -x, lambda x: -x], 1),\n (2.0, [lambda x: x**2, math.sqrt], 2),\n (8.0, [lambda x: x**2, math.sqrt, lambda x: x**3], 2),\n])\ndef test_applychain(expected, funcs, initial_arg):\n if expected is None:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n applychain(funcs, initial_arg)\n else:\n res = applychain(funcs, initial_arg)\n if isinstance(expected, float):\n assert math.isclose(res, expected)\n else:\n assert res == expected\n\n\n@given(l=st.lists(st.integers(0, 10), min_size=2, max_size=2).flatmap(\n lambda size: st.lists(st.lists(st.integers(), min_size=size[0], max_size=size[0]),\n min_size=size[1], max_size=size[1])))\ndef test_flatten_list(l):\n l_ = flatten_list(l)\n\n assert type(l_) is list\n assert len(l_) == sum(map(len, l))\n\n\n@given(\n mat=strategy_dtm_small(),\n n_row_indices=st.integers(0, 10),\n n_col_indices=st.integers(0, 10),\n copy=st.booleans()\n)\ndef test_mat2d_window_from_indices(mat, n_row_indices, n_col_indices, copy):\n mat = np.array(mat)\n\n n_rows, n_cols = mat.shape\n\n if n_row_indices == 0:\n row_indices = None\n else:\n row_indices = np.random.choice(np.arange(n_rows), size=min(n_rows, n_row_indices), replace=False)\n\n if n_col_indices == 0:\n col_indices = None\n else:\n col_indices = np.random.choice(np.arange(n_cols), size=min(n_cols, n_col_indices), replace=False)\n\n window = mat2d_window_from_indices(mat, row_indices, col_indices, copy)\n\n if row_indices is None:\n asserted_y_shape = n_rows\n else:\n asserted_y_shape = len(row_indices)\n assert window.shape[0] == asserted_y_shape\n\n if col_indices is None:\n asserted_x_shape = n_cols\n else:\n asserted_x_shape = len(col_indices)\n assert window.shape[1] == asserted_x_shape\n\n if row_indices is None:\n row_indices_check = np.arange(n_rows)\n else:\n row_indices_check = row_indices\n\n if col_indices is None:\n col_indices_check = np.arange(n_cols)\n else:\n col_indices_check = col_indices\n\n for w_y, m_y in enumerate(row_indices_check):\n for w_x, m_x in enumerate(col_indices_check):\n assert window[w_y, w_x] == mat[m_y, m_x]\n\n\n@given(dicts=st.lists(st.dictionaries(st.text(), st.integers())),\n sort_keys=st.booleans(),\n safe=st.booleans())\ndef test_merge_dicts(dicts, sort_keys, safe):\n all_keys = set()\n has_common_keys = False\n for d in dicts:\n ks = set(d.keys())\n if not has_common_keys and any(k in all_keys for k in ks):\n has_common_keys = True\n all_keys.update(ks)\n\n if len(dicts) > 1 and has_common_keys and safe:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'^merging these containers would overwrite already existing contents'):\n merge_dicts(dicts, sort_keys=sort_keys, safe=safe)\n else:\n res = merge_dicts(dicts, sort_keys=sort_keys, safe=safe)\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n n = sum(map(len, dicts))\n if has_common_keys:\n assert len(res) <= n\n else:\n assert len(res) == n\n for d in dicts:\n for k, v in d.items():\n assert res[k] == v\n assert set(res.keys()) == all_keys\n if sort_keys:\n assert list(res.keys()) == sorted(all_keys)\n\n@given(sets=st.lists(st.sets(st.integers())), safe=st.booleans())\ndef test_merge_sets(sets, safe):\n all_elems = set()\n has_common_elems = False\n for s in sets:\n if not has_common_elems and any(e in all_elems for e in s):\n has_common_elems = True\n all_elems.update(s)\n\n if len(sets) > 1 and has_common_elems and safe:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError, match=r'^merging these containers would overwrite already existing contents'):\n merge_sets(sets, safe=safe)\n else:\n res = merge_sets(sets, safe=safe)\n assert res == all_elems\n\n\n@given(d=st.dictionaries(st.text(), st.integers()), n=st.integers())\ndef test_sample_dict(d, n):\n if 0 <= n <= len(d):\n res = sample_dict(d, n=n)\n assert isinstance(res, dict)\n assert len(res) == n\n assert set(res.keys()) <= set(d.keys())\n\n for k, v in res.items():\n assert v == d[k]\n else:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n sample_dict(d, n=n)\n\n\n@given(elems_dict=st.dictionaries(st.text(string.printable), st.floats(allow_nan=False, allow_infinity=False)),\n k=st.integers())\ndef test_greedy_partitioning(elems_dict, k):\n if k <= 0:\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n greedy_partitioning(elems_dict, k)\n else:\n bins = greedy_partitioning(elems_dict, k)\n\n if 1 < k <= len(elems_dict):\n assert k == len(bins)\n else:\n assert len(bins) == len(elems_dict)\n\n if k == 1:\n assert bins == elems_dict\n else:\n assert sum(len(b.keys()) for b in bins) == len(elems_dict)\n assert all((k in elems_dict.keys() for k in b.keys()) for b in bins)\n\n if k > len(elems_dict):\n assert all(len(b) == 1 for b in bins)\n\n\ndef test_combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise():\n m1 = coo_matrix(np.array([\n [1, 0, 3],\n [0, 2, 0],\n ]))\n \n cols1 = list('CAD')\n rows1 = [4, 0] # row labels. can be integers!\n \n m2 = coo_matrix(np.array([\n [0, 0, 1, 2],\n [3, 4, 5, 6],\n [2, 1, 0, 0],\n ]))\n\n cols2 = list('DBCA')\n rows2 = [3, 1, 2]\n\n m3 = coo_matrix(np.array([\n [9, 8],\n ]))\n\n cols3 = list('BD')\n\n m4 = coo_matrix(np.array([\n [9],\n [8]\n ]))\n\n cols4 = list('A')\n\n m5 = coo_matrix((0, 0), dtype=int)\n\n cols5 = []\n\n expected_1_2 = np.array([\n [0, 0, 1, 3],\n [2, 0, 0, 0],\n [2, 0, 1, 0],\n [6, 4, 5, 3],\n [0, 1, 0, 2],\n ])\n\n expected_1_5 = np.array([\n [0, 0, 1, 3],\n [2, 0, 0, 0],\n [2, 0, 1, 0],\n [6, 4, 5, 3],\n [0, 1, 0, 2],\n [0, 9, 0, 8], # 3\n [9, 0, 0, 0], # 4\n [8, 0, 0, 0], # 4\n ])\n\n expected_1_2_rows_sorted = np.array([\n [2, 0, 0, 0],\n [6, 4, 5, 3],\n [0, 1, 0, 2],\n [2, 0, 1, 0],\n [0, 0, 1, 3],\n ])\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise([], [])\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise((m1, m2), (cols1, ))\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise((m1, m2), (cols1, list('X')))\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise((m2, ), (cols1, cols2))\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise((m1, m2), (cols1, cols2), [])\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise((m1, m2), (cols1, cols2), (rows1, rows1))\n\n with pytest.raises(ValueError):\n combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise((m1, m2), (cols1, cols2), (rows1, [0, 0, 0, 0]))\n\n # matrices 1 and 2, no row re-ordering\n res, res_cols = combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise((m1, m2), (cols1, cols2))\n \n assert isspmatrix_csr(res)\n assert res.shape == (5, 4)\n assert np.all(res.A == expected_1_2)\n assert np.array_equal(res_cols, np.array(list('ABCD')))\n\n # matrices 1 and 2, re-order rows\n res, res_cols, res_rows = combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise((m1, m2), (cols1, cols2), (rows1, rows2))\n assert isspmatrix_csr(res)\n assert res.shape == (5, 4)\n assert np.all(res.A == expected_1_2_rows_sorted)\n assert np.array_equal(res_cols, np.array(list('ABCD')))\n assert np.array_equal(res_rows, np.arange(5))\n\n # matrices 1 to 5, no row re-ordering\n res, res_cols = combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise((m1, m2, m3, m4, m5), (cols1, cols2, cols3, cols4, cols5))\n\n assert isspmatrix_csr(res)\n assert np.all(res.A == expected_1_5)\n assert np.array_equal(res_cols, np.array(list('ABCD')))\n\n\n@pytest.mark.parametrize('testfn, testargs, expargs1, expargs2', [\n (lambda x, y: ..., {'x': 1, 'y': 2, 'z': 3}, {'x': 1, 'y': 2}, {'z': 3}),\n (lambda: ..., {'x': 1, 'y': 2, 'z': 3}, {}, {'x': 1, 'y': 2, 'z': 3}),\n (lambda x, y, z: ..., {'x': 1, 'y': 2, 'z': 3}, {'x': 1, 'y': 2, 'z': 3}, {}),\n])\ndef test_split_func_args(testfn, testargs, expargs1, expargs2):\n res = split_func_args(testfn, testargs)\n assert isinstance(res, tuple) and len(res) == 2\n args1, args2 = res\n assert args1 == expargs1\n assert args2 == expargs2\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/__init__.py", "content": "\"\"\"\ntmtoolkit – Text Mining and Topic Modeling Toolkit for Python\n\nMarkus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nfrom importlib.util import find_spec\nimport logging\n\n__title__ = 'tmtoolkit'\n__version__ = '0.11.2'\n__author__ = 'Markus Konrad'\n__license__ = 'Apache License 2.0'\n\nlogger = logging.getLogger(__title__)\nlogger.addHandler(logging.NullHandler())\nlogger.setLevel(logging.WARNING) # set default level\n\n\nfrom . import bow, topicmod, tokenseq, types, utils\n\nif not any(find_spec(pkg) is None for pkg in ('spacy', 'bidict', 'loky')):\n from . import corpus\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/__main__.py", "content": "\"\"\"\ntmtoolkit – Text Mining and Topic Modeling Toolkit for Python\n\nCLI module\n\nMarkus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nHELP_TEXT = \"\"\"tmtoolkit installation setup\n\nRun\n\n python -m tmtoolkit setup \n\nto install all necessary language models for languages listed as\ncomma-separated language ISO codes in . The list must\nbe specified without spaces. Example:\n\n python -m tmtoolkit setup en,de,ru\n\nThis will install language models for English, German and Russian.\nTo install all available language models, run:\n\n python -m tmtoolkit setup all\n\nYou can pass two additional arguments:\n\n --variants=... sets the model size variants to install; default is --variants=sm,md\n --no-update if this argument is passed, only models that are not installed so far will be installed\n\"\"\"\n\nif __name__ == '__main__':\n import sys\n import subprocess\n import json\n\n try:\n from tmtoolkit.corpus import DEFAULT_LANGUAGE_MODELS\n except ImportError:\n print('error: tmtoolkit is not installed with the dependencies required for text processing; '\n 'install tmtoolkit with the [recommended] or [textproc] option', file=sys.stderr)\n exit(1)\n\n def _setup(args):\n from spacy.cli.download import download\n\n variants_switch = '--variants='\n i_variants_arg = None\n for i, arg in enumerate(args):\n if arg.startswith(variants_switch):\n i_variants_arg = i\n break\n\n if i_variants_arg is not None:\n vararg = args.pop(i_variants_arg)\n variants = vararg[len(variants_switch):].split(',')\n else:\n variants = ['sm', 'md']\n\n try:\n args.remove('--no-update')\n no_update = True\n except ValueError:\n no_update = False\n\n if not args:\n print('error: you must pass a list of two-letter ISO 639-1 language codes to install the respective '\n 'language models or the string \"all\" to install all available language models', file=sys.stderr)\n exit(3)\n\n if args == ['all']:\n install_languages = list(DEFAULT_LANGUAGE_MODELS.keys())\n else:\n install_languages = []\n for arg in args:\n install_languages.extend([l for l in map(str.strip, arg.split(',')) if l])\n\n print('checking if required spaCy data packages are installed...')\n\n try:\n piplist_str = subprocess.check_output([sys.executable, '-m', 'pip', 'list',\n '--disable-pip-version-check',\n '--format', 'json'])\n except subprocess.CalledProcessError as exc:\n print('error: calling pip failed with the following error message\\n' + str(exc), file=sys.stderr)\n exit(4)\n\n piplist = json.loads(piplist_str)\n installed_pkgs = set(item['name'] for item in piplist)\n\n for modelvar in variants:\n model_pkgs = dict(zip(DEFAULT_LANGUAGE_MODELS.keys(),\n map(lambda x: x.replace('_', '-') + '-' + modelvar,\n DEFAULT_LANGUAGE_MODELS.values())))\n\n for lang in install_languages:\n if lang not in DEFAULT_LANGUAGE_MODELS.keys():\n print(f'error: no language model for language code \"{lang}\"', file=sys.stderr)\n exit(5)\n\n lang_model_pkg = model_pkgs[lang]\n\n if no_update and lang_model_pkg in installed_pkgs:\n print(f'language model package \"{lang_model_pkg}\" for language code \"{lang}\" is already installed '\n f'-- skipping')\n continue\n\n lang_model = DEFAULT_LANGUAGE_MODELS[lang] + '_' + modelvar\n print(f'installing language model \"{lang_model}\" for language code \"{lang}\"...')\n download(lang_model)\n\n print('done.')\n\n def _help(args):\n print(HELP_TEXT)\n\n commands = {\n 'setup': _setup,\n 'help': _help,\n }\n\n if len(sys.argv) <= 1:\n print('available commands: ' + ', '.join(commands.keys()))\n print('run `python -m tmtoolkit help` for help')\n exit(6)\n\n cmd = sys.argv[1]\n if cmd in commands.keys():\n commands[cmd](sys.argv[2:])\n else:\n print('command not supported:', cmd, file=sys.stderr)\n exit(7)\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/bow/__init__.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nBag-of-Words (BoW) sub-package with modules for generating document-term-matrices (DTMs) and some common statistics for\nthe BoW model.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nfrom . import bow_stats, dtm\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/bow/bow_stats.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nCommon statistics from bag-of-words (BoW) matrices.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nimport numpy as np\nfrom scipy.sparse import issparse\n\nimport pandas as pd\n\n\ndef doc_lengths(dtm):\n \"\"\"\n Return the length, i.e. number of terms for each document in document-term-matrix `dtm`.\n This corresponds to the row-wise sums in `dtm`.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw terms counts\n :return: NumPy array of size N (number of docs) with integers indicating the number of terms per document\n \"\"\"\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` must be a 2D array/matrix')\n\n res = np.sum(dtm, axis=1)\n if res.ndim != 1:\n return res.A.flatten()\n else:\n return res\n\n\ndef doc_frequencies(dtm, min_val=1, proportions=0):\n \"\"\"\n For each term in the vocab of `dtm` (i.e. its columns), return how often it occurs at least `min_val` times per\n document.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw term counts.\n :param min_val: threshold for counting occurrences\n :param proportions: one of :attr:`~tmtoolkit.types.Proportion`: ``NO (0)`` – return counts; ``YES (1)`` – return\n proportions; ``LOG (2)`` – return log of proportions\n :return: NumPy array of size M (vocab size) indicating how often each term occurs at least `min_val` times.\n \"\"\"\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` must be a 2D array/matrix')\n\n doc_freq = np.sum(dtm >= min_val, axis=0)\n\n if doc_freq.ndim != 1:\n doc_freq = doc_freq.A.flatten()\n\n if proportions == 1:\n return doc_freq / dtm.shape[0]\n elif proportions == 2:\n return np.log(doc_freq) - np.log(dtm.shape[0])\n else:\n return doc_freq\n\n\ndef word_cooccurrence(dtm, min_val=1, proportions=0):\n \"\"\"\n Calculate the co-document frequency (aka word co-occurrence) matrix. Alias for\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.codoc_frequencies`.\n \"\"\"\n return codoc_frequencies(dtm, min_val=min_val, proportions=proportions)\n\n\ndef codoc_frequencies(dtm, min_val=1, proportions=0):\n \"\"\"\n Calculate the co-document frequency (aka word co-occurrence) matrix for a document-term matrix `dtm`, i.e. how often\n each pair of tokens occurs together at least `min_val` times in the same document. If `proportions` is True,\n return proportions scaled to the number of documents instead of absolute numbers.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw term counts.\n :param min_val: threshold for counting occurrences\n :param proportions: one of :attr:`~tmtoolkit.types.Proportion`: ``NO (0)`` – return counts; ``YES (1)`` – return\n proportions; ``LOG (2)`` – convert input to dense matrix if necessary and return\n *log(proportions + 1)*\n :return: co-document frequency (aka word co-occurrence) matrix with shape (vocab size, vocab size)\n \"\"\"\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` must be a 2D array/matrix')\n\n if dtm.shape[1] < 2:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` must have at least two columns')\n\n if issparse(dtm) and dtm.format != 'csc':\n dtm = dtm.tocsc()\n\n bin_dtm = (dtm >= min_val).astype(int)\n\n cooc = bin_dtm.T @ bin_dtm\n\n if proportions == 1:\n return cooc / dtm.shape[0]\n elif proportions == 2:\n if issparse(cooc):\n cooc = cooc.todense()\n return np.log1p(cooc) - np.log(dtm.shape[0])\n else: # proportions == 0\n return cooc\n\n\ndef term_frequencies(dtm, proportions=0):\n \"\"\"\n Return the number of occurrences of each term in the vocab across all documents in document-term-matrix `dtm`.\n This corresponds to the column-wise sums in `dtm`.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw term counts.\n :param proportions: one of :attr:`~tmtoolkit.types.Proportion`: ``NO (0)`` – return counts; ``YES (1)`` – return\n proportions; ``LOG (2)`` – return log of proportions\n :return: NumPy array of size M (vocab size) with integers indicating the number of occurrences of each term in the\n vocab across all documents.\n \"\"\"\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` must be a 2D array/matrix')\n\n unnorm = np.sum(dtm, axis=0)\n if unnorm.ndim != 1:\n unnorm = unnorm.A.flatten()\n\n if proportions > 0:\n n = unnorm.sum()\n if n == 0:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` does not contain any terms (is all-zero)')\n else:\n if proportions == 1:\n return unnorm / n\n else: # proportions == 2\n return np.log(unnorm) - np.log(n)\n else:\n return unnorm\n\n\ndef tf_binary(dtm):\n \"\"\"\n Transform raw count document-term-matrix `dtm` to binary term frequency matrix. This matrix contains 1 whenever\n a term occurred in a document, else 0.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw term counts.\n :return: (sparse) binary term frequency matrix of type integer of size NxM\n \"\"\"\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` must be a 2D array/matrix')\n\n return (dtm > 0).astype(int)\n\n\ndef tf_proportions(dtm):\n \"\"\"\n Transform raw count document-term-matrix `dtm` to term frequency matrix with proportions, i.e. term counts\n normalized by document length.\n\n Note that this may introduce NaN values due to division by zero when a document is of length 0.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw term counts\n :return: (sparse) term frequency matrix of size NxM with proportions, i.e. term counts normalized by document length\n \"\"\"\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` must be a 2D array/matrix')\n\n norm_factor = 1 / doc_lengths(dtm)[:, None] # shape: Nx1\n\n if issparse(dtm):\n res = dtm.multiply(norm_factor)\n else:\n res = dtm * norm_factor\n\n if isinstance(res, np.matrix):\n return res.A\n else:\n return res\n\n\ndef tf_log(dtm, log_fn=np.log1p):\n \"\"\"\n Transform raw count document-term-matrix `dtm` to log-normalized term frequency matrix ``log_fn(dtm)``.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw term counts.\n :param log_fn: log function to use; default is NumPy's :func:`numpy.log1p`, which calculates ``log(1 + x)``\n :return: (sparse) log-normalized term frequency matrix of size NxM\n \"\"\"\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` must be a 2D array/matrix')\n\n if log_fn is np.log1p:\n if issparse(dtm):\n return dtm.log1p()\n else:\n return log_fn(dtm)\n else:\n if issparse(dtm):\n dtm = dtm.toarray()\n\n return log_fn(dtm)\n\n\ndef tf_double_norm(dtm, K=0.5):\n \"\"\"\n Transform raw count document-term-matrix `dtm` to double-normalized term frequency matrix\n ``K + (1-K) * dtm / max{t in doc}``, where ``max{t in doc}`` is vector of size N containing the maximum term count\n per document.\n\n Note that this may introduce NaN values due to division by zero when a document is of length 0.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw term counts\n :param K: normalization factor\n :return: double-normalized term frequency matrix of size NxM\n \"\"\"\n if dtm.ndim != 2 or 0 in dtm.shape:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` must be a non-empty 2D array/matrix')\n\n if issparse(dtm):\n dtm = dtm.toarray()\n\n max_per_doc = np.max(dtm, axis=1)\n\n return K + (1 - K) * dtm / max_per_doc[:, None]\n\n\ndef idf(dtm, smooth_log=1, smooth_df=1):\n \"\"\"\n Calculate inverse document frequency (idf) vector from raw count document-term-matrix `dtm` with formula\n ``log(smooth_log + N / (smooth_df + df))``, where ``N`` is the number of documents, ``df`` is the document frequency\n (see function :func:`~tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_frequencies`), `smooth_log` and `smooth_df` are smoothing\n constants. With default arguments, the formula is thus ``log(1 + N/(1+df))``.\n\n Note that this may introduce NaN values due to division by zero when a document is of length 0.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw term counts.\n :param smooth_log: smoothing constant inside log()\n :param smooth_df: smoothing constant to add to document frequency\n :return: NumPy array of size M (vocab size) with inverse document frequency for each term in the vocab\n \"\"\"\n if dtm.ndim != 2 or 0 in dtm.shape:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` must be a non-empty 2D array/matrix')\n\n n_docs = dtm.shape[0]\n df = doc_frequencies(dtm)\n\n if smooth_log == smooth_df == 1: # log1p is faster than the equivalent log(1 + x)\n # log(1 + N/(1+df)) = log((1+df+N)/(1+df)) = log(1+df+N) - log(1+df) = log1p(df+N) - log1p(df)\n return np.log1p(df + n_docs) - np.log1p(df)\n else:\n # with s = smooth_log and t = smooth_df\n # log(s + N/(t+df)) = log((s(t+df)+N)/(t+df)) = log(s(t+df)+N) - log(t+df)\n return np.log(smooth_log * (smooth_df + df) + n_docs) - np.log(smooth_df + df)\n\n\ndef idf_probabilistic(dtm, smooth=1):\n \"\"\"\n Calculate probabilistic inverse document frequency (idf) vector from raw count document-term-matrix `dtm` with\n formula ``log(smooth + (N - df) / df)``, where ``N`` is the number of documents and ``df`` is the document\n frequency (see function :func:`~tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_frequencies`).\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw term counts.\n :param smooth: smoothing constant (setting this to 0 can lead to -inf results)\n :return: NumPy array of size M (vocab size) with probabilistic inverse document frequency for each term in the vocab\n \"\"\"\n if dtm.ndim != 2 or 0 in dtm.shape:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` must be a non-empty 2D array/matrix')\n\n n_docs = dtm.shape[0]\n df = doc_frequencies(dtm)\n x = (n_docs - df) / df\n\n if smooth == 1: # small shortcut\n # log(1 + (N - df) / df) = log(N / df) = log(N) - log(df)\n return np.log(n_docs) - np.log(df)\n else:\n # with s = smooth\n # log(s + (N - df) / df) = log(((s-1)df + N) / df) = log((s-1)df + N) - log(df)\n return np.log((smooth-1) * df + n_docs) - np.log(df)\n\n\ndef tfidf(dtm, tf_func=tf_proportions, idf_func=idf, **kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Calculate tfidf (term frequency inverse document frequency) matrix from raw count document-term-matrix `dtm` with\n matrix multiplication ``tf * diag(idf)``, where `tf` is the term frequency matrix ``tf_func(dtm)`` and ``idf`` is\n the document frequency vector ``idf_func(dtm)``.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw term counts\n :param tf_func: function to calculate term-frequency matrix; see ``tf_*`` functions in this module\n :param idf_func: function to calculate inverse document frequency vector; see ``tf_*`` functions in this module\n :param kwargs: additional parameters passed to `tf_func` or `idf_func` like `K` or `smooth` (depending on which\n parameters these functions except)\n :return: (sparse) tfidf matrix of size NxM\n \"\"\"\n if dtm.ndim != 2 or 0 in dtm.shape:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` must be a non-empty 2D array/matrix')\n\n if idf_func is idf:\n idf_opts = {}\n if 'smooth_log' in kwargs:\n idf_opts['smooth_log'] = kwargs.pop('smooth_log')\n if 'smooth_df' in kwargs:\n idf_opts['smooth_df'] = kwargs.pop('smooth_df')\n\n idf_vec = idf_func(dtm, **idf_opts)\n elif idf_func is idf_probabilistic and 'smooth' in kwargs:\n idf_vec = idf_func(dtm, smooth=kwargs.pop('smooth'))\n else:\n idf_vec = idf_func(dtm)\n\n tf_mat = tf_func(dtm, **kwargs)\n\n # formally, it would be a matrix multiplication: tf * diag(idf), i.e. np.matmul(tf_mat, np.diag(idf_vec)),\n # so that each column i in tf in multiplied by the respective idf value: tf[:, i] * idf[i]\n # but diag(df) would create a large intermediate matrix, so let's use NumPy broadcasting:\n if issparse(tf_mat):\n return tf_mat.multiply(idf_vec)\n else:\n return tf_mat * idf_vec\n\n\ndef sorted_terms(mat, vocab, lo_thresh=0, hi_tresh=None, top_n=None, ascending=False, table_doc_labels=None):\n \"\"\"\n For each row (i.e. document) in a (sparse) document-term-matrix `mat`, do the following:\n\n 1. filter all values according to `lo_thresh` and `hi_thresh`\n 2. sort values and the corresponding terms from `vocab` according to `ascending`\n 3. optionally select the top `top_n` terms\n 4. generate a list with pairs of terms and values\n\n Return the collected lists for each row or convert the result to a data frame if document labels are passed via\n `data_frame_doc_labels` (see shortcut function :func:`~tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.sorted_terms_table`).\n\n :param mat: (sparse) document-term-matrix `mat` (may be tf-idf transformed or any other transformation)\n :param vocab: list or array of vocabulary corresponding to columns in `mat`\n :param lo_thresh: if not None, filter for values greater than `lo_thresh`\n :param hi_tresh: if not None, filter for values lesser than or equal `hi_thresh`\n :param top_n: if not None, select only the top `top_n` terms\n :param ascending: sorting direction\n :param table_doc_labels: optional list/array of document labels corresponding to `mat` rows\n :return: list of list with tuples (term, value) or data table with columns \"doc\", \"term\", \"value\"\n if `data_frame_doc_labels` is given\n \"\"\"\n n_vocab = len(vocab)\n\n if mat.shape[1] != n_vocab:\n raise ValueError('number of columns in `mat` does not match size of `vocab`')\n\n if lo_thresh is not None and hi_tresh is not None and lo_thresh > hi_tresh:\n raise ValueError('`lo_thresh` must be less than or equal `hi_thresh`')\n\n if top_n is not None and top_n < 1:\n raise ValueError('`top_n` must be at least 1')\n\n if table_doc_labels is not None and len(table_doc_labels) != mat.shape[0]:\n raise ValueError('length of `data_frame_doc_labels` must match number of rows in `mat`')\n\n if not isinstance(vocab, np.ndarray):\n vocab = np.array(vocab)\n\n if issparse(mat) and mat.format != 'csr':\n mat = mat.tocsr()\n\n if isinstance(mat, np.matrix):\n mat = mat.A\n\n res = []\n for i in range(mat.shape[0]): # iterate through matrix rows\n row = mat[i, :]\n\n # create mask to filter all values in the row according to `lo_thresh` and `hi_thresh`\n row_mask = np.ones((n_vocab,), dtype=bool)\n if lo_thresh is not None:\n row_mask_tmp = row > lo_thresh\n row_mask &= row_mask_tmp.A[0] if issparse(mat) else row_mask_tmp\n if hi_tresh is not None:\n row_mask_tmp = row > hi_tresh # using inverse of > here instead of <= because of sparse matrix\n row_mask &= ~(row_mask_tmp.A[0] if issparse(mat) else row_mask_tmp)\n\n # indices of values that we pick from this row\n mask_ind = np.where(row_mask)[0]\n\n # pick the values\n if issparse(row):\n mask_vals = row[:, mask_ind].A[0]\n else:\n mask_vals = row[mask_ind]\n\n # create indices that sort the selected values\n sorted_ind = np.argsort(mask_vals)\n if not ascending:\n sorted_ind = sorted_ind[::-1]\n\n # get the terms and values from the row in sorted order\n sorted_vocab_ind = mask_ind[sorted_ind] # indices into vocab\n row_terms = vocab[sorted_vocab_ind]\n row_vals = mask_vals[sorted_ind]\n\n # optionally select the top `top_n` terms\n if top_n is not None:\n row_terms = row_terms[:top_n]\n row_vals = row_vals[:top_n]\n\n rowsize = len(row_terms)\n assert rowsize == len(row_vals)\n\n if table_doc_labels is not None:\n if rowsize > 0:\n res.append(pd.DataFrame({'doc': np.repeat(table_doc_labels[i], repeats=rowsize),\n 'rank': np.arange(1, len(row_terms) + 1),\n 'token': row_terms,\n 'value': row_vals}))\n else:\n res.append(list(zip(row_terms, row_vals)))\n\n if table_doc_labels is not None:\n if res:\n res = pd.concat(res, axis=0)\n else:\n res = pd.DataFrame({'doc': [], 'rank': [], 'token': [], 'value': []})\n\n return res.set_index(['doc', 'rank'])\n else:\n return res\n\n\ndef sorted_terms_table(mat, vocab, doc_labels, lo_thresh=0, hi_tresh=None, top_n=None, ascending=False):\n \"\"\"\n Shortcut function for :func:`~tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.sorted_terms` which generates a data table with `doc_labels`.\n\n :param mat: (sparse) document-term-matrix `mat` (may be tf-idf transformed or any other transformation)\n :param vocab: list or array of vocabulary corresponding to columns in `mat`\n :param doc_labels: list/array of document labels corresponding to `mat` rows\n :param lo_thresh: if not None, filter for values greater than `lo_thresh`\n :param hi_tresh: if not None, filter for values lesser than or equal `hi_thresh`\n :param top_n: if not None, select only the top `top_n` terms\n :param ascending: sorting direction\n :return: data table with columns \"doc\", \"term\", \"value\"\n \"\"\"\n return sorted_terms(mat, vocab, lo_thresh=lo_thresh, hi_tresh=hi_tresh, top_n=top_n,\n ascending=ascending, table_doc_labels=doc_labels)\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/bow/dtm.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nFunctions for creating a document-term matrix (DTM) and some compatibility functions for Gensim.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nimport numpy as np\nfrom scipy.sparse import coo_matrix, issparse\n\nimport pandas as pd\n\n\n#%% DTM creation\n\ndef create_sparse_dtm(vocab, docs, n_unique_tokens, vocab_is_sorted=False, dtype=None):\n \"\"\"\n Create a sparse document-term-matrix (DTM) as matrix in\n `COO sparse format `_\n from vocabulary array `vocab`, a list of tokenized documents `docs` and the number of unique tokens across all\n documents `n_unique_tokens`.\n\n The DTM's rows are document names, its columns are indices in `vocab`, hence a value ``DTM[j, k]`` is the\n term frequency of term ``vocab[k]`` in document ``j``.\n\n A note on performance: Creating the three arrays for a COO matrix seems to be the fastest way to generate a DTM.\n An alternative implementation using LIL format was ~2x slower.\n\n Memory requirement: about ``3 * * 4`` bytes with default dtype (32-bit integer).\n\n .. seealso:: This is the \"low level\" function. For the straight-forward to use function see\n :func:`tmtoolkit.corpus.dtm`, which also calculates `n_unique_tokens`.\n\n :param vocab: list or array of vocabulary used as column names; size must equal number of columns in `dtm`\n :param docs: a list of tokenized documents\n :param n_unique_tokens: number of unique tokens across all documents\n :param vocab_is_sorted: if True, assume that `vocab` is sorted when creating the token IDs\n :param dtype: data type of the resulting matrix\n :return: a sparse document-term-matrix in COO sparse format\n \"\"\"\n\n if vocab_is_sorted:\n vocab_sorter = None\n else:\n vocab_sorter = np.argsort(vocab) # indices that sort \n\n nvocab = len(vocab)\n ndocs = len(docs)\n\n # create arrays for sparse matrix\n dtype = dtype or 'int32'\n data = np.empty(n_unique_tokens, dtype=dtype) # all non-zero term frequencies at data[k]\n cols = np.empty(n_unique_tokens, dtype=dtype) # column index for kth data item (kth term freq.)\n rows = np.empty(n_unique_tokens, dtype=dtype) # row index for kth data item (kth term freq.)\n\n ind = 0 # current index in the sparse matrix data\n # go through all documents with their terms\n for doc_idx, terms in enumerate(docs):\n if len(terms) == 0: continue # skip empty documents\n\n # find indices into `vocab` such that, if the corresponding elements in `terms` were\n # inserted before the indices, the order of `vocab` would be preserved\n # -> array of indices of `terms` in `vocab`\n if vocab_is_sorted:\n term_indices = np.searchsorted(vocab, terms)\n else:\n term_indices = vocab_sorter[np.searchsorted(vocab, terms, sorter=vocab_sorter)]\n\n # count the unique terms of the document and get their vocabulary indices\n uniq_indices, counts = np.unique(term_indices, return_counts=True)\n n_vals = len(uniq_indices)\n ind_end = ind + n_vals\n\n data[ind:ind_end] = counts # save the counts (term frequencies)\n cols[ind:ind_end] = uniq_indices # save the column index: index in \n rows[ind:ind_end] = np.repeat(doc_idx, n_vals) # save it as repeated value\n\n ind = ind_end\n\n assert ind == len(data)\n\n return coo_matrix((data, (rows, cols)), shape=(ndocs, nvocab), dtype=dtype)\n\n\ndef dtm_to_dataframe(dtm, doc_labels, vocab):\n \"\"\"\n Convert a (sparse) DTM to a pandas DataFrame using document labels `doc_labels` as row index and `vocab` as column\n names.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw terms counts\n :param doc_labels: document labels used as row index (row names); size must equal number of rows in `dtm`\n :param vocab: list or array of vocabulary used as column names; size must equal number of columns in `dtm`\n :return: pandas DataFrame\n \"\"\"\n if dtm.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`dtm` must be a 2D array/matrix')\n\n if dtm.shape[0] != len(doc_labels):\n raise ValueError('number of rows must be equal to `len(doc_labels)')\n\n if dtm.shape[1] != len(vocab):\n raise ValueError('number of rows must be equal to `len(vocab)')\n\n if not isinstance(dtm, np.ndarray):\n dtm = dtm.toarray()\n\n return pd.DataFrame(dtm, index=doc_labels, columns=vocab)\n\n\n#%% Gensim compatibility functions\n\n\ndef dtm_to_gensim_corpus(dtm):\n \"\"\"\n Convert a (sparse) DTM to a Gensim Corpus object.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.bow.dtm.gensim_corpus_to_dtm` for the inverse function or\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.bow.dtm.dtm_and_vocab_to_gensim_corpus_and_dict` which additionally creates a Gensim\n :class:`~gensim.corpora.dictionary.Dictionary`.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw terms counts\n :return: a Gensim :class:`gensim.matutils.Sparse2Corpus` object\n \"\"\"\n import gensim\n\n # DTM with documents to words sparse matrix in COO format has to be converted to transposed sparse matrix in CSC\n # format\n dtm_t = dtm.transpose()\n\n if issparse(dtm_t):\n if dtm_t.format != 'csc':\n dtm_sparse = dtm_t.tocsc()\n else:\n dtm_sparse = dtm_t\n else:\n from scipy.sparse import csc_matrix\n dtm_sparse = csc_matrix(dtm_t)\n\n return gensim.matutils.Sparse2Corpus(dtm_sparse)\n\n\ndef gensim_corpus_to_dtm(corpus):\n \"\"\"\n Convert a Gensim corpus object to a sparse DTM in COO format.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.bow.dtm.dtm_to_gensim_corpus` for the inverse function.\n\n :param corpus: Gensim corpus object\n :return: sparse DTM in COO format\n \"\"\"\n import gensim\n from scipy.sparse import coo_matrix\n\n dtm_t = gensim.matutils.corpus2csc(corpus)\n return coo_matrix(dtm_t.transpose())\n\n\ndef dtm_and_vocab_to_gensim_corpus_and_dict(dtm, vocab, as_gensim_dictionary=True):\n \"\"\"\n Convert a (sparse) DTM *and* a vocabulary list to a Gensim Corpus object and\n Gensim :class:`~gensim.corpora.dictionary.Dictionary` object or a Python :func:`dict`.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term-matrix of size NxM (N docs, M is vocab size) with raw terms counts\n :param vocab: list or array of vocabulary\n :param as_gensim_dictionary: if True create Gensim :class:`~gensim.corpora.dictionary.Dictionary` from `vocab`,\n else create Python :func:`dict`\n :return: a 2-tuple with (Corpus object, Gensim :class:`~gensim.corpora.dictionary.Dictionary` or\n Python :func:`dict`)\n \"\"\"\n corpus = dtm_to_gensim_corpus(dtm)\n\n # vocabulary array has to be converted to dict with index -> word mapping\n id2word = dict(zip(range(len(vocab)), vocab))\n\n if as_gensim_dictionary:\n import gensim\n return corpus, gensim.corpora.dictionary.Dictionary().from_corpus(corpus, id2word)\n else:\n return corpus, id2word\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/corpus/__init__.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nModule for processing text as token sequences in labelled documents. A set of documents is represented as *corpus*\nusing the :class:`Corpus` class. This sub-package also provides functions that work with a :class:`Corpus` object.\n\nText parsing and processing relies on the `SpaCy library `_ which must be installed when using this\nsub-package.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nfrom importlib.util import find_spec\n\nfor pkg in ('spacy', 'bidict', 'loky'):\n if find_spec(pkg) is None:\n raise RuntimeError(f'the required package \"{pkg}\" for text processing is not installed; did you install '\n f'tmtoolkit with \"recommended\" or \"textproc\" option? see '\n f'https://tmtoolkit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/install.html for further information')\n\nfrom ..tokenseq import strip_tags, numbertoken_to_magnitude, simplify_unicode_chars\n\nfrom ._common import DEFAULT_LANGUAGE_MODELS, LANGUAGE_LABELS, simplified_pos\nfrom ._document import Document, document_token_attr, document_from_attrs\nfrom ._corpus import Corpus\n\nfrom ._corpusfuncs import (\n doc_tokens, set_token_attr, set_document_attr, vocabulary, dtm, doc_texts, doc_labels, doc_lengths,\n corpus_num_tokens, vocabulary_size, tokens_table, print_summary, vocabulary_counts,\n doc_frequencies, doc_vectors, token_vectors, ngrams, to_lowercase, to_uppercase, remove_chars,\n serialize_corpus, deserialize_corpus, save_corpus_to_picklefile, load_corpus_from_picklefile,\n load_corpus_from_tokens, load_corpus_from_tokens_table, spacydocs,\n lemmatize, remove_punctuation, normalize_unicode, simplify_unicode, doc_token_lengths, filter_clean_tokens,\n corpus_ngramify, filter_tokens_by_mask, remove_tokens_by_mask, filter_tokens, remove_tokens,\n filter_documents, remove_documents, filter_documents_by_mask, remove_documents_by_mask,\n filter_documents_by_docattr, remove_documents_by_docattr, kwic, kwic_table, transform_tokens,\n corpus_summary, corpus_num_chars, filter_tokens_with_kwic, filter_documents_by_label,\n remove_documents_by_label, filter_for_pos, filter_tokens_by_doc_frequency, remove_common_tokens,\n remove_uncommon_tokens, filter_documents_by_length, remove_documents_by_length,\n join_collocations_by_patterns, join_collocations_by_statistic, corpus_tokens_flattened, corpus_collocations,\n remove_token_attr, remove_document_attr, builtin_corpora_info, corpus_add_files, corpus_add_folder,\n corpus_add_tabular, corpus_add_zip, corpus_sample, corpus_split_by_token, doc_num_sents, doc_sent_lengths,\n numbers_to_magnitudes, corpus_split_by_paragraph, doc_labels_sample, corpus_retokenize, corpus_unique_chars,\n corpus_join_documents, find_documents\n)\n\nif find_spec('nltk') is not None: # when NLTK is installed\n from ._nltk_extras import stem\n\nfrom . import visualize\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/corpus/_common.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nInternal module with common functions and constants for text processing in the :mod:`tmtoolkit.corpus` module.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nimport os\nfrom typing import Tuple, Dict\n\nMODULE_PATH = os.path.dirname(os.path.abspath(__file__))\nDATAPATH = os.path.normpath(os.path.join(MODULE_PATH, '..', 'data'))\n\n#: Default SpaCy language models used for a given two-letter ISO 639-1 language code.\n#: These model names will be appended with model size suffix like \"_sm\", \"_md\" or \"_lg\".\nDEFAULT_LANGUAGE_MODELS = {\n 'en': 'en_core_web',\n 'de': 'de_core_news',\n 'fr': 'fr_core_news',\n 'es': 'es_core_news',\n 'pt': 'pt_core_news',\n 'it': 'it_core_news',\n 'nl': 'nl_core_news',\n 'el': 'el_core_news',\n 'nb': 'nb_core_news',\n 'lt': 'lt_core_news',\n 'zh': 'zh_core_web',\n 'ja': 'ja_core_news',\n 'ca': 'ca_core_news',\n 'da': 'da_core_news',\n 'mk': 'mk_core_news',\n 'pl': 'pl_core_news',\n 'ro': 'ro_core_news',\n 'ru': 'ru_core_news',\n}\n\n#: Map two-letter ISO 639-1 language code to language name.\nLANGUAGE_LABELS = {\n 'en': 'english',\n 'de': 'german',\n 'fr': 'french',\n 'es': 'spanish',\n 'pt': 'portuguese',\n 'it': 'italian',\n 'nl': 'dutch',\n 'el': 'greek',\n 'nb': 'norwegian-bokmal',\n 'lt': 'lithuanian',\n 'zh': 'chinese',\n 'ja': 'japanese',\n 'ca': 'catalan',\n 'da': 'danish',\n 'mk': 'macedonian',\n 'pl': 'polish',\n 'ro': 'romanian',\n 'ru': 'russian',\n}\n\nBOOLEAN_SPACY_TOKEN_ATTRS = (\n 'is_alpha', 'is_ascii', 'is_digit', 'is_lower', 'is_upper', 'is_title',\n 'is_punct', 'is_left_punct', 'is_right_punct', 'is_space', 'is_bracket',\n 'is_quote', 'is_currency', 'is_stop', 'like_url', 'like_num', 'like_email',\n)\n\n# SpaCy token attributes per pipeline component\nSPACY_TOKEN_ATTRS = { # type: Dict[str, Tuple[str]]\n '_default': BOOLEAN_SPACY_TOKEN_ATTRS + ('shape', 'sentiment', 'rank', 'cluster'), # always enabled\n 'tagger': ('tag', 'pos'),\n 'morphologizer': ('pos', ),\n 'parser': ('dep', ),\n 'lemmatizer': ('lemma', ),\n 'ner': ('ent_type', 'ent_iob'),\n}\n\nSTD_TOKEN_ATTRS = {'is_punct', 'is_stop', 'like_num', 'tag', 'pos', 'lemma', 'ent_type'}\n\n# all token attributes that can be encoded in a uint64 matrix\nTOKENMAT_ATTRS = set([a for attrs in SPACY_TOKEN_ATTRS.values() for a in attrs]) \\\n | {'whitespace', 'token', 'sent_start'}\n\n\ndef simplified_pos(pos: str, tagset: str = 'ud', default: str = '') -> str:\n \"\"\"\n Return a simplified POS tag for a full POS tag `pos` belonging to a tagset `tagset`.\n\n Does the following conversion by default:\n\n - all N... (noun) tags to 'N'\n - all V... (verb) tags to 'V'\n - all ADJ... (adjective) tags to 'ADJ'\n - all ADV... (adverb) tags to 'ADV'\n - all other to `default`\n\n Does the following conversion by with ``tagset=='penn'``:\n\n - all N... (noun) tags to 'N'\n - all V... (verb) tags to 'V'\n - all JJ... (adjective) tags to 'ADJ'\n - all RB... (adverb) tags to 'ADV'\n - all other to `default`\n\n Does the following conversion by with ``tagset=='ud'``:\n\n - all N... (noun) tags to 'N'\n - all V... (verb) tags to 'V'\n - all JJ... (adjective) tags to 'ADJ'\n - all RB... (adverb) tags to 'ADV'\n - all other to `default`\n\n :param pos: a POS tag as string\n :param tagset: tagset used for `pos`; can be ``'wn'`` (WordNet), ``'penn'`` (Penn tagset)\n or ``'ud'`` (universal dependencies – default)\n :param default: default return value when tag could not be simplified\n :return: simplified tag string\n \"\"\"\n\n if pos and not isinstance(pos, str):\n raise ValueError('`pos` must be a string or None')\n\n if tagset == 'ud':\n if pos in ('NOUN', 'PROPN'):\n return 'N'\n elif pos == 'VERB':\n return 'V'\n elif pos in ('ADJ', 'ADV'):\n return pos\n else:\n return default\n elif tagset == 'penn':\n if pos.startswith('N') or pos.startswith('V'):\n return pos[0]\n elif pos.startswith('JJ'):\n return 'ADJ'\n elif pos.startswith('RB'):\n return 'ADV'\n else:\n return default\n elif tagset == 'wn':\n if pos.startswith('N') or pos.startswith('V'):\n return pos[0]\n elif pos.startswith('ADJ') or pos.startswith('ADV'):\n return pos[:3]\n else:\n return default\n else:\n raise ValueError('unknown tagset \"%s\"' % tagset)\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/corpus/_corpus.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nInternal module that implements :class:`Corpus` class representing a set of texts as token sequences in labelled\ndocuments.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nfrom __future__ import annotations # req. for classmethod return type; see https://stackoverflow.com/a/49872353\n\nimport logging\nimport multiprocessing as mp\nimport string\nfrom copy import deepcopy\nfrom functools import partial\nfrom typing import Dict, Union, List, Optional, Any, Iterator, Callable, Sequence, ItemsView, KeysView, ValuesView, \\\n Generator, Tuple, Collection\n\nimport numpy as np\nimport spacy\nfrom bidict import bidict\nfrom spacy import Language\nfrom spacy.tokens import Doc\nfrom loky import get_reusable_executor, ProcessPoolExecutor\n\nfrom ._common import DEFAULT_LANGUAGE_MODELS, SPACY_TOKEN_ATTRS, STD_TOKEN_ATTRS, BOOLEAN_SPACY_TOKEN_ATTRS, \\\n TOKENMAT_ATTRS\nfrom ._document import Document\nfrom ..utils import greedy_partitioning, split_func_args, applychain, merge_dicts\n\nlogger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n\n\nclass Corpus:\n \"\"\"\n The Corpus class represents text as *string token sequences* in labelled documents. It behaves like a Python dict,\n i.e. you can access document tokens via square brackets (``corp['my_doc']``).\n\n `SpaCy `_ is used for text parsing and all documents are\n `SpaCy Doc `_ objects with special user data. The SpaCy documents can be accessed by\n using the :attr:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.spacydocs` function. The SpaCy instance can be accessed via the\n :attr:`~Corpus.nlp` property. Many more properties are defined in the Corpus class.\n\n The Corpus class allows to attach attributes (or \"meta data\") to documents and individual tokens inside documents.\n This can be done using the :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.set_document_attr` and :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.set_token_attr`\n functions.\n\n Because of the functional programming approach used in tmtoolkit, this class doesn't implement any methods besides\n special Python \"dunder\" methods to provide dict-like behaviour and (deep)-copy functionality. Functions that operate\n on Corpus objects are defined in the :mod:`~tmtoolkit.corpus` module.\n\n Parallel processing is implemented for many tasks in order to improve processing speed with large text corpora\n when multiple processors are available. Parallel processing can be enabled setting the ``max_workers`` argument or\n :attr:`~Corpus.max_workers` property to the respective number or proportion of CPUs to be used. A *Reusable\n Process Pool Executor* from the `loky package `_ is used for job scheduling.\n It can be accessed via the :attr:`~Corpus.procexec` property.\n \"\"\"\n\n _BUILTIN_CORPORA_LOAD_KWARGS = {\n 'en-NewsArticles': {\n 'id_column': 'article_id',\n 'text_column': 'text',\n 'prepend_columns': ['title', 'subtitle']\n },\n 'en-News100': {\n 'id_column': 'article_id',\n 'text_column': 'text',\n 'prepend_columns': ['title', 'subtitle']\n },\n 'de-parlspeech-v2-sample-bundestag': {\n 'id_column': 'parlspeech_row',\n 'text_column': 'text',\n },\n 'en-parlspeech-v2-sample-houseofcommons': {\n 'id_column': 'parlspeech_row',\n 'text_column': 'text',\n },\n 'es-parlspeech-v2-sample-congreso': {\n 'id_column': 'parlspeech_row',\n 'text_column': 'text',\n },\n 'nl-parlspeech-v2-sample-tweedekamer': {\n 'id_column': 'parlspeech_row',\n 'text_column': 'text',\n },\n }\n\n def __init__(self, docs: Optional[Union[Dict[str, str], Sequence[Document]]] = None,\n language: Optional[str] = None, language_model: Optional[str] = None,\n load_features: Optional[Collection[str]] = None,\n add_features: Collection[str] = (),\n raw_preproc: Optional[Union[Callable, Sequence[Callable]]] = None,\n spacy_token_attrs: Optional[Collection[str]] = None,\n spacy_instance: Optional[spacy.Language] = None,\n spacy_opts: Optional[dict] = None,\n punctuation: Optional[Sequence[str]] = None,\n max_workers: Optional[Union[int, float]] = None,\n workers_timeout: int = 10) -> None:\n \"\"\"\n Create a new :class:`Corpus` class using *raw text* data (i.e. the document text as string) from the dict\n `docs` that maps document labels to document text.\n\n The documents will be parsed right away using a newly generated SpaCy instance or one that is provided via\n `spacy_instance`. If no `spacy_instance` is given, either `language` or `language_model` must be given.\n\n :param docs: either dict mapping document labels to document text strings or a sequence of\n :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` objects\n :param language: documents language as two-letter ISO 639-1 language code; will be used to load the appropriate\n `SpaCy language model `_ if `language_model` is not set\n :param language_model: `SpaCy language model `_ to be loaded if neither `language` nor\n `spacy_instance` is given\n :param spacy_instance: a SpaCy `Language text-processing pipeline `_; set this\n if you want to use your already loaded pipeline, otherwise specify either `language` or\n `language_model`\n :param load_features: SpaCy pipeline components to load; see\n `spacy.load `_; only in effective if not\n providing your own `spacy_instance`; has special feature `vectors` that determines the\n default language model to load, if no `language_model` is given; by default will use the\n set provided by \"pipeline\" model meta information except for NER\n :param add_features: shortcut for providing pipeline components *additional* to the default list in\n `load_features`\n :param spacy_token_attrs: SpaCy token attributes to be loaded from each parsed document; see attributes list\n for `spacy.Token `_\n :param spacy_opts: other SpaCy pipeline parameters passed to\n `spacy.load `_; only in effective if not\n providing your own `spacy_instance`\n :param punctuation: provide custom punctuation characters list or use default list from\n :attr:`string.punctuation` and common whitespace characters\n :param max_workers: number of worker processes used for parallel processing; set to None, 0 or 1 to disable\n parallel processing; set to positive integer to use up to this amount of worker processes;\n set to negative integer to use all available CPUs except for this amount; set to float in\n interval [0, 1] to use this proportion of available CPUs\n :param workers_timeout: timeout in seconds until worker processes are stopped\n \"\"\"\n\n logger.debug(f'creating new Corpus instance with language \"{language.lower() if language else \"None\"}\" / '\n f'language model \"{language_model} / SpaCy instance \"{spacy_instance}\"')\n\n # declare public attributes\n #: SpaCy Language instance\n self.nlp: Optional[Language] = None\n #: preprocessing pipeline for raw input text; must consist of functions that accept a string and return\n # a processed string\n self.raw_preproc: List[Callable]\n if raw_preproc:\n self.raw_preproc = [raw_preproc] if isinstance(raw_preproc, Callable) else list(raw_preproc)\n else:\n self.raw_preproc = []\n\n #: bijective maps (bidirectional dictionaries) for each token attribute that is represented with hashes\n self.bimaps: Dict[str, bidict] = {}\n #: sequence of punctuation characters\n self.punctuation: Sequence[str] = list(string.punctuation) + [' ', '\\r', '\\n', '\\t'] if punctuation is None \\\n else punctuation\n #: *Reusable Process Pool Executor* from the `loky package `_ used for job\n #: scheduling\n self.procexec: Optional[ProcessPoolExecutor] = None\n #: timeout in seconds until worker processes are stopped (used for parallel processing)\n self.workers_timeout: int = workers_timeout\n #: max. number of characters to display in :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_summary` for document tokens\n self.print_summary_default_max_tokens_string_length: int = 50\n #: max. number of documents to display in :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_summary`\n self.print_summary_default_max_documents: int = 10\n\n # declare private attributes\n #: keyword arguments passed to ``spacy.load`` when creating the Language instance\n self._spacy_opts: Dict[str, Any]\n #: n-grams setting: if 1, use unigrams, else use respective n-grams\n self._ngrams: int = 1\n #: character used to join n-grams\n self._ngrams_join_str: str = ' '\n #: number of workers used in parallel processing; if this is 0 or 1, parallel processing is disabled\n self._n_max_workers: int = 0\n #: document attributes and their defaults\n self._doc_attrs_defaults: Dict[str, Any] = {'label': '', 'has_sents': False}\n #: custom token attributes and their defaults\n self._token_attrs_defaults: Dict[str, Any] = {}\n #: dict that maps document labels to Document objects\n self._docs: Dict[str, Document] = {}\n #: structure to distribute documents among worker processes when using parallel processing;\n #: list is of size N for N workers; each element i in self._workers_docs is a list of variable length that\n #: contains the document labels for the documents assigned to the i-th worker process\n self._workers_docs: List[List[str]] = []\n\n # set or initialize SpaCy Language instance\n if spacy_instance:\n self.nlp = spacy_instance\n spacy_kwargs = {}\n else:\n if language is None and language_model is None:\n raise ValueError('either `language`, `language_model` or `spacy_instance` must be given')\n\n if language_model is None:\n if load_features is not None and ('vectors' in load_features or 'vectors' in add_features):\n model_suffix = 'md'\n else:\n model_suffix = 'sm'\n\n # if language_model is not given, load the default language model of the given language\n if not isinstance(language, str) or len(language) != 2:\n raise ValueError('`language` must be a two-letter ISO 639-1 language code')\n\n language = language.lower()\n\n if language not in DEFAULT_LANGUAGE_MODELS:\n raise ValueError('language \"%s\" is not supported' % language)\n language_model = DEFAULT_LANGUAGE_MODELS[language] + '_' + model_suffix\n\n # model meta information\n if language_model not in spacy.util.get_installed_models():\n raise RuntimeError(f'language model \"{language_model}\" cannot be loaded; are you sure it is installed? '\n f'see https://spacy.io/models or '\n f'https://tmtoolkit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/install.html for further information '\n f'on installing language models')\n\n model_info = spacy.info(language_model)\n\n # the default pipeline compenents for SpaCy language models – these would be loaded *and enabled* if not\n # explicitly excluded\n default_components = set(model_info['pipeline'])\n\n # set the \"features\", i.e. pipeline components to load\n load_features = default_components.copy() - {'ner'} if load_features is None else set(load_features)\n load_features.update(add_features)\n\n # set difference with `load_features` in order to get a set of components to be excluded from loading\n # example: \"ner\" is loaded by default, but not listed in `load_features` -> will be excluded from loading\n spacy_exclude = tuple(default_components - load_features)\n\n # set keyword arguments passed to `spacy.load`\n spacy_kwargs = dict(exclude=spacy_exclude)\n if spacy_opts:\n spacy_kwargs.update(spacy_opts)\n\n # load the language model\n self.nlp = spacy.load(language_model, **spacy_kwargs)\n\n # set difference with `default_components` in order to get a set of components to be enabled after loading;\n # restrict this set to those components that were actually loaded\n # example: \"senter\" is requested (i.e. it's in `load_features`) but is not enabled by default (but it is\n # loaded) -> will be enabled now\n additional_components = (load_features - set(self.nlp.pipe_names)) & set(self.nlp.component_names)\n for comp in additional_components:\n self.nlp.enable_pipe(comp)\n\n # store pipeline configuration for possible re-creation of the instance during copy/deserialize\n nlp_conf_allowed_keys = {'lang', 'pipeline', 'disabled', 'before_creation', 'after_creation',\n 'after_pipeline_creation', 'batch_size'}\n nlp_conf = {k: v for k, v in self.nlp.config['nlp'].items() if k in nlp_conf_allowed_keys}\n self._spacy_opts = spacy_kwargs\n self._spacy_opts.update({'config': {'nlp': nlp_conf}})\n\n # set number of workers -> this calls the property setter and distributes the documents to the workers\n self.max_workers = max_workers\n\n # record the SpaCy Token attributes that should be used; they depend on the set of allowed attributes\n # `spacy_token_attrs` and on the loaded and enabled pipelines in `self.nlp.pipe_names`\n spacy_token_attrs_is_default = spacy_token_attrs is None\n spacy_token_attrs = STD_TOKEN_ATTRS if spacy_token_attrs is None else set(spacy_token_attrs)\n if not spacy_token_attrs <= TOKENMAT_ATTRS:\n raise ValueError('all token attributes given in `spacy_token_attrs` must be valid SpaCy token attribute '\n 'names')\n\n spacy_attrs_checked = []\n for pipeline_comp, token_attrs in SPACY_TOKEN_ATTRS.items():\n if pipeline_comp == '_default' or pipeline_comp in self.nlp.pipe_names:\n spacy_attrs_checked.extend([a for a in token_attrs\n if a in spacy_token_attrs and a not in spacy_attrs_checked])\n\n if not spacy_token_attrs_is_default and spacy_token_attrs != set(spacy_attrs_checked):\n raise ValueError(f'the following SpaCy attributes are not available due to your language model and/or '\n f'pipeline configuration: {spacy_token_attrs - set(spacy_attrs_checked)}; you should '\n f'consider adding pipeline components via `load_features` or `add_features` parameter')\n\n self._spacy_token_attrs = tuple(spacy_attrs_checked)\n\n # initialize bijective maps for hash <-> token / attr. string conversion\n self._init_bimaps()\n\n logger.info(f'creating Corpus instance with {\"no\" if docs is None else len(docs)} documents')\n if self.max_workers <= 1:\n logger.info('using serial processing')\n else:\n logger.info(f'using parallel processing with {self.max_workers} workers')\n\n if docs is not None:\n if isinstance(docs, Sequence):\n for d in docs:\n if not isinstance(d, Document):\n raise ValueError('if `docs` is a Sequence, its values must be Document objects')\n d.bimaps = self.bimaps\n self._docs[d.label] = d\n else:\n self._init_docs(docs)\n\n self._update_bimaps()\n self._update_workers_docs()\n\n logger.debug(f'finished creating new Corpus instance: {str(self)}')\n\n def __str__(self) -> str:\n \"\"\"String representation of this Corpus object\"\"\"\n return self.__repr__()\n\n def __repr__(self) -> str:\n \"\"\"String representation of this Corpus object\"\"\"\n if self.procexec:\n parallel_info = f' / {self.max_workers} worker processes'\n else:\n parallel_info = ''\n\n return f' 1 else \"\"} ' \\\n f'{parallel_info} / language \"{self.language}\"]>'\n\n def __len__(self) -> int:\n \"\"\"\n Dict method to return number of documents.\n\n :return: number of documents\n \"\"\"\n return len(self._docs)\n\n def __getitem__(self, k: Union[str, int, slice]) -> Union[Document, List[Document]]:\n \"\"\"\n Dict method for retrieving a document with label, integer index or slice object `k` via ``corpus[]``.\n\n :param k: if `k` is a string, retrieve the document with that document label; if `k` is an integer, retrieve the\n document at that position in the list of document labels; if `k` is a slice, return multiple documents\n corresponding to the selected slice in the list of document labels\n :return: token sequence for document `k` or, if `k` is a slice, a list of token sequences corresponding to the\n selected slice of documents\n \"\"\"\n if isinstance(k, slice):\n return [self._docs[lbl] for lbl in self.doc_labels[k]]\n\n if isinstance(k, int):\n k = self.doc_labels[k]\n elif k not in self.keys():\n raise KeyError(f'document \"{k}\" not found in corpus')\n return self._docs[k]\n\n def __setitem__(self, doc_label: str, doc: Union[str, Doc, Document]):\n \"\"\"\n Dict method for inserting a new document or updating an existing document\n either as text, as `SpaCy Doc `_ object or as :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document`\n object.\n\n :param doc_label: document label\n :param doc: document text as string, as `SpaCy Doc `_ object or as\n :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` object\n \"\"\"\n if not isinstance(doc_label, str):\n raise KeyError('`doc_label` must be a string')\n\n if not isinstance(doc, (str, Doc, Document)):\n raise ValueError('`doc` must be a string, a spaCy Doc object or a tmtoolkit Document object')\n\n if isinstance(doc, str):\n if self.raw_preproc:\n logger.debug(f'applying {len(self.raw_preproc)} raw preprocessing functions')\n doc = applychain(self.raw_preproc, doc)\n doc = self.nlp(doc) # create Doc object\n\n if isinstance(doc, Doc):\n doc = self._init_document(doc, label=doc_label)\n\n # insert or update\n self._docs[doc_label] = doc\n\n # update bimaps\n self._update_bimaps({doc_label})\n\n # update assignments of documents to workers\n self._update_workers_docs()\n\n def __delitem__(self, doc_label):\n \"\"\"\n Dict method for removing a document with label `doc_label` via ``del corpus[]``.\n\n :param doc_label: document label\n \"\"\"\n if doc_label not in self.keys():\n raise KeyError(f'document \"{doc_label}\" not found in corpus')\n\n # remove document\n del self._docs[doc_label]\n\n # update bimaps\n self._update_bimaps()\n\n # update assignments of documents to workers\n self._update_workers_docs()\n\n def __iter__(self) -> Iterator[str]:\n \"\"\"Dict method for iterating through all documents.\"\"\"\n return self._docs.__iter__()\n\n def __contains__(self, doc_label) -> bool:\n \"\"\"\n Dict method for checking whether `doc_label` exists in this corpus.\n\n :param doc_label: document label\n :return: True if `doc_label` exists, else False\n \"\"\"\n return doc_label in self.keys()\n\n def __copy__(self) -> Corpus:\n \"\"\"\n Make a copy of this Corpus, returning a new object with the same data but using the *same* SpaCy instance.\n\n :return: new Corpus object\n \"\"\"\n return self._deserialize(self._serialize(deepcopy_attrs=True, store_nlp_instance_pointer=True))\n\n def __deepcopy__(self, memodict=None) -> Corpus:\n \"\"\"\n Make a copy of this Corpus, returning a new object with the same data and a *new* SpaCy instance.\n\n :return: new Corpus object\n \"\"\"\n return self._deserialize(self._serialize(deepcopy_attrs=True, store_nlp_instance_pointer=False))\n\n def items(self) -> ItemsView[str, Document]:\n \"\"\"\n Dict method to retrieve pairs of document labels and their Document objects.\n\n :return: pairs of document labels and their Document objects\n \"\"\"\n return self._docs.items()\n\n def keys(self) -> KeysView[str]:\n \"\"\"\n Dict method to retrieve document labels.\n\n :return: document labels\n \"\"\"\n return self._docs.keys()\n\n def values(self) -> ValuesView[Document]:\n \"\"\"\n Dict method to retrieve Document objects.\n\n :return: Document objects\n \"\"\"\n return self._docs.values()\n\n def get(self, *args) -> Document:\n \"\"\"\n Dict method to retrieve a specific document like ``corpus.get(, )``.\n\n :return: token sequence\n \"\"\"\n return self._docs.get(*args)\n\n def update(self, new_docs: Union[Dict[str, Union[str, Doc, Document]], Sequence[Document]]):\n \"\"\"\n Dict method for inserting new documents or updating existing documents as either:\n\n - dict mapping document label to text, to `SpaCy Doc `_ objects or to\n :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` object;\n - sequence of :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` objects\n\n :param new_docs: dict mapping document labels to text, `SpaCy Doc `_ objects or\n :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` objects; or sequence of :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document`\n objects\n \"\"\"\n if isinstance(new_docs, Sequence):\n new_docs = {d.label: d for d in new_docs}\n\n logger.debug(f'updating Corpus instance with {len(new_docs)} new documents')\n\n new_docs_text = {}\n for lbl, d in new_docs.items():\n if isinstance(d, str):\n new_docs_text[lbl] = d\n else:\n if isinstance(d, Doc):\n d = self._init_document(d, label=lbl)\n elif not isinstance(d, Document):\n raise ValueError('one or more documents in `new_docs` are neither raw text documents, nor SpaCy '\n 'documents nor tmtoolkit Documents')\n\n self._docs[lbl] = d\n\n if new_docs_text:\n self._init_docs(new_docs_text)\n\n self._update_bimaps(new_docs.keys())\n self._update_workers_docs()\n\n @property\n def uses_unigrams(self) -> bool:\n \"\"\"Returns True when this Corpus is set up for unigram tokens, i.e. :attr:`~Corpus.tokens_processed` is 1.\"\"\"\n return self._ngrams == 1\n\n @property\n def spacy_token_attrs(self) -> Tuple[str, ...]:\n \"\"\"\n Return tuple of available SpaCy token attributes.\n \"\"\"\n return self._spacy_token_attrs\n\n @property\n def token_attrs(self) -> Tuple[str, ...]:\n \"\"\"\n Return tuple of available token attributes (SpaCy attributes like \"pos\" or \"lemma\" and custom attributes).\n \"\"\"\n return self._spacy_token_attrs + tuple(self._token_attrs_defaults.keys())\n\n @property\n def custom_token_attrs_defaults(self) -> Dict[str, Any]:\n \"\"\"Return dict of available custom token attributes along with their default values.\"\"\"\n return self._token_attrs_defaults\n\n @property\n def doc_attrs(self) -> Tuple[str, ...]:\n \"\"\"Return list of available document attributes.\"\"\"\n return tuple(self._doc_attrs_defaults.keys())\n\n @property\n def doc_attrs_defaults(self) -> Dict[str, Any]:\n \"\"\"Return list of available document attributes along with their default values.\"\"\"\n return self._doc_attrs_defaults\n\n @property\n def ngrams(self) -> int:\n \"\"\"Return n-gram setting, e.g. *1* if Corpus is set up for unigrams, *2* if set up for bigrams, etc.\"\"\"\n return self._ngrams\n\n @property\n def ngrams_join_str(self) -> str:\n \"\"\"Return string that is used for joining n-grams.\"\"\"\n return self._ngrams_join_str\n\n @property\n def language(self) -> str:\n \"\"\"Return Corpus language as two-letter ISO 639-1 language code.\"\"\"\n if self.nlp:\n return self.nlp.lang\n else:\n return ''\n\n @property\n def language_model(self) -> str:\n \"\"\"Return name of the language model that was loaded.\"\"\"\n if self.nlp:\n return self.nlp.lang + '_' + self.nlp.meta['name']\n else:\n return ''\n\n @property\n def has_sents(self) -> bool:\n \"\"\"Return True if information sentence borders were parsed for documents in this corpus, else return False.\"\"\"\n return self.nlp and ('parser' in self.nlp.pipe_names or 'senter' in self.nlp.pipe_names)\n\n @property\n def doc_labels(self) -> List[str]:\n \"\"\"Return document label names.\"\"\"\n return list(self.keys())\n\n @property\n def n_docs(self) -> int:\n \"\"\"Same as :meth:`~Corpus.__len__`.\"\"\"\n return len(self)\n\n @property\n def workers_docs(self) -> List[List[str]]:\n \"\"\"\n When *N* is the number of worker processes for parallel processing, return list of size *N* with each item\n being a list of document labels for the respective worker process. Returns an empty list when parallel\n processing is disabled.\n \"\"\"\n return self._workers_docs\n\n @property\n def max_workers(self):\n \"\"\"Return the number of worker processes for parallel processing.\"\"\"\n return self._n_max_workers\n\n @max_workers.setter\n def max_workers(self, max_workers):\n \"\"\"\n Set the number of worker processes for parallel processing.\n\n :param max_workers: number of worker processes used for parallel processing; set to None, 0 or 1 to disable\n parallel processing; set to positive integer to use up to this amount of worker processes;\n set to negative integer to use all available CPUs except for this amount; set to float in\n interval [0, 1] to use this proportion of available CPUs\n \"\"\"\n old_max_workers = self.max_workers\n\n if max_workers is None:\n self._n_max_workers = 1\n else:\n if not isinstance(max_workers, (int, float)) or \\\n (isinstance(max_workers, float) and not 0 <= max_workers <= 1):\n raise ValueError('`max_workers` must be an integer, a float in [0, 1] or None')\n\n if isinstance(max_workers, float):\n self._n_max_workers = max(round(mp.cpu_count() * max_workers), 1)\n else:\n if max_workers >= 0:\n self._n_max_workers = max(max_workers, 1)\n else:\n self._n_max_workers = max(mp.cpu_count() + max_workers, 1)\n\n assert self._n_max_workers > 0 and isinstance(self._n_max_workers, int), \\\n 'self._n_max_workers must be strictly positive integer'\n\n if self._n_max_workers <= 1:\n logger.debug('setting Corpus instance to serial processing')\n else:\n logger.debug(f'setting Corpus instance to parallel processing with {self._n_max_workers} workers')\n\n # number of workers has changed\n if old_max_workers != self.max_workers:\n logger.debug('number of workers has changed')\n self.procexec = get_reusable_executor(max_workers=self.max_workers, timeout=self.workers_timeout) \\\n if self.max_workers > 1 else None # self.max_workers == 1 means parallel proc. disabled\n self._update_workers_docs()\n\n @classmethod\n def from_files(cls, files: Union[str, Collection[str], Dict[str, str]], **kwargs) -> Corpus:\n \"\"\"\n Construct Corpus object by loading files. Pass arguments for Corpus initialization and file loading as keyword\n arguments via `kwargs`. See :meth:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus.__init__` for Corpus constructor arguments and\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_add_files` for file loading arguments.\n\n :param files: single file path string or sequence of file paths or dict mapping document label to file path\n :return: Corpus instance\n \"\"\"\n from ._corpusfuncs import corpus_add_files\n return cls._construct_from_func(corpus_add_files, files, **kwargs)\n\n @classmethod\n def from_folder(cls, folder: str, **kwargs) -> Corpus:\n \"\"\"\n Construct Corpus object by loading files from a folder `folder`. Pass arguments for Corpus initialization and\n file loading as keyword arguments via `kwargs`. See :meth:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus.__init__` for Corpus\n constructor arguments and :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_add_folder` for file loading arguments.\n\n :param folder: folder from where the files are read\n :return: Corpus instance\n \"\"\"\n from ._corpusfuncs import corpus_add_folder\n return cls._construct_from_func(corpus_add_folder, folder, **kwargs)\n\n @classmethod\n def from_tabular(cls, files: Union[str, Collection[str]], **kwargs) -> Corpus:\n \"\"\"\n Construct Corpus object by loading documents from a tabular file, i.e. CSV or Excel file. Pass arguments for\n Corpus initialization and file loading as keyword arguments via `kwargs`. See\n :meth:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus.__init__` for Corpus constructor arguments and\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_add_tabular` for file loading arguments.\n\n :param files: single string or list of strings with path to file(s) to load\n :return: Corpus instance\n \"\"\"\n from ._corpusfuncs import corpus_add_tabular\n return cls._construct_from_func(corpus_add_tabular, files, **kwargs)\n\n\n @classmethod\n def from_zip(cls, zipfile: str, **kwargs) -> Corpus:\n \"\"\"\n Construct Corpus object by loading files from a ZIP file. Pass arguments for\n Corpus initialization and file loading as keyword arguments via `kwargs`. See\n :meth:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus.__init__` for Corpus constructor arguments and\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_add_zip` for file loading arguments.\n\n :param zipfile: path to ZIP file to be loaded\n :return: Corpus instance\n \"\"\"\n from ._corpusfuncs import corpus_add_zip\n return cls._construct_from_func(corpus_add_zip, zipfile, **kwargs)\n\n @classmethod\n def from_builtin_corpus(cls, corpus_label, **kwargs) -> Corpus:\n \"\"\"\n Construct Corpus object by loading one of the built-in datasets specified by `corpus_label`. To get a list\n of available built-in datasets, use :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.builtin_corpora_info`.\n\n :param corpus_label: the corpus to load (one of the labels listed in\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.builtin_corpora_info`)\n :param kwargs: override arguments of Corpus constructor\n :return: Corpus instance\n \"\"\"\n from tmtoolkit.corpus._corpusfuncs import builtin_corpora_info\n available = builtin_corpora_info(with_paths=True)\n\n if corpus_label in available:\n load_opts = {\n 'add_tabular_opts': cls._BUILTIN_CORPORA_LOAD_KWARGS[corpus_label],\n 'language': corpus_label[:2]\n }\n load_opts.update(kwargs)\n\n return cls.from_zip(available[corpus_label], **load_opts)\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'built-in corpus does not exist: {corpus_label}')\n\n def _nlppipe(self, docs: ValuesView[str]) -> Union[Iterator[Doc], Generator[Doc]]:\n \"\"\"\n Helper method to set up the SpaCy pipeline.\n \"\"\"\n if self.max_workers > 1: # pipeline for parallel processing\n logger.debug(f'using parallel processing NLP pipeline with {self.max_workers} workers')\n return self.nlp.pipe(docs, n_process=self.max_workers)\n else: # serial processing\n logger.debug('using serial processing NLP pipeline')\n return (self.nlp(txt) for txt in docs)\n\n def _init_bimaps(self):\n \"\"\"\n Initialize bijective maps for hash <-> token / attr. string conversion.\n \"\"\"\n for attr in ('whitespace', 'token', ) + self._spacy_token_attrs:\n if attr not in BOOLEAN_SPACY_TOKEN_ATTRS:\n self.bimaps[attr] = bidict()\n\n def _init_docs(self, docs: Dict[str, str]):\n \"\"\"\n Helper method to process the raw text documents using a SpaCy pipeline and initialize the Document objects.\n \"\"\"\n\n if self.raw_preproc:\n if self.max_workers > 1:\n logger.info(f'applying {len(self.raw_preproc)} raw preprocessing functions in parallel')\n self._update_workers_docs(docs)\n workers_data = [{lbl: docs[lbl] for lbl in itemlabels # data chunks are dicts\n if lbl in docs.keys()}\n for itemlabels in self.workers_docs]\n\n def _parallel_apply(chunk, funcs):\n return {lbl: applychain(funcs, txt) for lbl, txt in chunk.items()}\n\n res = self.procexec.map(partial(_parallel_apply, funcs=self.raw_preproc), workers_data)\n docs = merge_dicts(res)\n else:\n logger.info(f'applying {len(self.raw_preproc)} raw preprocessing functions')\n docs = {lbl: applychain(self.raw_preproc, txt) for lbl, txt in docs.items()}\n\n logger.info(f'running NLP pipeline on {len(docs)} documents')\n pipe = self._nlppipe(docs.values())\n\n # tokenize each document which yields a Document object `d` for each document label `lbl`\n logger.debug(f'initializing {len(docs)} new documents')\n for lbl, sp_d in dict(zip(docs.keys(), pipe)).items():\n self._docs[lbl] = self._init_document(sp_d, label=lbl)\n\n def _init_document(self, spacydoc: Doc, label: str):\n \"\"\"Helper method to create a new tmtoolkit `Document` object from a SpaCy document `spacydoc`.\"\"\"\n # somehow, the whitespace attribute is only available as string attribute, not as hash\n whitespace = np.array([self.nlp.vocab.strings[t.whitespace_] for t in spacydoc], dtype='uint64')\\\n .reshape((len(spacydoc), 1))\n load_token_attrs = ['orth']\n\n # unfortunately, spacydoc.is_sentenced cannot be trusted: it is always True for empty documents or documents\n # without sentences even if the sentences were not parsed; hence we check the SpaCy pipeline in `self.has_sents`\n\n if self.has_sents:\n load_token_attrs.append('sent_start')\n\n load_token_attrs.extend(self.spacy_token_attrs)\n\n # get token attributes as matrix of uin64 hashes\n spacy_token_attrs = spacydoc.to_array(load_token_attrs)\n\n # get document attributes as dict\n spacydoc_attrs = set(dir(spacydoc._)) - {'get', 'has', 'set', 'label', 'has_sents'}\n doc_attrs = {a: getattr(spacydoc._, a) for a in spacydoc_attrs}\n\n # construct Document object\n return Document(self.bimaps, label,\n has_sents=self.has_sents,\n tokenmat=np.hstack((whitespace, spacy_token_attrs)),\n doc_attrs=doc_attrs,\n tokenmat_attrs=self.spacy_token_attrs)\n\n def _update_bimaps(self, which_docs: Union[str, Optional[Collection[str]]] = None,\n which_attrs: Union[str, Optional[Collection[str]]] = None):\n \"\"\"Helper function to update bijective maps in `self.bimaps`.\"\"\"\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.DEBUG):\n logger.debug(f'updating bimaps for documents: '\n f'\"{str(which_docs) if which_docs is not None else \"all\"}\" / '\n f'attributes: \"{str(which_attrs) if which_attrs is not None else \"all\"}\"')\n all_docs = False\n if isinstance(which_docs, str):\n which_docs = (which_docs, )\n elif which_docs is None:\n which_docs = self.keys()\n all_docs = True\n\n if isinstance(which_attrs, str):\n which_attrs = (which_attrs, )\n elif which_attrs is None:\n which_attrs = list(self.bimaps.keys()) # copy keys\n\n for attr in which_attrs:\n bimap = self.bimaps[attr]\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.DEBUG):\n logger.debug(f'bimap size for attribute \"{attr}\" before update is {len(bimap)}')\n unique_attr_hashes = set()\n for lbl in which_docs:\n d = self._docs[lbl]\n hashes = []\n strings = []\n # iterate through hashes `h` for the attribute `attr` in document `d`\n try:\n attr_hashes = set(d.tokenmat[:, d.tokenmat_attrs.index(attr)])\n except ValueError: # `attr` not in `d.tokenmat_attrs`, i.e. the attribute is not defined in a document;\n # this happens when new documents are loaded which don't contain the same token attributes\n # that were defined before in the corpus\n\n # remove the attribute from the bimaps dict\n bimap = None\n del self.bimaps[attr]\n # remove the attribute from all documents if it exists there somewhere\n for d in self._docs.values():\n if attr in d.tokenmat_attrs:\n d.tokenmat_attrs.remove(attr)\n break\n\n for h in attr_hashes:\n # this hash is unknown so far\n if h not in bimap:\n # collect hash and its string representation\n hashes.append(h)\n strings.append(self.nlp.vocab.strings[h])\n\n # update bimap\n bimap.update(zip(hashes, strings))\n\n # update unique hashes\n unique_attr_hashes.update(attr_hashes)\n\n if all_docs and bimap is not None: # only remove unused hashes if all documents' hashes were checked\n unused_hashes = set(bimap.keys()) - set(unique_attr_hashes)\n for h in unused_hashes:\n del bimap[h]\n\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.DEBUG):\n logger.debug(f'bimap size for attribute \"{attr}\" after update is {len(bimap)}')\n\n def _update_workers_docs(self, based_on_docs=None):\n \"\"\"Helper method to update the worker <-> document assignments.\"\"\"\n\n if based_on_docs is None:\n based_on_docs = self._docs\n\n if self.max_workers > 1 and based_on_docs: # parallel processing enabled\n # make assignments based on number of tokens per document\n logger.debug(f'updating document assignments for {self.max_workers} workers')\n self._workers_docs = greedy_partitioning({lbl: len(d) for lbl, d in based_on_docs.items()},\n k=self.max_workers, return_only_labels=True)\n else: # parallel processing disabled or no documents\n logger.debug(f'purging document assignments (parallel proc. disabled or empty corpus)')\n self._workers_docs = []\n\n def _serialize(self, deepcopy_attrs: bool, store_nlp_instance_pointer: bool,\n documents: Union[bool, Collection[str]] = True) \\\n -> Dict[str, Any]:\n \"\"\"\n Helper method to serialize this Corpus object to a dict.\n\n If `store_nlp_instance_pointer` is True, a pointer to the current SpaCy instance will be stored, otherwise\n the language model name will be stored instead. For deserialization this means that for the former option the\n same SpaCy instance as the current one will be used in a deserialized object and for the latter options this\n means that a new SpaCy instance with the same language model (and options) will be loaded. The former should\n only be used for a local shallow copy, the latter for deep copies and storing serialized Corpus instances to\n disk.\n \"\"\"\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.DEBUG):\n logger.debug(f'serializing Corpus instance {\"with\" if deepcopy_attrs else \"without\"} attrib. deepcopy, '\n f'{\"with\" if store_nlp_instance_pointer else \"without\"} SpaCy NLP pipeline instance pointer, '\n f'with documents: {str(documents)}')\n\n state_attrs = {'state': {}}\n attr_deny = {'nlp', 'procexec', 'spacydocs', 'workers_docs',\n '_docs', '_n_max_workers', '_workers_docs'}\n\n if not attr_deny:\n attr_deny.update('bimaps')\n\n # 1. general object attributes\n for attr in dir(self):\n # dismiss \"dunder\" attributes, all-caps attributes and attributes in deny list\n if attr.startswith('__') or attr.isupper() or attr in attr_deny:\n continue\n\n # dismiss methods and properties\n classattr = getattr(type(self), attr, None)\n if classattr is not None and (callable(classattr) or isinstance(classattr, property)):\n continue\n\n # all others are copied\n attr_obj = getattr(self, attr)\n if deepcopy_attrs:\n state_attrs['state'][attr] = deepcopy(attr_obj)\n else:\n state_attrs['state'][attr] = attr_obj\n\n state_attrs['max_workers'] = self.max_workers\n\n # 2. documents\n if documents is True:\n state_attrs['docs_data'] = [d._serialize(store_bimaps_pointer=False) for d in self.values()]\n elif isinstance(documents, Collection) and documents:\n state_attrs['docs_data'] = [d._serialize(store_bimaps_pointer=False) for lbl, d in self.items()\n if lbl in documents]\n else:\n state_attrs['docs_data'] = []\n\n if store_nlp_instance_pointer:\n state_attrs['spacy_instance'] = self.nlp\n else:\n state_attrs['spacy_instance'] = self.language_model\n\n return state_attrs\n\n @classmethod\n def _deserialize(cls, data: Dict[str, Any]) -> Corpus:\n \"\"\"\n Helper method to deserialize a Corpus object from a dict. All SpaCy documents must be in\n ``data['spacy_data']`` as `DocBin `_ object.\n \"\"\"\n\n logger.debug('deserializing Corpus instance')\n\n # load a SpaCy language pipeline\n if isinstance(data['spacy_instance'], str):\n # a language model name is given -> will load a new SpaCy model with the same language model and with\n # parameters given in _spacy_opts\n kwargs = dict(language_model=data['spacy_instance'], spacy_opts=data['state']['_spacy_opts'])\n logger.debug(f'will load a new SpaCy model \"{data[\"spacy_instance\"]}\"')\n elif isinstance(data['spacy_instance'], Language):\n # a SpaCy instance is given -> will use this right away\n kwargs = dict(spacy_instance=data['spacy_instance'])\n logger.debug(f'will reuse instantiated SpaCy model \"{data[\"spacy_instance\"]}\"')\n else:\n raise ValueError('spacy_instance in serialized data must be either a language model name string or a '\n '`Language` instance')\n\n # create the Corpus instance\n instance = cls(max_workers=data['max_workers'], workers_timeout=data['state']['workers_timeout'],\n **kwargs)\n\n # set all other properties\n for attr, val in data['state'].items():\n if attr not in {'_spacy_opts', 'workers_timeout'}:\n setattr(instance, attr, val)\n\n # load documents\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.DEBUG):\n logger.debug(f'deserializing {len(data[\"docs_data\"])} documents')\n instance.update([Document._deserialize(d_data, bimaps=instance.bimaps) for d_data in data['docs_data']])\n\n return instance\n\n @classmethod\n def _construct_from_func(cls, add_fn: Callable, *args, **kwargs) -> Corpus:\n add_fn_args, corpus_args = split_func_args(add_fn, kwargs)\n add_fn_args['inplace'] = True\n\n corp = cls(**corpus_args)\n add_fn(corp, *args, **add_fn_args)\n return corp\n\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/corpus/_corpusfuncs.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nInternal module that implements functions that operate on :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus` objects.\n\nThe source is separated into sections using a ``#%% ...`` marker.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\nimport logging\nimport operator\nimport os\nimport random\nimport re\nimport unicodedata\nfrom collections import defaultdict\nfrom copy import copy\nfrom functools import partial, wraps\nfrom glob import glob\nfrom inspect import signature\nfrom dataclasses import dataclass\nfrom tempfile import mkdtemp\nfrom typing import Dict, Union, List, Callable, Optional, Any, Iterable, Set, Tuple, Sequence, Collection, TypeVar, cast\nfrom zipfile import ZipFile\n\nimport numpy as np\nimport pandas as pd\nfrom bidict import bidict\nfrom scipy.sparse import csr_matrix\nfrom spacy.strings import hash_string\nfrom spacy.tokens import Doc\nfrom loky import ProcessPoolExecutor\n\nfrom ._document import document_token_attr, document_from_attrs, Document\nfrom ..bow.dtm import create_sparse_dtm, dtm_to_dataframe\nfrom ..utils import merge_dicts, empty_chararray, as_chararray, \\\n flatten_list, combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise, pickle_data, unpickle_file, merge_sets, \\\n path_split, read_text_file, linebreaks_win2unix, sample_dict, dict2df\nfrom ..tokenseq import token_lengths, token_ngrams, token_match_multi_pattern, index_windows_around_matches, \\\n token_match_subsequent, token_join_subsequent, npmi, token_collocations, numbertoken_to_magnitude, token_match, \\\n collapse_tokens, simplify_unicode_chars, unique_chars\nfrom ..types import Proportion, StrOrInt\n\nfrom ._common import DATAPATH, LANGUAGE_LABELS, TOKENMAT_ATTRS, simplified_pos\nfrom ._corpus import Corpus\n\n\nTOKINDEX = 1\nPTTRN_WS = re.compile(r'^\\s+$')\n\nCorpusFunc = TypeVar('CorpusFunc', bound=Callable[..., Any])\n\nlogger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n\n\n#%% parallel execution helpers and other decorators\n\nmerge_dicts_sorted = partial(merge_dicts, sort_keys=True)\nmerge_dicts_safe = partial(merge_dicts, safe=True)\n\n\n@dataclass\nclass ParallelTask:\n \"\"\"A parallel execution task for a loky reusable process executor.\"\"\"\n # loky reusable process executor\n procexec: ProcessPoolExecutor\n # assignments of data chunks in `data` to workers; ``workers_assignments[i]`` contains list of keys in `data` which\n # worker ``i`` is assigned to work on\n workers_assignments: List[List[str]]\n # dict mapping data chunk key to data chunk\n data: dict\n\n\ndef _paralleltask(corpus: Corpus, tokens: Dict[str, Any], force_serialproc=False) -> ParallelTask:\n \"\"\"\n Helper function to generate a :class:`~ParallelTask` for the reusable process executor and the worker process\n assignments in the :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus` Corpus `corpus`. By default, use `corpus`' document tokens as\n data chunks, otherwise use `tokens`.\n \"\"\"\n return ParallelTask(None if force_serialproc else corpus.procexec, corpus.workers_docs, tokens)\n\n\ndef parallelexec(collect_fn: Callable) -> Callable[[CorpusFunc], Callable]:\n \"\"\"\n Decorator function for parallel processing. Using this decorator on a function `fn` will run this function in\n parallel, each parallel instance processing only a chunk of the whole data. After the results of all parallel\n instances were collected, they're merged to a single data object using `collect_fn`. Most Corpus functions will\n produce a dict (e.g. mapping document labels to some document-specific data), so :func:`tmtoolkit.utils.merge_dict`\n can be used as collection function.\n\n The function `fn` must accept a data chunk `data` *as first argument* which is always a dict and optionally\n additonal positional and/or keyword arguments.\n\n When a function `fn` is decorated with this decorator, you must create a :class:`~ParallelTask` object, e.g. with\n the :func:`~_paralleltask` helper, and call `fn` with this object.\n\n If a Corpus object and hence a :class:`~ParallelTask` object created from it has not enabled parallel processing,\n `fn` will be executed as usual in the main process.\n\n :param collect_fn: function to be called for combining the results from the parallel function executions; when\n returning a dict, :func:`tmtoolkit.utils.merge_dict` can be used as collection function;\n if this is None, simply always return None\n :return: wrapped function\n \"\"\"\n def deco_fn(fn: CorpusFunc) -> CorpusFunc:\n @wraps(fn)\n def inner_fn(task: ParallelTask, *args, **kwargs):\n if task.procexec and len(task.data) > 1: # parallel processing enabled and possibly useful\n logger.debug(f'{os.getpid()}: distributing function {fn} for {len(task.data)} items to '\n f'{len(task.workers_assignments)} workers')\n if args:\n # we have positional arguments -> map these to kwargs so that they don't overwrite the important\n # first argument (the data chunk)\n fn_argnames = list(signature(fn).parameters.keys())\n # first argument in `fn` is always the data dict -> we skip this\n if len(fn_argnames) <= len(args):\n raise ValueError(f'function {fn} does not accept enough additional arguments')\n kwargs.update({fn_argnames[i+1]: v for i, v in enumerate(args)})\n\n # generate a list where each item in the list represents the data chunk for the worker process\n workers_data = [{lbl: task.data[lbl] for lbl in itemlabels # data chunks are dicts\n if lbl in task.data.keys()}\n for itemlabels in task.workers_assignments]\n\n # execute `fn` in parallel, pass the worker data and additional keyword arguments\n res = task.procexec.map(partial(fn, **kwargs), workers_data)\n\n # combine the result\n if collect_fn:\n return collect_fn(res)\n else:\n return None\n else: # parallel processing disabled\n logger.debug(f'{os.getpid()}: directly applying function {fn} to {len(task.data)} items')\n res = fn(task.data, *args, **kwargs)\n if collect_fn is list:\n return [res]\n else:\n return res\n\n return cast(CorpusFunc, inner_fn)\n\n return deco_fn\n\n\ndef corpus_func_inplace_opt(fn: Callable) -> Callable:\n \"\"\"\n Decorator for a Corpus function `fn` with an optional argument ``inplace``. This decorator makes sure that if\n `fn` is called with ``inplace=False``, the passed corpus will be copied before `fn` is applied to it. Then,\n the modified copy of corpus is returned. If ``inplace: bool = True``, `fn` is applied as usual.\n\n If you decorate a Corpus function with this decorator, the first argument of the Corpus function should be\n defined as positional-only argument, i.e. ``def corpfunc(docs, /, some_arg, other_arg, ...): ...``.\n\n :param fn: Corpus function `fn` with an optional argument ``inplace``\n :return: wrapper function of `fn`\n \"\"\"\n @wraps(fn)\n def inner_fn(*args, **kwargs) -> Union[None, Corpus, Tuple[Corpus, Any]]:\n if not isinstance(args[0], Corpus):\n raise ValueError('first argument must be a Corpus object')\n\n if 'inplace' in kwargs:\n inplace = kwargs.pop('inplace')\n else:\n inplace = True\n\n # get Corpus object `corp`, optionally copy it\n if inplace:\n logger.debug(f'applying function {str(fn)} to {str(args[0])} inplace')\n corp = args[0]\n else:\n logger.debug(f'applying function {str(fn)} to a copy of {str(args[0])}')\n corp = copy(args[0]) # copy of this Corpus, a new object with same data but the *same* SpaCy instance\n\n # apply fn to `corp`, passing all other arguments\n ret = fn(corp, *args[1:], **kwargs)\n if ret is None: # most Corpus functions return None\n if inplace: # no need to return Corpus since it was modified in-place\n return None\n else: # return the modified copy\n return corp\n else: # for Corpus functions that return something\n if inplace:\n return ret\n else:\n return corp, ret # always return the modified Corpus copy first\n\n return inner_fn\n\n\ndef tabular_result_option(key: str, value: str) -> Callable:\n \"\"\"\n Decorator for a corpus function with an optional argument ``as_table``. This decorator takes the original dict\n output of a corpus function and optionally produces a dataframe from it, which is then returned as the actual\n output.\n\n If `as_table`` is True, return result as dataframe; if a string, sort dataframe by this column; if string is\n prefixed with \"-\", sort by this column in descending order.\n\n :param key: column name for dict keys\n :param value: column name for dict values\n :return: wrapper function\n \"\"\"\n def deco_fn(fn):\n @wraps(fn)\n def inner_fn(*args, **kwargs):\n if not isinstance(args[0], Corpus):\n raise ValueError('first argument must be a Corpus object')\n\n if 'as_table' in kwargs:\n as_table = kwargs.pop('as_table')\n else:\n as_table = False\n\n ret = fn(*args, **kwargs)\n\n if as_table:\n if not isinstance(ret, dict):\n raise ValueError('result must be a dictionary')\n if as_table is True:\n sort = None\n else: # as_table is string\n sort = as_table\n return dict2df(ret, key, value, sort=sort)\n else:\n return ret\n\n return inner_fn\n\n return deco_fn\n\n\ndef corpus_func_update_bimaps(which_attrs: Union[str, Optional[Collection[str]]] = None) -> Callable:\n \"\"\"\n Decorator for a corpus function that requires that the passed corpus' bimaps are updated (e.g. when the vocabulary\n was transformed).\n\n :param which_attrs: which bimaps to update\n :return: wrapper function\n \"\"\"\n def deco_fn(fn):\n @wraps(fn)\n def inner_fn(*args, **kwargs):\n if not isinstance(args[0], Corpus):\n raise ValueError('first argument must be a Corpus object')\n\n ret = fn(*args, **kwargs)\n\n if isinstance(ret, Corpus):\n corp = ret\n elif isinstance(ret, tuple):\n if not ret or not isinstance(ret[0], Corpus):\n raise ValueError('first return value must be a Corpus object')\n corp = ret[0]\n else: # return type is None or something else -> we assume `fn` was called with `inplace = True`\n corp = args[0]\n\n corp._update_bimaps(which_attrs=which_attrs)\n\n return ret\n\n return inner_fn\n\n return deco_fn\n\n\n#%% Corpus functions with readonly access to Corpus data\n\n\ndef doc_tokens(docs: Corpus,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n sentences: bool = False,\n only_non_empty: bool = False,\n tokens_as_hashes: bool = False,\n with_attr: Union[bool, str, Sequence[str]] = False,\n n_tokens: Optional[int] = None,\n as_tables: bool = False,\n as_arrays: bool = False,\n force_unigrams: bool = False) \\\n -> Union[\n # multiple documents\n Dict[str, Union[List[StrOrInt], # tokens\n List[List[StrOrInt]], # sentences with tokens\n np.ndarray, # tokens\n List[np.ndarray], # sentences with tokens\n Dict[str, Union[list, np.ndarray]], # tokens with attributes\n List[Dict[str, Union[list, np.ndarray]]], # sentences with tokens with attributes\n pd.DataFrame]],\n # single document\n List[StrOrInt], # plain tokens\n List[List[StrOrInt]], # sentences with plain tokens\n np.ndarray, # plain tokens\n List[np.ndarray], # sentences with plain tokens\n Dict[str, Union[list, np.ndarray]], # tokens with attributes\n List[Dict[str, Union[list, np.ndarray]]], # sentences with tokens with attributes\n pd.DataFrame\n ]:\n \"\"\"\n Retrieve documents' tokens from a Corpus or dict of SpaCy documents. Optionally also retrieve document and token\n attributes.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying the documents to fetch\n :param sentences: divide results into sentences; if True, each document will consist of a list of sentences which in\n turn contain a list or array of tokens\n :param only_non_empty: if True, only return non-empty result documents\n :param tokens_as_hashes: if True, return token type hashes (integers) instead of textual representations (strings)\n :param with_attr: also return document and token attributes along with each token; if True, returns all default\n attributes and custom defined attributes; if string, return this specific attribute; if sequence,\n returns attributes specified in this sequence\n :param n_tokens: max. number of tokens to retrieve from each document; if None (default), retrieve all tokens\n :param as_tables: return result as dataframe with tokens and document and token attributes in columns\n :param as_arrays: return result as NumPy arrays instead of lists\n :param force_unigrams: ignore n-grams setting if `docs` is a Corpus with ngrams and always return unigrams\n :return: by default, a dict mapping document labels to document tokens data, which can be of different form,\n depending on the arguments passed to this function:\n (1) list of token strings or hash integers;\n (2) NumPy array of token strings or hash integers;\n (3) dict containing ``\"token\"`` key with values from (1) or (2) and document and token attributes with\n their values as list or NumPy array;\n (4) dataframe with tokens and document and token attributes in columns;\n if `select` is a string not a dict of documents is returned, but a single document with one of the 4 forms\n described before; if `sentences` is True, another list level representing sentences is added\n \"\"\"\n if n_tokens is not None and n_tokens < 0:\n raise ValueError('`n_tokens` must be positive')\n\n if select is None:\n select_docs = None\n else:\n if isinstance(select, str):\n select_docs = {select}\n else:\n select_docs = set(select)\n\n # prepare `with_attr_list`: a list that contains the document and token attributes to be fetched\n add_std_attrs = False\n with_attr_list = []\n if isinstance(with_attr, str):\n with_attr_list = [with_attr] # populated by single string\n elif isinstance(with_attr, list):\n with_attr_list = with_attr.copy() # list already given, copy it\n elif isinstance(with_attr, tuple):\n with_attr_list = list(with_attr) # tuple given, convert to list\n elif isinstance(with_attr, bool):\n add_std_attrs = with_attr # True specified, means load standard attributes\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'cannot handle argument `with_attr` of type \"{type(with_attr)}\"')\n\n # if requested by `with_attr = True`, add standard token attributes\n if add_std_attrs:\n with_attr_list.extend(docs.spacy_token_attrs)\n\n # get ngram setting\n if force_unigrams:\n ng = 1 # ngram setting; default is unigram\n ng_join_str = None\n else:\n ng = docs.ngrams\n ng_join_str = docs.ngrams_join_str\n\n # get document attributes with default values\n if add_std_attrs or with_attr_list:\n exclude_doc_attrs = {'has_sents'} if as_tables else {'has_sents', 'label'}\n doc_attrs = {k: v for k, v in docs.doc_attrs_defaults.items() if k not in exclude_doc_attrs}\n # rely on custom token attrib. w/ defaults as reported from Corpus\n custom_token_attrs_defaults = docs.custom_token_attrs_defaults\n if add_std_attrs:\n with_attr_list.extend(custom_token_attrs_defaults.keys())\n else:\n doc_attrs = {'label': ''} if as_tables else {}\n custom_token_attrs_defaults = {}\n\n # subset documents\n if select_docs is not None:\n docs = {lbl: docs[lbl] for lbl in select_docs}\n\n # make sure `doc_attrs` contains only the attributes listed in `with_attr_list`; if `with_attr = True`, don't\n # filter the `doc_attrs`\n if with_attr_list and not add_std_attrs:\n doc_attrs = {k: doc_attrs[k] for k in with_attr_list + ['label'] if k in doc_attrs.keys()}\n\n token_attrs = [k for k in with_attr_list if k not in set(doc_attrs.keys()) | {'label', 'has_sents'}]\n\n res = {}\n for lbl, d in docs.items(): # iterate through corpus with label `lbl` and Document objects `d`\n # skip this document if it is empty and `only_non_empty` is True\n n = len(d) if n_tokens is None or len(d) < n_tokens else n_tokens\n if only_non_empty and n == 0:\n if select_docs is not None:\n raise ValueError(f'document \"{lbl}\" is an empty selected document but only non-empty documents should '\n f'be retrieved')\n continue\n\n token_base_attr = ['token']\n if as_tables and sentences and d.has_sents: # add sentence numbers column\n token_base_attr = ['sent'] + token_base_attr\n\n attr_values = {} # maps document or token attribute name to values\n\n # get token attributes (incl. tokens themselves)\n tok_attr_values = document_token_attr(d, attr=token_base_attr + token_attrs,\n default=custom_token_attrs_defaults,\n sentences=sentences and not as_tables,\n n=n_tokens,\n ngrams=ng,\n ngrams_join=ng_join_str,\n as_hashes=tokens_as_hashes,\n as_array=as_arrays or as_tables)\n\n # get document attributes\n if doc_attrs:\n # for tables, repeat the value to match the number of tokens, otherwise a document attrib. is a scalar value\n attr_values = {attr: np.repeat(d.doc_attrs.get(attr, default), n) if as_tables\n else d.doc_attrs.get(attr, default)\n for attr, default in doc_attrs.items()}\n\n if attr_values:\n # add token attributes to document attributes (doc. attrib. come first in dict/dataframe)\n attr_values.update(tok_attr_values)\n else:\n attr_values = tok_attr_values\n\n if as_tables or with_attr_list:\n res[lbl] = attr_values\n else: # tokens alone requested\n res[lbl] = attr_values['token']\n\n if as_tables: # convert to dict of dataframes\n res = {lbl: pd.DataFrame(doc_data) for lbl, doc_data in res.items()}\n\n if isinstance(select, str): # return single document\n return res[select]\n else:\n return res\n\n\n@tabular_result_option('doc', 'length')\ndef doc_lengths(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n as_table: Union[bool, str] = False) -> Union[Dict[str, int], pd.DataFrame]:\n \"\"\"\n Return document length (number of tokens in doc.) for each document.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param as_table: if True, return result as dataframe; if a string, sort dataframe by this column; if string prefixed\n with \"-\", sort by this column in descending order\n :return: dict of document lengths per document label or dataframe if `as_table` is active\n \"\"\"\n\n select = _single_str_to_set(select, check_docs=docs)\n\n if select is None:\n return {lbl: len(d) for lbl, d in docs.items()}\n else:\n return {lbl: len(d) for lbl, d in docs.items() if lbl in select}\n\n\ndef doc_token_lengths(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None) -> Dict[str, List[int]]:\n \"\"\"\n Return token lengths (number of characters of each token) for each document.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :return: dict with list of token lengths per document label\n \"\"\"\n\n # get token lengths for each token in the vocabulary\n vocab_hashes = docs.bimaps['token'].keys()\n vocab_tokens = docs.bimaps['token'].values()\n # maps token hash to token length\n vocab_lengths = dict(zip(vocab_hashes, token_lengths(vocab_tokens)))\n\n select = _single_str_to_set(select, check_docs=docs)\n\n res = {}\n for lbl, d in docs.items():\n if select is None or lbl in select:\n tok = d.tokenmat[:, TOKINDEX]\n # lookup token length by hash\n res[lbl] = [vocab_lengths[h] for h in tok]\n\n return res\n\n\n@tabular_result_option('doc', 'num_sents')\ndef doc_num_sents(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n as_table: Union[bool, str] = False) -> Union[Dict[str, int], pd.DataFrame]:\n \"\"\"\n Return number of sentences for each document.\n\n .. note:: This number may be unreliable after filtering tokens in the corpus, since a filter may remove\n the starting tokens of sentences.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param as_table: if True, return result as dataframe; if a string, sort dataframe by this column; if string prefixed\n with \"-\", sort by this column in descending order\n :return: dict with number of sentences per document label or dataframe if `as_table` is active\n \"\"\"\n\n select = _single_str_to_set(select, check_docs=docs)\n res = {}\n\n try:\n for lbl, d in docs.items():\n # using max() here to make sure that each non-empty document has at least one sentence (the \"sent_start\"\n # array may not report any sentence starts after filtering which may otherwise result in non-empty documents\n # being reported as containing no sentences)\n if select is None or lbl in select:\n res[lbl] = max(int(np.sum(document_token_attr(d, attr='sent_start', as_array=True))),\n 1 if len(d) > 0 else 0)\n return res\n except KeyError:\n raise RuntimeError('sentence borders not set; Corpus documents probably not parsed with sentence recognition')\n\n\ndef doc_sent_lengths(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None) -> Dict[str, List[int]]:\n \"\"\"\n Return sentence lengths (number of tokens of each sentence) for each document.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :return: dict with list of sentence lengths per document label\n \"\"\"\n\n select = _single_str_to_set(select, check_docs=docs)\n res = {}\n\n for lbl, d in docs.items():\n if select is None or lbl in select:\n n = len(d)\n if n == 0: # no tokens -> no sentences\n res[lbl] = []\n else:\n # get starting indices of sentences; make sure that at least the very first token is a starting index\n sent_start_ind = np.flatnonzero(document_token_attr(d, 'sent_start', as_array=True)).tolist() or [0]\n sent_start_ind.append(n) # add the number of tokens as virtual next sentence starting index\n # calculate the lengths between the starting indices to get the sentence lengths\n res[lbl] = np.diff(sent_start_ind).tolist()\n\n return res\n\n\ndef doc_labels(docs: Corpus, sort: bool = True) -> List[str]:\n \"\"\"\n Return list of the documents' labels.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param sort: if True, return as sorted list\n :return: list of the documents' labels\n \"\"\"\n if sort:\n return sorted(docs.keys())\n else:\n return list(docs.keys())\n\n\ndef doc_labels_sample(docs: Corpus, n: int) -> Set[str]:\n \"\"\"\n Generate random sample of document labels from `docs` with sample size `n`.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param n: sample size; must be in interval ``[0, len(docs)]``\n :return: set of sampled document labels\n \"\"\"\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n logger.info(f'sampling {n} documents out of {len(docs)} in the corpus')\n return set(random.sample(doc_labels(docs, sort=False), n))\n\n\n@tabular_result_option('doc', 'text')\ndef doc_texts(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None, collapse: Optional[str] = None,\n n_tokens: Optional[int] = None, as_table: Union[bool, str] = False) \\\n -> Union[Dict[str, str], pd.DataFrame]:\n \"\"\"\n Return reconstructed document text from documents in `docs`. By default, uses whitespace token attribute to collapse\n tokens to document text, otherwise custom `collapse` string.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying the documents to fetch\n :param collapse: if None, use whitespace token attribute for collapsing tokens, otherwise use custom string\n :param n_tokens: max. number of tokens to retrieve from each document; if None (default), retrieve all tokens\n :param as_table: if True, return result as dataframe; if a string, sort dataframe by this column; if string prefixed\n with \"-\", sort by this column in descending order\n :return: dict with reconstructed document text per document label or dataframe if `as_table` is active\n \"\"\"\n @parallelexec(collect_fn=merge_dicts)\n def _doc_texts(tokens, collapse):\n texts = {}\n for lbl, tok in tokens.items():\n if collapse is None:\n texts[lbl] = collapse_tokens(tok['token'], tok['whitespace'])\n else:\n texts[lbl] = collapse_tokens(tok, collapse)\n\n return texts\n\n select = _single_str_to_set(select) # force doc_tokens output as dict\n\n if collapse is None:\n tokdata = doc_tokens(docs, select=select, n_tokens=n_tokens, with_attr='whitespace')\n else:\n tokdata = doc_tokens(docs, select=select, n_tokens=n_tokens)\n\n return _doc_texts(_paralleltask(docs, tokdata,\n force_serialproc=(n_tokens is not None and n_tokens < 1000) or len(docs) < 1000),\n collapse=collapse)\n\n\n@tabular_result_option('token', 'freq')\ndef doc_frequencies(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n tokens_as_hashes: bool = False, force_unigrams: bool = False,\n proportions: Proportion = Proportion.NO,\n as_table: Union[bool, str] = False) \\\n -> Union[Dict[StrOrInt, Union[int, float]], pd.DataFrame]:\n \"\"\"\n Document frequency per vocabulary token as dict with token to document frequency mapping.\n Document frequency is the measure of how often a token occurs *at least once* in a document.\n Example with absolute document frequencies:\n\n .. code-block:: text\n\n doc tokens\n --- ------\n A z, z, w, x\n B y, z, y\n C z, z, y, z\n\n document frequency df(z) = 3 (occurs in all 3 documents)\n df(x) = df(w) = 1 (occurs only in A)\n df(y) = 2 (occurs in B and C)\n ...\n\n :param docs: a :class:`Corpus` object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param tokens_as_hashes: if True, return token type hashes (integers) instead of textual representations (strings)\n :param force_unigrams: ignore n-grams setting if `docs` is a Corpus with ngrams and always return unigrams\n :param proportions: one of :attr:`~tmtoolkit.types.Proportion`: ``NO (0)`` – return counts; ``YES (1)`` – return\n proportions; ``LOG (2)`` – return log10 of proportions\n :param as_table: if True, return result as dataframe; if a string, sort dataframe by this column; if string prefixed\n with \"-\", sort by this column in descending order\n :return: dict mapping token to document frequency or dataframe if `as_table` is active\n \"\"\"\n result_uses_hashes = docs.ngrams == 1 or force_unigrams\n\n if not result_uses_hashes and tokens_as_hashes:\n raise ValueError('supplied `docs` Corpus object uses n-grams; `tokens_as_hashes` must be False in that case')\n\n select = _single_str_to_set(select) # force doc_tokens output as dict\n tokens = doc_tokens(docs, select=select, tokens_as_hashes=result_uses_hashes, force_unigrams=force_unigrams)\n\n if not tokens: # empty corpus -> no doc. frequencies (prevent log(0) domain error)\n return {}\n\n # the following is faster than using `Counter`\n hashes = np.array(flatten_list(set(dtok) for dtok in tokens.values()), # count *unique* occurrences per document\n dtype='uint64' if result_uses_hashes else 'str')\n hashes, counts = np.unique(hashes, return_counts=True)\n\n if proportions == Proportion.YES:\n counts = counts / len(tokens)\n elif proportions == Proportion.LOG:\n counts = np.log10(counts) - np.log10(len(tokens))\n\n if tokens_as_hashes or not result_uses_hashes:\n return dict(zip(hashes, counts))\n else:\n return {docs.bimaps['token'][h]: n for h, n in zip(hashes, counts)}\n\n\ndef doc_vectors(docs: Union[Corpus, Dict[str, Doc]], select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n collapse: Optional[str] = None, omit_empty: bool = False) -> Dict[str, np.ndarray]:\n \"\"\"\n Return a vector representation for each document in `docs`. The vector representation's size corresponds to the\n vector width of the language model that is used (usually 300).\n\n .. note:: `docs` can be either a :class:`Corpus` object or dict of SpaCy Doc objects. If it is a Corpus object,\n it must use a SpaCy language model with word vectors (i.e. an *_md* or *_lg* model).\n If the corpus was transformed, especially if tokens were removed, then you should set `collapse` to `\" \"`.\n Otherwise tokens may be joint because of missing whitespace between them.\n\n :param docs: a :class:`Corpus` object or dict mapping document labels to SpaCy Doc objects\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param collapse: if None, use whitespace token attribute for collapsing tokens, otherwise use custom string\n :param omit_empty: omit empty documents\n :return: dict mapping document label to vector representation of the document\n \"\"\"\n spacydocs = _spacydocs_for_vectors(docs, select=select, collapse=collapse)\n\n return {lbl: d.vector for lbl, d in spacydocs.items() if not omit_empty or len(d) > 0}\n\n\ndef token_vectors(docs: Union[Corpus, Dict[str, Doc]], select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n collapse: Optional[str] = None, omit_oov: bool = True) -> Dict[str, np.ndarray]:\n \"\"\"\n Return a token vectors matrix for each document in `docs`. This matrix is of size *n* by *m* where *n* is\n the number of tokens in the document and *m* is the vector width of the language model that is used (usually 300).\n If `omit_oov` is True, *n* will be number of tokens in the document **for which there is a word vector** in\n used the language model.\n\n .. note:: `docs` can be either a :class:`Corpus` object or dict of SpaCy Doc objects. If it is a Corpus object,\n it must use a SpaCy language model with word vectors (i.e. an *_md* or *_lg* model).\n If the corpus was transformed, especially if tokens were removed, then you should set `collapse` to `\" \"`.\n Otherwise tokens may be joint because of missing whitespace between them.\n\n :param docs: a :class:`Corpus` object or dict mapping document labels to SpaCy Doc objects\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param collapse: if None, use whitespace token attribute for collapsing tokens, otherwise use custom string\n :param omit_oov: omit \"out of vocabulary\" tokens, i.e. tokens without a vector\n :return: dict mapping document label to token vectors matrix\n \"\"\"\n spacydocs = _spacydocs_for_vectors(docs, select=select, collapse=collapse)\n\n return {lbl: np.vstack([t.vector for t in d if not (omit_oov and t.is_oov)])\n if len(d) > 0 else np.array([], dtype='float32')\n for lbl, d in spacydocs.items()}\n\n\ndef spacydocs(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None, collapse: Optional[str] = None) \\\n -> Dict[str, Doc]:\n \"\"\"\n Generate `SpaCy Doc `_ objects from current corpus.\n\n .. note:: If the corpus was transformed, especially if tokens were removed, then you should set `collapse` to\n ``\" \"``. Otherwise tokens may be joint because of missing whitespace between them.\n\n :param docs: a :class:`Corpus` object or a dict of token strings\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param collapse: if None, use whitespace token attribute for collapsing tokens, otherwise use custom string\n :return: dict mapping document labels to `SpaCy Doc `_ objects\n \"\"\"\n # set document extensions for document attributes\n for attr, default in docs.doc_attrs_defaults.items():\n Doc.set_extension(attr, default=default, force=True)\n\n # generate texts\n logger.debug('generating document texts')\n txts = doc_texts(docs, select=select, collapse=collapse)\n\n # set up pipe\n logger.debug('generating SpaCy documents from Corpus instance documents')\n pipe = docs._nlppipe(txts.values())\n sp_docs = {}\n\n # iterate through SpaCy documents\n for lbl, sp_d in zip(txts.keys(), pipe):\n # take over document attributes from corresponding Document object\n for attr, val in docs[lbl].doc_attrs.items():\n setattr(sp_d._, attr, val)\n\n assert sp_d._.label == lbl, f'document label \"{lbl}\" must match SpaCy document attribute'\n assert lbl not in sp_docs, f'document label \"{lbl}\" must be unique'\n sp_docs[lbl] = sp_d\n\n return sp_docs\n\n\ndef vocabulary(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None, tokens_as_hashes: bool = False,\n force_unigrams: bool = False, sort: bool = True, convert_uint64hashes: bool = True) \\\n -> Union[Set[StrOrInt], List[StrOrInt]]:\n \"\"\"\n Return the vocabulary, i.e. the set or sorted list of unique token types, of a Corpus or a dict of token strings.\n\n :param docs: a :class:`Corpus` object or a dict of token strings\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param tokens_as_hashes: use token hashes instead of token strings\n :param force_unigrams: ignore n-grams setting if `docs` is a Corpus with ngrams and always return unigrams\n :param sort: if True, sort the vocabulary\n :param convert_uint64hashes: if True, convert NumPy ``uint64`` hashes to Python ``int`` types (only is effective if\n `tokens_as_hashes` is True)\n :return: set or, if `sort` is True, a sorted list of unique token types\n \"\"\"\n if select is not None or (not force_unigrams and docs.ngrams > 1):\n if isinstance(select, str): # force doc_tokens output as dict\n select = [select]\n logger.debug(\"generating vocabulary from documents' tokens\")\n v = flatten_list(doc_tokens(docs, select=select, tokens_as_hashes=tokens_as_hashes).values())\n else:\n logger.debug(\"generating vocabulary from tokens bimap\")\n if tokens_as_hashes:\n v = docs.bimaps['token'].keys()\n else:\n v = docs.bimaps['token'].values()\n\n v = set(v)\n\n if sort:\n if tokens_as_hashes and convert_uint64hashes:\n v = map(int, v)\n return sorted(v)\n else:\n if tokens_as_hashes and convert_uint64hashes:\n return set(map(int, v))\n else:\n return v\n\n\n@tabular_result_option(key='token', value='freq')\ndef vocabulary_counts(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n proportions: Proportion = Proportion.NO,\n tokens_as_hashes: bool = False, force_unigrams: bool = False,\n convert_uint64hashes: bool = True, as_table: Union[bool, str] = False) \\\n -> Union[Dict[StrOrInt, Union[int, float]], pd.DataFrame]:\n \"\"\"\n Return a dict mapping the tokens in the vocabulary to their respective number of occurrences across all or selected\n documents.\n\n :param docs: a :class:`Corpus` object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param proportions: one of :attr:`~tmtoolkit.types.Proportion`: ``NO (0)`` – return counts; ``YES (1)`` – return\n proportions; ``LOG (2)`` – return log10 of proportions\n :param tokens_as_hashes: if True, return token type hashes (integers) instead of textual representations (strings)\n :param force_unigrams: ignore n-grams setting if `docs` is a Corpus with ngrams and always return unigrams\n :param convert_uint64hashes: if True, convert NumPy ``uint64`` hashes to Python ``int`` types (only is effective if\n `tokens_as_hashes` is True)\n :param as_table: if True, return result as dataframe; if a string, sort dataframe by this column; if string prefixed\n with \"-\", sort by this column in descending order\n :return: dict mapping the tokens in the vocabulary to their respective counts or dataframe if `as_table` is active\n \"\"\"\n result_uses_hashes = docs.ngrams == 1 or force_unigrams\n\n if not result_uses_hashes and tokens_as_hashes:\n raise ValueError('supplied `docs` Corpus object uses n-grams; `tokens_as_hashes` must be False in that case')\n\n if isinstance(select, str): # force doc_tokens output as dict\n select = [select]\n tok = doc_tokens(docs, select=select, tokens_as_hashes=result_uses_hashes, force_unigrams=force_unigrams)\n\n if not tok: # shortcut\n return {}\n\n # the following is faster than using `Counter`\n hashes = np.array(flatten_list(tok.values()), dtype='uint64' if result_uses_hashes else 'str')\n hashes, counts = np.unique(hashes, return_counts=True)\n\n if proportions == Proportion.YES:\n counts = counts / np.sum(counts)\n elif proportions == Proportion.LOG:\n counts = np.log10(counts) - np.log10(np.sum(counts))\n\n if tokens_as_hashes or not result_uses_hashes:\n if tokens_as_hashes and convert_uint64hashes:\n hashes = hashes.tolist()\n return dict(zip(hashes, counts))\n else:\n return {docs.bimaps['token'][h]: n for h, n in zip(hashes, counts)}\n\n\ndef vocabulary_size(docs: Union[Corpus, Dict[str, List[str]]], select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n force_unigrams: bool = False) -> int:\n \"\"\"\n Return size of the vocabulary, i.e. number of unique token types in `docs` (or a subset via `select`).\n\n :param docs: a :class:`Corpus` object or a dict of token strings\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param force_unigrams: ignore n-grams setting if `docs` is a Corpus with ngrams and always return unigrams\n :return: size of the vocabulary\n \"\"\"\n return len(vocabulary(docs, select=select, sort=False, tokens_as_hashes=docs.uses_unigrams,\n force_unigrams=force_unigrams, convert_uint64hashes=False))\n\n\ndef tokens_table(docs: Corpus,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n sentences: bool = False,\n tokens_as_hashes: bool = False,\n with_attr: Union[bool, str, Sequence[str]] = True,\n force_unigrams: bool = False) -> pd.DataFrame:\n \"\"\"\n Generate a dataframe with tokens and document/token attributes. Result has columns \"doc\" (document label),\n \"position\" (token position in the document, starting at zero), \"token\" and optional columns for\n document/token attributes.\n\n :param docs: a :class:`Corpus` object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying the documents to fetch\n :param sentences: if True, list sentence index (starting at zero) per token in `sent` column\n :param tokens_as_hashes: if True, return token type hashes (integers) instead of textual representations (strings)\n :param with_attr: also return document and token attributes along with each token; if True, returns all default\n attributes and custom defined attributes; if sequence, returns attributes specified in this\n sequence\n :param force_unigrams: ignore n-grams setting if `docs` is a Corpus with ngrams and always return unigrams\n :return: dataframe with tokens and document/token attributes\n \"\"\"\n @parallelexec(collect_fn=list)\n def _tokens_table(chunks):\n # store data for dataframe as dict mapping columns to values\n col_data = defaultdict(list)\n\n # iterate through document dicts per parallel processing chunk\n for lbl, d in chunks.items():\n n = None\n\n if not isinstance(d, dict):\n d = {'token': d}\n\n # make sure tokens are retrieved first in order to get `n`\n attrs = ['token'] + list(set(d.keys()) - {'token'})\n\n if 'label' not in d: # make sure to set document label\n d['label'] = lbl\n attrs.append('label')\n\n # iterate through attributes\n for a in attrs:\n val = d[a]\n if isinstance(val, np.ndarray): # token attrib.\n if n is None:\n n = len(val)\n col_data['position'].append(np.arange(n))\n col_data[a].append(val)\n else: # document attrib.\n if n is None:\n raise ValueError('number of tokens must be determined before')\n col_data[a].append(np.repeat(val, n))\n\n # construct dataframe for all data passed to this worker process\n return pd.DataFrame({col: np.concatenate(vals) for col, vals in col_data.items()})\n\n # get dict of dataframes\n if with_attr is True:\n with_attr = list(docs.spacy_token_attrs)\n if sentences:\n with_attr.append('sent')\n with_attr.extend(docs.doc_attrs)\n with_attr.extend(docs.custom_token_attrs_defaults.keys())\n elif with_attr is False:\n with_attr = []\n elif isinstance(with_attr, str):\n with_attr = [with_attr]\n elif isinstance(with_attr, list):\n with_attr = with_attr.copy()\n elif isinstance(with_attr, tuple):\n with_attr = list(with_attr)\n else:\n raise ValueError(f'cannot handle argument `with_attr` of type \"{type(with_attr)}\"')\n\n if sentences and 'sent' not in with_attr:\n with_attr.append('sent')\n\n logger.debug('getting tokens')\n doc_tok = doc_tokens(docs,\n select={select} if isinstance(select, str) else select,\n sentences=False,\n tokens_as_hashes=tokens_as_hashes,\n only_non_empty=True,\n with_attr=with_attr,\n as_arrays=True,\n force_unigrams=force_unigrams)\n\n logger.debug('generating result')\n if doc_tok:\n dfs = _tokens_table(_paralleltask(docs, doc_tok))\n if len(dfs) == 1:\n res = dfs[0]\n else:\n # concatenate the dataframes from the worker processes\n res = pd.concat(dfs, axis=0, ignore_index=True)\n else:\n # empty corpus\n logger.debug('corpus is empty')\n cols = ['label']\n if sentences:\n cols.append('sent')\n cols.extend(['position', 'token'])\n if isinstance(with_attr, (list, tuple, set)):\n cols.extend([a for a in with_attr if a not in cols])\n\n res = pd.DataFrame({c: [] for c in cols})\n\n if sentences:\n first_cols = ['doc', 'sent', 'position', 'token']\n else:\n first_cols = ['doc', 'position', 'token']\n\n cols = first_cols + sorted(c for c in res.columns if c not in first_cols + ['label'])\n return res.sort_values(['label', 'position'])\\\n .rename(columns={'label': 'doc'})\\\n .reindex(columns=cols)\\\n .reset_index(drop=True)\n\n\ndef corpus_tokens_flattened(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n sentences: bool = False, tokens_as_hashes: bool = False,\n as_array: bool = False, force_unigrams: bool = False) -> Union[list, np.ndarray]:\n \"\"\"\n Return tokens (or token hashes) from `docs` as flattened list, simply concatenating all documents.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param sentences: divide results into sentences; if True, the result will consist of a list of sentences\n :param tokens_as_hashes: passed to :func:`doc_tokens`; if True, return token hashes instead of string tokens\n :param as_array: if True, return NumPy array instead of list\n :param force_unigrams: ignore n-grams setting if `docs` is a Corpus with ngrams and always return unigrams\n :return: list or NumPy array (depending on `as_array`) of token strings or hashes (depending on `tokens_as_hashes`);\n if `sentences` is True, the result is a list of sentences that in turn are token lists/arrays\n \"\"\"\n\n if isinstance(select, str): # force doc_tokens output as dict\n select = [select]\n\n tok = doc_tokens(docs, select=select, sentences=sentences, only_non_empty=True,\n tokens_as_hashes=tokens_as_hashes, as_arrays=as_array, force_unigrams=force_unigrams)\n\n dtype = 'uint64' if tokens_as_hashes else 'str'\n if as_array and not sentences:\n if tok:\n return np.concatenate(list(tok.values()), dtype=dtype)\n else:\n return np.array([], dtype=dtype)\n else:\n res = flatten_list(tok.values())\n\n if res or not sentences:\n return res\n else:\n if as_array:\n return [np.array([], dtype=dtype)]\n else:\n return [[]]\n\n\ndef corpus_num_tokens(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None) -> int:\n \"\"\"\n Return the number of tokens in a Corpus `docs`.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :return: number of tokens\n \"\"\"\n return sum(doc_lengths(docs, select=select).values())\n\n\ndef corpus_num_chars(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None) -> int:\n \"\"\"\n Return the number of characters (excluding whitespace) in a Corpus `docs`.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :return: number of characters\n \"\"\"\n return sum(sum(n) for n in doc_token_lengths(docs, select=select).values())\n\n\ndef corpus_unique_chars(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None) -> Set[str]:\n \"\"\"\n Return the set of characters used in a Corpus `docs`.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :return: set of characters\n \"\"\"\n return unique_chars(vocabulary(docs, select=select, sort=False))\n\n\ndef corpus_collocations(docs: Corpus,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n threshold: Optional[float] = None,\n min_count: int = 1,\n embed_tokens_min_docfreq: Optional[Union[int, float]] = None,\n embed_tokens_set: Optional[Set] = None,\n statistic: Callable = npmi,\n return_statistic: bool = True,\n rank: Optional[str] = 'desc',\n as_table: bool = True,\n glue: str = ' ',\n **statistic_kwargs) \\\n -> Union[pd.DataFrame, List[Union[tuple, str]]]:\n \"\"\"\n Identify token collocations in the corpus `docs`. Collocations are tokens that occur together in a series\n frequently (i.e. more than would be expected by chance).\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.token_collocations`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param threshold: minimum statistic value for a collocation to enter the results; if None, results are not filtered\n :param min_count: ignore collocations with number of occurrences below this threshold\n :param embed_tokens_min_docfreq: dynamically generate the set of ``embed_tokens`` used when calling\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.token_collocations` by using a minimum document\n frequency (see :func:`~doc_frequencies`); if this is an integer, it is used as\n absolute count, if it is a float, it is used as proportion\n :param embed_tokens_set: tokens that, if occurring inside an n-gram, are not counted;\n see :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.ngrams`\n :param statistic: functicorpus_join_documentson to calculate the statistic measure from the token counts; use one of the\n ``[n]pmi[2,3]`` functions provided in the :mod:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq` module or provide\n your own function which must accept parameters ``n_x, n_y, n_xy, n_total``; see\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.pmi` for more information\n :param return_statistic: also return computed statistic\n :param rank: if not None, rank the results according to the computed statistic in ascending (``rank='asc'``) or\n descending (``rank='desc'``) order\n :param as_table: return result as dataframe with columns \"collocation\" and optionally \"statistic\"\n :param glue: if not None, provide a string that is used to join the collocation tokens; must be set if\n `as_table` is True\n :param statistic_kwargs: additional arguments passed to `statistic` function\n :return: if `as_table` is True, a dataframe with columns \"collocation\" and optionally \"statistic\";\n else same output as :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.token_collocations`, i.e. list of tuples\n ``(collocation tokens, score)`` if `return_statistic` is True, otherwise only a list of collocations\n \"\"\"\n if as_table and glue is None:\n raise ValueError('`glue` cannot be None if `as_table` is True')\n\n if docs.ngrams > 1:\n raise ValueError(f'this function is only applicable to Corpus objects with unigrams, but `docs` has '\n f'docs.ngrams set to {docs.ngrams}')\n\n logger.debug('getting flattened tokens')\n tok = corpus_tokens_flattened(docs, select=select, sentences=True, tokens_as_hashes=True, as_array=True)\n logger.debug('getting vocabulary counts')\n vocab_counts = vocabulary_counts(docs, tokens_as_hashes=True)\n\n # generate ``embed_tokens`` set as used in :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.token_collocations`\n logger.debug('creating embed tokens')\n embed_tokens = _create_embed_tokens_for_collocations(docs, embed_tokens_min_docfreq, embed_tokens_set,\n tokens_as_hashes=True)\n\n # identify collocations\n logger.debug('identifying collocations')\n colloc = token_collocations(tok, threshold=threshold, min_count=min_count, embed_tokens=embed_tokens,\n vocab_counts=vocab_counts, statistic=statistic, return_statistic=return_statistic,\n rank=rank, glue=glue, tokens_as_hashes=True, hashes2tokens=docs.bimaps['token'],\n **statistic_kwargs)\n\n logger.debug('generating result')\n if as_table:\n if return_statistic: # generate two columns: collocation and statistic\n if colloc:\n bg, stat = zip(*colloc)\n else:\n bg = []\n stat = []\n cols = {'collocation': bg, 'statistic': stat}\n else: # use only collocation column\n cols = {'collocation': colloc}\n return pd.DataFrame(cols)\n else:\n return colloc\n\n\ndef corpus_summary(docs: Corpus,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n max_documents: Optional[int] = None,\n max_tokens_string_length: Optional[int] = None) -> str:\n \"\"\"\n Generate a summary of this object, i.e. the first tokens of each document and some summary statistics.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param max_documents: maximum number of documents to print; ``None`` uses default value 10; set to -1 to\n print *all* documents; this setting is disabled if `select` is not None\n :param max_tokens_string_length: maximum string length of concatenated tokens for each document; ``None`` uses\n default value 50; set to -1 to print complete documents\n :return: summary as string\n \"\"\"\n\n if max_tokens_string_length is None:\n max_tokens_string_length = docs.print_summary_default_max_tokens_string_length\n if max_documents is None:\n max_documents = docs.print_summary_default_max_documents\n\n n_docs = len(docs)\n summary = f'Corpus with {n_docs} document' \\\n f'{\"s\" if n_docs > 1 else \"\"} in ' \\\n f'{LANGUAGE_LABELS[docs.language].capitalize()}'\n\n select = _single_str_to_set(select, check_docs=docs)\n top_docs = None\n\n if select is None and max_documents > 0:\n top_docs = doc_labels(docs)[:max_documents]\n\n if select is not None:\n summary += f' ({len(select)} document{\"s\" if len(select) > 1 else \"\"} selected for display)'\n\n logger.info('generating document texts')\n texts = doc_texts(docs, select=select or top_docs, collapse=' ',\n n_tokens=max_tokens_string_length if max_tokens_string_length >= 0 else None)\n dlengths = doc_lengths(docs, select=select or top_docs)\n\n for i, (lbl, tokstr) in enumerate(texts.items()):\n tokstr = tokstr.replace('\\n', ' ').replace('\\r', '').replace('\\t', ' ')\n if select is None and max_documents >= 0 and i >= max_documents:\n break\n if max_tokens_string_length >= 0 and len(tokstr) > max_tokens_string_length:\n tokstr = tokstr[:max_tokens_string_length] + '...'\n\n summary += f'\\n> {lbl} ({dlengths[lbl]} tokens): {tokstr}'\n\n if select is None and max_documents >= 0 and len(docs) > max_documents:\n summary += f'\\n(and {len(docs) - max_documents} more documents)'\n\n summary += f'\\ntotal number of tokens: {corpus_num_tokens(docs)} / vocabulary size: {vocabulary_size(docs)}'\n\n return summary\n\n\ndef print_summary(docs: Corpus,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n max_documents: Optional[int] = None,\n max_tokens_string_length: Optional[int] = None) -> None:\n \"\"\"\n Print a summary of this object, i.e. the first tokens of each document and some summary statistics.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param max_documents: maximum number of documents to print; ``None`` uses default value 10; set to -1 to\n print *all* documents; this setting is disabled in `select` is not None\n :param max_tokens_string_length: maximum string length of concatenated tokens for each document; ``None`` uses\n default value 50; set to -1 to print complete documents\n \"\"\"\n print(corpus_summary(docs, select=select, max_documents=max_documents,\n max_tokens_string_length=max_tokens_string_length))\n\n\ndef dtm(docs: Corpus, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None, as_table: bool = False,\n dtype: Optional[Union[str, np.dtype]] = None, return_doc_labels: bool = False, return_vocab: bool = False) \\\n -> Union[csr_matrix,\n pd.DataFrame,\n Tuple[Union[csr_matrix, pd.DataFrame], List[str]],\n Tuple[Union[csr_matrix, pd.DataFrame], List[str], List[str]]]:\n \"\"\"\n Generate and return a sparse document-term matrix (or alternatively a dataframe) of shape\n ``(n_docs, n_vocab)`` where ``n_docs`` is the number of documents and ``n_vocab`` is the vocabulary size.\n\n The rows of the matrix correspond to the *sorted* document labels, the columns of the matrix correspond to the\n *sorted* vocabulary of `docs`. Using `return_doc_labels` and/or `return_vocab`, you can additionally return these\n two lists.\n\n .. warning:: Setting `as_table` to True will return *dense* data, which means that it may require a lot of memory.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param as_table: return result as dense pandas DataFrame\n :param dtype: use a specific matrix dtype; otherwise dtype will be uint32\n :param return_doc_labels: if True, additionally return sorted document labels that correspond to the rows of the\n document-term matrix\n :param return_vocab: if True, additionally return the sorted vocabulary that corresponds to the columns of the\n document-term matrix\n :return: document-term matrix as sparse matrix or dense dataframe; additionally sorted document labels and/or sorted\n vocabulary if `return_doc_labels` and/or `return_vocab` is True\n \"\"\"\n @parallelexec(collect_fn=list)\n def _sparse_dtms(chunk):\n vocab = sorted(set(flatten_list(chunk.values())))\n alloc_size = sum(len(set(dtok)) for dtok in chunk.values()) # sum of *unique* tokens in each document\n\n return (create_sparse_dtm(vocab, chunk.values(), alloc_size, vocab_is_sorted=True, dtype=dtype),\n chunk.keys(),\n vocab)\n\n select = _single_str_to_set(select)\n logger.debug('getting tokens')\n tokens = doc_tokens(docs, select=select)\n\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n logger.info(f'generating sparse DTM with {len(tokens)} documents and '\n f'vocab size {len(set(flatten_list(tokens.values())))}')\n\n if len(tokens) > 0:\n logger.debug('generating sparse DTM')\n res = _sparse_dtms(_paralleltask(docs, tokens=tokens))\n w_dtms, w_doc_labels, w_vocab = zip(*res)\n dtm, vocab, dtm_doc_labels = combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise(w_dtms, w_vocab, w_doc_labels)\n # sort according to document labels\n dtm = dtm[np.argsort(dtm_doc_labels), :]\n doc_labels = np.sort(dtm_doc_labels)\n else:\n logger.debug('empty corpus')\n dtm = csr_matrix((0, 0), dtype=dtype or 'int32') # empty sparse matrix\n vocab = empty_chararray()\n doc_labels = empty_chararray()\n\n logger.debug('generating result')\n if as_table:\n mat = dtm_to_dataframe(dtm, doc_labels, vocab)\n else:\n mat = dtm\n\n if return_doc_labels and return_vocab:\n return mat, doc_labels.tolist(), vocab.tolist()\n elif return_doc_labels and not return_vocab:\n return mat, doc_labels.tolist()\n elif not return_doc_labels and return_vocab:\n return mat, vocab.tolist()\n else:\n return mat\n\n\ndef ngrams(docs: Corpus, n: int, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None, join: bool = True,\n join_str: str = ' ') -> Dict[str, Union[List[str], str]]:\n \"\"\"\n Generate and return n-grams of length `n`.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param n: length of n-grams, must be >= 2\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param join: if True, join generated n-grams by string `join_str`\n :param join_str: string used for joining\n :return: dict mapping document label to document n-grams; if `join` is True, the list contains strings of\n joined n-grams, otherwise the list contains lists of size `n` in turn containing the strings that\n make up the n-gram\n \"\"\"\n if n < 2:\n raise ValueError('`n` must be at least 2')\n\n @parallelexec(collect_fn=merge_dicts_sorted)\n def _ngrams(chunk):\n return {lbl: token_ngrams(dtok, n, join=join, join_str=join_str) for lbl, dtok in chunk.items()}\n\n select = _single_str_to_set(select)\n logger.debug('getting tokens')\n tokens = doc_tokens(docs, select=select)\n logger.debug(f'generating {n}-grams')\n return _ngrams(_paralleltask(docs, tokens=tokens))\n\n\ndef kwic(docs: Corpus, search_tokens: Any, context_size: Union[int, Tuple[int, int], List[int]] = 2,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n by_attr: Optional[str] = None, match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case: bool = False,\n glob_method: str = 'match', inverse: bool = False, with_attr: Union[bool, str, Sequence[str]] = False,\n as_tables: bool = False, only_non_empty: bool = False, glue: Optional[str] = None,\n highlight_keyword: Optional[str] = None) \\\n -> Dict[str, Union[list, pd.DataFrame]]:\n \"\"\"\n Perform *keyword-in-context (KWIC)* search for `search_tokens`. Uses similar search parameters as\n :func:`filter_tokens`. Returns results as dict with document label to KWIC results mapping. For\n tabular output, use :func:`kwic_table`. You may also use `as_tables` which gives dataframes per document with\n columns ``doc`` (document label), ``context`` (document-specific context number), ``position`` (token position in\n document), ``token`` and further token attributes if specified via `with_attr`.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param search_tokens: single string or list of strings that specify the search pattern(s)\n :param context_size: either scalar int or tuple/list (left, right) -- number of surrounding words in keyword\n context; if scalar, then it is a symmetric surrounding, otherwise can be asymmetric\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param by_attr: if not None, this should be an attribute name; this attribute data will then be\n used for matching instead of the tokens in `docs`\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is 'glob', use this glob method. Must be 'match' or 'search' (similar\n behavior as Python's :func:`re.match` or :func:`re.search`)\n :param inverse: inverse the match results for filtering (i.e. *remove* all tokens that match the search\n criteria)\n :param with_attr: also return document and token attributes along with each token; if True, returns all default\n attributes and custom defined attributes; if sequence, returns attributes specified in this\n sequence\n :param as_tables: return result as dataframe with \"doc\" (document label) and \"context\" (context ID per document) and\n optionally \"position\" (original token position in the document) if tokens are not glued via `glue`\n parameter\n :param only_non_empty: if True, only return non-empty result documents\n :param glue: if not None, this must be a string which is used to combine all tokens per match to a single string\n :param highlight_keyword: if not None, this must be a string which is used to indicate the start and end of the\n matched keyword\n :return: dict with `document label -> kwic for document` mapping or a dataframe, depending on `as_tables`\n \"\"\"\n if isinstance(context_size, int):\n context_size = (context_size, context_size)\n elif not isinstance(context_size, (list, tuple)):\n raise ValueError('`context_size` must be integer or list/tuple')\n\n if len(context_size) != 2:\n raise ValueError('`context_size` must be list/tuple of length 2')\n\n if any(s < 0 for s in context_size) or all(s == 0 for s in context_size):\n raise ValueError('`context_size` must contain non-negative values and at least one strictly positive value')\n\n if glue is not None and with_attr:\n raise ValueError('when `glue` given, `with_attr` must be False')\n\n by_attr = by_attr or 'token'\n select = _single_str_to_set(select, check_docs=docs)\n\n logger.debug('getting data to match against')\n\n try:\n matchdata = _match_against(docs, by_attr, select=select,\n default=docs.custom_token_attrs_defaults.get(by_attr, None))\n except AttributeError:\n raise AttributeError(f'attribute name \"{by_attr}\" does not exist')\n\n if with_attr:\n logger.debug('getting tokens')\n docs_w_attr = doc_tokens(docs, select=select, with_attr=with_attr, as_arrays=True)\n prepared = {}\n for lbl, matchagainst in matchdata.items():\n if by_attr != 'token':\n d = {k: v for k, v in docs_w_attr[lbl].items() if k != 'token'}\n else:\n d = docs_w_attr[lbl]\n \n prepared[lbl] = merge_dicts((d, {'_matchagainst': matchagainst}))\n else:\n prepared = {k: {'_matchagainst': v} for k, v in matchdata.items()}\n\n logger.debug('generating KWIC')\n kwicres = _build_kwic_parallel(_paralleltask(docs, prepared), search_tokens=search_tokens,\n context_size=context_size, by_attr=by_attr,\n match_type=match_type, ignore_case=ignore_case,\n glob_method=glob_method, inverse=inverse, highlight_keyword=highlight_keyword,\n with_window_indices=as_tables, only_token_masks=False)\n\n return _finalize_kwic_results(kwicres, only_non_empty=only_non_empty, glue=glue, as_tables=as_tables,\n matchattr=by_attr, with_attr=bool(with_attr))\n\n\ndef kwic_table(docs: Corpus, search_tokens: Any, context_size: Union[int, Tuple[int, int], List[int]] = 2,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n by_attr: Optional[str] = None, match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case: bool = False,\n glob_method: str = 'match', inverse: bool = False, with_attr: Union[bool, str, Sequence[str]] = False,\n glue: str = ' ', highlight_keyword: Optional[str] = '*') -> pd.DataFrame:\n \"\"\"\n Perform *keyword-in-context (KWIC)* search for `search_tokens` and return result as dataframe.\n\n If a `glue` string is given, a \"short\" dataframe will be generated with columns ``doc`` (document label),\n ``context`` (document-specific context number) and ``token`` (KWIC result) or, if `by_attr` is set, the specified\n token attribute as last column name.\n\n If a `glue` is None, a \"long\" dataframe will be generated with columns ``doc`` (document label),\n ``context`` (document-specific context number), ``position`` (token position in document), ``token`` and further\n token attributes if specified via `with_attr`.\n\n Uses similar search parameters as :func:`filter_tokens`.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param search_tokens: single string or list of strings that specify the search pattern(s)\n :param context_size: either scalar int or tuple/list (left, right) -- number of surrounding words in keyword\n context; if scalar, then it is a symmetric surrounding, otherwise can be asymmetric\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param by_attr: if not None, this should be an attribute name; this attribute data will then be\n used for matching instead of the tokens in `docs`\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is 'glob', use this glob method. Must be 'match' or 'search' (similar\n behavior as Python's :func:`re.match` or :func:`re.search`)\n :param inverse: inverse the match results for filtering (i.e. *remove* all tokens that match the search\n criteria)\n :param with_attr: also return document and token attributes along with each token; if True, returns all default\n attributes and custom defined attributes; if sequence, returns attributes specified in this\n sequence\n :param glue: if not None, this must be a string which is used to combine all tokens per match to a single string\n :param highlight_keyword: if not None, this must be a string which is used to indicate the start and end of the\n matched keyword\n :return: dataframe with columns ``doc`` (document label), ``context`` (document-specific context number)\n and ``kwic`` (KWIC result)\n \"\"\"\n\n kwicres = kwic(docs, search_tokens=search_tokens, context_size=context_size, select=select, by_attr=by_attr,\n match_type=match_type, ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method, inverse=inverse,\n with_attr=with_attr, as_tables=True, only_non_empty=True, glue=glue,\n highlight_keyword=highlight_keyword)\n\n logger.debug('turning KWIC results into table')\n\n if kwicres:\n kwic_df = pd.concat(kwicres.values(), axis=0)\n if glue is None:\n return kwic_df.sort_values(['doc', 'context', 'position'])\n else:\n return kwic_df.sort_values(['doc', 'context'])\n else:\n matchattr = by_attr or 'token'\n cols = ['doc', 'context']\n\n if glue is None:\n cols.append('position')\n cols.append(matchattr)\n\n if with_attr is True:\n cols.extend([a for a in docs.spacy_token_attrs if a != by_attr])\n elif isinstance(with_attr, list):\n cols.extend([a for a in with_attr if a != by_attr])\n if isinstance(with_attr, str) and with_attr != by_attr:\n cols.append(with_attr)\n\n return pd.DataFrame(dict(zip(cols, [[] for _ in range(len(cols))])))\n\n\n#%% Corpus I/O\n\n\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef corpus_add_files(docs: Corpus, files: Union[str, Collection[str], Dict[str, str]], encoding: str = 'utf8',\n doc_label_fmt: str = '{path}-{basename}', doc_label_path_join: str = '_',\n read_size: int = -1, sample: Optional[int] = None, force_unix_linebreaks: bool = True,\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Read text documents from files passed in `files` and add them to the corpus. If `files` is a dict, the dict keys\n represent the document labels. Otherwise, the document label for each new document is determined via format string\n `doc_label_fmt`.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param files: single file path string or sequence of file paths or dict mapping document label to file path\n :param encoding: character encoding of the files\n :param doc_label_fmt: document label format string with placeholders \"path\", \"basename\", \"ext\"\n :param doc_label_path_join: string with which to join the components of the file paths\n :param custom_doc_labels: instead generating document labels from `doc_label_fmt`, pass a list of document labels\n to be used directly\n :param read_size: max. number of characters to read. -1 means read full file.\n :param sample: if given, draw random sample of size `sample` from `files` (without replacement)\n :param force_unix_linebreaks: if True, convert Windows linebreaks to Unix linebreaks\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if isinstance(files, str):\n filepaths = [files]\n filelabels = None\n elif isinstance(files, dict):\n filepaths = files.values()\n filelabels = dict(zip(files.values(), files.keys())) # reverse mapping\n if len(filelabels) != len(filepaths):\n raise ValueError('file paths in `files` must be unique')\n else: # list\n filepaths = files\n filelabels = None\n\n if sample is not None:\n logger.info(f'sampling {sample} file(s) out of {len(filepaths)}')\n filepaths = random.sample(filepaths, sample)\n\n logger.info(f'adding text from {len(filepaths)} file(s)')\n\n docs.update(_load_text_from_files(filepaths, filelabels, existing_docs=set(docs.keys()), encoding=encoding,\n doc_label_fmt=doc_label_fmt, doc_label_path_join=doc_label_path_join,\n read_size=read_size, force_unix_linebreaks=force_unix_linebreaks))\n\n\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef corpus_add_folder(docs: Corpus, folder: str, valid_extensions: Collection[str] = ('txt', ),\n encoding: str = 'utf8', strip_folderpath_from_doc_label: bool = True,\n doc_label_fmt: str = '{path}-{basename}', doc_label_path_join: str = '_', read_size: int = -1,\n sample: Optional[int] = None, force_unix_linebreaks: bool = True, inplace: bool = True) \\\n -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Read documents residing in folder `folder` and ending on file extensions specified via `valid_extensions` and\n add these to the corpus. This is done recursively, i.e. documents are also loaded from sub-folders inside `folder`.\n\n Note that only raw text files can be read, not PDFs, Word documents, etc. These must be converted to raw\n text files beforehand, for example with *pdttotext* (poppler-utils package) or *pandoc*.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param folder: folder from where the files are read\n :param valid_extensions: collection of valid file extensions like .txt, .md, etc.\n :param encoding: character encoding of the files\n :param strip_folderpath_from_doc_label: if True, do not include the folder path in the document label\n :param doc_label_fmt: document label format string with placeholders \"path\", \"basename\", \"ext\"\n :param doc_label_path_join: string with which to join the components of the file paths\n :param read_size: max. number of characters to read. -1 means read full file.\n :param sample: if given, draw random sample of size `sample` from all loaded files\n :param force_unix_linebreaks: if True, convert Windows linebreaks to Unix linebreaks\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if not os.path.exists(folder):\n raise IOError(f'path does not exist: \"{folder}\"')\n\n if isinstance(valid_extensions, str):\n valid_extensions = (valid_extensions, )\n\n new_docs = {}\n # iterate through all files in `folder` and its sub-folders\n logger.debug('reading files')\n for root, _, files in os.walk(folder):\n if not files:\n continue\n\n for fname in files:\n # get file path components\n basename, ext = os.path.splitext(fname)\n basename = basename.strip()\n if ext:\n ext = ext[1:]\n\n fpath = os.path.join(root, fname)\n\n if valid_extensions and (not ext or ext not in valid_extensions): # skip files with wrong file ext.\n continue\n\n # load the text\n text = read_text_file(fpath, encoding=encoding, read_size=read_size,\n force_unix_linebreaks=force_unix_linebreaks)\n\n # create the document label\n if strip_folderpath_from_doc_label:\n dirs = path_split(root[len(folder)+1:])\n else:\n dirs = path_split(root)\n\n lbl = doc_label_fmt.format(path=doc_label_path_join.join(dirs), basename=basename, ext=ext)\n if lbl.startswith('-'):\n lbl = lbl[1:]\n\n # check for duplicate and add the data from the file\n if lbl in docs or lbl in new_docs:\n raise ValueError(f'duplicate document label \"{lbl}\" not allowed')\n\n new_docs[lbl] = text\n\n if sample is not None:\n logger.info(f'sampling {sample} documents(s) out of {len(new_docs)}')\n new_docs = sample_dict(new_docs, n=sample)\n\n logger.info(f'adding text from {len(new_docs)} documents(s)')\n docs.update(new_docs)\n\n\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef corpus_add_tabular(docs: Corpus, files: Union[str, Collection[str]],\n id_column: StrOrInt, text_column: StrOrInt,\n prepend_columns: Optional[Sequence[str]] = None, encoding: str = 'utf8',\n doc_label_fmt: str = '{basename}-{id}', sample: Optional[int] = None,\n force_unix_linebreaks: bool = True, pandas_read_opts: Optional[Dict[str, Any]] = None,\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Add documents from tabular (CSV or Excel) file(s) to the corpus.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param files: single string or list of strings with path to file(s) to load\n :param id_column: column name or column index of document identifiers\n :param text_column: column name or column index of document texts\n :param prepend_columns: if not None, pass a list of columns whose contents should be added before the document\n text, e.g. ``['title', 'subtitle']``\n :param encoding: character encoding of the files\n :param doc_label_fmt: document label format string with placeholders ``\"basename\"``, ``\"id\"`` (document ID), and\n ``\"row_index\"`` (dataset row index)\n :param sample: if given, draw random sample of size `sample` from all text data\n :param force_unix_linebreaks: if True, convert Windows linebreaks to Unix linebreaks in texts\n :param pandas_read_opts: additional arguments passed to :func:`pandas.read_csv` or :func:`pandas.read_excel`\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n\n logger.debug('reading tabular file(s)')\n new_docs = _load_text_from_tabular_files(files,\n id_column=id_column,\n text_column=text_column,\n existing_docs=set(docs.keys()),\n prepend_columns=prepend_columns,\n encoding=encoding,\n doc_label_fmt=doc_label_fmt,\n force_unix_linebreaks=force_unix_linebreaks,\n pandas_read_opts=pandas_read_opts)\n\n if sample is not None:\n logger.info(f'sampling {sample} documents(s) out of {len(new_docs)}')\n new_docs = sample_dict(new_docs, n=sample)\n\n logger.info(f'adding text from {len(new_docs)} documents(s)')\n docs.update(new_docs)\n\n\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef corpus_add_zip(docs: Corpus, zipfile: str, valid_extensions: Collection[str] = ('txt', 'csv', 'xls', 'xlsx'),\n encoding: str = 'utf8', doc_label_fmt_txt: str ='{path}-{basename}', doc_label_path_join: str = '_',\n doc_label_fmt_tabular: str = '{basename}-{id}',\n sample: Optional[int] = None,\n force_unix_linebreaks: bool = True,\n add_files_opts: Optional[Dict[str, Any]] = None,\n add_tabular_opts: Optional[Dict[str, Any]] = None,\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Add documents from a ZIP file. The ZIP file may include documents with extensions listed in `valid_extensions`.\n\n For file extensions 'csv', 'xls' or 'xlsx' :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_add_tabular()` will be called. Make\n sure to pass at least the parameters `id_column` and `text_column` via `add_tabular_opts` if your ZIP contains\n such files.\n\n For all other file extensions :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_add_files()` will be called.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param zipfile: path to ZIP file to be loaded\n :param valid_extensions: list of valid file extensions of ZIP file members; all other members will be ignored\n :param encoding: character encoding of the files\n :param doc_label_fmt_txt: document label format for non-tabular files; string with placeholders ``\"path\"``,\n ``\"basename\"``, ``\"ext\"``\n :param doc_label_path_join: string with which to join the components of the file paths\n :param doc_label_fmt_tabular: document label format string for tabular files; placeholders ``\"basename\"``,\n ``\"id\"`` (document ID), and ``\"row_index\"`` (dataset row index)\n :param sample: if given, draw random sample of size `sample` from all text data\n :param force_unix_linebreaks: if True, convert Windows linebreaks to Unix linebreaks in texts\n :param add_files_opts: additional arguments passed to :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_add_files()`\n :param add_tabular_opts: additional arguments passed to :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_add_tabular()`\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n common_kwargs = dict(encoding=encoding, force_unix_linebreaks=force_unix_linebreaks)\n\n if add_files_opts is None:\n add_files_opts = {}\n else:\n add_files_opts = add_files_opts.copy()\n add_files_opts.update(common_kwargs)\n\n if add_tabular_opts is None:\n add_tabular_opts = {}\n else:\n add_tabular_opts = add_tabular_opts.copy()\n add_tabular_opts.update(common_kwargs)\n\n # sampling is handled *after* loading all data from the zip file in a separate step; this is necessary\n # because we don't know in advance how many documents we get from possible tabular files in the zip\n if 'sample' in add_files_opts:\n del add_files_opts['sample']\n if 'sample' in add_tabular_opts:\n del add_tabular_opts['sample']\n\n tmpdir = mkdtemp()\n\n # open the zip and iterate through its files\n logger.debug('extracting data from ZIP file')\n with ZipFile(zipfile) as zipobj:\n new_docs = {}\n for member in zipobj.namelist():\n # extract the components of the file path\n path_parts = path_split(member)\n\n if not path_parts:\n continue\n\n dirs, fname = path_parts[:-1], path_parts[-1]\n\n basename, ext = os.path.splitext(fname)\n basename = basename.strip()\n\n if ext:\n ext = ext[1:]\n\n if ext in valid_extensions:\n # extract to temp. location\n tmpfile = zipobj.extract(member, tmpdir)\n\n if ext in {'csv', 'xls', 'xlsx'}: # this is a tabular file\n new_docs.update(_load_text_from_tabular_files(tmpfile, doc_label_fmt=doc_label_fmt_tabular,\n **add_tabular_opts))\n else: # otherwise it must be a text file\n doclabel = doc_label_fmt_txt.format(path=doc_label_path_join.join(dirs),\n basename=basename,\n ext=ext)\n\n if doclabel.startswith('-'):\n doclabel = doclabel[1:]\n\n new_docs.update(_load_text_from_files([tmpfile], {tmpfile: doclabel}, **add_files_opts))\n\n # apply sampling here after loading all data\n if sample is not None:\n logger.info(f'sampling {sample} documents(s) out of {len(new_docs)}')\n new_docs = sample_dict(new_docs, n=sample)\n\n logger.info(f'adding text from {len(new_docs)} documents(s)')\n docs.update(new_docs)\n\n\ndef save_corpus_to_picklefile(docs: Corpus, picklefile: str) -> None:\n \"\"\"\n Serialize Corpus `docs` and save to Python pickle file `picklefile`.\n\n .. seealso:: Use :func:`load_corpus_from_picklefile` to load the Corpus object from a pickle file.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param picklefile: path to pickle file\n \"\"\"\n serdata = serialize_corpus(docs, deepcopy_attrs=False)\n logger.debug('storing serialized data')\n pickle_data(serdata, picklefile)\n\n\ndef load_corpus_from_picklefile(picklefile: str) -> Corpus:\n \"\"\"\n Load and deserialize a stored Corpus object from the Python pickle file `picklefile`.\n\n .. seealso:: Use :func:`save_corpus_to_picklefile` to save a Corpus object to a pickle file.\n\n .. warning:: Python pickle files may contain malicious code. You should only load pickle files from trusted sources.\n\n :param picklefile: path to pickle file\n :return: a Corpus object\n \"\"\"\n logger.info('loading serialized data')\n serdata = unpickle_file(picklefile)\n return deserialize_corpus(serdata)\n\n\ndef load_corpus_from_tokens(tokens: Dict[str, Any],\n sentences: bool = False,\n doc_attr: Dict[str, Any] = None,\n token_attr: Dict[str, Any] = None,\n **corpus_opt) -> Corpus:\n \"\"\"\n Create a :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus` object from a dict of tokens (optionally along with document/token\n attributes) as may be returned from :func:`doc_tokens`.\n\n :param tokens: dict mapping document labels to tokens (optionally along with document/token attributes)\n :param sentences: if True, `tokens` are assumed to contain another level that indicates the sentences (as from\n :func:`doc_tokens` with ``sentences=True``)\n :param doc_attr: document attributes with their respective default values\n :param token_attr: token attributes with their respective default values\n :param corpus_opt: arguments passed to :meth:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus.__init__`; shall not contain ``docs``\n argument; at least ``language``, ``language_model`` or ``spacy_instance`` should be given\n :return: a Corpus object\n \"\"\"\n if 'docs' in corpus_opt:\n raise ValueError('`docs` parameter is obsolete when initializing a Corpus with this function')\n\n corp = Corpus(**corpus_opt)\n\n logger.debug('creating new documents')\n newdocs = {}\n for lbl, tokattr in tokens.items():\n newdocs[lbl] = document_from_attrs(corp.bimaps, corp.nlp.vocab, lbl, tokattr, sentences=sentences,\n doc_attr_names=set(doc_attr.keys()) if doc_attr else None,\n token_attr_names=set(token_attr.keys()) if token_attr else None)\n\n if doc_attr:\n corp._doc_attrs_defaults.update(doc_attr)\n if token_attr:\n corp._token_attrs_defaults.update(token_attr)\n\n logger.info(f'adding {len(newdocs)} new documents')\n corp.update(newdocs)\n\n return corp\n\n\ndef load_corpus_from_tokens_table(tokens: pd.DataFrame,\n doc_attr: Dict[str, Any] = None,\n token_attr: Dict[str, Any] = None,\n **corpus_kwargs) -> Corpus:\n \"\"\"\n Create a :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus` object from a dataframe as may be returned from :func:`tokens_table`.\n\n :param tokens: a dataframe with tokens, optionally along with document/token attributes\n :param doc_attr: optional dict mapping document attribute names to default values\n :param token_attr: optional dict mapping token attribute names to default values\n :param corpus_kwargs: arguments passed to :meth:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Corpus.__init__`; shall not contain ``docs``\n argument\n :return: a Corpus object\n \"\"\"\n if 'docs' in corpus_kwargs:\n raise ValueError('`docs` parameter is obsolete when initializing a Corpus with this function')\n\n req_columns = {'doc', 'position', 'token', 'whitespace'}\n if not req_columns.issubset(set(tokens.columns)):\n raise ValueError(f'`tokens` dataframe must at least contain the following columns: {req_columns}')\n\n logger.debug('preparing tokens data from table')\n tokens_dict = {}\n doc_attr_w_unknown_defaults = {}\n token_attr_w_unknown_defaults = {}\n for lbl in tokens['doc'].unique(): # TODO: could make this faster\n doc_df = tokens.loc[tokens['doc'] == lbl, :]\n\n colnames = doc_df.columns.tolist()\n colnames.remove('doc')\n colnames.remove('position')\n\n doc_attr_w_unknown_defaults.update({c: None for c in colnames[:colnames.index('token')]})\n token_attr_w_unknown_defaults.update({c: None for c in colnames[colnames.index('token')+1:]})\n\n tokens_dict[lbl] = {col: doc_df[col].to_list() for col in colnames}\n\n if doc_attr:\n doc_attr_w_unknown_defaults.update(doc_attr)\n if token_attr:\n token_attr_w_unknown_defaults.update(token_attr)\n\n doc_attr = {k: v for k, v in doc_attr_w_unknown_defaults.items() if k != 'sent'}\n token_attr = {k: v for k, v in token_attr_w_unknown_defaults.items() if k not in TOKENMAT_ATTRS}\n\n return load_corpus_from_tokens(tokens_dict,\n sentences=False,\n doc_attr=doc_attr,\n token_attr=token_attr,\n **corpus_kwargs)\n\n\ndef serialize_corpus(docs: Corpus, deepcopy_attrs: bool = True) -> Dict[str, Any]:\n \"\"\"\n Serialize a Corpus object to a dict. The inverse operation is implemented in :func:`deserialize_corpus`.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param deepcopy_attrs: apply *deep* copy to all attributes\n :return: Corpus data serialized as dict\n \"\"\"\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n logger.info(f'serializing Corpus with {len(docs)} documents')\n return docs._serialize(deepcopy_attrs=deepcopy_attrs, store_nlp_instance_pointer=False)\n\n\ndef deserialize_corpus(serialized_corpus_data: dict) -> Corpus:\n \"\"\"\n Deserialize a Corpus object from a dict. The inverse operation is implemented in :func:`serialize_corpus`.\n\n :param serialized_corpus_data: Corpus data serialized as dict\n :return: a Corpus object\n \"\"\"\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n logger.info(f'deserializing Corpus with {len(serialized_corpus_data[\"docs_data\"])} documents')\n return Corpus._deserialize(serialized_corpus_data)\n\n\n#%% Corpus functions that modify corpus data: document / token attribute handling\n\n\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef set_document_attr(docs: Corpus, /, attrname: str, data: Dict[str, Any], default: Optional[Any] = None,\n inplace: bool = True) \\\n -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Set a document attribute named `attrname` for documents in Corpus object `docs`. If the attribute\n already exists, it will be overwritten.\n\n .. seealso:: See :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.remove_document_attr` to remove a document attribute.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param attrname: name of the document attribute\n :param data: dict that maps document labels to document attribute value\n :param default: default document attribute value\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if attrname in docs.token_attrs or attrname in TOKENMAT_ATTRS:\n raise ValueError(f'attribute name \"{attrname}\" is already used as token attribute')\n\n logger.debug('setting document attribute')\n for lbl, d in docs.items():\n d.doc_attrs[attrname] = data.get(lbl, default)\n\n if attrname not in {'label', 'has_sents'}: # set Corpus-specific default\n docs._doc_attrs_defaults[attrname] = default\n\n\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef remove_document_attr(docs: Corpus, /, attrname: str, inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Remove a document attribute with name `attrname` from the Corpus object `docs`.\n\n .. seealso:: See :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.set_document_attr` to set a document attribute.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param attrname: name of the document attribute\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if attrname not in docs.doc_attrs:\n raise ValueError(f'attribute name \"{attrname}\" is not registered as document attribute')\n\n logger.debug('removing document attribute')\n for d in docs.values():\n try:\n del d.doc_attrs[attrname]\n except KeyError: pass\n\n del docs._doc_attrs_defaults[attrname]\n\n\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef set_token_attr(docs: Corpus, /, attrname: str, data: Dict[str, Any], default: Optional[Any] = None,\n per_token_occurrence: bool = True, inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Set a token attribute named `attrname` for all tokens in all documents in Corpus object `docs`. If the attribute\n already exists, it will be overwritten.\n\n There are two ways of assigning token attributes which are determined by the argument `per_token_occurrence`. If\n `per_token_occurrence` is True, then `data` is a dict that maps token occurrences (or \"word types\") to attribute\n values, i.e. ``{'foo': True}`` will assign the attribute value ``True`` to every occurrence of the token ``\"foo\"``.\n If `per_token_occurrence` is False, then `data` is a dict that maps document labels to token attributes. In this\n case the token attributes must be a list, tuple or NumPy array with a length according to the number of\n tokens.\n\n .. seealso:: See :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.remove_token_attr` to remove a token attribute.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param attrname: name of the token attribute\n :param data: depends on `per_token_occurrence`; if `per_token_occurrence` is True, then `data` is a dict that maps\n token occurrences (or \"token types\") to attribute values; if `per_token_occurrence` is False, then\n `data` is a dict that maps document labels to token attributes; in this case token attributes must be\n a list, tuple or NumPy array with a length according to the number of tokens values\n :param per_token_occurrence: determines how `data` is interpreted when assigning token attributes\n :param default: default token attribute value\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if attrname in TOKENMAT_ATTRS:\n raise ValueError(f'cannot set attribute with protected name \"{attrname}\"')\n\n if attrname in docs.doc_attrs:\n raise ValueError(f'attribute name \"{attrname}\" is already used as document attribute')\n\n if per_token_occurrence:\n # convert data token string keys to token hashes\n data = {hash_string(k): v for k, v in data.items()}\n\n logger.debug('getting token hashes')\n docs_hashes = doc_tokens(docs, tokens_as_hashes=True, as_arrays=True)\n\n logger.debug('setting token attributes')\n for lbl, tok_hashes in docs_hashes.items():\n if per_token_occurrence:\n # match token occurrence with token's attribute value from `data`\n attrvalues = np.array([data.get(h, default) for h in tok_hashes])\n else:\n # set the token attributes for the whole document\n if lbl not in data.keys(): # if not attribute data for this document, repeat default values\n attrvalues = np.repeat(default, len(tok_hashes))\n else:\n attrvalues = data[lbl]\n\n # convert to array\n if isinstance(attrvalues, (list, tuple)):\n attrvalues = np.array(attrvalues)\n elif not isinstance(attrvalues, np.ndarray):\n raise ValueError(f'token attributes for document \"{lbl}\" are neither tuple, list nor NumPy array')\n # set the token attributes\n docs[lbl][attrname] = attrvalues\n\n docs._token_attrs_defaults[attrname] = default\n\n\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef remove_token_attr(docs: Corpus, /, attrname: str, inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Remove a token attribute with name `attrname` from the Corpus object `docs`.\n\n .. seealso:: See :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.set_token_attr` to set a token attribute.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param attrname: name of the token attribute\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if attrname not in docs.custom_token_attrs_defaults.keys():\n raise ValueError(f'attribute name \"{attrname}\" is not registered as custom token attribute')\n\n # remove respective attribute in each document\n logger.debug('removing token attributes')\n for d in docs.values():\n try:\n del d[attrname]\n except KeyError: pass\n\n # remove custom token attributes entry\n del docs._token_attrs_defaults[attrname]\n\n\n#%% Corpus functions that modify corpus data: token transformations\n\n\ndef corpus_retokenize(docs: Corpus, collapse: Optional[str] = ' ', inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Parse the corpus again using the current – possibly modified – tokens, but the same NLP pipeline as before.\n\n .. note:: This function is useful when you modified the corpus' tokens, e.g. by removing punctuation characters or\n transforming to lower-case characters, which has influence on token attributes like POS tags when parsing\n the corpus again. **Already specified custom document and token attributes will be removed when\n applying this function.**\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param collapse: if None, use whitespace token attribute for collapsing tokens, otherwise use custom string\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n logger.info('generating document texts')\n texts = doc_texts(docs, collapse=collapse)\n\n if inplace:\n docs._docs = {}\n else:\n logger.info('making bare corpus copy')\n docs = Corpus._deserialize(docs._serialize(deepcopy_attrs=False, store_nlp_instance_pointer=True,\n documents=False))\n\n logger.info('re-parsing document texts')\n if docs.max_workers <= 1:\n logger.info('using serial processing')\n else:\n logger.info(f'using parallel processing with {docs.max_workers} workers')\n\n docs.bimaps = {}\n docs._init_bimaps()\n docs._init_docs(texts)\n docs._update_bimaps()\n docs._update_workers_docs()\n\n if inplace:\n return None\n else:\n return docs\n\n\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef transform_tokens(docs: Corpus, /, func: Callable, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n vocab: Optional[Set[Union[int]]] = None, inplace: bool = True, **kwargs) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Transform tokens in all documents by applying function `func` to each document's tokens individually.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param func: a function to apply to all documents' tokens; it must accept a single token string and vice-versa\n return single token string\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param vocab: optional vocabulary of token *hashes* (set of integers), which should be considered for\n transformation; if this is not given, the full vocabulary of `docs` will be generated\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :param kwargs: additional arguments passed to `func`\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n\n select = _single_str_to_set(select, check_docs=docs)\n\n # get unique token types as hashes\n if vocab is None:\n vocab = vocabulary(docs, select=select, sort=False, tokens_as_hashes=True, force_unigrams=True,\n convert_uint64hashes=False)\n hash2token = docs.bimaps['token']\n\n # apply transformations to tokens in vocabulary\n logger.debug('applying transformation function to vocabulary')\n replacements = {} # original token hash -> new token hash for transformed tokens\n for t_hash in vocab: # iterate through token type hashes\n # get string representation for hash and transform it\n t_transformed = func(hash2token[t_hash], **kwargs)\n # get hash for transformed token type string\n t_hash_transformed = hash_string(t_transformed)\n # if hashes differ (i.e. transformation changed the string), record the hashes\n if t_hash != t_hash_transformed:\n hash2token.forceput(t_hash_transformed, t_transformed)\n if select is None and t_hash in hash2token: # remove the old hash only if applying transform to all docs.\n del hash2token[t_hash]\n replacements[t_hash] = t_hash_transformed\n\n # replace token hashes in token matrix for each document\n logger.info(f'replacing {len(replacements)} token hashes')\n for lbl, d in docs.items():\n if select is None or lbl in select:\n d.tokenmat[:, TOKINDEX] = np.array([replacements.get(h, h)\n for h in d.tokenmat[:, TOKINDEX]], dtype='uint64')\n\n if select is not None:\n docs._update_bimaps(which_attrs='token')\n\n\ndef to_lowercase(docs: Corpus, /, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None, inplace: bool = True) \\\n -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Convert all tokens to lower-case form.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return transform_tokens(docs, str.lower, select=select, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef to_uppercase(docs: Corpus, /, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None, inplace: bool = True) \\\n -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Convert all tokens to upper-case form.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return transform_tokens(docs, str.upper, select=select, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef remove_chars(docs: Corpus, /, chars: Iterable[str], select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Remove all characters listed in `chars` from all tokens.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param chars: list of characters to remove; each element in the list should be a single character\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n del_chars = str.maketrans('', '', ''.join(chars))\n return transform_tokens(docs, lambda t: t.translate(del_chars), select=select, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef remove_punctuation(docs: Corpus, /, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Removes punctuation characters *in* tokens, i.e. ``['a', '.', 'f;o;o']`` becomes ``['a', '', 'foo']``.\n\n If you want to remove punctuation *tokens*, use :func:`~filter_clean_tokens`.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return remove_chars(docs, docs.punctuation, select=select, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef normalize_unicode(docs: Corpus, /, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n form: str = 'NFC', inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Normalize unicode characters according to `form`.\n\n This function only *normalizes* unicode characters in the tokens of `docs` to the form\n specified by `form`. If you want to *simplify* the characters, i.e. remove diacritics,\n underlines and other marks, use :func:`~simplify_unicode` instead.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param form: normal form (see https://docs.python.org/3/library/unicodedata.html#unicodedata.normalize)\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return transform_tokens(docs, lambda t: unicodedata.normalize(form, t), select=select, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef simplify_unicode(docs: Corpus, /, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n method: str = 'icu', ascii_encoding_errors: str = 'ignore',\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n *Simplify* unicode characters in the tokens of `docs`, i.e. remove diacritics, underlines and\n other marks. Requires `PyICU `_ to be installed when using\n ``method=\"icu\"``.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param method: either ``\"icu\"`` which uses `PyICU `_ for \"proper\"\n simplification or ``\"ascii\"`` which tries to encode the characters as ASCII; the latter\n is not recommended and will simply dismiss any characters that cannot be converted\n to ASCII after decomposition\n :param ascii_encoding_errors: only used if `method` is ``\"ascii\"``; what to do when a character cannot be\n encoded as ASCII character; can be either ``\"ignore\"`` (default – replace by empty\n character), ``\"replace\"`` (replace by ``\"???\"``) or ``\"strict\"`` (raise a\n ``UnicodeEncodeError``)\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n\n fn = partial(simplify_unicode_chars, method=method, ascii_encoding_errors=ascii_encoding_errors)\n return transform_tokens(docs, fn, select=select, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef numbers_to_magnitudes(docs: Corpus, /, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n char: str = '0', firstchar: str = '1', below_one: str = '0',\n zero: str = '0', drop_sign: bool = False,\n decimal_sep: str = '.', thousands_sep: str = ',',\n value_on_conversion_error: Optional[str] = None,\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Convert each string token in `docs` that represents a number (e.g. \"13\", \"1.3\" or \"-1313\") to a string token that\n represents the magnitude of that number by repeating `char` (\"00\", \"0\", \"0000\" for the mentioned examples). A\n different first character can be set via `firstchar`.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.numbertoken_to_magnitude`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param char: character string used to represent single orders of magnitude\n :param firstchar: special character used for first character in the output\n :param below_one: special character used for numbers with absolute value below 1 (would otherwise return `''`)\n :param zero: if `numbertoken` evaluates to zero, return this string\n :param drop_sign: if True, drop the sign in number `numbertoken`, i.e. use absolute value\n :param decimal_sep: decimal separator used in `numbertoken`; this is language-specific\n :param thousands_sep: thousands separator used in `numbertoken`; this is language-specific\n :param value_on_conversion_error: determines placeholder when the input token cannot be converted to a number; if\n `value_on_conversion_error` is None, use the input token unchanged, otherwise use\n `value_on_conversion_error`\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n # get hashes of those tokens that qualify as \"number-like\"\n vocab = set()\n select = _single_str_to_set(select)\n logger.debug('getting tokens')\n tokens = doc_tokens(docs, select=select, only_non_empty=True, tokens_as_hashes=True, with_attr='like_num',\n force_unigrams=True, as_arrays=True).values()\n logger.debug('storing number-like tokens in vocab')\n for tok in tokens:\n vocab.update(set(tok['token'][tok['like_num'].astype('bool')]))\n\n # apply `numbertoken_to_magnitude` function to all these number-like tokens\n fn = partial(numbertoken_to_magnitude, char=char, firstchar=firstchar, below_one=below_one, zero=zero,\n decimal_sep=decimal_sep, thousands_sep=thousands_sep, drop_sign=drop_sign,\n value_on_conversion_error=value_on_conversion_error)\n return transform_tokens(docs, fn, select=select, vocab=vocab, inplace=inplace)\n\n\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef lemmatize(docs: Corpus, /, select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Lemmatize tokens, i.e. set the lemmata as tokens so that all further processing will happen\n using the lemmatized tokens.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n\n select = _single_str_to_set(select, check_docs=docs)\n logger.debug(\"copying lemma hashes to token column in each document's hash matrix\")\n for lbl, d in docs.items():\n if select is None or lbl in select:\n d.tokenmat[:, TOKINDEX] = d.tokenmat[:, d.tokenmat_attrs.index('lemma')]\n\n if select is None:\n # all docs. were selected -> copy lemma bimap to token bimap\n logger.debug(\"copy lemma bimap to token bimap\")\n docs.bimaps['token'] = docs.bimaps['lemma'].copy()\n else:\n # only subset was selected -> use hashes from lemma also in token map\n logger.debug(\"update token bimap with lemma bimap entries\")\n docs.bimaps['token'].update(docs.bimaps['lemma'])\n\n\n@corpus_func_update_bimaps(which_attrs='token')\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef join_collocations_by_patterns(docs: Corpus, /, patterns: Sequence[str],\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None, glue: str = '_',\n match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case=False, glob_method: str = 'match',\n return_joint_tokens: bool = False, inplace: bool = True) \\\n -> Optional[Union[Corpus, Tuple[Corpus, Set[str]]]]:\n \"\"\"\n Match *N* *subsequent* tokens to the *N* patterns in `patterns` using match options like in :func:`filter_tokens`.\n Join the matched tokens by glue string `glue` and mask the original tokens that this new joint token was\n generated from.\n\n .. warning:: For each of the joint subsequent tokens, only the token attributes of the first token in the sequence\n will be retained. All further tokens will be removed. For example: In a document with tokens\n ``[\"a\", \"hello\", \"world\", \"example\"]`` where we join ``\"hello\", \"world\"``, the resulting document will\n be ``[\"a\", \"hello_world\", \"example\"]`` and only the token attributes (lemma, POS tag, etc. and custom\n attributes) for ``\"hello\"`` will be retained and assigned to \"hello_world\".\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param patterns: a sequence of search patterns as excepted by `filter_tokens`\n :param glue: string used for joining the matched subsequent tokens\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is ``'glob'``, use either ``'search'`` or ``'match'`` as glob method\n (has similar implications as Python's ``re.search`` vs. ``re.match``)\n :param return_joint_tokens: also return set of joint collocations\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object; if\n `return_joint_tokens` is True, return set of joint collocations instead (if `inplace` is True) or\n additionally in tuple ``(modified Corpus copy, set of joint collocations)`` (if `inplace` is False)\n \"\"\"\n if not isinstance(patterns, (list, tuple)) or len(patterns) < 2:\n raise ValueError('`patterns` must be a list or tuple containing at least two elements')\n\n hash2token = docs.bimaps['token']\n\n @parallelexec(merge_dicts)\n def _join_colloc(chunk):\n res = {}\n for lbl, tokenmat in chunk.items():\n # convert token hashes to strings\n tok_strs = [hash2token[h] for h in tokenmat[:, 1]]\n\n # get the subsequent matches as boolean mask arrays\n matches = token_match_subsequent(patterns, tok_strs, match_type=match_type, ignore_case=ignore_case,\n glob_method=glob_method)\n\n # join the matched subsequent tokens; `return_mask=True` makes sure that we only get the newly\n # generated joint tokens together with an array to mask all but the first token of the subsequent tokens\n new_tok, mask = token_join_subsequent(tok_strs, matches, glue=glue, return_mask=True)\n\n res[lbl] = _apply_collocations(tokenmat, new_tok, mask, hash2token=hash2token, tokens_as_hashes=False,\n glue=glue, return_joint_tokens=return_joint_tokens) + (mask, )\n\n return res\n\n select = _single_str_to_set(select, check_docs=docs)\n logger.debug('getting token matrices')\n doc_tokmats = {lbl: d.tokenmat for lbl, d in docs.items() if select is None or lbl in select}\n\n logger.debug('joining token collocations')\n res = _join_colloc(_paralleltask(docs, doc_tokmats))\n\n if return_joint_tokens:\n joint_tokens = set()\n\n logger.debug('applying new token hash matrices')\n for lbl, colloc_res in res.items():\n if return_joint_tokens:\n tokenmat, doc_hash2token_upd, doc_joint_tok, mask = colloc_res\n joint_tokens.update(doc_joint_tok)\n else:\n tokenmat, doc_hash2token_upd, mask = colloc_res\n\n d = docs[lbl]\n d.tokenmat = tokenmat\n for a in d.custom_token_attrs.keys():\n d.custom_token_attrs[a] = np.delete(d.custom_token_attrs[a], np.flatnonzero(mask == 0), axis=0)\n\n hash2token.forceupdate(doc_hash2token_upd)\n\n if return_joint_tokens:\n return joint_tokens\n\n\n@corpus_func_update_bimaps(which_attrs='token')\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef join_collocations_by_statistic(docs: Corpus, /, threshold: float,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None, glue: str = '_',\n min_count: int = 1, embed_tokens_min_docfreq: Optional[Union[int, float]] = None,\n embed_tokens_set: Optional[Set] = None,\n statistic: Callable = npmi, return_joint_tokens: bool = False,\n inplace: bool = True, **statistic_kwargs) \\\n -> Optional[Union[Corpus, Tuple[Corpus, Set[str]]]]:\n \"\"\"\n Join subsequent tokens by token collocation statistic as can be computed by :func:`corpus_collocations`.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param threshold: minimum statistic value for a collocation to enter the results\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param glue: string used for joining the subsequent tokens\n :param min_count: ignore collocations with number of occurrences below this threshold\n :param embed_tokens_min_docfreq: dynamically generate the set of ``embed_tokens`` used when calling\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.token_collocations` by using a minimum document\n frequency (see :func:`~doc_frequencies`); if this is an integer, it is used as\n absolute count, if it is a float, it is used as proportion\n :param embed_tokens_set: tokens that, if occurring inside an n-gram, are not counted; see :func:`token_ngrams`\n :param statistic: function to calculate the statistic measure from the token counts; use one of the\n ``[n]pmi[2,3]_from_counts`` functions provided in the :mod:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq` module or provide\n your own function which must accept parameters ``n_x, n_y, n_xy, n_total``; see\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.pmi_from_counts` and :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.pmi`\n for more information\n :param return_joint_tokens: also return set of joint collocations\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :param statistic_kwargs: additional arguments passed to `statistic` function\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object; if\n `return_joint_tokens` is True, return set of joint collocations instead (if `inplace` is True) or\n additionally in tuple ``(modified Corpus copy, set of joint collocations)`` (if `inplace` is False)\n \"\"\"\n if not isinstance(glue, str):\n raise ValueError('`glue` must be a string')\n\n # get tokens as hashes\n logger.debug('getting flattened tokens')\n tok_flat = corpus_tokens_flattened(docs, select=select, sentences=True, tokens_as_hashes=True)\n logger.debug('getting flattened tokens')\n vocab_counts = vocabulary_counts(docs, select=select, tokens_as_hashes=True)\n\n # generate ``embed_tokens`` set as used in :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.token_collocations`\n logger.debug('creating embed tokens')\n embed_tokens = _create_embed_tokens_for_collocations(docs, embed_tokens_min_docfreq, embed_tokens_set,\n tokens_as_hashes=True)\n\n # identify collocations\n logger.debug('identifying collocations')\n colloc = token_collocations(tok_flat, threshold=threshold, min_count=min_count, embed_tokens=embed_tokens,\n vocab_counts=vocab_counts, statistic=statistic, return_statistic=False,\n rank=None, tokens_as_hashes=True, **statistic_kwargs)\n\n hash2token = docs.bimaps['token']\n\n @parallelexec(merge_dicts)\n def _join_colloc(chunk):\n res = {}\n for lbl, tokenmat in chunk.items():\n # get the subsequent matches of the collocation token hashes as boolean mask arrays\n matches = []\n for hashes in colloc:\n matches.extend(token_match_subsequent(hashes, tokenmat[:, 1], match_type='exact'))\n\n # join the matched subsequent tokens; `return_mask=True` makes sure that we only get the newly\n # generated joint tokens together with an array to mask all but the first token of the subsequent tokens\n # `glue=None` makes sure that the token hashes are not joint\n new_tok, mask = token_join_subsequent(tokenmat[:, 1], matches, glue=None, tokens_dtype='uint64',\n return_mask=True)\n\n res[lbl] = _apply_collocations(tokenmat, new_tok, mask, hash2token=hash2token, tokens_as_hashes=True,\n glue=glue, return_joint_tokens=return_joint_tokens) + (mask, )\n\n return res\n\n # join collocations\n logger.debug('getting token matrices')\n select = _single_str_to_set(select)\n doc_tokmats = {lbl: d.tokenmat for lbl, d in docs.items() if select is None or lbl in select}\n\n logger.debug('joining token collocations')\n res = _join_colloc(_paralleltask(docs, doc_tokmats))\n\n if return_joint_tokens:\n joint_tokens = set()\n\n logger.debug('applying new token hash matrices')\n for lbl, colloc_res in res.items():\n if return_joint_tokens:\n tokenmat, doc_hash2token_upd, doc_joint_tok, mask = colloc_res\n joint_tokens.update(doc_joint_tok)\n else:\n tokenmat, doc_hash2token_upd, mask = colloc_res\n\n d = docs[lbl]\n d.tokenmat = tokenmat\n for a in d.custom_token_attrs.keys():\n d.custom_token_attrs[a] = np.delete(d.custom_token_attrs[a], np.flatnonzero(mask == 0), axis=0)\n\n hash2token.forceupdate(doc_hash2token_upd)\n\n if return_joint_tokens:\n return joint_tokens\n\n\n#%% Corpus functions that modify corpus data: filtering / KWIC\n\n@corpus_func_update_bimaps()\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef filter_tokens_by_mask(docs: Corpus, /, mask: Dict[str, Union[List[bool], np.ndarray]], inverse: bool = False,\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Filter (i.e. remove) tokens according to a boolean mask specified by `mask`.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`remove_tokens_by_mask`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param mask: dict mapping document label to boolean list or NumPy array where ``False`` means \"remove\" and\n ``True`` means \"keep\" for the respective token; the length of the mask must equal the number of tokens\n in the document\n :param inverse: inverse the truth values in the mask arrays\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n n_tok_before = corpus_num_tokens(docs)\n else:\n n_tok_before = None\n\n logger.debug('filtering tokens by mask')\n for lbl, m in mask.items():\n if lbl not in docs.keys():\n raise ValueError(f'document \"{lbl}\" does not exist in Corpus object `docs` - '\n f'cannot set token mask')\n\n d = docs[lbl]\n\n if len(m) != len(d):\n raise ValueError(f'length of provided mask for document \"{lbl}\" does not match length of the document')\n\n if not isinstance(m, np.ndarray):\n m = np.array(m, dtype=bool)\n elif not np.issubdtype(m.dtype, bool):\n m = m.astype(bool)\n\n if inverse:\n m = ~m\n\n d.tokenmat = d.tokenmat[m, :]\n for a in d.custom_token_attrs.keys():\n d.custom_token_attrs[a] = d.custom_token_attrs[a][m]\n\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n logger.info(f'filtered tokens by mask: num. tokens was {n_tok_before} and is now {corpus_num_tokens(docs)}')\n\n\ndef remove_tokens_by_mask(docs: Corpus, /, mask: Dict[str, Union[List[bool], np.ndarray]], inplace: bool = True) \\\n -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Remove tokens according to a boolean mask specified by `mask`.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`filter_tokens_by_mask`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param mask: dict mapping document label to boolean list or NumPy array where ``False`` means \"keep\" and\n ``True`` means \"remove\" for the respective token; the length of the mask must equal the number of\n tokens in the document\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return filter_tokens_by_mask(docs, mask=mask, inverse=True, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef filter_tokens(docs: Corpus, /, search_tokens: Any, by_attr: Optional[str] = None,\n match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case: bool = False,\n glob_method: str = 'match', inverse: bool = False, inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Filter tokens according to search pattern(s) `search_tokens` and several matching options. Only those tokens\n are retained that match the search criteria unless you set ``inverse=True``, which will *remove* all tokens\n that match the search criteria (which is the same as calling :func:`remove_tokens`).\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`remove_tokens` and :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.token_match`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param search_tokens: single string or list of strings that specify the search pattern(s); when `match_type` is\n ``'exact'``, `pattern` may be of any type that allows equality checking\n :param by_attr: if not None, this should be an attribute name; this attribute data will then be\n used for matching instead of the tokens in `docs`\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is ``'glob'``, use either ``'search'`` or ``'match'`` as glob method\n (has similar implications as Python's ``re.search`` vs. ``re.match``)\n :param inverse: inverse the match results for filtering (i.e. *remove* all tokens that match the search\n criteria)\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n _check_filter_args(match_type=match_type, glob_method=glob_method)\n\n @parallelexec(collect_fn=merge_dicts)\n def _filter_tokens(chunk):\n return _token_pattern_matches(chunk, search_tokens, match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method)\n\n by_attr = by_attr or 'token'\n\n logger.debug('creating tokens filter mask by pattern search')\n try:\n matchdata = _match_against(docs, by_attr, default=docs.custom_token_attrs_defaults.get(by_attr, None))\n masks = _filter_tokens(_paralleltask(docs, matchdata))\n except AttributeError:\n raise AttributeError(f'attribute name \"{by_attr}\" does not exist')\n\n return filter_tokens_by_mask(docs, masks, inverse=inverse, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef remove_tokens(docs: Corpus, /, search_tokens: Any, by_attr: Optional[str] = None,\n match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case: bool = False,\n glob_method: str = 'match', inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n This is a shortcut for the :func:`filter_tokens` method with ``inverse=True``, i.e. *remove* all tokens that match\n the search criteria).\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`filter_tokens` and :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.token_match`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param search_tokens: single string or list of strings that specify the search pattern(s); when `match_type` is\n ``'exact'``, `pattern` may be of any type that allows equality checking\n :param by_attr: if not None, this should be an attribute name; this attribute data will then be\n used for matching instead of the tokens in `docs`\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is ``'glob'``, use either ``'search'`` or ``'match'`` as glob method\n (has similar implications as Python's ``re.search`` vs. ``re.match``)\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return filter_tokens(docs, search_tokens=search_tokens, match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method,\n by_attr=by_attr, inverse=True, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef filter_for_pos(docs: Corpus, /, search_pos: Union[str, Collection[str]], simplify_pos: bool = True,\n tagset:str = 'ud', inverse: bool = False, inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Filter tokens for a specific POS tag (if `required_pos` is a string) or several POS tags (if `required_pos`\n is a list/tuple/set of strings). The POS tag depends on the tagset used during tagging. See\n https://spacy.io/api/annotation#pos-tagging for a general overview on POS tags in SpaCy and refer to the\n documentation of your language model for specific tags.\n\n If `simplify_pos` is True, then the tags are matched to the following simplified forms:\n\n * ``'N'`` for nouns\n * ``'V'`` for verbs\n * ``'ADJ'`` for adjectives\n * ``'ADV'`` for adverbs\n * ``None`` for all other\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param search_pos: single string or list of strings with POS tag(s) used for filtering\n :param simplify_pos: if True, simplify POS tags in documents to forms shown above before matching\n :param tagset: tagset used for `pos`; can be ``'wn'`` (WordNet), ``'penn'`` (Penn tagset)\n or ``'ud'`` (universal dependencies – default)\n :param inverse: inverse the matching results, i.e. *remove* tokens that match the POS tag\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n @parallelexec(collect_fn=merge_dicts)\n def _filter_pos(chunk):\n if simplify_pos:\n chunk = {lbl: list(map(lambda x: simplified_pos(x, tagset=tagset), tok_pos))\n for lbl, tok_pos in chunk.items()}\n\n return _token_pattern_matches(chunk, search_pos)\n\n logger.debug('creating tokens filter mask by POS matching')\n matchdata = _match_against(docs, 'pos')\n masks = _filter_pos(_paralleltask(docs, matchdata))\n\n return filter_tokens_by_mask(docs, masks, inverse=inverse, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef filter_tokens_by_doc_frequency(docs: Corpus, /, which: str, df_threshold: Union[int, float],\n proportions: Proportion = Proportion.NO,\n return_filtered_tokens: bool = False,\n inverse: bool = False,\n inplace: bool = True) \\\n -> Union[None, Corpus, Set[str], Tuple[Corpus, Set[str]]]:\n \"\"\"\n Filter tokens according to their document frequency.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param which: which threshold comparison to use: either ``'common'``, ``'>'``, ``'>='`` which means that tokens\n with higher document freq. than (or equal to) `df_threshold` will be kept;\n or ``'uncommon'``, ``'<'``, ``'<='`` which means that tokens with lower document freq. than\n (or equal to) `df_threshold` will be kept\n :param df_threshold: document frequency threshold value\n :param proportions: controls whether document frequency threshold is given in (log) proportions rather than absolute\n counts\n :param return_filtered_tokens: if True, additionally return set of filtered token types\n :param inverse: inverse the match results for filtering (i.e. *remove* all tokens that match the search\n criteria)\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: depending on `return_filtered_tokens` and `inplace`: if both are True, returns only filtered token types;\n if `return_filtered_tokens` is True and `inplace` is False, returns tuple with modified copy of `docs` and\n filtered token types; if `return_filtered_tokens` is False returns either original Corpus object `docs` or\n a modified copy of it\n \"\"\"\n comp = _comparison_operator_from_str(which, common_alias=True)\n\n logger.debug('creating tokens filter mask by applying document frequency threshold')\n toks = doc_tokens(docs)\n doc_freqs = doc_frequencies(docs, proportions=proportions)\n mask = {lbl: [comp(doc_freqs[t], df_threshold) for t in dtok] for lbl, dtok in toks.items()}\n\n if return_filtered_tokens:\n filt_tok = set(t for t, f in doc_freqs.items() if comp(f, df_threshold))\n else:\n filt_tok = set()\n\n res = filter_tokens_by_mask(docs, mask=mask, inverse=inverse, inplace=inplace)\n if return_filtered_tokens:\n if inplace:\n return filt_tok\n else:\n return res, filt_tok\n else:\n return res\n\n\ndef remove_common_tokens(docs: Corpus, /, df_threshold: Union[int, float] = 0.95,\n proportions: Proportion = Proportion.YES,\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Shortcut for :func:`filter_tokens_by_doc_frequency` for removing tokens *above* a certain document frequency.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param df_threshold: document frequency threshold value\n :param proportions: controls whether document frequency threshold is given in (log) proportions rather than absolute\n counts\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return filter_tokens_by_doc_frequency(docs, which='common', df_threshold=df_threshold, proportions=proportions,\n inverse=True, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef remove_uncommon_tokens(docs: Corpus, /, df_threshold: Union[int, float] = 0.05,\n proportions: Proportion = Proportion.YES,\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Shortcut for :func:`filter_tokens_by_doc_frequency` for removing tokens *below* a certain document frequency.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param df_threshold: document frequency threshold value\n :param proportions: controls whether document frequency threshold is given in (log) proportions rather than absolute\n counts\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return filter_tokens_by_doc_frequency(docs, which='uncommon', df_threshold=df_threshold, proportions=proportions,\n inverse=True, inplace=inplace)\n\n\n@corpus_func_update_bimaps()\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef filter_documents_by_mask(docs: Corpus, /, mask: Dict[str, bool], inverse: bool = False) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Filter documents by setting a mask.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`remove_documents_by_mask`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param mask: dict that maps document labels to document attribute value\n :param inverse: inverse the mask\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n n_docs_before = len(docs)\n else:\n n_docs_before = None\n\n logger.debug('filtering documents by mask')\n for lbl, m in mask.items():\n if inverse:\n m = not m\n\n if not m:\n del docs._docs[lbl]\n\n docs._update_workers_docs()\n\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n logger.info(f'filtered documents by mask: number of documents was {n_docs_before} and is now {len(docs)}')\n\n\ndef remove_documents_by_mask(docs: Corpus, /, mask: Dict[str, bool], inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n This is a shortcut for the :func:`filter_documents_by_mask` function with ``inverse_result=True``, i.e. *remove* all\n documents where the mask is set to True.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`filter_documents_by_mask`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param mask: dict that maps document labels to document attribute value\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return filter_documents_by_mask(docs, mask=mask, inverse=True, inplace=inplace)\n\n\n@tabular_result_option('doc', 'n_matches')\ndef find_documents(docs: Corpus, /, search_tokens: Any, by_attr: Optional[str] = None,\n matches_threshold: int = 1, match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case: bool = False,\n glob_method: str = 'match', inverse_result: bool = False, inverse_matches: bool = False,\n as_table: Union[bool, str] = False)\\\n -> Union[Dict[str, int], pd.DataFrame]:\n \"\"\"\n For each document, the number of token matches is counted and a dict or dataframe (if `as_table` is True) is\n returned with entries of document labels when the number of matches is at least `matches_threshold`.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`filter_documents` which does that same but applies the matches to the corpus, creating a subset\n of documents instead of only reporting the matches\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param search_tokens: single string or list of strings that specify the search pattern(s); when `match_type` is\n ``'exact'``, `pattern` may be of any type that allows equality checking\n :param by_attr: if not None, this should be an attribute name; this attribute data will then be\n used for matching instead of the tokens in `docs`\n :param matches_threshold: number of matches required for filtering a document\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is ``'glob'``, use either ``'search'`` or ``'match'`` as glob method\n (has similar implications as Python's ``re.search`` vs. ``re.match``)\n :param inverse_result: inverse the threshold comparison result\n :param inverse_matches: inverse the match results for filtering\n :param as_table: if True, return result as dataframe; if a string, sort dataframe by this column; if string prefixed\n with \"-\", sort by this column in descending order\n :return: dict of number of matches per document label or dataframe if `as_table` is active\n \"\"\"\n _check_filter_args(match_type=match_type, glob_method=glob_method)\n\n by_attr = by_attr or 'token'\n\n logger.debug('creating documents filter mask by pattern search')\n try:\n matchdata = _match_against(docs, by_attr, default=docs.custom_token_attrs_defaults.get(by_attr, None))\n docs_matches = _filter_documents(_paralleltask(docs, matchdata), search_tokens=search_tokens,\n match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method,\n inverse_matches=inverse_matches,\n matches_threshold=matches_threshold, inverse_result=not inverse_result,\n return_num_matches=True)\n except AttributeError:\n raise AttributeError(f'attribute name \"{by_attr}\" does not exist')\n\n return docs_matches\n\n\ndef filter_documents(docs: Corpus, /, search_tokens: Any, by_attr: Optional[str] = None,\n matches_threshold: int = 1, match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case: bool = False,\n glob_method: str = 'match', inverse_result: bool = False, inverse_matches: bool = False,\n inplace: bool = True)\\\n -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n This function is similar to :func:`filter_tokens` but applies at document level. For each document, the number of\n matches is counted. If it is at least `matches_threshold` the document is retained, otherwise it is removed.\n If `inverse_result` is True, then documents that meet the threshold are removed.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`find_documents` which does that same but only reports the found documents;\n :func:`remove_documents` which is the same as this function but with inversed result\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param search_tokens: single string or list of strings that specify the search pattern(s); when `match_type` is\n ``'exact'``, `pattern` may be of any type that allows equality checking\n :param by_attr: if not None, this should be an attribute name; this attribute data will then be\n used for matching instead of the tokens in `docs`\n :param matches_threshold: number of matches required for filtering a document\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is ``'glob'``, use either ``'search'`` or ``'match'`` as glob method\n (has similar implications as Python's ``re.search`` vs. ``re.match``)\n :param inverse_result: inverse the threshold comparison result\n :param inverse_matches: inverse the match results for filtering\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n _check_filter_args(match_type=match_type, glob_method=glob_method)\n\n by_attr = by_attr or 'token'\n\n logger.debug('creating documents filter mask by pattern search')\n try:\n matchdata = _match_against(docs, by_attr, default=docs.custom_token_attrs_defaults.get(by_attr, None))\n remove = _filter_documents(_paralleltask(docs, matchdata), search_tokens=search_tokens, match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method, inverse_matches=inverse_matches,\n matches_threshold=matches_threshold, inverse_result=inverse_result,\n return_num_matches=False)\n except AttributeError:\n raise AttributeError(f'attribute name \"{by_attr}\" does not exist')\n\n return filter_documents_by_mask(docs, mask=dict(zip(remove, [False] * len(remove))), inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef remove_documents(docs: Corpus, /, search_tokens: Any, by_attr: Optional[str] = None,\n matches_threshold: int = 1, match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case: bool = False,\n glob_method: str = 'match', inverse_matches: bool = False, inplace: bool = True) \\\n -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n This is a shortcut for the :func:`filter_documents` function with ``inverse_result=True``, i.e. *remove* all\n documents that meet the token matching threshold.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`filter_documents`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param search_tokens: single string or list of strings that specify the search pattern(s); when `match_type` is\n ``'exact'``, `pattern` may be of any type that allows equality checking\n :param by_attr: if not None, this should be an attribute name; this attribute data will then be\n used for matching instead of the tokens in `docs`\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is ``'glob'``, use either ``'search'`` or ``'match'`` as glob method\n (has similar implications as Python's ``re.search`` vs. ``re.match``)\n :param inverse_matches: inverse the match results for filtering\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return filter_documents(docs, search_tokens=search_tokens, by_attr=by_attr, matches_threshold=matches_threshold,\n match_type=match_type, ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method,\n inverse_matches=inverse_matches, inverse_result=True, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef filter_documents_by_docattr(docs: Corpus, /, search_tokens: Any, by_attr: str,\n match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case: bool = False, glob_method: str = 'match',\n inverse: bool = False, inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Filter documents by a document attribute `by_attr`.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`remove_documents_by_docattr`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param search_tokens: single string or list of strings that specify the search pattern(s); when `match_type` is\n ``'exact'``, `pattern` may be of any type that allows equality checking\n :param by_attr: document attribute name used for filtering\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is ``'glob'``, use either ``'search'`` or ``'match'`` as glob method\n (has similar implications as Python's ``re.search`` vs. ``re.match``)\n :param inverse: inverse the match results for filtering (i.e. *remove* all tokens that match the search\n criteria)\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n _check_filter_args(match_type=match_type, glob_method=glob_method)\n\n if by_attr not in docs.doc_attrs_defaults:\n raise ValueError(f'document attribute \"{by_attr}\" not defined in Corpus `docs`')\n\n logger.debug('creating documents filter mask by pattern search on document attributes')\n default = docs.doc_attrs_defaults[by_attr]\n attr_values = [d.doc_attrs.get(by_attr, default) for d in docs.values()]\n matches = token_match_multi_pattern(search_tokens, attr_values, match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method)\n return filter_documents_by_mask(docs, mask=dict(zip(docs.keys(), matches)), inverse=inverse, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef remove_documents_by_docattr(docs: Corpus, /, search_tokens: Any, by_attr: str,\n match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case: bool = False,\n glob_method: str = 'match', inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n This is a shortcut for the :func:`filter_documents_by_docattr` function with ``inverse=True``, i.e. *remove* all\n documents that meet the document attribute matching criteria.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`filter_documents_by_docattr`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param search_tokens: single string or list of strings that specify the search pattern(s); when `match_type` is\n ``'exact'``, `pattern` may be of any type that allows equality checking\n :param by_attr: document attribute name used for filtering\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is ``'glob'``, use either ``'search'`` or ``'match'`` as glob method\n (has similar implications as Python's ``re.search`` vs. ``re.match``)\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return filter_documents_by_docattr(docs, search_tokens=search_tokens, by_attr=by_attr, match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method, inverse=True, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef filter_documents_by_label(docs: Corpus, /, search_tokens: Any, match_type: str = 'exact',\n ignore_case: bool = False, glob_method: str = 'match',\n inverse: bool = False, inplace: bool = True) \\\n -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Filter documents by document label.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`remove_documents_by_label`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param search_tokens: single string or list of strings that specify the search pattern(s); when `match_type` is\n ``'exact'``, `pattern` may be of any type that allows equality checking\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is ``'glob'``, use either ``'search'`` or ``'match'`` as glob method\n (has similar implications as Python's ``re.search`` vs. ``re.match``)\n :param inverse: inverse the match results for filtering (i.e. *remove* all tokens that match the search\n criteria)\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return filter_documents_by_docattr(docs, search_tokens=search_tokens, by_attr='label', match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method, inverse=inverse,\n inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef remove_documents_by_label(docs: Corpus, /, search_tokens: Any, match_type: str = 'exact',\n ignore_case: bool = False, glob_method: str = 'match', inplace: bool = True) \\\n -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Shortcut for :func:`filter_documents_by_label` with ``inverse=True``, i.e. *remove* all\n documents that meet the document label matching criteria.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`filter_documents_by_label`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param search_tokens: single string or list of strings that specify the search pattern(s); when `match_type` is\n ``'exact'``, `pattern` may be of any type that allows equality checking\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is ``'glob'``, use either ``'search'`` or ``'match'`` as glob method\n (has similar implications as Python's ``re.search`` vs. ``re.match``)\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return filter_documents_by_label(docs, search_tokens=search_tokens, match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method, inverse=True,\n inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef filter_documents_by_length(docs: Corpus, /, relation: str, threshold: int, inverse: bool = False,\n inplace: bool = True) \\\n -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Filter documents in `docs` by length, i.e. number of tokens.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`remove_documents_by_length`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param relation: comparison operator as string; must be one of ``'<', '<=', '==', '>=', '>'``\n :param threshold: document length threshold in number of documents\n :param inverse: inverse the mask\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if threshold < 0:\n raise ValueError(\"`threshold` cannot be negative\")\n\n logger.debug('creating documents filter mask by checking the document length')\n comp = _comparison_operator_from_str(relation, equal=True, whicharg='relation')\n mask = {lbl: comp(n, threshold) for lbl, n in doc_lengths(docs).items()}\n\n return filter_documents_by_mask(docs, mask=mask, inverse=inverse, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef remove_documents_by_length(docs: Corpus, /, relation: str, threshold: int, inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Shortcut for :func:`filter_documents_by_length` with ``inverse=True``, i.e. *remove* all\n documents that meet the length criterion.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`filter_documents_by_length`\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param relation: comparison operator as string; must be one of ``'<', '<=', '==', '>=', '>'``\n :param threshold: document length threshold in number of documents\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n return filter_documents_by_length(docs, relation=relation, threshold=threshold, inverse=True, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef filter_clean_tokens(docs: Corpus, /,\n remove_punct: bool = True,\n remove_stopwords: Union[bool, Iterable[str]] = True,\n remove_empty: bool = True,\n remove_shorter_than: Optional[int] = None,\n remove_longer_than: Optional[int] = None,\n remove_numbers: bool = False,\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Filter tokens in `docs` to retain only a certain, configurable subset of tokens.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param remove_punct: remove all tokens that are considered to be punctuation (``\".\"``, ``\",\"``, ``\";\"`` etc.)\n according to the ``is_punct`` attribute of the\n `SpaCy Token `_\n :param remove_stopwords: remove all tokens that are considered to be stopwords; if True, remove tokens according to\n the ``is_stop`` attribute of the `SpaCy Token `_;\n if `remove_stopwords` is a set/tuple/list it defines the stopword list\n :param remove_empty: remove all empty (``\"\"``) and whitespace-only string tokens\n :param remove_shorter_than: remove all tokens shorter than this length\n :param remove_longer_than: remove all tokens longer than this length\n :param remove_numbers: remove all tokens that are \"numeric\" according to the ``like_num`` attribute of the\n `SpaCy Token `_\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if not remove_punct and not remove_stopwords and not remove_empty and \\\n remove_shorter_than is None and remove_longer_than is None and \\\n not remove_numbers:\n # nothing to do\n return\n\n # check parameters\n if remove_shorter_than is not None and remove_shorter_than < 0:\n raise ValueError('`remove_shorter_than` must be >= 0')\n if remove_longer_than is not None and remove_longer_than < 0:\n raise ValueError('`remove_longer_than` must be >= 0')\n\n # add stopwords\n if isinstance(remove_stopwords, (list, tuple, set)):\n tokens_to_remove = remove_stopwords\n else:\n tokens_to_remove = []\n\n # convert to hashes\n if tokens_to_remove:\n tokens_to_remove = np.unique(np.fromiter(map(hash_string, tokens_to_remove),\n dtype='uint64', count=len(tokens_to_remove)))\n else:\n tokens_to_remove = None\n\n if remove_empty:\n vocab = vocabulary(docs, sort=False)\n h_empty = [hash_string('')] + [hash_string(t) for t in vocab if PTTRN_WS.match(t)]\n\n if tokens_to_remove is None:\n tokens_to_remove = np.array(h_empty, dtype='uint64')\n else:\n tokens_to_remove = np.append(tokens_to_remove, h_empty)\n\n # function for parallel filtering: accepts a chunk of documents as dict\n # doc. label -> doc. data and returns a dict doc. label -> doc. filter mask\n @parallelexec(collect_fn=merge_dicts)\n def _filter_clean_tokens(chunk, docs_data_attrs):\n bool_cols = [i for i, a in enumerate(docs_data_attrs) if a in {'is_punct', 'like_num', 'is_stop'}]\n\n docs_mask = {}\n for lbl, tokenmat in chunk.items():\n mask = np.repeat(True, len(tokenmat))\n\n if remove_shorter_than is not None:\n mask &= (tokenmat[:, docs_data_attrs.index('token_lengths')] >= remove_shorter_than)\n\n if remove_longer_than is not None:\n mask &= (tokenmat[:, docs_data_attrs.index('token_lengths')] <= remove_longer_than)\n\n if bool_cols:\n mask &= ~np.sum(tokenmat[:, bool_cols].astype(bool), axis=1).astype(bool)\n\n if tokens_to_remove is not None:\n mask &= ~np.isin(tokenmat[:, docs_data_attrs.index('token')], tokens_to_remove)\n\n docs_mask[lbl] = mask\n\n return docs_mask\n\n # data preparation for parallel processing: create a dict `docs_data` with\n # doc. label -> doc. data that contains all necessary information for filtering\n # the document, depending on the filtering options\n docs_data_attrs = []\n\n if tokens_to_remove is not None and len(tokens_to_remove) > 0:\n docs_data_attrs.append('token')\n\n if remove_shorter_than is not None or remove_longer_than is not None:\n token_lengths = doc_token_lengths(docs)\n docs_data_attrs.append('token_lengths')\n else:\n token_lengths = None\n\n if remove_punct:\n docs_data_attrs.append('is_punct')\n if remove_numbers:\n docs_data_attrs.append('like_num')\n if remove_stopwords is True:\n docs_data_attrs.append('is_stop')\n\n if not docs_data_attrs:\n # nothing to do\n return\n\n logger.debug('creating tokens filter mask by applying cleaning methods')\n docs_data = {}\n for lbl, d in docs.items():\n attr_indices = [d.tokenmat_attrs.index(a) for a in docs_data_attrs if a != 'token_lengths']\n d_data = None\n\n if attr_indices:\n d_data = d.tokenmat[:, attr_indices]\n\n if 'token_lengths' in docs_data_attrs:\n d_toklen = np.array(token_lengths[lbl], dtype='uint64').reshape((len(token_lengths[lbl]), 1))\n\n if attr_indices:\n d_data = np.hstack((d_data, d_toklen))\n else:\n d_data = d_toklen\n\n docs_data[lbl] = np.array([], dtype='uint64') if d_data is None else d_data\n\n # run filtering in parallel\n try:\n # move 'token_lengths' to last position\n docs_data_attrs.pop(docs_data_attrs.index('token_lengths'))\n docs_data_attrs.append('token_lengths')\n except ValueError: pass\n\n new_masks = _filter_clean_tokens(_paralleltask(docs, docs_data), docs_data_attrs=docs_data_attrs)\n return filter_tokens_by_mask(docs, mask=new_masks, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef filter_tokens_with_kwic(docs: Corpus, /, search_tokens: Any,\n context_size: Union[int, Tuple[int, int], List[int]] = 2,\n by_attr: Optional[str] = None, match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case: bool = False,\n glob_method: str = 'match', inverse: bool = False, inplace: bool = True) \\\n -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Filter tokens in `docs` according to Keywords-in-Context (KWIC) context window of size `context_size` around\n `search_tokens`. Uses similar search parameters as :func:`filter_tokens`. Use :func:`kwic` or :func:`kwic_table`\n if you want to retrieve KWIC results without filtering the corpus.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param search_tokens: single string or list of strings that specify the search pattern(s)\n :param context_size: either scalar int or tuple/list (left, right) -- number of surrounding words in keyword\n context; if scalar, then it is a symmetric surrounding, otherwise can be asymmetric\n :param by_attr: if not None, this should be an attribute name; this attribute data will then be\n used for matching instead of the tokens in `docs`\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is 'glob', use this glob method. Must be 'match' or 'search' (similar\n behavior as Python's :func:`re.match` or :func:`re.search`)\n :param inverse: inverse the match results for filtering (i.e. *remove* all tokens that match the search\n criteria)\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if isinstance(context_size, int):\n context_size = (context_size, context_size)\n elif not isinstance(context_size, (list, tuple)):\n raise ValueError('`context_size` must be integer or list/tuple')\n\n if len(context_size) != 2:\n raise ValueError('`context_size` must be list/tuple of length 2')\n\n logger.debug('creating tokens filter mask by applying KWIC')\n\n by_attr = by_attr or 'token'\n\n try:\n matchdata = _match_against(docs, by_attr, default=docs.custom_token_attrs_defaults.get(by_attr, None))\n except AttributeError:\n raise AttributeError(f'attribute name \"{by_attr}\" does not exist')\n\n matches = _build_kwic_parallel(_paralleltask(docs, matchdata), search_tokens=search_tokens,\n context_size=context_size, by_attr=by_attr,\n match_type=match_type, ignore_case=ignore_case,\n glob_method=glob_method, inverse=inverse, only_token_masks=True)\n return filter_tokens_by_mask(docs, matches, inplace=inplace)\n\n\n#%% Corpus functions that modify corpus data: other\n\n\n@corpus_func_inplace_opt\ndef corpus_ngramify(docs: Corpus, /, n: int, join_str: str = ' ', inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Set the Corpus `docs` to handle tokens as n-grams.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param n: size of the n-grams to generate\n :param join_str: string to join n-grams\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if n < 1:\n raise ValueError('`n` must be greater or equal 1')\n\n docs._ngrams = n\n docs._ngrams_join_str = join_str\n\n\ndef corpus_sample(docs: Corpus, /, n: int, inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Generate a sample of `n` documents of corpus `docs`. Sampling occurs without replacement, hence `n` must be smaller\n or equal ``len(docs)``.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param n: sample size; must be in range ``[1, len(docs)]``\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n n_docs = len(docs)\n if n_docs == 0:\n raise ValueError('cannot sample from empty corpus')\n\n if not 1 <= n <= n_docs:\n raise ValueError(f'`n` must be between 1 and {n_docs}')\n\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n logger.info(f'sampling {n} documents out of {len(docs)}')\n sampled_doc_lbls = random.sample(list(docs.keys()), n)\n return filter_documents_by_label(docs, sampled_doc_lbls, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef corpus_split_by_paragraph(docs: Corpus, /, paragraph_linebreaks: int = 2, linebreak_str: str = '\\n',\n new_doc_label_fmt: str = '{doc}-{num}', force_unix_linebreaks: bool = True,\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Split documents in corpus by paragraphs and set the resulting documents as new corpus. Paragraphs are divided by\n a number `paragraph_linebreaks` of line breaks (given as `linebreak_str`).\n\n .. seealso::\n\n See :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_split_by_token` which allows to split documents by any token.\n\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param paragraph_linebreaks: number of subsequent line breaks to start a new paragraph\n :param linebreak_str: string used for line breaks\n :param new_doc_label_fmt: document label format string with placeholders \"doc\" and \"num\" (split number)\n :param force_unix_linebreaks: if True, convert Windows linebreaks to Unix linebreaks\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if not isinstance(paragraph_linebreaks, int) or paragraph_linebreaks < 1:\n raise ValueError('`paragraph_linebreaks` must be an integer greater than or equal to one')\n\n if not linebreak_str:\n raise ValueError('`linebreak_str` must be a non-empty string')\n\n return corpus_split_by_token(docs, split=linebreak_str * paragraph_linebreaks, new_doc_label_fmt=new_doc_label_fmt,\n force_unix_linebreaks=force_unix_linebreaks, inplace=inplace)\n\n\ndef corpus_split_by_token(docs: Corpus, /, split: str, new_doc_label_fmt: str = '{doc}-{num}',\n force_unix_linebreaks: bool = True, inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Split documents in corpus by token `split` and set the resulting documents as new corpus.\n\n .. seealso::\n\n See :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.corpus_split_by_paragraph` for a shortcut for splitting by paragraph,\n which is a common use case.\n\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param split: string used for splitting documents\n :param new_doc_label_fmt: document label format string with placeholders \"doc\" and \"num\" (split number)\n :param force_unix_linebreaks: if True, convert Windows linebreaks to Unix linebreaks\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n n_docs_before = len(docs)\n else:\n n_docs_before = None\n\n logger.debug('splitting documents')\n new_docs = {}\n remove_docs = []\n for lbl, d in docs.items():\n tok = d['token']\n if force_unix_linebreaks:\n tok = list(map(linebreaks_win2unix, tok))\n tok = as_chararray(tok)\n\n # find indices that split the document\n split_indices = np.flatnonzero(tok == split)\n\n if len(split_indices) > 0: # there are split tokens in this document so it can be split\n # split the token matrix' rows\n split_mat = np.vsplit(d.tokenmat, split_indices+1) # shift indices one to the right to include split token\n # split the custom token attributes arrays\n split_custom_attrs = {k: np.split(v) for k, v in d.custom_token_attrs.items()}\n\n # iterate through splits\n for i, mat in enumerate(split_mat):\n # generate new document using the split data\n new_lbl = new_doc_label_fmt.format(doc=lbl, num=i+1)\n if new_lbl in new_docs:\n raise ValueError(f'generated document label \"{new_lbl}\" is not unique')\n\n new_d = Document(docs.bimaps, new_lbl, has_sents=d.has_sents,\n tokenmat=mat, tokenmat_attrs=d.tokenmat_attrs,\n custom_token_attrs={k: v[i] for k, v in split_custom_attrs.items()},\n doc_attrs=d.doc_attrs)\n new_docs[new_lbl] = new_d\n\n # record old document label for later removal\n remove_docs.append(lbl)\n\n if inplace: # remove old documents in-place\n logger.debug('removing old documents')\n for lbl in remove_docs:\n del docs[lbl]\n else: # make a copy without the old documents\n logger.debug('copying corpus without old documents')\n docs = Corpus._deserialize(docs._serialize(deepcopy_attrs=True, store_nlp_instance_pointer=True,\n documents=set(doc_labels(docs, sort=False)) - set(remove_docs)))\n\n # add split documents\n logger.debug('adding split documents')\n docs.update(new_docs)\n\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n logger.info(f'corpus had {n_docs_before} documents before splitting, now has {len(docs)} documents')\n\n if not inplace:\n return docs\n\n\ndef corpus_join_documents(docs: Corpus, /, join: Dict[str, Union[str, List[str]]], glue: str = '\\n\\n',\n sort_document_labels: bool = True,\n match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case: bool = False,\n glob_method: str = 'match', doc_opts: Dict[str, Any] = None,\n inplace: bool = True) -> Optional[Corpus]:\n \"\"\"\n Join documents using the document labels or patterns for document labels in `join`. For each entry in `join`, the\n document labels in `docs` are matched against a provided pattern. This may be a string or a list of strings either\n for exact matching (default) or pattern matching (controlled via `match_type`). If no match is found for an entry\n in `join`, no joint document is generated.\n\n .. code-block::\n\n # example: generate joint document named \"joined-tweets-foo\" with all documents\n # whose labels start with \"tweets-foo\"\n corpus_join_documents(corp, {'joined-tweets-foo': 'tweets-foo*'}, match_type='glob')\n\n # alternatively specify a list of documents to match, this time using exact matching\n corpus_join_documents(corp, {'joined-tweets-foo': ['tweets-foo-1',\n 'tweets-foo-2',\n 'tweets-foo-3']})\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param join: dictionary that maps a name for the newly joint document to a string pattern or a list of string\n patterns of documents to be joint\n :param glue: string used for concatenating the documents\n :param sort_document_labels: if True, sort the matched document labels before joining the documents\n :param match_type: the type of matching that is performed: ``'exact'`` does exact string matching (optionally\n ignoring character case if ``ignore_case=True`` is set); ``'regex'`` treats ``search_tokens``\n as regular expressions to match the tokens against; ``'glob'`` uses \"glob patterns\" like\n ``\"politic*\"`` which matches for example \"politic\", \"politics\" or \"\"politician\" (see\n `globre package `_)\n :param ignore_case: ignore character case (applies to all three match types)\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is 'glob', use this glob method. Must be 'match' or 'search' (similar\n behavior as Python's :func:`re.match` or :func:`re.search`)\n :param doc_opts: keyword arguments passed to :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` constructor when creating a\n joint document\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either None (if `inplace` is True) or a modified copy of the original `docs` object\n \"\"\"\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n n_docs_before = len(docs)\n else:\n n_docs_before = None\n\n logger.debug('joining documents')\n\n # generate temporary \"glue\" document\n if glue:\n glue_tokenmat = docs._init_document(docs.nlp(glue), label='glue_doc').tokenmat\n else:\n glue_tokenmat = None\n\n old_docs = set()\n new_docs = {}\n doc_lbls = np.array(docs.doc_labels)\n\n for new_lbl, join_pattern in join.items():\n # match document label pattern\n matches = token_match_multi_pattern(join_pattern, doc_lbls,\n match_type=match_type, ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method)\n matched_lbls = doc_lbls[matches]\n if sort_document_labels:\n matched_lbls = sorted(matched_lbls)\n\n tokenmats = []\n token_attrs = None\n has_sents = None\n custom_token_attrs = None\n # iterate through matched documents for this pattern and build data for new joint document\n for i, lbl in enumerate(matched_lbls):\n d = docs[lbl]\n\n if has_sents is None:\n has_sents = d.has_sents\n elif has_sents != d.has_sents:\n raise ValueError(f'all documents for joining must have sentences recognition '\n f'{\"enabled\" if has_sents else \"disabled\"} when joining')\n\n if token_attrs is None:\n token_attrs = d.token_attrs.copy()\n elif token_attrs != d.token_attrs:\n raise ValueError('all documents must have the same token attributes when joining')\n\n if custom_token_attrs is None:\n custom_token_attrs = d.custom_token_attrs.copy()\n else:\n for k, v in d.custom_token_attrs.items():\n custom_token_attrs[k] = np.concatenate((custom_token_attrs[k], v))\n\n if glue_tokenmat is None or i >= len(matched_lbls) - 1:\n tokenmats.append(d.tokenmat)\n else:\n tokenmats.extend((d.tokenmat, glue_tokenmat)) # additional \"glue\" string between joint documents\n\n if tokenmats:\n # concatenate the token matrices of all documents\n new_tokenmat = np.concatenate(tokenmats)\n # generate new document\n new_d = Document(docs.bimaps, new_lbl, has_sents=has_sents,\n tokenmat=new_tokenmat,\n tokenmat_attrs=token_attrs[:new_tokenmat.shape[1]],\n custom_token_attrs=custom_token_attrs, **(doc_opts or {}))\n # add it to the dictionary\n new_docs[new_lbl] = new_d\n\n # add the matched document labels so we can later remove these documents\n old_docs.update(matched_lbls)\n\n if inplace: # remove matched documents in-place\n logger.debug('removing matched documents')\n for lbl in old_docs:\n del docs[lbl]\n else: # make a copy without the matched documents\n logger.debug('copying corpus without matched documents')\n docs = Corpus._deserialize(docs._serialize(deepcopy_attrs=True, store_nlp_instance_pointer=True,\n documents=set(doc_labels(docs, sort=False)) - old_docs))\n\n # add joint documents\n logger.debug('adding joint documents')\n docs.update(new_docs)\n\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n logger.info(f'corpus had {n_docs_before} documents before joining, now has {len(docs)} documents')\n\n if not inplace:\n return docs\n\n\n\n\n#%% other functions\n\ndef builtin_corpora_info(with_paths: bool = False) -> Union[List[str], Dict[str, str]]:\n \"\"\"\n Return list/dict of available built-in corpora.\n\n :param with_paths: if True, return dict mapping corpus label to absolute path to dataset, else return only\n a list of corpus labels\n :return: dict or list, depending on `with_paths`\n \"\"\"\n\n corpora = {}\n\n for fpath in glob(os.path.join(DATAPATH, '**/*.zip')):\n pathcomp = path_split(fpath)\n basename, _ = os.path.splitext(pathcomp[-1])\n\n corpora[pathcomp[-2] + '-' + basename] = os.path.abspath(fpath)\n\n if with_paths:\n return corpora\n else:\n return sorted(corpora.keys())\n\n\n#%% helper functions\n\n\n@parallelexec(collect_fn=merge_sets)\ndef _filter_documents(chunk, search_tokens, match_type, ignore_case, glob_method, inverse_matches, inverse_result,\n matches_threshold, return_num_matches):\n matches = _token_pattern_matches(chunk, search_tokens, match_type=match_type,\n ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method)\n if return_num_matches:\n docs_matches = {}\n else:\n docs_matches = set()\n\n for lbl, m in matches.items():\n if inverse_matches:\n m = ~m\n\n n = np.sum(m)\n thresh_met = n >= matches_threshold\n if inverse_result:\n thresh_met = not thresh_met\n if not thresh_met:\n if return_num_matches:\n docs_matches[lbl] = n\n else:\n docs_matches.add(lbl)\n\n return docs_matches\n\n\n@parallelexec(collect_fn=merge_dicts)\ndef _build_kwic_parallel(docs, search_tokens, context_size, by_attr, match_type, ignore_case, glob_method,\n inverse=False, highlight_keyword=None, with_window_indices=None, only_token_masks=False):\n \"\"\"Parallel KWIC processing for a chunk of documents in `docs`.\"\"\"\n # find matches for search criteria -> list of NumPy boolean mask arrays\n if only_token_masks:\n matchagainst = docs\n else:\n matchagainst = {lbl: d['_matchagainst'] for lbl, d in docs.items()}\n\n # keyword matches\n matches = _token_pattern_matches(matchagainst, search_tokens,\n match_type=match_type, ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method)\n\n if not only_token_masks and inverse:\n matches = {lbl: ~m for lbl, m in matches.items()}\n\n # build \"context windows\"\n left, right = context_size\n matchattr = by_attr or 'token'\n\n kwic_res = {} # maps document labels to context windows\n for lbl, mask in matches.items():\n ind = np.where(mask)[0]\n\n # indices around each keyword match\n ind_windows = index_windows_around_matches(mask, left, right,\n flatten=only_token_masks, remove_overlaps=True)\n\n if only_token_masks: # return only boolean mask of matched token windows per document\n assert ind_windows.ndim == 1\n assert len(ind) <= len(ind_windows)\n\n # from indices back to boolean mask; this only works with remove_overlaps=True\n win_mask = np.repeat(False, len(mask))\n win_mask[ind_windows] = True\n\n if inverse:\n win_mask = ~win_mask\n\n kwic_res[lbl] = win_mask\n else: # return list of token windows per keyword match per document\n docdata = docs[lbl]\n tok_arr = docdata.pop('_matchagainst')\n\n if not isinstance(tok_arr, np.ndarray) or not np.issubdtype(tok_arr.dtype, str):\n assert isinstance(tok_arr, (list, tuple, np.ndarray))\n tok_arr = as_chararray(tok_arr)\n\n assert len(ind) == len(ind_windows)\n\n windows_in_doc = [] # context windows\n for match_ind, win in zip(ind, ind_windows): # win is an array of indices into dtok_arr\n tok_win = tok_arr[win].tolist() # context window for this match\n\n if highlight_keyword is not None: # add \"highlight\" around matched keyword, e.g. to form \"*keyword*\"\n highlight_mask = win == match_ind\n assert np.sum(highlight_mask) == 1\n highlight_ind = np.where(highlight_mask)[0][0]\n tok_win[highlight_ind] = highlight_keyword + tok_win[highlight_ind] + highlight_keyword\n\n # add matched attribute window (usually tokens)\n win_res = {matchattr: tok_win}\n\n # optionally add indices\n if with_window_indices:\n win_res['index'] = win\n\n # optionally add windows for other attributes\n for attr_key, attr_vals in docdata.items():\n if attr_key != matchattr:\n win_res[attr_key] = attr_vals[win].tolist()\n\n windows_in_doc.append(win_res)\n\n kwic_res[lbl] = windows_in_doc\n\n assert len(kwic_res) == len(docs)\n\n return kwic_res\n\n\ndef _finalize_kwic_results(kwic_results, only_non_empty, glue, as_tables, matchattr, with_attr):\n \"\"\"\n Helper function to finalize raw KWIC results coming from `_build_kwic_parallel()`: Filter results,\n \"glue\" (join) tokens, transform to dataframe, return or dismiss attributes.\n \"\"\"\n logger.debug('finalizing KWIC results')\n\n if logger.isEnabledFor(logging.INFO):\n logger.info(f'KWIC found {sum(len(wins) for wins in kwic_results.values())} contexts in '\n f'{len(kwic_results)} documents')\n\n if only_non_empty: # remove documents with no matches and hence no KWIC results\n kwic_results = {dl: windows for dl, windows in kwic_results.items() if len(windows) > 0}\n\n if glue is not None: # join tokens in context windows\n kwic_results = {lbl: [glue.join(win[matchattr]) for win in windows] for lbl, windows in kwic_results.items()}\n\n if as_tables: # convert to dataframes\n dfs = {} # dataframe for each result\n for lbl, windows in kwic_results.items():\n if glue is not None: # every \"window\" in windows is a concatenated string; there are no further attributes\n if windows:\n dfs[lbl] = pd.DataFrame({'doc': np.repeat(lbl, len(windows)),\n 'context': np.arange(len(windows)),\n matchattr: windows})\n elif not only_non_empty:\n dfs[lbl] = pd.DataFrame({'doc': [], 'context': [], matchattr: []})\n else: # every \"window\" in windows is a KWIC context window...\n win_dfs = []\n for i_win, win in enumerate(windows):\n if isinstance(win, list): # ... with separate tokens as list or a dict of tokens and attributes\n win = {matchattr: win}\n\n n_tok = len(win[matchattr])\n df_windata = [np.repeat(lbl, n_tok),\n np.repeat(i_win, n_tok),\n win['index'],\n win[matchattr]]\n\n if with_attr:\n meta_cols = [col for col in win.keys() if col not in {matchattr, 'index'}]\n df_windata.extend([win[col] for col in meta_cols])\n else:\n meta_cols = []\n\n df_cols = ['doc', 'context', 'position', matchattr] + meta_cols\n win_dfs.append(pd.DataFrame(dict(zip(df_cols, df_windata))))\n\n if win_dfs:\n dfs[lbl] = pd.concat(win_dfs, axis=0)\n elif not only_non_empty:\n dfs[lbl] = pd.DataFrame(dict(zip(['doc', 'context', 'position', matchattr],\n [[] for _ in range(4)])))\n\n return dfs\n\n if not with_attr and glue is None: # dismiss attributes\n return {lbl: [win[matchattr] for win in windows] for lbl, windows in kwic_results.items()}\n else:\n return kwic_results\n\n\ndef _create_embed_tokens_for_collocations(docs: Corpus, embed_tokens_min_docfreq, embed_tokens_set, tokens_as_hashes):\n \"\"\"\n Helper function to generate ``embed_tokens`` set as used in :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.token_collocations`.\n\n If given, use `embed_tokens_min_docfreq` to populate ``embed_tokens`` using a minimum document frequency for\n token types in `docs`. Additionally use fixed set of tokens in `embed_tokens_set`.\n \"\"\"\n if embed_tokens_min_docfreq is not None:\n if not isinstance(embed_tokens_min_docfreq, (float, int)):\n raise ValueError('`embed_tokens_min_docfreq` must be either None, a float or an integer')\n\n df_prop = isinstance(embed_tokens_min_docfreq, float)\n if df_prop and not 0.0 <= embed_tokens_min_docfreq <= 1.0:\n raise ValueError('if `embed_tokens_min_docfreq` is given as float, it must be a proportion in the '\n 'interval [0, 1]')\n elif not df_prop and embed_tokens_min_docfreq < 1:\n raise ValueError('if `embed_tokens_min_docfreq` is given as integer, it must be strictly positive')\n\n # get token types with document frequencies and filter them\n token_df = doc_frequencies(docs, tokens_as_hashes=tokens_as_hashes, proportions=df_prop)\n embed_tokens = {t for t, df in token_df.items() if df >= embed_tokens_min_docfreq}\n if embed_tokens_set: # additionally use fixed set of tokens\n embed_tokens.update(embed_tokens_set)\n return embed_tokens\n else:\n # solely use fixed set of tokens\n if tokens_as_hashes and embed_tokens_set:\n return {hash_string(t) for t in embed_tokens_set}\n else:\n return embed_tokens_set\n\n\ndef _apply_collocations(tokenmat: np.ndarray,\n new_tok: Sequence[StrOrInt],\n mask: np.ndarray,\n hash2token: Optional[bidict],\n tokens_as_hashes: bool,\n glue: Optional[str],\n return_joint_tokens: bool):\n \"\"\"\n Helper function to apply collocations from `joint_colloc` to documents in `docs`. `joint_colloc` maps document label\n to a tuple containing new (joint) tokens and a mask as provided by :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.token_join_subsequent`\n with parameter ``return_mask=True``. The tokens can be given as strings or as hashes (integers).\n \"\"\"\n if return_joint_tokens:\n joint_tokens = set()\n\n hash2token_updates = {}\n\n if new_tok:\n tok_hashes = tokenmat[:, 1]\n\n # get new tokens as strings\n if tokens_as_hashes:\n # the tokens in the collocations are hashes:\n # 1. get the token type strings for each collocation token hash `t` from the bimap\n # 2. join the token type strings with `glue`\n new_tok_strs = [glue.join(hash2token[h] for h in colloc) for colloc in new_tok]\n else:\n # the tokens in the collocations are strings: use them as-is\n new_tok_strs = new_tok\n\n if return_joint_tokens:\n joint_tokens.update(new_tok_strs)\n\n # add the strings as new token types to the bimap and save the hashes to the array\n new_tok_hashes = list(map(hash_string, new_tok_strs))\n hash2token_updates.update(zip(new_tok_hashes, new_tok_strs))\n tok_hashes[mask > 1] = np.array(new_tok_hashes, dtype='uint64') # replace with hashes of new tokens\n tokenmat = np.delete(tokenmat, np.flatnonzero(mask == 0), axis=0)\n\n if return_joint_tokens:\n return tokenmat, hash2token_updates, joint_tokens\n else:\n return tokenmat, hash2token_updates\n\n\ndef _comparison_operator_from_str(which: str, common_alias=False, equal=True, whicharg: str = 'which') -> Callable:\n \"\"\"\n Helper function to return the appropriate comparison operator function from a specifier string like \">=\" or \"<\".\n \"\"\"\n op_table = {\n '>': operator.gt,\n '>=': operator.ge,\n '<=': operator.le,\n '<': operator.lt,\n }\n\n if common_alias:\n op_table.update({\n 'common': operator.ge,\n 'uncommon': operator.le,\n })\n\n if equal:\n op_table['=='] = operator.eq\n\n if which not in op_table.keys():\n raise ValueError(f\"`{whicharg}` must be one of {', '.join(op_table.keys())}\")\n\n return op_table[which]\n\n\ndef _match_against(docs: Union[Corpus, Dict[str, Document]], by_attr: str = 'token',\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None, **kwargs) \\\n -> Dict[str, Any]:\n \"\"\"Return the list of values to match against in filtering functions.\"\"\"\n return {lbl: document_token_attr(d, attr=by_attr, **kwargs) for lbl, d in docs.items()\n if select is None or lbl in select}\n\n\ndef _check_filter_args(**kwargs):\n \"\"\"Helper function to check common filtering arguments match_type and glob_method.\"\"\"\n if 'match_type' in kwargs and kwargs['match_type'] not in {'exact', 'regex', 'glob'}:\n raise ValueError(\"`match_type` must be one of `'exact', 'regex', 'glob'`\")\n\n if 'glob_method' in kwargs and kwargs['glob_method'] not in {'search', 'match'}:\n raise ValueError(\"`glob_method` must be one of `'search', 'match'`\")\n\n\ndef _token_pattern_matches(tokens: Dict[str, List[Any]], search_tokens: Any,\n match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case=False, glob_method: str = 'match'):\n \"\"\"\n Helper function to apply `token_match` with multiple patterns in `search_tokens` to `docs`.\n The matching results for each pattern in `search_tokens` are combined via logical OR.\n Returns a dict mapping keys in `tokens` to boolean arrays that signal the pattern matches for each token in each\n document.\n \"\"\"\n\n # search tokens may be of any type (e.g. bool when matching against token attributes)\n if not isinstance(search_tokens, (list, tuple, set)):\n search_tokens = [search_tokens]\n elif isinstance(search_tokens, (list, tuple, set)) and not search_tokens:\n raise ValueError('`search_tokens` must not be empty')\n\n matches = [np.repeat(False, repeats=len(dtok)) for dtok in tokens.values()]\n\n for dtok, dmatches in zip(tokens.values(), matches):\n for pat in search_tokens:\n dmatches |= token_match(pat, dtok, match_type=match_type, ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method)\n\n return dict(zip(tokens.keys(), matches))\n\n\ndef _load_text_from_files(files: Collection[str],\n filelabels: Optional[Dict[str, str]] = None,\n existing_docs: Optional[Collection[str]] = None,\n encoding: str = 'utf8',\n doc_label_fmt: str = '{path}-{basename}',\n doc_label_path_join: str = '_',\n read_size: int = -1,\n force_unix_linebreaks: bool = True) \\\n -> Dict[str, str]:\n \"\"\"\n Helper function to load text data from text files.\n\n :param files: collection of files to be loaded (as full file paths)\n :param filelabels: dict mapping file paths to document labels\n :param existing_docs: collection of already existing document labels to check against duplicates\n :param encoding: character encoding\n :param doc_label_fmt: document label format for non-tabular files; string with placeholders ``\"path\"``,\n ``\"basename\"``, ``\"ext\"``\n :param doc_label_path_join: string with which to join the components of the file paths\n :param read_size: max. number of characters to read. -1 means read full file.\n :param force_unix_linebreaks: if True, convert Windows linebreaks to Unix linebreaks\n :return: dict mapping document label to document text\n \"\"\"\n existing_docs = existing_docs or set()\n new_docs = {}\n for fpath in files:\n text = read_text_file(fpath, encoding=encoding, read_size=read_size,\n force_unix_linebreaks=force_unix_linebreaks)\n\n path_parts = path_split(os.path.normpath(fpath))\n if not path_parts:\n continue\n\n dirs, fname = path_parts[:-1], path_parts[-1]\n basename, ext = os.path.splitext(fname)\n basename = basename.strip()\n if ext:\n ext = ext[1:]\n\n if filelabels is None: # generate a label\n lbl = doc_label_fmt.format(path=doc_label_path_join.join(dirs), basename=basename, ext=ext)\n\n if lbl.startswith('-'):\n lbl = lbl[1:]\n else: # use from dict keys\n lbl = filelabels[fpath]\n\n if lbl in existing_docs or lbl in new_docs:\n raise ValueError(f'duplicate document label \"{lbl}\" not allowed')\n\n new_docs[lbl] = text\n\n return new_docs\n\n\ndef _load_text_from_tabular_files(files: Union[str, Collection[str]],\n id_column: StrOrInt, text_column: StrOrInt,\n existing_docs: Optional[Collection[str]] = None,\n prepend_columns: Optional[Sequence[str]] = None, encoding: str = 'utf8',\n doc_label_fmt: str = '{basename}-{id}',\n force_unix_linebreaks: bool = True,\n pandas_read_opts: Optional[Dict[str, Any]] = None) \\\n -> Dict[str, str]:\n \"\"\"\n Helper function to load text data from tabular files.\n\n :param files: collection of files to be loaded (as full file paths)\n :param id_column: column name or column index of document identifiers\n :param text_column: column name or column index of document texts\n :param existing_docs: collection of already existing document labels to check against duplicates\n :param prepend_columns: if not None, pass a list of columns whose contents should be added before the document\n text, e.g. ``['title', 'subtitle']``\n :param encoding: character encoding of the files\n :param doc_label_fmt: document label format string with placeholders ``\"basename\"``, ``\"id\"`` (document ID), and\n ``\"row_index\"`` (dataset row index)\n :param sample: if given, draw random sample of size `sample` from all text data\n :param force_unix_linebreaks: if True, convert Windows linebreaks to Unix linebreaks in texts\n :param pandas_read_opts: additional arguments passed to :func:`pandas.read_csv` or :func:`pandas.read_excel`\n :return: dict mapping document label to document text\n \"\"\"\n existing_docs = existing_docs or set()\n\n if isinstance(files, str):\n files = [files]\n\n read_opts = {\n 'encoding': encoding,\n 'usecols': [id_column, text_column]\n }\n\n if prepend_columns:\n read_opts['usecols'] += prepend_columns\n\n if all(isinstance(x, int) for x in read_opts['usecols']):\n id_column, text_column = 0, 1\n if prepend_columns:\n prepend_columns = list(range(2, len(prepend_columns) + 2))\n\n if pandas_read_opts:\n read_opts.update(pandas_read_opts)\n\n read_opts_excel = read_opts.copy()\n del read_opts_excel['encoding']\n\n new_docs = {}\n for fpath in files:\n if fpath.endswith('.csv'):\n data = pd.read_csv(fpath, **read_opts)\n elif fpath.endswith('.xls') or fpath.endswith('.xlsx'):\n if fpath.endswith('.xlsx') and 'engine' not in read_opts_excel:\n read_opts_excel['engine'] = 'openpyxl'\n data = pd.read_excel(fpath, **read_opts_excel)\n else:\n raise ValueError('only file extensions \".csv\", \".xls\" and \".xlsx\" are supported')\n\n basename, _ = os.path.splitext(fpath)\n basename = os.path.basename(basename).strip()\n\n for idx, row in data.iterrows():\n lbl = doc_label_fmt.format(basename=basename, id=row[id_column], row_index=idx)\n\n if lbl in existing_docs or lbl in new_docs:\n raise ValueError(f'duplicate document label \"{lbl}\" not allowed')\n\n if prepend_columns:\n text = '\\n\\n'.join([row[col] for col in (prepend_columns + [text_column]) if pd.notna(row[col])])\n else:\n text = row[text_column] if pd.notna(row[text_column]) else ''\n\n if force_unix_linebreaks:\n text = linebreaks_win2unix(text)\n\n new_docs[lbl] = text\n\n return new_docs\n\n\ndef _spacydocs_for_vectors(docs, select, collapse):\n select = _single_str_to_set(select, check_docs=docs)\n\n if isinstance(docs, Corpus):\n if docs.nlp.meta.get('vectors', {}).get('width', 0) == 0:\n raise RuntimeError(\"Corpus object `docs` doesn't use a SpaCy language model with word vectors; you should \"\n \"enable the 'vectors' feature via `load_features` parameter or specify a different language \"\n \"model (i.e. an ..._md or ..._lg model) via `language_model` parameter when initializing \"\n \"the Corpus object\")\n return spacydocs(docs, select=select, collapse=collapse)\n elif isinstance(docs, dict):\n if select:\n return {lbl: d for lbl, d in docs.items() if lbl in select}\n else:\n return docs\n else:\n raise ValueError('`docs` must be Corpus object or dict of SpaCy Doc objects')\n\n\ndef _single_str_to_set(select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]], check_docs: Optional[Corpus] = None) \\\n -> Optional[Collection[str]]:\n if isinstance(select, str):\n select = {select}\n\n if select is not None and check_docs is not None and not set(select) <= set(check_docs.keys()):\n raise KeyError(f'one or more documents not found in corpus: {set(select) - set(check_docs.keys())}')\n\n return select\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/corpus/_document.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nInternal module that implements :class:`Document` class representing a text document as token sequence.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nfrom __future__ import annotations # req. for classmethod return type; see https://stackoverflow.com/a/49872353\nfrom typing import Optional, Dict, Any, List, Union, Sequence, Collection\n\nimport numpy as np\nfrom bidict import bidict\nfrom spacy import Vocab\n\nfrom ..tokenseq import token_ngrams\nfrom ..types import StrOrInt\nfrom ..utils import empty_chararray, flatten_list\n\nfrom ._common import BOOLEAN_SPACY_TOKEN_ATTRS, TOKENMAT_ATTRS\n\n\n#%% document class\n\nclass Document:\n \"\"\"\n A class that represents text as sequence of tokens. Attributes are also implemented at two levels:\n\n 1. Document attributes like the document label (document name);\n 2. Token attributes (e.g. POS, lemma, etc.)\n\n Token attributes are further divided into \"standard\" or \"SpaCy\" token attributes and custom attributes.\n The former are represented as 64 bit unsigned integer hash value and are stored in a \"token matrix\" in which\n rows represent tokens and columns represent token attributes. The token hash itself is also stored in this matrix\n as \"token\" attribute. The custom token attributes are stored as NumPy arrays of any dtype.\n \"\"\"\n\n def __init__(self, bimaps: Optional[Dict[str, bidict]], label: str, has_sents: bool,\n tokenmat: np.ndarray, tokenmat_attrs: Sequence[str],\n custom_token_attrs: Optional[Dict[str, Union[Sequence, np.ndarray]]] = None,\n doc_attrs: Optional[Dict[str, Any]] = None):\n \"\"\"\n Create a new :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` object that uses the bidirectional dictionaries in `bimaps` for\n hash <-> text conversion, has a document label `label`, has sentences recognized (`has_sents`) and has a token\n matrix `tokenmat`.\n\n :param bimaps: bidirectional dictionaries for hash <-> text conversion of data in `tokenmat`\n :param label: document label (document name)\n :param has_sents: if True, this document supports sentences\n :param tokenmat: token matrix as uint64 matrix of shape (N, M) for N tokens and with M attributes; the data is\n *not* copied\n :param tokenmat_attrs: names of token attributes in `tokenmat` with respect to column order\n :param custom_token_attrs: additional custom token attributes\n :param doc_attrs: document attributes\n \"\"\"\n # set up document attributes\n doc_attrs = {} if doc_attrs is None else doc_attrs.copy()\n doc_attrs['label'] = label\n doc_attrs['has_sents'] = has_sents\n\n # contains standard attrib. \"label\", \"has_sents\"\n self.doc_attrs = doc_attrs\n\n # bimaps for hash <-> string token conversion\n self.bimaps = bimaps\n\n # uint64 matrix of shape (N, M) for N tokens and with M attributes, where M is\n # len(tokenmat_attrs) + 2 or 3 (without or with information about sentences)\n self.tokenmat = tokenmat\n self.custom_token_attrs = {} # type: Dict[str, np.ndarray]\n\n if custom_token_attrs:\n for attr, val in custom_token_attrs.items():\n self[attr] = val\n\n # labels of additional token attributes in `tokens` after base attributes\n tokenmat_attrs = list(tokenmat_attrs) # copy\n base_token_attrs = ('whitespace', 'token', 'sent_start') if has_sents else ('whitespace', 'token')\n base_token_attrs = [tokenmat_attrs.pop(tokenmat_attrs.index(a)) if a in tokenmat_attrs else a\n for a in base_token_attrs]\n self.tokenmat_attrs = base_token_attrs + (tokenmat_attrs or [])\n\n assert self.tokenmat.ndim == 2, '`tokenmat` must be 2D-array'\n assert self.tokenmat.shape[1] == 2 + int(has_sents) + len(tokenmat_attrs), \\\n f'`tokens` must contain {2 + int(has_sents)}+len(token_attrs) columns'\n\n def __len__(self) -> int:\n \"\"\"\n Length of the document, i.e. number of tokens.\n\n :return: length of the document, i.e. number of tokens\n \"\"\"\n return self.tokenmat.shape[0]\n\n def __repr__(self) -> str:\n \"\"\"\n Document summary.\n\n :return: document summary as string\n \"\"\"\n return f'Document \"{self.label}\" ({len(self)} tokens, {len(self.token_attrs)} token attributes, ' \\\n f'{len(self.doc_attrs)} document attributes)'\n\n def __str__(self) -> str:\n \"\"\"\n Document summary.\n\n :return: document summary as string\n \"\"\"\n return self.__repr__()\n\n def __getitem__(self, attr: str) -> list:\n \"\"\"\n Get list of token attributes for attribute `attr`. E.g. ``d['token']`` returns list of\n text tokens or ``d['pos']`` returns list of POS-tags for each token of a document ``d``.\n\n .. seealso:: See :func:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.document_token_attr` for more options on retrieving token attributes.\n\n :param attr: token attribute\n :return: list of token attributes\n \"\"\"\n return document_token_attr(self, attr)\n\n def __setitem__(self, attr: str, values: Union[Sequence, np.ndarray]):\n \"\"\"\n Set a new token attribute `attr` with values `values`. The length of `values` must match the number of tokens\n in this document.\n\n :param attr: token attribute name\n :param values: token attribute values\n \"\"\"\n if not isinstance(values, (Sequence, np.ndarray)):\n raise ValueError('`values` must be sequence or NumPy array')\n\n if len(values) != len(self):\n raise ValueError(f'number of token attribute values ({len(values)}) does not match number of tokens '\n f'({len(self)})')\n\n if not isinstance(values, np.ndarray):\n # convert to NumPy array: if attr is a token matrix attribute, convert to uint64, else don't specify a type\n values = np.array(values, dtype='uint64' if attr in TOKENMAT_ATTRS else None)\n\n if values.ndim != 1:\n raise ValueError('`values` must be one-dimensional')\n\n if attr in TOKENMAT_ATTRS:\n # add/replace token matrix attribute\n if not np.issubdtype(values.dtype, 'uint64'):\n raise ValueError('`values` must be uint64 array')\n\n if attr in self.tokenmat_attrs: # replace\n self.tokenmat[:, self.tokenmat_attrs.index(attr)] = values\n else: # add\n self.tokenmat = np.hstack((self.tokenmat, values.reshape((len(self), 1))))\n self.tokenmat_attrs.append(attr)\n else:\n # add/replace custom token attribute\n self.custom_token_attrs[attr] = values\n\n def __delitem__(self, attr: str):\n \"\"\"\n Remove a token attribute `attr`.\n\n :param attr: token attribute to remove\n \"\"\"\n if attr in TOKENMAT_ATTRS:\n # remove token matrix attribute\n self.tokenmat = np.delete(self.tokenmat, self.tokenmat_attrs.index(attr), axis=1)\n self.tokenmat_attrs.remove(attr)\n else:\n # remove custom token attribute\n del self.custom_token_attrs[attr]\n\n def __copy__(self) -> Document:\n \"\"\"\n Make a copy of this Document, returning a new object with the same data but using the *same* SpaCy instance.\n\n :return: new Corpus object\n \"\"\"\n return self._deserialize(self._serialize(store_bimaps_pointer=True))\n\n @property\n def label(self) -> str:\n \"\"\"Document label (document name).\"\"\"\n return self.doc_attrs['label']\n\n @property\n def has_sents(self) -> bool:\n \"\"\"\n Status on information on borders of sentences.\n\n :return: True if information on borders of sentences is contained in this document, else False\n \"\"\"\n return self.doc_attrs['has_sents']\n\n @property\n def token_attrs(self) -> List[str]:\n \"\"\"\n Retrieve list of token attribute names (standard *and* custom attributes).\n\n :return: list of token attribute names\n \"\"\"\n return self.tokenmat_attrs + list(self.custom_token_attrs.keys())\n\n def _serialize(self, store_bimaps_pointer: bool) -> Dict[str, Any]:\n \"\"\"\n Helper function for serializing a Document object as dictionary.\n\n :param store_bimaps_pointer: if True, add an entry ``'bimaps'`` pointing to the ``self.bimaps`` object\n :return: dictionary with all necessary data to reconstruct this Document object\n \"\"\"\n serdata = {}\n for attr in ('doc_attrs', 'tokenmat', 'tokenmat_attrs', 'custom_token_attrs'):\n serdata[attr] = getattr(self, attr).copy()\n\n if store_bimaps_pointer:\n serdata['bimaps'] = self.bimaps\n\n return serdata\n\n @classmethod\n def _deserialize(cls, data: Dict[str, Any], **kwargs) -> Document:\n \"\"\"\n Helper function for de-serializing a Document object from a dictionary.\n\n :param data: dictionary of document data\n :param kwargs: additional keyword arguments passed to Document constructor\n :return: new Document object\n \"\"\"\n init_args = {\n 'bimaps': data.get('bimaps', kwargs.pop('bimaps', None)),\n 'label': data['doc_attrs'].pop('label'),\n 'has_sents': data['doc_attrs'].pop('has_sents'),\n 'tokenmat': data['tokenmat'],\n 'tokenmat_attrs': data['tokenmat_attrs'],\n 'custom_token_attrs': data['custom_token_attrs'],\n 'doc_attrs': data['doc_attrs'],\n }\n\n init_args.update(kwargs)\n\n return cls(**init_args)\n\n\n#%% document functions\n\n\ndef document_token_attr(d: Document,\n attr: Union[str, Sequence[str]] = 'token',\n default: Optional[Any, Dict[str, Any]] = None,\n sentences: bool = False,\n n: Optional[int] = None,\n ngrams: int = 1,\n ngrams_join: str = ' ',\n as_hashes: bool = False,\n as_array: bool = False) \\\n -> Union[list,\n List[list], # sentences\n np.ndarray,\n List[np.ndarray], # sentences\n # w/ multiple attributes\n Dict[str, list],\n Dict[str, List[list]], # sentences\n Dict[str, np.ndarray],\n Dict[str, List[np.ndarray]]]: # sentences\n \"\"\"\n Retrieve one or more token attributes given as `attr` from a :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` object `d`.\n\n :param d: :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` object\n :param attr: either single token attribute name or a sequence of token attribute names\n :param default: default value if a token attribute doesn't exist\n :param sentences: divide result into sentences\n :param n: max. number of tokens to retrieve from each document; if None (default), retrieve all tokens\n :param ngrams: form n-grams if `ngrams` > 1\n :param ngrams_join: use this string to join the n-grams if `ngrams` > 1\n :param as_hashes: return hashes instead of textual representations\n :param as_array: return NumPy arrays instead of lists\n :return: if a single token attribute is given as `attr`, return a list, a NumPy array or a list of lists or NumPy\n arrays depending on `as_array` and `sentences`; if multiple token attributes are given, return a dictionary\n mapping the token attribute name to the respective result\n \"\"\"\n # check arguments\n if not as_hashes and d.bimaps is None:\n raise ValueError('tokens as string representation requested, but no bimaps instance set for document `d`')\n\n if sentences and not d.has_sents:\n raise ValueError('sentences requested, but sentence borders not set; '\n 'Corpus documents probably not parsed with sentence recognition')\n\n if ngrams > 1 and as_hashes:\n raise ValueError('cannot join ngrams as hashes; either set `as_hashes` to False or use unigrams')\n\n if n is not None and n < 0:\n raise ValueError('`n` must be positive')\n\n if isinstance(attr, str): # handle single attribute\n single_attr = attr\n attr = [attr]\n if default:\n default = {attr: default}\n else: # handle multiple attributes\n single_attr = None\n if default is not None and not isinstance(default, dict):\n raise ValueError('`default` must be a dict mapping attribute names to default values')\n\n if ngrams > 1 and 'sent_start' in attr:\n raise ValueError('cannot join ngrams for sent_start')\n\n if 'sent' in attr and not d.has_sents:\n raise ValueError('sentence numbers requested, but sentence borders not set; '\n 'Corpus documents probably not parsed with sentence recognition')\n\n res = {} # token attributes per attribute label\n tokslice = slice(0, n)\n for a in attr: # iterate through requested attributes\n if a in d.tokenmat_attrs:\n # token matrix attribute\n tok = d.tokenmat[tokslice, d.tokenmat_attrs.index(a)] # token attribute hashes\n\n if a in BOOLEAN_SPACY_TOKEN_ATTRS: # convert to boolean array\n tok = tok.astype(bool)\n\n if as_hashes and not as_array:\n tok = tok.tolist() # list of hashes\n elif not as_hashes:\n # convert hashes to other representations (mostly string representations)\n if a == 'sent_start': # sentences border marks\n if as_array:\n tok = tok == 1 # convert to boolean array\n else:\n tok = [t == 1 for t in tok] # convert to boolean list\n else: # every other token matrix attribute\n if a in BOOLEAN_SPACY_TOKEN_ATTRS:\n if not as_array or ngrams > 1:\n tok = tok.tolist() # convert boolean attribute simply to list\n if ngrams > 1: # ngrams require strings\n tok = list(map(str, tok))\n else: # use the attribute-specific bimap to convert the hash to a string\n tok = [d.bimaps[a][t] for t in tok]\n\n if ngrams > 1: # generate ngrams\n tok = token_ngrams(tok, n=ngrams, join=True, join_str=ngrams_join)\n\n # convert (back) to NumPy array\n if as_array and (a not in BOOLEAN_SPACY_TOKEN_ATTRS or ngrams > 1):\n tok = np.array(tok, dtype=str)\n elif a == 'sent':\n # special attribute \"sent\" generates a sentence number for each token\n sent_start = d.tokenmat[tokslice, d.tokenmat_attrs.index('sent_start')]\n tok = np.cumsum(sent_start == 1) - 1 # let sentence index start with zero\n if not as_array:\n tok = tok.tolist()\n else:\n # custom attribute\n if default is None or a in d.custom_token_attrs.keys():\n tok = d.custom_token_attrs[a]\n if n is not None:\n tok = tok[tokslice]\n else: # attribute doesn't exist, but default value is possibly given\n try:\n tok = np.repeat(default[a], len(d) if n is None else n)\n except KeyError:\n raise KeyError(f'requested token attribute \"{a}\" not set in the document')\n\n if as_hashes:\n raise ValueError('cannot return hashes for a custom token attribute')\n\n if not as_array:\n tok = tok.tolist()\n\n if ngrams > 1:\n if as_array:\n tok = tok.tolist()\n\n try:\n tok = token_ngrams(tok, n=ngrams, join=True, join_str=ngrams_join)\n except TypeError: # tok is not a list of str\n tok = token_ngrams(list(map(str, tok)), n=ngrams, join=True, join_str=ngrams_join)\n\n if as_array:\n tok = np.array(tok, dtype=str)\n\n if sentences:\n # divide tokens into sentences\n tok = _chop_along_sentences(tok, d.tokenmat[:, d.tokenmat_attrs.index('sent_start')],\n as_array=as_array, as_hashes=as_hashes, skip=-ngrams+1)\n\n res[a] = tok\n\n if single_attr is None: # return dict with multiple attributes\n return res\n else:\n return res[single_attr] # return single attribute values\n\n\ndef document_from_attrs(bimaps: Dict[str, bidict],\n vocab: Vocab,\n label: str,\n tokens_w_attr: Dict[str, Union[list, np.ndarray]],\n sentences: bool,\n doc_attr_names: Optional[Collection[str]] = None,\n token_attr_names: Optional[Collection[str]] = None) \\\n -> Document:\n \"\"\"\n Create a new :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` object from tokens with attributes in `tokens_w_attr`.\n\n :param bimaps: bidirectional dictionaries for hash <-> text conversion\n :param label: document label\n :param tokens_w_attr: dictionary mapping attribute names to attribute values\n :param sentences: if True, `tokens_w_attr` contains data split by sentences, else sentences are not split\n :param doc_attr_names: names of keys in `tokens_w_attr` that are assumed to be document attributes\n :param token_attr_names: names of keys in `tokens_w_attr` that are assumed to be token attributes\n :return: :class:`~tmtoolkit.corpus.Document` object with data from `tokens_w_attr`\n \"\"\"\n def uint64arr_from_strings(attr, strings):\n \"\"\"\n Helper function to convert strings of attribute `attr` to array of hashes while updating `bimaps` and `vocab`.\n \"\"\"\n\n hashes = []\n upd = []\n\n for s in strings:\n h = vocab.strings[s] if s in vocab.strings else vocab.strings.add(s)\n if h not in bimaps[attr]:\n upd.append((h, s))\n hashes.append(h)\n\n bimaps[attr].update(upd)\n\n return np.array([hashes], dtype='uint64')\n\n def values_as_uint64arr(attr, val):\n \"\"\"Helper function that tries to convert `val` to an array of hashes, depending on the type of `val`.\"\"\"\n if isinstance(val, np.ndarray):\n if np.issubdtype(val.dtype, str): # this is an array of strings -> convert to hashes\n return uint64arr_from_strings(attr, val.tolist())\n else:\n return val.astype('uint64')\n elif isinstance(val, list):\n try:\n return np.array(val, dtype='uint64')\n except ValueError: # this is a list of strings -> convert to hashes\n return uint64arr_from_strings(attr, val)\n else:\n raise ValueError('`tokens_w_attr` must be a dict that contains lists or NumPy arrays')\n\n def flatten_if_sents(val):\n \"\"\"Helper function to flatten sentences in `val` to a concatenated list or array.\"\"\"\n if sentences:\n if val and isinstance(next(iter(val)), np.ndarray):\n return np.concatenate(val)\n else:\n return flatten_list(val)\n return val\n\n if not isinstance(tokens_w_attr, dict):\n raise ValueError('`tokens_w_attr` must be given as dict with token attributes')\n\n sent_start = None\n\n if 'sent_start' in tokens_w_attr and tokens_w_attr['sent_start'] is not None:\n sent_start = tokens_w_attr['sent_start']\n elif 'sent' in tokens_w_attr and tokens_w_attr['sent'] is not None:\n # convert sentence indices to sentence start indicators\n sent_start_indices = [0] + (np.flatnonzero(np.diff(tokens_w_attr['sent'])) + 1).tolist()\n sent_start = np.repeat(False, len(tokens_w_attr['token']))\n sent_start[sent_start_indices] = True\n elif sentences:\n # get sentence borders\n sent_borders = np.cumsum(list(map(len, tokens_w_attr['token'])))\n if len(sent_borders) > 0 and sent_borders[-1] > 0: # non-empty doc.\n # create array filled with 0, where start of sentence is indicated by 1\n sent_start = np.repeat(0, sent_borders[-1])\n sent_start[0] = 1\n sent_start[sent_borders[:-1]] = 1\n sent_start = sent_start.astype(dtype='uint64')\n else: # empty document\n sent_start = np.array([], dtype='uint64')\n\n # define \"base attributes\"\n if sent_start is None:\n base_attrs = ('whitespace', 'token')\n else:\n base_attrs = ('whitespace', 'token', 'sent_start')\n\n # collect data for \"base attributes\" in token matrix\n tokenmat_arrays = []\n tokenmat_attrs = []\n for attr in base_attrs:\n if attr in {'sent_start', 'sent'}:\n val = sent_start\n else:\n try:\n val = tokens_w_attr[attr]\n except KeyError:\n raise ValueError(f'at least the following base token attributes must be given: {base_attrs}')\n\n val = flatten_if_sents(val)\n\n tokenmat_arrays.append(values_as_uint64arr(attr, val))\n tokenmat_attrs.append(attr)\n\n # collect data for other token matrix attributes and for custom token attributes and document attributes\n custom_token_attrs = {}\n doc_attrs = {}\n for attr, val in tokens_w_attr.items():\n if attr in base_attrs or attr == 'sent': # already collected\n continue\n\n val = flatten_if_sents(val)\n\n if attr in TOKENMAT_ATTRS: # a token matrix attribute\n tokenmat_arrays.append(values_as_uint64arr(attr, val))\n tokenmat_attrs.append(attr)\n else:\n if (token_attr_names is not None and attr in token_attr_names) or \\\n (token_attr_names is None and isinstance(val, (list, np.ndarray))):\n custom_token_attrs[attr] = val # a custom token attribute\n elif (doc_attr_names is not None and attr in doc_attr_names) or \\\n (doc_attr_names is None and not isinstance(val, (list, np.ndarray))):\n doc_attrs[attr] = val # a document attribute\n else:\n raise ValueError(f\"don't know how to handle attribute \\\"{attr}\\\"\")\n\n # create Document instance\n return Document(bimaps, label=label, has_sents=sent_start is not None,\n tokenmat=np.vstack(tokenmat_arrays).T, tokenmat_attrs=tokenmat_attrs,\n custom_token_attrs=custom_token_attrs,\n doc_attrs=doc_attrs)\n\n\n#%% internal helper functions\n\ndef _chop_along_sentences(tok: Union[list, np.ndarray],\n sent_start: np.ndarray,\n as_array: bool,\n as_hashes: bool,\n skip: int = 0) \\\n -> Union[List[StrOrInt], List[List[StrOrInt]], np.ndarray, List[np.ndarray]]:\n # generate sentence borders: each item represents the index of the last token in the respective sentence;\n # only the last token index is always missing\n sent_borders = np.nonzero(sent_start == 1)[0][1:]\n\n sent = []\n prev_idx = 0\n for idx in sent_borders:\n if prev_idx < idx+skip: # make sure to skip \"empty\" sentences\n sent.append(tok[prev_idx:idx+skip])\n prev_idx = idx\n\n sent.append(tok[prev_idx:len(tok)]) # last token index is always missing\n\n if sent:\n return sent\n else:\n if as_array:\n if as_hashes:\n return [np.array([], dtype='uint64')]\n else:\n return [empty_chararray()]\n else:\n return [[]]\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/corpus/_nltk_extras.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nInternal module with some additional functions that are only available when the `NLTK `_ package\nis installed.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\nfrom typing import Optional\n\nfrom ._corpus import Corpus\nfrom ._common import LANGUAGE_LABELS\nfrom ._corpusfuncs import transform_tokens\n\n\ndef stem(docs: Corpus, /, language: Optional[str] = None,\n stemmer_instance: Optional[object] = None, inplace=True):\n \"\"\"\n Apply stemming to all tokens in `docs` using a stemmer `stemmer_instance`.\n\n .. note: This requires that the `NLTK `_ package is installed.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param language: language in which `docs` is given; if None, will be detected from the ``language`` property of\n `docs`; note that this is not an ISO language code but a language\n label like \"english\" or \"german\" that NLTK accepts\n :param stemmer_instance: a stemmer instance; it must implement a method `stem` that accepts a single string;\n default is :class:`nltk.stem.SnowballStemmer`\n :param inplace: if True, modify Corpus object in place, otherwise return a modified copy\n :return: either original Corpus object `docs` or a modified copy of it\n \"\"\"\n\n from nltk.stem import SnowballStemmer\n\n if stemmer_instance is None:\n if language is None:\n language = LANGUAGE_LABELS[docs.language]\n stemmer_instance = SnowballStemmer(language)\n\n return transform_tokens(docs, stemmer_instance.stem, inplace=inplace)\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/corpus/visualize.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nFunctions to visualize corpus summary statistics.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nimport logging\nimport re\nfrom typing import Optional, Union, Collection, Tuple, Dict, Any\n\nimport matplotlib.pyplot as plt\nimport numpy as np\n\nfrom ._corpus import Corpus\nfrom ._corpusfuncs import doc_lengths, vocabulary_counts, doc_frequencies, doc_num_sents, doc_sent_lengths, \\\n doc_token_lengths\nfrom ..types import Proportion\nfrom ..utils import flatten_list\n\nlogger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n\nPTTRN_NUMPY_UFUNC = re.compile(r\"^$\")\n\n\n#%%\n\ndef plot_doc_lengths_hist(fig: plt.Figure, ax: plt.Axes, docs: Corpus,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n y_log: bool = True,\n title: Optional[str] = 'Histogram of document lengths',\n xaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'document lengths',\n yaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'count',\n **kwargs) -> Tuple[plt.Figure, plt.Axes]:\n \"\"\"\n Plot histogram of document lengths for corpus `docs`.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param y_log: if True, scale y-axis via log10 transformation\n :param title: plot title\n :param xaxislabel: x-axis label\n :param yaxislabel: y-axis label\n :param kwargs: additional keyword arguments passed on to matplotlib histogram plotting function ``ax.hist``\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n\n # get document lengths\n logger.info('processing document lengths')\n dlengths = doc_lengths(docs, select=select)\n\n if not dlengths:\n raise ValueError('cannot produce histogram for empty corpus or empty corpus selection')\n\n x = np.fromiter(dlengths.values(), dtype='uint32', count=len(dlengths))\n\n # generate plot\n logger.info('producing plot')\n\n return _plot_hist(fig, ax, x, y_log=y_log,\n title=title, xaxislabel=xaxislabel, yaxislabel=yaxislabel,\n **kwargs)\n\n\ndef plot_vocab_counts_hist(fig: plt.Figure, ax: plt.Axes, docs: Corpus,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n y_log: bool = True,\n title: Optional[str] = 'Histogram for number of occurrences per token type',\n xaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'number of occurrences per token type',\n yaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'count',\n **kwargs) -> Tuple[plt.Figure, plt.Axes]:\n \"\"\"\n Plot histogram of vocabulary counts (i.e. number of occurrences per token type) for corpus `docs`.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param y_log: if True, scale y-axis via log10 transformation\n :param title: plot title\n :param xaxislabel: x-axis label\n :param yaxislabel: y-axis label\n :param kwargs: additional keyword arguments passed on to matplotlib histogram plotting function ``ax.hist``\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n\n # get document lengths\n logger.info('processing vocabulary counts')\n vocabcounts = vocabulary_counts(docs, select=select, tokens_as_hashes=not docs.uses_unigrams,\n convert_uint64hashes=False)\n\n if not vocabcounts:\n raise ValueError('cannot produce histogram for empty corpus or empty corpus selection')\n\n x = np.fromiter(vocabcounts.values(), dtype='uint32', count=len(vocabcounts))\n\n # generate plot\n logger.info('producing plot')\n\n return _plot_hist(fig, ax, x, y_log=y_log,\n title=title, xaxislabel=xaxislabel, yaxislabel=yaxislabel,\n **kwargs)\n\n\ndef plot_doc_frequencies_hist(fig: plt.Figure, ax: plt.Axes, docs: Corpus,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n proportions: Proportion = Proportion.NO,\n y_log: bool = True,\n title: Optional[str] = 'Histogram of document frequencies',\n xaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'document frequency',\n yaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'count',\n **kwargs) -> Tuple[plt.Figure, plt.Axes]:\n \"\"\"\n Plot histogram of document frequencies for corpus `docs`.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param proportions: one of :attr:`~tmtoolkit.types.Proportion`: ``NO (0)`` – return counts; ``YES (1)`` – return\n proportions; ``LOG (2)`` – return log10 of proportions\n :param y_log: if True, scale y-axis via log10 transformation\n :param title: plot title\n :param xaxislabel: x-axis label\n :param yaxislabel: y-axis label\n :param kwargs: additional keyword arguments passed on to matplotlib histogram plotting function ``ax.hist``\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n\n # get document lengths\n logger.info('processing document frequencies')\n dfreqs = doc_frequencies(docs, select=select, proportions=proportions)\n\n if not dfreqs:\n raise ValueError('cannot produce histogram for empty corpus or empty corpus selection')\n\n x = np.fromiter(dfreqs.values(), dtype='uint32' if proportions == Proportion.NO else 'float64',\n count=len(dfreqs))\n\n # generate plot\n logger.info('producing plot')\n\n if proportions == Proportion.LOG:\n xaxislabel += ' (log scale)'\n\n return _plot_hist(fig, ax, x, y_log=y_log, title=title, xaxislabel=xaxislabel, yaxislabel=yaxislabel,\n **kwargs)\n\n\ndef plot_num_sents_hist(fig: plt.Figure, ax: plt.Axes, docs: Corpus,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n y_log: bool = True,\n title: Optional[str] = 'Histogram of number of sentences per document',\n xaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'number of sentences',\n yaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'count',\n **kwargs) -> Tuple[plt.Figure, plt.Axes]:\n \"\"\"\n Plot histogram of number of sentences per document of corpus `docs`.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param y_log: if True, scale y-axis via log10 transformation\n :param title: plot title\n :param xaxislabel: x-axis label\n :param yaxislabel: y-axis label\n :param kwargs: additional keyword arguments passed on to matplotlib histogram plotting function ``ax.hist``\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n\n # get document lengths\n logger.info('processing number of sentences')\n dfreqs = doc_num_sents(docs, select=select)\n\n if not dfreqs:\n raise ValueError('cannot produce histogram for empty corpus or empty corpus selection')\n\n x = np.fromiter(dfreqs.values(), dtype='uint32', count=len(dfreqs))\n\n # generate plot\n logger.info('producing plot')\n\n return _plot_hist(fig, ax, x, y_log=y_log, title=title, xaxislabel=xaxislabel, yaxislabel=yaxislabel,\n **kwargs)\n\n\ndef plot_sent_lengths_hist(fig: plt.Figure, ax: plt.Axes, docs: Corpus,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n y_log: bool = True,\n title: Optional[str] = 'Histogram of sentence lengths',\n xaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'sentence length',\n yaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'count',\n **kwargs) -> Tuple[plt.Figure, plt.Axes]:\n \"\"\"\n Plot histogram of sentence lengths in corpus `docs`.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param y_log: if True, scale y-axis via log10 transformation\n :param title: plot title\n :param xaxislabel: x-axis label\n :param yaxislabel: y-axis label\n :param kwargs: additional keyword arguments passed on to matplotlib histogram plotting function ``ax.hist``\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n\n # get document lengths\n logger.info('processing sentence lengths')\n sentlengths = doc_sent_lengths(docs, select=select)\n\n if not sentlengths:\n raise ValueError('cannot produce histogram for empty corpus or empty corpus selection')\n\n x = np.array(flatten_list(sentlengths.values()), dtype='uint32')\n\n # generate plot\n logger.info('producing plot')\n\n return _plot_hist(fig, ax, x, y_log=y_log, title=title, xaxislabel=xaxislabel, yaxislabel=yaxislabel,\n **kwargs)\n\n\ndef plot_token_lengths_hist(fig: plt.Figure, ax: plt.Axes, docs: Corpus,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n y_log: bool = True,\n title: Optional[str] = 'Histogram of token lengths',\n xaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'token length',\n yaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'count',\n **kwargs) -> Tuple[plt.Figure, plt.Axes]:\n \"\"\"\n Plot histogram of sentence lengths in corpus `docs`.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param y_log: if True, scale y-axis via log10 transformation\n :param title: plot title\n :param xaxislabel: x-axis label\n :param yaxislabel: y-axis label\n :param kwargs: additional keyword arguments passed on to matplotlib histogram plotting function ``ax.hist``\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n\n # get document lengths\n logger.info('processing token lengths')\n toklengths = doc_token_lengths(docs, select=select)\n\n if not toklengths:\n raise ValueError('cannot produce histogram for empty corpus or empty corpus selection')\n\n x = np.array(flatten_list(toklengths.values()), dtype='uint32')\n\n # generate plot\n logger.info('producing plot')\n\n return _plot_hist(fig, ax, x, y_log=y_log, title=title, xaxislabel=xaxislabel, yaxislabel=yaxislabel,\n **kwargs)\n\n\ndef plot_num_sents_vs_sent_length(fig: plt.Figure, ax: plt.Axes, docs: Corpus,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n min_n_sents: int = 0,\n x_log: bool = False,\n y_log: bool = False,\n title: Optional[str] = 'Number of sentences vs. mean sentence length',\n xaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'number of documents',\n yaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'sentence length',\n **kwargs) -> Tuple[plt.Figure, plt.Axes]:\n \"\"\"\n Make scatter plot of number of sentences vs. mean sentence length in corpus `docs`.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param min_n_sents: plot only mean sentence lengths for documents with at least `min_n_sents` sentences\n :param x_log: if True, scale x-axis via log10 transformation\n :param y_log: if True, scale y-axis via log10 transformation\n :param title: plot title\n :param xaxislabel: x-axis label\n :param yaxislabel: y-axis label\n :param kwargs: additional keyword arguments passed on to matplotlib histogram plotting function ``ax.hist``\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n\n # get document lengths\n logger.info('processing sentence lengths')\n sentlengths = doc_sent_lengths(docs, select=select)\n\n if not sentlengths:\n raise ValueError('cannot produce histogram for empty corpus or empty corpus selection')\n\n x = []\n y = []\n for sents in sentlengths.values():\n n_sents = len(sents)\n if n_sents > min_n_sents:\n x.append(n_sents)\n y.append(np.mean(sents))\n\n if x_log:\n x = np.log10(x)\n else:\n x = np.array(x, dtype='uint32')\n\n if y_log:\n y = np.log10(y)\n else:\n y = np.array(y, dtype='float64')\n\n # generate plot\n logger.info('producing plot')\n\n # set title\n if title:\n ax.set_title(title)\n\n # plot as scatter plot\n _plot_opts = {'alpha': 0.3, 'edgecolors': 'white'}\n if kwargs:\n _plot_opts.update(kwargs)\n ax.scatter(x, y, **_plot_opts)\n\n # customize axes\n if xaxislabel:\n ax.set_xlabel(_add_axis_scale_info(xaxislabel, x_log))\n\n if yaxislabel:\n ax.set_ylabel(_add_axis_scale_info(yaxislabel, y_log))\n\n return fig, ax\n\n\ndef plot_ranked_vocab_counts(fig: plt.Figure, ax: plt.Axes, docs: Corpus,\n select: Optional[Union[str, Collection[str]]] = None,\n x_log: bool = True,\n y_log: bool = True,\n zipf: bool = False,\n title: Optional[str] = 'Scatter plot for vocabulary term count vs. rank',\n xaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'rank',\n yaxislabel: Optional[str] = 'count',\n hist_opts: Optional[Dict[str, Any]] = None,\n plot_opts: Optional[Dict[str, Any]] = None) -> Tuple[plt.Figure, plt.Axes]:\n \"\"\"\n Make scatter plot for vocabulary term count vs. rank and optionally overlay with theoretical distribution from\n Zipf's law via `zipf=True`.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param select: if not None, this can be a single string or a sequence of strings specifying a subset of `docs`\n :param x_log: if True, scale x-axis via log10 transformation\n :param y_log: if True, scale y-axis via log10 transformation\n :param zipf: if True, add red dashed line indicating theoretical frequencies according to Zipf's law\n :param title: plot title\n :param xaxislabel: x-axis label\n :param yaxislabel: y-axis label\n :param hist_opts: additional keyword arguments passed on to histogram binning function ``np.histogram``\n :param plot_opts: additional keyword arguments passed on to respective matplotlib plotting function\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n\n _plot_opts = {'alpha': 0.3, 'edgecolors': 'white'}\n if plot_opts:\n _plot_opts.update(plot_opts)\n\n _hist_opts = {'bins': 'auto'}\n if hist_opts:\n _hist_opts.update(hist_opts)\n\n del plot_opts, hist_opts\n\n # get document lengths\n logger.info('processing vocabulary counts')\n vocabcounts = vocabulary_counts(docs, select=select, tokens_as_hashes=not docs.uses_unigrams,\n convert_uint64hashes=False)\n\n if not vocabcounts:\n raise ValueError('cannot produce histogram for empty corpus or empty corpus selection')\n\n y = np.fromiter(vocabcounts.values(), dtype='uint32', count=len(vocabcounts))\n y = -np.sort(-y) # sort in descending order\n\n x = np.arange(1, len(y)+1) # rank\n\n if x_log:\n x = np.log10(x)\n\n if y_log:\n y = np.log10(y)\n\n # generate plot\n logger.info('producing plot')\n\n # set title\n if title:\n ax.set_title(title)\n\n # plot as scatter plot\n ax.scatter(x, y, **_plot_opts)\n\n if zipf:\n # Zipf's law scaled to natural frequencies with `N_max` being the maximum count and rank `k`:\n # y = N_max/k <=> log y = log N_max - log k\n\n if x_log and not y_log: # sequence in log space (otherwise to few points on lower end of x-axis)\n zipf_x = np.logspace(0, np.log10(len(y)), num=1000)\n else:\n zipf_x = np.linspace(1, len(y)+1, num=1000)\n\n if x_log and y_log:\n zipf_x = np.log10(zipf_x)\n\n if y_log:\n zipf_y = np.max(y) - (zipf_x if x_log and y_log else np.log10(zipf_x))\n else:\n zipf_y = np.max(y) / zipf_x\n\n if x_log and not y_log:\n zipf_x = np.log10(zipf_x)\n\n # plot as line\n ax.plot(zipf_x, zipf_y, c='red', linestyle='dashed')\n\n # customize axes\n if xaxislabel:\n ax.set_xlabel(_add_axis_scale_info(xaxislabel, x_log))\n\n if yaxislabel:\n ax.set_ylabel(_add_axis_scale_info(yaxislabel, y_log))\n\n return fig, ax\n\n\n#%% helper functions\n\n\ndef _add_axis_scale_info(axislbl: str, log: bool):\n if log:\n return axislbl + ' (log10 scale)'\n\n return axislbl\n\n\ndef _plot_hist(fig: plt.Figure, ax: plt.Axes, x: np.ndarray,\n y_log: bool = False,\n title: Optional[str] = None,\n xaxislabel: Optional[str] = None,\n yaxislabel: Optional[str] = None,\n **kwargs) -> Tuple[plt.Figure, plt.Axes]:\n \"\"\"\n Helper function for producting a histogram.\n \"\"\"\n\n kwargs = kwargs or {}\n kwargs.update({'log': y_log})\n\n # set title\n if title:\n ax.set_title(title)\n\n ax.hist(x, **kwargs)\n\n # customize axes\n if xaxislabel:\n ax.set_xlabel(xaxislabel)\n\n if yaxislabel:\n ax.set_ylabel(_add_axis_scale_info(yaxislabel, y_log))\n\n return fig, ax\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/tokenseq.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nModule for functions that work with text represented as *token sequences*, e.g. ``[\"A\", \"test\", \"document\", \".\"]``\nand single tokens (i.e. strings).\n\nTokens don't have to be represented as strings -- for many functions, they may also be token hashes (as integers).\nMost functions also accept NumPy arrays instead of lists / tuples.\n\n.. [RoleNadif2011] Role, François & Nadif, Mohamed. (2011). Handling the Impact of Low Frequency Events on\n Co-occurrence based Measures of Word Similarity - A Case Study of Pointwise Mutual Information.\n.. [Bouma2009] Bouma, G. (2009). Normalized (pointwise) mutual information in collocation extraction. Proceedings\n of GSCL, 30, 31-40.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nimport itertools\nimport math\nimport re\nimport unicodedata\nfrom collections import Counter\nfrom collections.abc import Mapping\nfrom functools import partial\nfrom html.parser import HTMLParser\nfrom typing import Union, List, Any, Optional, Callable, Iterable, Dict, Sequence, Set\n\nimport globre\nimport numpy as np\n\nfrom .types import StrOrInt\nfrom .utils import flatten_list\n\n\n#%% functions that operate on single string tokens or texts\n\ndef numbertoken_to_magnitude(numbertoken: str, char: str = '0', firstchar: str = '1', below_one: str = '0',\n zero: str = '0', decimal_sep: str = '.', thousands_sep: str = ',',\n drop_sign: bool = False, value_on_conversion_error: Optional[str] = '') -> str:\n \"\"\"\n Convert a string token `numbertoken` that represents a number (e.g. \"13\", \"1.3\" or \"-1313\") to a string token that\n represents the magnitude of that number by repeating `char` (\"10\", \"1\", \"-1000\" for the mentioned examples). A\n different first character can be set via `firstchar`. The sign can be dropped via `drop_sign`.\n\n If `numbertoken` cannot be converted to a float, either the value `value_on_conversion_error` is returned or\n `numbertoken` is returned unchanged if `value_on_conversion_error` is None.\n\n :param numbertoken: token that represents a number\n :param char: character string used to represent single orders of magnitude\n :param firstchar: special character used for first character in the output\n :param below_one: special character used for numbers with absolute value below 1 (would otherwise return `''`)\n :param zero: if `numbertoken` evaluates to zero, return this string\n :param decimal_sep: decimal separator used in `numbertoken`; this is language-specific\n :param thousands_sep: thousands separator used in `numbertoken`; this is language-specific\n :param drop_sign: if True, drop the sign in number `numbertoken`, i.e. use absolute value\n :param value_on_conversion_error: determines return value when `numbertoken` cannot be converted to a number;\n if None, return input `numbertoken` unchanged, otherwise return\n `value_on_conversion_error`\n :return: string that represents the magnitude of the input or an empty string\n \"\"\"\n if decimal_sep != '.':\n numbertoken = numbertoken.replace(decimal_sep, '.')\n\n if thousands_sep:\n numbertoken = numbertoken.replace(thousands_sep, '')\n\n try:\n number = float(numbertoken)\n except ValueError: # catches float conversion error\n if value_on_conversion_error is None:\n return numbertoken\n else:\n return value_on_conversion_error\n\n prefix = '-' if not drop_sign and number < 0 else ''\n abs_number = abs(number)\n\n if abs_number < 1:\n return prefix + below_one\n\n try:\n magn = math.floor(math.log10(abs_number)) + 1 # absolute magnitude, sign is discarded here\n except ValueError: # catches domain error when taking log10(0)\n return zero\n\n if firstchar != char:\n return prefix + firstchar + char * (magn-1)\n else:\n return prefix + char * magn\n\n\ndef simplify_unicode_chars(token: str, method: str = 'icu', ascii_encoding_errors: str = 'ignore') -> str:\n \"\"\"\n *Simplify* unicode characters in string `token`, i.e. remove diacritics, underlines and\n other marks. Requires `PyICU `_ to be installed when using\n ``method=\"icu\"``.\n\n :param docs: a Corpus object\n :param token: string to simplify\n :param method: either ``\"icu\"`` which uses `PyICU `_ for \"proper\"\n simplification or ``\"ascii\"`` which tries to encode the characters as ASCII; the latter\n is not recommended and will simply dismiss any characters that cannot be converted\n to ASCII after decomposition\n :param ascii_encoding_errors: only used if `method` is ``\"ascii\"``; what to do when a character cannot be\n encoded as ASCII character; can be either ``\"ignore\"`` (default – replace by empty\n character), ``\"replace\"`` (replace by ``\"???\"``) or ``\"strict\"`` (raise a\n ``UnicodeEncodeError``)\n :return: simplified string\n \"\"\"\n\n method = method.lower()\n if method == 'icu':\n try:\n from icu import UnicodeString, Transliterator, UTransDirection\n except ImportError:\n raise RuntimeError('package PyICU (https://pypi.org/project/PyICU/) must be installed to use this method')\n\n u = UnicodeString(token)\n trans = Transliterator.createInstance(\"NFD; [:M:] Remove; NFC\", UTransDirection.FORWARD)\n trans.transliterate(u)\n return str(u)\n elif method == 'ascii':\n return unicodedata.normalize('NFKD', token).encode('ASCII', errors=ascii_encoding_errors).decode('utf-8')\n else:\n raise ValueError('`method` must be either \"icu\" or \"ascii\"')\n\n\ndef strip_tags(value: str) -> str:\n \"\"\"\n Return the given HTML with all tags stripped and HTML entities and character references converted to Unicode\n characters.\n\n Code taken and adapted from https://github.com/django/django/blob/main/django/utils/html.py.\n\n :param value: input string\n :return: string without HTML tags\n \"\"\"\n # Note: in typical case this loop executes _strip_once once. Loop condition\n # is redundant, but helps to reduce number of executions of _strip_once.\n value = str(value)\n while '<' in value and '>' in value:\n new_value = _strip_once(value)\n if value.count('<') == new_value.count('<'):\n # _strip_once wasn't able to detect more tags.\n break\n value = new_value\n return value\n\n\n#%% functions that operate on token sequences\n\n\ndef unique_chars(tokens: Iterable[str]) -> Set[str]:\n \"\"\"\n Return a set of all characters used in `tokens`.\n\n :param tokens: iterable of string tokens\n :return: set of all characters used in `tokens`\n \"\"\"\n chars = set()\n for t in tokens:\n chars.update(set(t))\n return chars\n\n\ndef token_lengths(tokens: Union[Iterable[str], np.ndarray]) -> List[int]:\n \"\"\"\n Token lengths (number of characters of each token) in `tokens`.\n\n :param tokens: list or NumPy array of string tokens\n :return: list of token lengths\n \"\"\"\n return list(map(len, tokens))\n\n\ndef collapse_tokens(tokens: Union[Iterable[str], np.ndarray], collapse: Union[str, Iterable[str], np.ndarray] = ' ') \\\n -> str:\n if isinstance(collapse, str):\n return collapse.join(tokens)\n else:\n if len(tokens) != len(collapse):\n raise ValueError('if `collapse` is given as sequence, it must have the same length as `tokens`')\n\n interleaved = itertools.chain(*zip(tokens, collapse))\n return ''.join(interleaved)\n\n\ndef pmi(x: np.ndarray, y: np.ndarray, xy: np.ndarray, n_total: Optional[int] = None, logfn: Callable = np.log,\n k: int = 1, normalize: bool = False) -> np.ndarray:\n \"\"\"\n Calculate pointwise mutual information measure (PMI) either from probabilities p(x), p(y), p(x, y) given as `x`,\n `y`, `xy`, or from total counts `x`, `y`, `xy` and additionally `n_total`. Setting `k` > 1 gives PMI^k variants.\n Setting `normalized` to True gives normalized PMI (NPMI) as in [Bouma2009]_. See [RoleNadif2011]_ for a comparison\n of PMI variants.\n\n Probabilities should be such that ``p(x, y) <= min(p(x), p(y))``.\n\n :param x: probabilities p(x) or count of occurrence of x (interpreted as count if `n_total` is given)\n :param y: probabilities p(y) or count of occurrence of y (interpreted as count if `n_total` is given)\n :param xy: probabilities p(x, y) or count of occurrence of x *and* y (interpreted as count if `n_total` is given)\n :param n_total: if given, `x`, `y` and `xy` are interpreted as counts with `n_total` as size of the sample space\n :param logfn: logarithm function to use (default: ``np.log`` – natural logarithm)\n :param k: if `k` > 1, calculate PMI^k variant\n :param normalize: if True, normalize to range [-1, 1]; gives NPMI measure\n :return: array with same length as inputs containing (N)PMI measures for each input probability\n \"\"\"\n if not isinstance(k, int) or k < 1:\n raise ValueError('`k` must be a strictly positive integer')\n\n if k > 1 and normalize:\n raise ValueError('normalization is only implemented for standard PMI with `k=1`')\n\n if n_total is not None:\n if n_total < 1:\n raise ValueError('`n_total` must be strictly positive')\n x = x/n_total\n y = y/n_total\n xy = xy/n_total\n\n pmi_val = logfn(xy) - logfn(x * y)\n\n if k > 1:\n return pmi_val - (1-k) * logfn(xy)\n else:\n if normalize:\n return pmi_val / -logfn(xy)\n else:\n return pmi_val\n\n\nnpmi = partial(pmi, k=1, normalize=True)\npmi2 = partial(pmi, k=2, normalize=False)\npmi3 = partial(pmi, k=3, normalize=False)\n\n\ndef simple_collocation_counts(x: Optional[np.ndarray], y: Optional[np.ndarray], xy: np.ndarray, n_total: Optional[int]):\n \"\"\"\n \"Statistic\" function that can be used in :func:`~token_collocations` and will simply return the number of\n collocations between tokens *x* and *y* passed as `xy`. Mainly useful for debugging purposes.\n\n :param x: unused\n :param y: unused\n :param xy: counts for collocations of *x* and *y*\n :param n_total: total number of tokens (strictly positive)\n :return: simply returns `xy`\n \"\"\"\n return xy.astype(float)\n\n\ndef token_collocations(sentences: List[List[StrOrInt]], threshold: Optional[float] = None,\n min_count: int = 1, embed_tokens: Optional[Iterable] = None,\n statistic: Callable = npmi, vocab_counts: Optional[Mapping] = None,\n glue: Optional[str] = None, return_statistic: bool = True, rank: Optional[str] = 'desc',\n tokens_as_hashes: bool = False, hashes2tokens: Optional[Union[Dict[int, str], dict]] = None,\n **statistic_kwargs) \\\n -> List[Union[tuple, str]]:\n \"\"\"\n Identify token collocations (frequently co-occurring token series) in a list of sentences of tokens given by\n `sentences`. Currently only supports bigram collocations.\n\n :param sentences: list of sentences containing lists of tokens; tokens can be items of any type if `glue` is None\n :param threshold: minimum statistic value for a collocation to enter the results; if None, results are not filtered\n :param min_count: ignore collocations with number of occurrences below this threshold\n :param embed_tokens: tokens that, if occurring inside an n-gram, are not counted; see :func:`token_ngrams`\n :param statistic: function to calculate the statistic measure from the token counts; use one of the\n ``[n]pmi`` functions provided in this module or provide your own function which\n must accept parameters ``x, y, xy, n_total``; see :func:`~pmi` for more information\n :param vocab_counts: pass already computed token type counts to prevent computing these again in this function\n :param glue: if not None, provide a string that is used to join the collocation tokens\n :param return_statistic: also return computed statistic\n :param rank: if not None, rank the results according to the computed statistic in ascending (``rank='asc'``) or\n descending (``rank='desc'``) order\n :param tokens_as_hashes: if True, return token type hashes (integers) instead of textual representations (strings)\n :param hashes2tokens: if tokens are given as integer hashes, this table is used to generate textual representations\n for the results\n :param statistic_kwargs: additional arguments passed to `statistic` function\n :return: list of tuples ``(collocation tokens, score)`` if `return_statistic` is True, otherwise only a list of\n collocations; collocations are either a string (if `glue` is given) or a tuple of strings\n \"\"\"\n\n # TODO: extend this to accept parameter n for arbitrary n-gram collocations, not only bigrams;\n # requires implementing multivariate mutual information https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interaction_information\n # or other measures\n # TODO: add more measures, esp. t-test\n # (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collocation#Statistically_significant_collocation);\n # this requires an additional threshold comparison relation argument\n\n if min_count < 0:\n raise ValueError('`min_count` must be non-negative')\n\n n_tok = sum(len(sent) for sent in sentences)\n\n if n_tok < 2: # can't possibly have any collocations with fewer than 2 tokens\n return []\n\n if vocab_counts is None:\n vocab_counts = Counter(flatten_list(sentences))\n\n ngramsize = 2\n bigrams = []\n for sent_tokens in sentences:\n if len(sent_tokens) >= ngramsize:\n bigrams.extend(token_ngrams(sent_tokens, n=ngramsize, join=False, embed_tokens=embed_tokens,\n keep_embed_tokens=False))\n\n if tokens_as_hashes:\n bigrams = np.array(bigrams, dtype='uint64')\n else:\n bigrams = np.array(bigrams, dtype='str')\n\n bigrams, n_bigrams = np.unique(bigrams, return_counts=True, axis=0)\n\n if min_count > 1: # filter bigrams\n mask = n_bigrams >= min_count\n bigrams = bigrams[mask]\n n_bigrams = n_bigrams[mask]\n\n if len(n_bigrams) == 0: # can't possibly have any collocations with no bigrams after filtering\n return []\n\n # first and last token of bigrams\n bg_first = bigrams[:, 0]\n bg_last = bigrams[:, 1]\n\n # num. of occurrences for first and last token of bigrams\n n_first = np.array([vocab_counts[t] for t in bg_first], dtype=n_bigrams.dtype)\n n_last = np.array([vocab_counts[t] for t in bg_last], dtype=n_bigrams.dtype)\n\n # apply scoring function\n scores = statistic(x=n_first, y=n_last, xy=n_bigrams, n_total=n_tok, **statistic_kwargs)\n assert len(scores) == len(bigrams), 'length of scores array must match number of unique bigrams'\n\n # build result\n res = []\n for bg, s in zip(bigrams, scores):\n if hashes2tokens is None:\n bg = tuple(bg)\n else:\n bg = tuple(hashes2tokens[h] for h in bg)\n\n if glue is not None:\n bg = glue.join(bg)\n\n if threshold is None or s >= threshold:\n res.append((bg, s))\n\n if rank in {'asc', 'desc'}:\n res = sorted(res, key=lambda x: x[1], reverse=rank == 'desc')\n\n if not return_statistic:\n if res:\n res = list(list(zip(*res))[0])\n else:\n return []\n\n return res\n\n\ndef token_match(pattern: Any, tokens: Union[List[str], np.ndarray],\n match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case: bool = False, glob_method: str = 'match',\n inverse: bool = False) -> np.ndarray:\n \"\"\"\n Return a boolean NumPy array signaling matches between `pattern` and `tokens`. `pattern` will be\n compared with each element in sequence `tokens` either as exact equality (`match_type` is ``'exact'``) or\n regular expression (`match_type` is ``'regex'``) or glob pattern (`match_type` is ``'glob'``). For the last two\n options, `pattern` must be a string or compiled RE pattern, otherwise it can be of any type that allows equality\n checking.\n\n See :func:`token_match_multi_pattern` for a version of this function that accepts multiple search patterns.\n\n :param pattern: string or compiled RE pattern used for matching against `tokens`; when `match_type` is ``'exact'``,\n `pattern` may be of any type that allows equality checking\n :param tokens: list or NumPy array of string tokens\n :param match_type: one of: 'exact', 'regex', 'glob'; if 'regex', `search_token` must be RE pattern; if `glob`,\n `search_token` must be a \"glob\" pattern like \"hello w*\"\n (see https://github.com/metagriffin/globre)\n :param ignore_case: if True, ignore case for matching\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is 'glob', use this glob method. Must be 'match' or 'search' (similar\n behavior as Python's `re.match` or `re.search`)\n :param inverse: invert the matching results\n :return: 1D boolean NumPy array of length ``len(tokens)`` where elements signal matches between `pattern` and the\n respective token from `tokens`\n \"\"\"\n if match_type not in {'exact', 'regex', 'glob'}:\n raise ValueError(\"`match_type` must be one of `'exact', 'regex', 'glob'`\")\n\n if len(tokens) == 0:\n return np.array([], dtype=bool)\n\n if not isinstance(tokens, np.ndarray):\n tokens = np.array(tokens)\n\n ignore_case_flag = re.IGNORECASE if ignore_case else 0\n\n if match_type == 'exact':\n return np.char.lower(tokens) == pattern.lower() if ignore_case else tokens == pattern\n elif match_type == 'regex':\n if isinstance(pattern, str):\n pattern = re.compile(pattern, flags=ignore_case_flag)\n vecmatch = np.vectorize(lambda x: bool(pattern.search(x)))\n return vecmatch(tokens)\n else:\n if glob_method not in {'search', 'match'}:\n raise ValueError(\"`glob_method` must be one of `'search', 'match'`\")\n\n if isinstance(pattern, str):\n # using separator \" \" instead of default seperator \"/\" since this cannot occur in a token;\n # also adding \"EXACT\" flag so that the pattern must match the whole token\n pattern = globre.compile(pattern, sep=' ', flags=ignore_case_flag|globre.EXACT)\n\n if glob_method == 'search':\n vecmatch = np.vectorize(lambda x: bool(pattern.search(x)))\n else:\n vecmatch = np.vectorize(lambda x: bool(pattern.match(x)))\n\n res = vecmatch(tokens) if len(tokens) > 0 else np.array([], dtype=bool)\n\n if inverse:\n return ~res\n else:\n return res\n\n\ndef token_match_multi_pattern(search_tokens: Any, tokens: Union[List[str], np.ndarray],\n match_type: str = 'exact', ignore_case: bool = False, glob_method: str = 'match') \\\n -> np.ndarray:\n \"\"\"\n Return a boolean NumPy array signaling matches between any pattern in `search_tokens` and `tokens`. Works the\n same as :func:`token_match`, but accepts multiple patterns as `search_tokens` argument.\n\n :param search_tokens: single string or list of strings that specify the search pattern(s); when `match_type` is\n ``'exact'``, `pattern` may be of any type that allows equality checking\n :param tokens: list or NumPy array of string tokens\n :param match_type: one of: 'exact', 'regex', 'glob'; if 'regex', `search_token` must be RE pattern; if `glob`,\n `search_token` must be a \"glob\" pattern like \"hello w*\"\n (see https://github.com/metagriffin/globre)\n :param ignore_case: if True, ignore case for matching\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is 'glob', use this glob method. Must be 'match' or 'search' (similar\n behavior as Python's `re.match` or `re.search`)\n :return: 1D boolean NumPy array of length ``len(tokens)`` where elements signal matches\n \"\"\"\n if not isinstance(search_tokens, (list, tuple, set)):\n search_tokens = [search_tokens]\n elif isinstance(search_tokens, (list, tuple, set)) and not search_tokens:\n raise ValueError('`search_tokens` must not be empty')\n\n matches = np.repeat(False, repeats=len(tokens))\n for pat in search_tokens:\n matches |= token_match(pat, tokens, match_type=match_type, ignore_case=ignore_case, glob_method=glob_method)\n\n return matches\n\n\ndef token_match_subsequent(patterns: Sequence, tokens: Union[list, np.ndarray], **match_opts) \\\n -> List[np.ndarray]:\n \"\"\"\n Using N patterns in `patterns`, return each tuple of N matching subsequent tokens from `tokens`. Excepts the same\n token matching options via `match_opts` as :func:`token_match`. The results are returned as list\n of NumPy arrays with indices into `tokens`.\n\n Example::\n\n # indices: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6\n tokens = ['hello', 'world', 'means', 'saying', 'hello', 'world', '.']\n\n token_match_subsequent(['hello', 'world'], tokens)\n # [array([0, 1]), array([4, 5])]\n\n token_match_subsequent(['world', 'hello'], tokens)\n # []\n\n token_match_subsequent(['world', '*'], tokens, match_type='glob')\n # [array([1, 2]), array([5, 6])]\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`token_match`\n\n :param patterns: a sequence of search patterns as excepted by :func:`token_match`\n :param tokens: a sequence of string tokens to be used for matching\n :param match_opts: token matching options as passed to :func:`token_match`\n :return: list of NumPy arrays with subsequent indices into `tokens`\n \"\"\"\n if not isinstance(patterns, Sequence) or isinstance(patterns, str):\n raise ValueError('`patterns` must be a sequence but not a string')\n\n n_pat = len(patterns)\n\n if n_pat < 2:\n raise ValueError('`patterns` must contain at least two strings')\n\n n_tok = len(tokens)\n\n if n_tok == 0:\n return []\n\n if not isinstance(tokens, np.ndarray): # required since we need multiple item indexing\n tokens = np.array(tokens)\n\n # iterate through the patterns\n for i_pat, pat in enumerate(patterns):\n if i_pat == 0: # initial matching on full token array\n next_indices = np.arange(n_tok)\n else: # subsequent matching uses previous match indices + 1 to match on tokens right after the previous matches\n next_indices = match_indices + 1\n next_indices = next_indices[next_indices < n_tok] # restrict maximum index\n\n # do the matching with the current subset of \"tokens\"\n pat_match = token_match(pat, tokens[next_indices], **match_opts)\n\n # pat_match is boolean array. use it to select the token indices where we had a match\n # this is used in the next iteration again to select the tokens right after these matches\n match_indices = next_indices[pat_match]\n\n if len(match_indices) == 0: # anytime when no successful match appeared, we can return the empty result\n return [] # because *all* subsequent patterns must match corresponding subsequent tokens\n\n # at this point, match_indices contains indices i that point to the *last* matched token of the `n_pat` subsequently\n # matched tokens\n\n assert np.min(match_indices) - n_pat + 1 >= 0\n assert np.max(match_indices) < n_tok\n\n # so we can use this to reconstruct the whole \"trace\" subsequently matched indices as final result\n return list(map(lambda i: np.arange(i - n_pat + 1, i + 1), match_indices))\n\n\ndef token_join_subsequent(tokens: Union[List[str], np.ndarray], matches: List[np.ndarray], glue: Optional[str] = '_',\n tokens_dtype: Optional[Union[str, np.dtype]] = None, return_glued: bool = False,\n return_mask: bool = False) -> Union[list, tuple]:\n \"\"\"\n Select subsequent tokens as defined by list of indices `matches` (e.g. output of\n :func:`token_match_subsequent`) and join those by string `glue`. Return a list of tokens\n where the subsequent matches are replaced by the joint tokens.\n\n .. warning:: Only works correctly when `matches` contains indices of *subsequent* tokens.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`token_match_subsequent`\n\n Example::\n\n token_glue_subsequent(['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'd', 'a', 'b', 'c'],\n [np.array([1, 2]), np.array([6, 7])])\n # ['a', 'b_c', 'd', 'd', 'a', 'b_c']\n\n\n :param tokens: a sequence of tokens\n :param matches: list of NumPy arrays with *subsequent* indices into `tokens` (e.g. output of\n :func:`token_match_subsequent`)\n :param glue: string for joining the subsequent matches or None to keep them as separate items in a list\n :param tokens_dtype: if tokens is not a NumPy array, it will be converted as such; use this dtype for the array\n :param return_glued: if True, return also a list of joint tokens\n :param return_mask: if True, return also a NumPy integer array with the length of the input `tokens` list that marks\n the original input `tokens` in three ways: 0 means mask that original token, 1 means retain\n that original token, 2 means replace original token by newly generated joint token;\n if True, also only return newly generated joint subsequent tokens and *not* also the original\n tokens\n :return: either two-tuple, three-tuple or list depending on `return_glued` and `return_mask`\n \"\"\"\n if return_glued and glue is None:\n raise ValueError('if `glue` is None, `return_glued` must be False')\n\n if not isinstance(matches, list):\n raise ValueError('`matches` must be a list')\n\n n_tok = len(tokens)\n\n # handle empty token list or no matches\n if n_tok == 0 or (not matches and return_mask):\n if return_glued:\n if return_mask:\n return [], [], np.repeat(1, n_tok).astype('uint8')\n return [], []\n else:\n if return_mask:\n return [], np.repeat(1, n_tok).astype('uint8')\n return []\n\n if not isinstance(tokens, np.ndarray): # we require an array for multi-indexing\n tokens = np.array(tokens, dtype=tokens_dtype)\n\n # map match subsequence start index to all indices of that subsequence\n start_ind = dict(zip(map(lambda x: x[0], matches), matches))\n res = []\n glued = []\n\n i_t = 0 # current token index\n subseq_until = 0 # token match subsequence until this index\n while i_t < n_tok:\n if i_t in start_ind: # a token match subsequence starts\n seq = tokens[start_ind[i_t]] # get the full subsequence\n t = seq.tolist() if glue is None else glue.join(seq) # join using `glue` or keep separated (but as list)\n if return_glued:\n glued.append(t)\n res.append(t)\n subseq_until = i_t + len(seq) # mark the end of the subsequence\n else: # not a subsequence *start*\n # if we don't return the mask and we're not inside a subsequence, add this original token to the result list\n if not return_mask and i_t >= subseq_until:\n res.append(tokens[i_t])\n i_t += 1\n\n if return_mask:\n # generate a mask\n mask = np.repeat(1, n_tok).astype('uint8') # 1 means use original token\n try:\n set_zero_ind = np.unique(np.concatenate([m[1:] for m in matches]))\n mask[set_zero_ind] = 0 # 0 means mask original token\n except ValueError:\n pass # ignore \"zero-dimensional arrays cannot be concatenated\"\n\n mask[np.array(list(start_ind.keys()))] = 2 # 2 means use newly generated joint token\n assert len(res) == np.sum(mask == 2)\n\n if return_glued:\n return res, glued, mask\n else:\n return res, mask\n\n if return_glued:\n return res, glued\n else:\n return res\n\n\ndef token_ngrams(tokens: Sequence, n: int, join: bool = True, join_str: str = ' ',\n ngram_container: Callable = list, embed_tokens: Optional[Iterable] = None,\n keep_embed_tokens: bool = True) -> list:\n \"\"\"\n Generate n-grams of length `n` from list of tokens `tokens`. Either join the n-grams when `join` is True\n using `join_str` so that a list of joined n-gram strings is returned or, if `join` is False, return a list\n of n-gram lists (or other sequences depending on `ngram_container`).\n For the latter option, the tokens in `tokens` don't have to be strings but can by of any type.\n\n Optionally pass a set/list/tuple `embed_tokens` which contains tokens that, if occurring inside an n-gram, are\n not counted. See for example how a trigram ``'bank of america'`` is generated when the token ``'of'``\n is set as `embed_tokens`, although we ask to generate bigrams:\n\n .. code-block:: text\n\n > token_ngrams(\"I visited the bank of america\".split(), n=2)\n ['I visited', 'visited the', 'the bank', 'bank of', 'of america']\n > token_ngrams(\"I visited the bank of america\".split(), n=2, embed_tokens={'of'})\n ['I visited', 'visited the', 'the bank', 'bank of america', 'of america']\n\n :param tokens: sequence of tokens; if `join` is True, this must be a list of strings\n :param n: size of the n-grams to generate\n :param join: if True, join n-grams by `join_str`\n :param join_str: string to join n-grams if `join` is True\n :param ngram_container: if `join` is False, use this function to create the n-gram sequences\n :param embed_tokens: tokens that, if occurring inside an n-gram, are not counted\n :param keep_embed_tokens: if True, keep embedded tokens in the result\n :return: list of joined n-gram strings or list of n-grams that are n-sized sequences\n \"\"\"\n if n < 2:\n raise ValueError('`n` must be at least 2')\n\n if len(tokens) == 0:\n ng = []\n else:\n if len(tokens) < n:\n ng = [ngram_container(tokens)]\n else:\n if embed_tokens:\n ng = []\n i = 0\n while i < len(tokens) - n + 1:\n stop = n # original stop mark\n g = []\n j = 0\n\n while j < stop and (len(g) < n or keep_embed_tokens):\n t = tokens[i + j]\n is_embed = t in embed_tokens\n if not is_embed or keep_embed_tokens:\n g.append(t)\n if is_embed and i + stop < len(tokens):\n stop += 1 # increase stop mark when the current token is an \"embedded token\"\n j += 1\n\n if len(g) == n or (keep_embed_tokens and len(g) >= n):\n ng.append(ngram_container(g))\n\n i += 1\n if not keep_embed_tokens:\n i += (stop - n) # 1 plus number of skipped tokens\n else: # faster approach when not using `embed_tokens`\n ng = [ngram_container(tokens[i + j] for j in range(n))\n for i in range(len(tokens) - n + 1)]\n\n if join:\n return list(map(lambda x: join_str.join(x), ng))\n else:\n return ng\n\n\ndef index_windows_around_matches(matches: np.ndarray, left: int, right: int,\n flatten: bool = False, remove_overlaps: bool = True) \\\n -> Union[List[List[int]], np.ndarray]:\n \"\"\"\n Take a boolean 1D array `matches` of length N and generate an array of indices, where each occurrence of a True\n value in the boolean vector at index i generates a sequence of the form:\n\n .. code-block:: text\n\n [i-left, i-left+1, ..., i, ..., i+right-1, i+right, i+right+1]\n\n If `flatten` is True, then a flattened NumPy 1D array is returned. Otherwise, a list of NumPy arrays is returned,\n where each array contains the window indices.\n\n `remove_overlaps` is only applied when `flatten` is True.\n\n Example with ``left=1 and right=1, flatten=False``:\n\n .. code-block:: text\n\n input:\n # 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8\n [True, True, False, False, True, False, False, False, True]\n output (matches *highlighted*):\n [[0, *1*], [0, *1*, 2], [3, *4*, 5], [7, *8*]]\n\n Example with ``left=1 and right=1, flatten=True, remove_overlaps=True``:\n\n .. code-block:: text\n\n input:\n # 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8\n [True, True, False, False, True, False, False, False, True]\n output (matches *highlighted*, other values belong to the respective \"windows\"):\n [*0*, *1*, 2, 3, *4*, 5, 7, *8*]\n \"\"\"\n if not isinstance(matches, np.ndarray) or matches.dtype != bool:\n raise ValueError('`matches` must be a boolean NumPy array')\n if not isinstance(left, int) or left < 0:\n raise ValueError('`left` must be an integer >= 0')\n if not isinstance(right, int) or right < 0:\n raise ValueError('`right` must be an integer >= 0')\n\n ind = np.where(matches)[0]\n nested_ind = list(map(lambda x: np.arange(x - left, x + right + 1), ind))\n\n if flatten:\n if not nested_ind:\n return np.array([], dtype=int)\n\n window_ind = np.concatenate(nested_ind)\n window_ind = window_ind[(window_ind >= 0) & (window_ind < len(matches))]\n\n if remove_overlaps:\n return np.sort(np.unique(window_ind))\n else:\n return window_ind\n else:\n return [w[(w >= 0) & (w < len(matches))] for w in nested_ind]\n\n\n#%% helper functions and classes\n\n\nclass _MLStripper(HTMLParser):\n \"\"\"\n Code taken and adapted from https://github.com/django/django/blob/main/django/utils/html.py.\n \"\"\"\n def __init__(self):\n super().__init__(convert_charrefs=True)\n self.reset()\n self.fed = []\n\n def handle_data(self, d):\n self.fed.append(d)\n\n def get_data(self):\n return ''.join(self.fed)\n\n\ndef _strip_once(value):\n \"\"\"\n Internal tag stripping utility used by strip_tags.\n\n Code taken and adapted from https://github.com/django/django/blob/main/django/utils/html.py.\n \"\"\"\n s = _MLStripper()\n s.feed(value)\n s.close()\n return s.get_data()\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/topicmod/__init__.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nTopic modeling sub-package with modules for model evaluation, model I/O, model statistics, parallel computation and\nvisualization.\n\nFunctions and classes in :mod:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_gensim`, :mod:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda` and\n:mod:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_sklearn` implement parallel model computation and evaluation using popular topic modeling\npackages. You need to install the respective packages (*lda*, *scikit-learn* or *gensim*) in order to use them.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\n\nimport importlib.util\n\nfrom . import evaluate, model_io, model_stats, parallel, visualize\n\n# conditional imports\n\n# lda package\nif importlib.util.find_spec('lda'):\n from . import tm_lda\n\n# sklearn package\nif importlib.util.find_spec('sklearn'):\n from . import tm_sklearn\n\n# gensim package\nif importlib.util.find_spec('gensim'):\n from . import tm_gensim\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/topicmod/_common.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nCommon constants and functions for topic modeling sub-package.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\n\nDEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT = 'topic_{i1}'\nDEFAULT_RANK_NAME_FMT = 'rank_{i1}'\nDEFAULT_VALUE_FORMAT = '{lbl} ({val:.4})'\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/topicmod/_eval_tools.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nCommon utility functions for LDA model evaluation.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nimport numpy as np\nfrom scipy.sparse import issparse\n\n\ndef split_dtm_for_cross_validation(dtm, n_folds, shuffle_docs=True):\n \"\"\"\n Split a (sparse) document-term matrix `dtm` for n-fold cross validation with `n_folds` folds.\n\n :param dtm: (sparse) document-term matrix\n :param n_folds: number of folds during cross validation\n :param shuffle_docs: shuffle documents (matrix rows) before splitting\n :return: a generator for `n_folds` folds, each yielding a 3-tuple with (fold index starting at zero, training DTM,\n test DTM)\n \"\"\"\n if issparse(dtm) and dtm.format != 'csr':\n dtm = dtm.tocsr()\n\n n_docs = dtm.shape[0]\n\n if n_folds < 2:\n raise ValueError('`n_folds` must be at least 2')\n\n if n_docs < n_folds:\n raise ValueError('not enough documents in `dtm` (must be >= `n_folds`)')\n\n rand_doc_ind = np.arange(n_docs)\n\n if shuffle_docs:\n np.random.shuffle(rand_doc_ind)\n\n n_per_fold = n_docs // n_folds\n assert n_per_fold > 0\n start_idx = 0\n for fold in range(n_folds):\n end_idx = start_idx + n_per_fold\n fold_doc_ind = rand_doc_ind[slice(start_idx, end_idx)]\n test_dtm = dtm[fold_doc_ind, :]\n\n if issparse(dtm):\n inv_fold_doc_ind = np.ones(n_docs, bool)\n inv_fold_doc_ind[fold_doc_ind] = 0\n train_dtm = dtm[inv_fold_doc_ind, :]\n else:\n train_dtm = np.delete(dtm, fold_doc_ind, axis=0) # can't be used with sparse matrices\n\n assert test_dtm.shape[0] + train_dtm.shape[0] == dtm.shape[0]\n\n yield fold, train_dtm, test_dtm\n\n start_idx = end_idx\n\n\nclass FakedGensimDict:\n \"\"\"\n A class that resembles a Gensim :class:`~gensim.corpora.dictionary.Dictionary`.\n \"\"\"\n def __init__(self, data):\n if not isinstance(data, dict):\n raise ValueError('`data` must be an instance of `dict`')\n\n self.id2token = data\n self.token2id = {v: k for k, v in data.items()}\n\n @staticmethod\n def from_vocab(vocab):\n return FakedGensimDict(dict(zip(range(len(vocab)), vocab)))\n\n def __iter__(self):\n \"\"\"Iterate over all ids.\"\"\"\n return iter(self.keys())\n\n def keys(self):\n \"\"\"Get all stored ids.\"\"\"\n return self.id2token.keys()\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/topicmod/evaluate.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nMetrics for topic model evaluation.\n\nIn order to run model evaluations in parallel use one of the modules :mod:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_gensim`,\n:mod:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda` or :mod:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_sklearn`.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nimport numpy as np\nfrom scipy.spatial.distance import pdist\nfrom scipy.sparse import issparse\nfrom scipy.special import gammaln\n\nfrom ._eval_tools import FakedGensimDict\nfrom tmtoolkit.bow.dtm import dtm_and_vocab_to_gensim_corpus_and_dict\nfrom .model_stats import top_words_for_topics, marginal_topic_distrib\nfrom tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats import doc_frequencies, codoc_frequencies\nfrom ..utils import argsort\n\n\n#%% Evaluation metrics\n\n\ndef metric_held_out_documents_wallach09(dtm_test, theta_test, phi_train, alpha, n_samples=10000):\n \"\"\"\n Estimation of the probability of held-out documents according to [Wallach2009]_ using a\n document-topic estimation `theta_test` that was estimated via held-out documents `dtm_test` on a trained model with\n a topic-word distribution `phi_train` and a document-topic prior `alpha`. Draw `n_samples` according to `theta_test`\n for each document in `dtm_test` (memory consumption and run time can be very high for larger `n_samples` and\n a large amount of big documents in `dtm_test`).\n\n A document-topic estimation `theta_test` can be obtained from a trained model from the \"lda\" package or scikit-learn\n package with the `transform()` method.\n\n Adopted MATLAB code `originally from Ian Murray, 2009 `_ and\n downloaded from `umass.edu `_.\n\n .. note:: Requires `gmpy2 `_ package for multiple-precision arithmetic to avoid\n numerical underflow.\n\n .. [Wallach2009] Wallach, H.M., Murray, I., Salakhutdinov, R. and Mimno, D., 2009. Evaluation methods for\n topic models.\n\n :param dtm_test: held-out documents of shape NxM with N documents and vocabulary size M\n :param theta_test: document-topic estimation of `dtm_test`; shape NxK with K topics\n :param phi_train: topic-word distribution of a trained topic model that should be evaluated; shape KxM\n :param alpha: document-topic prior of the trained topic model that should be evaluated; either a scalar or an array\n of length K\n :return: estimated probability of held-out documents\n \"\"\"\n import gmpy2\n\n n_test_docs, n_vocab = dtm_test.shape\n\n if n_test_docs != theta_test.shape[0]:\n raise ValueError('shapes of `dtm_test` and `theta_test` do not match (unequal number of documents)')\n\n _, n_topics = theta_test.shape\n\n if n_topics != phi_train.shape[0]:\n raise ValueError('shapes of `theta_test` and `phi_train` do not match (unequal number of topics)')\n\n if n_vocab != phi_train.shape[1]:\n raise ValueError('shapes of `dtm_test` and `phi_train` do not match (unequal size of vocabulary)')\n\n if isinstance(alpha, np.ndarray):\n alpha_sum = np.sum(alpha)\n else:\n alpha_sum = alpha * n_topics\n alpha = np.repeat(alpha, n_topics)\n\n if alpha.shape != (n_topics, ):\n raise ValueError('`alpha` has invalid shape (should be vector of length n_topics)')\n\n # samples: random topic assignments for each document\n # shape: n_test_docs x n_samples\n # values in [0, n_topics) ~ theta_test\n samples = np.array([np.random.choice(n_topics, n_samples, p=theta_test[d, :])\n for d in range(n_test_docs)])\n assert samples.shape == (n_test_docs, n_samples)\n assert 0 <= samples.min() < n_topics\n assert 0 <= samples.max() < n_topics\n\n # n_k: number of documents per topic and sample\n # shape: n_topics x n_samples\n # values in [0, n_test_docs]\n n_k = np.array([np.sum(samples == t, axis=0) for t in range(n_topics)])\n assert n_k.shape == (n_topics, n_samples)\n assert 0 <= n_k.min() <= n_test_docs\n assert 0 <= n_k.max() <= n_test_docs\n\n # calculate log p(z) for each sample\n # shape: 1 x n_samples\n log_p_z = np.sum(gammaln(n_k + alpha[:, np.newaxis]), axis=0) + gammaln(alpha_sum) \\\n - np.sum(gammaln(alpha)) - gammaln(n_test_docs + alpha_sum)\n\n assert log_p_z.shape == (n_samples,)\n\n # calculate log p(w|z) for each sample\n # shape: 1 x n_samples\n\n log_p_w_given_z = np.zeros(n_samples)\n\n dtm_is_sparse = issparse(dtm_test)\n for d in range(n_test_docs):\n if dtm_is_sparse:\n word_counts_d = dtm_test[d].toarray().flatten()\n else:\n word_counts_d = dtm_test[d]\n words = np.repeat(np.arange(n_vocab), word_counts_d)\n assert words.shape == (word_counts_d.sum(),)\n\n phi_topics_d = phi_train[samples[d]] # phi for topics in samples for document d\n log_p_w_given_z += np.sum(np.log(phi_topics_d[:, words]), axis=1)\n\n log_joint = log_p_z + log_p_w_given_z\n\n # calculate log theta_test\n # shape: 1 x n_samples\n\n log_theta_test = np.zeros(n_samples)\n\n for d in range(n_test_docs):\n log_theta_test += np.log(theta_test[d, samples[d]])\n\n # compare\n log_weights = log_joint - log_theta_test\n\n # calculate final log evidence\n # requires using gmpy2 to avoid numerical underflow\n exp_sum = gmpy2.mpfr(0)\n for exp in (gmpy2.exp(x) for x in log_weights):\n exp_sum += exp\n\n return float(gmpy2.log(exp_sum)) - np.log(n_samples)\nmetric_held_out_documents_wallach09.direction = 'maximize'\n\n\ndef metric_cao_juan_2009(topic_word_distrib):\n \"\"\"\n Calculate metric as in [Cao2009]_ using topic-word distribution `topic_word_distrib`.\n\n .. [Cao2009] Cao Juan, Xia Tian, Li Jintao, Zhang Yongdong, and Tang Sheng. 2009. A density-based method for\n adaptive LDA model selection. Neurocomputing — 16th European Symposium on Artificial Neural Networks\n 2008 72, 7–9: 1775–1781. .\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :return: calculated metric\n \"\"\"\n # pdist will calculate the pair-wise cosine distance between all topics in the topic-word distribution\n # then calculate the mean of cosine similarity (1 - cosine_distance)\n cos_sim = 1 - pdist(topic_word_distrib, metric='cosine')\n return np.mean(cos_sim)\nmetric_cao_juan_2009.direction = 'minimize'\n\n\ndef metric_arun_2010(topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths):\n \"\"\"\n Calculate metric as in [Arun2010]_ using topic-word distribution `topic_word_distrib`, document-topic\n distribution `doc_topic_distrib` and document lengths `doc_lengths`.\n\n .. note:: It will fail when num. of words in the vocabulary is less then the num. of topics (which is very unusual).\n\n .. warning:: There's no code available for the [Arun2010]_ paper. The code follows the procedures outlined in the\n paper so that its results could be reproduced for the NIPS dataset. See the discussion at\n https://github.com/nikita-moor/ldatuning/issues/7.\n\n .. [Arun2010] Rajkumar Arun, V. Suresh, C. E. Veni Madhavan, and M. N. Narasimha Murthy. 2010. On finding the\n natural number of topics with latent dirichlet allocation: Some observations. In Advances in knowledge\n discovery and data mining, Mohammed J. Zaki, Jeffrey Xu Yu, Balaraman Ravindran and Vikram Pudi\n (eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 391–402. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13657-3_43.\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents\n :param doc_lengths: array of length `N` with number of tokens per document\n :return: calculated metric\n \"\"\"\n\n # CM1 – sing. value decomp. of topic-word distrib.\n cm1 = np.linalg.svd(topic_word_distrib, compute_uv=False)\n cm1 /= np.sum(cm1) # normalize\n\n # CM2 – topics scaled by document lengths\n doc_lengths = np.asarray(doc_lengths).flatten()\n cm2 = doc_lengths @ doc_topic_distrib\n cm2 = -np.sort(-cm2) # sort in desc. order (just like cm1 is already sorted in desc. order)\n cm2 /= np.sum(cm2) # normalize\n\n # symmetric Kullback-Leibler divergence KL(cm1||cm2) + KL(cm2||cm1)\n # note: using log(x/y) instead of log(x) - log(y) here because values in cm vectors are not small\n return np.sum(cm1 * (np.log(cm1 / cm2))) + np.sum(cm2 * (np.log(cm2 / cm1)))\nmetric_arun_2010.direction = 'minimize'\n\n\ndef metric_griffiths_2004(logliks):\n \"\"\"\n Calculate metric as in [GriffithsSteyvers2004]_.\n\n Calculates the harmonic mean of the log-likelihood values `logliks`. Burn-in values\n should already be removed from `logliks`.\n\n .. [GriffithsSteyvers2004] Thomas L. Griffiths and Mark Steyvers. 2004. Finding scientific topics. Proceedings of\n the National Academy of Sciences 101, suppl 1: 5228–5235.\n http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307752101\n\n .. note:: Requires `gmpy2 `_ package for multiple-precision arithmetic to avoid\n numerical underflow.\n\n :param logliks: array with log-likelihood values\n :return: calculated metric\n \"\"\"\n\n import gmpy2\n\n # using median trick as in Martin Ponweiser's Diploma Thesis 2012, p.36\n ll_med = np.median(logliks)\n ps = [gmpy2.exp(ll_med - x) for x in logliks]\n ps_mean = gmpy2.mpfr(0)\n for p in ps:\n ps_mean += p / len(ps)\n return float(ll_med - gmpy2.log(ps_mean)) # after taking the log() we can use a Python float() again\nmetric_griffiths_2004.direction = 'maximize'\n\n\ndef metric_coherence_mimno_2011(topic_word_distrib, dtm, top_n=20, eps=1, include_prob=False, normalize=False,\n return_mean=False):\n \"\"\"\n Calculate coherence metric according to [Mimno2011]_. You need to provide a topic word distribution as\n `topic_word_distrib` and a document-term-matrix `dtm` (can be sparse). `top_n` controls how many most probable\n words per topic are selected.\n\n If you set ``eps=1e-12`` and ``normalize=True``, this is equivalent to the \"U_Mass\" coherence metric as provided\n in the Gensim package and as wrapper function in :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate.metric_coherence_gensim` with\n ``measure='u_mass'``.\n\n By default, it will return a NumPy array of coherence values per topic (same ordering as in `topic_word_distrib`).\n Set `return_mean` to True to return the mean of all topics instead.\n\n .. [Mimno2011] D. Mimno, H. Wallach, E. Talley, M. Leenders, A. McCullum 2011: Optimizing semantic coherence in\n topic models\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param dtm: document-term matrix of shape NxM with N documents and vocabulary size M\n :param top_n: number of most probable words selected per topic\n :param eps: smoothing constant epsilon\n :param include_prob: if True, include probabilities of top words per topic in the calculations\n :param normalize: if True, normalize coherence values\n :param return_mean: if True, return mean of all coherence values, otherwise array of coherence per topic\n :return: if `return_mean` is True, mean of all coherence values, otherwise array of length K with coherence per\n topic\n \"\"\"\n n_topics, n_vocab = topic_word_distrib.shape\n\n if n_vocab != dtm.shape[1]:\n raise ValueError('shapes of provided `topic_word_distrib` and `dtm` do not match (vocab sizes differ)')\n\n if top_n > n_vocab:\n raise ValueError('`top_n=%d` is larger than the vocabulary size of %d words'\n % (top_n, topic_word_distrib.shape[1]))\n\n if include_prob:\n top_words, top_prob = top_words_for_topics(topic_word_distrib, top_n, return_prob=True) # V\n else:\n top_words = top_words_for_topics(topic_word_distrib, top_n, return_prob=False) # V\n top_prob = None\n\n if issparse(dtm) and dtm.format != 'csc':\n dtm = dtm.tocsc()\n\n coh = []\n for t in range(n_topics):\n # calc. coherence for topic t\n v = top_words[t] # V_t\n p = None if top_prob is None else top_prob[t] # prob. of words in V_t\n top_dtm = dtm[:, v] # occurrences for top words V_t; shape (n_docs, top_n)\n df = doc_frequencies(top_dtm) # for D(v)\n codf = codoc_frequencies(top_dtm) # for D(v, v')\n\n c_t = 0\n for m in range(1, top_n):\n for l in range(m):\n if p is None: # include_prob is False: sum(log((D(v_m, v_l) + eps) / D(v_l)))\n c_t += np.log((codf[m, l] + eps) / df[l])\n else: # include_prob is True: sum(log(p_m * p_l * (D(v_m, v_l) + eps) / D(v_l)))\n c_t += np.log(p[m] * p[l] * (codf[m, l] + eps) / df[l])\n\n coh.append(c_t)\n\n coh = np.array(coh)\n\n if normalize:\n coh *= 2 / (top_n * (top_n-1))\n\n if return_mean:\n return coh.mean()\n else:\n return coh\nmetric_coherence_mimno_2011.direction = 'maximize'\n\n\ndef metric_coherence_gensim(measure, topic_word_distrib=None, gensim_model=None, vocab=None, dtm=None,\n gensim_corpus=None, texts=None, top_n=20,\n return_coh_model=False, return_mean=False, **kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Calculate model coherence using Gensim's\n `CoherenceModel `_. See also this `tutorial\n `_.\n\n Define which measure to use with parameter `measure`:\n\n - ``'u_mass'``\n - ``'c_v'``\n - ``'c_uci'``\n - ``'c_npmi'``\n\n Provide a topic word distribution `topic_word_distrib` OR a Gensim model `gensim_model`\n and the corpus' vocabulary as `vocab` OR pass a gensim corpus as `gensim_corpus`. `top_n` controls how many most\n probable words per topic are selected.\n\n If measure is ``'u_mass'``, a document-term-matrix `dtm` or `gensim_corpus` must be provided and `texts` can be\n None. If any other measure than ``'u_mass'`` is used, tokenized input as `texts` must be provided as 2D list::\n\n [['some', 'text', ...], # doc. 1\n ['some', 'more', ...], # doc. 2\n ['another', 'document', ...]] # doc. 3\n\n If `return_coh_model` is True, the whole :class:`gensim.models.CoherenceModel` instance will be returned, otherwise:\n\n - if `return_mean` is True, the mean coherence value will be returned\n - if `return_mean` is False, a list of coherence values (for each topic) will be returned\n\n Provided `kwargs` will be passed to :class:`gensim.models.CoherenceModel` or\n :meth:`gensim.models.CoherenceModel.get_coherence_per_topic`.\n\n .. note:: This function also supports models from `lda` and `sklearn` (by passing `topic_word_distrib`, `dtm` and\n `vocab`)!\n\n :param measure: the coherence calculation type; one of the values listed above\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size if\n `gensim_model` is not given\n :param gensim_model: a topic model from Gensim if `topic_word_distrib` is not given\n :param vocab: vocabulary list/array if `gensim_corpus` is not given\n :param dtm: document-term matrix of shape NxM with N documents and vocabulary size M if `gensim_corpus` is not\n given\n :param gensim_corpus: a Gensim corpus if `vocab` is not given\n :param texts: list of tokenized documents; necessary if using a `measure` other than ``'u_mass'``\n :param top_n: number of most probable words selected per topic\n :param return_coh_model: if True, return :class:`gensim.models.CoherenceModel` as result\n :param return_mean: if `return_coh_model` is False and `return_mean` is True, return mean coherence\n :param kwargs: parameters passed to :class:`gensim.models.CoherenceModel` or\n :meth:`gensim.models.CoherenceModel.get_coherence_per_topic`\n :return: if `return_coh_model` is True, return :class:`gensim.models.CoherenceModel` as result; otherwise if\n `return_mean` is True, mean of all coherence values, otherwise array of length K with coherence per\n topic\n \"\"\"\n try:\n import gensim\n except ImportError:\n raise ValueError('package `gensim` must be installed for `coherence_gensim` metric')\n\n if measure == 'u_mass' and dtm is None and gensim_corpus is None:\n raise ValueError('document-term-matrix `dtm` or Gensim corpus `gensim_corpus` must be provided for measure '\n '`u_mass`')\n elif measure != 'u_mass' and texts is None:\n raise ValueError('`texts` must be provided for any other measure than `u_mass`')\n\n if gensim_model is None:\n if topic_word_distrib is None:\n raise ValueError('`topic_word_distrib` must be given if `gensim_model` was not passed')\n n_topics, n_vocab = topic_word_distrib.shape\n else:\n n_topics, n_vocab = None, None\n\n if vocab is not None:\n if len(vocab) != n_vocab:\n raise ValueError('shape of provided `topic_word_distrib` and length of `vocab` do not match '\n '(vocab sizes differ)')\n if top_n > n_vocab:\n raise ValueError('`top_n=%d` is larger than the vocabulary size of %d words'\n % (top_n, topic_word_distrib.shape[1]))\n elif gensim_corpus is None:\n raise ValueError('a gensim corpus `gensim_corpus` must be passed if no `vocab` is given')\n\n if measure == 'u_mass' and gensim_corpus is None and n_vocab != dtm.shape[1]:\n raise ValueError('shapes of provided `topic_word_distrib` and `dtm` do not match (vocab sizes differ)')\n\n if vocab is not None:\n top_words = top_words_for_topics(topic_word_distrib, top_n, vocab=vocab) # V\n else:\n top_words = None\n\n coh_model_kwargs = {'coherence': measure}\n if measure == 'u_mass':\n if gensim_corpus is None:\n gensim_corpus, gensim_dict = dtm_and_vocab_to_gensim_corpus_and_dict(dtm, vocab)\n coh_model_kwargs.update(dict(corpus=gensim_corpus, dictionary=gensim_dict, topics=top_words))\n else:\n coh_model_kwargs.update(dict(model=gensim_model, corpus=gensim_corpus, topn=top_n))\n else:\n if gensim_corpus is None:\n coh_model_kwargs.update(dict(texts=texts, topics=top_words, dictionary=FakedGensimDict.from_vocab(vocab)))\n else:\n coh_model_kwargs.update(dict(texts=texts, model=gensim_model, corpus=gensim_corpus, topn=top_n))\n\n get_coh_kwargs = {}\n for opt in ('segmented_topics', 'with_std', 'with_support'):\n if opt in kwargs:\n get_coh_kwargs[opt] = kwargs.pop(opt)\n\n coh_model_kwargs.update(kwargs)\n\n coh_model = gensim.models.CoherenceModel(**coh_model_kwargs)\n\n if return_coh_model:\n return coh_model\n else:\n if return_mean:\n return coh_model.get_coherence()\n else:\n return coh_model.get_coherence_per_topic(**get_coh_kwargs)\nmetric_coherence_gensim.direction = 'maximize'\n\n\n#%% Helper functions for topic model evaluation\n\ndef results_by_parameter(res, param, sort_by=None, sort_desc=False):\n \"\"\"\n Takes a list of evaluation results `res` returned by a topic model evaluation function – a list in the form:\n\n .. code-block:: text\n\n [(parameter_set_1, {'': result_1, ...}),\n ...,\n (parameter_set_n, {'': result_n, ...})])\n\n Then returns a list with tuple pairs using only the *m* parameter(s) listed in `param` from the parameter sets in\n the evaluation results such that the returned list is:\n\n .. code-block:: text\n\n [(param_1_0, ..., param_1_m, {'': result_1, ...}),\n ...,\n (param_n_0, ..., param_n_m, {'': result_n, ...})]\n\n Optionally order either by parameter value (`sort_by` is None - the default) or by result metric\n (``sort_by=''``).\n\n :param res: list of evaluation results\n :param param: string of parameter name\n :param sort_by: order by parameter value if this is None, or by a certain result metric given as string\n :param sort_desc: sort in descending order\n :return: list with tuple pairs using only the parameter `param` from the parameter sets\n \"\"\"\n if len(res) == 0:\n return []\n\n if isinstance(param, str):\n param = [param]\n\n tuples = []\n for res_params, res_vals in res:\n row = tuple(res_params[p] for p in param) + (res_vals,)\n tuples.append(row)\n\n metric_results = list(zip(*tuples))[-1]\n\n if sort_by is None:\n sort_by = param[0]\n\n if sort_by in param:\n s = param.index(sort_by)\n sorted_ind = argsort([r[s] for r in tuples])\n else:\n sorted_ind = argsort([r[sort_by] for r in metric_results])\n\n if sort_desc:\n sorted_ind = reversed(sorted_ind)\n\n return [tuples[i] for i in sorted_ind]\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/topicmod/model_io.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nFunctions for printing/exporting topic model results.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\nimport logging\nfrom collections import OrderedDict\n\nimport numpy as np\nimport pandas as pd\n\nfrom ._common import DEFAULT_RANK_NAME_FMT, DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT\nfrom .model_stats import marginal_topic_distrib, top_n_from_distribution, _join_value_and_label_dfs\nfrom ..bow.bow_stats import doc_lengths\nfrom ..utils import pickle_data, unpickle_file\n\nlogger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n\n\ndef ldamodel_top_topic_words(topic_word_distrib, vocab, top_n=10, val_fmt=None, row_labels=DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT,\n col_labels=None, index_name='topic'):\n \"\"\"\n Retrieve the top (i.e. most probable) `top_n` words for each topic in the topic-word distribution\n `topic_word_distrib` as pandas DataFrame.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_full_topic_words` to retrieve the full distribution as\n formatted pandas DataFrame;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_word_topics` to retrieve the top topics per word from\n a topic-word distribution;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_doc_topics` to retrieve\n the top topics per document from a document-topic distribution;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_topic_docs` to retrieve\n the top documents per topic;\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param vocab: vocabulary list/array of length K\n :param top_n: number of most probable words per topic to select\n :param val_fmt: format string for table cells where ``{lbl}`` is replaced by the respective word from `vocab` and\n ``{val}`` is replaced by the word's probability given the topic\n :param row_labels: format string for each row index where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective\n zero- or one-indexed topic numbers or an array with individual row labels\n :param col_labels: format string for the columns where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective zero-\n or one-indexed rank\n :param index_name: name of the table index\n :return: pandas DataFrame\n \"\"\"\n df_values = top_n_from_distribution(topic_word_distrib, top_n=top_n,\n row_labels=row_labels, val_labels=None)\n df_labels = top_n_from_distribution(topic_word_distrib, top_n=top_n,\n row_labels=row_labels, val_labels=vocab)\n return _join_value_and_label_dfs(df_values, df_labels, top_n, row_labels=row_labels,\n val_fmt=val_fmt, col_labels=col_labels, index_name=index_name)\n\n\ndef ldamodel_top_word_topics(topic_word_distrib, vocab, top_n=10, val_fmt=None, topic_labels=DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT,\n col_labels=None, index_name='token'):\n \"\"\"\n Retrieve the top (i.e. most probable) `top_n` topics for each word in the topic-word distribution\n `topic_word_distrib` as pandas DataFrame.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_full_topic_words` to retrieve the full distribution as\n formatted pandas DataFrame;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_topic_words` to retrieve the top words per topic from\n a topic-word distribution;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_doc_topics` to retrieve\n the top topics per document from a document-topic distribution;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_topic_docs` to retrieve\n the top documents per topic;\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param vocab: vocabulary list/array of length K\n :param top_n: number of most probable words per topic to select\n :param val_fmt: format string for table cells where ``{lbl}`` is replaced by the respective topic label from\n `topic_labels` and ``{val}`` is replaced by the word's probability given the topic\n :param topic_labels: format string for each row index where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective\n zero- or one-indexed topic numbers or an array with individual topic labels\n :param col_labels: format string for the columns where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective zero-\n or one-indexed rank\n :param index_name: name of the table index\n :return: pandas DataFrame\n \"\"\"\n word_topic_distrib = topic_word_distrib.T\n df_values = top_n_from_distribution(word_topic_distrib, top_n=top_n,\n row_labels=vocab, val_labels=None)\n df_labels = top_n_from_distribution(word_topic_distrib, top_n=top_n,\n row_labels=vocab, val_labels=topic_labels)\n return _join_value_and_label_dfs(df_values, df_labels, top_n, row_labels=vocab,\n val_fmt=val_fmt, col_labels=col_labels, index_name=index_name)\n\n\ndef ldamodel_top_doc_topics(doc_topic_distrib, doc_labels, top_n=3, val_fmt=None, topic_labels=DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT,\n col_labels=None, index_name='document'):\n \"\"\"\n Retrieve the top (i.e. most probable) `top_n` topics for each document in the document-topic distribution\n `doc_topic_distrib` as pandas DataFrame.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_full_doc_topics` to retrieve the full distribution as\n formatted pandas DataFrame;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_topic_docs` to retrieve\n the top documents per topic;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_topic_words` to retrieve\n the top words per topic from a topic-word distribution;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_word_topics` to retrieve the top topics per word from\n a topic-word distribution\n\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_labels: list/array of length N with a string label for each document\n :param top_n: number of most probable topics per document to select\n :param val_fmt: format string for table cells where ``{lbl}`` is replaced by the respective topic name and\n ``{val}`` is replaced by the topic's probability given the document\n :param topic_labels: format string for each row index where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective\n zero- or one-indexed topic numbers or an array with individual topic labels\n :param col_labels: format string for the columns where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective zero-\n or one-indexed rank\n :param index_name: name of the table index\n :return: pandas DataFrame\n \"\"\"\n df_values = top_n_from_distribution(doc_topic_distrib, top_n=top_n,\n row_labels=doc_labels, val_labels=None)\n df_labels = top_n_from_distribution(doc_topic_distrib, top_n=top_n,\n row_labels=doc_labels, val_labels=topic_labels)\n return _join_value_and_label_dfs(df_values, df_labels, top_n, row_labels=doc_labels,\n val_fmt=val_fmt, col_labels=col_labels, index_name=index_name)\n\n\ndef ldamodel_top_topic_docs(doc_topic_distrib, doc_labels, top_n=3, val_fmt=None, topic_labels=DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT,\n col_labels=None, index_name='topic'):\n \"\"\"\n Retrieve the top (i.e. most probable) `top_n` documents for each topic in the document-topic distribution\n `doc_topic_distrib` as pandas DataFrame.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_full_doc_topics` to retrieve the full distribution as\n formatted pandas DataFrame;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_doc_topics` to retrieve\n the top topics per document;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_topic_words` to retrieve\n the top words per topic from a topic-word distribution;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_word_topics` to retrieve the top topics per word from\n a topic-word distribution\n\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_labels: list/array of length N with a string label for each document\n :param top_n: number of most probable documents per topic to select\n :param val_fmt: format string for table cells where ``{lbl}`` is replaced by the respective document label and\n ``{val}`` is replaced by the topic's probability given the document\n :param topic_labels: format string for each row index where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective\n zero- or one-indexed topic numbers or an array with individual topic labels\n :param col_labels: format string for the columns where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective zero-\n or one-indexed rank\n :param index_name: name of the table index\n :return: pandas DataFrame\n \"\"\"\n topic_doc_distrib = doc_topic_distrib.T\n df_values = top_n_from_distribution(topic_doc_distrib, top_n=top_n,\n row_labels=topic_labels, val_labels=None)\n df_labels = top_n_from_distribution(topic_doc_distrib, top_n=top_n,\n row_labels=topic_labels, val_labels=doc_labels)\n return _join_value_and_label_dfs(df_values, df_labels, top_n, row_labels=topic_labels,\n val_fmt=val_fmt, col_labels=col_labels, index_name=index_name)\n\n\ndef ldamodel_full_topic_words(topic_word_distrib, vocab, colname_rowindex='_topic',\n row_labels=DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT):\n \"\"\"\n Generate a pandas DataFrame for the full topic-word distribution `topic_word_distrib`.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_topic_words` to retrieve only the most probable words\n in the distribution as formatted pandas DataFrame;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_full_doc_topics` to retrieve the full document-topic\n distribution as dataframe\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param vocab: vocabulary list/array of length K\n :param colname_rowindex: column name for the \"row index\", i.e. the column that identifies each row\n :param row_labels: format string for each row index where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective\n zero- or one-indexed topic numbers or an array with individual row labels\n :return: pandas DataFrame\n \"\"\"\n if isinstance(row_labels, str):\n rownames = [row_labels.format(i0=i, i1=i + 1) for i in range(topic_word_distrib.shape[0])]\n else:\n rownames = row_labels\n\n return pd.concat((pd.DataFrame({colname_rowindex: rownames}),\n pd.DataFrame(topic_word_distrib, columns=list(vocab))),\n axis=1)\n\n\ndef ldamodel_full_doc_topics(doc_topic_distrib, doc_labels, colname_rowindex='_doc',\n topic_labels=DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT):\n \"\"\"\n Generate a pandas DataFrame for the full doc-topic distribution `doc_topic_distrib`.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_top_doc_topics` to retrieve only the most probable topics\n in the distribution as formatted pandas DataFrame;\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.ldamodel_full_topic_words` to retrieve the full topic-word\n distribution as dataframe\n\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_labels: list/array of length N with a string label for each document\n :param colname_rowindex: column name for the \"row index\", i.e. the column that identifies each row\n :param topic_labels: format string for each row index where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective\n zero- or one-indexed topic numbers or an array with individual topic labels\n :return: pandas DataFrame\n \"\"\"\n if isinstance(topic_labels, str):\n colnames = [topic_labels.format(i0=i, i1=i+1) for i in range(doc_topic_distrib.shape[1])]\n else:\n colnames = topic_labels\n\n return pd.concat((pd.DataFrame({colname_rowindex: doc_labels}),\n pd.DataFrame(doc_topic_distrib, columns=list(colnames))),\n axis=1)\n\n\ndef print_ldamodel_distribution(distrib, row_labels, val_labels, top_n=10):\n \"\"\"\n Print `top_n` top values from a LDA model's distribution `distrib`. This is a general function to print top values\n of any multivariate distribution given as matrix `distrib` with H rows and I columns, each identified by\n H `row_labels` and I `val_labels`.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.print_ldamodel_topic_words` to print the top values of a\n topic-word distribution or :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.print_ldamodel_doc_topics`\n to print the top values of a document-topic distribution.\n\n :param distrib: either a topic-word or a document-topic distribution of shape HxI\n :param row_labels: list/array of length H with label string for each row of `distrib` or format string\n :param val_labels: list/array of length I with label string for each column of `distrib` or format string\n :param top_n: number of top values to print\n \"\"\"\n\n df_values = top_n_from_distribution(distrib, top_n=top_n, row_labels=row_labels, val_labels=None)\n df_labels = top_n_from_distribution(distrib, top_n=top_n, row_labels=row_labels, val_labels=val_labels)\n\n for i, (ind, row) in enumerate(df_labels.iterrows()):\n print(ind)\n for j, label in enumerate(row):\n val = df_values.iloc[i, j]\n print('> #%d. %s (%f)' % (j + 1, label, val))\n\n\ndef print_ldamodel_topic_words(topic_word_distrib, vocab, top_n=10, row_labels=DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT):\n \"\"\"\n Print `top_n` values from an LDA model's topic-word distribution `topic_word_distrib`.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.print_ldamodel_doc_topics`\n to print the top values of a document-topic distribution.\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param vocab: vocabulary list/array of length K\n :param top_n: number of top values to print\n :param row_labels: format string for each row index where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective\n zero- or one-indexed topic numbers or an array with individual row labels\n \"\"\"\n print_ldamodel_distribution(topic_word_distrib, row_labels=row_labels, val_labels=vocab,\n top_n=top_n)\n\n\ndef print_ldamodel_doc_topics(doc_topic_distrib, doc_labels, top_n=3, val_labels=DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT):\n \"\"\"\n Print `top_n` values from an LDA model's document-topic distribution `doc_topic_distrib`.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.print_ldamodel_topic_words`\n to print the top values of a topic-word distribution.\n\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_labels: list/array of length N with a string label for each document\n :param top_n: number of top values to print\n :param val_labels: format string for each value where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective\n zero- or one-indexed topic numbers or an array with individual value labels\n \"\"\"\n print_ldamodel_distribution(doc_topic_distrib, row_labels=doc_labels, val_labels=val_labels,\n top_n=top_n)\n\n\ndef save_ldamodel_summary_to_excel(excel_file, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_labels, vocab,\n top_n_topics=10, top_n_words=10, dtm=None,\n rank_label_fmt=None, topic_labels=None):\n \"\"\"\n Save a summary derived from an LDA model's topic-word and document-topic distributions (`topic_word_distrib` and\n `doc_topic_distrib` to an Excel file `excel_file`. Return the generated Excel sheets as dict of pandas DataFrames.\n\n The resulting Excel file will consist of 6 or optional 7 sheets:\n\n - ``top_doc_topics_vals``: document-topic distribution with probabilities of top topics per document\n - ``top_doc_topics_labels``: document-topic distribution with labels (e.g. ``\"topic_12\"``) of top topics per\n document\n - ``top_doc_topics_labelled_vals``: document-topic distribution combining probabilities and labels of top topics per\n document (e.g. ``\"topic_12 (0.21)\"``)\n - ``top_topic_word_vals``: topic-word distribution with probabilities of top words per topic\n - ``top_topic_word_labels``: topic-word distribution with top words per (e.g. ``\"politics\"``) topic\n - ``top_topic_words_labelled_vals``: topic-word distribution combining probabilities and top words per topic\n (e.g. ``\"politics (0.08)\"``)\n - optional if `dtm` is given – ``marginal_topic_distrib``: marginal topic distribution\n\n :param excel_file: target Excel file\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_labels: list/array of length N with a string label for each document\n :param vocab: vocabulary list/array of length K\n :param top_n_topics: number of most probable topics per document to include in the summary\n :param top_n_words: number of most probable words per topic to include in the summary\n :param dtm: document-term matrix; shape NxM; if this is given, a sheet for the marginal topic distribution will\n be included\n :param rank_label_fmt: format string for the rank labels where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective\n zero- or one-indexed rank numbers (leave to None for default)\n :param topic_labels: format string for each row index where ``{i0}`` or ``{i1}`` are replaced by the respective\n zero- or one-indexed topic numbers or an array with individual topic labels\n :return: dict mapping sheet name to pandas DataFrame\n \"\"\"\n\n rank_label_fmt = rank_label_fmt or DEFAULT_RANK_NAME_FMT\n if topic_labels is None:\n topic_labels = DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT\n sheets = OrderedDict()\n\n # must convert NumPy string array to lists of Python strings, because OpenPyXL can't handle them\n if isinstance(doc_labels, np.ndarray):\n doc_labels = list(map(str, doc_labels))\n\n if isinstance(vocab, np.ndarray):\n vocab = list(map(str, vocab))\n\n if isinstance(topic_labels, np.ndarray):\n topic_labels = list(map(str, topic_labels))\n\n # doc-topic distribution sheets\n logger.info(f'generating document-topic distribution sheets for top {top_n_topics} topics')\n sheets['top_doc_topics_vals'] = top_n_from_distribution(doc_topic_distrib, top_n=top_n_topics,\n row_labels=doc_labels,\n col_labels=rank_label_fmt)\n sheets['top_doc_topics_labels'] = top_n_from_distribution(doc_topic_distrib, top_n=top_n_topics,\n row_labels=doc_labels,\n col_labels=rank_label_fmt,\n val_labels=topic_labels)\n sheets['top_doc_topics_labelled_vals'] = ldamodel_top_doc_topics(doc_topic_distrib, doc_labels,\n topic_labels=topic_labels,\n top_n=top_n_topics)\n\n # topic-word distribution sheets\n logger.info(f'generating topic-word distribution sheets for top {top_n_words} words')\n sheets['top_topic_word_vals'] = top_n_from_distribution(topic_word_distrib, top_n=top_n_words,\n row_labels=topic_labels,\n col_labels=rank_label_fmt)\n sheets['top_topic_word_labels'] = top_n_from_distribution(topic_word_distrib, top_n=top_n_words,\n row_labels=topic_labels,\n col_labels=rank_label_fmt,\n val_labels=vocab)\n sheets['top_topic_words_labelled_vals'] = ldamodel_top_topic_words(topic_word_distrib, vocab,\n row_labels=topic_labels,\n top_n=top_n_words)\n\n if dtm is not None:\n logger.info('generating marginal topic distribution')\n doc_len = doc_lengths(dtm)\n marg_topic_distr = marginal_topic_distrib(doc_topic_distrib, doc_len)\n if isinstance(topic_labels, str):\n row_names = [DEFAULT_TOPIC_NAME_FMT.format(i0=i, i1=i + 1) for i in range(len(marg_topic_distr))]\n elif isinstance(topic_labels, list):\n row_names = topic_labels\n else:\n raise ValueError('unexpected type of `topic_labels`: %s. must be string or list' % type(topic_labels))\n sheets['marginal_topic_distrib'] = pd.DataFrame(marg_topic_distr, columns=['marginal_topic_distrib'],\n index=row_names)\n\n logger.info(f'generating Excel file \"{excel_file}\"')\n excel_writer = pd.ExcelWriter(excel_file)\n\n for sh_name, sh_data in sheets.items():\n sh_data.to_excel(excel_writer, sh_name)\n\n excel_writer.save()\n\n return sheets\n\n\ndef save_ldamodel_to_pickle(picklefile, model, vocab, doc_labels, dtm=None, **kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Save an LDA model object `model` as pickle file to `picklefile`.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.load_ldamodel_from_pickle` to load the saved model.\n\n :param picklefile: target file\n :param model: LDA model instance\n :param vocab: vocabulary list/array of length M\n :param doc_labels: document labels list/array of length N\n :param dtm: optional document-term matrix of shape NxM\n :param kwargs: additional options for :func:`tmtoolkit.utils.pickle_data`\n \"\"\"\n pickle_data({'model': model, 'vocab': vocab, 'doc_labels': doc_labels, 'dtm': dtm}, picklefile, **kwargs)\n\n\ndef load_ldamodel_from_pickle(picklefile, **kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Load an LDA model object from a pickle file `picklefile`.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_io.save_ldamodel_to_pickle` to save a model.\n\n .. warning:: Python pickle files may contain malicious code. You should only load pickle files from trusted sources.\n\n :param picklefile: target file\n :param kwargs: additional options for :func:`tmtoolkit.utils.unpickle_file`\n :return: dict with keys: ``'model'`` – model instance; ``'vocab'`` – vocabulary; ``'doc_labels'`` – document labels;\n ``'dtm'`` – optional document-term matrix;\n \"\"\"\n return unpickle_file(picklefile, **kwargs)\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/topicmod/model_stats.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nCommon statistics and tools for topic models.\n\n.. [SievertShirley2014] Sievert, C., & Shirley, K. (2014, June). LDAvis: A method for visualizing and interpreting\n topics. In Proceedings of the workshop on interactive language learning, visualization, and\n interfaces (pp. 63-70).\n\n.. [Chuang2012] J. Chuang, C. Manning, J. Heer. 2012. Termite: Visualization Techniques for Assessing Textual Topic\n Models\n\"\"\"\nimport logging\n\nimport numpy as np\n\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod._common import DEFAULT_RANK_NAME_FMT, DEFAULT_VALUE_FORMAT\nfrom tmtoolkit.utils import empty_chararray\n\n\nlogger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n\n#%% Common statistics from topic-word or document-topic distribution\n\n\ndef marginal_topic_distrib(doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths):\n \"\"\"\n Return marginal topic distribution ``p(T)`` (topic proportions) given the document-topic distribution (theta)\n `doc_topic_distrib` and the document lengths `doc_lengths`. The latter can be calculated with\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats.doc_lengths`.\n\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_lengths: array of size N (number of docs) with integers indicating the number of terms per document\n :return: array of size K (number of topics) with marginal topic distribution\n \"\"\"\n unnorm = (doc_topic_distrib.T * doc_lengths).sum(axis=1)\n return unnorm / unnorm.sum()\n\n\ndef marginal_word_distrib(topic_word_distrib, p_t):\n \"\"\"\n Return the marginal word distribution ``p(w)`` (term proportions derived from topic model) given the\n topic-word distribution (phi) `topic_word_distrib` and the marginal topic distribution ``p(T)`` `p_t`.\n The latter can be calculated with :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.marginal_topic_distrib`.\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param p_t: marginal topic distribution; array of size K\n :return: array of size M (vocabulary size) with marginal word distribution\n \"\"\"\n return (topic_word_distrib.T * p_t).sum(axis=1)\n\n\ndef most_probable_words(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, n=None):\n \"\"\"\n Order the words from `vocab` by marginal word probability from most to least probable. Optionally only\n return the `n` most probable words.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.marginal_word_distrib`\n\n :param vocab: vocabulary array of length M\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_lengths: array of size N (number of docs) with integers indicating the number of terms per document\n :param n: if not None, return only the `n` most salient words\n :return: array of length M or `n` (if `n` is given) with most probable words\n \"\"\"\n return _words_by_marginal_word_prob(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths,\n n=n, least_to_most=False)\n\n\ndef least_probable_words(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, n=None):\n \"\"\"\n Order the words from `vocab` by marginal word probability from least to most probable. Optionally only\n return the `n` least probable words.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.marginal_word_distrib`\n\n :param vocab: vocabulary array of length M\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_lengths: array of size N (number of docs) with integers indicating the number of terms per document\n :param n: if not None, return only the `n` most salient words\n :return: array of length M or `n` (if `n` is given) with least probable words\n \"\"\"\n return _words_by_marginal_word_prob(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths,\n n=n, least_to_most=True)\n\n\ndef _words_by_marginal_word_prob(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, n=None,\n least_to_most=False):\n \"\"\"Return words in `vocab` ordered by marginal word probability.\"\"\"\n p_t = marginal_topic_distrib(doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths)\n prob = marginal_word_distrib(topic_word_distrib, p_t)\n return _words_by_score(vocab, prob, least_to_most=least_to_most, n=n)\n\n#%% General scores functions\n\n\ndef _words_by_score(words, score, least_to_most, n=None):\n \"\"\"\n Order a vector of `words` by a `score`, either `least_to_most` or reverse. Optionally return only the top `n`\n results.\n \"\"\"\n if words.shape != score.shape:\n raise ValueError('`words` and `score` must have the same shape')\n\n if n is not None and (n <= 0 or n > len(words)):\n raise ValueError('`n` must be in range [0, len(words)]')\n\n indices = np.argsort(score)\n if not least_to_most:\n indices = indices[::-1]\n\n ordered_words = words[indices]\n\n if n is not None:\n return ordered_words[:n]\n else:\n return ordered_words\n\n\n#%% Saliency (Chuang et al. 2012)\n\n\ndef word_saliency(topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths):\n \"\"\"\n Calculate word saliency according to [Chuang2012]_ as ``saliency(w) = p(w) * distinctiveness(w)`` for a word ``w``.\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_lengths: array of size N (number of docs) with integers indicating the number of terms per document\n :return: array of size M (vocabulary size) with word saliency\n \"\"\"\n p_t = marginal_topic_distrib(doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths)\n p_w = marginal_word_distrib(topic_word_distrib, p_t)\n\n return p_w * word_distinctiveness(topic_word_distrib, p_t)\n\n\ndef _words_by_salience_score(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, n=None, least_to_most=False):\n \"\"\"Return words in `vocab` ordered by saliency score.\"\"\"\n saliency = word_saliency(topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths)\n return _words_by_score(vocab, saliency, least_to_most=least_to_most, n=n)\n\n\ndef most_salient_words(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, n=None):\n \"\"\"\n Order the words from `vocab` by saliency score from most to least salient. Optionally only\n return the `n` most salient words.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.word_saliency`\n\n :param vocab: vocabulary array of length M\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_lengths: array of size N (number of docs) with integers indicating the number of terms per document\n :param n: if not None, return only the `n` most salient words\n :return: array of length M or `n` (if `n` is given) with most salient words\n \"\"\"\n return _words_by_salience_score(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, n)\n\n\ndef least_salient_words(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, n=None):\n \"\"\"\n Order the words from `vocab` by saliency score from least to most salient. Optionally only\n return the `n` least salient words.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.word_saliency`\n\n :param vocab: vocabulary array of length M\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_lengths: array of size N (number of docs) with integers indicating the number of terms per document\n :param n: if not None, return only the `n` least salient words\n :return: array of length M or `n` (if `n` is given) with least salient words\n \"\"\"\n return _words_by_salience_score(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, n, least_to_most=True)\n\n\n#%% Distinctiveness (Chuang et al. 2012)\n\n\ndef word_distinctiveness(topic_word_distrib, p_t):\n \"\"\"\n Calculate word distinctiveness according to [Chuang2012]_:\n\n ``distinctiveness(w) = KL(P(T|w), P(T)) = sum_T(P(T|w) log(P(T|w)/P(T)))``, where\n\n - ``KL`` is Kullback-Leibler divergence,\n - ``P(T)`` is marginal topic distribution,\n - ``P(T|w)`` is prob. of a topic given a word.\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param p_t: marginal topic distribution; array of size K\n :return: array of size M (vocabulary size) with word distinctiveness\n \"\"\"\n topic_given_w = topic_word_distrib / topic_word_distrib.sum(axis=0)\n return (topic_given_w * (np.log(topic_given_w.T) - np.log(p_t)).T).sum(axis=0)\n\n\ndef _words_by_distinctiveness_score(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, n=None,\n least_to_most=False):\n \"\"\"Return words in `vocab` ordered by distinctiveness score.\"\"\"\n p_t = marginal_topic_distrib(doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths)\n distinct = word_distinctiveness(topic_word_distrib, p_t)\n\n return _words_by_score(vocab, distinct, least_to_most=least_to_most, n=n)\n\n\ndef most_distinct_words(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, n=None):\n \"\"\"\n Order the words from `vocab` by distinctiveness score from most to least distinctive. Optionally only\n return the `n` most distinctive words.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.word_distinctiveness`\n\n :param vocab: vocabulary array of length M\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_lengths: array of size N (number of docs) with integers indicating the number of terms per document\n :param n: if not None, return only the `n` most distinctive words\n :return: array of length M or `n` (if `n` is given) with most distinctive words\n \"\"\"\n return _words_by_distinctiveness_score(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, n)\n\n\ndef least_distinct_words(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, n=None):\n \"\"\"\n Order the words from `vocab` by distinctiveness score from least to most distinctive. Optionally only\n return the `n` least distinctive words.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.word_distinctiveness`\n\n :param vocab: vocabulary array of length M\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_lengths: array of size N (number of docs) with integers indicating the number of terms per document\n :param n: if not None, return only the `n` least distinctive words\n :return: array of length M or `n` (if `n` is given) with least distinctive words\n \"\"\"\n return _words_by_distinctiveness_score(vocab, topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, n,\n least_to_most=True)\n\n\n#%% Relevance (Sievert and Shirley 2014)\n\n\ndef topic_word_relevance(topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, lambda_):\n \"\"\"\n Calculate the topic-word relevance score with a lambda parameter `lambda_` according to [SievertShirley2014]_:\n\n ``relevance(w,t|lambda) = lambda * log phi_{t,w} + (1-lambda) * log (phi_{t,w} / p(w))``, where\n\n - ``phi`` is the topic-word distribution,\n - ``p(w)`` is the marginal word probability.\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_lengths: array of size N (number of docs) with integers indicating the number of terms per document\n :param lambda_: lambda parameter (influences weight of \"log lift\")\n :return: matrix with topic-word relevance scores; shape KxM\n \"\"\"\n p_t = marginal_topic_distrib(doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths)\n p_w = marginal_word_distrib(topic_word_distrib, p_t)\n\n logtw = np.log(topic_word_distrib)\n loglift = np.log(topic_word_distrib) - np.log(p_w)\n\n return lambda_ * logtw + (1-lambda_) * loglift\n\n\ndef _check_relevant_words_for_topic_args(vocab, rel_mat, topic):\n if rel_mat.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`rel_mat` must be a 2D array or matrix')\n\n if len(vocab) != rel_mat.shape[1]:\n raise ValueError('the length of the `vocab` array must match the number of columns in `rel_mat`')\n\n if not 0 <= topic < rel_mat.shape[0]:\n raise ValueError('`topic` must be a topic index in range [0,%d)' % rel_mat.shape[0])\n\n\ndef most_relevant_words_for_topic(vocab, rel_mat, topic, n=None):\n \"\"\"\n Get words from `vocab` for `topic` ordered by most to least relevance according to [SievertShirley2014]_.\n Use the relevance matrix `rel_mat` obtained from :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.topic_word_relevance`.\n Optionally only return the `n` most relevant words.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.topic_word_relevance`\n\n :param vocab: vocabulary array of length M\n :param rel_mat: relevance matrix; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param topic: topic number (zero-indexed)\n :return: array of length M or `n` (if `n` is given) with most relevant words for topic `topic`\n \"\"\"\n _check_relevant_words_for_topic_args(vocab, rel_mat, topic)\n return _words_by_score(vocab, rel_mat[topic], least_to_most=False, n=n)\n\n\ndef least_relevant_words_for_topic(vocab, rel_mat, topic, n=None):\n \"\"\"\n Get words from `vocab` for `topic` ordered by least to most relevance according to [SievertShirley2014]_.\n Use the relevance matrix `rel_mat` obtained from :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.topic_word_relevance`.\n Optionally only return the `n` least relevant words.\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.topic_word_relevance`\n\n :param vocab: vocabulary array of length M\n :param rel_mat: relevance matrix; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param topic: topic number (zero-indexed)\n :return: array of length M or `n` (if `n` is given) with least relevant words for topic `topic`\n \"\"\"\n _check_relevant_words_for_topic_args(vocab, rel_mat, topic)\n return _words_by_score(vocab, rel_mat[topic], least_to_most=True, n=n)\n\n\n#%% Top words / topics\n\n\ndef generate_topic_labels_from_top_words(topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, vocab,\n n_words=None, lambda_=1, labels_glue='_', labels_format='{i1}_{topwords}'):\n \"\"\"\n Generate *unique* topic labels derived from the top words of each topic. The top words are determined from the\n relevance score [SievertShirley2014]_ depending on `lambda_`. Specify the number of top words in the label\n with `n_words`. If `n_words` is None, a minimum number of words will be used to create unique labels for each\n topic. Topic labels are formed by joining the top words with `labels_glue` and formatting them with\n `labels_format`. Placeholders in `labels_format` are ``\"{i0}\"`` (zero-based topic index),\n ``\"{i1}\"`` (one-based topic index) and ``\"{topwords}\"`` (top words glued with `labels_glue`).\n\n .. seealso:: :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats.topic_word_relevance`\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_lengths: array of size N (number of docs) with integers indicating the number of terms per document\n :param vocab: vocabulary array of length M\n :param n_words: minimum number of words to be used to create unique labels\n :param lambda_: lambda parameter (influences weight of \"log lift\")\n :param labels_glue: string to join the top words\n :param labels_format: final topic labels format string\n :return: NumPy array of topic labels; length is K\n \"\"\"\n\n logger.info('calculating topic-word relevance matrix')\n rel_mat = topic_word_relevance(topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, doc_lengths, lambda_=lambda_)\n\n logger.info('identifying most relevant words per topic')\n if n_words is None:\n n_words = range(1, len(vocab)+1)\n else:\n if not 1 <= n_words <= len(vocab):\n raise ValueError('`n_words` must be in range [1, %d]' % len(vocab))\n\n n_words = range(n_words, n_words+1)\n\n most_rel_words = [tuple(most_relevant_words_for_topic(vocab, rel_mat, t))\n for t in range(topic_word_distrib.shape[0])]\n\n n_most_rel = []\n for n in n_words:\n n_most_rel = [ws[:n] for ws in most_rel_words]\n if len(n_most_rel) == len(set(n_most_rel)): # we have a list of unique word sequences\n break\n\n assert n_most_rel\n\n logger.info('building topic labels')\n topic_labels = [labels_format.format(i0=i, i1=i+1, topwords=labels_glue.join(ws))\n for i, ws in enumerate(n_most_rel)]\n\n if len(topic_labels) != len(set(topic_labels)):\n raise ValueError('generated labels are not unique')\n\n return np.array(topic_labels) if topic_labels else empty_chararray()\n\n\ndef top_n_from_distribution(distrib, top_n=10, row_labels=None, col_labels=None, val_labels=None):\n \"\"\"\n Get `top_n` values from LDA model's distribution `distrib` as DataFrame. Can be used for topic-word distributions\n and document-topic distributions. Set `row_labels` to a format string or a list. Set `col_labels` to a format\n string for the column names. Set `val_labels` to return value labels instead of pure values (probabilities).\n\n :param distrib: a 2D probability distribution of shape NxM from an LDA model\n :param top_n: number of top values to take from each row of `distrib`\n :param row_labels: either list of row label strings of length N or a single row format string\n :param col_labels: column format string or None for default numbered columns\n :param val_labels: value labels format string or None to return only the probabilities\n :return: pandas DataFrame with N rows and `top_n` columns\n \"\"\"\n import pandas as pd\n\n if len(distrib) == 0:\n raise ValueError('`distrib` must contain values')\n\n if top_n < 1:\n raise ValueError('`top_n` must be at least 1')\n elif top_n > distrib.shape[1]:\n raise ValueError('`top_n` cannot be larger than num. of values in `distrib` rows')\n\n if isinstance(row_labels, str):\n row_label_fixed = row_labels\n else:\n row_label_fixed = None\n\n if val_labels is not None and type(val_labels) in (list, tuple):\n val_labels = np.array(val_labels)\n\n if col_labels is None:\n columns = range(top_n)\n else:\n columns = [col_labels.format(i0=i, i1=i+1) for i in range(top_n)]\n\n series = []\n\n for i, row_distrib in enumerate(distrib):\n if row_label_fixed:\n row_name = row_label_fixed.format(i0=i, i1=i+1)\n else:\n if row_labels is not None:\n row_name = row_labels[i]\n else:\n row_name = None\n\n # `sorter_arr` is an array of indices that would sort another array by `row_distrib` (from low to high!)\n sorter_arr = np.argsort(row_distrib)\n\n if val_labels is None:\n sorted_vals = row_distrib[sorter_arr][:-(top_n + 1):-1]\n else:\n if isinstance(val_labels, str):\n sorted_vals = [val_labels.format(i0=i, i1=i+1, val=row_distrib[i]) for i in sorter_arr[::-1]][:top_n]\n else:\n # first brackets: sort vocab by `sorter_arr`\n # second brackets: slice operation that reverts ordering (:-1) and then selects only `top_n` number of\n # elements\n sorted_vals = val_labels[sorter_arr][:-(top_n + 1):-1]\n\n series_kwargs = dict(index=columns)\n if row_name is not None:\n series_kwargs['name'] = row_name\n\n series.append(pd.Series(sorted_vals, **series_kwargs))\n\n return pd.DataFrame(series)\n\n\ndef top_words_for_topics(topic_word_distrib, top_n=None, vocab=None, return_prob=False):\n \"\"\"\n Generate sorted list of `top_n` words (or word indices) per topic in topic-word distribution `topic_word_distrib`.\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param top_n: number of top words (according to probability given topic) to select per topic; if None return full\n sorted lists of words\n :param vocab: vocabulary array of length M; if None, return word indices instead of word strings\n :param return_prob: if True, also return sorted arrays of word probabilities given topic for each topic\n :return: list of length K consisting of sorted arrays of most probable words; arrays have length `top_n` or M\n (if `top_n` is None); if `return_prob` is True, another list of sorted arrays of word probabilities for\n each topic is returned\n \"\"\"\n if not isinstance(topic_word_distrib, np.ndarray) or topic_word_distrib.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`topic_word_distrib` must be a 2D NumPy array')\n\n if len(topic_word_distrib) == 0:\n raise ValueError('`topic_word_distrib` cannot be empty')\n\n if vocab is not None:\n if not isinstance(vocab, np.ndarray) or vocab.ndim != 1:\n raise ValueError('`vocab` must be a 1D NumPy array')\n\n if len(vocab) == 0:\n raise ValueError('`vocab` cannot be empty')\n\n if topic_word_distrib.shape[1] != len(vocab):\n raise ValueError('shapes of provided `topic_word_distrib` and `vocab` do not match (vocab sizes differ)')\n\n n_vocab = topic_word_distrib.shape[1]\n\n if top_n is None:\n top_n = n_vocab\n\n if top_n < 1:\n raise ValueError('`top_n` must be at least 1')\n elif top_n > n_vocab:\n raise ValueError('`top_n` cannot be larger than vocab size')\n\n topic_words = []\n topic_probs = []\n\n for topic in topic_word_distrib:\n sorter_arr = np.argsort(topic)\n sorter_slice = slice(None, -(top_n+1), -1) if top_n < n_vocab else slice(None)\n\n if vocab is None:\n topic_words.append(sorter_arr[sorter_slice])\n else:\n topic_words.append(vocab[sorter_arr][sorter_slice])\n\n if return_prob:\n topic_probs.append(topic[sorter_arr[sorter_slice]])\n\n if return_prob:\n return topic_words, topic_probs\n else:\n return topic_words\n\n\ndef _join_value_and_label_dfs(vals, labels, top_n, val_fmt=None, row_labels=None, col_labels=None, index_name=None):\n import pandas as pd\n\n val_fmt = val_fmt or DEFAULT_VALUE_FORMAT\n col_labels = col_labels or DEFAULT_RANK_NAME_FMT\n\n if col_labels is None:\n columns = range(top_n)\n else:\n columns = [col_labels.format(i0=i, i1=i+1) for i in range(top_n)]\n\n rows = []\n for i, (_, row) in enumerate(labels.iterrows()):\n joined = []\n for j, lbl in enumerate(row):\n val = vals.iloc[i, j]\n joined.append(val_fmt.format(lbl=lbl, val=val))\n\n if row_labels is not None:\n if isinstance(row_labels, str):\n row_name = row_labels.format(i0=i, i1=i+1)\n else:\n row_name = row_labels[i]\n else:\n row_name = None\n\n row_data = pd.Series(joined, name=row_name, index=columns)\n rows.append(row_data)\n\n if rows:\n # concat's behavior when using series is odd and doesn't respect the axis arg., hence we use transpose\n df = pd.concat(rows, axis=1).transpose()\n else:\n df = pd.DataFrame([], columns=columns)\n\n if index_name:\n df.index.name = index_name\n\n return df\n\n\ndef filter_topics(search_pattern, vocab, topic_word_distrib, top_n=None, thresh=None, match_type='exact', cond='any',\n glob_method='match', return_words_and_matches=False):\n \"\"\"\n Filter topics defined as topic-word distribution `topic_word_distrib` across vocabulary `vocab` for a word (pass a\n string) or multiple words/patterns `w` (pass a list of strings). Either run pattern(s) `w` against the list of\n top words per topic (use `top_n` for number of words in top words list) or specify a minimum topic-word probability\n `thresh`, resulting in a list of words above this threshold for each topic, which will be used for pattern matching.\n You can also specify `top_n` *and* `thresh`.\n\n Set the `match` parameter according to the options provided by :func:`~tmtoolkit.tokenseq.token_match`\n (exact matching, RE or glob matching). Use `cond` to specify whether at only *one* match suffices per topic when\n a list of patterns `w` is passed (``cond='any'``) or *all* patterns must match (``cond='all'``).\n\n By default, this function returns a NumPy array containing the *indices* of topics that passed the filter criteria.\n If `return_words_and_matches` is True, this function additionally returns a NumPy array with the top words for each\n topic and a NumPy array with the pattern matches for each topic.\n\n .. seealso:: See :func:`tmtoolkit.tokenseq.token_match` for filtering options.\n\n :param search_pattern: single match pattern string or list of match pattern strings\n :param vocab: vocabulary array of length M\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param top_n: if given, consider only the top `top_n` words per topic\n :param thresh: if given, consider only the words with a probability above `thresh`\n :param match_type: one of: 'exact', 'regex', 'glob'; if 'regex', `search_token` must be RE pattern; if `glob`,\n `search_token` must be a \"glob\" pattern like \"hello w*\"\n (see https://github.com/metagriffin/globre)\n :param cond: either ``\"any\"`` or ``\"all\"``; controls whether only one or all patterns must match if multiple match\n patterns are given\n :param glob_method: if `match_type` is 'glob', use this glob method. Must be 'match' or 'search' (similar\n behavior as Python's `re.match` or `re.search`)\n :param return_words_and_matches: if True, additionally return list of arrays of words per topic and\n list of binary arrays indicating matches per topic\n :return: array of topic indices with matches; if `return_words_and_matches` is True, return two more lists as\n described above\n \"\"\"\n from tmtoolkit.tokenseq import token_match\n\n if not search_pattern:\n raise ValueError('`search_pattern` must be non empty')\n\n if isinstance(search_pattern, str):\n search_pattern = [search_pattern]\n elif not isinstance(search_pattern, (list, tuple, set)):\n raise ValueError('`search_pattern` must be either string or list, tuple or set')\n\n if top_n is None and thresh is None:\n raise ValueError('either `top_n` or `thresh` must be given')\n\n if cond not in {'any', 'all'}:\n raise ValueError(\"`cond` must be one of `'any', 'all'`\")\n\n logger.info(f'generating top {top_n} words per topic')\n\n if thresh is None:\n top_words = top_words_for_topics(topic_word_distrib, top_n=top_n, vocab=vocab)\n top_probs = None\n else:\n top_words, top_probs = top_words_for_topics(topic_word_distrib, top_n=top_n, vocab=vocab, return_prob=True)\n\n logger.info('filtering topics')\n\n found_topic_indices = []\n found_topic_words = []\n found_topic_matches = []\n cond_fn = np.any if cond == 'any' else np.all\n\n for t_idx, words in enumerate(top_words):\n token_matches = [token_match(x, words, match_type, glob_method=glob_method) for x in search_pattern]\n if top_probs:\n words_p = top_probs[t_idx]\n probs_matches = [sum(words_p[m] >= thresh) > 0 for m in token_matches]\n else:\n probs_matches = [[True]]\n\n token_matches_comb = np.any(token_matches, axis=1)\n assert len(token_matches_comb) == len(search_pattern)\n\n if cond_fn(token_matches_comb) and cond_fn(probs_matches):\n found_topic_indices.append(t_idx)\n if return_words_and_matches:\n found_topic_words.append(words)\n found_topic_matches.append(np.any(token_matches, axis=0))\n\n ind = np.array(found_topic_indices) if found_topic_indices else np.array([], dtype=int)\n\n if return_words_and_matches:\n return ind, np.array(found_topic_words), np.array(found_topic_matches)\n else:\n return ind\n\n\ndef exclude_topics(excl_topic_indices, doc_topic_distrib, topic_word_distrib=None, renormalize=True,\n return_new_topic_mapping=False):\n \"\"\"\n Exclude topics with the indices `excl_topic_indices` from the document-topic distribution `doc_topic_distrib` (i.e.\n delete the respective columns in this matrix) and optionally re-normalize the distribution so that the rows sum up\n to 1 if `renormalize` is set to `True`.\n\n Optionally also strip the topics from the topic-word distribution `topic_word_distrib` (i.e. remove the respective\n rows).\n\n If `topic_word_distrib` is given, return a tuple with the updated doc.-topic and topic-word distributions, else\n return only the updated doc.-topic distribution.\n\n .. warning:: The topics to be excluded are specified by *zero-based indices*.\n\n :param excl_topic_indices: list/array with zero-based indices of topics to exclude\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param topic_word_distrib: optional topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary\n size\n :param renormalize: if True, re-normalize the document-topic distribution so that the rows sum up to 1\n :param return_new_topic_mapping: if True, additional return a dict that maps old topic indices to new topic indices\n :return: new document-topic distribution where topics from `excl_topic_indices` are removed and optionally\n re-normalized; optional new topic-word distribution with same topics removed; optional dict that maps old\n topic indices to new topic indices\n \"\"\"\n new_theta = np.delete(doc_topic_distrib, excl_topic_indices, axis=1)\n if renormalize:\n new_theta /= new_theta.sum(axis=1)[:, None]\n\n if topic_word_distrib is not None:\n new_phi = np.delete(topic_word_distrib, excl_topic_indices, axis=0)\n res_tuple = (new_theta, new_phi)\n else:\n res_tuple = (new_theta, )\n\n if return_new_topic_mapping:\n topic_ind = np.arange(doc_topic_distrib.shape[1])\n old_topic_ind = np.delete(topic_ind, excl_topic_indices)\n res_tuple += (dict(zip(old_topic_ind, range(len(old_topic_ind)))), )\n\n if len(res_tuple) == 1:\n return res_tuple[0]\n else:\n return res_tuple\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/topicmod/parallel.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nBase classes for parallel model fitting and evaluation. See the specific functions and classes in\n:mod:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_gensim`, :mod:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda` and :mod:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_sklearn` for\nparallel processing with popular topic modeling packages.\n\n.. note:: The classes and functions in this module are only important if you want to implement your own parallel\n model computation and evaluation.\n\"\"\"\n\n\n# import atexit\nimport ctypes\nimport itertools\nimport logging\nimport multiprocessing as mp\nfrom collections import defaultdict\n\nimport numpy as np\nfrom scipy.sparse import coo_matrix\n\nlogger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n\n\n#%% General parallel model computation\n\n\nclass MultiprocModelsRunner:\n \"\"\"\n Runner class for distributing and managing worker processes for parallel model computation.\n \"\"\"\n\n def __init__(self, worker_class, data, varying_parameters=None, constant_parameters=None, n_max_processes=None):\n \"\"\"\n Initiate runner class with a model computation worker class `worker_class` (which should be derived from\n :class:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.parallel.MultiprocModelsWorkerABC`). This class represents the worker\n processes and each will be instantiated with `data` and work on it with a different parameter set that can be\n passed via `varying_parameters`.\n\n :param worker_class: model computation worker class derived from\n :class:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.parallel.MultiprocModelsWorkerABC`\n :param data: the data that the workers use for computations; 2D (sparse) array/matrix or a dict with such\n matrices; the latter allows to run all computations on different datasets at once\n :param varying_parameters: list of dicts with parameters; each parameter set will be used in a separate\n computation\n :param constant_parameters: dict with parameters that are the same for all parallel computations\n :param n_max_processes: maximum number of worker processes to spawn\n \"\"\"\n\n self.tasks_queues = None\n self.results_queue = None\n self.workers = None\n\n n_max_processes = n_max_processes or mp.cpu_count()\n if n_max_processes < 1:\n raise ValueError('`n_max_processes` must be at least 1')\n\n varying_parameters = varying_parameters or []\n n_varying_params = len(varying_parameters)\n\n self.worker_class = worker_class\n\n self.varying_parameters = varying_parameters\n self.constant_parameters = constant_parameters or {}\n\n self.got_named_data = isinstance(data, dict)\n if self.got_named_data:\n self.data = {lbl: self._prepare_data(d) for lbl, d in data.items()}\n else:\n self.data = {None: self._prepare_data(data)}\n\n # number of workers: at least as much as needed for the varying params and datasets but at max. n_max_processes\n self.n_workers = min(max(1, n_varying_params) * len(self.data), n_max_processes)\n\n logger.info(f'init with {self.n_workers} workers')\n\n # atexit.register(self.shutdown_workers)\n\n def __del__(self):\n \"\"\"destructor. shutdown all workers\"\"\"\n self.shutdown_workers()\n\n def shutdown_workers(self):\n \"\"\"Send shutdown signal to all worker processes to stop them.\"\"\"\n if not self.workers:\n return\n\n logger.info('sending shutdown signal to workers')\n\n [q.put(None) for q in self.tasks_queues] # `None` is the shutdown signal\n [q.join() for q in self.tasks_queues]\n\n [w.join() for w in self.workers]\n\n self.tasks_queues = None\n self.results_queue = None\n self.workers = None\n self.n_workers = 0\n\n def run(self):\n \"\"\"\n Set up worker processes and run parallel computations. Blocks until all processes are done, then stops all\n workers and returns the results.\n\n :return: if passed data is 2D array, returns a list with tuples (parameter set, results); if passed data is\n a dict of 2D arrays, returns dict with same keys as data and the respective results for each dataset\n \"\"\"\n\n # set up worker processes\n self._setup_workers(self.worker_class)\n\n # merge varying and constant parameters to get parameter set for each worker\n params = _merge_params(self.varying_parameters, self.constant_parameters)\n n_params = len(params)\n\n # create the worker tasks: cartesian product of parameter sets and datasets (here named \"docs\")\n docs = list(self.data.keys())\n n_docs = len(docs)\n if n_params == 0:\n tasks = list(zip(docs, [{}] * n_docs))\n else:\n tasks = list(itertools.product(docs, params))\n n_tasks = len(tasks)\n\n logger.info(f'multiproc models: starting with {n_params} parameter sets on {n_docs} datasets '\n f'(= {n_tasks} tasks) and {self.n_workers} processes')\n\n # distribute tasks to first \"n_workers\" workers\n logger.debug('distributing initial work')\n task_idx = 0\n for d, p in tasks[:self.n_workers]:\n logger.debug(f'> sending task {task_idx + 1}/{n_tasks} to worker {task_idx}')\n self.tasks_queues[task_idx].put((d, p))\n task_idx += 1\n\n # collect results for these workers\n worker_results = []\n while task_idx < n_tasks: # until all tasks are distributed\n logger.debug('awaiting result')\n finished_worker, w_doc, w_params, w_result = self.results_queue.get() # blocking\n logger.debug(f'> got result from worker {finished_worker}')\n\n worker_results.append((w_doc, w_params, w_result))\n\n # the finished worker is free for a new task, send it\n d, p = tasks[task_idx]\n logger.debug(f'> sending task {task_idx + 1}/{n_tasks} to worker {finished_worker}')\n self.tasks_queues[finished_worker].put((d, p))\n task_idx += 1\n\n # collect results for the last submitted tasks\n logger.debug('awaiting final results')\n [q.join() for q in self.tasks_queues] # block for last submitted tasks\n\n for _ in range(self.n_workers):\n _, w_doc, w_params, w_result = self.results_queue.get() # blocking\n worker_results.append((w_doc, w_params, w_result))\n\n logger.info('multiproc models: finished')\n\n # stop worker processes\n self.shutdown_workers()\n\n # return results\n if self.got_named_data:\n res = defaultdict(list)\n for d, p, r in worker_results:\n res[d].append((p, r))\n return res\n else:\n _, p, r = zip(*worker_results)\n return list(zip(p, r))\n\n def _setup_workers(self, worker_class):\n \"\"\"Create worker classes, their task queues and the result queue.\"\"\"\n self.tasks_queues = []\n self.results_queue = mp.Queue()\n self.workers = []\n\n for i in range(self.n_workers):\n task_q = mp.JoinableQueue()\n w = self._new_worker(worker_class, i, task_q, self.results_queue, self.data)\n w.start()\n\n self.workers.append(w)\n self.tasks_queues.append(task_q)\n\n def _new_worker(self, worker_class, i, task_queue, results_queue, data):\n \"\"\"Initiate new worker class.\"\"\"\n return worker_class(i, task_queue, results_queue, data, name='%s#%d' % (str(worker_class), i))\n\n @staticmethod\n def _prepare_data(data):\n \"\"\"\n Prepare 2D array/matrix `data` for parallel processing by converting it to COO sparse matrix (if necessary)\n and creating shared data pointers for direct access for worker processes.\n \"\"\"\n if hasattr(data, 'dtype'):\n if not hasattr(data, 'shape') or len(data.shape) != 2:\n raise ValueError('`data` must be a NumPy array/matrix or SciPy sparse matrix of two dimensions')\n\n if data.dtype == np.int32:\n arr_ctype = ctypes.c_int32\n elif data.dtype == np.int64:\n arr_ctype = ctypes.c_int64\n else:\n raise ValueError('dtype of `data` is not supported: `%s`; you need to convert to int32 or int64'\n % data.dtype)\n\n if not hasattr(data, 'format'): # dense matrix -> convert to sparse matrix in coo format\n data = coo_matrix(data)\n elif data.format != 'coo':\n data = data.tocoo()\n\n sparse_data_base = mp.Array(arr_ctype, data.data)\n sparse_rows_base = mp.Array(ctypes.c_int, data.row) # TODO: datatype correct?\n sparse_cols_base = mp.Array(ctypes.c_int, data.col) # TODO: datatype correct?\n\n logger.info(f'initializing evaluation with sparse matrix of format `{data.format}` and '\n f'shape {data.shape[0]}x{data.shape[1]}')\n\n return sparse_data_base, sparse_rows_base, sparse_cols_base\n else:\n return data\n\n\nclass MultiprocModelsWorkerABC(mp.Process):\n \"\"\"\n Abstract base class for parallel model computations worker class.\n \"\"\"\n\n package_name = None # abstract. override in subclass\n\n def __init__(self, worker_id, tasks_queue, results_queue, data,\n group=None, target=None, name=None, args=(), kwargs=None):\n \"\"\"\n Initialize parallel model computations worker class with an ID `worker_id`, a queue to receive tasks from\n `tasks_queue`, a queue to send results to `results_queue` and the `data` to operate on.\n\n :param worker_id: process ID\n :param tasks_queue: queue to receive tasks from\n :param results_queue: queue to send results to\n :param data: data to operate on; a dict mapping dataset label to a dataset; can be anything but is usually a\n tuple of shared data pointers for sparse matrix in COO format\n :param group: see Python's :class:`multiprocessing.Process` class\n :param target: see Python's :class:`multiprocessing.Process` class\n :param name: see Python's :class:`multiprocessing.Process` class\n :param args: see Python's :class:`multiprocessing.Process` class\n :param kwargs: see Python's :class:`multiprocessing.Process` class\n \"\"\"\n super(MultiprocModelsWorkerABC, self).__init__(group, target, name, args, kwargs or {})\n\n logger.debug(f'worker \"{self.name}\": creating worker with ID {worker_id}')\n self.worker_id = worker_id\n self.tasks_queue = tasks_queue\n self.results_queue = results_queue\n\n # set up data to operate on\n self.data_per_doc = {}\n for doc_label, mem in data.items():\n if isinstance(mem, tuple) and len(mem) == 3:\n sparse_data_base, sparse_row_ind_base, sparse_col_ind_base = mem\n sparse_data = np.ctypeslib.as_array(sparse_data_base.get_obj())\n sparse_row_ind = np.ctypeslib.as_array(sparse_row_ind_base.get_obj())\n sparse_col_ind = np.ctypeslib.as_array(sparse_col_ind_base.get_obj())\n logger.debug(f'worker \"{self.name}\": creating sparse data matrix for document \"{doc_label}\"')\n self.data_per_doc[doc_label] = coo_matrix((sparse_data, (sparse_row_ind, sparse_col_ind)))\n else:\n self.data_per_doc[doc_label] = mem\n\n def run(self):\n \"\"\"\n Run the process worker: Calls :meth:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.parallel.MultiprocModelsWorkerABC.fit_model` on each\n dataset and parameter set coming from the tasks queue.\n \"\"\"\n logger.debug(f'worker \"{self.name}\": run')\n\n for doc, params in iter(self.tasks_queue.get, None):\n logger.debug(f'worker \"{self.name}\": received task')\n\n data = self.data_per_doc[doc]\n logger.info(f'fitting LDA model from package \"{self.package_name}\" with parameters: {params}')\n\n results = self.fit_model(data, params)\n self.send_results(doc, params, results)\n self.tasks_queue.task_done()\n\n logger.debug(f'worker \"{self.name}\": shutting down')\n self.tasks_queue.task_done()\n\n def fit_model(self, data, params):\n \"\"\"\n Method stub to implement actually model fitting for `data` with parameter set `params`.\n\n :param data: data passed to the model fitting algorithm\n :param params: parameter set dict\n :return: model fitting / evaluation results\n \"\"\"\n raise NotImplementedError('abstract base class method `fit_model` needs to be defined')\n\n def send_results(self, doc, params, results):\n \"\"\"\n Put the results into the results queue.\n\n :param doc: \"document\" / dataset label\n :param params: used parameter set\n :param results: generated results, e.g. fit model and/or evaluation results\n \"\"\"\n self.results_queue.put((self.worker_id, doc, params, results))\n\n\n#%% Parallel model evaluation\n\n\nclass MultiprocEvaluationRunner(MultiprocModelsRunner):\n \"\"\"\n Specialization of :class:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.parallel.MultiprocModelsRunner` for parallel model evaluations.\n \"\"\"\n\n def __init__(self, worker_class, available_metrics, data, varying_parameters, constant_parameters=None,\n metric=None, metric_options=None, n_max_processes=None, return_models=False):\n \"\"\"\n Initialize evaluation runner.\n\n :param worker_class: model computation worker class derived from\n :class:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.parallel.MultiprocModelsWorkerABC`\n :param available_metrics: list/tuple with available metrics as strings\n :param data: the data that the workers use for computations; 2D (sparse) array/matrix\n :param varying_parameters: list of dicts with parameters; each parameter set will be used in a separate\n computation\n :param constant_parameters: dict with parameters that are the same for all parallel computations\n :param metric: string or list of strings; if given, use only this metric(s) for evaluation; must be subset of\n `available_metrics`\n :param metric_options: dict of options for metric used metric(s)\n :param n_max_processes: maximum number of worker processes to spawn\n :param return_models: if True, also return the computed models in the evaluation results\n \"\"\"\n\n if isinstance(data, dict):\n raise ValueError('`data` cannot be a dict for evaluation')\n\n super(MultiprocEvaluationRunner, self).__init__(worker_class, data, varying_parameters, constant_parameters,\n n_max_processes)\n\n if len(self.varying_parameters) < 1:\n raise ValueError('`varying_parameters` must contain at least one value')\n\n if type(available_metrics) not in (list, tuple) or not available_metrics:\n raise ValueError('`available_metrics` must be a list or tuple with a least one element')\n\n metric = metric or available_metrics\n\n if metric_options is None:\n metric_options = {}\n\n if type(metric) not in (list, tuple):\n metric = [metric]\n\n if type(metric) not in (list, tuple) or not metric:\n raise ValueError('`metric` must be a list or tuple with a least one element')\n\n for m in metric:\n if m not in available_metrics:\n raise ValueError('invalid metric was passed: \"%s\". valid metrics: %s' % (m, available_metrics))\n\n self.eval_metric = metric\n self.eval_metric_options = metric_options or {}\n self.return_models = return_models\n\n def _new_worker(self, worker_class, i, task_queue, results_queue, data):\n \"\"\"Initiate new worker class. Also pass metrics to be used during evaluation.\"\"\"\n return worker_class(i, self.eval_metric, self.eval_metric_options, self.return_models,\n task_queue, results_queue, data, name='%s#%d' % (str(worker_class), i))\n\n\nclass MultiprocEvaluationWorkerABC(MultiprocModelsWorkerABC):\n \"\"\"\n Specialization of :class:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.parallel.MultiprocModelsWorkerABC` for parallel model evaluations.\n \"\"\"\n\n def __init__(self, worker_id,\n eval_metric, eval_metric_options, return_models,\n tasks_queue, results_queue, data,\n group=None, target=None, name=None, args=(), kwargs=None):\n \"\"\"\n Initialize parallel model evaluations worker class with an ID `worker_id`, a queue to receive tasks from\n `tasks_queue`, a queue to send results to `results_queue` and the `data` to operate on. Use evaluation\n metrics `eval_metric`.\n\n :param worker_id: process ID\n :param eval_metric: list/tuple of strings of evaluation metrics to use\n :param eval_metric_options: dict of options for metric used metric(s)\n :param tasks_queue: queue to receive tasks from\n :param results_queue: queue to send results to\n :param data: data to operate on; a dict mapping dataset label to a dataset; can be anything but is usually a\n tuple of shared data pointers for sparse matrix in COO format\n :param group: see Python's :class:`multiprocessing.Process` class\n :param target: see Python's :class:`multiprocessing.Process` class\n :param name: see Python's :class:`multiprocessing.Process` class\n :param args: see Python's :class:`multiprocessing.Process` class\n :param kwargs: see Python's :class:`multiprocessing.Process` class\n \"\"\"\n\n super(MultiprocEvaluationWorkerABC, self).__init__(worker_id,\n tasks_queue, results_queue, data,\n group, target, name, args, kwargs)\n self.eval_metric = eval_metric\n self.eval_metric_options = eval_metric_options\n self.return_models = return_models\n\n\n#%% Helper functions\n\n\ndef _merge_params(varying_parameters, constant_parameters):\n if not varying_parameters:\n return [constant_parameters]\n\n merged_params = []\n for p in varying_parameters:\n m = p.copy()\n m.update(constant_parameters)\n merged_params.append(m)\n\n return merged_params\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/topicmod/tm_gensim.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nParallel model computation and evaluation using the `Gensim package `_.\n\nAvailable evaluation metrics for this module are listed in :data:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_gensim.AVAILABLE_METRICS`.\nSee :mod:`tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate` for references and implementations of those evaluation metrics.\n\"\"\"\n\nimport logging\n\nimport numpy as np\n\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod.parallel import MultiprocModelsRunner, MultiprocModelsWorkerABC, MultiprocEvaluationRunner, \\\n MultiprocEvaluationWorkerABC\nfrom tmtoolkit.bow.dtm import dtm_to_gensim_corpus, gensim_corpus_to_dtm\nfrom .evaluate import metric_cao_juan_2009, metric_arun_2010, metric_coherence_mimno_2011, metric_coherence_gensim\n\n#: Available metrics for Gensim.\nAVAILABLE_METRICS = (\n 'perplexity',\n 'cao_juan_2009',\n 'arun_2010',\n 'coherence_mimno_2011',\n 'coherence_gensim_u_mass', # same as coherence_mimno_2011\n 'coherence_gensim_c_v',\n 'coherence_gensim_c_uci',\n 'coherence_gensim_c_npmi',\n)\n\n#: Metrics used by default.\nDEFAULT_METRICS = (\n 'perplexity',\n 'cao_juan_2009',\n 'coherence_mimno_2011',\n 'coherence_gensim_c_v'\n)\n\n\nlogger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n\n\n#%% Specialized classes for parallel processing\n\n\nclass MultiprocModelsWorkerGensim(MultiprocModelsWorkerABC):\n \"\"\"\n Specialized parallel model computations worker for Gensim.\n \"\"\"\n\n package_name = 'gensim'\n\n def fit_model(self, data, params, return_data=False):\n \"\"\"\n Fit model to `data` using gensim with parameter set `params`.\n \"\"\"\n from gensim.models.ldamodel import LdaModel\n\n dictionary = params.pop('dictionary', None)\n\n if hasattr(data, 'dtype') and hasattr(data, 'shape') and hasattr(data, 'transpose'):\n corpus = dtm_to_gensim_corpus(data)\n dtm = data\n else:\n if isinstance(data, tuple) and len(data) == 2:\n dictionary, corpus = data\n else:\n corpus = data\n dtm = gensim_corpus_to_dtm(corpus)\n\n model = LdaModel(corpus, id2word=dictionary, **params)\n\n if return_data:\n return model, (corpus, dtm)\n else:\n return model\n\n\nclass MultiprocEvaluationWorkerGensim(MultiprocEvaluationWorkerABC, MultiprocModelsWorkerGensim):\n \"\"\"\n Specialized parallel model evaluations worker for Gensim.\n \"\"\"\n\n def fit_model(self, data, params, return_data=False):\n model, (corpus, dtm) = super(MultiprocEvaluationWorkerGensim, self).fit_model(data, params, return_data=True)\n\n results = {}\n if self.return_models:\n results['model'] = model\n\n for metric in self.eval_metric:\n if metric == 'cao_juan_2009':\n res = metric_cao_juan_2009(model.state.get_lambda())\n elif metric == 'arun_2010':\n doc_topic_list = []\n for doc_topic in model.get_document_topics(corpus):\n d = dict(doc_topic)\n # Gensim will not output near-zero prob. topics, hence the \"d.get()\":\n t = tuple(d.get(ind, 0.) for ind in range(model.num_topics))\n doc_topic_list.append(t)\n\n doc_topic_distrib = np.array(doc_topic_list)\n assert doc_topic_distrib.shape == (dtm.shape[0], params['num_topics'])\n\n res = metric_arun_2010(model.state.get_lambda(), doc_topic_distrib, dtm.sum(axis=1))\n elif metric == 'coherence_mimno_2011':\n topic_word = model.state.get_lambda()\n default_top_n = min(20, topic_word.shape[1])\n res = metric_coherence_mimno_2011(topic_word, dtm,\n top_n=self.eval_metric_options.get(\n 'coherence_mimno_2011_top_n', default_top_n),\n eps=self.eval_metric_options.get('coherence_mimno_2011_eps', 1),\n include_prob=self.eval_metric_options.get(\n 'coherence_mimno_2011_include_prob', False),\n normalize=self.eval_metric_options.get(\n 'coherence_mimno_2011_normalize', False),\n return_mean=True)\n elif metric.startswith('coherence_gensim_'):\n coh_measure = metric[len('coherence_gensim_'):]\n topic_word = model.state.get_lambda()\n default_top_n = min(20, topic_word.shape[1])\n metric_kwargs = {\n 'measure': coh_measure,\n 'gensim_model': model,\n 'gensim_corpus': corpus,\n 'return_mean': True,\n 'processes': 1,\n 'top_n': self.eval_metric_options.get('coherence_gensim_top_n', default_top_n),\n }\n\n if coh_measure != 'u_mass':\n if 'coherence_gensim_texts' not in self.eval_metric_options:\n raise ValueError('tokenized documents must be passed as `coherence_gensim_texts` for any other '\n 'coherence measure than `u_mass`')\n metric_kwargs.update({\n 'texts': self.eval_metric_options['coherence_gensim_texts']\n })\n\n metric_kwargs.update(self.eval_metric_options.get('coherence_gensim_kwargs', {}))\n\n res = metric_coherence_gensim(**metric_kwargs)\n elif metric == 'perplexity':\n res = _get_model_perplexity(model, corpus)\n else:\n raise ValueError('metric not available: \"%s\"' % metric)\n\n logger.info('> evaluation result with metric \"%s\": %f' % (metric, res))\n results[metric] = res\n\n return results\n\n\n#%% main API functions for parallel processing\n\n\ndef compute_models_parallel(data, varying_parameters=None, constant_parameters=None, n_max_processes=None):\n \"\"\"\n Compute several topic models in parallel using the \"gensim\" package. Use a single or multiple document term matrices\n `data` and optionally a list of varying parameters `varying_parameters`. Pass parameters in `constant_parameters`\n dict to each model calculation. Use at maximum `n_max_processes` processors or use all available processors if None\n is passed.\n\n `data` can be either a Document-Term-Matrix (NumPy array/matrix, SciPy sparse matrix) or a dict with corpus ID ->\n Document-Term-Matrix mapping when calculating models for multiple corpora.\n\n If `data` is a dict of named matrices, this function will return a dict with document ID -> result list. Otherwise\n it will only return a result list. A result list always is a list containing tuples `(parameter_set, model)` where\n `parameter_set` is a dict of the used parameters.\n\n :param data: either a (sparse) 2D array/matrix or a dict mapping dataset labels to such matrices\n :param varying_parameters: list of dicts with parameters; each parameter set will be used in a separate\n computation\n :param constant_parameters: dict with parameters that are the same for all parallel computations\n :param n_max_processes: maximum number of worker processes to spawn\n :return: if passed data is 2D array, returns a list with tuples (parameter set, results); if passed data is\n a dict of 2D arrays, returns dict with same keys as data and the respective results for each dataset\n \"\"\"\n mp_models = MultiprocModelsRunner(MultiprocModelsWorkerGensim, data, varying_parameters, constant_parameters,\n n_max_processes=n_max_processes)\n\n return mp_models.run()\n\n\ndef evaluate_topic_models(data, varying_parameters, constant_parameters=None, n_max_processes=None, return_models=False,\n metric=None, **metric_kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Compute several Topic Models in parallel using the \"gensim\" package. Calculate the models using a list of varying\n parameters `varying_parameters` on a single Document-Term-Matrix `data`. Pass parameters in `constant_parameters`\n dict to each model calculation. Use at maximum `n_max_processes` processors or use all available processors if None\n is passed.\n\n `data` must be a Document-Term-Matrix (NumPy array/matrix, SciPy sparse matrix).\n\n Will return a list of size `len(varying_parameters)` containing tuples `(parameter_set, eval_results)` where\n `parameter_set` is a dict of the used parameters and `eval_results` is a dict of metric names -> metric results:\n\n .. code-block:: text\n\n [(parameter_set_1, {'': result_1, ...}),\n ...,\n (parameter_set_n, {'': result_n, ...})])\n\n .. seealso:: Results can be simplified using :func:`tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate.results_by_parameter`.\n\n :param data: a (sparse) 2D array/matrix\n :param varying_parameters: list of dicts with parameters; each parameter set will be used in a separate\n evaluation\n :param constant_parameters: dict with parameters that are the same for all parallel computations\n :param n_max_processes: maximum number of worker processes to spawn\n :param return_models: if True, also return the computed models in the evaluation results\n :param metric: string or list of strings; if given, use only this metric(s) for evaluation; must be subset of\n `available_metrics`\n :param metric_kwargs: dict of options for metric used metric(s)\n :return: list of evaluation results for each varying parameter set as described above\n \"\"\"\n mp_eval = MultiprocEvaluationRunner(MultiprocEvaluationWorkerGensim, AVAILABLE_METRICS, data,\n varying_parameters, constant_parameters,\n metric=metric or DEFAULT_METRICS, metric_options=metric_kwargs,\n n_max_processes=n_max_processes, return_models=return_models)\n\n return mp_eval.run()\n\n\n#%% Helper functions\n\n\ndef _get_model_perplexity(model, eval_corpus):\n n_words = sum(cnt for document in eval_corpus for _, cnt in document)\n bound = model.bound(eval_corpus)\n perwordbound = bound / n_words\n\n return np.exp2(-perwordbound)\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/topicmod/tm_lda.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nParallel model computation and evaluation using the `lda package `_.\n\nAvailable evaluation metrics for this module are listed in :data:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_lda.AVAILABLE_METRICS`.\nSee :mod:`tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate` for references and implementations of those evaluation metrics.\n\"\"\"\n\nimport logging\nimport importlib.util\n\nimport numpy as np\n\nfrom ._eval_tools import split_dtm_for_cross_validation\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod.parallel import MultiprocModelsRunner, MultiprocModelsWorkerABC, MultiprocEvaluationRunner, \\\n MultiprocEvaluationWorkerABC\nfrom .evaluate import metric_griffiths_2004, metric_cao_juan_2009, metric_arun_2010, metric_coherence_mimno_2011, \\\n metric_coherence_gensim, metric_held_out_documents_wallach09\n\nif importlib.util.find_spec('gmpy2'):\n metrics_using_gmpy2 = ('griffiths_2004', 'held_out_documents_wallach09')\nelse: # if gmpy2 is not available: do not use 'griffiths_2004'\n metrics_using_gmpy2 = ()\n\nif importlib.util.find_spec('gensim'):\n metrics_using_gensim = (\n 'coherence_gensim_u_mass', # same as coherence_mimno_2011\n 'coherence_gensim_c_v',\n 'coherence_gensim_c_uci',\n 'coherence_gensim_c_npmi'\n )\nelse:\n metrics_using_gensim = ()\n\n\n#: Available metrics for lda (``\"griffiths_2004\"``, ``\"held_out_documents_wallach09\"`` are added when package gmpy2\n#: is installed, several ``\"coherence_gensim_\"`` metrics are added when package gensim is installed).\nAVAILABLE_METRICS = (\n 'loglikelihood', # simply uses the last reported log likelihood as fallback\n 'cao_juan_2009',\n 'arun_2010',\n 'coherence_mimno_2011',\n) + metrics_using_gmpy2 + metrics_using_gensim\n\n#: Metrics used by default.\nDEFAULT_METRICS = (\n 'cao_juan_2009',\n 'coherence_mimno_2011'\n)\n\n\nlogger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n\n\n#%% Specialized classes for parallel processing\n\n\nclass MultiprocModelsWorkerLDA(MultiprocModelsWorkerABC):\n \"\"\"\n Specialized parallel model computations worker for lda.\n \"\"\"\n\n package_name = 'lda'\n\n def fit_model(self, data, params):\n from lda import LDA\n lda_instance = LDA(**params)\n lda_instance.fit(data)\n\n return lda_instance\n\n\nclass MultiprocEvaluationWorkerLDA(MultiprocEvaluationWorkerABC, MultiprocModelsWorkerLDA):\n \"\"\"\n Specialized parallel model evaluations worker for lda.\n \"\"\"\n\n def fit_model(self, data, params):\n if list(self.eval_metric) != ['held_out_documents_wallach09'] or self.return_models:\n lda_instance = super(MultiprocEvaluationWorkerLDA, self).fit_model(data, params)\n else:\n lda_instance = None\n\n results = {}\n if self.return_models:\n results['model'] = lda_instance\n\n for metric in self.eval_metric:\n if metric == 'griffiths_2004':\n if 'griffiths_2004_burnin' in self.eval_metric_options: # discard specific number of burnin iterations\n burnin_iterations = self.eval_metric_options['griffiths_2004_burnin']\n burnin_samples = burnin_iterations // lda_instance.refresh\n\n if burnin_samples >= len(lda_instance.loglikelihoods_):\n raise ValueError('`griffiths_2004_burnin` set too high (%d) – not enough samples to use. should be less than %d.'\n % (burnin_iterations, len(lda_instance.loglikelihoods_) * lda_instance.refresh))\n else: # default: discard first 50% of the likelihood samples\n burnin_samples = len(lda_instance.loglikelihoods_) // 2\n\n logliks = lda_instance.loglikelihoods_[burnin_samples:]\n if logliks:\n res = metric_griffiths_2004(logliks)\n else:\n raise ValueError('no log likelihood samples for calculation of `metric_griffiths_2004`')\n elif metric == 'cao_juan_2009':\n res = metric_cao_juan_2009(lda_instance.topic_word_)\n elif metric == 'arun_2010':\n res = metric_arun_2010(lda_instance.topic_word_, lda_instance.doc_topic_, data.sum(axis=1))\n elif metric == 'coherence_mimno_2011':\n default_top_n = min(20, lda_instance.topic_word_.shape[1])\n res = metric_coherence_mimno_2011(lda_instance.topic_word_, data,\n top_n=self.eval_metric_options.get(\n 'coherence_mimno_2011_top_n', default_top_n),\n eps=self.eval_metric_options.get('coherence_mimno_2011_eps', 1),\n include_prob=self.eval_metric_options.get(\n 'coherence_mimno_2011_include_prob', False),\n normalize=self.eval_metric_options.get(\n 'coherence_mimno_2011_normalize', False),\n return_mean=True)\n elif metric.startswith('coherence_gensim_'):\n if 'coherence_gensim_vocab' not in self.eval_metric_options:\n raise ValueError('corpus vocabulary must be passed as `coherence_gensim_vocab`')\n\n coh_measure = metric[len('coherence_gensim_'):]\n default_top_n = min(20, lda_instance.topic_word_.shape[1])\n metric_kwargs = {\n 'measure': coh_measure,\n 'topic_word_distrib': lda_instance.topic_word_,\n 'dtm': data,\n 'vocab': self.eval_metric_options['coherence_gensim_vocab'],\n 'return_mean': True,\n 'processes': 1,\n 'top_n': self.eval_metric_options.get('coherence_gensim_top_n', default_top_n),\n }\n\n if coh_measure != 'u_mass':\n if 'coherence_gensim_texts' not in self.eval_metric_options:\n raise ValueError('tokenized documents must be passed as `coherence_gensim_texts` for any other '\n 'coherence measure than `u_mass`')\n metric_kwargs.update({\n 'texts': self.eval_metric_options['coherence_gensim_texts']\n })\n\n metric_kwargs.update(self.eval_metric_options.get('coherence_gensim_kwargs', {}))\n\n res = metric_coherence_gensim(**metric_kwargs)\n elif metric == 'held_out_documents_wallach09':\n n_folds = self.eval_metric_options.get('held_out_documents_wallach09_n_folds', 5)\n shuffle_docs = self.eval_metric_options.get('held_out_documents_wallach09_shuffle_docs', True)\n n_samples = self.eval_metric_options.get('held_out_documents_wallach09_n_samples', 10000)\n\n folds_results = []\n # TODO: parallelize this\n for fold, train, test in split_dtm_for_cross_validation(data, n_folds, shuffle_docs=shuffle_docs):\n logger.info('> fold %d/%d of cross validation with %d held-out documents and %d training documents'\n % (fold+1, n_folds, test.shape[0], train.shape[0]))\n\n model_train = super(MultiprocEvaluationWorkerLDA, self).fit_model(train, params)\n theta_test = model_train.transform(test)\n\n folds_results.append(metric_held_out_documents_wallach09(test, theta_test, model_train.topic_word_,\n model_train.alpha, n_samples=n_samples))\n\n logger.debug('> cross validation results with metric \"%s\": %s' % (metric, str(folds_results)))\n res = np.mean(folds_results)\n elif metric == 'loglikelihood':\n res = lda_instance.loglikelihoods_[-1]\n else:\n raise ValueError('metric not available: \"%s\"' % metric)\n\n logger.info('> evaluation result with metric \"%s\": %f' % (metric, res))\n results[metric] = res\n\n return results\n\n\n#%% main API functions for parallel processing\n\n\ndef compute_models_parallel(data, varying_parameters=None, constant_parameters=None, n_max_processes=None):\n \"\"\"\n Compute several topic models in parallel using the \"lda\" package. Use a single or multiple document term matrices\n `data` and optionally a list of varying parameters `varying_parameters`. Pass parameters in `constant_parameters`\n dict to each model calculation. Use at maximum `n_max_processes` processors or use all available processors if None\n is passed.\n\n `data` can be either a Document-Term-Matrix (NumPy array/matrix, SciPy sparse matrix) or a dict with corpus ID ->\n Document-Term-Matrix mapping when calculating models for multiple corpora.\n\n If `data` is a dict of named matrices, this function will return a dict with document ID -> result list. Otherwise\n it will only return a result list. A result list always is a list containing tuples `(parameter_set, model)` where\n `parameter_set` is a dict of the used parameters.\n\n :param data: either a (sparse) 2D array/matrix or a dict mapping dataset labels to such matrices\n :param varying_parameters: list of dicts with parameters; each parameter set will be used in a separate\n computation\n :param constant_parameters: dict with parameters that are the same for all parallel computations\n :param n_max_processes: maximum number of worker processes to spawn\n :return: if passed data is 2D array, returns a list with tuples (parameter set, results); if passed data is\n a dict of 2D arrays, returns dict with same keys as data and the respective results for each dataset\n \"\"\"\n mp_models = MultiprocModelsRunner(MultiprocModelsWorkerLDA, data, varying_parameters, constant_parameters,\n n_max_processes=n_max_processes)\n\n return mp_models.run()\n\n\ndef evaluate_topic_models(data, varying_parameters, constant_parameters=None, n_max_processes=None, return_models=False,\n metric=None, **metric_kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Compute several Topic Models in parallel using the \"lda\" package. Calculate the models using a list of varying\n parameters `varying_parameters` on a single Document-Term-Matrix `data`. Pass parameters in `constant_parameters`\n dict to each model calculation. Use at maximum `n_max_processes` processors or use all available processors if None\n is passed.\n\n `data` must be a Document-Term-Matrix (NumPy array/matrix, SciPy sparse matrix).\n\n Will return a list of size `len(varying_parameters)` containing tuples `(parameter_set, eval_results)` where\n `parameter_set` is a dict of the used parameters and `eval_results` is a dict of metric names -> metric results:\n\n .. code-block:: text\n\n [(parameter_set_1, {'': result_1, ...}),\n ...,\n (parameter_set_n, {'': result_n, ...})])\n\n .. seealso:: Results can be simplified using :func:`tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate.results_by_parameter`.\n\n :param data: a (sparse) 2D array/matrix\n :param varying_parameters: list of dicts with parameters; each parameter set will be used in a separate\n evaluation\n :param constant_parameters: dict with parameters that are the same for all parallel computations\n :param n_max_processes: maximum number of worker processes to spawn\n :param return_models: if True, also return the computed models in the evaluation results\n :param metric: string or list of strings; if given, use only this metric(s) for evaluation; must be subset of\n `available_metrics`\n :param metric_kwargs: dict of options for metric used metric(s)\n :return: list of evaluation results for each varying parameter set as described above\n \"\"\"\n mp_eval = MultiprocEvaluationRunner(MultiprocEvaluationWorkerLDA, AVAILABLE_METRICS, data,\n varying_parameters, constant_parameters,\n metric=metric or DEFAULT_METRICS, metric_options=metric_kwargs,\n n_max_processes=n_max_processes, return_models=return_models)\n\n return mp_eval.run()\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/topicmod/tm_sklearn.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nParallel model computation and evaluation using the `scikit-learn package `_.\n\nAvailable evaluation metrics for this module are listed in :data:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.tm_sklearn.AVAILABLE_METRICS`.\nSee :mod:`tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate` for references and implementations of those evaluation metrics.\n\"\"\"\n\nimport logging\nimport importlib.util\n\nimport numpy as np\nfrom scipy.sparse import issparse, csr_matrix\n\nfrom ._eval_tools import split_dtm_for_cross_validation\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod.parallel import MultiprocModelsRunner, MultiprocModelsWorkerABC, MultiprocEvaluationRunner, \\\n MultiprocEvaluationWorkerABC\nfrom .evaluate import metric_cao_juan_2009, metric_arun_2010, metric_coherence_mimno_2011, \\\n metric_coherence_gensim, metric_held_out_documents_wallach09\n\n\nif importlib.util.find_spec('gmpy2'):\n metrics_using_gmpy2 = ('held_out_documents_wallach09', )\nelse: # if gmpy2 is not available: do not use 'griffiths_2004'\n metrics_using_gmpy2 = ()\n\nif importlib.util.find_spec('gensim'):\n metrics_using_gensim = (\n 'coherence_gensim_u_mass', # same as coherence_mimno_2011\n 'coherence_gensim_c_v',\n 'coherence_gensim_c_uci',\n 'coherence_gensim_c_npmi'\n )\nelse:\n metrics_using_gensim = ()\n\n#: Available metrics for sklearn (``\"held_out_documents_wallach09\"`` is added when package gmpy2\n#: is installed, several ``\"coherence_gensim_\"`` metrics are added when package gensim is installed).\nAVAILABLE_METRICS = (\n 'perplexity',\n 'cao_juan_2009',\n 'arun_2010',\n 'coherence_mimno_2011',\n 'coherence_gensim_u_mass', # same as coherence_mimno_2011\n 'coherence_gensim_c_v',\n 'coherence_gensim_c_uci',\n 'coherence_gensim_c_npmi',\n) + metrics_using_gmpy2 + metrics_using_gensim\n\n#: Metrics used by default.\nDEFAULT_METRICS = (\n 'perplexity',\n 'cao_juan_2009',\n 'coherence_mimno_2011'\n)\n\n\n#%% Specialized classes for parallel processing\n\n\nlogger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n\n\nclass MultiprocModelsWorkerSklearn(MultiprocModelsWorkerABC):\n \"\"\"\n Specialized parallel model computations worker for sklearn.\n \"\"\"\n\n package_name = 'sklearn'\n\n def fit_model(self, data, params, return_data=False):\n from sklearn.decomposition import LatentDirichletAllocation\n\n if issparse(data):\n if data.format != 'csr':\n data = data.tocsr()\n else:\n data = csr_matrix(data)\n\n lda_instance = LatentDirichletAllocation(**params)\n lda_instance.fit(data)\n\n if return_data:\n return lda_instance, data\n else:\n return lda_instance\n\n\nclass MultiprocEvaluationWorkerSklearn(MultiprocEvaluationWorkerABC, MultiprocModelsWorkerSklearn):\n \"\"\"\n Specialized parallel model evaluations worker for sklearn.\n \"\"\"\n\n def fit_model(self, data, params, return_data=False):\n lda_instance, data = super(MultiprocEvaluationWorkerSklearn, self).fit_model(data, params,\n return_data=True)\n\n topic_word_distrib = _get_normalized_topic_word_distrib(lda_instance)\n\n results = {}\n if self.return_models:\n results['model'] = lda_instance\n\n for metric in self.eval_metric:\n if metric == 'cao_juan_2009':\n res = metric_cao_juan_2009(topic_word_distrib)\n elif metric == 'arun_2010':\n res = metric_arun_2010(topic_word_distrib, lda_instance.transform(data), data.sum(axis=1))\n elif metric == 'coherence_mimno_2011':\n default_top_n = min(20, topic_word_distrib.shape[1])\n res = metric_coherence_mimno_2011(topic_word_distrib, data,\n top_n=self.eval_metric_options.get(\n 'coherence_mimno_2011_top_n', default_top_n),\n eps=self.eval_metric_options.get('coherence_mimno_2011_eps', 1),\n include_prob=self.eval_metric_options.get(\n 'coherence_mimno_2011_include_prob', False),\n normalize=self.eval_metric_options.get(\n 'coherence_mimno_2011_normalize', False),\n return_mean=True)\n elif metric.startswith('coherence_gensim_'):\n if 'coherence_gensim_vocab' not in self.eval_metric_options:\n raise ValueError('corpus vocabulary must be passed as `coherence_gensim_vocab`')\n\n coh_measure = metric[len('coherence_gensim_'):]\n default_top_n = min(20, topic_word_distrib.shape[1])\n metric_kwargs = {\n 'measure': coh_measure,\n 'topic_word_distrib': topic_word_distrib,\n 'dtm': data,\n 'vocab': self.eval_metric_options['coherence_gensim_vocab'],\n 'return_mean': True,\n 'processes': 1,\n 'top_n': self.eval_metric_options.get('coherence_gensim_top_n', default_top_n),\n }\n\n if coh_measure != 'u_mass':\n if 'coherence_gensim_texts' not in self.eval_metric_options:\n raise ValueError('tokenized documents must be passed as `coherence_gensim_texts` for any other '\n 'coherence measure than `u_mass`')\n metric_kwargs.update({\n 'texts': self.eval_metric_options['coherence_gensim_texts']\n })\n\n metric_kwargs.update(self.eval_metric_options.get('coherence_gensim_kwargs', {}))\n\n res = metric_coherence_gensim(**metric_kwargs)\n elif metric == 'held_out_documents_wallach09':\n n_folds = self.eval_metric_options.get('held_out_documents_wallach09_n_folds', 5)\n shuffle_docs = self.eval_metric_options.get('held_out_documents_wallach09_shuffle_docs', True)\n n_samples = self.eval_metric_options.get('held_out_documents_wallach09_n_samples', 10000)\n\n folds_results = []\n # TODO: parallelize this\n for fold, train, test in split_dtm_for_cross_validation(data, n_folds, shuffle_docs=shuffle_docs):\n logger.info('> fold %d/%d of cross validation with %d held-out documents and %d training documents'\n % (fold+1, n_folds, test.shape[0], train.shape[0]))\n\n model_train = super(MultiprocEvaluationWorkerSklearn, self).fit_model(train, params)\n theta_test = model_train.transform(test)\n\n phi_train = _get_normalized_topic_word_distrib(lda_instance)\n\n folds_results.append(metric_held_out_documents_wallach09(test, theta_test, phi_train,\n model_train.doc_topic_prior_,\n n_samples=n_samples))\n\n logger.debug('> cross validation results with metric \"%s\": %s' % (metric, str(folds_results)))\n res = np.mean(folds_results)\n elif metric == 'perplexity':\n res = lda_instance.perplexity(data)\n else:\n raise ValueError('metric not available: \"%s\"' % metric)\n\n logger.info('> evaluation result with metric \"%s\": %f' % (metric, res))\n results[metric] = res\n\n return results\n\n\n#%% main API functions for parallel processing\n\n\ndef compute_models_parallel(data, varying_parameters=None, constant_parameters=None, n_max_processes=None):\n \"\"\"\n Compute several topic models in parallel using the \"sklearn\" package. Use a single or multiple document term matrices\n `data` and optionally a list of varying parameters `varying_parameters`. Pass parameters in `constant_parameters`\n dict to each model calculation. Use at maximum `n_max_processes` processors or use all available processors if None\n is passed.\n\n `data` can be either a Document-Term-Matrix (NumPy array/matrix, SciPy sparse matrix) or a dict with corpus ID ->\n Document-Term-Matrix mapping when calculating models for multiple corpora.\n\n If `data` is a dict of named matrices, this function will return a dict with document ID -> result list. Otherwise\n it will only return a result list. A result list always is a list containing tuples `(parameter_set, model)` where\n `parameter_set` is a dict of the used parameters.\n\n :param data: either a (sparse) 2D array/matrix or a dict mapping dataset labels to such matrices\n :param varying_parameters: list of dicts with parameters; each parameter set will be used in a separate\n computation\n :param constant_parameters: dict with parameters that are the same for all parallel computations\n :param n_max_processes: maximum number of worker processes to spawn\n :return: if passed data is 2D array, returns a list with tuples (parameter set, results); if passed data is\n a dict of 2D arrays, returns dict with same keys as data and the respective results for each dataset\n \"\"\"\n\n mp_models = MultiprocModelsRunner(MultiprocModelsWorkerSklearn, data, varying_parameters, constant_parameters,\n n_max_processes=n_max_processes)\n\n return mp_models.run()\n\n\ndef evaluate_topic_models(data, varying_parameters, constant_parameters=None, n_max_processes=None, return_models=False,\n metric=None, **metric_kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Compute several Topic Models in parallel using the \"sklearn\" package. Calculate the models using a list of varying\n parameters `varying_parameters` on a single Document-Term-Matrix `data`. Pass parameters in `constant_parameters`\n dict to each model calculation. Use at maximum `n_max_processes` processors or use all available processors if None\n is passed.\n\n `data` must be a Document-Term-Matrix (NumPy array/matrix, SciPy sparse matrix).\n\n Will return a list of size `len(varying_parameters)` containing tuples `(parameter_set, eval_results)` where\n `parameter_set` is a dict of the used parameters and `eval_results` is a dict of metric names -> metric results:\n\n .. code-block:: text\n\n [(parameter_set_1, {'': result_1, ...}),\n ...,\n (parameter_set_n, {'': result_n, ...})])\n\n .. seealso:: Results can be simplified using :func:`tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate.results_by_parameter`.\n\n :param data: a (sparse) 2D array/matrix\n :param varying_parameters: list of dicts with parameters; each parameter set will be used in a separate\n evaluation\n :param constant_parameters: dict with parameters that are the same for all parallel computations\n :param n_max_processes: maximum number of worker processes to spawn\n :param return_models: if True, also return the computed models in the evaluation results\n :param metric: string or list of strings; if given, use only this metric(s) for evaluation; must be subset of\n `available_metrics`\n :param metric_kwargs: dict of options for metric used metric(s)\n :return: list of evaluation results for each varying parameter set as described above\n \"\"\"\n\n mp_eval = MultiprocEvaluationRunner(MultiprocEvaluationWorkerSklearn, AVAILABLE_METRICS, data,\n varying_parameters, constant_parameters,\n metric=metric or DEFAULT_METRICS, metric_options=metric_kwargs,\n n_max_processes=n_max_processes, return_models=return_models)\n\n return mp_eval.run()\n\n\n#%% Helper functions\n\ndef _get_normalized_topic_word_distrib(lda_instance):\n return lda_instance.components_ / lda_instance.components_.sum(axis=1)[:, np.newaxis]\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/topicmod/visualize.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nFunctions to visualize topic models and topic model evaluation results.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\nimport itertools\nimport math\nimport os\nimport logging\nfrom collections import defaultdict\n\nimport numpy as np\nimport matplotlib.pyplot as plt\n\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod.model_stats import top_n_from_distribution\nfrom tmtoolkit.bow.bow_stats import doc_lengths, term_frequencies\nfrom tmtoolkit.topicmod import evaluate\nfrom tmtoolkit.utils import mat2d_window_from_indices\n\nlogger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n\n\n#%% word clouds from topic models\n\n\ndef _wordcloud_color_func_black(word, font_size, position, orientation, random_state=None, **kwargs):\n return 'rgb(0,0,0)'\n\n\n#: Default wordcloud settings for transparent background and black font; will be passed to ``wordcloud.WordCloud``\nDEFAULT_WORDCLOUD_KWARGS = {\n 'width': 800,\n 'height': 600,\n 'mode': 'RGBA',\n 'background_color': None,\n 'color_func': _wordcloud_color_func_black\n}\n\n\ndef write_wordclouds_to_folder(wordclouds, folder, file_name_fmt='{label}.png', **save_kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Save all wordcloud image objects in `wordclouds` to `folder`.\n\n :param wordclouds: dict mapping wordcloud label to wordcloud object\n :param folder: target path\n :param file_name_fmt: file name string format with placeholder ``\"{label}\"``\n :param save_kwargs: additional options passed to `save` method of each wordcloud image object\n \"\"\"\n\n if not os.path.exists(folder):\n raise ValueError('target folder `%s` does not exist' % folder)\n\n for label, wc in wordclouds.items():\n file_name = file_name_fmt.format(label=label)\n file_path = os.path.join(folder, file_name)\n logger.info(f'writing wordcloud to file \"{file_path}\"')\n\n wc.save(file_path, **save_kwargs)\n\n\ndef generate_wordclouds_for_topic_words(topic_word_distrib, vocab, top_n, topic_labels='topic_{i1}', which_topics=None,\n return_images=True, **wordcloud_kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Generate wordclouds for the top `top_n` words of each topic in `topic_word_distrib`.\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param vocab: vocabulary array of length M\n :param top_n: number of top values to take from each row of `distrib`\n :param topic_labels: labels used for each row; determine keys in in result dict; either single format string with\n placeholders ``\"{i0}\"`` (zero-based topic index) or ``\"{i1}\"`` (one-based topic index), or\n list of topic label strings\n :param which_topics: if not None, a sequence of indices into rows of `topic_word_distrib` to select only these\n topics to generate wordclouds from\n :param return_images: if True, store image objects instead of ``wordcloud.WordCloud`` objects in the result\n dict\n :param wordcloud_kwargs: pass additional options to ``wordcloud.WordCloud``; updates options in\n :data:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.DEFAULT_WORDCLOUD_KWARGS`\n :return: dict mapping row labels to wordcloud images or instances generated from each topic\n \"\"\"\n return generate_wordclouds_from_distribution(topic_word_distrib, row_labels=topic_labels, val_labels=vocab,\n top_n=top_n, which_rows=which_topics, return_images=return_images,\n **wordcloud_kwargs)\n\n\ndef generate_wordclouds_for_document_topics(doc_topic_distrib, doc_labels, top_n, topic_labels='topic_{i1}',\n which_documents=None, return_images=True, **wordcloud_kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Generate wordclouds for the top `top_n` topics of each document in `doc_topic_distrib`.\n\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_labels: list/array of length N with a string label for each document\n :param top_n: number of top values to take from each row of `distrib`\n :param topic_labels: labels used for each row; determine keys in in result dict; either single format string with\n placeholders ``\"{i0}\"`` (zero-based topic index) or ``\"{i1}\"`` (one-based topic index), or\n list of topic label strings\n :param which_documents: if not None, a sequence of indices into rows of `doc_topic_distrib` to select only these\n topics to generate wordclouds from\n :param return_images: if True, store image objects instead of ``wordcloud.WordCloud`` objects in the result\n dict\n :param wordcloud_kwargs: pass additional options to ``wordcloud.WordCloud``; updates options in\n :data:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.DEFAULT_WORDCLOUD_KWARGS`\n :return: dict mapping row labels to wordcloud images or instances generated from each document\n \"\"\"\n return generate_wordclouds_from_distribution(doc_topic_distrib, row_labels=doc_labels, val_labels=topic_labels,\n top_n=top_n, which_rows=which_documents, return_images=return_images,\n **wordcloud_kwargs)\n\n\ndef generate_wordclouds_from_distribution(distrib, row_labels, val_labels, top_n, which_rows=None, return_images=True,\n **wordcloud_kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Generate wordclouds for each row in a given probability distribution `distrib`.\n\n .. note:: Use :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.generate_wordclouds_for_topic_words` or\n :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.generate_wordclouds_for_document_topics` as shortcuts for creating\n wordclouds for a topic-word or document-topic distribution.\n\n :param distrib: 2D (sparse) array/matrix probability distribution\n :param row_labels: labels for rows in probability distribution; these are used as keys in the return dict\n :param val_labels: labels for values in probability distribution (e.g. vocabulary)\n :param top_n: number of top values to take from each row of `distrib`\n :param which_rows: if not None, select only the rows from this sequence of indices from `distrib`\n :param return_images: if True, store image objects instead of ``wordcloud.WordCloud`` objects in the result\n dict\n :param wordcloud_kwargs: pass additional options to ``wordcloud.WordCloud``; updates options in\n :data:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.DEFAULT_WORDCLOUD_KWARGS`\n :return: dict mapping row labels to wordcloud images or instances generated from each distribution row\n \"\"\"\n\n prob = top_n_from_distribution(distrib, top_n=top_n, row_labels=row_labels, val_labels=None)\n words = top_n_from_distribution(distrib, top_n=top_n, row_labels=row_labels, val_labels=val_labels)\n\n if which_rows:\n prob = prob.loc[which_rows, :]\n words = words.loc[which_rows, :]\n\n assert prob.shape == words.shape\n\n wordclouds = {}\n for (p_row_name, p), (w_row_name, w) in zip(prob.iterrows(), words.iterrows()):\n assert p_row_name == w_row_name\n logger.info(f'generating wordcloud for \"{p_row_name}\"')\n wc = generate_wordcloud_from_probabilities_and_words(p, w,\n return_image=return_images,\n **wordcloud_kwargs)\n wordclouds[p_row_name] = wc\n\n return wordclouds\n\n\ndef generate_wordcloud_from_probabilities_and_words(prob, words, return_image=True, wordcloud_instance=None,\n **wordcloud_kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Generate a single wordcloud for given probabilities (weights) `prob` of the respective `words`.\n\n :param prob: 1D array or sequence of probabilities for `words`\n :param words: 1D array or sequence of word strings\n :param return_images: if True, store image objects instead of ``wordcloud.WordCloud`` objects in the result\n dict\n :param wordcloud_instance: optionally pass an already initialized ``wordcloud.WordCloud`` instance\n :param wordcloud_kwargs: pass additional options to ``wordcloud.WordCloud``; updates options in\n :data:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.DEFAULT_WORDCLOUD_KWARGS`\n :return: either a wordcloud image if `return_images` is True, otherwise a ``wordcloud.WordCloud`` instance\n \"\"\"\n\n if len(prob) != len(words):\n raise ValueError('`prob` and `words` must have the name length')\n if hasattr(prob, 'ndim') and prob.ndim != 1:\n raise ValueError('`prob` must be a 1D array or sequence')\n if hasattr(words, 'ndim') and words.ndim != 1:\n raise ValueError('`words` must be a 1D array or sequence')\n\n weights = dict(zip(words, prob))\n\n return generate_wordcloud_from_weights(weights, return_image=return_image,\n wordcloud_instance=wordcloud_instance, **wordcloud_kwargs)\n\n\ndef generate_wordcloud_from_weights(weights, return_image=True, wordcloud_instance=None, **wordcloud_kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Generate a single wordcloud for a `weights` dict that maps words to \"weights\" (e.g. probabilities) which determine\n their size in the wordcloud.\n\n :param weights: dict that maps words to weights\n :param return_images: if True, store image objects instead of ``wordcloud.WordCloud`` objects in the result\n dict\n :param wordcloud_instance: optionally pass an already initialized ``wordcloud.WordCloud`` instance\n :param wordcloud_kwargs: pass additional options to ``wordcloud.WordCloud``; updates options in\n :data:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.DEFAULT_WORDCLOUD_KWARGS`\n :return: either a wordcloud image if `return_images` is True, otherwise a ``wordcloud.WordCloud`` instance\n \"\"\"\n\n if not isinstance(weights, dict) or not weights:\n raise ValueError('`weights` must be a non-empty dictionary')\n\n if not wordcloud_instance:\n from wordcloud import WordCloud\n\n use_wc_kwargs = DEFAULT_WORDCLOUD_KWARGS.copy()\n use_wc_kwargs.update(wordcloud_kwargs)\n wordcloud_instance = WordCloud(**use_wc_kwargs)\n\n wordcloud_instance.generate_from_frequencies(weights)\n\n if return_image:\n return wordcloud_instance.to_image()\n else:\n return wordcloud_instance\n\n\n#%% plot 2D probability distribution rankings\n\n\ndef plot_topic_word_ranked_prob(fig, ax, topic_word_distrib, n,\n highlight_label_fmt='topic {i0}',\n highlight_label_other='other topics',\n title='Ranked word probability per topic',\n xaxislabel='word rank',\n yaxislabel='word probability',\n **kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Plot a topic-word probability distribution by ranking the probabilities in each row. This is for example useful\n in order to examine how many top words usually describe most of a topic.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word probability distribution\n :param n: limit max. shown word rank on x-axis\n :param highlight_label_fmt: if `highlight` is given, use this format for labeling the highlighted rows\n :param highlight_label_other: if `highlight` is given, use this as label for non-highlighted rows\n :param title: plot title\n :param xaxislabel: x-axis label\n :param yaxislabel: y-axis label\n :param kwargs: further arguments passed to :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_prob_distrib_ranked_prob`\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n return plot_prob_distrib_ranked_prob(fig, ax, topic_word_distrib, x_limit=n,\n highlight_label_fmt=highlight_label_fmt,\n highlight_label_other=highlight_label_other,\n title=title, xaxislabel=xaxislabel, yaxislabel=yaxislabel, **kwargs)\n\n\ndef plot_doc_topic_ranked_prob(fig, ax, doc_topic_distrib, n,\n highlight_label_fmt='document {i0}',\n highlight_label_other='other documents',\n title='Ranked topic probability per document',\n xaxislabel='topic rank',\n yaxislabel='topic probability',\n **kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Plot a document-topic probability distribution by ranking the probabilities in each row. This is for example useful\n in order to examine how many top topics usually describe most of a document.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic probability distribution\n :param n: limit max. shown topic rank on x-axis\n :param highlight_label_fmt: if `highlight` is given, use this format for labeling the highlighted rows\n :param highlight_label_other: if `highlight` is given, use this as label for non-highlighted rows\n :param title: plot title\n :param xaxislabel: x-axis label\n :param yaxislabel: y-axis label\n :param kwargs: further arguments passed to :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_prob_distrib_ranked_prob`\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n return plot_prob_distrib_ranked_prob(fig, ax, doc_topic_distrib, x_limit=n,\n highlight_label_fmt=highlight_label_fmt,\n highlight_label_other=highlight_label_other,\n title=title, xaxislabel=xaxislabel, yaxislabel=yaxislabel, **kwargs)\n\n\ndef plot_prob_distrib_ranked_prob(fig, ax, data, x_limit, log_scale=True, lw=1, alpha=0.1,\n highlight=None, highlight_label_fmt='{i0}', highlight_label_other='other',\n highlight_lw=3, highlight_alpha=0.3,\n title=None, xaxislabel='rank', yaxislabel='probability'):\n \"\"\"\n Plot a 2D probability distribution (one distribution for each row which should add up to 1) by ranking the\n probabilities in each row.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param data: a 2D probability distribution (one distribution for each row which should add up to 1)\n :param x_limit: limit max. shown rank on x-axis\n :param log_scale: if True, apply log scale on y-axis\n :param lw: line width\n :param alpha: line transparency\n :param highlight: if given, pass a sequence or NumPy array with *indices* of rows in `data`, which should be\n highlighted\n :param highlight_label_fmt: if `highlight` is given, use this format for labeling the highlighted rows\n :param highlight_label_other: if `highlight` is given, use this as label for non-highlighted rows\n :param highlight_lw: line width for highlighted distributions\n :param highlight_alpha: line transparency for highlighted distributions\n :param title: plot title\n :param xaxislabel: x-axis label\n :param yaxislabel: y-axis label\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n if not isinstance(data, np.ndarray):\n data = np.array(data)\n\n if data.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`data` must be a 2D matrix/array')\n\n if data.shape[1] == 0:\n raise ValueError('`data` must have at least one column')\n\n if not 1 <= x_limit <= data.shape[1]:\n raise ValueError('`x_limit` must be strictly positive and no larger than the number of columns in `data`')\n\n if highlight:\n if not isinstance(highlight, np.ndarray):\n highlight = np.array(highlight)\n\n palette = plt.get_cmap('Dark2')\n highlight_handles = []\n else:\n palette = None\n highlight_handles = None\n\n # log transform\n if log_scale:\n data = np.log10(data)\n\n # set title\n if title:\n ax.set_title(title)\n\n # rowwise sorting (NumPy still doesn't support descending order, hence the \"-\" hack)\n data_desc = -np.sort(-data, axis=1)\n\n ranks = np.arange(1, x_limit + 1)\n for i, row in enumerate(data_desc): # each row is a prob. distrib. with descending prob. values\n if highlight is not None:\n highlight_index = np.where(i == highlight)[0]\n else:\n highlight_index = []\n\n if len(highlight_index) > 0:\n color = palette(highlight_index[0])\n label = highlight_label_fmt.format(i0=i, i1=i+1)\n lw_ = highlight_lw\n alpha_ = highlight_alpha\n else:\n color = 'black'\n label = highlight_label_other\n lw_ = lw\n alpha_ = alpha\n\n res = ax.plot(ranks, row[:x_limit], color=color, label=label, lw=lw_, alpha=alpha_)\n\n if len(highlight_index) > 0:\n highlight_handles.append(res[0])\n\n # customize axes\n if xaxislabel:\n ax.set_xlabel(xaxislabel)\n if yaxislabel:\n if log_scale:\n yaxislabel += ' (log10 scale)'\n ax.set_ylabel(yaxislabel)\n\n if highlight_handles:\n ax.legend(handles=highlight_handles, loc='best')\n\n return fig, ax\n\n\n#%% plot heatmaps (especially for doc-topic distribution)\n\n\ndef plot_doc_topic_heatmap(fig, ax, doc_topic_distrib, doc_labels, topic_labels=None,\n which_documents=None, which_document_indices=None,\n which_topics=None, which_topic_indices=None,\n xaxislabel=None, yaxislabel=None,\n **kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Plot a heatmap for a document-topic distribution `doc_topic_distrib` to a matplotlib Figure `fig` and Axes `ax`\n using `doc_labels` as document labels on the y-axis and topics from 1 to K (number of topics) on\n the x-axis.\n\n .. note:: It is almost always necessary to select a subset of your document-topic distribution with the\n `which_documents` or `which_topics` parameters, as otherwise the amount of data to be plotted will be too\n high to give a reasonable picture.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param doc_labels: list/array of length N with a string label for each document\n :param topic_labels: labels used for each row; either single format string with\n placeholders ``\"{i0}\"`` (zero-based topic index) or ``\"{i1}\"`` (one-based topic index), or\n list of topic label strings\n :param which_documents: select documents via document label strings\n :param which_document_indices: alternatively, select documents with zero-based document index in [0, N-1]\n :param which_topics: select topics via topic label strings (when string array or list) or with\n one-based topic index in [1, K] (when integer array or list)\n :param which_topic_indices: alternatively, select topics with zero-based topic index in [0, K-1]\n :param xaxislabel: x axis label string\n :param yaxislabel: y axis label string\n :param kwargs: additional arguments passed to :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_heatmap`\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n\n if not isinstance(doc_topic_distrib, np.ndarray) or doc_topic_distrib.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`mat` must be a 2D NumPy array')\n\n if doc_topic_distrib.shape[0] == 0 or doc_topic_distrib.shape[1] == 0:\n raise ValueError('invalid shape for `mat`: %s' % str(doc_topic_distrib.shape))\n\n if which_documents is not None and which_document_indices is not None:\n raise ValueError('only `which_documents` or `which_document_indices` can be set, not both')\n\n if which_topics is not None and which_topic_indices is not None:\n raise ValueError('only `which_topics` or `which_topic_indices` can be set, not both')\n\n if which_documents is not None:\n which_document_indices = np.where(np.isin(doc_labels, which_documents))[0]\n\n select_distrib_subset = False\n\n if topic_labels is None:\n topic_labels = np.array(range(1, doc_topic_distrib.shape[1]+1))\n elif not isinstance(topic_labels, np.ndarray):\n topic_labels = np.array(topic_labels)\n\n if which_topics is not None:\n which_topics = np.array(which_topics)\n if which_topics.dtype.kind == 'U':\n which_topic_indices = np.where(np.isin(topic_labels, which_topics))[0]\n else:\n which_topic_indices = which_topics - 1\n\n if which_document_indices is not None:\n select_distrib_subset = True\n doc_labels = np.array(doc_labels)[which_document_indices]\n\n if which_topic_indices is not None:\n select_distrib_subset = True\n topic_labels = topic_labels[which_topic_indices]\n\n if select_distrib_subset:\n doc_topic_distrib = mat2d_window_from_indices(doc_topic_distrib, which_document_indices, which_topic_indices)\n\n return plot_heatmap(fig, ax, doc_topic_distrib,\n xaxislabel=xaxislabel or 'topic',\n yaxislabel=yaxislabel or 'document',\n xticklabels=topic_labels,\n yticklabels=doc_labels,\n **kwargs)\n\n\ndef plot_topic_word_heatmap(fig, ax, topic_word_distrib, vocab, topic_labels=None,\n which_topics=None, which_topic_indices=None,\n which_words=None, which_word_indices=None,\n xaxislabel=None, yaxislabel=None,\n **kwargs):\n \"\"\"\n Plot a heatmap for a topic-word distribution `topic_word_distrib` to a matplotlib Figure `fig` and Axes `ax`\n using `vocab` as vocabulary on the x-axis and topics from 1 to `n_topics=doc_topic_distrib.shape[1]` on\n the y-axis.\n\n\n .. note:: It is almost always necessary to select a subset of your topic-word distribution with the\n `which_words` or `which_topics` parameters, as otherwise the amount of data to be plotted will be too high\n to give a reasonable picture.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param vocab: vocabulary array of length M\n :param topic_labels: labels used for each row; either single format string with\n placeholders ``\"{i0}\"`` (zero-based topic index) or ``\"{i1}\"`` (one-based topic index), or\n list of topic label strings\n :param which_topics: select topics via topic label strings (when string array or list and `topic_labels` is given)\n or with one-based topic index in [1, K] (when integer array or list)\n :param which_topic_indices: alternatively, select topics with zero-based topic index in [0, K-1]\n :param which_words: select words with one-based word index in [1, M]\n :param which_word_indices: alternatively, select words with zero-based word index in [0, K-1]\n :param xaxislabel: x axis label string\n :param yaxislabel: y axis label string\n :param kwargs: additional arguments passed to :func:`~tmtoolkit.topicmod.visualize.plot_heatmap`\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n if not isinstance(topic_word_distrib, np.ndarray) or topic_word_distrib.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`mat` must be a 2D NumPy array')\n\n if topic_word_distrib.shape[0] == 0 or topic_word_distrib.shape[1] == 0:\n raise ValueError('invalid shape for `mat`: %s' % str(topic_word_distrib.shape))\n\n if which_topics is not None and which_topic_indices is not None:\n raise ValueError('only `which_topics` or `which_topic_indices` can be set, not both')\n\n if which_words is not None and which_word_indices is not None:\n raise ValueError('only `which_words` or `which_word_indices` can be set, not both')\n\n if which_words is not None:\n which_word_indices = np.where(np.isin(vocab, which_words))[0]\n\n select_distrib_subset = False\n\n if topic_labels is None:\n topic_labels = np.array(range(1, topic_word_distrib.shape[0]+1))\n elif not isinstance(topic_labels, np.ndarray):\n topic_labels = np.array(topic_labels)\n\n if which_topics is not None:\n which_topics = np.array(which_topics)\n if which_topics.dtype.kind == 'U':\n which_topic_indices = np.where(np.isin(topic_labels, which_topics))[0]\n else:\n which_topic_indices = which_topics - 1\n\n if which_topic_indices is not None:\n select_distrib_subset = True\n topic_labels = topic_labels[which_topic_indices]\n\n if which_word_indices is not None:\n select_distrib_subset = True\n vocab = np.array(vocab)[which_word_indices]\n\n if select_distrib_subset:\n topic_word_distrib = mat2d_window_from_indices(topic_word_distrib, which_topic_indices, which_word_indices)\n\n return plot_heatmap(fig, ax, topic_word_distrib,\n xaxislabel=xaxislabel or 'vocab',\n yaxislabel=yaxislabel or 'topic',\n xticklabels=vocab,\n yticklabels=topic_labels,\n **kwargs)\n\n\ndef plot_heatmap(fig, ax, data,\n xaxislabel=None, yaxislabel=None,\n xticklabels=None, yticklabels=None,\n title=None, grid=True,\n values_in_cells=True, round_values_in_cells=2,\n legend=False,\n fontsize_axislabel=None,\n fontsize_axisticks=None,\n fontsize_cell_values=None):\n \"\"\"\n Generic heatmap plotting function for 2D matrix `data`.\n\n :param fig: matplotlib Figure object\n :param ax: matplotlib Axes object\n :param data: 2D array/matrix to be plotted as heatmap\n :param xaxislabel: x axis label string\n :param yaxislabel: y axis label string\n :param xticklabels: list of x axis tick labels\n :param yticklabels: list of y axis tick labels\n :param title: plot title\n :param grid: draw grid if True\n :param values_in_cells: draw values of `data` in heatmap cells\n :param round_values_in_cells: round these values to the given number of digits\n :param legend: if True, draw a legend\n :param fontsize_axislabel: font size for axis label\n :param fontsize_axisticks: font size for axis ticks\n :param fontsize_cell_values: font size for values in cells\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Axes object)\n \"\"\"\n\n if not isinstance(data, np.ndarray):\n data = np.array(data)\n\n if data.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`data` must be a 2D matrix/array')\n\n # draw basic heatmap\n cax = ax.matshow(data)\n\n # draw legend\n if legend:\n fig.colorbar(cax)\n\n # set title\n if title:\n ax.set_title(title, y=1.25)\n\n n_rows, n_cols = data.shape\n\n # draw values in cells\n if values_in_cells:\n textcol_thresh = data.min() + (data.max() - data.min()) / 2\n x_indices, y_indices = np.meshgrid(np.arange(n_cols), np.arange(n_rows))\n for x, y in zip(x_indices.flatten(), y_indices.flatten()):\n val = data[y, x]\n # lower values get white text color for better visibility\n textcol = 'white' if val < textcol_thresh else 'black'\n disp_val = round(val, round_values_in_cells) if round_values_in_cells is not None else val\n ax.text(x, y, disp_val, va='center', ha='center', color=textcol, fontsize=fontsize_cell_values)\n\n # customize axes\n if xaxislabel:\n ax.set_xlabel(xaxislabel)\n if yaxislabel:\n ax.set_ylabel(yaxislabel)\n\n if fontsize_axislabel:\n for item in (ax.xaxis.label, ax.yaxis.label):\n item.set_fontsize(fontsize_axislabel)\n\n ax.set_xticks(np.arange(0, n_cols))\n ax.set_yticks(np.arange(0, n_rows))\n\n if xticklabels is not None:\n ax.set_xticklabels(xticklabels, rotation=45, ha='left')\n if yticklabels is not None:\n ax.set_yticklabels(yticklabels)\n\n if fontsize_axisticks:\n for label in (ax.get_xticklabels() + ax.get_yticklabels()):\n label.set_fontsize(fontsize_axisticks)\n\n # gridlines based on minor ticks\n if grid:\n ax.set_xticks(np.arange(-.5, n_cols), minor=True)\n ax.set_yticks(np.arange(-.5, n_rows), minor=True)\n ax.grid(which='minor', color='w', linestyle='-', linewidth=1)\n\n return fig, ax\n\n\n#%% plotting of evaluation results\n\n\ndef plot_eval_results(eval_results, metric=None, param=None,\n xaxislabel=None, yaxislabel=None,\n title=None,\n title_fontsize='xx-large',\n subfig_fontsize='large',\n axes_title_fontsize='medium',\n show_metric_direction=True,\n metric_direction_font_size='medium',\n subplots_adjust_opts=None,\n figsize='auto',\n fig_opts=None,\n subfig_opts=None,\n subplots_opts=None):\n \"\"\"\n Plot the evaluation results from `eval_results`, which must be a sequence containing\n `(param_0, ..., param_N, metric results)` tuples, where `param_N` is the parameter value to appear on the x axis\n and all parameter combinations before are used to create a small multiples plot (if there are more than one param.).\n The metric results can be a dict structure containing the evaluation results for each metric. `eval_results` can be\n created using :func:`tmtoolkit.topicmod.evaluate.results_by_parameter`.\n\n .. note:: Due to a bug in matplotlib, it seems that it's not possible to display a plot title when plotting small\n multiples and adjusting the positioning of the subplots. Hence you must set `show_metric_direction` to\n False when you're displaying small multiples and need want to display a plot title.\n\n :param eval_results: topic evaluation results as sequence containing `(param_0, ..., param_N, metric results)`\n :param metric: either single string or list of strings; plot only this/these specific metric/s\n :param param: names of the parameters used in `eval_results`\n :param xaxislabel: x axis label string\n :param yaxislabel: y axis label string\n :param title: plot title\n :param title_fontsize: font size for the figure title\n :param axes_title_fontsize: font size for the plot titles\n :param show_metric_direction: if True, show whether the shown metric should be minimized or maximized for\n optimization\n :param metric_direction_font_size: font size for the metric optimization direction indicator\n :param subplots_opts: options passed to Matplotlib's ``plt.subplots()``\n :param subplots_adjust_opts: options passed to Matplotlib's ``fig.subplots_adjust()``\n :param figsize: tuple ``(width, height)`` or ``\"auto\"`` (default)\n :param fig_opts: additional parameters passed to Matplotlib's ``plt.figure()``\n :param subfig_opts: additional parameters passed to Matplotlib's ``fig.subfigures()``\n :param subplots_opts: additional parameters passed to Matplotlib's ``subfig.subplots()``\n :return: tuple of generated (matplotlib Figure object, matplotlib Subfigures, matplotlib Axes)\n \"\"\"\n if type(eval_results) not in (list, tuple) or not eval_results:\n raise ValueError('`eval_results` must be a list or tuple with at least one element')\n\n first_row = next(iter(eval_results))\n\n if type(first_row) not in (list, tuple):\n raise ValueError('`eval_results` must be a list or tuple containing a (param, values) tuple. '\n 'Maybe `eval_results` must be converted with `results_by_parameter`.')\n\n n_params = len(first_row) - 1\n\n if n_params < 1:\n raise ValueError('each entry in `eval_results` must contain at least two values '\n '(n parameter values and evaluation results)')\n\n if isinstance(param, str):\n param = [param]\n\n if param and len(param) != n_params:\n raise ValueError('if `param` is given, its length must equal the number of parameters in the eval. results')\n\n eval_colwise = list(zip(*eval_results))\n n_param_combinations = 1\n for p in range(0, n_params-1): # we don't count the last level as this will go on the x-axis\n n_param_combinations *= len(set(eval_colwise[p]))\n\n if metric is not None and type(metric) not in (list, tuple):\n metric = [metric]\n elif metric is None:\n # remove special evaluation result 'model': the calculated model itself\n metric = sorted(set(first_row[-1].keys()) - {'model'})\n\n metric = sorted(metric)\n\n metric_direction = []\n for m in metric:\n if m == 'perplexity':\n metric_direction.append('minimize')\n else:\n m_fn_name = 'metric_%s' % (m[:16] if m.startswith('coherence_gensim') else m)\n m_fn = getattr(evaluate, m_fn_name, None)\n if m_fn:\n metric_direction.append(getattr(m_fn, 'direction', 'unknown'))\n else:\n metric_direction.append('unknown')\n\n n_metrics = len(metric)\n\n assert n_metrics == len(metric_direction)\n\n metrics_ordered = []\n for m_dir in sorted(set(metric_direction), reverse=True):\n metrics_ordered.extend([(m, d) for m, d in zip(metric, metric_direction) if d == m_dir])\n\n assert n_metrics == len(metrics_ordered)\n\n if n_param_combinations > 3:\n n_fig_rows = math.ceil(math.sqrt(n_param_combinations))\n n_fig_cols = n_fig_rows\n\n n_fig_rows -= (n_fig_rows**2 - n_param_combinations) // n_fig_rows\n else:\n n_fig_rows = 1\n n_fig_cols = n_param_combinations\n\n # get figures and subplots (axes)\n if figsize == 'auto':\n figsize = (6 * n_fig_cols, 2 * n_fig_rows * n_metrics)\n\n fig = plt.figure(layout='constrained', figsize=figsize, **(fig_opts or {}))\n\n subfigs = fig.subfigures(nrows=n_fig_rows, ncols=n_fig_cols, **(subfig_opts or {}))\n if isinstance(subfigs, np.ndarray):\n subfigs = subfigs.flatten()\n else:\n subfigs = [subfigs]\n\n #unique_param_values_param_index = []\n unique_param_values = []\n for col in eval_colwise[:-2]:\n unique_vals = set(col)\n #unique_param_values_param_index.append([i] * len(unique_vals))\n unique_param_values.append(sorted(unique_vals))\n\n param_combinations = list(itertools.product(*unique_param_values))\n assert len(param_combinations) == n_param_combinations\n\n x = np.array(sorted(set(eval_colwise[-2])))\n all_metrics_results = np.array(eval_colwise[-1])\n\n subfigs_axes = []\n\n for i_subfig, subfig in enumerate(subfigs):\n if len(subfigs) > 1:\n if i_subfig >= len(param_combinations):\n break\n param_vals = param_combinations[i_subfig]\n if param:\n subfig_titles = [f'{param[i]} = {v}' for i, v in enumerate(param_vals)]\n else:\n subfig_titles = [str(v) for v in param_vals]\n\n subfig.suptitle('\\n'.join(subfig_titles), fontsize=subfig_fontsize)\n which_results = np.repeat(True, len(all_metrics_results))\n for i, v in enumerate(param_vals):\n which_results &= np.isclose(np.array(eval_colwise[i]), v)\n\n metrics_results = all_metrics_results[which_results]\n else:\n metrics_results = all_metrics_results\n\n axes = subfig.subplots(nrows=n_metrics, ncols=1, sharex=True, **(subplots_opts or {}))\n subfigs_axes.append(axes)\n\n # draw subplot for each metric\n axes_pos_per_dir = defaultdict(list)\n axes_sequence = axes.flatten() if n_metrics > 1 else [axes]\n assert len(axes_sequence) == len(metrics_ordered)\n for i, (ax, (m, m_dir)) in enumerate(zip(axes_sequence, metrics_ordered)):\n if show_metric_direction:\n axes_pos_per_dir[m_dir].append(ax.get_position())\n\n y = [mres[m] for mres in metrics_results]\n ax.plot(x, y, label=m)\n\n ax.set_title(m, fontsize=axes_title_fontsize)\n\n # set axis labels\n if (param or xaxislabel) and i == len(metric)-1:\n if xaxislabel:\n ax.set_xlabel(xaxislabel)\n else:\n ax.set_xlabel(param[-1])\n if yaxislabel:\n ax.set_ylabel(yaxislabel)\n\n # show grouped metric direction on the left\n if axes_pos_per_dir: # = if show_metric_direction\n left_xs = []\n ys = []\n for m_dir, bboxes in axes_pos_per_dir.items():\n left_xs.append(min(bb.x0 for bb in bboxes))\n min_y = min(bb.y0 for bb in bboxes)\n max_y = max(bb.y1 for bb in bboxes)\n ys.append((min_y, max_y))\n\n left_x = min(left_xs) / 2.5\n\n for (min_y, max_y), m_dir in zip(ys, axes_pos_per_dir.keys()):\n center_y = min_y + (max_y - min_y) / 2\n\n subfig.text(left_x / 1.5, center_y, m_dir, fontsize=metric_direction_font_size, rotation='vertical',\n horizontalalignment='right', verticalalignment='center')\n\n # set adjustments\n subplots_adjust_kwargs = {}\n\n if show_metric_direction:\n subplots_adjust_kwargs.update({'left': 0.15})\n\n subplots_adjust_kwargs.update(subplots_adjust_opts or {})\n\n if subplots_adjust_kwargs:\n fig.subplots_adjust(**subplots_adjust_kwargs)\n\n if title:\n fig.suptitle(title, fontsize=title_fontsize)\n\n return fig, subfigs, subfigs_axes\n\n\n#%% Other functions\n\n\ndef parameters_for_ldavis(topic_word_distrib, doc_topic_distrib, dtm, vocab, sort_topics=False):\n \"\"\"\n Create a parameters dict that can be used with the\n `pyLDAVis package `_ by passing the dict ``params`` like\n ``pyLDAVis.prepare(**params)``.\n\n :param topic_word_distrib: topic-word distribution; shape KxM, where K is number of topics, M is vocabulary size\n :param doc_topic_distrib: document-topic distribution; shape NxK, where N is the number of documents, K is the\n number of topics\n :param dtm: document-term-matrix; shape NxM\n :param vocab: vocabulary array/list of length M\n :param sort_topics: if True, sort the topics\n :return: dict with parameters ready to use with pyLDAVis\n \"\"\"\n return dict(\n topic_term_dists=topic_word_distrib,\n doc_topic_dists=doc_topic_distrib,\n vocab=vocab,\n doc_lengths=doc_lengths(dtm),\n term_frequency=term_frequencies(dtm),\n sort_topics=sort_topics,\n )" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/types.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nModule with common types used in type annotations throughout this project.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nfrom enum import IntEnum\nfrom typing import Union\n\n\nProportion = IntEnum('Proportion', 'NO YES LOG', start=0)\n\nStrOrInt = Union[str, int]\n" }, { "path": "tmtoolkit/utils.py", "content": "\"\"\"\nMisc. utility functions.\n\n.. codeauthor:: Markus Konrad \n\"\"\"\n\nimport codecs\nimport logging\nimport os\nimport pickle\nimport random\nfrom collections import Counter\nfrom inspect import signature\nfrom typing import Union, List, Any, Optional, Sequence, Dict, Callable, Tuple, Iterable\n\nimport numpy as np\nimport pandas as pd\n\nfrom scipy import sparse\nfrom scipy.sparse import csr_matrix\n\nfrom .types import StrOrInt\n\n\n#%% logging\n\n_default_logging_hndlr: Optional[logging.Handler] = None # default logging handler\n\n\ndef enable_logging(level: int = logging.INFO, fmt: str = '%(asctime)s:%(levelname)s:%(name)s:%(message)s',\n logging_handler: Optional[logging.Handler] = None, add_logging_handler: bool = True,\n **stream_hndlr_opts) -> None:\n \"\"\"\n Enable logging for tmtoolkit package with minimum log level `level` and log message format `fmt`. By default, logs\n to stderr via ``logging.StreamHandler``. You may also pass your own log handler.\n\n .. seealso:: Currently, only the logging levels INFO and DEBUG are used in tmtoolkit. See the\n `Python Logging HOWTO guide `_ for more information\n on log levels and formats.\n\n :param level: minimum log level; default is INFO level\n :param fmt: log message format\n :param logging_handler: pass custom logging handler to be used instead of\n :param add_logging_handler: if True, add the logging handler to the logger\n :param stream_hndlr_opts: optional additional parameters passed to ``logging.StreamHandler``\n \"\"\"\n\n global _default_logging_hndlr\n\n logger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n logger.setLevel(level)\n\n if logging_handler:\n _default_logging_hndlr = logging_handler\n else:\n _default_logging_hndlr = logging.StreamHandler(**stream_hndlr_opts)\n\n _default_logging_hndlr.setLevel(level)\n\n if fmt:\n _default_logging_hndlr.setFormatter(logging.Formatter(fmt))\n\n if add_logging_handler:\n logger.addHandler(_default_logging_hndlr)\n\n\ndef set_logging_level(level: int) -> None:\n \"\"\"\n Set logging level for tmtoolkit package default logging handler.\n\n :param level: minimum log level\n \"\"\"\n\n logger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n logger.setLevel(level)\n\n if _default_logging_hndlr:\n _default_logging_hndlr.setLevel(level)\n\n\ndef disable_logging() -> None:\n \"\"\"\n Disable logging for tmtoolkit package.\n \"\"\"\n set_logging_level(logging.WARNING) # reset to default level\n\n if _default_logging_hndlr:\n logger = logging.getLogger('tmtoolkit')\n logger.removeHandler(_default_logging_hndlr)\n\n\n#%% pickle / unpickle and general file handling\n\n\ndef pickle_data(data: Any, picklefile: str, **kwargs) -> None:\n \"\"\"\n Save `data` in `picklefile` with Python's :mod:`pickle` module.\n\n :param data: data to store in `picklefile`\n :param picklefile: either target file path as string or file handle\n :param kwargs: further parameters passed to :func:`pickle.dump`\n \"\"\"\n\n if isinstance(picklefile, str):\n with open(picklefile, 'wb') as f:\n pickle.dump(data, f, **kwargs)\n else:\n pickle.dump(data, picklefile, **kwargs)\n\n\ndef unpickle_file(picklefile: str, **kwargs) -> Any:\n \"\"\"\n Load data from `picklefile` with Python's :mod:`pickle` module.\n\n .. warning:: Python pickle files may contain malicious code. You should only load pickle files from trusted sources.\n\n :param picklefile: either target file path as string or file handle\n :param kwargs: further parameters passed to :func:`pickle.load`\n :return: data stored in `picklefile`\n \"\"\"\n\n if isinstance(picklefile, str):\n with open(picklefile, 'rb') as f:\n return pickle.load(f, **kwargs)\n else:\n return pickle.load(picklefile, **kwargs)\n\n\ndef path_split(path: str, base: Optional[List[str]] = None) -> List[str]:\n \"\"\"\n Split path `path` into its components::\n\n path_split('a/simple/test.txt')\n # ['a', 'simple', 'test.txt']\n\n :param path: a file path\n :param base: path remainder (used for recursion)\n :return: components of the path as list\n \"\"\"\n if not base:\n base = []\n\n if os.path.isabs(path):\n path = path[1:]\n\n start, end = os.path.split(path)\n\n if end:\n base.insert(0, end)\n\n if start:\n return path_split(start, base=base)\n else:\n return base\n\n\ndef read_text_file(fpath: str, encoding: str, read_size: int = -1, force_unix_linebreaks: bool = True) -> str:\n \"\"\"\n Read the text file at path `fpath` with character encoding `encoding` and return it as string.\n\n :param fpath: path to file to read\n :param encoding: character encoding\n :param read_size: max. number of characters to read. -1 means read full file.\n :param force_unix_linebreaks: if True, convert Windows linebreaks to Unix linebreaks\n :return: file content as string\n \"\"\"\n with codecs.open(fpath, encoding=encoding) as f:\n contents = f.read(read_size)\n\n if force_unix_linebreaks:\n contents = linebreaks_win2unix(contents)\n\n return contents\n\n\ndef linebreaks_win2unix(text: str) -> str:\n \"\"\"\n Convert Windows line breaks ``\\\\r\\\\n`` to Unix line breaks ``\\\\n``.\n\n :param text: text string\n :return: text string with Unix line breaks\n \"\"\"\n while '\\r\\n' in text:\n text = text.replace('\\r\\n', '\\n')\n\n return text\n\n\n#%% NumPy array/matrices related helper functions\n\n\ndef empty_chararray() -> np.ndarray:\n \"\"\"\n Create empty NumPy character array.\n\n :return: empty NumPy character array\n \"\"\"\n return np.array([], dtype=' np.ndarray:\n \"\"\"\n Convert a NumPy array or sequence `x` to a NumPy character array. If `x` is already a NumPy character array, return\n a copy of it.\n\n :param x: NumPy array or sequence\n :return: NumPy character array\n \"\"\"\n if len(x) > 0:\n if isinstance(x, np.ndarray):\n if np.issubdtype(x.dtype, str):\n return x.copy()\n else:\n return x.astype(str)\n elif not isinstance(x, (list, tuple)):\n x = list(x)\n return np.array(x, dtype=str)\n else:\n return empty_chararray()\n\n\ndef mat2d_window_from_indices(mat: np.ndarray,\n row_indices: Optional[Union[List[int], np.ndarray]] = None,\n col_indices: Optional[Union[List[int], np.ndarray]] = None,\n copy=False) -> np.ndarray:\n \"\"\"\n Select an area/\"window\" inside of a 2D array/matrix `mat` specified by either a sequence of\n row indices `row_indices` and/or a sequence of column indices `col_indices`.\n Returns the specified area as a *view* of the data if `copy` is False, else it will return a copy.\n\n :param mat: a 2D NumPy array\n :param row_indices: list or array of row indices to select or ``None`` to select all rows\n :param col_indices: list or array of column indices to select or ``None`` to select all columns\n :param copy: if True, return result as copy, else as view into `mat`\n :return: window into `mat` as specified by the passed indices\n \"\"\"\n if not isinstance(mat, np.ndarray) or mat.ndim != 2:\n raise ValueError('`mat` must be a 2D NumPy array')\n\n if mat.shape[0] == 0 or mat.shape[1] == 0:\n raise ValueError('invalid shape for `mat`: %s' % str(mat.shape))\n\n if row_indices is None:\n row_indices = slice(None) # a \":\" slice\n elif len(row_indices) == 0:\n raise ValueError('`row_indices` must be non-empty')\n\n if col_indices is None:\n col_indices = slice(None) # a \":\" slice\n elif len(col_indices) == 0:\n raise ValueError('`col_indices` must be non-empty')\n\n view = mat[row_indices, :][:, col_indices]\n\n if copy:\n return view.copy()\n else:\n return view\n\n\ndef combine_sparse_matrices_columnwise(matrices: Sequence,\n col_labels: Sequence[StrOrInt],\n row_labels: Sequence[str] = None,\n dtype: Optional[Union[str, np.dtype]] = None) \\\n -> Union[Tuple[csr_matrix, np.ndarray], Tuple[csr_matrix, np.ndarray, np.ndarray]]:\n \"\"\"\n Given a sequence of sparse matrices in `matrices` and their corresponding column labels in `col_labels`, stack these\n matrices in rowwise fashion by retaining the column affiliation and filling in zeros, e.g.:\n\n .. code-block:: text\n\n m1:\n C A D\n -----\n 1 0 3\n 0 2 0\n\n m2:\n D B C A\n -------\n 0 0 1 2\n 3 4 5 6\n 2 1 0 0\n\n will result in:\n\n .. code-block:: text\n\n A B C D\n -------\n 0 0 1 3\n 2 0 0 0\n 2 0 1 0\n 6 4 5 3\n 0 1 0 2\n\n (where the first two rows come from ``m1`` and the other three rows from ``m2``).\n\n The resulting columns will always be sorted in ascending order.\n\n Additionally you can pass a sequence of row labels for each matrix via `row_labels`. This will also sort the rows in\n ascending order according to the row labels.\n\n :param matrices: sequence of sparse matrices\n :param col_labels: column labels for each matrix in `matrices`; may be sequence of strings or integers\n :param row_labels: optional sequence of row labels for each matrix in `matrices`\n :param dtype: optionally specify the dtype of the resulting sparse matrix\n :return: a tuple with (1) combined sparse matrix in CSR format; (2) column labels of the matrix; (3) optionally\n row labels of the matrix if `row_labels` is not None.\n \"\"\"\n if not matrices:\n raise ValueError('`matrices` cannot be empty')\n\n if len(matrices) != len(col_labels):\n raise ValueError('number of matrices in `matrices` must match number of elements in `col_labels`')\n\n if row_labels is not None and len(matrices) != len(row_labels):\n raise ValueError('number of matrices in `matrices` must match number of elements in `row_labels`')\n\n # generate common set of column names to be used in the combined matrix\n all_cols = set()\n for i, (mat, cols) in enumerate(zip(matrices, col_labels)):\n if len(cols) != mat.shape[1]:\n raise ValueError('number of columns in supplied matrix `matrices[{i}]` does not match number of columns '\n 'in `col_labels[{i}]`'.format(i=i))\n\n all_cols.update(cols)\n\n # generate list of row labels to be used in the combined matrix, if it is given\n if row_labels is not None:\n all_row_labels = []\n for i, (mat, rows) in enumerate(zip(matrices, row_labels)):\n if len(rows) != mat.shape[0]:\n raise ValueError('number of rows in supplied matrix `matrices[{i}]` does not match number of rows '\n 'in `row_labels[{i}]`'.format(i=i))\n\n all_row_labels.extend(rows)\n\n if len(set(all_row_labels)) != len(all_row_labels):\n raise ValueError('there are duplicate elements in `row_labels`, which is not allowed')\n\n all_row_labels = np.array(all_row_labels)\n else:\n all_row_labels = None\n\n # sort the column names\n all_cols = np.array(sorted(all_cols))\n n_cols = len(all_cols)\n\n # iterate through the matrices and their corresponding column names\n parts = []\n for mat, cols in zip(matrices, col_labels):\n if mat.shape[0] == 0: continue # skip empty matrices\n\n # create a partial matrix with the complete set of columns\n # use LIL format because its efficient for inserting data\n p = sparse.lil_matrix((mat.shape[0], n_cols), dtype=dtype or mat.dtype)\n\n # find the column indices into `p` so that the columns of `mat` are inserted at the corresponding columns in `p`\n p_col_ind = np.searchsorted(all_cols, cols)\n p[:, p_col_ind] = mat\n\n parts.append(p)\n\n # stack all partial matrices in rowwise fashion to form the result matrix\n res = sparse.vstack(parts)\n assert res.shape[0] == sum(m.shape[0] for m in matrices)\n assert res.shape[1] == n_cols\n\n if all_row_labels is not None:\n # additionally sort the row labels if they are given\n assert len(all_row_labels) == res.shape[0]\n res = res.tocsr() # faster row indexing\n row_labels_sort_ind = np.argsort(all_row_labels)\n res = res[row_labels_sort_ind, :]\n\n return res, all_cols, all_row_labels[row_labels_sort_ind]\n else:\n return res.tocsr(), all_cols\n\n\n#%% misc functions\n\n\ndef dict2df(data: dict, key_name: str = 'key', value_name: str = 'value', sort: Optional[str] = None) -> pd.DataFrame:\n \"\"\"\n Take a simple dictionary that maps any key to any **scalar** value and convert it to a dataframe that contains\n two columns: one for the keys and one for the respective values. Optionally sort by column `sort`.\n\n :param data: dictionary that maps keys to **scalar** values\n :param key_name: column name for the keys\n :param value_name: column name for the values\n :param sort: optionally sort by this column; prepend by \"-\" to indicate descending sorting order, e.g. \"-value\"\n :return: a dataframe with two columns: one for the keys named `key_name` and one for the respective values named\n `value_name`\n \"\"\"\n if not key_name:\n raise ValueError('`key_name` must be a non-empty string')\n if not value_name:\n raise ValueError('`value_name` must be a non-empty string')\n\n if key_name == value_name:\n raise ValueError('`key_name` and `value_name` must differ')\n\n df = pd.DataFrame({key_name: data.keys(), value_name: data.values()})\n if sort is not None:\n if sort.startswith('-'):\n asc = False\n sort = sort[1:]\n else:\n asc = True\n return df.sort_values(by=sort, ascending=asc)\n else:\n return df\n\n\ndef applychain(funcs: Iterable[Callable], initial_arg: Any) -> Any:\n \"\"\"\n For n functions ``f`` in `funcs` apply ``f_0(initial) ∘ f_1() ∘ ... ∘ f_n()``.\n\n :param funcs: functions to apply; must not be empty\n :param initial_arg: initial function argument\n :return: result after applying all functions in `funcs`\n \"\"\"\n if not funcs:\n raise ValueError('call chain not defined (`funcs` is empty)')\n\n res = initial_arg\n for f in funcs:\n res = f(res)\n\n return res\n\n\ndef flatten_list(l: Iterable[Iterable]) -> list:\n \"\"\"\n Flatten a 2D sequence `l` to a 1D list and return it.\n\n Although ``return sum(l, [])`` looks like a very nice one-liner, it turns out to be much much slower than what is\n implemented below.\n\n :param l: 2D sequence, e.g. list of lists\n :return: flattened list, i.e. a 1D list that concatenates all elements from each list inside `l`\n \"\"\"\n flat = []\n for x in l:\n flat.extend(x)\n\n return flat\n\n\ndef _merge_updatable(containers: Sequence, init_fn: Callable, safe: bool = False) -> Union[dict, set, Counter]:\n \"\"\"Helper function to merge updatable container instances in `containers`.\"\"\"\n merged = init_fn()\n for x in containers:\n if safe and any(k in merged for k in x):\n raise ValueError('merging these containers would overwrite already existing contents '\n '(note: `safe` is set to True)')\n merged.update(x)\n return merged\n\n\ndef merge_dicts(dicts: Sequence[dict], sort_keys: bool = False, safe: bool = False) -> dict:\n \"\"\"\n Merge all dictionaries in `dicts` to form a single dict.\n\n :param dicts: sequence of dictionaries to merge\n :param sort_keys: sort the keys in the resulting dictionary\n :param safe: if True, raise a ``ValueError`` if sets of keys in `dicts` are not disjoint, else later dicts in the\n sequence will silently update already existing data with the same key\n :return: merged dictionary\n \"\"\"\n res = _merge_updatable(dicts, dict, safe=safe)\n if sort_keys:\n return {k: res[k] for k in sorted(res.keys())}\n else:\n return res\n\n\ndef merge_sets(sets: Sequence[set], safe: bool = False) -> set:\n \"\"\"\n Merge all sets in `sets` to form a single set.\n\n :param sets: sequence of sets to merge\n :param safe: if True, raise a ``ValueError`` if sets are not disjoint\n :return: merged set\n \"\"\"\n return _merge_updatable(sets, set, safe=safe)\n\n\ndef sample_dict(d: dict, n: int) -> dict:\n \"\"\"\n Return a subset of the dictionary `d` as random sample of size `n`.\n\n :param d: dictionary to sample\n :param n: sample size; must be positive and smaller than or equal to ``len(d)``\n :return: subset of the input dictionary\n \"\"\"\n return dict(random.sample(list(zip(d.keys(), d.values())), n))\n\n\ndef greedy_partitioning(elems_dict: Dict[str, Union[int, float]], k: int, return_only_labels=False) \\\n -> Union[List[Dict[str, Union[int, float]]], List[List[str]]]:\n \"\"\"\n Implementation of greed partitioning algorithm as explained `here `_ for a dict\n `elems_dict` containing elements with label -> weight mapping. A weight can be a number in an arbitrary range. Since\n this is used for task scheduling, you can think if it as the larger the weight, the bigger the task is.\n\n The elements are placed in `k` bins such that the difference of sums of weights in each bin is minimized.\n The algorithm does not always find the optimal solution.\n\n If `return_only_labels` is False, returns a list of `k` dicts with label -> weight mapping,\n else returns a list of `k` lists containing only the labels for the respective partitions.\n\n :param elems_dict: dictionary containing elements with label -> weight mapping\n :param k: number of bins\n :param return_only_labels: if True, only return the labels in each bin\n :return: list with `k` bins, where each each bin is either a dict with label -> weight mapping if\n `return_only_labels` is False or a list of labels\n \"\"\"\n if k <= 0:\n raise ValueError('`k` must be at least 1')\n elif k == 1:\n return [list(elems_dict.keys())] if return_only_labels else elems_dict\n elif k >= len(elems_dict):\n # if k is bigger than the number of elements, return `len(elems_dict)` bins with each\n # bin containing only a single element\n if return_only_labels:\n return [[k] for k in elems_dict.keys()]\n else:\n return [{k: v} for k, v in elems_dict.items()]\n\n sorted_elems = sorted(elems_dict.items(), key=lambda x: x[1], reverse=True)\n bins = [[sorted_elems.pop(0)] for _ in range(k)]\n bin_sums = [sum(x[1] for x in b) for b in bins]\n\n for pair in sorted_elems:\n argmin = min(enumerate(bin_sums), key=lambda x: x[1])[0]\n bins[argmin].append(pair)\n bin_sums[argmin] += pair[1]\n\n if return_only_labels:\n return [[x[0] for x in b] for b in bins]\n else:\n return [dict(b) for b in bins]\n\n\ndef argsort(seq: Sequence) -> List[int]:\n \"\"\"\n Same as NumPy's :func:`numpy.argsort` but for Python sequences.\n\n :param seq: a sequence\n :return: indices into `seq` that sort `seq`\n \"\"\"\n return sorted(range(len(seq)), key=seq.__getitem__)\n\n\ndef split_func_args(fn: Callable, args: Dict[str, Any]) -> Tuple[Dict[str, Any], Dict[str, Any]]:\n \"\"\"\n Split keyword arguments `args` so that all function arguments for `fn` are the first element of the returned tuple\n and the rest of the arguments are the second element of the returned tuple.\n\n :param fn: a function\n :param args: keyword arguments dict\n :return: tuple with two dict elements: all arguments for `fn` are the first element, the rest of the arguments\n are the second element\n \"\"\"\n sig = signature(fn)\n argnames = set(args.keys())\n fn_argnames = set(sig.parameters.keys()) & argnames\n\n return {k: v for k, v in args.items() if k in fn_argnames},\\\n {k: v for k, v in args.items() if k not in fn_argnames}\n" }, { "path": "tox.ini", "content": "# tox (https://tox.readthedocs.io/) is a tool for running tests\n# in multiple virtualenvs. This configuration file will run the\n# test suite on all supported python versions. To use it, \"pip install tox\"\n# and then run \"tox\" from this directory.\n#\n# The following environments are defined:\n#\n# - Python 3.8 to 3.10 with dependency sets:\n# - minimal\n# - recommended\n# - recommendedextra\n# - full\n#\n# The following dependency sets are defined, which specify the \"extras_require\" section to choose when installing\n# via setup.py:\n#\n# - minimal: no additional extras\n# - recommended: textproc and wordclouds\n# - recommendedextra: recommended and all topic modeling packages (lda, scikit-learn, gensim)\n# - full: recommendedextra and textproc_extra, topic_modeling_eval_extra\n#\n\n\n[tox]\nenvlist =\n py{38,39,310}-{minimal,recommended,recommendedextra,full}\n\n[testenv]\ndeps = .[test]\nextras =\n recommended: recommended\n recommendedextra: recommended, lda, sklearn, gensim\n full: recommended, lda, sklearn, gensim, textproc_extra, topic_modeling_eval_extra\ncommands_pre =\n - python -m tmtoolkit setup all --no-update\ncommands =\n pytest -v {posargs}\n" } ]